From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Luke Return to
Home
By Roland H. Worth,
Jr. © 2015
All reproduction of
text in paper, electronic, or computer
form both permitted
and encouraged so long as authorial
and compiler credit
is given and the text is not altered.
CHAPTER
TEN
Verses
1-42
Books Utilized
Codes at End of Chapter
10:1 Translations
Weymouth: After this the
Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them before Him, by twos, to go to
every town or place which He Himself intended to visit.
WEB: Now after
these things, the Lord also appointed seventy others, and sent them two by two
ahead of him into every city and place, where he was about to come.
Young’s: And after these things, the Lord did
appoint also other seventy, and sent them by twos before his face, to every
city and place whither he himself was about to come,
Conte (RC): Then, after these
things, the Lord also designated another seventy-two. And he sent them in pairs
before his face, into every city and place where he was to arrive.
10:1 Introductory note:
The Biblical setting / historical context of the mission being described. Luke has told us of the journey through
After these things. After the appointment of the twelve
apostles and the transactions recorded in the previous chapter. [11]
the Lord appointed. The seventy were probably selected
from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates
so well sifted in its closing verses, and from some of our Lord's friends in
other seventy also.
Seventy others besides the apostles.
They were appointed for a different purpose from the apostles. The apostles were to be with Him--to hear His
instructions--to be witnesses of His miracles, His sufferings, His death, His
resurrection and ascension, that they might then go and proclaim all
these things to the world. The seventy
were sent out to preach immediately and chiefly where He Himself was to
come. They were appointed for a
temporary object. [11]
The saying about the paucity of labourers, found also in Mt. (ix. 38), implies that Jesus
was constantly on the outlook for competent assistants, and that He would use
such as were available. [12]
The number was
large, that they might rapidly accomplish, in a short time, throughout
Aside: Why seventy
in particular? Why the
precise number seventy? The most
common opinion is that as the number twelve had a reference probably to the
number of the Patriarchs intimating the Lord's provision for His
The number
may have been suggested by the seventy nations into which the Jews divided
mankind (Gen. ch. 10) or the 70 members of the
Sanhedrin, but more likely by the seventy elders appointed to help Moses (Num.
11:16-17, 24-25). [22]
Seventy (seventy-two in B), representing
the nations of the earth, the number consciously fixed by the evangelist to symbolise Christian universalism--according to Dr. Baur and the Tubingen School;
representing in the mind of Jesus the
seventy Sanhedrists, as the Twelve were meant to
represent the tribes of Israel, the seventy disciples having for their vocation
to do what the Sanhedrists had failed to do--prepare the people for the
appearance of the Christ--according to Hahn.
[12]
and sent them. Luke alone records this mission. [7]
two and two. So there were thirty-five
different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and
counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses everything might be
established. Compare the two witnesses
of Revelation 11:3. [14]
Christ sends His
disciples two and two, to teach them to labour in the
church in the spirit of concord and charity.
[27]
before His face. In advance:
to [announce] this, His last journey.
[7]
into every city and place. The Twelve had been sent out to assist
Jesus in His work; the Seventy were sent to prepare the way for His own
arrival, so that there should be no needless loss of time, which at the best
was short for the great work that remained to be done. As the work of the two missions was in
some respects similar, the instructions were substantially the same in both
cases. But note that, while the Twelve
were forbidden to go to the Gentiles or to the Samaritans (Matt. 10:5), no such
restriction was put on the Seventy whose work lay in a district where Gentiles
were numerous. [22]
whither he Himself would come. In Greek, whither he was about to come;
that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. [14]
In depth: the unique nature of the work of the Seventy [16]. The
mission, unlike that of the Twelve, was evidently quite temporary. All the instructions are in keeping with a
brief and hasty pioneering mission, intended to supply what of general
preparation for coming events the Lord's own visit afterwards to the same
"cities and places" (verse 1) would not, from want of time, now
suffice to accomplish; whereas the instructions to the Twelve, besides
embracing all those to the Seventy, contemplate world-wide and permanent effects. Accordingly, after their return from this
single missionary tour, we never again read of the Seventy.
In depth: The
geographic location to which the men were sent [55]. This
sentence makes it clear that Jesus planned a quite extensive evangelistic tour,
intended himself to visit not less than thirty-five town [since He sent two
representatives to each, rw], probably many
more. Where these towns were Luke does
not say, other than that they were between
In depth: The historicity of the mission of the Seventy
[23]. The narrative of the Seventy has been
relegated into the unhistorical domain by Strauss, Baur,
Ritschl, and others.
But:
1. As they accept that this was only a temporary
and special appointment for the present journey, and not a permanent function
(verse 1) the silence of the rest of the evangelists, as well as the silence of
the subsequent history about their doings, is very easy to understand.
2. That Jesus in general had around Him a larger
circle of constant disciples, broader the twelve from whom He could appoint
seventy for a special commission, is in itself, and from the evidence of such
passages as Acts 1:15, 21; I Corinthians
15:6, as well as John 6:60, not to be doubted.
3. If an invention, the tradition would hardly
have restrained itself within these narrow limits, but would have gone further
than simply to allow the Seventy to be appointed and sent forth, and then to
return and vanish; and would especially have passed over into the apostolic
history.
4. That Jesus gave them a commission similar to
that which He gave the Twelve, arose from the similar character of their
temporary [missions].
5. If the narrative had been, as has been
supposed, an invention of the author, to keep the apostle call of Paul in
contrast with that of the Twelve, it would have been put as necessary as it was
easy to the inventor to relate what they did, or at least to interweave
references to the ministry of Paul, yet these are entirely wanting. Moreover, the Acts of the Apostles would not
have been perfectly silent about the Seventy.
10:2 Translations
WEB: Then he
said to them, "The harvest is indeed plentiful, but the laborers are few.
Pray therefore to the Lord of the harvest, that he may send out laborers into
his harvest.
Young’s: then said he unto them, 'The harvest
indeed is abundant, but the workmen few; beseech ye then the Lord of the
harvest, that He may put forth workmen to His harvest.
Conte (RC): And he said to them:
"Certainly the harvest is great, but the workers are few. Therefore, ask
the Lord of the harvest to send workers into his harvest.
10:2 Therefore said He unto them, The harvest truly is great. Compare
Matthew 9:37; John 4:35. [56]
but the labourers are few. The
laborers, even now that he had called seventy others, were few to meet the
demand. We may infer that He had no more
that He could hopefully send out for such work.
[52]
pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He would
send forth labourers into His harvest. That the
harvest increase is God’s, gives them good ground for praying Him to do what
they cannot of themselves accomplish.
The injunction may mean, “Pray that God will prosper you in winning men
to faith in me, some of whom will become light-bearers to others,” or also,
“that He may incline some who already believe to such ardor of love and zeal,
that they will, without reserve, give themselves up to the ministry of the
gospel.” [52]
send forth. Strictly, “thrust forth;” the Greek implies
urgency, almost compulsion, as though much reluctance would have to be
overcome. Send forth, not,
specifically, from
10:3 Translations
WEB: Go your
ways. Behold, I send you out as lambs among wolves.
Young’s: 'Go away; lo, I send you forth as lambs
in the midst of wolves;
Conte (RC): Go forth. Behold, I
send you out like lambs among wolves.
10:3 Go your ways. The
origin and authority of the gospel ministry, Divine. [7]
behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves. Not a flattering
introduction to their work, if there were faint-hearted men among them; but
honest. They were at once guarded
against illusions. [52]
“As sheep,” Matthew
10:4 Translations
WEB: Carry no
purse, nor wallet, nor sandals. Greet no one on the way.
Young’s: carry no bag, no scrip, nor sandals; and
salute no one on the way;
Conte (RC): Do not choose to
carry a purse, nor provisions, nor shoes; and you shall greet no one along the
way.
10:4 Carry neither purse [money bag, NKJV]. If there’s no money bag then, to all
practical extent, there is no money to be carried either for where would
you put it? (They weren’t a society that
had pockets in their clothing.) [rw]
nor scrip. Not
money, but a “traveling bag” (Holman translation) or “knapsack” (ESV) where one
could carry clothing and other objects.
[rw]
nor shoes. Not that they were to go unshod, but that
they were not to carry a change of sandals.
See Deut. xxix. 5; xxxiii. 25. [2]
and salute no man on
the way. Oriental
salutations are tedious and complicated.
The command is suited to a rapid and temporary mission. Compare 2 Kings iv. 29. "These instructions were also intended
to reprove another propensity which an Oriental can hardly resist, no matter
how urgent his business. If he meets an
acquaintance, he must stop and make an endless number of inquiries, and answer as many.
If they come upon men making a bargain, or discussing any other matter,
they must pause and intrude their own ideas, and enter keenly into the
business, though it in nowise concerns them . . ." (Thomson,
"Land and Book") [2]
In their salutations on meeting, much time
is often consumed by the Orientals in mutual inquiries and compliments, manual
and oral. That our Saviour
did not intend to intimate any objection to proper salutations of civility and
respect, appears clearly enough from the courteous salutation enjoined in the
next verse [but] they are not to waste their time in useless and empty
ceremonies, as others do who have nothing better to do with their time. [9]
10:5 Translations
WEB: Into
whatever house you enter, first say, 'Peace be to this house.'
Young’s: and into whatever house ye do enter,
first say, Peace to this house;
Conte (RC): Into whatever house
you will have entered, first say, 'Peace to this house.'
10:5 And into whatsoever house ye enter. No matter whose it is; no matter where it
is. [rw]
first say, Peace be to this house. The common
formula of salutation among the Jews, with whom “peace” comprehended all
blessing, and welfare, as it is among the Mahometans
now, in their Salaam = Hebrew Shalom. [52]
10:6 Translations
Weymouth: And if there
is a lover of peace there, your peace shall rest upon it; otherwise come back
upon you.
WEB: If a son
of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; but if not, it will return to
you.
Young’s: and if indeed there may be there the son
of peace, rest on it shall your peace; and if not so, upon you it shall turn
back.
Conte (RC): And if a son of
peace is there, your peace will rest upon him. But if not, it will return to
you.
10:6 And if. Note
that it is contingent. It is what is
naturally hoped for; not necessarily what will occur. [rw]
the son of peace be there. One
disposed to peace or peaceful and kind in his disposition. [11]
In the Jewish style, a
man who has any good or bad quality is called "the son" of it. Thus, wise men are called "the children
of wisdom" (Matthew
your peace shall rest upon it. “Your
greeting will be accepted” (GW translation)
Or: They
will receive what you have wished for them.
[rw]
if not, it shall turn to you again. “Your greeting will be rejected” (GW
translation)
Or: The wish/prayer will go unanswered. [rw]
Matthew 10:13.
“My prayer returned into mine own bosom,” Psalms 35:13. [56]
10:7 Translations
Weymouth: And in that
same house stay, eating and drinking at their table; for the labourer deserves his wages. Do not move from one house to
another.
WEB: Remain in
that same house, eating and drinking the things they give, for the laborer is
worthy of his wages. Don't go from house to house.
Young’s: And in that house remain, eating and
drinking the things they have, for worthy is the workman of his hire; go not
from house to house,
Conte (RC): And remain in the
same house, eating and drinking the things that are with them. For the worker
is worthy of his pay. Do not choose to pass from house to house.
10:7 And in the same house remain. Don’t go changing your place of
residence. You have a roof over your
head. You won’t be there but so
long. So be content with it. [rw]
eating and drinking such things as they give. Whether quality cooking or mediocre. Whether the food you are used to or not. Whether the items you prefer or not. Take it in the spirit of generosity in which
it is provided. [rw]
the laborer is worthy of his hire. This expression is a proverbial one. It is remarkable as being the only expression
in the Gospels which is quoted in the Epistles.
Paul uses it in writing to Timothy, in connection with the expression,
"the Scripture saith" (1 Tim. v. 18). [9]
This obvious truth might
free their minds from scruple in receiving the hospitality of the house;
“eating and drinking” such things as they gave. [52]
Go not from
house to house. It
would be treating with disrespect those who were the first willing to help
you. It could easily degenerate into an
effort to find the most prestigious family you could stay with—flattering to
your ego, but ignoring the central purpose of your being there, teaching God’s
word. [rw]
10:8 Translations
WEB: Into whatever
city you enter, and they receive you, eat the things that are set before you.
Young’s: and into whatever city ye enter, and they
may receive you, eat the things set before you,
Conte (RC): And into whatever
city you have entered and they have received you, eat what they set before you.
10:8 And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they
receive you, eat such things as are set before you. They were to have the same practice of verse
7 no matter where they landed up on this journey. They were to adopt to local dietary custom
rather than expect their own to be followed.
[rw]
10:9 Translations
WEB: Heal the
sick who are therein, and tell them, 'The
Young’s: and heal the ailing in it, and say to
them, The reign of God hath come nigh to you.
Conte (RC): And cure the sick
who are in that place, and proclaim to them, 'The
10:9 And heal the sick that are therein. Both as a
satisfaction to Christ-like sympathy with suffering, and to prepare hearts for
a more ready acceptance of the greater boon of spiritual healing and eternal
life. [52]
and
say unto them, The
WEB: But into
whatever city you enter, and they don't receive you, go out into its streets
and say,
Young’s: 'And into whatever city ye do enter, and
they may not receive you, having gone forth to its broad places, say,
Conte (RC): But into whatever
city you have entered and they have not received you, going out into its main
streets, say:
WEB: 'Even the
dust from your city that clings to us, we wipe off against you. Nevertheless
know this, that the
Young’s: And the dust that hath cleaved to us,
from your city, we do wipe off against you, but this know ye, that the reign of
God hath come nigh to you;
Conte (RC): 'Even the dust which
clings to us from your city, we wipe away against you. Yet know this: the
notwithstanding
be ye sure of this, that the
WEB: I tell
you, it will be more tolerable in that day for
Young’s: and I say to you, that for
Conte (RC): I say to you, that
in that day,
that it shall be more tolerable. Also see verse 14. There is “bad” and there is “B-A-D.” They are going to personally discover the
difference when they see that cities they themselves would have dismissed as
terrible receive a judgment that, comparatively, seems less than their own. This could be on the emotional scale of
their reaction since they dismiss these cases as examples of outright depravity
far unlike their own “righteous” souls—in that context, even the same
punishment seems proportionately less.
If taken literally, then their situation would be even more horrifying
to them. [rw]
in that day. Since the earliest prophets, Obadiah (verse
8) and Joel (
for
WEB: "Woe
to you, Chorazin! Woe to you,
Young’s: 'Woe to thee, Chorazin;
woe to thee,
Conte (RC): Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you,
Woe unto thee, Bethsaida! [This] was in the same
region with Chorazin.
It was the birth-place of
Andrew, Peter and Philip. (Mark xiv. 70;
John i. 44.) [9]
for if the
mighty works had been done in
they had a great while ago repented. Historically, of course, these cities
were “a great while ago,” far in the past.
What he is talking about, of course, is their quickness to
change. These first century
contemporaries had either seen or heard of miracle after miracle after miracle
of Jesus and refused to alter their course of life. In contrast, these pagans would have
been smart enough--after seeing a fraction of them--to heed the message of
moral and religious reform. They would
have repented “a great while ago” while these contemporaries still were
unable to grasp the message and its implications for behavior. [56]
sitting in sackcloth.
[Examples of its use:] Jacob put
sackcloth upon his lions and mourned (Genesis 37:34). Lord bids Isaiah put off sackcloth from his
body (Isaiah 20:2). Rejoicing, it was
flung off (Psalms 30;11) and white put on (Ecclesiastes 9:8). [7]
and ashes. As a sign of mourning. Defiling one's self with dead things, as
ashes or dirt, as a sign of sorrow, was common among the Orientals and Greeks. Thus Homer describes Achilles on hearing of
the death of Patroclus:
"Grasping
in both hands
The ashes of the hearth,
he showered them o'er
His head, and soiled
with them his noble face."
Iliad,
xviii., 23.
And Priam,
mourning for Hector:
"In the
midst the aged man
Sat with a cloak wrapped
round him, and much dust
Strewn on his head and
neck, which, when he rolled
Upon the earth, he
gathered with his hands."
Iliad,
xxiv., 162--5.
See 1 Sam. iv. 12; 2
Sam. i. 2; xiii. 19; Job ii. 12; Ezek. xvii. 30; Apoc. xviii. 19. In
Judith iv. 14, 15, in the mourning over the ravages of the Assyrians, the
priests ministering at the altar, girded with sackcloth, and with ashes on
their mitres. [2]
WEB: But it
will be more tolerable for
Young’s: but for
Conte (RC): Yet truly,
for
and
at the judgment. Note
that Jesus does not speak of this happening “at death,” nor
“individually.” He speaks as if this is
a judgment event that will occur to one and all at the same time. [rw]
The guilty inhabitants
of these cities had received their temporal punishment (Genesis
than for you. They
were so self-confident of their own acceptability to God. They weren’t like those, those nasty
Gentiles. And in many ways they
weren’t. But they had fallen for the
delusion that because one is religiously right (or at least, “righter”)
than another, that God is going to forgive them their own evils. In every age, it is far easier to tell others
to fix their evils than to undertake the time and frustration of
handling our own! [rw]
Weymouth: And thou,
Capernaum, shalt thou be lifted high as Heaven? Thou shalt be driven down as low as Hades.
WEB: You,
Young’s: 'And thou,
Conte (RC): And as for you,
shalt be thrust down to Hell. Literal versus
symbolic depiction of greatest possible degree of alienation/distance from God [52]. Hades may be here a metaphor to express the
lowest imaginable depth, according to that representation of the ancient mythologies,
which made the abode of Hades open as far below the surface of the earth as the
heaven—the sky or the ethereal firmament—is above it. This would be to the Greek mind the greatest
possible perpendicular measure [= distance], from heaven to Hades.
As the
Greek name for the world of the dead had become naturalized in Palestine, since
the rule of Alexander the Great, we may well suppose that the Greek conception
of it might be so familiar as to warrant allusions to it, although the Hebrew
conception of Sheol, the abode of the dead, as
modified during the four or more centuries after the close of the Old
Testament, was commonly expressed by the word, in Christ’s time.
But the whole sentence may be taken as it usually
has been, not metaphorically, but literally:
A symbolic
description of what happened to the region during the Jewish Revolt of 66-70
A.D. [18]? The
present state of the Plain of Gennesaret is indeed so
desolate and miserable that we can scarcely picture to ourselves that it was
once a populous, crowded district, the blue lake covered with fishing and
trading vessels, its shores and the plain inland highly cultivated, a very
garden in that part of Asia. Rich towns
and thriving villages in that favoured neighbourhood are described by contemporary writers in such
glowing terms that we, who are spectators of the dreary and melancholy shores
of the Gennesaret lake, are puzzled as we read, and
should suspect an exaggeration, only an exaggeration would have been
purposeless (see Josephus, 'Bell. Jud.,' 3.3.2).
Some thirty
years after the woe had been uttered, in the terrible wars in which
WEB: Whoever
listens to you listens to me, and whoever rejects you rejects me. Whoever
rejects me rejects him who sent me."
Young’s: 'He who is hearing you, doth hear me; and
he who is putting you away, doth put me away; and he who is putting me away,
doth put away Him who sent me.'
Conte (RC): Whoever hears you,
hears me. And whoever despises you, despises me. And whoever despises me,
despises him who sent me."
and he that despiseth Me despiseth Him that sent me. But all that only partly covers the
subject. By treating with disdain those
teachings they are also despising the Father who sent Him: “the words that I speak unto you I speak not
of Myself: but the Father that dwelleth in Me, he
doeth the works” (John 14:10b). “The
word which ye hear is not Mine, but the Father's which sent Me” (John
14:24b). [rw]
WEB: The
seventy returned with joy, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to
us in your name!"
Young’s: And the seventy turned back with joy,
saying, 'Sir, and the demons are being subjected to us in thy name;'
Conte (RC): Then the seventy-two
returned with gladness, saying, "Lord, even the demons are subject to us,
in your name."
As in ch. ix. 6-10, Luke attaches the return of the Seventy very
closely to their mission. They probably
were not many days absent. [15]
Or: How
long a time had elapsed since their mission began, and where they found the
Master on their return, are matters of doubt.
Some weeks probably had been required.
[52]
with joy. Their
mission had gone very well and they had every reason for exuberance. [rw]
even the devils
are subject unto us. If demons are subject,
saints need fear no other foe. [7]
Not merely cast out, but
subjected, subdued and tamed. [9]
through Thy Name. When commanded in Thy name to come out of those
who are possessed. [11]
In depth: What was
Jesus doing while their mission was being carried out? It has been supposed, with much probability,
by a great many harmonizers, that all which is recorded in John
WEB: He said
to them, "I saw Satan having fallen like lightning from heaven.
Young’s: and he said to them, 'I was beholding the
Adversary, as lightning from the heaven having fallen;
Conte (RC): And he said to them:
"I was watching as Satan fell like lightning from heaven.
Or: There has been much discussion as to what is
meant by this fall, and why it is referred to.
It has been identified with the fall of the angels at the beginning of
the world, with the Incarnation, with the temptation of Jesus, in both of which
Satan sustained defeat. The Fathers
adopted the first of these alternatives, and found the motive of the reference
in a desire to warn the disciples. The
devil fell through pride; take care you fall not from the same cause (verse
20). [12]
Or: The prophets used the past tense in
describing their visions of future events.
Thus Daniel (vii. 9) says:
"I beheld till the thrones were cast down, etc." He saw in that rapture of prophecy, the
future as plainly as if it were before him.
So Jesus as a prophet saw Satan fall, because, by the work of the Church
on earth the supremacy of evil in the heathen nations would be destroyed. [4]
as lightning. The precise point of the comparison has been
variously conceived: momentary
brightness, quick, sudden movement, inevitableness of the descent--down it must
come to the earth, etc. [12]
fall.
Implies its rapid, decisive, and terrible nature. [7]
from heaven. From exalted power and
privilege (verse 15). [8]
Implies loss of preeminence and power (Revelation 20:2). [7]
WEB: Behold, I
give you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power
of the enemy. Nothing will in any way hurt you.
Young’s: lo, I give to you the authority to tread
upon serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the enemy, and nothing by
any means shall hurt you;
Conte (RC): Behold, I have given
you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and upon all the powers of
the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.
Literal interpretation: This was after they and returned from
their brief mission, and therefore refers to powers to be continued to them
permanently. It is an increase of
power, confirming that already received.
You have done well, receive a power of miracles which shall abide with
you, and show you to be true prophets and ministers of Mine. [4]
A symbolic interpretation: It seems
however, best, in the case of this peculiar promise, to interpret the Lord's
words as referring to spiritual powers of evil, taking the serpent and scorpion
as symbols of these. It should be
remembered that the subject of conversation between the Master and his servants
was the conflict with and victory ever these awful powers restlessly hostile to
the human race (see Psalms 91:13). [18]
and scorpions.
Scorpions (poisonous insects about four inches long, with a sting in
their tails and found in tropical climates) are often put figuratively for crafty,
wicked and malicious men (Ezek. ii. 6). [9]
and
over all the power of the
enemy. Satan. The meaning of this verse is that Jesus would
preserve them from the power of Satan and all his emissaries--from all wicked
and crafty men; and this shows that He had Divine power. [11]
and nothing
shall by any means hurt you. Romans 8:28, 39. [56]
As I sit here adding new material to this
volume, I feel repeated minor heart pains.
It’s been about thirteen or fourteen years since my “elephants on the
chest” heart attack and my quadruple bypass.
And perhaps nine years since my double bypass. One of these days one of these pains—or the
other varieties of chest discomfort that like to chip into the endeavor—will
kill me. I will be “hurt;” barring
something quite amazing, some variant of this will eventually kill me. Yet am I hurt? The pain will be short though, perhaps,
intense. But the glory that comes
afterwards, that is eternal. In
the long view, it will simply be the final step toward something far greater. [rw]
WEB: Nevertheless,
don't rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rejoice that
your names are written in heaven."
Young’s: but, in this rejoice not, that the
spirits are subjected to you, but rejoice rather that your names were written
in the heavens.'
Conte (RC): Yet truly, do not
choose to rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you; but rejoice
that your names are written in heaven."
rejoice not . . . but rather rejoice. I.e., not so much. So far from forbidding it, He takes occasion
from it to tell them what had been passing in His own mind. But as power over demons was after all
intoxicating, He gives them a higher joy to balance it, the joy of having their
names in Heaven's register. (Philippians
4:3). [16]
The power to preach the
Gospel of the kingdom and to work miracles in proof of it, was a fit subject of
rejoicing, but it was far more important to them that they were heirs of that
kingdom by faith, and by a diligent perseverance, might at the last save their
own souls. Not all who work miracles in
the name of the Lord shall be saved (Matt. vii. 22-23), nor all who preach to
others shall therefore escape being themselves castaways. 1 Cor. ix. 27. [4]
but
rather rejoice, because your
names are written in heaven. In
the census register of the new kingdom (Philippians 4:3; Hebrews
The names of citizens of a city or state
were accustomed to be written in a book or register from which they were
blotted out when they became unworthy or forfeited the favor of their
country. Compare Psalm 69:28; Exodus
32:32; Deuteronomy 9:14;
Revelation 3:5. [The phrase] means that
they were citizens of heaven. [11]
WEB: In that
same hour Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit, and said, "I thank you, O
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the
wise and understanding, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for
so it was well-pleasing in your sight."
Young’s: In that hour was Jesus glad in the
Spirit, and said, 'I do confess to thee, Father, Lord of the heaven and of the
earth, that Thou didst hide these things from wise men and understanding, and didst
reveal them to babes; yes, Father, because so it became good pleasure before
Thee.
Conte (RC): In the same hour, he
exulted in the Holy Spirit, and he said: "I confess to you, Father, Lord
of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and the
prudent, and have revealed them to little ones. It is so, Father, because this
way was pleasing before you.
Most
valuable as recording one element—the element of exultant joy—which the
Evangelists so rarely touch as to have originated the legend, preserved in the
spurious letter of P. Lentulus to the Senate, that He
wept often, but that no one had ever seen Him smile. [56]
and said, I thank thee, O Father. This is
"the only record, outside
Lord of heaven and earth. Nowhere
and nothing is exempt from the Lordship of Jehovah. Wherever there is intelligent or mere animal
existence, there He is Lord as both creator and preserver of the universe. The ultimate embodiment of power. And mere mortals think they can permanently
challenge and defy His will—and get away with it? [rw]
that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent,
and hast revealed them unto babes. Here we have the contrast between the “wisdom
of the world,” which is “foolishness with God,” and the “foolishness of the
world,” which is “wisdom with God,” on which Paul also was fond of dwelling, 1
Corinthians 1:21, 26; 2 Corinthians 4:3, 4; Romans 1:22. For similar passages in the Gospels see
Matthew 16:17, 18:3, 4. [56]
even
so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight. It was the Father’s decision to send
earthbound a message that would make far more sense and be far more appealing
to the average person rather than the intellectual. In purely utilitarian terms, of course, this
made great sense: there are far more
“common men” than there are those who spend all their time possible in the
world of ideas. Indeed, if that weren’t
the case, society couldn’t prosper, but would collapse. [rw]
WEB: Turning
to the disciples, he said, "All things have been delivered to me by my
Father. No one knows who the Son is, except the Father, and who the Father is,
except the Son, and he to whomever the Son desires to reveal him."
Young’s: All things were delivered up to me by my
Father, and no one doth know who the Son is, except the Father, and who the
Father is, except the Son, and he to whom the Son may wish to reveal Him.'
Conte (RC): All things have been
delivered to me by my Father. And no one knows who the Son is, except the
Father, and who the Father is, except the Son, and those to whom the Son has
chosen to reveal him."
“Are
delivered:” Rather, “were
delivered to me by,” cf.
no
man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who
the Father is, but the Son. St.
Chrysostom comments, "He does not mean that all
men are altogether ignorant of Him; but that none knows Him with that knowledge
wherewith He knows Him." [30]
and he to whom the Son will reveal him. One can understand what the Son
does of the Father, and vice versa, by listening to the Son: By the Son’s actions and teachings one will
gain a reliable understanding of both. [rw]
WEB: Turning
to the disciples, he said privately, "Blessed are the eyes which see the
things that you see,
Young’s: And having turned unto the disciples, he
said, by themselves, 'Happy the eyes that are perceiving what ye perceive;
Conte (RC): And turning to his
disciples, he said: "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see.
WEB: for I
tell you that many prophets and kings desired to see the things which you see,
and didn't see them, and to hear the things which you hear, and didn't hear
them."
Young’s: for I say to you, that many prophets and
kings did wish to see what ye perceive, and did not see, and to hear what ye
hear, and did not hear.'
Conte (RC): For I say to you,
that many prophets and kings wanted to see the things that you see, and they
did not see them, and to hear the things that you hear, and they did not hear
them."
And: Because of this the disciples were—in their
own special way—more blessed than those they read about in Scripture and whose
praise they freely gave. [rw]
WEB: Behold, a
certain lawyer stood up and tested him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do
to inherit eternal life?"
Young’s: And lo, a certain lawyer stood up, trying
him, and saying, 'Teacher, what having done, life age-during shall I inherit?'
Conte (RC): And behold, a
certain expert in the law rose up, testing him and saying, "Teacher, what
must I do to possess eternal life?"
A teacher of the Mosaic Law—differing
little from a scribe, as the man is called in Mark 12:28. The same person may have had both
functions—that of preserving and that of expounding the Law. [56]
stood up. The Master was evidently
teaching in a house or a courtyard of a house. Many were sitting round him. To
attract his attention, this lawyer stood up before putting his question to
Jesus. [18]
and tempted Him saying.
[Pretended] a desire to be instructed, but did it to perplex Him or to
lead Him, if possible, to contradict some of the maxims of the Law. [11]
Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? How
many times have we, like this lawyer, tempted God in prayer! We often beg of Him to instruct us in His
will, as if we really intended to do it, while, at the same time, we neglect to do that which we know of it
already. There are but too many who
place the best part of their devotion in asking questions, and hearing a
spiritual guide or director, concerning those things which they sufficiently
understand; and who waste both His time and their own in such discourses as are
of little or no advantage at all. The
gospel would save them abundance of this trouble, if they would but therein
sincerely consult the truth itself, and practice that which they know. [27]
Or: Something more than a desire to test the
extent of Christ's knowledge appears to have prompted his question. It is not presented in an abstract form. It is not, "Master, what should be done
that eternal life may be inherited?" but, "Master, what shall I do
to inherit eternal life?" It looks
as if it came from one feeling a deep, personal interest in the inquiry. [9]
WEB: He said
to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?"
Young’s: And he said unto him, 'In the law what
hath been written? how dost thou read?'
Conte (RC): But he said to him:
"What is written in the law? How do you read it?"
This manner of bringing
all questions of this kind to the test of the law and the testimony, was
confounding to the malice and cunning of the Pharisees, and will ever be so to
all men who, following cunningly devised fables, wander from the path of God's
commandments. Our Lord does not answer
him as he expected, with the subtle distinctions of the two great schools of
doctors then existing, but by a simple reference to Moses himself. The law was a covenant. If the Jews kept their part and promise, God
surely would keep His, and give them eternal life. So of the Christian covenant in baptism. [4]
How readest thou? The
phrase resembled one in constant use among the Rabbis, and the lawyer deserved
to get no other answer because his question was not sincere. The very meaning and mission of his life was
to teach this answer. [56]
Christ may
have pointed to the text (Deuteronomy
Weymouth: "'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God,'" he replied, "'with
thy whole heart, thy whole soul, thy whole strength, and thy whole mind; and
thy fellow man as much as thyself.'"
WEB: He
answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all
your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as
yourself."
Young’s: And he answering said, 'Thou shalt love the Lord thy God out of all thy heart, and out
of all thy soul, and out of all thy strength, and out of all thy understanding,
and thy neighbour as thyself.'
Conte (RC): In response, he
said: "You shall love the Lord your God from your whole heart, and from
your whole soul, and from all your strength, and from all your mind, and your
neighbor as yourself."
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God. It was not mere obedience that was sought
but love as well. Obedience may come due
to fear alone, but when it is rooted in love of God it comes out of a far
higher and more honorable motive. [rw]
with all thy heart. Without
divided sentiments; not part favoring God and part preferring something else
entirely. By including four different
items in His list—all the heart, soul, strength, and mind—Jesus is clearly
intending to convey the sentiment that with whatever you have, that you
can love God with, love Him fully and completely. Don’t try to cut out a segment of your entity,
your existence, where you promote a separate agenda. [rw]
and with all thy soul.
I.e., with thy warmest affections.
[7]
Or: With all thy inner being, the eternal part of
you. [rw]
and with all thy
strength. I.e., with the most vigorous resolution of
thy will. [7]
and with all thy
mind. I.e., with thy understanding guiding
thy affections and thy will. [7]
and thy neighbour as thyself. Hillel had given this part of the answer to an enquirer who
similarly came to put him to the test, and as far as it went, it was a right
answer (Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:13, 14; James 2:8); but it became futile if
left to stand alone, without the first Commandment.
[56]
WEB: He said
to him, "You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live."
Young’s: And he said to him, 'Rightly thou didst
answer; this do, and thou shalt live.'
Conte (RC): And he said to him:
"You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live."
“If
thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” Genesis 4:7; “which if a man do, he shall
live in them,” Leviticus 18:5; Romans 10:5; but see Galatians
this do. The lawyer had asked his question simply as a
test. With him the law was simply matter
for speculation and theory, and the word "do" was very startling. It showed the difference between his and the
Master's views of the law. He had hoped
by a question to expose Jesus as one who set aside the law, but Jesus had
exposed the lawyer as one who merely theorized about the law, and himself as
one who advocated the doing of the law. [53]
As the passage from
Deuteronomy was one of those inscribed in the phylacteries (little leather
boxes containing four texts in their compartments), which the scribe wore on
his forehead and wrist, it is an ingenious conjecture that our Lord, as He
spoke, pointed to one of them. [56]
and thou shalt live. Rather than die physically or
spiritually. Whatever may happen in this
world, you will be blessed with a “life” state that nothing can strip you of
but your own rejection of it. [rw]
WEB: But he,
desiring to justify himself, asked Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?"
Young’s: And he, willing to declare himself
righteous, said unto Jesus, 'And who is my neighbour?'
Conte (RC): But since he wanted
to justify himself, he said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"
And who is my neighbour? He
starts another question as an excuse for dropping the former. [7]
He wants his moral duties to be labeled
and defined with the Talmudic precision to which ceremonial duties had been
reduced. [56]
WEB: Jesus
answered, "A certain man was going down from
Young’s: and Jesus having taken up the word, said,
'A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among
robbers, and having stripped him and inflicted blows, they went away, leaving
him half dead.
Conte (RC): Then Jesus, taking
this up, said: "A certain man descended from
Our Lord did not give
the inquirer a direct answer, but stated a case, and led him to answer
himself. This has generally been called
a "parable," but it is related as a fact and probably was
so. [20]
A certain man. Clearly, as the tenor of the Parable implies,
a Jew. [56]
went down. The expression is quite literal: [
from
The
road from
and fell among
thieves. Rather,
"robbers." The thief takes by
stealth, the robber by force. [14]
The word
"thieves" means those who merely take property. These were highwaymen, and not merely took
the property, but endangered the life.
They were robbers. At this time
which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him. Perhaps he carries his all
along with him, and, unwilling to part with it, stands upon his defense,
wishing to sell life and property as dearly as he can. Perhaps he carries but little--nothing that
the thievish band into whose hands he falls [into] much value. Whether it is that a struggle has taken
place, or that exasperation at disappointment whets their wrath, the robbers of
the wilderness strip their victim of his raiment, wound him and leave him there
half dead. [9]
and departed, leaving him
half dead. So near dead as to be unable to help himself;
and yet not without hope if he were but helped.
[14]
So far as the robbers
were concerned, it was a mere accident that any life was left in him. [56]
In depth: The road to
In depth: The conflict between personal, direct
helpfulness and indirect advocacy of help [42]. The service of the Good Samaritan was
personal. And in no respect is he more
worthy of eternal emulation than in that.
He got down from his horse and gave himself to the man's needs. This is worth noting in these days when so
many things are done through organizations and committees.
Organization
is so great a help in all good work that there has grown up a pathetic faith
that all that is necessary to overcome an evil is to form an organization,
appoint committees, and deal with it impersonally. Dr. Charles R. Brown says, "This story
would have been very different if the Samaritan had seen the trouble and said,
'When I reach home I must send a check to the Relief Corps for Wounded
Travelers'; or if he had simply determined to get a ringing resolution passed
at the next meeting of the association, denouncing 'these Bedouin atrocities'; or if he had
consumed all his philanthropic zeal in writing an open letter' to the paper on
the laxity of police regulations on the road between Jerusalem and
Jericho. In the meantime, the poor,
wounded, half-dead traveler would have been dead altogether. What the Good Samaritan did was to take
personal care of the needy man; after that the check, the open letter, the
resolutions might be very well."
WEB: By chance
a certain priest was going down that way. When he saw him, he passed by on the
other side.
Young’s: 'And by a coincidence a certain priest
was going down in that way, and having seen him, he passed over on the opposite
side;
Conte (RC): And it happened that
a certain priest was descending along the same way. And seeing him, he passed
by.
Many good
opportunities are hidden under that which may seem accidental. [24]
Or: [By chance,] humanly speaking, though, as regards God, it was arranged
by His all-seeing Providence. [17]
there came down a certain priest. It is said
that not less than twelve thousand priests and Levites dwelt at
The
Talmudists said that there were almost as many priests at
The
priest should have been first to offer aid.
It became his place. And it was
safer for him to do it, even if the thieves had returned, from the reverence
generally paid by even the worst men to his office. Lam. iv. 16.
Alas for the people, when the shepherds are daunted and flee from
trouble. [4]
He was selfishly afraid
of risk, trouble, and ceremonial defilement, and since no one was there to know
of his conduct, he was thus led to neglect the traditional kindness of Jews
towards their own countrymen (Tacitus Hist. V. 5; Juvenal xiv. 103,104), as well as
the positive rules of the Law (Deuteronomy 22:4) and the Prophets (Isaiah lviii. 7). [56]
that way. Rather, “on the road.” It is emphatically mentioned, because there
was another road to
and when he saw him, he
passed by on the other side. First
“he saw him” and after seeing him “he passed by on the other side.” In other words, he went out of his way to
avoid doing anything at all—to not even come close. [rw]
In depth: How did the
priest rationalize his conduct?
He does not look whether it be an enemy or friend. His only idea [is]: "This is a dangerous place, and I must
escape." If some compassion stirs
his heart, "He is too far gone, what can I do?" Or his robes might be spoiled with
blood. He may tell others, "I saw a
poor creature dying, and I prayed for his soul." Yet this priest would have aided a[n animal]
in danger (Luke 14:5). "If thou
meet an enemy's ass lying under a burden, thou shalt
surely help him" (Exodus 23:5). God
prefers mercy to sacrifice: he omitted
the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith. [7]
There
may have been many excuses for this neglect of the wounded man: danger, hate, dread of defilement, expense,
but Jesus does not consider any of them worth mentioning. [53]
In depth: The unique nature of the condemnation [18]. It
has been remarked that the grave censure which this story levels at the
everyday want of charity on the part of priests and Levites, fills up what
would otherwise have been a blank in the Master's many-sided teaching. Nowhere else in the gospel narrative do we
find our Lord taking up the attitude of censor of the priestly and Levitical orders. We
have little difficulty in discovering reasons for this apparently strange
reticence. They were still the official
guardians and ministers of his Father's house. In his public teaching, as a rule, he would
refrain from touching these or their hollow, pretentious lives.
Once, and once
only, in this one parable did he dwell--but even here with no severe
denunciations, as in the case of scribes and Pharisees--on the shortcomings of
the priestly caste. The bitter woe was
fast coming on these degenerate children of Aaron. In less than half a century, that house, the
glory and the joy of
Weymouth: In like manner
a Levite also came to the place, and seeing him passed by on the other side.
WEB: In the
same way a Levite also, when he came to the place, and saw him, passed by on
the other side.
Young’s: and in like manner also, a Levite, having
been about the place, having come and seen, passed over on the opposite side.
Conte (RC): And similarly a
Levite, when he was near the place, also saw him, and he passed by.
and looked upon him. It is remarked by critics here that the
expression used does not denote, as in the case of the priest, that he
accidentally saw him and took no farther notice of him, but that he came and
looked on him more attentively --but still did nothing to relieve him. [11]
passed by on the other side. Thus did the priest and the Levite, who made
their boast in, and were the express interpreters of that law, which was so
careful in pressing the duties of humanity, that twice it had said, "Thou shalt not see thy brother's ass or his ox fall down by the
way, and hide thyself from them: thou shalt surely help him to lift them up again" (Deut.
xxii. 4; Ec. xxxiii. 5). Here not a brother's ox or his ass, but a
brother himself was lying in his blood, and they hid themselves from him (Isa. lviii. 7). These men had not learned that God "will
have mercy rather than sacrifice." [9]
In depth: how did the Levite rationalize his conduct? There was pride, [for Levites] were superior
in station, of the sacred tribe, and despised the poor wounded man. There was selfish fear probably--they might
be attacked by the same robbers. There
was over-sensibility probably--they shrank from the sight of an object so
deplorable. [7]
Or: Sadler
comments, "It seems as if the Levite examined the case more closely, but
declined giving assistance as too difficult or too expensive. The Levite seems in one respect to have been
more blamable than the priest, for being more of a menial servant of the
temple, he was accustomed to rougher work . . . so it would not have been out
of the way of his occupation to remove the wounded man to the neighbouring inn."
[30]
Or: Perhaps
the Priest had been aware that a Levite was behind him, and left the trouble to
him: and perhaps the Levite said to
himself that he need not do what the priest had not thought fit to do. [56]
WEB: But a
certain Samaritan, as he traveled, came where he was. When he saw him, he was
moved with compassion,
Young’s: 'But a certain Samaritan, journeying,
came along him, and having seen him, he was moved with compassion,
Conte (RC): But a certain
Samaritan, being on a journey, came near him. And seeing him, he was moved by
mercy.
The
southern border of their territory was not far north of this road, and with all
their mutual hatred, there was nothing, under the Roman rule, to hinder their
traveling through each other’s country. [52]
The irony:
A Samaritan is thus selected for high eulogy—though the Samaritans had
so ignominiously rejected Jesus (
as he journeyed, came where he was. Speculation:
He was not “coming down” as the Priest and Levite were from the
and when he saw him, he had compassion on him. Thereby shewing himself, in spite of his heresy and ignorance, a
better man than the orthodox Priest and Levite; and all the more so because he
was an “alien” (17:18), and “the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans”
(John 4:9) and this very wounded man would, under other circumstances, have
shrunk from the touch of the Samaritan as from pollution. Yet this “Cuthaean”—this
“worshipper of the pigeon”—this man of a race which was accused of misleading
the Jews by false fire-signals, and of defiling the Temple with human
bones—whose testimony would not have been admitted in a Jewish court of
law—with whom no Jew would so much as eat (Josephus Antiquities xx. 6,
1, xviii. 2, 2; B. J. II. 12. 3)--shews a spontaneous
and perfect pity of which neither Priest nor Levite had been remotely
capable. The fact that the Jews had
applied to our Lord Himself the opprobrious name of “Samaritan” (John
In depth: The origins
and characteristics of the Samaritans [22]. This people
was a mixed race which sprang up in Northern Israel after the fall of the
Kingdom of Israel, in B.C. 722, as a result of the intermarriage of the heathen
Assyrian colonists (II Kings 17:24-41) with the remnants of the Israelites left
in the land. On account of this impurity
of their descent and because of their opposition to the rebuilding of the
WEB: came to
him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. He set him on his own
animal, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.
Young’s: and having come near, he bound up his
wounds, pouring on oil and wine, and having lifted him up on his own beast, he
brought him to an inn, and was careful of him;
Conte (RC): And approaching him,
he bound up his wounds, pouring oil and wine on them. And setting him on his
pack animal, he brought him to an inn, and he took care of him.
pouring in oil and
wine. Oil and wine always formed part of the
provision for a journey. [13]
Usual remedies for
sores, wounds, etc. Hippocrates
prescribes for ulcers, "Bind with soft wool, and sprinkle with wine and oil." [2]
If the oil was brought
from
and set him upon his own beast. “Set:” The word implies the labour
of “lifting him up,” and then the good Samaritan walked by his
side. [56]
and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. The last thing a wounded man needed was to
be left outdoors over night. For that
matter there was always the danger the thieves would return and make the
Samaritan an additional victim. So he
does the wise thing and proceeds to an inn (where there would be a roof over
their heads) and took additional care of him (provided for any obvious
needs: water, a comforting word,
etc.). [rw]
WEB: On the
next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii,
and gave them to the host, and said to him, 'Take care of him. Whatever you
spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.'
Young’s: and on the morrow, going forth, taking
out two denaries, he gave to the innkeeper, and said
to him, Be careful of him, and whatever thou mayest
spend more, I, in my coming again, will give back to thee.
Conte (RC): And the next day, he
took out two denarii, and he gave them to the
proprietor, and he said: 'Take care of him. And whatever extra you will have
spent, I will repay to you at my return.'
he took out two pence
and gave them to the host.
Benevolent himself, he treats the host as guided by self-interest
alone. [7]
Stier
says, "He does not demand of the host to continue the work of love freely
and for nothing; he lays no burden on the shoulder of another, because he had
preceded with a good example; but pays in advance ample wages for two days' labour." [30]
The host. The innkeeper. [11]
The word occurs here
only in the New Testament, and the fact that in the Talmud the Greek
word for “an inn with a host” is adopted, seems to shew
that the institution had come in with Greek customs. In earlier and simpler days the open
hospitality of the East excluded the necessity for anything but ordinary
khans. [56]
and saith unto him, Take care of him. The inns of the ancients supplied
nothing but room and lodging, it being expected that the traveller
carried his own supplies. [14]
and whatsoever thou spendest more. No need for you to worry that this might
cost you more than what I’m leaving for you.
[rw]
when I come again. Implying
that he was a regular traveler along this route and had no doubt that he would
be returning again. [rw]
I will repay thee. "Emphatic. The wounded man must not be made chargeable." (Bengel) [30]
WEB: Now which
of these three do you think seemed to be a neighbor to him who fell among the
robbers?"
Young’s: 'Who, then, of these three, seemeth to thee to have become neighbour
of him who fell among the robbers?'
Conte (RC): Which of these
three, does it seem to you, was a neighbor to him who fell among the
robbers?"
We typically think of “neighbors” as those who live close to us. Jesus uses the term of whoever we
encounter, a much broader use of the term.
[rw]
WEB: He said,
"He who showed mercy on him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do
likewise."
Young’s: and he said, 'He who did the kindness
with him,' then Jesus said to him, 'Be going on, and thou be doing in like
manner.'
Conte (RC): Then he said,
"The one who acted with mercy toward him." And Jesus said to him,
"Go, and act similarly."
Jesus
gave countenance to no such racial prejudice, even though the Samaritans had
rejected him but a few weeks before this (Luke
Our neighbour
is he who stands in need of our assistance, let him be what he will. Blood, interest, friendship, inclination, or
vain generosity, are but private and
selfish motives: the common ties of
nature, and those of grace, are the things which ought to give us a common
satisfaction or concern for the happiness or misery of other men. Mercy is a natural debt, not a service which
is arbitrary and left to our own discretion.
[27]
Then said Jesus unto him, Go and do thou likewise. Show the same kindness to all--to friend and
foe--and then you will have evidence that you keep the Law, and not till
then. [11]
Learn from an enemy
wisdom, and imitate him. Thus is the
question answered. No matter how warm
our expressions, how burning our eloquence, how superior our dogmas, so long as
we have not charity they profit us nothing. 1 Cor.
xiii. In Christ Jesus neither
circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision--neither privilege of itself saves, nor want
of it ruins, but only as joined to faith which worketh
by love. "For all the law is
fulfilled in one word, even in this:
Thou shalt love they neighbor as
thyself." Gal. v. 6, 14. [4]
In depth: An
allegorical interpretation of the parable, using it to construct a parallel
with spiritual matters [18]. Another and a very different exposition of
this great parable treats it as a Divine allegory. It commends itself to the present generation
less than the plain matter-of-fact exegesis adopted in the foregoing notes. In the allegory, the wounded traveller represents mankind at large, stripped by the
devil and his angels; he is left by them grievously wounded, yet not dead
outright. Priest and Levite were alike
powerless to help.
"Many
passed us by," once wrote a devout mediaeval writer, "and there was
none to save." Moses and his Law, Aaron and his sacrifices, patriarch,
prophet, and priest,—these were powerless. Only the true Samaritan (Christ), beholding,
was moved with compassion and poured oil into the wounds.
Among the
ancients, Chrysostom and Clement of
Weymouth: As they
pursued their journey He came to a certain village, where a woman named Martha
welcomed Him to her house.
WEB: It
happened as they went on their way, he entered into a certain village, and a
certain woman named Martha received him into her house.
Young’s: And it came to pass, in their going on,
that he entered into a certain village, and a certain woman, by name Martha,
did receive him into her house,
Conte (RC): Now it happened
that, while they were traveling, he entered into a certain town. And a certain
woman, named Martha, received him into her home.
and a certain woman named
Martha. The name is rather Aramaic than pure
Hebrew. It is equivalent to the Greek Kyria, and signifies "lady." It has been suggested that the Second Epistle
of
received Him.
Received Him kindly and hospitably.
[11]
into her house. We know little of the internal relations of
the family. Lazarus appears as without a
wife—perhaps a widower. Martha appears
as the older sister. Some think her to
have been the wife of one Simon, who had been a leper, whose house was known as
his after his decease (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; compare John 12:1). The house is here called “her house” and she
is seen to be housekeeper. [52]
In depth: Who were
the members of this family [18]? Various
identifications, more or less probable, have been attempted in the persons of
the
In depth: Why isn’t
the name of the village or of Lazarus mentioned [18]? A close
intimacy evidently existed between the brother and his two sisters and Jesus.
They evidently were prominent friends of the Master, and during the years of
the public ministry were on many occasions associated with Jesus of
There was some reason, no doubt, why
the three synoptical evangelists exercised this
reticence. The long recital of John
11:1-57 gives us the clue. For the
disciples of Jesus publicly to call attention in their sermons and addresses to
Lazarus, on whom the Master's greatest miracle had been worked,
would have no doubt called down a ceaseless, restless hostility on the Bethany
household; for it must be remembered that for years after the Resurrection the
deadly enemies of Jesus and his followers were supreme in Jerusalem and the neighbourhood.
There were [other] reasons, no
doubt, now unknown to us, which rendered it important to the welfare of the
early Church that the
WEB: She had a
sister called Mary, who also sat at Jesus' feet, and heard his word.
Young’s: and she had also a sister, called Mary,
who also, having seated herself beside the feet of Jesus, was hearing the word,
Conte (RC): And she had a
sister, named Mary, who, while sitting beside the Lord's feet, was listening to
his word.
This was the common
posture of disciples before their teachers. Deut. xxxiii. 3. So
and heard His word. This
notable difference in their manner of receiving the Lord, may have arisen from the different
lights, under which they regarded His Person.
Martha may have regarded Him, as come to establish a temporal kingdom;
and therefore she was cumbered with much serving, in order to do Him the greatest honour. Mary, on the other
hand, viewing Him, as a Spiritual teacher and deliverer, waited upon Him in
silent attention and sat at His feet.
As is the nature and degree of our faith, so is our conduct;
according to our inward apprehension [= understanding] of the Lord, is our outward demeanour [= behavior] towards Him. vii. 47;
Martha honored Christ as a
"guest", but Mary honored him as a "teacher". [53]
WEB: But
Martha was distracted with much serving, and she came up to him, and said,
"Lord, don't you care that my sister left me to serve alone? Ask her
therefore to help me."
Young’s: and Martha was distracted about much
serving, and having stood by him, she said, 'Sir, dost thou not care that my
sister left me alone to serve? say then to her, that she may partake along with
me.'
Conte (RC): Now Martha was
continually busying herself with serving. And she stood still and said:
"Lord, is it not a concern to you that my sister has left me to serve
alone? Therefore, speak to her, so that she may help me."
cumbered.
Greek, "distracted by thought-scattering anxieties." [7]
Literally
means “was being dragged in different direction,” i.e., was distracted
(1 Corinthians
and
came to Him and said. Dr. Farrar very happily seizes the tone and
temper of Martha. He renders the Greek
words here, "but suddenly coming up."
We see in this inimitable touch the little petulant outburst of jealousy
in the loving, busy [woman], as she hurried in with the words, "Why is
Mary sitting there doing nothing?" [18]
Lord, Dost Thou not
care. This was an improper reproof of our Lord, as
if He encouraged Mary in neglecting her duty. Or perhaps Martha supposed that Mary was
sitting there to show Him the proper expressions of courtesy and kindness and
that Mary would not think it proper to leave Him without His direction and
permission. She, therefore, hinted
to Jesus the need of the aid of her sister and requested that Jesus would
signify His wish that Mary should assist her.
[11]
that my sister hath left me to serve alone? “Left me:” The Greek word means ‘left me
alone in the middle of my work” to come and listen to you. [56]
bid her therefore that she help me. We almost
seem to hear the undertone of “It is no use for me to tell her.” [56]
WEB: Jesus
answered her, "Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many
things,
Young’s: And Jesus answering said to her, 'Martha,
Martha, thou art anxious and disquieted about many things,
Conte (RC): And the Lord
responded by saying to her: "Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled
over many things.
thou art careful [worried, NKJV] and troubled. Disturbed, distracted. [11]
about many things. The
many objects which [require] your attention in the family. [11]
Our Lord by no means
condemns household activities: prompt, untiring energies in the daily affairs
of life often solemnly enjoined (Proverbs 6:6; 10:5; 1 Timothy 5:8). He did condemn the state of mind
she had in her work. [7]
In depth: The relationship of the admonition to the
preceding parable of the good Samaritan. Stier
comments, "We would regard it as the intention of the Evangelist to guard
by this deep contrast, in its juxtaposition with the preceding parable, against
the misconception, which even to this day clings to people's view of the good
Samaritan. Have not many believers who
wish to follow Christ's admonition, and offer to Him the loving service of
abundant works of charity, lost themselves, on the other side, in a Christian
concern about many things, in an urgent, self-troubled spirit, which prevents
the calm reception of peace? And is not
the inmost fundamental thought of the word directed to busy Martha a warning
against such a tendency?" [30]
WEB: but one
thing is needed. Mary has chosen the good part, which will not be taken away
from her."
Young’s: but of one thing there is need, and Mary
the good part did choose, that shall not be taken away from her.'
Conte (RC): And yet only one
thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the best portion, and it shall not be taken
away from her."
and
Mary hath chosen that good
part. Not in the general sense of
Moses' choice (Hebrews
which shall not be taken away from her. Our Saviour will never Himself take away His grace from the
believer, nor allow any creature to do it.
Only as we reject it, will it be lost.
[4]
To speak of such
theological questions as “indefectible grace” here, is to use the narrative
otherwise than was intended. The general
meaning is that of Philippians 1:6; 1 Peter 1:5. It has been usual with Roman Catholic and
other writers to see in Martha the type of the active, and in Mary of the
contemplative disposition, and to exalt one above the other. This is not the point of the narrative, for
both may and ought to be combined as in
In depth: An
alternate reading to “one thing” [18]. Some
expositors have taken the expression to mean "a single dish is
sufficient" for my entertainment; so much careful, anxious thought is
thrown away. A curious variation in the
reading occurs here in some, though not in all the oldest, authorities. It seems as though some of the early copyists
of the text of the Gospel were wishful to make the words, which they possibly
understood as a lesson of the Master's on simplicity of food, clearer
and more emphatic.
This other
reading is, "There is need of few things, or of one only." In other words, "Few things are enough
for me and my friends to sit down to, or even one dish only." The teaching contained in Luke 10:7 gives a
little colour to this quaint interpretation of the
Master's words here, which sees in them a general warning against taking
thought for the pleasures of the table.
But, on the
whole, the old reading contained in the received text is preferable, and the
old interpretation, too, viz. that the true life of man needs but one thing,
or, if the other reading be adopted, needs but few things. If we must specify the one, we
would call it "love," or "charity." So John, we know, in his old days, summed up
all man's duties in this "love."
If, on the other hand, we are asked to name the few, then
we would add to love, faith and hope. The parable of the
"good Samaritan," that practical lesson of the love or charity the
Master was alluding to, had just been spoken; it was still, we may reverently
assume, fresh in the Divine Teacher's mind.
Books Utilized
(with number code)
1 = Adam Clarke. The New
Testament . . . with a Commentary and
Critical Notes. Volume
I: Matthew to the Acts. Reprint,
2 = Marvin R. Vincent. Word
Studies in the New Testament. Volume
I:
The Synoptic Gospels, Acts of
the Apostles, Epistles of Peter, James,
and Jude. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1887; 1911 printing.
3 = J. S. Lamar. Luke.
[Eugene S. Smith, Publisher; reprint, 1977 (?)]
4 = Charles H. Hall. Notes,
Practical and Expository on the Gospels;
volume two: Luke-John.
1871.
5 = John Kitto.
Daily Bible Illustrations.
Volume II: Evening
Series:
The Life and Death of Our Lord.
Brothers, 1881.
6 = Thomas M. Lindsay. The Gospel
According to St. Luke. Two
volumes.
7 = W. H. van Doren. A Suggestive Commentary on the New
Testament:
Saint Luke. Two
volumes.
1868.
8 = Melancthon W. Jacobus.
Notes on the Gospels, Critical and
Explanatory: Luke and John.
Brothers, 1856; 1872 reprint.
9 = Alfred Nevin.
Popular Expositor of the Gospels and Acts: Luke.
10 = Alfred Nevin.
The Parables of Jesus.
Board of Publication, 1881.
11 = Albert Barnes. "Luke." In Barnes' Notes on the New Testament.
Reprint, Kregel Publications, 1980.
12 = Alexander B. Bruce. The Synoptic
Gospels. In The Expositor's
Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll. Reprint, Grand
Rapids,
13 = F. Godet.
A Commentary on the Gospel of St. Luke. Translated
from the Second French Edition by E. W. Shalders
and M. D. Cusin.
14 =
15 = Henry Alford. The Greek
Testament. Volume I: The Four Gospels.
Fifth Edition.
16 = David Brown. "Luke"
in Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and
David Brown, A Commentary,
Critical and Explanatory, on the
Old and New Testaments.
Volume II: New Testament.
S. S. Scranton Company, no date.
17 = Dr. [no first name provided] MacEvilly. An Exposition of the Gospel
of St. Luke.
18 = H. D. M. Spence. “Luke.”
In the Pulpit Commentary, edited by H. D.
M. Spence. Reprinted by Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company,
1950.
19 = John Calvin. Commentary on a
Harmony of the Evangelists,
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Translated
by William Pringle. Reprint,
20 = Thomas Scott. The Holy Bible
. . . with Explanatory Notes (and)
Practical Observations.
21 = Henry T. Sell. Bible Studies
in the Life of Christ: Historical and
Constructive.
22 = Philip Vollmer. The Modern
Student's Life of Christ.
Fleming H. Revell Company, 1912.
23 = Heinrich A. W. Meyer. Critical
and Exegetical Handbook to the
Gospels of Mark and Luke.
Translated from the Fifth German
Edition by Robert Ernest Wallis.
N. Y.: Funk and Wagnalls,
1884; 1893 printing.
24 = John Albert Bengel. Gnomon of the New
Testament. A New
Translation by Charlton T.
Lewis and Marvin R. Vincent.
Volume One.
25 = John Cummings. Sabbath
Evening Readers on the New Testa-
ment: St. Luke.
26 = Walter F. Adeney, editor. The Century Bible: A Modern
Commentary--Luke.
missing from copy.
27 = Pasquier Quesnel.
The Gospels with Reflections on Each Verse.
Volumes I and II. (Luke is in
part of both).
D. F. Randolph, 1855; 1867 reprint.
28 = Charles R. Erdman. The Gospel
of Luke: An Exposition.
29 = Elvira J. Slack. Jesus: The Man of
Board of the Young Womens Christian
Associations, 1911.
30 = Arthur Ritchie. Spiritual
Studies in St. Luke's Gospel.
The Young Churchman Company, 1906.
31 = Bernhard Weiss. A Commentary
on the New Testament. Volume
Two: Luke-The Acts.
32 = Matthew Henry. Commentary on
the Whole Bible. Volume V:
Matthew to John. 17--. Reprint,
Company, no date.
33 = C. G. Barth.
The Bible Manual: An
Expository and Practical
Commentary on the Books of Scripture. Second Edition.
34 = Nathaniel S. Folsom. The Four
Gospels: Translated . . . and with
Critical and Expository Notes.
Third Edition.
Upham, and Company, 1871; 1885 reprint.
35 = Henry Burton. The Gospel
according to Luke. In the Expositor's
Bible series.
36 = [Anonymous]. Choice Notes on
the Gospel of S. Luke, Drawn from
Old and New Sources.
37 = Marcus Dods.
The Parables of Our Lord.
Revell Company, 18--.
38 = Alfred
Edersheim. The
Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.
Second Edition.
1884.
39 = A. T. Robertson. Luke the
Historian in the Light of Research.
New York: Charles Scribner's
Sons, 1920; 1930 reprint.
40 = James R. Gray. Christian
Workers' Commentary on the Old and
New Testaments.
ion/Fleming H. Revell Company, 1915.
41 = W.
Sanday. Outlines
of the Life of Christ.
Scribner's Sons, 1905.
42 = Halford E. Luccock. Studies in the Parables of Jesus.
Methodist Book Concern, 1917.
43 = George
H. Hubbard. The Teaching of Jesus in
Parables. New
44 = Charles S. Robinson. Studies
in Luke's Gospel. Second Series.
45 = John
Laidlaw. The
Miracles of Our Lord.
Wagnalls Company, 1892.
46 = William
M. Taylor. The Miracles of Our Saviour. Fifth
Edition.
New York: A. C. Armstrong &
Son, 1890; 1903 reprint.
47 = Alexander
Maclaren. Expositions
of Holy Scripture: St. Luke.
New York: George H. Doran
Company, [no date].
48 = George
MacDonald. The Miracles of Our Lord.
George Routledge & Sons, 1878.
49 = Joseph
Parker. The People's Bibles: Discourses upon Holy Scrip-
ture—Mark-Luke.
50 = Daniel
Whitby and Moses Lowman. A Critical Commentary and
Paraphrase on the New Testament:
The Four Gospels and the Acts
of the Apostles.
51 = Matthew
Poole. Annotations on the Holy Bible. 1600s.
Computerized.
52 = George
R. Bliss. Luke. In An American Commentary on the New
Testament.
1884.
53 = J.
W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel.
1914. Computerized.
54 = John Trapp. Commentary on the Old and New Testaments. 1654.
Computerized.
55 = Ernest D. Burton and Shailer Matthews. The Life of Christ.
Chicago, Illinois: University of
Chicago Press, 1900; 5th reprint,
1904.
56 = Frederic W. Farrar. The Gospel According to St. Luke. In “The
the University Press,
1882.