From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Mark Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2013
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.
Over 50 Interpreters
Explain the Gospel of Mark
A COMPENDIUM OF THE MOST INSIGHTFUL MATERIAL FROM COMMENTARIES
AND OTHER WORKS
NOW IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
Volume 2:
Chapters 9-16
Compiled and Edited
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr.
Copyright © 2013 by author
All electronic and computer
reproduction both permitted and encouraged so long as authorial and compiler
credit is given
and
the text is not altered.
*
The primary text of this work is the traditional King
James Version. More modern renditions
are included from the New King James Version of selected words and phrases.
Scripture taken from the New King
James Version. Copyright © 1979, 1980, 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. All rights reserved.
*
WORKS CITED
1 = G.
A. Chadwick. The
Gospel According to St. Mark.
New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son.
2 = A.
Irvine Robertson. Lessons
on the Gospel of St. Mark.
New York: Fleming H. Revell
Company.
3 = Joseph
Addison Alexander. The
Gospel According to Mark.
New
York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co.,
1858 (1874 printing).
4 = Andrew
C. Zenos. The
Son of Man: Studies in the Gospel of
Mark. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons.
5 = A.
C. Gaebelein. The
Annotated Bible; volume 1: The
Gospels and
the
Book of Acts. New York: Publication Office "Our Hope,"
1913.
6 = W.
C. Allen. The
Gospel According to Saint Mark.
New York: Macmillan Company, 1915.
7 = Robert
F. Horton. The
Cartoons of St. Mark.
New York: Fleming H. Revell
Company, 1894.
8 = Edwin
W. Rice. People's Commentary on the
Gospel
According
to Mark. (Fourth
Edition). Philadelphia: The
American
Sunday-School Union, 1892.
9 = Harvey
Goodwin. A
Commentary on the Gospel of Mark.
Cambridge: Deighton, Bell and
Company, 1860.
10 = John
Henry Burn. The Preacher's Homiletic
Commentary on the
Gospel according to
Mark. New York: Funk & Wagnalls.
11 = Matthew
P. Riddle. The International
Revision Commentary on
Mark. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1881.
12 = John
Peter Lange. A Commentary on the Holy
Scriptures: The
Gospel according to
Mark. Sixth
Edition. New York: Scribner,
Armstrong
& Company, 1866; 1872 printing.
13 = Edward
I. Bosworth. Studies
in the Life of Jesus Christ.
New
York: Young Men's Christian Association Press,
1904; 1909 reprint.
14 = Charles
R. Erdman. The
Gospel of Mark.
Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1917.
15 = Henry
Cowles. Matthew and
Mark. New York: D. Appleton &
Company,
1881.
16 = John
Albert Bengel.
Gnomon of the New Testament (volume 1).
Revised and Edited by
Andrew R. Fausset.
Edinburgh: T. & T.
Clark, MDCCCLIX.
17 = Alexander
Bruce. "The Synoptic Gospels"
in The Expositor's Greek
Testament
(Volume One). New York: Hodder and
Stoughton, [no
date].
18 = Samuel
J. Andrews. The
Life of Our Lord. Fourth Edition.
New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Company, 1873.
19 = Melanchton W. Jacobus. Notes on the Gospel of
Mark. 1853. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1859; 1872
printing.
20 = Pasquier Quesnel. The Gospels: with Moral Reflections on Each
Verse. Volume I. New
York: Anson D. F. Randolph, 1855; 1867
printing.
21 = Adam
Clarke. Commentary
on Mark. No date
22 = Bernhard
Weiss. A Commentary on the New
Testament: Matthew
and
Mark. Translated by George H. Schodde and Epiphanius
Wilson. New York; Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1906.
23 = W.
N. Clarke. American
Commentary on the Gospel of Mark.
Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1881.
24 = Alfred
Nevin. Popular
Expositor of the Gospels and Acts:
Matthew,
Mark, John. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Ziegler & McCurdy, 1871.
25 = Charles
H. Hall. Notes, Practical and Expository
on the Gospels:
Matthew and Mark
(Second Edition). New York: Hurd and
Houghton, 1856, 1871.
26 = Jeremiah
W. Jenks. The Political and Social
Significance of the Life
and Teachings of Jesus.
New York: Young Men's Christian
Association Press, 1906; 1908 printing.
27 = Herman
H. Horne. Modern Problems as Jesus
Saw Them. New
York: Association Press, 1918;
1926 printing.
28 = Henry
C. King. The Ethics
of Jesus. New York: Macmillan
Company, 1910; 1912 printing.
29 = Halford E. Luccock. Studies in the Parables
of Jesus. New York: Methodist
Book Concern, 1917; 1925 reprint.
30 = W.
H. Thomson. The
Parables by the Lake. New
York: Harper & Brothers,
Publishers, 1895.
31 = ?
32 = William
M. Taylor. The
Miracles of Our Saviour. New York:
A. C. Armstrong
& Son, 1890; 5th edition, 1903.
33 = John
Laidlaw. The Miracles of Our Lord. New York:
Funk &
Wagnalls Company, 1892.
34 = A.
T. Robertson. Studies
in Mark's Gospel. New
York: Macmillan Company, 1918; 1919.
35 = Ernest
De Witt Burton. Studies
in the Gospel According to Mark.
Chicago,
Illinois: University of Chicago Press,
1904; 1923 printing.
36 = Joseph
Parker. The People's Bible: Mark-Luke. New York:
Funk
& Wagnalls
Company, 18--.
37 = Marcus
Dods. The Parables of our Lord. New York:
Fleming H.
Revell Company, 18--.
38 = J.
W. McGarvey. Commentary on Matthew and Mark. 1875.
39 = E.
Bickerstith. St.
Mark in The Pulpit Commentary. Reprint,
Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Wm B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company.
40 = Henry
Alford. The Greek Testament. Volume One; Fifth Edition.
Cambridge, Britain,
1863.
41 = Benjamin
W. Bacon. The
Beginnings of the Gospel Story.
New
Haven, Connecticut: Yale
University Press, 1909.
42 = Albert
Barnes. Commentary on Mark. 18--.
43 = David
Brown. The Four
Gospels. Philadelphia: William S. &
Alfred Martien, 1859.
44 = Ernest
D. Burton and Shailer Matthews. The Life of Christ.
Chicago,
Illinois: University of Chicago
Press, 1900; 18th reprint, 1923.
45 = W.
A. Campbell. A
Commentary on the Gospel According to Mark. Richmond,
Virginia: Presbyterian Publishing
Company, 1881.
46 = G.
A. Chadwick. The
Gospel According to Mark. In The
Expositor's
Bible. New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son, 1903.
47 = John
Cumming. Sabbath Evening Readings on the New Testament:
Mark. Cleveland, Ohio: John P. Jewett and Company, 1853.
48 = Andrews
Norton. A Translation of the Gospels With Notes.
Boston: Little, Brown, and Company,1856
49 = B.
W. Johnson. The
People's New Testament. 18--.
50 = Alexander
Maclaren. Expositions
of Holy Scripture: Mark.
Hartford,
Connecticut: S. S. Scranton Company.
51 = F.
N. Peloubet and M. A. Peloubet. A Commentary on the
International Lesson for 1895. Boston: W. A. Wilde and Company,
1894.
F. N. Peloubet
and M. A. Peloubet. A Commentary on the
International Lessons for 1900. New
York: Fleming H. Revell
Company, 1899.
52 = Thomas
Scott. Commentary
on the Bible. Volume Three.
Philadelphia: Lippincott &
Company, 1862.
53 = Marvin
R. Vincent. Word
Studies in the New Testament.
Volume I:
The Synoptic Gospls, Acts of the Apostles, Epistles of Peter, James,
and
Jude. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1887;
1911 reprint.
54 = Matthew
Henry. Commentary
on the Whole Bible.
1721. Reprint,
York: Fleming H. Revell
Company, [no date].
*
From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain the Gospel of
Mark Return to
Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2013
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 9:
9:1 Translations
Weymouth: He went on to
say, "In solemn truth I tell you that some of those who are standing here
will certainly not taste death till they have seen the Kingdom of God already
come in power."
WEB: He said
to them, "Most certainly I tell you, there are
some standing here who will in no way taste death until they see the Kingdom of
God come with power."
Young’s: And he
said to them, 'Verily I say to you, That there are
certain of those standing here, who may not taste of death till they see the
reign of God having come in power.'
Conte (RC): And he said
to them, "Amen I say to you, that there are some among those standing here
who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God arriving in power.
9:1 And He said to them.
This verse is in [a] sense inseparable from the preceding
[8:34-38]. This closing word was
intended for solemn warning and encouragement to the men of that generation who
had just been put to the test by the words already spoken; as if He had said,
"You will not have long to wait."
[23]
Verily
[Assuredly] I say unto you. A rhetorical means of stressing the
certainty and importance of what is about to be said. [rw]
That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not
taste of death. (1)
Stressing the chronological nearness:
it is no longer merely “near” or “at hand;” this is shown by the use of
an expression that is far less vague and permits no undue lengthening of the
time period under discussion—“which shall not taste of death.” In other words, within
their lifetimes. (2) “Some of them” though leaves open how many
would be alive when the promise was fulfilled:
If it were to be within the next few months or even year or two, would
not the more appropriate terms have been “most” or “nearly all of them”? [rw]
Till they have seen the kingdom of God present. The Transfiguration has bee thought to be referred to, but this was too
near at hand to be meant, as it occurred only a week afterwards; nor can the
final judgment be meant as that was beyond the lifetime of those present.
Some understand the outpouring of the Spirit on the day of
Pentecost. We need not, however, limit
the application of the language to a single event. Jesus was speaking of His
death, the establishment of His kingdom, and the conditions of membership. It is the new dispensation, which could not
be proclaimed till after His resurrection, that is the
subject of discourse. We may therefore
understand "the coming of the kingdom with power" or its parallel in
Matthew, "the Son of Man coming in His kingdom," to include all
the early events that ushered in and gave prosperity to His kingdom under the
new dispensation, beginning with Pentecost and including the destruction of
Jerusalem and the overthrow of the nation.
[45]
with power. The
expression probably refers to the coming of the kingdom in the conversion of
multitudes who should believe on Him in the times of the apostles after His
resurrection. [35]
Or: All save one were witnesses of His
resurrection and of the Pentecostal scene [Acts 2]; one at least, John,
survived the capture of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, and on
each of these occasions "the kingdom of God" was manifested
"with power." [8]
9:2 Translations
Weymouth: Six days
later, Jesus took with Him Peter, James, and John, and brought them alone,
apart from the rest, up a high mountain; and in their presence His appearance
underwent a change.
WEB: After six
days Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John, and brought them up onto a
high mountain privately by themselves, and he was changed into another form in
front of them.
Young’s: And after six days doth Jesus take Peter, and James, and
John, and bringeth them up to a high mount by
themselves, alone, and he was transfigured before them,
Conte (RC): And after
six days, Jesus took with him Peter, and James, and John; and he led them
separately to a lofty mountain alone; and he was transfigured before them.
9:2 And after six days. St.
Luke (9:28) says, "About eight days after these sayings." There is no real discrepancy here. There were six whole days that
intervened between our Lord's words and the Transfiguration itself. [39]
Jesus taketh
with him Peter, and James, and John. The “inner three” of the apostolic group. If
Peter were all that much more important than the others (as in Catholic theology),
would we not have expected it to have been Jesus and Peter alone? [rw]
into
an high mountain. The Transfiguration probably took place in
the night. 1. Jesus had gone up into the mountain to pray
(Luke 9:28), which He usually did at night (Luke 6:12; 21:37; 22:39; Matthew
14:23, 24). 2. The Apostles were heavy with sleep. 3.
They did not descend till the next day (Luke 9:37). 4. The
Transfiguration itself could be seen to better advantage at night than in
daylight. [11]
apart by themselves. The other apostles were spending the night
below. [23]
and He. This splendor was not in
the air, nor in the eyes of the Disciples, but in the person of the Son of
God--a splendor which communicated itself to His raiment so that "his
garments became glistering, exceeding white; so as no fuller on earth can
whiten them." [39]
was transfigured before them. The
change in His appearance took place while He was praying (Luke 9:29). [11]
Literally, "He was
changed in form." Luke, writing
primarily for Greek readers, avoids the word "transfigured" or
"transformed" ("metamorphosed" would be a still closer
rendering), which Matthew and Mark employ.
The associations of heathen mythology would almost inevitably attach
themselves to it in the imagination of a Greek.
In naming this great event "die Verklarung,"
or "the Glorification," German theology has seized this point, not
the same as our "Transfiguration."
[8]
In depth:
What was the purpose behind the Transfiguration [45]? On no point do the
expositors of Scripture seem more at variance than as to the object of the
transfiguration. The views of some will
be presented but we need not regard as worthy of consideration the opinions of
those who do not admit inspiration and therefore deal with the narrative as
suit their views or fancies.
Some regard it as
designed for the benefit of our Lord along; others, for this with other
ends. Moore: "The great object of the transfiguration
terminated in the mind of our Lord Himself.
It was mainly designed to prepare Him for His approaching
sufferings." Thomson (in Smith's Bible
Dictionary) gives the same as one of several reasons. Farrar gives the same as its design, so far
as Jesus was concerned. There is,
however, no evidence in the narratives of any such purpose and several most
important circumstances cannot be explained on this
hypotheses.
Still more inadmissible
is the view of Olshausen that the transfiguration was
a stage in the development of the spiritual life of Jesus.
The above reason will
also stand against the view of Alford, who says: "This weighty event forms the solemn
installation of our Lord to His sufferings and their result." Thomson gives the same as one of the ends of
this event. There is, however, nothing
in the scene that at all suggests “an inauguration” or "installation” and
moreover He had already entered upon His sufferings.
Others see in it the
good of the disciples.
Kitto
says: "He now purposed to encourage
them, to strengthen their faith and to advance their views of His character and
office, by affording them a glimpse of that glory which essentially belonged to
Him." Owen, Lange, Farrar and Thomson
present similar opinions, giving prominence to strengthening the disciples'
faith for the special trials through which they were to pass. But we may ask, why
were only three of the disciples allowed to share these benefits? Why were Moses and Elijah especially chosen
from the redeemed in heaven in preference to other patriarchs and
prophets? Why was His decrease the topic
of conversation? Why was all hushed till
after the resurrection?
Barnes says: "The sole design of this
transfiguration was to convince them that He was the Christ; that He was
greater than the greatest of the prophets; that He was the Son of
God." We ask again, why convince
only three of the apostles of the fact?
And why has this grand event to convince them of what, just one week
before, they had so promptly confessed, and what their Lord acknowledged they
had received from the Father (8:29; Matthew 16:16-17)?
The most prominent
lesson of this scene, according to Macduff is “that
the legal and prophetical dispensations were superseded by the
gospel." Alford gives a modified
view of the same design. This, however,
restricts the significance of the scene to its vanishing, to the passing away
of Moses and Elijah, leaving Jesus only.
Adam Clarke sums up its
teachings, giving all the most important doctrines of revelation. As few will be ready to admit that all
divine truth was revealed on the mount of transfiguration, we need not consider
his long summary.
Brown presents a view
approaching nearer to that which will be advocated than any of the
preceding: "This scene was designed
to show to the eyes as well as the heart how glorious that death was in the
view of heaven." But even this does
not bring out the chief significance of the transfiguration.
Now, where there is such
diversity of opinion among Christian interpreters, it is less presumptuous to
suggest a new view of this portion of Scripture. The view proposed is that it should be
interpreted as a typical transaction:
The Transfiguration sets forth in a type the glory that Christ secured
for Himself and the redeemed by His death and triumphant resurrection.
9:3 Translations
Weymouth: His garments
also became dazzling with brilliant whiteness--such whiteness as no bleaching
on earth could give.
WEB: His
clothing became glistening, exceedingly white, like snow, such as no launderer
on earth can whiten them.
Young’s: and his
garments became glittering, white exceedingly, as snow, so as a fuller upon the
earth is not able to whiten them.
Conte (RC): And his
vestments became radiant and exceedingly white like snow, with such a brilliance as no fuller on earth is able to achieve.
9:3 And His raiment. Peter afterwards mentions the
face (1 Peter 1:16-18) and John alludes to it (John 1:14). [11]
became shining. A still more expressive term in the original
[Greek], applied by Homer to the glistening of polished surfaces and to the
glittering of arms, by Aristotle to the twinkling of the stars, and by
Euripides to the flashing of lightning, which last idea Luke (9:29) expresses
by a different verb. [3]
exceedingly white as snow, so as no fuller [launderer, NKJV] on earth
can white[n, NKJV] them. Persons
of high rank often were distinguished by the brightness of their white
garments. [11]
9:4 Translations
Weymouth: Moreover
there appeared to them Elijah accompanied by Moses; and the two were conversing
with Jesus,
WEB: Elijah
and Moses appeared to them, and they were talking with Jesus.
Young’s: And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were
talking with Jesus.
Conte (RC): And there
appeared to them Elijah with Moses; and they were speaking with Jesus.
9:4 And
there appeared unto them Elias [Elijah]
with Moses. They were recognized by the
disciples, probably by intuition. [11]
The same Divine power
which presented them with a vision of the other world gave them an intuitive
knowledge [of whom they saw]. [39]
Elias . . . with Moses. Moses was the law-giver of
Israel, the founder under God, of that dispensation. Elijah was a prominent prophet, perhaps the
most prominent after Moses; at least, he was so conspicuous as to be made the
type of the forerunner of the Messiah, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah. There was
something in the circumstances of these persons peculiarly fitting them to be
participants in a scene displaying the results of that work of which the
resurrection was the consummation.
Of the heavenly participants, Elijah
had not tasted death but had passed in a triumphal chariot to heaven. He was thus as it were a risen saint. As to Moses, the other
glorious personage, there was also something peculiar in his relation to death. He had died, it is true, and he was buried;
but no man was witness of his death. No
man ever knew of his sepulcher. So far as the eye of man was witness, so far as
his testimony could go, there was no death nor
burial. He, too, therefore, was a fit
participant in this transaction typical of the glory secured by a risen
Redeemer. [45]
And they were
talking with Jesus. Luke (9:31) says, “They spake of the decrease which He should accomplish at
Jerusalem." [45]
9:5 Translations
Weymouth: when Peter
said to Jesus, "Rabbi, we are thankful to you that we are here. Let us put
up three tents--one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
WEB: Peter
answered Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let's make three
tents: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
Young’s: And Peter answering saith to
Jesus, 'Rabbi, it is good to us to be here; and we may make three booths, for
thee one, and for Moses one, and for Elijah one:'
Conte (RC): And in
response, Peter said to Jesus: "Master, it is good for us to be here. And
so let us make three tabernacles, one for you, and one for Moses, and one for
Elijah."
9:5 And Peter answered and said to Jesus. He
did not probably respond to anything addressed to him, but to something implied
in what he saw or to some part of the conversation overheard. [45]
Master, it is good for us to be here. Implicitly
thanking Him for giving them the opportunity.
But recognizing the profound blessing they had been given, on one level
his mind may have been working frantically to show both that and the desire for
it to continue. What the next verse
tells us of his mind frame, however, is that on a conscious level at least he
was simply grasping for something to say.
Hence he comes up with the suggestion that follows. [rw]
let us make three tabernacles. So
delightful was the scene that he wished to retain them there by building for
each a tabernacle. [45]
three tabernacles. Tents or booths woven of the branches of
trees. In such booths the children of
Israel were required to dwell during the feast of tabernacles. Perhaps he vaguely remembered how God talked
with Moses at the tabernacle soon after the Exodus. [23]
one for thee,
and one for Moses, and one for Elias. For
themselves nothing is suggested. It was
enough of an honor to be permitted to remain in such illustrious company. [rw]
9:6 Translations
Weymouth: For he knew
not what to say: they were filled with such awe.
WEB: For he
didn't know what to say, for they were very afraid.
Young’s: for he was not knowing what he might say, for they were greatly
afraid.
Conte (RC): For he did
not know what he was saying. For
they were overwhelmed by fear.
9:6 because he did not know what to say. It
was too brief, too transient a glimpse and foretaste of the heavenly glory, for
him to recover his surprise. [8]
In all fairness to Peter, could we have spontaneously come up
with anything better to suggest? [rw]
For they were sore [greatly,
NKJV] afraid.
Compare Hebrews 12:21, "Moses said, I exceedingly fear and
quake." [8]
The experience was too grand to dare flee and too terrifying to
stay. Again, would we have been any
different? [rw]
9:7 Translations
Weymouth: Then there
came a cloud spreading over them, and a voice issued from the cloud, "This
is my Son, dearly loved: listen to Him."
WEB: A cloud
came, overshadowing them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is my
beloved Son. Listen to him."
Young’s: And there came a cloud overshadowing them, and there came a
voice out of the cloud, saying, 'This is My Son -- the Beloved, hear ye him;'
Conte (RC): And there
was a cloud overshadowing them. And a voice came from the cloud, saying: "This
is my most beloved Son. Listen to him."
9:7 And there was a cloud.
Matthew: "a bright
cloud." The cloud would
remind them of the pillar of cloud and fire at the Exodus (Exodus 13:21), of
the cloud that filled the temple of Solomon at the dedication (1 Kings 8:10),
which had also rested on the tabernacle (Exodus 40:34), and perhaps of the
"smoke" that filled the temple in Isaiah's vision of the divine glory
(Isaiah 6:4). All these had been visible
signs of Jehovah's presence; and in later Jewish times the cloud was expressly
recognized as the Shechinak, the dwelling of the
glory of God. The sweeping of a bright
cloud over them at such a moment would certainly bring all this to mind, in
vague impressions if not in distinct thought.
[23]
that overshadowed them. Not merely, Moses, and Elijah, for the
disciples entered the cloud, and feared as they entered (Luke). [23]
and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is My beloved
Son. Once before, at His baptism, and once
afterward (John 12:18), did God, in an audible voice, bear testimony in favor
of His Son. [24]
Hear Him. An emphatic declaration that the teachings of
Jesus were to take pre-eminence over those of Moses and the prophets (compare Deuteronomy
18:15; Hebrews 1:1-2). [24]
If the disciples had
found it difficult to believe what Jesus had said about His sufferings and
death, and if this had even shaken somewhat their faith that he was really the
Messiah, this voice was calculated to lead them to believe both in His messiahship and the things which He had said about His
sufferings. [35]
9:8 Translations
Weymouth: Instantly they looked round, and now they could no longer see
any one, but themselves and Jesus.
WEB: Suddenly
looking around, they saw no one with them any more, except Jesus only.
Young’s: and suddenly, having looked around, they saw no one any
more, but Jesus only with themselves.
Conte (RC): And
immediately, looking around, they no longer saw anyone, except Jesus alone with
them.
9:8 And
suddenly. The
termination of this grand scene was as sudden and abrupt as its beginning. [3]
when they had looked round. In search of those who had been standing near them when the cloud
passed over them. [3]
they saw no man any more, save Jesus only with
themselves. One great
purpose of the transfiguration was to represent the cessation of the Jewish and
the commencement of the Christian dispensation.
Moses and Elias disappear--the former objects of the disciples'
veneration are no more. Christ remains
alone "the Way, the Truth, and the Life." No man can come unto the Father but through
Him. [24]
9:9 Translations
Weymouth: As they were coming down from the mountain, He very strictly
forbad them to tell any one what they had seen "until after the Son of Man
has risen from among the dead."
WEB: As they
were coming down from the mountain, he commanded them that they should tell no
one what things they had seen, until after the Son of Man had risen from the
dead.
Young’s: And as
they are coming down from the mount, he charged them that they may declare to
no one the things that they saw, except when the Son of Man may rise out of the
dead;
Conte (RC): And as they
were descending from the mountain, he instructed them not to relate to anyone
what they had seen, until after the Son of man will have risen again from the
dead.
9:9 And
as they came down from the mountain.
He gave them some time to think
about what they had seen before He spoke with them. Today we would probably call this
“decompression time.” Having recognized
that no one else had been blessed with them, they needed time to calm down so
they could pay attention to Jesus’ words of caution. [rw]
He charged [commanded]. Not “asked” or “requested,” but outright ordered. It was that important not to inflame
popular sentiment with (revolutionary?) dreams of independence that could
easily warp an intended spiritual lesson into an excuse for all too temporal
violence. [rw]
Them that they
should tell no man the things they had
seen. Only these three, not even the other
nine were to know it till after the resurrection. [45]
They were not even to
tell their fellow-disciples, lest it might cause vexation or envy that they had
not been thus favoured. [39]
Till the Son of man were risen from the dead. Because
the scene portrayed the result of that work which would be completed in the
resurrection. He would display to
the world in type His glory and that of the redeemed only when He could
accompany it with the evidence of its reality.
[45]
9:10 Translations
Weymouth: So they kept
the matter to themselves, although frequently asking one another what was meant
by the rising from the dead.
WEB: They kept
this saying to themselves, questioning what the "rising from the
dead" meant.
Young’s: and the
thing they kept to themselves, questioning together what the rising out of the
dead is.
Conte (RC): And they
kept the word to themselves, arguing about what "after he will have risen
from the dead" might mean.
9:10 And they
kept that saying with themselves [kept this word to themselves, NKJV]. This is one of the few times that Jesus had
a “secret” teaching and even that was time limited. False teachers who came later cultivated the
mythology of a “secret gospel” just for the elite like themselves; this was 180
degrees different from the attitude of Jesus toward Divine truth. [rw]
questioning one with another. If they
could not share this with others, they still felt the need to figure out
exactly what it meant. [rw]
what the rising from the dead meant. Not
that they did not believe a future resurrection or had any peculiar difficulty
concerning the common meaning of the words; for they had witnessed some
instances of the dead being restored to life:
but they were so prepossessed with prejudices against the Messiah's
being cut off by death, and so assured that Jesus was the Messiah, that they
supposed some figurative sense must be put on His words; for as they
erroneously supposed He could not literally die, so He could not literally
rise again. [52]
9:11 Translations
Weymouth: They also
asked Him, "How is it that the Scribes say that Elijah must first
come?"
WEB: They
asked him, saying, "Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come
first?"
Young’s: And they were questioning him, saying, that the scribes say
that Elijah it behoveth to come first.
Conte (RC): And they
questioned him, saying: "Then why do the Pharisees and the scribes say
that Elijah must arrive first?"
9:11 And
they asked Him, saying, Why say the
scribes that Elias must come first? These expounders of law taught from
Malachi 4:5 Elijah should come before the Messiah. Their having seen Elijah on the mount
suggested a perplexity. Supposing this
appearance upon the mount the fulfillment of the prophecy,
how is it that he did not come before the Messiah? [45]
scribes. "It would be an infinite task,"
says Lightfoot, "to produce all the passages out of the Jewish writings
which one might concerning the expected coming of
Elijah." He was to restore to the
Jews the pot of manna and the rod of Aaron, to cry to the mountains,
"Peace and blessing come into the world, peace
and blessing come into the world!" "Salvation cometh.
Salvation cometh, to gather all the scattered sons of
Jacob, and restore all things to Israel as in ancient times." [8]
9:12 Translations
Weymouth: "Elijah,"
He replied, "does indeed come first and reforms everything; but how is it
that it is written of the Son of Man that He will endure much suffering and be
held in contempt?
WEB: He said
to them, "Elijah indeed comes first, and restores all things. How is it
written about the Son of Man, that he should suffer many things and be
despised?
Young’s: And he
answering said to them, 'Elijah indeed, having come first, doth restore all
things; and how hath it been written concerning the Son of Man, that many
things he may suffer, and be set at nought?
Conte (RC): And in
response, he said to them: "Elijah, when he will arrive first, shall
restore all things. And in the manner that it has been written about the Son of
man, so must he suffer many things and be condemned.
9:12 And He answered and told them,
Elias [Elijah, NKJV] verily cometh
first. The use of such a phrase as this to
describe the work of John should keep us from over-literalism in interpreting
Biblical language. [44]
and restoreth all things. The language comes from the Septuagint of
Malachi 4:6, where it is said that Elijah "shall restore the heart of
father to son, and the heart of man to his neighbor." The Hebrew is similar in meaning though not
identical: "Shall turn the heart of
the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to the fathers." It is a restoration of piety and love that is
thus assigned to Elijah as his work. [23]
and how it is written of the Son of Man. It
is true Elijah must first come, as the scribes say, but remember that the
sufferings and rejection of the Messiah are also predicted. [8]
that He must suffer many things and be set at nought [treated with contempt, NKJV]. He
had spoken of these things before they went up to the mount (8:31). Now He refers them to the Scriptures. After His resurrection He made a fuller
exposition of these Scriptures to two of the disciples as they walked to Emmaus
(Luke 24:27). He no doubt expounded such
scriptures as the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah; but we know from the course of
the disciples afterwards, that they were slow to receive these teachings till
after His resurrection. The conversation
with the two going to Emmaus became no doubt the turning point in their
interpretation of the scriptures that speak of a suffering and dying Saviour. [45]
9:13 Translations
Weymouth: Yet I tell you that not only has Elijah come, but they have also
done to him whatever they chose, as the Scriptures say about him."
WEB: But I
tell you that Elijah has come, and they have also done to him whatever they
wanted to, even as it is written about him."
Young’s: But I say
to you, That also Elijah hath come, and they did to
him what they willed, as it hath been written of him.'
Conte (RC): But I say to
you, that Elijah also has arrived, (and they have done to him whatever they
wanted) just as it has been written about him."
9:13 But I say unto you, that Elias is indeed come.
"Then the disciples understood that he spake
unto them of John the Baptist" (Matthew 17:13).
And they had done unto him whatsoever they listed [wished,
NKJV]. Although we are naturally centered on how the religious establishment
rejected Jesus, they dismissed John’s teaching of moral reformation as
well. In his case, they were willing to
go through baptism as a mere rite rather than as a decisive break with their
preceding moral lapses. (Cf. John’s
rebuke of them in Matthew 3:7) Unlike
Jesus, they were not responsible for John’s death, but the gap between them
could hardly have resulted in many tears at his demise. [rw]
as it is written of him. There is no direct prophecy of the sufferings of the predicted
Elijah. But as the prophet Elijah suffered,
it might be inferred from the Old Testament that the forerunner of the messiah
(called Elijah) would suffer, especially in view of the predicted sorrows of
the Messiah Himself. [11]
Or: [This phrase] seems intended to qualify only
the first clause, the statement that Elijah had indeed come; for the Scriptures
did not predict the death of the forerunner of the Messiah. [45]
9:14 Translations
Weymouth: As they came to rejoin the disciples, they saw an immense
crowd surrounding them and a party of Scribes disputing with them.
WEB: Coming to
the disciples, he saw a great multitude around them, and scribes questioning
them.
Young’s: And having
come unto the disciples, he saw a great multitude about them, and scribes
questioning with them,
Conte (RC): And
approaching his disciples, he saw a great crowd surrounding them, and the
scribes were arguing with them.
9:14 When He came to His
disciples. Either the rest of the apostles or the
remainder of the apostles and the broader band of disciples that
sometimes traveled with them. In light of the questioning being done, the
former is the most likely, since they would be the ones challenged as the most
knowledgeable of Jesus’ attitudes and opinions.
[rw]
He saw a great multitude about them. Or
more exactly, "much crowd," implying not mere numbers, but pressure
and confusion. [3]
and the scribes questioning with them. The questioning of the scribes had
reference, no doubt, to the ineffectual attempt of the nine disciples to cast
out the demon (verses 16-18). It was a
great triumph to these unbelievers to witness even one such failure, and they
eagerly pressed the advantage which it appeared to give them. [38]
9:15 Translations
Weymouth: Immediately
the whole multitude on beholding Him were astonished
and awe-struck, and yet they ran forward and greeted Him.
WEB: Immediately
all the multitude, when they saw him, were greatly
amazed, and running to him greeted him.
Young’s: and
immediately, all the multitude having seen him, were amazed, and running near, were saluting him.
Conte (RC): And soon all
the people, seeing Jesus, were astonished and struck with fear, and hurrying to
him, they greeted him.
9:15 And
straightway [immediately, NKJV] all the people, when they beheld Him, were greatly amazed. It
is difficult to account for the amazement of the people at seeing Jesus. The conjecture that His face was still
shining from the transfiguration, as did the face of Moses when he came down
from the mount (see Alford, Lange, and others), is not even suggested by the
text. The natural impression from the
text is not that it was something peculiar in His appearance, but the fact of
His being seen at that particular time and place, which amazed
them.
I infer that
the people supposed Jesus to have been at a much greater distance from them
than He had been and that His return was most unexpected. If they were partaking in the doubts and
suspicions of the questioning scribes, the thought of being caught by Him in
such a state of mind would have added much to their excitement; or if they were
pained by the momentary triumph of the enemy, they would be equally excited,
though from a different cause, at His unexpected return. But whatever was the cause of their
amazement, its effect was to make them run to Him and salute Him. [38]
all the
people. Not the whole mass
but large numbers, while at least as many may have waited for Him where they
were. This difference, not only natural
but almost unavoidable in all such cases, [when compared with] Matthew's
("coming to the crowd") and Luke's ("the crowd met Him") is
gravely represented by [certain] writers as a discrepancy. [3]
and running to Him saluted [greeted, NKJV] Him. “Running:” thereby showing their great
enthusiasm. [rw]
9:16 Translations
Weymouth: "What is
the subject you are discussing?" He asked them.
WEB: He asked
the scribes, "What are you asking them?"
Young’s: And he questioned the scribes, 'What dispute ye with them?'
Conte (RC): And he
questioned them, "What are you arguing about among yourselves?"
9:16 And He asked the scribes, What question ye
[What are you discussing, NKJV] with them? Before any one had found time to tell
Jesus what had been going on, He surprised the scribes by demanding of them, “What
question ye with them?" They saw at
once that He knew all, and their failure to answer shows that they felt a
deserved rebuke for their exultation. [38]
Or: Addressing Himself to the scribes, He
demands the subject of their discussion, ready to meet them where they had
pressed hard upon His apostles. Ere they
had time to reply, the father of the boy, whose case had occasioned the dispute, himself steps forward and answers the question
(verses 17-18). [43]
9:17 Translations
Weymouth: One of the
multitude answered, "Teacher, I brought to you my son, who has a mute
spirit;
WEB: One of
the multitude answered, "Teacher, I brought to you my son, who has a mute
spirit;
Young’s: and one
out of the multitude answering said, 'Teacher, I brought my son unto thee,
having a dumb spirit;
Conte (RC): And one from
the crowd responded by saying: "Teacher, I have brought to you my son, who
has a mute spirit.
9:17 And one of the multitude. Matthew says that he "came
kneeling," and Luke that he "cried out" with his request. [23]
answered and
said, Master, I have brought unto Thee my
son. "Mine only
child" (Luke 9:38). [8]
Since this grows out of Jesus approaching
the crowd and seeing the Scribes discussing an unidentified subject with the
disciples (verse 14), the immediate transition to this healing argues that it
was in regard to healing itself that they raised their challenges. One can easily imagine them leaping from the
apostolic inability to heal to a questioning of even Jesus’ ability to do so (verse
18). And from there to a denial that,
even if the power was present, that it was improper to do so without
proper rabbinic sanction. [rw]
Which hath a dumb [mute,
NKJV] spirit. i.e., possessed of a
demon that caused dumbness. He
was also deaf (verse 25). [45]
The young man was not
only deaf and dumb, but a lunatic and subject to fits (Matthew 17:15). [38]
9:18 Translations
Weymouth: and wherever
it comes upon him, it dashes him to the ground, and he foams at the mouth and
grinds his teeth, and he is pining away. I begged your
disciples to expel it, but they had not the power."
WEB: and
wherever it seizes him, it throws him down, and he foams at the mouth, and
grinds his teeth, and wastes away. I asked your disciples to cast it out, and
they weren't able."
Young’s: and
wherever it doth seize him, it doth tear him, and he foameth,
and gnasheth his teeth, and pineth
away; and I spake to thy disciples that they may cast
it out, and they were not able.'
Conte (RC): And whenever
it takes hold of him, it throws him down, and he foams and gnashes with his
teeth, and he becomes unconscious. And I asked your disciples to cast him out,
and they could not."
9:18 And whersoever
he taketh [seizes, NKJV] him. The
convulsions seem to have occurred at irregular intervals, being regulated by
the whim and moods of the demon which produced them. The father's expression also seems to imply
that he supposed the spirit to be in the child only at these periods of sever
suffering; and this thought is confirmed by the words of Jesus: "Come out of him, and enter no more
into him" (verse 25). [38]
he teareth him (throws him down, NKJV], he foameth [NKJV
adds: at the mouth], and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth
away [becomes rigid, NKJV]. The symptoms, as described
here and by the other Evangelists, are those of epilepsy. The fits were sudden, but the dumbness seems
to have been continuous. The peculiar
difficulty in this case was the combination of this possession and
epilepsy. [11]
And I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out. He
brought his son, expecting to find Jesus [verse 17], but failing in this, he
applied to our Lord's disciples to cast out the evil spirit, but they could
not. [39]
and they could not. The
disciples were not unwilling to cure the unfortunate boy. They tried and failed. The same degree of faith, the same degree of
miracle-working power, that had healed the sick, and in other cases cast out
demons, was unavailing in this instance.
This failure was not because with God one miracle is harder than
another; but it was meant to teach a lesson of wrestling and prayer in behalf
of those so sunk in depravity as to be, humanly speaking, hard to save. [45]
9:19 Translations
Weymouth: "O
unbelieving generation!" replied Jesus; "how long must I be with you?
how long must I have patience with you? Bring the boy
to me."
WEB: He
answered him, "Unbelieving generation, how long shall I be with you? How
long shall I bear with you? Bring him to me."
Young’s: And he answering him, said, 'O generation unbelieving, till
when shall I be with you? till when shall I suffer
you? bring him unto me;'
Conte (RC): And
answering them, he said: "O unbelieving generation, how long must I be
with you? How long shall I endure you? Bring him to me."
9:19 He answereth
him, and saith, O faithless generation. In both Matthew and Luke
the words of rebuke are stronger:
"O faithless and perverse generation." To whom are we to apply the words of our
Lord's reply.
Trench says: "Some, as for
instance Origen, apply them to the disciples,
and them alone. . . . Others, as Chrysostom and generally the early interpreters, would
pointedly exclude the disciples from the rebuke; and they give it all to the
surrounding multitude. . . . The most
satisfactory explanation is that which reconciles both these views." [45]
How long shall I be with you? Must I be forever with you to teach you
faith? We may apply the language He used
to Philip, "Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known
Me?" (John 14:9).
[45]
How long shall I suffer [bear with,
NKJV] you? His forbearance has a limit. It was sorely tried then, as it had been
often during His ministry. With many of
that generation it soon reached its limit.45
bring him unto
Me. “If the only way this child can be made well is by a miraculous healing
and you still can’t do it at this point in My
ministry, then I’ll take care of it Myself!”
[rw]
9:20 Translations
Weymouth: So they
brought him to Jesus. And the spirit, when he saw Jesus, immediately threw the
youth into convulsions, so that he fell on the ground and rolled about, foaming
at the mouth.
WEB: They
brought him to him, and when he saw him, immediately the spirit convulsed him,
and he fell on the ground, wallowing and foaming at the mouth.
Young’s: and they
brought him unto him, and he having seen him, immediately the spirit tare him,
and he, having fallen upon the earth, was wallowing -- foaming.
Conte (RC): And they
brought him. And when he had seen him, immediately the spirit disturbed him.
And having been thrown to the ground, he rolled around foaming.
9:20 And they brought him unto
Him. This would rule out any denial that what happened was directly linked
to Jesus’ actions. The reference in verse
18 to the demon not always, apparently, being present (“and wherever it seizes
him,” NKJV) could have been invoked by arguing that any present calmness
represented a “natural” remission that would only be temporary. With the juvenile in front of Jesus, the
argument of coincidence would have been very hard to make credible when there
were tangible, outward signs of the expulsion.
[rw]
and when he saw Him. The
sight of Christ stirred the evil spirit dwelling in the child. He was irritated by the presence of Christ;
for he knew His power and feared lest he should be cast out. [39]
straightway [immediately, NKJV] the spirit tare [convulsed,
NKJV] him. This act of the spirit in the very
presence of Jesus, as they brought the child near, displayed a wickedness and
obstinacy on its part unequaled in the accounts of these desperate beings. Having clung to its victim in spite of all
the efforts of the disciples, it now seems determined to defy the power of
Jesus Himself. How different from the
piteous supplications of the legion at Gadara!
and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming. A full
“fit” was upon him; all the symptoms were there in their full power. [rw]
9:21 Translations
Weymouth: Then Jesus
asked the father, "How long has he been like this?" "From early
childhood," he said;
WEB: He asked
his father, "How long has it been since this has come to him?" He
said, "From childhood.
Young’s: And he questioned his father, 'How long time is it since
this came to him?' and he said, 'From childhood,
Conte (RC): And he
questioned his father, "How long has this been happening to him?" But
he said: "From infancy.
9:21 And He asked his father, How long is it ago since
this came unto [this has been happening to, NKJV] him? The
question which He asked the father was designed to bring out all the worst
features of the case, so as to make the discomfiture of His enemies by the
miracle the more complete, to give the people and the disciples stronger ground
of faith in His power and to leave to all ages lessons of encouragement, where
otherwise faith might utterly fail. [45]
And he said, Of a child [from childhood, NKJV]. The
long continued possession of the demon from infancy showed its more hopeless
character. [45]
It was but too common in
ancient times to turn maniacs loose and this boy was fortunate above many in
having care and protection. [23]
9:22 Translations
Weymouth: "and
often it has thrown him into the fire or into pools of water to destroy him.
But, if you possibly can, have pity on us and help us."
WEB: Often it
has cast him both into the fire and into the water, to destroy him. But if you
can do anything, have compassion on us, and help us."
Young’s: and many
times also it cast him into fire, and into water, that it might destroy him;
but if thou art able to do anything, help us, having compassion on us.'
Conte (RC): and often it
casts him into fire or into water, in order to destroy him. But if you are able
to do anything, help us and take pity on us."
9:22 And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire. The father's answer shows
still further the malignity of the demon in that it took a fiendish pleasure in
this pain which it had the
power to inflict. [38]
and into the
waters, to destroy him.
This demoniac had watchful friends [to protect him from
harm]. It was but too common in ancient
times to turn maniacs loose, and this boy was fortunate above many in having
care and protection. [23]
Was the demonic getting pleasure from causing someone else pain and
even trying to kill him? Or, being
within the child and since destroying the child would be destroying his own abiding
place, was this also a form of self-hatred as well? [rw]
But if thou canst do anything. At this
point, he would settle even for improvement without it being an outright,
permanent cure. This is called
desperation and despair. [rw]
have compassion on us, and help us. Making
the case his own.
[43]
To the extent that Jesus helped the child, he would also be taking
concern and torment off of the father as well.
[rw]
9:23 Translations
Weymouth: "'If I
possibly can!'" replied Jesus; "why, everything is possible to him
who believes."
WEB: Jesus
said to him, "If you can believe, all things are possible to him who
believes."
Young’s: And Jesus said to him, 'If thou art able to believe! all things are possible to the one that is believing;'
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said to him, "If you are able to believe: all things are possible to one
who believes."
9:23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe. The
thought is expressed, not so much reprovingly as cheeringly, the hopeful
announcement of the boundless breadth of the possibilities of faith. [23]
all things are possible to him that believeth. These
words do not imply inability to heal an unbeliever for many of the miracles
were wrought on persons who had no faith; but it hinted at a possible refusal,
as at Nazareth, to heal those who in the face of competent evidence were still
unbelievers. It also served as an
incentive to the father to get rid of the doubt implied in his petition, and it
was an assertion in the presence of the scribes who had exulted over the
failure of the disciples, that "all things were possible" with
Himself. [38]
9:24 Translations
Weymouth: Immediately the
father cried out, "I do believe: strengthen my weak faith."
WEB: Immediately
the father of the child cried out with tears, "I believe. Help my
unbelief!"
Young’s: and
immediately the father of the child, having cried out, with tears said, 'I
believe, sir; be helping mine unbelief.'
Conte (RC): And
immediately the father of the boy, crying out with tears, said: "I do
believe, Lord. Help my unbelief."
9:24 And straightway the father
of the child cried out, and said with tears. Seeing
the case stood still, waiting not upon the Lord's power but his faith, the man
become immediately conscious of conflicting principles and rises into one of
the noblest utterances on record. [43]
His tears expressed his
anxiety for his son, and his words declared the weakness of the faith on which
the cure was now to depend. [38]
Lord, I believe; help my unbelief! It
is as though he said, “I do believe; but my faith is weak. [39]
Or:
“Although I do believe, how can that possibly be enough?” [rw]
9:25 Translations
Weymouth: Then Jesus,
seeing that an increasing crowd was running towards Him, rebuked the foul
spirit, and said to it, "Dumb and deaf spirit, *I* command you, come out
of him and never enter into him again."
WEB: When
Jesus saw that a multitude came running together, he rebuked the unclean
spirit, saying to him, "You mute and deaf spirit, I command you, come out
of him, and never enter him again!"
Young’s: Jesus
having seen that a multitude doth run together, rebuked the unclean spirit,
saying to it, 'Spirit -- dumb and deaf -- I charge thee, come forth out of him,
and no more thou mayest enter into him;'
Conte (RC): And when
Jesus saw the crowd rushing together, he admonished the unclean spirit, saying
to him, "Deaf and mute spirit, I command you, leave him; and do not enter
into him anymore."
9:25 When Jesus saw that the people came running
together. Attracted by the conversation with the
father, and eager to see whether or not Jesus would fail as did the disciples,
the people pressed upon Him. [45]
You deaf and dumb spirit. So addressed
with reference to its work upon the child, the effects of its agency. [23]
He rebuked the foul [unclean] spirit, saying unto him, Thou
dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee thee, come out of
him. Identifying whatever happened next as being directly and solely the
result of His words alone. [rw]
And enter no more into him. He
added [these words] to relieve [the father's] fears for the future and show the
completeness of the cure. These words,
not called for in other cases, were especially appropriate in a case of long
continued possession like this. [45]
9:26 Translations
Weymouth: So with a
loud cry he threw the boy into fit after fit, and came out. The boy looked as
if he were dead, so that most of them said he was dead;
WEB: Having
cried out, and convulsed greatly, it came out of him. The boy became like one
dead; so much that most of them said, "He is dead."
Young’s: and having
cried, and rent him much, it came forth, and he became as dead, so that many
said that he was dead,
Conte (RC): and crying
out, and convulsing him greatly, he departed from him. And he became like one
who is dead, so much so that many said, "He is dead."
9:26 And the spirit cried, and
rent him sore [convulsed him greatly, NKJV]. Such
torture wantonly inflicted by a demon, gives an awful conception of the state
of society which must prevail among these God-forsaken spirits. [38]
and he was as one dead. No
motion. No apparent breath. The reaction of a body who
has gone through all it can possibly endure and is so weak that it simply lies
there, absolutely still. [rw]
insomuch
that many said, He is dead. No triumph then after all, thought they. He has cast out the
spirit, but killed the child. [45]
9:27 Translations
Weymouth: but Jesus
took his hand and raised him up, and he stood on his feet.
WEB: But Jesus
took him by the hand, and raised him up; and he arose.
Young’s: but Jesus,
having taken him by the hand, lifted him up, and he arose.
Conte (RC): But Jesus,
taking him by the hand, lifted him up. And he arose.
9:27 But Jesus took him by the hand,
and lifted him up. Again
emphatically linking what was happening to His actions and His alone. [rw]
and he arose.
While the bystanders were
saying that the youth was dead, the touch of Jesus, who alone can deliver us
from the power of the devil, brought instant restoration to him and joy to the
heart of his father. [38]
9:28 Translations
Weymouth: After the return of Jesus to the house His disciples asked
Him privately, "How is it that we could not expel the spirit?"
WEB: When he
had come into the house, his disciples asked him privately, "Why couldn't
we cast it out?"
Young’s: And he
having come into the house, his disciples were questioning him by himself --
'Why were we not able to cast it forth?'
Conte (RC): And when he
had entered into the house, his disciples questioned him privately, "Why
were we unable to cast him out?"
9:28 And
when he was come into the house.
Where they would be alone and they
could ask their question without public embarrassment. [rw]
His disciples asked Him privately, Why could not we cast him out? He had given
them "power and authority over all demons" (Luke 9:1), and "against
unclean spirits to cast them out" (Matthew 10:1). What was the reason of their failure now? [8]
The question had already
been answered by the exclamation, "O faithless generation!" in verse
19, but they were not quick to take [the] reproof, and this inquiry was one of
the many illustrations of their slowness, with which He had to be patient. Yet perhaps unbelief never fully understands
its own failures, but supposes there must be some reason for them to be sought. [23]
9:29 Translations
Weymouth: "An evil
spirit of this kind," He answered, "can only be driven out by
prayer."
WEB: He said
to them, "This kind can come out by nothing, except by prayer and
fasting."
Young’s: And he
said to them, 'This kind is able to come forth with nothing except with prayer
and fasting.'
Conte (RC): And he said
to them, "This kind is able to be expelled by nothing other than prayer
and fasting."
9:29 This kind. This order of beings, not this kind of demons; so Bloomfield and
others understood it. [8]
Alternate
interpretation: The demons differed
in power and wickedness. There are
"principalities," "powers," and "rulers" in the
kingdom of darkness (Ephesians 6:12).
The demon that would return to the man from whom he had gone out, found
"seven other spirits more wicked than himself" (Matthew 13:45). This therefore was one of the more wicked and
powerful of Satan's hosts. [45]
can come forth by nothing, but by prayer. On
the part of those who would exercise the demon.
[11]
and fasting. The words
“and fasting” are to be omitted. Even if
retained, they cannot refer, as the Sermon on the Mount shows, to stated or
ceremonial observances, but to proper spiritual discipline, in which fasting
(private and personal) holds an important place. Nothing is implied about the power to cast
out evil spirits in later times. The
“prayer and fasting” would not work the miracle, but were necessary to sustain
the faith which would successfully call upon Christ's power in such a case. [11]
9:30 Translations
Weymouth: Departing
thence they passed through Galilee, and He was unwilling that any one should
know it;
WEB: They went
out from there, and passed through Galilee. He didn't want anyone to know it.
Young’s: And having gone forth thence, they were passing through
Galilee, and he did not wish that any may know,
Conte (RC): And setting
out from there, they passed through Galilee. And he intended that no one know
about it.
9:30 And
they departed thence, and passed
through Galilee. They were returning from Caesarea
Philippi (8:27), whither they had gone by passing east of the upper Jordan
through the district called Iturea. That they returned “through Galilee” shows
that they came down on the west of the Jordan.
They were on their way back to Capernaum (vs. 33). [38]
and He would
not that any man should know it. His aim is still to be with His disciples and
to teach them. [35]
This statement is the
last mention made of the privacy which Jesus had maintained ever since His
journey to the vicinity of Tyre (cf. 7:24, 33, 36;
8:23, 26; 9:25). It was this privacy
which occasioned the taunting remark of His unbelieving kindred (John 7:3-4). [38]
9:31 Translations
Weymouth: for He was
teaching His disciples, and telling them, "The Son of Man is to be
betrayed into the hands of men, and they will put Him to death; and after being
put to death, in three days He will rise to life again."
WEB: For he
was teaching his disciples, and said to them, "The Son of Man is being
handed over to the hands of men, and they will kill him; and when he is killed,
on the third day he will rise again."
Young’s: for he was
teaching his disciples, and he said to them, 'The Son of Man is being delivered
to the hands of men, and they shall kill him, and having been killed the third
day he shall rise,'
Conte (RC): Then he
taught his disciples, and he said to them, "For the Son of man shall be
delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him, and having been
killed, on the third day he will rise again."
9:31 For He taught. The
tense in the original implies that the constant subject of His teaching
in private now was His approaching suffering, death and resurrection. [8]
His disciples. To the exclusion of everyone else. Not because it was teaching
designed to be for “initiates only” but because, before it happened, they were
the ones that needed the forewarning to prepare themselves, [rw]
The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men. i.e., is to be delivered up as a prisoner. [35]
Jesus here uses the
present tense because the sad event was so vividly present to His
imagination. The usage is common in the
writings of the prophets. [38]
and they shall
kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day. The disciples needed both halves of
this teaching: death so it won’t destroy
their faith--and resurrection because it is going to be the way that death will
be removed. [rw]
9:32 Translations
Weymouth: They,
however, did not understand what He meant, and were afraid to question Him.
WEB: But they
didn't understand the saying, and were afraid to ask him.
Young’s: but they were not understanding the saying, and they were afraid to
question him.
Conte (RC): But they did
not understand the word. And they were afraid to question him.
9:32 But they understood not that saying. This
can seem incredible only to such as are unable to
divest themselves of subsequent associations, and distinguish between what we now
see clearly and what we should have seen if we had lived before the
death of Christ. [3]
and were afraid to ask Him. They
could not understand the plain words of this prediction, simply because they
were not willing to receive them in their obvious import, and they could not
discover in them any other meaning. It
is not infrequently the case, even at the present day, that
a passage of Scripture is obscure merely because it is capable of but one
meaning, and this meaning one that we are unwilling to accept. Being for this reason unable to understand
Jesus, they were afraid to ask Him what He meant, lest He should rebuke them. [38]
9:33 Translations
Weymouth: So they came
to Capernaum; and when in the house He asked them, "What were you arguing
about on the way?"
WEB: He came
to Capernaum, and when he was in the house he asked them, "What were you
arguing among yourselves on the way?"
Young’s: And he came to Capernaum, and being in the house, he was
questioning them, 'What were ye reasoning in the way among yourselves?'
Conte (RC): And they
went to Capernaum. And when they were in the house, he questioned them,
"What did you discuss on the way?"
9:33 And He came to Capernaum. Which He had used as a base of operations repeatedly in between travels
to other places. [rw]
And being in the house. Where
there was privacy and He could ask about matters they had not seen fit to share
with Him and minimize the danger of embarrassment to them. [rw]
He asked them, What was it ye
disputed among yourselves by the way [on the road, NKJV]? He
had let them talk as they would on the road, walking alone in front, and they
keeping, as they thought, out of ear-shot; but, when at rest together in the
house (perhaps Peter's) where He lived in Capernaum, He lets them see by the
question and still more by the following teaching that He knew what He asked
and needed no answer. [50]
In
depth: The chronology of the discussion
on greatness through service [38]. There
is an appearance of discrepancy here between Matthew and Mark. Matthew represents the disciples as beginning
the conversation by asking who should be greatest, while Mark introduces it by
saying that Jesus asked them, “What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by
the way?"
We take both reports as
true and each as elliptical. As Matthew
states, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the
kingdom of heaven?" (Matthew
18:1). They ask this with an air of
innocent inquiry, giving no intimation of the dispute in which they had
engaged. Jesus begins His reply by
asking them, “What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?"
showing that He knew the cause and the occasion of their inquiry. Confused and conscience-smitten, “they held
their peace” (verse 34).
9:34 Translations
Weymouth: But they remained
silent; for on the way they had debated with one another who was
the chief of them.
WEB: But they
were silent, for they had disputed one with another on the way about who was
the greatest.
Young’s: and they
were silent, for with one another they did reason in the way who
is greater;
Conte (RC): But they
were silent. For indeed, on the way, they had disputed among
themselves as to which of them was greater.
9:34 But they held their peace [kept silent, NKJV]. The
tongues that had been so loud on the road were dumb in the house--silenced by
conscience. [50]
We today would probably word it:
“silenced by embarrassment.” [rw]
For by the way [on
the road, NKJV] they had disputed among themselves who should be [would be,
NKJV] the greatest. With worldly notions of the new
kingdom of heaven still in great strength, they were fondly anticipating power
and preferments, and were even debating among
themselves which should have the highest.
[15]
Before going up to the
mount, He had proclaimed the coming of His kingdom (8:38; 9:1). This occasioned the contest about the highest
place in the kingdom. The
transfiguration could not have had as much to do with it as many expositors
suppose because it was known only to the three; and the preference shown to
these, so far as the others knew, consisted simply in His having taken them
apart into the mountain to spend the night, it being probably known also that
it was for prayer. [45]
9:35 Translations
Weymouth: Then sitting
down He called the Twelve, and said to them, "If any one wishes to be
first, he must be last of all and servant of all."
WEB: He sat
down, and called the twelve; and he said to them, "If any man wants to be
first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all."
Young’s: and having
sat down he called the twelve, and he saith to them, 'If any doth will to be first, he shall be
last of all, and minister of all.'
Conte (RC): And sitting
down, he called the twelve, and he said to them, "If anyone wants to be
first, he shall be the last of all and the minister of all."
9:35 And he sat down. So
taking the attitude in which the teachers of that land [commonly used] to speak
(so Matthew 5:1). [23]
and called the
twelve. Gathered them altogether, made sure that every body relevant was
present. The idea of finding some
business that “had” to be acted on “immediately,” was surely going through the
minds of at least some for how do you admit to your Leader that what you were
arguing about was who should be regarded as the most important among them? [rw]
and saith unto them, if any man. i.e.,
this is a principle that applies to anyone who seeks or considers the
possibility of being a leader among Jesus’ followers. [rw]
desire to be first, the same shall be last of all and servant of
all.
"Last of all” is not the
same as “servant of all." The one
phrase expresses humility, the other ministry.
An indolent humility, so very humble that it does nothing for others,
and a service which is not humble, are equally incomplete, and neither leads to
or is the greatness at which alone a Christian ought to aim. [50]
9:36 Translations
Weymouth: And taking a young child He made him stand in their midst,
then threw His arms round him and said,
WEB: He took a
little child, and set him in the midst of them. Taking him in his arms, he said
to them,
Young’s: And having taken a child, he set him in the midst of them,
and having taken him in his arms, said to them,
Conte (RC): And taking a
child, he set him in their midst. And when he had embraced him, he said to
them:
9:36 And He took a little child. A type of all that is unaggressive and
unimportant in society. [44]
A
tradition not earlier than the ninth century says that this child was Ignatius. [39]
And set him in the midst of them. A means of making the point even more emphatic—by putting a specific
example directly in front of them. [rw]
when He had taken him in His arms. A similar expression is used at Luke 2:28,
where Jesus Himself is in like manner embraced by the aged Simeon. Is it wrong to suggest that if this was
Peter's child, it would be in Peter's memory that this act of tenderness would
most certainly live, and that in Mark's Gospel it would most certainly appear? [23]
He said unto them. Only
after “setting up the situation,” does He proceed to use it to teach. The point
could just as easily have been made without the child being present, but could
it have been as potent? [rw]
9:37 Translations
Weymouth: "Whoever
for my sake receives one such young child as this, receives me; and whoever
receives me, receives not so much me as Him who sent me."
WEB: "Whoever
receives one such little child in my name, receives me, and whoever receives
me, doesn't receive me, but him who sent me."
Young’s: 'Whoever
may receive one of such children in my name, doth receive me, and whoever may
receive me, doth not receive me, but Him who sent me.'
Conte (RC): "Whoever
receives one such child in my name, receives me. And whoever receives me,
receives not me, but him who sent me."
9:37 Whosoever
shall receive one of such children in
My name. Literally,
“upon my name"--i.e., upon My name as the ground
of the action, as the reason for the receiving.
[23]
The motive of one's act
gives the importance to the person one receives. One does not need to be important to be the
representative of a great man. The
humblest child could serve as such a representative of both Jesus and God. Hence there was no need of the disciples'
struggling after pre-eminence, for their greatness would never lie in the
honors and leadership they wanted but in the fact that they would be received
as the representatives of Jesus and God, and this honor the smallest child
could share with them. [44]
receiveth Me. The act done even to so little a child for
His sake He recognizes as done to Himself.
The one who would serve [would] be recognized by Him. [45]
and whosoever
shall receive Me, receiveth not Me, but Him that sent
Me. There are repercussions to whether one accepts or rejects Jesus. Jesus is so uniquely linked to the Father
that the rejection of Him also turns the back on the Father. [rw]
9:38 Translations
Weymouth: "Rabbi,"
said John to Him, "we saw a man making use of your name to expel demons,
and we tried to hinder him, on the ground that he did not follow us."
WEB: John said
to him, "Teacher, we saw someone who doesn't follow us casting out demons
in your name; and we forbade him, because he doesn't follow us."
Young’s: And John did answer him, saying, 'Teacher, we saw a certain
one in thy name casting out demons, who doth not follow us, and we forbade him,
because he doth not follow us.'
Conte (RC): John
responded to him by saying, "Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in
your name; he does not follow us, and so we prohibited him."
9:38 And John answered him, saying,
Master, we saw one [someone, NKJV]. We know nothing of this man beyond what these
verses tell us of him. [35]
Nor
do we know how this was linked to the gentle rebuke of their pride in the preceding
verse. Is it an attempt to change
topics? Or is it ultimately tied in with
their debate over status—for example, was this outsider actually “greater” than
they, since none of them could do the exorcism of the possessed child
but an “outsider” could? [rw]
casting out devils [demons, NKJV] in Your
name. It can scarcely be
supposed that a man who knew nothing of Christ or who was a common exorcist
could be able to work a miracle in Christ's name; we may therefore safely
imagine that this was either one of John the Baptist's disciples who, at his
master's command, had believed in Jesus or one of the seventy, whom Christ had
sent out (Luke 10:1-7), who, after he had fulfilled his commission, had retired
from accompanying the other disciples; but as he still held fast his faith in
Christ and walked in good conscience, the influence of his Master still
continued with him, so that he could cast out demons as well as the other
disciples. [21]
Alternate
interpretation: Although only the
disciples who followed Christ had a commission to work miracles, yet there were
others, no enemies to Christ, who, in imitation of His disciples, attempted to
cast out devils--and God was pleased, for the honor of His Son, sometimes to
give them success. [24]
And he followeth not us: and we
forbad him because he followeth not us. Not
"because he followeth not thee." It is the utterance of excited party feeling. [8]
Seeing
such a man casting out demons excited John's jealousy, because he thought that
no others than the chosen twelve ought to be honored with this power. Such jealousy in regard to official
prerogatives is a very common passion, and one against which men occupying
positions of trust and authority should be constantly on their guard. [38]
9:39 Translations
Weymouth: "You
should not have tried to hinder him," replied Jesus, "for there is no
one who will use my name to perform a miracle and be able the next minute to
speak evil of me.
WEB: But Jesus
said, "Don't forbid him, for there is no one who will do a mighty work in
my name, and be able quickly to speak evil of me.
Young’s: And Jesus
said, 'Forbid him not, for there is no one who shall do a mighty work in my
name, and shall be able readily to speak evil of me:
Conte (RC): But Jesus
said: "Do not prohibit him. For there is no one who can
act with virtue in my name and soon speak evil about me.
9:39 But Jesus aid, Forbid him not. Let
it be carefully observed that our Lord does not say this man should not
have "followed them," nor yet that it was indifferent whether he did
or not, but simply teaches how such a person was to be regarded, although he
did not, viz.: as a reverer of His name and a promoter of His cause. [24]
Compare the words of
Joshua and the reply of Moses in Numbers 11:28-29. [8]
for there is no man which do a
miracle in My name. If the man had been an enemy of Christ,
using his power in opposition to the truth, it would have been right to forbid
him; but, according to John's own statement, he was casting out demons in the
name of Jesus and this proved him to be a friend. Moreover, John should have known that no man
could cast out demons in the name of Jesus unless Jesus had given him power to
do so; and if Jesus had given him the power it was his privilege to exercise
it. [38]
that can
lightly [soon, NKJV] speak evil of Me. The same verb that is rendered
"curse" in 7:10, but more exactly here, as it includes all degrees of
evil speaking from the direct imprecation to the mildest censure, and is here
used to denote all oral expression of hostility, however gentle or however
fierce. The essential idea is, he cannot be opposed to me, the act of speaking being
mentioned only as the natural and usual expression of the inward dispositions
and affections. [3]
9:40 Translations
Weymouth: He who is not
against us is for us;
WEB: For
whoever is not against us is on our side.
Young’s: for he who
is not against us is for us;
Conte (RC): For whoever
is not against you is for you.
9:40 For he that is not against us. Why
should any one suspect evil in the heart, when in outward appearance there is
nothing but what is good? [20]
Matthew 12:30: "He that is not with Me,
is against Me." In certain cases,
the absence of hostility is a proof of friendship; in others, the failure to
cooperate is the proof of enmity; and both might occur in the experience of the
same person. But in all cases there is
either friendship or enmity. The apparently
contradictory proverbs suggest the need of discrimination in applying them. The saying in Matthew refers more to inward
unity with Christ; this one to outward conformity with His people. The former may exist independently of the
latter and its existence unites real Christians, whatever their name and
outward difference. [11]
is on our part [side, NKJV]. No
verse has been more employed than this in sectarian controversy. And sometimes it has been pressed too
far. The man whom St. John would have
silenced was not spreading a rival organization. This was simply a doer of good without
ecclesiastical sanction, and the warning of the test is against all who would
use the name of discipline or of order to bridle the zeal, to curb the
energies, of any Christian soul. [1]
9:41 Translations
Weymouth: and whoever
gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, I solemnly tell
you that he will certainly not lose his reward.
WEB: For
whoever will give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because you are
Christ's, most certainly I tell you, he will in no way lose his reward.
Young’s: for
whoever may give you to drink a cup of water in my name, because ye are
Christ's, verily I say to you, he may not lose his reward;
Conte (RC): For whoever, in my name, will give you a cup of water to drink,
because you belong to Christ: Amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.
9:41 For whosoever shall give
you a cup of water to drink. A figure for the smallest
act of kindness. [11]
In the hot dry climate
of Palestine, where springs were few, and far apart, it was an act of
hospitality. Water was precious and
often an invaluable refreshment. [25]
"Life affords few
opportunities of doing great services for others, but there is scarcely
an hour of the day that does not afford us the opportunity of performing some little,
it may be, unnoticed kindness."--Bowes.
[8]
in My name, because ye belong to Christ. They
are doing good to you because of what they think of
Me. He may know little or nothing about
those being helped, but he does know about the Lord. And out of that underlying loyalty,
assistance is provided. [rw]
by no means lose his reward. God will recognize the motive of the act and
treat it accordingly. [35]
9:42 Translations
Weymouth: "And
whoever shall occasion the fall of one of these little ones who believe, he
would be better off if, with a millstone round his neck, he were lying at the
bottom of the sea.
WEB: Whoever
will cause one of these little ones who believe in me to stumble, it would be
better for him if he was thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around his
neck.
Young’s: and
whoever may cause to stumble one of the little ones believing in me, better is
it for him if a millstone is hanged about his neck, and he hath
been cast into the sea.
Conte (RC): And whoever
will have scandalized one of these little ones who believe in me: it would be
better for him if a great millstone were placed around
his neck and he were thrown into the sea.
9:42 And
whosoever shall offend [cause . .
. to stumble, NKJV]. Put obstacles in his way, making it harder
for him to follow the right path. In
verses 43-48 Jesus, having previously spoken of hindering others, causing them
to stumble, turns to speak of things by which we cause ourselves to stumble, to
fall into sin. [35]
these little ones that believe in me. The weakest believers. [45]
If the child Jesus had been holding is still there (verse 36), youthful
believers are particularly in mind, but the principle is obviously applicable
to “spiritually (and not just chronologically) young” as well. [rw]
It is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast
into the sea. The
"millstone" here is not the stone of the ordinary hand-mill, which
was of moderate size and weight, but the stone of the larger mill that was
turned by beasts of burden. Drowning by
the use of a heavy weight was not a Jewish punishment, but was known among the
Greeks, Romans, Syrians, and Phoenicians.
It was inflicted by order of the Roman emperors in certain cases of
infamy, and is said by Jerome to have been inflicted in Galilee. [23]
9:43 Translations
Weymouth: If your hand
should cause you to sin, cut it off: it would be better for you to enter into
Life maimed, than remain in possession of both your hands and go away into Gehenna, into the fire which cannot be put out.
WEB: If your
hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life
maimed, rather than having your two hands to go into Gehenna,
into the unquenchable fire,
Young’s: 'And if thy
hand may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee maimed to
enter into the life, than having the two hands, to go away to the gehenna, to the fire -- the unquenchable --
Conte (RC): And if your
hand causes you to sin, cut it off: it is better for you to enter into life
disabled, than having two hands to go into Hell, into the unquenchable fire,
9:43 And if
thy hand thee [causes you to sin, NKJV]. The
hand [verse 43], or the foot [verse 45], or the eye [verse 47] represents any instrument by which sin may be
committed; and it applies to those who may be the means of drawing us into
sin. If your relative or your friend,
who is useful or dear to you as your hand, your foot, or your eye, is drawing you
into sin, cut him off from you, lest he should draw you into hell. [39]
cut it off. A strong expression,
indicating the necessity of sacrificing even the dearest things if they lead us
into sin. It is not to be
supposed that Jesus meant that we should actually cut off a hand or a foot (verse
45) or pluck out an eye (verse 47). Sin
comes from the heart (7:2-23), and mutilating the body would not prevent
it. But He did mean that we
should, if necessary, sacrifice things as dear to us as hand or foot or eye,
rather than go on sinning. [35]
In reading it we must
avoid a slavish literalism and remember the main thought which is to spare
nothing which hinders our salvation. A
literal execution would turn the Church into a house of invalids, since every Christian
is more or less tempted to sin by his eye or hand; nor would the cutting off of
all the members, of itself, destroy lust in the heart. [11]
it is better
for thee to enter into life maimed. The
life here referred to is not the temporal life, nor the Christian life, into
both of which the disciples addressed had already entered; but eternal life,
into which they had not yet entered.
Being cast into hell, then, which is the alternative of entering into
this life, can be none other than punishment in the future state. [38]
than having
two hands to go into hell. Literally, the Gehenna. Primarily, this phrase was applied to the
"Ravine of Hinnom," also called "Topheth" (2 Kings 23:10; Isaiah 30:33; Joshua 18:16),
on the south of Mount Zion. Its total
length is a mile and a half. It is a
deep, retired glen, shut in by rugged cliffs, with the bleak mountain sides
rising over all. It became notorious in
the times of Ahaz and Manasseh as the scene of the
barbarous rites of Molech and Chemosh,
when the idolatrous inhabitants of Jerusalem cast their sons and daughters into
the red-hot arms of a monster idol of brass placed at the opening of the ravine
(2 Kings 16:3; 2 Chronicles 28:3; Jeremiah 7:31). To put an end to these abominations the place
was polluted by Josiah, who spread over it human bones and other corruptions (2
Kings 23:10, 13-14), from which time it seems to have become the common
cesspool of the city. [8]
It
thus became the receptacle of everything that was vile and filthy. These noisome accumulations were from time to
time consumed by fire; and the things which were not consumed by fire were the
prey of worms. Hence “Gehenna" became the image of the place of eternal
punishment, where “the worm dieth not and the fire is
not quenched." These terrible
images are conclusive as to the eternity of future punishment, so far as our
nature is concerned and our knowledge reaches.
They are the symbols of certain dreadful realities; too dreadful for
human language to describe or human thought to conceive. [39]
into the fire
that never shall be quenched.
However one may choose to
interpret the “fire of Hell,” Jesus assures us of a key fact—it will never
end. And the only way for that
to be a threat is if those who are there can never escape it. Otherwise, they have escaped its
punishment. [rw]
9:44 Translations
Weymouth: (Omitted)
WEB: 'where
their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.'
Young’s: where
their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.
Conte (RC): where their
worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
These words are a quotation from Isaiah 66:24, and they are repeated
three times in the Authorized Version.
But the best authorities omit them in the first two places (verses 44
and 46), retaining them at verse 48. [39]
9:45 Translations
Weymouth: Or if your foot should cause you to sin, cut it off: it
would be better for you to enter into Life crippled, than remain in possession
of both your feet and be thrown into Gehenna.
WEB: If your
foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life
lame, rather than having your two feet to be cast into Gehenna,
into the fire that will never be quenched--
Young’s: 'And if
thy foot may cause thee to stumble, cut it off; it is better for thee to enter
into the life lame, than having the two feet to be cast to the gehenna, to the fire -- the unquenchable --
Conte (RC): But if your
foot causes you to sin, chop it off: it is better for you to enter into eternal
life lame, than having two feet to be cast into the Hell of unquenchable fire,
9:45 And if thy foot offend
thee. i.e.,
the principle applies to whatever the source of successful temptation
may be. In a sense all sins are “equal”—if
unrepented of, in their spiritual results at least. [rw]
cut it off. Remove
it. The fact that Jesus uses physical
body parts to illustrate His point shows just how serious sin is and just how
devastating and overwhelming the punishment for it will be. [rw]
it is better for them to enter halt [lame, NKJV], than having
two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched. The
state of punishment is continual; there is no respite, alleviation, nor end. [21]
9:46 Translations
Weymouth: (Omitted)
WEB: 'where
their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.'
Young’s: where
their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched.
Conte (RC): where their
worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
9:46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [Verses
44 and 46] are omitted [in many translations] as spurious. They are supposed to have been introduced by
some copyist from verse 48, with which they are identical. The truth of the words cannot be questioned,
whether they belong in one or three places.
But the solemn grandeur of the passage is greatly diminished by the
omission of what has been likened to the "burden of a funeral dirge." This fact furnishes a strong internal argument
for the genuineness of the passage, although not found in the Sinaitic and Vatican copies. [45]
9:47 Translations
Weymouth: Or if your
eye should cause you to sin, tear it out. It would be better for you to enter
into the Kingdom of God half-blind than remain in possession of two eyes and be
thrown into Gehenna,
WEB: If your
eye causes you to stumble, cast it out. It is better for you to enter into the
Kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire,
Young’s: And if thine eye may cause thee to stumble, cast it out; it is
better for thee one-eyed to enter into the reign of God, than having two eyes,
to be cast to the gehenna of the fire --
Conte (RC): But if your
eye causes you to sin, pluck it out: it is better for you to enter into the
kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into the Hell of
fire,
9:47 And if thine
eye offend thee [causes you to sin, NKJV]. Verses 43 and 47 are, in
substance, a part of the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:29-30). Jesus often repeated His teachings as
occasion called for them. [45]
pluck it out. Are these commands of self-mutilation
to be taken literally? By no means. According to the principle of Mark 7:18-19, dependence upon
self-mutilation for the avoidance of sin would rank with dependence upon
classification of food for purity.
The reason that was given for that case perfectly covers this: "It cannot defile, because it entereth not into the heart"--i.e., anything that
reaches and affects merely the body fails to reach the seat of sin. Sin dwells in the heart, not in the hand, the
foot, or the eye. Not self-mutilation
but self-conquest is the Christian ideal (1 Cor.
9:24-27; Romans 6:19; Col. 3:1-11). The
passage is not less exacting than it would be if its language were to be taken
literally. The self-denial to which it
calls our attention is of the extremist kind.
[23]
It is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with
one eye. By
reasonable implication, this also carries the weight that having a physical
disability—of whatever nature—will not keep one out of heaven. You may not enter heaven “physically” perfect
for that never mattered in the first place, only the spiritual perfection
created by Divine forgiveness. [rw]
than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. One cannot but loathe the mawkish
sentimentalism which condemns all such language in the mouth of His servants as
inconsistent with what they presume to call “the religion of the meek and lowly
Jesus." [43]
9:48 Translations
Weymouth: where their
worm does not die and the fire does not go out.
WEB: 'where
their worm doesn't die, and the fire is not quenched.'
Young’s: where
their worm is not dying, and the fire is not being quenched;
Conte (RC): where their
worm does not die, and the fire is not extinguished.
9:48 Where
their worm dieth not. As indication of guilty conscience?: Who can conceive the torment of this gnawing
worm, namely, of the eternal reproach of conscience, when a man shall reflect
upon the graces and mercies of God which he has despised, and on the preference
he has made of the shadow of a momentary happiness before a substantial and
eternal good, which is God Himself! [20]
and the fire is not quenched. The
metaphor is very striking as well as awful.
Ordinarily the worm feeds upon the disorganized body and then dies. The fire consumes the fuel, and then it
expires. But here the worm never
dies; the fire never goes out. [39]
Both figures represent
as strongly as it can be expressed in language the intensity and the perpetual
duration of the sufferings of the lost.
It is strange that any one can believe in Christ as a divine teacher and
reject the doctrine of the eternal punishment of the wicked. [45]
9:49 Translations
Weymouth: Every one,
however, will be salted with fire.
WEB: For
everyone will be salted with fire, and every sacrifice will be seasoned with
salt.
Young’s: for every
one with fire shall be salted, and every sacrifice with salt shall be salted.
Conte (RC): For all
shall be salted with fire, and every victim shall be salted with salt.
9:49 For everyone. This
does not necessarily include the whole human race, but only all of the class
here referred to, the saved or the lost, according to the application of the
sentence. [45]
A
saying without parallel, and one of the most difficult in the Gospels. Meyer cites fourteen different
interpretations besides giving his own. [23]
shall be
salted [seasoned, NKJV] with fire. They
suffer without being able to die, they are burned without ever being consumed, they are sacrificed without being sanctified, and salted
with the fire of hell, as eternal victims of the divine justice. [20]
and every sacrifice shall be salted [seasoned,
NKJV] with salt. According to Leviticus 2:13, every sacrifice had to be salted. [22]
In depth:
The case for "salting" with salt as a contrast to "seasoned" with fire [38]. The meaning
of this clause turns on the question whether it expresses a comparison
of those who are salted with fire with the sacrifices which are salted with
salt, or presents those who are salted with fire in antithesis with
others who would make the required sacrifices.
Alford and some other interpreters adopt the former view, and would express
the idea thus: "For every one shall
be salted with fire, just as every sacrifice is salted with salt."
But if this had been the
meaning, it is inexplicable that the conjunction "and" is used to
connect the two clauses instead of the adverb "so." It is safer, and far more in harmony with the
context, to take the conjunction in its proper and ordinary sense, and to
understand the clause as continuing the antithesis which has been kept up
throughout the context between those who would cut off the offending hand or
foot, and enter into life, and those who--refusing to do so--would be cast into
hell.
By every sacrifice is
meant every person who presents himself as a sacrifice to God in cutting
off his offending members, or, in other words, by denying himself those sinful
pleasures and enjoyments which are represented by these. That such shall be salted with salt--as
contrasted with being salted with fire--seems that they shall be preserved unto
everlasting life--that they shall enter into that life
which is contrasted with being cast into hell.
The figure and the mode of expressing it are both taken from a provision
in the law which required that every offering presented at the altar should be
seasoned with salt (Leviticus 2:13).
In depth:
the case for conceptual equivalency between "seasoned" with
fire and "salting" with salt as conveying the central idea of
continued preservation [45]. It is admitted that the symbolic use of "salt" is derived from its power to preserve from
corruption and decay. This compound
figure then must express the idea of preservation by means of fire. What preservation is meant turns upon the
connection indicated by the introductory word “for." If we connect the sentence with "the fire that is not
quenched" at the close of the
preceding verse--as the word
"fire" would
suggest--this clause presents the fearfully solemn thought that the eternal
fire preserves the soul cast into it in unending torture. The use of the word “fire” to describe the
sufferings of the lost might intimate their annihilation, which would end their
sufferings; and therefore, according to this view, our Lord added, “For every
one shall be salted with fire," preserved in and by the unquenchable
fire. This gives a good and striking
sense and is preferred by Alexander and some other interpreters.
But it is more difficult
to harmonize it with the last clause and the next verse than an exposition
which will now be given. Let “for” be
regarded as connecting this verse with the leading idea of the preceding
context. Jesus taught His disciples that
the worldly motives that led them to seek high places in His kingdom and every
cherished earthly good that led them into sin, must be given up, though it
should be as cutting off the hand or foot or plucking out the eye. this self-denial and
these self-imposed sufferings would be the “fire” or "fiery trials” (1
Peter 4:12) that would purify and thus preserve them from destruction. They
“shall be saved; yet so as by fire” (1 Corinthians 3:15).
9:50 Translations
Weymouth: Salt is a
good thing, but if the salt should become tasteless, what will you use to give
it saltness? Have salt within you and live at peace
with one another."
WEB: Salt is
good, but if the salt has lost its saltiness, with what will you season it?
Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another."
Young’s: The salt
is good, but if the salt may become saltless, in what
will ye season it? Have in yourselves salt, and have peace in one another.'
Conte (RC): Salt is
good: but if the salt has become bland, with what will you season it? Have salt
in yourselves, and have peace among yourselves."
9:50 Salt is good. For all other foods are
seasoned by it. [16]
Salt is here used, as in
the preceding verse, to symbolize the principle in Christian life which leads
to perseverance amid all required self-sacrifice. [38]
but if the salt have lost his saltiness [its
flavor, NKJV], wherewith will ye season
it? The question answers itself and
affirms that the lost saltness will not be
restored. Passing from the symbol to
that which is symbolized, it is affirmed that if a man lose the power of
perseverance in the Christian life, there is no restoration for him; his
inevitable fate is to be cast into hell, to be "salted with fire." [38]
Have salt in yourselves. Keep
in yourselves that which makes you the salt of the earth. [23]
Maintain in yourselves
the quality of perseverance by making every sacrifice necessary thereto. Their contention as to who should be greatest
(vs. 33-34) and their jealousy toward the brother who had been casting out
demons (vs. 38) were calculated to impair this quality by causing alienations
and discouragement. [38]
Or: Salting of disciples imports suffering
pain, but is not to be confounded with the cross-bearing of faithful disciples
(8:34). The former is the discipline of
self-denial necessary to make a man a follower of Christ worthy of the
name. The latter is the tribulation that
comes on all who follow closely in the footsteps of Christ. The one is needful to make us holy, the other overtakes us when and because we are holy. [17]
and have peace one with another. This
whole exhortation had grown out of their ambitious striving who should be the
greatest. Hence the conclusion urges
holiness and peace. [19]
Among Orientals, salt
was a sing of sacred covenant engagements and obligations (Leviticus 2:13; 2
Chronicles 13:5). To eat salt together,
meant to make peace, and enter into covenant with each other. Hence, in view of the contention between the
disciples, the warning was timely to have salt in themselves and be at peace
one with another. [8]