| |
THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO
MATTHEW
Commentary by DAVID BROWN
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
CHAPTER 12
@Mt
12:1-8. PLUCKING CORN EARS ON THE SABBATH DAY. ( = @Mr
2:23-28 Lu 6:1-5).
The season of the year when this occurred is determined by
the event itself. Ripe corn ears are found in the fields
only just before harvest. The barley harvest seems clearly
intended here, at the close of our March and beginning of
our April. It coincided with the Passover season, as the
wheat harvest with Pentecost. But in Luke (@Lu
6:1) we have a still more definite note of time, if we
could be certain of the meaning of the peculiar term which
he employs to express it "It came to pass (he says)
on the sabbath, which was the first-second,"
for that is the proper rendering of the word, and not
"the second sabbath after the first," as in our
version. Of the various conjectures what this may mean,
that of SCALIGER is the most approved, and, as we think,
the freest from difficulty, namely, the first sabbath
after the second day of the Passover; that is, the first
of the seven sabbaths which were to be reckoned from the
second day of the Passover, which was itself a sabbath,
until the next feast, the feast of Pentecost (@Le
23:15,16 De 16:9,10) In this case, the day meant by
the Evangelist is the first of those seven sabbaths
intervening between Passover and Pentecost. And if we are
right in regarding the "feast" mentioned in @Joh
5:1 as a Passover, and consequently the second
during our Lord's public ministry (see on Joh
5:1), this plucking of the ears of corn must have
occurred immediately after the scene and the discourse
recorded in @Joh
5:19-47, which, doubtless, would induce our Lord to
hasten His departure for the north, to avoid the wrath of
the Pharisees, which He had kindled at Jerusalem. Here,
accordingly, we find Him in the fields--on His way
probably to Galilee.
1. At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through
the corn--"the cornfields" (@Mr
2:23 Lu 6:1).
and his disciples were
an hungered--not as one may be before his regular
meals; but evidently from shortness of provisions: for
Jesus defends their plucking the corn-ears and eating them
on the plea of necessity.
and began to pluck the
ears of corn, and to eat--"rubbing them in their
hands" (@Lu
6:1).
2. But when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto him,
Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do
upon the sabbath day--The act itself was expressly
permitted (@De
23:25). But as being "servile work," which
was prohibited on the sabbath day, it was regarded as
sinful.
3. But he said unto them, Have ye not read--or, as
Mark (@Mr
2:25) has it, "Have ye never read."
what David did when he
was an hungered, and they that were with him--(@1Sa
21:1-6)
4. How he entered into the house of God, and did eat
the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat,
neither for them which were with him, but only for the
priests?--No example could be more apposite than this.
The man after God's own heart, of whom the Jews ever
boasted, when suffering in God's cause and straitened for
provisions, asked and obtained from the high priest what,
according to the law, it was illegal for anyone save the
priests to touch. Mark (@Mr
2:26) says this occurred "in the days of Abiathar
the high priest." But this means not during his high
priesthood--for it was under that of his father Ahimelech--but
simply, in his time. Ahimelech was soon succeeded by
Abiathar, whose connection with David, and prominence
during his reign, may account for his name, rather than
his father's, being here introduced. Yet there is not a
little confusion in what is said of these priests in
different parts of the Old Testament. Thus he is called
both the son of the father of Ahimelech (@1Sa
22:20 2Sa 8:17); and Ahimelech is called Ahiah (@1Sa
14:3), and Abimelech (@1Ch
18:16).
5. Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the
sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath--by
doing "servile work."
and are blameless?--The
double offerings required on the sabbath day (@Nu
28:9) could not be presented, and the new-baked
showbread (@Le
24:5 1Ch 9:32) could not be prepared and presented
every sabbath morning, without a good deal of servile work
on the part of the priests; not to speak of circumcision,
which, when the child's eighth day happened to fall on a
sabbath, had to be performed by the priests on that day.
(See on Joh
7:22,23).
6. But I say unto you, That in this place is one
greater than the temple--or rather, according to the
reading which is best supported, "something
greater." The argument stands thus: "The
ordinary rules for the observance of the sabbath give way
before the requirements of the temple; but there are
rights here before which the temple itself must give
way." Thus indirectly, but not the less decidedly,
does our Lord put in His own claims to consideration in
this question--claims to be presently put in even more
nakedly.
7. But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have
mercy, and not sacrifice--(@Ho
6:6 Mic 6:6-8, &c.). See on Mt
9:13.
ye would not have
condemned the guiltless--that is, Had ye understood
the great principle of all religion, which the Scripture
everywhere recognizes--that ceremonial observances must
give way before moral duties, and particularly the
necessities of nature--ye would have refrained from these
captious complaints against men who in this matter are
blameless. But our Lord added a specific application of
this great principle to the law of the sabbath, preserved
only in Mark: "And he said unto them, the sabbath was
made for man, and not man for the sabbath" (@Mr
2:27). A glorious and far-reaching maxim, alike for
the permanent establishment of the sabbath and the true
freedom of its observance.
8. For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day--In
what sense now is the Son of man Lord of the sabbath day?
Not surely to abolish it--that surely were a strange
lordship, especially just after saying that it was made or
instituted for MAN--but to own it, to interpret
it, to preside over it, and to ennoble it,
by merging it in the "Lord's Day" (@Re
1:10), breathing into it an air of liberty and love
necessarily unknown before, and thus making it the nearest
resemblance to the eternal sabbatism.
@Mt
12:9-21. THE HEALING OF A WITHERED HAND ON THE SABBATH
DAY AND RETIREMENT OF JESUS TO AVOID DANGER. ( = @Mr
3:1-12 Lu 6:6-11).
Healing of a Withered Hand (@Mt
12:9-14).
9. And when he was departed thence--but "on
another sabbath" (@Lu
6:6).
he went into their
synagogue--and taught," He had now, no doubt,
arrived in Galilee; but this, it would appear, did not
occur at Capernaum, for after it was over, He
"withdrew Himelf," it is said "to the
sea" (@Mr
3:7), whereas Capernaum was at the sea.
And, behold, there was a
man which had his hand withered--disabled by paralysis
(as in @1Ki
13:4). It was his right hand, as Luke (@Lu
6:6) graphically notes. And they asked him, saying, Is
it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might
accuse him--Mark and Luke (@Mr
3:2 Lu 6:7) say they "watched Him whether He
would heal on the sabbath day." They were now come to
the length of dogging His steps, to collect materials for
a charge of impiety against Him. It is probable that it
was to their thoughts rather than their words that
Jesus addressed Himself in what follows.
11. And he said unto them, What man shall there be
among you that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a
pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and
lift it out?
12. How much then is a man better than a sheep?--Resistless
appeal! "A righteous man regardeth the life of his
beast" (@Pr
12:10), and would instinctively rescue it from death
or suffering on the sabbath day; how much more his nobler
fellow man! But the reasoning, as given in the other two
Gospels, is singularly striking: "But He knew their
thoughts, and said to the man which had the withered hand,
Rise up, and stand forth in the midst. And he arose and
stood forth. Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one
thing: Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to
do evil? to save life or to destroy it?" (@Lu
6:8,9), or as in Mark (@Mr
3:4), "to kill?" He thus shuts them. up to
this startling alternative: "Not to do good, when it
is in the power of our hand to do it, is to do evil; not
to save life, when we can, is to kill"--and must the
letter of the sabbath rest be kept at this expense? This
unexpected thrust shut their mouths. By this great ethical
principle our Lord, we see, held Himself bound, as man.
But here we must turn to Mark, whose graphic details make
the second Gospel so exceedingly precious. "When He
had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved
for the hardness of their hearts, He saith unto the
man" (@Mr
3:5). This is one of the very few passages in the
Gospel history which reveal our Lord's feelings.
How holy this anger was appears from the "grief"
which mingled with it at "the hardness of their
hearts."
13. Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand.
And he stretched it forth--the power to obey going
forth with the word of command.
and it was restored
whole, like as the other--The poor man, having faith
in this wonderful Healer--which no doubt the whole scene
would singularly help to strengthen--disregarded the proud
and venomous Pharisees, and thus gloriously put them to
shame.
14. Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council
against him, how they might destroy him--This is the
first explicit mention of their murderous designs against
our Lord. Luke (@Lu
6:11) says, they were filled with madness, and
communed one with another what they might do to
Jesus." But their doubt was not, whether to
get rid of Him, but how to compass it. Mark (@Mr
3:6), as usual, is more definite: "The Pharisees
went forth, and straightway took counsel with the
Herodians against Him, how they might destroy Him."
These Herodians were supporters of Herod's dynasty,
created by Cæsar--a political rather than religious
party. The Pharisees regarded them as untrue to their
religion and country. But here we see them combining
together against Christ as a common enemy. So on a
subsequent occasion (@Mt
22:15,16).
Jesus Retires to Avoid Danger (@Mt
12:15-21).
15. But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from
thence--whither, our Evangelist says not; but Mark (@Mr
3:7) says "it was to the sea"--to
some distance, no doubt, from the scene of the miracle,
the madness, and the plotting just recorded.
and great multitudes
followed him, and he healed them all--Mark gives the
following interesting details: "A great multitude
from Galilee followed Him, and from Judea and from
Jerusalem, and from Idumea, and from beyond Jordan; and
they about Tyre and Sidon, a great multitude, when they
had heard what great things He did, came unto Him. And He
spake to His disciples, that a small ship should wait on
Him because of the multitude, lest they should throng Him.
For He had healed many; insomuch that they pressed upon
Him for to touch Him, as many as had plagues. And unclean
spirits, when they saw Him, fell down before Him, and
cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God. And He straitly
charged them that they should not make Him known" (@Mr
3:7-12). How glorious this extorted homage to the Son
of God! But as this was not the time, so neither were they
the fitting preachers, as BENGEL says. (See on Mr
1:25, and compare @Jas
2:19). Coming back now to our Evangelist: after
saying, "He healed them all," he continues:
16. And charged them--the healed.
that they should not
make him known--(See on Mt
8:4).
17. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by
Esaias the prophet, saying--(@Isa
42:1).
18. Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved,
in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my Spirit upon
him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles.
19. He shall not strive nor cry; neither shall any man
hear his voice in the streets.
20. A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax
shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto
victory--"unto truth," says the Hebrew
original, and the Septuagint also. But our
Evangelist merely seizes the spirit, instead of the letter
of the prediction in this point. The grandeur and
completeness of Messiah's victories would prove, it seems,
not more wonderful than the unobtrusive noiselessness with
which they were to be achieved. And whereas one rough
touch will break a bruised reed, and quench the
flickering, smoking flax, His it should be, with matchless
tenderness, love, and skill, to lift up the meek, to
strengthen the weak hands and confirm the feeble knees, to
comfort all that mourn, to say to them that are of a
fearful heart, Be strong, fear not.
21. And in his name shall the Gentiles trust--Part
of His present audience were Gentiles--from Tyre and Sidon--first-fruits
of the great Gentile harvest contemplated in the prophecy.
@Mt
12:22-37. A BLIND AND DUMB DEMONIAC HEALED AND REPLY
TO THE MALIGNANT EXPLANATION PUT UPON IT. ( = @Mr
3:20-30 Lu 11:14-23).
The precise time of this section is uncertain. Judging
from the statements with which Mark introduces it, we
should conclude that it was when our Lord's popularity was
approaching its zenith, and so before the feeding of the
five thousand. But, on the other hand, the advanced state
of the charges brought against our Lord, and the plainness
of His warnings and denunciations in reply, seem to favor
the later period at which Luke introduces it. "And
the multitude," says Mark (@Mr
3:20,21), "cometh together again," referring
back to the immense gathering which Mark had before
recorded (@Mr
2:2)--"so that they could not so much as eat
bread. And when His friends"--or rather,
"relatives," as appears from @Mt
12:31, and see on Mt
12:46--"heard of it, they went out to lay hold on
Him; for they said, He is beside Himself." Compare @2Co
5:13, "For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to
God."
22. Then was brought unto him one possessed with a
devil--"a demonized person."
blind and dumb, and he
healed him, insomuch that the blind and the dumb both
spake and saw.
23. And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not
this the son of David?--The form of the interrogative
requires this to be rendered, "Is this the Son of
David?" And as questions put in this form (in Greek)
suppose doubt, and expect rather a negative answer, the
meaning is, "Can it possibly be?"--the people
thus indicating their secret impression that this must be
He; yet saving themselves from the wrath of the
ecclesiastics, which a direct assertion of it would have
brought upon them. (On a similar question, see on Joh
4:29; and on the phrase, "Son of David," see
on Mt
9:27).
24. But when the Pharisees heard it--Mark (@Mr
3:22) says, "the scribes which came down from
Jerusalem"; so that this had been a hostile party of
the ecclesiastics, who had come all the way from Jerusalem
to collect materials for a charge against Him. (See on Mt
12:14).
they said, This fellow--an
expression of contempt.
doth not cast out
devils, but by Beelzebub--rather, "Beelzebul"
(see on Mt
10:25).
the prince of the devils--Two
things are here implied--first, that the bitterest enemies
of our Lord were unable to deny the reality of His
miracles; and next, that they believed in an organized
internal kingdom of evil, under one chief. This belief
would be of small consequence, had not our Lord set His
seal to it; but this He immediately does. Stung by the
unsophisticated testimony of "all the people,"
they had no way of holding out against His claims but the
desperate shift of ascribing His miracles to Satan.
25. And Jesus knew their thoughts--"called
them" (@Mr
3:23).
and said unto them,
Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to
desolation; and every city or house divided against itself
shall not stand--"house," that is,
"household"
26. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against
himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?--The
argument here is irresistible. "No organized society
can stand--whether kingdom, city, or household--when
turned against itself; such intestine war is suicidal: But
the works I do are destructive of Satan's kingdom: That I
should be in league with Satan, therefore, is incredible
and absurd."
27. And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do
your children--"your sons," meaning here the
"disciples" or pupils of the Pharisees, who were
so termed after the familiar language of the Old Testament
in speaking of the sons of the prophets (@1Ki
20:35 2Ki 2:3, &c.). Our Lord here seems to admit
that such works were wrought by them; in which case the
Pharisees stood self-condemned, as expressed in Luke (@Lu
11:19), "Therefore shall they be your
judges."
28. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God--In
Luke (@Lu
11:20) it is, "with (or 'by') the finger of
God." This latter expression is just a figurative way
of representing the power of God, while the former
tells us the living Personal Agent was made use of
by the Lord Jesus in every exercise of that power.
then--"no
doubt" (@Lu
11:20).
the kingdom of God is
come unto you--rather "upon you," as the
same expression is rendered in Luke (@Lu
11:20):--that is, "If this expulsion of Satan is,
and can be, by no other than the Spirit of God, then is
his Destroyer already in the midst of you, and that
kingdom which is destined to supplant his is already
rising on its ruins."
29. Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house--or
rather, "the strong man's house."
and spoil his goods,
except he first bind the strong man? and then he will
spoil his house.
30. He that is not with me is against me; and he that
gathereth not with me scattereth abroad--On this
important parable, in connection with the corresponding
one (@Mt
12:43-45), see on Lu
11:21-26.
31. Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and
blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men--The word
"blasphemy" properly signifies
"detraction," or "slander." In the New
Testament it is applied, as it is here, to vituperation
directed against God as well as against men; and in this
sense it is to be understood as an aggravated form of sin.
Well, says our Lord, all sin--whether in its ordinary or
its more aggravated forms--shall find forgiveness with
God. Accordingly, in Mark (@Mr
3:28) the language is still stronger: "All sin
shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies
wherewith soever they shall blaspheme." There is no
sin whatever, it seems, of which it may be said.
"That is not a pardonable sin." This glorious
assurance is not to be limited by what follows; but, on
the contrary, what follows is to be explained by this.
but the blasphemy
against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of
man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh
against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him,
neither in this world, neither in the world to come--In
Mark the language is awfully strong, "hath never
forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal
damnation"--or rather, according to what appears to
be the preferable though very unusual reading, "in
danger of eternal guilt"--a guilt which he will
underlie for ever. Mark has the important addition (@Mr
3:30), "Because they said, He hath an unclean
spirit." (See on Mt
10:25). What, then, is this sin against the Holy
Ghost--the unpardonable sin? One thing is clear: Its
unpardonableness cannot arise from anything in the nature
of sin itself; for that would be a naked contradiction to
the emphatic declaration of @Mt
12:31, that all manner of sin is pardonable. And what
is this but the fundamental truth of the Gospel? (See @Ac
13:38,39 Ro 3:22,24 1Jo 1:7, &c.). Then, again
when it is said (@Mt
12:32), that to speak against or blaspheme the Son of
man is pardonable, but the blasphemy against the Holy
Ghost is not pardonable, it is not to be conceived that
this arises from any greater sanctity in the one blessed
Person than the other. These remarks so narrow the
question that the true sense of our Lord's words seem to
disclose themselves at once. It is a contrast between
slandering "the Son of man" in His veiled
condition and unfinished work--which might be done
"ignorantly, in unbelief" (@1Ti
1:13), and slandering the same blessed Person after
the blaze of glory which the Holy Ghost was soon to
throw around His claims, and in the full knowledge of all
that. This would be to slander Him with eyes open, or to
do it "presumptuously." To blaspheme Christ in
the former condition--when even the apostles stumbled at
many things--left them still open to conviction on fuller
light: but to blaspheme Him in the latter condition would
be to hate the light the clearer it became, and resolutely
to shut it out; which, of course, precludes salvation.
(See on Heb
10:26-29). The Pharisees had not as yet done this; but
in charging Jesus with being in league with hell they were
displaying beforehand a malignant determination to shut
their eyes to all evidence, and so, bordering upon,
and in spirit committing, the unpardonable sin.
33. Either make the tree good, &c.
34. O generation of vipers--(See on Mt
3:7).
how can ye, being evil,
speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart
the mouth speaketh--a principle obvious enough, yet of
deepest significance and vast application. In @Lu
6:45 we find it uttered as part of the discourse
delivered after the choice of the apostles.
35. A good man, out of the good treasure of the heart,
bringeth forth good things--or, "putteth forth
good things":
and an evil man, out of
the evil treasure, bringeth forth evil things--or
"putteth forth evil things." The word "putteth
" indicates the spontaneity of what comes from the
heart; for it is out of the abundance of the heart that
the mouth speaketh. We have here a new application of a
former saying (see on Mt
7:16-20). Here, the sentiment is, "There are but
two kingdoms, interests, parties--with the proper workings
of each: If I promote the one, I cannot belong to the
other; but they that set themselves in wilful opposition
to the kingdom of light openly proclaim to what other
kingdom they belong. As for you, in what ye have now
uttered, ye have but revealed the venomous malignity of
your hearts."
36. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men
shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of
judgment--They might say, "It was nothing: we
meant no evil; we merely threw out a supposition, as one
way of accounting for the miracle we witnessed; if it will
not stand, let it go; why make so much of it, and bear
down with such severity for it?" Jesus replies,
"It was not nothing, and at the great day will not be
treated as nothing: Words, as the index of the heart,
however idle they may seem, will be taken account of,
whether good or bad, in estimating character in the day of
judgment."
@Mt
12:38-50. A SIGN DEMANDED AND THE REPLY--HIS MOTHER
AND BRETHREN SEEK TO SPEAK WITH HIM, AND THE ANSWER. ( = @Lu
11:16,24-36 Mr 3:31-35 Lu 8:19-21).
A Sign Demanded, and the Reply (@Mt
12:38-45).
The occasion of this section was manifestly the same with
that of the preceding.
38. Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees
answered, saying, Master--"Teacher,"
equivalent to "Rabbi."
we would see a sign from
thee--"a sign from heaven" (@Lu
11:16); something of an immediate and decisive nature,
to show, not that His miracles were real--that they
seemed willing to concede--but that they were from above,
not from beneath. These were not the same class with those
who charged Him with being in league with Satan (as we see
from @Lu
11:15,16); but as the spirit of both was similar, the
tone of severe rebuke is continued.
39. But he answered and said unto them--"when
the people were gathered thick together" (@Lu
11:29).
An evil and adulterous
generation--This latter expression is best explained
by @Jer
3:20, "Surely as a wife treacherously departeth
from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with Me,
O house of Israel, saith the Lord." For this was the
relationship in which He stood to the
covenant-people--"I am married unto you" (@Jer
3:14).
seeketh after a sign--In
the eye of Jesus this class were but the spokesmen of
their generation, the exponents of the reigning spirit of
unbelief.
and there shall no sign
be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas.
40. For as Jonas was--"a sign unto the
Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this
generation" (@Lu
11:30). For as Jonas was
three days and three
nights in the whale's belly--(@Jon
1:17).
so shall the Son of man
be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth--This
was the second public announcement of His resurrection
three days after His death. (For the first, see @Joh
2:19). Jonah's case was analogous to this. as being a
signal judgment of God; reversed in three days; and
followed by a glorious mission to the Gentiles. The
expression "in the heart of the earth,"
suggested by the expression of Jonah with respect to the
sea (@Jon
2:3, in the Septuagint), means simply the
grave, but this considered as the most emphatic expression
of real and total entombment. The period during which He
was to lie in the grave is here expressed in round
numbers, according to the Jewish way of speaking, which
was to regard any part of a day, however small, included
within a period of days, as a full day. (See @1Sa
30:12,13 Es 4:16 5:1 Mt 27:63,64, &c.).
41. The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this
generation, &c.--The Ninevites, though heathens,
repented at a man's preaching; while they, God's
covenant-people, repented not at the preaching of the Son
of God--whose supreme dignity is rather implied here than
expressed.
42. The queen of the south shall rise up in the
judgment with this generation, &c.--The queen of
Sheba (a tract in Arabia, near the shores of the Red Sea)
came from a remote country, "south" of Judea, to
hear the wisdom of a mere man, though a gifted one, and
was transported with wonder at what she saw and heard (@1Ki
10:1-9). They, when a Greater than Solomon had come to
them, despised and rejected, slighted and slandered
Him.
43-45. When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man,
&c.--On this important parable, in connection with the
corresponding one (@Mt
12:29) see on Lu
11:21-26.
A charming little incident, given only in @Lu
11:27,28, seems to have its proper place here.
@Lu
11:27:
And it came to
pass, as He spake these things, a certain woman of the
company--out of the crowd.
lifted up her voice
and said unto Him, Blessed is the womb that bare
Thee, and the paps which Thou hast sucked--With
true womanly feeling she envies the mother of such a
wonderful Teacher. And a higher and better than she had
said as much before her (see on Lu
1:28). How does our Lord, then, treat it? He is far
from condemning it. He only holds up as "blessed
rather" another class: @Lu
11:28:
But he said, Yea
rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God,
and keep it--in other words, the humblest real
saint of God. How utterly alien is this sentiment from
the teaching of the Church of Rome, which would
doubtless excommunicate any one of its members that
dared to talk in such a strain!
His Mother and Brethren Seek to Speak with Hint and the
Answer (@Mt
12:46-50).
46. While he yet talked to the people, behold, his
mother and his brethren--(See on Mt
13:55,56).
stood without, desiring
to speak with him--"and could not come at Him for
the press" (@Lu
8:19). For what purpose these came, we learn from @Mr
3:20,21. In His zeal and ardor He seemed indifferent
both to food and repose, and "they went to lay hold
of Him" as one "beside Himself." Mark (@Mr
3:32) says graphically, "And the multitude sat
about Him"--or "around Him."
47. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy
brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee,
&c.--Absorbed in the awful warnings He was pouring
forth. He felt this to be an unseasonable interruption,
fitted to dissipate the impression made upon the large
audience--such an interruption as duty to the nearest
relatives did not require Him to give way to. But instead
of a direct rebuke, He seizes on the incident to convey a
sublime lesson, expressed in a style of inimitable
condescension.
49. And he stretched forth his hand toward his
disciples--How graphic is this! It is the language
evidently of an eye-witness.
and said, Behold my
mother and my brethren!
50. For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which
is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and
mother--that is, "There stand here the members of
a family transcending and surviving this of earth: Filial
subjection to the will of My Father in heaven is the
indissoluble bond of union between Me and all its members;
and whosoever enters this hallowed circle becomes to Me
brother, and sister, and mother!"
|
|
