Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση
[blocks in formation]

present. But he had neglected a duty. Macknight, in a very full note, offers proof that the fault of this guest consisted in not accepting the garment, when offered to him, and appearing at the feast in his ordinary dress, perhaps soiled and defiled. It was customary for one who gave such a feast, to furnish each of his guests with a garment for the occasion. Such a garment had been offered and rejected. Hence the guest was guilty; and hence the king was angry, and punished him. This relieves the difficulty which some have experienced in accounting for the fact, that all the guests were expected to have the wedding-garment, though they were gathered, on a sudden, from the highways and hedges. To the same effect is the following: "It was considered an honor of the highest kind, if a king or any person in high authority thought it proper, as a manifestation of his favor, to give away to another the garment which he had previously worn himself. In the East, at the present day, it is expected that every one, who has received a garment from the king, will immediately clothe himself in it, and properly present himself and render his homage to the giver; otherwise he runs the hazard of exciting the king's displeasure; compare Matt. xxii. 11, It was sometimes the case, that the king, when he made a feast, presented vestments to all the guests who were invited, with which they clothed themselves before they sat down to it; 2 Kings x. 22; Gen. xlv. 22; Rev. iii. 5; Čyrop. viii. 3, 1; Iliad xxiv. 226, 227." Jahn.

12.

13. Cast him into outer darkness, &c. This phrase, or its equivalent, occurs in the following places: Matt. viii. 12; xiii. 42, 50; xxii. 13; xxiv. 51; xxv. 30; Luke xiii. 28. "Outer darkness," however, is connected with the "gnashing of teeth" only in Matt. viii. 12, and xxv. 30, besides the instance now under consideration. This phraseology seems derived from circumstances connected with Jewish weddings. The interior of the apartments, where the festival was observed, was splendidly illuminated. To pass hence into the open air

into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

was to pass into comparatively utter darkness. And the gnashing or chattering of teeth may denote the rage or mortification of one who was thrust out with marks of indignity, or the natural effect of the chilly air of a night in Palestine. In this particular case, however, the binding of the man, "hand and foot," has been supposed to indicate that he was cast into a dungeon; in which case, both the forementioned causes would operate the more forcibly. "As the feasts were always held towards evening, the room or rooms, where they were held, were lighted up, and the fact that, in the climate of Palestine, the night, at least as it approached towards the morning, was cold, will afford a clue to the explanation of Matt. viii. 12; xxii. 13; xxv. 30; &c."-Jahn. The language has here a moral signification, and denotes the disappointment and misery, felt by those who had considered themselves heirs of the gospel kingdom, but for their unbelief and ungodliness were thrust out, and their place supplied by others. It seems to convey the same idea here as in Matt. viii. 12, and Luke xiii. 28. If, as some suppose, our Lord referred to a state of endless misery, it is very surprising that Luke, in recording the similar parable, (xiv. 16-24,) which so closely corresponds with this in every other point, should be utterly silent about any punishment except simple exclusion from the feast. It is remarkable, too, on this theory, that a more severe punishment should be inflicted on him whose only crime alleged was his being destitute of the weddinggarment, than on those who had actually murdered the servants of their king. These were merely destroyed, and their city burned; while this man is thought to have been doomed to endless misery. This seems not like equal and evenhanded justice.

14. Many are called, but few cre chosen. This phrase, which seems to have been proverbial, is here used by our Lord to indicate, that many, whom he called, would not then enter into his kingdom. They would reject his invitation, and become subject to such pun

15 ¶ Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk.

16 And they sent out unto him their disciples, with the Herodians,

ishment as he had indicated in the parable.

The true intent and meaning of this parable is well expressed by Whitby, in his Paraphrase. The first seven verses he explains with reference to the Jews who rejected the offers of the gospel, and whose nation and city were destroyed by the Roman armies. Thus far most commentators agree. He proceeds: "Then saith he to his servants, the wedding-feast is ready, but they who were bidden were not worthy, and therefore shall not taste of this feast. Go ye therefore into the highways, to the dispersion of the Jews, and to the Gentiles, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all, as many as they found, both bad and good, and the wed ding was furnished with guests; and when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding-garment, that is, a faith and conversation answerable to the design of the gospel. And he saith to him, friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding-garment? And he was as one speechless. Then said the king to his servants, bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into utter darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth; so shall it be with the Jews, the children of the kingdom. Matt. viii. 12; Luke xiii. 28. For many of the Jews are called, but few of them are chosen, that is, believers in the gospel." In a note on ver. 11, the same author says, "That this man must represent the Jews is evident, because Christ had said in the former chapter, that the kingdom of God should be taken from them; and here, proceeding to discourse of the same thing, as appears from the connective particle, ver. 1 of this chapter, he shows how worthy the Jews would be of this punishment, as being either wholly refractory to God, calling them by his Son to the participation of these blessings, or coming to them without due preparations, as the false apostles and deceitful workers did, or else by

[ocr errors]

saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

casting off that wedding-garment they had once put on, as did those Jews whose charity waxed cold, Matt. xxiv. 10-12, and who, being scandalized, fell off from the Christian faith. It remains, then, that these backsliders, or these false apostles, must be the persons represented by the man not having on his wedding-garment." See Whittemore's notes on Par., and Selections, sect. xxxiv.

15-33. Parallel with Mark xii. 1327, and Luke xx. 20-38.

15. Then went the Pharisees and took counsel. They perceived that the parables of Jesus were directed against them, and could not deny the facts to which they referred. They had failed in their efforts to obtain any advantage over him; but the people listened to him rather than to them. Their feelings are manifest from what they said at about the same time. "The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? Behold, the world is gone after him." John xii. 19. They therefore consulted together, and endeavored to devise some new and more effectual method of attack upon him. The result appears in the succeeding verses. T Entangle him. Ensnare him; obtain an advantage over him. The original word has reference to the capture of birds by means of a snare or a net. ¶ In his talk. Rather in talk; that is, in conversation. The word his, inserted by the translators, adds no force to the expression, and might better be omitted.

16. Herodians. This term is found in only two other places in the Scriptures, one of which is parallel with this. Mark iii. 6; xii. 13. It is generally understood to denote a political rather than a religious sect among the Jews; though, indeed, their politics had such an intimate connexion with their religion, that it is not always easy to distinguish between them. Their prominent characteristics are said to have been these: (1.) They considered it lawful to pay tribute to the Roman government; while the mass of the Jews, and especially the Pharisees, held

17 Tell us therefore, What | And they brought unto him a thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give penny. tribute unto Cesar, or not?

18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?

20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image, and superscription?

21 They say unto him, Cesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render denounce him as an enemy to the government, and a mover of sedition." If he said it was lawful, the Pharisees might denounce him as a despiser of the law, and an enemy to the rights of his country. And, in either case, he was so cordially hated by both parties, that, if denounced by the one, he could expect no assistance from the other.

[ocr errors]

18. Jesus perceived their wickedness. Their hypocrisy." Mark xii. 15. "Their craftiness." Luke xx. 23. The particular kind of wickedness, here intended, is manifest. ¶Hypocrites. Pretenders; dissemblers. Their professed object was to learn the truth, and they pretended the utmost confidence in his wisdom and deference to his authority. Their real object was to make his answer a subject of accusation against him. They pretended a desire that he should enlighten and benefit them. They cherished a desire to ensnare and injure him. Well then did he call them hypocrites.

19 Shew me the tribute-money. it unlawful, and forbidden by Moses, to do any act by which their subjection to any foreign power should be acknowledged. Deut. xvii. 15. (2.) They considered it right to adopt the manners and customs of their temporal rulers; while others insisted that the law of Moses and that alone was to be their guide in such concerns. We have little exact information, however, concerning this sect or party. From their name, we may safely judge they were zealous supporters of Herod's government and his principal measures. "These were certain flatterers of the court, which ever maintained that religion which King Herod best approved; and though they were enemies to the Pharisees, yet in this thing they consented, thinking to entangle Christ, and so either to accuse him of treason, or to bring him into the hatred of all his people."-Geneva Bible. We know that thou art true, &c. This, though designed as a mere compliment, and intended to throw Jesus off his guard by making him believe them to be sincere inquirers and "just men," Luke xx. 20, expressed the exact truth in regard to his character. He was the very personification of truth, "neither was guile found in his mouth." 1 Pet. ii. 22. He came into the world to "bear witness unto the truth," John xviii. 37; and most faithfully did he fulfil his mission. He was neither seduced by flatteries, nor dismayed by frowns. But without partiality for the 20. Image. The impression of a head person of any man, and disregarding on one side of the coin. The head or human applause or censure, he pro-likeness of the reigning prince would claimed the truth of God, and revealed his gracious purposes.

17. Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? This was a question upon which the Pharisees and Herodians were themselves in dispute; yet they united in the effort to ensnare Jesus by their question. They supposed he must bring himself under severe censure and reproach, in whichever way he answered it. If he said, it was not lawful, the Herodians might

19. Tribute-money. By the Roman law, the tribute to that government was payable in Roman coin. By the Mosaic law, the tribute, or yearly offerings for the service of the temple, was payable in Jewish coin. When Jesus, therefore, demanded a specimen of the tribute-money, he was understood to mean the Roman coin. ¶ And they brought him a penny. The Roman denarius, or penny, was equal in value to about fourteen cents.

seem to have been exhibited on the coin; as is now the fact in regard to English and other European coins. Superscription. The names and titles of the Emperor. The practice of stamping these on coins continues in the present_day.

21. Cæsar's. From the time of Julius Cæsar, the Roman Emperors assumed the title of Cæsar, as the Egyptian kings did that of Ptolemy. TRender therefore unto Cæsar.

therefore unto Cesar, the things | him, and went their way.
which are Cesar's; and unto God,
the things that are God's.

22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left

23 The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,

"Christ answers the treachery of the
question propounded, out of the very
determinations of the schools, where
this was taught; 'Wheresoever the
money of any king is current, there the
inhabitants acknowledge that king for
their lord."-Light foot. "It is cer-
tain, their not daring to refuse this coin,
when offered them in payment, was in
effect a confession that they were con-
quered by the Romans, and conse-
quently that the Emperor had a right
to their tribute."-Doddridge. His
answer, then, may be understood thus:
You say this coin is Cæsar's; by using
it, for currency, you acknowledge your
subjection to him; and hence it follows
that you should render to him his
own, or the tribute he demands. T And
unto God, the things that are God's.
While he taught them to perform their
duty as citizens, he instructed them
that they owed also a duty to God,
which should not be neglected. He
may have referred to the annual pay-
ment of the half shekel; meaning that
the payment of tribute to Cæsar did
not exonerate them from the other duty
imposed by their own law. Or he
may have referred to their religious
duties generally, of which, indeed, the
payment of the half shekel was one;
meaning that they should be no less
careful in the performance of their re-ligious faith. See Acts xxiii. 8.
ligious duties, as children of God, than
in the performance of their political
duties, as the subjects of Cæsar. The
conjecture in the following passage is
ingenious, and worthy of consideration.
"I apprehend our Lord had a more ex-
tensive view; and that as he cautions
the Pharisees against using religion as
a pretence to justify sedition, so he also
warns the Herodians that they should
not, as they were too inclinable to do,
make a compliment of their religion to
the Romans, by complying with those
things which were forbidden by the
divine law, that they might ingratiate
themselves with Caesar's party. See
Prideaux' Connexion, ii., 366-368."-
Doddridge. But whatever particular
application Jesus might design it
should have, the general import of his

language is sufficiently obvious; and it
conveys an admonition, which all men
should carefully observe and obey.

22. They marvelled. They were astonished at his easy and skilful escape from the snare. He had answered the question directly. Yet he had founded his answer on principles which they could not dispute. They had not obtained the slightest advantage. They had failed to find ought whereof to accuse him. Disappointed and mortified, they left him, and went their way, having no disposition to enter upon another trial of skill.

23. The same day came to him the Sadducees. See note on Matt. iii. 7. There seems to have been a concert of action, on this day, between the opposers of our Lord, and a combined attempt to entangle him in conversation. Ver. 15. First, the Herodians commenced the assault, ver. 16. When they were foiled, the Sadducees made an onset, ver. 23. They being equally unsuccessful, the proud and haughty Pharisees made trial of their strength, ver. 34. They also were utterly discomfited, insomuch that no man dared, "from that day forth, ask him any more questions." Ver. 46. T Say that there is no resurrection. This was one of the main characteristics of their re

The ideas which the Pharisees entertained on the subject of the resurrection were very vague and crude. Yet, in some form, they believed in it, and in a future life. The Sadducees denied both. It was known that Jesus taught the resurrection of the dead to a state of endless life. On this point the Sadducees founded their attack. And it is worthy of remark, that each class selected a subject with which they were most familiar. The Herodians questioned Jesus concerning the tribute,a matter which they had frequently discussed, and one of the distinguishing points of their political creed; the Sadducees took the doctrine of the resurrection,-which had long been disputed between them and the Pharisees; and the Pharisees selected the relative im

24 Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.

25 Now, there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased; and having no issue, left his wife unto his brother.

portance of the several precepts in the law, a subject to which they had devoted much attention, and in which they had made many useless and injurious distinctions. See note on Matt.

V. 19.

24. Moses said, &c. See Deut. xxv. 5, 6. This law was designed to perpetuate families, so that not a name should perish out of Israel. It had the further effect of preserving the tribes distinct, and simplifying the laws of inheritance. Raise up seed unto his brother. The first-born of such a marriage was to be accounted as a child of the deceased, and to bear his name: the subsequent children were called by the name of their natural father.

26 Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. 27 And last of all the woman died also.

28 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the

clothed in the future life; whether the natural body should be raised and spiritualized, or a new body prepared.

29. Ye do err. Ye are deceived. Ye have taken a wrong view of the subject. The difficulty exists only in your own imagination. It does not actually attach to the doctrine. ¶ Not knowing the Scriptures. The Scriptures, in the New Testament, generally denote all the books of the Old Testament, which the Jews esteemed sacred, and regarded as emphatically the writings or, the Book. In this place, however, our Lord referred particularly to the writings of Moses; for these only were admitted by the Sadducees to have the authority of divine revelation; and 25-28. The Sadducees selected a consequently, the passage he adduces, case which might have occurred under ver. 32, is taken from these writings, the provisions of this law, and which whose authority the Sadducees admitthey seem to have supposed to be irre- ted. He might have quoted abundantly concileable with the doctrine of the res- from other writers; but they would urrection. It is not improbable that have denied the validity of the proof. they had before used the same argu¶ Nor the power of God. Their ideas ment successfully against the Pharisees. Undoubtedly they supposed this as difficult as any objection which they could urge against the doctrine of the resurrection, as taught by Jesus. They did not pretend, themselves, to have any faith in the resurrection, but denied it openly: of course they did not propose their question for the sake of information; but only, if possible, to confound Jesus, by stating a case which he could not reconcile with his doctrine. ¶ Therefore, in the resurrection, &c. Their meaning, by the term resurrection, was probably as vague as that of the Pharisees; and it differed much from the true Christian doctrine of the resurrection. See notes on 1 Cor. chap. xv. But it clearly embraced the idea of a future life. And, in his reply, our Lord directed their attention chiefly to this point, without describing the particular process of the resurrection, or the kind of bodies with which men should be

of his power were too limited. The same mistake has lain at the foundation of many false doctrines, and been productive of much unbelief, since the days of the Sadducees. See note on Matt. xix. 26. For one peculiarity in their unbelief, see note on ver. 30. Whether they were ignorant, that God could preserve the life of the spirit when separated from the body, or that he could reänimate the body after it had returned to the dust, or that he could renew the existence which he originally bestowed, does not distinctly appear.-But in some manner they did not sufficiently consider that the power of God was adequate to raise his children from the dead to a state of immortality. And such has been the misfortune of very many, who have consequently mourned without hope when their friends departed, and have gone down to their own graves uncheered by the anticipation of a future life.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »