CHAPTER 10

Matthew 10:2. Tisch. 8 has καί before Ἰάκωβος, only according to B א* Syr.

Matthew 10:3. Λεββ. ὁ ἐπικλ. Θαδδ.] Fritzsche: Θαδδ. ὁ ἐπικλ. Λεββ., only according to 13, 346. Changed because Θαδδ. is really the proper noun.[439]

Matthew 10:4. ΚΑΝΑΝΊΤΗς] the form ΚΑΝΑΝΑῖΟς (Lachm. Tisch.) is decisively attested.

Matthew 10:8. ΚΑΘΑΡΊΖΕΤΕ] Elz. inserts ΝΕΚΡΟῪς ἘΓΕΊΡΕΤΕ, which words Griesb. Lachm. and Tisch. 8 (so B C* D א) place after ΘΕΡΑΠΕΎΕΤΕ, while Fritzsche puts them after ἘΚΒΆΛΛΕΤΕ. Correctly struck out by Scholz and Tisch. 7. For besides being suspicious, owing to their omission in C*** E F G K L M S U V X Γ Π and very many Curss., also several versions and Fathers,—a suspicion that is heightened by their diversity of position in the unquestionably important authorities which witness in their favour,—they have the appearance of being an interpolation, which, in accordance with the apostolic narrative (Acts 9:20 ff.), seemed necessary by way of completing the list of miraculous powers that had been conferred. Had the words been original, their contents would in any case have contributed much more to preserve them than to cause their omission.

Matthew 10:10. ῬΆΒΔΟΝ] C E F G K L M P S U V X Δ Π Curss. Copt. Arm. Syr. p. Theoph. have ῬΆΒΔΟΥς. Adopted by Scholz and Tisch. Altered because of the preceding plurals, and because what is spoken applies at the same time to a plurality of persons.

ἘΣΤΙ] should be deleted, see on Luke 10:7.

Matthew 10:19. The reading fluctuates between ΠΑΡΑΔΊΔΩΣΙΝ (Elz. Tisch. 7), ΠΑΡΑΔΏΣΟΥΣΙΝ, and ΠΑΡΑΔῶΣΙΝ (Tisch. 8, after B E* א and Lachm.). The future is adopted from Matthew 10:17; while the present, which is best authenticated, and most in accordance with the sense, would be easily transformed into the aorist by the omission, on the part of the transcribers, of the middle syllable.

ΔΟΘΉΣΕΤΑΙ to ΛΑΛΉΣΕΤΕ] is not found in D L, Curss. Arm. Codd. of It. Or. Cypr. and a few Verss. Bracketed by Lachm. Ancient omission occasioned by the homoioteleuton.

Matthew 10:23. ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἌΛΛΗΝ] Griesb.: (ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἙΤΈΡΑΝ, ΚἊΝ ἘΚ ΤΑΎΤΗς ΔΙΏΚΩΣΙΝ ὙΜᾶς, ΦΕΎΓΕΤΕ ΕἸς ΤῊΝ ἌΛΛΗΝ,[440] after D L, Curss. and some Fathers and Verss., however, with differences in detail. A continuous extension of the sentence.

Matthew 10:25. ἘΠΕΚΆΛΕΣΑΝ] Elz.: ἘΚΆΛΕΣΑΝ, against decisive testimony. Lachm. again (defended by Rettig in Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 477 ff.; Buttmann, ibid. 1860, p. 342 f.) has, instead of the accusative, the dative Τῷ ΟἸΚΟΔΕΣΠΌΤῌ) and ΟἸΚΙΑΚΟῖς, only after B*, which is to be ascribed to a grammarian who took ἘΠΙΚΑΛΕῖΝ as meaning to reproach.

Matthew 10:28. φοβεῖσθε] Elz., Fritzsche: φοβηθῆτε, against decisive testimony. Adopted from Matthew 10:26. Likewise in Matthew 10:31 we ought, with Lachm. and Tisch., to restore φοβεῖσθε in accordance with B D L א, Curss. Or. Cyr.

ἀποκτενόντων] so also Scholz. The ἀποκτεινόντων (B, Or.) of the Received text is condemned by counter testimony as a grammatical correction. But although the form ἀποκτενόντων is supported by important testimony, yet we ought, with Lachm. and Tisch., to follow C D U Γ Δ Π א and Curss. and adopt the Aeolic-Alexandrine form ἀποκτεννόντον (see Sturz, Dial. Al. p. 128), because ἈΠΟΚΤΕΝΌΝΤΩΝ as a present is nowhere found, while an aorist, if the verb had had that form, would have been in this instance without meaning.

Matthew 10:33. The position ΚἈΓῺ ΑὐΤΌΝ (Beng. Lachm. Tisch. 8) is a mechanical alteration on account of Matthew 10:32.

[439] D, 122, Codd. quoted in Augustine, Hesychius, Rufinus, have merely Λεββαῖος. B א, 17, 124, and several versions have only Θαδδαῖος. So Lachm. I regard the simple Λεββαῑος (with Tisch. and also Ewald) as the original reading. The other readings are derived from Mark 3:18, because of the identity of Lebbaeus and Thaddaeus. Comp. Bengel, Appar. crit. Had the simple Θαδδαῖος been the true one, it would have been impossible to see how Λεββαῖος should have been inserted, seeing it does not occur anywhere else in the New Testament. No doubt D and Codd. of It., also Mark 3:18, have Λεββαῖον, but against testimony so decisive that it appears to have come there from our present passage.

[440] Instead of the ἄλλην of the Received text, Lachm. and Tisch. 8, following B א 33, 265, Or. Petr. Ath. have ἑτέραν, which, however, is undoubtedly connected with the above interpolation.

Matthew 10:1. Not the choosing, but merely the mission of the Twelve, is here related; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:1. The choosing (Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; comp. also John 6:70), which had taken place some time before,—although a still earlier one, viz. that of the five (Matthew 4:18 ff., Matthew 9:9), is recorded,—is assumed, as far as the complete circle of the Twelve, to be generally known, which is certainly an omission on the part of the narrator.

ἐξουσίαν] Authority over unclean spirits. The following ὥστε is epexegetical: so that they would cast them out. But καὶ θεραπεύειν, etc., is not dependent on ὥστε also, but on ἐξουσίαν (1 Corinthians 9:5). Power was given to them both to cure demoniacs and to heal those who suffered from natural disease as well; comp. Matthew 10:8. The manner of imparting this power, whether through a laying on of hands, or breathing on them (John 20:22) through a symbolic act (de Wette), or by communicating to them certain sacred words or signs, or by certain movements of the hands (Ewald), or even by magnetic influences (Weisse), or by the mere effectual word of the Lord (which is more likely, since nothing is specified), is not stated.

On the genitive, comp. Mark 6:7; John 18:2; Sir 10:4.

Matthew 10:2. Δώδεκα] Theophylact: κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν; comp. Matthew 19:28. On this occasion, when the mission is understood to take place, it is precisely the designation ἀποστόλων (not occurring elsewhere in Matthew, while in Mark it is found only in Matthew 6:30) that is made choice of, though doubtless also used by Jesus Himself (John 13:16; Luke 6:13), and from that circumstance it gradually came to be employed as the distinguishing official title.

πρῶτος Σίμων] The first is Simon. The further numbering of them ceases, for Matthew mentions them in pairs. The placing of Peter first in all the catalogues of the apostles (Mark 3:16 ff.; Luke 6:14 ff.; Acts 1:13) is not accidental (Fritzsche), but is due to the fact that he and his brother were looked upon as the πρωτόκλητοι (see, however, John 1:41). This accords with the pre-eminence which he had among the apostles as primus inter pares (Matthew 16:16 ff., Matthew 17:1. Matthew 24:19, Matthew 27:26; Matthew 27:37; Matthew 27:40; Luke 8:45; Luke 9:32; Luke 22:31 f.; John 21:15; Acts 1:15; Acts 2:14; Acts 5:3 f., Matthew 8:14, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:7; Galatians 1:18; Galatians 2:7), and which was recognised by Jesus Himself. For that they were arranged in the order of their rank is perfectly obvious, not only from the betrayer being uniformly put last, but also from the fact that in all the catalogues James and John, who along with Peter were the Lord’s most intimate friends, are mentioned immediately after that apostle (and Andrew). Moreover, a conjoint view of the four catalogues of the apostles (Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 395 ff., Bleek, Keim) will confirm Bengel’s observation, that “universi ordines habent tres quaterniones, quorum nullus cum alio quicquam permutat; turn in primo semper primus est Petrus, in secundo Philippus … in tertio Jacobus Alphaei; in singulis ceteri apostoli loca permutant; proditor semper extremus.”

ὁ λεγόμ. Πέτρος] who is called Peter (Schaeffer, Melet. p. 14); that was his usual apostolic name.

Ἀνδρέας] Greek name (found even in Herod. vi. 126), like Philippus below. Doubtless both originally had Hebrew names which are not recorded.

Matthew 10:3. Βαρθολομαῖος] בַּר תָּלְמַי, son of Tolmai, LXX. 2 Samuel 13:37, patronymic. His proper name was Nathanael; see note on John 1:46, and Keim, II. p. 311.

Θωμᾶς] תְּאֹם, Δίδυμος, twin (John 11:16; John 20:24; John 21:2), perhaps so called from the nature of his birth. In Eusebius and the Acts of Thomas he is called (see Thilo, p. 94 ff.) Ἰούδας Θωμᾶς ὁ καὶ Δίδυμος.

ὁ τελώνης] In reference to Matthew 9:9 without any special object.

ὁ τοῦ Ἀλφαίου] Matthew’s father was likewise called Alphaeus (Mark 2:14), but this is a different person; see Introduction, sec. 1.

Λεββαῖος] who must be identical with Judas Jacobi,[441] Luke 6:16 (comp. John 14:22), Acts 1:13; who, however, is not the author of the New Testament epistle bearing that name. Lebbaeus (the courageous one, from לֵב), according to our passsage, had become his regular apostolic name. According to Mark 3:18, he had the apostolic name of ΘΑΔΔΑῖΟς (which must not be taken as the correct reading of the present passage; see the critical notes), and it is in vain to inquire how this twofold appellation has arisen. The name Thaddaeus, however, is not “deflexio nominis Judae, ut rectius hic distingueretur ab Iscariota” (Lightfoot, Wetstein), but the independent name חדאי, which is also currently used in the Talmud (Lightfoot, Schoettgen, Wetstein). There is the less reason to seek for an etymology of ΘΑΔΔ. such as will make the name almost synonymous with ΛΕΒΒ., as if from תַּר (which, however, signifies mamma), or even from שַׁרַּי, one of the names of God, and meaning potens (Ebrard). For the apocryphal but ancient Acts of Lebbaeus, see Tischendorf, Acta ap. apocr. p. 261 ff. According to these, he received the name Θαδδαῖος when John the Baptist baptized him, and was previously known by the name of Lebbaeus. This is in accordance with the reading of the Received text in the case of the present passage, and with the designation in the Constit. apost., Λεββαῖος ὁ ἐπικληθεὶς Θαδδαῖος, 6. 14. 1, 8. 25,—a circumstance which, at the same time, goes to show that the name of the apostle as given in Mark is to be preferred to that found in Matthew

[441] On the relation of the genitive in Judas Jacobi (not brother, but son), see note on Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13. Comp. Nonnus, John 14:22 : Ἰούδας υἱὸς Ἰακώβοιο. The view that this Judas is a different person from Lebbaeus, and that he had succeeded to the place rendered vacant, probably by the death of Lebbaeus (Schleiermacher, Ewald), cannot possibly be entertained, for this reason, that in that case the statement in Luke 6:13 (ἐκλεξάμενος, etc.) would be simply incorrect, which is not to be supposed in connection with a matter so important and generally known (Rufinus, in Praef. ad Origen in ep. ad Rom.). According to Strauss, only the most prominent of the Twelve were known, while the others had places assigned them in conformity with the various traditions that prevailed.

Matthew 10:4. Ὁ καναναῖος] see the critical remarks. Luke calls him ζηλώτης, the (quondam) zealot. Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13; Chald. קַנְאַנִי; Hebr. קַנא; Exodus 20:5; Exodus 34:14; Deuteronomy 4:24. Zealots were a class of men who, like Phinehas (Numbers 25:9), were fanatical defenders of the theocracy; and who, while taking vengeance on those who wronged it, were themselves frequently guilty of great excesses; Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 67 f. But the ὁ Καναναῖος (or Κανανίτης, according to the Received text) is not to be explained in this way, inasmuch as this form of the epithet is derived from the name of some place or other: the Canaanite, or Cananaean; comp. Κανανίτης in Strabo, xiv. 5, p. 674 (ἀπὸ κώμης τινος). It cannot be derived from the town of Cana in Galilee (Luther, Calovius); in that case it would require to have taken the form Καναῖος, just as the inhabitants of Κάναι in Aeolis (Strabo, xiii. 1, p. 581) were called Καναῖοι (Parmenides in Athen. 3, p. 76 A). This enigmatical name is to be explained from the fact that, in accordance with his previous character, Simon bore the surname קַנְאָנִי, ζηλώτης, a name which was correctly interpreted by Luke; but, according to another tradition, was erroneously derived from the name of a place, and accordingly came to be rendered ὁ Καναναῖος.

Ἰσκαριώτης] אִישׁ קְרִיּוֹת, a native of Karioth, in the tribe of Judah. Joshua 15:25; Joseph. Antt. vii. 6. 1 : Ἴστοβος (אִישׁ טוֹב). There is no evidence that he was the only one that did not belong to Galilee (which has induced Ewald to think that the place in question is the town of קַרְתָּה (Joshua 21:34) in the tribe of Zebulon. The proposal of Lightfoot, to derive either from אסקורטיא, leather apron, or from אסכרא, strangulation, is indeed recommended by de Wette; but like the interpretation איש שקרים, man of lies (Paulus, Hengstenberg), it is not suited to the Greek form of the word; nor are de Wette’s or Hengstenberg’s objections to the ordinary explanation of the name to be regarded as unanswerable.

ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν] who also delivered him over (not betrayed, in which case we should have had προδούς). A tragic reminiscence, and ever present to the mind! Καί has the force of qui idem; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 636.

Matthew 10:5 ff. From this on to Matthew 10:42 we have the instructions to the Twelve; comp. Mark 6:8 ff., and especially Luke 9:3 ff. As in the case of the Sermon on the Mount, so on this occasion also, Luke’s parallels are irregular in their connection (in ch. 9 connected with the mission of the Twelve, in ch. 10 with the mission of the Seventy). But this is only an additional reason (in answer to Sieffart, Holtzmann) why the preference as respects essential originality—a preference, however, which in no way excludes the idea of the proleptical interweaving of a few later pieces—should also in this instance be given to Matthew, inasmuch as the contents of the passage now before us are undoubtedly taken from his collection of our Lord’s sayings.

The mission itself, to which Luke 20:35 points back, and which for this very reason we should be the less inclined to regard as having taken place repeatedly (Weisse, Ewald), was intended as a preliminary experiment in the independent exercise of their calling. For how long? does not appear. Certainly not merely for one day (Wieseler), although not exactly for several months (Krafft). According to Mark 6:7, they were sent out by twos, which, judging from Luke 10:1, Matthew 21:1, is to be regarded as what originally took place. As to the result, Matthew gives nothing in the shape of an historical account.

Matthew 10:5. With the Gentiles (ὁδὸν ἐθνῶν, way leading to the Gentiles, Acts 2:28; Acts 16:17; Kühner, II. 1, p. 286) Jesus associates the Samaritans, on account of the hostility which prevailed between the Jews and the Samaritans. The latter had become intermixed during the exile with Gentile colonists, whom Shalmaneser had sent into the country (2 Kings 17:24), which caused the Jews who returned from the captivity to exclude them from any participation in their religious services. For this reason the Samaritans tried to prevent the rebuilding of the temple by bringing accusations against them before Cyrus. Upon this and upon disputed questions of a doctrinal and liturgical nature, the hatred referred to was founded. Sir 1:25 ff.; Lightfoot, p. 327 f. In accordance with the divine plan of salvation (Matthew 15:24), Jesus endeavours, above all, to secure that the gospel shall be preached, in the first instance, to the Jews (John 4:22); so, with a view to the energies of the disciples being steadily directed to the foremost matter which would devolve upon them, He in the meantime debars them from entering the field of the Gentiles and Samaritans. This arrangement (if we except hints such as Matthew 8:11, Matthew 21:43, Matthew 22:9, Matthew 24:14) He allows to subsist till after His resurrection; then, and not till then, does He give to the ministry of the apostles that lofty character of a ministry for all men (Matthew 28:19 f.; Acts 1:8), such as, from the first, He must have regarded His own to have been (Matthew 5:13). The fact that Jesus Himself taught in travelling through Samaria (John 4), appears to be at variance with the injunction in our passage (Strauss); but this is one of those paradoxes in the Master’s proceedings about which the disciples were not to be enlightened till some time afterwards. And what He could do, the disciples were not yet equal to, so that, in the first place, they were called upon only to undertake the lighter task.

Matthew 10:6-7. Τὰ πρόβατα … Ἰσραήλ] the members of Israel, the family of Israel (Leviticus 10:6; Exodus 19:3), the theocratic nation, who were alienated from the divine truth and the divine life, and so were found wandering in error, like sheep without a shepherd. Comp. Matthew 15:24. And such sheep (Matthew 9:36) were they all, seeing that they were without faith in Him, the heaven-sent Shepherd. For the figure generally, comp. Isaiah 53:6; Jeremiah 50:8; Ezekiel 34:5.

Matthew 10:7. ἤγγικεν, κ.τ.λ.] being precisely the same terms as those in which Jesus Himself (Matthew 4:17), and the Baptist before Him, had commenced their preaching (Matthew 3:2).

Matthew 10:8-9. Δωρεὰν … δότε] with reference to the miraculous gifts just mentioned, not to the teaching, for which, as a matter of course, nothing was to be asked in return except the bare necessaries of life, Matthew 10:10 (1 Corinthians 9:4 ff.).

ἐλάβετε] refers back to Matthew 10:1.

μὴ κτήσησθε] you must not provide for yourselves.

The girdle, which holds together the loose upper robe, served the double purpose of keeping money as well, the different kinds of which are, in the order of their value, denoted by χρυσόν, ἄργυρον, χαλκόν. Rosenmüller, Morgenl. V. p. 53 f. Therefore εἰς τ. ζ. ὑ.: in your girdles, is depending on κτής.

Matthew 10:10. Μή] sc. κτήσησθε, with which εἰς ὁδόν is to be connected. Πήρα, a bag slung over the shoulder, see Duncan, Lex. Hom. ed. Rost, s.v.

δύο χιτῶνας] two under-garments, either with a view to wear both at one time (Mark 6:9), or only one while carrying the other with them in case of need.

ὑποδήματα] namely, for the requirements of the journey, besides the pair already in use. The question whether, as Lightfoot and Salmasius think, it is shoes in the strict sense of the word (ὑποδήματα κοῖλα, Becker, Charicl. p. 221) that are here meant, or whether it is ordinary σανδάλια (Mark 6:9), is, judging from the usual Oriental mode of covering the feet, to be decided in favour of the sandals, which the Greeks also called by the same name as that in the text (Pollux, VII. 35 ff.).

μηδὲ ῥάβδον] nor a staff to carry in the hand for support and self-defence (Tob 5:17), an unimportant variation from Mark 6:8.

ἄξιος γὰρ, κ.τ.λ.] a general proposition, the application of which is of course evident enough. Free and unembarrassed by any ὑλικῆς φροντίδος, εἰς μόνην δὲ βλέποντες τὴν ἐγχειρισθεῖσαν αὐτοῖς διακονίαν (Euth. Zigabenus), such as is represented by the matters just specified, they are to rely upon God’s care of them, who will cause them to realize in their own experience how true it is that the labourer is worthy of His support.

Matthew 10:11. Ἄξιος] according to what follows: worthy to provide you lodging at his house, “ne praedicationis dignitas suscipientis infamia deturpetur,” Jerome. Jesus forbids the apostles to indulge in a fickle and frequent shifting of their quarters as a thing unbecoming their office, and as calculated to interfere with the steady progress of their labours. And He directs them to go to private houses, not to the synagogues nor to the market-places, seeing that they were unaccustomed to making public appearances, but also out of regard to the importance of domestic efforts.

Matthew 10:12. Εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν] This does not mean the house at which you arrive (de Wette), but that which belongs to him whom, on inquiry, you find to be worthy of you (Matthew 10:11), and where, if the owner is worthy, you are to stay until you remove to another locality. The article is definite as referring to κἀκεῖ.

ἀσπάσασθε αὐτήν] Euth. Zigabenus: ἐπεύχεσθε εἰρήνην αὐτῇ, the usual form of salutation, שָׁלוֹם לְךָ, Genesis 40:23; Jdg 19:20; Luke 10:5.

Matthew 10:13. Ἀξία] not “bonis votis, quae salute dicenda continebuntur” (Fritzsche), but, as in Matthew 10:11, worthy of your remaining in it. It should be noticed that ᾖ and μὴ ᾖ are put first for sake of emphasis; and should the house be worthy, then come, and so on; but if it is not a worthy one, then, and so on. In this way the reference of ἄξιος remains unchanged.

ἐλθέτω] shall come, that is my will.

ἡ εἰρήνη ὑμῶν] the blessings brought by you by way of salutation.

πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐπιστραφήτω] Euth. Zigabenus: μηδὲν ἐνεργησάτω, ἀλλὰ ταύτην μεθʼ ἑαυτῶν λαβόντες ἐξέλθετε. An expression which represents the idea to the senses. Isaiah 45:23; Isaiah 60:11.

Matthew 10:14. Καὶ ὃς ἐὰν, κ.τ.λ.] The nominative is a case of anacoluthon, and placed at the beginning, so as to be emphatic, as in Matthew 7:24 : Whosoever will not have received you … as you quit that house or that town, shake, and so on.

ἐξέρχεσθαι, with a simple genitive (Acts 16:39); Kühner, II. 1, p. 346. The ἔξω, which Lachmann, Tischendorf 8. insert (B D א), is a gloss upon what is a rare construction in the New Testament. Notice the present participle, thereby meaning “upon the threshold,” and relatively “at the gate.”

ἤ] or, should a whole town refuse to receive you and listen to you. The shaking off the dust is a sign of the merited contempt with which such people are reduced to the level of Gentiles, whose very dust is defiling. Iightfoot, p. 331 f.; Mischna Surenhusii, VI. p. 151; Wetstein on this passage; Acts 13:51; Acts 18:6. This forcible, meaning of the symbolical injunction is not to be weakened (Grotius, Bleek: “Nil nobis vobiscum ultra commercii est;” de Wette: “Have nothing further to do with them;” Ewald: “Calmly, as though nothing had happened”); on the contrary, it is strengthened by Matthew 10:15. Comp. Matthew 7:6.

Matthew 10:15. Γῇ Σοδ., κ.τ.λ.] the land (those who once inhabited the land) where Sodom and Gomorrah stood. The truth of this asseveration is founded on the principle in morals, that the more fully the will of God is proclaimed (Luke 12:47; Matthew 11:20 ff.), the greater the guilt of those who resist it. Notice how the resurrection of the wicked also is here assumed (John 5:29); observe likewise how Jesus’ words bespeak the highest Messianic self-consciousness.

Matthew 10:16. Ἰδού] Introduces demonstratively the thought for which Matthew 10:14-15 have prepared the way. Such forms of address as ἰδού, ἄγε, etc., frequently occur in the singular in classical writers also, and that, too, where it is a question of plurality (Matthew 18:31, Matthew 26:65; John 1:29; Acts 13:46); see Bremi, ad Dem. Philipp. I. 10, p. 119, Goth.

ἐγώ] here, as always, is emphatic (in answer to Fritzsche, de Wette, Bleek): It is I who send you into the midst of such dangers; conduct yourselves, then, in such circumstances in a manner becoming those who are my messengers; be wise as serpents, and so on.

ὡς πρόβατα ἐν μέσῳ λύκων] tanquam oves, etc., i.e. so that, as my messengers, you will be in the position of sheep in the midst of wolves. Usually ἐν μέσῳ λύκ. is made to depend on ἀποστέλλω, in which case ἐν, in accordance with its well-known pregnant force (Bernhardy, p. 208 f.), would not only express the direction of the verb, but also convey the idea of continuing in the position in question, while ὡς would have the meaning of as. This is harsh, inasmuch as the ἀποστέλλω, which occurs so often in the New Testament, is in no other instance (in Luke 4:19 it is an abstract expression) used in such a local sense. Moreover, ἐν μέσῳ gives more striking prominence to the danger than the simple ἐν.

ἀκέραιος] Etym. M.: ὁ μὴ κεκραμένος κακοῖς, ἀλλʼ ἁπλοῦς καὶ ἀποίκιλος. Comp. Romans 16:19, Php 2:15, common in classical authors; see Ruhnken, ad Tim. p. 18. In view of the dangerous circumstances in which they would be placed, Jesus asks of them to combine (a combination to be realized under the direction of the Holy Spirit, as in Matthew 10:19) prudence (in the recognition of danger, in the choice of means for counteracting it, in regard to their demeanour in the midst of it, and so on) with uprightness, which shuns every impropriety into which one might be betrayed in the presence of the dangers referred to, and therefore refrains from thinking, choosing, or doing anything of a questionable nature in connection with them. For Rabbinical passages bearing on the wisdom of the serpent (Genesis 3:1) and the innocence of the dove (Hosea 7:11), see Schoettgen.

The loftiest example of this combination is Jesus Himself; while among the apostles, so far as we know them, the one who ranks highest in this respect is Paul.

Matthew 10:17. Δέ] denoting continuation of this same matter: “But in order to comply with this injunction (usually the wisdom alone is arbitrarily supposed to be referred to), be on your guard, and so on.” The passage that now follows on to Matthew 10:23 originally formed part (comp. Mark 13:9 ff.) of the eschatological utterances, but the connection in which it now stands was probably that in which it was already met with in the collection of our Lord’s sayings. Comp. Matthew 24:9-13; Luke 21:12 ff. Then again, taken in detail, the different portions of this address, as given by Matthew, possess the advantage of originality. Comp. Weizsäcker, p. 160 ff.

ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων] The article is not meant to indicate men who are hostile (Matthew 10:16, Erasmus, Fritzsche), who must have been indicated in some other way than by the simple article (by τῶν τοιούτων, or such like), or by the general expression ἀνθρώπων; but it is to be understood generically: men in general, taken as a whole, are conceived of as hostile, in accordance with the idea of that κόσμος to which the disciples do not belong (John 15:19), and by which they are hated (John 17:14).

συνέδρια] taken generally, tribunals in general.

ἐν ταῖς συναγ.] That scourging also belonged to the synagogal forms of punishment, as a matter of synagogue discipline, is placed beyond a doubt by the New Testament. See, besides the Synoptists, Acts 22:19; Acts 26:11; 2 Corinthians 11:24. The evidence from Rabbinical literature is doubtful.

Matthew 10:18. Καὶ … δέ] and … but (always separated except in the epic poets), is of the nature of a climax, introducing still another circumstance, whereupon δέ follows this new and emphasized thought. Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 181 f.; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 645; Baeumlein, Partik. p. 148 f.

ἡγεμόνας] comprises the three kinds of provincial chief magistrates, propraetors, proconsuls, and procurators. Fischer, de vit. Lex. N. T. p. 432 ff.

εἰς μαρτύριον … ἔθνεσιν] as a testimony to them and to the Gentiles, i.e. those wrongs and that violent treatment have this as their object, that (through your confession and demeanour) a testimony regarding me may be given to the Jews and the Gentiles. Comp. Matthew 8:4, Matthew 24:14. Let it be observed: (1) that it is arbitrary to refer εἰς μαρτύριον, as is usually done, merely to the last point, καὶ ἐπὶ ἡγεμόνας, etc., seeing that everything, in fact, from παραδώσουσι onwards, belongs to one category and has one common aim; (2) that αὐτοῖς, therefore, cannot point to the ἡγεμόνας and βασιλεῖς, to whom it is commonly referred (Baumgarten-Crusius, Bleek), though not in keeping with the distinction expressed by καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, for the truth is, the procurators and kings were Gentiles also; but that, as is at once suggested to the reader by this adding on of καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, it rather refers to the Jews (Maldonatus, Bengel, Lange, Hilgenfeld, Schegg, following Theophylact), who (αὐτῶν, Matthew 10:17) are the active subjects of παραδώσουσι, μαστιγώσουσιν, and partly also of ἀχθήσεσθε; (3) that, according to the context, τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, to the Gentiles, refers to the ἡγεμόνας and βασιλεῖς, and their Gentile environment; (4) and lastly, that the further reference of μαρτύριον is to be gathered from ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ: a testimony of me, regarding my person and work. The dative case, however, is that of reference as regards the μαρτύριον; to define more specifically would be an unwarrantable liberty. This is applicable to the view adopted since Chrysostom: εἰς ἔλεγχον αὐτῶν (Theophylact, Euth. Zigabenus, Erasmus, Beza, Maldonatus, Kuinoel), although this is included in that general reference.

Matthew 10:19-20. But now, when the delivering of you up actually takes place, give yourselves no anxious concern, and so on.

ἢ τί] not καὶ τί, but the distinctive expression used renders more fully prominent the two elements, the how and the what (Dissen, ad Dem, de cor. p. 264), in which “eleganter notatur cura” (Bengel). The difficulty, first of all, is with regard to the πῶς; observe, however, that in the sequel only τί is used (“ubi τό quid obtigit, τό quomodo non deest,” Bengel).

δοθήσεται] not docebitur, but suggeretur, by God through the Holy Spirit, Isaiah 50:4; Ephesians 6:19; 1 Corinthians 2:10 ff.; Luke 21:15.

Observe the difference between τί λαλήσητε and τί λαλήσετε (what you ought to speak, and what you will speak); and for this use of τί, see Bernhardy, p. 443. Kühner, II. 2, p. 1016.

οὐ … ἀλλά] In this decided, and not in any half and half way, does Jesus conceive of that relation, in virtue of which His disciples were to become πνευματικοῖς πνευματικὰ συγκρίνοντες (1 Corinthians 2:13).

ἐστέ] the future situation is thought of as present.

Matthew 10:21. Comp. Micah 7:6.

ἐπαναστής.] not merely before the judges, but generally. It is the expression in classical Greek for rebellious rising (ἐπανάστασις, 2 Kings 3:4; Krüger, ad Dion. p. 55); in Greek authors usually with the dative, also with ἐπί τινι.

θανατώσουσιν] take away life (Matthew 26:59), i.e. bring about their execution. A vivid expression. Comp. also Matthew 27:1. The reason of this hostile treatment is self-evident, but may be further seen from Matthew 10:22.

Matthew 10:22. Ὑπὸ πάντων] Popular way of expressing the universal character of the hatred.

διὰ τὸ ὄνομά μου] because you confess and preach it. Tertullian, Apol. 2 : “Torquemur confitentes et punimur perseverantes et absolvimur negantes, quia nominis proelium est.”

ὑπομείνας] whosoever will have persevered in the confessing of my name. This is to be inferred from διὰ τὰ ὄνομά μου. Comp. note on Matthew 24:13.

εἰς τέλος] usque ad finem horum malorum (Theophylact, Beza, Fritzsche). Others think that the end of life is meant, or (as also Bleek) mingle together a variety of references. Contrary to Matthew 10:23.

σώζεσθαι] obtain the blessedness of the Messianic kingdom.

Matthew 10:23. Ταύτῃ and τὴν ἄλλην are to be understood δεικτιῶς. Jesus points with the finger in the direction of various towns. Your sphere is large enough to admit of your retreating before persecution in order to save others.

γάρ] A ground of encouragement for such perseverance.

οὐ μὴ τελέσητε, κ.τ.λ.] You will not have completed your visits to the towns of the people of Israel; i.e., you will not have accomplished in all of them your mission, associated as it will be with such flights from town to town Comp. the analogous use of ἀνύειν (Raphel, Krebs, Loesner, on this passage), explere, in Tibull. i. 4. 69 (Heyne, Obss. p. 47); consummare, in Flor. i. 18. 1 (see Ducker on the passage). The interpretation: to bring to Christian perfection (Maldonatus, Zeger, Jansen, following Hilary; Hofmann, Weissag. u. Erfüll. II. p. 267 f.), is an erroneous makeshift, by way of removing the second coming farther into the future. Observe that here, too, as in Matthew 10:5, the apostolic ministry is still confined to Israel.

ἕως ἂν ἔλθῃ] until the Son of man will have come, i.e. the Messiah, such as He has been promised in Daniel’s vision (Matthew 8:20), who will then put an end to your troubles, and receive you into the glory of His kingdom. Jesus means neither more nor less than His second coming (Matthew 24), which He announces even at this early stage, and as being so near, that Matthew 24:14, and even Matthew 26:28, are not to be reconciled with this view. Different elements of the tradition, which, in the course of experience, came to view the prospect as more remote,—a tradition, however, that was still the product of the existing γενεά (Matthew 24:34, Matthew 14:28). The interpretations which explain away the final coming, content themselves, some with the idea of a vague coming after or coming to their help (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euth. Zigabenus, Beza, Kuinoel; even Origen and Theodoret, Heracleon in Cramer’s Cat. p. 78); others with the coming through the Holy Spirit (Calvin, Grotius, Calovius, Bleek), or with supposing that the, as yet too remote, destruction of Jerusalem is referred to (Michaelis, Schott, Glöckler, Ebrard, Gess); and others, again, explaining it allegorically of the victory of Christ’s cause (Baumgarten-Crusius). On the prediction of the second coming itself, see on ch. 24.

Matthew 10:24. Similarly, what follows from here on to the close consists of anticipations of later utterances. Comp. as far as Matthew 10:33; Luke 12:1 ff., and from Matthew 10:34 onward; Luke 12:49 ff.

Do not be surprised at such intimations beforehand of the sad troubles that await you; for (as the proverb has it) you need not expect a better fate than that which befalls your Lord and Master. Comp. John 5:20; Rabbinical passages in Schoettgen, p. 98.

Matthew 10:25. ʼΑρκετὸν τῷ μαθητῇ, ἵνα, κ.τ.λ.] It is enough for the disciple he should be as his Master, i.e. let him satisfy himself with being destined to share the same fate; a better he cannot claim. For ἵνα, comp. John 6:29 and the note upon it.

κιὰ ὁ δοῦλος, κ.τ.λ.] by attraction for καὶ τῷ δούλῳ, ἵνα γένηται ὡς ὁ Κύρ. αὐτοῦ. Winer, p. 583 [E. T. 783].

Βεελζεβούλ, name of the devil, which the majority of modern critics (Kuinoel, Fritzsche, de Wette, Bleek, Grimm) agree, with Lightfoot and Buxtorf, in deriving from בַּעַל and זֶבֶל, dominus stercoris, an expression intended to designate with loathing the prince of all moral impurity. It is supposed, at the same time, that the name Beelzebub, the Philistine god of flies, by being changed into Beelzebul (god of dung), came to be employed, in a jocular way, as a name for the devil. See below on the reading Βεελζεβούβ. But, as against the meaning god of dung, there is (1) the form of the name itself, which, if derived from זֶבֶל, should have been spelt Βεελζαβήλ, or Βεελζάβελ, according to the analogy of Ἰεζαβήλ (אִיזֶבֶל), or Ἰεζάβελ (Revelation 2:20). (2) The fact that Jesus’ own designation of Himself as οἰκοδεσπότης is evidently chosen with reference to the meaning of Βεελζεβούλ, as indeed is clear from δεσπότης = בעל, and that, accordingly, the name Βεελζεβούλ must contain something corresponding to οἶκος as well. This being so, it is preferable to derive the word from בַּעַל and זְבוּל, a dwelling (Gusset, Michaelis, Paulus, Jahn, Hitzig, Philistäer, p. 314; Hilgenfeld, Volkmar), according to which the devil, as lord of his domain, in which the evil spirits dwell, was called Dominus domicilii (but neither tartari, as Paulus, nor domicilii coelestis, as Hilgenfeld, Keim, suppose). Jesus was, in relation to His disciples (τοὺς οἰκιακοὺς αὐτοῦ), the Herus domesticus, בַּעַל הַבַּיִת (Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 333); but, in malicious jest, they applied to Him the corresponding name of the devil: Herus domicilii. Jerome wrote Βεελζεβούβ, from זְבוּב, musca, i.e. Dominus muscarum. Such was the name given to a fortune-telling divinity of the Ekronites (2 Kings 1:2; 2 Kings 1:16), which during an illness was consulted by King Ahaziah, and to which, in connection with the very ancient heathen worship of flies, was ascribed the dominion over those insects, and which therefore was supposed, at the same time, to have the power of averting this scourge of the East. Plin. N. H. x. 28; Pausan. viii. 26, 27; Aelian. H. A. v. 17; Solin. Polyh. 1. But critical testimony most decidedly preponderates in favour of the reading Βεελζεβούλ, which might easily have been changed into Βεελζεβούβ, on account of what is found in 2 Kings 1; and the greater the correspondence between the meaning of the former name and that of οἰκοδεσπότης, it is also the more likely to be the correct form.

That the Jews really called Jesus Βεελζεβούλ, is not elsewhere stated in any of the Gospels, though from our present passage the fact cannot be doubted, while it is probably connected with the accusation in Matthew 9:34, Matthew 12:34, though going rather further.

Matthew 10:26. Further encouragement by pointing to the providence of God.

στρουθία] The diminutive is used advisedly. Comp. Psalm 11:1; Psalm 84:3; Aristot. H. An. v. 2, ix. 7. Two small sparrows for a single farthing. The latter was one-tenth of a drachma, and subsequently it was still less. It is also used by Rabbinical writers to denote the smallest possible price of anything; Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 175, Lightfoot, Schoettgen.

καί] is simply and, and placed first in the answer, which is, in fact, a continuation of the thought contained in the question. See Kühner, ad Xen. Mem. ii. 10. 2.

ἕν] a single.

πεσεῖται ἐπὶ τ. γῆν] not spoken of the bird that is caught in the snare or gin (Irenaeus, Chrysostom, Euth. Zigabenus), but of that which has dropped dead from the sky or the branches.

ἄνευ] independently of, without the interference; the reading ἄνευ τῆς βουλῆς τοῦ πατρ. ὑμ. is an old and correct gloss. Comp. the classical expressions ἄνευ θεοῦ, ἄτερ θεῶν, and sine Diis, Isaiah 36:10.

Matthew 10:26-27. Οὖν] inference from Matthew 10:24-25 : since, from the relation in which, as my disciples, you stand to me as your Master, it cannot surprise you, but must only appear as a necessary participation in the same fate, if they persecute you.

The γάρ which follows, then, conjoins with the μὴ φοβ. αὐτ. a further awakening consideration—that, namely, which arises out of the victorious publicity which the gospel is destined to attain; whereupon is added, in Matthew 10:27, the exhortation—an exhortation in keeping with this divine destiny of the gospel—to labour boldly and fearlessly as preachers of that which He communicates to them in private intercourse. This addition is the more emphatic from there being no connecting particle to introduce it. The thought, “elucescet tandem orbi vestra sinceritas,” which others (Chrysostom, Theophylact, Theodoret, Heracleon in Cramer’s Cat., Erasmus, Grotius, Beza) have found in Matthew 10:26, as well as the reference to the judgment (Hilgenfeld), are equally at variance with the context, as seen in Matthew 10:27. For the figurative contrasting of σκοτία and φῶς, in the case of λέγειν and such like, comp. Soph. Phil. 578, and Wunder in loc.; for εἰς τ. οὖς, also a common expression among classical writers for what is told in confidence, see Valckenaer, ad Eurip. Hipp. 932.

Matthew 10:28. Τὸν δυνάμενον … γεέννῃ] who is in a position to consign body and soul, at the day of judgment, to everlasting destruction in Gehenna. Comp. Matthew 5:29. It is God that is meant, and not the devil (Olshausen, Stier). Comp. Jam 4:12; Wis 16:13-15.

φοβεῖσθαι ἀπό, as a rendering of יָרֵא מִן, and expressing the idea of turning away from the object of fear, occurs often in the LXX. and Apocrypha; the only other instance in the New Testament is Luke 12:4; not found in classical writers at all, though they use φόβος ἀπό (Xen. Cyr. iii. 3. 53; Polyb. ii. 35. 9, ii. 59. 8).

μᾶλλον] potius. Euth. Zigabenus: φόβον οὖν ἀπώσασθε φόβῳ, τὸν τῶν ἀνθρώπων τῷ τοῦ θεοῦ.

Matthew 10:30. Ὑμῶν δέ] Put first by way of emphasis. Euth. Zigabenus aptly observes: ὑμεῖς δὲ τοσοῦτόν ἐστε τίμιοι, ὥστε καὶ πάσας ὑμῶν τρίχας ἠριθμημένας εἶναι παρὰ θεοῦ … καὶ λεπτομερῶς οἶδε πάντα τὰ καθʼ ὑμᾶς. Poetical expression for the providentia specialissima. Comp. Luke 21:18; Acts 27:34; 1 Samuel 14:45; 2 Samuel 14:11; 1 Kings 1:52; Plato, Legg. x. p. 900 C.

Matthew 10:32 f. Πᾶς οὖν, κ.τ.λ.] Nominative, like Matthew 10:14.

ἐν ἐμοί] is neither a Hebraism nor a Syriac mode of expression; nor does it stand for the dative of advantage; nor does it mean through me (Chrysostom); but the personal object of confession is conceived of as the one to whom the confession cleaves. Exactly as in Luke 12:8. Similar to ὀμνύειν ἐν, Matthew 5:34.

In the apodosis, notice the order: confess will I also him (as really one of mine, and so on).

ἔμπροσθεν … οὐρανοῖς] namely, after my ascension to the glory of heaven as σύνθρονος of the Father, Matthew 26:64; comp. Revelation 3:5.

Matthew 10:32-33 contain, as an inference from all that has been said since Matthew 10:16, a final observation in the form of a promise and a threatening, and expressed in so general a way that the disciples are left to make the special application for themselves.

The address, which is drawing to a close in Matthew 10:33, pursues still further the same lofty tone, and that in vivid imagery, in Matthew 10:34, so full is Jesus of the thought of the profound excitement which He feels He is destined to create.

Matthew 10:34. Ἦλθον βαλεῖν] The telic style of expression is not only rhetorical, indicating that the result is unavoidable, but what Jesus expresses is a purpose,—not the final design of His coming, but an intermediate purpose,—in seeing clearly presented to His view the reciprocally hostile excitement as a necessary transition, which He therefore, in keeping with His destiny as Messiah, must be sent first of all to bring forth.

βαλεῖν] an instance of zeugma, in which the thought of a sword is the predominant one, after which the verb also spontaneously suggested itself for εἰρήνην, and all the more naturally the more sudden and powerful was to be the excitement of men’s minds, which He, instead of a comfortable peace, was to bring about.

Matthew 10:35-36. Comp. Matthew 10:21. Involuntary recollection of Micah 7:6. Comp. also Sota xlix. 2, in Schoettgen.

ἦλθον γάρ] solemn repetition.

διχάσαι] to separate (Plat. Polit. p. 264 D), i.e. to place a man in that attitude of party hostility (διχοστασία) toward his father which results in their separation, and so on.

νύμφη: young wife (common in classical writers), specially in the sense of daughter-in-law (in the LXX.).

καὶ ἐχθροὶ, κ.τ.λ.] imminent, as if already present: and a man’s enemies (are) the members of his own family! ἐχθροί is a predicate.

Matthew 10:37. Demeanour in the midst of this excitement: the love of the family on no account to take precedence of love to Christ, but quite the reverse! The inalienable rights of family affection remain intact, but in subordination to the love of Christ, which determines how far it is of a truly moral nature.

μου ἄξιος] worthy to belong to me as his Lord and Master. Comp. Luke 14:26.

Matthew 10:38. To take up his cross means, willingly to undergo the severe trials that fall to his lot (2 Corinthians 1:5; Php 3:10). Figurative expression, borrowed from the practice according to which condemned criminals were compelled to take up their own cross and carry it to the place of execution; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26; John 19:16; Artemid. ii. 56, p. 153; Plut. Mor. p. 554 A; Cic. de divin. i. 26; Valer. Max. xi. 7. The form of this expression, founded as it is upon the kind of death which Christ Himself was to die, is one of the indications of that later period from which the passage from Matthew 10:24 onward has been transferred to its present connection. Matthew himself betrays the prolepsis in Matthew 26:24 f.; comp. Mark 8:34; Luke 14:27.

ὀπίσω μου: in conformity with the Hebrew אחרי. Comp., however, ἀκολ. κατόπιν τινός, Arist. Plut. xiii.

Matthew 10:39. Ψυχήν and αὐτήν have no other meaning than that of soul (Matthew 2:20, Matthew 6:25, Matthew 9:28); but the point lies in the reference of the finding and losing not being the same in the first as in the second half of the verse. “Whoever will have found his soul (by a saving of his life in this world through denying me in those times when life is endangered), will lose it (namely, through the ἀπώλεια, Matthew 7:13, the eternal death at the second coming; comp. Luke 9:24 f.); and whoever will have lost his soul (through the loss of his life in this world in persecution, through an act of self-sacrifice), will find it” (at the resurrection to the eternal ζωή); σωθήσεται, Matthew 10:22. For ἀπόλλ. ψυχήν, comp. Eur. Hec. 21; Anth. Pal. vii. 272. 2. The finding in the first half, accordingly, denotes the saving of the ψυχή, when to all appearance hopelessly endangered from temporal death; while, in the second, it denotes the saving of the ψυχή after it has actually succumbed to death. The former is a finding that issues in eternal death; the latter, one that conducts to eternal life.

Matthew 10:40-42. Before concluding, the reassuring statement is added that: In all such troubles you are to have the less hesitation in claiming to be entertained and supported by believers; the holier the deeds and the greater (in the Messianic kingdom) the reward of those will prove to be who so receive and maintain you. Euth. Zigabenus appropriately observes: ταῦτα εἶπεν ἀνοίγων τοῖς μαθηταῖς τὰς οἰκίας τῶν πιστευόντων. Comp. with Matthew 10:40, John 13:20; and with Matthew 10:41 f., comp. Mark 9:37; Mark 9:41.

Matthew 10:41. A general expression, the special reference of which to the disciples is found in Matthew 10:42.

εἰς ὄνομα] from a regard to that which the name implies, to the prophetic character; διʼ αὐτὸ τὸ ὀνομάζεσθαι καὶ εἶναι, Euth. Zigabenus. In Rabbinical writers we find לְשֵׁם. Schoettgen, p. 107; Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 2431. Therefore; for the sake of the cause which stamps them with their distinguishing characteristics, for sake of the divine truth which the prophet interprets from the revelation that has been made to him, and for sake of the integrity which the δίκαιος exhibits in his life.

δίκαιον] an upright man, correct parallel to προφήτην. The apostles, however, belong to both categories, inasmuch as they receive and preach the revelation (προφῆται) communicated by God through Christ, and seeing that, through their faith in the Lord, they are characterized by true and holy righteousness of life (δίκαιοι).

The reward of a prophet and of a righteous man is the same reward, which they will receive (in the Messianic kingdom).

Matthew 10:42. Ἕνα … τούτων] a single one of these (δεικτικῶς) little ones. According to the whole context, which has been depicting the despised and painful circumstances of the disciples, and is now addressing to them the necessary encouragement, it is to be regarded as intentional and significant that Jesus employs the term μικρῶν (not μαθητῶν), an expression which (in answer to Wetstein) is not usual among Rabbinical writers to convey the idea of disciples. Otherwise Matthew 18:6.

μόνον] only, connected with what precedes.

τὸν μισθὸν αὐτοῦ] the reward awaiting him, in the kingdom of the Messiah; Matthew 5:12. Grotius says correctly: “Docemur hic, facta ex animo, non animum ex factis apud Deum aestimari.”