Luke · Chapter 10

Verse 1. The Lord appointed other seventy] Rather, seventy others, not other seventy, as our translation has it, which seems to intimate that he had appointed seventy before this time, though, probably, the word other has a reference to the twelve chosen first: he not only chose twelve disciples to be constantly with him; but he chose seventy others to go before him. Our blessed Lord formed every thing in his Church on the model of the Jewish Church; and why? Because it was the pattern shown by God himself, the Divine form, which pointed out the heavenly substance which now began to be established in its place. As he before had chosen twelve apostles, in reference to the twelve patriarchs, who were the chiefs of the twelve tribes, and the heads of the Jewish Church, he now publicly appointed (for so the word anedeizen means) seventy others, as Moses did the seventy elders whom he associated with himself to assist him in the government of the people. Exodus 18:19; 24:1-9. These Christ sent by two and two: 1. To teach them the necessity of concord among the ministers of righteousness. 2. That in the mouths of two witnesses every thing might be established. And, 3. That they might comfort and support each other in their difficult labour. See on Mark 6:7. Several MSS. and versions have seventy-two. Sometimes the Jews chose six out of each tribe: this was the number of the great Sanhedrin. The names of these seventy disciples are found in the margin of some ancient MSS., but this authority is questionable.

Verse 1. The Lord appointed other seventy also — Or rather, seventy others, as eterouv ebdomhkonta, should certainly be translated; for the expression, other seventy, implies that seventy had been sent before, which certainly was not the fact, (those sent before being no more than twelve,) nor is it implied in the Greek. So inconsiderable a difference in the words makes a great alteration in the sense. “The scene of Christ’s ministry being, from this time forth, to lie in Judea, and the country beyond Jordan, it was expedient that his way should be prepared in every city and village of those countries whither he was to come. He therefore sent out seventy of his disciples on this work, mentioning the particular places which he intended to visit, and in which they were to preach; whereas, the twelve had been allowed to go where they pleased, provided they confined their ministry to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Luke is the only evangelist who has given us this account of Christ’s sending out the seventy; and it is the less to be wondered at, that he should do it so particularly, if the ancient tradition be true, which Origen and Epiphanius have mentioned, that he was himself one of the number. It is remarkable that our Lord assigns the same reason for the mission of the seventy which he had assigned for the mission of the twelve disciples. The harvest was plenteous in Judea and Perea, as well as in Galilee, and the labourers there also were few. Hence his exhortation, Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest that he would send forth (Greek, ekballh, thrust out) labourers. For God alone can do this: he alone can qualify and commission men for this work, and incline them to undertake it.

Verse 1. The Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two. This was after the twelve had returned, and brought reports of the eager cries of the people for the word of life. Some old copies of the Greek read, seventy two, which is followed by the Vulgate. Some rabbins persisted in writing seventy two for seventy, because Eldad and Medad had prophesied in the camp. He wisely sent them two and two, that one might the better assist the other; that they might the more edify the people, for one would generally be more acceptable than the other; and this mode of a travelling companion, we find was followed by Paul and Peter. Acts 15:36.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

1 Christ sendeth out at once seventy disciples to work miracles, and to preach: 17 admonisheth them to be humble, and wherein to rejoice: 21 thanketh his Father for his grace: 23 magnifieth the happy estate of his Church: 25 teacheth the lawyer how to attain eternal life, and to take every one for his neighbour that needeth his mercy: 41 reprehendeth Martha, and commendeth Mary her sister.

CHAPTER 10. Verse 1. Other seventy also. — Seventy other preachers beside the twelve apostles before appointed, and who had fulfilled their commission in another direction. Our Lord, who had laboured chiefly in Galilee, was about to visit several parts of Judea; and these seventy disciples were sent to those cities and villages whither he himself would come, to prepare his way, by preaching his doctrine, and confirming it by miracles in his name. In going up to Jerusalem he made short stages, visiting many places. This mission, from the number of those employed, was soon accomplished; and hence we read of their speedy return. St. Luke alone mentions this mission of the seventy; and ancient tradition affirms that he was of the number, — a fact which is not confirmed by the introduction to this gospel, which rather intimates that he was of a subsequent class of disciples. In the choice of twelve apostles, and seventy other preachers, there was reference probably to the twelve tribes of Israel, and to the seventy elders of Israel, and also to the sanhedrim or grand ecclesiastical assembly of Jewish doctors, consisting of seventy persons. Some, indeed, think the sanhedrim to have had seventy-two members; and from this notion it was that some of the fathers conclude that there were seventy-two disciples, called seventy as a round number, according to the Jewish mode. It is of more consequence to observe that our Lord appears by these numbers to have intimated that he was displacing the old Church, and forming a new one, with its appropriate officers of apostles, elders, and instructers, to govern and teach it.

V. 2. Pray ye the Lord of the harvest, that he would thrust forth labourers-For God alone can do this: he alone can qualify and commission men for this work. Matthew 9:37.

Verse 2. That he would send forth] ekbalh. There seems to be an allusion here to the case of reapers, who, though the harvest was perfectly ripe, yet were in no hurry to cut it down. News of this is brought to the Lord of the harvest the farmer, and he is entreated to exert his authority, and hurry them out; and this he does because the harvest is spoiling for want of being reaped and gathered in. See the notes on Matthew 9:37, 38.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verse 2. The harvest truly is great. — The harvest in Judea as well as Galilee. See the notes on Matthew 9:37.

V. 3. Matthew 10:16.

Verse 3. Lambs among wolves.] See Clarke on “Matthew 10:16”.

Verses 3, 4. I send you forth as lambs, &c. — As so many defenceless lambs, in the midst of ravenous and cruel wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10:9, 10, 16. Salute no man by the way — Let not matters of mere compliment detain you, but make all the haste you possibly can. The salutations usual among the Jews took up much time. But these had so much work to do in so short a space, that they had not a moment to spare.

3. Go your ways—Take your various routes. This address to the Seventy is much on the model of that to the twelve in Matthew 10. It has, however, no limitation to the house of Israel, or prohibition from Samaria. On the other hand, the powers are less extensive, and the prediction of persecutions is briefer.

Verse 3. Go your ways, &c. — Our Lord gives many of the same directions to the seventy, as he had done to the twelve. See the notes on Matthew 10.

V. 4. Salute no man by the way-The salutations usual among the Jews took up much time. But these had so much work to do in so short a space, that they had not a moment to spare.

Verse 4. Carry neither purse nor scrip] See Clarke on “Matthew 10:9”, &c., and see Clarke on “Mark 6:8”, &c. Salute no man by the way.] According to a canon of the Jews, a man who was about any sacred work was exempted from all civil obligations for the time; forasmuch as obedience to God was of infinitely greater consequence than the cultivation of private friendships, or the returning of civil compliments.

Verses 3, 4. I send you forth as lambs, &c. — As so many defenceless lambs, in the midst of ravenous and cruel wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10:9, 10, 16. Salute no man by the way — Let not matters of mere compliment detain you, but make all the haste you possibly can. The salutations usual among the Jews took up much time. But these had so much work to do in so short a space, that they had not a moment to spare.

Ver. 4. Salute no man by the way. Elisha gave a similar command to his servant. 2 Kings 4. This intimates that we must dispense with worldly civilities, when they impede the work of the Lord.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verse 5. Peace be to this house] See Clarke on “Matthew 10:12”.

Verses 5, 6. Into whatsoever house ye enter, &c. — They are supposed to enter into private houses; for, not being admitted into the synagogues, they were forced to preach where they could have liberty. First say, Peace be to this house — To all under this roof, to this family, and all that belong to it. As if he had said, In all the stages of your journey, carry along with you those benevolent affections which are so well suited to the design of your mission. Peace be to you, was the common form of salutation among the Jews. They must not use it in formality, and according to custom, to those they meet on the way; but they must use it with solemnity and seriousness to those into whose houses they entered. And if the son of peace — Or any truly pious man who is worthy of such a blessing; be there — In the house; your peace shall rest upon it — Your prayer for the peace and prosperity of the family shall be heard and answered. Or, the blessing which you gave at your entrance, shall, by my power, be made effectual to that house, and shall remain with it. If not, it shall turn, &c. — You will meet with some that are not disposed to hear or regard your message; even whole houses that have not one son of peace in them. Now it is certain your peace shall not come upon them; they shall have no part nor lot in the matter: the blessing that shall rest upon the sons of peace shall never come upon the sons of Belial; nor can any expect the privileges of the covenant of grace that will not come under the bonds of it; but it shall turn to you again — You shall have the comfort of having discharged your trust, and done your duty to God.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

V. 6. A son of peace-That is, one worthy of it.

Verse 6. The son of peace] In the Jewish style, a man who has any good or bad quality is called the son of it. Thus, wise men are called the children of wisdom, Matthew 11:19; Luke 7:35. So, likewise, what a man is doomed to, he is called the son of, as in Ephesians 2:3, wicked men are styled the children of wrath: so Judas is called the son of perdition, John 17:12; and a man who deserves to die is called, 2 Samuel 12:5, a son of death. Son of peace in the text not only means a peaceable, quiet man, but one also of good report for his uprightness and benevolence. It would have been a dishonour to this mission, had the missionaries taken up their lodgings with those who had not a good report among them who were without.

Verses 5, 6. Into whatsoever house ye enter, &c. — They are supposed to enter into private houses; for, not being admitted into the synagogues, they were forced to preach where they could have liberty. First say, Peace be to this house — To all under this roof, to this family, and all that belong to it. As if he had said, In all the stages of your journey, carry along with you those benevolent affections which are so well suited to the design of your mission. Peace be to you, was the common form of salutation among the Jews. They must not use it in formality, and according to custom, to those they meet on the way; but they must use it with solemnity and seriousness to those into whose houses they entered. And if the son of peace — Or any truly pious man who is worthy of such a blessing; be there — In the house; your peace shall rest upon it — Your prayer for the peace and prosperity of the family shall be heard and answered. Or, the blessing which you gave at your entrance, shall, by my power, be made effectual to that house, and shall remain with it. If not, it shall turn, &c. — You will meet with some that are not disposed to hear or regard your message; even whole houses that have not one son of peace in them. Now it is certain your peace shall not come upon them; they shall have no part nor lot in the matter: the blessing that shall rest upon the sons of peace shall never come upon the sons of Belial; nor can any expect the privileges of the covenant of grace that will not come under the bonds of it; but it shall turn to you again — You shall have the comfort of having discharged your trust, and done your duty to God.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verse 6. The son of peace. — The meaning is, If the master of the house be a man of kind and friendly disposition, returning your salutation, which was a form of wishing peace in the same language and spirit, your peace shall rest upon the house. It would not be an empty form, but prove an effectual prayer, bringing down the peace and blessing of God. In the Jewish style, a man who has any good or bad quality is called the son of it. Hence we have sons of wisdom, for wise men; and in the text, son of peace, for a man of peaceable and friendly disposition.

If not, it shall turn to you again. — The salutation, Peace be to this house, shall not be effectual. There is a similar expression in Psalms 35:13Psalm 35:13: “And my prayer returned into mine own bosom.”

V. 7. Matthew 10:11.

Verse 7. The labourer is worthy] See on Matthew 10:8, 12. Go not from house to house.] See Clarke on “Matthew 10:11”. It would be a great offence among the Hindoos if a guest, after being made welcome at a house, were to leave it and go to another.

Verses 7-9. And in the same house remain — As long as you stay in the town or village: eating and drinking — Cheerfully and contentedly; such things as they give — Neither suspect your being welcome, nor be afraid of being troublesome; for the labourer — In the work of the ministry, if he be indeed a labourer; is worthy of his hire — It is not an act of charity, but of justice, in them who are taught in the Word, to communicate to them that teach: and whatever kindness they show you, it is but a small return for the kindness you do them in bringing them the glad tidings of peace. Go not from house to house — Be content with whatever fare you meet with; and never create any unnecessary trouble in the family where you are, nor quit your lodgings to seek others, in hope of better accommodations during the short stay you make in a place. And heal the sick that are therein — Which, as I direct, so I shall empower you to do; And say unto them, The kingdom of God, &c. — Publish the approach of the kingdom of God; its approach to them; and that they stand fair for an admission into it, if they will but obey the call of God, and turn to him without delay. Say, Now is the day of your visitation; see that you understand and improve it. Observe, reader! It is well to be made sensible of our advantages and opportunities, that we may lay hold on and embrace them. When the kingdom of God comes nigh to us, it concerns us to go forth to meet it.

7. Go not from house to house—Spend not your time in convivial visits.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

Verses 7-9. And in the same house remain — As long as you stay in the town or village: eating and drinking — Cheerfully and contentedly; such things as they give — Neither suspect your being welcome, nor be afraid of being troublesome; for the labourer — In the work of the ministry, if he be indeed a labourer; is worthy of his hire — It is not an act of charity, but of justice, in them who are taught in the Word, to communicate to them that teach: and whatever kindness they show you, it is but a small return for the kindness you do them in bringing them the glad tidings of peace. Go not from house to house — Be content with whatever fare you meet with; and never create any unnecessary trouble in the family where you are, nor quit your lodgings to seek others, in hope of better accommodations during the short stay you make in a place. And heal the sick that are therein — Which, as I direct, so I shall empower you to do; And say unto them, The kingdom of God, &c. — Publish the approach of the kingdom of God; its approach to them; and that they stand fair for an admission into it, if they will but obey the call of God, and turn to him without delay. Say, Now is the day of your visitation; see that you understand and improve it. Observe, reader! It is well to be made sensible of our advantages and opportunities, that we may lay hold on and embrace them. When the kingdom of God comes nigh to us, it concerns us to go forth to meet it.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

Verse 9. The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you.] ef umav, is just upon you. This was the general text on which they were to preach all their sermons. See it explained, Matthew 3:2.

Verses 7-9. And in the same house remain — As long as you stay in the town or village: eating and drinking — Cheerfully and contentedly; such things as they give — Neither suspect your being welcome, nor be afraid of being troublesome; for the labourer — In the work of the ministry, if he be indeed a labourer; is worthy of his hire — It is not an act of charity, but of justice, in them who are taught in the Word, to communicate to them that teach: and whatever kindness they show you, it is but a small return for the kindness you do them in bringing them the glad tidings of peace. Go not from house to house — Be content with whatever fare you meet with; and never create any unnecessary trouble in the family where you are, nor quit your lodgings to seek others, in hope of better accommodations during the short stay you make in a place. And heal the sick that are therein — Which, as I direct, so I shall empower you to do; And say unto them, The kingdom of God, &c. — Publish the approach of the kingdom of God; its approach to them; and that they stand fair for an admission into it, if they will but obey the call of God, and turn to him without delay. Say, Now is the day of your visitation; see that you understand and improve it. Observe, reader! It is well to be made sensible of our advantages and opportunities, that we may lay hold on and embrace them. When the kingdom of God comes nigh to us, it concerns us to go forth to meet it.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

Verses 10-12. Into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you not — Show no willingness to hear your doctrine, and no inclination to give you entertainment, or the necessaries of life; go your way out into the streets, &c. — Declare in the most public manner, how greatly they have sinned in rejecting you and your message; and that your declaration may make the greater impression upon them, let it be accompanied with the symbolical action of publicly wiping the dust of their city from off your feet, as a testimony that you will have no communication with such a faithless and disobedient people. Say, Since you reject so gracious and important a message, we cannot but consider you as rejected by God, and devoted to certain and inevitable destruction, and therefore we separate ourselves from all that belongs to you, even from the dust of your city. This was agreeable to the manner of the eastern people, who taught their disciples by symbolical actions, as well as by discourse; see on Matthew 10:14. Jesus added, When you have so done, say, Notwithstanding, be ye sure of this — And remember it in the midst of all the calamities which are to befall you; that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you — That mercy and salvation, present and eternal, the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory, have been offered you, though you will not receive them. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable, &c. — To make the seventy the more earnest in preaching the gospel, that so, if possible, the people might be prevailed upon to believe and obey it, he proceeds to declare the terrible punishment about to come upon those who should reject it. See on Matthew 10:15.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

V. 11. The kingdom of God is at hand-Though ye will not receive it.

Verse 11. Even the very dust of your city] See on Matthew 10:14, 15.

Verses 10-12. Into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you not — Show no willingness to hear your doctrine, and no inclination to give you entertainment, or the necessaries of life; go your way out into the streets, &c. — Declare in the most public manner, how greatly they have sinned in rejecting you and your message; and that your declaration may make the greater impression upon them, let it be accompanied with the symbolical action of publicly wiping the dust of their city from off your feet, as a testimony that you will have no communication with such a faithless and disobedient people. Say, Since you reject so gracious and important a message, we cannot but consider you as rejected by God, and devoted to certain and inevitable destruction, and therefore we separate ourselves from all that belongs to you, even from the dust of your city. This was agreeable to the manner of the eastern people, who taught their disciples by symbolical actions, as well as by discourse; see on Matthew 10:14. Jesus added, When you have so done, say, Notwithstanding, be ye sure of this — And remember it in the midst of all the calamities which are to befall you; that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you — That mercy and salvation, present and eternal, the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory, have been offered you, though you will not receive them. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable, &c. — To make the seventy the more earnest in preaching the gospel, that so, if possible, the people might be prevailed upon to believe and obey it, he proceeds to declare the terrible punishment about to come upon those who should reject it. See on Matthew 10:15.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

Verses 10-12. Into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you not — Show no willingness to hear your doctrine, and no inclination to give you entertainment, or the necessaries of life; go your way out into the streets, &c. — Declare in the most public manner, how greatly they have sinned in rejecting you and your message; and that your declaration may make the greater impression upon them, let it be accompanied with the symbolical action of publicly wiping the dust of their city from off your feet, as a testimony that you will have no communication with such a faithless and disobedient people. Say, Since you reject so gracious and important a message, we cannot but consider you as rejected by God, and devoted to certain and inevitable destruction, and therefore we separate ourselves from all that belongs to you, even from the dust of your city. This was agreeable to the manner of the eastern people, who taught their disciples by symbolical actions, as well as by discourse; see on Matthew 10:14. Jesus added, When you have so done, say, Notwithstanding, be ye sure of this — And remember it in the midst of all the calamities which are to befall you; that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you — That mercy and salvation, present and eternal, the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory, have been offered you, though you will not receive them. But I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable, &c. — To make the seventy the more earnest in preaching the gospel, that so, if possible, the people might be prevailed upon to believe and obey it, he proceeds to declare the terrible punishment about to come upon those who should reject it. See on Matthew 10:15.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verses 7-12. And in the same hour, &c. — See notes on Matthew 10.

V. 13. Wo to thee, Chorazin-The same declaration Christ had made some time before. By repeating it now, he warns the seventy not to lose time by going to those cities. Matthew 11:21.

Verse 13. Wo unto thee, Chorazin!] See on Matthew 11:21-24.

Verse 13. Wo unto thee, Chorazin, &c. — “Having mentioned the punishment of those cities which should reject his ministers, it naturally brought to his mind the sad state and punishment of the cities where he himself had preached most frequently, namely, Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum. For, notwithstanding he had often resided in those cities, and performed many miracles before the inhabitants of them, they had continued impenitent. Wherefore, because he was never to preach to them any more, and because he knew how great their punishment would be, in the overflowing tenderness of his soul he affectionately lamented their obstinacy, which he foresaw would draw down on them the heaviest judgments. The same declaration Christ had made some time before. By repeating it now he warns the seventy not to lose time by going to those cities. At the same time, this part of his discourse was well calculated to comfort these disciples, now sent out, under the ill usage they might meet with; the preaching of Christ himself had often been unacceptable and unsuccessful, with respect to many of his hearers, and therefore it was not much to be wondered at if theirs should prove so likewise.” Considering the affectionate temper of our Lord, it is no wonder that he should renew his lamentation over those unhappy places where he had so intimately conversed; and that he should do it in such words as these, so well calculated to alarm and impress all that should hear or read them. O! that they might now have their due weight with those who might pass them over too slightly, when they occurred before in Matthew 11:20-24. O! that every impenitent creature who reads them might know that the sentence of his own condemnation is now before his eyes! See Macknight and Doddridge, and the notes on Matthew 11:20-24.

13. Woe… Chorazin… Bethsaida—As Jesus has just left these cities, this is the last sad reference he makes to them. It expresses in language what the wiping the dust from the feet does in action. And this verse indicates that the sending forth of the seventy could have been on no later occasion.

Verse 13. Wo unto thee, Chorazin. — See notes on Matthew 11:21-23.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verse 15. To hell.] To hades. See this explained, Matthew 11:23.

15. Thou, Capernaum—In neither of the awful maledictions upon the incorrigible cities, as reported by different evangelists, does Jesus include Nazareth. The reason assigned for this by commentators, namely, that its inclusion might have been attributed to personal resentment, would apply equally well to either of the cities by whom he was rejected. May we not rather suppose that it was a manifestation of human tenderness for the home of his mother and of his own childhood? Nor has Nazareth so been blotted from existence, like the others, as that its site is doubtful. The Seventy went their ways, and Jesus proceeded to Jerusalem, where took place the events of the FEAST OF TABERNACLES. John 7:14; 10:21. Luke, however, as if to complete the history of the Seventy in one passage, immediately subjoins their return.

V. 16. Matthew 10:40; John 13:20.

Verse 16. He that despiseth you, despiseth me] “The holy, blessed God said: ‘Honour my statutes, for they are my ambassadors: and a man’s ambassador is like to himself. If thou honour my precepts, it is the same as if thou didst honour me; and if thou despise them, thou despisest me.” R. Tancum. “He that murmurs against his teacher is the same as if he had murmured against the Divine Shekinah.” Sanhedrin, fol. 110.

Verse 16. He that heareth you — Here our Lord declares the general rule which he would observe, with regard to those to whom he sent, or should send his ministers; that he would reckon himself treated as they treated his servants. Indeed, what is done to the ambassador is generally considered as done to the prince that sends him. 1st, He that heareth you, and regards what you say, heareth me, and therein doth me honour: but, 2d, He that despiseth you, doth, in effect, despise me, and shall be reckoned with as having put an affront upon me: nay, he despiseth him that sent me. Observe, reader, those that contemn the Christian religion, do, in effect, put a slight upon natural religion, of which it is perfective. And they who despise the faithful ministers of Christ, they who, though they do not hate and persecute them, yet think meanly of them, look on them with scorn, and neglect to attend their ministry, will be reckoned with as despisers of God and of Christ.

Ver. 16. He that heareth you heareth me. All the virtue and power of my words shall accompany your sermons for the illumination of the world, and the regeneration of the heart; and he that despiseth you despiseth me. He who rejects the gospel rejects not man but God.

§ 80.—COMMISSIONING OF THE SEVENTY, 1-16.

Our Lord having finally withdrawn his rejected ministry from Northern Palestine, and having arrived at the northern boundary of Judea on his last setting his face in that direction, proceeds to perform, in the midst of apparent dejection, a public symbol of future triumph. He selects from the messengers mentioned in the last chapter, from the candidates so well sifted in its closing verses, and probably from some of his friends in Judea, a body of Seventy to perform a mission of heralding his name and preaching through city and country.

Of the commissioning of the SEVENTY, Luke gives the sole account; and his narrative is limited to three paragraphs. Of the brevity of the account, imaginative men, especially among papists, have taken advantage, to fill up the number with names like Mark, Matthias, and Luke himself, and a sufficient catalogue of fictitious names. Rationalists, on the other hand, have used the fact that no reference is ever afterwards made to the Seventy in apostolic history, to discredit the truth of the account. To this cavil it may be perhaps a sufficient reply to say, that Luke is the sole author of later apostolic history; and it can hardly be supposed that he would by such omission slight or throw discredit on his own statement. And a still more conclusive reply is furnished, as will soon appear, from the transient character of the symbol. But why the precise number Seventy? Grotius tells us that as the Jews, for smaller bodies of select men customarily used the number twelve, so in the larger they used the number seventy. The former number was doubtless founded upon that of the twelve sons of Jacob, and thence the twelve tribes of Israel; the latter had some respect to the seventy souls who came with Jacob into Egypt; or, rather, we may perhaps say that the reckoning of this seventy was so adjusted in reckoning Jacob’s family, as to make a customary significant number. In the same manner Matthew so adjusts the reckoning of Christ’s genealogy as thrice to produce twice the sacred seven; just as seventy is that sacred number decimally multiplied. See supplementary note to chap. 6. But there was something of a vibrating between the number seventy and seventy-two. The seventy translators of the Septuagint were in full seventy-two, (p. 10;) and seventy was in fact put simply as the round expression of the fuller number. As twelve was the number of the phylarchs or tribe-chiefs, so seventy-two was the number of elders chosen by Moses, being six from each tribe; which makes the sacred number twelve multiplied by its own half. And then seventy (the round for seventy-two) were the palms, and twelve the springs of Elim. Exodus 15:27. Seventy was the number of the Jewish Sanhedrim. So Josephus tells us that Varus sent twelve Jewish legates to the Jews of Ecbatana; and by the Jews of Ecbatana seventy legates were sent to Varus to plead their cause, all of whom he slew. Josephus himself, when sent to regulate the affairs of Galilee, choose seventy colleagues. In the siege of Jerusalem there were seventy citizens chosen as a body of judges. As twelve was the number of the tribes of Israel, so seventy is the ritual number of the nations of the earth, and seventy the ritual number of Gentile dialects. At the Feast of Tabernacles, whither Jesus was now going, the Jews were accustomed to sacrifice seventy bullocks in behalf of the Gentile nations. We may now see the reason for the selection of the number Seventy, and the probable significance of this body. This college of ministry, next in rank to the twelve, was appointed to herald the way of Jesus. But as the twelve had reference to the tribes of Jews, so the Seventy were the symbol of the preaching of the universal gospel to all the nations of the earth. It is true that the twelve, independently considered, were the ministry for the whole world. But just as Peter, though a universal minister, was the apostle of the circumcision in comparison with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles, so the twelve, though absolutely a universal ministry, were a Jewish ministry in comparison with the Seventy. This general view (adopted by such scholars as Weiseler, Tischendorf, and Ellicott) will perhaps increase in apparent probability as we proceed.

What the Seventy were to Christ, his missionaries, that the demons were to Satan, his emissaries. The downfall of the emissaries is revealed to the missionaries; the downfall of the prince of darkness is revealed to the prince of light. See notes on verse 17.

1. After these things—The preparatory doings of the last chapter. Appointed—In the Greek set forth, or publicly exhibited. The proper word to indicate the exhibition of a significant symbol. But inasmuch as ministers were so set forth or publicly inducted into their dignities, the word becomes synonymous with ordain, or to publicly appoint to office. Two and two—So that there were thirty-five different couples to go thirty-five different ways. Two were suited for mutual support and counsel; and, also, that by the mouth of two witnesses every thing might be established. Compare the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3; upon which Bishop Newton remarks, that reformers in different ages seem to come in pairs; as Moses and Aaron, Elijah and Elisha, Huss and Jerome, Luther and Melancthon; and, we may add, in a later reformation, Wesley and Fletcher. Whither he himself would come—In Greek whither he was about to come; that is, provided the proper conditions should exist. It is not likely that our Lord would, or did, in fact, expect to visit the thirty-five different localities. But these Seventy are a miniature of the progress of the gospel in the Gentile world. They are the representatives of the preachers of the gospel, to herald the goings of Jesus in all the earth.

Verse 17. The seventy returned again with joy] Bishop PEARCE thinks they returned while our Lord was on his slow journey to Jerusalem, and that they had been absent only a few days.

Verses 17-20. And the seventy returned — The seventy disciples, having gone through the several parts of the country appointed them, returned and told their Master with great joy what they had done, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name — We have not only cured diseases, according to the power thou wast pleased to give us, but, though thy commission did not directly express so much, yet even the devils themselves have been compelled to obey us, when in thy name we commanded them to go out of the persons whom they had possessed. From the manner in which they speak of this latter exertion of their power, it would appear to have been what they did not expect when they set out. For though Jesus had given them power to heal diseases, he had said nothing of their casting out devils. And he said, I beheld Satan as lightning — “I myself saw Satan, the great prince of the demons, falling like lightning from heaven, on his first transgression, and well remember how immediate and dreadful his ruin was: and I foresee, in spirit, that renewed, swift, and irresistible victory, of which this present success of yours is an earnest, and which the preaching of the gospel shall shortly gain over all these rebel powers, that, even in their highest strength and glory, were so incapable of opposing the arm of God.” Thus Doddridge, who adds, “I think this answer to the seventy loses much of its beauty and propriety, unless we suppose Satan to have been the prince of the demons they spoke of, and also allow a reference to the first fall of that rebellious spirit.” To be exalted unto heaven, signifies to be raised unto great power and privileges, and particularly to sovereign dominion. To fall from heaven, therefore, may signify to lose one’s dominion and pre-eminency. The devils, by the idolatry of the Gentiles and wickedness of the Jews, had been exalted into heaven, and had ruled mankind in opposition to the dominion of God; by the preaching of the gospel their power was to be destroyed in every country. As Christ foreknew this, so he here foretels it. Behold, I give unto you power, &c. — To prove that he had thrown down Satan from his exaltation, and that his power should, in the end, be totally destroyed; and to increase their joy, and render them more fit for their work, he here enlarges their powers. To tread on serpents, is a proverbial expression, which signifies victory over enemies; accordingly, it is added, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall by any means hurt you — See note on Mark 16:18; and Acts 28:5; and Psalms 91:13Psalm 91:13. Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not — Rejoice not so much in this, that the spirits, namely, evil spirits, are subject unto you, and that you are enabled miraculously to control and cast them out of those possessed by them, and that you can perform other miracles, because this is but a temporary endowment and pre-eminence, sometimes granted to wicked men, whom it in no wise qualifies for heaven; but rather rejoice that your names are written in heaven — That you stand enrolled among the heirs of future glory and felicity, as the peculiar objects of the divine favour and love. This and similar passages seem to be allusions to the enrolment of citizens’ names in registers, by which their right to the privileges of citizenship was acknowledged by the community. See notes on Exodus 32:32; Daniel 12:1; and compare Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5.

§ 85.—RETURN OF THE SEVENTY, 17-24.

A reference to our Historical Synopsis (vol. 1,) as well as to the Harmony on p. 101, will show that the events of the Feast of Tabernacles intervene between the departure of the Seventy and their return.

17. The seventy returned—How long their absence we know not; but the most obvious place to assign their return is at or near Jerusalem, soon after the Feast of Tabernacles. As they were formally and solemnly assembled when assigned and sent, so it is plain from the account, that they now appear in full body at the appointed occasion to resign their significant offices. As they present themselves, seventy strong our Lord may be supposed to face them at the head of his Twelve, who are in the background. See verse 26. With joy—But it is remarkable that, jubilant as they were upon this occasion, their rejoicing is not over souls or people converted, or houses or paths opened to our Lord. It does not appear that a single field of harvest was found for a divine laborer. But their joy is over a deeper success than even that. We understand that as they went forth in their respective character as symbols of a future ministry of Christ, it pleased the Father Almighty to vouchsafe to them that superior token of success which declared the complete triumph on earth of the gospel they preached. Even the devils—Rather demons, which in Greek is properly a different word from devil. It is to be regretted that our translators have used the same word for both. The word devil is seldom used in the original in the plural, and commonly signifies Satan, the Prince; while all the inferior evil spirits are daimonia, demons. The demons, it was, who possessed men. The demons were held to possess the power of working evil miracles, (compare Revelation 10:21 with John 8:44;) to utter pagan oracles; and to lurk in the idols of the heathen which are hence called demons, 1 Corinthians 10:20; Revelation 9:20; and hence the gods of the Pagan Mythology were held by the early Christians to be demons. Are subject unto us—They are not merely cast out, but subjected, subdued, and tamed. In thy name—It is by our act but in thy name; ours is the joy, but thine the glory. Hence, though our Lord cautioned them, he did not condemn their joy. The minister may rejoice in the happy effect of his own preaching; he may enjoy his work, if the glory be Christ’s and not his own. And when we remember that the casting out of demons was not included in their commission, and that the apostles themselves had but lately failed in their attempt to perform that work we shall easily see that there was peculiar ground of joy. But there was, perhaps, a higher meaning in the subjection of demons than they supposed. As Satan, the Prince of demons, is opposed to Christ, so these demons, his angels, were opposed to these human angels or messengers of Christ. They had, at his advent, themselves come forth as if in an abortive attempt, by possession, to rival his incarnation. And when these demons were subdued before these messengers it was as a symbol, sent from the Father, of the subjection of the powers of evil in the world to the rule of Christ. The perception of this fact by the Saviour was to him a higher joy than the Seventy knew, as will next perhaps clearly appear.

Verse 17. Through thy name. — This was the grand distinction between the miracles of our Lord and those of his servants. One was wrought by an original, the other by a derived power; his, says Grotius, vi propria, by his own power, theirs, vi magistri, by the power of Christ. As heretofore demons had been ejected in the name of the God of Israel, they were now cast out in the name of Jesus.

V. 18. I beheld Satan-That is, when ye went forth, I saw the kingdom of Satan, which was highly exalted, swiftly and suddenly cast down.

Verse 18. I beheld Satan] Or, Satan himself, ton satanan, the very Satan, the supreme adversary, falling as lightning, with the utmost suddenness, as a flash of lightning falls from the clouds, and at the same time in the most observable manner. The fall was both very sudden and very apparent. Thus should the fall of the corrupt Jewish state be, and thus was the fall of idolatry in the Gentile world.

Verses 17-20. And the seventy returned — The seventy disciples, having gone through the several parts of the country appointed them, returned and told their Master with great joy what they had done, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name — We have not only cured diseases, according to the power thou wast pleased to give us, but, though thy commission did not directly express so much, yet even the devils themselves have been compelled to obey us, when in thy name we commanded them to go out of the persons whom they had possessed. From the manner in which they speak of this latter exertion of their power, it would appear to have been what they did not expect when they set out. For though Jesus had given them power to heal diseases, he had said nothing of their casting out devils. And he said, I beheld Satan as lightning — “I myself saw Satan, the great prince of the demons, falling like lightning from heaven, on his first transgression, and well remember how immediate and dreadful his ruin was: and I foresee, in spirit, that renewed, swift, and irresistible victory, of which this present success of yours is an earnest, and which the preaching of the gospel shall shortly gain over all these rebel powers, that, even in their highest strength and glory, were so incapable of opposing the arm of God.” Thus Doddridge, who adds, “I think this answer to the seventy loses much of its beauty and propriety, unless we suppose Satan to have been the prince of the demons they spoke of, and also allow a reference to the first fall of that rebellious spirit.” To be exalted unto heaven, signifies to be raised unto great power and privileges, and particularly to sovereign dominion. To fall from heaven, therefore, may signify to lose one’s dominion and pre-eminency. The devils, by the idolatry of the Gentiles and wickedness of the Jews, had been exalted into heaven, and had ruled mankind in opposition to the dominion of God; by the preaching of the gospel their power was to be destroyed in every country. As Christ foreknew this, so he here foretels it. Behold, I give unto you power, &c. — To prove that he had thrown down Satan from his exaltation, and that his power should, in the end, be totally destroyed; and to increase their joy, and render them more fit for their work, he here enlarges their powers. To tread on serpents, is a proverbial expression, which signifies victory over enemies; accordingly, it is added, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall by any means hurt you — See note on Mark 16:18; and Acts 28:5; and Psalms 91:13Psalm 91:13. Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not — Rejoice not so much in this, that the spirits, namely, evil spirits, are subject unto you, and that you are enabled miraculously to control and cast them out of those possessed by them, and that you can perform other miracles, because this is but a temporary endowment and pre-eminence, sometimes granted to wicked men, whom it in no wise qualifies for heaven; but rather rejoice that your names are written in heaven — That you stand enrolled among the heirs of future glory and felicity, as the peculiar objects of the divine favour and love. This and similar passages seem to be allusions to the enrolment of citizens’ names in registers, by which their right to the privileges of citizenship was acknowledged by the community. See notes on Exodus 32:32; Daniel 12:1; and compare Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5.

Ver. 18. I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. This idea is coincident with the apostrophe in Isaiah 14:12. How art thou fallen from heaven, oh Lucifer, son of the morning. He is so called because light attended his presence. The seventy having reported their success, when they met at some festival in Jerusalem, the Lord foretold the rapid diffusion of his gospel, — that it would dart like lightning on a benighted world. The heathen temples would be deserted, the idols would be demolished, and the prince of this world no longer be allowed to reign in high places.

18. I beheld Satan—Beheld here is in the Greek imperfect, I was beholding; and grammatically it describes the action as going on while another action is being performed. While you were subduing demons, I was beholding and contemplating Satan himself falling like lightning from heaven. As the yielding demons, so the falling Satan, was a visible revelation; each symbolizing the glorious future. But how could it be a literal reality which Jesus saw? We pretend not to know. If, however, we understand it aright, there was vouchsafed from the eternal Father, to the human thought of Jesus a view of the actual event of Satan’s primeval fall, seen in the past; with a true beholding like the divine seeing of a real event in the future. To the human perception of the man Jesus, that is, was presented the full view of that great event in the past eternity, known and remembered in the mind of the eternal Father, the first downfall of Lucifer from his heavenly state. That great reality he beheld, not so much in vision as in a perfect and divine perception, directed into the eternal past. This great reality was unveiled to him from God the Father (as intimated in verse 21) as the symbol of Satan’s future overthrow in the great contest of Heaven and Hell on earth. It was perception rather than conception. As it was a reality, then, which the Seventy saw, so it was a reality which Jesus saw. And both realities were the type and prophecy of a divine future. We know not, however, upon what authority it is that some divines (as Stier) decide that Jesus could never receive revelation by vision. We see no proof that he who as a child grew in wisdom, who as a youth suffered temptation, who as a man was to suffer grievous eclipse of spirit on the cross, might not have had his moments of human cheer derived from divine revelation exhibited to his human vision.

Verses 18, 19. I beheld Satan, &c. — The disciples returned with joyful surprise to announce that the devils had been subject to them through the name of Christ. Our Lord’s calm reply indicates that they were conveying no news to him; he had been with them in spirit, knew all that had passed, by virtue of his omniscience, and he answers, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. To fall from heaven is, in prophetic language, to fall from a height of power and authority. So the king of Babylon is addressed, Isaiah 14:12: — “How art thou fallen from heaven!” The Latins have the same mode of expression. Pompey is said by Cicero, ex astris decidisse, “to have fallen from the stars.” Upon the kingdom of Satan our Lord was making war, both by casting out devils by his word, or by his name, and by rescuing the souls of men from his power, by the hallowing influence of his heavenly doctrine. Even by his weak and despised disciples was he effecting this casting down of Satan from the heaven of that dominion he had so long held. But he promises to render those disciples still more formidable to the kingdom of darkness, by increasing those miraculous endowments with which he had already enriched them; which was fulfilled at the day of Pentecost. For the mission of the seventy, like that of the twelve apostles, was to be considered as emblematical of that ministry which they were, with enlarged powers and heightened qualifications, to be permanently employed in. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, not only literally, though they had that; but figuratively, over devils and their agents, fitly represented, as to their cunning and deadly cruelty, by serpents and scorpions: And over all the power of the enemy, however displayed, or by whatever instruments wielded against you: And nothing shall by any means hurt you, that is, nothing shall injure you as to your work, which shall prevail against all opposition; or injure you personally: no affliction being permitted till it shall turn out for the fartherance of the Gospel, and your spiritual welfare, and the greatest tyrants not being able to inflict death upon you until your death itself shall be a benefit, and not an evil, both to yourselves and to the cause in which you suffer. This total exemption from harm, by all things being made to work together for the good of them who love God, belongs, in an important sense, to all Christians; for it was with reference to this encouraging and elevating doctrine that St. Peter, when writing even to suffering and persecuted Christians, says, “And who is he that shall harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?”

V. 19. I give you power-That is, I continue it to you: and nothing shall hurt you-Neither the power, nor the subtilty of Satan.

Verse 19. To tread on serpents, &c.] It is possible that by serpents and scorpions our Lord means the scribes and Pharisees, whom he calls serpents and a brood of vipers, Matthew 23:33, (see the note there,) because, through the subtilty and venom of the old serpent, the devil, they opposed him and his doctrine; and, by trampling on these, it is likely that he means, they should get a complete victory over such: as it was an ancient custom to trample on the kings and generals who had been taken in battle, to signify the complete conquest which had been gained over them. See Joshua 10:24. See also Romans 16:20. See the notes on Mark 16:17, 18.

Verses 17-20. And the seventy returned — The seventy disciples, having gone through the several parts of the country appointed them, returned and told their Master with great joy what they had done, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name — We have not only cured diseases, according to the power thou wast pleased to give us, but, though thy commission did not directly express so much, yet even the devils themselves have been compelled to obey us, when in thy name we commanded them to go out of the persons whom they had possessed. From the manner in which they speak of this latter exertion of their power, it would appear to have been what they did not expect when they set out. For though Jesus had given them power to heal diseases, he had said nothing of their casting out devils. And he said, I beheld Satan as lightning — “I myself saw Satan, the great prince of the demons, falling like lightning from heaven, on his first transgression, and well remember how immediate and dreadful his ruin was: and I foresee, in spirit, that renewed, swift, and irresistible victory, of which this present success of yours is an earnest, and which the preaching of the gospel shall shortly gain over all these rebel powers, that, even in their highest strength and glory, were so incapable of opposing the arm of God.” Thus Doddridge, who adds, “I think this answer to the seventy loses much of its beauty and propriety, unless we suppose Satan to have been the prince of the demons they spoke of, and also allow a reference to the first fall of that rebellious spirit.” To be exalted unto heaven, signifies to be raised unto great power and privileges, and particularly to sovereign dominion. To fall from heaven, therefore, may signify to lose one’s dominion and pre-eminency. The devils, by the idolatry of the Gentiles and wickedness of the Jews, had been exalted into heaven, and had ruled mankind in opposition to the dominion of God; by the preaching of the gospel their power was to be destroyed in every country. As Christ foreknew this, so he here foretels it. Behold, I give unto you power, &c. — To prove that he had thrown down Satan from his exaltation, and that his power should, in the end, be totally destroyed; and to increase their joy, and render them more fit for their work, he here enlarges their powers. To tread on serpents, is a proverbial expression, which signifies victory over enemies; accordingly, it is added, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall by any means hurt you — See note on Mark 16:18; and Acts 28:5; and Psalms 91:13Psalm 91:13. Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not — Rejoice not so much in this, that the spirits, namely, evil spirits, are subject unto you, and that you are enabled miraculously to control and cast them out of those possessed by them, and that you can perform other miracles, because this is but a temporary endowment and pre-eminence, sometimes granted to wicked men, whom it in no wise qualifies for heaven; but rather rejoice that your names are written in heaven — That you stand enrolled among the heirs of future glory and felicity, as the peculiar objects of the divine favour and love. This and similar passages seem to be allusions to the enrolment of citizens’ names in registers, by which their right to the privileges of citizenship was acknowledged by the community. See notes on Exodus 32:32; Daniel 12:1; and compare Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5.

Ver. 19. I give you power to tread on serpents, as in Mark 16:18. Isaiah 11:8.

19. Behold I give—The perfect tense, I have given. The Greek perfect signifies a past act whose effect remains. I have given and the gift still remains. The gift was imparted in the first bestowment of their symbolical office, as one of its significant points. It was probably to cease with their office, though this may not be so certain. The same promise was made even to private believers in Mark 16:18, on which see our note. Power to tread on serpents and scorpions—And as the casting out of demons by the Seventy, and the fall of Satan, which Christ saw, were both actual and physical realities, so was this treading on serpents and scorpions an actual and physical reality. The Seventy during their mission should find a superiority to reptile venom one of their miraculous gifts, as did Paul at Melita. Acts 28:5. But all three of these realities were symbols of the spiritual. They were the type of the final bruising of the serpent’s head. All the power of the enemy—It is not sin which has produced physical evil in the world; for evil, accident, and death existed on earth, as geology shows, before Adam sinned. But sin excluded man from access to the tree of life, from which he had been immortal, and thus sin established that relation of the body and mind of man towards external nature, as that disease and death ensue. Sin, therefore, constitutes to man the power of the serpent’s venom and the scorpion’s sting. Christ here promises to these his followers some faint restoration of the Adamic superiority to the power of the enemy. The enemy—The chief and first old Serpent; the Satan of verse 18, by whose first hostility all other venomous things are poisonous to man. Hurt you—This promise of miraculous power should doubtless be limited by the laws of miracle and faith, as defined in our note on Matthew 17:20.

Verses 18, 19. I beheld Satan, &c. — The disciples returned with joyful surprise to announce that the devils had been subject to them through the name of Christ. Our Lord’s calm reply indicates that they were conveying no news to him; he had been with them in spirit, knew all that had passed, by virtue of his omniscience, and he answers, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. To fall from heaven is, in prophetic language, to fall from a height of power and authority. So the king of Babylon is addressed, Isaiah 14:12: — “How art thou fallen from heaven!” The Latins have the same mode of expression. Pompey is said by Cicero, ex astris decidisse, “to have fallen from the stars.” Upon the kingdom of Satan our Lord was making war, both by casting out devils by his word, or by his name, and by rescuing the souls of men from his power, by the hallowing influence of his heavenly doctrine. Even by his weak and despised disciples was he effecting this casting down of Satan from the heaven of that dominion he had so long held. But he promises to render those disciples still more formidable to the kingdom of darkness, by increasing those miraculous endowments with which he had already enriched them; which was fulfilled at the day of Pentecost. For the mission of the seventy, like that of the twelve apostles, was to be considered as emblematical of that ministry which they were, with enlarged powers and heightened qualifications, to be permanently employed in. Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, not only literally, though they had that; but figuratively, over devils and their agents, fitly represented, as to their cunning and deadly cruelty, by serpents and scorpions: And over all the power of the enemy, however displayed, or by whatever instruments wielded against you: And nothing shall by any means hurt you, that is, nothing shall injure you as to your work, which shall prevail against all opposition; or injure you personally: no affliction being permitted till it shall turn out for the fartherance of the Gospel, and your spiritual welfare, and the greatest tyrants not being able to inflict death upon you until your death itself shall be a benefit, and not an evil, both to yourselves and to the cause in which you suffer. This total exemption from harm, by all things being made to work together for the good of them who love God, belongs, in an important sense, to all Christians; for it was with reference to this encouraging and elevating doctrine that St. Peter, when writing even to suffering and persecuted Christians, says, “And who is he that shall harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?”

V. 20. Rejoice not so much that the devils are subject to you, as that your names are written in heaven-Reader, so is thine, if thou art a true, believer. God grant it may never be blotted out!

Verse 20. Because your names are written in heaven.] This form of speech is taken from the ancient custom of writing the names of all the citizens in a public register, that the several families might be known, and the inheritances properly preserved. This custom is still observed even in these kingdoms, though not particularly noticed. Every child that is born in the land is ordered to be registered, with the names of its parents, and the time when born, baptized, or registered; and this register is generally kept in the parish church, or in some public place of safety. Such a register as this is called in Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5, &c., the book of life, i.e. the book or register where the persons were enrolled as they came into life. It appears also probable, that when any person died, or behaved improperly, his name was sought out and erased from the book, to prevent any confusion that might happen in consequence of improper persons laying claim to an estate, and to cut off the unworthy from the rights and privileges of the peaceable, upright citizens. To this custom of blotting the names of deceased and disorderly persons out of the public registers, there appear to be allusions, Exodus 32:32, where see the note; and Revelation 3:5; Deuteronomy 9:14; 25:19; 29:20; 2 Kings 14:27; Psalms 69:28Psalm 69:28; 109:13, and in other places.

Verses 17-20. And the seventy returned — The seventy disciples, having gone through the several parts of the country appointed them, returned and told their Master with great joy what they had done, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name — We have not only cured diseases, according to the power thou wast pleased to give us, but, though thy commission did not directly express so much, yet even the devils themselves have been compelled to obey us, when in thy name we commanded them to go out of the persons whom they had possessed. From the manner in which they speak of this latter exertion of their power, it would appear to have been what they did not expect when they set out. For though Jesus had given them power to heal diseases, he had said nothing of their casting out devils. And he said, I beheld Satan as lightning — “I myself saw Satan, the great prince of the demons, falling like lightning from heaven, on his first transgression, and well remember how immediate and dreadful his ruin was: and I foresee, in spirit, that renewed, swift, and irresistible victory, of which this present success of yours is an earnest, and which the preaching of the gospel shall shortly gain over all these rebel powers, that, even in their highest strength and glory, were so incapable of opposing the arm of God.” Thus Doddridge, who adds, “I think this answer to the seventy loses much of its beauty and propriety, unless we suppose Satan to have been the prince of the demons they spoke of, and also allow a reference to the first fall of that rebellious spirit.” To be exalted unto heaven, signifies to be raised unto great power and privileges, and particularly to sovereign dominion. To fall from heaven, therefore, may signify to lose one’s dominion and pre-eminency. The devils, by the idolatry of the Gentiles and wickedness of the Jews, had been exalted into heaven, and had ruled mankind in opposition to the dominion of God; by the preaching of the gospel their power was to be destroyed in every country. As Christ foreknew this, so he here foretels it. Behold, I give unto you power, &c. — To prove that he had thrown down Satan from his exaltation, and that his power should, in the end, be totally destroyed; and to increase their joy, and render them more fit for their work, he here enlarges their powers. To tread on serpents, is a proverbial expression, which signifies victory over enemies; accordingly, it is added, and over all the power of the enemy; and nothing shall by any means hurt you — See note on Mark 16:18; and Acts 28:5; and Psalms 91:13Psalm 91:13. Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not — Rejoice not so much in this, that the spirits, namely, evil spirits, are subject unto you, and that you are enabled miraculously to control and cast them out of those possessed by them, and that you can perform other miracles, because this is but a temporary endowment and pre-eminence, sometimes granted to wicked men, whom it in no wise qualifies for heaven; but rather rejoice that your names are written in heaven — That you stand enrolled among the heirs of future glory and felicity, as the peculiar objects of the divine favour and love. This and similar passages seem to be allusions to the enrolment of citizens’ names in registers, by which their right to the privileges of citizenship was acknowledged by the community. See notes on Exodus 32:32; Daniel 12:1; and compare Philippians 4:3; Revelation 3:5.

20. In this rejoice not—This is said comparatively. Rejoice not so much in a temporal power as in your own eternal salvation. Of what use is it to cast out demons, if you are finally cast away with devils forever? Names are written in heaven—The record or census of the names of all the living citizens was, as we find, kept in Jerusalem. Isaiah 4:3. So, figuratively, a book or census-roll of the living, a book of life, a celestial census, is kept in the New Jerusalem. “1 John saw the holy city, New Jerusalem… And there shall in no wise enter into it any… but they which are written in the Lamb’s book of life.” The record of our names in this New Jerusalem census is evidence of our heavenly citizenship. Our names are there recorded when we are justified by a living faith. The retention of our names is conditional; that is, our names may be blotted out by sin, and thus our citizenship be lost. Psalms 69:19Psalm 69:19, 28; Exodus 32:31. “God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city.” Revelation 22:19. To cast out devils, to possess great power, may be a joyous prerogative; but what if it be enjoyed at the expense of a loss of our citizenship from heaven and name blotted from the Book of Life?

Verse 20. Because your names are written in heaven. — The words are plainly metaphorical; for that God keeps a book, and writes in it the names of his servants, is too gross a conception to be entertained even by children. The allusion here is either to the public enrolment of the names of citizens in their respective cities, in a book kept for that purpose, so that those whose names were found there were entitled to the rights, immunities, and privileges of citizenship, which in many cases were objects of great honour and ambition; or more generally to the record kept of the names of all living Israelites, — which appears to have given rise to the phrase, the “book of life,” and to “blotting the name out of the book,” to express death, because the names of the dead were obliterated, — and to which also the Apostle Paul alludes, when he speaks of the Church or assembly of the first born, whose names are written in heaven. As those written in the book of life were Israelites, and entitled to all the privileges of the Jewish Church and nation, so Christians as forming the true and spiritual Israel of God are said to have their names enrolled in heaven. This has no relation to predestination and election from eternity; but expresses the actual relation and acceptance of the persons referred to by God. As the Israelite after the flesh obtained his enrolment by virtue of his natural birth, so the spiritual Israelite obtains his by virtue of his reconciliation and new birth. This is the foundation of the distinction. It rests not upon supposed eternal decrees, but upon the actual experience of man in the forgiveness of sin, and the renewal of his heart; and it was for this reason that our Lord bade the seventy rejoice, not because they were endowed with miraculous powers, which were no certain evidences of grace, either of its reality or its degree; and which had no direct relation to their final salvation; but rather to rejoice that God had accepted them as his people, the members of his Church, and the heirs of his eternal kingdom. He thus taught them, and he teaches us, to estimate the most splendid gifts, as nothing in comparison with real piety; since the former indeed might, as he teaches us elsewhere, fail to give us any title to be received into his kingdom; while the latter brings every one who lives under its influence, into vital communion with God here, and will, if persevered in, infallibly secure his final acceptance with God at the last day. He who in this spirit “endureth to the end shall be saved.” This great lesson is lost in those comments which consider these words as a declaration of the eternal election of the seventy disciples, to whom they were originally addressed; and awkwardly brings in a subject which had at best, if true, a very distant relation to any part of the context. — Certain also it is, that if this registry of the names of true believers had any reference to their eternal election, the fact of their names being written in heaven could give them no security of eternal salvation, since Christ threatens some to blot out their names from the book of life, Revelation 22:19, and promises others, Revelation 3:5, that he will not blot out their names.

V. 21. Lord of heaven and earth-In both of which thy kingdom stands, and that of Satan is destroyed.

That thou hast hid these things-He rejoiced not in the destruction of the wise and prudent, but in the display of the riches of God's grace to others, in such a manner as reserves to Him the entire glory of our salvation, and hides pride from man. Matthew 11:25.

Verse 21. Rejoiced in spirit] Was truly and heartily joyous: felt an inward triumph. But tw pneumati, tw agiw, the HOLY Spirit, is the reading here of BCDKL, six others; the three Syriac, later Persic, Coptic, Æthiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, all the Itala except one, and Augustin and Bede. These might be considered sufficient authority to admit the word into the text. I thank thee] Bishop PEARCE justly observes, the thanks are meant to be given to God for revealing them to babes, not for hiding them from the others. See Clarke on “Matthew 11:25”.

Thou hast hid] That is, thou hast not revealed them to the scribes and Pharisees, who idolized their own wisdom; but thou hast revealed them to the simple and humble of heart.

Verses 21-24. In that hour Jesus rejoiced — On this occasion Jesus, meditating on the unspeakable wisdom and goodness of the divine dispensations to mankind, felt extraordinary emotions of joy. And said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth — In both of which thy kingdom stands, and that of Satan is to be destroyed; that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent — Hast suffered them to be hid from those that are wise and prudent in their own eyes, or who really are so with respect to the things of this world; and hast revealed them unto babes — To persons illiterate, and of comparatively weak understanding, but are wise as to the things of God. He rejoiced not in the state of ignorance and darkness, in which the wise and prudent were left, as a punishment of their self-confidence and pride, and in their consequent destruction, but in the display of the riches of God’s grace to others, in such a manner as reserves to him the entire glory of our salvation, and hides pride from man. All things are delivered to me of my Father — He repeats the declaration of his own extensive authority, which he had testified before. See notes on Matthew 11:25-27. And no man knoweth who the Son is — Essentially one with the Father; but the Father — Who sent him, and who only knows his dignity and the mystery of his person. And who the Father is — How great, how wise, how good; but the Son — His essential wisdom and word. And he to whom the Son will reveal him — In pursuance of one very important design of his coming, which was to declare the Father, and communicate the saving knowledge of him to all truly willing and desirous to receive it. And he turned to his disciples, and said privately, &c. — It appears, that when the seventy disciples returned, Jesus was surrounded with a great multitude of people; therefore after he had spoken publicly as above related, to the seventy, he turned himself to all his disciples, and uttered what follows privately, so as not to be heard by the people in general. Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see, &c. — The happiness here praised was enjoyed by the seventy, as well as by the twelve, and consequently it was as fit that they should be made sensible of its greatness, as that the twelve should understand it. Besides, this declaration, as well as what was spoken more publicly, was designed to moderate the joy which the seventy had conceived, on finding the devils subject to them. The subjection of the devils to their command was not so great a happiness as their being allowed to hear Christ’s sermons, and to see his miracles. These things show, that what our Lord said privately to his disciples, was said to the seventy as well as to the twelve.

Ver. 21. In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, to hear of the success of the seventy disciples, for there is no joy to the Saviour, to angels, or to saints, like that of the repentance of sinners, and their turning to the Lord.

21. In that hour—At the season of that transaction. Father, Lord of heaven and earth—For it was from God the Father Almighty, as above stated, that the omens of triumph were given, both to the Seventy and to the human spirit of the blessed Jesus. Rejoiced in spirit—Rather triumphed or exulted in spirit. The revelations of the hour gave to him his joy and triumph, as well as to the Seventy theirs. From the wise and prudent— From not only the statesman, the general, and the prince, but from the rabbi, the priest, and the pontiff; from Herod, Caiaphas, and Gamaliel. Jesus was soon to encounter these wise and prudent at the Feast of Tabernacles.

These two verses, 21, 22, show that Jesus, in illustrating his mystical unity with the Father, rose into precisely the style of his discourses as reported in the Gospel of John.

Verse 21. Jesus rejoiced in spirit. — The subject of this exulting and grateful excitement in the mind of our Lord must have been important. It is not often that we read of his manifesting such emotions of joy; and nothing but considerations of the mightiest character can be supposed to have produced a manifestation of them visible to all the seventy who were with him, the twelve apostles, and probably many other disciples. — This strong emotion could scarcely have been produced by the short mission of the seventy on this occasion, and the works they had wrought. He regarded them rather in this as making an essay in preparation for that wonderful ministry they were to accomplish; for that it was with reference to their whole ministerial life that he addressed both the twelve and the seventy, in the discourses he held with them on their appointment, many parts of those discourses themselves sufficiently prove. On this occasion, both the seventy who had just returned, and the twelve apostles also, stood before him, when he offered this ardent thanksgiving, in which he recognized at once the sovereignty of God to choose his own instruments to accomplish his own designs, and his wisdom and power in accomplishing such events by an agency despised by the world, but which brought to shame all that the world had held wise and great. “The scribe,” “the disputer,” the philosopher, were all confounded, when it had pleased God, by the instrumentality of these simple men, to fill the earth with the profoundest wisdom on all theological and moral subjects, and to implant a system which all foresaw must ultimately absorb all others, and by the very force of its own internal evidence fix an everlasting conviction of its truth and Divinity in the hearts of men. In fact, the true Christian ministry is the most wonderful institution ever introduced among mankind. — It is that which gives a new life to the soul, creates a new order of feelings, awakens men out of the sleep of sin, leads them in penitence and prayer to God, produces such a trust in Christ as is followed by peace of conscience and the supporting assurance of the friendship of God, inspires man with a moral power which he has not by nature, exerts a sanctifying influence upon his affections, raises him into the condition of a spiritual man, and completes its high office by presenting the souls which it has trained under its godly discipline purged from every spot of sin, and meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light. Such effects produced by the visible agency of weak and inefficient men, and hence called “babes,” implies necessarily the constant agency of God in its most gracious and condescending as well as powerful operations; and under these views our Lord offers this thanksgiving, and acknowledges the wondrous work of God. See the notes on Matthew 11:25-27.

V. 22. Who the Son is-Essentially one with the Father: who the Father is-How great, how wise, how good!

Verse 22. The Codex Alexandrinus, several other very ancient MSS., and some ancient versions, as well as the margin of our own, begin this verse with, And turning to his disciples, he said. But as this clause begins Luke 10:23, it is not likely that it was originally in both. Griesbach has left these words out of the text, and Professor WHITE says, Certissime delenda, “These words should most assuredly be erased.” Ver. 22. All things are delivered to me] See Clarke on “Matthew 11:27”.

Verses 21-24. In that hour Jesus rejoiced — On this occasion Jesus, meditating on the unspeakable wisdom and goodness of the divine dispensations to mankind, felt extraordinary emotions of joy. And said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth — In both of which thy kingdom stands, and that of Satan is to be destroyed; that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent — Hast suffered them to be hid from those that are wise and prudent in their own eyes, or who really are so with respect to the things of this world; and hast revealed them unto babes — To persons illiterate, and of comparatively weak understanding, but are wise as to the things of God. He rejoiced not in the state of ignorance and darkness, in which the wise and prudent were left, as a punishment of their self-confidence and pride, and in their consequent destruction, but in the display of the riches of God’s grace to others, in such a manner as reserves to him the entire glory of our salvation, and hides pride from man. All things are delivered to me of my Father — He repeats the declaration of his own extensive authority, which he had testified before. See notes on Matthew 11:25-27. And no man knoweth who the Son is — Essentially one with the Father; but the Father — Who sent him, and who only knows his dignity and the mystery of his person. And who the Father is — How great, how wise, how good; but the Son — His essential wisdom and word. And he to whom the Son will reveal him — In pursuance of one very important design of his coming, which was to declare the Father, and communicate the saving knowledge of him to all truly willing and desirous to receive it. And he turned to his disciples, and said privately, &c. — It appears, that when the seventy disciples returned, Jesus was surrounded with a great multitude of people; therefore after he had spoken publicly as above related, to the seventy, he turned himself to all his disciples, and uttered what follows privately, so as not to be heard by the people in general. Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see, &c. — The happiness here praised was enjoyed by the seventy, as well as by the twelve, and consequently it was as fit that they should be made sensible of its greatness, as that the twelve should understand it. Besides, this declaration, as well as what was spoken more publicly, was designed to moderate the joy which the seventy had conceived, on finding the devils subject to them. The subjection of the devils to their command was not so great a happiness as their being allowed to hear Christ’s sermons, and to see his miracles. These things show, that what our Lord said privately to his disciples, was said to the seventy as well as to the twelve.

22. All things—Thus far the face of Jesus has been toward the face of the Seventy—the babes for whose faith he has been thanking his Father; but now, as indicated by the words turning to his disciples, (which, though omitted from the English translation, are admitted by the best editions of the Greek Testament,) he so turns as to address the disciples in connection with the Seventy; and then, at verse 23, he so completely turns around and from the Seventy as to address the disciples privately; that is, separately. This present verse expresses the divine correspondence between Father and Son which had been implied by the thanksgiving of the previous verse. See notes on Matthew 11:25-27.

V. 23. Matthew 13:16.

Verse 23. Blessed are the eyes which see the things that ye see] There is a similar saying to this among the rabbins, in Sohar. Genes., where it is said, “Blessed is that generation which the earth shall bear, when the King Messiah cometh.”

Verses 21-24. In that hour Jesus rejoiced — On this occasion Jesus, meditating on the unspeakable wisdom and goodness of the divine dispensations to mankind, felt extraordinary emotions of joy. And said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth — In both of which thy kingdom stands, and that of Satan is to be destroyed; that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent — Hast suffered them to be hid from those that are wise and prudent in their own eyes, or who really are so with respect to the things of this world; and hast revealed them unto babes — To persons illiterate, and of comparatively weak understanding, but are wise as to the things of God. He rejoiced not in the state of ignorance and darkness, in which the wise and prudent were left, as a punishment of their self-confidence and pride, and in their consequent destruction, but in the display of the riches of God’s grace to others, in such a manner as reserves to him the entire glory of our salvation, and hides pride from man. All things are delivered to me of my Father — He repeats the declaration of his own extensive authority, which he had testified before. See notes on Matthew 11:25-27. And no man knoweth who the Son is — Essentially one with the Father; but the Father — Who sent him, and who only knows his dignity and the mystery of his person. And who the Father is — How great, how wise, how good; but the Son — His essential wisdom and word. And he to whom the Son will reveal him — In pursuance of one very important design of his coming, which was to declare the Father, and communicate the saving knowledge of him to all truly willing and desirous to receive it. And he turned to his disciples, and said privately, &c. — It appears, that when the seventy disciples returned, Jesus was surrounded with a great multitude of people; therefore after he had spoken publicly as above related, to the seventy, he turned himself to all his disciples, and uttered what follows privately, so as not to be heard by the people in general. Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see, &c. — The happiness here praised was enjoyed by the seventy, as well as by the twelve, and consequently it was as fit that they should be made sensible of its greatness, as that the twelve should understand it. Besides, this declaration, as well as what was spoken more publicly, was designed to moderate the joy which the seventy had conceived, on finding the devils subject to them. The subjection of the devils to their command was not so great a happiness as their being allowed to hear Christ’s sermons, and to see his miracles. These things show, that what our Lord said privately to his disciples, was said to the seventy as well as to the twelve.

23. Privately—To congratulate them particularly on the blessedness of the Gospel revelation to them in connection with the Seventy. These scenes are unknown and unappreciated by the great ones of the day; but the holier spirits of past ages had, and the unborn spirits of future ages will have; their eyes fixed on them. There was for the former a Christ in prophecy, for whose form they had looked with anxious expectation; and there is a Christ in history for the latter, on whom the best thinkers look back with wonder.

Verse 24. Many prophets] See on Matthew 13:11, 17.

Verses 21-24. In that hour Jesus rejoiced — On this occasion Jesus, meditating on the unspeakable wisdom and goodness of the divine dispensations to mankind, felt extraordinary emotions of joy. And said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth — In both of which thy kingdom stands, and that of Satan is to be destroyed; that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent — Hast suffered them to be hid from those that are wise and prudent in their own eyes, or who really are so with respect to the things of this world; and hast revealed them unto babes — To persons illiterate, and of comparatively weak understanding, but are wise as to the things of God. He rejoiced not in the state of ignorance and darkness, in which the wise and prudent were left, as a punishment of their self-confidence and pride, and in their consequent destruction, but in the display of the riches of God’s grace to others, in such a manner as reserves to him the entire glory of our salvation, and hides pride from man. All things are delivered to me of my Father — He repeats the declaration of his own extensive authority, which he had testified before. See notes on Matthew 11:25-27. And no man knoweth who the Son is — Essentially one with the Father; but the Father — Who sent him, and who only knows his dignity and the mystery of his person. And who the Father is — How great, how wise, how good; but the Son — His essential wisdom and word. And he to whom the Son will reveal him — In pursuance of one very important design of his coming, which was to declare the Father, and communicate the saving knowledge of him to all truly willing and desirous to receive it. And he turned to his disciples, and said privately, &c. — It appears, that when the seventy disciples returned, Jesus was surrounded with a great multitude of people; therefore after he had spoken publicly as above related, to the seventy, he turned himself to all his disciples, and uttered what follows privately, so as not to be heard by the people in general. Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see, &c. — The happiness here praised was enjoyed by the seventy, as well as by the twelve, and consequently it was as fit that they should be made sensible of its greatness, as that the twelve should understand it. Besides, this declaration, as well as what was spoken more publicly, was designed to moderate the joy which the seventy had conceived, on finding the devils subject to them. The subjection of the devils to their command was not so great a happiness as their being allowed to hear Christ’s sermons, and to see his miracles. These things show, that what our Lord said privately to his disciples, was said to the seventy as well as to the twelve.

24. Prophets—As Moses, Isaiah, and Daniel. Kings—As David, Josiah, and Hezekiah.

The SEVENTY, as being a temporary symbol, now recede forever from view. Their collective name has not been recorded in later apostolic history; but their individual names were written in heaven, and the fulfilment of the predictions they symbolized is now taking place on earth. By consulting the Harmony, at page 101, it will be seen that after “the return of the Seventy,” which followed the Feast of Tabernacles, Jesus “prosecutes a ministry in Judea” until the Feast of Dedication. In what section of Judea this ministry was prosecuted we are not informed, as Luke gives no notice of place. But as we know from other evangelists that the residence of the sisters of Lazarus was in Bethany, so we may infer that Eastern Judea, lying between Jerusalem and the Jordan, was the region of the whole period. This entire period, extending from the Feast of Tabernacles to the Feast of Dedication, terminates at Luke 13:21. Though the contents are not equally striking with the lessons of the Peraean ministry, (Luke 13:23-17:10,) this period contains some brilliant gems of divine wisdom. Beginning with the memorable parable of the Good Samaritan, (25-37,) we have next the home in Bethany, (38-42,) the establishment of the Lord’s Prayer as a permanent heritage, (Luke 11:1-13,) the sermon to the myriads, with its appendix, (Luke 12:1-13:9.)

Verse 24. Many prophets and kings have desired. — Of the prophets and inspired kings, as Moses, David, Josiah, &c., here referred to, St. Peter says, “They searched what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of the Christ, and the glory that should follow.” Distant and obscure, though to them most interesting, visions of the future intensely fixed their attention, and produced the strongest desires for clearer knowledge on subjects all-important to them, and to mankind at large. See the notes on Matthew 13:16, 17.

V. 25. Matthew 22:35; Mark 12:28.

Verse 25. A certain lawyer] See Clarke on “Matthew 24:35”.

Verses 25-28. And behold, a certain lawyer — A doctor of the law; stood up and tempted him — Greek, ekpeirazwn auton, trying him. It seems this lawyer was one of the multitude which attended Jesus when the seventy returned, and having listened to what he said to his disciples in private, concerning their enjoying a happiness which many prophets and kings had desired in vain to obtain, namely, the happiness of seeing his miracles, and of hearing his sermons, thought he would make trial of that great wisdom which some said he possessed, by proposing to him one of the most important questions which it is possible for the human mind to examine, namely, What a man must do to inherit eternal life. For, that this learned doctor asked the question, not from a sincere desire to know his own duty, but merely to try our Lord’s knowledge, is evident from the text, which informs us, that he did it tempting, or trying him, expecting, perhaps, that, on this head he would teach differently from Moses. He said unto him, What is written in the law? — Jesus, alluding to his profession, made answer by inquiring of him what the law taught on that point. And he, answering out of Deuteronomy 6:5, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, &c. — That is, Thou shalt unite all the faculties of thy soul to render him the most intelligent and sincere, the most affectionate and resolute service. We may safely rest in this general sense of these important words, if we are not able to fix the particular meaning of every single word. If we desire to do this, perhaps the heart, which is a general expression, may be explained by the three following; With all thy soul — With the warmest affection; with all thy strength — The most vigorous efforts of thy will; and with all thy mind — Or understanding, in the most wise and reasonable manner thou canst, thy understanding guiding thy will and affections. And thy neighbour as thyself — See on Mark 12:30, 31. And he said, Thou hast answered right — Jesus approved of his answer, and allowed, that to love God as the law enjoined is the means of obtaining eternal life, because it never fails to produce obedience to all the divine revelations and commands, consequently even to the gospel, which he was then preaching. Observe well, therefore, reader, our Lord’s words are not spoken ironically, but seriously; and contain a deep and weighty truth. He, and he alone, shall live for ever, who thus loves God and his neighbour in the present life.

Ver. 25. Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? As a man of letters he knew the law. It is said in Leviticus 18:5, “Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and judgments, which if a man do, he shall live in them. I am the Lord.” Moses repeats the same promise in Deuteronomy 6:24, 25. The lawyer evidently understood these promises of more than a temporal life. The pharisees also, like St. Paul, understood life eternal to be promised under the law, as stated on Deuteronomy 31:16.

§ 86.—JESUS INSTRUCTS THE LAWYER BY THE PARABLE OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN, 25-37. This narrative is given by Luke alone, without assignment of time or place. It has no apparent connection with the preceding narration. The parable of the good Samaritan, which is embraced in it, has been celebrated for ages for its beauty and moral power.

25. A certain lawyer—The law embraced in this man’s profession consisted of two parts, the oral and the written. The written was contained in the Pentateuch of Moses; the oral was professedly derived by unwritten tradition from the seventy elders appointed by Moses to aid in the government of Israel. Numbers 11:16. Both these formed a mass of rules and regulations, civil, moral, and religious, boundless in extent, complicated in character, exercising a controlling influence over the whole of Jewish life, and forming a subject for an infinite variety of subtle distinctions, disputes, and questionings. The distinction between lawyer and scribe is not very clearly drawn. In fact the same person receives from different evangelists each of these titles. Matthew 22:35; Mark 12:28. The title of the scribe would seem to indicate a more special relation to the text of the law and its transcription; that of lawyer more to the study of its principles. Stood up—Rose to indicate his purpose of a discussion. Tempted him—That is, proposed to try his depth of intellect and knowledge of the law. There was no malicious purpose in the case. It was simply a challenge to a keen encounter of wits and professional knowledge. Among the Jews there was the disciple and the doctor; the former was one able to answer questions which he bad specially read up; the latter was ready to answer questions on any part of the law. Similarly the Sophists among the Greeks would take a seat in public, and offer to discourse on any topic that any one would please to propose. What shall I do?—Though the lawyer proposes this question in the first person singular, he means it rather for a theoretical than a practical question. He is no convicted sinner asking the way to eternal life.

Verses 25, 26. A certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him. — The lawyers, nomikoi, were interpreters and teachers of the Mosaic law. They were the same as the scribes. To tempt here signifies to prove his skill by a question, which was a favourite mode of trying each other’s skill among the Jewish doctors, It was one, probably, debated in their schools, and to which various answers would be given, just as some estimated the comparative importance of different duties, or of ceremonial observances. Our Lord’s answer, What is written in the law? how readest thou? seems intended to turn the attention from all the vain disputations of the schools, and the opinions of mere men, on this grave question, to the written word of God. The Jews had a revelation of the will of God; and an answer to the question, What shall I do to inherit eternal life? must of necessity be found there. Our Lord therefore somewhat reprovingly said, How readest thou?

Verses 25-28. And behold, a certain lawyer — A doctor of the law; stood up and tempted him — Greek, ekpeirazwn auton, trying him. It seems this lawyer was one of the multitude which attended Jesus when the seventy returned, and having listened to what he said to his disciples in private, concerning their enjoying a happiness which many prophets and kings had desired in vain to obtain, namely, the happiness of seeing his miracles, and of hearing his sermons, thought he would make trial of that great wisdom which some said he possessed, by proposing to him one of the most important questions which it is possible for the human mind to examine, namely, What a man must do to inherit eternal life. For, that this learned doctor asked the question, not from a sincere desire to know his own duty, but merely to try our Lord’s knowledge, is evident from the text, which informs us, that he did it tempting, or trying him, expecting, perhaps, that, on this head he would teach differently from Moses. He said unto him, What is written in the law? — Jesus, alluding to his profession, made answer by inquiring of him what the law taught on that point. And he, answering out of Deuteronomy 6:5, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, &c. — That is, Thou shalt unite all the faculties of thy soul to render him the most intelligent and sincere, the most affectionate and resolute service. We may safely rest in this general sense of these important words, if we are not able to fix the particular meaning of every single word. If we desire to do this, perhaps the heart, which is a general expression, may be explained by the three following; With all thy soul — With the warmest affection; with all thy strength — The most vigorous efforts of thy will; and with all thy mind — Or understanding, in the most wise and reasonable manner thou canst, thy understanding guiding thy will and affections. And thy neighbour as thyself — See on Mark 12:30, 31. And he said, Thou hast answered right — Jesus approved of his answer, and allowed, that to love God as the law enjoined is the means of obtaining eternal life, because it never fails to produce obedience to all the divine revelations and commands, consequently even to the gospel, which he was then preaching. Observe well, therefore, reader, our Lord’s words are not spoken ironically, but seriously; and contain a deep and weighty truth. He, and he alone, shall live for ever, who thus loves God and his neighbour in the present life.

26. What is written… how readest thou?—It is right to refer the lawyer to his own law-books, the minister to his Bible. Stier makes some beautiful points as to the how, here, as distinguished from the what. How we read, the spirit with which we inquire or study, is often of even more importance than what we read.

Verses 25, 26. A certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him. — The lawyers, nomikoi, were interpreters and teachers of the Mosaic law. They were the same as the scribes. To tempt here signifies to prove his skill by a question, which was a favourite mode of trying each other’s skill among the Jewish doctors, It was one, probably, debated in their schools, and to which various answers would be given, just as some estimated the comparative importance of different duties, or of ceremonial observances. Our Lord’s answer, What is written in the law? how readest thou? seems intended to turn the attention from all the vain disputations of the schools, and the opinions of mere men, on this grave question, to the written word of God. The Jews had a revelation of the will of God; and an answer to the question, What shall I do to inherit eternal life? must of necessity be found there. Our Lord therefore somewhat reprovingly said, How readest thou?

V. 27. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God-That is, thou shalt unite all the faculties of thy soul to render him the most intelligent and sincere, the most affectionate and resolute service. We may safely rest in this general sense of these important words, if we are not able to fix the particular meaning of every single word. If we desire to do this, perhaps the heart, which is a general expression, may be explained by the three following, With all thy soul, with the warmest affection, with all thy strength, the most vigorous efforts of thy will, and with all thy mind or understanding, in the most wise and reasonable manner thou canst; thy understanding guiding thy will and affections. Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18.

Verse 27. Thou shalt love the Lord] See this important subject explained at large, on Matthew 22:37-40.

Thy neighbour as thyself.] See the nature of self-love explained, on Matthew 19:19.

Verses 25-28. And behold, a certain lawyer — A doctor of the law; stood up and tempted him — Greek, ekpeirazwn auton, trying him. It seems this lawyer was one of the multitude which attended Jesus when the seventy returned, and having listened to what he said to his disciples in private, concerning their enjoying a happiness which many prophets and kings had desired in vain to obtain, namely, the happiness of seeing his miracles, and of hearing his sermons, thought he would make trial of that great wisdom which some said he possessed, by proposing to him one of the most important questions which it is possible for the human mind to examine, namely, What a man must do to inherit eternal life. For, that this learned doctor asked the question, not from a sincere desire to know his own duty, but merely to try our Lord’s knowledge, is evident from the text, which informs us, that he did it tempting, or trying him, expecting, perhaps, that, on this head he would teach differently from Moses. He said unto him, What is written in the law? — Jesus, alluding to his profession, made answer by inquiring of him what the law taught on that point. And he, answering out of Deuteronomy 6:5, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, &c. — That is, Thou shalt unite all the faculties of thy soul to render him the most intelligent and sincere, the most affectionate and resolute service. We may safely rest in this general sense of these important words, if we are not able to fix the particular meaning of every single word. If we desire to do this, perhaps the heart, which is a general expression, may be explained by the three following; With all thy soul — With the warmest affection; with all thy strength — The most vigorous efforts of thy will; and with all thy mind — Or understanding, in the most wise and reasonable manner thou canst, thy understanding guiding thy will and affections. And thy neighbour as thyself — See on Mark 12:30, 31. And he said, Thou hast answered right — Jesus approved of his answer, and allowed, that to love God as the law enjoined is the means of obtaining eternal life, because it never fails to produce obedience to all the divine revelations and commands, consequently even to the gospel, which he was then preaching. Observe well, therefore, reader, our Lord’s words are not spoken ironically, but seriously; and contain a deep and weighty truth. He, and he alone, shall live for ever, who thus loves God and his neighbour in the present life.

27. Thou shalt love—All the being of man is, by this law, to be given up to the work of loving God: the immortal, the animal, the intellectual, the moral, all in their highest vigor and to their utmost strain. These are syllables easily spoken; and the lawyer utters them in the routine professional style. These two passages of the law may be found in Deuteronomy 6:5, and in Leviticus 19:18.

V. 28. Thou hast answered right; this do, and thou shalt live-Here is no irony, but a deep and weighty truth. He, and he alone, shall live for ever, who thus loves God and his neighbour in the present life.

Verses 25-28. And behold, a certain lawyer — A doctor of the law; stood up and tempted him — Greek, ekpeirazwn auton, trying him. It seems this lawyer was one of the multitude which attended Jesus when the seventy returned, and having listened to what he said to his disciples in private, concerning their enjoying a happiness which many prophets and kings had desired in vain to obtain, namely, the happiness of seeing his miracles, and of hearing his sermons, thought he would make trial of that great wisdom which some said he possessed, by proposing to him one of the most important questions which it is possible for the human mind to examine, namely, What a man must do to inherit eternal life. For, that this learned doctor asked the question, not from a sincere desire to know his own duty, but merely to try our Lord’s knowledge, is evident from the text, which informs us, that he did it tempting, or trying him, expecting, perhaps, that, on this head he would teach differently from Moses. He said unto him, What is written in the law? — Jesus, alluding to his profession, made answer by inquiring of him what the law taught on that point. And he, answering out of Deuteronomy 6:5, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, &c. — That is, Thou shalt unite all the faculties of thy soul to render him the most intelligent and sincere, the most affectionate and resolute service. We may safely rest in this general sense of these important words, if we are not able to fix the particular meaning of every single word. If we desire to do this, perhaps the heart, which is a general expression, may be explained by the three following; With all thy soul — With the warmest affection; with all thy strength — The most vigorous efforts of thy will; and with all thy mind — Or understanding, in the most wise and reasonable manner thou canst, thy understanding guiding thy will and affections. And thy neighbour as thyself — See on Mark 12:30, 31. And he said, Thou hast answered right — Jesus approved of his answer, and allowed, that to love God as the law enjoined is the means of obtaining eternal life, because it never fails to produce obedience to all the divine revelations and commands, consequently even to the gospel, which he was then preaching. Observe well, therefore, reader, our Lord’s words are not spoken ironically, but seriously; and contain a deep and weighty truth. He, and he alone, shall live for ever, who thus loves God and his neighbour in the present life.

28. Answered… do and thou shalt live—It requires no depth of penitent conviction in the lawyer, but simply a proper appreciation of the words he has uttered, to see that he is damned with all his race. For the direction do this governs both his whole past and his whole future. Has he kept it in the past? Will he, can he, keep it in the future? That is a hopeless case. But under this law the live depends upon the do. Death, therefore, is the only result.

Verse 28. This do, and thou shalt live. — This is the religion of both the Old and the New Testament. It has indeed been said that our Lord said this only to convince the inquirer that life by the law was impossible, and that obedience to the command is impracticable. But nothing appears to warrant this in the history itself. When our Lord commended the answer, he showed that this was the way to life opened by the Mosaic institute; and when he repeats, This do, and thou shalt live, he shows that this also is the way to eternal life, under his own dispensation. Under the law of Moses, the forgiveness of sin was provided for by sacrifice, and so under the Gospel; the Holy Spirit was also formerly promised to those who sought the gift, to renew their nature. — “Thy Spirit,” says David, “is good: lead me into the land of uprightness.” And still more largely is that heavenly gift promised by Christ; but the great practical end and effect of our redemption, and all the promises of God, is, that we may be brought to love him with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind, that is, with the might of all our affections, and our neighbour as ourselves. Faith leads to pardon; a sense of forgiving mercy produces LOVE: love is the great principle of true obedience, and when supreme and universal, produces the willing consecration of our entire service to God. — So as to our neighbour: love is the great principle here; it extinguishes all the malignant, selfish, and irascible passions, and is, as to the duties of the second table, “the fulfilling of the law.” All this is NECESSARY to eternal life; and if so, all this is POSSIBLE, by the grace of God.

V. 29. To justify himself-That is, to show he had done this. Leviticus 18:5.

Verse 29. Willing to justify himself] Wishing to make it appear that he was a righteous man, and that consequently he was in the straight road to the kingdom of God, said, Who is my neighbour? supposing our Lord would have at once answered, “Every Jew is to be considered as such, and the Jews only.” Now as he imagined he had never been deficient in his conduct to any person of his own nation, he thought he had amply fulfilled the law. This is the sense in which the Jews understood the word neighbour, as may be seen from Leviticus 19:15-18. But our Lord shows here, that the acts of kindness which a man is bound to perform to his neighbour when in distress, he should perform to any person, of whatever nation, religion, or kindred, whom he finds in necessity. As the word plhsion signifies one who is near, Anglo Saxon [A.S.], he that is next, this very circumstance makes any person our neighbour whom we know; and, if in distress, an object of our most compassionate regards. If a man came from the most distant part of the earth, the moment he is near you he has a claim upon your mercy and kindness, as you would have on his, were your dwelling-place transferred to his native country. It is evident that our Lord uses the word plhsion (very properly translated neighbour, from nae or naer, near, and buer, to dwell) in its plain, literal sense. Any person whom you know, who dwells hard by, or who passes near you, is your neighbour while within your reach.

Verses 29-32. But he, willing to justify himself — That is, to show he had done this, and was blameless, even with respect to the duties which are least liable to be counterfeited, namely, the social and relative duties, asked him what was the meaning and extent of the word neighbour in the law? It seems, being strongly tinctured with the prejudices of his nation, he reckoned none brethren but Israelites; or neighbours, but proselytes; and expected that Jesus would confirm his opinion, by approving of it. For, according to this interpretation, he thought himself innocent, although enemies and heathen had no share of his love, since the precept enjoined the love of neighbours only. And Jesus answering said, A certain man, &c. — Our Lord, who well knew how to convince and persuade, answered him in such a manner as to make the feelings of his heart overcome the prejudices of his understanding. He convinced him of his mistake by a parable, an ancient, agreeable, and inoffensive method of conveying instruction, very fit to be used in teaching persons who are greatly prejudiced against the truth. For, “as to the scope of the passage, every body perceives, that it is the intention of it to confound those malignant Jewish prejudices, which made them confine their charity to those of their own nation and religion. Nor could any thing be better adapted for the purpose than this story, which, as it is universally understood, exhibits a Samaritan overlooking all national and religious differences, and doing offices of kindness and humanity to a Jew in distress. By this means the narrow-minded Pharisee, who put the question, is surprised into a conviction that there is something amiable, and even divine, in surmounting all partial considerations, and listening to the voice of nature, which is the voice of God, in giving relief to the unhappy.” — Campbell. Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho — Jericho was situated in a valley, hence the phrase of going down to it: and as the road to it from Jerusalem (about eighteen miles) lay through desert and rocky places, so many robberies and murders were committed therein, that it was called, according to Jerome, the bloody way. This circumstance of the parable, therefore, is finely chosen. And fell among thieves — This Jew, in travelling this road, was assaulted by robbers, who, not satisfied with taking all the money he had, stripped him of his raiment, beat him unmercifully, and left him for dead. While he was lying in this miserable condition, utterly incapable of helping himself, a certain priest, happening to come that way, saw him in great distress, but took no pity on him. In like manner a Levite, espying him, would not come near him, having no mind to be at any trouble or expense with him. The priest and Levite are here introduced coming that way very naturally, there being, according to a considerable Jewish writer, quoted by Dr. Lightfoot, no fewer than twelve thousand priests and Levites, who dwelt at Jericho, and all occasionally attending the service of the temple at Jerusalem, frequently travelled this road. The expression, kata sugkurian, here, is very improperly rendered, by chance, in our translation. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing in the universe as either chance or fortune. The phrase merely means, as it happened, or, it came to pass. Both the priest and the Levite are represented as passing by without so much as speaking to the poor distressed and dying man, notwithstanding that their sacred characters, and eminent knowledge in the law, obliged them to be remarkable for compassion, and all the tender offices of charity; especially when it was the distress of a brother, which called for their help. In other cases, indeed, these hypocrites might have invented reasons to palliate their inhumanity: but here it was not in their power to do it. For they could not excuse themselves by saying, This was a Samaritan, or a heathen, who deserved no pity; they could not even excuse themselves by saying, they did not know who he was; for though they took care to keep at a distance, they had looked on their brother lying, stripped, wounded, and half dead, without being in the least moved with his distress. No doubt, however, they would try to excuse themselves to their own consciences for thus neglecting him, and, perhaps, might gravely thank God for their own deliverances, while they left their brother bleeding to death. Is not this an emblem of many living characters, perhaps of some who bear the sacred office? O house of Levi, and of Aaron, is not the day coming when the virtues of heathen and Samaritans will rise up in judgment against you?

Ver. 29. But he, willing to justify himself, said — And who is my neighbour? How can I love the heathen as myself; they are unclean. How can I love the Samaritans; they are accursed and excommunicated. Thus the world make distinctions: Christ makes none. Allow but a single exception, and love exists no more. Whether our neighbour be rich or poor, whether he be haughty or affable, whether he be friend or foe, he is still our neighbour; and by consequence, if not the object of our esteem, he is at least the object of charity, active and sincere. Partial charity destroys the extension and universality of love; and is in fact, a confederation against the love of our neighbour.

The universal unity and extension of charity is the basis and glory of all true religion. He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Now, as we are all one by nature, let us all be one by charity. Let us seek, in conformity to his prayer, to be one with Christ, as he is one with the Father. Then, and only then, love which is divine in its principle, becomes universal in its object. But let us not err in the grand basis and principle of charity. It is a grace of celestial birth, it is a love spiritual and pure. To love my neighbour as I ought, I must regard the relations in which he stands to his Maker. In this view, every man enjoying the favours of heaven, though, on certain points he may be hostile to me, yet I am bound to love him with good affection. The argument of his celestial relation to his Creator is most conclusive for charity. I cannot hate my neighbour without hating Him, to whom he is so closely related. This man, separately considered, may not merit my esteem; regarding him as a christian, he has every claim to that love from me which I expect from Christ. And can the fire of anger be subdued, but by the purer flame of love?

Nor should it escape remark, that our Lord has associated abundance of righteousness with the love of our neighbour, which this lawyer did not know, and which neither the priest nor the levite exemplified. We are bound to assist our neighbour in the time of trouble to the utmost of his need, according to our capacity. This is to love our neighbour in the Lord. But if we love men for their fine qualities, for their wit, their fortune and good offices, we in fact are loving our own concupiscence, and the sordid gratification of our passions.

To love our neighbour in the Lord, and not merely for amiable qualities, is the only basis on which reciprocal charity can be permanent. If our love be built on good qualities, ah, how soon may our affection and esteem fluctuate. How soon may an insidious whisper divert our love to other objects, or cause it to burn with anger against the friend we once esteemed. Charity being the grand principle on which religion is built, and on which its progress depends, we should cultivate it as the first of all graces; for he that loveth not his brother abideth in death. How was it that christianity, without money, without power, made so surprising a conquest of more than the Roman world, when jews and priests, and all the powers of darkness were leagued against it. It is replied, because it excelled all other religions in charity. How was it that the jews fell into general contempt. I answer, it was because they had no charity for the gentiles, except they became proselytes.

Just the contrary was the character of the early church. Every believer was a good Samaritan. He fed the hungry, and clothed the naked; he was a husband to the widow, and a father to the orphan. This is the charity that conquers all; — for God is love, and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.

29. Justify himself—The lawyer sees that he is proved to have asked a question both very easy to answer and very condemning in the answer. To justify himself in both these respects, he would show that there is a deeper bottom to the subject; and that at that bottom he may be saved. He resorts for this purpose to a definition of terms. He might fight a battle upon several of the particular words. What is love? what is heart, strength, etc.? If they mean one thing, I am, indeed, damned. By the law, I, under such definition, get nothing but the hopeless knowledge of sin. But does the word mean this one thing? And to save himself he selects the term neighbour. Who is my neighbour?—If it mean my dear brother Jew, I have a good conscience and a safe soul; and the voice of all Jewry ratifies the conclusion. If, however, this Jesus replies, “Every member of the race is your neighbour, even the Samaritan,” then Jesus closes the door of popular prejudice against his conclusion. The lawyer will then have the bystanders on his side. Our Lord takes measures by the following parable to make this lawyer say it himself.

Verse 29. But he, willing to justify himself, &c. — Some have thought that the scribe, expecting our Lord to describe his neighbour according to the Jewish idea, as a man of his own nation and religion, thought that he should justify or prove himself righteous by averring that he had always strictly observed this branch of the law. But we are rather to conclude that he felt himself somewhat piqued at being referred to the written testimony of the law as an answer to his question, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” as though it were a very plain and simple one; and answered by a mere reference to a well known scripture, and that, willing to justify himself in having propounded such a question, he intimates that it was not so easily answered as our Lord had suggested; but that, as to the duty of loving our neighbour as ourselves, a question might arise. He therefore said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour? Many of the Jewish teachers would not allow a Gentile, nor even a proselyte, to be intended in the law enjoining the love of our neighbour; and they excluded the Samaritans with still bitterer hostility. This churlish and exclusive spirit, though no doubt often exaggerated, is made matter of reproach against them by heathen writers, as by Tacitus: “Apud ipsos misericordia in promptu; sed adversus omnes alios hostile odium;” and also Juvenal, Sat. 14:103. But the very question of the lawyer shows that the subject had been debated in the Jewish schools; and although the proud, exclusive spirit of Pharisaism predominated, a few had been found to advocate a more rational and religious interpretation of this important law. It was to settle this point for ever that our Lord spake the beautiful and affecting parable which follows.

V. 30. From Jerusalem to Jericho-The road from Jerusalem to Jericho (about eighteen miles from it) lay through desert and rocky places: so many robberies and murders were committed therein, that it was called the bloody way. Jericho was situated in the valley: hence the phrase of going down to it. About twelve thousand priests and Levites dwelt there, who all attended the service of the temple.

Verse 30. And Jesus answering] Rather, Then Jesus took him up. This I believe to be the meaning of the word upolabwn; he threw out a challenge, and our Lord took him up on his own ground. See WAKEFIELD’S Testament.

A certain man went down from Jerusalem] Or, A certain man of Jerusalem going down to Jericho. This was the most public road in all Judea, as it was the grand thoroughfare between these two cities for the courses of priests, twelve thousand of whom are said to have resided at Jericho. See Lightfoot.

Fell among thieves] At this time the whole land of Judea was much infested with hordes of banditti; and it is not unlikely that many robberies might have been committed on that very road to which our Lord refers.

Verses 29-32. But he, willing to justify himself — That is, to show he had done this, and was blameless, even with respect to the duties which are least liable to be counterfeited, namely, the social and relative duties, asked him what was the meaning and extent of the word neighbour in the law? It seems, being strongly tinctured with the prejudices of his nation, he reckoned none brethren but Israelites; or neighbours, but proselytes; and expected that Jesus would confirm his opinion, by approving of it. For, according to this interpretation, he thought himself innocent, although enemies and heathen had no share of his love, since the precept enjoined the love of neighbours only. And Jesus answering said, A certain man, &c. — Our Lord, who well knew how to convince and persuade, answered him in such a manner as to make the feelings of his heart overcome the prejudices of his understanding. He convinced him of his mistake by a parable, an ancient, agreeable, and inoffensive method of conveying instruction, very fit to be used in teaching persons who are greatly prejudiced against the truth. For, “as to the scope of the passage, every body perceives, that it is the intention of it to confound those malignant Jewish prejudices, which made them confine their charity to those of their own nation and religion. Nor could any thing be better adapted for the purpose than this story, which, as it is universally understood, exhibits a Samaritan overlooking all national and religious differences, and doing offices of kindness and humanity to a Jew in distress. By this means the narrow-minded Pharisee, who put the question, is surprised into a conviction that there is something amiable, and even divine, in surmounting all partial considerations, and listening to the voice of nature, which is the voice of God, in giving relief to the unhappy.” — Campbell. Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho — Jericho was situated in a valley, hence the phrase of going down to it: and as the road to it from Jerusalem (about eighteen miles) lay through desert and rocky places, so many robberies and murders were committed therein, that it was called, according to Jerome, the bloody way. This circumstance of the parable, therefore, is finely chosen. And fell among thieves — This Jew, in travelling this road, was assaulted by robbers, who, not satisfied with taking all the money he had, stripped him of his raiment, beat him unmercifully, and left him for dead. While he was lying in this miserable condition, utterly incapable of helping himself, a certain priest, happening to come that way, saw him in great distress, but took no pity on him. In like manner a Levite, espying him, would not come near him, having no mind to be at any trouble or expense with him. The priest and Levite are here introduced coming that way very naturally, there being, according to a considerable Jewish writer, quoted by Dr. Lightfoot, no fewer than twelve thousand priests and Levites, who dwelt at Jericho, and all occasionally attending the service of the temple at Jerusalem, frequently travelled this road. The expression, kata sugkurian, here, is very improperly rendered, by chance, in our translation. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing in the universe as either chance or fortune. The phrase merely means, as it happened, or, it came to pass. Both the priest and the Levite are represented as passing by without so much as speaking to the poor distressed and dying man, notwithstanding that their sacred characters, and eminent knowledge in the law, obliged them to be remarkable for compassion, and all the tender offices of charity; especially when it was the distress of a brother, which called for their help. In other cases, indeed, these hypocrites might have invented reasons to palliate their inhumanity: but here it was not in their power to do it. For they could not excuse themselves by saying, This was a Samaritan, or a heathen, who deserved no pity; they could not even excuse themselves by saying, they did not know who he was; for though they took care to keep at a distance, they had looked on their brother lying, stripped, wounded, and half dead, without being in the least moved with his distress. No doubt, however, they would try to excuse themselves to their own consciences for thus neglecting him, and, perhaps, might gravely thank God for their own deliverances, while they left their brother bleeding to death. Is not this an emblem of many living characters, perhaps of some who bear the sacred office? O house of Levi, and of Aaron, is not the day coming when the virtues of heathen and Samaritans will rise up in judgment against you?

Ver. 30. A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. “The whole of this road,” says Buckingham in his travels, “is held to be the most dangerous in Palestine; and indeed the very aspect of the scenery is sufficient, on the one hand, to tempt to robbery and murder; and on the other, to occasion terror in those who pass that way. The bold precipices of rocks, the dark shadows in which the scenery is involved below; the towering elevation of superior cliffs, and the revolting desolations which reign around, present a picture in harmony with itself. Wisely therefore did our Saviour choose these defiles to exhibit the calamities of the Hebrew traveller, and the compassion of the good Samaritan.

“One must really be amid those gloomy scenes of solitude, and fancy one’s self surrounded with a banditti, and feel the impatience of the traveller who rushes on to catch a new view at every pass and turn. One must feel palpitation and alarm at the sound of the horses’ hoofs, resounding through the cavernous rocks, and the frequent shouts of the footmen, scarcely less loud than the echoing thunder produced by the repeated discharges of their muskets. One must witness all these, produced upon the spot, before we can feel the full force, and perceive the beauty of our Saviour’s admirable story of the good Samaritan.”

30. A certain man—This man is doubtless to be supposed a Jew, since he goes from Jerusalem. But our Lord chooses to state him to be simply and purely a man. Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho—From the heights of the mountains upon which Jerusalem was built, to the vale of the Jordan, in which Jericho stood, (eighteen miles distant,) is almost a constant descent. This man, we may suppose, takes the usual route. Starting from what is now St. Stephen’s gate, through the eastern wall of Jerusalem, he crosses the garden and the southern slopes of the Mount of Olives to Bethany. Thence he proceeds through the road, once the channel of a stream and now a deep ravine; and at about ten miles from the city he enters that gloomy road through the desert wilderness called by St. Jerome the bloody way, and which from that time to the present has been the haunt of Arab and other robbers. “If we might conceive the ocean,” says Professor Hackett, “as being suddenly congealed when its waves are tossed mountain-high and pitching in wild confusion against each other, we should then have some idea of the scene of the desert in which the Saviour has placed so truthful a parable as that of the good Samaritan. The ravines, the almost inaccessible cliffs, the caverns, furnish admirable lurking-places for robbers; they can rush forth upon their victims unexpectedly and escape as soon almost beyond the possibility of pursuit.” Scarce a season at the present day passes in which some murder does not vindicate its title to the name of the bloody way.

Should the traveller have escaped unharmed, as the priest and Levite did, in due time there would open before him in rare beauty the plains of Jericho and the distant towers of that city of palms. It had been lately raised to its highest pitch of splendour by Herod the Great, who here built a favourite palace; and here, smitten, not by the vengeance of man, but by the hand of God, he died a most loathsome and terrible death. At the present day scarce do the ruins themselves remain to tell the spot where its towers, walls, and palaces stood. Thieves—Rather robbers. The thief takes by stealth, the robber by force. Stripped him of his raiment—The word raiment is not in the Greek. The stripping included, by force of the word, his property as well as his raiment. Half dead—So near dead as to be unable to help himself; and yet not without hope if he were but helped.

Verse 30. A certain man. — A Jew, as the whole story shows, for the points turn upon it.

From Jerusalem to Jericho. — In the days of Christ Jericho was a large and important city, and had a royal palace, where Herod died. It was numerously inhabited by priests, who had to go up to Jerusalem to attend at the temple service in their regular courses. See Luke 1:5. The road would therefore often be travelled by priests and Levites, a circumstance which forms part of the picture of the parable. A part of the road was wild and rocky, and notoriously infested with robbers. The whole road from Jerusalem to Jericho is described by modern travellers as, at this day, the most dangerous in Palestine, from the numbers of robberies and murders committed upon it.

V. 31. The common translation is, by chance-Which is full of gross improprieties. For if we speak strictly, there is no such thing in the universe as either chance or fortune.

A certain priest came down that way, and passed by on the other side-And both he and the Levite no doubt could find an excuse for passing over on the other side, and might perhaps gravely thank God for their own deliverance, while they left their brother bleeding to death. Is it not an emblem of many living characters, perhaps of some who bear the sacred office? O house of Levi and of Aaron, is not the day coming, when the virtues of heathens and Samaritans will rise up in judgment against you?

Verses 31. - 32. Priest and Levite are mentioned here, partly because they were the most frequent travellers on this road, and partly to show that these were the persons who, from the nature of their office, were most obliged to perform works of mercy; and from whom a person in distress had a right to expect immediate succour and comfort; and their inhuman conduct here was a flat breach of the law, Deuteronomy 22:1-4.

Verses 29-32. But he, willing to justify himself — That is, to show he had done this, and was blameless, even with respect to the duties which are least liable to be counterfeited, namely, the social and relative duties, asked him what was the meaning and extent of the word neighbour in the law? It seems, being strongly tinctured with the prejudices of his nation, he reckoned none brethren but Israelites; or neighbours, but proselytes; and expected that Jesus would confirm his opinion, by approving of it. For, according to this interpretation, he thought himself innocent, although enemies and heathen had no share of his love, since the precept enjoined the love of neighbours only. And Jesus answering said, A certain man, &c. — Our Lord, who well knew how to convince and persuade, answered him in such a manner as to make the feelings of his heart overcome the prejudices of his understanding. He convinced him of his mistake by a parable, an ancient, agreeable, and inoffensive method of conveying instruction, very fit to be used in teaching persons who are greatly prejudiced against the truth. For, “as to the scope of the passage, every body perceives, that it is the intention of it to confound those malignant Jewish prejudices, which made them confine their charity to those of their own nation and religion. Nor could any thing be better adapted for the purpose than this story, which, as it is universally understood, exhibits a Samaritan overlooking all national and religious differences, and doing offices of kindness and humanity to a Jew in distress. By this means the narrow-minded Pharisee, who put the question, is surprised into a conviction that there is something amiable, and even divine, in surmounting all partial considerations, and listening to the voice of nature, which is the voice of God, in giving relief to the unhappy.” — Campbell. Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho — Jericho was situated in a valley, hence the phrase of going down to it: and as the road to it from Jerusalem (about eighteen miles) lay through desert and rocky places, so many robberies and murders were committed therein, that it was called, according to Jerome, the bloody way. This circumstance of the parable, therefore, is finely chosen. And fell among thieves — This Jew, in travelling this road, was assaulted by robbers, who, not satisfied with taking all the money he had, stripped him of his raiment, beat him unmercifully, and left him for dead. While he was lying in this miserable condition, utterly incapable of helping himself, a certain priest, happening to come that way, saw him in great distress, but took no pity on him. In like manner a Levite, espying him, would not come near him, having no mind to be at any trouble or expense with him. The priest and Levite are here introduced coming that way very naturally, there being, according to a considerable Jewish writer, quoted by Dr. Lightfoot, no fewer than twelve thousand priests and Levites, who dwelt at Jericho, and all occasionally attending the service of the temple at Jerusalem, frequently travelled this road. The expression, kata sugkurian, here, is very improperly rendered, by chance, in our translation. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing in the universe as either chance or fortune. The phrase merely means, as it happened, or, it came to pass. Both the priest and the Levite are represented as passing by without so much as speaking to the poor distressed and dying man, notwithstanding that their sacred characters, and eminent knowledge in the law, obliged them to be remarkable for compassion, and all the tender offices of charity; especially when it was the distress of a brother, which called for their help. In other cases, indeed, these hypocrites might have invented reasons to palliate their inhumanity: but here it was not in their power to do it. For they could not excuse themselves by saying, This was a Samaritan, or a heathen, who deserved no pity; they could not even excuse themselves by saying, they did not know who he was; for though they took care to keep at a distance, they had looked on their brother lying, stripped, wounded, and half dead, without being in the least moved with his distress. No doubt, however, they would try to excuse themselves to their own consciences for thus neglecting him, and, perhaps, might gravely thank God for their own deliverances, while they left their brother bleeding to death. Is not this an emblem of many living characters, perhaps of some who bear the sacred office? O house of Levi, and of Aaron, is not the day coming when the virtues of heathen and Samaritans will rise up in judgment against you?

Ver. 31. By chance a certain priest came that way. Kata sugkurian, a word derived from kuriov, Lord. Better then to read, by divine providence, instead of by chance. A sparrow does not fall to the ground without our heavenly Father. Jericho was at this time the second city of Judea, and Herod had a palace there. Our Saviour’s remarks about the priest and the levite are appropriate; for twelve thousand of them are said in the talmud to have resided there.

31. By chance—By a concurrence or coincidence of the two things. A certain priest—Very naturally; for Jericho was by law a sacerdotal city; that is, a city for the residence of the priests who, in their turn, went up to Jerusalem to perform their office at the Temple. No less than twelve thousand priests here lived, one or more of whom were daily seen walking this route. On the other side—He availed himself of the broad road to sheer away from the victim.

Verses 31. - 32. Priest and Levite are mentioned here, partly because they were the most frequent travellers on this road, and partly to show that these were the persons who, from the nature of their office, were most obliged to perform works of mercy; and from whom a person in distress had a right to expect immediate succour and comfort; and their inhuman conduct here was a flat breach of the law, Deuteronomy 22:1-4.

Verses 29-32. But he, willing to justify himself — That is, to show he had done this, and was blameless, even with respect to the duties which are least liable to be counterfeited, namely, the social and relative duties, asked him what was the meaning and extent of the word neighbour in the law? It seems, being strongly tinctured with the prejudices of his nation, he reckoned none brethren but Israelites; or neighbours, but proselytes; and expected that Jesus would confirm his opinion, by approving of it. For, according to this interpretation, he thought himself innocent, although enemies and heathen had no share of his love, since the precept enjoined the love of neighbours only. And Jesus answering said, A certain man, &c. — Our Lord, who well knew how to convince and persuade, answered him in such a manner as to make the feelings of his heart overcome the prejudices of his understanding. He convinced him of his mistake by a parable, an ancient, agreeable, and inoffensive method of conveying instruction, very fit to be used in teaching persons who are greatly prejudiced against the truth. For, “as to the scope of the passage, every body perceives, that it is the intention of it to confound those malignant Jewish prejudices, which made them confine their charity to those of their own nation and religion. Nor could any thing be better adapted for the purpose than this story, which, as it is universally understood, exhibits a Samaritan overlooking all national and religious differences, and doing offices of kindness and humanity to a Jew in distress. By this means the narrow-minded Pharisee, who put the question, is surprised into a conviction that there is something amiable, and even divine, in surmounting all partial considerations, and listening to the voice of nature, which is the voice of God, in giving relief to the unhappy.” — Campbell. Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho — Jericho was situated in a valley, hence the phrase of going down to it: and as the road to it from Jerusalem (about eighteen miles) lay through desert and rocky places, so many robberies and murders were committed therein, that it was called, according to Jerome, the bloody way. This circumstance of the parable, therefore, is finely chosen. And fell among thieves — This Jew, in travelling this road, was assaulted by robbers, who, not satisfied with taking all the money he had, stripped him of his raiment, beat him unmercifully, and left him for dead. While he was lying in this miserable condition, utterly incapable of helping himself, a certain priest, happening to come that way, saw him in great distress, but took no pity on him. In like manner a Levite, espying him, would not come near him, having no mind to be at any trouble or expense with him. The priest and Levite are here introduced coming that way very naturally, there being, according to a considerable Jewish writer, quoted by Dr. Lightfoot, no fewer than twelve thousand priests and Levites, who dwelt at Jericho, and all occasionally attending the service of the temple at Jerusalem, frequently travelled this road. The expression, kata sugkurian, here, is very improperly rendered, by chance, in our translation. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing in the universe as either chance or fortune. The phrase merely means, as it happened, or, it came to pass. Both the priest and the Levite are represented as passing by without so much as speaking to the poor distressed and dying man, notwithstanding that their sacred characters, and eminent knowledge in the law, obliged them to be remarkable for compassion, and all the tender offices of charity; especially when it was the distress of a brother, which called for their help. In other cases, indeed, these hypocrites might have invented reasons to palliate their inhumanity: but here it was not in their power to do it. For they could not excuse themselves by saying, This was a Samaritan, or a heathen, who deserved no pity; they could not even excuse themselves by saying, they did not know who he was; for though they took care to keep at a distance, they had looked on their brother lying, stripped, wounded, and half dead, without being in the least moved with his distress. No doubt, however, they would try to excuse themselves to their own consciences for thus neglecting him, and, perhaps, might gravely thank God for their own deliverances, while they left their brother bleeding to death. Is not this an emblem of many living characters, perhaps of some who bear the sacred office? O house of Levi, and of Aaron, is not the day coming when the virtues of heathen and Samaritans will rise up in judgment against you?

32. A Levite—A Levite was one of the tribe of Levi; a priest was of the family of Aaron in that tribe. The Levites performed the humble services of the temple, as cleaning, carrying fuel, and acting as choristers. Levites were also writers, teachers, preachers, and literati. The scribes and lawyers were frequently of this tribe, which, in fact, was set apart by Moses as the intellectual body in the nation.

V. 33. But a certain Samaritan came where he was-It was admirably well judged to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self interest would make the very scribe sensible, how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord's inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected.

Verse 33. Samaritan is mentioned merely to show that he was a person from whom a Jew had no right to expect any help or relief, because of the enmity which subsisted between the two nations.

Verses 33-37. But a certain Samaritan, &c. — Soon after this, a Samaritan happened to come that way, and seeing a fellow-creature lying on the road naked and wounded, went up to him; and though he found it was one of a different nation, who professed a religion opposed to his own, the violent hatred of all such persons, that had been instilled into his mind from his earliest years, and all other objections, were immediately silenced by the feelings of pity awakened at the sight of the man’s distress; his bowels yearned toward the Jew, and he hastened, with great tenderness, to give him assistance. It was admirably well judged, to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self-interest would make the very scribe sensible how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord’s inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected. And went to him and bound up his wounds, &c. — It seems this humane traveller, according to the custom of those times, carried his provisions along with him; for he was able, though in the fields, to give the wounded man some wine to recruit his spirits. Moreover, he carefully bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, which, when well beaten together, are said to be one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound; then, setting him on his own beast, he walked by him on foot and supported him. In this manner did the good Samaritan carry the Jew, his enemy, to the first inn he could find, where he carefully attended him all that night; and on the morrow, when he was going away, he delivered him over to the care of the host, with a particular recommendation to be very kind to him. And, that nothing necessary for his recovery might be wanting, he gave the host what money he could spare, a sum about equal to fifteen pence with us, desiring him, at the same time, to lay out more, if more were needful, and promising to pay the whole at his return. It seems he was afraid the mercenary temper of the host might have hindered him from furnishing what was necessary, if he had no prospect of being repaid. Thus we see, “All the circumstances of this beautiful parable are formed with the finest skill imaginable, to work the conviction designed; so that had the lawyer been ever so much disposed to reckon none his neighbours but men of his own religion, it was not in his power to do it on this occasion. And, although favours from a Samaritan had always been represented to him as an abomination, more detestable than the eating of swine’s flesh, he was obliged to acknowledge, that not the priest or the Levite, but this Samaritan, by discharging a great office of humanity toward the Jew in distress, was truly his neighbour, and deserved his love more than some of his own nation, who sustained the most venerable characters; that the like humanity was due from any Israelite to a Samaritan who stood in need of it; and that all men are neighbours to all men, how much soever they may be distinguished from one another in respect of country, or kindred, or language, or religion. Mankind are intimately knit together by their common wants and weaknesses, being so formed that they cannot live without the assistance of each other, and therefore the relation that subsists between them is as extensive as their natures; and the obligations under which they lie, to aid one another by mutual good offices, are as strong and urgent as every man’s own manifold necessities. By this admirable parable, therefore, our Lord has powerfully recommended that universal benevolence, which is so familiar in the mouths, but foreign to the hearts of many ignorant pretenders to religion and morality. It would appear that the presumption of the Jews in matters of religion exceeded all bounds; for though the Supreme Being pays little regard to mere outward worship, and is much more delighted with the inward homage of a holy and benevolent mind, yet because they prayed daily in his temple, and offered sacrifices there, and carried about his precepts written on their phylacteries, and had God and the law always in their mouths, they made no doubt but they worshipped God acceptably, notwithstanding they were so enormously wicked, that they would not put themselves to the smallest expense or trouble, though they could have saved life by it; and therefore had no real love to God or their neighbour. This monstrous presumption being entirely subversive of true religion, our Lord thought fit to condemn it in the severest manner, and to brand it with the blackest and most lasting note of infamy in the above charming parable.” — Macknight. Jesus, having finished the parable, said to the lawyer, Which now of these three was neighbour, &c. — Which acted the part of a neighbour? And he said, He that showed mercy on him — This reply the lawyer made without hesitation, being greatly struck with the truth and evidence of the case. Indeed he could not for shame say otherwise. In speaking thus, however, he condemned himself, and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom his love was due. Go, and do thou likewise — Show mercy and kindness to every one that stands in need of thy assistance, whether he be an Israelite, a heathen, or a Samaritan; and when works of charity are to be performed, reckon every man thy neighbour, not inquiring what he believes, but what he suffers. Reader, let us attend to, and diligently put in practice, our Lord’s advice to this lawyer: let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number, whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember the kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

33. A certain Samaritan—To what we have said in regard to the Samaritan, in our note on Matthew 10:5, (to which we refer the reader,) we may add that it is denied by Dr. Trench, in his work on the Parables, that the Samaritan had any Hebrew blood in him. Before they were brought from Assyria the land of Samaria had been cleared of its Hebrew inhabitants to a man, and room made for a purely Gentile importation. Robinson tells us that the Samaritans of the present day present not the Jewish physiognomy. If so, the Samaritan was to the Jew a heathen in blood, a heretic and pretender in creed, a hereditary enemy in practice. The Jew derided the Samaritan as a Cuthite, abhorred his meals as swine’s flesh, and cursed him in the synagogue. The Samaritans shed the blood of Jewish travellers to the Passover, gave false signals to the near province as to the time of the new moon, and even by stealth polluted the Temple by scattering dead men’s bones in their holy places. As he journeyed—The Samaritan was not, like the others, a mere foot-passenger between the two cities; but he comes upon a beast, doubtless to be supposed an ass, from a distance. He is himself little likely to be treated with any favour in this latitude.

Verses 33-35. But a certain Samaritan. — The point of the parable lies here. The man left by the road side, half dead, was a Jew; the priest and Levite, who unfeelingly passed by on the other side, after they had seen him, were of course Jews, and Jews who from their office and character were most bound to an observance of the law of their God; but the man who actually treated this unfortunate Jew as a neighbour, and exemplified the true spirit and meaning of the law, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” was a Samaritan, before whose conscientious and warm charity all distinctions of nation and religion, all prejudices of education and habit and associations, vanished, so that he was intent only on fulfilling the law of love. The benevolence of this excellent Samaritan, which probably was not an ideal picture, but a real occurrence, is so amplified by our Lord, that one feels, in reading the words, that his heart delighted to dwell upon the scene. When he saw him, he had compassion upon him, and went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, both which were used as medicaments by the ancient surgeons; and set him on his own beast, himself going on foot, and not influenced by the fear of not being able to escape from robbers if attacked while so encumbered with a wounded stranger; and brought him to an inn, pandoceion, a house of public entertainment for travellers; and took care of him, by personal attendance and procuring for him all necessary aid during that day and the following night; and departing on the morrow, pressed probably by his own concerns, he places two denarii, Roman pence, about fifteen pence of our money, in the hands of the host, with an injunction to take care of him, and an engagement to pay all additional expenses upon his return. Nothing could be more complete than this act of charity. It stopped short of nothing, but performed all that the circumstances required, being simply intent, not upon making an appearance, not upon compounding matters with conscience by a half and imperfect effort at exercising kindness, but upon relieving the case, and placing the unfortunate man in the best circumstances to promote his recovery.

V. 34. Pouring in oil and wine-Which when well beaten together are one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound.

Verse 34. Pouring in oil and wine] These, beaten together, appear to have been used formerly as a common medicine for fresh wounds. Bind up a fresh cut immediately in a soft rag or lint, moistened with pure olive oil, and the parts will heal by what is called the first intention, and more speedily than by any other means.

An inn] pandoceion, from pan, all, and decomai, I receive; because it receives all comers.

Verses 33-37. But a certain Samaritan, &c. — Soon after this, a Samaritan happened to come that way, and seeing a fellow-creature lying on the road naked and wounded, went up to him; and though he found it was one of a different nation, who professed a religion opposed to his own, the violent hatred of all such persons, that had been instilled into his mind from his earliest years, and all other objections, were immediately silenced by the feelings of pity awakened at the sight of the man’s distress; his bowels yearned toward the Jew, and he hastened, with great tenderness, to give him assistance. It was admirably well judged, to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self-interest would make the very scribe sensible how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord’s inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected. And went to him and bound up his wounds, &c. — It seems this humane traveller, according to the custom of those times, carried his provisions along with him; for he was able, though in the fields, to give the wounded man some wine to recruit his spirits. Moreover, he carefully bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, which, when well beaten together, are said to be one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound; then, setting him on his own beast, he walked by him on foot and supported him. In this manner did the good Samaritan carry the Jew, his enemy, to the first inn he could find, where he carefully attended him all that night; and on the morrow, when he was going away, he delivered him over to the care of the host, with a particular recommendation to be very kind to him. And, that nothing necessary for his recovery might be wanting, he gave the host what money he could spare, a sum about equal to fifteen pence with us, desiring him, at the same time, to lay out more, if more were needful, and promising to pay the whole at his return. It seems he was afraid the mercenary temper of the host might have hindered him from furnishing what was necessary, if he had no prospect of being repaid. Thus we see, “All the circumstances of this beautiful parable are formed with the finest skill imaginable, to work the conviction designed; so that had the lawyer been ever so much disposed to reckon none his neighbours but men of his own religion, it was not in his power to do it on this occasion. And, although favours from a Samaritan had always been represented to him as an abomination, more detestable than the eating of swine’s flesh, he was obliged to acknowledge, that not the priest or the Levite, but this Samaritan, by discharging a great office of humanity toward the Jew in distress, was truly his neighbour, and deserved his love more than some of his own nation, who sustained the most venerable characters; that the like humanity was due from any Israelite to a Samaritan who stood in need of it; and that all men are neighbours to all men, how much soever they may be distinguished from one another in respect of country, or kindred, or language, or religion. Mankind are intimately knit together by their common wants and weaknesses, being so formed that they cannot live without the assistance of each other, and therefore the relation that subsists between them is as extensive as their natures; and the obligations under which they lie, to aid one another by mutual good offices, are as strong and urgent as every man’s own manifold necessities. By this admirable parable, therefore, our Lord has powerfully recommended that universal benevolence, which is so familiar in the mouths, but foreign to the hearts of many ignorant pretenders to religion and morality. It would appear that the presumption of the Jews in matters of religion exceeded all bounds; for though the Supreme Being pays little regard to mere outward worship, and is much more delighted with the inward homage of a holy and benevolent mind, yet because they prayed daily in his temple, and offered sacrifices there, and carried about his precepts written on their phylacteries, and had God and the law always in their mouths, they made no doubt but they worshipped God acceptably, notwithstanding they were so enormously wicked, that they would not put themselves to the smallest expense or trouble, though they could have saved life by it; and therefore had no real love to God or their neighbour. This monstrous presumption being entirely subversive of true religion, our Lord thought fit to condemn it in the severest manner, and to brand it with the blackest and most lasting note of infamy in the above charming parable.” — Macknight. Jesus, having finished the parable, said to the lawyer, Which now of these three was neighbour, &c. — Which acted the part of a neighbour? And he said, He that showed mercy on him — This reply the lawyer made without hesitation, being greatly struck with the truth and evidence of the case. Indeed he could not for shame say otherwise. In speaking thus, however, he condemned himself, and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom his love was due. Go, and do thou likewise — Show mercy and kindness to every one that stands in need of thy assistance, whether he be an Israelite, a heathen, or a Samaritan; and when works of charity are to be performed, reckon every man thy neighbour, not inquiring what he believes, but what he suffers. Reader, let us attend to, and diligently put in practice, our Lord’s advice to this lawyer: let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number, whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember the kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

34. Went to him—First he saw him at a distance, as lying in his blood, yet living. Next he had compassion on him. Third, he did not pass around him, nor pass on from him, but went to him. He closed the lips of his gashes and bound them up. He had probably none of the balsam for which Jericho was in that day famous. But he had some of that oil which the Orientals consider so beneficial in their hot climate, the expressed juice of the olive. See note on Matthew 6:17. So Jacob, even when a foot-passenger, carried his oil with him. Genesis 28:18. If the oil was brought from Samaria, it was celebrated for its excellence. Ancient physicians recommended the use of both wine and oil, the first to cleanse the wound, and the last to soothe and heal. Sometimes they were mingled into a compound called an oinoleum. Brought him to an inn—The Greek word for inn here signifies a Take-all or Khan; and one is mentioned by travellers as still standing by the road, claimed to be the inn here specified. See note on Luke 1:7.

Verses 33-35. But a certain Samaritan. — The point of the parable lies here. The man left by the road side, half dead, was a Jew; the priest and Levite, who unfeelingly passed by on the other side, after they had seen him, were of course Jews, and Jews who from their office and character were most bound to an observance of the law of their God; but the man who actually treated this unfortunate Jew as a neighbour, and exemplified the true spirit and meaning of the law, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” was a Samaritan, before whose conscientious and warm charity all distinctions of nation and religion, all prejudices of education and habit and associations, vanished, so that he was intent only on fulfilling the law of love. The benevolence of this excellent Samaritan, which probably was not an ideal picture, but a real occurrence, is so amplified by our Lord, that one feels, in reading the words, that his heart delighted to dwell upon the scene. When he saw him, he had compassion upon him, and went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, both which were used as medicaments by the ancient surgeons; and set him on his own beast, himself going on foot, and not influenced by the fear of not being able to escape from robbers if attacked while so encumbered with a wounded stranger; and brought him to an inn, pandoceion, a house of public entertainment for travellers; and took care of him, by personal attendance and procuring for him all necessary aid during that day and the following night; and departing on the morrow, pressed probably by his own concerns, he places two denarii, Roman pence, about fifteen pence of our money, in the hands of the host, with an injunction to take care of him, and an engagement to pay all additional expenses upon his return. Nothing could be more complete than this act of charity. It stopped short of nothing, but performed all that the circumstances required, being simply intent, not upon making an appearance, not upon compounding matters with conscience by a half and imperfect effort at exercising kindness, but upon relieving the case, and placing the unfortunate man in the best circumstances to promote his recovery.

Verse 35. Two pence] Two denarii, about fifteen pence, English; and which, probably, were at that time of ten times more value there than so much is with us now.

Verses 33-37. But a certain Samaritan, &c. — Soon after this, a Samaritan happened to come that way, and seeing a fellow-creature lying on the road naked and wounded, went up to him; and though he found it was one of a different nation, who professed a religion opposed to his own, the violent hatred of all such persons, that had been instilled into his mind from his earliest years, and all other objections, were immediately silenced by the feelings of pity awakened at the sight of the man’s distress; his bowels yearned toward the Jew, and he hastened, with great tenderness, to give him assistance. It was admirably well judged, to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self-interest would make the very scribe sensible how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord’s inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected. And went to him and bound up his wounds, &c. — It seems this humane traveller, according to the custom of those times, carried his provisions along with him; for he was able, though in the fields, to give the wounded man some wine to recruit his spirits. Moreover, he carefully bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, which, when well beaten together, are said to be one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound; then, setting him on his own beast, he walked by him on foot and supported him. In this manner did the good Samaritan carry the Jew, his enemy, to the first inn he could find, where he carefully attended him all that night; and on the morrow, when he was going away, he delivered him over to the care of the host, with a particular recommendation to be very kind to him. And, that nothing necessary for his recovery might be wanting, he gave the host what money he could spare, a sum about equal to fifteen pence with us, desiring him, at the same time, to lay out more, if more were needful, and promising to pay the whole at his return. It seems he was afraid the mercenary temper of the host might have hindered him from furnishing what was necessary, if he had no prospect of being repaid. Thus we see, “All the circumstances of this beautiful parable are formed with the finest skill imaginable, to work the conviction designed; so that had the lawyer been ever so much disposed to reckon none his neighbours but men of his own religion, it was not in his power to do it on this occasion. And, although favours from a Samaritan had always been represented to him as an abomination, more detestable than the eating of swine’s flesh, he was obliged to acknowledge, that not the priest or the Levite, but this Samaritan, by discharging a great office of humanity toward the Jew in distress, was truly his neighbour, and deserved his love more than some of his own nation, who sustained the most venerable characters; that the like humanity was due from any Israelite to a Samaritan who stood in need of it; and that all men are neighbours to all men, how much soever they may be distinguished from one another in respect of country, or kindred, or language, or religion. Mankind are intimately knit together by their common wants and weaknesses, being so formed that they cannot live without the assistance of each other, and therefore the relation that subsists between them is as extensive as their natures; and the obligations under which they lie, to aid one another by mutual good offices, are as strong and urgent as every man’s own manifold necessities. By this admirable parable, therefore, our Lord has powerfully recommended that universal benevolence, which is so familiar in the mouths, but foreign to the hearts of many ignorant pretenders to religion and morality. It would appear that the presumption of the Jews in matters of religion exceeded all bounds; for though the Supreme Being pays little regard to mere outward worship, and is much more delighted with the inward homage of a holy and benevolent mind, yet because they prayed daily in his temple, and offered sacrifices there, and carried about his precepts written on their phylacteries, and had God and the law always in their mouths, they made no doubt but they worshipped God acceptably, notwithstanding they were so enormously wicked, that they would not put themselves to the smallest expense or trouble, though they could have saved life by it; and therefore had no real love to God or their neighbour. This monstrous presumption being entirely subversive of true religion, our Lord thought fit to condemn it in the severest manner, and to brand it with the blackest and most lasting note of infamy in the above charming parable.” — Macknight. Jesus, having finished the parable, said to the lawyer, Which now of these three was neighbour, &c. — Which acted the part of a neighbour? And he said, He that showed mercy on him — This reply the lawyer made without hesitation, being greatly struck with the truth and evidence of the case. Indeed he could not for shame say otherwise. In speaking thus, however, he condemned himself, and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom his love was due. Go, and do thou likewise — Show mercy and kindness to every one that stands in need of thy assistance, whether he be an Israelite, a heathen, or a Samaritan; and when works of charity are to be performed, reckon every man thy neighbour, not inquiring what he believes, but what he suffers. Reader, let us attend to, and diligently put in practice, our Lord’s advice to this lawyer: let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number, whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember the kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

Ver. 35. He took out two pense, two denarions, the exact sum which Hebrews paid for the redemption of their souls. Exodus 30:13. The denarion was the eighth part of an ounce of silver.

35. Two pence—Which, being the amount of the wages of a labourer for two days, was more than as many dollars’ worth in our time. Take care of him—The inns of the ancients supplied nothing but room and lodging, it being expected that the traveller carried his own supplies. I will repay—He asked no aid in his charity, as if the doing of good was his own business and its own reward.

Verses 33-35. But a certain Samaritan. — The point of the parable lies here. The man left by the road side, half dead, was a Jew; the priest and Levite, who unfeelingly passed by on the other side, after they had seen him, were of course Jews, and Jews who from their office and character were most bound to an observance of the law of their God; but the man who actually treated this unfortunate Jew as a neighbour, and exemplified the true spirit and meaning of the law, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,” was a Samaritan, before whose conscientious and warm charity all distinctions of nation and religion, all prejudices of education and habit and associations, vanished, so that he was intent only on fulfilling the law of love. The benevolence of this excellent Samaritan, which probably was not an ideal picture, but a real occurrence, is so amplified by our Lord, that one feels, in reading the words, that his heart delighted to dwell upon the scene. When he saw him, he had compassion upon him, and went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, both which were used as medicaments by the ancient surgeons; and set him on his own beast, himself going on foot, and not influenced by the fear of not being able to escape from robbers if attacked while so encumbered with a wounded stranger; and brought him to an inn, pandoceion, a house of public entertainment for travellers; and took care of him, by personal attendance and procuring for him all necessary aid during that day and the following night; and departing on the morrow, pressed probably by his own concerns, he places two denarii, Roman pence, about fifteen pence of our money, in the hands of the host, with an injunction to take care of him, and an engagement to pay all additional expenses upon his return. Nothing could be more complete than this act of charity. It stopped short of nothing, but performed all that the circumstances required, being simply intent, not upon making an appearance, not upon compounding matters with conscience by a half and imperfect effort at exercising kindness, but upon relieving the case, and placing the unfortunate man in the best circumstances to promote his recovery.

V. 36. Which of these was the neighbour to him that fell among the robbers-Which acted the part of a neighbour?

Verse 36. Which-was neighbour] Which fulfilled the duty which one neighbour owes to another?

Verses 33-37. But a certain Samaritan, &c. — Soon after this, a Samaritan happened to come that way, and seeing a fellow-creature lying on the road naked and wounded, went up to him; and though he found it was one of a different nation, who professed a religion opposed to his own, the violent hatred of all such persons, that had been instilled into his mind from his earliest years, and all other objections, were immediately silenced by the feelings of pity awakened at the sight of the man’s distress; his bowels yearned toward the Jew, and he hastened, with great tenderness, to give him assistance. It was admirably well judged, to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self-interest would make the very scribe sensible how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord’s inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected. And went to him and bound up his wounds, &c. — It seems this humane traveller, according to the custom of those times, carried his provisions along with him; for he was able, though in the fields, to give the wounded man some wine to recruit his spirits. Moreover, he carefully bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, which, when well beaten together, are said to be one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound; then, setting him on his own beast, he walked by him on foot and supported him. In this manner did the good Samaritan carry the Jew, his enemy, to the first inn he could find, where he carefully attended him all that night; and on the morrow, when he was going away, he delivered him over to the care of the host, with a particular recommendation to be very kind to him. And, that nothing necessary for his recovery might be wanting, he gave the host what money he could spare, a sum about equal to fifteen pence with us, desiring him, at the same time, to lay out more, if more were needful, and promising to pay the whole at his return. It seems he was afraid the mercenary temper of the host might have hindered him from furnishing what was necessary, if he had no prospect of being repaid. Thus we see, “All the circumstances of this beautiful parable are formed with the finest skill imaginable, to work the conviction designed; so that had the lawyer been ever so much disposed to reckon none his neighbours but men of his own religion, it was not in his power to do it on this occasion. And, although favours from a Samaritan had always been represented to him as an abomination, more detestable than the eating of swine’s flesh, he was obliged to acknowledge, that not the priest or the Levite, but this Samaritan, by discharging a great office of humanity toward the Jew in distress, was truly his neighbour, and deserved his love more than some of his own nation, who sustained the most venerable characters; that the like humanity was due from any Israelite to a Samaritan who stood in need of it; and that all men are neighbours to all men, how much soever they may be distinguished from one another in respect of country, or kindred, or language, or religion. Mankind are intimately knit together by their common wants and weaknesses, being so formed that they cannot live without the assistance of each other, and therefore the relation that subsists between them is as extensive as their natures; and the obligations under which they lie, to aid one another by mutual good offices, are as strong and urgent as every man’s own manifold necessities. By this admirable parable, therefore, our Lord has powerfully recommended that universal benevolence, which is so familiar in the mouths, but foreign to the hearts of many ignorant pretenders to religion and morality. It would appear that the presumption of the Jews in matters of religion exceeded all bounds; for though the Supreme Being pays little regard to mere outward worship, and is much more delighted with the inward homage of a holy and benevolent mind, yet because they prayed daily in his temple, and offered sacrifices there, and carried about his precepts written on their phylacteries, and had God and the law always in their mouths, they made no doubt but they worshipped God acceptably, notwithstanding they were so enormously wicked, that they would not put themselves to the smallest expense or trouble, though they could have saved life by it; and therefore had no real love to God or their neighbour. This monstrous presumption being entirely subversive of true religion, our Lord thought fit to condemn it in the severest manner, and to brand it with the blackest and most lasting note of infamy in the above charming parable.” — Macknight. Jesus, having finished the parable, said to the lawyer, Which now of these three was neighbour, &c. — Which acted the part of a neighbour? And he said, He that showed mercy on him — This reply the lawyer made without hesitation, being greatly struck with the truth and evidence of the case. Indeed he could not for shame say otherwise. In speaking thus, however, he condemned himself, and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom his love was due. Go, and do thou likewise — Show mercy and kindness to every one that stands in need of thy assistance, whether he be an Israelite, a heathen, or a Samaritan; and when works of charity are to be performed, reckon every man thy neighbour, not inquiring what he believes, but what he suffers. Reader, let us attend to, and diligently put in practice, our Lord’s advice to this lawyer: let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number, whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember the kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

36. Which… was neighbour?—Dr. Trench, and other commentators of the present day, with doubtful correctness, we think, say that our Lord here reverses the question. The lawyer, they suppose, asks, Who is to be held as a neighbour to be loved? Whereas the real present form of the question is, Who becomes my neighbour by loving? Our Lord supposes the lawyer to identify himself with the wounded Jew; and thereby proceeds to force him by the parable to confess that even a Samaritan may be and is his neighbour. Neighbourship, then, depends not upon blood, or sect, or profession, but upon humanity. If the Samaritan, in spite of his being a Samaritan, may, as a man, with the true sympathies of a man, be my neighbour, then any being within the unity of the species, by his very being human, is my neighbour. And all this the Saviour clinches with his Go and do thou likewise. Deal with a Samaritan as this Samaritan deals with a Jew; and so you will, Jew and Samaritan, be neighbours. And then the lawyer finds himself placed upon that high platform by which the divine law of love, ignoring the divisions of race, nation, and color, unites mankind into one neighbourship and brotherhood. It is not without propriety that Luke, a Gentile, should furnish this most beautiful parable.

Verses 36, 37. Which of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour? &c. — Which of the three fulfilled the office of neighbour? To this the answer was imperative. The kindness being done to a Jew, he could not say that the Samaritan had done more than his duty, as he might have replied had the unfortunate man been a Samaritan, and the person relieving him a Jew. They denied, indeed, the right of others to their kindness, but, as God’s chosen people, thought they had a right, to be served by all others; and therefore the lawyer must needs commend the benevolence of the Samaritan. This then being granted, the great moral was explicitly laid down: Go, and do thou likewise; compassionate and relieve the distressed, without any respect to nation or religion; be a neighbour to every man that needs thy assistance, and consider him thy neighbour, one who according to the law thou art to love as thyself. Thus our Lord teaches that this law is binding upon all men, and that all men are neighbours of each other. He breaks down, as to the obligation of this great social statute, all the distinction of nation and religion, all the divisions created by interests and partial affections, erects the whole community of man into one neighbourhood, and binds each individual to serve another by all kinds of good offices. Nor is this to be admired only as a just and noble sentiment. Sentiments somewhat similar may be found in some pagan writers, the relics of that traditional truth and morality which descended from the patriarchs; but in them these are opinions, and not law. In Christianity they are not only more perfectly stated, and radicated in their true principles, but they become obligatory; they seize upon the conscience, and connect themselves as THE LAW of Christ with our hopes and fears. That they have not hitherto been so influential as they ought in this bad world, is true; but that they have had, in all ages, a large and happy influence, is certain.

V. 37. And he said, He that showed mercy on him-He could not for shame say otherwise, though he thereby condemned himself and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom our love is due. Go and do thou in like manner-Let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember that kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

Verse 37. He that showed mercy] Or, so much mercy. His prejudice would not permit him to name the Samaritan, yet his conscience obliged him to acknowledge that he was the only righteous person of the three. Go, and do thou likewise] Be even to thy enemy in distress as kind, humane, and merciful, as this Samaritan was. As the distress was on the part of a Jew, and the relief was afforded by a Samaritan, the lawyer, to be consistent with the decision he had already given, must feel the force of our Lord’s inference, that it was his duty to act to any person, of whatever nation or religion he might be, as this Samaritan had acted toward his countryman. It is very likely that what our Lord relates here was a real matter of fact, and not a parable; otherwise the captious lawyer might have objected that no such case had ever existed, and that any inference drawn from it was only begging the question; but as he was, in all probability, in possession of the fact himself, he was forced to acknowledge the propriety of our Lord’s inference and advice.

Those who are determined to find something allegorical, even in the plainest portions of Scripture, affirm that the whole of this relation is to be allegorically considered; and, according to them, the following is the true exposition of the text.

The certain man means Adam-went down, his fall-from Jerusalem, שלום hary yorih shalom, he shall see peace, perfection, &c., meaning his state of primitive innocence and excellence-to Jericho, (yjry yareacho, his moon,) the transitory and changeable state of existence in this world-thieves, sin and Satan-stripped, took away his righteousness, which was the clothing of the soul-wounded, infected his heart with all evil and hurtful desires, which are the wounds of the spirit-half dead, possessing a living body, carrying about a soul dead in sin.

The priest, the moral law-the Levite, the ceremonial law-passed by, either could not or would not afford any relief, because by the law is the knowledge of sin, not the cure of it. A certain Samaritan, Christ; for so he was called by the Jews, John 8:48 -as he journeyed, meaning his coming from heaven to earth; his being incarnated-came where he was, put himself in man’s place, and bore the punishment due to his sins-had compassion, it is through the love and compassion of Christ that the work of redemption was accomplished-went to him, Christ first seeks the sinner, who, through his miserable estate, is incapable of seeking or going to Christ-bound up his wounds, gives him comfortable promises, and draws him by his love-pouring in oil, pardoning mercy-wine, the consolations of the Holy Ghost-set him on his own beast, supported him entirely by his grace and goodness, so that he no longer lives, but Christ lives in him-took him to an inn, his Church, uniting him with his people-took care of him, placed him under the continual notice of his providence and love-when he departed, when he left the world and ascended to the Father-took out two pence, or denarii, the law and the Gospel; the one to convince of sin, the other to show how it is to be removed-gave them to the host, the ministers of the Gospel for the edification of the Church of Christ-take care of him, as they are Gods watchmen and God’s stewards, they are to watch over the flock of Christ, and give to each his portion of meat in due season. What thou spendest more, if thou shouldst lose thy health and life in this work-when I come again, to judge the world, I will repay thee, I will reward thee with an eternity of glory.

Several primitive and modern fathers treat the text in this way. What I have given before is, I believe, the meaning of our blessed Lord. What I have given here is generally true in itself, but certainly does not follow from the text. Mr. Baxter’s note here is good: “They who make the wounded man Adam, and the good Samaritan Christ, abuse the passage.” A practice of this kind cannot be too strongly reprehended. Men may take that advantage of the circumstances of the case to illustrate the above facts and doctrines; but let no man say this is the meaning of the relation; no: but he may say, we may make this use of it. Though I cannot recommend this kind of preaching, yet I know that some simple upright souls have been edified by it. I dare not forbid a man to work by whom God may choose to work a miracle, because he follows not with us. But such a mode of interpretation I can never recommend.

Verses 33-37. But a certain Samaritan, &c. — Soon after this, a Samaritan happened to come that way, and seeing a fellow-creature lying on the road naked and wounded, went up to him; and though he found it was one of a different nation, who professed a religion opposed to his own, the violent hatred of all such persons, that had been instilled into his mind from his earliest years, and all other objections, were immediately silenced by the feelings of pity awakened at the sight of the man’s distress; his bowels yearned toward the Jew, and he hastened, with great tenderness, to give him assistance. It was admirably well judged, to represent the distress on the side of the Jew, and the mercy on that of the Samaritan. For the case being thus proposed, self-interest would make the very scribe sensible how amiable such a conduct was, and would lay him open to our Lord’s inference. Had it been put the other way, prejudice might more easily have interposed, before the heart could have been affected. And went to him and bound up his wounds, &c. — It seems this humane traveller, according to the custom of those times, carried his provisions along with him; for he was able, though in the fields, to give the wounded man some wine to recruit his spirits. Moreover, he carefully bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, which, when well beaten together, are said to be one of the best balsams that can be applied to a fresh wound; then, setting him on his own beast, he walked by him on foot and supported him. In this manner did the good Samaritan carry the Jew, his enemy, to the first inn he could find, where he carefully attended him all that night; and on the morrow, when he was going away, he delivered him over to the care of the host, with a particular recommendation to be very kind to him. And, that nothing necessary for his recovery might be wanting, he gave the host what money he could spare, a sum about equal to fifteen pence with us, desiring him, at the same time, to lay out more, if more were needful, and promising to pay the whole at his return. It seems he was afraid the mercenary temper of the host might have hindered him from furnishing what was necessary, if he had no prospect of being repaid. Thus we see, “All the circumstances of this beautiful parable are formed with the finest skill imaginable, to work the conviction designed; so that had the lawyer been ever so much disposed to reckon none his neighbours but men of his own religion, it was not in his power to do it on this occasion. And, although favours from a Samaritan had always been represented to him as an abomination, more detestable than the eating of swine’s flesh, he was obliged to acknowledge, that not the priest or the Levite, but this Samaritan, by discharging a great office of humanity toward the Jew in distress, was truly his neighbour, and deserved his love more than some of his own nation, who sustained the most venerable characters; that the like humanity was due from any Israelite to a Samaritan who stood in need of it; and that all men are neighbours to all men, how much soever they may be distinguished from one another in respect of country, or kindred, or language, or religion. Mankind are intimately knit together by their common wants and weaknesses, being so formed that they cannot live without the assistance of each other, and therefore the relation that subsists between them is as extensive as their natures; and the obligations under which they lie, to aid one another by mutual good offices, are as strong and urgent as every man’s own manifold necessities. By this admirable parable, therefore, our Lord has powerfully recommended that universal benevolence, which is so familiar in the mouths, but foreign to the hearts of many ignorant pretenders to religion and morality. It would appear that the presumption of the Jews in matters of religion exceeded all bounds; for though the Supreme Being pays little regard to mere outward worship, and is much more delighted with the inward homage of a holy and benevolent mind, yet because they prayed daily in his temple, and offered sacrifices there, and carried about his precepts written on their phylacteries, and had God and the law always in their mouths, they made no doubt but they worshipped God acceptably, notwithstanding they were so enormously wicked, that they would not put themselves to the smallest expense or trouble, though they could have saved life by it; and therefore had no real love to God or their neighbour. This monstrous presumption being entirely subversive of true religion, our Lord thought fit to condemn it in the severest manner, and to brand it with the blackest and most lasting note of infamy in the above charming parable.” — Macknight. Jesus, having finished the parable, said to the lawyer, Which now of these three was neighbour, &c. — Which acted the part of a neighbour? And he said, He that showed mercy on him — This reply the lawyer made without hesitation, being greatly struck with the truth and evidence of the case. Indeed he could not for shame say otherwise. In speaking thus, however, he condemned himself, and overthrew his own false notion of the neighbour to whom his love was due. Go, and do thou likewise — Show mercy and kindness to every one that stands in need of thy assistance, whether he be an Israelite, a heathen, or a Samaritan; and when works of charity are to be performed, reckon every man thy neighbour, not inquiring what he believes, but what he suffers. Reader, let us attend to, and diligently put in practice, our Lord’s advice to this lawyer: let us go and do likewise, regarding every man as our neighbour who needs our assistance. Let us renounce that bigotry and party zeal which would contract our hearts into an insensibility for all the human race, but a small number, whose sentiments and practices are so much our own, that our love to them is but self-love reflected. With an honest openness of mind let us always remember the kindred between man and man, and cultivate that happy instinct whereby, in the original constitution of our nature, God has strongly bound us to each other.

§ 86.—JESUS INSTRUCTS THE LAWYER BY THE PARABLE OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN, 25-37. This narrative is given by Luke alone, without assignment of time or place. It has no apparent connection with the preceding narration. The parable of the good Samaritan, which is embraced in it, has been celebrated for ages for its beauty and moral power.

25. A certain lawyer—The law embraced in this man’s profession consisted of two parts, the oral and the written. The written was contained in the Pentateuch of Moses; the oral was professedly derived by unwritten tradition from the seventy elders appointed by Moses to aid in the government of Israel. Numbers 11:16. Both these formed a mass of rules and regulations, civil, moral, and religious, boundless in extent, complicated in character, exercising a controlling influence over the whole of Jewish life, and forming a subject for an infinite variety of subtle distinctions, disputes, and questionings. The distinction between lawyer and scribe is not very clearly drawn. In fact the same person receives from different evangelists each of these titles. Matthew 22:35; Mark 12:28. The title of the scribe would seem to indicate a more special relation to the text of the law and its transcription; that of lawyer more to the study of its principles. Stood up—Rose to indicate his purpose of a discussion. Tempted him—That is, proposed to try his depth of intellect and knowledge of the law. There was no malicious purpose in the case. It was simply a challenge to a keen encounter of wits and professional knowledge. Among the Jews there was the disciple and the doctor; the former was one able to answer questions which he bad specially read up; the latter was ready to answer questions on any part of the law. Similarly the Sophists among the Greeks would take a seat in public, and offer to discourse on any topic that any one would please to propose. What shall I do?—Though the lawyer proposes this question in the first person singular, he means it rather for a theoretical than a practical question. He is no convicted sinner asking the way to eternal life.

Verses 36, 37. Which of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour? &c. — Which of the three fulfilled the office of neighbour? To this the answer was imperative. The kindness being done to a Jew, he could not say that the Samaritan had done more than his duty, as he might have replied had the unfortunate man been a Samaritan, and the person relieving him a Jew. They denied, indeed, the right of others to their kindness, but, as God’s chosen people, thought they had a right, to be served by all others; and therefore the lawyer must needs commend the benevolence of the Samaritan. This then being granted, the great moral was explicitly laid down: Go, and do thou likewise; compassionate and relieve the distressed, without any respect to nation or religion; be a neighbour to every man that needs thy assistance, and consider him thy neighbour, one who according to the law thou art to love as thyself. Thus our Lord teaches that this law is binding upon all men, and that all men are neighbours of each other. He breaks down, as to the obligation of this great social statute, all the distinction of nation and religion, all the divisions created by interests and partial affections, erects the whole community of man into one neighbourhood, and binds each individual to serve another by all kinds of good offices. Nor is this to be admired only as a just and noble sentiment. Sentiments somewhat similar may be found in some pagan writers, the relics of that traditional truth and morality which descended from the patriarchs; but in them these are opinions, and not law. In Christianity they are not only more perfectly stated, and radicated in their true principles, but they become obligatory; they seize upon the conscience, and connect themselves as THE LAW of Christ with our hopes and fears. That they have not hitherto been so influential as they ought in this bad world, is true; but that they have had, in all ages, a large and happy influence, is certain.

Verse 38. A certain village] If this village was Bethany, where Martha and Mary lived, at less than two miles’ distance from Jerusalem, see John 11:1, 18; 12:2, then this must have happened later than Luke places it; because, in Luke 19:29, he represents Jesus as having arrived after this at Bethany; and what is said in Luke 13:22, and Luke 17:11, seems to confirm that this visit of Jesus to Martha and Mary ought to be placed later. Bishop PEARCE.

Received him] Kindly received, upedexato, she received him in a friendly manner, under her roof; and entertained him hospitably. So the word is used in the best Greek writers. Martha is supposed by some to have been a widow, with whom her brother Lazarus and sister Mary lodged.

Verses 38-42. It came to pass as they went — As they journeyed to Jerusalem, whither it seems he was going to celebrate the feast of dedication: he entered into a certain village — Namely, Bethany, nigh to Jerusalem; and a certain woman named Martha received him — Martha was probably the elder sister, and, Grotius thinks, a widow, with whom her brother and sister lived. At least, she was now the housekeeper, and acted as the mistress of the family. And she had a sister called Mary — Who, with her brother Lazarus, doubtless made Jesus as welcome as Martha did. Who also sat at Jesus’s feet — On this occasion, Martha expressed her regard for her divine guest, by the care she look to provide the best entertainment in her power for him and his disciples; but Mary sat quietly at his feet, attending to his doctrine, for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. But Martha was cumbered with much serving — The word

periespato, here rendered cumbered, properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first. And said, Lord, dost thou not care, &c. — The burden of the service lying upon Martha, and she being encumbered with it, blamed Jesus for allowing her sister to sit idly by him, while she was so much hurried. And Jesus said unto her, Martha, Martha — There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in this repetition of the word; Thou art careful, merimnav, anxiously careful, and troubled, turbazh, disturbed, or hurried, about many things. The word is nowhere else used in the New Testament. It seems to express the restless situation of a person in a tumultuous crowd, where so many are pressing upon him that he can hardly stand his ground; — or of water in great agitation. But one thing is needful — Not one dish to eat of, as Theophylact, Basil, and many of the fathers explain the expression; but the care of the soul, or that spiritual wisdom and grace which Mary made it her chief care to seek and labour after. And Mary — Who now employs herself in hearing my doctrine, rather than in providing an entertainment for me, hath chosen a part which I approve of, and which I will not take from her. As if he had said, “There is one thing absolutely necessary, and of infinitely greater importance than any of these domestic and secular affairs: even to be instructed in the saving knowledge of the way that leads to eternal life, and to secure a title to, and meetness for it. And Mary is wisely attending to this; therefore, instead of reproving her, I must rather declare, that she has chosen what may eminently be called the good part, which as it shall not — Finally; be taken away from her — I would not now hinder her from pursuing it; but rather invite thee to join with her in her attention to it, though the circumstances of our intended meal should not be so exactly adjusted as thy fond friendship could desire.”

Observe, reader, Martha’s care, if it had been moderate, and her work, were good, in their proper place and season: but now something more important chiefly demanded her attention, and should have been done first, and most regarded. She expected Christ to have censured Mary for not doing as she did; but he, on the contrary, blamed her for not doing as Mary did; and we are sure that the judgment of Christ is according to truth, and that the day will come when Martha will wish she had sat with Mary at his feet! Mary said nothing in her own defence; but since Martha appealed to the Master, to him she was willing to refer the matter, and to abide by his award. And he justified her against her sister’s clamours. However we may be censured and condemned by men for our piety and zeal, our Lord Jesus will take our part; and, sooner or later, Mary’s choice will be justified, and all who make that choice and abide by it. Happy, therefore, “the man or woman, who, in a pressing variety of secular business, is not so encumbered and careful as to forget that one thing, which is absolutely needful, but resolutely chooses this better part, and retains it as the only secure and everlasting treasure! O that this comprehensive, important sentence, were ever before our eyes! O that it were inscribed deep upon our hearts! One thing is needful: And what is this one thing but present and eternal salvation? What but an humble attention to the voice of the gospel of Christ? Yet, as if this were of all things the most unnecessary, for what poor trifling cares is it not commonly forgot? Yea, to what worthless vanity is it not daily sacrificed? Let the ministers of Christ, let the friends of souls, in every station, exert themselves, that all about them may be awakened duly to regard this great interest, accounting it their meat and drink to promote it. Let them be always solicitous, that neither they, nor others, may neglect it, for the hurries of too busy a life, or even for the services of an over-officious friendship.” — Doddridge.

Ver. 38. He entered into a certain village. Bethany, called Beth-hene in Hebrew books, from the figtrees and the ancient gardens which supplied Jerusalem; famed also for its pool of water. It lay east of Jerusalem fifteen furlongs, and seems in our Saviour’s time, when the population of Jerusalem was dense, to have been adorned with villas of opulence. And a certain woman named Martha received him, whose sister Mary sat at the Saviour’s feet. Luke names a woman of the city who was a sinner: Luke 7:37. He also mentions Mary Magdalene, as associated with religious women of Galilee: Luke 8:2. The three are given as distinct persons, and as dissimilar cases. Simon the pharisee, of the city, who doubted whether Christ were a prophet, and Simon the leper, a ruler whose country house was at Bethany, and whom the Saviour had cured, could not be, one would think, the same person. Where the gospels are silent, conjectures are irrelevant.

§ 99.—JESUS RECEIVED INTO MARTHA’S HOUSE—MARTHA AND MARY, 38-42. The document which Luke here uses names no place, as he narrates not so much for the story as for the lesson it inculcates. If from the parable of the good Samaritan any one should infer that all religion consisted in outward works of benevolence, let him learn from the example of Mary, and the rebuke of Martha, that outward performance must be based upon an inner work. Let no man despise the studies of the priest or the religious meditations of the Levite because, in some cases, such men sink into a mere abstract religion and forget the active duty.

38. A certain village—The village unquestionably was Bethany. Luke says nothing of Lazarus, and his account is evidently independent of John; and yet the character and condition of Mary and Martha so perfectly agree with their appearance in John as to furnish a striking proof of the truth of both. Received him into her house—Martha, it is evident, not only from this place, but from the order in which the three are named in John 12:5, was the housekeeper. Whether she was a widow or maiden lady we know not; we only know that she was mistress, if not proprietor of the house.

Verse 38. A certain village, and a certain woman. — The village was Bethany, about two miles from Jerusalem. The woman was Martha: the family was that which Jesus loved, composed of Martha, Lazarus, and Mary. From Martha receiving Jesus into her house hospitably to entertain him, it appears that she was its mistress, and that Lazarus and Mary resided with her. Grotius conjectures, with probability, that Martha was a widow.

Verse 39. Sat at Jesus’ feet] This was the posture of the Jewish scholars, while listening to the instructions of the rabbins. It is in this sense that St. Paul says he was brought up at the FEET of Gamaliel, Acts 22:3.

Verses 38-42. It came to pass as they went — As they journeyed to Jerusalem, whither it seems he was going to celebrate the feast of dedication: he entered into a certain village — Namely, Bethany, nigh to Jerusalem; and a certain woman named Martha received him — Martha was probably the elder sister, and, Grotius thinks, a widow, with whom her brother and sister lived. At least, she was now the housekeeper, and acted as the mistress of the family. And she had a sister called Mary — Who, with her brother Lazarus, doubtless made Jesus as welcome as Martha did. Who also sat at Jesus’s feet — On this occasion, Martha expressed her regard for her divine guest, by the care she look to provide the best entertainment in her power for him and his disciples; but Mary sat quietly at his feet, attending to his doctrine, for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. But Martha was cumbered with much serving — The word

periespato, here rendered cumbered, properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first. And said, Lord, dost thou not care, &c. — The burden of the service lying upon Martha, and she being encumbered with it, blamed Jesus for allowing her sister to sit idly by him, while she was so much hurried. And Jesus said unto her, Martha, Martha — There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in this repetition of the word; Thou art careful, merimnav, anxiously careful, and troubled, turbazh, disturbed, or hurried, about many things. The word is nowhere else used in the New Testament. It seems to express the restless situation of a person in a tumultuous crowd, where so many are pressing upon him that he can hardly stand his ground; — or of water in great agitation. But one thing is needful — Not one dish to eat of, as Theophylact, Basil, and many of the fathers explain the expression; but the care of the soul, or that spiritual wisdom and grace which Mary made it her chief care to seek and labour after. And Mary — Who now employs herself in hearing my doctrine, rather than in providing an entertainment for me, hath chosen a part which I approve of, and which I will not take from her. As if he had said, “There is one thing absolutely necessary, and of infinitely greater importance than any of these domestic and secular affairs: even to be instructed in the saving knowledge of the way that leads to eternal life, and to secure a title to, and meetness for it. And Mary is wisely attending to this; therefore, instead of reproving her, I must rather declare, that she has chosen what may eminently be called the good part, which as it shall not — Finally; be taken away from her — I would not now hinder her from pursuing it; but rather invite thee to join with her in her attention to it, though the circumstances of our intended meal should not be so exactly adjusted as thy fond friendship could desire.”

Observe, reader, Martha’s care, if it had been moderate, and her work, were good, in their proper place and season: but now something more important chiefly demanded her attention, and should have been done first, and most regarded. She expected Christ to have censured Mary for not doing as she did; but he, on the contrary, blamed her for not doing as Mary did; and we are sure that the judgment of Christ is according to truth, and that the day will come when Martha will wish she had sat with Mary at his feet! Mary said nothing in her own defence; but since Martha appealed to the Master, to him she was willing to refer the matter, and to abide by his award. And he justified her against her sister’s clamours. However we may be censured and condemned by men for our piety and zeal, our Lord Jesus will take our part; and, sooner or later, Mary’s choice will be justified, and all who make that choice and abide by it. Happy, therefore, “the man or woman, who, in a pressing variety of secular business, is not so encumbered and careful as to forget that one thing, which is absolutely needful, but resolutely chooses this better part, and retains it as the only secure and everlasting treasure! O that this comprehensive, important sentence, were ever before our eyes! O that it were inscribed deep upon our hearts! One thing is needful: And what is this one thing but present and eternal salvation? What but an humble attention to the voice of the gospel of Christ? Yet, as if this were of all things the most unnecessary, for what poor trifling cares is it not commonly forgot? Yea, to what worthless vanity is it not daily sacrificed? Let the ministers of Christ, let the friends of souls, in every station, exert themselves, that all about them may be awakened duly to regard this great interest, accounting it their meat and drink to promote it. Let them be always solicitous, that neither they, nor others, may neglect it, for the hurries of too busy a life, or even for the services of an over-officious friendship.” — Doddridge.

39. A sister called Mary—We have met this sister and noted her before in our comment on Matthew 26:1-16. Twice is this Mary rebuked, and twice vindicated by her Saviour. Once the rebuke is among the twelve, and here by her own sister. In both cases the rebuke is for an act of devout love to him as Lord and Redeemer. And in the last instance a eulogy is pronounced commemorating her name and deed forever.

Sat at Jesus’ feet—As her divine teacher and rabbi. So young Saul sat at Gamaliel’s feet. Acts 22:23. The rabbi’s seat was high above the disciple’s; so that the disciple was at his feet. The Jewish proverb was, “The disciples must soil themselves with the dust of the feet of the doctors.”

Heard his word—In our note on Matthew 26:12, we note the fact that Jesus seems to impute to Mary a clearer knowledge of his approaching death than even his disciples had attained. May not this have been the time of his imparting to her that knowledge, and may not the solemn sacrifice of the atonement have been the absorbing Subject of this present converse? No wonder, then, that she should less regard the cares of the house than her more responsible sister.

Verse 39. Which also sat at Jesus’ feet, &c. — To sit at the feet, is a mode of describing a disciple, because this was the attitude; the Master sitting, and the disciples forming a semicircle about his feet. That Mary very literally took this position with the other disciples, may be doubted; the words only indicating that she was a diligent and attentive hearer of Christ’s discourses. This too was the character of Martha. She was a disciple, for Mary is said also to sit at Jesus’ feet, that is, as Martha did. When our Lord visited them, they both placed themselves with the others, as attentive, believing, and deeply interested auditors; and probably, like several other female disciples, followed him to various places, and heard his words, and witnessed his wondrous works. On this occasion, our Lord’s visit appears to have been improved, with special diligence, by Mary, who left all other occupations to continue within the hearing of those words which conveyed to her so much instruction, and life, and joy. Both Martha and Mary were common names among the Jews; Mary is the same as Miriam.

V. 40. Martha was encumbered-The Greek word properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind, surrounded (as Martha's then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first.

Verse 40. Martha was cumbered] periespato, perplexed, from peri, about, and spaw, I draw. She was harassed with different cares and employments at the same time; one drawing one way, and another, another: a proper description of a worldly mind. But in Martha’s favour it may be justly said, that all her anxiety was to provide suitable and timely entertainment for our Lord and his disciples; for this is the sense in which the word diakoviav, serving, should be taken. And we should not, on the merest supposition, attribute earthly-mindedness to a woman whose character stands unimpeachable in the Gospel; and who, by entertaining Christ and his disciples, and providing liberally for them, gave the highest proof that she was influenced by liberality and benevolence, and not by parsimony or covetousness.

Dost thou not care] Dost thou not think it wrong, that my sister thus leaves me to provide and prepare this supper, alone?

Help me.] sunantilabhtai, from sun, together, and antilambanomai, to support. The idea is taken from two pillars meeting together at the top, exactly over the centre of the distance between their bases, and thus mutually supporting each other. Order her to unite her skill and strength with mine, that the present business may be done with that speed and in that order which the necessity and importance of the case demand.

Verses 38-42. It came to pass as they went — As they journeyed to Jerusalem, whither it seems he was going to celebrate the feast of dedication: he entered into a certain village — Namely, Bethany, nigh to Jerusalem; and a certain woman named Martha received him — Martha was probably the elder sister, and, Grotius thinks, a widow, with whom her brother and sister lived. At least, she was now the housekeeper, and acted as the mistress of the family. And she had a sister called Mary — Who, with her brother Lazarus, doubtless made Jesus as welcome as Martha did. Who also sat at Jesus’s feet — On this occasion, Martha expressed her regard for her divine guest, by the care she look to provide the best entertainment in her power for him and his disciples; but Mary sat quietly at his feet, attending to his doctrine, for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. But Martha was cumbered with much serving — The word

periespato, here rendered cumbered, properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first. And said, Lord, dost thou not care, &c. — The burden of the service lying upon Martha, and she being encumbered with it, blamed Jesus for allowing her sister to sit idly by him, while she was so much hurried. And Jesus said unto her, Martha, Martha — There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in this repetition of the word; Thou art careful, merimnav, anxiously careful, and troubled, turbazh, disturbed, or hurried, about many things. The word is nowhere else used in the New Testament. It seems to express the restless situation of a person in a tumultuous crowd, where so many are pressing upon him that he can hardly stand his ground; — or of water in great agitation. But one thing is needful — Not one dish to eat of, as Theophylact, Basil, and many of the fathers explain the expression; but the care of the soul, or that spiritual wisdom and grace which Mary made it her chief care to seek and labour after. And Mary — Who now employs herself in hearing my doctrine, rather than in providing an entertainment for me, hath chosen a part which I approve of, and which I will not take from her. As if he had said, “There is one thing absolutely necessary, and of infinitely greater importance than any of these domestic and secular affairs: even to be instructed in the saving knowledge of the way that leads to eternal life, and to secure a title to, and meetness for it. And Mary is wisely attending to this; therefore, instead of reproving her, I must rather declare, that she has chosen what may eminently be called the good part, which as it shall not — Finally; be taken away from her — I would not now hinder her from pursuing it; but rather invite thee to join with her in her attention to it, though the circumstances of our intended meal should not be so exactly adjusted as thy fond friendship could desire.”

Observe, reader, Martha’s care, if it had been moderate, and her work, were good, in their proper place and season: but now something more important chiefly demanded her attention, and should have been done first, and most regarded. She expected Christ to have censured Mary for not doing as she did; but he, on the contrary, blamed her for not doing as Mary did; and we are sure that the judgment of Christ is according to truth, and that the day will come when Martha will wish she had sat with Mary at his feet! Mary said nothing in her own defence; but since Martha appealed to the Master, to him she was willing to refer the matter, and to abide by his award. And he justified her against her sister’s clamours. However we may be censured and condemned by men for our piety and zeal, our Lord Jesus will take our part; and, sooner or later, Mary’s choice will be justified, and all who make that choice and abide by it. Happy, therefore, “the man or woman, who, in a pressing variety of secular business, is not so encumbered and careful as to forget that one thing, which is absolutely needful, but resolutely chooses this better part, and retains it as the only secure and everlasting treasure! O that this comprehensive, important sentence, were ever before our eyes! O that it were inscribed deep upon our hearts! One thing is needful: And what is this one thing but present and eternal salvation? What but an humble attention to the voice of the gospel of Christ? Yet, as if this were of all things the most unnecessary, for what poor trifling cares is it not commonly forgot? Yea, to what worthless vanity is it not daily sacrificed? Let the ministers of Christ, let the friends of souls, in every station, exert themselves, that all about them may be awakened duly to regard this great interest, accounting it their meat and drink to promote it. Let them be always solicitous, that neither they, nor others, may neglect it, for the hurries of too busy a life, or even for the services of an over-officious friendship.” — Doddridge.

40. Cumbered—Her mind was not only occupied, but disturbed and distracted. Much serving—The preparations of the apartments for her guest; furnishings, and feastings, and lodging. This was to honour him, but in a very physical way. To provide amply for her Lord was her duty, and practical proof of her love and faith, (as attested in John 11:20-28;) but there was a way more truly to honour him than by considering him as an epicure who had come for a banquet. Mary better understood that the Son of God sojourned but briefly upon earth, and that he devoted these few hours to their quiet home for higher purposes than the appetites of the table. Lord, dost thou not care?—Now, this is a nervous lady; and hers is a sharp, nay, a two-edged speech. It cuts Mary, and it cuts our Lord. Dost thou not care? This seems to mean that lazy Mary shirks, while Jesus, who ought to prevent, is indulging her. Hath left me—That is, she aided Martha for a while, until, perhaps, a sense of divine propriety said, “Enough; to provide more were an overdoing which he would blame;” and then she left, satisfied that she honoured the Lord more, and that she fulfilled the purpose of his visit better, by listening to the truths of the great Teacher than by providing a luxurious banquet or superabundant furnishings.

Verses 40-42. But Martha was cumbered, &c. — The word perispaw signifies to draw around or aside, and is therefore properly applied to express those cares which absorb the attention, and lead it from that which ought also to be observed and done, as well as the immediate object of solicitude. The same word is used by Epictetus, when describing the distractions to which that man must necessarily be exposed who, fond of externals, has yet some relish for mental improvement and cultivation. Martha was thus drawn aside by her anxious care to have the meal properly prepared and served, in honour of her Lord, from paying that attention to the words of Christ which the opportunity presented, and which Mary embraced. Not only so, but she thought her excess in this respect right, and therefore complains of her sister, nay, even of our Lord himself, who, by detaining Mary by his discourse, she intimates, partook of the blame of not sufficiently caring that she was left alone to the bustle and fatigue of the occasion. Our Lord’s reply is at once full of wisdom and affection. The repetition of her name twice in his address showed that he was uttering a solemn caution, as to a person in danger. The state of her mind was both careful and troubled, too anxious because inwardly disquieted and querulous; a state inconsistent with self-possession, the spirit of prayer, and delight in God. It does not appear that our Lord condemns the many things about which Martha cared; but her caring unnecessarily and in too great a degree about them. Those who fancy that he enjoins one dish instead of many, debase the passage entirely; and it is certain that our Lord often partook of public dinners, after the mode of the country, without objection: besides, if by the one needful thing is meant one dish, what can be understood by Mary having chosen that good part which should not be taken away from her? By the good part our Lord must, in all fair interpretation, mean the same as the one thing which he had declared to be needful, or the connection of the sentence is lost. He could not therefore refer to dishes or foods, since the time of the meal had not arrived, and Mary was not choosing any thing already upon the table, or selecting any thing to be brought there. The absurdity of the interpretation, not less than its trifling and jejune character, is sufficient to refute it. The meaning is well expressed in the paraphrase of Grotius: “Various and multiplied are the cares of this life: but there is one thing which, if we would be saved, is altogether and indispensably necessary to us, namely, the care of religion and piety, and the study of Divine things.” A most important moral is thus taught, which ought to be deeply engraven upon the heart of every human being. As Martha was not forbidden to care about the affairs of her house, but to care excessively, so to care, in fact, as to neglect important opportunities of instruction and salvation; so we are not prohibited from a proper attention to the affairs of this life, but are exhorted to subordinate them all to our higher and eternal interests, and so to engage in them as not to be hurried and distracted or absorbed by them, but so as still to leave the mind unembarrassed, in the exercise of holy affections, and in the performance of holy duties. Those who would go to the other extreme, and argue, like the papists, from this passage, in favour of the contemplative life, to the renunciation of active duties, find no real countenance from the history rightly understood. That Mary did not renounce her domestic engagements and affairs in consequence of her discipleship, is plain from this, that she was not, any more than Martha, a constant follower of Christ. We never read of her being in his train either before or after this visit, except when he was at Bethany or the neighbourhood. She was not, therefore, one of those who were commanded to leave all and follow Christ, and was, in all probability, as active in the family as Martha. But on this occasion she lost no part of the opportunity of hearing Christ; and yet it does not follow that she neglected any part of her duty, nor that Martha would have neglected any part of hers, had she sat as closely as her sister at the feet of Christ. Preparations for this visit had, doubtless, been made; as people of wealth, they had servants at command; and the affairs of the house and table would, in all likelihood, have gone on as well or better had not Martha given herself up to chafing, restless, and distracting cares. No defect of real duty is implied in the case of Mary; but excess of solicitude and bustle is certainly implied in the reproof administered to Martha. Yet was Martha a good woman, loved by her Lord, and, as a proof of that, reproved by him. She had a dangerous habit of indulging an anxious mind; this was her weakness and her source of danger; but this reproof probably cured the evil. In the account we have of St. John, she appears before us as a woman of a noble and most exalted faith. Let all who have the natural fault of Martha, be corrected by the reproof which our Lord administers to them through her; for, as Mr. Baxter truly, though quaintly, remarks, “preferring things unnecessary, though good, and troubling ourselves about NEED-NOTS, is a common fault, even of religious persons.”

Which shall not be taken away from her. — She hath made choice of an imperishable good, the effects of which will endure to eternity. Mary therefore wisely regulated her cares by the true measure and proportion of things; and gave up her whole affection only to those objects which were spiritual and enduring. There is one good which we, through the mercy of God, can command, and but one. That is THE CHIEF GOOD. Every other may be taken away by time, accident, by the power of man, by the stripping and impoverishing hand of death. But this is above all such accidents, it is a “life hid with Christ in God.” Of this truth several of the heathen sages had some notion. “The true good,” says one, “is something strictly belonging to and within ourselves, and that cannot easily be taken from us;” and another makes it a characteristic of virtue that “it cannot be taken away,” arhth anafaireton.

V. 41. Martha, Martha-There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in the repetition of the word:

thou art careful, inwardly, and hurried, outwardly.

Verse 41. Thou art careful and troubled] Thou art distracted, merimnav, thy mind is divided, (see Clarke on “Matthew 13:22”,) in consequence of which, turbazh, thou art disturbed, thy spirit is thrown into a tumult.

About many things.] Getting a variety of things ready for this entertainment, much more than are necessary on such an occasion.

Verses 38-42. It came to pass as they went — As they journeyed to Jerusalem, whither it seems he was going to celebrate the feast of dedication: he entered into a certain village — Namely, Bethany, nigh to Jerusalem; and a certain woman named Martha received him — Martha was probably the elder sister, and, Grotius thinks, a widow, with whom her brother and sister lived. At least, she was now the housekeeper, and acted as the mistress of the family. And she had a sister called Mary — Who, with her brother Lazarus, doubtless made Jesus as welcome as Martha did. Who also sat at Jesus’s feet — On this occasion, Martha expressed her regard for her divine guest, by the care she look to provide the best entertainment in her power for him and his disciples; but Mary sat quietly at his feet, attending to his doctrine, for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. But Martha was cumbered with much serving — The word

periespato, here rendered cumbered, properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first. And said, Lord, dost thou not care, &c. — The burden of the service lying upon Martha, and she being encumbered with it, blamed Jesus for allowing her sister to sit idly by him, while she was so much hurried. And Jesus said unto her, Martha, Martha — There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in this repetition of the word; Thou art careful, merimnav, anxiously careful, and troubled, turbazh, disturbed, or hurried, about many things. The word is nowhere else used in the New Testament. It seems to express the restless situation of a person in a tumultuous crowd, where so many are pressing upon him that he can hardly stand his ground; — or of water in great agitation. But one thing is needful — Not one dish to eat of, as Theophylact, Basil, and many of the fathers explain the expression; but the care of the soul, or that spiritual wisdom and grace which Mary made it her chief care to seek and labour after. And Mary — Who now employs herself in hearing my doctrine, rather than in providing an entertainment for me, hath chosen a part which I approve of, and which I will not take from her. As if he had said, “There is one thing absolutely necessary, and of infinitely greater importance than any of these domestic and secular affairs: even to be instructed in the saving knowledge of the way that leads to eternal life, and to secure a title to, and meetness for it. And Mary is wisely attending to this; therefore, instead of reproving her, I must rather declare, that she has chosen what may eminently be called the good part, which as it shall not — Finally; be taken away from her — I would not now hinder her from pursuing it; but rather invite thee to join with her in her attention to it, though the circumstances of our intended meal should not be so exactly adjusted as thy fond friendship could desire.”

Observe, reader, Martha’s care, if it had been moderate, and her work, were good, in their proper place and season: but now something more important chiefly demanded her attention, and should have been done first, and most regarded. She expected Christ to have censured Mary for not doing as she did; but he, on the contrary, blamed her for not doing as Mary did; and we are sure that the judgment of Christ is according to truth, and that the day will come when Martha will wish she had sat with Mary at his feet! Mary said nothing in her own defence; but since Martha appealed to the Master, to him she was willing to refer the matter, and to abide by his award. And he justified her against her sister’s clamours. However we may be censured and condemned by men for our piety and zeal, our Lord Jesus will take our part; and, sooner or later, Mary’s choice will be justified, and all who make that choice and abide by it. Happy, therefore, “the man or woman, who, in a pressing variety of secular business, is not so encumbered and careful as to forget that one thing, which is absolutely needful, but resolutely chooses this better part, and retains it as the only secure and everlasting treasure! O that this comprehensive, important sentence, were ever before our eyes! O that it were inscribed deep upon our hearts! One thing is needful: And what is this one thing but present and eternal salvation? What but an humble attention to the voice of the gospel of Christ? Yet, as if this were of all things the most unnecessary, for what poor trifling cares is it not commonly forgot? Yea, to what worthless vanity is it not daily sacrificed? Let the ministers of Christ, let the friends of souls, in every station, exert themselves, that all about them may be awakened duly to regard this great interest, accounting it their meat and drink to promote it. Let them be always solicitous, that neither they, nor others, may neglect it, for the hurries of too busy a life, or even for the services of an over-officious friendship.” — Doddridge.

41. Martha, Martha—There is a solemn reproof in this repetition. It implies a doubt and a danger. Careful and troubled—To be the best housekeeper in town adorns the Christian piety of a lady, if it in no way encroaches upon and destroys it. But it is sad when the ambition of a secular duty crowds out important spiritual thoughts and engagements; allowing no time for the cultivation of those germs of spiritual life which are the commencement here of a heavenly life hereafter. We venture to believe that Mary, who limited one duty by another, and gave each its just proportion, could, in her calmness and clearness, accomplish more even of secular duty than her older sister with all her fluster.

Verses 40-42. But Martha was cumbered, &c. — The word perispaw signifies to draw around or aside, and is therefore properly applied to express those cares which absorb the attention, and lead it from that which ought also to be observed and done, as well as the immediate object of solicitude. The same word is used by Epictetus, when describing the distractions to which that man must necessarily be exposed who, fond of externals, has yet some relish for mental improvement and cultivation. Martha was thus drawn aside by her anxious care to have the meal properly prepared and served, in honour of her Lord, from paying that attention to the words of Christ which the opportunity presented, and which Mary embraced. Not only so, but she thought her excess in this respect right, and therefore complains of her sister, nay, even of our Lord himself, who, by detaining Mary by his discourse, she intimates, partook of the blame of not sufficiently caring that she was left alone to the bustle and fatigue of the occasion. Our Lord’s reply is at once full of wisdom and affection. The repetition of her name twice in his address showed that he was uttering a solemn caution, as to a person in danger. The state of her mind was both careful and troubled, too anxious because inwardly disquieted and querulous; a state inconsistent with self-possession, the spirit of prayer, and delight in God. It does not appear that our Lord condemns the many things about which Martha cared; but her caring unnecessarily and in too great a degree about them. Those who fancy that he enjoins one dish instead of many, debase the passage entirely; and it is certain that our Lord often partook of public dinners, after the mode of the country, without objection: besides, if by the one needful thing is meant one dish, what can be understood by Mary having chosen that good part which should not be taken away from her? By the good part our Lord must, in all fair interpretation, mean the same as the one thing which he had declared to be needful, or the connection of the sentence is lost. He could not therefore refer to dishes or foods, since the time of the meal had not arrived, and Mary was not choosing any thing already upon the table, or selecting any thing to be brought there. The absurdity of the interpretation, not less than its trifling and jejune character, is sufficient to refute it. The meaning is well expressed in the paraphrase of Grotius: “Various and multiplied are the cares of this life: but there is one thing which, if we would be saved, is altogether and indispensably necessary to us, namely, the care of religion and piety, and the study of Divine things.” A most important moral is thus taught, which ought to be deeply engraven upon the heart of every human being. As Martha was not forbidden to care about the affairs of her house, but to care excessively, so to care, in fact, as to neglect important opportunities of instruction and salvation; so we are not prohibited from a proper attention to the affairs of this life, but are exhorted to subordinate them all to our higher and eternal interests, and so to engage in them as not to be hurried and distracted or absorbed by them, but so as still to leave the mind unembarrassed, in the exercise of holy affections, and in the performance of holy duties. Those who would go to the other extreme, and argue, like the papists, from this passage, in favour of the contemplative life, to the renunciation of active duties, find no real countenance from the history rightly understood. That Mary did not renounce her domestic engagements and affairs in consequence of her discipleship, is plain from this, that she was not, any more than Martha, a constant follower of Christ. We never read of her being in his train either before or after this visit, except when he was at Bethany or the neighbourhood. She was not, therefore, one of those who were commanded to leave all and follow Christ, and was, in all probability, as active in the family as Martha. But on this occasion she lost no part of the opportunity of hearing Christ; and yet it does not follow that she neglected any part of her duty, nor that Martha would have neglected any part of hers, had she sat as closely as her sister at the feet of Christ. Preparations for this visit had, doubtless, been made; as people of wealth, they had servants at command; and the affairs of the house and table would, in all likelihood, have gone on as well or better had not Martha given herself up to chafing, restless, and distracting cares. No defect of real duty is implied in the case of Mary; but excess of solicitude and bustle is certainly implied in the reproof administered to Martha. Yet was Martha a good woman, loved by her Lord, and, as a proof of that, reproved by him. She had a dangerous habit of indulging an anxious mind; this was her weakness and her source of danger; but this reproof probably cured the evil. In the account we have of St. John, she appears before us as a woman of a noble and most exalted faith. Let all who have the natural fault of Martha, be corrected by the reproof which our Lord administers to them through her; for, as Mr. Baxter truly, though quaintly, remarks, “preferring things unnecessary, though good, and troubling ourselves about NEED-NOTS, is a common fault, even of religious persons.”

Which shall not be taken away from her. — She hath made choice of an imperishable good, the effects of which will endure to eternity. Mary therefore wisely regulated her cares by the true measure and proportion of things; and gave up her whole affection only to those objects which were spiritual and enduring. There is one good which we, through the mercy of God, can command, and but one. That is THE CHIEF GOOD. Every other may be taken away by time, accident, by the power of man, by the stripping and impoverishing hand of death. But this is above all such accidents, it is a “life hid with Christ in God.” Of this truth several of the heathen sages had some notion. “The true good,” says one, “is something strictly belonging to and within ourselves, and that cannot easily be taken from us;” and another makes it a characteristic of virtue that “it cannot be taken away,” arhth anafaireton.

V. 42. Mary hath chosen the good part-To save her soul. Reader, hast thou?

Verse 42. One thing is needful] This is the end of the sentence, according to Bengel. “Now Mary hath chosen, &c.,” begins a new one. One single dish, the simplest and plainest possible, is such as best suits me and my disciples, whose meat and drink it is to do the will of our heavenly Father. Mary hath chosen that good part] That is, of hearing my word, of which she shall not be deprived; it being at present of infinitely greater importance to attend to my teaching than to attend to any domestic concerns. While thou art busily employed in providing that portion of perishing food for perishing bodies, Mary has chosen that spiritual portion which endures for ever, and which shall not be taken away from her; therefore I cannot command her to leave her present employment, and go and help thee to bring forward a variety of matters, which are by no means necessary at this time. Our Lord both preached and practised the doctrine of self-denial; he and his disciples were contented with a little, and sumptuous entertainments are condemned by the spirit and design of his Gospel. Multos morbos, multa fercula fecerunt. SENECA.

“Many dishes, many diseases.”

Bishop PEARCE remarks that the word creia, needful, is used after the same manner for want of food in Mark 2:25, where of David it is said, creian esce, he had need, when it means he was hungry. I believe the above to be the true meaning of these verses; but others have taken a somewhat different sense from them: especially when they suppose that by one thing needful our Lord means the salvation of the soul. To attend to this is undoubtedly the most necessary of all things, and should be the first, the grand concern of every human spirit; but in my opinion it is not the meaning of the words in the text. It is only prejudice from the common use of the words in this way that could make such an interpretation tolerable. KYPKE in loc. has several methods of interpreting this passage. Many eminent commentators, both ancient and modern, consider the text in the same way I have done. But this is termed by some, “a frigid method of explaining the passage;” well, so let it be; but he that fears God will sacrifice every thing at the shrine of TRUTH. I believe this alone to be the true meaning o£ the place, and I dare not give it any other. Bengelius points the whole passage thus: Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things: but one thing is needful. Now, Mary hath chosen that good portion, which shall not be taken away from her. THAT the salvation of the soul is the first and greatest of all human concerns, every man must acknowledge who feels that he has a soul; and in humility of mind to hear Jesus, is the only way of getting that acquaintance with the doctrine of salvation without which how can he be saved? While we fancy we are in no spiritual necessity, the things which concern salvation will not appear needful to us! A conviction that we are spiritually poor must precede our application for the true riches. The whole, says Christ, need not the physician, but those who are sick. Martha has been blamed, by incautious people, as possessing a carnal, worldly spirit; and as Mary Magdalene has been made the chief of all prostitutes, so has Martha of all the worldly-minded. Through her affectionate respect for our Lord and his disciples, and through that alone, she erred. There is not the slightest intimation that she was either worldly-minded or careless about her soul; nor was she at this time improperly employed, only so far as the abundance of her affection led her to make a greater provision than was necessary on the occasion. Nor are our Lord’s words to be understood as a reproof; they are a kind and tender expostulation, tending to vindicate the conduct of Mary. The utmost that can be said on the subject is, Martha was well employed, but Mary, on this occasion, better.

If we attend to the punctuation of the original text, the subject will appear more plain. I shall transcribe the text from Bengel’s own edition, Stutgardiæ, 1734, 12mo. Luke 10:41, 42, v. 41. apokriqeiv de eipen auth o ihsouv, marqa, marqa, merimnav kai turbazh peri polla\ enov de esti creia. maria de thn agaqhn merida

exelexato, htiv ouk afaireqhsetai ap~ authv. “Then Jesus answered her, Martha, Martha, thou art anxiously careful and disturbed about many things; but one thing is necessary. But Mary hath chosen that good portion which shall not be taken away from her.” I have shown, in my notes, that Martha was making a greater provision for her guests than was needful; that it was in consequence of this that she required her sister’s help; that Jesus tenderly reproved her for her unnecessary anxiety and superabundant provision, and asserted that but one thing, call it course or dish, was necessary on the occasion, yet she had provided many; and that this needless provision was the cause of the anxiety and extra labour. Then, taking occasion, from the circumstances of the case, to vindicate Mary’s conduct, and to direct his loving reproof more pointedly at Martha’s heart, he adds, Mary hath chosen a good portion; that is, she avails herself of the present opportunity to hear my teaching, and inform herself in those things which are essential to the salvation of the soul. I cannot, therefore, order her to leave my teaching, to serve in what I know to be an unnecessary service, however kindly designed: for it would be as unjust to deprive her of this bread of life, after which she so earnestly hungers, as to deprive thee, or thy guests, of that measure of common food necessary to sustain life. All earthly portions are perishing: “Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, but God will destroy both it and then; but the work of the Lord abideth for ever;” her portion, therefore, shall not be taken away from her. This is my view of the whole subject; and all the terms in the original, not only countenance this meaning, but necessarily require it. The words, one thing is needful, on which we lay so much stress, are wanting in some of the most ancient MSS., and are omitted by some of the fathers, who quote all the rest of the passage: a plain proof that the meaning which we take out of them was not thought of in very ancient times; and in other MSS., versions, and fathers, there is an unusual variety of readings where even the thing, or something like it, is retained. Some have it thus; Martha, Martha, thou labourest much, and yet a little is sufficient, yea, one thing only. Others: And only one thing is required. Others: Thou art curious and embarrassed about many things, when that which is needful is very small. Others: But here there need only a few things. Others: But a few things, or one only, is necessary. Now these are the readings of almost all the ancient versions; and we plainly perceive, by them, that what we term the one thing needful, is not understood by one of them as referring to the salvation of the soul, but to the provision THEN to be made. It would be easy to multiply authorities, but I spare both my own time and that of my reader. In short, I wonder how the present most exceptionable mode of interpretation ever obtained; as having no countenance in the text, ancient MSS. or versions, and as being false in itself; for even Christ himself could not say, that sitting at his feet, and hearing his word, was the ONE thing NEEDFUL. Repentance, faith, prayer, obedience, and a thousand other things are necessary to our salvation, besides merely hearing the doctrines of Christ, even with the humblest heart.

ST. LUKE

Verses 38-42. It came to pass as they went — As they journeyed to Jerusalem, whither it seems he was going to celebrate the feast of dedication: he entered into a certain village — Namely, Bethany, nigh to Jerusalem; and a certain woman named Martha received him — Martha was probably the elder sister, and, Grotius thinks, a widow, with whom her brother and sister lived. At least, she was now the housekeeper, and acted as the mistress of the family. And she had a sister called Mary — Who, with her brother Lazarus, doubtless made Jesus as welcome as Martha did. Who also sat at Jesus’s feet — On this occasion, Martha expressed her regard for her divine guest, by the care she look to provide the best entertainment in her power for him and his disciples; but Mary sat quietly at his feet, attending to his doctrine, for he embraced every opportunity of imparting the knowledge of divine things to such as were willing to receive it. But Martha was cumbered with much serving — The word

periespato, here rendered cumbered, properly signifies to be drawn different ways at the same time, and admirably expresses the situation of a mind surrounded (as Martha’s then was) with so many objects of care, that it hardly knows which to attend to first. And said, Lord, dost thou not care, &c. — The burden of the service lying upon Martha, and she being encumbered with it, blamed Jesus for allowing her sister to sit idly by him, while she was so much hurried. And Jesus said unto her, Martha, Martha — There is a peculiar spirit and tenderness in this repetition of the word; Thou art careful, merimnav, anxiously careful, and troubled, turbazh, disturbed, or hurried, about many things. The word is nowhere else used in the New Testament. It seems to express the restless situation of a person in a tumultuous crowd, where so many are pressing upon him that he can hardly stand his ground; — or of water in great agitation. But one thing is needful — Not one dish to eat of, as Theophylact, Basil, and many of the fathers explain the expression; but the care of the soul, or that spiritual wisdom and grace which Mary made it her chief care to seek and labour after. And Mary — Who now employs herself in hearing my doctrine, rather than in providing an entertainment for me, hath chosen a part which I approve of, and which I will not take from her. As if he had said, “There is one thing absolutely necessary, and of infinitely greater importance than any of these domestic and secular affairs: even to be instructed in the saving knowledge of the way that leads to eternal life, and to secure a title to, and meetness for it. And Mary is wisely attending to this; therefore, instead of reproving her, I must rather declare, that she has chosen what may eminently be called the good part, which as it shall not — Finally; be taken away from her — I would not now hinder her from pursuing it; but rather invite thee to join with her in her attention to it, though the circumstances of our intended meal should not be so exactly adjusted as thy fond friendship could desire.”

Observe, reader, Martha’s care, if it had been moderate, and her work, were good, in their proper place and season: but now something more important chiefly demanded her attention, and should have been done first, and most regarded. She expected Christ to have censured Mary for not doing as she did; but he, on the contrary, blamed her for not doing as Mary did; and we are sure that the judgment of Christ is according to truth, and that the day will come when Martha will wish she had sat with Mary at his feet! Mary said nothing in her own defence; but since Martha appealed to the Master, to him she was willing to refer the matter, and to abide by his award. And he justified her against her sister’s clamours. However we may be censured and condemned by men for our piety and zeal, our Lord Jesus will take our part; and, sooner or later, Mary’s choice will be justified, and all who make that choice and abide by it. Happy, therefore, “the man or woman, who, in a pressing variety of secular business, is not so encumbered and careful as to forget that one thing, which is absolutely needful, but resolutely chooses this better part, and retains it as the only secure and everlasting treasure! O that this comprehensive, important sentence, were ever before our eyes! O that it were inscribed deep upon our hearts! One thing is needful: And what is this one thing but present and eternal salvation? What but an humble attention to the voice of the gospel of Christ? Yet, as if this were of all things the most unnecessary, for what poor trifling cares is it not commonly forgot? Yea, to what worthless vanity is it not daily sacrificed? Let the ministers of Christ, let the friends of souls, in every station, exert themselves, that all about them may be awakened duly to regard this great interest, accounting it their meat and drink to promote it. Let them be always solicitous, that neither they, nor others, may neglect it, for the hurries of too busy a life, or even for the services of an over-officious friendship.” — Doddridge.

42. One thing is needful—That is, one thing is a necessity. Your mind, in attending to a multiplicity, is forgetting the great one. These are desirable; that is indispensable. To make Jesus here say, as some commentators do, that but one dish instead of many is needful, is scarce less than burlesque; and such an interpretation should be carried out by making Mary’s good part signify the best bit in the dish! How unjustifiable is this low interpretation, (ancient though it be,) is clear from this fact, that neither dish nor food has been once named in the narrative. The many to which the one thing is contrasted does not indicate either. It is properly supplemented by our translators with the word things; as including the total multiplicity of her household cares. Against this distracting earthly many our Lord solemnly opposes the heavenly but forgotten one.

The term needful in the Greek is a noun—necessity. What profit earthly activities, pre-eminences, gains, and enjoyments, if we miss that one absolute necessity, without which our all is lost!

Chosen that good part—Our Lord does not imply that Martha has not so chosen; he only asserts that Mary has. His purpose is not accusation; but, after gentle reproof of the accuser, to vindicate the accused. In preference to the distracting many things, she has chosen the one good part, a share in the blessed eternal things. Chosen—It was the act of her own free will. Neither the good part, nor the choice, nor the will, was imposed upon her by any arbitrary decree or purpose of God, or any necessity of her own inward nature. As amiable natures as she, with as good opportunities, doubtless, rejected the Saviour; as with all her loveliness and opportunities it was in her power to do. And, hereby, we do not depreciate the grace of God, and the operations of the Spirit, or the fullness or the freeness of the Saviour’s atonement; all which enabled and offered, but never imposed or necessitated, her acceptance or her salvation. Not be taken away from her—As her free choice, through God’s grace, accepted and made that good part her own, so that same free choice can ever retain it. As God never will take it from her, so neither men nor devils ever can. She may renounce and throw it away; but not all the powers of evil can ever take it from her.

Verses 40-42. But Martha was cumbered, &c. — The word perispaw signifies to draw around or aside, and is therefore properly applied to express those cares which absorb the attention, and lead it from that which ought also to be observed and done, as well as the immediate object of solicitude. The same word is used by Epictetus, when describing the distractions to which that man must necessarily be exposed who, fond of externals, has yet some relish for mental improvement and cultivation. Martha was thus drawn aside by her anxious care to have the meal properly prepared and served, in honour of her Lord, from paying that attention to the words of Christ which the opportunity presented, and which Mary embraced. Not only so, but she thought her excess in this respect right, and therefore complains of her sister, nay, even of our Lord himself, who, by detaining Mary by his discourse, she intimates, partook of the blame of not sufficiently caring that she was left alone to the bustle and fatigue of the occasion. Our Lord’s reply is at once full of wisdom and affection. The repetition of her name twice in his address showed that he was uttering a solemn caution, as to a person in danger. The state of her mind was both careful and troubled, too anxious because inwardly disquieted and querulous; a state inconsistent with self-possession, the spirit of prayer, and delight in God. It does not appear that our Lord condemns the many things about which Martha cared; but her caring unnecessarily and in too great a degree about them. Those who fancy that he enjoins one dish instead of many, debase the passage entirely; and it is certain that our Lord often partook of public dinners, after the mode of the country, without objection: besides, if by the one needful thing is meant one dish, what can be understood by Mary having chosen that good part which should not be taken away from her? By the good part our Lord must, in all fair interpretation, mean the same as the one thing which he had declared to be needful, or the connection of the sentence is lost. He could not therefore refer to dishes or foods, since the time of the meal had not arrived, and Mary was not choosing any thing already upon the table, or selecting any thing to be brought there. The absurdity of the interpretation, not less than its trifling and jejune character, is sufficient to refute it. The meaning is well expressed in the paraphrase of Grotius: “Various and multiplied are the cares of this life: but there is one thing which, if we would be saved, is altogether and indispensably necessary to us, namely, the care of religion and piety, and the study of Divine things.” A most important moral is thus taught, which ought to be deeply engraven upon the heart of every human being. As Martha was not forbidden to care about the affairs of her house, but to care excessively, so to care, in fact, as to neglect important opportunities of instruction and salvation; so we are not prohibited from a proper attention to the affairs of this life, but are exhorted to subordinate them all to our higher and eternal interests, and so to engage in them as not to be hurried and distracted or absorbed by them, but so as still to leave the mind unembarrassed, in the exercise of holy affections, and in the performance of holy duties. Those who would go to the other extreme, and argue, like the papists, from this passage, in favour of the contemplative life, to the renunciation of active duties, find no real countenance from the history rightly understood. That Mary did not renounce her domestic engagements and affairs in consequence of her discipleship, is plain from this, that she was not, any more than Martha, a constant follower of Christ. We never read of her being in his train either before or after this visit, except when he was at Bethany or the neighbourhood. She was not, therefore, one of those who were commanded to leave all and follow Christ, and was, in all probability, as active in the family as Martha. But on this occasion she lost no part of the opportunity of hearing Christ; and yet it does not follow that she neglected any part of her duty, nor that Martha would have neglected any part of hers, had she sat as closely as her sister at the feet of Christ. Preparations for this visit had, doubtless, been made; as people of wealth, they had servants at command; and the affairs of the house and table would, in all likelihood, have gone on as well or better had not Martha given herself up to chafing, restless, and distracting cares. No defect of real duty is implied in the case of Mary; but excess of solicitude and bustle is certainly implied in the reproof administered to Martha. Yet was Martha a good woman, loved by her Lord, and, as a proof of that, reproved by him. She had a dangerous habit of indulging an anxious mind; this was her weakness and her source of danger; but this reproof probably cured the evil. In the account we have of St. John, she appears before us as a woman of a noble and most exalted faith. Let all who have the natural fault of Martha, be corrected by the reproof which our Lord administers to them through her; for, as Mr. Baxter truly, though quaintly, remarks, “preferring things unnecessary, though good, and troubling ourselves about NEED-NOTS, is a common fault, even of religious persons.”

Which shall not be taken away from her. — She hath made choice of an imperishable good, the effects of which will endure to eternity. Mary therefore wisely regulated her cares by the true measure and proportion of things; and gave up her whole affection only to those objects which were spiritual and enduring. There is one good which we, through the mercy of God, can command, and but one. That is THE CHIEF GOOD. Every other may be taken away by time, accident, by the power of man, by the stripping and impoverishing hand of death. But this is above all such accidents, it is a “life hid with Christ in God.” Of this truth several of the heathen sages had some notion. “The true good,” says one, “is something strictly belonging to and within ourselves, and that cannot easily be taken from us;” and another makes it a characteristic of virtue that “it cannot be taken away,” arhth anafaireton.