Matthew · Chapter 15

V. 1. Mark 7:1.

Verse 1. The scribes and Pharisees-of Jerusalem] Our Lord was now in Galilee, Matthew 14:34.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

§ 66. — DEBATE WITH THE PHARISEES IN REGARD TO TRADITIONS, 1-20. The scenes of love and faith closing the last chapter are now suddenly reversed. The third passover of our Lord’s ministry to which these vast multitudes were travelling, had now passed, but which, on account of the hostile dispositions of the ruling powers, he did not attend, but remained in the northern parts of Galilee. The Jews, not finding our Lord at the passover, seem to have sent a portion of their number to Capernaum to open a debate with him. They commenced it with a challenge in regard to the disrespect of his disciples toward the traditions of the elders, in not washing their hands before they ate. Our Lord firmly meets them by showing that their traditions both contradicted the law of God, and are founded upon a false and superstitious morality.

1. Then came — Our Lord was probably at Capernaum. Were of Jerusalem — And probably from Jerusalem. Saying — They seem to have come with a quarrel in their mouths.

CHAPTER 15. Verse 1. Scribes and Pharisees which were at Jerusalem. — This sect was found in every considerable place; but the most eminent were those of Jerusalem. They professed to be the most deeply skilled in the law and traditions, and everywhere had great authority. Whether these were sent by the chiefs of the party to watch the conduct of our Lord, or came of their own accord, does not appear. They seem, however, to have considered themselves as guardians of the traditions of the elders, and as authorized to rebuke those who transgressed them.

V. 2. The elders-The chief doctors or, teachers among the Jews.

Verse 2. Elders] Rulers and magistrates among the Jews. For they wash not their hands] What frivolous nonsense! These Pharisees had nothing which their malice could fasten on in the conduct or doctrine of our blessed Lord and his disciples, and therefore they must dispute about washing of hands! All sorts of Pharisees are troublesome people in religious society; and the reason is, they take more pleasure in blaming others than in amending themselves.

The tradition of the elders] The word paradosiv, tradition, has occupied a most distinguished place, both in the Jewish and Christian Church. Man is ever fond of mending the work of his Maker; and hence he has been led to put his finishing hand even to Divine revelation! This supplementary matter has been called paradosiv, from paradidomai, to deliver from hand to hand-to transmit; and hence the Latin term, tradition, from trado, to deliver, especially from one to another;-to hand down. Among the Jews TRADITION signifies what is also called the oral law, which they distinguish from the written law: this last contains the Mosaic precepts, as found in the Pentateuch: the former, the traditions of the elders, i.e. traditions, or doctrines, that had been successively handed down from Moses through every generation, but not committed to writing. The Jews feign that, when GOD gave Moses the written law, he gave him also the oral law, which is the interpretation of the former. This law, Moses at first delivered to Aaron then to his sons Eleazar and Ithamar; and, after these to the seventy-two elders, who were six of the most eminent men chosen out of each of the twelve tribes. These seventy-two, with Moses and Aaron, delivered it again to all the heads of the people, and afterwards to the congregation at large. They say also that, before Moses died, he delivered this oral law, or system of traditions, to JOSHUA, and Joshua to the ELDERS which succeeded him-THEY to the Prophets, and the PROPHETS to each other, till it came to JEREMIAH, who delivered it to BARUCH his scribe, who repeated it to EZRA, who delivered it to the men of the great synagogue, the last of whom was SIMON the Just. By Simon the Just it was delivered to ANTIGONUS of Socho; by him to JOSE the son of Jochanan; by him to JOSE, the son of Joezer; by him to NATHAN the Arbelite, and Joshua the son of Perachiah; and by them to JUDAH the son of Tabbai, and Simeon, the son of Shatah; and by them to SHEMAIAH and ABTALION; and by them to HILLEL; and by Hillel to SIMEON his son, the same who took Christ in his arms when brought to the temple to be presented to the Lord: by SIMEON it was delivered to GAMALIEL his son, the preceptor of St. Paul, who delivered it to SIMEON his son, and he to Rab. JUDAH HAKKODESH his son, who compiled and digested it into the book which is called the MISHNA; to explain which the two Talmuds, called the Jerusalem and Babylyonish Talmuds, were compiled, which are also called the Gemera or complement, because by these the oral law or Mishnah is fully explained. The Jerusalem Talmud was completed about A. D. 300; and the Babylonish Talmud about the beginning of the sixth century. This Talmud was printed at Amsterdam in 12 vols. folio. These contain the whole of the traditions of the elders, and have so explained, or rather frittered away, the words of God, that our Lord might well say, Ye have made the word of God of no effect by your traditions. In what estimation these are held by the Jews, the following examples will prove: “The words of the scribes are lovely beyond the words of the law: for the words of the law are weighty and light, but the words of the scribes are all weighty.” Hierus. Berac. fol. 3.

“He that shall say, There are no phylacteries, though he thus transgress the words of the law, he is not guilty; but he that shall say, There are five Totaphot, thus adding to the words of the scribes, he is guilty.”

“A prophet and an elder, to what are they likened! To a king sending two of his servants into a province; of one he writes thus: Unless he show you my seal, believe him not; for thus it is written of the prophet: He shall show thee a sign; but of the elders thus: According to the law which they shall teach thee, for I will confirm their words.”-See Prideaux. Con. vol. ii. p. 465, and Lightfoot’s Hor. Talmud.

They wash not their hands] On washing of hands, before and after meat, the Jews laid great stress: they considered eating with unwashed hands to be no ordinary crime; and therefore, to induce men to do it, they feigned that an evil spirit, called Shibta atbyv, who sits on the hands by night, has a right to sit on the food of him who eats without washing his hands, and make it hurtful to him! They consider the person who undervalues this rite to be no better than a heathen, and consequently excommunicate him. See many examples of this doctrine in Schoettgen and Lightfoot.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

Verse 2. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? The cabala, or unwritten law, was counted by the pharisees of equal authority with the law itself. Rabbi Aquiba says, he who eats with hands unwashed is worthy of death! Rabbi Jose is rather more mild, in saying, the sin is the same as though he cohabited illicitly with a woman! They alleged in defence of those censures, that a man might have touched unawares something unclean. Surely the Lord justly called those men “blind guides.” Traditions may be respected so far only as they tend to health of body, to purity of mind, and to the peace and edification of the church.

2. Tradition of the elders — That is, of the ancient commentators, the teachers of the Mosaic law. The written law of Moses is contained in the Old Testament. But besides, the Jews had oral law, which they pretended was handed down from Moses by verbal tradition. At the time of our Saviour this was not reduced to writing. But it was afterward compiled in The Talmud, now extant; of which the two parts are called the Mishna, or Text, and the Gemara, or Commentary.

Extravagant were the praises lavished by the Pharisees upon these Traditions. “The written word is water, said they; but the interpretation, and that which is added to it, is wine.” “If the scribes say the right is left, hear them.” Thus the foundations of morality were undermined. Wash not their hands — The Pharisees select for debate a point with which morality has very little to do, and the law of God nothing. But the washings here mentioned were very positively insisted upon by the Jewish doctors. The Talmud says: “He who eats bread with unwashen hands is as bad as if he were to commit fornication.” The Rabbi Akiba was once imprisoned, and only water sufficient to drink allowed him. But he chose rather to die of thirst than to eat anything with unwashen hands. How enormous, then, to their view, must have been this crime of our Lord’s disciples! They wash not their hands! They had better break any command in the decalogue. And though the Jews open this quarrel with the disciples, it is plain they intend a blow at the Master himself. A subject for a decisive issue is now laid open.

Verse 2. Tradition of the elders. — The elders do not appear to have been any body or council of men, like the sanhedrim, but learned men who had made themselves notable as doctors or expounders of laws and customs, and who, according to the reputation and influence they had acquired, were followed in their opinions by others. As the pagan philosophers had their sects, so the most illustrious of these Jewish doctors had their schools or followers; and as we speak of Pythagoreans and Platonists, so the Jews speak of the schools of Hillel and Shammai, and other ancient doctors, among whom there was a general agreement, though in minor points, which, however, their disciples magnified into importance, they differed in opinion. Tradition, paradosiv, hlbq, “cabbala,” in its general sense, is any thing taught, or delivered down from one to another; and that which bore that appellation in our Lord’s time was entirely oral, and was supposed to contain the opinions and decisions of the wise in different ages, as to the import and interpretation of what might be obscure in the law and customs of Moses. It originated, doubtless, in a better age, and was then probably confined to a few practical particulars; but as false opinions, superstitions, and other corruptions prevailed, it swelled to vast extent, and not only descended to the invention and regulation of a vast number of particulars of ceremonial observance, but, what was still worse, brought in a subtle casuistry to explain away the meaning of many moral precepts and to palliate and give sanction to bad principles and a vicious practice. As these traditions also embodied many things, not only explanatory of the law, but supplementary to it, the Pharisees at length raised them above their original character, when they existed in a simple form, as the mere opinions of wise men, and pretended that they were delivered by God verbally to Moses, so that he received, not only a written, but also an oral law, which was from him transmitted to their elders in successive ages. These traditions, or at least many of them, were collected in the Mishna, by Rabbi Judah, A.D. 180. The extravagant and even impious authority given by the scribes and Pharisees to their traditions, appears from numerous extracts given by Lightfoot, Schoetgenius, Gill, and others, from their later rabbins. Two instances from the Babylonian Talmud will be sufficient for illustration: “Know then that the words of the scribes are more lovely than the words of the law; weightier are the words of the elders than the words of the prophets.” “My son, attend to the words of the scribes more than to the words of the law; every one that transgresses the words of the scribes is guilty of death.” How truly, therefore, did our Lord charge them with making “the word of God void through their tradition!” The Sadducees, however, rejected their traditions as expositions of the written law. The mystical cabala was distinct from these traditions, and was a mode of interpreting Scripture by giving a meaning to parts of words, and even to the letters of which they are composed, either by considering the arithmetical value of a letter, or taking each letter of a word for an entire diction; or making up a word from the initial letters of many; or changing or transposing the letters of a word; and thus discovering, as the adepts dreamed, many important mysteries. This solemn trifling has been preferred by many of the most learned of the Jews, since the Christian era, to every other mode of exposition. How far it prevailed in our Lord’s time, does not appear; but there was then a dogmatic cabalism drawn out of the eastern and Greek pagan philosophy, which before that period considerably influenced the opinions of many of the more learned Jews. Not many traces of this, however, appear in the conversations of Christ as recorded in the gospels.

They wash not their hands when they eat bread. — The washing of hands before taking any food was so important a matter with the Pharisees, that they appear to have been greatly offended that the example of Christ and his disciples should diminish in the minds of the people their reverence for this ceremony. How serious a matter they made of it, appears from their writers. — Rabbi Jose says, “Whoever eats bread without washing of hands is as if he committed whoredom.” “He that blesseth food with unwashed hands is guilty of death.” — This custom, it is to be observed, was not one of cleanliness, but a matter of mere superstition; for, whether the hands needed cleansing or not, it was equally binding.

V. 3. They wash not their hands when they eat bread-Food in general is termed bread in Hebrew; so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal.

Verse 3. Why do ye-transgress the commandment] Ye accuse my disciples of transgressing the traditions of the elders-I accuse you of transgressing the commands of God, and that too in favour of your own tradition; thus preferring the inventions of men to the positive precepts of God. Pretenders to zeal often prefer superstitious usages to the Divine law, and human inventions to the positive duties of Christianity.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

3. He answered and said — Jesus knows that a challenge is intended, but he does not shun to meet it. They come armed with the traditions of the elders; he meets them with the law of Jehovah. It is man’s authority opposed by the authority of God. Commandment of God — When God speaks, let man keep silence.

Verse 3. Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God? &c. — the answer of our Lord is, in sum, If my disciples disregard the tradition of the elders, this is but a transgression against a commandment of MEN; but ye transgress even (for the kai is to be taken intensively) the commandment of God by your tradition. Thus he strikes at the foundation of the whole system of tradition, by stripping it at once of that authority which they had fabulously assigned to it; teaching that it was not only of men, but not always of wise or good men, since in several instances it stood in sinful opposition to the Divine law, and was therefore in no case worthy of respect.

V. 4. Honour thy father and mother-Which implies all such relief as they stand in need of. Exodus 20:12; 21:17.

Verse 4. Honour thy father and mother] This word was taken in great latitude of meaning among the Jews: it not only meant respect and submission, but also to take care of a person, to nourish and support him, to enrich. See Numbers 22:17; Judges 13:17; 1 Timothy 5:17. And that this was the sense of the law, as it respected parents, see Deuteronomy 27:16, and see Clarke’s note “Exodus 20:12”.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

4. God commanded — There are some who deny the authority of the Old Testament, yet admit the New. Our Saviour here sets his seal to the divine mission of Moses, and declares that the decalogue is God’s law. Honour thy father — Our Saviour selects the precept where the law coincides with the plainest dictate of nature, and with the universal conscience and customs of mankind.

Verse 4. Honour thy father and mother. — In this duty our Lord includes affording support to parents, which indeed is implied in the Hebrew word dbk. This command of God could not be denied by the Pharisees: it had been written by the finger of God; it was “the first command with promise;” and by themselves it was understood not merely of respect and reverence to parents, and cheerful obedience to all their lawful commands, but also of the duty of honouring them with substance, of feeding, clothing, and supplying their wants with liberality and tender affection. Thus their own writers call this “the weightiest commandment among weighty ones;” and by the Jewish canons a son is bound “to afford his father meat, drink, and clothing, to lead him in and out, and to wash his hands and feet.” Their law was also severe against cursing father or mother, that is, reviling them, or using reproachful and disrespectful language, katalogia, to them, against which heinous crime the penalty of death was denounced, Exodus 21:17; so that the import and strictness of the Divine law on this point could not be mistaken. — Nor does it appear that the Jews in general were chargeable with any general infraction of this duty, except in the case where the wretched, selfish, and infecting sophistry of the Pharisaic tradition interposed, and which, therefore, our Lord selects, in order to maintain his charge against them.

V. 5. It is a gift by whatsoever thou mightest have been profited by me-That is, I have given, or at least, purpose to give to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me.

Verse 5. It is a gift] ˆbrq korban, Mark 7:11, an offering of approach; something consecrated to the service of God in the temple, by which a man had the privilege of approaching his Maker. This conduct was similar to the custom of certain persons who bequeath the inheritance of their children to Churches or religious uses; either through terror of conscience, thus striving to purchase the kingdom of glory; or through the persuasion of interested hireling priests. It was in this way that, in the days of popish influence, the principal lands in the nation had fallen into the hands of the Church. In those charters, multitudes of which have passed through my hands, a common form was, pro salute meæ, et pro salute antecessorum meorum, et pro salute successorum meorum, et pro solute uxoris meæ, &c., &c., do, et concedo Deo et Ecclesiæ, &c. “For my salvation, and for the salvation of my predecessors, and for the salvation of my successors, and for the salvation of my wife, &c., &c., I give and bequeath to God and his Church, &c.”

Though a world of literature was destroyed, and fine buildings ruined, by the suppression of the monasteries in England, yet this step, with the Stat. 23 Hen. VIII. c. 10, together with the Stat. 9 Geo. II. c. 36, ware the means of checking an evil that had arrived at a pitch of unparalleled magnitude; an evil that was supplanting the atonement made by the blood of the covenant, and putting death-bed grants of land, &c., in the place of Jesus Christ, and throwing the whole secular power of the kingdom into the hands of the pope and the priests. No wonder then that they cried out, when the monasteries were suppressed! It is sacrilege to dedicate that to God which is taken away from the necessities of our parents and children; and the good that this pretends to will doubtless be found in the catalogue of that unnatural man’s crimes, in the judgment of the great day, who has thus deprived his own family of its due. To assist our poor relatives, is our first duty; and this is a work infinitely preferable to all pious legacies and endowments.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

Ver. 5. It is a gift. Dwron doron, or “let it be a gift.” Hebrew ˆbrq corban, as St. Mark reads. It signifies a gift devoted to God, according to the law of Moses. Leviticus 1:2. 7:14. Here it is most unnaturally abused, when a young man told his parents that instead of assisting them he had made a vow of a gift to God, and therefore he could not do both; so that now, they must look to God, and languish with hunger. So Origen, Theophylact, Erasmus, Beza, Heinsius, Lightfoot, Hammond, and the Synopsis, where copious notes may be found.

5. A gift — That is, a corban, or thing consecrated to God. If a thing were consecrated to God, that, by Jewish tradition, rendered it exempt from every other claim; even from the duty of supporting one’s parents. A form of this kind of vowing was: “Let what I may gain be devoted, so that my father, even, may eat nothing of it.” Thou — Our Lord gives the words as if addressed to the parents. The Jews held that if the child should say this thing even in a moment of anger, it was still binding. And Lightfoot is quoted by Alford as showing that the mere utterance of the word corban absolved the utterer, even though he made no consecration of his property. The meaning of the address to the parent here given by our Lord, may be thus rendered: “My parent, that property of mine by which thou mightest be supported or benefitted, is a gift consecrated to God; thou canst therefore have no share of it.”

Verses 5, 6. It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me. — St. Mark expresses it, “It is corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, and ye suffer him no more to do aught for his father or mother.” The word corban signifies a sacred gift or offering, from brq, to offer; and from hence the treasury of the temple was called korbanon, as the depository of the consecrated or devoted offerings. Such gifts were unalienable, and could not be diverted to any other use. — The word corban was therefore used in vowing or dedicating any thing to a sacred or supposed sacred use, and had the import of a solemn oath; for to say, Corban, or, Let it be corban, or, as corban, effectually prohibited any thing from private use or advantage. The Pharisees therefore held, that when application was made by a parent to a son for relief, and he should say, “Corban whatever thou mightest be profited by me,” he was released from his obligation to the fifth commandment, and might without blame leave his parents to poverty and wretchedness; and this was probably done from that rapacity which our Lord so frequently rebukes in them, by which they encouraged the alienation of property to the temple, or probably often to their own use, under pretence of receiving honour on account of their sanctity from those superstitious persons upon whose credulity they practised. To these vows the parties who made them were held to be bound in the strictest manner: and as they alienated to pretended pious uses that portion of their property by which their parents might have been sustained, “the tradition of the elders” most clearly rendered the commandment of God of none effect.

Our translators, both here and in Mark, have supposed an ellipsis, Which they supply with, “he shall be free.” Koinoel considers the kai before the ou mh timhsh redundant like the Hebrew w, and reads, “Whosoever shall say, It is a gift — he need not honour his father and mother.” Bower takes kai in the sense of therefore, and translates, “Therefore he must not relieve his father or mother.” An ellipsis must, however, probably be understood; and our translation properly fills it up with the natural inference from the premises. He shall be free, he shall not be liable to the penalty. Verse 4.

Verses 1-6. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees — See notes on Mark 7:1-23, where the facts here spoken of are related more at large. Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders — That is, of the principal doctors or teachers among the Jews. They wash not when they eat bread — Food in general is termed bread in the Hebrew: so that to eat bread is the same as to make a meal. But he said, Why do ye also, &c. — As if he had said, Nay; but I may with much greater reason ask you why you transgress what is infinitely more sacred, even the commandment of God, by your tradition — Your vain and superstitious doctrine, delivered by verbal communication, and handed down from age to age. For God commanded, Honour thy father and mother — Which implies the affording them all such relief as they stand in need of: and, He that curseth father or mother — Although it be in a sudden transport of passion; let him die the death — Let him be put to death without mercy, Exodus 21:17; Leviticus 20:9; where see the note. But ye say — But what you teach is contradictory to this divine command; and an ungrateful child may justify himself in the neglect of it in consequence of your tradition: for your doctrine is, Whosoever shall say to his father, It is a gift, &c. — That is, I have given, or at least I purpose to give, to the treasury of the temple, what you might otherwise have had from me; and honour not his father and his mother — Namely, by relieving them in their poverty, or supplying their wants, he shall be free — From all blame, or from all obligation of giving them relief. Thus have ye made the commandment of God — Even a commandment written with his own finger on the tables of stone; of none effect by your tradition — Have absolutely rendered it useless, and as it were annihilated it.

6. He shall be free — These words, let it be observed, are printed in italics. This means that they are not in the original Greek, but are inserted by the English translators on their own authority, in order to make sense. But it may be doubted whether they are properly inserted here. The whole sentence preceding this phrase may be thus rendered: “Whosoever shall say… It is a gift, etc., he may not honour his father or his mother.” It is plain our Lord here holds that the fifth commandment requires of the child the duty, when needed, of providing a necessary support for the parent in his age. So the Jewish writer Philo says: “What the children have belongs to the parents.” So Solomon had declared before our Saviour. Proverbs 28:24: “Whoso robbeth or withdraweth from father or mother, is the companion of the destroyer.” When we think how liable the Jewish child might be in a fit of anger to utter this corban or vow to starve his parent, it can be realized how likely the custom was to destroy the dutiful conduct of children to the parent. And yet these men thought it a terrible offence to God to eat without washing the hands! This reminds one of the strictness with which Romish priests compel their followers to eat no meat on Friday, but indulge them with comparative ease in thefts, falsehoods, or intemperance. Indeed, the Romish trust in tradition, derived from the fathers of the dark and ignorant ages, in depreciation of the Scriptures, is precisely the same crime over again that was committed by the Jewish doctors of our Lord’s day.

Verses 5, 6. It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me. — St. Mark expresses it, “It is corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, and ye suffer him no more to do aught for his father or mother.” The word corban signifies a sacred gift or offering, from brq, to offer; and from hence the treasury of the temple was called korbanon, as the depository of the consecrated or devoted offerings. Such gifts were unalienable, and could not be diverted to any other use. — The word corban was therefore used in vowing or dedicating any thing to a sacred or supposed sacred use, and had the import of a solemn oath; for to say, Corban, or, Let it be corban, or, as corban, effectually prohibited any thing from private use or advantage. The Pharisees therefore held, that when application was made by a parent to a son for relief, and he should say, “Corban whatever thou mightest be profited by me,” he was released from his obligation to the fifth commandment, and might without blame leave his parents to poverty and wretchedness; and this was probably done from that rapacity which our Lord so frequently rebukes in them, by which they encouraged the alienation of property to the temple, or probably often to their own use, under pretence of receiving honour on account of their sanctity from those superstitious persons upon whose credulity they practised. To these vows the parties who made them were held to be bound in the strictest manner: and as they alienated to pretended pious uses that portion of their property by which their parents might have been sustained, “the tradition of the elders” most clearly rendered the commandment of God of none effect.

Our translators, both here and in Mark, have supposed an ellipsis, Which they supply with, “he shall be free.” Koinoel considers the kai before the ou mh timhsh redundant like the Hebrew w, and reads, “Whosoever shall say, It is a gift — he need not honour his father and mother.” Bower takes kai in the sense of therefore, and translates, “Therefore he must not relieve his father or mother.” An ellipsis must, however, probably be understood; and our translation properly fills it up with the natural inference from the premises. He shall be free, he shall not be liable to the penalty. Verse 4.

V. 7. Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying-That is, the description which Isaiah gave of your fathers, is exactly applicable to you. The words therefore which were a description of them, are a prophecy with regard to you.

Verse 7. Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you] In every place where the proper names of the Old Testament occur, in the New, the same mode of orthography should be followed: I therefore write Isaiah with the Hebrew, not Esaias, with the Greek. This prophecy is found Isaiah 29:13. Our blessed Lord unmasks these hypocrites; and we may observe that, when a hypocrite is found out, he should be exposed to all; this may lead to his salvation: if he be permitted to retain his falsely acquired character, how can he escape perdition!

Verses 7-9. Ye hypocrites — To substitute superstitious observances of man’s invention, in the place of obedience to God’s commands, is downright hypocrisy; it is, however, the prerogative of Him who searches the heart, and knows what is in man, to pronounce who are hypocrites. And as hypocrisy is a sin which only his eye discovers, so it is a sin which above all others he abhors. Well did Esaias prophesy of you — That is, the words which Isaiah addressed to your fathers are exactly applicable to you: his description of them is a prophecy with regard to you. Observe, reader, the reproofs of sin and sinners, which we find in the Scriptures, were designed to be applied to similar persons and practices to the end of the world; for they are not of private interpretation, 2 Peter 1:20. Threatenings directed against others belong to us, if we be guilty of the same sins. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouths, &c. — They make a great profession, and pretend to much devotion and piety; but their heart is far from me — They do not sincerely love and obey me. They do not give me their hearts; and, if the heart be not given to God, all outward worship is no better than a mockery of him. In vain they do worship me — That is, idly, unprofitably, and to no purpose. Their worship does not attain the end for which divine worship was appointed. It neither pleases God nor profits themselves. For if it be not in spirit, it is not in truth, and so it is all nothing. Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men — As equal with, nay, superior to, those of God. What can be a more heinous sin?

7. Ye hypocrites — For fabricating a religion without morality. Prophesy of you — Isaiah, by inspiration, describing such characters as yours beforehand. The class and the race are indeed foreseen by God as recurring, and are so predescribed once for all.

Verse 7. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy, &c. — Since, under pretence of piety, these wretched men devoured the substance of the poor, and caused their infatuated followers to violate the most solemn laws of God, they were in truth accurately described as hypocrites, acting their part in religion for gain, and personating a character to which they had no claim. The quotation from Isaiah cannot be considered as a mere adaptation of words addressed by the prophet to the Jews of his day; for our Lord expressly says, Well or justly did Esaias PROPHESY OF YOU; and upon examining the section of prophecy from which the words are taken, it will appear evident that it has respect also to the times of Messiah, and ranks therefore in that class of predictions which have a primary and an ulterior application. The quotation very nearly agrees with the Septuagint, but differs in one clause from the present Hebrew text, which, however, may be interpreted to the same meaning. Of all will worship, all self-devised schemes of piety, not authorized by the word of God, or comprising any thing contrary to its principles, our Lord declares, In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. The word rendered “worship” includes not only all acts of a directly devotional kind, but every thing by which reverence is manifested and respect is had to God. It comprehends, therefore, all the services of piety. The entalmata, rendered “doctrines,” are not to be understood in the sense of opinions; but of injunctions or regulations. Campbell translates “institutions merely human,” which accurately expresses the meaning; for, as he observes, “the word entalma is always in the New Testament joined with anqrwpwn; and wherever it occurs is contrasted by implication with the precepts of God, which in the New Testament are never denominated entalmata, but entolai.” All such worship is vain and fruitless: and not only unprofitable, but in its general tendency hurtful. As to every thing required of us, the word of God contains either particular directions, or general principles easily applicable to any given case; and, only as we have its authority, can we look with confidence to the Divine acceptance. This shows the necessity of as simple a conformity to the word of God as possible in every thing connected with religious services, and ought to have guarded the Church against all those attempts at improving upon the primitive examples contained in the New Testament, in order, as it has been pretended, to render the acts of worship more impressive and influential. But in the Christian Church, as in the Jewish, the gates were thrown open to a flood of ceremonial and superstitious observances, which produced in both hypocrisy, pride, bigotry, and often direct and flagrant wickedness. With the loss of simplicity came the loss of power; and in both, though the people “drew near to God with their mouth, and honoured him with their lips,” and that in a formal, exact, and pompous manner, the result was, that “their heart was removed far from him.” — In all such cases religion degenerates into form, or mere sentimentalism, or superstition, or a mixture of all; and the minds of men, instead of being directly led to God, to seek communion with him, are detained amid complex and varied services, which produce a self-righteous dependence, or are taken as a discharge from the obligations of holiness.

V. 8. Their heart is far from me-And without this all outward worship is mere mockery of God. Isaiah 29:13.

Verse 8. Their heart is far from me.] The true worship of God consists in the union of the heart to him-where this exists not, a particle of the spirit of devotion cannot be found.

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth] This clause, which is taken from Isaiah 29:13, is omitted by several excellent MSS., and by several versions and fathers. Erasmus, Mill, Drusius, and Bengel, approve of the omission, and Griesbach has left it out of the text; but as I find it in the prophet, the place from which it is quoted, I dare not omit it, howsoever respectable the above authorities may appear.

Verses 7-9. Ye hypocrites — To substitute superstitious observances of man’s invention, in the place of obedience to God’s commands, is downright hypocrisy; it is, however, the prerogative of Him who searches the heart, and knows what is in man, to pronounce who are hypocrites. And as hypocrisy is a sin which only his eye discovers, so it is a sin which above all others he abhors. Well did Esaias prophesy of you — That is, the words which Isaiah addressed to your fathers are exactly applicable to you: his description of them is a prophecy with regard to you. Observe, reader, the reproofs of sin and sinners, which we find in the Scriptures, were designed to be applied to similar persons and practices to the end of the world; for they are not of private interpretation, 2 Peter 1:20. Threatenings directed against others belong to us, if we be guilty of the same sins. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouths, &c. — They make a great profession, and pretend to much devotion and piety; but their heart is far from me — They do not sincerely love and obey me. They do not give me their hearts; and, if the heart be not given to God, all outward worship is no better than a mockery of him. In vain they do worship me — That is, idly, unprofitably, and to no purpose. Their worship does not attain the end for which divine worship was appointed. It neither pleases God nor profits themselves. For if it be not in spirit, it is not in truth, and so it is all nothing. Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men — As equal with, nay, superior to, those of God. What can be a more heinous sin?

8. Lips… heart — With their lips they utter the pious corban or consecration. With their hearts they mean to break the decalogue, and rob a parent.

V. 9. Teaching the commandments of men-As equal with, nay, superior to, those of God. What can be a more heinous sin?

Verse 9. In vain they do worship me, &c.] By the traditions of the elders, not only the word of God was perverted, but his worship also was greatly corrupted. But the Jews were not the only people who have acted thus: whole Christian Churches, as well as sects and parties, have acted in the same way. Men must not mould the worship of God according to their fancy-it is not what they think will do-is proper, innocent, &c., but what God himself has prescribed, that he will acknowledge as his worship. However sincere a man may be in a worship of his own invention, or of man’s commandment, yet it profits him nothing. Christ himself says it is in vain. To condemn such, may appear to some illiberal; but whatever may be said in behalf of sincere heathens, and others who have not had the advantages of Divine Revelation, there is no excuse for the man who has the BIBLE before him.

Verses 7-9. Ye hypocrites — To substitute superstitious observances of man’s invention, in the place of obedience to God’s commands, is downright hypocrisy; it is, however, the prerogative of Him who searches the heart, and knows what is in man, to pronounce who are hypocrites. And as hypocrisy is a sin which only his eye discovers, so it is a sin which above all others he abhors. Well did Esaias prophesy of you — That is, the words which Isaiah addressed to your fathers are exactly applicable to you: his description of them is a prophecy with regard to you. Observe, reader, the reproofs of sin and sinners, which we find in the Scriptures, were designed to be applied to similar persons and practices to the end of the world; for they are not of private interpretation, 2 Peter 1:20. Threatenings directed against others belong to us, if we be guilty of the same sins. This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouths, &c. — They make a great profession, and pretend to much devotion and piety; but their heart is far from me — They do not sincerely love and obey me. They do not give me their hearts; and, if the heart be not given to God, all outward worship is no better than a mockery of him. In vain they do worship me — That is, idly, unprofitably, and to no purpose. Their worship does not attain the end for which divine worship was appointed. It neither pleases God nor profits themselves. For if it be not in spirit, it is not in truth, and so it is all nothing. Teaching for doctrines the commandments of men — As equal with, nay, superior to, those of God. What can be a more heinous sin?

9. In vain they do worship me — Their very prayers offered in that spirit are a mockery and abomination to God.

Verse 10. Hear and understand] A most important command. Hear-make it a point of conscience to attend to the ministry of the word. Understand-be not satisfied with attending places of public worship merely; see that the teaching be of God, and that you lay it to heart.

Verses 10, 11. And he called the multitude — Having shown the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and condemned them for the unwarrantable stress which they laid on their vain and precarious traditions, he took this opportunity to undeceive the people, and let them see how insignificant that outward strictness was on which the Pharisees insisted. And said, Hear and understand — From these words, and those recorded Mark 7:16, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear, all spoken to the multitude, it is evident that, in our Lord’s judgment, the whole multitude was capable of understanding those things which the Pharisees did not understand, and by which their traditions and those of the elders were overthrown. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man — It is not the kind or quality of our food, nor the want of cleanness of hands when we eat it, that affects the soul with any moral pollution. For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, Romans 14:17. A man is defiled by that by which guilt is contracted before God, and the man is rendered offensive to him, and unfitted for communion with him. Now what we eat, if we do not eat unseasonably and immoderately, does not produce this effect, for to the pure all things are pure, Titus 1:15. The Pharisees carried their ideas concerning the ceremonial pollutions which arose from eating certain forbidden meats much further than the law intended, and burdened it with additions of their own, which our Saviour witnesses against, intending hereby to pave the way for a repeal of the ceremonial law in that matter. But that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man — We are polluted, not by the meat we eat with unwashen hands, but by the words we speak from unsanctified hearts. Christ, in a former discourse, had laid a great stress upon our words, Matthew 12:36, which was intended for reproof and warning to those that cavilled at him. This, here, is intended for reproof and warning to those that cavilled at and censured the disciples. The latter did not defile themselves with what they ate, but the Pharisees defiled themselves with what they spoke spitefully and censoriously of them. Observe, reader, those who charge guilt upon others for transgressing the commandments of men, many times bring greater guilt upon themselves by transgressing the law of God against rash judging. Those most defile themselves who are most forward to censure the defilements of others.

Ver. 10. He called the multitude, who are often the best judges in questions of common sense. Food cannot defile the mind, which is unconscious of any defilement; the main question is, whether it hurt the conscience of another, who is weak in faith.

10. Called the multitude — The Pharisees, who had come all the way from Jerusalem to open the debate in such fierce style, now sink into the background, and the Lord turns to the people.

Verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth] This is an answer to the carping question of the Pharisees, mentioned Matthew 15:2, Why do thy disciples eat with unwashed hands? To which our Lord here replies, That what goes into the mouth defiles not the man; i.e. that if, in eating with unwashed hands, any particles of dust, &c., cleaving to the hands, might happen to be taken into the mouth with the food, this did not defile, did not constitute a man a sinner; for it is on this alone the question hinges: thy disciples eat with unwashed hands; therefore they are sinners; for they transgress the tradition of the elders, i.e. the oral law, which they considered equal in authority to the written law; and, indeed, often preferred the former to the latter, so as to make it of none effect, totally to destroy its nature and design, as we have often seen in the preceding notes. That which cometh out of the mouth] That is, what springs from a corrupt unregenerate heart-a perverse will and impure passions-these defile, i.e. make him a sinner.

Verses 10, 11. And he called the multitude — Having shown the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and condemned them for the unwarrantable stress which they laid on their vain and precarious traditions, he took this opportunity to undeceive the people, and let them see how insignificant that outward strictness was on which the Pharisees insisted. And said, Hear and understand — From these words, and those recorded Mark 7:16, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear, all spoken to the multitude, it is evident that, in our Lord’s judgment, the whole multitude was capable of understanding those things which the Pharisees did not understand, and by which their traditions and those of the elders were overthrown. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man — It is not the kind or quality of our food, nor the want of cleanness of hands when we eat it, that affects the soul with any moral pollution. For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, Romans 14:17. A man is defiled by that by which guilt is contracted before God, and the man is rendered offensive to him, and unfitted for communion with him. Now what we eat, if we do not eat unseasonably and immoderately, does not produce this effect, for to the pure all things are pure, Titus 1:15. The Pharisees carried their ideas concerning the ceremonial pollutions which arose from eating certain forbidden meats much further than the law intended, and burdened it with additions of their own, which our Saviour witnesses against, intending hereby to pave the way for a repeal of the ceremonial law in that matter. But that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man — We are polluted, not by the meat we eat with unwashen hands, but by the words we speak from unsanctified hearts. Christ, in a former discourse, had laid a great stress upon our words, Matthew 12:36, which was intended for reproof and warning to those that cavilled at him. This, here, is intended for reproof and warning to those that cavilled at and censured the disciples. The latter did not defile themselves with what they ate, but the Pharisees defiled themselves with what they spoke spitefully and censoriously of them. Observe, reader, those who charge guilt upon others for transgressing the commandments of men, many times bring greater guilt upon themselves by transgressing the law of God against rash judging. Those most defile themselves who are most forward to censure the defilements of others.

11. Not that which goeth into the mouth… cometh out — That is, not the material food that enters the man’s stomach. This is set in contrast to that which goeth out of man; that is, the moral action, that goeth forth from the man’s will and intention. A man’s intentional words defile the soul. And so do his actions, and even his thoughts, for they all alike go forth from himself.

Intemperance in food or drink may indeed morally defile a man. But even here the defilement proceeds not from the material contact received, but from the forthgoing will and act by which those foods are taken. Indeed, the whole force of our Lord’s maxim is, that not physical touch but moral action makes a man truly impure before God.

Verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth, &c. — Our Lord addressed these words to the multitude in the presence of the Pharisees, who were malignantly observing him, and thus openly took there out of the hands of these false teachers, and instilled into their minds truth as solid and important as their traditions were vain and trifling in every thing but their corrupting effect. Either he referred in what follows to the notion, that food eaten with unwashed hands defiled those who partook of it, and so this address to the multitude arose out of his conversation with the Pharisees; or he intended still farther to expose the absurdity of their notions by showing the folly of the reason on which they made a distinction as to clean and unclean meats beyond the rule of the Jewish law. He might also thus tacitly intend to prepare his disciples, by the general principles he laid down on this occasion, for that general abolition of the Mosaic distinctions as to clean and unclean meats which was to follow the full institution of his religion. The Jewish notion was, that a moral defilement arose from the use of certain prohibited food; so that forbidden meats “are unclean in themselves, and defile both body and soul.” In this also moral and ceremonial distinctions were confounded; and when the partaking of certain food was regarded as a moral defilement, the abstinence from it was held, by a fair deduction, to be an important branch of righteousness. and thus the attention was turned from the state of the heart to external observances. — To counteract this, our Lord declares to the multitude, in direct opposition to the Pharisaic doctrine, that not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, renders him common, and unclean as the word signifies in opposition to holy; that no kind of meats and drinks assigned by God for the use of man, taken temperately, renders him offensive and odious to God, as though he had contracted guilt and pollution by committing sin; but that which cometh out of the mouth defileth a man. The expression is enigmatical, the mouth, in the second clause, signifying the HEART OF MAN; but the Pharisees sufficiently understood it to be offended with this saying, the meaning of which he opens more fully to his disciples in a following verse.

Verse 12. The Pharisees were offended] None so liable to take offence as formalists and hypocrites, when you attempt to take away the false props from the one, and question the sincerity of the other. Besides, a Pharisee must never be suspected of ignorance, for they are the men, and wisdom must die with them!

Verses 12, 13. Then came his disciples — Namely, when he was come into the house, apart from the multitude; and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, &c. — The apostles, it seems, would gladly have conciliated the good-will of the Pharisees, thinking it might be of service to their cause; and thought it strange that their Master should say that which he knew would give them so much offence. Surely, they thought, if he had considered how provoking such a saying would be, he would not have uttered it. But he knew what he said, and to whom he said it, and what would be the effect of it; and he hereby teaches us, that though in indifferent things, we must be tender of giving offence, yet we must not, for fear of that, neglect to declare any truth, or enforce any duty. Truth must be owned, and duty must be done; and if any be offended, it is their own fault. Offence is not given, but taken. But he said, Every plant — Or rather, plantation, as futeia is more properly rendered. As if he had said, Be they as angry as they will, you need not be afraid of them, for they and their doctrine shall perish together, being neither of them from God. Not only the corrupt opinions and superstitious practices of the Pharisees, but their sect, and way, and constitution were plants not of God’s planting: the rules of their profession were not his institutions, but owed their original to pride and formality. And the people of the Jews in general, though planted a noble vine, were now become the degenerate plant of a strange vine. God disowned them as not of his planting.

12. Then came his disciples — Both the doctors and the multitude are now gone, and the talk is with the disciples. Knowest thou — The disciples meantime have been where they had chance to learn that the Pharisees were offended. They have been perhaps talking with the Pharisees themselves. They will bring intelligence of it to their Master. How liable the disciples’ minds were to be influenced by converse with Christ’s opposers! Pharisees were offended — Very likely; they came to beat, not to be beaten. They were going to strike the disciples, and thereby hit their Lord with the traditions of the elders. Our Lord beat them down with a piece of the decalogue. This saying — Both the saying to the Pharisees and its explanation to the multitude.

V. 13. Every plant-That is, every doctrine.

Verse 13. Every plant] Every plantation. So I render futeia, and so it is translated in the Itala version which accompanies the Greek text in the Codex Bezæ, omnis plantatio, and so the word is rendered by Suidas. This gives a different turn to the text. The Pharisees, as a religious body, were now a plantation of trees, which God did not plant, water, nor own: therefore, they should be rooted up, not left to wither and die, but the fellers, and those who root up, (the Roman armies,) should come against and destroy them, and the Christian Church was to be planted in their place. Since the general dispersion of the Jews, this sect, I believe, has ceased to exist as a separate body, among the descendants of Jacob. The first of the apostolical constitutions begins thus: qeou futeia h kaqolikh ekklhsia, kai ampelwn autou eklektov. The Catholic Church is the plantation of God, and his chosen vineyard.

Verses 12, 13. Then came his disciples — Namely, when he was come into the house, apart from the multitude; and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, &c. — The apostles, it seems, would gladly have conciliated the good-will of the Pharisees, thinking it might be of service to their cause; and thought it strange that their Master should say that which he knew would give them so much offence. Surely, they thought, if he had considered how provoking such a saying would be, he would not have uttered it. But he knew what he said, and to whom he said it, and what would be the effect of it; and he hereby teaches us, that though in indifferent things, we must be tender of giving offence, yet we must not, for fear of that, neglect to declare any truth, or enforce any duty. Truth must be owned, and duty must be done; and if any be offended, it is their own fault. Offence is not given, but taken. But he said, Every plant — Or rather, plantation, as futeia is more properly rendered. As if he had said, Be they as angry as they will, you need not be afraid of them, for they and their doctrine shall perish together, being neither of them from God. Not only the corrupt opinions and superstitious practices of the Pharisees, but their sect, and way, and constitution were plants not of God’s planting: the rules of their profession were not his institutions, but owed their original to pride and formality. And the people of the Jews in general, though planted a noble vine, were now become the degenerate plant of a strange vine. God disowned them as not of his planting.

Ver. 13. Every plant, futeia, plantation, or garden, which my Father hath not planted, and such are the sects of the pharisees and the sadducees, shall be rooted up. But while they sink as the associations of men, the righteous shall flourish as the palm tree, and grow as the cedars of Lebanon.

13. Every plant — Every doctrine. These traditions are a plant not planted by God, but by men, and they will be rooted up. Tradition can never stand as God’s word, much less against God’s word.

Verses 13, 14. Every plant which my heavenly Father, &c. — Futeia signifies the act of planting, but by transition a plant; and by a common metaphor the opinions and affections of the human mind are compared to plants and fruits, springing up from the seeds which have been sown there by instruction. Here the plants are to be understood of the doctrines and precepts of the Pharisees; which, being opposed to the truths and laws of the Scriptures, are said not to have been planted by the Father, and therefore, whatever offence might be taken by Pharisees, and whatever might be the consequence of their rage, they were to be rooted up with unsparing hand. Truth can make no compromise with error, and it shall ultimately prevail. Innumerable are the seeds of error which have been sown in the Church, and great and deleterious their product; but let none despair: the words of Christ are PROPHETIC as well as admonitory: every plant which springs not from heavenly seed, planted by the Divine hand itself, shall be rooted up. By this general declaration the disciples were also taught their duty. Not, indeed, when they became public teachers, to root up supposed error, as in later times, by civil coercion and violence; but as they had an example in their Lord, by calm but most faithful and unsparing refutation. In this way no allowance was to be made for errors opposed to the clearly revealed decisions of the Father; but at all hazards they were to proclaim the truth, and to expose the unsoundness and the evil consequences of the errors it was designed to displace and destroy. The force and instructiveness of this passage is lost by those who suppose our Lord refers to the destruction of the Pharisees themselves, by the judgments which were to come upon the Jewish nation.

V. 14. Let them alone-If they are indeed blind leaders of the blind; let them alone: concern not yourselves about them: a plain direction how to behave with regard to all such. Luke 6:39.

Verse 14. Let them alone] afete autouv, give them up, or leave them. These words have been sadly misunderstood. Some have quoted them to prove that blind and deceitful teachers should not be pointed out to the people, nor the people warned against them; and that men should abide in the communion of a corrupt Church, because that Church had once been the Church of God, and in it they had been brought up; and to prove this they bring Scripture, for, in our present translation, the words are rendered, let them alone: but the whole connection of the place evidently proves that our blessed Lord meant, give them up, have no kind of religious connection with them, and the strong reason for which he immediately adds, because they are blind leaders. This passage does not at all mean that blind leaders should not be pointed out to the people, that they may avoid being deceived by them; for this our Lord does frequently, and warns his disciples, and the people in general, against all such false teachers as the scribes and Pharisees were; and though he bids men do that they heard those say, while they sat in the chair of Moses, yet he certainly meant no more than that they should be observant of the moral law when read to them out of the sacred book: yet neither does he tell them to do all these false teachers said; for he testifies in Matthew 15:6, that they had put such false glosses on the law, that, if followed, would endanger the salvation of their souls. The Codex Bezæ, for afete autouv, has afete touv tuflouv, give up these blind men. Amen! A literal attention to these words of our Lord produced the Reformation.

Probably the words may be understood as a sort of proverbial expression for-Don’t mind them: pay no regard to them.-“They are altogether unworthy of notice.”

And if the blind lead the blind] This was so self-evident a case that an apter parallel could nut be found-if the blind lead the blind, both must fall into the ditch. Alas, for the blind teachers, who not only destroy their own souls, but those also of their flocks! Like priest, like people. If the minister be ignorant, he cannot teach what he does not know; and the people cannot become wise unto salvation under such a ministry-he is ignorant and wicked, and they are profligate. They who even wish such God speed; are partakers of their evil deeds. But shall not the poor deceived people escape? No: both shall fall into the pit of perdition together; for they should have searched the Scriptures, and not trusted to the ignorant sayings of corrupt men, no matter of what sect or party. He who has the Bible in his hand, or within his reach, and can read it, has no excuse.

Verse 14. Let them alone — Do not trouble or concern yourselves about their censures: neither court their favour nor dread their displeasure, nor much care though they be offended. Seek not to please a generation of men that please not God, 1 Thessalonians 2:15; and will be pleased with nothing less than absolute dominion over your consciences. They be blind leaders of the blind — Teachers, who foolishly think to lead their disciples to heaven by the observation of precepts wherein there is not the smallest degree of true piety, and will not be convinced of the contrary, being grossly ignorant of divine things, and strangers to the spiritual nature of God’s law; and yet so proud, that they think they see better than any others, and therefore undertake to be leaders of others. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch — The guides and the guided, the blind leaders and the blind followers, shall perish together. Both will be involved in the general desolation coming upon the Jews, and both will fall into the ditch of eternal destruction. We find, Revelation 22:15, that hell is the portion of those that make a lie, and of those that love it when made. The sin and rain of the deceivers will be no security to those that are deceived by them. “Though the leaders of the people cause them to err, yet they that are led of them are destroyed,” Isaiah 9:16; because they shut their eyes against the light which would have rectified their mistake. Hence “it follows,” says Dr. Whitby, “that sometimes the multitude neither ought, nor can, without their utmost peril, follow the guidance of their ecclesiastical superiors;” or, as he expresses himself afterward, believe, or comply with their rules, “because it is their duty never to follow them into the ditch.” “Learn here,” says Burkit, “1st, that ignorant, erroneous, and unfaithful ministers are the heaviest judgment that can befall a people; 2d, that the following of such teachers and blind guides will be no excuse to people another day, much less free them from the danger of eternal destruction.”

14. Let them alone — Leave them to their own inveterate folly. Their will is determined, and their purpose is fixed to ignore the truth and to deceive the people. Blind lead… fall into the ditch — A proverbial expression. Both seducer and seduced shall perish.

Verse 14. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind, &c. — Leave them; have done with them, because of their false and dangerous doctrines; renounce them as your teachers, for when one blind man leads another, both shall fall into the ditch. Our translation, Let them alone, is too weak; for Christ exhorts his disciples, and all who might be present, not merely not to trouble themselves about them, as to whether they were offended or not, as some understand the words, but the proverbial and figurative mode of speech which follows shows that he enjoins an entire renunciation and disallowance of them as religious guides. These professedly learned instructers were themselves ignorant of the true way of salvation; and for any to place their souls under their charge would be an act of infatuation as fatal as that of blind persons putting themselves under the guidance of the blind to be led along a dangerous road.

Both shall fall into the ditch. — To fall into a ditch conveys the idea of sustaining only a trifling inconvenience or injury, whereas our Lord intended to intimate danger of the highest kind. Both shall fall into the PIT, better conveys the idea; and boqunon is to be understood as the image of eternal perdition: so strongly does our Lord guard us here, as well as in his sermon on the mount, against erring and wicked teachers. By whatever plausible arguments men may be deluded into the belief that they may innocently sanction them by attending on their ministrations, our Lord’s words fully decide the question.

Verse 15. Declare unto us this parable.] Is it not strange to hear the disciples asking for the explanation of such a parable as this! The true knowledge of the spirit of the Gospel is a thing more uncommon than we imagine, among the generality of Christians, and even of the learned.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

15. Declare — Explain or make clear. Parable — Or simile, by which the nature of moral impurity is illustrated.

Verse 15. Declare unto us this parable. — This is an instance in which the word parable is used to signify any figurative or enigmatical speech. The disciples had only a general conception of our Lord’s meaning, and desired a farther explanation; but our Lord’s words, “Are ye also YET without understanding,” convey a mild reproof, that, after so long an attendance upon his instructions, they had not at once thoroughly comprehended his meaning; also intimating, perhaps, that they were not themselves sufficiently freed from that superstitious importance which the Jews in general attached to distinctions of meats.

Verse 16. Are ye also yet without understanding?] The word akmh, which we translate yet, should be here rendered still: Are ye still void of understanding? and the word is used in this sense by several Greek writers. The authorities which have induced me to prefer this translation may be seen in Kypke.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

16. Are ye — My own disciples. Also — That is, as well as the Pharisees. Yet — After all my example and instruction. Without understanding — Of the difference between physical uncleanness and moral defilement. The disciples have plainly been permitted by our Lord to neglect these washings. They have been doubtless many a time told that washing the body does not wash the soul. Still, when the precept in its avowed power is brought into direct collision with the doctrines of the teachers, they become a little confused, and need to have it stated outright and in full terms by the Master.

V. 17. Are ye also yet without understanding-How fair and candid are the sacred historians? Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes.

Verse 17. Cast out into the draught] eiv afedwna, [Anglo-Saxon]. And beeth into the forthgoing a sent-what is not fit for nourishment is evacuated; is thrown into the sink. This I believe to be the meaning of this difficult and variously translated word, afedrwn. Diodati translates it properly, nella latrina, into the privy. And the Persian translator has given a good paraphrase, and appears to have collected the general meaning [Persian] her teche der dehen ander ayeed, az nusheeb beeroon rood, we ber zemeen aftad: “Whatsoever enters into the mouth goes downward, and falls upon the ground.” Michaelis, and his annotator, Dr. Marsh, have been much perplexed with this perplexing passage. See Michaelis’s Introduction, vol. i. note 35. p. 458.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

17. Entereth in… mouth… draught — The food passes the stomach and goes to the draught or privy without touching the soul to defile it.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

18. Proceed out of the mouth — Our words particularly. From the heart — They proceed from the inward intention. Thereby not merely our words but our actions, and all that go from the heart, are included. A man is a voluntary cause, and is responsible for all his voluntary and intentional effects.

V. 19. First evil thoughts-then murders-and the rest. Railings-The Greek word includes all reviling, backbiting, and evil speaking.

Verse 19. Out of the heart] In the heart of an unregenerate man, the principles and seeds of all sin are found. And iniquity is always conceived in the heart before it be spoken or acted. Is there any hope that a man can abstain from outward sin till his heart, that abominable fountain of corruption, be thoroughly cleansed? I trow not.

Evil thoughts] dialogismoi ponhroi, wicked dialogues-for in all evil surmisings the heart holds a conversation, or dialogue, with itself. For fonoi, murders, two MSS. have fqonoi, envyings, and three others have both. Envy and murder are nearly allied: the former has often led to the latter.

Blasphemies] I have already observed, Matthew 9:3, that the verb blasfhmew, when applied to men, signifies to speak INJURIOUSLY of their persons, characters, &c., and, when applied to God, it means to speak IMPIOUSLY of his nature, works, &c.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

Ver. 19. Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, wholly evil and devoid of good, for in our flesh dwelleth no good thing. Whatever good is found in man emanates from the wisdom which descends from above. These thoughts or evil surmisings, altogether unconnected with meats clean and unclean, are the sources of all outward sins, which are named in a scale of turpitude. Murders, the first sin against our brother, for which an avenging providence pursues the guilty. Adulteries, which pollute both body and mind, and defile the whole stock and race. Fornications. The Saxon forliggian, to forelie, is more expressive. The crime of bastardy was rare among our Saxon fathers, for the young man who committed it must either marry or fight. Thefts, which are connected with every crime of idleness and concealment. False witness. This is setting God at defiance, and is directed against the life or property of a neighbour. Blasphemies, whether against God, or against divine revelation, or the soul of our neighbour. — In my travels and labours I have known half a dozen instances of blasphemers struck dead with the oaths in their mouths. The conclusion is, that all sin has its seat in the mind, but where that is pure, the body is preserved to God, a living and a holy sacrifice.

19. Out of the heart — The fountain of the moral intention and the moral action. Sinful action flows forth from a sinful nature. There lies back of the bad action a permanent badness of the disposition. The heart is therefore depraved. Evil thoughts — The word thoughts here refers to these internal reasonings and weighing for and against yielding to sin which precede its commission. The heart parleys with crime and fluctuates before it gives forth the act. Hence the phrase evil thoughts designates the springs from which proceed the whole catalogue of sins enumerated in the verse. This catalogue follows nearly the order of the second table of the decalogue, beginning with the sixth commandment. False witness — This phrase includes false testimony, or lying of every kind. Blasphemies — Injurious expressions against God or man.

Verse 19. For out of the heart. — Never was a stronger and more humbling picture drawn of the corruption of human nature. Of whatever evil we can conceive, of whatever evils manifest themselves, and spread desolation and misery through society, the human heart is the fountain. The seat is there; they all spring from that source; and on this is grounded the necessity of that renewal of the heart, that entire regeneration of the will, affections, and all other moral faculties of the soul, upon which our Lord insisted in opposition to the Pharisees, who placed holiness in external acts, and left the vices of the heart unremedied. And it is here to be remarked that “the heart” of which our Lord speaks is not the heart of any individual exclusively, nor of the Pharisees, nor of the Jews, but the HEART OF MAN; and so this is a most unequivocal declaration and proof of the fall of man’s nature from that original state of “righteousness and true holiness” in which it was first created. It is similar, indeed, both in its generality and import, to the testimony of Jeremiah on the same subject: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” and to that of Solomon: “The heart of the sons of men is full of evil.” This indeed could not be a new doctrine; the whole scheme of our redemption is built upon it: for if the first Adam had not been a fountain of sin and of death to his posterity, we had needed no second Adam to be a fountain of salvation and holiness.

Evil thoughts. — This is feebly rendered by Doddridge, evil reasonings; and not happily by Campbell, malicious contrivances. Evil thoughts appear to comprehend both those wicked imaginings upon which corrupt minds love to dwell, and also evil desires and purposes, and secret mental oppositions of temper to persons and to truth, which, our Lord had already taught, subjected men to condemnation as effectually as the overt acts to which they usually lead. “Evil thoughts” is a more extensive term, and includes all that can be meant by either “evil reasonings,” or “malicious contrivances.” The terms used are general, and do not affect strict precision.

Blasphemies. — Calumnies and detractions, which, when impiously directed against God and sacred things, are strictly denominated blasphemy, and when against others, evil speaking. See note on Mark 7:9.

Verse 20. These-defile a man] Our Lord’s argument is very plain. What goes into the mouth descends into the stomach and other intestines;-part is retained for the nourishment of the body, and part is ejected, as being improper to afford nourishment. Nothing of this kind defiles the soul, because it does not enter into it; but the evil principles that are in it, producing evil thoughts, murders, &c., these defile the soul, because they have their seat and operation in it.

Verses 15-20. Peter said, Declare unto us this parable — That is, the sentence, maxim, or proverb, mentioned verse 11. Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, &c. — A declaration very intelligible, and evidently true, and yet appearing to the disciples obscure, and needing explanation, or doubtful, and wanting confirmation. The reason is evident: it did not agree with the notions of religion which they had formerly imbibed. And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding? — Are ye so stupid as not to see that what a man eats or drinks, being of a corporeal nature, cannot defile the mind, or make a man a sinner in the sight of God, unless when used immoderately, or in opposition to the commandment of God, in which case the pollution arises from the man, and not from the meat; whereas, that which proceedeth out of a man’s mouth, coming from his heart, really pollutes his mind. How fair and candid are the sacred historians! Never concealing or excusing their own blemishes. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts — Or rather, evil reasonings, as the words dialogismoi ponhri properly signify. The expression includes all sinful devices, contrivances, schemes, designs, and purposes which arise from the thoughts and imaginations of the mind: murders — Including rash anger, hatred, malice, envy, and revenge, sins against the sixth commandment: adulteries, fornications — Sins against the seventh commandment; proceeding from unchaste thoughts, wanton looks, immodest expressions, lascivious actions; thefts — All unjust or dishonest actions, sins against the eighth commandment; frauds, wrongs, rapines, and all injurious contracts: false witness — An offence against the ninth commandment; arising generally from a complication of falsehood and covetousness, or falsehood and malice in the heart. If truth, holiness, and love reigned in the heart, as God requires that they should, there would be no bearing false witness: blasphemies — Or calumnies, as the original word may be rendered, which signifies either speaking evil of God, a violation of the third commandment, or calumniating our neighbor, a breach of the ninth. These are the things which defile a man — And are therefore the things which we should carefully avoid, and guard against all approaches to them; and not lay an undue stress on the washing of the hands, or on any distinction of meats and drinks. It is a matter of much lamentation that our corrupted nature should abound with such poisonous productions as these; let us earnestly pray that they may be rooted out by divine grace, and that the Holy Spirit may create in us clean hearts, and implant therein tempers diametrically opposite to all these enormities!

20. These are the things — Not all the things, but plentiful specimens of them. There is a strong analogy between physical and moral defilement, which forms the basis of much of the emblems and types of the Scripture system. But it is the pushing this analogy to a superstitious extent which produced the tradition about unwashen hands which our Lord here so forcibly condemns.

§ 67. — HEALING OF THE SYROPHENICIAN WOMAN’S DAUGHTER — OTHER MIRACLES, 21-32.

V. 21. Mark 7:24.

Verse 21. Departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.] eiv ta merh, towards the coasts or confines. It is not clear that our Lord ever left the land of the Hebrews; he was, as the apostle observes, Romans 15:8, the minister of the circumcision according to the truth of God. Tyre and Sidon are usually joined together, principally because they are but a few miles distant from each other.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

Ver. 21. Tyre and Sidon. The kings of these two cities are thought to be comprised in the kings of the Hittites. 1 Kings 10:29.

21. Then Jesus went thence — So aggravated was the previous hostility of the Pharisees toward our Lord in consequence of his refutation just given, that he seems to have left Capernaum on account of their machinations. He was also at this time, since the death of John the Baptist, an object of notice by Herod Antipas. Unsafe, therefore, from the ruling powers of both Judea and Galilee, we suddenly find him on the margin of the Mediterranean. See note on Matthew 14:13. Tyre and Sidon — Lying upon the Mediterranean Sea, in the northwestern part of Judea. Mark says that Jesus “entered into an house and would have no man know it: but he could not be hid. For a certain woman,” etc. Yet it seems by Matthew’s account that Jesus and his disciples were out of doors, on their way. The for, therefore, of Mark only qualifies the last clause, and introduces an instance or illustration of the fact that Jesus could not maintain his concealment.

V. 22. A woman of Canaan-Canaan was also called Syrophenicia, as lying between Syria properly so called, and Phenicia, by the sea side. Cried to him-From afar,

Thou Son of David-So she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah.

Verse 22. A woman of Canaan] Matthew gives her this name because of the people from whom she sprung-the descendants of Canaan, Judges 1:31, 32; but Mark calls her a Syrophenician, because of the country where she dwelt. The Canaanites and Phoenicians have been often confounded. This is frequently the case in the Septuagint. Compare Genesis 46:10, with Exodus 6:15, where the same person is called a Phoenician in the one place, and a Canaanite in the other. See also the same version in Exodus 16:35; Joshua 5:12. The state of this woman is a proper emblem of the state of a sinner, deeply conscious of the misery of his soul.

Have mercy an me, &c.] How proper is this prayer for a penitent! There are many excellencies contained in it; 1. It is short; 2. humble; 3. full of faith; 4. fervent; 5. modest; 6. respectful; 7. rational; 8. relying only on the mercy of God; 9. persevering. Can one who sees himself a slave of the devil, beg with too much earnestness to be delivered from his thraldom? Son of David] An essential character of the true Messiah.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

Ver. 22. A woman of Canaan — cried unto him, saying, have mercy on me. This woman was a Greek by birth, as Mark says, though living in the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. — A general has his eye on campaigns, battles and sieges; a merchant calculates on his gain, and a scholar is fraught with discoveries in science; but the Lord Jesus has his eye on whatever in man is found to resemble God. While the jews gloried in the divine presence, resident in their temple, he declared his purpose to dwell with the man who was poor and contrite, and trembled at his word. Thus while many in Israel, who received miraculous cures, are passed over in silence, here is a poor Canaanite, having apparently neither husband nor friend, who has enrolled her name in the annals of the gospel; for she had faith which would have honoured the first of prophets. And as Christ has improved his feeding of the multitude, John 6:27, and his raising the dead, John 11:25, with a spiritual gloss, so ought we to do in the prominent case of this woman.

Observe then, that afflictions are useful to the soul. They enable us to see the insufficiency of worldly comforts, and the unavailing aid of physicians; they repress the confidence we are apt to indulge in the time of health and prosperity; and they discover, in a manner which theory can never do, the infinite need we have of divine support and protection.

In our troubles we are here taught to go directly to the Lord for counsel and comfort, with persevering prayer. Whether we groan under trouble of mind, or under the rod of affliction, the Lord alone can save in the day of trouble. Without his blessing, other means are destitute of effect. This woman cried for mercy, addressing the Saviour by faith, and with his proper titles.

Delays in answering prayer are not to be interpreted in any unfavourable way. The silence of Jesus is wise and good. This woman cried at first for her daughter; ultimately she said, Lord help me. Perhaps, when we first cry, we are but half awakened; we pray for afflictions to be removed before our sins are removed, but David never fell into any temporal trouble without always remembering his sins.

Though good men should pray for us, and apparently be denied, we are not to be discouraged. Jesus denied, as was thought, the disciples, by saying, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel; yet the gentiles were to follow Israel in the covenant. He had reasons of a hallowing character for deferring the blessing.

We must persevere in prayer till every sin is confessed, and till the soul is impressed with the most humiliating views of its lost condition; for dogs are more worthy of bread than sinners are of pardon.

The frowns and apparent denials of Christ are tokens of a blessing. While he gives us a heart to pray, let us never despair of success. When he said, it is not meet to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs, all the company thought this woman’s to be a lost case. But she, drowning in sorrow and trouble, saw one twig which brought her safe to shore: even from the name of “dogs,” she read her fairest claim to the crumbs. Here was heroic faith; faith resolved either to obtain the blessing, or to perish at the feet of Christ. Here was great faith, which attracted a great encomium. “Be it unto thee even as thou wilt.” Here the waters of grace flowed with the greater force for a momentary obstruction. This case is set before us to encourage perseverance in prayer, that we may rise the higher in importunity whenever the blessing is apparently delayed.

22. A woman of Canaan — She was a Gentile, but she had heard of and seems to have believed in the Jewish Messiah. She is called by Mark a Greek, that is, a heathen by religion, and also a Syrophenician by birth. Phenicia was the Greek name of that strip of country inhabited by the ancient Canaanites, lying between the Lebanon range and the Mediterranean. That part of it which was included in the Roman province of Syria was called Syrophenicia. Coasts — Territories. Thou Son of David — She calls him by his Jewish name and pedigree. She does this to gain his attention and good-will. At the same time it shows that she had become acquainted with Jewish ideas and probably believed in them. Daughter… devil — Horrible misfortune! disease and insanity are terrible; but what must be the mother’s feelings to find her child struggling under a demon’s grasp? No wonder that when she hears that a man possessing divine power to relieve approaches, she comes to him and with all the energy of desperate prayer pursues him with her outcries.

Verse 22. A woman of Canaan. — St. Mark calls her “a Greek,” that is, a Gentile, “a Syro-Phenician by nation.” Syro or Syrian Phenicia was so called from its being formerly included in the kingdom of Syria. It was that part of the coast of Canaan on the Mediterranean in which the cities of Tyre and Sidon were situated; and is in the Acts and the gospels termed “the coasts of Tyre and Sidon,” as in the preceding verse. This woman is called a woman of Canaan, because that country was still inhabited, at least in part, by the descendants of Canaan, of whom Sidon was the eldest son. Canaanite as she was, she had heard of Christ, or seen his works, and acknowledged him to be the Messiah, the Son of David, by which title she addresses him, and thus declares her faith.

V. 23. He answered her not a word-He sometimes tries our faith in like manner.

Verse 23. He answered her not a word.] Seemed to take time to consider her request, and to give her the opportunity of exercising her faith, and manifesting her fervour.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

23. He answered her not a word — The order of his mission is limited to the house of Israel. There is indeed misery in plenty in heathendom; and though for them he will make atonement before he returns to his Father, yet his miracles and his preaching belong to Israel. Not a word — He said no unkind word. He did not repel her. He simply kept upon his way to pass her, as he must the great mass of the world lying in sin and misery. Send her away — They mean (though they are very careless in saying it) that he shall dismiss her by performing her request. But they would have our Lord merciful to her in order to get rid of her.

Crieth after us — Here in this foreign land, this woman is making us ridiculous by screaming at our heels! Besides, the disciples know that the very reason of being in that remote locality is to escape dangerous notoriety. Alas! how do men despise the excitement with which they do not sympathize! Many cannot endure the excitement of prayer, who are fond of the excitement of carousal.

Verse 23. He answered her not a word. — He knew the strength of her faith, and the extent of the trial to which it might safely be put; and he appeared to disregard her, as though in denial of her request, that her faith might in the result be more illustriously displayed.

Send her away, for she crieth after us. — Dismiss her, by granting her request, for she is overwhelmed with distress, as is manifest by her cries. Those who think that the reason why the disciples thus urged our Lord, was, that they might rid themselves of a clamorous petitioner, do them little credit, and there is not the least reason for so uncandid an interpretation. That they wished her request to be granted, is clear, from our Lord’s reply; and that her cries had excited a deep commiseration in her case may be well presumed: and it is pleasing to notice this instance of the triumph of benevolent and charitable feelings toward a Gentile and a Canaanite over the Jewish prejudices of the disciples; it was a proof that they had BEGUN, at least, to imbibe the spirit of their Master. Still, however, for the first time, our blessed Lord in appearance, but in appearance only, was deaf to the voice of a suffering and believing suppliant, and answered, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. His personal mission while on earth was to them, and he had not yet accomplished it. So far, however, were the Gentiles from being excluded from the scope and purpose of his ministry on earth, that he was even then training up apostles to “preach the Gospel to every creature;” and in a few instances, even during his stay on earth, he extended both temporal and spiritual mercies to individuals of different nations.

V. 24. I am not sent-Not primarily; not yet.

Verse 24. I am not sent but unto the lost sheep] By the Divine appointment, I am come to preach the Gospel to the Jews only. There are certain preachers who should learn a lesson of important instruction from this part of our Lord’s conduct. As soon as they hear of a lost sheep being found by other ministers, they give all diligence to get that one into their fold: but display little earnestness in seeking in the wilderness for those that are lost. This conduct, perhaps, proceeds from a consciousness of their inability to perform the work of an evangelist; and leads them to sit down in the labours of others, rather than submit to the reproach of presiding over empty chapels. Such persons should either dig or beg immediately, as they are a reproach to the pastoral office; for, not being sent of God, they cannot profit the people.

The wilderness of this world is sufficiently wide and uncultivated. Sinners abound every where; and there is ample room for all truly religious people, who have zeal for God, and love for their perishing follow creatures, to put forth all their strength, employ all their time, and exercise all their talents, in proclaiming the Gospel of God; not only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, but to a lost WORLD. Nor can such exertions be unsuccessful. There the pure truth of God is preached, many will be converted. Where that truth is preached, though with a mixture of error, some will be converted, for God will bless his own truth. But where nothing but false doctrine is preached, no soul is converted: for God will never sanction error by a miracle of his mercy.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

24. He answered — To the disciples. The fact that our Lord gives this reason to the disciples shows that he is assigning the true cause of his actions. It is not, as some think, to draw out the woman’s faith, that he declines to hear her prayer; but because his immediate mission is not to Gentile, but to Jew. Sent — All his actions are under the control of Him from whom he has received his commission; and the tenor of that commission limits him to Israel. Lost sheep — Such is the character of which the whole house of Israel consists. They are all lost sheep, and to them is he sent.

V. 25. Then came she-Into the house where he now was.

Verse 25. Lord, help me.] Let me also share in the deliverance afforded to Israel.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

25. Then came she — During the conversation with the disciples, our Lord seems to have stopped his walk a moment; and the woman, who was before running behind him, improves the opportunity to place herself before him, and flinging herself at his feet pants forth this desperate ejaculation: “Lord, help me.” “O dismiss these cold thoughts about thy mission; think of my misery; and have mercy, not so much on my daughter, as upon me in saving her.”

Verse 25. Then came she and worshipped him, &c. — Perhaps the foregoing reply to the disciples was made in the hearing of the woman waiting with intense anxiety the result of their application in her behalf; but as she had not been discouraged by his apparently repulsive silence, neither was she driven to despair by those still more forcibly repelling words, I am not sent but to the house of Israel. Still, the pressure of her case, and her mighty faith, which yet persuaded her that the Son of David must have mercy upon her, urges her to a more direct attempt. She came and worshipped him, throwing her whole case upon his compassion in one burst of agonized feeling, — Lord, help me.

Verse 26. The children’s bread] The salvation provided for the Jews, who were termed the children of the kingdom. And cast it to the kunarioiv, little dogs-to the curs; such the Gentiles were reputed by the Jewish people, and our Lord uses that form of speech which was common among his countrymen. What terrible repulses! and yet she still perseveres!

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

26. It is not meet — Not fitting. It is not in the order which God has established. Children’s bread… dogs — The original is little dogs; so that with the contempt, there is a tenderness in the epithet. Yet our Lord begins to recognize in her a Gentile that may prove an Israelite indeed if fully tested. He therefore puts her in a most humble place, to see if she has an humble, though a Gentile heart.

Verse 26. But he answered and said, &c. — From the known character and compassionate conduct of Christ, as displayed in all former instances, the conclusion in every mind would be, “Now this pleading mother MUST prevail in behalf of her daughter; that daughter is afflicted with the most grievous calamity; that mother is distressed to agony, and lies imploring at his feet who never yet rejected a prayer, and her faith is equal to her earnestness.” But a farther trial awaited her; and the reply of our Lord rose even to seeming austerity, and Jewish moroseness: — It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. “Dog,” was the common term of contempt used of every Gentile, by the Jews; but our Lord adopted it only to bring forth the pious perseverance of this affectionate mother into so strong a light as to shame those who should, hereafter at least, indiscriminately apply it. He only could safely apply so severe a proof to this good woman; for he well knew the strength of that resolution with which her faith had inspired her.

Verse 27. Truth, Lord] nai kurie, Yes, Lord. This appears to be not so much an assent, as a bold reply to our Lord’s reason for apparently rejecting her suit.

The little dogs share with the children, for they eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. I do not desire what is provided for these highly favoured children, only what they leave: a single exertion of thy almighty power, in the healing of my afflicted daughter, is all that I wish for; and this the highly favoured Jews can well spare, without lessening the provision made for themselves. Is not this the sense of this noble woman’s reply?

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

27. Truth, Lord — Desperation almost makes the woman witty. To take your opponent’s words and give them a turn against him is always a dexterous mode of mastering him. The woman admits the dismissing epithet, and proves that it entitles her to his mercy. “Dog is it I am? And the Jews my masters? Then, at least, let me have the crumb that mercy does not deny to the very dog.”

Verse 27. And she said, Truth, Lord; yet the dogs, &c. — Her humility is such that she spurns not at the offensive title; she is too intent upon the case of her daughter: for this she knew too well, that if not relieved by Christ, there was no hope in any other; and, instead of cavilling at the reply, she with admirable readiness, prompted by the working of a heart intent upon its object, finds a reason for urging her request in the very terms of the refusal, — “Let the full provisions of THE TABLE be reserved for the children; but at least let the CRUMBS of thy mercy be vouch-safed to me.” Nai is sometimes a particle of beseeching, as Philemon, verse 20, nai, adelfe, yea, brother, I beseech thee, brother, and answers to the Hebrew an. The rejoinder of this extraordinary woman may therefore be taken to import, “Still I beseech thee, Lord, to help me, for even the dogs eat of the crumbs,” &c. Or, if nai be understood to mark assent, there is an ellipsis to be supplied, as, “Truth, Lord; but nevertheless grant my request, gar, for even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” This sense is, however, well expressed by the yet in our translation.

V. 28. Thy faith-Thy reliance on the power and goodness of God.

Verse 28. O woman, great is thy faith] The hinderances thrown in this woman’s way only tended to increase her faith. Her faith resembles a river, which becomes enlarged by the dykes opposed to it, till at last it sweeps them entirely away with it,

Her daughter was made whole] Persevering faith and prayer are next to omnipotent. No person can thus pray and believe, without receiving all his soul requires. This is one of the finest lessons in the book of God for a penitent, or for a discouraged believer. Look to Jesus! As sure as God is in heaven, so surely will he hear and answer thee to the eternal salvation of thy soul! Be not discouraged at a little delay: when thou art properly prepared to receive the blessing, then thou shalt have it. Look up; thy salvation is at hand. Jesus admires this faith, to the end that we may admire and imitate it, and may reap the same fruits and advantages from it.

Verses 21-28. Jesus departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon — Not to those cities which were to have no share in his mighty works, Matthew 11:21, 22; but into that part of the land of Israel which bordered on their coast. And behold a woman of Canaan — Or, a Syrophœnician, as she is called, Mark 7:26; Canaan being also called Syrophœnicia, as lying between Syria, properly so called, and Phœnicia, by the sea-side. Came, and cried unto him — From afar; Have mercy on me, thou son of David — Consider my distressed case, and extend thy compassion to me, though a stranger. By addressing him as the son of David, she shows she had some knowledge of the promised Messiah, and that she believed Jesus to be that divine person. But he answered her not a word — He did not seem to regard her, intending that the greatness of her faith should be manifested: an end highly worthy of the wisdom of Jesus; because it not only justified his conduct in working a miracle for a heathen, but was a sharp rebuke to the Jews for their infidelity. Our Lord often tries the faith of his followers in a similar way. His disciples besought him, saying, Send her away — The disciples, being ignorant of our Lord’s design, were uneasy at the woman’s importunity, thinking, if she were permitted to follow them, that they would soon be discovered. Desiring, therefore, to get rid of her, they entreat their Master to dismiss her as he was wont to dismiss such petitioners, namely, with the grant of her request. But he answered, I am not sent — Not primarily; not yet; but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel — By the lost sheep of Israel we are to understand the whole nation of the Jews, who, being as sheep dispersed, and having no shepherd, are therefore called lost sheep. To them the Messiah was first promised; to them he came; and to them his personal ministry was to be almost wholly confined: and hence he is styled a minister of the circumcision, Romans 15:8. Thus at the first Jesus seemed both to refuse this woman’s request, and the intercession of the disciples in her behalf. She, however, far from being discouraged by the repulse, drew near and worshipped him — That is, fell on her knees before him; saying, Lord, help me — Her necessity and distress were great, and she was unwilling to take a denial. But he said — What was still more discouraging, and seemed to cut her off from all hope, and would, doubtless, have driven her to despair, if she had not had very strong faith indeed; It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs — “The Jews gloried greatly in the honourable title of God’s children, because of all nations they alone knew and worshipped the true God. They gave the name of dogs to the heathen for their idolatry and other pollutions, by which they had degraded themselves from the rank of reasonable creatures: this appellation, therefore, marked the impurity of the Gentiles, and their odiousness in the sight of God; at the same time conveying an idea of the contempt in which they were held by the holy nation. But though, in some respects, it was applicable, it must have been very offensive to the heathen. Nevertheless, this woman neither refused it, nor grudged the Jews the honourable title of children. She acknowledged the justness of what Christ said, and by a strong exercise of faith drew an argument from it, which the candour and benevolence of his disposition could not resist.” She said, Truth, Lord — It would not be fit to put the dogs and the children on a level; Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs, &c. — “Let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than do the children of a family by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” — Macknight. Then Jesus answered, O woman, great is thy faith — There were several other graces that shone bright in her; wisdom, humility, meekness, patience, perseverance in prayer, but these were the product of her faith, and therefore Christ particularly commends that: because of all graces faith honours Christ most, therefore of all graces Christ honours faith most. This woman’s faith was great indeed, considering that she had no promise to rely on, and had suffered so many repulses, joined with such seeming contempt, and yet still she retained a confidence in the mercy, kindness, and power of Jesus. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt — Thy request is granted in all its extent. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour — Thus the mother’s faith prevailed for the daughter’s cure, and the patient’s being at a distance was no hinderance to the efficacy of Christ’s word, He spake, and it was done. We learn two important lessons from the success which the suit of this Canaanitish woman met with: 1st, that God is no respecter of persons, but always accepts sincere faith and fervent prayer, proceeding from an humble, penitent heart. 2d, That it is our duty to continue in prayer with earnestness, although the answer thereof should be long deferred.

28. O woman — The Lord breaks forth in exclamation! He chooses to find himself overcome. Her faith takes her out as an exception to the whole Gentile world. She shall be as an Israelite. The very letter of her prayer shall be fulfilled. Mark says that when she returned home “she found the devil gone out, and her daughter laid upon the bed.” Faith — Her faith is not only peculiar in its greatness, but peculiar in this, that it obtains a blessing not for herself but for another. Or, to express it more truly, she obtains her blessing for herself upon another. It is a case of successful intercession. For her sake and through her fervent effectual prayer did the blessing light upon her offspring. And so a blessed thing it may be to be the child of the praying parent. And encouraged may every praying parent be to persevere in fervent prayer, for even the most hopeless case of sin or suffering of a child.

Verse 28. O woman, great is thy faith. — For the manifestation of the power of faith in man, and to commend this great principle to all, the faith of this Canaanite was put to so severe a test; but the moment that end was answered, the compassion of our Lord, which throughout the whole scene had been rising still higher, at once breaks forth in its fulness of grace and power. Be it unto thee even as thou wilt; and her daughter was made whole from that very hour; as she found upon her return to her house. It is here most instructive to mark the character of the faith which our Lord thus commends and rewards. It was not faith merely in his Messiahship, though that was the ground of its higher exercises; it was grounded upon the knowledge which the woman had attained of his character, as manifested in his acts of power and compassion; and on this it rested all through the trial to which it was subjected. To his ABILITY and his kindness the piercing eye of that faith looked through all the veils with which even our Lord himself had surrounded them: he was silent, he refused the intercession of his disciples; he answered in the contemptuous language of the Jews to her own imploring supplication; yet still she received no DIRECT denial. The language was contemptuous, but to faith it seemed not to sound like his own; and still she resolutely clung to the full persuasion that he was “full of grace and truth.” Such is true faith in its highest exercises in all. It looks through every thing simply to the LOVE, PITY, and POWER of the Saviour; and presses its plea until it triumphantly carries off the blessing.

V. 29. The sea of Galilee-The Jews gave the name of seas to all large lakes. This was a hundred furlongs long, and forty broad. It was called also, the sea of Tiberias. It lay on the borders of Galilee, and the city of Tiberias stood on its western shore. It was likewise styled the lake of Gennesareth: perhaps a corruption of Cinnereth, the name by which it was anciently called, Numbers 34:11. Mark 7:31.

Verse 29. Went up into a mountain] to orov, THE mountain. “Meaning,” says Wakefield, “some particular mountain which he was accustomed to frequent; for, whenever it is spoken of at a time when Jesus is in Galilee, it is always discriminated by the article. Compare Matthew 4:18, with Matthew 5:1; and Matthew 13:54, with Matthew 14:23; and Matthew 28:16. I suppose it was mount Tabor.”

Verses 29-31. Jesus came unto the sea of Galilee — The Jews gave the name of seas to all large lakes. This was one hundred furlongs long, and forty broad. It was called also the sea of Tiberias. It lay on the borders of Galilee, and the city of Tiberias stood on its western shore. It was likewise styled the lake of Gennesaret; perhaps a corruption of Cinnereth, the name by which it was anciently called. See notes on Numbers 34:11, and Matthew 4:15, 16. And went up into a mountain and sat down — Not only to rest himself, but also, and especially, to teach the people, who resorted to him in great multitudes; having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, &c. — The dumb were probably deaf also, and the maimed, such as had lost one or more limbs, as the word kullouv properly signifies. It is true, it is sometimes applied to those who were only disabled in those parts; we may “reasonably suppose, however, that among the many maimed who were brought on such occasions, there were, at least, some whose limbs had been cut off; and I thinks,” says Dr. Doddridge, “hardly any of the miracles of our Lord were more illustrious and amazing than the recovery of such.” And many others — Who had different complaints; and cast them down at Jesus’s feet — Entreating his compassion, which was so moved at the sight of so many people in distress, that he graciously healed them all. On these miracles, Dr. Macknight remarks as follows: “On the dumb, who are commonly deaf also, he not only conferred the faculty of hearing and pronouncing articulate sounds, but conveyed into their minds at once the whole language of their country, making them perfectly acquainted with all the words in it, their significations, and their uses, so as to comprehend the whole distinctly in their memories, and, at the same time, he gave them the habit of speaking it both fluently and copiously. This was a kind of miracle vastly astonishing. The change that was produced in the bodies of the men was but the least part of it; what passed in their minds was the principal thing, being an effect so extensive that nothing inferior to infinite power could produce it. With respect to the maimed, that is, persons who had lost their legs and arms, Jesus gave them new members in their stead. But when he thus created such parts of their bodies as were wanting, without having any thing at all, as a subject, to work upon, the spectators could not have been more surprised had they seen him make a whole human body out of the dust of the earth.” Accordingly, on the sight of these miracles, it is here said, They wondered and glorified the God of Israel. See also Matthew 9:33; and 12:22, 23; Mark 7:37.

29. Departed… thence… unto the sea of Galilee — From the northwest to the northeastern part of Galilee. The probable reason of these sudden movements is given in note on verse 21. Our Lord seems to pass by Capernaum without a visit, as he had lately abruptly left there after the altercation with the Pharisees who came from Jerusalem to assault him. Went up into a mountain — A mountain range on the east side of Lake Gennesaret: It was in the dominions of Herod Philip. See note on 14:13. Sat down there — He seated himself like a rabbi to teach on the slope of the mountain.

Verse 30. Those that were-maimed] kullouv. Wetstein has fully proved that those who had lost a hand, foot, &c., were termed kulloi by the Greeks. Kypke has shown, from Hippocrates, that the word was also used to signify those who had distorted or dislocated legs, knees, hands, &c. Mr. Wakefield is fully of opinion that it means here those who had lost a limb, and brings an incontestable proof from Matthew 18:8; Mark 9:43. “If thy hand cause thee to offend, CUT IT OFF; it is better for thee to enter into life (kullov) WITHOUT A LIMB, than, having thy TWO hands, to go away into hell.” What an astonishing manifestation of omnific and creative energy must the reproduction of a hand, foot, &c., be at the word or touch of Jesus! As this was a mere act of creative power, like that of multiplying the bread, those who allow that the above is the meaning of the word will hardly attempt to doubt the proper Divinity of Christ. Creation, in any sense of the word, i.e. causing something to exist that had no existence before, can belong only to God, because it is an effect of an unlimited power; to say that such power could be delegated to a person is to say that the person to whom it is delegated becomes, for the time being, the omnipotent God; and that God, who has thus clothed a creature with his omnipotence, ceases to be omnipotent himself; for there cannot be two omnipotents, nor can the Supreme Being delegate his omnipotence to another, and have it at the same time. I confess, then, that this is to me an unanswerable argument for the Divinity of our blessed Lord. Others may doubt; I can’t help believing.

Verses 29-31. Jesus came unto the sea of Galilee — The Jews gave the name of seas to all large lakes. This was one hundred furlongs long, and forty broad. It was called also the sea of Tiberias. It lay on the borders of Galilee, and the city of Tiberias stood on its western shore. It was likewise styled the lake of Gennesaret; perhaps a corruption of Cinnereth, the name by which it was anciently called. See notes on Numbers 34:11, and Matthew 4:15, 16. And went up into a mountain and sat down — Not only to rest himself, but also, and especially, to teach the people, who resorted to him in great multitudes; having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, &c. — The dumb were probably deaf also, and the maimed, such as had lost one or more limbs, as the word kullouv properly signifies. It is true, it is sometimes applied to those who were only disabled in those parts; we may “reasonably suppose, however, that among the many maimed who were brought on such occasions, there were, at least, some whose limbs had been cut off; and I thinks,” says Dr. Doddridge, “hardly any of the miracles of our Lord were more illustrious and amazing than the recovery of such.” And many others — Who had different complaints; and cast them down at Jesus’s feet — Entreating his compassion, which was so moved at the sight of so many people in distress, that he graciously healed them all. On these miracles, Dr. Macknight remarks as follows: “On the dumb, who are commonly deaf also, he not only conferred the faculty of hearing and pronouncing articulate sounds, but conveyed into their minds at once the whole language of their country, making them perfectly acquainted with all the words in it, their significations, and their uses, so as to comprehend the whole distinctly in their memories, and, at the same time, he gave them the habit of speaking it both fluently and copiously. This was a kind of miracle vastly astonishing. The change that was produced in the bodies of the men was but the least part of it; what passed in their minds was the principal thing, being an effect so extensive that nothing inferior to infinite power could produce it. With respect to the maimed, that is, persons who had lost their legs and arms, Jesus gave them new members in their stead. But when he thus created such parts of their bodies as were wanting, without having any thing at all, as a subject, to work upon, the spectators could not have been more surprised had they seen him make a whole human body out of the dust of the earth.” Accordingly, on the sight of these miracles, it is here said, They wondered and glorified the God of Israel. See also Matthew 9:33; and 12:22, 23; Mark 7:37.

30. Great multitudes — This was a region which he had before visited, and the people are all alive to avail themselves, even from great distances, of his power of healing. Maimed — Whose limbs were deformed from misfortunes at birth. Cast them down — Expressive of the humility of their submission.

Verse 30. The maimed. — Not deprived of one or more limbs, but the use of them by distortion or paralysis. The maimed are by some distinguished from the lame, by referring the infirmity of the former to the arms, and that of the latter to the feet; by others the “maimed,” kullouv, are supposed to have suffered distortion of the limbs; and “the lame,” cwlouv, to have been rendered so by accident rather than disease.

Verse 31. The multitude wondered] And well they might, when they had such proofs of the miraculous power and love of God before their eyes. Blessed be God! the same miracles are continued in their spiritual reference. All the disorders of the soul are still cured by the power of Jesus.

Verses 29-31. Jesus came unto the sea of Galilee — The Jews gave the name of seas to all large lakes. This was one hundred furlongs long, and forty broad. It was called also the sea of Tiberias. It lay on the borders of Galilee, and the city of Tiberias stood on its western shore. It was likewise styled the lake of Gennesaret; perhaps a corruption of Cinnereth, the name by which it was anciently called. See notes on Numbers 34:11, and Matthew 4:15, 16. And went up into a mountain and sat down — Not only to rest himself, but also, and especially, to teach the people, who resorted to him in great multitudes; having with them those that were lame, blind, dumb, maimed, &c. — The dumb were probably deaf also, and the maimed, such as had lost one or more limbs, as the word kullouv properly signifies. It is true, it is sometimes applied to those who were only disabled in those parts; we may “reasonably suppose, however, that among the many maimed who were brought on such occasions, there were, at least, some whose limbs had been cut off; and I thinks,” says Dr. Doddridge, “hardly any of the miracles of our Lord were more illustrious and amazing than the recovery of such.” And many others — Who had different complaints; and cast them down at Jesus’s feet — Entreating his compassion, which was so moved at the sight of so many people in distress, that he graciously healed them all. On these miracles, Dr. Macknight remarks as follows: “On the dumb, who are commonly deaf also, he not only conferred the faculty of hearing and pronouncing articulate sounds, but conveyed into their minds at once the whole language of their country, making them perfectly acquainted with all the words in it, their significations, and their uses, so as to comprehend the whole distinctly in their memories, and, at the same time, he gave them the habit of speaking it both fluently and copiously. This was a kind of miracle vastly astonishing. The change that was produced in the bodies of the men was but the least part of it; what passed in their minds was the principal thing, being an effect so extensive that nothing inferior to infinite power could produce it. With respect to the maimed, that is, persons who had lost their legs and arms, Jesus gave them new members in their stead. But when he thus created such parts of their bodies as were wanting, without having any thing at all, as a subject, to work upon, the spectators could not have been more surprised had they seen him make a whole human body out of the dust of the earth.” Accordingly, on the sight of these miracles, it is here said, They wondered and glorified the God of Israel. See also Matthew 9:33; and 12:22, 23; Mark 7:37.

31. Glorified the God of Israel — The same God who had performed such wonders for ancient Israel in the days of the Old Testament. They were feeling as if the days of wonders from his hand were now returning.

Verse 31. They glorified the God of Israel. — The place where these astonishing miracles were wrought was near the sea of Galilee; yet, in a desert place into which the multitudes had followed him: and if we consider the number and nature of the miracles suddenly effected upon all who came or were brought to Christ; the joy which the afflicted persons themselves must have manifested at their instant and perfect relief from the most melancholy infirmities, as blindness and dumbness, and from the most painful sicknesses and infirmities; the absence of the Pharisees; whose captious and detracting remarks did not here interpose to prevent the full flow of those grateful feelings which the people at large had so often manifested, — we cannot wonder that the deserts of Galilee were made to resound with the high praises of the God of Israel. To this multitude, so well disposed, and many of whom we may believe were afterward gathered unto the Christian Church, and numbered with true believers, our Lord farther showed his compassion by working a miracle similar to that by which he fed the five thousand near Bethsaida. From seven loaves and a few small fishes, after giving thanks, and distributing them to the disciples, as in the former instance, he supplied their wants, after they had expended their provisions, having been with him three days. See notes on Matthew 14:15, &c.

V. 32. They continue with me now three days-It was now the third day since they came. Mark 8:1.

Verse 32. I have compassion, &c.] See a similar transaction explained, Matthew 14:14-22.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

32. Compassion on the multitude — Some faith had they shown in attending his word and works. The tenderness of our Lord suggests all the pitiableness of their case. What they would have thought of had they framed a prayer for succour, he has thought of before them. So does our merciful Lord know what we need before we ask him; and we have need to ask him only in order to make ourselves in the right position to receive the spiritual blessings he would confer.

Verse 33. Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness, &c.] Human foresight, even in the followers of Christ, is very short. In a thousand instances, if we supply not its deficiency by faith, we shall be always embarrassed, and often miserable. This world is a desert, where nothing can be found to satisfy the soul of man, but the salvation which Christ has procured.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

§ 69. — THE MIRACLE OF FEEDING THE FOUR THOUSAND, 33-39.

Skeptical critics have maintained that this narrative is a traditional repetition, by mistake, of the miracle of feeding the five thousand. That there was no oversight, however, on the part of the author of this Gospel is plain from Matthew 16:9, 10, where both accounts are alluded to in connection. But there is a minute but convincing argument for the genuineness of the two accounts thus given by Mr. Alford: “It is, that whereas the baskets in which the fragments were collected on the other occasion are called by all four evangelists kofinoi, cophini, those used for that purpose after this miracle are, in both Matthew and Mark, spuridev, spurides. And when our Lord refers to the two miracles, the same distinction is observed; a particularity which could not have arisen except as pointing to a matter of fact, that (whatever the distinction be, which is uncertain) different kinds of baskets were used on the two occasions.” But besides the differences in detail, such as the different number of the fed, and of the loaves and fishes, there are differences important in character. The first miraculous feeding was performed for the inhabitants who followed Jesus, and anticipated his debarkation from the western side of the lake. They meet Jesus in intense excitement at the shore, and the miracle takes place upon the plain of Butaiha, near the village of Bethsaida. This second feeding takes place when Jesus is secreting himself from Herod Antipas. He rapidly and quietly passes to the coast northeast of the lake, out of the dominion of Herod; and it is in the country, probably, of the Decapolis that the miracle takes place. It is probably the multitudes from the eastern side who are sharers of the product of this miracle. And we cannot help thinking that there is some truth in the ancient opinion that they were mostly Gentiles; and thus an intimation is given that since the Jews have had their banquet at the table of God, the Gentiles too shall have a share. After the former miracle, the Lord sends forward his disciples by ship at night, and overtakes them before morning dawn by walking upon the sea. After the present miracle our Lord leaves the multitudes in their own regions, and departs to Magdala.

33. Whence should we have… bread — The wavering reply of the apostles evinces a recollection of the former miracle. They have not indeed the boldness to call for a miracle, as his mother Mary did at the wedding of Cana; and mother though she was, she received a check from her son and Lord. They do not say, If we are to feed this multitude your miraculous power must meet the expense. They only put a modest but suggestive Whence? Their eyes then watch every movement, we may suppose, of his lip and hand.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

34. How many loaves…? — What is your present stock? God has in his ordinary providence furnished thus much; and these shall be a germ or basis for a special supply of enough for all. So God has given man the natural powers of reason and conscience, which serve as a basis for his gracious super-additions.

Twice, then, in the same general region of country, and under the same general necessity, did the Saviour supply “bread in the wilderness” to the needy multitudes who, far from their homes, stayed to listen to his word. This multitude thought not of making him a king; and he quietly departs with his disciples, crossing the Gennesaret.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

§ 69. — THE MIRACLE OF FEEDING THE FOUR THOUSAND, 33-39.

Skeptical critics have maintained that this narrative is a traditional repetition, by mistake, of the miracle of feeding the five thousand. That there was no oversight, however, on the part of the author of this Gospel is plain from Matthew 16:9, 10, where both accounts are alluded to in connection. But there is a minute but convincing argument for the genuineness of the two accounts thus given by Mr. Alford: “It is, that whereas the baskets in which the fragments were collected on the other occasion are called by all four evangelists kofinoi, cophini, those used for that purpose after this miracle are, in both Matthew and Mark, spuridev, spurides. And when our Lord refers to the two miracles, the same distinction is observed; a particularity which could not have arisen except as pointing to a matter of fact, that (whatever the distinction be, which is uncertain) different kinds of baskets were used on the two occasions.” But besides the differences in detail, such as the different number of the fed, and of the loaves and fishes, there are differences important in character. The first miraculous feeding was performed for the inhabitants who followed Jesus, and anticipated his debarkation from the western side of the lake. They meet Jesus in intense excitement at the shore, and the miracle takes place upon the plain of Butaiha, near the village of Bethsaida. This second feeding takes place when Jesus is secreting himself from Herod Antipas. He rapidly and quietly passes to the coast northeast of the lake, out of the dominion of Herod; and it is in the country, probably, of the Decapolis that the miracle takes place. It is probably the multitudes from the eastern side who are sharers of the product of this miracle. And we cannot help thinking that there is some truth in the ancient opinion that they were mostly Gentiles; and thus an intimation is given that since the Jews have had their banquet at the table of God, the Gentiles too shall have a share. After the former miracle, the Lord sends forward his disciples by ship at night, and overtakes them before morning dawn by walking upon the sea. After the present miracle our Lord leaves the multitudes in their own regions, and departs to Magdala.

33. Whence should we have… bread — The wavering reply of the apostles evinces a recollection of the former miracle. They have not indeed the boldness to call for a miracle, as his mother Mary did at the wedding of Cana; and mother though she was, she received a check from her son and Lord. They do not say, If we are to feed this multitude your miraculous power must meet the expense. They only put a modest but suggestive Whence? Their eyes then watch every movement, we may suppose, of his lip and hand.

V. 36. He gave thanks, or blessed the food-That is, he praised God for it, and prayed for a blessing upon it.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

§ 69. — THE MIRACLE OF FEEDING THE FOUR THOUSAND, 33-39.

Skeptical critics have maintained that this narrative is a traditional repetition, by mistake, of the miracle of feeding the five thousand. That there was no oversight, however, on the part of the author of this Gospel is plain from Matthew 16:9, 10, where both accounts are alluded to in connection. But there is a minute but convincing argument for the genuineness of the two accounts thus given by Mr. Alford: “It is, that whereas the baskets in which the fragments were collected on the other occasion are called by all four evangelists kofinoi, cophini, those used for that purpose after this miracle are, in both Matthew and Mark, spuridev, spurides. And when our Lord refers to the two miracles, the same distinction is observed; a particularity which could not have arisen except as pointing to a matter of fact, that (whatever the distinction be, which is uncertain) different kinds of baskets were used on the two occasions.” But besides the differences in detail, such as the different number of the fed, and of the loaves and fishes, there are differences important in character. The first miraculous feeding was performed for the inhabitants who followed Jesus, and anticipated his debarkation from the western side of the lake. They meet Jesus in intense excitement at the shore, and the miracle takes place upon the plain of Butaiha, near the village of Bethsaida. This second feeding takes place when Jesus is secreting himself from Herod Antipas. He rapidly and quietly passes to the coast northeast of the lake, out of the dominion of Herod; and it is in the country, probably, of the Decapolis that the miracle takes place. It is probably the multitudes from the eastern side who are sharers of the product of this miracle. And we cannot help thinking that there is some truth in the ancient opinion that they were mostly Gentiles; and thus an intimation is given that since the Jews have had their banquet at the table of God, the Gentiles too shall have a share. After the former miracle, the Lord sends forward his disciples by ship at night, and overtakes them before morning dawn by walking upon the sea. After the present miracle our Lord leaves the multitudes in their own regions, and departs to Magdala.

33. Whence should we have… bread — The wavering reply of the apostles evinces a recollection of the former miracle. They have not indeed the boldness to call for a miracle, as his mother Mary did at the wedding of Cana; and mother though she was, she received a check from her son and Lord. They do not say, If we are to feed this multitude your miraculous power must meet the expense. They only put a modest but suggestive Whence? Their eyes then watch every movement, we may suppose, of his lip and hand.

Verse 37. They did all eat, and were filled] ecortasqhsan-they were satisfied. The husks of worldly pleasures may fill the man, but cannot satisfy the soul. A man may eat, and not be satisfied: it is the interest therefore of every follower of Christ to follow him till he be fed, and to feed on him till he be satisfied.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

§ 69. — THE MIRACLE OF FEEDING THE FOUR THOUSAND, 33-39.

Skeptical critics have maintained that this narrative is a traditional repetition, by mistake, of the miracle of feeding the five thousand. That there was no oversight, however, on the part of the author of this Gospel is plain from Matthew 16:9, 10, where both accounts are alluded to in connection. But there is a minute but convincing argument for the genuineness of the two accounts thus given by Mr. Alford: “It is, that whereas the baskets in which the fragments were collected on the other occasion are called by all four evangelists kofinoi, cophini, those used for that purpose after this miracle are, in both Matthew and Mark, spuridev, spurides. And when our Lord refers to the two miracles, the same distinction is observed; a particularity which could not have arisen except as pointing to a matter of fact, that (whatever the distinction be, which is uncertain) different kinds of baskets were used on the two occasions.” But besides the differences in detail, such as the different number of the fed, and of the loaves and fishes, there are differences important in character. The first miraculous feeding was performed for the inhabitants who followed Jesus, and anticipated his debarkation from the western side of the lake. They meet Jesus in intense excitement at the shore, and the miracle takes place upon the plain of Butaiha, near the village of Bethsaida. This second feeding takes place when Jesus is secreting himself from Herod Antipas. He rapidly and quietly passes to the coast northeast of the lake, out of the dominion of Herod; and it is in the country, probably, of the Decapolis that the miracle takes place. It is probably the multitudes from the eastern side who are sharers of the product of this miracle. And we cannot help thinking that there is some truth in the ancient opinion that they were mostly Gentiles; and thus an intimation is given that since the Jews have had their banquet at the table of God, the Gentiles too shall have a share. After the former miracle, the Lord sends forward his disciples by ship at night, and overtakes them before morning dawn by walking upon the sea. After the present miracle our Lord leaves the multitudes in their own regions, and departs to Magdala.

33. Whence should we have… bread — The wavering reply of the apostles evinces a recollection of the former miracle. They have not indeed the boldness to call for a miracle, as his mother Mary did at the wedding of Cana; and mother though she was, she received a check from her son and Lord. They do not say, If we are to feed this multitude your miraculous power must meet the expense. They only put a modest but suggestive Whence? Their eyes then watch every movement, we may suppose, of his lip and hand.

Verse 37. And they took up of the broken meat seven baskets full. — The word here rendered basket is spuriv], and differs from kofinov, the basket before mentioned. The latter was suspended from the shoulder, the other was carried by hand and was probably of smaller dimensions.

Verse 38. Four thousand] Let the poor learn from these miracles to trust in God for support. Whatever his ordinary providence denies, his miraculous power will supply.

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

§ 69. — THE MIRACLE OF FEEDING THE FOUR THOUSAND, 33-39.

Skeptical critics have maintained that this narrative is a traditional repetition, by mistake, of the miracle of feeding the five thousand. That there was no oversight, however, on the part of the author of this Gospel is plain from Matthew 16:9, 10, where both accounts are alluded to in connection. But there is a minute but convincing argument for the genuineness of the two accounts thus given by Mr. Alford: “It is, that whereas the baskets in which the fragments were collected on the other occasion are called by all four evangelists kofinoi, cophini, those used for that purpose after this miracle are, in both Matthew and Mark, spuridev, spurides. And when our Lord refers to the two miracles, the same distinction is observed; a particularity which could not have arisen except as pointing to a matter of fact, that (whatever the distinction be, which is uncertain) different kinds of baskets were used on the two occasions.” But besides the differences in detail, such as the different number of the fed, and of the loaves and fishes, there are differences important in character. The first miraculous feeding was performed for the inhabitants who followed Jesus, and anticipated his debarkation from the western side of the lake. They meet Jesus in intense excitement at the shore, and the miracle takes place upon the plain of Butaiha, near the village of Bethsaida. This second feeding takes place when Jesus is secreting himself from Herod Antipas. He rapidly and quietly passes to the coast northeast of the lake, out of the dominion of Herod; and it is in the country, probably, of the Decapolis that the miracle takes place. It is probably the multitudes from the eastern side who are sharers of the product of this miracle. And we cannot help thinking that there is some truth in the ancient opinion that they were mostly Gentiles; and thus an intimation is given that since the Jews have had their banquet at the table of God, the Gentiles too shall have a share. After the former miracle, the Lord sends forward his disciples by ship at night, and overtakes them before morning dawn by walking upon the sea. After the present miracle our Lord leaves the multitudes in their own regions, and departs to Magdala.

33. Whence should we have… bread — The wavering reply of the apostles evinces a recollection of the former miracle. They have not indeed the boldness to call for a miracle, as his mother Mary did at the wedding of Cana; and mother though she was, she received a check from her son and Lord. They do not say, If we are to feed this multitude your miraculous power must meet the expense. They only put a modest but suggestive Whence? Their eyes then watch every movement, we may suppose, of his lip and hand.

Verse 39. He sent away the multitude] But not before he had instructed their souls, and fed and healed their bodies.

The coasts of Magdala.] In the parallel place, Mark 8:10, this place is called Dalmanutha. Either Magdala was formed by a transposition of letters from Dalman, to which the Syriac termination atha had been added, or the one of these names refers to the country, and the other to a town in that neighbourhood. Jesus went into the country, and proceeded till he came to the chief town or village in that district. Whitby says, “Magdala was a city and territory beyond Jordan, on the banks of Gadara. It readied to the bridge above Jordan, which joined it to the other side of Galilee, and contained within its precincts Dalmanutha.” The MSS. and VV. read the name variously-Magada, Madega, Magdala; and the Syriac has Magdu. In Mark, Dalmanutha is read by many MSS. Melagada, Madegada, Magada, Magidan, and Magedam. Magdala, variously pronounced, seems to have been the place or country; Dalmanutha, the chief town or capital. In this chapter a number of interesting and instructive particulars are contained.

1. We see the extreme superstition, envy, and incurable ill nature of the Jews. While totally lost to a proper sense of the spirituality of God’s law, they are ceremonious in the extreme. They will not eat without washing their hands, because this would be a transgression of one of the traditions of their elders; but they can harbour the worst temper and passions, and thus break the law of God! The word of man weighs more with them than the testimony of Jehovah; and yet they pretend the highest respect for their God and sacred things, and will let their parents perish for lack of the necessaries of life, that they may have goods to vow to the service of the sanctuary! Pride and envy blind the hearts of men, and cause them often to act not only the most wicked, but the most ridiculous, parts. He who takes the book of God for the rule of his faith and practice can never go astray: but to the mazes and perplexities produced by the traditions of elders, human creeds, and confessions of faith, there is no end. These evils existed in the Christian as well as in the Jewish Church; but the Reformation, thank God! has liberated us from this endless system of uncertainty and absurdity, and the Sun of righteousness shines now unclouded! The plantation, which God did not plant, in the course of his judgments, he has now swept nearly away from the face of the earth! Babylon is fallen!

2. We wonder at the dulness of the disciples, when we find that they did not fully understand our Lord’s meaning, in the very obvious parable about the blind leading the blind. But should we not be equally struck with their prying, inquisitive temper? They did not understand, but they could not rest till they did. They knew that their Lord could say nothing that had not the most important meaning in it: this meaning, in the preceding parable, they had not apprehended, and therefore they wished to have it farther explained by himself. Do we imitate their docility and eagerness to comprehend the truth of God? Christ presses every occurrence into a means of instruction. The dulness of the disciples in the present case, has been the means of affording us the fullest instruction on a point of the utmost importance-the state of a sinful heart, and how the thoughts and passions conceived in it defile and pollute it; and how necessary it is to have the fountain purified, that it may cease to send forth those streams of death.

3. The case of the Canaanitish woman is, in itself, a thousand sermons. Her faith-her prayers-her perseverance-her success-the honour she received from her Lord, &c., &c. How instructively-how powerfully do these speak and plead! What a profusion of light does this single case throw upon the manner in which Christ sometimes exercises the faith and patience of his followers! They that seek shall find, is the great lesson inculcated in this short history: God is ever the same. Reader, follow on after God-cry, pray, plead-all in Him is for thee!-Thou canst not perish, if thou continuest to believe and pray. The Lord will help THEE.

ST. MATTHEW

Verses 32-39. Jesus called his disciples, and said, I have compassion, &c. — For some observations on the contents of these verses, see the notes on Mark 8:1-9.

39. Magdala — At present a poor village on the western side of the lake, a little north of Tiberias. Tracing his own course northward along the lake shore, Dr. Olin says: “We left Tiberias a few minutes before twelve o’clock. After one hour and twenty minutes a plain opened before us, extending several miles to the north and west. A miserable looking village of thirty or forty huts stands in the entrance; and we stopped to make some inquiries of the pale, sickly-looking inhabitants. This poor village, however, possesses a special historical interest. The people of whom we inquired its name called it Mejdal; and it is evident from the name, as well as from its position here, that it is the Magdala of the New Testament, and the Migdol of the Old.”

It was the place from which Mary Magdalene received her appellation.

Verse 39. The coasts of Magdala. — These were on the eastern side of the Sea of Galilee.