Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer.

Critical and exegetical hand-book to the Gospel of Matthew (Volume 2) online

. (page 1 of 30)
Online LibraryHeinrich August Wilhelm MeyerCritical and exegetical hand-book to the Gospel of Matthew (Volume 2) → online text (page 1 of 30)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


T. and T. Clark's Publications.



Just published, in demy 4fo, Third Edition, price 25*.,

BIBLICO-THEOLOGICAL LEXICON OF NEW
TESTAMENT GREEK.

By HERMANN CREMER, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GREIF8WALD.

TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF THE SECOND EDITION
(WITH ADDITIONAL MATTER AND CORRECTIONS BY THE AUTHOR)

By WILLIAM URWICK, M.A.

' Dr. Cremer's work is highly and deservedly esteemed in Germany. It gives with
care and thoroughness a complete history, as far as it goes, of each word and phrase
that it deals with. . . . Dr. Cremer's explanations are most lucidly set out' Guardian.

'It is hardly possible to exaggerate the value of this work to the student of the Greek
Testament. . . . The translation is accurate and idiomatic, and the additions to the
later edition are considerable and important.' Church Bells.

' A valuable addition to the stores of any theological library. ... It is what it claims
to be, a Lexicon, both biblical and theological, and treats not only of words, but of the
doctrines inculcated by those words.' John Bull.

' We very heartily commend this goodly volume to students of biblical literature.'
Evangelical Magazine.

'We cannot find an important word in our Greek New Testament which is not
discussed with a fulness and discrimination which leaves nothing to be desired.'
Nonconformis .

' Cremer's Lexicon is, and is long likely to be, indispensable to students whether of
theology or of the Bible, and must always bear witness to his scholarship, erudition, and
diligence.' Exposior.

' A work of immense erudition.' Freeman.

'This noble edition in quarto of Cremer's Biblicc-Theological Lexicon quite super-
sedes the translation of the first edition of the work. Many of the most important
articles have been re-written and re-arranged. . . . We heartily congratulate Mr. Urwick
on the admirable manner in which he has executed his task, revealing on his part
adequate scholarship, thorough sympathy, and a fine choice of English equivalents and
definitions.' Briish Quarterly Review.

'As an aid in our search, we warmly commend the honest and laborious New
Testament Lexicon of Dr. Cremer.' London Quarterly Review.

'The judiciousness and importance of Dr. Cremer's design must be obvious to all
students of the New Testament; and the execution of that design, in our judgment, fully
establishes and justifies the translator's encomiums.' Watchman.

'A majestic volume, admirably printed and faultlessly edited, and will win gratitude
as well as renown for its learned and Christian Author, and prove a precious boon to
students and preachers who covet exact and exhaustive acquaintance with the literal
and theological teaching of the New Testament.' Dickinson's Theological Quarterly.



T. and T. Clark's Publications.



Just published, in One Volume, 8vo, price 12a.,

FINAL CAUSES.

BY PAUL JANET, Member of the Institute, Paris.
CranalateU from tlje dFrenc$ bp ZZailltam Sffiwlt, 33. .

CONTENTS. PRELIMINARY CHAPTER The Problem. BOOK I. The Law of
Finality. BOOK II. The First Cause of Finality. APPENDIX.

1 This very learned, accurate, and, within its prescribed limits, exhaustive work. . . .
The book as a whole abounds in matter of the highest interest, and is a model of learn-
ing and judicious treatment' Guardian.

'Illustrated and defended with an ability and learning which must command the
reader's admiration.' Dublin Review.

' A great contribution to the literature of this subject M. Janet has mastered the
conditions of the problem, is at home in the literature of science and philosophy, and has
that faculty of felicitous expression which makes French books of the highest class such
delightful reading; ... in clearness, vigour, and depth it has been seldom equalled, and
more seldom excelled, in philosophical literature.' Spectator.

A wealth of scientific knowledge and a logical acumen which will win the admiration
of every reader.' Church Quarterly Review.

1 Both on the physical and on the metaphysical side the work is well worth studying.
It is the best recent work on a controversy which, if it has not yet found its way
to our pulpits, is keenly discussed in all educated circles.' Clergyman's Magazine.

' The book is a valuable addition to the permanent literature on this great subject, and
we welcome its appearance in an English drees, as supplying a want in the philosophical
thought of the day regarding natural theology.' British Quarterly Review.

'M. Janet has done his work with a sustained power, a logical acuteness, and an
extensive knowledge of many provinces of science which is worthy of all praise and
thanks.' Literary Churchman.

1 One of those exhaustive pieces of reasoning, which go thoroughly to prove the validity
of the view of Final Causes which the Author has adopted.' Bell's Weekly Messenger.

' One of the most important contributions of late years made to European literature.'
English Independent.

' The style of this distinguished essayist throughout is singularly philosophical. He
is always calm and cool, eminently analytic and painstaking, yet often throwing out
new and striking views of the subject without the slightest parade.' Tablet.

1 This is perhaps the most exhaustive book that has been written on a subject with
which all deep thinkers have been more or less exercised.' English Churchman.



CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL

HANDBOOK



TO



THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.



BY
IIEINRICH AUGUST WILHELM MEYEK, TnJ) v

OBERCONSISTORIALEATH, HANNOVER.



TRANSLATED FROM THE SIXTH EDITION OF THE GERMAN BY

REV. PETER CHRISTIE.



THE TRANSLATION EEVISED AND EDITED BY

WILLIAM STEWART, D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM IN THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW.



VOL. II.



EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

MDCCCLXXXI.



PRINTED BY MORRISON AND GIBB,

FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.

LONDON, HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.

DUBLIN, . . . . ROBERTSON AND CO.
NEW YORK, .... SCRIBNER AND WELFORD.



CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL

COMMENTARY
THE NEW TESTAMENT.

BY

HEINRICH AUGUST WILHELM MEYER, Tn.D.,

OBERCONSISTORIALKATH, HANNOVER.

dfrcm U)r German, luttl) ti)c Sanction of ti)c 3utl)or.
THE TRANSLATION REVISED AND EDITED BY

WILLIAM P. DICKS OX, D.D.,

AND

WILLIAM STEWART, D.D.



PART I.

THE GOSPEL OF ST. MATTHEW.
VOL. II.



EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

MDCCCLXXXI.



Air



v. a

PEEFATOEY NOTE.



AS Dr. 0101111)16 has been prevented by other engagements
from continuing his co-operation with me in the
revision and editing of this series of translations, I have asked
my esteemed colleague, Dr. Stewart, to take part in it. He
has kindly consented to do so ; and he has revised, and seen
through the press, the present volume, with the exception of a
few pages at the beginning which I had previously looked
over. I learn from him that the translation has been executed
with care and skill by Mr. Christie.

Mr. Christie desires me to mention that at the time of pre-
paring his translation of the earlier portion of the Commentary
on Matthew (from chapter vi. onward) he was not aware of
the mode of rendering, which had been adopted in the previous
volumes, for Dr. Meyer's references to other portions of his
own Commentary (e.g. " comp. on Luke xvi. 7 ; " " see on Horn,
viii. 5 ") ; and he requests that, in conformity to it, the word
" note " inserted by him in such cases may be held as deleted,
since the references are, in general, to the text of the commen-
tary itself, and not to the notes or Eemarks appended (except
when so specified).

The following important work ought to have been included
in the " Exegetical Literature " prefixed to voL I. :

WEISS (Bernhard) : Das Matthausevangelium und seine Lukas-
Parallelen. ' 8, Halle, 1876.

WILLIAM P. DICKSON.

GLASGOW COLLEGE, February 1879.



GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.



CHAPTEK XVIII.

VER. 1. upq] Lachra.: fa'spy, which Fritzsche has adopted, against
decisive evidence; although ancient, since both readings are
found as early as the time of Origen, w'ipcf, is a gloss instead of
up a, as there appeared to be nothing in the context to which
the latter might be supposed to refer. Ver. 4. ravsivueri]
The future Tuvtivuosi is, with Lachm. and Tisch., to be adopted
on decisive evidence. Ver. 6. sis rbv rp.] for s/g Elz. has IT/,
while Lachm. and Tisch. 8 read vepi. Only sis and irtpi have
anything like important testimony in their favour. But vtpi is
taken from Mark ix. 42; Luke xvii. 2. Ver. 7. On weighty
evidence we should follow Lachm. in deleting eenv after yap,
and sx.iivu in the next clause, as words that might naturally have
been inserted; Tisch. 8 has deleted eenv only. Ver. 8. aura]
B D L K, min. vss. and Fathers : airon. So Lachm. and Tisch.
correctly; avrd is an emendation to include both. Further
on Lachm. and Tisch. 8 have xvXXbv 3j %XoX following B K,
Vulg. It.; a transposition to suit %g/> and irws. Ver. 10. The
evidence is too weak to warrant us in substituting ev rp olpuvp
(so Lachm. in brackets) for the first ev ovpavofs; still weaker
is the evidence in favour of omitting the words, although
they are omitted at an early period (as early as the time of
Clem. Or. Syr.?). Ver. 11. This verse does not occur in
B L*N, 1*, 13, 33, Copt. Sahid. SyrJ er . Aeth. (cod. 1), Eus.
Or. Hil. Jer. Juv. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. ; condemned
also by Einck. Already suspected by Griesb. to have been
an interpolation from Luke xix. 10, which in fact it is, con-
sidering how much evidence there is against it, and considering,
on the other hand, that, if it had been genuine, there was no
obvious motive on exegetical grounds for the omission. Ver.
12. a<pei$ . . . voptvdsis] Lachm. : afrieet . . . xal Kopiv6ti$, follow-
ing B D L, min. Vulg. It. (of which, however, D,Vulg.have a

MATT. IL JL



2 THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.



and D, vopiuo/jMoi). Exegetical analysis, in order to remove
ambiguity as to the connection. Ver. 14. fT;] Lachm. and
Tisch. : iv, following B D L M* K, min. Altered to sff in
accordance with ver. 10; while Karpos pov, which Lachm. sub-
stitutes for varp. Ifiuv (following B F H J, min. vss. Or.), is to
be regarded in the same light. Ver. 15. els as] deleted by
Lachm. and Tisch. 8, after B K, 1, 22, 234*, Sahid. Or. Cyr. Bas.
This evidence is too weak, especially as the omission of EI22E
might easily enough have happened from its following H2H
(afj,aprri<rr{), while it is further to be borne in mind that, in
what goes before, it was sin in general, not merely an offence,
that was in question. The e!$ as, which is here genuine, was
inserted from our passage into Luke xvii. 3, Elz. IXsygov]
Elz., Scholz: xal ?x., against B C K and many min. vss. and
Fathers. The xai was inserted as a connective particle.
Ver. 19. vdXiv a/^jjv] Elz. (so also Griesb. Scholz, Fritzsche,
Rinck, Tisch. 8) has merely -raX/v, and Lachm., following min.
only (B being erroneously quoted), has merely apjjv. But the
attestation for craX/v a/tjjv (Tisch. 7) is about equal in weight
(incl. B) to that in favour of the simple -raX/v (incl. K), and
one of the words might easily enough have been omitted from
the combination not occurring anywhere else. ffv/j,(puvf t au)6iv]
Seeing that the future tvppuvfiffovoiv is supported by the prepon-
derating evidence of BDEHILVAK, min., and seeing, on
the other hand, that it might very readily have been supplanted
by the subjunctive as being the mood most in accordance
with the usual construction, it is, with Tisch., to be adopted
as the correct reading. Ver. 24. -rpoa^vs^dri] Lachm. and
Tisch. 7 : <zpoerr/Jn, following B D Or. Correctly ; this and
Luke ix. 41 are the only instances in which ^poadysiv occurs in
the Gospels, vpoaptptiv being the form most familiar to the
copyists. Ver. 25. six*] Lachm. and Tisch. 7: %e/, following
only B, min. Or.; but it is to be preferred, since to the mecha-
nical transcribers the present would doubtless seem to be
improper. Ver. 26.] xvptt before paxp. is to be regarded as
interpolated, being omitted by B D, min. Vulg. codd. of It.
Syr cur Or. Chrys. Lucif., and deleted by Lachm. and Tisch.
Ver. 27. Jxs/vou] omitted by Lachm., only after B, min., as is
also Ixffro?, ver. 28, only after B. Ver. 28. poi] not found in the
more weighty witnesses; deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. An
interpolation. / */] Elz.: o, n, against decisive evidence.
Erroneous emendation. Ver. 29. airoD] Elz. Fritzsche, Schulz,
Scholz, Tisch. 7, insert tig rolg <?65as adroD, which, however, is
omitted by B C* D G L A K, min. Copt. Sahid. Aeth. Syr cur



CHAP. XVIU. 1, 2.

It. (Brix. excepted) Vulg. Or. Lucif. Gloss on the simple
In regard to /;, comp. John xi. 32, ol. Kdvra] Deleted by
Matth., Scholz, Tisch., on preponderating evidence; bracketed
by Lachm. It is a mechanical interpolation from ver. 26.
Ver. 31. For the first ytvopsva Fritzsche and Tisch. substitute
7/vo/isva, following only D L K**, min. Vulg. It. Chrys. Lucif.,
but correctly. The transcribers failed to notice the difference
of meaning. For avruv or alruv we should, with Lachm. and
Tisch., read eauruv, upon decisive evidence ; the reflexive refer-
ence of the pronoun was overlooked, as was often the case.
Ver. 34. avr&] not found in B D K**, min. vss. Lachm.; but it
may easily enough have been left out in conformity with ver.
30. Ver. 35. v/j,v] Elz. Fritzsche, Schulz, Scholz insert rd
irapa-TTriM^ara avruv, which is not found in B D L tf, min. and
several vss. and Fathers. Gloss from vi. 14, 15 ; Mark xi. 25,
26. But sKoupdvio?, for which Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. 8
substitute oi>pdvio$ (B C** D K L n K, min. Or. Damasc.), is
to be retained, all the more that the expression 6
occurs nowhere else, though we frequently find 6 *. 6



Ver. 1. *Ev eiceivrj rfj &pa] the account of Matthew, which
is throughout more original in essential matters than Mark ix.
33 ff. and Luke ix. 46 ff., bears this impress no less in this
definite note of time : in that hour, namely, when Jesus was
holding the above conversation with Peter. rt? a pa] quis
igitur (see Klotz, ad Devar. p. 176). The question, according
to Matthew (in Mark otherwise), is suggested ~by the considera-
tion of the circumstances : Who, as things stand, is, etc. ; for
one of them had just been peculiarly honoured, and that for
the second time, by the part he was called upon to take in a
special miracle. Euthymius Zigabenus says well : avOpcairivov
TI Tore jreTTovOaaiv ol fiaOfjrai. /ie /&>!/] greater than the
other disciples in rank and power. ecrriv] they speak as
though the approaching Messianic kingdom were already present.
Comp. xx. 21.

Ver. 2. natSiov] According to Mcephorus, ii. 35, the
child in question is alleged to have been St. Ignatius.
Chrysostom correctly observes that it is a little child (<r<f>6Spa
fCocSuw) ; TO yap TOIOVTOV Trai&iov KCU airovoia^ KOI So^o/j,avia<;
K. fiacricavtas K. <f)i\oveiKelas K. TTU.VTWV TWV roiovTcav aTT^XXa/c-
rat iradwv, /cal TroXXa? e^oi/ ras dpera?, a^eXetav, Taireivo(f>-



4 THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.

poavvyv, aTrpay/JLoavvrjv, eV ovSevl TOVTCOV eVa/perat. Comp.
Mark ix. 36 ; Luke ix. 47.

Ver. 3. Ei TIS avre^erat TWV TrpoaiperiK&v traQwv, yiverai
<U9 ra TraiSta, KTapevos St' aovc?7<Te&>9, a?re/3 e^ovat TO, TraiS/a
ef a<eXei'a9, Euthymius Zigabenus. To w?7t round (<rrpa-
4>f)T6, representing the fj,eravoia under the idea of turning
round upon a road), and to acquire a moral disposition similar
to the nature of little children such is the condition, without
complying with which you will assuredly not (ov prj) enter,
far less be able to obtain a high position in, the Messianic
kingdom, about to be established. The same truth is presented
under a kindred figure and in a wider sense in John iii. 3,

5 ff. ; the divine agent in this moral change, in which child-
like qualities assume the character of manly virtues, is the Holy
Spirit ; comp. Luke xi. 1 3, ix. 5 5.

Ver. 4. Inference from the general principle of ver. 3 to
the special child-like quality in which the disciples were
deficient, as well as to the special subject of their question.
If your entering the future Messianic kingdom at all is deter-
mined by your returning again to a child-like frame of mind,
then above all must you acquire, through humble self-abase-
ment, the unassuming character of this child, in order to
be greater than others in the Messiah's kingdom. oo-rt9]
quicunque ; " de indimduo, de quo quaerebant, non respondet,"
Bengel. In what follows TaTreivcacrei is emphatic, and accord-
ingly stands near the beginning of the sentence. Had the
subjunctive been critically certain, we should not have had to
borrow eav from the second part of the statement (Fritzsche),
but rather to observe the distinction in the manner of pre-
senting the idea, according to which the insertion of av marks
the presupposition as conditioned. The future assumes the
action as actually occurring in the future ; while the subjunc-
tive after the relative without av keeps the future realization
still within the domain of thought, without, however, conceiving
of the realization as conditioned (av}. For this usage among
Attic prose writers, see Klihner, ad Xen. Mem. i. 6. 13.
Moreover, the words of vv. 3, 4, inasmuch as they are essentially
connected with the question of the disciples, are certainly



CHAP. XVIII. 5, C. 5

original, not an anticipation of xix. 13 ff. (Holtzmann), and
dispose us to prefer the account of Matthew to that of Mark
or Luke.

Ver. 5. Comp. Mark ix. 37; Luke ix. 47. The question
of the disciples has been answered. But His eye having
lighted upon this child who happened to be present, Jesus
now seizes the opportunity of inculcating upon them the duty
of taking an affectionate interest in such little ones, an exhor-
tation, of which the jealous and ambitious spirit evinced by
their question in ver. 1 must have shown they stood but too
much in need. TraiSiov TOLOVTOV] such a little child, i.e.
according to the context, not a literal child (Bengel, Paulus,
Neander, de Wette, Arnoldi, Bleek, Hilgenfeld), which would
give a turn to the discourse utterly foreign to the connection,
but a man of such a disposition as this little child represents
one who with child-like simplicity is humble and unassum-
ing. So Chrysostom (vraiSlov jap evravda rov<j av6pu>irov$ TOIJ?
o>Tft>9 ac^eXei? ^crt teal Taireivov^ teal a7reppififj,evov<f Trapa TOI<?
TroXXofc), Erasmus, Beza, Calvin, Grotius, Wetstein, Kuinoel,
Olshausen, Kern, Baumgarten-Crusius, Ewald, Keim. Jesus
well knew how much the unassuming, child-like disposition, free
from everything like self-assertion, was just that which others,
animated by an opposite spirit, were in the habit of overlook-
ing, slighting, and thrusting aside. e v\ a single one. So
very precious are they ! 8 e 77 rat] denotes a loving reception
with a view to further care for the soul ; the opposite to this
is (rtcavSaXi&iv, ver. 6. CTTI TW ovopari /AOV] on the ground
of my name (xxiv. 5) i.e. on account of my name, which,
however, is not, with de Wette, to be taken subjectively, and
referred to the faith of the one who receives (whosoever confess-
ing my name, on account of his faith in me, etc.), but is to be
understood as referring to the ira^iov TOIOVTOV that is to be
received (Mark ix. 41 ; Matt. x. 42), because my name (Jesus
the Messiah) contains the sum of his belief and confession (" non
ob causas naturales ant politicas," Bengel). e'ytte] comp. x.
40, xxv. 40 ; John xiii. 20.

Ver. 6. Comp. Mark ix. 42 ; Luke xvii. 2. <?icava\icrr)]
Opposite of SsgrjTai, meaning : will have been to him the



6 THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.

occasion of his fall, especially of his apostasy from the faith
(v. 29, xi. 6). r&v fjbiicpwv TOVTWV] not to be understood,
any more than iraiBiov TOIOVTO, ver. 5, of literal children (Holtz-
mann), and consequently not to be used as proof of the faith
of little children (Baur, Delitzsch), but as meaning: one of
those little, ones, a way of designating modest, simple-minded,
unassuming believers, that had just been suggested by seeing
in the child then present a model of such simplicity. This is
not quite the same as TWV ijiiKpwv TOVTWV, x. 42 (xxv. 40),
where the expression is not borrowed from the illustration of
a child. <rvfj,<ppet avrw, iva, K.T.\.] For the construction,
comp. note on v. 2 9. " But whoever will have offended one
of those little ones," it is of service to him, with a view
to, i.e. in hunc finem ut. That, which such a person may
have come to deserve, is thus expressed in the form of a
divine purpose, which his evil deed must help him to bring
about; comp. John XL 50. A comparative reference of
<rv(jb(j>pt, (Jerome: " quam aeternis servari cruciatibus ; " others :
than again to commit such a sin) is a pure importation.
ovtKos] The larger mills (in contradistinction to the
i, xxiv. 41) were driven by an ass; Buxtorf, Lex.
Talm. p. 2252. Comp. also Anth. Pal. ix. 301 ; Ovid, A. A.
iii. 290. The Karairovna-pos (Wesseling, ad Diod. Sic.
xvi. 35; Hermann, Privatalterth. 72, 26; Casaubon, ad
Suet. Oct. 67) was not a Jewish method of putting to death,
neither was it a practice in Galilee (Joseph. Antt. xiv. 15. 10),
but belonged to the Greeks, Romans, Syrians, and Phoenicians.
Consequently it here expresses in a manner all the more
vivid and awe-inspiring that punishment of death to which
the man in question has become liable, and which is intended
to represent the loss of eternal life ; comp. vv. 79.

Ver. 7. Oval] Oprjvel o>? $iXdvOp<t>iro<s rbv Koepov &>9
\ovTa (3\a/3fjvai 0.770 TWV crfcav&d\a)v, Theophylact.
indicating the causal origin of the woe for humanity (T&>
Koo-fAfo). The world is not conceived of as giving the offence
(in answer to Jansen, Arnoldi, Bleek), but as suffering from it.
With regard to diro, see Buttmann, Neut. Gramm. p. 277 [E. T.
322]. dvdyKij yap] assigns the reason for the diro



CHAP. XVIII. 8, 9. 7

X. immediately before : on account of offences, I say, for
they cannot but come. This necessity (necessitas consequential)
has its foundation in the morally abnormal condition of man-
kind, yet (comp. 1 Cor. xi. 1 9) is to be traced back to the divine
purpose (not merely permission), which, however, does away
neither with the moral freedom of him who, by word or deed,
gives offence (Rom. xiv. 13), nor with his liability to 'punish-
ment. Hence: irXrjv (ye) oval TO) avOpdnry, K.T.\. ra <ricdv-
SaXa] temptations, as a general conception. TO <r/cdi>&] the
temptation as conceived of in each individual case.

Ver. 8 f. Comp. Mark ix. 43 ff. A passing direction, sug-
gested by ver. 7, for avoiding certain specified offences, and
substantially the same as in v. 29. A repetition depending
here, no doubt, on Mark (Weiss), yet not to be regarded as out
of place, because the proverbial saying refers to one's own
temptations as coming through the senses, while here the point
in question is the temptation of others (de Wette, Kuinoel,
Strauss, Holtzmann, Hilgenfeld), but on the contrary as
quite appropriate, inasmuch as the a-icdvBa\a occasioned from
without operate through the senses, and thereby seduce into
evil. na\6v <roi <TTIV . .. fj] a mixture, by attraction,
of two constructions : It is good to enter into the life (of the
Messiah's kingdom at the second coming) maimed (and
better) than, etc. See Fritzsche's note on this passage, and
Dissert. II. ad 2 Cor. p. 85; Winer, p. 226 [E. T. 302];
Buttmann, p. 309 [E. T. 360]. For examples from classical
writers, see Kypke, Obss. I. p. 89 ; Bos, Ellips., ed. Schaefer,
p. 769 ff. See besides, the note on v. 29, 30. But in the
present passage the material representation of mortification as
the condition of eternal life is somewhat more circumstantial
and graphic. ^o\oz/] refers to the feet, one of which, indeed,
is supposed to be awanting (comp. Horn. //. ii. 217: %ft>Xo$
8' eTepoi/ TroSa) ; while, according to the context, /cv\\6v here
(more general in xv. 30) refers to mutilation of the arm, from
which the hand is supposed to be cut off. Hence : limping
(^&>Xoi>) or maimed (KV\\OV). But the circumstance of %a)\6v
being put first is due to the fact that the cutting off of the foot
(avrov, see critical notes) had been specified, although at the



8 THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW.

same time an identical proceeding in regard to the hand is, of
course, to be understood. fiov6<j>6a\f J i,.'] Herod, iii. 116,
iv. 27 ; Strabo, II. p. 70. According to the grammarians, we
should have had erepo^OaXfj,. in contradistinction to fjwv6<J>0a\fj,.,



Online LibraryHeinrich August Wilhelm MeyerCritical and exegetical hand-book to the Gospel of Matthew (Volume 2) → online text (page 1 of 30)