28—37.
Φέρετε ὑμεῖς.
167
32. Mas οὖν ὅστις " ὁμολογήσει ἐν ἐμοὶ ἔμπροσθεν Ε also in Lt.
xii. 8 (with
τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ ἔµπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός µου «εν and a
- 3 1 3 ~ του εν οὐρανοις.
ἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαι αὐτὸν κἀγὼ 3 ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός µου τοῦ
ἐν > οὐρανοῖς.
γῆν” οὖκ ἦλθον βαλεῖν εἰρήνην, ἀλλὰ µάχαιραν. διχάσαι ἄνθρωπον κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ θυγατέρα κατὰ τῆς
34. Μὴ νοµίσητε ὅτι ἦλθον
33. ὅστις 8 ἂν " ἀρνήσηταί µε ἔμπροσθεν τῶν hb ο σοι
7ο, 72. Lk. Xii. ο. i is leat >a
βαλεῖν Spiny ἐπὶ τὴν i Lea az 35. ἦλθον 3. Rev.
xiv. 16, 19.
μητρὸς αὐτῆς, καὶ νύµφην κατὰ τῆς πενθερᾶς αὐτῆς: 36. καὶ ἐχθροὶ
τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οἱ οἰκιακοὶ αὐτοῦ.
37. Ὁ Φφιλῶν πατέρα ἢ µητέρα
ὑπὲρ ἐμέ, οὐκ ἔστι µου ἄξιος: καὶ ὁ giddy υἱὸν ἢ θυγατέρα ὑπὲρ
1 τοις before ονρανοις in BC,
7 xayw αυτον in BDA.
3 τοις before ουρ. in BX (W.H. adopt the art. both in 1 and in 3).
sparrows; one hair of your head as much worth to God as one sparrow. “It isa litotes to say that there is a great difference between many sparrows and a human being” (Holtz., H.C.). There is really no comparison between them. It was by such simple comparisons that Jesus insinuated His doctrine of the absolute worth of man.
Vv. 32, 33: Solemn reference to the final Fudgment. οὖν points back to νετ. 27, containing injunction to make open proclamation of the truth.—was ὅστις: nominative absolute at the head of the sentence.—év ἐμοὶ, ἐν αὐτῷ: observe these phrases after the verb in ver. 32, compared with the use of the accusative µε, αὐτὸν in the following verse: ‘“‘confess in me,” “deny me,” “confess iz him,” ‘‘deny him”. Chry- sostom’s comment is: we confess by the grace of Christ, we deny destitute of grace. Origen (Cremer, Catenae, i. p. 80) interprets the varying construction as indicating that the profit of the faith- ful disciple lies in fellowship with Christ and the loss of the unfaithful in the lack of such fellowship. (Spa δὲ, el μὴ τὸ πλεονέκτημα τοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ὁμολογοῦν- τος, ἤδη ὄντως ἐν χριστῷ δηλοῦται, ἐκ τοῦ, “Kaya ἐν αὐτῷ” ὁμολογεῖν : τὸ δὲ κακὸν τοῦ ἀρνουμένου, ἐκ τοῦ μὴ συνῆφθαι τῇ ἀρνήσει τὸ "ἐν ἐμοὶ,' ἢ τὸ “‘év αὐτῷ ”.)
Vv. 34-39. The whole foregoing dis- course, by its announcements and con- solations, implies that dread experiences are in store for the apostles of the faith. To the inexperienced the question might naturally suggest itself, why? Can the new religion not propagate itself quietly and peaceably? Jesus meets the ques- tion of the surprised disciple with a de-
cided negative.—Ver. 34. μὴ νοµίσητε, do not imagine, as you are very likely to do (cf. v. 17).---ἦλθον βαλεῖν: the use of the infinitive to express aim is common in Matt., but Christ has here in view result rather than purpose, which are not carefully distinguished in Scripture. For βαλεῖν Luke has δοῦναι, possibly with a feeling that the former word does not suit εἰρήνην. It is used specially with re- ference to µάχαιραν. The aorist points to a sudden single action. Christ came to bring peace on earth, but not in an immediate magical way; peace at last through war (Weiss, Matt. Evang.).— µάχαιραν : Luke substitutes διαµερισμόν. The connecting link may be that the sword divides in two (Heb. iv. 12). Grotius says that by the word there should be understood : ‘‘non bellum sed dissidium ”’.—Ver. 35. Description of the discord.—8tyaoat, to divide in two (δίχα), to separate in feeling and in- terest, here only in N.T.; verifies the truth of Grotius’ comment as to the ‘‘ sword ”’.—avOpwrov κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ. In this and the following clauses it is the young that are set against the old. ‘In all great revolu- tions of thought the change begins from the young” (Carr, Cambridge Gr. T.).— vupoyny, a young wife, here as opposed to πενθερᾶς, a daughter+in-law.—Ver. 36. ἔχθροὶ: the predicate standing first for emphasis ; enemies, not friends as one would expect, the members of one’s family (οἰκιακοὶ, as in νετ. 25). The passage reproduces freely Micah vii. 6.— Ver. 37. Such a state of matters imposes the necessity of making a very painful choice between relatives and truth.— φιλῶν : this verb denotes natural affee- tion as distinct from ἀγαπάω, which