7—16.
µενοι: διὰ τοῦτο λήψεσθε περισσότερον κρίμα.ὶ
~ A , [ή Ὑραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι κλείετε τὴν βασιλείαν
~ > α΄ ὃν ~ > 6 2 ς A Δ > ο θ των ουρανων ἔμπροσθεν των ανγύρωπων * υμεις γαρ ουκ εισερχεσ' €,
, a οὐδὲ τοὺς εἰσερχομένους ἀφίετε εἰσελθεῖν. ματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι περιάγετε τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ
281
14. Odat? ὑμιν,
τς. Ovat ὑμῖν αμ- 5 HE ite i Heb. xi. 19 (without
x i A a 2 j AX λα , ο σον 2a Fi τὴν ᾿ξηρὰν ποιῆσαι ἕνα ’ προσήλυτον, καὶ ὅταν γένηται, ποιεῖτε αὐτὸν R., with
υἱὸν γεέννης διπλότερον ὑμῶν.
λέγοντες, Ὃς ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ ναῷ, οὐδέν ἐστιν" ὃς δ ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν
s in T. hes es in 'W.H.). 16. Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, ὁδηγοὶ τυφλοί, οἱ | Actsii. το;
Vi. 5; xiii. 43.
1 Ver. 13 omitted in $$BDLZ, some cursives, versions (including Syr. Sin.),
Fathers, and by modern editors.
2 $< must be supplied here if ver. 13 be omitted.
claimed to be opening the Kingdom while really shutting it, and therein lay their Ἀγροοτίδγ.--ἔμπροσθεν τ. a.: as it were in men’s faces, when they are in the act of entering.—tpeis yap, etc. Cf. ν. 20. They thought themselves certainly within, but in the judgment of Jesus, with all their parade of piety, they were without.—r. εἰσερχομένους, those in the mood to enter, in the act of entering; the reference is to sincere seekers after God, and the statement is that the scribes were the worst advisers such persons could go to: the effect of their teaching would be to keep them out. This is the position implied throughout the Sermon on the Mount and in xi. 28-30.—Ver. 15. The second woe is the complement of the first: it represents the false guides, as, while utterly incompetent for the function, extremely eager to exercise it.—7epid- Ὕετε, ye move about, intransitive, the accusative following being governed by περὶ.---τ. ξηρὰν, the dry (land), some- times typa@ is similarly used for the sea (examples in Elsner). Cf. ψνυχρόν for cold water in x. 42. To compass sea and land is proverbial for doing anything with great Ζεα].---π. ἕνα προσήλυτον, to makea single proselyte. The zeal here ascribed to the Pharisees seems in one sense alien to their character as described in Lk. xviii. 11. One would expect them rather to be pleased to be a select few superior to all others than to be animated with a burning desire to gain recruits whether from Jews or from Gentiles. For an elaborate discussion of the question as to the existence of the proselytising spirit among the Jews vide Danz’s treatise in Meuschen, Nov. Test. ex Tal. illustratum, p. 649. Vide also Wetstein, ad loc. Wiunsche (Beitrage, p- 285) cites passages from the Talmud
to prove that the Pharisees, far from being addicted to proselytising, were rather reserved in this respect. He con- cludes that Mt. xxiii. 15 must refer not to making proselytes to Judaism from Gentiles, but to making additions to their sect from among Jews (Sectirerei). This, however, is against the meaning of προσήλυτος. Assuming the fact to have been as stated, the point to be noted is that the Pharisees and scribes aimed chiefly, not at bringing men into the Kingdom of God, but into their own coterie.—8imddtepov v., twofold more, duplo quam, Vulgate. Kypke, while aware that the comparative of διπλοῦς (διπλότερος) does not occur in profane writers, thinks it is used here in the sense of deceitful, and renders, ye make him a son of gehenna, more fraudulent, more hypocritical than yourselves. Briefly the idea is: the more converted the more perverted, “je bekehrter desto verkehrter ” (Holtz., H. C.).
Vv. 16-22. The third woe refers to the Jesuitry of the scribes in the matter of oaths ; the point emphasised, how- ever, is their stupidity in this part of their teaching (cf. Mt. v. 33 f.), where Christ’s teaching is directed against the use of oaths at all.—Ver. 16. ὁδηγ. τυφλοί, blind guides, not only deceivers but deceived themselves, lacking spiritual insight even in the simplest matters. Three instances of their blindness in reference to oaths are directly or in- directly indicated: oaths by the temple and the gold of the temple, by the altar and the offerings on it, by heaven and the throne of God therein. The principle underlying Rabbinical judgments as to the relative value of oaths seems to have been: the special form more binding than the general; therefore gold of the temple more than the temple, sacrifice on