The Pulpit Commentary — Matthew — Volume 1 — Section 169

teo.ching, notwithstanding the fact that this temporary relation, quite apart from any onrrent form represented truly the original question of a common source. Yet as this thought underlying its promulgation. In could have been represented by II neighbour" the following words our Lord speaks of three (of. oh. xix. 19), it seems reasonable to see grades of anger, and, as answering to them, something more in "brother,'' and to view of three grades of punishment. The former it with reference to its implied meaning, will be examined nnder the several terms "fellowship of life based on iclentity of employed. Upon the latter it is necessary origin" (Cremer). To Jews as suoh the to make a few remarks here. They have term would doubtless only suggest identity been very variously understood. (1) (a) of origin nationally, i.e. a fellow-Jew (of. "The jndgment " means the judgment of especially Lev. xix. 17a with 16, 17b, 18; God alone, for he alone oan take cognizance so even Mai. ii. 10); but to Christians of of mere anger; (b) "the council" means the the time when the Gospel was written jndgment of the Sanhedrin, "a publick rather identity of spiritual origin, i.e. a tryal;" (o) "the Gehenna of fire" means follow-Christian. Probably when the expres- the judgment of hell (Lightfoot, 'Hor. sion fell from Christ's lips not one of those Hehr.,' in Zoo.). (2) (a) "The judgment" who heard him imagined that it could have means the local court; (b) " the council " any wider meaning than fellow-Jew or means the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem; (c) fellow-believer on Jesus, and probably most "ihe Gehenna of :fire" means hell (appa- of them limited it to the former. In fact, rently Niisgen, and many other, especially Christ seems to have used it as a means Romish, expositors). It will be noticed that whereby to lead up bis hearers from the idea both the above interpretations are incon- of e. national to that of a spititual relation sistent. They make our Lord pass from (cf. vers. 47, 48). We a.re therefore hardly literal to :figure.tive language in the same warranted (far-ree.ching as the word on sentence. Besides, in the second it is in- Christ's lips is) in seeing here any reference explico.ble how mere anger could be brought to the thought of the universal brotherhood nnder the cognizance of a human court. For of man, based on the fact of all being these reasons it is probable that (3) all children of one common Father ( cf. further three stages express metaphorically grades Bishop Westcott, on 1 John ii 9). Without; of Divine judgment nnder the form of the e. cause. Omitted by the Revised Version; Jewish processes of law. (a) "The judg- Revised Version margin, " many ancient ment" primarily mea.ns the local court; authorities insert witlwut oau.ae." The d,cij, (b) "the council "primarily means the San- though found in the Old La.tin and Old hedrin in Jerusalem; (c) "the Gehenna of Syriac, is certainly to be omitted, with N, B, :fire" primarily means the Valley ofHinnom, and Vulgate, notwithstanding Dean Burgon where the last processes of judgment seem (' Revision,' p. 358) ; of. especially Westcott to have taken place (1Jide infra). Christ and Hort, • App.' It is redundant, because does not say that the sins spoken of render the two following expressions show that a man liable to any of these earthly processes the anger itself is unloving and hostile (of. of law; he says that they render him liable further Meyer). There is a holy anger, bul to processes of Divine law which are :fittingly that is with a. brother's sin, not with the symbolized by these expressions. (So Alford, brother himself (cf. Augustine, in Trench, Mansel. e.nd especially Trench,' Sermon on 'Sermon on the Mount'). Shall he in the Monnt,' p. 190). Whosoever is angry ; danger of the judgment; -i.e. of God's wrath Revised Version, more precisely, e1Jery 01111 e.s symbolized by the lowest degree of Jewish tDho (Tiis t, 01'Y1(0/U"os). This form of ex- trial (vide supra). And whosoever (81 II' 1£11). pression is specie.Uy frequent in 1 John, e.g. For in this case there was no need for the iii. 3, where Bishop Westcott says, "In emphasizing inclusiveness of ,rcis. Baoa. ea.oh COBe where this characteristic form of (I) Augustino's explanation (in loo.· 1Jide language occurs there is e.pparently a. re- Trench ; cf. also 'In Joann. Evang.,' §li. 2; ference to some who had questioned the 'De Dootr. Christ.,' ii. 11), which he got II e. e.pplication of e. general pnnciple in par- quoclam Hebrroo," that Raoa is in itself ticular OBBes." (For the thought of this ruea.niugless, and is only an interjeotion ex- clause, cf. 1 John iii. 15.) With his brother. pressing indignation, as " Heu I" sorrow, or The term "brother" was applied in both "Hem I" anger, or "Hosanna. " (I) joy, will Greek and Hebrew, by way of metaphor, to La.rdly commend itself to ns to-day. (2) Nor things that possessed merely such fellowship will Chrysostom's ( in loo. ; vide Oho.se's ad- e.s a.rises from juxtaposition or from simi- mirn Llo monograph on Ohrysostom (1887), larity of purpose ( cf. of the cherubim, Exod. p. 133), "As wo in giving orders to a servant xxv. 20, "with their faces one to another," or to some oneofmea.u mnk,sa.y, Go you; take literally," each (man) to his brother"). It you tloie meaeage (1£,r•l\8• o-b, ,i,rl, ,,-,;, Ii,,.,, o-6), is thus possible the.t here the thought is of so those who use the Syrian language used apy person with whom ODe is brought into Raca., e.n equive.11,nt to our you (o-6)," 11e0111 on. v. 1-48.J THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 161