The Pulpit Commentary — Matthew — Volume 1 — Section 489

see eh. ix. 13, note). Hod you learned the another tho.t brollght about the determina- simple Dible truth the.t God places the tion to kill him. exercise of your more.I fe.cultiee, pe.rticule.rly those of kindness, a.hove merely extern ..l Ver. 9.-And when he was departed theuce observe.uecs, you would not have committed (Kai /HTa{Jo.s '"•.B•v). The phrase implies this sin of ta.king up the position of wrong more than remove.I from that place in the judges. He traces their error up to its true corn-fields where he hllod been accused by the source, ignore.nee :r the first princivles of Ph11orieees, o.nd is to be understood of removal religion, ignorunce of what God really from one town to another, the words that desires. Condemned. Formally and officially originally preceded this narrative not being (Kcmz811,d("')- The guilUess. As were the recorded (cf. infra, and eh. xi. I, note). very priests (ver. 5). When, therefore, it took place we have Ver. 8.-Parallel paBBllges: Mark ii. 28; absolutely no means of knowing, save that Luke vi. 5. For. With immediate refer- it was not on the same day as the event ence to guiltless. The Bon of man is I.ord recorded in vers.1-8 (of. Luke, '' on another even of the sabbath day; is Lord of the sabbath "), and that it was later on in his, sabbath (Revised Version); e1ien being adde,1 ministry, He went into their synagogue.. in the Received Text from Mark and Luke. Whose? Hardly the Pharisees mentioned- Christ olinches the argument, and at the in ver. 2, e.s this was a different occasion .. same time explains his phrase in ver. 6. Possibly the Galilmans, among whom he The temple is greater than the so.bbe.th ; I then wo.s (of. eh. iv. 23; ix. 35), or probably am greater than the temple; these my the Jews generally (of. eh. xi. 1, note). In disciples are therefore guiltless; fo!, to put the two last cases the subject of "they. it briefiy, I, whom they are followmg, am asked" in ver. 10, would be tLe same aa- greater than the eabbe.th and rule over it. tha.t ~r "they watched," in ll'Iark (iii. 2),- Observe, however, that Christ does not namely, the frequenters of the synagogue, directly say '' I," but the Son of man. The o.mong whom the Pharisees naturally took a. reason is seen in Mark, where a connecting prominent place. But it is quite possible link is given : "The se.bbath was me.de for that we ho.vs here a trace of the use of e. man, and not man for the ae.bbath: so that fresh source, the abTiiiv being quite intel- the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath." ligible in its original context. Christ there implies that the sabbath is Ver. 10.-And, behold, there was a man inferior to man, not only because it exists for whioh had his hand withered ; and behold a his sake (of. 1 Cor. xi. 9), but also because it man having a withered hand (Revised Ver- falls under the lordship referred to in Gen. sion, with Westcott and Hort). For the I. 28; and therefore that he himself is quotation by Jerome from" the Gospel which really superior to it as man, and much more the Nazarenes and Ebionites use" (comp. as the ideal Man (eh. viii. 20, note). Our also Introduction, p. xvi.), in which this man eaying is very condensed, but inoludes the tells our Lord, "Cmmentaiius(e.me.son) eram. same thought, omitting e,ien as unnecessary, manibus viotum qumrite.ns," see especially after having definitely pronounced the inno- Resch, • Agre.phn,' p. 379. And they asked cence of his discip Jes. (For the thought of him, saying. In the no.rre.ti ve of healing the saying, of. 2 Mace. v. 19, "God diu not the man with the dropsy, found in Lnke xiv. choose the people for the place's sake, but 1-6 (mde supra), a similar question is the place for the people's sake," and the asked by Dill' Lord. Is it la.wful to heal on Midrash 'Meohilte.,' on Exod. xxxi. 13, the sa.bblloth da.ys t 'l'he Te.lmudio e.nswe?> espeoie.lly the words, " The sabbe.th is given is that it is unlawful except in en.sea of to you, not you to the so.bbe.th." So also actual danger to life (of. Schurer, II. ii. 10-l); Te.Im. Bab., 'Yomn.,' 85 b.) but whether this distinction was reo.lly- dre.wn as early as the time of our Lord is Vers. 9-14.-7'7,e liealing of the man ,cith not known in the present bnckward state otl lhe toiU,ered hand. Pn.rallcl pllilse.gcs: l\fork all oritical investigations of Jewish litera- iii. 1-6; Luke vi. 6-11. In vers. 10, 11 ture. That they might aoouse him ; i.e. there ore reminiscences of a narre.ti ve, pre- before the local colll't, oh. v. 21 (Meyer). Observe that, reoognizing his readine1111 to sumably belonging to th B Framework, which help others, they desire (according to is eseenti11olly preserved in Luke xiv. 2-5 M11otthew) to get 11, eleo.r statement from him (cf. Weiss). whether he woulu follow the !re.di tiona..l law In this seotiun the opposilinn of the (as we may assume it was) or not, intending Pharisees is turned directly agoinst Dill' to buse their acousotion on his reply. Ver- bally, however, Christ avoids the dilemma., Lord himself for bre11oking the sabbath. as in the more fa.moue case of the tribute to Observe, however, th11ot he did not do this Cmear (eh. xxii. 21). for hill own benefit. It was his kindness to Ver. 11.-Me.tthew a.lone on this occa.sion,  (86 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. [en. xu. 1-50.