Luke 11:40

Luk 11:40. Ὁ ποιήσας, He who made) God.—καὶ τὸ) On this account, both must be attended to. Cleanness of the manner of life [answering to the vessel] becomes a clean heart [answering to the interior or inward part].

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk_11:40. Jesus now shows how irrational (ἄφρονες) this is from the religious point of view.

οὐχ ὁ ποιήσας κ.τ.λ.] did not He (God) who made that which is without (i.e. everything external in general, res externas) also make that which is within (res internas)? How absurd, therefore, for you to cleanse what belongs to the rebus externis, the outside of the cup, but allow that which belongs to the rebus internis, your inner life and effort, to be full of robbery, etc.; that ye do not devote to the one and to the other (therefore to both) the cleansing care that is due to Gods work! Consequently τὸ ἔξωθεν is the category to which belongs τὸ ἔξωθεν τ. ποτ. κ. τ. πίν., Luk_11:39, and τὸ ἔσωθεν the category to which belongs τὸ ἔσωθεν ὑμῶν, Luk_11:39. In opposition to the context, others limit the words to the relation of body and spirit (Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabenus, and many others, Bornemann also), which is not permitted by τὸ ἔξωθεν τοῦ ποτηρίου, Luk_11:39, Others limit them to the materiale patinae et poculi and the cibum et potum, which τὸ ἔσωθεν ὑμῶν, Luk_11:39, does not allow (in opposition to Starck, Notae select. p. 91, and Wolf, Paulus also and Bleek). Kuinoel (following Elsner and Kypke) makes the sentence affirmative: Non qui exterius purgavit, pocula patinasque, (eadem opera) etiam interius purgavit, cibos; but this view, besides being open to the objection drawn from τὸ ἔσωθεν ὑμῶν, Luk_11:39, is opposed to the usus loquendi of the words ἐποίησε and ποιήσας.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 11:40 . ἄφρονες , stupid men! not so strong a word as μωροὶ (Mat 23:17 ). οὐχ ὁ ποιήσας , etc.: either a question or an assertion. As an assertion = he that makes the outside (as it should be) does not thereby also make the inside: it is one thing to cleanse the outside, another, etc. On this view ποιήσας has a pregnant sense = purgare , which Kypke and others (Bornemann dissenting) claim for it in this place. As a question the reference will be to God, and the sense: did not the Maker of the world make the inside of things as well as the outside? Why therefore lay so exclusive stress on the latter? The outside and inside are variously taken as body and spirit (Theophy., Euthy., etc.), vessel and contents (Wolf, Hofmann), vessel and human spirit (Bengel).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

that which is without, &c.--that is, He to whom belongs the outer life, and right to demand its subjection to Himself--is the inner man less His?

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 40. Did not he that made that which is without] Did not the maker of the dish form it so, both outwardly and inwardly, as to answer the purpose for which it was made? And can it answer this purpose without being clean in the inside as well as on the outside? God has made you such, both as to your bodies and souls, as he intended should show forth his praise; but can you think that the purpose of God can be accomplished by you while you only attend to external legal purifications, your hearts being full of rapine and wickedness? How unthinking are you to imagine that God can be pleased with this outward purification, when all within is unholy!

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(40) Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without . .?—The question is peculiar to St. Luke, and implies a latent parabolic application of the previous words. Outward, positive ceremonial law, ordering the cleansing of the outside of the cup and of the platter, the eternal moral law requiring truth in the inward parts,—these had, to say the least, the same Maker, and one was not to be neglected for the other.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

40. that which is within also] See Mar_7:18-19, which contains our Lord’s distinctest utterance in abrogation of the Levitic Law— “This He said ...making all meats clean.”

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But woe unto you Pharisees,.... Though these words, with several other passages in this chapter, are much alike with those in Matthew 23 yet it is clear that they were spoken at different times, these in the house of a Pharisee, and they in the temple at Jerusalem:

for ye tithe mint and rue; See Gill on Mat 23:23 the Persic version here reads, "mint and anise", as there; and the Ethiopic version only "hyssop":

and all manner of herbs; or "every herb"; that is, all sorts of herbs that grow in the garden, and were not common to all;

and pass over judgment, and the love of God: by "judgment" may be meant justice, or doing that which is right between man and man, both publicly and privately, which was greatly neglected by these extortioners and unjust men: and by "the love of God" may be intended, both love to God, which shows itself in the observance of the first table of the law, and love to the neighbour, which God requires, and regards the second table:

these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone; See Gill on Mat 23:23.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

40 Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make that which is within also?

Ver. 40. Did not he that made, &c.] Ought he not, therefore, to be served with both? It is the hidden man of the heart that he most regardeth; the law of the mind that he would have chiefly observed.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Ye fools - How unwise and wicked is your conduct! The word denotes not only “want of wisdom,” but also wickedness. Compare Psa 14:1; Pro 13:19; Pro 14:9. Your conduct is not merely “foolish,” but it is a cloak for sin - designed to countenance wickedness.

Did not he ... - Did not God, who made the “body,” make also the “soul?” You Pharisees take great pains to cleanse the “body,” under a pretence of pleasing “God.” Did “he”” not also make the “mind?” and is it not of as much importance that “that” should be pure, as that the body should?

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

40. Without… within also—If the Creator require a clean body, will not he also require a clean soul?

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

40. καὶ τὸ ἔσωθεν. See Mar 7:18-19, which contains our Lord’s distinctest utterance in abrogation of the Levitic Law—“This He said … making all meats clean.” (Revised Version.)

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

40. ἄφρονες. A strong word: quite classical, but in the N. T. almost confined to Lk (12:20) and Paul (Rom 2:20; 1Co 15:36; 2Co 11:16, 2Co 11:19, 2Co 11:12:6, 2Co 11:11; Eph 5:17. See on 24:25).

οὐχ ὁ ποιήσας τὸ ἔξωθεν. This is almost certainly a question. “Not he who has done the outside has thereby done the inside,” makes sense, but it is harsh and hardly adequate. It is better with most Versions to make οὐκ = nonne. “Did not God, who made the material universe, make men’s souls also?”1 It is folly to be scrupulous about keeping material objects clean, while the soul is polluted with wickedness. 2

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.