Luke 14:5

Luk 14:5-6. And answered them — Accordingly, while the Pharisees were considering with themselves how to turn the miracle against him, he disconcerted them by proving the lawfulness of what he had done from their own practice. Which of you shall have an ass, &c., fallen into a pit on the sabbath day — Will you, for fear of breaking the sabbath, let it pass before ye attempt to draw the beast out? and not rather make all the haste you can to save its life, though it should cost you a great deal of work? But the labour of this cure was barely that Jesus laid his hand on the man. His argument, therefore, was what the grossest stupidity could not overlook, nor the most virulent malice contradict. Our Lord had used the same reasoning before, almost in the same words, when vindicating the cure of the man whose hand was withered, Mat 12:14; and at another time had urged an argument in effect the same, with regard to the cure of the crooked woman, Luk 13:15. Which may serve, among a variety of other instances, to vindicate several repetitions which must be supposed, if we desire to assert the exact and circumstantial truth of the sacred historians. And they could not answer him again — What he said was so consonant to common sense, and common practice, that they had not a word to reply. They were much ashamed, therefore, and vexed at their disappointment, having gathered themselves together, and invited him in with a design to insnare him.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14:5 Jesus pointed out the Pharisees’ hypocrisy. See also study note on 13:15-16.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Luk 14:5. Ἀνασπάσει, will pull out) with much toil.

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

Luk 14:5 . τίνος ὑμῶν , etc.: an awkward Hebraistic construction for τίς ὑμῶν οὗ , etc. υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς , a son or (even) an ox, in either case, certainly in the former, natural instinct would be too strong for artificial Sabbatic rules. φρέαρ , a well, or cistern, an illustration as apt to the nature of the malady as that of the ox loosed from the stall in Luk 13:15 (Godet). εὐθέως , at once, unhesitatingly, without thought of Sabbath rules. The emphasis lies on this word.

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

Verse 5. An ass or an ox] See Clarke on Lu 13:15.

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

(5) Which of you shall have an ass or an ox . . .—The line of thought is all but identical with that of Luk_13:15. Here, as there, the outward features of Jewish life are the same as they had been in Exo_20:17, and Isa_1:3. The “ox and the ass” are the beasts which common men use and value. The horse belongs to conquerors and kings. This is said with reference to the received text. Many of the best MSS., however, read, “Which of you shall have a son, or an ox . . .?” and, on the whole, this reading seems likely to be the true one. The familiar combination of the ox and the ass would naturally lead a transcriber to substitute ῠνος (ass) for ὑιός (son). There would be nothing to tempt any one to a change in the opposite direction.

Fallen into a pit.—Literally, into a well, as in Joh_4:6-11, but the word was applied also, as in Rev_9:1-2, to “wells without water”—i.e., as here, to “pits.”

And will not straightway pull him out.—The words appeal to the common action and natural impulse of men, but the casuistry of the Pharisees had, as a matter of fact, given a different answer. Food might be let down to the ox or ass, but no effort to pull him out was to be made till the Sabbath rest was over.

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

5. an ass or an ox] The unquestionable reading if we are to follow the MSS. is ‘a son or an ox.’ The strangeness of the collocation (which however may be taken to imply ‘a son—nay even an ox’) has led to the conjectural emendation of huios into ois ‘a sheep’ (whence the reading probaton ‘a sheep’ in D) or onos ‘an ass’ which was suggested by Deu_22:4. When however it is a question between two readings it is an almost invariable rule that the more difficult is to be preferred as the more likely to have been tampered with. Further (i) Scripture never has “ass and ox” but always “ox and ass and (ii) “son” is a probable allusion to Exo_23:12, “thine ox and thine ass and the son of thine handmaid shall rest on the sabbath,” and (iii) the collocation ‘son and ox’ is actually found in some Rabbinic parallels. If it be said that ‘a son falling into a well’ is an unusual incident, the answer seems to be that it may be an allusion to the man’s disease (dropsy=the watery disease); also that pits and wells are so common and often so unprotected in Palestine that the incident must have been less rare than it is among us.

straightway pull him out] although the Sabbath labour thus involved would be considerable. And why would they do this? because they had been taught, and in their better mind distinctly felt, that mercy was above the ceremonial law (Deu_22:4). An instance which had happened not many years before shews how completely they were blinding and stultifying their own better instincts in their Sabbath quibblings against our Lord. When Hillel—then a poor porter—had been found half-frozen under masses of snow in the window of the lecture-room of Shemaiah and Abtalion where he had hidden himself to profit by their wisdom because he had been unable to earn the small fee for entrance, they had rubbed and resuscitated him though it was the Sabbath day, and had said that he was one for whose sake it was well worth while to break the Sabbath.

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.

And answered them, saying,.... Murmuring secretly at what he had done:

which of you shall have an ass, or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? being just ready to be drowned there; and therefore it must be much more right and necessary to cure a man, a reasonable creature, just drowning with a dropsy, as this man was. The Syriac and Persic versions, instead of "an ass", read "a son", very wrongly: a like kind of reasoning is used by Christ, in See Gill on Mat 12:11, Luk 13:15.

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

5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day?

Ver. 5. Pull him out on the sabbath day] The Jew of Tewkesbury, that would not be pulled out of the outhouse whereinto he fell on their sabbath day, perished deservedly.

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.

See the notes at Mat 12:11.

Which of you ... - In this way Jesus refuted the notion of the Pharisees. If it was lawful to save an ox on the Sabbath, it was also to save the life of a man. To this the Jews had nothing to answer.

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

By this example Christ convicts his adversaries, as guilty of sordid avarice, since, in delivering beasts from the danger of perishing on the sabbath-day, they consult only their own advantage, whilst he was only employed in an act of charity towards his neighbour; an action they seemed so warmly to condemn. (Ven. Bede)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

5. Fallen into a pit—Our Lord used the instance of unloosing the beast in defending his loosing the bonds of a daughter of Abraham. He uses this instance of relieving the beast from the well in this case of the man saved from the watery disease.

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

And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? Most of the older authorities here, instead of" an ass or an ox," read "a son or an ox." The difference here in the reading without doubt arises from the perplexity which was felt in very early days over the strangeness of the collocation of "a son and an ox." This is the reading, however, which, according to all the acknowledged principles of criticism, we must consider the true one. The meaning is clear. "If thy son, or even, to take a very different comparison, thy ox, were to fall into a pit, wouldn"t you," etc.? How the sophistries of the scribes and the perplexing traditions of the Jerusalem rabbis on their sabbath restrictions must have been torn asunder by the act of mercy and power performed, and the words of Divine wisdom spoken by the Physician-Teacher of Galilee! The noble instincts even of the jealous Pharisees must have been for a moment stirred. Even they, at times, rose above the dreary, lightless teaching with which the rabbinical schools had so marred the old Divine Law. Dr. Farrar quotes a traditional instance of this. "When Hillel afterwards the great rabbi and head of the famous school which bore his name a poor porter, had been found half-frozen under masses of snow in the window of the lecture room of Shemaiah and Abtation, where he had hidden himself, to profit by their wisdom, because he had been unable to earn the small fee for entrance, they had rubbed and resuscitated him, though it was the sabbath day, and had said that he was one for whose sake it was well worth while to break the sabbath."

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5. υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς. See the note.

5. υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς. The unquestionable reading if we are to follow the MSS. is υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς. The strangeness of the collocation (which however may be taken to imply ‘a son—nay even an ox’) has led to the conjectural emendation of υἱὸς into ὄϊς ‘a sheep’ (whence the reading πρόβατον ‘a sheep’ in D) or ὄνος ‘an ass’ which was suggested by Deu 22:4. When however it is a question between two readings it is an almost invariable rule that the more difficult is to be preferred as the more likely to have been tampered with. Further (i) Scripture never has “ass and ox” but always “ox and ass;” and (ii) “son” is a probable allusion to Exo 23:12, “thine ox and thine ass and the son of thine handmaid shall rest on the sabbath,” and (iii) the collocation ‘son and ox’ is actually found in some Rabbinic parallels. If it be said that ‘a son falling into a well’ is an unusual incident, the answer seems to be that pits (as in Mat 12:2) and wells (as here) are so common and often so unprotected in Palestine that the incident must have been less rare than it is among us.

εὐθέως ἀνασπάσει αὐτόν. Will at once draw him out. Vulg[285] extrahat. They would draw him out although the Sabbath labour thus involved would be considerable. And why would they do this? because they had been taught, and in their better mind distinctly felt, that mercy was above the ceremonial law (Deu 22:4). An instance which had happened not many years before shews how completely they were blinding and stultifying their own better instincts in their Sabbath quibblings against our Lord. When Hillel—then a poor porter—had been found half-frozen under masses of snow in the window of the lecture-room of Shemaiah and Abtalion where he had hidden himself to profit by their wisdom because he had been unable to earn the small fee for entrance, they had rubbed and resuscitated him though it was the Sabbath day, and had said that he was one for whose sake it was well worth while to break the Sabbath.

[285] Vulg. Vulgate.

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.

5.] There is a strict propriety in the comparison: the accident and disease are analogous.

υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς] This reading, which evidently was the original, seemed incompatible with the supposed argument à minori ad majus: υἱός was therefore altered to ὄνος (as in ch. 13:15) or πρόβατον (Mill and Bornemann conjectured ὄϊς). But our Lord’s argument is of another and a far deeper kind. The stress is on ὑμῶν: and the point of comparison is the ownership, and consequent tender care, of the object in question. ‘Those who are in your possession and care, whether belonging to your families, or your herds, are cared for, and rescued from perishing: am I (the possessor of heaven and earth,—this lies in the background) to let mine perish without care or rescue?’

There may be in the words the meaning ‘son, or even ox;’ but I prefer rendering them simply.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5. Τίνος ὑμῶν υἱὸς ἢ βοῦς. The emphatic word is ὑμῶν. “How do you act, when your interests are concerned? When your son, or even your ox, falls into a well?”1 Palestine abounds in unprotected cisterns, wells and pits. Wetst. quotes from the Mishna, Si in puteum bos aut asinus … filius aut filia. The argument is that what the Pharisees allowed themselves for their own benefit must be allowed to Christ for the benefit of others. Their Sabbath help had an element of selfishness; His had none.

The reading ὄνος ἢ βοῦς probably comes from 13:15. The correction was doubly tempting: 1. because υἱός seemed rather to spoil the à fortiori argument; 2. because ὄνος is more naturally coupled with βοῦς. Comp. Deu 22:4. The reading πρόβατον (D) for υἱός has a similar origin, while ὄϊς is a conjecture as the supposed original of both υἱός and ὄνος. The evidence is thus divided: υἱός A B A G D M S U V G D L etc., e f g Syrr., Cyr-Alex.—ὄνος א K L X Π, a b c i Syr-Sin. Vulg. Arm. Aeth. See WH. 2. App, p. 62; Sanday, App. to Grk. T. p. 120. The ἀποκριθείς before πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἶπεν (א A, Vulg.) is probably an insertion.

Note the Hebraistic construction instead of τίς ὑμῶν οὗ υἱὸς, κ.τ.λ., οὐθ εὐθέως ἀνασπάσει αὐτόν;

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

Pit [φρεαρ] . The primary meaning is a well, as distinguished from a fountain.

Pull out. More correctly up [ανα] .

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.