Luke 9:55

Luk 9:55. Οἵου πνεύματος, of what manner of Spirit) Namely, of that Spirit which is the Spirit of Christ, and the Spirit of grace. There may be compared with this the fact, that when Jesus prayed on the cross, employing the very words of the twenty-second and thirty-first psalms, yet He did not pray against His enemies, which would have been also in accordance with prophetical psalms, but for His enemies.—ὑμεῖς) ye. The appeal to Elias is hereby proved erroneous.

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

Luk 9:55 . στραφεὶς : an imposing gesture, as in Luk 7:9 ; Luk 7:44 .

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

So speak the Hebrews, that is, you know not what will, mind, and counsel you are of: so the gifts of God are called the spirit, because they are given of God’s Spirit, and so are they, that are contrary to them, which proceed of the wicked spirit, as the spirit of covetousness, of pride, and madness.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

know not what . . . spirit--The thing ye demand, though in keeping with the legal, is unsuited to the genius of the evangelical dispensation. The sparks of unholy indignation would seize readily enough on this example of Elias, though our Lord's rebuke (as is plain from Luk 9:56) is directed to the principle involved rather than the animal heat which doubtless prompted the reference. "It is a golden sentence of Tillotson, Let us never do anything for religion which is contrary to religion" [WEBSTER and WILKINSON].

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 55. Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.] Ye do not consider that the present is a dispensation of infinite mercy and love; and that the design of God is not to destroy sinners, but to give them space to repent, that he may save them unto eternal life. And ye do not consider that the zeal which you feel springs from an evil principle, being more concerned for your own honour than for the honour of God. The disciples of that Christ who died for his enemies should never think of avenging themselves on their persecutors.

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

(55) Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.—The words admit of two constructions: (1) that the disciples did not know that the Spirit that had been given “not by measure” to their Master, and promised by Him to them (Mat_10:20; Joh_3:34), was one of gentleness and love; (2) that they did not know that in yielding to what they thought a righteous anger, they were really yielding themselves to the evil mind, or the personal Evil Spirit which was at enmity with God. Looking to the general use of the word “spirit” in our Lord’s teaching, the former way of taking the words seems, on the whole, preferable, and agrees better with what follows. The Spirit which had claimed them for its own was one that led Him to save and not to destroy. The whole clause, however, is wanting in the best MSS.

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

55. Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of] The whole of this passage down to “save them” is omitted in K, A, B, C, and other manuscripts; but it is impossible to doubt its genuineness, because it breathes a spirit far purer, loftier, and rarer than is ever discernible in ecclesiastical interpolations. It was omitted on the same grounds as the words in the last verse, because it was regarded as ‘dangerous’ to the authority of the O.T. It is quite impossible to believe that the narrative abruptly ended with the unexplained “He rebuked them.” Ecclesiastical censurers have failed to see that “religionis non est religionem cogere” (Tert. ad Scap. 2), and that, as Bp Andrewes says, “The times require sometimes one spirit, sometimes another, Elias’ time Elias’ spirit.” The Apostles learnt these truths better when they had received the Holy Ghost (Rom_12:19; Jas_1:19-20; Jas_3:16-17; Joh_3:17; Joh_12:47). They learnt that the spirit of Jesus was the spirit of the dove; and that there is a difference between Carmel and Hermon, between Sinai and Kurn Hattin. It is possible that the words may be a question —Know ye not that yours (emphatically placed last) is the spirit of Elijah, not of Christ? Our Lord quoted Psa_22:31 on the Cross, and yet prayed for His enemies. Bengel.

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 Jesus said unto him, foxes have holes,.... Both the words of this man to Christ, and Christ's answer to him, are exactly the same as in Matthew, which makes it look as if it was the same history; though it is not improbable, that Christ might be accosted in the same manner by another person, at another time and place, and return a like answer to each; See Gill on Mat 8:20.

.

Luke 9:59

luk 9:59

luk 9:59

luk 9:59And he said unto another, follow me,.... According to Matthew, one of his disciples, who had attended him some time, and whom he now called to the ministerial work; See Gill on Mat 8:20. The Ethiopic version reads, "another said to him, shall I not follow thee?" but without any foundation: they are certainly the words of Christ, directed to another person, at the same time he met with the former:

but he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father; See Gill on Mat 8:21.

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

55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

Ver. 55. But he turned and rebuked them] He did it not slightly, and by-the-by, but seriously, and on set purpose; so must we rebuke and rebate our vindictive spirits, our unruly lusts, when like kine in a strait they rush and ride one upon the back of another.

Ye know not what manner of spirits ye are of] Not of Elias’s spirit, as ye imagine; this wildfire was never kindled on God’s hearth, as his zeal was; you are men of another mould than Elias. He was a minister of indignation, you of consolation; his actions fit not you, because your persons are not like his. It is a rare thing to be of a heroic spirit, saith the moralist, Σπανιον το θειον ανδρα ειναι (Aristot.). Every man cannot be an Elias or a Phineas, Num 25:8. To that height of heat ordinary men’s tempers are not raised.

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 know not what manner of spirit ye are of - You suppose that you are actuated by a proper love for me; but you know not yourselves. It is rather a love of revenge; rather revengeful feelings toward the “Samaritans” than proper feelings toward “me.” We learn here:

That “apparent” zeal for God may be only improper opposition toward our fellow-men. That people, when they wish to honor God, should examine their spirit, and see if there is not lying at the bottom of their professed zeal for God some bad feeling toward their fellow-men. That the highest opposition which Jesus met with was not inconsistent with “his” loving those who opposed him, and with his seeking to do them good.

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

You know not of what spirit you are, i.e. that my Spirit, which you ought to follow, is the Spirit of mercy, mildness, and patience. (Witham)

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).

The term spirit sometimes signifies, the inward motions, propensities, and inclinations of the soul, influenced either from the Holy Spirit of God, or from the evil spirit. So the term is used 2Ti 1:7. You do not (saith our Saviour) consider what kind of motions these are, which you indulge yourselves in. The case of Elijah and this case had three remarkable differences.

1. The people of Israel at that time had been in an apostasy but of few years comparatively to these Samaritans; they were fallen into it in the sight of the true worship of God, at that time upheld in Judah. They were not only stiff in it, but the king sends these captains to apprehend Elijah for declaring what God had commanded him to declare. These Samaritans were under the prejudices of antiquity, and prescription for many hundreds of years. Histories tell us, that the Samaritan temple, on Mount Gerizim, built in opposition to the temple at Jerusalem, was built by one Sanballat, Darius’s governor in those parts, to be revenged on the Jews for turning his son-in-law Manasseh from the priesthood at Jerusalem, which if it be true, the Samaritans had been fixed now in their false worship more than five hundred years. Nor were these that we read of any of the heads and rulers, but probably ordinary country people, rooted so long in this corrupt way, and doing this in zeal to their own temple on Mount Gerizim, and so inclined to show no favour to those who in any devotion were going to the opposite temple. Christ pitieth them under these prejudices, and though he doth not approve of their worship, yet he did not think that the way to change their minds was to call for fire from heaven against them, nor would he be so severe against them. It is not the will of God that we should approve of any corrupt worship, and join with those that use it; but neither is it his will that we should by fire and sword go about to suppress it, and bring men off from it. Antiquity, or the practice of our forefathers, is no sufficient plea to justify any worship. (It was the Samaritans’ plea, Joh 4:20) But yet where any such prejudice against the truth is, it calleth to us for mild and gentle behaviour towards such as are under those disadvantages for the receiving of the truth.

2. But, secondly, there was a difference in the call of Elijah. He was an extraordinary prophet, who did nothing of this nature but by an immediate impulse and direction; so as what he did was in zeal for God, guided by a knowledge of the will of God. The disciples had no such call.

3. The times differed; Elijah acted under the legal dispensation, which was more severe; they were under the more mild and gentle dispensation of the gospel. And in this question they did but indulge their passions, and sinful desire of revenge; therefore, saith our Saviour,

Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. Our Saviour lets them know that they were under a more mild and gentle dispensation, by propounding his own example: The Son of man (saith he) came not to destroy men’s lives, but to save. The term translated lives signifieth also souls; but if we consider the apostles’ question, which was not whether they should call for fire from heaven to destroy their souls, but to destroy them as to their lives here, it will well enough justify our translators rendering it in this place lives. You see, saith our Saviour, by my healing the sick, raising the dead, &c., that my business is not to make my ministry ungrateful to men, by any ways prejudicing them in their outward concerns. If it were translated souls, it is yet a great truth: Christ came not to destroy men’s souls, but to bring the means of salvation and eternal happiness; if they reject these, and perish, their destruction is of themselves.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

55. What manner of spirit—We do not understand by these words, that these apostles knew not the nature of their own temper or spirit; but that they knew not the spirit of the dispensation to which they belonged. When the fifties of the wicked king came to Elijah he said, “If I be a man of God, let fire come down;” thus demonstrating his prophetic character by a miracle of destruction. But the Son of man came not to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. Miracles of wrath belong not to his and their mission. They forget the spirit of their dispensation. This was assigning a reason why they knew not the spirit to which they belonged; and not, as many interpret it, the spirit which belonged to them. At the same time it points to a fact too wonderful and too glorious for these apostles or the evangelists to invent, that the miracles of Jesus are throughout miracles of love and mercy. None but the great divine Original himself could have conceived such a character and thus have demonstrated its divinity forever.

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

But he turned, and rebuked them. "Christ wrought miracles in every element except fire. Fire is reserved for the consummation of the age" (Bengel). And said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.

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

Ye know not what manner of spirit - The spirit of Christianity is. It is not a spirit of wrath and vengeance, but of peace, and gentleness, and love.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Here we have our Saviour’s censure of the rash and hot motion of his disciples, which proceeded first from ignorance of themselves, Ye know not what spirit ye are of; you are not now under the rough and sour dispensation of the law, but under the calm and gentle institution of the gospel, which designs universal love, peace, and good-will, to all mankind.

Hence learn, first, that a cruel and revengeful spirit is directly contrary to the design and temper of Christianity.

Secondly, that no difference in religion, no pretence of zeal to God, can warrant and justify such a spirit and temper.

Again, this rashness in the disciples proceeded from their ignorance of Christ their Lord and Master, as well as of themselves: the Son of man did not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them; that is, the proper intent and design of my coming was to save, and not to destroy, though the accidental event of it may be otherwise, through the malice and perverseness of men.

Learn, that it is the design of Christ and his holy religion to discountenance all fierceness, rage, and cruelty, in men, one towards another, and to inspire them universally with a spirit of love and unity. Christ is so far from allowing us to persecute them that hate us, that he forbids us to hate them that persecute us.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

55. He rebuked them. Their spirit was not his. He quietly left the inhospitable village and went elsewhere. He was not a destroyer, but a Savior. Zeal for Christ is no excuse for fanaticism.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

55. καὶ εἶπεν … ὑμεῖς. D. Rec[194] omitted by אABCL La[195] Ti[196] Probably tampered with for dogmatic reasons.

[194] Rec. The Textus Receptus.

[195] La. Lachmann.

[196] Ti. Tischendorf.

55. [οὐκ οἴδατε οἵου πνεύματός ἐστε ὑμεῖς.] ‘Ye know not of what spirit ye are, Ye.’ This does not mean, ‘Ye know not how unlike your spirit is to that of Elias;’ but ‘your spirit is that of Elias, and is not now commendable.’ Βία ἐχθρὸν θεῷ. The whole of this passage down to “save them” is omitted in אABC, and other manuscripts; but it is impossible to doubt its genuineness, because it breathes a spirit far purer, loftier, and rarer than is ever discernible in ecclesiastical interpolations. It was omitted on the same grounds as the words in the last verse, because it was regarded as ‘dangerous’ to the authority of the O. T. It is quite impossible to believe that the narrative abruptly ended with the unexplained, “He rebuked them.” Ecclesiastical censurers have failed to see that “religionis non est religionem cogere” (Tert. ad Scap. 2), and that, as Bp. Andrewes says, “The times require sometimes one spirit, sometimes another, Elias’ time Elias’ spirit.” The Apostles learnt these truths better when they had received the Holy Ghost (Rom 12:19; Jas 1:19-20; Jas 3:16-17; Joh 3:17; Joh 12:47). They learnt that the spirit of Jesus was the spirit of the dove; and that there is a difference between Carmel and Hermon, between Sinai and Kurn Hattîn. It is possible that the words may be a question—Know ye not that yours (emphatically placed last) is the spirit of Elijah, not of Christ? Our Lord quoted Psalms 22, 31 on the Cross, and yet prayed for His enemies. Bengel.

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.

55.] [οὐκ οἴδατε οἵου πνεύματός ἐστε. Besides the mistaken ways of explaining these words of our Lord (e.g. ‘Do you not see what a (bad) spirit you are shewing?’ Bornemann) there are two senses which they may bear. (1) Affirmative, as in E. V.,—‘putatis vos agi Spiritu tali quali olim Elias … sed erratis. Habetis quidem ζῆλον sed οὐ κατʼ ἐπίγνωσιν, et qui proinde humani est affectus, non divinæ motionis.’ Grot.; or (2) interrogative—‘Know ye not what manner of spirit ye belong to (are of)?’ the spirit meant being the Holy Spirit. ‘The Spirit in Elias was a fiery and judicial spirit, as befitted the times and the character of God’s dealings then; but the Spirit in Me and mine is of a different kind—a spirit of love and forgiveness.’

The latter of these is perhaps better suited to the context: but we seem to want an example in the Gospels of (οὐκ) οἴδατε used interrogatively: see Mat 7:11 ║; 20:22, 25 ║; 24:42 ║; 25:13; 26:2: Mar 4:13 (doubtful, but the construction is direct): ch. 12:56: Joh 8:14; Joh 14:4 al. I have therefore punctuated according to the former sense: which, indeed, seems more naturally followed by the γάρ of the clause following.

It is very interesting to remember that this same John came down to Samaria (Act 8:14-17) with Peter, to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit on the Samaritan believers.]

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

55. στραφεὶς δέ. “But (instead of assenting to their proposal) He turned.” He was in front, and the disciples were following Him. Syr-Sin.omits στραφείς as well as the three clauses.

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