Matthew 7:29

Mat_7:29

Having authority.

The great authority

There resides in what is called an authority a power which we shall do well to contemplate. By it I mean that position as an adviser which is gained only by diligent study and habitual practical research; or else by the inherent endowment or special gifts of a superior nature. The medicine man, the legal man, gain authority by study. The importance of finding in Jesus the authority in the affairs of the soul, and also of the mind when brought up against eternal questions. There is a class of mind which takes delight to fathom the unfathomable. Faith is as much an integral part as our ignorance, in our imperfect condition. It is the aim of faith to turn ignorance into bliss in the perplexities of life, with respect to most of which it were folly to be wise. What a calamity if in this half-fledged condition we knew all about ourselves and God. We should shake our dispositions with thoughts beyond the reaches of our souls. Christ knows. He is the authority for the soul. (U. P. Philpot, M. A.)

Authority His result of knowledge

We have lately learned among the laws of solar light which have been revealed to us-for science also has its late and lagging revelations-the astonishing fact, that beyond the atmosphere of our world, as of all other worlds, all is blackness and darkness, even till the eye again reaches the airy envelopes of other worlds, and catches the bright particular stars which are the sources, direct or mediate, of the rays that play upon its tiny pupil. And so we find it to be round all the circle of science, round every world of knowledge there is also a darkness which no knowledge can penetrate. We live and move and have our being upon the edge of a ring of precipitous and abysmal darkness. But, as we have seen to be the case in the fiery- citadels of heaven, so we Christians believe it to be in the moral world; that, dark as its surroundings are -in respect of the origin and workings of evil, and all the problems that hang about this inquiry, there abides above and beyond all a Paternal source of Light. God is a central and Personal Sun, Who gives light to all, and borrows none from any, and in Whom, as Jesus shows Him to us, is no darkness at all. In that light Jesus dwells, having no part dark, and from that light He speaks to us, and teaches with an authority which is unique. (U. P. Philpot, M. A.)

Divine audacity

Audacity, in reverent sense, better expresses the word than authority. This He did-

1. In declaring His pre-existence.

2. In declaring His identity with the Godhead.

3. In assuming Divine prerogatives.

4. In arrogating exclusive rights, and exhausting in Himself the similitude of things.

Lessons:

1. A proof that Christ was what He professed to be.

2. This was the only consistent course.

3. An audacious Christ should have an audacious Church. (J. Parker, D. D.)

Authority of our Saviour as a teacher

The nature of this authority.

1. It was the authority of truth. There was no artifice or affectation in His manner; no excess; solemnity. Earnestness of conviction apparent.

2. It was derived from the intrinsic truth of the doctrines which Jesus communicated, as from the sincerity with which they were taught.

3. It arose from the purity of His character. It was the authority of a good life.

4. It was the authority of heaven. The Divine assistance was afforded to Jesus; God confirmed what He said, and miracles were wrought. We are too familiar with Christs doctrine to be astonished at it. (F. W. P. Greenwood, D. D.)

Truth, not beauty, gives authority to doctrine

The question is not whether a doctrine is beautiful, but whether it is true. When we want to go to a place, we dont ask whether the road leads through a pretty country, but whether it is the right road, the road pointed out by authority, the turnpike-road. (Hare.)

Christ an unconventional but model preacher

I. He was A model as to the matter of his preaching, which was unconventional. Christ taught Himself.

1. He had nothing higher to represent than Himself.

2. He had nothing that the world required more than Himself.

II. HE was A model as to the manner of his teaching, which was unconventional.

1. His positiveness.

2. His self-assurance.

3. His naturalness.

4. His freshness.

5. His suggestiveness.

6. His definiteness.

7. His tenderness.

8. His faithfulness.

9. His consistency.

10. His devoutness. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 7:29. Ὡς ἑξουσίαν ἔχων, as one having authority) They could not withdraw themselves away.[353] It is the mark of truth to constrain minds, and that of their own free will. See examples of our Lord’s authority (ἐξουσία) in the Gnomon on ch. Mat 5:3; Mat 5:18-20, Mat 7:22-23, and also Mat 8:19, and Joh 7:19.—γραμματεῖς,[354] scribes) to whom the people were accustomed, and who had no authority,

[353] They felt the majesty of the Teacher, and the power of His word.—V. g.

[354] The argin of Edit. A.D. 1753 regards the fuller reading,οἱ γραμματεῖς αὐτῶν καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, as almost equal in probability to this shorter one.—E. B.

Lachm. adds the words with C corrected by the first and second later hand, ac Vulg. Hil. 640, Euseb. ἀποδ. 27b:b also, adding αὐτῶν. However the weighty authority of B is against the additional words.—ED.

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

Mat_7:29. Ἦν διδάσκων] expresses more emphatically than a simple imperf. that it was a continuous thing, Kühner, II. 1, p. 35. Winer, p. 526 f. [E. T. 437].

ὡς ἐξουσίαν ἔχων] as one who is invested with prophetic authority, in contrast to the γραμματεῖς, in listening to whom one could hear that they were not authorized to speak in the same fearless, candid, unconstrained, convincing, telling, forcible way. All was full of life, and sounded as though it had hands and feet, Luther. Comp. Luk_4:32; Luk_4:36; Mar_1:22; Mar_1:27; Rev_9:19.

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.

Mat 7:29 . ὡς ἐξουσίαν ἔχων : Fritzsche supplies, after ἔχων , τοῦ διδάσκειν , and renders, He taught as one having a right to teach, because He could do it well, “scite et perite,” a master of the art. The thought lies deeper. It is an ethical, not an artistic or æsthetical contrast that is intended. The scribes spake by authority, resting all they said on traditions of what had been said before. Jesus spake with authority, out of His own soul, with direct intuition of truth; and, therefore, to the answering soul of His hearers. The people could not quite explain the difference, but that was what they obscurely felt.

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

For he taught them as one having authority--The word "one," which our translators have here inserted, only weakens the statement.

and not as the scribes--The consciousness of divine authority, as Lawgiver, Expounder and Judge, so beamed through His teaching, that the scribes teaching could not but appear drivelling in such a light.

Next: Matthew Chapter 8

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 29. Having authority] They felt a commanding power and authority in his word, i.e. his doctrine. His statements were perspicuous; his exhortations persuasive; his doctrine sound and rational; and his arguments irresistible. These they never felt in the trifling teachings of their most celebrated doctors, who consumed their own time, and that of their disciples and hearers, with frivolous cases of conscience, ridiculous distinctions, and puerile splittings of controversial hairs-questions not calculated to minister grace to the hearers.

Several excellent MSS. and almost all the ancient versions read, και οι φαρισαιοι, and the Pharisees. He taught them as one having authority, like the most eminent and distinguished teacher, and not as the scribes and Pharisees, who had no part of that unction which he in its plenitude possessed. Thus ends a sermon the most strict, pure, holy, profound, and sublime, ever delivered to man; and yet so amazingly simple is the whole that almost a child may apprehend it! Lord! write all these thy sayings upon our hearts, we beseech thee! Amen.

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

(29) He taught them.—The Greek implies continuity, He was teaching.

As one having authority, and not as the scribes.—Some instances have been already pointed out: the “I say unto you,” which is contrasted with what had been said “to them of old time”; the assumption that He, the speaker, was the Head of the divine kingdom and the Judge of quick and dead. More striking still is the entire absence of any reference by name to the teaching of other interpreters of the Law. As a rule, the scribe hardly ever gave his exposition without at least beginning by what had been said by Hillel or by Shammai, by Rabbi Joseph or Rabbi Meir, depending almost or altogether upon what had thus been ruled before, as much as an English lawyer depends on his precedents. In contrast with all this, our Lord fills the people with amazement by speaking to them as One who has a direct message from God. It is the prophet, or rather, perhaps, the king, who speaks, and not the scribe.

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

29. having authority] He was Himself a lawgiver. His teaching was not a mere expansion of the old law. Much less did he confine himself to the words of any particular Rabbi.

the scribes] Sopherim = either (1) “those who count;” because the Scribes counted each word and letter of the Scriptures; or (2) “those occupied with books.” The Scribes, as an organized body, originated with Ezra, who was in a special sense the “Sopher” or Scribe. This order of Sopherim, strictly so called, terminated b. c. 300. Their successors in our Lord’s time were usually termed Tanaim, “those who repeat, i. e. teach the Law.” They are called “lawyers” (ch. Mat_22:35; Luk_5:17; Act_5:34), also “the wise,” “Elders,” and “Rabbis.”

A scribe’s education began as early as in his fifth year. At thirteen he became a “son of the precept,” Bar-mitsvah. If deemed fit, he became a disciple. At thirty he was admitted as a teacher, having tablets and a key given him. See note, ch. Mat_16:19. His functions were various; he transcribed the law (here the greatest accuracy was demanded); he expounded the law, always with reference to authority—he acted as judge in family litigation, and was employed in drawing up various legal documents, such as marriage contracts, writings of divorce, etc. (See Kitto’s Cycl. Bib. Lit. and Smith’s Bib. Dict. art. Scribes.)

The alliance between Scribes and Pharisees was very close, each taught that the law could be interpreted, fenced round and aided by tradition, in opposition to the Sadducees, who adhered to the strict letter of the written law.

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.

29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Ver. 29. For he taught them as one having authority] Never man spake as he spake, said those catch poles that came to take him, but were taken by him. For matter, his doctrine was not his own, but his Father’s that sent him, Joh 7:16. For manner, this prince of preachers had the tongue of the learned, Isa 50:4; yet without ostentation of learning he delivered himself so plainly that the simplest might conceive him, and so powerfully that his enemies could not but confess that he "was true, and taught the way of God truly," Mat 22:14. And for end, he seriously sought his Father’s glory in the salvation of men’s souls. A fair precedent for preachers; who should thus seek to get within the people, and to maintain the credit of their ministry, that their words may carry an authority and command attention.

And not as the Scribes] Who, 1. Stuck in the bark of the law, and pierced not into the heart and sense of it. 2. Delivered "for doctrines the commandments of men" about washings, tithings, &c. 3. They sought not the glory of God, but praise of men; and were therefore mad at our Saviour, as one that bare away the bell from them for a powerful preacher. 4. They rejected publicans and sinners, though penitent: so did not Christ. 5. They taught coldly and carelessly; but he zealously and imperiously, as the lawgiver, and not as an interpreter only; as that "prophet like unto me," saith Moses; yea, far beyond him, or any other that ever spake with a tongue. For he could and did speak to the hearts of his hearers; together with his word "there went forth a power," as to heal the bodies of those, Luk 5:17, so the souls of his elect; he was a minister of the spirit and not of the letter only. {a}

{a} Optimi ad vulgus hi sunt concionatores, dixit Lutherus, qui pueriliter, trivialiter, populariter, et simplicissime docent. Melch. Ad. in Vita. Γραμματεις ησαν δευτερωται του νομουγραμμα τικην τινα επιστημην εφηγουμενοι. Epiphan. lib. 1 Panarii. Scribarum doctrina erat torpida, elumbis, frigida. Heb 2:3.

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.

He taught as one having power, Greek: exousian, to found a law of his own. Hence he said: Ego autem dico vobis; "But I say to you, " viz. as a legislator, announcing to you not the law of Moses, or of any other, but my own law. (Estius, in different location) --- All agree that St. Matthew anticipates the sermon on the mount, in order thus to prefix the doctrines of Christ to the account of his miracles; for we cannot doubt that the discourse on the mount, which is mentioned by St. Matthew, is the same as that recorded by St. Luke. The beginning, the middle, and the conclusion correspond with each other. If St. Matthew mentions some particulars omitted by St. Luke, it is because his design was to collect together several instructions, which Jesus delivered on different occasions; and these, for the most part, are to be found in other parts of St. Luke. --- This admirable sermon may be divided into three parts, viz. the exordium, the body of the discourse, and the conclusion. The exordium comprises the eight beatitudes, and merits our most serious attention. The body of the discourse is chiefly addressed to the apostles, whom Jesus had recently chosen, in order to instil into them, and all succeeding pastors of the Church, a right sense of the great duties belonging to their ministry; and, in the second place, it refers to all the faithful in general. The conclusion consists of an exhortation to a life of piety, and contains several advices, some of which chiefly regard pastors, others indiscriminately all the faithful in general. --- May this excellent abridgment of thy doctrine, O Jesus! be the rule of our manners, the pattern of our life. Amen. (Haydock)

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).

29. Having authority — Not relying on rabbis, or elders, or prophets, or even upon Moses; but as one greater than they all. The authority, original and unappealable, resided in his own Divine person.

The Sermon on the Mount contains a summary of all the great moral principles and cardinal doctrines of the Gospel, except the atonement. His own divinity, as the superior of Moses and the final judge of men, is fully asserted; man’s fallen and evil nature, the needs of the Holy Spirit to salvation, the duty and success of prayer for its bestowment, are affirmed; faith in Christ as the only rock of safety, the necessity of renouncing self and the world, and giving ourselves by faith to God, whereby we may be regenerated into sons of God, are plentifully explained; holiness of heart, Christian perfection, purity, are described and required in explicit terms; probation, the final judgment, and everlasting retribution, are depicted in the clearest colours; and though the CROSS is not fully presented, yet that spirit of faith is powerfully inculcated, by which the cross, in the fulness of time, would be embraced with full purpose of heart.

The wonderful reports in regard to Jesus had drawn the multitudes from various parts to hear him. (Mat_4:25.) As Jesus arose and walked down the mountain toward Capernaum “great multitudes followed him.” (Mat_8:1.) How much, in regard to the Messiah, they understood, is not clear; but it cannot be doubted that many a heart was beginning to open with receptive faith for his religion. Alas! how may counter influences blast the fairest hopes!

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

For he taught them. Such was his constant habit (hn ... didaskwn). As one having authority, and not as the scribes. Who, indeed, never claimed personal authority. Jewish teachers lean on the fact of their having received that which they expound. They professedly sink their own personality in that of those of old time, to whom the teaching was first given. (Mat_5:21) To this our Lord"s personal claims stand in sharp contrast. The scribes; Revised Version, their scribes, with the manuscripts; i.e. the scribes to which they were accustomed to listen. Whether the reference is primarily to scribes of the nation generally or only to those of the neighbouring district, is hardly material, for these were representatives of the one class. A few authorities add, "and the Pharisees," which may either be derived from Luk_5:30 or be an independent gloss due to the fact that the Pharisees were looked upon as the typical Jewish teachers.

The distinguishing feature of Christ"s teaching.

"As a rule, the scribe hardly ever gave his exposition without at least beginning by what had been said by Hillel or Shammai, by Rabbi Joseph or Rabbi Meir, depending almost or altogether upon what had thus been ruled before, as much as an English lawyer depends upon his precedents." Geikie mentions one of the rabbis who "boasted that every verse of the Bible was capable of six hundred thousand different interpretations." But on such principles who could hope to know or find the truth? To venture on originality and independence in teaching was something hitherto unknown; and the difference between the method of Jesus and the method of the scribes forcibly impressed the people. The point which may be profitably opened, illustrated, and impressed is the difference in power exerted by those who must be classed under the term "scribe," and, those who may be classed along with the Lord Jesus. And all our teachers, in home, school, church, society, literature, will thus divide.

I THE POWER OF THE SCRIBE-LIKE TEACHER. A very small power. Such men often do more harm than good by their pettiness, narrow limitations, quibbles, interest in trifles, and uncertainties of mere verbal interpretation. They are always seriously affected by the prejudices of the schools to which they belong. They find it impossible to grasp or to apply great, comprehensive principles. Such are dangerous teachers still.

II THE POWER OF THE CHRIST-LIKE TEACHER. NO doubt Christ had an authority arising from his office which was unique; but we can recognize also an authority in respect of which we may be like him. He was strong in unquestioning, unwavering, convictions of the truth. That is the kind of authority that is still needed. Prophet-like authority. The age needs men, like Christ, who can speak with the "accent of conviction." Our fellow-men and we ourselves are always best helped by those who hold truth with a great grasp of faith, and have no quavering in their voice as they speak to us the message of God. They are not stubborn men, but believing men. What they say to us is this, "I believe; therefore have I spoken. R.T.

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

He taught them - The multitudes, as one having authority - With a dignity and majesty peculiar to himself as the great Lawgiver, and with the demonstration and power of the Spirit: and not as the scribes - Who only expounded the law of another; and that in a lifeless, ineffectual manner.

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

29. As having authority. He spoke, not as a man, with human doubts and limitations, but as one who was omniscient. He came from God, and spoke as one divine; not as a human, hesitating, halting, limping expounders like the scribes, the interpreters of the Scriptures.

On what are you building, my brother,

Your hopes of an eternal home?

Is it loose, shifting sand, or the firm, solid rock,

You are trusting for the ages to come?

Hearing and doing, we build on the Rock;

Hearing alone, we build on the sand;

Both will be tried by the storm and the flood;

Only the rock the trial will stand.

—H.R. Trickett.

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.

29. ἦν γάρ διδάσκων. The analytic imperfect indicates vividly the continuance of the action, ‘He was teaching,’ not as A.V. ‘taught.’ The thought of the listeners was: ‘While He was teaching we felt all along that He was a lawgiver, not merely an interpreter of the law.’

ὡς οἱ γραμματεῖς αὐτῶν. Whose highest boast it was that they never spoke save in the words of a Rabbi.

οἱ γραμματεῖς. Sopherim = either (1) ‘those who count’ (Heb. saphar); because the Scribes counted each word and letter of the Scriptures; or (2) ‘those occupied with books’ (Heb. sepher). The Scribes, as an organised body, originated with Ezra, who was in a special sense the ‘Sopher’ or Scribe. This order of Sopherim, strictly so called, terminated B.C. 300. Their successors in our Lord’s time were usually termed Tanaim, ‘those who repeat, i.e. teach the Law.’ They are called ‘lawyers’ (ch. Mat 22:35; Luk 5:17; Act 5:34), also ‘the wise,’ ‘Elders,’ and ‘Rabbis.’

A scribe’s education began as early as in his fifth year. At thirteen he became a ‘son of the law,’ Bar-mitsvah. If deemed fit, he became a disciple. At thirty he was admitted as a teacher, having tablets and a key given him. See note, ch. Mat 16:19. His functions were various; he transcribed the law (here the greatest accuracy was demanded); he expounded the law, always with reference to authority—he acted as judge in family litigation, and was employed in drawing up various legal documents, such as marriage-contracts, writings of divorce, &c. (See Kitto’s Cycl. Bib. Lit. and Smith’s Bib. Dict. Art. ‘Scribes.’)

The alliance between Scribes and Pharisees was very close, each taught that the law could be interpreted, ‘fenced round’ and aided by tradition, in opposition to the Sadducees, who adhered to the strict letter of the written law.

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.

29. ἦν διδάσκων] The assertion is spread more widely, by this resolved imperfect, over His whole course of teaching. Chrysostom’s comment is, οὐ γὰρ εἰς ἕτερον ἀναφέρων, ὡς ὁ προφήτης καὶ ὁ Μωυσῆς, ἔλεγεν ἅπερ ἔλεγεν ἀλλὰ πανταχοῦ ἑαυτὸν ἐνδεικνύμενος εἶναι τὸν τὸ κῦρος ἔχοντα. καὶ γὰρ νομοθετῶν συνεχῶς προσετέθει Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, καὶ τῆς ἡμέρας ἀναμιμνήσκων ἐκείνης, ἑαυτὸν ἐδείκνυ τὸν δικάζοντα εἶναι. Hom. xxv. 1, p. 306.

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

29. For He was teaching them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.] Mk. has the same without αὐτῶν.

The relation of the Sermon to S. Luk 6:20-49.

The Introduction, 5:1, 2.

Lk. introduces His Sermon at a later period in the narrative. After borrowing Mar 3:1-6 = Luk 6:6-11, he passes on to the appointment of the Twelve, Mar 3:13-19=Luk 6:12-16. This took place, according to Mk., on a mountain. He then records the descent into the plain again, καὶ καταβὰς μετʼ αὐτῶν ἒστη ἐπὶ τόπου πεδινοῦ, 6:17, and then turns back in order to summarise Mar 3:7-12 = Luk 6:7-19, thus obtaining an audience for the Sermon which he introduces in 6:20 with the words: “And He, lifting up His eyes upon His disciples, said.” It is clear that the two Evangelists independently create a suitable time and place and audience for the Sermon. Mt. places it early in his Gospel to illustrate Mar 1:21, Mar 1:22 “He was teaching—at His teaching—He was teaching.” Lk. places it after the formal appointment of the Twelve, and provides an audience by transposing Mar 3:13-19 and 7-12. Mt.’s τὸ ὄρος and Lk.’s τόπου πεδινοῦ may both represent a tradition that the Sermon was spoken on a hillside. But Mt.’s τὸ ὄρος may equally well be due to the Evangelist. It was fitting that the exposition of the Christian law of the kingdom should have been given on a mountain as the Old Law to Moses on Mount Sinai. Cf. in this Gospel the mountain of temptation (4:8), the mountain of transfiguration (17:1), and the mountain upon which the Lord gave His final commands to the disciples (28:16). Lk.’s καταβὰς—ἐπὶ τόπου πεδινοῦ is probably an editorial connecting link. It was more natural to represent the Lord as descending from the mountain upon which He had appointed the Twelve to find an audience for His Sermon in the plain than to bring the multitudes from Judæa and Tyre and Sidon up into the mountain. Lastly, Mt. has provided an audience for His Sermon by collecting phrases from Mk. (see on 4:23-25), whilst Lk. provides an audience by transposing Mar 3:7-12 and 13-19.

There is therefore no necessary connection between the introduction to the Sermon in Mt. and Lk. other than a common use of Mk.’s Gospel.

A. The Beatitudes, 5:3-13.

Lk. has a corresponding section, consisting of four blessings and four woes, 6:20-26. The four blessings are addressed in the second person (Mt. in the third) to οἱ πτωχοί (Mt. πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι), οἱ πεινῶντες (Mt. οἱ πεινῶντες καὶ διψῶντες τὴν δικαιοσύνην), οἱ κλαίοντες (no parallel in Mt.), and to those who are hated and persecuted; cf. Mt vv. 11, 12. It is clear that the Evangelists in this section are independent of one another, and that they did not use a common written source. The Sermon traditionally began with Beatitudes, but the number and form of these varied in different recensions.

B. The two metaphors of discipleship, Mat 5:13-16, do not occur in Lk.’s Sermon. They have probably been inserted here from other parts of the Logia. Lk. has parallels to 5:13, 15 in 14:34, 35, 8:16, 11:33. See notes on vv. 13-16. He drew the sayings from some source, or sources, other than the Logia.

C. Relation to the Old Law, 5:17-48.

Lk. has no parallel in his Sermon to 5:17-39a. But in 6:27-36 he has parallels to Mat 5:39-48. The ἀλλʼ ὑμῖν λέγω τοῖς ἀκούουσιν (Cf. Mat 5:44 ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν) suggests that Lk. himself, or the source which he follows, has omitted from the Sermon matter parallel to Mat 5:17-39a on account of its polemical character. On the other hand, Mt. has probably added to this section of the Sermon as it stood in the Logia sayings from other parts of the Logia. Such additions are probably vv. 18-19, 22b.c. 25-26. 33-37. See the notes on these passages.

D. Three illustrations of righteousness, Mat 6:1-18.

No parallels to this occur in Lk.’s Sermon. The Sermon in the Logia may have contained it; but if so, Mt. has probably added 7-15 from other sections of the Logia. Lk. has parallels to 8 in 12:30, and to 9-12 in 11:2-4. He was drawing from independent sources.

E. Three prohibitions, Mat 6:19-6.

Lk. has no parallels in his Sermon to 6:19-34, but has sayings corresponding to 6:19-21 in 12:33-34, to 6:22-23 in 11:34-35, to 6:24 in 16:13, and to 6:25-34 in 12:22-31. The Sermon in the Logia may have contained Mat 6:19-20, which Mt. has enlarged by adding 21-34 from other parts of the Logia. Lk. drew from independent sources. Lk. has parallels in his Sermon to 7:1-5 in 6:37-42. Mt. probably drew from the Logia, Lk. from his independent source.

F. Three commands, Mat 7:7-23.

Lk. has parallels in his Sermon to 7:12a. 16-18 and 21 = Luk 6:43-44, Luk 6:46. The section probably stood in the Logia, but may have been enlarged by Mt., e.g. vv. 16b-20, from other parts of the Logia.

G. Concluding parable, Mat 7:24-27, is found at the end of Lk’s Sermon, 6:47-49.

These facts seem most easily explained on some such lines as these:

Mt. found in the Logia a sermon containing—

A. Beatitudes, 5:2-12.

B. Relation to Old Law, 5:17, 20, 21-24, 27-30, 31-32, 33-42, 43-48.

C. Three illustrations of righteousness, 6:1-4, 5-6, 16-18.

D. Three prohibitions, 6:19-21, 7:1-5, 6, 12.

E. Two commands, 7:13-14, 15-16a.

F. A warning and concluding parable, 7:21-23, 24-27.

This sermon he has enlarged by adding to it sayings which also were probably contained in the Logia, viz. 5:13-16, 18-19, 25-26, 33-37, 6:7-15, 22-34, 7:7-11, 16b-20.

Lk. also had in one of his sources (not the Logia) a Sermon which was parallel in outline to that of the Logia. It contained, A, a section of blessings and woes (6:20-26), and then passed, B, to a series of exhortations to Christian love (6:27-38), followed by, C, various precepts (6:39-45), and ended by D, a parable (6:46-49). Either Lk. himself or, more probably, an editor at an earlier stage, in the transmission of the Sermon, omitted before B a section dealing with Christ’s relation to the Old Law. Of course, the Hebrew or Aramaic Logia may be the ulimate source of both Mt. and Lk.’s Sermon. But if so, it is probable that the sermon was excerpted from the Logia, and passed through several stages before it reached S. Luke. Mt., on the other hand, seems to have used a Greek translation of the Logia itself. That Mt. and Lk. were not using the same Greek source for the Sermon is suggested by their frequent divergence in language, and is decisively proved by the remarkable differences in the section containing blessing, with which the Sermon opens. Lk. also has, not in the Sermon, but elsewhere in his Gospel, sayings corresponding to sayings which Mt. has in the Sermon. Whilst Mt. drew these probably from the Logia, where some of them need not have stood in the Sermon, Lk. borrowed them from oral tradition or from other sources. That the two Evangelists did not draw them from the same Greek source is proved by the variations in setting and in language, and by other differences. The Lord’s Prayer alone, with its striking variation in the two Gospels, proves that the Evangelists took it from quite independent sources or streams of tradition. For it is very improbable that Lk. should have shortened Mat 6:9-13, or that Mt. should have expanded Luk 11:2-4. On the other hand, it is very probable that the Prayer should have received different forms in the period of transmission prior to our two Gospels. The Logia may be the ultimate source of tradition. But if Mt. drew directly from a Greek translation of the Logia, LK. borrowed from some source in which the Prayer had been borrowed from the Logia after passing through several stages of transmission. The fact that in both Gospels the Sermon is followed by an entry into Capharnaum (Mat 8:5=Luk 7:1), and by the miracle of the centurion’s servant, has led to the supposition that both Evangelists used a source in which this connection was already made. But this is very doubtful. In Mat 8:5 Εἰσελθόντος δὲ αὐτοῦ εἰς Καφαρναούμ may be purely editorial. The editor places immediately after the Sermon Mk.’s narrative of the leper, 8:1-4. He now wishes to continue with the story of the centurion’s servant. Capharnaum was the obvious place in which to locate this, cf. Mat 4:13, especially as the editor intends to continue with Mar 1:29-31, which did take place in Capharnaum. He was therefore obliged to insert a statement of the return to that city somewhere, and 8:5 was an obvious opportunity for doing so. In Lk. also, if we allow that Capharnaum was the natural place for the miracle, there was an obvious reason for inserting 7:1 between the Sermon and the miracle. Of course, there are other possibilities. The statement in Mat 8:5 may be editorial, whilst in the source which Lk. was following the Sermon may have been immediately followed by the return to Capharnaum and the miracle. In that case the agreement of Mt. and Lk. in linking the Sermon to the miracle by the entry into Capharnaum may be accidental. Or this may be just one of those points in which the first Gospel has influenced Lk. He remembered the closing formula of Mat 7:28 “And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these words,” and reproduced them in 7:1 in the form, “When He had fulfilled all His sayings in the ears of the people.” Then, passing over Mat 7:28-29 and 8:1-4 because he has them in other contexts in Mk., he came to Mat 8:5, and recorded the entry into Capharnaum and the miracle, not slavishly following Mt., but giving the miracle in the form known to him from another source. The view that Mt. and Lk. were both following a source in which Sermon and miracle were already linked by the statement of the entry into Capharnaum, would have everything in its favour if it did not make it impossible to understand the variations in the Sermon in the two Gospels.

L the Matthæan Logia.

Ox. Pap. Oxyrhynchus Papyri.

Tert. Tertullian.

Eus. Eusebius.

1 Cf. also Isocrates, Nicocl. 39 C: ἂ πάσχοντες ὑφʼ ἑτέρων όργίζεσθε, ταῦτα τοῖς ἄλλοις μὴ ποιεῖτε.

Dalm. Dalman.

S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS.

E editorial passages.

al i.e. with other uncial MSS.

S Syriac version: Curetonian.

latt. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version.

Clem. Alex. Clement of Alexandria.

M the Second Gospel.

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

He taught [ην διδασκων] . He was teaching. This union of the verb and participle emphasized the idea of duration or habit more than the simple tense.

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