Sivut kuvina

shows how the bitter, censorious tone of those who have themselves gone astray, has its ground in inward blindness. In the measure in which their thoughts concerning love, and their faith in love, are poor, they show themselves equally poor in the actings of love. The blind man who leads the blind—who, doubly blind, offers himself as a guide to him who is conscious of blindness, and so far in part sees,—that is the pharisaical heart, empty of love, empty of light. The man with a beam in his eye, who desires to cure his brother with a mote in his eye,—that is the unloving act of this heart, the corrupt fruit of a corrupt tree. We may not, however, expect anything else from minds so corrupted. First one knows indeed the tree from the fruit; but at last, even from a distance, the fruit from the tree.

That the corrupt trees with their fruits, and the good trees with their fruits, are the opposites of one another, the Lord here already indicates. In the last of the parables this contrast is carried out and completed.

The Lord opens this part of His address with the reproof, Why call ye Me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? Whosoever cometh to Me, and heareth My sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like. He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock. And when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house; but could not shake it, for it was founded on a rock. But he that heareth and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth, against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell. And the ruin of that house was great.' This is a picture of the future that awaits believers and unbelievers; and, in the first instance, that awaits the true followers of Christ amongst the people of Israel on the one hand, and His unbelieving hearers, gradually transforming themselves into despisers, on the other.


1. The history of the cure of the leper belongs to a time subsequent to the return of Christ from the Mount. The healing of the sick of the palsy does not belong to this journey, but follows the return of Christ from Gadara. Likewise, the calling of Matthew, and what was spoken in connection with that event.



The incident in the corn-field took place considerably later, on the second Sabbath after the first,-thus, after Easter; and on this followed the healing of the man with a withered hand. The decisive setting apart of the apostles belongs also to a later period. It is manifest that the Evangelist followed an arrangement according to the matter.

2. Weisse (ii. 138) is of opinion that every impartial reader must regard the history of Peter's draught of fishes as an expansion and embellishment of the words spoken by Jesus, according to all the three synoptists, to the fishers, who by Him were to be made fishers of men.

3. Schleiermacher thinks it is most probable that no solemn calling and inauguration of the twelve apostles ever took place (p. 88). The address is, according to his supposition, the same as in Matthew; nevertheless, our narrator seems in part to have had a more unfavourable position for hearing, therefore not to have heard all, and here and there to have lost the connection ; partly, also, he may have noted it down later, when a good deal had escaped his memory.' According to Gfrörer, “the Mount,' as it often occurs in the Gospels, is to be understood as one and the same, in the sense of the old Christian legends;' which, of course, is quite impossible, as it must lie sometimes on this and sometimes on that side of the sea. The wild fancies which the author of the work referred to Die Evangelien, ihr Geist,' etc.—has written regarding the Sermon on the Mount, are to be found pp. 47 ff. According to him, the joint authors of the third Gospel have attacked the chief points in the Sermon on the Mount, with biting irony, in the counterpart to it which they wrote. According to Matthew (v. 1), Jesus went up to a mountain (åvéßn eis ópos); according to Luke (vi. 16), He came down from a mountain (kataßàs pet' aŭt@v). According to Matthew, He set Himself down (kabloavtos aŭtoû), and thus spoke sitting on an eminence; according to Luke, He stood, and spoke standing on a plain (έστη επί τόπου πεδινού). It would indeed be sharp irony upon ascending the mountain, to come down again ; standing would be an irony upon sitting; and a level place an irony upon an eminence. Certainly, however, would we prefer rather to designate this criticism as an irony upon criticism, were we to pass the mildest judgment upon it. Regarding the difference between the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew and in Luke, comp. vol. ii. pp. 381 ff.

4. Luke does not appropriate (v. 29) the expressionpublicans and sinners, which he well knows to be a term used by the Pharisees (ver. 30). He alone has the addition, 'to repentance, in the declaration of Christ (ver. 32). The disciples of John are put together with the scribes and Pharisees (ver. 35). The remark that the disciples of John have also exercises for prayer, besides their fastings, is found in him only (ver. 33). The expression, 'Can ye make the companions of the bridegroom fast ?' is stronger than in Matthew and Mark (ver. 34). The piece of unfulled cloth he already designates as a piece of a new garment, no doubt because there hovered before the eye of the Pauline Evangelist a more distinct form of Christian society, separated from Judaism (ver. 36). Luke alone has the exculpatory remark of Christ, that those who are accustomed to old wine, give it their preference (ver. 39). So also the observation, that the disciples rubbed the ears of corn in their hands (vi. 1); that the enemies of Jesus, after the healing of the man with the withered hand on the Sabbath, were almost mad with rage (ver. 11). It is worthy of remark, that in the catalogue of the apostles, he places Judas the brother of James in the last pair, beside Judas Iscariot, where, in the narratives of Matthew and Mark, Simon Zelotes stands. The sameness of names, however, seems to be the occasion of this.




(Chap. vii. 1-10.) The Lord had already exhibited the central truths of the kingdom of God, and that as well in deeds as in words. It was now time to widen the spiritual horizon of His followers; and He was furnished with a suitable occasion by the petition of one in need of help, on His return to Capernaum. The servant of

a centurion, who was dear unto him, lay at the point of death. As soon as he heard of Jesus, he applied to Him for help.

He did this with the appearance of the deepest humility, having requested the elders of the Jewish synagogue to go to meet the Lord, and beseech Him to come and heal his servant. Being a Gentile, who belonged to Israel only in the wider sense, he regarded himself as too insignificant to present his petition personally to the Lord ; and as he desired to pay Him honour, and give weight to his request, he had sought the intervention of this deputation of elders. They had two grounds specially to urge. The first was the consideration that the man was a proselyte. The other they themselves expressed, when they appeared before Jesus, and earnestly begged for help, in these words : ‘He is worthy that thou shouldst grant him this; for he loveth our nation, and hath built us a synagogue.' They thought they could employ no stronger motives to induce the Lord to go with them. The Lord, however, said not a word to their application, and proceeded with them in silence. For Him the mark of humility, of faith, and of love to his sick servant, which the man had exhibited, was of greater importance.

Thus He went with them. When, however, they had nearly reached the house of the centurion, the latter sent to Him a second message by the hands of friends, saying, “Lord, trouble not thyself; for I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof : wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee; but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed.' The second proof of his humility was still stronger than the firstit was even so with the proof of his faith. This faith that Jesus could help his servant even from a distance, he expressed with the remark: For I also am a man set under authority, having under me soldiers (and know thus—he appeared as if about to add-how it is with the different orders of superior power): I say to this man, Go, and he goeth; to that man, Come, and he cometh ; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it. With this new proof of his faith, he had also given a new proof of his love to his servant. Not only had he set in motion the elder of the Jews on his account, but his friends also; and the last word was a word of praise for his obedience.

i Without doubt belonging to the proselytes of the gate.


I 6

When Jesus heard these things, He marvelled at him, and turned Him about, and said to the people that followed Him, 'I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.'

The Evangelist does not find it necessary expressly to mention that the Lord spoke the word of consent, as that was fully implied in His previous remark. Those that were sent returned to the house, and found the servant whole that had been sick.

The act itself, as an exercise of the power of Christ from a distance, belonged to His greater miracles. But it was not this especially by which the Gospel horizon was expanded, for the healing of the nobleman's son had already taken place. Nor was it properly the circumstance, that the person who experienced His healing power was the servant of a centurion, who had been originally a heathen ; for here, where the elders of the synagogue made intercession for the man as a proselyte, there lay nothing in the help rendered that was offensive to Jewish exclusiveness. But the fact was of great significance, that to the intercession of the Jewish elders, who praised the merits of the centurion-his worthiness—Jesus made no reply; that, however, on receiving the message by the probably heathen friends of the centurion, giving expression to his feeling of unworthiness, his great humility, and his faith, He immediately put forth His miraculous power. To this must be added especially the word with which Jesus crowned the faith of the man; the more so, that He did not regard him as a Jewish proselyte, but as a pious heathen, and placed his faith above the faith of the Israelites who had hitherto met Him with similar requests.

[ocr errors]


Regarding the difference between the centurion and the nobleman at Capernaum, see above, vol. i. p. 214. Likewise the last-quoted passage with respect to the differences between Matthew and Luke. The Pauline conception and representation of the fact is not to be mistaken.

i See the above-mentioned work, Die Evang., p. 56.

« EdellinenJatka »