Bible Commentaries

Matthew 9:35 to Matthew 10:15.
Mission Of The Twelve

Our Lord here undertakes another circuit of Galilee, similar to that described in Matthew 4:23 ff., and in connection with it he now sends out the Twelve to engage in the same work, viz., to make the Same proclamation of the near approach of the Messianic reign (compare Matthew 10:7 with Matthew 4:17), and to work similar miracles of healing. (Matthew 10:1, Matthew 10:8) Before sending forth the Twelve, our Lord addressed them a long discourse, (Matthew 10:5-42) giving them instruction not only for this mission, but for all their subsequent labours in his name; after which discourse he went to his work, (Matthew 11:1) and they to theirs. (Mark 6:12 f.; Luke 9:6)—Some prefer to consider this as not the record of a distinct journey, but simply a return to the general statement of Matthew 4:23. The idea would thus be, that having given a grand specimen of our Lord's teaching (ch. 5-7), and a group of specimens of his miracles (ch. 8 and 9), the Evangelist now repeats the general description of his journeying, teaching and healing (same terms in Matthew 9:35 as in Matthew 4:23), and presently branches off again to describe the mission of the Twelve. But it seems more likely that this was a second and distinct journey. Indeed, Luke appears to give a third journey, (Luke 8:1-3) which a Harmony would make intermediate between the two in Matthew.—Our present section includes so much of the address to the Twelve as is given by Mark and Luke also. The remainder (Matthew 10:16-42) is given by Matthew only.

I. Matthew 9:35 to Matthew 10:1. Jesus Is Moved To Send Out The Twelve

While engaged in a circuit of Galilee, he is moved with compassion at the spiritual destitution of the people, and begins to prepare the Twelve for going out as teachers. The portion in Matthew 9:35-38 is found in Matthew alone, except that Mark (Mark 6:6) says simply, 'And he went round about the villages teaching.'

Matthew 9:35. Same as Matthew 4:23, except that for 'went about all Galilee' we here have more particularly, went about all the cities and (the) villages, referring still to Galilee, as the connection and the circumstances show. All is so placed in the Greek as to be confined to the cities; and he could not have visited all the villages. Josephus says there were in Galilee not less than two hundred and four cities and populous villages. (See on "Matthew 4:12".) The word rendered villages denotes properly a town without walls, as opposed to a fortified town. The larger places would of course all be fortified. We learn then that our Lord made a thorough circuit, going into all the large towns, and very generally into the smaller places also. He did not go only where he could have a very large congregation. For every sickness and every disease—i.e., every kind, not necessarily every case—and for the other terms, see on "Matthew 4:23". Among the people, com. Greek text, is omitted on overwhelming evidence. Here again, as in Matthew 8:16 and Matthew 4:23, we must pause and dwell on the strong general statement, or we shall not adequately conceive of the immense extent of our Lord's work as a Healer.

Matthew 9:36. But when he saw the multitudes—crowds—as in Matthew 5:1. As there his compassion led to a long address on the Mount, so here it leads him to send out the Twelve, that they might aid in the so much needed work of teaching and healing. Similarly after the return of the Twelve. (Mark 6:34) In the present case, as in Matthew 5:1, we understand that what follows took place at some unassigned time in the course of the circuit just described. Because they fainted, best text, were distressed, or 'harassed,' 'worried,' rendered 'trouble' in Mark 5:35, Luke 8:49. The evidence for this Greek word rather than 'fainted' (com. Greek text) is ample. Scattered, literally, 'thrown,' 'hurled,' might mean prostrate (so Davidson), lying down, as being worn out and unable to go forward, or might mean cast off, neglected; the general conception remains the same, that of a flock worried and suffering for lack of a shepherd's care. In the East, where sheep wander freely in wild, unenclosed regions, so as to require constant attention, this image is very striking. Meyer supposes that our Lord saw the people to be worn out with following him in long journeys, and that this suggested to him the image of a flock tired down; but the supposition seems quite improbable. (Weiss). The people were greatly in need of spiritual instruction and guidance, for those who professed to be their shepherds were not faithful and safe guides. (See the same expression in Numbers 27:17, and compare 1 Kings 22:17; Jeremiah 50:6; Ezekiel 34:5; Zechariah 10:2)

Matthew 9:37-38. He seeks to awaken a similar compassion in his followers. Disciples, see on "Matthew 5:1". There were probably other disciples present, besides the Twelve, (Matthew 10:1) and the exhortation to pray was addressed to them all, but only the Twelve were at that time sent forth; at a later period, seventy others. (Luke 10:1) The figure of reaping a harvest he had employed before (perhaps a year before), at Jacob's well, (John 4:25 ff.) and will use again when sending out the seventy. (Luke 10:2) Truly represents the Greek word (men) explained on Matthew 3:11, which denotes merely that this clause is set in contrast with what follows. The idea is sufficiently expressed in English by an emphatic utterance of 'harvest' and 'labourers'; it was so rendered by Tyn. and Gen. (so also Davidson), 'truly' being introduced by Great Bible. The harvest signifies, not (as some explain) the elect, those who will actually be saved, but men in general, who unless gathered and saved will perish like wheat that is not reaped.—This compassion for perishing men will naturally lead to prayer for labourers, (Matthew 9:38) and such compassion and prayer will form the best preparation for going forth to be labourers ourselves. (Matthew 10:1) Any man who is called of God to devote himself to preaching the gospel will have felt something, ought to have felt much, of this pitying love for his perishing fellow men, and will have prayed much for their rescue; and those engaged in that work should be careful to maintain, as long as they live, this same pity and prayer. And not only preachers, but all Christians, should feel as Jesus felt, and should regularly and habitually pray this prayer. Send forth is literally cast out, 'throw out,' or 'thrust out,' the same word that is used in Matthew 9:33 f., in Matthew 10:1, and above in Matthew 9:25 (where see note). Compare its use in Mark 1:12; James 2:25. It always implies urgency, haste, constraint, or some such idea, and here means that the labourers should be sent out promptly, pushed into their work. Beza: "For we are all very tardy, especially in such matters."This same word is retained when our Lord speaks to the seventy. (Luke 10:2)¹ Such labourers as the Lord of the harvest does put forth, we may endeavour, with his blessing, to train for the better performance of their work (see on "Matthew 10:1"); but they must be his labourers, not ours, called into the work, and urged to the performance of it, by himself.

Mission Of The Twelve, Cont

Matthew 10:1. Having led the disciples to feel interest in perishing throngs of men, and encouraged them to pray for labourers, Jesus now bids them go forth to labour themselves. We ought carefully to observe the slow and gradual process by which our Lord prepared the Twelve for their great and important life-work. First, he called various individuals to be his disciples, as, for example, those in John 1:35-51; these went with him for a time, but afterwards returned to their homes and their secular employments. Next, he called some to attach themselves permanently to him, as above in Matthew 4:18-22, stating at the time his intention to make them fishers of men. After a while, he selected from the general mass of his followers the Twelve, who were to be specially near to him, and to be trained for special duties; delivering to them, immediately after their selection (see on "Matthew 5:1"), a great discourse on the true nature of that Messianic reign which they were to aid in bringing about. And now, at a still later period, when they have been long hearing his discourses to the people, talking with him familiarly in private, and witnessing his multiplied miracles, he sends them forth, two and two, to preach and heal; but not yet to work independently of him, for they are only to go before and prepare the way for his coming. After a season spent in such personal labours, they will return, and remain long with him, receiving further instruction, which they will more earnestly desire and more fully appreciate, from their attempts at actual preaching. And finally, after his ascension, they will be ready, with the Holy Spirit as their abiding Instructor, to go and disciple all nations. After all this training they could do nothing without the Spirit; yet, though they were to have the Spirit, they must also have this training—doing what they could, meanwhile, to reap the great and perishing harvest, but devoting themselves mainly to preparation for wider usefulness in the coming years.

With Matthew 10:1-15 compare Mark 6:7-11, Luke 9:1-5. Disciples, see on "Matthew 5:1".—Power, authority, which in such a case would carry with it the power, see on "Matthew 9:6". As to demoniacal possessions, see on "Matthew 8:28". These spirits are called unclean, because of their own wickedness, and perhaps because their presence was a pollution to the person possessed (compare on Matthew 12:43 ff.); and this served to distinguish them from good or pure spirits. Sometimes they are called 'evil spirits.' All manner of, etc., every disease and every infirmity, compare Matthew 9:35, Matthew 4:23.

II. Matthew 10:2-4. List Of The Twelve

Matthew has not mentioned the selection of the Twelve, which took place before this. (Mark 3:13, Luke 6:13, compare on Matthew 5:1) At the time when he wrote, the twelve apostles were well known, and he speaks of them accordingly: 'his twelve disciples,' 'the twelve apostles.' The number twelve was probably chosen with reference to the number of tribes (see on "Matthew 19:28"). Apostles; the name, borrowed from Greek apostolos, 'one sent off,' or 'sent forth,' is here introduced by Matt. for the first time, in connection with the occasion on which they were first actually sent forth (Matthew 10:5) to labour. But our Lord gave them that name when he selected the Twelve. (see Luke 6:13) The word is translated 'one that is sent' in John 13:16; 'messenger' in 1 Corinthians 8:13, Philippians 2:25; everywhere else in Com. Ver. and Rev. Ver., it is 'apostle.' Jesus himself is called an apostle, i.e., sent by God, in Hebrews 8:1. Our word missionary, derived from the Latin, likewise signifies "one sent."

Curious, and in some respects instructive results, may be obtained from a comparison of the four lists of the Twelve.

We observe at once that, with all the variety in the order of succession, Simon Peter is always first, and Judas Iscariot last. Again, the first six names in Matthew, Mark, and Luke are the five earliest known converts., (John 1:35-51) together with James, the brother of one of them; and the first four in all the lists are the two pairs of brothers whose call to follow Jesus is the earliest mentioned. (Matthew 4:18-22) Furthermore we note in each of the lists three groups of four, headed respectively in every list by Peter, Philip, and James, which groups contain always the same four persons, though within the limits of each group the order greatly varies, except as to Judas Iscariot. It seems a natural and unavoidable inference that the Twelve were in some sense divided into three companies of four, each having a recognized leader. The foremost in the first company, and at the head of all the Twelve, is Simon Peter. When Matthew says, First, Simon who is called Peter, he cannot mean merely that this happens to be the name first mentioned by him; and there is no explanation in the fact that those are mentioned first who first came to Jesus; for then Andrew and probably John, ought to precede Peter. (John 1:35 ff.) It is unquestionable that Simon Peter was a sort of leader among the Twelve. (See on "Matthew 16:18".) As regards the remaining members of the first company or group of four, we may suppose that Matthew and Luke put Andrew next to Simon because they were brothers; while Mark and Acts and Mark 13:3 place James and John next to Simon, because they three were admitted to special intimacy and favour with Jesus, being the only persons present on several solemn occasions. (See on "Matthew 17:1".) The four who formed this first group are mentioned in Mark 13:3 as making private inquiries of Jesus concerning the destruction of the temple, etc. In the second company, Matthew puts Thomas before himself (compare Acts), while Mark and Luke place Matthew first. After Philip, Matthew, Mark and Luke put Bartholomew, probably the same as Nathanael, who was brought to Jesus by Philip (John 1:46 ff) In the third company of four, Simon the Cananite in Matthew and Mark is obviously the same as Simon the Zealot in Luke and Acts (see below); hence Thaddeus (Lebbeus is a false reading) must be only another name of Judas the brother of James. He might naturally be put next to his brother, as by Matthew and Mark; or Luke's order may indicate that Simon the Zealot was reckoned the more important personage. Observe that there are among the Twelve three pairs of brothers—Simon and Andrew, James and John, James the son of Alpheus, and Judas the brother of James (though this last may be 'son,' see below); also that Matthew and Luke give the list in couples, and Mark (Mark 6:7) says they were sent forth 'by two and two,' and these couples would easily lead to the grouping into fours. It would be natural that in different journeyings the couples should somewhat vary, and this might perhaps account for the different order of names in the several groups of four.

Simon who is called Peter. Simon was a Greek name, but in the New Testament is pretty certainly a contraction of Simeon, which form is given in Acts 15:14, and by some authorities in 2 Peter 1:1. Simeon signified hearing. (Genesis 29:33) Simon was a native of Bethsaida, (John 1:44) a town on the Sea of Galilee, described below on Matthew 11:21. His father's name was Jonah or John (see on "Matthew 16:17"). He and his brother Andrew were fishermen on the Lake of Galilee. Andrew, and probably Simon also. was a disciple of John the Baptist, before coming to know Jesus. (John 1:35 ff.) Jesus gave to Simon when he first approached him, the surname of Cephas, (John 1:43) which in the Aramaic language spoken by them, signified a rock or stone (Kepha, Greek form Kephas), and which was translated into the Greek, signifying the same thing; hence Latin Petrus, English Peter. The Aramaic Cephas is always used by Paul (1 Corinthians, Gal. correct text), and nowhere else in N. T. (except John 1:43) After following Jesus for some time, Simon appears to have returned to his business as a fisherman, and was subsequently prominent among those called to be regular attendants. (See on "Matthew 4:18 ff.") The principal events of his subsequent life are given in Matthew 8:14 ff Matthew 14:28 ff.; Matthew 16:16 Matthew 16, 22 ff.; John 13:6 ff.; Matthew 26:33, Matthew 26:69 ff.; John 21:15 ff.; then in Acts 1:15, Acts 2:14, Acts 4:8, Acts 5:3, Acts 8:14 ff.; Acts 10:1 ff.; Acts 12:3 ff.; Acts 15:7. He was an ardent and impulsive man, of great force of character, and extremely self-confident. Sad experience, through the special influences of the Sprit, wrought a great change in him, though still, the last time he appears distinctly in the N. T. history, we discern the same impulsiveness and readiness to change, as of yore. (Galatians 2:11) He seems to have been at Babylon, where there were many Jews, at the time of writing his First Epistle. (1 Peter 5:13) The traditions concerning his later life are very uncertain, and so as to all the apostles except John. As regards Peter's position of leader among the Twelve, see on "Matthew 16:18"f.

Andrew. The name is Greek, signifying 'manly.' The facts concerning his parentage. residence, occupation, and early discipleship have been mentioned in connection with Peter. The only other cases in which he appears are John 6:8, John 12:22, Mark 13:3. The traditions concerning him are wholly unreliable. Yet he is important to us, not only as one of the inspired apostles, but as the means of bringing to Jesus his own brother Simon. All the usefulness of Simon Peter is, in one sense, due to the brother who told him of Jesus. And so, many a one in every age, little known himself, and of no marked influence otherwise, has been among the great benefactors of mankind, by bringing to Jesus some other person who proved widely useful.

James and John. James was probably the elder, as he is usually mentioned first, while John is sometimes put foremost, (Luke 9:28, Acts 12:2) probably because more prominent, and because alone surviving when the books were written. James is originally the same name as Jacob, 'supplanter,' being written in the Greek, Iacobos, Latin, Iacobus, then Jacopus, Jacomus, and so James. John is the Hebrew Johanan, 'Jehovah graciously gave,' see on "Matthew 3:1". Their father, Zebedee, was a fisherman on the Lake of Galilee, (Matthew 4:21) but apparently a man of some property, as he employed hired servants, (Mark 1:20) and as his wife was one of the women who contributed to the support of Jesus and his disciples (Matthew 27:55 f.; Luke 8:3), and probably a man of good social position, as we find John familiarly acquainted at the house of the high priest. (John 18:15 f.) Prom their mother Salome (see on "Matthew 27:56") was perhaps inherited the ambition (see on "Matthew 20:26"), and perhaps also the ardor, intensity, vehemence, and warm affection, which characterized her sons. These qualities of theirs were doubtless the ground of the name Boanerges, 'sons of thunder,' which Jesus gave to the two brothers. (Mark 3:17) John appears to have been a disciple of John the Baptist, it being almost certain that he was the unnamed disciple of John 1:35-41.

We have no account of any call of James, until the time when the two brothers, with Simon and Andrew, were called to become our Lord's constant followers; (Matthew 4:21) John at least was probably with Jesus during the previous labours recorded in his Gospel. (Matthew 2-4.) The peculiar temperament of the brothers appears in Mark 9:38 ff.; Luke 9:52 ff.; Matthew 20:20 ff. After this last event, we hear nothing of James, save as present at Gethsemane, and included in the list of Acts 1:13, until the time when Herod Agrippa I. put him to death, (Acts 12:2) the first martyr among the apostles.

John, however, appears quite frequently, usually in immediate association with Peter, between whom and himself there was probably a special friendship. Together they were sent to prepare for the Paschal Supper, (Luke 22:8) at which John was allowed to lean on Jesus' breast, "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Together they (and James) witnessed the agony in the garden, and both followed to the trial. (John 18:15.) At the cross, John only of the Twelve seems to have been present, drawn by his ardent affection, and perhaps relying to some extent on his acquaintance with the high-priest for safety; and there he received the mother of his dying friend as one of his own family. Peter and John were also together in John 20:2 ff.; John 21:2 ff.; Acts 3:1 ff.; Acts 8:14, Galatians 2:9. From Revelations Galatians 1:9 we learn that at some time he was in exile on the Island of Patmos. There seems little doubt that he spent many years in "Asia," i.e., Proconsular Asia, particularly about Ephesus, and there wrote his inspired works. Several early traditions in regard to him are pleasing and probably true, particularly the story of his reclaiming the young robber, of his keeping a tame bird, of his saying, "Little children, love one another," and of his leaving a house because a noted false teacher was there. John as disciplined by grace, exhibits one of the noblest types of human character. The love with which his Epistles abound has in it nothing effeminate. He strongly condemns and severely denounces the prevailing errors and evils. He is not merely contemplative, but intensely practical; insisting that Christian love must show itself in holiness and usefulness, or it is naught. Still vehement, uncompromising, and outspoken, the loving and beloved old man has not ceased to be the "Son of Thunder"; but the vaulting ambition which once aspired to be next to royalty in a worldly kingdom, now seeks to overcome the world, to bear testimony to the truth, to purify the churches, and glorify God.

Matthew 10:3. Philip. The name is Greek, signifying "lover of horses." Philip, like Peter and Andrew, was a native of Bethsaida, (John 1:45) and one of those who left the Baptist at the Jordan to follow Jesus, his friend Nathanael, or Bartholomew, being also brought to Jesus through his influence. (John 1:44 ff.) The only recorded incidents of his life are given in John 6:5 ff.; Matthew 12:21, Matthew 14:8 ff. And yet he was apparently one of the leaders among the Twelve, always standing at the head of the second group of four. The traditions concerning him are quite unreliable. He must of course be distinguished from Philip the Evangelist, of whom we read in the Acts. The name Bartholomew is Bar Tolmai, 'son of Tolmai,' and Tolmai (perhaps 'plowman') is an O. T. name, having in the Septuagint of Joshua 15:14 the form Tholami, and in Josephus "Ant.," 20, 1, 1, the form Tholomeus. Nathanael denotes 'God-given,' like Theodore, etc. From John 21:2 we naturally suppose Nathanael to have been one of the Twelve; and as it was Philip who brought Nathanael to Jesus, (John 1:44 ff.) and Bartholomew stands immediately after Philip in the catalogues of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, we conclude that Nathanael and Bartholomew were the same person. The only fact known in his history is that he was a native of Cana. (John 21:2) The traditions concerning him are of little or no value. But he stands out in conspicuous lustre from the tribute of Jesus when he first approached him,"Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile"! (John 1:47) Thomas. This name signifying 'twin' was sometimes translated into the Greek Didymus, (John 11:16) which means the same thing, just as Cephas and Peter are used, or Messiah and Christ. The incidents given of his life are in John 11:16, John 14:4 f.; John 20:24 ff. He does not deserve to be called "doubting Thomas,"in the usual sense of the phrase; he was desponding, slow to believe what he ardently desired (as he had been ready to believe the worst, John 11:16), but when convinced, uttering the noblest confession in the Gospels. (John 20:28) The traditions concerning him are uncertain. As to Matthew, see on "Matthew 9:9". It is a trait of humility that he speaks of himself as Matthew, the publican; recalling the discreditable business which he had formerly followed, while the other catalogues make no such allusion. Eusebius says ("Hist." iii. 24, 6) that "Matthew, after first preaching to the Hebrews, when he was about to go also to other nations, committed to writing in his native tongue the Gospel according to him, thus supplying the place of his presence." Papias, who wrote about A. D. 130, says: "Matthew composed in the Hebrew language the oracles, and every one interpreted them as he was able." The term "oracles" might mean simply discourses, or might have a more general sense, including narrative, as in Romans 3:2. The relation of this Hebrew (Aramaic) writing to our Greek Gospel we have scarcely the means of determining. See the works on Canon and on Introduction.—The later history of Matthew is unknown; the traditions are unreliable.

James the son of Alpheus. If we adopt the much more probable view that this James is distinct from "James the brother of the Lord" (see on Matthew 13:55), we are left with scarcely any knowledge of this eminent apostle, the leader in the third group of four. His father's name was Alpheus or Halpheus, which was also the name of Matthew's father. (Mark 2:14) Clopas (John 19:25) might be another form of the same name, but we cannot say that it was the same person. As to whether James was the brother of Judas Thaddeus, see below.

The copious accounts sometimes given of him result from identifying him with James the brother of the Lord. Thaddeus. This alone is the name in Matt. and Mark, according to the correct text.¹ We have seen from comparing the catalogue that Thaddeus must be only another name of 'Judas the brother of James,' as given in Luke and Acts. He was thus known as Judas the beloved, or darling. In Luke and Acts he is distinguished from Judas Iscariot by calling him 'Judas of James,' or 'James's Judas,' a form of expression which is quite common in Greek, and which usually adds the father of the person described, but sometimes another connection, such as husband, son, brother, or even friend. (See Winer, p. 190 237.) An eminent example is that of the early Christian writer Eusebius, who, after the death of his friend Pamphilus, always called himself Eusebius of Pamphilus. If nothing were known to the contrary, we should naturally translate 'Judas son of James,' as is done by the Peshito and Thebaic versions, and by our Rev. Ver. (Luke 6:16, Acts 1:13) Compare Bishop Lightfoot on Gal., p. 256. But as the Epistle of Jude begins 'Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James' (where brother is expressed in the Greek), we seem entirely warranted in using that fact to solve the ambiguity of Luke's expression 'Judas of James,' and understanding it to mean the brother of James; yet it is impossible to determine the question with certainty, for we cannot even be certain that the Epistle was written by the apostle Judas. The only incident in the life of Judas Thaddeus is given in John 14:22. The traditions concerning him are worthless.

Simon the Canaanite, or Cananaean. The name Simon being very common, this apostle is distinguished from Simon Peter and others by the surname Cananaean, which in Aramaic would signify the same thing as the Greek word Zelotes given in Luke and Acts, viz., 'Zealot.' Thirty years later than this, as we find from Josephus ("War,"4, 3, 9), there existed a party calling themselves Zealots, as being very zealous for the national religion and institutions. (Compare Acts 21:20, Romans 10:2) They were accustomed to punish without trial, to "lynch" any Jew who seemed to them a traitor or violator of the law, finding precedent and sanction in the ease of Phinehas. (Numbers 25:7) This practice, as must always happen when it is continued, led finally to gross abuses and horrid cruelties, and the Zealots had no small part in the ruin of the nation. It is likely that the party already existed in the time of our Lord (having come down from Judas the Galilean), (Acts 5:27) though on a much smaller scale than afterwards, and that Simon had at one time belonged to it, and thus acquired his surname, Zelotes or Cananaean. It is quite a mistake to confound this with Canaanite, which in Greek is materially different; (Matthew 15:22) the mistake is found as early as Great Bible, "Simon of Canaan," (so in Bagster's Hexapla, both in Matt. and Mark. Bishop Lightfoot Rev. seems to be mistaken in ascribing the double a to the Bishop's Bible.) Of this apostle's history we know nothing at all. The fact that he had been a Zealot would suggest an ardent nature; it is probable that, like Paul, he showed in doing good the same fiery zeal he had shown in doing evil.

Judas Iscariot has the same surname in John 12:4, John 13:2. His father was called Simon Iscariot. (John 6:71, John 13:26, correct text.) Judas is a Greek form of Judah. (See on "Matthew 1:2".) The surname Iscariot is Ish-Kerioth, 'man of Kerioth,' a town in the tribe of Judah; (Joshua 15:15) it is spelled Iscarioth in the better Greek text of Mark 3:19, Luke 6:16. So Ish-Tob, 'man of Tob' or 'men of Tob' is in the Sept., Istob, and in Josephus Istobos. The fact that his father had the same surname quite excludes Lightfoot's fanciful etymologies from Latin scortea, a leathern apron, because he carried the hag, or from Hebrew askara, strangling. All the other disciples appear to have been Galileans (though that is not certain), and this difference might have some effect on Judas in preventing full sympathy with the others. We know nothing of his early history or his call to he a disciple. It was not only a matter of divine foreknowledge that he would betray his Teacher—as all things are—but was distinctly foreseen from an early period by Jesus, (John 6:64) who in his human mind was not omniscient. (Matthew 24:36) That a person in whom this was foreseen should be chosen one of the Twelve, is not more mysterious than a thousand other things which are done in the providence of the same Lord. Weiss : "The other disciples, too, were not without great weaknesses and faults of character, which were certainly no secret to Jesus..... On the other hand, Judas must have possessed special endowments, for Jesus to consider it desirable to secure him as a disciple." His talent for business, with the care of the common fund, seems to have developed a ruinous avarice, even in the very company of Jesus. He shows us that the greatest outward privileges may be of no avail, and may even be perverted into a curse; and he exemplifies the gradual progress, the terrible power, and the awful results, of covetousness. It may very well be that in the beginning he was sincere and meant to be faithful; but as so often happens, his gift became his snare.—It is some relief to our distress when we see men in high places of Christian usefulness at the present day falling utterly away, to remember that it was so at the beginning, even among our Lord's chosen Twelve. Judas must have wrought miracles like the others, (compare Matthew 7:22 f.) and his preaching must have produced effects like theirs, or the difference would have been noticed by him and them. In like manner now, a bad man sometimes preaches, and God converts souls through his instrumentality; and these, when he afterwards turns out to have been all the while a bad man at heart, may well mourn for him, but need have no fears as to the preciousness of the truths he proclaimed, or scruples as to the validity of the ordinances he administered. As to the motives of Judas in the betrayal, see on "Matthew 26:14 ff.", and as to his remorse and self-destruction, see on "Matthew 27:3 ff." Betrayed, is literally, delivered up (margin Rev. Ver.), the same word as in Matthew 10:17, Matthew 10:19, Matthew 10:21, above in Matthew 5:25, and often, It is a part of the characteristic moderation of the Evangelists that never, except in Luke 6:16, do they apply to Judas the harsh words betray and traitor, which have become so fixed in our usage. Compare on Matthew 17:22.

III. Matthew 10:5-15. Instructions To The Twelve

The remainder of Matthew 10 contains the charge given to the Twelve on sending them out. (Compare on Matthew 9:35) The earlier portion of this, (Matthew 10:5-15) is also briefly reported by Mark, (Mark 6:8-11) and Luke. (Matthew 9:3-5) The rest (Matthew 10:16-42) is found in Matthew only. (See below on "Matthew 10:16".) A charge closely resembling the earlier part of this discourse was also given to the Seventy, when sent out some time later. (Luke 10:1-16)

Matthew 10:5 f, These twelve Jesus sent forth; in Greek the verb from which comes apostolos, 'one sent off.' (See on "Matthew 10:2".) We learn from Mark (Mark 6:7) that he sent them 'two and two.' This arrangement may possibly have been suggested by the fact that there were among the Twelve two or three pairs of brothers (see on "Matthew 10:2"f.), but it had also some important advantages, both as regards the apostles themselves, and as to their work. The two served as company for each other, preventing the loneliness which the apostle Paul took so much pains to avoid on his journeys. They could also relieve each other in preaching, which, in the open air, and to the crowds gathered by their miracles, would be laborious, as our Lord himself found it. And then the testimony of the two witnesses concerning the teachings and miracles of the Great Prophet who was coming after them, would be more impressive among the people than that of one alone. The Seventy also were sent forth two and two. (Luke 10:1) Compare Ecclesiastes 4:9-12, Luke 7:19.—how long these journeyings and labours of the six pairs of apostles continued, we have no means of ascertaining; one would conjecture a few weeks. Way of the Gentiles, like 'the removal of Babylon' (compare on Matthew 1:11), and 'the way of the tree of life,', (Genesis 3:24) readily signifies a way leading to the Gentiles (so rendered by Tyndale), a road to Gentile countries. (Compare also Jeremiah 2:18, Acts 2:28, Acts 16:17) In travelling on the southern border of Galilee, they would of course come near some Samaritan towns; thus we see that the language is quite precise—Do not enter a city of the Samaritans, do not go off into a road to the Gentiles.

Samaritans. samaria was the district lying between Judea and Galilee. The dislike between the Jews and the Samaritans had its beginnings as far back as the earliest times of Israel in the jealousy existing between the tribes of Judah and Ephraim, which finally led to the division into two kingdoms. When the people of the Northern Kingdom (who came to be called Samaritans from the capital city, Samaria, 1 Kings 16:24), were carried into captivity by the Assyrians, the country was partly occupied by Mesopotamian colonists, who were idolaters. These gradually coalesced with the dregs of the Israelites who had been left in the land, and with the fugitives who returned from surrounding countries, into a half-heathen nation, attempting to unite idolatry with the worship of Jehovah. When the people of the Southern Kingdom, the Jews, returned from their captivity in Babylon, and undertook to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem, the Samaritans proffered to help them; and being repulsed, as not of pure Israelitish descent, they then did all in their power to hinder the building of the temple, and the fortification of the city. A brother of the Jewish high-priest, having married a Samaritan woman, and being unwilling to put her away as required went over to the Samaritans, and was made priest in a temple built for him on Mount Gerizim (Jos."Ant.," 11, 8, 2), which the Samaritans from that time began to contend was the proper place for the worship of Jehovah, rather than Jerusalem. (John 4:20) These causes naturally led to bitter hatred between Jews and Samaritans, and they were constantly attempting to injure and insult each other, while under the dominion of the Greek kings of Syria. John Hyrcanus conquered the Samaritans, destroying their temple and capital (about B. C. 125). Pompey established their independence (B. C. 63). At the time of our Lord's public ministry, Judea and Samaria were governed by the same Roman procurator, but as distinct administrative districts; and the hatred between the two nations, cherished through centuries, and combining all the elements of race jealousy, religious rivalry, political hostility, and numerous old grudges, had become so intense that the world has probably never seen its parallel. The theory of some writers that the Samaritans were of purely heathen origins would suppose that the entire population of tile Northern people was deported by the Assyrians—a thing extremely improbable; would render the frequent claim of the Samaritans to be Jews an absurdity; and would make it difficult to account for the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the Samaritan expectation of Messiah. For the Samaritans, like the Jews, expected the Messiah, (John 4:25, John 4:29) and something like a year before this mission of the Twelve our Lord's preaching among them at Sychar was warmly received, and many believed on him. (John 4:39-42) Some time after this mission he also went twice through Samaria, and spoke and acted kindly towards them. (Luke 9:51 ff.; Luke 17:11 ff.) Why, then, might not the Twelve go into their cities? It is enough to reply that the Twelve had not then such feelings towards that people as would qualify them to do good there. The proposal of James and John to call down fire from heaven upon a Samaritan village (Luke 9:52 ff.) shows that there would have been bitter controversies, with the old national hate ever ready to burst out. (Compare Bruce,"Training of the Twelve.") In Acts 1:8, Samaria is expressly included in the field of their appointed labours after the ascension. (Compare Acts 8:5)

Matthew 10:6. To the lost sheep, etc., compare on Matthew 9:36; and see the same figure employed in Isaiah 53:6, Jeremiah 50:6, Ezekiel 34:5. Our Lord confined his own personal labours almost entirely to the Jews; he declares, in Matthew 15:24, that his mission was 'to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,' the same expression as here; though at a later period he says that he has other sheep which are not of this fold.' (John 10:16) It was a part of the peculiar privileges of the Jewish nation that the gospel should be first preached to them; (Luke 24:47, Acts 13:46, Romans 1:16) yet Jesus frequently intimated that these exclusive privileges could not last always (Matthew 8:11, Matthew 10:18, Matthew 21:43, Matthew 22:9, Matthew 24:14) By confining his labours and those of the Twelve to them he avoided exciting their prejudices, and thus deprived them of even the poor excuse for rejecting him which they would have found in his preaching freely among the Gentiles and Samaritans. Accordingly, Matthew mentions this limitation, while Mark and Luke do not. Even at a later period, Paul found it almost impossible to convince some Jewish Christians that the Gentiles were to be admitted to the privileges of the gospel, without becoming Jews. And then had the reign of Messiah been proclaimed to the Gentiles before it had been welcomed by many Jews, the former might have made it a very plausible objection to the new religion that it was not believed in at home, where it was best understood. Furthermore, as regards this mission of the Twelve, they were as yet too ignorant themselves of the true nature of Messiah's kingdom to undertake its propagation among the Gentiles; they would have introduced the current Jewish errors on the subject. Some years later, when their own course of early instruction was completed, and the Spirit was come, they were prepared to preach "repentance and remission of sins... unto all the nations." (Luke 24:47, Rev. Ver.) For the present they could prepare the Jews among whom they went for the preaching of Jesus, and what they said would not strengthen, but so far as it went would rather correct the popular errors. Such a restriction of labour to the Jews is not addressed to the Seventy, (Luke 10:1 ff.) but it is really involved in the statement that they were to go where Jesus was going.

Matthew 10:7 f. Preach, see on "Matthew 4:17". The kingdom of heaven is at hand, see on "Matthew 8:2". This was the same announcement that John the Baptist had made, and with which Jesus himself had begun his ministry in Galilee (compare on Matthew 4:17); so the Seventy likewise. (Luke 10:9) Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils—demons. The Greek has no article. The original means, Heal sick, i.e., persons, etc. They were not commanded to heal all the sick they met with. Probably they restricted their miracles, as Jesus himself usually did, to those who showed desire and faith. The Seventy also were commanded to heal the sick, in every city which received them. (Luke 10:9) As to leprosy, see on Matthew 8:2; and upon demoniacal possessions, see on Matthew 8:28-31. The clause raise dead, i.e., persons, is not certainly genuine, but most probably.¹ Freely (or, gratis) ye have received, freely (or, gratis) give. The word which Tyn., etc., and Com. Ver. here render 'freely' really signifies 'as a gift,' and is exactly rendered gratis, by the Latin versions and Rheims. It is not opposed to the idea of giving or receiving in a stingy way, or on a small scale, but to the idea of giving or receiving for pay. Observe the force of the word, as thus explained, in Romans 3:24; 1 Corinthians 11:7; Revelation 21:6, Revelation 22:17. (Compare Isaiah 55:1) The Jewish exorcisers who pretended to cast out demons were no doubt accustomed to have pay; and physicians of course took pay for healing the sick. The Twelve could easily have obtained money, in large sums, for the cures they were empowered to perform. We might think it strange that they should need to be told not to do so; but they had as yet very imperfect conceptions of the nature of Christ's work, and not merely might Judas Iscariot have been glad enough to drive a brisk trade in miraculous healing for pay, but others of them might have seen no impropriety in receiving compensation for conferring such important benefits. Jesus tells them they received gratis, and must give gratis. They had not purchased the power of miraculous healing—as Simon Magus wished to do, (Acts 8:18)—nor obtained it by long and expensive study, and laborious practice; it was received as a gift, and must be exercised in like manner. The miracles were really credentials for their teaching, as well as indications of divine benevolence, and should be used accordingly. As to teaching, we find Micah (Micah 3:11) making it a reproach that the heads of Israel "judge for reward, priests teach for hire, and prophets divine for money." Some of the later Jewish writers maintained very earnestly, though often on fanciful grounds, and though many rabbis acted quite otherwise, that a man ought not to teach the law for pay, but gratuitously—just as Socrates and Plato held with reference to philosophy.

Matthew 10:9 f. While they were thus to work their miracles, and teach the people, without pay, they must, on the other hand, look to those among whom they went for food and clothing, (Matthew 10:9 f.) and for a hospitable reception. (Matthew 10:11-15) They must neither seek for gain, (Matthew 19:8) nor be anxious about their livelihood, but laying aside both selfish aims and personal cares, devote themselves to their appointed task. He therefore directs them to lay in no money, whether gold, silver, or copper, no provision bag, nor staff, nor extra clothing, nor even a loaf of bread; (Mark 6:8, Luke 9:3) since the labourer is worthy of his sustenance. Our Lord is not giving an exact list of objects to be dispensed with, but is only illustrating the principle; and so (Luketteroth) it is not strange that the other Gospels give the details somewhat differently.

Provide neither gold, etc., or, as in Rev, Ver., Get you no gold, nor silver, nor copper, in your girdles. The expression involves a climax—not gold, nor yet silver, nor even copper. Mark (Mark 6:8) mentions only copper; Luke (Luke 9:3) only silver, 'Brass,' as in Com. Ver., a mixture of copper and zinc, is not believed to have been in use among the ancients; they made coins, and a great variety of utensils and implements, sometimes of pure copper, but more frequently of bronze, a mixture of copper and tin, and it is this that is commonly meant in Scripture by the word copper. The 'girdle' (see on "Matthew 3:4") was often of fine materials and elegant workmanship, and made hollow so as to carry money. The word rendered 'purse' in Luke 10:4, is different, and denotes a small pouch, like our purse. No scrip, etc., or, no bag for the road, (travelling bag, or haversack), the word signifying a leather bag or wallet, used for carrying provisions when travelling. The English word 'scrip' was formerly used in that sense, but is now obsolete. Two coats, the word meaning the inner garment or long shirt, described on Matthew 5:40. It was not uncommon to wear two of them at once, but was unnecessary; and so John the Baptist (Luke 3:11) directed him who had two to give to him who had none. In setting out on a journey it is natural to assume additional or thicker clothing; and even this is here prohibited. (Compare Mark 6:9) Or it may mean that they must not carry with them a change of clothing, but trust to obtaining it when needed. Neither shoes, or, sandals. See on "Matthew 3:11". Nor yet staves —better— nor staff. The singular is tile best supported reading of the Greek text. Mark, (Mark 6:8) 'he charged them to take nothing for their journey save a staff only,' would not necessarily conflict with Matthew. The one forbids them to procure a staff for the purpose, the other allows them to carry with them one already possessed. But Luke (Luke 9:3) uses the same Greek term as Mark, they must not carry a staff, and we have to fall back upon the principle stated above; there are indeed many cases in which the Evangelists give details differently, while the substance is the same. So in Matthew they are forbidden to procure sandals, while Mark has it, 'but to go shod with sandals.' These soles of leather or raw hide, bound under the feet, would very soon wear out in travelling, and one setting out on a long pedestrian journey would naturally wish to lay in a supply of them; but the disciples must go with those they had on. Compare as to the Seventy Luke 10:4. We might take for granted that these specific directions were designed only for the existing circumstances of the disciples, and were meant to be followed after the Ascension only according to the principles involved, not according to the particular details. Still more clearly is that seen in the directions of Matthew 10:11 ff., which are manifestly founded upon the peculiar usages of Oriental hospitality. And this view is established beyond controversy by Luke 22:35 ff., where under different circumstances they are commanded to pursue an altogether different course. Yet there have not been wanting some to contend, and even persons fanatical enough to attempt carrying the idea into practice, that ministers now, and especially foreign missionaries, should always go forth in the way here directed. But our Lord himself and the Twelve with him sometimes had money, which Judas carried in a purse, (John 12:6) and expended from time to time in supplying their wants and in relieving the poor. (John 13:29) For the workman is worthy of his meat—or—sustenance, this being the exact meaning of the word—whatever is needed to sustain life. To the Seventy he said, (Luke 10:7) 'for the labourer is worthy of his hire,' and this is the form in which Paul quotes the saying. (1 Timothy 5:18) Aristotle says,"A slave's hire is his sustenance." (Compare Numbers 18:31) It was a very useless variation for Tyndale, etc., and Com. Ver., to put 'workman' here, when the same word is rendered 'labourers' just above in Matthew 9:37 f., and also in the corresponding passages of Luke and 1 Timothy Our Lord here distinctly sets forth the same truth concerning the preacher's right to have his wants supplied by those among whom he labours, which Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 9, and 1 Timothy 5:17 f. Some think the meaning bore to be that as God's labourers they had a right to expect that he would give them sustenance, by his providence; but that view does not well suit the connection here, or in Luke 10:7, nor at all accord with Paul's use of the saying in 1 Tim. See also 1 Corinthians 9:14, which seems to refer to this passage, if we there understand 'the Lord' to mean, as so often in the Epistles, the Lord Jesus.

Matthew 10:11-13. Whatsoever city or town (village), see on "Matthew 9:35". Nearly all the people were gathered into cities or villages, it being unusual to live alone in the country, and indeed unsafe, from the unsettled condition of affairs and the prevalence of robbers; in fact, travellers in Palestine have to pursue a similar course now. Inquire, search out, or 'ascertain by investigation,' a stronger term than 'enquire.' Who in it is worthy, i.e., a man of piety and hospitality such as would make a fit associate and a willing host. And there abide till ye go hence, viz., forth from the city. In addressing the Seventy, (Luke 10:7) he adds 'go not from house to house.' The chief object of this injunction seems to have been to make them feel perfectly easy about the burden of entertaining them; they must not even trouble themselves to change their stopping-place in a town, with a view to divide the burden. They had a right to a support, and must go without fear to a suitable place and stay there. It would not prove a real burden to entertain two men on a hurried journey, and they would of course not go to stay with a family which they learned was very poor. We can see another advantage of this course in that they could give themselves more uninterruptedly to their public labours. Thomson says (Vol. ii., 407), that at the present day, "when a stranger arrives in a village or an encampment, the neighbours, one after another, usually invite him to eat with them. There is a strict etiquette about it, involving much ostentation and hypocrisy, and a failure in the due observance of such hospitality is frequently resented, and often leads to alienations and feuds amongst neighbours."—The apostles found in carrying out the directions here given, that they lacked nothing—all their wants were supplied. (Luke 22:35) Into a (the) house, i.e., the one selected according to his direction. Salute it. The form of salutation would be readily understood, and was stated to the Seventy, (Luke 10:5) "Peace be to this house." This was the common salutation among the Jews, e. g., Luke 24:36; John 20:19, John 20:21, John 20:26; 1 Samuel 25:6; Psalms 122:7, Psalms 122:8. The Hebrew word employed, shalom, signified originally wholeness, soundness, and hence health, welfare, prosperity, well-being in general; and then peace, as opposed to war, because this so greatly conduces to prosperity and welfare in general. As a salutation, the term was thus an invocation of good of every kind, a benediction, a wish that one might be blessed in every respect. It is important to observe this breadth of meaning in the term, when studying various passages, such as John 14:27; James 2:16, and the opening and closing salutations of several of the Epistles. The same word, salaam, is now used by the Arabs. If the house be worthy, i. e., of your abiding in it, as in Matthew 10:11. The emphasis in the Greek is on 'be,' and if the house be worthy, as you were informed.—If (Matthew 10:11) it be not worthy, let your peace return to you, without having accomplished anything. (Compare Isaiah 45:23, Isaiah 55:11) The explanation offered by many, that he says the benediction would come back and do good to themselves, does not appear to be warranted by the usage of similar expressions, although the idea which would thus be conveyed, is itself just and Scriptural.

Matthew 10:14 f. Out of that house or (that) city. He refers at the same time to the case of an individual refusing them hospitality, and of a community refusing to hear their message. They would turn away from an individual, shaking off the dust of their feet, if he refused to receive or hear, but would not necessarily abandon the whole community for his sake. But if a city refused to receive or hear, then they would turn away from that city, shaking off the dust of their feet. These two directions are blended in one sentence. Whosoever is singular here, plural in Luke 9:5. Shaking off the dust, etc., denoted that they wanted nothing whatever to do with them, counting them vile, and all that pertained to them polluting. We find Paul doing this in Acts 13:51, Acts 18:6. The Talmud represents it as common for Jews to do so when re-entering the Holy Land from a heathen country. Similar is the ancient and modern Oriental custom of removing shoes when entering a holy place. Our Lord himself had already been rejected at Nazareth, (Luke 4:16) and in the country of the Gadarenes, and was rejected afterwards at a Samaritan village; (Luke 9:52) indeed, in general, 'he came to his own, and his own received him not.' (John 1:11) We need not then be surprised if some reject us and our message, since it was so with Jesus, and so with the apostles, even on the Day of Pentecost. More tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, compare on Matthew 11:22, Matthew 11:24. This solemn utterance is here given by Matthew only, the corresponding sentence in Mark 6:11 being an unquestionably spurious though early addition to the text, such as we so often find made in parallel passages.

Homiletical And Practical

Matthew 9:36-38. What a theme for meditation is the Saviour's compassion—at once human compassion and divine—and not a mere sentiment, but leading him to corresponding action, as Teacher and as Redeemer; and also leading him to send out others to teach the way of salvation. Every one now who is truly sent forth of God to spend his life in proclaiming salvation is really a fruit of the Saviour's compassion for the perishing. Looking over a congregation, or any crowd, do you feel a tender concern for their salvation? Thinking of the millions who are perishing, in our own and other lands, do you long for their salvation and pray for it? If not, you are not like Jesus.—The prayer for labourers ought much oftener to form a part of our public and private supplications. All Christian men and women, and boys and girls, ought to feel that they have a work to do in gathering the great harvest of souls, that waves wide and perishing over all the earth.

Matthew 9:36-38. Luther: "The world think nothing more trifling and despicable than the ministers of the word, or labourers in the Lord's harvest; but that is like rejoicing over their own endless misfortune."

Matthew 9:36 to Matthew 10:6. Origin and development of a call to the ministry. (1) Compassionate reflection upon the perishing condition of men, Matthew 10:36 f. (2) Prayer that God will send forth labourers, Matthew 10:38. (3) Conviction that we ourselves must go, Matthew 10:1, Matthew 10:5. Henry: "Those who are to be ministers ought, (1) to live near to Christ; (2) to be taught by him."

Matthew 10:1. Henry: "This was that famous jury, (and to make it a grand jury, Paul was added to it) that was impanelled to inquire between the King of kings and the body of mankind; and in this chapter they have their charge given them by him to whom all judgment was committed."

Matthew 10:2. Henry: "Kinsmen may be dear companions in Christian labour."

Matthew 10:7 f. The relation between the supernatural and the miraculous.

Matthew 10:9-13. Hospitality to travelling preachers; compare Hebrews 13:2, 2 John 1:10.

Matthew 10:12 f. The courtesies of life may be the vehicles of temporal and spiritual blessing.

Matthew 10:14 f. Dreadful guilt of rejecting the gospel. Henry: "The best and most powerful preachers of the gospel must expect to meet with some who will not so much as give them the hearing, nor show them any token of respect."—It may be suggested that in sermons on the twelve apostles it would be well to group two or more of those concerning whom we know very little into one discourse, rather than use uncertain traditions as material.