Bible Commentaries

II

The disease in the family; the diseases in the city. Salvation spreading from the household of Peter, or the dwelling of the Lord (the Church), into the city

Matthew 8:14-17

14And when Jesus was [had] come into Peter’s house, he saw his wife’s mother laidand sick of a fe Matthew 8:15 And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose,and ministered unto them [him].⁸ 16When the even [evening] was come, they brought⁹ unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his [a] word, and healed all that were sick: 17That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias [Isaiah] the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare [bore] our sicknesses.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The accounts in Mark and Luke confirm the statement, that on the evening of the day when the Lord restored the mother-in-law of Peter, a large number of demoniacs in Capernaum were healed. Chronologically speaking, the event took place during the residence of the Lord at Capernaum, previous to His first journey into Galilee, and to the Sermon on the Mount. The statement of Luke, that Christ rebuked the disease, implies no contradiction. The healing word of Christ is omitted by Matthew and Mark, while Luke omits to mention that He took her by the hand and lifted her up. Lastly, according to Mark and Luke, the cure was performed on the intercession of the members of the family,—the sick person herself being unable to entreat help. From the circumstance that Jesus rebuked the fever, we gather that her disease was somehow connected with the sufferings resulting from demoniacal possessions then prevailing in the town.

Matthew 8:14. Into the house of Peter.—According to John 1:44, Peter and Andrew, as well as Philippians, were natives of Bethsaida. Afterward, Peter, and probably Andrew ( Matthew 4:18), had settled in Capernaum,—partly, perhaps, on account of the fisheries, and partly from his connection by marriage with the place. The marriage of Peter is also referred to in 1 Corinthians 9:5. It is remarkable that he who is said to have been the first bishop of Rome was a married man. Legend has it that her name was Perpetua, or Concordia; and that her husband accompanied her on her way to martyrdom in Rome. Their daughter was called Petronella. (Clement of Alexandria.)¹⁰

Matthew 8:15. She ministered unto Him, διηκόνει.—This refers particularly to waiting at table and serving, as an evidence of her perfect recovery.

Matthew 8:16. It was a time when there was in Capernaum a deep stirring of enthusiasm for the Lord—the evening of a great day—when this general longing seems to have seized the inhabitants of the place, and they brought unto Him their sick, especially those who were possessed with devils, and laid them down at the door of His house. On demoniacal possessions compare the remarks to Matthew 4:24.

Matthew 8:17. That it might be fulfilled.—A reference to Isaiah 53:4 Our diseases (חֳלָיֵנוּ) has He borne (נָשְׂא), and our sorrows (מַכְאֹבֵינוּ) He has taken on Himself (סְבָלָם). In the Sept. more freely: τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει, καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν ὀδυνᾶται,—The Evangelist quotes from the original; but in strict accordance with its meaning, as Olshausen and others rightly remark, though Meyer denies it. It is true that in the original Hebrew, the Messiah is represented as bearing and expiating our sins. But our diseases are undoubtedly connected with sin on the one, and death on the other hand; while the suffering of Christ depends on His taking on Himself our sufferings, which again is connected with His carrying them away. We must not, however, go so far as Olshausen, and speak of spiritual exhaustion on the part of Christ. Meyer and von Ammon have overlooked the fact that, when healing those who were diseased, Christ entered into and shared their sufferings,—a circumstance evident from the narrative in Mark 5:30 (showing that He felt the going out of virtue from Him), as also from the resurrection of Lazarus. But, in the present instance, the Lord had to contend with the concentrated sorrow and sickness of the whole city, and that on the evening of a laborious day. For this labor and contest of the Lord, the Evangelist can find no more apt description than by quoting the passage from Isaiah. Christ takes away disease, in token of His removing its root, sin, by taking upon Himself death as the full wages and the full burden of sin.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The afflicted family and the afflicted city, both highly privileged by the presence and grace of Christ. Significant connection between them: salvation spreading from the house to the city.

2. The Evangelist gives us here the key to the mystery of Christ’s atoning death. By His fellow-suffering with our diseases, He gradually descended into the unfathomable depth of His full sympathy with our death. Hence His miracles of healing partook of the nature of atoning suffering, and prepared for it. Accordingly, as He suffered in all He did, so His suffering and death crowned and completed all He had done. His active and passive obedience are most closely connected. But as in His fellow-suffering He took away the sting of suffering by taking away sin and awakening faith, so also has He swallowed up death in victory by discharging the debt of sin in His vicarious death, finishing the work of redemption, and introducing justifying faith. Such, then, was our reconciliation. In virtue of His perfect fellow-suffering, He submitted to the death due to us; by His perfect surrender to God, He became our reconciliation, even as by His communication of grace He wrought in us faith in the mercy of God, and in the imputation to us of His sacrificial service. His miracles form the introduction and the commencement of His reconciliation. Comp. 1 Peter 2:24.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The cross in the family.—The family and the town, as a household and a city of the Lord.—How Christianity elevated woman.—Christ and His people by turns engaged in the service of love1. He serves them; 2. they serve Him.—Rapid change produced in the house by the interposition of Christ: 1. One laid down by fever, an active hostess; 2. an anxious family, a festive circle; 3. the Lord a physician, the Lord a king; 4. the house an hospital, the house a church.—The right mode of celebrating our recovery.—From the church, salvation spreads to the city.—Glorious evening of power and grace.—The morbid sympathy of man, and the healing sympathy Of the Lord1. With reference to the former,—a. disease itself appears in morbid and irresistible sympathy; b. morbid sympathy increases disease and pestilence; c. at best, it leads to excitement and running to the Lord, while not a few are unprepared and unready2. The sympathy of Christ: a. Its Divine power resists all sinful influences, especially cowardice and despair; b. it penetrates into, and lights up, the lowest depths of misery; c. it conquers and removes the sufferings of man.—The sufferings of Christ in His miraculous cures, pointing to the great miraculous cure by His sufferings on the cross—Jesus has taken upon Him the diseases of man also.—The wards where those mentally afflicted are confined, belong also to the Lord.—The sceptre of Christ’s triumph extends even over the cursed realm of demons.—The apparent strength of despair, and the Divine strength of perfect confidence.—Solemn night-seasons: 1. The night of suffering; 2. the night of repentance; 3. the night of death.

Starke:—If we recover from disease, it is our duty to thank God, and all the more zealously to serve Christ and our neighbor.—Let each bear another’s burden, Galatians 6:2.—Zeisius:—Above all, learn that sin is the root of all disease, and that by true repentance thou mayest be set free from it.—To visit, to comfort, to refresh, and to serve those who are laid on beds of sickness, Isaiah 38:1; Isaiah 38:4-5; Sirach 7:2; Sirach 7:4.—Gossner:—To come, to see, and to heal is here one.

Footnotes

III

Miraculous works of Jesus on His missionary journey: The troubled disciples—the troubled sea

Matthew 8:18-27

( Matthew 8:23-27, the Gospel for the 4th Sunday after Epiphany.—Parallels: Mark 4:35-41; Luke 8:22-25; Luke 9:57-60.)

18Now, when Jesus saw great multitudes¹¹ about him, he gave commandment to departunto the other side 19 And a certain scribe came, and said unto him, Master, I willfollow thee whithersoever thou goest 20 And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests;¹² but the Son of man hath not where to layhis head 21 And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go andbury my father 22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

23And when he was [had] entered into a¹³ ship, his disciples followed him 24 And, behold, there arose a great tempest in the sea, insomuch [so] that the ship wascovered with the waves: but he was asleep [sleeping]. 25And his disciples [they]¹⁴ cameto him, and awoke him, saying, Lord, save us [save]:¹⁵ we perish 26 And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked thewinds [wind]¹⁶ and the sea; and there was a great calm 27 But the men marvelled, saying, What manner of man¹⁷ is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him!

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Matthew 8:18. Now, when Jesus saw great multitudes.—In this instance a motive for withdrawing, as in Matthew 5:1; John 6:3; John 6:15.—There were seasons when the multitude would have proclaimed Him King: sudden outbursts of carnal excitement, from which the Lord withdrew. That such was the case in this instance, we gather from the profession made by the scribe in Matthew 8:19.

Εἰςτὸπέραν, to the opposite side of the lake.

Matthew 8:19. And one, a scribe, came.—The εἷς refers to the ἕτερος in Matthew 8:21; from which verse we also gather that this scribe was already one of Christ’s disciples, in the wider sense of the term, and that he now proposed henceforth to follow Jesus continuously. When the Evangelists mention these calls to follow the Lord in a particular sense of the term, they seem always to refer to the apostolic office, not to discipleship. But as Andrew, John, Peter, James the Elder, Nathanael or Bartholomew, and Philippians, had been previously called, and as the persons here addressed could not have been any of the brothers of the Lord (James the Younger, Joseph, Judas Lebbeus or Thaddeus, and Simon), we conclude that they must have been either Judas Iscariot, Matthew, or Thomas. From the peculiar characteristics which appear in the narrative, we venture to suggest, that the first of the two scribes was Judas Iscariot, the second Thomas, and the third individual (who is only mentioned by Luke) Matthew. This is, however, merely a hypothesis made more or less probable by the nexus of history (comp. Leben Jesu, ii2, p651).—In the Gospel of Luke, this event is introduced at a later period, when Jesus prepared for His last journey to Jerusalem ( Luke 9:51-62). A superficial investigation will serve to convince us that the transaction between Jesus and the sons of thunder, recorded in Luke, had led to the introduction of this history in that connection. It seems like a psychological combination designed to exhibit Christ’s mastery in dealing with different dispositions (say the four temperaments). Schleiermacher, Schneckenburger, Gfrörer, and Olshausen, adopt the chronology of Luke; Rettig, Meyer, and others, that of Matthew.

Matthew 8:20. Κατασκηνώσεις, “Dwelling-places, not nests, as birds do not live in their nests.” De Wette.¹⁸

The Son of man.—Jesus adopted the name ὁυἱὸς τοῦἀν θρώ που no doubt with special reference to the prophetic vision in Daniel 7:13, where Messiah is seen coming in the clouds of heaven, כְּבַי אֱנָשׁ. (Comp. Hävernick’s Daniel.) Hitzig imagines that the Son of man seen by Daniel in the clouds was not the Messiah, but the whole people of Israel;—an absurd hypothesis, refuted by Ewald (in his “Jahrbücher” for1850). Daniel say only the image or likeness of the Son of man, who appeared in the full sense in Jesus of Nazareth. In all probability, Jesus chose this particular Old Testament designation of the Messiah, because, unlike the others, it had not been grossly perverted to foster the carnal expectations of the Jews. Thus our Lord met the morbid and fantastic expectations of His contemporaries—and among them, apparently, those also of the scribe in the text—by laying emphasis on His genuine and true humanity as the Messiah. His great aim was, that the people should view Him as true man—in the lowliness of His outward appearance, but also at the same time in His high character, as the Son of man, i. e, the ideal man, the second Adam from heaven (1Cor. xv.). The bold supposition of Weisse, that the term, “Son of man,” is used in opposition to the name of Messiah, deserves no refutation. It is remarkable that John had similarly avoided the title of Elijah, under which Malachi had predicted his advent, while he chose the designation given him by Isaiah: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness.” The reason of this was, that carnal notions concerning the Messianic kingdom were connected with the former, but not with the latter expression ( John 1:19, etc.). Meyer conceives that there is an antithesis implied in the term, “Son of man,” as opposed to “Son of God,” and denies the conception of ideal humanity (p82).¹⁹ According to Augustine, there is a faint allusion to the boastfulness of the scribe in the expression, “birds of the air.” But this seems strained; and we would rather apply the term to the unreliable and fugitive character of his enthusiasm, while the word, “foxes,” refers to cunning.

Where to lay His head.—A picture of a homeless pilgrim: hence, not of want in the ordinary sense, but of voluntary poverty. The answer of Christ implied, not a positive refusal of the overture of the scribe, but a solemn warning. He who saw not as men do, perceived, under that excessive profession of this man, an amount of unreliableness and insincerity which called for such caution.

Matthew 8:21. Another of His disciples.—In the stricter [rather in the wider] sense of the term—such as the “scribe” had been. Clement of Alexandria (Stromat. iii4) suggests that this disciple was Philip; but he had been called at an earlier period.

Bury my father.—The father had died. According to some critics, his old father was still alive, and the expression, to bury, meant to take care of him till his end, and then to commit him to his last resting-place. But the call to follow Christ immediately, evidently implies, that at the time the father was actually dead. Burial was the most ancient mode of disposing of the dead (Cic. Legg. 2:22; Plin7:55), and was always practised by the Jews, in opposition to the Greek custom of burning the dead, which was quite exceptional among the Jews. It was considered the duty of sons to bury their parents, Genesis 25:9; Genesis 35:29, etc. Tobith4:3. Comp. Winer sub voce: Begraben, Schöttgen’s Horœ [W Smith: Bibl. Dict. sub Burial, vol1:233].

Matthew 8:22. Let the dead bury their dead.—Artificial explanations see in Meyer’s Commentary. The sentence is an Oxymoron, by which the burial of the dead is assigned to those who are spiritually dead.²⁰ The expression conveys to the hesitating disciple that there were more urgent duties in the kingdom of heaven than that of burying the dead, and particularly, of going through all the ceremonies connected with a Jewish burial. At the same time, it also alludes to the goal and end of those who are spiritually dead—their last and highest aim here is to bury one another. Death of the soul is connected with death of the body.—Celsus (according to Origen) founded on this passage the objection, that the Saviour demanded what was inconsistent with duty to parents. But He only subordinates the duty of a Christian toward his own household and family, especially when another could take his place, to the highest of all duties—those of his spiritual calling, and to his Master.²¹ Lastly, we infer from this trait, that this and the former reply were addressed to disciples in the narrower sense of the term.

Matthew 8:23. The ship, τὸπλοῖον.—With the article, meaning a definite ship, which waited to take them across the lake; the words of Jesus having induced His disciples (in the narrower sense) to follow Him implicitly.²²

Matthew 8:24. Σεισμός,—indicating the effect, of which the cause (the winds, Matthew 8:26) is afterward mentioned—a violent commotion of the sea. On the sudden storms occasioned by the situation of the Lake of Galilee, comp. Schubert3:237; Robinson2:416.

Matthew 8:25. Save! we perish! Σῶσο ν, ἀπολλύμεθα.—Asyndetic (disconnected) language of intense anxiety.

Matthew 8:26. Why are ye fearful?—The word “afraid” would be too weak, and “cowardly” too strong. At any rate, it was a fearfulness which the Lord censured. It is worthy of special notice, that, according to Matthew, the Lord first rebuked the disciples, and after that the sea. See גָּעַר, Psalm 106:9. (Mark and Luke reverse the order.)

Matthew 8:27. The men, οἱἄνθρωποι.—The men in their human nature,—more particularly, in their rapid transition from extreme anxiety to boundless admiration. Hence we infer that it applied to the disciples, and not, as Meyer supposes, to other parties accompanying Jesus. According to the account given by Mark, other vessels went along with that which bore the Lord; so that He must have been followed by a numerous company of disciples.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. In dealing with the different characters of the disciples, and adapting Himself to their natural dispositions, the Lord showed how closely He read, and how wisely He directed, the hearts of men. (Leben Jesu, ii2, 651; iii422)

2. The Son of man. The description furnished by Daniel of the appearance of Messiah, under the form of the Son of man, indicates a very advanced stage of the prophetic doctrine of the Messiah. But, in order clearly to perceive its import, we must compare this term, as used by Daniel, with the passage about the seventy weeks ( Daniel 9). [In the sixty-third week, the Messiah who was not a prince, was to be set aside by the advent of the people of the Prince who was not Messiah.] After seven weeks, i. e, at the close of the seventy weeks—cometh the Messiah, who, at the same time, is also a Prince. Hence the figure of the Son of man combines the two ideas of the suffering and the glorified Messiah. As the Son of humanity to which the curse attaches, He is humbled and rejected; while, as the Son of humanity on which the blessing is bestowed, He is exalted and declared Lord of an eternal kingdom. Gerlach: “The first man was simply called Adam—i. e, man, and every descendant of his is called a son of man; but Christ is called the Son of man, as being derived from Adam, and yet the Head of a new race, 1 Corinthians 15:47.”

3. The import of the miracle of stilling the tempest has frequently been misunderstood. Paulus (of Heidelberg) resolves it into a natural phenomenon; Ammon regards it as an allegory or symbol; while Strauss treats it as a myth.²³ It may also be turned into magic,²⁴ if, with Meyer, we were to overlook the connection between the tempest in the hearts of the disciples and that on the lake—between sin in man, and “the convulsions and throes of nature” (Olshausen)—and regard this history as merely a direct act of power exercised upon the elements, and nothing else. In this respect, it is sufficient to remind the reader of Romans 8:20. Not that we thereby explain the miracle, but that we present its Christian aspect. The Lord rebukes the storm in the minds of His disciples; thus preparing for calming the tempest on the sea.—He takes away the sin of the microcosm, in order then to remove the evils of the macrocosm. Hence this event has frequently been regarded as a symbol of the passage of the Church of Christ through the world. There is another aspect of it which deserves attention. In this miracle, the operation of the Son and of the Father coincide; as the New Testament completion of the Old Testament miracles upon nature, it is at the same time a prediction and a miracle, and thus a sign that the Son had, in the name of the Father, entered upon the government of the world.

4. Our modern degenerate and false philanthropy fails to perceive the difference between a soul that is mourning and one which is fearful or desponding. It is altogether erroneous, and must fail of its desired effect, if we administer to the fearful the comfort which is only appropriate to the afflicted. The latter, Christ ever upheld with words of kindness; while He rebuked the fearful, by setting before them the terrors of His word, and thus recalling them to a better state of mind. Thus He rebuked those who were possessed, who by their cowardice had become the prey of unclean spirits; and similarly He rebuked the disciples, when from want of faith they were desponding or fearful. Thus also He rebuked the fever which weighed down the mother-in-law of Peter; and, in the present instance, the sea and the winds. Such a rebuke must, of course, be regarded as symbolical, since neither sea nor tempest had personal consciousness. The ultimate ground of this rebuke lay in the fact, that the disturbances of nature were caused by unclean spirits. Christ apparently regarded those sudden outbursts in nature not as manifestations of healthy and regular force, but as manifestations of weakness; just as the fever was the consequence of inherent weakness, or of a germ of death, against which nature employed her utmost efforts in convulsive struggle.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Jesus sees the multitude and approaches them; Jesus sees the multitude and retires from them1. The fact itself,—(a) in the Gospel history; (b) in that of the Church; (c) in individual Christian communities2. Explanation of the fact: (a) He approaches when He sees multitudes longing for His salvation and waiting upon His word; (b) He retires at the first appearance of fanaticism, which would have confirmed the carnal expectations of man, and not the word of God.—The Lord eschews the sinful obtrusion of worldly men, in order to seek out the poor and the needy, afar off.—The watchword of Christ: To the other side! 1. A watchword of faith, breaking through all narrow boundaries; 2. a watchword of love, overcoming all selfishness; 3. a watchword of courage, overcoming all dangers.—The Saviour and the spiritual distemper of His disciples: 1. Spurious enthusiasm in our own strength (I will); 2. spurious scruples and spiritual hesitation (Suffer me).—Jesus the great model of pastoral work.—Jesus warning superficial enthusiasts to count the cost of following Him.—If we are willing to follow the Lord, we must become homeless wanderers, and be ready to renounce all our comforts.—The Son of man has not where to lay His head1. The fact: at the commencement, the manger; at the close, the cross; during His pilgrimage, a bench on the ship2. Its import,—(a) so far as He is concerned; (b) so far as we are concerned.—The nests and caves of professing disciples who are not ready to yield their all to Christ. They seek,—(a) high places (nests) in time of prosperity; (b) places of concealment (caves) in the hour of adversity.—Jesus teaches His faithful disciples to get quit of their scruples and hesitation by considering the final aim of life.—Let the dead bury their dead: 1. Compared with following Christ, which he had undertaken, this was the lesser duty; 2. others were able to take his place; 3. the disciple seemed to hesitate between two duties, while yet he had taken upon him the yoke of Christ.—Is a collision of duties possible? As little as,—(a) between the commandments of God; (b) between the angels of God; (c) between the ways of God; for such, indeed, are all duties, so far as we are concerned.—It is characteristic of the spiritually dead, that they busy themselves with special affection about the ceremonials of life.—The dead bury their dead: such is the end of all unbelieving lives.—Symbolical import of the passage of Christ with His disciples across the sea. It is a figure of all His leadings,—(a) of the people of God (the ark, etc.); (b) in the history of the Church; (c) in the experience of believers.—The unexpected tempest: 1. After so glorious a day, and on the beautiful, tranquil lake; 2. in company with the Lord Himself.—We read only once of the Lord being asleep,—a sleep full of majesty: (a) a sabbatic rest after His labor at Capernaum; (b) a sign of deep calm in the midst of the dreadful tempest; (c) a preparation for the most glorious awakening; (d) a type of His rest in the grave.—The cry of despair becomes a prayer when in proximity to the Lord.—How the Lord purifies even the supplications of the helpless.—All fearfulness or despondency in life springs from want of faith.—The little faith of the disciples: 1. A want of faith in what it forgot (Christ’s presence in the ship; the hope of Israel, the salvation of the race); 2. still faith in that they took refuge to Christ.—Jesus calms every storm.—What manner of man is this!—The admiration of Jesus a transition to praise and adoration. Our gratitude for deliverance and salvation should ever end in praise.

Starke:—We should occasionally retire into solitude, Luke 6:12; Luke 5:16.—Much preaching wearies the body, Ecclesiastes 12:12; Mark 6:31.—Sudden fervor and good inclinations are not equivalent to following Christ.—Many would like to be pious, but at the same time to retain their nests, houses, riches, honor, and comforts, Matthew 16:24.—We must not run before God calls, Romans 10:15.—Christ rejects none who come to Him, John 6:37; but he who desires only earthly things from Him, receives a solemn warning. Cramer.—Christ, the Lord of heaven and earth, became poorer than the beasts that perish; yet His poverty is our riches, 2 Corinthians 8:9.—The poor, who have nothing of their own, may well derive comfort from the voluntary poverty of Jesus. Quesnel.— 2 Corinthians 11:27.—Man is always opposed to the will of God: he either lags behind, or is determined to run before. The right way is, to wait till God speaks, and then not to delay a single moment following Him, Isaiah 55:8.—The spiritually dead, Hebrews 11:6; Jeremiah 5:3.—They who accompany the dead, are themselves subject to death.—A seafaring life affording striking signs of God’s wisdom and power ( Psalm 107:23), but used for merely selfish purposes. Zeisius.—God leads His own wondrously, but well, Psalm 41:4.—Through fire and water, Psalm 91:14; Isaiah 43:2; Isaiah 42:16.—Genuine Christians follow their Saviour through storm and tempest, even unto death, 2 Corinthians 6:4; Psalm 73:23.—If Christ do not immediately come to our help, we are prone to imagine that He is asleep; but He never oversleeps the hour of our deliverance.—United prayer is the most effectual.—Prayer the best anchor in danger.—Let Christians beware of cowardice: His Church will continue so long as He endures. Bibl. Wirtemb.—In seasons of extreme danger, the omnipotence and mercy of the Saviour is most fully and gloriously displayed, 2 Chronicles 20:12; Isaiah 33:10; 2 Corinthians 1:8.—Weak faith is nevertheless faith, only it must increase.—After the tempest, sunshine.—The works of God, and His marvellous power in our deliverance, call for praise and thanksgiving.—Under the cross we learn what wonders our Lord worketh.—Gratitude, Psalm 14:7; Romans 11:20.

Gossner:—Christ taught His disciples in a wandering school. Here He led them to the stormy lake to teach them fearlessness.—Fearlessness great happiness.

Heubner:—Our whole life may be compared to a sea voyage, in which we make for the heavenly haven.—“Christus habet suas horas et moras.”—Christ the Lord of nature.—The passage across the lake, a figure of our lives: 1. The commencement; 2. the progress; 3. the end.

Lisco—Luther: Some make a pretext of good works for not following Christ; but the Lord shows that these are dead works.—Almighty power of Christ, by which He overcomes the world, and renders everything subservient to the kingdom of God.

The pericope, the calming of the tempest, Matthew 8:24-27.

Dräseke:—The passage across the lake, a figure of spiritual calm: 1. In reference to its character; 2. in reference to its origin; 3. in reference to its effects.—Marheineke:—How we may courageously meet every danger, when near to the Lord.—Harms:—This narrative a pictorial representation of the Christian life: The vessel which carries believers; the sea, or the world, with its tempest and waves, and the sufferings of the children of God; Christ asleep, or delaying His succor; then follow prayer, His rebuke, His word of command, and the exclamation of marvel.—Hagenbach:—Christ our refuge in the tempests of life.—Greiling:—The inner calm of the soul in the midst of the raging storm.—Hüffell:—God is always and everywhere near us.—Kraussold.—Lord save! we perish! 1. The distress; 2. the cry for help; 3. the deliverance.

[Alford:—“The symbolic application of this occurrence (the calming of the tempest) is too striking to have escaped general notice. The Saviour with the company of His disciples in the ship tossed on the waves, seemed a typical reproduction of the ark bearing mankind on the flood, and a foreshadowing of the Church tossed by the tempests of this world, but having Him with her always. And the personal application is one of comfort and strengthening of faith in danger and doubt.”—Hilary:—Those churches where the Word of God is not awake, are in danger of shipwreck, not that Christ sleeps, but He is slumbering in us by reason of our sleep. But where faith watches, there is no fear of wreck from the powers of this world.—P. S.]

Footnotes

IV

Christ healing the demoniacs who profess His name; banished from Gadara; He restores the paralytic, and is accused of blasphemy,—or, the blessed working of the Lord despite the contradiction of the kingdom of darkness.

Matthew 8:28-34, Matthew 9:1-8

( Matthew 9:1-8 the Gospel for the 19 th Sunday after Trinity.—Parallels: Mark 5:1-20; Luke 8:26-39, Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26.)

28And when he was [had] come to the other side, into the country of the Gergesenes [Gadarenes],²⁵ there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man [one] might [could, or was able to, ὥστε μὴ ἰσχύειν] passby that way 29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee,30Jesus,²⁶ thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time? And there was a good way off from them a herd of many swine feeding 31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away [send us away]²⁷ intothe herd of swine 32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine [into the swine];²⁸ and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently [rushed] down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters 33 And they that kept them [the herdsmen, οἱ βόσκοντες] fled, and went their ways into the city, and told every thing, and what was befallen to [had befallen] the possessedof [with] the devils 34 And, behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus; and when they saw him, they besought him that he would depart out of their coasts [borders].

Matthew 9:1 And he entered into a ship, and passed over, and came into his own city 2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus, seeing their faith, said unto the sick of the palsy, Song of Solomon, be of good cheer; thy sins be3[are] forgiven²⁹ thee. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This4man blasphemeth. And Jesus, knowing³⁰ their thoughts, said, Wherefore think ye evil 5 in your hearts? For whether [which] is easier, to say, Thy sins be [are] forgiven thee;or to say, Arise, and walk? 6But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thybed, and go³¹ unto thine [to thy] house 7 And he arose, and departed to his house 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled [feared]³², and glorified God, which [who] had given such power unto men.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Matthew 8:28. On the discussion about the readings, Γεργεσηνῶν, Γαδαοηνῶν, Γερασηνῶν, comp. the Commentaries.—Bleek (Beiträge zur Evangelienkritik, 1:26): “From Orig. (in Joh. Tom6:24), we may infer with tolerable certainty, that, at the time of that Father, Γεργεσηνῶν was not found in any of the MSS. of the Gospels then current. He only mentions it as a conjecture, that this may have been an older reading. From that time it seems to have been introduced into manuscripts. Origen found that the common reading was Γερασηνῶν, that of Γαδαρηνῶν also occurring. The change of the former into the latter word is easily accounted for, but not the reverse. Hence the writer has always been of opinion, that Γερασηνῶν, which Lachmann also has adopted, is the correct reading in all the three Gospels. But as the town of Gerasa, in Arabia, could not possibly be meant, we suppose that the name was incorrectly written by the Evangelists, and that they probably meant the town of Gergesa, as Origen suggests.” Accordingly, we drop the reading Γεργεσηνῶν, and only retain thus much, that Origen was exegetically right in maintaining that Jesus landed in the district of the Gergesenes, whose name at least (Γεργεσαῖοι, Genesis 15:21; Deuteronomy 7:1; Joshua 24:11) is mentioned by Josephus (Ant. i6, 2). But the MSS. are divided between the readings Gadara and Gerasa. Hence, judging from the circumstances of this narrative, we are warranted in fixing upon the adjoining Gadara, which was the capital of Peræa, rather than on the distant Gerasa, which lay on the eastern boundary of Peræa, and indeed was considered by some geographers to have been situate in Arabia. So also Winer and Meyer. Besides, the expulsion of the Lord is represented as an event of considerable importance, which would not have been the case had He been banished from Gerasa, and not from the capital of Peræa. Expulsion from a village by the sea-shore would only have induced Him to go farther inland; but banishment from the capital of the district rendered at least a temporary removal absolutely necessary. The pagan character of the district (swine, raging demons) may have led to the evangelical tradition, by which the scene of this narrative was transferred from Gadara to Gerasa. Gadara, the capital of Peræa (Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv8, 3), situated to the southeast of the southern end of the Lake of Gennesareth, south of the river Hieromax, sixty stadia from Tiberias, upon a mountain, inhabited chiefly by Gentiles (according to Seetzen and Burckhardt). It is supposed to have been the modern Omkeis (but comp. Ebrard, who places Gadara only one hour from the lake). See Winer and the Encyclops. and von Raumer’s Palestine. On the eastern shore of the lake, comp. Ritter’s Palestine. Ebrard suggests, that there had been a village called Gerasa in the neighborhood of Gadara. Euseb. Onomasticon refers to such a village under the article Gergesa, without, however, pronouncing decidedly on the point.

Two possessed with devils.—Mark and Luke speak only of one. Strauss and de Wette hold, that the account of Matthew is the authentic narrative; Weisse and others prefer that of Mark and Luke. Ebrard suggests, that Matthew joined the account of the possessed at Gadara with that in Mark 1:23; others fancy, that our Evangelist is in the habit of speaking of two individuals when there was only one. Meyer leaves the difficulty unsolved; while Augustine, Calvin, and Chrysostom suppose that one of the demoniacs is specially mentioned, as the principal personage and the greater sufferer. This idea is confirmed by the consideration, that two demoniacs would not have associated, unless the one had been dependent upon the other. For the details of the narrative, the parallel passages in the other Gospels must be consulted.

Coming out of the tombs.—This was their abode, the only one left them, after they had withdrawn from human supervision and society. We conjecture that they chose this haunt not merely from melancholy, but rather from a morbid craving for the terrible. These tombs were either natural or artificial caves in the rocks, or built in the ground. The calcareous mountain on which Gadara was situated, was specially suited for such sepulchres. Even Epiphanius (adv. Hœres. i131) mentions these rocky caves near Gadara, which were called πολυάνδρια and τύμβοι.

Matthew 8:29. What have we to do with Thee? מָה לָנוּ וָלָךְ, 2 Samuel 16:10, etc. Grotius remarks ad loc.: “Hoc si ex usu Latini sermonis interpreteris, contemtum videtur inducere. Ita enim Latini aiunt: Quid tibi mecum est? At Hebrœis aliud significat, nimirum cur mihi molestiam exhibes?”³³ The ordinary consciousness of the demoniacs was always affected by, and mixed up with, their morbid consciousness. Hence their power of anticipation was morbidly developed. By virtue of this faculty they now recognized the Divine power and majesty of the Lord (comp. Luke 4:34). Hence the question, whether πρὸκαι ρο ῦ means: before the judgment of the Messiah, as de Wette and Meyer suppose. Perhaps they also anticipated that the work of Jesus in the district would be interrupted by them, and that it was not ready for the reception of the Messiah.

To torment us.—The apparent contradiction in the conduct of the demoniacs affords a striking confirmation of the truthfulness of this narrative. On the one hand, they seem to have felt the power of the Lord; they hastened to meet Him; their fierceness was kept in check, and they humbly entreated. But on the other hand, they identified themselves with the demons under whose power they were; they, so to speak, appeared as their representatives, and in that capacity complained that Jesus was about to torment them by healing the demoniacs,—i. e, that He was about to send the demons to the place of torment. De Wette: “Torment us,” by disturbing our stay and rule in man.

Matthew 8:30. A herd of many swine.—The Jews were prohibited from keeping swine, which were unclean animals (Lightfoot, 315; Eisenmenger, Entdektes Judenthum, i704). The herd must therefore have belonged to pagans, or else have been kept for purposes of traffic. In any case, it might serve as evidence of the legal uncleanness of the people, and of their essentially Gentile disposition.

Matthew 8:31. Probably the request was expressed in such terms as “Send us, ἀπόστειλον ἡμᾶς,” but the assent of the Lord was couched in the form of a permission, or even of a sentence of banishment. Hence the other reading of the Received Text. The request shows that these demons were antinomian, not Pharisaical; hence their choice of the swine. Possibly, there was also the malicious design latent, in this manner to put an end to the work of the Lord in the district. But in that case, the compliance of the Lord must be regarded as an evidence that at that time the awakening of terror was a sufficient effect. Lastly, the request of the demons implies that they were many (Meyer), which indeed is expressly mentioned in Mark and Luke.

Matthew 8:32. Go, ὑπάγετε.—The emphasis rests on the command to go. Strauss and others have raised an objection, on the ground that Jesus here interfered with the property of others. In reply, Ebrard appeals to the divinity and the absolute power of Christ. He also reminds us of the casting out of those who bought and sold in the temple; which, however, is scarcely a case in point, as every Jew might claim the right of reproving and opposing open and daring iniquity. Probably the conduct of Christ, in the case of so manifest a contravention of Mosaic ordinances, might be vindicated on the same ground, as simply the privilege of every zealous Israelite.³⁴ But the text does not oblige us to suppose that Jesus interfered at all with the here of swine. He neither administered justice, nor enforced police regulations, nor took oversight of the herds of swine of Gadara. His only object was to cure the demoniacs, which He did by commanding the demons simply to go. Other objections—such as, that the demons would have acted foolishly by driving the swine into the sea—are scarcely worth repeating. Any such difficulty would arise from the false assumption that demons can never be stupid. It must be admitted that certain morbid states, such as derangement of the nervous system, madness, idiocy, raving, etc, formed the natural substratum of demoniac possessions. Hence there is a marked difference between the possessed, and those who, like Judas and the Pharisees, voluntarily surrendered themselves to the power of evil, as there is also between the demons themselves, and Satan, or between the renunciation of Satan in Christian baptism, and exorcism,—a rite which originally was only applied in the case of the possessed, and only introduced into the ordinary ritual of baptism and confirmation of catechumens generally when spiritual knowledge was obscured in the Church. The demoniacs were destitute of freedom, not merely on account of the psychical ailment under which they labored, but because, while thus suffering, they were possessed by unclean spirits (πνεύματα ἀκάθαρτα). The idea of bodily possession, or the indwelling of the evil spirit in the physical frame of the diseased, was merely the popular notion. The main point was, that they were under the power of some special demoniac influence, or of a number of such influences, which proceeded from real demons, and were so strong, that the persons possessed identified themselves in their own minds with the demons. But it is quite possible that such influences may have proceeded not merely from the kingdom of Satan, in the narrowest sense, but also from the spirits of the departed. Hence Josephus (De Bello Jud. vii6, 3) held, that the demons were the spirits of wicked men; an opinion which was shared by some of the oldest of the Fathers, such as Justin Martyr and Athenagoras. Tertullian was the first to turn the current of opinion on the subject, and ultimately, on the authority of Chrysostom, the old idea of the spirits of departed and lost men was discarded, and that of devils adopted. But a closer inquiry into the character of sympathetic influences will show, that while the question, whence these demoniac influences proceeded, is of secondary importance, such influences—even to literal bodily possession—are quite possible, whether the party affected was conscious of them or not. From this it follows, that a demoniac might feel himself under the influence of a whole legion of unclean spirits, as, from the account in the other Gospels, appears to have been the case in the present instance. Hence we must beware of the common mistake, of putting the guilt of the demoniacs on the same level with that of wilful slaves of Satan. In our view, the blame attachable to such persons varied from the minimum, in the case of idiots, to a maximum. The common characteristic of all was cowardice,—a cowardly surrender of a weakened and lowered consciousness to wicked influences. The same remarks apply to the moral aspect of madness generally; and we would adopt the idea, that all madness was connected with a kind of demoniac influence, rather than the view, that the demoniacs of Scripture were merely lunatics, or even that of older orthodox interpreters, who regarded them as a class of persons possessed by the devil,—God allowing it at the time of Christ, and then only, for the purpose of glorifying His name. We do not, however, deny, that at that period, when all human corruption had reached its climax, these demoniac possessions also appeared in a more full and patent manner. But if we consider that the evil primarily depended upon moral cowardice and non-resistance to evil, we shall understand all the better the method of cure adopted by the Lord. The thunderbolt of His power and divine rebuke would once more kindle the ray of life and strength in the soul, fill the spirits who possessed the demoniac with fear, and thus break the fetters by which they held their victims. It snapped, so to speak, the connection between the diseased mind, deprived of its freedom, and the demon; while at the same time the soul was brought under the influence of the Divine Being. Such was the deliverance from the δαίμων, who, although a personal being, is designated as δαιμόνιον, in allusion to the impersonality of the relationship.

They went into the herd of swine.—Of course the demons, not the demoniacs. The commotion in the herd, by which they rushed down a steep place into the sea, is readily accounted for from the well-known sympathy existing among gregarious animals. If one of the herd was seized with terror, all the others would be affected. Probably the horse is, of all animals, most liable to sudden fright, especially from spectral apparitions; but swine are also subject to such wild frights (comp. Scheitlin’s Thierseelenkunde, vol. ii486). Perhaps the reason why swine were Levitically unclean, may have been not merely their outward conformation, but their susceptibility for impure psychical impressions. The circumstance, that the demons went into the swine, seems indeed mysterious; but the fright of these animals arose probably from the last terrible paroxysm, which ordinarily accompanied the healing of the possessed ( Mark 1:26; Luke 4:35; Mark 9:26, etc.).

Όρμᾷν, cum impetu ferri, irruere, Acts 19:29.—Olshausen suggests, that the demons drove down the herd; Henneberg, Neander, and others, that they were impelled by an unknown, but accidental cause; while Meyer regards this as a mythical addition. We prefer leaving it unexplained, as belonging to the mysterious connection between the world of spirit and nature.

Matthew 8:34. The whole city.—For the moment, the terror produced by this miracle proved even stronger than the indignation excited by the loss sustained. Accordingly, as the heathen were wont to go in solemn procession to the altars of the gods in order to avert calamities, so the people of Gadara went out to meet Christ, humbly beseeching Him to depart from their coasts. They evidently feared, lest, if He remained, they should sustain yet greater damage. The cure of two furious demoniacs, involving the loss of a herd of swine, appears a calamity in a district where swine have their keepers, but men are left uncared for. Jesus departs; but those who have been restored are left behind—more especially he who would fain have followed Him—to bear witness it Decapolis of the power and grace of Christ.

Footnotes