มัทธิว 22:34 วิจารณ์

And Jesus answered and spake unto them again,.... Not to the multitude only, but to the chief priests, elders, Scribes, and Pharisees: for though Mark seems to intimate, that upon the delivery of the last parable of the vineyard, they left him, and went their way; yet since he does not relate the following parable, they might not leave him until they had heard that, which is spoken with much the same design as the former, and might increase their resentment the more: or if the chief priests and elders did go away, the Pharisees remained behind, as is clear from Mat 22:15 to whom he spake by parables, similitudes, and comparisons, taken from earthly things, and against whom he directed the following one; and said, as hereafter related.

Jesus said unto him,.... Directly, without taking time to think of it; and though he knew with what design it was put to him, yet, as an answer to it might be useful and instructive to the people, as well as silence and confound his adversaries, he thought fit to give one; and is as follows, being what is expressed in Deu 6:5. thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind; that is, with all the powers and faculties of the soul, the will, the understanding, and the affections; in the most sincere, upright, and perfect manner, without any dissimulation and hypocrisy, and above all objects whatever, for this the law requires; and which man, in his state of innocence, was capable of, though now fallen, he is utterly unable to perform; so far from it, that without the grace of God, he has no true love at all to God, in his heart, soul and mind, but all the reverse; his carnal mind is enmity against God, and everything that is divine and good, or that belongs unto him: and though this is now the case of man, yet his obligation to love the Lord in this manner is still the same; and when the Spirit of God does produce the grace and fruit of love in his soul, he does love the Lord sincerely; because of the perfections of his nature, and the works of his hands, and because of the blessings of grace bestowed, and especially for Christ, the unspeakable gift of his love; and most affectionately does he love him, when he is most sensible of his everlasting and unchangeable love to him, and when that is shed abroad by the Spirit; "for we love him, because he first loved us", Jo1 4:19 instead of, "with all thy mind", as here, in Deu 6:5 it is read, "with all thy might"; and which clause is here added by the Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions, as it is in Mar 12:30. The Hebrew phrase seems to denote the vehemency of affections, with which God is to be beloved. Though the Jewish writers (s) paraphrase and interpret it, "with all thy substance", or "money"; and in the Misna (t), the following interpretation is given of the whole, ""with all thy heart", with thy imaginations, with the good imagination, and with the evil imagination; and "with all thy soul", even if he should take away thy soul; and "with all thy strength", with all thy "mammon", or riches; or otherwise, "with all thy might", with every measure he measures unto thee, do thou measure unto him; that is, as one of the commentators says (u), whether it be good or evil; or, as another (w), in every case that happens give thanks to God, and praise him. And certain it is, that as God is to be loved in the strongest manner we are capable of, and with all we have, and are; so always, at all times, under all dispensations of his providence, and upon all accounts, and for all he does towards, in, upon, and for us, (s) Targum Onk. & Jarchi in Deut. vi. 5. (t) Beracot, c. 9. sect. 5. Vid. Targum Jon. in Dent. vi. 5. (u) Bartenora in Misn. ib. (w) Maimon. in ib.

For in this law given to Adam we recognise in embryo all the precepts which afterwards sprouted forth when given through Moses; that is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from thy whole heart and out of thy whole soul; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; Thou shalt not kill; Thou shall not commit adultery; Thou shalt not steal; False witness thou shall not utter; Honour thy father and mother; and, That which is another's, shall thou not covet.

Jesus had put the Sadducees to silence, to show that the tongue of falsehood is silenced by the brightness of truth. For as it belongs to the righteous man to be silent when it is good to be silent, and to speak when it is good to speak, and not to hold his) peace; so it belongs to every teacher of a the Not indeed to be silent, but to be silent as far as any good purpose is concerned.

Again doth the evangelist express the cause, for which they ought to have held their peace, and marks their boldness by this also. How and in what way? Because when those others were put to silence, these again assail Him. For when they ought even for this to hold their peace, they strive to urge further their former endeavors, and put forward the lawyer, not desiring to learn, but making a trial of Him, and ask, "What is the first commandment?" For since the first commandment was this, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God," thinking that He would afford them some handle, as though He would amend it, for the sake of showing that Himself too was God, they propose the question.

(Verse 34 and following) But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him: "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" What we read about Herod and Pontius Pilate, that they conspired in the death of the Lord, we also see now concerning the Pharisees and the Sadducees, who are opposed to each other, but agree with the same mind in testing Jesus. Therefore, those who had already been confuted in the display of the coin and had seen the faction of the opposing party undermined, should have been warned by example not to plot further snares: but malice and envy nourish audacity. One of the legal experts, not desiring to not know but attempting, asks whether the one being questioned knew what was being asked, what the greater commandment is: not asking about the commandments, but what the first and great commandment is; so that when all that God has commanded is great: whatever he may answer, he may have an opportunity to slander, asserting that something else is great among many. Therefore, whoever knows and asks not by desire to learn, but by the desire to know, whether the one who is going to respond knows, approaches in the likeness of the Pharisees, not as a disciple, but as a tempter.

The Pharisees having been themselves already confuted (in the matter of the denarius), and now seeing their adversaries also overthrown, should have taken warning to attempt no further deceit against Him; but hate and jealousy are the parents of impudence. The Pharisees and Sadducees, thus foes to one another, unite in one common purpose to tempt Jesus.

After the humiliation of the Sadducees Jesus was highly regarded by the crowds. The Pharisees, filled with envy out of an immeasurable shamelessness, again were testing him, hypocritically asking if he might deliver a ruling concerning the first commandment. By doing so, perhaps Jesus would amend the commandment in a manner that might lead to an accusation against him. Now, Matthew and Luke call the person who asked the question a lawyer, while Mark calls him a teacher of the law. This does not indicate a disagreement. For they both represent the questioner as one learned in the law and as a teacher of the law who is an interpreter of the law to the people. But the Lord publicly reveals their evil. They were not coming to have him interpret the law so that they might benefit but because they were seized by envy. So Jesus teaches that one should not measure out one’s devotion, loving God in part but also clinging in part to the concerns of this world. Through his teaching Jesus said that his commandment was the summary of all the commandments. The lawyer thought he could cast Jesus into danger as one who makes himself out to be God. Jesus failed to respond in the manner he expected, but he ends up praising Jesus, as Mark says.

Or the Pharisees meet together, that their numbers may silence Him whom their reasonings could not confute; thus, while they array numbers against Him, showing that truth failed them; they said among themselves, Let one speak for all, and all speak, through one, so if He prevail, the victory may seem to belong to all; if He be overthrown, the defeat may rest with Him alone; so it follows, Then one of them, a teacher of the Law, asked him a question, tempting him.

Out of immeasurable spite this man comes forward to put the Lord to the test. For when they saw the Sadducees put to shame and the Lord praised for His wisdom, they came forward to test Him to see if He would add something to the first commandment, and thus give them the chance to accuse Him of being an innovator who corrects the law. But the Lord discloses their malice, and because they came not to learn, but rather, devoid of love, to show their envy and their spite, He reveals to them the exceedingly great love expressed by the commandments. And He teaches that we ought not to love God partially, but to give all of ourselves to God. For we perceive these three distinctions of the human soul: the vegetative, the animal, and the rational. When the soul grows and is nourished and begets what is like unto it, it resembles the plants; when it experiences anger or desire, it is like the animals; when it understands, it is called rational. See, then, how these three facets are indicated here. "Thou shalt love thy God with all thy heart" - this is the animal part of a man; "and with all thy soul [or life]" - this is the vegetative part of a man, for plants are alive and animate; "and with all thy mind" - this is the rational (Deut. 6:5). So one must love God with all one's soul, that is, one must attend to Him with all the parts and powers of one's soul. "This is the first and great commandment," training us in piety. "The second is like unto it," which exhorts us to do to other men what is just and right. For there are two things which lead to perdition, evil doctrines and a corrupt life. Lest we fall into unholy doctrines, we must love God; so that we do not lead a corrupt life, we must love our neighbor (Levit. 19:18). For he who loves his neighbor fulfills all the commandments, and he who fulfills all the commandments, loves God. So by means of each other these two commandments are welded together and united, containing within themselves all the other commandments. For who is it that loves God and his neighbor, but also steals, or bears grudges, or commits adultery, or murders, or fornicates? This lawyer, then, at the onset came to test Him but then, hearing Christ's answer, he amended his ways, and the Lord praised him, as Mark also says that Jesus looked at him with love, and said, "Thou art not far from the kingdom of heaven" (Mk. 12:34).

Above, the Lord responded to the question raised about the payment of tribute, and also to the question about the resurrection; here he responds to the question about the comparison of the divine commandments: and he does two things. First, the question is presented; secondly, the response, at Jesus said to them, etc. Concerning the first, he does two things. First, he describes the wickedness of the questioners; secondly, the question, at master, which is the great commandment in the law? He describes their wickedness with respect to three things. First, with respect to their impudence; secondly, with respect to their calculated malice; thirdly, with respect to their deceitfulness. With respect to their impudence, when it says, hearing that he had silenced. He had already confuted the disciples of the Pharisees and the Sadducees; hence from this they could well have believed him and been ashamed. Hence Chrysostom says: envy and anger nourish and cause impudence. But they did not on that account leave off, but still questioned him; Isaiah 56:11: most impudent dogs, they never had enough. And it is signified that although they heard this, they nevertheless did not keep silent. One person keeps silence voluntarily, and this belongs to the prudent man. Likewise, another keeps silence because silence is imposed on him, and this belongs to the imprudent; Sirach 20:6: there is one that holdeth his peace because he knoweth not what to say; and there is one that holdeth his peace, knowing the proper time; Ecclesiastes 3:7: a time to keep silence, and a time to speak.

PARABLE OF THE MARRIAGE OF THE KING'S SON. (Mat 22:1-14) The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son--"In this parable," as TRENCH admirably remarks, "we see how the Lord is revealing Himself in ever clearer light as the central Person of the kingdom, giving here a far plainer hint than in the last parable of the nobility of His descent. There He was indeed the Son, the only and beloved one (Mar 12:6), of the Householder; but here His race is royal, and He appears as Himself at once the King and the King's Son (Psa 72:1). The last was a parable of the Old Testament history; and Christ is rather the last and greatest of the line of its prophets and teachers than the founder of a new kingdom. In that, God appears demanding something from men; in this, a parable of grace, God appears more as giving something to them. Thus, as often, the two complete each other: this taking up the matter where the other left it." The "marriage" of Jehovah to His people Israel was familiar to Jewish ears; and in Psa. 45:1-17 this marriage is seen consummated in the Person of Messiah "THE KING," Himself addressed as "GOD" and yet as anointed by "HIS GOD" with the oil of gladness above His fellows. These apparent contradictions (see on Luk 20:41-44) are resolved in this parable; and Jesus, in claiming to be this King's Son, serves Himself Heir to all that the prophets and sweet singers of Israel held forth as to Jehovah' s ineffably near and endearing union to His people. But observe carefully, that THE BRIDE does not come into view in this parable; its design being to teach certain truths under the figure of guests at a wedding feast, and the want of a wedding garment, which would not have harmonized with the introduction of the Bride.