Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 10:4 - 10:4
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mat_10:4. Ὁ καναναῖος ] see the critical remarks. Luke calls him ζηλώτης , the (quondam) zealot. Luk_6:15; Act_1:13; Chald. ÷ÇðÀàÇðÄé ; Hebr. ÷Çðà ; Exo_20:5; Exo_34:14; Deu_4:24. Zealots were a class of men who, like Phinehas (Num_25:9), were fanatical defenders of the theocracy; and who, while taking vengeance on those who wronged it, were themselves frequently guilty of great excesses; Ewald, Gesch. Chr. p. 67 f. But the ὁ Καναναῖος (or Κανανίτης , according to the Received text) is not to be explained in this way, inasmuch as this form of the epithet is derived from the name of some place or other: the Canaanite, or Cananaean; comp. Κανανίτης in Strabo, xiv. 5, p. 674 ( ἀπὸ κώμης τινος ). It cannot be derived from the town of Cana in Galilee (Luther, Calovius); in that case it would require to have taken the form Καναῖος , just as the inhabitants of Κάναι in Aeolis (Strabo, xiii. 1, p. 581) were called Καναῖοι (Parmenides in Athen. 3, p. 76 A). This enigmatical name is to be explained from the fact that, in accordance with his previous character, Simon bore the surname ÷ÇðÀàÈðÄé , ζηλώτης , a name which was correctly interpreted by Luke; but, according to another tradition, was erroneously derived from the name of a place, and accordingly came to be rendered ὁ Καναναῖος .
Ἰσκαριώτης ] àÄéùÑ ÷ÀøÄéÌåÉú , a native of Karioth, in the tribe of Judah. Jos_15:25; Joseph. Antt. vii. 6. 1 : Ἴστοβος ( àÄéùÑ èåÉá ). There is no evidence that he was the only one that did not belong to Galilee (which has induced Ewald to think that the place in question is the town of ÷ÇøÀúÌÈä (Jos_21:34) in the tribe of Zebulon. The proposal of Lightfoot, to derive either from àñ÷åøèéà , leather apron, or from àñëøà , strangulation, is indeed recommended by de Wette; but like the interpretation àéù ù÷øéí , man of lies (Paulus, Hengstenberg), it is not suited to the Greek form of the word; nor are de Wette’s or Hengstenberg’s objections to the ordinary explanation of the name to be regarded as unanswerable.
ὁ καὶ παραδοὺς αὐτόν ] who also delivered him over (not betrayed, in which case we should have had προδούς ). A tragic reminiscence, and ever present to the mind! Καί has the force of qui idem; Klotz, ad Devar. p. 636.