Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 12
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
Mat_12:4. ἔφαγεν ] Tisch. 8 : ἔφαγον , only according to B à . Altered to suit what follows.
οὕς ] Lach. Tisch.: ὅ , after B D 13, 124, Cant. 12 :Harl.* Correctly; the Received text is a correction in accordance with Mark and Luke.
Mat_12:6.
μείζων ] B D E G K M S U V Γ Π , Curss. and Fathers: μεῖζον . So Fritzsche, Scholz, Lachm. Tisch. Authority and exegesis favour the neuter, by way of explaining which the masculine would readily suggest itself.
Mat_12:8. Before τοῦ σαββάτου Elz. inserts καί , which has been deleted in accordance with decisive testimony. From Mark and Luke.
Mat_12:10. ἦν τήν ] is certainly wanting in B C à , while Vulg. and Codd. of the It. Copt. leave it doubtful whether they did not read simple ἦν . Ἦν τήν is deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Correctly. The brevity of Matthew’s statement was supplemented from Mar_3:1, and hence ἐκεῖ came to be inserted between ἦν and τήν (by others at a different place).
Mat_12:11. Lachm., following inadequate testimony, reads ἐγείρει instead of ἐγερεῖ . An error on the part of the transcriber.
Mat_12:14. The following arrangement, ἐξελθόντες δὲ οἱ Φαρ . συμβ . ἔλ . κατ . αὐτοῦ (B C D A à , Curss. Syr. Copt. It. Vulg. Eus. Chrys. Fritzsche, Gersd. Lachm. Tisch.), is to be preferred to that of the Received text ( οἱ δ . Φ . ς . ἔλ . κ . ἀ . ἐξ .), as being simpler and more in keeping with Matthew’s style.
Mat_12:15. ὄχλοι ] omitted in B à , Vulg. It. Eus., deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Homoeoteleuton.
Mat_12:17. With Lachm. and Tisch. we ought to adopt ἵνα instead of ὅπως , in accordance with B C D à , 1, 33, Or. Eus.; ὅπως was introduced for sake of variety.
Mat_12:18. εἰς ὅν ] Lachm. and Tisch. 8 (see note of the latter): ὅν , after B à * and several Curss. On inadequate testimony, for εἰς would be readily dropped out, from a mechanical effort to conform the construction to ὃν ᾑρέτισα ; ἐν ᾧ in D is a gloss.
Mat_12:21. τῷ ὀνόματι ] Elz. Fritzsche: ἐν τῷ ὀνόμ ., against decisive testimony. ἐν is an interpolation, as is also ἐπί in Eus. and several Curss.
Mat_12:22. τὸν τυφλὸν καὶ κωφόν ] Lachm. and Tisch. have merely τὸν κωφόν (B D à , Copt. Syrcur Cant. Corb. 1, Germ. 1). But λαλεῖν coming first in what follows gave rise partly to the omission of τυφλόν , partly to the inverted arrangement: κωφὸν καὶ τυφλόν (L X Δ , Curss. Syr. Arm.).
Mat_12:28. The order ἐν πνεύμ . θεοῦ ἐγώ , as against that of the Received text, ἐγὼ ἐν πνεύμ ., is supported by decisive testimony (less adequately the arrangement of Lachm. and Tisch.: κριταὶ ἔσονται ὑμῶν , in Mat_12:27).
Mat_12:29. In accordance with B C* X, Curss., Lachm. and Tisch. have ἁρπάσαι instead of διαρπάσει . The reading of the Received text is adopted from Mark. In what follows Lachm. has ἁρπάσει instead of διαρπάσει ; so also Tisch. 7; but according to testimony that is far too inadequate. Tisch. 8, following D G K Π à , Curss., reads διαρπάσῃ . But still the evidence in favour of διαρπάσει remains so strong, that there is but the more reason to look upon διαρπάσῃ as a supposed grammatical correction.
Mat_12:31. Tisch. 8, following Lachm., has indeed also deleted the second τοῖς ἀνθρώποις (after B à , Curss. Verss. and a few Fathers); it is, however, to be preserved as a solemn yet superfluous repetition.
Mat_12:35. Elz., against decisive testimony, inserts τῆς καρδίας after the first θησαυροῦ . A gloss. But with Tisch. 8, and on the strength of sufficient testimony, τά before ἀγαθά is to be maintained, in opposition to Griesb. Lachm. Tisch. 7. The article came to be omitted from a desire to conform to the second clause.
Mat_12:36. The reading λαλήσουσιν , adopted by Tisch. (B C à ), is to be traced to the futures which follow.
Mat_12:38. With Lachm. and Tisch. αὐτῷ should be inserted after ἀπεκρίθ ., in accordance with B C D L M à , Curss. and most Verss. and Chrys. Perhaps it was omitted from being considered unnecessary.
καὶ Φαρις .] is deleted by Lachm. on too inadequate testimony.
Mat_12:44. The arrangement: εἰς τ . οἶκ . μ . ἐπιστρ . (Lachm. Tisch.), as opposed to that of the Received text ( ἐπιστρ . ἐ . τ . ὀ . μ .), finds testimony sufficiently strong in B D Z à . Comp. Luke.
ἐλθόν ] D F G X Γ , Curss.: ἐλθών . So Fritzsche and Tisch. Correctly; the reading of the Received text is here and in Luk_11:25 a grammatical correction.
Mat_12:46. δέ ] omitted in B à , Curss. Vulg. It. Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8. But how easily may it have been omitted at the beginning of the new section (one reading even begins with αὐτοῦ )!
Mat_12:48. εἰπόντι ] Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch.: λέγοντι , after B D Z Π à , Curss. Correctly. The former has crept in mechanically, in conformity with Mat_12:47.