Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 25
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
Mat_25:2. Lachm. and Tisch. 8 : ΠΈΝΤΕ ΔῈ ἘΞ ΑὐΤῶΝ ἮΣΑΝ ΜΩΡΑῚ ΚΑῚ ΠΈΝΤΕ ΦΡΌΝΙΜΟΙ , following B C D L Z à , min. and vss. (also Vulg. It.). Considering what a preponderance of evidence is here, and seeing how ready the transcribers would be to place the wise first in order, the reading of the Received text must be regarded as a subsequent transposition.
Mat_25:3. For ΑἽΤΙΝΕς there are found the readings (glosses): ΑἹ ΔΈ in Z, Vulg. codd. of the It. Lachm., and ΑἹ ΓΆΡ in B C L à , Tisch. 8; likewise ΑἹ ΟὖΝ in D.
Mat_25:4. In witnesses of importance ΑὐΤῶΝ is wanting after ἈΓΓΕΊΟΙς , so that, with Lachm. and Tisch. 8, it is to be deleted as a common interpolation.
Mat_25:6. ἜΡΧΕΤΑΙ ] is wanting in such important witnesses (B C* D L Z à , 102, Copt. Sahid. Arpo. Cant. Method. Ephr. Cyr.), and has so much the look of a supplement, that, with Lachm. and Tisch. 8, it should be erased. But the ΑὐΤΟῦ after ἈΠΆΝΤ ., which Tisch. 8 deletes, is wanting only in B à , 102, Meth. Cyr.
Mat_25:7. For ΑὐΤῶΝ it is better, with Lachm. and Tisch., to read ἙΑΥΤῶΝ , following A B L Z à . The reflective force of the pronoun had never been noticed, especially with Mat_25:4 preceding it, in which verse ἙΑΥΤῶΝ instead of ΑὐΤῶΝ after ΛΑΜΠ . (so Tisch. 8) is supported only by the evidence of B à .
Mat_25:9. For ΟὐΚ , as in the Received text, there is a preponderance of evidence in favour of reading Οὐ ΜΉ , which Griesb. has recommended, and which Lachm., Tisch. 7, and also Scholz have adopted. The ΜΉ , which Fritzsche and Tisch. 8 have discarded, was omitted from its force not being understood.
ΔΈ after ΠΟΡΕΎΕΣΘΕ (in Elz., Tisch. 7) would be just as apt to be inserted as a connective particle, as it would be ready to be omitted if ΠΟΡΕΎΕΣΘΕ , Κ . Τ . Λ . was taken as the apodosis. Accordingly, the matter must be decided by a preponderance of evidence, and that is in favour of deleting the ΔΈ .
Mat_25:11. ΚΑῚ ΑἹ ] Lachm. has simply ΑἹ , but against decisive evidence; and then think how readily ΚΑΊ might be dropped out between TAI and AI!
Mat_25:13. After ὭΡΑΝ Elz. inserts ἘΝ ᾟ Ὁ ΥἹῸς ΤΟῦ ἈΝΘΡΏΠΟΥ ἜΡΧΕΤΑΙ , words which, in accordance with a decided preponderance of evidence, are to be regarded as a gloss (Mat_24:44).
Mat_25:16. ἘΠΟΊΗΣΕΝ ] A** B C D L à ** min.: ἘΚΈΡΔΗΣΕΝ . Recommended by Griesb. and Schulz, adopted by Lachm. Gloss derived from what follows.
The omission of the second ΤΆΛΑΝΤΑ by Lachm. is without adequate authority, nor had the transcribers any motive for inserting it; comp. Mat_25:17.
Mat_25:17. ΚΑῚ ΑὐΤΌς ] is wanting in important witnesses, and is erased by Lachm. and Tisch. 8; but, owing to the circumstance of ὩΣΑΎΤΩς ΚΑΊ having preceded, it may very readily have been left out as superfluous and clumsy.
Mat_25:18. Lachm. inserts ΤΆΛΑΝΤΟΝ after ἛΝ , only on the authority of A, It.; but ἜΚΡΥΨΕΝ (Lachm. Tisch.) for ἈΠΈΚΡΥΨΕΝ is supported by such a preponderance of evidence that it is unnecessary to regard it as taken from Mat_25:25.
Mat_25:19. It is better, with Lachm. and Tisch., to adopt in both cases the order ΠΟΛῪΝ ΧΡΌΝΟΝ and ΛΌΓΟΝ ΜΕΤʼ ΑὐΤῶΝ , in accordance with preponderating evidence.
Mat_25:20. ἘΠʼ ΑὐΤΟῖς ] is omitted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8, both here and in Mat_25:22, following B D L à , min. and vss., while E G, min. read ἘΝ ΑὐΤΟῖς ; but D, Vulg. It. Or. insert ἘΠΕΚΈΡΔΗΣΑ before the ἘΠʼ ΑὐΤΟῖς . Later variants are interpretations of the superfluous (and therefore sometimes omitted) ἘΠʼ ΑὐΤΟῖς
Mat_25:21. ΔΈ , which Elz. inserts after ἜΦΗ , has been deleted, in accordance with preponderating evidence, as being an interpolation of the connective particle (so also Griesb., Scholz, Fritzsche, Lachm., Tisch.).
Mat_25:22. ΛΑΒΏΝ ] is wanting in A B C L Δ à , min. Syr.utr.; a few min. have ΕἸΛΗΦΏς . Deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. Correctly; a supplement.
Mat_25:27. For ΤῸ ἈΡΓΎΡ . ΜΟΥ Tisch. 8 reads ΤᾺ ἈΡΓΎΡΙΆ ΜΟΥ , following B à *, Syr.p. Correctly; the plural would be apt to be replaced by the singular (comp. Luke), because it is a question of one talent, and because of the ΤῸ ἘΜΌΝ following.
Mat_25:29. ἈΠῸ ΔῈ ΤΟῦ ] B D L à , min.: ΤΟῦ ΔΈ . Approved by Griesb., adopted by Fritzsche, Lachm., Tisch.; the ordinary reading is by way of helping the construction.
Mat_25:30. ἘΚΒΆΛΕΤΕ for ἘΚΒΆΛΛΕΤΕ (in Elz.) is confirmed by decisive evidence.
Mat_25:31. Elz. Scholz insert ἍΓΙΟΙ before ἌΓΓΕΛΟΙ , in opposition to B D L Π * à , min. and many vss. and Fathers. An adjective borrowed from the ordinary ecclesiastical phraseology, and which, though it might readily enough be inserted, would scarcely be likely to be omitted. Comp. Zec_14:5.
Mat_25:40. ΤῶΝ ἈΔΕΛΦῶΝ ΜΟΥ ] wanting only in B* and Fathers. Bracketed by Lachm. But comp. Mat_25:45.
Mat_25:41. ΟἹ ΚΑΤΗΡΑΜ .] Tisch. 8 has deleted the article, in accordance with B L à , and that correctly; it is taken from Mat_25:34.
[19] The Codex Alex. (A) joins the list of critical authorities for the first time at ch. 25. It begins at ver. 6 with the word ἑξέρχεσθε .