Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 5:22 - 5:22
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mat_5:22. I, on the other hand, as the fulfiller of the law, already declare unrighteous anger to be as worthy of punishment as the act of murder was declared to be to those of old time; as still more worthy of punishment, however, the expression of such anger in injurious language, to which I, in the worst cases, even assign the punishment of hell. Observe (1) that Jesus does not at all enter into the question of murder itself, by which He makes it to be felt that it was something unheard of amongst those who believed on Him; (2) that for the same reason He does not mention any outbursts of anger in acts, such as ill-usage and the like; (3) that the abusive words, which are quoted by way of example, represent different degrees of outbursts of anger in speech, in accordance with the malignity of the disposition from which they proceed; and (4) that κρίσις , συνέδριον , γέεννα , illustrate different degrees of greater culpability before God (for κρίσις and συνέδριον are also analogical representations of divine, although temporal, penal judgment), down to the everlasting damnation; so that (5) as the general moral idea in the concrete discourse, whose plastic ascent in details is not to be pressed, the highest and holiest severity appears in the point of unlovingness (comp. 1Jn_3:15), and therein lies the ideal consummation of the law, οὐ φονεύσεις , not only in itself, but also in the antithesis of its traditional threat, ὃς δʼ ἂν φονεύσῃ , etc.
ὁ ὀργιζόμ .] has the emphasis of opposition to φονεύειν .
τῷ ἀδελφῷ ] does not go beyond the popular conception (a member of the nation, comp. Mat_5:47), out of which grew at a later time the representation and designation of Christian brotherly fellowship. The conception of the πλησίον from the point of view of humanity, Luk_10:29, is not contained in the ἀδελφός .
If εἰκῆ were genuine (but see critical remarks), then this idea would be contained in it, that Jesus does not mean simply being angry, but the being angry without a reason (Rom_13:4; Col_2:18), the anger of mere passionateness, without moral justification; εἰκῆ would stand as equivalent to ἀλογίστως (Polyb. i. 52. 2), παραλόγως (Polyb. i. 74. 14), ἀσκόπως (Polyb. iv. 14. 6). There is, moreover, a holy anger, which has its basis in what is right, and in its relation to the unholy world. Comp. on Eph_4:26. But never ought it to be unloving and hostile anger; and that such an anger is here meant is shown by the context, therefore εἰκῆ would not even be an appropriate closer definition.
ῥακά ] as Jerome and Hesychius already correctly interpret it, is the Chaldee øÅé÷Èà , vacuus, that is, empty head!
At that time a very common word of opprobrium. Buxtorf, Lex. talm. p. 2254; Lightfoot, Hor. p. 264; Wetstein in loc. That it is, so far as regards its idea, of the same nature with μωρέ that follows, speaks rather in favour of than against this common interpretation. Comp. κενός (Jam_2:20; Soph. Ant. 709), κενόφρων (Aesch. Prom. 761), κενόκρανος (Sibyll. iii. p. 418). Ewald thinks of the Aramaic ø÷òà , and interprets it: rascal.
μωρέ ] ðÈáÈì , fool, but in the moral sense (Hupfeld on Psa_14:1), as the virtuous man was rightly regarded as wise (comp. Xen. Mem. iii. 9. 4) and the wicked as foolish; therefore equivalent to “wicked,” and thus a stronger word of opprobrium, one affecting the moral character, than ῥακά ; see Wetstein.
εἰς τὴν γέενναν ] literally: into hell,[407] which is to be regarded as a pregnant expression from the idea of being cast down into hell. Winer, p. 200 [E. T. 267]; Buttmann, p. 148 [E. T. 170], Plastic representation with the increasing liveliness of the discourse, instead of the more abstract dative. No example elsewhere. γέεννα , properly âÌÅéà äÄðÌí , or
[407] The attributive genitive τοῦ πυρός (Mat_13:42; 2Th_1:8), as an expression of the specific nature, is to be explained from the well-known popular representation of hell (comp. Mat_3:11, Mat_18:8 f., Mat_25:41, and elsewhere). The explanation of Kuinoel, who follows the older interpreters, “is dignus est, qui in valle Hinnomi vivus comburatur,” is, irrespective of the illegality of burning alive, opposed to the constant usage of γέεννα as signifying hell, which usage also forbids us to think of the burning of the body in the valley of Hinnom (Michaelis) after execution, or at least of a casting forth of the latter into this detested place (B. Crusius, comp. Tholuck).