Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 6
Verse Commentaries:
Chapter Level Commentary:
δικαιοσύνην ] Elz. Matth. Scholz have ἐλεημοσύνην , against B D à , 1, 209, 217, It. (Brix. excepted) Vulg. Or. and some other Fathers. A false gloss.
Mat_6:4. αὐτός ] not found in B K L U Z à , Curss. Vulg. It. Copt. Syrcur and several Fathers. It seemed superfluous, and was accordingly omitted, and that all the more readily that it is likewise wanting in Mat_6:6; Mat_6:18. Cancelled by Fritzsche, Lachm. and Tisch. 8.
σοι ] Elz. Griesb. Matth. Scholz add ἐν τῷ φανερῷ , which is not found in B D Z à , Curss. Codd. gr. in Aug. Syrcur Copt. Vulg. and several Fathers. Also in the case of Mat_6:6, the testimonies in favour of omitting are essentially the same; while, as regards Mat_6:18, the testimony for excluding is far more decided. It should be retained in Mat_6:4; Mat_6:6, but in Mat_6:18 it is an interpolation, and ought to be deleted.[418]
Mat_6:5. προσεύχῃ , οὐκ ἔσῃ ] Lachm. and Tisch.: προσεύχησθε , οὐκ ἔσεσθε , after B Z, 1, 22, 116, Copt. Sahid. Aeth. Goth. It. Vulg. Or. Chrys. Aug. Correctly; the singular was occasioned by the use of that number in what precedes and follows. à has προσεύχῃ οὐκ ἔσεσθε ; see, however, Tisch. on Cod. à .
Mat_6:12. ἀφίεμεν ] D E L Δ Π , 157, 253, Ev. 26 : ἀφίομεν ; B Z à *, 1, 124 (on the margin), Harl. For. Or. Nyss. Bass.: ἀφήκαμεν . So Lachm. and Tisch. The latter is to be adopted. The reading of the Received text and ἀφίομεν are from Luk_11:4, into which, again, as quoted in Origen (once), ἀφήκαμεν has found its way from our present passage.
Mat_6:13. πονηροῦ ] Elz. Matth. add the doxology: ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας , Ἀμήν . Against a preponderance of testimony, and contrary to the whole connection with Mat_6:14 f. A very old (Syr.) addition from the liturgy; one, however, that has assumed a variety of forms.
Mat_6:15. τὰ παραπτ . αὐτῶν ] is correctly deleted by Tisch. It is wanting in D à , Curss. Vulg. It. Syr. Aug., and how easy was it mechanically to insert it as a supplement from Mat_6:14!
Mat_6:18. σοι ] Elz. Fritzsche add ἐν τῷ φανερῷ ; see on Mat_6:4.
Instead of κρυπτῷ , Lachm. and Tisch., in both instances, have κρυφαίῳ , after B D à , 1, 22; correctly, seeing that κρυπτῷ is the common reading, and derived from Mat_6:4; Mat_6:6.
Mat_6:21. Instead of ὑμῶν , B à , 1, 128, and important Verss. and Fathers, have σου both times, which Griesb. has recommended, and Fritzsche, Lachm. Tisch. have adopted. Correctly; ὑμῶν is taken from Luk_12:34.
Mat_6:22. After the first ὀφθαλμός Lachm. has σου , only after B, Vulg. Aeth. Codd. It. Or. Hil. Taken from the one which fallows. Then in what comes next Lachm. places the ᾖ immediately after οὖν , only according to B. In à and several Verss. and Fathers οὖν is omitted; deleted by Tisch. 8, against decisive testimony. Coming as it does after ἐάν , it might easily be left out through an oversight on the part of the transcriber.
Mat_6:25. καὶ τί ] Fritzsche, Lachm. ἢ τί , according to B, Curss. and a few Verss. and Fathers. Too inadequate testimony. à Curss. Verss. and Fathers, who are followed by Tisch. 8, omit καὶ τί πίητε altogether. In conformity with Luk_12:22.
Mat_6:28. Instead of αὐξάνει , κοπιᾷ , and νήθει , Lachm. and Tisch. have the plurals, after B à , Curss. Ath. Chrys. Correctly. See Luk_12:27. Likewise in Mat_6:32, where Lachm. and Tisch. have ἘΠΙΖΗΤΟῦΣΙΝ , the sing, is used to conform with Luk_12:30.
Mat_6:33. Τ . ΒΑς . Τ . ΘΕΟῦ Κ . Τ . ΔΙΚΑΙΟς . ΑὐΤΟῦ ] Lachm.: Τ . ΔΙΚΑΙΟς . ΚΑῚ ΤῊΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΊΑΝ ΑὐΤΟῦ , only after B. In à , Τ . ΘΕΟῦ is wanting; and its omission, in which Tisch. 8 concurs, is favoured by the testimony of the reading in B. Several Verss. and Fathers also leave out Τ . ΘΕΟῦ , which, as being a supplement, ought to be deleted. The testimony is decisive, however, in favour of putting Τ . ΒΑς . first.
Mat_6:34. ΤᾺ ἙΑΥΤῆς ] Lachm. and Tisch. have merely ἙΑΥΤῆς , according to important. testimony. Correctly; from the genitive not being understood, it was attempted to explain it by means of ΤΆ , and in other ways ( ΠΕΡῚ ἙΑΥΤῆς , ἙΑΥΤΉΝ , ἙΑΥΤῇ ).
[418] Lachm. and Tisch. have deleted ἐν τῷ φανερῷ in all the three passages; in ver. 18 it is also erased by Griesb. Matth. and Scholz.