Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Matthew 8:19 - 8:19
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Mat_8:19. Εἷς γραμματεύς ] Never, not even in passages like Joh_6:9, Mat_21:19, Rev_8:13 (in answer to Winer, p. 111 [E. T. p. 145]; Buttmann, neut. Gr. p. 74 [E. T. 85]), is εἷς equivalent to the indefinite pronoun τίς , to which the well-known use of εἷς τίς is certainly opposed, but is always found, and that in the N. T. as well, with a certain numerical reference, such as is also to be seen (Blomfield, Gloss. in Persas, 333) in the passages referred to in classical writers (Jacobs, ad Achill. Tat. p. 398, ad Anthol. XII. p. 455). It is used (Mat_6:24) in the present instance in view of the ἕτερος about to be mentioned in Mat_8:21; for this γραμματείς , Mat_8:19, and the subsequent ἕτερος , were both of them disciples of Jesus. It is therefore to be interpreted thus: one, a scribe. It follows from Mat_8:21 that this γραμματεύς already belonged to the number of Jesus’ disciples in the more general sense of the word, but he now intimated his willingness to become one of His permanent and intimate followers.
The difference in time and place which, as regards the two incidents, Mat_8:19-22 (in Mark they are omitted), is found in Luk_9:57-60, is not to be removed. The question as to which evangelist the preference is to be assigned in point of the historical faithfulness of his narrative, falls to be decided in favour of Matthew (Rettig in d. Stud. u. Krit. 1838, p. 240 ff.), as compared with the loose and indefinite account in Luke (Schleiermacher, Schneckenburger, Gfrörer, Olshausen, Arnoldi, Holtzmann), who, moreover, adds Luk_9:61 f.) still a third, and doubtless no less historical an incident with which he had been made acquainted. Schleiermacher inaptly refers ὅπου ἂν ἀπέρχῃ to the various roads by which Jesus might travel to Jerusalem (Schleiermacher, Schrift. d. Luk. p. 169). It is clear, however, from the fact of this narrative occurring so far on in Luke, that he cannot have supposed that the γραμματεύς was Judas Iscariot, and that the ἕτερος was Thomas (Lange). As far was he from supposing that the one was Bartholomew and the other Philip (Hilgenfeld), according to the discovery already made by Clement of Alexandria.
Observe, further, how quite differently Jesus answers the scribe with his supposed claims as compared with the simple-minded ἕτερος (Ewald), and how in addressing the latter He merely says, ἀκολούθει μοι .