Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 15:39

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 15:39” utilice nuestra app.

And he sent away the multitude, and took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala.

Mat 15:32; Mat 15:39

And Jesus said unto them, How many loaves have ye?

The miracle of the loaves and fishes; or, continuity and economy

Want in men moves Christs whole nature. His help leaves no injury. Here generosity and frugality meet. Observe in this miracle two principles.

I. Continuity. That which is comes out of that which has been.

II. Frugality. There is no waste.

1. These two principles are exhibited in nature. Mere spontaneity nature disowns. The field says, Give me seed, and I will give you back harvest. Nature disowns waste, all things are utilized.

2. These principles are found in history. God does not fling loaves from the sky; they are growths. Not one life is lost.

3. These principles are seen in the moral world. There is no dropping of truths than of great men from heaven. Hence out of the few loaves grow the feast. He who holds in sincerity a little truth has the promise of all.

In applying the truth of the text we learn-

1. To hope. The less will become more.

2. The effect of this law upon character. Your future must come out of your past.

3. A lesson in helping others. We help by bringing the better out of some good in men. How many loaves have you? One has a feeble resolution; that, with the blessing of God, may be sufficient. (P. Brooks, D. D.)

The miraculous feeding of four thousand

I. The features by which this miracle was distinguished.

1. It was a miracle of mercy.

2. Its publicity is another feature worthy of notice.

3. The scale on which it was wrought was most extensive.

4. It was the result of no previous arrangement, but was done in order to meet a pressing emergency.

5. The consciousness He evinced that His resources were adequate to the occasion.

II. The lessons which this miracle enforces.

1. Reliance.

2. Gratitude.

3. Charity.

4. Economy. (Expository Outlines.)

The necessities of man and the all-sufficiency of Christ

I. That circumstances are continually reminding man of his necessitous condition. Man can go but a short way into lifes wilderness without feeling that his is a craving nature. Life-long dependence should teach life-long humility.

II. That mans necessitous condition is fully met by Christs sufficiency. Christ knows the necessities of our human constitution. In Christ dwells all fulness. Man needs pardon, purity, freedom, peace.

III. That if man will not avail himself of Christs sufficiency he will be chargeable with the ruin of his own soul. These men did not refuse to eat because they could not understand the mystery by which the bread was multiplied, Refuse to eat and they die. (J. Parker.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 39. He sent away the multitude] But not before he had instructed their souls, and fed and healed their bodies.

The coasts of Magdala.] In the parallel place, Mr 8:10, this place is called Dalmanutha. Either Magdala was formed by a transposition of letters from Dalman, to which the Syriac termination atha had been added, or the one of these names refers to the country, and the other to a town in that neighbourhood. Jesus went into the country, and proceeded till he came to the chief town or village in that district. Whitby says, “Magdala was a city and territory beyond Jordan, on the banks of Gadara. It readied to the bridge above Jordan, which joined it to the other side of Galilee, and contained within its precincts Dalmanutha.” The MSS. and VV. read the name variously – Magada, Madega, Magdala; and the Syriac has Magdu. In Mark, Dalmanutha is read by many MSS. Melagada, Madegada, Magada, Magidan, and Magedam. Magdala, variously pronounced, seems to have been the place or country; Dalmanutha, the chief town or capital.

In this chapter a number of interesting and instructive particulars are contained.

1. We see the extreme superstition, envy, and incurable ill nature of the Jews. While totally lost to a proper sense of the spirituality of God’s law, they are ceremonious in the extreme. They will not eat without washing their hands, because this would be a transgression of one of the traditions of their elders; but they can harbour the worst temper and passions, and thus break the law of God! The word of man weighs more with them than the testimony of Jehovah; and yet they pretend the highest respect for their God and sacred things, and will let their parents perish for lack of the necessaries of life, that they may have goods to vow to the service of the sanctuary! Pride and envy blind the hearts of men, and cause them often to act not only the most wicked, but the most ridiculous, parts. He who takes the book of God for the rule of his faith and practice can never go astray: but to the mazes and perplexities produced by the traditions of elders, human creeds, and confessions of faith, there is no end. These evils existed in the Christian as well as in the Jewish Church; but the Reformation, thank God! has liberated us from this endless system of uncertainty and absurdity, and the Sun of righteousness shines now unclouded! The plantation, which God did not plant, in the course of his judgments, he has now swept nearly away from the face of the earth! Babylon is fallen!

2. We wonder at the dulness of the disciples, when we find that they did not fully understand our Lord’s meaning, in the very obvious parable about the blind leading the blind. But should we not be equally struck with their prying, inquisitive temper? They did not understand, but they could not rest till they did. They knew that their Lord could say nothing that had not the most important meaning in it: this meaning, in the preceding parable, they had not apprehended, and therefore they wished to have it farther explained by himself. Do we imitate their docility and eagerness to comprehend the truth of God? Christ presses every occurrence into a means of instruction. The dulness of the disciples in the present case, has been the means of affording us the fullest instruction on a point of the utmost importance-the state of a sinful heart, and how the thoughts and passions conceived in it defile and pollute it; and how necessary it is to have the fountain purified, that it may cease to send forth those streams of death.

3. The case of the Canaanitish woman is, in itself, a thousand sermons. Her faith – her prayers – her perseverance – her success – the honour she received from her Lord, &c., &c. How instructively – how powerfully do these speak and plead! What a profusion of light does this single case throw upon the manner in which Christ sometimes exercises the faith and patience of his followers! They that seek shall find, is the great lesson inculcated in this short history: God is ever the same. Reader, follow on after God-cry, pray, plead-all in Him is for thee! – Thou canst not perish, if thou continuest to believe and pray. The Lord will help THEE.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

And he sent away the multitude,…. Dismissing them, either with a prayer for them, or with a suitable word of exhortation, to be thankful for the mercies, both spiritual and temporal, they had received, and behave agreeably in their lives and conversations:

and took ship; being near the sea side, the sea of Galilee,

and came into the coasts of Magdala: not far from Tiberias; for often mention is made of Magdala in the Talmud s, along with Tiberias, and Chammath, another place in the same neighbourhood; and was famous for some Rabbins, as R. Joden and R. Isaac t, who are said to be , “of Magdala”. Thus the Syriac version reads it Magedo, and the Vulgate Latin Magedan; and Beza says, in one Greek exemplar it is read Magadan; and some have thought it to be the same with Megiddo, where Josiah was slain by Pharaohnecho, and which Herodotus calls Magdolos u. The Evangelist Mark says, that he came into the parts of Dalmanutha, which was a place within the coasts of Magdala. This was not the place, but another of the same name near Jerusalem, from whence Mary Magdalene may be thought to have her name. The Ethiopic version renders it, “they went into a ship, and departed into the mountains of Magdala”; that is, Christ, and his disciples.

s T. Hieros. Sheviith, fol. 38. 4. Maaserot, fol. 50. 3. Erubin, fol. 21. 4. t T. Hieros. Taanith, fol. 64. 3. T. Bab. Yoma, fol. 81. 2. & Nidda, fol. 33. 1. Bereshit Rabba, fol. 4. 4. u I. 2. c. 159.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

The borders of Magadan ( ). On the eastern side of the Sea of Galilee and so in Galilee again. Mark terms it Dalmanutha (Mr 8:10). Perhaps after all the same place as Magdala, as most manuscripts have it.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Section 39
JESUS REFUSES TO GIVE ADDITIONAL SIGNS TO DOUBTERS

(Parallel: Mar. 8:10-12)

TEXT: 15:39b16:4

39 And he sent away the multitudes, and entered into the boat, and came into the borders of Magadan. Mat. 16:1 And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and trying him, asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2 But he answered and said unto them. When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the heaven is red. 3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather today: for the heaven is red and lowering. Ye know how to discern the face of the heaven; but ye cannot discern the signs of the times. 4 An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of Jonah. And he left them and departed.

THOUGHT QUESTIONS

Why do you think the Sadducees would join with the Pharisees in bringing this attack against Jesus?

What was there in Jesus ministry or message that collided with Sadducean tenets?

What, in your opinion, is the meaning of the religious leaders demand: did they want Him to work more miracles than He had already done? Did they want more stupendous miracles? What do you think they expected?

Mark says Jesus refused to give any sign to these Jewish leaders, while Matthew affirms that He gave the sign of Jonah. Which is right? How do you know?

Why is the Pharisees and Sadducees question important to us today?

(1)

Why is it important precisely as asked by these theologians?

(2)

Why is it important as Jesus answered it, but not as intended by those leaders?

In your opinion, what forced these religious leaders to reject or ignore the evidence of all of Jesus other miracles as signs of His identity and consequent authority?

Today, would we be tempted by obstacles in our minds which are similar to those in the minds of the Jewish leaders who rejected Jesus? If so, how? If not, why not?

Does the expression the signs of the times have anything to do with current events in our day? Why do you answer as you do?

PARAPHRASE AND HARMONY

Immediately following the feeding of the four thousand, Jesus boarded a boat with His disciples and sailed for the region of Magadan-Dalmanutha. It was there that the Pharisees and Sadducees approached Jesus together and began an argument with Him. To put Him to the test, they told Him to demonstrate the authority of His ministry by showing them a special signal from God.
Sighing deeply within Himself, Jesus answered them, When night falls, you say, It will be fine weather, for the sky is red. In the morning you observe, It will be stormy today, because the sky is red and threatening. You know how to interpret the look of the sky, and yet you cannot interpret the most obvious signs given in our times?! Why are these people always asking for more evidence? It is only an evil, unfaithful people that demands more proof! Furthermore, I tell you no other demonstration of my authority shall be provided these people, except the sign of Jonah.
Jesus left them, boarded the boat again with His Apostles and sailed for the other side of the Sea of Galilee.

SUMMARY

Jesus dismissed the Decapolis crowds and sailed west to Magadan-Dalmanutha. There, representatives of both religious parties, Pharisees and Sadducees, demanded that He produce some special miracle to prove His right to speak authoritatively for God. But Jesus answer showed that, given their native ability to interpret weather signs, they ought to be able to interpret something as clear and evident as the miracles He had already done that identified Him as Gods spokesman. Only those unfaithful to God and fundamentally evil could dare ask for more evidence when enough had already been given to convince less biased people. Nor would further, special evidence be given, other than Jesus resurrection. Then Jesus turned His back on His attackers and strode back to the boat.

NOTES

Mat. 15:39 b And he entered into the boat, and came into the borders of Magadan. If He embarked on the Decapolis side of the Sea of Galilee (see notes on Mat. 15:29) where He fed the 4000, then the borders of Magadan (Dalmanutha, Mar. 8:9) would be sought on the western lakeshore, or possibly on the far south side. Presumably, He would normally have walked to any site on the eastern shore, unless impelling reasons forced Him to do otherwise, i.e. reasons such as those surrounding the abrupt conclusion of the feeding of the 5000. Unfortunately, positive identification of Magadan-Dalmanutha is lacking today.

A. THE CHRIST CHALLENGED (16:1)

Mat. 16:1 For fuller notes on the ideas contained in this section, see comments under Mat. 12:38-40. Pharisees and Sadducees came: what were these bitter, long-time rivals for the religio-political control of the Jewish mind, doing TOGETHER? This unholy coalition is as unlikely a union of forces as could be imagined. (See Special Study on these sects at the end of chapter 15 and on Mat. 16:6.) Here they temporarily join forces to battle a common enemy. In fact, Jesus supernatural message radically threatened the Pharisees preference for human traditions, (See on Mat. 15:1-20.) Again, His attacks on profitable Sadducean rackets in the Temple (cf. Joh. 2:13-18) and His teaching about resurrection, angels, spirits and other supernatural phenomena supported the Pharisean views against the Sadducees; consequently, these latter felt menaced. Politically, neither could ignore Him, because the common people heard Him gladly. (Joh. 4:40-42; Joh. 4:45; Mar. 1:36-38 = Luk. 4:42 f; Mat. 4:23 f; Luk. 4:15; Luk. 6:17; Mat. 7:28 to Mat. 8:1; Luk. 15:1; Mar. 10:1; Luk. 19:48 = Mar. 11:18; Mar. 12:37; Luk. 21:38) They must react with speed and efficiency or lose their grip on the nations, even if later they must battle it out with each other for supremacy in their incessant power struggle.

From the standpoint of their official responsibility to protect the flock of Israel from false prophets, it was their proper duty to demand precisely such evidence as they now require of Him. (Cf. Deu. 18:9-22; Joh. 2:18 f; Mat. 12:38 ff; Luk. 11:16; Luk. 11:29 f) Whereas Jesus definitely dissected their motives and unmasked their lack of moral qualifications to judge Him (Cf. Mat. 21:23-27 and parallels), He never objected to the request when made honestly with the intention to know.

Trying Him: i.e. not a court trial, because the impression left by Matthew and Mark is that Jesus and His group never got far from their boat beached on the shore after disembarking, before these theologians made their attack. Rather, this is but one more attempt to discredit Him publicly by challenging Him to provide credentials they hoped He did not possess. Such bloodless ordeals were the enemies only real strategy short of the violence that surfaced in Jesus final arrest and crucifixion. (Cf. Luk. 10:25; Luk. 11:53 f; Luk. 14:1; Mat. 19:3 = Mar. 10:2; Mat. 22:15-40 and parallels,) Their intention not to accept whatever evidence He might give is evident in their argumentative spirit in which they approached Him. (Mar. 8:11)

Asked him to show them a sign from heaven. From heaven probably means from God: what did they expect? Fire to fall, unconsumed burning bushes, great plagues, suns standing still, moons turning into blood, hail from a cloudless sky, voices from the Throne? But. that this demand, while formally correct, is really hypocritical, may be seen against the background of those who formulated it:

From the Sadducees point of view, no such supernatural interventions would really take place. However, if the ignorant populace and the hated Pharisees want to believe in such, then let the Nazarene discredit Himself in the eyes of His followers by failing to produce them!

From the Pharisees standpoint, He of all people, could not do them, because God would not sanction nor authenticate the message or ministry of one who regularly contradicted their cherished traditions and standard messianic notions, so certain were they of the divine approval of their views. (See notes on Mat. 15:2; cf. Joh. 9:16 f, Joh. 9:24-34)

Although they secretly desired His public exposure as a fraud, the form of their demand suggests that they expected to see some feat of such supernatural proportions that they could do nothing but believe.

B. CHRIST CRITICIZES THE CRITICS CONSPICUOUS CALLOUSNESS (16:2, 3)

2 But he answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather; for the heaven is red. 3 In the morning, It will be foul weather today: for the heaven is red and lowering. Ye know how to discern the face of the heaven; but ye cannot discern the signs of the times. The textual validity of these verses should be noticed: did Matthew write them, or did some scribe copy them into his text from elsewhere? Metzger (Textual Commentary, 41) informs us:

The external evidence for the absence of these words is impressive, including Aleph, B, f13, 157, al. syrc,s, copsa,bo, arm, Origen, and, according to Jerome, most manuscripts known to him (though he included the passage in the Vulgate). The question is how one ought to interpret this evidence. Most scholars regard the passage as a later insertion from a source similar to Luk. 12:54-56, or from the Lukan passage itself, with an adjustment concerning the particular signs of the weather. On the other hand, it can be argued . . . that the words were omitted by copyists in climates (e.g. Egypt) where red sky in the morning does not announce rain. In view of the balance of these considerations it was thought best to retain the passage enclosed within square brackets.

Beyond Metzgers conclusion, it is well to note that Lukes Gospel cannot be the source for Matthews Mat. 16:2-3, because of the following considerations. In the actual weather information (Mat. 16:2 b, Mat. 16:3 a; Luk. 12:54 b, 55) there are 39 Greek words that neither Evangelist shares in common with the other, out of a total of 52 words thought to be parallel. In the rebuke (Mat. 16:3 b; Luk. 12:56 b), despite some parallels of thought, only 2 Greek words are actually parallel in the two Gospels (d and ou!), out of a total for both Gospels of 31 words! One must pronounce the two passages in question as relatively similar in thought, but hardly verbatim repetitions to the extent that one should be thought the literary origin of the other. Because the omission of these verses is easier to account for than is their insertion, their probable authenticity is the better conclusion.

The particular weather signs mentioned by Jesus are characteristic of Palestine. The particular meteorological phenomena in other places might well be different. The Lord is arguing this point with dwellers in Palestine to whom these data would be common knowledge. He is not describing world-wide meteorological information. Had copyists realized this, they would have been less ready to suppress these verses, expunging them from the text.

Rather than meet their challenge with a blazing burst of supernatural power, Jesus refused to grant them additional signs. His reasons are multiple:

Because they already possessed abundant and conclusive evidence, but deliberately misread it. Jesus criticism, spoken as it was in deep sorrow of spirit (Mar. 8:12), has a light touch of satire in it which is neither coarse, cruel nor brutal: You are experts at seeing the cause-and-effect relationships in the natural world, yet you cannot discern the same kind of relationships in the very area where you claim to be authorities, i.e. in the world of the spirit, signs and God! You thereby disqualify yourselves to ask me for signs. Though naturally able to read so undependable an indicator as that of the weather, yet they were wilfully blind to the more numerous and far more certain signs Jesus had already furnished. This explains their obvious lack of moral qualification to demand more evidence when their own epoch was replete with signs as yet unread or deliberately misinterpreted by them.

They had demanded a sign from heaven, so He bases His rebuttal on their wording. His answer repeats heaven (ourands) three times as if to say: The very heaven whence you demand that my proof must come, condemns you for making such an ultimatum, for if you can predict weather on the basis of its observable phenomena, you could also decide about me on the basis of the observable phenomena that characterize this age: the mission and message of John the Baptist, as well as my own ministry and miraculous works predicted by John.

They already possessed the signs of the times, i.e. the evidence that they were then living in the days of the Messiah. These are the same evidences that continued to convince the Apostles and other open-minded people that Jesus was really Gods Anointed. (Cf. Mat. 16:16 f) The difference in ability to decide about the signs, therefore, lay not in the miracles themselves, but in the beholder. To what extent would each single observer determine to grasp, or release, his prejudices in favor of new truth? Consider:

What could be more indicative than the spiritual revival of the nation during the ministry of John the Baptist? (Cf. Mat. 3:5-6; Joh. 5:35; Mat. 11:7 ff)

What more spectacular indication of Gods merciful presence and approval of Jesus ministry could be desired than instant healing of so many and so varied human diseases, raising of the dead or multiplying food, as Jesus Himself did? (Cf. Mat. 12:28)

What could stir the Hebrew heart more deeply than the evidence that the ancient prophecies were now being fulfilled in often surprisingly new, but certain ways? (Cf. Joh. 1:45; Mat. 11:4-5)

What could be more surprising than the sheer multiplicity of His signs? (See on Joh. 7:31!)

The Lord rightly insists on the word signs, although He could have referred to His mighty works as wonders or miracles, because these deeds are not important merely for their mere display of supernatural might, but primarily because of that which they SIGNify; Gods gracious mercy at work among men to deliver them from their various bondages. This observation fully justifies Jesus damning the disbelievers, because of their hypocritical claim to be unable to detect the hand of God at work in Jesus miracles of mercy, redemption and healing. (Cf. Mat. 12:22-36) Their demand, as well as Jesus reference to previous miracles, shows that the previous miraculous deeds of the Christ had not convinced them, although they had been objectively both countless and conclusive. This inability to see God at work in anything He had done previously is but the old sin against the Holy Spirit all over again. (Matthew 12)

Another motive for His refusal to provide further signs is the evidential value of all preceding miracles. The endless multiplication of ones credentials will never convince the doubters, if the first copy be rejected. Why should Jesus appear to downgrade His own preceding demonstrations of divine power, by no longer mentioning their evidential force, while, at the same time, producing miraculous works that would, hopefully, win over the skeptics now? Had He done so, it might have been thought that there were something unworthy, unreal or unacceptable about all that He had done previously. No, there comes a time when the skeptic must face the adequacy of the evidence God gives, and either bow before it or else deny himself, saying he did not see what, in fact, he saw. The signs of the times were really sufficient, had they but eyes to see it. First, let them interpret the signs already given, before coming to demand others!

A third motive for refusing to grant them a sign was the fact that He had already conceded them a spectacular sign: the sign of Jonah. (Mat. 12:39 f) Here the Lord put these callous critics on trial, because, on their own premises, they must actually await the verification of the sign He gave. So, by giving them THIS sign which promised His own future resurrection, He literally beat them at their own game. Technically, therefore, He was under no obligation to furnish any immediately verifiable miracle. Nevertheless, by reminding them of even this sign, He tested their conscience: would they finally admit the weight of ANY God-given proof of His identity and consequent authority? Or would they continue to reject the obvious direction of all His evidence? It is now their CONSCIENCE, not their intellectual equipment, that is put on trial.

Another motive for not granting the demanded credentials, although not mentioned in our text, lies in the very nature of Christian discipleship.

Had Jesus shown them a heaven full of angels with a vision of the Son of man as glorious as the sun, a heavenly exhibition of such magnitude and glory as to exceed their wildest expectations, would this have produced in them the kind of faith He expects in His disciples? If the discipleship of Jesus is to be founded upon a faith that trusts Him on the basis of the evidence He grants, and does not whine to behold His glory as triumphant and realized (cf. 1Pe. 1:8; Joh. 20:29), is it psychologically probable that they would have been great believers, had He actually granted their wish?

And if faith is to be founded upon evidence that can be verified, but yet must have some unseen, yet hoped-for object, for it to be faith (Heb. 11:1; Rom. 8:24 f; 2Co. 4:18; 2Co. 5:7), how could a celestial demonstration foster real faith, if its effects would have been so imposing on the mind as to render unbelief so impossible that the denial of the evidence would be absolute folly? If Jesus had rendered faith really impossible, how could He hope to consider the witnesses of such a supernatural extravaganza as believers or disciples? They would not be believers, for they would know what now in this life they must yet believe, trusting the evidence to be true.

Further, if faith is to be a personal, free decision, then overwhelming revelations of such magnitude that would nullify the power or reality of personal decision, eliminates each mans free will. This would make God responsible for their salvation, since none could refuse to follow Jesus. It would also compromise Gods impartiality by representing Him as granting overpowering evidence to some and not to all, as saving some against their will and despite their lack of personal faith, and as damning the rest to whom He gave no such overwhelming evidence.

C. CONCESSION OF CONVINCING COUNTEREVIDENCE TO CULMINATE CHRISTS CLAIMS (16:4)

Mat. 16:4 An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign. His analysis was two-pronged:

They were evil, because they were deliberately evading the plain evidence of His previous miracles which revealed Gods will. They resisted the force of empirical proof upon their minds, although it was such evidence as would appeal to the unbiased researcher. What kind of mentality does it take to be far more impressed by thunderbolts from heaven, than by the restoring of usefulness to earths suffering humanity? or by fire from heaven, than by miraculous provision of food to feed thousands of hungry and tired men and women? Their hypocrisy revealed itself in their despising the credentials that God had ordered and in demanding other evidence more in line with their own dictates.

They were adulterous, or unfaithful, because they loved something other than God. They were not seeking Gods will and approval. (Joh. 5:38-47) Their disposition proved they did not adore God: they bowed before the false gods of their own mind, their own concepts of what Gods will and Gods Messiah must be. They flattered themselves to be wiser than John the Baptist or Jesus. (Cf. Mat. 11:7-19)

There shall no sign be given unto it. What they lacked was not a sign, but sight, i.e. the desire to see the obvious. But these men were blind to the moral glory of the Lord. In fact, in contrast to the capricious weather signs, His were not at all difficult to fathom, if the heart of the interpreter be good and honest. (Cf. Luk. 8:15) The very moral character of Jesus miracles, demonstrating the fact that a holy, loving God was at work in the person of His Son, tests the character and conscience of the observers. Since every type of truth has its own proper evidence by which it is demonstrated, Christ and His truth must be verified by the proper proof. Rather than be tested by mathematical or musical evidence, the truth of Jesus and Christianity has a double foundation: a historical, or empirical, foundation, and a moral base. But, if the critics themselves are not morally qualified or capable of judging the evidences, they will never see the meaning of His signs, regardless of how strong the historical evidences might be. Not even the best evidence can win over those who have stubbornly decided not to be convinced!

The simple fact that Jesus refused to work a miracle in the presence of His enemies is no sign of weakness or inability. Rather, it evidences His confidence in the adequacy and validity of the miracles already provided, as well as of the prophetic sign He did give. Any imposter can also refuse to furnish credentials to his critics, but only a real prophet can risk his reputation on the precise fulfilment of a future sign, since the imposter who attempts the same is only postponing his own day of reckoning and exposure as a fraud. Also, His refusal to be bullied or frightened into rash miracles is proof of His self-mastery.

No sign . . . but the sign of Jonah. Apparently, on this occasion the Lord did not explain the sense of the prediction, as He had done earlier. (Cf. Mat. 12:39 f) Rather, He simply refers back to it. Not only were the former miracles enough; what He had already told them was enough too! Why keep adding word upon word to convince the wilfully deaf? When He had given them the sign of Jonah in the past, He had furnished EVERYTHING they really demanded and needed. So, this time He just dropped the enigmatic sign in their midst to discuss among themselves. Its very obscurity and its importance as a sign such as they demanded would have spurred them on to debate its meaning until its future fulfilment made its meaning understandable. Then, when the Apostles began preaching the resurrection of Jesus as an indisputable fact, the realization that He had furnished them such unforeseeable information in advance would surprise them with factual evidence that He had known all along what no mere human could have known. This fact throws light on the depth of the leaders obstinance and guilt when, despite their inability to answer the Apostles affirmations and proof, they continued to reject Jesus as Israels Messiah.

This exception (no sign . . . but that of Jonah) is no new method being attempted after all other signs had seemingly failed to convince the skeptics, because . . .

Jesus had not failed. THEY had failed to admit what other impartial witnesses could see.

This exception, i.e. the proof inherent in Jesus resurrection, is the proper climax of all His other signs, since a permanently dead miracle-worker is less startling evidence of divine approbation than is a resurrected Lord.

This exception underlines once again Jesus patience. In infinite mercy, He continues to leave them evidence when, according to strict justice, they deserved no more.

When Jesus originally gave them this sign, it was sufficient then, and it is sufficient now, no matter how impatient they be to see its realization. Therefore, in the future moment when it would have been fulfilled, they would then be basing their conviction upon evidence already given prior to the resurrection, thus upon evidence they possessed even at this moment. So, let them believe that.

On the previous occasion they had not insisted that the sign come from heaven, as they now required. Nevertheless, by referring them back to the sign of the resurrection, He is giving them precisely what they asked for. Since the resurrection of Jesus would be brought about by the direct intervention of God, rather than by any human agency, this proof would be exactly what they now had requested: from heaven.

This man, whose voice condemned the traditionalism of the Pharisees and whose miracles damned the anti-supernaturalistic rationalism of the Sadducees, would be silenced in death by these very clergymen. But He would rise from the dead to wreck their rationalism by His resurrection and topple their traditionalism and theories by His truth. This was His sign, but they must wait for its fulfilment.

And he left them and departed. For the man or group that refuses to recognize Gods hand in all that Jesus was, did or taught, but obstinately insists that God furnish other reasons to believe, the only alternative remaining (short of immediate, judgmental punishment!) is to abandon such to their self-chosen fate. (Cf. Mat. 4:13; Mat. 10:14 f; Act. 13:44-51; Rom. 1:24; Rom. 1:26; Rom. 1:28; Jdg. 16:20; 1Sa. 15:35; 1Sa. 16:14; 1Sa. 28:6; Deu. 31:17; 2Ki. 21:14; 2Ch. 15:2; 2Ch. 24:20; Psa. 78:60; Isa. 2:6) So, by the very act of turning on His heel and striding back to the boat, Jesus continued to instruct His disciples: that is, there comes a time even for Jesus Christ to leave the critics and their haggling. Not even the Lord would force their will not to believe. He refused even to render it impossible NOT to believe His precious truth! He left them His truth to do with it as they pleased. Now it was up to them to submit to the guidance of the light available to them, or stumble in the dark.

EVIDENCE OF HUMAN FREEDOM

This section underscores once more the absolutely inviolate freedom of the human will. The Pharisees and Sadducees were really free to accept or reject Jesus revelations. God coerces no one to believe against his own will. However, He does furnish man with evidence that is the kind of proof that allows him to be voluntarily willing and obedient, the kind of evidence that is sufficiently convincing to encourage man to exercise his will and choose the right. But none is compelled against his will. The very certainty of Gods evidence, however, gives a moral quality to mans decision about it, And yet, if man cannot come to God by his own power or on his own terms, neither is he forced by irresistible evidence. Still, the light is sufficient. Therefore, men who love darkness rather than light because their lives are evil, deserve the condemnation that is theirs. (Joh. 3:16-21) Responsibility is always commensurate with the opportunities to know the truth and the favor enjoyed.

APPLICATIONS

SHALL WE PUT GOD TO FURTHER, USELESS TESTS, OR ACCEPT THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE EVIDENCES ALREADY FURNISHED? In what way(s) is it possible for us to demand signs from God in this same illegitimate way? The analogy between our situation and that of those who lived in Jesus time consists in recognizing that:

To us, as to them, have been already granted multitudinous motives for deciding whether or not God has really spoken through Jesus of Nazareth.

To us, as to them, falls the responsibility for weighing the evidences and letting ourselves be guided by their force and direction, be it material or moral.

Neither we nor they have the right to pretend OTHER proof DIFFERENT from what has already been granted. Rather than criticize the proof, we must examine the heart that will not admit such proof.

We too, like they, may have personal or group prejudices that block our ready acceptance of something God says that seems unreasonable, unreal or otherwise unacceptable. Nevertheless, we too humbly submit ourselves in willing obedience to what is revealed to us, without complaining that God should give something other than what He has.

THEREFORE:

When we sigh for miracles to give us more confidence, ignoring those ancient demonstrations that authenticate our faith once and for all, or when we are reasonably certain about a given duty and yet remain unmoved, hoping earnestly that God will provide some spiritual light or emotional stimulation that would blast us into action, then we are demanding that God prove to us what we should already admit. We are haggling over a sign when we already possess sufficient reasons and guidance for moving out in obedience.
We must not let ourselves be hindered by the fact that there is always a multiplicity of opinions and differences of interpretation regarding every Christian duty. Rather, we must ask ourselves why SOME cannot see the truth involved in such questions, and seek to know that truth for ourselves with a view to obeying it.
He who chooses to remain in doubt, after all that God has said and done to convince the common man, acts in bad faith and merits what he will get! When, in order to justify some decision, we say, If God would just give me some sign, then I would do what He says, we are putting Him to unnecessary tests, and fall under the just condemnation of Jesus! Rather than fall victim to the temptation to say, Oh, if God would just give me some further sign, assuring me of His will regarding some choice I must make, I would be happier, surer, more willing to do my duty, let us walk in the light we have, by faith, not by sight.
The original readers of Matthews Gospel had to decide whether to put God to further, useless tests, demanding more proof of Jesus Messiahship, or embrace the evidence already furnished. Can we, will we, decide about His revelations to us?

FACT QUESTIONS

1. Where had Jesus come from and what had He done just before boarding the boat to sail for Magadan?

Locate Magadan-Dalmanutha geographically on the basis of the information in the text.

Who are the Sadducees? What is their theological position in Judaism?

What does this collusion between the Pharisees and Sadducees against Jesus prove about them? What was their more usual attitude toward each other?

What was the semi-official position in Judaism of the Pharisees and Sadducees which would require of them that they ask precisely the question they now place before Jesus?

What is a sign? What part did signs play in the identification of Gods messengers? What are the signs of the times to which Jesus made reference? What are the times intended?

What was Jesus inner reaction to this request for signs? (Mar. 8:12)

Harmonize the differing answers reported by Matthew and Mark: No sign shall be given this generation, and No sign shall be given it, except the sign of Jonah. How can both answers be correct?

Explain Jesus point in mentioning the reading of weather signs. Are these weather signs mentioned universal, i.e. true all over the world?

10.

Explain the sign of Jonah. On what other occasion did Jesus explain its meaning?

11.

On what other occasions did people request signs of Jesus and what answers did He give them?

12.

Explain the peculiar immorality of asking for signs in the spirit in which this was done by the Jewish theologians.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(39) Into the coasts of Magdala.The better MSS. give the reading Magadan. The narrative implies that it was on the western shore of the lake, and it is probably to be identified with the modern village of El Mejdel, about three miles above Tabarieh (Tiberias). The name would seem to be an altered form of the Hebrew Migdol, a tower. On the assumption that Mary, called Magdalene, derived her name from a town of that name, we may think of our Lords visit as having been in some way connected with her presence. It is clear that the company of devout women who ministered to Him could hardly have followed Him in the more distant journey to the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, and it was natural, if they did not, that they should have returned for a time to their homes. St. Mark gives Dalmanutha as the place where our Lord disembarked. This has been identified with the modern Ain-el-Brideh, the cold fountain, a glen which opens upon the lake about a mile from Magdala.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

39. Magdala At present a poor village on the western side of the lake, a little north of Tiberias. Tracing his own course northward along the lake shore, Dr. Olin says: “We left Tiberias a few minutes before twelve o’clock. After one hour and twenty minutes a plain opened before us, extending several miles to the north and west. A miserable looking village of thirty or forty huts stands in the entrance; and we stopped to make some inquiries of the pale, sickly-looking inhabitants. This poor village, however, possesses a special historical interest. The people of whom we inquired its name called it Mejdal; and it is evident from the name, as well as from its position here, that it is the Magdala of the New Testament, and the Migdol of the Old.”

It was the place from which Mary Magdalene received her appellation.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘And he sent away the crowds, and entered into the boat, and came into the borders of Magadan.’

After the feeding the crowds are sent away and He enters a boat with His disciples and come to the borders of Magadan, which is in fact unknown. But that it is on the west shore is confirmed by the scene that follows. The fact that the crowd was ‘sent away’ indicates how reluctant they were to leave. But Jesus knew when He felt that they had had sufficient teaching for the time being.

The Pharisees and Sadducees Seek Proof of His Authority By Requiring a Sign From Heaven (Mat 16:1-4).

The weight of the opposition begins to grow. To the Pharisees and their Scribes are now added the Sadducees. This suggests that the Pharisees in Galilee, determined to bring Him to account, have swallowed their pride and taken common cause with the Sadducees at Herod’s court so as to call Him to account (compare Mar 8:15). Alternately it may signify that the whole of the religious element in the Sanhedrin have united to come to call on Him, either to prove His credentials by some God-given sign or cease preaching. As Paul tells us later from his own experience, the Jews were famed for ‘asking for signs’ (1Co 1:22). They remembered Moses. They remembered Elijah and Elisha. They remembered other occasions when God had done wonders. (They conveniently forgot that David and many of the prophets performed no signs). And while they acknowledged that Jesus had performed many miracles of healing and cast out evil spirits they dismissed such things, probably on the grounds that others did similar things.

But had they watched carefully they would have realised that He not only healed in abundance, and but also, unlike the others, never failed, and the reason that they did not do so was because their minds were set. Nor, because He had performed such miracles only among responsive and believing crowds, had they seen the miracles of the loaves. They only had that on hearsay. So they wanted Jesus to perform to order. (This was something that neither Moses, nor Elijah and Elisha, had ever done. They only performed to God’s orders, not men’s). It was this casual use of ‘signs’ as wonders to be performed to satisfy men who demanded them, something that had never been done before, that Jesus refused to have anything to do with. It was one thing for God to choose to reveal signs, it was quite another for men to demand them, and decide what suited them and what did not.

Analysis.

a And the Pharisees and Sadducees came (Mat 15:1 a).

b And trying him asked him to show them a sign from heaven (Mat 15:1 b).

c But he answered and said to them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the heaven is red’. And in the morning, ‘It will be foul weather today, for the heaven is red and lowering’ ” (Mat 15:2-3 a).

c You know how to discern the face of the heaven, but you cannot discern the signs of the times” (Mat 15:3 b).

b An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and there will no sign be given to it, but the sign of Jonah (Mat 15:4 a).

a And he left them, and departed (Mat 15:4 b).

Note that in ‘a’ the Pharisees and Sadducees come, and in the parallel Jesus leaves them and departs. In ‘b’ they ask for a sign from Heaven, and in the parallel he gives His view on those who ask for signs. In ‘c’ He illustrates the use of signs, and in the parallel points out that while they know how to use physical signs, they are unable to discern spiritual signs.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Mat 15:39. And came into the coasts of Magdala Bengelius properly separated this verse from the present chapter, and placed it at the beginning of the next; for it was on the coasts of Magdala that the Pharisees came to our Saviour. Compare Mar 8:10 where it is said, that Jesus came into the parts of Dalmanutha: but the Evangelists may be easily reconciled, by supposingthat Dalmanutha was a city and territory within the district of Magdala. Reland (Palaest. p. 884.) mentions a castle called Magdala, not far fromGamaba, which he thinks gave this region its name. See Hammond, Calmet, and Wetstein.

Inferences.The good Shepherd walks the wilderness to seek for immortal souls, Mat 15:21. Why are we weary in doing good, when our Saviour underwent this perpetual toil in healing bodies, and winning souls?

No nation carried such brands and marks of a curse as Canaan; yet, to the shame of these careless Jews, even a faithful Canaanite is a suppliant to Christ, while they neglect so great salvation. God is no accepter of persons; in every nation they who fear him will obtain his favour. This woman does not merely speak but cry; need and desire have raised her voice to an important clamour; the God of mercy is quick to hear; yet he loves a vehement solicitation; not to make himself inclinable to grant, but to make us capable of receiving blessings. They are words, and not prayers, which fall from careless lips.Neither does her vehemence so much argue her faith, as her address, O Lord, thou Son of David! What proselyte, what disciple could have said more? O blessed Syrophenician! who taught thee this abstract of divinity? What can we Christians confess more, than the Deity, the humanity, and the Messiahship of our glorious Saviour? His Deity as Lord, his humanity as a Son, his Messiahship as the Son of David. Whoever would come to Christ effectually, must come in the right style; apprehending a true God, a true man, a true God and man: any of these severed from the other, makes Christ an idol, and our prayers sin.

Being thus acknowledged, what suit is so fit for the Son of David as mercy? Have mercy on me! It was her daughter who was tormented; yet she says, Have mercy on me. Perhaps her possessed child was senseless of her misery: the parent feels both her sorrow and her own. As she was a good woman, so a good mother. No creature is so unnatural, as the reasonable who has put off affection.

My daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. It was this which sent her to Christ. I doubt whether she would have inquired after Christ, if it had not been for her daughter’s distress. Our affections are the files and whetstones which set an edge on our devotions; neither are they stronger motives to our suit than our own misery; that misery sues, and pleads, and importunes for as; that, which sets men at a distance, whose compassion is finite, attracts God to us. Who can plead discouragements in his access to the throne of grace, when our wants are our forcible advocates, and all our worthiness is in a capable misery?

Who would expect any other than a kind answer to so pious and faithful a petition? But behold, he answered her not a word! O holy Saviour, we have often found cause to wonder at thy words; never, till now, at thy silence: A miserable suppliant cries and sues, while the God of mercies answereth not! he who comforts the afflicted, adds affliction to the comfortless by a willing disrespect! Whether for the trial of her patience and perseverance; whether for the farther sharpening of her desires, and raising of her zealous importunity; whether for the giving more sweetness to the blessing by the difficulty of obtaining it; whether for the engaging of his disciples in so charitable a suit; whether for the wise avoidance of exception from the captious Jews; or, lastly, for the drawing of a holy and imitable pattern of faithful perseverance, and to teach us not to measure God’s hearing of our suit by his present answer; the wisdom of Jesus resolved upon silence.

It was no small fruit of this silence, that the disciples thereupon were moved to pray for a favourable dismission of this woman; they felt her misery, and became suitors for her, unrequested. It is our duty, in case of necessity, to intercede for each other; and by how much the more familiar we are with Christ, so much the more to improve our interest for the relief of the distressed. We are bidden to say, our father, not mine; he cannot pray, or be heard for himself, who is no man’s friend but his own. There is no prayer, without faith; no faith, without charity; no charity, without mutual intercession.

That which urged them to speak for her, is urged to Christ by them for her obtaining her request; she crieth after us, Mat 15:23. Prayer is as an arrow; if it be drawn up but a little, it goes not far; but if it be pulled to the head, it flies strongly, and pierces deep: heartless motions do but teach us to deny; fervent suits offer violence both to earth and heaven.

Christ would not answer the woman, But he answers his disciples, I am not sent, Mat 15:24. But who can tell whether his silence or his answer be more grievous? While he said nothing, his forbearance might have been supposed to proceed from the necessity of same greater thoughts. But now his answer professes that silence to have proceeded from a willing resolution not to answer. Yet is not this woman hereby to be discouraged. Neither the silence of Christ, nor his denial, can repulse her: as if she saw no arguments of discouragement, she comes, and worships, and cries, Lord, help me! no contempt can cast her off. Faith is an undaunted grace. It has a strong heart and a bold forehead; even denials cannot dismay it, much less delays. The woman’s first suit was for mercy; her present, for help. There is no use of mercy, if it produce not help. To be pitied without aid, is but an addition to misery. Who can blame us, if we care not for an unprofitable compassion? the very suit was gracious. She says not, Lord, if thou canst,help me, like the father of the lunatic; but professes the power, while she begs the act, and gives glory, where she would have relief.

Who can expect other than a fair and yielding answer to so humble; so faithful, so patient a suppliant? What can succeed well, if a prayer of faith, from the knees of humility, succeed not?And yet, behold! her discouragement is doubled with her suit. It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs. First, his silence seemed to imply a contempt; then, his answer defended his silence; now, his speech expresses and defends his apparent contempt. Lo, he has turned her from a woman to a dog; and, as it were, spurns her from his feet with a harsh repulse. What shall we say? Is the Lamb of God turned a lion? Does that clear fountain of mercy run blood? O Saviour! did ever so hard a word fall from those mild lips? Thou calledst Herod fox, and most worthily,he was crafty and wicked;the Scribes and Pharisees a generation of vipers,they were venomous and cruel;Judas a devil,he was both covetous and a traitor:but here,was a woman in distress, and challenges mercy;a good woman, a faithful suppliant, a Canaanitish disciple, a Christian Canaanite;yet treated by thee with great severity; by thee, who wert all goodness and mercy. How different are thy ways from ours! even thy severity argues favour: the trial had not been so sharp, if thou hadst not found the faith so strong,if thou hadst not meant the issue so happy!

What ordinary patience would not have been over-strained with such a repulse? how few but would have fallen into passionate expostulations? “Art thou the prophet of God, who so disdainfully entertainest poor suppliants? Is this the comfort which thou dealest to the distressed? Is this the fruit of my humble adoration, of my faithful profession?”But here was nothing of this kind; on the contrary, her humility grants all; her patience overcomes all; and she meekly answers, Truth, Lord; yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. “Thou, O Lord, art truth itself; thy word can be no other than truth; thou hast called me a dog, and indeed such I am; a poor outcast, a sinner, and a Gentile. Give me therefore the favour and privilege of a dog, that I may gather up some crumbs of mercy from under the table whereat thy children sit. This blessing, though great to me, yet, to the infinitude of thy power and mercy, is but a crumb to a feast. I presume not to press to the board, but to creep under it: deny me not those small offals, which else would be swept away, and lost in the dust!”

O woman, say I, great is thy humility, great is thy patience; but, O woman, says my Saviour, great is thy faith! He sees the root, we the stock; nothing but faith could thus temper the heart, thus strengthen the soul, thus charm the tongue. It is no wonder, if that chiding end in favour; be it unto thee even as thou wilt: Never did such grace go away uncrowned: the beneficence had been strait, if thou hadst not carried away more than thou suedst for; lo, thou, that camest as a dog, goest away a child. Thou that wouldst but creep under the children’s feet, art set at their elbow, art fed with full dishes. The way to succeed well at God’s hand, is to be humbled in His eyes, and in our own. It is quite otherwise with God than with men: with men, we are so accounted of, as we account of ourselves; he will be sure to be vile in the sight of the children of this world, who is vile in his own: but with God nothing is got by vain ostentation; nothing is lost by abasement. He that humbleth himself, shall be exalted!

REFLECTIONS.1st, Since the purity of the Redeemer’s conduct was such that his most inveterate enemies could not convict him of sin, the Scribes and Pharisees endeavoured, if they could not prove him guilty of a breach of God’s law, to accuse him at least as a breaker of the canons of their church.

1. The accusation laid against him is for permitting his disciples “to transgress the tradition of the elders; and eat bread with unwashen hands:” which to them appeared highly criminal, who, having lost the spirit and power of godliness, were wholly engrossed with the form, and spent their zeal in practising, and enforcing the vain superstitions of their own invention as the most essential parts of religion. And, similar to this, we still too frequently see the most rigid and superstitious observers of the form of godliness the greater enemies to the power of it, and the most inveterate persecutors of the spiritually-minded. 2. Christ answers their accusation, vindicates his disciples, and rebukes their hypocrisy. [1.] He vindicates his disciples, by shewing the folly and wickedness of the traditions on which they grounded their charge, and recriminates by a juster accusation of their conduct who made void the commandments of God by their traditions. In proof of which, he produces the fifth commandment, where the duty of children towards their parents is enjoined; and in the honour that we must pay to them there is included the relief of their wants, in case of need: and to this law God has annexed the most aweful sanction: the transgressor who curses, or but speaks contemptibly of, his father or mother, is doomed to death, Exo 21:17. But their false casuistry had provided an evasion, to avoid ministering to the necessities of their parents; and their tradition asserted, that however urgent these might be, if they vowed to employ in sacred uses what should have been given to relieve their parents’ wants; or, as Dr. Gill interprets the passage, vowed that what they had should be as Corban, as if dedicated to the sanctuary, and should not be given to their parents’ use; they were then supposed to be bound by their vow; and though the things were not employed in sacred uses, they thought themselves authorised under this pretence to withhold from their father or mother the relief which they ought to have afforded them: a tradition as absurd as impious, and utterly overturning the law of God. Note; (1.) Many who are flaming in zeal for trifling human ceremonies, disregard and violate the most essential precepts of charity, and the most evident commands of God’s law. (2.) Tradition has been ever a treacherous guide; therefore neither antiquity nor authority must weigh a rush with us against the revealed truths of God’s word.

[2.] He rebukes their hypocrisy. He knew their hearts, and therefore there was no rashness nor uncharitableness in the charge laid against them: and he brings his reproof from Isaiah; for what the prophet spake as the character of the men of his day, had also a farther view to the generation then present, who exactly answered the description; and it is indeed equally applicable to the state of all hypocrites and formal professors to the end of time. They made an outward shew of religion, and, so far as lip-service and external worship went, pretended to honour God; but their hearts, without which he is pleased with no services, were far estranged from him: and while they appeared to pay the higher respect to God, they set up their traditions and human inventions, or many of them at least, in direct opposition to God’s law; and this rendered all their worship and apparent devotion vain, useless, and rejected. Note; (1.) Hypocrisy is among the most common and fatal sins; and though men may not discover it in us, it cannot be hidden from God. (2.) God’s first requirement of us is our heart; if this be alienated from him, nothing that we can offer him besides will meet with any acceptance.

2nd, Having vindicated his disciples, and rebuked the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, he endeavours to set the multitude in general right in a matter of such importance, which had been so grievously mistaken. And for this purpose he calls them to him, as perhaps they had withdrawn while the Pharisees talked with him, and bids them hear and understand; for it requires much attention and careful examination before we can emancipate ourselves from the fetters of long-rooted error, and the prejudices of education.
1. He lays down this grand axiom, that all defilement comes from within. It was a superstitious tradition which the Pharisees inculcated, that the meat eaten with unwashen hands communicated pollution to the soul; whereas nothing can defile the soul but sin, which, taking its rise in the heart, issues forth at the mouth. And herein he levelled a tacit rebuke against these cavillers, who, while they contended for cleanness and purity, betrayed the venom and malignity of their own hearts. The severest censurers of others are usually thus found most culpable themselves. While they pretend to pluck the mote from their brother’s eye, they discover not the beam which is in their own.
2. When they were retired into a house, the disciples, aware of the great offence which this declaration gave to the Pharisees, expressed their concern about it, as if the observation had been better suppressed, and might prejudice and exasperate them against him. Note; (1.) Truth, however offensive, must on proper occasions be spoken; and the woe lies not against those who give the offence, but against those who take it. (2.) We are too apt to hear for others, and to fear, lest some of the audience should be disgusted with plain dealing. But they who would convert men’s souls, must often be content to offend nice ears.

3. In answer to their suggestion, Jesus vindicates what he had spoken, as proper and necessary. As these men, and their traditions, were not those heavenly plants which God the Father had planted; they are thus, by the piercing word of truth, discovered, detected, and rooted up. If they be offended, the disciples need not regard it; for high as their character was among the people, they were in fact no better than blind leaders of the blind, ignorant themselves of saving truth, and misleading those who blindly and implicitly obeyed their dictates. And the necessary consequence of this was, that they must perish together, and fall into the pit of eternal misery. Note; (1.) However plausible men’s professions may be, and however admired their characters, if they are not the planting of God, and experimentally partakers of the quickening influences of his Spirit, their ruin is as sure as that of impenitent publicans and harlots. (2.) Pride and blindness of heart are inseparable companions; and none are so far from the light of truth, as those who, filled with the conceit of their own wisdom and abilities, vainly boast how clearly they see. (3.) The deceived and the deceiver will perish together; and they who choose their own delusions, have themselves only to blame for the ruin which ensues.

4. Peter, in the name of the disciples, not understanding the meaning of the parable, or still biassed by the prejudices of education, desires his Master to explain himself more distinctly on this point: and though their backwardness to understand was culpable, their desire to be informed was commendable. It is always good to be inquisitive about the great concerns of our souls, and Christ is willing to teach those who desire to learn; while the wilfully ignorant, the self-sufficient, and the proud, are justly left to their darkness and ruin.
5. Christ rebukes the dulness of their capacity, yet graciously condescends to give a farther explication of what he had advanced. Are ye also yet without understanding? They had enjoyed many and long opportunities for profiting under him; and it was a shame that, in a matter so plain, they should be yet so ignorant. Christ justly expects that our means and mercies should produce a proportionate advancement in grace and knowledge. Nothing could be more evident than that the meat, of whatever sort it were, which entered at the mouth, and merely passed through the body, could communicate no moral defilement to the soul. But the heart being the source and fountain of all spiritual impurity, what flowed thence alone communicated in God’s sight defilement to the man: and the corrupt and impure streams which flow from that spring he enumerates,a dreadful catalogue, but the natural produce of every fallen spirit. (1.) Evil thoughts, such as lewd desires, infidel reasonings, covetous wishes, malicious purposes, fraudulent designs, which never appeared in words for actions, but were naked and open before God, and brought guilt upon the soul. (2.) Murders, not only the effusion of human blood, but every word of anger, every act of violence, every expression of malice, hatred, or revenge. (3.) Adulteries, fornications, with all the various steps and contrivances which have a tendency to lead men to these horrid deeds. (4.) Thefts, whether committed by force or fraud. (5.) False witness, in perjuries, lies, deceit, and misrepresentation. (6.) Blasphemies, against God or man. These are the great violations of God’s law, the things which involve the conscience in guilt, and make us loathsome in the eyes of divine purity: while to eat with unwashen hands communicates no defilement to the soul, nor in the least renders any man a sinner before God.

3rdly, Departing from the country of Gennesaret, our Lord visited the coasts of Tyre and Sidon; where, by an act of favour to one of the poor Gentiles, he intimated the mercy which he had in store for them. We have,
1. The application made to him by a poor woman of that country, a Canaanite. Having heard the fame of Jesus, she seized the present moment to prefer her request. Her case was very afflictive, her daughter was grievously vexed with a devil, possessed and tormented by him, and therefore she earnestly cries, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David. She professes her faith in him as the true Messiah, expresses her confidence of his power to help her, and, conscious of her own unworthiness to receive any favour from him, casts herself intirely on his mercy. Note; (1.) To see their children under the power of disease, is deeply felt by every tender parent; but to beheld them under the power of sin and Satan, is far more grievous. (2.) When we can do no more for our unhappy offspring, we must continue in prayer to present their miserable state to Jesus, if so be he may interpose to heal them. (3.) The mercies shewn to our children are favours done to ourselves, and should be so acknowledged. (4.) All that a sinner has to ask of the Saviour, is mere mercy; we have no claim upon him, and can only cast ourselves at his feet, to do with us, and by us, according to the riches of his grace.

2. Her application at first appears to be utterly disregarded, and Jesus did not condescend to make a reply; not that he meant to deny her request, but to exercise her faith, and quicken her importunity. His disciples, who had never before seen their Master deaf to the intreaties of the miserable, interested themselves in her behalf; and not merely to be rid of her cries, but probably affected with her deep distress, wished her request granted, and that she were dismissed in peace; but his answer seemed to carry a still more unfavourable aspect, as if his ministry and miracles were to be confined to Israel alone. Nay, when the poor petitioner, notwithstanding all discouragement, approaching nearer, fell down at his feet, importunately reiterating her request, she apparently meets with still a rougher reception; seems to be spurned away as a dog, and excluded from the participation of mercies which were confined to the Jews; as if all out of the pale of their church deserved to be treated as impure animals, and rejected by the faithful. Note; (1.) We must not conclude that our requests are refused, because they are not immediately granted; nor that though the Saviour seems to frown, or even really frowns, he forbids farther intreaty; it is to exercise our faith, and quicken our prayers. (2.) Gracious souls are ever ready advocates and intercessors for the miserable.

3. Not dismayed by this repulse, nor driven to quit her hold, her faith cleaves to Jesus, and her soul bows down before him. Far from being offended at being treated as a dog, or sinking into despair at Christ’s reply, her answer expressed the deep humility and unshaken dependence of her heart upon him. “Truth, Lord, she replied; I own the charge; more vile and worthless than I am, no dog can be; a sinner, a Gentile, undeserving of any favour: yet, as a dog regard me;” (So gracefully and powerfully does she improve that for her plea, which seemed to convey the greatest discouragement;) “They are permitted, under their master’s table, to pick up the crumbs which fall; I ask no more. While happier Israelites enjoy the abundance of thy miracles, let one crumb fall on me, a poor Canaanite; no loss to them, to me a mercy so unspeakable.” Note; (1.) Nothing must ever drive us from Christ; the more we are distressed, the more should we cleave to him. If we perish, we perish; but let it be at least at the feet of Jesus, and there none ever yet were cast away. (2.) We can never have too lowly thoughts of ourselves; the worst that we can say of ourselves, or others can say of us, is nothing in comparison with what God has seen in us. (3.) Active faith lays hold even on the hand which seems stretched out to destroy: “Though thou slay me, yet will I trust in thee:” and this is indeed the triumph of faith.

4. As if amazed and overcome by faith so distinguished, Jesus grants her request, and dismisses her with the highest marks of his approbation. To her utmost wishes he extends the favour, and instantly her daughter was made whole. Note; (1.) Nothing is so pleasing and honourable to Jesus as great faith in his power and love. (2.) There is no mercy that we can ask, believing, which Jesus will ever refuse us; whether it be pardon, holiness, or consolation, it shall assuredly be given us.

4thly, Jesus returned again to the coasts of Galilee: and seating himself on a rising ground, as the great and universal physician, appeared ready to receive and relieve every miserable patient, whatever his disease might be, without money, and without price. We have an account,
1. Of the multitudes who came to him, bringing the afflicted with various maladies, and casting them down at his feet. And his compassions were so great, his power so effectual, that he healed them all. Note; (1.) The diseases of our bodies drive us instantly to the physician, though his art is uncertain; shall not then the more dangerous diseases of our souls drive us to Jesus, whose medicines of grace are infallible? (2.) The world is full of sickness and pain because full of sin; but if the cause be removed through the infinite merit of Jesus, and by the spirit of grace, in the faithful soul, the effects will quickly cease, and the inhabitants above shall never more say I am sick.

2. These wonders of power and grace deeply affected the beholders. Amazed to hear the dumb speak, to see the lame walk, the blind restored to sight, and every malady removed with a word, they glorified the God of Israel for sending the promised Messiah; for such their words bespoke him whom they now beheld. Note; Every mercy demands a tribute of praise; and if the removal of bodily complaints excited such wonder and thankfulness, how much more should we admire the spiritual riches of Christ, and adore the God of our salvation, if our souls have experienced the power of his healing grace; if our once blind eyes see the light of truth; if our ears, once deaf, are open to the Gospel’s joyful sound; if our once lame feet are strengthened to run the way of his commandments! For these unutterable blessings, praise the Lord, O my soul.

3. A singular miracle is wrought, wherein all partook, similar to what he had done before, chap. 14: with this little variation, that in the present instance four thousand, besides women and children, are fed with seven loaves and a few little fishes: in the former, five thousand men, besides women and children, were fed with five loaves.

[1.] The circumstances of the people assembled moved the compassion of Jesus. So eager were they to attend on his ministry, and to behold his miracles, that for three days successively they continued with him; and if they brought any little provision with them, it was ere this consumed, so that they had now nothing to eat; and as many of them came from far, and could not soon get a supply of food, to send them away thus fasting might expose them to faint by the way through weakness, and to perish with hunger. Calling his disciples, therefore, he acquainted them with his gracious design of feeding them there; but they forgetting what they had so lately seen, chap. Mat 14:21 objected to the possibility of providing meat for such a multitude in that wilderness; and especially when by his question he seemed to intend supplying the table out of their scanty store, which appeared so insufficient, being no more than seven loaves, and a few small fishes. Note; (1.) They who know the sweetness of the Gospel word, will undergo weariness and hunger, rather than be deprived of it. (2.) It is through our forgetfulness of the past interpositions we have experienced, that under new difficulties we fall into fresh perplexity.

[2.] Having commanded the multitude to sit down, he took the loaves and fishes, as before, and, thanking God for the provision, divided the bread and fishes among the disciples, that they should distribute them to the people; and far from any lack, when all had eaten and were filled, seven baskets full of fragments still remained. The provision indeed was somewhat more, the company fewer, and the fragments less than in the former instance, but the miracle was the same in one case as the other; and the wondrous enlargement of the food evidenced the same divine creative power. Note; We stand astonished at this relation; but is not every corn which is cast into the earth as marvellously increased at the harvest? yet who thinks of the wonder-working hand of him, by whose daily bread we are continually fed?

[3.] Having liberally satisfied his guests, he dismisses them to their own homes. Thither duty called them; we cannot always be in attendance on the sanctuary, it is not proper that we should. As for himself and his disciples, they took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala. His work was to be going about doing good; and in every place he left behind him abundant marks of his transcendant power, grace, and love.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Mat 15:39 . The village of Magdala (Jos 19:38 ?) is not to be regarded as situated on the east (Lightfoot, Wetstein, Cellarius), but on the west side of the lake, where now stands the Mohammedan village of Mejdel . See Gesenius on Burckhardt , II. p. 559; Buckingham, I. p. 404; Robinson, Pal . III. p. 530. This situation likewise corresponds with Mar 7:21 . Comp. note on Mat 15:29 . It is well, however, to take note of the reading (B D Syr cur Syr. in this instance; similarly Lachmann, Tischendorf; comp. Erasmus and Grotius), or (Vulgate, It., Jerome, Augustine), which unknown name might readily enough have been supplanted by one rendered more familiar on account of its connection with Mary Magdalene. In C M, Curss. the final syllable is still retained ( ). According to Ewald, Magadan, or Magedan, refers to the well-known town of Megiddo. But this latter was too far inland (Robinson, III. p. 413 f.; Furer in Schenkel’s Bibellex.), for it would seem, from what is stated in the text ( . ), that the place meant must have been somewhere on the shore, and one admitting of being approached by a boat. Mar 8:10 calls it Dalmanutha.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

D. CHRIST MINIFESTS HIMSELF AS THE HIGH PRIEST IN HIS SUFFERINGS;BEING REJECTED BY THE PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES, OR BY THE COMBINED THEOCRATICAL AUTHORITIES OF GALILEE

Mat 15:39 to Mat 16:12

Contents:Although the Lord landed privately on the western shore near Magdala, He was immediately met by His enemies. The combined authorities of the country now demand of Him to prove His claims to the Messianic title by showing that sign from heaven, which in their carnal expectations they connected with the appearance of the promised Deliverer. Their object evidently was to represent His probable refusal of their request as an acknowledgment of His being a false Messiah. Jesus dismisses them with a rebuke, In which He again points them to the sign of Jonah, i.e., to His death and resurrection. Thus rejected in Galilee, He immediately returns across the sea to the eastern shore, there to prepare in retirement for His last journey to Jerusalem. The warning addressed to the disciples about the leaven of the Pharisees and scribes was intended to teach them that they were now to forsake Galilee, which had practically surrendered itself to heathenism, just as Hoses and his people had left the land of Egypt.

1. The Sign from Heaven. Mat 15:39 to Mat 16:4

Mat 15:39 And he sent away the multitude [multitudes, ], and took ship [entered into the ship],15 and came into the coasts of Magdala [Magadan].16

Mat 16:1 The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came,17 and tempting, desired him 2that he would shew [to show] them a sign from heaven. He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be18 fair weather: for the sky is red. 3And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites,19 ye can [ye know how to]20 discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? 4A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign [and no sign shall] be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet21 Jonas [Jonah]. And he left them, and departed.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Mat 15:39.Into the coasts of Magdala [Magdalan, Magadan].The circumstance that Jesus secretly lands in an obscure and unknown place, throws considerable light on the degree of hostility and persecution which He had to encounter during His last journey in Galilee. The watchfulness of the Jewish leaders appears from this, that despite the precautions used by the Lord, they are seemingly ready immediately to meet Him, this time with a categorical demand.Magdalan lay on the western shore of the lake. Probably it is the modern small Village of el Mejdel, about an hour and a half to the north of Tiberias, and protected toward the sea by high cliffs (Robinson, ii. 897; Schubert, iii. 250). Robinson enumerates the various arguments against placing it on the eastern shore of the lake. In all likelihood the name of Mary Magdalene was derived from this place, which also gave birth to several of the Rabbins mentioned in the Talmud. According to Mar 8:10, the landing took place in the district of Dalmanutha, probably a village not far from Magdalan. We conjecture that the Lord touched the shore somewhere between these two villages, and nearer to Dalmanutha than to Magdalanthe account in Mark being the more accurate, while Matthew only speaks of Magdalan, as being the place more generally known. Winer suggests that Magdalan was the of the Old Testament; Ewald, that it was Megiddo, which, however, according to Robinson, 2:329, lay farther inland. The view of Ewald is based on the reading , in Codd. B., D., the Syriac version, etc. (which has been adopted by Lachmann and Tischendorf), and with which the reading (Vulg., Ital.) may be compared. But Codd. C., M., the Coptic translation, etc., read . Now it is quite possible, either that this difference of reading may have originated from a desire to assimilate this name to that of a better known place, or else that Magada, the name of an obscure village on the lake, may have been converted into that of the well-known birthplace of Mary Magdalene.

Mat 16:1. And the Pharisees and (the) Sadducees.According to Strauss and de Wette, this is the same event as that recorded in Mat 12:38. The remark is true, but only so far as the spirit, the tendency, and some of the external features, not so far as the peculiar characteristics, of the narrative are concerned. Evidently, it occurred at a later period of history; the place where the Saviour landed, the demand made upon Him, and His reply, are all different. Strauss and de Wette regard it as improbable that the Pharisees and Sadducees should have combined. And yet these two parties must have united in the Sanhedrin which condemned Jesus to death! Instead of such idle conjectures, it would have been well if critics had rather inquired how it came that the two parties even at this early period united in their hostility to the Saviour. That both the Pharisees and the Sadducees are introduced with the article,1 implies that in this case they represented the hierarchical authorities of the country generally. In the former contest, the Synagogue alone had been represented, while now in all probability the Sanhedrin itself, in its official capacity, deals with Jesus. Hence also the express demand of a sign from heaven, which may be considered as the logical inference from the last interview between the Pharisees and Jesus. On that occasion, the Saviour had not only discarded the authority of traditionalism, but His statements might even be interpreted as implying superiority to the law itself. This they knew was equivalent to asserting His claims as the Messiah. Accordingly, they now gave full utterance to the idea which the Pharisees of Galilee had previously urged, though in a less distinct manner ( Matthew 12), by demanding a sign from heaven. Withal, as Theophylact remarks, their request still implies the supposition that the miraculous cures performed by Him had been effected by the power of Beelzebul.

Tempting (), or in order to tempt Him.This does not necessarily imply the presupposition that He was really a false Messiah, and hence unable to show the sign from heaven. For, if He had acceded to their request, they would have been well satisfied with Him, and He would have been a Messiah according to their own mind, pledged to fulfil all their carnal hopes (see Matthew 4) Repeatedly afterward did they utter their secret desire that it might even be so; nor does this hope seem to be wholly extinct even in the derisive taunt, If He be the Son of God let Him come down from the cross. But these carnal hopes were already in great measure eclipsed by their unbelief and their hostility. Hence the primary object of this twofold temptation was to represent Jesus to the people as a spurious Messiah, who was unable to substantiate His claims.

A sign from heaven.The same request had already been proffered by the Jews after He had driven from the temple those that bought and sold (Joh 2:18); and His reply Destroy this temple, etc., substantially conveyed the same meaning as the answer given on the occasion recorded in the text. A second demand to the same effect was made, according to Joh 6:30, immediately after the first miraculous feeding of the multitude, or about the same time as the request mentioned in Mat 12:38; a proof that the artifice of entrapping Him by such a proposal was at the time further carried out. In the text, this demand is brought forward a third time, and now in most explicit language. This sign from heaven was popularly expected to be outwardly visible; such passages as Dan 7:13 being interpreted in a sensuous manner, and probably referred to some visible manifestation of the Shechinah. From the answer of Christ, in which the appearance of the clouds as a sign of the weather is subordinated to the signs of the spiritual world, we infer that the Pharisees and Sadducees shared the popular notions. The sign which they expected was, therefore, something purely external, belonging to a totally different sphere from the miraculous cures performed by Jesus. That the term implies not merely questioning (as Fritzsche and Meyer suppose), but a formal demand, appears from die reply of Jesus: , …, , and from the meaning of in Mat 15:23. The reply of Jesus is entirely adapted to the character of the deputation. If on a former occasion He had convinced the deputation from the synagogue that they were wretched teachers of the law, He now shows that these rulers were equally indifferent politicians, i.e., very superficial observers of the signs of the times. They knew how to prophesy the weather for the ensuing day, but not how to interpret the signs of the times.

Mat 16:2-3. When it is evening.Curiosi erant admodum Judi in observandis tempestatibus cli et temperamento aris. Lightfoot. We would suggest that the Lord attached a symbolical meaning to what He said about the signs of the weather. The red at even of the Old Testament betokened fair weather at hand. Similarly, the red sky at the commencement of the New Testament indicated the storm about to descend upon Israel. But they were incapable of understanding either one or other of these signs.

Mat 16:3. The signs of the times.The plural is here used on account of the contrast of these two times. Beza, Kuinoel, and others, apply the expression to the miracles of Jesus; Grotius, to the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecies; Meyer and de Wette, to the Messianic hopes and views entertained by the people in connection with Jesus. But undoubtedly these signs of the times depended mainly on their own relationship and conduct toward the Lord, which really constituted the contrast between this evening and morning, or the contrast of these . Accordingly, we might apply the redness of the sky at evening to the activity of Christ, and the red and lowering sky in the morning to His sufferings on the cross. This would strictly accord with His sign of the prophet Jonah. Besides, the reply of Jesus also involved the rebuke, that their views of the sign from heaven were entirely carnal and sensuous, applying only to the clouds and the outward sky; while the true sign from heaven consisted in the spiritual indications of the times. The circumstance that Jesus thus addressed the Pharisees and Sadducees before the people, seems to have been the reason why Luke records the event in a different connection (Luk 12:54). Compare also the of Luk 12:29.

Mat 16:4. The sign of Jonah.This time without any further explanation; implying that their present demand was connected with the former request of the Pharisees (Luke 12), and hence that they were already acquainted with His explanation of the sign of Jonah. As if He would say, I refer you to My former statement on this subject as sufficient and final.

And He left them.This abrupt termination indicates that He judicially gave them up. Bengel: Justa severitas. Comp. Mat 15:10; Mat 21:17; Mat 22:46; Mat 24:1. But the strongest evidence of this judicial surrender lies in the fact that Jesus at once passed to the eastern shore, and in His warning of the disciples against the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Manifestly Jesus now immediately returned with His disciples to the other side. (Comp. here Meyer against Fritzsche.)

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The demand of the Pharisees for a sign from heaven was certainly in itself no absurdity. But it depended upon an entire confusion of the first and the second advent of Christ. It is quite true that the prophecies on which they founded their views contained references to vast transformations in the world which would result from the completion of Christs mission. But as the death and resurrection of Christ are related to the end of the world as the principle to the full development, or as the seed-corn to the ripe fruit, so also is the sign of Jonah (or Christs death and resurrection) most definitely connected with those signs from heaven which shall usher in the final catastrophe. Indeed, strictly speaking, it is the sign from heaven in principle which by and by will also appear in the clouds of heaven (Mat 24:30).

2. Ye know how to discern the face of the sky, but.Of course this statement does not imply that it was easier to interpret the signs of the spiritual world than those of the sky. But the former, and not the latter, was the calling and business of the Sanhedrin, while in reality they were better prophets of the weather than interpreters of those prophecies which it was their duty to expound. Besides, the statement also indicates that the signs of the sky are uncertain, and may deceive us; while moral signs, if properly understood, never mislead.

3. Mark relates that the Saviour sighed deeply in spirit when His enemies again met Him with this demand. He fully comprehended the decisive importance of that hour. Henceforth He could no longer tarry in GalileeGalilee rejected Him. This holds even more true of Judea, whence these persecutions issued. The Master felt that now only a brief time of respite was left Him on the other side of Jordan, to prepare Himself and His intimate disciples for the decease at Jerusalem.
4. This was the third occasion on which Jesus was driven from Galilee, and passed over the lake into the mountains. The first time it was to avoid the court of Herod; the second time He retreated before the traditionalism of the schools; the third time before the hardened hierarchy of the whole country.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The demand of a sign from heaven; or, the old temptation under a new form. 1. The old temptation: (a) The proposal itself, to be a worldly Messiah, a Jewish conqueror, not a Saviour of nations; to overthrow the old world, not to renew the spiritual world by regeneration, and thereby to transform the external world. (b) Why a temptation? Because it was based upon elements of truth which were perverted into error. 2. The new form of this temptation, (a) It was under the guise of a sign from heaven; (b) partly an allurement and partly a threat, forming a transition from the temptations from the pleasures of the world (Matthew 4) to those from its sufferings (Matthew 26); (c) it was urged with the evident intention to represent the Lord to the people as a false Messiah, and thus to destroy His influence, even if He escaped their hands.How the Jewish politicians, in their knowledge of the weather, overlooked the signs of the spiritual weather: (a) They lost the brightest day; (b) they encountered the severest storm.The successors of the prophets sunk to the level of weather-prophets,a warning example.How even their superficial knowledge of nature would rise in testimony against their theology.Why the Lord here calls them hypocrites? (a) Because they neglected and misunderstood those spiritual signs which it was their calling to interpret, while, on the other hand, they gave themselves to the interpretation of outward signs with which they had no business; (b) because in general they perverted their spiritual into a secular calling.Outward calculations of things always end in this, that a man at last becomes slavishly dependent upon wind and weather.How most men allow themselves to be so engrossed by the signs of the visible sky as to overlook what is going on in the spiritual sky.The true signs of the time.Signs at evening and in the morning in the kingdom of God.Let us not be dependent on wind and weather, but look up to the Sun of righteousness.Why no other sign than that of Jonah could be given to this evil and adulterous generation.He left them and departed; or, the decisive hour: 1. His death was now decided upon; 2. their fall and judgment were now decided; 3. the grand course of events during the long-suffering of Christ, from His resurrection to His second advent, was now decided; 4. the future condition of the Church as sharing the fate of her banished and persecuted Lord was now decided; 5. the termination of the old things of this world by the final judgment was now decided.And He left them; or, the silent commencement of a new era.He departed; but they are still standing and waiting for the sign from heaven.

Starke:The Pharisees and the Sadducees.Hedinger: In any undertaking against Christ or His people, Pilate and Herod will always be ready to join hands, Luk 23:12.The enemies of Christ always repeat objections which have already been thoroughly answered and refuted.Unbelief trusts God no further than it can see with its eyes and feel with its hands; while true faith simply relies on the word of God, even though it sees neither signs nor miracles.Canstein: Let us give heed to those times which God has marked by certain signs.Woe to those from whom Jesus departs; who is to be their Saviour and Helper?

Gerlach:If your vision were not at fault, you could descry miracles enough to satisfy you!

Heubner:How fruitful is human wisdom in expedients for our earthly concerns, and how inexperienced and unskilful in divine things!There are signs of the times in the kingdom of heaven.These signs only a devout mind can read; the Spirit of God discloses the purposes of God.A Christian and a spiritual policy.Christ does not beg for applause.

Footnotes:

[1][The article before is omitted by Tischendorf, Lachmann, and Alford on the best authorities, which Dr. Lange must have overlooked.P. S.]

[15]Ch. 15, Mat 15:39.[ .]

[16] Mat 15:39.[The authorities are divided between , , and . The Vatican and the Sinaitic MSS. read , and so do Tischendorf, Lachmann, and Alford. Lange prefers . See his Exeg. and Crit Notes in loc.P. S.]

[17] Mat 16:1.[Better: And the Pharisees and (the) Sadducees came, () .P. S.]

[18] Mat 16:2.[The interpolation here and in Mat 16:3 is unnecessary. Fair weather! is more lively. So Ewald, Lange: Sehn Wetter! Meyer: Heiteres Wetter! The Greek has only one word in each case, (from and , gen. of ), clear sky, fine weather, and , storm, rainy, foul weather.P. S.]

[19] Mat 16:3. , hypocrites, is wanting in Codd., C., D., L., etc., and thrown out by Lachmann and Tischendorf [Cod. Sinait. omits all the words from , to Mat 16:2-3, probably by an oversight of the transcriber.P. S.]

[20] Mat 16:3.[ . So also Lange: ihr verstehts. The second discern () of the E. Vers, is an interpolation, but makes the sense clearer. The lit. rendering is: Ye know () how to discern the face of the sky; but can ye not ( ) the signs of the times? Lange gives an emphatic sense and translates: die Zeichen der Enttcheidungszeiten, the decisive epochs, such as the one of Christs ministry on earth.P. S.]

[21] Mat 16:4. is wanting in B., D., L., and erased by Lachmann and Tischendorf. [It is also omitted in the Codex from Mt. Sinai, and in the editions of Tregelles, and Alford. Lange retains it in his version, but in smaller type and in parenthesis.P. S.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

REFLECTIONS

Who can read in the opening of this Chapter, the pitiful substitution of outward acts of religion for the defect of inward purity, but with painful mortification, when we consider in such proofs to what a sad state of ruin, our whole nature is reduced by the fall? Alas! what are these Scribes and Pharisees, but representatives of all men in the Adam race, until a work of mercy in salvation hath passed upon the soul?

Do we not all draw nigh to God with our mouth, and honor him with our lips, while our hearts are far from him; until God the Holy Ghost, hath revealed Christ to us, in his person, offices, and character, and we are brought nigh by the blood of his cross?

What a beautiful relief, from such a universal corruption of nature is the subject this Chapter introduceth us to, of the woman of Canaan. Oh! ye parents of perverse children, and children under the dominion of Satan; oh! may ye learn for them, for yourselves, yea, for the whole Church of Christ, how to come to Jesus. Who shall say what mercies Jesus is continually manifesting of the same kind? And if we feel interested, as that we cannot but feel interested, for our own, and their everlasting welfare, that neither we nor our offspring should remain under the worst of all distresses, even soul-distresses in Satan’s influence; oh! let us come out of all the coasts of the Tyre and Sidon of this world, and look unto Jesus: and beholding his mercy here, let us hope for mercy for all Israel: for with him is plenteous redemption.

Jesus! do thou have compassion, Lord, as thou hadst in the days of thy flesh, and beholding the multitudes in the wilderness, send us not empty away, but feed us with thyself; and command a blessing upon thy bounty for thou Lord art the bread of life, of which whosoever eateth shall live forever!

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

39 And he sent away the multitude, and took ship, and came into the coasts of Magdala.

Ver. 39. And he sent away the multitude ] Not without a blessing, and a great deal of good counsel. “Labour not for the meat which perisheth,” &c. Amend your lives, for the kingdom of heaven is come home to you. Now that you have eaten and are full, beware that you forget not the Lord your God, &c., Deu 8:10-11 . Be not as children, with whom eaten bread is soon forgotten. This was wholesome counsel, and far better than their good cheer; for this would stick by them. Deal we so by our guests.

And came into the coasts of Magdala ] This is held to be Mary Magdalene’s country, better known by her than she was by it, as the island of Co was by Hippocrates, and Hippo by Austin.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

39. ] Of Magadan nothing is known.

Lightfoot (Centurio Chorograph. Marco prmissa, p. 413) shews Magdala to have been only a sabbathday’s journey from Chamnath Gadara on the Jordan, and on the east side of the lake: but probably he is mistaken, for most travellers (see Winer, Realwrterbuch, in v.) place it about three miles from Tiberias, on the west side of the lake, where is now a village named Madschel. Dalmanutha , mentioned by Mark ( Mar 8:10 ), seems to have been a village in the neighbourhood.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Mat 15:39 . : the true reading, place wholly unknown, whence probably the variants.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 15:39

39And sending away the crowds, Jesus got into the boat and came to the region of Magadan.

Mat 15:39 “the region of Magadan” This location is unknown. In the Markan parallel the text has “Dalmanatha” (Mar 8:10), but this site is also unknown. Some Greek manuscripts changed Magadan to Magdala which was a Semitic term for “tower.”

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

took ship = entered into Greek. eis. the ship (mentioned above, in Mat 14:22, &c).

Magdala. See App-169.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

39.] Of Magadan nothing is known.

Lightfoot (Centurio Chorograph. Marco prmissa, p. 413) shews Magdala to have been only a sabbathdays journey from Chamnath Gadara on the Jordan, and on the east side of the lake: but probably he is mistaken, for most travellers (see Winer, Realwrterbuch, in v.) place it about three miles from Tiberias, on the west side of the lake, where is now a village named Madschel. Dalmanutha, mentioned by Mark (Mar 8:10), seems to have been a village in the neighbourhood.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Mat 15:39. [705] , He again went on board the vessel)[706] sc. that mentioned a little before in ch. Mat 14:33. The word occurs with the same force in Mar 6:51.

[705] Mat 15:38. , four thousand) They were in truth mighty miracles, whereby five thousand (ch Mat 14:21) and four thousand men were fully satisfied with food; and it was then that the abundance of Jesus miracles had reached its highest point. How widely His glory ought to have been spread abroad by so many thousands of witnesses!-Harm., p. 344.

[706] E. V. took ship. Bengel would give another force to the preposition , and renders , iterum conscendit.-(I. B.)

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

he sent: Mat 14:22, Mar 8:10

Reciprocal: Mat 13:36 – Jesus Mat 16:5 – General

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

5:39

The multitudes were given sufficient nourishment to overcome the effects of their three-day fast and were dismissed. Magdala was a city on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee and it is sometimes mentioned by other names.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Mat 15:39. Into the boat. Probably one awaiting Him.

Into the borders of Magadan, according to the best authorities. (Magdalan is also found.) Mark: Into the parts of Dalmanutha. This was probably a village not far from Magadan. Our Lord, pursued by the hostility of the Jews and seeking retirement, landed at an obscure locality between the two places. The site of Magdala (Magadan), now called Madschel (Migdol, Jos 19:38), is north of Tiberias and directly east of Cana, on the western shore of the lake, since the next voyage (chap. Mat 16:5; Mar 8:13) was across the lake to the eastern side.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

CHAPTER 35

SIGNS OF HIS COMING

Mat 15:39. Having sent away the multitudes, He entered into a ship, and came to the coasts of Magdala. Mar 8:10 : Immediately embarking on a ship, with His disciples, He came into the parts of Dalmanutha. In these records, chronicling the peregrinations and defining the whereabouts of our Savior, Matthew and Mark precisely agree, both certifying His embarkation, crossing the sea, and His landing the latter in Dalmanutha, which is the name of the country; and the former, in Magdala, which is the name of the city into which He came on landing. This is the nativity of Mary Magdalene, the latter cognomen being taken from her city, Magdala. Though evidently saved out of the slums, by the ejectment of seven demons, she became one of the brightest saints and truest disciples on whom the sun ever looked down, being last at the cross, first at the sepulcher, and first to receive the full-orbed gospel commission, Run and preach the risen Christ. Among the mighty works of Jesus, only a small fraction do we have on record. We have no account of Mary Magdalenes conversion; but a mere reference to the ejectment of the seven demons, and her subsequent incessant concomitancy of our Lord to the end of His earthly ministry. I trow, she was converted during the present or some other visit of Jesus to her city, Magdala. I feel it pertinent thus to write about her, as she stood at the head of the female department of our Saviors ministry.

Mat 16:1-4 : The Pharisees and Sadducees, coming to Him, tempting, asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. He, responding, said to them, It being evening, you say, It will be fair, for the sky is red; in the morning, It will be stormy today, for the sky is red, lowering. O ye hypocrites, you truly know how to discern the face of the sky, and are you not able to discern the signs of the times? A wicked and adulterous nation seeketh after a sign; and no sign shall be given unto it, except the sign of the prophet Jonah. He had fed the multitudes this second time over in Decapolis, not very far out in the country, off the southeast coast of the Galilean Sea; after which, coming with His disciples and embarking on a ship, He crosses the sea from southeast to northwest, landing at Magdala, which is on the coast between Bethsaida and Tiberias, but nearer the former. I was in it, and as I sailed all around the sea, landing at many places, I saw all of these localities, and this as well as other routes pursued by our Lord and on record for our edification.

Jesus now preaches to the multitudes assembled at Magdala, in the land of Dalmanutha. Here we have, by Matthew and Mark, the subtle attack made on Him by the Pharisees and Sadducees. These, and the Essenes, were the great denominations of the Jewish Church. The Pharisees were the orthodox, with plenty of good and true doctrine, but spiritually dead; the Sadducees were rich and worldly, skeptical in doctrine, regarded as the heterodox wing of the popular Church; while the Essenes, very poor and generally living in the desert, were the holiness people of that day. As in all ages and countries there has been an exterminating war between orthodoxy and heterodoxy, so it was in that age. The Pharisees and Sadducees, however, bury the hatchet, and unite their forces against Jesus, as we see on this occasion, and may see all over this country, if you will open your eyes. Let a holiness evangelist come to a wicked town, and pour out the lightning truth of full salvation, and the warring sects will all make peace, like Pilate and Herod, and unite their forces, to criticize, oppose, and if possible defeat the revival. Though Jesus had flooded the whole country with His stupendous miracles, always exercising His power for the relief of suffering humanity, doing good to soul or body; dissatisfied with these wonderful benefactions, which they could neither criticize nor call in question, they allege that these works are all confined to this world, and as Moses, the great leader, lawgiver, and mediator of Israel, whose disciples they boastingly claim to be, had fed them with manna from heaven, incessantly, forty years in the wilderness, therefore they demanded of Him a similar miracle, coming down from heaven. He now, responsively to their impudent and arrogant demands, called them hypocrites; not by way of insult, but because it behooved the Author of all truth to call everything by its right name; and if these preachers had enjoyed the true light of God, instead of antagonizing Jesus, they would have been His faithful and loving disciples. Hence, the reason why, with all their meteorological sagacity, which enabled them to prognosticate the weather, and still they could not discern the spiritual signs of the time, was demonstrative proof that they were not the true ministers of God as they claimed to be, as in that case, the light of the Holy Ghost on the prophecies would enable them so to decipher the signs of the times as to know that He was truly the Christ. That it was not the want of natural intelligence was abundantly evinced by their accurate discriminations of the weather. But it was simply the want of spiritual illumination, which the Holy Ghost sheds on the Word, clear and unmistakable to the spiritually-minded. Hence, the very fact that those preachers were utterly blind to the signs of the times was demonstrative proof that they were hypocrites. What were those signs of His coming? The seventy weeks of Daniel i.e., four hundred and ninety prophetic years were just about expired. The scepter, which was not to depart from Judah till Shiloh (Christ) came, had actually departed about the time of His birth, as, on the death of Herod, Augustus Caesar, the Roman emperor, instead of transmitting to Archelaus, took it away altogether, turning Judea into a Roman province, and sending Coponius to serve as proconsul. Besides, all the prophets had just poured out torrents of Messianic predictions, which were wonderfully fulfilled on all sides; John the Baptist, the last of all, and the greatest of the prophets, not only having preached Him with all His might, but actually introduced Him publicly to all the people, assuring them of His Messiahship. If these preachers had not been bigoted and blinded hypocrites, they would most assuredly have seen in Jesus the Christ of prophecy.

Let us beware lest we plunge into the same awful dilemma. The present age is flooded with prophetic signs of the Lords near coming, as we are now in the last century of the demiurgic week; the six thousand years, according to some chronologies, already out; while all of them expire the period in the present century. The Gentile times, according to Daniel and John, are actually running out on us, the lunar chronology having them already expired, the Calendar due in twenty-four years, and the solar in seventy, all conspiring to illustrate the obvious fact that we are living in the time of the end of the Gentile age. Besides, the prophetical fulfillments among the Mohammedans, Romanists, heathens, and Protestants, and especially the Jews, literally girdle the globe with signs of His near coming; e.g., the rapid gathering of the Jews to Palestine, the revival of the old cities in that country, the great and rapid apostasy of the Church in the home lands, and the wonderful and unprecedented progress of missions among all heathen nations, are all literal fulfillments of the latter-day prophecies, ominous of the Lords near coming. And yet preachers by thousands see nothing of it, but comfort their carnal members by ridiculing the awful and momentous truths which Gods awakened people are preaching in all the earth, arousing the spiritually-minded to wash, and dress, and be ready for their coming King. We should not be surprised at the blindness of the pulpit and pew with reference to our Lords second coming, when we see how literally this state of things was verified in His first advent; as intellectual and educational culture has no power to open spiritual eyes, and reveal the electric light of Gods truth, so we may expect to find humanity uniform in all ages, and the same paradoxical blindness on Israel this day which, in the visitation of her Lord, disqualified her learned preachers to see Him.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

Verse 39

Magdala; south of Capernaum.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles