Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 26:18
And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
18. to such a man ] “To a certain man” (one who is known, but not named), with whom the arrangements had been previously made. He was doubtless a follower of Jesus. It was usual for the inhabitants of Jerusalem to lend guestchambers to the strangers who came to the feast.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 18. Go – to such a man] It is probable that this means some person with whom Christ was well acquainted, and who was known to the disciples. Grotius observes that the Greeks use this form when they mean some particular person who is so well known that there is no need to specify him by name. The circumstances are more particularly marked in Lu 22:8, &c.
My time is at hand] That is, the time of my crucifixion. Kypke has largely shown that is often used among the Greeks for affliction and calamity. It might be rendered here, the time of my crucifixion is at hand.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And he said, go into the city to such a man,…. That is, to such a man in the city of Jerusalem, for, as yet, they were in Bethany, or at the Mount of Olives however, without the city; he does not mention the man’s name, but describes him, as Mark and Luke say, and tells them, “there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water; follow him into the house, where he entereth in”, Mr 14:13; who seems to be not the master of the house, but a servant, that was sent on such an errand. This is a very considerable instance of our Lord’s prescience of future contingencies; he knew beforehand, that exactly at the time that the disciples would enter Jerusalem, such a man, belonging to such a house, would be returning with a pitcher of water in his hand; and they should meet him; and follow him, where he went, which would be a direction to them what house to prepare the passover in;
and say unto him; not to the man bearing the pitcher of water; but, as the other Evangelists say, to the good man of the house, the owner of it, who probably might be one of Christ’s disciples secretly; for many of the chief rulers in Jerusalem believed on Christ, though they did not openly confess him, for fear of the Pharisees, as Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea; and this man might be one of them, or some other man of note and wealth; since they were to find, as they did, a large upper room furnished and prepared. For, it seems, that without mentioning his name, the man would know him by their language, he dictates to them in the following clause, who they meant;
the master saith; the Syriac and Persic versions read, our master; thine and ours, the great master in Israel, the teacher sent from God:
my time is at hand; not of eating the passover, as if it was distinct from that of the Jews, and peculiar to himself, for he ate it at the usual time, and when the Jews ate theirs; and which time was fixed and known by everybody, and could be no reason to move the master of the house to receive him: but he means the time of his death, that he had but a little while to live; and that this instance of respect would be the last he would have an opportunity of showing him whilst living, and the last time Christ would have an opportunity of seeing him; and he might say this to prepare him to meet the news of his death with less surprise:
I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples; not with him and his family, but with his disciples, who were a family, and a society of themselves, and a sufficient number to eat the passover together; for there might be two companies eating their distinct passovers in one house, and even in one room: concerning which is the following rule,
“dxa tybb Mylkwa wyhv twrwbx ytv, “two societies that eat in one house”; the one turn their faces this way and eat, and the other turn their faces that way and eat, and an heating vessel (in which they heat the water to mix with the wine) in the middle; and when the servant stands to mix, he shuts his mouth, and turns his face till he comes to his company, and eats; and the bride turns her face and eats o.”
o Misn. Pesachim, c. 7. sect. 13.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
To such a man ( ). The only instance in the N.T. of this old Attic idiom. The papyri show it for “Mr. X” and the modern Greek keeps it. Jesus may have indicated the man’s name. Mark (Mr 14:13) and Luke (Lu 22:10) describe him as a man bearing a pitcher of water. It may have been the home of Mary the mother of John Mark.
I keep the passover at thy house ( ). Futuristic present indicative. The use of for “at thy house” is neat Greek of the classic period. Evidently there was no surprise in this home at the command of Jesus. It was a gracious privilege to serve him thus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Such a man [ ] . The indefiniteness is the Evangelist ‘s, not our Lord ‘s. He, doubtless, described the person and where to find him.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
18. Go into the city to such a man. Matthew specifies a certain man; the other two Evangelists relate that the disciples were sent as to an unknown individual, because a sign was given to them of a man carrying a pitcher of water. But this difference is easily reconciled; for Matthew passing by the miracle, describes that man who was then unknown to the disciples; for it cannot be doubted that, when they came to the house, they found that it was one of their acquaintances. Christ enjoins him authoritatively to make ready a lodging for himself and his disciples, calling him master; and the man immediately complies But though he might have expressly pointed out the man by name, he chose rather to direct his disciples to him by a miracle, that, when they shortly afterwards saw him reduced to a state of weakness, their faith might remain firm, being supported by this evidence. It was no slight confirmation that, a few hours before he was put to death, he had given an undoubted proof that he was God, that they might know that he was not constrained by necessity, but yielded of his own accord. And though at the very time when the weariness occurred, this was perhaps of no advantage to them, yet the recollection of it was afterwards useful; as even in the present day, in order to rise above the offense of the cross, it is of great importance to us to know that, along with the weakness of the flesh, the glory of divinity appeared in Christ about the very time of his death.
My time is near. Though he celebrated the passover correctly according to the injunction of the Law, yet he appears to assign this reason for the express purpose of avoiding the blame of self-will. He says, therefore, that there are reasons why he must make haste, and not comply with a received custom, because he is called to a greater sacrifice. And yet, as we have said, he introduces no change in the ceremony, but repeats once and again, that the time of his death is near, in order to inform them that he hastens cheerfully to do what the Father had appointed. And as to his connecting the figure of the sacrifice with the reality, in this way he exhorted believers to compare with the ancient figures what he accomplished in reality. This comparison is highly fitted to illustrate the power and efficacy of his death; for the passover was enjoined on the Jews, not merely to remind them of an ancient deliverance, but also that they might expect future and more excellent deliverance from Christ. Such is the import of what Paul says, that
Christ our passover is sacrificed for us, (1Co 5:7.)
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(18) To such a man.The Greek word is that used when the writer knows, but does not care to mention, the name of the man referred to. St. Mark and St. Luke relate the sign that was given them. They were to meet a man bearing a pitcher of water and follow him. and were to see in the house into which he entered that in which they were to make their preparations. The master of the house was probably a disciple, but secretly, like many others, for fear of the Jews (Joh. 12:42), and this may explain the suppression of his name. He was, at any rate, one who would acknowledge the authority of the Master in whose name the disciples spoke. In the other two Gospels our Lord describes the large upper room furnished which the disciples would find on entering. The signal may have been agreed upon before, or may have been the result of a supernatural prescience. Scripture is silent, and either supposition is legitimate.
My time is at hand.For the disciples, the time may have seemed the long-expected season of His manifesting Himself as King, and the memory of such words as those of Joh. 7:8 (My time is not yet full come) may have seemed to strengthen the impression. We read, as it were, between the lines, and see that it was the time of the suffering and death which were the conditions of His true glory (Joh. 12:23; Joh. 13:32).
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
18. Go into the city The city of Jerusalem, for a paschal lamb could be eaten at no other place. The Jews of the present day do not eat the paschal lamb at their annual passover. They only celebrate the feast of unleavened bread, which, as we have before said, followed the passover.
To such a man This was a very indefinite direction; and perhaps Matthew only gives the substance of what Mark gives more explicitly. As they entered the city they would find a water carrier, whom they should follow and he would guide them to the householder, who would furnish them a room. Such a man A man I will not name. The man will occur by human accident; but free will and human accident all operate under the clear-seeing eye of God’s foreknowledge. God clearly sees what man will freely do. As God sees how man will freely do, so he does most wisely adjust his plans. So God carries out his vast projects by taking and interweaving man’s free acts into his complex plans.
This direction very much resembles the sending the disciples to find in a miraculous manner the beast on which he should ride into Jerusalem, as well as the miracle of finding the coin in the fish’s mouth. For even if we suppose, with some commentators, that our Lord had intimated beforehand to some wealthy friend, as Joseph or Nicodemus, that he would take the last passover upon earth at his house, still, finding the pitcher-bearer was a supernatural contingency. The reason of such proceedings on the part of our Lord, which some commentators are so puzzled to find, is clearly to manifest to all around that he foresees all the events and sufferings before him. That is, he marches forward in a foreseen path of duty, and his sufferings are undergone in a perfectly voluntary manner. Joh 10:18.
The Master saith The word master is correlative to the word disciple; and thus it is clearly implied that the householder is a follower of Jesus. Indeed, when we recollect that the rulers were afraid of the multitudes, as being adherents of Jesus, we may reasonably infer that the number of those who would call him “Master” was not few. My time is at hand My time of suffering, previous to which I have promised to eat the paschal lamb at your house. And this language clearly implies that the man was our Lord’s disciple, that he clearly understood what was meant by the phrase “my time,” and that he was fully ready to appreciate the honour of furnishing the room for our Lord’s use. During passover week the houses of Jerusalem were hospitably open to the comers from the different parts of Palestine to celebrate the passover.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And he said, “Go into the city to such a man, and say to him, “The Teacher says, “My time is at hand. I keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.”
As they again probably expected (it would not be the first time) Jesus had already made arrangements for a house in the city in which to observe the Passover, and He thus gave directions accordingly. We learn in the other Gospels that Jesus had also made certain arrangements so as to ensure that no one, apart from two fully trustworthy disciples, knew in which house the celebration was to be held until the actual event took place (Mar 14:13-16), by which time it would no longer matter. The meal would be over before the information could leak out.
“The Teacher says, “My time is at hand. I keep the Passover at your house with my disciples.” This would appear to have been an arranged password. Jesus was often spoken of as ‘the Teacher’. Or it maybe that a friend had arranged it and informed Jesus that he had booked it in His name as ‘the Teacher’. ‘My time is at hand’ would indicate to the houseowner that it was now time to prepare for the meal, but it had the double significance that the time was now drawing near when Jesus would fulfil His destiny (compare Mat 26:2). This Passover was to be of especial importance (compare Joh 13:1).
‘Keep the Passover.’ Compare ‘eat the Passover’ (Mat 26:13). The impression is definitely given that this is to be an ‘ordinary’ Passover meal including all the accoutrements. This is thought by some to be a difficulty as they consider that John indicates that Jesus died on the same day as the Passover lambs were offered in the Temple (although he nowhere says so). Thus there are a number of views taken of the situation:
1). That the Synoptics were right and that John was strictly incorrect, and was rather portraying an ‘ideal’ picture.
2). That John was correct and that the Synoptics were describing a pre-Passover meal, mistakenly thinking that it was the Passover.
3). That the Synoptics were right and that John’s account can in fact be reconciled with this. This is the view that we think most probably correct.
Excursus on the Problem in John’s Gospel.
Some have argued that the meal described in John 13 could not have been the Passover meal. They have argued:
1). A trial would not have been held on Passover night.
2). The disciples would not have borne arms on that night.
3). Simon of Cyrene would not have been ‘coming in from the country’ the following morning.
4). Some Synoptic passages are inconsistent with it e.g. Mar 14:2.
However these arguments are not convincing. Passover time, while the pilgrims were still in the city, might be considered precisely the time when a ‘false prophet’ should be arrested and executed in order that ‘all Israel might hear and fear’ (Deu 17:13). Furthermore they would recognise that the whole affair would have to be carried out in haste because Judas’ information made it possible for it to be done secretly and Jesus was there available. They dared not miss such an opportunity. They probably thought that dealing with this ‘blasphemer’ at the Feast justified ignoring any doubts that they might otherwise have.
Mar 14:2 merely expresses the plan of the authorities, which was subject to alteration if circumstances demanded. Some have suggested translating ‘feast’ as ‘festal crowd’ rather than ‘feast day’ which is quite possible.
There was in fact no prohibition of arms being carried at the Passover.
‘Coming in from the country’ need not mean that Simon had been outside the prescribed limits, and indeed he may not have been a Jew. Besides it would always be possible that he had been delayed by some cause beyond his control so that he had arrived late for the Passover. Thus this vague argument carries little weight.
But this immediately faces us with a problem. The words in Joh 18:28 (‘they themselves did not enter the palace in order that they might not be defiled but might eat the Passover’) might appear to suggest that Jesus died at the same time as the Passover sacrifice, otherwise they would not be able to eat the Passover.. That would mean that the scene in John 13 occurred on the night before the Passover feast. But as we have seen the other Gospels make clear that Jesus officiates at the Passover feast (Mar 14:12; Luk 22:7), and there can be no doubt that both are depicting the same feast.
However, what must be borne in mind is that Joh 18:28 may be speaking of ‘the Passover’, not as meaning the Passover feast itself, but in a general sense as including the whole eight day feast (compare Joh 2:23 where ‘the feast of the Passover’ is clearly the seven days of the feast and Luke’s use in Luk 22:1), in which case ‘eating the Passover’ may refer to the continual feasting during the week (unleavened bread had to be eaten throughout the week and there would be many thank-offerings as well), and especially to the second Chagigah (special peace-offering), and not to the actual Passover celebration, in which case there is no contradiction. We can compare with this how in 2Ch 30:22 the keeping of the Feast of the Unleavened Bread (Mat 26:13) which includes the Passover (Mat 26:15) is described as ‘eating the food of the festival for seven days’.
Against this, however we should note that ‘to eat the Passover’ does at least include eating the Passover supper in the Synoptics (Mat 26:17; Mar 14:12; Mar 14:14; Luk 22:8; Luk 22:11; Luk 22:15). That does not, however, necessarily tie the escorts of Jesus to using it in the same way after the Passover supper has passed.
Alternately it has been suggested that in fact the men involved had been so taken up with the pursuit of Jesus into the night as a result of Judas’ unexpected offer to lead them to Jesus in a place where He could be taken without fear of the people, that they had not yet had time to complete their Passover meal. They would not have been disturbed until they were part of the way through it. We only have to consider the facts of that night to recognised how involved their night had been! They may well have been disturbed in the middle of their Passover meal with news that it was possible to catch Jesus and His disciples alone and have convinced themselves that such a delay was justified in order to deal with Jesus at what was clearly a crucial moment. Once they had dealt with Him they could go home to finish eating their Passover, which had been suddenly delayed for reasons of state, with contented minds.
After all any uncleanness perpetrated on the 14th of Nisan would only have lasted until the evening, and they would thus still have been able to ‘eat the Passover’, although it is true that they would not have been allowed to approach the Temple to sacrifice during the day. But in that case why did John not say ‘sacrifice the Passover’.
In the same way his reference to ‘the preparation of the Passover’ or ‘the Friday of the Passover’ (paraskeue tou pascha) (Joh 19:14) can equally be seen as referring to the ‘preparation’ for the Sabbath occurring in Passover week, i.e. the Friday of Passover week, as it certainly does in Joh 19:31, and therefore not to the preparation of the Passover feast itself. Basically the word paraskeue can mean ‘day before the Sabbath in preparation for it’ and the term Passover (pascha) was used to describe the whole festival. If this be the case John gives no suggestion that Jesus died at the same time as the Passover lamb.
End of Excursus.
4). That John was right and that the Synoptics can in fact be reconciled with that fact, by for example suggesting that it was a pre-Passover event. Had Jesus wished it, He could have been arranged for such a meal to be very similar to a Passover meal by the offering of a lamb as a thank-offering, and treating it as a Passover lamb, or even by foregoing the lamb.
5). That the Passover was held on different days by different sections of the Jewish population (certainly the Qumranis had a different calendar from the Temple), with those whom Jesus favoured holding it a day earlier than the orthodox Jerusalemites. To some this connects up with a possible dispute as to what was the correct date of the Passover, which would depend on which night the 1st day of Nisan commenced, something which was at times disputable. There is then disagreement on whether the Passover lamb could have been offered if any of this were true. That would depend on how acceptable the difference interpretations would be to the priesthood (who would not necessarily all agree). Alternately a freewill offering could have been offered and then utilised as a Passover lamb. Some consider that the non-mention of the Passover lamb in any of the Gospel accounts favours this overall view. However this last can equally be explained by the new emphasis placed on the bread and the wine, with their new significance. The lamb had now ceased to be important because Jesus was the Lamb (1Co 5:7). Were it not for the fact of 3). which makes it unnecessary, 5). could be a genuine possible explanation, for our knowledge of the Jewish history of this period is negligible.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 26:18 . ] to Jerusalem . According to Mat 26:6 ff., they were still at Bethany.
] as we say when we either cannot or will not mention the name of the person intended: to so and so . See Wetstein and Hermann, ad Vig . p. 704. But it was not Jesus Himself who omitted to mention the name (“ut discipulus ex diuturna consuetudine notissimum,” Fritzsche), for, after the question of the disciples, Mat 26:17 , He could not assume that it was quite well understood who it was that He referred to; but it has been omitted by the evangelist in his narrative (comp. even Augustine, de cons, ev . ii. 80), either because it had not been preserved as part of the tradition, or for some other reason, to us unknown.
.] the Teacher . Doubtless the unknown person here referred to was also a believer. Comp. Mat 21:3 .
] i.e . the time of my death (Joh 13:1 ), not: for my observing the Passover (Kuinoel), which would render the words singularly meaningless; for this time was, in fact, the same for all There is nothing whatever to justify the very old hypothesis, invented with a view to reconcile the synoptic writers with John, that Jesus partook of His last Passover meal a day earlier than that on which it was wont to be eaten by the Jews. See on Joh 18:28 . Further, this preliminary preparation implies a pious regard for Jesus on the part of the , who was thus singled out; this Passover observance, for which preparations are being made, was destined, in fact, to be a farewell feast! According to Ewald, denotes the time when the Messianic phenomena would appear in the heavens (comp. Mat 24:34 ), which, however, is at variance with the text, where the death of Jesus is the all-pervading thought (see Mat 26:2 ; Mat 26:4 ; Mat 26:11 f., Mat 26:21 ). Comp. , Joh 17:1 .
] is not the Attic future (Fritzsche, Bleek), but the present , representing what is future as now going on, and suited to the idea of a distinct friendly arrangement beforehand: at thy house I observe the Passover. Comp. Exo 12:48 ; Jos 5:10 ; Deu 15:1 ; Deu 3 Esdr. Mat 1:6 . Similarly classical writers frequently use in the sense of to observe a feast.
Matthew’s account presupposes nothing miraculous here, as Theophylact and Calvin would have us believe, but simply an arrangement, of which nothing further is known, which Jesus had come to with the person in question, and in consequence of which this latter not only understood what was meant by the , but was also keeping a room in reserve for Jesus in which to celebrate the Passover. It is probable that Jesus, during His stay in Jerusalem after the triumphal entry, had come to some understanding or other with him, so that all that now required to be done was to complete the preparations. It was reserved for the later tradition, embodied in Mark and Luke, to ascribe a miraculous character to these preparations, in which respect they seem to have shared the fate of the incident mentioned at Mat 21:2 f. This being the case, the claim of originality must be decided in favour of what is still the very simple narrative of Matthew (Strauss, Bleek, Keim), in preference to that of Mark and Luke (Schulz, Schleiermacher, Weisse, Ewald, Weiss). As represented, therefore, by Matthew (who, according to Ebrard and Holtzmann, seems to have regarded the circumstance about the man bearing a pitcher of water as only “an unnecessary detail,” and whose narrative here is, according to Ewald, “somewhat winnowed”), this incident is a natural one, though the same cannot be said of the account given by Mark and Luke (in opposition to Olshausen and Neander).
Who that unknown person above referred to might be, is a point which cannot be determined.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples.
Ver. 18. Go into the city to such a man ] Meaning some man of his special acquaintance, for so the Greek ( ) imports, though he named him not. So Palmoni hammedabber, ” such an one the speaker,” Dan 8:13 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
18. ] The person spoken of was unknown even by name, as appears from Mark and Luke, where he is to be found by the turning in of a man with a pitcher of water . The Lord spoke not from any previous arrangement, as some have thought, but in virtue of His knowledge, and command of circumstances. Compare the command ch. Mat 21:2 sq., and that in ch. Mat 17:27 . In the words here must be involved the additional circumstance mentioned by Mark and Luke, but perhaps unknown to our narrator: see note on Luk 22:10 , where the fullest account is found.
The words ., common to the three accounts, do not imply that the man was a disciple of our Lord . It was the common practice during the feast for persons to receive strangers into their houses gratuitously, for the purpose of eating the Passover: and in this description of Himself in addressing a stranger, our Lord has a deep meaning, as (perhaps, but see note) in in ch. Mat 21:3 . ‘Our Master and thine says.’ It is His form of ‘pressing’ for the service of the King of this earth, the things that are therein.
is not ‘the time of the feast ,’ but my time, i.e. for suffering: see Joh 7:8 a [169] . freq. There is no reason for supposing from this expression that was aware of its meaning. The bearers of the message were; and the words, to the receiver of it, bore with them a weighty subjective reason, which, with such a title as prefixed, he was bound to respect. For these words we are indebted to St. Matthew’s narrative.
[169] alii = some cursive mss.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 26:18 . , go ye into the city, i.e. , Jerusalem. , to such a one, evidently no sufficient direction. Mk. and Lk. are more explicit. Mt. here, as often, abbreviates. Doubtless a previous understanding had been come to between Jesus and an unknown friend in Jerusalem. Euthy. suggests that a roundabout direction was given to keep Judas in ignorance as to the rendezvous. ., my time (of death). Some (Grotius, Speaker’s Com. , Carr, Camb. N.T.) find in the words a reason for anticipating the time of the Paschal Feast, and so one of the indications, even in the Synoptics, that John’s date of the Passion is the true one. . ., I make or keep (present, not future), a usual expression in such a connection. Examples in Raphel. . .: making thirteen with the Master, a suitable number ( justa , Grotius), between the prescribed limits of ten and twenty. The lamb had to be entirely consumed (Exo 12:4 ; Exo 12:43 ). Did Jesus and the Twelve eat the Paschal lamb?
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
into. Greek. eis. App-104. as in verses: Mat 26:30, Mat 26:32, Mat 26:41, Mat 30:45, Mat 30:52, Mat 30:71. such a man = a certain one. Greek. deina. Occurs only here in N.T.
Master = Teacher. App-98. Mat 26:3.
at thy house = with (App-104.) thee.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
18.] The person spoken of was unknown even by name, as appears from Mark and Luke, where he is to be found by the turning in of a man with a pitcher of water. The Lord spoke not from any previous arrangement, as some have thought, but in virtue of His knowledge, and command of circumstances. Compare the command ch. Mat 21:2 sq., and that in ch. Mat 17:27. In the words here must be involved the additional circumstance mentioned by Mark and Luke, but perhaps unknown to our narrator: see note on Luk 22:10, where the fullest account is found.
The words ., common to the three accounts, do not imply that the man was a disciple of our Lord. It was the common practice during the feast for persons to receive strangers into their houses gratuitously, for the purpose of eating the Passover: and in this description of Himself in addressing a stranger, our Lord has a deep meaning, as (perhaps, but see note) in in ch. Mat 21:3. Our Master and thine says. It is His form of pressing for the service of the King of this earth, the things that are therein.
is not the time of the feast, but my time, i.e. for suffering: see Joh 7:8 a[169]. freq. There is no reason for supposing from this expression that was aware of its meaning. The bearers of the message were; and the words, to the receiver of it, bore with them a weighty subjective reason, which, with such a title as prefixed, he was bound to respect. For these words we are indebted to St. Matthews narrative.
[169] alii = some cursive mss.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 26:18. , a certain man) This word is put instead of a proper name.[1122]- , the Master) Therefore the host in question was a disciple, but not one of the Twelve.- , My time) which I have long foreseen and foretold, when I shall suffer.- , …, I celebrate the Passover, etc.) A courteous mode of announcing the fact to that ready disciple at whose house the Master was about to celebrate the Passover. It is astonishing that some learned men should have called in question, or denied the fact, of our Lords having then celebrated the Passover; see Mat 26:17-19, the commencement of Mat 26:30, and Luk 22:7-8; Luk 22:12; Luk 22:14-15.
[1122] i.e. Our Lord mentioned the mans name, though St Matthew has omitted it.-(I. B.)
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Go: Mar 14:13-16, Luk 22:10-13
The Master: Mat 26:49, Mat 21:3, Mat 23:8, Mat 23:10, Mar 5:35, Joh 11:28, Joh 20:16
My time: Mat 26:2, Luk 22:53, Joh 7:6, Joh 7:30, Joh 12:23, Joh 13:1, Joh 17:1
Reciprocal: Mat 21:2 – General Mat 22:16 – Master
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6:18
Jesus directed them to go to a certain man in the city and deliver the request of their Master to him. Notice Jesus called it my time; that is, his time of crucifixion was at hand and he needed to eat the pass-over that evening. Also, since it was a special date, he wanted to eat it in a private house and hence made the request for the use of this man’s house to be occupied by him and his apostles.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 26:18. Go into the city. Addressed to two of his disciples (Mark), Peter and John (Luke).
To such a man. The name is not given. Mark and Luke give the sign by which they should find the right person: a man should meet them, bearing a pitcher of water, and following him, they should address the master of the house he entered. Possibly the householder was a believer; of a previous understanding there is no hint. Such hospitality was usual on such occasions. This mode of directing the disciples would prevent Judas from knowing the place in time to betray our Lord at the Passover meal.
The Master saith. The man must have recognized to some extent our Lords authority.
My time is at hand. The time of suffering; not the time of my Passover, over against the ordinary time of observing it. How far either the disciples or the householder understood this is uncertain.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
The city was Jerusalem. The identity of the man to whom Jesus referred His disciples, Peter and John (Luk 22:8), was not important enough for any of the evangelists to record. Obviously Jesus was planning this Passover meal carefully (cf. Mat 21:2-3). To the disciples and the man responsible for the room, the time to which Jesus referred was the time of the Passover. Later the disciples realized that the time Jesus meant was the time Jesus would culminate His mission. They complied with Jesus’ instructions. Perhaps Jesus kept the location of the Passover secret so Judas could not inform the religious leaders.