Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 7:44
And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped [them] with the hairs of her head.
44. Seest thou this woman ] Rather, Dost thou mark? Hitherto the Pharisee, in accordance with his customs and traditions, had hardly deigned to throw upon her one disdainful glance. Now Jesus bids him look full upon her to shew him that she had really done the honours of his house. Her love had more than atoned for his coldness.
We notice in the language here that rhythmic parallelism, which is often traceable in the words of our Lord, at periods of special emotion.
Into thine house I entered:
Water upon my feet thou gavest not,
But she with her tears bedewed my feet,
And with her tresses wiped them.
A kiss thou gavedst me not:
But she, since I entered, ceased not earnestly kissing my feet.
My head with oil thou anointedst not,
But she anointed my feet with perfume.
Wherefore I say to thee, Her sins, her many sins, have been forgiven, because she loved much.
But he to whom little is being forgiven loveth little.
“As oft as I think over this event,” says Gregory the Great, “I am more disposed to weep over it than to preach upon it.”
thou gavest me no water for my feet ] Thus Simon had treated his guest with such careless indifference as to have neglected the commonest courtesies and comforts. To sandalled travellers on those burning, rocky, dusty paths, water for the feet was a necessity; Joh 13:4-5. “ Wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree” Gen 18:4. “Tarry all night, and wash your feet,” Gen 19:2. “He brought them into his house, and they washed their feet,” Jdg 19:21. “If she have washed the saints’ feet,” 1Ti 5:10.
hath washed ] Rather, bedewed or wetted.
with tears ] “The most priceless of waters.” Bengel. “She poured forth tears, the blood of the heart.” S. Aug.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Seest thou this woman? – You see what this woman has done to me, compared with what you have done. She has shown me expressions of regard which you, in your own house, have not shown.
I entered into thine house – I came at your invitation, where I might expect all the usual rites of hospitality.
Thou gavest me no water for my feet – Among Eastern people it was customary, before eating, to wash the feet; and to do this, or to bring water for it, was one of the rites of hospitality. See Gen 18:4; Jdg 19:21. The reasons for this were, that they wore sandals, which covered only the bottom of the feet, and that when they ate they reclined on couches or sofas. It became therefore necessary that the feet should be often washed.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Luk 7:44
Simon, seest thou this woman?
—
Penitence worth seeing
Not only with the bodily eye, for with that he saw and mistook, but with consideration and observation. The deportment of a true penitent is worth our seeing; their carriage and conversation is worthy observation. (N. Rogers.)
Thou gavest Me no water for My feet: Ceremonies of courtesy
And, to reason from the less to the greater, if ritual observances are requisite for the full welcome of friends, think it not enough in entertaining your Saviour that you give Him the substance of good usage, neglecting the compliments. Simon, you see, here gave Him both meat and welcome, yet the neglect of washing, kissing, and anointing is not well taken. When we come to His house, and to His ordinances, as to the word, sacraments, prayer, we make Him good cheer, He esteems Himself then feasted; but if we perform not these things with the decency of outward carriage, we give Him neither water, kiss, nor oil. Believe it, our-best actions receive either life or bane from their circumstances; the substance or matter of a work may be good, and yet the work cannot be so called, unless it be done mode et forma. Velvet is good matter to make a garment, timber goad matter to build a house; and yet the one may be so marred in the cutting and the other in the framing, as that neither the one nor the other shall attain the name of good. What is good in the substance may be sin in the circumstance, and for want of care about the manner, the best work may be done thanklessly. (N. Rogers.)
She hath washed My feet with tears
There are two sorts of tears, as shows St. Austin. Some are commendable, others are discommendable.
1. Commendable tears are natural or spiritual. Natural tears, as Jer 31:15. These discover natural affection, and being well bounded are not to be blamed (Luk 23:28).
2. Spiritual tears are either tears of passion and contrition, as Mat 26:75, or of compassion and devotion, as Jer 9:1-2; Luk 19:1-48. Tears culpable or discommendable are likewise of two sorts, temporal or infernal.
1. Temporal, are those shed in this life by wicked ones. And they are of two sorts, worldly or hypocritical.
(1) Worldly tears are those which are occasioned merely for worldly losses. Of these we read in Eze 8:14; Hos 7:14; Heb 12:1-29.
(2) Hypocritical tears are those which are produced from dissimulation and deceit. Of these we read in Jer 41:5-6.
2. Infernal tears are those shed by the damned in hell (Luk 13:28; Mat 24:51; Mat 25:30). (N. Rogers.)
The smart of sin a good sign
And as it is in a diseased body or with some old sore, if in the dressing of the wound no pain be felt, we conclude the flesh is dead, but when the patient begins to complain of the pain and is sensible of the smart, then it is taken for a good sign that the cure is in a good forwardness. (N. Rogers.)
Is shedding of tears absolutely necessary in godly sorrow?
May not the heart be drowned, and yet the eyes dry? Tears are additions and necessary appendences of true repentance, but not always necessary and true tokens of it. Some have repented truly who have not wept, and some have wept bitterly who have not repented truly. All who shed tears are not straightway penitents; the hardest marble against some weather may weep. And how often do we see the dew to stand on the blasted corn or grass. There are eyeing waters spoken of by Jeremiah, as well as clouds without water, spoken of by St. Jude. It is an easy matter to give you instances Gen 17:3-4; 1Sa 24:17; Mal 2:13). Tears are deceitful things; nothing sooner dried up than a tear, and, therefore, not to be trusted too far. For a man may as well go to his graves end by water as by land. (N. Rogers.)
Tears few at first
In a deep or fresh wound in the body, there is not first that pain felt, nor so much blood seen, as is in a little cut of the finger, because the part is astonied for the time. So is it sometimes with the soul. The wine vessel, you know, without vent runs not though it be ready to burst. (N. Rogers.)
Tears vocal
Tears have a voice with them, nay, they are not only vocal, but importunate. What do you weeping, and breaking my heart? saith St. Act 21:13). You may remember how the tears of Moses, whilst he was floating in an ark of bulrushes on the water, prevailed with Pharaohs daughter. The babe wept, saith the text, and she had compassion on him (Exo 2:6). (N. Rogers.)
To answer the greatness of our sin with the greatness of our sorrow
According to the proportion of the one, should the other be proportioned. Look how grievously we have sinned, so greatly should our sins be bewailed and lamented. A deep wound must have a large plaster, and our repentance, as showeth St. Cyprian, must not be less than our fault. (N. Rogers.)
Sorrow for sin must not be slight
Where sins are great, think it not enough that your sorrow be slight. If thy sins be small and little, thy sorrow may be the less, but if great, thy grief must be suitable. A garment that is deeply soiled cannot, without much rubbing and many layers, become clean. Where there is a deep pollution, and of a scarlet tincture, there must be not only ablutio, but balneatio, a soaking and bathing in the tears of contrition, as is required in Isa 1:16. But may not a man exceed in sorrow, may he not grieve over much? A man cannot exceed in the displeasure of his will against sin, yet he may in the testification of his displeasure by weeping and macerating of his body. Too much moistening chokes a plant, when moderate moistening quickens it. Too much rain gulls the earth, and standing waters on low grounds breed nothing but flags and rushes. So it is with our hearts when they prove standing pools. (N. Rogers.)
Sorrow for sin measured by duration
A torrent may run faster for the present than a continual current, but the current is to be preferred, and hath more water in it than the torrent. One keeps open house at Christmas, but all the year after the gates are shut; he hath taken up a citys refuge. Another keeps a constant and full table all the year, though at that time he may not be compared with the other for abundance. Which of these two now would you count the best housekeeper? I suppose you will grant the latter. So is it here. (N. Rogers.)
Grace quickened by tears
By tears, likewise, grace is quickened. They are not like well water, springing out of the bowels of the earth, nor like rain, distilling from the clouds which clear the air, but they are as the dew of Hermon, which makes all herbs to flourish. Such as mourn for sin grow
up as the lily, and fasten themselves in grace like the trees of Lebanon. They are like the former and the latter rain, they make the heart fruitful in all good works, as you see here in Mary. It is a sovereign water, and will fetch the sinner again to the life of grace though never so far gone. As for glory hereafter (Psa 126:5). Thus as the sun draws up vapours from the earth, not for itself, but to restore them back again; so cloth God our tears. But the bottle spoken of (Psa 56:8), and the vial Rev 5:8), are for the saints both. In them He preserves both their tears and prayers. Not a drop of their eye-water will He suffer to run in waste, He catcheth every tear before it comes to the ground; and till death close up those two fountains, Jor and Dan, flowing from Mount Lebanon, they shall never fail running, but then shall our souls be wafted in them from grace to glory, as they were first transported by them here from sin to grace. (N. Rogers.)
The city of waters taken by Satan
If, in case what hath been said of the good which our tears procure for us prevail not, then give me leave to add a word of the great danger which follows upon the neglect of them, and it shall be only by way of allusion to that we read (2Sa 12:27). Joab having taken the city of waters, he sent to David and willed him to come quickly to take the city itself, well knowing that it could not hold out, the city of waters being cut off before. Thus when Satan hath taken the eyes and cut off the pipes, can you think your soul can long hold out against his temptations? (N. Rogers.)
Wiped them with the hairs of her head
1. In true repentance there is a converting of those things which have been abused to the service of sin to the service of God.
2. That the best ornament of the body, in the judgment of a penitent, is not too good to be employed about the meanest piece of service which concerns Christ. (N. Rogers.)
Truth impressed by living examples
After all, there is no so forcible way of impressing truth as by a living example. The parable of the two debtors could but faintly show the power of forgiveness to win gratitude, in comparison with that vivid picture of the penitent, trusting, grateful woman, washing the feet of her Saviour with her tears, and wiping them with her dishevelled hair. And so it has been from the beginning. Would you realize the power of one person in tempting others to ruin? Seest thou this woman Eve, or this woman Jezebel? Would you realize the beauty of fidelity in friendship? Seest thou this woman Ruth? Would you realize the grandeur of moral heroism? Seest thou this woman Esther? Would you realize the holy influence of a mothers love and faithfulness? Seest thou this woman Jochebed, or this woman Hannah, or this woman Eunice? Would you realize the power of unwavering faith? Seest thou this woman of Syro-Phoenicia? Would you realize the force and beauty of any trait of human character, or the preciousness of any truth which God would have his children to bear in mind? Seest thou this woman before you, who illustrates it as it could not be taught in any other way? That woman is your mother, your wife, your sister, your friend, your neighbour. Look at her glorious example, and thank God for the blessedness of His grace in a willing and trustful human heart. (H. Clay Trumbull.)
Seest thou this woman?
Simon had not seen the woman yet He had only seen the sinner. Look, then, on the woman at last, O Pharisee. Look upon her in the light of the parable you have just heard. Look on thyself, too, for as yet thou hast not seen thyself–the Pharisee hiding the man from thy incurious eyes. Thou poor blind Pharisee I if love be the proof of forgiveness, how much hast thou, loving so little, been forgiven? (S. Cox, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 44. Thou gavest me no water] In this respect Simon was sadly deficient in civil respect, whether this proceeded from forgetfulness or contempt. The custom of giving water to wash the guest’s feet was very ancient. See instances in Ge 18:4; Ge 24:32; Jdg 19:21; 1Sa 25:41. In Hindoostan it is the custom, that when a superior enters the house of an inferior, the latter washes his feet, and gives him water to rinse his mouth before he eats. See AYEEN AKBERY, vol. iii. p. 226.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
44-47. I entered . . . no wateracompliment to guests. Was this “much love?” Was it any?
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he turned to the woman,…. That stood behind him at his feet,
and said to Simon, seest thou this woman? and what she has done? pointing to her, and comparing him, and her, and their actions together, whereby he might judge of the preceding parable, and how fitly it might be applied to the present case:
I entered into thine house; not of his own accord, but by the invitation of Simon, and therefore might have expected the usual civilities:
thou gavest me no water for my feet: to wash them with, no, not so much as water; a civility very common in those hot countries, where walking without stockings, and only with sandals, they needed often washing; and which was very refreshing, and was not only used to travellers and strangers, but to guests, and was usually done by the servants of the house; [See comments on Lu 7:38].
but she hath washed my feet with tears. The Persic version reads, “with the tears of her eyes”; which made a bath for his feet;
and wiped them with the hairs of her head. The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions read only, “with her hair”, which she used instead of a towel, when Simon neither gave him water to wash with, nor a towel to wipe with.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Turning (). Second aorist passive participle.
Seest thou (). For the first time Jesus looks at the woman and he asks the Pharisee to look at her. She was behind Jesus. Jesus was an invited guest. The Pharisee had neglected some points of customary hospitality. The contrasts here made have the rhythm of Hebrew poetry. In each contrast the first word is the point of defect in Simon:
water (44), kiss (45), oil (46).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon,” (kai strapheis pros ten gunaika to Simon! ephe) “And then turning directly toward the woman for the first time, he said to Simon, the Pharisee host,” to apply the parable. The woman was standing behind and at the feet of Jesus, where He reclined, with His feet outward from the table, according to the custom of the times.
2) “Seest thou this woman?” (blepeis tauten ten gunaikai) “Do you see this woman?” Of course he did, but he did not seem to realize what she had done, what the real meaning of it was, how a change had come in her heart that impelled her actions on this occasion.
3) I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet:” (eiselthon sou eis oikian hudor moi epi podas ouk edokas) “I came into your house (residence) and you gave me no water for (to put on or wash) my feet,” as a simple hospitable courtesy, that when ignored was practically an insult, a violation of common courtesy and Pharisaic rule, Gen 18:4; Jdg 19:21.
4) “But she hath washed my feet with tears,” (oute de tois dakrusin ebreksen mou tous podas) “Yet this woman has wet (washed) my feet with tears,” of real gratitude, sincerity, of contrition, at a great sacrifice of cost to her, according to her ability. She did it out of love, much love, Luk 7:42.
5) “And wiped them with the hairs of her head.” (kai, tais thriksin sutes eksemaksen) “And has wiped them with her hair,” the hairs of her head, Luk 7:38. Jesus pointed to the woman’s works of gratitude, that Simon had seen, to justify His acceptance of what she had done by faith. But when he dismissed or sent the woman away forgiven, in peace of soul, He called attention to her faith; One can see or recognize the faith of another by the deeds he does and attitudes he shows. For only in such is faith visible, Jas 2:14-26; Tit 2:14; Tit 3:4-8.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
44. And turning to the woman. The Lord appears to compare Simon with the woman, in such a manner as to make him chargeable with nothing more than light offenses. But this is spoken only in the way of concession. “Suppose now, Simon,” he says, “that the guilt from which God discharges thee was light, (244) and that this woman has been guilty of many and very heinous offenses. Yet you see how she proves by the effect that she has obtained pardon. For what mean those profuse tears, those frequent kisses of the feet, that precious ointment? What mean they but to acknowledge, that she had been weighed down by an enormous burden of condemnation? And now she regards the mercy of God with fervor of love proportioned to her conviction that her necessity had been great.”
From the words of Christ, therefore, we are not at liberty to infer, that Simon had been a debtor to a small amount, or that he was absolved from guilt. (245) It is more probable that, as he was a blind hypocrite, he was still plunged in the filth of his sins. But Christ insists on this single point, that, however wicked the woman may have been, she gave undoubted proofs of her righteousness, by leaving no kind of duty undone to testify her gratitude, and by acknowledging, in every possible way, her vast obligations to God. At the same time, Christ reminds Simon, that he has no right to flatter himself, as if he were free from all blame; for that he too needed mercy; and that if even he does not obtain the favor of God without pardon, he ought to look upon this woman’s gifts, whatever might have been her former sins, as evidences of repentance and gratitude.
We must attend to the points of contrast, in which the woman is preferred to Simon. She moistened his feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head; while he did not even order water to be given, according to custom. She did not cease to kiss his feet, while he did not deign to receive Christ with the kiss of hospitality. (246) She poured precious ointment on his feet, while he did not even anoint his head with oil. But why did our Lord, who was a model of frugality and economy, permit the expense of the ointment? It was because, in this way, the wretched sinner testified that she owed all to him. He had no desire of such luxuries, was not gratified by the sweet odor, and did not approve of gaudy dress. But he looked only at her extraordinary zeal to testify her repentance, which is also held out to us by Luke as an example; for her sorrow, which is the commencement of repentance, was proved by her tears. By placing herself at Christ’s feet behind him, and there lying on the ground, she discovered her modesty and humility. By the ointment, she declared that she offered, as a sacrifice to Christ, herself and all that she possessed. Every one of these things it is our duty to imitate; but the pouring of the ointment was an extraordinary act, which it would be improper to consider as a rule. (247)
(244) “ Mettons le cas, Simon, que le fardeau des pechez, desquels Dieu t’a descharge fust petit;” — “let us put the case, Simon, that the burden of the sins, from which God has discharged thee, was small.”
(245) “ Et s’il avoit este absous de la condamnation qu’il avoit encourue;” —”and if he had been absolved from the condemnation which he had incurred.”
(246) “ En lieu que l’autre n’a pas mesme daigne le baiser par une facon commune de civilite;” — “whereas the other did not even deign to kiss him, according to an ordinary custom of civility.”
(247) “ A este un acte special et extraordinaire, duquel si on vouloit faire une reigle generale, ce seroit un abus;” — “was a special and extraordinary act, of which, if we wished to make a general rule, it would be a mistake.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(44) Thou gavest me no water for my feet.There had, then, been no real respect or reverence in the Pharisees invitation. It was hardly more than an act of ostentatious patronage. It was honour enough for the carpenters son to be admitted into the house. The acts of courtesy which were due to well-nigh every guest (comp. Notes on Mat. 3:11; Joh. 13:5; 1Ti. 5:10), and which a Rabbi might expect as a thing of course, were, in his judgment, superfluous. Possibly the fact which afterwards drew down the censure of the Pharisees (Mar. 7:8) had already become known, and may have influenced Simon. If the new Teacher cared so little about ablutions, why take the trouble to provide them for Him?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
44. Turned to the woman Half inclining his face, as he reclines upon the couch, towards her, while he speaks from the couch to Simon.
I entered into thy house Our Lord knew the honour that entrance conferred upon the house, but the host did not. Very touching is the reminder to the Pharisee of his want, not of courtesy to him as a guest, but of the tokens of love to him as a Saviour. Had Jesus come from a journey, the offices he named would have been matters of obligatory hospitality; and Jesus was evidently invited from the town. Beautiful indeed is the threefold contrast. Simon withheld water; she gave tears. Simon kissed not his face; she kissed his feet. Simon furnished no customary oil; she poured forth the costly ointment.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And turning to the woman, he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered into your house, you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wetted my feet with her tears, and wiped them with her hair.”
Up to this point Simon had probably been ignoring the woman and pretending that he had not noticed her. So Jesus pointedly draws attention to her. And then He draws attention to what she had done that Simon had left undone. When Jesus had entered his house no one had washed His feet.
It was normally considered polite to arrange for the feet of guests to be washed once they had come in off the dusty road. The failure to arrange it for Jesus must have been deliberate. Perhaps Simon had wanted to make it clear to the other guests that Jesus was not here because he thoroughly approved of Him, but more under sufferance; that He was not so much a guest as an invitee. He was indicating that he was wanting to find out what He had to say, but must not be thought to be too interested, or making too many concessions. It would not be a discourtesy, only an indication that Jesus was not a particularly welcome guest.
The fact that Jesus drew attention to it demonstrates that He wanted to strike his conscience and give a gentle rebuke. Here was Simon criticising the woman in his mind for being a ‘sinner’, but in fact Simon was far more guilty than the woman. He had failed in offering basic hospitality to one whom he considered might well be a prophet of God (which did put him in the wrong. It was a discourtesy to God).
The fact that there were sufficient tears to wipe His feet demonstrates the deep feeling the woman was experiencing. Her gratitude to Jesus was overflowing. And then when she had washed His feet she used her hair to dry them.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Luk 7:44. Seest thou this woman? The kindness which this woman shewed to Jesus, was very extraordinary; therefore, as he had all the softer and finer passions of human nature in their utmost purity and perfection, he was greatly moved with the consciousness that she had of her guilt, the sincerity of her repentance, and the profoundness of her humility; and with gracious condescension expressed the sense he had of it: for, in the hearing of all the guests he recounted particularly, and with approbation, the several actions by which she had testified her respect; and because by accident she had wetted his feet with her tears, he gave it an agreeable turn, well knowingfrom what spring her tears had flowed. That the company might know it was not offensive to him, he called it a washing of his feet; a mark of respect, which was usually paid to guests on their coming into a house, especially after travelling; but which Simon had neglected. The words of the subsequent clause of this verse, Thou gavest me no water for my feet, may sound somewhat harsh to us; but will be found agreeable to the nicest propriety, if the manners of the eastern countries are considered. There, persons of the highest rank did not think itbeneath them to honour their guests by performing offices of this kind for them. Thus in Gen 18:7-8 we read, that on the arrival of the three angels, Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a calf, and took butter and milk, and the calf which his servant had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree to serve them, and they did eat. Something of this sort we find, Iliad, 9. ver. 205. And Dr. Shaw, (Trav. p. 301.) tells us, that these customs subsist among the eastern nations to this day, particularly among the Arabs, who are remarkable for retaining their ancient manners; and that the person who first presents himself to welcome a stranger, and wash his feet, is the master of the family: for as they still walk barefooted, or with sandals only, this piece of civility in some way or other is absolutely necessary
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Luk 7:44-46 . Jesus places the affectionate services rendered by the woman in contrast with the cold respectable demeanour of the Pharisee, who had not observed towards Him at all the customs of courtesy (foot-washing, kissing) and of deference (anointing of the head).
. ] I came into thy house . The being placed first sharpens the rebuke.
That, moreover, even the foot-washing before meals was not absolutely a rule (it was observed especially in the case of guests coming off a journey , Gen 18:4 ; Jdg 19:21 ; 1Sa 25:41 ; 1Ti 5:10 ) is plain from Joh 13 , and hence the neglect on the part of the heartless Pharisee is the more easily explained.
. .] moistened my feet . Comp. on Joh 11:32 ; Mat 8:3 .
Observe the contrasts of the less and the greater : (1) and ; (2) , which is plainly understood as a kiss upon the mouth , and . . . ; (3) . and . . ( is an aromatic anointing oil, and more precious than , see Xen. Conv. ii. 3).
] loosely hyperbolical in affectionate consideration, suggested by the mention of the kiss which was appropriate at the entering .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.
Ver. 44. She hath washed my feet with tears ] Her heart was a sacred alembic, a out of which those tears were distilled. Never did any man read his pardon with dry eyes.
Washed my feet with tears, &c. ] We read not that the Virgin Mary ever did as this greater sinner did. Repentance is the fair child of that foul mother, sin, as the Romans said of Pompey, . And it is question whether more glorifies God, innocence or penitence?
a An apparatus formerly used in distilling, consisting of a cucurbit or gourd-shaped vessel containing the substance to be distilled, surmounted by the head or cap, or alembic proper, the beak of which conveyed the vaporous products to a receiver, in which they were condensed. It is now superseded by the retort and worm still. D
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
44 46. ] It would not appear that Simon had been deficient in the ordinary courtesies paid by a host to his guests for these, though marks of honour sometimes paid, were not (even the washing of the feet, except when coming from a journey) invariably paid to guests: but that he had taken no particular pains to shew affection or reverence for his Guest. Respecting water for the feet, see Gen 18:4 ; Jdg 19:21 . Observe the contrasts here: , (‘fudit lacrymas, sanguinem cordis,’ Aug [66] Serm. xcix. (xxiii.) 1, vol. v.), . (on the face ), : ., (which was more precious) .
[66] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo , 395 430
. ] These words will explain one difficulty in the circumstances of the anointing: how such a woman came into the guest-chamber of such a Pharisee.
She appears by them to have entered simultaneously with our Lord and His disciples . Nor do Luk 7:36-37 at all preclude this idea: may mean, ‘having knowledge that He was going to dine,’ &c. If she came in His train, the Pharisee would not exclude her, as He was accustomed to gather such to hear Him: it was the touching at which he wondered.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Luk 7:44-46 . : Jesus looks at the woman now for the first time, and asks His host to look at her, the despised one, that he may learn a lesson from her, by a contrast to be drawn between her behaviour and his own in application of the parable. A sharply marked antithesis runs through the description. ; ; (common oil), (precious ointment); . There is a kind of poetic rhythm in the words, as is apt to be the case when men speak under deep emotion.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Seest thou = Host thou mark. Greek. blepo. App-133. The Lord calls Simon’s attention to her works, but He calls the woman’s attention (Luk 7:47) to His own grace towards her.
thou gavest, &c. Op. Gen 18:4; Gen 19:2. Jdg 19:21. 1Ti 5:10. no. Greek. ou. App-105.
for = upon. Greek. epi. App-104.
she. Emphatic.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
44-46.] It would not appear that Simon had been deficient in the ordinary courtesies paid by a host to his guests-for these, though marks of honour sometimes paid, were not (even the washing of the feet, except when coming from a journey) invariably paid to guests:-but that he had taken no particular pains to shew affection or reverence for his Guest. Respecting water for the feet, see Gen 18:4; Jdg 19:21. Observe the contrasts here:-,- (fudit lacrymas, sanguinem cordis, Aug[66] Serm. xcix. (xxiii.) 1, vol. v.),- . (on the face),- :- .,- (which was more precious) .
[66] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, 395-430
.] These words will explain one difficulty in the circumstances of the anointing: how such a woman came into the guest-chamber of such a Pharisee.
She appears by them to have entered simultaneously with our Lord and His disciples. Nor do Luk 7:36-37 at all preclude this idea:- may mean, having knowledge that He was going to dine, &c. If she came in His train, the Pharisee would not exclude her, as He was accustomed to gather such to hear Him: it was the touching at which he wondered.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 7:44. , this) The woman, by her very attitude and appearance at the time, was refuting Simon, and moving the emotions of all present [save Simon].-, thy) Therefore in this instance Simons obligation [as being in his own house, and the host] was greater than that of the woman.- , thou hast not given) Simon treated Jesus in the way that a guest who is not honoured is treated.- , with tears) The Lord observed and notices all the circumstantial details of her pious action: Psa 56:9 (8). Tears are the most precious of waters.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Simon
See Jam 2:14-26. When Jesus would justify the woman in the eyes of Simon, He points to her works, for only through her works could Simon see the proof of her faith; but when He would send the woman away in peace, He points to her faith, not her works. See; Tit 2:14; Tit 3:4-8. His own works can never be to the believer his own ground of assurance, which must rest upon the work of Christ (cf. Mat 7:22; Mat 7:23). See “Assurance”; Isa 32:17; Jud 1:1.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Seest: Luk 7:37-39
thou: Gen 19:2, Jdg 19:21, 1Sa 25:41, 1Ti 5:10, Jam 2:6
Reciprocal: Gen 18:4 – wash your feet Gen 24:32 – wash Gen 43:24 – General 1Ki 21:29 – Seest thou Pro 26:12 – Seest Son 6:13 – What Isa 61:2 – to comfort Mat 26:10 – Why Mar 9:24 – with Luk 7:38 – wash Joh 13:5 – feet 1Co 13:7 – hopeth 2Co 8:12 – if Jam 2:3 – to the
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
4
Simon had other guests (verse 49), and evidently they were “rating” a little higher than Jesus, and had received the regular attention usually paid to visitors. For some reason, Jesus had been neglected and he decided to make a lesson of it.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Luk 7:44. Seest thou this woman? He thus brings face to face the two persons whose cases He had set forth in the parable. Possibly Simon had hitherto avoided looking at her, or in any case had looked down upon her; now according to his own verdict he must look up to her.
Thine house. The emphasis rests upon the word thy, thus pointing the rebuke. It was thy duty, rather than hers, to show such attentions, for I became thy guest. While ordinary courtesy did not demand from the host all the acts here alluded to, they were bestowed on honored guests. Simon had not been rude and uncivil, but loving little, he had treated our Lord as an ordinary guest. With this treatment the conduct of the woman, who loved much, is contrasted. Simon did not give water, she gave tears, and instead of a linen cloth the thousand hairs of her head.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, 1. How our Saviour recounts and sums up the several particular instances of this woman’s love and respect towards himself: she washed, wiped, kissed, and anointed his feet, according to the custom of those eastern countries. Love will creep where it cannot go, it will stoop to the meanest offices, and is ambitous of the highest services for, and towards the persons we sincerely love.
Observe, 2. The words of comfort given by our Saviour to this poor woman: Thy sins, which are many, are forgiven thee.
Thence learn, that the pardoning mercy of God is boundless and unlimited; it is not limited to any degree of sins or sinners; Thy sins, that are many, are forgiven thee: and thy sins, which are heinous, are forgiven also.
Observe, 3. What is the effect and fruit, of great pardoning mercy; it is great love; her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. Her love to Christ was the effect of his pardoning love to her, and not the cause of it; she did not first love much, and then Christ forgave her, and then she loved much. Her love was a love of gratitude, because she was pardoned, and not a love of merit to purchase and procure her pardon.
The Papists interpret this word (for) as if it were the antecedent cause of her forgiveness; whereas it is a consequential sign and evidence, that the free grace and mercy of Christ had forgiven her; her many and great sins were forgiven her, and therefore she loved much. The debt is not forgiven, because the debtor loves his creditor; but the debtor therefore loves, because the debt is forgiven. Forgiveness goes before, and love follows after.
Hence learn, that much love will follow great forgiveness. Love will work in the heart towards God, in some proportion to that love which we have experienced from God.
Observe lastly, the very gracious dismission which this woman meets with from our blessed Saviour: what could she desire that is not here granted to her? Here is remission, safety, faith, and peace; all these here meet to make a contrite soul happy: remission is the ground of her safety, faith the ground of her peace, peace the fruit of her faith, and salvation the issue of her remission.
O woman! Great was thy sin, great was Christ’s pardoning grace, and great was thy joy and comfort: Thy sins are forgiven thee, thy faith hath saved thee, go in peace.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Luk 7:44-48. And he turned to the woman That had been a scandalous, notorious sinner, and was the greater, the five hundred pence debtor. The Pharisee, however, though the less, the fifty pence debtor, yet was a debtor too; which was more than he thought himself to be, judging rather that God was his debtor, Luk 18:10-11. Seest thou this woman Afflicted and distressed as she is? and canst thou avoid taking notice of the extraordinary tenderness and affectionate regard to me that she has now manifested? I entered into thy house As a guest, on thine own express invitation; thou gavest me no water for my feet Though that be so customary and necessary a refreshment on these occasions. But she hath washed my feet with her tears Tears of affection for me, tears of affliction for sin; and wiped them with the hairs of her head In token of her great love to me. Thou gavest me no kiss When I first came under thy roof. So little was thy love to me. It was customary with the Jews to show respect and kindness to their welcome guests, by saluting them with a kiss, by washing their feet, and anointing their heads with oil, or some fine ointment. It is possible Simon might omit some of these civilities, lest his brethren, who sat at the table with him, should think he paid Jesus too much respect; and, if there was any such slight intended, it might be an additional reason for our Lords taking such particular notice of the neglect. But this woman, since the time I came in Or rather, as many copies read it, , she came in, hath not ceased to kiss even my feet With the greatest humility and affection. My head with oil thou didst not anoint Though few entertainments fail of being attended with that circumstance, (see Deu 28:40; Mic 6:15; Psa 2:5; and Psa 104:15; and Psa 141:5;) but she, as thou seest, hath anointed my feet with precious and fragrant ointment; wherefore I say unto thee I declare it openly, both for her vindication and for thy admonition; her sins, which are many And exceedingly heinous, as I well know; are forgiven Freely and graciously; for Rather, therefore, as undoubtedly ought here to be translated, she loved much As I have been the means of bringing her to repentance, and to enjoy pardon and peace, she has thus testified the great love and high regard she has for me, as being persuaded that she never can sufficiently express her sense of the obligation. But to whom little is forgiven Or who thinks his debt was but small; the same loveth little Is not much affected with the kindness of the creditor that forgives him: and feels but little gratitude and love to him on that account. The substance, therefore, of our Lords answer to the Pharisee is, It is true, this woman has been a great sinner; but she is a pardoned sinner, which supposes her to be a penitent sinner: what she has done to me, is an expression of her great love to me, her Saviour, by whom her sins are forgiven: and as she is pardoned, who was so great a sinner, it may reasonably be expected that she will love her Saviour more than others, and give greater proofs of it; and if this be the fruit of her love, flowing from a sense of the pardon of her sins, it becomes me to accept of it, and ill becomes any to be offended at it. It must be carefully observed here, that her love is mentioned as the effect and evidence, not the cause of her pardon. She knew that much had been forgiven her, and therefore she loved much. It is true, Jesus had not yet given her any express intimation in word of the pardon of her sins; yet, having, by his sermons and his grace attending her hearing them, brought her to true repentance, without doubt she was assured of her pardon by the general doctrine of the gospel, which she had heard; by the promise of rest, which Jesus had lately made to all weary and heavy-laden sinners; and especially by the Spirit of adoption, which he had sent into her heart, sealing forgiveness upon her conscience, begetting her again to immortal hopes, and filling her with joy and peace, through believing that God was pacified toward her after all she had done.
As a further proof of the justness of this interpretation, it may not be improper to produce here the following testimony of Dr. Whitby: Christ saith not her sins are forgiven because she loved much, but this ought to be a token, that her sins, which rendered her unworthy to touch me, have been forgiven; this great love to me being an indication of her deep sense of Gods mercy to her in pardoning her many sins; and this do I, the prophet and the Son of God, declare unto her. To this sense lead both the parable of the great debtor, to whom his lord frankly had forgiven all, for he loved much because much had been forgiven, and the conclusion of it, in these words, he that hath little forgiven, loveth little. Whence it appears, that here cannot be causal, or intimate that she was forgiven much because she loved much; the cause assigned of her forgiveness being, not her love, but faith, Luk 7:50; but only consequential, denoting the effect, or indication of the forgiveness of her many sins. So, Hos 9:15, all their iniquity was in Gilgal, , therefore there I hated them; for they did not sin in Gilgal because he hated them there; but he hated them there because there they offended. Thus also Dr. Campbell, who translates the words, Therefore her love is great, observing, The whole context shows that the particle is illative, and not causal, in this place. The parable of the debtors clearly represents the gratuitous forgiveness as the cause of the love, not the love as the cause of the forgiveness. And this, on the other hand, is, Luk 7:50 th, ascribed to her faith. Observe, reader, 1st, The Pharisee doubted whether Jesus was a prophet or not, nay, he, in effect, denied it; but Christ here shows that he was more than a prophet, that he was one who had power on earth to forgive sins, and to whom the affections and thankful acknowledgments of penitent sinners were due; in other words, that he was the Messiah, the Son of God, whose sole prerogative and right it was, in conjunction with the Father, to forgive mens sins. 2d, In testifying that this pardoned sinner loved much, because she had had much forgiven, and in signifying that to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little; he intimated to the Pharisee, that his love to Christ was so little, that he had reason to question whether he loved him at all in sincerity; and consequently, whether indeed his sins, though comparatively little, were forgiven him. From this we learn that, instead of grudging great sinners the mercy they find with Christ upon their repentance, we ought to be excited by their example to examine ourselves, whether we be indeed forgiven, and do at all love Christ. Our Lord did not make the application of this parable more directly, but left Simon to do it, because he could not but see that if love invites love, and merits a return, Jesus would have been ungenerous had he treated this woman with rudeness and contempt. Having expressed greater love to him, she deserved higher returns of gratitude from him than even Simon himself; for which reason he was not to blame when he allowed her to wash his feet with her tears, wipe them with the hairs of her head, kiss them, and anoint them with fragrant ointment. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven Having vindicated her, he spake kindly to her, and assured her, in express terms, that her sins, of which he knew she had truly repented, were actually forgiven.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Vers. 44-47. The Application.
Jesus follows an order the inverse of that which He had taken in the parable. In the latter He descends from the cause to the effect, from the debt remitted to the gratitude experienced. In the application, on the contrary, He ascends from the effect to the cause. For the effect is evident, and comes under the observation of the senses ().
Jesus describes it, Luk 7:44-46, whilst the cause is concealed (Luk 7:47), and can only be got at by means of the principle which forms the substance of the parable.
During the first part of the conversation, Jesus was turned towards Simon. He now turns towards the woman whom He is about to make the subject of His demonstration. Jesus had not complained of the want of respect and the impoliteness of His host. But He had noticed them, and felt them deeply. And now what a contrast He draws between the cold and measured welcome of the Pharisee, who appeared to think that it was honour enough to admit Him to his table, and the love shown by this woman that was a sinner! The customary bath for the feet had been omitted by the one, while copious tears were showered upon His feet by the other; the usual kiss with which the host received his guests Simon had neglected, while the woman had covered His feet with kisses; the precious perfume with which it was usual to anoint an honoured guest on a festive day (Psa 23:5) he had withheld, but she had more than made up for the omission. In fact, it is not Simon, it is she who has done Jesus the honours of the house! The omission of (Luk 7:44) in the Alex., [the hairs] of her head, is probably the result of negligence. The word perfectly suits the context; the head, as the most noble part of the body, is opposed to the feet of Jesus.
The reading , [ever since] she entered, found in one Mn., has at first glance something taking about it. But it has too little support; and the T. R., ever since I entered, is in reality preferable. Jesus thereby reminds Simon of the moment when He came under his roof, and when He had a right to expect those marks of respect and affection which had been neglected. The woman had followed Jesus so closely that she had all but entered with Him; there she was, the moment He was set at the table, to pay Him homage.
From this visible effectthe total difference between the love of the one and the love of the other, Jesus ascends, Luk 7:47, to its hidden causethe difference in the measure of forgiveness accorded to them respectively. , wherefore; properly, an account of which, that is to say, of this contrast between the respective exhibitions of your gratitude (Luk 7:44-46). This conjunction is the inverse of the therefore in Luk 7:42, which led from the cause to the foreseen effect.
We might make this wherefore bear upon the principal idea, Her sins are forgiven her. In that case we should have to regard the words , I say unto thee, as an inserted phrase, and the last proposition as an epexegetical explanation of this wherefore: Wherefore I say unto thee, her many sins are forgiven, and that because she loved much. But we may also make the wherefore bear directly on I say unto thee, and make all the rest of the verse the complement of this verb: Wherefore I say unto thee, that her many sins are forgiven her, because that… The latter is evidently the more simple construction. The reading, I said unto thee, of , would indicate that this truth was already contained in this parable. It has neither authority nor probability. How should we understand the words, for she loved much? Is love, according to Jesus, the cause of forgiveness? Catholic interpreters, and even many Protestants, understand the words in this sense: God forgives us much when we love much; little, if we love little. But, 1. In this case there is no coherence whatever between the parable and its application. On this principle, Jesus should not have asked, Luk 7:42, Which of them will love Him most? but, Which then loved Him most? The remission of the two debts of such different amounts would result from the different degrees of love in the two debtors; while, on the contrary, it is the difference between the debts remitted which produces the different amount of gratitude. 2. There would be, if possible, a more striking incoherence still between the first part of the application, Luk 7:47 a, and the second, Luk 7:47 b: To whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. To be logical, Jesus should have said precisely the contrary: Who loves little, to him little is forgiven. 3. The words, Thy faith hath saved thee (Luk 7:50), clearly show what, in Jesus’ view, was the principle on which forgiveness was granted to this woman; it was faith, not love. We must not forget that , because, frequently expresses, just as our for does, not the relation of the effect to its cause, but the relation (purely logical) of the proof to the thing proved. We may say, It is light, for the sun is risen; but we may also say, The sun is risen, for [I say this because] it is light. So in this passage the , because, for, may, and, according to what precedes and follows, must mean: I say unto thee that her many sins are forgiven, as thou must infer from this, that she loved much. Thus all is consistent, the application with the parable, this saying with the words that follow, and Jesus with Himself and with St. Paul.
Ver. 47b contains the other side of the application of this same principle: the less forgiveness, the less love. This is addressed to Simon. But with delicacy of feeling Jesus gives this severe truth the form of a general proposition, He to whom…; just as He also did with Nicodemus, Except a man be born… (Joh 3:3).
The thought expressed in this Luk 7:47 raises two difficulties: 1. May forgiveness be only partial? Then there would be men half-saved and half-lost! 2. Is it necessary to have sinned deeply in order to love much?
The real forgiveness of the least sin certainly contains in germ a complete salvation, but only in germ. If faith is maintained and grows, this forgiveness will gradually extend to all the sins of a man’s life, just as they will then become more thoroughly known and acknowledged. The first forgiveness is the pledge of all the rest. In the contrary case, the forgiveness already granted will be withdrawn, just as represented in the parable of the wicked debtor, Matthew 18; and the work of grace, instead of becoming complete, will prove abortive. All is transition here below, free transition, either to perfect salvation or to complete condemnation. As to the great amount of sin necessary in order to loving much, we need add nothing to what each of us already has; it is sufficient to estimate accurately what we have. What is wanting to the best of us, in order to love much, is not sin, but the knowledge of it.
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)
Jesus probably surprised Simon by making the woman the focus of his parable and by contrasting her with Simon. Moreover Jesus made her the heroine and Simon the villain, the opposite of how Simon thought. The woman was guilty of sins of commission, but Simon was guilty of sins of omission. All the things Simon had failed to do for Jesus were courtesies that hosts frequently extended their guests. However Simon had not acted discourteously. He had just not performed any special acts of hospitality on Jesus. [Note: A. E. Harvey, The New English Bible: Companion to the New Testament, p. 244.] The scented oil in view would have been olive oil that was plentiful and inexpensive. The woman, however, had gone far beyond courtesy and had made unusual sacrifices for Jesus out of love. Simon appears in the incident as the greater sinner of the two.