Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 15:27
And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.
27. yet the dogs eat of the crumbs ] “Yet,” of the E. V., is misleading. Translate “ for even; ” the woman takes Jesus at his word, accepts the name of reproach, and claims the little share that falls even to the dogs. No need to cast the children’s bread to the dogs, for even the dogs have crumbs from the Master’s hands.
the crumbs ] Probably as in E. V., not, as Trench suggests, the pieces of bread used by the guests to wipe their hands on and then thrown to the dogs.
their masters’ table ] The “Masters” must be interpreted to mean God, not, as by some, the Jewish people.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 27. Truth, Lord] , Yes, Lord. This appears to be not so much an assent, as a bold reply to our Lord’s reason for apparently rejecting her suit.
The little dogs share with the children, for they eat the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table. I do not desire what is provided for these highly favoured children, only what they leave: a single exertion of thy almighty power, in the healing of my afflicted daughter, is all that I wish for; and this the highly favoured Jews can well spare, without lessening the provision made for themselves. Is not this the sense of this noble woman’s reply?
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Mark reports it to the same sense, Mar 7:28. She goeth on after three repulses, the last of which was not without a reproach, for our Lord had implicitly called her a dog. These words are as much as if she had said, Lord, I confess the Jews are children; I am a dog, a poor heathen, no proper member of the household of God; and it is truth that it seemeth unreasonable that I, being a dog, should be served before all the children are filled. Lord, I do not beg such a full manifestation of thy power and goodness for the Gentiles. I beg but a crumb of mercy for myself and poor child; and, Lord, though we do not use to give our loaves prepared for our children to the dogs that feed under our table, crumbs of our childrens bread, as Mark expresses it, yet we suffer our dogs to gather them up. Lord, I know thou hast a plenty of grace and blessing, the children may be filled, and yet I may have some crumbs. Three things are remarkable in her answer, besides her faith so eminently expressed.
1. Her humility; she owneth herself a dog.
2. Her modesty; she begs no more than a crumb.
3. Her fervency and importunity after three repulses.
By this we learn our duty in prayer, to go to God humbly, to implore him modestly, and to be instant in prayer, going on in our duty, though we have not presently such an answer as we desire. These things, conjoined with faith, make an acceptable prayer.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And she saith, truth, Lord,…. She owns all that he had said to be true, that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel: that she was indeed but a dog, a poor sinful creature, and unworthy of any favour; and that it was not right and fitting that all the children’s bread should be taken from them and given to dogs:
yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master’s table. The Syriac and Persic versions add “and live”: thus she wisely lays hold upon and improves in a very beautiful manner, in her own favour, what seemed to be so much against her. It is observed q of the Syrophoenicians in general, that they have all, in their common talk, something “pleasant and graceful”, as there is indeed in this smart reply of her’s, who was one of that people. She suggests that though the Gentiles were but dogs, and she one of them; yet their common Lord and Master had a propriety in them, and they in him; and were to be maintained and fed, and ought to live, though not in such fulness of favours and blessings, as the Jews, the children of God: nor did she desire their affluence, only that a crumb of mercy might be given her, that her poor daughter might be healed; which was but a small favour, in comparison of the numerous ones he heaped upon the children, the Jews: nor would this be any more detrimental to them, than it is to the children, for the dogs, under the table, to eat of the crumbs that fall.
q Eunapius in Vita Libanii.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Even the dogs ( ). She took no offence at the implication of being a Gentile dog. The rather she with quick wit took Christ’s very word for little dogs () and deftly turned it to her own advantage, for the little dogs eat of the crumbs (, little morsels, diminutive again) that fall from the table of their masters (), the children.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
27. Certainly, Lord. The woman’s reply showed that she was not hurried along by a blind or thoughtless impulse to offer a flat contradiction (420) to what Christ had said. As God preferred the Jews to other nations, she does not dispute with them the honor of adoption, and declares, that she has no objection whatever that Christ should satisfy them according to the order which God had prescribed. She only asks that some crumbs — falling, as it were, accidentally — should come within the reach of the dogs And at no time, certainly, did God shut up his grace among the Jews in such a manner as not to bestow a small taste of them on the Gentiles. No terms could have been employed that would have described more appropriately, or more justly, that dispensation of the grace of God which was at that time in full operation.
(420) “ Pour se rebequer et heurter directement;” — “to give a saucy and open contradiction.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(27) Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs.The insertion of the conjunction for in the Greek gives it a force which it is hard to reproduce in English, Yet grant what I ask, for the dogs under the table . . . The woman catches at the form which had softened the usual word of scorn, and presses the privilege which it implied. She did not ask that the children might be deprived of any fragment of their portion; but taking her place, contentedly, among the dogs, she could still claim Him as her Master, and ask for the crumbs of His mercy. The Talmud contains a story so singularly parallel to this that it is worth reproducing. There was a famine in the land, and stores of corn were placed under the care of Rabbi Jehudah the Holy, to be distributed to those only who were skilled in the knowledge of the Law. And, behold, a man came, Jonathan, the son of Amram, and clamorously asked for his portion. The Rabbi asked him whether he knew the condition, and had fulfilled it, and then the supplicant changed his tone, and said, Nay, but feed me as a dog is fed, who eats of the crumbs of the feast, and the Rabbi hearkened to his words, and gave him of the corn.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
27. Truth, Lord Desperation almost makes the woman witty. To take your opponent’s words and give them a turn against him is always a dexterous mode of mastering him. The woman admits the dismissing epithet, and proves that it entitles her to his mercy. “Dog is it I am? And the Jews my masters? Then, at least, let me have the crumb that mercy does not deny to the very dog.”
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘But she said, “Yes, Lord, for even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.” ’
She knows precisely what He means. He is a Jewish prophet, and His ministry is to the Jews. They are the ‘children’ of His God, and she acknowledges both this, and their right. What He says is true. But then she points out that the dogs under the table are allowed crumbs from the table. This would also include bread on which they had wiped their fingers. Thus the master considers it right to give such crumbs to dogs. Will not the God of Israel then give His crumbs to her?
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 15:27. And she said, Truth, Lord , : which is sometimes used as a form of assenting, and sometimes of intreating. “I acknowledge, Lord, the truth and justice of what thou hast said; nevertheless let me have such kindness as the dogs of any family enjoy: from the plenty of miraculous cures which thou bestowest on the Jews, drop the offal of this one to me, who am a poor distressed heathen; for by it they will suffer no greater loss than the children of a family do by the crumbs which are cast to the dogs.” See Macknight, and Blackwall’s Classicks, vol, 1: p. 143.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 15:27 . , as in Mat 11:9 ; Mat 11:26 , confirms the whole statement of Jesus in Mat 15:26 (not merely the appellation of dogs, Theophylact, Euth. Zigabenus, Erasmus, Maldonatus); and means, as everywhere in the New Testament, and even to a far greater extent among classical writers (who use it but rarely in the sense of namque ,
consequently is connective), for even ; see especially, Khner, II. 2, p. 855. It gives a reason for the ; but it is quite according to rule to regard as the expression to which is meant to give prominence. Consequently the passage would run thus: Yes, Lord , Thou art right in what Thou sayest, for even the dogs eat of the crumbs , and so on; or, to express it negatively (with ): for even the dogs are not sent away empty, and so on. That is to say, this , so far as can be seen from the context, cannot be intended to serve any other purpose than to suggest a comparison between the and the , so that the passage may be paraphrased as follows: Thou art right, Lord; for not merely the children are filled with bread at the family-meal, but so richly is the table spread even the dogs receive their share, inasmuch as they eat of the fragments , and so on. It would therefore be but the more unseemly to take the children’s bread and cast it to the dogs, so as possibly to leave the former unfed. But in thus justifying her , , the woman seeks to suggest the inference to our Lord that He might yet venture to give her that which is hinted at in those with which the have to be contented. Of course by this she means a share of His abundant mercy, after the wants of Israel have been fully supplied. Following Grotius and Kuinoel, de Wette explains incorrectly: For it is even usual for the dogs to get nothing but the fragments . In that case we should have expected to find: , . . . Fritzsche (comp. Bleek, Schegg) is likewise wrong when he explains thus: Yes, Lord, it is allowable to give the bread to the dogs, for , and so on. As against this view we have not merely , which can only be taken as a confirming , a justifying of what Jesus had said, not simply the ignoring of , which it would involve, but also the “repugnandi audacia,” which is not to be excused in consideration of the , and the meaning itself, which would certainly not bear out the idea of a contradiction on the part of the woman. But if there is one thing more than another that must not be associated with the tender language of this woman, it is the appearance of anything like contradiction. Finally, all interpretations are wrong which would necessitate our having instead of (Chrysostom, Luther, Vatablus, Glckler, Baumgarten-Crusius).
The reason why we find Jesus, Mat 15:26 , and consequently the woman also, Mat 15:27 , making use of the diminutive (a classical term, Plat. Euthyd . p. 298 D; Xen. Cyr . viii. 4. 20, although discarded by Phrynichus, p. 180), is because His idea is that of a family-meal , in connection with which it was not unnatural to think of the little house-dogs that ran about under the table (comp. , Hom. Il . xxiii. 173). The plural may be ascribed to the fact that, in what she says, the woman is understood to be stating what is matter of general experience.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.
Ver. 27. Truth, Lord ] , . This is particula assentientis et obsecrantis. How strangely doth God enable and enlarge his weak people many times in prayer! they are carried beyond themselves in a wonderful manner, and though otherwise rude in speech, and unlettered, yet then they have words at will, far above natural apprehension, and such as they are not able to repeat again; being, for the time, lost in the endless maze of spiritual ravishments, and ascending, with the Church, in those pillars of incense, out of this wilderness of the world, Son 5:6 .
Yet the dogs eat of the crumbs ] Lo, she locks herself within Christ’s denial, and picks an argument of speeding out of a repulse; she gathereth one contrary out of another by the force of her faith. See the like, Deu 32:36 ; 2Ki 14:26 . Going into captivity was a sign of the Israelites returning out of captivity. Be it that I am a dog, saith this brave woman, yet some crumbs of comfort, Lord. Dogs, though they may not eat the children’s meat (if they offer to do it, they are shut out of doors), yet, if children fully fed crumble their meat and make waste of it, as they will, and as the Jews now do, may not the Gentile dogs lick up those leavings? Thus she reasons it, and thus she makes use of anything she can lay hold of, whereby she may hope the better to prevail. Those that are hunger starved are glad to feed upon hedge fruit, and will make hard shift rather than perish. So, faithful hearers are not delicate, hut can “suffer an exhortation,” Heb 13:22 , hear a reproof, yea, suck honey, with the bee, out of bitter thyme.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
27. ] The sense of is not given by ‘ yet ’ in the E. V. The woman, in her humility, accepts the appellation which our Lord gives her, and grounds her plea upon an inference from it . Her words also have a reference to , expressed by Mar 7:27 . The Vulgate has rightly, ‘Etiam Domine: nam et catelli edunt.’ Yea, Lord: for even the dogs eat: or, for the dogs too eat Our Lord in the use of the familiar diminutive, has expressed not the uncleanness of the dog so much, as his attachment to and dependence on the human family: she lays hold on this favourable point and makes it her own, ‘if we are dogs, then may we fare as such; be fed with the crumbs of Thy mercy.’ She was, as it were, under the edge of the table close on the confines of Israel’s feast.
Some say that the are the pieces of bread on which the hands were wiped, (Eustathius, cited by Trench on Mir. p. 342); but the looks more like accidental falling, and the like minute crumbs.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 15:27 . , , etc.: eager assent, not dissent, with a gleam in the eye on perceiving the advantage given by the comparison = Yes, indeed, Lord, for even, etc. Kypke cites an instance from Xenophon of the combination in the same sense. , dimin. from , a bit, crumb, found only in N. T. (here and Mar 7:28 , Luk 16:21 T. R.), another diminutive answering to = the little pet dogs, eat of the minute morsels. Curiously felicitous combination of ready wit, humility and faith: wit in seizing on the playful and improving on it by adding , humility in being content with the smallest crumbs, faith in conceiving of the healing asked as only such a crumb for Jesus to give.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Truth = Yea.
yet = for even: assenting to the Lord’s words, while using them as an additional ground of her plea.
crumbs = scraps.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
27.] The sense of is not given by yet in the E. V. The woman, in her humility, accepts the appellation which our Lord gives her, and grounds her plea upon an inference from it. Her words also have a reference to , expressed by Mar 7:27. The Vulgate has rightly, Etiam Domine: nam et catelli edunt. Yea, Lord: for even the dogs eat: or, for the dogs too eat Our Lord in the use of the familiar diminutive, has expressed not the uncleanness of the dog so much, as his attachment to and dependence on the human family: she lays hold on this favourable point and makes it her own, if we are dogs, then may we fare as such;-be fed with the crumbs of Thy mercy. She was, as it were, under the edge of the table-close on the confines of Israels feast.
Some say that the are the pieces of bread on which the hands were wiped, (Eustathius, cited by Trench on Mir. p. 342); but the looks more like accidental falling, and the like minute crumbs.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 15:27. , yea) The woman seizes upon the appellation , for she says immediately, , which must be rendered, for even (etenim). The particle partly assents, partly as it were places on our Lords tongue the assent to her prayers, i.e. prays. The word is thus used in Phm 1:20, and Jdt 9:12.[699]-, eat) since the children often waste their bread.- , of the crumbs) She does not say the morsels, nor the bread.- , which fall) in opposition to , to take and cast, in the last verse. She asks for it as a favour, essential to herself, injurious to no one.-, from). She does not ask to be admitted to the table, but implies that she was not far distant from it. Her nation was contiguous to Israel.- , of their masters) This indicates the prerogative of the children, and vet a certain tie of connection (necessitudinem) with them on the part of the little dogs. The language of the Canaanitess corresponds with the curse addressed to Canaan, Gen 9:26 : A servant of servants shall he be, etc.
[699] Such modes of pleading she could not have learned from books by anticipation. The Spirit of faith supplies the best forms of prayer.-V. g.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Truth: Mat 8:8, Gen 32:10, Job 40:4, Job 40:5, Job 42:2-6, Psa 51:4, Psa 51:5, Eze 16:63, Dan 9:18, Luk 7:6, Luk 7:7, Luk 15:18, Luk 15:19, Luk 18:13, Luk 23:40-42, Rom 3:4, Rom 3:19, 1Co 15:8, 1Co 15:9, 1Ti 1:13-15
yet: Mat 5:45, Luk 16:21, Rom 3:29, Rom 10:12, Eph 3:8, Eph 3:19
Reciprocal: 2Sa 9:8 – a dead dog 2Ki 5:11 – Naaman Son 6:5 – away Isa 56:3 – The Lord hath
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5:27
The woman was not discouraged nor even hurt at the Lord’s comparison. Instead, she accepted the classification as a good basis for her persistence. After the children have been abundantly fed, the scraps are generally gathered up and given to the dogs. She would be satisfied with a temporal favor from Jesus in the healing of her (laughter ,even though it would be like the crumbs compared with the loaves of spiritual blessings that he was daily bestowing on his disciples.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 15:27. Yea, Lord. She accepts the Lords word and makes an argument of it.
For even, not yet, the dogs. Not as one of the children; but as a humble dependent, she asks only what falls to such: the crumbs. Possibly a reference to the pieces of bread on which, according to the ancient usage, the hands were wiped; but the usual sense is more natural. She was, as it were, under the edge of the table, close on the confines of Israels feast. (Alford.)The woman had been earnest in gaining a hearing at all. Her answer shows a quickness of mind, approaching wit, humility also, joined with true wisdom; in her persevering faith she saw the mind of Christ even in the seemingly repulsive figure.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe, how her humility grants all, her patience overcomes all, she meekly desires to possess the dog’s place; not to crowd to the table, but to creep under it, and to partake of the crumbs of mercy that fall from thence. Indeed she shewed one of the best qualities of a dog, in keeping her hold where she had once fastened; not letting go, or giving over, until she had gotten what she desired.
Learn hence, that nothing is so pleasing unto Christ, as to see his people following him with faith and importunity, when he seems to withdraw from them.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 27
Crumbs; her idea was, that, as so slight an exercise of the Savior’s goodness and power was required to save her daughter, she thought the favor might be bestowed, although it was asked by a sufferer who was not one of the favored descendants of Abraham.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
In her reply the woman said, "for even," not "but even" (Gr. kai gar). This is an important distinction because she did not challenge what Jesus had said. She acknowledged the truthfulness of what He said and then appealed to Him on the basis of its implications. Her words reveal great faith and spiritual wisdom. She did not ask for help because her case made her an exception or because she believed she had a right to Jesus’ help. She did not argue about God’s justice in seeking the Jews first. She simply threw herself on Jesus’ mercy without pleading any merit.
". . . she is confident that even if she is not entitled to sit down as a guest at the Messiah’s table, Gentile ’dog’ that she is, yet at least she may be allowed to receive a crumb of the uncovenanted mercies of God." [Note: Tasker, p. 152.]
She used the diminutive form of "dogs" (Gr. kynaria) probably because small house dogs are even more dependent than large street dogs. She also used the diminutive form of "crumbs" (Gr. psichion) that expressed her unworthiness to receive a large blessing.
"The metaphor which Christ had used as a reason for rejecting her petition she turns into a reason for granting it." [Note: Plummer, p. 217.]
She bowed to God’s will regarding Jewish priority, but she also believed that God would extend His grace to believing Gentiles (cf. Romans 9-11).