Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 22:12
And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
12. was speechless ] See Mat 22:34.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Friend – Rather, companions. The word does not imply friendship.
He was speechless – He had no excuse. So it will be with all hypocrites.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 12. He saith unto him, Friend] Rather, companion: so should be translated. As this man represents the state of a person in the visible Church, who neglects to come unto the master of the feast for a marriage garment, for the salvation which Christ has procured, he cannot be with any propriety called a friend, but may well be termed a companion, as being a member of the visible Church, and present at all those ordinances where Christ’s presence and blessing are found, by all those who sincerely wait upon him for salvation.
How camest thou in hither] Why profess to be called by my name while living without a preparation for my kingdom?
He was speechless.] , he was muzzled, or gagged. He had nothing to say in vindication of his neglect. There was a garment provided, but he neither put it on, nor applied for it. His conduct, therefore, was in the highest degree insulting and indecorous. As this man is the emblem, by general consent, of those who shall perish in the last day, may we not ask, without offence, Where does the doctrine of absolute reprobation or preterition appear in his case? If Christ had never died for him, or if he had applied for the garment, and was refused, might he not well have alleged this in behalf of his soul? – and would not the just God have listened to it? But there is not the smallest excuse for him: Christ died, the sacrifice was offered, for him; the ministers of the Gospel invited him; the Holy Spirit strove with him; he might have been saved, but he was not: and the fault lies so absolutely at his own door that the just God is vindicated in his conduct, while he sends him to hell, not for the lack of what he could not get, but for the lack of what he might have had, but either neglected or refused it.
Then said the king to the servants] To the ministering angels, executors of the Divine will.
Cast him into outer darkness] The Jewish marriages were performed in the night season, and the hall where the feast was made was superbly illuminated; the outer darkness means, therefore, the darkness on the outside of this festal hall; rendered still more gloomy to the person who was suddenly thrust out into it from such a profusion of light. See all this largely treated of on Mt 8:12.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
12. Friend, how camest thou inhither, not having a wedding garment? And he was speechlessbeingself-condemned.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And he saith unto him, friend,…. Either in an ironical way, or because he professed to be a friend of God and Christ:
how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? Which way didst thou come in hither? since he did not come in by faith, in the righteousness of Christ; intimating, that he climbed up some other way, and was a thief and robber; or with what face, or how couldest thou have the assurance to come in hither in such a dress, having nothing but the filthy rags of thine own righteousness? How couldest thou expect to meet with acceptance with me, or to be suitable company for my people, not being arrayed with the garments of salvation, and robe of righteousness, as they are?
And he was speechless: or muzzled: his mouth was stopped, he had nothing to say for himself: not but that there will be pleas made use of by hypocrites, and formal professors, another day; who will plead either their preaching and prophesying in Christ’s name; or their attendance on outward ordinances; or the works they have done, ordinary or extraordinary; but then these will all be superseded and silenced, their own consciences will condemn them, their mouths will be stopped, and they will have nothing to say in vindication of themselves; their righteousness will not answer for them in a time to come. The Jews have a tradition l, that
“Esau the wicked, will veil himself with his garment, and sit among the righteous in paradise, in the world to come; and the holy blessed God will draw him, and bring him out from thence, which is the sense of those words, Ob 1:4. “Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord.””
l T. Hieros. Nedarim, fol. 38. 1.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Not having a wedding-garment ( ). is in the Koine the usual negative with participles unless special emphasis on the negative is desired as in . There is a subtle distinction between and like our subjective and objective notions. Some hold that the wedding-garment here is a portion of a lost parable separate from that of the Wedding Feast, but there is no evidence for that idea. Wunsche does report a parable by a rabbi of a king who set no time for his feast and the guests arrived, some properly dressed waiting at the door; others in their working clothes did not wait, but went off to work and, when the summons suddenly came, they had no time to dress properly and were made to stand and watch while the others partook of the feast.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Not having [ ] . It is hardly possible to convey the subtle sense of the negative particle [] to the English reader. A different word for not [] is used in the preceding verse, expressing an outward, objective fact which attracted the king’s notice. The man had not [] a wedding garment. When the king addresses the guest, he is thinking not so much of the outward token of disrespect, as of the guest ‘s mental attitude toward the proprieties of the occasion. It is as if he had said, “What were you thinking of, where was your respect for me and for my guests, when you allowed yourself to come hither not [] having the proper garment, as you knew you ought to have?” It implies, as Dr. Morison observes, that the man was conscious of the omission when he entered, and was intentionally guilty of the neglect. This distinction between the two negative particles rests on the law of the Greek language, according to which ouj and its compounds stand where something is to be denied as a matter of fact, and mh and its compounds when something is to be denied as a matter of thought.
He was speechless [] . Lit., he was muzzled or gagged. It is used of muzzling the ox (1Ti 5:18), and is addressed by Christ to the demon (Mr 1:25), and to the raging sea (Mr 4:39). Peter uses it of putting the ignorant and foolish to silence (1Pe 2:15).
The outer darkness. See on Mt 8:12.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
(12) Friend.(See Note on Mat. 20:13.) The question implies that the act was strange, unlooked-for, inexcusable.
He was speechless.The verb is the same as the put to silence of Mat. 22:34, and points literally to the silence of one who has been gagged.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
12. Friend There is here the politeness of solemn rebuke. Speechless The spirit of brave contempt has deserted him at the trying time. Men, who are now loquacious and brave in sin and ungodly error, will be terribly dumb in the hour when conscious guilt within responds to the terrible voice of God’s judgment without.
It is plainly presupposed that he was fully able to have been clothed with the proper garments. Poor though he was, it is not his poverty but his neglect, or his contempt, which has prevented his supplying himself with the proper garments. And this is illustrated by the fact that in Eastern countries, and in some degree among the Romans, the custom existed of supplying to the guests the proper vesture for the festal occasion. That this custom existed in ancient times is rendered probable by such passages as Gen 46:22; 2Ki 10:22; Est 6:8; Rev 3:5. So Charden narrates that the vizier of a Persian Shah lost his life for not appearing before his sovereign in a gift robe.
It will then be noted this man represents the Pharisee who rejects the offered righteousness of Christ, and appears in judgment in his own righteousness. It is not the case of the thousands who pay no attention to the invitation of the feast, or those who persecute the inviters. It is one of those men good enough, in their own esteem, to come and stand the gaze of the host in their own natural character, slighting the robe of “the righteousness of God.” What was this but the case of the very men with whom our Lord is now contending?
But why does our Lord suppose but one man of this character? Doubtless for two reasons. One is, that to suppose many would be to destroy the good order of the feast by supposing too great a breaking up. The second is, that any Pharisee in the company who might have conscience enough left, might feel it to be his own single case and tremble.
And he who reads, as well as those who heard, has abundant reason to be earnest lest this one be a true picture of his own case. Unless clothed in “the fine linen which is the righteousness of the saints,” we shall be found guilty of a sad contempt when we appear before God, for which we shall be speechless when he puts the awful, How?
Mat 22:12. And he was speechless And he was struck speechless. This is the true import of the original word , which is more expressive than the phrase in our translation, he was speechless; as an English reader might be led by our translation to conceive that the man was dumb, and so could not speak; whereas he was made dumb only by self-condemnation and conviction, even as Christ made dumb , put to silence the Sadducees, Mat 22:34 and as Peter would have us make speechless,put to silence, the ignorance of foolish men. See Gerhard’s Continuation of Chemnitz’s Harmony, on the place. This latter part of the parable represents the last judgment; teaching us, that, though the Gentiles obeyed the call of the Gospel with more alacrity than the Jews, they would not all be saved by it: Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.
12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
Ver. 12. Friend, how camest? &c. ] Not wretch, rebel, reprobate. Hard reproofs administered in soft language break the bones. See the notes above on Mat 20:13 .
Not having a wedding garment ] Is it fit to come to such a feast in thy worst? in the leathern coats, in the tattered rags and menstruous clouts of wretched old Adam?
And he was speechless ] He was muzzled or haltered up, a that is, he held his peace, as though he had had a bridle or a halter in his mouth. This is the import of the Greek word here used. He was , self-condemned,Tit 3:11Tit 3:11 , and could not , chat at God, Rom 9:30 , as he used to do; he was gagged, as it were.
a . Occlusum est illi os quasi capistro et fraeno ac si brutum animal fuisset, ratione prorsus viduum. Novarin.
Mat 22:12 . , as in Mat 20:13 . : the question might mean, By what way did you come in? the logic of the question being, had you entered by the door you would have received a wedding robe like the rest, therefore you must have come over a wall or through a window, or somehow slipped in unobserved (Koetsveld). This assumes that the guests were supplied with robes by the king’s servants, which in the circumstances is intrinsically probable. All had to come in a hurry as they were, and some would have no suitable raiment, even had there been time to put it on. What the custom was is not very clear. The parable leaves this point in the background, and simply indicates that a suitable robe was necessary, however obtained. The king’s question probably means, how dared you come hither without, etc.? : this time, not , as in Mat 22:11 , implying blame. Euthymius includes the question as to how the man got in among the matters not to be inquired into, (freedom) . , he was dumb, not so much from a sense of guilt as from confusion in presence of the great king finding fault, and from fear of punishment.
Friend. Greek. hetairos. Occurs only in Matthew (here; Mat 11:16; Mat 20:13; Mat 26:50).
not. Greek. me. Not the same word as in Mat 22:11, because this refers to the man’s subjective consciousness of the omission when he entered, not to the mere forgetfulness of the fact.
speechless. There was no excuse for the insult implied in the negative me, above.
Mat 22:12. , comrade) A word of ambiguous meaning, which is also applied to those with whom we are not on terms of intimacy or friendship.-, …, how, etc.) by what culpable indulgence of the servants? by what audacity on thine own part?-[, he was speechless) By this speechlessness [implying, as it does, that the lost perish altogether through their own fault] all objections whatever that are directed against Christianity are dissipated.-V. g.]
Friend: Mat 20:13, Mat 26:50
how: Mat 5:20, Act 5:2-11, Act 8:20-23, 1Co 4:5
And he was: 1Sa 2:9, Job 5:16, Psa 107:42, Jer 2:23, Jer 2:26, Rom 3:19, Tit 3:11
Reciprocal: Gen 3:17 – Because Exo 28:43 – bear not iniquity 1Ki 18:21 – answered 2Ki 10:22 – vestments Neh 5:8 – held Job 36:13 – they Psa 31:17 – them Psa 45:13 – clothing Psa 51:15 – O Lord Isa 33:14 – the hypocrites Isa 47:5 – silent Dan 5:27 – art Mat 8:12 – be cast Mat 13:49 – and sever Mat 22:10 – both Luk 15:22 – the best Luk 19:22 – Out Luk 20:26 – and they marvelled Rom 3:22 – and upon Rev 19:8 – to her
THE WEDDING GARMENT
Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?
Mat 22:12
What does this wedding garment mean? Every student of the Word of God knows that it is another term for the Lord Jesus Christ. St. Paul says, Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, that is the wedding garment, and without it there is no sitting down at the wedding feast. Observe the points about this garment.
I. The garment of grace.In John 1 we read He was full of grace and truth. If I put Him on then I have a very graceful garment; if I live Christ, what greater grace can possibly be seen in my whole life?
II. The garment of atonement.You cannot be a Christian without recognising the Atonement of Christ. You are one with God through faith in Him.
III. The garment of righteousness.Righteousness is rightness, that which is right. Christs righteousness is His rightness, so that if I am clothed with Him I am all right. Whatever rightness belongs to Him belongs to every person who trusts Him.
IV. The garment of mediation.See 1Ti 2:5. Trusting in Him, resting on His mediation, we are accepted, we are perfect.
V. The garment of emancipation.There is no power to break from any sin in any man or woman. The power lies in Christ. He is the Emancipator of this world, and those who are set free by Him are set free indeed. If I put Him on, if He is mine by simple faith, I am delivered by His power from the power of sin.
VI. The garment of truth.Not merely the truth of His appearances and sayings, not merely the truth that He was the interpretation of all Old Testament times, but was Himself the Truth, all truth being embodied in Him, and no truth apart from Him.
VII. How it may be obtained.If I would have this wedding garment I must earnestly accept it and definitely decide on it.
The Rev. W. R. Mowll.
2:12
And he was speechless. It was customary for a man arranging a wedding to provide garments for the occasion so that all would be in orderly appearance. It would therefore not be on account of poverty or lack of opportunity to procure the garment that this man was not wearing one, hence he was speechless because he had no excuse. The garment to be worn by the guests at the marriage of the Lamb is “the righteousness of saints” (Rev 19:8). This robe has been provided by the Lord and offered to the espoused bride without money and without price (Isa 55:1; Rom 13:14), hence there will be no excuse for any professed Christian to appear at the day of judgment not properly adorned.
Mat 22:12. Friend. The word used in chap. Mat 20:13, and addressed to Judas (chap. Mat 26:50). It means companion, without implying friendship.
How camest thou! It was a bold intrusion, a despising of the king, to appear in his own ordinary dress. This points to the pride of self-righteousness. Some think it indicates lawlessness or hypocrisy.
He was speechless. There can be no excuse for failure to have on the wedding garment, to be righteous through and in Christ Jesus.
Mat 22:12-13. Friend, how camest thou in hither How camest thou to presume to enter into my church, by taking upon thee a profession of my religion, and to sit down among the guests, or associate thyself with my disciples; not having on a wedding-garment? Not having put off the old man and put on the new, not being made a new creature, not having put on the Lord Jesus Christ in holy graces and moral virtues. It is needless to dispute, says Calvin, about the wedding-garment, whether it be faith, or a pious, holy life. For neither can faith be separated from good works, nor can good works proceed except from faith. Christs meaning is only that we are called in order that we may be renewed in our minds after his image. And therefore, that we may remain always in his house, the old man, with his filthiness, must be put off, and a new life designed, that our attire may be such as is suitable to so honourable an invitation. And he was speechless Gr. , he was struck speechless. This is the true import of the original word, which is rendered very improperly in our translation, he was speechless; as from hence the English reader is led to conceive that the man was dumb, and so could not speak; whereas he was made dumb only by self-condemnation and conviction, even as Christ made dumb , or put to silence, the Sadducees, Mat 22:34; and as Peter would have us to make speechless, or put to silence, (,) the ignorance of foolish men. See Gerhards Continuation. Then said the king to his servants, Bind him hand and foot, &c. Thus, 1st, Christ commands the ministers of his gospel, to whom the exercise of discipline in his church is committed, to exclude from the society of the faithful all who, by walking disorderly, bring a reproach upon the gospel, and to leave them to outer darkness, or the darkness without the pale of the church; that is, heathenish darkness. In other words, as is expressed Mat 18:17, to let such be unto them as heathen and as publicans. But, 2d, This clause of the sentence is to be chiefly referred to the last judgment, when Christ will command his angels to gather out of his kingdom not only all things that offend, but them which do iniquity, and to cast them into the darkness which is without the heavenly city, namely, into the darkness of hell, where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. The mention of outer darkness in the parable, in the connection in which it stands, would incline one to think, either that the word , rendered dinner, Mat 22:4, may signify supper as well as dinner; or that the king is represented as visiting the guests in the evening. But not to insist on this, which is of little moment, it is well known that banquets of this kind were generally celebrated in rooms richly adorned: and considering how splendid and magnificent the entertainments of the eastern princes were, it cannot be thought an unnatural circumstance, that such an affront as this, offered to the king, his son, his bride, and the rest of the company, should be punished with such bonds and thrown into a dungeon.
22:12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was {d} speechless.
(d) Literally, “haltered”, that is to say, he held his peace, as though he had a bridle or a halter around his neck.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes