Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 9:10
And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
10 13. A Meal in the Evangelist’s House. Mar 2:15-17; Luk 5:29-32
10. in the house ] St Luke says “and Levi made him a great feast,” which makes it clear that the meal was in Levi’s house.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house – This was at a feast given to him by Levi or Matthew, Luk 5:29. This is another circumstance favorable to Matthew, but omitted by him, and recorded by Luke; showing also that the apostles were averse to praising themselves. To receive Christ hospitably and kindly was a commendable act, and it strongly evinces Matthews freedom from ostentation that he has not himself mentioned the fact. It thus illustrates the command of the Saviour, as recorded by himself, Mat 6:1-4.
At meat – At the table; at supper.
Many publicans and sinners came – Probably the old friends of Matthew who had been invited by him. The character of a publican, or tax-gatherer, among the Jews was commonly not very respectable (see notes at Mat 5:47; Mat 18:17), and there is no improbability in supposing that Matthew, before his conversion, had sustained the general character of such people, and that his associations and friendships had been among those who were not remarkable for their morality.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Mat 9:10
As Jesus sat at meat in the house.
I. Levis calling.
II. Levis feast.
1. It probably did not immediately follow the call, but was a fit token of the joy of its acceptance.
2. St. Matthew the blessed means of bringing together the Saviour and the lost whom He came to redeem. (A. M. Stuart.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 10. Sat at meat in the house] Viz. of Matthew, who it appears, from Lu 5:29, made a great feast on the occasion, thus testifying his gratitude for the honour done him; and that his friends and acquaintances might profit by the teaching of his new master, he invites them to the entertainment that was honoured by the presence of Christ. His companions, it appears, were not of the most creditable kind. They were tax-gatherers (See Clarke on Mt 5:46) and sinners, , a word which I believe in general signifies heathens, throughout the Gospels, and in several other parts of the New Testament. See, among others, Mt 11:19; Mt 26:45; Mr 2:15-17; Mr 14:41; Lu 5:30-32; Lu 6:32-34; Lu 7:34; Lu 7:37; Lu 7:39; Lu 15:1-2; Lu 15:7; Lu 15:10; Lu 19:7; Lu 24:7; Joh 9:16; Joh 9:24; Joh 9:25; Joh 9:31; Ro 5:8; Ga 2:15; Heb 7:26; 1Pe 4:18; in most, if not all of which places, it evidently refers to the character or state of a Gentile, or Heathen. See also the notes on these passages.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Luke saith that Levi made him a great feast in his own house: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them, Luk 5:29. Mark saith, there were many, and they followed him, Mar 2:15. Matthew, touched with the sense of the free and infinite love of Christ to him, maketh Christ a feast: this speaketh him a man of some estate: he invites many to dine with him, some of them publicans, some noted sinners. He designs good undoubtedly to such as had been his former companions, that they might also see the Lord, and be brought to follow him. Grace teacheth a man to study the conversion of others, and never dwelleth in a narrow soul, nor studieth its concealment from others.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
10. And it came to pass, as Jesussat at meat in the houseThe modesty of our Evangelist signallyappears here. Luke says (Lu 5:29)that “Levi made Him a great feast,” or “reception,”while Matthew merely says, “He sat at meat”; and Mark andLuke say that it was in Levi’s “own house,” while Matthewmerely says, “He sat at meat in the house.” Whetherthis feast was made now, or not till afterwards, is a point of someimportance in the order of events, and not agreed among harmonists.The probability is that it did not take place till a considerabletime afterwards. For Matthew, who ought surely to know what tookplace while his Lord was speaking at his own table, tells us that thevisit of Jairus, the ruler of the synagogue, occurred at that moment(Mt 9:18). But we know fromMark and Luke that this visit of Jairus did not take place till afterour Lord’s return, at a later period from the country of theGadarenes. (See Mar 5:21-43;Luk 8:40-56, c.). Weconclude, therefore, that the feast was not made in the novelty ofhis discipleship, but after Matthew had had time to be somewhatestablished in the faith when returning to Capernaum, his compassionfor old friends, of his own calling and character, led him to gatherthem together that they might have an opportunity of hearing thegracious words which proceeded out of His Master’s mouth, if haplythey might experience a like change.
behold, many publicans andsinnersLuke says, “a great company” (Lu5:29)
came and sat down with himand his disciplesIn all such cases the word rendered “sat”is “reclined,” in allusion to the ancient mode of lying oncouches at meals.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house,…. That is, as the Arabic version reads it, in the house of Matthew, not in the toll house, but in his own house; for he immediately quitted the toll booth, and his office there, and followed Christ, and had him to his own house, where he made a great feast for him, as Luke says, to testify the sense he had of the wondrous grace which was bestowed on him; and also, that other publicans and sinners might have an opportunity of hearing Christ, and conversing with him, whom he invited to this feast; his bowels yearning towards them, and sincerely desiring their conversion, which is the nature of true grace: for, when a soul is made a partaker of the grace of God, it is earnestly desirous that this might be the case of others, especially its sinful relations, friends, or companions; and it takes every opportunity of using, or bringing them under the means; so did Matthew: hence it is said,
behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples; not of their own accord, but by the invitation of Matthew, and with the good will, and full consent of Christ, who was far from being displeased with their company and freedom; but gladly embraced every opportunity of doing good to the souls of the worst of men; for such as these he came to call and save.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Publicans and sinners ( ). Often coupled together in common scorn and in contrast with the righteous ( in 9:13). It was a strange medley at Levi’s feast (Jesus and the four fisher disciples, Nathanael and Philip; Matthew Levi and his former companions, publicans and sinners; Pharisees with their scribes or students as on-lookers; disciples of John the Baptist who were fasting at the very time that Jesus was feasting and with such a group). The Pharisees criticize sharply “your teacher” for such a social breach of “reclining” together with publicans at Levi’s feast.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
JESUS ANSWERS INQUIRES OF THE PHARISEES
V. 10-15
1) “And it came to pass,” (kai egeneto) “And it occurred,” happened, or came to pass, that shortly thereafter, after his Commitment to leave all and follow Jesus, Luk 5:28.
2) “As Jesus sat at meat in the house,” (autou anakeimenou en te oikia) “As Jesus was reclining in the house,” Matthew’s house where Jesus had been invited for a meal, explained by Luk 5:29, as a “great feast” or reception.
3) “Behold, many publicans and sinners came (kai idou polloi telonai kai hamartoloi elthontes) “And as many tax collectors (customs-collectors) and lawbreakers were coming,” to the place both Mark and Luke stated was Levi’s “own house,” Mr 2:15; Luk 5:29.
4) “And sat down with him and his disciples.” (sunanekeinto to lesou kai tois Matthetais autou) “And reclining at the table with Jesus and his disciples;” Luke states, “a great company,” came for the meal, as a guest of Matthew, and to meet Jesus, as they sat or reclined in social concourse around the meal, Luk 5:29.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
(10) As Jesus sat at meat in the house.The Greek runs, as he sat at meat. The insertion of the name Jesus in this part of the sentence injures the sense. What seems to have been meant is, that while Matthew sat (i.e., reclined after Roman fashion), many publicans and sinners came and reclined with Jesus and His disciples. On the assumption of St. Matthews authorship of the Gospel, there is a noticeable humility in his omission of the fact that he had made a great feast (Luk. 5:29). It was apparently a farewell feast to old friends and neighbours before he entered on his new calling. They were naturally mostly of his own class, or on a yet lower level. The publican was the pariah of Palestine, and no decent person would associate with him. The term sinners may have included Gentiles, but does not necessarily designate them. So far as the context goes, as in Mat. 9:13, the term is used in its simple and natural sense.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
52. CONVERSATION AT MATTHEW’S FEAST, Mat 9:10-17 .
This fact occurred probably some six months after the call mentioned in the last verse.
10. At meat in the house Luke informs us that it was in Matthew’s or Levi’s house. Publicans and sinners Men of unpopular reputation, and men guilty of wicked conduct. Matthew called to this feast not only his old associates the publicans, but many whom he would gladly bring under the reforming power of our Lord’s discourse. He thus showed to his acquaintances and friends that he gloried in his Christian profession and Christian hopes.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And it came about that as he reclined at meat in the house, behold, many public servants and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples.’
We know from the other synoptic Gospels that this gathering was in Matthew’s house. He, together with Jesus and His other disciples, had come there to eat. Often at such meals Jesus would almost inevitably become the focal point. It was so here. This was probably some time after Matthew’s conversion and call to discipleship, and he had therefore called together some old friends to meet Jesus, possibly even at their request. These consisted of public servants like he had been, together with other people who were looked on by the Pharisees as ‘sinners’. By ‘sinners’ is meant those who failed to live according to even the minimum requirements of the Pharisees. They would include many who worked in trades that made it difficult to do so, for example, tanners, and probably also some with bad reputations. To eat with such people was to risk becoming ‘unclean’. The Pharisees would have withdrawn in horror at the idea.
But even worse were the public servants. They served a foreign state, who used locals for collecting taxes and other revenues in order to try to make them more acceptable. But to the Jews these taxes were an insult to their religion. So these public servants were seen by the vast majority of Jews as traitors, especially in a fanatically nationalistic country like Galilee, and even moreso as they used their positions in order to make themselves rich. They were on the whole notoriously dishonest. They often overtaxed the people, keeping what they skimmed off for themselves, they would take large bribes so as to look the other way when assessing taxes, and they presented a false picture to the authorities to whom they had to account. They were by the nature of their contacts looked on as unclean, and they were excluded from the synagogues. Along with robbers and murderers they were unacceptable as witnesses in Jewish courts. No one with any respect for themselves would have relations with them.
However Jesus did not hesitate, and His disciples followed His lead (they had even been willing to accept Matthew into their number). This did not mean that Jesus compromised on His own standards, nor that He relaxed His requirements for discipleship. But it did mean that He did not cut Himself off from them nor demand of them unnecessary observances. They would not, however, be there ‘partying’. The point was that they had come to hear what Jesus had to say.
‘In the house.’ It has been suggested that this rather vague description arises from the fact that the writer was speaking of his own home. How often many of us must have said, ‘I’ve got one in the house’ or ‘let’s go into the house’, calling it that because of its familiarity to us.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Jesus Has Come as the Healer of the Sins of All Men, But the Pharisees Criticise Him For Eating with Public Servants and Sinners (9:10-13).
Jesus now makes clear that He has come in order to save the undeserving. That was something that the Pharisees, who slaved at being ‘deserving’, could not understand. Indeed they could not comprehend why, if He was of God, He could possibly behave in the way that He did. It went against all their principles. They failed to realise that God was like that. For to them God was a stern taskmaster Who did not give anyone an inch, or even half an inch. They had overlooked the laws about love and compassion.
Analysis.
a
b And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to his disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with the public servants and sinners?” (Mat 9:11).
b But when he heard it, he said, “Those who are whole have no need of a physician, but those who are sick” (Mat 9:12).
a “But you go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Mat 9:13).
Note that in ‘a’ Jesus sat down with public servants and sinners, and in the parallel it was because He had come precisely in order to call people like that. In ‘b’ the Pharisees ask why Jesus eats with them, and in the parallel He explains why.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
What Jesus Has To Offer And The Growth of Pharisaic Opposition (9:10-34).
We are now informed about the first open opposition among the Pharisees to Jesus. The Pharisees had seemingly previously approached John with a critical attitude, along with the Sadducees. They had felt that it was their duty to vet any new prophet. But they had been firmly put in their place (Mat 3:7-9). Now they will begin to criticise Jesus, and their criticism will grow and will continue on to the end. Not all Pharisees, however, were like this. Some did meet up with Jesus and hold conversations with Him (e.g. Joh 3:1-6; Luk 14:1; Mar 12:28-34). But here it is the antagonistic majority who are in mind.
They are mentioned three times in this passage, in Mat 9:11; Mat 9:14; Mat 9:34, and as a result we begin to recognise their growing hostility. Previously we have had the murmuring of the Scribes (Mat 9:3). Now the opposition will become more open, and He will be more closely observed. They will first criticise Him for the company He keeps (Mat 9:11), then indirectly for not encouraging fasting (Mat 9:14), and finally, quite falsely, for casting out devils by the prince of devils (Mat 9:34). This last is what shows up their total hypocrisy, for they had no grounds for such a claim. It was simply a let out for them because they had no other explanation for His success, apart from the one that they were not willing to contemplate, that He really was from God. But we should note that Matthew does not yet associate them with the Scribes in their opposition. That would become prominent later
The original Pharisees had been genuine protectors of the Law, but many of them had gradually become more taken up with the ritual that their teachers had laid down than with the root purposes of the Law. To them the correct washing of the hands, the observance of minutiae about the Sabbath, and the tithing of even the smallest thing had become more important than a genuine concern for others. And they suspiciously watched others in order to ensure that they maintained the same standards as themselves, especially people like Jesus and John, because they were so sure hat they were right.
On the other hand Jesus stands in contrast to them and stresses what He has come to offer. This will be revealed in Mat 9:10-35. He has come in order to help those who have been neglected by religious people (Mat 9:10). He wanted to reach down and lift up the fallen. He has come as a physician (Mat 9:12). He wanted to heal the spiritually needy. He wanted to bring sinners to God. And that involved meeting up with them. He has come as the Bridegroom to bring something new, putting the old aside, for His presence as the Bridegroom is the proof that a new age is upon them (Mat 9:15-17). He has come as the Life-giver to offer life and restoration (Mat 9:18-26). He has come to open the eyes of the blind and to loosen the tongue of the dumb (Mat 9:27-34). He has come bringing the Good News of God’s Kingly Rule offered to all who will accept it (Mat 9:35).
Analysis.
a
b Jesus is criticised for not fasting but points out that He has come bringing something new. He is the heavenly Bridegroom (Mat 9:14-17).
c Jesus raises the dead with His HAND of power and heals a woman who is unclean with a discharge of blood through her FAITH (Mat 9:18-26).
b Jesus opens the eyes of the blind with His TOUCH as a result of their FAITH. He is the SON OF DAVID (Mat 9:27-31).
a Jesus makes the demon-possessed dumb man speak but is accused by the Pharisees of casting out demons by means of the Prince of demons (Mat 9:32-34).
Note that in ‘a’ Jesus is criticised by the Pharisees for the company He keeps, and similarly in the parallel. In ‘b’ Jesus has brought something new as the heavenly Bridegroom and in the parallel blind eyes are opened. Centrally in ‘c’ is the raising of the dead and the cleansing of the woman because of her faith.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The publican feast:
v. 10. And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Him and His disciples. Matthew, either upon his own initiative or at the suggestion of Jesus, caused a feast to be prepared, Mar 2:15; Luk 5:29. But here is a significant fact: publicans and sinners were the guests beside Jesus and His disciples. They were reclining, after the Oriental fashion, on special sofas, resting on pillows; scores, possibly hundreds, were present, all of the lowly, the social outcasts of the city, those whom the Pharisees had excommunicated from the synagogues. The latter took offense:
v. 11. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto His disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
They regarded the whole festival as a scandalous affair, but lacked the courage to address Christ directly on this matter, hoping incidentally thus to alienate the disciples from the Master. Jesus, the Friend of the sinners, is a rock of offense to all self-righteous, proud hearts. They find His behavior savoring of the gutter, and criticize severely such as follow His directions in seeking sinners.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
Mat 9:10. And it came to pass Matthew, thinking himself highly honoured by the call of Jesus, made an entertainment for his Master, who did not refuse to partake of it: at the same time he invited as many of his brother publicans as he could, hoping that Christ’s conversation might bring them to repentance. In this feast, therefore, St. Matthew shewed both gratitude and charity; gratitude to Christ, who had reclaimed him; charity to his acquaintance, in labouring to bring about their conversion. It has been commonly thought that Matthew made this entertainment on the very day that Christ called him to attend upon him. The early harmonies of Tatian and Ammonius very justly separated them (see Chemnitz, Harm. cap. 23.). And to the many convincing arguments which Mr. Jones, in his Vindication of Matthew, p. 129, &c. has brought to prove that they ought to be separated; we may add, that it seems very evident they were not both on the same day, from the following obvious consideration. So many things happened before the calling of Matthew, that the day must be far advanced, and there could not have been time to prepare a great feast, and invite a number of guests: on which account it is certain that the feast was after the day of his calling; perhaps some months, after, when he had made up his accompts, and regularly passed his business into other hands; which certainly, from a principle of justice as well as prudence, he would take care to do.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 9:10 . ] see note on Luk 5:12 .
] In classical Greek, to recline at table is represented by , as frequently also in the N. T. (Mar 2:15 ; Mar 14:3 ), though in Polybius, Athenaeus, and later writers , too, is by no means rare. Phrynichus, ed. Lobeck, p. 217. On the custom itself (with the left arm resting on a cushion), comp. note on Joh 13:23 .
] With the exception of Fritzsche, Bleek, Holtzmann, Keim, Hilgenfeld (yet comp. already the still merely doubtful remark of Bengel), critics have gratuitously assumed the house to have been that of Matthew , which accords, no doubt, with Luk 5:29 (not Mar 2:15 ), but neither with the simple (see Mat 9:23 ; Mat 13:1 ; Mat 13:36 ; Mat 17:25 ) nor with the connection. Seeing, then, that the publican who rose from his seat at the custom-house and followed Jesus cannot, of course, have gone to his own residence, nothing else can have been meant but the house of Jesus (in which He lived). There lies the variation as compared with Luke, and like many another, it cannot be disposed of. But de Wette’s objection, reproduced by Lichtenstein, Lange, and Hilgenfeld, that it is scarcely probable that Jesus would give feasts, has no force whatever, since Matthew does not say a single word about a feast ; but surely one may suppose that, when the disciples were present in his residence at Capernaum, Jesus may have eaten, i.e . have reclined at table with them. The publicans and sinners who came thither were at the same time hospitably received.
] and in general men of an immoral stamp , with whom were also classed the publicans as being servants of the Roman government, and often guilty of fraudulent conduct (Luk 3:13 ); comp. Luk 19:7 . Observe that Jesus Himself by no means denies the in regard to those associated with Him at table, Mat 9:12 f. They were truly diseased ones, who were now, however, yielding themselves up to the hands of the physician.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
10 And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
Ver. 10. As Jesus sat at meat in the house ] Matthew feasted Christ, for joy of his conversion. Yea, he made a feast, a feast like a king, a very sumptuous feast, as St Luke’s word importeth, a he kept open house, a table for all comers. As princes at their coronation straw the streets with coin, make the conduits run wine, release prisoners, &c.; so here. “Kill the fatted calf, and let us be merry,” said he at his son’s return, Luk 15:23 . When a sinner repents there are grand festivals and feasts in heaven: instruments of music are put into the angels’ hands, and songs into their mouths. How well paid was Zaccheus, when salvation was come home to his house! When God was once reconciled to the people in the wilderness, after their sin in setting up the golden calf, to testify their great joy and thankfulness, they brought stuff more than enough to the building of the tabernacle. The centurion, when he once became a proselyte, built the Jewish synagogues that had been thrown down by Antiochus, Luk 7:5 . And Tyre converted finds another manner of merchandise than formerly, namely, to feed and clothe God’s saints with durable clothing,Isa 23:18Isa 23:18 .
a Luk 5:29 , . acceptionem, splendidum epulum, ut annotat Erasm. ex Athenaeo.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10. ] We are told in Luk 5:29 , that Levi made him a great feast in his house; and, similarly, Mark has . . The narrative in our text is so closely identical with that in Mark, that it is impossible to suppose, with Greswell, that a different feast is intended. The arguments by which he supports his view are by no means weighty. From the words , he infers that the house was not that of Matthew, but that in which our Lord usually dwelt, which he supposes to be intended in several other places. But surely the article might be used without any such significance, or designating any particular house, as would be very likely if Matthew himself is here the narrator. (A similar mistake has been made in supposing , as in Mat 9:1 , and elsewhere, to mean some one particular ship; whereas it is generic: see note there.) Again, Greswell presses to verbal accuracy the terms used in the accounts (e.g. and ), and attempts to shew them to be inconsistent with one another. But surely the time is past for such dealing with the historic text of the Gospels; and, besides, he has overlooked a great inconsistency in his own explanation, viz., that of making in the second instance, according to him, Scribes and Pharisees present at the feast given by a Publican, and exclaiming against that which they themselves were doing. It was not at , but after the feast that the discourse in Mat 9:11-17 took place. And his whole inference, that must be the great meal in the day, and consequently in the evening, hangs on too slender a thread to need refutation. The real difficulty, insuperable to a Harmonist, is the connexion here of the raising of Jaeirus’s daughter with this feast: on which see below, Mat 9:18 .
. ] a Hebraism, see reff.; it occurs, but with the omission of , in Mark’s account. The not very usual word, , is also common to the two. St. Mark, with his usual precision, adds : a clause answering to in our text. See last note.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 9:10 . , etc. The narrative of this incident in all three Synoptists is condensed, and the situation not clear. What house is meant ( .), and why so many ( )? “There were many,” Mark remarks, emphatically (Mat 2:15 ), and the here implies that something important took place. Luke infers (for we need not suppose independent information) that it is a feast ( ), and, doubtless, he is right. But given by whom? Levi, according to Luke. It may have been so, but not necessarily as the prime mover; possibly, nay, probably, as the agent of his new Master. Our thoughts have been too much biassed by the assumption that the call of Matthew in this section is the main thing, and the feast an accompanying incident, a farewell feast of Matthew’s in which Jesus passively partook. The truth, probably, is that the call was a preliminary to the feast, the first step in the working out of a plan. Jesus aims at a mission among the reprobated classes, and His first step is the call of Matthew to discipleship, and His second the gathering together, through him, of a large number of these classes to a social entertainment; the place of meeting being, possibly, not a private house, whether Christ’s or Matthew’s, but a public hall. If Matthew’s house or Simon’s (in which Jesus probably had His home, vide Mark) was large enough to have a quadrangular court, the gathering might be there, where, according to Faber, Archologie der Hebrer , p. 408, meetings of various sorts were held. In any case it was a great affair scores, possibly hundreds, present, too large for a room in a house, a conventicle meeting, so to speak; a meeting with such people in the Synagogue not being possible. For further remarks vide on Mark. : publicans naturally, if Matthew was the host, but why .? He was a respectable man; are the . simply the as viewed from the outside, so named in anticipation of the Pharisaic description of the party? If Jesus was the inviter, they might be a distinct class, and worse, very real sinners, for His aim was a mission among the social Pariahs.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mat 9:10-13
10Then it happened that as Jesus was reclining at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and were dining with Jesus and His disciples. 11When the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples, “Why is your Teacher eating with the tax collectors and sinners?” 12But when Jesus heard this, He said, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick. 13But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire compassion, and not sacrifice,’for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
Mat 9:10 This referred to Matthew’s house, not Jesus’ . Apparently the giving of a banquet after a meaningful decision in life was quite common because Zaccheus, another tax-collector, does the same thing (cf. Luke 19). “Notorious sinners” would refer basically to those outcasts of Jewish society who could not perform the meticulous details of the Mosaic Law as amplified in the oral tradition of rabbinical Judaism. That some of them were openly immoral people is possible, but again, it may have been that their trade or occupation was unacceptable to the Jewish leaders (i.e., shepherds, tanners, etc.).
The phrase “took their seats” meant “reclined.” The people during this historical period reclined on their left elbows when they ate. Only in Egypt did people sit at a table to eat.
Mat 9:11 “when the Pharisees saw this, they said to His disciples” These Pharisees were present at the dinner, but were not a part of the dinner. It seems unusual but in the ancient world anyone could come and stand around the walls or look in the windows and participate in the conversation without being an official guest at the dinner. Apparently “the Pharisees” was another name for “the scribes” who were mentioned earlier in this context. They were a group of committed Jews who followed a particular tradition which affirmed the oral tradition of the Jews (the Talmud). Notice that they confronted the disciples and not Jesus Himself. Jesus, by eating with these notorious sinners, was expressing fellowship and friendship. John the Baptist had come earlier as an ascetic and the Jewish leaders had rejected him and now they rejected Jesus who came as a more social person (cf. Mat 11:19; Luk 7:34). They even accused Jesus of being a “wine-bibber” which meant a “glutton” or “one who over-drinks.” Quite often religious conservatism has an ugly and self-righteous side. For a full discussion of the origin and theology of the Pharisees, see note at Mat 22:15.
Mat 9:12 “But when Jesus heard this, He said” On this occasion Jesus obviously did not read the minds of the Pharisees (cf. v.4). Either it was conveyed to Him what they were saying or He heard them Himself.
“It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick”This does not imply that the Pharisees were without sin; rather it was a sarcastic response.
Mat 9:13 “But go and learn what this means” This is a quote from Hos 6:6 (as is Mat 12:7). This verse began with an aorist imperative phrase which was an idiom that the rabbis used to tell their students to study a particular issue. Mat 9:13 is unique to Matthew’s Gospel.
“for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” Luk 5:32, which is the Synoptic parallel to this account, adds “to repentance.” Matthew’s account, although it does not specifically record this, implied it. The two necessary responses for people to be right with God were repentance and faith (cf. Mar 1:15; Act 3:16; Act 3:19; Act 20:21). Jesus even asserted that unless people repent they shall perish (cf. Luk 13:5). Repentance basically is a turning from self, sin, and rebellion and turning to God’s will and way for one’s life. It is not so much an emotion as it is a change in priority and lifestyle. It is willingness to change. See Special Topic at Mat 3:2.
The verb “call” (kale) can be understood as ” invite” (cf. Mat 22:2-10 and Luk 14:16-25; Joh 2:2; Rev 19:9). In a theological sense this accentuates the covenant concept.
1. God invites (divine call)
2. humans must respond (with initial and continuing faith, repentance, obedience, and perseverance)
See SPECIAL TOPIC: ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE at Mat 24:22.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
And it came to pass. A Hebraism: frequent in O. T See note on Gen 1:2.
sat at meat = was reclining
the house = his house:
he. Matthew’s house. Compare Luk 5:29; so in Mat 9:28.
publicans = tax-gatherers.
sinners. Especially in a religious sense. This usage is common in the Inscriptions in Asia Minor (Deiss-mann).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
10.] We are told in Luk 5:29, that Levi made him a great feast in his house; and, similarly, Mark has . . The narrative in our text is so closely identical with that in Mark, that it is impossible to suppose, with Greswell, that a different feast is intended. The arguments by which he supports his view are by no means weighty. From the words , he infers that the house was not that of Matthew, but that in which our Lord usually dwelt, which he supposes to be intended in several other places. But surely the article might be used without any such significance, or designating any particular house,-as would be very likely if Matthew himself is here the narrator. (A similar mistake has been made in supposing , as in Mat 9:1, and elsewhere, to mean some one particular ship; whereas it is generic: see note there.) Again, Greswell presses to verbal accuracy the terms used in the accounts (e.g. and ), and attempts to shew them to be inconsistent with one another. But surely the time is past for such dealing with the historic text of the Gospels; and, besides, he has overlooked a great inconsistency in his own explanation, viz., that of making in the second instance, according to him, Scribes and Pharisees present at the feast given by a Publican, and exclaiming against that which they themselves were doing. It was not at, but after the feast that the discourse in Mat 9:11-17 took place. And his whole inference, that must be the great meal in the day, and consequently in the evening, hangs on too slender a thread to need refutation. The real difficulty, insuperable to a Harmonist, is the connexion here of the raising of Jaeiruss daughter with this feast: on which see below, Mat 9:18.
.] a Hebraism, see reff.; it occurs, but with the omission of , in Marks account. The not very usual word, , is also common to the two. St. Mark, with his usual precision, adds : a clause answering to in our text. See last note.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 9:10. , in the house) Cf. Mat 9:28; or, if you take it of Matthews house, Mar 2:15; Luk 5:29. Matthew appears in this feast to have bid adieu to his former companions,[404] nor does he call the house any longer his own.- , publicans and sinners) who had sinned grievously against the sixth and seventh [seventh and eighth] commandments.-, sat down together with) Kind and condescending was the intercourse of Jesus.[405]
[404] He seems also hereby to have afforded them an opportunity of going to the Lord, such as would hardly have been given to so great a number of such characters at any other time. Shortly after, Matthew came to know the glory of Jesus by His acts, and especially by the raising of Jairus daughter, ch. Mat 9:19; and he was sent forth, at no long interval afterwards, with the rest of His apostles: on which occasion he has called himself Matthew the publican, ch. Mat 10:3; and, from the deepest sense of gratitude (as is natural), has recalled to remembrance with what marvellous speed grace transferred him from his state as a publican (ch. Mat 18:17) to an Apostolic embassy which was distinguished by miracles.-Harm. p. 282.
[405] For whose sake the banquet was given, to which, without any command on His part, publicans and sinners came. Therefore the objection of the Pharisees, even looking at it in a mere external point of view, was void of all justice.-V. g.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Mat 9:10-13
Jesus at the House of Matthew
Mat 9:10-13
10-13 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat in the house.- We learn from the record of Mar 2:15 and Luk 5:29 that this feast was in the house of Matthew; some think that it was a farewell banquet or feast that Matthew gave to his friends; however Jesus was present. “He sat at meat in the house” and many publicans and sinners came to this feast and sat with Jesus. Matthew modestly omits some details which are recorded by Luke, who says it was “a great feast,” “a feast for all corners.” Matthew gave his friends an opportunity to see and hear Jesus; it seems from the record that the feast was held immediately after the call of Matthew. “Publicans” were tax collectors and “sinners” were notoriously wicked persons; they disregarded the law and the tradition of the elders and were regarded by the Pharisees as unfit for association. It may be that the “sinners” were not as wicked as the Pharisees thought they were. Jesus was in the house of Matthew with other publicans and sinners; this was, to the Pharisees, a ridiculous surrounding for one who claimed to be the Messiah.
And when the Pharisees saw it.–The Pharisees were not present at the feast, but they could pass along the street and observe what was going on in Matthew’s house; the self-righteous Pharisee would not pollute himself by going into the house of a publican and making common with sinners. The scribes were associated with the Pharisees. They asked the disciples of Jesus, “Why eateth your Teacher with the publicans and sinners?” Luke records it, “Why do ye eat and drink with the publicans and sinners?” They asked this of the disciples of Jesus after the feast, and the disciples reported it to Jesus. The Pharisees and scribes were astonished at the thought of a “Teacher” of the Jews going into the house of a publican; they thought that a teacher ought carefully to avoid all intercourse with such persons. There was not only the social objection to keeping company with such a low class, but there was the pollution which resulted from contact with those who were ceremonially unclean. Jesus replied, “They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick.” Those who are sound in health do not need a physician; this was a proverbial expression. The application of this proverb is obvious; the physician goes among the sick, and why should not the Teacher of salvation go among sinners? Jesus then added that they should learn a lesson which was, “I desire mercy, and not sacrifice: for I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” Here is a quotation from Hos 6:6, “I desire mercy,” kindness and sympathy and helpfulness, and “not sacrifice.” Jesus does not mean that there are any who do not need a Savior, but there were those who claimed to be righteous, and therefore did not need a Savior. His quotation has an ironical application to the Pharisees, who really needed repentance as much as the publicans.
[Then, as now, there were self-righteous Pharisees and scribes who felt it was contamination to go near these weak, sinful classes, and even refused to countenance Jesus when he was working signs and wonders, because he went among these weak and sinning classes. It was a serious charge they made against him, that “he eateth with publicans and sinners.” His response is wisdom and instruction to us if we will hear and be guided by it: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Jesus did not see the rich or the fashionable, the learned or the elite, but he came to call sinners to repentance. To those who felt and acknowledged themselves to be sinners, and they heard.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
as: Mar 2:15, Mar 2:16, Mar 2:17, Luk 5:29-32
many: Mat 5:46, Mat 5:47, Joh 9:31, 1Ti 1:13-16
Reciprocal: Gen 13:13 – But the Mat 11:19 – a friend Luk 15:1 – General Act 10:24 – and had
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
9:10
All men are sinners to some extent, but they are named as a class in this passage which means they were unrighteous in their life as a whole and hence regarded as an unworthy group. They are also classed with the publicans which shows they also were regarded as an unworthy group. They are referred to frequently in the New Testament, and I shall quote from the works of reference for the information of the reader.
“The class designated by this word [publican] in the New Testament were employed as collectors of the Roman revenue. The Roman senate farmed the direct taxes and the customs to capitalists who undertook to pay a given sum into the treasury, and so received the name of publicani. Contracts of this kind fell naturally into the hands of the equites [military orders], as the richest class of Romans. They appointed managers, under whom were the portitores, the actual custom-house officers, who examined each bale of goods, exported or imported, assessed its value more or less arbitrarily, wrote out the ticket, and enforced payment. The latter were commonly natives of the province in which they were stationed, as being brought daily into contact with all classes of the population. The name publicani was used popularly, and in the New Testament exclusively, of the portitores. The system was essentially a vicious one. The portitores were encouraged in the most vexatious or fraudulent exactions, and a remedy was all but impossible. They overcharged whenever they had an opportunity, Luk 3:13; they brought false charges of smuggling in the hope of extorting hush-money, Luk 19:8; they detained and opened letters on mere suspicion. It was the basest of all livelihoods. All this was enough to bring the class into ill favor everywhere. In Judea and Galilee there were special circumstances of aggravation. The employment brought out all the besetting vices of the Jewish character. The strong feeling of many Jews as to the absolute unlawfulness of paying tribute at all made matters worse. The scribes who discussed the question, Mat 22:15, for the most part answered it in the negative. In addition to their other faults, accordingly, the publicans of the New Testament were regarded as traitors and apostates, defiled by their frequent intercourse with the heathen, willing tools of the oppressor. The class thus practically excommunicated furnished some of the earliest disciples both of the Baptist and of our Lord. The position of Zacchaeus as a “chief among the publicans,” Luk 19:2, implies a gradation of some kind among the persons employed.” Smith’s Bible Dictionary, article, Publican.
“TELONES, 1. a renter or farmer of taxes; among the Romans usually a man of equestrian [one who rides on horseback] rank. 2. a tax-gatherer, collector of taxes or tolls, one employed by a publican or farmer-general in collecting the taxes. The tax-collectors were, as a class, detested not only by the Jews but by other nations also, both on account of their employment and of the harshness, greed, and deception, with which they prosecuted it.”–Thayer. “TELONES, a farmer of the taxes or customs, one who pays to the government a certain sum for the privilege of collecting the taxes and customs of a district. . . . Whence in the English Version, a publican. The public revenues of the Greeks and Romans were usually thus farmed out; and among the latter the purchasers were persons of wealth and rank, and in the later periods chiefly of the equestrian order. . . . The farmers-general had also sub-contractors, or employed agents, who collected the taxes and customs at the gates of cities, in seaports, on public ways, bridges, and the like. . . . In the New Testament in the later sense, a toll-gatherer, collector of customs, publican, the object of bitter hatred and scorn to the Jews, and often coupled with the most depraved classes of society.” Robinson’s Greek Lexicon. This long note will not be copied again, hence it will be important that the reader make careful note of its location for reference as occasion requires.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 9:10. And it came to pass. All three accounts are indefinite as to the length of the interval. As already intimated, the arrangement of Matthews narrative seems to have been occasioned by the fact that Jairus came to his house, where the Pharisees were objecting to the keeping company with publicans. The mention of the feast required a notice of the call of the publican; and the call occurred during the powerful impression made by the healing of the paralytic
The house, that of Matthew himself (Luk 5:29), who made a great feast for our Lord, although he modestly omits the mention of that fact.The common version has inserted Jesus at the beginning of the verse, and omitted it at the close, without any authority.
Many publicans and sinners came and sat at meat with Jesus and his disciples. Luke says they were invited, and Mark: they were many and they followed him. The general character of the publicans may be inferred from their associates, sinners, i.e., persons excommunicated and generally disreputable. On the word publicans, comp. chap. Mat 5:46.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, Christ invites Matthew to a discipleship, Matthew invites Christ to a feast; the servant invites his master, a sinner invited his Saviour. We do not find, wherever Christ was invited to any table, that he refused to go; if a Pharisee, if a publican invited, he constantly went; not for the pleasure of eating, but for the opportunity of conversing and doing good; Christ feasts us when we feast him.
From Matthew’s example, learn, That new converts are full of affection towards Christ, and very expressive of their love unto him. Such as before conversion disesteemed him, do afterwards kindly and respectfully entertain him; Matthew touched with a sense of Christ’s rich love, makes him a royal feast.
Observe farther, How at this feast many publicans and sinners were present, of Matthew’s acquaintance no doubt, and probably invited by him, that they might also see Christ, and be partakes of the same grace with him.
Whence we learn, That grace teaches a man to desire and seek the conversion of others; and such as are truly brought home to Christ, themselves, will study and endeavour to bring in all their acquaintance to Christ also.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 9:10-13. As Jesus sat at meat in the house Namely, of Matthew, (see Mar 2:15,) who, being desirous at once to show his respects to Christ, and to give his former companions and acquaintance an opportunity of enjoying his instructive conversation, made a great entertainment for him, Luk 5:29. And many publicans and sinners came and sat down with him Being invited by Matthew. The publicans, or collectors of taxes which the Jews paid the Romans, were infamous for their illegal exactions. With these were now present several other open, notorious sinners. When the Pharisees saw it When they observed that Jesus ate and openly conversed with these men, being offended, they said, Why eateth your Master, &c. Thus they commonly ask our Lord, Why do thy disciples do this? and his disciples, Why doth your Master? The Pharisees pretended to greater strictness than Christ in keeping at a distance from sinners, but they were far from being strict in reforming themselves, or in zeal for love and doing good to their fellow-creatures. When Jesus heard that The Pharisees, it seems, though they had not directed their discourse to Jesus, yet had spoken so loud as to let all the guests hear their censure. Hence it was necessary that Christ should show them the unreasonableness of it, and therefore he said, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick Implying that, since the Pharisees thought themselves righteous persons, they had no need of his company and instructions, whereas the publicans, whom they called sinners, being sick, had the best right to it: and that as nobody ever blamed a physician for going into the company of the patients whose case he had undertaken; so, they could not blame him for conversing with sinners, since he did it not as their companion but as their physician, and therefore with a view to reclaim them. But go ye and learn what that meaneth Ye that take upon you to teach others; I will have mercy, and not sacrifice That is, I will have mercy rather than sacrifice: I love acts of mercy better than sacrifice itself. See this explained at large in the note on Hos 6:6; as if he had said, In bringing sinners to repentance, which is the highest exercise of benevolence, I do what is more acceptable to God than offering sacrifices, however many or costly, or observing the most important ceremonial institutions, so unreasonably magnified by the men of your sect, who observe them on many occasions at the expense of charity.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
LVII.
MATTHEW’S FEAST. DISCOURSE ON FASTING.
(Capernaum.)
aMATT. IX. 10-17; bMARK II. 15-22; cLUKE V. 29-39.
c29 And Levi [another name for the apostle Matthew] made him a great feast in his house: b15 And it came to pass, that he was sitting {aas he sat} at meat in the {bhis} ahouse, cand there was a great multitude of publicans [Matthew had invited his old friends] and of others band abehold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples. bfor there were many, cthat were sitting at meat with them. band they followed him. c30 And the Pharisees and their scribes {bthe scribes of the Pharisees,} [that is, the scribes which were of their party or sect] when they saw that he was eating with the sinners and publicans, c murmured against his disciples, saying, {athey said} unto his disciples, cWhy do ye eat and drink with the publicans and sinners? aWhy eateth your Teacher with the publicans and sinners? bHow is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners? [From their standpoint, the question was natural enough. No strict Jew could eat with a Gentile ( Act 11:3, Gal 2:12), and Matthew’s guests were classed with the heathen.] a12 But {b17 And} awhen he bJesus heard it, he canswering said {bsaith} unto them, They that are whole {cin health} have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. a13 But go ye and learn what this meaneth, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice [For an explanation of this passage, see Mat 22:4, Luk 14:8, Joh 2:8, Joh 2:9). Mourning and fasting would therefore ill befit such an occasion.] c35 But the days will come; and when the bridegroom shall [350] be taken from them, band then will they fast in that day. {cthose days.} [Jesus here foretells the removal of his visible presence from his disciples by his ascension. His words predict but do not command a fast. He prescribed no stated fasts, and the apostolic church kept none. History shows that prescribed fasts become formal and tend to Phariseeism.] 36 And he spake also a parable unto them: No man rendeth a piece from a new garment and putteth it upon an old garment, else he will rend the new, and also the piece from the new will not agree with the old. a16 And no man putteth {bseweth} a piece of undressed cloth on {aupon} an old garment; for {belse} that which should fill it up taketh from it, {afrom the garment,} bthe new from the old, and a worse rent is made. [Jesus justifies the conduct of his disciples by an appeal to the principles of the new dispensation, by which they were governed. The disciples of John looked upon Jesus as a reformer of Judaism, but he corrects their false impressions. To tear the new dispensation to pieces to renovate or embellish the old would be to injure the new and to destroy the old. By the process of fulling or dressing, new cloth was cleansed and shrunk so as to become more compact. The new cloth, therefore, had in it, so to speak, a life-element, and in its movement while shrinking it would tear the weaker fiber of the old cloth to which it was sewed, and thus enlarge the rent. The new dispensation could have rites and forms of its own, but could not conform to the rites of the Pharisees. If the conduct of his disciples had made a rent in the rabbinical traditions with regard to fasting, Jesus could not so modify the conduct of his disciples as to patch the rent without injuring the moral sense of his disciples, and without making Phariseeism a more meaningless hypocrisy than ever.] 22 And no man putteth {a17 Neither do men put} new wine into old wine-skins: celse the the new wine will burst the skins, aand the wine citself will be {ais} spilled, band the wine perisheth, and the skins: aburst, cand the skins will perish. abut they put new wine {cnew [351] wine must be put} binto fresh wine-skins. aand both are preserved. [This parable is also an illustration of the principles set forth above. Wine was then stored in casks of skin–usually hides of goats. Wine-skins, newly made, were elastic, and would expand to accommodate the fermentation of the new wine within. But the old wine-skins were stiff and of little strength, and would burst if fermenting liquid were confined within them.] c39 And no man having drunk old wine desireth new; for he saith, The old is good. [The thought here is that as wine should be put in skins suited for it, and as, at an entertainment, the different kinds of wine should be served in appropriate succession; so, fasting should be observed on suitable occasions–not, for instance, at a wedding.]
[FFG 349-352]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
Verse 10
Publicans and sinners. The publicans mentioned in the New Testament were persons employed by the government, or by farmers of the revenue acting under authority of the government, to collect customs and taxes. They were generally held in great detestation, not only on account their usual depravity of character but also because it was exceedingly humiliating to the proud spirit of the Jews, to be compelled to pay taxes to their heathen masters, whom they both hated and despised. The feeling, however, with which the publicans were regarded, was, in part, a prejudice, and in some cases, perhaps, as, for instance, in that of Matthew, wholly so. There is no evidence that he was not always a man of uprightness on integrity. That the office in itself innocent, seems to be implied by the directions which John gave for the performance of its duties. (Luke 3:12,13.)
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
9:10 And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and {e} sinners came and sat down with him and his disciples.
(e) The publicans who were placed by the Romans, after that time Judea was brought into the form of a province, to gather the taxes, and therefore by the rest of the Jews they were called sinners, that is to say, very vile men.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Matthew’s own account of the feast that he threw for Jesus that followed his calling is brief, and it focuses on the controversy with the Pharisees that occurred then. Matthew had friends who were also tax collectors (cf. Mat 5:46). "Sinners" is a term the Pharisees used to describe people who broke their severe rules of conduct (Pharisaic Halakoth). Eating with these people put Jesus and His disciples in danger of ceremonial defilement, but the spiritual need of these people was more important to Jesus than ritual cleanliness.
"In the ancient world generally a shared meal was a clear sign of identification, and for a Jewish religious teacher to share a meal with such people was scandalous, let alone to do so in the ’unclean’ house of a tax collector." [Note: France, The Gospel . . ., p. 353.]
The Pharisees’ question, addressed to Jesus’ disciples, was really an ironic accusation against Him (Mat 9:11). A teacher would normally keep all the religious traditions as well as the Mosaic Law to provide the best example for his disciples. The Pharisees despised Jesus for the company He kept, which implied that He had a lax view of the Law. Note that the Pharisees now become critics of Jesus as the scribes had earlier (Mat 9:3). Opposition mounts.