Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 9:3
And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This [man] blasphemeth.
This man blasphemeth – The word blaspheme originally means to speak evil of anyone; to injure by words; to blame unjustly. When applied to God, it means to speak of him unjustly; to ascribe to him acts and attributes which he does not possess; or to speak impiously or profanely. It also means to say or do anything by which his name or honor is insulted, or which conveys an impression unfavourable to God. It means. also, to attempt to do, or say a thing, which belongs to him alone, or which he only can do. This is its meaning here. Christ was charged with saying a thing in his own name, or attempting to do a thing, which properly belonged to God; thus assuming the place of God, and doing him injury, as the scribes supposed, by an invasion of his prerogatives. None, said they (see Mark and Luke), can forgive sins but God only. In this they reasoned correctly. See Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22. None of the prophets had this power; and by saying that he forgave sins, Jesus was understood to affirm that he was divine; and as he proved this by working a miracle expressly to confirm the claim, it follows that he is divine, or equal with the Father.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 3. This man blasphemeth.] comes either from , to hurt or blast the reputation or credit of another, or from , to smite with reports. Whenever it is used in reference to GOD, it simply signifies, to speak impiously of his nature, or attributes, or works. Injurious speaking is its proper translation when referred to man.
The scribes were the literati of that time; and their learning, because not used in dependence on God, rendered them proud, envious, and obstinate. Unsanctified knowledge has still the same effect: that light serves only to blind and lead men out of the way which is not joined with uprightness of heart. The most sacred truths often become an occasion of delusion, where men are under the government of their evil passions.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Mark saith, There were certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God only? Mar 2:6,7. Luke saith, The scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? Luk 5:21. It should seem they did not speak it out. Mark saith, they reasoned in their hearts. Matthew in the next verse saith,
Jesus, knowing their thoughts. It seemeth that it was then agreed on all hands, that forgiving of sins was the prerogative of God alone; and that for man to arrogate to himself such a power as belonged to God alone was no less than blasphemy, as all ascribings of Divine perfections to creatures must be. It stands the pope and priests in hand to clear themselves from this guilt. It was also agreed by the scribes and Pharisees, that Christ spake blasphemy in pronouncing to the sick of the palsy, that his sins were forgiven. The reason was, because they did not believe him to be the Son of God, but looked on him as mere man.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And behold, certain of the Scribes said within themselves,…. And of the Pharisees also, as Luke says; for there were at this time Pharisees and doctors of the law, who were come out of every town of Galilee and Judea, and out of Jerusalem, sitting and hearing him teach, and observing what he said, and did; who upon hearing him pronounce the sentence of pardon, upon this “paralytic” man, reasoned and concluded in their own minds, though they did not care to speak it out, that
this man blasphemeth: the reason was, because they thought he ascribed that to himself, which was peculiar to God: and so he did, and yet did not blaspheme; because he himself was God, of which he quickly gave convincing proofs.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
This man blasphemeth ( ). See the sneer in “this fellow.” “The prophet always is a scandalous, irreverent blasphemer from the conventional point of view” (Bruce).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “And, behold, certain of the scribes,” (kai idou tines ton grammateon) “And behold some of the scribes,” certain ones who were present on this occasion,
2) “Said within themselves,” (elpan en heautois) “Said among themselves,” in fault-finding collusion, but did not speak out audibly to interrupt Jesus. Yet, Jesus knew their thought, their raised eyebrows of doubt, thinking within, Mr 2:6.
3) “This man blasphemeth (houtos blasphemei) “This man (Jesus) blasphemes.” Mr 2:7 adds their comments” who can forgive sins but God only?” That is who He was, Isa 43:25; Joh 1:1; Joh 1:14; Joh 8:11.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
3. And, lo, some of the scribes They accuse Christ of blasphemy and sacrilege, because he claims for himself what is God’s prerogative. The other two Evangelists tell us also that they said, Who can forgive sins but God alone? It is beyond all question, that their eagerness to slander drove them to this wicked conclusion. If they think that there is any thing which deserves blame, why do they not inquire into it? (510) Besides, as the expression admits of more than one meaning, and as Christ said nothing more than what the Prophets frequently say when they announce the grace of God, why do they take in a bad sense what admits of a favorable interpretation? They must have been already poisoned by malice and envy, otherwise they would not so eagerly have seized an occasion of blaming Christ. They remain silent, but think in their hearts, that they may slander him when absent among people of their own class. It is no doubt true, that God alone has power and authority to forgive sins: but they are wrong in concluding that it does not belong to Christ, for he is God manifested in the flesh, (1Ti 3:16.) They had a right to inquire on what grounds Christ laid claim to such authority: but, without any inquiry, they suppose him to be one of the common rank of men, and proceed rashly to condemn him.
(510) “ s’ils pensent qu’il y ait quelque chose digne de reprendre aux paroles de Christ, que ne parlent-ils a luy pour en avoir resolution ?” — “If they think that there is any thing worthy of blame in the words of Christ, why do they not speak to him to have it explained?”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(3) This man blasphemeth.The words were but an echo of the charge that had been brought at Jerusalem, that He made Himself equal with God (Joh. 5:18), and may well have come from some of the same objectors. St. Mark and St. Luke give the grounds of their accusation: What is this that this Man thus speaks? Who can forgive sins but One, that is, God? Speaking abstractedly, they were affirming one of the first principles of all true religious belief. All sins are offences against God, and therefore, though men may forgive trespasses as far as they themselves are concerned, the ultimate act of forgiveness belongs to God only; and for a mere man, as such, to claim the right of forgiving thus absolutely, was to claim a divine attribute, and therefore to blasphemei.e., to utter words as disparaging as open profaneness to the majesty of God. What they forgot to take into account was the possibility (1) that God might so far delegate His power to His chosen servants that they, on sufficient evidence of that delegation, might rightly declare sins to be forgiven; or (2) that the Teacher might Himself be one with God, and so share in His perfections and prerogatives. On either of these suppositions the charge of blasphemy was fully answered, and the sin of the scribes lay in their ignoring the fact that He had given sufficient proof of the former, if not of the latter also.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
3. Blasphemeth By its proper force, this word means to slander or reproach. Here it means to infringe the divine attributes or impeach the divine character in a presumptuous way.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, “This man is blaspheming”.’
The Scribes were the teachers of the Law, and they had come to check Jesus out. Here was this man performing all these miracles, and they wanted to know if He was ‘sound’, that is, whether He taught what they taught. And these dreadful words convinced them that He did not. Indeed they considered that what He had said was blasphemy. Who was this man to dare to suggest that a man’s sins were certainly forgiven? Men could only hope and pray, and give alms, and then hope that God would take notice of them. Only God could determine whether a man was worthy of forgiveness. For that was their problem. They did not believe in God’s free forgiveness.
But Jesus had come to bring men forgiveness. He had come to save His people from their sins (Mat 1:21). Thus he knew that forgiveness was available for all who truly turned to God from their past lives, seeking a true change of heart. And He had seen that in this man before Him.
Central to the idea of blasphemy was the using of God’s Name lightly, but that clearly also included a careless claiming of the prerogatives of God. And that was what they saw Jesus as doing. Their thought was simply, ‘None can forgive sins apart from God’, and they considered that He did it in His own way, so that to claim the knowledge that a man was forgiven was insupportable arrogance.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The condemnation of the scribes:
v. 3. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
v. 4. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
v. 5. For whether is easier to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee, or to say, Arise, and walk?
As usual, the enemies of Christ had their representatives in the people surrounding Jesus, to counteract, if possible, the influence of His teaching and of His miracles. It was not a rude interruption which they tried here, but their objection, to the omniscient mind of Christ, was as open as though they had shouted it at the top of their voice. They bring the accusation of blasphemy against the Lord, of an impious assumption of divine rights and powers. They challenge His prerogative, correctly stating that it was God’s office to pardon sins, Luk 5:21. Jesus read their thoughts as He read the mental state of the paralytic. His very searching and knowing of their hearts reproved their wickedness, and to this He adds the spoken rebuke: To what end, with the expectation of what, what do you propose to accomplish with the evil thoughts that are in your hearts? His question to them: Both being equally easy to say, which takes the greater power and authority, which would prove the stronger argument as to divine omnipotence, the healing of the body or the healing of the soul?
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
Ver. 3. This man blasphemeth ] True, had he been but a man, and had taken upon him to forgive sins by his own authority, as Popish priests do, to the subverting of some men’s souls. I have known one, saith a reverend divine, who neither by education nor affection was disposed to Popery; who having the ill hap, when his conscience was perplexed, to fall into the hands of a Popish priest, became a Papist upon this reason, because, as the priest suggested, that religion afforded more comfort for the conscience than ours; and therefore more comfort, because it had and exercised a power to pardon sin, which our ministers neither did nor dare to assume unto themselves.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mat 9:3 . . : some scribes present on this occasion. Ominous fact duly introduced by ; its significance still more distinctly recognised by Luke, who gives it prominent mention at the beginning of his narrative (Mat 9:17 ). Sure sign of the extent, depth, and quality of Christ’s influence. : of course; the prophet always is a scandalous, irreverent blasphemer from the conventional point of view. The scribes regarded forgiveness purely under the aspect of prerogative, and in self-defence Jesus must meet them on their own ground. His answer covers the whole case. There is more than prerogative in the matter; there is the right, duty, privilege, and power of every man to promote faith in pardon by hearty proclamation of the law of the moral world. This is dealt with first.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Mat 9:3. , , said within themselves, this man blasphemeth) Blasphemy is committed when (1.) things unworthy of God are attributed to Him; (2.) things worthy of God are denied to Him; (3.) when the incommunicable attributes of God are attributed to others.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Mat 9:3-8
Jesus and the Scribes
Mat 9:3-8
3-8 And behold, certain of the scribes.-Luke adds that the Pharisees joined with the scribes; these were the religious leaders and they said “within themselves,” not aloud; the word in Mark here means “held a dialogue with themselves.” They reached the conclusion that Jesus was a blasphemer; they were not courageous enough to accuse him of blasphemy; probably they talked among themselves about Jesus and accused him of blasphemy, but were not bold enough to openly make the accusation. Their argument was, “It is blasphemy for any but God to assume the prerogative of forgiving sins; but this man does so; therefore he blasphemeth.” The Jews reasoned in a similar way (Joh 10:31-36), when they were ready to stone Jesus; this was the penalty for blasphemy according to the law (Lev 24:15-16.) To blaspheme was to speak profanely, irreverently of God and religion, so as to diminish his influence among men. It is high treason against the kingdom of God to speak blasphemously.
And Jesus knowing their thoughts.-While they did not speak aloud, but only reasoned “within themselves,” Jesus knew their thoughts and answered their accusation. They must have been greatly surprised when Jesus said to them, “Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?” “But Jesus did not trust himself unto them, for that he knew all men, and because he needed not that any one should bear witness concerning man; for he himself knew what was in man.” (Joh 2:24-25.) Hence, Jesus asked them why these faults and injurious reasonings concerning his character and claims; when they perceived that Jesus knew their thoughts, they ought to have been prepared to recognize his claims, as the power of reading the heart was one of their criteria of the Messiah.
Jesus now gives the proof that he had power to forgive sin. He said to them, “Which is easier, to say, Thy sins are forgiven; or to say, Arise, and walk?” “Which is easier?” He who can say with effect, arise and walk, can say with effect, thy sins are forgiven; both were possible for God, but impossible for man. In the case of the healing they could test the reality of the power he claimed; they could see whether the paralytic arose and walked; and from this they ought to infer that he possessed the other power also, seeing that he claimed to possess it, and that one who could work a miracle ought to be believed. The scribes could not deny that it was as easy to say with effect to the man, “Thy sins are forgiven,” as to say, “Arise, and walk.”
But that ye may know that the Son of man hath authority. -“Son of man” is a title that Jesus used in referring to himself and also a title that the Jews used in referring to the Messiah, the ideal man, the head and representative of the new humanity, the Son of God manifested in the flesh. That they might know that he had “authority on earth to forgive sins,” he would say, “Arise, and take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.” It would be impossible without a miracle for this paralytic to do as Jesus commanded him; that they might know that Jesus had both right and might, authority and power, to forgive sins on earth, he would command the man sick of palsy to arise and take up his bed and walk; if the man obeyed his command, then they would know that he had the power and authority to forgive sins. So Jesus demonstrated his power to forgive sins by commanding the man who was paralyzed to arise from his bed and take it up and go home. The man immediately “arose and departed to his house.” He took up his bed in the presence of the assembly (Mark), departed to his house; this was a living unimpeachable witness to Jesus that he was the Messiah, doing precisely what the Messiah naturally would do.
But when the multitudes saw it.-The multitudes that saw what was done were afraid and “glorified God”; Luke adds, “they were filled with fear.” The miracle awakened a religious awe in the minds of the people such as men ever feel in the presence of a great and mysterious power. They were filled with wonder, reverence, and gratitude when they saw that God had imparted such authority over physical and moral evil; it is probable that they had no knowledge of Jesus’ divine nature. We are not told what influence this miracle had on the prejudiced scribes and Pharisees; such men are rarely touched by any possible demonstration of goodness and grace; but the multitude marveled and glorified God. Mark describes the effect on the multitude by recording that they said, “We never saw it on this fashion” (Mar 2:12); and Luke expresses it, “We have seen strange things today” (Luk 5:26.)
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
certain: Mat 7:29, Mar 2:6, Mar 2:7, Mar 7:21, Luk 5:21, Luk 7:39, Luk 7:40
This: Mat 26:65, Lev 24:16, Mar 14:64, Joh 10:33-36, Act 6:11-13
Reciprocal: 1Ki 21:13 – blaspheme God Pro 23:7 – as Luk 7:49 – Who
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
9:3
Blaspheme is from a Greek word of virtually the same form, BLAS-PHEMEO, and Thayer defines it, “To speak reproachfully, rail at, revile, calumniate [accuse falsely].” In his own comments on the word he says it means, “Specifically of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally [emphasis mine, E. M. Z.] come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things.” Thus we see they accused Jesus of showing disrespect for God in claiming authority to forgive. In Mark’s account of the same event they make that item the basis of their accusation (Mar 2:7).
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 9:3. Certain of the scribes. Many Pharisees and doctors of the law were present, from all parts of the land (Luk 5:17).
Said within themselves, i.e., in their hearts, as is plain from Mar 2:6.
This man, not necessarily a term of contempt
Blasphemeth. The parallel passages base the charge on the correct premise, that God only can forgive sins. The language of our Lord must therefore have been authoritative.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
See here, how the best of men are sometimes charged with saying and doing the worst of things; to do well and bear ill, was the portion of Christ himself, and may be the portion of the holiest of those that belong to Christ; the innocent Jesus was accused of blasphemy, of sorcery, and of the blackest crimes. Innocency itself can protect no man from slander and false accusations.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Mat 9:3-8. Behold, certain of the scribes, (Luke adds, and Pharisees,) said within themselves That is, in their hearts, This man blasphemeth Attributing to himself a power (that of forgiving sins) which belongs to God only. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, which, it appears, they did not openly declare, (for Mark says, Mar 2:8, He perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves,) said: Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts Namely, concerning me, on account of these words which I have spoken? For whether is easier, &c. Do not both of them argue a divine power? Therefore: if I can heal his disease, I can forgive his sins, especially as his disease is the consequence of his sins, therefore these must be taken away, if that is. But that ye may know May have evident proof, that the Son of man hath power on earth Even in his state of humiliation, to forgive sins; then (turning from them) he saith to the sick of the palsy, Arise, &c., and he arose Thus Jesus gave the Pharisees a twofold demonstration of his divinity: 1st, by showing that he knew their thoughts; for to search the hearts and know the thoughts of mankind is not in the power either of men or angels, but is the prerogative of God only; 2dly, by assuming to himself, and manifesting undeniably, that he possessed power to forgive sins. But when the multitude saw it, they marvelled They were all amazed, says Mark, and glorified God, &c. So, what was to the scribes an occasion of blaspheming, was to the people an incitement to praise God.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Verse 3
Blasphemeth. They justly considered the power of forgiving sins as the attribute of God.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
9:3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This [man] {c} blasphemeth.
(c) To blaspheme, signifies among the divines, to speak wickedly: and among the more eloquent Greeks, to slander.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Some of the teachers of the law who were standing by took offense at what Jesus said. He was claiming to forgive sins, but God alone can forgive sins since it is He whom people sin against (Psa 51:4; Isa 43:25; Isa 44:22). They called Jesus’ words blasphemy because they viewed them as a slanderous affront to God. This is the first instance of this charge in Matthew, but it will become a prominent theme.