34<\/strong>. what was done<\/em> ] Rather, what had happened.<\/p>\n Verse 34. They fled, and went and told it<\/B><\/I>] , They<\/I> went<\/I>, is omitted by almost every MS. of repute, and by the best of the ancient versions. Griesbach<\/I> leaves it out, and with propriety too, as it is not likely that so correct a writer as Luke would say, They fled, and WENT and told it<\/I>.<\/P><\/p>\n When they that fed them saw what was done<\/strong>,…. That the devils went out of the man possessed by them, and entered into the herd of swine, which becoming mad therewith, ran furiously down the precipice into the sea, and were drowned:<\/p>\n they fled<\/strong>; as persons affrighted, at these uncommon and surprising events, and as afraid to see their owners:<\/p>\n and went and told it in the city<\/strong>; that is, of Gadara, or some other city near at hand; the Syriac and Ethiopic versions read, “in the cities”; in all the cities round about, in that country:<\/p>\n and in the country<\/strong>, or “fields”, in the villages adjacent, and in the houses which were scattered about in the fields for conveniency, for rural business.<\/p>\n Saw what had come to pass <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). This item only in Luke. Note the neat Greek idiom <\/SPAN><\/span>, articular second perfect active participle of <\/SPAN><\/span>. Repeated in verse 35<\/span> and in Mr 5:14<\/span>. Note numerous participles here in verse 35<\/span> as in Mr 5:15<\/span>. <\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “When they that fed them saw what was done,” <\/strong>(idontes de hoi baskontes to gegonos) “Then when those feeding the herd of swine saw what happened,” what had occurred, as also stated, Luk 8:35<\/span>; Mat 8:33<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “They fled,” <\/strong>(ephugon) “They fled,” astounded, fearful, Mar 5:14<\/span>, in excited haste. to tell what had happened to the devil possessed, the change that had taken place in him, and what had happened to the swine.<\/p>\n 3) “And went and told it,” <\/strong>(kai apengeila) “And they reported,” gave an oral account or report of everything that had happened, Mat 8:33<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “In the city and in the country.” <\/strong>(eis ten polin kai eis tous agrous) “In the city and in the farm areas,” with excitement, Mar 5:14<\/span>.<\/p>\n (34) In the country.<\/strong>Better, in the farms.<\/em> The noun is in the plural, and is so rendered in Mat. 22:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n ‘And when those who fed them saw what had come about, they fled, and told it in the city and in the country.’<\/p>\n When those who were watching over the pigs saw what had happened they ‘fled’. What they had seen had been too much for them. And, as they no doubt went to inform the owners, they told everyone around what had happened.<\/p>\n The consequences:<\/p>\n v. 34<\/strong>. When they that fed them saw what was done, they fled, and went and told it in the city and in the country.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 35<\/strong>. Then they went out to see what was done; and came to Jesus, and found the man out of whom the devils were departed sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right mind; and they were afraid.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 36<\/strong>. They also which saw it told them by what means he that was possessed of the devils was healed.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 37<\/strong>. Then the whole multitude of the country of the Gadarenes round about besought Him to depart from them; for they were taken with great fear; and He went up into the ship, and returned back again.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 38<\/strong>. Now the man out of whom the devils were departed besought Him that he might be with Him; but Jesus sent him away, saying,<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 39<\/strong>. Return to thine own house, and show how great things God hath done unto thee. And he went his way, and published throughout the whole city how great things Jesus had done, unto him.<\/p>\n <\/strong> The swineherds were taken by surprise at this strange action of the animals entrusted to them. When this supernatural thing happened before their eyes, they fled and brought the news to the people of the district, both in city and country, wherever such lived as owned some of the drowned swine. They knew or felt that there must be some connection between the coming of Jesus and His speaking to the demoniac and the misfortune which struck the entire countryside. And the people, undoubtedly with some resentment, went out to the spot to see what had happened. They came to Jesus, not in a gentle, receptive, but in an aggressive mood. They found many things which should have set them to thinking and praising God. He that formerly roamed over the country without rest was now quietly sitting at the feet of Jesus; he that formerly was plagued with the devils was now freed from that scourge; he that had scorned shame and clothing was now fully dressed; he that had been a raving maniac was in full possession of rational powers of thinking and speaking. The feeling of the presence of the supernatural took hold of them all, and they were afraid. They did not learn the lesson which was held before them; they did not realize that this was a time of gracious visitation for them. Neither did they understand when those that were present told them how the demoniac had been delivered from his terrible condition. This rather increased their superstitious terror, they were possessed with a great fear, they were panic-stricken. And the entire countryside, as one man, arose and begged Jesus to leave their coasts. Their pigs, in their eyes, exceeded both the value of the one former demoniac and of the Prophet of their salvation. Note: Even today there are many people that neglect Jesus, the Savior of their souls, and His holy Word, for the sake of some petty earthly property. People act as though there were always plenty of time for preparing for death and for believing in Jesus after their hoard has grown large enough for their greed, forgetting, meanwhile, that the time of grace may never come again.<\/p>\n Jesus complied with their request, since for Him to stay in the country under the present circumstances would have been foolish. He entered into the boat and returned to Galilee. But when the healed man begged Him that he might join Him and become one of the disciples that were always with Jesus, He denied the request. The Lord wanted a witness of His power in these parts. And since they did not want Him, this man would be the best substitute, as he would speak from personal experience and conviction. It was good for the man that he should return to his home and people, and tell them all that had befallen him through the mercy of God. The man, following the order of Christ, promptly became a missionary throughout the city and region, declaring what Jesus had done for him. His faith would not permit him to remain silent; he must needs declare the great works of God. Every Christian has received such wonderful gifts of God in and through Christ, though perhaps not in the body, yet surely in the soul. And it behooves every one that loves the Lord Jesus to speak of the great things which God has done for him, as far as his personal influence reaches.<\/p>\n Luk 8:34-39<\/span> . The sequel<\/em> . Lk. tells the second part of the story very much as it is given in Mk., with slight stylistic variations. In Luk 8:36<\/span> he substitutes the expression , how the demoniac was saved, for Mk.’s “how it happened to the demoniac, and concerning the swine,” suggesting the idea that the destruction of the swine was a part of the cure. They had to be drowned that he might be restored to sanity.<\/p>\n NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Luk 8:34-39<\/p>\n 34When the herdsmen saw what had happened, they ran away and reported it in the city and out in the country. 35The people went out to see what had happened; and they came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting down at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they became frightened. 36Those who had seen it reported to them how the man who was demon-possessed had been made well. 37And all the people of the country of the Gerasenes and the surrounding district asked Him to leave them, for they were gripped with great fear; and He got into a boat and returned. 38But the man from whom the demons had gone out was begging Him that he might accompany Him; but He sent him away, saying, 39″Return to your house and describe what great things God has done for you.” So he went away, proclaiming throughout the whole city what great things Jesus had done for him.<\/p>\n Luk 8:34-37 What a sad account of fear and greed (cf. Mar 5:15). There was no joy over the man’s restitution, just fear (cf. Luk 8:37). They were so concerned over the loss of a herd of pigs and other possible consequences that they asked Jesus to leave, and He did! This is a good example that shows that miracles, in and of themselves, do not always result in faith!<\/p>\n Luk 8:38-39 “the man from whom the demons had gone out was begging Him that he might accompany Him” Jesus wanted this Gentile man to witness to his family and friends about the love and power of God. This was the first “home missionary” (assuming he was a Gentile). This man’s presence and testimony may have negatively affected Jesus’ mission to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.<\/p>\n was done = had happened. <\/p>\n in = into. Greek. eis. App-104. <\/p>\n they fled: Mat 8:33, Mat 28:11, Mar 5:14, Act 19:16, Act 19:17 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Joh 17:9 – pray for<\/p>\n 7<\/p>\n It will be well to read the comments on Mat 8:28-34.<\/p>\n Vers. 34-39. The Effect produced.<\/p>\n First, on the people of the country; next, on the afflicted man. The owners of the herd dwelt in the city and neighbourhood. They came to convince themselves with their own eyes of the loss of which they had been informed by the herdsmen. On reaching the spot, they beheld a sight which impressed them deeply. The demoniac was known all through the country, and was an object of universal terror. They found him calm and restored. So great a miracle could not fail to reveal to them the power of God, and awaken their conscience. Their fears were confirmed by the account given them of the scene which had just occurred by persons who were with Jesus, and had witnessed it ( , Luk 8:36). These persons were not the herdsmen; for the cure was wrought at a considerable distance from the place where the herd was feeding (Mat 8:30). They were the apostles and the people who had passed over the sea with them (Mar 4:36). The , also, is undoubtedly authentic; the latter account was supplementary to that of the herdsmen, which referred principally to the loss of the herd.<\/p>\n The fear of the inhabitants was doubtless of a superstitious nature. But Jesus did not wish to force Himself upon them, for it was still the season of grace, and grace limits itself to making its offers. He yielded to the request of the inhabitants, who, regarding Him as a judge, dreaded further and still more terrible chastisement at His hand. He consents, therefore, to depart from them, but not without leaving them a witness of His grace in the person of him who had become a living monument of it. The restored man, who feels his moral existence linked as it were to the person of Jesus, begs to be permitted to accompany Him. Jesus was already in the ship, Mark tells us. He does not consent to this entreaty. In Galilee, where it was necessary to guard against increasing the popular excitement, He forbade those He healed publishing abroad their cure. But in this remote country, so rarely visited by Him, and which He was obliged to leave so abruptly, He needed a missionary to testify to the greatness of the Messianic work which God was at this time accomplishing for His people. There is a fine contrast between the expression of Jesus: What God hath done for thee, and that of the man: What Jesus had done for him Jesus refers all to God; but the afflicted man could not forget the instrument. The whole of the latter part of the narrative is omitted in Matthew. Mark indicates the field of labour of this new apostle as comprising not his own city merely, but the whole of the Decapolis. <\/p>\n Volkmar applies here his system of allegorical interpretation. This incident is nothing, according to him, but the symbolical representation of the work of Paul amongst the Gentiles. The demoniac represents the heathen world; the chains with which they tried to bind him are legislative enactments, such as those of Lycurgus and Solon; the swine, the obscenities of idolatry; the refusal of Jesus to yield to the desire of the restored demoniac, when he wished to accompany Him, the obstacles which Jewish-Christians put in the way of the entrance of the converted heathen into the Church; the request that Jesus would withdraw, the irritation caused in heathen countries by the success of Paul (the riot at Ephesus, ex. gr.). Keim is opposed to this unlimited allegorizing, which borders, indeed, on absurdity. He very properly objects, that the demoniac is not even (as is the case with the Canaanitish woman) spoken of as a heathen; that the precise locality, so little known, to which the incident is referred, is a proof of its historical reality; that the request to Jesus to leave the country is a fact without any corresponding example, which does not look like imitation, but has the very features of truth. In short, he only objects to the episode of the swine, which appears to him to be a legendary amplification. But is it likely that the preachers of the gospel would have admitted into their teaching an incident so remarkable, if it could be contradicted by the population of a whole district, which is distinctly pointed out? If possession is only, as Keim thinks, an ordinary malady, this conclusion is certainly inevitable. But if there is any degree of reality attaching to the mysterious notion of possession, it would be difficult to determine priori what might not result from such a state. The picture forms a whole, in which each incident implies all the rest. The request made to Jesus to leave the country, in which Keim acknowledges a proof of authenticity, is only explained by the loss of the swine. Keim admits too much or too little. Either Volkmar and his absurdities, or the frank acceptance of the narrative,this is the only alternative (comp. Heer’s fine work, already referred to, Kirchenfreund, Nos. 10 and 11, 1870). <\/p>\n The latter condition of the man contrasts with his former state. He now sat at Jesus’ feet as a disciple. The power that Jesus possessed to effect such a transformation terrified the people. Luke’s use of the Greek sozo<\/span> (Luk 8:36, "made well" or "cured," lit. "saved") suggests that the man became a believer and a disciple of Jesus. Fear of Jesus led the residents to reject Him, unfortunately. Thus Luke showed his reader disciples that this is a reaction they could expect.<\/p>\n "Their fear may have been a superstitious reaction to the supernatural power that had so evidently been in operation. It may also have been associated with the material loss involved in the destruction of the pigs. If so, they saw Jesus as a disturbing person, more interested in saving men than in material prosperity. It was more comfortable to ask Him to go." [Note: Morris, p. 157.] <\/span><\/p>\n When they that fed [them] saw what was done, they fled, and went and told [it] in the city and in the country. 34. what was done ] Rather, what had happened. Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Verse 34. They fled, and went and told it] , They went, is omitted by … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 8:34”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-25263","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25263","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=25263"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25263\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25263"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25263"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25263"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"