26<\/strong>. how readest thou?<\/em> ] The phrase resembled one in constant use among the Rabbis, and the lawyer deserved to get no other answer because his question was not sincere. The very meaning and mission of his life was to teach this answer.<\/p>\n What is written … – <\/B>Jesus referred him to the law as a safe rule, and asked him what was said there. The lawyer was doubtless endeavoring to justify himself by obeying the law. He trusted to his own works. To bring him off from that ground – to make him feel that it was an unsafe foundation, Jesus showed him what the law required, and thus showed him that he needed a better righteousness than his own. This is the proper use of the law. By comparing ourselves with that we see our own defects, and are thus prepared to welcome a better righteousness than our own – that of the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus the law becomes a schoolmaster to lead us to him, Gal 3:24<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n Luk 10:26<\/span><\/p>\n How readest thou?<\/em><\/p>\n —<\/em><\/p>\n Profitable reading of the Bible<\/strong><\/p>\n As there are always among violets some that are very much sweeter to us than others, so among texts there are some that are more precious to us than others. When I go to the Bible, it is not once in a hundred times that I react a whole chapter for my own devotions. As one that goes out into the field to rest does not take the first spot that presents itself, but waits till he finds a nook where the mosses and the flowers and the shrubs are right, and then sits down and feasts his eyes on the beauties around, so I wander along till I come to a passage which, though I cannot tell why, I read over and over and over again. One or two verses or sentences, perhaps, will linger in my head all day, like some sweet passage in a letter, or like some felicitous word spoken by a friend, coming and going all the time. I find often that one single text, taking possession of the mind in the morning, and ringing through it during the whole day, does one more good than the reading of a whole chapter. Frequently some one thing that Christ said fixes itself in my mind, and remains there from morning till night. (H. W. Beecher.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n The law of God, the guide of youth<\/strong><\/p>\n 26. What is written in thelaw<\/B>apposite question to a doctor of the law,<\/I> andputting him in turn to the test [BENGEL].<\/P><\/p>\n What is written in the law?<\/strong>…. Christ, with great propriety, sends him to the law, to see and observe what was written there, what are the terms and conditions of life, as fixed there; partly, because this man, by his office and character, was an interpreter of the law; and partly, because his question was, what shall I do?<\/p>\n how readest thou<\/strong>? in the law, every day; referring to the “Keriat Shema”, the reading of the Shema, i.e. those words in De 6:4<\/span>, &c, “Hear, O Israel, &c.” morning and evening i as appears by his answer<\/p>\n i Vid. Misn. Beracot, c. 1. sect. 1, 2.<\/p>\n How readest thou? <\/B> ( ;<\/SPAN><\/span>). As a lawyer it was his business to know the facts in the law and the proper interpretation of the law. See on Lu 7:30<\/span> about <\/SPAN><\/span> (lawyer). The rabbis had a formula, “What readest thou?” <\/P> <\/p>\n Read. See on ch. Luk 4:16<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “He said unto him,” <\/strong>(ho de eipen pros auton) “Then he (Jesus) replied directly to him,” not for information, but that the disciples might hear His reply, to indict him at length that he could not save himself, as a self-righteous man, Rom 10:2-4<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “What is written in the law?” <\/strong>(en to nomo ti gegraptai) “What has been and is inscribed in the law?” Do you recall? It was a double question.<\/p>\n 3) “How readest thou?” <\/strong>(pos anaginoskeis) “Just how do you read or interpret it,” on this matter, or as it relates to eternal life for you? Joh 1:17<\/span>. The question was perhaps raised in a synagogue. The “how” question elicited an interpretation, a “tell us what you think about how you may have eternal life,” based on the teaching of your law, Act 10:43<\/span>.<\/p>\n Luk 10:26<\/span><\/p>\n . What is written in the law? He receives from Christ a reply different from what he had expected. And, indeed, no other rule of a holy and righteous life was prescribed by Christ than what had been laid down by the Law of Moses; for the perfect love of God and of our neighbors comprehends the utmost perfection of righteousness. Yet it must be observed, that Christ speaks here about obtaining salvation, in agreement with the question which had been put to him; for he does not teach absolutely, as in other passages, how men may arrive at eternal life, but how they ought to live, in order to be accounted righteous in the sight of God. Now it is certain that in the Law there is prescribed to men a rule by which they ought to regulate their life, so as to obtain salvation in the sight of God. That the Law can do nothing else than condemn, and is therefore called the doctrine of death, and is said by Paul to increase transgressions, (Rom 7:13<\/span>,) arises not from any fault of its doctrine, but because it is impossible for us to perform what it enjoins. Therefore, though no man is justified by the Law yet the Law itself contains the highest righteousness, because it does not falsely hold out salvation to its followers, if any one fully observed all that it commands. (72) Nor ought we to look upon this as a strange manner of teaching, that God first demands the righteousness of works, and next offers a gratuitous righteousness without works; for it is necessary that men should be convinced of their righteous condemnation, that they may betake themselves to the mercy of God. Accordingly, Paul (Rom 10:5<\/span>) compares both kinds of righteousness, in order to inform us that the reason why we are freely justified by God is, that we have no righteousness of our own. Now Christ in this reply accommodated himself to the lawyer, and attended to the nature of his question; for he had inquired not how salvation must be sought, but by what works it must be obtained. <\/p>\n (72) “ S’il s’en trouvoit quelqu’un qui observast entierement ce qu’elle commande;” — “if any one were found who observed entirely what it commands.” <\/p>\n 26<\/strong>. <\/strong> What is written how readest thou<\/em>? It is right to refer the lawyer to his own law-books, the minister to his Bible. Stier makes some beautiful points as to the how, here, as distinguished from the what. How <\/em> we read, the spirit with which we inquire or study, is often of even more importance than what we read.<\/p>\n ‘And he said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read it?” ’<\/p>\n In dealing with his question Jesus followed a favourite technique of the Rabbis and replied with a question. He asked him what he thought the Instruction (Law – Torah) of Moses taught on the matter. Note His emphasis on ‘written’. He is not thinking of the traditions of the elders but of the Scriptures, and particularly the Law of Moses. He is pointing to that as the sole arbiter of religious response and behaviour.<\/p>\n Luk 10:26-27<\/span> . ] , a customary Rabbinical formula to give occasion to a scriptural citation, Lightfoot, p. 794.<\/p>\n ] how, that is, with what words, not instead of (Kypke and others). Comp. , , , and the like. Observe that is placed first for the sake of emphasis, and that the doubled expression of the question indicates the urgency of the questioner. Lechler in the Stud. u. Krit. 1854, p. 802, is wrong in explaining the passage as if it were .<\/p>\n Luk 10:27<\/span> . The lawyer quotes Deu 6:5<\/span> along with Lev 19:18<\/span> . The Jews had to repeat daily morning and evening the former passage, together with Deu 11:13<\/span> ff. (Berac. f. 3. 3; comp. on Mar 12:29<\/span> ); it appeared also on the phylacteries (see on Mat 23:5<\/span> ), but not Lev 19:18<\/span> ; hence the opinion of Kuinoel: “Jesum digito monstrasse thecam illam, qua se ornaverat legis peritus,” must be rejected. The reason why the lawyer answered entirely in the meaning of Jesus, and especially adds the passage from Leviticus, is found in the fact that his attention was directed not to what had immediately preceded, but to the problem ; and that he used the question . . ., Luk 10:25<\/span> , only as an introduction thereto. To this question, familiar as he was with the principles of Jesus, he must have expected an answer in which the duty of the love of one’s neighbour was not wanting, and thereto he would then attach the special question meant to tempt him, viz. ; But since the dialogue takes such a turn that he himself becomes the respondent, he gives the answer which he had expected from Jesus; and now for his own self-justification to show, to wit, that notwithstanding that correct answer, he did not ask his question without reason, but still needs more detailed instruction, he adds the problem under cover of which the temptation was to be brought in. The questioner, unexpectedly made to play the part of the respondent, thus keeps his object in view with presence of mind and craftiness, and it can neither be asserted that by his reply, in keeping with the meaning of Jesus, he at once gave himself up as a captive (de Wette), nor that this reply was not suggested till the question of Jesus was interposed (Bleek).<\/p>\n 26. <\/strong> <\/strong> .;<\/strong> ] A common Rabbinical formula for eliciting a text of Scripture.<\/p>\n <\/strong> is not merely = , but implies how?<\/em> i.e. to what purport; so that the answer should contain a summary of his reading in the Law.<\/p>\n Luk 10:26<\/span> . ., ., how stands it written? how readest thou? double question with a certain empressement<\/em> .<\/p>\n What is written . . . ? = What standeth written? See App-143. <\/p>\n the law. See note on Mat 5:17, and App-117<\/p>\n 26. .;] A common Rabbinical formula for eliciting a text of Scripture.<\/p>\n is not merely = , but implies how? i.e. to what purport; so that the answer should contain a summary of his reading in the Law.<\/p>\n Luk 10:26. , in the law) This is apposite in reference to , a lawyer, a teacher of the law, Luk 10:25.-, how) The Jews used daily to repeat the subsequent text. We must read Scripture often, but also daily [with due care to ascertain its spiritual meaning] [It is your duty to strive to attain the scope of Scripture.-V. g.]<\/p>\n Isa 8:20, Rom 3:19, Rom 4:14-16, Rom 10:5, Gal 3:12, Gal 3:13, Gal 3:21, Gal 3:22 <\/p>\n Reciprocal: Neh 13:1 – they read Isa 58:7 – thine own Mat 9:13 – go Mat 12:3 – Have Mat 19:4 – Have Mat 19:17 – but Mar 2:25 – Have Mar 10:19 – knowest Luk 18:20 – knowest Rom 2:23 – that makest<\/p>\n 6<\/p>\n How readest thou? This was a direct allusion to the profession of the lawyer. That being his business he should have known what he was expected to do to be saved if he had been reading the law carefully, hence the question Jesus asked him.<\/p>\n He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? <\/p>\n [How readest thou?] an expression very common in the schools, What readest thou? when any person brought a text of Scripture for the proof of any thing. The Rabbins have a tradition, that the disease of the squinancy came into the world upon the account of tithes. (The Gloss hath it: “For eating of fruits that had not been tithed.”) “R. Eliezer Ben R. Jose saith, ‘It was for an evil tongue.’ Rabba saith, and it is the saying also of R. Joshua Ben Levi, What readest thou? The king shall rejoice in God; every one that sweareth by himself shall glory: for the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.” And a little after, upon another subject: “R. Simeon Ben Gezirah saith, What or how readest thou? If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock”: Canticles 1:8.<\/p>\n We will not be very curious in inquiring whether our Saviour used the very same form of speech, or any other. In this only he departs from their common use of speech, in that he calls to another to allege some text of Scripture; whereas it was usual in the schools that he that spoke that would allege some place himself.<\/p>\n Luk 10:26. In the law. These words are emphatic; as if our Lord would say, the answer to your question is in the law you teach.<\/p>\n How readest thou? This form was used by the Rabbins to call out a quotation from Scripture. How means to what purport.<\/p>\n Rather than answering the lawyer’s question outright Jesus directed him to the authority they both accepted, the Old Testament. Moreover by asking this counter-question Jesus put Himself in the position of evaluating the lawyer’s answer rather than having the lawyer evaluate His answer.<\/p>\n He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? 26. how readest thou? ] The phrase resembled one in constant use among the Rabbis, and the lawyer deserved to get no other answer because his question was not sincere. The very meaning and mission of his life was to teach this … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 10:26”<\/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-25372","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25372","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=25372"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25372\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25372"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25372"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25372"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
I. <\/strong>In following out this question to a satisfactory reply, we may, in the first place, inquire, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW, AND HOW WE SHOULD READ, ON THE SUBJECT OF FAITH, IN THE GOSPEL? Does not the law of God tell you what the faith of the gospel is, especially all that God has revealed respecting His Son <\/p>\n
II. <\/strong>But, in the second place, we must not only TAKE WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW, IN ORDER TO OUR BELIEF, BUT IN ORDER TO OUR PRACTICE. The law holds out, not only testimony to be believed, but precepts to be obeyed. <\/p>\n
III. <\/strong>But, in the third place, let us inquire, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW CONCERNING THOSE FEELINGS WHICH WE OUGHT TO CULTIVATE? <\/p>\n
IV. <\/strong>But again, there is another important subject, on which it is our duty to be informed. WHAT IS WRITTEN OF THOSE ENJOYMENTS HELD OUT IN THE GOSPEL? <\/p>\n
V. <\/strong>Then, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW ON THE SUBJECT OF TRUST IN THE LORD? <\/p>\n
VI. <\/strong>For again, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE WORD OF GOD CONCERNING DANGER? It states, the only danger to be apprehended is, the danger arising from sin. <\/p>\n
VII. <\/strong>Let us inquire, however, further, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW CONCERNING HOPE? <\/p>\n
VIII. <\/strong>But next, WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW CONCERNING THE TIME WHEN THE MIND SHOULD THUS GIVE ITSELF WHOLLY TO GOD? (J. Burner.<\/em>)<\/p>\nFuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole 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: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"