8<\/strong>. stood<\/em> ] The word means ‘taking his position’ in sight of all the crowd; see Luk 18:11<\/span>.<\/p>\n unto the Lord<\/em> ] Not to the crowd who had nothing but contempt and hatred for him, but to Him who loved the nobler self which He saw in him, and of whose notice he desired to be more worthy.<\/p>\n the half of my goods<\/em> ] A vast sacrifice for one whose very position shewed that he had not been indifferent to wealth.<\/p>\n I give<\/em> ] i.e. I now propose to give; a purpose<\/em> not a past habit.<\/p>\n by false accusation<\/em> ] On the word esukophantesa,<\/em> see Luk 3:14<\/span>.<\/p>\n fourfold<\/em> ] far more therefore than was required by the Mosaic Law, which only demanded the restitution of a fifth part<\/em> beyond the principal, Num 5:7<\/span>. The words neither deny nor affirm that any part of his wealth had been thus dishonestly gained.<\/p>\n The half of my goods I give to the poor – <\/B>It is not necessary to understand this as affirming that this had been his practice, or that he said this in the way of proclaiming his own righteousness. It maybe understood rather as a purpose which he then formed under the teaching of Christ. He seems to have been sensible that he was a sinner. Of this he was convinced, as we may suppose, by the presence and discourse of Jesus. At first, attracted only by curiosity, or, it may be, by partial conviction that this was the Messiah, he had sought to see the Saviour; but his presence and conversation convinced him of his guilt, and he stood and openly confessed his sins, and expressed his purpose to give half his ill-gotten property to the poor. This was not a proclamation of his own righteousness, nor the ground of his righteousness, but it was the evidence of the sincerity of his repentance, and the confession which with the mouth is made unto salvation, Rom 10:10<\/span>.<\/P> And if I have taken – <\/B>His office gave him the power of oppressing the people, and it seems that he did not deny that it had been done.<\/P> By false accusation – <\/B>This is the same word which in Luk 3:14<\/span> is rendered neither accuse any falsely. The accusation seems to have been so made that the person accused was obliged to pay much greater taxes, or so that his property came into the hands of the informer. There are many ways in which this might be done, but we do not know the exact manner.<\/P> I restore him – <\/B>We cannot suppose that this had been always his practice, for no man would wantonly extort money from another, and then restore him at once four times as much; but it means that he was made sensible of his guilt; perhaps that his mind had been a considerable time perplexed in the matter, and that now he was resolved to make the restoration. This was the evidence of his penitence and conversion. And here it may be remarked that this is always an indisputable evidence of a mans conversion to God. A man who has hoarded ill-gotten gold, if he becomes a Christian, will be disposed to do good with it. A man who has injured others – who has cheated them or defrauded them, even by due forms of law, must, if he be a Christian, be willing, as far as possible, to make restoration. Zacchaeus, for anything that appears to the contrary, may have obtained this property by the decisions of courts of justice, but he now felt that it was wrong; and though the defrauded people could not legally recover it, yet his conscience told him that, in order to his being a true penitent, he must make restitution. One of the best evidences of true conversion is when it produces this result; and one of the surest evidences that a professed penitent is not a true one, is when he is not disposed to follow the example of this son of Abraham and make proper restitution.<\/P> Four-fold – <\/B>Four times as much as had been unjustly taken. This was the amount that was required in the Jewish law when a sheep had been stolen, and a man was convicted of the theft by trial at law, Exo 22:1<\/span>. If he confessed it himself, without being detected and tried, he had only to restore what was stolen, and add to it a fifth part of its value, Num 5:6-7<\/span>. The sincerity of Zacchaeus repentance was manifest by his being willing to make restoration as great as if it had been proved against him, evincing his sense of the wrong, and his purpose to make full restitution. The Jews were allowed to take no interest of their brethren Lev 25:35-36<\/span>, and this is the reason why that is not mentioned as the measure of the restitution. When injury of this kind is done in other places, the least that is proper is to restore the principal and interest; for the injured person has a right to all that his property would have procured him if it had not been unjustly taken away.<\/P> <\/p>\n Verse 8<\/span>. The half of my goods I give to the poor<\/B><\/I>] Probably he had already done so for some time past; though it is generally understood that the expressions only refer to what he now purposed<\/I> to do.<\/P> <\/P> If I have taken any thing – by false accusation<\/B><\/I>] , from , a fig<\/I>, and , I show<\/I> or declare<\/I>; for among the primitive Athenians, when the use of that fruit<\/I> was first found out, or in the time of a dearth, when all sorts of provisions were exceedingly scarce, it was enacted that no figs<\/I> should be exported from Attica<\/I>; and this law (not being actually repealed, when a plentiful harvest had rendered it useless, by taking away the reason of it) gave occasion to ill-natured and malicious fellows to accuse all persons they found breaking the letter<\/I> of it; and from them all busy informers<\/I> have ever since been branded with the name of sycophants<\/I>. POTTER’s Antiq. vol. i. c. 21, end.<\/P> <\/P> I restore<\/B><\/I> him fourfold.<\/I>] This restitution the Roman laws obliged the tax-gatherers to make, when it was proved they had abused their power by oppressing the people. But here was no such proof: the man, to show the sincerity of his conversion, does it of his own accord. He who has wronged his fellow must make restitution<\/I>, if he have it in his power. He that does not do so cannot expect the mercy of God. See the observations at the end of Gen 42<\/span>, and Nu 5:7<\/span>.<\/P> <\/p>\n See here the first effects of Christs saving looks upon any soul. The soul presently begins to cry out with the prophet, Isa 6:5<\/span>, Woe is me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.<\/I> Zacchaeus is now made sensible of his covetousness, and hardness of heart towards the poor, of his extortion and oppression, and resolves upon an effectual reformation. Christ never looks any soul in the face, but he looks his scandalous sinnings out of countenance. Acts of charity and justice are the first fruits of true repentance. The world, and the love of it, go out of the heart as soon as ever the true love of Christ comes into it; the soul knows that it cannot serve God and mammon.<\/I> In case of wrong done to others, there can be no repentance, nor (consequently) any remission, without restitution and satisfaction, so far as we know it, and are able. <\/P> I restore, <\/B>saith Zacchaeus. True love to Christ never giveth him bare measure. God had no where required the giving of half a mans goods to the poor, nor the restoring of fourfold, except in case of theft, of which men were judicially convicted; in case of voluntary confession, the law was but for a fifth part, over and above the principal, its to which a person was wronged, Num 5:7<\/span>. In case an ox were stolen, the thief was to restore fivefold, and in case of a sheep stolen four were to be restored, if the person had alienated it; if it were found alive in his hand, he was to restore double, Exo 22:1<\/span>,4<\/span>. In other cases he was to restore but double, if it came to the sentence of the judge, Exo 22:9<\/span>; but in case of a voluntary confession, He was only tied to a fifth part above the principal, and to bring a trespass offering to the Lord, Lev 6:1-6<\/span>. This was the case of Zacchaeus; being touched with the sense of his sin, he voluntarily confesseth, and promises the highest degree of restitution. But a true love in the soul to Christ thinks nothing too much to do in the detestation of sin, or demonstration of itself in works which may be acceptable in the sight of God. <\/P> <\/p>\n 8-10. stood<\/B>before all. <\/P> said unto the Lord, Behold,Lord<\/B>Mark how frequently Luke uses this title, and always wherelordly authority, dignity,<\/I> or power<\/I> is intended. <\/P> if I have<\/B>that is, “sofar as I have,” for evidently the “if” is so used (asin Php 4:8<\/span>). <\/P> taken by falseaccusation<\/B>defrauded, overcharged (Luk 3:12<\/span>;Luk 3:13<\/span>). <\/P> fourfold<\/B>The Roman lawrequired this; the Jewish law, but the principal and a fifth more (Nu5:7<\/span>). There was no demand<\/I> made for either; but, as if torevenge himself on his hitherto reigning sin (see on Joh20:28<\/span>), and to testify the change he had experienced, besidessurrendering the half of his fair<\/I> gains to the poor, hevoluntarily determines to give up all that was ill-gotten,quadrupled. He gratefully addressed this to the “Lord,” towhom he owed the wonderful change.<\/P><\/p>\n And Zacchaeus stood<\/strong>,…. Before Christ, in respect to him, and reverence of him; and in the presence of others, to make a public confession before them, and that they might all hear it, when come to his own house:<\/p>\n and said unto the Lord<\/strong>; that is, to “Jesus”, as the Syriac and Persic versions, and some copies read; he addressed himself to Christ, and made his confession to him, as the Israelite, when he brought the basket of the firstfruits to the priest, confessed before the Lord his God, De 26:4<\/span>. And the rather Zacchaeus directed his speech to Christ, being, as he was now convinced, the discerner of the thoughts, and intents of the heart; who knew the genuineness of his repentance, that it was hearty and real; and the sincerity of his expressions and resolutions, and upon what principles he acted, and proposed to do as follows:<\/p>\n behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give unto the poor<\/strong>; not to make satisfaction for the sins he had committed, but to testify his sense of them, and his repentance for them, and as willing to do good with what he had gotten; which shows, that the disposition of his mind was altered, and of a covetous oppressor, he was become tender, kind, and liberal. According to an order made by the Jews in Usha, a man might not give away more than a fifth part of his estate, unless in some extraordinary cases u; and we read of one, that gave a “third” part of his goods to the poor w; and of another, that gave, as here, half of his mammon, or wealth x; and another, half of his food to the poor y; and of another, that gave away all his goods to them z; see 1Co 13:3<\/span>; to give a tenth part, was reckoned a medium a:<\/p>\n and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation<\/strong>; or by extorting any thing from him on any pretence, by making an unjust demand upon him; or in any oppressive way, by defrauding and tricking, and by doing him any injury, in any form or manner:<\/p>\n I restore him fourfold<\/strong>: the same that was done in case of sheep stealing, Ex 22:1<\/span> but in such a case as this, the law only required the principal, with the fifth part added to it; see Le 6:5<\/span> but Zacchaeus proposes as much as in the case of theft, and which was rarely used. The Jews b say,<\/p>\n “that the manner of paying double, was more used than the manner of paying fourfold, or fivefold; for the manner of paying double was used, both in things animate and inanimate; but the manner of paying fourfold and fivefold, was used but with respect to an ox, and a sheep only.”<\/p>\n This was done by Zacchaeus, to show the truth and reality of his repentance; for with that nation,<\/p>\n “the repentance of shepherds, and of collectors, and of “publicans”, is said c to be very difficult:”<\/p>\n the reason given by the gloss is, because they rob many, and do not know who to return to.<\/p>\n u T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 50. 1. & Maimon. in Misn. Peah, c. 1, sect 1. w T. Bab. Menachot, fol. 44. 1. x T. Bab. Cetubot, fol. 67. 2. y Juchasin, fol. 105. 2. z T. Hieros. Peah, fol. 15. 2. a Maimon. Hilch. Mattanot Anayim, c. 7. sect. 5. b Misna Bava Kama, c. 7. sect. 1. c T. Bab. Bava Kama, fol. 94. 2.<\/p>\n Stood <\/B> (<\/SPAN><\/span>). Apparently Jesus and Zacchaeus had come to the house of Zacchaeus and were about to enter when the murmur became such a roar that Zacchaeus turned round and faced the crowd.<\/P> If I have wrongfully exacted aught of any man <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). A most significant admission and confession. It is a condition of the first class (<\/SPAN><\/span> and the aorist active indicative) that assumes it to be true. His own conscience was at work. He may have heard audible murmurs from the crowd. For the verb <\/SPAN><\/span>, see discussion on 3:14<\/span>, the only two instances in the N.T. He had extorted money wrongfully as they all knew.<\/P> I return fourfold <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). I offer to do it here and now on this spot. This was the Mosaic law (Exod 22:1<\/span>; Num 5:6<\/span>). Restitution is good proof of a change of heart. D. L. Moody used to preach it with great power. Without this the offer of Zacchaeus to give half his goods to the poor would be less effective. “It is an odd coincidence, nothing more, that the fig-mulberry (sycamore) should occur in connexion with the fig<\/I>-shewer (sycophant).” <\/P> <\/p>\n Stood [] <\/SPAN><\/span>. See on ch. Luk 18:11<\/span>. Describing a formal act, as of one who is about to make a solemn declaration. He was like the Pharisee in attitude, but not in spirit. The more formal word for standing, applied to the Pharisee in the temple, is here used of the publican. <\/P> I give. Not, It is my practice to give. Zacchaeus’ statement is not a vindication, but a vow. “I now give by way of restoration.” <\/P> If I have taken anything by false accusation [ ] <\/SPAN><\/span>. If – anything does not state a merely possible case, as if Zacchaeus were unconscious of any such extortion; but is a milder way of saying “Whatever I have taken.” See on ch. Luk 3:14<\/span>. It is an odd coincidence, nothing more, that the fig – mulberry (sycamore) should occur in connection with the fig – shewer (sycophant). It was common for the publicans to put a fictitious value on property or income, or to advance the tax to those unable to pay, and then to charge usurious interest on the private debt. On the harsh exaction of such debts, see Mt 18:28<\/span>; Luk 12:58<\/span>. <\/P> Fourfold. The restoration required of a thief (Exo 22:1<\/span>).<\/P> <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/p>\n 1) “And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord;” <\/strong>(statheis de Zakchaios eipen pros ton kurion) “Then Zacchaeus stood, openly (took a stand) and said directly to the Lord,” as a matter of open commitment of his ways to the Lord, Psa 37:5<\/span>.<\/p>\n 2) “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods,” <\/strong>(idou ta hemise mou ton huparchonton kurie) “Lord, behold (take note) the half of my possessions,” what I have accumulated in goods; His conscience, prompted by the spirit, after he met Jesus, motivated him to say:<\/p>\n 3) I<\/strong> give to the poor” <\/strong>(tois plochois didomi) “I give or dole out to the poor,” or commit myself, right now, to give to the impoverished; not that I am in the habit of doing it, but I now and hereafter purpose to dole out to the poor, Psa 41:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n 4) “And If I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation,” <\/strong>(kai ei tions ti esukophantesa) “And if anyone I have accuse falsely,” defrauded, extorted, or overcharged to get anything that I have; Or whatever I have taken dishonestly; He does not deny his sinful conduct of the past, Exo 22:1-15<\/span>. Such was too frequently done among the publicans, Luk 3:12-13<\/span>.<\/p>\n 5) I<\/strong> restore him fourfold.” <\/strong>(apodidomi tetraploun) “I restore voluntarily fourfold,” of my own will and accord; Yet as prescribed by the law, Exo 22:1<\/span>. Thus the principle of restitution for wrong was repaid, with dividend for loss or injury, Num 5:6-7<\/span>. Restitution for wrong is a fruit of true conversion.<\/p>\n 8. And Zaccheus stood, and said. From this result they ought to have formed their opinion of what Christ did; but men are so hasty and precipitate, that they do not take time to wait for God. (680) The conversion of Zaceheus is described by fruits and outward signs. As it was probable that he had enriched himself to the injury of others, <\/p>\n if he had wronged any man, he was ready to restore fourfold. Besides, the half of his goods he dedicates to the poor. A man might indeed bestow all his goods on the poor, (1Co 13:3<\/span>,) <\/p>\n and yet his generosity might be of no value in the sight of God; but, though no mention is here made of inward repentance, yet Luke means that the godly zeal, which he commends in Zaccheus, proceeded from that living root. In like manner, Paul, when treating of repentance, exhorts us to those duties, by which men may learn that we are changed for the better. <\/p>\n Let him that stole steal no more; but rather let him labor with his hands, that he may assist the poor and needy, (Eph 4:28<\/span>.) <\/p>\n We ought therefore to begin with the heart, but our repentance ought also to be evinced by works. <\/p>\n Now let us observe that Zaccheus does not make a present to God out of his extortions, as many rich men give to God a portion of what they have obtained by dishonesty, that they may the more freely pillage in future, and that they may be acquitted of the wrongs which they have formerly done. But Zaccheus devotes the half of his goods to God in such a manner, as to give, at the same time, compensation for whatever wrongs he has done; and hence we infer that the riches which he possessed were not the fruit of dishonest gain. Thus Zaccheus is not only ready to give satisfaction, if he has taken any thing by fraud, but shares his lawful possessions with the poor; by which he shows that he is changed from a wolf not only into a sheep, but even into a shepherd. And while he corrects the faults which had been formerly committed, he renounces wicked practices for the future, as God demands from his people, first of all, that they abstain from doing any act of injury. Zaccheus has not laid others under obligation, by his example, to strip themselves of the half of their goods; but we have only to observe the rule which the Lord prescribes, that we dedicate ourselves, and all that we have, to holy and lawful purposes. <\/p>\n (680) “ Qu’ils n’ont pas la patience d’attendre que Dieu monstre ce qu’il vent faire;” — “that they have not patience to wait till God show what he intends to do.” <\/p>\n (8) Zacchus stood, and said unto the Lord . . .<\/strong>The word for stood is the same as that used in the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Luk. 18:11<\/span>). Too much stress has, perhaps, been laid on its supposed force as indicating self-assertion in both cases. It does not seem to imply more than that Zacchus, in his own house, hearing the murmurs of those who looked in at doors or windows, rose from his couch, and stood up, and in the hearing of all, said what follows. The phrase, unto the Lord, indicates, as elsewhere, that the facts were recorded by St. Luke at a comparatively late period. (See Note on Luk. 7:11<\/span>.)<\/p>\n The half of my goods I give<\/strong> . .It seems more natural to see in this the statement of a new purpose than that of an habitual practice. In the absence of any words implying a command of this nature, we must assume either that it was a spontaneous impulse of large-hearted devotion, or, possibly, that Zacchus had heard of the command given but a few days before to the young ruler (Luk. 18:22<\/span>). The promise implies immediate distribution. The compensation for wrongs that men might have suffered at his hands was to come out of the remaining half.<\/p>\n If I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation.<\/strong>The seven words of the English text are all needed to express the one Greek word, the same as that in Luk. 3:14<\/span>, where see Note. It is a pity that English usage, and the modern meaning of the words, do not allow us to say, If I have sycophanted<\/em> any man. Conscience probably reproached Zacchus with not a few of such acts of spoliation in the past. The Greek phrase, If I have taken anything, hardly implies doubt as to the fact, and is used like our English wherever.<\/p>\n I restore him fourfold.<\/strong>Here, also, it seems best to recognise in the words a new purpose. He is ready to compensate now for whatever wrong had been done before. There seems, indeed, something almost ludicrously incongruous in a devout man boasting that his rule of life is to make amends to those whom he deliberately cheats, and the special force of the verb practically excludes the idea of involuntary wrong.<\/p>\n The Law required in cases of voluntary restitution the addition of one-fifth of the value of the thing restored (Lev. 6:5<\/span>; Num. 5:6-7<\/span>).<\/p>\n The whole force of the history seems lost if we suppose Zacchus, as some have done, to have been a model of a virtuous publican before he sought to see Jesus. On that supposition his words are like those of the Pharisee in the parable, a self-righteous boast. The strivings of repentance must, indeed, have begun before, and the man, when he welcomed our Lords presence, and trusted His words, was justified by faith. Is it too utterly bold a conjecture that He who saw Nathanael under the fig-tree (Joh. 1:48<\/span>), had seen Zacchus in the Temple, and that the figure in the parable of Luk. 18:14<\/span>, was in fact a portrait?<\/p>\n 8<\/strong>. <\/strong> And Zaccheus stood<\/em> As they arrived at his door followed by the murmuring crowd. <\/p>\n I give to the poor<\/em> Zaccheus is not, as some strangely construe him, telling what he has <\/em> heretofore been accustomed to do; but what it is now a part of his new life to do. I hereby <\/em> give. <\/p>\n If I have<\/em> A sorrowful and delicate way of confessing that, though not his uniform custom, yet it had been done. <\/p>\n By false accusation<\/em> Accusing him of selling his property to avoid his taxes, and so making gain from his penalty. The Greek word for the perpetrators of this kind of false accusation is a compound, fig-exposer; <\/em> and was the epithet applied in Athens to a class of informers who exposed those who imported figs without paying the duties. <\/p>\n Fourfold<\/em> The Roman law of forfeit prescribed a fourfold restoration. But the law regarding the extortion of publicans simply required a restoration of the defrauded sum. David, in his excitement at the parable of Nathan, pronounced a sentence of fourfold restoration, which lighted upon himself. 2Sa 12:6<\/span>. Moses required in cases of forfeit the restoration of a double amount. Exo 22:4<\/span>; Exo 22:9<\/span>. But Zaccheus doubles that double from his full repentant heart. The man who feels the evil of sin, and longs for a deliverance, will feel that restoration is not a law of hardship, but a relief and a delight. Though Zaccheus here probably intended no defence against the murmurers, (for there is no proof that he heard their cavils,) yet his words might well have shamed them into silence.<\/p>\n ‘And Zacchaeus stood, and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, half of my goods I am giving to the poor, and if I have wrongfully exacted anything of any man, I restore fourfold.”<\/p>\n Unknown to the crowd, inside that house a miracle was taking place. Earlier when Jesus had been questioned about who could be saved He had spoken of God doing the impossible. No doubt all would have seen as impossible the conversion and transformation of this evil man who had caused his people such harm. But this day God had done the impossible. For this man, who all his life had coldly calculated how he could extract as much as possible out of people by fair means or foul, suddenly became a giver. He now began calculating what he should give back to the people whom he had so systematically robbed. And he was going to restore fourfold. This was an admission of guilt. In the case of theft restitution had to be double (Exo 22:7<\/span>; Exo 22:9<\/span>). But in the case of sheep (Exo 22:1<\/span>), and in especially heinous cases (2Sa 12:6<\/span>), restoration had to be fourfold. Josephus also speaks of a fourfold fine for thieves (Antiquities Luk 16:1-3<\/span>).<\/p>\n And not only would he be restoring what he had stolen from people, but he would then give half his goods to the poor (the Rabbis would have recommended a fifth). By the time he was finished he would no longer be so hugely rich.<\/p>\n ‘Zacchaeus stood.’ The idea would seem to be of a special announcement. The ‘behold’ might suggest a spur of the moment decision. But he would have been thinking of it all through the meal. Jesus’ presence had affected him profoundly. ‘Am giving.’ This may suggest that he has already given instructions to his clerks to work out who was owed what.<\/p>\n Here then was the evidence of genuine repentance. Here is the explanation of Jesus’ presence in his house. For we need to recognise that Jesus did not just mix with any tax collectors, He mixed with those who were interested in His message. He did not meet with them to talk about the races, or to learn about their jobs. He met with them to talk about God.<\/p>\n The pledge of Zacchaeus and the Lord’s answer:<\/p>\n v. 8<\/strong>. And Zacchaeus stood and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken anything from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 9<\/strong>. And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.<\/strong><\/p>\n v. 10<\/strong>. For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.<\/p>\n <\/strong> Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Faith is bound to show itself in works of repentance and mercy. It had been no mere curiosity, but desire for salvation which had prompted Zacchaeus to seek the Savior, and now the personal impression created by the Lord in word and deed made his heart sure of its trust. He did not slink into a corner and make half-hearted promises, but made an open confession of his sins and an equally open statement as to his manner of making amends. He promises the Lord to give half of his goods to the poor; as a proof of his entire change of heart he makes restitution. And wherever he has defrauded any man in any manner whatsoever, he is willing to restore the unjust gain fourfold. See Exo 22:1<\/span>. He did this of his own accord; it showed the sincerity of his conversion. “He had been a publican and a usurer; but now that he has the Lord as his guest, matters are changed with him, and he is ready to restore all where he has cheated any man; he also gives half of his goods to the poor. For he believes that they are all his equals and members of Christ; of which he formerly, before Christ came to him, did the opposite, taking money from the poor, grafting and harming wherever he could graft and harm. At once the matter is changed with him; he cares no more for such things; his riches are no longer his treasure, but Christ; he makes use of his goods without discrimination, not that he alone may have a full supply, but that he also may give food and assistance to the poor. ” Therefore Jesus also, seeing this proof of the faith which He knew to be present in his heart, proclaims this publicly: Today salvation is come to this house, in the conversion of Zacchaeus by the advent and influence of Christ. Zacchaeus was now in truth a son of Abraham, spiritually considered, a child of the promise. Although the personal ministry of Jesus was confined principally to the children of Israel, He is come to seek and save that which was lost. All poor sinners throughout the wide world are included in His gracious counsel of redemption. That is the purpose of His coming. His seeking of the lost must be done if salvation, rescue, is to come to them all; there is none excepted.<\/p>\n Luk 19:8<\/span><\/em><\/strong>. <\/strong>And Zaccheus stood,<\/em><\/strong><\/strong> Stood forth;<\/em>in order to make the noble declaration following. By the half of his goods, <\/em>he probably meant his income. <\/em>, which we render taken by false accusation, <\/em>properly signifies any kind of oppression, especially under any pretence of law; and therefore would be more properly rendered, “If I have taken any thing wrongfully, <\/em>by injurious charge, or oppressive claims in my office.” See Ecc 4:1<\/span>; Ecc 5:8<\/span>. LXX. One great reason of the odium which followed the occupation of a publican, was the injustice which many of that denomination practised in their office. This verse may be either considered as a declaration of what Zaccheus had been accustomed to do, agreeably to the force of his expressions which run in the present tense, I give, I restore, <\/em>not in the future, I will give, I will restore, <\/em>and likewise agreeably to the testimony with which Jesus honoured Zaccheus, that he was a son of Abraham;or, we may take it as a declaration of his resolution, with respect to his future conduct. That Zaccheus <\/em>was a Jew, appears from his name, which is the same with Zaccai, <\/em>Ezr 2:9<\/span>. Four-fold <\/em>was the utmost which the Jewish law required, even in cases of a fraudulent concealment and conviction; (unless where an ox had been killed or sold, and so its labour lost to the owner, and its discovery rendered more difficult, Exo 22:1<\/span>.) for the phrase of restoring sevenfold, <\/em>Pro 6:31<\/span> seems only proverbial, to express making abundant satisfaction: but if a man, not being legally convicted or accused, voluntarily discovered the fraud he had committed, besides his trespass-offering he was to add to the principal only a fifth part, Lev 6:5<\/span>. Zaccheus therefore shews the sincerity of his repentance by such an offer. Some commentators have remarked, that oppressive publicans were by the Roman law required to restore fourfold; but this was only after judgment obtained, where they had been guilty of extortion by force; whereas, before conviction, it was enough to make restitution of what had been taken; and even after it, in common cases, all that the law required was restoring twice as much. Archbishop Tillotson justly observes, that, “had more than an eighth part of Zaccheus’s possessions been unjustly gotten, he could not have been able to make such restitution, after having given away half of what he now had to the poor, even though he had stripped himself of all.” <\/p>\n Luk 19:8<\/span> . The supposition “Jesu cohortationes et monitiones tantam vim habuisse in Zacchaei animum,” etc. (Kuinoel, comp. Grotius), and that the murmuring and the vow did not occur till the morning of the departure (Schleiermacher, Olshausen), has no foundation in the text, in accordance with which it was rather the immediate personal impression<\/em> of Jesus that seized and took possession of the wealthy chief publican in that manner. His vow<\/em> includes the consciousness of his unworthiness of the great happiness that has befallen him through the entertainment of the Messiah, and his determination, for the sake of this happiness, to make abundant compensation for his former guilt. According to Paulus, the publican wished to confute the charge . , and said . . . . in the conviction of his innocence. This is opposed to the context, opposed to the preceding . . . ., and opposed to Luk 19:10<\/span> ; moreover, his whole style of asserting his innocence would be an unbecoming piece of parade.<\/p>\n ] he stood forth<\/em> before Jesus, a joyful confidence. Comp. on Luk 18:11<\/span> .<\/p>\n ] The form (Lachmann), which Attic writers approve, is a correction either from or from . [230] As to the substantival neuter, see Khner, 479 b; Bornemann, ad Xen. Cyrop<\/em> . viii. 3. 41.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> .<\/em><\/strong> ] If I have taken anything from any one by fraud<\/em> . The verb (Luk 3:14<\/span> ) is construed like (Plut. Dem. iv.; Soph. Phil<\/em> . 1267), (Xen. Hier<\/em> . vii. 9, Mem<\/em> . i. 6. 2; Plat. Crit<\/em> . p. 54 A; Arist. Nub<\/em> . 1231); among the Greeks with <\/em><\/strong> , Lys. p. 177, 32. The <\/em><\/strong> is not to make the matter uncertain, as though he were conscious to himself of no such extortion, but <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> <\/em><\/strong> is the milder expression of self-confession instead of <\/em><\/strong> Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/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: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/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: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n