Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

24 the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said: This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of the 25 devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them: Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every 26 city or house divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his king

astonished beyond measure at the cure of the demoniacs.-Is not this the son of David? According to some commentators the negative particle should be omitted, and the question would read, Is this the son of David? This phrase is usually considered equivalent to, Is this the Messiah? For it was expected that the Messiah would descend from the house of David. See note on Mat. ix. 27. "This inference was drawn by the common people, and not by the proud and haughty Pharisees. It is not uncommon that the plain common sense of the candid but unlearned sees the true beauty and meaning of the Bible, while men filled with pride, and science, falsely so called, are blinded."

24. Fellow. This expression of contempt is not contained in the original, but was inserted by the translators, as is indicated by the Italic letters.-Beelzebub. The margin reads Beelzebul. See note on Mat. x. 25.-Devils should be rendered demons. The people were evidently deeply impressed with the miraculous power of Christ. The Pharisees feared the loss of their influence, and they resorted to this unjustifiable method to destroy the confidence of the people in Jesus, catching at the words of the relations of Jesus, that "he was beside himself," or mad, Mark iii. 21. They could not deny the exercise of a superhuman power, but, to frustrate its influence, they attributed it to an evil being. This argued

a stubbornness that would yield to no evidence whatever, since it perverted the highest proofs of divine authority by the malicious insinuation that he himself was mad, or possessed with Beelzebub.

25. Knew their thoughts, &c. He had a spiritual insight into the hearts of men.— -Said unto them. Jesus uses reasoning, and not invective, even with his most malignant enemies; an example worthy of all imitation. He first argues against them from the absurdity of their charge; laying down the general rule, that every community, large or small, subsists by its union, and then, verse 26, applying the rule to the case in hand; from premises that they would admit, he draws a conclusion subversive of their accusation.-House, i. e. Family.

26. Satan. The original signifies an adversary, but afterwards had the more general meanings of tempter and accuser. Satan is a general, Beelzebub a specific term. The former is often used as the principle, or perhaps the personification of all evil. Jesus addresses to them an argumentum ad hominem, or takes them upon their own ground. If your calumny is true, the evil one is fighting against himself, and overthrowing his own kingdom; he must then have less than human wisdom. As Jesus laid claim to be a divine teacher, we have a natural curiosity to ascertain how his teaching and his claim corresponded, and we always

dom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do 27 your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of 28 God is come unto you. Or else, how can one enter into a strong 29 man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. He that is not with me is against 30

discover in his conversations the traces of the most eminent wisdom, autographs of the divine spirit. We meet with constant intrinsic proofs of the truth of the history and divinity of our Master.

27. Your children cast them out? Sons, disciples, or followers; those who had been instructed under the care of the doctors of the law. Jesus reasons, in the second place, against their charge, from the case of their own exorcists. It must be borne in mind that our Saviour does not assert that they actually did cast out demons. But he argues with them on their own premises. He and the exorcists were on the same footing; and if it was alleged that the one cast out demons through the power of demons, the same must be admitted of the other also. If I use magical arts, do not your disciples likewise? But if your disciples cast them out by a divine power, may I not be authorized in the same manner? We learn that there were exorcists among the Jews from Luke ix. 49, Acts xix. 13, also from the Jewish historian, Josephus, and the early Christian Fathers. They pretended to exorcise demons in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Solomon was alleged to have been the author of this art. The Egyptians and the heathen borrowed from the Jews the forms of adjuration used in their magical practices.-Therefore they shall be your judges. They will convict you of slander and calumny; for

they show your inconsistency. The opinion you form therefore eoncerning them will determine what decision you are to make respecting me.

28. The Spirit of God. Luke, xi. 20, has, "the finger of God." The idea is the same. Jesus worked miracles by the divine power or coöperation. Having foiled the accusation of his enemies, he draws the irresistible conclusion, that, as he performed works of divine energy, he gave conclusive evidence of a divine mission.-The kingdom of God is come unto you. Since he bore proofs of divine authority, he was to be received as the founder of a new religion.

29. He continues his argument. He had shown above that he acted independently of Beelzebub and Satan. He now proves that he must necessarily be superior to them, else he could not have expelled demons. He brings an illustration from common life. The robber cannot plunder a house or 'castle until he has first overcome or bound its owner. So, unless Jesus were more powerful than Satan, he could not subvert his kingdom.-Spoil his goods-his house. Despoil, or plunder his plate, treasures, or furniture of his house.

30. He that is not with me is against me. A proverbial expression, which Jesus employs still farther to refute their charge. He had shown, by expelling the demons, that he was not with, or on the side of Beelzebub, but against

31 me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not 32 be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against

him. In Mark ix. 40, Luke ix. 50, the converse of this proverb is used: "He that is not against us is on our part." Both are applicable and true, according to different circumstances. The proverb in Mark and Luke has been thus paraphrased: “He that does not make use of my name to injure me must be friendly to me."-He that gathereth not with me, &c. This is another proverbial phrase, borrowed from rural life. He who assists not the shepherd in collecting his flock, or the husbandman in gathering his harvest, would, if he labored at all, hinder him in his object. The application is the same with that of the preceding expression. Let it be borne in mind that Jesus, throughout this whole passage, is reasoning with the Pharisees on their own grounds, and not on his.

31. Wherefore. This word has reference to the foregoing reasoning, equivalent to so then, in view of your calumny and the refutation it has received.-I say unto you. In verses 25, 26, Jesus had shown the inconsistency of their charge; in verse 27, how it would operate against themselves; in verse 29, his superiority to Satan; and in verse 30, his hostility to him. He now goes on to describe the criminality of their accusation, and its awful consequences to themselves.-Blasphemy. Calumny, reviling, or, as it is expressed in the next verse, speaking against.-Shall be, i. e. may or can be. All kinds of sin may be forgiven unto men, except the sin which he now specifies.-Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.

What this sin was is evident from the tenor of the antecedent passage; but that we may not be mistaken as to the nature of this offence, it is distinctly declared in Mark iii. 30, that it was, "because they said, He hath an unclean spirit." Their sin consisted in blaspheming or defaming that Holy Spirit or power of God, which cooperated with him and enabled him to perform his wonderful works. They were instigated to this crime by their envy of his power and popularity, and the fear of losing their own; as is casually suggested in one instance, where they said, "If we let him alone, all men will believe on him." John xi. 48. Their object, in charging him with an alliance with the prince of demons, was to undermine the confidence of the people in him and destroy his influence.

32. Speaketh a word against the Son of Man. Our Lord in this verse reiterates what he had said in the last, with the addition of a comparison, to place the heinousness of their offence in bolder relief. He says, Whosoever speaks against me personally may be forgiven. Thus the Jews had objected to his humble birth, had called him a glutton and a wine-bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, a Galilean, a Nazarene, and a Samaritan, as terms of contempt. They had brought many grave but groundless accusations against his conduct and his character. But all these, he says, are pardonable sins, compared with the one of which they are now guilty.-Whosoever speaketh against

the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world,

the Holy Ghost, &c. We have seen in the previous verse what constituted this daring transgression, viz. attributing Jesus' beneficent deeds to an evil agency. This was more than to speak against Jesus himself. It was impiety against God. It was shutting the eyes and hardening the heart against the mightiest proofs and brightest manifestations of God's Spirit and power. It was rejecting the last evidence, as it would seem, by which God could give testimony that he had commissioned his Son to declare his will.-It shall not be forgiven him. Two modes of interpreting this passage have been defended. One literal, that the sin in question is strictly unpardonable, whether in the present or the future state. The other, grounded upon the fact that our Saviour spoke a free and popular language, and used the idioms of his nation, supposes that he declared the extreme enormity of the sin, and the consequent difficulty of its being forgiven. Thus God is represented as saying, "I will have mercy and not sacrifice," a Hebrew idiom to express his preference of mercy to sacrifice. Our Saviour says, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven," declaring the extreme difficulty, but not the absolute impossibility of that event. So the text in hand is designed to give a deep impression of the malignity of assigning the very works of God to the power of Satan, and how hardly so heinous a perversity could be forgiven. The latter mode seems the most rational, for we are informed of no crime or transgression, unless it be this, which does not come within the reach of divine mercy. And

we know that Jesus still labored and taught amongst the impenitent Jews, and that he prayed for their forgiveness upon the cross. It would appear therefore that the reason, why this sin was so difficult to be forgiven, was not any indisposition on the part of God to forgive, but the reluctance of the offender to repent. If repented of, this, like every other transgression, would be pardoned. But he who would not believe, when such evidence was presented, as the works wrought by the divine Spirit, was clearly in such a stubborn, perverse, and determined state of opposition; he was so resolved to suppress the honest convictions of his own heart, and to wear a front of hypocrisy and defiance, that there was little hope or probability that he would repent, and cherish a better mind, and little therefore that he would be forgiven. He could not be pardoned, because he would not ask for mercy, would not acknowledge his sin, but persist in it, would not fulfil the conditions of forgiveness, viz. repentance and reformation. Such a fell spirit could not hope for pity, because it spurned it; and as long as it continued hardened, it must, from the very nature of man, and the laws of God, continue unforgiven. The fear of cominitting the unpardonable sin has always haunted many tender consciences, and mingled in the terrible fancies of insanity. The particular sin, however, of which Christ here speaks could not now occur. But still a similar perverse and wilful state of mind, and a determination to reject the claims of religion, or of the purest form of religion, against the clearest evidence and the strongest convictions of the

33 neither in the world to come. Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt; for 34 the tree is known by his fruit. O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart

mind, a stubborn intention to repress the relentings of the heart, might now expose one to the doom here pronounced. Not, surely, because God would not be ready to pardon his child, though his sins be as scarlet, but because his child would not fulfil those conditions of penitence and amendment without which there can be no forgiveness. -Neither in this world, neither in the world to come. World often means, in the New Testament, age or dispensation. Wakefield accordingly paraphrases the sentence thus: "Though the Christian religion is a dispensation of mercy, this sin shall no more be forgiven by the laws of the Gospel than it is by the law of Moses," under which the punishment was death. Lev. xxiv. 16. Others suppose that it means literally neither in time nor in eternity. The best word to express it is, perhaps, never, Mark iii. 29, for this is used in Hebrew idioms with a general and indefinite sense. At least we well know that the sin would never be pardoned as long as the sinner continued impenitent, though it were forever in the most literal sense; for the Bible assures us that there is an eternal connection between sin and misery, one of the greatest elements of the latter of which must be, the state of not being forgiven by God.

33. Either make the tree good, &c. Two methods of interpreting this verse are proposed, according as it is connected with the foregoing or with the succeeding passage. If with the preceding, the sense is, -Reconcile me and my works; either make it appear that the tree

is bad and the fruit consequently bad, or else admit that the tree is good and the fruit also. Be consistent with yourselves; for there is as much connection between deeds and the motives which prompt them, as between the nature of the tree and the nature of its fruit. If it is a good work to cast out demons, acknowledge me to be good; or if you contend that I am evil, then to cast out demons must be evil likewise. The other way of explanation is, that the words are connected with the succeeding verses, and signify that the Pharisees ought not to be guilty of the inconsistency of evil conduct and pious pretensions. Better be openly base, than hypocritically good. There is, however, no particular objection to supposing that he referred both to himself and to the Pharisees, since the rule of judgment he proposes would be as effectual to convict them of wickedness, as it would to vindicate himself from their charges. Mat. vii. 16—20.

34. O generation of vipers. Brood of vipers, see note on Mat. iii. 7, also xxiii. 33. This most venomous reptile is used as an emblem of malice and wickedness.-How can ye, being evil, &c. A question requiring a strong negative answer. They could not, being evil at heart, speak otherwise than evil of Christ and his works.-Out of the abundance, &c. Out of the overflowing of the heart; a proverbial expression, implying that as a man speaketh so is he, as a general rule, without denying that there may be hypocritical words,

35. A repetition and enlargement

« ZurückWeiter »