Luke 6

Luke 6:1

1. δευτεροπρώτῳ] This word presents much difficulty. None of the interpretations have any certainty, as the word is found no where else, and can be only judged of by analogy. (1) It is not altogether clear that the word ought to be here at all:—see var. readd. Schulz supposes it to have arisen from putting together two separate glosses, in the margin of some MSS., one δευτέρῳ, the other πρώτῳ:—originally inserted,—the first, to distinguish this sabbath from that in ch. Luke 4:31,—the latter, from that in Luke 6:6. (2) Chrysostom, Hom. xxxix. on Matt., vol. vii. p. 431, says, ὁδὲΛουκᾶςφησινἘνσαββάτῳδευτεροπρώτῳ. τίδέἐστιν, ἐνδευτεροπρώτῳ; ὅτανδιπλῆἡἀργίαᾖ, καὶτοῦσαββάτουτοῦκυρίου, καὶἑτέραςἑορτῆςδιαδεχομένης. Paulus and Olsh. also take this interpretation.

(3) Theophylact understands,—a sabbath, the day before which (παρασκευή) had been a Feast-day.

(4) Isidore of Pelusium, Euthym[53], and others, think that the first day of unleavened bread is meant, and is called δευτερόπ., because it is δευτέρατοῦπάσχα, which had been slain on the evening before.

[53] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116

(5) Scaliger and Petavius interpret it to mean the sabbath following the second day of the Passover, from which the seven weeks to Pentecost were reckoned. This has been commonly followed; but is liable to the objection that the assumption, σάββ. δευτερόπρ. = σάββ. τῆςἑβδομάδοςδευτεροπρώτου = σάββ. τῆςἑβδ. πρώτηςμετὰτὴνδευτέραντῶνἀζύμων, is an unjustifiable one.

(6) To omit many other conjectures, I may mention that Wieseler (Chron. Synop. der 4 Evv., p. 231 ff.) suggests that it may mean the first sabbath in the second of the cycle of seven years, which completed the sabbatical period. He shews, by a passage from the κήρυγμαΠέτρου (Clem. Alex[54], Strom. vi. 5, p. 760 [55].), that the Jews did call the first sabbath of the year πρῶτον—and that the years were reckoned as the first, second, &c., of the septennial cycle (see a decree of Jul. Cæsar in Jos. Antt. xiv. 10. 6).

Thus the first sabbath of the first year would be πρωτόπρωτον or πρῶτον, that of the second δευτερόπρωτον, &c. And according to his chronology, which fixes this in A.U.C. 782, this year was the second of the sabbatical cycle. If we follow this conjecture, this day was the first sabbath in the month Nisan.

[54] Alex. Clement of Alexandria, fl. 194

[55] By these symbols are designated the portions of two ancient MSS., discernible (as also are fragments of Ulphilas’ gothic version) under the later writing of a volume known as the Codex Carolinus in the Ducal Library at Wolfenbüttel. P ( A) contains fragments of each of the Gospels. Q (GUELPH. B) fragments of Luke and John. Both are probably of the sixth century. They were edited by F. A. Knittel in 1762; and, more thoroughly, by Tischendorf in 1860 [1869], Monumenta Sacra, vol. iii. [vi.]

The point so much insisted on, that this must have been after the presentation of the first-fruits which took place on the 16th of Nisan,—on account of the prohibition in Leviticus 23:14,—is of no weight, as it is very uncertain whether the action mentioned here is included in the prohibition.

As regards the analogy of the word, δευτεροδεκάτη, sometimes cited from Jerome on Ezekiel 45, is not to the point: for that word represents the fact that “rursus ex ipsis decimis Levitæ, hoc est inferior ministrorum gradus, decimas dabant sacerdotibus:” so that it was not “the second-tenth,” as Wordsw., but a tenth of a tenth,—a second tithing of a tithe.

ψώχ. τ. χ. is a detail peculiar to Luke: rubbing them and blowing away the chaff.

Luke 6:2

2. In Matt. and Mark, the Pharisees address our Lord, ‘Why do Thy disciples,’ &c.

Luke 6:3

3. οὐδὲ …] Have ye not read so much as this? E. V.: i.e. ‘Are ye so utterly ignorant of the spirit of Scripture?’ see Mark 12:10, where the same expression occurs.

The remarkable substitution in [56] for Luke 6:5 seems to be an interpolation, but hardly an invention of a later time. Its form and contents speak for its originality and, I am disposed to believe, its authenticity.

[56] The CODEX , or BEZÆ,—so called because it was presented by Beza in 1581 to the University Library at Cambridge; where it is now exposed to view in a glass case. He procured it in 1562, from the monastery of St. Irenæus at Lyons. It is on parchment, and contains the Gospels and Acts, with a Latin version. Its lacunæ, which are many, will be perceived by the inner marginal letters in this edition. It once contained the Catholic Epistles: 3 John 1:11-14 in Latin is all that now remains.

It was edited with very accurate imitative types, at the expense of the University of Cambridge, by Dr. Kipling, in 1793. A new edition carefully revised and more generally accessible was published by Mr. Scrivener in 1864, and has been collated for this Edition. In the introduction some ten or twelve correctors are distinguished, whose readings are found in the notes at the end of the volume. The text of the Codex Bezæ is a very peculiar one, deviating more from the received readings and from the principal manuscript authorities than any other.

It appears to have been written in France, and by a Latin transcriber ignorant of Greek, from many curious mistakes which occur in the text, and version attached. It is closely and singularly allied to the ancient Latin versions, so much so that some critics have supposed it to have been altered from the Latin: and certainly many of the phænomena of the MS. seem to bear out the idea. Where D differs in unimportant points from the other Greek MSS., the difference appears to be traceable to the influence of Latin forms and constructions. It has been observed, that in such cases it frequently agrees with the Latin codex e (see the list further on). Its peculiarities are so great, that in many passages, while the sense remains for the most part unaltered, hardly three words together are the same as in the commonly received text. And that these variations often arise from capricious alteration, is evident from the way in which the Gospels, in parallel passages, have been more than commonly interpolated from one another in this MS.

The concurrence with the ancient Latin versions seems to point to a very early state of the text; and it is impossible to set aside the value of D as an index to its history;—but in critical weight it ranks the lowest of the leading MSS. Its age has been very variously given: the general opinion now is that it was written in the latter end of the fifth or the sixth century.

Luke 6:6

6. The circumstances related in ch. Luke 14:1-6 are very similar to these; and there Luke has inserted the question of Mat 12:11-12. I should be disposed to think that Mark and Luke have preserved the exact narrative here. Matthew, as we see, describes the watching of the Pharisees (τοὺςδιαλογισμοὺςαὐτῶν, Luke, Luke 6:8) as words actually spoken, and relates that they asked the question: which certainly arises from an imperfect report of what took place, the question itself being verbatim that which our Lord asked on that other occasion, Luke 14:3, and followed by a similar appeal about an animal. There can hardly be a doubt that in Matthew’s narrative the two occurrences are blended: and this may have taken place from the very circumstance of the question about an animal having been asked on both occasions; Luke omitting it here, because he reports it there—Matthew joining to it the question asked there, because he was not aware of another similar incident.

ἡδεξ. is a mark of accuracy, and from an eye-witness.

Luke 6:9

9. The words in the re[57]. text, ἐπ. ὑμᾶςτίἔξεστιν, admit of two constructions according as they are punctuated: ‘I will ask you what is allowable on the sabbath,—to do good, or to do evil?’ (ἐπ. ὑμ. τίἔξ. κ.τ.λ.); or, ‘I will ask you a certain thing: Is it,’ &c. (ἐπ. ὑμ. τιἔξ. κ.τ.λ.) This latter is preferable, both on account of the future ἐπερ., and of its similarity to ἐρωτήσωὑμᾶςκἀγὼλόγον, ch. Luke 20:3. But the reading in the text is much preferable to either. After the question, Mark adds οἱδὲἐσιώπων—as they did after the question just referred to in ch. 20, because they were in a dilemma, and either answer would have convicted them.

[57] TheTextus Receptus or received text of the Greek Testament. Used in this Edition when elz and Steph agree

Luke 6:10

10. Mark adds μετʼ ὀργῆςσυλλυπούμενοςἐπὶτῇπωρώσειτῆςκαρδίαςαὐτῶν—one of the most striking and graphic descriptions in the Gospels.

It was thus that He bare (see Matthew 8:17), even while on earth, our sins and infirmities. Their hearts were hardened,—but He grieved for it.

Luke 6:11

11. ἀνοίας] It does not appear that this word can ever mean, as in some former editions, ‘madness,’ rage of a senseless kind: certainly it does not in reff., nor in Herod. vi. 69 or Thuc. iii. 48, there carelessly referred to. The proper meaning, ‘senselessness,’ ‘wicked folly,’ must be kept to. See Ellicott’s note on 2 Timothy 3:9, to which I owe this correction.

διελάλ., viz. the Pharisees and Herodians: Mark 3:6, where see note.

Luke 6:12

12. ἐντ. ἡμ. τ. is vague in date, and may belong to any part of the period of our Lord’s ministry now before us. I believe it to be a form of acknowledgment on the part of the Evangelist, that he did not determine exactly into what part of this period to bring the incident so introduced. Indeed the whole of this paragraph is of a supplementary and indefinite character, serving more as a preface to the discourse which follows, than as an integral part of the narration in its present sequence. This of course in no way affects the accuracy of the circumstances therein related, which nearly coincide in this and the cognate, though independent, account of Mark.

ἐξελθεῖν—viz. from Capernaum.

τὸὄρος] See on Matthew 5:1.

προσεύξ.] See note on ch. Luke 5:16.

κ. ἦνδιαν.…] and spent the night in prayer to God, see E. V. The whole context, and the frequency of the objective genitive (see Winer, § 30. 1, edn. 6), should have prevented the Commentators (Hammond, Olearius, &c.) from making the blunder of imagining προσευχή here to be a proseucha or house of prayer: see note on Acts 16:13.

Luke 6:13

13. προσεφ. τ. μ. αὐτ.] Expressed in Mark, προσκαλεῖταιοὓςἤθελεναὐτός—i.e. He summoned to Him a certain larger number, out of whom He selected Twelve. We are not to suppose that this selection was now first made out of a miscellaneous number—but now first formally announced; the Apostles, or most of them, had had each their special individual calling to be, in a peculiar manner, followers of the Lord, before this.

ὠνόμασεν—not at a previous, or subsequent period, as Schleiermacher suggests (Trans. p. 89); but at this time. Mark (Mark 3:14) gives the substance, without the form, of the word ἀπόστολος—ἐποίησενδώδεκαἵνα … ἀποστέλλῃαὐτοὺςκηρύσσειν …

Luke 6:14

14. On the catalogue, see notes on Matthew 10:1 ff.

Luke 6:16

16. ἸούδανἸακώβου—usually, and I believe rightly, rendered Jude the brother of James: see Prolegg. to Jude. On the question who this James was, see on Matthew 10:3; Matthew 13:55.

Luke 6:17

17. Having descended from the mountain, He stood on a level place—i.e. possibly, as has been suggested by some, on a flat ledge or shelf on the side of the mountain; but more naturally below the mountain: see on Matthew 5:1. Whether Luke could thus have written with the Gospel of Matthew before him, I leave the reader to judge: premising, that is, the identity of the two discourses.

Luke 6:19

19. Luke uses the same expression, of power going forth from our Lord, in ch. Luke 8:46.

Luke 6:20

20. εἰςτοὺςμ.] The discourse was spoken to the disciples generally,—to the Twelve particularly,—to the people prospectively; and its subject, both here and in Matt., is, the state and duties of a disciple of Christ.

πτωχοί] To suppose that Luke’s report of this discourse refers only to this world’s poverty, &c.—and the blessings to anticipated outward prosperity in the Messiah’s Kingdom (De Wette, Meyer), is surely quite a misapprehension. Comparing these expressions with other passages in Luke himself, we must have concluded, even without Matthew’s report, that they bore a spiritual sense: see ch. Luke 16:11, where he speaks of ‘the true riches,’ and ch. Luke 12:21, where we have εἰςθεὸνπλουτῶν. And who would apply such an interpretation to our Luke 6:21?

See on each of these beatitudes the corresponding notes in Matt.

ἡβασ. τ. θ. = ἡβασ. τ. οὐρανῶν Matt., but it does not thence follow that αὐρανοί = θεός, but the two are different ways of designating the same kingdom—the one by its situation—in heaven, where its πολιτεία is (ἡἄνωἸερουσαλήμ, Galatians 4:26), the other by Him, whose it is.

Luke 6:22

22. ἀφορίσωσιν and ἐκβάλ, must not be understood of Jewish excommunication only, but of all kinds of expulsion from society.

τὸὄν. ὑμ., literal: your name:—either your collective name as Christians,—to which Peter seems to refer, 1 Peter 4:14-16;—or, your individual name.

Luke 6:23

23. ἐνἐκ. τ. ἡμ., not in the most solemn sense of the words (see Matthew 7:22), but in the day when men shall do thus to you.

Luke 6:24

24. Of course (see Prolegg. ch. 1.) I cannot assent to any such view as that taken by Meyer and others, that these ‘woes’ are inserted from later tradition (gehdren zur Formation der spatern Mberlieferung); in other words, were never spoken by our Lord at all:—either we must suppose that they ought to follow Matthew 5:12, which is from the context most improbable,—or that they, and perhaps the four preceding beatitudes with them, were on some occasion spoken by our Lord in this exact form, and so have been here placed in that form.

Luke 6:26

26. Not said to the rich, but to the disciples. The very warning conveyed in ψευδοπροφ. shews this, and should have prevented Meyer from making the blunder. The mention of προφ. and ψευδοπροφ. has reference to the disciples’ office as the salt of the earth. The address in Luke 6:27 is not (Meyer) a turning of the discourse to His own disciples, but ὑμῖνλέγωτοῖςἀκούουσιν = ἐγὼδὲλέγωὑμῖν, which introduces the same command Matthew 5:44,—and τοῖςἀκούουσιν serves the purpose of the ἐγώ—to you who now hear Me. The discourse being mutilated, the strong antithesis could not be brought out.

Luke 6:29

29. See Matthew 5:39 ff.

Luke 6:31

31. Matthew 7:12; but here it seems somewhat out of connexion, for the sense of Luk 6:29-30, has been resist not evil, whereas this precept refers to the duty of man to man, injury being out of the question.

Luke 6:32

32. This verse again belongs to Luke 6:28, not to Luke 6:31: see Matthew 5:46 ff.

Luke 6:33

33 ff.] χάρις corresponds to μισθός, Matt. (see note on Matthew 5:12).

Luke 6:35

35. ἀπελπίζοντες] Three renderings have been given—(1) the ordinary one, μηδὲνἀπʼ αὐτῶνἐλπίζοντες, Euthym[58];—but this meaning of the word is unexampled, though agreeing with the context. (2) ‘causing no one to despair,’ i.e. refusing no one (reading μηδένʼ: cf. [59] [[60][61] in various readings);—so the Sy[62]. renders it. (3) ‘not despairing,’ i.e. ‘without anxiety about the result.’ This last sense of the word is best supported by examples, both from Polybius (e.g. ἀπελπ. τὰπράγματα, i. 19. 12,—τὴνσωτηρίαν, ii. 54. 7, alli[63]. freq., see Index), and the Apocrypha,—see reff. But as it is an ἅπαξλεγόμενον in the N.T., perhaps the force of the context should prevail, and the ordinary interpretation be adopted, as there is nothing in analogy (ἀπαιτῶ, ἀπολαμβάνω, …) to forbid the meaning; and so Passow gives it in Lexic.

[58] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116

[59] CODEX . Edited by Tregelles, London, 1861, with the types cast for printing the Codex Alexandrinus. The following is an abridgment of his account of the MS.: “On the 11th of August, 1858, I received a letter from Dr. Paul de Lagarde of Berlin, informing me that a palimpsest MS., hitherto unused, containing a considerable portion of St. Luke’s Gospel, with a Catena, was in the library of the British and Foreign Bible Society. It is noted in the Catalogue, and on the back, ‘24, Greek Evangelisterium.

Parchment.’ In many parts the ancient writing is illegible, except in a very good light. The later writing is a Greek Lectionary from the Four Gospels, and belongs, I suppose, to the thirteenth century. The elder writing must have been part of a volume of large folio size; for the leaves are now folded across, the later writing running the other way. The text is in round full well-formed uncial letters, such as I should have had no difficulty in ascribing to the sixth century, were it not that the Catena of the same age has the round letters (ΘΘΟΧ) so cramped as to make me believe that it belongs to the eighth century. Besides the ordinary κεφάλαια or τίτλοι, this MS. contains also the same chapters as the Vatican MS., similarly numbered. The only other document in which I have ever seen this Capitulatio Vaticana is the Vatican Codex itself; nor do I know of its being found elsewhere.

Occasionally the same portion of Scripture occurs twice, when accompanied by a different Patristic extract.”

[60] Codex Petropolitanus (Tischendorf, N.T. edn. 8). Of the ninth century. The readings of this MS. were not available [for the sixth Edition] at the beginning of St. Matthew, nor for Luke 1:30 to Luke 8:3, nor beyond Luke 18:9. [Def. John 3:5-36; John 21:22–end supplied by a later hand.]

[61] The CODEX . Procured by Tischendorf, in 1859, from the Monastery of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai. The Codex Frederico-Augustanus (now at Leipsic), obtained in 1844 from the same monastery, is a portion of the same copy of the Greek Bible, the 148 leaves of which, containing the entire New Testament, the Ep. of Barnabas, parts of Hermas, and 199 more leaves of the Septuagint, have now been edited by the discoverer. A magnificent edition prepared at the expense of the Emperor of Russia appeared in January, 1863, and a smaller edition containing the N.T. &c., has been published by Dr. Tischendorf.

The MS. has four columns on a page, and has been altered by several different correctors, one or more of whom Tischendorf considers to have lived in the sixth century. The work of the original scribe has been examined, not only by Tischendorf, but by Tregelles and other competent judges, and is by them assigned to the fourth century. The internal character of the text agrees with the external, as the student may judge for himself from the readings given in the digest. The principal correctors as distinguished by Tischendorf are:—A, of the same age with the MS. itself, probably the corrector who revised the book, before it left the hands of the scribe, denoted therefore by us à-corr1; B (cited as à2), who in the first page of Matt. began inserting breathings, accents, &c., but did not carry out his design, and touched only a few later passages; Ca (cited as à3a) has corrected very largely throughout the book. Wherever in our digest a reading is cited as found in à1, it is to be understood, if no further statement is given, that Ca altered it to that which is found in our text; Cb (cited as à3b) lived about the same time as Ca, i.e. some centuries later than the original scribe. These are all that we need notice here6.

[62] The Peschito (or simple) Syriac version. Supposed to have been made as early as the second century. The text as edited is in a most unsatisfactory state.

[63] alli= some cursive mss.

υἱοὶὑψίστου] Meyer maintains that this must mean ‘sons of God’ in the sense of partakers of the glory of the Messiah’s Kingdom, but without reference to the state of believers in this life, which last he says is according to the usage of Paul, not of the three first Evangelists. But surely this is sufficiently answered by ὁπατὴρὑμῶν in the next verse, where the actual present sonship to our heavenly Father is a reason why we should imitate Him.

Luke 6:36

36. οἰκτίρμ. = τέλειοι Matthew 5:48, which last is the larger description, comprehending in it charity and mercy: see note there.

Luke 6:37 f. = Matthew 7:1-2. The saying is much enriched and expanded here; perhaps it was so uttered by our Lord on some other occasion; for the connexion is very strict in Matt., and would hardly bear this expansion of what is not in that place the leading idea.

Luke 6:38

38. The similitude is taken from a very full measure of some dry thing such as corn. That no liquid is intended by ὑπερεκχ., as Bengel supposes, is evident—for the three present participles all apply to the same μέτ. καλ. and form a climax.

δώσουσιν] The subject of this verb answers to the unexpressed agents of ἀντιμετρηθήσεται; such agents being indefinite, and the meaning thereby rendered solemn and emphatic: see on ch. Luke 12:20. If we are to find a nom., it should be the Angels, who are in this matter the ministers of the divine purposes (so Meyer).

This saying is found with a totally different import Mark 4:24; one of the many instances how the Lord turned about, so to speak, the Light of Truth contained in His declarations, so as to shine upon different departments of life and thought.

Luke 6:39

39. From this verse to the end is in the closest connexion, and it is impossible that it should consist of sayings thrown together and uttered at different times.

The connexion with what went before is not so evident, indeed the εἶπενδὲπ. αὐτ. seems to shew a break. The parabolic saying, implying the unfitness of an uncharitable and unjustly condemning leader (the Lord was speaking primarily to His Apostles) to perform his office, leads to the assertion (Luke 6:40) that no Christian ought to assume in this respect an office of judging which his Master never assumed; but rather will every well-instructed Christian strive to be humble as his Master was. Then follows the reproof of Luk 6:41-43; and Luke 6:44-49 shew us, expanded in different images, what the beam in the eye is, to which our first efforts must be directed.

τυφλ. τ. ὁδ.] See this in quite another connexion, Matthew 15:14, where Peter answers, φράσονἡμῖντὴνπαραβολὴν [ταύτην]—meaning apparently the last uttered words, which the Lord however explains not specifically, but by entering into the whole matter. I believe this παραβολή to have been one of the usual and familiar sayings of our Lord.

Luke 6:40

40. See above. κατηρτισμένος (see reff.)—fully instructed—perfect, in the sense of ‘well-conditioned,’ knowing what is his duty, and consistently endeavouring to do it. De Wette, Kuinoel, &c., have given a strange rendering of this clause, making κατηρτ. ὡςὁδ. αὐτ. the predicate—‘every disciple will be instructed as his Master.’ But if I mistake not, the position of κατηρτ. as first in the sentence forbids this rendering.

Luke 6:41

41. De Wette imagines a break in the sense here, and a return to Matthew 7:3 f.;—but the whole is in the strictest connexion: see above.

Luke 6:43

43. The καρπὸςσαπρός = the δοκὸςἐντῷὀφθ. If thy life is evil, it is in vain to pretend to teach others.

Luke 6:45

45. Again the closest connexion of sense and argument; nor is this verse (De Wette) put here because of the similarity of the preceding verses to Matthew 12:33 reminding the compiler of Luk 6:35 there. Do these expositors suppose that our Lord only once spoke each of these central sayings, and with only one reference?

Luke 6:46-48

46–48. The connexion goes on here also—and our Lord descends into the closest personal searching of the life and heart, and gives His judicial declaration of the end of the hypocrite, whether teacher or private Christian: see notes on Matt.

Luke 6:48

48. ἔσκαψενκ. ἐβάθυνεν—not a mere hendiadys for “dug deep,” but, as Bengel observes, “crescit oratio:” he dug, and deepened as he dug: was not content with one digging, but kept going deeper.

Luke 6:49

49. συνέπεσεν] So we have συμπίπτειστέγη, Eur. Herc. Fur. 905: πόλιν … ὑπὸσεισμοῦ … ξυμπεπτωκυῖαν, Thuc. viii. 41.