Matthew 9

Matthew 9

“THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW”

Chapter Nine Back in Capernaum, Jesus’ ministry in Galilee continued with both forgiving and healing a paralytic (Matthew 9:1-8). Matthew the tax collector was called to be a disciple, who invited Jesus to his home where He was questioned by the Pharisees and disciples of John (Matthew 9:9-17). Asked by a ruler to go and raise his dead daughter, Jesus did so, healing a woman with a flow along the way (Matthew 9:18-26). Afterward Jesus healed two blind men and a man who was both mute and demon-possessed (Matthew 9:27-34). He then went about the region, teaching and healing, moved with compassion for the multitudes that came to Him (Matthew 9:35-38).

POINTS TO PONDER

• Jesus’ power to forgive sins

• His willingness to eat with sinners

• His compassion for the lost

REVIEW

1. What are the main points of this chapter?

• Five miracles in Capernaum of Galilee - Matthew 9:1-8; Matthew 9:18-34- The call of Matthew and the questions at his house - Matthew 9:9-17- The itinerant teaching and healing in cities and villages - Matthew 9:35-38

2. List the five miracles recorded in this chapter (Matthew 9:1-8; Matthew 9:18-34)

• Jesus forgives and heals a paralytic
• Jesus heals a woman with a flow of blood
• Jesus restores a ruler’ s daughter to life
• Jesus heals two blind men
• Jesus heals a man mute and demon-possessed

3. How did Jesus demonstrate His power to forgive sins? (Matthew 9:6)

• By healing a paralytic

4. Who was called to be a disciple and then gave a feast at his house? (Matthew 9:9-10)

• Matthew, also known as Levi, author of this gospel (cf. Luke 5:27-29)

5. What two groups confronted Jesus regarding what two issues? (Matthew 9:11-17)

• The Pharisees, concerning eating with sinners
• The disciples of John, concerning fasting

6. What explanation did Pharisees give for Jesus’ ability to exorcise demons? (Matthew 9:34)

• “He casts out demons by the ruler of the demons.”

7. What moved Jesus to call for prayer for more laborers? (Matthew 9:36-38)

• Compassion for the multitudes who were like sheep without a shepherd

Matthew 9:1-38 Verse 1 Mat 9:1-38 And he entered into a boat, and crossed over, and came into his own city. (Matthew 9:1)Christ simply and immediately complied with the request of the citizens of Gadara and shipped immediately to his own city, Capernaum, directly across the lake. This body of water, some 12 or 13 miles in length and only about six miles wide, did not require long to cross. Deductions from this abrupt departure of Jesus are significant: (1) Christ will not force his gospel upon any man or upon any community. (2) The fact that Jesus never returned to Gadara shows how a single decision may have the most extensive consequences. (3) The future history of this area was determined in a single day, even in an hour, when these hapless citizens, ignoring the fantastic blessing which had come to two of their number, and thinking only about the loss of the swine, requested the Saviour of the world to leave their shores. Foolish and irrevocable as their decision was, it does not stand by itself, because countless souls are continually making decisions just as tragic.

Verse 2 And behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, be of good cheer; thy sins are forgiven.This is one of those “mighty works” mentioned by Jesus in his reproach of Capernaum (Matthew 11:23). Important details are mentioned in Mark 2:1-12 and Luke 5:17-26 which are not contained in Matthew. Mark tells that he was carried by four men, and Luke relates the breaking up of the roof to let him down to Jesus. Seeing their faith refers not merely to the faith of the four but of the man with the palsy as well. He could not have permitted or encouraged such activity on his behalf if he had not truly believed in Jesus. What a reward he received, “Thy sins be forgiven!” Christ dealt with the sin problem first, for it was most important. Also, there is the possibility that in his case sin was the cause of his illness. Christ’s announcing the forgiveness of this man’s sins was clearly the assertion of the prerogatives of deity. “Who can forgive sins, but one, even God” (Mark 2:7).

Verse 3 And behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.The thinking of the scribes that only God could forgive sins was altogether correct. Moreover, if Christ was not God, as he claimed to be, they were correct in attributing blasphemy to Jesus. Christ himself accepted both these assumptions and demonstrated his divinity in the miracle that followed. The Scriptures relate in this place what the scribes said “within themselves!” This is one thing which no other literature except the Bible can relate, that is, what people say “within themselves.”

Verse 4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?Two things are plainly apparent in this verse: (1) that Christ knew people’s thoughts, an ability only God could have, and (2) the Scriptural “heart” is the part that THINKS, thus equating it with the mind, or the seat of the intelligence.

Verse 5 For which is easier, to say, Thy sins are forgiven; or to say, Arise and walk?Of course, one of these is as easily “said” as the other; but the overwhelming impact of this lies in the plain truth, presented here by Christ, that a person who cannot do BOTH can do NEITHER! Those of every age who dare to say, “I absolve thee,” should prove their power really to do it by demonstrating the other side of the same power, performing miracles. Christ consented to do this, and “the servant is not above his master” (Matthew 10:24). Inability to do the miracle is proof that the pretender is also unable to forgive sins.

Verse 6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath authority on earth to forgive sins (then saith he to the sick of the palsy), Arise, and take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.But that ye may know … is equivalent to saying men could NOT KNOW Jesus’ power to forgive sins without such a demonstration of his power. Now, if it is allowed that the Christ himself could not cause people to know of his power to forgive sins without the accompanying power to heal the body, how much more is it certain that people should never expect to have their claims to powers of absolution accepted without a similar demonstration on their part? Jesus’ handling of this entire case shows that the power to forgive sins pertains to God alone and that only divine power can accomplish it. Here Christ places the absolution of sins on parity with performing a miracle, affirming in fact that one is as easily done as the other. What sophistry, then, must be attributed to those who “pretend” to do one but cannot even pretend to do the other! A clear understanding of these words of Christ would prohibit the unwarranted assumption of authority by those who make it their business to forgive the sins of other people!

Verse 7 And he arose, and departed to his house.Thus, another mighty wonder performed by the Master followed the usual pattern: (1) It was complete. (2) It was immediate. (3) It was accomplished by a mere word. (4) There were no incantations. (5) There was no agonizing. (6) There were no loud prayers. (7) It was totally accomplished with the utmost ease in the presence of his enemies, without prior staging, and without any props.

Verse 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they: were afraid, and glorified God, who had given such authority unto men.The fear of the multitude is proof that they saw in this great miracle nothing but the power of God in a dramatic display of authority over sin and disease. God’s power, even in nature, is always awe-inspiring; and it is much more so when seen in those areas of the soul itself which are concerned with man’s spiritual health. The words “unto men” are at first surprising, Why is it said, “unto men,” whereas men simply cannot do the things mentioned here? Trench explained it thus: “They felt truly that what was given to one man, to him who had just set himself forth under the title of the Son of man,' was given for the sake of all, and given ultimately to ALL, that thus it was indeed given unto men’."[1] Also, Jesus did appoint plenipotentiaries with full authority to announce men’s forgiveness, namely, apostles, with authority to bind and loose on earth with equal consequences in heaven. (See Matthew 16:19). Those who profess to see in this spontaneous comment from the rabble positive sanction of THEIR authority to forgive sins certainly see far more than is in it. ENDNOTE:[1] Richard H. Trench, Notes on the Miracles (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1953), p. 227.

Verse 9 And as Jesus passed by from thence, he saw a man, called Matthew, sitting at the place of toll: and, he saith unto him, Follow me. And he arose, and followed him.How many of Jesus’ mighty deeds were done “as he passed by”? (John 9:1; Matthew 4:18; Matthew 9:27; Mark 11:20, etc.). He seized the golden chances as they came. Whatever came to hand, that he did to the glory of God. Note that he saw “a man.” Some would have seen only a tax collector, but Jesus saw the scholarly student of the prophecies, the human heart that beat beneath the tax-taker’s shirt. Disciples in this generation would do well to follow his example.

How often men’s eyes are blinded by prejudice, social bias, or self-interest, and they fail to see “the man.” They see instead a banker, a policeman, a farmer, a negro, a doorman, a taxi driver, a soldier, a grocer, etc. How comforting is the thought that the Saviour always saw (and sees) the man, whatever the outward circumstances that may disguise him from his fellows! One wonders if this call of Matthew was as spontaneous as it seems from this brief account of it. Very probably, Matthew, like the four fishermen, already had some knowledge of Christ and his teachings when the call occurred. The brevity of this account shows the humility and modesty which characterized this ancient publican who rose to such heights in the service of the Lord. Matthew’s call was a challenge to the Pharisees and other snobbish groups of that day. A publican was a social outcast. Nothing good was expected of such a person; and, in this call, Jesus showed that the church has a mission to the downtrodden as well as to others. Adam Clarke makes this feast to occur in the house of Matthew, as indicated in Luke 5:29.[2] Publicans were renters of the Roman taxes, an occupation particularly odious to the Jews, and the more so on the part of one of their own race who was thus leagued with the despised oppressors of the land. and SINNERS were synonymous terms in the culture of that day. That the Messiah would attend a feast with such a man and even name him to the apostleship was a fact which few people of that day, especially the rulers, could accept with any degree of tolerance. Their bitterness toward the despised and socially unacceptable masses was the prime reason for their failure to recognize Jesus as their Lord. Snobbishness is still a reality in many hearts, and its effect of spiritual blindness are just as real and fatal now as then. ENDNOTE:[2] Adam Clarke, Commentary (New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837), Vol. V, p. 109.

Verse 10 And it came to pass as he sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples. And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Teacher with the publicans and sinners? But when he heard it, he said, They that are whole have no need of a physician, but they that are sick.Regarding the place and make-up of the company that attended the feast mentioned here, see final paragraph under Matthew 9:9 above. Note that the Pharisees, by directing their questions to Jesus’ disciples instead of to him, were attempting to open a wedge between them and were trying to inoculate the disciples with their own blind prejudice. Jesus’ rejoinder to the effect that the sick, not the whole. require a physician, was rich in irony. It passed over the fact, known to all, that spiritually the Pharisees themselves were about the sickest people of that generation. Whether the Pharisees got the point or not is not revealed; but it may safely be assumed that if they did not, others did. The whole population was fully acquainted with the greed, cunning, duplicity, and general wickedness of those evil men who sat in Moses’ seat. Jesus’ remark might well have been the occasion for a roar of laughter.

Verse 13 But go ye and learn what this meaneth, I desire mercy, and not sacrifice: for I came not to call the righteous but sinners.Both here and in Matthew 12:7, Christ quoted from Hosea 6:6. The context in that passage shows that Christ was here comparing the Pharisees with the reprobate priesthood of Hosea’s times. In that same paragraph, Hosea charged, “And as the troops of robbers wait for a man, so the company of priests murder in the way by consent; for they commit lewdness” (Hosea 6:6-9). This, of course, must have infuriated the Pharisees who, as subsequent events would prove, were every whit as wicked as the Lord indicated. His words continued to be ironical when he said, “I came not to call the righteous”; for of course he did call the truly righteous, and, for that matter, even the Pharisees; but they would not be called.

Verse 14 Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?At this point, the disciples of John were already beginning to be jealous of the rising popularity of Christ (John 4:1-3). The use of the participle “were fasting” in Mark 2:18, show that this feast in the home of Matthew probably took place on a Monday or Thursday, when the Pharisees and disciples of John the Baptist were observing their customary feasts. The appearance of John’s disciples at that moment shows that the Pharisees had not overlooked any occasion for making trouble. They had obviously tried, with some success, to maneuver a breach between the followers of Christ and those of the Baptist. How could Jesus defend the conduct of his disciples without drawing a rebuke from John whose public endorsement of Jesus had, in effect, launched our Saviour’s ministry? In an answer as diplomatic, and devastating, as the famous reply on the tribute money, Jesus gave three parables, the last of which is given only by Luke, in which he fully defends both his own and John’s respective views.

These parables are: (1) new cloth on old garments, (2) new wine in old wineskins, and (3) the person familiar with old wine does not desire new. The reference to the relaxation of rules during a wedding, however, was the most devastating of all.

Verse 15 And Jesus said unto them, Can the sons of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then will they fast.This was an answer calculated to convince John’s disciples, because John had already identified Jesus as the bridegroom, saying, “He that hath the bride is the bridegroom” (John 3:29). There is heavenly genius in this answer of Christ. The habit of the Pharisees of indulging every appetite, to the point of gluttony and drunkenness, at a wedding, makes this a center shot. Since Christ is the bridegroom, THIS IS A WEDDING (in a spiritual sense)! It is likely that this reply was greeted with howls of laughter. Yet there is a tragic note here also. The holy bridegroom will be “taken away from them,” that is, by these same pious hypocrites who were so solicitous about the strict observances of their petty fasts.

Verse 16 And no man putteth a piece of undressed cloth upon an old garment; for that which should fill it up taketh from the garment, and a worse rent is made.The illustration in this place is simply that of trying to patch an old garment with a piece of new, that is, unshrunken, cloth which, if attempted, would prove unavailing as soon as the garment was washed. The shrinkage of the new piece would tear itself out and the rent be made worse. The application is that Jesus did not come to apply Christianity as a new patch upon the old garment of Judaism. Christianity was not designed as an addition to Judaism, not as a patch upon an old system, but as an excitingly new and different religion altogether.

Verse 17 Neither do men put new wine into old wineskins: else the skins burst, and the wine is lost, and the skins perish: but they put new wine into fresh wineskins, and both are preserved.This illustration refers to the custom of putting wine into the bladders and skins of animals. Only new wineskins could serve for unfermented or new wine. After fermentation, the skins hardened and became brittle, thus becoming entirely unsuitable for new wine, yet continuing to serve well enough as containers for old wine. The application was that Christ did not pour the new wine of his teaching into the old wineskins (John’s disciples) but into new wineskins (his disciples). It is noteworthy that none of Jesus’ disciples had previously been followers of John. The reason is explained in this passage. It took new hearts, fresh viewpoints, unaccustomed to the practices and prejudices of old ways, to contain the marvelous new teachings of Christ.

Verse 18 While he spake these things unto them, behold, there came a ruler and worshipped him, saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live.This miracle of raising Jairus’ daughter from the dead is the first resurrection recorded in the New Testament. There were three such wonders, forming a sequence: (1) Jairus’ daughter had been dead only a very short time. (2) The son of the widow of Nain had been dead longer and was being carried to the tomb. (3) Lazarus had been dead and buried for four days (Luke 7:12; John 11:1-57). Christ considered raising the dead a part of his ministry (Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22), and he delegated the power to the apostles (Matthew 10:8). Peter raised Dorcas from the dead, acting under this commission (Acts 9:40). Regarding Jairus’ daughter, the quibble is raised that she might not have been dead but had merely swooned; however, the statement of the damsel’s father, the presence of the hired mourners, and their laughing Jesus to scorn, knowing her to be dead, remove any thought that only a swoon had occurred. Such quibbles are grounded on false premises, namely, that one type of miracle was more difficult than another for Jesus to perform. Actually, there is no difference in raising a person from the dead who has been dead only a few minutes, and raising one who has been dead a thousand years. Furthermore, such miracles as cleansing lepers, healing the blind, deaf, mute, palsied, etc. were in no sense either easier or more difficult than raising the dead. All such wonders were done effortlessly by the Son of God. Jairus was the ruler of the synagogue, and was among the most respected and honored citizens of Capernaum. It is strange that after so much was done by Jesus for so many, including wonders worked on behalf of the city’s leading citizens, that Capernaum rejected him.

Verse 19 And Jesus arose and followed him, and so did his disciples.From the other accounts, it is learned that only Peter, James, and John accompanied him into the inner chamber where this great deed was wrought. The other disciples, however, were doubtless not far away.

Verse 20 And behold, a woman, who had an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the border of his garment.This remarkable case was mentioned by Eusebius, whose remarks quoted by Dummelow are: She was a heathen living at Caesarea Philippi, near the sources of the Jordan. Her house is shown in the city … and at the gates of which, on an elevated stone stands a brazen statue of a woman on her bended knee, with her hands stretched out before her like one entreating. Opposite to this is another statue of a man, erect, of the same materials, decently clad in a mantle, and stretching out his hand to the woman. This statue, they said, was a likeness of Jesus Christ.[3] The so-called Report of the Procurator Concerning Our Lord Jesus Christ contains this: And a woman that had an issue of blood for many years, and whose joints and veins were drained by the flowing of the blood, so that she did not present the appearance of a human being, but was like a corpse, and was speechless every day, so that all the physicians of the district could not cure her (was in such a condition) that there was not any hope of life left to her. And when Jesus passed by, she mysteriously received strength through his overshadowing her; and she took hold of his fringe behind; and, immediately in the same hour, power filled up what was in her empty, so that, no longer suffering any pain, she began to run swiftly to her own city Kepharnaum, so as to accomplish the journey in six days.[4] Perhaps these ancient quotations have little value, but they serve to focus a little further attention on this wonderful deed which came as a parenthesis in the more important miracle of the raising of Jairus’ daughter. [3] J. R. Dummelow, One Volume Commentary (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 659. [4] Pontius Pilate, quoted in ancient writings, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951), Vol. VIII, p. 460.

Verse 21 For she said within herself, If I do but touch his garment, I shall be made whole.Here again is noted that characteristic of the Scriptures which reveal what people said within themselves. In this chapter is recorded what the Pharisees said within themselves, and here is related what this woman said within herself. Other examples are those of the unjust steward and the prodigal son (Luke 15:17; Luke 16:3). The surmise of this woman that only a touch was required to heal her was altogether correct. One of the profoundest statements in Holy Writ is Mark 6:56. “As many as touched him were made whole.” If with all our striving, we may but TOUCH HIM, we shall be made perfectly whole.

Verse 22 But Jesus turning and seeing her said, Daughter, be of good cheer; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour. It is plain from this that Jesus rejected whatever of superstition there may have been in the woman’s act. A suspicion that some element of superstition might have motivated her comes from the fact that she touched a particular part of his garment supposed to be especially holy. That was the tuft, Matthew 9:22 (Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), p. 38."[5] or tassel, which, according to Numbers 15:37, every Jew wore on the four corners of his cloak to remind him of God’s commands, and which was considered the holiest part of his apparel. Jesus’ action, as more fully given in Mark 5:25-34, and his plain words made it clear to the woman that he, of his own will, had healed her; and that she had not merely taken advantage of some supernatural influence radiating from his person. ENDNOTE:Matthew 9:22 (Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), p. 38.">[5] Emphatic Diaglott, Matthew 9:22 (Brooklyn, New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), p. 38.

Verse 23 And when Jesus came into the ruler’s house, and saw the flute-players, and the crowd making a tumult.The flute-players were the hired mourners who took part in every funeral of that day. The large crowd and the general tumult were due to the prominence of the family in which this tragedy had occurred. The very suggestion that a prominent ruler of the Jews, such as Jairus, had gone so far as to hire public mourners for a daughter who was merely sick or had swooned, is ridiculous. Are there any examples, even in modern times, when a funeral was actually planned and under way for a person who was not actually deceased?

Verse 24 He said, Give place: for the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn.Here, in the words of Jesus, of course, are the grounds for cavil; but it should be remembered that Christ said the same concerning Lazarus who had been dead and buried for four days (John 11:11). The actuality of death is not the point in either case, but the nature of death. IT IS A SLEEP. In death, as in sleep: (1) there is a loss of consciousness; (2) both are terminated, sleep by awakening, and death in the resurrection; (3) there is a rejuvenation or rebuilding of powers during the period of waiting; or, more properly, both are followed by an state of the person; (4) there is no total destruction and loss of the person in either case; (5) and there is no loss of personality or identity. Jesus thus gave an utterly new concept of death; and from that came the custom, universally observed among Christians, of writing “asleep in Jesus” upon the tombs of the departed. The words “And they laughed him to scorn” should be read in close connection with what immediately followed and is recorded in the next verse.

Verse 25 But when the crowd was put forth, he entered in, and took her by the hand; and the damsel arose.They scorned him, but it resulted in their being put out of the room. Then, as in all ages, scorners proved witnesses only against themselves. What an opportunity they denied themselves! Ever afterwards, it must have been a source of remorse to some of that company that their conduct had made it impossible for them to witness one of the great wonders of all time, and to see that remarkable outflashing of the glory from the Majesty on high. Mark recorded the actual words Jesus spoke to the maiden, “Talitha Cumi,” an Aramaic expression meaning “Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise!” There was no strain or pressure on Christ. This astounding deed was done as easily as he spoke the words, and with no more exertion on his part. Christ was delayed, due to the incident concerning the woman with the issue of blood, in reaching the home of Jairus. Thus, it might be said that Jairus’ prayer for our Saviour’s aid was answered after delay. Prayers are often answered, not at once, but after delay; and the child of faith should not despair during the interval when it appears that no answer is forthcoming. God in his own time will bless those who call upon Him in faith.

Verse 26 And the fame hereof went forth into all the land.Mark mentions Jesus’ request that the deed should not be publicized; but, in this case, there was no possible way to prevent its being widely known. Breaking up a funeral already in progress would be an event almost impossible to conceal. From this, it is supposed that Jesus merely meant that Jairus should conceal the truth until Jesus and his disciples could have safe passage through the throng of people. Mark also noted that Jesus commanded that the damsel should be given something to eat (Mark 5:43).

Verse 27 And as Jesus passed by from thence, two blind men followed him, crying out, and saying, Have mercy on us, thou Son of David. As Jesus passed by … (See under Matthew 9:9). The symbolism of this incident is magnificent. Although the learned Pharisees and doctors of religion could not see Christ as the Messiah, or Son of David, these blind people COULD! Even a blind man knew that the Messiah had indeed appeared in the person of Jesus Christ. Matthew alone recorded this incident. From various Old Testament passages, it is clear that blindness is a type of sin (See Deuteronomy 28:29; Isaiah 59:10; Job 12:25; Zephaniah 1:17; Isaiah 29:8; also Ephesians 5:8; and Matthew 15:14). A number of examples of Jesus’ restoring sight to the blind are recorded and were prophetically included as a positive mark of the Messiah’s power when he should be revealed. Isaiah said of the Messiah and his times, “Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened” (Isaiah 35:5). The expression “Have mercy on us, thou Son of David” has seven words as do so many forceful expressions in Scripture. See other examples in Matthew 6:7; Matthew 6:11; Matthew 6:20; Matthew 6:28; Matthew 6:24 - all in a single chapter. Countless others may be noted in both the Old and New Testaments.

Verse 28 And when he was come into the house, the blind men came to him: and Jesus saith unto them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.Christ tested the faith of the two men by waiting until he had entered the house and they had followed, and also by asking them if they believed he was able to do it. They passed the test, and Jesus healed them.

Verse 29 Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it done unto you.Jesus often touched the person of the ones he healed. In this case, he touched their eyes. In a sense, Christ’s words to those ancient blind men are applicable to all in every age who seek his blessing. “According to your faith be it done unto you.”

Verse 30 And their eyes were opened. And Jesus strictly charged them, saying, See that no man know it. But they went forth, and spread abroad his fame in all the land.The Greek term in this place translated “strictly” is actually “sternly,” as a glance at the English Revised Version (1885) margin will show. It must follow, then, that those recipients of the Lord’s healing grace were most reprehensible in their violation of his orders not to tell it. Trench noted that most Catholic commentators on this place, “applaud rather than condemn these men for not adhering strictly to Christ’s command (which) conduct should be regarded, not as a fault, but a merit."[6] On the other hand, interpreters of the Reformed Church see in this “a blemish in the perfectness of their faith who thus disobeyed; a fault which remained a fault, even while they recognize it as one which only grateful hearts could have committed."[7] This profound difference of the views of expositors is ascribed by Trench to the desire of the reformers to “take God’s word as absolute rule of law, and to worship him not with self-advised services, but after the pattern which he has shown … that obedience is better than sacrifice, even though the sacrifice be intended for God’s special honor."[8] We say the same and can only wonder at the disobedience of those who had been so signally honored and healed by the Saviour. [6]Richard C. Trench, op. cit., p. 215. [7] Ibid. [8] Ibid.

Verse 32 And as they went forth, behold, there was brought to him a dumb man possessed with a demon.On demon possession, see under Matthew 8:28 ff.

Verse 33 And when the demon was cast out, the dumb man spake: and the multitudes marveled, saying, It was never so seen in Israel. But the Pharisees said, By the prince of the demons casteth he out demons.See under Matthew 12:24 ff for more on the prince of demons. The Pharisees were absolutely unwilling to admit any good thing in Jesus. When they were unable to deny his wonderful deeds, they questioned the source of his power. In addition to accusing Christ of being in league with the devil, they made a big issue of the cures wrought on the sabbath day; and, it may be assumed, they denied, whenever practical, that any good deed had been done. There is an implicit admission of this in their words, “A notable miracle hath been wrought through them … and we cannot deny it” (Acts 4:16). This is very nearly the equivalent of their saying that they would have denied the miracle of the apostles performed at the Beautiful Gate of the temple, if they could have done so with any prospect of being believed.

Verse 35 And Jesus went about all the cities and the villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness.The total number of Jesus’ miracles must have been truly fantastic. There were mighty deeds in all the cities and villages and upon all kinds of sicknesses and diseases, as well as upon demoniacs. What significance, in the light of this, must be in the words of John who said: Many, other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name (John 20:30-31).

Verse 36 But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion for them, because they were distressed and scattered, as sheep not having a shepherd.This records Jesus’ own reaction to the extensive tour of Galilee mentioned in the preceding verse, in which the opposition of the Pharisees had been so evident, with the consequent confusion and distress of the people. Christ viewed the situation with profound pity for the multitudes and proposed, at once, to correct it by sending out his disciples as missionaries to bear widespread testimony to the truth. The word “compassion” in this place gives an insight into the benevolent and gracious heart of Christ. It indicated a combination of love, pity, concern, and deep emotional feeling for the “lost sheep” of the house of Israel.

Verse 37 Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest indeed is plenteous, but the laborers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send forth laborers into his harvest.Christ here asked his disciples to pray for that which he himself was about to initiate, namely, the sending forth of more witnesses to the truth of the kingdom. The sending forth of the Twelve was Jesus’ own response to the marvelous opportunity for reaping a great harvest of souls. Significantly, Christ asked the disciples to pray about it; and he himself continued all night in prayer before naming the Twelve (Luke 6:12-13). In view of this, should Christ’s disciples today undertake any project without prayer for guidance and blessing? If Jesus leaned so heavily upon the arm of prayer, how much more should his disciples ask, and seek, and knock to obtain that providential support, without which every human endeavor must inevitably come to naught?

McGarvey Commentary For Matthew Chapter NineHealing the Paralytic, in Capernaum, Matthew 9:1-8. (Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26)

1. his own city.—At the beginning of his ministry in Galilee Jesus left Nazareth and came and dwelt in Capernaum (Matthew 4:12-13), and the latter was thenceforward “his own city.”
2. thy sins be forgiven.—As the terms of pardon prescribed in the law were yet in full force, this speech of Jesus was a surprising assertion of authority. It was also exceptional in the ministry of Jesus; for only on three recorded occasions did he thus forgive sins. (See Luke 7:48 Luke 23:43.) Being exceptional, and not the established method of pardon, it must have been designed for a special purpose. The purpose is plainly declared in verse 6 below.
3. This man blasphemeth.—The scribes were right in charging him with blasphemy if he was not the Son of God. He doubtless made the remark for the purpose of forming this issue, and thereby preparing his hearers for the demonstration which followed.
4. think ye evil.—The thought of the scribes was evil, not because it was illogically drawn from their premises, but because their premises were wrong in that they denied the divinity of Jesus.
5. whether is easier.—This use of whether is now obsolete, having been supplanted by which. The scribes could not deny that it was as easy to say with effect to the man, “Thy sins are forgiven;” as to say, “Arise and walk.” The power to work miracles does not in itself imply the authority to forgive sins; but it does when the authority is asserted and the miracles are wrought in proof of it.
6. that ye may know.—Assuming the only possible answer to his question as granted, he now demonstrates his power to forgive sins by commanding the man who was paralyzed to arise from his bed, and take it up, and go home. He had been brought there on his bed, perfectly helpless; he returns, carrying the bed in his arms. The proof was demonstrative, showing that Jesus was in the highest sense a Savior, because he could save men from their sins as well as from the diseases of the body, the stormy elements of the sea, and the power of demons.
7. they were afraid.—Here it the same fear that was exhibited by the Gergesenes (8:34); but instead of asking Jesus to leave their country, the people “glorified God who had given such power to men.” Notice here Matthew’s peculiar use of the plural. It was to the man, Jesus, that the power was given, and to men only as he was contemplated as one of the race. For remarks on the faith displayed by the friends of the paralytic, see the note on Mark 2:5, where the details are more fully stated. Matthew’s Call and Feast, Matthew 9:9-13. (Mark 2:15-17; Luke 5:29-32)
8. the receipt of custom.—The Greek word (τελνιον) here rendered “receipt of custom,” means “the office of publican,” or, “a collector’s office.” Matthew was a publican (Matthew 10:3), and was receiving the taxes assessed by the Roman government. (Comp. notes on Matthew 5:46-47.) he arose and followed him.—That Matthew promptly obeyed when Jesus said “Follow me,” is proof that he was already a disciple. He now becomes one of the immediate personal attendants of the Lord, preparatory to being appointed one of the twelve. We are not to conclude, from the apparent abruptness of his movement, that he neglected to settle the accounts of his office. An honest settlement of accounts was indispensable to a good name in the future.
9. at meat in the house.—From Mark 2:15, and Luke 5:29, we learn that this feast was in Matthew’s own house. It was a kind of farewell feast, preparatory to leaving all and following Jesus. The publicans and sinners who made up the company were his old associates, and the only persons, except Jesus and his companions, who would honor Matthew’s invitation.
10. with publicans and sinners.—The publicans and other sinners habitually neglected the law and the traditions in regard to legal purifications, and therefore the Pharisees regarded it as incompatible with religious purity to associate with them. 12, 13. he said.—Had Jesus been unable to vindicate himself in reference to these associations, his cause would have been damaged in the estimation of many good persons. But he here presents three brief arguments which are so conclusive, and so tersely expressed, that they must have taken his accusers by surprise. First, his office being analogous to that of a physician who visits the sick and not the well, sinners are the very persons whom he should visit. Second, God himself had said in the Scriptures, “I will have mercy and not sacrifice”— a Hebraism, which means, “I will have mercy in preference to sacrifice.” (Hosea 6:6.) The mercy shown to these publicans and sinners by mingling with them for their good, was more acceptable to God than the sacrifices of the altar. (See the context in Hosea.) Third, “I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” His call was a call to repentance, and therefore sinners alone were those to whom he should go; and the greater the sinners, the greater the need that he should be among them. It is impossible to conceive a more complete vindication, or one more happily expressed. It should be observed, before we dismiss this incident, that neither the example nor the arguments of Jesus justify us in keeping company with bad people, except for the purpose of doing them good— the purpose for which the physician visits the sick. Question about Fasting, Matthew 9:14-17 (Mark 2:18-22; Luke 5:33-39)
11. the disciples of John.—The fact that the question about fasting was propounded by the disciples of John should not be overlooked. It shows that the question was not intended as a captious objection, but as an honest inquiry: for although the disciples of John were not, as yet, identical with those of Jesus, we can not class them among the enemies of Jesus. Fast ing twice in the week was regarded by the Pharisees as a mark of superior piety (Luke 18:12), and the disciples of John seem to have agreed in this matter with the Pharisees. Indeed, John himself practiced what may be regarded as a continual fast, eating only locusts and wild honey, and this was well calculated to impress his disciples with great respect for fasting. It appeared to them, therefore, as a serious defect in the religious life of Jesus and his disciples, that they paid no respect to the regular fast days. The feast at Matthew’s house, which occurred on a fast day (see note on Mark 2:18), very naturally brought the matter up for consideration, because it shocked the sensibility of the objectors. 15-17. Jesus said unto them.—Jesus reduces the objection to an absurdity by three arguments from analogy. First, he refers to the wedding customs of the day, and demands, “Can the children of the bridechamber”— that is, the invited guests at a wedding— “mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them?” While he remained with his disciples, they were enjoying a wedding feast, and it would be absurd to fast as if they were mourning. But when he should leave them they would fast, because that would be a time of sorrow. Secondly, he draws an argument from the absurdity of putting a patch of new (properly rendered unfulled) cloth on an old garment. The unfulled piece, never having been shrunk, would shrink the first time it got wet, and would tear open the rent still wider.

Thirdly, it would be equally absurd to put new wine into old bottles. The bottles being made of goat skins, an old one had little strength and no elasticity, and therefore the fermentation of new wine would burst it. The argument drawn from these two examples is not, as some have supposed, that it would be absurd to patch the old Jewish garment with the unfulled cloth of the gospel, or to put the new wine of the gospel into the old Jewish bottles; for the question at issue was not one concerning the proper relation of the gospel dispensation to the Jewish law, but one concerning the propriety of fasting on a certain occasion. Moreover, in Luke’s report of this answer we find the additional argument, “No man, having drunk old wine, straightway desireth new; for he says the old is better.” (Luke 5:39.) To carry out the interpretation just named, would make Jesus here argue that the old dispensation was better than the new But the argument is the same as in the first example. It shows that it would have been absurdly inappropriate to the occasion for his disciples to fast, as much so as to mourn at a wedding, to patch an old garment with unfulled cloth, or to put new wine into old bottles. The arguments not only vindicated his disciples, but taught John’s disciples that fasting has value only when it is demanded by a suitable occasion. The Ruler’s Daughter and the Bloody Issue, Matthew 9:18-26. (Mark 5:22-43; Luke 8:41-56.) 18. a certain ruler.— Ruler of a synagogue. (Mark 5:22.) Even men of this class were ready to honor Jesus when they were in distress and wanted his aid. So it is with sinners generally. even now dead.—On this expression see note on Mark 5:23. 20-22.—See for remarks on the cure of the bloody issue the notes on Mark 5:25-34, where the account is more elaborate than here. Matthew mentions it briefly as an instance of the cure of a chronic disease by merely touching the hem of the Savior’s garment. 23. saw the minstrels.—Minstrels in a house of mourning would be incongruous according to western taste. But among the Jews it had been customary for ages to call to their service, on funeral occasions, certain women who were professional mourners, and who, by continual wailing and plaintive instrumental music, intensified the grief of the family and friends of the deceased. (Comp. Jeremiah 9:17-18; Amos 5:16; and see Smith’s Dictionary, Art. Mourning.) 24. not dead but sleepeth.—The maid was actually dead (Luke 8:53), but not, as the company thought, permanently so. She was about to be revived, and her death would then be more like sleep than death. The remark of Jesus was easily understood by the Jews after he had raised her to life, but before he did so it appeared so absurd that “they laughed him to scorn,” or derided him. This is the only instance given by Matthew of raising the dead. The account is singularly free from suspicion as to its authenticity. If it were a pretended death and revival, we would expect to see an anxiety on the part of Jesus to make it appear that the girl was dead, and a disposition on the part of the unbelievers present to question this fact.

But the reverse is true: it is the unbelievers who insist that the girl is dead, while Jesus alone raises a question about it. Perhaps the chief object of the remark, “She is not dead, but sleepeth,” was to bring forth from the inmates of the house, who had the best opportunity to know the fact, a more emphatic affirmation that she was certainly dead. For a more elaborate discussion of the details of this miracle, see the notes on Mark 5:22-43. Two Blind Men Healed, Matthew 9:27-3127. Thou son of David.—By thus addressing Jesus, the blind men acknowledged him to be the Christ; for it was understood by all the Jews that the Christ was to be a son of David. (See 22:42.) 28. Believe ye.—Being blind, the two men could not see the miracles for themselves; hence the pertinency of the question, “Believe ye that I am able to do this?” That they believed with so little opportunity to know the evidence, being necessarily dependent on the testimony of others, shows, on the one hand, the abundance of the evidence, and, on the other, the obduracy of those who could see and still would not believe. Jesus questions them in order to draw attention to this consideration. He had also paid no attention to their cries until after they followed him into the house, in order that they might show their faith by their perseverance. 30, 31. See that no man know it.—The cure of the woman with the issue of blood, immediately followed by the resurrection of the ruler’s daughter, and this by the cure of the blind men, had probably thrown the people into an ecstasy which once more required repression by the injunction of silence. (Comp. 8:4.) Mark tells us that Jesus gave the same injunction to the parents of the girl just mentioned. The two blind men, however, were too much exhilarated by the recovery of their eyesight, to heed the command of Jesus, or, perhaps, to believe that he meant what he said. They were too full to hold in; so “they spread abroad his fame throughout all that country.” The Dumb Demoniac, Matthew 9:32-3532. a dumb man.—He was dumb in consequence of the demon-possession, as appears from the fact that he spoke as soon as the demon left him. (Matthew 9:33.) Demon-possession had different effects on different persons. Some it deprived of reason, as in case of the man in the land of the Gergesenes (Mark 5:15); some it deprived of one or more of the senses, as in the present case; and some it threw into convulsions or distortions. (See Mark 9:18; Luke 13:11 Luke 13:16.) 33. the multitude marveled.—With every new variety of miracles there came fresh surprise among the people. After seeing a few sick persons cured, they naturally ceased being surprised at cures of sickness; but when they saw this dumb man restored to speech, they were almost as much surprised as if they had seen no previous miracle. The range of fresh miracles, however, necessarily had a limit, and therefore miracle working, as a means of impressing men, had to be of temporary duration. A permanent continuance of miracles would have robbed them of their value by making them common. 34. through the prince of the devils.—It seems that when the Pharisees now accused Jesus of casting out demons by the prince of the demons, he made no reply, but waited till a subsequent occasion when they repeated the charge, and then he replied exhaustively. (See Matthew 12:22-30.) 35. Jesus went about.—In this verse Matthew groups together in a general statement a multitude of miracles and discourses, of which those in the section which is here brought to a close are specimens. Argument of Section 6The obvious purpose of Matthew in the preceding section is to present miraculous proofs of the claims of Jesus. The fact that his word was attended by divine power is proof that he spoke by divine authority. He is represented as making this argument himself in the case of the paralytic (Matthew 9:5-6), and it is Matthew’s argument throughout the section. The demonstration is manifold, including the miraculous cure of six diseases— leprosy, paralysis, fever, chronic female hemorrhage, blindness, and dumbness. It includes also the expulsion of demons, the stilling of a tempest at sea, and the raising of the dead. All the ills to which humanity is exposed— the diseases of the flesh, the dangers of land and sea, the dominion of demons, and the power of death— are proved to be alike under the control of Jesus, and they are all controlled for the good of man. The benevolent purpose of his mission is demonstrated at the same time with its divine origin. Occasion of the Commission, Matthew 9:36-3836. moved with compassion.—The masses of the people in Galilee had now been deeply stirred by the teaching and miracles of Jesus, but they knew not as yet what direction was to be given to this popular movement. Jesus very aptly compares them, in their bewildered state, to a flock of sheep without a shepherd, scattered over the hills, and faint from fright and running. He has compassion on them, and is moved by this to provide for their relief by appointing twelve men who shall assist him in teaching them now, and shall be shepherds to them hereafter. Men are still like sheep— they must have shepherds to lead them. 37. The harvest.—The figure is here changed from that of a flock to that of a harvest. The condition of the people, as represented in the previous comparison, rendered them like an abundant harvest ready to be gathered in for the master’s use. But as Jesus contemplates it, he laments the absence of laborers, as he has lamented the want of a shepherd. Shepherds to gather them into the fold, and laborers to reap an abundant harvest, are two figures to represent the one want of the unhappy people. 38. pray ye.—When any want is realized, the first impulse of a worshiping soul, and rightly so, is to pray. Jesus here teaches us to pray for more laborers to reap the world’s great harvest, and so long as the laborers continue to remain few in proportion to the harvest, the disciples must continue to offer this prayer. Our compassion should be moved, like his, toward a scattered and distracted world. Like him, too, we must not be content with praying, but we must act. Having told his disciples to pray that laborers be sent, he proceeded in the same discourse to command them to go. (10:5-7.) It is in vain that we pray God to send laborers unless we go ourselves, or co-operate in finding and sending those whom God makes willing to go.

Questions by E.M. Zerr For Matthew 91. Jesus entered into what? 2. He passed over what ? 3. To what city did he come? 4. Who was brought to him ? 5. How helpless was he? 6. Whose faith did Jesus consider? 7. To whom did he speak ? 8. Tell what favor he gave them. 9. What accusation did the scribes make ? 10. In what manner did they make it? 11. What did Jesus know? 12. Repeat his question. 13. Which do you say is easier? 14. What did Jesus then bid the man do? 15. Tell what this was to test. 16. How did the test end? 17. State its effect upon the multitude. 18. For what did they glorify God? 19. What important man is now introduced? 20. State his business. 21. What was the reputation of this class? 22. Tell what Jesus told this man to do. 23. Who sat at meat with Jesus and his disciples 24. Who objected? 25. To whom did they make their objection? 26. Who heard it? 27. From what did he draw an illustration? 28. What scripture did he quote? 29. State what class needs repentance. 30. Who next came to Jesus? 31. What was their inquiry? 32. In the illustration who is the bridegroom ? 33. What was going to happen to him ? 34. State lesson of appropriateness from the garment. 35. And from wine bottles. 36. While speaking who came to Jesus? 37. What did he do? 38. And what did he announce ? 39. How did he express his faith? 40. Did Jesus respond favorably to him ? 41. On the way who contacted him? 42. How long had she been afflicted? 43. What showed their faith ? 44. State what Jesus said to her. 45. How soon did she improve ? 46. Whose house did Jesus now enter? 47. What did he see there? 48. State his remark to them. 49. How was it received? 50. What did Jesus do for the maid? 51. How did this affect his fame ? 52. Leaving this place, who followed him? 53. Whose son did they call him? 54. Were they correct? 55. What was their request? 56. How far did they follow Jesus? 57. State the question he asked them. 58. And their answer. 59. On what did Jesus base their recovery ? 60. State the outcome. 61. What did he charge them? 62. How well did they obey ? 63. What unfortunate was next brought? 64. Which was dumb, the man or the devil? 65. When did the dumb speak? 66. State the remark of the multitude. 67. Who opposed the work? 68. What was their remark ? 69. Where did Jesus go teaching? 70. Tell the object of his preaching. 71. What did he also do for the people? 72. How was his compassion moved ? 73. What did he say of the harvest? 74. And of the laborers? 75. For what were they to pray?

Matthew 9:1

9:1 Having been requested to leave the country of the Gergesenes, .Jesus took passage in a ship and recrossed the Sea of Galilee. His own city means Capernaum as may be learned in chapter 4:13 where he changed his residence.

Matthew 9:2

9:2 The palsy was a form of paralysis and rendered a man helpless. Jesus knew the hearts of all men and hence the words seeing their faith does not mean that what he saw was what gave him the information. The conclusion must be that what Jesus saw was an outward indication of faith. But the palsied man was not doing anything, hence as far as the direct evidence shows, the men carrying the bed were the only ones who had faith. Thus we have no positive authority for saying that the patient had any faith, notwithstanding which, the Lord gave him forgiveness for his sins. We also have no evidence that such a favor was being sought when they brought him to Jesus, but rather that they merely wished to have the afflicted man cured. Son is from TEKNON and Thayer renders it in this place, “affectionate address, such as patrons, helpers, teachers, and the like, employ.”

Matthew 9:3

9:3 Blaspheme is from a Greek word of virtually the same form, BLAS-PHEMEO, and Thayer defines it, “To speak reproachfully, rail at, revile, calumniate [accuse falsely].” In his own comments on the word he says it means, “Specifically of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally [emphasis mine, E. M. Z.] come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things.” Thus we see they accused Jesus of showing disrespect for God in claiming authority to forgive. In Mark’s account of the same event they make that item the basis of their accusation (Mark 2:7).

Matthew 9:4

9:4 The scribes were afraid to make their accusation so that others could hear it, but Jesus knew their thoughts and exposed them.

Matthew 9:5

9:5 The thing Jesus declared to be done was invisible and thus open to question. He then proposed to make another declaration that would be visible if accomplished. Whether it is easier means that if he has the authority to do the one he also has it to do the other, for one would be no harder to do than the other for one endowed with divine power as he claimed to be.

Matthew 9:6

9:6 Jesus then proposed to prove his power (from EXOUSIA meaning authority) to perform the invisible by doing the visible. Addressing the palsied man, Jesus told him not only to arise, but to take up his bed and go home. This evidently was the bed on which he was lying when the men came to carry him to Jesus.

Matthew 9:7

9:7 It would require something more than imaginative “mind over matter” to enable a helpless paralytic to walk and carry a piece of furniture.

Matthew 9:8

9:8 The aforesaid logic was suggested to the minds of the multitude and they expressed themselves to that effect. Nothing is said about the attitude of the accusers, and they doubtless hung their heads in shame. Glorify is from DOXAZO and Thayer defines it in this place, “to praise, extol, magnify, celebrate.” Given such power unto men. The last word is from AN-THROPOS, and its universal meaning as given by Thayer is, “A human being, whether male or female,” and hence the distinction is made between the brute creation and human beings. We are not told how much this multitude knew about the dual character of the person of Christ, but the outstanding appearance was that he was a man. That is why they marveled at his authority and might which could be accounted for only by giving the credit to God.

Matthew 9:9

9:9 Receipt of custom is from one Greek word that means “tax office.” The man who had charge of the taxes was called a publican, and that subject will be explained in detail in the next verse. Matthew was connected with that work when Jesus came along, and he was called to follow which he did. He was baptized by John since Jesus “came unto his own” who were the ones whom John baptized and prepared for him. It was in keeping with his instruction from John, therefore, for him to quit his secular employment and follow at the call of him for whom he had been made ready.

Matthew 9:10

9:10 All men are sinners to some extent, but they are named as a class in this passage which means they were unrighteous in their life as a whole and hence regarded as an unworthy group. They are also classed with the publicans which shows they also were regarded as an unworthy group. They are referred to frequently in the New Testament, and I shall quote from the works of reference for the information of the reader.

“The class designated by this word [publican] in the New Testament were employed as collectors of the Roman revenue. The Roman senate farmed the direct taxes and the customs to capitalists who undertook to pay a given sum into the treasury, and so received the name of publicani. Contracts of this kind fell naturally into the hands of the equites [military orders], as the richest class of Romans. They appointed managers, under whom were the portitores, the actual custom-house officers, who examined each bale of goods, exported or imported, assessed its value more or less arbitrarily, wrote out the ticket, and enforced payment. The latter were commonly natives of the province in which they were stationed, as being brought daily into contact with all classes of the population. The name publicani was used popularly, and in the New Testament exclusively, of the portitores.

The system was essentially a vicious one. The portitores were encouraged in the most vexatious or fraudulent exactions, and a remedy was all but impossible.

They overcharged whenever they had an opportunity, Luke 3:13; they brought false charges of smuggling in the hope of extorting hush-money, Luke 19:8; they detained and opened letters on mere suspicion. It was the basest of all livelihoods. All this was enough to bring the class into ill favor everywhere. In Judea and Galilee there were special circumstances of aggravation. The employment brought out all the besetting vices of the Jewish character. The strong feeling of many Jews as to the absolute unlawfulness of paying tribute at all made matters worse.

The scribes who discussed the question, Matthew 22:15, for the most part answered it in the negative. In addition to their other faults, accordingly, the publicans of the New Testament were regarded as traitors and apostates, defiled by their frequent intercourse with the heathen, willing tools of the oppressor.

The class thus practically excommunicated furnished some of the earliest disciples both of the Baptist and of our Lord. The position of Zacchaeus as a “chief among the publicans,” Luke 19:2, implies a gradation of some kind among the persons employed.” Smith’s Bible Dictionary, article, Publican. “TELONES, 1. a renter or farmer of taxes; among the Romans usually a man of equestrian [one who rides on horseback] rank. 2. a tax-gatherer, collector of taxes or tolls, one employed by a publican or farmer-general in collecting the taxes. The tax-collectors were, as a class, detested not only by the Jews but by other nations also, both on account of their employment and of the harshness, greed, and deception, with which they prosecuted it.”–Thayer. “TELONES, a farmer of the taxes or customs, one who pays to the government a certain sum for the privilege of collecting the taxes and customs of a district. . . . Whence in the English Version, a publican. The public revenues of the Greeks and Romans were usually thus farmed out; and among the latter the purchasers were persons of wealth and rank, and in the later periods chiefly of the equestrian order. . . . The farmers-general had also sub-contractors, or employed agents, who collected the taxes and customs at the gates of cities, in seaports, on public ways, bridges, and the like. . . . In the New Testament in the later sense, a toll-gatherer, collector of customs, publican, the object of bitter hatred and scorn to the Jews, and often coupled with the most depraved classes of society.” Robinson’s Greek Lexicon. This long note will not be copied again, hence it will be important that the reader make careful note of its location for reference as occasion requires.

Matthew 9:11

9:11 The information given with the comments on the preceding verse shows the Moral and social standing of the publicans and sinners. The significance of eating with others was different in ancient times from what it is now. I shall quote from Funk and Wagnalls Standard Bible Dictionary on this subject: “The moral aspects of eating are taken account of in a series of prescriptions and prohibitions on the manner, time, and articles to be eaten. ‘Eating together’ was a sign of community of life, and symbolized either adoption into the household, or entrance into irrevocable [unbreakable] covenant (Jeremiah 41:1). This conception underlies the sacrificial meal in which God is taken as a participant. It was the worst form of treason, therefore, to break a covenant entered into through the ceremony of eating together.” The Pharisees who pretended to be very righteous, wanted to appear shocked that a righteous teacher like Jesus would defile himself by associating with these low characters, especially on such an intimate occasion as eating a meal together.

Matthew 9:12

6. This verse is one of the passages that are perverted into meaning just the opposite of their real teaching. The woman had grown worse in spite of her being treated by physicians. The fact is used by many “drugless healers” to prove that physicians are useless, even though Jesus said in Matthew 9:12 that the sick need a physician. But the very statement that this woman had not been benefited by the physicians is proof that others had been helped by them.

Matthew 9:13

9:13 Learn what that meaneth. Learn the meaning of the statement, I will have mercy and not sacrifice. I request the reader to “learn” its meaning by consulting Isaiah 58:3; Ezekiel 34:1-4; Hosea 6:6; Joe 2:13; Micah 6:6-8. By these passages it will be learned that the self-righteous Jewish leaders in former times imposed on the poor and common people, then tried to get things even before the Lord by offering big material sacrifices. Under those circumstances the Lord would want these leaders to leave off their sacrifices until they had showed mercy to the unfortunate populace. Jesus wanted these same pretentious Jewish leaders before him to get this lesson so they would cease their selfish attitude toward the “sinners.” A physician does not make calls at homes where all are in good health, and on that principle Jesus came to call on the sinners of the earth because they are the ones who are spiritually sick. If the Pharisees were as righteous as they professed to be, they should not expect Jesus to pay much attention to them.

Matthew 9:14

9:14 Fasting was never commanded as a regular practice but was voluntarily done in times of grief or anxiety. At the time of this conversation John the Baptist had been slain, which is recorded later in this book, and his disciples were fasting in honor of his memory. Not that they were doing so just at the time they came to Jesus, but had been doing so oft or at intervals since his death.

Matthew 9:15

9:15 Jesus represents himself as a bridegroom who is still present with the children which is used in the sense of friends. These friends would have no occasion to fast or mourn for their bridegroom because he was still with them. Fasting under these circumstances would be inappropriate. Days will come refers to the time when he would be taken from them and when that time happens they will mourn (Mark 16:10).

Matthew 9:16-17

6-17 I have made one paragraph of the two verses because they are on the same subject, and whatever comments I wish to make will have a common application to both verses. But I shall first explain the literal meaning of the terms used, after which I shall offer my comments on the application. When fabric is old it is shrunk, and also weakened with age and easily torn. If a hole in it is repaired with new and unshrunk cloth, it will pull loose in shrinking and tear the old cloth. Bottles were made of the skins of animals, being closed tightly around the mouth somewhat like a leathern pouch. While these pouches are new they are moist and capable of expanding without bursting.

New wine has to expand as it ferments, and if it is put into old pouches that have become dry, the expansion of the liquid will burst these vessels. The usual explanation of these illustrations is that it represents the folly of trying to mix the new religion that Jesus was introducing with the old one that Moses gave to the people of God. I do not believe that is the purpose of the illustrations and will give the reasons for my statement.

It would be an abrupt change of subject from anything that had been said for several chapters. Nothing in the conversation between Jesus and the audience would call for the injection of a highly figurative argument concerning the comparative merits of the Old and New Testaments. On the other hand, the importance of the work of John and Christ, and of the truth that the first was to be replaced by the second, would justify some further teaching from Jesus on it. If the old garment and old bottles represent the old law, on which and into which the new law should not be put, then what constitutes the old cloth and old wine that is to be attached to it? I believe the whole point is simply a lesson on the subject of appropriateness. The disciples of John could fittingly mourn because he had been taken from them.

Jesus was still with his disciples and they could not appropriately mourn. It will be well to recall the words of Solomon in Ecclesiastes 3:4, “A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance.”

Matthew 9:18

9:18 The word for ruler is defined by Thayer, “A ruler, commander, chief, leader.” The word could hence be applied to various persons, but in this verse it means, “of the officers presiding over the synagogues.” For a description of these synagogues and their uses see the comments at Mat-they 4:23. This man was a Jew and had learned enough about the work of Jesus to have the faith that he expressed. He was consistent in his attitude, for if a person has the power to perform other miracles he also can raise the dead. Modern professed miracle workers betray their fradulent practices by refusing even to try raising the dead, because they know they have no miraculous power.

Matthew 9:19

9:19 Jesus had previously showed his ability to work miracles by “absent treatment” (chapter 8:13). He therefore had some special reason for going to the ruler’s house.

Matthew 9:20

9:20 On the way to the ruler’s house an afflicted woman sought relief from a chronic case of hemorrhage of blood of twelve years’ standing. Her only contact with Jesus was that of touching the hem of his garment. There was no literal curative properties in the clothing of the Lord, but the woman thought there was and her faith was manifested by touching it which induced him to favor her.

Matthew 9:21

9:21 The woman expressed her faith in words only to herself.

Matthew 9:22

9:22 Jesus could read the thoughts of mankind and knew the woman said within herself. Turning, he made no mention of her touching his garment, but granted her the cure because of her faith. As usual, the recovery from her disease was immediate.

Matthew 9:23

9:23 By this time Jesus had reached the ruler’s house. As he entered he saw the minstrels (musicians) and the people making a noise. These words are from which Thayer defines at this place, “to wail tumultuously.” The instruments that such minstrels used were flutes and they could be made to produce a turbulent “noise.”

Matthew 9:24

9:24 Not dead but sleepeth. The Bible as well as secular compositions uses both figurative and literal language, and the distinction should always be remembered or confusion may result. I shall quote Webster on the two words: “figurative, 2. Expressing one thing in terms normally denoting another with which it may be regarded as analogous [similar]; as figurative language, sense. Literal, 4. Of senses of words, conveying the primary meaning, opposed to figurative.” With this authentic information we may form a convenient and correct formula as follows: “Figurative language is that based on appearances regardless of the facts; literal language is that based on the facts regardless of appearances.” Jesus used the figurative because when a person is dead he “appears” to be asleep.

The people did not recognize the figure but thought he was speaking literally and hence they laughed him to scorn. The last word is not in the original and the statment should merely say that they laughed at him. The same kind of circumstance as to language occurred in the case of Lazarus in John 11:11; John 11:14, except that Jesus used both figurative and literal language for his disciples.

Matthew 9:25

9:25 This is another instance where Jesus saw fit to make bodily contact in performing the miracle. However, that would not account for it as far as any physical cause was concerned, for the same procedure would not raise the dead if performed by another without the possession of supernatural power.

Matthew 9:26

9:26 Fame is from the Greek word PHEME and one word in Thayer’s definition is, “report.” The idea means to express the fact of the extent of the news about the deed, not so much the thought of Jesus from the standpoint of notoriety.

Matthew 9:27

9:27 These blind men must have heard this report referred to in the preceding verse. Son of David means he was descended from David in the blood line. Many people in. Palestine were familiar with the prediction in the law that the Messiah was to come through that line. Their addressing him with this title not only acknowledged him to be possessed with miraculous power (others had possessed that), but that he was the fulfiller of the law and the prophets.

Matthew 9:28

9:28 The blind men did not lose heart but followed Jesus until he had entered another house, and there they came to him for relief. Jesus knew all hearts and was aware of the faith in the minds of these men, but a public profession of faith is one of the acts that puts a man in favorable light before the Lord.

Matthew 9:29

9:29 According to your faith is said on the same principle as that said to the centurion in chapter 8:13, “as thou past believed.”

Matthew 9:30

9:30 Eyes were opened. Thayer explains the last word to mean, “to restore one’s sight,” hence the passage does not mean their eyelids had been closed.

Matthew 9:32

9:32 Dumb, possessed with a devil. The reader should consult the long quotation from the lexicons that is given at chapter 8:28. It will there be seen that being possessed with a devil did not always produce the same effect on the people. In the case of our present verse it produced dumbness in the man.

Matthew 9:35

9:35 Jesus taught in the syna gogues because he could meet the Jews assembled there to hear the reading of the Scriptures. Gospel of the kingdom means the good news that the kingdom of heaven was near. Healing every sickness and disease is significant. Modern professed miracle workers will select such ailments that are not apparent so that their failure to effect a cure cannot be known.

Matthew 9:36

9:36 The multitudes were worn out by foot travel in their quest for the favors they hoped to get from Jesus. Their condition caused him to be moved with pity, which fulfilled the many predictions that he was to be a man who could “be touched with the feeling of our infirmities” (Hebrews 4:15).

Matthew 9:37

9:37 There were so many people who needed help that neither Jesus nor any other man could be bodily present with all of them. That is what he meant by harvest plenteous, laborers few.

Matthew 9:38

9:38 The prayer intimated in this verse will call for something definite to be done. Jesus will himself bring about a fulfillment in the next chapter.