Gospel of Matthew 15 14. Holy Gospel from Matthew. About God's commandment and human decrees

Comments on Chapter 15

INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW

SYNOPTIC GOSPELS

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are usually called Synoptic Gospels. Synoptic comes from two Greek words that mean see together. Therefore, the above-mentioned Gospels received this name because they describe the same events in the life of Jesus. In each of them, however, there are some additions, or something is omitted, but, in general, they are based on the same material, and this material is also arranged in the same way. Therefore, they can be written in parallel columns and compared with each other.

After this, it becomes very obvious that they are very close to each other. If, for example, we compare the story of the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:12-21; Mark 6:30-44; Luke 5:17-26), then this is the same story, told in almost the same words.

Or take, for example, another story about the healing of a paralytic (Matthew 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26). These three stories are so similar to each other that even the introductory words, “said to the paralytic,” appear in all three stories in the same form in the same place. The correspondence between all three Gospels is so close that one must either conclude that all three took material from the same source, or two were based on a third.

THE FIRST GOSPEL

Examining the matter more carefully, one can imagine that the Gospel of Mark was written first, and the other two - the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke - are based on it.

The Gospel of Mark can be divided into 105 passages, of which 93 are found in the Gospel of Matthew and 81 in the Gospel of Luke. Only four of the 105 passages in the Gospel of Mark are not found in either the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of Luke. There are 661 verses in the Gospel of Mark, 1068 verses in the Gospel of Matthew, and 1149 in the Gospel of Luke. There are no less than 606 verses from Mark in the Gospel of Matthew, and 320 in the Gospel of Luke. Of the 55 verses in the Gospel of Mark, which not reproduced in Matthew, 31 yet reproduced in Luke; thus, only 24 verses from Mark are not reproduced in either Matthew or Luke.

But not only the meaning of the verses is conveyed: Matthew uses 51%, and Luke uses 53% of the words of the Gospel of Mark. Both Matthew and Luke follow, as a rule, the arrangement of material and events adopted in the Gospel of Mark. Sometimes Matthew or Luke have differences from the Gospel of Mark, but it is never the case that they both were different from him. One of them always follows the order that Mark follows.

REVISION OF THE GOSPEL OF MARK

Due to the fact that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are much larger in volume more gospel from Mark, you might think that the Gospel of Mark is a brief transcription of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. But one fact indicates that the Gospel of Mark is the earliest of them all: so to speak, the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke improve the Gospel of Mark. Let's take a few examples.

Here are three descriptions of the same event:

Map. 1.34:"And He healed many, suffering from various diseases; expelled many demons."

Mat. 8.16:"He cast out the spirits with a word and healed everyone sick."

Onion. 4.40:"He, laying on everyone of them hands, healed

Or let's take another example:

Map. 3:10: “For He healed many.”

Mat. 12:15: “He healed them all.”

Onion. 6:19: "... power came from Him and healed everyone."

Approximately the same change is noted in the description of Jesus' visit to Nazareth. Let's compare this description in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark:

Map. 6.5.6: “And he could not perform any miracle there... and he marveled at their unbelief.”

Mat. 13:58: “And he did not perform many miracles there because of their unbelief.”

The author of the Gospel of Matthew does not have the heart to say that Jesus could not perform miracles, and he changes the phrase. Sometimes the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke leave out little hints from the Gospel of Mark that may somehow detract from the greatness of Jesus. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke omit three remarks found in the Gospel of Mark:

Map. 3.5:“And he looked upon them with anger, grieving because of the hardness of their hearts...”

Map. 3.21:“And when his neighbors heard, they went to take him, for they said that he had lost his temper.”

Map. 10.14:"Jesus was indignant..."

All this clearly shows that the Gospel of Mark was written earlier than the others. It gives a simple, lively and direct account, and the authors of Matthew and Luke were already beginning to be influenced by dogmatic and theological considerations, and therefore they chose their words more carefully.

TEACHINGS OF JESUS

We have already seen that the Gospel of Matthew has 1068 verses and the Gospel of Luke 1149 verses, and that 582 of these are repetitions of verses from the Gospel of Mark. This means that there is much more material in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke than in the Gospel of Mark. A study of this material shows that more than 200 verses from it are almost identical among the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke; for example, passages such as Onion. 6.41.42 And Mat. 7.3.5; Onion. 10.21.22 And Mat. 11.25-27; Onion. 3.7-9 And Mat. 3, 7-10 almost exactly the same. But here's where we see the difference: the material that the authors of Matthew and Luke took from the Gospel of Mark deals almost exclusively with events in the life of Jesus, and these additional 200 verses shared by the Gospels of Matthew and Luke deal with something other than that. that Jesus did, but what He said. It is quite obvious that in this part the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke drew information from the same source - from the book of sayings of Jesus.

This book no longer exists, but theologians called it KB, what does Quelle mean in German - source. This book must have been extremely important in those days because it was the first textbook on the teachings of Jesus.

THE PLACE OF THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW IN THE GOSPEL TRADITION

Here we come to the problem of Matthew the Apostle. Theologians agree that the first Gospel is not the fruit of Matthew's hands. A person who was a witness to the life of Christ would not need to turn to the Gospel of Mark as a source of information about the life of Jesus, as the author of the Gospel of Matthew does. But one of the first church historians named Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, left us the following extremely important news: “Matthew collected the sayings of Jesus in the Hebrew language.”

Thus, we can consider that it was Matthew who wrote the book from which all people should draw as a source who want to know what Jesus taught. It was because so much of this source book was included in the first Gospel that it was given the name Matthew. We should be eternally grateful to Matthew when we remember that we owe to him the Sermon on the Mount and almost everything we know about the teaching of Jesus. In other words, it is to the author of the Gospel of Mark that we owe our knowledge of life events Jesus, and Matthew - knowledge of the essence teachings Jesus.

MATTHEW THE TANKER

We know very little about Matthew himself. IN Mat. 9.9 we read about his calling. We know that he was a publican - a tax collector - and therefore everyone should have hated him terribly, because the Jews hated their fellow tribesmen who served the victors. Matthew must have been a traitor in their eyes.

But Matthew had one gift. Most of Jesus' disciples were fishermen and did not have the talent to put words on paper, but Matthew was supposed to be an expert in this matter. When Jesus called Matthew, who was sitting at the toll booth, he stood up and, leaving everything but his pen, followed Him. Matthew nobly used his literary talent and became the first person to describe the teachings of Jesus.

GOSPEL OF THE JEWS

Let us now look at the main features of the Gospel of Matthew, so that when reading it we will pay attention to this.

First, and above all, the Gospel of Matthew - this is the gospel written for the Jews. It was written by a Jew to convert the Jews.

One of the main purposes of Matthew's Gospel was to show that in Jesus all the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled and therefore He must be the Messiah. One phrase, a recurring theme, runs throughout the book: “It came to pass that God spoke by the prophet.” This phrase is repeated in the Gospel of Matthew no less than 16 times. The Birth of Jesus and His Name - Fulfillment of Prophecy (1, 21-23); as well as flight to Egypt (2,14.15); massacre of the innocents (2,16-18); Joseph's settlement in Nazareth and the raising of Jesus there (2,23); the very fact that Jesus spoke in parables (13,34.35); triumphal entry into Jerusalem (21,3-5); betrayal for thirty pieces of silver (27,9); and casting lots for Jesus' clothes as He hung on the Cross (27,35). The author of the Gospel of Matthew set his main goal to show that the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus, that every detail of Jesus' life was foretold by the prophets, and thereby convince the Jews and force them to recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

The interest of the author of the Gospel of Matthew is directed primarily to the Jews. Their appeal is closest and dearest to his heart. To the Canaanite woman who turned to Him for help, Jesus first answered: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (15,24). Sending the twelve apostles to proclaim the good news, Jesus told them: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles and do not enter the city of Samaritans, but go especially to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (10, 5.6). But don’t think that this is the Gospel for everyone possible ways excludes pagans. Many will come from the east and west and lie down with Abraham in the Kingdom of Heaven (8,11). "And the gospel of the kingdom will be preached throughout the whole world" (24,14). And it is in the Gospel of Matthew that the order was given to the Church to set out on a campaign: “Go therefore and teach all nations.” (28,19). It is, of course, obvious that the author of Matthew's Gospel is primarily interested in the Jews, but he foresees the day when all nations will be gathered together.

The Jewish origin and Jewish orientation of the Gospel of Matthew is also evident in its attitude towards the law. Jesus did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Not even the smallest part of the law will pass. There is no need to teach people to break the law. The righteousness of a Christian must exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (5, 17-20). The Gospel of Matthew was written by a man who knew and loved the law, and saw that it had a place in Christian teaching. In addition, we should note the obvious paradox in the attitude of the author of the Gospel of Matthew to the scribes and Pharisees. He recognizes them special powers: “The scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses’ seat; therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do.” (23,2.3). But in no other Gospel are they condemned as strictly and consistently as in Matthew.

Already at the very beginning we see the merciless exposure of the Sadducees and Pharisees by John the Baptist, who called them "born of vipers" (3, 7-12). They complain that Jesus eats and drinks with publicans and sinners (9,11); they declared that Jesus casts out demons not by the power of God, but by the power of the prince of demons (12,24). They are plotting to destroy Him (12,14); Jesus warns the disciples to beware not of the leaven of bread, but of the teachings of the Pharisees and Sadducees (16,12); they are like plants that will be uprooted (15,13); they cannot discern the signs of the times (16,3); they are killers of prophets (21,41). There is no other chapter in the entire New Testament like Mat. 23, in which it is not what the scribes and Pharisees teach that is condemned, but their behavior and way of life. The author condemns them for the fact that they do not at all correspond to the teaching they preach, and do not at all achieve the ideal established by them and for them.

The author of Matthew's Gospel is also very interested in the Church. From all the Synoptic Gospels the word Church found only in the Gospel of Matthew. Only the Gospel of Matthew includes a passage about the Church after Peter's confession at Caesarea Philippi (Matthew 16:13-23; cf. Mark 8:27-33; Luke 9:18-22). Only Matthew says that disputes should be resolved by the Church (18,17). By the time the Gospel of Matthew was written, the Church had become a large organization and indeed the most important factor in the life of Christians.

The Gospel of Matthew especially reflects an interest in the apocalyptic; in other words, to what Jesus spoke about His Second Coming, the end of the world and the Day of Judgment. IN Mat. 24 provides a much more complete account of Jesus' apocalyptic reasoning than any other Gospel. Only in the Gospel of Matthew is there a parable of the talents. (25,14-30); about wise and foolish virgins (25, 1-13); about sheep and goats (25,31-46). Matthew had a special interest in the end times and the Day of Judgment.

But this is not the most important feature Gospel of Matthew. This is in highest degree meaningful gospel.

We have already seen that it was the Apostle Matthew who gathered the first meeting and compiled an anthology of Jesus’ teaching. Matthew was a great systematizer. He collected in one place everything he knew about the teaching of Jesus on this or that issue, and therefore we find in the Gospel of Matthew five large complexes in which the teaching of Christ is collected and systematized. All these five complexes are associated with the Kingdom of God. Here they are:

a) Sermon on the Mount or Law of the Kingdom (5-7)

b) Duty of Kingdom Leaders (10)

c) Parables about the Kingdom (13)

d) Greatness and Forgiveness in the Kingdom (18)

e) The Coming of the King (24,25)

But Matthew not only collected and systematized. We must remember that he wrote in an era before printing, when books were few and far between because they had to be copied by hand. At such a time, comparatively few people had books, and so if they wanted to know and use the story of Jesus, they had to memorize it.

Therefore, Matthew always arranges the material in such a way that it is easy for the reader to remember it. He arranges the material in threes and sevens: three messages of Joseph, three denials of Peter, three questions of Pontius Pilate, seven parables about the Kingdom in chapter 13, sevenfold "woe to you" to the Pharisees and scribes in Chapter 23.

A good example of this is the genealogy of Jesus, with which the Gospel opens. The purpose of a genealogy is to prove that Jesus is the son of David. There are no numbers in Hebrew, they are symbolized by letters; In addition, Hebrew does not have signs (letters) for vowel sounds. David in Hebrew it will be accordingly DVD; if these are taken as numbers rather than letters, their sum would be 14, and the genealogy of Jesus consists of three groups of names, each containing fourteen names. Matthew does his best to arrange Jesus' teachings in a way that people can understand and remember.

Every teacher should be grateful to Matthew, because what he wrote is, first of all, the Gospel for teaching people.

The Gospel of Matthew has one more feature: the dominant thought in it is the thought of Jesus the King. The author writes this Gospel to show the kingship and royal origin of Jesus.

The genealogy must prove from the very beginning that Jesus is the son of King David (1,1-17). This title Son of David is used more often in the Gospel of Matthew than in any other Gospel. (15,22; 21,9.15). The Magi came to see the King of the Jews (2,2); Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem is a deliberately dramatized declaration by Jesus of His rights as King (21,1-11). Before Pontius Pilate, Jesus consciously accepts the title of king (27,11). Even on the Cross above His head stands, albeit mockingly, the royal title (27,37). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus quotes the law and then refutes it with the royal words: “But I say to you...” (5,22. 28.34.39.44). Jesus declares: "All authority has been given to me" (28,18).

In the Gospel of Matthew we see Jesus the Man born to be King. Jesus walks through its pages as if dressed in royal purple and gold.

PURE AND UNCLEAN (Matthew 15:1-9)

It is not necessary to say much that although this passage seems to us one of the most difficult and dark, it is one of the most important in all of the gospel history. It depicts Jesus' clash with the leaders of the orthodox Jewish religion. The very first sentence shows us that the scribes and Pharisees went all the way from Jerusalem to Galilee to ask Jesus their questions. These questions were not posed maliciously. The scribes and Pharisees are not trying to maliciously trap Jesus. They were genuinely confused and soon they were irritated and shocked, because what is important in this passage is not so much the personal clash between Jesus and the Pharisees, but the clash of two different points of view about religion and what God needs.

There could be no compromise, or even a business agreement, between these two points of view. One had to inevitably destroy the other. Thus, this passage contains one of the greatest religious controversies of history. To understand it, we must understand the foundations of the Jewish religion of the Pharisees and Scribes.

In this passage we have the whole concept pure And unclean. We must clearly understand that this idea has nothing to do with physical cleanliness, except perhaps remotely with hygiene. This is an exclusively ritual problem. To be pure meant to be in a state where a person could approach God and honor Him, and to be unclean meant to be in a state where he could neither approach God nor honor Him. Such uncleanness was a consequence of contact with certain people and objects. So, for example, a woman was considered unclean when she had bleeding, even if this bleeding was the most normal monthly bleeding; she was also considered unclean for a certain period after the birth of the child; Every dead body was unclean, and touching it made a person unclean; every pagan was unclean.

This impurity could be transmitted from one to another; she was, so to speak, contagious. For example, if a mouse touched a clay pot, that pot became unclean, and if it did not then undergo a ritual washing procedure, everything in that pot was considered unclean. As a result of this, every person who then touched the pot, ate or drank from what was in it, became unclean; and everyone who touched an unclean person also became unclean.

This idea is not unique to Jews: it is also found in other religions. In the opinion of a Hindu belonging to a higher caste, everyone who does not belong to his caste is unclean. If a member of this higher caste becomes a Christian, he will be even more unclean in the eyes of the members of his caste. The Hindu Premanand, himself a high-caste man, writes that when he became a Christian, his family cast him out. Sometimes he visited his mother, whose heart was literally broken because of what she considered his apostasy, but she continued to love him dearly. Premanand says in this regard: “As soon as my father came to know that I was visiting my mother during the day while he was at work, he ordered the gatekeeper Ram Rapu, a staunch man from central regions country, ... not to let me into the house." Over time, Premananda's mother was able to convince the gatekeeper not to perform his duties so strictly. "My mother prevailed over the gatekeeper Ram Rap and I was allowed to enter her. The prejudice was so strong that even the servants refused to wash the dishes from which my mother fed me. Sometimes my aunt would purify the place where I was sitting by sprinkling it with water from the Ganges River, or water mixed with cow dung." Premanand was unclean in their eyes, and everything he touched became unclean.

It should be noted that all this had nothing to do with morality. Touching certain things entailed impurity, and this impurity excluded a person from the company of other people and from the presence of God. There seemed to be a cloud of infection hanging around certain people and things. This can be better understood if we remember that this idea has not died even in Western civilization, although it has mainly the opposite effect. There are still people who believe that a four-leaf clover or some kind of wooden or metal amulet, or a black cat can bring good luck or bad luck.

Thus, this idea sees religion as something to do with avoiding contact with certain people and things that are considered unclean; and if such contact does occur, perform a certain cleansing ritual in order to cleanse yourself of this impurity. But let's look at this a little deeper.

FOOD THAT MAN EATS (Matthew 15:1-9 (continued))

The law of clean and unclean was also widely applied in another wide area. It outlined everything that a person could eat and what he could not eat. In the broad sense of the word, all fruits and vegetables were clean. But there were strict standards regarding living creatures. They are given in A lion. eleven.

We can summarize them here. Animals that can be eaten are those that have cloven hooves and chew cud. This is why a Jew cannot eat pork, hare or rabbit. Under no circumstances should you eat the meat of an animal that has died of natural causes. (Deut. 14:21). In all cases, all blood must be drained from the carcass; Orthodox Jews still buy meat from kosher a butcher who sells only such meat. Regular fat and lard on meat can be eaten, but fat from the kidneys and other viscera of the peritoneum, which we call kidney or visceral fat, cannot be eaten. Regarding sea food, only animals in the water with fins and scales can be eaten. This means that shellfish, such as lobsters, are unclean. All insects are unclean, with the exception of the common locust. In relation to fish and animals, there is, as we see, a standard text - what you can eat and what you cannot eat. There is no such text for birds, and a list of edible and unfit birds is given in Lev 11:13-21.

There were certain visible reasons for this.

1. Refusal to eat corpses or meat of animals that died a natural death could well be associated with belief in demons. One could easily imagine that such a demon took up residence in such a body and thus penetrates the body of the eater.

2. In other religions, certain animals are considered sacred, for example, in Egypt the cat and the crocodile were sacred, and one can quite naturally assume that the Jews considered everything unclean that other peoples deified. In such a case, the animal would be considered a kind of idol and therefore dangerously unclean.

3. In the very useful book "The Bible and modern medicine" Randle Short points out that some of the rules about clean and unclean food were indeed wise from the point of view of health and hygiene. He writes: "We, it is true, eat pork, hare and rabbit, but they are very susceptible to infection, and their Meat is best eaten only after thorough cooking. The pig is a very picky eater and can be infected with tapeworms and trichinella, which can be transmitted to humans. IN modern conditions the danger is small, but in ancient Palestine everything was different, and therefore such food was better avoided." The prohibition of eating meat with blood, perhaps, comes from the Jewish belief that blood is life. This is a completely natural thought, because, according to "As blood flows out of the body, life also leaves it. And life belongs to God and only God. This is where the prohibition of eating fat comes from. Fat is the most expensive part of the whole carcass, and the most expensive part had to be given to God. In some, although few cases, these prohibitions against eating certain foods were based on common sense.

4. In many other cases, things, animals and beasts were considered unclean without any reason. Taboos are always impossible to explain; they were simply superstitions in which certain animals were associated with good or bad luck, with purity or impurity.

Actually, the things themselves would not have of great importance, but the problem, and the tragedy associated with it, was that for the scribes and Pharisees it all became a matter of life and death. To serve God, to be religious, meant in their eyes to comply with these laws. If you look at it a certain way, you can see where this leads. In the eyes of the Pharisees, the prohibition against eating rabbit or pork was tantamount to God's commandment prohibiting adultery. That is, eating pork or rabbit meat was the same sin as seducing a woman or engaging in illicit sexual intercourse. Religion among the Pharisees was mixed with all sorts of external rules and regulations, and since it is much easier to follow the rules and regulations and control those who do not do so, these rules and regulations become the religion of Orthodox Jews.

WAYS OF CLEANSING (Matthew 15:1-9 (continued))

Now let's see how all this affects our passage. It was quite obvious that it was impossible to comply with all the norms of ritual purification. A person himself can avoid contact with unclean things, but how could he know when he came into contact with some unclean thing on the street? All this was complicated by the fact that there were pagans in Palestine, and even the sand on which the pagan’s feet stepped became unclean.

To combat impurity, an elaborate system of ablutions was developed, which was increasingly improved. At first there was only morning ablution. Then arose an elaborate system of washing the hands, which was first intended for the priests in the temple before they ate their share of the sacrifice. Later, Orthodox Jews began to require these complex ablutions from themselves and from everyone who claimed to be truly religious.

Edersheim's book, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, contains the most refined forms of ablution. Jugs of water were kept ready for ablution before meals. The minimum amount of water consumed was one and a half eggshells. First, water was poured onto both hands, fingers raised up; the water had to flow down the hand to the wrist, after which the water had to flow from the wrist, because now the water itself was unclean, because it had come into contact with unclean hands, and if it began to flow down the fingers again, the fingers would again become unclean. The procedure was repeated, with the hands now held in the opposite direction, with the fingers pointing down, and then each hand was cleansed by rubbing the clenched fist of the other hand. A true Orthodox Jew did all this not only before meals, but also between all dishes.

The Orthodox Jewish leaders asked Jesus the question: “Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.”

They talk about legends of the elders. For the Jew, the law consisted of two parts: written law contained in Scripture itself, and oral law which boiled down to improvements and modifications, such as washing hands, etc., which were formulated by scribes and other experts over many generations. These modifications constituted the legends of the elders, and they were considered just as, if not even more binding, than the written law. And again we must stop to emphasize what is most clear - in the understanding of the Orthodox Jew by religion and was this ritual ceremony. This, in their opinion, is what God required. To do all this meant to satisfy God's demands and to be a good person. In other words, all this fuss around the ritual ablution was considered as important and obligatory as the Ten Commandments. Religion began to be identified with a mass of ostentatious rules. Washing your hands was considered as important as keeping the commandment: “Thou shalt not covet the things of others.”

BREAKING GOD'S LAW AND KEEPING THE COMMANDMENTS OF MAN (Matthew 15:1-9 (continued))

Jesus did not directly answer the Pharisees' question, but rather demonstrated by example how the oral ritual law generally functions in order to show that its observance is not at all observance of God's law and may even be completely contrary to it.

Jesus says that God's law says that a person must honor his parents; but, Jesus continues, if a person says: “This is a gift (to God),” then he is released from the obligation to honor his father and mother. If you look at the parallel passage in the Gospel of Mark, you can see that this phrase looks like this: " corvan, that is, a gift to God" [in Hebrew: korban]. What is the meaning of this obscure passage? It can have two meanings because the word korban has two meanings.

1. Korban may mean that which is dedicated to God. If a person had a needy father or mother, and if the poor parent turned to him for help, he had a way of avoiding the duty of helping them. He could, so to speak, officially dedicate all his property and all his money to God and the Temple and then his property was korban, dedicated to God, and he could say to his father or mother: “I’m sorry, but I can’t give you anything: all my property is dedicated to God.” He could take advantage of ritual custom to escape his primary duty of honoring and helping his father and mother; he could have recourse to a rule devised by the scribes to nullify one of the Ten Commandments.

2. But korban has another meaning, and it may well be that it is this second meaning that is used here. Word korban used as an oath. A person could say to his father or mother:

"Korban, if I help you with anything from what I have." Let us assume that he had remorse, and that he said this in anger, at a moment of irritation or excitement; maybe others, kinder and more peaceful thoughts and he felt that he still had to help his parent. In such a case, every prudent person would say that this person sincerely repented, and that such a change is a good sign, and since he is now ready to do the right thing and fulfill the law of God, he must be supported in this.

And the strict scribe said: “No. Our law says that an oath cannot be broken,” and he quoted Number 30.3:“If a person makes a vow to the Lord, or swears an oath, placing a vow on his soul, then he should not break his word, but must fulfill everything that came out of his mouth.” The scribe would assert, relying on the law: “You took an oath, and under no circumstances can you break it.” In other words, the scribes would argue that a person must keep a thoughtlessly given oath, which forced him to transgress the higher law of humanity given by God.

This is what Jesus meant: “You use your interpretations, your traditions and traditions to force a person to act dishonorably towards his father and his mother even when he himself has repented and realized what he should do right.”

Strange and tragic as it may seem, the scribes and Pharisees of that time opposed what the greatest Jewish thinkers taught. Rabbi Eliezer said, “The door is open to a man concerning his father and mother,” and by this he meant that if a man who took an oath that offended his father and mother, and then repented of it, is free to change his mind and act differently, even if he took an oath. As always, Jesus did not tell people truths they did not know, but only reminded them of what God had already told them, and what they already knew, but forgot because they preferred their cunningly composed rules to the great simplicity of God's law.

Here is the divergence and clash, here is the competition between two types of religion and two forms of worship of God. For the scribes and Pharisees, religion was the observance of certain visible rules, norms and rituals, such as the proper washing of hands before eating. In the teachings of Jesus, reverence for God comes from the heart of man, and it is manifested in compassion and kindness, which are above the law.

In the understanding of the scribes and Pharisees, worship was a ritual ritual law, and in the understanding of Jesus, worship is a person’s pure heart and loving life. This discrepancy still exists today. What is worship? Even today, many will say that a divine service is not a divine service at all unless it is performed by a priest, ordained according to a certain procedure, in a building consecrated in a certain way and with a liturgy established by a certain church. But all these are just external, visible moments.

One of the greatest definitions of worship was given by William Temple: "Worship is the awareness of the holiness of God, the saturation of the truth of God, the contemplation of the beauty of God, the receiving into the heart of the love of God, and the conscious submission to the will of God." We, too, must beware of the obvious blindness of the scribes and Pharisees, external ritualism, and not find ourselves in the same shortcomings. True religion can never be based only on rites and rituals; it must always be based on the personal relationship of man to man, and man to God.

REAL VIRTUE AND REAL EVIL (Matthew 15:10-20)

It may well be that for a Jew this was the most amazing thing that Jesus ever said, because here He is not only condemning the ritual and ceremonial religion of the scribes and Pharisees. He, in fact, discards large sections of the Book of Leviticus. This is not only a discrepancy with the traditions of our ancestors; this is a discrepancy with Scripture itself. This statement of Jesus invalidates and erases all Old Testament laws regarding clean and unclean foods. These laws may perhaps still remain in force in the area of ​​health and cleanliness, common sense and medical wisdom, but they have forever lost their power in the religious sphere. Jesus declares once and for all that it is not a person's observance of rituals that is important, but the state of his heart.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the scribes and Pharisees were shocked. The very foundation of their religion was cut out from under their feet. Jesus' statement was not only alarming, it was downright revolutionary. If Jesus was right, then their whole theory of religion was wrong. They identified religion and pleasing God with rules and regulations regarding cleanliness and uncleanness, what one ate, and how one washed one's hands before eating. Jesus identified religion with the condition of the human heart. He clearly said that all these rules and regulations of the Pharisees and scribes have nothing to do with religion. Jesus said that the Pharisees are blind leaders who have no idea about the way of God, and that if people follow them, then only one thing awaits them - they will lose their way and fall into a pit.

1. If religion consists of external, visible rules and their observance, then two consequences follow from this. Firstly, such a religion too simple and easy. It is much easier to abstain from certain foods and wash your hands in a certain way, than to love the unpleasant and unattractive and help the needy at the expense of your time and your money, sacrificing your comfort and your pleasures.

But we have not yet fully understood this lesson. Going to church regularly, giving generously to the church, being a member of a Bible study group - all this is external, visible. This is a means to religion, but it is not faith. It is never a bad idea to remind ourselves that faith lies in personal relationships, in our relationship to God and to our fellow men.

Further, if religion consists of observing external rules and norms, then it is only confuse. Many people outwardly have a completely impeccable life, but in their souls they have the most bitter and vicious thoughts. Jesus teaches that keeping even all the external and visible standards in the world will not redeem a heart in which pride, bitterness and lust reign.

2. Jesus teaches that what matters in a person is his heart. "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God" (Matthew 5:8).

For God it is not so important How we arrive, how much Why That's how we do it; not like us we actually do but what we we want to do in the depths of our hearts."Man," said Thomas Aquinas, "sees deeds. God sees intentions."

Jesus teaches - and His teaching condemns each of us - that no one can call himself good just because he observes external, visible rules and norms; Only he is kind who has a pure heart. And this is the end of all pride, and therefore each of us can only say: “God! Be merciful to me, a sinner!” (Luke 18:13)

FAITH TESTED AND JUSTIFIED (Matthew 15:21-28)

There is deep meaning in this passage. Among other things, this is the only recorded time when Jesus was outside the territory of Palestine. Greatest meaning of this passage is that it foreshadows the spread of the gospel throughout the world; it shows the beginning of the end of all barriers and obstacles.

For Jesus it was a time of conscious withdrawal. He chose this area knowing that the end was approaching and He needed a little peace so He could prepare for it. He did not so much want to prepare Himself as He needed time to prepare the disciples for His suffering. He needed to tell them something that they had yet to understand.

There was no place in Palestine where He could be sure that no one would disturb His solitude; Wherever He went, the people followed Him everywhere. And so He headed straight north, through Galilee, until He came to the territory of Sidon and Tire, where the Phoenicians lived. There He could, at least for a time, be safe from the malicious hostility of the scribes and Pharisees and from the dangerous popularity of the people, because not a single Jew would follow Him into the territory of the Gentiles.

In this passage we see Jesus seeking peace before the troubles of His end. This should not be understood as escape; He is preparing Himself and His disciples for the last and decisive battle, which was already so close.

But Jesus, even in these foreign lands, was not free from the urgent demands of needy people. One woman's daughter suffered severely. This woman must have heard from somewhere about the miracles that Jesus could perform; she followed Him and His disciples, desperately asking for help. At first Jesus seemed to take no notice of her at all. His disciples were embarrassed by His behavior and asked Him to grant her request and let her go. The disciples did not say this out of compassion at all; on the contrary, the woman simply disturbed them and they wanted only one thing - to get rid of her as soon as possible. Giving something to a person in order to get rid of him because he has become a nuisance is done quite often. But this is not at all a response of Christian love, regret and sympathy.

But there was a problem for Jesus: we cannot doubt for a minute that He was filled with compassion for this woman, but she was a pagan. But she was not only a pagan - she was a Canaanite, and the Canaanites had been enemies of the Israelites for a long time. It was at that time, or a little later, that the historian Josephus wrote: “Of the Phoenicians, the inhabitants of Tyre are the worst against us.” As we have already seen, in order for Jesus' power and influence to be fully realized, He had to, like a wise general, limit His purposes. He had to start with the Jews; and then a pagan woman asked for help. Jesus only needed to awaken true faith in the woman’s heart.

And so Jesus finally turned to her: “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” To call a person a dog meant to insult him mortally and contemptuously. The Jews spoke with insulting arrogance about "pagan dogs", "infidel dogs", and later about "Christian dogs". At that time, dogs were dirty animals, eating garbage on the street, skinny, wild, and often sick. But you need to pay attention to the following:

Tone and look matter a lot. A tough-sounding phrase can be said with a disarming smile. You can call your friend a derogatory name with a smile and a tone that takes the snarkiness out of the words and fills them with love. We can be quite sure that the smile of Jesus and the feeling of compassion in His eyes took away the offensiveness and harshness from His words.

Secondly, in the original Greek the diminutive degree of the word is used dogs (cunaria), A qunaria - These were small domestic dogs, different from the stray dogs that filled the streets with barking and squealing, rummaging through garbage.

The woman was Greek; she quickly understood and answered with Greek wit: “It is true,” she said, “but even dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” And Jesus’ eyes lit up with joy at the sight of such strong faith, and He blessed her and gave her the healing of her daughter.

FAITH THAT WINS BLESSINGS (Matthew 15:21-28 continued)

It is worth noting some facts about this woman.

1. First, and above all, in her heart was Love. As one theologian said about her: “The misfortune of her child became her misfortune.” She may have been a pagan, but she had in her heart the love for her child, which is always a reflection of God's love for His children. This love pushed her to turn to a stranger; this love made her persevere even when she was met with deafening silence; this love made her calmly endure a seemingly harsh refusal; the same love gave her the ability to see the compassion behind Jesus' words. The driving force in this woman's heart was love, and there is nothing that would be stronger and that would be closer to God than love.

2. This woman had faith.

a) This faith grew up from fellowship with Jesus. At first she called Him Son of David. It was a well-known, common political title. This title was used to call Jesus, the great miracle worker, in the world terrestrial strength and glory. This woman came to ask the favor of the great and all-powerful person. She came with some kind of superstitious feeling with which one comes to a sorcerer. Then she called Him Lord.

Jesus seemed to force her to look at Himself, and she saw in him something that cannot be expressed in words at all, something truly Divine, and it was precisely this feeling that Jesus wanted to awaken in her before fulfilling her persistent request. He wanted her to see that it is not necessary to treat request to great man, and with a prayer to the Living God. You can see this woman's faith growing as she stands face to face with Christ until she finally sees, albeit very distantly, who He really is.

b) This faith manifested itself with worship. The woman first followed Jesus and ended up kneeling; She started with a request and ended with a plea. We should always approach Jesus with a sense of admiration for His greatness, and only then turn to Him with our requests and needs.

3. This woman had iron persistence. Nothing could discourage her. As someone said, many people pray only because they don't want to miss an opportunity: they don't really believe in prayer, they just feel that maybe something will happen. This woman did not come to Jesus because she thought He might help her—He was her only hope. She came with full hope, with a keen sense of need, and refusal could not discourage her. Her prayer was supremely powerful seriousness. For her, prayer was not a formal ritual, but an outpouring of the burning desire of her soul, which felt that it could not be satisfied with refusal.

4. The woman had a special the gift of cheerfulness. She had big problems and troubles, everything was very serious, and she could still smile; she was cheerful. God loves a bright, joyful faith, whose eyes shine with hope, which can always illuminate the darkness.

This woman brought to Jesus a beautiful and bold love and a growing faith as she knelt before Jesus, a firm insistence on an unshakable hope, and an unflagging cheerfulness. Such faith will be heard in your prayers.

BREAD OF LIFE (Matthew 15:29-39)

We have already seen that Jesus, going to the borders of Phenicia, deliberately left the sphere of Jewish everyday life for a while in order to be able to prepare Himself and prepare His disciples for the last days before His suffering. One of the difficulties is that the Gospels do not give precise times and dates; we have to establish them ourselves, using all kinds of hints that can be found in the narrative. In this case, we find that the departure of Jesus and his disciples from the Jewish regions lasted much longer than one might imagine from a quick reading.

Feeding the Five Thousand (Matthew 14:15-21; Mark 6:31-44) took place in the spring, because in this hot country the grass cannot be green at any other time (Matt. 14:19; Mark 6:39). After a conflict with the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus went to the region of Tire and Sidon (Mark 7:24; Matt 15:21). This journey on foot in itself was difficult.

The next starting point for determining time and place is found at Mar. 7.31:.“Having left the borders of Tire and Sidon, Jesus again went to the Sea of ​​Galilee through the borders of the Decapolis.” It's a strange way to travel. Sidon is located north from Tire, and the Sea of ​​Galilee - to the south from Tire; The Decapolis was a unification of Greek cities on the eastern shore of the Sea of ​​Galilee. In other words, Jesus went on North, to get in South: He seemed to go through the top of the triangle to get from one corner of the base of the triangle to another corner of the base. This, as they say, is to walk from Leningrad to Moscow via Kazan or Perm. It is clear that Jesus deliberately delayed His journey so that He could remain with His disciples as long as possible before leaving for Jerusalem.

Finally, He came to the Decapolis, where, as we know from Mar. 7.31, the incident described in our passage occurred. This is where we find the next instruction. In this case, He ordered the people to lie down on the ground (epi ten gen), on the ground; It was late summer and all the grass had dried up, leaving bare ground.

In other words, this northern journey took Jesus almost six months. We know nothing of what happened during these six months, but we can be quite sure that these were the most important months in the lives of His disciples, because during these months Jesus purposefully taught and trained them to perceive the truth. We must remember that the disciples were with Jesus for six months before the time of testing came.

Many theologians believe that the feeding of the five thousand and the feeding of the four thousand are just different versions of the same event, but this is not the case. As we have seen, the events took place in different time: the first happened in the spring, the second in the summer; people and places differ. The feeding of the four thousand took place in Decapolis, in Greek Decapolis, that is ten cities. The Decapolis was a loose union of ten independent Greek cities. At the same time, many pagans should have been present, perhaps more than Jews. This fact explains the strange phrase in 15,31: "the people... glorified God of Israel."

In the eyes of the Gentiles, this was a manifestation of the power of the God of Israel. There is another small indication that these are different events. In the account of the feeding of the five thousand, the baskets that were used to collect the fragments are called caffeine, and in the account of the feeding of the four thousand they are called sfurides. Kofinos was a bottle-shaped basket with a narrow neck, which the Jews often carried with them and their food in it, so as not to be forced to eat food that had been touched by the hands of the pagans, and which was therefore unclean. Sfurides was more like our basket with a lid; it could be very large - so large that a person could be carried in it. This type of basket was used by the pagans.

The strangeness and miracle of this healing and this feeding is that the mercy and compassion of Jesus extended to the Gentiles. This is a kind of symbol and foreshadowing of the fact that the bread of life is intended not only for the Jews, but also for the pagans, who should also have a part with Him who is the bread of life.

THE MERCY OF JESUS ​​(Matthew 15:29-39 (continued))

This passage reveals to us the full extent of the mercy and goodness of Jesus Christ. We see how He alleviates every human need.

1. We see Him healing the physical infirmity. The lame, the maimed, the blind and the deaf were brought to His feet, and He healed them. Jesus is endlessly concerned with the physical suffering of the world, and those who bring health and healing to people are still doing the work of Jesus Christ today.

2. We see that Jesus cares about tired. The people are tired, and He wants to strengthen them for a long and difficult road. Jesus cares endlessly for the travelers and workers of the world whose eyes are weary and whose hands have fallen.

3. We see Jesus feeding hungry. We see that He gives all He has to alleviate physical hunger and physical need. Jesus cares endlessly for a person's body as well as for their soul.

Here we see God's power and compassion poured out to meet man's many needs. A wonderful thought was made in connection with this passage. Jesus ends all three successive stages of His ministry with the feeding of His people. First it was the feeding of the five thousand at the end of the Galilee ministry, because after that Jesus never again taught, preached, or healed in Galilee. The second is the feeding of the four thousand - at the end of His short ministry to the pagans, outside Palestine, first in the region of Tire and Sidon, and then in the Decapolis. The third and last is the Last Supper in Jerusalem at the end of His stay in the flesh.

And this is a wonderful thought: Jesus always left people after giving them strength for the journey; He always gathered people around Him to satisfy them with the bread of life; before we go any further. He always gave Himself to them. And today He comes to us, offering us bread that will satisfy our immortal soul and give strength throughout our lives.

Commentary (introduction) to the entire book of Matthew

Comments on Chapter 15

In the grandeur of the concept and the force with which the mass of material is subordinated to great ideas, no Scripture of the New or Old Testaments dealing with historical subjects can be compared with the Gospel of Matthew.

Theodore Zahn

Introduction

I. SPECIAL POSITION IN THE CANON

The Gospel of Matthew is an excellent bridge between the Old and New Testaments. From the very first words we return to the forefather of the Old Testament people of God Abraham and to the first great King David of Israel. Due to its emotionality, strong Jewish flavor, many quotations from the Jewish Scriptures and position at the head of all books of the New Testament. Matthew represents the logical place from which the Christian message to the world begins its journey.

That Matthew the Publican, also called Levi, wrote the first Gospel, is ancient and universal opinion.

Since he was not a regular member of the apostolic group, it would seem strange if the first Gospel was attributed to him when he had nothing to do with it.

Except for the ancient document known as the Didache ("Teaching of the Twelve Apostles"), Justin Martyr, Dionysius of Corinth, Theophilus of Antioch and Athenagoras the Athenian regard the Gospel as reliable. Eusebius, the church historian, quotes Papias, who stated that "Matthew wrote "Logic" in the Hebrew language, and each one interprets it as he can." Irenaeus, Pantaine and Origen generally agree on this. It is widely believed that "Hebrew" is a dialect of Aramaic used by the Jews in the time of our Lord, as this word occurs in the NT. But what is "logic"? Usually this Greek word means "revelations", because in the OT there are revelations God's. In Papias's statement it cannot have such a meaning. There are three main points of view on his statement: (1) it refers to Gospel from Matthew as such. That is, Matthew wrote the Aramaic version of his Gospel specifically in order to win Jews to Christ and instruct Jewish Christians, and only later did the Greek version appear; (2) it only applies to statements Jesus, which were later transferred to his Gospel; (3) it refers to "testimony", i.e. quotes from Old Testament Scriptures to show that Jesus is the Messiah. The first and second opinions are more likely.

Matthew's Greek does not read as an explicit translation; but such a widespread tradition (in the absence of early disagreements) must have a factual basis. Tradition says that Matthew preached in Palestine for fifteen years, and then went to evangelize foreign countries. It is possible that around 45 AD. he left to the Jews who accepted Jesus as their Messiah the first draft of his Gospel (or simply lectures about Christ) in Aramaic, and later did Greek final version for universal use. Joseph, a contemporary of Matthew, did the same. This Jewish historian made the first draft of his "Jewish War" in Aramaic , and then finalized the book in Greek.

Internal evidence The first Gospels are very suitable for a pious Jew who loved the OT and was a gifted writer and editor. As a civil servant of Rome, Matthew had to be fluent in both languages: his people (Aramaic) and those in power. (The Romans used Greek, not Latin, in the East.) The details of numbers, parables involving money, financial terms, and an expressive, regular style were all perfectly suited to his profession as a tax collector. The highly educated, non-conservative scholar accepts Matthew as the author of this Gospel in part and under the influence of his compelling internal evidence.

Despite such universal external and corresponding internal evidence, most scientists reject The traditional opinion is that this book was written by the publican Matthew. They justify this for two reasons.

First: if count, that Ev. Mark was the first written Gospel (referred to in many circles today as "gospel truth"), why would the apostle and eyewitness use so much of Mark's material? (93% of Mark's Gospels are also in the other Gospels.) In answer to this question, first of all we will say: not proven that Ev. Mark was written first. Ancient evidence says that the first was Ev. from Matthew, and since the first Christians were almost all Jews, this makes a lot of sense. But even if we agree with the so-called "Markian majority" (and many conservatives do), Matthew might concede that Mark's work for the most part created under the influence of the energetic Simon Peter, co-apostle with Matthew, as early statements claim church traditions(See "Introduction" to Ev. from Mark).

The second argument against the book being written by Matthew (or another eyewitness) is the lack of vivid details. Mark, whom no one considers to be a witness to the ministry of Christ, has colorful details from which it can be assumed that he himself was present at this. How could an eyewitness write so dryly? Probably, the very characteristics of the publican’s character explain this very well. To give more space to our Lord's speeches, Levi had to give less space to unnecessary details. The same would have happened with Mark if he had written first, and Matthew had seen the traits inherent directly in Peter.

III. WRITING TIME

If the widespread belief that Matthew first wrote the Aramaic version of the Gospel (or at least the sayings of Jesus) is correct, then the date of writing is 45 AD. e., fifteen years after the ascension, completely coincides with ancient legends. He probably completed his more complete, canonical Gospel in Greek in 50-55, and perhaps later.

The view that the Gospel there must be written after the destruction of Jerusalem (70 AD), is based, rather, on disbelief in the ability of Christ to predict future events in detail and other rationalistic theories that ignore or reject inspiration.

IV. PURPOSE OF WRITING AND TOPIC

Matthew was a young man when Jesus called him. A Jew by birth and a publican by profession, he left everything in order to follow Christ. One of his many rewards was that he was one of the twelve apostles. Another is his election to be the author of the work that we know as the first Gospel. It is usually believed that Matthew and Levi are one person (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27).

In his Gospel, Matthew sets out to show that Jesus is the long-awaited Messiah of Israel, the only legitimate contender for the throne of David.

The book does not purport to be a complete account of the life of Christ. It begins with His genealogy and childhood, then moves on to the beginning of His public ministry, when He was about thirty years of age. Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, Matthew selects those aspects of the Savior's life and ministry that testify to Him as Anointed God (which is what the word “Messiah” or “Christ” means). The book takes us to the culmination of events: the suffering, death, resurrection and ascension of the Lord Jesus.

And in this culmination, of course, lies the basis for human salvation.

That is why the book is called "The Gospel" - not so much because it paves the way for sinners to receive salvation, but because it describes the sacrificial ministry of Christ, thanks to which this salvation was made possible.

Bible Commentaries for Christians does not aim to be exhaustive or technical, but rather to inspire personal reflection and study of the Word. And most of all, they are aimed at creating in the reader’s heart desire return of the King.

"And even I, with my heart burning more and more,
And even I, nourishing sweet hope,
I sigh heavily, my Christ,
About the hour when you return,
Losing courage at the sight
Burning steps of Your coming."

F. W. G. Mayer ("St. Paul")

Plan

GENEALOGY AND BIRTH OF THE MESSIAH-KING (CHAPTER 1)

THE EARLY YEARS OF THE MESSIAH KING (CHAPTER 2)

PREPARATION FOR THE MESSIANIC MINISTRY AND ITS BEGINNING (CHAP. 3-4)

ORDER OF THE KINGDOM (CHAP. 5-7)

MIRACLES OF GRACE AND POWERS CREATED BY THE MESSIAH AND DIFFERENT REACTIONS TO THEM (8.1 - 9.34)

GROWING OPPOSITION AND REJECTION OF THE MESSIAH (CHAP. 11-12)

THE KING REJECTED BY ISRAEL DECLARES A NEW, INTERMEDIATE FORM OF THE KINGDOM (CHAPTER 13)

THE MESSIAH'S TIRESLESS GRACE MEETS INCREASING HOSTILITY (14:1 - 16:12)

THE KING PREPARES HIS DISCIPLES (16.13 - 17.27)

THE KING GIVES INSTRUCTION TO HIS DISCIPLES (CHAP. 18-20)

INTRODUCTION AND REJECTION OF THE KING (CHAP. 21-23)

THE KING'S SPEECH ON THE MOUNT OF OLIVES (CHAP. 24-25)

SUFFERING AND DEATH OF THE KING (CHAP. 26-27)

TRIUMPH OF THE KING (CHAPTER 28)

D. Dirt comes from within (15.1-20)

It is often easy to notice that Matthew does not follow chronology in the early chapters. But, from the 14th chapter to the end, events are mostly presented according to the order in which they occurred.

Chapter 15 also maintains an orderly sequence. First, the long dispute and squabble of the scribes and Pharisees (vv. 1-20) foreshadows Israel's rejection of the Messiah. Second, the faith of the Canaanite woman (vv. 21-28) illustrates how the gospel is being extended to the Gentiles in the present age.

Finally, the healing of the great crowds (vv. 29-31) and the feeding of the four thousand (vv. 32-39) point to a future thousand-year period of worldwide health and prosperity.

15,1-2 Scribes and Pharisees were relentless in their efforts to catch the Savior. From Jerusalem their delegation came and accused students Jesus is unclean because they eat unwashed hands, thus violating legends of the elders. In order to appreciate this incident, we must understand the reference to clean and unclean and we must know what exactly the Pharisees meant by washing. In general, the concept of pure and unclean originates in the OT. The uncleanness of which the disciples were accused was absolutely ritualistic. If, for example, a person touched a dead body or ate something known to be unclean, he became technically unclean—he could not ritually worship God. Before he could approach God, God's law required that he undergo ritual purification.

But the elders added traditions to the cleansing rituals. They insisted that the Jew, before he began to eat, subject his hands to a thorough process of cleansing: he had to wash not only his hands, but his arms up to the elbows. If he visited the bazaar, he had to take a ritual bath. Thus, the Pharisees accused the disciples of not observing all the rules sufficiently. complex system ablutions prescribed by Jewish tradition.

15,3-6 The Lord Jesus reminded His critics that they had violated commandment of the Lord, not just tradition elders. The law commanded read their parents, which, if necessary, included financial support. But the scribes and Pharisees (and many others) did not want to spend their money on supporting their elderly parents. So they came up with a tradition to avoid responsibility. If father or mother asked them for help, they only had to say: “All the money that I should use to help you has already been dedicated to God therefore I cannot give them to you." Having uttered this formula, they found themselves free from financial responsibility for their parents.

Following such a cunning tradition, they thus annulled the Word God's which commanded them to take care of their parents.

15,7-9 Skillfully twisting words, they fulfilled the prophecy Isaiah(29.13). They testified that honor God with their tongue, but their heart is far away From him. Their worship of God was futile because they gave more preference to human traditions than to the Word of God.

15,10 -11 By contacting to the people Jesus made an announcement of the greatest importance. He stated that It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but rather, then what comes out of the mouth. We can hardly appreciate the revolutionary nature of this statement. According to the Levitical code, what entered the mouth desecrated a person. Jews were forbidden to eat the meat of any animal that did not have cloven hooves or chew the cud. They were not allowed to eat fish unless it had scales and fins. God gave them detailed instructions regarding clean and unclean food.

The Legislator was now preparing the way for the abolition of the whole system of ceremonial impurity. He said that the food His disciples ate with unwashed hands did not defile them. But the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees is the real defilement.

15,15 Undoubtedly, the disciples were shocked by such a complete revolution in the teaching they knew about clean and unclean food. For them it was like parable, those. unclear, hidden narrative. Peter expressed their bewilderment on this issue when he asked for an explanation.

15,16 -17 The Lord was at first surprised at their slow ability to understand, then explained that real defilement is moral, not physical. Essentially, food is neither pure nor unclean. In reality, no material thing in itself is harmful; it is bad when it is abused. The food that a person eats enters his mouth, passes into his stomach for digestion, then undigested remains erupt out.

The moral essence is not affected, only the body. Today we know that “every creation of God is good and nothing is blameworthy if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer” (1 Tim. 4:4-5). Of course, this passage is not talking about poisonous plants, but about products that are created by God for human consumption. All things are good and should be eaten with thanksgiving. If a person is allergic to or intolerant to certain foods, he should not eat them; but in general we should eat with confidence that God is using food to sustain us physically.

15,18 If food does not defile, then what does? Jesus answered: "...what comes from the mouth comes from the heart; it defiles a person." Here the heart is not the organ that pumps blood, but the corrupted source of human urges and desires. This part of a person's moral nature makes itself known through corrupt thoughts, dirty words, and evil deeds.

15,19 -20 Man is desecrated evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness and blasphemy(in Greek this word also means slandering others).

The scribes and Pharisees were especially zealous in the ostentatious, scrupulous observance of the ritual of washing their hands. But their inner life was desecrated. They emphasized the little things and turned a blind eye to matters of real importance. They may have criticized the disciples for not following soulless traditions, but they themselves were conspiring to kill the Son of God and be guilty of the entire list of sins listed in verse 19.

E. The pagan woman receives a blessing for her faith (15:21-28)

15,21 -22 Jesus retired to the countries of Tire and Sidon on the shore Mediterranean Sea. To our knowledge, this is the only time during His public ministry that He was outside of Jewish territory. Here in Phenicia, a Canaanite woman asked to be healed demon-possessed daughter.

It is very important to understand that this woman was not a Jew, but a pagan. She was a Canaanite by origin, from an immoral tribe that God destined to disappear from the face of the earth. Because of Israel's disobedience, some of them survived the Israelite invasion of Canaan under Joshua, and this woman was a descendant of those survivors. Being a pagan, she did not enjoy the privileges given by God to His chosen people. She was a stranger with no hope. Due to her position, she could not demand anything from God or the Messiah.

When talking to Jesus, she addressed Him as The Lord, son of David. This was the title that the Jews used to talk about the Messiah. Although Jesus really was son of David the pagans had no right to turn to Him on this basis. That's why He didn't answer her at first.

15,23 The disciples came and asked Him to send her away, she annoyed them. For Him, she was a good example of faith and a vessel in which grace would shine. But first He must test and train her faith.

15,24-25 He reminded her that His mission was to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and not against the Gentiles, especially the Canaanites. But such an obvious refusal did not frighten her. Dropping the title “Son of David,” she bowed to Him, saying: "God help me". If she did not have the right to approach Him as a Jew to her Messiah, she could approach as a creature to her Creator.

15,26 Wanting to further test the authenticity of her faith, Jesus told her that not good take away food from the Jewish children to give bread to the Gentiles dogs. If this sounds rude to us, then we must remember that the purpose of these words is not to hurt her, but, on the contrary, like a surgeon’s scalpel, to heal her. Yes, she was a pagan.

Jews looked at the Gentiles as dirty, stray dogs roaming the streets in search of food. However, Jesus used a word here that means little pet puppies. The question was: did she realize that she was unworthy to receive the least of His mercies?

15,27 Her answer was perfect. She completely agreed with Jesus' characterization. Taking the place of an unworthy pagan, she surrendered herself to His mercy, love and grace. She finally said, "You're right! I'm just one of the small dogs, located under the table. But I notice that sometimes crumbs fall from the table on the floor. Let me get some crumbs. I am not worthy for You to heal my daughter, but I beg You to do this for one of Your unworthy creations."

15,28 Jesus praised her for great faith. While the unbelieving children had no need for bread, here was one who recognized herself as a “dog” and asked Him with tears.

Her faith was rewarded, her daughter immediately healed. The fact that the Lord healed the Gentile daughter from a distance suggests that His ministry at the right hand of God is now to provide spiritual healing to the Gentiles in this age, while His ancient people are bypassed as a nation.

G. Jesus heals many people (15:29-31)

In Mark (7:31) we read that the Lord left Tire and went north to Sidon, then east through the Jordan and south through the Decapolis. There, by the Sea of ​​Galilee, He healed the lame, the blind, the dumb, the maimed and many others. Surprised people glorified the God of Israel. There is a strong belief that this was among the pagan neighboring peoples. People, identifying Jesus and His disciples with Israel, correctly concluded that he worked among them God of Israel.

H. Feeding of the four thousand (15.32-36)

15,32 Inattentive or critical readers of Scripture, confusing this event with the feeding of the five thousand, accused the Bible of copying, contradiction, and miscounting. The fact is that these are two different events, and they complement each other rather than contradict one another.

After being with the Lord for three days in people the food is over. He couldn't let them go hungry - they might get weak on the road.

15,33-34 Again His students they were at a loss before the problem of doing the impossible - feeding such a mass of people. This time they only had seven loaves and several fish.

15,35-36 As with the five thousand, Jesus made the people sit down, gave thanks, broke bread and fish and gave to His disciples for them to distribute. He waits for the students to do what they can, and then he steps in and does what they can't.

15,37-39 When people satiated collected seven large baskets leftover food. The number of those who ate was four thousand people, excluding women and children. In the next chapter we will see that the statistics regarding these two miracles of feeding the people are important (16:8-12). Every detail of the biblical narrative is full of meaning. Having dismissed the people, our Lord sailed on boat V Magdala, located on the western shore of the Sea of ​​Galilee.

How to use the data interpretation of the 15th chapter of the Gospel of Matthew?

1. The title number is the number of the verse or verses that will be discussed.
2. The Scriptures follow in logical order.
3. After reflecting on them and connecting it into a logical chain, you will understand the essence of the place under discussion, its true meaning.

Matthew 15:1-6

1 Then the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem came to Jesus and said: 2 Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they do not wash their hands when they eat bread. 3 And he answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” 4 For God has commanded: Honor your father and mother; and: He who curses his father or mother shall die by death. 5 But you say: if someone says to his father or mother, “This is a gift [to God] that you would use from me,” 6 he may not honor his father or his mother; Thus you have made void the commandment of God by your tradition.

• Both today and in the days of Christ, there were additional traditions, rituals and rules invented by carnal people, not born of the Holy Spirit. Such believers are not able to understand the ESSENCE of the commandments given through Moses. The Apostle Paul, on the contrary, wrote about himself (and his brothers) this way: “But God has revealed [this] to us by His Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. Which we speak not in words taught by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Holy Spirit, comparing spiritual with spiritual” (1 Cor. 2:10,13).
  In some cases, the "Law of Moses" did require washing with water and washing clothes - however, this was an image pointing to the spiritual cleansing of believers by the "water" - the Spirit of God. By demonstrating such fruits of the “water” Spirit as: love, goodness, mercy, faith, etc. , the Pharisees and their followers would have received true cleansing by accepting the true “Bread” of Christ.
• 1 And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying: 31 So guard the children of Israel from their uncleanness, lest they die in their uncleanness, defiling My habitation which is among them: ((see Lev 15:1,31))
• 1 Then Jesus began to speak to the people and to His disciples, 2 and said, “The scribes and Pharisees sat in the seat of Moses; 4(a) they bind heavy and unbearable burdens and lay them on people’s shoulders. 25 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you purify the outside of the cup and the platter, while inside they are full of robbery and unrighteousness. 23(c, d) and left the most important things in the law: judgment, mercy and faith; this had to be done, and this should not be abandoned. (Matthew 23:1,2,4(a),25,23(c,d))
• Proverbs 30:12,11,13 12 There is a generation that is clean in its own eyes, but is not washed from its filthiness. 11 There is a generation that curses its father and does not bless its mother. 13 There is a generation - oh, how arrogant are its eyes, and how lifted are its eyelashes!

Matthew 15:7-9

7 Hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied well about you, saying: 8 This people draws near to Me with their lips, and honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me; 9 But in vain they worship Me, teaching doctrines the commandments of men.

• 1 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: (Exodus 25:1)
• 20 Behold, I am sending an angel before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. 21 Watch yourself before Him and listen to His voice; do not persist against Him, for He will not forgive your sin, for My name is in Him. (Exodus 23:20,21)
• 37 This is the Moses who said to the children of Israel: The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your brothers; Listen to him. 38 This is he who was in the meeting in the wilderness with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, and who received living words to pass on to us (Acts 7:37,38)
• 14(a) And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; (John 1:14(a))
• 43 I came in the name of My Father, and you do not receive Me; but if another comes in his own name, you will receive him. 44 How can you believe when you receive glory from one another, but do not seek the glory that is from the One God? 42 But I know you: you do not have the love of God in you. (John 5:43,44,42)
• 13(a,e) And the Lord said: And their reverence before Me is the study of the commandments of men; (Isaiah 29:13(a,e))
• 51(a) Stiff-necked! people with uncircumcised hearts and ears! you always resist the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51(a))

Matthew 15:10-14

10 And he called the people and said to them, “Hear and understand!” 11 It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth defiles a person. 12 Then His disciples came and said to Him: Do you know that when the Pharisees heard this word, they were offended? 13 And he answered and said, Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted; 14 Leave them alone: ​​they are blind leaders of the blind; and if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.

• Here it is worth emphasizing the words: “they are the blind leaders of the blind.” Despite the pious appearance of the spiritual leaders of Israel, the Lord said that they were “an evil and adulterous generation,” which complemented the guilt of their fathers (Matt. 23:27-36.). The Prophet Isaiah, addressing the Jews, wrote: “Hear the word of the Lord, princes of Sodom; Hearken unto the law of our God, O people of Gomorrah!” (Isaiah 1:10). The Sodomites did not accept two angels - witnesses, for which they were struck with blindness (Gen. 19: 1,4-11.). The spiritual Sodomites - the Jews, also did not accept two messengers: John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus (Matt. 17:12,13.). Therefore, the same prophet Isaiah wrote about the punishment that the “Sodomites” of Christ’s time would become spiritually blind, losing their minds (Isaiah.29:13,14. Isaiah.8:14,15.).
  The second part of the Scriptures below is a warning for us. Especially for those who live to see the sign of the coming of Christ; those who, without repentance, will reject the preaching of the true followers of the Lord about whom it is written in: Dan.11:32-35. Rev. 11:3-8. (*** Also, see the article: “Christianity in the last days - Mysteries of the Bible”)
• 4Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take off foreskin from your hearts, men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem, lest My anger be revealed like fire and burn unquenchable because of your evil inclinations. (Jer 4:4)
• 6 and if, having condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, he turned them into ashes, setting an example for future wicked people, 9 then, of course, the Lord knows how to deliver the godly from temptation, and to preserve the wicked for the day of judgment, for punishment (2 Pet 2:6 ,9)
• 10 Then the men stretched out their hands and brought Lot into their house, and they locked the door; 11 And the people who were at the entrance to the house were struck with blindness, from the least of them to the greatest, so that they were tormented in seeking the entrance. (Genesis 19:10,11)
• 10 Hear the word of the Lord, O princes of Sodom; Hear the law of our God, O people of Gomorrah! (Isaiah 1:10)
• 14 Then, behold, I will deal with this people in a strange and wonderful way, so that the wisdom of their wise men will perish, and the understanding of those who have understanding will be lost. (Isaiah 29:14)
• 14(a) And He will be a sanctification and a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense to both houses of Israel, 15 And many of them will stumble and fall and be broken and entangled in a snare and be caught. (Isaiah 8:14(a),15)
• 11 All these things happened to them [as] images; but it is described for the instruction of us who have reached the last centuries. (1 Cor 10:11)
• 10 Many will be purified, made white, and refined [in temptation]; But the wicked will do wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand, but the wise will understand. (Dan 12:10)
• 8(a) And then the wicked one will be revealed, 9(b,c) the one whose coming, according to the work of Satan, will be with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception of those who are perishing, because they did not receive the love of the truth. for your salvation. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, so that they will believe a lie, 12 that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth, but loved unrighteousness. (
• 8 And all who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names were not written in the book of life of the Lamb, which was slain from the foundation of the world. 9 He who has an ear, let him hear. (Rev 13:8,9)
• 2(b) for not everyone has faith. 3 But the Lord is faithful, who will strengthen you and keep you from evil. 4 We are confident about you in the Lord, that you do and will do what we command you. 5 May the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the patience of Christ. (2 Thessalonians 3:2(b)-5)

Matthew 15:14,21-28

14 Leave them alone: ​​they are blind leaders of the blind; and if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit. 21 And Jesus departed from there and departed into the countries of Tire and Sidon. 22 And behold, a Canaanite woman came out of those places and cried out to Him: Have mercy on me, O Lord, son of David, my daughter is cruelly raging. 23 But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came up and asked Him: let her go, because she is screaming after us. 24 And he answered and said, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. 25 And she came up and bowed to Him and said: Lord! help me. 26 He answered and said, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said: Yes, Lord! but the dogs also eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table. 28 Then Jesus answered and said to her, O woman! great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish. And her daughter was healed at that hour.

• 25 (a) Truly I say to you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah, 26 and Elijah was sent to none of them, but only to a widow in Zarephath of Sidon; (Luke 4:25(a),26)
• 17(a,c) After this, the woman’s son fell ill, so that there was no breath left in him. 22 And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the soul of the lad returned to him, and he lived. (1 Kings 17:17(a,c),22)
• 27 There were also many lepers in Israel under the prophet Elisha, and not one of them was cleansed except Naaman the Syrian. (Luke 4:27)
• 29 And they will come from the east and the west, and the north and the south, and will lie down in the kingdom of God. 30 And behold, there are last which will be first, and there are first which will be last. (Luke 13:30,29)
• 2 Every day I stretched out My hands to a disobedient people, who walked in evil ways, according to their own thoughts - 1 (a, b) I made myself known to those who did not ask about Me; Those who did not look for Me found Me. (Isaiah 65:2,1(a,b))

Matthew 15:24

24 And he answered and said, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

• 46(a,b) Then Paul and Barnabas said boldly, “The word of God must be preached to you first” (Acts 13:46(a,b))
• 44 And Pharaoh said to Joseph, I am Pharaoh; without you no one will move his hand or his foot in all the land of Egypt. 40 You will be over my house, and all my people will keep your word; Only with the throne will I be greater than you. 46(a) Joseph was thirty years old when he appeared before Pharaoh king of Egypt. 47 And in the seven years of plenty the earth brought forth handfuls of grain. 50 Before the years of famine came, Joseph had two sons, whom Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera, priest of Heliopolis, bore to him. [Joseph - the image of Christ] (Genesis 41:44,40,46(a),47,50)
• 14 (a) But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, although he was the youngest, and his left hand on the head of Manasseh. 20(d) And he made Ephraim superior to Manasseh. (Genesis 48:14(a),20(d))
• 31 But many who are first will be last, and those who are last will be first. (Mark 10:31)
• 31 Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a deal with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. New Testament 6 For the day will come when the watchmen on Mount Ephraim will proclaim, “Arise, and let us go up to Zion to the Lord our God.” 9(c) For I am the father of Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn. (Jer 31:31,6,9(c))

Matthew 15:26-28

26 He answered and said, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said: Yes, Lord! but the dogs also eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table. 28 Then Jesus answered and said to her, O woman! great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish. And her daughter was healed at that hour.

• 9 When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the edge of your field, and do not glean what is left of your harvest, 10 and do not strip your vineyard clean, and do not glean the grapes that fall in the vineyard; leave it to the poor and the stranger. I am the Lord your God. (Lev 19:9,10)
• 17(a) For the Lord your God 18(b,c) loves the stranger and gives him bread and clothing. (Deut 10:17(a),18(b,c))
• 2(a,b) And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “I will go into the field and glean the ears of grain from the tracks of him from whom I find favor.” 3(b) And it came to pass that that part of the field belonged to Boaz, who was of the tribe of Elimelech. (Ruth 2:2(a,b),3(b))
• 1 Genealogy of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham. 5(b) Boaz fathered Obed by Ruth; (Matthew 1:1.5(b))
• 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; And the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. (John 6:51)
• 5 And we, who were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ; by grace you have been saved. 11 Remember therefore that you who were once Gentiles in the flesh, 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 8 For by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: (Eph 2:5,11(a),13,(8))

Matthew 15:30,31

30 And a great multitude came to him, having with them the lame, the blind, the dumb, the crippled, and many others, and they cast them down at Jesus’ feet; and He healed them; 31 So that the people marveled, seeing the dumb speaking, the crippled healthy, the lame walking, and the blind seeing; and glorified the God of Israel.

• 17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet Isaiah, who said: He took upon Himself our infirmities and bore our sicknesses. (see Mat 8:17;)

Matthew 15:32,36,37

32 Jesus called His disciples and said to them, “I have pity on the people, because they have been with Me for three days and have nothing to eat; I don’t want to let them go dumb, lest they become weak on the road. 36 And he took the seven loaves and fishes, and gave thanks, and broke them, and gave them to his disciples, and the disciples to the people. 37 And they all ate and were filled; and they took up the remaining pieces, seven baskets full,

• The sign of the loaves is an image of true salvation leading to eternal life with God blessing. The Gospels indicate that the Lord gave this sign twice. In the first case, twelve baskets of loaves were collected, in the second, seven; and this was not an accident. The sign of the loaves is an image of true salvation, leading to eternal life with God. The Gospels indicate that the Lord gave this sign twice. In the first case, twelve baskets of loaves were collected, in the second, seven; and this was not an accident. The following Scriptures indicate that Joseph, the son of Jacob, was a prophetic image of Christ the Savior; who was also betrayed by his “brothers” - but thanks to this, Israel was saved. Joseph (like Christ) received great royal power, calling to himself the twelve patriarchs of Israel and his father’s people - seventy people. And the baskets of bread (12 and 7 (X10)) symbolically indicated that the Heavenly bread, Christ, became the “father of eternity” to heavenly Israel, His spiritual brothers, followers called to the royal priesthood.
• 48 I am the bread of life. 27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you, for the Father God has set His seal on Him. (John 6:48,27)
• 23 If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear! (Mark 4:23)
• 42 And Pharaoh took his ring from his hand and put it on Joseph’s hand; He dressed him in fine linen, and put a golden chain around his neck; 43(a) ordered to take him on the second of his chariots and proclaim before him: bow down! 46(a) Joseph was thirty years old when he appeared before Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Genesis 41:42,43(a),46(a))
• 6(b,c) he sold grain to all the people of the earth. Joseph's brothers came and bowed down to him with their faces to the ground. 13 They said, We thy servants are twelve brothers; We are the sons of one man in the land of Canaan, and behold, the youngest is now with our father, but one is gone. (Genesis 42:6(b,c),13)
• 17 This is a shadow of the future, but the body is in Christ. (Col 2:17)
• 16 And the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had commanded them, 17 (a) and when they saw Him, they worshiped Him, 18 And Jesus came near and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.” (Matthew 28:16,17(a),18)
• 28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the end of life, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you also will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matthew 19:28)
• 19 When I broke five loaves for five thousand [people], how many baskets full did you pick up of pieces? They say to Him: twelve. 20 And when there are seven for four thousand, how many baskets did you take up of the remaining fragments? They said seven. (Mark 8:19,20)
• 27(b) All the souls of the house of Jacob that went over to Egypt were seventy. (Genesis 46:27(b))
• 17(a) This is a shadow of the future (Col 2:17(a))
• 16(a,b) And the Lord said to Moses, Gather for Me seventy men from among the elders of Israel, whom you know to be his elders and officers. 17 I will go down and speak with you there, and take from the Spirit that is on you. and I will lay it upon them, that they may bear the burden of the people with thee, and not thou bearest alone. (Numbers 11:16(a,b),17)
• 5 Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, that I will raise up a righteous Branch for David, and a King will reign, and will act wisely, and will execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. 4 And I will appoint shepherds over them who will feed them, and they will no longer be afraid or dismayed, nor will they be at a loss, says the Lord. (Jer 23:5,4)
• 11 And He appointed some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some shepherds and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph 4:11,12)
• 1 Having called the twelve, he gave power and authority over all demons and to heal diseases ((see Luke 9:1))
• 1 After this the Lord chose seventy others [disciples], and sent them two by two before Him into every city and place where He Himself wanted to go ((Luke 10:1))

Matthew 15:36,37

36 And he took the seven loaves and fishes, and gave thanks, and broke them, and gave them to his disciples, and the disciples to the people. 37 And they all ate and were filled; and they took up the remaining pieces, seven baskets full,

• The verses given below show that the twelve apostles of Christ were in the figurative sense of the word “streams of living water”, through the laying on of which the true “living water” - the Holy Spirit - was supplied. Further, the first Psalm points to the shepherds of the true church bearing spiritual fruit (seventy figurative trees, from Exodus 15:27). See also: Eph.4:8,11,12. 1 Peter 5:1-4. Luke 12:42-44.
• 27 And they came to Elim; There [were] twelve springs of water and seventy date trees, and they encamped there by the waters. (Exodus 15:27)
• 3(e) This will be a sign for the house of Israel. (Eze 4:3(e))
• 33 And the apostles testified with great power to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ; and great grace was upon them all. (Acts 4:33)
• 23 Having ordained them elders for each church, they prayed with fasting and commended them to the Lord in whom they believed. (Acts 14:23)
• 1 Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked, and does not stand in the way of sinners, and does not sit in the seat of the wicked, 2 but his will is in the law of the Lord, and on His law he meditates day and night! 3 And he will be like a tree planted by streams of water, which brings forth its fruit in its season, and whose leaf does not wither; and in everything he does, he will succeed. (Ps 1:1-3)
• 1 Behold, the King will reign in righteousness, and princes will rule by law; 2 And each of them will be like a shelter from the wind and a shelter from the weather, like springs of water in the desert, like the shadow of a high rock in a thirsty land. (Isaiah 32:1,2)

Mat 15:36-38

36 And he took the seven loaves and fishes, and gave thanks, and broke them, and gave them to his disciples, and the disciples to the people. 37 And they all ate and were filled; and they took up the remaining fragments, seven baskets full, 38 and those who did eat were four thousand people, besides women and children.

• 3(e) This will be a sign for the house of Israel. (Eze 4:3(e))
• 35(a) Jesus said to them: I am the bread of life; 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; And the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. (John 6:35(a),51)
• 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; and if it dies, it will bear much fruit. (John 12:24)
• 33 He told them another parable: The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of flour until it was all leavened. 9 He who has ears to hear, let him hear! (Matthew 13:33.9)

On observing the traditions of the elders

1 Then the Jerusalem scribes and Pharisees came to Jesus and said:

2 “Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.”

3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

4 For God has commanded: “Honor your father and mother,” and “Whoever curses his father or mother, let him die.”

5 But you say, “If anyone says to father or mother, ‘Gift to God what you would use from me,”

6 he may not honor his father or his mother.” Thus you have made void the commandment of God by your tradition.

7 Hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied well about you, saying:

8 “These people draw near to Me with their lips and honor Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me;

9 But in vain they worship Me, teaching doctrines the commandments of men."

What defiles a person

10 And calling the people, he said to them: “Hear and understand!

11 It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth that defiles a person.”

12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, “Do you know that when the Pharisees heard this word, they were offended?”

13 He answered and said, “Every plant that My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted;

14 Leave them alone: ​​they are blind leaders of the blind; and if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”

15 Peter answered and said to Him, “Explain this parable to us.”

16 Jesus said, “Do you also not yet understand?

17 Do you still not understand that everything that goes into the mouth goes into the belly and is cast out?

18 But what comes out of the mouth comes from the heart, and it defiles a person,

19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander.

20 This defiles a person, but eating with unwashed hands does not defile a person.”

Faith of the Canaanite woman

21 And Jesus departed from there and departed into the countries of Tyre and Sidon.

22 And a Canaanite woman came out of those places and cried out to Him: “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David, my daughter is cruelly raging.”

23 But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples, approaching, asked Him: “Let her go, because she is screaming after us.”

24 He answered and said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

25 And she came up, bowed to Him and said: “Lord! Help me".

26 He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”

27 She said: “Yes, Lord! But dogs also eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.”

28 Then Jesus answered her: “Oh woman! Great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed at that hour.

Healing many people

29 Jesus went on from there and came to the Sea of ​​Galilee, and went up to a mountain and sat down there.

30 And a great multitude came to him, having with them the lame, the blind, the dumb, the maimed, and many others, and they cast them down at Jesus’ feet; and He healed them;

31 So that the people marveled, seeing the dumb speaking, the crippled healthy, the lame walking, and the blind seeing, and they glorified the God of Israel.

1. Then the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem come to Jesus and say:

2. Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.

3. He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?”

4. For God commanded: “Honor your father and mother”; and: “Whoever curses his father or mother, let him die.”

5. And you say: if someone says to father or mother: “Whatever you use from me is a gift to God,”

6. he may not honor his father or his mother; Thus you have made void the commandment of God by your tradition.

7. Hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied well about you, saying:

8. “This people draws near to Me with their lips, and honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me;

9. But in vain they worship Me, teaching doctrines the commandments of men.”

According to the rules of Pharisaic piety, it was imperative to wash your hands before and after eating food, and the Talmud precisely defines how much water is enough for this, how to wash, when exactly, in what order, if the number of those present exceeds five. These rules were attributed such importance that for non-compliance with them, the Sanhedrin (council of elders) subjected them to excommunication from the synagogue. For some reason, the Jews believed that Moses received two laws on Mount Sinai: one, written down by him in books, and the other, unwritten, which passed from mouth to mouth from parents to children and was then written down in the Talmud. This law was called the “tradition of the elders,” that is, the ancient men, the ancient rabbinical teachers. The provisions of this unwritten law were very petty. Thus, the custom of washing one’s hands, initially inspired by cleanliness and useful in itself, became a prejudice, which, along with others of the same kind, became empty and harmful. Thus, the apostles, together with their Divine Teacher, worked for the great work of creating the Kingdom of God on earth and sometimes did not have time or bread to taste (Mark 3:20), and the Pharisees demanded from them strict observance of all these petty traditions.

The Lord points out that the Pharisees, in fulfillment of their tradition, violate a very specific commandment about honoring parents. This tradition allowed children to refuse material support to their parents if they declared their property “corvan,” that is, dedicated to God. And everything could be dedicated as a gift to God: a house, a field, and animals, and the dedicator himself could continue to use his property, paying a small ransom to the temple treasury, but he considered himself free from all public obligations, even from duties take care of their parents, denying them the food they need. Calling the Pharisees “hypocrites” for this, the Lord refers to them the prophecy of Isaiah (29:13), claiming that they honor God only outwardly, but in their hearts they are far from Him: in vain they think in this way to please God, in vain they teach others the same.

The Savior here does not justify the disciples in non-compliance with the petty pharisaical regulations, and admits that there was some kind of violation on the part of His disciples of the human establishment. But at the same time he asserts that there was also a violation on the part of the scribes and Pharisees, and to a much greater extent, and their tradition was to blame for this violation.

By observing the traditions of their elders, the Pharisees and scribes wanted to please God, because all these traditions, like all Jewish legislation in general, were of a religious nature. The scribes and Pharisees thought that by washing their hands before eating food, they were fulfilling religious requirements that were obligatory for everyone, and even more so for such religious teachers as Christ and His disciples. Failure to observe the traditions of the elders could serve both in the eyes of the enemies of Christ and in the eyes of the people as a sign of deviation from true religious teachings. But the Savior’s enemies did not notice that, while observing these little things that had nothing to do with religion, they did not pay attention to more important things and violated not the traditions of the elders, but the very commandments of God. From this it was clear that it was not the religion of Christ, but their own religion, that was false. They approached God only with their lips and with their tongues they honored Him.

St. John Chrysostom says that the scribes and Pharisees who lived in Jerusalem and who now approached the Savior with reproach “were much more evil than the others, since they enjoyed greater honor and were more arrogant. Old Testament priests They introduced a lot of new things into the law, although Moses, under pain of great punishment and with many threats, forbade them to add anything to the law or take away from it (Deut. 4:2). And, nevertheless, they introduced new regulations, which included those that one should not eat with unwashed hands, that bowls and cauldrons must be washed and that one must wash oneself. They feared losing power and wanted to be feared as legislators. Therefore, things came to such wickedness that their commandments were kept, but God’s were violated, and their power was so great that this was no longer considered a crime. That’s why they had a double guilt: both for introducing new regulations and for ignoring God’s commandments. A human decree is not the law of God, much less a decree of lawless people. But since the tradition commanding one to wash one’s hands did not contradict the law, Christ cites another, illegal one: the Pharisees taught, under the guise of piety, to despise parents. The Savior quotes the law to the Pharisees, in which he shows that God strictly demands respect for parents. If, He says, those who are disrespectful in words are punished, then much more will you be punished, who are disrespectful in deeds, and not only those who act so, but also those who teach others to do the same. So,” concludes Chrysostom, “having dealt a mortal blow to the Pharisees and strengthened the accusation both by deed, and by his own judgment, and by the words of the prophet, the Lord stops speaking to them, since they could no longer correct themselves, but turns to the people with teaching.”

Blazh. Theophylact of Bulgaria draws our attention to the fact that the Lord, denouncing the scribes and Pharisees, “in the words of Isaiah shows that their fathers in relation to His Father were the same as they are in relation to Him. For, being evil and removing themselves from God through evil deeds, they only spoke the word of God with their lips. Yes, says the blessed one. Theophylact, “those who dishonor Him with evil deeds worship God in vain and consider themselves believers.”

10. And calling the people, he said to them: Hear and understand!

11. It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth defiles a person.

12. Then His disciples came and said to Him: Do you know that when the Pharisees heard this word, they were offended?

13. He answered and said, “Every plant that My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted;

14. Leave them: they are blind leaders of the blind; and if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.

15. Peter answered and said to Him, Explain this parable to us.

16. Jesus said: Do you also not yet understand?

17. Do you still not understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the belly and is thrown out?

18. But what comes from the mouth - comes from the heart - this defiles a person,

19. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, theft, false witness, slander -

20. It defiles a person; but eating with unwashed hands does not defile a person.

The Pharisees believed that unclean food or only taken by unclean hands produces moral uncleanness, making a person unclean, guilty before the Law of God. Exposing the injustice of this thought, the Lord points out that only sin in his heart makes a person morally unclean, and food that enters the mouth passes by the person’s soul and is spewed out.

Christ did not abolish the law of Moses and did not say that every kind of food or drink is beneficial to man. He only said that no food and no methods of taking it defile a person.

Saint John Chrysostom draws attention to the fact that the Savior said not about food that defiles a person, but that “ what is not included defiles a person,” and this could also be attributed to the lack of washing of hands, so that the Pharisees could not say anything contrary.

Blazh. Theophylact of Bulgaria draws attention to the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ “no longer wants to speak with the Pharisees, as incurable,” but, turning to the people, he teaches that only a person’s soul is desecrated when he says what he should not. “By this the Lord points to the Pharisees,” continues the blessed one. Theophylact, who defiled themselves with their envious speeches. Christ speaks of eradicating the traditions of the elders and the commandments of the Jews, and not the Law. For the Law is the planting of God, and therefore Christ does not say that it should be uprooted. Its root, that is, the hidden spirit, remains; only the leaves, that is, the visible letter, fall off; and we understand the Law not by the letter of the word, but by the spirit. Since the Pharisees were hopeless and incurable (incorrigible), He said “leave them, they are blind leaders of the blind.”

21 And Jesus departed from there and withdrew into the countries of Tire and Sidon.

22. And behold, a Canaanite woman, coming out of those places, shouted to Him: have mercy on me, O Lord, son of David, my daughter is cruelly raging.

23. But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came up and asked Him: let her go, because she is screaming after us.

24 And he answered and said, I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

25. And she came up, bowed to Him and said: Lord! Help me.

26 And he answered and said, It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.

27. She said: Yes, Lord! But dogs also eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.

28. Then Jesus answered and said to her, O woman! Great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish. And her daughter was healed at that hour.

Having left Galilee, Christ retired to the pagan country of Phenicia in the northwest of Galilee with the main cities of Tire and Sidon, located not far from one another. The Phoenicians themselves called themselves Canaanites, and their country Canaan. It can be assumed that the purpose of the Lord’s departure to places where non-religious and foreign populations lived was temporary solitude for rest from the countless crowd that constantly accompanied him in Galilee, and perhaps from the irreconcilable anger of the Pharisees. But He could not hide, for a certain pagan woman, whose daughter was possessed by an unclean spirit, heard about Him. The woman knew from the Jews about the coming Messiah and called the Savior “Son of David,” thus confessing her faith in Him. In the Holy Tradition, the Canaanite woman is known as Justa, and her daughter is known as Veronica. The woman says: have mercy not on my daughter, but on me. Because the daughter's illness was the mother's illness. She does not say: come and heal, but have mercy. Testing the faith of the Canaanite woman, the Lord did not answer her. To the request of His disciples to help her, Christ answered that He was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, for the Jews were the chosen people of God and only they were promised the Divine Redeemer, and it was to them that He had to come first, to save them and from them perform miracles. It is possible that He said this, wanting to reveal the full strength of the faith of a pagan woman before His apostles, brought up in the Jewish disdain of the pagans, i.e. for their edification. Knowing, of course, the strength of her faith and continuing to test it, the Lord refuses her with words that could seem extremely cruel if they had not been uttered by a Savior filled with love for suffering humanity. The meaning of His words is this: “It was not for this reason that I withdrew from the borders of the chosen people of God, having taken from them My beneficial, miraculous power, in order to squander it in a pagan country.” Of course, these words were spoken by Jesus Christ only in order to reveal to everyone the power of this woman’s faith and to show with their own eyes that the pagans, since they believe, are worthy of God’s mercies, despite the contempt that the Jews had for them. The Jews called the pagans dogs because of idolatry and unclean living. And the Canaanite woman really showed the full height of her faith and at the same time the extraordinary depth of humility. This greatest faith and deepest humility were immediately rewarded: her daughter was instantly healed. The peculiarity of this miracle is that it was performed from afar, in absentia, as the healing of the servant of the Capernaum centurion, also a pagan, whose faith also received special praise from the Lord.

St. John Chrysostom draws attention to the fact that the Canaanite woman “did not dare to bring her raging daughter to the Teacher, but, leaving her at home on her bed, she herself begged Him and declared only illness, adding nothing more. And he does not call the Doctor into his house, but, having told about his grief and the serious illness of his daughter, he turns to the mercy of the Lord and cries out in a loud voice, asking for mercy not for his daughter, but for himself: have mercy on me! As if he were saying this: my daughter does not feel her illness, but I endure thousands of different torments. The woman did not consider herself worthy of the benefit and did not come to demand what was due, but asked for mercy and expressed only her misfortune. Hearing the refusal, she intensified her prayers even more. That's not how we act. If we do not receive what we ask for, then we stop asking, when we should have asked even more diligently. Who would not be perplexed by the words of the Savior? Seeing her intercessors (Christ's disciples) with her in bewilderment and hearing that her request could not be fulfilled, one could lose all hope. And, however, the woman did not lose her, but, seeing the powerlessness of her intercessors, armed herself with commendable courage, comes closer and bows, saying: God help me, didn’t say: ask and pray, but - help me, believing that He is Lord. Having honored her with an answer, the Lord struck her even more with His words than with silence: It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs. He no longer calls the Jews sheep, but children, and her dog. But the woman finds protection for herself in His very words. If I’m a dog, she says, then that means I’m not a stranger. If I cannot use food at all, then I have, like a dog, the crumbs that fall from their masters' table. Christ knew she would say this. That’s why I hesitated (to help her). She did not contradict, did not envy those whom the Lord called “children,” and was not offended by her own insult. She calls herself a dog, and the Jews masters; and for this reason she became a child. What about Christ? Oh woman! - He exclaims, - great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish. That is why He delayed until now to provide help, in order to say these words and glorify the Canaanite woman. That is, your faith can do more than this. The words she spoke were not empty and flattering, but expressed the true power of faith. The best proof and evidence of this faith lies in the event itself, namely, her daughter was immediately healed. Let us note that she did what the apostles were defeated and could not do. Such is the power of persistent prayer! God wants us to ask Him for our needs more than others to intercede for us. Although the apostles had more boldness, the woman showed great patience.”

1–20. Disputes and teaching regarding the “tradition of the elders.” – 21–28. Healing of the Canaanite daughter. – 29–39. Feeding four thousand with seven loaves.

Matthew 15:1. Then the Jerusalem scribes and Pharisees come to Jesus and say:

(Compare Mark 7:1).

This entire chapter coincides in presentation with Mark. 7:1–37, 8:1–10. That this happened in Gennesaret is clear from Matt. 14:34, and this is indirectly confirmed by the evangelist John, who, having outlined the conversation in Capernaum, says that “after this Jesus walked through Galilee” (John 7:1). It is very likely that this was some time after the Passover, close to the events of the feeding of the five thousand. The scribes and Pharisees came from Jerusalem, as Matthew and Mark unanimously testify. These were people who were more honorable than the provincials, and were distinguished by a stronger hatred of Christ than the latter. These Pharisees and scribes were probably sent by the Jerusalem Sanhedrin.

Matthew 15:2. Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they do not wash their hands when they eat bread.

(Compare Mark 7:2-5).

In the following story, Matthew departs from Mark, who provides detailed information about what exactly the traditions of the Jewish elders were about washing their hands and why the scribes and Pharisees accused the Savior and His disciples. Mark's testimony is very well confirmed by the Talmudic information we have about these Jewish rites. The Pharisees had many washings, and their observance reached the extreme pettiness. There were, for example, different types of water that had different cleansing powers, up to six in number, and it was precisely determined which water was suitable for certain ablutions. The definitions regarding hand washing were especially detailed. Speaking about hand washing, the evangelists, and especially Mark, reveal a very close acquaintance with the then customs of the Jews, set out mainly in the small Talmudic treatise on hand washing “Yadaim”. Hand washing, as Edersheim (1901, II, 9 et seq.) shows, mainly on the basis of this treatise, was not a legal institution, but a “tradition of the elders.” The Jews observed the ritual of washing their hands so strictly that Rabbi Akiba, being imprisoned and having barely enough water to support life, preferred to die of thirst than to eat with unwashed hands. Failure to observe ablution before dinner, which was considered an institution of Solomon, was punishable by minor excommunication (“niddah”). The Pharisees and scribes blame the disciples, and not the Savior Himself, just as they did when plucking the ears of grain.

Matthew 15:3. He answered and said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

(Compare Mark 7:9).

The Pharisees and scribes accuse the disciples of violating the tradition of the elders, and they themselves are guilty of violating the commandment of God. This latter is violated by “your tradition,” which relates not to ablutions, but to a completely different subject. According to Chrysostom, the Savior proposed this question, “showing that he who sins in great deeds should not so carefully notice in others unimportant actions. You should be accused, He says, but you yourself accuse others.” The Savior reveals the error of the Pharisees in that they paid attention to little things and lost sight of the most important things in human relationships. Washing hands and honoring father and mother are opposite poles in human moral relations. Both John Chrysostom and Theophylact and Euthymius Zigavin say that the Savior here does not justify the disciples in non-compliance with petty Pharisaic institutions and admits that there was some kind of violation of human institutions on the part of His disciples. But at the same time he asserts that there was also a violation on the part of the scribes and Pharisees in a much higher sense, and, what is much more important, their tradition was to blame for this violation. The Lord here puts clavum clavo retundit.

Matthew 15:4. For God commanded: honor your father and mother; and: He who curses his father or mother shall die by death.

(Compare Mark 7:10). (Quotes from Ex. 20:12, 21:17; Deut. 5:16; Lev. 20:9).

According to St. John Chrysostom, the Savior “does not immediately turn to the offense committed and does not say that it means nothing, otherwise He would increase the insolence of the accusers, but first he defeats their insolence, presenting a much more important crime and laying it on their head. He does not say that those who violate the decree do well, so as not to give them an opportunity to accuse Himself, but He also does not condemn the action of the disciples, so as not to confirm the decree. He also does not accuse the elders as lawbreaking and vicious people, but, abandoning all this, chooses another path and, apparently condemning those who approached Him, meanwhile concerns those who made the decisions themselves.”

Matthew 15:5. And you say: if someone says to father or mother: what you would use from me is a gift to God,

Matthew 15:6. he may not honor his father or his mother; Thus you have made void the commandment of God by your tradition.

(Compare Mark 7:11–12).

Matthew is almost identical with Mark, but with the omission of the word “corban” and with the replacement of Mark’s words: “you now allow him to do nothing for his father or his mother,” with other expressions set out in the first half of verse 6. The construction of the verse in Matthew is less clear than in Mark. The word "corban" is a literal translation of a frequently used Jewish votive formula that has been subject to much abuse.

The basis for votive practice was given in Holy Scripture Old Testament (see Gen. 28:20–22; Lev. 27:2–4, 27:9–12, 26-29; Num. 6:2–3, 6:13–15, 21, 21:2 –3, 30:2–17; Deut. 23:21–23; Judges 11:30–31; 1 Sam. 1:11). Subsequently, vows became the subject of Jewish casuistry. The word "korvan" was changed into "konam" "out of piety." They began to say not only “this thing is for the good,” but also “for my eyes, if they sleep,” “for my hands, if they work,” and even simply “for the horses, that I will not sleep,” and so on (see. Talmud, trans. Pereferkovich, III, 183). The gift to God in Hebrew was called "corban" (as in Mark 7:11), and is often mentioned in Lev. Chapters 1–3, where lambs, goats, and calves brought to God as a burnt offering, a peace offering, or a sin offering are called “corban,” i.e. "victim". Gasophilakia (treasury) in the temple, where offerings from the people were deposited, is metonymically called “korvan” or “korvana” Matt. 27:6. Vows could and often had to be canceled, the main reason for this being that they were repented of (harata), in which case the lawyers had to cancel them. The custom that the Savior condemns was that the scribes allowed a person with this formula to dedicate his property to the temple and thus evade the obligation to help his parents. The legalistic formula was thus more sacred than the divine commandment set forth in Scripture.

Matthew 15:7. Hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied well about you, saying:

Matthew 15:8. These people draw near to Me with their lips, and honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me;

Matthew 15:9. but in vain they worship Me, teaching doctrines the commandments of men.

(Compare Mark 7:6–8).

In Mark, these words of the prophet Isaiah (Is. 29:13) were spoken by Christ before the denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees. The meaning of this quotation when applied to the present case is quite clear. By observing the traditions of their elders, the Pharisees and scribes wanted to please God, because all these traditions, like all Jewish legislation in general, were of a religious nature. The scribes and Pharisees thought that by washing their hands before eating food, they were fulfilling religious requirements that were obligatory for everyone, and even more so for such religious teachers as Christ and His disciples. Failure to observe the traditions of the elders could serve both in the eyes of the enemies of Christ and in the eyes of the people as a sign of deviation from true religious teachings. But the enemies of Christ did not notice that, while observing these little things that had nothing to do with religion, they did not pay attention to more important things and violated not the traditions of the elders, but the commandments of God. From this it was clear that it was not the religion of Christ, but their own religion, that was false. They approached God only with their lips and with their tongues they honored Him.

Matthew 15:10. And calling the people, he said to them: listen and understand!

(Compare Mark 7:14).

Having placed His enemies in a hopeless situation with the extraordinary force of His arguments, the Savior leaves them and addresses the whole people. This is indicated by προσκαλεσάμενος - “calling” or “calling” the people who stood right there, perhaps only making way for their teachers and leaders who were talking with Christ.

Matthew 15:11. It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth defiles a person.

(Compare (Mark 7:15) - with a slight difference in expressions).

When the Pharisees accused the disciples of eating with unwashed hands, the Savior says that no food defiles a person. But if food does not defile, then much less eating it with unwashed hands. Here a completely new principle was set forth, which, no matter how simple it is in itself, is still not properly understood by many. It expresses the opposite idea that any food can be the cause of spiritual or religious defilement. Here Jesus Christ is obviously thinking not about legal, but about moral defilement, which has to do not with what goes into the mouth (cf. 1 Tim. 4:4), but with what comes out of the mouth (immoral speech) . Judging by the context, the Savior does not speak against the Mosaic institutions, but the application of His speech to them is inevitable, so that as a result the law and its dominion are subject to material abolition. In the appropriate place in Mark they correctly find some ambiguity. Matthew substitutes the explanatory “out of mouth” instead of “out of man.”

Matthew 15:12. Then His disciples came and said to Him: Do you know that when the Pharisees heard this word, they were offended?

Mark and the other evangelists do not have verses corresponding to verses 12–14. But in Mark (Mark 7:17) one can find an explanatory note that is not in Matthew, and on the basis of it one can conclude that the disciples did not approach the Savior in front of the people, but when He entered the house with them. However, this can also be guessed from Matthew’s testimony in verses 12 and 15 in comparison with Matthew. 13:36, where almost identical expressions are used.

“This word” is referred to by many as stated in verses 3-9. But it is better to understand the 11th verse here with Evfimy Zigavin. Because this “word,” if addressed to the people, could seem especially tempting to the Pharisees. The Pharisees were greatly tempted by these very words of Christ, because they saw in them the destruction and open violation of not only their traditions, but also the entire Mosaic ritual.

Matthew 15:13. He answered and said: Every plant that My Heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted;

According to John Chrysostom, the Savior says this about the Pharisees themselves and their traditions. The plant here serves as an image of the Pharisees as a party or sect. The thought expressed here by Christ is similar to the thought of Gamaliel (Acts 5:38).

Matthew 15:14. leave them alone: ​​they are blind leaders of the blind; and if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit.

(Compare Luke 6:39).

According to John Chrysostom, if the Savior had said this about the law, he would have called it a blind leader of the blind. Wed. Matt. 23:16, 24. In Luke (Luke 6:39), a similar saying is inserted into the Sermon on the Mount.

Matthew 15:15. Peter answered and said to Him, Explain this parable to us.

(Compare Mark 7:17).

The speech coincides in meaning with the second half of the indicated verse in Mark. Difference from Mk. 7Meyer calls it “insignificant.” Best Read- just a “parable”, without adding “this”. If we accept the word “this,” then Peter’s request will, of course, refer to the 14th verse. But here the question is fully explained by Mark, in whom the words of Peter undoubtedly refer to Mark. 7:15, and in Matthew, therefore, to the 11th verse. The Savior's further speech confirms this interpretation.

Matthew 15:16. Jesus said: Do you also not yet understand?

(Compare Mark 7:18).

The meaning is that even “you” - the word on which there is a special emphasis - who have been with Me for so long and studied with Me, do you really not even understand yet?

Matthew 15:17. Do you not yet understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the belly and is thrown out?

(Compare Mark 7:18–19).

Mark is much more detailed: “Are you really that slow-witted? Don't you understand that nothing that enters a person from outside can defile him? Because it does not enter into his heart, but into his belly and out.” For the passage in question there is a parallel in Philo (De opificio mundi, I, 29), who says: “Through the mouth, according to Plato, the mortal enters, and the immortal comes out. Through the mouth food and drink enter, the perishable sustenance of the perishable body. And words, the immortal laws of the immortal soul, which govern rational life, come out of the mouth.”

Matthew 15:18. but what comes from the mouth - comes from the heart - this defiles a person,

(Compare Mark 7:20).

What enters a person (food) does not defile him. And what comes out of his heart can defile him. A further precise explanation is given in the next verse

Matthew 15:19. for from the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, blasphemy -

Matthew 15:20. it defiles a person; but eating with unwashed hands does not defile a person.

(Compare Mark 7:23).

Christ did not abolish the law of Moses and did not say that every kind of food or drink is beneficial to man. He only said that no food and no methods of taking it defile a person.

Matthew 15:21. And leaving there, Jesus withdrew into the countries of Tire and Sidon.

(Compare Mark 7:24).

In both Matthew and Mark the word “from there” is completely unclear. Origen believed that from Gennesaret, through which the Savior traveled (Matthew 14:34; Mark 6:53); but he withdrew, perhaps due to the fact that the Pharisees who listened to Him were offended by the speech about objects that defile a person. Having departed from Israel, Jesus Christ comes to the borders of Tire and Sidon. John Chrysostom, Theophylact and others, when interpreting this passage, have a lot of reasoning about why the Savior told the disciples not to follow the path of the pagans, when He Himself was coming to them. The answer is given in the sense that the Savior went to the borders of Tire and Sidon not to preach, but to “hide,” although he could not do this.

From these interpretations it is clear that the Savior, contrary to popular opinion, “transgressed the borders of Palestine” and, albeit a little, was in a pagan country. If we agree with this, then further history will seem somewhat clearer to us.

Tire (in Hebrew “tzor” - rock) was a famous Phoenician trading city. Around the time of the conquest of the kingdom of Israel by Shalmaneser (721 BC), the Assyrians besieged it, but could not take it after a five-year siege and only imposed tribute on it (Is. 23). Around the time of the destruction of Jerusalem (588 BC), Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tire and took it, but did not destroy it. In 332 BC, after a seven-month siege, Tire was taken by Alexander the Great, who crucified 2,000 Tyrians for their resistance. Tire is now called Es-Sur. From 126 BC. Tire was an independent city with a Hellenistic structure.

Sidon (fishing city, fishing, fishery - the same root as [Beth]saida) was older than Tire. Sidon is often mentioned in Old Testament. It currently has up to 15,000 inhabitants, but its commercial importance is inferior to Beirut. Sidon is now called Saida.

Matthew 15:22. And so, a Canaanite woman, coming out of those places, shouted to Him: have mercy on me, O Lord, son of David, my daughter is cruelly raging.

(Compare Mark 7:25).

The story given in verse 22 and further in verses 23-24 is not found in Mark or the other evangelists. Mark's expressions (Mark 7:25) are completely different from those of Matthew. Matthew and Mark call this woman by different names: Matthew - a Canaanite, Mark - a Greek (ἑλληνίς) and a Syrophoenician. The first name - Canaanite - is consistent with the fact that the Phoenicians themselves called themselves Canaanites, and their country - Canaan. In Gen. 10:15–18 lists the descendants of Canaan, the son of Ham, among whom Sidon is listed first. From Mark’s testimony that the woman was Greek, we can conclude that she was called that only by the language that, in all likelihood, she spoke. In the Vulgate this word is translated, however, through gentilis - pagan. If this translation is correct, then the word refers to the woman's religious beliefs, not her dialect. As for the name “Syro-Phoenician,” this was the name given to the Phoenicians who lived in the region of Tire and Sidon or Phoenicia, in contrast to the Phoenicians who lived in Africa (Libya) on its northern shore (Carthage), who were called Λιβοφοίνικες, Carthaginians (lat. .poeni). How this woman learned about Christ and that He was the Son of David is unknown, but it is very likely that it was from rumors, because in the Gospel of Matthew there is a direct note that the rumor about Christ spread “throughout all Syria” (Matthew 4: 24), which was near Phenicia. The latter is not mentioned in the Gospels. The woman calls Christ first Lord (κύριε) and then Son of David. The title of Christ as Lord is common in the New Testament. This is what the centurion calls Christ (Matt. 8:6, 8; Luke 7:6) and the Samaritan woman (John 4:15, 19). Against the opinion that the woman was a proselyte of the gate, verse 26 speaks (Mark 7:21). But the expression "Son of David" may indicate her acquaintance with Jewish history. In legend, she is known as Justa, and her daughter is Veronica. The woman says: have mercy not on my daughter, but on me. Because the daughter's illness was the mother's illness. She does not say: come and heal, but - have mercy.

Matthew 15:23. But He did not answer her a word. And His disciples came up and asked Him: let her go, because she is screaming after us.

Comparing the stories of Matthew and Mark, we must present the matter like this. The Savior arrived in pagan territory together with His disciples and went into the house to “hide” or hide (λαθεῖν - Mark). The reasons that the Savior “did not want anyone to know” about His stay in Phenicia are unknown to us. But there was nothing unnatural or inconsistent with His other actions, because He did the same on other occasions, withdrawing from the crowd and for prayer (Matt. 14:23; Mark 1:35, 6:46; Luke 5 and etc.). It can be assumed that in the present case, the removal of Christ from Israeli society occurred in view of the great events that required solitude, which are described in Matt. 16; Matt. 17 (Peter's confession and transfiguration). The woman’s cry, as it seemed to the disciples, did not correspond to Christ’s intention to remain alone, and they ask Him to let her go (cf. Matt. 19:13). The word “let go” (ἀπόλυσον) does not express that the disciples asked Christ to grant the woman’s request.

According to Mark, the woman entered the house where the Savior was, and there she screamed for help (Mark 7– εἰσελθοῦσα), and according to Matthew, this was when the Savior was on the way. There is no contradiction, because both were possible. Further explanation in the comments to the next verse.

Matthew 15:24. He answered and said: I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

The key to explaining all this is given by John Chrysostom, Theophylact and Euthymius Zigavin, who believe that the purpose of Christ's refusal was not a test, but a discovery of the faith of this woman. This must be accurately noted in order to understand further. Although Chrysostom says that the woman heard the words of Christ: “sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” it is more likely that she did not hear, because it is said: “He did not answer her a word.” The answer to the disciples was both practically and theoretically correct, because Christ had to limit and limited His activity only to the house of Israel, and in this individualization of His activity lay its universal character. The Gospel expression cannot be explained in the sense that it refers to spiritual Israel. If Christ had directly let the woman go, as His disciples asked, then we would not have had a wonderful example that explains how “the kingdom of heaven is taken by force” (Matthew 11:12). It is taken despite all the obstacles and even humiliations to which the pagans are or may be subjected.

Matthew 15:25. And she, coming up, bowed to Him and said: Lord! help me.

(Compare Mark 7:25–26).

Mark reports in more detail that the woman fell at the feet of the Savior and asked Him to cast out the demon from her daughter. About προσεκύνει, see comments to Matt. 2:2. The woman now does not call Christ the Son of David, but only Lord and worships Him as God.

Matthew 15:26. He answered and said, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.”

(Compare (Mark 7:27) with the addition: “let the children first be satisfied”).

Literally: “one cannot (should not) take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs” (in Mark it is “not good”). They think that the Savior speaks here “ex publico judaeorum affectu” (Erasmus), or, what is the same, in the ordinary speech of the Jews, who called the pagans dogs; the Israelites, like the children of Abraham, are “sons of the kingdom” (Matthew 8:12) and have the first right to the bread of grace and truth. The Jews called the pagans dogs because of idolatry and unclean living.

Matthew 15:27. She said: yes, Lord! but the dogs also eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.

Matthew 15:28. Then Jesus answered and said to her: O woman! great is your faith; let it be done to you as you wish. And her daughter was healed at that hour.

Matthew 15:29. Having crossed over from there, Jesus came to the Sea of ​​Galilee and, going up to a mountain, sat down there.

(Compare Mark 7:31).

According to Mark, Christ, “having left the borders of Tire” (so according to some readings), “went again” through Sidon (this is not in the Russian translation) “to the Sea of ​​Galilee”, in middle part(ἀνὰ μέσον - cf. 1 Cor. 6:5; Rev. 7:17) the boundaries of the Decatopolis (in Russian translation - “through the borders of the Decatopolis”). By mountain we mean some high area on the shore of a lake, and not any individual mountain. It is not clear from Matthew's account which side of the Lake of Galilee this was on, but Mark says clearly that it was on the eastern side.

Matthew 15:30. And a great multitude came to Him, having with them the lame, the blind, the dumb, the maimed, and many others, and they cast them down at Jesus’ feet; and He healed them;

Matthew 15:31. so that the people marveled, seeing the dumb speaking, the maimed healthy, the lame walking, and the blind seeing; and glorified the God of Israel.

(Compare Mark 7:37).

In Mark there is only the first sentence of verse 31 of Matthew, expressed completely differently. Matthew then adds words that are not found in the other gospels. The expressions “glorify, glorify God” are found many times in the New Testament (Matt. 9:8; Mark 2:12; Luke 5:25–26, 7:16; 1 Pet. 2:12, 4:11; Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 6:20; 2 Cor. 9, etc.). But nowhere is there an increase in “Israelev” as here. On this basis, they think that Christ was now among the pagans who glorified a God alien to them - “the God of Israel” (cf. Mark 8:3 - “some of them came from afar”).

Matthew 15:32. Jesus, calling His disciples, said to them: I feel sorry for the people, because they have been with Me for three days now, and they have nothing to eat; I don’t want to let them go dumb, lest they become weak on the road.

Matthew 15:33. And His disciples said to Him: where can we get so much bread in the desert to feed so many people?

(Compare (Mark 8:1-4) with significant differences in expression.)

If all four evangelists told about the feeding of five thousand people, then the real story belongs only to Matthew and Mark. In general content, it is so similar to the story of the feeding of five thousand with five loaves that many took it for a variant of the same event. If so, then this could, on the one hand, influence the interpretation of the first story, and on the other hand, it would give reason to consider both stories legendary. But others have different opinions. Even in ancient times, they paid attention to the differences between both stories and on this basis argued that they depict two actual events. Thus, Origen wrote among other things: “Now, after the healing of the dumb and others, (the Lord) has mercy on the people who had been around Him for three days and had no food. There the disciples ask for five thousand, but here He Himself speaks of four thousand. Those who are satisfied in the evening, having spent the day with Him, it is said about these that they stayed with Him for three days, and they receive bread so as not to weaken on the way. There the disciples talk about the five loaves and two fishes that they had, although the Lord did not ask about this, but here they answer the question that they had seven loaves and a few fishes. There He commands the people to lie down on the grass, but here He does not command, but announces to the people that they should lie down... These are fed on the mountain, and those in a deserted place. These remained with Jesus three days, and those one day, on which they were satisfied in the evening.” Hilary and Jerome also made a distinction between the two saturations. That these were really two events is strongly confirmed by the Savior Himself, Who indicates this in Matt. 16:9. The assumption that both events are identical is based on the imaginary difficulty of the disciples’ question: “Where can we get so much bread in the desert?”, who so quickly forgot the previous miracle, but similar slowness in faith is found among people in other cases, and examples of it are reported in Scripture itself (cf. Exod. 16c Num. 11:21–22; see Exod. 17:1–7; Alford). This whole story apparently has a connection with the previous story about the healing of the Canaanite daughter and the crumbs that fall from the master’s table to the dogs. The miracle was performed in Decapolis, i.e. where the population consisted, if not exclusively, then predominantly of pagans. The ratio of the numbers of the first and second saturation is: 5000:4000; 5:7; 2:x; 12 (number of people, loaves, fishes and boxes filled with loaves).

Matthew 15:34. Jesus said to them: How many loaves have you? They said: seven, and a few fish.

(Compare Mark 8:5).

Matthew adds “and some fish.” The word “fish” (ἰχθύδια) is diminutive here, instead of the former “fish” (ἰχθύες) in the weather forecasters and ὀψάρια in John (John 6:9).

Matthew 15:35. Then he ordered the people to lie down on the ground.

(Compare Mark 8:6).

“In everything else, he does the same thing as before: he seats the people on the ground and makes sure that the bread in the hands of the disciples does not decrease” (St. John Chrysostom). Externally, the event now differs from the previous one only in numbers.

Matthew 15:36. And taking the seven loaves and fishes, he gave thanks, broke them, and gave them to his disciples, and the disciples to the people.

Matthew 15:37. And they all ate and were filled; and they took up the remaining pieces, seven baskets full,

(Compare Mark 8:7–8).

The addition to the story “having blessed, He ordered them to be distributed also” (i.e., the loaves) is found only in Mark. The parallel of verse 37 is Mark. 8:8, with some difference in expression. Matthew adds: (“seven baskets”) full, which Mark does not have. Instead of the “boxes” into which the pieces were collected after the feeding of the five thousand, now we speak of “baskets” (σπυρίδες). This word, besides the Gospels, is used only once more in the New Testament (Acts 9:25), where it is said that the Apostle Paul was lowered in a basket along the wall in Damascus. On this basis it is assumed that these were large baskets. Where they were taken from is completely unknown. Perhaps they were brought by people who followed Christ and were initially filled with provisions. The number of baskets filled with pieces from the remaining loaves now corresponds to the number of loaves broken and distributed to the people.

Matthew 15:38. and those who ate were four thousand people, besides women and children.

(Compare Mark 8:9).

Matthew here also adds “except women and children,” which is not found in Mark (see comments on Matthew 14:21).

Matthew 15:39. And, having dismissed the people, He entered the boat and arrived in the region of Magdalene.

(Compare Mark 8:9–10).

Instead of “to the borders (τὰ μέρη) of Magdalene” (according to the Russian translation), Mark has “to the borders (τὰ μέρη) of Dalmanutha.” Augustine has no doubt that this is the same place, only with a different name. Because in numerous codices and in Mark it is also written “Magedan”. But in this case, why is the same place indicated? different names? First of all, let us note that the correct reading in Matthew is not Magdala, but Magadan. So in Sinaitic, BD, ancient Latin, Syro-Sinaitic. The word Magadan or Magedan is considered identical with Magdala (modern Medjdel). Magdala means "tower". This was the name of a place on the western shore of Lake Galilee, perhaps mentioned in the book of Joshua (Joshua 19:38). It was the birthplace of Mary Magdalene. Why it was also called Magadan is unknown. Nothing is known about Magadan itself, if it was not identical with Magdala. Most travelers believed that Magdala was located about five miles north of Tiberias, where the village of Medjdel is now. Currently it is a small village. It contains up to half a dozen houses, without windows, with flat roofs. Laziness and poverty reign here now. Children run through the streets half naked. Dalmanutha, mentioned in Mark, was apparently located somewhere in the vicinity of Magdala. If so, then there is no contradiction in the testimony of the evangelists. One calls the place where Christ arrived with His disciples on a boat Magadan (Magdala), the other points to a place nearby.

Found an error in the text? Select it and press: Ctrl + Enter