Verse 1-2
Matthew 19:1-2. When Jesus had
finished these sayings — Had
delivered the instructions
contained in the preceding
chapter, to his disciples at
Capernaum; he departed from
Galilee — Where he had long
dwelt, and through which he had
made repeated journeys, but in
which, from henceforward, he
walked no more; and came into
the coasts of Judea beyond
Jordan — “Properly speaking, no
part of Judea was on the farther
side of Jordan; for though,
after the Jews returned from the
captivity, the whole of their
land was called Judea,
especially by foreigners who
happened to mention their
affairs, it is certain that in
the gospels Judea is always
spoken of as a particular
division of the country. We may
therefore reasonably suppose,
that Matthew’s expression is
elliptical; and may supply it
from Mark 10:1, thus, And came
into the coasts of Judea, δια
του περαν του ιορδανου, through
the country beyond Jordan. See
John 10:40. In this journey, our
Lord passed through the country
beyond Jordan, that the Jews
living there might enjoy the
benefit of his doctrine and
miracles. And great multitudes
followed him — Namely, from
Galilee into Perea, for his fame
having become exceeding great,
he was everywhere resorted to,
and followed by the sick who
wished to be healed; by their
friends who attended them; by
those whose curiosity prompted
them to see and examine things
so wonderful; by well-disposed
persons, who found themselves
greatly profited and pleased
with his sermons; by enemies who
watched all his words and
actions with a design to expose
him as a deceiver; lastly, by
those who expected that he would
set up the kingdom immediately:
besides, at this time the
multitude may have been greater
than ordinary, because, as the
passover was at hand, many,
going thither, may have chosen
to travel in our Lord’s train,
expecting to see new miracles.”
— Macknight.
Verse 3
Matthew 19:3. The Pharisees also
— Who always had a watchful eye
on his motions, and attended him
with the most malignant designs,
being now more especially
irritated by the fame of his
late miracles, which they had in
vain endeavoured to suppress;
came unto him, tempting him —
With what they thought a very
artful and insnaring question;
and — That they might, if
possible, find some reason to
accuse him, or to discredit him,
at least, among the people; they
asked him, Is it lawful for a
man to put away his wife for
every cause? — That is, for any
thing which he dislikes in her.
“The school of Hillel taught,
that a man might put away his
wife for any cause. The son of
Sirach saith, ‘If she go not as
thou wouldest have her, cut her
off from thy flesh, give her a
bill of divorce, and let her
go.’ Sirach 25:26. Josephus
saith, The law runs thus: ‘He
that would be disjoined from his
wife, for any cause whatsoever,
let him give her a bill of
divorce.’ And he confesseth,
that he himself put away his
wife, after she had borne him
three children, ‘because he was
not pleased with her behaviour.’
But the school of Shammah
determined, on the contrary that
the wife was only to be put away
for adultery.” — Whitby.
(Christ, it must be observed,
“had delivered his sentiments on
this subject twice; once in
Galilee, Matthew 5:31; and again
in Perea, Luke 16:18. It is
probable, therefore, that they
knew his opinion, and solicited
him to declare it, hoping it
would incense the people, who
reckoned the liberty which the
law gave them of divorcing their
wives, one of their chief
privileges. Or if, standing in
awe of the people, he should
deliver a doctrine different
from what he had taught on
former occasions, they thought
it would be a fit ground for
accusing him of dissimulation.
But they missed their aim
entirely; for Jesus, always
consistent with himself, boldly
declared the third time against
arbitrary divorces, not fearing
the popular resentment in the
least.” — Macknight.
Verses 4-6
Matthew 19:4-6. He answered,
Have ye not read, &c. — It is
thought by some that the chief
design of the Pharisees in
putting the fore-mentioned
question to our Lord, was to
make him contradict Moses. If
so, they were much disappointed,
for, instead of contradicting
him, he confutes them by the
very words of Moses. He who made
them at the beginning — When the
human race began to exist; made
them male and female — Greek,
αρσεν και θηλυ, which Dr.
Campbell renders, a male and a
female. He finds fault with our
version as inaccurate and
irrelative to our Lord’s
argument, and thinks our
translators “could not have
rendered the clause differently
if the original expression had
been αρρενας και θηλειας
εποιεσεν αυτους. Yet it is
manifest, that the sense would
have been different. All that
this declaration would have
implied is, that when God
created mankind, he made people
of both sexes. But what argument
could have been drawn from this
principle, to show that the tie
of marriage was indissoluble? Or
how could the conclusion annexed
have been supported? For this
cause shall a man leave father
and mother. Besides, it was
surely unnecessary to recur to
the history of the creation to
convince those Pharisees of what
all the world knew, that the
human race was composed of men
and women, and consequently of
two sexes. The weight of the
argument, therefore,” he says,
“must lie in this circumstance,
that God created at first no
more than a single pair, one of
each sex, whom he united in the
bond of marriage, and, in so
doing, exhibited a standard of
that union to all generations.
The very words, and these two,
show that it is implied in the
historian’s declaration, that
they were two, one male and one
female, and no more. But this is
by no means implied in the
common version. It lets us know,
indeed, that they were two
sexes, but gives us no hint that
these were but two persons.” And
said — By the mouth of Adam, who
uttered these words, For this
cause — On account of his
engaging in the married state;
shall a man leave father and
mother — When those dear
relations of parental and filial
tenderness shall take place, and
shall cleave to his wife — With
an affection more strong and
steady than he feels even for
those from whom, under God, he
has derived his being: and they
twain shall be one flesh — That
is, “shall constitute only one
person, in respect of the unity
of their inclinations and
interests, and of the mutual
power which they have over each
other’s bodies, 1 Corinthians
6:16; 1 Corinthians 7:4; and as
long as they continue faithful
to this law, they must remain
undivided till death separates
them.” Wherefore they are no
more twain, but one flesh —
“From the original institution
of marriage, therefore, in
paradise, and from the great law
thereof, declared by God himself
on that occasion, it evidently
appears that it is the strongest
and tenderest of all
friendships, a friendship
supported by the divine sanction
and approbation, a friendship
therefore which ought to be
indissoluble till death.” What
therefore God hath joined
together, let no man put asunder
— By unreasonable divorces.
Husbands and wives, being joined
together by the ordinance of
God, must not be put asunder by
any ordinance of man: but the
bond of marriage must be
esteemed sacred, and incapable
of being dissolved by any thing
which does not make them cease
to be one flesh, by making that
of the one common to some third
person, that is, by one of the
parties committing adultery: for
as, by forming at first only one
man and one woman, God condemned
polygamy, so, by making them one
flesh, he condemned divorce.
Verses 7-9
Matthew 19:7-9. They say, Why
did Moses then command to give a
writing of divorcement, &c. —
“If divorce be contrary to the
original institution of
marriage, as you affirm, how
came it that Moses has commanded
us to give a bill of divorce?
&c. The Pharisees, by calling
the law concerning divorce a
command, insinuated that Moses
had been so tender of their
happiness that he would not
suffer them to live with bad
wives, though they themselves
had been willing; but
peremptorily enjoined, that such
should be put away.” He saith,
Moses, because of the hardness
of your hearts — Because neither
your fathers nor you could bear
the more excellent way;
suffered, (or permitted,) not
commanded, you to put away your
wives: but from the beginning it
was not so — And the account
which Moses himself gives of the
original constitution of things,
which has now been referred to,
proves it to be an irregularity
which must have no place under
the gospel dispensation. And I
say unto you, Whosoever shall
put away his wife, except it be
for fornication — Which is a
fundamental breach of the main
article of the marriage
covenant, by which they are one
flesh; and shall marry another,
committeth adultery — Against
her that was his former wife,
and who continues still to be so
in the sight of God. As the law
of Moses allowed divorce, for
the hardness of men’s hearts,
and the law of Christ forbids
it, we learn from hence that
Christians being under a
dispensation of love and
liberty, tenderness of heart may
justly be expected among them,
and that they should not be
hard-hearted like the Jews.
Indeed there will be no occasion
for divorces if we bear with one
another, and forgive one another
in love, as those that are and
hope to be forgiven of God, and
have found him reluctant to put
us away, Isaiah 50:1. Divorces
are unnecessary if husbands love
their wives, and wives be
obedient to their husbands, and
they dwell together as heirs of
the grace of life. These are the
laws of Christ, and such as we
find not in all the law of
Moses.
Verse 10-11
Matthew 19:10-11. His disciples
say, If the case of a man be so
with his wife — If the
marriage-bond be thus
indissoluble, and a man cannot
dismiss his wife unless she
break that bond by going astray,
but must bear with her, whether
she be quarrelsome, petulant,
prodigal, foolish, barren, given
to drinking, or, in a word,
troublesome by numberless vices;
it is not good to marry — A man
had better not marry at all,
since by marrying he may
entangle himself in an
inextricable snare, and involve
himself in trials and troubles
which may make him miserable all
the rest of his days. But he
said, All men cannot receive
this saying — Namely, that it is
not expedient to marry; save
they to whom it is given — As a
peculiar gift, to conquer those
inclinations toward that state
which are found in mankind in
general, according to the common
constitution of human nature.
Verse 12
Matthew 19:12. For there are
some eunuchs, &c. — Our Lord
here shows that the
fore-mentioned gift of
continence is given to three
sorts of persons: 1st, To some
by natural constitution, without
their choice. 2d, To some by the
violence of men, against their
choice: and, 3d, To others by
grace, with their choice; who
steadily withstand their natural
inclinations, that they may wait
upon God without distraction,
and may glorify him in a single
life, judging it to be a state
more free from worldly cares,
and more friendly to devotion,
than that of marriage. He that
is able to receive it, let him
receive it — He that has this
gift, in any of these ways,
whether by natural constitution
and disposition; or by the
injury of human force used upon
him, rendering him incapable of
the matrimonial union; or by an
ardent desire of promoting the
interests of religion, animating
him to subdue his natural
appetite, and enabling him to
live in voluntary chastity,
unencumbered with secular
concerns; such a person will not
sin though, he leads a single
life. The words, however, let
him receive it, must not be
referred to the clauses
immediately preceding them, as
if our Lord had meant to say, He
that is able to become a eunuch
by any of the ways I have
mentioned, let him become one;
for the second way, namely,
through violence offered to
men’s bodies, is absolutely
unlawful: but they must be
referred to Matthew 19:11, as is
plain from the words themselves;
and the meaning of them is, He
that can receive the saying
there mentioned, and live
chastely without marriage, may
receive it; and, as many
commentators understand the
words, ought to receive it.
“They who have the gift of
continency,” says Henry, “and
are not under any necessity of
marrying, do best if they
continue single, 1 Corinthians
7:1; for they that are unmarried
have opportunity, if they have
but a heart, to care more for
the things of the Lord, how they
may please the Lord, 1
Corinthians 7:32; 1 Corinthians
7:34, being less encumbered with
the cares of this life, and
having greater vacancy of
thoughts, and time to mind
better things.” The word
eunuchs, from the Greek
ευνουχοι, eunouchoi, means
having the care of the bed, or
bed-chamber, (from ευνην εχειν,)
this being the principal
employment of eunuchs in the
eastern countries, that is, of
such as our Lord says were made
eunuchs by men, merely for the
purpose of attending in the
apartments of queens and
princesses.
Verses 13-15
Matthew 19:13-15. Then were
brought unto him little children
— Luke says, βρεφη, infants. It
is not said by whom they were
brought, but probably it was by
their parents or guardians: and
herein, 1st, they testified
their respect for Christ, and
the value they set upon his
favour and blessing: and, 2d,
manifested their love to their
children, not doubting but it
would be for their benefit in
this world and the next to have
the blessing and prayers of the
Lord Jesus, whom they looked
upon at least as an
extraordinary person, a holy
man, and as a prophet, if not
also as the Messiah, and the
blessings of such were valued
and desired. Observe, reader,
they who glorify Christ by
coming to him themselves, ought
further to glorify him by
bringing their children to him
likewise, and all upon whom they
have influence. That he should
put his hands on them and pray —
It appears to have been
customary among the Jews, when
one person prayed for another
who was present, to lay his hand
upon the person’s head; and this
imposition of hands was a
ceremony used in ancient times,
especially in paternal blessing:
thus Jacob, when he blessed and
adopted the sons of Joseph, laid
his hands upon their heads,
Genesis 48:14-20. And the
disciples rebuked them — That
is, them that brought the
children; probably thinking such
an employ beneath the dignity of
their Master. But Jesus said,
Suffer little children to come
unto me — Mark says, that when
Jesus saw it, that is, observing
his disciples rebuking those
that brought the children, he
was much displeased, namely, to
find his disciples so defective
in benevolence toward objects
whose innocence and helplessness
entitled them to great affection
from persons of riper years. He
ordered them therefore to let
the children be brought to him;
saying, For of such is the
kingdom of heaven — The Church
of God on earth, and his kingdom
in heaven, is composed of
persons who resemble little
children in their dispositions;
and children, even in a natural
sense, have a right to be
admitted into his kingdom, the
gospel authorizing the ministers
of Christ to admit the children
of believing parents into his
church by baptism, and those
that die in infancy being
undoubtedly heirs of eternal
glory. And he laid his hands on
them, as he was desired to do,
and blessed them, Mark 10:16;
recommended them in a solemn
manner to the divine blessing
and favour.
Verse 16
Matthew 19:16. And behold, one
came, &c. — Many of the poor had
followed him from the beginning.
One rich man came at last, and
came running, with great
earnestness, and kneeled to him
with great humility and
reverence, Mark 10:17, and said,
Good Master — Manifesting by the
appellation both a submissive
and teachable disposition; his
persuasion that Christ was a
divinely-commissioned teacher,
and his affection and peculiar
respect to him as such. What
good thing shall I do? — Or, as
Mark and Luke express it, What
shall I do to inherit eternal
life? — By this question he
manifested, 1st, That he
believed in a future state; that
there was an eternal life that
might be inherited; he was
therefore no Sadducee: 2d, that
he was concerned to ensure that
life to himself, and was more
desirous of it than of any of
the enjoyments of this life:
thus he differed from many of
his age and quality; for the
rich are apt to think it below
them to make such an inquiry as
this, and young people in
general are inclined to defer
making it to some future period
of their lives: 3d, that
something must be done; some
evils omitted, some duties
performed, or divine injunctions
complied with, in order to it:
4th, that he was, or at least
thought he was, willing to do
what was to be done, or to take
the steps necessary to be taken
for the obtaining of this
eternal life. And surely those
that know what it will be to
enjoy eternal life, and what to
come short of it, will be glad
to accept it on any terms.
Verses 17-22
Matthew 19:17-22. He said, Why
callest thou me good? — Whom
thou regardest merely as a
prophet sent from God, and
therefore supposest to be only a
man; there is none good —
Supremely, originally,
essentially, but God. If thou
wilt enter into life, keep the
commandments — From a principle
of loving faith. Believe, and
thence love and obey. And this
undoubtedly is the way to
eternal life. Our Lord therefore
does not answer ironically,
which had been utterly beneath
his character, but gives a
plain, direct, serious answer to
a serious question. The young
man saith, All these have I kept
from my childhood — So he
imagined, and perhaps he had, as
to the letter, but not as to the
spirit, which our Lord
immediately shows. What lack I
yet? — Wherein am I deficient?
What is further needful in order
to my securing the glorious
prize which I am pursuing? In
answer to this inquiry, made by
one evidently puffed up with a
high opinion of his own
righteousness, our Lord replies,
If thou wilt be perfect — That
is, a real, thorough Christian,
yet lackest thou one thing,
(Luke,) namely, to be saved from
the love of the world; from all
undue esteem for, and inordinate
affection to, earthly things.
Therefore, go and sell that thou
hast, (Luke, all that thou
hast,) and give — Distribute the
money which arises from the sale
thereof; to the poor, and thou
shalt have treasure in heaven —
Infinitely more excellent and
durable than that which thou
renouncest on earth. And come,
(take up the cross, Mark,) and
follow me — Unite thyself to me
as my constant attendant, though
it should be even at the expense
of thy life. He who reads the
heart, saw that this young man’s
bosom sin was the love of his
worldly possessions; and that he
could not be saved from it but
by literally parting with them.
To him, therefore, he gave this
particular direction, which he
never designed for a general
rule to all his followers. For
him this was necessary, not
only, as some suppose, in order
to his giving proof of exalted
piety, but in order to his
salvation. For him literally to
sell all, was an absolute duty;
for many to do this would be an
absolute sin. And yet, though
God does not in fact require
every man to distribute all his
goods to others, and so in
effect to become one of the
number of the poor relieved out
of his own possessions, yet
sincere piety and virtue require
in all an habitual readiness not
only to sacrifice their
possessions, but their lives, at
the command of God; and
Providence has in fact, in all
ages, called some out to trials
as severe as this. And certainly
an entire renunciation of the
world, so far at least as to be
willing to part with it whenever
God should call them to it, was
peculiarly necessary for all
Christians in the first ages,
when the profession of
Christianity so generally
exposed men to persecution and
death. And when he heard this he
went away sorrowful — Not being
willing to have salvation at so
high a price; for he had great
possessions — Which he now
plainly showed he valued more
than eternal life: and it was
with great wisdom that our Lord
took this direct and convincing
method of manifesting both to
himself and others that secret
insincerity and carnality of
temper which prevailed under all
these specious pretences and
promising appearances.
Verse 23-24
Matthew 19:23-24. Then said
Jesus unto his disciples — While
they had this example before
their eyes, and were witnesses
of the melancholy fact of a
well-educated and well-disposed
man voluntarily foregoing all
hope of eternal life rather than
part with his temporal
possessions; that is,
relinquishing all prospect of
the infinite and everlasting
riches and glories of heaven,
for the unsatisfying, uncertain,
and transitory enjoyments of
earth! Verily I say unto you —
And enjoin you firmly to believe
and seriously to consider what I
say; that a rich man shall
hardly enter into the kingdom of
heaven — Either into the kingdom
of grace or the kingdom of
glory; or be brought to have
such an esteem and love for the
gospel, with its present and
future blessings, as to embrace
it at the hazard of losing their
worldly property, together with
their good name, thereby, or so
as to use that property in such
a manner as the laws of the
gospel require. Our Lord
therefore adds, It is easier for
a camel to go through the eye of
a needle, &c. — A common proverb
among the Jews to express the
extreme difficulty of a thing.
Theophylact observes, that some
explain the word, καμηλον, as
signifying here a cable. “A good
authority, however, for this
signification, though adopted by
Castalio, who says, rudentem,
I,” says Dr. Campbell, “have
never seen. The frequency of the
term among all sorts of writers,
for denoting the beast so
denominated, is undeniable.
Besides, the camel being the
largest animal they were
acquainted with in Judea, its
name was become proverbial for
denoting any thing remarkably
large, and a camel’s passing
through a needle’s eye came, by
consequence, as appears from
some rabbinical writings, to
express a thing absolutely
impossible.” Our Lord,
therefore, here represents the
salvation of a rich man as being
next to an impossibility. It was
especially so in those early
days, when the profession of the
gospel exposed men to so much
persecution. And perhaps, as Dr.
Macknight observes, these strong
expressions, in their strictest
sense, must be understood of the
state of things at that time
subsisting; yet they are also
applicable to rich men in all
ages. The reason is, “Riches
have a woful influence upon
piety in two respects. 1st, In
the acquisition; for, not to
mention the many frauds and
other sins that men commit to
obtain riches, they occasion an
endless variety of cares and
anxieties, which draw the
affections away from God. 2d,
They are offensive to piety in
the possession; because, if they
are hoarded, they never fail to
beget covetousness, which is the
root of all evil; and if they
are enjoyed they become strong
temptations to luxury,
drunkenness, lust, pride, and
idleness.” But, besides these,
riches are a dangerous snare in
several other respects. 1st, It
is difficult to possess them and
not inordinately love them, and
put that trust in them which
ought to be put only in the
living God. For rich men
“obtaining all the necessaries
and superfluities of life by
means of their riches, are apt
to consider them as the sources
of their happiness, and to
depend upon them as such,
forgetting altogether their
dependance on God. It is
otherwise with the poor. They
are exposed to manifold
afflictions, and labour under
the pressure of continual wants.
These serve to convince them of
the vanity of the world, and to
put them in mind of their
dependance upon God; at the same
time, the unexpected
deliverances and supplies which
they meet with, rivet the idea
more firmly. Wherefore, in the
very nature of things, the poor
are nearer to the kingdom of God
than the rich; and if the
latter, yielding to the
temptations of their state,
trust in their riches, words can
scarce be invented strong enough
to paint the difficulty of
bringing them to that holy
temper of mind which would
qualify them for the kingdom of
God.” 2d, It is not easy to
possess riches and not think
highly of ourselves on account
of them, as they certainly give
their possessors a consequence
which they otherwise could not
have, and cause them to be
looked up to with respect by all
that are round about them. But,
3d, The most difficult thing of
all is, to possess them and make
a right use of them, even that
use which God wills all to make
in whose hands he hath lodged
them. In other words, To use
them as those who are persuaded
that, properly speaking, they
are not proprietors, but merely
stewards of them, and will
certainly be called by the great
Lord of all to give an account
how they have employed every
part of them, and what use they
have made of the advantages and
opportunities for doing and
receiving good above others,
which riches put in their power.
Verse 25-26
Matthew 19:25-26. When his
disciples heard it, they were
exceedingly amazed — The
disciples, who had followed
their Master in expectation of
becoming rich and great, were
exceedingly astonished when they
heard him declare that it was
next to impossible for a rich
man to enter into the kingdom of
God. They thought if the rich
and the great could not enter
his kingdom, he never could have
any kingdom at all; and,
therefore, they asked one
another with great surprise, Who
then can be saved — If rich men
with all their advantages
cannot? “Who? A poor man: a
peasant: a beggar: — ten
thousand of them,” says Mr.
Wesley, “sooner than one that is
rich.” But Jesus beheld them —
Mark says, looking upon them —
To compose their hurried
spirits. O what a speaking look
was there! Said to them — With
the utmost sweetness; With men
this is impossible — It is
observable, he does not retract
what he had said; no, nor soften
it in the least degree, but
rather strengthens it, by
representing the salvation of a
rich man as the utmost effort of
Omnipotence. The energy of
divine grace is able to make a
man despise the world, with all
that it contains, when no
efforts of man, no arguments,
eloquence, or persuasions are
able to do it.
Verse 27-28
Matthew 19:27-28. Then answered
Peter — With some warmth and
confidence; Behold, we have
forsaken all — We have done what
this youth, hopeful as he
seemed, had not the resolution
to do; for though indeed we had
not much, we have left all the
little that we had, and have at
all adventures followed thee
with the sincerest zeal and
affection. What shall we have
therefore? — It seems Peter was
ready to think that their labour
was lost, because they were to
have no recompense on earth, and
that his stewardship, the office
which he supposed his Master had
promised him under the metaphor
of the keys of the kingdom, was
likely to be of little service
to him. Jesus said, Ye which
have followed me in the
regeneration — During this time
and state of things, in which
men are to be regenerated and
created anew by the gospel, and
the earth is to be renewed in
righteousness. Mr. Fleming
paraphrases the verse thus:
“You, my apostles, who have
followed me in this new state of
the church, which is to be
brought to the birth when I am
to ascend to heaven, shall be to
the whole Christian Church what
the twelve heads of the tribes
were of old to the whole Jewish
nation: my followers shall
appeal to your decisions, as the
rule of their faith and
practice.” But, it seems, the
expression, εν τη παλιγγενεσια,
ought rather to be connected
with what follows; the sense
then will be, In the renovation,
namely, the final renovation, or
restitution of all things, Acts
3:21, when the Son of man shall
sit on the throne of his glory —
Exalted above the highest angels
of God, and presiding over and
judging the assembled world; ye
also shall sit — In the
beginning of the judgment they
shall stand; (2 Corinthians
5:10.) Then, being absolved,
they shall sit with the Judge:
(1 Corinthians 6:2 :) on twelve
thrones — So our Lord promised,
without expressing any
condition: yet, as absolute as
the words are, it is certain
there is a condition implied, as
in many scriptures where none is
expressed. In consequence of
this, these twelve did not sit
on those twelve thrones: for the
throne of Judas another took, so
that he never sat thereon.
Judging the twelve tribes of
Israel — Concurring joyfully
with me in the sentence which
will then be passed on the
Jewish nation, and on all the
professed members of my church,
as they have been sincere or
faithless in their profession,
and in the observance of those
laws which you, by authority
from me, shall have given them.
Verse 29-30
Matthew 19:29-30. And every one
— In every age and country, and
not you my apostles only; that
hath forsaken houses, or
brethren, or wife, or children —
Either by giving any of them up,
when they could not be retained
with a clear conscience; or by
willingly refraining from
acquiring them: shall receive a
hundred-fold — In value, though
not in kind, even in the present
world, in the inward
satisfaction and divine
consolation attending real
religion; and inherit
everlasting life — Shall enjoy
to all eternity that unspeakable
felicity and glory which God has
prepared for all his children,
and especially for those who
have cheerfully made such
sacrifices as those, and have
given such proofs of their faith
in, and love to, their God and
Saviour. But many first — In the
advantages and privileges which
they enjoy; shall —
notwithstanding this, fall short
of others, and be last — in the
great day of accounts; and those
who are the last, shall prove in
this respect the first: for
some, from whom it might be
least expected, shall embrace
the gospel, and courageously
endure the greatest hardships
for it; while others, with far
greater advantages, shall reject
it, and under much stronger
engagements shall desert it. The
words thus interpreted may be
considered as a prediction that
the Gentiles would receive and
obey the gospel, while the Jews
should reject it. As if he had
said, “Though you may imagine
that you and your brethren have
a peculiar title to the great
and substantial blessings of my
kingdom, which I have been
describing, the Gentiles shall
have equal opportunities and
advantages for obtaining them;
because they shall be admitted
to all the privileges of the
gospel on the same footing with
you Jews; nay, in point of time,
they shall be before you; for
they shall generally embrace the
gospel before your nation is
converted, Romans 11:25-26.” —
Macknight. The words may also be
thus interpreted: Many that are
first in profession, and in the
opinion of their
fellow-creatures, and their own
opinion, for piety and virtue,
shall be last in my esteem, and
in that of my Father, or shall
be found wanting, and therefore
shall be condemned at the day of
judgment: and the last in the
opinion of men, and in their own
opinion, and who are despised
and rejected by those that judge
according to appearance, shall
be first — Shall be preferred to
others, and be found highest in
my favour in that day. The
passage has evidently yet
another sense, namely, Many of
those who were first called
shall be last, shall have the
lowest reward, those who came
after them being preferred
before them: and yet possibly
both the first and the last may
be saved, though with different
degrees of glory. The doctrine
contained in this sentence is
illustrated by the parable of
the householder, contained in
the beginning of the following
chapter. |