Biblical commentary on the New Testament - The Christian ...

Matthew XVIII. 6-9. 581
who wrestles and struggles with the old man for dominion. The
greatness of the guilt invoxved in giving spiritual offence, or in
deterring the little ones from a life of faith, is depicted hy the
Saviour in a form palpable to the senses, inasmuch as he represents
the sin of these delinquencies as greater than those crimes on which
the heaviest political punishment is inflicted. (The avixcpcpei avrQ,
it were better for him, expresses a heavier, namely, a spiritual and
eternal punishment.—The sinking into the sea was not practised
among the Jews, but was in use among other nations. See for
example, Sueton., August, c. 68. Instead of the less usual expres-
sion ixvXog dviKog in Matthew and Luke, Mark has P^idog nvXiKog.
MvAof = iwXt] denotes properly the mill itself, and in a secondary
sense the mill-stone. The word ovoq is commonly used of the lower
mill-stone, which does not move. The adjective form, bvLKog, is not
in use as applied to it. The words ^ivXog dviKog therefore cannot
well mean the lower and heavier mill-stone. We do better to adhere
to the sense of set in motion hy asses, as expressing the size of the
stone. The ass mill-stone is contrasted with the stone of a mill
driven by the hand of man.)
Yer. 7.—This thought again meets us at Luke xvii. 1, v/here
we shall more closely consider it. Here it is only incidental,
and unconnected with the rest of the discourse. (Koanog the
counterpart of (Baa. r. 9. See in regard to it more at length in the
exposition of John i. 9.)
Ver. 8, 9.—After speaking of offence given to others, Jesus
passes on to that inward offence which he who is born again may
give to himself. The general meaning of the words is clear. The
cutting off hand and foot, the jilucking out of the eye, is intended
to denote the denying ourselves of what is dearest and most indis-
pensable to the outward life, when through sinful influences
transmitted from without, it endangers the spiritual life. But here,
as at Matth. ver. 29, 30, a difficulty is raised by the additional
clause, It is better for thee to enter into life (sc, eternal) lame,
maimed, one-eijed {x^^^v, kvXXov, ixovocpOaXfiov) .'^ For, I cannot
persuade myself to regard this as a mere embelHshment, which has
no meaning of its own. The sense of the whole comparison rather
seems to be this. The cutting off of hand or foot, can, as is selfevident,
be only taken spiritually, since the outward act were mean-
ingless (compare on Matth. xix. 12), unless the inward root of sin
were destroyed. Hand, foot, eye, here appear to be used by the
Saviour to denote mental powers and dispositions, and he counsels
their restraint, their non-development, if their culture interferes
with that of the higher elements of spiritual life. The unrestricted
• Compare as to fiov6