KJV: The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
YLT: And the Pharisees came near to him, tempting him, and saying to him, 'Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?'
Darby: And the Pharisees came to him tempting him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
ASV: And there came unto him Pharisees, trying him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
| προσῆλθον | came |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: προσέρχομαι Sense: to come to, approach. |
|
| αὐτῷ | to Him |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Dative Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| Φαρισαῖοι | Pharisees |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: Φαρισαῖος Sense: A sect that seems to have started after the Jewish exile. |
|
| πειράζοντες | testing |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: πειράζω Sense: to try whether a thing can be done. |
|
| λέγοντες | saying |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: λέγω Sense: to say, to speak. |
|
| ἔξεστιν | is it lawful |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ἔξεστι Sense: it is lawful. |
|
| ‹ἀνθρώπῳ› | for a man |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Masculine Singular Root: ἄνθρωπος Sense: a human being, whether male or female. |
|
| ἀπολῦσαι | to divorce |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Infinitive Active Root: ἀπολύω Sense: to set free. |
|
| γυναῖκα | a wife |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: γυνή Sense: a woman of any age, whether a virgin, or married, or a widow. |
|
| αὐτοῦ | to him |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| πᾶσαν | every |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: πᾶς Sense: individually. |
|
| αἰτίαν | cause |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Singular Root: αἰτία Sense: cause, reason. |
|
Greek Commentary for Matthew 19:3
They “could not ask a question of Jesus without sinister motives” (Bruce). See note on Matthew 4:1 for the word (πειραζω peirazō). [source]
This clause is an allusion to the dispute between the two theological schools over the meaning of Deuteronomy 24:1. The school of Shammai took the strict and unpopular view of divorce for unchastity alone while the school of Hillel took the liberal and popular view of easy divorce for any passing whim if the husband saw a prettier woman (modern enough surely) or burnt his biscuits for breakfast. It was a pretty dilemma and meant to do Jesus harm with the people. There is no real trouble about the use of κατα kata here in the sense of προπτερ propter or because of (Robertson, Grammar, p. 509). [source]
See on Matthew 6:13. [source]
The temptation turned upon the dispute dividing the two great Rabbinical schools, the one of which (that of Hillel) held that a man might divorce his wife for any reason which rendered her distasteful to him; and the other (that of Shammai) that divorce was allowable only in case of unchastity. The querists would be anxious to know which side Jesus espoused. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 19:3
Explaining and confirming Matthew 19:30. [source]
Not the relation of the man to his wife, nor the circumstances, the state of the case. Αἰτία refers to cause (Matthew 19:3), and the meaning is, if the matter stands thus with reference to the cause which the man must have for putting away his wife. [source]
The use of ει ei in direct questions is really elliptical and seems an imitation of the Hebrew (Robertson, Grammar, p. 916). See also Matthew 19:3. It is not translated in English. [source]
The word may refer to the use in Matthew 19:3 “for every cause.” It may have a vague idea here = ρες res condition. But the point clearly is that “it is not expedient to marry” (ου συμπερει γαμησαι ou sumpherei gamēsai) if such a strict view is held. If the bond is so tight a man had best not commit matrimony. It is a bit unusual to have αντρωπος anthrōpos and γυνη gunē contrasted rather than ανηρ anēr and γυνη gunē sa120 [source]
The parable of the house illustrates the aphorism in Matthew 19:30. [source]
The adjectives change places as compared with Matthew 19:30. The point is the same, though this order suits the parable better. After all one‘s work does not rest wholly on the amount of time spent on it. “Even so hath Rabbi Bun bar Chija in twenty-eight years wrought more than many studious scholars in a hundred years” (Jer. Berak. ii. 5c). [source]
The word for “bill” Wycliff has it here “a libel of forsaking.” This same point the Pharisees raise in Matthew 19:7, showing probably that they held to the liberal view of Hillel, easy divorce for almost any cause. That was the popular view as now. See note on Matthew 19:8 for this and for discussion of “for your hardness of heart” Jesus expounds the purpose of marriage (Genesis 2:24) and takes the stricter view of divorce, that of the school of Shammai. See notes on Matthew 19:3-11 for discussion. Mark 10:10 notes that the disciples asked Jesus about this problem “in the house” after they had gone away from the crowd. [source]
This saying was repeated many times (Matthew 19:30; Mark 10:31; Matthew 20:16). [source]
Or reason. Common in this sense. See note on Matthew 19:3. [source]
Referring to Christ's declarations respecting divorce, Matthew 5:31, Matthew 5:32; Matthew 19:3-12. Not a distinction between an inspired and an uninspired saying. Paul means that his readers had no need to apply to him for instruction in the matter of divorce, since they had the words of Christ himself. [source]
Not mere wish as in 1 Corinthians 7:7, 1 Corinthians 7:8. Not I, but the Lord (ουκ εγω αλλα ο κυριος ouk egō alla ho kurios). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in Matthew 5:31.; Matthew 19:3-12; Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In Mark 10:9 we have from Christ: “What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder” (μη χοριζετω mē chorizetō). That the wife depart not from her husband First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after παραγγελλω paraggellō) of χοριζω chorizō old verb from adverbial preposition χωρις chōris separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark 10:12). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the Koiné{[28928]}š (Robertson, Grammar, p. 817).sa120 [source]
Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in Matthew 5:31.; Matthew 19:3-12; Mark 10:9-12; Luke 16:18. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In Mark 10:9 we have from Christ: “What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder” (μη χοριζετω mē chorizetō). [source]
Present active participle of λαλεω laleō That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true.Hard to be understood (δυσνοητα dusnoēta). Late verbal from δυς dus and νοεω noeō (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2 Timothy 2:17) and Spitta holds that Paul‘s teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:20, Romans 3:28; Romans 5:20 (with which cf. Romans 6:1 as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom.Unlearned Old word (alpha privative and μαντανω manthanō to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T.Unsteadfast (αστηρικτοι astēriktoi). See note on 2 Peter 2:14.Wrest Present active indicative of στρεβλοω strebloō old verb (from στρεβλος streblos twisted, στρεπω strephō to turn), here only in N.T.The other scriptures (τας λοιπας γραπας tas loipas graphas). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16) just as the prophets of old did (2 Peter 1:20.). Note λοιπας loipas (rest) here rather than αλλας allas (other). Peter thus puts Paul‘s Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matt 5:21-44; Matthew 15:3-6; Matthew 19:3-10). [source]
Old word (alpha privative and μαντανω manthanō to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T.Unsteadfast (αστηρικτοι astēriktoi). See note on 2 Peter 2:14.Wrest Present active indicative of στρεβλοω strebloō old verb (from στρεβλος streblos twisted, στρεπω strephō to turn), here only in N.T.The other scriptures (τας λοιπας γραπας tas loipas graphas). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16) just as the prophets of old did (2 Peter 1:20.). Note λοιπας loipas (rest) here rather than αλλας allas (other). Peter thus puts Paul‘s Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matt 5:21-44; Matthew 15:3-6; Matthew 19:3-10). [source]
Present active indicative of στρεβλοω strebloō old verb (from στρεβλος streblos twisted, στρεπω strephō to turn), here only in N.T.The other scriptures (τας λοιπας γραπας tas loipas graphas). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16) just as the prophets of old did (2 Peter 1:20.). Note λοιπας loipas (rest) here rather than αλλας allas (other). Peter thus puts Paul‘s Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matt 5:21-44; Matthew 15:3-6; Matthew 19:3-10). [source]
There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16) just as the prophets of old did (2 Peter 1:20.). Note λοιπας loipas (rest) here rather than αλλας allas (other). Peter thus puts Paul‘s Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matt 5:21-44; Matthew 15:3-6; Matthew 19:3-10). [source]