Matius 2:16

2:16 When Herod ¹  saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, he became enraged. He sent men ²  to kill all the children in Bethlehem ³  and throughout the surrounding region from the age of two and under, according to the time he had learned from the wise men.

Matius 5:29

5:29 If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away! It is better to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into hell. ⁴ 

Matius 18:8

18:8 If ⁵  your hand or your foot causes you to sin, ⁶  cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life crippled or lame than to have ⁷  two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.

Matius 21:21

21:21 Jesus ⁸  answered them, “I tell you the truth, ⁹  if you have faith and do not doubt, not only will you do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, ‘Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,’ it will happen.

Matius 21:31

21:31 Which of the two did his father’s will?” They said, “The first.” ¹⁰  Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, ¹¹  tax collectors ¹²  and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God!

[2:16]  ¹ sn See the note on King Herod in 2:1. Note the fulfillment of the prophecy given by the angel in 2:13.

[2:16]  ² tn Or “soldiers.”

[2:16]  ³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[5:29]  ⁴ sn On this word here and in the following verse, see the note on the word hell in 5:22.

[18:8]  ⁵ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[18:8]  ⁶ sn In Greek there is a wordplay that is difficult to reproduce in English here. The verb translated “causes…to sin” (σκανδαλίζω, skandalizw) comes from the same root as the word translated “stumbling blocks” (σκάνδαλον, skandalon) in the previous verse.

[18:8]  ⁷ tn Grk “than having.”

[21:21]  ⁸ tn Grk “And answering, Jesus said.” This is somewhat redundant and has been simplified in the translation.

[21:21]  ⁹ tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ¹⁰ tc Verses 29-31 involve a rather complex and difficult textual problem. The variants cluster into three different groups: (1) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. The second son is called the one who does his father’s will. This reading is found in the Western mss (D it). But the reading is so hard as to be nearly impossible. One can only suspect some tampering with the text, extreme carelessness on the part of the scribe, or possibly a recognition of the importance of not shaming one’s parent in public. (Any of these reasons is not improbable with this texttype, and with codex D in particular.) The other two major variants are more difficult to assess. Essentially, the responses make sense (the son who does his father’s will is the one who changes his mind after saying “no”): (2) The first son says “no” and later has a change of heart, and the second son says “yes” but does not go. But here, the first son is called the one who does his father’s will (unlike the Western reading). This is the reading found in (א) C L W (Z) 0102 0281 ˹ 33 Ï and several versional witnesses. (3) The first son says “yes” but does not go, and the second son says “no” but later has a change of heart. This is the reading found in B Θ Ë¹³ 700 and several versional witnesses. Both of these latter two readings make good sense and have significantly better textual support than the first reading. The real question, then, is this: Is the first son or the second the obedient one? If one were to argue simply from the parabolic logic, the second son would be seen as the obedient one (hence, the third reading). The first son would represent the Pharisees (or Jews) who claim to obey God, but do not (cf. Matt 23:3). This accords well with the parable of the prodigal son (in which the oldest son represents the unbelieving Jews). Further, the chronological sequence of the second son being obedient fits well with the real scene: Gentiles and tax collectors and prostitutes were not, collectively, God’s chosen people, but they did repent and come to God, while the Jewish leaders claimed to be obedient to God but did nothing. At the same time, the external evidence is weaker for this reading (though stronger than the first reading), not as widespread, and certainly suspect because of how neatly it fits. One suspects scribal manipulation at this point. Thus the second reading looks to be superior to the other two on both external and transcriptional grounds. But what about intrinsic evidence? One can surmise that Jesus didn’t always give predictable responses. In this instance, he may well have painted a picture in which the Pharisees saw themselves as the first son, only to stun them with his application (v. 32).

[21:31]  ¹¹ tn Grk “Truly (ἀμήν, amhn), I say to you.”

[21:31]  ¹² sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.