Matthew 10:8-10

New English Translation

Footnotes

1. Matthew 10:8 tc The majority of Byzantine minuscules, along with a few other witnesses (C³ K L Γ Θ 579 700^txt* 1424^c sa mae), lack νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε (nekrous egeirete, “raise the dead”), most likely because of oversight due to a string of similar endings (-ετε in the second person imperatives, occurring five times in v. 8). The longer version of this verse is found in several diverse and ancient witnesses such as א B C* (D) N 0281^vid ƒ^{1, 13} 33 565 579^mg lat bo; P W Δ 348 sy^h have a word-order variation, but nevertheless include νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε. Although some Byzantine-text proponents charge the Alexandrian witnesses with theologically-motivated alterations toward heterodoxy, it is interesting to find a variant such as this in which the charge could be reversed (do the Byzantine scribes have something against the miracle of resurrection?). In reality, such charges of wholesale theologically-motivated changes toward heterodoxy are immediately suspect due to lack of evidence of intentional changes (here the change is evidently due to accidental omission).
2. Matthew 10:8 sn See the note on leper in Matt 8:2.
3. Matthew 10:9 sn The gold, silver, and copper probably represent varying degrees of provision, with gold the most valuable and copper the least. Jesus’ point appears to be that not even minimal provision (copper) was to be taken along, forcing the disciple to be totally dependent on God.
4. Matthew 10:10 tn Or “no traveler’s bag”; or possibly “no beggar’s bag” (L&N 6.145; BDAG 811 s.v. πήρα).
5. Matthew 10:10 tn Grk “two tunics,” that is, wearing one and carrying one as a spare. See the note on the word “tunic” in Matt 5:40.
6. Matthew 10:10 tn Mark 6:8 allows one staff. It is possible that Matthew’s “two” with regard to the tunics (NET “an extra tunic”) extends to cover the sandals and staff as well (although “staff” is singular), making this a summary (cf. Luke 9:3) meaning not taking an extra pair of sandals or an extra staff (like the tunics). It is also possible the expression is merely rhetorical for “traveling light” which has been rendered in two slightly different ways.sn The point of the prohibitions seems to be not so much urgency as total dependence on God. Lack of a staff, in particular, would leave the traveler extremely vulnerable to wild animals and robbers.