19 But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias his brother Philip's wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done,
19 But G1161 Herod G2264 the tetrarch, G5076 being reproved G1651 by G5259 him G846 for G4012 Herodias G2266 his G846 brother G80 Philip's G5376 wife, G1135 and G2532 for G4012 all G3956 the evils G4190 which G3739 Herod G2264 had done, G4160
19 but Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias his brother's wife, and for all the evil things which Herod had done,
19 and Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him concerning Herodias the wife of Philip his brother, and concerning all the evils that Herod did,
19 But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him as to Herodias, the wife of his brother, and as to all the wicked things which Herod had done,
19 but Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias, his brother's{TR reads "brother Philip's instead of brother's"} wife, and for all the evil things which Herod had done,
19 But Herod the king, because John had made a protest on account of Herodias, his brother's wife, and other evil things which Herod had done,
For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife.
He that reproveth a scorner getteth to himself shame: and he that rebuketh a wicked man getteth himself a blot. Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee.
Worthy.Bible » Commentaries » Matthew Henry Commentary » Commentary on Luke 3
Commentary on Luke 3 Matthew Henry Commentary
Chapter 3
Nothing is related concerning our Lord Jesus from his twelfth year to his entrance on his thirtieth year. We often think it would have been a pleasure and advantage to us if we had journals, or at least annuls, of occurrences concerning him; but we have as much as Infinite Wisdom thought fit to communicate to us, and, if we improve not that, neither should we have improved more if we had had it. The great intention of the evangelists was to give us an account of the gospel of Christ, which we are to believe, and by which we hope for salvation: now that began in the ministry and baptism of John, and therefore they hasten to give us an account of that. We could wish, perhaps, that Luke had wholly passed by what was related by Matthew and Mark, and had written only what was new, as he has done in his two first chapters. But it was the will of the Spirit that some things should be established out of the mouth, not only of two, but of three witnesses; and we must not reckon it a needless repetition, nor shall we do so if we renew out meditations upon these things, with suitable affections. In this chapter we have,
Luk 3:1-14
John's baptism introducing a new dispensation, it was requisite that we should have a particular account of it. Glorious things were said of John, what a distinguished favourite of Heaven he should be, and what a great blessing to this earth (ch. 1:15, 17); but we lost him in the deserts, and there he remains until the day of his showing unto Israel, ch. 1:80. And now at last that day dawns, and a welcome day it was to them that waited for it more than they that waited for the morning. Observe here,
Luk 3:15-20
We are now drawing near to the appearance of our Lord Jesus publicly; the Sun will not be long after the morning-star. We are here told,
The evangelist concludes his account of John's preaching with an et caetera (v. 18): Many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people, which are not recorded.
Luk 3:21-38
The evangelist mentioned John's imprisonment before Christ's being baptized, though it was nearly a year after it, because he would finish the story of John's ministry, and then introduce that of Christ. Now here we have,
One difficulty occurs between Abraham and Noah, which gives us some perplexity, v. 35, 36. Sala is said to be the son of Cainan, and he the son of Arphaxad, whereas Sala was the son of Arphaxad (Gen. 10:24; 11:12), and there is no such man as Cainan found there. But, as to that, it is sufficient to say that the Seventy Interpreters, who, before our Saviour's time, translated the Old Testament into Greek, for reasons best known to themselves inserted that Cainan; and St. Luke, writing among the Hellenist Jews, was obliged to make use of that translation, and therefore to take it as he found it.
The genealogy concludes with this, who was the son of Adam, the son of God.