Matthew Chapter 4 verse 13 Holy Bible

Pulpit Commentary

Pulpit CommentaryVerse 13. - And leaving Nazareth. Finally as a place of residence. The form Ναζαρά occurs only here and Luke 4:16, which in itself well suits the opinion that Luke 4:16-30 is only a fuller account of this sojourn at Nazareth (cf. Weiss, ' Matthaus-Evang.'). He came and dwelt; i.e. made his home in (cf. Matthew 2:23). Not as having a house of his own there, so that he could take shelter in it as of right (cf. Matthew 8:20, "The foxes have holes," etc.); but probably settling his mother there, and being himself generally admitted to some one's house (perhaps Peter's, cf. Matthew 8:14, 16) when he came to the town. In Capernaum. Most probably the modern Tell-hum, upon the north-western shore, two miles from where the Jordan enters the lake. On the interesting relic of the synagogue, presumably that built by the centurion (Luke 7:5), vide especially Bishop Westcott on John 6:59. The identification with Tell-Hum can, however, hardly be considered as absolutely settled. "Some of the narratives of pilgrims of the sixth and seventh centuries appear to place Capernaum here. Jewish authors mention a place called Karat Tankhum, or Nakhum; and as the Arabic Tell ("hill") might easily be substituted for the word Kaphar ("village"), and Nakhum corrupted to Hum, Capernaum and Tell-Hum may be identical. On the other hand, Sepp supposes that the name of the Minim (Jewish Christians), who are known to have been numerous at Capernaum down to the time of Constantine, has been preserved in the Khan Minyeh" (Socin's ' Baedeker,' p. 373). Which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim. The details are mentioned to show the accordance with the following prophecy. Neubauer ('Geogr. du Talm.,' p. 222, edit. 1868) points out that, according to Joshua 19:33, 34, and the notices in the Talmud, the whole western side of the lake was in Naphtali, and that hence Capernaum could not, strictly speaking, be "in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim." He himself explains the discrepancy by saying that St. Matthew imitates the Haggadistic methods in accommodating the geography to the text he quotes. But it is clear that the expression is satisfied by the fact that Zebulun was really near Capernaum, and that numbers of those who frequented the town must have come from Zebulun. The position of Capernaum thus formed quite a sufficient reason for quoting the prophecy in Isaiah. Our evangelist, who (ch. 2.) had noticed the coining of distant heathen to worship Messiah, though he was persecuted by the then ruler of the nation, found it very significant that his public activity should begin at a distance from the home of the hierarchy, and in a district which had been the first to suffer from heathen attacks in the past, and had at the present moment a population in which there was a great mixture of the heathen element (cf. Weiss, 'Matthiaus-Evang.').

Ellicott's Commentary

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers(13) Leaving Nazareth.--The form of the name in the older MSS. is Nazara. St. Matthew records the bare fact. St. Luke (Luke 4:16-30) connects it with His rejection by the men of this very place, where He had been brought up, and their attempt upon His life. St. John (John 2:12) states a fact which implies (1) that Capernaum had not been before the home of the mother of our Lord and of His brethren, and (2) that there were ties of some kind drawing them thither for a temporary visit. The reasons for the choice of that city lie, some of them, on the surface.(1.) The exact site of Capernaum has long been one of the vexed questions of the topography of Palestine, but the researches of the Palestine Exploration Society have identified it with the modern village of Tell-H-m, where their excavations have disinterred the remains of an ancient building of the Roman period, which is supposed to have been the synagogue of the city; possibly, therefore, the very synagogue, built by the believing centurion (Luke 7:5), in which our Lord worshipped and taught (John 6:59). Its position on the shore of the lake, as a town with a garrison and a custom-house, made it the natural centre of the fishing-trade of the Lake of Galilee. As such, it fell in with the habits of the four first-called disciples, who, though two of them were of Bethsaida, were already partly domiciled there. (2.) It was within an easy day's journey of Nazareth, and so admitted either of another visit thither, as if to see whether those who dwelt there were more capable of faith than they had shown themselves at first (Matthew 13:54), or, as in Matthew 12:46-50, of visits from His mother, and His brethren, when they were anxious to restrain Him from teaching that seemed to them perilous. (3.) Even the presence of the "publicans and sinners"--the latter term including Gentiles, the class of those who had flocked to the preaching of John, and were to be found in the half-Romanised city, and were not to be found in the more secluded villages--may have been one of the elements which led to the decisive choice. (4.) Lastly, St. John's narrative supplies another link. The healing of the son of one of the Tetrarch's officers at Capernaum (John 4:46-54) had secured there a certain degree of protection and of influence. . . .