Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point

JESUS WAS USING EXAGGERATION TO MAKE A POINT
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Matthew 23:24 24Youblind guides! You strainout a
gnat but swallowa camel.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
The Gnat And The Camel
Matthew 23:24
W.F. Adeney
It was characteristic ofthe scribes and Phariseesto strain out the gnat and yet
to swallow the camel. They would be very carefulin avoiding minute formal
improprieties, while they committed greatsins without compunction.
I. THE EVIL HAUNT. This is seen in many forms today.
1. In moral conduct. People are found to be very scrupulous about points of
politeness, and very negligentof real kindness. They will not offend an
acquaintance with a harsh phrase, and yet they will ruin him if they can
outwit him in a business transaction. There are persons of strict Puritanism,
who forbid even innocent forms of amusement for their children, and yet who
are self-indulgent, ill-tempered, uncharitable, and covetous. Suchpeople
swallow many a huge camel, while sedulouslystraining the gnats out of their
children's cup of pleasure.

2. In religious observances.The greatestcare is takenfor the correct
observance ofritual, while the spirit of devotion is neglected;a rigid standard
of orthodoxy is insisted on, but living faith is neglected;a punctual
performance of Church ordinances is accompaniedby a total disregard for
the will of Godand the obligations of obedience.
II. THE SOURCE OF THIS HABIT.
1. Hypocrisy. This was the source in the case ofthe scribes and Pharisees, as
our Lord himself indicated. It is easierto attend to minutiae of conduct than
to be right in the great fundamental principles; to rectify these a resolution, a
regenerationof character, is required; but to setthe superficial details in a
certain state of decencyand order involves no such serious change. Moreover,
the little superficialpoints are obvious to all people, and, like Chinese puzzles,
challenge admiration on accountof their very minuteness.
2. Small-mindedness. In some casesthere may be no conscioushypocrisy. But
a littleness of thinking and acting has dwarfed the whole area of observation.
The small soul is able to see the gnat, but it cannoteven perceive the existence
of the camel. It is so busy with the fussy trivialities on which it prides itself,
that it has no powerleft to attend to weightiermatters.
III. THE CURE OF THE HABIT.
1. By the revelationof its existence. Whenthe foolishthing is done in all
simplicity and goodfaith, it only needs to be seento be rejected. When it is the
fruit of sheerhypocrisy, the exposure of it will, of course, make it clearthat
the performance will no longer win the plaudits of the crowd;and then, as

there will be no motive to continue in it, the actorwill lay his part aside. But
this does not imply a realcure. For that we must go further.
2. By the gift of a largerlife. We are all of us more or less cramped by our own
pettiness, and just in proportion as we are self-centredand self-contained
shall we give attention to small things. We want to be lifted out of ourselves,
we need the awakening ofour higher spiritual powers. It is the objectof
Christ to effectthis grand change. When he takes possessionofthe soul he sets
all things in their true light. Then we can strive for greatobjects, fight great
sins, win greatvictories, and forgetthe gnats in the magnitude of the camels. -
W.F.A.
Biblical Illustrator
And have omitted the weightier matters of the law.
Matthew 23:23, 24
Sins of omission
J. Vaughan, M. A.
1. The very earliestcause of nearly all sin lies in omitting something which we
ought to have done. Perhaps you left your room without prayer.
2. That sins of omissionin God's sight are of larger magnitude than sins of
commission.
3. They will form the basis of judgment at the lastday — "Ye gave Me no
meat."
4. Why is any man lostthat is lost, but because he omitted God's way of
escape?

5. Sins of omissionare characteristicallysins of the Christian dispensation. Its
laws are positive.
(J. Vaughan, M. A.)
The greatduties of religion
J. Saurin
Define these weightiermatters of the law.
1. One virtue originating immediately in primitive law is more important than
another, an obligation to perform which is founded only on some particular
circumstances.
2. Virtues anterior to particulars subsistafter those circumstances.
3. A virtue that hath a greatobject is more than those which have small
objects.
4. Every virtue connectedwith other virtues, and drawing after it many more,
is greaterthan any single or detachedvirtue.
5. A virtue that constitutes the end, to which all religion conducts us, is more
important than other virtues, which at most are only means to lead to the end.
(J. Saurin)

Small duties of religion
J. Saurin.
Obligation to little duties may be urged, because
(1)they contribute to maintain a tenderness of conscience;
(2)they are sources ofre-conversionafter greatfalls;
(3)they make up by their frequency what is wanting to their importance;
(4)they have sometimes charactersas certainof real love as the greatduties
have.
(J. Saurin.)
The superlative importance of the moral duties of religio
W. Leechman.
n: —
I. Moralduties, the weightiermatters of the law, the love of God, justice,
mercy, and fidelity, are more excellentin their own nature, and ought always
to be preferred to all ritual and positive institutions, whenever they come into
competition with them.

II. Notwithstanding the intrinsic and superior excellence ofmoral duties, yet
those rites and external institutions which are of Divine appointment ought to
be religiously observed, and it is really criminal in the sight of God to despise
and neglectthem.
(W. Leechman.)
Sins of omission
The lastwords that Archbishop Usher was heard to express, were, "Lord,
forgive my sins; especiallymy sins of omission."
Fidelity in little duties no excuse for neglectof great
W. Gurnall.
The tithing of cummin must not be neglected;but take heed thou dost not
neglectthe weightiestthings of the Law — judgment, mercy, and faith;
making your precisenessin the less a blind for your horrible wickednessin the
greater.
(W. Gurnall.)
All sin traced to an omission
J. Vaughan, M. A.
It scarcelyadmits of a question, but that every sin which was ever committed
upon the earth, is traceable, in the first instance, to a sin of omission. At a
certain point of the genealogyofthat sin, there was something of which it is
not too much to say that if it had been done that sin would have been cut
short. And the very earliestcause ofthat sin (whether you are able to discover
a root or not) lay, not in anything we did, or said, or thought, but in that
which we might have done, and did not do; or, might have said, and did not
say; or, might have thought, and did not think. Every sin lies in a chain, and

the first link is fastenedto another link. For instance, that first sin committed
after the Fall — Cain's fratricide — was the result of anger; that angerwas
the result of jealousy;that jealousywas the result of an unacceptedsacrifice;
that unacceptedsacrifice was the result of the absence offaith; and that
absence offaith was the result of an inattentive ear, or a heart which had
grown silent towards God .... As you uncoil a sin, you have been surprised to
find what a compound thing that is which, at first sight, appearedsingle. You
have gone on, finding the germ of one sin in the seedof another sin, till you
could scarcelypursue the process becauseit stretched so far; but, if you went
far enough, you found at last that some neglectwas the beginning of it all.
(J. Vaughan, M. A.)
Sins of omissionthe most heinous
J. Vaughan, M. A.
By which are we most pained — the omissions, orthe commissions, oflife?
Say you have two persons whom you love. I will suppose a father with two
sons. The one often offends him by direct and open disobedience;and your
heart is made to ache, againand again, by his frequent and flagrant
transgressions ofyour law. The other does nothing which is outwardly and
palpably bad. His life is moral, and his course correct. But he shows no sign
whatsoeverofany personalregard for you. You long to catchsome indication
of affection; but there is none. Day after day you have watchedfor it; but still
there is none! You are plainly indifferent to him. He does not injure you. But
in no thought, or word, or deed, does he ever show you that he has you in his
heart, to care for you and love you. Now, which of those two sons will pain you
most? The disobedient, or the cold one? The one who often transgresses,or
the one who never loves? The one who commits, or the one who omits? Is
there a doubt that, howevermuch the committee may the more injure himself,
or society, the omitter most wounds the parent's heart? And is it not so with
the greatFatherof us all?
(J. Vaughan, M. A.)

Omissionthe sin of the lost
J. Vaughan, M. A.
Why is any man lost who is lost? Is it because he did certainthings which
brought down upon him the righteous retribution of eternal punishment? No;
but because, having broken God's commandments, he omitted to use God's
way of escape — to go to Christ, to believe the promises, to acceptpardon, to
realize truth: therefore he is lost; and the cause ofthe final condemnation of
every sinner in hell is a sin of omission. The gospelprecept — unlike the law
— is direct and absolute, not negative:"Thou shalt love God, and thy
neighbour." And therefore the transgressionmust consistin an omission. It is
only by not loving, that you canbe brought in guilty, under the code of the
gospelof Jesus Christ.
(J. Vaughan, M. A.)
Religious duties greatand small to be combined
W. M. Taylor, D. D.
Turning to the house-old, we may see how the principle here statedholds
good. Public religious services must not be made the substitute for home
duties; and, again, home duties must not be pleaded as an apologyfor the
neglectof public ordinances. Arrangements ought to be made for rightly
engaging in both. The instructing of other people's children must not be
allowedto keepus from giving needed attention to the godly upbringing of
our own. And, again, the training of our own families should not be made a
plea for exemption from all effort for the spiritual welfare of those of others.
A workman meeting a friend on the streetin Edinburgh, one Monday
morning, said to him, "Why were you not at church last night? our minister
preachedan excellentsermon on home religion. Why were you not there to
hear it?" "Because,"was the answer, "I was at home doing it." That was a
goodanswer, for the service was anextra one, and the man had been at

church twice before. So he was right, with the third, to give his home duties
the preference. But then, on the other hand, the "athome doing it" is not all,
and it should be so provided for as not to take awayfrom proper attendance
on regular ordinances, otherwise the result will be that after a while religion
will not be much caredfor either in the church or in the home. A tardy
student coming late into the class was askedby his professorto accountfor his
want of punctuality; and replied that he had delayed for purposes of private
devotion. But his teachervery properly reproved him by saying, "You had no
right to be at your prayers, when you ought to have been here; it is your duty
to make such arrangements that the one shall not interfere with the other." So
in regard to the conflicting claims of the house. hold and the church upon you.
Make arrangements forgiving due attention to both, and do not sacrifice the
one on the shrine of the other.
(W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
These things done, and others not left undone
W. M. Taylor, D. D.
A clearconceptionof the real nature of Phariseeismis all that is needed to
vindicate the severity of this denunciation.
1. The error of the Pharisees was notsuperficial, but fundamental. Their
religion was not simply defective, but positively false.
2. Such radically erroneous notions concerning religion, lulled the Pharisees
into absolute self-security.
3. Still further we may accountfor the severityof these denunciations from
the factthat the Saviour foresaw thatPhariseeismwould in after ages become
the greatesthindrance to the progress ofHis cause in the world. There is a
constanttendency to retain the form after the life has departed.

I. THAT THE COMMANDS OF GOD ARE OF DIFFERENT DEGREESOF
IMPORTANCE.There are matters of more weight than others among the
Divine precepts. The heart that reverences Godwill seek to obey all, but each
in its ownorder. In morals as in doctrine there are things essentialand non-
essential. The weightiestofall God's commands have respectto judgment,
mercy, faith. The inner is more important than the outward life; out of the
heart are the issues of life, and therefore should have the greatestattention. So
the greatthings and the smallerwill follow in their train.
II. THAT ATTENTION TO THE MATTERS OF LESS IMPORTANCE
WILL NOT COMPENSATEFOR THE NEGLECT OF THOSE WHICH
ARE OF ESSENTIALMOMENT. Punctilious title-paying will not condone
lack of humble faith in God.
III. That when the heart is right with God through faith in Jesus Christ,
BOTH THE WEIGHTIER MATTERS AND THOSE OF LESS
IMPORTANCE WILL BE PROPERLYATTENDED TO.
(W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
The gnat and the camel
D. Fraser, D. D.
I. Inward qualities count for more than outward observances.
II. That a just sense ofproportion is essentialto a welt-regulatedChristian
mind. It is no infrequent thing to find a personwho seems to be very religious
curiously deficient in the sense of proportion. He cannotquite see what is
greator what is small. If he be disposed to obstinacyor bigotry, he simply

regards all that is plain to him as great;and all his tenets and regulations as
equally great. If he be merely small-minded, by natural affinity he fastens
keenly on small points. These are of the proper size for him; and he takes
them to be quite large. Or if he be of a self-regarding mind, considering
religion simply with reference to his own safety, he lays all the stress on the
truths which are near himself, and has but a faint appreciationof those which
are much more vast but more remote.
(D. Fraser, D. D.)
Cummin
C. Bulkley.
"Thatwe meet so often," says Sir Thomas Brown, "with cummin seeds in
many parts of Scripture, in reference unto Judaea, a seedso abominable at
present to our palates and nostrils, will not seemstrange unto any who
considerthe frequent use thereof among the ancients, not only in medical, but
in dietetical use and practice;for their dishes were filled therewith; and their
noblest festivalpreparations in Apicius, were not without it; and even in the
polenta and parched corn, the old diet of the Romans, unto every measure
they mixed a small proportion of linseedand cummin seed. And so cummin is
justly set down among things of vulgar and common use.
(C. Bulkley.)
Tithe of mint
DeanPlumptre.
The Pharisee, in his minute scrupulosity, made a point of gathering the tenth
sprig of every gardenherb, and presenting it to the priest.
(DeanPlumptre.)

Straining out a gnat
Trench.
The expressionmay be more preciselyrendered, "strain out a gnat," and then
there may be a reference intended to the customthat prevailed, among the
more strict and accurate Jews,ofstraining their wine and other drinks, lest
they should inadvertently swallow a gnat, or some other unclean insect:
supposing that thereby they would transgress (Leviticus 11:20, 23, 41, 42). A
traveller in North Africa, where Easterncustoms are very jealouslyretained,
reports noticing that a Moorishsoldierwho accompaniedhim, when he
drank, always unfolded the end of his turban, and placed it over the mouth of
his bota, drinking through the muslin to strain out the gnats, whose larvae
swarm in the water of that country.
(Trench.)
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(24) Strain at a gnat.—Better, as in Tyndale’s and other earlier versions,
strain out. It is sometimes saidthat the present rendering of the Authorised
version is but the perpetuation of a printer’s blunder; but of this there is
scarcelysufficientevidence, nor is it probable in itself. In the Greek both
nouns have the emphasis of the article, “the gnat—the camel.” The scrupulous
care describedin the first clause of the proverbial saying was literally
practisedby devout Jews (as it is now by the Buddhists of Ceylon), in
accordancewith Leviticus 11:23; Leviticus 11:42. In the secondclause, the
camelappears, not only, as in Matthew 19:24, as the type of vastness, but as

being among the unclean beasts of which the Israelites might not eat
(Leviticus 11:4).
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
23:13-33 The scribes and Pharisees were enemies to the gospelofChrist, and
therefore to the salvationof the souls of men. It is bad to keepaway from
Christ ourselves, but worse also to keepothers from him. Yet it is no new
thing for the show and form of godliness to be made a cloak to the greatest
enormities. But dissembled piety will be reckoneddouble iniquity. They were
very busy to turn souls to be of their party. Not for the glory of God and the
goodof souls, but that they might have the credit and advantage ofmaking
converts. Gain being their godliness, by a thousand devices they made religion
give way to their worldly interests. They were very strict and precise in
smaller matters of the law, but careless andloose in weightier matters. It is
not the scrupling a little sin that Christ here reproves; if it be a sin, though but
a gnat, it must be strained out; but the doing that, and then swallowing a
camel, or, committing a greatersin. While they would seemto be godly, they
were neither sobernor righteous. We are really, what we are inwardly.
Outward motives may keepthe outside clean, while the inside is filthy; but if
the heart and spirit be made new, there will be newness oflife; here we must
begin with ourselves. The righteousness ofthe scribes and Pharisees waslike
the ornaments of a grave, or dressing up a dead body, only for show. The
deceitfulness of sinners'hearts appears in that they go down the streams of
the sins of their ownday, while they fancy that they should have opposedthe
sins of former days. We sometimes think, if we had lived when Christ was
upon earth, that we should not have despisedand rejectedhim, as men then
did; yet Christ in his Spirit, in his word, in his ministers, is still no better
treated. And it is just with God to give those up to their hearts' lusts, who
obstinately persistin gratifying them. Christ gives men their true characters.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
Which strain at a gnat ... - This is a proverb. There is, however, a
mistranslation or misprint here, which makes the verse unmeaning. "To

strain" at a "gnat" conveys no sense. It should have been to strain out a gnat;
and so it is printed in some of the earlier versions, and so it was undoubtedly
rendered by the translators. The common reading is a "misprint," and should
be corrected. The Greek means to "strain" out by a cloth or sieve.
A gnat - The gnat has its origin in the water;not in greatrivers, but in pools
and marshes In the stagnantwaters they appear in the form of small "grubs"
or "larvae." These larvae retaintheir form about three weeks,afterwhich
they turn to chrysalids, and after three or four days they pass to the form of
gnats. They are then distinguished by their well-knownsharp sting. It is
probable that the Saviour here refers to the insectas it exists in its "grub" or
"larva" form, before it appears in the form of a gnat. Wateris then its
element, and those who were nice in their drink would take pains to strain it
out. Hence, the proverb. See Calmet's Dict., art. "Gnat." It is used here to
denote a very small matter, as a camel is to denote a large object. "You Jews
take greatpains to avoid offence in very small matters, superstitiously
observing the smallestpoints of the law, like a man carefully straining out the
animalculae from what he drinks, while you are at no pains to avoid greatsins
- hypocrisy, deceit, oppression, and lust - like a man who should swallow a
camel." The Arabians have a similar proverb: "He eats an elephant, and is
suffocatedwith a gnat." He is troubled with little things, but pays no attention
to greatmatters.
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
24. Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat—The proper rendering—as in the
older English translations, and perhaps our own as it came from the
translators'hands—evidently is, "strainout." It was the custom, says Trench,
of the stricter Jews to strain their wine, vinegar, and other potables through
linen or gauze, lest unawares they should drink down some little unclean
insecttherein and thus transgress (Le 11:20, 23, 41, 42)—justas the Buddhists
do now in Ceylonand Hindustan—and to this custom of theirs our Lord here
refers.

and swallow a camel—the largestanimal the Jews knew, as the "gnat" was
the smallest;both were by the law unclean.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
It is a proverbial expressionused amongstthem, againstsuchas would
pretend a greatniceness and scrupulosity about, and zeal for, little things, but
in matters of much higher concernand moment were not nice and scrupulous
at all: and this indeed is both a certain note and an ordinary practice of
hypocrites. There is no man that is sincere in his obedience to God, but hath
respectto all God’s commandments, Psalm119:6. Though some duties be
greater, of more moment for the honour and glory of God, than others, which
a goodman will lay the greateststressupon, yet he will neglectnothing which
the law of God enjoins him. But concerning hypocrites, these two things are
always true:
1. They are partial in their pretended obedience.
2. They always lay the greateststressupon the leastthings of the law, bodily
labour and exercise, and those things which require leastof the heart, and
leastself-denial.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Ye blind guides,.... As in Matthew 23:16.
who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel: the Syriac and Persic versions read
the words in the plural number, gnats and camels. The Jews had a law, which
forbid them the eating of any creeping thing,

Leviticus 11:41 and of this they were strictly observant, and would not be
guilty of the breach of it for everso much,
"One that eats a flea, or a gnat; they say(p) is "an apostate";
one that has changedhis religion, and is no more to be reckonedas one of
them. Hence they very carefully strained their liquors, lestthey should
transgress the above command, and incur the characterof an apostate;and at
least, the penalty of being beatenwith forty stripes, save one; for,
"whoevereats a whole fly, or a whole gnat, whether alive or dead, was to be
beaten on accountof a creeping flying thing (q).
Among the accusations Hamanis said to bring againstthem to Ahasuerus,
and the instances he gives of their laws being different from the king's, this
one (r); that "if a fly falls into the cup of one of them, , "he strains it, and
drinks it"; but if my lord the king should touch the cup of one of them, he
would throw it to the ground, and would not drink of it.
Maimonides says (s),
"He that strains wine, or vinegar, or strong liquor, and eats "Jabchushin" (a
sort of small flies found in wine cellars (t), on accountof which they strained
their wine), or gnats, or worms, which he hath strained off, is to be beaten on
accountof the creeping things of the water, or on accountof the creeping
flying things, and the creeping things of the water.

Moreover, it is said (u),
"a man might not pour his strong liquors through a strainer, by the light (of a
candle or lamp), lest he should separate and leave in the top of the strainer
(some creeping thing), and it should fail againinto the cup, and he should
transgress the law, in Leviticus 11:41.
To this practice Christ alluded here; and so very strict and carefulwere they
in this matter, that to strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel, became at length
a proverb, to signify much solicitude about little things, and none about
greater. These men would not, on any consideration, be guilty of such a crime,
as not to pay the tithe of mint, anise, and cummin, and such like herbs and
seeds;and yet made no conscienceofdoing justice, and showing mercy to
men, or of exercising faith in God, or love to him. Just as many hypocrites,
like them, make a greatstir, and would appear very conscientious and
scrupulous, about some little trifling things, and yet stick not, at other times,
to commit the grossestenormities, and most scandalous sins in life,
(p) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 26. 2. & Horaiot, fol. 11. 1.((q) Mainon. Hilch.
MaacolotAsurot, c. 2. sect. 22. (r) T. Bab. Megilla, fol, 13. 2. Vid. T. Hietos.
Sota, fol. 17. 1.((s)Ubi supra, (Mainon. Hilch. MaacolotAsurot, c. 2.) sect. 20.
(t) Gloss. in T. Bab. Cholin, fol. 67. 1.((u) Ib.
Geneva Study Bible
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary

Matthew 23:24. The Jews were in the habit of straining their wine (διϋλίζ.,
Plut. Mor. p. 692 D), in order that there might be no possibility of their
swallowing with it any unclean animal, howeverminute (Leviticus 11:42).
Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 516. Comp. the liquare vinum of the Greeks and
Romans;Mitscherlich, ad Hor. Od. i. 11. 7; Hermann, Privatalterth. § xxvi.
17. Figurative representationof the painful scrupulosity with which the law
was observed.
τὸν κώνωπα] a kind of attractionfor percolando removentes muscam (that
found in the wine, τὸν κ.), just as in classicalwriters the phrase καθαίρειντι is
often used to express the removing of anything by cleansing (Hom. Il. xiv. 171,
xvi. 667;Dio Cass. xxxvii. 52). κώνωψ is not a worm found in sour wine
(Bochart, Bleek), but, as always, a gnat. In its attempt to suck the wine, it falls
in amongstit.
τὴν δὲ κάμηλ. καταπίν.]proverbial expression, τὰ μέγιστα δὲ ἀπαρατηρήτως
ἁμαρτάνοντες Euthymius Zigabenus. Observe at the same time that the camel
is an uncleananimal, Leviticus 11:4.
Expositor's Greek Testament
Matthew 23:24. διϋλίζοντες (διὰ and ὕλη, Passow), a little used word, for
which Hesychius gives as a synonym, διηθέω, to strain through.—τὸν
κώνωπα, τὴν κάμηλον, the gnat, the camel: article as usual in proverbial
sayings. The proper objectof the former part is οἶνον: straining the wine so as
to remove the uncleanmidge. Swallowing the camelis a monstrous
supposition, but relevant, the camelbeing unclean, chewing the cud but not
parting the hoof (Leviticus 11:4). The proverb clinches the lessonof the
previous verse.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges

24. strain out a gnat] A correctionfor the reading of E. V. “strainat a gnat;”
the reading in the text appears in the earliereditions of the English Bible from
Tyndale to Bishops’Bible. See Cambridge ParagraphBible, Introd.,
Appendix A. The reading of the E. V. is not a misprint, as some have thought;
“to strain at” meant, to strain the wine on the occurrence ofa gnat.
Bengel's Gnomen
Matthew 23:24. Τὸν κώνωπα, the gnat) They who objectto swallowing a
camelshould not be found fault with for merely straining a gnat,[1006]such
being far from our Lord’s intention: for no one can safelyswallow a gnat,
which may choke him. A beam is the worse of the two, and yet a chip[1007]is
not disregarded, evenin the hand, much more in the eye. See ch. Matthew 7:5.
The noun κώνωψ is a word of common gender, and signifies a gnat, properly
one belonging to wine, which easilyfalls into a strainer.[1008]
[1006]The clause rendered by E. V., “who strain at a gnat,” is interpreted
more correctlyby Bengel, “who strain a gnat,” on which Alford observes in
loc., “The straining the gnat is not a mere proverbial saying. The Jews (as do
now the Buddists in Ceylon and Hindostan) strained their wine, etc., carefully,
that they might not violate Leviticus 11:20;Leviticus 11:23; Leviticus 11:41-
42 (and it might be added, Leviticus 17:10-14). The camelis not only opposed
as of immense size, but is also unclean.”—(I. B.)
[1007]In the original, “Festuca,”corresponding to the English word, Mote;
the meaning of which, in Matthew 7:3 (which is here referred to), is not a
mote such as we see in sunbeams, but a small particle of straw. I know of no
English word that now corresponds to this idea: it is something betweena chip
and a speck.—(I. B.)

[1008]The wine-gnat, according to Rosenmüller, is found in wine when
turning acid. The Jews usedto strain out their wines through a napkin or
strainer, to prevent this wine-gnat being swallowedunawares.See Buxtorf on
the root‫ַס‬‫נ‬ ֵ‫.ן‬ Beng. wishes to guard us againstthe abuse of this passage,
whereby it is often said to those who are careful in the greaterduties, when
particular also on minor points, “Oh! you are straining at a gnat.” They forget
that Jesus does not objectto tenderness of conscienceas to moral gnats, but to
those who, whilst scrupulous as to gnats, are unscrupulous as to moral camels,
Ecclesiastes10:1.—ED.
Matthew 23:24
Vincent's Word Studies
Strain at (διυλίξοντες)
διά, thoroughly or through, and ὑλίζω, to filter or strain. Strain at is an old
misprint perpetuated. Hence the Rev. correctly, as Tynd., strain out. Insects
were ceremoniallyunclean (Leviticus 11:20, Leviticus 11:23, Leviticus 11:41,
Leviticus 11:42), so that the Jews strainedtheir wine in order not to swallow
any unclean animal. Moreover, there were certain insects which bred in wine.
Aristotle uses the word gnat (κώνωπα)of a worm or larva found in the
sediment of sour wine. "In a ride from Tangierto Tetuan I observedthat a
Moorishsoldier who accompaniedme, when he drank, always unfolded the
end of his turban and placedit overthe mouth of his bota, drinking through
the muslin to strain out the gnats, whose larvae swarmin the waterof that
country" (cited by Trench, "On the Authorized Version").
Swallow (καταπίνοντες)
The rendering is feeble. It is drink down (κατά);gulp. Note that the camel was
also unclean (Leviticus 11:4).

STUDYLIGHTRESOURCES
Adam Clarke Commentary
Blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. - This clause should
be thus translated: Ye strain out the gnat, but ye swallow downthe camel. In
the common translation, Ye strain At a gnat, conveys no sense. Indeed, it is
likely to have been at first an error of the press, At for Out, which, on
examination, I find escapedin the edition of 1611, and has been regularly
continued since. There is now before me, "The Newe Testament, (both in
Englyshe and in Laten), of MaysterErasmus translacion, imprynted by
Wyllyam Powell, dwellynge in Flete strete: the yere of our Lorde
M.CCCCC.XLVII. the fyrste yere of the kynges (Edwd. VI). moste gracious
reygne." in which the verse stands thus: "Ye blinde gides, which strayne out a
gnat, and swalowe a cammel." It is the same also in Edmund Becke's Bible,
printed in London 1549, andin severalothers. - Clensynge a gnatte. - MS.
Eng. Bib. So Wickliff. Similar to this is the following Arabic proverb: He eats
an elephant and is chokedby a gnat.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
BibliographicalInformation
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "The Adam Clarke
Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/matthew-
23.html. 1832.
return to 'Jump List'

Albert Barnes'Notes onthe Whole Bible
Which strain at a gnat … - This is a proverb. There is, however, a
mistranslation or misprint here, which makes the verse unmeaning. “To
strain” at a “gnat” conveys no sense. It should have been to strain out a gnat;
and so it is printed in some of the earlier versions, and so it was undoubtedly
rendered by the translators. The common reading is a “misprint,” and should
be corrected. The Greek means to “strain” out by a cloth or sieve.
A gnat - The gnat has its origin in the water;not in greatrivers, but in pools
and marshes In the stagnantwaters they appear in the form of small “grubs”
or “larvae.” These larvae retaintheir form about three weeks,afterwhich
they turn to chrysalids, and after three or four days they pass to the form of
gnats. They are then distinguished by their well-knownsharp sting. It is
probable that the Saviour here refers to the insectas it exists in its “grub” or
“larva” form, before it appears in the form of a gnat. Wateris then its
element, and those who were nice in their drink would take pains to strain it
out. Hence, the proverb. See Calmet‘s Dict., art. “Gnat.” It is used here to
denote a very small matter, as a camel is to denote a large object. “You Jews
take greatpains to avoid offence in very small matters, superstitiously
observing the smallestpoints of the law, like a man carefully straining out the
animalculae from what he drinks, while you are at no pains to avoid greatsins
- hypocrisy, deceit, oppression, and lust - like a man who should swallow a
camel.” The Arabians have a similar proverb: “He eats an elephant, and is
suffocatedwith a gnat.” He is troubled with little things, but pays no attention
to greatmatters.
Copyright Statement

Barnes, Albert. "Commentaryon Matthew 23:24". "Barnes'Notesonthe
Whole Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/matthew-
23.html. 1870.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
Ye blind guides,.... As in Matthew 23:16.
who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel: the Syriac and Persic versions read
the words in the plural number, gnats and camels. The Jews had a law, which
forbid them the eating of any creeping thing,
Leviticus 11:41 and of this they were strictly observant, and would not be
guilty of the breach of it for everso much,
"One that eats a flea, or a gnat; they sayF16 is ‫,רמומ‬ "an apostate";
"whoevereats a whole fly, or a whole gnat, whether alive or dead, was to be
beaten on accountof a creeping flying thingF17.
oneF18;that "if a fly falls into the cup of one of them, sniarts eh" ,‫ושותהו‬ ‫זורקו‬

it, and drinks it"; but if my lord the king should touch the cup of one of them,
he would throw it to the ground, and would not drink of it.
Maimonides saysF19,
"He that strains wine, or vinegar, or strong liquor, and eats "Jabchushin" (a
sort of small flies found in wine cellarsF20,onaccountof which they strained
flying things, and the creeping things of the water.
Moreover, it is saidF21,
"a man might not pour his strong liquors through a strainer, by the light (of a
transgress the law, in Leviticus 11:41.
seeds;and yet made no conscience ofdoing justice, and showing mercy to
to commit the grossestenormities, and most scandalous sins in life,

Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernisedand adapted
for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rights Reserved, Larry
Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard
Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Gill, John. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "The New JohnGill Exposition
of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/matthew-
23.html. 1999.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat — The proper rendering - as in the
older English translations, and perhaps our own as it came from the
translators‘hands - evidently is, “strain out.” It was the custom, says Trench,
of the stricter Jews to strain their wine, vinegar, and other potables through
linen or gauze, lest unawares they should drink down some little unclean
insecttherein and thus transgress (Leviticus 11:20, Leviticus 11:23, Leviticus
11:41, Leviticus 11:42) - just as the Buddhists do now in Ceylon and
Hindustan - and to this custom of theirs our Lord here refers.
and swallow a camel — the largestanimal the Jews knew, as the “gnat” was
the smallest;both were by the law unclean.
Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text
scannedby Woodside Bible Fellowship.

This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-BrownCommentary is in the
public domain and may be freely used and distributed.
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.;Fausset,A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on
Matthew 23:24". "CommentaryCritical and Explanatory on the Whole
Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/matthew-23.html. 1871-
8.
People's New Testament
Ye strain at a gnat. "Strain out a gnat," as in the Revision. A forcible image of
those who are very conscientiousoversmall, and carelessofgreat, matters.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.
Original work done by Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 atThe
RestorationMovementPages.
Johnson, BartonW. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "People's New
Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pnt/matthew-23.html.
1891.
Robertson's WordPictures in the New Testament
Strain out the gnat (διυλιζοντες τονκωνωπα — diulizontes ton kōnōpa). By
filtering through (δια — dia), not the “straining at” in swallowing so crudely
suggestedby the misprint in the A.V.

Swallow the camel (την δε καμηλονκαταπινοντες — tēn de kamēlon
katapinontes). Gulping or drinking down the camel. An oriental hyperbole
like that in Matthew 19:24. See also Matthew 5:29, Matthew 5:30; Matthew
17:20;Matthew 21:21. Both insects and camels were ceremoniallyunclean
(Leviticus 11:4, Leviticus 11:20, Leviticus 11:23, Leviticus 11:42). “He that
kills a flea on the Sabbath is as guilty as if he killed a camel” (Jer. Shabb.
107).
Copyright Statement
The Robertson's WordPictures of the New Testament. Copyright �
Broadman Press 1932,33,Renewal1960. All rights reserved. Used by
permission of Broadman Press (Southern BaptistSunday SchoolBoard)
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "Robertson's Word
Pictures of the New Testament".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/matthew-23.html. Broadman
Press 1932,33. Renewal1960.
Vincent's Word Studies
Strain at ( διυλίξοντες )
διά , thoroughly or through, and ὑλίζω , to filter or strain. Strain at is an old
misprint perpetuated. Hence the Rev. correctly, as Tynd., strain out. Insects
were ceremoniallyunclean (Leviticus 11:20, Leviticus 11:23, Leviticus 11:41,
Leviticus 11:42), so that the Jews strainedtheir wine in order not to swallow
any unclean animal. Moreover, there were certain insects which bred in wine.
Aristotle uses the word gnat ( κώνωπα ) of a worm or larva found in the
sediment of sour wine. “In a ride from Tangierto Tetuan I observedthat a
Moorishsoldier who accompaniedme, when he drank, always unfolded the
end of his turban and placedit overthe mouth of his bota, drinking through

the muslin to strain out the gnats, whose larvae swarmin the waterof that
country” (cited by Trench, “On the Authorized Version”).
Swallow ( καταπίνοντες )
The rendering is feeble. It is drink down ( κατά ); gulp. Note that the camel
was also unclean(Leviticus 11:4).
Copyright Statement
The text of this work is public domain.
Vincent, Marvin R. DD. "Commentaryon Matthew 23:24". "Vincent's Word
Studies in the New Testament".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/matthew-23.html. Charles
Schribner's Sons. New York, USA. 1887.
Wesley's ExplanatoryNotes
Ye blind guides, who teachothers to do as you do yourselves, to strain out a
gnat - From the liquor they are going to drink! and swallow a camel - It is
strange, that glaring false print, strain at a gnat, which quite alters the sense,
should run through all the editions of our English Bibles.
Copyright Statement

is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "JohnWesley's
Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/matthew-23.html. 1765.
The Fourfold Gospel
Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel1!
Strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!A proverbial expression,
indicating care for little faults and a corresponding unconcern for big ones.
Copyright Statement
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website. These files
were made available by Mr. Ernie Stefanik. First published online in 1996 at
The RestorationMovementPages.
J. W. McGarveyand Philip Y. Pendleton. "Commentaryon Matthew 23:24".
"The Fourfold Gospel".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tfg/matthew-23.html. Standard
Publishing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. 1914.
John Trapp Complete Commentary
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

Ver. 24. Which strain at a gnat, &c.] A proverbial speech, warranting the
lawful use of such expressions for illustration of a truth. The Greeks have a
like proverb, ανδριαντα γαργαλιζειν, to gargle downan image, statue, or
coloss;that is, to make no bones of a foul fault when matters of less moment
are much scrupled. Saul kept a greatstir about eating the flesh with the blood,
when he made nothing of shedding innocent blood, 1 Samuel 14:33. Doeg was
detained before the Lord by some voluntary vow belike, 1 Samuel 21:7. But
better he had been further off, for any goodhe did there. The priests made
conscienceofputting the price of blood into the treasury, Matthew 27:6, who
yet made no conscienceofimbruing their hands in the innocent blood of the
Lamb of God. The Begardiand Beginnae, a certainkind of heretics, A.D.
1322, held this mad opinion, that a man might here attain to perfection, and
that having attained to it, he might do whatsoeverhis nature led him to; that
fornicari peccatum non esse reputabant: at mulieri osculum figere mortale
facinus arbitrabantur, fornication was no sin, but to kiss a woman was a
mortal wickedness, &c. {a}Archbishop Bancroftfell foul upon MasterPaul
Bayn, for a little black-work-edging abouthis cuffs, threatening to lay him by
the heels for it, when far greaterfaults in others were winked at.
{a} Funcc. Chron. ex Massei, xviii.
Copyright Statement
Text Courtesyof BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". John Trapp Complete
Commentary. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/matthew-23.html.
1865-1868.

Heinrich Meyer's Critical and ExegeticalCommentaryon the New Testament
Matthew 23:24. The Jews were in the habit of straining their wine ( διϋλίζ.,
Plut. Mor. p. 692 D), in order that there might be no possibility of their
swallowing with it any unclean animal, howeverminute (Leviticus 11:42).
Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. p. 516. Comp. the liquare vinum of the Greeks and
Romans;Mitscherlich, ad Hor. Od. i. 11. 7; Hermann, Privatalterth. § xxvi.
17. Figurative representationof the painful scrupulosity with which the law
was observed.
τὸν κώνωπα] a kind of attractionfor percolando removentes muscam (that
found in the wine, τὸν κ.), just as in classicalwriters the phrase καθαίρειντι is
often used to express the removing of anything by cleansing (Hom. Il. xiv. 171,
xvi. 667;Dio Cass. xxxvii. 52). κώνωψ is not a worm found in sour wine
(Bochart, Bleek), but, as always, a gnat. In its attempt to suck the wine, it falls
in amongstit.
τὴν δὲ κάμηλ. καταπίν.]proverbial expression, τὰ μέγιστα δὲ ἀπαρατηρήτως
ἁμαρτάνοντες Euthymius Zigabenus. Observe at the same time that the camel
is an uncleananimal, Leviticus 11:4.
Copyright Statement
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". Heinrich Meyer's
Critical and ExegeticalCommentary on the New Testament.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/hmc/matthew-23.html. 1832.

Johann Albrecht Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament
Matthew 23:24. τὸν κώνωπα, the gnat) They who objectto swallowing a camel
should not be found fault with for merely straining a gnat,(1006)suchbeing
far from our Lord’s intention: for no one can safelyswallow a gnat, which
may choke him. A beam is the worse ofthe two, and yet a chip(1007)is not
disregarded, even in the hand, much more in the eye. See ch. Matthew 7:5.
The noun κώνωψ is a word of common gender, and signifies a gnat, properly
one belonging to wine, which easilyfalls into a strainer.(1008)
Copyright Statement
Bengel, JohannAlbrecht. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". Johann
Albrecht Bengel's Gnomonof the New Testament.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jab/matthew-23.html. 1897.
Matthew Poole's EnglishAnnotations
on the Holy Bible
It is a proverbial expressionused amongstthem, againstsuchas would
pretend a greatniceness and scrupulosity about, and zeal for, little things, but
in matters of much higher concernand moment were not nice and scrupulous
at all: and this indeed is both a certain note and an ordinary practice of
hypocrites. There is no man that is sincere in his obedience to God, but hath
respectto all God’s commandments, Psalms 119:6. Thoughsome duties be
greater, of more moment for the honour and glory of God, than others, which
a goodman will lay the greateststressupon, yet he will neglectnothing which
the law of God enjoins him. But concerning hypocrites, these two things are
always true:

1. They are partial in their pretended obedience.
2. They always lay the greateststressupon the leastthings of the law, bodily
labour and exercise, and those things which require leastof the heart, and
leastself-denial.
Copyright Statement
Poole, Matthew, "Commentaryon Matthew 23:24". Matthew Poole's English
Annotations on the Holy Bible.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mpc/matthew-23.html. 1685.
Alexander MacLaren's Expositions ofHoly Scripture
оцеживающие комара,а верблюда поглощающие Некоторыефарисеи
процеживали свои напитки через высококачественные ткани, чтобы
убедиться, что они ненароком не проглотили комара – самоемаленькое
из нечистыхживотных (Лев.11:23). Верблюд являлсясамым большим
нечистым животным (Лев.11:4).
Copyright Statement

MacLaren, Alexander. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". Alexander
MacLaren's Expositions ofHoly Scripture.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/mac/matthew-23.html.
Justin Edwards' Family Bible New Testament
Strain at a gnat; strain the liquid which you drink at the presence of a gnat in
it, lestyou should be made unclean by swallowing it. They reckonedthe gnat
among the unclean creeping things. Leviticus 11:20;Leviticus 11:23 The
reader will notice that the camelwas also an unclean animal. The meaning
therefore is, that they were very scrupulous about little things, while, without
scruple, they committed greatsins.
Copyright Statement
Edwards, Justin. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "FamilyBible New
Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/fam/matthew-23.html.
American Tract Society. 1851.
Whedon's Commentary on the Bible
24.Strainat a gnat — Rather strain out a gnat. Our Lord here uses a
proverbial figure, by which a personin drinking is representedas filtrating a
gnat from the liquid, while he will at another time swallow downa camel. It is
a physical impossibility, indeed, but its meaning is none the less possible in
matters of religion and morality.

Alford remarks:“The straining of a gnatis not a mere proverbial saying. The
Jews (as do now the Budhists in Ceylon and Hindostan) strained their wine,
etc., carefully, that they might not violate Leviticus 11:20; Leviticus 11:23;
Leviticus 11:41-42, (and it might be added Leviticus 17:10-14.)The camelis
not only opposedas of immense size, but is also unclean.” Indeed, in warm
countries, where insect life is exceedinglyexuberant, straining liquors for
drinking is often necessary.
Copyright Statement
Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "Whedon's Commentary
on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/matthew-
23.html. 1874-1909.
PeterPett's Commentary on the Bible
“You blind guides, who strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel!”
He summarises their position by a huge contrast. The gnat(qamla) was one of
the smallestof creatures, the camel (gamla) the largestin Palestine. Note the
play on words in the Aramaic. They are so one-sided in vision spiritually that
when they see that a gnat (qamla) has fallen into their drink they carefully
strain it out in order not to partake of an ‘unclean’ creeping thing, but when a

camel(gamla) falls into the drink (equally ‘unclean’) they swallow it down
without even noticing it. The point is that they are such blind guides that they
concentrate ondealing with the small things with greatcare, and practically
ignore the big things altogether, without bothering to considerthem. They
spend hours splitting their dill and cummin into tenths and nine tenths, and
ensuring that they have missed none, and even include mint which was not
necessarilytitheable, and yet they pass over justice, mercy and faithfulness as
though they did not matter. They are too busy with the intricate details to
spend much time on large matters.
Note that in the fourth blessing (Matthew 5:6) the blessedare to be filled with
righteousness, whichthey hunger and thirst after. But these, while avoiding
an unclean gnat, will be filled with an unclean camel which they did not even
notice!
Copyright Statement
Pett, Peter. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "PeterPett's Commentaryon
the Bible ". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/pet/matthew-23.html.
2013.
Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Matthew 23:24. Strain out the gnat, i.e., to filter wine, so as to avoid
swallowing a gnat. The common version may have been intended to express
this, but more probably contains a misprint. The saying is proverbial; this
straining actually took place to avoid defilement (Leviticus 11:20;Leviticus
11:23;Leviticus 11:41-42). The same customobtains among the Buddhists.

And swallow the camel, i.e., indulge in the greatestimpurities. The camel was
one of the largestof the impure animals forbidden for food. (Leviticus 11:4 : it
did not divide the hoof.) Besides to swallow it, would be to eatblood and what
was strangled. What was impossible literally, is only too possible figuratively.
The reality of Pharisaic sinexceeds the figure.
Copyright Statement
Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "Schaff's Popular
Commentary on the New Testament".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/matthew-23.html. 1879-90.
The Expositor's Greek Testament
Matthew 23:24. ( and , Passow), a little used word, for which Hesychius gives
as a synonym, , to strain through.— , , the gnat, the camel:article as usual in
proverbial sayings. The proper objectof the former part is : straining the
wine so as to remove the unclean midge. Swallowing the camelis a monstrous
supposition, but relevant, the camelbeing unclean, chewing the cud but not
parting the hoof (Leviticus 11:4). The proverb clinches the lessonof the
previous verse.

Copyright Statement
Nicol, W. Robertson, M.A., L.L.D. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". The
Expositor's Greek Testament.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/egt/matthew-23.html. 1897-1910.
E.W. Bullinger's Companion Bible Notes
which, &c. Figure of speechParoemia. App-6.
strain = habitually filter out. Greek. diulizo. Occ-only here.
at. A mistake perpetuated in all editions of the Authorized Version. All "the
former translations" had "out".
a = the: which makes it read like a proverb.
gnat. Greek. konops. Occurs only here.
swallow = gulp down: Eng. drink up.
camel. An uncleananimal. See Leviticus 11:4.

Copyright Statement
Bullinger, Ethelbert William. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "E.W.
Bullinger's Companion bible Notes".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bul/matthew-23.html. 1909-1922.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat. The proper rendering-as in the older
English translations, and perhaps our own as it came from the translators'
hands-evidently is, 'strain out.' It was the custom, says Trench, of the stricter
Jews to strain their wine, vinegar, and other potables through linen or gauze,
lest unawares they should drink down some little unclean insect therein, and
thus transgress (Leviticus 11:20; Leviticus 11:23;Leviticus 11:41-42}-justas
the Buddhists do now in Ceylonand Hindustan-and to this custom of theirs
our Lord here refers.
And swallow a camel - the largestanimal the Jews knew, as the "gnat" was
the smallest:both were by the law unclean.
Copyright Statement

Jamieson, Robert, D.D.;Fausset,A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on
Matthew 23:24". "CommentaryCritical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
- Unabridged". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/matthew-
23.html. 1871-8.
The Bible Study New Testament
24. You strain a fly out of your drink. Satire. Jesus had a sense ofhumor. Can
you imagine them straining out the fly, and then swallowing the camel!This
illustrates Matthew 23:23.
Copyright Statement
Ice, Rhoderick D. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "The Bible Study New
Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ice/matthew-23.html.
College Press, Joplin, MO. 1974.

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(24) Strain at a gnat.—Better, as in Tyndale’s and other earlier versions,
strain out. It is sometimes saidthat the present rendering of the Authorised
version is but the perpetuation of a printer’s blunder; but of this there is
scarcelysufficientevidence, nor is it probable in itself. In the Greek both
nouns have the emphasis of the article, “the gnat—the camel.” The scrupulous
care describedin the first clause of the proverbial saying was literally
practisedby devout Jews (as it is now by the Buddhists of Ceylon), in
accordancewith Leviticus 11:23; Leviticus 11:42. In the secondclause, the
camelappears, not only, as in Matthew 19:24, as the type of vastness, but as
being among the unclean beasts of which the Israelites might not eat
(Leviticus 11:4).
Copyright Statement
Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "Ellicott's
Commentary for English Readers".
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/matthew-23.html. 1905.
Treasuryof Scripture Knowledge
7:4; 15:2-6;19:24; 27:6-8; Luke 6:7-10;John 18:28,40
Reciprocal:Job 20:18 - swallow; Psalm119:99 - than all; Ecclesiastes7:16 -
Be not; Isaiah60:2 - the darkness; Matthew 12:45 - Even; Matthew 22:36 -
General; Matthew 23:16 - ye blind; Mark 2:24 - why; Mark 10:25 - General;
Luke 6:2 - Why; Luke 18:12 - I give; Luke 18:25 - a camel

Copyright Statement
Torrey, R. A. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". "The Treasuryof Scripture
Knowledge". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tsk/matthew-23.html.
E.M. Zerr's Commentary on SelectedBooksofthe New Testament
The point in this verse is the same as in the preceding one but expressedwith
different terms. Both the gnat and camel were among the creatures classedas
unclean by the law of Moses.Whenthe Jews made wine they strained i t
through a fine cloth to get out all the objectionable objects. Strain at should be
translated strain out, and means they were so particular about having the
wine pure they would strain out a gnat, but would swallow a camel
(figuratively speaking). The meaning is, they would make a big ado about
minor matters but overlook the duties of greatimportance.
Copyright Statement
Zerr, E.M. "Commentary on Matthew 23:24". E.M. Zerr's Commentary on
SelectedBooksofthe New Testament.
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/znt/matthew-23.html. 1952.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible

24.Blind guides. This is s proverbial saying, by which he beautifully describes
the affectedscrupulousness ofhypocrites about trifling matters; for they
utterly shrink from very small faults, as if a single transgressionappearedto
them more revolting than a hundred deaths, and yet they freely permit
themselves and others to commit the most heinous crimes. They actas
absurdly as if a man were to strain out a small crumb of bread, and to
swallow a whole loaf.
Straining out (101)a gnat, and swallowing a camel. We know that a gnat is a
very small animal, and that a camelis a huge beast. Nothing therefore could
be more ridiculous than to strain out the wine or the water, so as not to hurt
the jaws by swallowing a gnat, and yet carelesslyto gulp down a camel. (102)
But it is evident that hypocrites amuse themselves with such distinctions; for
while they pass by judgment, mercy, and faith, and even tear in pieces the
whole Law, they are excessivelyrigid and severe in matters that are of no
greatimportance; and while in this way they pretend to kiss the feet of God,
they proudly spit in his face.
END OF STUDYLIGHT RESOURCES
Straining Out Gnats And Eating Camels Series
Contributed by PatDamiani on Sep 23, 2019
based on 1 rating (rate this sermon) | 2,187 views
Scripture: Matthew 23:23-24
Denomination: Baptist

Summary: You might be a “modern day Pharisee” if you major in minors and
minor in majors
1 2 3 … 5 6
Next
NOTE:
This is a manuscript, and not a transcript of this message. The actual
presentationof the messagediffered from the manuscript through the leading
of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it is possible, and even likely that there is
material in this manuscript that was not included in the live presentationand
that there was additional material in the live presentationthat is not included
in this manuscript.
ENGAGE
Downloadthe slides for this sermon
Full name
Church name
Your email address
Get the slides
Downloadthe presentationslides. Plus, you'll get preaching ideas & ministry
offers from SermonCentral. Privacy
In the first church that I pastored, we had monthly business meetings in
which the church would vote on such important issues as what temperature
the thermostatshould be set to on Sunday mornings, what words to put on the

church sign, when to have a potluck, and even what colorpaint to use when
we repainted the walls. That was something new to me and I was shockedat
how passionate thatpeople could be about such trivial matters.
But the bigger problem is that those people didn’t have the same kind of zeal
for bringing the kingdom of God near to others and reaching others with the
gospel. Theiridea of a goodchurch was one where they got to sing their
favorite hymns, the pastorwore a suit every Sunday, and where they gota
personalvisit from the pastorat leastonce a month. To them those things
were far more important than actually reaching their community for Jesus.
That situation was a real eye-openerfor me. That was the first church I had
been a part of that was so completely focusedon such minor and trivial
matters that they missedthe more important major ones. And so, after
working for over a yearto try to change some of those attitudes with little
success, Idecided that I needed to move on.
TENSION
Fortunately since that time, I’ve never been in a church where such trivial
matters were the driving force. However, that doesn’tmean that from time to
time, I haven’t run into that attitude in some individuals.
In the time I’ve been here at TFC, I’ve seena number of people leave the
church. And in those caseswhere the people have been courteous enough to
explain why they left, I canonly remember a couple times where someone left
because ofsomething important like a disagreementabout doctrine. In every
other case, people essentiallyleft over a matter of personalpreference or some
trivial matter.

Unfortunately it seems to be human nature to major in the minors and minor
in the majors when it comes to our relationship with and we’re probably all
guilty of doing that at times. By now you’ve probably figured out that the
Pharisees also did that and this morning as we continue our current sermon
series titled “Modern Day Pharisees” we’ll see whatwe can learn about how
to make sure we don’t follow in their footsteps.
TRUTH
Before we look at this morning’s passage,let’s quickly remind ourselves ofthe
six traits of a “modern day Pharisee” thatwe’re covering in this series.
Create BiblicalSermons FasterAd
You might be a “modern day Pharisee”if…
• You judge the Scriptures rather than being judged by them
• You think you’re better than other Christians
• You are more interestedin making clones of yourself than disciples of Jesus
• You look for loopholes in God’s Word in order to excuse your sin
• You major in minors and minor in majors

• You work harder at looking goodthan being good
This morning, we’re going to focus on the fifth indication that you might be a
“modern day Pharisee”:
You might be a “modern day Pharisee”if you
major in minors and minor in majors
[ReadMatthew 23:23-24]
You can’t possibly read these words without seeing that Jesus had a sense of
humor. I love the illustration that He uses here to point out the way that the
Pharisees majoredin minors and minored in majors. He accusedthem of
straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel. That paints a pretty vivid
picture, but you might be wondering why Jesus usedthose particular animals
in His illustration.
According to the ceremoniallaw in the Old Testament, both the gnat and the
camelwere designatedby Godas “unclean” animals that were not to be eaten
by the Israelites. Jesuspicks them out here because they were the smallestand
the largestofthose uncleananimals.
You can imagine in that day how easyit was for a tiny gnat to get into a cup of
wateror wine. So in order to show just how pious they were, the Pharisees
would go to greatlengths to strain any gnats out of what they were drinking,

just to make sure they didn’t ingest one unintentionally. They would often
strain those liquids through a piece of cloth and then just to let everyone else
know how meticulous they were they would drink through clenchedteeth just
in case a gnat had slipped through undetected.
Now obviously, the Phariseesweren’tliterally eating camel steaks. Butthe
point that Jesus is making here is that they had totally missed out on what
really matters in the kingdom of God. They were meticulous about the details
of the ceremoniallaw, but they had failed to understand the larger, more
important matters of justice, mercy and faithfulness.
APPLICATION
So with that big picture in mind, let’s go back to verse 23 and see how we can
apply this passagein our own lives. As we’ve done eachweek in this series,
we’ll first identify some characteristicsthat canhelp us to identify whether we
have become “modern day Pharisees”andthen we’ll discuss some Biblical
remedies.
HOW TO TELL IF I’M A “MODERNDAY PHARISEE”
Strong sermons during fear & uncertainty
Now, getstarted with PRO free today
Full name
Your email address
Get Started

Enter your name and email to begin. Credit card required, cancelany time.
Plus, getemail updates & offers from SermonCentral. Privacy
1. I’m doing but not being
As we’ve seenconsistentlythroughout this series the Pharisees were farmore
concernedwith outward acts of religion than in what was going on in their
hearts. And here Jesus uses the example of the way they tithe to point that out.
The conceptof the tithe, which literally means “to pay one tenth”, was found
in the Old Testamentlaw. God instructed His people to give one-tenth of all
their crops and products to the treasury of Israel as a way to support the
theocracythat was run by the priests. So it was basicallya form of income tax.
There were also two other kinds of tithes specifiedin the law, one to be paid
annually for the funding of the national festivals and feasts and another paid
every three years for the welfare of the poor and the non-Israelites in the land.
So altogether, these tithes averagedout to about 23% of what one produced.
In both Deuteronomy and Leviticus we find that the tithe included the seed
that was produced:
“You shall tithe all the yield of your seedthat comes from the field year by
year.
(Deuteronomy 14:22 ESV)
Not surprisingly, the Pharisees hadtaken this far beyond what God intended
and they were even tithing on the seeds of the herbs that they were growing in
their homes. They were literally sitting down and counting out these tiny seeds

– one for God, nine for me, one for God nine for me… It certainly gave them a
greatway to display their holiness and their dedicationto God.
What is interesting here is that Jesus doesn’tcondemn them for what they are
doing. He tells them to go aheadand keepon tithing their seeds. In other
words, it’s not an “either/or” situation, but rather a “both/and” one. What He
does tell them is that while they are doing these religious tasks, to make sure
they don’t lose perspective on what really matters in the kingdom, which is
developing a heart that is like God’s.
What are the “seeds” in your life? What are the things that you are doing for
God that are taking your focus awayfrom becoming the person God wants
you to be – one, who like David, is a man or womanafter God’s own heart?
I’ve sharedthis with you before, but I think it bears repeating. For me, one of
the things that can become my “seeds”are my sermons. It is so easyfor me to
slip into the trap of thinking that my sermon preparation time is a substitute
for spending time in God’s Word just to getto know His heart better and to
allow Him to speak into my life personally.
There are a lot of really goodthings that have the potential to be “seeds” in
our life. Let me mention just a few that seemto be pretty common:
• It’s possible to come to church every week and yet never really worship God.
Worship is not an event – it’s a lifestyle in which we love God with all our
heart by getting to know Him and become more like Him in every area of our
lives.

• It’s possible to follow the example of the Pharisees andmeticulously tithe on
every penny of our income but fail to lift a finger to help out someone in need.
Unfortunately in our culture today, far too many have the idea that they give
to the church so that the church can pay someone else to do the work of
ministry that all of us have been calledto.
• It’s even possible to engage in ministry for all the wrong reasons. Insteadof
ministering to others because we have the same heart for them that God does,
we serve in order to be noticedby others, to earn favor with God, or even to
make ourselves feelgood.
Full name
Your email address
Get Started
2. I focus on the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law
As I mentioned earlier, a significant portion of the tithes required by the Old
Testamentlaw were for the purpose of caring for the vulnerable in that
culture – widows, the poor, immigrants. The spirit behind the law was that
God cares for the vulnerable so much that He made provision for their needs
to be met.

Obviously the Pharisees hadlost sight of the spirit behind the law and all they
focusedon what carrying out the letter of the law. As we’ve seenthroughout
this series, they didn’t really care about anyone but themselves. When they
tithed their spices, it wasn’tbecause they thought that would help provide for
the needs of anyone else. It was only so they would look goodin front of
others. No wonderJesus accusedthem of straining out gnats and eating
camels.
Since Jesus usedthe illustration of tithing, I’m also going to use that to
illustrate how we canalso get focusedon the letter of the law rather than the
spirit of the law. I only have time for that one example, but obviously there
are a lot of other areas where we can fall into this trap.
While not all would agree with me, I am of the opinion that the tithe does not
apply directly to New Testamentbelievers. And before you are too quick to
argue with me on that, let me just remind you that if you want to apply the
Old Testamenttithing laws literally, you should probably be giving more like
23% of your income and not merely 10%.
In the New Testamentwe are instructed to give generouslyand cheerfully in
accordancewith how much has been entrusted to us by God. That is really
more of a spirit of the law principle than a letter of the law rule. I do think
that the tithe, or 10%, is probably a helpful standard that ought to guide us in
determining the minimum amount we should give.
But I have seenChristians who have prospered financially and who likely
should be giving much more than 10% of their income to help bring the
kingdom of God near to others, claim that they have satisfiedthe letter of the
law by giving 10% and that is all they are going to give. But the spirit of the

law says that I ought to strive to give as much as I can to help others know
Jesus and not be restrictedin my giving by clinging to the letter of the law.
3. I exhibit selective zealousness
As I mentioned earlier, Jesus did not condemn the practice of tithing, even
when it came to those little seeds. In fact, he told them they ought to continue
that practice. His problem was with the fact that they had neglectedthe
“weightiermatters of the law”.
Jesus borrowedthe word translated “weightier” from the rabbinical tradition
which had divided the law into “light” and “heavy” categories. The problem is
that the Pharisees had inverted those categories andrelegatedthe important
matters to the “light” categoryand elevatedthe less important matters to the
“heavy” category. Theywere majoring in the minors and minoring in the
majors. When we talk about the remedy in just a moment, we’ll see how God
defines the light and the heavy or, using the terms I’ve used this morning, the
minor and the major.
If we’re completely honest, I think most of us have been guilty of selective
zealousnessattimes. I think that can take two forms:
Full name
Your email address

Get Started
1) We become overly zealous about those areas where we tend to excel. So if I
read my Bible and pray 30 minutes every day, I then make that the standard
by which I measure every other disciple of Jesus. If I’m at church every single
Sunday without fail, then I become zealous about that. If I have a fish symbol
and a “Honk if you love Jesus” bumper stickeron my car, then I think
everyone else should, too. If I raise my hands or clap during the worship
service then I embark on a campaignto geteveryone else to do that, too.
Obviously there is nothing wrong with any of those activities. In fact, many of
them are either commanded or encouragedin the Bible. But they can also get
in the way of the more important things we’ll talk about in a minute.
2) We become zealous againstthose sins that we don’t necessarilystruggle
with while accepting our own sins. Unfortunately, that often takes the form of
being judgmental againstthose who are not yet disciples of Jesus and it ends
up pushing them awayfrom Jesus and the gospel.
This week I read an article that was titled “9 Sins the Church is Okay With”.
And with the risk of offending pretty much every one of us here this morning,
let me share that list with you:
• Fear
• Apathy

• Gluttony
• Worry
• Flattery
• Comfort
• Consumerism
• Patriotism
• Lying
I’m not going to embarrass anyone by asking for a show of hands, but my
guess is that everyone here struggles with at leastone of the items on that list.
As a result, we tend not to be very zealous in our oppositionto those sins.
THE REMEDY

1. Keep the main thing the main thing
When Jesus defines those things that are truly the weightiermatters – justice,
mercy and faithfulness – He is almostcertainly thinking of the words from
that the prophet Micah had written some 700 years earlier:
He has told you, O man, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
(Micah 6:8 ESV)
The Pharisees,just as we are prone to do, had forgotten that their God-given
purpose was not to perpetuate religious rules and activity that only burdened
people down, but rather to bring about righteousness in this world through
the gospelthat embodies justice, kindness or mercy, and faithfulness or
walking humbly with God.
While we don’t use those exactwords, our church’s mission statement
embodies those three attributes:

Know Jesus. Grow and Serve. Go and Share.
Full name
Your email address
Get Started
Our mission as a church is not to help people learn a bunch of religious rules
or engage in religious activities, but rather to help us and others develop a
relationship with Jesus in which we exhibit justice, mercy and faithfulness.
And that process is going to look a bit different in eachone of our lives. So we
need to be okaywith the idea that not everyone’s journey needs to look just
like mine.
2. Love others
Some of you may be wondering how I developed the idea of loving others from
the principles of justice, mercy and faithfulness. A parallelpassage in Luke’s
gospelaccountand a proper understanding of what Jesus meant by the word
“justice” will be helpful. Let’s begin with the parallelpassage in Luke’s
gospel:

“But woe to you Pharisees!Foryou tithe mint and rue and every herb, and
neglectjustice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without
neglecting the others.
(Luke 11:42 ESV)
Notice here that Jesus has boiled the main thing down to “justice” and the
“love of God”. It’s pretty obvious that “the love of God” can be equated with
“faithfulness” in Matthew’s accountas well as “walk humbly with your God”
in Micah. We’ll come back to that in a moment.
When Jesus uses the word “justice” here, He has in mind the Hebrew
understanding of that word as it was used in the Old TestamentScriptures.
There are three primary Hebrew words that are translated “justice” in the
Old Testament. While they have slightly different nuances, all essentially
mean “to give a personwhat he or she is due”. Obviously, in some places that
refers to punishment for sin. But it is also used frequently in the sense ofthe
protection or care that is due to people, especiallyto the vulnerable people in
that culture – the poor, widows, orphans, and immigrants. The Old Testament
consistentlypainted a picture of a God who cares forthose weak and helpless
people and expects His children to do the same.
This is the aspectofjustice that the Pharisees missed. Theycertainly wanted a
God who would be just in punishing of the sins of others, but not one that
would hold them responsible for giving protection and care to the vulnerable.
In fact, as we saw a few weeks ago, they actuallypreyed on the vulnerable
rather than taking care of them.

Hopefully now you can see how I’ve developed this principle of loving others.
We are to treat others with mercy and kindness and we are especiallyto
provide justice for the down and out in our culture by providing care and
protection for them.
I’m grateful for the way we’ve done that as a church and as individuals. Our
church has been able to provide financial help for those right here in our
church family that are experiencing financial hardships. We have partnered
with the GospelRescueMissionto minister to the homeless in our community.
And I know that many of you also personally support the GospelRescue
Missionand other organizations that minister to the down and out.
When we do that, then we end up majoring on the majors and not on the
minors.
But it is not always easy to love others, is it? Often the people that need our
mercy and compassionare the most difficult people to love because they
require a biggersacrifice on our part.
3. Love God
The accounts in Matthew, Luke and Micah’s words express this idea with
different words:
Full name

Your email address
Get Started
• In Luke, Jesus calls it “the love of God”
• In our passagein Matthew, he calls it “faithfulness”
• Micah refers to it as “walking humbly with your God”
While we are quick to criticize the Pharisees, we needto acknowledgethat
they did much of what they did because theybelieved that their outward
religious acts were actually an indication of their love for God. But what they
missed was that the love of God is more a matter of the heart than what we
do. Perhaps they should have spent more time meditating on these words
given to the prophet Hosea by God:
For I desire steadfastlove and not sacrifice,
the knowledge ofGodrather than burnt offerings.
(Hosea 6:6 ESV)

God wants us to love Him by spending time with Him and getting to know
Him, not by engaging in some religious act that is intended to gain favor with
Him.
ACTION
As we close this morning, I want to encourage allof us to consider just one
concrete stepthat we could take this week to apply one of these three
remedies.
• What could you do this week to make the main thing the main thing?
• Who is it that God wants you to love and what is one thing you could do this
week to love that person?
• What could you do this week to spend some time with God and get to know
Him better?
INSPIRATION

I think that overall we’ve done a pretty goodjob of not majoring in minors
and minoring in majors. Let’s make sure that we continue to focus on our
main purpose. Let’s continue to work together to…
Know Jesus. Grow and Serve. Go and Share.
and to help others to do that as well.
Discussionquestions for Bible Roundtable
1. What are some things that ought to be “majors” in the church? What are
some things that ought to be “minors”?
2. Why do you think there is a tendency for churches and individuals to focus
on the “minors”? What are some practicalways we can prevent that?
3. Why is it often easierto focus on “doing” rather than “being”? Whatare
some indications that I am doing that?
4. How does the Hebrew idea of “justice” help us understand how we are to
treat the vulnerable in our culture?
5. What does it mean to “walk humbly with your God”?

Matthew 23:24
Bible / Our Library / Bible Commentaries / John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
/ Matthew / Matthew 23 / Matthew 23:24
Share TweetSave
Matthew 23:23 Matthew 23:25
Matthew 23:24
Ye blind guides
As in ( Matthew 23:16 )
who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel:
the Syriac and Persic versions readthe words in the plural number, gnats and
camels. The Jews had a law, which forbid them the eating of any creeping
thing, ( Leviticus 11:41 ) and of this they were strictly observant, and would
not be guilty of the breach of it for everso much.
``One that eats a flea, or a gnat; they sayF16 is (rmwm) , "anapostate";''
``whoever eats a whole fly, or a whole gnat, whether alive or dead, was to be
beaten on accountof a creeping flying thing F17.''
one F18;that

``if a fly falls into the cup of one of them, (whtwvw wqrwz) , "he strains it, and
would throw it to the ground, and would not drink of it.''
Maimonides says F19,
``He that strains wine, or vinegar, or strong liquor, and eats "Jabchushin" (a
sort of small flies found in wine cellars F20, onaccountof which they strained
flying things, and the creeping things of the water.''
Moreover, it is said F21,
``a man might not pour his strong liquors through a strainer, by the light (of a
transgress the law, in ( Leviticus 11:41 ) .''
to commit the grossestenormities, and most scandalous sins in life.
Straining Out Gnats and Swallowing Camels

Matthew 23:23,24
"Woe to you teachers of the law and Pharisees, youhypocrites! You give a
tenth of your spices -- mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglectedthe more
important matters of the law -- justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should
have practicedthe latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides!
You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel" (Matthew 23:23,24)
Given my druthers, I wouldn't swallow a gnat or a camel, but if forcedto
choose betweenthe two I'd quickly be heading out the door with my gnat trap.
The Pharisees,onthe other hand, seemedto have a more ambitious appetite.
Even though they painstakinglyavoided swallowing a tiny gnat, they did seem
to enjoy stuffing huge, gangly camels into their mouths.
Actually the Phariseesdid well to avoid eating gnats as they were unclean
(albeit the most minute of the unclean animals). The Pharisees wouldobey the
law to the extent of literally straining their wine or drinking waterthrough a
cloth in order to avoid the possibility of swallowing an unclean insect. But
they would then turn around and engage in religious activity that was grossly
unlawful, immoral and ungodly, not thinking anything about it. And this
disorderly activity Jesus likens to the eating of a camel.
The ungodliness of the Phariseesis also illustrated in reference to their tithing.
One tenth of the harvest was to be given to God (usually going to the priests
and Levites - Nu 18:20-24;Dt 14:24-29). The Phariseeswouldgo so far as to
pay tithes on a mint, dill, and cummin (three tiny garden herbs grown for
seasoning andflavoring their food). To pay tithes on these crops was to be

scrupulously obedient. For the tithe was scarcelyworth the trouble of
removing it from the garden. Jesus did not condemn this tithing, but he did
condemn leaving undone the more important matters; an omissionof which
the Phariseeswere guilty.
The Pharisees dismissedas needing no attention at all the more important
spiritual parts of the law such as justice (the act of righteously judging our
fellow man), mercy (forbearance towardthe guilty and compassionfor the
suffering), and faithfulness (manifesting belief in our lives).
Could it be that we too are guilty of the same legalistic attitude which
prompted such a stern Messianicrebuke? Is it possible that in our enlightened
spiritual environment we could be replacing more important matters of the
Lord's work with the less important details? It would be the height of
religious arrogance to assume that it could not happen to us.
When it comes to justice, we are judging the worth of others basedupon the
details of clothing, financial status and socialpositionrather than on the
eternal value of their soul? Are we more concernedabout community gossip
and the standards of other religious groups in judging people than we are of
the standard of God? Are we reflecting the justice of God when we become
upset over the orderliness of worship but not upset over the lostsouls of those
who may be disorderly?
When it comes to mercy, we must follow the example of Jesus who often
attended to physical needs such as hunger and sickness, but was primarily
concernedwith man's spiritual needs. To show mercy by helping a needy
person with a handout is certainly commendable, but to assistthat same
person in obtaining a saving knowledge ofthe Word of God is even more
important.

As far as faithfulness is concerned, we all realize the importance of attending
worship services and avoiding any public display of ungodliness. But what
about when our actions are hidden from the public? How do we treat our
spouse and our children in the privacy of our home? What about our
thoughts, our true desires? Are we as spiritual inwardly as we appear to be?
The messageofJesus in Matthew 23:23,24 is not that we neglectthe details of
obedience, but that we also remember the more important matters. Giving
perfectionistic attention to the details while neglecting true service to God and
our fellow man will only result in our condemnation as one who strains out
the gnats and swallowsthe camel.
By Ed Barnes
From Expository Files 6.11;November1999
ReadMatthew 23:24 Using Other Translations
KJVYe blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.ESVYou
blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!NLTBlind guides!
You strain your water so you won’t accidentallyswallow a gnat, but you
swallow a camel!
What does Matthew 23:24 mean?
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
Matthew 23:24

Ye blind guides
As in ( Matthew 23:16 )
who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel:
the Syriac and Persic versions readthe words in the plural number, gnats and
camels. The Jews had a law, which forbid them the eating of any creeping
thing, ( Leviticus 11:41 ) and of this they were strictly observant, and would
not be guilty of the breach of it for everso much.
``One that eats a flea, or a gnat; they sayF16 is (rmwm) , "anapostate";''
transgress the above command, and incur the characterof an apostate; and at
``whoever eats a whole fly, or a whole gnat, whether alive or dead, was to be
beaten on accountof a creeping flying thing F17.''
one F18;that
``if a fly falls into the cup of one of them, (whtwvw wqrwz) , "he strains it, and
would throw it to the ground, and would not drink of it.''
Maimonides says F19,
``He that strains wine, or vinegar, or strong liquor, and eats "Jabchushin" (a
sort of small flies found in wine cellars F20, onaccountof which they strained
flying things, and the creeping things of the water.''

Moreover, it is said F21,
``a man might not pour his strong liquors through a strainer, by the light (of a
transgress the law, in ( Leviticus 11:41 ) .''
to commit the grossestenormities, and most scandalous sins in life.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/matthew/23-24.html
Free Sunday SchoolLessons
You are here: Free Sunday SchoolLessons / Biblical Theology/ New
TestamentTheology/ Matthew 23:24: "Straining at Gnats"
Matthew 23:24: "Straining at Gnats"

May 17, 2008 by FSSL 5 Comments
Matthew 23:24: “Straining at Gnats”
The KJV states “Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a
camel.” (Matthew 23:24)What does this passagemean? One little preposition,
“at,” causessome confusionand has led to some inaccurate interpretations.
Various Interpretations Basedon “Strain At.”
The following interpretations are not comprehensive.
Interpretation 1: A common interpretation. Seeking to preserve the term “at,”
those who interpret this add the phrase “the discoveryof” to make sense of
the translation. The Pharisees would“strain(the wine) at (the discovery of) a
gnat.”
Interpretation 2: Matthew Henry’s Commentary: Suggesting thatthe phrase
means to look intensely at, says:“In their practice they strained at gnats,
heaved at them, with a seeming dread, as if they had a greatabhorrence of
sin, and were afraid of it in the leastinstance…”
Interpretation 3: “Strain at a gnat” is the wrong reading. It should have been
translated “strainout” to mean that the blind guides strain gnats out of their
wine. They major on the minors by avoiding drinking something unclean, but
at the same time, they drink down an unclean camel.

Meaning of “Straining”
The crux of the matter lies in what the verb means. Does the verb mean to
“strain at” as if intently looking at something. Or, does it mean something
entirely different?
Why the KJV translators translatedthe Greek Word, diulitzo, as “strain at”
is not clearat all. This word has nothing to do with looking at a gnat. The
Greek word means to “strain out, filter.” It is used in this passageas
“straining out” or “filtering” gnats out of wine. This word never has the idea
of “looking at” as the secondinterpretation suggests.
While one can make a case forthe first interpretation, it is a forced
interpretation that requires the addition of “the discovery of” to make sense
of the passage. Readers ofthe KJV would not come to that conclusionunless
this was explained to them. So, we prefer to let the Greek word to stand on its
own. It is a more clearand precise translationto say:“You blind guides! You
strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.” (NIV)
The History of “Strain At.”
There is no explanation why the KJV translators chose “strainat” insteadof
the easier, normalreading “strain out.” Is this the way people spoke in 1611?
Some suggestthat is the case.However, no other contemporaryEnglish
translation supports the 1611 KJV translation. Note the following:
1525-6 AD:Tyndale, “Ye blinde gydes which strayne out a gnat and swalowe
a cammyll.”

1599 AD: Geneva, “Ye blind guides, which strain out a gnat, and swallow a
camel.”
Even the Oxford English Dictionary states that “strain at” was misunderstood
by Shakespeare himself. It would certainly be a “violent effort” on the part of
a blind man to look intensely at a gnat. However, the idea of “straining to see
a gnat” is not involved at all. It simply means to strain gnats out of wine.
What then does the passagemeanand how does it apply?
It is human nature to focus on the technicalaspects ofa verse and miss the
overall point. We should not simply leave this passagewith a discussionof “It
doesn’t mean this, it means that.” There is a greattruth here that must not be
missed. Even though a clarificationmust be made, the ultimate importance is
what does the passagemeanand what significance is there for me?
In probably the harshestseries of denouncements, Jesus “blasts”the
Pharisees worshipat the temple. From an Old Testamentlegalperspective,
the Phariseesbrought all of the right things and the right amount for their
tithe. In all, their gifts were perfectly acceptable. Any grain, fruit, or vegetable
was appropriate for temple tithes (Lev 27:30). The Pharisees, givento
extremism, collectedofferings of mint (leaves), dill and cummin (seeds). The
more common grains, fruits and vegetables would have satisfiedthe tithe, but
the Phariseeswere givento the minutest detail. The problem is that while they
were given to counting seeds and leaves, they lackedthe most obvious–justice,
mercy and faithfulness (v 23) What is easier? Is it easierto focus on details
that require only accounting skills, orgiving oneselfto the more difficult,

Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point

Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point

Similar to Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Jesus was using exaggeration to make a point