Why this "redundant" detail in scripture?

[WesleyF]

“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Why this detail that he “opened his mouth” and taught? It seems redundant. Or is there anything profound there?? It is obvious that if someone has to teach then he is going to open his mouth. Then why should it be mentioned?

 

[Barbkw]

It reminds me of Genesis.

“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.”

Perhaps Matthew is making the connection between God the Father and God the Son.

Also, there are five discourses in Matthew that mirror the 5 books of the Torah, each of the five end with, “When Jesus had finished saying these things…” (or something very similar; see 7:28, 11:1, 13:53, 19:1, and 26:1).

See also: catholic-resources.org/Bible/Matthew-Discourses.htm

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Literary poetics, such as “Four score and seven years” and similar superfluous or redudunt statements, are there to underscore the importance of the statement or concept. In your cited case, it was to convey the tremendous skill, fearlessness and brilliance of the Jesus’ teaching of that day.

 

[NotWorthy]

“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Why this detail that he “opened his mouth” and taught? It seems redundant. Or is there anything profound there?? It is obvious that if someone has to teach then he is going to open his mouth. Then why should it be mentioned?

Hmmm…

I see one time in Luke’s Gospel where he began teaching by “opening the scroll…” (Luke 4) I wonder if it has anything to do with the source of the teaching.

 

[Barbkw]

Hmmm…

I see one time in Luke’s Gospel where he began teaching by “opening the scroll…” (Luke 4) I wonder if it has anything to do with the source of the teaching.

Good point - indicating in Matthew that Jesus taught the Sermon on the Mount by His own authority.

 

[InspiritCarol]

“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Why this detail that he “opened his mouth” and taught? It seems redundant. Or is there anything profound there?? It is obvious that if someone has to teach then he is going to open his mouth. Then why should it be mentioned?

Well, now no one can claim Jesus was a ventriloquist.

BTW the NRSV translates it as “…then he began to speak and taught them…”

Soooo it’s just a funny translation thing; nothing profound (beyond the anti-ventriloquist insight.)

 

[PJM]

=WesleyF;7360092]“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Why this detail that he “opened his mouth” and taught? It seems redundant. Or is there anything profound there?? It is obvious that if someone has to teach then he is going to open his mouth. Then why should it be mentioned?

***Because "He is the very SON OF GOD. [So listen closely to wht He has to say.] ***

 

[ryanoneil]

Symbolically there is a parallel with Jesus giving the Law of the New Covenant and Moses delivering the Old Covenant. He is speaking with divine authority as a new Moses and lawgiver. He is not just delivering stone tablets though. He is deepening and perfecting the moral codes later when he uses the refrain “but I say to you” (5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44).

 

[PJM]

=ryanoneil;7361004]Symbolically there is a parallel with Jesus giving the Law of the New Covenant and Moses delivering the Old Covenant. He is speaking with divine authority as a new Moses and lawgiver. He is not just delivering stone tablets though. He is deepening and perfecting the moral codes later when he uses the refrain “but I say to you” (5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44).

Very astute observation.
THANKS

 

[Oldtimer_7]

One of the problems of literal translation is that idiom and convention vary from one language to another. It may be perfectly good Greek or Aramaic, but it makes for weird modern English.

 

[NotWorthy]

Symbolically there is a parallel with Jesus giving the Law of the New Covenant and Moses delivering the Old Covenant. He is speaking with divine authority as a new Moses and lawgiver. He is not just delivering stone tablets though. He is deepening and perfecting the moral codes later when he uses the refrain “but I say to you” (5:22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44).

I believe it is here that Jesus preaches from the mountaintop declaring, “I AM GOD!”.

As you point out, and I’m paraphrasing, “God may have told you, through Moses, not to commit adultery. But I say to you, whoever looks at a woman with lust has committed adultery”. If Jesus were merely a man, He would be placing himself above God with statements like that.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Good point - indicating in Matthew that Jesus taught the Sermon on the Mount by His own authority.

A Jewish friend told me that there is no superfluous word in the OT. I think the same applies to the NT. So the apparent redundancy must convey additional information. I think you have the best explanation I have seen.

 

[Crumpy]

There may be various levels of meaning and symbolism in the phrase that He opened His mouth. What strikes me about that verse in isolation is the dramatic pause before Jesus begins to speak.

If it said that that He began to speak, we would assume that He opened His mouth. But, separating the two actions of opening His mouth and speaking creates some tension and anticipation. You may have noticed that in a speaker who separates those actions.There is probably more to it than that.

Jesus was probably looking around at everyone, which is attention-grabbing in itself. Given His reputation, people were waiting on His every word, not wanting to miss anything.Then, if He opens His mouth, you would probably elbow your wife or husband to quiet down, so you could hear Him.

Then, He begins to speak.

At another level it’s an indication of God’s will and revelation in the due course of time. It’s an echo of God speaking in due course of time in the Old Testament.

 

[Petergee]

“He opened His mouth…” Means more than a poetical way of saying “he said.” It is regularly used to introduce any weighty, grave and important utterance… It is used of an utterance of calculated courage… It is used of an utterance in which there are no reservations, in which nothing is kept back and in which the whole truth is told and the whole heart is opened…

By using this phrase of Jesus, Matthew warns us that there is to follow an utterance of the greatest weight and importance, an utterance in which no cautious and prudential motives of safety will keep the speaker from telling the truth, an utterance in which mind and heart are opened and in which nothing is kept back.

William Barclay, The Plain Man Looks at the Beatitudes.

See also Acts 8:35 where the same phrase is used for the same reason.

Note also

“When He sat down…” A Jewish Rabbi was officially teaching he would sit down to teach… like when the Pope speaks ex cathedra … So, from this introduction Matthew means us to see that what follows is no chance teaching given in the by-going; it is no pleasant discourse given in the passing; it is the official teaching of Jesus. It is Jesus telling His disciples the very essence of what He came to say.

 

[inocente]

“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Which translation is that? The NIV has “Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them.”

 

[thistle]

“Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him. And he **opened his mouth **and taught them, saying” (Matthew 5:1-2)

Why this detail that he “opened his mouth” and taught? It seems redundant. Or is there anything profound there?? It is obvious that if someone has to teach then he is going to open his mouth. Then why should it be mentioned?

D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 2. Opening his mouth. It is a Hebraism, to signify he began to speak. (Witham) — This is a common expression in Scripture, to signify something important is about to be spoken. Thus it is used in various other places, as “Job opening his mouth cursed his day, and said,” &c. Daniel, chap. x. et alibi. (Jansenius) — And why is it added, says St. Chrysostom “and opening his mouth,” without doubt that we might know, that not only when he spoke, but even when silent, he gave instruction: sometimes, therefore, he opened his mouth; at other times he spoke by his very actions. (Hom. xv.)

 

[ethereality]

Literary poetics, such as “Four score and seven years” and similar superfluous or redudunt statements, are there to underscore the importance of the statement or concept. In your cited case, it was to convey the tremendous skill, fearlessness and brilliance of the Jesus’ teaching of that day.

I agree. It sounds very Jewish to me; read through some of the prayers in the Old Testament, the Psalms, e.g. the Song of Songs. There are loads of “statement A, statement A repeated using different words; statement B, statement B repeated using different words” – to make it more beautiful. Kind of like Gothic architecture, I suppose (among many other kinds): You could just have a building with four corners (or a dome, whatever) and be done with it, flat, plain. Instead we like to add all kinds of unnecessary flair: Although it doesn’t change the essence of the building, it gives the mind more to experience or to think about.

 

[ryanoneil]

Very astute observation.
THANKS

Your welcome, and thank God for study bibles.

I believe it is here that Jesus preaches from the mountaintop declaring, “I AM GOD!”.

As you point out, and I’m paraphrasing, “God may have told you, through Moses, not to commit adultery. But I say to you, whoever looks at a woman with lust has committed adultery”. If Jesus were merely a man, He would be placing himself above God with statements like that.

I’ve heard the same thing.

 

[NHInsider]

Which translation is that? The NIV has “Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, and he began to teach them.”

Have I mentioned recently what a lame translation the NIV is?

Yesterday in Bible Study we were looking at the transfiguration in Luke 9. What is the significance of the conversation that Jesus is having with Moses and Elijah? The question essentially fell flat. Turns out the NIV, which most of the participants use, says they were talking about His “departure.” Which loses a great deal of the heft of the word “exodus,” which I have no doubt Luke chose deliberately.

 

[inocente]

Have I mentioned recently what a lame translation the NIV is?

No, I don’t think you have.

It’s the most popular multi-denominational Bible, and I guess the translators want to make scripture as clear as possible to a wide modern audience. The shiny new 2010 translation has the footnote “Luke 9:31 Greek exodus” which isn’t in the 1984 version that most people own.

In case you never found it, the following link is a good resource for comparing translations. Use the drop-down list and you’ll see that verse translated in a whole bunch of different ways. Cool dudes bring laptops to their wi-fi enabled Bible class.

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%209:31&version=NIV