Search the Bible
* powered by Bible Study Tools

Matthew 15:26

    Matthew 15:26 Translations

    King James Version (KJV)

    But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.

    American King James Version (AKJV)

    But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.

    American Standard Version (ASV)

    And he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to the dogs.

    Basic English Translation (BBE)

    And he made answer and said, It is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs.

    Webster's Revision

    And he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to the dogs.

    World English Bible

    But he answered, "It is not appropriate to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs."

    English Revised Version (ERV)

    And he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread and cast it to the dogs.

    Definitions for Matthew 15:26

    Cast - Worn-out; old; cast-off.
    Meet - Agreeable; fit; proper.

    Clarke's Commentary on Matthew 15:26

    The children's bread - The salvation provided for the Jews, who were termed the children of the kingdom. And cast it to the κυναριοις, little dogs - to the curs; such the Gentiles were reputed by the Jewish people, and our Lord uses that form of speech which was common among his countrymen. What terrible repulses! and yet she still perseveres!

    Barnes' Notes on Matthew 15:26

    But he answered and said, It is not meet ... - That is, it is not appropriate or proper.

    Children's bread - The Jews considered themselves as the special children of God.

    To all other nations they were accustomed to apply terms of contempt, of which dogs was the most common. The Muslims still apply the term "dogs" to Christians, and Christians and Jews to each other. The term is designed as an expression of the highest contempt. The Saviour means to say that he was sent to the Jews. The woman was a Gentile. He meant merely using a term in common use, and designed to test her faith in the strongest manner - that it did not comport with the design of his personal ministry to apply benefits intended for the Jews to others. Evidently he cannot be understood as intending to justify or sanction the use of such terms, or calling names. He meant to try her faith. As if he had said, "You are a Gentile; I am a Jew. The Jews call themselves children of God. You they vilify and abuse, calling you a dog. Are you willing to receive of a Jew, then, a favor? Are you willing to submit to these appellations to receive a favor of one of that nation, and to acknowledge your dependence on a people that so despise you?" It was, therefore, a trial of her faith, and was not a lending of his sanction to the propriety of the abusive term. He regarded her with a different feeling.