Καὶ ἰδόντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι εἶπον τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ· διατί μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν; (Matthew 9:11)
Grammar of a Grumble
In Matthew 9:11, the Pharisees aren’t just curious — they’re offended. Their question, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?” carries theological weight and rhetorical heat. But the grammar amplifies this by placing stress on association, using the preposition μετά, and turning the verb ἐσθίει (he eats) into an action of solidarity, not mere consumption.
This article explores how Greek expresses moral challenge through third-person accusatory questioning, and how the construction Διατί… ἐσθίει functions not just as an inquiry, but as a social rebuke.
Rhetorical Interrogative with διατί + Present Indicative
The key clause:
Διατί μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν;
“Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
This is a direct question using:
– Διατί = Why? (idiomatic expression of reason/cause)
– Present Indicative = questioning of ongoing behavior
– Subject delayed to the end — ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν — for emphasis and potential derision (“your teacher”)
Key Morphology and Parsing
- ἰδόντες
- Root: ὁράω
- Form: Aorist Active Participle, Nominative Masculine Plural
- Lexical Meaning: “having seen,” “after seeing”
- Contextual Notes: Sets up background action for the main verb εἶπον
- εἶπον
- Root: λέγω
- Form: Aorist Active Indicative, 3rd Person Plural
- Lexical Meaning: “they said”
- Contextual Notes: Introduces direct speech (the Pharisees questioning the disciples)
- Διατί
- Root: διά + τί
- Form: Interrogative adverb
- Lexical Meaning: “Why?” (literally, “because of what?”)
- Contextual Notes: Standard way to introduce a “why” question in NT Greek; expresses either genuine inquiry or challenge
- μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν
- Root: μετά + genitive
- Form: Prepositional phrase (with genitive plural)
- Lexical Meaning: “with tax collectors and sinners”
- Contextual Notes: The preposition μετά strongly implies fellowship, not mere proximity — making the eating morally problematic in Pharisaic logic
- ἐσθίει
- Root: ἐσθίω
- Form: Present Active Indicative, 3rd Person Singular
- Lexical Meaning: “he eats”
- Contextual Notes: Present tense conveys habitual or repeated action — as in “this is his pattern”
Clause and Emphasis Structure
Phrase | Grammatical Role | Syntactic Function | Theological/Emotional Impact |
---|---|---|---|
Διατί | Interrogative Adverb | Introduces the “Why?” question | Challenges legitimacy of behavior |
μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν | Prepositional Phrase | Locative accompaniment | Frames association as scandal |
ἐσθίει | Main Verb | Present indicative action | Suggests habitual solidarity |
ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν | Subject (delayed) | Emphatic third-person reference | Possibly ironic or accusatory |
When Syntax Questions Grace
In Greek, word order can function like facial expression — subtle, but emotionally powerful. Here, the subject ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν comes last, giving the question a sharp edge: “Why does your teacher (of all people!) eat with them?” The rhetorical stress is not on the action but on the inconsistency of the actor — a teacher of righteousness eating with the unrighteous.
The verb ἐσθίει, though mundane, becomes loaded. In first-century Judaism, shared meals were boundary markers. In this case, the grammar exposes what the Pharisees considered a breach of moral boundaries — Jesus’ grammar of table fellowship as an expression of grace.
The Question That Ate With Sinners
Matthew 9:11 is more than a question — it’s a grammatical protest against grace. The Pharisees’ syntax cannot tolerate a table wide enough for sinners. And yet Jesus sits, eats, and teaches not despite their sin, but because of it. The preposition μετά — “with” — becomes the axis of the scandal. The verb ἐσθίει reveals not just what Jesus does, but who He welcomes.
In this brief question, Greek grammar captures the tension of the gospel: the righteous asking why grace breaks the rules — and Jesus answering not with a rebuttal, but with a meal.