33482
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ST. LUKE
REV. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D.
THE INTERNATIONAL .-CRITICAL- COMMENTARY
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY
GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE
BY THE
REV. ALFRED PLUMMER, M.A., D.D,
MASTER OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, DURHAM
FORMERLY FELLOW AND SENIOR TUTOR OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD
NEW YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1920
PREFACE
THIS volume has no such ambitious afm as that of being a
final commentary on the Gospel according to S. Luke.
The day is probably still far distant when any such com-
mentary can be written. One of the difficulties with which
the present commentator has had to contend is the im-
possibility of keeping abreast of all that is constantly
appearing respecting the Synoptic Gospels as a whole and
this or that detail in them. And the Third Gospel abounds
in details which have elicited special treatment at the hands
of a variety of scholars. Every quarter, indeed almost every
month, brings its list of new books, some of which the
writer wishes that he could have seen before his own words
were printed. But to wait is but to prolong, if not to
increase, one's difficulties : it is waiting dum defluat arnms.
Notes written and rewritten three or four times must be
fixed in some form at last, if they are ever to be published.
And these notes are now offered to those who care to use
them, not as the last word on any one subject, but simply
as one more stage in the long process of eliciting from the
inexhaustible storehouse of the Gospel narrative some of
those things which it is intended to convey to us. They
will have done their work if they help someone who is far
better equipped entirely to supersede them,
The writer of this volume is well aware of some of
its shortcomings. There are omissions which have been
knowingly tolerated for one or other of two adequate
reasons, (i) This series is to include a Commentary on
iii
hr PREFACE
the Synopsis of tkt Four Gospels by the Rev. Dr. Sanday,
Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Oxford, and his dis-
tinguished pupil, the Rev. W. C. Allen, Fellow and Lecturer
of Exeter College. Various questions, especially as regards
the relations of the Third Gospel to the First and Second,
which have been but slightly touched or entirely passed
over in this volume, can be more suitably treated, and will
be much more efficiently treated, by those who are to con**
ment on the Synopsis. (2) Economy of space has had to
be considered and rigorously enforced. It has been
thought undesirable to allow more than one volume to
any one book in the New Testament : and therefore sub-
jects, which might with propriety be discussed at some
length in a work on the Gospel of S. Luke, have of
necessity been handled very briefly or left entirely un-
touched. Indeed, as editor of those New Testament
volumes which are written by British scholars, the present
writer has been obliged to strike out a good deal of what
he had written as contributor to this series. And it has
been with a view to economize space that the paraphrastic
summaries, which are so very valuable a feature in the
commentary on Romans^ have been altogether omitted, as
being a luxury rather than a necessity in a commentary on
one of the Synoptic Gospels. For the same reason separate
headings to sections and to special notes have been used
very sparingly. The sub-sections have no separate head-
ings, but are preceded by an introductory paragraph* the
first sentence of which is equivalent to a heading,
The fact of the same person being both contributor
and editor has, in the case of this volume, produced short-
comings of another kind. Two heads are better than one,
and two pairs of eyes are better than one. Unintentional
and unnecessary omissions might have been avoided, and
questionable or erroneous statements might have been
amended, if the writer had had the advantage of another's
supervision. Even in the humble but important work of
PREFACE v
detecting misprints the gain of having a different reviser is
great. Only those who have had the experience know how
easy it is for the same eye to pass the same mistakes again
and again.
If this commentary has any special features, they will
perhaps be found in the illustrations taken from Jewish
writings, in the abundance of references to the Septuagint
and to the Acts and other books of the New Testament, in
the frequent quotations of renderings in the Latin Versions,
and in the attention which has been paid, both in the
Introduction and throughout the Notes, to the marks of S.
Luke's style.
The illustrations from Jewish writings have been sup-
plied, not because the writer has made any special study
of them, but because it is becoming recognized that the
pseudepigraphical writings of the Jews and early Jewish
Christians are now among the most promising helps
towards understanding the New Testament ; and because
these writings have of late years become much more
accessible than formerly, notably by the excellent editions
of the Book of Enoch by Mr. Charles, of the Psalms of
Solomon by Professor Ryle and Dr. James, and of the
Fourth Book of Ezra by the late Professor Bensly and Dr.
James. 1
A very eminent scholar has said that the best com-
mentary on the New Testament is a good Concordance;
and another venerable scholar is reported to have said that
the best commentary on the New Testament is the Vulgate.
There is truth in both these sayings : and, with regard to
the second of them, if the Vulgate by itself is helpful, d
fortiori the Vulgate side by side with the Latin Versions
which preceded it is likely to be helpful. An effort has
1 For general information on these Jewish writings see Schiirer, Hist, of the,
Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1886, Div. II. vol. iii. j
W. J. Deane, Pseudepigrapha^ Edinburgh, 1891 ; J, Winter und A. Wlinsche,
Die judisck* Literatur seit Abschluss des Kanons* Trier : Part III. has just
appeared.
n PREFACE
been made to render those who use this commentary to a
large extent independent of a Concordance, and to some
extent independent of the invaluable edition of the Vulgate
now being produced by the Bishop of Salisbuiy and Mr.
White. Great trouble has been taken with the numerous
references to the Septuagint, the books of the New Testa-
ment, and other writings. The large majority of them
have been verified at least twice. But the difficulty of
excluding error in such things is so great that the writer
cannot suppose that he has succeeded in doing so. It is
possible that a few references have accidentally escaped
verification. A very few have been knowingly admitted
without it, because the reference seemed to be of value,
the source was trustworthy, and verification was not easy.
Reasons are stated in the Introduction for regarding a
study of S. Luke's style as a matter of great interest and
importance ; and it is hoped that the analysis given of it
there will be found useful. A minute acquaintance with it
tells us something about the writer of the Third Gospel.
It proves to us that he is identical with the writer of the
Acts, and that the whole of both these books comes from
his hand. And it justifies us in accepting the unswerving
tradition of the first eight or nine centuries, that the writer
of these two books was Luke the beloved physician*
Dogma in the polemical sense is excluded from the plan
of these commentaries. It is not the business of the com*
mentator to advocate this or that belief. But dogma in the
historical sense must of necessity be conspicuous in a com-
mentary on any one of the Gospels, It is a primary duty
of a commentator to ascertain the convictions of the
writer whose statements he undertakes to explain. This
fa specially true of the Third Gospel, whose author tells
us that he wrote for the very purpose of exhibiting the
historical basis of the Christian faith (L 1-4). The
Evangelist assures Theophilus, and with him all other
Christians, that he knows, upon first-hand and carefully
PREFACE vi!
investigated evidence, that at a definite point in the history
of the world, not far removed from his own time, a Prophet
of God once more appeared in Israel to herald the coining
of the Christ (iii. 1-6), and that his appearance was im-
mediately followed by that of the Christ Himself (iii. 23,
iv. 14, 15), whose Ministry, Passion, Death, and Resur-
rection he then narrates in detail On all these points
the student is again and again met by the question, What
does the Evangelist mean? And, although about this
or that word or sentence there may often be room for
discussion, about the meaning of the Gospel as a whole
there is no doubt. If we ask what were "the things
wherein " Theophilus " was instructed " and of u the
certainty* 1 concerning which he is assured, the answer is
not difficult We may take the Old Roman Creed as a
convenient summary of it.
riurrcuw els 6e&K irarlpa iraKTOJcpdropa (i 37, ill 8, xi. 2-4,
xii. 32, etc.). Kal cts Xptor&K 'ITJCTOUH, vibv aurou rbv fiovoyeKq
(i. 31, II 21, 49, ix. 35, x. 21, 22, xxil 29, 70, xxiiL [33] 46:
comp. iv. 41, viiL 28), T&K itrfpioy r^w (i 43, ii. n, vil 13, x. i,
XL 39, xiL 42, rvii. 5, 6, xix. 8, 31, xxiL 61, xxiv. 3, 34) TO*
YcmjWRra IK. trycujiaros dyiou ical Mapias TTJS irapO^ou (1.31-35, 43
ii. 6, 7), T^K Ivl floKTtou riiXdrou onraupoO^Kra ical T<x<|>&nra (xxii.,
xxiiL), rfl TpiT|j f\ppq> dKo<jT<nra JK FCKpuF (xxiv. 149), dmpdli^ra
els roDs odpaKorfs (xxir. 50-53), Ka,Qr\pvov Iv Sc^i^ TOW irarp<$s
(xxiL 69), oSeK fpxT<u icptKai Jwvras KOI vcKpofo (comp. ix. 26,
xii. 35-48, xviii. 8). Kal its nvufi,a Syio^ (i 15, 35, 41, 67, ii. 26,
iv. i, 14, xi. 13, xii. 10, 12)* Ayta? lKK\T|<riaK (comp. i 74, 75,
ix. i-^ x. 1-16, xxiv. 49)' a4>e< dfAapri^K (i. 77, iil 3, xxiv. 47)'
aapK^s drdaracriK (xiv. 14, xx 27-40).
The Evangelists own convictions on most of these
points are manifest; and we need not doubt that they
include the principal things in which Theophilus had been
instructed, and which the writer of the Gospel solemnly
affirms to be wdi established. Whether in our eyes they
Vii! PREFACE
are well established depends upon the estimate which we
form of his testimony. Is he a truth-loving and competent
witness? Does the picture which he draws agree with
what can be known from other authorities ? Could he or
his informants have invented the words and works which
he attributes to Jesus Christ ? A patient and fair student
of the Third Gospel will not be at a loss for an answer.
ALFRED PLUMMEU
University College, Durham^
Feast ofS. Luke*
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
f I. The Author ,..,,*,
was the Author of the Acts * * ad
a Companion of S. Paul * . xii
S. Luke . ,* liii
| 2. S. Luke the Evangelist xriii
{ 3. The Sources of the Gospel . xxiii
No Ebionite Source xxv
Supposed Dislike of Duplicates ncviii
{ 4. Time and Place xxht
{ 5. Object and Plan .... xxxiii
Analysis of the Gospel ..* nocviii
| 6. Characteristics, Style, and Language xll
The Gospel of S. Paul xliii
of Prayer * xlv
of Praise . xlvi
literary, historic, domestic xlvi
S. Luke's Command of Greek xlix
Expressions peculiar to S. Luke lii
to him and S. Paul . . liv
to both with Hebrews * hriii
to S. Luke with Hebrews Ux
Expressions frequent in S. Luke lix
possibly medical Ixiii
His Diction compared with that of & Matthew
and S. Mark Ixfi
| 7. The Integrity of the Gospel ***** fccvii
f 8* The Text * . . Ixx
| 9. Literary History * badii
Clement of Rome .* Ixxiv
fexvi
of Pet<r ......
Ttstamtnts of XTI, Patriarchs , *
iz
CONTENTS
f*oi
|ia Commentaries ...... * baas
Abbreviations *** bcocvi
COMMENTARY ....... , .
SPECIAL NOTES
On the use of lyfrfro ..**.. 45
The Decree of Augusta* *** 48
The fifteenth year of Tiberius 82
The Genealogy .,.. loi
Demoniacal Possession ..... 136
The Miraculous Draught of Fishes . . * * 147
The title "Son of Man" ...... 156
The word ticvrcpoirp&ry ..... * 165
The Sermon cirl rtfn-ov trf&xov . * * . 176
Christ's Raising the Dead ...... 201
The Journeyings towards Jerusalem * . * 260
The word dvaX^p.^Lt . . * * 362
The Mission of the Seventy ...... 269
The Idea of Hades or Sheol in the O.T. . * * 397
The Blind Man at Jericho , . . , 439
The Parable of the Pounds . . . . . 437
The Question about Psalm ex . . . . . 472
The Apocalypse of Jesus .*** 487
Readings in Chapters xxiL and xxiiL * * 544
The Narratives of the Resurrection . . * . 546
Western Non-interpolations *.*** $66
Interpolations in the Sinaitic Syriac * . * . 569
INDEX TO THE NOTES
L General ....* 571
II. Writers and Writings . * 577
III. Greek Words ....... 581
IV* Knglfoh and T^ftti Words * 90
INTRODUCTION.
I. THE AUTHOR.
As In the case of the other Gospels, the author is not named in
the book itself. But two things may be regarded as practically
certain, and a third as highly probable in itself and much more
probable than any other hypothesis, (i.) The author of the Third
Gospel is the author of the Acts, (ii.) The author of the Acts
was a companion of S. Paul (iii.) This companion was S. Luke.
(L) 27tt Author of the Third Gospel is the Author of the Acts.
This position is so generally admitted by critics of all schools
that not much time need be spent in discussing it. Both books
are dedicated to Theophilus. The later book refers to the former.
The language and style and arrangement of the two books are so
similar, and this similarity is found to exist in such a multitude of
details (many of which are very minute), that the hypothesis of
careful imitation by a different writer is absolutely excluded. The
idea of minute literary analysis with a view to discover peculiarities
and preferences in language was an idea foreign to the writers of
the first two centuries ; and no known writer of that age gives
evidence of the immense skill which would be necessary in order
to employ the results of such an analysis for the production of an
elaborate imitation. To suppose that the author of the Acts
carefully imitated the Third Gospel, in order that his work might
be attributed to the Evangelist, or that the Evangelist carefully
imitated the Acts, in order that his Gospel might be attributed to
the author of the Acts, is to postulate a literary miracle. Such an
idea would not have occurred to any one ; and if it had, he would
not have been able to execute it with such triumphant success
as is conspicuous here. Any one who will underline in a few
chapters of the Third Gospel the phrases, words, and constructions
which -are specially frequent in the book, and then underline the
xii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 1.
same phrases, words, and constructions wherever they occur in the
Acts, will soon have a strong conviction respecting the identity of
authorship. The converse process will lead to a similar result.
Moreover, the expressions which can be marked in this way by no
means exhaust the points of similarity between the two books.
There are parallels of description ; e.g. about angelic appearances
(comp. Lk. i. 1 1 with Acts xii. 7 ; Lk. i. 38 with Acts i. 1 1 and
x. 7 ; Lk. ii. 9 and xxiv. 4 with Acts i. 10 and x. 30); and about
other matters (comp. Lk. i. 39 with Acts L 15; Lk. ii. 39 with
Acts xiii. 29 ; Lk. iii. 8 with Acts xxvi. 20 ; Lk. xx. i with Acts
iv. i; Lk. xxi. 18 with Acts xxvii. 34; Lk. xxi. 35 with Acts
xvii. 26 ; Lk. xxiii. 2 with Acts xxiv. 2-5 ; Lk. xxiii. 5 with Acts
x. 37 ; Lk. xxiv. 27 with Acts viii. 35). 1 And there are parallels
of arrangement. The main portion of the Gospel has three marked
divisions : The Ministry in Galilee (iii. i-ix. 50), between Galilee
and Jerusalem (ix. 5i-xix. 28), and in Jerusalem (xix. 29-xxiv. ii).
And the main portion of the Acts has three marked divisions :
Hebraic (ii.-v.), Transitional (vi.-xii.), and Gentile (xiii.-xxviii.),
In the one case the movement is from Galilee through Samaria,
etc. to Jerusalem : in the other from Jerusalem through Samaria,
etc. to Rome. And in both cases there is an introduction con-
necting the main narrative with what precedes.
(ii.) The Author of Acts was a Companion of S. Paul.
A full discussion of this statement belongs to the commentary
on the Acts rather than to the present volume : but the main
points in the evidence must be noted here. It is perhaps no
exaggeration to say that nothing in biblical criticism is more
certain than this statement
There are the " we " sections in which the writer uses the first
person plural in describing journeys of S. PauL This "we" is
found in Codex Bezae as early as xi. 28 at Antioch, and may
represent a true tradition without being the original reading. 2
It appears certainly xvi. 10 at Troas s and continues to Philippi
(xvi. 17).* Several years later it reappears at Philippi (xx, 5)^ and
continues to Jerusalem (xxL iB). Q Finally, it reappears at the
departure for Italy (xxvii. i) 7 and continues to Rome (xxviii i6). s
* J Friedrich, Das Lukascvangcttum und die
desselben Verfa$$ers> Halle a.S., 1890. The value of this useM pamphlet Js
somewhat lessened by want of care in sifting the readings. The argument as a
whole stands ; but the statistics on which it is based axe often not exact
3 For dpcwrr&j W e?J if afrrQ* D has <rwffrp&jjyjidvup <5# ^/jt&r 1^ r?i if
avrujf, revcrtenfibus autcm nobis ait unus ex ipsis. This reading is also found
in Augustine (De Serm* Dom* ii. <7 [xvii,]).
1.] THE AUTHOR xii!
The " we " necessarily implies companionship, and may possibly
represent a diary kept at the time. That the " we " sections are
by the same hand as the rest of the book is shown by the simple
and natural way in which they fit into the narrative, by the refer-
ences in them to other parts of the narrative, and by the marked
identity of style. The expressions which are so characteristic of
this writer run right through the whole book. They are as
frequent inside as outside the "we" sections, and no change of
style can be noted between them and the rest of the treatise.
The change of person is intelligible and truthlike, distinguishing
the times when the writer was with the Apostle from the times
when he was not : but there is otherwise no change of language.
To these points must be added the fact that the author of the
Acts is evidently a person of considerable literary powers, and the
probability that a companion of S. Paul who possessed such
powers would employ them in producing such a narrative as the
Acts.
(iii*) The Companion of S. Paul who wrote the Acts and the
Third Gospel was S. Luke.
Of the companions of S. Paul whose names are known to us
no one is so probable as S. Luke ; and the voice of the first eight
centuries pronounces strongly for him and for no one else as the
author of these two writings.
If antiquity were silent on the subject, no more reasonable
conjecture could be made than "Luke the beloved physician."
He fulfils the conditions. Luke was the Apostle's companion
during both the Roman imprisonments (Col. iv. 14 ; Philem. 24 ;
2 Tim. iv. n), and may well have been his companion at other
times. That he is not mentioned in the earlier groups of Epistles
is no objection ; for none of them coincide with the " we " sections
in the Acts. Moreover, the argument from medical language,
although sometimes exaggerated, is solid and helpfuL Both in
the Acts and in the Third Gospel there are expressions which are
distinctly medical; and there is also a good deal of language
which is perhaps more common in medical writers than elsewhere.
This feature does not amount to proof that the author was a
physician ; still less can it prove that, if the author was a physician,
he must have been Luke. The Apostle might have had another
medical companion besides the beloved physician. But, seeing
that there is abundance of evidence that Luke was the writer of
these two documents, the medical colour which is discernible here
and there in the language of each of them is a valuable con-
firmation of the evidence which assigns the authorship of both to
Luke.
xb THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
For the voice of antiquity is not silent on the subject ; and we
are not left to conjecture. There is no need to argue whether
Timothy, or Titus, or Silas, or some unnamed companion of the
Apostle is more likely than S. Luke to have written these two
books. The evidence, which is both abundant and strong, is
wholly in favour of Luke. Until we reach the blundering state-
ment in Photius near the end of the ninth century, there is no
hint that any one ever thought of any person but Luke as the
author of either treatise. Photius has this statement: "Some
say that the writer of the Acts was Clement of Rome, others
Barnabas, and others again Luke the Evangelist; but Luke
himself decides the question, for at the beginning of his preface
he mentions that another treatise containing the acts of the Lord
had been composed by him" (AmphiL Qu. 123). Here he seems
to be transferring to the Acts conjectures which had been made
respecting the Epistle to the Hebrews. But at any rate the
statement shows that the Third Gospel was regarded as un-
questionably by Luke.
The Pauline authorship of Romans and Galatians is now com-
monly regarded as certain, and the critic who questions it is held
to stultify himself. But is not the evidence for the Lucan author-
ship of the Third Gospel and the Acts equally strong? If these
are not named by any writer earlier than Irenseus, neither are
those Epistles. And the silence of the Apostolic Fathers respect-
ing the Third Gospel and the Acts is even more intelligible than
their silence respecting Galatians and Romans, because the two
former, being addressed to Theophilus, were in the first instance
of the nature of private writings, and because, as regards the
Gospel narrative, the oral tradition still sufficed. But from
Irenaeus onwards the evidence in all these cases is full and
unwavering, and it comes from all quarters of the Christian
world. And in considering this third point, the first point must
be kept steadily in view, viz. the certainty that the Third Gospel
and the Acts were written by one and the same person. Con-
sequently all the evidence for either book singly is available for
the other book. Every writer who attributes the Third Gospel
to Luke thereby attributes the Acts to Luke and vies uer$^
whether he know anything about the second book or not Thus
in favour of Luke as the author of the Third Gospel we have
three classes of witnesses : viz. those who state that Luke wrote
the Third Gospel, those who state that Luke wrote the Acts, and
those who state that he wrote both treatises. Their combined
testimony is very strong indeed ; and there is nothing against it
At the opening of his commentary on the Acts, Chrysostom says
that many in his day were ignorant of the authorship and even of
the existence of the book (Migne, Ix. 13). But that statement
1-3 THE AUTHOR xv
creates no difficulty. Many could be found at the present day,
even among educated Christians, who could not name the author
of the Acts. And we have seen that the late and confused state-
ment in Photius, whatever it may mean respecting the Acts,
testifies to the universal conviction that the Third Gospel was
written by Luke.
But we obtain a very imperfect idea of the early evidence in
favour of the Third Gospel when we content ourselves with the
statement that it is not attributed to Luke by any one before
Irenaeus and the Muratorian Fragment, which may be a little
earlier than the work of Irenseus, but is probably a little later.
We must consider the evidence of the existence of this Gospel
previous to Irenseus; and also the manner in which he himself
and those who immediately follow him speak of it as the work of
S. Luke.
That Justin Martyr used the Third Gospel (or an authority
which was practically identical with it) cannot be doubted. He
gives a variety of particulars which are found in that Gospel
alone ; e.g. Elizabeth as the mother of the Baptist, the sending of
Gabriel to Mary, the census under Quirinius, there being no room
in the inn, His ministry beginning when Jesus was thirty years
old, His being sent by Pilate to Herod, His last cry, " Father, into
Thy hands I commend My spirit " (i ApoL xxxiv. ; Try. IxxviiL,
Ixxxviii., c., ciii., cv., cvL). Moreover, Justin uses expressions
respecting the Agony, the Resurrection, and the Ascension which
show that the Third Gospel is in his mind.
That his pupil Tatian possessed this Gospel is proved by the
Diatessaron. See Hemphill, Diatessaron of Tatian^ pp. 3 ff.
Celsus also knew the Third Gospel, for he knew that one of
the genealogies made Jesus to be descended from the first man
(Orig. Con. Cels. ii. 32).
The Clementine Homilies contain similarities which are pro
ably allusions (iii. 63, 65, xi. 20, 23, xvii. 5, xviii. 16, xix. 2).
The Third Gospel was known to Basilides and Valentinus, and
was commented upon by Heracleon (Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 9,
p. 596, ed. Potter).
Marcion adopted this Gospel as the basis for what he called
the " Gospel of the Lord " or " Gospel of Christ." He omitted a
good deal as being inconsistent with his own teaching, but he
does not appear to have added anything. 1 See 7 ; also Wsctt,
Int. to Gospels, App. D ; Sanday, Gosfels in the Second Century \
App.
In the Epistle of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne to the
Churches in Asia there is a quotation of Lk. i. 6 (Eus. H.E* v. i. 9).
1 What Pseudo-Tert. says of Cerdo is perhaps a mere transfer to Cerdo of
what is known of
XI* THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ X
These instances, which are by no means exhaustive, may suffice
as evidence for the early existence of the Third Gospel. It re-
mains to notice the way in which Irenseus and his later contem-
poraries speak of the book. Irenasus, who represents the traditions
of Asia Minor and Rome and Gaul in the second half of the
second century, quotes it many times and quotes from nearly every
chapter, especially from those which are wholly or in the main
peculiar to this Gospel, c*g. L, ii., ix.-xix., xxiv. In a very remark-
able passage he collects together many of the things which this
Gospel alone narrates and definitely assigns them to Luke : " Now
if any one reject Luke, as if he did not know the truth, he will
manifestly be casting out the Gospel of which he claims to be a
disciple. For very many and specially necessary elements of the
Gospel we know through him, as the generation of John, the
history of Zacharias, the coming of the angel to Mary," etc. etc.
(iii. 14. 3. Comp. iii. 10. i, 22. 4, 12. 12, 14. 4, etc.). It will be
observed that he does not contemplate the possibility of any one
denying that Luke was the author. Those who may reject it will
do so as thinking that Luke's authority is inadequate; but the
authorship is unquestioned.
Clement of Alexandria (A.D 190-202) had had teachers from
Greece, Egypt, Assyria, Palestine, and had received the tradition
handed down from father to son from the Apostles (Strom, i. i,
p. 322, ed Potter). He quotes the Gospel very frequently, and
from many parts of it He definitely assigns it to Luke (Strom.
i. 2 1, p. 407, ed. Potter).
Tertullian (A.D. 190-220) speaks for the African Church. He
not only quotes the Gospel frequently in his other works, but in
his treatise against Marcion he works through the Gospel from
ch. iv. to the end, often calling it Luke's.
The Muratorian Fragment (A.D. 170-200) perhaps represents
Rome. The first line of the mutilated Catalogue probably refers
to S, Mark ; but the next seven unquestionably refer to S. Luke,
who is twice mentioned and is spoken of as mtdicus. (See Lft on
Supernatural Religion^ p. 189.)
It would be waste of time to cite more evidence. It is mani-
fest that in all parts of the Christian world the Third Gospel had
been recognized as authoritative before the middle of the second
century, and that it was universally believed to be the work of
S. Luke. No one speaks doubtfully on the point The possibility
of questioning its value is mentioned ; but not of questioning its
authorship. In the literature of that period it would not be easy
to find a stronger case. The authorship of the four great Epistles
of S. Paul is scarcely more certain. In all these cases, as soon a&
we have sufficient material for arriving at a conclusion, the evidence '
b found to be all on one side and to be decisive. And exactly
1.] THE AUTHOR xvii
the same result is obtained when the question is examined as to
the authorship of the Acts, as Bishop Lightfoot has shown (art.
" Acts " in >.*). Both the direct and the indirect argument for
the Lucan authorship is very strong.
With this large body of historical evidence in favour of S. Luke
before us, confirmed as it is by the medical expressions in both
books, it is idle to search for another companion of S. Paul who
might have been the author. Timothy, Sopater, Aristarchus,
Secundus, Gaius, Tychicus, and Trophimus are all excluded by
Acts xx. 4, 5. And it is not easy to make Silas fit into the " we "
sections. Titus is possible : he can be included in the " we " and
the " us " without contradiction or difficulty. But what is gained
by this suggestion ? Is a solution which is supported by no evi-
dence to be preferred to an intrinsically more probable solution,
which is supported by a great deal of evidence, and by evidence
which is as early as we can reasonably expect ?
Those who neglect this evidence are bound to explain its
existence. Irenaeus, Clement, and Tertullian, to say nothing of
other authorities, treat the Lucan authorship as a certainty. So far
as their knowledge extends, Luke is everywhere regarded as the
writer. How did this belief grow up and spread, if it was not
true ? There is nothing in either treatise to suggest Luke, and he
is not prominent enough in Scripture to make him universally
acceptable as a conjecture. Those who wanted apostolic authority
for their own views would have made their views more conspicuous
^in these books, and would have assigned the books to a person of
higher position and influence than the beloved physician, e.g. to
Timothy or Titus, if not to an Apostle. As Renan says, " There
is no very strong reason for supposing that Luke was not the
author of the Gospel which bears his name. Luke was not yet
sufficiently famous for any one to make use of his name, to give
authority to a book" (Les vangiles> ch. xiil p. 252, Eng. tr.
p. 132)* "The placing of a celebrated name at the head of a
work . . . was in no way repugnant to the custom of the times.
But to place at the head of a document a false name and an
obscure one withal, that is inconceivable. . . . Luke had no place
in tradition, in legend, in history " (Lts Apotres, p. xvii., Eng. tr.
p. n). 1
1 Even Jiilicher still talks of " the silence of Papias " as an objection (EinL
in das N.T. 27, 3, Leipzig, 1894). In the case of a writer or whose work
only a few fragments are extant, how can we know what was not mentioned in
the much larger portions which have perished? The probabilities, in the
absence of evidence, are that Papias did write of Luke. But we are not quite
without evidence. In the " Hexsemeron " of Anastasius of Sinai is a passage in
which Papias is mentioned as an ancient interpreter, and in which Lk. x. 1 8 is
quoted in illustration of an interpretation. Possibly the illustration is borrowed
from Papias, Lft Supernatural Religion^ pp. 186, 200. Hilgenfeld thinka
xviii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 2,
2. S. LUKE THE EVANGELIST,
The name Lucas is probably an abbreviation of Lucanus, but
possibly of Lucilius, or Lucius, or Lucianus. There is, however,
no proof that Lucanus was shortened into Lucas 1 Nevertheless
some of the oldest Latin MSS, (e.g. Corbeiensis and Vercdlensis)
have secundum Lucanum as the title of the Third Gospel. Lucas,
like Apollos, Artemas, Demas, Hernias, and Nymphas, is a form
not found in classical literature, whereas Lucanus is common in
inscriptions. Lobeck has noticed that these contracted proper
names in -as are common in the case of slaves (Patholog. Proleg*
p. 506). Slaves were sometimes physicians, and S. Luke may
have been a freedman. Antistius, the surgeon of Julius Caesar,
and Antonius Musa, the physician of Augustus, were freedmen.
That Lucas = Lucanus is probable. 3 But that Lucanus = Silvanus, because
kittissilva^ and that therefore Luke and Silas are the same person (Van
Vloten), looks like a caricature of critical ingenuity. Equally grotesque is the
idea that Luke is the Aristion of Papias (Eos. f. . Hi. 39. 4, 6), because dpi<r~
rk faiv = lucere ( Lange).
Only in three places is Lk. named in Scripture ; and it is worth
noting that in all three of them the other Evangelist who is not an
Apostle is named with him (Col. iv. 10, 14; Philem. 24; 2 Tim.
iv. n). These passages tell us that "the physician, the beloved
one" (6 tarpos 6 dya/n^Tos), 8 was with S* Paul during the first
Roman imprisonment, when the Epistles to the Colossians and to
Philemon were written, and also during the second imprisonment,
when 2 Timothy was written. Besides telling us that Luke was a
physician very dear to the Apostle, they also tell us that he was his
" fellow-worker " in spreading the Gospel. But apparently he was
not his "fellow-prisoner." In Col. iv, 10 Aristarchus is called
crwaix/u-aAcoros, and in Philem. 23 Epaphras is called such ; but Lk.
in neither place.
Almost all critics are agreed that in Col iv. 14 Luke is
that the preface to Papias shows that he was acquainted with the preface
to Luke. Salmon is disposed to agree with him (Intr. p. 90, ed. 5).
1 The argument from the Greek form (that AevxtW*, not Aowcayfo, is the
equivalent of Lucanus) is inconclusive. Alter about A.I>. 50 forms in AOVJC-
begin to take the place of forms in Aei;*-,
fl Comp. Annas for Ananus ; Apollos for Apolloniu (Codex Bezae, Acts
xviii. 24) ; Artemas for Artemidorus (Tit ui 12 ; Mart v. 40) j Cleopas for
Geopatros; Demas for Demetrius, Demarchus for Demaratusj Npnpnas for
Nymphodorus, Zenas for Zenodorus, and possibly Hermas for Hermodonii.
For other examples ee Win. xvi, 5, p, 127 j Lft* on CoL Iv. 15 j Chandler,
Grk, Accent. 34.
1 Martion omitted these words, perhaps because he thought that an Evan-
elist ought not to devote himself to anything go contemptible as the haman
" ' ( Ttxte und Vnters, viii, 4, p. 40)
S. LUKE THE EVANGELIST xix
separated from "those of the circumcision,' 9 and therefore was a
Gentile Christian. i_ Hofmann, Tiele, and Wittichen have not suc-
ceeded in persuading many persons that the passage does not
necessarily imply this. Whether he was a Jewish proselyte before
he was a Christian must remain uncertain : his knowledge of
Jewish affairs and his frequent Hebraisms are no proof. That he
was originally a heathen may be regarded as certain. He is the
only one of the Evangelists who was of Gentile origin ; and, with
the exception of his companion S. Paul, and possibly of Apollos,
he was the only one among the first preachers of the Gospel who
had had scientific training.
If Luke was a Gentile, he cannot be identified with Lucius,
who sends a salutation from Corinth to Rome (Rom. xvi. 21). This
Lucius was Paul's kinsman, and therefore a Jew. The identifica-
tion of Luke with Lucius of Cyrene (Acts xiii. i) is less impossible.
But there is no evidence, and we do not even know that Lucas
was ever used as an abbreviation of Lucius. In Afost Const.
vi. 1 8. 5 Luke is distinguished from Lucius. Nor can he be iden-
tified with Silas or Silvanus, who was evidently a Jew (Acts xv. 22).
Nor can a Gentile have been one of the Seventy, a tradition which
seems to have been adopted by those who made Lk. x. 1-7 the
Gospel for S. Luke's Day. The tradition probably is based solely
on the fact that Luke alone records the Mission of the Seventy
(Epiph. H&r. ii. 51. n, Migne, xli. 908). The same reason is fatal
to Theophylact's attractive guess, which still finds advocates, that
Lk. was the unnamed companion of Cleopas in the walk to
Emmaus (xxiv. 13), who was doubtless a Jew (w. 27, 32), The
conjecture that Luke was one of the Greek proselytes who applied
to Philip to be introduced to Christ shortly before His Passion
(Jn. xii. 20) is another conjecture which is less impossible, but is
without evidence. In common with some of the preceding guesses
it is open to the objection that Luke, in the preface to his Gospel,
separates himself from those "who from the beginning were eye-
witnesses and ministers of the word " (L 2). The Seventy, these
Greeks, and the companion of Cleopas were eye-witnesses, and
Lk. was not. In the two latter cases it is possible to evade this
objection by saying that Luke means that he was not an eye-witness
from the beginning, although at the end of Christ's ministry he
became such. But this is not satisfactory. He claims to be
believed because of the accuracy of his researches among the best
1 Of the six who send greetings, the first three (Aristarchus, Mark, Jesus
Justus) are doubly bracketed together : (i) as ol 5vres to TepiTojtwJs, (2) as j&<5voc
ff\n>pyol els T%V /JcwrtXtlcu' roD 6eo0, *. the only Jewish converts in Rome who
loyally supported S. Paul. The second three (Epaphras, Luke, Demas) are not
bracketed together. - In Philem. 23 Epaphras is <rvt>euxfjd)wro5 t and Mark,
Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke are ol trwcpyol /**v, while Justus is not men*
tioned.
XX THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ .
authorities. Had he himself been an eye-witness of any portion,
would he not have let us know this ? Why did he not use the first
person, as in the " we " sections in the Acts ? He belongs to the
second generation of Christians, not to the first.
It is, however, possible that Chrysostom and the Collect for
S. Luke's Day are right in identifying " the brother whose praise
in the Gospel is spread through all the Churches " (2 Cor. viii. 18)
with S. Luke. But the conjectures respecting this unnamed
brother are endless ; and no more can be affirmed than that Luke
is a reasonable conjecture.
The attempt to show that the writer of the Thud Gospel and the Acts is a
Jew is a failure ; and the suggestion that he is S. Paul is absurd. See below
( 5) for evidence that our Evangelist is a Gentile writing for Gentiles.
Besides the three passages in the Pauline Epistles and the
preface to the Gospel, there are three passages of Scripture which
tell us something about S. Luke, viz. the " we " sections. The first
of these (Acts xvi. 10-17) tells us that during the second missionary
journey Luke accompanied Paul from Troas to Philippi (A.D. 5 1 or
52), and thus brings the physician to the Apostle about the time
when his distressing malady (2 Cor. xii. 7) prostrated him in Galatia,
and thereby led to the conversion of the Galatians (Gal. iv. 13-15).
Even without this coincidence we might believe that the relation
of doctor to patient had something to do with drawing Luke to
the afflicted Apostle, and that in calling him " the physician, the
beloved one," the Apostle is not distinguishing him from some
other Luke, but indicating the way in which the Evangelist earned
his gratitude. The second section (xx. 5-xxi. 18) tells us that about
six years later (A.D. 58), during the third missionary journey, Luke
was again at Philippi l with Paul, and went with him to Jerusalem
to confer with James and the elders. And the third (xxvii. i-
xxviii. 1 6) shows that he was with him during the voyage and
shipwreck until the arrival in Rome.
With these meagre notices of him in the N.T. our knowledge
of Luke ends. We see him only when he is at the side of his
magister and illuminator (Tertull. Adv. Martian, iv. 2) S. Paul
That he was with the Apostle at other times also we can hardly
doubt, inseparabilis fuit a PauZo> says Irengeus ; but how often he
was with him, and in each case for how long a time, we have no
means of knowing. Tertullian perhaps means us to understand
that Luke was converted to the Gospel by Paul, and this is in itself
probable enough. And it is not improbable that it was at Tarsus.
1 Renan conjectures that Luke was a native of Philippi, Ramsays takes the
Same view, suggesting that the Macedonian whom S. Paul*saw in a vision {Acts
xvi. 9) was Luke himself, whom he had just met for the first time t Troai
(& Paul tkt Traveller p, 202).
&] S. LUKE THE EVANGELIST xju
where there was a school of philosophy and literature rivalling
those of Alexandria and Athens (Strabo, xiv. 5. 13), that they first
met. Luke may have studied medicine at Tarsus. Nowhere else
in Asia Minor could he obtain so good an education : < 1X00-0$ tW
Kal r. aXXyv TrcuSaW ey/cwcAtov airacrav (/.^.). Our earliest authori-
ties appear to know little or nothing beyond what can be found in
Scripture or inferred from it (Iren. i. i. i, 10. i, 14. 1-4, 15. i,
22. 3; Canon Murator. sub init. \ Clem. Alex. Strom, v. 12 sub
fin. ; Tert. Adv. Marcion. iv. 2). Nor can much that is very
trustworthy be gleaned from later writers. The statement of
Eusebius (H. E. iii. 4. 7) and of Jerome (De vir. UL vii.), which
may possibly be derived from Julius Africanus (Harnack, Texte
und Unters. viii, 4, p. 39), and is followed by Theophylact, Euthy-
mius Zigabenus, and Nicephorus, that Luke was by family of
Antioch in Syria, is perhaps only an inference from the Acts.
AovKas \ TO jucv yevos &v r&v air 'Avrto^tas (Eus.) need not mean
more than that Luke had a family connexion with Antioch ; but it
hardy "amounts to an assertion that Luke was not an Antiochian."
Jerome says expressly Lucas medicus Antiochensis. This is probable
in itself and is confirmed by the Acts. Of only one of the deacons
are we told to which locality he belonged, " Nicolas a proselyte of
Antioch " (vi. 5) * : and we see elsewhere that the writer was well
acquainted with Antioch and took an interest in it (xi. 19-27,
xiiL i, xiv, 19, 21, 26, xv. 22, 23, 30, 35, xviii, 22).
Epiphanius states that Luke " preached in Dahnatia and Gallia, in Italy and
Macedonia, but first in Gallia, as raul says of some of his companions, in his
Epistles, Cresctns in Gallia y for we are not to read in Galatia y as some errone-
ously think, but in Gallia " (Hr. ii. 51. 1 1, Migne, xli. 908) ; and Oecumenius
says that Luke went from Rome to preach in Africa. Jerome believes that his
bones were translated to Constantinople, 3 and others give Achaia or Bithynia as
the place of his death. Gregory Nazianzen, in giving an off-hand list of primi-
tive martyrs Stephen, Peter, Andrew, etc. places Luke among them (Oraf,
adv. Jul. i, 79). None of these statements are of any value.
The legend which makes Luke a painter is much more ancient
than is sometimes represented. Nicephorus Callistus ( H. E. ii. 43)
in the fourteenth century is by no means the earliest authority for
it. Omitting Simeon Metaphrastes (c. A.D. noo) as doubtful, the
Menology of the Emperor Basil IL, drawn up A.D. 980, represents
1 It has been noted that of eight narratives of the Russian campaign of
1812, three English, three French, and two Scotch, only the last (Alison and
Scott) state that the Russian General Barclay de Tolly was of Scotch
extraction.
* His words are : Sepultus e$t Constantinopoli [vixit octoginta et quatuor
armos, uxorem non habens] ad quam urbem mccsi-nio Censtantii anno ossa ejus
cum reliqu&s AndrcK apostoli translate, sitnt [de Achaia]. The words in
brackets are not genuine, but are sometimes quoted as such. The first insertion
is made in more than one place in Zte vir. ill. vii.
xxii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO & 1UKE [
S. Luke as painting the portrait of the Virgin. The oldest witness,
however, is Theodorus Lector, reader in the Church of Constantin-
ople in the sixth century. Some place him as late as the eighth
century; but the name is common, and between A.D. 500 and 8oc
there may have been many readers of that name at Constantinople
He says that the Empress Eudoxia found at Jerusalem a picture ol
the op,rJTa>p painted by Luke the Apostle^ and sent it to Constantin-
ople as a present to her daughter Pulcheria, wife of Theodosius n.
(Collectan. i. 7, Migne, Pair. Gr. Ixxxvi. 165). In 1204 this
picture was brought to Venice. In the Church of S. Maria
Maggiore at Rome, in the Capella Paolina, is a very ancient picture
of the Virgin ascribed to S. Luke. It can be traced back to
A.D. 847, and may be still older, 1 But although no such legend
seems to be known to Augustine, for he says, neque novimus faciem
virginis Manse (De Trin* viii. 5. 7), yet it is many centuries older
than Nicephorus (Kraus, Real-Enc. d* Christ Alt ii. p. 344, which
quotes Gliikselig, Christus-Arckaol. tor ; Grimouard de S. Laurent,
Guide de Fart chret iii. 15-20). And the legend has a strong ele-
ment of truth. It points to the great influence which Luke has
had upon Christian art, of which in a real sense he may be called
the founder. The Shepherd with the Lost Sheep on His shoulders,
one of the earliest representations of Christ, comes from Lk. xv
(Tert. De Pud. vii. and x.) : and both medieval and modern artists
have been specially fond of representing those scenes which are
described by S. Luke alone : the Annunciation, the Visit of Mary
to Elizabeth, the Shepherds, the Manger, the Presentation in the
Temple, Symeon and Anna, Christ with the Doctors, the Woman
at the Supper of Simon the Pharisee, Christ weeping over Jeru-
salem, the Walk to Emmaus, the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal
Son. Many other scenes which are favourites with painters might
be added from the Acts. See below, 6, i. d.
The four symbolical creatures mentioned in Ezek. i, and Rev.
iv., the Man, the Lion, the Ox, and the Eagle, are variously ex-
plained by different writers from Irenseus (iii 11, 8) downwards.
But all agree in assigning the Ox or Calf to S. Luke* "This
sacerdotal animal implies Atonement and Propitiation; and this
exactly corresponds with what is supposed to be the character of
St. Luke's Gospel, as one which more especially conveys mercy to
the Penitent ... It begins with the Priest, dwelling on the
Priestly family of the Baptist ; and ends with the Victim, in ouf
Lord's death " (Isaac Williams, On tfa Study ef the Gmptt* %
Pt I. sect vi).
1 For an interesting account of this fiunou* picture, mod of others attributed
to the EvacgfcliU, ice Tk* Mod**** tf St. Luk* t by H. L Eolton,
1895.
8,] THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL
3. THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL.
The idea of a special revelation to the Evangelist is excluded
by the prologue to the Gospel : his narrative is the result of care-
ful enquiry in the best quarters. But (a) which " eye-witnesses
and ministers of the word" were his principal informants,
iff) whether their information was mostly oral or documentary,
(c) whether it was mostly in Aramaic or in Greek, are questions
about which he is silent. Internal evidence, however, will carry
us some way in finding an answer to them.
(a) During a large portion of the time in which he was being
prepared, and was consciously preparing himself, for writing a
Gospel, he was constantly with S. Paul ; and we may be sure that
it was among S. Paul's companions and acquaintances that Luke
obtained much of his information. It is probable that in this way
he became acquainted with some of the Twelve, with other
disciples of Christ, and with His Mother and brethren. He
certainly was acquainted with S. Mark, who was perhaps already
preparing material for his own Gospel when he and S. Luke were
with the Apostle in Rome (Col. iv. 10, 14 ; Philem. 24). S. Paul
himself could tell Luke only that which he himself received (i Cor.
xv. 3) ; but he could help him to first-hand information. While
the Apostle was detained in custody at Csesarea, Luke would be
able to, do a good deal of investigation, and as a physician he would
perhaps have access to people of position who could help him.
() In discussing the question whether the information was
given chiefly in an oral or a documentary form, we must remember
that the difference between oral tradition and a document is not
great, when the oral tradition has become stereotyped by frequent
repetition. A document cannot have much influence on a writer '
who already knows its contents by heart. Luke tells us that many
documents were already in existence, when he decided to write ;
and it is improbable that he made no use of these. Some of his
sources were certainly documents, eg. the genealogy (iii* 23-38) :
and we need not doubt that the first two chapters are made up of
written narratives, of which we can see the conclusions at i So,
ii. 40, and ii. 52. The early narrative (itself perhaps not primary),
of which all three Synoptists make use, and which constitutes the
main portion of S. Mark's Gospel, was probably already in writing
when Lk. made use of it. S. Luke may have had the Second
Gospel itself, pretty nearly in the form in which we have it, and
may include the author of it among the iroXXoi (i. i). But som^
phenomena are rather against this. Luke omits (vi 5) "the
sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath " (Mk.
ii 27). He omits the whole of Mk* vL 45-viii. 9, which contain!
xxiv THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ a
the digression into the borders of Tyre and Sidon and the incident
with the Syrophenician woman, which is also in Matthew
(xv. 21-28). And all this would have been full of interest to
Luke's Gentile readers. That he had our First Gospel is much
less probable. There is so much that he would have been likely
to appropriate if he had known it, that the omission is most easily
explained by assuming that he did not know it. He omits the
visit of the Gentile Magi (Mt ii. 1-15). At xx. 17 he omits
" Therefore I say to you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away
from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits
thereof" (Mt. xxi. 43). At xxi. 12-16 he omits "And this gospel
of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony
unto all the nations " (Mt. xxiv. 14 ; comp. Mk. xiii. 10). Comp.
the omission of Mt. xvii. 6, 7 at Lk. ix. 35, of Mt xvii. 19, 20 at
Lk. ix. 43, of Caesarea Philippi (Mt. xvi. 13 ; Mk. viii. 27) at Lk.
ix. 18; and see p. xli. Both to S. Luke and his readers such
things would have been most significant. Again, would Luke have
left the differences between his own Gospel and that of Matthew as
they are, if he had been aware of them? Contrast Mt ii. 14, 15
with Lk. ii. 39, Mt. xxviii. 7, 10, 16 with Lk. xxiv. 49 ; and gener-
ally mark the differences between the narratives of the Nativity and
of the Resurrection in these two Gospels, the divergences in the
two genealogies, the "eight days" (Lk.) and the "six days" (Mt
and Mk.) at the Transfiguration, and the perplexing phenomena in
the Sermon on the Mount. These points lead us to the conclusion
that Lk. was not familiar with our First Gospel, even if he knew it
at all. But, besides the early narrative, which seems to have been
nearly coextensive with our Second Gospel, Matthew and Luke
used the same collection, or two similar collections, of " Oracles "
or " Sayings of the Lord w ; and hence the large amount of matter,
chiefly discourses, which is common to Matthew and Luke, but is
not found in Mark. This collection, however, can hardly have
been a single document, for the common material is used very
differently by the two Evangelists, especially as regards arrange-
ment. 1 A Book of " Oracles " must not be hastily assumed,
In addition to these two main sources, (i) the narrative of
events, which he shares with Matthew and Mark, and (2) the
collection of discourses, which he shares with Matthew ; and be-
sides (3) the smaller documents about the Infancy incorporated
in the first two chapters, which are peculiar to himself,- Luke
1 There are a few passages which are common to Mark and Luke, but arc
not found in Matthew: the Demoniac (Mk. 5, 23-28 Lk, Jv. 33-37)?
the Journey in Galilee (Mk, i, 35-39 = Lk, iv. 42- 44) ; the Request of Ute
Demoniac (Mk. v. iS ~ Lk. ^viiu 38) ; the Complaint of John Against the
Caster out of Demons (Mk. ix, 38 = Lk. ix, 49} ; the Hpices brought to th*
Tomb (Mk. xvi, i as Lk, xxiv. x), Are these the result of the time when
S. Mark and S* Luke were together (CoU iv jo, 14 j Philem,
3.] THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL XX*
evidently had (4) large sources of information respecting the
Ministry, which are also peculiar to himself. These are specially
prominent in chapters ix. to xix. and in xxiv. But it must not be
forgotten that the matter which S. Luke alone gives us extends over
the whole range of Christ's life, so far as we have any record of
it. It is possible that some of these sources were oral, and it is
probable that one of them was connected with the court of Herod
(iii. i, 19, viii. 3, ix. 7-9, xiii. 31, xxiii. 7-12 ; Acts xiii. i). But
we shall probably not be wrong if we conjecture that most of this
material was in writing before Luke made use of it
It is, however, begging the question to talk of an " Ebiomtu
source." First, is there any Ebionism in S. Luke? And secondly,
does what is called Ebionism in him come from a portion of his
materials, or wholly from himself? That Luke is profoundly im-
pressed by the contrasts between wealth and poverty, and that,
like S. James, he has great sympathy with the suffering poor and
a great horror of the temptations which beset all the rich and to
which many succumb, is true enough. But this is not Ebionism.
He nowhere teaches that wealth is sinful, or that rich men must
give away all their wealth, or that the wealthy may be spoiled by
the poor. In the parable of Dives and Lazarus, which is sup-
posed to be specially Ebionitic, the rich Abraham is in bliss with
the beggar, and Lazarus neither denounces on earth the super-
fluity of Dives, nor triumphs in Hades over the reversal of posi-
tions. The strongest saying of Christ against wealth, " It is easier
for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to
enter into the Kingdom of God " is in Matthew (xix. 24) and Mark
(x, 25) as well as in Luke (xviii. 25). So also is the story of Peter
and Andrew, James and John leaving their means of life and
following Christ (Mt. iv. 18-22; Mk. i. 16-20; Lk. v. i-n). So
also is the story of Matthew or Levi leaving his lucrative calling to
follow Christ (Mt. ix. 9 ; Mk. ii. 14 ; Lk. v. 27, 28). In both these
cases Luke expressly states that they forsook all (v. n, 28), which,
however, is sufficiently clear from the other narratives. In the
story about Zacchasus, which is peculiar to Luke, this head tax-
collector retains half his great wealth, and there is no hint that he
ought to have surrendered the whole of it Elsewhere we find
touches in the other Gospels which are not in Luke, but which
would no doubt have been considered Ebionitic, if they had been
found in Luke and not in the others. Thus, in the description of
the Baptist, it is Matthew (iii. 4) and Mark (i. 6) who tell us of
John's ascetic clothing and food, about which Luke is silent. In
the parable of the Sower it is the others (Mt. xiii. 22 ; Mk. iv, 19)
who speak of " the deceitfulmss of riches," while Luke (viiL 14) has
simply "riches." It is they who record (Mt xix, 29 ; Mk. x. 29)
that Christ spoke of the blessedness of leaving relations and fro*
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE (8
forty (dypoife) for His sake, where Luke (xviii. 29) omits <Jypous.
He alone preserves Christ's declaration that he who sits at meat
is superior to him who serves (xxii. 27), and there is no hint that
to have servants is wrong. While the others tell us that Joseph
of Arimathaea was a man of rank (Mk. xv. 43) and wealth (Mt
xxvii. 57), Luke is much more explicit than they are about his
goodness and rectitude (xxiii. 50, 51), which does not look like
prejudice against the rich. And it is Luke alone who tells us of
the women, presumably well-to-do, who " ministered unto them of
their substance " (viii. 3). To which may perhaps be added the
fact that in the quotation from Ps. cviL 10 in Lk. i. 79 those "fast
bound in poverty " (TTT^^) are omitted. Throughout the Third
Gospel there is a protest against worldliness; but there is no
protest against wealth. And there is no evidence that the protest
against worldliness is due to some particular source from which he
drew, and from which the others did not draw. Rather it is
something in the writer himself, being apparent in the Acts, as
well as in the Gospel ; and it shows itself, sometimes in what he
selects from his materials, sometimes in the way in which he treats
it As Jiilicher says, Man hat von dem ebionttischen charakter dieses
JSvang. gcsprochen und nach den judischen Rinflussen odtr Quelhn
gcsucht: sehr mit Unrecht* . . , Von fendenzioser Rbionitisirung
des Evangeliums kann bei ihm nicht die Redt scin (RinL 27,
p. 206).
(f) Frequent Hebraisms indicate that a great deal of Luke's
material was originally in Aramaic. These features are specially
common in the first two chapters. In translating Aramaic sources
Luke would have ample opportunity for exhibiting his own pre-
dilection for certain words, phrases, and constructions. If the
materials were already in Greek when Luke made use of them,
then he could and did somewhat alter the wording in appropriat-
ing them. But it will generally be found that wherever the ex-
pressions which are characteristic of him are less frequent than
usual, there we have come upon material which is common to him
and the others, and which he has adopted without much alteration.
Thus the parable of the Sower (viii. 4-15) has few marks of his
style (Zv ftcr<j>, ver. 7^6 Aoyos rov <5)eou, ver. 1 1 ; SC^OFTCU and
<i<rravTtu, ver. 13) which are not also in Mt. (rov erTmpat, ver 5)
or in both (&> r<j> oWpew, ver. 5). But absence or scarcity of
Luke's characteristics is most common in those reports of dis*
courses which are common to him and Matthew : <?.; iiL 7-9, 17
Mt iii. 7-10, 12 ; vii. 6-9** Mt viiL 8-10 ; ix* 57, 58 * Mt viii 19,
20; vii. 22-28 * Mt xi. 4-11; vii. 31-35 Mtxi 16*19. This last
passage is one of those which were excised by Marcion. As we
might expect, there is much more variation between the Gospels
In narrating the same facts than in reporting the same sayings;
THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL xxvii
and the greater the variation, the greater the room for marks of
individual style. But we cannot doubt that an immense amount
of what Luke has in common with Matthew, or with both him
and Mark, was already in a Greek form before he adopted it.
It is incredible that two or three independent translations should
agree quite or almost word for word.
It is very interesting to notice how, in narratives common to
all three, individual characteristics appear: e.g. viii. 22-56 = Mk.
iv. 35-41, v. i~43 = Mt. viii. 23-34, ix. 18-25. These narratives
swarm with marks of Luke's style, although he keeps closely to
the common material (see below, 6. ii.). Thus he has etTro' Trpos
tLvrovs, eirwrrara, Seo/xai orov, efeX^etv ctTro, iKai/os, eSetro avrov, crvv,
U7rocrrp(e, Trapa TOUS -TroSas, Trapa^piJ/jia, etc., where Mark has Aeyei
avrois, SiSacr/caXc, op/a<t> ere, e^eXtfetv e/c, //.eyas, Trape/coXec avrov, /ACTCI,
vTraye, Trpos TOVS ^rdSas, tvQvs, etc. Moreover Luke has ev r<3
C. in/in., KOL ovros, /cat avrds, i)7rap\ew, iras or aTras, juovoyci/ifc, etc.,
where the others have nothing. The following examples will repay
examination: iv. 38-41 = Mk. i. 29-34 = Mt. viii. 1417; v. 12-16
Mk. i. 40-45 = Mt. viii. 1-4; v. i7~2 = 6Mk. ii. i-i2Mt. ix.
1-8; ix. io~i7 = Mk. vi. 30-44 Mt. xiv. 13-21 ; ix. 38-40 = Mk.
ix. 17, i8~Mt,xvii. 15, 16; and many others. It is quite evident
that in appropriating material Luke works it over with his own
touches, and sometimes almost works it up afresh; and this is
specially true of the narrative portion of the Gospel.
It is impossible to reach any certain conclusion as to the
amount of material which he had at his disposal. Some suppose
that this was very large, and that he has given us only a small
portion of it, selected according to the object which he is sup-
posed to have had in view, polemical, apologetic, conciliatory,
or historical. Others think that his aim at completeness is too
conspicuous to allow us to suppose that he rejected anything
which he believed to be authentic. Both these views are probably
exaggerations. No doubt there are cases in which he deliberately
omits what he knew well and did not question. And the reason
for omission may have been either that he had recorded something
very similar, or that the incident would be less likely to interest or
edify Gentile readers. No doubt there are other cases in which
the most natural explanation of the omission is ignorance : he does
not record because he does not know. We know of a small amount
which Mark alone records; of a considerable amount which
Matthew alone records; of a very considerable amount which
John alone records; and of an enormous amount (Jn. xxi. 25)
which no one records. To suppose that Luke knew the great
part of this, and yet passed it over, is an improbable hypothesis.
And to suppose that he knew scarcely any of it, is also improbable,
But a definite estimate cannot be made.
XXV111
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE f 8.
The statement that Luke avoids duplicates on principle has been
made and accepted too hastily. It is quite possible that he has
deliberately omitted some things, because of their similarity to
others which he has recorded. It is possible that he has omitted
the feeding of the 4000, because he has recorded the feeding of
the 5000; and the anointing by Mary of Bethany, because of the
anointing by the sinner ; and the healing of the Syrophenician's
daughter at a distance, because of the centurion's servant at a
distance ; and the cursing of the barren fig-tree, because of the
parable of the same ; and the mocking by Pilate's soldiers, because
of the mocking by Herod's soldiers. But in many, or even most,
of these cases some other motive may have caused the omission.
On the other hand, we must look at the doublets and triplets
which he has admitted. If he made it a rule to exclude duplicates,
the exceptions are more numerous than the examples, and they
extend all through the Gospel.
The Mother of the Christ has a song (i. 46 ff.), and the father of
the Baptist has a song (68 ff.). The venerable Simeon welcomes
the infant Christ in the temple (ii. 28), and so does the venerable
Anna (38). Levi the publican is converted and entertains Jesus
(v. 27 ff.), and Zacchaeus the publican also (xix. i ff.). The
mission of the Twelve (ix, i) is followed by the mission of the
Seventy (x. i). True disciples are equal to Christ's relations
(viii. 21), and to His Mother (xi. 28). Twice there is a dispute as
to who is the greatest (ix, 46, xxii. 24). Not content with the
doublets which he has in common with Mt. (viiL 19-22, ix. 16, 17,
xxiv. 40, 41), he adds a third instance (ix. 61, 62, v. 39, xvii. 36 ?) ;
or where Mt. has only one example (xxiv. 37-39), he gives two
(xvii. 26-29). So also in the miracles. We have the widow's son
raised (vii. 14), and also Jairus' daughter (viii. 54), where no other
Evangelist gives more than one example. There are two instances
of cleansing lepers (v. 13, xvii. 14); two of forgiving sins (v. 20,
vii. 48); three healings on the sabbath (vi 6, xill 10, xiv. i);
four castings out of demons (iv. 35, viii. 29, ix. 42, xi. 14), Similar
repetition is found in the parables. The Rash Builder is followed
by the Rash King (xiv. 28-32), the Lost Sheep by the Lost Coin
(xv. 1-10) ; and the Friend at Midnight (xi. 5) does not involve
the omission of the Unrighteous Judge (xviil x). The exceptions
to the supposed principle are still more numerous in the shorter
sayings of Christ: viii, i6 = xi. 33; viii. ly-xli 2; viii. 18 -xix*
26; ix. 23 = xiv. 27; ix. 24 *B xvii. 33; ix. 26:jcii. 9; x. 25 =xvin, 18;
xi. 43 ~xx. 46; xii. n, i2=xxi. 14, 15; xiv. xxxviiL 14;
xix. 44*=xxi. 6; and cornp. xvii, 31 with xxi, 21, and xxi. 23
with xxiii. 29. These instances, which are not exhaustive, suf-
fice to show that the Evangelist cannot have had any very
strong objection to recording duplicate instances of similar
4.] TIME AND PLACE xxix
dents and sayings. Could more duplicates be found in any other
Gospel ?
For recent (since 1885) discussions of the Synoptic problem see Badham,
The Formation of the Gospels , 1891 ; Blair, The Apostohc Gospel, 1896 ; Jolley,
The Synoptic Problem , 1893 ; Salmon, Historical Introduction to the Books oj
theN.T., 5th ed. 1891 ; Wright, The Composition of the Gospels, 1890; Synopsis
of the Gospels in Greek, 1896 ; Holsten, Die synopt. Evang. nach Form
ikres Inhalts dargestellt, 1886 ; Holtzmann, Etnleitung in das N. T. 1892 ;
Jiilicher, EinL in das N. T. 1894; Nosgen, Geschickte Jesu Christi, being Pait
I. of Gesch. der N.T. Offenbarung, 1891; H. H. Wendt, Dis Lehre und das
Lebenjesu, 1885-1890. Other literature is mentioned on p. Ixxxv.
See especially Sanday in Book by Book, 1893, P- 345 ff-> in Diet,, of the
Bible> 2nd ed. 1893, supplement to the article on "Gospels," pp. 1217-1243 ;
and in the Expositor^ 4th series, Feb. to June, 1891.
4. TIME AND PLACE.
(i.) It is a disappointment that Bishop Lightfoot's admirable
article on the Acts (D.B? i. pp. 25-43) does not discuss the Date.
The Bishop told the present writer that he regarded the question
of date as the province of the writer of the article on S. Luke, an
article which has not yet been rewritten. The want has, how-
ever, been to a large extent supplied in the Bampton Lectures for
1893 (Lect. vi.), and we may safely accept this guidance.
The main theories respecting the date of the Third Gospel
contend respectively for a time in or near the years A.D. 100, A.D.
80, and A.D. 63.
(a) The strongest argument used by those who advocate a
date near the close of the first century or early in the second x is
the hypothesis that the author of the Third Gospel and of the
Acts had read the Antiquities of Josephus, a work published about
A.D. 94. But this hypothesis, if not absolutely untenable, is highly
improbable. The coincidences between Luke and Josephus are
not greater than might accidentally occur in persons writing in-
dependently about the same facts ; while the divergences are so
great as to render copying improbable. At any rate Josephus
must not be used both ways. If the resemblances are made to
prove that Luke copied Josephus, then the discrepancies should
not be employed to prove that Luke's statements are erroneous.
If Luke had a correct narrative to guide him, why did he diverge
from it only to make blunders ? It is much more reasonable to
suppose that where Luke differs from the Antiquities he had in-
dependent knowledge, and that he had never read Josephus.
Moreover, where the statements of either can be tested, it is Luke
who is commonly found to be accurate, whereas Josephus is often
1 Among these are Baur, Davidson, Hilgenfeld, Jacpbsen, Pfleiderer, Over-
beck, Schwegler, Scholten, Volkmar, Weizsacker, Wittichen, and Zeller. The
more moderate of these suggest A.D. 95-105, the more extreme A~D. 120-135.
XXX THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 4,
convicted of exaggeration and error. See the authorities cited bj
Lft. D.jB* p. 39; by Holtzmann, EinL in d. N.T. p. 374, 1892,
and by Schanz, Comm. uber d. JEvang* d. h. Lukas^ p. 16, 1883.
The relation of Luke to Josephus has recently been rediscussed ; on the one
side by Clemen (Die Chronologie der paulin. Brief c, Halle, 1893) and Krenkel
(Josephus und Lukas ; der schriftstellerischc Einfluss des judischen Gesckicht-
schrcibers auf den (hristlichen^ Leipzig, 1894), who regard the use of Josephus
by Luke as certain ; on the other by Belser ( TheoL Quartalschnft, Tubingen,
1895, I ^9^)> who justly criticizes the arguments of these writers and especially
of Krenkel. 1 It is childish to point out that Luke, like Josephus, uses such
words as dvcxrrAAetj', afiiKveTvOat, avdi>6Lv f iraiSlov, irtjuiretv, Tri/Xi?, K.r.\. t in
their usual sense : and such phrases as TrpotKoirrev r# trotylo. Kal 77X^/9 (Lk. ii. 52)
and 3t<rravro rdvTes ol &KOIJOVTCS atfrou fol r% crtivecret teal rats ex7ro/cp/crea-u> avrov
(ii. 47) are not strikingly similar to ds peydXyv iratfotas irpotiKOTrrov MSoviv,
lwf)p' f Q re jcai <riW<ri SOK&V 8ta,<t>pw (Jos. Vita^ 2) and #atf/wicras rty &ir6KpL<nv
avrov <ro$ty oCrw ytvo^vriv (Ant t xii. 4. 9). Far more striking resemblances
may be found in writings which are indisputably independent, Luke alone in
N.T. calls the Sea of Galilee ^ \lfj,vr) rewTjo-apfr. Could he not call it a lakt
without being prompted ? Josephus also calls it a \t{Jt,v7j t but his designations
all differ from Luke s : Tvvv)<r&p $ \liwt), i) X. Tevvycrdp, X, ^ FewTjcrapirLs, ^
rW7?(rapms X. (B.J, ii. 20. 6, iii. 10. 7 ; Ant* xviii. 2. I ; Vita, 65), and other
variations. Luke has irpo<rw<rjf rots y6fa<riv 'I^croO (v. S), and Josephus has
rots ydrnfftv CLVTOU irpo<T7r^cro^res (Ant. xix. 3. 4). But Josephus more often
writes Tpocnr/Trrct^ TIVI Trpos T& ybvaTa, and the more frequent phrase would
more probably have been borrowed. Comp. (rvvexofjLtvrj trvperf jAcyd\<j> (Lk,
iv. 38) with rerapraty vvpery <rv(rxeOels (Ant* xiii. 15. 5); pt\ /AerwpifcvOe
(xii. 29) with Ant t xvi. 4. 6, sub Jin. (where, however, vevewtpurro is the more
probable reading); &<j>avro$ ty&ero dir* OL^TWV (xtiv. 31) with d0a"^f ^y^ero
\Ant+ xx. S. 6). In these and many other cases the hypothesis of copying is
wholly uncalled for. The expressions are not very uncommon. Some of them
perhaps are the result of both Luke and Josephus being familiar with LXX.
Others are words or constructions which are the common material of various
Greek writers. Indeed, as Belser has shown, a fair case may be made out to
show the influence of Thucydides on Luke. In a word, the theory that Luke
had read Josephus " rests on little more than the fact that both writers relate
or allude to the same events, though the differences between them are really
more marked than the resemblances'* (Sanday, Bampton Lectures, 1893, p.
278). As SchUrer and Salmon put it, if Luke had read Josephus, he must
very quickly have forgotten all that he read in him.
In itself, the late date A.D. 100 is not incredible, even for those
who are convinced that the writer is Luke, and that he never read
Josephus. Luke may have been quite a young man, well under
thirty, when he first joined S. Paul, A.I>. 50-52 ; and he may have
been living and writing at the beginning of the second century.
But the late date has nothing to recommend it; and we may
believe that both his writings would have assumed a different
form, had they been written as late as this. Would not o X/Hcrro's,
which is still a title and means **the Messiah^ (ii. 26, iii. 15, iv. 41,
ix. 20, xx. 41, xxii. 67, xxiii. 35, 39, xxiv. 26, 46), have become a
1 F. Bole, Flafoius Josephus iiber Christws -unddu
AUtrthumcm, Brixen, 1896, defends the disputed passage about Christ (amiL
3* 3) rather than the independence of S. Luke,
4.] TIME AND PLACE xxxf
proper name, as in the Epistles? Would not o Ktfpios, as a
designation of Jesus Christ, have been still more frequent? It is
not found in Matthew or Mark (excepting in the disputed
appendix) ; but it is the invariable designation in the Gospel of
Peter. In Luke (vii. 13, x. i, xi. 39, xii. 42, xiii. 15, xvii. 5, 6,
xviii. 6, xix. 8, xxii. 61, xxiv. 34) and in John this use is begin-
ning, but it is still exceptional. Above all, would xxi. 32 have stood
as it does, at a date when " this generation " had " passed away "
without seeing the Second Advent? Moreover, the historical
atmosphere of the Acts is not that of A.D. 95-135. In the Acts the
Jews are the persecutors of the Christians; at this late date the
Jews were being persecuted themselves. Lastly, what would ham
induced a companion of S. Paul, whether Luke or not, to wait so long
before publishing the results of his researches 1 Opportunities of
contact with those who had been eye-witnesses would have been
rapidly vanishing during the last twenty years.
(b) The intermediate date of A.D. 75-80 has very much
more to recommend it. 1 It avoids the difficulties just men-
tioned. It accounts for the occasional but not yet constant
use of o Kv/nos to designate Jesus. It accounts for the omis-
sion of the very significant hint, "let him that readeth under-
stand" (Mk. xiii. 14; Mt. xxiv. 15). When the first two Gospels
(or the materials common to both) were compiled, the predicted
dangers had not yet come but were near; and each of these
Evangelists warns his readers to be on the alert When the Third
Gospel was written, these dangers were past. It accounts for the
greater definiteness of the prophecies respecting the destruction of
Jerusalem as given by Luke (xix. 43, 44, xxi. 10-24), when com-
pared with the records of them in Mark (xiii. 14-19) and Matthew
(xxiv, 15-22). After the destruction had taken place the tradition
of the prediction might be influenced by what was known to have
happened; and this without any conscious tampering with the
report of the prophecy. The possibility of this influence must be
admitted, and with it a possibility of a date subsequent to A.D. 70
for the Gospel and the Acts. Twice in the Gospel (viii. 51, ix 28),
as in the Acts (i. 13), Luke places John before his elder brothei
James, which Mt and Mk. never do ; and this may indicate that
Luke wrote after John had become the better known of the two.
Above all, such a date allows sufficient time for the " many " to
" draw up narratives M respecting the acts and sayings of Christ.
1 Some year between A.D. 70 and 95 IB advocated by Beyschlag, Bleek,
Cook, Credner, De Wette, Ewald, Glider, Holtzmann ?, Jtllicher, Keim?,
Kostlin, Lechler, Lekebusch, Mangold, Ramsay, Kenan, Reuss, Sanday,
Schenkel, Trip, Tobler, Weiss, and others. And the more trustworthy of these,
e.g. Ramsay, Sanday, and Weiss, are disposed to make A.D* 80 th latest data
that can reasonably be assigned to the Goipel, or even to the Acts.
xxxii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 4
(c) The early date of about A.D. 63 still finds advocates ;* and
no doubt there is something to be said for it. Quite the simplest
explanation of the fact that S. Paul's death is not recorded in the Acts
is that it had not taken place. If that explanation is correct the
Third Gospel cannot be placed much later than A.D, 63. Again,
the writer of the Acts can hardly have been familiar with the
Epistles to the Corinthians and the Galatians : otherwise he would
have inserted some things and explained others (Salmon, Hist.
Int. to N.T.Q 319, ed. 5). How long might Luke have been
without seeing these Epistles ? Easily till A.D. 63 ; but less easily
till A.D. So. Once more, when Luke records the prophecy of
Agabus respecting the famine, he mentions that it was fulfilled
(Acts xi. 28). When he records the prophecy of Christ respecting
the destruction of Jerusalem (xxi. 5-36), he does not mention that
it was fulfilled. The simplest explanation is that the destruction
had not yet taken place. And, if it be said that the prediction of
it has been retouched in Luke's record in order to make it more
distinctly in accordance with facts, we must notice that the words,
" Let them that are in Judseayfo? to the mountains? are in all three
reports. The actual flight seems to have been, not to the moun-
tains, but to Pella in north Penea ; and yet " to the mountains M
is still retained by Luke (xxi. 21). Eusebius says that there was
a " revelation " before the war, warning the Christians not only to
leave the city, but to dwell in a town called Pella (H, JE. iii. 5. 3).
This " revelation " is evidently an adaptation of Christ's prophecy ;
and here we reasonably suspect that the detail about Pella has been
added after the event. But there is nothing of it in Luke's report
Nevertheless, the reasons stated above, and especially those
derived from the prologue to the Gospel, make the intermediate
date the most probable of the three. It combines the advantages
of the other two dates and avoids the difficulties of both. It may
be doubted whether any of the Gospels, as we have them, was
written as early as A.D. 63 ; and if the Third Gospel is placed
after the death of S. Paul, one main reason for placing it before
A.D. 70 is gone,
(ii) As to the Place in which Luke wrote his Gospel we
have no evidence that is of much value. The Gospel itself gives
no sure clue. The peculiarities of its diction point to a centre
in which Hellenistic influences prevailed ; and the way in which
places in Palestine are mentioned have been thought to in-
dicate that the Gospel was written outside Palestine (1. 26,
ii. 4, iv. 31, viii. 26, xxiiL 51, xriv, 13), The first of these
considerations does not lead to anything vary definite, and the
1 Amon^ them are Alford, Ebranl, Farrar, Gloeg, Godt, Gran,
Hahn, Hitag, Hofmann, Hug, Kezl, Lange, Lainby, Ndsgm, Oottcntee,
Raehm, Schaff, Schauz (67*70), Thiersch, Tholuck, met Wieieter,
5.] OBJECT AND PLAN xxxiii
second has little or no weight. The fact that the Gospel was
written for readers outside Palestine, who were not familiar with
the country, accounts for all the topographical expressions. We
do not know what evidence Jerome had for the statement which
he makes in the preface to his commentary on S. Matthew :
Tertius Lucas medicus^ nation? Syrus Antiochensis (cujus lavs in
Evangelic?)) qui et distipulus apostoli Pauh\ in Achaiae Bceoticeque
partibus volumen condidit (2 Cor. viii.), qu&dam altius repetens>
et ut ipse in procemio confitetur^ audita magis^ quam visa describens
(Migne, xxvi. 18), where some MSS. have Bithyni& for Bceotiat*
Some MSS. of the Peshitto give Alexandria as the place of com-
position, which looks like confusion with Mark. Modern guesses
vary much : Rome (Holtzmann, Hug, Keim, Lesebusch, Zeller),
Caesarea (Michaelis, Schott, Thiersch, Tholuck), Asia Minor
(Hilgenfeld, Overbeck), Ephesus (Kostlin), and Corinth (Godet),
There is no evidence for or against any of them.
5. OBJECT AND PLAN.
(i.) The immediate Object is told us in the preface. It was
written to give Theophilus increased confidence in the faith which
he had adopted, by supplying him with further information
respecting its historical basis. That Theophilus is a real person,
and not a symbolical personage representing devout Christians in
general, 1 is scarcely doubtful, although Bishop Lightfoot, with
characteristic caution, has warned us not to be too confident of
this. A real person is intrinsically more probable. The name
was a very common one, fairly frequent among Jews, and very
frequent among Gentiles. It is thus quite unlike such obviously
made up names as Sophron and Neologus in a modern book,
or Philotheus, to whom Ken dedicates his Manual of Prayer for
Winchester scholars. Moreover, the epithet /cparto-re is far more
likely to have been given to a real person than to a fictitious one.
It does not however necessarily imply high rank or authority (Acts
xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, xxvi. 25), and we must be content to be in ignor-
ance as to who Theophilus was and where he lived. But the tone
of the Gospel leads us to regard him as a representative Gentile
convert, who was anxious to know a good deal more than the few
fundamental facts which were taught to catechumens. The topo-
graphical statements mentioned above, and such remarks as " the
1 The idea that Theophilus may symbolize the true disciple is as old as
Origen (Horn, i. in Luc.}, and is adopted by Ambrose : scriptum est euangelium
ad Theoghilum) hoc est ad turn quern Deus diligit (Comm. in Luc. i. 3).
Epiphamus regards the name's denoting was Mp&vcs 6e? fayairw as a possible
alternative (Br> E, i, 51, Migne, zli 900).
xxxiv THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ &
feast of unleavened bread which is called the passover" (xxii. i),
would not have been required for a Jewish convert.
But, although Theophilus was almost certainly an actual person
well known to Luke, we need not suppose that the Evangelist had
only this one reader in view when he wrote. It is evident that he
writes for the instruction and encouragement of all Gentile con-
verts, and possibly Greek-speaking converts in particular. Theo-
philus is to be the patron of the book with a view to its
introduction to a larger circle of readers. Perhaps Luke hoped
that Theophilus would have it copied and disseminated, as he
probably did.
Among the many indications that the book is written by a
Gentile for Gentiles are the substitution of Greek for Hebrew names,
(> 217X0)7179 for 6 Kavavalos (vi. 15; Acts i. 13), and Kpaviov for
ToXyoOa (xxiii. 33) ; his never using *Pa/3/?i as a form of address,
but either &Sao-KaXe or emo-Tara ; l his comparatively sparing use
of QLjjLifo (seven times as against thirty in Matthew), for which he
sometimes substitutes dA/^ws (ix. 27, xii. 44, xxi. 3) or en-' aXyQcLws
(iv. 25, xxii. 59); his use of VO^LKOS for ypa^areus (vii. 30, x. 25,
xi. 45, 46, 52, xiv. 3) ; his adding aKaOaprov as an epithet to
Saipoviov (iv. 33), for Gentiles believed in good Sai/xdno, whereas
to a Jew all Sat/xcwa were evil ; his avoiding /jL^re^op^Orj (Mk.
ix. 2 ; Mt. xvii. 2) in his account of the Transfiguration (ix. 29), a
word which might have suggested the metamorphoses of heathen
deities ; his notice of the Roman Emperor (ii. i), and using bis
reign as a date (iii. i) ; his tracing the Saviour's descent to Adam,
the parent of Gentile as well as Jew (iii. 38). Although full
honour is shown to the Mosaic Law as binding on Jews (ii. 21,
27, 39, v. 14, x. 26, xvi. 17, 29-31, xvii. 14, xviii. 20), yet there is
not much appeal to it as of interest to his readers. Luke has no
parallels to Mt. v. 17, 19, 20, 21, 27, 31, 33, xii. 5-7, 17-20,
xv. 1-20* The quotations from the Old Testament are few as
compared with Matthew, and they are found mostly in the sayings
of Christ (iv. 4, 8, 12, 18, 19, 26, vi, 4, vii. 27, viii. 10, xiiL 19,
28 2 9> 3Si ***" 20 ; x. 4 6 > xx. 17, 37, 42, 43, xxi. *o, 24, 26, 27,
35, xxii. 37, 69, xxiii 30, 46) or of others (L 15, 17, 37, 46-515,
68-79, " 3> 3* 3 2 > * v * *> I3C > x, 27, xx. 28), Very little is said
about the fulfilment of prophecy, which would not greatly interest
Gentile readers (iii. 4, iv, 21, xxi. 22, xxii, 37, xxiv, 44) j and of
these five instances, all but the first occur in sayings of Christ
addressed to Jews. Many of the quotations noted above are mere
1 The following Hebrew or Aramaic words, which occur itt the other Gospel*,
are not found in Luke: 'AftSfi (Mk.), Boow^t (ML), T*$M& (10*)*
'toppaforl (Jn), TSwwowjX (Mt.), 4#0a0d (Mk,), Ko^Sr {Mk.}, Ko/tySfeprff
(Mt,)> Htf<nra* (Jn.), w<ravrd (Mt Mk. Jru), together with the laying*, rXi0A
*ofytt (Mk.) and Art, Awf, *.nX, (Mt Mk).
5.] OBJECT AND PLAN
reproductions, more or less conscious, of the words of Scripture ;
but the following are definitely given as citations : ii. 23, 24, iii. 4,
iv. 4, 8, 10, ri, 12, 18, 19, vii. 27, x. 27, xviii. 20, xix. 46, xx. 17,
28, 37, 42, 43, xxii. 37. Excepting vii. 27, they may all have come
from LXX. 1 And vii. 27 does not agree with either the Hebrew
or LXX of Mai. iii. i, and is no evidence that the Evangelist
knew Hebrew. On the other hand it agrees verbatim with Mt.
xi. 10, and we need not doubt that both Evangelists used the same
source and copied it exactly. Add to these his command of the
Greek language and his use of " Judaea " for the land of the Jews,
i.e. the whole of Palestine (i. 5, iv. 44?, vii. 17, xxiii, 5 ; Acts ii. 9,
x. 37, xi. i, 29). This combination of non-Jewish features would
be extraordinary in a treatise written by a Jew or for Jews. It is
thoroughly intelligible in one written by a Gentile for Gentiles.
In his desire to give further instruction to Theophilus and
many others like him, it is evident that Luke aims at fulness. He
desires to make his Gospel as complete as possible. This is clearly
indicated in the prologue. He has " traced up the course of all
things accurately from the first " (avvOev Tracriv), in order that
Theophilus may "know in full detail" (eu-iyvoJs) the historic
foundations of the faith. And it is equally clearly seen in the
Gospel itself. Luke begins at the very beginning, far earlier than
any other Evangelist ; not merely with the birth of the Christ, but
with the promise of the birth of the Forerunner. And he goes on
to the very end : not merely to the Resurrection but to the Ascen-
sion. Moreover his Gospel contains an immense proportion of
material which is peculiar to himself. According to one calcula-
tion, if the contents of the Synoptic Gospels are divided into 172
sections, of these 172 Luke has 127 (f), Matthew 114 (f), and
Mark 84 (y) , and of these 172 Luke has 48 which are peculiar to
himself (f-), Matthew has 22 (|), and Mark has 5 (-^y)- According
to another calculation, if the total be divided into 1 24 sections, of
these Lk. has 93, Matthew 78, and Mark 67; and of these 124
Luke has 38 peculiar to himself, Matthew 17, and Mark 2. 2 The
portions of the Gospel narrative which Luke alone has preserved
for us are among the most beautiful treasures which we possess,
and we owe them in a great measure to his desire to make his
collection as full as possible.
1 Jerome (Comm. in Is. vi. 9, Migne, mv. 100) says, Evangelistafn Lucam
tradunt vctercs ILccUsisz tractatores medicinm artis fuissc scientissimum, et
magis Grszcas litteras scisse quam Hebr&as. Unde et sermo e/us, tarn, in Evan-
gelo quam in Actibus Apostol&rum^ id est in utroque volumim tomptior &r/ } et
stcularcm rtdolet eloquentiam, magisque testimoniis Grmcis utiturquam Hebr&is.
* Six miracles are peculiar to Luke, three to Matthew, and two to Mark.
Eighteen parables are peculiar to Luke, ten to Matthew, and one to Mark.
See p. xli For other interesting statistics respecting the relations between the
Synoptiiti tee Westcott, Mr. to Gospels^ pp. 194 ff.
xxxvi THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 5.
It is becoming more and more generally admitted that the old
view of the purpose of Gospel and Acts is not far off the truth* It
was Luke's intention to write history, and not polemical or apolo-
getic treatises. It was his aim to show all Christians, and especi-
ally Gentile Christians, on how firm a basis of fact their belief was
founded. The Saviour had come, and He had come to save the
whole human race. The work of the Christ and the work of His
Apostles proved this conclusively. In the Gospel we see the
Christ winning salvation for the whole world ; in the Acts we see
His Apostles carrying the good tidings of this salvation to the
whole world. Luke did not write to depreciate the Twelve in the
interests of S. Paul ; nor to vindicate S. Paul against the attacks of
Judaizing opponents ; nor yet to reconcile the Judaizers with the
disciples of S. Paul. A Gospel which omits the severe rebuke
incurred by Peter (Mt xvi. 23 ; ML viii. 33), the ambitious
request of James and John (Mt. xx. 21 ; Mk. x. 37), the boastful
declaration of loyalty made by all the Twelve (Mt. xxvi. 35; Mk.
xiv. 31), and the subsequent flight of all (Mt xxvi. 56 ; Mk.
xiv. 50) ; which promises to the Twelve their judgment- thrones
(xxii, 30), and trusts them with the conversion of " ail the nations "
(xxiv. 47), cannot be regarded as hostile to the Twelve. And why
address a vindication of Paul to a representative Gentile ? Lastly,
how could Judaizers be conciliated by such stern judgments on
Judaism as Luke has recorded ? See, for instance, the following
passages, all of them from what is peculiar to Luke : iv. 28, 29,
x. 10, n, 31, 32, xi. 39, 40, xii. 47, xiii. 1-5, 15, xvi. 15, xviL 18,
xviii. 10-14, xxiii. 28-31 \ Acts ii. 23, v. 30, vii. 51-53, etc. It is
well that these theories as to the purpose of the Evangelist have
been propounded : the examination of them is most instructive.
But they do not stand the test of careful investigation. S. Luke
remains unconvicted of the charge of writing party pamphlets
under the cover of fictitious rdstory.
(ii*) The JPlan of the Gospel is probably not elaborated. In
the preface Luke says that he means to write " in order " (*ca<9c$/s)>
and this most naturally means in chronological order. Omitting
the first two chapters and the last chapter in each case, the
main features of the First and Third Gospels agree ; and in outline
their structure agrees to a large extent with that of the Second, *
Luke perhaps took the tradition which underlies all three Gospels
as his chief guide, and inserted into it what he had gathered from
other sources. In arranging the additional material he followed
chronology, where ke had any chronological clue ; and where he
1 As regards orde*v to the first half the Second and Third Gospels commonly
agm, white *fce First varies. In the second half the First ana Second earn-
p-Kwlp *^ree, while the Third varies. Matthew's additions to the common
*atriai sure anosily in the first half ; Luke's are mostly in the second.
5.] OBJECT AND PLAN xxxvii
had none (which perhaps was often the case), he placed similar
incidents or sayings in juxtaposition.
But a satisfactory solution of the perplexing phenomena has not yet been
found : for what explains one portion of them with enticing clearness cannot be
made to harmonize with another portion. We may assert with some confidence
that Luke generally aims at chronological order, and that on the whole he
attains it ; but that he sometimes prefers a different order, and that he often,
being ignorant himself, leaves us also in ignorance as to chronology. Perhaps
also some of his chronological arrangements are not correct.
The chronological sequence of the Acts cannot be doubted ; and ' this is
strong confirmation of the view that the Gospel is meant to be chronological in
arrangement. Comp. the use of *a0e|?7S viii. I ; Acts iii. 24, xi, 4, xviii. 23.
That the whole Gospel is elaborately arranged to illustrate the development
and connexion of certain theological ideas does not harmonize with the im-
pression which it everywhere gives of transparent simplicity. That there was
connexion and development in the life and work of Christ need not be doubted ;
and the narrative which reports that life and work in its true order will illustrate
the connexion and development. But that is a very different thing from the
supposition that Luke first formed a scheme, and then arranged his materials to
illustrate it. So far as there is " organic structure and dogmatic connexion " in
the Third Gospel, it is due to the materials rather than to the Evangelist.
Attempts to trace this supposed dogmatic connexion are instructive in two
ways. They suggest a certain number of connexions, which (whether intended
or not) are illuminative. They also show, by their extraordinary divergences,
how far we are from anything conclusive in this direction. The student who
compares the schemes worked out by Ebrard (Gosf. Hist. I. i. I, 20, 21),
McClellan (N.T. pp. 427 ff.), Oosterzee (Lange's Comm. Int. 4), and West-
cott (Int. to Gospels^ ch. vii. note G) will gather various suggestive ideas, but
will also doubt whether anything like any one of them was in the mind of the
Evangelist.
The analysis which follows is obtained by separating the
different sections and grouping them under different heads. There
is seldom any doubt as to where one section ends and another
begins; and the grouping of the sections is avowedly tentative.
But most analyses recognize a break between chapters ii. and iii.,
at or about ix, 51 and xix. 28, and between chapters xxi. and xxii.
If we add the preface, we have six divisions to which the numer-
ous sections may be assigned. In the two main central divisions,
which together occupy nearly seventeen chapters, some subsidiary
grouping has been attempted, but without confidence in its cor-
rectness. It may, however, be conducive to clearness, even if
nothing of the kind is intended by S. Luke. 1 The mark indicates
that this portion is found hi Luke alone ; * that it is common to
Luke and Mark ; t that it is common to Luke and Matthew ; * that
it is common to all three*
1 The divisions and subdivisions of the Gospel in the text of WH. are most
Instructive. Note whether paragraphs and sentences have spaces between them
or not, and whether sentences begin with a capital letter or not* The analysis
of the Gospel by Sanday in Book by Book, pp. 402-404 (libiitcr, 1893), will be
found very helpfuL
xxxviii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 5
There is a presumption that what is peculiar to Luke cornea from some
source that was not used by Mark or Matthew ; and this presumption is in som
cases a strong one ; e.g. the Examination of Christ before Herod, or the Walk
to Emmaus ; but all that we know is that Luke has preserved something which
they have not. Again there is a presumption that what is given by Luke and
Matthew, but omitted by Mark, comes from some source not employed by the
latter ; and this presumption is somewhat stronger when what is given by them,
but omitted by him, is not narrative but discourse ; e.g. the Parable of the
Lost Sheep. Yet the book of "Oracles," known to Matthew and Luke, but
not known to Mark, is nothing more than a convenient hypothesis for which a
good deal may be said. And it would be rash to affirm that the few {p. xxiv)
sections which are found in Mark and Luke, but not in Matthew, such as the
Widow's Mite, come from some source unknown to Matthew. The frequency
of the mark gives some idea of what we should have lost had S. Luke not
been moved to write. And it must be remembered that in the sections which
are common to him and either or both of the others he often gives touches of
his own which are of the greatest value. Attention is frequently called to these
in the notes. They should be contrasted with the additions made to the
Canonical Gospels in the apocryphal gospels.
L i. 1-4. THK PREFACE. THE SOURCES AND OBJECT or
THE GOSPEL.
II. i. 5~ii. 52. THE GOSPEL or THE INFANCY.
1. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner (5-25).
2. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour (26-38).
j. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviour to the Mother of
the Forerunner (39-56).
4. The Birth of the Forerunner (57-80).
5. The Birth of the Saviour (ii. 1-20).
6. The Circumcision and Presentation of the Saviout
(a 1-40),
7. The Boyhood of the Saviour (41-52).
III. Hi. i-ix. 50. THE MINISTRY, MAINLY IN GALILEE.
L The External Preparation for the Ministry ; The Preach-
ing of the Baptist (Hi. 1-22).
i. The Date (i, 2).
ft. *The New Prophet, his Preaching, Prophecy, mud
Death (3-20).
j. *He baptizes the Christ (21, 22)*
The Genealogy of the Christ (23-38),
1L The Internal Preparation far the Ministry ; * Tk* Ttmftfr
tion (iv. 1-13).
Bi The Ministry in Galilee (iv, *4~ix 50).
i. Visit to Nazareth; *At Capernaum an andean Demon
cast out (iv. 1444).
*. j*The Miraculous Draught and tho Call of Simon;
* Two Healings which provoke Controversy j
Call of Levi; *Two Sabbath Incident* w
provoke Controversy (v* ift *i).
5.] OBJECT AND PLAN xxxix
j. *The Nomination of the Twelve; tThe Sermon "on
the Level Place 11 ; t The Centurion's Servant;
The Widow's Son at Nain; tThe Message from
the Baptist; The Anointing by the Sinner; The
Ministering Women ; * The Parable of the Sower ;
* The Relations of Jesus ; * The Stilling of the Tem-
pest ; * The Gerasene Demoniac ; *The Woman with
the Issue and the Daughter of Jairus (vi. 1 2-viii. 56).
4. *The Mission of the Twelve; *The Feeding of the
Five Thousand ; * Peter's Confession and the First
Prediction of the Passion ; * The Transfiguration ;
*The Demoniac Boy^; *The Second Prediction of
the Passion; *Who is the greatest? *Not against
us is for us (ix. 1-50).
IV. ix. 5i-rix. 28. THE JOURNEYINGS TOWARDS JERUSALEM :
MINISTRY OUTSIDE GALILEE.
i, The departure from Galilee and First Period of ike
Journey (ix. si-xiii. 35).
i. The Samaritan Village; t Three Aspirants to Dis-
cipleship ; The Seventy : The Lawyer's Questions
and the Good Samaritan; Mary and Martha
(ix. SMC. 42).
t. Prayer; * Casting out Demons by Beelzebub ; True
Blessedness ; * The Demand for a Sign : Denuncia-
tion of Pharisaism ; t Exhortation to Sincerity ;
The Avaricious Brother; The Rich Fool; God's
Providential Care; The Signs of the Times (xi. i-
xii. 59).
$. Three Exhortations to Repentance; The Woman
with a Spirit of Infirmity; *The Mustard Seed;
tThe Leaven; The Number of the Saved; The
Message to Antipas and fthe Lament over Jeru-
salem (xiiL 1-35).
iL The Second Period of the Journey (xiv. i-xvii. 10).
I. The Dropsical Man; Guests and Hosts; The
Great Supper ; The Conditions of Discipleship \
tThe Lost Sheep; The Lost Coin; The Lost
Son (xiv. i-xv. 32).
t. The Unrighteous Steward; t Short Sayings; The
Rich Man and Lazarus ; Four Sayings on * Offences,
Forgiveness, t Faith, Works (xvi. i-xvii. 10).
Hi. The Third Period of the Journey (xvii. n-xix. 28).
i. The Ten Lepers; *The coming of the Eangdom;
The Unrighteous Judge; The Pharisee and the
Publican (xvii. n-xviiL 14).
3d THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 5.
a. * Little Children; *The Rich Young Ruler; *The
Third Prediction of the Passion ; * The Blind Man
at Jericho; Zaccha2us; The Pounds (xviii. 15-
xix. 28).
V. xix. 29~xxi. 38. LAST DAYS OF PUBLIC TEACHING:
MINISTRY IN JERUSALEM.
I. * The Triumphal Procession and Predictive Lament-
ation; *The Cleansing of the Temple (xix. 29-48).
t. The Day of Questions. * Christ's Authority and John's
Baptism; *The Wicked Husbandmen; * Tribute;
* The Woman with Seven Husbands ; * David's Son
and Lord; *The Scribes; The Widow's Mite;
* Apocalyptic Discourse (xx. i-xxi. 38).
VI. xxii.~xxiv. THE PASSION AND THE RESURRECTION.
i. The Passion (xxii. i-xxiii. 56).
1. *The Treachery of Judas (xxii. i~6).
2. * The Paschal Supper and Institution of the Eucharist ;
*The Strife about Priority; The New Conditions
(xxii. 7-38).
3. *The Agony; *The Arrest,; * Peter's Denials; The
Ecclesiastical Trial; *The Civil Trial; Jesus
sent to Herod; * Sentence; * Simon of Cyrene;
The Daughters of Jerusalem ; * The Crucifixion ;
The Two Robbers; *The Death (xxii. 39-
xxiii. 49).
4. * The Burial (xxiii. 50-56).
ii. Tke Resurrection and tJie Ascension (XXIY,),
i. *The Women at the Tomb (i~xi)*
a. [Peter at the Tomb (12),]
$. The Walk to Emmaus (13-32).
4. The Appearance to the Eleven (33-43),
5. Christ's Farewell Instructions (44-49),
6. The Departure (50-53).
Note that each of the three divisions of the Ministry begins
with scenes which are typical of Christ's rejection by His people :
the Ministry in Galilee with the attempt on His life at Nazareth
(iv, 28-30) ; the Ministry outside Galilee with the refusal of
Samaritans to entertain Him (ix. 51-56); and that in Jerusalem
with the Lament over the city (xix, 41-44). In the first and last
case the tragic rejection is heightened by being preceded by a
momentary welcome.
It will be useful to collect for separata cnctidgmdott th* Hinudc* ad tbt
Ifcnble* which arc recorded by S. Luic.
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE xli
MIRACLES. PABABLBS.
* Unclean Demon cast out f Two Debtors.
* Peter's Wife's Mother healed. * Sower.
Miraculous Draught of Fish, Good Samaritan,
* Leper cleansed. Friend at rmdnightfe
* Palsyed healed. Rich Fool.
* Withered Hand restored. Watchful Servant!,
t Centurion's Servant healed Barren Fig-tree.
Widow's Son raised. * Mustard Seed,
* Tempest stilled. t Leaven.
* Gerasene Demoniac. Chief Seats.
* Woman with the Issue* Great Supper*
* Tairus' Daughter raised* Rash Builder.
* Five Thousand fed. Rash King.
* Demoniac Boy. t Lost Sheep,
f Dumb Demon cast out* Lost Coin.
Spirit of Infirmity. Lost Son.
Dropsical Man. Unrighteous Steward*
Ten Lepers cleansed, Dives and Lazarus.
* Blind Man at Jericho* Unprofitable Servant*
Malchus* ear. Unrighteous Judge.
1 Pharisee and Publican*
i Pounds.
h Wicked Husbandmen.
Thus, out of twenty miracles recorded by Luke, six are peculiar to him ;
while, out of twenty-three parables, all but five are peculiar to him. And he
omits only eleven, ten peculiar to Matthew, and one peculiar to Mark (iv. 26-29).
Whence did Luke obtain the eighteen parables which he alone records ? And
whence did Matthew obtain the ten parables which he alone records ? If the
** Oracles" contained them all, why does each Evangelist omit so many? If
S. Luke knew our Matthew, why does he omit all these ten, especially the
Two Sons (Mt. xxi. 28-32), which points to the obedience of the Gentiles (see
p. xxiv). In illustration of the met that the material common to all three
Gospels consists mainly of narratives rather than discourses, it should be noticed
that most of the twenty miracles in Luke are in the other two also, whereas
only three of the twenty-three parables in Luke are also in Matthew and Mark.
It is specially worthy of note that the eleven miracles recorded by all three
occur m the same order in each of the Gospels ; and the same is true of the
three parables which are common to all three. Moreover, if we add to these the
three miraculous occurrences which attest the Divinity of Christ, these also are
in the same order in each. The Descent of the Spirit with the Voice from
Heaven at the Baptism precedes all. The Transfiguration is placed between
the feeding of the 5000 and the healing of the demoniac boy. The Resurrection
closes all. Evidently the order had already been fixed in the material which all
three Evangelists employ.
6. CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE.
(L) It has already been pointed out (p. xxxv) that Luke aims at
fblness and completeness. (a) Comprehensiveness is a charac-
teristic of his Gospel. His Gospel is the nearest approach to a
biography ; and his object seems to have been to give his readers
xiii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 6.
as full a picture as he could of the life of Jesus Christ, in all the
portions of it infancy, boyhood, manhood respecting which he
had information.
But there is a comprehensiveness of a more important kind
which is equally characteristic of him : and for the sake of a
different epithet we may say that the Gospel of S. Luke is in a
special sense the universal Gospel. All four Evangelists tell us
that the good tidings are sent to "all the nations" (Mt. xxviiL 19 ;
Mk. xiii. 10 ; Lk. xxiv. 47) independently of birth (Jn. i. 12, 13).
But no one teaches this so fully and persistently as S. Luke. He
gives us, not so much the Messiah of the O.T., as the Saviour of
all mankind and the Satisfier of all human needs. Again and
again he shows us that forgiveness and salvation are offered to all,
and offered freely, independently of privileges of birth or legal
observances. Righteousness of heart is the passport to the King-
dom of God, and this is open to everyone; to the Samaritan
(be. 51-56, x. 30-37, xvii. 11-19) and the Gentile (ii. 32, iii, 6, 38,
iv. 25-27, vii. 9, x. i, xiii. 29, xxi. 24, xxiv. 47) as well as to the
Jew (i. 33, 54, 68-79, " I0 )> to publicans, sinners, and outcasts
(iii. 12, 13, v. 27-32, vii. 37-50, xv. i, 2, 11-32, xviii, 9-14, xix,
2-10, xxiii. 43) as well as to the respectable (vii. 36, xi. 37, xiv. i) \
to the poor (i. 53, ii. 7, 8, 24, iv. 18, vi. 20, 21, vii. 22, xiv. 13, 21,
xvi. 20, 23) as well as to the rich (xix. 2, xxiii. 50). And hence
Dante calls S. Luke " the writer of the story of the gentleness of
Christ," scriba mansuttudinis Christi (De Monarch^ L 16 [18],
ed. Witte, 1874, p. 33; Church, p. 210). It cannot be mere
accident that the parables of the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal
Son, the Great Supper, the Pharisee and the Publican, the rebukes
to intolerance, and the incidents of the sinner in the house of
Simon, and of the penitent robber are peculiar to this Gospel. Nor
yet that it omits Mt. vii. 6, x. 5, 6, xx, 16, xxiL 14, which might be
regarded as hostile to the Gentiles. S. Luke at the opening of the
ministry shows this universal character of it by continuing the
great prophecy from Is. xl. 3 ff. (which all four Evangelists quote)
till he reaches the words " All flesh shall see the salvation of God "
(iii. 6). And at the close of it he alone records the gracious
declaration that " the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that
which was lost" (xix. 10 ; interpolated Mt xviii* ixj)* 1
It is a detail, but an important one, In the universality of the
Third Gospel, that it is in an especial sense the Gospel for women,
Jew and Gentile alike looked down on women** But aU through
this Gospel they are allowed a prominent place, and many types
1 Comp. al*o the dose of the Act*, e*jx xxviiL 38 j *nd the v&t (Lk.
xvi. i6) which is not in Mt (it is).
In the Jewiih liturgy the men thank God that they ham oot been nuidt
women.
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE xlin
of womanhood are placed before us : Elizabeth, the Virgin Mary,
the prophetess Anna, the widow at Nain, the nameless sinner in
the house of Simon, Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, the woman
with the issue, Martha and Mary, the widow with the two mites,
the "daughters of Jerusalem," and the women at the tomb. A
Gospel with this marked antipathy to exclusiveness and intolerance
appropriately carries the pedigree of the Saviour past David and
Abraham to the parent of the whole human race (iii. 38)* It is
possible that Luke simply copied the genealogy as he found it, or
that his extending it to Adarn is part of his love of completeness ;
but the thought of the father of all mankind is likely to have been
present also.
It is this all-embracing love and forgiveness, as proclaimed in
the Third Gospel, which is meant, or ought to be meant, when it
is spoken of as the " Gospel of S. Paul" The tone of the Gospel
is Pauline. It exhibits the liberal and spiritual nature of Chris-
tianity. It advocates faith and repentance apart from the works
of the Law, and tells abundantly of God's grace and mercy and the
work of the Holy Spirit. In the Pauline Epistles these topics and
expressions are constant
The word rf<rrtf, which occurs eight times Jn Mt, five In Mk., and not
At all in Jn., is found eleven times in Lk. and sixteen in the Acts : ftcrdyoia,
twice in Mt., once in Mk., not in Jn., occurs five times in Lk. and six in Acts :
XC/HS, thrice in Jn., not Mt. or Mk., is frequent both in Lk. and Acts : Xeos,
thrice in Mt., not in Mk. or Jn., occurs six times in Lk. but not in Acts : &<pe<rit
afjLaprlwv, once in Mt, twice in Mk,, not in Jn., is found thrice in Lk. and
five times in Acts ; and the expression *' Holy Spirit," which is found five times
in Mt., four in Mk., four in Jn., occurs twelve times in Lk. and forty-one in
Acts. See on i. 15.
It is characteristic that rlva. tuvQbr Igrre (Mt. v. 46) becomes rota v^lv
X<ip*t tffriv (Lk. vi. 32) ; and (<re<r&e fywtj r^Xeiot, <fo 6 var^p &pw 6 ofyivios
r\et6t Amr (Mt v. 48) becomes ytvetrtie olKripportt, Ka0&t & *rarJjy>
(Lk. vi. 36). Note also the incidents recorded iv. 25-27 and
at. 1-16, and the office of the Holy Spirit as indicated L 15, 35, 41, 67, iL 25,
26, 27, iv. I, x. 21, xi. 13, all of which are peculiar to Lk.
But it is misleading in this respect to compare the Second
Gospel with the Third From very early times the one has been
called the Petrine Gospel, and the other the Pauline. S. Mark is
said to give us the teaching of S. Peter, S. Luke the teaching of
S. Paul. The statements are true, but in very different senses.
Mark derived his materials from Peter. Luke exhibits the spirit
of Paul : and no doubt to a large extent he derived this spirit from
the Apostle. But he got his material from eye-witnesses. Mark
was the interpreter of Peter, as Irenseus (iii. 1. 1, 10. 6) and Tertullian
(Adv. Martian, iv. 5) aptly called him ; he made known to others
what Peter had said. Paul was the illuminator of Luke (Tert. iv. 2 ) :
he enlightened him as to the essential character of the Gospel.
xliv
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. 1UKE
Luke, as his "fellow-worker," would teach what the Apostle taught,
and would learn to give prominence to those elements in the
Gospel narrative of which he made most frequent use. Then at
last " Luke, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel
preached by him" (Iren. iii. i. i).
Jiilicher sums up the case justly when he says that Luke has adopted from
Paul no more than the whole Catholic Church has adopted, viz. the universality of
salvation and the boundlessness of Divine grace : and it is precisely in these two
points that Paul has been a clear-sighted and logical interpreter of Jesus Christ
(Einl. 27, p. 204). See also Knowling, The Witntss of the Epistks, p. 328,
and the authorities there quoted.
Holtzmann, followed by Davidson (Introd* to N.T. ii. p. 17} and Schaflf
(Apostolic Christianity^ ii. p. 667), gives various instances of parallelism be-
tween the Third Gospel and the Pauline Epistles. Resch (Ausscrcanonischt
Paralleltexte^ p. 121, Leipzig, 1893), while ignoring some of Holtzmann's ex-
amples, adds others ; but some of his are not very convincing, or depend upon
doubtful readings. The following are worth considering :-*-
S. LUKE.
iv. 32.
vi. 36,
vi. 39.
S. PAUU
I Cor. Ii. 4.
irarfyp i)fiMV olicrip/Mtv <rrtv.
Mmrcu rv0\6f rv^Xftr
vi. 48,
vii. 8. &v Spur fa ttfu
2 Cor. i. 3* Tasrp rwv
Rom. ii. 19. rtiroi&as ffcavr
tvai rv<p\&p.
I Cor. iii. ro.
Rom. xiii. x,
viii. 12, rwre&rairef <ruQ&ffir*
viii. 13. jterA x a P** WXOWM r.
I Cor. i. 21. <ro r cu roi)s irwrr
Rom. i. 16. e/f
x. 7.
^roO*
x, 8.
x. 16.
rot?
i Thes. i. 6. ^</tww r. X^yar . , .
ri xapas,
i Tim. v. 1 8. dios i ^/yydr^t r0
ffdov aiVov*
I Cor. x. 27. vow* r
x, 2O, ri
iv rots otipavots,
xi. 7. p'/i fJ,w Kfarovt
dffereT'
<rr\ayr
rfry^ypairrcu
I Thes. iv. 8. ^ dflerfly o?J/c
iror d^eret dXXd rdi' 6e6F
Phil. iv. 3. c&y rA Mfjutra. if
rjs (Ps, hix. 28).
Gal. vi. 17. ic6irot/! /xot
xi. 29. -
ct
xi. 41.
rfr.
xii. 35*
ptefwcryU^yoi.
xii. 42. rt* Apa, hrlv b irrr&
I Cor. i. 22.
Tit. 1* 15. irdiwx. ira^a/xi rot*
ots.
Eph. vi X4-
xiii. 27. dw<5omjre dir*
tyy&rat tiStKiat (Ps. vi. 8).
xviii, I, #et
(Is. xL 5)*
1 Cor. iv. 2* ^rerat AC
pots 'ivft, mtrrfo rty e^xr^
2 Tim. ii. 19. cbwr|ra? dird' d^lt|
Col. i.
2 Thes. i. 1 1.
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE
Gal. VI. 9. fJ
xx. 1 6. /u-fy y&oiro. Rom. ix. 14, xi. II; GaU iii. 21.
xx. 22, 25. g&o-Tir facts Ka.lev.pi Rom. xiii. 7. <hr65ore 3ra<r
Qbpov Sovvcu, fy oti ; dw65ore ret Ka/cra- <J0&Xds, T$ rd? $6pov rbv tpbpov.
pos Kalffa/u.
xx. 35. oZ 8 KaraZLwQtvres rov alu^or 2 Thes. i. 5. e/y rd
iKelvov TVX&V. fl/uas TT^S paff&efas rov OfoO.
xx. 38. vdprey "yfy> adry &<riv. Rom. vi. n. JUNTOS
Gal. ii. 19. fro, 6e<
xxi. 23. &TOI yttp . . . <5/xyi; rf I Thes. ii. 1 6.
Xay rotfry. ^ ^PT^? e/s rAof.
xxi. 24. ;jt/w o5 v\TipwdCbffw Kcupol Rom. xi. 25. A
^^<S^. rwv ^wy elartXdv.
x^- 34- M^ ""or* papijO&criv a,l Kapdtat I Thes. v. 3-5. r6re attfivLStos avroit
u, SKeffpos , . . tf/tety 5i o&K
cr/c6ret,
xxi. 36. dvpiwryetre 5^ ^y -ain-i KCW/W? Eph. vi. 18. vpoa-evx^voi 4v rarrj
5e6/JLVOi. KCUp^J , . . Kdi dypVTTVOVVTtSt
xxii. 53. ^ ^ova-La rov <nc6rovj. Col. i. 13. & r^y tfovcrlas rov <TK&rov9.
It is not creditable to modem scholarship that the foolish opinion, quoted
by Eusebius with a <f>a<rl 54 (H. E* iii. 4. 8) and by Jerome with quidam sus-
picantur (De vir. illus. vii.), that wherever S. Paul speaks of "my Gospel*'
(Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25 ; 2 Tim. ii. 8) he means the Gospel of S. Luke, still
finds advocates. And the supposition that the Third Gospel is actually quoted
I Tim. v. 1 8 is incredible. The words Xyei 17 ypa^ refer to the first sentence
only, which comes from Deut. xxv. 4. What follows, " the labourer is worthy
of his hire," is a popular saying, adopted first by Christ (Lk. x. 7 ; Mt. x. 10)
and then by S. Paul. Had S. Paul quoted the saying as an utterance of Christ,
he would not have said Xyei ij ypcKfitf. He would have used some such expres-
sion as [LvqfAOvetieiv T&V Xtiycav rod KvpLov 'Ivjffov 6n atfrds X^yet (Acts xx. 35), or
irapayyAXet & ripios (I Cor. vii. 10, 12), or peppy fjitvoi T&V \&ytav rov Kvpiov
'lycrov, oCs AdXiytrep (Clem. Rom. Cor. xiii. I ; comp. xlvi, 7), or simply eZiw
6 Ktiptos (Polyc. vii. 2). Comp. I Thes. iv. 15 ; i Cor. ir. 14, xi 23*
(S) More than any of the other Evangelists S. Luke brings
before his readers the subject of Prayer ; and that in two ways,
(i) by the example of Christ, and (2) by direct instruction. All
three Synoptists record that Christ prayed in Gethsemane (Mt.
xxvi 39; Mk. xiv. 35; Lk. xxii. 41) ; Mark (i. 35) mentions His
retirement for prayer after healing multitudes at Capernaum, where
Luke (iv. 42) merely mentions the retirement : and Matthew
(xiv. 23) and Mark (vi. 46) relate His retirement for prayer after
the feeding of the 5000, where Luke (ix. 17) relates neither. But
on seven occasions Luke is alone in recording that Jesus prayed :
at His Baptism (iii. 21); before His first collision with the hierarchy
(v. 1 6); before choosing the Twelve (vi. 12); before the first
prediction of the Passion (ix. 18) ; at the Transfiguration (ix. 29) ;
before teaching the Lord's Prayer (xi. i) ; and on the Cross (xxiiL
[34], 46). Moreover, Luke alone relates the declaration of Jesua
that He had made supplication for Peter, and His charge to the
Twelve, " Pray that ye enter not into temptation * (xxii 32, 40).
xlvl THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 6,
It was out of the fulness of His own experience that Jesus said,
" Ask, and it shall be given you " (xi. 9). Again, Luke alone re-
cords the parables which enjoin persistence in prayer, the Friend
at Midnight (xi. 5-13) and the Unrighteous Judge (xviii. t-8);
and to the charge to "watch" (Mt xxv. 13 ; Mk. xiii. 33) He adds
" at every season, making supplication, that ye may prevail," etc.
(xxi. 36). In the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican the
difference between real and unreal prayer is illustrated (xviii.
11-13)-
(e) The Third Gospel is also remarkable for the prominence
which it gives to Praise and Thanksgiving. It begins and ends
with worship in the temple (i. 9, xxiv. 53). Luke alone has pre-
served for us those hymns which centuries ago passed from his
Gospel into the daily worship of the Church : the Gloria m
ExcelstS) or Song of the Angels (ii. 14) ; the Magnificat, or Song
of the blessed Virgin Mary (i. 46-55); the Benedictus^ or Song of
Zacharias (i. 68-79) ; and the Nunc Dimittis^ or Song of Symeon
(ii. 29-32). Far more often than in any other Gospel are we told
that those who received special benefits " glorified God " (Soaiv
rov eov) for them (ii. 20, v. 25, 26, vii. 16, xiii. 13, xvii. 15,
xviii. 43). Comp. Mt ix. 8, xv. 31; Mk. ii. 12. The expression
"praising GodrXafr/eu> TOV eov) is almost peculiar to Luke in
N.T. (ii 13, 20, xix. 37, xxiv. 53?; Acts ii. 47, Hi. 8, 9). "Bless-
ing God" (evXoydv TOV eo'i>) is almost peculiar to Luke (i. 64,
ii. 28, xxiv. 53 ?) : elsewhere only Jas. iii. 9. " Give praise (olvov
SiSovat) to God" occurs Luke xviii. 43 only. So also xatpav,
which occurs eight times in Matthew and Mark, occurs nineteen
times in Luke and Acts ; x a P<* seven times in Matthew and Mark,
thirteen times in Luke and Acts.
(</) The Gospel of S. Lukejs rightly styled " the most literary
of the Gospels " (Renan, Les Evangiles^ ch. xiii.). " S. Luke has
more literary ambition than his fellows " (Sanday, Book by Book^
p. 401), He possesses the art of composition. He knows not
only how to tell a tale truthfully, but how to tell it with effect He
can feel contrasts and harmonies, and reproduce them for his
readers. The way in which he tells the stories of the widow's son
at Nain, the sinner in Simon's house, Martha and Mary at
Bethany, and the walk to Emmaus, is quite exquisite. And one
might go on giving other illustrations of his power, until one had
mentioned nearly the whole Gospel, The sixth century was not
far from the truth when it called him a painter, and said that he
had painted the portrait of the Virgin. There is no picture of her
so complete as his. How lifelike are his sketches of Zacharias,
Anna, Zacchseus, Herod Antipas \ And with how few touches is
tach done ! As a rule Luke puts in fewer descriptive details than
Mark. In his description of the Baptist he omits the strange attire
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE xlvii
and food (Mk. i. 6 ; Mt iii. 4). In the healing of Simon's wife's
mother he omits the taking of her hand (Mk. i. 31 ; Mt. viii. 15).
In that of the palsied he omits the crowding at the door (Mk. ii. 2).
And there are plenty of such cases. But at other times we have
an illuminating addition which is all his own (iii. 15, 21, iv. 13, 15,
40, 42, v. i, 12, 15, 16, vi. 12, viii. 47, etc.). His contrasts are
not confined to personal traits, such as the unbelieving priest and
the believing maiden (i. 18, 38), the self-abasing woman and the
self-satisfied Pharisee (vii. 37 ff.), the thankless Jews and the thank-
ful Samaritan (xvii. 17), the practical Martha and the contemplative
Mary (x. 38-42), the hostile hierarchy and the attentive people
(xix. 47, 48), and the like ; the fundamental antithesis between
Christ's work and Satan's 1 (iv. 13, x. 17-20, xiii. 16, xxii. 3,
31, 53), often exhibited in the opposition of the scribes and
Pharisees to His work (xi. 52, xii. i, xiii. 14, 31, xv. 2, xvi. 14,
xix. 39, 47, xx. 20), is brought out with special clearness. The
development of the hostility of the Pharisees is one of the main
threads in the narrative. It is this rare combination of descriptive
power with simplicity and dignity, this insight into the lights and
shadows of charactei and the conflict between spiritual forces,
which makes this Gospel much more than a fulfilment of its
original purpose (i. 4). There is no rhetoric, no polemics, no
sectarian bitterness. It is by turns joyous and sad ; but even where
it is most tragic it is almost always serene. 3 As the fine literary
taste of Renan affirms, it is the most beautiful book in the world.
(<?) S. Luke is the only Evangelist who writes history as distinct
from memoirs. He aims at writing " in order," which probably
means in chronological order (i. 5, 26, 36, 56, 59, ii. 42, iii. 23,
ix. 28, 37, 51, xxii. i, 7), and he alone connects his narrative with
the history of Syria and of the Roman Empire (ii i, iii. i). The
sixfold date (iii. i) is specially remarkable : and it is possible that
both it and ii. i were inserted as finishing touches to the narra-
tive. The words eros (|f) and fuqv (V) occur more often in his
writings than in the rest of N.T. : and this fact points to a special
fondness for exactitude as regards time. Where he gives no date,
probably because he found none in his authorities, he fre-
quently lets us know what incidents are connected together,
although he does not know in what year or time of year to place
the group (iv. i, 38, 40, vii. i, 18, 24, viii. i, x. i, 21, xl 37, xii. i,
xiii. i, 31, xix. n, 28, 41, xxii. 66, xxiv, 13). He is very much
1 Both in Mark (i. 21-28) and in Luke (iv. 31-37) the miracle of healing the
demoniac in the synagogue at Capernaum is perhaps placed first as being
typical of Christ's whole work. But there is no evidence of any special
"demonologv" in Luke. With the doubtful exception of the "spirit of
infirmity M (xiii. 10) there is no miracle of custfag out demons which he alone
records.
* A marked exception is the violent scene so graphically described xL 53, 54*
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 8.
less definite than Josephus or Tacitus ; but that is only what we
ought to expect He had not their opportunities of consulting
public records, and he was much less interested in chronology than
they were. Yet it has been noticed that the Agricola of Tacitus
contains no chronology until the last chapter is reached. The
value of Christ's words and works was quite independent of dates.
Such remarks as he makes xvi. 14, xviii. i, 9, xix. n throw far
more light upon what follows than an exact note of time would
have done. Here and there he seems to be giving us his own
estimate of the situation, as an historian or biographer might do
(ii. 50, iii. 15, viii 30, xx. 20, xxii. 3, xxiii. 12) : and the notes,
whether they come from himself or his sources, are helpful. If
chronology even in his Gospel is meagre, yet there is a continuity
and development which may be taken as evidence of the true
historic spirit 1 He follows the Saviour through the stages, not
only of His ministry, but of His physical and moral growth (ii. 40,
42, 51, 52, iii. 23, iv. 13, xxii, 28, 53). He traces the course of
the ministry from Nazareth to Capernaum and other towns of
Galilee, from Galilee to Samaria and Peraea, from Peraea to Jeru-
salem, just as in the Acts he marks the progress of the Gospel, as
represented successively by Stephen, Philip, Peter, and Paul, from
Jerusalem to Antioch, from Antioch to Ephesus and Greece, and
rinally to Rome.
(/) But along with these literary and historical features it has a
marked domestic tone. In this Gospel we see most about Christ in
His social intercourse with men. The meal in the house of Simon,
in that of Martha and Mary, in that of a Pharisee, when the
Pharisees were denounced, in that of a leading Pharisee on a
sabbath, when the dropsical man was healed, His sojourn with
Zacchaeus, His walk to Emmaus and the supper there, are all
peculiar to Luke's narrative, together with a number of parables,
which have the same quiet and homely setting. The Good
Samaritan in the inn, the Friend at Midnight, the Woman with the
Leaven, the Master of the house rising and shutting the door, the
Woman sweeping for the Lost Coin, the Father welcoming the Lost
Son, all have this touch of familiar domesticity. And perhaps it
is to this love of homely scenes that we may trace the fact that
whereas Mk. (iv. 31) has the mustard-seed sown "on the earth,"
and Mt (xiii. 31) makes a man sow it "in his field," Lk. (xiii. 19)
tells us that a man sowed it " in his own garden? Birks, Hor. Rv.
(ii.) When we consider the sfyk-and language of S. Luke, we
are struck by two apparently opposite features, his great com-
1 Ramsay regards Luke as a historical writer of the highest order, one who
u commands excellent means of knowledge . * , and brings to the treatment of
his subject genius, literary skill, and sympathetic historical insight '* ( Paul
the Traveller, pp, 2, 3, 20, 21, Hodder, 1895).
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE xlix
mand of Greek and his very un-Greek use of Hebrew phrases and
Constructions. These two features produce a result which is so
peculiar, that any one acquainted with them in detail would at
once recognize as his any page torn out of either of his writings.
This peculiarity impresses us less than that which distingu shes the
writings of S. John, and which is felt even in a translation ; but it
is much more easily analysed. It lies in the diction rather than in
the manner, and its elements can readily be tabulated. But for this
very reason a good deal of it is lost in translation, in which pecu-
liarities of construction cannot always be reproduced. In any
version the difference between S. Mark and S. John is felt by the
ordinary reader. The most careful version would fail to show to
an attentive student more than a good portion of the differences
between S. Mark and S. Luke.
The author of the Third Gospel and of the Acts is the most
versatile of all the N.T. writers. He can be as Hebraistic as the
LXX, and as free from Hebraisms as Plutarch. And, in the main,
whether intentionally or not, he is Hebraistic in describing Hebrew
society, and Greek in describing Greek society. It is impossible
to determine how much of the Hebraistic style is due to the
sources which he is employing, how much is voluntarily adopted
by himself as suitable to the subject which he is treating. That
Aramaic materials which he translated, or Greek materials which
had come from an Aramaic source, influenced his language con-
siderably, need not be doubted ; for it is where he had no such
materials that his Greek shows least sign of such influences. In
the second half of the Acts, where he writes of his own experiences,
and is independent of information that has come from an Aramaic
source, he writes in good kte Greek. But then it is precisely here
that he is describing scenes far away from Jerusalem in an Hellen-
istic or Gentile atmosphere. So that it is quite possible that to
some extent he is a free agent in this matter, and is not merely
exhibiting the influence under which he is writing at the moment.
No doubt it is true that, where he has used materials which directly
or indirectly are Aramaic, there his style is Hebraistic ; but it may
also be true that he has there allowed his style to be Hebraistic,
because he felt that such a style was appropriate to the subject-
matter.
He has enabled us to judge of the two styles by placing two
highly characteristic specimens of each in immediate juxtaposition.
In the Acts the change from the more Hebrew portion to the more
Greek portion takes place gradually, just as in the narrative there
is a change from a Hebrew period (i.-v.), through a transitional
period (vi.-xii.), to a Gentile period (xiii.-xxviii.). 1 But in the
1 Compare in this respect the letter of Lysias (xxiii. 26-30) and the speech
of Tertullus (xxiv, 2-9) with the speeches of Peter (ii. 14-39, *" 12-26).
d
1 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 6,
Gospel the remarkably elegant and idiomatic Greek of the Preface
is suddenly changed to the intensely Hebraistic Greek of the open-
ing narrative. It is like going from a chapter in Xenophon to a
chapter in the LXX. 1 And he never returns to the style of the
Preface. In the Gospel itself it is simply a question of more or
less Hebrew elements. They are strongest in the first two chapters,
but they never entirely cease ; and they are specially common at
the beginning of narratives, e.g. v. i, 12, 17, vi. i, 6, 12, viii. 22,
ix. rS, 51, etc. It will generally be found that the parallel passages
are, in the opening words, less Hebraistic than Luke. In construc-
tion, even Matthew, a Jew writing for Jews, sometimes exhibits
fewer Hebraisms than this versatile Gentile, who writes for Gentiles.
Comp. Lk. ix. 28, 29, 33, 38, 39 with Mt. xvii. i, 2, 4, 15; Lk.
xiii. 30 with Mt. xix. 30; Lk. xviii. 35 with Mt. xx. 29; Lk. xx. i
with Mt. xxi. 23.
From this strong Hebraistic tinge in his language some (Tiele,
Hofmann, Harm) have drawn the unnecessary and improbable
conclusion that the Evangelist was a Jew ; while others, from the
fact that some of the Hebraisms and many other expressions
which occur in the Third Gospel and the Acts are found also in
the Pauline Epistles, have drawn the quite impossible conclusion
that this hypothetical Jew was none other than S. Paul himself.
To mention nothing else, the " we " sections in the Acts are fatal
to the latter theory. In writing of himself and his companions,
\vhat could induce the Apostle to change backwards and forwards
between "they" and "we"? As to the former theory, good
reasons have been given above for attributing both books to a
Gentile and to S. Luke, who (as S, Paul clearly implies in Col. iv.
11-14) was a Gentile. The Hebraistic colour in the Evangelist's
language, and the elements common to his diction and that of the
Pauline Epistles, can be easily explained, and more satisfactorily
explained, without an hypothesis which imports more difficulties
than it solves. The Hebraisms in Luke come partly from his
sources, partly from his knowledge of the LXX, and partly from
his intercourse with S. Paul, who often in his presence discussed
the O.T. with Jews in language which must often have been
charged with Hebraisms. The expressions which are common to
the two Lucan documents and the Pauline Epistles are partly
mere accidents of language, and partly the result of companion-
ship between the two writers. Two such men could not have
been together so often without influencing one another's language.
S. Luke's command of Greek is abundantly shown both in the
freedom of his constructions and also in the richness of his vocabulary.
1 There are some who attribute the strongly Hebraistic tone of the tot two
chapters to a conscious and deliberate imitation of the LXX rather than to tbf
influence of Aramaic sources.
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE li
(a) The freedom of his constructions is seen not infrequently
even in his Hebraisms. Two instances will suffice, (i) His
frequent use of eyevero is often purely Hebraistic (i. 8, 9),
sometimes less so (vi. i), sometimes hardly Hebraistic at all
(Acts ix. 3, xxi. i). This will be found worked out in
detail in a detached note at the end of ch. i. (2) His
frequent use of periphrastic tenses, i.e. the substantive verb
with a present or perfect participle instead of the simple
tense, exhibits a similar variety,
The use of fy with pres. or perf. part, as a periphrasis for imper or pluperf.
indie, is of Aramaic origin in many cases and is frequent in the Gospels, most
frequent in Luke ; but it is not always easy to say whether it is a Hebraism or
a use that might very well stand in classical Greek. For $? with pres. part, see
i. 10, 21, 22, ii. 33, 1, iv. 20, 31, 38, 44, v. 16, 17, 29, vi. 12, viii. 40, ix. 53,
xi. 14, xiii. 10, n, xiv. i, xv. i, xix. 47, [xxi. 37], xxiii. 8, xxiv. 13, 32. Most
of these are probably due to Hebrew or Aramaic influence ; but many would be
admissible in classical Greek, and may be used to imply continuance of the
action. In i. 21, 22, ii. 51, iv. 31, xv. i, xix. 47, xxui. 8, xxiv. 13, 32 the
simple imperf. follows immediately in the next clause or sentence. That such
cases as ii. 33, iv. 20, ix. 53, xi. 14, xiii. 10, ii, xiv. i are Hebraistic need
hardly be doubted. So also where fy with perf. part, is used for the pluperf.
(i. 7, ii. 26, iv. 1 6, 17, v. 17, ix. 32, 45, xviii. 34), i. 7 and ix, 32 with most
of the others are probably Hebraistic, but v. 17 almost certainly is not.
Anyhow, Luke shows that he is able to give an Hellenic turn to his Hebraisms,
so that they would less offend a Greek ear. Much the same might be said of
his use of Kai to introduce the apodosis, which may be quite classical (ii. 21),
but may also be Hebraistic, especially where IM is added (vii. 12, xxiv. 4), or
ai>r6s (v. i, 17, viii. i, 22, ix. 51, etc.): or of his frequent use of & ry with the
infinitive (L 8, 21, ii. 6, 43, v. I, etc.).
Simcox, Lang, of N.T. pp. 131-134, has tabulated the use of periphrastic
imperf. and plupen. See also his remarks on Luke's Hebraisms, Writers of
N, T. pp. 19-22.
But Luke's freedom of construction is conspicuous in other respect*. Al-
though he sometimes co-ordinates clauses, joining them, Hebrew iashion, with
a simple ical (i. 13, 14, 31-33, xvi. 19, etc.), yet he is able to vary his sentences
with relatives, participles, dependent clauses, genitive absolutes, and the like,
almost to any extent. We find this even in the most Hebraistic parts of the
Gospel (L 20, 26, 27, ii. 4, 21, 22, 26, 36, 37, 42, 43) ; but still more in other
parts: see especially vii. 36-50. He is die only N.T, writer who uses the
optative in indirect questions, both without Ay (i. 29, iii. 15, viii. 9, xxii. 3 ; Acts
xviu II, xxi. 31, xxv. 20) and with it (vi. ii, xv. 26; Acts v. 24, x, 17), some-
times preceded by the article (i. 62, ix. 46). In xviii, 36 the Ar is doubtful*
The elegant and idiomatic attraction of the relative is very common in Luke
(L 4, v. 9, ix. 36, xii. 46, xv. 16, xxiii 41; Acts i, 22, ii. 22, iii. 21, 25, etc.),
especially after ras (ii. 20, iii. 19, ix. 43, xix. 37, xxiv. 25 ; Acts i I, x, 39,
xiii. 39, xxii. 10), whereas it occurs only twice in Matthew (xviii. 19, xxiv. 50)
and once in Mark (vii. 13). His more frequent use of re is another instance of
more idiomatic Greek (ii. 16, xii. 45, xv. 2, xxi. ii (Ms), xxii* 66, xxiii. 12,
xxiv. 20) : only once in Mark and four times in Matthew. Sometimes we find
the harsh Greek of Matthew or Mark improved in the parallel passage in Luke :
e.g. rQv 0eX6rrw>' & oroXcuj weptTareo> /cat cWcunrod* & rout dyopctft (Mk. xii 38)
has an awkwardness which Luke avoids by inserting ^tXotfrrwr before <fcnra<r-
>*w>t (xx* 46). Or again, <XX& efrra^v *E dvOptbruv tfofSoGvro rto> &x\w*
I*wrvf yfy clxov rbv lad*?? 6maj Sri rpo<p^rr}s ty (Mk. 3d. 32) is smoothed
lii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 6.
in more details than one in Luke : lav 6 ettru^v *E &vOp&iruv, 6 Xetds A?ras
KaraAi0a<rei TJjtias ' ireireicr/j(.4i'o$ ydp tffTiv 'ludvyv Trpo^r^v etvcu (xx. 6). Com-
pare /cat Trptol ez>vv%a Xav, which perhaps is a provincialism (Mk. i. 35), with
yevoptjfijs $ Jwtyus (Lk. iv. 42). In the verses which follow, Luke's diction is
smoother than Mark's. Compare also Lk. v. 29, 30 with Mk. n. 15, 1 6 and
Mt. ix. 10, ri ; Lk. v. 36 with Mk. h. 21 and Mt. ix. i6j Lk. vi. n with Mk.
iii. 6 and Mt. xii. 14. The superior freedom and fulness of Luke's narrative of
the message of the Baptist (vii. 18-21), as compared with that of Matthew
(xi. 2, 3), is very marked.
(b) But Luke's command of Greek is seen also in the richness
of Ms vocabulary. The number of words which occur in his two
writings and nowhere else in N.T. is estimated at 750 or (includ-
ing doubtful 1 cases) 851 ; of which 26 occur in quotations from
LXX. In the Gospel the words peculiar to Luke are 312 ; of
which 52 are doubtful, and n occur in quotations. Some of these
are found nowhere else in Greek literature. He is very fond of
compound verbs, especially with Bid or ZWL, or with two preposi-
tions, as CTravayctv, erreLcrep^a-^aLj avTLTrctpepxecrOai, crvyKaTariOevai,
TTpoo-ava/^atvav. He may have coined some of them for himself.
The following are among the most remarkable words and expres-
sions which occur either in both his writings and nowhere else in
N.T., or in his Gospel and nowhere else in N.T. No account is
\ere taken of the large number, which are peculiar to the Acts.
Those in thick type are found in LXX. Those with an
asterisk are shown by Hobart to be frequent in medical writers.
Many of these might be frequent in any writers. But the number
of less common words, which are peculiar to Luke in N.T. t and
are fairly common in medical writers, is remarkable ; and those of
them which are not found in LXX are specially to be noted.
Thirty times in G. and A. -yevto 8 (not Jn. x. 22).
Nine times in G. and A. r?/u<^oa 'ytverai.
Eight times in G. ev avrfi TTJ (^u^og, wpa, olnlq.}.
Seven times in G. and A. diroSex. 60 ^ - 1 ) * o-uvpdXXetv, iv ra?j ////^pcus ratfrcus.
Six times in G. and A. JcaOoTt, ?rovT|p<5s as an epithet of ?r feO/xa : six in G,
, ,
Fwe times in G. and A. c|ffc, Kadet-rjs KO.&' O\TJS r^s, 7rpocr^x T ^ eaurots, 6
<rrpari776s or ol <rrp. rov kpov t o TJ\|ntrTo$ or litJAcrros (of God) : five in G.
dvcucptvciv (in the legal sense), K&1 ouros, Kdl ws, Xfyxvi}, 4v /u ruijt/.
Poitr times in G. and A. Awmv, SiaTropew, iTroipeiv T^V <(x>v^v, ^-rrupwvfSv,
KaOUvai, * 68tivatr0cu, * ojAtXetv, * crvvapird^iv, afrtov, IvavrCor, vXa|3irj$,
KpdTtcrros, * TapaXeAv^ws (in the medical sense of " palsied *') : four in G.
* KO,TaKXCviv, paAXdvnov, <|>d"vq, ws TJyyLcrev.
Three times in G. and A. AvattiTttv, &|IQ{)V c. inf'^ $X0tv Iws
vai, 4-7riptp(iiv, * lirtx^P^i crvjnrXTjpotiv, a^r-g rfj wpa, dw* atwvos,
T^S, r& S^crjxa, 8ovXt|, Ivavri, l<rir^pa, 0dfipo$, pov
Tro\Lrij? t rfj TJfi^pa r<5v <rappdrcav, * arvy-y^ta, rd
KvpCo-u: three in G. 0paimjeiv dtrd,
oriTUT(is, T^ V^9 rov <raj3j8<frov, ^v /xn?
1 Owing to the various readings it may be doubted either (i) whether the
word is used by Luke, or (2) whether it is not used by some other writer.
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND JuAJNUUAuru
Twice in G. and A. dvcLSeircvfoat , &vaKa6tfetv t * ivacr?rv, dvat^afveiv,
* &vvpCcrKtv, dvTciTrciv, aTroYpa^T], * aiTOTivdcroreiv, * 8iaTt]piv, *
fradat,, * SioSeueiv, * lve8piJiv, ^rriSetv, * e-urdvwSj T^ ^xo/i^, ^xp
* Ka/raKXeieiv, KaTaKoXol50eiv, K\dffis t icXCvei ^ r^pa, * KXtv(8iov,
* Trapa|3id<T8ai, ircpiXdjximv, tropcijo-v ls elpi^virjv, * 7rpof3dX\iv, irpoiropeu-
cr0ai, *irpocrSoKia, * irpo-uirapxctv, crrpaTid, cruvevvai, Tpavjiart^iv, rpax^S*
Xpeo<j>iXrrjs : twice in G. &y/>a, * dvdimpos, * avT^irapepxccrflai, acrrpd-TrTeiv,
etTp, * > *
TJ Trots, irpdtcTwp, TrpccrpiCa, irpo^epetv, * crirap'yavovv, <ruKocj)avTciv, *VJTO-
It is not worth while to make a complete list of the words (over 2OO in
number) which occur once in the Third Gospel and nowhere el*e in N.T, The
following will give a good idea of their character :
ew, &9po[;eiv, iXXo-yevifis, ajMreXaup-yrfs, dvaSeigis,
&iraprtffp.6f t
Xeiv, frdtxerai, frraffpotfeiv, eVei&farep, Itreia-^pxecrOai, rd
iiri'7ropeuo > 0ai, ^TTLO-LTtcr^<5s, * lTrtcrx''i3iv, * Itrixeiv,
* Oecopta, * 0-ujjLKjv, * Ufids, tffd'yyeXof, * Kardpacris, * tcaraSetv, i
Kara,^'v^iv t Kepdnov, tcXtcria, Kpeird\y, tcpwrfi, Xa/Mr/>cD>, * X-fjpos,
* perea>p(iv, ^epi<rrj}j, * oSetJciv,
%ei5s, * irapd.So|o9 T
' *', * irivaidSioif, * i
crdXos,
uvK-upta, * orwirCirrc^ * crw-
4>viv 9 * re\ff<popetv, rerpowrXioj, *Tpav(ji.a, * vyp^s, * $8fHitTiK6t 9 * toro-
*
But the words which are peculiar to Luke in N.T. are by
no means even the chief of the marks of his style. Still more
striking are those expressions and constructions which he uses
frequently, or more frequently than any other writer. Many of
these occur more often in S. Luke's writings than in all the rest
of N.T. A collection of them is rendered much more useful by
being to some extent classified ; and the following lists have been
made with a view to illustrating the affinities between the diction
of S. Luke and of S. Paul and that of the Epistle to the Hebrews
both jointly with the Pauline Epistles and also by itself. In this
survey the Pastoral Epistles have been kept distinct from the main
groups of the Pauline Epistles, in order to show their harmony with
the diction of the Apostle's beloved companion. Words peculiar to
Luke and to the Pastoral Epistles are not improbably Pauline.
Words which are found in other Pauline Epistles as well as
in the Pastoral Epistles and in Luke's writings are still more
safely regarded as Pauline
Eight classes have been made; and in them the very great
variety of the words included, many of them quite classical or of
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
(.
classical formation, illustrate the richness of S. Luke's vocabulary
and his command of the Greek language, (i) Expressions peculiar
to S. Luke and S. Paul in N.T. (2) Peculiar to S. Luke and
S. Paul and the Epistle to the Hebrews. (3) Peculiar to S. Luke
and the Epistle to the Hebrews. (4) Not found in any other
Gospel and more frequent in S. Luke than in the rest of N.T.
(5) Found in one or more of the other Gospels, but more fre-
quent in S. Luke than in the rest of N.T. (6) Due to Hebrew
influence. (7) Miscellaneous expressions and constructions which
are specially frequent in his writings. (8) Expressions probably or
possibly medical. In the first of these classes the second list con-
tains expressions peculiar to the writers in question, although not
frequent in Luke. The figures state the number of times which
the word occurs in that book or group ; and in fractions the upper
figures indicates the number of times that the word occurs in the
writings of Luke, the lower figure the number of times which it
occurs elsewhere : e.g. in class 3 the fraction f- means twice in
Luke's writings and once in Hebrews ; and in classes 4 and 5 the
fraction means seven times in Luke's writings and four times in
the other books of N.T. Where various readings render the exact
proportions doubtful a "<r." is placed in front of the fraction; e.g. c. .
In classes i and 2, when a reference to chapter and verse is given,
this is the only instance of the use of the word in that book or group.
(i) Expressions peculiar to & Luke and S. Paul in N.T.
S. LUKB.
S. PAUU
Gosp.
Acts.
Main.
Put
cLvff* c&j .
3
xll. 23
2 Th, ii. 10
dtroXoyetcrffcu
2
6
2
d,7r6 roC vvv .
5
xviiL6
2 Cor. v. 16
iiTevlfoiv .
2
10
2
*#ro7ror .
xxiii. 41
2
2 Th. iii. 2
5ta,7ro/)ei5e(r#at
3
rvi. 4
Rom. xv. 24
y/caXe?*> .
r6 elpyjjLtvQV
6
Rom. viii 33
Rom. IT. 18
^^a7ro<rr^X\ai'
3
7
2
tpyatrta
xii. 58
4
Eph. IT, 19
tyurrdvai .
7
II
I Th. T. 3
ft
*i)ffvxdfcti' .
s
2
I Th. iv, ii
/5oz> 7^ .
5
ix. II
2 Cor. vii ii
KaKovpyes *
3
s Tb*. H 9
JcaTCfyy^XXwi'
II
7
tcardyew ,
T. SI
7
Ron, x.6
/caravr^r .
9
4
e.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE
Iv
S. L
rjKR.
S. PA
UL.
Gosp,
Acts.
Main*
Past.
6 \6yot r. xvplov
oltcovo/jda ,
S
3
5
2Th. L 5
iTh.i.5
?lTim.L4
rtmlLi, It*
3
ii
3
I Cor. iv. 4
** Mf '
s
2
3
All the above are proportionately common in S. Luke's writings ; but there
are many more which illustrate the affinities between the two writers ; e.g.
dmjceurdcu .
dirooToXiJ .
&Tp(><rKOTOt
A/to, ; or &p& ;
xi,44
xxi. 34
xxi. 24
xxiii. 14
*$
3
xxiv. 25
VI. II
xiv. 12
xiv. 6
2
xviiiS
xvii. 7
L 4
xxiii. 41
vt 35
xxi. 34
v. 7
v- 33
2
xiii. 15
xriii. 14
5
? xxv. 21
2
xxv. 14
xxiv. 23
xxvi 19
3
2
XXVli.22
xxii. 16
xxiv. 16
viii. 3 30
v. 23
2
I Cor. xiv. 8
1 Th. v. 3
2
2 Cor. iii 14
5
10
2?
Phil. L 23
Philem. 12
Gal. v. 12
Gal ii. 2
4
3
Rom. xi. 9
Rom. ix. 20
4
Rom. L 30
Eph. vi 9
2
Rom. xi. 15
I Cor. vi. ii
3
2
2
GaL ii. 17
I Cor, ix. 10
1 Th. v. 3
2 Th. iii. 2
4
2
Phil. i. 4
2
2 Tim. in. 6
I Tim. iv. 13
2 Tim. iii. 9
I Tim. vi. 2
a Tim. iii. 2
1 Tim. i. 19
t Tim. HI 2
I Tim. vi. 9
I Tim. ii* I
Ivi
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
S, LUKB,
S. PAUL.
Gosp.
Acts.
Main.
Past
<JiayyAX? .
ix.6o
xxi 26
Rorn. ix. 17
Statpc'iif .
XV. 12
viL
i Cor. xii ii
Rom. xiii a
diepwvefatv'
xxiv. 27
ix. 36
4
d6yim . ,
ii. I
2
8
a
a Tim. iv. 7
5vvd<mjt \
i.52
viii. 27
i Tim, vi 15
l ft Kai .
xi 18
4
tfLtfrwflt
x, 40
Rom. x, 20
^vdo^Qf (
2
a
ey8tie(T0(u
xxiv. 49
14
v/caK:ei> .
xviii I
5
&VO/AOS
xix. 39
xxi. 5
i Cor. ix. ai
aTinuiiil7
i%Qvdve& .
2
iv. II
8
tfovo-lar. ffx6rwt
xxii. 53
Coi i. 13
eou<rideir .
xxii. 25
3
^iraim?
xvi. 8
4
eVava'jraiWtfai
x.6
Rom. ii 17
tirtxctp .
xiv. 7
*
Phil, ii 16
I Tim. Iv. 16
ne/ceta
xxiv. 4
3 Cor. x. I
&rtjU.e\tardai
3
I Tim, iii. 5
&r<rrcuns .
xxiv. 12
3 Cor, xi 28
&ri<j>alv& .
I 79
xxvii 20
a
eOa77\t<rr^f
xxi 8
Eph. iv. II
euycv/)!
xix. 12
xvii. n
I Cor. i. 26
cuo-e/SetF .
xvii. 23
i Tim, v. 4
^y r. TFeiJ/mn
xviii 25
Rom. xii ii
^y^i/a . ,
a
a
^ayypetK .
V. 10
aTim*iia6
*^"wo70v*y ,
xvii. 33
vii 19
i Tim. vi 13
Bfarpor *
2
xxii. 22
i Cor. iv. 9
Rom, i 28
SSSSSS:
i79
viii. 23
3
I Cor. xv. 30
/cparatoOcr^ou
2
a
icupieiJeiv .
xxii, 25
5
iTim.Ti!5
Ac/Tecv ss fell
xviii. 22
x
futfyrUjpecrBu .
xx. 26
a
fie&KTT&pai -ew
xvi. 4
a
a
ftedtio-KecrQcu
xii 45
a
/JltpLS . .
x.42
a
a
fiera.5tS&vat, .
iii n
4
yojM,o5t5d(r/caXof
v. 17
*. 34
i Tira, i 7
juxr^^etrftu ,
2
Tit ii 10
vovOereiv
xx. 31
7
evla . *
xxviii. 23
Philcm. aa
****** .
xxi. 24
a
6*j CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE
Ivii
S. LtTKB.
S. PAUL.
Gosp.
Acts.
Main.
Past
tooAKtfew
a
xix. 13
6
2 Tim. ii. 19
6TTTa<rla>
2
xxvi 19
2 Cor. xii I
OiTtonyf
tw
Eph. iv. 24
&lfr(i3VtiQW
iii 14
3
irdyu .
xxi 34
Rom. xi 9
3
TtLvoirXlck
xi 22
2
vavovpyia
xx. 23
4
vdvrtin
iv. 23
3
5
rapayyeXfa
2
I Th. iv. 2
2
vapcuricevdfeir
X. 10
3
7rapax^dffcu
2
I Cor. xvi. 6
Tit iii. 12
*irapoifre<r0cu
xvii 16
I Cor. xiii. 5
TTOipprj(nd^0'$cU:
7
2
TrarpLa ,
u 4
iii 25
Eph. iii. 15
veiOo.p'xeiv .
3
Tit iii i
vcplcpyos .
xix. 19
t Tim. v. 13
repuroicTcr8a4
*vii33
xx. 28
I Tim. iii, 13
irl rXeloy .
3
2
ir\iripo<pQpcir
i I
xxii. 28
Eph. ii. 12
2
ToXiretWftu
xxiii i
Phil, i 27
ropOeiv .
ix. 21
2
Trptafiirrtfx.g9
xxii 66
xxii 5
I Tim. iv. 14
vpecrpfrrijt *
i 18
Philem. 9
Tit. ii. 2
7TpO$f>T1f)t
vi 16
vii. 52
2 Tim. iii. 4
Tpoeiiray .
i 16
2
vpoOvfjila
xvii. ix
4
irpQiticiv
ii 31
Gal. iii. 8
VpOKOTTTtii 1 *
a 52
2
3
irp6voLct> m
xxiv. 2
Rom. xiii. 14
Tpooplfetr
iv. 28
s
W/)07rTTJS .
xix. 36
2 Tim. iii. 4
jcarA 7r/>6<rwrcw
31
2
2
f>a{3$lfUf ,
Xvi 22
2 Cor. xi. 25
ff^pacr/JA, .
xvii 23
aTh. ii. 4
ffKQTTGlV m
xi 35
5
<rrotx*t ir *
xxi 24
4
ffvyKaQtfav .
xxii. 55
Eph. ii 6
ffvyKXdew ,
v. 6
3
<riry%a(pe'
3
4
ffv/AJSifldfeiv
3
4
wvaim\at*,pdi>w
x.40
Rom. viii. 26
artivdecrfjLOS .
viii. 23
3 ...
wvtKdtfiiLQt
xix. 29
2 Cor. viii. 19
(rvvea-Oleiv .
XV. 2
xi. 3
4
<rvvevdoKtv .
xi. 48
2
3
crvvox/l *
xxi. 25
2 Cor. ii. 4
roraXar .
v. 6
I Cor. vii, 29
Iviii
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
S. LUKB.
S. PAUL.
Gosp,
Acts.
Main.
Past
<F(tJ/MLTlK6l
ill. 22
I Tim. iv. 8
r6 ffwr/iptov
a
xxviii. 28
Eph. vL 17
(raMppocruvtf
xxvi. 25
*
Terpdiroda.
2
Rom. i. 23
*T^p^fflS
3
I Cor. vii. 19
dovvat. r6vor
xiv. 9
2
OjSpts .
2
2 Cor. xii. IO
^TnJ/coos
vii 39
2
il'TrwTrt^eti'
xviii 5
I Cor. ix. 27
tiffrtpii/JUL
xxi. 4
8
5/>d<7Keu>
2
Rom. i. 22
<pi\at/9p(xnrl&
xxviii. 2
Tit ffl. 4
ipiXdpyvpos
xvi 14
2 Tim. iii. 2
<j>bpos .
a
2
<pp6vr}<rts
i.17
Eph. i. 8
XaptfcffQtu
3
4
15
^OLplTOVV
La8
Eph. i. 6
Xi,pOTOVUf
xiv. 23
2 Cor. viii. 19
Xpqff$04
2
7
f
(2) Expressions peculiar to S. Luke and S. Paul and the
Mpistle to the Hebrews.
Gosp.
Acts.
Main.
Past
Hch.
dvayKatot
16
[ii 19]
a
xix. 20
xrL 28
4
3
xvi 28
viii 47
XV. 22
7
9
3
4
a
ix.22
xxv. 24
viiiiS
adiia
3
4
a
aTh. i II
Coii 5
Phil, iii I
a Cor. xii S
I Hulv. 6
3
3
3
Rom. xv. 17
Tit iii 14
1 Tim. v. 17
2 Tim. ir. 8
3
iTim. vi 7
3
*
a Tim. i 10
viii 7
viii 3
x. 30
J
ix.27
vi 19
iii 12
ii6
ii II
Vi O
vii. 25
vi a
x. II
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE lix
Gosp.
Acts.
Main.
Past
Heb.
\cirovpyla ,
i-3
3
a
/AraXaft/3drfcr
4
2 Tim. ii 6
2
vvvl .
18?
PviiL 6
*6pletv .
xxii22
5
Rom. i. 4
iv. 7
irapatT0"0at
3
XXV. II
4
3
TrcLpdK\if)ffit
4
19
I Tim. iv. 13
3
fcptOttpfTv
2
2 Cor. iii 16
X. II
Trepitpxco-Qat
2
I Tim. v. 13
xi 37
(TK\1]pVVW
xix. 9
Rom. be. 1 8
4
rdfct .
1. 8
2
6
*fcro<rTAXeu'
35
5
2
Gal. ii 12
2 Tim. ii 10
2
x.38
xptw
iv. 18
2
2 Cor. i 21
i9
(3) Expressions peculiar to S. LukJs Writings and to the
Epistle to the Hebrews.
J, ir6pp<i)6ey% t
affrdarc
inLXX.
, els rh
, ^<7wre/>or, and
Excepting fo
s, all the above are
(4) Expressions not found in the other Gospels and more frequent
in S. LukJs Writings than in all the rest of IV. T.
r. V, i Xctyoy roO
, fjLc0urrdvat^ t jul/n?$, /u,it)v* t dirb TOV vvv{,
(excluding rd
f, *^7roXa/A/3d'eiv^, viro(rTpt<piv* : and several others
which occur twice in Luke and once elsewhere. All of these occur in LXX,
(5) Expressions found in one or more of the other Gospels, but mon
frequent in S. LukJs Writings than in all the rest of N.T.
ITT* d
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 8.
ci Se /*YXe, els cKourrosI, ctcrayeivf,
ev rats rj/Jiepais y|, /ca0* ^/xe'pav 1 ^, 0ctt>/uieiv 7riy, * ia,<r@ai yy
ydpy, i
Aav -5-, icoAAacr$ai-y, Kovtoprosy, /cpe/Aa)v|-, Kracr^at|-,
6
/caracal Aav -5-, icoAAacr$ai-y, Kovtoprosy, /cpe/Aa)v|-, Kracr^at|-, iccaX-uetv yy,
7Ttt5 6 AdOS"?^, fJLCyaX \)V.W ^, */U,OrOVVKTt0^y, /Al^y/za^, VO/JLt'^Ct^^-, VOfLl-
/cos ^-, 17 OLKOVjULGVY] y, ovo/xaTi ^ , op$o>s y, Trai/Ta^ov |^, i7reiv or Acy etv
TrapoLfBoXr^v Y"* ira,paylv<r0ai ^. 2 ^, ^irapaT^petvl-, irapaxprjiJLa 1 ^*, Trept-
p(a)pos^, -Tnjpa^, TrXyOeiv*-/) ^irXfjOos^-f, TrXtjv^, * Tr\irj pys -*Y > ^P ^-
So/cotv 1 ^ 1 , TrpocrTt^erat^, 7rpocr<jf>a)i/etvy, puft^y, (raAevai/f, o-racrts|-,
Sia o"TOjM,aro5y, (rrpe<ecr#(Uy, ory/caAer^y, crvAAaAetv^, *<rvAAa/-t-
Tao-crciv <r.f, rcrpap^s y, rts
Excepting d/cpt^co-repov, a^>eorts d/x,aprta>i/, e^aur?}?, oi/d/Aart,
and Tis ef v/tcur, all the above are found in LXX.
To these may be added a few which are specially frequent in
Luke's writings, although not in excess of the rest of N.T. taken
together: apxr#<u!-|, a^ot <r.-||> ^^(eor^at-||-, eTriracrcreivf, 6 Aoyo?
rot) oOyg-, A.v^vos|-, TTapayyeAActVy J-, Trpoo-xtTrretv-j-, TrpocrSexeor^aty,
o"x^iv^, Tpc^etK^, rpo^T/l, x^P ? twenty-five times In Lk. and Acts,
not in Mt or ML, and only thrice in Jn.
Phrases which indicate the expression of emotion are unusually
common, and belong to the picturesqueness of Luke's style ; <?.*.
<o/?os //.eyasy, x a P^ /*yaA?7 or TroAA^ *-, <jj>cov?y yaeyaA?/ ^.
Equally remarkable is his fondness for dv7/p, where others have
ros or efs or nothing. Thus, vi. 8 ro> dvSpt, Mt. and Mk. rw
dv<9po)7ra>; viil, 27 d^p rts, Mk. dv^pcuTros ; IX. 38 cunfp, Mt. dv^pwTros,
Mk, els; xxiii. 50 di/^p, Mt. avOpMiro^ Mk. nothing. Comp. v. 8,
12, 1 8, viii. 38, ix. 30, xxii. 63 : and the word is very much more
frequent in Lk. than in all the other Gospels together.
The expression Trats avrov or crov in the sense of "God's servant"
is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (i. 54, 69 ; Acts iii. 13, 26, iv. 25, 27, 30),
with the exception of Mt xii. 18, which is a quotation from Is,
xlil i.
(6) Expressions frequent in S, Lukjs Writing* and probably
due to Hebrew Influence.
The frequent use of lylvcro is discussed at the end of ch. i
Add to this Luke's fondness for v<o7rt,oi/, which does not occur
in Mt or Mk. and only once in Jn. (xx. 30). It is found more
than thirty times in Lk. and Acts, especially in the phrase iv&Trwv
oi) (L 19, 75, xii. 6, xvi. 15) or xvptov (I. 15). *VV5th this com-
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE bd
pare irpo irpocrtoTrov TH/OS (vii. 27, ix. 52, x. l) and Kara, irpocro*
TTOV TWOS (iL 31). The frequent use of tSov (i. 38, ii. 34, 48,
vii. 25, 27, 34, etc.) and /cal tSou (i. 20, 31, 36, ii. 25, v. 12, vii. 12,
37, etc.); of pi} //.a for the matter of what is spoken (i. 65, ii. 15,
X 9> 5*)> of oticos in the sense of "family" (i. 27, 33, 69, ii. 4,
x. 5, xix. 9); of *<s in the sense of rts (v. 12, 17, viii. 22, xiii. 10,
xx. i) or of 7rpam> (xxiv. i); of v^to-ros for "the Most High"
(i. 32, 35, 76, vi. 35), illustrates the same kind of influence. So
also do such expressions as Troizlv IXeos /x-cra (i. 72, x. 37)
and /j,yaX,vviv eXcos /xera (i. 58) ; -TTOLGIV Kparos (i. 51) ; IK
KotXias jjLfjrpos (i. 15); combinations with lv TTJ KapSia or Iv
rats *., such as SiaXoyecrftu (iii. 15, v. 22 ; comp. xxiv. 38), Siar??-
piv (ii. 51), 6e<r6ai (L 66, xxi. 14), o-vvftdXXew (ii. 19); cv rats
^c'pais (i. 5, 39, ii. i, iv. 2, 25, v. 35, etc.); r# ^c'pa rov <ra-
fidrov (xiii. 14, 16, xiv. 5); with perhaps Sia o-royuaros (i. 70),
where both the expression and the omission of the article seem to
be Hebraistic : in LXX we commonly have, however, kv rw crrd/Atm
or /c rov crrojuctros. Nearly all these expressions are found in the
Acts also, in some cases very often. The frequent use of peri-
phrastic tenses has been pointed out "above (p. Ii) as being due
in many cases to Hebraistic influence. The same may be said of
the attributive or characterizing genitive, which is specially common
in Luke (iv. 22, xvi, 8, 9, xviii. 6; comp. x. 6, xx. 34, 36);
and of the frequent use of /cat aurds (ii. 28, v. i, 17, viii. i, 22,
xvii. n, xix. 2), KCU a-uT-j; (ii. 37), and KCU avrot (xiv. i, xxiv, 14)
after eycVero, feat tSov, and the like. Phrases like Bo^d^iv TOV
edv (v. 25, 26, vii. 16, xiiL 13, xvii. 15, xviii. 43, xxiii, 47), 6
Xdyos roO eov (v. I, viii. II, 21, xi. 28), and csratpeii/ ryv
<t>tovyv (xi. 27) may be placed under the same head; and they all
of them occur several times in the Acts.
In common with other N.T. writers S. Luke uses several
Hebrew words, which may be mentioned here, although they are
not specially common in his writings: ap,iqv (iv. 24, xu. 37, xviii.
17, etc.), /Jce^ov'X (xi. 15, 18, 19), yiewo. (xii. 5), it fox* (ii 41,
xxii. i, 7, 8, ii, 13, 15), o-d/Sparov (iv, 16, 31, vi. i, 2, 5, & 7, 9,
etc.), o-aravas (x. 18, xi. 18, xiii. 16, etc.). Three others occur
once in his Gospel and nowhere else in N.T. ; /3dro<s (xvi 6),
*cd|pos (xvi. 7;* ori/ccpa (i. 15). Other words, although Greek in
origin, are used by him, as by other N.T. writers, in a sense which
is due to Hebrew influence; ayycXos (i. ii, 13, 18, etc), yp*!*,-
//.arais (v. 21, 30, vi* 7, ix. 22, eta), Sta/JoXos (iv. 2-13, viii. 12),
I0V72 (ii. 32, xviii. 32, xxi. 24 3/j, etc.), dpr^vq (i. 79, ii. 29,, vii. ?o,
etc.), Kvpios (i. 6, 9, ii, 15, etc.); and e^jiwpia (L 5, 8) is
irord specially formed to express a Hebrew idea.
ixii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 6,
(7) Miscellaneous Expressions and Constructions which are
specially frequent in S. Luke's Writings.
In his use of the article he has several favourite constructions.
He is very fond of lv r<3 followed by a present infinitive to express
time during which (i. 8, 21, ii. 6, 43, v. i, 12, viii. 5, 42, etc.) or
by an aorist infinitive to express time after which (ii. 27, iii. 21,
ix. 34, 36, xi. 37, etc.); also of rot) with an infinitive to express
purpose or result (i. 73, ii. 27, v. 7, xii. 42, etc.). He frequently
employs TO to introduce a whole clause, especially interrogations,
much as we use inverted commas (i. 62, ix. 46, xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4,
23, 24, 37).
In the case of certain verbs he has a preference for special
constructions. After verbs of speaking, answering, and the like
he very often has irpos and the accusative instead of the simple
dative. Thus, we have dirziv Trpos (i. 13, 18, 28, 34, 61, ii. 15,
34,^48, 49, etc.), AoXctv a-posji. 19,^55, & i8> 20, xii. 3,^etc.), Xcy*"'
7T/30S (iv. 21, v. 36, vii. 24, viii. 25, ix, 23, etc.), airoKpivea-Oai TT/>OS
(iv. 4, vi. 3, xiv. 5), yoyyvy Trpos (v. 30), crwtqTclv TT^OS (xxii. 23),
o-wXaXctv 7T/005 (iv. 36). It often happens that where Mt or Mk
has the dative, Luke has the accusative with irpos (Mt. ix. 1 1 ; Mk
ii. 16; Lk. v. 30). Whereas others prefer cgepxecrOat l/c, he hat
e&px*<r6<u OLTTO (iv. 35, 41, v. 8, viii. 2, 29, 33, 35, 38, ix. 5, etc.),
and for QQ.VHO.&W TL he prefers Oavpd&iv ITTI nvi (ii. 33, iv. 22,
IX. 43, XX. 26). For OepaTrevew vocrov? he sometimes has Oeparreuziv
dTTo v&vw (v. 15, vii. 21, viii* 2). He is fond of the infinitive after
&a TO (ii. 4, viii. 6, ix. 7, xi. 8, xviii. 5, etc.), fiTa TO (xii. 5, xxii
20), and irpb TOV (ii. 21, xxii. 15). The quite classical lx lv Tt ^
common (vii. 42, ix. 58, xi. 6, xii. 17, 50, xiv. 14). His use of the
optative has been mentioned above (p. Ii),
Participles with the article often take the place of substantives
(ii. 27, iv. 1 6, viii. 34, xxii. 22, xxiv. 14). They are frequently
added to verbs in a picturesque and classical manner ; dvacrravTcs
e/2aAov (iv. 29), KaOicras eSiScur/cev (v. 3), crra^as eAreXewrcv (xviii.
40), <rrpa<jUis cTreTtft^crcv (ix. 55), etc. Tney are sometimes strung
together without a conjunction (ii. 36, iv. 35, v. ii, 19, 25, etc.).
S. Luke is very fond of ira<$, and especially of the stronger
form aTras. It is not always easy to determine which is the right
reading; but a?ras is certainly very common (iii 21, iv. 6, v, 26,
viii. 37, ix. 15, xix. 37, 48, xxiii. i; also in Acts), Elsewhere in
N.T. aTras is rare. Not unfrequently Luke has way or &ras where
the others have nothing (iii. 15, 16, 21, iv. 37, v. it, 28, vi, 4, 10,
17, 19, 30, vii. 35, etc.). TTCIS 6 Xaos and anus o X. are very freq.
In the use of certain prepositions he has some characteristic
expressions : cts ra &ra (i. 44, ix. 44]) and ts r&s &coas (vii i), cv
oxrtv (iv. 21) and cv /xcVy (iL 46, viii. 7, x 3,xxL ai xadt 27, 55,
8.J CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE ixiii
xxiv. 36) ; Kara ro 20o (L 9, ii. 42, xxii. 39), TO tldtarpivw (n* 27),
TO o#os (iv. 16), TO tlprjptvov (ii. 24), and TO upivnevov (xxii 22) ;
vapa TOVS TroSas (vii. 38, viii. 35, 41, xvii. 16), whereas Mark has
*pds T. ?rd8as (v. 22, vii. 25). Luke is very fond of crvi>, which
is rather rare in the other Gospels but is very frequent in both of
Luke's writings. Sometimes he has <n/i> where the others have
/ira (viii. 38, 51, xxii. 14, 56) or /cat (xx. i) or nothing (v. 19).
The pronouns avrds (see below) and o&ros are specially common.
The latter is added to a numeral, rpCrrjv ravrrjv yp.epav (xxiv. 21),
to make it more definite, rk * V Sv > is almost peculiar to him
(xi. 5, xii. 25, xiv. 28, xv. 4, xvii. 7), and so also is 's ccmv ovros
os; (v. 21, vii. 49). The indefinite rts with nouns is freq.
In using conjunctions he is very fond of combining Se with /cat,
a combination which occurs twenty-six times in his Gospel (ii. 4,
iii 9, 12, iv. 41, v. 10, 36, vi. 6, ix. 61, etc.) and seven in the Acts,
It is rare in the other Gospels. His Hebraistic use of icat avros,
avn; or avrot, and of KOL 26W, to introduce the apodosis to eye^cro
and the like, has been pointed out above (p. Ixi). But Luke is
also fond of xat avros at the beginning of sentences or independent
clauses (i. 17, 22, iii. 23, iv. 15, v. 37, vi. 20, xv. 14, etc.), and
of /cai OVTOS, which is peculiar to him (i. 36, viii. 41 ?, xvL i,
xx. 28). In quoting sayings he most frequently uses S<, and el-rev
& occurs forty-six times in the Gospel and fourteen in the Acts.
It is not found in Mt. or Mk., and perhaps only once in Jn.
(xii. 6 [viii. n,l ix. 37 ?) : they prefer 6 fe ctTrev, or ml Aeyei, K.T.X.
Luke also has cXcyev oe nine times in the Gospel ; it occurs twice
in Mk., once in Jn., and never in Mt. Five times he begins a
sentence with KCLL o>$ (temporal), which is not found elsewhere in
N.T. (xv. 25, xix. 41, xxii. 66, xxiii. 26; Acts i. 10). The inter-
rqsfLtive ct is found eighteen times in Gospel and Acts (vi. 7, 9,
xiii. 23, xiv. 28, 31, xxii. 49, 67, etc.), et Sc/x^ye five times, and ct
apa twice. All of these are comparatively rare elsewhere.
The idiomatic attraction of the relative is very common in both
books (i. 4, ii. 20, iii. 19, v. 9, ix 36, 43, xii. 46, xv. 16, xix. 37,
etc.) ; it is rare in Mt. and Mk., and is not common in Jn.
After TOVTO he has OTI in Gospel and Acts (x. 1 1, xiL 39, etc.) ;
Mt. and Mk. never ; Jn. only after Sta TOVTO.
He is fond of combinations of cognate words> e.g. <vAaVcrovTas
as (ii. 8), tyoprjOyo-av $Q/3ov /Aeyav (ii. 9), /2a7rrr6 l 6'Tes TO j@dV-
(vii. 29), 17 dcrrpaTT^ dcrrpaTTTovo-a (xvii. 24). Some of these
aie Hebraistic, especially such as iri0u/u ^Ovpjj^a (xxii 15).
(8) Expressions probably or possibly medical.
It was perhaps not until 1841 that attention was called to the
existence of medical phraseology in the writings of S. Luke. In the
Ixiv THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [g 6
Gentleman 's Magazine for June 1841 a paper appeared on the
subject, and the words a^A^s (Acts xiii. n), KpanraXri (Lk. xxi. 34),
TrapaAeA-uyueVos (v. 1 8, 24; Acts viii. 7, ix. 33), -Trapofucr^os (Acts
XV. 39), <rw<r)(o/jievi7 Tupero) /jceya/Xa) (Lk. iv. 38), and uSpooTn/cos
(xiv. 2) were given as instances of technical medical language.
Since then Dr. Plumptre and others have touched on the subject ;
and in 1882 Dr. Hobart published his work on The Medical
Language of St. Luke, Dublin and London. He has collected
over 400 words from the Gospel and the Acts, which in the main
are either peculiar to Luke or are used by him more often than
by other N.T. writers, and which are also used (and often very
frequently) by Greek medical writers. He gives abundant quota-
tions from such writers, that we may see for ourselves ; and the
work was well worth doing. But there can be no doubt that the
number of words in the Gospel and the Acts which are due to
the Evangelist's professional training is something very much less
than this. It may be doubted whether there are a hundred such
words. But even if there are twenty-five, the fact is a considerable
confirmation of the ancient and universal tradition that " Luke the
beloved physician " is the author of both these books. Of
Dr. Hobart's long list of words more than eighty per cent are
found in LXX, mostly in books known to S. Luke, and sometimes
occurring very frequently in them. In all such cases it is more
reasonable to suppose that Luke's use of the word is due to his
knowledge of LXX, rather than to his professional training. In
the case of some words, both of these causes may have been at
work. In the case of others, the medical training, and not famili-
arity with LXX, may be the cause. But in most cases the prob-
ability is the other way. Unless the expression is known to be
distinctly a medical one, if it occurs in books of LXX which were
known to Luke, it is probable that his acquaintance with the ex-
pression in LXX is the explanation of his use of it If the expres-
sion is also found in profane authors, the chances that medical
training had anything to do with Lk.'s use of it become very
remote. It is unreasonable to class as in any sense medical such
words as a#potai/ f OLKQIJ, avcupetv, ^vaXa/i/^avctF, avop#ovv, aTratrav,
uTraAXacrcrav, twToXucii/, aTropctv, a<r<aAex, a$e<ri$, etc, etc. All of
these are frequent in LXX, and some of them in profane authors
also.
Nevertheless, when Dr, Hobart's list has been well sifted, there
still remains a considerable number of words, the occurrence or
frequency of which in S. Luke's writings may very possibly be due
to the fact of his being a physician. The argument is a cumulat-
ive one. Any two or three instances of coincidence with medical
writers may be explained as mere coincidences: but the large
cumber of coincidences renders this explanation unsatisfactory for
6.] CHARACTERISTICS, STYLE, AND LANGUAGE Ixv
all of them ; especially where the word is either rare in LXX, or
not found there at all.
The instances given in the Gentleman's Magazine require a
word of comment. Galen in treating of the diseases of the eye
gives a^yXt)? as one of them, and repeatedly uses the word, which
occurs nowhere else in N.T. or LXX. Perhaps /cpatTraX??, which
in bibl. Grk. is found Lk. xxi. 34 only, is a similar instance. It
occurs more than once in Aristophanes, but is frequent in medical
writers of the nausea which follows excess. In TrapaAeAv/xeros we
have a stronger instance. Whereas the other Evangelists use
'jrapaAirr/./cds, Luke in harmony with medical usage has TrapoAeAi;-
fteVo?, as also has Aristotle, a physician's son (Etk. Nic. i. 13. 15).
But this use may come from LXX, as in Heb. xii. 12. That Trapo-
fuayx-Qs is a medical term is indisputable ; but as early as Demos-
thenes it is found in the sense of exasperation, as also in LXX
*Deut. xxix. 28 ; Jer. xxxix. [xxxii.] 37). The instance in Lk. iv. 38
as perhaps a double one : for <rov^^ivt) is possibly, and TruperoJ
/leyoXw probably, a medical expression. Moreover, here Mt. and
Mk. have merely Trvpeo-crovo-a, and in Acts xxviii. 8 we have the
parallel Truperot? KCU Svcrei/Tcpta <rvv6)(ofjLvov t In rSpwTriKos we have
a word peculiar to Luke in bibL Grk. and perhaps of purely
medical origin.
By adopting doubtful or erroneous readings Hobart makes other instances
double, e.g. ^ir^irecrev for girevev (Acts xiii. Il), (3cLpvvQ&c'w for fiapyQuxrw (Lk.
xxi. 34). Again, whether or no avMrrfoveiv has any medical flavour, Lk.
iv. 17 must not be quoted in connexion with it, for there the true reading is
To the examples given in the Gentlemarfs Magazine may per-
haps be added such instances as Sa/cruAa> Trpoo-^auav (xi. 46), where
Mt. has BaKT-vXto Kwfjcrai: Sta Tpif/Aaros /SeAoV^s (xviii. 25^, where Mk.
has BLOL Tpv/x,aAtas pa<tSos : co-ny fj pvcris rov aipa/ros (viii. 44), where
Mk. has Ir}pav8rj f) TT^y-J) r. alfj.aro's \ rT/oe<o6fycrav at ySacrsis avrou
KCU ra <r<f>vSpd (Acts iii. 7) ; and more doubtfully oQovrjv Tcoro-apcrtv
apxcus KaOitfievov (Acts x. n) and ave/ca&o-ev (vii. 14; Acts ix. 40).
Luke alone relates what may be called the surgical miracle of
the healing of Malchus* ear (xxii. 51). And perhaps the marked
way in which he distinguishes demoniacal possession from disease
(vi. 18, xiii. 32 ; Acts xix. 12) may be put down to medical train-
ing. His exactness in stating how long the person healed had been
afflicted (xiii. n ; Acts ix. 33) and the ag6 of the person healed
(viii. 42 ; Acts iv. 22) is a feature of the same kind* For other
possible instances see notes on iv. 35, v. 12, vii. 10.
The coincidences between the preface of the Gospel and the
opening words of some medical treatises are remarkable (see small
print, pp. 5, 6). Arid it is worth noting that Luke alone records
Christ's quotation of the proverb, *Iarp, Otpdrtwrar <rcavr<?
ixvi
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO 8. LUKE
(w. 23) ; and that almost the last words that he records in the
Acts are S. Paul's quotation from Is. vi., which ends Kal tocro/ioi
awrovs (xxviii. 26, 27).
The following table will illustrate some characteristics of S.
Luke's diction as compared with that of the other Synoptists :
S. L0KK.
iii. 9. W<n 3* K&L
iii. 22. rdrv. r6 4*y
iii. 22. Aeoyi
S. MATTHEW.
S. MARK.
iiL 10.
iii. 1 6. irvevfJui 8eo0.
iii. 17. #wHj 4t r.
vu
\i. 2,
iv. 5, S.
L xa
i. II.
At r.
viii. 4. ical \tytt & L?<ro0t.
iz. 2.
tXw
ix. 7.
ix.8.
fac. 9, Ma^dacov Xfya/tlwr.
riL ^a r6 6&i)fM r. rar-
xiii 7. rfrl rij dxdv^at,
xiii. 19. r, Xiyo^ r. ^<i-
xiii. 20.
xiii. 21.
v. 15* KQ-lownv \&xy<nf,
viii. 21.
viii 30.
toXXwr.
ix, 1 8.
t awry.
X 14.
vi, 1^
iv. 12.
iv, 1 8.
iv. 20.
viii. 2. XeTrpdy rpoffc\9&i>
L 14.
i 16.
i. 1 8.
i. 40. Xtfir/)ds
i44-
ii, 3. $fyorrt* TpAt adrii'
'T iT
ili2.
ii. 14.
iii. 35
rd fffiujpa T.
iv. 7.
lv. 14.
iv. 16,
iv. 17.
iv. 38. dt$d<rKa\e.
r. 7. p*/iw <re.
dXi;.
v. 22, tpxcrcu els T&V dp-
Xt<rwa7c&7Wic /eal
vp&t ro>i ir65af aurov.
T. 23,
29.
.
vi, ii.
.
viii. 29*
IV. i.
5, 9.
iv. 14.
y, I.
v. ii. &$frrS rdpreu
v. 12. dy^p r
X^rpar rccr^y <?ri
anrov * 8 a 1 ) 8 7) ai/roD.
v. 14.
v. 25*
acrr&y
v. 26.
/9ou.
v. 27. (J
viii. 21.
viii. 7*
u>.
viii. n.
viii. 13.
viii. 13.
viii. 1 6.
viii. 24.
viii. 28.
viii. 32.
avwy.
viii 41,
l <rov,
18 oft
dvfyp Kal o0ros
ffwayaryfy ^wrj
Teo'tij' rctpA ron)*
r l^<ro0.
viii, 42, Kal
^viycrjce?.
viii. 44. ir
I^Tiy ij ^(TtJ.
ix* 5,
UL 20. etrt r 14
/cat
otirl-
7.]
THE INTEGRITY OF THE THIRD GOSPEL
kvii
& MATTHEW.
20.
xvii. 4. *t?/xe.
xvii. 16.
xvii. 1 8.
rats.
xix. 13.
xxii. 1 8. 7701)1 T
ip&w'.
xxvi. 20. /M*r4 r.
xxvi. 27.
xxvi. 29. od fi4j dr* Apri.
xxvi. 41. ypnjyof**
xxvi. 64. dr
xxvii. 2.
aptfuicav IlctXdry.
xxvii. 13.
xxvii. 57. foepwrot r\a6-
0f,
xxviii. 8. droXltaftrai . . .
rott
S. MAUL
riii 30.
ix. I.
ix. 5. 'Paj3j3e(.
ix. 18,
ix. 27.
x. 13. ratfta.
xii. 15.
xiv. 17. fttrbruv MSeica.
xiv. 23.
xiv. 25.
xv. I.
Tapt&uicar IletXdry.
xv. 4.
XT. 43.
S. LUKE.
2x. 21. faiTtju.'ficr
yci\cr.
ix. 27. X^yw ^
rap
ix. 33.
ix. 40.
ix. 42. idaaro
xviii. 15. rd ftp t<f>y,
xx. 23.
xxii. 14. ol d7r6<rroXoi
os.
6 rov
xxii. 17.
xxii. 18.
xiv. 38. ypiftopetrt /col xxii. 46.
<o2
xxii. 69. d'o rcy vvv.
xxiii. I.
i r. ]Ifc>6,i ov.
xxiii. 9. i/Bijoiio ^ X<5-
701? f/cayoij,
xxiii. 50. xai 'Fob utvrjp
1.,
xvi. 8. #eX0oC<r<tt
xxiv. 9.
7o rots
tv rott \>u ret* 1 ,
jral
These are only specimens taken from a large lumber of
instances, and selected for their brevity and the ease witi vhkb
they admit of comparison. The student who has mustered ta?
main features of Luke's style will be able to fird many nor*- iv
himselt
S 7, THE INTEGRITY OF THE THIRD GOSPEL,
This question maybe regarded as naturally following ih^ cis-
cussion of S. Luke's peculiarities and characteristics, for ii is bv a
knowledge of these that we are able to solve it. The quests ha^
been keenly debated during the last forty years, and may now o^
said to be settled, mainly through the exertions cf ^olkmat,
Hilgenfeld, and Sanday. Dr. Sanday's article m the Fortnight^
Review > June 187 5, in answer to Supernatural Religion^ was p*o-
nounced by Bishop Lightfoot to be "able and (as it seems to m^
unanswerable" (On Sup. Rel. p. 186). This article was incoj 1
Ixviii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 7.
porated in The Gospels in the Second Century, Macmillan, 1896,
now unfortunately out of print, and it remains unanswered. It is
now conceded on all sides 1 that Marcion's Gospel does not
represent the original S. Luke, and that our Third Gospel has
not been largely augmented and interpolated, especially by the
addition of the first three chapters and the last seven verses ; but
that Marcion's Gospel is an abridgment of our S. Luke, which
therefore was current before Marcion began to teach in Rome in
or before A.D. 140. The statements of early Christian writers (not
to be accepted as conclusive without examination) have been
strongly confirmed, and it is right to speak of Marcion's Gospel as
a " mutilated " or " amputated " edition of S. Luke.
Irenseus says of Marcion: id quod est secundum Liicam evcmgelntm
circumcidens (i. 27. 2, iii. 12. 7); and again: Marcion et qm ab eo sunt, ad
intercidendas couversi sunt Scripturas, qnasdam quideni in tot um non <,og-
noscentes, secundum Lucam autem evangdium et epitfolas Pattli deiwtanUs,
hcsc sola legitima esse dicunf, qua: ipsi niitwraverunt (iii. 12. 12). Similarly
Tertullian : Qms tarn comesor mus Ponticus quam qiu evangelic* corrosit?
{Adv* Marcion. i. i). Marcion evangeho suo nullum adsi,nbit auctorem,
. . . ex Us commentatoribus qiios habemus Liuam videtur JMarcion elcgi^ss
qiiem ccederet (ibid. iv. 2) . Epiphanius also : 6 fjv yap xa/xx/cr?}/) rov /caret, Aou/cav
r^Xosr, I/barton fieppu/jL^vov inrb TroXXwi' o"r}r&v TTXL rov rpbirov (^ffizr. i. 3, H,
Migne, xli. 709). Epiphanius speaks of additions, ra 5 Trpoa-Ttd^a-Lv : but these
were very trifling, perhaps only some two or three dozen words.
The evidence of Tertullian and Epiphanius as to the contents
of Marcion's Gospel is quite independent, and it can be checked
to some extent by that of Irenaeus. Their agreement is remark-
able, and we can determine with something like certainty and
exactness the parts of the Third Gospel which Marcion omitted ;
not at all because he doubted their authenticity, but because he
disliked their contents. They contradicted his> doctrine, or did
not harmonize well with it, or in some other way displeased him.
In this arbitrary manner he discarded i. ii. and iii. excepting iii. i,
with which his Gospel began. Omitting iii. 2-iv. 13, 17-20, 24,
he went on continuously to xi. 28. His subsequent omissions
were xi. 29-32, 49-51, xiii. 1-9, 29-35, xv. 11-32, xvii. 5-10,
xviii. 31-34, xix, 29-48, xx. 9-18, 37, 38, xxi. 1-4, 18, 21, ? 2 ,
xxii. 1 6 1 8, 28-30, 35-38, 49-51, xxiv. 47-53. Perhaps he also
omitted vii. 29-35 ; and he transposed iv. 27 to xvii. 18.
It should be observed that not only does Marcion's Gospel
1 An exception must be made of the author of The Four Gospels as
Historical Records, Norgate, 1895, pp. 93-95. The work is retrograde, and
rakes together criticisms and positions which have been rendered impotent and
untenable. One is tempted to apply to it the author's own words (respecting a
volume of very real merit and ability, which has rendered signal service to the
cause of truth), that it "maybe said, without much injustice, to bvg every
question with which it deals " (p. 491).
7.J THE INTEGRITY OF THE THIRD GOSPEL Ixix
contain nearly all the sections which are peculiar to Luke, but it
contains them in the same order. Where Luke inserts something
into the common tradition, Marcion has the insertion \ where Luke
omits, Marcion omits also. This applies in particular to "the
great intercalation" (ix. 5i-xviii. 14) as well as to smaller
insertions; and this minute agreement, step by step, between
Marcion and Luke renders the hypothesis of their independence
incredible. The only possible alternatives are that Marcion has
expurgated our Third Gospel, or that our Third Gospel is an
expansion of Marcion's; and it can be demonstrated that the
second of these is untenable.
(1) In most cases we can see why Marcion omitted what his
Gospel did not contain. He denied Christ's human birth;
therefore the whole narrative of the Nativity and the genealogy
must be struck out. The Baptism, Temptation, and Ascension
involved anthropomorphic views which he would dislike. All
allusions to the O.T. as savouring of the kingdom of the Demiurge
must be struck out. And so on. ,In this way most of the
omissions are quite intelligible. The announcement of the
Passion (xviii. 31-34) and the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, etc.
(xix. 29-48), were probably disliked as being fulfilments of O.T.
prophecy. It is lest> easy to see Marcion's objection to the
Prodigal Son (xv. 11-32) and the massacre of Galileans, etc.
(xiii. 1-9) ; but our knowledge of his strange tenets is imperfect,
and these passages probably conflicted with some of them. But
sfcch changes as "all the righteous" for "Abraham and Isaac and
Jacob and all ihe prophets" (xiii. 28), or "the Lord's words" for
"the law" (xvi. 17), or "those whom the god of that world shall
account worthy " for " they that are accounted worthy to attain to
that world" (xx. 35), are thoroughly intelligible. Others which his
critics supposed to be wilful depravations of the text are mere
differences of reading found in other authorities ; e.g. the omission
of alwtov (x. 25} and of v pepurrrjv (xii. 14) ; and the insertion of
JCCLI KaraXvovra rov VOJJLOV KCLL rows irpotfrvjras (xxiii. 2),
(2) But the chief evidence (in itself amounting to something
like demonstration) that Marcion abridged our S. Luke, rather
than the Evangelist expanded Marcion, is found in the peculiarii" -s
and characteristics of Luke's style and diction. These run through
our Gospel from end to end, and on the average are as frequent in
the portions which Marcion omitted as in the rest. In the first
two chapters they are perhaps somewhat more frequent than else-
where. It is quite incredible that the supposed interpolator made
a minute analysis of the style and diction of Marcion's Gospel,
practised himself in it, and then added those portions of our
Gospel which Marcion did not include in his Gospel : and that he
accomplished this feat without raising a suspicion. Such a feat in
hoc THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ a
that age would have been a literary miracle. Only those who
have worked through the passages expunged by Marcion, carefully
marking what is peculiar to Luke or characteristic of him, can
estimate the full force of this argument. But the analysis of a few
verses will be instructive.
The dotted lines indicate that the expression is found more
often in Luke's writings than in the rest of N.T., and the fraction
indicates the proportion: e.g. the with KafleiXev means that
KaOaiptw occurs six times in Lk. and Acts, and three elsewhere in
the rest of N.T. The plain lines indicate that the expression is
peculiar to Luke in N.T., and the figure states the number of
times in which it occurs in his writings : e.g. icara TO f0o occurs
thrice in Lk. and Acts, and nowhere else in N.T.
-J Svvaaras cwro 0p6Va>v, KCU vi^cocrev rcwroyovs,
dya#uiv, /cat 7rA.ourovVras c^aTretrrctXcv ^ jcevovs. dvrcXa-
ptro "lo-paT/A. TratSos-j- avVov, fJLVrja-Oijvai eXe'ov? (jcaflws eXaXTytrtv
Trpos TOVS Trarepas ^uoiv) T<3 "A/?paa/* KOLI r<3 OTTfp/xart avrov ft? TOV
ataJi^a. E/itVv Si Mapta/x. crvv -J-| avr we /"pas ^ rpcts, /<al
VTT(TTp^V ^ 15 TOV ot/COV ttVT^? (L 5256).
Kal 7ropevovTO ot yovet? avrov /car* cros-J-J <fe *Icpov<raX^/A T^
opr]7 rov irda^a. ical 5rc cyevcro T<3v|-J- ScaSexa, ava/Baivovrtav
avraJv Kara TO ^053 ^^ copras, *cat reXetoxravrcay Ta
CV T<3 V7TOOTpC<j!)tV S ^ avTOVS V7T/XtVV "iTyCTOVJ 6 ITttlS
Kat ou/c ^yvcuo-av ot yovets avroi)' vo^,to*avrS J- Se avrov
ctvai iJAflov ^/Jtepas 68ov, Kal dvc^^row 3 avrov Iv TOW <rvyyvco'i /cat
rots 2 yrcooTors* y 1 icai ^ cvpo^rcs virecrrpe^aF ^ cJ
dva^rovi/rcs 3 avrov. icat jfycvero ft^* ^/xcpas Tpcts, cvpov a-vrov Iv
ra> tpu>, Ka&f^QfJLCvov v fteo*<j> roiv SiSaovcaA.fcH', /cat (iicovovra ai/ro>v, /cai
eTrcpcoTanra avrovs* cf icrravro ^ Si TraVrcs ot djcovovrf cvroS iirl
rfj crw<r4 jcat TO4 dvoicptcrcartv avrov (iL 41-47).
I 8. THE TEXT.
The authorities quoted for the various reading* are taken from
different sources, of which Tischendorf s Nov. Ttst. Grt* vol. L
ed. 8, Lipsiae, 1869, and Sanday's Aff. ad^N&v. Test Step^
Oxonii, 1889, are the chief. The Patristic evidence has been in
many cases verified. Gregory's Prolegomena to Tischendorf
Lipsiae, 1884-94, and Mille?s edition of Scrivener's Introduction
to fhe Criticism of N.T. % Bell, 1894, must be consulted by those
who desire more complete information respecting the authorities.
a] THE TEXT Ixxi
(i) GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.
Primary uncials.
tt Cod Sinaiticus, ssec. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the
Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai ; now at St. Peters-
burg. Contains the whole Gospel complete.
Its correctors are
K* contemporary, or nearly so, and representing a second
MS. of high value ;
K b attributed by Tischendorf to ssec, vl ;
\K> attributed to the beginning of saec. vil Two hands of
about this date are sometimes distinguished as K* and
K cb ,
A* Cod. Alexandrinus, ssec. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library
at Alexandria ; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles i.
in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete.
B* Cod. Vaticanus, ssec, iv. In the Vatican Library certainly
since I533 1 (BatirTol, La Vaticam de Paul in, etc.) p. 86).
Complete.
The corrector B 2 is nearly of the same date and used a
good copy, though not quite so good as the original.
Some six centuries later the faded characters were
retraced, and a few new readings introduced by B 3 .
C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, ssec. v. In the National Library
at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel:
L 2-ii. 5, ii 42-iii. 21, iv. 2S~vi. 4, vi. 37~vii. 16 or 17,
viii. 28-xii. 3, xix. 42-xx. 27, xxL ai-xxii. 19, xxiii 25-
xxiv. 7, xxiv. 4<5-53-
These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles,
and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX
andN.T.
D. Cod. Bezae, saea vl Given by Beza to the University
Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains
the whole Gospel
L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sac. viil National Library at Paris.
Contains the whole Gospel.
R." Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, ssec. viii. Brought from a convent
in the Nitrian desert about 1847, m& now ^ n tne British
Museum. Contains i 1-13, L 69-41. 4, 16-27, i v - 38~v. 5,
v. 25-vL 8, 18-36, 39, vi 49-viL 22, 44, 46, 47, viii. 5-15,
viii. 25-ix. i, 12-43, * 3" l6 > ^ S" 2 7> SL 4-15, 40-52,
iL 26-xiv. i, xiv. i2-xv. i, xv. 13-xyj. 16, xvii. 2i-xviii. ic,
xviiL 22-xx. 20, xx. 33-47, xxL 12-xxii. 15, 42-56, xxii. 71-
xxiii. ii, 38-51. By a second hand xv. 19-21.
T. Cod. Borgianus, ssec. v. In the library of the Propaganda at
Rome. Greek and Egyptian. Contains xxii. ao-xxiiL 20,
bofi THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ a
X, Cod Monacensis, ssec. ix. In the University Library at
Munich. Contains L 1-37, ii. ip-iil 38, iv. ai-x 37,
xi. i-xviii. 43, xx. 46-xxiv. 53.
A. Cod. Sangallensis, ssec. ix In the monastery of St Gall in
Switzerland Greek and Latin. Contains the whole
Gospel.
3. Cod. Zacynthius Rescriptus, ssec. via. In the Library of the
Brit, and For. Bible Soc. in London. Contains i 1-9,
19-23, 27, 28, 30-32, 36-66, L 77-ii. 19, 21, 22, 33-39,
iii. 5-8, 1 1-20, iv. i, 2, 6-20, 32-43, v. 17-36, vi. 21-
vii. 6, 11-37, 39-47, viii. 4-21, 25-35, 43~5 1-28,
32, 33 35. K. 4*-*. i8 *i~4O, xi. i, t, 5, 4, 24-30, 31, 32,
33-
If these uncials were placed in order of merit for the textual
criticism of the Gospel, we should have as facile princeps B, with
K as equally easily second. Then T, S, L, C, R. The Western
element which sometimes disturbs the text of B is almost entirely
absent from the Gospels.
Secondary Uncials*
E. Cod. Basileensis, ssec. viii. In the Public Library at Basle. Contain*
the whole Gospel, except iii. 4-1$ and xxiv. 47-53.
F. Cod. Boreeli, ssec. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht* Contains
considerable portions of the Gospel.
G. Cod. Harleianus, ssec. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable
portions.
K. Cod. Cyprius, saec. ix. In the National Library at Paris* Contains the
whole Gospel.
M. Cod. Campianus, saec. Ix, In the National Library at Paris. Contains
the whole Gospel,
S. Cod. Vaticanus, saec. x. In the Vatican. The earliest dated MS. of the
Greek Testament. Contains the whole Gospel.
U. Cod. Nanianus, saec. x. In the Library of St. Mark's, Venice* Contains
the whole Gospel.
Only six uncials MSS., tfBKMS U, afford complete copies of all few
Gospels.
(a) VERSIONS,
The Versions quoted are the following ;
The Latin (Lat).
The Vetus Latina (lat Y*t^
The Vulgate (Vulg,).
The Egyptian (Aegyptt),
The Bohairic (Boh.),
The Sahidic (Sah,),
The Syriac (Syrr.).
The Curetonian (Cur*
The Sinaitic (Sifi.).
The Peshitto
0*] UTERARY HISTORY Sxxiii
The Hardean (Hard).
The Palestinian (Hier.).
The Armenian (Arm.).
The Ethiopia (Aeth.).
The Gothic (Goth.),
We are not yet in a position to determine the relation of the
recently discovered Sinaitic Syriac (Syr-Sin.) to the other Syriac
Versions and to other representatives of primitive texts: and it
would be rash for one who is ignorant of Syriac to attempt a
solution of this problem. But the readings of Syr-Sin., as given
hi the translation by Mrs. Lewis, are frequently quoted in the
notes, so that the reader may judge to what extent they support
the text adopted in this commentary.
It should be noticed that four of the seven instances of Con-
flate Readings ) cited by WH. (ii. pp. 99-104) as proof of the
comparative lateness of the traditional text, are found in this
Gospel (ix. ro, xi. 54, xii. 18, xxiv. 23). Mr. Miller, in his new
edition of Scrivener's Introduction to the Criticism of the N.T.
(Bell, 1894), denies the cogency of the proof; but the only case
with which he attempts to deal, and that inadequately (ii. pp. 292,
293), is Lk. xxiv. 53. See the Classical Review^ June 1896, p. 264.
9. UTERARY HISTORY.
It is not easy to determine where the literary history of the
Third Gospel begins. The existence of the oral tradition side by
aide with it during the first century of its existence, and the
existence of many other documents (i. i) previous to it, which
may have resembled it, or portions of it, very closely, are facts
which render certainty impossible as to quotations which bear
considerable resemblance to our Gospel. They may come from
this Gospel ; but they may also have another source. Again,
there are possibilities or probabilities which have to be taken into
account. We do not know how soon Harmonies of two, or three,
or four Gospels were constructed. The Third Gospel itself is a
combination of documents; and there is nothing improbable in
the supposition that before Tatian constructed his Diatessaron
others had made combinations of Matthew and Luke, or of all
three Synoptic Gospels (Sanday, Bampton Lectures^ p. 302).
Some early quotations of the Gospel narrative look as if they
may have come either from material which the Evangelists used,
or from a compound of their works, rather than from any one of
them as they have come down to us. On the other hand the
difficulty of exact quotation must be remembered. MSS. were
bad? THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
not abundant, and even those who possessed them found a diffi-
culty in "verifying their references," when rolls were used and
not pages, and when neither verses nor even chapters were num-
bered or divided. In quoting from memory similar passages of
different Gospels would easily become mixed ; all the more so, tf
the writers who quote were in the habit of giving oral instruction
in the Gospel narrative ; for in giving such instruction they would
be hi the habit of constructing a compound text out of the words
which they chanced to remember from any two or three Gospels.
What they wanted to convey was the substance of " the Gospel,"
and not the exact wording of the Gospel according to Matthew, or
Mark, or Luke.
There is nothing in the Epistle of Barnabas which warrants us
in believing that the writer knew the Third Gospel : and the co-
incidence of jcott'wv^cms fv iracriv ra> ir\ifj(rlov <rov, KOL OVK tpets
tSta tlvai (xix. 8) with Acts iv. 32 is too slight to be relied upon,
Comp. Didacte iv. 8. Indeed it is not impossible that this
Epistle was written before our Gospel (A.D. 70-80). In the
Epistle of Clement, which doubtless is later than the Gospel
(A.D. 95, 96), we have the perplexing phenomena alluded to
above.
Mr. T, 7, vii. x, 2. Cuui. ROM. C*r. xffi. a. LK. vi 36*38;
yap
fir*, ^
tra afcffi w/wV* tiy mx- &t o irarljp
fTCy ot^rw * > onf0iy<r<Tcu Tippto' ArT*!** Kal
'f,Kalo6f*}i
t ^r y y&p KplfM~ vtT 9 odrajf
Kpiwtre Kpidfot&Oc, tht xpriffTctieirQc, oiJrwi; a7ro\^ert r Kal diroXu-
/cal iv tf fjt^rpi^ fitrpciT* xprfUTcvQ-fyreTcu. vfuv* < OfacffQc* dldorc, Kal do*
e, iv ai/ry
This quotation fa found in the Epistle of Pplycarp (it 3) in
this , form ; ftr^/Jtovcvoyres Se &v ?7rV o Kvpios St^acr/c^F* /i^ Kpwert-
Iva, pfy icpt^re* ci^tcrc, Kat a<j>^<rr(U v/uv* ^Xcarc, tva ^A.c^^r* <j>
/*eVp<ji /icrptT, dvTt/tcrpij^^crcTat v/xtv. And Clement of Alexandria
(Strom, il 18, p. 476, ed Potter) has it exactly as Clement of
llome, with the exception of dw/^TpTf&ftrcrai for /tcrp^^erat :
but he is perhaps quoting his namesake. If not, then the
probability that both are quoting a source different from any of
our Gospels becomes much greater (Resch, Agr&pfat) pp* 96,
97)-
9.J LITERARY HISTORY tar
Mr. rriiL 6, 7, xxvl 24. CLBM. ROM. Cfcr.xlviS. LK. xv& t f i, mi a.
***
rQv jJUKpQv Tofrrav, TWF &v8p&v<f iKclvtp* Ka\br ri
a Kpjm<rOy 4) ^va TWV ^/cXe/crwv ^ov XwrcreXet 1 aiJry ci
ire/>l rpd- ffKavSaXicrat' Kpftrrov fy /tvXt/cit vepLiceircu. rcpl
afrrov Kal Kara,' a$r$ 7re/>cre0?Jpcu jj,ti\ov rbv Tp&xij\ov airrov /cat
iv Ty ireX<i7 irai Kara,TrovTi<j-0Tjvai clt tppiirrat eh rijy tfdXcwrcrax,
dd\affffav 9 % lya TWF ^ ?^a (rAraySaX/oT; rwr
errwr /not; flta<rrp^cu. futepwr TOITUV gva.
*i ...
ce^v 5t oO ti6s TOV it <
rapa
^y ai>ry
Here again Clement of Alexandria (Strom, iii. 18, p. <6i)
quotes exactly as Clement of Rome, with the exception of fwy for
OVK after ct, and the omission of rrfv before OaXdo-o-av. In Clem.
Rom. Cor. lix. 3 we have a composite quotation (Is. xiii. 1 1 ; Ps.
xxiii. 10; Job v. u, etc.), which may possibly have been in-
fluenced by Lk. i. 52, 53, xiv. n, xviii. 14; but nothing can be
built on this possibility. We must be content to leave it doubtful
whether Clement of Rome knew our Gospel according to Luke ;
and the same must be said of Polycarp (see above) and of Ignatius.
In ILph* xiv. we have <avepov TO SevSpov cwro TOV KapTrov avrov,
which recalls e/c yap TOV Kapirov TO SevSpov yw&a-Kfrai (Mt. xii. 33)
and I/caorov yap Sc^Spov lie TOV l$iov Kapirov ytvwo-iccTat (Lk. vi. 44).
Smyr* iii, we have the very remarkable passage which perplexed
Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome as to its source : OT Trpos TOUS icepl
Jlirpov rjX6cv 9 e^iy avrots* Aa^erc, if/7]\a<f>tj<raTf. /*, /cat tSeT Sri OVK
el/jil Scu/AoViov acrco/AaTov. This may be a condensation of Lk.
xxiv. 36-39, or may come from oral tradition or a lost document
Of other possibilities, TO n-vp TO aa-ftco-rov (Eph* xvi.) recalls Mk,
ix. 43 rather than Lk. iii. 1 7 : /eoXovs /la^ms l&v <^tX^5, \a.pvs aroi
OVK. Ivnv (Polyc. u.) is not very dose to Lk. vi 32 : ^Sovat TO
/3iov (Rom. vii.) is found Lk. viii. 14, but is a common phrase :
and other slight resemblances (c.g. Magn. x.) niay as easily come
from other Gospels or from tradition.
We are on surer ground when we come to the Didacht and
the Gospel of Peter ^ the dates of which remain to be determined,
but which may be placed between A.D. 75 and 125. In the former
we find further evidence of a combination of passages from
Matthew and Luke, of which we have seen traces in Clement of
Rome, and which suggests the possibility of a primitive Harmony
of these two documents.
Ixxvi THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
MT. 3or. 13. DiDACHd xvi I. LK. xii 35.
8n etoc offiar*
Kal al 6<7<p\j(S
iK\v<r6(i)ffav t dXXa 71?-
t<r0e&roifjW o&yapotdare
&pav fr 5 o /nJptof
a-tdvai ical ol
vpo<r-
r&v tcvpiov
Here the acquaintance with our Gospel is highly probable, for
of the Evangelists Luke alone has the plural of A^'x^o? and of
6<r<t>v$. In giving the substance of the Sermon on the Mount, the
Didachk again seems to compound the two Gospels.
MT.
** rdrra
T.
&ra
2-5*
&v6puirot, 9 ofrrwt
v^tfty irotetre a^rotj.
44
OT>
LK. vi,
tbs ^Aere tva r<H-
jU,r^ ol
fario
*
ro)f
rtva
xal
ykp
roi)s
fyuic /cai Trpocretf-
rtDy $ut)K6vTti>v /zaV ro/a
d^ararc
<re
r^if 8ct&v ffidyova,
ov a^ry *al
, tiiraye
n&rmt $vo. * ry Behovri
KpiOyvtu /cai
<rou Xape
xai ra
d^a-
ware TOI>S
icai ovx %&
tk dv rtj <rot 54? ftdTncFfui tit
p- rijv defray (rta^d^a, crrpty '
rAoy* ^A^ dyya-
r* fil\iov ly,
p * aiJroO 5i5o* ^Av
88 $\oyeiT roiJs Kara-
/t^yous iJ^taJ, irpoortf-
TTpl ruff tirypea.-
^as. ^ dXXa
re roi>r tyOpobs
83 /cai ef dyaware rodt
/ca
roi)s
dyaTrare
icai
TTUTTOVTI <rc M
rdpe%e xai
r alrovvri
56s, jcai ri
<rov 5a- *yAp Stivturtu. irarri
* ~ ' t 5ov, /cai ,
/cai d?r6 roO a
6 IpdrLoit /cai
/ccoXutr^s. w Trawl a/-
<re SLdov, jcai
roiJ tttporr6t rA <ra
Expressions which are peculiar to each form of the Sermon
are here so abundant that we conclude that this doctrine of the
Two Ways has been influenced by both forms. But the order in
which the several precepts are put together is so different from
both Gospels, that the editor can scarcely have had either Gospel
before him. Very possibly the order and wording have been
disturbed by oral instruction in Christian morality given to cate-
chumens (Sanday, Hamptons* p. 302). But the evidence of
0.] LITERARY HISTORY Ixxvii
acquaintance with the Third Gospel is strong ; and it is somewhat
strengthened by the fact that in the Didach'e Christ is called the
" Servant (TTCUS) of God " (ix. 2, 3, x. 2, 3), a use of TT<US which in
N.T. is almost confined to Luke (Acts iii. 13, 26, iv. 27, 30;
comp. iv. 23 ; Lk. i. 54, 69). But this use is common in LXX,
and may easily be derived from Isaiah or the Psalms rather than
from the Acts. Nevertheless there is other evidence of the in-
fluence of the Acts on the Didacke, and scarcely any evidence of
the influence of Isaiah or of the Psalms : indeed the references to
the O.T. are remarkably few. And this not only makes it quite
possible that the use of 6 Trats <rov comes from the Acts, but also
still further strengthens the conviction that the Didache is in-
debted to the writings of S. Luke. Comp. o-vyKoa^z^Ws &e
Trcxvra TO> aSeA<<3 crov /cat OVK cpcis tSta eZvat (Did. iv. 8) with ovSe
els Tt TWV VTrapxwTwv aura) eA.eyev iStor etycu, aAA* v}v avTois irdvra
KOLvd (Acts iv. 32). Bryennios and Wunsche see traces of Lk.
ix. 1-6 and x. 4-2 1 in Did. xi. ; but this chapter might easily have
stood as it does if Luke had never written. Yet there is enough
in what has been quoted above to establish the fact of the influence
of Luke on the Didache.
It is generally admitted that the fragment of the Gospel of
Peter suffices to show that the writer of that apocryphal narrative
was acquainted with all four of the Canonical Gospels. But it
will be worth while to quote some of the expressions and state-
ments which have a marked resemblance to Luke in particular.
GOSPEL OF PETER. LK. xxiii.,
4. niXarot x^u^a* vpbs 'Hputfijr. 7. UeiXaroj . . .
5. Kal ffdpparov ivujxLffKct. . 54. Kal rdfi/Sarar hrtip&VK
IO. fyeyicov 5i^o icaicotJ/ryow. 32. Ifrovro Si Kal Irepot
Mo.
13, els 84 rt* r&v K&Kovpyw ^jce^wr 39. efy & TWV KpefJMvQ&rw xajco^p-
atJrous, X^yw" fjfieis Sib, rb, yuv ^jSXair^^et afrr6v. . . .
41. d^ta 7dp &v irpda.fj&y d-roXa^t-
o9ros 5i ov$v &TOTTOV tvpaj-ev.
<cai Ac6r- 4
rerat rd <rnj^. TtJirrovres rd
34. irpwtat W ^ri0(6<ricoirroi roO <ra)5- 54, xal <rdp(3a,TOv ivtytametr*
pdrov.
36. 5oo tivdpat Ka,rc\06vrat txeWcr 4.
voXiy ^yyos ^xoyrar. taB^ri &,<rrpairroti<rii.
50. 6p9pov ot rys KvptaKT)* . . t M I. rj W /u rwv
54. & fapopcr tit fjj'-rjfjLoc-uvTjv afrroO. A 'fyrotfjuuraar dpc&/wtra.
These resemblances, which are too close and too numerous to
be accidental, are further emphasized when the parallel narratives
Ixxviii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 9.
are compared. S. Luke alone mentions the sending to Herod
He alone uses the expression <ra.ppa.rov ITT^OXTKCV (contrast Mt
xxviii. i). He alone calls the two robbers KaKovpyoL. He alone
tells us that one of the robbers reviled, and that one contrasted
the justice of their fate with the innocence of Jesus. He alone
mentions the sun in connexion with the darkness. He alone
speaks of all the multitudes of spectators, and of their beating
their breasts. He alone calls the two Angels at the tomb avSpes
(Mt. and Mk. mention only one), and calls the tomb /ii^/ia ; and
he alone uses <j>epiv of the women bringing the spices. There are
other passages in which the Gospel of Peter resembles Luke with
one or more of the other Gospels; but what has been quoted
above is sufficient to show that the writer of the apocryphal gospel
was influenced by S. Luke's narrative. It must be remembered
that these ten coincidences are found within the compass of fifty-
five verses, and that they are not exhaustive. The inscription on
the cross, ovros CCTTIV 6 /?acriAei>s TOT) 'lorpa-qA (n), is closer to that
given by S. Luke, 6 /?. r&v "louScuW ovros (xxiii. 38), than to any
of the other forms ; and perhaps the words of the robber, CTOM-T)/)
yei/o/AO/os (see above, 13), are suggested by crcocrov creavrov /cai i^/jtas
(xxiii. 39). The use of /xecny/i^pta for "midday" (15) is found
in N.T. nowhere but Acts xxii. 6. The cry of the Jews after
Christ's death, TScre on TTOCTOV SIKCUO'S ccrm/ (28), looks like an
adaptation of the centurion's confession, OI/TCOS o avflpwrros o&ros
Si/catos yv (xxiii. 47) ; and perhaps efqy^cravro Trdvra a7Tp etSov (45)
is an echo of cfijyoiWo ra ev rfi 6Sa> (xxiv. 35). And, as already
pointed out ( i), Pseudo-Peter always speaks of Jesus Christ
as 6 JCV/HOS, a use which begins to be common in the Third
Gospel
The evidence of another interesting document of about the
same date is worth quoting. The Testaments of the XIL Patri-
archs is a Jewish Christian writing which almost certainly was
composed between the two destructions of Jerusalem, A.D. 70 and
135. It shows marked traces of a knowledge of the Synoptic
traditions and of S. Luke's Gospel in particular. Some of the
coincidences given below are probably the result of independent
citation of the O.T, But the citation may have been suggested
to the later writer by acquaintance with it in the Gospel narrative.
TBST. XIL PAT*, S. LUKE.
y (Reuben L). olvov ical oi/cepa o$ ^ wt^ (L 151
Num. vi. 3).
lyra? Srt SticaUtt rdtrx** (Sim. iv,). /cai jjptfs itiv SiKaiw (xxiii. 41).
I<re<r0* c&pbricorret X<tpiv fr&rtov *I?7<roJ/f irpo^/correr . . . %<pm
8to0 *ai d?0p<fcrF (Sim. v.), 6A ical dvfyxtorott (ii. 52; I
iu 26).
LITERARY HISTORY
bocbc
Zawffev atfroik (Sim. vi.).
ol ovpavoL (Levi ii.,
<rvre<T&lei a&roit (xv. 2) comp. <rw
- afoy (Acts
xviii.).
ircpl rov fji\\ovrot XurpoOcr&u rov
(Ibid.).
'ijrai Ktf/wo* rdvra rd
cf'yxj'otj vlov aftrod
a/afroi (Levi iv. }.
<rwcrfipovv roi)y Xd7ow rotfrovs &> rj
KapSly. fjiov (Levi vi.).
Kafye iKpvtya roOro A> rj xapSta /wu,
*ai otf/c dj^yytftXa atfrd ra^ri dr-
evi viii.).
*T '\f/t<rrov (Levi xvi.).
be* adroi)s rpou,6t (Tudah
iiL).
Toielv jrdvra ri St/caicS^uara Kt/^fou xa2
iiraicoi5j' &r6X<M OeoO (Judah xiii.)-
dvoiyTfrrovrai v' afrrbp ol otf/xw'o/,
^KX^ot xpefyta, efaoylav TLarpbt aylov
(Judah xxiv.).
ol ^y vrtitxctg, 8tk Ktiptov r\ovrur
OijcrovTCUf Kal ol iv Tcviq, 'xppra.eB'^-
ffovr&i, Kal ol fr toQcveiq, I<rx6<ro\)ffi
(Judah xxv.).
hricrrpfrbtt. KapSiat drct^ett Tpct
Ktpiov (Dan v.).
ical thv
x,
Ixiv. I).
rbv <>{>pa,vQV (iiL 21 ; Is.
(xxiv. 2l).
ffir\dyx va A^ovj OeoO
ots briaKtycTOA ijftat dvaroXk
(rwenjpei rb. /rffuiTa, rai/ra . . , fr
r KdpSlg, afoys (ii. 19; comp. ii. 51).
Kal afrroi 4<riyi]<TQ,y /cai otdevl &irijy-
yei\a.r iv iKelva.it rait -fy^/xuj tDv
(ix. 36).
'^^rrov (i. 35).
rew tr a,tr6r (L 12 ;
comp. Acts xix. 17).
vropetio/JAVOi iv rdcrait raa <*vro\au
Kal diKau&fMtriv rov wplov (i. 6).
dveyx^wu rov o&pavbv Kal Kara-
Pfyai TO rvcQ/M rb aytov (ii. 21, 22).
Kdl avrbi A^wv wy
Kal vlvwv /Ar4 rw^
vii,). See above, Sim. vi.
(Asher
fwucdpiot ol irrw%o/, Sri {rfjrpa, i<rrlv
^ pafftXeLa rov 9eov. ^ta/cdptot ol wet
vQvret rOv, Sri xP TO ' (f Q'n ffQvr( U' (vi.
20, 21 ; Mt v. 3-6).
6rrrpty<u xapSlas irariptav iirl
tiKva.* Kal diradefr iv <f>povij<rci.
(i. 17 ; Mai. iv. 5).
xal iav
(xvii. 3).
AifXvflev d vlot rotf avOptfarov Mm
ical rlvuv (vii. 34; Mt xi 19).
Besides these verbal coincidences there are many coincidences
in thought, especially respecting the admission of the Gentiles to
the Kingdom through the Messiah, who is the Saviour of all, Jew
and Gentile alike. " The Lord shall raise up from Levi a Priest,
and from Judah a King, God and man. He shall save all the
nations and the race of Israel " (Simeon viL). "A King shall rise
from Judah and shall make a new priesthood . . . unto all the
nations (Levi yiii.). Comp. Judah xxiv, ; Zebulon ix. ; Dan, vi. ;
Naphtali iv., viii. ; Asher vii. ; Benjamin ix. Moreover, there are
passages which are very similar in meaning, although not in word-
ing, to passages in Luke : comp. the end of Joseph xvii with
L xvii. 27, and the beginning of Joseph xviii with Lk. vi. 28.
It is hardly necessary to trace the history of the Third Gospel
in detail any further. It has been shown already (pp. xv-xyii)
that Justin Martyr, Tatian, Celsus, the writer of the Clementine
Homilies, Basilides, Valentinus, Marcion, and the Churches of
Lyons and Vienne, knew the Third Gospel, and that Irenseus, the
hoes THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ 1C.
Muralorian Canon, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and others
definitely assign it to S. Luke. In the second half of the second
century this Gospel is recognized as authentic and authoritative ;
and it is impossible to show that it had not been thus recognized
at a very much earlier date.
The order of the Gospels has not always been the same. But,
just as in the interpretation of the four symbolical creatures, the
calf has uniformly been taken as indicating S. Luke, so in the
arrangement of the Gospels his has almost invariably been placed
third. The order with which we are familiar is the common order
in most MSS. and Versions: but in D 594, abcdefff^iqr and
the Gothic Version, and in the Apostolic Constitutions, what is called
the Western order (Matthew, John, Luke, Mark) prevails. The
obvious reason for it is to have the two Apostles together and before
the other two Evangelists. In a few authorities other arrangements
are found. X and the Latin k have John, Luke, Mark, Matthew,
while 90 has John, Luke, Matthew, Mark, and 399 John, Luke,
Matthew. The Curetonian Syriac has Matthew, Mark, John, Luke.
g 10. COMMENTARIES.
A good and full list of commentaries on the Gospels is given
by Dr. W. P. Dickson in the English translation of Meyer's Com-
mentary on S. Matthew^ i. pp. xxiii-xliii and of commentaries on
S. Mark and S. Luke in that of Meyer's Commentary on S. Mark
*nd S. Luke> i. pp. xiii-xvi. It will suffice to name a few of the
chief works mentioned by him, especially those which have been
in constant use during the writing of this commentary, and to add
* few others which have appeared since Dr. Dickson published
his lists (1877, 1880), or for other reasons were omitted by him. 1
Of necessity the selection here given in many cases corresponds
with that in the volume on Romans by Dr. Sanday and Mr.
Headlam; and the reader is referred to that (pp. xcix cix) for
excellent remarks on the characteristics of the different com-
mentaries, which need not be repeated here.
i GREEK WRITERS.
ORIGEN (Orig.); t 253* Hbmilise in Lucam in Qrigenis Of p.
ed. Delarue, iii. 932; Lommatzsch, v. 85; Migne, xiii 1801,
1902. These thirty-nine short Homilies are an early work, and
have been preserved in the Latin translation made by Jerome. A
few fragments of the original Greek survive in the Philocalia (ed.
1 See also Introduction to the Synoptic Gosptls by Dr. P. J. Gloag, T. & T
Clark, 1895, and the literature quoted p. 2pa
10.] COMMENTARIES taxi
J. A. Robinson, Camb. 1893) and elsewhere. The genuineness of
these Homilies has been disputed, but is not doubtful. A sum-
mary of the contents of each is given in Westcott's article
ORIGENES, D* Chr. Biog* iv. 113. The first twenty are on Lk.
i., ii., and the next twelve on Lk. iiL, iv., leaving the main portion
of the Gospel almost untouched. Besides these there are frag-
ments of notes in the original Greek, which have been preserved
in Venice MS. (28, 394); Migne, xviii. 311-370. They extend
over chapters i.-xx.
EUSEBIUS of Csesarea (Eus.); f before 341. Efe r& jcarck
AcnjKav cvayyeXtov in Migne, xxiv. 529. Only fragments remain:
on Lk. i. 5, 18, 19, 32, 35, 38, ii. 32, iv. 18, vL 18, 20, viL 29, 30,
viii. 31, 43, ix. i, 3, 4, 7, 26, 28, 34, x. 6, 8, xi. 21, xil n, 22, 34,
36, 37, 42, 45, xiii. 20, 35, xiv. 18, xvii. 3, 23, 25-31, 34, 37,
xviii. 2, xix. 12, 13, 17, xx. 2, 3, xxi. 25, 26, 28-32, 36, xxii. 30, 57,
xxiv. 4.
CYRIL of Alexandria (Cyr. Alex.); t 444- ^Ef^o-ts cfe r
Kara Aovxav evayyeAto^ in Migne, Ixxii. 475. Only portions of the
original Greek are extant, but a Syriac version of the whole has
been edited by Dr. R. Payne Smith, who has also translated this
version into English (Oxford, 1859). The Syriac version shows
that many Greek fragments previously regarded as part of the com-
mentary are from other writings of Cyril, or even from other writ-
ings which are not his. The Greek fragments which coincide with
the Syriac prove that the latter is a faithful translation. The com-
mentary is homiletic in form.
THEOPHYLACT (Theoph.), archbishop of Bulgaria (107 11078);
t after 1118. Migne, cxxiii.
EUTHYMIUS ZIGABENUS (Euthym.) ; t after mS. Migne,
cxxix. 853.
These two almost contemporaneous commentaries are among
the best of their kind. They draw much from earlier writers, but
do not follow slavishly, and are far superior to mediaeval Latin
commentaries. The terseness of Euthymius is not unlike that of
BengeL
a. LATIN WRITERS.
AMBROSE (Ambr.); t397- Expositio Evang. sea Lucam;
Migne, xv. 1525. Ambrose follows Philo and Origen in seeking
for spiritual or mystical meanings under the natural or historical
sense, and these are sometimes very far-fetched : in verdis ludit^ in
scnttntiis dormitat (Jerome, ProL in Horn. Orig. in Luc.).
EUCHERIXJS; t449 or 450. Liber instructionum in IMC*
Evang. ; Migne, 1. 799.
ARNOBIUS JUNIOR ; t after 460. Annotations ad qumdam
Evangeliorum loca ; Migne, liiL 570, 578.
Ixxxii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [10,
PATERIUS of Brescia ; friend of Gregory the Great He col-
lected from the writings of Gregory an Expositio Vet. et Nov.
Test., of which Book III. is a catena of Passages on S. Luke ;
Migne, Ixxix. 1057. In the eleventh century the monk ALULF
made a similar collection; Migne, Ixxix. 1199.
None of these works are very helpful as regards exegesis
Eucherius and Arnobius do not repay perusal. The extracts from
Gregory are mainly from the Moralia or commentary on Job, full
of allegorical interpretation.
BEDE, the Venerable; t735- /# Lucam Exp. Libri VL\
Migne, xcii. 307; Giles, xi., xii.; ed. Colon. 1612, v. 217. The
character of the work may be given in his own words: "I have
made it my business, for the use of me and mine, briefly to com-
pile out of works of the venerable Fathers, and to interpret accord-
ing to their meaning (aolding somewhat of my own) these
following pieces " and he gives a list of his writings (H. R. sub
fin. See also the ProL in Mart.). This commentary is far
superior to those just mentioned, and is an oasis in a desert.
SEDULIUS SCOTUS ; t c- 830. A mere compiler, often from
Origen ; Migne, ciii. 2 7. WALAFRID STRABUS of Reichenau ;
t 849. Glossa ordinaria, a compilation with some original matter ;
Migne, cxiv. 243, 893. It became very famous. We may pass
over with bare mention CHRISTIANUS DRUTHMARUS; c* 850;
Migne, cvL 1503 ; BRUNO ASTENSIS; c. 1125; Migne, clxv. 33 :
and PETRUS COMESTOR; c. 1180; Migne, cxcviii. 1537.
THOMAS AQUINAS, Doctor Angelicus; t I 274. Expositio
contmua or Catena aurea in Evangelia^ a mosaic of quotations (to
be accepted with caution) from over eighty Christian writers, from
Ignatius to Euthymius, so arranged as to form a summary of
patristic theological teaching. Opj>. ed Venet iv. 5 ; translated
Oxford, 1845.
ALBERTUS MAGNUS of Ratisbon ; t * 280.
3. REFORMATION AND POST-REFORMATION WRITERS.
ERASMUS, Desideriusj fi536. Adnotationes in N.T. % 1516;
Paraphrases^ 1522.
BUTZER or BUCER, Martin; 1 1551. In sacra guatuar Evan-
gelia Enarrationes^ 1551.
CALVIN, John ; 1 1564. In karmoniam ex Matt* Marc, et Luc.
comfositam Commentarii> 1553; Brunsvigas, 1868; translated by
the Calvin Trans. Society, 1842 ; strong and independent
BEZA, Theodore ; 11605. Adnotationes in N.T^ 1565,
1594-
GROTIUS (Huig van Grootf; 11645. Adnotationes in N.T. %
1644. Arminian ; an early attempt to apply philological principles
10.) COMMENTARIES Ixxxiii
(learned from J. J. Scaliger) and classical illustrations to the Bible ;
still useful.
HAMMOND, Henry ; 1 1660. Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ;
" the Father of English Commentators." Paraphrase and Annota-
tions of the N.T., 1653, 1845; "reveals genuine exegetical tact
and learning." Biblical paraphrase is of English origin.
One or two Roman Catholic commentators in this period
require mention.
CAJETAN, Cardinal (Jacob de Vio) ; 1 1534; a Dominican. In
quatuor Evang. et Acta Apost. Commcntarii, 1543. Under pressure
from Luther (1518) he became considerably emancipated from
patristic and scholastic influence.
MALDONATUS, Joannes (Maldon.); 1*1583; a Spanish Jesuit
Commentarii in quatuor Evangelia 1596; ed. Sansen, 1840; ed.
K. Martin (condensed) 1850. Admirable of its kind : he rarely
shirks a difficulty, and is often sagacious in his exposition. An
English translation by G. J. Davie is being published by
Hodges.
CORNELIUS A LAPIDE (van Stein); ti^37; a Jesuit Comm.
in quatuor Evang^ 1638. Part of a commentary on almost the
whole Bible. A voluminous compilation, including much allegory
and legend; devout and often edifying, but sometimes puerile.
English translation of the Comm. on S. Luke, Hodges, 1887.
ESCOBAR Y MENDOSA, Antonio ; 1 1669 ; a Spanish Jesuit,
whose casuistry was gibbeted by Pascal In Evangelia sanctorum
et temporis commentarii^ 1637.
Two great names in the eighteenth century serve well as a
transition from the writers of the two preceding centuries to the
present age.
BENGEL, Johann Albrecht (Beng.); ti75*. Gnomon JV.T. t
1 742. A masterpiece, rivalling Euthymius Zigabenus in terseness,
and excelling him in originality and insight English translation,
Clark, 1857.
WETSTEIN, Johann Jacob (Wetst); ti7S4* Nov. Test.
Grs&cum, 1751, 1752. A monument of criticism and learning.
Wetstein was a leader in the field of textual criticism, and the
stores of learning collected hi his notes have been of the greatest
service to all subsequent students of N.T.
4. MODERN WRITERS.
SCHLEIERMACHER, Fried. Dan. Ernst; 1*1834; Ueber die
S^hriften des Lukas> 1817. Translated anonymously by Thirlwall,
1825.
BORNEMANN, Fried. August ; 1 1850. Scholia in Lucsb Evan-
getium, 1830.
kxxiv THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [10.
DE WETTE, Wilh. Mart. L. ; 11849. Kurze Erkldrung der
Evangelien des Lukas und Markus, 1839. Free, precise, and
compact
MEYER, Hein. Aug. Wilh.; 1*1873. Kritisch exegetischer
Kommentar uber das N.T. Markus und Lukas, 1846. Excellent
A good English translation of the fifth edition was published by
T. & T. Clark, 1880. Grammar is sometimes ridden to death;
but this is still one of the best commentaries for English readers.
The German revisions of Meyer by Bernhard Weiss, 1885, etc 'f
are superior, especially as regards the text
OOSTERZEE, Jan Jacob van ; ti88a. In Lange's TheologiscJic-
homiletisches Bibelwerk, 1857-1876, he commented on S. Luke,
English translation published by T. & T. Clark, 1864. The notes
are hi three sections throughout ; critical, doctrinal, and homiletic.
HAHN, G. L., Professor of Theology at Breslau. Das Evan-
gelium des Lukas, 1892, 1894. Two substantial volumes, full of
useful material, but grievously perverse in questions of textual
criticism.
SCHANZ, Paul Das Evangelium des heiligen Lucas^ 1883.
Probably much the best Roman Catholic commentary.
LASSERRE, Henri. Les Saints vangiles, 1886, 1887. A
French translation of the Gospels with brief notes. Uncritical, but
interesting. It received the imprimatur of the Archbishop of
Paris and the praise of Leo xiu., ran through twenty-five editions
in two years, and then through the influence of the Jesuits was
suppressed.
^GODET, Frederic, Professor at Neuchatel. Commentaire sur
fj&vangik de S. Luc^ 1871, 1872, 1888. Equal to Meyer in
exegesis, but weak in textual criticism. The edition of 1888 is
greatly to be preferred. An English translation of the second
edition was published by T. & T. Clark, 1879.
ALFORD, Henry; 11871. Greek Testament, vol. i 1849, 5*k
ed. 1863. Sensible and clear.
WORDSWORTH, Christopher, Bishop of Lincoln; 11885.
Greek Testament, vol. i. 1856, 5th ed. 1866. Scholarly and devout,
supplying the patristic element wanting in Alford, but otherwise
inferior ; weak in textual criticism.
MCCLELLAN, John Brown. The New Testament, a new trans-
lation, from a revised text, with analyses, copious references and
illustrations, chronological and analytical harmony, notes and dis-
sertations, voL i, 1875 ; unfortunately the only one published.
Contains some grotesque renderings and perverse arguments, with
a great deal of valuable matter.
PLTJMPTRE, Edward Hayes ; f 1891. The Synoptic Gospels in
Bishop Ellicott*s Commentary for English Readers, Cassell, 1878.
Popular and suggestive, with a tendency to excessive ingenuity.
10.] COMMENTARIES Ixxxv
JONES, William Basil, Bishop of St. David's, and COOK,
Frederic Charles, Canon of Exeter; St. Luke in the Speakers
Commentary ) 1878. Inadequate.
CARR, Arthur, Notes on the Greek Testament, St. Lukt^ 1875,
A scholarly handbook.
FARRAR, Fred. William, Dean of Canterbury. St. Luke in the
Cambridge Greek Testament^ 1884 and later. More full, but less
precise, than Carr.
SADLER, Michael Ferrebee : 11895. Gospel ace. to St. Luke,
1886. Dogmatic and practical rather than critical: somewhat
capricious in textual criticism.
BOND, John. WH. text of St. Luke with introduction and
notes, 1890. Brief to a fault, but useful.
CAMPBELL, Colin. Critical Studies in St. LukJs Gospel^ 1890.
Fails to establish a special demonology and Ebionite tendency,
but contains many useful remarks.
BERNARD, Thomas Dehany. The Songs of the Holy Nativity ,
1895. Did not come to the knowledge of the present writer until
the commentary on chapters L and ii. was in print. 1
Index II. contains the names of many other writers whose
works are of great use to the student of this Gospel.
1 A similar fact Gu&ed the omission at p. xxix of some recent discussions of
the Synoptic problem : e.g. The Abb Loisy, Essays in 1} Rnseignemeni
Biblique, 1892, Revue des Religions, 1894, and Revue JSibliqtie, 1896 (see the
Guardian, August 1896, p. 1317) ; W. Arnold Stevens and E. De Witt Burton,
A H*n*9*y *f*k* Gijfdsfyr Historical Study, Bottcc, 1*96
ABBREVIATIONS.
EccUsiastical Writer**
Ambr. .
Aug.
Bas.
Chrys. .
Clem. Alex.
Clem. Horn.
Clem. Recoga.
Clem. Rom.
Cypr. .
Cyr. Alex.
Cyr. Hier.
Dion. Alex,
Epiph. .
Eus.
Euthym.
Greg. Naz.
Greg. Nys.
Herm. .
HippoL .
Ign.
Iren.
Iren-lat.
Jer. (Hieroo.)
Jos.
Just M-
Orig. .
Orig-lat
Tert. ,
Theopk
Versums.
Aegyptt
Boh.
Sah.
Ambrose.
Augustine.
Basil.
Chrysostom.
Clement of Alexandria.
Clementine Homilies.
Clementine Recognitions
Clement of Rome.
Cyprian.
Cyril of Alexandria.
Cyril of Jerusalem.
Dionysius of Alexandria.
Epiphanius.
Eusebius.
Euthymius Zigabenus.
Gregory of Nazianzum
Gregory of Nyssa.
Hennas.
Hippolytus.
Ignatius.
Irenaeus.
Latin Version of Irentttui
Jerome.
Josephus.
Justin Martyr.
Origen.
Latin Version of Orige*
Tertullian,
TheophylacL
Egyptian.
Bohairic.
Sahidic,
ABBREVIATIONS
kxxvi
Aeth. t
Ann*
Goth. .
Latt .
LatVet
Vulg.
Cod Azo.
Syrr. .
Cur.
Sin.
Pesh.
Hard
Hier.
Coy.
Gen.
LutL
Rhem.
Tyn,
Wic.
AV.
RV.
Ethiopia
Armenian
Gothic.
Latin.
Vetus Latina.
Vulgate.
Codex
Syriac.
Curetonian,
Sinai tia
Peshitto.
Harcleanu
Jerusalem.
Coverdale.
Geneva.
Luther.
Rheims (or Douay)
Tyndalc.
Wiclif.
Authorized Version.
Revised Versioa
Sditon.
TR.
Tisch.
Treg.
Wl
Al
De
Grot
Maldon.
Mey.
Nosg.
Wetst
Wordsw
Textus Receptus,
Tischendorfc
Tregelles.
Westcott and Hort.
Alford.
BengeL
De Wette.
Grotius.
Maldonatos.
Meyer.
Nosgen.
Wetstein.
Wordsworth (Chr.).
Miscellaneous
Burton .
C. L G.
Didon,/
JLJ.
Burton, N.T. Moods and
Tenses.
Corpus Inscriptwnvm Gr
carum*
Pere Didon, fesus Chnst.
Leben Jesus.
Vudejhus
{xxxviii THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE
Lft. Eff.
Wsctt .
Edersh. Z, 6* T.
Hist. off. N.
Rob. Res. in PaL .
Schiirer,/. P. in T. ofj. C. .
Scriv. Inf.
Stanley, Si*. * Pah .
Trench, Mir. . *
Par. .
Syn. . .
Tristram, Ak/. JSltt. of B.
D. .* or D. B?
D. Chr. Ant. *
Kraus, Real-Enc. d. Chr. Alt*.
Crem. Lex.
L. & S.
Greg.
WUL
OOL
ins.
J. B. Lightfoot, 1 Notes on
Epistles of S. Paul.
Westcott
Edersheim, Life and Timz*
of Jesus the Messiah.
History of the Jewish Nation.
Robinson, Researches in
Palestine.
Schiirer, Jewish People in the
Times of Jesus Christ.
Scrivener, Introduction to
the Criticism of the New
Testament.
Stanley, Sinai and Palestine
Trench, Miracks.
Parables.
M New Testament Syn-
onyms.
Tristram, Natural History
of the Bible.
Smith's Dictionary of the
Bible^ ist or and edition.
Smith's Dictionary of Chris-
tian Antiquities.
Kraus, Real - Encyklopddie
der Christlichen Alter-
thumer.
Herzog*s Protestantische
Real-Encyklopddi$ 9 ist or
2nd edition.
Cremer, Lexicon of New
Testament Greek.
Liddle and Scott, Lexicon.
Gregory, Prolegomena ad
Tischendorfii ed. N. T.
Winer, Grammar of N.T.
Greek (the page refers to
Moulton's edition),
omit
insert
N.B. The text commented, upon IB that of Westoott and Hot! The
yery few Instances In which the editor IB Inclined to dissent from thla
text are noted as they occur.
1 The name of John Lightfoot is not abbreviated in this vohu&e.
THE
GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE.
y H us TITLE OP THE
THE title cannot be any part of the original autograph. It is
found in different forms in ancient authorities, the earliest being
the simplest : Kara AouKay (fc$ B F), cuayyeXiov Kara Aovicav (A C
D H), TO Kara Aou/cav evayyeXiov or TO Kara Aowcav aytov euayyeA-iov
(cursives).
The Kttrd neither affirms nor denies authorship i it implies conformity to a
type. But, inasmuch as all four Gospels have the /card, these uniform titles
must be interpreted according to the belief of those who gave the titles, viz. the
Christians of the first four centuries ; and it was their belief that each Evangelist
composed the Gospel which bears his name. Had the /card meant no more
than "drawn up according to the teaching of," then this Gospel would have
been called /card IlaOXov, and the second Gospel would have been called Kar&
TLtrpov ; for it was the general tradition that Mark wrote according to the
teaching of Peter, and Luke (in a different sense) according to the teaching of
Paul. The KO.T&, however, is not a mere substitute for the genitive of author-
ship, but indicates that the same subject has been treated by others. Thus,
^ To-Xcuct SiaO^Ky Kara, rods ^do/jL^Kovra points to the existence of other transla-
tions, just as "OjLCT/poy /caret ' ApiffrapKov or /card ' Api<rTo<f>&v?)v points to the
existence of other editions. That the /card does not exclude authorship is
shown by such expressions as ^ /caret Marite'la ircjcrdreir^or (Epiphanius) and
ij Ko.6* 'Hpddorov Itrropta, (Diodorus) : comp. iv row tfTo/i^/jwrnoyxcus rots /car&
rdy NeepLav (2 Mac. ii. 13). Strictly speaking, there is only one Gospel,
cvayy&Lov Oeou, the Gospel of God concerning His Son (Rom. i. i); but it
has been given to us in four shapes, eflayyA.ioj' Terpdjywptfrov (Iren. ffser.
Ji. ii. 8), and the icard indicates the shape in which the writer named
composed It*
L 1-4. THE PROLOGUE OB PBEPAOTL
The classical style of this opening, and its similarity to the
prefaces of Herodotus, Thucydides, and Polybius, hardly amount
to proof that Lk. was well read in classical literature, and con-
sciously imitated Greek historians ; but there is nothing improbable
in this supposition. Among the words which are classical rather
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [X.
than biblical should be noticed
Si^o-is, Kd^e^s. The construction also is classical, and in no
way Hebraistic. We have clauses idiomatically interlaced, not
simply co-ordinated. The modest position claimed by the writer
is evidence of his honesty. A forger would have claimed to be an
eye-witness, and would have made no apology for writing. Ewald
remarks that " in its utter simplicity, modesty, and brevity, it is
the model of a preface to an historical work." Its grammatical
construction should be compared with tfajtf of the preface to the
synodical epistle in Acts xv. 24, 25: 9 E^-i8^ ij/covcra//,ev .
This prologue contains all that we really know respecting the
composition of early narratives of the life of Christ, and it is the
test by which theories as to the origin of our Gospels must be
judged. No hypothesis is likely to be right which does not
harmonize with what is told us here. Moreover, it shows that an
inspired writer felt that he was bound to use research and care in
order to secure accuracy.
1. "EiretS^-nrep. A stately compound, suitable for a solemn
opening : freq. in class. Grk., but not found in LXX, or elsewhere
in N.T. Quoniam quidem, " For as much as," Weil denn einmaL
iroXXoi. The context seems to imply that these, like Lk., were
not eye-witnesses. That at once would exclude Mt, whose Gospel
Lk. does not appear to have known. It is doubtful whether Mk.
is included in the TroXXoi. The writers of extant apocryphal
gospels cannot be meant, for these are all of later origin. Probably
all the documents here alluded to were driven out of existence by
the manifest superiority of the four Canonical Gospels. The
emxeLpTjo-aj' cannot imply censure, as some of the Fathers thought,
for Lk, brackets himself with these writers (ISofe /cd^tot); what
they attempted he may attempt. The word occurs 2 Mac. ii. 29,
vii. 19 ; Acts ix. 29, xix. 13 ; and is freq. in class. Grk. in the sense
of "put the hand to, take in hand, attempt" The notion of
unlawful or unsuccessful attempting is sometimes implied by the
context : it is not contained in the word. Luther renders unttr-
wunden haben^ "have ventured." Lk. must have regarded these
attempts as insufficient, or he would not have added another.
Meyer quotes Ulpian, p. 159 (in Valckenaer), l7ra7?7r/> TTC/H rovrow
i cTTi^eip^ow a7To\oy^cra<rOai. It is doubtful whether
. necessarily implies a great undertaking.
Stu SI^Y^I'- "To draw up again in order a narra-
tive"; Le. to arrange afresh so as to show the sequence of events.
The verb is a rare one, and occurs ^ elsewhere only Plut Moral
p. 969 C, De sollert. animal, xii. (Reiske, x, p. 36), in the sense ot
"practise, go over again in order," Iren. in, 21. 2, and as #./.
Eccles. ii. 20. The subst. implies something more than mere
I. 1, 2.] THE PROLOGUE OR PREFACE 3
notes or anecdotes; "a leading through to the end" (durch-
fuhreri), "a narrative" (Ecclus. vi. 35, ix. 15 ; 2 Mac, ii. 32, vi.
17; Plat. Rep. 392 D; Arist. Rhet. in. 16. i).
Versions vary greatly: ordinare narrationem (Latt.), componere narra-
tionem (Beza), stellen die JRedt (Luth.), "ordeyne the telling" (Wic.),
"compyle a treates" (Tyn.), "set forth the words" (Cov.), " set forth the
declaracion" (Cran.), "write the historic " (Gen.), "compile a narration'*
(Rhem.), "set forth in order a declaration" (AV.), "draw up a narrative"
(RV.), composer une narration suivie (Godet), coordonner en corps der'ecit
(Lasserre), " Restore from memory a narrative " (Blass).
TWV weir\i]po<|)opTi|jivcov. " Of the things which have been car-
ried through to the end., of the matters which have been accom-
plished, fully established." Here again English Versions differ
much; but "surely known" (Tyn.), "surely to be believed"
(Cran.), "surely believed" (AV.), cannot be justified. The verb
when used of persons may mean " persuade fully, convince," and
in pass, "be fully persuaded" (Rom. iv. 21, xiv. 5); but of things
it means "fulfil" (2 Tim. iv. 5, 17). Here we may render
" accomplished." Others less well render "fully proved." See
Lightfoot on Col. iv. 12. The ly TJJJIII> probably means "among us
Christians." Christendom is the sphere in which these facts have
had their full accomplishment. The THUV in ver. 2 shows that con-
temporaries are not meant. If these things were handed down to
Lk., then he was not contemporary with them. The verse is
evidence that the accomplished facts were already fully established
and widely known, for they had already been narrated by many.
See Westcott, Intr* to Gosp. p. 190, 7th ed.
2. Ka0&s irap&oouy r\y.lv. " Even as they delivered them to us."
The difference between o>s, "as," and /caSws, "just as," should be
marked in translation : the correspondence was exact Lk. im-
plies that he himself was among those who received the tradition,
Like the ?roXXoi, he can only arrange afresh what has been handed
down, working at second hand, not as an eye-witness. He gives
no hint as* to whether the facts were handed down orally or in
writing. The difference between the TroAXoi and these avroTrrot is
not that the ^roXXoi wrote their narratives while the auroirroi did
not, but that the ovroarai were primary authorities, which the
vroXXol were not.
uin)prtH yeyofj^voi TOU Xfyou. They not only had personal know*
ledge of the facts (afroirrai), they also had practical experience of
the effects. They had preached and taught, and had thus learned
what elements in the Gospel were of most efficacy for the winning
and saving of souls. That TOU A,dyov belongs to wnjperoi only, not
to CU&TOTTTCU, and means " the doctrine," Le. the Gospel (Acts vi. 4,
viii 4, xiv. 25, xvi. 6, xvii. n), is manifest from the context.
Origen and Athanasius are wrong in making rov Xoyov mean the
4 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 2, 3.
personal Word, the Son of God, a use which is peculiar to Jn.
The owr' apx*5 s refers to the beginning of Christ's ministry (Jn. xv.
27, xvi. 4). For uinjpe'-rqs see on iv. 20 and comp. Acts xiii. 5.
3. e8oe KdjxoL. This is the main sentence, the apodosis of
ciretSywep TroXXol Iv^x^pW -^ I* neither Implies nor excludes
inspiration : the ISo^e may or may not have been inspired. The
wish to include inspiration caused the addition in some Latin
MSS. of et spiritui sancto (Acts xv. 28), which makes what follows
to be incongruous. With e'Soe comp. the Muratorian Fragment :
Lucas iste medicus . . . nomine suo ex opinione conscripsit*
Dominum tamen nee ipse vidit in earns et idem, prout assequi
potuit, ita et a natwitate Joannis incepit dicere. The Kapoi shows
that Lk. does not blame the TroXXot: he desires to imitate and
supplement them. It is their attempts that encourage him to write.
What they have done he may do, and perhaps he may be able to
improve upon their work. This is his first reason for writing a
narrative.
Trapr)Ko\ou0r]K<$Tt, This is his second reason for writing, making
the argument d fortiori. He has had special advantages and
qualifications ; and therefore what was allowed to others may be
still more allowed to him. These qualifications are fourfold, and
are told off with precision. In the literal sense of " following a
person closely so as to be always beside him," 7rapaKoXov#ti>
does not occur in N.T. Here it does not mean that Lk. was
contemporaneous with the events, but that he had brought himseli
abreast of them by careful investigation. Comp. the famous
passage in Dem. De Cor. cap. liii. p. 285 (344), Trapa/coXou^Kora
rot? TTpayjtuxcrtv cf ap;^?.
ai/wOcK. This is the first of the four qualifications: he has gone
back to the very beginning, viz. the promise of the birth of the
Forerunner. " From the first " is the meaning of awOev here, not
"thoroughly," radicitus, as in Acts xxvi. 5, which would make
ai'o>$ev almost the same as Tracrti/. Vulg. has a principio, and d has
desusum (comp. the French dessus). It is the irao-ii/ which implies
thoroughness ; and this is the second point. He has begun at the
beginning, and he has investigated everything. The Syriac makes
masc., but there is little doubt that it is neut, and refers to
in ver. i.
This is the third point. He has done all this
"accurately." There is no idle boast in any one of the three
points. No other Gospel gives us this early history about the
Baptist and the Christ. No other is throughout so full, for of
170 sections contained in the synoptic narrative 48 are peculiar
to Lk. And, in spite of the severest scrutiny, his accuracy can
very rarely be impugned. We cannot be sure whether he means
to imply that d/cpt/^oi? was not true of the TroXXot, but we may be
L 3, 4.] THE PROLOGUE OR PREFACE J
sure that none of them could claim all three of these points. In
any case we have an inspired historian telling us in his inspired
writings that he is giving us the results of careful investigation.
From this it seems to follow that an inspired historian may fail in
accuracy if his investigation is defective.
Ka0efjs. This is the fourth point, resulting from the other three,
He does not propose to give a mere collection of anecdotes and
detached sayings, but an orderly narrative systematically arranged.
Chronological order is not necessarily implied in Kafo^s, but
merely arrangement of some kind. Nevertheless, he probably
has chronological order chiefly in view. In N.T. the word is
peculiar to Lk. (viii. i; Acts iii. 24, xi. 4, xviii. 23), as is also
the more classical ^s (vii. n, ix. 37, etc.); but <efJ}s does not
occur.
Kpdno-Te 0eoc{>iXe. The epithet Kpcmcrros, often given to persons
of rank (Acts xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, xxvi. 25), is strongly in favour of
the view that Theophilus was a real person. The name Theophilus
was common both among Jews ( = Jedidiah) and among Gentiles,
But it was a name likely to be used to represent any pious reader.
See Lft. on "Acts," D.B? pp. 25, 26. The word Kparioros occurs
in N.T. only here and in the Acts, where it is evidently a purely
official epithet, for the persons to whom it is applied are of bad
character,
4. 1W Imyyws irepl &v Kanqx'n^S ^<5y wl ' i"V da^dXeiaK. ** In
order that thou mightest fully know the certainty concerning the
words wherein thou wast instructed." The Ao'yoi are not the
-^pay/Accra or historic facts, but the details of the Aoyos or Gospel
(ver. 2), which "ministers of the word" had communicated to
Theophilus. The compound eTriyvoJs indicates additional and more
thorough knowledge. It is very freq. in Lk. and Paul : see esp.
Rom. i. 28, 32 ; i Cor. xiii. 12 ; Lft. on Col i. 9 ; Trench, Syn.
Ixxv. In N.T. Kar^eivy "to sound down into the ears, teach
orally," is found only in Lk. and Paul. The position of Ttjv
acr<pd\Lav gives it solemn emphasis. Theophilus shall know that
the faith which he has embraced has an impregnable historical
foundation.
The idiomatic attraction, repi c&x KvrtrxfiQ'n* Xyw?, Is best resolved into
Ttpi rw X^wv oiJy KQ,nr)X'/)0'r)$ $ not irepl T&V \6yur ircpl &v KanefxfyQ'ttt. Only
of persons does vepl TWOS stand after KarTjx^v (Acts xxi. 21, 24) : of tking$
we have the ace. (Acts xviii. 25 ; Gal. vi. 6). These attractions are very freq.
in Lk.
On the superficial resemblance between this preface and Jos. Con. Apian* L
9, 10, see Godet, i. pp. 92, 93, 3eme ed. 1888. The resemblance hardly
amounts to remarkable coincidence, and such similarities are common in
literature. It is more interesting to compare this preface with that of
medical writer Dioscorides. The opening words of Dioscorides'
S) run thus :
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE |L 4.
repl rjjs rCjv tfapjLi&KUv crKevafftas re Kal $vvdjJ.U$ Kal 5o/r^a<r/as, 0/Xrarc 'A/xtfe,
Tipd(ro/jLaL croc ?ra/)cwr?Jcraf ^ Ktvty fj,7]5 &\oyov 6p^y ^crxjrjK^vai irpbs rfyde rty
vpaytMLTdav. The date of Dioscorides Pedacius is uncertain ; but, as Pliny
does not mention him, he is commonly assigned to the first or second centuiy
A.D, He is said to have been a native of Anazarbus in Cilicia, about fifty
miles from Tarsus ; and in that case he would almost certainly obtain hi
medical knowledge in the great school at Tarsus. That he and S. Luke may
have been there at the same time with S. Paul, seems to be a not impossible
conjecture. The treatise vcpl dpx^^s lyTptKJjs, commonly attributed to Hippo*
crates (c. 460-350 B.c.) begins: '0*60-01 6r%e//j<ra* vepl fyr/H/c^s \tyeiv $
X. 5-IL 5& THE GOSPEL OF THE
These chapters have often been attacked as unhistorical.
That Marcion omitted them from his mutilated edition of this
Gospel is of no moment. He did not do so upon critical grounds,
but because their contents did not harmonize with his doctrine.
It is more to the point to urge that these early narratives
lack apostolic authority; that they cover ground which popular
imagination, in the absence of history, would be sure to fill ; that
they abound in angelic appearances and other marvels ; that
their form is often highly poetical; and that it is sometimes
difficult to reconcile them with the narrative of Mt. or with
known facts of history. To this it may be replied that reserve
would keep Christ's Mother from making known these details at
first Even Apostles may have been ignorant of them, or unwilling
to make them known until the comparatively late period at which
Lk. wrote. The dignity, beauty, and spirituality of these narratives
is strong evidence of their authenticity, especially when contrasted
with the silly, grotesque, and even immoral details in the apo-
cryphal gospels. They abound in historic features, and are
eminently true to life. Their independence of Mt. is evident,
and both accounts bear the stamp of truthfulness, which is not
destroyed by possible discrepancies in a few minor points. That
Lk. is ever at variance with other historians, has still to be proved ;
and the merit of greater accuracy may still be with him, even if
such variance exists.
This Gospel of the Infancy is made up of seven narratives,
in two parallel groups of three, followed by a supplement, which
connects these two groups with the main body of the Gospel.
I. i. The Annunication of the Birth of the Forerunner
(5-25); 2. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour (26-38);
3. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviour to the Mother of
the Forerunner (39-56).
II. 4. The Birth of the Forerunner (57-80) ; 5. The Birth of
the Saviour (ii. 1-20) ; & The Circumcision and Presentation of
the Saviour (ii. 21-40).
L5.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 7
III. 7. The Boyhood of the Saviour (ii. 41-52).
On the two accounts of our Lord's infancy see E. C. S.
Gibson, Expositor, 2nd series, iii. p. 116; Gore, Dissertations on
Subjects connected with the Incarnation^ pp. 12 ff. : Murray, 1895
I. 5-25. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner.
"When John the Baptist appeared, not the oldest man in
Palestine could remember to have spoken even in his earliest
childhood with any man who had seen a prophet ... In these
circumstances it was an occurrence of the first magnitude^ more
important far than war or revolution^ when a new prophet actually
appeared" (Ecce Homo> ch. i.). The miracles recorded are in
keeping with this. God was making a new departure in dealing
with His people. We need not, therefore, be startled if a highly
exceptional situation is accompanied by highly exceptional facts.
After more than three centuries of silence, Jehovah again speaks
by prophecies and signs to Israel. But there is no violent rupture
with the past in making this new departure. The announcement
of the rise of a new Prophet is made in the temple at Jerusalem,
to a priest of the old covenant, who is to be the Prophet's father.
It is strong evidence of the historic truth of the narrative that no
miracles are prophesied of the new Prophet, and that after his
appearance his disciples attribute none to him.
5. 'EY^CTO & rats tjjj^pais. The elegant idiomatic Greek of the
preface comes abruptly to an end. Although the marks of Lk.'s
style are as abundant here as in any part of the Gospel, yet the
form of the narrative is strongly Hebraistic ; so much so that one
may be confident that he is translating from an Aramaic document.
These first two chapters seem to consist of a series of such docu-
ments, each with a distinct conclusion (i. 80, ii. 40, ii. 52). If they
are historical, the Virgin Mary must have been the source of much
that is contained in these first two chapters , and she may have
been the writer of documents used by Lk. In any case, we have
here the earliest documentary evidence respecting the origins of
Christianity which has come down to us, evidence which may
justly be called contemporary. Both eyei/cro and & rat? ^epats
are Hebraistic (see on ver. 39) ; but there is no need to understand
ty or any other verb after eyevero, " It came to pass that there was."
Rather, " There arose, came into notice," or simply " There was."
See on iv. 36, and comp. Mk. i. 4 ; Jn. i. 6.
paoriX&)s TTJS MouSaCas. Herod "the Great," a title not
8 THE GOSPEI ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [X &
given to him by his contemporaries, who during his last years
suffered greatly from his cruelty. It is in these last years that the
narrative of Lk. begins. The Herods were Idumasans by birth, 1
though Jews by religion, and were dependent upon the Romans
for their sovereignty. As Tacitus says : Regnum ab Antonio
Herodi datum victor Augustus auxit (Hist. v. 9. 3).
The name 'H/j^fo?? is contracted from 'H/ow/fo??, and should have iota sub-
script, which is well supported by early inscriptions. Later inscriptions and I
coins omit the iota. In the Codex Ambronanus of Josephus the name is
written with iota adscript, Hpwt&jy (Ant. xi,-xx.). See the numerous
instances from inscriptions cited by Schiirer in the TheoL Litztg. 1892, No,
21, col. 516. The TOV inserted before paciXfos in A and other texts is in
accordance with classical usage. But in LXX the art. is commonly omitted
in such cases, because in Hebrew, as in English, "Saul, king of Israel,"
"George, king of England," is the common idiom (Gen. xiv. I, 2, 18, xx. 2 f
xxvi. I, etc etc.). See Simcox, Lang, of N. T. p. 47.
-n)s *louSaia$. This was the title conferred on him by
the Senate at the request of Antony, Messala, and Atratinus (Jos.
Ant. xiv. 14. 4). Judaea here may mean " the land of the Jews,
Palestine" (vii. 17, xxiii. 5; Acts ii. 9, x. 37, xi. r, 29). Besides
Judsea in the narrower sense, Herod's dominions included Samaria,
Galilee, a great deal of Persea, and Ccele-Syria. For the abundant
literature on the Herods see D.B2 i. p. 1341 ; Herzog, PRE? vi.
p. 47 ; Schiirer, Jewish People in the T. off. C. i. i, p. 400.
tepeus TIS oVo/Acm Zayapia$. In the Protevangelium of James
(viii.), Zacharias is called high priest; and this has been adopted by
later writers, who have supposed that the incident narrated by Lk.
took place on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies. But
the high priest would not have been called te^us res, and it could
not have been by lot (lAaxe) that he offered incense on the Day of
Atonement. Priestly descent was much esteemed. The name
means "Remembered by Jehovah." For 6Vo/jicm see on v. 27.
c| &f>K]fjipia$ 'A(3it. The word l<f>7jfjLpta has two meanings :
i. " service for a term of days " (Neh. xiii. 30 ; i Chron. xxv. 8 ;
2 Chron. xiii. 10); 2. "a course of priests who were on duty for a
term of days," viz. for a week (i Chron. xxiii. 6, xxviii. 13 ; i Esdr.
i. 2, 15). These courses were also called Swupe<rei9, and by Josephus
-jrarpiai and c^^piBes (Ant vii. 14. 7 ; Vita y i.). Abijah was de-
scended from Eleazar, and gave his name to the eighth of the
twenty-four courses into which David divided the priests (i Chron.
xxiv. 10 ; 2 Chron. viii. 14). Of these twenty-four only the courses
of Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Harim returned from captivity
(Ezra ii. 36-39) ; but these four were divided again into twenty-
quoque Herodis aliegetttz videlicet rcgis etiam ipsum
attesteztttr adventui. Prsedictum natnquc fueraf t quia, tton deficiet princeps
Juda % dome vented qui mitttndus erat (Bede).
L 5, G.J THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 9
four with the old names. So that Zacharias did not belong to the
original course of Abijah, for that did not return from exile. Each
course was on duty twice during the year ; but we know far too
little about the details of the arrangement to derive any sure chron-
ology from the statements made by Lk. See on ii, 7.
Wieseler places the vision of Zacharias early in October A.U.C. 748 01 B.C. 6
(Ckrott. Syn. ii. 2, Eng. tr. p. 123). With this result Edersheim agrees (L. and
71 i. p. 135), as also does Andrews (Z-. of our Lord ^ p. 52, ed. 1892). Lewin
prefers May i6th, B.C. 7 (Fasti Sacri^ 836). Caspari is for July iSth, B.C. 3j
but remarks "how little reliance is to be placed upon conclusions of this kind"
(Chron. EinL 42, Eng. tr. p. 57). For the courses of priests, see Herzog,
PRE* art. Pnestertum im A.T. ; Schiirer, Jewish People in the T. ofj* C*
ii. i, pp. 216-220.
yu^r] aurw eic TO>P OuYaT^pw *Aap(6i>. "He had a wife," not "his
wife was" (AV.). Lk. follows LXX in omitting the art. with the
gen. after flvydryp : comp. xiii. 16 and the quotations Mt. xxi, 5
and Jn. xii. 15, and contrast Mt. xiv. 6. To be a priest and
married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction. It was a
common summary of an excellent woman, " She deserves to marry
a priest" In the fullest sense John was of priestly birth. See
IVetst : Sacrosancta pr&cur sorts nobilitas non solum a parentibus>
ted etiam a progenitoribus gloriosa descendit (Bede). Aaron's wife
was Elisabeth- Elisheba = " God is my oath."
6. SiKdioi. Once a term of high praise, and meaning righteous-
ness in the fullest sense (Ezek. xviii. 5, 9, n, 19, 20, 22, 24, 26);
but it had come to mean little more than careful observance of
tegal duties. The addition of the Hebraistic l^amoH TOU Oeou
^Acts viii. 21 ; Gen. vi. 8, n, 13, vii. i, x. 9) gives Sucaioi its full
meaning : Zacharias and Elisabeth were saints of the O.T. type.
Symeon is called St'/ccuos (ii. 25), and Joseph (Mt i. 19). Comp.
St/catOF etvat /x* a t'Oftos ^ tj^^crt? ff a/ta TrapeT^ r<3 ew (Eur. Ion*
643). The Gospel was to restore to &'/ccuos its -original spiritual
meaning. See detached note on the word SIKCUOS and its cognates^
Rom. i. 17. For djj^orepoi. see on v. 7.
-rropeuopLe^oi Iv ircicrats rats erroXats teal StKatojjxacrtK T. K. Another
Hebraism (Deut. xxviii. 9 j i Sam. viii. 3, 5 ; i Kings iii. 14, etc.).
The distinction often drawn, that cvroXai are moral, while SCK<U<-
ftara are ceremonial, is baseless ; the difference is, that the latter
is the vaguer term. Here, although they differ in gender, they
have only one article and adjective, because they are so similar in
meaning. Comp. Col. ii. 22 ; Rev. v. 12 ; and see Win. xix. 3 c^
Li 5 7. The two words are found combined Gen. xxvi. 5 and
ut iv. 40. For SiicaicSjxaTa, " things declared right, ordinances,"
comp. Rom. ii. 26 and Heb. ix. i, and see note in Sf. Comm. on
i Cor. v. 6 as to the force of the termination -/ia. The genitive
here, as in Rom, ii. 26 and viii, 4, expresses the authority from
ID THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [3L 6~a
which the ordinance springs. The ajxejurroi anticipates what
follows, and, of course, does not mean that they were sinless. No
one is sinless; but the conduct of some is free from reproach.
Comp. Phil iii. 6.
7. KG! OUK fy aurois T^KKOK. This calamity is grievous to all
Orientals, and specially grievous to Jews, each of whom is ambitious
of being among the progenitors of the Messiah. It was commonly
believed to be a punishment for sin (Lev. xx. 20, 21 ; Jer. xxii. 30).
The story of Glaucus, who tempted the oracle at Delphi, and " at
the present time has not a single descendant" (Hdt. vi. 86. 16),
indicates a similar belief among the Greeks. Zacharias and
Elisabeth had the sorrow of being childless, as Anna of being
husbandless, and all three had their consolation. Comp. the
births of Samson and Samuel, both of whom were Nazirites, and
of Isaac.
Peculiar to Lk. " Because that" (xix. 9 ; Acts H. 24, xvii. 31),
or "according as" (Acts ii. 45, iv. 35). In class. Grk. editors commonly
write Ka$ 9 S rt. The clause /cai d/06repot . . . f)<ra,v does not depend upon
Kct&6ri t which would be illogical, but is a separate statement. Their age
would not explain why they had had no children, but why they were not likely
to have any. " They had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren ; and
they were both advanced in years," so that they had no hope of children.
iv rats i^pcus aurwi'. Hebraistic : in class. Grk.
we should rather have had rfj ^AWa. In LXX we have Trpo/Se/?.
tytie/xus, or ^e/jcov, or TWV ^e/xov (i Kings L i; Gen. xxiv. i ; Josh.
xiii. i). Levites were superannuated at about sixty, but a priest
served as long as he was able.
8. "Ey^vcro . . * Xaxe. On the various constructions with y&ro in
Lk. see detached note at the end of this chapter ; and on 4v T$ Upon-cvc?
-&T<$V, ** while he was officiating as priest," which is another very favourite
construction with Lk., see on iii. 21. The verb Upareijetv is freq. in LXX,
but occurs nowhere else in N.T. It is not found earlier than LXX, but is not
rare in later Greek. See Kennedy, Sources ofN. T. Grk. p. 119. The phrase
Kara rd e0og is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (ii. 42, xxii. 39), but occurs in Theod.
Bel 15 ; and Zdos occurs ten times in his writings, and only twice elsewhere
(Jn. xix. 40 ; Heb. x. 25). Comp. *ard rb elQwptvov (ii. 27) and KO.T& rb eiwdfa
(iv. 16 ; Acts xvii, 2). It is for the sake of those who were unfamiliar with the
usages of the temple that he says that it was " according to the custom of the
priest's service " that it was decided by lot which priest should offer incense.
To take /card r6 0os r^s leparia.3 with what precedes robs it of all point ; it is
tautology to say that he was officiating as priest according to the custom of Jic
priest's service. But the number of cases in which Lk. has a clause or word
which is grammatically amphibolous is very large ; w, 25, 27, ii. 22, wherf
see note. The word lepareLa occurs in N.T. only here and Heb. vii. 5. "In
relation to lepwrvvij (Heb. vii. II, 12, 24} it expresses the actual service of
the priests, and not the office of priesthood " (Wsctt on Heb. vii. 5).
TOU Oujxiaoui. The casting of lots took place twice a day,
at the morning and the evening offering of incense. In the morn-
L 8-11.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 1 1
ing the drawing lots for offering the incense was the third and chief
of a series of drawings, four in all ; in the evening it was the only
one. We do not know whether this was morning or evening. No
priest might have this honour twice ; and the number of priests
was so great that many never offered the incense. The fortunate
lot was a i/o5<os Xcu/a;, to which there is a possible reference
Rev. ii. 17. The priest who obtained it chose two others to help
him ; but, when they had done their part, they retired, leaving him
alone in the Holy Place. For the very elaborate details see
Edersh. The Temple -, its Ministry and Services > pp. 129-142.
The gen. TOV Sumatrai is probably governed by Xaxe, which in class. Grk.
commonly has a gen. when it means " became possessed of," and an ace.
when it means " obtained by lot" (Acts i. 17 ; comp. 2 Pet. i. i). In I Sam.
xiv. 47 we have Saoz>X Xa%e [a!. L /caTa/cXiypoDrcu] TOV pa<n\veiv 6rl 'Icr/ja^X.
The t<T\6&v els rbv vabv must be taken with tivfuacrai, not with Xax ** he
obtained by lot to go in and burn incense," not " after entering into the vabs
he obtained by lot to burn incense." The lots were cast before he entered the
Holy Place, which was the front part of the va6$.
10. v:S,v T& irX^Oos r\v TOU Xaou 7rpocrU)(6|xeroi>. Cod. Am. has the
same order, omnis multitude erat populi orans. The position of
TOV Xaov is against taking yv with irpo<revx6/j>evov as the analytical
tense instead of the imperf., a constr. of which Lk. is very fond
(w. 20, 21, 22, ii. 33, iv. 17, 31, 38, 44, etc.); fy may mean
"was there," or "there was," and TOV Xaov be epexegetic of TO
TrA^o?. But certainty is unattainable and unimportant. We need
not infer from TTO.V r& 7r\f)@o<s that there was a great multitude. As
compared with the solitary priest in the vaos, all the worshippers
outside were a irXyOos. The word is a favourite one with Lk., who
uses it twenty-five times against seven in the rest of N.T. It is
remarkable that prayer is not expressly mentioned in the Law as
part of public worship, except in connexion with the offering of the
first-fruits (Deut. xxvi. 15). But comp. i Kings viii. 33-48 j
2 Chron, vi. 14-42 ; Is. Ivi. 7. The people were inside the icpov,
although outside (efo>) the vaos, and the other priests would be
between them and the vaos.
11. atyOi) Se aurw ayyeAos Kuptou. It was the most solemn
moment of his life, when he stood alone in that sacred spot to offer
the pure and ideal symbol of the imperfect prayer which he and
those outside were offering. The unique circumstances contri-
buted to make him conscious of that unseen world which is around
all of us (2 Kings vi. 17 ; comp. Lk. xv. 7, 10). For &<t>@r} see on
xxii. 43 ; and for an analysis of the psychological facts see Lange,
Z. of Christ, bk. ii. pt ii. 2 ; Eng. tr. i. 264. But must we not
choose between admitting an objective appearance and rejecting
the whole as a myth? To explain it as a "false perception" or
optical delusion, Lc* a purely subjective result of psychological
12 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 11-13.
causes, seems to be not admissible. In that case Zacharias, like Lord
Herbert of Cherbury, 1 would have accepted the sign which he sup-
posed that he had received. To believe in the reality of a subject-
ive appearance and not believe its testimony is a contradiction.
Moreover, the psychological explanation leaves the dumbness to be
explained. Again, we have similar appearances ver. 26, ii. 9, 13,
xxii. 43, xxiv. 4. Can we accept here an explanation which is very
difficult (ii. 9, 13) or inadmissible (xxiv. 4) elsewhere? Are all
these cases of false perception ? See Paley, Evidences of Christi-
anity, prop, ii, ch. i. ; Mill, Pantheistic Principles ', ii. i. 4, p. 123,
2nd ed. 1861 \ Edersh. L. 6* T. i. p. 142, ii. g. 751.
e*c euoi> TOU 0ucriao-rr]piou. The place of honour. It was " the
right side of the altar," not of Zacharias, who was facing it. Comp.
Acts vii. 55, 56. The right side was the south side, and the Angel
would be between the altar and the golden candlestick. On the
left, or north side, of the altar was the table with the shewbread.
12. <J>6/3os eTreVecrey ITT* auroV. Fear is natural when man be-
comes suddenly conscious of contact with the unseen : Humanx
fragihtatis est spirituals creature msione turbari (Bede). Comp.
ii. 9, ix. 34; Judg. vi. 22, xiii. 22 ; Job iv. 15, etc. For the phrase
comp. Acts xix. 17; Exod. xv. 16; Judith xv. 2. In class. Grk.
the dat. is more usual : Thuc. iii. 87. i ; Xen. Anab. ii. 2. 19 ; Eur.
Andr. 1042.
13. ctirei/ 8c trpos auroV. Both etTrev e and dirty Trpos are very
freq. in Lk., who prefers *7rev Se to /ecu etTrcv even at the beginning
of narratives, and uses Trpos avroV, arrow's, K.r.X. in preference to
avraJ, aurois, /c.r.A., after verbs of speaking, answering, etc., to an
extent which is quite remarkable (vv. 18, 19, 34, 55, 61, 73,
ii. 15, 1 8, 20, 34, 48, 49, etc. etc.). This Trpos is so strong a mark
of his style that it should be distinguished in translation : clrro/
Trpos ttvroV, " He said unto him," and eiTrev avrw, " He said to him."
But not even E.V. does this.
MY) 4>o|3oG. This gracious charge is specially common in Lk.
(ver. 30, ii. 10, viii. 50, xii. 4, 7, 32 ; Acts xviii. 9, xxvii. 24),
Bengel says of it, Primum alloquium caleste in aurora JV.T. per
Lucam amcsnissime descrifta, Comp. Gen. xv. i ; Josh. viii. i;
Is. xliii. i, 5, xliv. 2; Jer. xlvi. 27, 28; Dan. x. 12.
Stem. "Because," as generally in N,T. Comp. ii. 7, xxi, 28.
It never means "therefore"; not Rom. i. 19 nor i Thes. ii 18.
elo-ijKoua0Yj r\ Serjcris <rou. "Thy supplication was heard," at the
time when it was offered. The pass, is used both of the petition
(Acts x. 31 ; Ps. iv. 2) and of the petitioner (Mt. vi. 7 ; Heb. v. 7).
The word Se-^o-ts implies personal need) it is a "special petition for
the supply of want" (Lft. on Phil. iv. 6; Trench, Syn. Ii.). Un-
like Trpoo-eux^, it may be used of petitions to men The word
1 Life> written by himself, $*&fin^ pp, 171 ff. ed. 1792, pp. 24* ff. txL 1824*
L 13, 14.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 1 3
favours, but by no means proves, the view that the prayer of
Zacharias was for a son. And the context at first seems to con-
firm this. But would Zacharias have made his private wishes the
main subject of his prayer at so unique an opportunity ? Would
he have prayed for what he regarded as impossible? As Bede
remarks, Nemo orat quod se accepturum desferat. Having prayed
for it as possible, would he have refused to believe an Angel who
told him that the petition was granted ? It is much more probable
that he and the people were praying for the redemption of Israel,
for the coming of the Messiah's kingdom ; and it is this supplica-
tion which was heard. To make Sevens refer to habitual suppli-
cation, and not to the prayer offered with the incense, seems
unnatural.
What Didon points out (p. 298) in quite a different connexion seems to
have point here. It was an axiom with the Rabbins that a prayer in which
there was no mention of the kingdom of God was no prayer at all (Babyl^
Beracoth, fol. 40, 2) ; and in the ritual of the temple the response of the
people to the prayers of the priests was, " Blessed be the name of the glory of
the Kingdom of God for ever" (Badyl^ Taanith, foL 1 6, 2): Jesus Christ >
ed. 1891. See also Edersh. The Tempk, p. 127.
KCU TJ yuH] aou 'EXeicrdpcr yt^a-ci utoV croi. Not ^ ywj; yap.
" For thy wife shall bear thee a son " would have made it dear
that the son was the answer to the SeVrts. But " and thy wife
shall bear thee a son " may mean that this is an additional boon,
which (as ver. 17 shows) is to prepare the way for the blessing
prayed for and granted. Thus, like Solomon, Zacharias receives
the higher blessing for which he prayed, and also the lower blessing
for which he did not pray.
IWdw is generally used of the father (Mt. i. 1-16 ; Acts vii, 8, 29 % Gen.
v. 3-30, xi. 10-28, etc.) ; but sometimes of the mother (ver. 57, xxiiL 20 }
Jn. xvi. 21 ). The best authorities give 'Iwdvjjs, with only one r (WH. u.
App. p. 159). In LXX we have Iwdv^y (2 Chron. xxviii. 12) ; 'Ibtttya?
2 Chron. xvii. 15 j Neh. xii. 13); 'Iwdp (Neh. vi. 18); lewd (2 Kingi
xxv. 23 ; comp. Jn. xxi. 15-17). All these forms are abbreviations of Jeho-
hanan, "Jehovah's gift," or " God is gracious." Gotthold is a German name
of similar meaning. It was a Rabbinical saying that the names of six were
given before they were born Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Jooiah, and
Messiah.
14. iroXXot Im rtj yf&rct aurou xap^fOTai* With the waAAof
here contrast iravrl TO> Ao<3 in ii 10. The joy at the appearance of
a Prophet after centuries of need was immense, although not uni-
versal. The Pharisees did not dare to say that John was not a
Prophet (Mt xxi. 26) ; and Herod, until driven to it, did not dare
to put him to death (Mt xiv. 5). The word dyaXXtao-i? means
" extreme joy, exultation." It is not class., but is freq, in LXX*
Elsewhere in N.T. only ver, 44 ; Acts ii. 46 ; Jude 24 ; Heb. L 9
(from Ps. xliv. 8).
14 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 14, 15.
In class. Grk. %aJp7 more often has the simple dat, but iwl is usual in
N.T. (xiii. 17 ; Acts xv. 31 ; Mt. xviii. 13, etc.). It marks the basis of the
joy. The reading 'yevvijra (G X T) for yevfrei (tf A B C D) probably comes
from yew/irei in ver. 13.
15. <rrcu yap fiyas IV&TTIQV [TOU] Kupiou. For he shall be great
in the truest sense of the term. Whatsoever a character man has
before God, of that character he really is.
The adj. &&TTIOS is found in Theocr. (xxii. 152) and in LXX,
as a prep, seems to be confined to LXX and N.T. It is not in Mt. or Mk.,
but is specially freq. in Lk. (w. 17, 19, 75, iv. 7, v. 18, 25, etc.), as also
in Rev. The phrase tvuirlov row Kvptov or Qeov is a Hebraism (xii. 6, xvi. 15;
Acts iv. 19, vii. 46, x. 31, 33; Judg. xi. n ; I Sam. x. 19 ; 2 Sam. v. 3,
vi. 5). The preposition retains this meaning in modem Greek.
ttl critcepa ofl jx^j mrj. He is to drink neither wine nor
any intoxicating liquor other than wine. The same Hebrew word
is rendered sometimes cri/cepa, sometimes /Lt&W/za, and sometimes
a-tKcpa /jLeOvo-fjia (Lev. x. 9 ; Num. vi. 3 Judg. xiii. 4, 7, 14).
Wiclif here has "ne wine ne syder." See D*B? art. "Drink,
Strong." John is to be a Nazirite, not only for a time, as was
usual, but for all his life, as Samson and Samuel. This is not
disproved by the omission of the command not to cut his hair
(Edersh. The Temple^ p. 322). Eusebius (Pr&p, Evang. vi. 10. 8)
has gen. o-i/cepo?, and crwceparos is also quoted ; but mKcpa is usually
undeclined.
nycufAaTos dyiou 7rXi]<r9i]<TTcu. This is in obvious contrast to
olvov KOL <r(KepoL. In place of the physical excitement of strong
drink he is to have the supernatural inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
The whole phrase is peculiar to Lk. (uv. 41, 67 ; Acts ii. 4,
iv. 8, 31, ix. 17, xiii. 9); and the two elements of it are specially
characteristic of him. Excepting Mt xxii. 10, xxvii. 48; Jn.
xix. 29, irifjmXijfu occurs only in Lk., who uses it twenty-two times.
Mt. has the expression " Holy Spirit " five times, Mk. and Jn. each
four times. Lk. has it fifty-three times, of which twelve are in the
Gospel. He uses three forms: wefyia aytov (i, 15, 35, 41, 67,
[ii. 25,] iii. 1 6, iv. I, xi. 13); TO aytov -nrevfia (xii 10, 12); and TO
irvev/j,a TO aytov (ii. 26, iii. 22). According to Schoettgen (i.
p. 255), "to be filled with the Holy Spirit is " locutio Judms famiS-
arts. He gives one example. Comp. the contrast in Eph. v. 18.
ITV lie KoiXCas ntjTp&s O/UTOV, A Hebraism (Ps. xxii. 1 1, bcxi. 6; !.
xlbc. i. 5: comp. Judg. xiii. 5, 7, xvi. 17* Job xxxi. 18, etc.); instead of
the more classical J/c yeverys, with or without etiQiSs (Horn. //. xxiv. 535, O&
xviii. 6; Arist. th Nic* vi. 13. i, vii. 14. 4, viii. 12. 6). For the rt
comp. #rt K ftptyeos, #rt dw' dpx^?> &n xal K irapbrrw, where &rt seems to
mean "even." The expression does not imply that John was filled with the
Spirit before he was born (ver. 41). In LXX KoiKla is oft-n used of the
womb (see esp. Jer. i. 5) ; but this is very rare in class. Grk,
I 16, 17.J THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 1 5
16, 17. The two personal characteristics just stated subjection
of the flesh and sovereignty of the spirit will manifest themselves
in two external effects, a great religious revival and the prepara-
tion for the Messianic kingdom. The first of these was the
recognized work of every Prophet Israel, through sin, was con-
stantly being alienated from God; and it was one of the chief
functions of a Prophet to convert the people to God again (Jer,
iii. 7, 10, 14, xviii. 8 ; Ezek. iii. 19; Dan. ix, 13).
K\ a$T<$s The personal pronouns are much more used in N.T. f*mp in
class. Grk., esp. in the oblique cases. But even in the nom. the pronoun is
sometimes inserted, although there is little or no emphasis. Lk. is very fond
of beginning sentences witn * a * atfrfo, even where <xt>r6s can hardly mean
"he on his part," as distinct from others (iii. 23, v. 14, 17, vi. 20, etc.). In
rpo\evfferai we have another mark of Lk.'s style. Excepting Mk. vL 33
and 2 Cor. be. 5, the verb is peculiar to Lk. In N.T. (zxii. 47 ; Acts xii IO,
$, I 3>-
aflrou. "Before God," who conies to His people in
the person of the Messiah (Is. xl. i-iij Mai. iii 1-5). It is
unlikely that afaov means the Messiah, who has not yet been
mentioned. There is no analogy with avros <a, ipse dixit^ where
the pronoun refers to some one so well known that there is no
need to mention him by name. For Iv&mov see on ver. 15; and
for SuVafus, on iv. 14, 36. Elijah is mentioned, not as a worker of
miracles, for "John did no sign " (Jn. x. 41), but as a preacher of
repentance: it was in this that the Baptist had his spirit and
power. For Rabbinic traditions respecting Elijah as the Fore-
runner see Edersh. Z. 6* T. ii. p. 706.
The omission of the articles before m>cvfia.n and tiwdptt is probably due
to the influence of an Aramaic original, in which the gen. which follows
would justify the omission. Proper names in -at pure commonly have gen.
in -ou (Mt i. 6, iii. 3) ; but here H\ela is the true reading.
icapSuxs -narlptav em r&ra. The literal interpretation
here makes good sense, and perhaps, on the whole, it is the best
In the moral degradation of the people even parental affection had
languished : comp. Ecclus. xlviil 10. Genuine reform strengthens
family ties; whatever weakens them is no true reform. Or the
meaning may be that the patriarchs will no longer be ashamed of
their offspring: comp. Is. bdii. 16. In any case, dirciOeis is not to
be referred to TCKVO. It is not the disobedience of children to
parents that is meant, but that of the Jews to God*
The Vulg. renders dretlrft by iwredibiUs> for which some MSS. have
iwrtdulos : comp. dis sociability ptnctrabilis for adjectives in -bilis with thit
force. Lat. Vet. varies : ineruditos (/), no* consentientes (a?), cotttttmaccs (c\
4v 4>pov^cri SucaCov* The prep, of rest after a verb of motion expresses
the result of the motion (viii. 17 ; Mt. xiv. 3) : "Turn tnem 50 as to be in
the wisdom rf the just" For fyfoijeu see Lft on Col. L 9; the
16 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE pL 17-19,
occurs only here and Eph. i. 8 in N.T. De Wette, Bleck, and others main-
tain that <f>p6vr}o-i,s here means simply "disposition," Gestnnung. In what
follows it is better to make troifjuiffai dependent upon &rtffrp4iptu 9 not
co-ordinate with it. The preparation is the consequence of the conversion,
and the final object of the irpoeXeiVera* : ne Dominus populum imparatum
majestaU sua obterat (Beng. ).
18. Karct TI y^o-ojiat -TOUTO; The very question asked by
Abraham (Gen. xv. 8) : " In accordance with what shall I obtain
knowledge of this ? " Le. What shall be in harmony with it, so as
to be a sign of it ? Comp. the cases of Gideon (Judg. vi. 36-39)
and of Hezekiah (2 Kings xx. 8), who asked for signs ; also of
Moses (Exod. iv. 2-6) and of Ahaz (Is. vii. n), to whom signs
were given unasked. The spirit in which such requests are made
may vary much, although the form of request may be the same ,
and the fact that Zacharias had all these instances to instruct him
made his unbelief the less excusable. By his cyo> yap dpt, K.T.A., he
almost implies that the Angel must have forgotten the fact
19. iiroicpiOels 6 ayY^os etircv. In Attic droKpbo/wu, in Homeric and
Ionic titroKplvofAat, is used in the sense of "answering." In N.T. itiroKpl-
vofuu occurs only once (xx. 20), and there of " acting a part,'* not " answer-
ing * s : comp. 2 Mac. v. 25. But diroKpiQels for the class, &T<>Kpw6.jj,vot
(which is rare in N.T.) marks the decay of the middle voice. In bibl. Grk.
the middle voice is dying ; in mod. Grk. it is dead. Machon, a comic poet
about B.C. 250, is perhaps the earliest writer who uses aireKpldiqv like
dTeKpLvdfjt,7)v in the sense of '* replied, answered." In LXX, as in N.T.,
dircKpLvd^v is rare (Judg. v. 29 [A]; I Kings ii. I ; I Chron. x. 13). See
Veitch, Greek Verbs, p. 78.
19. *Eyc eiju r<x|3ptr]X. Gabriel answers his !yw clfu with
another. "Thou art old, and not likely to have children, but
I am one whose word is to be believed " : dyyeAo) dmo-rets, icat TM
cwrooTet'Aaj/Ti (Eus.). The names of two heavenly beings are given
us in Scripture, Gabriel (Dan. viii. 16, ix. 21) and Michael (Dan.
x 13, 21, xii. r ; Jude 9 ; Rev. xii. 7); other names were given in
the later Jewish tradition. It is one thing to admit that such
names are of foreign origin, quite another to assert that the belief
which they represent is an importation. Gabriel, the "Man of
God," seems to be the representative of angelic ministry to man ;
Michael, "Who is like God," the representative of angelic opposi-
tion to Satan. In Scripture Gabriel is the angel of mercy, Michael
the angel of judgment In Jewish legend the reverse is the case,
proving that the Bible does not borrow Jewish fables. In the
Targums Gabriel destroys Sennacherib's army; in the CXT. he
instructs and comforts Daniel. The Rabbis said that Michael flies
in one flight, Gabriel in two, Elijah in four, and Death in eight ;
Le. mercy is swifter than judgment, and judgment is swifter than
destruction.
TOW oG, See on ver* 15. Gabriel is "the
X. 19, SO.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY I?
angel of His presence " (Is. Ixiii. 9 ; comp. Mt. xviii. 10). " Stand-
ing before" implies ministering. In LXX the regular phrase is
Trapa<rnjvat evw-tnov (Jobi. 6, which is a close parallel to this; i Kings
xvii. i, xviii. 15^2 Kings iii. 14, v. i6V It is also used of service
to a king (i Kings x. 8). But when Gehazi "stood before his
master," we have 7rapemj/cei irpos rov Kvpiov CLVTQV (2 Kings V. 25)*
Only here and ix. 27 does Lk. use the unsyncopated form of the perf. part
of timjfu. and its compounds. Elsewhere he prefers &mfo to foTTjK&s (i. II,
v. I, 2, xviii. 13 ; Acts iv. 14, vii. 55, etc.). In Mt. xxvii. 47 and Mk. ix.
I and xi. 5, &m?/*:&Ta?? is the right reading. In Jn. the unsyncopated form
is common.
Xa\TJcrat irpos ere KCU euayyeXtaaaOcu <rot Taora. This
reminds Zacharias of the extraordinary favour shown to him, and
so coldly welcomed by him. It is the first use in the Gospel
narrative of the word which was henceforward to be so current,
and to mean so much. In LXX it is used of any good tidings
(2 Sam. i. 20; i Chron. x. 9), but especially of communications
respecting the Messiah (Is. xl 9, Iii. 7, be. 6, Ixi. i). See on ii. ro
and iv. 18.
20. Kal 1806 I<nj atanrooy ical ji$) SuydjULeyos XaX-Jjorcu. The iSov is
Hebraistic, but is not rare in class. Grk. It introduces something
new with emphasis. Signum poscenti datur congruum, quamvis non
optatum (Beng.). The analytical form of the fut. marks the dura-
tion of the silence (comp. v. 10, vi. 40 ?, xvii. 35 ?, xxi. 17); and /t-J)
Swa/*,ej/os, K.T.X., is added to show that the silence is not ^ voluntary
act, but the sign which was asked for (comp. Dan. x. 15). Thus
his wrong request is granted in a way which is at once a judgment
and a blessing ; for the unbelief is cured by the punishment. For
) ^of dumbness comp. 4 Mac. x. 18.
We have here one of many parallels in expression between Gospel and
Acts. Comp. this with Acts xiii. u ; i. 39 with Acts i. 15 ; i. 66 with Acts
xi. 21 ; ii. 9 with Acts xii. 7 ; xv. 20 with Acts xx. 37 ; xxi. 18 with Acts
xxvii. 34 ; xxiv. 19 with Acts vii. 22.
In N.T. jtJ with the participle is the common constr., and in mod. Grk.
it is the invariable use. In Lk. there is only one instance of otf with a parti-
cipia (vi. 42). See Win. Iv. 5. /3, pp. 607-610 j Lft. Epp. oj St. Paul> p. 39,
1895. The combination of the negative with the positive statement of the
same thing, although found in class. Grk., is more common in Heb. literature.
In Acts xiii. 1 1 we have &r# rv<pf\bs f^ p\^irwp ; comp. Jn. i. 3, 20, iii. 1 6,
x. 5, 1 8, xviii. 20, xx. 27 ; Rev. ii. 13, iii. 9 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 30, 31, 48 ; 2 Sam.
xiv. 5 ; Is. xxxviii, i, etc.
axpi. fjs ^jUpas. Gal. iii. 19 is the only certain exception to the rule
that &XP L > n t &XP l $> usually precedes vowels in N.T. Comp. xvii. 27, xxi.
24, and see on xvi. 16. For the attraction, comp. Acts i. 2 ; Mt. xxiv. 38.
Attractions are specially freq. in Lk. See on iii. 19.
av0* ffiv. Only in this phrase does fort suffer elision in N.T. It is
equivalent to dvrl rovrwy 0ri, " for that, because " (xix. 44 ; Acts xii. 23 ;
2 Thes. ii. 10 ; Lev. xxvi. 43 ; 2 Kings xxii. 17 ; Ezek. v. ii). It is found
in class* Grk. (Soph. Ant. 1068 ; Aristoph. /*/**. 434).
2
1 8 THE COMPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L &0-
Stronger than the simple relative: "which are of such a
character that" Comp. ii. 10, vii. 37, 39, viii. 3, 15. Almost always in nom.
elf TK K<up&v a^Twv. That which takes place in a time may be regarded
as entering into that time : the words go on to their fulfilment. Comp. eh rd
ft&Xo* (xiiL 9) and c/ rb fMTa b <r<$3aroy (Acts xiii. 42).
8L ty 6 Xa&s irpoaSoKwv. As in ver. 20, the analytical tense
marks the duration of the action. Zacharias was longer than was
customary; and the Talmud states that the priests were accustomed
to return soon to prevent anxiety. It was feared that in so sacred
a place they might incur God's displeasure, and be slain (Lev. xvi.
13). Hence I0auji,aoy iv T$ xpo^l 61 "' "They were wondering while,
he tarried" Comp. ver. 8, and see on iii. 21. The common
rendering, " at his tarrying," or " because he tarried," quod tardaret>
is improbable even if possible. This would have been otherwise
expressed : c^av^o^ov Ivl (ii. 33, iv. 22, ix. 43, etc.), which D reads
here; or Sia (Mk. vi. 6; Jn. vii. 21); or ort (xi 38; Jn. iii. 7, iv.
27); or vepl(\L 18).
23. oOit 8<5mTo XaXtjo-at afirois. He ought to pronounce the
benediction (Num. vL 24-26) from the steps, either alone or with
other priests. His look and his inability to speak told them at
once that something extraordinary had taken place ; and the sacred
circumstances would suggest a supernatural appearance, even if his
signs did not make this clear to them.
The compound lirfyvwo-ov implies clear recognition and full knowledge
(v. 22, xxiv. i6, 31) ; and the late form diprcurfav (for 6$iv) is commonly used
of supernatural sights (xxiv. 23 ; Acts xxyi. 19 ; 2 Cor. xii. I ; Dan. ix. 23,
x. I, 7, 8, 16). For ical a<&T<5s "he on his part," as distinct from the con-
gregation, see on ver. 17, and Win. xxii. 4. b, p. 187. The periphrastic tense
TJV Biavrvw again calls attention to the continued action. The verb is found
here only in N.T., but occurs twice in LXX (Ps. xxxiv. 19 ; Ecclus. xxvii.
22). In Silp.ci.v6 Ko><|><$g both the compound and the tense emphasize the fact
that it was no mere temporary seizure (xxii. 28 ; Gal. ii. 5 ; 2 Pet. iii. 4).
23* <&S irX^cr0ir|cra>> at ^/jL^pat TTJS Xciroupyuis aorou. When the
week for which the course of Abijah was on duty for public service
was at an end. See on w. 15 and 57, In class. Grk. \irovpyia
(/Uo>$, Ipyov) is freq. of public service undertaken by a citizen at
his own expense. In bibl. Grk. it is used of priestly service in the
worship of God (Heb. viii. 6, ix. 21; Num. viii. 22, xvi. 9, xviii. 4;
2 Chron. xxxL 2), and also of service to the needy (2 Cor. ix. 12;
Phil, ii, 30).
Airij\0K is rby otitov afiroo. This was not in Jerusalem, in the
Ophel quarter, where many of the priests resided, but in an un-
named town in the hill-country south of Jerusalem (ver. 39). It is
probable that most of the priests who did not live in the city itself
resided in the towns and villages in the neighbourhood. Con-
venience would suggest that they should live inside Judsea* I
Neh. xi 10-19 we have 1192 priests in Jerusalem; in i Chron, ix
L 23-25.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY ip
13 we have 1760. Later authorities speak of 24,000; but such
figures are very untrustworthy. The whole question of the resi-
dences of the priests is an obscure one, and Josh. xxi. must not be
quoted as evidence for more than a projected arrangement That
it was carried into effect and maintained^ or that it was revived after
the Exile, is a great deal more than we know. Schiirer, Jewish
People in the T. off. C. ii. i, p. 229.
24. o-ui/<(Xa|3i'. The word occurs eleven times in Lk. against
five times elsewhere. He alone uses it in the sense of conceiving
offspring, and only in these first two chapters (vv. 31, 36, ii. 21).
This sense is common in medical writers and in Aristotle. Hobart
remarks that the number of words referring to pregnancy and
barrenness used by Lk. is almost as great as that used by Hippo-
crates : cv yacrrpi e^etv (xxi. 23), ey/cvos (ii. 5), orcipa (i. 7), OLTCKVOS
(xx. 28). And, excepting cv ycwrrpt c^ciy, all of these are peculiar
to himself in N.T. (Med. Lang, of Lk. p. 91).
Trspi&cpupei/ <XUTTJI> pji/as ir^re. The reflexive pronoun brings
out more forcibly than the middle voice would have done that the
act was entirely her own (Acts xxiii. 14; i Cor. XL 31; i Jn. L 8) ;
and the compound verb implies all round, complete concealment
Her motive can only be conjectured ; but the enigmatical conduct
and remark are evidence of historic truth, for they would not be
likely to be invented. The five months are the first five months ;
and at the end of them it would be evident that she had ceased
to be 17 o-TLpa (ver. 36). During these five months she did not
wish to risk hearing a reproach, which had ceased to be true, but
which she would not care to dispute. She withdrew, therefore,
until all must know that the reproach had been removed.
The form ticpvpor is late : in class. Grk. &pv^a is used* But a present
pw is found, of which this might be the imperfect
It can hardly be accidental that /$*> is scarcely ever used in N.T. in a
literal sense by any writer except Lk., who has it five times in his Gospel
and five times in the Acts. The chronological details involved in tnis
frequent use are the results of the careful investigation of which he writes in
the preface. The other passages are Gal. iv. loj Jas. v. 17, and six times
in Revelation. So also Irot occurs fifteen times in Lk. and six in Mt Mk.
and Jn.
S5. lircLSey d<j>eXetv oVeiBo's fiou IF dvOprfiroi*. The object of
Sev is neither c/xe understood (as all English Versions except
Wic. and Rhem.) nor TO omSos JJLOV (Hermann), but d<eXw:
" watched to take away, taken care to remove." The constr. seems
to be unique; but comp. Acts xv. 14. Alford and Holtzmann
translate "hath designed, condescended to remove"; but can
cTretScv mean that? Elsewhere in N.T. it occurs only Acts iv. 295
but in class. Grk. it is specially used of the gods regarding human
affairs (Aesch SuppL i. 1031 ; Sept. 485). Hdt L 124. a is not
2O THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [1.25,28.
rightly quoted as parallel. Omitting cVaoW, Rachel makes the
same remark : "A^etXev 6 eos jtxou TO oVetSos (Gen. xxx. 23 ; comp.
Ps. cxiiu 9; Is. iv. i); but the different position of the /xov is
worth noting. In fr avOpwroi? we have another amphibolous
expression (see on ver. 8). It may be taken with d^eXetv, but
more probably it belongs to ri oVeiSos jmov (ver. 36).
6-38. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour. 1
The birth of the Baptist is parallel to the birth of Isaac ; that
of the Messiah to the creation of Adam. Jesus is the second
Adam. But once more there is no violent breach with the past
Even in its revolutions Providence is conservative. Just as the
Prophet who is to renovate Israel is taken from the old priesthood,
so the Christ who is to redeem the human race is not created out
of nothing, but "born of a woman."
26. els ir<5W rfjs TaXtXatas p oVojia Naapr. The description
perhaps implies that Lk. is writing for those who are not familiar
with the geography of Palestine. There is no reason for believing
that he himself was unfamiliar with it. Comp. ver. 39, iv. 31,
vii. n, viii. 26, ix. 10, xvii. n, xix. 29, 37, 41.
Galilee is one of many geographical names which have gradually extended
their range. It was originally a little "circuit" of territory round Kadesh-
Naphtali containing the towns given by Solomon to Hiram ( I Kings ix. 1 1 ).
This was called the "circuit of the Gentiles," because the inhabitants were
strangers (I Mac. v. 15, FaX. aXXo^z/Xwr), But it grew, until in the time of
Christ it included the territory of Naphtali, Asher, Zebulon, and Issachar
(D.B? i, p. 1117). For a description of this region see Jos, J3,f, iii. 3. 1-3.
ffazarcth is mentioned neither in O.T. nor in Josephus, but it was probably
not a new town in our Lord's time. The site is an attractive one, in a basin
among the south ridges of Lebanon. The sheltered valley is very fruitful, and
abounds in flowers. From the hill behind the town the view over Lebanon,
Hermon, Carmel, the Mediterranean, Gilead, Tabor, Gilboa, the plain of
Esdraelon, and the mountains of Samaria, is very celebrated (Renan, Vie de /.
p. 27). It would seem as if Mt. (ii. 23) was not aware that Nazareth was the
original home of Joseph and Mary.
1 *' It has been argued that the different modes in which God is recorded to
have communicated with men, in St. Matthew by dreams and in St. Luke by
Angels, show the extent of the subjective influence of the writer's mind upon,
the narrative. But surely those are right who see in this difference the use of
various means adapted to the peculiar state of the recipient. Moreover, as St.
Matthew recognizes the ministry of Angels (xxviii. 2), so St. Luke relate*
Visions (Acts x. 9-16, xvi. 9, xviii. 9, 10). . . . It is to be noticed that the
contents of the divine messages (Matt. i. 20, 21 ; Luke i. 30-33) are related
conversely to the general character of the Gospels, as a consequence of the
difference of character in those to whom they are addressed. The promise of
Redemption is made to Joseph ; of a glorious Kingdom to the Virgin " ( Wsctt.
/nf. to Gospels^ p. 317, 7th ed.)-
L 26-28.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 21
The form of the nair e of the town varies much, between Nazareth, Nazaret,
Nazara, and Nazarath. Keim has twice contended strongly for Nazara (J. a)
Naz.t Eng. tr. ii. p. 16, iv. p. 108) ; but he has not persuaded many of the
correctness of his conclusions. WH. consider that "the evidence when
tabulated presents little ambiguity" (ii. App. p. 160). Nafapdd is found
frequently (eight out of eleven times) in Codex A, but hardly anywhere else.
Nafapd is used once by Mt. (iv. 13), and perhaps once by Lk. (iv. 16).
Na<fcp<?0 occurs once in Mt. (xxi. ii) and once in Acts (x. 38). Everywhere
else (Mt. ii. 23; Mk. i. 9; Lk. i. 26, ii. 4, 39, 51 ; Jn. i. 46, 47) we have
certainly or probably Nafap^r. Thus Mt. uses the three possible forms
equally ; Lk. all three with a decided preference for Nazaret ; while Mk. and
Jn. use Nazaret only. This appears to be fairly conclusive for Nazaret. Yet
Scrivener holds that " regarding the orthography of this word no reasonable
certainty is to be attained" (Int. to Crit. ofN.T. ii. p. 316); and Alford
seems to be of a similar opinion (i. Prolegom* p. 97). Weiss thinks that
Nazara may have been the original form, but that it had already become
unusual when the Gospels were written. The modern town is called JStt
Nazirah) and is shunned by Jews. Its population of 5000 is mainly Christian,
with a few Mahometans.
27. fjbiT)<rTeufjb&'i]i'. This is the N.T. form of the word (ii. 5) : in
LXX we have /^v^crreu/*. (Deut. xxii. 2-8). The interval between
betrothal and marriage was commonly a year, during which the
bride lived with her friends. But her property was vested in her
future husband, and unfaithfulness on her part was punished, like
adultery, with death (Deut. xxii. 23, 24). The case of the woman
taken in adultery was probably a case of this kind.
l OIKOO Aauio*4 It is unnecessary, and indeed impossible, to
decide whether these words go with d?opt, or with irapOcvov, or
with both. The last is the least probable, but Chrysostom and
Wieseler support it. From w* 32 and 69 we may with probability
infer that Lk. regards Mary as descended from David. In ii. 4 he
states this of Joseph. Independently of the present verse, therefore,
we may infer that, just as John was of priestly descent both by
Zacharias and Elisabeth, so Jesus was of royal descent both by
Mary and Joseph. The title " Son of David" was publicly given
to Jesus and never disputed (Mt L i, ix. 27, xii. 23, xv. 22,
xx- 3 S 1 ) Mt x. 47, 48 ; Lk. xviii. 38, 39). In the Test. XIL
Patr. Christ is said to be descended from Levi and Judah
(Simeon vii.); and the same idea is found in a fragment of
Irenseus (Frag, xvii., Stieren, p. 836). It was no doubt based,
as Schleiermacher bases it (St. Luke^ Eng. tr. p. 28), on the fact
that Elisabeth, who was of Levi, was related to Mary (see on
ver. 36). The repetition involved in rrfs TrapO^ou is in favour of
taking l OLKOV Aave$ with avSpt: otherwise we should have ex-
pected avr^s. But this is not conclusive.
sa Xatpe, Kcxapmujji,^. 1 Note the alliteration and the con-
1 The Avc Maria as a liturgical address to the Virgin consists of thr
parts, two of which are scriptural and one not The first two parts, " Hail,
Mary, fMl>of grace: the kord is with thee," and "Blessed art thoa among
22 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [t 28-30.
nexion between x a ~P an ^ x^P^- The **&**& pkna of the Vulg.
is too indefinite. It is right, if it means "full of grace, which
thou hast reatved" ; wrong, if it means "full of grace, which
thou hast to bestow? From Eph. i. 6 and the analogy of verbs
in -o<o, xej(aptra>/x^ must mean "endued with grace" ^Ecclus.
xviii. 17). Non ut mater grati^ sed ut filia gratix (Beng.).
What follows explains Kx a P i ' r < t >l JL * vr ]y f r w ^h /^era <rov we under-
stand cart, not ccrro) (comp. Judg. vi. 12). It is because the Lord
is with her that she is endued with grace. Tyn., Cov., and Cran.,
no less than Wic. and Rhem., have " full of grace " ; Genev. has
"freely beloved."
The familiar etfXoy^j^ <ni) h fvv<u%lv 9 although well attested (A C D X
fAII, Latt. Syrr. Aeth. Goth., Tert. Ens.), probably is an interpolation
borrowed from ver. 42 : N B L, Aegyptt. Arm. omit.
29. Here also ISovaa (A), for which some Latin texts have cum audisset,
is an interpolation borrowed perhaps from ver. 12. It is not stated that Mary
saw Gabriel. The pronominal use of the article (17 5^) is rare in N.T.
(Acts i. 6 ; Mt. ii. 5, 9). It is confined to phrases with yv and d 9 and
mostly to nom. masc. and fern.
Here only in N.T. It is stronger than
in ver. 12. Neither Zacharias nor Mary are accustomed to
visions or voices : they are troubled by them. There is no
evidence of hysterical excitement or hallucination in either case.
The 8ieXoyi6To, "reckoned up different reasons," is in itself
against this. The verb is confined to the Synoptic Gospels
(v. 21, 22 ; Mk. ii. 6, 8) : Jn. xi. 50 the true reading is Aoyf7>o-0.
iroTainJs. In N.T. this adj. never has the local signification,
"from what country or nation?" cujast (Aesch. Cho. 575 ; Soph.
O*C. 1 1 60). It is synonymous with ?rotos, a use which is found in
Demosthenes ; and it always implies astonishment, with or without
admiration (vii. 39 ; Mt. viii. 27 ; Mk. xiii. r ; 2 Pet. iii. ii ; i Jn,
iii. r). In LXX it does not occur. The original form is TrooWos,
and may come from iroD aTro ; but -6Wos is perhaps a mere ter-
mination.
cti]. It is only in Lk. in N.T. that we find the opt. in indirect question!.
In him it is freq. both without to (iii. 15, viii. 9, xxii. 23; Acts xvii. n,
xxi. 33, xxv. 20) and with &v (vi. n ; Acts v. 24, x. 17). In Acts viii. 31 we
have opt. with to in a direct question. Simcox, Lang, of N.T. p. 112;
Win. xli 4. c, p. 374.
80, M$j 4>opou, Mapi<jji, eupes y&p ydpiv irapdt TW 6cw. See OH
women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb " (ver. 42), are first found in the
Liber Awtfyfamianus attributed to Gregory the Great ; and they were authorized
as a formula to be taught with the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, c. A.D. 1198.
The third part, "Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at
the hour of death,** was added in the fifteenth century, and was authorized bar
Pope Pius v. b 1568,
1. 30-33.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 23
ver. 13. The e*pes x^P LV v * T * explains Ke^aptTco/zo^. The phrase
is Hebraic: Noie evpev x^P tv ^ai/Tiov Kvpiou TOV eov (Gen. vi 8;
comp. xviii. 3, xxxix. 4). See on iv. 22.
For the word see on ver. 24, and for the form comp. H. 21,
JDC. 47 ; Acts i. 8, ii. 38, xxiii. 27 ; Jn. v. 43, xvi. 14, 15, 24. In Ionic we
have fut Xd^o/wu. Veitch, p. 359 ; Win. v. 4. f, p. 54.
al T^YJ ul<$i% Kal icaX^crcts T& oFOfia. The same word-
ing is found Gen. xvi. 16 of Ishmael, and Is. vii. 14 of ImmanueL
Comp. Gen. xvii. 19 of Isaac, and Mt. i. 21 of Jesus. In all cases
the KoAeW? is not a continuation of the prophecy, but a command,
as in most of the Ten Commandments (Mt. v. 21, 27, 33 ; comp.
Lk. iv. 12; Acts xxiii. 5, eta). Win. xliii. 5. c, p. 396. The
name *Ir]<rov$ was revealed independently to Joseph also (Mt i. 21).
It appears in the various forms of Oshea, Hoshea, Jehoshua,
Joshua, Jeshua, and Jesus. Its meaning is " Jehovah is help," or
" God the Saviour." See Pearson, On the Creed t art. ii. sub init.
p. 131, ed. 1849.
32. OUTOS eorai fjt^yas. As in ver. 15, this is forthwith ex-
plained; and the greatness of Jesus is very different from the
greatness of John. The title utos "Y^icrrou expresses some very
close relation between Jesus and Jehovah, but not the Divine Son-
ship in the Trinity; comp. vi. 35. On the same principle as tos
and KTJ/OIOS, "Yi/acrTos is anarthrous : there can be only one Highest
(Ecclus. vii. 15, xvii. 26, xix. 17, xxiv. 2, 23, xxix. n, eta). The
K\T)0TJo-Tcu is not a mere substitute for tforai : He not only shall be
the Son of God, but shall be recognised as such. In the Acti Fault
et Theclst we have Maicapioi ot <ro<tav Aa/3ovrs 'I^o-ov Xpwrrov, STL
avrol viol vif/Lcrrov KX-rjOrfarovTai (Tischendorf, p. 239). For T^K OptS^oK
AaueiS comp. 2 Sam. vii. 12, 13 ; Is. ix. 6, 7, xvL 5.
AauctS TOU irarpos aurou. This is thought to imply the Davidic
descent of Mary ; but the inference is not quite certain. Jesus
was the heir of Joseph, as both genealogies imply. Comp, Ps.
cxxxii. 1 1 ; Hos. iiL 14. There is abundant evidence of the belief
that the Messiah would spring from David : Mk. xiL 35, x. 47,
. 10 ; Lk. xviii. 38, xx. 41 ; 4 Ezra xii. 32 (Syr. Arab. Arm.); -ft.
Sol. xvii. 23, 24 ; Talmud and Targums. See on Rom. L 3.
33. pcuriXerfcret ... els rods a!wms. Comp. " But of the Son
he saith, God is Thy throne for ever and ever" (Heb. i 8, where
see Wsctt); also Dan. ii. 44, viL 14; Jn. xii 34; Rev. xL 15.
The eternity of Christ's kingdom is assured by the fact that it is to
be absorbed in the kingdom of the Father (i Cor, xv. 24-28).
These magnificent promises could hardly have been invented by a
writer who was a witness of the condition of the Jews during the
tialf century which followed the destruction of Jerusalem. Indeed,
we may perhaps go further and say that "it breathes the spirit of
24 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 83-35.
the Messianic hope before it had received the rude and crushing
blow in the rejection of the Messiah" (Gore, Dissertations > p. 16).
Comp. w. 17, 54, 55> 68 -7* & 3 s -
The constr. /JcunXet/ei* trt c. ace, is not classical. We have it again
xix. 14, 27.
34. ns eoTTai TOUTO. She does not ask for proo] f t as Zacharias
did (ver. 18) ; and only in the form of the words does she ask as to
the mode of accomplishment. Her utterance is little more than
an involuntary expression of amazement : non dubitantis sed admir-
antis (Grotius). In contrasting her with Zacharias, Ambrose says,
H&c jam de negotio tractat ; ille adhuc de nuntio dubitat It is
clear that she does not doubt the fact promised, nor for a moment
suppose that her child is to be the child of Joseph.
eirei at/Spa oo yii/c5<r*co). Comp. Gen. xix. 8 ; Judg. xi. 39 ;
Num. xxxi. 1 7. The words are the avowal of a maiden conscious
of her own purity ; and they are drawn from her by the strange
declaration that she is to have a son before she is married. It is
very unnatural to understand the words as a vow of perpetual
virginity, or as stating that such a vow has already been taken, or
is about to be taken. It is difficult to reconcile ov/c cyiVaxr/co/ (im-
perf., not aor.) avryv Icos (Mt. i. 25) with any such vow. 1
35. rbeGjjia fiy 10 " eTrcXeucrerai Im cr<:. It may be doubted whether
the article is omitted " because Holy Spirit is here a proper name " ;
rather because it is regarded impersonally as the creative power of
God. Comp. KOL irvevfjLa eov 7T<f)epTO 7rav(& TovvSaros (Gen. i. 2) ;
che two passages are very parallel. See on ver. 15. Both 7n/ev/x,a
and aytov have special point. It is spirit and not flesh, what is
holy and not what is sinful, that is to produce this effect in her.
With eTToUvcrerat eTTt ere comp. Acts L 3. Excepting Eph. ii. 7 and
Jas. v. i, the verb is peculiar to Lk. (xi. 22, xxi. 26; Acts i. 8,
viii. 24, xiii. 40, xiv. 19).
Suva/its "Ytyurrou imcnadcret am. For BiVajus see on iv. 14 ; for
!mcna<iaei comp. the account of the Transfiguration (ix. 34), and
for the dak comp. the account of Peter's shadow (Acts v. 15). It
is the idea of the Shechinah which is suggested here (Exod. xl. 38).
The cloud of glory signified the Divine presence and power, and it
is under such influence that Mary is to become a mother.
8t. This illative particle is rare in the Gospels (vii. 7 ; Mt xrvii 8) f
not in Mk. or Jn.
T& "yevv&pevov ayioi> K\t]9i]crTai u!o$ Geou. "The holy thing which
shall be born shall be called the Son of God," or, "That which
1 H. Lasserre renders puisque je n'at nul rapport avec mon mart, and ex-
plains that <wj signifie man, epoux ; et la phrase marqite la voeu de virginitl
conjugate fait par Marie (pp. 265, 564, ed. 1887). It is impossible that
without either article or possessive pronoun, can mean "my misband,"
1. 35-87.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 2|
shall be born shall be called holy, the Son of God." The latter of
these two renderings seems to be preferable. Comp. aytov TO> icvpiip
K\riOri<T<LTai (ii. 22); Nacopatos /cX^^crcrat ("Mt. ii. 23); vioi eou
KXyOtfcrovTaL (v. 9); IXaxioros KX^^Verai and /^eyas *A. (v. 19). In
all cases the appellation precedes the verb. The unborn child is
called aytov as being free from all taint of sin. De hoc Sancto idem
angelus est locutus, Dan. ix. 24 (Beng.). The IK o-o9, which many
authorities insert after ycn/dyia'ov, is probably an ancient gloss, de-
rived perhaps from Mt. i. 16 : X A B C 3 D and most versions omit.
The title " Son of God," like " Son of Man," was a recognized
designation of the Messiah. In Enoch, and often in 4 Ezra, the
Almighty speaks of the Messiah as His Son. Christ seldom used
it of Himself (Mt. xxvii, 43 ; Jn. x. 36). But we have it in the
voice from heaven (iii. 22, ix, 35); in Peter's confession (Mt
xvi. 1 6) ; in the centurion's exclamation (Mk. xv. 39) ; in the devil's
challenge (iv. 3, 9); in the cries of demoniacs (Mk. iii. n, v. 7).
Very early the Christian Church chose it as a concise statement of
the divine nature of Christ. See on Rom. i. 4, and Swete, Apost.
Creed, p. 24. For ayiov see on Rom. L 7. The radical meaning
is " set apart for God, consecrated."
36. ical ISou 9 E\eicr((3eT ^ oruyyci'ts o-ou. Comp. ver. 20. Mary,
who did not ask for one, receives a more gracious sign than
Zacharias^who demanded it The relationship between her and
Elisabeth is unknown.
" Cousin," started by Wiclif, and continued until RV. substituted "kins-
woman," has now become too definite in meaning. The kinship has led
artists to represent the two children as being playmates; but Jn. .31 seems
to be against such companionship. It has also led to the conjecture that
Jesus was descended from both Levi and Judah (see on ver. 27). But Levites
might marry with other tribes ; and therefore Elisabeth, who was descended
from Aaron, might easily be related to one who was descended from David.
This verse is not evidence that Mary was not of the house of David.
The late form <rvyyei>ls (comp. evV>k), and the Ion. dat yfipet for yjpg,
(Gen. xv. 15, xxi. 7, xxv. 8), should be noticed ; also that otiros being the
subject, the noun has no article. Comp. xxi 22. The combination ical
otfros is peculiar to Lk. (viii. 41 ?, xvi. i, xx, 28). The relative ages of Jesus
and of John are fixed by this statement
We may take KoXov^vQ as imperf. part., " Used to be called." This
reproach would cease when she reappeared at the end of the five months
(ver. 24). KaXotf/xevoy with appellations is freq. in Lk.
37. OUK dSupaT^crct irapA TOO 0oG irai> %a. The negative and
the verb are to be closely combined and taken as the predicate of
TTOLV ffipa. We must not take ow with nav. This is plain from
Gen. xviii. 14 : /My a$vvari irapa r<3 o> irav prj/jia " Hath God
said, and can He not do it?" i.e. Is anything which God has pro-
mised impossible ? E.V. here has " be void of power " for d^worav ;
but it is doubtful whether the verb ever has this signification. Of
things, it means "to be impossible" (Mt xvii. 20); and of persons,
26 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 37, 3S.
" to be unable " ; in which case, like Swaretv (Rom. xiv. 4 ; 2 Cor.
ix. 8), it is followed by the infm. That "be impossible" is the
meaning, both here and Gen. xviii. 14, is probable from Job xlii. 2,
olSa. on irdvra $vva<rai, dSurarct Se <roi ovOev ; and from Zech. viii. 6,
where dSwariyo-ei is used of a thing being too hard for man but not
too hard for God ; and from Jer. xxxii. 1 7, where both Aquila and
Symmachus have OVK dSwo/nJcrei for ov JULTJ aTTOKpvftfj of LXX. We
render, therefore, " From God no word shall be impossible." The
idiom ov . . . ?ras, in the sense of "all . . . not," /.<?. "none," is
probably Hebraic. Comp. Mt. xxiv. 22. It is less common in
N.T. than in LXX (Exod. xii. 16, 44, xx. 16; Dan. ii. 10, etc.),
Win. xxvi. i, p. 214.
38. 9 iSou rj Sou'Xij Kupiou. That tSov is not a verb, but an
exclamation, is manifest from the verbless nominative which follows
it. Comp. v. 12, 1 8. "Handmaid" or "servant" is hardly
adequate to $ov\rj. It is rather " bondmaid " or " slave." In an
age in which almost all servants were slaves, the idea which is
represented by our word " servant ** could scarcely arise. In N.T.
the fem. &ov\rj occurs only here, ver. 48, and Acts ii. 18, the last
being a quotation.
yeVoiro juiot Kara rb prjfidl <rou. This is neither a prayer that
what has been foretold may take place, nor an expression of joy at
the prospect. Rather it is an expression of submission^ " God's
will be done " : 7rwa et/u ypa^o/^evog- o /3ovAercu 6 ypcu^e-us,
ypa.<f>T<i> (Eus.). Mary must have known how her social position
and her relations with Joseph would be affected by her being with
child before her marriage. There are some who maintain that the
revelation made to Joseph (Mt. i. 18-23) ^ s inconsistent with what
Lk. records here ; for would not Mary have told him of the angelic
message ? We may reasonably answer that she would not do so.
Her own inclination would be towards reserve (ii. 51); and what
likelihood was there that he would believe so amazing a story?
She would prefer to leave the issue with regard to Joseph in God's
hands.
dinjXOci' tar* au-njs 6 clyyeXos. Ut peracta kgatiotu. Compi,
Acts xii. 10 ; Judg. vi. 21.
On the whole of this exquisite narrative Godet justly remarks : ** Quell*
dignity quelle purett, qudle simplicity quellt delicatessc dans tout t dialogue /
Pas un mot de trop> pas un de trop peu. Une telle narration nfa pu tmansr qut
de la sphere sainte dans laquelle lefait lui-mtme await eu lieu" (i. p. 128, 3&me
ed. 1 838). Contrast the attempts in the apocryphal gospels, the writers of
which had our Gospels to imitate, and yet committed such gross offences against
taste, decency, and even morality. What would their inventions have been if
they had had no historical Gospels to guide them ?
Dr* Swete has shown that the doctrine of the Miraculous Conception
was from the earliest times part of the Creed. Beginning with Justin
Martyr (ApoL L 21, 31, 32, 33, 63; Try. 23, 48, 100), he traces back
t. 38, 39.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 2?
through Aristides (J. R. Harris, p. 24 ; Hennecke, p. 9 ; Barnes, Canon, and
Uncanon. Gospp. p. 13), Ignatius (Eph. xix. j Trail, ix. ; Smyr. i.) the
Valentinians, and Basihdes, to S. Luke, to whom these Gnostics appealed.
The silence of S. Mark is of no weight ; his record does not profess to go
farther back than the ministry of the Baptist. In the Third Gospel we reach
not merely the date of the Gospel (A.D. 75-80), but the date of the early
traditions incorporated in these first chapters, traditions preserved (possibly
in writing) at Jerusalem, and derived from Mary herself.
The testimony of the First Gospel is perhaps even earlier in origin, and is
certainly independent. It probably originated with Joseph, as the other with
Mary (Gore, Bampton lectures, p. 78 ; Dissertations en Subjects connected
with the Incarnation^ pp. 12-40). Greatly as the two narratives differ, both
bear witness to the virgin birth (Swete, The Apostles* Creed 9 ch. iv.).
39-56. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviouf to the Mother
of the Forerunner.
This narrative grows naturally out of the two which precede it
in this group. The two women, who through Divine interposition
are about to become mothers, meet and confer with one another.
Not that a desire to talk about her marvellous experience prompts
Mary to go, but because the Angel had suggested it (ver. 36).
That Joseph's intention of putting her away caused the journey, is
an unnecessary conjecture.
It is not easy to see why the Song of Elisabeth is not given in metrical
form either in WH. or in RV. It seems to have the characteristics of Hebrew
poetry in a marked degree, if not in so full a manner as the Magnificat^
Benedicts ', and Nunc Dimittis. It consists of two strophes of four lines
each, thus
jcol 6^X0777^^05 6 Kapiros TTJS Kct\tas <rov.
KOl T00CV flOl TOVTO
TJ fjrfTTrjp TOV KVpiov jtcou vpos t/jd ;
J8oi> yap eta $yvTO ^ tpajy}) rof? doTracr/toi; <rou els ra &rd ftov t
<<rKtpTi)<Tw fr &Ya\\id(Ti rb fiptyos & T% K0i\ta /iov.
ical fjiaKCLpla, $ 7rt<rri5o*ao > a 6Vt ?<rrat reXetufftt
TOW \a\TjfjLtyois atry vapb Kvptov.
On all four songs see a paper on "Messianic Psalms of the N.T.,** by
B. B. Warfield, Expositor > 3rd series, ii. pp. 301, 321 ff.
39. "Avacrracra. A very favourite word with Lk., who has it
about sixty times against about twenty-two times in the rest of
N.T. It occurs hundreds of times in LXX. Of preparation for
a journey it is specially common (xv. 18, 20; Acts x. 20, xxii. 10,
etc.). Lk. is also fond of such phrases as iv TCUS Tjfj^pcus ratals,
or v rat? ^cpat? TIT/OS (ver. 5, ii. i, iv. 2, 25, v. 35, vi. 12, ix. 36,
etc.; Acts i. 15, ii. 18, v. 37, vi. i, vii. 41, etc.). They are not
found in Jn., and occur only four times in Mt, and the same in Mk
Here "in those days" means soon after the Annunciation. As
28 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [L 89-42.
the projected journey was one of several days, it would require time
to arrange it and find an escort. See small print note on ver. 20.
iropu'$T) els TT]j> optn^. There is no trace of 9 Qpwrj as a
proper name; f) opivvj means the mountainous part of Judah as
distinct from the plain (ver. 65; Gen. xiv. 10; Num. xiii. 29;
Josh. ix. i, x. 40; comp. Judith i. 6, ii. 22, iv. 7). It is worth
noting that in this narrative, which is from an independent source,
Lk. twice uses fj optvtj. Elsewhere, when he is on the same ground
as Mt. and Mk., he uses, as they do, TO OQOS (vi. 12, viii. 32, ix.
28, 37). None of them use either opos or TO. opy. Lft. On a Fresh
Revision o/N.T. pp. 124, 186, 3rd ed. 1891. For the shortening of
optLvy to opwTJ see WH. ii. App. p. 154. Grotius rightly remarks on
juterct cnrouo%, ne negligent signum quod augends ipsius fiduti& Deus
assignaverat. Comp. Mk. vi. 25 ; Exod. xii. n ; Wisd. xix. 2.
els Tro'Xii' 'louSa, Lk. does not give the name, probably because
he did not know it It may have been Hebron, just as it may
have been any town in the mountainous part of Judah, and Hebron
was chief among the cities allotted to the priests. But if Lk. had
meant Hebron, he would either have named it or have written rr/v
7r6\Lv in the sense of the chief priestly dwelling. But it is very
doubtful whether the arrangement by which certain cities were
allotted to the priests was carried into effect ; and, if so, whether
it continued. Certainly priests often lived elsewhere. Eli lived
at Shiloh, Samuel at Ramathaim-Zophim, Mattathias at Modin.
None of these had been allotted to the priests. See on ver. 23.
That 'lotf&x is the name of the town, and represents Juttah ('Irdv or 'lerrd
or Tayi5), which was in the mountain region of Judah (Josh. xv. 55), and had
been allotted to the priests (Josh. xxi. 16), is possible. Reland (1714) was
perhaps the first to advocate this. Robinson found a village called Yuttah in
that region (Res. in PaL ii. p. 206), and the identification is attractive. But
the best authorities seem to regard it as precarious. A tradition, earlier than
the Crusades, makes Ain JZarim to be the birthplace of John the Baptist.
Didon (Jhus Christ ', App. D) contends for this, appealing to V. Guerin,
Description de la Palestine, i. p. 83, and Fr. Lievin, Guide dt la Palestine^ ii.
But it is best to regard the place as an unknown town of Judah. In any case,
the spelling ** Juda" (AV.) is indefensible ; comp. iii. 33.
41. cy^ero . , , lo-Kip-njo-cK. See detached note at the end of
the chapter. It is improbable that in her salutation Mary told
Elisabeth of the angelic visit. The salutation caused the move-
ment of the unborn child, and Elisabeth is inspired to interpret
this sign aright Grotius states that the verb is a medical word for
the movement of children in the womb, but he gives no instances.
It is used Gen. xxv. 22 of the unborn Esau and Jacob, and Ps.
cxiii. 4, 6 of the mountains skipping like rams. In class. Grk. it is
used of the skipping both of animals and of men. For ^TrX-no-Ori
TjyeujuiaTos dyiou see on ver. 15. <*>s = " when " is very freq. in Lk,
42. &v$4vv}<rv. i Chron. xv. 28, xvi. 4, 5, 42 ; 2 Chroru
L 42-45. J THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 29
v 13; here only in N.T, Lie. frequently records strong expres-
sions of emotion, adding fxeydXrj to KpauyTJ, <a>v?;, x a P-> etc - (** I0 >
iv. 33, viii. 28, xvii. 15, xix. 37, xxiii. 23, 46, xxiv. 52). It is
perhaps because Kpavytf seemed less appropriate to express a cry of
joy that it has been altered (A C D) to the more usual <j>wij. But
it is convincingly attested ( B L H). It means any cry of strong
feeling, whether surprise (Mt, xxv. 6), anger (Eph. iv. 31), or
distress (Heb. v. 7).
Eu\oyT]fji^nf] <rd & yuvai&v. A Hebraistic periphrasis for the
superlative, "Among women thou art the one who is specially
blessed." Mary has a claim to this title /car* efo^^v. Comp.
vii. 28. Somewhat similar expressions occur in class. Grk., esp. in
poetry : <I> <iXa yvrouKuv (Eur. Ale. 460); & cr^irXi avBp&v (Aristoph.
Ran. 1048). In N.T. evXoy^evos is used of men, 6^X0777709 of
God : see on ver. 68. With e 0X0^1x0/05 6 Kapiros rfjs KoiXias aou
COmp. fvXoyrj^vaL ra tK-yova rf]$ K. <rov (Deut xxviii. 4) and KapTrov
icoiXias (Gen. xxx. 2 ; Lam. ii. 20). See small print on ver. 15.
43. KCH TroOei' JULOI TOUTO. We understand yiyovev : comp. Mk.
xii. 37. Modestiae, filii pr&ludens qui olim Christo erat dicturus^ o-u
ZpXQ vpfa P*'* (Grotius). It is by inspiration (ver. 41) that Elisabeth
knows that she who greets her is r\ wryp rov Kvptov, i.e. of the
Messiah (Ps. ex. i). The expression "Mother of God" is not
found in Scripture. 1
In tva X0fl we have a weakening of the original force of fra, which begins
with the Alexandrine writers as an alternative for the infinitive, and has
become universal in modern Greek. Godet would keep the telic force by
arbitrarily substituting "What have I done?" for "Whence is this to me?"
"What have I done in order that?" etc. Comp. the Lucan constr., roCro
Sri (x. II, xii. 39; Acts xxiv. 14).
44. "l8ou Y&P <&S |Y^ VTO ^ ^^ TO " Atnracrfxou crou. On this
yap Bengel bases the strange notion that the conception of the
Christ takes place at the salutation : yap rationem exferimens, cuf
hoc ipso temporis puncto Elisabet primum " Matrem Domini sui"
proclamet Mariam. . . . Nunc Dominus^ et respectu matris et
progenitorum^ et respectu locorum, ubi conceptus seque ac natus esl^
ex Juda est ortus. It is a mark of the delicacy and dignity of tht,
narrative that the time is not stated ; but ver. 38 is more probable
than ver. 40. Excepting 2 Cor. vii. n, ISov yap is peculiar to Lk.
(ver. 48, ii. 10, vi, 23, xvii. 21; Acts ix. n). For eyr^eTo 3\ 4>wi^
see on iii. 22 and 36.
45* jxaKapia r\ mcrrcucracra on. Latin texts, both of Lat. Vet
and of Vulg., vary much between beata qu& credidit quoniam and
beata qu& credidisti quoniam. English Versions are equally v^tried >
even Wic. and Rhem. being different "Blessed is j/# that
1 P* Didon inaccurately renders this, Comment & fffiti>il j*u fa txlrc de mott
Duu vtenne b moi (p. T TI").
30 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [X 45,
believed" is probably right This is the first beatitude in the
Gospel ; and it is also the last : fta/captot ol yx^ ISovres /cat Tnorcv-
o-avres (Jn. xx. 29). In Mk. /xa*apios does not occur; and in
Jn. only xiii. 17 and xx. 29. It is specially common in Lk
This verse is one of many places in N.T. in which 5rt may be eithe r " that n
or "because" ; see on vii. 16. There can be little doubt that Luther, Erasmus,
Beza, and all Latin and English Versions are right in taking the latter sense here.
The #re introduces the reason why the belief is blessed and not the contents (Syr.
Sin. ) of the belief. There is no need to state what Mary believed. Elisabeth
adds her faith to Mary's, and declares that, amazing as the promise is, it will
assuredly be fulfilled. Only a small portion of what had been promised (31-33)
nad as yet been accomplished ; and hence the ecrrai reXcCaxns, " There shall
be a bringing to perfection, an accomplishment " (Heb. vii, 1 1). Comp. #eXetf-
ffOfuu els reXetwffw r&v \6ywv &v AaX^trare /icr' tyov (Judith x. 9),
46-66. The Magnificat or Song of Mary.
This beautiful lyric is neither a reply to Elisabeth nor an
address to God. It is rather a meditation ; an expression of per-
sonal emotions and experiences. It is more calm and majestic
than the utterance of Elisabeth. The exultation is as great, but it
is more under control. The introductory CITTCV, as contrasted with
dve<coF>7erev Kpavyrj fteyaXfl (ver. 42), points to this. The hymn is
modelled upon the O.T. Psalms, especially the Song of Hannah
(i Sam. ii. i-io); but its superiority to the latter in moral and
spiritual elevation is very manifest From childhood the Jews
knew many of the O.T, lyrics by heart ; and, just as our own poor,
who know no literature but the Bible, easily fall into biblical
language in times of special joy or sorrow, so Mary would naturally
fall back on the familiar expressions of Jewish Scripture in this
moment of intense exultation. The exact relation between her
hymn and these familiar expressions can be best seen when the
two are placed side by side in a table,
THE MAGNIFICAT. THE OLD TESTAMENT.
MeyaXt?m % tyvxh JJLQV rbv K&piwr * ^Rffreped&vj $ KapSta ftov to Kvplif,
ical tyaXX/twev ri vvevfi& pov inf/ddij ripas JJLQV
M ry <rwTT)pt futv ^ Qe$ juov.
far
WUffl*
8ofi\ijt avro0 r^t 8otfXip vov
ftaKaptofotv fie vacrat al ycvtaL f*aicaptov<rly fjt rafftu
5rt 4vd'ti<r& ^01 ^eyA\a, 6 8wa,r6s, * Sorts frrotyrev iv <roi rd fU
Kal tiyiov rb 6vo/j,a aiirou, " tiyiov ical ifrofiepbv r6 (Jvo/ta a^roO.
JtfiU rb IXeoj afcov ck yevebs leal ycvtdt * ri $ \eo$ rov icvptov &vb roO altivm
Kal ^wy TOV altivos
rots tpopov/dvus a.vr6r. rfri roi>f
1 1 Sam. ii. I. i Sam. i. ii. Gen, xxx. 13.
* Deut. x. 21. Ps. cxi. 9. Ps. ciii. 17.
1.46, 47.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 31
birep
ev tiirep'r)<pdvov*
Stavoiq,
taOeiXcr Swdcrras &irb ftpfotav * lairo<7Tt\\cov lepels a
jcai ijij/tixrev raireivofy, dvv&<rrcLS 8 yjjs fta
* r6v -roioui/ra raire^ous
4 Kt'ptoj
rairetvo'i
* Si) 5e, '
"
* 5
*A/3/xi(i/i jcai ry ffr^pfiart atfrou e/f ry 'A^pad^, jcd^ort <5/-wx7a j
varpdffiv VIIL&V <card rir ^pat rds
alamos.
The hymn falls into four strophes, 46-48, 49 and 50, 51-53,
54 and ss. 10
46. MYaXui>et ^ 'j'ux'n f^ou roy tcupioj'. The verb is used in the
literal sense of " enlarge," Mt. xxiii. 5 : comp. Lk. i. 58. More often,
as here, in the derived sense "of "esteem great, extol, magnify"
(Acts v. 13, x. 46, xix. 17). So also in class. Grk. . Weiss goes
too far when he contends that "distinctions drawn between
ilfvxn and irvevfjia have absolutely no foundation in N.T. usage"
(sind gdnzlich unbegrundef) \ but it is evident that no distinction
is to be made here. The ^x 7 ? an< ^ ^ e ^eO/xa are the immaterial
part of man's nature as opposed to the body or the flesh. It is in
her inner, higher life, in her real self, that Mary blesses God in
jubilation. If a distinction were made here, we ought to have
ftcyaXwa TO irvcvju,a /xov and ^yoAXiacrev rj ifrvx^ /* ov > f r ^ e in/ev/Aa
is the seat of the religious life, the ^x 9 ? of the emotions. See Lft
Notes on the Epp. ofS. Paul^ p. 88, 1895, and the literature there
quoted, esp. Olshausen, Opusc. p. 157.
47. ^YoXXCcwrcr. A word formed by Hellenists from A-ydXXojtwii, and
freq. in LXX (Ps. xv. 9, xlvii. 12, Ixix. 5 ; Is. xxxv. 2 ; Jer. xlix. 4). The
act. is rare ; perhaps only here and Rev. xix. 7 ; but as vJ. I Pet. i. 8. The
mor. may refer to the occasion of the angelic visit. But it is the Greek idiom
to use the aor. in many cases in which we use the perf. , and then it is mis-
leading to translate the Grk. aor. by the Eng. aor. Moreover, in late Grk.
1 Ps. Ixxxix. xi. * Job xii. 19. 'Job v. n,
4 I Sam. ii. 7. Ps. cvii. 9. f Is. xli. 8.
* Ps. xcviii. 3. 8 Mic. vii. 20. * 2 Sam. xxii. 51,
10 On the structure of Hebrew poetry, see Driver, Literature of the O. T t
HP- 338-345. T. & T. Clark, 1891.
On the use of the Magnificat^ first at Lauds in the Gallican Church, from
A.D. 507, and then at Vespers on Saturday in the Sarum Breviary, see Blunt,
Annotated Prayer-Book.
32 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [X 47-51.
the distinction between aor. and perf. had become less sharp. Simcox,
Lang. ofN. T. pp. 103-106.
Ttj> e<3 T(3 crurfjpt jxou. He is the Saviour of Mary as well as
of her fellows. She probably included the notion of external and
political deliverance, but not to the exclusion of spiritual salvation.
For the expression comp. i Tim. i. i, ii. 3; Tit i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4;
Jude 25; Ps, xxiii. 5, cvi. 21. In the Ps. Sot. we have *AA^eta
Tail/ St/cawov Trapa eoO cramjpos avrcov (iii. 7) , and ^/xeis Se cXmou/jtev
Im ov rov crorr^pa ^ucoi/ (xvii. 3). Comp. Ps. Sol. viii. 39, xvi. 4.
48. STI eir^pXexl/ey 4m TTJI> Ta-rrctywcrii' -rijs SouXtjs aurou. Comp.
Hannah's prayer for a child i Sam. i. ii. In spite of her humble
position as a carpenter's bride, Mary had been chosen for the
highest honour that a human being could receive. For raTmvcoo-ts
comp. Acts viii. 33 (from Is. liii. 8) and Phil. iii. 2 1 ; and for iSew
rrjv rcwmVoxnv comp. 2 Kings xiv. 26 and Ps. xxv. 18. This use
of rx/?Xe7rv ITT/ is freq. in LXX (Ps. xxv. 16, Ixix. 16, cii. 19,
cxix. 132, etc.); see esp. i Sam. ix. 16.
ISoO y&p diro roO vuv juLaKapLoucrir JJLC iracrai at yei/eat. For 1806
ydp see on ver. 42, and for dird TOU vvv see on v. 10. Elisabeth
had begun this paKapifav, and we have another instance in the
woman from the crowd (xi. 27). Note the wide difference between
the scope of Mary's prophecy, juaKapiovcriv Trao-at at yevecu, and
Leah's statement of fact, /AaKa/>tou<riv /AC mlo-cu at ywat/ces (Gen.
xxx. 13).
The Latin renderings of dwA TOW vfo are interesting: ex koc
a moda (d), a nunc (Cod. Gall.).
49. OTI ^irofycreV |moi fjieyaXa 6 8ui/aT<5s. Here the second stropha
begins. The reading ^eyaAeta may come from Acts ii. 1 1 : comp.
d eTTofycras /icyaXeta (Ps. Ixx. 19). With 6 Bvvaros comp. &W/ua
"Ytf/io-Tov (ver. 35) and Kvptos /cparatos /cat Swaros (Ps. xxiii. 8). In
LXX Swaros is very common, but almost invariably of men. After
both SWCLTOS and avrov we should place a colon. The clause /cai
aytoy TO oVofta a^roO is a separate sentence, neither dependent upon
the preceding or*, nor very closely connected with what follows.
5<X Kal TO \eo$ a^ToO 15 yei/as Kal yeyeas TOIS
auroi'. Comp. Ps. Sol. X. 4, /cat TO eAeos Kvptov ITT! Tot>5 a
avrov ev aX-jy^aa, /cat fJivycrOijcreTai Kvp^os TWV SouXcov avrov ev
also xiii. 1 1, ?rt Se TOVS ocrtbus TO IXeos /cvptou, /cat ITTI TOVS <
vov5 avToi/ TO IXeos a-uTOv. With is yevcas K. y. comp. ct? yei/eas
ycvew (Is. xxxiv. 17), cts ycyeav /cat ycvcav (Ps. Ixxxix. 2), and /caTa
yeveai/ /cat yeveav (i Mac. ii. 6l). "Fearing God" is the O.T.
description of piety. Nearly the whole verse comes from Ps*
riii. 17.
61* 'EiroftjiTfv icp&ros Iv ppaxCovi a^Tov, Suo-KiSpirtcrcv, x.rJL
niug of the third strophe. The six aorists in it are variously explained.
L 51-54.] Ti*? GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 33
I. They tell of things which the Divine power and holiness and mercy
(w. 49, 5) have already accomplished in the past. 2. According to the
common prophetic usage, they speak of the future as already past, and tell of
the effects to be produced by the Messiah as if they had been produced.
3. They are gnomic, and express God's normal acts. We may set aside this
last. It is very doubtful whether the aor. is ever used of what is normal or
habitual (Win. xl. 5. b, I, p. 346). Of the other two explanations, the
second is to be preferred. It is more likely that Mary is thinking of the far-
reaching effects of the blessing conferred upon herself than of past events un-
connected with that blessing. In either case the six aorists must be translated
by the English perfect. They show that in this strophe, as in the second, we
have a triplet. There it was God's power, holiness, and mercy. Here it is
the contrasts between ^proud and humble, high and low, rich and poor.
Both lirohrjcrev tcpo/ros and kv ppaxiovi <urrot are Hebraisms. For the
former comp. 5eia Kvplov liroificcv dtiva/jLw (Ps. cxviii. 15). For ppaxLuv to
express Divine power comp. Acts xiii. 17 ; Jn. xii. 38 (from Is. liii. i) ; Ps.
xliv. 3, xcviii. I, etc. The phrase & X i pl KparaLq, Kal 4v fipaxlovi, $\//ij\$ is
freq. in LXX (Deut. iv. 34, v. 15, vi. 21, xxvi. 8). This use of & is in the
main Hebraistic '(xxii. 49 ; Rev. vi. 8 ; Judg. xv. 15, xx. 16 ; I Kings xii. 18 j
Judith vi. 12, viii. 33). Win. xlviii. 3. d, p. 485.
uirepij^avovs 8iavo<j KapSCas O/UTWV. The dat. limits irjrepqifidrovs J
they are proud and overweening in thought. In N.T. fare/y^avof is never
"conspicuous above" others, but always in a bad sense, "looking down on* 1
others (Jas. iv. 6 ; I Pet. v, 5 ; Rom. i. 30 ; 2 Tim. iii. 2. It is freq. in
LXX. Comp. Ps. Sol* ii. 35, KOifLLfav tiirepirjfidvovs ets dir<6Xeiaj> cdwvior tv
. ; also iv. 28. See Wsctt. on I Jn. ii. 16, and Trench, Syn. . '~
62. KaOelXcy cWdoras Airo 0p6V<av KCU itywcrci' Tairii'0i5$. "He
hath put down potentates from thrones." "Potentates" rather
than "princes" (RV.), or "the mighty" (AV.), because of i Tim.
vi. 15. Comp. oWacrrai <3>apaa> (Gen. 1. 4). In Acts viii. 27 it is
an adj. It is probable that rcwmvovs here means primarily the
oppressed poor as opposed to tyrannical rulers. See Hatch, Biblical
Greek) pp. 73-77. Besides the parallels given hi the table (p. 31)
comp. avcL\apl$av<av Trp^els 6 fcupto?, TCLTTZLV&V Sc afjLapr<aXovg !<o$ rS
y^s (Ps. cxlvii. 6) ; Opovovs &PXQVTWV /ca^eiXcv 6 Kvptos, /cat exa^ta-cv
ir/or^eis avr avrwv (Ecclus. x. 14) ; also Lk. xiv. ii, xviii. 14; Jas.
i. 9, 10. In Clem. Rom. Cor. lix. 3 we have what looks like a
paraphrase, but may easily come from O.T. Comp. Enoch xlvi. 5.
53. irctywiras evn:Xi)<re> dyaOwv. Both material and spiritual
goods may be included. Comp. TrAifpeis apra>v ^XaTrw^crav, Kal
a<r#evowTs iraprJKav yrjv (i Sam. ii. 5); also Ps. SoL v. 10-12, x. 7.
54. "ArrcXdpcTo 'lo-pa^X iraiSos aurou. The fourth strophe.
The regular biblical meaning of dvrtXa^ai/o/iat is "lay hold of
in order to sup fort or succour" (Acts xx. 35 ; Ecclus. ii 6) ; hence
avriXyif/Ls is "succour, help" (i Cor. xii. 28 ; Ps. xxi. 20, IxxxiiL 8),
and dvTiA^Tmoyo is "helper" (Ps. xviii. 3, liv. 6). There 13 no
doubt that ?r<uS&s avrov means "His servant," not "His son.*
The children of God are called re/o/a or vtot, but not watSe?. We
have -TTCIL? in the sense of God's servant used of Israel or Jacob
(Is. xii. 8, 9, xUL i, xliv. i, 2, 21, xlv. 4); of David (Lk. u 69 \
34 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [I. 54-56,
Acts iv. 25; Ps. xviL i; Is. xxxvii. 35); and of Christ (Acts
jii. 13, 26, iv. 27, 30). Comp. Ps. Sol. xii. 7, xvii. 23; Didacht^
ix 2, 3, x. 2, 3.
fjL^o-OTJmt eX^ous. "So as to remember mercy," i.e. to piove
that He had not forgotten, as they might have supposed. Comp.
Ps. Sol. X. 4, KOI /xj'7;<j$>7creraL KJupios T&V 8ot>Aa>v avrov ev eX.L.
55. Ka0o>s 5 XaXT}a-/ Trpos- "Even as He spake unto": see on
m, 2 and 13. This clause is not a parenthesis, but explains the
extent of the remembrance of mercy. RV. is the first English
Version to make plain that TW 'AJSpadji, K.T.\., depends upon
fjLvffa-OrjvaL and not upon eXaXyo-ev by rendering wpos " unto " and
the dat. " toward." To make this still more plain, " As He spake
unto our fathers " is put into a parenthesis, which is not necessary.
The Genevan is utterly wrong, " (Even as He promised to our
fathers, to wu> to Abraham and his sede) for ever." It is im-
probable that Lk. would use both vpos and the simple dat after
cXoX^crei/ in the same sentence; or that he means to say that
God spoke to Abraham's seed for ever. The phrase els TOI> alGtva
Is common in the Psalms, together with ets rov at&va TOV cuwvos
(Heb. i. 8) and ete alwa cuoivos. It means "unto the age," i.e.
the age /car* t&xyv, the age of the Messiah. The belief that
whatever is allowed to see that age will continue to exist in that
age, makes as TOV afova equivalent to " for ever." This strophe,
like ver. 72, harmonizes with the doctrine that Abraham is still
alive (xx. 38), and is influenced by what takes place in the
development of God's kingdom on earth (Jn. viii. 56 ; comp. Heb,
jrii. i ; Is. xxix. 22, 23).
For els rbv al&va ACFMS here have fa* a^rof (I Quon. xvii 16;
Eiek. xxv. 15 ?), which does not occur in N.T.
60. *Efjiti'K 8e Mapict/ji vbv aurff. Lk. greatly prefers o-vv to
jura. He uses o-w much more often than all N.T. writers put
together. In his Gospel we find him using ow where the parallel
passage in Mt or Mk. has ftcra or /cat ; e.g. viii. 38, 51, xx. i, xxii. 14,
56. We have crvv three times in these first two chapters ; here, ii. 5
and 13. It is not likely that an interpolator would have caught
all these minute details in Lk.'s style : see Introd. 6.
ws pjras Tpet$. This, when compared with p^v ?KTOS (ver. 36),
leads us to suppose that Mary waited until the birth of John the
Baptist. She would hardly have left when that was imminent
Lk. mentions her return before mentioning the birth in order to
complete one narrative before beginning another; just as he
mentions the imprisonment of the Baptist before the Baptism of
the Christ in order to finish his account of John's ministry before
beginning to narrate the ministry of Jesus (iii. 20, 21). That
Mary is not named in w. 57, 58 is no evidence that she was not
L 56, 57.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY
present. It would be unnatural to say that one of the
heard of the event; and, in fact, ol crvyycvcts would include her,
whether it is intended to do so or not. Origen, Ambrose, Bede,
and others believe that she remained until the birth of John. For
the patristic arguments for and against see Corn, a Lap. Lk.
leaves us in doubt, probably because his authority left him in
doubt ; but Didon goes too far in saying that Lk. insinuates that
she was not present. 1
For this use of us comp. viii. 42 (not ii. 37) ; Acts i. 15, v. 7, 36. Lk,
more often uses &<reL in this sense (Hi. 23, ix. 14, 28, xxii. 41, 59, xxiii. 44;
Acts ii. 41, etc. ). In bir(FTpe\pev we have another very favourite word which
runs through both Gospel and Acts. It does not occur in the other Gospels,
and is found elsewhere only Gal. i. 17 and Heb. vii. I.
Meyer rightly remarks that "the historical character of the Visitation of
Mary stands or falls with that of the Annunciation." The arguments against it
are very inconclusive, I. That it does not harmonize with Joseph's dream in
Mt. i. 20 ; which has been shown to be incorrect. 2. That there is no trace
elsewhere of great intimacy between the two families ; which proves absolutely
nothing. 3. That the obvious purpose of the narrative is to glorify Jesus, in
making the unborn Baptist acknowledge Him as the Messiah ; which is mere
assertion. 4. That the poetic splendour of the narrative lifts it out of the
historical sphere ; which implies that what is expressed with great poetic beauty
cannot be historically true, a canon which would be fatal to a great deal of
historical material. We may assert of this narrative, as of that of the Annuncia-
tion, that no one in the first or second century could have imagined either.
Least of all could any one have given us the Magnificat ', *' the most magni-
ficent cry of Joy that has ever issued from a human breast." Nothing that has
come down to us of that age leads us to suppose that any writer could have
composed these accounts without historic truth to guide him, any more than an.
architect of that age could have produced Milan cathedral. Comp. the Prot-
evangelium of James xii.-xiv.; the Pseudo-Matthew ix.-xii.; the JEKst. of Joseph
the Carpenter iii.-vL
57-80. The Birth and Circumcision of the Forerunner.
57. lirX^crGt) 6 xpoyos T 3 T^cety aC-r^v* Expressions about time
or days being fulfilled are found chiefly in these two chapters in
N.T. (ver. 23, ii. 6, 21, 22). They are Hebraistic: e.g. irX-qp<*>
O-qcrav ol ij/icpat rov TSKUV aimrjv (Gen. xxv. 24 ; comp. xxix. 21 ; Lev.
xii. 4, 6 ; Num. vi. 5, etc.). And rov re/cctv is gen. after 6 xpoVos.
1 Didon has some excellent remarks on the poetical portion of this
narrative. La pohie est k langage des impressions vthtmentes et des ictics
sublimes. Chez les Juifs> comme chez tous les peuples d* Orient, elle jaillait
a* inspiration. Tout dme est potte^ la joie ou la douleur la fait chanter. Si
jamais un coeur a d& faire explosion dans quelque hymne inspirte> <?est bien
celui de lajeunefille tlue de Dieu pour tire la mire du Messie.
Elle emprunte h FJiistoire biblique des femmes qui t avant clle, ont tressailh
dans leur maternit^ comme Liah et la mire de Samuel des expressions qt? elle
elargit et transfigure. Les hymnes nationaux qui c&lebrent la gkirt de son
feuple, la mislricorde^ la puissance, la sagesse et la fidtliti de Duu, revienneni
sur ses fcvres habitutes a les chanter (Jesus Christ ', p. m f ed, 1891). rh*
whole passage is worth consulting.
36 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [I. 57-63.
KupLOs TO IXeos cturoG JJLST' aurJjs, The verb is not
used in the same sense as in ver. 46, nor yet quite literally as in
Mt. xxiii. 5, but rather "made conspicuous," i.e. bestowed con-
spicuous mercy. Comp. e^ueyaXvi/ag rrjv St/cacocrwi?]/ croi> (Gen.
xix. 19). The ptr avnjs does not mean that she co-operates
with God, but that He thus deals with her. Comp. ver. 72, x. 37,
and etSere d e/AeyaAwev /xe(9' v/xcov (l Sam. xii. 24). In oruyexcupoy
aur] we have the first beginning of the fulfilment of ver. 14. It
means "rejoiced with her" (xv. 6, 9; i Cor. xii, 26), rather
than "congratulated her" (Phil. ii. 17).
59. YJ\6ai/ irepiTe/jietj' TO iraiSio^ The nom. must be under-
stood from the context, amid ad earn rent advocati, viz. some of
those mentioned ver. 58, Circumcision might be performed
anywhere and by any Jew, even by a woman (Exod. iv. 25).
On the mixture of first and second aorist in such forms as ?}\6av 9
etftajLte?, dm\av, etc., see Win. xiii. I. a, p. 86; WH. ii. App. p. 164;
and comp. ver. 61, ii. 16, v. 7, 26, vi. 17, vil. 24, xi, 2, 52, xxu. 52 ; Acts
ii, 23, xii. 7, xvi. 37, xxii. 7, etc.
aflro Im TW o^paTt TOU rrarpos a^Tou. Not merely
"they wished to call," but "they began to call, were calling";
comp. v. 6; Acts vii. 26; Mt. iii. 14. The custom of com-
bining the naming with circumcision perhaps arose from Abram
being changed to Abraham when circumcision was instituted.
Naming after the father was common among the Jews (Jos. Vita^
I ; Ant. xiv. I. 3). For the liri comp. K\r}6r) ITT OVO/JLGLTL avruv
(Neh. vii. 63).
60. K\iq0yjorTat "fwrfnfjs. It is quite gratuitous to suppose that
the name had been divinely revealed to her, or that she chose it
herself to express the boon which God had bestowed upon her.
Zacharias would naturally tell her in writing what had taken place
in the temple. With KaXetTcu TW oi/oficm comp. xix. 2.
6S. eyeVeuoK Here only in N.T., but we have veva> similarly
used Acts xxiv. 10 and Jn. xiii. 24. Comp. eiWei o<(9oVc3,
O">7//,cuVei Se 7ro6Y, StSacr/cet Se evvev/xacrn/ 8aKrt;A.a)v (Prov. vi. 13),
and 6 ewevu>v o^^aX/Aot? /*era SoAou (Prov. x. 10). Some infei
that Zacharias was deaf as well as dumb ; and this is often the
meaning of K<D<OS (ver. 22), viz. "blunted in speech or hearing, or
both" (vii. 22). But the question is not worth the amount of
discussion which it has received.
TO rt &v OA.OU The art. turns the whole clause into a sub-
stantive. "They communicated by signs the question^ what he, r
etc. Comp. Rom. viii. 26 ; i Thes. iv. i; Mt xix, 18. Tho TO
serves the purpose of marks of quotation.
This use of r<5 with a sentence, and especially with a question, is common
ixv Lk. (ix. 46, xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4, 23, 24, 37 ; Acts iv. zi, xxii, 30), Note
I. 62-65.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 37
the &v : "what he would perhaps wish, might wish." We have exactly thtf
same use of &v Jn. xiii. 24 ; comp. Lk. vi. 1 1 j Acts v. 24, xxi. 33. Win.
xlii. 4, P- 386.
63. atTi]o-a9 mi/aiu8iop. Postulans pugillarem (Vulg.), cum petis-
set tabulam (d). Of course by means of signs, ewc^ao-ty Sa/ervAw.
One is inclined to conjecture that Lk. or his authority accidentally
put the dweveij/ in the wrong place. Signs must have been used
here, and they are not mentioned. They need not have been used
ver. 62, and they are mentioned. The Trmi/aSiov would probably be
a tablet covered with wax : loquitur in stylo^ auditur in cera (Tert
De idol, xxiii.).
All four forms, viva!;, irtvaids, irwdKiov, and iriva,Ktdiov y are used of writing-
tablets, and irivatclda is v.L (D) here. But elsewhere in N.T. iriva.% is a " dish "
or "platter" (xi. 39; Mt. xiv. 8, II ; Mk. vi. 25, 28). Note the Hebraistic
particularity in yp a ij/tv \4ywv, and comp. 2 Kings x. 6 ; I Mac. x. 17,
xi. 57. This is the first mention of writing in N.T.
*l&)cnrjs e<TTly orop,a aurou. Not ecrrcu, but <TTIV : habet vocabulum
suum quod agnovimus, non quod elegimus (Bede) ; quasi dicat nullam
superesse consultationem in re quam Deus jam definiisset (Grotius) j
non tamjubet) quamjussum divinum indicat (Beng.). The !0auf;,acrai>
irarres may be used on either side of the question of his deafness.
They wondered at his agreeing with Elisabeth, although he had not
heard her choice of name ; or, they wondered at his agreeing with
her, although he had heard the discussion.
64. dyecj)(0i() TO crnJjjta aurou irapaxp^/xa. The prophecy
which he had refused to believe was now accomplished, and the
sign which had been granted to him as a punishment is withdrawn.
That the first use of his recovered speech was to continue blessing
God (eXaXct evXoywv), rather than to complain, is evidence that the
punishment had proved a blessing to him. The addition of KCU ^
yXw<rcra auroO involves a zeugma, such as is common in all lan-
guages : comp. i Cor. iii. 2; i Tim. iv. 3; Win. Ixvi. i. e, p. 777.
The Complutensian Bible, on the authority of two cursives (140,
251), inserts St^p^pco^ after 17 yXaJaxra cd/rov: see on ii. 22. For
irapaxp^p-a see on v. 25 and comp. iv. 29. We are left in doubt
as to whether eXdXei cuXoyow refers to the Benedictus or to some
euXoyta which preceded it The use of lirpo^reva-ev and not
cuXoy^crev in ver. 67 does not prove that two distinct acts of thanks-
giving are to be understood.
65. ey^ero !m ira^ras <j>o(3os. See on iv. 36. Zacharias (ver. 1 2)
and Mary (ver. 30) had had the same feeling when conscious of the
nearness of the spiritual world. A writer of fiction would liave
been more likely to dwell upon the joy which the wonderful birth
of the future Prophet produced ; all the more so as such joy
had been predicted (ver. 14). Ths aurou's means Zacharias and
Elisabeth.
38 THE GOSfEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [1.65,68.
irdvra ret pyjjutaTa rccura. This need not be confined
to what was said at the circumcision of John. It is probably the
Hebraistic use of p^ara for the things which are the subject-
matter of narration. Comp. ii. 19, 51, where RV. has "sayings"
in the text and "things" in the margin; and Acts v. 32, where it
has " things " in the text and " sayings " in the margin. Comp.
LXX Gen. xv. i, xxii. i, 16, xxxix. 7, xl. i, xlviii. i, and esp.
XXIV. 66, Travra ra pyfjiara a eTrofycrej/. The verb StaAaXciv occurs
only here and vi. 1 1 : not in LXX, but in Sym. several times in
the Psalms.
66. eOevTo iravres ol &Kov<ravTes v rifj KapSCa avTaiv. Comp. ii. 19.
We find all three prepositions with this phrase, tv, M, and els : fdero AavelS
ret pj)fj,a,TCL & TJJ KapSLq. auroO (i Sam. xxi. 12) ; i-dero Acm-fyX M rty Kapftlav
avroO (Dan. i. 8) ; rL6ecrd efr rty Kapdtav bp&v (Mai. ii. 2). Lk. is fond of
constructions with $v ry K. or 4v rats K. (ii. 19, iii. 15, v. 22, xxi. 14 ;
comp. ii. 51, xxiv. 38). In Horn, we have both ffewal n and &<r#at rt,
either fr (ppevi or & (m^etm. Note that, not only is7rct$or#7rasa favourite
word with Lk., but either form combined with a participle of d/coi'w is also
freq. and characteristic (ii. 1 8, 47, iv. 28, vi. 47, vii. 29, xx. 45 ; Acts v. 5,
u, ix. 21, x. 44, xxvi. 29 ; comp. Acts iv. 4, xviii. 8). See on vi. 30.
TC apa T& iraiSCov TOVTO ecrrat; Not rls the reut. makes the question
moie indefinite and comprehensive: comp. rl &pa 6 Ufrpos fyfrero (Acts xii.
18). The &pa, t igiturt means **in these circumstances"; viii. 25, xii, 42,
xxii. 23.
KCU ydp x^P Kuptou fy p,T* aurou. " For besides all that," *>.
in addition to the marvels which attended his birth. This is a
remark of the Evangelist, who is wont now and then to interpose
in this manner: comp. ii. 50, iii. 15, vii. 39, xvi 14, xx. 20,
xxiii. 12. The recognition that John was under special Divine
influence caused the question, ri apa earac ; to be often repeated in
after times. Here, as in Acts xi. 21, x**P Kvptov is followed by
/lera, and the meaning is that the Divine power interposes to guide
and bless. See small print on i. 20 for other parallels between
Gospel and Acts. Where the preposition which follows is eVt, the
Divine interposition is generally one of punishment (Acts xzii. 1 1 ;
Judg. ii. 15; i Sam. v. 3, 6, vii. 13; Exod. vii. 4, 5). But this is
by no means always the case (2 Kings iii. 1 5 ; Ezra vii. 6, viiL
22, 31); least of all where x^P nas the epithet dya0?J (Ezra vii.
9, 28, viii. iS). In N.T. x* L P Kvptbv is peculiar to Lk, (Acts
xi. 2 1, xiii. 1 1 ; comp. iv. 28, 30).
67-79. The Benedictus or Song of Zacharias may be the cv-
Xoyta mentioned in ver. 64. 1 To' omit it there, in order to continue
the narrative without interruption, and to give it as a solemn
conclusion, would be a natural arrangement. As the Magnificat
is modelled on the psalms, so the Benedictus is modelled on the
1 Like most of the canticles, the Benedictus was originally said at Laud* i
and it is still said at Lauds, in the Roman Church daily, in the Greek Church
on special occasions. See footnote on p. 67.
I. 66.]
THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY
39
prophecies, and it has been called "the last prophecy of the Old
Dispensation and the first in the New." And while the tone of
the Magnificat is regal, that of the Benedictus is sacerdotal. The
one is as appropriate to the daughter of David as the other to the
son of Aaron. The relation between new and old may again be
seen in a table.
THE BENEDICTUS.
EiJ\o7?7r6j Ktfpcos 6 Beds rov '
#rt ^recr/c^aro Kal brolijffcv
r$ Xa<j5 ourov,
Kal jjyetpev /e^pas ffUTyplas $iif
& ofoy AavelS rat56s ai/rov,
*a0<bs ^\d\Ti<rev Sia crr6fjut,rot ru>v
far* alwvos Tpo<pTjrw avrov
(rorrrjplav 4% tydpQv rjaQv Kal K
Xeos pera TUV
SiaB'/jK'iqs aylat auroO,
rbv trartpa ^/iwr,
roO Sovvai ijfuv &<p6fi<as tic xeipbs
fvuTLOv avrov Tdvatt ratj
rpOTOpevcri] yap fruiriov KvpLov
i tdotis avroQ,
rw JoO^at yvucriv ffurypla
yu rots cv <rx6r
Oa
roO Hcarei^wat roOs ir<55ay
THB OLD TESTAMENT.
1 BuXoyT^is Ktfpios 6 Gcdf
cavaTc\Q xtpas rg Aai/efd.
e\i /c^pay wavri ry of/c<f> '
' ty&arei Ktpas X/W(rrov ai/roO.
* tffdxrev avrotis CK \eipQv [ucrotivrur ceU
cXvrp&ffaro avrous CK xp^s
'
rots traT
B'/jKy
* envJiffQy ^ 9e6s r^s Si
tifuxra, rots Trarpdciv i)^y, TOV tiovvcu
avrots yyv ptovcrav yd\a Kal /xAt.
i els rbv ai&va $ta&'/)Ki}S avrov
jcai rov
'I<radjc.
r^w fabv Kvptov.
111 oi Karot/couyrer ev X^P^ *** *"*^
$avdrov $ws Xd/*^e
There is a manifest break at the end of ver. 75. The first
of these two portions thus separated may be divided into three
1 Ps, xli. 14, Ixxii. 1 8, cvi. 48. * Ps. cxi. 9.
4 Ezek. xxix. 21* I Sam. iL 10. * Ps. cvi. i<x
Ps. cvi. 45. f Exod. ii. 24- w Ter. xL 5.
* Ps. cxaodi. 17
7 Mic. vii. 2a
u Ps. cv. 8, 9.
w Ps. cvii.
40 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [I. 66-70.
strophes (68, 69; 70-72; 73-75), and the second into two (76,
77 ; 73, 79)-
67. l-n\r\a-Qr\ TTffufxaTOs dyiou icai lnpocJy^Teuo-ey. See on ver. 15
The prophesying must not be confined to the prediction of the
future ; it is the delivery of the Divine message ; speaking under
God's influence, and in His Name. Zacharias sees in his son the
earnest and guarantee of the deliverance of Israel.
In some texts tirpofi'/jTevffev has been altered into the more regular 7rpoe0ifr-
rewrev, but everywhere in N.T. (even Jude 14) the augment should precede
Che prep, in this compound. This is intelligible, seeing that there is no
simple verb 01/retfw. Comp. Num. xi. 25, 26; Ecclus. xliii. 13, and the
similar forms tffaev and -ijvo^ejf. Win. adi. 5, p. 84.
68. EuXoyijTos Ku'pios 6 0c6s TOU 'icrpcnjX. Not eo-riV but efy is
to be supplied. The line is verbatim as Ps. xli. 14, Ixxii. 18,
cvi. 48, excepting that in LXX rov is omitted. In N.T. euAoy^ros
is used of God, but never of men : see on ver. 42. In LXX there
are a few exceptions: Deut. vii. 14; Ruth ii. 20; i Sam. xv. 13,
xxv. 33.
eireo-K^aro ical zroi7]<ri' XuTpaxriv T< Xaw auroC. Here, as in
Ecclus. xxxii. 17, an ace, is to be supplied after cTrccncetyaro ; there
TOJ> raTTtivov, here rov Kaov. See on vii. 16. Excepting Heb, ii. 6,
where it is a quotation from Ps. viii. 5, this verb is used in the
Hebrew sense (Exod. iv. 31) of Divine visitation by Lk. alone in
N.T. Comp. Ps. Sol. iii. 14. No doubt XvTpoxrw has reference
to political redemption (ver. 71), but accompanied by and based
upon a moral and spiritual reformation (w. 75, 77). Comp.
Ps. cxxix. 7.
69. KCX! *5yipeR Ke'pas cr&mjptas ^fitc. For this use of !ytpa>
Comp. ijyapev Kvptos ortorijpa r<3 ^Icrpa^X. (Judg. iii. 9, 15). In
Ezek. xxix. 21 and Ps. cxxxii. 17 the verb used is drarcAXw or
^ai/areAAo) (see table). The metaphor of the horn is very freq. in
O.T. (i Sam. ii. 10; 2 Sam. xxii. 3; Ps. Ixxv. 5, 6, n, etc.), and
is taken neither from the horns of the altar, nor from the peaks of
helmets or head-dresses, but from the horns of animals, especially
bulls. It represents, therefore, primarily, neither safety nor dignity,
but strength. The wild-ox, wrongly called " unicorn " in AV., was
proverbial for strength (Num. xxiv. 22; Job xxxix. 9-11; Deut
xxxiii. 17). In Horace we have addis cornua pauperi^ and in Ovid
turn pauper cornua sumit* In Ps. xriii. 3 God is called a /cepas
arwvjpiajs. See below on ver. 71. For -rrcuSos aurou see on ver. 54.
" In the house of His servant David " is all the more true if Mary
was of the house of David. But the fact that Jesus was the heir
of Joseph is sufficient, and this verse is no proof of Mary's descent
from David.
70. Second strophe. Like ver, 55, this is not a parenthesis,
but determines the preceding statement more exactly, As a priest.
1.70-74,] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 4!
Zacharias would be familiar with O.T. prophecies. Even if the T&V
before &if al&vos (A C D) were genuine, it would be unlikely that
TWI/ dyuov means " the saints " in app. with TW air al&vos -n-po^r^v.
Lk. is fond of the epithet aytos (ver. 72, ix. 26 ; Acts iii. 21, x. 22,
xxi, 28). He is also fond of the periphrasis 8ta OTOJJKXTOS (Acts
i. 1 6, iii. 1 8, 21, iv. 25): comp. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 22. And the
expression dir* al&yos is peculiar to him in N.T. (Acts iii. 21,
xv. 1 8). It is used vaguely for "of old time." Here it does not
mean that there have been Prophets "since the world began."
Comp. ot yfycLvres ol OLTT atoivos (Gen. vi. 4), and Kara/?povra /cat
ra.ra<f)yy(, rows car* atoivos prjropas (Longin. xxxiv.), and adverbially
(Hes. Theog. 609).
71. cromjpiay e| tytipw ty&v. This is in app. with /^pas
ercoTT/ptas and epexegetic of it. That the e^^pcSv ^//.ojv and T<W
fjLt&ovvTtov ^/xas are identical is clear from Ps. xviii. 18 and cvi. 10
(see table). The heathen are meant. Gentile domination prevents
the progress of God's kingdom, and the Messiah will put an end
to this hindrance. Comp. Exod. xviii. 10.
Neither <ruTijpta (vv. 69, 77, xix. 9; Acts iv. 12,^ etc.) nor rb ^
(ii. 30, iii. 6 ; Acts xxviii. 28) occur in Mt. or Mk. The former occurs once
in Jn. (iv. 22). Both are common in LXX. The primary meaning is
preservation from bodily harm (Gen. xxvi. 31 ; 2 Sam. xix. 2), especially of
the great occasions on which God had preserved Israel (Exod. xiv. 13, xv. 2;
2 Chron. xx. 17) ; and hence of the deliverance to be wrought by the Messiah
(Is. xhx. 6, 8), which is the meaning here. Comp. rov KvpLov TJ (ramjpta. &r'
olKQj' *I<rpa^X els eixfypocrijvyv al&viov (Ps. Sol. x. 9 ; and very similarly xii. 7).
As ihe idea of the Messianic salvation became enlarged and purified, the word
which so often expressed it came gradually to mean much the same as
" eternal life." See on Rom. 1. 16.
72. iroiYJcm Duos ficra, K.r.X. This is the purpose of TJyeiper/
/ce'pas. The phrase is freq. in LXX (Gen. xxiv. 12 ; Judg. i. 24,
viii. 35 ; Ruth i. 8 ; i Sam. xx. 8, etc.). Comp. yttcr" avrys, ver.
58. "In delivering us God purposed to deal mercifully with our
fathers." This seems to imply that the fathers are conscious of
what takes place : comp. vv. 54, 55. Besides the passages given
in the table, comp. Lev. xxvi. 42, and see Wsctt. on Heb. ix,
15, 16.
73. Spico^ ov w/jtocrcK irpSs 'Af3pcufi. Third strophe. The oath
is recorded Gen. xxiL 16-18 : comp. xxvi. 3.
It is best to take $PKCV in app. with SiaB^KTfjs, but attracted in case to
Sv : comp w. 4, 20, and see on iii. 19. It is true that in LXX fivrjo-Oyvai is
found with an ace. (Exod. xx. 8 ; Gen. ix. 1 6). But would Lk. give it first
a gen. and then an ace. in the same sentence? For the attraction of the
antecedent to the relative comp. xx. 17 and Acts x. 36.
oS^oo-ev irpfe 'A, So also in Horn, (Od. xiv. 331, xk. 288): but see
on ver. 13.
74. rov Sotivca -f||iiv. This is probably to be taken after tipieov as the
contents and purpose of the oath; and the promise that "thy seed shall
42 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S, LUKE [1.74-77.
possess the gate of his enemies" (Gen. xxii. 17) is in favour of this But it
is possible to take TOV Sovvai as epexegetic of ver. 72 ; or again, as the
purpose of -ffyeipey /c<-pas, and therefore parallel to ver. 72. This last is not
likely, because there is no TOV with TTOI^CTCU. This TOV c. injin. of the purpose
or result is a favourite constr. with Lk. (w. 77> 79 & 2 4? where see reff.),
It marks the later stage of the language, in which aim and purpose become
confused with result. Perhaps the gen. of the aim may be explained on the
analogy of the part. gen. after verbs of hitting or missing.
IK. x l pos ex^P^* It does not follow from 6<J60T?2Tt Kal
that spiritual enemies are meant The tyranny of heathen
conquerors was a hindrance to holiness. In addition to the
parallel passages quoted in the table, comp. Ps. xviii. 18,
/ JJLOV
For the ace. frvcrOfrras after TJ/MV comp. arol <$ crvyyytfywj \6ycip rdS* 4<rrl t
fjA} Trdtrxoveav u?s y& KCLK&S (Eur. Med. 814).
75. \a,Tpefaiv aurw. Comp. Aarpevcrcre r<p 0ea> cv TO> opet rovry
(Exod. Hi. 12). We must take IvwTtwv aurou with AarpeiW aur<3.
The service of the redeemed and delivered people is to oe a
priestly service, like that of Zacharias (ver. 8). For ei/co-moy see on
ver. 15, and for Xarpeueiv on iv. 8. The combination 6ai6TT)s KCU
SiKcuocrunj becomes common ; but perhaps the earliest instance is
Wisd. ix. 3. We have it Eph. iv. 24 and Clem. Rom. xlviii.:
comp. Tit. i. 8 and i Thes. ii. 10.
76. Kal a^ 8^, TraiSioi/. Here the second part of the hymn, and
the distinctively predictive portion of it, begins. The Prophet
turns from the bounty of Jehovah in sending the Messiah to the
work of the Forerunner. "But thou also, child," or "Yea and
thou, child " (RV.). Neither the /cat nor the oV must be neglected.
There is combination, but there is also contrast. Not " my child" :
the personal relation is lost in the high calling. The K\t)0^<nj has
the same force as in ver. 32 : not only " shalt be," but " shalt be
acknowledged as being."
TTpoTropeucn] yelp ewfarioi' Kupiou. Comp. Kupios 6 eo5 <rov 6
irp07ropv6fjLvo$ TTpo Trpo<Tu>7rov (Toy, Ka6a eAaX^crev Kvpto? (Deut.
xxxi. 3). Here Kvpiov means Jehovah, not the Christ, as is clear
from vv. 1 6, 17.
77. TOU 8oGy<u yv&uiv crwr^pias TW Xaw afirou. This is the aim
and end of the work of the Forerunner. In construction it comes
after eroijuacrai 68ot>s avrov. We may take iv d<J>&m djiapTicoy aurwK
with either So?Wi, or yvwa-tv, or cra>T7jpia$. The last is best. John
did not grant remission of sins; and to make "knowledge of
salvation " consist in remission of sins, yields no very clear sense.
But that salvation is found in remission of sins makes excellent
sense (Acts v. 31). The Messiah brings the o-om/pi'a (vv. 69, 71):
the Forerunner gives the knowledge of it to the people, as consist-
ing, not in a political deliverance from the dominion of Rome but
X. 77-79.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 43
in a spiritual deliverance from the dominion of sin. This is the
tirst mention of the " remission of sins " in the Gospel narrative*
78. Sia o-TrXciyx^a eXeoug eou r\\L&v. The concluding strophe,
referring to the whole of the preceding sentence, or (if we take a
single word) to TrpoTropevcrr]. It is because of God's tender mercy
that the child will be able to fulfil his high calling and to do all
this. Comp. Test. XII. Pair. Levi iv., os cTricnce^Tcu Kvpios iravra
TO. Wvrj Iv <nrXa.yvoig vlov avrov la>9 atcovos.
Originally the <nr\iyx v < L y e *e the " inward parts," esp. the upper portions,
the heart, lungs, and liver (viscera thoracis]^ as distinct from the ^repa or bowels
(viscera abdominis}. The Greeks made the <nr'\dyx va ' the seat of the emotions,
anger, anxiety, pity, etc. By the Jews these feelings were placed in the ^repaj
and hence in LXX we have not only <nr\dyxva> (which may include the frrepa),
but also KOL\la and y/rara used for the affections. Moreover in Hebr. literature
these words more often represent compassion or love, whereas ff7r\dyxva. in class.
Grk. is more often used of wrath (Aristoph. Ran* 844, 1006 ; Eur. Ale. 1009).
"Heart" is the nearest English equivalent for a-TrAd-y^o, (RV. Col. iii. 12;
Philem. 12, 20). See Lft. on Phil. i. 8. " Because of our God's heart of
mercy," i.e. merciful heart, is the meaning here. For this descriptive or
characterizing gen. comp. Jas. i. 25, ii. 4 ; Jude 18. Some would make yv&crw
ffujT-yjpLas an instance of it, " saving knowledge," i.e. that brings salvation. But
this is not necessary. For Iv ots see on h ppvylw 1 -, ver. 51. For liric
comp. vii. 17 ; Ecclus. xlvi. 14 ; Judith viii. 33 ; and see on ver. 68.
eg u\|/ou. " Rising from on high." The word is used
of the rising of the sun (Rev. vii. 2, xvi. 12; Horn. Od. xiL 4) and
of stars (^Esch. P. V. 457; Eur. Phcen. 504). Here the rising of
the heavenly body is put for the heavenly body itself. Comp. the
use of di/areAAo) in Is. Ix. i and Mai. iv. 2. Because sun, moon,
and stars do not rise from on high, some join ef vif/ovs with
eTricr/cei^crat, which is admissible. But, as avaroXo? means the sun
or star itself, whose light comes from on high, this is not necessary.
Seeing that <Wre'AAo> is used of the rising or sprouting of plants^
and that the Messiah is sometimes called " the Branch " (Jer. xxiii.
5, xxxiiL 15; Zech. iii. 8, vi. 12), and that in LXX this is expressed
by avaroXtf, some would adopt that meaning here. But ef vifsows,
7rt<avai, and KarevOvvat. are conclusive against it. These expres-
sions agree well with a rising sun or star, but not with a sprouting
branch.
79. m<j>av<u TOLS Iv o-Koret ica! CTKIOL 6a!/cTou Ka0Tf)|ji,^ous. For
7r%<aj/cu comp. Acts xxvii. 20, and for the form Ps. xxx. 17, cxviL
27. In 3 Mac. VI. 4 we have S-u <apaci> . . . obroiAe<ras, <>'yyos
7ri<jE>avas cXeovs 'Icrpa'JyX ylvet,. Note that the Ka@r)fjivovs ev CTKOTCI
of Is. xlii. 7 and the <TKI^ Qavdrov of Is. ix. i are combined here as
in Ps. cvii. 10 (see table). Those who hold that these hymns are
1 This is the reading of X B Syr. Arm. Goth. Boh. and virtually of L
which has &r<nt^<urcu. Godet defends &re<r/e^uro., because Zacharias would
not suddenly turn from the past to the future ; but this thought would lead to
the corruption of the more difficult reading.
44 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [I. 79, SO.
Written in the interests of Ebionism have to explain why
i'ous <h' Trrwxeta (Ps. evil. 10) is omitted.
TOU KareuGuyai TOUS TroSas TQJJLWV ets oSoy eLp^nrjg, For the COnstr
comp, vv. 74, 77. Those who sat in darkness did not use their
feet : the light enables them to do so, and to use them profitably.
The fifj,&v shows that Jews as well as Gentiles are regarded as being
in darkness until the Messianic dawn. "The way of peace " is the
way that leads to peace, especially peace between God and His
people (Ps. xxix. n, Ixxxv. 9, cxix. 165; Jer. xiv. 13). It was one
of the many blessings which the Messiah was to bring (ii. 14, x. 5,
xxiv. 36). See on Rom. L 7 and comp. 6Soj/ o-wr^'as (Acts xvi. 17).
80. To Sc iraiSioy Yjuai>6 Kdl IfcparcuouTo irpcujuuxTi. The verse
forms a set conclusion to the narrative, as if here one of the
Aramaic documents used by Lk. came to an end. Comp. ii. 40,
52; Judg. xiii. 24, 25; i Sam. ii. 26. In LXX avgdv<i> is never, as
here, intrans. Thus avav& <rc <r<f>6Spa (Gen. xvii. 6); rjvgyOr} TO
iraiSiov (Gen. xxi. 8). In N.T. it is used of physical growth (ii. 40,
xii. 27, xiii. 19), and of the spread of the Gospel (Acts vi. 7, xii. 24,
xix. 20). With c/cparatovro Trvevp.ari comp. Eph. iii. 1 6 ; and for
the dat Rom. iv. 20 and i Cor. xiv. 20.
r\v iv TCUS epTJjjuHs. The wilderness of Judaea, west of the Dead
Sea, is no doubt meant. But the name is not given, because the
point is, not that he lived in any particular desert, but that he lived
in desert places and not in towns or villages. He lived a solitary
life. Hence nothing is said about his being "in favour with meri";
for he avoided men until his <WSeits brought him disciples. This
fact answers the question whether John was influenced by the
Essenes, communities of whom lived in the wilderness of Judaea.
We have no reason to believe that he came in contact with them.
Excepting the ascetic life, and a yearning for something better
than obsolete Judaism, there was little resemblance between their
principles and his. He preached the Kingdom of God; they
preached isolation. They abandoned society ; he strove to reform
it. See Godet in loco and D*B? art. " Essenes." Lk. alone uses
the plur. at cpijfjLOL (v. 16, viii. 29).
ecus iqfAe'pas dnxBeiletos aurou trpos iw 'itrpa-jjX. John probably
went up to Jerusalem for the feasts, and on those occasions he and
the Messiah may have met, but without John's recognizing Him as
such. Here only in N.T. does dyaSafts occur. In Ecclus. xliii. 6
we have <xva8ei/ xpdvcoi/ as a function of the moon. In Plut the
word is used of the proclaiming or inauguration of those who are
appointed to office (Mar. viii. ; (7. Grac* xii.). It is also used of
the deticcation of a temple (Strabo, viii. 5. 23, p. 381). Comp.
(x. i).
of the appointment of the Seventy (x. i). It was John
himself f ho proclaimed the inauguration of his office by manifesting
hiros< it o the people at God's command (iii. 2) ,
THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 45
NOTB ON THE USE OF
More than any other Evangelist Lk. makes use of the Hebr. formula, tyhcrQ
d(- or Kal frytvero. But with it he uses a variety of constructions, some of which
are modelled on the classical use of crw^/S?/, which Lk. himself employs Acts xxi.
35. The following types are worth noting.
(a) The y6>ero and that which came to pass are placed side by side as
parallel statements in the indicative mood without a conjunction.
i. 8. tytvcTQ 8k & rf teparetiew avrbv . . , IXa^e rou dv/Aiacrai.
i. 23. Kal ty&ero a?? tirXTjedriffav at Tft-c^pat 7775 \eirovpytti5 O.IUTOV,
|. 41. Kal ty&ero u>s iJKOvo-ev rbv dcnratr/jLbv rrjs M. ^ 'E., faKlpTqo'e
ii. I. tyfrero 8t v rats fy^paty ^KeLvais trj\dev SbyfJM..
Of the same type are i. 59, ii. 6, 15, 46, vii. 11, ix. 18, 28, 29, 33, 37, xL I,
14, 27, xvii. 14, xviii. 35, xix. 29, xx. I, xxiv. 30, 51. In viii. 40, ix. 57, x,
38 the frytveTo dt is probably spurious. In the Acts this type does not occur.
(j3) The tytvero and that which came to pass are coupled together by *a/,
which may be regarded as (i) uniting two co-ordinate statements; or (2)
epexegetic, " It came to pass, namely* j or (3) introducing the apodosis, as
often in class. Grk., " It came to pass that."
v. I. ty&ero 5 iv rf rbv &-x\ov ^rire?cr5at adry . . . Kal afrrbs fy ierdt,
v. 17, Jcal ^y^ero A pig. ruv Ttfjpw Kal airfc ty 5t5d<rKbJV t
viii. I. KO.I tytvero & r(j) Ka6eJ;7Js Kal ai/rds 8t,<b8evei>.
viii. 22, iyvero 5^ ^ yw^ ruv ijjj^pwy Kal atrbs dvtpi] els 7rXo?ov.
Of the same type are v. 12, ix. 51, xiv. I, xvii. ii, xix. 15, xxiv* 4; Aqts
v. 7. It will be observed that in nearly all cases the Kal is followed by avrbs or
afoot. In v. 12 and xxiv. 4 it is followed by the Hebraistic Idoti, and in xix. 15
we have simply Ka,l etircv.
(7) That which takes place is put in the infinitive mood, and this depends
upon tyfrero.
iii. 21. tyfrero W ^ r$ paimffdTjvat faarr* rbv \abv . . . dreyx^^oi rAr
otipavbv.
vi. I. eyfrero 8 ev ffafifi&Tip SiairopefaffQai avrbv Sia <riroplfj.<av.
vi. 12. y^ero fr racs -^/>cus raiJrats ^eX^eti' otJr^x' e^s r& 5po.
xvi. 22. ^z/ero 8 airodavetv rbv m-a^6y.
This type of construction is common in the Acts : iv. 5, ix. 32, 37, 43, xL 26,
xiv. I, xvi. 16, xix. i, xxii. 6, 17, xxviii. 8, 17.
(5) In the Acts we have several other forms still more closely assimilated to
classical constructions, the fryfrero being placed later in the sentence, or being
preceded by cbs or 5re.
ix. 3. iv $ r$ TTOpefacrdat, jfy&ero afobv y7^;> TQ Aa/ta^^.
xxi. I. (>$ $ tytvero disaxQTJvat. f]fj.a,s . . . JjX&opw els r^v Ka;.
xxi. 5. &rc 8t fryfrero %apri<rai ^/*as ras ypApaSj %\6ovT$ frropcvbiAcBcL,
x. 25. ws 5^ lyfrero TQV tffe\6ew rbv n^rpov, . . . Trpoa-eKtiyvia-ev*
In these last three instances we are far removed from the Hebraistic types (a)
and (). The last is very peculiar ; but comp. xxvii. I and the exact parallel in
Ada Bamab. Agocryp. vii. quoted by Lumby, &$ dt fytvero rov reX^<rat ai/roi)f
We have obtained in this analysis the following results. Of the two Hebra-
istic types, (a) is very common in the first two chapters of the Gospel, where Lk.
is specially under the influence of Hebrew thought and literature, and is probably
translating from the Aramaic ; but (a) is not found at all in the Acts, and (ft)
occurs there only once. On the other hand, of the more classical types, (y) is
much less common in the Gospel than in the Acts, while the forms grouped
under (8) do not occur in the Gospel at all. All which is quite what we might
have expected. In the Acts there is much less room for Hebrew influences than
there is in the Gospel j and thus the more classical forms of construction becotna
there the prevailing types.
46 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE |L
IL 1-20. The Birth of the Saviour, its Proclamation by the
Angels^ and its Verification by the Shepherds.
The second of the narratives in the second group (i. 57-ii. 40)
in the Gospel of the Infancy (i. 5-1!. 52). It corresponds to the
Annunciation (i. 26-38) in the first group. Like the sections which
precede and which follow, it has a clearly marked conclusion. And
these conclusions have in some cases a very marked resemblance.
Comp. ii. 20 with i. 56, and ii. 40 and 52 with i. 80. This
similarity of form points to the use of material from one and
the same source, and carefully arranged according to the sub-
ject-matter. This source would be some member of the Holy
Family (see on i. 5). The marks of Lk.'s style, accompanied by
Hebraistic forms of expression, still continue; and we infer, as
before, that he is translating from an Aramaic document The
section has three marked divisions : the Birth (1-7), the Angelic
Proclamation (8-14), and the Verification (15-20). The con-
nexion with what precedes is obvious. We have just been told
how the promise to Zacharias was fulfilled ; and we are now to be
told how the promise to Mary was fulfilled
1-7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem at the Time of the
Enrolment. The extreme simplicity of the narrative is in very
marked contrast with the momentous character of the event thus
narrated. We- have a similar contrast between matter and form in
the opening verses of S. John's Gospel. The difference between
the evangelical account and modern Lives of Christ is here very
remarkable. The tasteless and unedifying elaborations of the
apocryphal gospels should also be compared. 1
1-3. How Bethlehem came to be the Birthplace of Jesus
Christ, although Nazareth was the Home of His Parents. This
explanation has exposed Lk. to an immense amount of criticism,
which has been expressed and sifted in a manner that has produced
a voluminous literature. In addition to the commentaries, some
1 ** Such marvellous associations have clung for centuries to these verses, that
it is hard to realise how absolutely naked they are of all ornament. We are
obliged to read them again and again to assure ourselves that they really do set
forth what we call the great miracle of the world. If, on the other hand, the
Evangelist was possessed by the conviction that he was not recording a miracle
which had interrupted the course of history and deranged the order of human
life, but was telling of a divine act which explained the course of history and
restored the order of human life, one can very well account for his calmness"
(F. D. Maurice, Lectures on S. Luke, p. 28, ed. 1879).
IL 1.J THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 47
of the following may be consulted, and from Schurer and Herzog
further information about the literature may be obtained.
S. J. Andrews, Life of our Lord, pp. 71-81, T. & T. Clark,
1892; T. Lewin, Fasti Sacri^ 955, Longmans, 1865; J. B.
McClellan, The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour, i. pp.
392-399, Macmillan, 1875; C. F. Nosgen, Gesehiehte Jesu Christi,
pp. 172-174, Beck, 1891; *E. Schurer, Jewish People in the Time of
fesus Christ, i. 2, pp. 105-143, T. & T. Clark, 1890; B. Weiss,
Lebenjesu, i. 2. 4, Berlin, 1882 ; Eng. tr. pp. 250-252 ; K. Wieseler,
Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels , pp. 66106, 129135,
Deighton, 1864; O. Zockler, Handbuch der Theologischen Wissen-
schaften, i. 2, pp. 188-190, Beck, 1889; A. W. Zumpt, Das
Geburtsjahr Christi (reviewed by Woolsey in the Bibliotheca Sacra^
1870), Leipzig, 1869; D.B? art. "Cyrenius"; Herzog, PRE?
xiii. art. " Schatzung " ; P. SchafF, History of the Church, i. pp.
121-125, T. & T. Clark, 1883; Ramsay, Was Christ Born at
Bethlehem 1 1899 ; Hastings, D.B. art. Chronology of N.T.
1. 'Ey^vcTO 81 Iv rats Tjfjufpcus eiceirais e^XOey S<5yjia irap& Kai-
o-apog Auyouorou d-iroyp(<f>ea0ai ircUrap TYJ^ olfcoujj^n'jy. For the constr.
see detached note at the end of ch. i. ; and for ev raw fjp.epais
/ctVais see on i. 5 and 39. The time of the birth of John is
roughly indicated. Even in class. Grk. the first meaning of StSyjua,
as "opinion, philosophic tenet," is not very common (Plat. Rep.
538 C); it is more often a " public decree, ordinance." This is
always the meaning in N.T., whether an ordinance of the Roman
Emperor (Acts xvii. 5), or of the Apostles (Acts xvi. 4; comp.
Ign. Mag. xiii.; Didachc, xi. 3), or of the Mosaic Law (Col. ii. 14;
Eph. ii. 15; comp. 3 Mac. i. 3; Jos. Ant. xv. 5. 3). For e|T)X0ei>
8<tyjjt,a comp. Dan. ii. 13 (Theod.). In Daniel Soy/uct is freq. of a
royal decree (iii. ro, iv. 3, vi. 9, 10). See Lft on Col. ii. 14.
d7royp<<j>ecr0at. Probably passive, ut describeretur (~Vulg.), not
middle, as in ver. 3. The present is here used of the continuous
enrolment of the multitudes ; the aorist in ver. 5 of the act of one
person. The verb refers, to the writing off, copying, or entering
the names, professions, fortunes, and families of subjects in the
public register^ generally with a view to taxation (aTroTt/^o-ts or
rtyut^a). It is a more general word than aTror^aw, which implies
assessment as well as enrolment But it is manifest that the d-?ro
ypa<?J here and in Acts v. 37 included assessment. The Jews were
exempt fiom military service; and enrolment for that purpose
cannot be intended. In the provinces the census was mainly for
purposes of taxation.
iracrav TTJV olKoujj^nqv. "The whole inhabited world/' i.e. the
Roman Empire, orbis terrarum. Perhaps in a loose way the ex-
pression might be used of the provinces only. But both the -rrao-av
and the context exclude the limitation to Palestine, a meaning
4.8 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IL 1.
which the expression never has, not even in Jos. Ant. via. 3. 4.
See on iv. 5 and xxi. 26. In inscriptions Roman Emperors are
called Kvptoi T7j<s OIKOV^^. The verse implies a decree for a general
census throi'ghoiit the empire.
It must be confessed that no direct evidence of any such decree
exists beyond this statement by Lk., and the repetitions of it by
Christian writers. But a variety of items have been collected,
which tend to show that a Roman census in Judsaa at this time,
in accordance with some general instructions given by Augustus,
is not improbable.
I. The rationarium or rationes imperii, which was a sort of balance-sheet
published periodically by the emperor (Suet. Aug. xxviii, ; CaL xvi.). 2 - The
hbellus or breviarium totius imperzi, which Augustus deposited with his will
(Tac. Ann. i. II. 5, 6 ; Suet. Aug. ci.). 3. The index rerum gestarum to be
inscribed on his tomb, which was the original of the Marmor Ancyranum.
But these only indicate the orderly administration of the empire. A general
census would have been useful in producing such things ; but that does not
prove that it took place. Two passages in Dion Cassius are cited ; but one of
these (Uv. 35) refers to a registration of the emperor's private property, and
the other (Iv. 13) to a census of Roman citizens. If Augustus made a
general survey of the empire, of which there is evidence from the commen*
tarn of Agrippa mentioned by Pliny (Nat. Hist. iii. 2. 17), this also would
have been conveniently combined with a general census, although it does
mt show that such a census was ordered. Of some of the provinces we
^notv that no census was held in them during the reign of Augustus. But
it is probable that in the majority of them a census took place; and the
statement of so accurate a writer as Lk., although unsupported by direct evi-
dence, may be accepted as substantially true : viz. that in the process of reduc-
ing the empire to order, Augustus had required that a census should be held
throughout most of it. So that Lk. groups the various instances under one ex-
pression, just as in Acts xi. 28 he speaks of the famines, which took place in
different parts of the empire in th time of Claudius, as a famine efi SKtjv oltcov-
fitj/yv. Of the^ Christian witnesses none is of much account. Riess seems to be
almost alone in contending that Orosius (Hist, Rom. vi. 22. 6) had any
authority other than Lk. Cassiodorus ( V&narum Epp. iii. 52) does not men-
tion a census of persons at all clearly ; but if orbis Romanus agris divisus cen-
suque descriptus est means such a census, he may be referring to Lk, ii. j. The
obscure statement of Isidore of Spain (Etymologiarum^ v. 26. 4 ; Opera^ iii. 229,
ed. Arevallo) may either be derived from Lk. or refer to another period. What
Suidas states (Lex. f.v. dir&ypa,<j>/i) partly comes from Lk. and partly is improb-
able. At the best, all this testimony is from 400 to 1000 years after the event,
and cannot be rated highly. The passages are given in full by Schurer (Jewish
People in the T. off. C. i. 2, pp. 116, 117). But it is urged that a Roman
census, even if held elsewhere, could not have been made in Palestine during the
time of Herod the Great, because Palestine was not yet a Roman province. In
A.D. 6, 7, when Quirinius certainly did undertake a Roman census in Judaea,
such a proceeding was quite in order. Josephus shows that in taxation Herod
acted independently (Ant. xv. 10. 4, xvi. 2. 5, xvii. 2. 1, n. 2 ; comp. xvii. 8. 4),
That Herod paid tribute to Rome is not certain ; but, if so, he would pay it out
of taxes raised by himself. The Romans would not assess his subjects for the
tribute which he had to pay. Josephus, whose treatment of the last years of
Herod is very full, does not mention any Roman census at that time. On the
contrary, he implies that, even after the death of Herod, so long as Palestine
was ruled by its own princes, there was no Roman taxation ; and Tie states that
JX 1, 2.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 49
the census undertaken by Quirinius A.D. 7 excited intense opposition, pesrain*
ably as being an innovation (Ant. xviii. I. I, 2. l).
In meeting this objection, let us admit with Schurer and Zumpt that the case
of the Clitse is not parallel. Tacitus (Ann. vi. 41. i) does not say that the
Romans held a census in the dominions of Archelaus, but that Archelaus wished to
have a census after the Roman fashion. Nevertheless, the objection that Augustus
would not interfere with Herod's subjects in the matter of taxation is untenable.
When Palestine was divided among Herod's three sons, Augustus ordered that
the taxes of the Samaritans should be reduced by one-fourth, because they had
not taken part in the revolt against Varus (Ant. xvii. n. 4 ; B.J. iu 6, 3) ; and
this was before Palestine became a Roman province. If he could do that, he
could require information as to taxation throughout Palestine ; and the obsequi-
ous Herod would not attempt to resist. 1 The value of such information would
be great. It would show whether the tribute paid (if tribute was paid) was
adequate ; and it would enable Augustus to decide how to deal with Palestine
in the future. If he knew that Herod's health was failing, he would be anxious
to get the information before Herod's death ; and thus the census would take
place just at the time indicated by Lk., viz. in the last months of the reign of
Herod.
2. auTYj obroypa^Y] Trp&n\ ey^i/erc. This may be accepted as
certainly the true reading ; 2 and the meaning of it is not really
doubtful. "This took place as a first enrolment, when Q. was
governor of Syria." The object of the remark is to distinguish
the census which took Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem from the
one undertaken by Q. in A.D. 6, 7, at which time Q. was governor
of Syria. But was he governor B.C. 4, when Herod died ? It is
very difficult to establish this.
From B.C. 9 to 6 Sentius Saturninus was governor ; from B.C.
6 to 4 Quinctilius Varus. Then all is uncertain until A.D. 6,
when P. Sulpicius Quirinius becomes governor and holds the
census mentioned Acts v. 37 and also by Josephus (Ant. xviii.
i. i, 2. i). It is quite possible, as Zumpt and others have shown,
that Quirinius was governor of Syria during part of the interval
between B.C. 4 and A.D. 6, and that his first term of office was
B.C. 3, 2. But it seems to be impossible to find room for him
between B.C. 9 and the death of Herod ; and, unless we can do
that, Lk. is not saved from an error in chronology. Tertullian
states that the census was held by Sentius Saturninus (Adv. Marc.
iv- 19) ; and if that is correct we may suppose that it was begun
by him and continued by his successor. On the other hand,
Justin Martyr three times states that Jesus Christ was born ITTL
IZvpyvtov, and in one place states that this can be officially ascer-
tained K roiv airoypact>v r<3v yevofievwv (ApoL L 34, 46 ; Dial.
Ixxviii.).
1 See the treatment to which Herod had to submit in the matter of
(Jos. Ant. xvi. 9. 3, 4).
3 B (supported by 81, 131, 203) has a#n? diroypaffi irp^rij ey^cr*.
fc$ has the impossible avrfyv drrcrypafify cyfrero irpdrry.
D (supported by Orig-Lat.) has CL^TT) eyfrero^ dvoypaffi wp&rq.
Thus all three are against the TJ before tiToypa.^ inserted in A C L R S.
?0 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE f EL &
We must be cGiiW-nt to leave the difficulty unsolved. But it is
monstrous to argue that because Lk. has (possibly) made a mistake
as to Quirinius being governor at this time, therefore the whole
story about the census and Joseph's journey to Bethlehem is a
fiction. Even if there was no census at this time, business con-
nected with enrolment might take Joseph to Bethlehem, and Lk.
would be correct as to his main facts. That Lk. has confused
this census with the one in A.D. 6, 7, which he himself mentions
Acts v. 37, is not credible. We are warranted in maintaining (i)
that a Roman census in Judaea at this time, in accordance with
instructions given by Augustus, is not improbable ; and (2) that
some official connexion of Quirinius with Syria and the holding of
this census is not impossible. The accuracy of Lk. is such that
we ought to require very strong evidence before rejecting any
statement of his as an unquestionable blunder. But it is far
better to admit the possibility of error than to attempt to evade
this by either altering the text or giving forced interpretations of it
The following methods of tampering with the /<?#/have been suggested : to
regard irpdmt] as a corruption of irp&rv &rei through the intermediate irpwret
(Linwood); to insert irpb TTJS after eytvero (Michaelis) ; to substitute for Ku-
pifvLov either Kvuvi\lov (Huetius), or K/)o^oi;=Saturnini (Heumann), or "Sarovp-
vtvov (Valesius) ; to omit the whole verse as a gloss (Beza, Pfaff, Valckenaer).
All these are monstrous. The only points which can be allowed to be doubtful
in die text are the accentuation of ^rt\ and the spelling of Kvpjjvlov, to which
may perhaps be added the insertion of the article.
Among the various interpretations may be mentioned
(1) Giving vp&ros a comparative force, as in Jn. i. 15, 30: "This taxing
took place before Quirinius was governor of Syria " (Huschke, Ewald, Caspari) ;
or, as ccrxdrT) r&v vlCov $ ^r^p ereXetfr^iTe (2 Mac. vii. 41) means " The mother
died last of all, and later than her sons," this may mean, " This took place as
the first enrolment, and before Q. was governor of S." (Wieseler). But none of
thefae passages are parallel: the addition of fryqaoj'etfoj'Tos is fatal. When
irpw-ros is comparative it is followed by a simple noun or pronoun. It is
incredible that Lk., if he had meant this, should have expressed it so clumsily.
(2) Emphasizing fy&ero, as in Acts xi. 28: "This taxing took effect,
was carried out, when Q. was governor of S." (Gumpach, etc.) ; i.e. the decree
was issued in Herod's time, and executed ten or twelve years later by Q.
This makes nonsense of the narrative. Why did Joseph go to Bethlehem to be
enrolled, if no enrolment took place then ? There would be some point in
saying that the census was finished, brought to a close, under Q., after having
been begun by Herod ; but eyfrero cannot possibly mean that.
(3) Reading and accentuating avrf) $ biroypa.^ : * { The raising of the tax
itself (as distinct from the enrolment and assessment) first took place when Q.,"
etc. ** Augustus ordered a census and it took place, but no money was raised
until the time of Q." (Ebrard). This involves giving to diroypa^ in ver. 2
a totally different meaning from 6,Tr0ypd(j><rdcu in ver. I and &Troypd\f/a(r0at in
ver, 5 ; which is impossible.
(4) With atiri} ij diro-ypa^i), as before: "The census itself called the first
took place when Q.," etc. The better known census under Q. was commonly
regarded as the first Roman census in Judaea : Lk. reminds his readers that
there had really been an earlier one (Godet). This is very forced, requires the
insertion of the article, which is almost certainly an interpolation, and assumet
IX 2-4L] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 5 1
that the census of A.D. 6, 7 was generally known as " the first census." From
Acts v. 37 it appears that it was known as "the census": no previous or
subsequent enrolment was taken into account. In his earlier edition Godet
omitted the ^ : in the third (1888) he says that this interpretation requires the
article (i. p. 170).
McClellan quotes in illustration of the construction : aMa avrt) Trp&ry
eyfrero rov ITO\/J,OV (Thuc. i. 55. 3) ; afrn? T&V irepl Qrj^as Gyfrero dpx^l Kal
K<LTd<TTa<ri$ irpdry (Dem. 291. IO) ; irpc6r?7 jjv ^weis eyevero afinj /card TOI/TO*
r&v dvSpQv (Andoc. iii. 5) ; atirij Trp^nj ^uoreXfys Kpiat.s eytvero aper^s irp^s
irXoDrov (Aristid. i. 124} ; and adds the curious remark that " the Holy Spirit
would have us note that the Saviour of the World was registered in the first
census of the World 1 "
TTJS Juptas Kuprpiou. Like rjyefJLuv (xx. 2O,
xxi. 12, etc.) and yyepovia (iii. i), the verb is generic, and may
express the office of any ruler, whether emperor, propraetor,
procurator, etc. It does not tell us that Quirinius was legatus
in B.C. 4 as he was in A.D. 6. And it should be noted that Justin
(see above) states that Quirinius was procurator (eTrtVpoTros) at the
time of this census (Apol. i. 34) ; and that in the only other
place in which Lk. uses this verb he uses it of a procurator (iii. i).
This gives weight to the suggestion that, although Varus was
legatus of Syria at the time of the enrolment, yet Quirinius may
have held some office in virtue of which he undertook this census.
Lk. is probably not giving a mere date. He implies that
Quirinius was in some way connected with the enrolment. For
what is known about P. Sulpicius Quirinius see Tac. Ann. ii.
30. 4, iii. 22. i, 2, 23. i, and esp. 48; Suet. Tib. xlix. Dion
Cassius (liv. 48) calls him simply IIoVXios DovATruaos. But he
was not really a member of the old patrician gens Sulftcia. The
familiar word Quirinus (Kvpwos) induced copyists and editors to
substitute Quirinus for Quirinius.
B has "Kvpelvov, but there is no doubt that the name is Quirinius and not
Quirinus. This is shown, as Fumeaux points out in a note on Tac. Ann. ii.
30. 4, by the MS. readings in Tacitus ; by the Greek forms Kvplvtos (Strabo,
12, 6, 5, 569) and Kvpfyios (here and Jos. Ant. xviii. i. i)- \nd by Latin
inscriptions (Orell. 3693, etc.). Quirinius is one of the earliest distances of a
person bearing two Gentile names,
3. Ktl! 7TOpUOJTO 7T(l>TS dTTOypd^CCrOat, ffCaOTOS IS TTjl/ IttUTOU
The /cat looks back to ver. i, ver. 2 being a parenthesis.
The xavres means all those in Palestine who did not reside at the
seat of their family. A purely Roman census would have required
nothing of the kind. If Herod conducted the census for the
Romans, Jewish customs would be followed. So long as Augustus
obtained the necessary Information, the manner of obtaining it was
immaterial. Where does Lk. place the death of Herod ?
4. 9 A^ep7] $e Kal *lw(7Tj<j> diro TTjs TaXiXcuas IK TroXcws N<xap^r.
For di^prj a>mp. ver. 42, xviii. 31, xix. 28; Acts xL 2; and fot
52 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. L'TKE [EL 4, 5
81 KCU see on iii. 9. Note the change of prep, from awo to e
But d is used of towns (x. 30; Acts viii. 26, xiii. 14, xx. 17,
etc.), and IK of districts (xxiii. 55 ; Acts vii. 4, etc.) ; so that there
is no special point in the change, although it should be preserved
in translation. Cornp. Jn. i. 45 and xi. i j also the IK of Lk.
xxi. 1 8 with the OLTTO of Acts xxvii. 34.
ets -irdXii' AaueiS. That Bethlehem was David's birthplace and
original home is in accordance with i Sam. xvii. 12 ff. *wd xvii. 58 ;
but both passages are wanting in LXX. In O.T. " Hie city of
David " always means the fortress of Zion, formerly the stronghold
of the Jebusites (2 Sam. v. 7, 9; i Chron. xi. 5, 7), and tn LXX
TroXts in this phrase commonly has the article. Bethlehem is about
six miles from Jerusalem. Note that Lk. does not connect Christ's
birth at Bethlehem with prophecy,
icaXeiTai BrjOXet'fjL. In late Greek forts is sometimes scarct T y dis-
tinguishable from $s : comp. Acts xvri. 10. But in ix. 30 (as in Acts xxiii 14,
xxviii. 18, and Eph. i. 23, which are sometimes cited as instances of 6V wss
Sy) there may be special point in 8<m$, Even here it may "denote an
attribute which is the essential property of the antecedent," and may possibly
refer to the meaning of Bethlehem. Comp. T6Xtp Krlcras Tatryv, ijns vvv
M^tj KdXeirai (Hdt. ii. 99. 7).
" House of Bread " ; one of the most ancient
towns in Palestine. It is remarkable that David did nothing
for Bethlehem, although he retained affection for it (2 Sam.
xxiii. 15); and that Jesus seems never to have visited it again.
In Jn. vii. 42 it is called a KW/AT/, and no special interest seems
to have attached to the place for many years after the birth of
Christ. Hadrian planted a grove of Adonis there, which con-
tinued to exist from A.D. 135 to 315. About 330 Constantine
built the present church. D.B? art " Bethlehem." The modern
name is Beit Lahm ; and, as at Nazareth, the population is almost
entirely Christian.
otKou K. irarptas. Both words are rather indefinite, and either
may include the other. Here ot/cos seems to be the more com-
prehensive ; otherwise KCU Trarpias would be superfluous. Usually
7ror/Ha is the wider term. That a village carpenter should be able
to prove his descent from David is not improbable. The two
grandsons of S. Jude, who were taken before Domitian as
descendants of David, were labourers (Eus. H. E. iii. 20. 1-8).
6. diroyp(\|/aor0ai. "To get himself enrolled." The aorist of
his single act, the present (ver. 3) of a series of such acts. Both
are middle, while airoypdfao-Oat in ver. i is probably passive.
We must not take ow Maptaju with dTroypat^ao-^at : it belongs to
avl/3rj. It is essential to the narrative that she- should go up with
with him ; not so that she should be enrolled with him. In a
Roman census women paid the poll-tax, but were not obliged to-
IL5-7.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 53
come in person. That Mary had property in Bethlehem is a con-
jecture which is almost disproved by her resourcelessness in the
place. And if it was necessary for her to come, because she also
was of David's line, would not Lk. have written Sia TO eTvat aurous
ef OLKOV K. TT. A. ? This reading is found in Syr-Sin. : " because
they were both of the house of D." It is futile to argue that a
woman in her condition would not have gone unless she was com-
pelled : therefore Lk. represents her as beirg compelled : there-
fore he has made a mistake. She would be anxious at all risks
not to be separated from Joseph. Lk. does not even imply that
her presence was obligatory ; and, if he had said that it was, we
do not know enough about the matter te> say whether he would
have been wrong. Had there been a law which required her to
remain at home, then Lk. might be suspected of an error. For
vuv see on i. 56.
*rfj ejumqcrreujji^nr] aurw, oucnj eyjcuw. The yvvaiKt of A, Vulg.
Syr. and Aeth. is a gloss, but a correct one. Had she been only
his betrothed (i. 27 ; Mt. i. 18), their travelling together would
have been impossible. But by omitting ywcu/a Lk. intimates
what Mt. states i. 25. The ov<rrj introduces, not a mere fact, but
the reason for what has just been stated. Not, he had her with
him, and she happened to be with child ; but, he took her with
him, "because she was with child." After what is related Mt. i. 19
he would not leave her at this crisis. See on i. 24.
6, 7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem. The Gospel of
Pseudo- Matthew (xiii.) represents the birth as taking place before
Bethlehem is reached. So also apparently the Protevangelium of
fames (xvii.), which limits the decree of Augustus to those who
lived at Bethlehem ! For irXifjcr0i(]aai> see on i. 15 and 57.
7. rby uiov au-njs roy TrpwwroKoy. The expression might
certainly be used without implying that there had been subsequent
children. But it implies the possibility of subsequent children,
and when Luke wrote this possibility had been decided. Would
he have used such an expression if it was then known that Mary
had never had another child? He might have avoided all
ambiguity by writing /xovoyev^, as he does vii. 12, viii. 42, be. 38.
In considering this question the imperf. cytvaxr/cev (Mt i. 25) has
not received sufficient attention. See Mayor, Ep. of St. James>
pp. xix-xxii.
ifnrapydvwaw aMy. It has been inferred from her being able
to do this that the birth was miraculously painless (ryv fo&Sivw
Kvrjcrw, Euthym.), of which there is no hint For tne verb comp.
o/ux^-17 avr?7v Icnrapyavcao-a, "I made thick darkness a swaddling
band for it " (Job xxxviii. 9).
Iv ^drcY). The traditional rendering "in a manger" is right;
not " a stall " either here or in xiii. i <. The animals were out at
54 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EL 7.
pasture, and the manger was not being used. Justin (Try. hrxviii.)
and some of the apocryphal gospels say that it was in a cave, which
is not improbable. In Origen's time the cave was shown, and the
manger also (Con. Cels. i. 51). One suspects that the cave may
be a supposed prophecy turned into history, like the vine in xix. 31.
Is. xxxiii. 1 6 (ouros OLKTJOTGI kv 1/07X0) (TTnyAato) TreVyoas oxvpas) was
supposed to point to birth in a cave, and then the cave may have
been imagined in order to fit it, just as the colt is represented as
"tied to a vine" in order to make Gen. xlix. n a prediction of
Lk. xix. 30-33^ (Justin, AfoL i. 32).
OUK r[v auTOis TOTTOS iv TU> fcaraXj/jxan. Most of the Jews then
residing in Palestine were of Judah or Benjamin, and all towns
and villages of Judah would be very full. No inhospitality is
implied. It is a little doubtful whether the familiar translation
"in the inn" is correct. In x. 34 "inn" is 7rav$oxov, and in
xxii. ii KaTaXvfjLa is not "inn." It is possible that Joseph had
relied upon the hospitality of some friend in Bethlehem, whose
"guest-chamber," however, was already full when he and Mary
arrived. See on xxii. n. But mra-Xi^a in LXX represents five
different Heb. words, so that it must have been elastic in meaning.
All that it implies is a place where burdens are loosed and let
down for a rest. In Polybius it occurs twice in the plural : of
the general's quarters (ii. 36. i), and of reception rooms for envoys
(xxxii. 19. 2). It has been suggested that the "inn" was the
Geruth Chimham or "lodging-place of Chimham " (Jer. xli. 17),
the [son] of Barzillai (2 Sam. xix. 37, 38), "which was by
Bethlehem," and convenient for those who would "go to enter into
Egypt." See Stanley, Sin. 6 Pal. pp. 163, 529. Justin says
that the cave was o-wcyyvs rfjs KCO^S, which agrees with "b>
Bethlehem." The Mandra of Josephus (Ant. x. 9. 5) was perhaps
the same place as Geruth Chimham.
8-14. The Angelic Proclamation to the Shepherds : -7rra>xot
euayy/u'oyrai (vii. 22). It was in these pastures that David spent
his youth and fought the lion and the bear (i Sam. xvii. 34, 35).
" A passage in the Mishnah (Shek. vii. 4 ; comp. Baba K. vii. 7,
So a) leads to the conclusion that the flocks which pastured there
were destined for Temple - sacrifices, and accordingly, that the
shepherds who watched over them were not ordinary shepherds.
The latter were under the ban of Habbinism on account of their
necessary isolation from religious ordinances and their manner of
life, which rendered strict religious observance unlikely, if not
absolutely impossible. The same Mischnic passage also leads us
to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round, since they are
spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover that is,
in the month of February, when in Palestine the average rainfall is
nearly greatest" (Edersh. Z. &* T. i. pp. 186, 187). For details of
H. 8, 9.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 5J
the life of a shepherd see D.B. art. " Shepherds/' and Herzog,
/>AE. 2 art. " Viehzucht-und Hirtenkben?
8. dypauXoujres. Making the dy/oo's their auX??, and so "spend-
ing their life in the open air": a late and rare word, whereas
aypavAos is class. This statement is by no means conclusive
against December as the time of the year. The season may have
been a mild one; it is not certain that all sheep were brought
under cover at night during the winter months.
It is of the flocks in the wilderness > far from towns or villages, that the often
quoted saying was true, that they were taken out in March and brought home
in November. These shepherds may have returned from the wilderness, and if
so, the time would be between November and March. But the data for
determining the time of year are so very insufficient, that after minute calculation
of them all we are left in our original uncertainty. Among those who have
made a special study of the question we have advocates for almost every month
in the year. The earliest attempts to fix the day of which we have knowledge
are those mentioned (and apparently condemned as profane curiosity) by
Clement of Alexandria (Strom, i. 21 sub Jin.}. In his time some took April 21,
others April 22, and others May 20, to be the day. What was unknown in his
time is not likely to have been discovered afterwards respecting such a detail.
December 2$th cannot be traced higher than the fourth century, and it seems to
have been adopted first in the West. We must be content to remain in
ignorance as to the date of the birth of Christ. See on tyr]/j,eptas i. 5 ; D. of
Chr. Ant. art. *' Christmas" ; Andrews, L. of our Lord > pp. 12-21, ed. 1892.
<(>uX(o-crorres 4>u\aic<s. The plural refers to their watching in
turns rather than in different places. The phrase occurs Num.
viii. 26; Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 10; but in LXX T&S faXaicas ^vX is
more common; Num. iii. 7, 8, 28, 32, 38, etc. Comp. Plat
Ph&dr. 240 E; Laws^ 758 D. The fondness of Lk. for such
combinations of cognate words is seen again ver. 9, vii. 29,
xvii. 24, xxii. 15, and several times in the Acts. See on xi. 46 and
xxiii. 46. We may take rfjs WKTQS after ^vAoicas, " night-watches,"
or as gen. of time, " by night"
9. ayyeXos Kupiou iir&m) 0187015. The notion of coming
suddenly is not inherent in the verb, but is often derived from the
context : see on ver. 38. 1 In N.T. the verb is almost peculiar to
Lk., and almost always in 2nd aor. In class. Grk. also it is used
of the appearance of heavenly beings, dreams, visions, etc. Horn.
IL x. 496, xxiii. 106 ; Hdt i. 34. 2, vii. 14. i. Comp. Lk. xxiv. 4;
Acts xii. 7, xxiii. n.
86a Kupi'ou. The heavenly brightness which is a sign of the
presence of God or of heavenly beings, 2 Cor. iii. 18 : comp. Lk
ix, 31, 32. In O.T, of the Shechinah, Exod. xvi. 7, 10, xxiv. 17,
* In Vulg. it is very variously translated: e.g* stare juxta (here), supervenirt
(ii. 38, xxi. 34), stare (iv. 39, x. 40, xxiv. 4), convenire (xx. i), cmcumrt
(Acts vi 12), adstare (Acts x. 17, xL II, xii. 7), adsisttre (Acts xviL 5,
Ii), immintre (Acts xxviu. a|>
56 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [H. 9-11
xl. 34; Lev. ix. 6, 23 ; Num. xii. 8, etc. This glory, according to
the Jews, was wanting in the second temple.
1O. 6 aYveX.05. The art. is used of that which has been mentioned before
without the art, Comp. rb jSp^os and TQ Qdrvg in ver. 1 6.
Mf) 4>o(3etcree. Comp. i. 13, 30, v. 10; Mt xiv. 27, xxviii. 5, lo. 1
For iSou ydtp see on i. 44.
euayyeXiJopai Spiv \ap&v /j.cydX^i'. The verb is very freq. in
Lk. and Paul, but is elsewhere rare; not in the other Gospels
excepting Mt xi. 5, which is a quotation. See on i. 19.
The act. occurs Rev. x. 7, xiv. 6 ; the pass. Lk. vii 22, xvi. 16 ; Gal.
i, 1 1 ; Heb. iv. 2, 6 ; I Pet. i. 25, iv. 6 ; the mid. is freq. with various
constructions. As here, dat. of pers. and ace. of thing, i. 19, iv. 43 ; Acts
viii. 35 ; ace. of thing only, viii. I ; Acts v. 42, viii. 4, 12 ; ace. of person,
iii. 1 8 ; Acts viii. 25, 40 ; ace. of person and of thing, Acts xiii. 32.
TJTIS <rrai iram TO> Xaw. " Which shall have the special char-
acter of being for all the people." The 7?rts has manifest point here
(see on ver. 4) ; and the art. before Aaw should be preserved. A
joy so extensive may well banish fear. Comp. rw Aao>, i. 68, 77,
and TOV AaoV, vii. 16. In both these verses (9, 10) we have instances
of Lk. recording intensity of emotion : coinp. i. 42, viii. 37,
xxiv. 52 ; Acts v. 5, n, xv. 3. Dat. after dpi is freq. in Lk.
11. Ir^x&l "fuy en^epoy cromrjp. To the shepherds, as a part,
and perhaps a specially despised part, of the people of Israel.
Here first in N.T. is crwr^p used of Christ, and here only in Lk.
Not in Mt. or ML, and only once in Jn. (iv. 42) : twice in Acts
(v. 31, xiii. 23), and freq. in Tit and 2 Pet. The ist aor. of TIKTCO,
both act. and pass., is rare : see Veitch.
Xpioros Ku'ptos. The combination occurs nowhere else in N.T.,
and the precise meaning is uncertain. Either " Messiah, Lord," or
"Anointed Lord," or "the Messiah, the Lord," or "an anointed
one, a Lord." It occurs once in LXX as a manifest mistranslation.
Lam. iv. 20, "The breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the
Lord," is rendered Trvev/JLa irpocrMTrov ^JJL^V XJOIO-TOS KV/HOS. If this
is not a corrupt reading, we may perhaps infer that the expres-
sion Xpioros KvpLos was familiar to the translator. It occurs
in the Ps. &/., where it is said of the Messiah KCU OVK ecmy
dSt/c/a & rats ^aepcus avrov cv /tccrw avr&v, ori Travrcs aytoi, /cat
/foa-iAcus avTvv Xpto-ros Kvpws (xvii. 36 : comp. the title of xviii.).
But this may easily be another mistranslation, perhaps based on
1 " This Gospel of Luke Is scarce begun, we are yet but a little wa) r in the
second chapter, and we have already three noli timeres in it, and all, as here,
at the coming of an Angel (i. 13, 30, ii. 10). . . . What was it? It was not
the fear of an evil conscience ; they were about no harm. ... It is a plain
sign our flature is fallen from her original ; Heaven and we are not in the terms
we should be, not the best of us all " (Bishop Andrewes, Serm. V. Oft th$
k
H. 11-14.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 5;
that in Lam. iv. 20. Comp. el-rev 6 Kvpios ro> Kvpiu JJLO*. (Ps. ex. i),
and 7TKaXOra^l/ K.VpLOV 7TOLTpa KVpLOV fJLOV (EcclUS. H. IO). See
Ryle and James, Ps. of SoL pp. 141-143. The addition of cV
TToXet AaueiS here indicates that this o-urijp is the King of Israel
promised in the Prophets : see on ver. 4.
12. Kcti TOUTO ufjiiK TO <rr]|ALoi>. BS omit the TO. Sign for what?
By which to prove that what is announced is true, rather than by
which to find the Child. It was all-important that they should be
convinced as to the first point ; about the other there would be no
great difficulty. eupTJcrcTe (3pe'4>os. "Ye shall find a babe," "not
the babe," as most English Versions and Luther ; Wiclif has " a
yunge child." This is the first mention of it; in ver. 16 the art is
right In N.T., as in class, Grk., fiptyos is more often a newly-
born child (xviii. 15 ; Acts vii. 19; 2 Tim. iii. 15; i Pet ii. 2) than
an unborn child (Lk. i. 41, 44); in LXX it is always the former
(i Mac. i. 6 1 ; 2 Mac. vi. 10; 3 Mac. v. 49 ; 4 Mac. iv. 25), unless
Ecclus. xix. ii be an exception. Aquila follows the same usage
(Ps. viii. 3, xvi. 14; Is. Ixv. 20). IffTrapya^&jjjL^i/oi/ KCU fteipevov Iv
4><iTnr). Both points are part of the sign. The first participle is
no more an adjective than the second. No art. with <an/# : the
shepherds have not heard of it before.
13. Ig^nrjs. 1 The fact that this is expressly stated here
confirms the view that suddenness is not necessarily included in
eye'cmy (ver. 9). For ow TW dyy^Xw see on i. 56. cn-pcn-icis. Magna
afpellatio. Hie exercitus tamen pacem laudat (Beng.). The
genitive is partitive: "a multitude (no art.) forming part of the
host." Comp. i Kings xxii. 19; 2 Chron. xviii. 18; Ps. ciii. 21;
Josh. v. 15). al^ourroiK. Constr. ad sensum* The whole host
of heaven was praising God, not merely that portion of it which
was visible to the shepherds. The verb is a favourite with Lk.
(ver. 20, xix. 37, xxiv. 53?; Acts ii. 47, iii. 8, 9). Elsewhere
only Rom. xv. ii (from Ps. cxvii. i) and Rev. xix. 5; very freq.
in LXX.
14. Aof a . . . cuSoKtas. The hymn consists of two members
connected by a conjunction ; and the three parts of the one mem-
ber exactly correspond with the three parts of the other member.
GLORY to God in the highest,
And on earth PEACE among men of His good will.
Aofa balances elpyvr), Iv vi/rwrTois balances ITT! 7^5, $ balances fr
di/^pajTrots e-uSo/aas. This exact correlation between the parts ia
lost in the common triple arrangement; which has the further
awkwardness of having the second member introduced by a con-
1 The word is thus written in the best texts here and ix. 39 ; comp.
xzu 34 ; Kpfai>< xvi, 17 ; KpeTdXy,*!!, 34 (WH. App. pp. 150, 151). In class.
Grk, ovpdvios is of three terminations ; but the true reading here may be
(BD).
$S THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX M
junction, 1 while the third is not, and of making the second and
third members tautological. " On earth peace " is very much the
same as " Good will amongst men." Yet Scrivener thinks that " in
the first and second lines heaven and earth are contrasted; the
third refers to both those preceding, and alleges the efficient cause
which has brought God glory and earth peace" (Int. to Crit* of
N*T. ii. p. 344) ; which seems to be very forced. The construction
o> cb^ptoTTots evBoKio^ is difficult ; but one of the best of modern Greek
scholars has said that it " may be translated * among men of His
counsel for good' or 'of His gracious purpose.* This rendering
seems to be in harmony with the preceding context and with the
teaching of Scripture in general" (T. S. Evans, Contemp. Rev.)
Dec. 1 88 1, p. 1003). WH. take a similar view. They prefer,
among possible meanings, " in (among and within) accepted man-
kind/' and point out that "the Divine * favour' (Ps. xxx. 5, 7,
Ixxxv. i, Ixxxix. 17, cvi. 4) or 'good pleasure/ declared for the
Head of the race at the Baptism (iii. 22), was already contemplated
by the Angels as resting on the race itself in virtue of His birth "
(ii. App. p. 56, where the whole discussion should be studied).
H. suggests that the first of the two clauses should end with errl
ygs rather than e<3, and that we should arrange thus : " Glory
to God in the highest and on earth; Peace among men of His
good pleasure." With the construction of this first clause he com-
pares vii. 17 and Acts xxvi. 23 : " Glory to God not only in heaven,
but now also on earth." " In this arrangement ' glory ' and * peace '
stand severally at the head of the two clauses as twin fruits of the
Incarnation, that which redounds to ' God ' and that which enters
ipto 'men.'" This division of the clauses, previously commended
by Olshausen, makes the stichometry as even as in the familiar
triplet, but it has not found many supporters. It destroys the
exact correspondence between the parts of the two clauses, the
first clause having three or four parts, and the second only two.
W. here leaves H. to plead alone.
cuSoiaas. The word has three meanings : (i) " design, desire,"
as Ecclus. xi. 17 ; Rom. x. i ; (2) "satisfaction, contentment," as
Ecclus. xxxv. 14; 2 Thes. i. n; (3) "benevolence, goodwill," as
Ps. cvi. 4 ; Lk. ii. 14. Both it and evSo/cetv are specially used of
the favour with which God regards His elect, as Ps. cxlvL 12 ;
Lk. iii. 22. The meaning here is " favour, goodwill, good pleasure" ;
and av#pa)7roi uSo/aas are "men whom the Divine favour has
blessed." See Lft. on Phil. i. 15. Field (Otium Norv. iii. p. 3^)
urges that, according to Graeco-biblical usage, this would be, not
ctyOpuTrot. euSo/a'a?, but a^Spes evSo/aas, and he appeals to nine ex-
amples in LXX. But two-thirds of them are not in point, being
singulars, and having reference to a definite adult male and not to
1 Syr-Sin, inserts a second "and" before "goodwill to man."
H. 14-16.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 59
human beings in general. These are 2 Sam. xvi. 7, xviii. 20 ; Ps.
Ixxx. 1 8 ; Jer. xv. 10; ibid. Aq.; Dan. x. n. There remain avSpes
POVX.TJS pay, Ps. cxix. 24, Aq. ; ol avSpe? TT}? Sia&yKiys crov, Obad. 7;
avBpes elpyviKol crou, Obad. 7. This last is again not parallel, as being
accompanied by an adj. and not a gen. Substitute ai/Spes at/^arwv,
Ps. cxxxviii. 19. Of these instances, all necessarily refer to adult
males, excepting Aq. in Ps. cxix. 24, and this more naturally does
so, for "counsellors" are generally thought of as male. But,
allowing that the usual expression would have been dvSpdcnv
e-uSoKtas, this might well have been avoided here in order to em-
phasize the fact that all, male and female, young and old, are
included. Even in the case of an individual S. Paul writes o av-
Bp&Tros T7J? ctj/o/uas (2 Thes. u. 3), so that the combination is at
anyrate possible.' See on Rom. x. i.
The reading is a well-known problem, but the best textual critics are
unanimous for ei55o/cas. The internal evidence is very evenly balanced, as
regards both transcriptional and intrinsic probabilities, which are well stated
and estimated in WH. (ii. App. pp. 55, 56). The external evidence is very
decidedly in favour of the apparently more difficult reading evSoxla.*. Roughly
speaking, we have all the best MSS. (excepting C, which is here defective),
with all Latin authorities, against the inferior MSS., with nearly all versions,
except the Latin, and nearly all the Greek writers who quote the text, Syr-
Sin, has " and goodwill to men."
For cudoKlas, * A B D, Latt. (Vet Vulg.) Goth. Iren-Lat. Orig-Lat
and the Lat. Gloria in excelsis*
For evSoKla, LPT A AS, etc., Syrr. (Pesh. Sin. Hard.) Boh. Arm.
Aeth. Orig. Eus. Bas. Greg-Naz. Cyr-Hier. Did. Epiph. Cyr-Alex.
" The agreement, not only of K with B, but of D and all the Latins with
both, and of A with them all, supported by Origen in at least one work, and
that in a certified text, affords a peculiarly strong presumption in favour of
evdoKLas. If this reading is wrong, it must be Western ; and no other reading
in the New Testament open to suspicion as Western is so comprehensively
attested by the earliest and best uncials " (WH. p. 54). The vehemence with
which Scrivener argues against evSotdas is quite out of place.
16-20. The Verification by the Shepherds.
15. eXdXouy irpos dXXVjXous AL<?X0(i>jxei> S^. "They repeatedly
said unto one another, Come then let us go over," or " Let us at
once go across." The compound verb refers to the intervening
country (Acts ix. 38, xi. 19, xviii. 27), and the &f makes the
exhortation urgent. Lk. is fond of Si'px cr # at > which occurs thirty
times in his writings and less than ten elsewhere in N.T. In LXX
it is very freq. Note o> ? = " when."
TO pTJjxa TOUTO. This need not be limited to the saying of the
Angel. It is rather the thing of which he spoke : see on i. 65. In
class. Grk. Aoyos is used in a similar manner ; e.g. Hdt i. 21. a.
Videamus hoc verbum quodfactum est (Vulg.).
16. flXfiav <nri5cravT9 teal avcvpav. For these mixed forms of the aor.
see OB i. 59. Lk. alone in N.T. uses (nretfdet? in its class, intrans. sense
60 THE GOSPEL A "CORDING TO S. LUKE [II. 16-20,
5, 6 ; Acts xx. 1 6, xxii. 18). In 2 Pet. iii. 12 it is intrans. as in Is. xvi. 5.
Lk. alone uses avevplffKeiv (Acts xxi. 4), but the mid. occurs 4 Mac. hi. 14,
2nd aor. in all three cases. The compound implies a search in order to find.
In his Gospel Lk. never uses re without Kai (xii. 45, xv. 2, xxi. it, etc.).
Here both ftptyos and <pdrv^ having been mentioned before, have the article.
17. lyvtipivav. " They made known," not merely to Mary and
Joseph, but to the inhabitants of Bethlehem generally. Both in
N.T. and LXX yi/G>/>ico is commonly trans. ; but in Phil. i. 22 and
Job xxxiv. 25, as usually in class. Grk., it is intrans. Vulg. makes
it intrans. here : cognoverunt de verbo quod dictum erat illis de puero
hoc. But ver. 14 makes this very improbable.
18. ir<rrs ol aKoucrarres. See on i. 66. This probably includes
subsequent hearers, just as ver. 19 includes a time subsequent to the
departure of the shepherds. The constr. e0aujjt,acrai> irepi is unusual.
But in English "about," which is common after "perplexed," might
easily be transferred to such a word as "astonished."
19. 17 Se Mapia irdvra, ower^pei ret p^juiara raura. " But Mary"
could have no such astonishment; neither did she publish her
impressions. The revelations to Joseph and herself precluded
both. Note the change from momentary wonder (aor.) to sus-
tained reticence (imper) : also that irdvra is put before the verb
with emphasis. Comp. Dan. vii. 28; Ecclus. xxxix. 2. aui'pdXXouo-a
iv rg icapS la afrrijs. Conferens in corde suo. From whom could
Lk. learn this ? The verb is peculiar to him (xiv. 3 1 ; Acts iv. 15;
xvii. 1 8, xviii. 27, xx. 14). See small print note on i. 66.
20. So<onres K<X! aivouvres. The latter is the more definite
word. The former is one of the many words which have acquired
a deeper meaning in bibl. Grk. Just as Sofa in bibl. Grk. never
(except 4 Mac. v. 18) has the class, meaning of "opinion," but
rather " praise " or " glory," so Soao> in bibl. Grk. never means
" form an opinion about," but " praise " or " glorify." It is used
of the honour done by man to man (i Sam. xv. 30), by man to God
(Exod. xv. 2), and by God to man (Ps. xci. 15). It is also used of
God glorifying Christ (Acts iii. 13), a use specially common in Jn.
(viii. 54, xi. 4, etc.), and of Christ gloryfying God (xvii. 4). See
on Rom, i. 21. For the combination comp. atverov /cat SeSofacr-
fjicvov (Dan. iii. 26, 55). For alveiy see on ver. 13.
Traa-LK ots. For the attraction see on iii. 19. If iJKoucray refers
to the angelic announcement, then KaOcos refers to etSoK only. But
jjKovacLv /cat ctSov may sum tip their experiences at Bethlehem,
which were a full confirmation (Ka6<f><$ ** " even as, just as ") of what
the Angel had said.
Schleiermacher points out that, if this narrative had been a mere poetical
composition, we should have had the hymn of the shepherds recorded and more
extensive hymns assigned to the Angels (S. Luke, Eng. tr. p. 31). He regards
the shepherds as the probable source of the narrative ; " for that which to them
was most material and obvious, the nocturnal visioD in the fields, is the only
H. 20, SI.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 6 1
circumstance treated in detail " (p. 33). But any narrator would give the vision,
and could haidly give it more briefly without material loss. The brevity of it,
especially when contrasted with the apocryphal gospels, is strong guarantee for
its truth. How tempting to describe the search for the Babe and the conversa-
tion between the parents and the shepheids ! Of the myth-hypothesis Weiss
rightly says that "it labours hi vain to explain the part played here by the
shepherds by means of the pastoral tales of the ancients, and is driven to drag
in, awkwardly enough, the legends of Cyrus and Romulus" (Lebenjesu, i. 2.
4, note, Eng. tr. p. 255). As for the old rationalism, which explained the
angelic vision by ignis fatuus or other phosphoric phenomena, which travellers
have said to be common in those parts; "the more frequent such phenomena,
the more familiar must shepherds above all men, accustomed to pass their nights
the whole summer long in the open air, have been with them, and the less likely
to consider them as a sign from heaven pointing at a particular event"
(Schleierm. p. 36).
21-40. The Circumcision and the Presentation in the Temple.
This forms the third and last section in the second group of
narratives (i. 57-ii. 40) in the Gospel of the Infancy (i. 5-11. 52).
It corresponds to the Visitation (i. 39-56) in the first group. Its
very marked conclusion has close resemblance to i. 80 and ii. 52.
See introductory note to w. 1-20 (p. 46). The absence of parallel
passages in the other Gospels shows that at first this portion of the
Gospel narrative was less well known. An oral tradition respect-
ing the childhood of the Christ (when hardly anyone suspected that
He was the Christ) would be much less likely to arise or become
prevalent than an oral tradition respecting the ministry and cruci-
fixion. We can once more trace a threefold division, viz. a longer
narrative between two very short ones: the Circumcision (21), the
Presentation in the Temple (22-38), and the Return to Home Life
at Nazareth (39, 40).
21. The Circumcision. The verse contains an unusual number
of marks of Lk.'s style, i. Kcu ore (w. 22, 42, vi. 13, xxii. 14,
xxiii. 33) ; 2. TrktfQciv (twenty-two times in Lk. and Acts, and
thrice elsewhere in N.T.) ; see on i. 57 ; 3. TOV c. infin. to express
aim or purpose (i. 74, 77, 79, ii. 24, iv. 10, v. 7, viii. 5, etc.) ;
see on i. 74; 4. /cat introducing the apodosis (v- i, 12, 17, vii. 12,
ix. 51, etc.); 5. crvXXa/x,/3avetv (eleven times in Lk. and Acts, and
five times elsewhere). See on v. i.
21. TOU Trepirejiety auroK There being no art. with ^cpat
(contrast ver. 22), we cannot, as in ver. 6 and i. 57, make the gen.
depend on at ^//-epac or 6 xpovos. The o/cTtS does not take the
place of the art. As Jesus was sent "in the likeness of sinful
flesh" (Rom. viii. 3), and "it behoved Him in all things to be
made like unto His brethren" (Heb. ii. 17), He underwent cir-
cumcision. He was "born under the kw" (Gal. iv. 4), and ful-
filled the law as a loyal son of Abraham. Had He not done so,
ov/c ay oXa)S trapcB^Orj Si8acrK<t>v > dAA' airoTrcp.^Qv) av a>?
62 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [H. ffl, 2&
(Euthym.) His circumcision was a first step in His obedience to
the will of God, and a first shedding of the redeeming blood. It
was one of those things which became Him, in order " to fulfil all
righteousness" (Mt. iii. 15). The contrast with the circumcision
of the Baptist is marked. Here there is no family gathering of
rejoicing neighbours and kinsfolk. Joseph and Mary are strangers
in a village far from home.
The reading rd rattiiov (D E G H) for m&rte (tf A B R E and versions) prob-
ably arose from this being the beginning of a lection, " Him " being changed
to "the child" (AV.) for greater clearness. The same kind of thing has
been done at the beginning of many of the Gospels in the Book of Common
Prayer, "Jesus" being substituted for "He" or "Him": e.g. the Gospels
for the 6th, 9th, nth, I2th, i6th, i8th, igth, and 22nd Sundays after
Trinity.
The KOL is almost our " then " and the German
da : but it may be left untranslated. It introduces the apodosis,
as often in GrL, and esp. in Lk. This is simpler than to explain
it as a mixture of two constructions, " When eight days were ful-
filled ... He was called" and "Eight days were fulfilled . . .
and He was called" (Win. liii. 3. f, p. 546, Ixv. 3. c, p, 756)*
Comp. Acts i. 10. " He was also called " is not likely to be right.
The Vulgate and Luther are right. Et postquam consummati sunt
dies octo ut circumcideretur vocatum est nomen ejus Jesus. Und da
acht Tage urn waren^ dass das Kind beschnitten wurde, da wardsein
Name genannt Jesus. This passage, with that about John the Baptist
(i. 59), is the chief biblical evidence that naming was connected
with circumcision : comp. Gen. xvii. 5, 10. Among the Romans
the naming of girls took place on the eighth day : of boys on the
ninth. The purification accompanied it ; and hence the name dies
lustricus. Tertullian uses nominalia of the naming festival (Idol
xvi. i). Among the Greeks the naming festival was on the tenth
day j Se/carTp ecrrtav or 6viv.
i This and corresponding forms, such as Xtf^ojmi, /-
, and the like, are abundantly attested in good MSS. both of LXX
and of N.T. See on i. 31. K o i X a = " womb " is specially freq. in Lk.
22-38. The Purification and the Presentation in the Temple.
Here also we have a triplet The Ceremony (22-24); Symeon
and the Nunc Dimittis(25-3s); and Anna the Prophetess (36-38).
Symeon and Anna, like Zacharias and Elisabeth, with those spoken
of in ver. 38, are evidence that Judaism was still a living religion
to those who made the most of their opportunities.
22. at ijfjieptu TOU K. Lev. xii. 6. Lk. is fond of these peri-
phrases, which are mostly Hebraistic. Comp. ^ fipepa r&v <ra/3/3ir
22.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 63
(iv, 1 6), or TOV (rafipdTOV (xiii. 14, 16, XIV. 5),
Lw (xxii 7), and the like.
TOU KaGapio-jjLoG auTo^. "Of their purification." The Jewish
law (Lev. xii.) did not include the child in the purification. This
fact, and the feeling that least of all could Jesus need purifying,
produced the corrupt reading avrJJs, followed in AV.
No uncial and perhaps only one cursive (76) supports the reading avrfo
which spread from the Complutensian Polyglott Bible (1514) to a number of
editions. It is a remarkable instance of a reading which had almost no
authority becoming widely adopted. It now has the support of Syr- Sin.
The Complutensian insertion of SiypQp&d'ri after 77 ^wtro-a avrov in i. 64 was
less successful, although that has the support of two cursives (140, 251).
D here has the strange reading avrov, which looks like a slip rather than a
correction. No one would alter avruv to avrov. The Vulgate also has
purgationis ejus 9 but some Lat. MSS. have eorum. The O.VTTJS might come
from LXX of Lev. xii. 6, 6rav dvaTrX^pajtfwcrtj' al Tj^pai KaQdp<rew$ aur^s*
Note that Lk. uses Ka&apifffi6s and not /r<0a/><rts, which is a medical term for
menstruation, and which Gentile readers might misunderstand*
The meaning of avrv is not clear. Edersheim and Van Hengel
interpret it of the Jews ; Godet, Meyer, and Weiss of Mary and
Joseph. The latter is justified by the context : " When the days
of their purification were fulfilled . . . they brought Him." Con-
tact with an unclean person involved uncleanness. Purification
after childbirth seems to have been closely connected with purifica-
tion after menstruation; the rites were similar. Herzog, PRE?
art. Reinigungen. After the birth of a son the mother was unclean
for seven days, then remained at home for thirty-three days, and on
the fortieth day after the birth made her offerings.
icard, TOV yojxoi/ Mwucr^ws. These words must be taken with what
precedes, for the law did not require them to bring Him to Jeru-
salem (Lev. xii. 1-8). We have already had several places in
ch. i. (w. 8, 25, 27) in which there are amphibolous words or
phrases: comp. viii. 39, ix. 17, 18, 57, x. 18, xi. 39, xii. i, xviL 22,
xviii. 31, xix. 37, xxi. 36, etc.
The trisyllabic form Mwforijj is to be preferred to Mwcrifc. The name is
aid to be derived from two Egyptian words, mo = ** water," and ugat = " to
be preserved." Hence the LXX, a version made in Egypt, and the best
MSS. of the N.T., which in the main represent the text of the N.T. that was
current in Egypt, keep nearest to the Egyptian form of the name by preserving
the v. Josephus also has Mwy<r^s. But Mwcr^y is closer to* the Hebrew form
of the name, and is the form most commonly used by Greek and Latin writers,
Win. v. 8, p. 47*
ov. One of Lk.'s favourite words (iv. 5, viiL 22, and
often in Acts). It is here used of bringing Him up to the capital^
like ava./3aw6vT(0v in ver. 43. In the literal sense they went down \
for Bethlehem stands higher than Jerusalem. This journey is the
first visit of the Christ to His own city,
64 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [II. 22, 23,
"fepoo-oXima. In both his writings Lk. much more often uses
the Jewish form 'lepova-aXtjfji (w. 25, 38, 41, 43, 45, etc.), which
Mt uses only once (xxiii. 37), and Mk. perhaps not at all (? xi. i).
Jn. uses the Greek form in his Gospel, and the Jewish form in the
Apocalypse. The Jewish form is used wherever the name is not
a geographical term, but has a specially religious signification (Gal,
iv. 25 ; Heb. xii. 22). The Greek form is neut. plur. In Mt. ii. 3
it may be fem. ; but perhaps Tracra ^ iroXts was in the writer's mind.
Neither form should have the aspirate, which a " false association
with cepoV has produced (WH. ii. 313; App. p. 160). This visit
to Jerusalem probably preceded the arrival of the Magi, after which
Joseph and Mary would hardly have ventured to bring Him to the
city. If this is correct, we must abandon the traditional view that
the Epiphany took place on the thirteenth day after the Nativity.
There is no improbability in Joseph's going back to Bethlehem
for a while before returning to Nazareth. See Andrews, Life of our
d) p. 92, ed. 1892 ; Swete, The Afostkf Creed^ p. 50, ed. 1894.
In any case the independence of Mt. and Lk. is manifest, for we do not
know how to harmonize the accounts. Lk. seems to imply that " the law of
Moses " was kept in all particulars ; and if so, the purification did not take
place befoie the fortieth day. Mt. implies that the flight into Egypt took
place immediately after the visit of the Magi (ii. 14). As Bethlehem is so
close to Jerusalem, Herod would not wait long for the return of the Magi
before taking action. We adopt, therefore, as a tentative order the Presenta-
tion on the fortieth day, Return to Bethlehem, "Visit of the Magi, Flight into
Egypt, without any return to Nazareth.
TW Kupup. The Heb. verb in Ex. xiii. 12 means
" cause to pass over." It is elsewhere used of parents causing their
children to pass through the fire in offering them to Moloch, but is
not then translated by Trapwmy/u (Deut xviii. 10; 2 Kings xvi. 3,
xvii. 17, xxiii. 10, etc.). For 7rapa<rn?crai of offering to God comp.
Horn. xii. i. This Trapao-rfjo-at ra> KV/HO) is quite distinct from the
purification, which concerned the mother, whereas the presentation
concerned the son. It is evident that the presentation is the main
fact here. Not, " she came to offer a sacrifice," but " they brought
Him up to present Him to the Lord," is the principal statement
The latter rite points back to the primitive priesthood of all first-
bom sons. Their functions had been transferred to the tribe of
Levi (Num. iiL 12); but every male firstborn had to be redeemed
from service in the sanctuary by a payment of five shekels (Num.
xviii. 15, 1 6), as an acknowledgment that the rights of Jehovah
had not lapsed. This sum would be about twelve shillings accord-
ing to the present worth of that amount of silver, but in purchasing
power would be nearly double that
S3. The quotation (which is not a parenthesis) is a combination of Ex.
xiii. 2 with Ex. xiii. 12, and is not exact with either : KXTjO-qo-erat, o/y. perhapg
Comes from Ex. xii, 16 ; comp. Lk. i. 35. For irav apcrcv see Gen* viL 23 ;
2X 23, 24. J THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 6$
Ex. i. 22. The Stavolyov ji^rpav seems to be fatal to patristic speculations
respecting Mary's having given birth to the Christ clauso utero, and therefore
painlessly : see on ver. 7.
Excepting Mk. vii. 34, Siavotyta is peculiar to Lk. (xxiv. 31, 45 ; Acts vii,
56, xvi. 14, xvii. 3) ; freq. in LXX (Gen. iii. 5, 7 ; Exod. xiii. 15 j Num. iii.
12, etc.).
24. TOD Sourai $UCTICH>. See on i. 74, and to the reff. there given
add v. 7, viii. 5, ix. 51, xii. 42, xxi. 22, xxii. 6, 31, xxiv. 15, 25, 29,
45. This is Mary's offering for her own purification : it has nothing
to do with the ransom of the firstborn. The record of the offerings
is considerable guarantee for the truth of the history. A legend
would very probably have emphasized the miraculous birth by
saying that the virgin mother was divinely instructed not to bring
the customary offerings, which in her case would not be required.
euyos TpuyoVcoi/. The offering of the poor. It has been argued
that this is evidence that the Magi had not yet come. But their
gifts, even if they had already offered them, would not have raised
Mary's condition from poverty to riches. Only well-to-do people
offered a lamb and a pigeon. Neither here nor elsewhere in N.T.
have we any evidence that our Lord or His parents were among
the abjectly poor.
" The pigeon and turtle-dove were the only birds enjoined to be offered in
sacrifice by the law of Moses. In almost every case they were permitted as a
substitute for those who were too poor to provide a kid or a lamb. . . . But
while the turtle-dove is a migrant, and can only be obtained from spring to
autumn, the wild pjgeons remain throughout the year ; and not only so they
have young at all times. Consequently, at any time of the year when the turtle-
dove was unattainable, young pigeons might be procured. There is also a force
in the adjective ' young ? ; for while the old turtle-dove could be trapped, it was
hopeless to secure the old pigeon" (Tristram, Nat. Hist, of the . pp. 211, 213).
26-36. The Benediction of Symeon. He and Anna are repre-
sentatives of the holiness which, in a time of great spiritual deadness,
still survived among the men and women of Israel. They are
instances of that "spontaneous priesthood" which sometimes
springs up, and often among the lower orders, when the regular
clergy nave become corrupt and secularized. To identify Symeon
with any other Symeon is precarious, the name being exceedingly
common. He is introduced rather as an unknown person (avOpwrros
yv). It is sometimes said that Symeon, son of HilLel and father of
Gamaliel, would hardly have been old enough; he was president
of the Sanhedrin A.D. 13. But ver. 29 does not necessarily imply
that Symeon is very old. What we know of the Sanhedrin at this
period, however, does not lead us to expect to find saints among
its presidents. In the Gosfel of Nlcodemus he is called sacerdos
magnus, and it is his two sons who are raised from the dead by
Christ, and reveal what they have seen in Hades (Pars altera^
A. i.).
66 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [XL 25, 26
25. o "lepoucraX^/x. It is remarkable that with one excep
tion (Rom. xv. 26) this expression is used in N.T. by no one
but Lk., who has it very often (ver. 43, ix. 31; Acts i. 8, ii, 5,
vi. 7, ix. 13, 21, x. 39, xiii. 27, xvi. 4, xxi. n). In LXX it is
common.
euXajBrjs. The word is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts ii. 5,
viii. 2, xxii. 12) : lit. "taking hold well," and so "cautious." Lat.
timoratus (Vulg.), timens (e), metuens (d), timens deum (r).
Plutarch uses ^Xa/?wt in the sense of " carefulness about religious
duties, piety " ; but e&Xa^s is not thus used in class. Grk. We
find the combination of these same two adjectives, Succuo? and
A.a/3?fo twice in Plato's sketch of the ideal statesman. He ought
to have both moderation and courage ; and of moderation the two
chief elements are justice and circumspection. If he is merely
courageous, he will be wanting in TO Succuov KOI evXapes (Polit.
311 B). See also Philo, Quis rer. div. hs&r. vi., of the evAayfeia of
Abraham. The meaning of the combination here is that Symeon
was conscientious, especially in matters of religion.
TTpocrSexojJieyos (see on xxiii. 51) irap<kXir]a-ii>. i. "Appeal for
help " ; 2. " encouragement " ; 3. " consolation." The last is the
meaning here. Those who "sit in darkness and the shadow of
death" (L 79) need consolation; and the salvation which the
Messiah was to bring was specially called such by the Jews.
Comp. "Comfort ye, comfort ye, My people" (Is. xl. i, xlix. 13,
Ii. 3, Ixi. 2, Ixvi. 13). There was a belief that a time of great
troubles (dolores Me$si&) would precede the coming of the Christ.
Hence the Messiah Himself was spoken of as " the Consoler," or
"the Consolation." Comp. Joseph of Arimathsea, "who was wait-
ing for the kingdom of God" (xxiii. 51; Mk. xv. 43); and with
this " waiting " or " looking " of Symeon and Joseph comp. Jacob's
death-song, Gen. xlix. 18.
n-i/eufia ty Syioy. This is the order of the words in the best
authorities ; and the separation of ayiov from 7n/e{5/m by rjv accentu-
ates the difference between this expression and that in the next
verse. Here the meaning is, " an influence which was holy was
upon him"; i. 15, 35, 41, 67 are not parallel. See on L 15. The
accusative, ITT' avrov, indicates the coming^ rather than the resting,
*f the holy influence ; the prophetic impulse.
26. KxpiqjAaTicrjx&>o>>. The act. = i. "transact business"
(xp^a); 2. "give a divine response" to one who consults an
oracle; 3. "give a divine admonition, teach from heaven" (Jer.
xxv. 30, xxxi. 2; Job xl. 8). The pass, is used both of the
admonition divinely given, as here, and of the person divinely
admonished (Mt ii. 12, 22; Acts x. 22; Heb. viii. 5, xl. 7). It is
gratuitous to conjecture that it was in a dream that the Holy Spirit
made this known to Symeon.
IL 46-28.] 1HE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 6?
p$l ISetv 0* irpVy ^ &v tS^. This is the only example in N.T. of vplr
with the subj, (Win. xli. 3. b, p. 371) ; and, if the reading is correct, the only
instance of irplv &v : but perhaps either ij or &v should be omitted. The repe-
tition of "see" is doubtless intentional. In many languages "see" is used
of any kind of experience (Acts ii. 27, 31, xiii. 35-37, etc.).
Toy Xpioroi' Kupiou. " The Anointed of the Lord " ; Him whom
God has sent as the Messiah. Comp. TOJ> Xp. rov eov (ix. 20),
and also i Sam. xxiv. 7.
27. iv T iri/eu/xaTi. Not " in a state of ecstasy " (Rev. i. 10),
out " under the influence of the Spirit," who had told him of the
blessing in store for him. By T& UpoV is probably meant the Court
of the Women. ev TW eiaayaYeti'. " After they had brought in " :
see on iii. 21. The verb is a favourite with Lk. (xiv. 21, xxii. 54,
and six times in Acts) : elsewhere only Jn. xviii. 16; Heb. i. 6.
Toug yo^cis. We cannot infer from this that either here or
ver. 41 Luke is using an authority that was ignorant of the super-
natural birth of Jesus. It is more reasonable to suppose that the
whole of this " Gospel of the Infancy " comes from one source,
viz. the house of Mary, and that in these passages the narrator
employs the usual expression. Joseph (iv. 22) and Mary were
commonly called His parents: comp. ver. 33. It is possible
to take -jrepl aurou after VO/JLOV or after elBtcrfievov ; but more prob-
ably it belongs to rov Trot^crat. For K<XT& TO elQi^lvoy see on L 8.
28. KCU auTo's. First the parents, and then he holds the child in
his arms ; the KCLL being either " also " (he as well as they), or simply
introducing the apodosis after ev TO) ctcrayayetv.. Each side acts its
proper part. The parents bring Him in accordance with the Divine
Law, and Symeon welcomes Him in accordance with the Divine
impulse. Symeon is sometimes called <5>o8oxos. See on viii. 13.
Latin renderings of d^/cdXor vary : #/otf (Vulg.)i manus (cef ), ampkxum
(a), alas (d). The last is a late use of a/a.
The Nunc Dimittis. In its suppressed rapture and
vivid intensity this canticle equals the most beautiful of the
Psalms. Since the fifth century it has been used in the evening
services of the Church (Apost. Const, vii. 48 1 ), and has often been
the hymn of dying saints. It is the sweetest and most solemn of
all the canticles.
Symeon represents himself as a servant or watchman released
from duty, because that for which he was commanded to watch has
appeared. Comp. the opening of the Agamemnon of ^Eschylus,
1 Most of the canticles from (XT, and N.T. were said at Lauds both in East
and West. But the Magnificat was transferred in the West to Vespers, and th
Nunc Dimittts seems to have been always used in the evening, in the East at
Vespers, in the West at Compline. Kraus, ReaL-Mnc. d. Ckr. Alt. ii. p. 506 }
Bingham, Qrig. vi. 47.
68 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [H. 29-31.
where the sentinel rejoices at his release from the long watch for
the fire- signal respecting the capture of Troy.
29. vuv. "Now that I have at last seen the long-looked for
Messiah " : the vvv stands first with emphasis.
dnroXu'eis T. SoXoV or., SecnroTa. All three words show that the
figure is that of the manumission of a slave, or of his release from
a long task. Death is the instrument of release. *A7roAua> is used
of the deaths of Abraham (Gen. xv. 2), of Aaron (Num. xx. 29), of
Tobit (Tob. iii. 6), of a martyr (2 Mac. vii. 9) : comp. Soph. Ant
1268, and many examples in Wetst Aeo-Tror^s is the "master of a
slave" and the Greeks sometimes refused the title to any but the
gods in reference to themselves (Eur. HippoL 88). In Scripture it
is not often used of God : Acts iv. 24; Rev. vi. ro; perhaps
Jude 4, which, however, like 2 Pet. ii. i, may refer to Christ.
Comp. Job v. 8; Wisd. vi. 7, viii. 3; Ecclus. xxxvi. i; 3 Mac.
ii. 2 ; Philo, Quis rer. div. h&r. vi. ; and see Trench, Syn. xxviii.
In using the word Symeon acknowledges God's absolute right to
dispose of him, either in retaining or dispensing with his service.
KCIT& TO pTjjjtd o-ou. The Divine command communicated to
him (ver. 26). Note the exact correspondence between his hymn
and the previous promise : aTroA-Jas = iftclv $ai/arov, cISov = 1817, TO
cramfpiov <rov = TOV Xpwrrov 'K.vpiov. ev elp^rj]. With emphasis,
answering to the emphatic vvv : the beginning and the end of the
verse correspond. It is the peace of completeness, of work
finished and hopes fulfilled. Comp. " Thou shalt go to thy fathers
in peace" (Gen. xv. 15).
30. OTI. Introduces the cause of the perfect peace. etSoy ot
o4>0a\juuH JJLOU. Hebraistic fulness of expression : comp. Job xix. 27,
xlii. 5. His hands also had handled (i Jn. i. i); but he mentions
sight rather than handling, because sight was specially promised
CVQT. 26). This verse probably suggested the worthless tradition
chat Symeon was blind, and received his sight as the Messiah
approached him.
TO <rwn7pioi>. "The Messianic salvation," and scarcely to be
distinguished from rty o-wT-qptav. Comp. iii. 6; Acts xxviii. 28;
Ps. xcviii. 3; Is. xl. 5; Clem. Rom. Cor. xxxvi. i. In LXX it is
freq., sometimes in the sense of " safety," sometimes of " peace-
offering." Win. xxxiv. 2, p. 294. That Symeon says so little about
the Child, and nothing about the wonders which attended His
birth (of which he had probably not heard), is a mark of genuine-
ness. Fiction would have made him dwell on these things.
31. 32. The second strophe of the canticle. Having stated
what the appearance of the Messiah has been to himself, Symeon
now states what the Messiah will be to the world.
31* TjTofp,acras. When used of God, tl le verb almost = " ordain. *
Comp. Mt. xx, 23, xxv. 34; Mk, x, 40; i Cor. ii. 9; Heb. xL 16,
H. 31, 32.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 69
where, as here, the word is used of ordaining blessings. It Is used
only once of punishment (Mt. xxv. 41).
Kara irpoo-coiro^ zrdvTcoi' r&v Xawi>. This includes both Jews and
Gentiles, as the next verse shows, and is in harmony with the
universal character of this Gospel: comp. Is. xix. 24, 25, xlii. 6,
xlix. 6, Ix. 3, and especially lii. 10, cwro/coXw/rci Kuptos rov fipaxtova
avrov rov aytoi/ IVMTTLOV TTQ.VTWV r&v e^vcov, /cat o\j/ovraL Trdvra ra a/cpa.
TT/S yfjs ryv crurrjpLav TJJV irapa rov eov '^u,a>y. Both in LXX and
N.T. /caret TrpoVcoirov is common; it occurs several times in
Polybius.
32. The ffwrypiov is analysed into light and glory, and " the
peoples " into heathen and Jews, that " profound dualism which
dominates the biblical history of humanity from Genesis to Revela-
tion" (Godet). The passage is a combination of Ps. xcviii. 2,
evavriov rwv iOv&v o/Tre/caA/u^e TTJV SiKaiocrvvyv avrov, with Is. xlix. 6,
Se'ScoKa ere eis <cos e#j/w, and <o>s and $6av are in apposition with
TO cro)T?fptoi/. But some take both as depending on ^T0i/x,ao-as ? and
others take Sof av after efe co-ordinately with cwro/caA/ui/w. This last
is Luther's : ein Lickt zu erleuchten die Heiden und zum Preis deines
Volkes ; but it is very improbable.
a/iroKc\u\|ni> ibv&v. Either i. "revelation to belong to the Gen-
tiles " ', or 2. " instruction of the Gentiles " ; or 3. " unveiling of the
Gentiles," i.e. for removing the gross darkness which covers them
(Is. xxv. 7, Ix. 2) ; or 4. (taking IQv&v after <6k) " a light of the
Gentiles unto revelation " (Is. xl. 5). The first is best, " a light
with a view to revelation which shall belong to the Gentiles," making
*6vS>v a poss. gen. Does dxo/caXv^ s ever mean "instruction"? 1
And to represent the heathen as revealed by the light seems to be
an inversion : revealed to whom ?
Elsewhere in N.T. the gen. after diro/tdXv^w is either the person who reveals
(2 Cor. xii. I; Rev. i. i), or the thing revealed {Rom. ii. 5; I Pet. iv. 13) ; but
the poss. gen. is quite possible. The word is eminently Pauline (Crem. Lex.
p. 343). It may be doubted whether the glory of Israel (Rom. ix. 4) is men-
tioned after the enlightening of the Gentiles in order to indicate that Israel
obtained its full glory after and through the enlightenment of the Gentiles ; for
the heathen accepted the salvation which the Jews refused, and from the heathen
it came back to Israel (Bede, Beng.).
The strain of confidence and joy which pervades the canticle is strong
evidence of the historical character of the narrative. The condition of the
Jewish nation at the close of the first century or beginning of the second is cer-
tainly not reflected in it : <?est U pur accent primitif (Godet). And Schleier-
macher remarks that "it is a circumstance too natural for a poetical fiction "
that Symeon takes no notice of the parents until they show surprise, but is lest
in an enthusiastic address to God. See small print on i. 56.
83-35. Symeon's Address to the Virgin. " The foreboding of
suffering to Mary, so indefinitely expressed, bears no mark otpost
1 Grotius admits without commending this rendering, and quotes Ps. cxix. 18,
(JLOV.
70 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [H. 33-35,
actum invention. But the inspired idea of Messiah in the pious
old man obviously connected the sufferings which He was to
endure in His strife against the corrupt people with those which
were foretold of Him in Is. liii." (Neander, Leben Jesus Chris tt,
1 8, Eng. tr. p. 27). The change from the unmixed joy and glory
of the angelic announcements and of the evangelic hymns is very
marked. Here for the first time in the narrative we have an
intimation of future suffering.
33. TJV. When the sing, verb was written, only the first of the personi
mentioned was in the writer's mind : such irregularities are common (Mt. xvii
3, xxii. 40). 0a-vjjL<xovTS !TT. Excepting Mk. xii. 17, this construction is
peculiar in N,T. to Lk. (iv. 22, ix. 43, xx. 26 ; Acts iii. 12). It is quite
class, and freq. in LXX (Judith x. 7, 19, 23, xi. 20 ; Job xli. I ; Eccles. v. 7 ;
Is. Iii. 15). The objection of Strauss, that this wonder of the parents is
inconsistent with the angelic annunciation, is pointless. Symeon's declaration
about the Gentiles goes far beyond the Angel's promise, and it was marvellous
that Symeon should know anything about the Child's nature and destiny.
34. KtTau "Is appointed," Phil. i. 16; r Thes. iii. 3; Josh.
iv. 6 ; not " is lying " here in thine arms.
els TrroKrtr. In accordance with Is. viii. 14, where the same
double destiny is expressed. The coming of the Messiah neces-
sarily involves a crisis, a separation, or judgment (/cpum). Some
welcome the Light; others "love the darkness rather than the
Light, because their works are evil" (Jn. iii. 19), and are by their
own conduct condemned. Judas despairs, Peter repents; one
robber blasphemes, the other confesses (2 Cor. ii. 16). Hence the
TTTwcris of many is an inevitable result of the manifestation of the
Christ. Yet the purpose is not Trrwcris, but oWorracris and crwr^pta
(Rom. xi. n, 12). Elsewhere in N.T. dvdoracris means the
resurrection of the dead; in bibl. Grk. it is never transitive.
Some understand the metaphor as that of a stone lying (fcema),
against which some stumble and fall (Mt xxi. 44 ; Acts iv. 1 1 ;
Rom. ix. 33 ; i Pet. ii. 6), while others use it as a means to rise.
But the latter half of the figure is less appropriate.
<n]fjietW. A manifest token, a phenomenon impossible to
ignore, by means of which something else is known. A person
may be a CT^JUCLOV, as Christ is said to be here, and Jonah in
xi. 30. dn-i\yojjiej>oi>. "Which is spoken against." This is the
Trrtocn?, that men recognize, and yet reject and oppose, the
(n^etov ; an opposition which reached a climax in the crucifixion
(Heb. xii. 3). For the passive comp. Acts xxviii. 22.
35. From nal aou to potato, is not a parenthesis; there is
nothing in the construction to indicate that it is one, and a state-
ment of such moment to the person addressed would hardly be
introduced parenthetically. It is the inevitable result of the
i'a: the Mother's heart is pierced by the rejection and
H. 35, 38.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY Jl
crucifixion of her Son. au-ri^s. 1 In opposition to oSros, rty
\J/uxV- The seat of the affections and human emotions. p
^i) A long Thracian pike; (2) a large sword, greater than
(xxii. 36, 38, 49, 52) or |t<os. Such a weapon better signifies
extreme anguish than doubt, the interpretation which Origen, Bleek,
and Reuss prefer, as if she would be tempted to join in the
dvrtAeyetv. In that case we should expect TO wrcv/xa for r. ^vx 1 ? 1 ''
The word is frequent in LXX and Rev. (L 16, ii. 12, 16, vi. 8,
xix. 15, 21).
OTT<OS ay. This depends upon the whole statement from *lSov
to po/jupaia, not on the last clause only ; on /cetrat, not on StcXev-
orerat. It was the Divine purpose that the manifestation of the
Messiah should cause the crisis just described ; men must decide
either to join or to oppose Him. The av indicates that in every
case the appearance of the Christ produces this result : thoughts,
hitherto secret, become known through acceptance or rejection of
the Christ
Acts Hi. 19, 20 should be compared. There, as here, we have tit
followed by forws &r. In N.T. SITUS &v is rare ; elsewhere only in quotations
from LXX (Acts xv. 17 from Amos ix. 12 ; Rom. ill. 4 from Ps, li. 6).
eic IT. fcapSuoy. " Forth from many hearts," where they have
been concealed; or "Forth from the hearts of many." For
fciaXoyurjuuH see on v. 22.
36-38. Anna the Prophetess. That the Evangelist obtained
this narrative " directly or indirectly from the lips of this Anna
who is so accurately described," is less probable than that the
source for all this chapter is one and the same, viz. some member
of the Holy Family, and probably Mary herself.
36, \v* Either "was present? as in ML xv. 40, in which case
fy in the sense of " was " has to be understood with what follows ;
or simply " there was," which is better. Thus all runs in logical
order. First the existence of Anna is stated, then her life and
character, and finally her presence on this occasion. Symeon
comes to the temple under the influence of the Spirit; Anna
(Hannah) dwells there continually. The sight of the Messiah
makes him at once long for death ; it seems to give her renewed
vigour of life. Is this subtle distinction of character the creation
of a writer of fiction ? We find fiction at work in the tradition
that Mary had been brought up in the temple under the tutelage
of Anna, There is nothing here to indicate that Anna had ever
seen Mary previously.
1 It is not easy to decide whether the W after <roD is genuine or not. OEU
B L #, Vulg, Boh. Aeth. Arm. Ins. tf A D, Syrr., Grig. If it be admitted,
comp. i. 76 ; and render xal . . . 5* . . . in the same way in both passages :
"Yea and." For &eXetf<rero* see on w. 15*
72 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [II. 36, 37.
Neither in ver. 36 (/cal fy] nor in ver. 37 (ml aflr^) does /ca = " also " in
ref. to ver. 25. The meaning is not " There was Symeon, the holy and aged
man ; also Anna, the holy and aged woman." Throughout the section Ka.1
= "and."
-n-po<j)TJTis. She was known as such before this occasion. Like
Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, and the daughters of Philip, Anna was
a woman divinely inspired to make known God's will to others.
That her genealogy is given because prophetesses are rare, is
doubtful But Lk.'s accuracy appears in such details, which a
forger would have avoided for fear of mistakes. Although the ten
tribes were lost, some families possessed private genealogies. For
the word -n-po^rts comp. Rev, ii. 20 ; Exod. xv, 20 \ Judg. iv. 4 ;
2 Chron. xxxiv. 2 ; Is. viii. 3,
For the omission of the art. after Qvydryp see on i. 5- $aVoi/?JX as *' Face
of God," Peniel or Penuel (Gen. xxxii. 31, 32) ; in LXX eWos 8eo0.~ 'A<nfo
2 Chron. xxx. ti.
afrnj irpoppY)Kuia, K.T.\. "She was advanced in many days,
having lived with a husband seven years from her virginity, and
herself a widow even for eighty-four years." From avr-q irpofte/3. to
Tro*apeov is a parenthesis in which fy is to be understood : 770-010-0,
explains irpo/3e/3r]Kvia, and awry balances /ACTO, avSpos. She was of
great age, because she had lived l seven years as a wife and eighty-
four years by farself (Rom. vii. 25) as a widow. The ecus draws
attention to the great length of her widowhood ; " up to as much
as" (Mt. xviii. 21, 22). That she should be considerably over a
huncired years old is not incredible. But the eighty-four may be
intended to include the seven years and the time before her
marriage. In any case the clumsy arrangement of taking all three
verses (36-38) as one sentence, and making cum? the nom. to
cWayxoAoyaro, should be avoided. That she had never, in spite of
her early widowhood, married again, was held to be very honourable
to her : comp. i Tim. v. 3, 5. Monogamia apud ethnicos in summo
honore est (Tertul. de* Exh. Cast. xiii. : comp. de Monog. xvi. ; ad
Uxor* L 7). See quotations in WetsL on i Tim. iii. 2, and
Whiston's note on Jos. Ant xviii. 6. 6.
37. OUK d^toraTo TOO lepou. See on viii. 13. This is to be
understood, like xxiv, 53, of constant attendance, rather than of
actual residence within the temple precincts, although the latter may
have been possible. She never missed a service, and between the
services she spent most of her time in the temple. In spite of her
age she kept more than the customary fasts (comp, v. 33), perhaps
more than the Mondays and Thursdays (see on xviii. 12), and spent
an unusual amount of time in prayer.
1 The first aorist of ^v is late Greek. It occurs Acts xxvi. 5 ; Rom* xiv* 91
Rev. iL 8, xx. 4. Attic writers use fpLwr, which is not found in N.T
H. 37-39.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 73
XaTp-uovro. Freq. in Lk., Paul, and Heb. See on iv. 3. Not in Mk.
or Jn. Mt. iv. 10 from Deut. vi. 13. VTJKTCI K. ^p,pav. Comp. Acts
xxvi. 7. Th 3 is the usual order : Mk. iv. 27, v. 5 ; Acts xx 31 ; I Thes.
ii. 9, iii. 10 ; 2 Thes. hi. 8 ; I Tim. v. 5 ; 2 Tim. i. 3. But the other is
ilbo common : xviii. 7 ; Acts ix. 24; Rev. ix. 8, etc.; and in O.T. is more
common. It may be doubted whether the oider makes any difference of
meaning : see Ellicott on I Tim. v. 5, and comp. Horn. Od. ii. 345 ; //.
*x* v 73> v - 4VJ Pl at - Theaet. 151 A.
38. au-HJ rfj wpa. "That very hour" (RV.): see on x. 7, 21.
. exaggerates with "that instant," as does Beza with eo ipso
O) and also Gen. with "at the same instant." emoracrci.
"Coming up" and * standing by," rather than "coming suddenly"
Gen. and Rhem.), although the word often has this meaning from
the context. Comp. xxi. 34, x. 40, xx. i Acts iv. i, vi. 12, xxii. 13,
xxiii. 27 ; and see on ver. 9. avQupokoyei-rQ. The avrL does not
refer to Symeon, meaning that " she in turn gave thanks " ; but to
the making n return^ which is involved in all thanksgiving: Ps.
Ixxviii. 1 3 ; Ezra iii. 1 1 ; 3 Mac. vi. 33 ; Test XII. Patr. Judah L
\cX. Not on that occasion, but afterwards, "she was
habitually speaking." When she met Mary and Joseph she could
not speak iraa-iv rots 7rpo<rSexo//,evois, for they were not present.
Grammatically irepl auroG may refer to rc3 ecp, but it evidently
refers to the Child. Godet divides the people into three sections :
the Pharisees, who expected a political deliverer ; the Sadducees,
who expected nothing; and the blessed few, who expected the
spiritual deliverance or consolation (ver. 25) of Jerusalem. Bengel
argues from -iraa-iv erant igitur non pauci^ which does not follow,
especially when we consider Lk.'s fondness for the word.
X/uTpwcrtv *IepovcraXvj|x. This, without & 9 is certainly the true reading
, many Versions and Fathers), "redemption ^Jerusalem," Comp. Is.
xl. 2. Fiction would probably have given Anna also a hymn. Against the
hypothesis that this narrative is "a poetical and symbolical representation, '*
Schleiermacher asks, *' Why should the author, along with Symeon, have
introduced Anna, who is not made even to answer any poetical purpose ? "
39. *r&crav. " Brought to a close, accomplished n ; especially
of executing what has been prescribed \ xii. 50, xviii. 31, xxii. 37;
Acts xiii. 29; Rom. iL 27; Jas. ii 8. See Jn. xix. 28, which
illustrates the difference between rcA-ao and rcAeiow. Syr-Sin.
here inserts "Joseph and Mary" as nom. to "accomplished."
Why not " His father and His mother" (ver. 33) or " His parents"
(ver. 43), if that text was framed to discredit the virgin birth ?
Naapr. Lk. appears to know nothing of the visit of the
MagL It would have suited his theme of the universality of the
Gospel so well, that he would hardly have omitted it, if he had
known it. In that case he was not familiar with our First GospeL
From Mt ii. ii we infer that the Holy Family, after the Purifi-
cation, returned to Bethlehem and there occupied a house (T^I>
74 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S, LUKE [IL 39-41,
oww'av), The parents may have thought that the Son of David,
born in Bethlehem, ought to be brought up there. Thence they
fly to Egypt, a flight not mentioned in the authority used by Lk.
40. The conclusion of a separate narrative: comp. i. 80.
Contrast the reticence of this verse (which is all that we know
respecting the next eleven years) with the unworthy inventions of
the apocryphal gospels.
rju'la^ K. iKpctTcuouTo. Of bodily development in size and
strength; for m/ev/Acm is an insertion from i. 80. TrXijpoujj^oy,
Pres. part "Being filled" day by day. The ero<f>ta is to be regarded
as wisdom in the highest and fullest sense. The intellectual, moral>
and spiritual growth of the Child, like the physical, was real. His
was a perfect humanity developing perfectly, unimpeded by
hereditary or acquired defects. It was the first instance of such a
growth in history. For the first time a human infant was realizing
the ideal of humanity.
X<pts OeoG ty CTT' auto. See on iv. 22 and comp. Acts iv. 33.
It was near the beginning of this interval that the Jews sent an embassy of
fifty to follow Archelaus to Rome, to protest against his accession, and to
petition that Judaea might be annexed to Syria (Jos. B. J. ii. 6. I ; Ant. xvii.
n. i), of which fact we perhaps have a trace in the parable of the Pounds
(xix. 14). And it was near the end of this interval that another embassy went
to complain of Archelaus to Augustus : and he was then deposed, and banished
to Vienne in Gaul (Ant. xvii. 13. 2; J3.J. ii. 7. 3). Lewin, Fasti Satri, 877,
944, ion, 1026.
41-52. The Boyhood of the Messiah,
His Visit to Jerusalem and the Temple, and His first recorded
Words. Here again, as in the Circumcision, the Purification, and
the Presentation, the idea of fidelity to the Law is very con-
spicuous. Hort, Judaistic Christianity ', Lect ii., Macmillan, 1894.
41. Kar* eras. The expression occurs here only in N.T.
Combined with the imperf. it expresses the habitual annual practice
of Joseph and Mary. At the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles
every male had to go up to Jerusalem (Ex. xxiii, 14-17, xxxiv. 23 ;
Deut xvi. 1 6). But since the Dispersion this law could not be
kept \ yet most Palestinian Jews tried to go at least once a year.
About women the Law says nothing, but Hillel prescribed that
they also should go up to the Passover. Mary, like Hannah
(i Sam. i. 7), probably went out of natural piety, and not in
obedience to HiUel's rule*
rff lop-rfi. "For foe feast," or, more probably, "at the feast": dat of
time, as in viii. 29, xii. 20, xiii. 14, 15, 16; Acts viL 8, xii. 21, xxi. 26,
xxii. 13, xxvii. 23. In class. Grk. rfi eo/>r?j without & is rare : Win. xxsi. 5,
p. 269. The phrase -7 topr^ rov ird<?xa occurs again ]"& xiii I only ; not in
H. 41-44.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 75
LXX. The fact that yovets has not been changed here, even in those MSS.
in which w* 27 and 43 have been corrupted, is some evidence that the
corruption was not made for dogmatic reasons. The love of amplification or
of definiteness might suffice.
42. erw 8o58Ka. At the age of twelve a young Jew became
" a son of the Law," and began to keep its enactments respecting
feasts, fasts, and the like. The mention of the age implies that
since the Presentation Jesus had not been up to Jerusalem.
&va,pa,wQVTw. Imperf. part. " On their usual going up." Kara TO
eOos. See small print on i. 9.
43. KCU TeXeKycraJTwi/. Note the change of tense. " And after
they had fulfilled." There is nothing ungrammatical in the com-
bination of an aor. with an imperf. part. But the reading dvafiavrw
is an obvious correction to avoid apparent awkwardness. rds
qjj^pas. The prescribed seven days (Ex. xii. 15, 16; Lev. xxiii.
6-8 ; Deut xvi. 3), or the customary two days, for many pilgrims
left after the principal sacrifices were over.
uirefXti/^. Contains an idea of persistence and perseverance,
and hence is used of remaining after others have gone : comp. Acts
xvii. 14. The attraction of Divine things held Him fast in spite of
the departure of His parents. It would be His first experience of
the temple services, and especially of the slaying of the Paschal
lamb. 6 -n-ais. " The Boy," to distinguish from TO Tra&iov : see on
ver. 52. OUK eyfwarai'. This shows what confidence they had in
Him, and how little they were accustomed to watch Him. That
it shows neglect on their part is a groundless assertion. They
were accustomed to His obedience and prudence, and He had
never caused them anxiety. See Hase, Geschichte Jesu 9 28,
p. 276, ed, 1891.
44. rfj owoSia. "The caravan." The inhabitants of a village,
or of several neighbouring villages, formed themselves into a
caravan, and travelled together. The Nazareth caravan was so
long that it took a whole day to look through it. The caravans
went up singing psalms, especially the " songs of degrees " (Ps.
cxx.-cxxxiv.) : but they would come back with less solemnity. It
was probably when the caravan halted for the night that He was
missed. At the present day the women commonly start first, and
the men follow ; the little children being with the mothers, and the
older with either. If this was the case then, Mary might fancy that
He was with Joseph, and Joseph that He was with Mary. Tristram,
Eastern Customs in Bibk Lands, p. 56.
In LXX 6dbv Tjfjt^pas (Num. xi. 31 ; I Kings xix. 4). Comp.
vopdav ^pas ;uas (Jon. iii. 4).
The compound faetyrow expresses thoroughness (Acts xi. 25 ; Job iii. 4,
x. 6 ; 2 Mac. xiii. 21).
o-vyyeveOortv. A barbarous form of dat. plur. found also Mk. vi. 4 and
1 Mac. x. 89. For yvu<rrois see on xxiii. 49.
76 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EL 46-47
45. fir) eupotres, " Because they did not find " . see on iii. 9.
tiirea-rpf-tyw d^x^rou^es. The turning back was a single act, the
Seeking continued a long time. Comp. Mk. viii. n, x. 2. In such
cases the pres, part, is not virtually tut., as if it meant " in order to
seek," The seeking was present directly the turning back took
place. Win. xlv. i. b, p. 429. For uTr^orpe^a^ see small print on
i 56, and for lylvero see detached note after ch. i.
46. tjfUpas rpets. These are reckoned in three ways, (i) One
day out, at the end of which the Child is missed ; one day back ;
and on the third the finding. This is probably correct. (2) One
day's search on the journey back ; one day's search in Jerusalem ;
and on the third the finding. (3) Two days' search in Jerusalem,
and then the finding. This is improbable. Jerusalem was not a
large place, and less than a day would probably suffice. We may
understand that on all three days Jesus was in the temple with the
doctors. Godet conjectures that He there had an experience
similar to that of Jacob at Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 10-22): "God
became more intimately His God, His Father." There is no
evidence.
f TW ip&. Not in a synagogue, if there was one in the temple
enclosure, but probably on the terrace, where members of the
Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and festivals. If
this is correct, His parents had left on the third day, and the
Passover was still going on. If all had been over, this public
teaching would have ceased.
Ka0<5jii>oi>. As a learner, not as a teacher. St. Paul sat *' at
the feet of Gamaliel" (Acts xxii. 3). Jesus probably 'sat on the
ground, while the Rabbis sat on benches or stood. r p,W, See
on viii. 7. Not dignitatis causd, (Beng.) or as doctor doctorum
(Calov.), but because there were teachers on each side, possibly in
a semicircle. The point is that He was not hidden, but where He
could easily be found. For a list of distinguished persons who
may have been present, see Farrar, L. of Christ^ i. ch. vi., from
Sepp, Leben Jesu, i. 17. Of biblical personages, Symeon,
Gamaliel, Annas, Caiaphas, Nicodemus, and Joseph of Arimathea
are possibilities.
dKouoira aorwv Kal lircpamiiiTa aflrous. Note that the hearing is
pkced first, indicating that He was there as a learner j and it was
as such that He questioned them. It was the usual mode of
instruction that the pupil should ask as well as answer questions,
A holy thirst for knowledge, especially of sacred things, would
prompt His inquiries. The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy represents
Him as instructing them in the statutes of the Law and the
mysteries of the Prophets, as well as in astronomy, medicine^
physics, and metaphysics (l.~lii.). See on iii. 10.
47. ei<rrai>To. A strong word expressing great amazement;
H. 47-49.>] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY J?
viii. 56; Acts ii. 7, 12, viii. 13, ix. 21. For !m comp, Wisd. v. 2
and the ?r/ which Lk. commonly uses after Oavpa^ew (see on ver.
33) ; and for irdn-es oE dicou'cires see on i. 66. ow&reu " Intelli-
gence " ; an application of the o-o^ta with which He was ever being
filled (ver. 40) : see Lft on Col. i. 9. faoKpiaeaiv. His replies
would show His wonderful intellectual and spiritual development
The vanity of Josephus (Vita> 2) and of Bellarmine (Vita, pp.
28-30, ed. Dollinger und Reusch, Bonn, 1887) leads them to
record similar amazement respecting themselves.
48. ISoVres. Return to the original subject, ot yovcts. |e-
irXdyiicrav'. Another strong expression: ix. 43; Acts xiii. 12.
They were astonished at finding Him there, and thus occupied,
apparently without thought of them.
TJ jxrjr^p auTou. It was most natural that she should be the first
to speak. Her reproachful question perhaps contains in it a vein
of self-reproach. She and Joseph had appeared to be negligent.
ir]ToGfii>. " Are seeking " : the pain of the anxiety has not yet
quite ceased. For KdycS see on xvi. 9.
K B read ^ov/iev, which WH. adopt. Almost all other editors follow
almost all other authorities in reading
" In great anguish" of mind, as in Acts xx. 38 and
Zech. xii. 10; of body and mind, xvi. 24, 25; comp. Rom. ix. 2;
i Tim. vi. 10. The potato, (ver. 35) has already begun its work.
Anguish cannot be reasonable. But they might have been sure
that the Child who was to be the Messiah could not be lost. This
agrees with ver. 50.
49. TI ort et]TeiT<f fX; Not a reproof, but an expression of
surprise: comp. Mk. ii. 16. He is not surprised at their coming
back for Him, but at their not knowing where to find Him.
Here also N has the pres, {"^retre.
<K rots TOU -rroTpos |*ou. " Engaged in My Father's business " is
a possible translation: comp. ra rov cov (Mt. xvi. 23; Mk. viii.
33); ra TOT) Kvptov (i Cor. vii. 32, 34). But " in My Father's house "
is probably right, as in Gen. xli. 51- Irenzeus (ZT&r. v, 36. 2) para-
phrases the tv TT? oiKto, of Jn. xiv. 2 by lv rots : comp. Ii/ rots *Ap,dv
(Esth. vii. 9); ev rot? avrov (Job xviii. 19); ra AVKWVOS (Theoc. ii.
76). Other illustrations in Wetst The Armenian Version has
in domo patris meL The words indicate His surprise that His
parents did not know where to find Him. His Father's business
could have been done elsewhere. There is a gentle but decisive
correction of His Mother's words, " Thy father and I," in the reply,
"Where should a child be (Set), but in his father's house? and My
Father is God," For the Set see on iv. 43. It is notable that the
first recorded words of the Messiah are an expression of His Divine
78 THE GOSPKL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IL 49-52.
Sonship as man ; and His question implies that they knew it, or
ought to know it. But there is nothing which implies that He had
just received a revelation of this relationship. These first recorded
words are the kernel of the whole narrative, and the cause of its
having been preserved. They must mean more than that Jesus is
a son of Abraham, and therefore has God as His Father. His
parents would easily have understood so simple a statement as
that
60. o3 <rvvf\K.a.v TO fjjxa. Ergo non ex illis hoc didicerat (Beng.).
There is nothing inconsistent in this. They learnt only gradually
what His Messiahship involved, and this is one stage in the process.
From the point of view of her subsequent knowledge, Mary recog-
nized that at this stage she and Joseph had not understood. This
verse, especially when combined with the next, shows clearly who
was the source of Lk.'s information. 1
51. YJV uTroTacr(ro'jjLei>os. This sums up the condition of the
Messiah during the next seventeen years. The analytical tense
gives prominence to the continuance of the subjection : comp. i.
i8 3 20, 21. For worao-crav comp. x. 17, 20.
aurots. The last mention of Joseph. He was almost certainly
dead before Christ's public ministry began ; but this statement of
continued subjection to him and Mary probably covers some years.
The main object of the statement, however, may be to remove the
impression that in His reply (ver. 49) Jesus resents, or henceforward
repudiates, their authority over Him.
SieT^pct. Expresses careful and continual keeping. Gen.
xxxvii. ii is a close parallel: comp. Acts xv. 29. We must not
confine irdsra T& p^/xara to w. 48, 49 ; the phrase is probably used
in the Hebraistic sense of "things spoken of." Comp. i. 65, ii. 19;
Acts v. 32 : but in all these cases " sayings " is more possible than
here. Still more so in Dan. vii 28 : TO prj^a cv T# /capSta
52. The verse is very similar to i Sam. ii, 26, of which it is
perhaps a quotation. See Athan. Con, Arian* iii. 51, p. 203, ed
Bright; Card Newman, Select Treatises of S. Athan. i. p. 419;
Wace & SchafT, p. 421 ; Pearson, On the Creed^ art. iii. p. 160,
"Irjo-ous. The growth is very clearly marked throughout: ri
/3p<os (ver. 16); TO -TraiStw (ver. 40); 'I^croijs 6 Trais (ver. 43);
f L?cro$ (ver. 52). Non statim plena statura^ ut Protoplasti^ appa-
ruit: sed omnes s&tatis gradus sanctificavit Senectusmm non decebat
(Beng.). SchafT, The Person of Christ^ pp. 10-17, Nisbet, 1880.
1 " This fine tender picture, in which neither truth to nature, nor the beauty
which that implies, is violated in a single line, * . . cannot have been devised
by human hands, which, when left to themselves, were always betrayed into
coarseness and exaggeration, as shown by the apocryphal gospels'* (
z., Eng tr. ii. p. 137).
XL 52.] THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY 79
Here only in the Gospels, and elsewhere in N.T.
only in S. Paul (Rom. xiii. 12; Gal. i. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 16, iii. 9, 13).
The metaphor probably comes from pioneers cutting in front \ but
some refer it to lengthening by hammering. Hence the meaning of
" promote " : but more often it is intransitive, as always in N.T.
Actual growth is expressed by the word, and to explain it of
progressive manifestation is inadequate. Hooker, EccL PoL bk. v.
53- J-3-
cro4Lou Not " knowledge " but " wisdom," which includes know-
ledge: it is used of the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts vii. 22).
Jesus was capable of growth in learning; e.g. He increased in
learning through experience in suffering : !/ia0j> d<" &v &raL0v
(Heb. v. 8, where see Westcott's notes).
rjXiKia. Not "age," which is probably the meaning xii. 25 and
Mt vi. 27, but would be rather an empty truism here. Rather,
" stature," as in xix. 3 : justam proceritatem nactus est ac decoram
(Beng.). His intellectual and moral growth (<ro<t'a), as well as His
physical growth (^Xi/aa), was perfect. The TrpotKoirre yXiKiq. corre-
sponds to IfteyaXwcTO (in some Copies Ivopevero /uyaAwo/Aevov) in
i Sam. ii. 26.
X<piTi. "Goodwill, favour, loving-kindness" (ver. 40, i. 30;
Acts iv. 33, vii. 10): see on iv. 22. That He advanced in favour
with God plainly indicates that there was moral and spiritual
growth. At each stage He was perfect for that stage, but the
perfection of a child is inferior to the perfection of a man ; it is
the difference between perfect innocence and perfect holiness. He
was perfectly (reXews) man, as set forth in the Council of Constan-
tinople (A.D. 381) against Apollinaris, who held that in Jesus the
Divine Logos was a substitute for a human soul In that case an
increase in <ro<jta'a and in x<*P ts napo. eo> would have been incon-
ceivable, as Pearson points out (On the Ct-eed^ art iii, p. 160; comp.
E. Harold Browne, Exp. of the XXXIX. Articles, iv. 2. 4).
KCU dKOp(5iroLs. Nothing of the kind is said of John (i. 66, 80) ;
his sternness and his retirement into the desert prevented it. But
an absolutely perfect human being living among men could not
fail to be attractive until His public ministry brought Him into
collision with their prejudices and sins. 1 Comp. what Josephus
says of the development of Moses (Ant. ii. 9. 6); also the promise
made in Prov. iii. 4 to him who keeps mercy and truth : " so shalt
1 Pearson in a long note gives the chief items of evidence as to the primitive
belief that Is. liii. 2, 3 was to be understood literally of the personal appearance
of Jesus as "a personage no way amiable $ an aspect, indeed, rather uncomely."
. . . " But what the aspect of His outward appearance was, because the Scrip-
tures are silent, we cannot now know" (On the Creed> art. ii. pp. 87, 88).
Lange has some good remarks on the "master-stroke of Divine wisdom* 1
which caused Jesus to be brought up at Nazareth (L. of Christ > Eng. tr. i. pp.
3i7 324)-
8o THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EL 52-111. 1,
thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and
man " evcuTTtov Kvptov KOL av@p<&7r<$v.
For answers to the objections urged by Strauss against the
historical character of this narrative see Hase, Gesch. fesu^ 28,
p. 280, eA 1891.
HX 1-ISL 50. THE BmriSTRY.
HI. 1-22. The External Preparation for the Ministry of the
Christ: the Ministry of John the Baptist^ Mt Hi. 1-12; Mk.
i. 1-8; Jn. i. 15-24.
Hu quasi scena N.T. panditur is BengeFs illuminative remark
" It was the glory of John the Baptist to have revived the function
of the prophet J> (ILece Homo^ p. 2) ; and it is difficult for us to
realize what that meant A nation, which from Samuel to Malachi
had scarcely ever been without a living oracle of God, had for
three or four centuries never heard the voice of a Prophet It
seemed as if Jehovah had withdrawn from His people. The
breaking of this oppressive silence by the voice of the Baptist
caused a thrill through the whole Jewish population throughout
the world. Lk. shows his appreciation of the magnitude of the
crisis by the sixfold attempt to give it an exact date. Of the foui
Evangelists he is the only one to whom the title of historian in the
full sense of the term can be given ; and of Christian writers he is
the first who tries to fit the Gospel history into the history of the
world. It is with a similar wish to do justice to a crisis that
Thucydides gives a sixfold date of the entry of the Thebans into
Plataea, by which the thirty years' truce was manifestly broken and
the Peloponnesian War begun (iL 2 ; comp. v. 20).
The section is carefully arranged. First the Date (i, 2) ; then
a Description of the new Prophet (3-6) ; then an account of his
Preaching and its Effects (7-17) ; and an Explanation as to how it
came to an End (18-20). He baptizes the Christ (21, 22).
1, A, The Date. The event that is thus elaborately dated is
the appearance of the new Prophet, not the beginning of Christ's
ministry. See below on the conclusion of ver. 2. Ellicott con-
siders it the date of the captivity of the Baptist This had been
advocated by Wieseler in his Synopsis (ii. ch. ii. Eng. tr. pv
17$), but he abandoned it in his Beitrage. Others would make
it refer to Christ's baptism, which may have followed closely
HI. 1.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 8 1
upon John's first appearance as a preacher (Caspari, Ckron. EtnL
33, Eng. tr. p. 41). But the interval between the beginning of
John's ministry and his baptizing Jesus cannot be determined.
Some estimate it at one month, others at six months, because John
was six months older than Jesus (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1171). Weiss
(JLebenJesu, I. ii. 8, Eng, tr. i. p. 316) shows that the interval was
not more than six months. The appearance of one who seemed
to be a Prophet soon attracted immense attention; and when
large numbers accepted his doctrine and baptism, it became
imperative that the hierarchy should make inquiry as to his
authority and claims. But it appears from Jn. i. 19-28 that th<5
first investigation made by the Sanhedrin was about the time when
the Baptist met Jesus. In neither case can year or time of year
be determined. If Jesus was born towards the end, John about
the middle, of 749 (B.C. 5), then John might begin to preach about
the middle of 779, and Jesus be baptized early in 780 (A,D. 27).
It is little or no confirmation of this result that both the Greek and the
Roman Churches celebrate the Baptism of Christ on Jan. 6th. Originally, the
Nativity, the Visit of the Magi, and the Baptism were all celebrated on Jan. 6th.
When Dec. 25th was adopted as the date of the Nativity, the Roman Church
continued to celebrate the Baptism with the Epiphany to the Gentiles on Jan.
6th, while the Greek Church transferred the latter along with the Nativity to
Dec. 25th, commemorating the Baptism alone on Jan. 6th. The fact that both
vne Eastern and the Western Church have concurred in celebrating the Baptism
on Jan. 6th seems at first sight to be imposing testimony. But there is little
doubt that all trustworthy evidence had perished before any of these dates were
selected* 1
Instead of the elaborate dates given in these first two verses, Mt, (iii. i) has
simply 'Ej> 5 rats ^pats tKebais, while Mk. (i. 4) has nothing. Comp. the
somewhat similar dating of the erection of Solomon's temple (i Kings vi. i).
Beng. says of this date, Epocha eccksi& omnium maxima. Hie quasi scena W. 71
panditur+ Ne nativitatis quidem, out mortis, resurrectionis, ascensionis christi
tempus tarn prascise definitur.
1. *EK erei 8e ireKreKCuocKciTW Tfjs TJyeji(aas Ttpcpiou Kaurapos.
He naturally begins with the Roman Empire, and then takes the
local governors, civil and ecclesiastical. "Now in the i5th year
of the reign of Tiberius Caesar," or " of Tiberius as Caesar." Is the
1 5th year to be counted from the death of Augustus, Aug, igrh,
A.U.C. 767, A.D. 14? or from the time when he was associated
with Augustus as joint ruler at the end of 764 or beginning of
765, A.D. ii or 12? It is impossible to determine this with
certainty. Good authorities (Zumpt, Wieseler, Weiss) plead for
the latter reckoning, which makes the Gospel chronology as a
whole run more smoothly; but it is intrinsically less probable,
1 For the chief data respecting the limits of our Lord's life see Lft
Biblical Essays, p. 58, note; and on Lk.'s chronology in these verses see
Ewald, Hist, of Israel, vi, Eng. tr. p, 149, and Lange, L. of C bk. ii. pt. iiL
| I, i p. 342.
6
82 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IU 1.
and seems to be inconsistent with the statements of Tacitus and
Suetonius.
The main points c these. I. Tiberius was not joint Emperor with
Augustus ; he was associated with him only in respect of the provinces and
armies: ut provincias cum Augusta communiter administraret^ simulqtte
censum ageret (Suet. Tib. xxi T ) ; ut &quum ei jus in omnibus provinciis
cxerritibusqzte esset (Veil. Paterc. ii. 121); filim \ colkga imperil* censors
tribunicisB protestatis adsumitur^ omnisqiu per exercitus ostentatur (Tac. Ann.
L 3. 3 ; comp. L II. 2 and Hi. 56. 2). 2. It is clear from Tacitus (Ann. i. 5-7)
that, when Augustus died, Tiberius was not regarded by himself or by oihers as
already Emperor* Suetonius confirms this by saying that Tiberius, while
manifestly getting the imperial power into his hands, for a time refused the
offer of it (Tib. xxiv.). 3. No instance is known of reckoning the reign of
Tiberius from his association with Augustus. The coins of Antioch, Lk.'s own
city, which helped to convert Wieseler from the one view to the other by
seeming to date the reign of Tiberius from the association, are not admitted by
Eckhel to be genuine. On the other hand, there are coins of Antioch which
date the reign of Tiberius from the death of Augustus. It remains, therefore,
that, although to reckon from the association was a possible method, especially
in the provinces, for there Tiberius had been really a consort of Augustus, yet
it is more probable that Lk. reckons in the usual way from the death of the
predecessor (see Wieseler, Chron. Synop. ii. ch. ii. ; Keim, fesus of Naz. ii.
pp. 381, 382; Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1044; Sanday, Fourth Gospel, p. 65).
Fifteen years from the death of Augustus would be A.D. 29, at which time our
Lord would probably be 32 years of age, which sufficiently agrees with Lk.'s
** about 30" (ver. 23)* -Jf the earlier date is admissible, the agreement becomes
exact*
. Quite a vague term, and applicable to the rule of
emperor, king, legatus^ or procurator^ as is shown by Jos. Ant.
xviii 4. 2, and by the use of fryepw in N.T. : xx. 20, xxi. 12 ;
Acts xxiii. 24, 26, 33, etc, Wieseler is alone in seeing in this
word (instead of /iovapxi), and in Kalcrap (instead of 2e/Wro$),
evidence that the co-regency of Tiberius is meant (Beitrage z.
richtigen Wurdigung d. Evan. 1869, pp. 191-194). From the
Emperor Lk. passes to the local governor under him.
^Yfxof(/ovros. The more exact eTnTpoTrciWros of D and other
authorities is an obvious correction to mark his office with pre-
cision : cm'rpoTros procurator. Pilate succeeded Valerius Gratus
A.D. 25, and was recalled A.D. 36 or 37 by Tiberius, who died,
March A.D. 37, before Pilate reached Rome. Having mentioned
the Roman officials, Lk. next gives the local national rulers.
TCTpapxoGrros. The word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is
used by Josephus of Philip, tetrarch of Trachonitis (B.f. iii. 10. 7).
The title tetrarch was at first used literally of the governor of a
fourth; e.g. of one of the four provinces of Thessaly (Eur. Ale.
1154), or one of the fourths into which each of the three divisions
of Galatia were divided (Strabo, 430, 540, 560, 567). But after-
wards it came to mean the governor of any division, as a third or
a half, or of any small country; any ruler not a /Jao-iAevs (Hor.
HL1.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 83
Sat i. 3. 12). Such seems to be the meaning here; but it may
be used in its literal sense, Pilate's province representing the
fourth tetrarchy, viz. the dominions of Archelaus.
In d we have the singular rendering : in anno quintodecimo ducatus Tiberi
C&saris procurante Pontio Pilato Jud&s&i q^laterd^icatus Gah&s& H 'erode.
Antipas, son of Herod the Great and Malthace the
Samaritan. See small print on i, 5 for the iota subscript. Two
inscriptions have been found, one at Cos and one at Delos, which
almost certainly refer to him as tetrarch, and son of Herod the
king (Schiirer, Jewish People in the T. off. C. I. vol. ii. p. 17),
His coins have the title tetrarch, and, like those of his father, bear
no image. Herod Philip was the first to have any portrait on the
coins of a Jewish prince. He had the images of Augustus and
Tiberius put upon his coins. As his dominions were wholly
heathen, this would cause little scandal. He even went so far as
to put the temple of Augustus at Panias on his coins. Herod
Antipas was made tetrarch of Persea and Galilee, B.C. 4 (Jos. Ant.
xvii. ii. 4; B.f. ii. 6. 3). As he ruled this district until A.D. 39
or 40, the whole of Christ's life falls within his reign, and nearly
the whole of Christ's ministry took place within his dominions.
For his character see on xiii. 32. He was by courtesy allowed
the title of /3a<riXeus (Mk. vi. 14) ; and as Agrippa had obtained
this by right, Antipas and Herodias went to Rome, A.D. 39, to try
and get the courtesy title made a real one by Caligula. The
attempt led to his banishment, the details of which are uncertain,
for Josephus makes inconsistent statements. Either he was
banished at Baiae, A.D, 39, to Lugdunum (Ant xviii 7. 2), or he
had a second audience with Caligula at Lugdunum, A.D. 40, and
was banished to Spain (B. f. ii. 9. 6). The latter is probably
correct (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1561).
4>tXtir7rou. Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleo-
patra. He reigned for nearly 37 years, B.C. 4 to A.D. 33, when he
died at Julias, which he had built and named in honour of the
infamous Julia, d. of Augustus and wife of Tiberius. He was the
builder of Csesarea Philippi (B.f. ii. 9. i), and was the best of the
Herods (Ant. xviii. 4. 6). He married his niece Salome soon
after she had danced for the head of the Baptist, c. A.D. 31 (Ant.
xviii. 5. 4). Trachonitis (rpa^oiv = rpa^us /cat ireT/xaS^s TOITOS)
derived its name from the rugged character of the country. It lay
N.E. of Galilee in the direction of Damascus, and its inhabitants
were skilled archers and very often banditti (Ant. xv. 10. i). The
expression TT\$ "Ir. /cat Tp. x^P a? > " tne region of Ilursea and
Trachonitis," seems to indicate that more than these two is
included; probably Auranitis and Batanaea. ITV/HUO, both here
and perhaps everywhere, is an adjective.'
0*4 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [HL 1,
-njs *Aj3tXr,n]s rerp. Not merely Strauss, Gfrorer, B,
Bauer, and Hilgenfeld, but even Keim and Holtzmann, attribute
to Lk. the gross chronological blunder of supposing that Lysanias,
son of Ptolemy, who ruled this region previous to B.C. 36, when he
was killed by M. Antony, is still reigning 60 years after his death.
Such a mistake is very improbable ; and the only difficulty about
Lk.'s statement is that we have no indisputable evidence of this
tetrarch Lysanias.
But I. Lysanias, son of Ptolemy, was styled king and not tetrarch, and the
seat of his kingdom was Chalcis in Ceele-Syria, not Abila in Abilene. 2. It is
pure assumption that no one of his name ever ruled in these parts afterwards.
3, Josephus (Ant. xix. 5. i) speaks of " Abila of Lysanias," and (xx. 7. i) of a
tetrarchy of Lysanias (comp. B.J. ii. II. 5, 12. 8) ; and as the son of Ptolemy
was not called tetrarch, nor was connected with Abila, and, moreover, reigned
for only 5 or 6 years, it is improbable that "Abila of Lysanias" was called
aftei him. Therefore these passages in Josephus confirm rather than oppose Lk.
4. A medal found by Pococke designates Lysanias " tetrarch and high priest."
If this refers to either, it is more likely to refer to Lk.'s Lysanias. 5. Two
inscriptions exist, one of which proves that Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy,
left children ; the other, that at the time when Tiberius was associated with
Augustus there was a "tetrarch Lysanias" (Boeckh, Corp. znscr* Gr. 4523,
4521). See Davidson, Intr* to N.T. i. pp. 214-221, 1st ed. ; Rawlinson,
Bampton Lectures for 1859, p. 203 ; Wieseler in Herzog, 2 i. pp. 87-89 ; and
the reff. in Thayer's Grimm
2. lirl dpx<-epe<>s "Awa ical Kcua<|>a. Lk. now passes to the
ecclesiastical rulers. The singular is probably not accidental, and
certainly not ironical. "Under the high priest Annas-Caiaphas,"
which means that between them they discharged the duties, or that
each of them in different senses was regarded high priest, Annas
dejure (Acts iv. 6) and Caiaphas de facto (Jn. xi. 49).
Annas had held office A.D. 7-14, when he had been deposed by Valerius
Gratus, the predecessor of Pilate, who set up in succession Ismael, Eleazar
(son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph surnamed Caiaphas, who held office A.D.
18-36, when he was deposed by Vitellius. Four more sons of Annas succeeded
Caiaphas, the last of whom (another Annas) put to death James the " brother
of the Lord J and the first bishop of Jerusalem. It is manifest that Annas
retained very great influence, and sometimes acted as high priest. " Annas
*he high priest was there, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as
many as were of the kindred of the high priest " (Acts iv. 6). Perhaps, so far
as it was safe to do so, he was encouraged to ignore the Roman appointments and
to continue in office during the high priesthoods of his successors. This would
be especially easy when his own son-m-law or son happened to be the Roman
nominee. 1 There were no less than twenty-eight high priests from the time of
Herod the Great to the capture of Jerusalem by Titus (Jos, Ant. xx. 10).
Oeou cirl * \<*&vr\v. It is clear from this that what
Lk. is anxious to date with precision is not any event in the life
of the Messiah, but the appearance of the new Prophet^ who was
1 Josephus sajs that David appointed Zadok high priest ^er' '
$i\os y&p fy <LVT<P (Ant* vii 5. 4). See Lft. Biblical Essay s> p. 163.
2XL 2, 3.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 85
to be the Messiah's herald, and who was by some mistaken for
the Messiah. John's preaching and baptizing is an epoch with
Lk. (Acts L 22, x. 37, xiii. 24). As distinct from 6 Aoyos TOV
eou, which means the Gospel message as a whole (see on
viii. n), pfjjjia ov means some particular utterance (Mt. iv. 4;
comp. Lk. xxii. 61). The phrase ytVeo-tfcu p-Jj/^a Kvptov (not co!)
is freq. in LXX (Gen. xv. i ; i Sam. xv. 10 ; 2 Sam. vii. 4 ; i Kings
xviL 2, 8, xviii. i, xx. 28, etc.) ; also yivf-crOai \6yov Kvpiov (2 Sam.
xxiv. ii ; i Kings vi. n, xii. 22, xiii. 20, xvi. i, etc.). It is the
O.T. formula to express Divine inspiration. In all cases the
phrase is almost always followed by TT/JOS : but in i Chron. xxii. 8 (?)
and Jer. i. i we have <brt. Jer. i. i is a close parallel to this : TO
prjfjia TOV ov o eyeyero lirl 'Icpe/xtW, The phrase occurs nowhere
else in N.T.
'Itodnrji' TOI> Zaxapiou utoV. Lk. alone describes the Baptist thus.
No other N.T. writer mentions Zacharias. Iv TV) eprj/jiw. The one
mentioned as his abode (i. 80), Both AV. and RV. rather obscure
this by using "deserts" in i. 80 and "wilderness" here. Mt. calls
it "the wilderness of Judaea" (iii. i). It is the Jeshimon of i Sam.
xxiii. 19. See D.B? art. " Arabah," and Stanley, Sin. &* PaL p. 310.
3-6. Description of the New Prophet. Lk. omits the state-
ments about his dress and food (Mt. iii. 4 ; Mk. i. 6), and also the
going out of the people of Jerusalem and Judaea to him (Mt. iii. 5 ;
Mk. i. 5). The famous account of the Baptist in Jos. Ant xviii.
5. 2 should be compared. It may have been altered by Christian
scribes, but its divergence from the Gospel narrative as to the
motive for imprisoning and killing John, is in favour of its origin-
ality. 1
3. irao-ay irepLxwpoj' TOU "lopSdvou. The same as "the plain of
Jordan," which is thus rendered in LXX Gen. xiii. 10, 11 ; by TW
jreptXw/DO) rov T., 2 Chron. iv. 17 ; and by T TrepioiKw TOV 'I., i
Kings vii. 46. The expression covers a considerable portion of the
Jordan valley at least as far north as Succoth (2 Chron. iv. 17).
The Baptistj therefore, moved north from the limestone desert on
the W. shore of the Dead Sea, and perhaps went almost the whole
length of the valley to the confines of the Sea of Galilee. For
" Bethany (Beth-Anijah ~ * House of Shipping ') beyond Jordan "
must have been near Galilee (Jn. i. 28), and is supposed by
Conder to be the same as Bashan (Handbook of the Bible^ pp. 315,
320). See, however, D.B? art "Bethabara." John was some-
times on one bank and sometimes on the other, for we read of his
working in Peraea (Jn. x. 40), His selection of the valley of the
1 ** This part of John's ministry, viz. his work as a reformer, Josephus has
brought out prominently ; while he has entirely failed to notice the indelible
itamp of the Baptist's labours left upon the history of the Theocracy " (Neander,
i-J.C. 34).
86 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EX 3, 4,
Jordan as his sphere of work was partly determined by the need of
water for immersion. Stanley, Sin. 6^ Pal p. 312.
KYjpuo-crw^ . . . dpapTiw. Verbatim as Mk. i. 4. Nowhere in
N.T. has Kypvora-ew its primary meaning of " act as a herald " ; but
either "proclaim openly" (viii. 39, xii 3; Mk. L 45, etc,) or
"preach the Gospel" (Mt. xi. i; Mk. iii. 14; Rom. x. 14, 15*
etc.). To "preach baptism" is to preach the necessity or value of
baptism; and "repentance baptism" (/fo'Tmcr/xa ^eravota?) is bap-
tism connected with repentance as being an external symbol of the
inward change (Acts xiii. 24, xix. 4). The repentance precedes
the baptism, which seals it and reminds the baptized of his new
obligations. To submit to this baptism was to confess that one
was a sinner, and to pledge oneself to a new life. The " change
of mind " x (^eravoto.) has reference both to past deeds and to future
purposes, and is the result of a realization of their true moral
significance (Wsctt on Heb. vi. i, 6, xii. 17). This inward
change is specially insisted upon in the account of John's preach-
ing in Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. 2. The word is rare in Mt. (iii. 8, n)
and Mk. (i. 4), and does not occur in Jn, It is freq. in Lk. (ver. 8,
v. 32, xv, 7, xxiv. 47; Acts v. 31, xi. 18, etc.). We find it in
Jos. Ant. xiii. n. 3 of Aristobulus after the murder of his brother;
in Plut Pericles, x., of the Athenians after the banishment of
Cimon ; and in Thuc. iii. 36. 3 of the Athenians after the sentence
on Mitylene. See American Ch. Rev. No. 134, pp. 143 if. John's
"repentance baptism" was els afaviv djmapTiwK This was its
purpose, assuring the penitent of forgiveness, and of deliverance
from the burden, penalty, and bondage of sin (Trench, Syn. xxxiii.;
Crem. Lex. p. 297 : comp. Lk. i. 77 ; Acts ii. 38 ; Heb. x. 18).
4. V J3i|3X<o Xoycoy. With the exception of Phil. iv. 3, Iv /&')3A<p
is peculiar to Lk. (xx. 42 ; Acts i. 20, vii. 42). The form J3iJ3\os
is usual where the meaning is a writing or document, ftvfi\os where
the plant or papyrus as writing material is intended (Hdt ii. 96. 3,
v. 58. 3). For \oyot in the sense of the "utterances of a teacher
or prophet" comp. Acts xx. 35 ; Amos i. i.
$wnj POWKTOS . . . rag Tpt(3ous aurou. From Mt. iii. 3 and Mk.
i. 3 we see that, in the tradition of which all three make use, these
words were quoted as applying to the Baptist This is therefore
a primitive interpretation; and we learn from Jn. i. 23 that it
originated with the Baptist himself. John was a $wq making
known the Aoyos. " The whole man was a sermon." The message
was more than the messenger, and hence the messenger is regarded
1 Lactantius, in writing de P&nitentia prefers resipiscentia as a better, al-
though still inadequate, rendering. Is enim quern facti sui pcemtet, errorem
suum pristinum intelligit ; ideoque Grmci melius et significantly fierdvotar
dieuni) quam nos latine possumus resipiscentiam dicere. Resipiscit enim mt
HUrttem suam quad ab insama redpit^ etc* (Div. Inst. vi. 24* 6).
ITL 4-6.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 87
as mainly a voice. Jn. has rffliWrc for eu&i'as Trotetre (i. 2 3), and
this looks as if he were translating direct from the Hebrew, which
has one word and not two. The quotation in the other three is
identical, and (with the substitution of O.VTOV for rov ov [^wv])
verbatim as LXX. Lk. quotes Is. xl. 4, 5 as well as xl 3, and
here slightly varies from LXX, having ev<9eta? for cu^etav, and at
r/3a^tat cts oSovs Aeia? for 17 rpa^ia eis TrcSt'cu 1
cv TY} epifjjKo. It is possible to take these words with IrotjuacraTc
rather than with <<ovr) fio&vros : but here, as in Mt. and ML, the
latter arrangement is more natural vox damantis in deserto.
Barnabas (ix. 3) connects them with /?OWTOS. It is evident from
the scenery which is mentioned that it is in a desert that the road
for the coming King has to be made. The details symbolize the
moral obstacles which have to be removed by the repentance
baptism of John, in order to prepare the people for the reception
of the Messiah, or (as some prefer) of Jehovah (Is. xxxv. 8-10).
That Lk. means the Messiah is shown by the substitution of a-urov
for TOV eou : and that this interpretation is in accordance with the
primitive tradition is shown by the fact that all three Gospels have
this substitution. Just as Oriental monarchs, when making a royal
progress, send a courier before them to exhort the population to
prepare roads, so the Messiah sends His herald to exhort His own
people (Jn. i. ir) to prepare their hearts for His coming.
5. 4>ap a vi' ** A valley shut in by precipices, a ravine " ; here only in
N.T., but found in LXX (Judith ii. 8) and in class. Grlc. (Thuc. ii. 67. 4).
It is perhaps from the same root as 0a/>dw=" plough" and foro" bore."
pow<$s. Herodotus seems to imply that this is a Cyrenaic word (iv.
199. z) : but it is freq. in later writers and in LXX* Comp. xsdii. 30, and
for the sense Zech. iv. 7 ; Is. xL 4.
lorai T& oxoXict els, K.T.X. " The crooked places shall become
straight ways, and the rough ways smooth ways" : i.e. roads shall
be made where there were none before, and bad roads shall be
made good roads. Comp. the account of Vespasian's inarch into
Galilee, especially the work of the pioneers (Jos. JB.f. iii. 6. 2).
6, iraou adpg. Everywhere in N.T, this expression seems to
refer to the human race only ; so even Mt. xxiv. 22 ; Mk. xiii. 20 ;
i Pet L 24; comp. Acts ii. 17 ; Rom. iii. 20. Fallen man, man
in his frailty and need of help, is meant In LXX it often in-
cludes the brutes: Gen. vi. 19, vii. 15, 16, 21, viii. 17, ix.ii,
1 Ewald says of the prophecy of which these verses form the introduction, that
"it is not only the most comprehensive, but also, in respect of its real prophetic
subject-matter, the weightiest piece of that time, and altogether one of the most
important portions of the O.T., and one of the richest in influence for all future
time. ... It is especially the thought of the passing away of the old time,
and the flourishing of the new, which is the life of the piece " (Prophets of 0, 7%
88 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [HX 8, 7,
*5 3 * 6, 17; Ps. cxxxvi. 25; Jer. xxxii, 27, xlv. 5. The phrase is
one of many which occur frequently in Is. xL-lxvi., but not at all
in the earlier chapters (Driver, Isaiah^ p. 197).
TO cr&mjpioK. It was obviously for the sake of this declaration
that Lk. continued the quotation thus far. That "the salvation
of God " is to be made known to the whole human race is the
main theme of his Gospel.
7-17. John's Preaching and its Effects. This section gives us
the burden of his preaching ("EXeyev, imperf.) in accordance (ow)
with the character which has just been indicated. The herald who
has to see that hearts are prepared for the Messiah must be stern
with hypocrites and with hardened sinners, because the impenitent
cannot escape punishment (7-9) ; must supply different treatment
for different classes (10-14; comp. ver. 5); and must declare the
certainty of his Master's coming and of its consequences (15-17).
7. "EXeyei; oui>. " He used to say, therefore " : being the pre-
dicted Forerunner, his utterances were of this character. We need
not regard this as a report of what was said on any one occasion,
but as a summary of what he was in the habit of saying during his
ministry to the multitudes who came out of the towns and villages
(e/cTropeuo^cj/ots) into the wilderness to hear the Prophet and gain
something from him. Mt. (iii. 7) represents this severe rebuke as
addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees; which confirms the
view that Lk. is here giving us the substance of the preaching
rather than what John said on some particular day. What he
said to some was also said to all ; and as the salvation offered was
universal, so also was the sin. This is thoroughly characteristic of Lk.
j3cnmo-6ijwu. As a substitute for repentance, or as some magical
rite, which would confer a benefit on them independently of their
moral condition. Their desire for his baptism showed their belief
in him as a Prophet; otherwise the baptism would have been
valueless (Jn. i. 25 ; comp. Zech. xiii. i ; Ezek. xxxvi. 25). Hence
the indignation of John's disciples when they heard of Jesus
baptizing, a rite which they regarded as their master's prerogative
(Jn. iii. 26). The title 6 fiaTmo-Tys or 6 /?o.7m'a>7/ shows that his
baptism was regarded as something exceptional and not an ordinary
purification (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, 2). Its exceptional character con-
sisted in (i) its application to the whole nation, which had become
polluted; (2) its being a preparation for the more perfect baptism
of the Messiah. It is only when baptism is administered by im-
mersion that its full significance is seen.
7, 8.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 8g
Genimina (Vulg.) or generatio (b ff2 1 qr) or
progenies (acdef) viperarum. In Mt, this is addressed to the
Pharisees^ first by John and afterwards by Jesus (iii. 7, xii. 34,
xxiii. 33). It indicates another parentage than that of Abraham
(Jn. viii. 44), and is perhaps purposely used in opposition to their
trust in their descent: comp. Aesch. Cho. 249; Soph. Ant, 531.
John's metaphors, like those of the prophecy (ver. 5), are from the
wilderness ; vipers, stones, and barren trees. It is from this stern,
but fresh and undesecrated region, and not from the " Holy," but
polluted City, that the regenerating movement proceeds (Is. xli.
1 8). These serpent-like characters are the c-KoAta that must be
made straight. Comp. Ps. Iviii. 4, cxl. 3.
uTreSci^. "Suggested" by showing to eye or ear: vi. 47,
xii. 5; Acts ix. 16, xx. 35; elsewhere hi N.T. only Mt. iii. 7.
TTJS jjLeXXouo-iqs OPY^S. It is possible that this refers primarily to
the national judgments involved in the destruction of Jerusalem
and the banishment of the Jews (xxi. 23; i Mac. i. 64); but the
penalties to be inflicted at the last day are probably included
(Rom. i. 1 8, ii. 5, 8, iii. 5, v. 9). The Jews believed that the judg-
ments of God, especially in connexion with the coming of the
Messiah, as threatened by the Prophets (Joel ii. 31; Mai. iii. 2,
iv. i ; Is. xiii. 9), were to be executed on the heathen. The Baptist
proclaims that there is no such distinction. Salvation is for all
who prepare their hearts to receive the Messiah ; judgment, for all
who harden their hearts and reject Him. Birth is of no avail.
8. TronqcraTe ouf xapirous dious T. p. " If you desire to escape
this wrath and to welcome the Messiah (ow), repent, and act at
once (aor. imperat.) as those who repent" Comp. xx. 24; Acts
iii. 4, vii. 33, ix.ii, xvi. 9, xxi. 39, xxii. 13 ; and see Win. xliii. 3. a,
p. 393. Mt. has Kap7r6v (iii. 8), which treats the series of acts as a
collective result Comp. S. Paul's summary of his own preaching,
esp. aia r^s /xeravotas epya Trpacra-ovras (Acts xxvi. 20).
It was a Rabbinical saying, " If Israel would repent only one day, the
Son of David would come forthwith" ; and again, '* If Israel would observe
only one sabbath according to the ordinance, forthwith would the Son of
David come" ; and, "All the stages are passed, and all depends solely on
repentance and good works."
The phrase VQI&V Kapvfo is not necessarily a Hebraism (Gen. i. ii, 12);
n occurs Arist. De Plant. L 4, p. 819, ii* 10, p. 829. Comp. Jas. iii. 12 ;
Mk. iv. 32.
" Do not even begin to have this thought in your
minds." Omnem excusationis etiam conatum pr&cidit (Beng.). If
there are any passages in which apxo^<u with an infin. is a mere
periphrasis for the simple verb (xx. 9), this is not one of them.
See Win. Ixv. 7. d, p. 767 ; Grim-Thay. p. 79 ; Fritzsche on Mt
xvi 21, p. 539. Xyeiv ev !auToi$. "To say within yourselves* 1
90 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S, LUKE [HI. 8-1L
rather than " among yourselves." Comp. vii. 49 and Aeye
KapStats VJJL&V (Ps. iv. 5), For the perennial boast about their
descent from Abraham comp. Jn. viii. 33, 53; Jas. ii. 21; 2 Esdr.
vl. 56-58 ; Jos. Ant, iii. 5. 3 ; B. J, v. 9. 4; Wetst. on Mt. iii. 9.
IK ruv KiQw Tourer. There is a play upon words between
"children" (banim) and "stones" (abanim). It was God who
made Abiaham to be the rock whence the Jews were hewn (Is.
li. i, 2) ; and out of the most unpromising material He can make
genuine children of Abraham (Rom. iv., ix. 6, 7, xi. 13-24 ; Gal.
iv. 21-31). The verb eyetpat is applicable to both stones and
children.
9. r\$i\. "Although you do not at all expect it" The image
of the axe is in harmony with that of the fruits (ver. 8). In the
East trees are valued mainly for their fruit ; and trees which pro-
duce none are usually cut down. " And even now also the axe is
laid unto the root"
The Trp<5s after Kctrat may be explained either, " is brought to the root
and lies there 3J ; or, "lies directed towards the root" In either case the
meaning is that judgment is not only inevitable, but will come speedily:
hence the presents, cKKOTTTerai and paXXcrcu.
The S tea I (in Mt. simply S) is Lk.'s favourite method of giving emphasis ;
ver. 12, ii. 4, iv. 41, v. 10, 36, ix. 61, x. 32, xi. 1 8, xii. '54, 57, xiv. 12,
xvi. I, 22, xviii. 9, xix. 19, xx. 12. For prf with a participle, expressing a
reason or condition, comp. ii. 45, vii. 30, xi. 24, xii, 47, xxiv. 23 ; Acts xi. 26,
xvii. 6, xxi. 34, xxvii. 7 ; and see Win. Iv. 5 (), p. 607. For eKKbirrew, '* to
ait off," of felling trees, comp. xiii. 7, 9; Hdt ix. 97. I. See notes on
vi. 43.
10-14. John's Different Treatment of Different Classes. Peculiar
to Lk., but probably from the same source as the preceding verses.
It shows that, in levelling the mountains and raising the valleys,
etc. (ver. 5), he did not insist upon any extraordinary penances or
"counsels of perfection." Each class is to forsake its besetting
sin, and all are to do then- duty to their neighbour. The stern
warnings of the Baptist made the rulers leave in disgust without
seeking baptism at his hands (vii. 30 ; Mt. xxi. 25) ; but they made
the multitude anxious to comply with the conditions for avoiding
the threatened judgment
10. s'Tnjpc&Tw. " Continually put this question." The notion
of repetition comes from the imperf. and not, as in cTracrw (xvi. 3,
xviii. 35), from the ert, which in eTrc/xorco/ indicates the direction of
the inquiry; Plato, Soph. 249 E, 250. Comp. cTre&ftfy in iv. 17.
Ti ouy TroiVjcrajjjiev ; "What then, if the .severe things which thou
sayest are true, must we do?" For the conjunctivus deliberations
comp. xxiii. 31; Mt. xxvi. 54; Mk. xii. 14; Jn. xii. 27; and see
Win. xii. 4. b, p. 356; Matth, 515. 2; Arnold's Madvtg, p. 99;
Green, p. 150.
11. Srfo xiToivas. The x ir & v was * e under and less necessary
HI. 11-13.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 9!
garment, distinguished from the upper and almost indispensable
Ifjidrtov ; vi. 29; Acts ix. 39; Mt. v. 40; Jn. xix. 23. When two of
these x"cuves were worn at once, the under one or shirt would be the
Hebrew cetoneth, the upper would be the Hebrew meil, which was
longer than the cetoneth. It was common for travellers to wear two
(Jos. Ant. xvii. 5. 7) ; but Christ forbade the disciples to do so
(ix. 3 ; Mt. x. ro). It is not implied here that the two are being
worn simultaneously. See Trench, Syn. 1. ; Conder, Handb. of B.
p. 195; D.J3? art "Dress"; SchafPs Herzog, art. "Clothing and
Ornaments of the Hebrews." If the owner of two shirts is to " give
a share" (fjieraSoTw), he will give one shirt. Comp. Rom. i. n,
xii. 8 ; and contrast Peter's reply to the same question Acts ii. 37,
38. With regard to ppuficn-a, nothing is said or implied about
having superfluity or abundance. He who has any food is to
share it with the starving. Comp. i Thes. ii. 8.
This verse is one of those cited to support the view that Lk. is Ebionite in
his sympathies, a view maintained uncompromisingly by Renan (Les ILvangzles ,
ch. xiii.; V. dej. chs. x., xi), and by Campbell (Critical Studies in St. Luke,
p. 193). For the answer see Bishop Alexander (Leading- Ideas of the Gospel,
p. 170). Here it is to be noticed that it is Mt. and Mk. who record, while Lk.
omits, the poor clothing and poor food of the Baptist himself; and that it is Mt.
who represents his sternest words as being addressed to the wealthy Pharisees
and Sadducees, while Lk. directs them against the multitudes generally.
From riXri (Mt xvii. 25 ; Rom. xiii. 7) and
so that etymologically reAcorat. publicani, " those who
bought or farmed the taxes " under the Roman government. But
in usage rcXwvat = portitores, " those who collected the taxes " for
the publicanL This usage is common elsewhere, and invariable in
N.T. Sometimes, and perhaps often, there was an intermediate
agent between the rcA-urai and the publicani^ e.g. apxtr&uvrjs or
magister (xix. 2).
These "tax-collectors" were detested everywhere, because of their oppres-
siveness and fraud, and were classed with the vilest of mankind : /tot^ol /cai
TopvopocrKoi Kal TcXQvcii Kal /c6Xa/ccs Kal ffVKQ<pdvrai, KO! rotouros fyuAos T&V Trdvra,
KVK&vTbjp ev rip ply (Lucian. Necyomant. xi.; comp. Aristoph. quit. 248;
Theophr. Charac. vi. ; Grotius, in loco ; Wetst. on Mt. v. 46). The Jews especi-
ally abhorred them as bloodsuckers for a heathen conqueror. For a Jew to
enter such a service was the most utter degradation. He was excommunicated,
and his whole family was regarded as disgraced. But the Romans allowed the
Herods to retain some powers of taxation ; and therefore not all tax-collectors
in Palestine were in the service of Rome. Yet the characteristic faults of
the profession prevailed, whether the money was collected in the name of Caesar
or of Herod ; and what these were is indicated by the Baptist's answer. See
Lightfoot, Opera, i. pp. 324, 325; Herzog, PRE? art Zott\ Edersh. L. <5r T. i.
P' 5I5-
13. AtSdo-icaXe. PubHcani majore ceteris reverentia utuntur
(Beng.).
irX^ov iropa. For trapd after comparatives comp. Heb. i. 4, iii, 3, ix, 23,
2 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EEL 13,
rL 4, pdi. 24; Hdt, vii. 103. 6; Thuc. i. 23. 4, iv. 6. i. The effect is to
i. 8 ;
intensify the notion of excess : so also ifor^), xvi. 8 ; Heb, iv. 12.
T Si<xTTaYjJiei>oj>. "That wiiich stands prescribed" (perf.);
a favourite word with Lk. : viiL 55; xvii. 9, 10; Acts vii. 44, xviii. 2,
xx. 13, xxiii. 31, xxiv. 23. Comp. tisponere, vzwrdnen. It is from
the general meaning of "transacting business" that Trpdcraew
acquires the special sense of " exacting tribute, extorting money " :
comp. xix. 23. This use is found from Herodotus onwards: Hdt
iii. 58.4; ^Esch. Cho. 311; Pers. 476; Eum. 624; Xen. Anab*
vii. 6. 17 : comp. TrpaKrwp, eunrpacrcmvj /arpa<rcreti/, and many
illustrations in Wetst Agere is similarly used : publicum quadra-
gesimse in Asia egit (Suet Vesp. i); but what follows is of interest
as showing how rare an honourable publicanus was : manebantque
imagines in cimtatibus ei positee, sub hoc titulo KAAO2 TEAONH-
SANTL This is said of Sabinus, father of Vespasian. After farm-
ing the quadragesima tax in Asia he was a money-lender among
the Helvetia. It is to be noticed that the Baptist does not con-
demn the calling of a tax-collector as unlawful for a Jew. He
assumes that these reXwvat will continue to act as such.
14. o-TpaTu6p,6^ot,. " Men on service, on military duty " ; milt-
tantes rather than milites (Vulg.). In 2 Tim. ii. 4, ovSets o-rpareuo-
/xevos is rightly rendered nemo militans. Who these "men on
service " were cannot be determined ; but they were Jewish soldiers
and not Roman, and not on service in the war between Antipas and
his father-in-law Aretas about the former's repudiation of the latter's
daughter in order to make room for Herodias. That war took
place after the Baptisfs death (Jos. Ant xviii. 5. 2), two or three
years later than this, and probably A.D. 32 (Lewin, Fasti Sacri^
1171, 1412). These crrparevo^voi were possibly gendarmerie^
soldiers acting as police, perhaps in support of the tax-collectors.
Such persons, as some modern nations know to their cost, have
great opportunities for bullying and delation. By their KOL ^/zeTs
they seem to connect themselves with the reAwvcu, either as know-
ing that they also were unpopular, or as expecting a similar answer
from John.
MtjSci'a Siao-cunjT*. Like concutio^ Siacraco is used of intimida-
tion, especially of intimidating to extort money (3 Mac, vii. 21).
Eusebius uses it of the extortions of Paul of Samosata (H. E*
^ 3* 7) ^ ^here, however, the true reading may be c/ccro'eu In
this sense O-CWD also is used (Aristoph. Equit, 840; Pax, 639) ; and
it is interesting to see that Antipho couples o-ccco with cruKo^avrw.
^iXoKpafTfj^ ovrocri Irepovs iw VTTCU^CVVOJV fcreie KCU tcruKO(|)din"t \Qrat.
vL p. 146, 1. 22). 1 This last passage, combined with the verse
1 In the Passio S. Perpetus&^ iii., the martyr suffers much <rr/>ariwrwv (rvKofias*
rlais TrAfforcus, and this is represented in the Latin by concussurm militum*
Comp. Tert Dt Fuga in Pers, L a xiii.
I2X 14, 15.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 93
before us, renders it probable that cru/co^divT???, a " fig-shower/' is
not one who gives information to the police about the exportation
of figs, but one who shows figs by shaking the tree ; i.e. who makes
the rich yield money by intimidating them. Nowhere is </co-
^avnys found in the sense of " informer," nor yet of " sycophant"
It always denotes a "false accuser," especially with a view to
obtaining money ; Arist. Ach. 559, 825, 828. Hatch quotes from
Brunet de Presle, Notices et textes du Mus'ee du Louvre, a letter of
B.C. 145 from Dioscorides, a chief officer of finance, to his sub-
ordinate Dorion : Treot Se Siao-eLo-p^ KOL TrapaXacoi/ ci/iW Be Kal
cruKo<j>aTU70cu Trpocr^epo/AC^wr j3ov\6/Ji6a v/xa? fjiij StaXav^avetv,
K.r.X, "in the matter of fictitious legal proceedings and plunder-
ings, some persons being, moreover, alleged to be even made the
victims of false accusations," etc. (BibL Grk. p. 91). Comp. Lev.
xix. n ; Job xxiv. 9. Hesychhis explains <rvKo<j>dvTr]s as
From ctyov, " cooked food " to be eaten with bread,
and wveojjiai, " I buy " : hence " rations, allowance, pay " of a
soldier; i Cor. ix. 7; i Mac. iii. 28, xiv. 32; i Esdr. iv. 56; and
freq. in Polybius. John does not tell these men on service that
theirs is an unlawful calling. Nor did the early Christians con-
demn the life of a soldier : see quotations in Grotius and J. B.
Mozley, University Sermons, Serm. v.
15-17. The certainty of the Messiah's Coming and the Conse-
quences of the Coming. Mt. iii. n, 12. The explanatory open-
ing (ver. 1 5) is peculiar to Lk. The substance of ver. 16 is common
to all three; but here Lk. inserts the characteristic ?racriy. In
ver. 17 he- and Mt. are together, while Mk. is silent. Lk. shows
more clearly than the other two how intense was the excitement
which the Baptist's preaching caused.
15. npoo-SoKGiiTos, What were they expecting? The result of all
this strange preaching, and especially the Messianic judgment
Would it be put in execution by John himself? For this absolute
use of Trpoo-So/eaco comp. Acts xxvii. 33. Excepting Mt. xi 13.,
xxiv. 50, 2 Pet. iii. 12-14, tft e verb is peculiar to Lk, (L si> vii
*9 5 20, viii. 40, xiL 46; Acts iii. 5, etc.).
The Vulg. here has the strange rendering existimante ; although in I. 21,
vii. 19, 20, viii. 40 Trpo<r5o/cdw is rendered expecto, and in xii. 46 spero* Cod.
Brix. has sperante here. See on xbc. 43 and xxi. 23, 25 for other slips in
Jerome's work. Here d has an attempt to reproduce the gen. abs. in
et cogitantium omnium. Comp. ix. 43, xix. 1 1, xxi. 5, xxiv. 36, 41.
p.11 irore aWs. " If haply he himself were the Christ." Their
thinking this possible, although " John did no sign," and had none
of the insignia of royalty, not even descent from David, is remark-
able. Non ita crassam adhuc ideam de Christo habebant* nam
94 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [HL 15, 16
fokannes nil splendoris exterm habebat et tamen talia de eo cogita*
bant (Beng.). That this question had been raised is shown by
Jn. i. 20. The Baptist would not have declared " I am not the
Christ," unless he had been asked whether he was the Messiah, or
had heard the people discussing the point.
For the constr. comp. iri\ TT&T Syij avroTs 6 Oedy peTdvotav (2 Tim. ii. 25).
The opt in indirect questions is freq. in Lk. both without &v (i. 29, viii. 9,
Acts xvii. II, xxi. 33) and also with &v (i. 62, vi. u, xv. 26; Acts v. 24,
x. 17).
16. itacriv. Showing how universal the excitement on this point
was. Neither Mt. (iii. n) nor Mk. (i. 7) has the -iraviv of which
Luke is so fond : comp. vi 30, vii. 35, be. 43, xi. 4, xii. 10.
The aor. mid. direKpivaro is rare in N.T. (xxiii. 9; Acts iii. 12; Mt.
xxvii. 12; Mk. xiv. 6i; Jn. v. 17, 19); also in LXX (Judg. v. 29; I Kings
ii, I ; I Chrpn. x. 13 ; Ezek. ix. II). In bibl. Grk. the pass, forms prevail :
see small print on i. 19.
3 yo> fAc> uSan. Both with emphasis : "/with water?
6 lcrxfpoTpos. Valebat Johannes > sed Christ us multoplus (Beng.).
The art marks him as one who ought to be well known.
Xuaat TQV Ejjtdrra r&v tfirootjjjidTwt'. More graphic than Mt's ra
v?ro8. jSaarao-cu, but less SO than Mk.'s iaj/ras Ado-at TOV t/A. raiv v?roS.
avrov. Both AV. and RV. mark the difference between 77-0877^0,
"that which is bound under" the foot, and o-avSoXtor, dim. of
o-ai/SaXoi/, by rendering the former "shoe" (x. 4, xv. 22, xxii. 35;
Acts vii. 33, xiii. 25) and the other "sandal" (Mt. vi. 9; Acts
xii. 8). The Vulg. has calceamenta for ^TroS^ara, and sandalia or
calig& for cravSaXia. In LXX the two words seem to be used
indiscriminately (Josh. ix. 5, 13); but woS. is much the more
common, and it is doubtful whether the Jews before the Captivity
wore shoes or manalim (Deut. xxxiii. 2 5) as distinct from sandals.
Comp. ot tyU.cti'res ro>y vTroS^/xarcov arah> (Is. V. 27). To unfasten
shoes or sandals, when a man returned home, or to bring them to
him when he went out, was the office of a slave (See Wetst. on Mt
iii. n). John is not worthy to be the bond-servant of the Christ
The aurou is not so entirely redundant as in some other passages :
"whose latchet of his shoes." 1
auros. In emphatic contrast to the speaker.
kv werfjuiaTt dytw. See on i. 15. That the cr with Tn/cv^an
ay/a> and its absence from uSart marks a distinction of any great
moment, either here or Acts i. 5, must be doubted ; for in Mt
iiL ii both expressions have the <b, and in Mk. i. 8 neither. The
simple dat marks the instrument or matter with which the baptism
1 Comp. Mk. vii. 25 ; I Pet. ii. 24 ; Rev. iii. 8, vii. 2, 9, xiii. 8, xx. 8.
Such pleonasms are Hebraistic, and are specially common in LXX (Gen. i. il|
Exod. xxxv. 29, etc.) ; Win. xxii. 4 (b), p. 184.
HZ 16,17] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 95
is effected; the lv marks the element in which it takes place (Jn.
i- 31)-
Kal Trupt. This remarkable addition is wanting in Mk. Various
explanations of it are suggested, (i) That the fiery tongues at
Pentecost are meant, is improbable. Were any of those who
received the Spirit at Pentecost among the Baptist's hearers on
this occasion? Moreover, in Acts i. 5 /cal mpi is not added.
(2) That it distinguishes two baptisms, the penitent with the
Spirit, and the impenitent with penal fire, is very improbable.
The same persons (vjw-as) are to be baptized with the Spirit and
with fire. In ver. 17 the good and the bad are separated, but not
here. This sentence must not be made parallel to what follows,
for the winnowing-shovel is not baptism. (3) More probably the
irvpC refers to the illuminating, kindling, and purifying power of
the grace given by the Messiah's baptism. Spiritus sanctus^ quo
Ckristus baptizat) igneam mm habet: atque ea vis ignea etlam
conspicua fuit oculis honinum (Beng.) : comp. Mai. iii. 2. (4) Or,
the fiery trials which await the disciple who accepts Christ's
baptism may be meant: comp. xii. 50; Mk. x. 38, 39. The
passage is one of many, the exact meaning of which must remain
doubtful ; but the purifying of the believer rather than the punish-
ment of the unbeliever seems to be intended.
17. nruoi'. The "winnowing-shovel" (pala lignea\ Vulg.
ventilabrum)) with which the threshed corn was thrown up into
the wind (irrvco = " spit "). 1 This is a further description of the
Messiah, He whose TTTVOV is ready for use. Note the impressive
repetition of avrov after T$ X a P^ r ^ v ahw&i &nd rrjv dTro^KTp, 2
T?JI> aXwva. The threshing-floor itself, and not its contents
It is by removing the contents corn to the bam, and refuse to
the fire that the floor is thoroughly cleansed. Christ's threshing-
floor is the world ; or, in a more restricted sense, the Holy Land.
See Meyer on Mt iii. 12.
dcrp&rrw. Comp. Mk. ix. 43; Lev. vi. 12, 13; Is. xxxiv. 8-10,
Ixvi 24; Jer. vii. 20; Ezek. xx. 47, 48. In Homer it is a freq.
epithet of y&os, /cAeo?, /3orj y /xei/o?, and once of <A.d (//, xvL 123).
As an epithet of 7n5/> it is opposed to /ioX0a/cdV and /mKpov. See
1 The wooden shovel, pala lignea (Cato, ^. ^. ti. 45. 151), ventilabrum
(Varro, R* R, i. 52), seems to have been more primitive than the vannus, which
was a basket, shaped like the blade of a large shovel. The Trrbw was a shovel
rather than a basket. In Tertullian (Pr&scrip* iii.) palam in manu ported ad
purgandam areant suam is probably the true reading : but some MSS. have
ventilabrum for palam*
3 The form 5ta/ca0apcu is worth noting : in later Greek &cc0apa for <?/ca0i?/>a
is not uncommon. Mt. here has Sta/ca#a/>t, but classical writers prefer 5ta-
Ka&aipew to SiaK&daptfrw. For the details of Oriental threshing see Herzog,
PR2L.* art. Ackerbau; JD.B, Z art. "Agriculture.*' For dxvpa, comp. Job
xxL 1 8, and Hdt. iv. 72. 2 ; the sing, is less common (Jer. xxiii. 28)
96 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EX 17~19 t
Heinichen on Eus. H* E. vi. 41. 15 and viii. 12. i. It is therefore
a fierce fire which cannot be extinguished, rather than ar endless
fire that will never go out, that seems to be indicated : and this is
just such a fire as TO ax^pov (the refuse left after threshing and
winnowing) would make. But aorfltcrros is sometimes used of a
fire that never goes out, as that of Apollo at Delphi or of Vesta at
Rome (Dion. Hal. cxciv. 8). For naranaUiv comp. Mt. xiii. 30,
40 ; also Ex. in. 2, where it is distinguished from *cuW ; it implies
utter consumption.
18-20. Explanation of the Abrupt Termination of the
Baptist's Ministry. This is given here by anticipation in order
tc complete the narrative. Comp. the conclusions to previous
narratives : i. 66, So, ii. 40, 52.
18. rioX\& jxe> otv KCU Irepa. The comprehensive irokXa *al
Irepa confirms the view taken above (ver. 7) that this narrative
(7-18) gives a summary of John's teaching rather than a report of
what was said on any one occasion. The Irepa means "of a
different kind " (Gal. i. 6, 7), and intimates that the preaching of
the Baptist was not always of the character just indicated.
The cases in which fifr ofo occurs must be distinguished. I. Where, as
here, p^v is followed by a corresponding 5^, and we have nothing more than
the distributive pfr ... 5^ ... combined with otiv (Acts viii. 4, 25, xi. 19,
xii. 5, xiv. 3, xv. 3, 30, etc.). 2. Where no t follows, and pMv confirms
what is said, while o$v marks an inference or transition, quident igitur (Acts
i. 6, ii. 41, v. 41, xiii 4, xvii, 30; Heb. vii. 1 1, viii. 4, etc.). Win. hii. 8, a,
P- 556.
irapaKct\wi> efiY]yY\(JeTo . . Xyx<5|Xvos. These words give
the three chief functions of the Baptist : to exhort all, to preach
good tidings to the penitent, to reprove the impenitent. It is
quite unnecessary to take rov Xaov with Trapa/caAwv, and the order
of the words is against such a combination.
In late Greek the ace. of the person to wham the announcement is made is
freq. after evayye\l^ffdat (Acts xiv. 15, xvi. 10 ; Gal. i. 9 ; I Pet. i. 12 ;
comp. Acts viii. 25, 40, xiv. 21) : and hence in the pass, we have Trro^oi
etfayyeX^oj'rai, The ace. of the message announced is also common (viii. i ;
Acts v. 42, viii. 4, 12, x. 36, xi. 20). Where both person and message are
combined, the person addressed is in the dat. (i. 19, ii. 10, iv. 43 ; Act*
viii- 35 ? comp. Lk. iv. 18 ; Acts xvii. 18; Rom. i. 15, etc.): but in Acts
xiii. 32 we have double ace. Here the Lat texts vary between evangeti&adat
(Cod. Am.) and evang. fiopuk (Cod. Brix.).
19. e Hp<j>St]s. Antipas, as in ver. i. The insertion of the
name 3>tAtV7rov after ywawco? comes from Mk. and Mt. (A C K X
and some versions). This Philip must be carefully distinguished
from the tetrarch Philip, with whom Jerome confuses him. He
svas the son of Mariamne, on account of whose treachery he had
been disinherited by Herod the Great ; and he lived as a private
III. 10, 20.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 97
individual at Jerusalem (Jos. B.J, i. 30. 7), Josephus calls both
Antipas and also this Philip simply " Herod " (Ant. xviii. 5. 4).
Herodias became the evil genius of the man who seduced her from
his brother. It was her ambition which brought about the down-
fall of Antipas. Lk. alone tells us that John rebuked Antipas for
his wicked life (K<XL -irepl -rrdrrwv) as well as for his incestuous
marriage. Obviously eXeyxof^os means "rebuked, reproved"
(i Tim. v. 20; 2 Tim. iv. 2), and not " convicted" or "convinced"
Qn. viii. 46, xvi. 8). In the former sense lXcyx*w is stronger
than iTTLTLfjLav : see Trench, Syn. iv.
Once more (see on ver. I ) we have a remarkable rendering in d : Herodes
autem quaterducatus cum argueretur ab eo, etc.
Note the characteristic and idiomatic attraction (irdvrwv t&v), and comp.
ii. 20, v. 9, ix 43, xii. 46, xv. 16, xix. 37, xxiv. 25 ; Acts Hi. 21, x. 39,
xiii. 39, xxii. 10, xxvi. 2.
SO. -rrpocrl0if]Kf Kai TOUTO em Trcto-ty, KareKXeLo-cy, K.T.X. "He
added this also on the top of all he shut up John in prison " ;
Le. he added this to all- the other Trovypd of which he had been
guilty.
Josephus, in the famous passage which confirms and supple-
ments the Gospel narrative respecting the Baptist (Ant. xviii. 5. 2),
says that Antipas put him in prison because of his immense
influence with the people. They seemed to be ready to do what-
ever he told them ; and he might tell them to revolt. This may
easily have been an additional reason for imprisoning him : it is no
contradiction of the Evangelists. What Josephus states is what
Antipas publicly alleged as his reason for arresting John : of course
he would not give his private reasons. The prison in which the
Baptist was confined was in the fortress of Machaerus at the N.E.
corner of the Dead Sea. Seetzen discovered the site in 1807
above the valley of the Zerka, and dungeons can still be traced
among the ruins. Tristram visited it in 1872 (Discoveries on the
East Side of the Dead Sea> ch. xiv.). It was hither that the
daughter of Aretas fled on her way back to her father, when she
discovered that Antipas meant to discard her for Herodias,
Machserus was then in her father's dominions; but Antipas
probably seized it immediately afterwards (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5. i, 2).
The expression Tpocr07iKGv roOro, KarK\et<rr must not be confounded
with the Hebraisms irpoo-dero Trtyipa,i (xx. II, 12), irpoetffero (TuXX-a/Set*
(Acts xii. 3). It is true that in LXX the act as well as the mid, is used in
this manner: vpofftByKe reK&v (Gen. iv. 2); Tpo<r07jKe \a,\r}<rcu (Gen.
xviii. 29) : see also Exod. x. 28 ; Deut. iii. 26 ; and for the mid. Exod.
xiv. 13. But in this Hebraistic use of wpoaTl&'rjjM for "go on and do" the
second verb is always in the infin. (Win. liv. 5, p. 588). Here there is no
Hebraism, and therefore no sign that Lk. is using an Aramaic source.
KctratfXefciv is classical, but occurs in N.T. only here and Acts xxvi. 10 ;
in both cases of imprisoning. It is freq. in medical writers, and Galen uses
7
98 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [EEL 20, 21
it of imprisonment (Hobart, Med. Lang, of Lk. pp. 66, 67). Mt. xiv. 3 we
have dWtfero, and Mk. vi 17, gdrjo-ev, of Herod's putting John i.ito prison.
SI, 22. y&w & baptized by John. It is remarkable, that
although the careers of the Forerunner and of the Messiah are
so closely connected, and so similar as regards prediction of birth
retirement, ministry, and early end, yet, so far as we know, they
come into actual contact only at one brief period, when the
Forerunner baptized the Christ. Once some of John's disciple?
raised the question of fasting, and Jesus answered it (v. 33 ; Mt
ix, 14), and once John sent some of his disciples to Jesus to
question Him as to His Messiahship (vii. 19-23; Mt. xi. 2-19) \
but there is no meeting between Christ and the Baptist. Lk.,
having completed his brief account of the Forerunner and his
work, begins his main subject, viz. the Messiah and His work.
This involves a return to the point at which the Forerunner met
the Messiah, and performed on Him the rite which prepared Him
for His work, by publicly uniting Him with the people whom He
came to save, and proclaiming Him before them.
dl. lv r<S |3cnrTLor07jj>ai airarai TQV \ao>. "After all the people
had been baptized"; cum baptizatus esset omnis populus (Cod.
Brix.) : not, "while they were be^ng baptized"; cum baptizaretur
(Cod. Am.). The latter would be ev r<3 with the/ra-. infin.
Both constructions are very freq. in Lk. Contrast the aorists in ii. 27,
ix. 36, xi. 37, xiv. I, xix, 15, xxiv. 30, Acts xi. 15 with the presents in v. I,
12, viii. 5, 42, ix. IS, 29, 33, 51, x. 35, 38, xi. I. 27, xvii. 11, 14, xxiv. 4,
Lk. is
15, 51; Acts viii. 6, xix. I. Lk. is ^ also fond of the stronger form
which is rare in N.T. outside his writings. Readings are often confused, but
dras is well attested v. 26, viii. 37, k. 15, xix:, 37, 48, xxiii. I ; Acts ii. 44,
iv. 31, v, 1 6, x. 8, ad. lo t xvL 3, 28, xxv. 24; and may be right in other
That there were great multitudes present when John baptized
the Christ is not stated ; nor is it probable. Had Lk. written /
TO> /?a7n<r#<u, this would have implied the presence of many other
candidates for baptism ; but it was not until " after every one of
the people had been baptized " that the baptism of Jesus took
place. Possibly Jesus waited until He could be alone with John.
In any case, those who had long been waiting for their turn would
go home soon after they had accomplished their purpose. It was
some time before this that John said to the people, " He that cometh
after me ... is standing in the midst of you, and ye know Him
not" (Jn. i. 26). They could hardly have been so ignorant of Him,
if large multitudes had been present when John baptized Him.
KCU s lrj(7oG pa-nrwrOerros. It is remarkable that this, which seems
to us to be the main fact, should be expressed thus incidentally by
a participle. It is as if the baptism of all the people were regarded
as carrying with it the baptism of Jesus almost as a necessary com-
HI. 21, 22.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 99
plement : "After they had been baptized, and when He had been
baptized and was praying." But perhaps the purpose of Lk. is to
narrate the baptism, not so much for its own sake as an instance of
Christ's conformity to what was required of the people, as for the
sake of the Divine recognition and authentication which Jesus then
received.
Jerome has preserved this fragment of the Gospel ac. to the Hebrews \ " Lo,
the mother of the Lord and His brethren said to Him, John the Baptist baptizeth
for remission of sins : let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them,
Wherein have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? except perchance
this very thing which I have said is ignorance " {Adv. Pelag, iii. I ). The Tractatus
de Rebaptismate says that the Pauli Prazdieatio represented " Christ, the only
man who was altogether without fault, both making confession respecting His
own sin, and driven almost against His will by His mother Mary to accept the
baptism of John : also that when He was baptized fire was seen on the water,
which is not written in any Gospel " (xvii. ; Hartel's Cyprian^ ii. p. 90). The
fire in the water is mentioned in Justin (Try. Ixxxviii.), but not as recorded by
the Apostles ; and also in the Gospel act, to tke Hebrews.
KCU irpocreuxojmeVou. Lk. alone mentions this. On his Gospel
as emphasizing the duty of prayer see Introd. 6. Mt. and Mk.
say that Jesus saw the Spirit descending ; Jn. says that the Baptist
saw it j Lk. that it took place (eycvero) along with the opening of
the heaven and the coming of the voice. Mk. says simply TO
Tirana \ Mt. has Trvevym cov j Lk. TO Tircfyta TO aytov. See OH
i 15-
The constr. of y6>er0 with ace. and infin. is on the analogy of the class,
constr. of o-vvtpr) : it is freq. in Lk, See note, p. 45. The form d?eyx
BTJVO.I. is anomalous, as if assimilated to dveyx^cu : comp. Jn, iz. IO, 14 ;
Rev. iv. i, vi. r.
2J3. crwyciTiKw ctSei <&s ircpurrep^. "In a bodily form" is
peculiar to Lk. Nothing is gained by admitting something visible
and rejecting the dove. Comp. the symbolical visions of Jehovah
granted to Moses and other Prophets. We dare not assert that the
Spirit cannot reveal Himself to human sight, or that in so doing
He cannot employ the form of a dove or of tongues of fire. The
tongues were appropriate when the Spirit was given "by measure"
to many. The dove was appropriate when the Spirit was given
in His fulness to one. It is not true that the dove was an ancient
Jewish symbol for the Spirit In Jewish symbolism the dove is
Israel. The descent of the Spirit was not, as some Gnostics
taught, the moment of the Incarnation : it made no change in the
nature of Christ. But it may have illuminated Him so as to com-
plete His growing consciousness of His relations to God and to
man (ii. 52). It served two purposes : (i) to make Him known to
the Baptist, who thenceforward had Divine authority for making
Him known to the world (Jn. i. 32, 33); and (2) to mark the offi-
cial beginning of the ministry, like the anointing of a king. As at
100 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [DDL 22.
the Transfiguration, Christ is miraculously glorified before setting
out to suffer, a voice from heaven bears witness to Him, and " the
goodly fellowship of the Prophets " waits on His glory.
The phrase Quvfyv yfvtcrdat is freq. In Lk. (i. 44, ix. 35, 36; Acts ii. 6,
vii. 31,%. 13, xix, 34). Elsewhere only Mk. i. 1 1, ix. 7 ; Jn. xii. 30 j Rev. viii. 5.
Comp. tpxerai <f>w/)> Jn. xii. 28; e&pxerat 0urtf, Rev. xvi. 17, xix. 5.
lu. Responsio adpreces^ ver. 2 1 (Beng.). The 2v shows that the
voice conveyed a message to the Christ as well as to the Baptist.
Mk. also has 2i> et : in Mt. iii. 1 7 we have Ovros IO-TLV. Diversitas
locutlonum adhuc etiam utilis est^ ne uno mode dictum minus intelli-
gatur (Aug.). In the narrative of the Transfiguration all three have
OSros
The reference seems to be to Ps. ii. 7 ; and here D and other important
witnesses have TMs JJLQV el crtf, eycb arffjiepov yeyfrvyKd ere. Augustine says that
this was the reading of some MSS., "although it is stated not to be found in the
more ancient MSS." (De Cons.Evang. ii. 14: comp. Enckir* ad Laurent, xlix.).
Justin has it in his accounts of the Baptism (Try* Ixxxviii., ciii.). In Mt. it is
possible to take 6 d/yarr^roy with what follows : ' * The beloved in whom I am
well pleased" ; but this is impossible here and in Mk. i. ii, and therefore im-
piobable in Mt. The repetition of the article presents the egithet as a separate
fact: "Thou art My Son, My beloved one." Comp. //.ou^os ecov ayairyros
(Horn. Od. ii. 365). It is remarkable that St. John never uses ayoLiryrds of
Chiist : neither in the Fourth Gospel nor in the Apocalypse does the word occur
in any connexion.
ei)S(5 K-qcra. " I am well pleased ": the timeless aorist. Comp. Jn. xiii. 3.
The verb is an exception to the rule that, except where a verb is compounded
with a prep., the verbal termination is not retained, but one from a noun of the
same root is substituted : e.g. d^ware??, etepyerew, not tidtivaffGaL, eue/yy^ecr^at.
Comp. Kap&doKew and SvcrQirfo-Kew, which are similar exceptions, Win. xvi. 5,
p. 125.
The voice does not proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, as a legend would prob-
ably have represented. No such proclamation was needed either by Jesus or
by the Baptist. The descent of the Spiiit had told John that Jesus was the
Christ (Jn. i. 33). This voice from heaven, as afterwards at the Transfiguration
(ix. 35), and again shortly before the Passion (Jn. xii. 28), followed closely upon
Christ's prayer, and may be regarded as the answer to it. His humanity was
capable of needing the strength which the heavenly assurance gave. To call
this voice from heaven the Bath-Kol of the Rabbis, or to treat it as analogous
to it, is misleading. The Rabbinic Bath-Kol^ or " Daughter -voice," is regarded
as an echo of the voice of God : and the Jews liked to believe that it had been
granted to them after the gift of prophecy had ceased. The utterances attri-
buted to it are in some cases so frivolous or profane, that the more intelligent
Rabbis denounced it as a superstition.
It has been pointed out that Lk, appears to treat the baptism of Jesus by
John as^a matter of course. Mt. tells us that the Baptist at first protested
against it ; and many writers have felt that it requires explanation. Setting
aside the profane suggestions that Jesus was not sinless, and therefore needed
" repentance baptism for remission of sins," or that He was in collusion with
John, we may note four leading hypotheses, i. He wished to do honour to
John. 2. He desired to elicit from John a declaration of His Messiahship.
3. Hetfiereby gave a solemn sign that He had done with home life, and was
beginning His public ministry. 4. He thereby consecrated Himself for Hi*
in. 22.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 101
work. This last seems to be nearest to the truth. The other three would be
more probable if we were expressly told that multitudes of spectators were
present ; whereas the reveise seems to be implied. John's baptism was prepara-
tory to the kingdom of the Messiah. For everyone else it was a baptism of
repentance. The Messiah, who needed no lepentance, could yet accept the
pieparation. In each case it marked the beginning of a new life. It conse-
crated the people for the reception of salvation. It consecrated the Christ for
the bestowing of it (Neander, L. J. C. 42 (5), Eng. tr, p. 68) But besides
this it was a "fulfilment of righteousness," a complying with the requirements
of the Law. Although pui e Himself, through His connexion with an unclean
people He was Levitically unclean. " On the principles of O.T. righteousness
His baptism was required" (Lange, L. of C* i. p. 355).
In the Fathers and liturgies we find the thought that by being baptized Him-
self Jesus elevated an external rite into a sacrament, and consecrated the element
of water for perpetual use. Baptixattts est ergo Dominus non mundari volens^
sed mundare aquas (Ambr. on Lk. iii. 21, 23). "By the Baptisme of thy wel
beloved sonne Jesus Christe, thou dydest sanctifie the fludde Jordan, and al other
waters to this misticall washing away of synne 1 ' (First Prayer-Book of Edw. vi.
1549, Public Baptism) ; which follows the Gregorian address, " By the Baptism
of Thine Only-begotten Son hast been pleased to sanctify the streams of water "
(Bright, Ancient Collects^ . 161).
There is no contradiction between John's "Comest Thou to me?" (Mt.
iii. 14) and " I knew Him not" (Jn. i. 31, 33). As a Prophet John recognized
the sinlessness of Jesus, just as Ehsha recognized the avarice and untruthfulness
of Gehazi, or the treachery and cruelty of Hazael (2 Kings v. 26, viii. 10-12) ;
but until the Spirit descended upon Him, he did not know that He was the
Messiah (Weiss, Lebenjem, I. ii. 9, Eng. tr. i. p. 320). John had three main
functions : to pi edict the coming of the Messiah ; to prepare the people for it ;
and to point out the Messiah when He came. When these were accomplished,
his work was nearly complete.
23-38. The Genealogy of Jesus Christ Comp. Mt i. 1-17.
The literature is very abundant : the following axe among the prin-
cipal authorities, from which a selection may be made, and the
names of other authorities obtained.
Lord A. Hervey, The Genealogies of our Lord and Saviour^
Macmillan, 1853; J. B. McClellan, The New Testament of our
Lord and Saviour^ L pp. 408-422, Macmillan, 1875; W. H. Mill,
Observations on the Application of Pantheistic Principles to the
Theory and Historic Criticism of the Gospel, pp. 147-218; D.B?
art "Genealogy"; JD. of Chr. Biog. art. " Africanus " ; SchafPs
Herzog, art. "Genealogy"; Commentaries of Mansel (Speaker)^
Meyer, Schaif, on Mt. L; of Farrar, Godet, M. R. Riddle, on
Lk. iii.
Why docs Lk. insert the genealogy here instead of at the beginning of his
Gospel ? It would be only a slight exaggeration to say that this is the beginning
of his Gospel, for the first three chapters are only introductory. The use of
&pX,6fjLevos here implies that the Evangelist is now making a fresh start. Two of
the three introductory chapters are the history of the Forerunner, which Lk.
completes in the third chapter before beginning his account of the work of the
Messiah, Not until Jesus has been anointed by the Spirit does the history of
the Messiah, i.e. the Anointed One, begin ; and His genealogy then becomes of
importance. In a similar way the pedigree of Moses is placed, not just before
102 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IIL 22, 23.
or just after the account of his birth (Exod. ii. i, 2), where not even the names
of his parents are given, but just after his public appearance before Pharaoh as
the spokesman of Jehovah and the leader of Israel (Exod. vi. 14-27).
The statement of Julius Africanus, that Herod the Great caused the genealo-
gies of ancient Jewish families to be destroyed, in order to conceal the defects
of his own pedigree {Eus. H. E+\* 7. 13), is of no moment. If he ever gave
such an order, it would of necessity be very imperfectly executed. Tke rebuild-
ing of the temple would give him the opportunity of burning the genealogies of
the priests, which were preserved in the temple archives, but pedigrees in the
possession of private families would be carefully concealed. Josephus was able
to give his own genealogy, as he ** found it described in the public records" ev
TCUS 577/zo<r&us 8\roi$ dvayeypa.fj./j^vijv ( Fzfa, I ) ; and he tells us what great care
was taken to preserve the pedigrees of the priests, not merely in Judsea, but in
Egypt, and Babylon, and " whithersoever our priests are scattered" (Apion.
i. 7). It is therefore an empty objection to say that Lk. could not have
obtained this genealogy from any authentic source, for all such sources had been
destroyed by Herod. It is clear from Josephus that, if Herod made the attempt,
he did not succeed in destroying even all public records. Jews are very tena-
cious of their genealogies ; and a decree to destroy such things would be evaded
in every possible way. The importance of the evidence of Afncanus lies in his
claim to have obtained information from members of the family, who gloried in
preserving the memory of their noble extraction ; and in his referring both
pedigrees as a matter of course to Joseph. It is not probable that Joseph was the
only surviving descendant of David who was known to be such But it is likely
enough that all such persons were in humble positions, like Joseph himself, and
thus escaped the notice and jealousy of Herod. Throughout his reign he took
no precaution against Davidic claimants ; and had he been told that a village
carpenter was the representative of David's house, he would possibly have
treated him as Domitian is said to have treated the grandsons of Judas the
brother of the Lord with supercilious indifference (Eus. H. E. iii. 20).
23. auros. "He Himself," to whom these miraculous signs
had reference: comp. i. 22; Mt. Mi. 4. The AV. translation of
the whole clause, aros fy 'IKJCTOUS dpxojxc^os (xxrel ZT&V TpidKorra,
"Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age," is im-
possible. It is probably due to the influence of Beza : indpiebat
esse quasi annorum triginta. But Cranmer led the way in this
error in the Bible of 1539, and the later versions followed. Purvey
is vague, like the Vulgate : " was bigynnynge as of thritti year,"
erat indpiens quasi annorum trigtnta. Tyndale is right : " was
about thirty yere of age when He beganne " ; i.e. when He began
His ministry in the solemn way just recorded. Comp. the use of
dpa/x,e>os in Acts i. 22. In both cases ^Sacr/cetv may be under-
stood, but is not necessary. In Mk. iv. i we have the full expres-
sion, ijpfaro 8tSa<r*ctv, which is represented in the parallel, Mt
xiiL i, by c/ca&yro. Professor Marshall has shown that rjp^aro and
cKaOyro may be equivalents for one and the same Aramaic verb
(Expositor i April 1891): see on v. 21.
It is obvious that this verse renders little help to chronology.
" About thirty " may be anything from twenty-eight to thirty-two,
to give no wider margin. It is certain that our era is at least four
years too late, for it besrins with A.U.C. 754- Herod the Great
HI. S3-27.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 103
died just before the Passover A.U.C. 750, which is therefore the
latest year possible for the Nativity. If we reckon the "fifteenth
year " of ver. i from the death of Augustus, Jesus was probably
thirty-two at the time of His Baptism.
&y utos, o>s K>fuTo, *iojorY)4> ToG 'HXei. This is the right punctua-
tion : " being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph the son of
Heli." It is altogether unnatural to place the comma after 'Icocn^
and not before it : "being the son (as was supposed of Joseph) of
Heli " ; i.e. being supposed to be the son of Joseph, but being
really the grandson of Heli. It is not credible that vlos can mean
both son and grandson in the same sentence. J. Lightfoot pro-
posed that "Jesus" (viz. wo'?, not vtov) should be understood
throughout ; " Jesus (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, and so
the son of Heli, and so the son of Matthat," etc. (Hor. Heb. on
Lk. iii. 23). But this is not probable : see on rov oO (ver. 38).
It is evident from the wording that Lk. is here giving the genealogy of Joseph
and not of Mary. It would have been quite out of harmony with either Jewish
ideas or Gentile ideas to derive the birthright of Jesus from His mother. In the
eye of the law Jesus was the heir of Joseph j and therefore it is Joseph's descent
which is of importance. Mary may have been the daughter of Heli ; but, if
she was, Lk. ignores the fact. The difference between the two genealogies was
from very early times felt to be a difficulty, as is seen from the letter of Julius
Africanus to Aristides, c. A.D. 220 (Eus. H. E. i. 7 ; Routh, Rel. Sacr. ii.
p. 228) ; and it is probable that so obvious a solution, as that one was the pedi-
gree of Joseph and the other the pedigree of Mary, would have been very soon
advocated, if there hqd been any reason (excepting the difficulty) for adopting
it. But this solution is not suggested by anyone until Annius of Viterbo pro-
pounded it, c. A.D. 1490.
The main facts of the two genealogies are these. From Adam to Abraham
Lk. is alone. From Abraham to David, Lk. and Mt. agree, From David to
Joseph they differ, excepting in the names of Zorobabel and his father Salathiel.
The various attempts which have been made at reconciling the divergences,
although hi no case convincingly successful, are yet sufficient to show that recon-
ciliation is not impossible. If we were in possession of all the facts, we might
find that both pedigrees are in accordance with them. Neither of them presents
difficulties which no addition to our knowledge could solve. In addition to the
authorities named above, the monographs of Hottinger, Surenhusius, and Voss
may be consulted.
27. TOU ZopofMpeX TOU 2aXa0ii]X It is highly improbable that
these are different persons from the Zerubbabel and the Shealtiel
of Mt i. 12. That at the same period of Jewish history there
should be two fathers bearing the rare name Salathiel or Shealtiel,
each with a son bearing the rare name Zerubbabel, and that both
of these unusually-named fathers should come in different ways
into the genealogy of the Messiah, is scarcely credible, although
this hypothesis has been adopted by both Hottinger and Voss.
Zerubbabel (= "Dispersed in Babylon," or "Begotten in Baby-
lon ") was head of the tribe of Judah at the time of the return from
the Babylonish Captivity in the first year of Cyrus ; and he was
104 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [XII, S7-3&
therefore an obvious person to include in the pedigree of the
Messiah. Hence he was called the Rhesa or Prince of the Cap-
tivity. In i Chron. iii. 19 he is given as the son of Pedaiah and
nephew of Shealtiel : and this is probably correct But he became
the heir of Shealtiel because the latter had no sons. In Mt. i. 1 2
and i Chron. iii. 17, Shealtiel is the son of Jechoniah, king of
Judah; whereas Lk. makes him the son of Neri. Jeconiah is
called Coniah, Jer. xxii. 24, and Jehoiachin, Iii. 31; 2 Kings xxiv. 6;
2 Chron. xxxvi. 8, 9 ; and all three names mean " The Lord will
establish." From Jer. xxii. 30 we learn that he had no children ;
and therefore the line of David through Solomon became extinct in
him. The three pedigrees indicate that an heir for the childless
Jeconiah was found in Shealtiel the son of Neri, who was of the
house of David through Nathan. Thus the junction of the two
lines of descent in Shealtiel 1 and Zerubbabel is fully explained.
Shealtiel was the son of Neri of Nathan's line, and also the heir of
Jeconiah of Solomon's line ; and having no sons himself, he had
his nephew Zerubbabel as adopted son and heir. Rhesa, who
appears in Lk,, but neither in Mt nor in i Chron., is probably not
a name at all, but a title, which some Jewish copyist mistook for a
name. "Zerubbabel Rhesa," or "Zerubbabel the Prince," has
been made into "Zerubbabel (begat) Rhesa." This correction
brings Lk. into harmony with both Mt and i Chron. For (i) the
Greek *Iwavas represents the Hebrew Hananiah (i Chron. iii. 19),
a generation which is omitted by Mt ; and (2) Lk.'s 'lovSa is the
jame as Mt's *A/3ioi58 (Jud-a = Ab-jud). Again, 'lovSa or 9 A/3tovS
may be identified with Hodaviah (i Chron. iii. 24) ; for this name
is interchanged with Judah, as is seen by a comparison of Ezra
iii. 9 and Neh, xi. 9 with Ezra ii. 40 and i Chron. ix. 7.
38. JaXd TOU KaiyajA TOU 'Ap<|>act?>. In LXX this Cainan appears
as the son of Sala or Shelah, and father of Arphaxad, in the genea-
logy of Shem (Gen. x. 24, xi. 12; i Chron. i. 18). But the name
is not found in any Hebrew MS., or in any other version made from
the Hebrew. In LXX it may be an insertion, for no one earlier
than Augustine mentions the name. D omits it here, while tf B L
have the form Kawdp for Kawav. But the hypothesis that inter-
polation here has led to interpolation in LXX cannot be maintained
upon critical principles.
38. *AB<jut. That Lk. should take the genealogy beyond David
and Abraham to the father of the whole human race, is entirely in
harmony with the Pauline universality of his Gospel. To the Jew
it was all-important to know that the Messiah was of the stock of
Abraham and of the house of David. Mt. therefore places this fact
1 Both forms of the name, Shealtiel and Salathiel, are found in Haggai and
elsewhere in O.T.; but in the Apocrypha and N.T. the form used is Salathiel
("I have asked God").
m.S8.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY JOS
in the forefront of his Gospel. LL, writing to all alike, shows that
the Messiah is akin to the Gentile as well as to the Jew, and that
all mankind can claim Him as a brother. 1
JBut why does Lk. add that Adam was the son of God ? Cer-
tainly not in order to show the Divine Sonship of the Messiah,
which would place Him in this respect on a level with all mankind.
More probably it is added for the sake of Gentile readers, to remind
them of the Divine origin of the human race, an origin which they
share with the Messiah. It is a correction of the myths respecting
the origin of man, which were current among the heathen. Scrip-
tura> etiam quod ad humani generis ortum pertinet, figit satiatque
cognitionem nostram ; earn qui spermmt aut ignorant^ pendent errant-
que inter tempora antemundana et postmundana (Beng.). It is very
forced and unnatural to take rov @eo9 as the gen. of 6 eos, and
make this gen. depend upon o>i/ vlos at the beginning of the gene-
alogy, as if Jesus and not Adam was styled the " son of God." Thus
the whole pedigree from o>9 IVQ^L^TO to *ASa/^ would be a gigantic
parenthesis between &v vlo<s and rot) eo{). The rov throughout
belongs to the word in front of it, as is clear from the fact that
*Ia>cr??<, the first name, has no TOT) before it. Each rov means " who
was of," i.e. either "the son of" or "the heir of." Both AV. and
RV. give the sense correctly.
IV. 1-13. The Internal Preparation for the Ministry of the
Christ: the Temptation in the Wilderness, ML iv. i-u; Mk.
L 12, 13.
R. C. Trench, Studies in the Gospels^ pp. 1-65, Macmillan,
1867; B. Weiss, Leben Jesu, I. ii. 10, Berlin, 1882; Eng. tr. i.
pp. 319-354; H. Latham, Pastor Pastorum, pp. 112-146, Bell,
1890; P. Schaff, Person of Christ, pp. 32, 153, Nisbet, 1880; A.
M. Fairbairn, Expositor *, first series, vol. iii. pp. 321-342, Hodder,
1876; P. Didon, Jksus Christ, ch. iii. pp. 208-226, Plon, 1891.
Many futile and irreverent questions have been raised respect-
ing this mysterious subject; futile, because it is impossible to
answer them, excepting by empty conjectures; and irreverent,
because they are prompted by curiosity rather than by a desire for
illumination. Had the answers to them been necessary for our
spiritual welfare, the answers would have been placed within our
reach. Among such questions are such as these : Did Satan
1 *' In the one case we see a royal Infant bom by a regal title to a glorious
Inheritance ; and in the other a ministering Saviour who bears the natural sum
of human sorrow " (Wsctt. Inf. to the Gospels, 7th ed. p. 316). The whole
passage should be read.
106 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV.
assume a human form, and change his form with each change 1 of
temptation, or did he remain invisible ? Did he know who Jesus
was, or was he trying to discover this ? Did he know, until he was
named, that Jesus knew who he was ? Where was the spot from
which he showed all the kingdoms of the world ?
Three points are insisted upon in the Epistle to the Hebrews
(il 1 8, iv. 15), and beyond them we need not go. i. The tempta-
tions were real. 2. Jesus remained absolutely unstained by them.
3. One purpose of the temptations was to assure us of His sym-
pathy when we are tempted. The second point limits the first and
intensifies the third. The sinlessness of Jesus excluded all those
temptations which spring from previous sin ; for there was no taint
in Him to become the source of temptation. But the fact that the
solicitations came wholly from without, and were not born from
within, does not prevent that which was offered to Him being
regarded as desirable. The force of a temptation depends, not
upon the sin involved in what is proposed, but upon the advantage
connected with it And a righteous man, whose will never falters
for a moment, may feel the attractiveness of the advantage more
keenly than the weak man who succumbs ; for the latter probably
gave way before he recognized the whole of the attractiveness \ or
his nature may be less capable of such recognition. In this way
the sinlessness of Jesus augments His capacity for sympathy ; for
in every case He felt \htfull force of temptation. 1
It is obvious that the substance of the narrative could have
had only one source. No one has succeeded in suggesting any
probable alternative. There is no Old Testament parallel, of which
this could be an adaptation. Nor is there any prophecy that the
Messiah would have to endure temptation, of which this might be
a fictitious fulfilment. And we may be sure that, if the whole
had been baseless invention, the temptations would have been of
a more commonplace, and probably of a grosser kind. No Jewish
or Christian legend is at all like this. It is from Christ Himself
that the narrative comes ; and He probably gave it to the disciples
in much the same form as that in which we have it here.
1 " Sympathy with the sinner in his trial does not depend on the experience
of sin, but on the experience of the strength of the temptation to sin, which only
the sinless can know in its full intensity. He who falls yields before the last
train " (Wsctt. on Heb. ii. 18). See Neander, L. J. C, 46, 47, pp. 77, 78.
IV. 1, 2.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTR/ IO;
1. irXYjp^s -nreJ/jiaTos dyiou* These words connect the Tempta-
tion closely with the Baptism. 1 It was under the influence of
the Spirit, which had just descended upon Him, that He went, in
obedience to God's will, into the wilderness. All three accounts
mark this connexion ; and it explains the meaning of the narrative.
Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was
tempted to make use of it in furthering His own interests without
regard to the Father's will. And here avrix^ ircipa<r0TJvai
(Mt. iv. i) must not be understood as meaning that Christ went
Into the wilderness to court temptation. That would be too like
yielding to the temptation which He resisted (vv. 9-12). He
went into the desert in obedience to the Spirit's promptings. That
He should be tempted there was the Divine purpose respecting
Him, to prepare Him for His work.
Neither Mt. nor Mk. has &ytoj> as an epithet of Tyefyw here (see on i. 15) ;
and neither of them has Lk.'s favourite b7ro'Tpci//er
r\yeTO iv TW iryeujxaTi iv *nj ep^fjiw. " He was led in (not into)
the wilderness," i.e. in His wanderings there, as in His progress
thither, He was under Divine influence and guidance. The imperf.
indicates continued action. Tradition, which is not likely to be of
any value, places this wilderness close to Jericho. Some region
farther north is more probable. The %ep a $ recrcrepdKorra may be
taken either with rp/ero (E.V.) or with 7retpao//,evos (AV.), As the
temptation by Satan was simultaneous (pres. part) with the lead-
ing by the Spirit, the sense will be the same, whichever arrange-
ment be adopted. In Mk. also the words are amphibolous, and
may be taken either with rjv cv TQ p^/io> or with Tmpa^o/Aevo?. If
we had only the account in Mt. we might have supposed that the
temptations did not begin until the close of the forty days. The
three recorded may have come at the end of the time, as seems to be
implied with regard to the first of them. Or they may be given as
representative of the struggles which continued throughout the
whole period.
2. iTipao'jjij>os. The word is here used in its commonest
sense of " try or test," with a sinister motive. In N.T. it has three
uses : i. " tiy or attempt" to do (Acts ix. 26, xvi. 7, xxiv. 6) ; 2.
" try or testf with a good motive (Jn. vi. 6 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 5 ; Rev.
ii. 2), especially of God's sending trials (i Cor. x. 13 ; Heb. xi. 17 ;
1 Le bapt&me et la tentation se succtdent fun & Fa-litre dans la rlalitS de
?histoire> comme dans k rtcit des Evangelistes. Ccs deux faits inseparables^
qui s*&lairent en fopposant dans un contrasts mgoreitx, sont le <vrai prelude
de la me du Christ* Dun est la manifestation de F Esprit de Dieu y Pautre^
tellc de F esprit du mat ; fun nous montre la filiation divine de Jlsus^ fautre^
sa nature humaine v&ute a la lutte et a Fepreuve; Fun nous r&uele la force infinie
twee laquelle il agira y Fautrc, F obstacle qu*il saura renverser ; fun nous
weignt sa inttme, Fautre, la loi de son action (Didon, p. 225).
108 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 2.
Rev, iii. 10) ; 3. "try or test? with a bad motive, in order to pro-
duce perplexity or failure (xi. 16 ; Mt xix. 3 ; Jn. viii. 6), especially
of tempting to sin (i Cor. vii. 5 ; i Thes. iii. 5 ; Jas. i. 13). It is
thus of much wider meaning than 8o/a^atv (xii. 56, xiv. 19),
which has only the second of these meanings. Trench, Syn.
bcxiv. ; Cremer, Lex. p. 494.
UTT& TOU SiajSoXou. All three use VTTQ of the agency of Satan.
He is not a mere instrument. Comp. 2 Cor. ii. 1 1 ; Acts x. 38.
In N.T. StajSoXos with the art. always means Satan, " the calumni-
ator/' /car' i&xyv. In Mt., Jn., Acts, Eph., i and 2 Tim., Heb.,
James, Jude, i Pet., and Rev. this use is invariable. It is possible
that 6 Sia/3oAos was originally a translation of Satan "the ad-
versary." In LXX IvSiafiaXXtLv sometimes means "meet, oppose"
(Num. xxii. 22, 32), and SidfioXos means "adversary" (i Mac. i.
36). In Job (i. 6-12, ii. 17) and Zech. (iii. 1-3) 6 ia/3oAo? is
used as in N.T. for Satan, as the accuser or slanderer of God to
man and of man to God. In this scene he endeavours to mis-
represent God, and to induce Jesus to adopt a false view of His
relation to God,
The existence of such a being is sometimes denied, but on
purely a priori grounds. To science the question is an open one,
and does not admit of demonstration either way. But the teach-
ing of Christ and His Apostles is clear and explicit; and only
three explanations are possible. Either (i) they accommodated
their language to a gross superstition, knowing it to be such ; or
(2) they shared this superstition, not knowing it to be such ; or
(3) the doctrine is not a superstition, but they taught the actual
truth. As Keirn rightly says, one cannot possibly regard all the
sayings of Jesus on this subject as later interpolations, and " Jesus
plainly designated His contention with the empire of Satan as a
personal one" (Jes. oflVaz., Eng. tr. ii. pp. 318, 325). See Gore,
Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation^ pp. 23-27.
ofl* e^ayei' ouSey. This does agree well with the supposition
that Jesus partook of the scanty food which might be found in the
wilderness. The j^oreucras of Mt. seems to imply the deliberate
fasting which was customary in times of solemn retirement for
. purposes of devotion. But this does not exclude the possibility
that the mental and spiritual strain was so great that for a time
there was no craving for food. In any case the want of food
would at last bring prostration of body and mind ; and then the
violence of temptation would be specially felt. Both Mt. and Lk.
appear to mean that it was not until near the end of the forty days
that the pangs of hunger were endured. For o-urrcXelcrOcu of days
being completed comp. Acts xxl 27 ; Job i. 5 ; Tobit x. 7. 1
1 The fasts of Moses and Elijah were of similar duration (Deut. ix. 9 ; i K.
xix. 8). The number forty in Scripture is connected with suffering. The
, 8.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY IO9
3. cnrey. Mt adds irpoo-eXOwv, which is a very favourite ex-
pression of his. It does not necessarily imply corporal presence,
although Mt, himself may have understood it in that sense. Jesus
says of the approaching struggle in Gethsemane, " The prince of the
world cometh " (Jn. xiv. 30). Nowhere in Scripture is Satan said
to have appeared in a visible form : Zech. iii. i is a vision. And
nothing in this narrative requires us to believe that Satan was
visible on this occasion,
Et utos ct TOU 0oC. Both Mt. and Lk. have mos r. . without
the article, the reference being to the relationship to God, rather
than to the office of the Messiah. The emphatic word is vtos.
The allusion to the voice from heaven (iii. 22) is manifest, but is
not likely to have occurred to a writer of fiction, who would more
probably have written, " If Thou art th^Chrijt.^ The "if " does
not necessarily imply any doubt in Satan, although Augustine takes
it so ; l but it is perhaps meant to inspire^Ho^t^rrJesusX "Hath
"God said, Thou art My beloved Son, and yet forbidden Thee to
give Thyself bread ? " Comp. " Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not
eat of any tree of the garden?" (Gen. iii. i). The suggestion
seems to be that Hejs to work a miracle in order to prove the
truth of God's express declaration, and that He may doubt His
relation to God, if God does not allow the miracle.
This seems better than to regard the first temptation as a temptation of the
flesh. If the food had been there, would it have been sinful for Jesus to partake
of it ? Again, it is sometimes said that it was a temptation to use His supernatural
power to supply His own necessities. Among " the Laws of the Working of
Signs" we are told was one to the effect that "Our Lord will not use His
special powers to provide for His peisonal wants or those of His immediate
followers. 3> a This law perhaps does not hold, except so far as it coincides
with the principle that no miracle is wrought where the given end can be ob-
tained without miracle. Some of Christ's escapes from His enemies seem to
have been miraculous. Was not that "providing for a personal want"? His
rejoining His disciples by walking on the sea might be classed under the same
head. The boat coming suddenly to land might be called "providing for the
wants of His immediate followers." Had He habitually supplied His personal
wants by miracle, then He would have ceased to share the lot of mankind.
But it would be rash to say that it would have been sinful for Him to supply
Himself with food miraculously, when food was necessary for His work and
could not be obtained by ordinary means. It is safer to regard this as a
temptation to satisfy Himself of the truth of God's word by a test of His own.
Deluge lasted forty days and nights (Gen. vii. 4, 12). The Israelites wandered
for forty years (Num. xiv. 33, xxxii. 13). Egypt is to lie waste forty years
(Ezek. xxix. n). Ezekiel is to bear the iniquity of the house of Judah (i.e. the
penalty for that iniquity) forty days, each day representing a year (iv. 6).
Offenders received forty stripes as a maximum (Deut. xxv. 3). A mother was
unclean for forty days after childbirth (Lev. xii. 1-4). Perhaps we are to
understand that the fast of the Ninevites lasted forty days.
1 Dubitcuvit de illo d&monum princeps t eumque Untwvit) an Christus estit
txplorans (De Civ, Dei, ix, 21).
9 Latham, Pasfw Pastorum^ p. 113,
1 10 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 3-5,
The singular r$ \t9y rotfr<p is more graphic tlan the ol \L6oi ofrroi of Mt. A
single loaf is all that He need produce. The similarity between lumps of stone
and loaves of bread perhaps explains why this material, so common in the
wilderness, was selected for change into food.
For the use of Iva after eM (x. 40, xix. 15, etc.) see Win. xliv. 8, pp.
420-424; B. Weiss on Mt. iv. 3; Simcox, Lang, of N.T. p. 177; Green,
Gr. of IT. T. p. 170. It is a weakening of the telic force of fra rather than a
mere substitute for the infinitive.
4. Christ does not reply to the "if" by affirming that He is
the Son of God ; nor does He explain why the Son of God does
not accept the devil's challenge. He gives an answer which holds
good for any child of God in similar temptation. 1 The reply is a
pointed refutation, however, of the special suggestion to Himself,
6 avtfpoTTos having direct reference to wos T. COT). Satan suggests
that God's Son would surely be allowed to provide food for Him-
self. Jesus replies that God can sustain, not only His Son, but
any human being, with or without food, and can make other things
besides bread to be food. Comp. " My meat is to do the will of
Him that sent Me " (Jn. iv. 34). The reply is verbatim as LXX
jof JDeut viii. 3. As all His replies come from this book, we may
f conjecture that Jesus had recently been reading it of meditating
on it The repeated use of a book which is so full of the trials of
Israel in the wilderness may suggest a parallel between the forty
days and the forty years. The direct reference is to the manna.
The addition of the remainder of the quotation in A D and other authorities
comes from Mt. It differs in wording in the texts which insert it. If it were
genuine here, its absence from the best authorities would be most extra-
ordinary. The insertion of 6 StdpoXos and of els 8pos tyijMr in ver. 5, and
the substitution of rov JOJCT/MW for rrfl otKOv^jftjs t are corruptions of the same
kind.
5. Lk. places second the temptation which Mt. places last
The reasons given for preferring one order to the other are sub-
jective and unconvincing. Perhaps neither Evangelist professes to
give any chronological order. Temptations may be intermingled.
It is very doubtful whether the Tore with which Mt. introduces the
temptation which he places second, and the irdXw with which he
introduces his third, are intended to specify sequence in time.
Many Lat MSS. (Gbcflqr) here place w. 5-8 after w. 9-11.
Lk. omits the command to Satan to depart; 2 and we have no
means of knowing which temptation it immediately followed. Mt
naturally connects it with the one which he places last.
See on ii. 22. The word does not require us to
1 Trench quotes from Ambrose : Non enim quasi Deus utitur protcstaU
(quid enim mihi proderat\ sed quasi homo commune sibi arcessit auxilium*
3 It is worth noting that AV., which follows those texts that insert "T7ra>w
dirtoov ftov, Sahara in ver. 8, readers the words "Get thee behind Me, Satan"
there, and "Get thee hence, Satan" in ML
IT. 5, 6,] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY III
believe that Satan had control of Christ's person and transferred
Him bodily from the desert to a mountain-top. From no mountain
could " all the kingdoms of the world " be visible, least of all " in
a moment of time." If Satan on the mountain could present to
Christ's mind kingdoms which were not visible to the eye, he
could do so in the desert We may suppose that he transferred
Jesus in thought to a mountain-top, whence He could in thought
see all. For " all the kingdoms of the world " comp. Ezra i. 2,
where we have -rifc yrjs f r " f tne world " : in Mt TOV Koo-pov,
which D substitutes here.
TTJS oUoujxeVrjs. A favourite expression with Lk. (ii. r, xxi. 26 ;
Acts xi. 28, xvii. 6, 31, xix. 27, xxiv. 5): elsewhere only six times,
of which one is a quotation (Rom. x. 18 from Ps. xix. 5). It
describes the world as a place of settled government ^ "the civilized
world." To a Greek it might mean the Greek ^orld as distinct
from barbarian regions (Hdt iv. no. 4; comp. Dem. De Cor.
p. 442). Later it meant " the Roman Empire," orbis terrarum^ as
in ii. i (Philo, Leg. ad CaL 25). In inscriptions the Roman
Emperor is 6 Kuptos rrjs olKovptvys. Finally, it meant " the whole
inhabited earth 3 " as here and xxi. 26 (Rev. xvi. 14 ; Heb. L 6 ;
Jos. Ant. viii. 1 3. 4 : B. f. vii. 3. 3). In Heb. ii. 5 it is used of
the world to come as an ordered system : see Wsctt. Lk. omits
KOL rrjv Sof av avr&v here, but adds it in Satan's offer.
ev oriyjifj xpo*' 00 * Puncto temporise comp. ev pnrQ o<$oA/jLov
(i Cor. xv. 52). Not hi Mt Comp. Is. xxix. 5; 2 Mac. be. ii.
It intimates that the kingdoms were represented, not in a series of
pageants, but simultaneously : acuta tentatio (Beng.). To take ev
XP* with avaya-yvv is not a probable arrangement. With
(<rrii,v = " to prick*") comp. stimulus^ "stick," and "sting."
6. 2ol ScSoroi . . . STL IJJLOI irapa8>oT<u. Both pronouns are
emphatic: "To Thee I will give . . . because to me it hath been
delivered."
The avrvr after rfyr $6a, is m construct ad sensnm^ referring to the
kingdoms understood in rty ^ova-lav rar/rij?', "this authority and jurisdiction.*'
In Trapa SCOTCH we have the common use of the perf. to express permanent
and present result of past action ; "it has been given over and remains in
my possession : comp. ytypavlrat (4, 8, 10) and etpTp-ctt (12).
Satan does not say by whom it has been given over ; and two answers aw
possible : i. by God's permission ; 2. by man's sin. But the latter does not
exclude the former ; and in any case confitetur tentator, se non es-se conditorem
(Beng. ). That it refers to a Divine gift previous to his revolt against God, is a
gratuitous conjecture. Christ Himself speaks of Satan as " the ruler of this
world" (Jn. xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. ii). In the Rabbinical writings "Lord of
this world " is a common name for Satan, as ruler of the heathen, in opposition
to God, the Head of the Jewish theocracy. The devil is the ruler of the un-
believing and sinful ; but he mixes truth with falsehood when he claims to hav
dominion over all the material glory of the world, Comp. Eph, ii. a j a Coc,
112 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 6-9.
iv. 4 ; Rev. xiii. 2. In $ &y Q\w the mixture of falsehood seems to be still
greater. Even of those who are under the dominion of Satan it is only in a
limited sense true that he can dispose of them as he pleases. But the subtlety
of the temptation lies partly in the fact that it appeals to what is in a very real
sense true. Satan intimates that the enormous influence which he possesses
over human affairs may be obtained for the promotion of the Messiah's King-
dom. Thus all the pain and suffering, which otherwise lay before the Saviour
of the world, might be evaded. 1
7. &v irpoffKuyrjo-tjs. Mt adds Treaty, which, like 7r/>ocreA0a>i/,
indicates that he may have believed that Satan was visible,
although this is not certain. Even actual prostration is possible
to an invisible being, and " fall down and worship " is a natural
figure for entire submission or intense admiration. In the East,
prostration is an acknowledgment of authority, not necessarily of
personal merit The temptation, therefore, seems to be that of
admitting Satan's authority and accepting promotion from him.
lv<t>7riov IJJLOTJ. Lk.*s favourite expression (i. 15, 17, 19, 75, etc.). The
usual constr. after irpcxrKvvew is the ace. (ver. 8 ; Mt. iv. 10 ; Rev. ix. 20,
xiii. 12, xiv. 9, n) or the dat. (Acts vii. 43; Jn. iv, 21, 23; Rev. iv. to,
vii, n) ; but Rev. xv. 4 as here.
IOTCU crou iracrcu "The efoim'a which has been delivered to
me I am willing to delegate or transfer" : magna superbia (Beng.).
The acceptance of it would be equivalent to Trpoo-mv-rjcris. Just as
in the first case the lawful desire for food was made an occasion of
temptation, so here the lawful desire of power, a desire specially
lawful in the Messiah. Everything depends upon why and how
the food and the power are obtained. Christ was born to be a
king j but His Kingdom is not of this world (Jn. xviii. 36, 37), and
the prince of this world has nothing in Him (Jn. xiv, 30). He
rejects the Jewish idea of the Messiah as an earthly potentate, and
thus condemns Himself to rejection by His own people. He
rejects Satan as an ally, and thereby has him as an implacable
enemy. The end does not sanctify the means.
8, irpoo-Kui^crcis. Mt. also has this word in harmony with
Satan's Trpoo-Kwrfoys ; but hi LXX of Deut vi. 13 we have <o-
fttl&YlvTQ : see on vii. 27. Xarpeuo-eis. Lit. "serve for hire"
(Aarpis = " hireling ") In class. GrL it is used of the service of
slaves and of freemen, whether rendered to men or to God : in
N.T. always of religious service, but sometimes of the worship of
idols (Acts vii. 42 ; Rom. i. 25). Trench, Syn. xxxv. Proposition
erat Domino humilitate diabolum mncere^ nonfotentia (Jerome).
9* T& irrcpuyiop TOU tepou. It is impossible to determine what
1 In this connexion a remark of Pere Didon is worth quoting. Of the
traditional scene of the Temptation he says that there Christ avait sous ks yettx
ce chemin de. Jlricho <i Jerusalem- qtf il d&vait smvre, un jour, avet us duciles %
pour alkr b la mort (Jlsus Christ, ch. iii. p. 209).
IV. 9-12.] PREPARATION FOR THE MINISTRY 113
this means. The article points to its being something well known
by this name. The three points conjectured are : i. the top of
the Royal Porch, whence one looked into an abyss (Jos. Ant
xv. ii. 5); 2. the top of Solomon's Porch; 3. the roof of the
faos. It was from TO Tnzpvyiov rot) tepov that James the Just was
thrown, according to Hegesippus (Eus. H. E. ii. 23. n, 16). Had
any part of the va6<s been intended, we should peihaps have had
r. vaov rather than r. lepov.
El utos el TOU 0eoO. The repetition of this preamble is evidence
that this temptation is in part the same as the first (ver. 3). In
both cases Jesus is to "tempt" (ver. 12) God, to challenge Him
to prove His Fatherhood by a test of His Son's own choosing.
But, whereas in the first case Christ was to be rescued from an
existing danger by a miracle, here He is to court needless danger
in order to be rescued by a miracle. It may be that this is also a
partial repetition of the second temptation. If the suggestion is
that He should throw Himself down into the courts of the temple,
so that the priests and the people might see His miraculous
descent, and be convinced of His Messiahship, then this is once
more a temptation to take a short cut to success, and, by doing
violence to men's wills, avoid all the pain and suffering involved
in the work of redemption. 1 If this is correct, then this tempta-
tion is a combination of the other two. It is difficult to see what
point there is in mentioning the temple, if presumptuously seeking
peril was the only element in the temptation. The precipices of
the wilderness would have served for that. The |3dXe creauTop
expresses more definitely than the mid. would have done that the
act is to be entirely His own. Not "Fall," nor "Spring," but
"Cast Thyself"; defies teipsum. Comp. eaurovs TrA-avw/^cv (i Jn.
i. 8).
10. The fact that after TOU 4>uXd|cu ore Satan omits lv Traorats
Tats oSots <rov is in favour of the view that presumptuous rushing
into danger is part of the temptation. To fling oneself down from
a height is not going "in one's ways," but out of them. The
disobedient Prophet was slain by the lion, the obedient Daniel
was preserved in the lions' den. But we are not sure that the
omission of the words has this significance.
11. !m x^p^- " On their hands," implying great carefulness.
The irpos \LQov has no special reference either to the temple or the
rocks below : stones abound in most places, and lie in the way
of those who stumble.
IS. EtpTjTai. In Mt. IlaXtv yeypcwrrat. Jesus had appealed to
Scripture; Satan does the same; and then Jesus shows that
isolated texts may be misleading. They may be understood in a
sense plainly at variance with some other passage. Satan had
1 See Edersh. L. <2r* 71 i. p. 304 ; Latham, Pastor Pastorum, p. 140.
8
114 THE &OSPEL ACCORDING TC S. LUKE [IV. 12, 13.
suggested that it was impossible to put too much trust in God.
Christ points out that testing God is not trusting Him.
The verb tevctpdpuy is wholly biblical (x. 25 ; Mt. iv. 7 ; Ps. Ixxvii. 1 8). In
the Heb, it is " Ye shall not tempt " : but in LXX we have the sing, as here.
13. trdrra -rreipacrpSv. " Every kind of temptation " : a further
indication that He was tempted throughout the forty days, and tha'
what is recorded is merely an illustration of what took place*
The enemy tried all his weapons, and was at all points defeated.
Comp. Tracra afjiapria KCU ySAao-^/Aia, "all manner of sin and
blasphemy" (Mt. xii. 31); irav Se^Spov, "every kind of tree (Mt.
Hi. 10) ; 6 /tz-ev -TTOCT^S yftovys airokavw KO.I /x/tySe/uas d?re;(d^vos
oKaXacrros, "he who enjoys every kind of pleasure," etc. (Arist
Eth. NIC. ii. 2. 7).
axpt Kcupou. "Until a convenient season." This rendering
gives the proper meaning both of axpi and of /catpos : comp. Acts
xiii. n, xxiv. 25; Lie xxi. 24. It is Satan's expectation that on
some future occasion he will have an opportunity of better success ;
and an opportunity came when Judas was allowed to deliver the
Christ into the hands of His enemies. That this was such an
occasion seems to be indicated by Christ's own declarations:
" The prince of this world cometh ; and he hath nothing in Me "
On. xiv. 30) ; and " This is your hour and the power of darkness "
(Lk. xxii. 53). Satan was not visible in a bodily shape then, and
probably not on this earlier occasion. It is Peter who on one
occasion became a visible tempter (Mt. xvi. 23; Mk. viii. 33). Not
that we are to suppose, however, that Satan entirely desisted from
attacks between the beginning and end of Christ's ministry : " Ye
are they which have continued with Me in My temptations/' rather
implies the contrary (xxii. 28); but the evil one seems to have
accumulated attacks at the beginning and the end. In the wilder-
ness he employed the attractiveness of painless glory and success ;
in the garden he tried the dread of suffering and failure. All
human temptation takes place through the instrumentality of
pleasure or pain.
Luke says nothing about the ministration of Angels which followed the
temptation, as recorded by both Mt and Mk., not because he doubts such facts,
for he repeatedly records them (i. II, 26, ii. 9, xxii. 43; Acts v. 19, viii. 26,
xii 7, xxvii. 23), but probably because his source said nothing about them. Mk.
seems to mean that Angels were ministering to Jesus during the whole of the
forty days : his three imperfects (ty ... fy . . . SiyKJvovv) are co-ordinate.
The Temptation is not a dream, nor a vision, nor a myth, nor a parable,
translated into history by those who heard and misunderstood it, but an histor-
ical fact. It was part of the Messiah's preparation for His work. In His
baptism He received strength. In His temptation He practised the use of it.
Moreover, He thus as man acquired experience (Heb. v. 8) of the possibilities of
evil, and of the violent and subtle ways in which His work could be ruined.
Only from Himself could the disciples have learned the history of thif
IV. 13.] THE MINISTRY IN GAULEE
struggle. Among other things it taught them the value of the Jewish Scripture!,
With these for their guide they could overcome the evil one, as He had done; no
special illumination was necessary (xvi. 29, 31).
IV. 14-IX. 50. The Ministry in Galikt*
Lk., like Mt and ML, omits the early ministry in Judsea ; but
we shall find that his narrative, like theirs, implies it. All three of
them connect the beginning of the Galilean ministry with the
Baptism and the Temptation ; while Mt and Mk. make the im-
prisonment of the Baptist to be the occasion of Christ's departure
from Judasa into Galilee (Mt iv. 12 ; Mk. i. 14). But they neither
assert nor imply that John was imprisoned soon after the Tempta-
tion ; nor do they explain why the arrest of John by Herod Antipas
should make Christ take refuge in this same Herod's dominions.
It is from the Fourth Gospel that we learn that there was a con-
siderable interval between the Temptation and John's imprison-
ment, and that during it Jesus went into Galilee and returned to
Judsea again (ii. 13). From it also we learn that the occasion of
the second departure into Galilee was the jealousy of the Pharisees,
who had been told that Jesus was making and baptizing more
disciples even than the Baptist Much as they disliked and feared
the revolutionary influence of John, they feared that of Jesus still
more. John declared that he was not the Christ, he " did no sign,"
and he upheld the Law. Whereas Jesus had been pointed out as
the Messiah ; He worked miracles, and He disregarded, not only
traditions which were held to be equal to the Law (Jn. iv. 9), but
even the Law itself in the matter of the Sabbath (Jn. v. 9, 10).
Thus we see that it was not to escape the persecution of Herod, but
to escape that of the Pharisees, who had delivered the Baptist into
the hands of Herod, that Jesus retired a second time from Judsea
into Galilee. It was " after that John was delivered up " (Mk. i. 14),
and "when He heard that John was delivered ttp" (Mt iv, 12),
that Christ retired into Galilee, In neither case was it Herod's
action, but the action of those who delivered John into the hands
of Herod, that led to Christ's change of sphere. And in this way
what is recorded in the Fourth Gospel explains the obscurities erf
the other three.
There is a slight apparent difference between the first two Gospels and the
third. The three Evangelists agree in noticing only one return from Judaea
1 16 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 14.
to Galilee, and possibly each knows of only one. But whereas Ml. and Mk.
aeem to point to the second return, for they connect it with the delivering up
of the Baptist, Lk. seems rather to point to the first return, for he connects it
with " the power of the Spirit," an expression which suggests a reference to
that power which Jesus had received at the Baptism and exercised in the
Temptation. It is quite possible, however, that the expression refers to the
power with which He had worked miracles and taught in Galilee and Judsea ;
in which case all three Gospels treat of the second return to Galilee.
Not very much plan is discernible in this portion of the Gospel ;
and it may be doubted whether the divisions made by com-
mentators correspond with any arrangement which the writer had
in his mind. But even artificial schemes help to a clearer appre-
hension of the whole ; and the arrangement suggested by Godet is,
at any rate, useful for this purpose. He takes the Development in
the Position of Chrisfs Disciples as the principle of his divisions.
1. iv. 14-44. To the Call of the first Disciples.
2, v. i~vi. 1 1. To the Nomination of the Twelve.
3, vi. i2-viii. 56. To the first Mission of the Twelve.
4. ix. 1-50. To the Departure for Jerusalem.
These divisions are clearly marked out in the text of WH., a
space being left at the end of each.
IV. 14-44. The Ministry in Galilee to the Call of the first
Disciples. The Visits to Nazareth and Capernaum.
14, 15. Comp. Mt. iv. 12; Mk. i. 14. These two verses are
introductory, and point out three characteristics of this period of
Christ's activity, i. He worked in the power of the Spirit. 2. His
fame spread far and wide. 3. The synagogues were the scenes of
His preaching (comp, ver. 44).
14, iv rfj 8ui/d|xi TOU -ny^ujxaTos. This is perhaps to remind us
that since His first departure from Galilee He has been endowed
with the Holy Spirit and has received new powers (Hi. 22, iv. i, 18).
Bengel's fast victoriam corroboratus connects it too exclusively
with the Temptation. Unless, with De Wette, we take K<X! $T\]M\
lfrj\0fiF as anticipating what follows, the statement implies much
preaching and perhaps some miracles, of which Lk. has said
nothing; for Jesus is famous directly He returns. The power of
the Spirit had already been exhibited in Him. Jn. says that " the
Galileans received Him, having seen all the things that He did in
Jerusalem at the feast " (iv. 45). But it is not likely that they had
heard of the wonders which attended the Birth, or of those which
attended the Baptism.
There are various marks of Lk. J s style, i. dirt err peif/ev, for which Mt. has
&vcx.dbpy<rcv and Mk. 1j\0v. Comp. ver. 1, where Lk. has {rTr&rpe^ev, while
Mt. has &v7)x0n' % 5rJya/uy of Divine power. Comp. i. 35, and see on
iv. 36. 3. *a0'5\if*in this sense. Comp. xxiii. 5; Acts ix. 31, 42, x. 37:
IV. 14, 15.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
it is peculiar to Lk. See Simcox, Lang, of N. T. p. 148. 4. 17 *epi%(5po j, #.
777, is an expression of which Lk. is fond (iii. 3, iv. 37, vii. 17, viii. 37; Acta
xiv. 6) ; not in Jn., and only twice in Alt. (iii. 5, xiv. 35) and jnce in Mk.
(i. 28 ; not vi. 55).
15. K<XI atiros eSiSamtey. Lk. is so fond of this mode of transi-
tion that CLVTOS possibly has no special significance ; if it has, it is
" He Himself," as distinct from the rumour respecting Him. The
imperf. points to His habitual practice at this time, and seems to
deprive what follows of all chronological connexion. All the
Gospels mention His teaching in synagogues, and give instances of
His doing so during the early part of His ministry (Mt. iv. 23,
ix. 35, xii. 9, xiii. 54; Mk. i. 21, 39, iii i, vi. 2; Lk. iv. 44, vi. 6;
Jn. vi. 59). Towards the close of it, when the hostility of the
teachers became more pronounced, there is less mention of this
practice : perhaps He then taught elsewhere, in order to avoid
needless collision. It should be noticed that here, as elsewhere, it
is the teaching rather than the worship in the synagogues that is
prominent. Synagogues were primarily places of instruction
(xiii. 10; Jn. xviii. 20; Acts xiii. 27, xv. 21, etc,), and it was as
such that Augustus encouraged them. Morality of a high kind
was taught there, and morality is on the side of order.
Iv TCUS crumywYals aurwy. This means in the synagogues of the
Galileans. Galilee at this time was very populous. Josephus no
doubt exaggerates when he says that the smallest villages had
fifteen thousand inhabitants (B. J. iii. 3. 2), and that there were
over two hundred towns and villages. But in any case there were
many Galileans. Among them there was more freshness and less
formalism than among the inhabitants of Judaea. Here the
Pharisees and the hierarchy had less influence, and therefore
Galilee was a more hopeful field in which to seek the first elements
of a Church. On the other hand, it was necessary to break down
the prejudices of those who had known Him in His youth, and had
seen in Him no signs of His being the Messiah that they were
expecting : and the fame of the miracles which He had wrought in
Judsea was likely to contribute towards this. Thus the Judsean
ministry prepared the way for the more promising ministry in
Galilee. We have no means of estimating the number of Galilean
synagogues; but the fact that such a place as Capernaum had
either none, or only a poor one, until a Roman centurion was
moved to provide one ("himself built us our synagogue," vii 5),
is some evidence that by no means every village or even every
small town possessed one. The remains o f ancient synagogues
exist at several places in Galilee ; Tell-Hum, Irbid (the Arbela of
i Mac. ix. i\Jisch (Giscala), Meiron (Mero), Kasyoun^ Ndbartein^
and Kefr-Bereim, But it is doubtful whether any of these are older
than the second or third century.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 15, 16.
The origin of synagogues is to be sought in the Babylonish captivity ; and
they greatly increased in number after the destruction of the temple. The fact
that Jewish legend derives the institution of synagogues from Moses, shows how
essential the Jews considered it to be. The statement that there were at one
time 480 synagogues in Jerusalem is also legendary ; but 480 may be a symbol-
ical number. One has only to remember the size of Jerusalem to see the
absurdity of 480 places of public instruction in it. But large towns sometimes
had several synagogues, either for different nationalities (Acts vi 9; see
Lamby and Blass) or different handicrafts. 1
6-iro irdrrwr. Because of the power of His preach-
ing, especially when contrasted with the lifeless repetitions and
senseless trivialities of ordinary teachers.
16-30. The Visit to Nazareth. Comp, Mt. xiii. 53-58; Mk.
vi. 1-6. It remains doubtful whether Lk. here refers to the same
visit as that recorded by Mt and Mk. If it is the same, he per-
haps has purposely transposed it to the opening of the ministry, as
being typical of the issue of Christ's ministry. He was rejected by
His own people. Similarly the non-Galilean ministry opens with a
rejection (ix. 51-56). In any case, the form of the narrative is
peculiar to Lk., showing that he here has some special source. We
are not to understand that the Galilean ministry began at Nazareth.
More probably Christ waited until the reports of what He had said
and done in other parts of Galilee prepared the way for His return
to Nazareth as a teacher.
16. ou r\v [d^a]T0pa|Xjjt^os. This tells us rather more than
ii 51 : it implies, moreover, that for some time past Nazareth had
ceased to be His home. But the addition of " where He had been
brought up " explains what follows. It had been " His custom "
during His early life at Nazareth to attend the synagogue every
sabbath. It is best to confine Kara TO euro's to the clause in
which it is embedded, and not carry it on to avlcrrrj avayv&vai : it
was possibly the first time that He had stood up to read at
Nazareth. But the phrase may refer to what had been His custom
elsewhere since He began His ministry ; or it may be written from
the Evangelist's point of view of what was afterwards His custom.
We may therefore choose between these explanations, i. He had
previously been in the habit of attending the synagogue at Nazareth,
and on this occasion stood up to read. 2. He had previously been
in the habit of reading at Nazareth. 3. He had lately been in the
habit of reading elsewhere, and -now does so at Nazareth. 4. This
was an early example of what became His custom. In no case
must the sermon be included in the custom. That this was His
first sermon at Nazareth is implied by the whole context
On synagogues see Edersh. L 6* T. i. pp. 430-450, Hist, of Jewish
on^ pp, 100-129, ed. 1896 ; Schiirer, Jew ish People in the T. of /. C. ii. 2,
52-89 ; Hausrath, N. T. Times, i. pp. 84-93 ; Plumptre in D.B* ; Leyrer in
erzog, PjREJ", Strack in Herzog. PjRE^i and other authorities in Schiirer.
IV, 16.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 11$
In D both reOpaw&os and a,fof after cMfo are omitted, and the text
runs, \&&v 5 ets Na*<xp5 Sirov fy /caret r6 efotfds tv r% yfj^pg. r&v (rappdruv
19 r^v ffwaykrffiv ; but in the Latin the former word is restored, veniens
autem in N'azared ubi erat mitricatus introibit secundum consuetudimm in
sabbato in synagogam. The omissions are perhaps due to Marcionite in-
fluence. According to Marcion, Christ came direct from heaven into the
synagogue, d& c&lo in synagogam (see p. 131) ; and therefore all trace of His
previous life in Nazareth must be obliterated. He was not reared there, and
was not accustomed to visit the synagogue there. Only a custom of attend-
ing the synagogue existed. See Rendel Harris, Study of Codex Bez&) p. 232,
in Texts and Stttdies, ii. I. Comp. the insertions ix. 54, 55, which may be
due to the same influence.
The phrase /card r6 eJtttfdj occurs in LXX Num. xxiv. I ; Sus. 13. Itis
characteristic of Lk. See on /card, r6 <?0os, i. 8. With the dat. /cari rb *tw&6t
occurs only here and Acts xvii. 2; and T?J yp^pq, TUV (rafifidruv occurs
only here, Acts xiii. 14, and xvi. 13 : but comp. Lk. xiii. 13, 1 6 and xiv, 5.
It is a periphrasis for fr rots <raj8., or & T$ <ra., or rois <rajS., or
&v<rrr\ dmyixuruu Standing to read was the usual practice,
excepting when the Book of Esther was read at the Feast of
Purim : then the reader might sit. Christ's standing up indicated
that He had been asked to read, or was ready to do so. This is
the only occasion on which we are told that Jesus read.
The lectern was close to the front seats, where those who were most likely
to be called upon to read commonly sat. A lesson from the Thorah or Law
was read first, and then one from the Prophets. After the lesson had been
read in Hebrew it was interpreted into Aramaic (Neh. viii. 8), or into Greek in
places where Greek was commonly spoken. This was done verse by verse in
the Law ; but in the Prophets three verses might be taken at once, and in this
case Jesus seems to have taken two verses. Then followed the exposition or
serwon. The reader, interpreter, and preacher might be one, two, or three
persons. Here Christ was both reader and preacher ; and possibly He inter
preted as well. 1 Although there were officers with fixed duties attached to' each
synagogue, yet there was no one specially appointed either to read, or interpret,
or preach, or pray. Any member of the congregation might discharge these
duties ; and probably those who were competent discharged them in turn at the
invitation of the apxivwdyuyos (Acts xiii. 1$. Comp. PMlo in Eus. Pr&p*
Evang. viii. 7, p. 360 A, and Quod omnis probus liber xiL ). Hence it was
always easy for Jesus to address the congregation. When He became famous
as a teacher He would often be invited to do so. a And during His early years
He may have read without interpreting or expounding ; for even those under
age were sometimes allowed to read in the synagogues. We cannot infer from
His being able to read that He Himself possessed the Scriptures. In N.T.
toayiv&tfKtit is used in no other sense than that of reading % lit, recognizing
1 We have no right to infer from this incident that the Hebrew Bible could
still be understood by the people. Nothing is said about interpretation j but
we cannot assume that it did not take place. Mk. xv. 34 is evidence of some
knowledge of O.T. in Aramaic. See Classical Review ', May 1894, p. 216,
against Kautzsch, Grammatik des biblischen Aramaischen^ p. 19.
a Comp. 'A^aor&f 5^ r<s TWP tfjnretpordTdiv ^<^ye<rat r&ptcrra ml vwobrornt)
ols &iras b files tmd&<rt vpfo r& p\riov (Philo, De Septenario^ vi.). See aUo
the fragments of Philo in Eus. Prs&p* Evang. viii, 7. 12, 13, and viiL 12. IO,
ed. Gaisford. These three passages give us Philo's account of the synagogue
services.
120 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 16-18.
again the written characters ; of reading aloud \ Acts xiii. 27, xv. 21 ; 2 Cor.
iii. 15; Col, iv. 16; I Thes. v. 27.
17. eireSoSTj. "Was handed" to Him, "was given over by
handing": comp. ITT^IJTOVV (ver. 42). It does not mean "was
handed to Him in addition" implying that something else had
been handed to Him previously. This meaning 5s not common,
and is not found elsewhere in N.T. The reading of the Parascha,
or section from the Law, had probably preceded, and had been
read possibly by someone else. This was the Hafihthara, or pro-
phetic section (Acts xiii. 15). That Is. Ixi. i, 2 was the lesson
appointed for the day is quite uncertain. We do not even know
whether there was at that time any cycle of prophetical lessons,
nor whether it would be strictly adhered to, if there was such.
Apparently Isaiah was handed to Him without His asking for it ;
but that also is uncertain. The cycle of lessons now in use is of
much later origin ; and therefore to employ the Jewish lectionary
in order to determine the day on which this took place is futile.
On the other hand, there is no evidence that "Jesus takes the
section which He lights upon as soon as it is unrolled " ; for evpe
quite as easily may mean the opposite; that He intentionally
found a passage which had been previously selected.
The more definite &vairTtas (&D) is probably a correction of
(A B L and most versions). The former occurs nowhere in N.T. , while the
latter is very common : see esp. Rev. v. 2, 3, 4, 5* x. 2, 8, xx. 12. Fond as
Lk. is of analytical tenses, ty yeypaj&jjJvov occurs nowhere else in his writings :
!<m yeypap. is common in Jn, (ii. 17, vi. 31, 45, x. 34, xii. 14, 16),
18. The quotation is given by the Evangelist somewhat freely
from LXX, probably from memory and under the influence of
other passages of Scripture. To argue that the Evangelist cannot
be S. Luke, because S. Luke was a Gentile, and therefore would
not know the LXX, is absurd. S. Luke was not only a constant
companion of S. Paul, but a fellow-worker with him in dealing
with both Jews and Gentiles. He could not have done this
without becoming familiar with the LXX.
Down to dTreWoX/ccv /ie inclusive the quotation agrees with
LXX. After that the text of LXX runs thus : ld<rao-0ai row crwr*-
rpi/tyieyovs TVJV KapStav, /c^pvfat at^taAcurots G^ea-iv /cat TiK^Aofc dva-
/SAei/rw, KaXtcrai cvtaurov "Kvpiov $K.TOV* In many authorities the
clause taoracr&u TOVS crwrerpt/x/icyov? T^V xapStav has been inserted
into the text of Lk. in order to make the quotation more full and
more in harmony with O.T. We have similar insertions Mt. xv.
8 : Acts vii. 37 ; Rom. xiil 9 ; Heb. xiii. 20, and perhaps ii. 7,*
1 Scrivener, Int. to Crit. of N.T. i. pp. 12, 13, 4th ed.
The evidence against the clause Id,<ra<r6ai . . . ryv Kapdtaif here (in 64 A Q of
LXX TV /ca/>3i$t) is decisive. It is omitted by K B D L 8 , 1 3-69, 33, most MSS. of
IV. 18. j THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 121
In the original the Prophet puts into the mouth of Jehoval 's ideal
Servant a gracious message to those in captivity, promising them
release and a return to the restored Jerusalem, the joy of which is
compared to the joy of the year of jubilee. It is obvious that
both figures, the return from exile and the release at the jubilee,
admirably express Christ's work of redemption.
rbeujAa Kupiou cir' e/xe. In applying these words to Himself the
Christ looks back to His baptism. He is more than a Prophet ;
He is "the Son, the Beloved One/* of Jehovah (iii. 21, 22).
With 4ir* JJL (fan) comp. ty tir' airrov (ii. 25). ofi elvtKev. Not " where-
fore," as in Acts xix. 32, which here would spoil the sense, but "because,"
a meaning which otiveicev often has in class. Grk. Vulg. has propter quod.
Comp. Gen. xviii. 5, xix. 8, xxii. 16, xxxviii. 26 ; Num. x. 31, xiv. 43, etc.
The Ionic form efretcev is found xviii. 29 ; Acts xxviii. 20 ; 2 Cor, iii. 10 \
but ZvKej> is the commonest form (2 Cor. vii, 12), and &GKO, also occurs before
consonants (vi. 22 ; Acts xxvi. 21).
fie. The Christ was anointed with the Spirit, as Pro-
phets and priests were anointed with oil (i Kings xix 16 ; Ex.
xxviii. 41, xxx, 30). Unlike irevys (2 Cor. ix. 9), irruxos "always
had a bad meaning until it was ennobled by the Gospels " (vi. 20,
vii. 22 ; 2 Cor. vi. 10 ; Jas. ii. 5). It suggests abject poverty
(TrroWa) " I crouch"). See Hatch, BibL Grk. pp. 76, 77.
d7r<C<rra\ic<k p.. Change from aor. to perf. "He anointed
Me (once for all) ; He hath sent Me (and I am here) " : comp.
i Cor. xv. 4. We have had aTroorTeXAw of the mission of Gabriel
(L 19, 26); here and ver. 43 we have it of the mission of the
Christ; vil 27 of the Forerunner; ix. 2 of the Twelve. Whereas
irc/xTrco is quite general and implies no special relation between
sender and sent, dirocrreAAco adds the idea of a delegated authority
making the person sent to be the envoy or representative of the
sender. But Tre/jwro also is used of the mission of the Christ (xx. 13),
of Prophets (ver, 26, xx. ir, 12), and of the Apostles (Jn. xiii. 20,
xx. 21). Strictly speaking, atx^aXcSTots means "prisoners of war"
(cux^ and oXwTos) : freq. in class. Grk. but here only in N.T,
The cognate alxjjLoX^rLt^ occurs xxi. 24 ; 2 Cor. x. 5 ; 2 Tim. iii.
6 ; alx/JU3.Xuxra, Epfcu iv. 8. Neither this metaphor nor that of
Tu4>Xot$ dy<|3\e4/ii> harmonizes very well with the year of jubilee, to
which Godet would restrict the whole passage. Both might apply
to captives in exile, some of whom had been blinded by their
captors, or by long confinement in a dungeon.
<jnrocrrL\ai Te0pau0|j^vous iv d4eVei. These words come from
another part of Isaiah (Iviii. 6), and are perhaps inserted through
a slip of memory. Jesus was reading, not quoting without book;
and therefore we cannot suppose that He inserted the clausd
Lat. Vet and best MSS. of Vulg., most MSS. of Boh. Aeth. Arm. Syr-Sin.*
Orig, Ens. etc., all the best editors and RV. See Sanday, App* ad&*T+ p. 117.
122 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 18-2Q,
Lightfoot says that it was lawful to skip from one passage to an-
other in reading the Prophets, but not in reading the Law (Hor.
Heb. on Lk. iv. 17). That might explain the omission of a few
verses, but not the going back three chapters. The insertion
comes from the Evangelist, who is probably quoting from memory,
and perhaps regards the unconsciously combined passages as a
sort of "programme of the ministry." The strong exprsss'on
T0paucj^ous is here applied to those who are shattered in fortune
and broken in spirit
For the pregnant construction, "send so as to be in," comp. i. 17. The
asyndeton throughout, first between txpiffev and dir&rraXKe*', and then oe-
tween the three infinitives which depend upon d-n^crraX/cep, is impressive.
19. evaauT6i> Kuptou SeKToV. The age of the Messiah, which is
Jehovah's time for bestowing great blessings on His people.
Comp. Kcupos Se/cros (2 Cor. vi. 2 ; Is. xlix. 8) : Se/cros is not found
in class. Grk. It is strange that Clement of Alexandria and
Origen, who are commonly so ready to turn fact into figure, here
turn an expression which is manifestly figurative into a literal
statement of fact, and limit Christ's ministry to a period of twelve
months (comp. Clem. Horn. xvii. 19). Keim and other modern
writers have made the same limit; but the three Passovers dis-
tinguished by S. John (ii. 13, vi. 4, xi. 55) are quite fatal to it. 1
It is, however, an equally faulty exegesis to find the three years
(i.e. two years and a fraction) of Christ's ministry in the three
years of Lk. xiii. 6-9 or the three days of xiiL 31-33. The first of
these is obviously a parabolic saying not to be understood literally;
and the other probably is such. The suggestion that the three
servants sent to the wicked husbandmen mean the three years of
the ministry is almost grotesque. See Nosgen, Gesch. Jesu Christi^
Kap. viii., Miinchen, 1890.
SO. The vivid description of what followed the reading of the lesson points
to an eye-witness as the source of the narrative. But the " closed " of AV. and
RV. gives a wrong impression of the first incident : it leads one to think of a
modern book with leaves. The Rhemish has "folded"; but "rolled up"
would be a better rendering of Trrvjjas. The long strip of parchment, or less
probably papyrus (2 Jn. 12), would be wound upon a roller, or possibly upon
two rollers, one at each end of the strip. Hence the name megillak (volumen-},
from gdlalj "to roll." Such a book was in Greek sometimes called /ee<aXt
(Ezr. vi. 2 ; Ezek. iii. 1-3) or Kc<f>a,\l$ /StjSXfou (Heb. x. 7 ; Ps. xxxix. 8 ; Ezek,
ii. 9) ; and it is said that KetpaKIs originally meant the knob (cornu or umbilicus)
at the end of the roller ; but no instance of this use of Ke<f>a\lt appears to be
known (Wsctt on Heb. x. 7).
The ^TTO- implies that it was the minister of
1 On the uncertainty respecting the length of the ministry, and the con-
jectuies respecting it made by early Christians, see Irem H&r* ii. 22 ; Eus.
& E. i. 10 ; Sanday in the Exfositor* ist series a xi. p. i&
IV. 20, 21,] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 123
chazzan who had handed Him the book who received it lack again.
The ru) may have the same meaning, just as TO ftt/BXtov means the
book which had been given to Him. But r< v^pirri more prob-
ably means the minister usually found in a synagogue. It was
among the duties of the chazzan to take the Scriptures from the
ark and put them away again (Surenhusius, Mishna^ ii. 246,
iii. 266). He taught the children to read, and inflicted the
scourgings (Mt. x. 17). A Roman epitaph to a Jew who held
this office is quoted by Schiirer, II. ii. p. 66
louAtavT/ ^vyariyp Trarpt
cipfjvrj ifj KoijA-yvts crov.
The chazzan of the synagogue became the deacon or sub-deacon
of the Christian Church.
A V7njpr7}$ is lit. "an under-rower" (/>&r<rtf). The word may be used
of almost any kind of attendant or servant (Acts v. 22, 26, xiii. 5? Mt.
xxvi. 58; Mk. xiv. 54, 65; Jn. vii. 32, 45; I Cor. iv. i). For the two
participles, irri/as , . . djrofozfe, without xal, comp. Acts xii, 4, 25,
eKt0i(rei>. This was the usual attitude for expounding or
preaching, and in the synagogues there was commonly a raised
seat for the purpose. On other occasions we find Christ sitting
to teach (v. 3 ; Mt v. i ; Mk. iv. i ; [Jn. viii. 2]) ; and the
disciples do the same (Acts xvi. 13).
Yjcray dTcn^ovnres. " Were fixed intently." Their intense interest
was caused by His reputation as a teacher and as a worker of
miracles, as well as by His having been brought up amongst
them ; perhaps also by His look and manner of reading. That
He had selected an unexpected passage, or had omitted the usual
lesson from the Law, and that this surprised them, is pure con-"
jecture. Comp. Acts vi. 15, where the same verb is used of the
whole Sanhedrin riveting their eyes upon Stephen. It is a
favourite word with Lk., who uses it a dozen times : elsewhere in
N.T. only 2 Cor. iii. 7, 13. It occurs in LXX (i Es. vi. 28;
3 Mac. ii, 26), in Aq. (Job vii. 8), and in Jos. (JB.f. v. 12. 3). The
analytical tense marks the continuance of the action.
21. -rjp^aro Be \lyeiv. The ypgaro is not pleonastic: it points
to the solemnity of the moment when His words broke the silence
of universal expectation : comp. vii. 24, xi. 29, xii. r, xiv. 18.
What follows may be regarded as a summary of what was said.
It gives us the main subject of His discourse. We are led to
suppose that He said much more ; perhaps interpreting to them in
detail the things concerning Himself (xxiv. 27). The conversation
with Nicodemus is similarly condensed by S. John (iii. 1-21).
without this narrative we should know from vii. 22 an4 Mt
124 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 21, 22.
xi. 5 that Christ interpreted Is. Ixi. i fF, of Himself. The whole
of the O.T. was to Him a prophecy respecting His life and work.
And this applies not only to prophetic utterances, but also to rites
and institutions, as well as to historical events, which were so
ordered as to be a forecast of the salvation and judgment which
He was to bring. 1
TJ vpac(>Y) atrnj. "This passage of Scripture" (Mk. xii. 10; Jn,
vii 42, etc.) : for Scripture as a whole the plural is used (xxiv. 27,
32, 45 ; Mt xxi. 42, xxii. 29, xxvi. 54, 56 ; Mk. xii. 24, etc.).
His interpretation of the prophecy was at the same time a fuliil-
ment of it; for the voice of Him of whom the Prophet wrote
was sounding in their ears. Hence it is that he affirms ireirX^pcoTai
iv rots &<TW ujjiwi'. As Renan says, // ne prechait pas ses opinions^
il se prtchait luimtme.
22. !|jtapTu'pou auTw. " They bore witness to Him," not that
what He said about Himself, but that what rumour had said
respecting His power as a teacher, was true. They praised Him
in an empty-hearted way. What they remembered of Him led
them to think that the reports about Him were exaggerations ; but
they were willing to admit that this was not the case. Comp. xi.
48. This "bearing witness" almost of necessity implies that
Jesus had said a great deal more than is recorded here. What
follows shows that they did not believe the teaching which so
startled and impressed them, any more than those whose attention
was riveted on Stephen, before he began to address them, were
disposed to accept his teaching. The cases are very similar.
Hence e#av/tafov expresses amazement rather than admiration.
For 0av/Aa<T6i' ITTI see small print on ii. 33,
rots X<$<y<n$ TT)S x < *P LT s* Characterizing genitive or genitive of quality ;
freq. in writings influenced by Hebrew, " which employs this construction, not
merely through poverty in adjectives, but also through the vividness of phrase-
ology which belongs to Oriental languages (Win. xxxiv. 3. b, p. 297. Comp.
olKOv6fj,os TTJS &8iKtcL$ (xvi. 8) ; /c/>iT7)s TV? aSitelas (xviii. 6) ; d/cpoartys ^TriA^oy-tov-gf
(Jas. i. 25) ; Kpiral 8i.a\oyi<T]j.&v Trovyp&v (Jas. ii. 4) j and perhaps the difficult
rpofl-Tjs &iro(rKta<rjya (Jas. i. 17). The meaning here is "winning words." The
very first meaning of xdpis (%apw) is "comeliness, winsomeness" (Horn. Od.
1 "Jesus acknowledged the Old Testament in its full extent and its perfect
sacredness. The Scripture cannot be broken^ He says (Jn. x. 35), and forthwith
draws His argument from the wording of it. Of course He can only have
meant by this the Scripture in the form in which it was handed down, and He
must have regarded it exactly as His age did (comp. xi. 51). Any kind of
superior knowledge in these matters would merely have made Him incapable of
placing Himself on a level with His hearers respecting the use of Scripture, or
would hare compelled Him to employ a far-reaching accommodation, the very
idea of which involves internal untruthfulness. All, therefore, that is narrated
in Scripture He accepted absolutely as actual history, and He regarded the
several books as composed by the men to whom they were ascribed by tradition **
(B. Weiss, Leben /esu, I. Hi. 5, Eng. tr. ii. pp. 62, 63).
IV. 22, 23.J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 125
viii. 175 ; Eccles. x. 12 ; Ps. xliv. 3 ; Ecclus, xxi. 16, xxxvii. 21 ; Col. iv. 6) :
and in all these passages it is the winsomeness of language that is specially
signified. From this objective attractiveness it easily passes to subjective
"favour, kindness, goodwill," esp. from a superior to an inferior (Acts li. 47 ;
Gen. xviii. 3, xxxii. 5, xxxiiu 8, etc. ) ; and hence, in particular, of finding
"favour" with God (i. 30; Acts vii. 46; Exod. xxxiii. 12, 13, 16, etc.). From
the sense of God's favour generally (ii 40, 52 ; Jn. i. 14, 16) we come to the
specially theological sense of " God's favour to sinners, the free gift of His
grace " (Acts xiv. 3, xx. 24, 32 ; and the Pauline Epp. passim}* Lastly, it
sometimes means the "gratitude" which this favour produces in the recipient
(vi. 32-34, xvii. 9 ; i Cor. x. 30), The word does not occur in Mt. or Mk.
See Sanday on Rom. i. 5, and Blass on Acts ii. 47 and iv. 33.
Origen evidently had this passage in his mind when he wrote : " For a prool
that grace was poured on Hts lips (Ps. xliv. 3, ^^i6f\ T\ X&PLS & xethecrlv crov)
is this, that although the period of His teaching was short, for He taught
somewhere about a year and a few months, the world has been filled with His
teaching" (De Prin. iv. i. 5). But the words so calculated to win did not win
the congregation. They were ** fulfilled in their ears," but not hi their hearts. 1
A doubt at once arose in their minds as to the congruity of such words with one
whom they had known all His life as the "son of Joseph" the carpenter.
Here oCros has a contemptuous turn, as often (v. 21, vii. 39, 49, xv. 2, xxii. 56,
59, etc.) : yet the Vulg. in none of these places has t'stt, but hie. " Is not this
person Joseph's son ? What does he mean by using such language ? " Just as
a single sentence is given as a summary of His discourse, so a single question is
given as a summary of their scepticism.
While the oSros and vl6s is in all three, the question as a whole differs. Mk.
iv b T^KTUV, 6 vlbs 7-775 Mapla? ; (vi. 3). Mt. has Q$x o$r6s
'
6 TQV T^KTOVOS vl6s ; (xiii. 55). Lk. Q&X.I vl6$ 4crny 'Iwerfy& ofiros ; And while
the others mention Christ's brothers and sisters in close connexion with His
mother, Lk. mentions none of them. Lk. and Jn, seem to prefer the expres-
sion "son of Joseph " (Lk. iii. 23, iv. 22 ; Jn. i. 45, vi. 42). Renan thinks that
Marc ne connatt pas Joseph ( V. dej. p. 71). But it may be that, as he does
not record the virgin birth of Christ, he avoids the expression " son of Joseph "
or " the carpenter's son," which those who have recorded the virgin birth could
use without risk of being misunderstood,
OS. ndrrojs ipetrc /AOL rrj^ -rrapaj3oX$ji< Tad]>. "At all events,
assuredly, ye will say," etc. : TTOJ/TCUS is used in strong affirmations
(Acts xxi. 22, xxviii. 4 ; i Cor. ix. 10). Excepting Heb. ix. 9 and xi.
19, vapa/3oX7j occurs only in the Synoptic Gospels : in Jn. x. 6 and
xvi. 25, 29, as in 2 Pet ii. 22, the word used is vapoifiia. It need
not be doubted that the notion of placing beside for the sake of
comparison, rather than that of merely putting forth, lies at the root
of -Trapa^oX-jy. From the notion of (i) "throwing beside" come
the further notions of (2) "exposing" and (3) "comparing," all
three of which are common meanings of irapa/SdXXw. While the
adj. 7ra/oa/?oAos represents the derived notion on the one side, the
subst, Trapa./3oXirj represents that on the other side. A irapaftoX.^,
therefore, is "an utterance which involves a comparison." Hence
various meanings : i. a complete parable or allegory (viiL 4, xiii. 6,
1 Comp. Augustine's description of his indifference to the preaching ol
Ambrose, although charmed with his winning style ; JRerum incuriosus nt con*
ttmptvr adstabam et dekctdbar sutcoitait scrmonis (In Ezek. yixjii. 32}*
126 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 3.
etc.); 2. a single figurative saying, proverb, or illustration (hete;
v - 36 vi 39) ; 3. a saying of deeper meaning, which becomes in-
telligible through comparison, in which sense it is sometimes joined
with <TKOTivbs Xdyo? (Prov. L 6), -jrpo/SX^/m (Ps. xlix. 5, Ixxviii. 2),
and the like. In the teaching of Christ irapa/3oX.ij is commonly
used in the first sense, and is a means of making known the
mysteries of the kingdom in a mixed audience; for it conceals
from the unworthy what it reveals to the worthy (viii. 9, 10). See
Crem. Lex. pp. 124, 657 ; Hatch, BibL Grk^ p. 70 ; Hase, Gesch.
fesu, 63, p. 535, ed. 1891; Didon, Jesus Christ^ ch. vi. p. 391,
ed. 1891 ; Latham, Pastor Pastorum, ch. x.
"lorpe, Oepdireuo-ov crcauToV. " Heal thine own lameness " is the
Hebrew form of the proverb. Similar sayings exist in other litera-
tures : e.g. a fragment of Euripides, aXXwv tarpos, avros IX/ceo-t
Ppvw ; Ser. Sulpicius to Cicero, Neque imitare malos medicos^ qui
in alienis morbis profitentur tenere se medicines, scientiam^ ipsi se
curare non possunt (Cic. Epp. ad dimrsos^ iv. 5). Hobart quotes
from Galen, cxp^v ^ v UVTOV tavrov irpwrov lacrOai r cr-u/ATrrcojaa /cat
ovrws m;(apetv crpovs ^epaTrevetv. Comp. Aesch. P. V. 469 ; Ov,
Metam. vii. 561 ; and the other examples in Lightfoot and Wetst.
It is remarkable that this saying of Christ is preserved only by
the beloved physician. Its meaning is disputed. Some take the
words which follow to be the explanation of it : " Heal the ills of
thine own town." Thus Corn, k Lap., " Cure Thine own people
and Thine own country, which should be as dear to Thee as Thyself."
Similarly Beng. Alf. Sadler and others. It is thus made to mean
much the same as "Charity begins at home." But tarpe and
en-avroV ought to be interpreted of the same person or group ; not
one of a person and the other of his neighbours. "Prophet,
heal Thine own countrymen" is not parallel to "Physician, heal
Thyself? The saying plainly refers to the passage just read from
Isaiah ; and although Lk. omits the words " to heal the broken-
hearted," yet Christ must have read them, and He had probably
explained them. He professed to be the fulfilment of them, and
to be healing the miseries of mankind. The people are supposed
to tell Him to better His own condition before bettering that of
others. He must make His own position more secure, and give
evidence of His high mission before asserting it He must work
convincing miracles, such as He is said to have worked elsewhere.
Comp. <rc3croT> srcavrov /cat ^as (xxiii. 39).
oua YjKouaafiey. They do not say ocra 47ron7cra9, wishing to leave
it open whether the report may not be untrue. We learn from
Jn. ii. 1 2 that after the miracle at Cana, Jesus was at Capernaum
for a short time ; and from John ii. 23, that there were many unre-
corded miracles. It is probably to reports of some of these that
reference is here made. For the constr. comp. Acts vii 1 2 andxxiv. io
IV. 23-25.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 12?
See on ver. 31. The readings vary between efc
Ka0." (K B), eft Ka<. ;D L), tv rg Ka<. (x), and fr Ka0. (A K). The
substitution of & for els, and the omission of the article between a preposition
and a proper name, are obvious corrections by a later hand. The as is not
" put for &." It may be doubted whether these two prepositions are ever
interchanged. Rather e& is used because of the idea of motion contained in
" come to pass." It is scarcely possible that els contains the notion of "to
the advantage of," and indicates the petty jealousy of the people of Nazareth.
We have the same constr. i. 44 ; Acts xxviii. 6 (comp. Lk. xi. 7) ; and in no
case is there any idea of advantage. That the jealousy was a fact, and that
the people of Nazareth were inclined to discount or discredit all that seemed
to tell in favour of prosperous Capernaum, is probable ; but there is no hint
of this in the els. What is said to have happened to Capernaum ought to
happen Jure. Conno. the Cornish use of "to" for "at. In N.T. &5e is
never "thus," but either "hither" (ix. 41, xiv. 21, xix. 27) or "here" (k.
33, acxii. 38). The fr rjj Trarptdt <rov is epexegetic of <S5e, and means " Thy
native town," not the whole of Israel : comp. Mk, vi. 5 ; Mt. xiii, 58.
24. Etirei> Se. When these words occur between two utter-
ances of Christ, they seem to indicate that there is an interval
between what precedes and what follows. The report of what
was said on this occasion is evidently very condensed. Comp.
vi. 39, xii. 16, xv. n, xviL i, 22, xviii. 9, and see on i. 8. The
Se is "but " (Cov.) rather than "and " (all other English Versions);
ait autem (Vulg.). "But, instead of gratifying them, He said."
There are various proverbial sayings which declare that those who
are close to what is great do not appreciate the greatness. Jesus
declares that He is no exception to this rule, and implies that He
will work no miracles to free Himself from its operation. In the
wilderness He had resisted a similar suggestion that He should
work a miracle of display, a mere repas (vv. 9-11). In this matter
Nazareth is a type of the whole nation, which rejected Him
because He did not conform to their own ideas of the Messiah.
Their test resembles that of the hierarchy, "He is the King of
Israel ; let Him now come down from the cross, and we will
believe Him" (Mt xxvii. 42). ETTrsv Se is peculiar to Lk. (i. 13).
25. "But I am like the Prophets, not only in the treatment
which I receive from My own people, but also in My principles of
action. For they also bestowed their miraculous benefits upon
outsiders, although there were many of then* own people who
would have been very glad of such blessings." Christ is here
appealing to their knowledge of Scripture, not to any facts out-
side the O.T. Testatur hoc Dominus ex luce omnisdentix su&
is not a legitimate inference. Arguments drawn from what was
known to Him, but not known to them, would not be likely to
influence His&udience. Note <L s = " when."
4-jr* &> JBas. " On a basis of truth " : comp. Mk. xii. 14* We hare
similar a JHpal expressions in IT fcr^j (#. ^tof/xts), tori
r
128 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [XV. 25-28,
em Irq rpia KOI p,7Ji/as l. Jesus, 'ike His brother James (Jas.
v. 17), follows Jewish tradition as to the duration of the famins.
In i Kings xviii. i we are told that the rain came in the third
year, which would make the drought about two years and a half.
But ever since the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes, three
years and a half ( = 42 months =1260 days) had become the
traditional duration of times of great calamity (Dan. vii. 25, xii. 7 ;
Rev. xi. 2, 3, xii. 6, 14, xiiL 5). The Jews would regard "in the
third year" as covering three years, and would argue that the
famine must have continued for some time after the rain came.
For M c. cue. of duration of time ("over," t.e. "during"), comp. Acts
riii. 31, xix. 10 ; Hdt. iii. 59. 2, vi. 101. 3 ; Thuc. ii. 25. 4. Heb. xi. 30 is
different. In accordance with common usage \Lju,6$ is here masc. ; but in
xv. 14 and Acts xi. 28 it is fern. ace. to what is called Doric usage, as in the
Megarean of Aristoph. Acham. 743. But this usage occurs elsewhere in late
Greek. It perhaps passed from the Doric into the KOIJO) AidXe/croy : for
examples see Wetst. and L. and S. Lex. In LXX perhaps only i Kings xviii. 2.
em Trao-ay T(\V y^. Here, as in Jas. v. 17, only the land of
Israel need be understood ; but it is possible that in each case we
have a popular hyperbole, and that the whole world is meant.
Lk. xxi. 23 and Rom. ix. 28 are not quite parallel, for there the
context plainly limits the meaning. Lk. xxiii. 44 is another
doubtful case, and there AV. has "earth" and RV. "land."
Both have "land "here.
26. The translation of eJ fvfi in this and the following clauses by " but
only" (RV.), r/(Beza), or sedtantum, is justifiable, because "save" (AV.)
and nisi (Vulg.) seem to involve an absurdity which was not apparent to a
Greek. It is not, however, correct to say that in such cases eJ / is put for
AXX<, any more than in Mt. xx. 23 or Mk. iv. 22 it would be correct to say
that d\Xd is put for el pif. Here and in Mt. xii. 4 (comp. Rom. xiv. 14 ;
I Cor. vii. 17 ; Gal. i. 7, ii. 16) "the question is not whether el prf retains
its exceptive force, for this it seems always to do, but whether the exception
refers to the whole clause or to the verb alone " (Lft. on Gal. i. 19) : comp.
Rev. xxi. 27. In els Saprra, AT.T.X., we perhaps have a quotation from LXX
of I Kings xvii. 9. There, as here, the readings vary between ZtSw^oy and
StSw^a? (sc. yys or %t6pas). Here the latter is right, meaning the territory of
Sidon, in which Sarepta lay. Zarephath (in Syriac Tsarfah y in Greek
2idpe<pda t 2dpeTTa, and 2<p6a) is probably represented by the modern
Stirafend on the coast road between Tyre and Sidon.
27. lirl 'E\tcra(o-u. For this use of M with a proper name to give a date,
"in the time of," comp. iii. 2 j Acts xi. 28 ; i Mac. xiii. 42, xiv. 27 ; 2 Mac.
xv. 22. The spelling EXt<r<rcuos is not well attested (WH. ii. App. p. 159).
For some of the " many lepers " comp. 2 Kings vii. 3, where we have four at
the gate of Samaria. In N.T. Stf/>ios is the only form of the adj. that is
found, viz. here and perhaps Mk. vii. 26 ; but Stfpos, Stfpios, and Svpa,K<5j occur
elsewhere (Hdt. ii. 104. 6 ; Aesch. JPers, 83 ; Theophr. C. /*. ii. 17. 3).
28. lirXTJ(T0ir|crai' Trdires OufxoG. See on i. 66. They see the
point of His illustrations ; He has been comparing them to those
Jews who were judged less worthy of Divine benefits than the
IV. 28-30.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 129
heathen. It is this that infuriates them, just as it infuriated the
Jews at Jerusalem to be told by S. Paul that the heathen would
receive the blessings which they despised (Acts xiii. 46, 50, xxii
21, 22). Yet to this day the position remains the same; and
Gentiles enjoy the Divine privileges of which the Jews have
deprived themselves. His comparing Himself to such Prophets
as Elijah and Elisha would add to the wrath of the Nazarenes
On the other hand, these early instances of God's special blessings
being conferred upon heathen, would have peculiar interest for Lk
29. ws ocjjpuos TOU opous. Tradition makes the scene of this
attempt to be a precipice, varying from 80 to 300 feet in height,
which exists some distance off to the S.E. of the town ; and we
read that " they cast Him out of the town and led Him as far as
the brow," etc. But modern writers think that a much smaller
precipice close at hand is the spot. Van der Velde conjectures
that it has crumbled away ; Conder, that it is hidden under some
of the houses. Stanley says that Nazareth "is built *upon, J that
is, on the side of, 'a mountain'; but the *brow' is not beneath,
but over the town, and such a cliff as is here implied is to be found,
as all modern travellers describe, in the abrupt face of the lime-
stone rock, about 30 or 40 feet high, overhanging the Maronite
Convent at the S.W. corner of the town " (Sin. 6 Pal. p. 367}.
So also Robinson (Res. in Pal. ii. pp. 325, 330), Hacket (DJ3* ii.
p. 470), and Schulz hi Herzog (PRJL? x. p. 447). The l<* o5, of
course, refers to rov op<w, not to o<$pvos. Both AV. and RV. have
" the brow of the hill whereon," which might easily be misunder-
stood. The town is on, the hill, but not on the brow of it : the
brow is above the modern village. Nowhere else in N.T. does
6<t>pv$ occur. Comp. Horn. //. xx. 151 ; and o</>uoas, IL xxii. 411,
and Hdt v. 92. 10, with other instances in Wetst. Supercilium is
similarly used: Virg. Georg. i. 108; Liv. xxviL 18, xxxiv. 29.
5<rr KaTo.KpiQp.vCcrai. The &<rre is not needed (i. 22 ; Mt. & 2, xx. 28 ;
Acts v. 31); but it expresses more clearly the result which was intended.
Comp. xx. 20, where, as here, &0re has been altered in some texts into the
simpler eZs rd, a constr. which Lk. does not employ elsewhere. In ix. 52 the
true reading is perhaps eta ; but in Mt. x. I, xxiv. 24, xxvii. I there is no doubt
about the #<rrc. For KaraKpijtivLfa (here only in N.T.) comp. 2 Chron.
xxv. 12 ; 2 Mac. i. 15, xiv. 43 ; 4 Mac. iv. 2$ ; Jos. Ant. VL o. 2, ix. 9. I
The whole attempt to put Jesus to death was perhaps an instance of the form
of punishment which the Jews called the " rebel's riating," which was some-
what analogous to Lynch Law. The (t rebel's beating" was adrnmistered by
the people, without trial and on the spot, when anyone was caught in what
seemed to be a flagrant violation of some law or tradition. Comp. the attempt!
to stone Jesus (Jn. viii, 59, x. 31). We have a similar attempt upon S. Paul'i
life (Acts xxi. 31, 32). In S. Stephen's case a formal trial seems to have ended
in the " rebel's beating" (Edersh. Tke Temple, p. 43).
3O. auros Be SteXOo^ Bid p&rou aura^ liropctfero. "But He (in
9
I3O THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 30, 3L
contrast to this attempt), after passing through the midst of them,
went His way." The addition of &a ^O-QV is for emphasis, and
seems to imply that there was something miraculous in His
passing through the very midst of those who were intending to
slay Him, and seemed to have Him entirely in their power. They
had asked for a miracle, and this was the miracle granted to them.
Those who think that it was His determined look or personal
majesty which saved Him, have to explain why this did not
prevent them from casting Him out of the synagogue. 1 It seems
better with Meyer and ancient commentators to understand a
miracle dependent on the will of Jesus : comp. Jn. xviii. 6 ; Dan.
vi. 22, Jn. viii. 59 is different : then Jesus hid Himself before
escaping. For SteXOwy see on ii. 15.
TTopeuTo. Here used in its common signification of going on
towards a goal : " He went His way " to Capernaum. And, so fai
as we know, He did not return to Nazareth. It had become a
typical example of "His own people receiving Him not" (Jn.
i. n); and apparently it had no other opportunity (but see
Edersh. L. 6 s * T. i. ch. xxvii.). If Mk. vi. 1-6 and Mt xiii.
53-58 refer to a different occasion, it probably preceded this.
After the attempt on His life He would not be likely to return ;
and, if He did return, they could hardly, after this experience of
Him, ask, " Whence has this man this wisdom ? " or be astonished
at His teaching.
Meyer (on Mt. xiii. 53), Wieseler (Chron. Syn. iii. 2, Eng. tr. p. 258), Godet
(/.<:., Eng. tr. i. p. 240^, Tischendorf (Synop. Evan. 29, 54), and others dis-
tinguish the two occasions. If with Caspari (Chron. Inf. 100) we identify
them, then Lk. is the more full and vivid, for the others omit the text of the
discourse and the attempt to kill Him. In this case Strauss may be right in sup-
posing that Lk. has placed the incident at the beginning of the ministry, although
it took place later, because he saw how typical it was of the ministry as a whole
(Lcbenjesuy p. 12 1, 1864). That it was this attempt on His life which made
Christ change His abode from Nazareth to Capernaum is contradicted by ver.
1 6. " Where He had been brought up " implies that He had ceased to reside
^ere: and from ver. 23 we infer that Capernaum had already become His
headquarters. Thither His Mother and brethren had also moved, while His
sisters remained at Nazareth (Mt JtiiL 56 ; Mk. vL 3), very probably because
they had married there.
81-44. The Stay at Capernaum : chiefly a Record of Miracles
of Healing. See Wsctt Characteristics of the Gospel Miracles^
Macmillan, 1859 ; Introduction to the Study of the Gospels^ App.
E: "A Classification of the Gospel Miracles," Macmillan, 1888.
81-37* The Healing of a Demoniac in the Synagogue at Caper-
1 Even Godet is among these. La majestt de sa ptrsonne et ta firmetf cU
son regard imposbrmt a ces furuux. V historic raconte plusieurs traits sem*
Matties (i. p, 327, seme ed.). Better Didon: Une force divint le
(p. 312, ed. 1891). See Hase, Gesch. Jesu^ p. 445, ed. 1891*
IV. SI.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 13!
naum. Mk. i. 21-28. Both Lk. and ML place this first among
Christ's miracles; wh areas Mt. puts the healing of a leper first
(viii. 2-4). Marcion began his mutilated edition of Lk. at this
point with the words *O EO'S Ka-rijXQw els Ka<^>api/aovpu The
earlier portion, which teaches the humanity of Christ, he omitted,
excepting the first clause of iii. r (Tert Adv. Marc. iv. 7. i).
81. Ka-n]X0ei>. Nazareth is on higher ground than Capernaum,
which was on the shore of the lake ; and therefore " went down n
or " came down " is the probable meaning. But it is possible that
here and Acts xviii, 5 it means " returned," as often in class. Grk.
(Hdt. iv. 4. 2, v. 30. 4 ; Thuc. viiL 68. 3). Excepting Jas, iii
15, the verb occurs in N.T. only in Lk. (ix. 37 and twelve times
in Acts).
Ka<j>apvaotjfA. This is the correct spelling, Caphar-Nahum, o! which
Ka-n-ep^aoi/^ is a Syrian corruption (WH. ii. App. p. 160). It was the chief Jewish
town, as Tiberias was the chief Roman town, of the neighbourhood. It was
therefore a good centre, especially as traders from all parts frequently met
there (Mk. ii. 15, iii. 20, 32, etc.). It is not mentioned in O.T., and perhaj
was not founded till after the Exile. Josephus mentions it only once, viz. in his
description of the lake (B. J* iii. 10. 7, 8), and then not as a town but as a
3-3777? yovi^ayrdrrfy which irrigates the neighbourhood : but there is no doubt that
the Kefapv&fjL'r), to which Josephus was carried, when he was thrown from his
horse in a skirmish with Roman troops, is Capernaum ( Vita, 72). The identi-
fication with the modern Tell Htim (Nau, Pococke, Burckhardt, Renan, 1 Ritter,
Rodiger, Ewald) is possible, but not certain. Many advocate the claims of
Khan Minyeh, which is three miles to the south {Quaresmrus, Keim, Robinson,
Sepp, Stanley, Strauss, Wilson). For the chief arguments see Wilson in D*B?
i. p. 530, and in Picturesque Pakstine^ ii. p. 81 ; Schulz in Herzog, RE.* vii.
p. 501 ; Keim, Jes. ofNaz., Eng. tr. iL p. 369 ; Andrews, Life of our Lord^ pp.
221-239, ed. 1592. The doubts about the site show how completely the woes
pronounced upon the place (Mt. xi. 23) have been fulfilled. But in any case
Jesus left the seclusion of the mountains for a busy mercantile centre by the lake.
-njs faXiXatas. Lk. adds this, because this is the first
time that he mentions Capernaum in his narrative. The explana-
tion could not be made ver. 23. It is another small indication
that he is writing for those who are not familiar with the geography
of Palestine: comp. i. 26, iL 4, viii. 26.
fy SiSdcrKw aurods IK rots oxlpjiJcurtr. Some maie vv. 31, 32 a
general introduction, stating the habitual practice, of which w.
33-37 gave a particular instance. In support of this they urge
the analytical tense, ^v StSao-Kcov, and the plur. rots o-a/2/&wrH> :
"He used to teach them on the sabbath days." But in the
parallel passage iSi'Satr/ccy and yv StSdo-Kw are equivalent, and
1 Of the cinq petites villes dont Fhumanit$parlera eternellemcnt autant q%u
de Rome ei <?Athenes> Renan considers the identification of Magala (Med/del)
alone as certain. Of Capharnahum, Chorazin, Dalmanutha, and Bethsaida he
says, II est douteux qdon arrive jamazs sur ce sol prof ondement de&astt, b
fa places ou fhumanite txwdraii venir baistr ftmprtintt d* us pink (
Jhus, p, 143).
132 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 31-33.
apparently refer to one occasion only (note the eutfife, Mk. i. 22, 23) :
and ra o-afifiaTa, is often sing, in meaning (Mt. xxviii. i ; Col. ii.
1 6 ; Exod. xx, 10; Lev. xxiii. 32 ; Jos, Ant i. i. i, h'i. 6. 6, x. i \
Hor. Sat. i. 9. 69). Acts xvii. 2 is the only place in N.T. in which
vdppoLTa is plur. in meaning, and there a numeral necessitates it,
7rl craft/Bara rpia ; which, however, may mean " for three weeks?
and not " for three sabbaths? Syr-Sin, here has " the sabbath days."
The Aramaic form of the word ends in a, the transliteration of which into
Greek looked like a neut. plur. This idea was confirmed by the fact that
Greek festivals are commonly neut. plur. : rd yevfoia, tyicatvia, iravaQfyaia,
K.T.\. Hence ffdpfiara, may either mean "a sabbath" or "sabbaths" or "a
week." Here it is better to retain the sing, meaning, and refer the whole of
32-37 to one occasion. In N.T. trdpfaorLv is the usual form of the dat. plur.,
with ffo.fr3a.Tois as ./. in some authorities (in B twice, Mt. xii. I, 12). In
LXX <ra/5 ( 5dTotj prevails. Joseph us uses both.
32. ef ejoucria rjv 6 Xoyos aurou. This does not refer to the
power which His'words had over the demoniac, but to the authority
with which they came home to the consciences of His hearers.
The healing of the demoniac was not so much an example of this
I^OVCTLOL as evidence that He had a Divine commission to exercise
It Lk. omits the comparison with the formal and ineffectual
teaching of the scribes (Mk. i, 22 ; Mt vii. 29).
The fr means "clothed in, invested with" (i. 17, iv. 36, 3d. 15, 18, 19,
20, xx. 2, 8 ; I Cor. ii. 4 ; Eph. vi. 2 ; 2 Thes. ii. 9). This use of iv is freq.
in late Grk. Green, Gram, of N. T. p. 206.
83. Iv rg auvaywYirj. "In the synagogue" in which He was
teaching on that sabbath; which confirms the view that ver. 31
refers to a particular occasion. We have already been told that it
was His practice to teach in the synagogues. But " in the syna-
gogue" may mean in the only one which Capernaum possessed
(viL 5).
IXWK weujxa SatfjioKtou dca6(pjou. The phrase is unique, and
the exact analysis of it is uncertain. The gen. may be of apposi-
tion (ii. 41, xxii. i ; Jn. ii. 21, xi. 13, xiii. i), or of quality (see on
ver. 22), or of possession, Le* an influence which belonged to an
unclean demon (Rev. xvi. 14). As to the Evangelists' use of the
epithet aKatiaprov, strange mistakes have been made. Wordsworth
inaccurately says, "Both St. Mark and St. Luke, writing for Gentiles,
add the word aKaOaprov to Satywmov, which St. Matthew, writing to
Jews (for whom it was not necessary), never does." Alford in
correcting him is himself inaccurate. He says, " The renl fact is,
that St Mark uses the word Sai/^oVtoy thirteen times, and never
adds the epithet aKaOaprov to it (his word here is -jn/ev/m only) ;
St. Luke, eighteen times, and only adds it this once. So much
for the accuracy of the data on which inferences of this kind are
IV. 33, 34.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 133
founded." Edersheim is still more inaccurate in his statement of
the facts \L* 6 7! L p. 479 n). Farrar has the strange misstate-
ment that " the word c unclean * is peculiar to St. Luke, who writes
for Gentiles." It occurs in Mt, Paul, and Apoc., as well as Mk.
The facts are these. Mt. uses &u/xoVioy ten times, and has
aj<d6apTov twice as an epithet of -m/er^a, Mk. has Sai^oviov thirteen
times, and aKaOaprov eleven times as an epithet of Trvev/xa. Lk. in
the Gospel has Scu/xoi/tov twenty-two times, with aKaOaprov as an
epithet, once of Sat/jLovtov, and once of Trvtv^a ; and with Trovypov
twice as an epithet of Trvevpa. In the Acts he has Saip&vLov once ;
and uses aKa6aprov twice, and worrjpoV four times, as an epithet of
Trvev/jia. The fact, therefore, remains 5 that the two Evangelists who
wrote for Gentiles (to whom demons or spirits were indifferent)
add a distinctive epithet much more often than the one who wrote
for Jews (who distinguished evil spirits from good). Moreover,
both Mk. and Lk. add this epithet the very first time that they
mention these beings (Mk. i. 23 ; Lk. iv. 33) ; whereas Mt men-'
tions them several times (vii. 22, viii. 16, ix. 33, 34) before he adds
the oLKaOaprov (x. i). In this passage Lk. and Mk. describe the
fact of possession in opposite ways. Here the man has the unclean
spirit. There he is in the unclean spirit's power, Iv Tryev^an
aKa6dpTto : with which we may compare the expression of Josephus,
TOVS VTTO TWV SatjLtoviW XafjLJ3avo/jii'ovs (Ant. viii. 2. 5). Similarly,
we say of a man that " he is out of his mind," or that " his mind
is gone " out of him. That a man thus afflicted should be in the
synagogue is surprising. He may have come in unobserved ; or
his malady may have been dormant so long as to have seemed to
be cured. The presence of " the Holy One of God " provokes a
crisis. For avl^pa^v comp. Josh. vi. 5 ; i Sam. iv. 5; and for
4>&>yjj j^ey^X?} see on i. 42.
34. *Ea. Probably not the imperative of cao>, " Let alone, leave
me in peace," but an interjection of anger or dismay ; common in
Attic poetry, but rare in prose (Aesch. P. V. 298, 688 j Eur. Hec.
501 ; Plato, Prof. 314 D). Here only in N.T. Comp. Job iv.
19?, xv. 1 6, xix. 5, xxv. 6. Fritzsche on Mk. i. 24 (where the word
is an interpolation) and L. and S. Lex. regard the imperative as the
origin of the interjection, which does not seem probable.
TI TjpK KCU croL; Not "What have we to contend about?" a
meaning which the phrase has nowhere in N.T. and perhaps only
once, if at all, in O.T. (2 Chron. xxxv. 21), but "What have we in
common?" Comp. viii. 28; Mt. viii. 29; Mk. i. 24; Jn. ii. 4;
Judg. xi. 12; i Kings xvii. 18 ; 2 Kings iii. 13; 2 Sam. xvi. 10;
I Esdr. i. 26; Epict. JDiss. i. i. 16, L 27. 13, ii. 9. 16.
*lij<rov Najaptjv^. This form of the adjective is found xxiv, 19 ; Mk, L
24, x. 47, xiv. 67, xvi. 6 ; but not in Mt. or Jn. or Acts. Its appearance
here i* no proof that Lk. is borrowing from Mk. JSa^wpcuos occurs Lk.
134 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 34,
37 ; Mt ii. 23, xrri. 71 ; Jn. rviii. 5, 7, xix. 19 ; Acts ii. 22, iii. 6, iv. 10,
vi. 14, xxii. 8, xsvi. 9; but not in Mk. The adjective, esp. Nafw/ocuos,
which is used in the title on the cross, sometimes has a tinge of contempt ;
and with the article it may be rendered " the Nazarene." Hence the early
Christians were contemptuously called " the Nazarenes " (Acts xxiv. 5). Con-
trast 6 drd Naap<?r (Mt. xxi. II ; Mk. i. 9; Jn. i. 46; Acts x. 38), which
is a mere statement of fact. It is worth noting that this demoniac, who is a
Jew, addresses Jesus as " of Nazareth," which the Gerasene, who was possibly
a heathen, does not do (viii. 28).
TJK06S diroX&m ^fias ; The ^a? and the preceding y/uv prob-
ably do not include the man, but rather other evil spirits. Com-
munem inter se causam habent d&monia (Beng.). It seems to be
idle to speculate as to the meaning of aTroAeo-at : apparently it is
the same as ets r^v a/3v<r<rov aire^Qeiv (viii. 31).
otSd ae TLS e*> 6 ayios TOO 0eou. In Mk. otSa/zey, which is more
m harmony with fjjMv and ^/x-as. Godet remarks that 6 ayios TOV
eov explains the knowledge. It was instinctive, and therefore
otSa is more suitable than yivcoor/cw. Eantipafhie riest pas moins
dairooyante que la sympathie. In the unique holiness of Jesus thus
evil spirit felt an essentially hostile power. The expression 6 ayi-os
rov ov occurs in the parallel in Mk. and Jn. vi. 69 ; but nowhere
else: comp. Acts iv. 27; i Jn. ii. 20; Rev. iii. 7. It may mean
either " consecrated to God" or " consecrated by God." In a lower
sense priests and Prophets are called aytot ro9 eov or Kvptov (Ps.
cvi. 1 6). It was not in flattery (male adulans^ as Tertullian says)
that the evil spirit thus addressed Him, but in horror. From the
Holy One he could expect nothing but destruction (Jas. ii. 19;
comp. Mt. viii. 29).
85. eircTipjcrej' aurw. " He rebuked the demon " who had used
the man as his mouth-piece. The verb is often used of rebuking
violence (ver. 41, viii. 24, ix. 42; Mt viii. 26, xvii. 18; Mk. iv. 39;
Jude 9); yet must not on that account be rendered "restrain"
(Fritzsche on Mt viii. 26, p. 325).
la N.T. rmjK<a? has no other meaning than "rebuke"; but in class.
Grk. it means z. " lay a value on, rate " ; 2. " lay a penalty on, sentence " ;
3. "chide, rate, rebuke." But while there is a real connexion between the
first and third meanings of the Greek verb, in English we have a mere
accident of language : " rate" = " value " is a different word from " rate " a
** scold." Note that Christ required no faith of demoniacs.
, Lit "Stop thy mouth with a <t^o?, be muzzled":
used literally i Cor. ix. 9 ; i Tim. v. 18; and as here, Mt xxii. 12;
Mk. i. 25, iv. 39 ; Jos. B. J. i. 22. 3. The peculiar infin. <^ip.oiv
occurs i Pet. ii. 15. Comp. ewroSejcaToiv (Heb. vii. 5); KaracrKyvoiv
(Mt. xui 32; Mk. iv. 32). The verb is probably a vernacular
word: it is not found between Aristoph. (Nub. 592) and LXX
(Kennedy, Sources o/N.T. Grk. p. 41).
IY. 35-37.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 135
ical ?|X0e iir* avTOv. This is the true reading. Other writers commonly
have ^pxofJiaL AT; but Lk. prefers t&pxojMtt &v6 (ver. 41, v. 8, viii. 2, 29,
33. 35 38, ix. 5, ri. 24, etc.).
frtyoiv CLVTQV . . . fiijSev pXdtyav auT<5v. " Having thrown him "
down in convulsions (a-Trapdgav Mk.) . . . without (as one might
have expected) having injured him at all." With ovBev fiXdij/av we
should have had a mere statement of fact But in N.T we com-
monly have fjirj with participles : comp. xi. 24, xii. 47, and see Win.
Iv. 5. ,8, p. 607. For ju/^Sev pXdij/av Mk. has cjxDvrjo-av (pwfj /x.yaA$.
It was the convulsions and the loud cry which made the spectators
suppose that the man had been injured. The malice of the demon
made the healing of the man as painful as possible. Hobart
classes both piVreiv and pXairreiv as medical words, the one being
used of convulsions, the latter of injury to the system (Med. Lang.
of Lk. p. 2).
36. cycVcro 0djipos. Mk. has Ida^dfjcrav ; but Lk. Is fond of
these periphrases with yfoopai (L 65, vi. 49, viii. 17, xii. 40, xiii. 2, 4,
xviii. 23, eta) : see on iii. 22. The word expresses amazement
akin to terror, and the subst is peculiar to Lk. (v. 9; Acts iii. 10).
Just as Christ's doctrine amazed them in comparison with the
formalism of the scribes, so His authority over demons in compari-
son with the attempts of the exorcists : all the more so, because a
single word sufficed for Him, whereas the exorcists used incanta-
tions, charms, and much superstitious ceremonial (Tob. viii. 1-3 ;
Jos. Ant. viii. 2. 5; Justin, ApoL ii. 6; Try. Ixxxv.).
TLS 6 Xoyos OUTOS. Not, Quid hoc rei estt "What manner a
thinge is this?" (Beza, Luth. Tyn. Cran. Grotius), but Quod est
hoc ver&um? "What is this word?" (Vulg. Wic, Rhem. RV.).
It is doubtful whether in N.T. Xoyos has the meaning of " event,
occurrence, deed": but comp. L 4 and Mk. i. 45. "Whether Xoyos
is here to be confined to the command given to the demon, or
includes the previous teaching (ver. 32), is uncertain. Mk. L 27 is
in favour of the latter. In this case we have an ambiguous OTI to
deal with; and once more "because" or "for" is more probable
than " that " (see on L 45). But if "that " be adopted, 6 Xoyos has
the more limited meaning : "What is this word, that with authority?"
etc,
ey eou<rta KCU Suydtfieu eavcrufr cut nonpotest contradict ; SiW/m,
tut non potest resisti (Beng.). Mk. has KOT loi?<rtav only. The
beloved physician is fond of Swa/ns, esp. in the sense of " inherent
power of healing" (v. 17, vi. 19, viii. 46, ix. i; Acts iii 12, iv. 7,
vi. 8). Mk. has it only once in this sense (v. 30), and Mt. not at
all. The plural in the sense of " manifestations of power, miracles "
(x. 13, xix. 37), is freq. in Mt and Mk. See on Rom. i. 16.
37. lieiroperfero tjxs irepl aoTou. In these sections attention is
often directed to the impression which Jesus made on His audi-
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE (TV. 37.
ences (uv. 20, 22, 32, 36, v. 26), and to the fame which spread
abroad respecting Him (w. 14, 15, 37, 40, v. 15, 17). ^H^os (6)
occurs only here, Acts ii. 2, and Heb. xii. 19. In xxi. 25, ^x ovs
may be gen. of either $ TJX or ^X 0? - But tne existence of TO
ifoos is doubtful The more classical word is y ^, of which
6 5x<>s is a later form. Hobart classes it as a medical word, esp.
for noises in the ears or the head (p. 64).
As already stated, this healing of a demoniac is recorded
by ML, but not by Mr, Ebrard and Holtzmann would have us
believe that it is to compensate for this omission that Mt. gives two
demoniacs among the Gadarenes, where ML and Lk. have only one.
In considering the question of demoniacal possession we must never lose sight
of the indisputable fact, that our sources of information clearly, consistently, and
repeatedly represent Christ as healing demoniacs by commanding demons to
depart out of the afflicted persons. The Synoptic Gospels uniformly state thai
Jesus went through the form of casting out demons.
If the demons were there, and Christ expelled them and set their victims
free, there is nothing to explain : the narrative is in harmony with the facts.
If the demons were not there, and demoniacal possession is a superstition, we
must choose between three hypotheses.
1. Jesus did not employ this method of healing those who were believed to
be possessed, but the Evangelists have erroneously attributed it to Him.
2. Jesus did employ this method and went through the form of casting out
demons, although He knew that there were no demons there to be cast out.
3. Jesus did employ this method and went through the form of casting out
demons, because in this matter He shared the erroneous belief of His con-
temporaries.
On the whole subject consult articles in Z?.J?. a , SchafF-Herzog, Ency. Brit*
on "Demoniacs," "Demons," " Demonology " ; Trench, Miracles, No. 5;
Caldwell, Contemp. Rev. Feb. 1876, vol. xxvii. pp. 369 f No explanation is
satisfactory which does not account for the uniform and repeated testimony of
the Evangelists.
88, 89- The Healing of Peter's Mother-in-law. Mk. i. 30.
It is quite beyond doubt that the relationship expressed by irevBepd is either
"wife's mother" or "husband's mother" (xii. 53; Mt. viii. 14, x. 35; Mk.
i. 30; Ruth L 14, ii. n, 18, 19, 23; Mic. vii. 6; Dem. Plut. Lucian). So also
v&Bepbs is either "wife's father" or "husband's father" (Jn. xviii. 13; Gen.
xxxviii. 25, 38; Judg. i. 16; i Sam. iv. 19, 21). But for "wife's father" the
more indefinite ya, t uftpo$ ("a relation by marriage") is fireq, in LXX (Exod.
iS. i, iv. 18; Num. x. 29; Judg. iv. ii, xix. 4, 7, 9). In Greek there is a dis-
tinct term for " stepmother," viz. tb? very common word iufirpvi& (Horn. Hes.
Hdt. ^sch. Plat. Plut.); and if Lfc. had intended to designate the second
wife of Peter's father, he would have used this term. That he should have
ignored a word in common use which would express his meaning, and employ
another word which has quite a different meaning, is incredible. That Peter
was married is clear from I Cor. ix. 5. Clement of Alexandria says that Peter'i
wife Jhelped him in ministering to women, an apostolic anticipation of Zenana
missions (Strom, iii. 6, p. ^36, ed. Potter). He also states that Peter and Philip
bad children, and that Philip gave his daughters in marriage (ibid. p. 535, e(
Potter, quoted Eus. ff, E.'m. 30. i); but he gives no names. It is remarkable
that nothing is known of any children of any one Apostle. This is the first
mention of Peter by Lk., who treats him as a person too well known to need
introduction. For other miracles of mercy on the sabbath see on xiv. x,
IV. 38, 39.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 137
38. "Avaoras Se diro -rrjs vvvaywyT}$. This may refer to Christ's
rising from His seat ; but it is more natural to understand it of
His leaving the synagogue. The verb is used where no sitting or
lying is presupposed, and means no more than preparation for
departure (i. 39, xv. 18, 20, xxiii. i; Acts x. 20, xxii. 10) : see on
i. 39. Mk. has efeA.<9oyre?, the plur. including Simon and Andrew,
James and John. Neither Lk. nor Mt. mention the presence of
disciples, but Peter, and perhaps Andrew, may be understood
among those who rjpuTr)<rav OVTOV Trepi avrjjs.
oru^exo/xeinri -iruperw jxcyclXw. Perhaps all three words are medical,
and certainly <nWxo/xcu occurs three times as often in Lk. as in the
rest of N.T. Galen states that fevers were distinguished as
"great" and "slight," /^cyaAoi and <r/uicpoi (Hobart, p. 3). Comp.
Plat. Gorg. 512 A. Note the analytical tense.
39. emoras eircivw auTtjs eircTtpjcre}'. Instead of this both Mt.
and Mk. state that He touched her hand. Proximus accessits
ostendebat^ vtrtuti Jesu cedere morbum, neqtte ullum carport ejus a
morbo imminere periculum (Beng.). The eTrcrt/.i^crev of ver. 35 does
not show that the use of the same word here is meant to imply that
the fever is regarded as a personal agent But comp. xiii. n, 16;
Mk. ix. 17, 23. The d^/cev, which is in all three narratives,
harmonizes with either view. In any case this unusual mode of
healing would interest and impress a physician ; and Lk. alone
notices the suddenness with which her strength returned. For
irapaxpTjjJ^ see on v. 2 5.
8t/r)Koi/i auTots. Mk. has a-urw : the aurots includes the disciples
and others present. Her being able to minister to them proves
the completeness of the cure. Recovery from fever is commonly
attended by great weakness. And this seems to be fatal to the view
of B. Weiss, that Christ's cures were " momentary effects produced
by His touch, which, although the result was absolutely certain, yet
merely began a healing process that was completed in a perfectly
natural way." What is gained by such an hypothesis ?
The Attic form of the imperf. of SiaKovfa is $LCLK6yow ; but $t7}K6vovv is
the reading of the MSS. in Eur. Cycl. 406 (Veitch, x.z>.). Comp. viii. 3 ; Mt.
iv. u, viii 15; Mk. L 13, 31 ; Jn. xii. 2; j Pet. i. 12.
40, 41. Numerous Healings in the Evening. Nous rencontroni
id un de ces moments dans la vie du Seigneur oil la puissance miracu*
leuse se deploy ait avec une richesse particuliere : vi. 19 " (Godet,
i. p. 339). Comp. Mt viii. 16, 17 ; Mk, i. 32-34. The healing
of the demoniac (ver. 35), and of Peter's mother-in-kw, had proved
ihat He could heal diseases both of mind and body. All three
note the two kinds of healing ; but " the physician separates the
two with special distinctness, and lends no support to the view
that possession is merely a physical disorder/'
138 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 40, 4L
40. Au^orros Se rod iqXiou. Mt has 'Oi/oas Se -ye^o/Ae^s, while
Mk. has *Q\l/ia$ Be yevo/xeV^?, ore eoWev 6 yXto<s. We infer that
here Mk. gives us the whole expression in the original tradition, of
which all three make use ; and that Mt. uses one half and Lk. the
other half of it. See v. 13, xxii. 34, xxiii. 38, for similar cases.
Some infer that Mk. has combined the phrases used by the other two,
and therefore must have written last of the three. But an analysis
of the passages which all three have in common shows that this is
incredible. The literary skill required for combining two narra-
tives, without adding much new material, would be immense ; and
Mk. does not possess it. It is much simpler to suppose that Mk.
often gives the original tradition in full, and that the other two
each give portions of it, and sometimes different portions. See E.
A. Abbott, Eney. Brit. Qth ed. art. "Gospels," and Abbott and
Rushbrooke, The Common Tradition of the Syn. Gosp. p. vL
Adfotros. " When the sun was setting? or " ere the sun was
set" as the hymn gives it. 1 The eagerness of the people was such
that the very moment the sabbath was over they began to move
the sick : comp. Jn. v. 10. Note Lk.'s favourite aw-ai/res.
iv\ ifc&rnp auT&i> T&S x ^P a s e?riTt0i9. Lk. alone preserves this
graphic detail, which emphasizes the laborious solicitude of the
work. Sic singuli penitius commoti snnt adfidem (Beng.). It does
not apply to the demoniacs, who were healed Xoy<u, as Mt. states.
The action is a generally recognized symbol of transmission^ especially in
conferring a blessing (Gen. xlyiii. 14; Lev. ix. 22, 23; Mk. x. 16). It is also
used to symbolize the transmission of guilt (Lev. i. 4, iii. 2, viii. 14, xvi. 21,
22). The statement that ** our Lord healed at first by laying on of hands, but
gradually passed over to the exclusive use of the word of power, in order that
He might not encourage the popular idea that there was a necessary connexion
between the laying on of hands and the cure," is not confirmed by Scripture.
The nobleman's son and the man at Bethesda were healed by a word (Jn. iv. 50,
v. 8) ; Malchus, by a touch. There was no necessity to use either word or
touch. He could heal by an act of will, and at a distance from His person
(vii. 10, xvii. 14 ; Jn. iv. 50). But He more often used means, possibly to aid
the faith of those who needed healing (xiii. 13, xiv. 4, Mt. viii. 3, ix. 29 ; Mk.
vii, 33, viii. 23, 25 ; Jn. ix. 6 : comp. Mk. v. 23, 28, 41, vii. 32, viii. 22).
The fact that Jesus commonly used some action in healing made the Jews the
more irate at His healing on the sabbath. Excepting Acts xvii. 25, depairetu in
N.T. is always "heal, cure," not merely "serve, take care of.*' Like colere, it
is used of service both to God and to men ; and like curare , it is both " to care
for" and "to cure.'* The imperfects, tffepdvevev and If^xero* mark the con-
tinuance and repetition of the actions.
41 e|ifcxTo 8e Kal SaifwSjaa &IT& iroAXw " But demons also w
1 The form Sfota seems to be Ionic, but occurs once or twice in Attic prose
(Veitch, s.v.). Except $8wrv or 8v in Mk. i. 32, the word does not occur again
in N.T. It is freq. in LXX (Judg. xiv. 1852 Sam. ii. 24 ; I Kings xxii, 36 j
2 Chron. xviii. 34, etc.). It means "sink into* enter," wbvrov or the like being
expressed or understood. Lk. never uses the tinclassical 6^/ia (ix. 12, xxii. 14,
xziiL 54, xxiv. 29), which occurs oft*"* ' ML and Mk* and twice in Jn*
IV. ffl, 42,] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 139
(as well as diseases) " came out of many." For Be KCU see on iii 9^
and for efepxecrdai diro see on ver. 35 : both are characteristic of
Lk. He alone mentions the Kpdjciy of the demons. There is not
much difference between 6 vlog rov eo9 here and 6 cfytos rov eov
in ver. 34. In both cases it is the presence of Divine holiness
which is felt and proclaimed. Phil. ii. 10 is here not to the point;
for KCL-ra^OoviCL there probably does not mean devils.
OUK eta aura XaXety, on. "He suffered them not to speak,
because." Not, "suffered them not to say that"; which would
require Aeyeu/. In N.T. XaXziv and Aeyeiv are never confused ; not
even Rom. xv. 18; 2 Cor. xi. 17; i Thes. i. 8. Excepting Mt
xxiv. 3 and i Cor. x. 13, eaw is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (xxii. 55;
Acts v. 38, xiv. 16, xvi. 7, xix. 30, xxiii. 32, xxvii. 32, 40, xxviii. 4);
and e<W is the usual form of imperf.
Godet's suggestion, that the demons wished to compromise Jesus by exciting
a dangerous enthusiasm among the people, or to create a belief that there was a
bond of connexion between their work and His, is gratuitous. Their cries are
more like involuntary exclamations of dismay. That Jesus should not allow
them to make Him known was natural, although Strauss condemns it as incon-
sistent. Nee tempus erat> nee hi pr&cottes (Beng. on Mk. iii. 12). ** It was not
meet that unclean demons should usurp the glory of the apostolic office " (Cyril
Alex.). Jesus had rejected the offered assistance of the evil one in the
wilderness, and could not desire to be proclaimed as the Messiah by His
ministers. Moreover, while the national ideas respecting the Messiah remained
so erroneous, the time for such proclamation had not yet come. Comp.
Jn. vi. 15.
42, 43. The Multitude's Pursuit of Him. Comp. Mk. i. 35-39
Although Lk. has some features which Mk. has not, the latter^
account is more like that of an eye-witness.
42. rcyojjL&tjs 8e ifjf^pas. See on vi. 12. Mk. has the strong
expression Trp&i evwx a ^w* It was so early that it was still like
night. This shows His anxiety to escape the multitude and secure
time for refreshment of His spiritual nature by converse with God :
Mk. adds Ko/cet trpoo-yvxero. Jesus had probably passed the night
in Simon's house ; and for ot o^Xot Mk has St/juoj/ KCU ot /ACT* avrou,
for as yet Jesus had no fixed disciples. Peter in telling Mk. of the
incident would say, " We went after Him."
ot ox\oi eire^Touj' auToy. " The multitudes kept seeking for
Him." The en-i- marks the direction of the search : comp. cTrcSo^
(ver. 17). They wanted more of His teaching and of His
miraculous cures. See on xi. 29. But neither this nor the
iroXXcov in ver. 41 proves that there had not been time to heal all
who came the previous evening. Would He have sent any empty
away ? Lk. is fond of recording the eagerness of the people to
come to Christ (v. i, 19, vi. 19, viii. 19, 40, xii. i, XXL 38: comp,
xix. 3 and xx*iL 8).
las aurou, ical ftaTctxof aMc TOU fir] iropeueaOai dir* afiruir.
240 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IV. 42, 4a
They did not leave off seeking until they reached Him, and they
tried to stay Him from going away from them.
This use of 2&jt with a person is not classical: comp. ?wj ^/AWV (Acts
ix. 33) and Iws roO a<riX^ws (i Mac, iii. 26). Of place (iv* 29, x. 15) or of
time (xxiii. 44) 2ws is common enough.
With Ka.Tf1-x.ov (imperf. of attempted or intended action) comp. &K&\OW
(L 59). The rov ^ iropefaffdat, is not Lk.'s favourite construction to express
purposes or result (see on i. 74), but the gen* after a verb of detention or
prevention; comp. Rom. xv. 22. For the apparently superfluous negative
comp. xx. 27, xxiv. 16 ; Acts x. 47, xiv. 1 8, xx. 27. Win. xliv. 4. b, p. 409 ;
Ixv. 2. ft p. 755-
43. Kal rats ircpais ir<5Xcrt^ Placed first for emphasis. "To
ike other cities also (as well as to Capernaum) I must preach the
good tidings." It is a rebuke to them for wishing to monopolize
Him. It is not a rebuke for interrupting His preaching by
requiring Him to work miracles. There is no evidence that He
ever regarded these works of mercy as an interruption of His
ministry, or as an unworthy lowering of it. On the contrary, they
were an essential part of it ; not as evidence of His Messiahship,
but as the natural work of the great Healer of body and soul.
They were, moreover, an important element in His teaching, for
His miracles were parables. As evidence they did not prove His
Messiahship, and He did not greatly value the faith which was
produced by them (Jn. ii. 23, 24). He Himself regarded them as
merely auxiliary (Jn. xiv. n). He warned His disciples that false
Christs and false prophets would work miracles (Mk. xiii. 22), just as
the O.T. had warned the Jews that a Prophet was not to be believed
simply because he worked miracles (Deut. xiii. 1-3). And, as a
matter of fact, Christ's miracles did not convince the Jews (Jn.
xii. 37). Some thought that He was a Prophet (vii. 16, ix. 8, 19 ;
Mt xxi. ii ; Jn. ix. 17), a view taken even by His disciples after
the crucifixion (xxiv. 19); while others attributed His miracles to
Satanic agency (Mt. xii. 24). On the other hand, the Baptist,
although he wrought no miracles, was thought to be the Messiah
(see on iii. 15). The saying here recorded does not mean, there-
fore, " You are mistaking My work. I came to preach the good
tidings, not to do works of healing " : but, "You are selfish in your
desires. I came to preach the good tidings and to do works of
healing to all, and not to a favoured few." For cuayyeXurao-Oai see
on ii. 10.
Set. For the second time (iL 49) Christ uses this word respect-
ing His own conduct. Comp. ix. 22, xiii. 33, xvii. 25, xix. 5,
xxii 37, xxiv. 26, 44, 46. His work and His sufferings are ordered
by Divine decree. The word is thus used of Christ throughout
N.T. (Acts iii. 21, xvii. 3 ; i Cor. xv. 25).
K TOO ecoO. This is Lk,"s first use of this frequent
IV, 43.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 14!
expression (vi. 20, vii, 28, viii. 1,10, etc.), which Jn, employs twice
(iii. 3, 5), Mt. thrice (xii. 28, xxi. 31, 43), and Mk, often, For its
import see Ewald, Hist, of Israel^ vi., Eng. tr pp. 201210;
Schaff's Herzog, art. "Kingdom of God"; Edeish. Z. & T. L
pp. 265-270. The em TOUTO refers to the whole of what precedes :
" For this end," viz. " to preach the good tidings everywhere in the
land." For this use of iirl comp. xxiii. 48 and Mt. xxvi 50. It
is quite classical (Xen. Anab. ii. 5. 22, vii. 8. 4). For dtr<nrcX^
see on ver. 18. The evidence for it (tfBCDLX) as against
a7rrraA//,ai (A Q R) is overwhelming. Yet Godet says on peui
hesiter. It refers to the mission from the Father, as does the
c&]X.6ov of Mk. But it is possible to give the latter the inadequate
interpretation of leaving the house at Capernaum.
44. Kal r\v K.r\pucrar(i)v els ras cruyayaryds rfjs 'fouSatas. This
statement forms a conclusion to the section (14-44); and the
analytical tense indicates that what is stated continued for some
time.
Both Lk. and Mk. have fit r&t ffvyayuydt , which in both cases has been
altered into the easier fr rats ffwaywyais. The e/? may be explained as a
pregn. constr., " He went into the synagogues and preached there" or as ex-
pressing the motion or direction of the preaching (Mk. iv. 15 ; Jn. viii. 26).
Comp. Is rbv STJ^OV ravra \iywrw (Thuc. v. 45. i). It seems probable that
the reading *Ioi>5atas (&$ B C L Q R) is the original one, which has been
corrected to FaXiAafos (A D XT A A IE) on account of its difficulty. But, as
in i. 5 and vii. 17, Judaea may here mean the whole country of the Jews,
Palestine. Lk. often uses 'Iou5ctfa in this sense (xxiii. 5 ; Acts ii. 9, x. 37,
xL i, 29, xxvi. 20 ; comp. Gal. i. 22). Classic writers use the term in much
the same manner. Strabo means by it all the region from Lebanon loath-
wards.
V. 1-VX 11. From the Call of the first Disciples to the Nomine
tion of the Twelve.
This section presents a symmetrical arrangement, which possibly
is intentional The call of a leading disciple (i-n) is followed
by two healings which provoke controversy (1216, 1726); and
then the call of another leading disciple (2739) is followed
by two incidents on the sabbath, which again provoke controversy
(vL i~s 6-i i).
V. 1-11, The call of Simon. In Mt iv. 18-22 and ML i
16-20 the narrative is the call of Simon and Andrew, and of James
and John. Here Andrew is not mentioned And although all obey
the call (ver. ii), yet Simon alone is addressed (w* 4, 10). But
142 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 1, &
the identity of this incident with that narrated by Mt. and Mk can
neither be affirmed nor denied with certainty. In Mt. and Mk.
the disciples are fishing ; here they are washing their nets before
putting them away. The important point is that in all narratives
those called are at work. Similarly, Levi is called from his busi-
ness. It would seem as if none of the Twelve were called when
idle.
L 'EyeVcro 8 See detached note at the end of ch. L For TOK
oxW see on xi. 29 ; for Iv TW TQV oxXoi/ emiceiaOcu see on iii. 21 ; for
rof Xdyoy roO 6ou see on viii. n ; for jtat introducing the apodosis
see on ii. 21 ; and for KCU auros see on ver. 14. All these points,
with the analytical ty lortas (i. 7, 10, 20, 21, etc.), are characteristic
of Lk. Not often do we find so many marks of his style in so
small a compass. Comp. viii. 22, 37, 40, 41. For the popular
desire to behold Christ see on iv. 42. With emKto-$cu comp. xxii.
23; Acts xxvii. 20; i Cor. ix. 16^ Heb. ix. 10; Jos. Ant. xx. 5. 3.
It is used in a literal sense Jn. xi. 38, xxi. 9. Here it is mainly
figurative, but it includes the notion of physical pressure. The
avros distinguishes Jesus from the o^os: comp. iv. 15, 30.
irapa ri\v \lpn\v fe^o-aptr. With characteristic accuracy Lk.
never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake. Except
in Rev. of the "lake of fire," Xi^vrj in N.T. is peculiar to Lie
When he uses $aXa<r<ra, he means sea in the ordinary sense (xvil
2, 6, xxi. 25 ; Acts iv. 24, etc.).
In AV. of 1611 both here and Mk. vi. 53 the name appears as " Genesareth,"
following the spelling of the Vulgate ; but in Mt. xiv. 34 as " Genesaret." The
printers have corrected this to " Gennesaret " in all three places, rewycrapfr
is the orthography of the best MSS. in all three places. Josephus writes both
\lfWTj Tcvv-Jia-apLTis (Ant. xviii. 2. i) and \ljmvij Tewycrdp (J5. f. iii. 10. 7).
i Mac. xi. 67 we have rb tidwp rod Fevvycrdp. But in O.T. the lake is called
6dXa<rcra Xe;^/>e0 (Num. xxxiv, 1 1 ? ; Josh. xii. 3) from a town of that name near
to it (Josh. xix. 35). Josephus contrasts its fertility with the barrenness of the
lower lake hi the Jordan valley (B. /. iv. 8. 2) : the one is the "Sea of Life,"
the other the "Sea of Death." See Stanley's fine description of ** the most
sacred sheet of water that this earth contains " (Stn. &* Pal. pp. 368-378) ;
Farrar, Life of Christ, L pp. 175-182 ; Conder, D.B* art. " Gennesaret."
For wapd c, ace, after a verb of rest comp. xviii 35 ; Acts r, 6, 32 ;
Heb. xi. 12 : Xen. Anab. iii. 5. I, vii. 2. n.
With fy <mJbs (which is the apodosis of ^y&ero), Aral etSev is to be joined :
" It came to pass that He was standing, and He saw." It is very clumsy to
make xal aMs ty ^orc6s parenthetical, and take jcai eWev as the apodosis of
2. o SI d\ts. "But the sea-folk * (SXs) or "fishermen." It
is one of many Homeric words which seem to have gone out of
use and then to have reappeared in late Greek. Fishing in the
lake has now almost ceased. The Arabs dislike the water. The
washing of the nets was preparatory to hanging them up to dry.
As distinct from vwmo, which is used of washing part of the human
V. 3-6. j THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 143
body, and Aouo), which is used of washing the whole of it, TrXuVw is
used of washing inanimate objects (Rev. vii. 14, xxii. 14 ; Gen. xiix.
ii ; ExocL xix. 10). In Lev. xv. 11 all three words are used with
exactly this difference of meaning. Trench, Syn. xiv.
TO. StKTua. The most general term for nets of all kinds, of which
a^LpXyarTpov (Mt. iv. 1 8) and oray^r} (ML xiii. 47) are special
varieties. Trench, Syn. bdv. ; D.B. art. " Net"
3. ^irafayayeiy. The correct word for "putting off to sea"
(2 Mac. xii. 4?; Xen. Hellen. vi. 2. 28): elsewhere in N.T. only
Mt xxi. 1 8 in the sense of "return." For the double preposition
COmp. iravpxo/J.at (x. 35, xix. 15) and <bravcwrca'a> (x. 6). Christ
uses Peter's boat as a pulpit, whence to throw the net of the Gospel
over His hearers. We have a similar scene ML iv. r, and in
both cases He sits to teach, as in the synagogue at Nazareth.
Peter was probably steering, and therefore both before and after
the sermon he is addressed as to the placing of the boat But the
letting down of the nets required more than one person, and hence
the change to the plural (^oXac-are). Non sfatim promitttt Daminus
capturam : explorat prius obsequia Simonis (Beng.).
5. 'Emcrrdra. Lk. alone uses Ziria-TdTTrjs (viii. 24, 45, ix. 33, 49,
xviL 13), and always in addresses to Christ He never uses
"Pa$3i, which is common in the other Gospels, esp. in Jn., but
would not be so intelligible to Gentiles. The two words are not
synonymous, err-toT-ar^s implying authority of any kind, and not
merely that of a teacher. Here it is used of one who has a right
to give orders.
Si* oXtjs WKTOS icom<icraKTs. Through the whole of the best
time for fishing they had toiled fruitlessly. Only in bibL Grk. has
KOTTtaco the meaning of " work with much effort, toil wearisomely "
(xiL 27; Acts xx. 35; Mt. vi. 28; Josh. xxiv. 13, etc.). The
original meaning is "become exhausted, grow weary " (Jn. iv. 6).
Clem. Alex, quotas a letter of Epicurus, M-fyrc Wos TO iv /teXAcTw
<iXo<ro<etv, ftijre ye/xav vrrap^v Kariarct) ^iA.ooro<c3v (Strom* IV. 8 t
p. 594, ed. Potter).
em 81 TW pTrjjiaTi crou xcCk&av T^ StKToa. "But relying upon
Thy word I will have the nets let down." The "nevertheless" of
AV. Cran. and Gen. is too strong : for that we should have irXiJv
(vi. 24, 35, etc.). For this use of &r "on the strength of," comp.
ii 20; Acts iv. 21. Win. xlviii. d, p. 491. The x^aorarc and
irot^(roi/T5 show that the x "^ includes the employment of
others. Excepting Mk. ii. 4 and 2 Cor. xi. 33, xaAaco is peculiar to
Lk. (vv. 4, 5 ; Acts ix. 25, xxviL 17, 30). With, the faith involved
in xoAa<ro) ret SIKTVOL we may compare jecXcvcrov /AC \.$eZV vpbs oJ
7rl ra vSara (Mt XIV. 28).
6. o-u^KXeicraK irXtJOos IX^UWK iroXJ. Not a miracle of creation,
but at least of knowledge, even if Christ's will did not bring the
144 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 6-8,
fish to the spot. In no miracle before the Resurrection does
Jesus create ; and we have no sufficient reason for believing that
the food provided at the second miraculous draught of fishes was
created (Jn. xxi. 9-13). There is no exaggeration, as De Wette
thinks, in Siepp-jcreTo or in flvtiifeo-OaL (ver. 7). The nets "were
breaking," Le. beginning to break, when the help from the other
boat prevented further mischief, and then both boats were over-
loaded. On the masses of fish to be seen in the lake see Tristram,
Nat Hist, of the Bible, p. 285, and D.B? p 1074 : "The density
of the shoals of fish in the Lake of Galilee can scarcely be con-
ceived by those who have not witnessed them. They sometimes
cover an acre or more on the surface in one dense mass."
The form p^ercrw occurs in poetry (Horn. //. xviii. 57 * xxiv. 454) and late
prose (Strab. xi. 14. 8). It is a collat. form of frtyvvfu (Veitch, f.v. t and
Curtius, Etym. 511, 661) : but see on ix. 42.
7. KaTeVeucraK rots peToxois. Possibly because they were too
far off for a call to be heard. The other boat was still close to the
shore (ver. 2), for Simon alone had been told to put out into deep
water. The verb is freq. in Horn., and occurs in Hdt. and Plato,
generally in the sense of "nod assent, grant." Here only in N.T.
Euthymius suggests that they were too agitated to call.
Here and Heb. i 9 (from Ps, xliv, 8) we have /^ro^os as a subst. Comp.
Heb. iii. i, 14, vi. 4, xii. 8: and see T. S. Evans on I Cor. x. 16-18 in
Speaker's Com. <{ As distinguished from Kowwds (ver. 10; Heb. x. 33), which
suggests the idea of personal fellowship, ^ro^os describes participation in
some common blessing or privilege, or the like. The bond of union lies in
that which is shared and not in the persons themselves" (Wsctt. on Heb.
iii. i). For crv\Xapecr6ai in the sense of "assist" comp. Phil. iv. 3. In
class. Grk. the act. is more common irs this sense. For tjXOav see on i* 59.
djA<J>($Tepa rd irXoia aJcrre J3u6ijeo-0ai adTcL For
see on i. 15 ; d^^orcpot is another favourite word (i. 6, 7, vi. 39,
vii. 42 ; Acts viii. 38, x. 16, xxiii. 8); not in Mk. or Jn. "They
filled both the boats, so that they began to sink " : comp. Siep/^crero.
The act. is used 2 Mac. xii. 4 of the sinking of persons ; by Poly-
bius (ii. 10. 5) of the sinking of ships ; and i Tim. vi. 9 of sending
down to perdition. Nowhere else in N.T.
8. Jcp&)jr Flrpos Trpoo-eTreae^ rots y<W<rcK 'Itjcrou. This IS the
only place in his Gospel in which Lk. gives Peter both names,
and it is the first mention of the surname : see on vi. 14.
The constr. Tcpwirlirrtiv TO 7<w. is quite classical (Eur. Or. 1332 ; comp,
Mk. vii. 25 ; Soph. 0. C. 1 606) ; often with dak of pers. (viii. 28, 47 ; Act!
rvi. 29 ; Mk. iii. II, v. 33).
*Efe\9e dir' l/xou. Not "Leave my boat," which is too definite,
but, " Go out of my vicinity, Depart from me" See on iv. 35.
e. 8-KXj THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 145
It is quite erroneous to introduce here the notion that sailors
believe it to be unlucky to have a criminal on board (Cic. De Nat.
Deor* lii. 37. 89 ; Hor. Carm, iii. 2. 26). In that case Peter, like
Jonah, would have asked to be thrown into the sea. That the
Twelve, before their call, were exceptionally wicked, vir*p iraaav
apapTLav dvo/^torepovs (Barn. v. 9), is unscriptural and incredible.
But Origin seems to accept it (Con. Cels. i. 63; cornp. Jerome,
Adv. Pelag. iii. 2). See Schanz, ad loc. p. 198.
Peter does not regard himself as a criminal, but as a sinful man ; and this
miracle has brought home to him a new sense, both of his own sinfulness and of
Christ's holiness. It is not that he fears that Christ's holiness is dangerous to a
sinner (B. Weiss), but that the contrast between the two is felt to be so intense
as to be intolerable. The presence of the sinless One is a reproach and a con-
demnation, rather than a peril ; and therefore such cases as those of Gideon and
Manoah (Judg. vi. 22, xiii. 22), cited by Grotius and De Wette, are not quite
parallel. Job (xlii. 5, 6) is a better illustration ; and Beng. compares the
centurion (Mt. viii. 8). The objection that Peter had witnessed the healing of
his wife's mother and other miracles, and therefore could not be so awestruck
by this miracle, is baseless. It frequently happens that one experience touches
the heart, after many that were similar to it have failed to do so. Perhaps,
without being felt, they prepare the way. Moreover, this was a miracle in
Peter's own craft, and therefore was likely to make a special impression on
him ; just as the healing of a disease, known to the profession as incurable,
would specially impress a physician.
KJpit. The change from eTricrraTa (see on ver. 5) is remarkable,
and quite in harmony with the change of circumstances. It is the
"Master" whose orders must be obeyed, the "Lord" whose holi-
ness causes moral agony to the sinner (Dan. x. 16). Grotius,
followed by Trench, points out that the dominion over all nature,
including "the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through
the paths of the seas " (Ps. viii. 8), lost by Adam, is restored in
Christ, the ideal man and the second Adam. But that Peter
recognized this is more than we know. In what follows notice the
characteristic Travras and a-vv.
9. cm rfj aypa r&v tx^iW. This was the basis of their amaze-
ment : see small print on ii. 33, and comp. Acts xiv. 3 and Rom.
v. 14. There is no need to make aypa act, in ver. 4, "a catching,"
and pass, here, "the thing caught." "For a catch" in ver. 4;
"at the catch of fish" here. If &v crwcXa/5ov (BDX, Goth.) is
the true reading, both may be act But if fj crwcAa/foi/ is right,
then in both places aypa is pass. In either case we have the
idiomatic attraction of the relative which is so freq. in Lk. See
small print on iii. 19. The word is common in poetry both act.
and pass. Not in LXX, nor elsewhere in N.T. Note the change
of meaning from ervAXaySecr^ai in ver. 7 to a-weXaftov. The verb
is freq. in LL, but elsewhere rare in N.T.
10. 'IdKGjpoH KCU *\vdn]v. The first mention of them by Lk.
IO
146 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 10, 1L,
In Mt and ML they were in their boat, mending their nets, when
Jesus called them; and Mt. adds that Zebedee was with them,
which Mk. implies (i 20). For Koivwyoi see on ver. 7. Are they
the same as the /xero^ot ? It is possible that Peter had his Kotrwol
in his boat, while the ^iro^i were in the other boat. In any case
the difference of word should be preserved in translation. This
Tyn. Cran. and Gen, effect, with "fellows" for perox 01 an( *
" partners " for KOIVUVOL. But Vulg. and Beza have socii for both ;
and RV. follows AV. with "partners " for both.
elite y irpos TOP ZijUL6*ra 'hrjcrous. It is still Peter who is singled
out for notice. Yet some critics affirm that it is the tendency of
this Evangelist to depreciate Peter. For pj <{>of3ou see on i. 13 :
excepting Mk. v. 36 and Rev. i. 17, Lk. alone uses the expres-
sion without an accusative. Peter's sense of unworthiness was in
itself a reason for courage* Quo magis sibi displicebat hoc magis
Domino placet (Grotius).
d-n-o TOU vw. The present moment is a crisis in his life, of
which he was reminded at the second miraculous draught of fishes,
when the commission given to him now was restored to him after
his fall Excepting 2 Cor. v. 16 and [Jn. viii. n], airo rov vvv is
peculiar to LL (L 48, xii 52, xxii. 18, 69 ; Acts xviii. 6). Comp.
cus rov vvv (Mt. xxiv. 21 ; ML xiii. 19) and o^pi rov vvv (Rom. viiL
22 ; Phil. L 5).
d^priirous l<nj Jwypuv. Both substantive and verb have special
point (men instead of fish ; for life instead of for death) ; while the
analytical tense marks the permanence of the new pursuit : comp.
i. 20. This kst is preserved in Rhem. "shalt be taking," follow-
ing Vulg. en's capiens. Beza seems to be alone in giving the full
force of u>ypcov (000$ and dypciv) : vivos capies homines. But to add
"alive" in English deprives "men" of the necessary emphasis. 1
The verb is used of sparing the lives of those taken in battle:
cSy/>*, 'Ar/XEOS vt, <ru S' afta Scat OLTTOLVO. (Horn. II. vi. 46). Else-
where in N.T only 2 Tim. ii. 26, of the evil one. Comp. the
exhortation of Socrates to Critobulus : l AAXa Qapp&v 7ra/)<5 dya(9o5
ytyj/etr^ai, KQ.I rotovro? ytyvo/tevos Oypav eirt^eipet TOIS Ka\ov<$ re
KayaQovs (Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 28).
H. KaTayayorrcs rA irXoiou Like CTravayayctv in ver, 3, this is
a nautical expression; freq. in Acts (ix. 30, xxii. 30, xxiii. 15, 20,
etc.). Comp. dvdyav, viii. 22.
d<{VTs irdiTa TjicoXoMrjoup afirfi. Even the large draught of
fishes does not detain them. They are sure that He who has
given them such marvellous returns from their usual business will
be ready to provide for them when, at His summons, they abandon
* Cod. Brix. has hominum eritis captores y including James and John,
although noli timers precedes. D has irorfa-u 7&p fycas aXteis &v0p&jrw (from
ML and Mk.) after the insertion py yLveaBe dXtets fyptiwr.
V.U.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 147
their business. The call was addressed to Peter (ver. 10), but the
sons of Zebedee recognize that it concerns them also ; and the}*
leave and follow.
In this late Greek d^trjfu is preferred to Xe/irw and its compounds, and
&KdXov0& to &TOJUCU (which does not occur in N.T,) and its compounds.
The fact that other disciples besides Peter obeyed the call and followed
Jesus, is the main reason for identifying this narrative with Mk. L 16-20 and
Mt. iv. 18-22. All three have the important word d^^res, and Mt. and Lk.
have 7}Ko\oti0i)<rai> afrry, for which Mk. has &TTTJ\BOV dirtcrov a^roO. But note
that Lk. alone has his favourite Trdvra after d^wey (comp. vi. 30, vii. 35,
ix. 43, xi. 4, xii. 10). Against these similarities, however, we have to set the
differences, chief among which is the miraculous draught of fishes, which Mt.
and Mk. omit. Could Peter have failed to include this in his narrative ? And
would Mk. have omitted it, if the Petrine tradition had contained it? It is
easier to believe that some of the disciples were called more than once, and that
their abandonment of their original mode of life was gradual : so that Mk. and
Mt. may relate one occasion and Lk. another. Even after the Resurrection
Peter speaks quite naturally of <e going a fishing " (Jn. xxi. 3), as if it was still at
least an occasional pursuit. But we must be content to remain in doubt as to
the relation of this narrative to that of Mk. and Mt. See Weiss, Leben Jesu,
I. iii. 4, Eng. tr.^ ii. pp. 54-59-
This uncertainty, however, need not be extended to the relation of this
miracle to that recorded in Jn. xxi. 1-14. It cannot be accepted as probable
that, in the source from which Lk. drew, " the narrative of the call of Peter has
been confused with that of his reinstatement in the office which had been
entrusted to him, and so the history of the miraculous draught of fishes which is
connected with the one has been united with the other." The contrast between
all the main features of the two mnacles is too great to be explained by confused
recollection. I. There Jesus is not recognized at first; nere He is known
directly He approaches. 2. There He is on the shore ; here He is in Peter's
boat. 3. There Peter and John are together ; here they seem to be in different
boat?. 4. There Peter leaves the capture of the fish to others ; here he is chief
actor in it. 5. There the net is not broken ; here it is. 6. There the fish are
caught close to the shore and brought to the shore ; here they are caught in
deep water and are taken into the boats. 7. There Peter rushes through the
water to the Lord whom he had lately denied ; here, though he had committed
no such sin, he says, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord."
There is nothing improbable in two miracles of a similar kind, one granted to
emphasize and illustrate the call, the other the re-call, of the chief Apostle*
The way in which the Fathers allegorize the two miracles is well known, the
first of the Church Militant, the second of the Church Triumphant. R. A.
Lipsius would have it that the first is an allegory of quite another kind, the
main point of which is the ^roxot in the other boat. He assumes that James
and John are in Peter's boat, and explains thus. That Christ first teaches and
then suddenly speaks of fishing, tells us that the fishing is symbolical. The
fishing in deep water is the mission to the heathen, which Peter at first is
unwilling (?) to undertake (comp. Acts x. 14). The marvellous draught after the
night of fruitless toil is the conversion of many heathen after the failure of the
mission to the Jews. This work is so great that Peter with the two other
Apostles of the Jews are unequal to it, and have to call Paul, Barnabas, and
others to help them. Peter then recognizes his former unwillingness (?) as a
sin, and both he and the sons of Zebedee are amazed at the success of the
mission to the heathen (Gal. ii. 9). Thus the rejection of Jesus by the people
of Nazareth (iv. 29, 30), and His preaching " to the other cities also " (iv. 43),,
teach the same lesson as the miraculous draught ; viz. the failure of the missios
148 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 11, 12,
to the Jews and the success of the mission to the heathen (Jahrb. fur prot.
TheoL 1875, i. p. 189). The whole is exceedingly forced, and an examination
of the details shows that they do not fit. If the common view is correct, that
James and Jojbn were the ^roxot in the other boat, the whole structure falls to
the ground. Had Lk. intended to convey the meaning read into the narrative
by Lipsius, he would not have left the point on which the whole is based so
open to misconception. Keim on the whole agrees with Lipsius, and dog-
matically asserts that " the artificial narrative of Lk. must unhesitatingly be
abandoned ... It is full of subtle and ingenious invention ... Its historical
character collapses under the weight of so much that is artificial " (Jes. of Naz. iii.
pp. 264, 265). Holtzmann also pronounces it to be " legendary and consciously
allegorical " (in loco]. Does Peter's apparently inconsistent conduct, beseeching
Jesus to depart and yet abiding at His feet, look like invention ?
12-16. The Healing of a Leper. Here we certainly have an
incident which is recorded by all three Evangelists. The amount
of verbal agreement is very great, and we may confidently affirm
that all three make use of common material. Mt. (viii. 1-4) is the
most brief, Mk. (i. 40-45) the most full; but Mt is the only one
who gives any note of time. He places the miracle just after Jesus
had come down from delivering the Sermon on the Mount.
On the subject of Leprosy see H. V. Carter, Leprosy and
Elephantiasis ) 1874; Tilbury Fox, Skin Diseases^ 1877; Kaposi,
HautkrankMteH) Wien, 1880 ; and the literature given at the end of
art. Aussatz in Herzog ; also in Hirsch, Handb. d. Pathologic^ 1860.
12. Kal tSoiJ. Hebraistic ; in Mt. viii. 2, but not in Mk. i. 40 :
the KCLL is the apodosis to eycvcro, as in ver. i. No verb follows
the 2oW, as if the presence of the leper were a surprise. Had the
man disregarded the law in approaching the crowd ? Or had the
people come upon him suddenly, before he could avoid them ?
What follows shows a third possibility.
TrX-qp^s Xrrpas. This particular is given only by the beloved
physician. His face and hands would be covered with ulcers and
sores, so that everyone could see that the hideous disease was at
a very advanced stage. This perhaps accounts for the man's
venturing into the multitude, and for their not fleeing at his
approach ; for by a strange provision of the law, " if the leprosy
break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of
him that hath the plague, from his head even to his feet, . . . then
the priest . . . shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague "
(Lev. xiii. 12, 13).
&Y)0r} auTou. Excepting Mt. ix, 38, the verb is peculiar in
N.T. to Lk. and Paul. It is especially freq. in Lk. (viii. 28, 38,
ix 38, 40, x. 2, etc.). In LXX it represents a variety of Hebrew
words, and is very common. Here Mk. has Tra/oaKoAuV.
l&v 0<X])s, SiWom fie KaOaptoxu. All three accounts have these
words, and the reply to them, A.<o, KaQapia-OijTL, without variation.
The Swacrac is evidence of strong faith in the Divine power of
Jesus ; for leprosy was believed to be incurable by human means.
7. 12-14.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 149
It was " the stroke " of God, and could not be removed by the
hand of man. But it is characteristic of the man's imperfect
apprehension of Chrisfs character, that he has more trust in His
power than in His goodness. He doubts the will to heal He
says KaOapicrat. rather than 0epcwre<Tcu or IdcracrOai because of the
pollution which leprosy involved (Lev. xiii. 45, 46). In O.T.
" unclean " and " clean," not " sick " and " healed," are the terms
used about the leper. The old rationalistic explanation, that
Ka&apLo-ai means "to pronounce clean," and that the man was
already cured, but wanted the great Rabbi of Nazareth to absolve
him from the expensive and troublesome journey to Jerusalem,
contradicts the plain statements of the Gospels. He was " full of
leprosy" (Lk.); "immediately the leprosy departed from him"
(Mk. Lk.). If KaOapia-ai means "to pronounce clean," then
KaOapicrOrjTt means " be thou pronounced clean." Yet Jesus sends
him to the priest (Lk. Mk. Mt.). Contrast the commands of
Christ with the prayers of Moses, Elijah, and Elisha, when they
healed.
13. KTii>as iV x *P a - All three have this Hebraistic ampli-
fication. In LXX the phrase commonly occurs in connexion
with an act of punishment: Ex. vii. 5, 19, viii. i, 2, ix. 22, 23,
x. 12, 21, 22, xiv. 16, 21, 26, 27; Ezek. vi. 14, xiv. 9, xvi 27,
xxv. 7, 13, 16, xxxv. 3; Zeph. i. 4, ii. 13; Jer. vi. 12, xv. 6. In
N.T. it rarely has this meaning. Jesus touched the leper on the
same principle as that on which He healed on the sabbath : the
ceremonial law gives place to the law of charity when the two
come into collision. His touch aided the leper's faith.
r\ Xbrpa aittjXOey dir* aurou. Here again (see on iv, 40) Mt
has the whole expression, of which Lk. and Mt each use a part
Mk. has aTrtjXQev cwr* avrov rj Aejrpo, KO! eKaQapMvj, and Mt has
eKaOapto-Brj avrov f] XeTrpo. All three have cWews or evOvs, showing
that Jesus not merely prepared the way for a cure which nature
accomplished, but healed the leper at once by His touch.
14. Kal aur6s. LL's favourite form of connexion in narrative :
m. i, 17, 37, i. 17, 22, 28, Hi. 23, iv. 15, vL 20, eta
irapriyyeiKtv. The word is specially used of commanders
whose orders are passed along the line (n-apd), and is freq. in Lk.
(viii. 29, 56, ix. 21 ; Acts i. 4, iv. 18, v. 28, 40, x. 42, etc.); rare
in Mt (x. 5, xv. 35) and Mk. (vi. 8, viii. 6) ; not in Jn. All the
others use IvreXXeo-tfai, and Mt. jeeXeuew, both of which are rare in
Lk. Here Mt. and Mk. have Xeyei.
fxirjSc/i clireiV. The charge was given with emphasis (&p*
firjSevl /x^Sei/ cnn;*) and sternness (lfi/?/jt/*^<r</iei/os), as Mk* tells
us. The meaning of it is variously explained. To prevent (i) the
man from having intercourse with others before being pronounced
clean by proper authority; (2) the man from becoming proud
150 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 14,
through frequent telling of the amazing benefit bestowed upon
him ; (3) the priests from hearing of the miracle before the man
arrived, and then deciding, out of hostility to Jesus, to deny the
cure; (4) the people from becoming unhealthily excited about
so great a miracle. Chrysostom and Euthymius suggest (5) that
Christ was setting an example of humility, StSacr/cwv TO d/co/ATracrrov
KOLL d^iXort/jiov, in forbidding the leper to proclaim His good deeds.
Least probable of all is the supposition (6) that " our Lord desired
to avoid the Levitical rites for uncleanness which the unspiritual
ceremonialism of the Pharisees might have tried to force upon
H im " for having touched the leper. The first of these was prob-
ably the chief reason ; but one or more of the others may be true
also. The man would be likely to think that one who had been
so miraculously cured was not bound by ordinary rules ; and if he
mixed freely with others before he was declared by competent
authority to be clean, he would give a handle to Christ's enemies,
who accused Him of breaking the law. In the Sermon on the
Mount He had said, " Think not that I came to destroy the law
or the prophets" (Mt v. 17); which implies that this had been
said of Him. The command /wyScvi /x^Sti/ enrfls is further evidence
that Jesus did not regard miracles as His chief credentials. And
there are many such commands (viii. 56; Mt. ix. 30, xii. 16;
Mk. i. 34, iii. 12, v. 43, vii 36, viii. 26).
dXXi &r\0&j> de?o*/ <rea,vrbi> rf lepe'i. Sudden changes to the oratio
directa are common after Tra/jayy^XXaj and similar verbs (Acts i. 4, xxiii. 22 ;
Mk. vi. 8, 9 ; comp. Acts xvii. 3 ; Tobit viii. 21 ; Xen. Anai>. i. 3. 1 6, 20).
Win. Ixiii. 2, p. 725,
no Upei. As in the original (Lev. xiii. 49), the sing, refers to
the priest who was on duty at the time. Note the Ko6u>$, " exactly
as " : the reference is to Lev. xiv. 4-10, which enjoins rather ex-
pensive offerings. Comp. Mt. i. 24. For the form Mwuo^s see
on ii. 22. This charge is in all three narratives almost in the
same words. On its import see Hort, Judaistic Christianity \ p. 30.
KaOapio-fjLoO. Emundatio (Vulg.), mundatio (fq) purgatio (a),
purificatio (d).
els fiapTijpiov auroTs. This addition is in all three, and various
explanations have been suggested. That (i) the priests may be
convinced of My Divine power; (2) the priests may see that I do
not disregard the Law \ (3) the people may be convinced that the
cure is complete, and that the leper may be readmitted to society ;
(4) the people may see that I do not disregard the Law. It is the
sacrifice which is the /wxprvpiov, and therefore the second or fourth
explanation is to be preferred. Both may be right. 1
1 "It is worthy of notice, that all the places where our Lord is stated to
bave met with lepers are in the central districts of Samaria and Galilee, ... It
V. 15, 16,] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 151
SI jxaXXof 6 Xoyos irepl auTou. Lk. does not state,
as Mlc. does, that this was owing to the man's disobedience. Mt.
omits both points. This use of Ste/>xoju,ai of the spreading of a
report is quite classical (Thuc. vi. 46. 5 ; Xen. Anak i. 4. 7). The
word is a favourite one with Lk. ; see on ii. 15. The paXXov
means "more than before, more than ever" (Jn. v. 18, xix. 8),
or " all the more," because of the command not to tell (xviii. 39 ;
Acts v. 14, ix. 22, xxii. 2).
aun 1PX orro OX^ 01 ^oXXol AKoiteii' Kal OcpaireuecrOat &TT& r&v dcr-
0yuui>. For miracles mentioned as being numerous, but without
details, COmp. IV. 40, vi. 18, vii. 21. The COnstr. OepcnreuecrOcu dir^
is peculiar to Lk. (vii. 21, viii. 2). The usual constr. with 6ep.
is the ace. (iv. 23, 40, ix. i, etc.). For do-Oei/eiw comp. ?iii. 2, xiii.
u, 12; Acts xxviii. 9; Heb. xi. 34, where we have a similar
COnstr., l$wafJLw@7jcrav GLTTO dcrtfeveias.
16. auros Be TJI> uiroxwpw^ !* rats ^p^jutots Kal Trpocrcuxofxei/os.
The verse forms one of those resting-places with which Lk. fre-
quently ends a narrative (i. 80, ii. 20, 40, 52, in. 18-20, iv. 13, 15,
30, 44). " But He " on His part, in contrast to the multitudes
who came to see Him, " was in retirement in the deserts, and in
prayer." See on iii. 21. The analytical tense expresses what
Jesus was engaged in while the multitudes were seeking Him.
That they were unable to find Him is not implied here, and ML
states the opposite. For the afiros comp, iv. 30, vi. 8, viii. 37, 54,
xi. 17, 28, xxiii. 9; and for uiroxc&peii', ix. 10. The verb occurs
nowhere else in N.T., but is freq. in class. GrL Lk, alone uses
the plur. of Ip^os (i. 80, viii. 29). See Bede, ad loc.
For Iv after a verb of motion, to express the rest which is the result of the
motion, comp. Mt. xiv. 3 ; Jn. iii. 35 ; 2 Cor. viii. 16, Such condensed
constructions are not common, if found at all, in earlier writers. The con-
verse use of ets after verbs of rest is more common (si. 7, xxi. 37 ; Acts ii. 39,
vii. 4, viii. 20, 23, 40, etc.). Win. L 4. a, p. 514.
17-26. The Healing of a Paralytic Mt ix. 1-8 ; Mk. ii. 1-12,
We again have a narrative which is narrated by all three Synoptists
in a way which shows that they are using common material. Mt.
is again the most brief. Mk. and Lk. agree in the details, but
differ considerably in the wording. Different translations of the
same Aramaic original, or of two very similar Aramaic originals,
would account for these similarities and differences. The cast of
the opening verse is very Hebraistic, as is shown by lycVero, by
cv /uoE T&V rjnep&v, by KO! avrog, and by 8wa/us lS.vpt.ov rjv et?. See
on iv. 36 and on viii. 22. The ev /u rwv ^epwv is an absolutely
indefinite expression, which we have no right to limit. Mt. and
Mk. give no date. The phrase Iv p,i$ roivis peculiar to Lk.
is just in this district that to this day we find the colonies of lepers most
numerous " (Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands^ p. 19).
152 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 17, 18.
17. 4>apia-cuoi. The first mention of them by Lk., who assumes
that his readers know who the Pharisees were. This introduction
of them stamps them as hostile to Christ ; and we have here the
first collision in Galilee between Jesus and the authorities at
Jerusalem. On the Pharisees see Jos. Ant xiii. 5. 9, x. 6, xvii. 2.
4, xviii. i. 2, 3 ; B.J. ii. 8. 14; Sclmiex, Jewish People, II. ii. 26,
p. 10 ; Hausrath, N.T. Times > L p. 135 ; Keim,y^. of Naz. i. p.
321 ; Edersh. L. 6* T. i. pp. 96, 97, 310-324.
HojjLoSiBdorKaXoi. The word is formed on the analogy of te/ooSiSacr-
KaAos and xP&Sao-/caAos, but is not classical. Elsewhere only
Acts v. 34 and i Tim. i. 7. In all three cases teachers of the
Jewish Law are meant, and the term is almost a synonym for 01
ypa^arets in the N.T. sense. That they had come IK ir<<nr)s KC^JULTJS
r?]s TaXiXatas K<X! 'louSatas is, of course, a popular hyperbolical
expression, and illustrates Lk.'s fondness for TTCLS: comp. vi. 17.
Srfpajus Kupiou r\v els TO iacr@ai. au*rw. "The power of Jehovah
was present for Him to heal with " ; /.<?. for Jesus to employ in
working miracles of healing. See on iv. 36 and comp. i. 35, xxiv.
49 ; Acts vi. 8. Hence miracles are often called Suva/Acts, or out-
comes of the power of God. Trench, Syn. xci. The failure to
see that ctvrov is the subject, not the object, of tao-0eu produced
the corrupt reading avnws (A C D and versions). This corrupt
reading produced the erroneous interpretation of Kvptov as mean-
ing Christ Lk. often calls Christ " the Lord " ; but in such cases
Kvpto? always has the article (vii. 13, x. i, xi. 39, xii. 42, xiii. 15,
xvii. 5, 6, xviii. 6, xix. 8, xxii. 61). Kvptos without the article
means Jehovah (L ii, ii. 9, iv. 18; Acts v. 19, viii. 26, 39, xii. 7).
This verse shows us Jesus armed with Divine power and con-
fronted by a large body of hostile spies and critics. What follows
(vv. 19, 26) proves that there was also a multitude of curious
spectators, who had not declared for either side, like the multitude
round Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Carmel (i Kings xviii.
21).
Except in quotations from LXX (Mt, xiii. 15 ; Jn. xii. 40) and one other
passage (Jn. iv. 47), IfarQai with act. signif. is peculiar to Lk. (vi. 19, ix. 2,
II, 42, xiv. 4, xxii. 51 ; Acts ix. 34, x. 38, etc.).
18, 8s fy iropaXeXufx^os. " Here and wherever St Luke men-
tions this disease, he employs the verb irapaXvecrOai, and never
TrapoAvriKo's. The other N.T. writers use the popular form ?rapa-
Aim/cos, and never use the verb, the apparent exception to this,
Heb. xii, 12, being a quotation from the LXX, Is. xxxv* 3. St
Luke's use is in strict agreement with that of the medical writers w
(Hobart, Med. Lang, of St. Lk. p. 6),
ei]Touy auroi> cicreycyKelv. Into the house, although it has not
yet been stated that Jesus *vas in a house, Mk, tells us that there
V. 18, 19.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 153
were four bearers, and that the place was thronged even about the
door. For IvefonoK see small print on L 15.
19. For p-fi with a participle expressing a reason see small print on iii, 9.
With irolas understand 66ov and comp. ^Kdvys (xix. 4). Here we should
have expected did, which some inferior MSS. insert in both jplaces. "By
what kind of a way " emphasizes their perplexity. For the omission of 656t
comp. iii. 5. Win. xxx. 11, hdv. 5, pp. 258, 738. The classical r^v #AXi
illustrates this common ellipse.
Sidt TOI> oxXov. " Because of the multitude " ; not " through the
multitude/' a meaning of St< c, ace. which is found only in poetry
and freq. in Horn. It was probably by means of outside steps
that they w * went up on to the top of the house." Oriental houses
sometimes have such steps; and in any case ladders could be
used. That the SWJJKX was a dwelling-house is not stated. In bibl.
Grk. it means a roof rather than a house (Deut. xxii. 8 ; Josh. ii.
6, 8), and in N.T. seems to imply a flat roof (xii. 3, xvii. 31 ; Acts
x. 9; Mk. xiii. 15; Mt. x. 27, xxiv. 17). It may have been over
a large hall on the ground floor. Even if Jesus was teaching in
the upper room of a dwelling-house (and the Rabbis often taught
there), the difficulty of getting on to the roof and removing a small
portion of it would not be very great. Edersh. Hist o/J. IV. p. 253.
Sid. T&V KepdLjiwy KadYJjcay. The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T.
(Acts ix. 25, x. ii, XL 5); freq. in class. Grk. Mk. has dTreo-rey-
a<rav rrjv crrey^v oVov ^v, /ecu lopv avres ^aAcotriv. We need not
infer froai eopvavr<$ that under the tiles was clay or mortar to be
"dug otu." Sut, it there was anything of the kind to be cut
through and removed, this could easily be done without serious
consequences to those who were in the crowded room below.
Men who had so much at stake, and who had got thus far, would
not desist through fear of sprinkling a few persons with rubbish.
To make these difficulties, which are very unsubstantial, a reason
for rejecting the whole narrative as a legend, is rather childish
criticism. The constructor of a legend would not have made his
details conspicuously incredible. The suggestion that Jesus was
in a gallery outside the house, teaching the multitude in the open
court below, is not helpful. In that case, why unroof the gallery ?
The sick man might have been let down to the front of it. Need-
less difficulty has been made about rather a simple mattor 1
O-DK T$ KXwSup. Lk. alone has his favourite o-vv. The sub-
stantive occurs* here only. It is the dim. of K\irtj (viii. 16, xvii.
34), and perhaps means here a portion of the icXtvi; mentioned in
ver. 1 8. Not all of what had been used to bring him through the
streets would be let down through the root Comp. KXwdpiw
(Acts v. 15). Double forms of diminutives are not uncommon;
' For another explanation see Tristram, Eastern Customs^ pp. 34, 35*
154 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [Y. 19-21.
& ywaiKiov and ywatKoipLov (2 Tim. iii. 6) ; TraiBlov (I. 59, 66)
and TraiBdpiov (Jn. vi. 9) ; irivaKiov and TTIVOLKL^LOV (i. 63). Mk. has
the inelegant Kpa/forros, grabatus (Acts v. 15, ix, 33), for which
the Greeks preferred O-KL/JLTTOVS or O-KI^TTO^LOV.
0. ISwp TTJI> mariF auTwy. The faith of the man and of those
who brought him. All three accounts have the words ; but Mt.
omits the persevering energy which proved how strong their faith
was. We need not assume that the paralytic himself did not share
his friends' confidence.
For a full discussion of ths Meaning of " Faith " in the New Testament and
in some Jewish Writing see detached note on Rom. i. 17. Here it will suffice
to point out its four main uses for (i) belief in God ; (2) belief in His promises ;
(3) belief in Christ ; (4) belief in some particular utterance or claim of God or of
Christ. Of these four the last is the commonest use in the Synoptic Gospels,
where it generally means belief in the power of Christ, or of God in Christ, to
work miracles, The efficacy of Chiist's power is commonly dependent upon
the faith of those who are to be benefited by its exercise, as here. Comp. vii.
50, viii. 48, xvii. 19, xviii. 42. By an easy transition this faith in the power of
God or of Christ to work miracles becomes used of the conviction that the
believer himself has received power to work miracles. Comp. xvii. 6. In
xviii. 8 the faith to be found on earth means faith in the Son of Man.
, d<j>ewj>rai om at djj,apTiai crou. Mk. has re/cvo^, and
Mt. has #apcrei Te/cvov. It is not likely that Lk.; the writer of the
Gospel of grace for all, has deliberately changed the more tender
address, because it seemed to be unsuitable to one who must, as
he thinks, have been a grievous sinner. Comp, xii. 14 and xxii.
57. And we affirm more than we know, if we say that this absolu-
tion was necessary for the man's cure, because otherwise he would
not have believed that Jesus could heal him, and his faith was
essential to the cure. He probably believed, and perhaps knew,
that his malady was the direct consequence of his own sin (xiii. 2 ;
Jn. v. 14, ix. 2 ; i Cor. xi. 30). But it does not follow from this
that faith on his part was thus far absent,
Suidas seems to be right in regarding &$favrai as a Doric form of the
perf. indie, for afaivraL. But it was admitted rather freely, even by Attic
writers. Comp. totwimu (Hdt. ii. 165. I ; but the reading is not ceitain)
and f?w0a from 0w (iv. 6). Win. xiv. 3. a, p. 96 ; Veitch, s. v. In Mt. and
Mk. the true reading here is cl^/emu : but d^cwrcu occurs again vii. 47, 48 ;
I John ii. 12, and probably Jn. xx. 23. Some have regaided it as a sub-
junctive : remissa sunto. Fritzsche (on Mt. ix. 2) pertinently asks, Quo usn
aui more subjunctivum in talibus locis absolute positwn defetidas ?
SiaXoyiecr0au Not a mere periphrasis for
a-avro: see on iv. 21. Hitherto they had found nothing in His
words to excite criticism. Here they seemed to see the oppor-
tunity for which they had been watching, and their discussions
forthwith began. 1 The ypajjtjiaTcts are evidently the same as the
1 It has been suggested that fyray *ca^/xevoi (Mk. ii. 6) and fjpj-avTQ (=
) here are simply different translations of the Aramaic verb, which
Y. 21-23.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 155
Foju,oSiSao-/coAoi in ver, 17, Neither Mt. nor Mk. mention the
Pharisees here ; and both of them imply that the criticisms were
not uttered aloud : ev cavrots (Mt), lv rats /capStats (Mk.). Even
here utterance is not stated, for Xeyovrcs may be used of thoughts
(xii. 17; Mt. xxi. 25).
Tis ecr-ny OUTOS os XaXet (3Xaa-<f>Tr)jjuas ; An accidental iambic line.
We have another ver. 39, if eu0<os be admitted as genuine. The
ovro? is contemptuous, as often (iv. 22, vii. 39, 49, ix, 9, xiv. 30,
xv, 2, etc.). In N.T., as in class. Grk., /3Aao-<^iua has the two
meanings of "evil speaking " (Col. iii. 8; Eph. iv. 31 ; i Tim. vi. 4;
Jude 9 : comp. Rom. iii. 8, xiv. 16) and "blasphemy" (Mt. xii. 31,
xxvi. 65; Rev. xiii. 6). These cavillers assume that Jesus has
claimed to have pardoned the man on His own authority, not
merely to have said that He knew that his sins have been forgiven
by God. And Jesus does not say that they are mistaken in this.
He acts on His own authority in accordance with the will of the
Father, doing on earth what the Father does in heaven (Jn. v. 19,
21). For d^tevai of sins comp. Mt xii. 31; Mk. iii 28; Rom.
iv. 7, etc.
22. emyyous Se 6 'I^aous TOUS SiaXoyio-jJious aura)!'. The COm-
pound verb implies thorough and accurate knowledge (i Cor.
xiii. 12; Rom. i. 32; Justin, Try. iii. p. 221 A). The subst ciri-
yj/oocris is used of " the knowledge of God and of Christ as being the
perfection of knowledge : e.g. Prov, ii. 5; Hos. iv, i, vi. 6; Eph.
i. 17, iv. 13; 2 Pet. i. i, 2, 8, ii. 20; Clem. Alex. P&d. ii. i, p. 173"
(Lft. on Col. i. 9). Comp. the climax in Apost. Const* vii. 39. i,
yvaxrts, 7rtyvo)cri5, irXrjpo^opCcu On both exiyi/oxn? and SioAoyter-
/JLOVS see Hatch, BibL Grk. p. 8. The latter seems here to mean
"thoughts" (IvQviLrivtis, Mt. ix. 4) rather than "discussions* 1
(ix. 46). In LXX it is used of the counsels of God (Ps. xxxix. 6,
xci. 6). It is, however, more often used in a bad sense (Ps. Iv. 5,
xciii. n, cxlv. 4, etc.), and is specially freq. in Lk. (ii. 35, vi. 8,
ix. 47, xxiv. 38). Not in Jn., and only once each in Mt and Mk.
Iv rais KapSuus upjy. This seems to imply that there had been
no utterance. Christ read their thoughts. See on Rom. L 21.
23. TI IcrTtK euKoin&TepoF, etTreiK . . . ^ eiirety. It is in this
verse and the next that the three accounts are most similar
almost verbatim the same. The challenge is a very practical one,
and the point of it is in the dirdv. It is easier to say t " Thy sins
are forgiven," because no one can prove that they are not forgiven.
But the claim to heal with a word can be easily and quickly
tested.
the very different meanings of "sitting at rest" and " beginning "5 or possibly
of two verbs which are identical in spelling (Expesitor, April 1891, p. 285)!
See on iii. 23. But these possibilities seem to be too isolated and sporadic to
be of great value in accounting for differences between the Gospels.
$6 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 23, 24.
epov. Lit. "more capable of being done with easy labour" (e#,
In N.T. always in the comparative {xvi. 17, xviii. 25; Mk. x. 25;
Mt. zix. 24); but evKQ7roj> occurs I Mac. m. 18; Ecclus. xxii. 15. It is
found in Polyb., but not in class. Grk. For rs in the sense of "whether of
two" like Tr6repos } as quis = uter y comp. xxii. 27; Mt. xxi. 31, xxiii. 17,
xxvii. 17, 21 ; Xen. Cyr. iii. I. 17.
24. 6 utos TOU <xi>0pci$7rou. This remarkable phrase in all four
Gospels is invariably used by Christ of Himself; upwards of eighty
times in all. The Evangelists never use it of Him, and no one
ever addresses Him by this title. Yet none of the four ever
directs our attention to this strict limitation in the use of the
phrase, so that their agreement must be regarded as undesigned,
and as evidence of their accuracy.
In O.T. we have "son of man" used in three different connexions, and it
must be noted that in each case the rendering in LXX is vlbs avBp&irov and not
6 vlos roO oLvOp&Trov. In the Psalms it is used of the ideal man : viii. 4, Ixxx. 16,
cxliv. 3, cxlvi. 3. In Ezektel it is the title by which the Prophet is addressed,
ii. i, 3, 6, 8, iii. I, 34, etc. etc.; upwards of eighty times in all. In DanieFs
night visions (via. 13, 14), "One like a son of man came with the clouds of
heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days," and received a dominion which was
universal and eternal. With this should be compared various passages in the
Book of Enoch, of which this is specially noteworthy. " There I saw one who
had a head of days, and His head was white like wool ; and with Him was a
Second, whose countenance was like the appearance of a man, and His counte-
nance was full of grace, like one of the holy angels. And I asked one of the
angels who were with me, and who showed me all the secrets, concerning this
Son of Man, who He was, and whence He was, and why He goes with the
Head of days. And he answered and said to me : This is the Son of Man who
has justice, and justice dwells with Him ; and all the treasures of secrecy He
reveals, because the Lord of the spirits has chosen Him, and His portion over-
comes all things before the Lord of the spirits in rectitude to eternity. And this
Son of Man, whom thou hast seen, will arouse the kings and mighty from their
couches, and the strong from their thrones, and will loosen the bands of the
strong, and will break the teeth of the sinners " (xlvi.). This Son of Man is the
Messiah. He is called " the Anointed " (xlviii. 1 1, li. 4), " the Righteous One "
(xxxviii. 2, liii. 6), " the Elect One" (passim], and the Lord speaks of Him as
"My Son" (cv. 2). That these Messianic passages in the Book of Enoch are
of Christian origin is the opinion of a few critics, but it is difficult to maintain it.
Everything distinctly Christian is absent. This Son of Man or Messiah is not
the Word, is not God. That He has lived on the earth is nowhere intimated.
Of the historical Jesus, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, or the Ascension, there
is not a hint ; nor yet of baptism, or of the eucharist, or of the doctrine of the
Trinity. Why should a Christian write just what any Jew might accept about
the Messiah and no more? But if the whole of the Book of Enoch was
written before the birth of Christ, then we have sufficient evidence to show that
when Christ was teaching on earth " Son of Man" was already accepted by the
Jews as one title, although not a common one, for the Messiah. 1 The idea of a
weak and suffering Messiah was unwelcome to the Jews, and therefore a name
1 Le Livre d^Htnoeh^ en particulier^ lequel Itaitfort fa dans V entourage d*
Jsi*z (Judse Epist. 14) nous doune la clef de F expression de "Fils de Fhomme"
et des idles qui s'y rattachaient (Renan, V. de J. p. xi.). It is, of course, quite
possible that the writer of the Book of Enoch took the idea from Daniel. For
a discussion of the title see Dorner, Person of Christy Eng. tr. I. i. p. 54.
V. 24-26. J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 157
which emphasized human weakness was not a favourite one. '* But the very
reason which induced them to avoid the title induced our Lord to take it. It
expressed His Messiahship definitely enough for His purpose ; but it expressed it
if that veiled and suggestive way which characterised the whole of His teaching
on His own person. At the same time, it conveyed to those who had ears to
hear the whole secret of the Incarnation. That which the Jews shrank from
and ignored He rather placed in the forefront of His mission " (Sanday in the
Expositor, Jan. 1891, p. 30, art. " On the Title, ' Son of Man ' ").
em rfjs yTJs* In all three accounts there is room for doubt as
tc the words which this expression qualifies. Here either efouo-tav
or d<iei/ai dju,a/mas. In Mk. and Mt. it may qualify 6 i tos roi;
It is best taken with elovcrtav ex t * But tne difference
in meaning is not great.
eiTri> TW TrapaXeXufi^ffc). This is not the apodosis to fra ct&Jrs,
but a parenthesis : l the apodosis to fva etS^re is Sot Xeyw. Note
the emphasis on crot : " to thee I say the crucial words." Clement
of Alexandria gives this address to the paralytic in singularly dif-
ferent language : dvacrra, <?ycr! TO> ?rapi/iei/a), rov Q-/a///7ro8a <j> ov
/caraKcto-at Aa/?a>v axriQi ot/caSc (P&d. i. 2, p. ioi, ed. Potter). Prob-
ably a paraphrase.
25. irapaxp'njJi.a dmcrrds ei>(67noi>. Every one of these words is
characteristic of Lk. For Trapa-xp^a Mk. has his equally charac-
teristic ev6v$, a feature which recurs Lk. viii. 44, 55, xviii. 43,
xxii. 60. Lk, has Trapaxp^/xa ten times in the Gospel and six times
in the Acts: elsewhere only Mt. xxi. 19, 20. For dvao-ras Mt.
has l-yepOeis and Mk. rj-ylpO-rj KOLLI see on i. 39. For evojirto^ avr&v
Mk. has tfjLTTpocrOcv -n-avrcuv.
apas e4>* o Kar^Keiro. // doit porter maintenant ce grabat qui Pa
si longtemps porte (Godet). The wording is peculiar to Lk., and is
perhaps intended to suggest this inversion of relations. Lk. alone
records that he glorified God. The phrase Sodeiy rov ov
is specially common with him (ver. 26, vii. 16, xiii. 13, xvii. 15,
xviii. 43, xxiii. 47; Acts iv. 21, xi. 18, xxi. 20): once in Mk., twice
in Mt., once in Jn.
The reading <:0* <J5 (R U A) is an obvious correction to a more usual con-
struction. For the ace. after a verb of rest comp. xxi. 35 ; Mt. xiii. 2 ; Mk.
iv. 38 ; Jn. xti. 4 ; also Plato, Spin. 212 D, &rrn}j/(H
26. IKOTCUTIS 2Xa(3cK atran-as. Mk. has fl-avras, Mt. nothing.
Lk. is fond of the stronger form. He alone records all three
emotions amazement, fear, and gratitude to God. The last is in
all three. For eKcrmcris comp. Mk. v. 42, xvi. 8; Acts iii. 10; Gen.
xxvii. 33; i Sam. xiv. 15; 2 Chron. xiv. 14. Mt, whose narrative
1 That this parenthesis occurs in exactly the same place in ait three prove*
that all three made use of a narrative, the form of which was already fixed, either
in memory or in writing (Salmon, Int. to N. 7 1 . p. 121, 5th ed.). Comp. Lie*
viii. 28, 29 with Mk. v. 7, 8, where we have similar agreement in arrangement*
158 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V. 20, 27
is much the most brief, adds after lSo'fa<rav rov oV, rov
lov<riav roLavryv rots avOptoirots, which seems to refer to the pre-
ceding tgovcriav l^ct. He who is the Son of Man, the ideal repre-
sentative of the race, had vindicated His claim to possess authority
to forgive sins.
EiSafxcy TrapdtSoJa crr\pi-pov. The adj. occurs here only in N.T
In LXX it is not rare (judg. xiii. 13; Wisd. v. 2; Ecclus. xliil, 25*
2 Mac. be 24; 4 Mac, ii. 13). It is used of the miracles of Jesws
in the famous passage, of very doubtful origin, in Josephus :
drijfp, ct ye avSpa avrov Xiyew XPT ?v T^P irapa86o>v epyvv
(Ant. xviii. 3. 3). Whereas !vSoa (xiii. 17) has reference to the
8o|a or glory of the agent, irapdSoga refers to the Soa or opinion oi
the spectators; but Soa in the sense of "opinion" or "belief" is
not found in N.T. For the mixed form of aor. etSa/jicv see small
print on L 59, and comp. i Sam. x. 14 and 2 Sam. x. 14.
S7-39. The Calling of Levi and the Discussion about Fasting.
Mt ix. 9-17; Mk. ii. 13-22. In all three narratives this section
is connected closely with the healing of the paralytic ; but Mt
places both incidents much later, viz. after the return from the
country of the Gadarenes.
The common identification of Lev! with Matthew is probably correct ; but
his father must not be identified with the father of James the Less. Matthew
is probably a contraction of Mattathias = " Gift of God," and this name may
have been given to Levi after His conversion, like that of Peter to Simon.
Comp. Joseph Barsabbas, surnamed Justus (Acts i. 23). In Galilee it was
common to have two names ; and therefore both names may have been original.
But if Levi was the earlier name, and was less well known among Christians,
that would account for Mk. and Lk. using it, while Mt. equally naturally would
let it be evident that a reXci^s had become, by Christ's mercy, the well-known
Apostle. There can be no reasonable doubt that the three narratives refer to
the same incident. And, as Levi is mentioned in no list of the Twelve, and
Matthew is mentioned in all such lists, the identity of Levi the reX&vrjs with Mt.
the rcX&vrjt and Apostle need not be doubted. Such doubts, however, are
ancient They existed in the Gnostic commentator Heracleon (Clem. Alex.
Strom. lv. 9, p. 595, ed. Potter), and were shared by Origen. They have been
reproduced by Grotius (on Mt. ix. 9) and Michaelis ; and more recently by
Sieffert, Neander, Ewald, Keim, and Reuss. But a satisfactory solution, which
is not contradicted by^ any evidence, is not to be rejected because it does not
amount to demonstration.
87. IgijXOei'. So also Mk., while Mt. has irapdyvr
Departure from the town, rather than from the house, is probably
meant; and we therefore obtain no evidence as to the site of
Capernaum. We may place Capernaum away from the lake, and
yet suppose the TcAowoi/ to have been close to the shore* The
customs collected there went to Herod Antipas, not to the imperial
fiscus (Jos. Ant. xvii. n. 4, 5 ; -Z?.y. ii. 6. 3) : see on xx. 25.
^ecfararo r\&vi\v. "Looked attentively at, contemplated, a
tax-collector/' as if reading his character. The verb often i
V. 47-29.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 1 59
enjoyment in beholding (vii. 24 ; Jn* i. 14, 32, 38 ; i Jn. L i). For
the TcXwi/cu see on iii. 12. The Talmud distinguishes two classes
of reAwai : the Gabbai or tax-gatherer (e.g. of income-tax or poll-
tax), and the Mokkes or custom-house officer. The latter was
specially hated, as having greater opportunities for vexatious
exactions, especially from the poor. Levi was one of the latter.
The great commercial route from Acre to Damascus, which con-
tinued until the crusades as the via marts, passed the lake at or
near Capernaum, and gave employment to excisemen (Is* ix. i).
cVofiaTi Aeueif. Mk. has Aeueo/ rov rov 'AAx^aiov, and Mt. nas
MaQOoiov. The fondness of Lk. for oi/o^art in introducing a name
is here conspicuous. Mt. has Aeyo/Ae^ov, and Mk. has neither.
Comp. i. 5, x. 38, xvi. 20, xxiii. 50, and over twenty times in the
Acts. Mt. and Mk, have oVo/iart once each, Jn. says ovopa
avr<5 (i. 6, iii. i, xviii. 10).
KaOVj/iei/oi/ em T& TeXc6>aov. Excepting in the parallel passages,
reXwviov does not occur in N.T. Nor is it common elsewhere.
In Strabo, xvi. i. 27, it seems to mean "customs, taxes," and some
would render e?rt TO reXwi/tov, " to receive the customs." But it is
more probable that it means the place where dues were collected,
" the tol bothe " (Wic.) or " the custom-house " (Rhem.). Comp.
the similarly formed 8e/carawo]/, " the orifice of a collector of tenths."
Very likely Levi was sitting outside the portitorium. He must
have been visible from the outside : the M is " at," not " in."
28. KaraXttroDi' irdira. Lk alone mentions this. 1 Note the
characteristic Travra, and comp. ver. n. The fact illustrates the
doctrine, to which Lk. often bears witness, that riches are a peril
and an impediment, and that the kingdom of God is specially
preached to the poor. The statement is against the supposition
\D.B. ii. p. 969) that Mt. returned to his business afterwards ; and
it is quite gratuitous to suppose that the statement is a mere
reminiscence of ver. n. In that case why has d^teycu been
changed to KaroAeomi'?
There is a slight awkwardness in KO,T<I\IV&I> preceding toturrdt : the rising
was the first act in the leaving all and in the following Christ. Both Mt. and
Lk. represent the following as habitual, ->7/coXotf0et. Mk. regards the single act
on this occasion, i fiKo\o^&fj<j-ey. With the call, 'JueokoMei pot, comp. Jn. i. 44,
and with the result comp. ver. II and Mt. iv. 19, 22. The two comhined lead
one to the view that this is a call to become an Apostle.
29. liroajcreK $o\ty |iydXif]K. "Made a great reception*
(Scxofwu) or banquet. The word is peculiar to Lk., who has
Soxty iroielv again xiv. 13. The phrase occurs in LXX (Gen.
xxL 8, xxvi. 30 ; Esth, i. 3, v. 4, 8). Of course lv T OIKI^ aurou
* Ce seul mot suffit* La parok qui venatf de giUrir U Upr*ux> de rendre am
paralysS k mouvement et de remtttre les ptckls, transforms studaimment un
pubKctdn en disciple (Didon,/. C. ch. iii. p, 340)*
160 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [V, 29- SI.
means in Levi's house, which is not included in KaraXtTrwv irdvra.
He was not at his house when he left all. The Trdvra refers to his
whole mode of life, his business as a
It is strange that any one should understand the words either here or Mk.
ii. 15 as meaning "in the house of Jesus." Had Jesus a house? If so, how
improbable that Levi should hold a reception in it 1 If the narrator had meant
this, must he not have given the name instead of azJroO, which would inevitably
be misunderstood? Mt has simply & rfi olidq., which possibly means "in-
doors," as opposed to the outdoor scene M TO rf\&nov. There is no evidence
that Christ had a house at Capernaum. After the call of Simon and Andrew
He is entertained in the house of Simon and Andrew (Mk. i. 1 6, 29) ; and
after the call of Levi He is entertained in the house of Levi. The new disciple
wishes his old friends to make the acquaintance of his new Master. Cest son
premier acte mhsionaire (Godet).
TToXds re\tov&v Kal aXXdif ot fj<ra> JWT* aflTwi>
p,i>oi. This proves that the house was a large one, which the
house of Jesus would not have been: and it also shows the
character of the company, for only social outcasts would sit down
at the same table with reXoji/cu.
30. eyoyYuJoy ol 4>apicratoi icai ot ypajmjuwxTCts aijToiy. The avrtov
means " the scribes of the Pharisees," i.e. who belonged to that
party. Some scribes were Sadducees. That this is the meaning
is clear from Mk. ii. 16. It is pointless, and scarcely grammatical,
to make (LVT&V refer to the inhabitants of the place, who have not
been mentioned, These scribes were probably not invited guests,
but had entered during the meal, like the woman that was a sinner
in the house of Simon. The Sinaiticus and other authorities omit
O.VTW, doubtless because it was not clear what it meant.
For yoyytfa, which is not in Mk. or Mt, see Lft. on Phil. ii. 14, and
Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Grk. p. 39. The Atticists preferred
Both are probably onomatop. Note that here, as in w. 31, 33 and iv. 43,
Lk. has trp6s c. ace. after a verb of speaking, where Mk. (ii. 16-19) has the
dat. See on i. 13.
Ai& T fieTct TWK reXeui/wK Kat djuapTwXwp IcrOieTe; The Single
article (so in all three) brackets them as one class. In Mt. and
Mk. the disciples are not included in the charge (eo-^tet, not
foOiere) ; but they both mention that the disciples were sitting at
table with Jesus and the reAobm, and therefore were open to the
charge. Lk., on the other hand, does not mention that the
disciples were sitting at table, but his fo&'crc implies it. With
Std, TI comp. Exod. v. 14.
31. In all three accounts Jesus ignores the insinuation against His disciples,
and answers for Himself. He is responsible for the intercourse with tax-
collectors and sinners. For ot vyiatvovr^ Mt. and Mk. have ol foxtiowts*
This looks like a deliberate change made by Lk. for the sake of a word which
would more definitely express health as opposed to sickness. Like srapaAeXi/-
udvQs for irapaXvTLtcfa (w. 1 8, 24) and larOat for $iacr&ew (vi. 19), these changei
V. 31-34.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE I6l
may be the result of Lk.'s medical training (Hobart, p. 67 ; Salmon, Int. to
N.T. p. 129, 5th ed.). But would Lk. have made changes in a report of
Christ's words? There would be no need to have scruples, for ol Ivy/wres is
only a translation of the Aramaic, and Lk. might think that ol vyialvovTes was a
better translation. Christ's reply is an argumentum ad hominem^ partly
ironical. On their own showing the Pharisees had no need of a teacher, while
these outcasts were in the greatest need of one.
83. cts [xe-rdi'oiai'. These words are peculiar to Lk., but in
some texts have been transferred to Mk. and Mt Both perdvota
and /xravotv are freq. in Lk. See on xv. 7. Obviously those who
are really Sweaioi do not need to be called to repentance ; but who
are 6Y/caioi ? That is the question which Christ's reply suggests.
If we had only Mk/s account, we might suppose that what follows
took place on some other occasion ; but both Lk. and Mt. (rorc)
connect it with the banquet in Matthew's house.
33. ol 8e itrai>. The same who asked the previous question,
viz. the Pharisees and their scribes (ver. 30). Mt. says that it was
the disciples of John who came up and put this question. Mk.
states that both the disciples of John and the Pharisees were
keeping a fast at that very time, and joined in asking why Christ's
disciples did not do so also. We know from Jn. iii. 26 how
jealous the Baptist's disciples were of Christ, and therefore ready
to criticize. Perhaps they were also jealous of the freedom from
legal restraints which His disciples seemed to enjoy. They leave
an opening for the reply, " You have no need to fast." The four
words which follow V^O-TOJOVO-LV, viz. the words TTUKVOI K<X! Seiqo-eis
TToiourrai, are peculiar to Lk. They imply that Christ's disciples
habitually neglected the frequent fasts which the disciples of John
and of the Pharisees kept. The fasts on Mondays and Thursdays
are probably meant, which were not obligatory, but which some
Pharisees observed (xviii. 12). Moses was believed to have gone up
Mount Sinai on a Thursday and to have come down on a Monday.
The Day of Atonement was the only fast of universal obligation.
For iroieurdai Se^creis comp. i Tim. ii, i j it refers to prayers at fixed
times according to rule. The disciples of Jesus seemed to have no
rule respecting such things. A late tradition fixes the number of
the Baptist's disciples as thirty, answering to the days of the
month, as the Twelve are supposed to answer to the months of the
year (Clem. Horn. ii. 23). KCU lavoucriy. These words also are
peculiar to Lk. in harmony with KO.I mi/ere in ver. 30.
84. Individuals were at liberty to choose their own days for
fasting, but they must not select a sabbath or any of the great
feasts. Christ suggests another exception, which very possibly
was made by the Pharisees themselves. Is it possible to make
the guests fast at a wedding ? Mt. and Mk. omit the xotetv : Can
the wedding-guests fast ? Would it not be morally impossible to
II
1 63 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S, LUKE [V* 84-36,
have such a combination ? To John's disciples this parable would
come home with special force, for their master had called Jesus
"the Bridegroom," and himself "the friend of the Bridegroom."
rods ulous TOU yujKjjwros. The common Hebraism to express
those who are closely connected with the wp,<j>w: comp. x. 6,
xvL 8, xx. 36; Acts iv. 36; Mt xxiii. 15; Jn. xii. 36, etc. In
1 Mac. iv. 2 ot viol -njs aicpas means the garrison of the citadel.
But in LXX such expressions are not very common (i Kings i. 52;
2 Sam. xii. 5 ; Gen. XL 10). The word vv^eov seems scarcely to
occur in class. Grk. f but it is rightly formed ^Tobit vi. 14, 17),
Comp. mxp#ra>Vj yuvat/ew, avSpcoi/, ^ocuv, djw.ireA.ajv, /c.r.A.
35. IXeucrorrai Se T)fjt,e?pai. " But days will come," />. days very
different from the joyous days of the wedding. It is best to take
this clause separately. After it there is an aposiopesis, which is
mournfully impressive ; and then the sentence begins again.
ical Gray dirap6fj dir' au-noy 6 njji<|>ios. There is no /cat in Mt"
or ML, and some texts omit it here, because of its apparent
awkwardness. We may take the /ecu as beginning a fresh sentence,
or as epexegetic of the preceding clause. " But days will come
and when the bridegroom shall be taken away," etc Or, " But
days will come, yea, days when the bridegroom," etc. The word
airap&fj is in all three, and nowhere else in N.T. It is common in
class. Grk., esp. of the moving of fleets and armies.
T&T* ^oreu'croucriy. " Then they will fast " of their own accord.
He does not say, " Then ye will be able to make them fast," which
would be the exact antithesis of what goes before j and the change
is significant. Compulsion will be as superfluous then as it would
be outrageous now : comp. xvii. 2 2. This is the first intimation of
His death and departure, after which fasting will be appropriate
and voluntary. Its value consists in its being spontaneously
adopted, not forcibly imposed. This point is further developed in
the short parables which follow. Note the characteristic IF
Ijccuscu? TCUS fjfjLepais (not in Mt. ix. 15), and see on ix, 36.
36. "EXcyep Be KOI irapapoK^ irpos auroJg. These introductory
words are peculiar to Lk., and the phrase Xtyew 7rapa/3o\^v is
used by no one else (xii. 41, xiii. 6, xiv. 7, xviii. i, xx. 9), For the
characteristic te KOI see small print on iii. 9, and for X^yct^ irp<$$
see on i. 13. For pairs of parables see on ver. 37 and xiii. 18,
ATTO t)i,cmou KCUVOU <rxuras. This also is peculiar to Lk.'s narra-
tive, and it heightens the effect of the parable. Both Mt. and Mk.
represent the patch as coming from an unused piece of cloth. To
tear it from a new garment is an aggravation of the folly. A good
garment is ruined in order to mend, and that very ineffectually, an
old one. In all three we have eTrt'jSX^ju.a for patch ; in Mt. and Mk.
wA^pcofui also ; and Mk. for cVtjSoAAei has lirtpdwmi; In Plutarch
and Arrian 1-0-1^X^0, means "tapestry" for hangings. In the
V. 36, 37.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 163
sense of "patch" it seems to occur only in Sym. Josh. ix. n (5).
The Latin translations of sTTLpXyjjLa vary : commissura (Vulg,), insu-
mentum (a), immissura (d).
cl 8 (juj-ye (d k ^ -ye, Lach. Treg.). "But if he acts otherwise," i.e. if
he commits this folly. Ni caveat errorem (Grotius). The formula is freq. in
Lk. (ver. 37, x. 6, xiii. 9, xiv. 32), who never uses d d p-ft. Ei d irf ye is
stronger than el $ pf), and follows both negative (xiv. 32 ; Mt. ix. 17 ; 2 Cor.
xi. 16) and affirmative sentences (x. 6, xiii. 9; Mt. vi. i). It is found in
Plato (Rep. ii. 375 C) : comp. Hdt. iv. 120. 4, See Fritzsche on Mt. vi I
and Meyer on 2 Cor. xi. 16.
Kal TO Kaiydv crxicrei. " Both he will rend the new garment "
in tearing the patch from it. AV. here goes wrong, although
(except as regards the tense) all previous English Versions were
right. Reading <rx%ei with A and Vulg. rumpit, Wic. Tyn. Cran.
and Rhem. have "He breaketh the new," while Cov. has "He
renteth the new." Beza has " the old breaketh the new." Luther
and AV. seem to be alone in taking TO KCLWOV as the nom., " Both
the new maketh a rent." With cr^tcra comp. Jn. xix. 24; Is.
xxxvii. i.
Kal TO Kawov . . . Kal T& iraXaiw. The double KO.L marks the
double folly. RV. avoids the awkwardness of " Both he will rend
, . . and the piece," etc., by rendering, " He will rend . . . and
also the piece," etc. The combination with *al T$ TraAaia? shows
that TO Kawov is object and not subject.
As to the precise meaning, interpreters are not agreed, beyond
the general truth that a new spirit requires a new form. But the
piece torn from the new garment is probably exemption from fast-
ing. To deprive Christ's disciples of this freedom, while He is with
them, would be to spoil the system in which they are being trained,
And to impose this exemption upon the disciples of John and the
Pharisees, would also spoil the system in which they have been
trained. In the one case fasting, in the other non-fasting, was the
natural outcome of the environment. For a variety of interpreta-
tions see Godet, who in his third ed. has changed his own (1888).
37. This second parable carries on and develops the teaching
of the first. We have similar pairs of parables in the Mustard- seed
and the Leaven, the Treasure hid in the Field and the Pearl of
great price, the Ten Virgins and the Talents, the Lost Sheep and
the Lost Coin, the Unwise Builder and the Unwise King. In tliree
respects this second parable differs from the first, (i) The piece
of new cloth represents only a fragment of the new system ; the
new wine represents the whole of it. (2) The new garment and
the old one are only marred ; the new wine is lost and the old
skins are destroyed. (3) Not only is the wrong method con-
demned, the right method is indicated (dAAofc . . . fiXiyrtw)* The
argument is a fortiori. If it is a mistake to take the natural out-
1 64 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE >. 37-39.
come from one system and force it upon an alien system, much
more fatal will it be to try to force the whole of a new and grow
ing system into the worn out forms of an old one. " I thank Thee,
O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these
things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto
babes "(x. 21). The scribes and Pharisees, wise in the letter of
the law, and understanding their own cramping traditions, were
incapable of receiving the free spirit of the Gospel. Young and
fresh natures, free from prejudice and open to new light and new
impressions, were needed to receive the new word and preserve it
unchecked and untramelled for future generations. On the fitness
of the twofold parable to the occasion Bengel remarks, parabolam
a vesfe, a vino : imprimis opportunam convivio.
ou$i$ pdXXci QIVQV viw els dcTKous TTttXatous. For /3a\\.iv of
pouring liquids comp. Jn. xiii. 5; Mt. xxvi. 12; Judg. vi. 19;
Epictet. iv. 19. 12. Skin-bottles, utres 9 are still in use in the East,
made of a single goat-skin (Horn. //. iii. 247), from which the flesh
and bones are drawn without ripping up the body. The neck of
the animal becomes the neck of the bottle. Gen. xxi. 14, 15, 19;
Ps. cxix. 83. Comp. Hdt. ii. 121. 20, iii. 9. 2; Horn. Od. v. 265.
In Job xxxii. 19 it is said that even new skins are ready to burst
when they are full of new wine : comp. xxxviii. 37. See Herzog,
PRE? art. Schlauch-, Tristram, Nat. Hist, of B. p. 92.
38. olvw vlov els AcncoDs KCUVOUS p\v\rlov. Here certainly, and
perhaps here only in N.T., the difference between ve'os and /cau/os
must be marked in translation : " New wine must be put \ntofresh
wine-skins." While veos is new in reference to time, " young " as
opposed to " aged," Katvos is new in reference to quality ', "fresh"'
as opposed to "worn out." Trench, Syn. Ix.; Crem. Lex. p. 321.
But "a fresh heaven and a fresh earth" (2 Pet. iii. 13; Rev. xxi. i),
and still more a "fresh Jerusalem" (Rev. iii. 12, xxi. 2), would be
intolerable. No English version prior to RV. distinguishes here
between F&S and K<UVO$; and Vulg. has novus for both. None
translates doveoi "skins" or "wine-skins," but either "bottles"
(Wia Gran. Rhem % AV.) or "vessels" (Tyn. Cov. Gen.). The
conclusion, KO! a/u^orepot erwnypowrai, is an interpolation from Mt.
ix. 17 (x B L and Aegyptt omit).
89. This third parable is peculiar to Lk. While the first two
show how fatal it would be to couple the new spirit of the Gospel
with the worn out forms of Judaism, the third shows how natural it
is that those who have been brought up under these forms should
be unwilling to abandon them for something untried. The con-
version of an outcast rcXwv^s, who has no such prejudices, may be
easier than one whose life is bound up in the formalism of the past.
Grotius, starting from Ecclus, ix. 13, olvos vcos <tXos Wos* &v
27, JUT* ev^potruviys irtWat avroF, interprets : Signtficavit ho*
V. 39-VL 1.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 165
proverbio Christus homines non subito ad austeriorem vitam fertra-
hendos, sed per gradus quosdam assuefaciendos esse ; which implies
that Christ considered Jewish fasting the more excellent way, up
to which His disciples must be gradually educated. Moreover, the
subito on which this explanation turns is an interpolation : e-u^ecos
is not genuine (tf B C 1 L, Boh. u^Sth, Arm. omit). Wetstein quotes
a multitude of passages to show that old wine was considered to
be superior to new, and concludes ; Pharisseorum austeritas corn-
par atur vino novO) Chris ti lenitas vino veteri; which exactly inverts
the parable. The comparative merits of the old and the new wine
are not touched by the parable, but the taste for them. One who
is accustomed to old will not wish for new : it does not attract him
by look or fragrance,
\yci -yap- e O iraXcu&s xp'n "' 1 "^ ^CTTLV. The reading of A C and Vulg.
(xpi?<rr6repos, melius} is a manliest corruption. The prejudiced person will
not even try the new, or admit that it has any merits. He knows that the old
is pleasant, and suits him ; and that is enough : he is not going to change.
Pharis&is doctrina sua ant^q^^a magis erat adpalattim, qttam generosa doctrina,
fesu, quam illi putabant esse novana (Beng.), and which they would not even
taste. Comp. Rom. vii. 6 ; 2 Cor. iii. 6. If we admit the undoubtedly
spurious eut^ws, we have another iambic line in this verse as in ver. 21 : in&v
iraXcuoV etf&r'ws 0e'Aei vtov. The whole verse is omitted in D and in most of
the best MSS. of the old Latin ; but WH. seem to be alone in placing it in
brackets as of doubtful authority. On the three parables see Trench, Stttdies
in the Gospels , pp. 168-183,
VX, 1-5. The first Incident on the Sabbath (see Maurice, Lec-
tures on St. Luke, p. 823, ed. 1879). The Call of Peter was followed
by two healings which provoked opposition to Christ : and now the
Call of Levi is followed by two incidents on the sabbath, which
lead to similar opposition. Mk. agrees with Lk. in placing these
two immediately after the call of Levi ; Mt. has them much later
(xii. 1-14). On the connexion here see Schanz, adloc.
1. K (rapp<r(p ScuTepoTrpcSrw. This passage is a well-known
crux in textual criticism and exegesis. Is Se-vrepoTrpaJro) part of the
true text ? If so, what does it mean ? The two questions to some
extent overlap, but it is possible to treat them separately.
I. The external evidence is very much divided, but the balance is against
the words being original. 1 The reading is Western and Syrian, and "has no
other clearly pre-Syrian authority than that of D a>ff" The internal evidence is
also divided. On the one hand, " The very obscurity of the expression, which
does not occur in the parallel Gospels or elsewhere, attests strongly to its genuine-
ness" (Scriv.), for "there is no reason which can explain the insertion of this
1 *>. A C D E H K M R S U V X T A A n most cursives, Vulg. Syr-Hard.
Goth. Arm., Epiph. Chrys. Greg-Naz, Amb. Hieroru and perhaps
Clem-Alex.
M*. K B L sir or seven good cursives, Syrr. Boh. Aeth. That evangelistari*
omit is not of much moment, as they often omit notes of time.
1 66 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VL L
word, while the reason for omitting it is obvious" (Tisch.) On the other hand,
"all known cases of probable omission on account of difficulty are limited to
single documents or groups of restricted ancestry, bearing no resemblance to the
attestation of text in either variety or excellence" (WH.). Moreover, if any
sabbath had really borne this strange name, which is introduced without explan-
ation as familiar to the readers, it would almost certainly have been found
elsewhere, either in LXX, Philo, Josephus, or the Talmud. In the life of
Eutychius (512-582) by his chaplain Eustathius devrepoirp&TTj Kvpiatc/j is used of
the first Sunday after Easter, but the expression is obviously borrowed from this
passage, and throws no light. In the whole of Greek literature, classical,
Jewish, or Christian, no such word is found independently of this text. The
often quoted 5eure/x>5e/ccT77, "second tenth" (Hieron. ad Ez. xlv. 13), gives no
help. The analogy of devrepoydjuos, devrepordKos, /c.r.X., suggests the meaning
of " a sabbath which for a second time is first"; that of ^evrepea-xaros, which
Heliodorus (^/^Soran. Med. vet.} uses for "last but one,'' suggests the mean-
ing "first but one," i.e. "second of two firsts." But what sense, suitable to
the passage, can be obtained from either of these ? The more probable conclusion
is that the word is spurious.
How then did it get into the text and become so widely diffused? The con-
jecture of Meyer is reasonable. An early copyist inserted irp&rtp to explain iv
er^py ffapftdrq) in ver. 6 ; this was corrected to deurepy because of iv. 31; and
the next copyist, not understanding 1 the -jorrection, combined the two words.
A few MSS. have the reading Sevrep^ Trptiry, among them R (Cod. Nitriensis),
a palimpsest of the sixth cent, in the Biitish Museum. See Knight's Field.
2. If the word is genuine, what can be its meaning? Jerome put this ques-
tion to Gregory Nazianzen, and the latter tleganter lusit % saying, Docebo te super
kac re in ecchsia (Hieron. Ep. Hi.). Of the numerous conjectures the following
may be mentioned as not altogether incredible, (i) The first sabbath of the
second year in a sabbatical cycle of seven years. This theory of Wieseler has
won many adherents. (2) The first sabbath in Nisan. The Jewish civil year
began in Tisri, while the ecclesiastical year began in Nisan ; so that each year
there were two first sabbaths, one according to civil, the other according to
ecclesiastical reckoning : just as Advent Sunday and the first Sunday in January
are each, from different points of view, the first Sunday in the year. It would
be possible to call the second of the two "a second first Sunday." But would
anyone use such language and expect to be understood ? (3) The first sabbath
of the second month. It is asserted that the story of David obtaining the shew-
bread would often be in the lesson for that sabbath. But the lectionary of the
synagogues in tbe time of Christ is unknown. See on iv. 17. For other guesses
see Godet, McClellan, and Meyer. Most editors omit or bracket it. Tisch,
changed his decision several times, but finally replaced it in his eighth edition.
auroy 8i& <nropijxw'. Excepting Rom. xv. 24, the
verb is peculiar to Lk. (xiii. 22, xviii. 36; Acts xvi. 4). In N.T.
cnropifjios occurs only here and parallels. In Theophr. (H. P. vi. 5. 4)
we have ^ crwopi/jn;, sc* y}. In Gen. i. 29 it is applied to the se^ed,
Travra xopTW cnropLjjiov ortrtipov cnrepfJLa ; SO that, like <nrf;0"0cu, it
can be used either of the field or of the seed.
enXXoK ol jjiaGujTCii adrou KCU ijcr0ioi> roiks ord^uas. For this
Mk. has f)pavro 6Sbv Trotetv rtAAovrcs TOTJT crra^va?, which has been
interpreted to mean " began to make a way by plucking the ears. 1 '
But (i) all three imply that Jesus was walking in front of the dis-
ciples. What need was there for them to make a way? (2) How
plucking the ears make a path? (3) In LXX 68or iroiew is
n. 1-4.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 167
used for iter facere (Judg. xvii. 8). All three mean that the
disciples went along plucking the ears. This was allowed (Deut.
xxiii. 25).
I|KUXOIT$ TCUS x 6 ? ^' This and the rtXXovres constituted the
offence : it was unnecessary labour on the sabbath. According to
Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, thrashing, winnowing, and pre-
paring food all at once. Lk. alone mentions the rubbing, and the
word \l/ux*w seems to occur elsewhere only in the medical writer
Nicander (Theriaca> 619). It is from the obsolete i/fo>a>, a collat.
form of i/raco. Comp. Hdt. iv. 75. 2. For the action described see
Robinson, Res. in Pal. i. pp. 493, 499.
2. Ti^es 8e TCW <J>apioraic>i/. As in ver. 30, they are represented
as addressing their question to the disciples. In Mk. ii, 24 and
Mt. xii. 2 the charge against the disciples is addressed to Christ,
while in Mk. ii. 16 and Mt. ix. n the charge against Christ is
addressed to the disciples. The 1-019 cra(3(3a<nv may mean either
" on the sabbath days " (AV. and most English Versions) or " on
the sabbath day " (RV.). Although Vulg. has in sabbatis, Wic.
has "in the saboth"; Cov. also "upon the sabbath." See on
iv. 31.
8. ouSe TOUTO dflyvaiT $ iroit]ai> AauetS. " Have ye not read
even this that David did?" Does your knowledge not extend
even thus far ? RV. follows AV. in translating 6 eTrowyo-ei/ as if it
were the same as the TI tTrofycrcv of Mt. and Mk., " what David
did."
KCU ot fwr" auroO orres. "The young men," whom David was
to meet afterwards. He came to Nob alone (i Sam. xxi. i^.
4. icnjX6K is TOP oticou ToG 0oO. This is not stated m O.T.,
but may be inferred from his being seen by Doeg the Edomite,
who was " detained before the Lord" : Le. he was in the tabernacle
as a proselyte, perhaps to be purified, or to perform a vow.
rods oprofls TTJS Trpo0rws. Lit "the loaves of the setting
forth." These were the twelve loaves of wheaten bread placed
before the Lord in the Holy Place every sabbath. The word
"shewbread" first appears in Coverdale, probably from Luther's
Schaubrote. Wic. follows the panes propositions of Vulg. with
** looves of proposisiounn," which is retained in Rhem. Tyn. has
"loves of halowed breed." In (XT. we have also aproi rov
irpocrawrov, ?'.. of the presence of God (i Sam. xxi. 7; Neh, x, ^33),
or aproi evumoi (Exod. xxv. 30), or aproi r^s irpocrfopas (i Kings
vii. 48), or again ot aprot oc Stairavro?, />. "the perpetual loaves'*
([Num. iv. 7). But the expression used here, Mt xii. 4 and Mk.
ii. 26, occurs Exod. xxxix. 36?, xl. 23; i Chrort ix. 31, xxiii. 29:
comp. 2 Chron. iv. 19. For the origin of ^ 7rpo0c<ris rfiv opr<uv
(Heb. ix. 2) comp. 2 Chron. xiii 1 1, xxix. 18. See Edersh. Th*
Tem$le, pp. 152-157; Herzog, /^J^.^art Schau&rotc.
168 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. 4-6.
ISwKev Kal rots fxer" auToD. This also is not stated in i Sam.
xxi., but it is implied in David's asking for five loaves, and in
Abimelech's asking whether the wallets of the young men were
Levitically clean. For K^eoriy c. ace. et inf. see on xx 22.
5. Kupios eoriy TOU crajSpdrou 6 uios TOU dvOpcoTrou. In all three
accounts KU/KO? comes first with emphasis. The Son of Man con-
trols the sabbath, not is controlled by it. This does not mean
that He abrogates it (Mt v. 17-20), but that He has power to
cancel the literal observance of it in order to perform or permit
what is in accordance with its spirit Mk. gives the additional
reason that " the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
sabbath," Le. that it was given to be a blessing, not a burden.
Even the Rabbis sometimes saw this ; " The sabbath is handed
over to you ; not, ye are handed over to the sabbath " (Edersh.
Z. & T. ii. p. 58). Ritual must give way to charity. The Divine
character of the Law is best vindicated by making it lovable ; and
the Pharisees had made it an iron taskmaster. And, if the sabbath
gives way to man, much more to the Son of Man. In Jn. v. 1 7
Christ takes still higher ground. The Father knows no sabbath in
working for man's good, and the Son has the same right and
liberty. For 6 uios TOU di>0p(6irou see on v. 24. The point here is
that Christ as the representative of man defends man's liberty.
Cod. D transfers ver. 5 to after ver. 10, and instead of it has the remarkable
insertion : rjj ai/rfj y^p? Oea(rdfjt.ejf6s TCVO, epya^bpevov rtf <rap{3dT(p elirev afrr<}'
dvOpwire, el i&v olSas rl Trotets, /xa/c<ptos el' d 8k /&$ olflas, ^riKardparos Kal
vrapapdrys el rov y6fj,ov. For tivdpu/ire comp. xii. 14 ; ^TriKCLTdparos, Jn. vii. 47 ;
vapcLpdrys v6/JLov 9 Rom. ii. 25, 27 ; Jas. ii. 1 1. It is possible that the tradition
here preserved in Cod. D is the source from which both S. Paul and S. James
derive the phrase vapapdryjs vbpov. In Rom. ii., where it occurs twice, we have
the address foOpwire twice (w. I, 3). There is nothing incredible in Christ's
having seen a man working (not necessarily in public) on the sabbath. The
words attributed to Christ are so unlike the undignified, silly, and even immoral
inventions in the apocryphal gospels that we may believe that this traditional
story is true, although it is no part of the Canonical Gospels. D has other con-
siderable insertions Mt. xx. 28 and Jn. vi. 56. See A. Resch, Agrapka
Aussercanoniscke Evangelienfragmentc (Leipzig, 1889) pp. 36, 189.
6-11. The Second Incident on the Sabbath. Mt xii. 9 would
lead us to suppose that it was the same sabbath (/xera/Sas tKtWw
TJX&W). Lk. definitely states that it was cv Irepcp cra/^arw, but not
that it was "on the very next sabbath folio wing. " He alone
mentions that Jesus taught in the synagogue on this occasion, and
that the withered hand that was healed was the right one.
6 'E7&ro 8e , . . et<rij\0e'iv a&rbv . . <cai 1}v - , . Kal fy. The same
Hebraistic constr. as in ver. I, somewhat modified in accordance with classical
usage : see note at the end of ch. i. We have Zypot at the Pool of Bethesda
(Jn. v. 3) ; but outside N.T. the word seems to mean, when applied to the
human body, either "not wet" or 'M
VL 7-9.] THE MINISTRY IK GALILEE l6g
7. TrapeTYjpourro $e auiw ol ypajjijaaTcis Kal or. Qapiomoi. Lk.
alone tells us who the spies were. Mt. puts their inquisitiveness
into words, " Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day ? " The verb
signifies "watch narrowly," esp. with sinister intent, perhaps from
looking sideways out of the corner of one's eyes, ex oblique ct
occulto. As in Gal. iv. 10, the mid. gives the idea of interested
observance. ML has Trape-njpow : comp. xx. 20; Sus. 12, 15, 16;
Polyb. xvii. 3. 2 ; Aris. Rhet ii. 6. 20; Top. viii. n. i.
el iv TW aafjpckro) Oepaireuci. The present has reference to His
habitual practice, of which His conduct on this occasion ^ould be
evidence. But K B with other authorities read fepcwrcwei, which
is probably genuine in Mk. iii. 2, and may be genuine here. The
future would limit the question to the case before them
tva evpcocrLV Karrj-yopeiv avr6v. According to what is probably the
invariable rule in N.T. we have trie subj. in spite of the past tense on
which the final clause is dependent The opt. for this purpose is obsolete ;
for yvoi (Mk. ix. 30) and similar forms are probably meant to be subj.
Simcox, Lang* of N.T. p. 107.
8. CIUTOS fce flSsi TO&S SiaXo^tafjious ctui-oW. " But He," in contrast
to these spies "(v. 16, viii. 37, 54) "knew their thoughts." For
c\a\oyi(7fjios comp. ii. 35, v. 22, ix. 46, xxiv. 38. It commonly
means intellectual and inward questioning rather than actual dis-
puting : but see on v. 22 and comp. i Tim. ii. 8.
TW dfSpl TW fyqp&v e'xoyTL -r^v yelpa. " To the man who had
his hand withered," not " who had the withered hand." For avSpi
comp, v. 1 2 : Mt. and Mk. have di/0joowra>.
"Eyeipe Kal o"ri]0i els TO plvov. Lk. alone preserves this.
Christ's method is as open as that of His adversaries is secret
"Arise and stand into the midst " ; i.e. "Come into the midst and
stand there": comp. xi. 7; Acts viii. 40. Win. 1. 4. b, p. 516.
In what follows note Lk.'s favourite avacrras (i. 39), which neither
Mt. nor Mk. has here.
None of them records any words of the man ; but Jerome in commenting on
Mt. xii. 13 states, in evangelio qtio utuntur Nazareni et Ebionit& . . . komt
iste q-ui andam habet manum c&mmentartus scribitur^ istiwmodi vocibus
attxitium precans^ Cs&mentarius cram^ tnanibus victum qu&ritans : precor U 9
fesu, ut mihi restitues sanitatem> nt turpiter mendicem cibos. See on xviii. 25.
9. 'ETrepwT^ffo fijutcis, ct. He answers the questioning in their
hearts by a direct question which puts the matter in the true light
To refuse to do good is to do evil; and it could not be right to do
evil on the sabbath.
The reading of TR f , ^irfp&mjo-w fyww n, is wrong in both variations; and
has the disadvantage of being ambiguous, for n may be indefinite or inter*
rogative. " I will ask you something, Is it lawful?* etc Or, " X will a*k
you what is lawful," etc.
170 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VL 9-11,
crwom ^ &iro\om. It was a principle of the Rabbinisti
that periculum wt& pellit sabbatum-, but the life must be that of a
Jew. This canon was liberally interpreted ; so that a large number
of diseases might be attended U on the sabbath, as being
dangerous. These modifications of the rigid rule were based on
the principle that it was lawful to do good and avert evil on the
sabbath ; and to this Jesus appeals. If the Pharisees said, " This
man's life is not in danger," the answer would have been easy,
" You do not know that, any more than in the cases always
allowed," The addition of T) cbnAeVai has special point, for this
was what these objectors were doing. They did not consider that
they were breaking the sabbath in plotting to destroy Jesus on
this day (ver. 7). Were they to be allowed to destroy, while He
was forbidden to save ?
10. TrepLpXe^djJLevos irdmis aurou's. Mk. adds, Still more
graphically, /x-er* opy^?, cnAAwoTfycei'OS <rVi TT? 7ro)pco<ra Trjg /eapStas
avrah/ : but Travras is peculiar to Lk. See on vii. 35 and ix. 43,
Mt. omits the whole of this, but inserts the case of the sheep
fallen into a pit. Lk. has a similar question about an ass or ox
fallen into a well, which was asked on another occasion (xiv. 5).
"EKTeiiw T$\V x&pd <rou. As His challenge to His enemies
remained unanswered, He now makes trial of the man. The
attempt to obey this command was evidence of his faith.
With the double augment in awsKarecrrd^ comp. &r/>o6raf a,
tKareffKetiaffav, favvcfjiapTtpovv, Tf^/worat, which occur in various writers.
Exod. iv. 7, direKaT^crrrj ; Jer. xxiii. 8, drexar&rtyfci'; Ign. Smyr* XL,
dreKareard^. Win. xii. 7. a, p. 84.
Cod. D here inserts ver. 5.
11. AvoCas. The phrensy or loss of reason which is caused by extreme
excitement; dementia rather than insipientia (Vulg.) or amentia (Beza).
Plato distinguishes two kinds of 5vota, r& ptv tuiiflw t T& 5' djJadlav ( Tim.
86 B), It is the former which is intended here. Elsewhere 2 Tim. Hi, 9 j
Prov. xxii. 15 ; Eccl. xi. IO ; Wisd. xv, 18, xix. 3 ; 2 Mac. iv. 6, etc.
T &V iroiifaaiei'. "What they should do," if they did any-
thing. In Lk. the opt is still freq. in indirect questions : see on
iii. 15. Mk. says that the Pharisees forthwith took counsel with the
Herodians how they might destroy Him (dTroAe'o-oxnv). They
would be glad of the assistance of the court party to accomplish
this end. With their help Antipas might be induced to treat
Jesus as he had treated the Baptist. Lk. nowhere mentions the
Herodians.
The Aeolic form voi^tap is not found in the best MSS. here. In Adi
xviL 27 ^7)\a<t>T)(ri.ay is probably genuine.
VL 12, 13.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 171
VI. 1S-VHL 50. From the Nomination of the Twelve to their
First Mission.
In proportion as the work of Christ progresses the opposition
between Him and the supporters of moribund Judaism is in-
tensified.
12-16. The Nomination of the Twelve. Common to all
three : comp. Mk. iii. 13-19 ; Mt. x. 2-4. Selection des Douze est
le premier acte organisateur accompli par Jesus-Christ. Sauf les
sacrementS) test le seul. Car <?etait ce colllge^ une fois constitue^ qui
devait unjourfaire le reste (Godet).
12. lv rats %epcus T. See on i. 39. This expression, like
eye VETO and rjv with the participle, are characteristic of Lk., and are
not found in the parallels in Mt. and Mk. For the constr. comp.
vu. i and 6 ; for irpocreufao-Oat see Introd. 6. The momentous
crisis of choosing the Twelve is at hand, and this vigil is the pre-
paration for it.
Here only in N.T., but not rare elsewhere ; Job ii. 9
(where LXX has much which is not in the extant Heb. ) ; Jos. Ant. vi.
13. 9 ; B*J. i. 29. 2 ; Xen. Hellen. v. 4. 3. The analytical tense emphasizes
the long continuance of the prayer.
TTJ irpoo-euxfi T0 ^ c " The phrase occurs nowhere else. It
means prayer which has God for its object: comp. $7X05 eov
(Rom. X. 2) ; 6 $7X09 rov OLKOV crov (Jn. ii. 17); TTLO-TLS *Ir)crov (Gal.
iii. 22). Win. xxx. i. a, p. 23I. 1 That irpoo-evxy here means an
oratory or place of prayer is incredible: see on Acts xvi 13.
Lightfoot says that some Rabbis taught that God prays : " Let it
be My will that My mercy overcome My wrath." But such trifling
has no place here.
13. lyivt-ro Tjjx^pa. The phrase is freq. in Lk. (iv. 42, xxii. 66 ;
Acts xii. 18, xvi. 35, xxiii. 12, xxvii. 29, 33, 39). Trpocre4x6Ti<ri>.
" Called to Him, summoned." This is the more correct use of
the word. Elsewhere in N.T. it means " address, call to " ; and,
excepting Mt. xi. 16, it is used only by Lk. (vii. 32, xiii. 12,
xxiii. 20; Acts xxi. 40, xxii. 2). rods jiaOtjTds. These are the
larger circle of disciples, out of whom He selected the Twelve.
Comp. Jn. vi. 70 ; Mt. xix, 28 ; Rev. xxi. 14. That either the
larger circle or the Twelve had spent the night with Him is neither
stated nor implied.
licXef djxepos. This implies the telling over (Xeycev) in preference
to others (&) for one's own advantage (mid.). The word is fatal
1 Green compares &r" etJcrejSe^ 9eoO (Jos. Ant. ii. 8. I) and vpbs iKcrciar rofi
6coO (ii. 9. 3): and, for the art. before ^trpoffevxi "as anjabstract or general
term"" " " ~"
(ii. 9. 3) : and, for the art. before irpocrevxfi "as an abstract
" Mt xxL 22 j Acts L 14; I Cor. vii. 5 (Gram, of N.T. p. 87).
I? 2 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VL 13, 14.
to Lange's theory that Judas was forced upon our Lord by the
importunity of the other Apostles (Z. of C. ii. p. 179).
oug KCU dirotrroXous wfo'juicKrey. Not at the time possibly, but
afterwards. The /cat marks the naming as a separate act from the
election. The word dirrocrroXos is used only once each by Mt.
(x. 2), Mk. (vi. 30), and Jn. (xiii. 16); by Lk. six times in the
Gospel (ix. 10, xi. 49, xvii. 5, xxii. 14, xxiv. 10) and often in the
Acts. In the Gospels the Twelve are generally called the Twelve.
The word occurs once in LXX, y<6 efyu cwrocrroAos Trpos o-s cr/cX^pos
(i Kings xiv. 6) ; and once in N.T. it is used of Christ (Heb. iii. i).
See Lft. Galatians, pp. 92-101, 6th ed.; D.B? art. "Apostle";
Harnack in Texte u. Untersuch. ii. in rT.; Sanday on Rom. i. i.
The theory that Lk. writes in order to depreciate the Twelve, does
not harmonize with the solemn importance which he assigns to
their election. And criticism is out of harmony with itself, when
it adopts this theory, and then suggests that Lk. has invented this
early election. See on xxii. 45.
14-16. In construction the twelve names are in apposition to &iro<rr6\o\x t
and the narrative is not resumed until ver. 17. The four lists of the Apostles
preserved in the Synoptic Gospels and the Acts agree in two main featuies.
I. The names are arranged in three groups of four. 2, The same Apostles,
Peter, Philip, and James of Alphseus, stand first in each group. Only in respect
of one name is there material difference between the lists. In the third grnup
Lk. both here and Acts i. 13 has Judas of James ; for whom Mt. (x. 3) and
Mk. (iii. 18) have Thaddseus or Lebbseus. In both places Thaddaaus is prob-
ably correct, Lebbseus being due to an attempt to include Levi among the
Apostles. Levi = Lebi or Lebbi, the Greek form of which might be Le/3/3a?oj,
as BaSdeLMs of Thaddi. Some MSS. read Lff/3cuoj, which is still closer to Levi.
See WH. ii. App. pp. 12, 24. The identification of Thaddseus with Judas of
James solves the difficulty, and there is nothing against it excepting lack of direct
evidence. No pairing of the Apostles is manifest in this list as in that of Mt.
If the Kal after Bo^a? be omitted, there is a break between the second and third
group ; but otherwise the list is a simple string of names. In the first six
names Lk. agrees with the first three pairs of Mt. In the other six he places
Matthew before Thomas (while Mt. places himself last in his group) and Simon
Zelotes before Judas of James.
14. Sijjiwva SP ical c5y<5/jiaorei> nlrpov. The similarity to the pre-
ceding clause is marked. This certainly does not mean that Simon
received the name of Peter on this occasion, and there is nothing
to show that the Twelve received the name of Apostles on this
occasion. But it should be noticed that henceforth Lk. always
speaks of him as Peter (viii. 45, 51, ix. 20, 28, 32, 33, xiL 41, etc.)
and not as Simon. In xxii. 31 and xxiv. 34 Lk. is quoting the
words of others. Hitherto he has called him Simon (iv. 38, v. 3,
4, 5, 10) and once Sirnon Peter (v. 8), but never Peter. In the
Acts he is never called Simon without the addition of the surname,
The usage with regard to the names Saul and Paul is very similar
See papers by Dean Chadwick on " The Group of the Apostles >J
VI. 14, 15.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 173
and on "Peter" in Expositor, 3rd series, vol. ix. pp. 100-114,
187-199, 1889; also Schanz, ad loc. p. 216.
'AvBpe'ai'. Only in his lists of the Apostles does Lk. mention
Andrew. Mt. mentions him on one other occasion, and Mk. on
three others (Mt. iv. 18 ; Mk. i. 16, 29, xiii. 3). Nearly all that we
know about him comes from Jn. (i. 41, 45, vi. 8, xii. 22). Although
one of the earliest disciples, he does not become one of the chosen
three, although Mk. xiii. 3 seems to indicate special intimacy. For
legends respecting him see Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelgeschichten
u. Apostellegenden, i. pp. 543-622 ; Tregelles, Canon Muratorianus y
PP- J7,34.
NdKwjBor KCU *\to&vr\v. This is their order according to age, and
it is observed in all three Gospels ; in Acts i. 13 John precedes
James. The fact that James was the first of the Twelve to be put
to death is evidence that he was regarded as specially influential.
James and John were probably first cousins of the Lord; for,
according to the best interpretation of Jn. xix. 25, their mother
Salome was the sister of the Virgin Mary. That the title of
Boanerges was given to them " at the time of the appointment of
the Twelve" (D.B? i. p. 1509) is a baseless hypothesis. See
Trench, Studies in the Gospels^ pp. 138-146; Suicer, Thesaurus , s*v.
fipovT-q. For legends see >.-Z>. 2 i. p. 1511 ; Lipsius, iii. pp. 201-228,
i. pp. 348-542.
4>iXnnroi/. All that we know of Him comes from Jn. (i. 44-49,
vi. 5-7, xii. 21, 22, xiv. 8, 9). There seems to have been some
connexion between him and Andrew (Jn. i. 44, xii. 22); and both
in Mk. iii. 18 and Acts i. 13 their names are placed together in the
lists; but the nature of the connexion is unknown. Lipsius,
iii. pp. 1-53.
BapOoXojxcuof. The ancient and common identification H^th
Nathanael is probable, but by no means certain, i. As Bar-tholomew
is only a patronymic, " son of Talmai," the bearer of it would be
likely to have another name. 2. The Synoptists do not mention
Nathanael ; Jn. does not mention Bartholomew. 3. The Synoptists
place Bartholomew next to Philip, and Philip brought Nathanael to
Christ. 4. The companions of Nathanael who are named Jn. xxi. 2
are all of them Apostles. Lipsius, iii. pp. 54-108.
15. MaOOatoy real o^ay. In all three these names are com-
bined ; but Mt. reverses the order, and after his own name adds
6 reXeSrqs, which is found in none of the other lists. All that we
know of Thomas is told us by Jn. (xi. 16, xiv. 5, xx. 24-29, xxi. 2).
Lipsius, iii. pp. 109-141, i. pp. 225-347.
*ldKw|3oj> *AX<|>aiou. His father is probably not the father of Levi
(Mk. ii. 14), and James himself is certainly not the brother of the
Lord (Mt. xiii. 55; Mk. vi. 3; Gal. i. 19) who was the first over-
seer of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts xii, 1 7, xv, 13 ; GaL ii. 9, ia v
1/4 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VL 15, 16,
The brethren of the Lord did not believe on Him at this time
(Jn. vii. 5), and none of them can have been among the Twelve.
But the Apostle James the son of Alphseus is probably identical
with James the Little (Mt. xxvii. 56 ; Mk. xv. 40 ; Jn. xix. 25), for
Alphseus and Clopas may be two different Greek forms of the
Aramaic Chalpai; but this is uncertain. See Mayor, Ej>. of
S. JameS) pp. i-xlvi ; also Expositors Bible, S. James and S. Jude^
pp. 25-30 (Hodder, 1891). In all the catalogues James of Alphseus
heads the third group of Apostles. Lipsius, iii. 229-238.
TOK KoXorffjKj'oi' StjXwrV. 1 Lk. has this in both his lists, while
Mt. and Mk. have 6 Kavai/aios, which in some authorities has
been corrupted into Kavavmys. Neither of these forms can mean
" Canaanite," for which the Greek is Xavavcuos (Mt. xv. 22 and
LXX), nor yet " of Cana," for which the Greek would be Kavatos.
Kavavatos is the Aramaic Kanan in a Greek form (on the analogy
of 3>apwratos from Pharish and 'AoYrtSaios from Chasitf) and =
Lipsius, iii. pp. 142-200. See on i. 36.
Rhem. leaves the word untranslated, Canan&us, and Wic. makes it unintel-
ligible, "Canane." All the other English Versions make it a local adj., "of
Cana," or "of Cane," or "of Canan,' ? or "of Canaan," or "the Canaanite."
The last error seems to begin with Cranmer in 1539. RV. is the first to make
clear that "Kananaean" means "Zealot." Lft. On Revision, pp. 138, 139
(154, 155, 2nd ed.) ; Fritzsche on Mt. x. 4. The Zealots date from the time of
the Maccabees as a class who attempted to force upon others their own rigorous
interpretations of the Law. S. Paul speaks of himself as irepicrcroTtpus ^Xwr)Jf
inrdpx^y T&V Tarpue&v pov xapa^icrcwy (Gal. i. 14), i.e. he belonged to the
extreme party of the Pharisees (Acts xxii. 3, xxiii. 7, xxvi, 5 ; Phil. iii. 5, 6).
Large numbers of this party were among the first converts at Jerusalem (Acts
xxi. 20), From these extremists had sprung the revolt under Judas of Galilee
(Acts. v. 37 ; Jos. Ant, xviii. I. 1,6), and the Siearii, who were the proximate
cause of the destruction of Jerusalem (Jos. JB. _/. iv. 3. 9, 5. i, 7. 2, vii. 8. i,
10. i, II. I). Milman, Hist, of the Jews > ii. pp. 191, 291, 299, 323, 4th ed.
1866; Ewald, Hist, of Israel, vii. 559 ff., Eng. tr. ; Herzog, PRE* art.
" Zeloten." Whether the Apostle Simon was called f^Xomfc because he had
once belonged to this party, or because of his personal character either before or
after JMs call, must remain uncertain.
16. *lorf8av "laictfpou. That there were two Apostles of the
name of Judas is clear from Jn. xiv, 22, although Mt. and Mk.
mention only one ; and the identification of their Thaddaeus with
the Judas not Iscariot of Jn. and with this Judas of James makes
all run smoothly. 'lovSas *Ia/o^ov must be rendered " Judas the
son of James," not " the brother of James," for which there is no
justification. When Lk. means "brother" he inserts
(iii. i, vL 14 ; Acts xii. 2). Nonnus in his Paraphrase (Me
Of Jn. xiv. 22 has 'lovoas vtos 'IaK<u/?oio. 'lovSas aScX^os '
(Jude i) is quite a different person, viz. the brother of James the
1 Tliis use of iraXotf/tero* is very common in Lk. (vii. n, viii. 2, be. 10, x.
3fc acri. 37, aaiL 3,riiL 33), and still more so in Acts. Not in Mt Mk, or Jn.
VI. 16, 17.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 175
Lord's brother. Tyn. Cov. and Cran. rightly supply " sonne "
here, and Luth. also has sohn. The error begins with Beza's
fratrem* Of this James, the father of Judas Thaddaeus, nothing
is known. Lk. adds the name of the father, because his arrange-
ment places this Judas next to the traitor.
"lo-KapioSO. This epithet probably means "man of Kerioth,"
which was a place in Judah (Josh. xv. 25), or possibly in Moab
(Jer. xlvitf. 24). Jn. vi. 71 confirms this; for there and Jn.
xiii. 26 the true reading gives "Judas son of Simon Iscariot";
and if the name is a local epithet, both father and son would be
likely to have it. In this case Judas was the only Apostle who
was r>o* a Galilean, and this may have helped to isolate him.
Other derivations of "Iscariot," which connect the word with
"lying," or " strangling, v or "apron," i.e. bag, or "date-trees"
(jcapuortSes), are much less probable. We know nothing about
Simon Iscariot. Farrar identifies him with Simon Zelotes, which
is most improbable. Simon was one of the commonest of names.
The MSS. vary between 'lo-Kapic^, which is right here, and 'lovcapteo-
rv}$ 9 which is right xxii. 3. Here only is irpoBoTrjs used of Judas :
it occurs in the plur. Acts vii. 52 ; 2 Tim. iii. 4; and in the sing.
2 Mac. v. 15, x. 13. All English Versions go wrong about iylvero
Nowhere in Scripture is Judas styled " the traitor," and
should be distinguished from rjv : therefore, not " was the
traitor," but "became a traitor," as the American Revisers pro-
posed. Judas " turned traitor." The difficulty about the call of
Judas is parallel to the powers bestowed upon a Napoleon. The
treason of Judas shows that no position in the Church, however
exalted, gives security against the most complete fall.
The verb used of the treachery of Judas is never *po8i86pai, but rapafa-
S6vat (xxii. 4, 6, 21, 22, 48 ; Mt. x. 4 ; Mk. iii. 19 $ Jn. vi. 64, 71). In
class. Grk. uy>o5i$<Wt commonly has this meaning; TrapaSttidvcu rarely.
Here the Lat. texts vary between proditor (Vulg.) and traditor (c f fl^ r) and
qui tradidit eum or ilium (d e).
17-19. The Descent from the Mountain, and many Miracles
of Healing. The parallel passages in Mk. iii. 7-12 and Mt. iv. 24,
25 are very different from Lk. and from one another in wording.
17. em TOTTOU TTcStyoG. This may mean a level spot below the
summit ; but in connexion with /cara/3as, and without qualification,
it more naturally means level ground near the foot of the mountain.
Hither it would be more likely that multitudes would come and
bring their sick, than to a plateau high up the mountain.
The Latin texts vary : in loco camgtstri (Vulg.), in loco catnpense (a), in
piano (f) in /. ftdeplatw (I.).
Kal QX\OS iro\ts /taO'riTwv atrov. Not a nom, pendens, but
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. 17-19.
included in the preceding Icrny : comp. the constr. t iii. 1-3. He
stood, and they stood. But the &TTI? is no evidence as to Christ's
attitude during the discourse, because the healings intervene:
iv. 20 shows that Lk. is aware of Christ's sitting to preach.
KCU irXTjOos iroXu TOU Xaou, K.T.\. This is a third group. Christ
and the Twelve form one group. The multitude of disciples in
the wider sense form a second. And besides these there is a
mixed throng from Judsea and the sea-coast : see on xl 29.
la0TJvcu air<$. The prep, is not classical ; but we say "to be cured from"
(Mk. v. 29). In the perf., I aor. and I fat. pass, the dep. IdofjLat is pass, hi
meaning (vii. 7, viii. 47, xvii. 15 ; Acts iii. 11). Except in Lk., the verb is
rare in N.T. writers. There should be at least a colon at r&v vbvuv afrrQv :
here the long sentence which began at ver. 13 ends.
18, 10, For similarly condensed accounts of groups of miracles
comp. iv. 40, v. 15, vii. 21. We once more have an amphibolous
expression : see on ii. 22. Here d-rro Trveu^rtav dicaOdpTwy may be
taken either with ki/o-^ov^evoi or with edepaTrevovro. From ver. 17
and vii. 21 we infer that the latter constr. is right: "They that
were troubled with them were healed of unclean spirits." But in
the other cases the gen. with a-n-o follows the verb ; so that
cvoxXou/xci/oi (XTTO may be right. The " and " before " were healed "
in AV. is from a corrupt reading : not only Wic. and Rhem, with
Vulg., but also Cov., omit the "and." For irpeufidTw dKctOdpTew
see on iv. 33. Note Tras and Travras here and -Traces in ver. 17.
They are not found in Mk. iii. 7, 10 : see on ver. 30. With Trap*
auTou J^pxero comp. Jn. xvi. 27. Lk. commonly writes ef cpx-
p.at air 6; see small print on iv. 35, and comp. viii. 46, which
illustrates an-re^at, SuVa/us, and efjjpxero. For Stfrajus and taro
see on iv, 36.
20-49. The Sermon &ri
To call it " the Sermon on the Plain," following the AV. in ver. 17, is con-
venient, but scarcely justifiable. "The plain" has not been mentioned, and
rd irediov does not occur in N.T, Moreover, it is by no means certain that this
riiros 7re8if6s was at the foot of the mount. And to talk of ** the Sermon on
the Plain " assumes, what cannot be proved, that the discourse here recorded is
entirely distinct from "the Sermon on the Mount" (Mt. v. i~vii. 29). The
relations between the two discourses will never cease to be discussed, because
the materials are insufficient for a final decision. The following are the chief
hypotheses which have been suggested in order to explain the marked similari-
ties and differences. I. They are reports, at first or second hand, of twc
similar but different discourses, distinct in time, place, and circumstance (Auger,
Greswell, Osiander, Patritius, Plumptre, Sadler ; so also in the main Barradius,
Basil, Doddiidge, Toletus, Tostatus), 2. They are reports of two different
discourses delivered on the same day, Mt. giving the esoteric address to the
disciples on the mountain, Lk. the exoteric address to the mixed multitude
below (Augustine, Lange). 3. They are recensions, with interpolations and
omissions, of two independent reports of one and the same serrnon (Schleier-
macher). 4. They are recensions of the ime report, to which Mt. adds
VT 20-49.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 177
material from other sources, and from which Lk. perhaps omits portions (B.
Weiss), 5. Mt. gives a conflate arrangement of sayings which were uttered on
various occasions, and some of these occasions are given by Lk. (Bleek, Calvin,
Godet, Holtzmann, Keim, Kuinoel, Neander, Pott, Semler, Weizsacker,
Wieseler). 6. Both sermons are a conglomeration of detached sayings collected
into an anthology of aphorisms (Strauss, and to some extent Baur). Besides
the writers mentioned above under the last four heads, a multitude of commen-
tators adopt the view that the main portions of the reports given by Mt. and Lk.
represent one and the same discomse (Bengel, Bucer, Calovius, Caspar!,
Chemnitz, Chrysostom, De Wette, Ebrard, Edersheim, Elhcott, Ewald, Farrar,
Fritzsche, Grotius, Hilgenfeld, Keim, Lewin, Luther, McClellan, Meyer,
Milman, Olshausen, Oosterzee, Origen, Robinson, Schanz, Schneckenburger,
Sieffert, Stroud, Tholuck, Tischendorf, Wordsworth).
Bad or inadequate arguments are used on both sides. It is a great deal too
much to say with Schleiermacher that the fact that the portions common to both
appear in the same order, with the same beginning and end, "proves incontro-
vertibly the identity of the discourse." Any preacher repeating a carefully
prepared sermon would begin and end in the same way, and would put
his points in the same order. And it is mere dogmatism without argument
when Sadler asserts that " the Lord must have pronounced each [beatitude]
which St. Matthew records, and yet it is equally plain that He could hardly
have pronounced them according to St. Luke's form. He would not have
said, Blessed are ye meek ones, Blessed are ye merciful ones, Blessed are
ye peacemakers. The four given by St. Luke are the only ones which could
well have been pronounced personally on the disciples ; so that the beatitudes
as given by St. Matthew and St. Luke respectively, could not have been altered
forms of the same discourse." Much more reasonable is the position of Grotius,
who believes that both record the same sermon : sicutfacti narrationes circum-
stantiis congruentes non temere ad res di'versas referenda sunt^ zta sermones nihil
vetat s&pius habitos eosdem aut si-miles, pr&sertim continentes vit& totius pr&-
cepta, qu& non potuerunt nimium ss&pe repeti (on Lk. vi. 17). We know
beyond all question that some of our Lord's words were uttered several times,
and there is nothing antecedently improbable in the hypothesis that the words
of this discourse, qus& non potuerunt nimium ssspf repeti, were delivered in one
or other of these forms more than once. Nor does it follow that those portions
which Lk. gives as having been uttered on other occasions were not also uttered
as parts of a continuous discourse. A preacher naturally repeats fragments of
his own sermons in giving catechetical instruction, and also gathers up detached
items of instruction when composing a sermon. The fact that Lk. meant to
record these other occasions may have been part of his reason for omitting the
similar words in this discourse. Another consideration which may have deter-
mined his selection is the thought of what would best suit Gentile readers. But
in any case th dictum of Grotius must be remembered, that the hypothesis of
a repetition of verbally similar sayings may be used with much more freedom
than the hypothesis of a repetition of circumstantially similar acts.
The conclusion arrived at by Sanday and P. Ewald is of this kind. The
beatitudes originally stood in the Logia in a form similar to that in Mt. v. 3-12.
Lk, used the Logia> but had also a document entirely independent of the Logia ;
and thia contained a discourse, spoken originally on some other occasion, but
yet so like the Sermon on the Mount as to be identified with it by Lk. The
sermon in Luke is, therefore, a compound of the reports of two similar but
different discourses \ and in this compound the elements derived from the Logia
are dominated by those derived from the independent document (Expositor for
April 1891, p. 315). It seems, however, simpler to suppose that Lk. took the
whole of his report from the document which contained this very similar, but
different sermon. See Paul Feine, Ueber das gegenseit. Verhaltniss d. Texte der
Bergprtdigt oei Matthaw und Lukas in foGjanrb.Jur Protest* Thcologie^ xi* i
12
178 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. 2O-49.
The following tables will show the parallels between the two Evangelists s~*
BETWEEN THE Two SERMONS.
Lk. vi. 20, 21 , . Mt v. 3, 4, 6. Lk. vi. 37, 38 . . Mt. vii. i, 2,
22,23, 11,12. 41*42. . 3-5
27-30 . * 39-4*. 43~4<5 . . 16-21.
31 , , vii. 12. 47-49 24-27.
BETWEEN DETACHED SAYINGS IN LK, AND THB
SERMON IN MT.
IIL 16 and X3U 33
xvi 17
w. 58, 59
atyi. iS
xi. 2-4
Mt v. r3. Lk. so. 34-36 ,
xvi. 13 ,
rii. 22-31
, 26. xi. 9-13 .
32. xiii. 24 ,
15.
18.
Mt. vt 22-23.
24.
*5~34.
vli 7-1 1.
13.
22,33,
19, 21.
BETWEEN THE SERMON IN LK. AND DETACHED
SAYINGS IN MT.
Lk. vi 39 . . Mt xv. 14. Lk. vL 40 . . Mt z. 24.
This last saying was frequently uttered. It is recorded twice by Jn. (xiiL 16,
xv. 20), and the four records seem to refer to four different occasions ; besidet
which we have a similar utterance Lk. xxii. 27.
These tables leave three verses of the sermon in Lk. without a parallel in
Mt. (or any other Gospel), viz. the four woes corresponding to the four beati-
tudes, w* 24-26. The portions of the sermon in Mt which have no parallel in
Lk. amount to forty-one verses, viz. Mt v, 5, 7-10, 14, 16, 17, 19-24, 27-31,
33-3 8 > 43> vi- i- 8 H-i8, vii. 6, 14, 15.
The plan of both discourses is the same. I. The qualifications of those who
can enter the kingdom (Lk. 20-26 ; Mt. v. 1-12) ; 2. The duties of those who
have entered the kingdom (Lk. 27-45 5 Mt v. 13-vii. 12) ; 3. The judgments
which await the members of the kingdom (Lk. 46-49 ; Mt vii. 13-27). En-
couragement, requirement, warning 5 or invitation, principles, sanction ;- these
are the three gradations which may be traced in these discourses ; and, as Stier
remarks, the course of all preaching is herein reflected.
There is considerable unanimity as to the spot where the sermon was
delivered (Stanley, Sin & PaL pp. 368, 369 ; Caspari, Chron. and Gcograph,
Int. to the L. of C. 108, p. 171 ; Robinson, PttZ* ii. 370, iii. pp. 241, 485 ;
Farrar, Z. of L p. 250, and on Lk. vi. 12 ; Keim, jes. of Naz. ii. p. 289).
On the other hand, Edersheim asserts that " the locality is for many reasons
unsuitable " ; but he gives no reasons (Z, &* T. L p. 524 ; see also Thomson,
Land and Book 9 ii. p. 118).
The Qualifications necessary for Admission to the
Kingdom : the Happiness of those who possess them (20-23), and
the Misery of those who possess them not (24-26). This contrast
of Blessings and Woes at the beginning of the sermon corresponds
with the contrast in the parable with which it ends.
Vt SO.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE IJ9
THE BEATITUDES COMMON TO MT. AMD LK. WITH THE CORRESPONDIM
WOES IN LK.
I* Oi VTWXOl T<j5 TFft?- I. ol TTOtf^O/, STL
IULTL, STL atrQv iorlx ^ r^pa tffrlw ^ /&wr*Xe/a rofl oVt dr^cre rJ^y rapd-
0a<TL\eta TUP o^paytDv. GcoO. icX^trty iJyuuii',
2. ol vevdovvTes, STL 3. oZ K\a.lovret rw, 5rt 3. oi 'yeXtSvrey rOv, tfri
a^rol vapaK\7]6'/]croin-ai. ycXaacrc. vtvQ 1
' 8ucat,o<rtivr)v, STL
Kal di&(j}crt.v Kal u/zas ol &vQpbnrot. t Acai 5rap TWffiv irdvres <
yaif vovvipbv Ka&' a<popt<r<t)<Tiv /*r
\f/ev86n,evoL ZveKcv 5(rw<rtv /cal K(3d\(*j<riv r6 row fav8oTpO(p$rcut J
^pioir Svojui. \jfjJZv cos Trovypbv rar^pcs ai/rwi'.
Xalpere Kal d-yaXXtcwr^e, J-ve/ca roO i/iou rov <"
#rt 6 fiiffObs iffi&v iroMs TOW x&P' r t T & v
iv rots otpavols 1 oi/T6>s 7^p Jjfdpg. Kal (rKiprfio
roi)s xpo^ra* 7&p 6 fu<r$6t tip&v iroXtot
' " ^ r$ oiJpary' /card rd
a^ri 7&P ^TTO^OW rots rpo-
ats ol vartpcs avrur,
VL 2O-23. Four Beatitudes; which correspond to the first,
second, fourth, and eighth in Mt. v. 3-12; those relating to the
meek, the merciful, the pure in heart, and the peacemakers being
omitted. In the four that Lk. gives the more spiritual words which
occur in Mt. are omitted, and the blessings are assigned to more
external conditions. Actual poverty, sorrow, and hunger are
declared to be blessed (as being opportunities for the exercise of
internal virtues); and this doctrine is emphasized by the corre-
sponding Woes pronounced upon wealth, jollity, and fulness of
bread (as being sources of temptation). It is in the last Beatitude
that there is least difference between the two. Even in Lk,
unpopularity is not declared to be blessed, unless it is " for the
Son of Man's sake"; and there is no Woe pronounced upon
popularity for the Son of Man's sake.
20. Kal auros eir(pas rods 5<j>0aXfjioOs aurou els rods jxa6i]T(s.
Lk.'s favourite mode of connexion in narrative : see on v. 14 and
comp. viii. i, 22, ix. 51, etc. With lirdpas T. o<0. comp. xviii. 13
and Jn. xvii. i. We must not take & with eXeycv; Lk. would
have written vpos, and after eXeyev: contrast xxu. 65 and Mk.
iii. 29. Mt. has 7Tpocn}A$av avrw ot fjLaOrjral avrov. /cat ... iStSaovccv
avrovs. The discourse in both cases is addressed to the disciples \
there is nothing to indicate that the discourse in Lk. is addressed
to mixed multitudes, including unbelieving Jews and heathen.
These Beatitudes would not be true, if addressed to them. It is to
the faithful Christian that poverty, hunger, sorrow, and unpopularity
180 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VX. 30, 21,
are real blessings ; to others they may be mere sterile suffering.
Whereas, even for the heathen, to be poor in spirit and to hunger
and thirst after righteousness are blessed things. In Mt. the
Beatitudes are in the third person and have a wider sweep.
fiaicapioi, ol. This is the common constr. both in LXX and N.T,, the
reason for the blessedness being expressed by a noun or participle which is the
subject of the sentence (Ps. ii. 12, xl 5, xli. 2, Ixxxiv. 5, 6, 13, Ixxxix. 16,
etc.); but the reason is sometimes expressed by the relative with a finite verb
(Ps. i. I, xxxii. i, 2; Lk. xiv. 15? Jas. i. 12), or by &n (xiv. 14; I Pet
iv. 14), or by 4&v (Jn. xiii. 17 ; I Cor. vii. 40).
ol TTTOOXOU See on iv. 18. We have no right to supply T^
trvtvfJLdTt, from Mt. It is actual poverty that is here meant. Nor
is it the meaning that actual poverty makes men "poor in spirit."
Still less does it mean that in itself poverty is to all men a blessing.
There is no Ebionite doctrine here. But " to you, My disciples,
poverty is a blessing, because it preserves you in your dependence
on God, and helps you to be truly His subjects " : ro yap vju-ercpa
SeiKTi/ccos TTpos Trapovras eAcyero (Eus.) Some of these disciples had
made themselves poor by surrendering all in order to follow Christ.
Comp. Ps. Ixxii. 12, 13.
fyerepa larlv YJ (BacriXeia. " Yours ts the kingdom," not "will
be." It is not a promise, as in the next Beatitudes, but the state-
ment of a fact. But the Kingdom is not yet theirs in its fulness ;
and those elements which are not yet possessed are promised in
the Beatitudes which follow.
21. ot ireiKwvres vuv. "Those of you who are suffering from
actual want in this life. Ye shall have compensation."
XopTao-0Y]<recr06. Originally the verb was confined to supplying
animals with fodder (xQpros), and if used of men implied a brutish
kind of feeding (Plato, Rep. ix. p. 586). But in N.T. it is never
used of cattle, and when it is used of men it has no degrading asso-
ciations (ix. 17; Jn. vi. 26 ; Phil. iv. 12; Jas. ii. 16); not even
xv. 1 6, if the word is genuine there, nor xvi. 21. Comp. rov$
TTTCOXOUS: avTvjs x<ra) aprcDV (Ps. cxxxii. 15). In LXX xp r< *<*
and 7Ti//,irA.?7/u are used to translate the same Hebrew word, some-
times in the same verse : on e^opTacrev i^ir^v Ke.vrfv t KOI ifrv^v
TTctvwcrav everr-A^cw aya#a>v (Ps. cvii. 9). Here the filling refers to
the spiritual abundance in the Kingdom of God. In all four cases,
although the suffering endured is external and literal, yet the com-
pensating blessing is spiritual.
ot KXaiorrcs vuv. Mt. has Trevtfowres, which expresses the
mourning, while /cAatWcs implies outward manifestation of grief in
loud weeping, just as yeXap-crc implied outward expression of mirth
in laughter. Though common in LXX, ycXaco occurs in N.T. only
here and ver. 20.
VI. 22, 23. J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 1 81
22. d4>opur(i)crii> fyas. " Mark you off from (cwro) by a boundary
It is used both in a good sense (Acts xiii. 2; Rom. i. i;
Gal. i. 15) and also in a bad, as here. Comp. K<U //,' OTTO yas wpwrc
(Eur. .Zfor. 940). Excommunication from the congregation as well
as from social intercourse is here meant. The usual sentence was
for thirty days, during which the excommunicated might not come
within four cubits of any one. Comp. Jn. ix. 22, xii. 42, xvi. 2.
Whether there was at this time a more severe form of excommunica-
tion is uncertain. Herzog, PRE? art. Bann bei den Hebrdern ;
Grotius on Lk. vi. 22 ; Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on Jn. ix. 22.
&vt8icrc<Ti,v. The object to be supplied may be either the preceding
tfjias (so most English Versions) or the following rb t>vo}ja ^wv (Bede, Weiss).
Vulg. supplies nothing ; and Tyn. and Gen. have simply "and rayle" with-
out an object. Neither AV. nor RV. has " you " in italics.
w$ iropqpoi'. " Throw your name con-
temptuously away, reject it with ignominy, as an evil thing."
There is no idea of striking a name off the list as a mark of dis-
grace, ex albo expungere^ a meaning which K/3aAAetv never has.
It is used of hissing an actor off the stage and otherwise dismissing
with contempt (Aristoph. Eq. 525 ; Nub. 1477 ; Soph, O. C. 631,
636 ; O. T. 849 ; Plato, Crito, 46 B). "Your name" means "the
name by which you are known as My disciples," as Christians.
" Christian " or " Nazarene " was a name of bad repute, which it
was disgraceful, and even unlawful, to bear, for Christianity was
not a religio licita. For -n-oi^pov as an epithet of OVO/ACL comp. Deut.
xxii. 19.
IveKa TOU utou TOU d^poSitou. A vital qualification. The hatred
and contempt must be undeserved, and be endured for Christ's
sake ; not merited by one's own misconduct.
23. <riapTi]auT. Peculiar to Lk. See on i. 41 and comp.
Mai. iv. 2.
jcarct ret aurct ycip eiroiW rols irpo^Tais. This implies that they
are to receive "a prophet's reward" (Mt. x. 41), as in this world, so
in the next.
For the dak comp. rotj fturovo-iv fyias (ver. 27). In class. Gk. we should
have had T& euJrd tirotow TOI)S irpofi. Thus, ^ycl) W ravra rovrov diroLyffa. cn>
dlicy (Hdt. i. 115. 3, iv. 166. 3 : comp. Aristoph. Nub. 259; Vesp* 697). In
later Gk. the dat. of relation becomes much more common.
ol -nraT^pes auTWK. The gen. refers to ol av^pcuTrot in ver. 22 ;
" the father of them " who hate and abuse you.
24-26. Four Woes corresponding to the four Beatitudes
There is no evidence that these were not part of the original dis-
course. Assuming that Mt. and Lk. report the same discourse,
Mt. may have omitted them. But the/ may have been spoken on
some other occasion. Schleiermacher and Weiss would have it
182 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE (VI. 24, 25.
that they are mere glosses added by Lk. to emphasize and explain
the preceding blessings. Cheyne thinks that some of them were
suggested to Lk. by Is. Ixv. 13-16. We have no right to assume
that no persons were present to whom these words would be
applicable. Even if there were none present, yet these Woes
might have been uttered as warnings both to those who heard
them and to others who would learn them from those who heard.
Just as the Beatitudes express the qualifications of those who aie
to enter the Kingdom, so these show the qualities which exclude
men from it. It is possible that some of the spies and adversaries
from Judsea were among the audience, and thus Jesus warns them
of their condition. When the discourse as placed by Mt. was
spoken there was less opposition to Christ, and hence no Woes
(Pastor Pastorum^ p. 256).
24. irXijv. Curtius makes vMiv an adverbial form of ir\tov, so that its
radical meaning would be " more than, beyond" (Gr Etym* 282) ; but Lft.
(Phil. iii. 1 6) connects it with Tr^Xas, in the meaning "besides, apart from
this, only." For the accusatival form comp. Slmjy, MK\T)V, clam, coram* It
sometimes restricts, sometimes expands, what precedes. It is a favourite
word with Lk., in the Gosrjel as an adv. (ver. 35, x. II, 14, 20, xi. 41, xii. 31,
adii. 33, xvii. i, xviii. 8, xix. 27, xxii. 21, 22, 42, xxiii. 28), in the Acts as *
prep. (viii. I, xv. 28, xxvii. 22). " But " is the only possible rendering here.
TOIS TrXoucriots. As a matter of fact the opponents of
Christ came mostly from the wealthy classes, like the oppressors of
the first Christians (Jas. v. 1-6). See Renan, LAntechri$t> p. xii ;
Ewald, Hist of Israel, ii. p. 451. But the cases of Nicodemus and
Joseph of Arimathea show that the rich as such were not excluded
from the kingdom. du^ere. "Ye have to the full"; so that
there is nothing more left to have. The poor consolation derived
from the riches in which they trusted is all that they get : they
have no treasure hi heaven. Comp. Mt. vi. 2, 5, 16 ; Philem. 15 ;
and see Lft. on Phil. iv. 18. This meaning is classical: comp.
aTroAa/Xy^ara), a7re/>yab/*,cu. For" irapeKXi](ri>> see on ii. 25, and COmp,
xvi. 25 of Lazarus.
5. ot IpretrXijorfA&oi vw. " Sated with the good things of this
life," like Dives (Ezek. xvi. 49). Grotius compares the epitaph,
rooxr* fx&> oW eTrtoi/ /cat c&Jrua. It may be doubted whether the
change of word from xopra&o-Oai (ver. 21) indicates that horum
pknitudo non meretur nomen satietatis (Beng.) ; comp. i. 53. In
Lat. Vet and Vulg. we have saturor both here and ver. 21.
Ttivd(TT. This received a partial and literal fulfilment when
Jerusalem was reduced to starvation in the siege : but the reference
is rather to the loss of the spiritual food of the Kingdom. Comp,
Is. Ixv. 13. Hillel said, "The more flesh one hath the more
worms, the more treasures the more care, the more maids the more
unchasrity, the more men-servants the more theft. The more law
1TIS5-27.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 183
the more life, the more schools the more wisdom, the more counsel
the more insight, the more righteousness the more peace."
ol y\u)T$ vuv* "Who laugh for joy over your present pro-
sperity," the loss of which will surely come and cause grief. But
the worst loss will be that of spiritual joy hereafter (Is, Ixv, 14),
26. oray icaXws eiirwcrii/ ujias. It is the wealthy who are com-
monly admired and praised by all who hope to win their favour.
The praise of worldly men is no guarantee of merit : rather it shows
that those who have won it do not rise above the world's standard
(Jn. xv. 19; Jas. iv. 4). Plutarch says that Phocion, when his
speech was received with universal applause, asked his friends
whether he had inadvertently said anything wrong,
TOIS x|feuSoirpo<|n]Tai$. Just as the persecuted disciples are the
representatives of the true Prophets, so the wealthy hierarchy
whom all men flatter are the representatives of the false (Jer.
v. 31 ; comp. xxiii. 17; Is. xxx. 10; Mic. ii. n).
Having stated who can .and who cannot enter the Kingdom,
Jesus goes on to make known the principles which regulate the
Kingdom.
S7-45. Requirement: the Duties to be performed by those
who are admitted to the Kingdom of God. This forms the main
body of the discourse. Lk. omits the greater portion of what is
reported in Mt. respecting Christ's relation to the Mosaic Law
(v. 17-19)1 and His condemnation of existing methods of interpret-
ing it (v. 20-48) and of fulfilling it (vi. 1-18). This discussion of
Judaic principles and practices would not have much meaning for
Lk. ; s Gentile readers. The portion of it which he gives is stated
without reference to Judaism. The main point in Mt. is the
contrast between legal righteousness and true righteousness. In
Lk. the main point is that true righteousness is love; but the
opposition between formalism and the spirit of love is not urged.
The opposition which is here marked is the more universal
opposition between the spirit of selfishness and the spirit of love.
There is a break in this main portion, which Lk. marks by making
a fresh start, Ewrcv Sc *at irapapoXfy avrots, but the second half
(39-45) continues the subject of the working of the principle of
love.
27. *A\Xd. What is the contrast which this dXX< marks ? The
emphatic position of the fyuV seems to show that the contrast is
between those on whom the Woes have been pronounced and the
hearers now addressed. Others interpret, " But, although
1 84 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE ["VX 27, 28*
I have denounced them, I do not allow you to hate them : you
stmst love them." There is, however, no indication that the
enemies who are to be loved are the wealthy who have just been
denounced, and such a limitation of the meaning of enemies
cannot be justified : comp. Mt. v. 44.
rots dicououo-iy. "Who give ear and obey," rots Tm0o/Acj'ots
(Euthym.). It is unnatural to take it literally as meaning " My
audience," in contrast to the rich who have just been addressed in
their absence. Representatives of the rich may have been present
among the audience. Schanz interprets "who listen with attention."
There is on the whole a double climax in what follows, the worse the
treatment received, the better the return made ; but it is not quite exact. One
would expect that dyairare would be coupled with TOUJ /ucrowraj. This is the
first time that Lk. uses the word dyairq.?, which sums up the whole spirit of the
Gospel : it is most frequent in the writings of Jn. " It should never be
forgotten that faydiri} is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion : it
occurs in the Septuagint ; but there is no example of its use in any heathen
writer whatever" (Trench, Syn. xii.). This is not true of ayairyv and dyaird-
frt-Vy which are common in class, Grk. But Christianity has ennobled the
meaning of both &yairq,v and 0tXy, with their cognates : p$v t which is scarcely
capable of such advancement, does not occur in N.T. See on xi. 42, the only
place where dydTtj occurs in Lk.
rods ix^P ^?- For the combination with rots /Ai<roi5<rtv comp.
L 71; Ps. xviii. 1 8, cvi. 10; and for the fourfold description of
enmity comp. ver. 22. In Mt v. 44 we have only enemies and
persecutors according to the best texts ; and as /caXws Troietre rovs
fucr. fytas (note the ace.) is not genuine there, this is the only
passage in which KoAcos 7roirv=" benefit, do good to" : comp.
.jcoAdSs t-n"/ (ver. 26), and contrast Mt. xii. 12 ; Mk. vii. 37 ; Acts
x 33 j i Cor. vii. 37, 38; PhiL iv. 14; Jas. ii. 8, 19; 2 Pet
L 19 ; 3 Jn. 6. TOLS fAio-ouany. For the dat comp. rots Trpo^rcus
(ver. 23) and rot? ^evoWpo<?7rai$ (ver. 26). See the expansion of
this principle Rom. xii. 17-21; i Thes. v. 15; i Pet iii. 9,
Comp. Exod. xxiii. 4; Job xxxi. 29; Prov. xvii. 5, xxiv. 17,
xxv. 21. See detached note on the relation of Rom* xii.-xiv. to the
Gospels at the end of Rom. xiii.
28. euXoyeire rod? Karapajfj^fous ujjias. In class. Grk. cvAoycti/
means "praise, honour," whether gods or men : comp. i. 64, ii. 28 ;
Jas. iii. 9. The meaning " invoke blessings upon " is confined to
LXX and N.T. (Gen. xiv. 19, xxii, 17, xlviii. 9; Rom. xii. 14;
Acts iii. 26).
In class. Grlu mraffarfat is followed by a dat (Horn. Hdt Xen- Dem.).
as in Ep. Jer. 65 : but in N.T. by an ace. (Mk. k. 21 ; Jas. iii. 9) ; and the
interpolation Mt. v. 44. For Tp0eretf%e<r0e irept we might have expected T/>.
fcr^/>, and the MSS. here and elsewhere are divided between farfy and wepl
(Gal. i. 4 ; Col. i. 3 ; Rom. i. 8). But comp* Act* viii 15 ; Heb. xiiL 19 1
CoL iv, 3. Win. xlvii L 3, p, 478,
71.28-30.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 185
UJJL<XS. Aristotle defines 7n7peacr//,os as IJJLTTO-
rats ftovXycrecrw, ov% iva rt aura?, oAX* Iva firj e/caW (Rhet.
ii. 2. 3). It is " spiteful treatment."
29, 30. Whereas w. 27, 28 refer to the active dyn? which returns good
for evil, these refer rather to the passive /taKpoOvfjila, which never retaliates.
The four precepts here given are startling. It is impossible for either govern-
ments or individuals to keep them. A State which endeavoured to shape its
policy in exact accordance with them would soon cease to exist ; and if
individuals acted in strict obedience to them society would be reduced to
anarchy. Violence, robbery, and shameless exaction would be supreme. The
inference is that they are not precepts, but illustrations of principles. They are
in the form of rules ; but as they cannot be kept as rules, we are compelled to
look beyond the letter to the spirit which they embody. If Christ had given
precepts which could be kept literally, we might easily have rested content with
observing the letter, and have never penetiated to the spirit. What is the spirit ?
Among other things this : that resistance of evil and refusal to part with our
property must never be a personal matter : so far as we are concerned we must
be willing to suffer still more and to surrender still more. It is right to with-
stand and even to punish those who injure us : but in order to correct them and
protect society ; not because of any personal animus. It is right also to with-
hoM o*2r possessions from those who without good reason ask for them ; but in
or<^r to check idleness and effrontery j not because we are too fond of our
possessions to part with them. So far as our personal feeling goes, we ought to
be ready to offer the other cheek, and to give, without desire of recovery,
whatever is demanded or taken from us. Love knows no limits but those
which love itself imposes. When love resists or refuses, it is because com-
pliance would be a violation of love, not because it would involve loss or
suffering.
29. TW Tuirroiri crc lirl TT\V criayoVa. A violent blow with the
fist seems to be meant rather than a contemptuous slap, for
criayuv means "jaw-bone" (Judg. xv. 15, 16; Ezek. xxix. 14;
Mic. v* 4; Hos. xi. 4). In what follows also it is an act of
violence that is meant; for in that case the upper and more
valuable garment (Ip&nov) would be taken first. In Mt. v. 40 the
spoiler adopts a legal method of spoliation (K/H^VCU), and takes
the under and less indispensable garment (xir&va) first. See on
iii. 1 1 and comp. Jn. xix. 23.
Here only do we find Ttivreiv &rl c. dat* In class. Grk. <. <?., e*g*
M Kdppys rtwreiv or ircmWet? (Plato, Gorg, 486 C, 508 D, 527 A) t Some-
times we have efc (Mt. xxvii. 30), which some MSS. read here and rviii. 13,
Comp. Xen. Cyr, v. 4, 5. So also KuKfeiv &v6 is not common. Comp. 01)
ytil KwX&rei ro /wj^ieiov auroO dir6 <7oC (Gen. xxiii. 6) and dir6 crou /cwAtfajj'
(Xen. Cyr. i. 3. II, iii. 3. 51). The more usual constr. both in N.T. and
class. Grk. is either ace. and inf. (xxiii. 2 ; Acts xvi. 6, xxiv. 23) or ace. of
pers. and gen. of thing (Acts xxvii. 43). Note that atpew does not mean
simply "take," which is Xa/xj8dveti', but either "take up" (v. 24, ix. 23) or
" take away" (xix. 24, xxiii. 18).
SO. vavrl aiToutrJ crc o(8ou. There is no iravri in Mt. V. 42,
and this is one of many passages which illustrate Lk.'s fondness
for iras (ver. 17, viL 35, ix. 43, xi. 4). The irwrl has been
differently understood "No one is to be excluded, not even
1 36 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. SO, 31,
one's enemies " (Meyer, Weiss). Omni petenti te tribue^ non omnia
petenti ; ut id des> quod dare hones te et juste potes (Aug.). Neither
remark is quite right Our being able to give juste et koneste
depends not only on what is asked, but upon who asks it. Some
things must not be conceded to any one. Others ought to be
given to some petitioners, but not to all. In every case, however,
we ought to be willing to part with what may be lawfully given
to any. The wish to keep what we have got is not the right motive
for refusing.
ScSoi/j Kal diro roO atpoiTos Tct crci JULY) dTratrei. The pres. in all
three cases implies continual action, making a practice of it.
" Continually give, and from him who continues to take away thy
goods do not continue to ask them again." For alptiv in the sense
of "take as one's own, appropriate," comp. xi. 52, xix. 21 ; Mk.
xv. 24. It does not imply that violence is used. But the //^
aTratret implies that hitherto asking them back has been usual.
The verb aTratretv is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (xii. 20 : comp. Wisd.
xv. 8; Ecclus. xx. 15; Hdt i, 3. 2). Prof. Marshall thinks that
we have here another instance of different translation of the same
Aramaic, and that Lk. J s aipovros and Mt's &W<racr0ai may repre-
sent the same word ; also Lk.'s oaratrei and Mt's airocrrpa<t>jj$. See
on v. 21 and viii. 15,
31. Kal icaOws O^Xerc. The /cat introduces the general principle
which covers all these cases : " and in short, in a word." How
would one wish to be treated oneself if one was an aggressor ?
How ought one to wish to be treated ? But obviously the principle
covers a great deal more than the treatment of aggressors and
enemies. In To bit iv. 15 we have, "Do that to no man which
thou hatest " ; but this purely negative precept, which was common
with the Rabbis, falls immeasurably short of the positive command
of Christ Isocrates has a waa-^OT/res <* Iripwv o/jyifecr$, ravra
rots aAAois p^i 7roitre, and the Stoics said, Quod tibi fieri non vis,
alteri ne feceris ; and the same is found in Buddhism. In the
At,8c9pJ, i. 2, and Apost. Const, vii. 2. i, we have both the positive
and the negative form. Cod. D, Iren. (iii. 12. 14), Cypr. (Test.
iii. 119) and other authorities insert the negative form Acts xv. 29.
How inadequate the so-called Rabbinical parallels to the Sermon
on the Mount are, as collected by Wiinsche and others, has been
shown by Edersheim (Z. 6" T. L p, 531). Note the icatfak, "even
as, precisely as " : the conformity is to be exact For Qlkew fra
comp. Mt. vii. 12 ; Mk. vi 25, ix, 30, x. 35 ; Jn. xvii. 24, and see
on iv. 3. The iceu vftels before Troteirc is omitted by B and some
Latin texts. "Do likewise " occurs only here, iii. n, and x. 37.
32-35. Interested affection is of little account : Christian love
is of necessity disinterested ; unlike human love, it embraces what
is repulsive and repellent
32-S&] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
32. iroia up.ii/ x^P l s- "What kind of thank, or favour, have
you?" This may be understood either of the gratitude of the
persons loved or of the favour of God. The latter is better, and is
more clearly expressed by rlva pio-Oov ex r > (Mt. v. 46). Other-
wise there does not seem to be much point in ol djuaprcuXot. For
of Divine favour comp. i, 30, ii. 40, 52 ; Acts vii. 46.
Kal yap. " For even " ; nam etiam. Comp. Mt. viii. 9 ; Mk. vii. 28,
x. 45 ; Jn. iv. 45 ; I Cor. xii. 14 ; and see Ellicott on 2 Thes. iii. 10 ; Meyer
on 2 Cor. xiii. 4.
33. Here only is ayaQoTroielv found with an ace. after it. It does not
occur in profane writers, and elsewhere in N.T. is absolute : w. 9, 35 ; Mk.
iii. 4; I Pet. ii. 15, 20, iii. 6, 17 ; 3 Jn. n. But in i Pet. and 3 Jn. it is
used of doing what is right as opposed to doing what is wrong, whereas in
Lk. and Mt. it is used, as in LXX, of helping others as opposed to harm-
ing them: Num. x. 32; Jud. xvii. 13 (Cod. B d-yaflwet) ; Zeph. i. 12.
Hatch, BibL Grk. p. 7 ; but see Lft. on Clem. Rom. Cor. ii. p. 17.
For dfiapTcAoi Mt. has in the one case reXw^at and in the
other tOviKoL Of course both "publicans" and "heathen" are
here used in a moral sense, because of their usual bad character ;
and Weiss confidently asserts that Lk. is here interpreting, while
Mt. gives the actual words used. But it is possible that Mt.,
writing as a Jew, has given the classes who to Jews were sinners
/car* If o^i/ instead of the general term.
34. This third illustration has no parallel in Mt., but see Mt.
v. 42 ; and comp. Prov. xix. 17.
davt<TijT. The texts are divided between this form,
and Savelfere. In N.T. 8avifo is to be preferred to Savetfa, which is the
class, form. The verb means to "lend upon interest" whereas Kixpy/u
indicates a friendly loan ; and therefore r& fact, would include both interest
and principal.
diro\<|3oD<ri>. " Receive as their due, receive back? or perhaps
"receive in full" ; comp. aTre^eo in ver. 24, and see Lft. on Gal. iv.
5 ; also Ellicott and Meyer. The phrase diroX. ret to-a need not
mean more than " receive equivalent services," but more probably
it refers to repayment in full : comp. cp<mo> and avrepavL^.
36. tr\r\v. See on ver. 24. " But^ when this kind of interested
affection has been rejected as worthless, what must be aimed at is
this." Note the pres. imperat. throughout: "Habitually love, do
good, and lend"; also that Christ does not change the word
&w'fere, nor intimate that it does not here have its usual meaning
of lending on interest.
pjScy dir\morr$. The meaning of this famous saying de-
pends partly upon the reading, whether we read pySev or
1 The external evidence stands thus
FoTwdtvdv. ABLRXTAetc., Latt. Syr-HarcU Boh.
For fiijtifra dir, tf S n* ; Syrr. Tisch. is almost alone among recent
editors in preferring wdtva ; WH. and RV. place in the margin*
1 88 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. 85.
but mainly upon the interpretation of a.7re\irLovT<s. All English
Versions previous to E.V. adopt the common view that avreXTr.
means " hoping for in return," a meaning which is without example,
but which is supposed to be justified by the context, or rather by
the corrupted context. Thus Field argues : " No doubt this use of
the word is nowhere else to be met with ; but the context is here
too strong for philological quibbles (!). * If ye lend to them Trap' &v
'EAIIIZETE 'AHOXa^etv, what thank have ye ? ' Then follows the
precept : * Lend fwyScv 'AHEAniZONTES,' which can by no possi-
bility bear any other meaning than ivcf&v l\7rLtpvr^ a7roAa/3eZ^ "
(Otium Noru. iii. p. 40). The argument would be precarious, even
if the facts were as stated ; but the true reading is Trap* <Si/ eA^crc
Xafttw (tf B L S, Justin), and therefore the whole falls to the ground.
The usual meaning of a7reX7n<o, " I give up in despair," makes
excellent sense ; either " despairing of nothing," or " despairing of
no one " (p/SeVa). " Despairing of nothing" or " never despairing "
may mean either "never doubting that God will requite you," or
"never despairing about your money." The latter meaning is
almost identical with " despairing of no one," i.e. " never doubting
that your creditor will pay." Eut it has been suggested that //^S<a/a
may be neut plur., on the authority of Steph. Thesaur. v. col. 962
[iii. col. 3645]. If this were correct, the two readings would have
the same meaning. On the authority of a single passage in the
Anthologia Palatina (ii. 114, p. 325, Brunck), Liddle and Scott
give d7rX7ri<i> a transitive meaning, "causing to despair"; but
there aXXov airekiritpv (of an astrologer who said that a person had
only nine months to live) may mean "giving him up in despair " :
comp. Polyb. ii. 54. 7. Therefore we may safely abandon the
common interpretation and render " giving up nothing in despair "
or " never despairing." Comp. CTTI <tXoi/ eav <nra<r??s po/^cjSatW, JJLJJ
aTreATrtcr^s (Ecclus. xxii. 2l); 6 Se airoKaXvij/as ju/ucrnypia aTnjXTTtcre
(xxvii. 21); ra /car* a vrov aTr^XTrtVa? (2 Mac. ix. 1 8), of Antiochus
when stricken with an incurable disease. Galen often uses the
verb of desperate cases in medicine; see Hobart, p. 118, and Wetst 1
D and many early Latin texts have nihil desperantes. See the valuable
note in Wordsworth's Vulgate, p. 344, But he thinks impossible that Lk.
may have written d7reX7rj"v for <-\.Trtfav d*"6 on the analogy of
toOieiv dv6 and diroXajSefr for XajSea> <iw6.
1 "What mischief the common interpretation (sanctioned by the Vulgate, nikil
inde sperantes] has wrought in Europe is strikingly shown by Do'llinger (Aha-
demische Vortrage^ i. pp. 223 fF. j Studies in European History > pp. 224 flf. ).
On the strength of it Popes and councils have repeatedly condemned the taking
of any interest whatever for loans. As loans could not be had without interest,
and Christians were forbidden to take it, money-lending passed into the hands
of the Jews, and added greatly to the unnatural detestation in which Jews were
held. The paradox that Christians may not take interest has been revived by
Ruskin.
1.85-38,] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
<reo-0 oiot *Y4/unrou. In Mt. v. 9 peacemakers are called vloi
eov. The moral likeness proves the parentage. Just as in m.
32, 33 Lk. has the generic d/xaprcoAot where Mt. has the specific
rcXSvat and lOvLKoi, so here we have " is kind towards the unthank-
ful and evil " instead of " maketkHis sun to rise on the evil and the
good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust " (Mt. v. 45).
For 'Yif/iarov comp. i. 32, 35, 76.
36, 37. A further development of the principle of Christian
love. Having told His disciples to cherish no personal animus
against those who injure them. He now warns them against judging
others respecting any supposed misconduct. To pose as a general
censor morum is unchristian. Censoriousness is a transgression of
the royal law of love, and an invasion of the Divine prerogatives.
Not only vengeance but judgment belongs to God. And judgment,
when it is inevitable, must be charitable (aTroXvere), directed by a
desire to acquit rather than to condemn. Comp. i Cor. xiii. 4;
Jas. iv n, 12. Hillel said, "Judge not thy neighbour until thou
comest into his place" (Ewald, Hist, of Israel^ vi. p, 27). See on
ver. 31.
The loose citations of these two verses by Clement of Rome (i 13. 2) and
Clement of Alexandria (Strom, ii. 1 8, p. 476, ed. Potter) are interesting. Both
have the words (is xptiffretiecrffe, otirws %/>?;<rTeu0?J<TeTai vfuv immediately before
<j5 fAtrpv, K.T.A. They repiesent ytfeffde olKTlp/j,oves in Lk., for which Justin
has ylveffdc 8t xP^ Toi * a * olicrlpiMwes (Try. xcvi; Apol. i. 15). Comp. Clem*
Horn. iii. 57. It is probable that Clem. Alex, here quotes Clem. Rom* uncon-
sciously.
38. The transition is easy from charity in judging others to
benevolence in general. Comp. ver. 30 and iii. u. God remains
in debt to no man. " He giveth not by measure " (Jn. iii. 34),
nor does He recompense by measure, unless man serves Him by
measure. Disciples who serve in the spirit of love make no
such calculations, and are amply repaid. We are here assured of
this fact in an accumulation of metaphors, which form a climax.
They are evidently taken from the measuring of corn, and Bengel
is clearly wrong in interpreting vircpeK-^ywo^vov of fluids : cis TOV
ICOA.TTOV is conclusive. The asyndeton is impressive.
The form iiTrepeKxyvvbpevQv seems to occur nowhere else, excepting as
./, Joel ii* 24. The class, form is tTrepetcxfa.
SoScrouo-ii' els Toy K^XTTOK upa v. Who shall give ? Not the persons
benefited, but the instruments of God's bounty. The verb is
almost impersonal, "there shall be given," SotfiJcreTai. Comp.
airovcTLv (xii. 20) and amjo-ovo-tv (xii. 48). The K^Xiros is the fold
formed by a loose garment overhanging a girdle. This was often
used as a pocket (Exod. iv. 6; Prov. vi. 27 ; and esp. Ps. Ixxix.
12; Is. Ixv. 6; Jer. xxxii, 18). Comp. Hdt. vi. 125. 5; Liv, xxi
18. 10 ; Hor* Sat. ii 3. 172, and other illustrations in WetsL
IpO THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VX 38-40.
y&p jj^Tpw |ATpeiT6. There is no inconsistency, as Weiss
states (stimmt immer nicht recht), with what precedes ; but he is
right in condemning such interpretations as TW avT<$ /xcrpw, ov p^v
rocrovro) (Theophyl.) and eadem mensura in genere sed exuberans
(Grot) as evasions. The loving spirit uses no measure in its services ;
and then God uses no measure in requiting. But the niggardly and
grudging servant, who tries to do just the minimum, receives just
the minimum in return. In Mk. iv. 24, 25 we have this saying
with a different application.
39. The second half of the discourse begins here, and this is
marked by a repetition of the introductory Etirei/. The connexion
with what precedes perhaps is, that, before judging others, we must
judge ourselves j otherwise we shall be blind leaders of the blind.
This saying occurs in quite another connexion Mt. xv. 14. It
may easily have been uttered several times, and it is a common-
place in literature. We are thus shown the manifold application
of Christ's sayings, and the versatility of truth. See Wetst. on Mt.
xv, 14. With the exception of Mk. xii. 12, the phrase etircy irapo-
poX^y is peculiar to Lk. (xii. 16, xv. 3, xviii. 9, xix. n, xx, 19,
xxi. 29).
els ^0? PW. " Into a pit M rather than " into the ditch," which
all English Versions prior to RV. have both here and Mt. xv. 14.
In Mt. xii. ir nearly all have "a pit." The word is a doublet of
fioBpos, fufeusj and is perhaps connected with /?a0v's. Palestine is
full of such things, open wells without walls, unfenced quarries,
and the like. For 6&7yu/ comp. Acts viiL 31 ; Jn. xvi. 13; Ps.
xxiv. 5, Ixxxv, ii, cxvirL 35; Wisd. ix. n, x. 17.
4<X This again is one of Christ's frequent sayings. Here the
connexion seems to be that disciples will not get nearer to the
truth than the teacher does, and therefore teachers must beware of
being blind and uninstructed, especially with regard to knowledge
of self. In xxii. 27 and in Jn. xiii. 16 the meaning is that disciples
must not set themselves above their master. In Mt. x. 24 the
point is that disciples must not expect better treatment than their
master. So also in Jn. xv. 20, which was a different occasion.
KanqpTicrji^pos Be iras lorai <&s SiSdcncaXos aflrou,, The sentence
may be taken in various ways. i. Every well instructed disciple
shall be as his master (AV.). 2. Every disciple, when he has
been well instructed, shall be as his master. 3. Every disciple
shall be as well instructed as his master (Tyn. Cran.). But Per-
fectus autem omnis erit, si sit sicut magister efus (Vulg.)? " Every one
shall be perfect, if he be as his master" (Rhem.), Wenn derjunger
ist wte sein Meister, so ist er vollkommen (Luth.), is impossible.
The meaning is that the disciple will not excel his master ; at the
best he will only equal him. And, if the master has faults, the
iisciple will be likely to copy th
TTL 40-4a] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 191
For KcwapTCJw, "make Apriot, equip,** comp. Mt. iy. 21 ; Mk. i. 195
X Thes. iii. ro ; Gal. vi I ; Heb. x. 5, xi. 3, xiii 21. It is a surgical word,
used of setting a bone or joint : for examples see Wetst. on Mt. iv. 21. There
is no rat in Mt. x. 24, 25 : see on ver. 30.
41, 42. In order to avoid becoming a blind teacher, whose
disciples will be no better than oneself, one must, before judging
and attempting to correct others, correct oneself. Self-knowledge
and self-reform are the necessary preparation of the reformer,
without which his work is one of presumption rather than of love.
Gen. viii. 1 1 it is used of the olive twig brought by the dove. See Wetst. on
Mt. vii. 3. The S<$KOS is the "bearing-beam, main beam," that which
receives (S^xofMt) the other beams in a roof or floor. It is therefore as
necessarily large as a /cdp^os is small.
"Fix thy mind upon." It expresses prolonged
attention and observation. Careful consideration of one's own
faults must precede attention to those of others. The verb is
specially freq. in LL (xii. 24, 27, xx. 23; Acts xi. 6, xxvii. 39:
comp. Heb. iii. x, x. 24; Rom. iv. 19).
42. TTWS SuKoom \&fiv. " With what face can you adopt this
tone of smug patronage ? " In Mt. viL 4 the patronizing *f&e\$l
is wanting.
&<J>s 3icf3aXtt. For the simple subj. after d0%u comp. Mt. xxvii. 49 ;
Mk. xv. 36. Epict Diss. i. 9. 15, iii. 12. 15. In modern Greek it is the
regular idiom. Win. xli. 4. b, JD. 356. In o-u pX&rwv we have the only
instance in Lk. of ofl with a participle : "When thou dost not look at, much
less anxiously consider " (Karavowv) : see small print on L 20.
The hypocrisy consists in his pretending to be so
pained by the presence of trifling evil that he is constrained to
endeavour to remove it Comp. xiii. 15. That he conceals his
own sins is not stated ; to some extent he is not aware of them.
The TOTC means "then, and not till then"; and the SiafBXetycts is
neither imperative nor concessive, but the simple future. When
self-reformation has taken place, then it will be possible to see
how to reform others. Note the change from /?AeVe/ to foa/SAe'-
iretv; not merely look at, but "see clearly." In class. Grk.
Sia/XVa> means " look fixedly," as in deep thought Plato notes
it as a habit of Socrates (Ph&do^ 86 D).
43. ofl Y^P ^OT^' Codex D and some versions omit the ya/>,
the connexion with the preceding not being observed. The con-
nexion is close. A good Christian cannot but have good results
in the work of converting others, and a bad Christian cannot have
such, for his bad life will more than counteract his efforts to
reclaim others.
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VI. 43-48.
The etymological connexion between Kapirbs (carpo> fferbst, harvest) and
Kdp<j>os is by no means certain. But if it is a fact, it has no place here. The
phrase iroielv Kap7r6v is not classical, but a Hebraism (iii. 9, viii. 8, xiii. 9 ; Gen.
[. n, 12; Ps. cvii. 37). By <Ta,irpbv (<njTw) is meant (i) what is "rotten,
putrid," and (2) what is "worthless." See Wetst. on Mt. vii. 18. A rotten
tree would produce no fruit ; and fishes just caught would not be putrid (Mt.
xiii, 48). In both places the secondary meaning is required.
44. The unreformed can no more reform others than thorns
and briars can produce figs and grapes. It is by their fruits that
each comes to be known (ytvwo-Kercu). The identification of the
many Hebrew words which denote thorny shrubs is a hopeless
task. Neither the originals nor their Greek representatives can be
satisfactorily determined (Groser, Trees and Plants of the Bible,
p. 172). Elsewhere in N.T. /3dros is used of the burning bush
(xx. 37 ; Acts vii. 30, 35 ; Mk. xii. 26 ; Exod. iil 2, 3, 4) : in Horn.
it is a "thorn-bush, bramble" (Od. xxiv. 230). The verb rpvyaw
is specially used of the vintage (Rev. xiv. 18, 19; Lev. xix. 10,
xxv. 5, ii ; Deut. xxiv. 21). Comp. the similar sayings Jas. iii.
n, 12, which are probably echoes of Christ's teaching as remem-
bered by the Lord's brother.
45. This forms a link with the next section. When men are
natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth
sometimes professes what the heart does not feel.
46-49. The Judgments which await the Members of the King-
dom. The Sanction or Warning. Mt. vii 13-27. This is some-
times called the Epilogue or the Peroration : but it is not a mere
summing up. It sets forth the consequences of following, and the
consequences of not following, what has been enjoined*
46. The question here asked may be addressed to all dis-
ciples, none of whom are perfect. The inconsistency of calling
Him Lord and yet failing in obedience to Him was found even
in Apostles. What follows shows that the question applies to
the whole of Christian conduct. Of the four parables in the latter
half of the sermon, the first two (the blind leading the blind ; the
mote and the beam) have special reference to the work of correct-
ing others; the third (the good and bad trees) may be either
special or general; while the fourth (the wise and foolish builders)
is quite general. With Ku/ote comp. xiii. 25; Mt. xxv. 11, 12;
Jas. i. 22, 26.
47. For iras 6 Ipxfycyos see small print on i. 66, and for
$iroSeta> see on iii. 7 and Fritzsche on Mt. iii. 7.
48. oricatj/i> ical epdOuvcK ica! 20YjKi> GejjtAiop. "He dug and
went deep (not a hendiadys for * dug deep ') and kid a founda-
tion." The whole of this graphic description is peculiar to Lk.
THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 193
Robinson stayed in a new house at Nazareth, the owner of which
had dug down for thirty feet in order to build upon rock (.Res. in
PaL ii. p. 338). The parables in Mt. and Lk. are so far identical
that in both the two builders desire to have their houses near a
water-course, water in Palestine being very precious. In Mt. they
build on different places, the one on the rock and the other on
the sand, such as is often found in large level tracts by a dry
water-course. Nothing is said about the wise builder digging
through the sand till he comes to rock. Each finds what seems
to him a good site ready to hand.
irXiqp,fjLupi]S. "A flood," whether from a river or a sea: and
hence a flood of troubles and the like. See Jos. Ant. ii. 10. 2
and examples in Wetst. Here only in N.T., and in LXX only
Job xx. 23.
od* foxucrei>. "Had not strength to." The expression is a
favourite one with Lk. (viii. 43, xiii. 24, xiv. 6, 29, xvi. 3, xx. 26 ;
Acts vi. 10, xv. 10, xix. 16, 20, xxv. 7, xxvii. 16). For o-aXcucrcu
comp. vii. 24, xxi. 26 ; Acts ii. 25 fr. Ps. xv. 8, iv. 31 : freq. in LXX.
8ia rb KaXoi? olKoSopYJcrdai a-urtjv. This is certainly the true reading
(tf B LS 33 157, Boh. Syr-HarcL marg.). The common reading, refle/ueXtaro
7&/> M rty trtrpav (ACDXetc.; Latt. Syrr. Goth. Arm.), is obviously
taken from Mt The Ethiopic combines the two readings.
49. -rrpocre'p^ct/ 6 iroTctjjios. Lk. gives only the main incident,
the river, created by the rain, smiting the house. But Mt. is much
more graphic : /care/??/ 07 Ppoxy /cat yXdov ol Trora/zot /cat eTn/eucrai/
ot ave/ioi /cat 7rpocrKO\f/av T$ ot/ctlp, e/cetV^.
crui^Trco-ev. " It fell in," Le. the whole fell together in a heap :
much more expressive than iTrecrcv, which some texts (A C) here
borrow from Mt.
ey^ero rb p%|JLa. To harmonize with trpocrepygw. This use of
p^y^ta for "ruin" (so first in Rhem.) seems to be without example.
In class. Grk. it is used of bodily fractures or ruptures, and also of
clothes ; so also in i Kings xi. 30, 31 ; 2 Kings ii. 12. But Amos
vi. 1 1 of rents in a building, -rraraiei rov oLcoi/ rov ^eyav $Xaoyx,acrtj/,
Kal rov ot/cov rov /u/cpov pay//,acrtv. Hobart contrasts the /3po)(rj 9
vpo<rKO\l/av 9 e3reo"V, and Trrokrts of Mt. With the -TrX^/xupa, irpotrep-
prj&v, <ruv'7rorv, and p^yp-a of Lk., and contends that the latter
four belong to medical phraseology (pp. 55, 56).
The fx^ya, like /xcyaXiy in Mt., comes last with emphasis.
Divine instruction, intended for building up, must, if neglected,
produce disastrous ruin. The Kctrcu ets m-wo-iv (ii. 34) is fulfilled.
The audience are left with the crash of the unreal disciple's house
sounding in their ears.
Similar Rabbinical sayings are quoted, but as coming from persons who lived
after A. P. 100, by which time Christ's teaching had uttered into both Jewish
13
194 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [TTL 49-VJX 8.
and pagan thought. " Whosesoever wisdom is above his works, to what is he
like ? To a tree whose branches are many and its roots few. Then the wind
cometh and rooteth it up and tumeth it over. And, whosesoever works are
above his wisdom, to what is he like? To a tree v-hose branches are few and
its roots many. Though all the winds come upon it they move it not from its
place" (Miskna, Pirqe aboth. III. xxvii.). And again, "To whom is he
like, that with many merits uniteth great wisdom? To him who first layeth
granite blocks and then bricks. Though ever so mighty floods wash round the
building, yet they cannot make it give way. But to whom is he like, who
knoweth much and fulfilleth little ? To him who layeth the foundation with
bricks, which are disturbed by the least water (Atoth R. Nathan, xxiii.). See
Edersh* Z. <5r T. i p. 540 ; Nicholson on Mt. vii. 24.
VIL 1. The division of the chapters is misleading. This
verse forms the conclusion of the preceding narrative quite in
Lk.'s manner. Comp. iv. 30, 37, 44, v. n, 16, 26, vi. n, etc.
It is not the introduction to what follows, for Jesus must have
been in Capernaum some time before the centurion heard about
Him. Lk. says nothing about the impression which the discourse
made upon the people (Mt. vii. 28), nor about their following Him
(Mt viii. i).
) lirXijpaxrev travra T& ^para afa-ov. This Is the only place in
N.T* in which &rei5ij is used in the temporal sense of "after that, when
now." Hence 'ETrei 5 is found hi many texts. K has 'ETraS-Jj W, while D
has Kal tytvero &rc. In the causal sense of *' since, seeing that," ^iret&ij
occurs only in Lk. and Paul (xi. 6 ; Acts xiii 46, xiv. 12, xv. 24 ; I Cor.
i. 21, 22, xiv. 1 6, xv. 21). See Ellicott on Phil, ii. 26. For 6rXi)/>w<re,
"completed," so that no more remained to be said, comp. Acts xiL 25,
xiii. 25, xiv. 26, xix. 21.
els ras ajcoas TOU Xaov. The els marks the direction of what was said :
comp. i. 44, iv. 44 ; Acts xi. 22, xvii. 20. Both in bibl. Grk. and in class,
Grk. &KOJJ has three senses. I. "The thing heard, report*' (i Sam. ii. 24;
38; Rom. x. 1 6). 2. "The sense of hearing"
i Kings ii. 28 ; Jn. xii.
(2 Sam. xxii. 4, 5 ; Job
ear" (Mk. vii. 35; Heb. v. 1 1 ;~2 Mac. xv. 39).
(2 Sam. xxii. 4, 5; Job. xlii. 5; I Cor. xii. 17; a Pet ii. 8). 3. "The
; Heb. v. ii j
2-10. The healing of the Centurion's Servant at Capernaum.
Mt. viii. 5-13. Mt. places the healing of the leper (Lk. v. 12-14)
between the Sermon on the Mount and the healing of the cen-
turion's slave. This centurion was a heathen by birth (ver. 9), and
was probably in the service of Antipas. He had become in some
degree attracted to Judaism (ver, 5), and was an illustration of the
great truth which Lk. delights to exhibit, that Gentile and Jew
alike share in the blessings of the kingdom. The anima naturaliter
Christiana of the man is seen in his affection for his slave.
2. r\p<-\\t-i> reXeurai'. "Was on the point of dying," and would
have done so but for this intervention (Acts xii. 6, xvi. 27, etc.).
Burton, 73. For IITIJAOS, "held in honour, held dear," comp.
xiv. 8; Phil. ii. 29; i Pet. ii. 4, 6; Is. xxviiL ift The fact
explains why this deputation of elders came.
VH,3-6.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 195
8. dir&rrciW irpos afire? Trpeo-pur^pous. These elders (no
article) would be leading citizens ; but they need not be identified
with the apxto-waywyoi (viii. 49, xiii. 14; Acts xiii. 15, xviii. 8, 17),
as Godet formerly advocated. The compound Stao-oSJci^ "to
bring safe through," is almost peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts
xxiii. 24, xxvii. 43, 44, xxviii. i, 4 ; Mt. xiv. 36 ; i Pet iii. 20).
4. ol 8e irapaYi/(5|jLKou A favourite verb (ver. 20, yiii. 19,
XL 6, xii. 51, xiv. 21, xix. 16, xxii 52 ; and about twenty times in
Acts) : elsewhere in N.T, eight or nine times, but very freq. in
LXX.
Icrriv <JS irapfl TOVTO. ** He is worthy that Thou shouldest do
this for him " ; 2 sing. fut. mid. The reading rap^et (G T A) is 3 sing. fut.
act. and must not be taken as analogous to the exceptional forms o?, fyei t
and /SotfXet. But beyond doubt raptfy (tf ABCDRS etc.) is the correct
reading.
5. dy air ? yctp T& eO^os YJJJ,WI>, This would hardly be said of one
who was actually a proselyte. He had learned to admire and
respect the pure worship of the Jews and to feel affection for the
people who practised it. This would be all the more likely if he
were in the service of the Herods rather than that of heathen
Rome.
T$)i> owa-ycay*!? afiros WKoSofuqaey ifjfup. "At his own expense he
built us our synagogue," the one which we have; not "a syna-
gogue " (AV.). Had Capernaum only one synagogue?
If Tell H&m represents Capernaum, and if the ruins of the synagogue there
are from a building of this date, they show with what liberality this centurioa
had carried out his pious work. But it is doubtful whether the excellent work
exhibited in these ruins is quite so early as the first century. The centurions
appear in a favourable light in N.T. (xxiiL 47 ; Acts x. 22, xxii. 26, xpdii 17,
23, 24, xxiv. 23, xxvii. 43). Roman organization produced, and was maintained
by, excellent individuals, who were a blessing to others and themselves. As
Philo says, after praising Petronius the governor of Syria, rots & dyaOoit AyaOfa
fnrrjxciv Notice yv&ftas 6 6e6j &' v c&^eXowres (^eX^ff-oyrai (/<f. ad Caivm,
p. 1027, ed. Gelen.). Augustus had recognized the value of synagogues in
maintaining order and morality.
6. 06 paKpdv. Comp. Acts xvii. 27. The expression is
peculiar to Lk., who is fond of o\> with an adj. or adv. to express
his meaning. Comp, ov TroAAo/ (xv. 13 ; Acts i. 5), ov iroXv (Acts
xxvii. 14), OVK oAiyos (Acts xii. 18, xiv. 28, xv. 2, xvii. 4, ia t
xix. 23, 24, xxvii. 20), OVK 6 rvx&v (Acts xix. u, xxviii. 2), ovic
acny/ios (Acts xxi. 39), ov /^erpwos (Acts xx. 12).
6TT]jL\lfK <|>i\ous. Comp. xv. 6, Acts x. 24. Mt. says' nothing about
cither of these deputations, but puts the message of both into the
mouth of the centurion himself, who comes in person. In Lk. the
man's humility and faith prevail over his anxiety as soon as he sees
that the first deputation has succeeded, and that the great Rabbi
196 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VET. 6-9.
and Prophet is really coming to him. Therefore he sends the
second deputation to say that he is not worthy of a visit, and that
the visit is not necessary.
Kupie, p) CTKU\XOU. "Lord, cease to trouble Thyself." The
verb is a marked instance of the tendency of words to become
weaker in meaning: <r/o'AAa> (<r/a)Aov, xi. 22) is i. "flay"; 2,
"mangle"; 3. "vex, annoy" (viii. 49; Mk. v. 35 ; Mt. ix. 36).
See Expositor^ ist series, 1876, iv. pp. 30, 31. What follows
seems to show that the centurion was not a proselyte. The house
of a Gentile was polluting to a Jew ; and therefore ov yap kayos
ci/u, K.T.A., is quite in point if he was still a heathen. But it is
rather strong language if he had ceased to be a heathen. For Iva
after IKCU/OS see Burton, 216.
T. clue X.6y(>, KCLI la0i]Tw 6 irats JJLOU. Lit. "Say with a word,
and let my servant be healed." The word is to be the instrument
with which the healing is to take place, instead of Jesus' coming in
person: comp. Acts ii. 40 and Gal. vi. n. There is no doubt
that 6 Trats fMov means " my servant." This use is found in N.T.
(xii. 45, xv. 26 ; Mt. viii. 6, 8, 13), and is very freq. in LXX and in
class. Grk.
It has been contended that in Mt. viii. 6, 8, 13 rats must mean " son,"
because the centurion calls his servant SouXos in ver. 9 : as if it were improbable
that a person in the same conversation should speak sometimes of his " servant "
and sometimes of his "boy." In both narratives TTCUS and 8ov\os are used as
synonyms ; and it is gratuitous to suppose that in using SovXos Lk. has misin-
terpreted the Tats in the source which he employed. Comp. xv. 22, 26. Here
6 rots JJLQV is more affectionate than 6 $oCX6j Atou would have been.
8. iy& ayOp&nros etjxi uiro Iforfcriav Tcuro'ojjiet'os. The et/u
must not be united with raoWjuevo? and made the equivalent of
Tacrcro/jm : Tao~(roju,vo$ is adjectival. Thus, " For I am a man who
is habitually (pres. part.) placed under authority." But, " For I
am an ordinary person (aj/#po>7ros), and a person in a dependent
position" is rather an exaggeration of the Greek. Comp. VTTO ryv
TOV /JaooXecos cfovcrtav Trecretv (2 Mac. ill. 6). The /cat yap shows
the intimate connexion with what precedes, ewre Aoyo> /cat ta0^ra> :
see on vi. 32. " I know from personal experience what a word
from one in authority can do. A word from my superiors secures
my obedience, and a word from me secures the obedience of my
subordinates. Thou, who art under no man, and hast authority
over unseen powers, hast only to say a word and the sickness is
healed." Perhaps avQp&iros hints that Jesus is superhuman.
Evidently wo covcrtav racro-o/icvos means that, if an inferior can
give effective orders, much more can a superior do so. It is the
certainty of the result without personal presence that is the point.
9. 6 'Itjaous ^0aJ|iaacK afiroK. This is stated in both narratives
Comp. Mk. vi. 6. Those who are unwilling to admit any limits
VH. 9, 10.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 197
tions in Christ's knowledge have to explain how wonder is com-
patible with omniscience. One limitation is clearly told us by
Himself (Mk. xiii. 32); so that the only question is how far such
limitations extend. See on ii. 46, 52, and xvii. 14. Note the
solemn A<yo> ujui/, and comp. ver. 28, x. 12, 24, xi. 8, 9, 51, etc.
ou8e ei/ TW s l<rpaT]X TocraurnjK mcnrii' eupoK. This again points co
the centurion being still a heathen. Nowhere among the Jews had
He found any one willing to believe that He could heal without
being present. It is natural that Lk. should express this preference
for a Gentile more strongly than Mt., who has Trap* o8<n/l Toa-avrrjv
TTLO-TW kv TO) "IcrpaTjX evpov. Lk. here omits the remarkable passage
Mt. viii. n, 12; but he gives it in quite a different connexion
xiii. 28, 29. Such teaching, so necessary and so unwelcome to the
Jews, may easily have been repeated.
10. uTroo-Tpe\|/ai/Ts. See on i. 56 and iv. 14. Lk.'s fiyiaiyoira is
stronger than the IdQrj of Mt. The servant was not only cured, but
" in good health." Non modo sanum, sed sanitate utentem (Beng.)
Hobart remarks that Lk. " is the only N.T. writer who uses vyiatveiv
in this its primary sense, * to be in sound health,' with the exception
of S. John, 3 Ep. 2. For this meaning it is the regular word in
the medical writers" (p. 10). See on v. 31 and comp. xv. 27.
Here and v. 31 Vulg. has sanus j in xv. 27, salvus.
The identification of this miracle with that of the healing of the son of the
royal official (f3a<ri\iK6s) in JIL iv. is not probable : it involves an amount of
misinformation or carelessness on one side or the other which would be very
startling. Irenseus seems to be in favour of it ; but " centurion " with him may
be a slip of memory or a misinterpretation! of a<nXt/:<5s. Origen and Chrysostom
contend against the identification. Is there any difficulty in supposing that on
more than one occasion Jesus healed without being present ? The difficulty is
to explain one such instance, without admitting the possession of supernatural
powers: this Strauss has shown, and the efforts of Keim and Schenkel to
explain it by a combination of moral and psychical causes are not satisfying.
There is no parallel to it in O.T., for (as Keim points oat) the healing of
Naaman is not really analogous.
11-17. The Raising of the Widow's Son at Nain. Because
Lk. alone records it, its historical character has been questioned.
But there were multitudes of miracles wrought by Christ which
have never been recorded in detail at all (iv. 23, 40, 41, vi. 18, 19 ;
Jn. ii. 23, iv. 45, vii. 31, xii. 37, xx, 30, xxi. 25), and among these,
as ver. 22 shows, were cases of raising the dead. We must not
attribute to the Evangelists the modern way of regarding the raising
of the dead as a miracle so amazing, because so difficult to perform^
that every real instance would necessarily become widely known,
and would certainly be recorded by every writer who had knowledge
of it To a Jew it would be hardly mo^e marvellous than the heal-
ing of a leper ; and to one who believes in miracles at all, dis-
tinctions as to difficulty are unmeaning It is not unreasonable to
198 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VH. 10-12.
suppose, either that this event never came to the knowledge of the
other Evangelists, or that, although they knew of it, they did not
see the necessity for recording it. It is worth noting that nearly all
recorded instances of raising the dead were performed for women
(i Kings xvii. 23; 2 Kings iv. 36; Jn. xi. 22, 32; Acts ix. 41;
Heb. xi, 35).
13U Iv Tc3 l|tjs. It is not easy to decide between the reading fr
sc. XP&V ( A B R)> a 11 ^ & TV ev> & 4^Pfl (K C D). On the one hand, Lk.
elsewhere, when he writes 4v r$, has /ca0e?)s (viii. i) ; on the other, when he
writes TO %rj$, he does not prefix 4v (ix. 37 ; Acts xxi. I, xxv. 17, xxyii. 18).
The less definite would be more likely to be changed to the more definite than
vice versa. Thus the balance both of external and internal evidence is in
favour of iv T< e^?, and we must not limit the interval between the miracles
to a single day. In N.T. <? ??s is peculiar to Lk. (ix. 37 ; Acts xxi. I, xxv. 17,
xxvii. 18). So also is ws 777710- ev (y. 12, xv. 25, xix. 29, 41).
Naty. The place is not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture ; and
the village of that name in Josephus (B. f. iv. 9. 4) is on the other
side of the Jordan, and cannot be the same.
A hamlet called Nein was found by Robinson about two miles west of
Endor, on the north slope of Little Hermon, which is where Eusebius and
Jerome place it; and it would be about a day's journey from Capernaum.
" One entrance alone it could have had, that which opens on the rough hillside
in its downward slope to the plain " (Stanley, Sin. &> PaL p. 357) ; so that the
very path on which the two companies met can be identified. About ten
minutes' walk on the road to Endor is a burying-place which is still used, and
there are many tombs cut in the rock. Robinson, PaL iii. p. 469 ; BibL Res.
ii. 361 j Thomson, Land,& Book^ p. 445 ; Tristram, I*and of Israel, p. 127.
The expression, wSKiv KaXovptvyv Nafr, looks as if Lk. were writing for those
who were not familiar with the country ; comp. i. 26, 39, iv. 31. See on vi. 15.
ot fjLa^Tjral aorou. Including more than the Twelve ; vi. 13.
See on xi. 29.
12. Kal ISod efeKojuJero reOvrjicoSs. "Behold there was being
carried out a dead man." Or, " there was being carried out dead
the only son," etc. The /cat introduces the apodosis of o>s S
7/yyiae, and must be omitted in translation : " then " would be too
strong. See on v. 12. The compound verb occurs here only in
N.T. and nowhere in LXX. It is equivalent to l/c^epetr (Acts v.
6, 9, 10) and efferre^ and is used of carrying out to burial, Polyb.
xxxv. 6.2; Plut. AgiSy xxi. ; Cic. xlii. In later Gk. c/cico/uSi/ is
used for /c<o/>< of burial. With TC^KOOS comp. Jn. xi. 44.
fiOKoyei^s uios rig pjTp! aurou. Comp. viii. 42, ix. 38; Heb.
xl 17; Judg. xi. 34; Tobit iii. 15, viii. 17. Only in Jn. is nova
used of the Divine Sonship (i. 14, 18, iii. 16, 18; i Jn. iv, 9).
ical a-ftr^i fjr x^P tt * T^ e $" wy safely be pronounced to be certainly
genuine (XBCLSVS and most Versions). For a#n} some editors write
crfn;, and a few authorities have *ai avrfj %-fipq^ The mourning of a widow
for an only son is typical for the extremity of grief ; orba cum JUt unicum
VIL 12-15.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 199
mater (Catull. xxxk. 5). Comp. Jer. vl 26 ; Amos viii. ro ; Zech, xiL 10 ;
Prov. iv. 3.
Some of this multitude would be hired
mourners, and musicians with flutes and cymbals. The mother
would walk in front of the bier, and Jesus would naturally address
her before touching it. This use of iicavo's for "enough and to
spare, much," is specially freq. in Lk. (viii. 27, 32, xx. 9, xxii. 38,
xxiii. 8, 9; Acts viii. n, ix. 23, 43, xi. 24, 26, etc.). It is possibly
colloquial : it occurs in Aristoph. Pax 354. See Kennedy, Sources
of N.T. Grk. p. 79. D here has woAife.
13. jcal IS&p aurqi' 6 Kuptos ecrrrXayyiaOif] iir* aurj). The introduc-
tion of o Kvpios has special point here : it is the Lord of Life meet-
ing sorrow and death. The expression is characteristic of Lk.
Comp. xxiv. 34, and see on v, 17. Compassion is elsewhere men-
tioned as a moving cause in Christ's miracles (Mt. xiv. 14, xv. 32,
xx. 34 ; Mk. i. 41, viii. 2). The verb is peculiar to the Synoptists ;
and, excepting in parables (Lk. x. 33, xv. 20; Mt. xviii. 27), is
used of no one but Christ. It is followed, as here, by eVi c. dat.
Mt. xiv. 14; and by -rrspi c. gen. Mt. ix. 36; but generally by
em c, ace. (Mt. xv. 32; Mk. vi. 34, viii. 2, ix. 22).
M$) icXalc. " Do not go on weeping, cease to weep " : comp.
ver. 6. He is absolutely sure of the result ; otherwise the command
would have been unnatural. Quts matrem^ nisi mentis inops y in
funere nati Flere vetat?
14. tj\|/aTo TYJS <ropou, ot 8 pa<rnorre$ Icrrrjo-aK. Lk. clearly
intimates that the purpose of the touching was to make the bearers
stand still. At such solemn times words are avoided, and this
quiet sign sufficed. Perhaps it also meant that Jesus claimed as
His own what Death had seized as his prey. Lk. equally clearly
intimates that the resurrection was caused by Christ's command.
This is the case in all three instances of raising the dead (viii. 54 ;
Jn. xi. 43). The o-opos may be either the bier on which the body
was carried, or the open coffin (probably wicker) in which it was
laid (Gen. 1. 26 ; Hdt. i. 68. 3, ii. 78. i).
It is worth noting that f$aar<itj> t which occurs twenty-seven times in
N.T. (x. 4, xi. 27, xiv. 27, xxii 10, etc.), is found only once in LXX.
OXH X^yw. "To thee I say, Arise." To the mother He had said,
" Weep not." The a-oi is emphatic. For this use of Acyo, almost
in the sense of " I command," comp. xi. 9, xii. 4, xvi. 9.
15. di>Kd0L<r> 6 yeKpos. The verb occurs only here and Acts
ix. 40 in N.T. ; in both cases of persons restored to life and sitting
up. Not in LXX. In this intrans. sense it is rare, excepting in
medical writers, who often use it of sick persons sitting up in bed
(Hobart, p. n). The speaking proved complete restoration.
200 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VH. 15-17.
To suggest that the young man was in a trance does not get rid of the
miracle. How did Jesus know that he was in a trance, and know exactly how
to rouse him ? And can we suppose that this happened on three different occa-
sions, even if we could reconcile Christ's action with a character for truthfulness ?
Here and in the case of Jairus' daughter it is the Evangelist who tells us that the
person was dead ; but Jesus Himself declared that Lazarus was dead (Jn. xi. 14).
We are told that the symmetry of the three instances is suspicious ; raised from
the death-bed, raised from the bier, raised from the tomb. But no Evangelist
gives us the triplet. Lk. is the only writer who records more than one, and the
two which he records he places in unsymmetrical order, the raising from the bier
coming before the raising from the death-bed. Strauss has shown how unsatis-
factory the trance theory is (Lebcnjesu, ed. 1864, p. 469).
aflrov rg fATjrpu The sudden change of nominative
causes no obscurity. Comp. xiv. 5, xv. 15, xvii. 2, xix. 4; Acts vi.
6, x. 4. Jesus might have claimed the life which He has restored,
nam juvenis jam desierat esse matris su& ; but compassion for the
mother again influences Him. Comp. ix. 55 ; Acts ix. 41 ; i Mac,
x. 9 ; i Kings xvii. 23 ; 2 Kings iv. 36.
16. "EXapei' 8e cj>6(3os irdiras. It is natural that this should be
the first feeling on seeing a corpse reanimated. But a writer of
fiction would rather have given us the frantic joy of the mother
and of those who sympathized with her. Comp. i. 65, v. 8, 26,
viii. 37 ; Acts ii. 43, xix. 37. See on i 12, and also Schanz, adloc.
Xfyorres on ... K<U on. It is very forced to make Sri in
both cases argumentative : " Saying, (We praise God) because
. . . and because." It is possible to take the second on in this
way ; but the common method of making both to be recitative is
preferable. Both, therefore, are to be omitted in translation, the
words quoted being in the oratio recta (Tyn. Cran. Cov. E.V.).
Cases in which on may be taken either way are freq. in N.T.
(i. 45, ii. ii, iv. 36, vii. 39, ix. 22, x. 21, xi. 38, xxii. 70 ; i Jn. iL
12-14, etc.).
'EiTeorKeijraTo 6 cos iw Kotoy aurou. Comp. i. 68, 78 ; Acts XT.
14 ; Heb. ii. 6. The verb was specially used of the " visits " of a
physician. Comp. Mt. xxv. 36, 43 ; Jas, i. 27 ; Acts vi. 3, viL 23,
xv. 36, the only other passages in N.T. in which the word occurs.
In the sense of visiting with judgment or punishment it is never
used in N.T. and but seldom in LXX (Ps. Ixxxviii. 33 ; Jer. ix. 9,
25, xi. 22, Ii. 29). After the weary centuries during which no
Prophet had appeared, it was indeed a proof of Jehovah's visiting
His people that one who excelled the greatest Prophets was among
them. No one in O.T. raised the dead with a word,
17. Jj\6i> 6 Xoyog OUTOS V oXif] rfj 'louSaux irepl afirou. The
Ao'yos is the one just mentioned, that God had visited His people
in sending a mighty Prophet The statement does not imply that
Lk. supposed Nain to be in Judaea. lo-uSata here probably means
Palestine : see on iv. 44 and xxiii. 5. But even if we take it in the
YH. 17-10. J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 2OI
narrower sense of Judsea as distinct from Galilee, Samaria, and
Peraea, there is no need to attribute to Lk. any geographical in-
accuracy, "This saying went forth (from Nain and circulated)
in Judaea " ; i.e. it reached the headquarters of Christ's opponents.
For Trepl aurou COmp. V. 15.
This pregnant use of a prep, of rest after a verb of motion is perhaps
found only in late Grk., for in Thuc. iv. 42. 3 and Xen. Hellen. vii. 5. 10 the
readings vary between dr^eo-ciF and drfyraw. Comp. viii. 7, and see Win. L
4. a, p. 514.
KCU inScrT) -rfj irepixcupcp. Note the position of this clause, which
is added after Trepl avrov with augmented force: "and (what is
more) hi all the region round about"; i.e. round about "louSa/o,
not Nain. Comp. Acts xxvi. 23. The verse prepares the way for
the next incident by showing how the Baptist's disciples came to
hear about "all these things."
The evidence that Jesus raised ike dead is that of all four Gospels and of
primitive tradition. The fact seems to have been universally believed in the
early Church (Justin, AfoL i. 22. 48; Try. Ixir,; Orig. c. Cels. ii. 48).
Quadratus, one of the eailiest apologists, who addressed a defence of Christianity
to Hadrian A.D. 125, says in the only fragment of it which is extant, " But the
works of our Saviour were always present, for they were true ; those that were
healed and those that were raised from the dead, who were seen not only when
they were healed and when they were raised, but were also always present ; and
not merely while the Saviour was on earth, but also after His departure, they
were there for a considerable time, so that some of them lived even to our own
times " (Eus. H. E. iv. 3. 2). This does not mean that Quadratus had seen
any^ of them, but that there was abundance of opportunity, long after the event,
to inquire into the reality of these miracles. S. Paul uses the same kind of
argument respecting the resurrection of Christ (I Cor. xv. 5-8). Weiss points
out how unsatisfactory are all the attempts to explain the evidence on any
other hypothesis than the historical fact that Jesus raised the dead (Lebenjcsu 9
L pp. 557-565, Eng. tr. ii. 178-186). He concludes thus: "In no other
miracle did the grace of God, which appeared in His Messiah, manifest itself so
gloriously, by overcoming the consequences of sin and thereby giving a pledge
for the highest consummation of salvation." See Aug. In/oh. Trac. xlix. 2.
18-36. The message from the Baptist to the Christ Peculiar
to Lk. and Mt, who place it in different connexions, but assign to
it the same occasion, viz. that John had " heard in his prison the
works of the Christ " (ML xi. 2). Lk.'s narrative, as usual, is the
more full. He does not mention that John is in prison, having
already stated the fact by anticipation (iii, 20). The irepl irdvT<av
ro-urcov shows that the works reported to the Baptist include the
healing of the centurion's servant and the raising of the widow's son*
This is probably the true reading (B L R X, a fi^ Vulg.)
rather than rpb* rfo f lii<rovv (tf A X T, b c f). See on ver. 13*
10* Zd ct 6 cpx < 5f jtl ' o s ; ** Art Thou (in emphatic contrast to
Jrepov) He that cometh," Le. ^rhose coming is a matter of quite
notorious certainty (iiL 16, xiii. 35, xix. 38 ; Heb. x. 37).
202 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S LUKE [VH. 19-2L
?\ frepoy 7rpocr8oKoJ/i^; " Or must we lock for another, different
in kind ? " whereas <2AAov might be anothei of the same kind (Lft
on GaL i. 6, 7). The reading ercpoi/ (K B L R X H) is right, and is
not taken from Mt It is oAAov (A D) that is the corruption.
For the delib. subj. comp. iii. 10, 12, 14. See on iii. 15.
The meaning of the question thus sent to Christ has been
much discussed, i. Chrystostom and other Fathers have sug-
gested that the question was asked for the sake of John's disciples^
who needed strengthening or correcting in their beliefs. See
Oxford Library of the Fathers ', x. p. 267, note e. Luther, Calvin,
Beza, Grotius, Bengel, and others adopt this view. But the whole
context is against it. Christ's reply is addressed to John, not to
the disciples; and it is not clear that the disciples even under-
stood the message which they carried. 2. Weiss and other critics
follow Tertullian (Martion. iv. 18) in contending that John's own
faith was failing, because the career of Jesus did not seem to
correspond with what he and the people had expected, and with
what he had foretold (iii. 17). There is nothing incredible in this
view ; but the Baptist had had such a long and stern preparation
for his work, and had received such convincing evidence that Jesus
was the Messiah, that a failure in his faith is surprising. 3. Hase
and others suggest that he was not failing in faith, but in patience.
John was disappointed that Jesus did not make more progress,
and he wished to urge Him on to take a more prominent and
indisputable position. " If Thou do these things, manifest Thyself
unto the world." Perhaps John was also perplexed by the fact
that one who could work such miracles did not set His forerunner
free, nor " cleanse His threshing-floor " of such refuse as Antipas
and Herodias. This view suits the context better than the second,
John's sending to Jesus is strong evidence that he was not seriously
in doubt as to His Messiahship. For a false Christ would not
have confessed that he was false-; and what proof could the true
Christ give more convincing than the voice from heaven and the
visible descent of the Spirit ? 4. The view of Strauss, that John
had just begun to conjecture that Jesus is the Messiah, and that
therefore this narrative is fatal to the story of his having baptized
Jesus and proclaimed Him as the Messiah, is answered by
Hase (Gesch. Jesu^ 39, p. 388, ed. 1891). See also Hahn, i
P- 475-
21. flcpairerfciK diro. See on v. 15 : it is peculiar to Lk.
jicurnytav. "Distressing feodity diseases"; Mk. iii. 10, v. 29,
34. In LXX it is used of any grievous trouble, but not specially
of disease: Ps. xxxv. 15, Ixxxviii. 3z; Ecclus. xL 9; 2 Mac. viL
37 : comp. Horn. //. xii. 37, xiii. 8ii ; Aesch. Sept. 607 ; Ag. 64*.
The notion that troubles are Divine chastisements is implied in
the word. It is used literally Acts xxii. 24 and Heb. XL 36,
VH. 21-24.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 203
" He graciously bestowed, made a free present
of"; magnificum verbum (Beng.); comp. 2 Mac. iii. 31.
22. dirayyeiXaTe "!&><>et. See on viii. 20. The answer is ex-
pressly sent to John : there is no intimation that it is for the in-
struction of his disciples, who are sent back, " like the messenger
from-Gabii to Sextus Tarquinius," to relate a symbolical narrative,
which their master is to interpret. That they can understand it is
neither stated nor implied.
Tu4>Xol ai>af3\TTou<riv, K.r.X. There is probably a direct reference
to Is. xxxv. 5, 6, Ixi. i. It is clear, not only that Lk. and Mt
understand Jesus to refer to bodily and not spiritual healings, but
that they are right in doing so. John's messengers had not " seen
and heard" Christ healing the spiritually blind and the morally
leprous. Moreover, what need to add TH-G^OI eayyeXiovrcu, if all
that precedes refers to the preaching of the good tidings ? It is
unnatural to express the same fact, first by a series of metaphors,
and then literally. All the clauses should be taken literally. They
seem to be arranged in two groups, which are connected by /cat,
and in each group there is a climax, the strongest item of evidence
being placed last.
TTTwxol uaYY ^*' Ta " This was the clearest sign of His being
the Christ (Is, Ixi. i), as He Himself had declared at Nazareth (iv.
18-21). His miracles need not mean more than that He was "a
great Prophet " ; moreover, the Baptist had already heard of them.
But it was a new thing that the poor, whom the Greek despised
and the Roman trampled on, and whom the priest and the Levite
left on one side, should be invited into the Kingdom of God (vL
20). For the passive sense of euayyeA^ea-flcu comp. Heb. iv. 2, 6,
and see Win. xxxix. i. a, p. 326, and Fritzsche on Mt. vi. 4. For
evayeXXiov see on Rom. i. i.
23. ju,aK<pios, Not fta/ca/not, as it would have been if the
direct reference were to the disciples of John. It implies that
the Baptist had in some way found an occasion of stumbling in
Jesus (i.e. he had been wanting in faith, or in trust, or in patience) ;
and it also encourages him to overcome this temptation.
cncai>?>aXtor0$. Only here and xvii. 2 in Lk., but frequent in
Mt. and Mk, Tht verb combines the notions of " trip up " and
" entrap," and in N.T. is always used in the figurative sense of
" causing to sin." See on xvii. i. This record of a rebuke to the
Baptist is one of many instances of the candour of the Evangelists.
For 05 Idv see Greg. Proleg. p. 96, and Win. xli. 6, p. 390 ; this
use of lav for av is common in LXX and N.T. (xviL 33?; Mt. v.
19, 32, xii. 32, xviii 5 ; Jas. iv. 4).
24. irep! 'faxfrou. This is further evidence that the question and
answer just recorded concerned John himself. The people had
heard Jesus send a rebuke to the Baptist But He forthwith
204 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S LUKE [VIL 24-27.
guards them from supposing that John has ceased to be worthy of
reverence. He waits till his disciples are gone j because if they
had heard and reported Christ's praise of John to their master, it
might have cancelled the effect of the rebuke. This panegyric is
almost the funeral oration of the Baptist ; for soon after this he
was put to death. For ^piaro see on iv. 21.
Ti I^XBarc. In each of the three questions it is possible to put the
note of interrogation before the infinitive, and render, " Why went ye out ? to
behold ? " etc. But the order of the words favours the usual punctuation.
Perhaps QedracrQat, implies " behold " with wonder and admiration.
icdXa/jLo^ . . aaXcuojjicyoi'. The literal meaning makes ex-
cellent sense: "Did you go out into the wilderness to admire
what you would certainly find there, but which would have no
interest or attraction? Or did you go out to see what would no
doubt have been interesting and attractive, but which you were
not likely to find there ? " But it also makes good sense to in-
terpret, "Had John been a weak and fickle person, you would
not have made a pilgrimage to see him."
25. avQputrov iv /jiaXaicois. Such a person would not be found
in the wilderness; although he might have attracted them. This
seems to show that the KaXdpov is not metaphorical, for this is
obviously literal.
ot Iv ijjLaTto-|x eySo'^o) KCU Tpu<j>$ flircipxoi'Tes. " Those who live
in gorgeous apparel and luxury." The word t/xaricr/xo? is of late
origin, and is seldom used excepting of costly vesture (ix. 29 ;
Acts xx. 33 ; Jn. xix. 24 ; i Tim. ii. 9 ; Gen. xxiv. 53 ; Exod. iii.
22, xii 35 ; i Kings x. 5), See Trench, Syn. L For Ivbofy
comp. xiii. 17, and for uinfcpxoi/Tes see on viii. 41. In N.T. rpv<t>^
occurs only here and 2 Pet. ii. 13 ; in LXX only as v.L Lam. iv. 5.
But it is freq. in class. Grk. It means an enervating mode of life
(tfp-uTTTOjucu, " I am broken up and enfeebled ").
26. TreptcrCTOTepov irpo^Tou. This completes the climax : /caXa-
jttov, av#jOW7rov, TTpo^rrjv, -rrepwrcrorcpoy irpo^rov. In trepio-oroTepov
we have a late equivalent of xXeV. It may be masc. or neut,
but is probably neut, like irXttov in xi. 32. Comp. xii. 4, xx. 47.
They went out to see something more than a Prophet, and they
did see it.
27. This quotation from Malachi (iii. i) is given by Mk. at the
opening of his Gospel coupled with <f>a>^ fjowrros, K.T.X., and
attributed as a whole to Isaiah. Neither Heb. nor LXX has irpd
irpo0-ci)Trou o-ou, which Mt. ML and Lk. all insert in the first clause.
See on ix. 52. Moreover, they all three have aTroo-reXAco and
Karao-Kevdo-eL instead of the If aTrooreAAoo and iTrt/JXei^erat of LXX.
See on iv. 18. The passage was one of the common-places of
Messianic prophecy, and had been stereotyped in ar independent
Greek form before the Evangelists made use of it
VIL28.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 20$
28. *v yeynjToTs yu^cuKwy. A solemn periphrasis for the whole
human race ; that it implies weakness and frailty is not evident :
in Job xiv. i these qualities are expressed. It is human generation
as distinct from heavenly regeneration that is meant. John's
superiority lay, not in his personal character, but in his office and
mission : the glory of being the immediate forerunner of the
Messiah was unique. He was a Prophet, like Moses and Elijah ;
yet he not only prophesied, but saw and pointed out to others
Him of whom he prophesied. Lk. omits the Hebrew
The word Tpo0-^n?j is an interpolation. The external evidence against
it is immense (tf B K L M X H and most Versions), and it is improbable that
the possibility of Prophets outside Israel would be indicated.
6 8e jiiKpoTcpos. There is no need to make this a superlative,
as AV. alone among English Versions : better, " he that is in-
ferior," i.e. less than other members of the Kingdom, less than
any among the more insignificant. It is most unnatural to explain
6 fjLiKp6rpo$ of Christ. Chrysostom says, Trept lavrov Xeytm/ et/coro)?
/cpuTrrei TO TrpoVcoTrov Sta TTJV In Kparovcrav VTrovoiav /cat 8ta TO ^77
Sofcu Trept cavrov /icya rt Aeyeiv (Horn, xxxvil. p. 417), and above
he explains /xi/eporepos as Kara rrjv yhiKtav KCLI Kara ryv r&v TroAAaJv
Sofav (p. 416). Much the same view is taken by Hilary, Theophy-
lact, Erasmus, Luther, Fritzsche, and others. In that case & rrj
/fczcrtAetg. TOV eoi> must be taken after /xtcoi/, which is awkward ;
and we can hardly suppose that Jesus would have so perplexed
the people as to affirm that He was inferior to the Baptist, who in
all his teaching had enthusiastically maintained the contrary (iii.
16; Mt. iii. n; Mk. i. 7 j Jn. i. 15, 20, 27, 30, iii. 28-30). By
his office John belonged to the old dispensation ; he was its last
and highest product (major prophet^ quia finis prophetarum\ but
he belonged to the era of preparation. In spiritual privileges, in
grace, and in knowledge any even of the humbler members of the
Kingdom are superior to him. He is a servant, they are sons ; he
is the friend of the Bridegroom, they are His spouse. It is
possible to understand "Icuavov after /u*poTpos, but it is unnecessary:
more probably the comparative refers to others in the Kingdom.
The paradox, " He that is less than John is greater than John," is
capable of interpretation ; but the principle that the lower members
of a higher class are above the highest member of a lower class is
simpler. The superlative of /ti/cpos does not occur in N.T.
S9, 30. Many have supposed that these two verses are a
parenthetical remark of the Evangelist But a comment inserted
in the middle of Christ's words, and with no indication that it is
a comment, is without a parallel and improbable. Jn. iii. 16-21
and 31-36 are not parallel. There the question is whether com-
ment is added. In both passages it is probable that there is no
205 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VH. 28-31,
comment But, assuming that the Evangelist is in both cases
commenting, he appends his comment : he does not insert it into
the utterances of others. Here w. 29 and 30 are part of Christ's
address, who contrasts the effect which John's preaching had
upon the people and upon the hierarchy (see Schanz). The con-
nexion between ver. 30 and ver. 31 is close, as is shown by the o3j>.
29. -n-as 6 Xads dKouo-ag. " All the people, when they heard " the
preaching of the Baptist. Note the Tras, and see small print on i. 66.
tBiKat&xrav TO> edi>, pairriaO^rres. "Admitted the righteous-
ness of God (in making these claims upon them and granting them
these opportunities) by being baptized." Their accepting baptism
was an acknowledgment of His justice. See on ver. 35, and the
detached note on the word SIKCUOS and its cognates > Rom. i. 17.
30. ot i/ofuKou Lk. often uses this expression instead of ot
ypa/jLp.aTi$, which might be misleading to Gentile readers (x. 25,
xi. 45, 46, 52, xiv. 3). Elsewhere in N.T. the word occurs only
Mt. xxii. 35 ; Tit. iii. 9, 13. Comp. 4 Mac. v. 4 ; Corp. Inscr.
2787, 8.
rf|^ pouXTjy TOU 0eou TjO^njo-eu" els laurorfs. "They frustrated
the counsel of God concerning themselves " : comp. ts ^as in
i Thes. v. 1 8. The rendering, "for themselves, so far as they
were concerned, they rendered the counsel of God effectless,"
would require TO efe eavrovs. The verb is a strong one : " render
a$Tov, placeless, Inefficacious " (Gal. ii. 21, iii. 15 ; Jn. xii. 48 ; Lk*
x. 1 6). Free will enables each man to annul God's purpose for
his salvation. The phrase TY^ pouXyjy TOU 0eou is peculiar to Lk.
in N.T. (Acts xiii. 36, xx. 27 ; comp. ii. 23, iv. 28). It occurs
Wisd. vi. 4; comp. Ps. xxxii n, cvi. ii ; Prov. xix. 21. With y&\
comp. the case of Nicodemus (Jn. iii. 4, 5).
31. The spurious reading etTre W 6 KiJ/wos was interpolated at the be-
f'nning of this verse to mark vu. 29, 30 as a parenthetical remark of the
vangelist. Owing to the influence of the Vulgate the interpolation was
followed by all English Versions prior to RV. Almost all MSS. and ancient
versions omit the words. But their spuriousness must not be quoted as
evidence against the view which they support. Many false readings are
correct glosses upon the true text, although that is probably not the caie
here.
ofo 6jaoi<$<Tto. The ovv would not be very intelligible if
vv. 29, 30 were omitted; but after ver. 30 it is quite in place.
" Seeing that the rulers and teachers have rejected the Divine in-
vitation given by John, and that ye (A-cyere, ver. 34) follow them
in refusing to follow Me, to what, then, shall I liken the people of
this generation?" So comprehensive a phrase as rods d^peiirous
rrjs y*>ea$ TaJnf|s may include the Baptist and the Christ : and
to assume that it does include them frees the true interpretation
of the parable from seeming to be somewhat at variance with the
VH. 81-33.J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 2OJ
opening words. With the double question comp. xiii 18; Mk.
iv. 30.
02. There are two parties of children. This is more clearly
marked by rols Ire/sots in Mt. than by aXXyXots here. Which of
the two groups is blamed ? It has been taken both ways, (r) The
children who invite the second group to play, first at dances and
then at dirges, represent Jesus and the Baptist with their respective
followers. The children who waywardly refuse to join in any kind
of game are the Jews as represented by the hierarchy and the
majority of the people. These rejected both the asceticism of
John and the joyous freedom of the Gospel Godet infers from
dAA^Aois that the two groups of children change sides and take
turns hi proposing the form of play. But it is not necessary to
give so much meaning to dAA^Aois. Yet such a change would
not be difficult to interpret. The Jews may have proposed to the
Baptist to become less stem. They certainly tried to force fast-
ing on Jesus. And hence (2) the possibility of the other inter-
pretation, which is preferred by Euthymius, Stier, and Alford, and
is ably defended by Trench (Studies in the Gospels^ pp. 150-153).
The children sitting in the market-place and finding fault with
their fellows are the Jews. John comes to them in his severity,
and they want him to play at festivals. When he retains his strict
mode of life, they complain and say, " We piped to you, and you
did not dance." Then Christ comes to them as the bringer of
joy, and they want Him to play at funerals. When He retains
His own methods, they say, " We wailed, and you did not weep."
This interpretation has two advantages. It makes the men of
this generation, viz. the Jews, to be like the children who cry, " We'
piped," etc. And it gives the two complaints a chronological
order. " We piped," etc., is a complaint against the Baptist, who
came first ; " We wailed," etc., is a complaint against the Christ,
who came afterwards*
With Ka0t]j^i/ois comp. v. 27; with dyop& Mk. vi. 56; with
TrpocnJjwi/oGcru' dXX^Xot?, Acts xxiL 2 ; with T]flX^<rajj,ev, I Cor. xiv. 7 ;
with (Spxifaao^c, 2 Sam. vL 21 ; with eOpuj^o-ajmeK, Jn. xvi. 20. Of
these irpoo-<l>tt)Viv is a favourite word : see on vi. 13. Both Optjvetr
and itXcueu' refer to the outward manifestation of grief as distinct
from the feeling ; and here the outward expression only is needed.
88. ^ ?<rOwv ctproK JJ^TC Ttivw ofrov. "Without eating bread
or drinking wine " ; spoken from the point of view of these who
objected to John, He did not take the ordinary food of mankind ;
and so Mt says, " neither eating nor drinking." For tne poetic
form cr0o) see on x. 7.
AaifwSiaoK ?x l * They afterwards said the same of Jesus (Jn.
yii 20, viii. 48, x. 20) ; and Stupovtov c^as shows that Saipwtov
is ace* and not nom- Renan compares the Arabic Medjnoun enti
208 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VH. 33-35.
as showing that Orientals consider all madness to be possession by
a demon (V. dej. p. 263). See on iv. 33. One regrets that the
American Revisers did not carry their point in getting " demon *
substituted for " devil " as the rendering of Sat/xoi/iov. Tyn. Cov.
and Cran. make great confusion by translating " hath the devil.**
Wic. is better with "hath a fende." The Xeyere in w. 33 and 34
shows that some of those censured are present Comp. xi. 1 5, where
Jesus is accused of casting out demons with the help of Beelzebub.
34. ^Y 05 * Like ob>or<$ri?j, this is a subst. and therefore paroxytone :
<pa,yfa 9 which L. and S. give, would be an adj. See Chandler, Greek Ae
centttation, 215. Latin Versions vary between devorator (Vulg. ), vorator (q),
wax (c e), manducator (d). English Versions vary between "devourer"
(Wic.), " glutton" (Tyn. Cov.), "gurmander" (Rhem.), and "gluttonous
man" (Cran. AV. RV.). The ref. is to v. 33 and similar occasions. For
<f>E\of Tf\wv&j> see v. 27, 29, 30.
35. Kal eSucaicSOiQ rj cro<|>ia. "And yet wisdom was justified."
In N.T. Kal often introduces a contrast, which is placed side by
side with that with which it is contrasted : " and (instead of what
might be expected), and yet." This is specially common in Jn.
(i. 5, 10, iii. n, 32, v. 39, 40, vi. 36, 43, 70, vii. 28, etc.). Atque
sometimes has the same force ; Cic. De Off. iii. n. 48. Although
the Jews as a nation rejected the methods both of John and of
Christ, yet there were some who could believe that in both these
methods the Divine wisdom was doing what was right
iSiKaioSOrj. This looks back to cStfcataxrav in ver. 29, and ij
<ro<ia looks back to rty /SotA^v TOV o in ver, 30. Here, as in
Rom. iii. 4 (Ps. li. 6), &/caioo> means " Show or pronounce to be
righteous, declare or admit to be just" The analogy of verbs in
-ota is often wrongly urged. An important distinction is sometimes
overlooked. In the case of external qualities, such verbs do mean
to " make or render? whatever the noun from which they are de-
rived signifies (ip^ou, ru<jSAoa>, xP vcr ^ K.r.A.). But in the case
of moral qualities this is scarcely possible, and it may be doubted
whether there is a passage in which SiKaio'co clearly means "I
make righteous." Similarly, dioo> never means " I make worthy,"
but " I consider worthy, treat as worthy." In the case of words
which might apply to either external or moral qualities both mean-
ings are possible ace. to the context: thus 6//,ofo> may mean
either "make like," e.g. make an image like a man (Eur. Hel. 33,
comp. Acts xiv. n; Rom. ix. 29), or "consider like, compare"
(ver. 31, xiii. 18, 20),
In &cjccuc&0q we perhaps have an example of what is sometimes called the
pomic aorist Comp. Jn, xr. 6; Jas. i. n, 34; i Pet L 24. Burton,
1 43. But see Win. xL b. I, p. 346, where the existence of this aorist in
N.T. is denied.
A5 tdrmv TWK T&WK aurijs. " At the hands of all her diit
ra.85.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 2O9
dren": the justification comes from them. It is certainly incorrect
to interpret axo as implying rescuing or protecting "from the
attacks of all her children," viz. from the Jews. The children of
the Divine Wisdom are the faithful minority who have welcomed
the Baptist and the Christ, not the unbelieving majority who re-
jected them. In Mt xi. 19 there is no Travreov, and DLMX
omit it here. But it is certainly genuine : see on vi. 30. In A P H
irdvrw is placed last with emphasis : there are no exceptions.
But the order of tf B is to be preferred. Mt. has epywv for re/cvcov,
and tf has epywv here. For the personification of the Wisdoftn of
God comp. Prov. viii., ix. ; Ecclus. xxiv, ; Wisd. vi. 22-ix, 18.
36-50. The Anointing by the Woman that was a Sinner.
Without note of time or express connexion. The connexion
apparently is that she is an illustration of ver. 35. The proposal
to identify this anointing with that by Mary of Bethany just before
the Passion (Mt. xxvi. 6 ; Mk. xiv. 3 ; Jn. xii. 3) is ancient, for
Origen on Mt xxvi. 6 contends against it ; and it still has sup-
porters. Thus Holtzmann is of opinion that the act of a " clean "
person in the house of " an unclean " (Simon the leper) has been
changed by Lk. into the act of an " unclean " person in the house
of a " clean " (Simon the Pharisee), in order to exhibit the way in
which Christ welcomed outcasts, a subject which Lk. often makes
prominent. But the confusion of Mary of Bethany with a
notorious dyu,apra>Ao? by Lk., who knows the character of Mary
(x. 39, 42), is scarcely credible. And there is nothing improbable
in two such incidents. Indeed the first might easily suggest the
second. Simon is one of the commonest of names (there are
ten or eleven Simons in N.T. and about twenty in Josephus), and
therefore the identity of name proves nothing. Moreover, there
are differences of detail, which, if not conclusive, are against the
identification. The chief objection is the irreconcilable difference
between Mary of Bethany and the d/AaprcoAos. Strauss and Baur
suggest a confusion with the woman taken in adultery. But the
narrative betrays no confusion : everything is clear and harmonious.
The conduct both of Jesus and of the woman is unlike either
fiction or clumsily distorted fact. His gentle severity towards
Simon and tender reception of the sinner, are as much beyond the
reach of invention as the eloquence of her speechless affection.
On the traditional, but baseless, identification of the woman
with Mary of Magdala see on viii. 2. The identification of this
woman with both Mary of Magdala and Mary of Bethany is ad-
vocated by Hengstenberg. His elaborate argument is considered
a tour de force, but it has not carried conviction with it. The
potest non eadem esse of Ambrose is altogether an understate-
ment It is probably from considerations of delicacy that Luke
does not name her : or his source may have omitted to do so.
14
210 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VH. 35-87.
The leading thought in the narrative is the contrast between
Pharisees and sinners in their behaviour to Christ.
80. 'HpoSra S^ TIS afcov TWK 3>apuraiwi/ Iva ^ayfl p.er s auroo. There is
nothing to show that the Pharisee had any sinister motive in asking
Him, although he was evidently not very friendly. As the Pharisees
were generally hostile to Christ, it may have been a courageous
thing. He is inclined to believe that Jesus may be a Prophet
(ver. 39) ; and Jesus rebukes him as one who loved little, not as a
secret enemy. But, like Herod Antipas, he may simply have been
curious. Lk. records two other instances of Christ being the
guest of a Pharisee (xi. 37, xiv. i). For Iva see on iv. 3, and comp.
vi. 31, vii. 6 ; and for KaTexAi^ (tf B D L X H) see on ix. 14.
37. Kal ISou yuH) YJTIS rjy. The opening words imply that her
presence created surprise. The ^TIS is stronger than 17 and has
point here : " who was of such a character as to be " : comp. viii. 3.
This is the right order, and iv rfj iroXet follows, not precedes, ^ns
fy ( B L H and most Versions). The exact meaning is not quite
clear : either, " which was a sinner in the city," Le. was known as
such in the place itself; or possibly, "which was in the city, a
sinner." The city is probably Capernaum.
d/jLccpTuXos. A person of notoriously bad character, and prob-
ably a prostitute : comp. Mt xxi. 32. For instances of this use
of d/iajoTwXos see Wetst. To the Jews all Gentiles were in a special
sense a/xaprwXot (vi. 32, 33, xxiv. 7; Gal. ii. 15; i Mac. ii. 44);
but something more than this is evidently meant here. The fy
need not be pressed to mean, " She was even up to this time "
(Alf.) ; nor does aaessit ad Dominum immunda, ut rediret munda
(Aug.) imply this. The rjv expresses her public character : ty kv ry
TToAet. She had repented (perhaps quite recently, and in conse-
quence of Christ's teaching); but the general opinion of her
remained unchanged. Her venturing to enter a Pharisee's house
in spite of this shows great courage. In the East at the present
day the intrusion of uninvited persons is not uncommon (Trench,
Parables, p. 302 n. ; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands,
p. 36). Mary of Bethany was not an intruder. Note the
idiomatic pres. KaraKetrai : just equivalent to our " He is dining
with me to-day," meaning that he will do so.
d\dt|3acrTpo (wfpou. Unguent-boxes or phials were called dAa-
fiao-rpa even when not made of alabaster. But unguenta optima
servantur in alabastris (Plin. N. H. xiii. 3, xxxvL I a ; comp.
Hdt. iii. 20. i). See Wetst. on Mt xxvi. 6.
The word is of all three genders in different writers ; but in dass. Grk.
the sing, is AXdpcurrpos, either masc. or fern. The origin of fi&pov is unknown,
jtitfpw, /Ai/ppa, <rjurf/>va, ptpros being conjectures. In N.T. certainly, and prob-
ably in LXX also, /w//3w, ** ointment," is distinguished from \cuov t " oiL M
Trench, Syn> aucxviii
VIL 88-40.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 211
38. crratra oTrtcra) irapcl rods iroSas aurou. The sandals were
removed at meals, and people reclined with their feet behind
them ; she could therefore easily approach the feet WhT " I ^
writes TraparousTTo'Sas (viii. 35, 41, x. 39, xvii. 16 ; Acts Iv. 35,
37, v. 2, 10, vii. 58, xxii. 3), Mk. has ?rpos rous^r-oSa? (v. 22, vii. 25),
and Jn. fits rovs TroSas (xi. 32). Mt. has Trapa To-ug -TroSa? (xv. 30).
rots 8dKpucrii> -?jpaTO j3p^x LJ/ TO <JS TroSas aurou KCXL rcus 6pii>,
K.T.X. This was no part of her original plan. She came to anoint
His feet, and was overcome by her feelings; hence the rjpgaro.
The /Spexftv led to the e^e/tao-cra/, which was also unpremeditated.
Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down
her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice. For ppe'x*^
comp. Ps. vi. 7 : it is probably a vernacular word (Kennedy,
Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 39).
KCU Ka,T<f>iXei. Note the compound verb and the change of
tense : " She continued to kiss affectionately." The word is used
of the kiss of the traitor (Mt. xxvi. 49 ; Mk. xiv. 45), which was
demonstrative, of the prodigal's father (Lk. xv. 20), and of the
Ephesian elders in their last farewell (Acts xx. 37), and nowhere
else in N.T. Comp. Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 33. Kissing the feet was a
common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading Rabbis
(Xen. Cyr. vii. 5. 32 ; Polyb. xv. i. 7 ; Aristoph. Vesp. 608).
39. TTpo^TTjs. Referring to the popular estimate of Jesus
(vv. r 6, 17). The OUTOS is contemptuous. No true Prophet would
knowingly allow himself to be rendered unclean by contact with
such a person. The reading 6 wpo^^n/s (B H) would mean " the
great Prophet" of Deut xviii. 15 (comp. Jn. L 25, vii. 40), or
possibly "the Prophet that He professes to be." The art is
accepted by Weiss, bracketed by WH., put in the margin by Treg.,
and rejected by Tisch.
TIS Kal iroTaTr}] if] ^wr^ ^ns aiTTTai auTou. " Who and of what
character is the woman who is clinging to Him," She was notori-
ous both in person and in life. See on i. 29. The a-m-erai implies
more than mere touching, and is the pres. of continued action.
Trench, Syn. xvii.; Lft. on Col. ii. 21. Imo si fu 9 Simon^ stires^
qualis h&c jam esset femina^ aliter judicares (Beng.). The on
comes after cytvcocr/cey : " that she is," not " because she is." See on
ver. 1 6, and comp. Is. Ixv. 5.
40. diroKpi0Ls 6 'Injo-ous. Audimt Pharis&um cogitantem (Aug.
Serm. xcix.). Jesus not only answered but confuted his doubts,
Simon questioned the mission of Jesus because He seemed to be
unable to read the woman's character. Jesus shows Simon that
He can read his inmost thoughts : He knows T& /cat TroraTros ecn-6.
For cx<0 <ro i TI ctirciK see on xiL 4. Christ asks permission of His
host to speak. As Godet remarks, there is a tone of Socratic irony
in the address. The historic present (^cnV) is very rare in Lk.
212 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [YH.
41. Avo xpeo$i.Xrai, TJcrav Savtcrrfl TtvL For the orthography of the two
substantives see WH. ii. App. p. 154; Greg. Proleg. p. 89. In N.T.
Xpeo<pL\(?Tijs occurs only here and xvi. 5 ; in LXX Job xxxi. 37 ; Prov. xxix. 13.
The word is of late origin. All English Veisions, except Rhem. and AV.,
rightly have "lender" and not "creditor" for BavLa-r^s : Vulg. f&nerator,
Luth. Wucherer. In weight of silver the denarius was considerably less than
a shilling ; in purchasing power it was about two shillings, the wage of a day-
labourer (Mt. xx. 2) and of a Roman soldier (Tac. Ann* i. 17. 8, where see
Furneaux). The two debts were about $o and
42. fjLYj iy6vruv aurwy diroSourau " Because they had not where-
with to pay ; ' ; non habentibus illis unde redderent (Vulg.). Comp.
xii. 4, xiv. 14 ; Acts iv. 14. Others render lyziv in these passages
"to be able," like habeo quod with the subjunctive. In exapio-aro,
" he made them a present " of what they owed, we trace the Pauline
doctrine of free grace and salvation for all. Comp. ver. 21.
TIS ouv auTwy irXeioK dycurqcrci; This is the point of the parable,
and perhaps the only point. The love and gratitude of those who
have had debts remitted to them depends upon their estimate of
the amount which has been remitted to them rather than upon the
actual amount.
43. YiroXajxprfKO). "I suppose," "I presume," with an air of
supercilious indifference. Comp. Acts ii. 15; Job xxv. 3; Tobit
vi. 1 8 ; Wisd. xvii. 2. It is very improbable that &n"oXa^,/3ai/a> here
means "I reply," as in x. 30; Job ii. 4, iv* i, vi. i, ix. i, xxv. i.
In N.T. it is almost peculiar to Lk. The 'Op9ws eKpims may be
compared with the iraw 6pQ&<s of Socrates, when he has led the
disputant into an admission which is fatal. In N.T. 6p6&<s occurs
only here, x. 28, xx. 21 ; Mk. vii, 35. Freq. in LXX. Comp. OVK
wpLvare op&Ss (Wisd. vi. 4).
44. crrpa<J>el$ irpos T^J^ yui/atica. She was behind Him. His
turning to her while He spoke to Simon was in itself half a rebuke.
Up to this He seems to have treated her as He treated the
Syrophenician woman, as if paying no attention. The series of
contrasts produces a parallelism akin to Hebrew poetry, and in
translating a rhythm comes almost spontaneously.
BX^TTCLS TauTKji/ TTJI> yvva.LK.Qt, ; This is probably a question : Simon
had ignored her presence. The crou being placed before els T^K
OIKUXV gives point to the rebuke, but it hardly makes the crou em-
phatic. An enclitic cannot be emphatic, and <rov here is enclitic.
The meaning is not " I entered into thine house," in preference
to others; but rather, "I came to thee in thy house," and not
merely in the public street ; " I was thy invited guest."
u8ot>p jxoi lirl Tr<$8a$. Comp. Gen. xviii. 4; Judg. xix. 21; i Sam.
xxv, 41 ; Jn. xiii. 5 ; i Tim. v. 10. The reading is somewhat un-
certain, and there are many variations between //m and pov, wooas
and rovs iroSas, and also of order : /x,ov CTT* TOVS TroSas (tt L B) may
be right
VII. 45-47.J THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 213
45. 4>i\ir]fjia. Comp. Gen. xxxiii. 4 ; Exod. xviii. 7 ; 2 Sam.
rv, 5, xix. 39, xx. 9. The traitor's choosing it as a sign seems to
mark it as usual.
d<j>* rjs el<njX0o>. The reading elcrrjXOev (L 1 Vulg.) is an attempt
to avoid the apparent exaggeration in "since the time I came in."
But there need be no exaggeration, or difference of meaning, be-
tween the two readings. The woman very likely entered with
Christ and His disciples in order to escape expulsion. Fear of it
would make her begin to execute her errand directly the guests
were placed. The compound KaracfjiXouo-a makes the contrast with
<t>L\-rjpa more marked, and TOUS -roSas makes it still more so. The
^iKrjfjLOi would have been on the cheek, or possibly (if Simon had
wished to be very respectful) on the hand.
46. eXcuw. Very cheap in Palestine, where olives abound, and
very commonly used (Ps. xxiii. 5, cxli. 5 ; Mt. vi. 1 7). The pvw
would be more valuable, and possibly very costly (Jn. xii. 3, 5).
This woman, whom Simon so despised in his heart, had really
done the honours of the house to his guest. This fact would be
all the more prominent if she entered close after Jesus, and thus
at once supplied Simon's lack of courtesy.
47. This is a verse which has been the subject of much contro-
versy. What is the meaning of the first half of it ? We have to
choose between two possible interpretations. i. "For which
reason, I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven, because
she loved much " j i.e. ou \dpiv anticipates on, and X^yw "o i is paren-
thetical. Her sins have been forgiven for the reason that her love
was great ; or her love won forgiveness. This is the interpretation
of Roman Catholic commentators (see Schanz), and the doctrine
of contritio caritate formata is built upon it. But it is quite at
variance (a) with the parable which precedes ; (&) with the second
half of the verse, which ought in that case to run, "but he who
loveth little, wins little forgiveness " ; (c) with ver. 50, which states
that it was faith^ not love, which had been the means of salvation ;
a doctrine which runs through the whole of the N.T. This cannot
be correct. 2. " For which reason I say to thee, her many sins
have been forgiven (and I say this to thee), because she loved
much " } i.e. Xey<o <rot is not parenthetical, but is the main sentence.
This statement, that her many sins have been forgiven, is rightly
made to Simon, because he knew of her great sinfulness, he had
witnessed her loving reverence, and he had admitted the principle
that the forgiveness of much produces much love. This interpreta-
tion is quite in harmony with the parable, with the second half of
the verse, and with ver. 50. There were two things evident, the
past sin and the present love, both of them great A third might
be known, because (according to the principle just admitted) it
explained how great love could follow great sin, the forgiveness
214 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VII. 47-50,
of the sin. Remissio peccatorum^ Simoni non cogitata^ probata a
fructu, qui est evidens, quum ilia sit occult a (Beng).
at djjiapTiai aurJjs at iroXXau The second art. refers to v. 39 :
" The many sins of which thou thinkest." " Her sins, yes (accord-
ing to thy estimate), her many sins."
J Se 6Xiyoi> apteral. " But he to whom little is forgiven," /.<?. who
thinks that he has committed little which could need forgiveness.
It is said with evident reference to Simon. O Pharis&e^ parum
diligis^ quia parum tibi dimitti suspicaris ; non quia parum dimit-
titur, sed quia parum putas quod dimittitur (Aug. Serm. xcix.). For
this use of the dat comp. Soph. Ant 904.
48. clrrey 8e aujfj. What He had to say to Simon (ver. 40) is
finished : it is His true entertainer (44-46) who now occupies His
attention.
d4>eo)rrai. " Have been and remain forgiven " : see on v. 20.
There is nothing either in the word or in the context to show that
her sins were not forgiven until this moment : the context implies
the opposite, and this is confirmed by the use of the perf. Augus-
tine's accessit ad Dominum immunda, ut rediret munda is in this
respect misleading. The teaching of Christ had brought her to
repentance and to assurance of forgiveness, and this assurance had
inspired her with love and gratitude. Jesus now confirms her
assurance and publicly declares her forgiveness. He thus lends
His authority to rehabilitate her with society.
49. Xe'yeiy ef laurois. " To say within themselves " rather than
among themselves ; so that Jesus answered their thoughts, as He
had already answered Simon's. The OUTOS is slightly contemptu-
ous, as often (v. 21 ; Mt. xiii. 55 ; Jn. vi. 42, 52, etc.). The K<U
in os KCX! djjiapTias &$lr\viv is "even" rather than "also." It is
difficult to see the point of " also."
50. enrei/ Se -rrpos rty yurauta. "But He said unto the woman."
He ignored their objection, and yet indirectly answered it, by telling
her that it was her faith that had delivered her from her sins.
Tropeuou els elpr\vv}v. "Depart into peace," i.e. into a lasting
condition of peace : a Hebrew formula of blessing and of good-
will, with special fulness of meaning. Comp. viii. 48 ; Mk. v. 34 ;
i Sam. i. 17, xx. 42. In Acts xvi. 36 and Jas. ii. 16 we have ev
clpyvy, which is less strong, the peace being joined to the moment
of departure rather than to the subsequent life: comp. Judg.
xviii. 6. In Acts xv. 33 we have /ACT"
Among the various points which distinguish this anointing from that by Mary
of Bethany should be noted that here we have no grumbling at the waste of tEe
ointment and no prediction of Christ's death, while there no absolution is pro-
nounced and Mary is not addressed. See Hase, Gesch, f. 91, p. 651, edL
1891 ; also Schanz, p. 250, at the end of this section.
VIII. 1-3. The ministering Women, This section is
VTCL 1, &] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 21$
evidence of the excellence of Lk.'s sources. The information
contained in it is exact and minute. The names and other details
are utterly unlike fiction. An inventor would avoid such things
as likely to be refuted : moreover, no motive for invention can be
discerned. The passage tells us what no other Evangelist
makes known how Jesus and His disciples lived when they
were not being entertained by hospitable persons. The common
purse (Jn. xiii. 29; comp. xii. 6) was kept supplied by the
generosity of pious women. This form of piety was not rare.
Women sometimes contributed largely towards the support of
Rabbis, whose rapacity in accepting what could ill be spared was
rebuked by Christ (xx. 47; Mt xxiii. 13; Mk. xii. 40) with great
severity*
1* Kal yvTo iv TU KaGefijs KCU auros SuiSSeucp. See detached
note p. 45, and comp. v. i, 12, 14: for iv TW Ka9ef)$ see small
print on vii. n. The avros anticipates /ecu ol ScuSexo, " He Himself
and the Twelve." But the /cat before avros comes after eyo/cro
and must not be coupled with the KCU before 01 SwSe/ca. In N.T.
SioSeuQ) occurs only here and Acts xvii, i, but it is freq. in LXX
(Gen. xii. 6, xiii. 17, etc.); also in Polyb. Plut. etc. Comp. ix. 6,
xiii. 22.
Kara ir<5\iK KCU KCXT& KcSfM}?. Ne quis Jud&us pr&teritum se queri
posset (Grotius), Jesus preached city by city (Acts xv. 21) and
village by village. The clause is amphibolous. It probably is
meant to go with SitoScve, but may be taken with Kypvcrcr<*)v /cat
tvayy. The incidental way in which the severity of Christ's
labours is mentioned is remarkable. Comp. ix. 58, xiii. 22 ; Mt
ix. 35 ; Mk. vi. 31. For euaYysX^H^os see on ii. 10. We are
not to understand that the Twelve preached in His presence, if at
all. Note the o-Jv (not JU-CTO), and see on w. 38, 51, and i. 56.
2. Trfcu'paTOH' Tronrjpwi'. See on iv. 33. We cannot tell how
many of these women had been freed from demons : perhaps only
Mary Magdalen, the others having been cured aarb ao-Qweiw. For
the dTT<5 comp, v. 15, vii. 21.
$ KaXoujm^nrj MaySaXif]^. See on vi. 15. The adj. probably
means " of Magdala," a town which is not named in N.T. ; for the
true reading in Mt. xv. 39 is " Magadan," " Magdala is only the
Greek form of Migdol^ or watch-tower, one of the many places of
the name in Palestine" (Tristram, Bible Places^ p. 260); and it is
probably represented by the squalid group of hovels which now
bear the name of Mejdel^ near the centre of the western shore of
ihe lake. Magdala was probably near to Magadan, and being
much better known through ^ MaySaA.^, at last it drove the
latter name out of the common text. See Stanley, Sin. 6* Pal.
p. 382. Mary being a common name, the addition of something
distinctive was convenient \ and possibly a distinction from Mary
216 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VTTL 2, &
of Bethany was specially designed by the Evangelists. Mary
Magdalen is commonly placed first when she is mentioned with
other women (Mt. xxvii. 56, 61, xxviii. i ; Mk. xv. 40, 47, xvi. i ;
Lk. xxiv. 10). Jn. xix. 25 is an exception. See on i. 36.
d<j> s rjs 8ai/i6i>ia ITTT& ee\Y)Xu'0i. This fact is mentioned in the
disputed verses at the end of Mk. (xvi. 9). It indicates a pos-
session of extraordinary malignity (Mk. v. 9). We need not give
any mystical interpretation to the number seven: comp. xi. 26;
Mt. xii. 25. There is nothing to show that demoniacs generally,
or Mary in particular, had lived specially vicious lives : and the
fact that no name is given to the d/AaprwXos in the preceding
section, while Mary Magdalen is introduced here as an entirely
new person, is against the traditional identification of the two.
Moreover, such an affliction as virulent demoniacal possession
would be almost incompatible with the miserable trade of prosti-
tution. If Lk. had wished to intimate that the a^aproXos is Mary
Magdalen, he could have done it much more clearly. Had he
wished to conceal the fact, he would not have placed these two
sections in juxtaposition. Had he wished to withhold the name
of the dyaapro)A.os, who may possibly be included among the Irepcu
TToXAat, he would have done as he has done. The d/xaprtoXos and
Mary Magdalen and Mary of Bethany are three distinct persons.
3. 'Iwd^a. She is mentioned with Mary Magdalen again
xxiv. 10 : all that we know about her is contained in these two
passages. Godet conjectures that Chuza is the fiacriXiKos, who
" believed and his whole house" (Jn. iv. 46-53). In that case her
husband would be likely to let her go and minister to Christ The
Herod meant is probably Antipas, and his emrpoiros would be the
manager of his household and estates : comp. Mt xx. 8. Blunt
finds here a coincidence with Mt xiv. 2; Herod "said to his
servants^ This is John the Baptist" If Herod's steward's wife was
Christ's disciple, He would often be spoken of among the servants
at the court; and Herod addresses them, because they were
familiar with the subject. Comp. the case of Manaen (Acts xiii. i),
Herod's <nWpo<os (Undesigned Coincidences, Pt IV. XL p. 263,
8th ed.). Of Susanna nothing else is known, nor of the other
women, unless Mary, the mother of James and Joses, and Salome
(Mk. xv. 40) may be assumed to be among them.
aiTii/es SujK^ouy aurois. "Who were of such a character as to
minister to them " ; i.e. they were persons of substance. For -fJTif
see on vii. 37, and for SiaKoyelp comp. Rom, xv. 25. The avrots
means Jesus and the Twelve, the reading avr& (A L M X) being
probably a correction from Mt. xxvii. 55 ; Mk. xv. 41. But avrots
has special point It was precisely because Jesus now had twelve
disciples who always accompanied Him, that there was need of
*.uitt support from other
V3XL 8, 4.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 217
* TWI> 5'irapx<$T<*>' aural?. It is this which distinguishes this
passage from Mt xxvii. 55 and Mk. xv. 41. There the SL<LKOVV
might refer to mere attendance en Him* We learn from this that
neither Jesus nor the Twelve wrought miracles for their own
support
Here, as in xii. 15 and Acts iv, 32, ri fa&pxovra, has the dat. Every-
where else in Lk. (xi. 21, rii. 33, 44, xiv. 33, xvi. i, xix. 8) and elsewhere
in N.T. (five times) it has the gen. So also in LXX the gen. is the rule, the
dat the exception, if it is the true reading anywhere. Both rd tiirdpxoj'Ta
and ftrdpxet'* are favourite expressions with Lk. See on ver. 41,
4-18. The Parable of the Sower. Mt xiii. 1-23; Mk.
iv. 1-20. We have already had several instances of teaching by
means of parables (v. 36-39, vi. 39, 41-44* 47~49 viL 41, 4 2 ) >
but they are brief and incidental. Parables seem now to become
more common in Christ's teaching, and also more elaborate.
This is intelligible, when we remember the characteristics of
parables. They have the double property of revealing and con-
cealing. They open the truth, and impress it upon the minds of
those who are ready to receive it : but they do not instruct, though
they may impress, the careless (ver. 10). As Bacon says of a
parable, " it tends to vail, and it tends to illustrate a truth." As the
hostility to His teaching increased, Jesus would be likely to make
more use of parables, which would benefit disciples without giving
opportunity to His enemies. The parable of the Sower is in some
respects chief among the parables, as Christ Himself seems to
indicate (Mk. iv. 13). It is one of the two which all three record,
the other being the Wicked Husbandmen : and it is one of which
we have Christ's own interpretation.
,4. SlWoWoS 0* 0)(XOU TTOXXOU KCtl T&V KdTCl TToXlP ImiTOpeUOjXCl'WI' TT.
<XUT. The constr. is uncertain, and we have choice of two ways,
according as the KCU is regarded as simply co-ordinating, or as
epexegetic. i. "And when a great multitude was coming
together, and they of every city were resorting to Him." 2.
"And when a great multitude was coming together, namely \ of
those who city by city were resorting to Him." According to 2,
the multitude consisted wholly of those who were following from
different towns (ver. i). As no town is named, there was perhaps
no crowd from the place itself. In any case the imperf. part.
should be preserved in translation. It was the growing multitude
which caused Him to enter into a boat (Mt xiii. 2 ; Mk. iv. i).
See on xL 29. Except Tit. i. 5,Kara7roAivis peculiar to Lk.
The Latin Versions vary greatly: conveniente autem turba magna ti
eorum qui ex ciuitatibus adveniebant dixit parabolam (a) ; conwniente autem
turba multa et qui de singulis civitatibus exibant dixit #. (c) ; congregate
populo muUo et ad civitatem tier faciebant ad eum dixit gar&bolam
ad MS (d); tta* pt&m turbaplurima tonvenitet ei de civitatibw i>ro'
21 8 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ VIII. 4-7.
perarent ad cum dixit per similitudinem (Vulg.) ; cum autem tzirba plurima
convenisset (crwA^o^ros, D) et dt civitatibus advenirent multi dixit pc?
similititdinem (Cod. Brix.).
Stct -n-apapoXtfc. The expression occurs nowhere else.
Mt and Mk. write kv 7rapa/3o\ai$ Aeyeti/ or AaAea/, while Lk. has
7rapa/3o\.r]i> etTretv or Aeyeti/. See on iv. 23, v. 36, and vi. 39 ; and
on the parable itself see Gould on Mk. iv. i rT.
5. efl\0> 6 o-rreipwy. So in all three accounts : " The sower
went forth." The force of the article is "he whose business it is
to sow " : he is the representative of a class who habitually have
these experiences. Rhem. has "the sower" in all three places,
Cran. in Mt. and Mk., Cov. hi Mt. For the pres. part, with the
article used as a substantive comp. iii. n, v. 31, vi. 29, 30, ix. 2,
II, x. 1 6 9 etc. There is solemnity in the repetition, 6 o-n-eipwv rot)
o-TTCipat TOI/ crTropoj/. The comparison of teaching with sowing is
frequent in all literature ; but it is possible that Jesus here applies
what was going on before their eyes. See the vivid description of
a startling coincidence with the parable in Stanley, Sin. 6r* Pal.
p. 425.
ei/ TO> cnreipcn' auToi>, " During his sowing, while he sowed " :
a-urdV is subj., not obj., and refers to 6 cnretpw, not rov cnropov.
See on iii. 21. Note the graphic change of prepositions: irapa
rfy 5SOV (Ver. 5), 7rl TT)V TTGTpaV (VCH 6), V ftCT<t) (VCH 7), $$ T^V
yrjv (ver. 8). In this verse Lk. has three features which are
wanting in Mt. and Mk. : rov tnropov, /cat /careTrarT^, and TOV
ovpavov.
irapct T^V &6v. Not "along the way," but "by the side of the
way." It fell on the field, but so close to the road that it was
trampled on.
Both Lk. and Mk. here have p^r followed by ml :
Comp. Mk. ix. 12. The absence of 84 after fUr is freq. in Acts, Pauline
Epp., and Heb.
6. iir! T$\V Trlrpaf. The rock had a slight covering of soil ; and
hence is called TO Trcrp&Ses (Mk.) and ra TrerpojS^ (Mt.), which does
not mean " stony ground," i.e. full of stones, but " rocky ground,"
i.e. with rock appearing at intervals and with "no depth of earth."
The thinness of the soil would cause rapid germination and rapid
withering ; but Lk omits the rapid growth. With fyuiv comp. Prov.
xxvi. 9 ; Exod. x. 5 ; and (for the constr.) Lk. iL 4. For iKjJw8a,
"moisture," Mt and Mk. have />(av. The word occurs Jer.
xvii. 8 ; Job xxvi. 14 ; Jos. Ant. iii. i. 3 ; but nowhere else in N.T.
7. & fA&ro) r<Sv djcayQwv. The result of the falling was that it
was in the midst of the thorns : prep, of rest after a verb of
motion: comp. vii. 16. Lk- is fond of ^v fic<r<j> (ii. 46, x. 3, xxL
VEX 7-10.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 219
21, xxii. 27, 55, xxiv. 36; Acts i. 15, etc.). Elsewhere it is rare,
except in Rev. Neither Mt. nor Mk. have it here.
cw<j>uumu Here only in N.T. In LXX only WiacL xiii. 13.
In Plato and Aristotle it is transitive : " cause to grow together."
We are to understand that the good seed fell into ground where
young thorns were growing ; otherwise the growing together would
hardly be possible. Indeed the avefi-yarav at a/caveat of Mt. and
Mk. almost implies that the thorns were not yet visible, when the
good seed was sown in the midst of them. The dirnviia*> means
" choked it off? so as to exterminate it : comp. the UTTO ha aTro-
KTtLvv. Wic. has " strangliden it " ; but that, though sufficient for
suffocaverunt (Vulg.), does not express the airo. The verb occurs
only here and ver. 31 in N.T., and in LXX only in Nah. ii 12 and
Tobit Hi. 8.
8. els TTJI> yfy T$]V &ya,Qfiv. Not merely upon, but into the soil
The double article in all three accounts presents the soil and its
goodness as two separate ideas : " the ground (that was intended
for it), the good (ground)." Mt. and Mk. have /caX^v. This
repetition of the article is specially frequent in Jn. Lk. omits the
sixty- and thirtyfold. Isaac is said to have reaped a hundredfold
(Gen. xxvi. 12). Hdt. (i. 193. 4) states that in the plain of
Babylon returns of two hundred- and even three hundredfold,
were obtained. Strabo (xvi. p. 1054) says much the same, but is
perhaps only following Hdt. See Wetst. on Mt. xiii. 8 for abundant
evidence of very large returns.
6 exwi' c5ra di<oueu> dKou^rw. This formula occurs in all three.
Comp. xiv. 35; Mt xi. 15, xiii. 43. In Rev. we have the sing.,
6 ex<ov ovs d/covcra-no (ii. 7, n, 17, 29, iii. 6, 13, 22). The intro-
ductory <<i>vei, " He cried aloud," indicates a raising of the voice,
and gives a solemnity to this concluding charge. The nnperf.
perhaps means that the charge was repeated. Comp. Ezek. iiL 27 ;
Horn. 77. xv. 129.
9. TIS auTY] citj r\ TrapafBoXirj. " What this parable might be in
meaning." See small print on i. 29, Mt says that the disciples
asked why He spoke to the multitude in parables. Christ answers
both questions. For cTnjpoSTwi/ see on iii. 10.
10. TOIS 8e XonroTs. " Those who are outside the circle of
Christ's disciples " ; e/cetVois rots eo>, as Mk. has it This implies
that it is disciples generally, and not the Twelve only, who are
being addressed. Mt is here the fullest of the three, giving the
passage from Is. vi. 9, 10 in full, Lk. is very brief.
Iva fJXihrovres JJL$J (SX^iraxn^ At first sight it might seem as if
the (W of Lk. and Mk. was very different from the on of Mt
But the principle that he who hath shall receive more, while he
who hath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have,
explains both the Iva and the OTL. Jesus speaks in parables!
220 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE Vm. 10-1&
because the multitude see without seeing and hear without hearing
But He also speaks in parables in order that they may see without
seeing and hear without hearing. They "have not" a mind to
welcome instruction, and therefore they are taught in a way which
deprives them of instruction, although it is full of meaning to those
who desire to understand and do understand. But what the
unsympathetic " hear without understanding " they remember, be-
cause of its impressive form ; and whenever their minds become
fitted for it, its meaning will become manifest to them.
WH. write ffwluaw, from the unused oWw, while other editors prefer
trwt.ioo'iv, from crwfoy/w or the unused <rm^w. Similarly WH. have crvvtova-ir
(Mt. xiii. 13), where others give <rvviov<rw. II. App. p. 167. Here some
authorities have crwcDcrtv, as in LXX.
11. Having answered the question Start lv irapa^oXaTs Xcys ;
Jesus now answers rts Icmv aim? fj 7rapa/5oX^; To the disciples
"who have " the one thing needful "more is given." The similarity
between the seed and the word lies specially in the vital power
which it secretly contains. Comp. "Behold I sow My law in
you, and it shall bring fruit in you, and ye shall be glorified in it
for ever. But our fathers, which received the law, kept it not, and
observed not the statutes : and the fruit of the law did not perish,
neither could it, for it was Thine ; yet they that received it perished,
because they kept not the thing that was sown in them " (2 Esdr.
31-33)-
6 \<5yos TOO Ocou. Mt. never (?xv. 6) has this phrase ; it occurs
only once in Mk. (vii. 13) and once in Jn. (x. 35). Lk, has it
four times in the Gospel (v. i, viii. n, 21, xi. 28) and twelve
times in the Acts. Here Mk. has rov Aoyov (iv. T$) and Mt. has
nothing (xiii. 18). So in ver. 21, where Lk. has rov X rov .,
Mk. has ro OeXyfjia rov . (iii. 35) and Mt. TO GOw^a rov Trarpos
(xii. 50). Does it mean " the word which comes from God " or
*' the word which tells of God " ? Probably the former. Comp.
the O.T. formula "The word of the Lord came to." The gen. is
subjective. Lft. Epp* of S. Paul, p, 15.
12. ot 8 irapoi T$)I> oBoy. There is no need to understand
<rjra/>Vrcs, as is clear from Mk. iv. 15. "Those by the wayside"
is just as intelligible as " Those who received seed by the way*
side."
etra epxcroi 6 SidjSoXos. Much more vivid than "And the
birds are the devil." This is Christ's own interpretation of the
birds, and it is strong evidence for the existence of a personal
devil. Why did not Jesus explain the birds as meaning impersonal
temptations. He seems pointedly to insist upon a personal ad-
versary. See on X. 18. Mt. h&fi 6 Tron^os, Mk. 6 eraravcte. The
concluding words are peculiar to Lk. : " in order that they may
not by believing be saved." Perhaps a sign of Pauline influence.
VHI. 13-15.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 221
13. The constr. is ambiguous. In m. 12, 14, 15 cfotv is expressed, and
it is usually understood here : " And those on the rock are they which, when
they have heard, receive the word with joy ; and these have no root. 3 ' But it
is not necessary to insert the dcriv. We may continue the protasis to rbv
\6yov and make xal mean also : " And those on the rock, which, when they
have heard, receive the word with joy, these also (as well as those by the
wayside) have no root." Thus otfroi fyoiHTiv exactly corresponds to o$rot
clew in W. 14, 15. But the usual arrangement is better. The ot irpbs Kaipby
Trurretiovcnr is a further explanation of ofcrot. Neither Mt. nor Mk. has
S^oprcu, of which Lk. is fond (ii. 28, ix. 5, 48, 53, x. 8, 10, xyi, 4, 6, 7,
9, etc.). It implies the internal acceptance; whereas \a/j,pdvetv implies no
more than the external reception.
IK Kcupw ireipacrjjiou d<|>i<rrarrau Mt. and Mk. have 6\L\f/eu><s 1}
i<oy/Aov, which shows that the temptation of persecution and ex-
ternal suffering is specially meant : comp. Jas. i. 2. In all times
of moral and spiritual revival persons who are won easily at first,
but apostatize under pressure, are likely to form a large portion :
comp. Heb. iii. 12. The verb does not occur in Mt. ML or Jn.
The repetition of Kaipos is impressive. As opportunity commonly
lasts only for a short time, /capo's may mean "a short time."
14. T& S ls TO.S &K<iv0as irecrov. It is not probable that this is an ace.
abs.: "Now as regards that which fell among the thorns." The attraction
of oCrot (for roOro) to ol dKofoavrcs is quite intelligible.
6iTC> jjLepifjL^oJV Kai irXoJrou KCU irjSoyw TOU |3iou. It is usual to take
this after (ropTrviyovrai ; and this is probably correct : yet Weiss
would follow Luther and others and join it with -nrojoevo/Aevot, "going
on their way under the influence of cares," etc. But ver. 7 is
against this : the cares, etc., are the thorns, and it is the thorns
which choke. This does not reduce Tro/oeuojueyot to a gehaltloser
Zusatz. The choking is not a sudden process, like the trampling
and devouring ; nor a rapid process, like the withering : it takes
time. It is as they go on their way through life, and before they
have reached the .goal, that the choking of the good growth takes
place. Therefore they never do reach the goal. The transfer of
what is true of the growing seed to those in whose heart it is sown
is not difficult; and <rv/myovTai is clearly passive, not middle
and transitive. The thorns choke the seed (ver. 7) ; these hearers
are choked by the cares, etc. (ver. 14). Here only in N.T. does
TXcr<f>opeii' occur. It is used of animals as well as of plants
(4 Mac. xiii. 20 ; Ps. Ixiv. 10, Sym.).
15. TO 8^ Iv rp KctXfj -yfj, K.T.X. It fell into the good ground
(ver, 8), and it is in the right ground. Perhaps OLTIVCS has its full
meaning: "who are of such a character as to," etc. The two
epithets used of the ground, ayaOtf in ver. 8 and KaXy in ver. 15,
are combined for Kap$t% : " in a right and good heart" We must
take IK KapBiqt with KwrlxQwi rather than with aKovo-avrcs. Even
if cucoveiv be interpreted to mean " hearing gladly, welcoming," it
222 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE |VZZL 15 > IQ *
is not the same as /carcx^ which means "holdfast" (i Cor.
xi. 2). It is reasonable to suppose that OLKOVGLV means the same in
all four cases (12, 13, 14, 15). But /carexovo-tv (Lk.), TrapaSe'xoi/rai
(Mk. iv. 20), and o-vvi&v (Mt. xiii. 23) may all be equivalents of
the same Aramaic verb, meaning " to take in " : see footnote on
v. 21. Comp. i Cor. xv. 2 ; i Thes. v. 21.
iv uTrojiovfj. "With endurance, perseverance," rather than
u patience," which would be /m/cpo6tyua : in patientia (Vulg.), in
tolerantia (c), in sufferentia (d), per patientiam (bffQ. See Lft
on CoL i. 1 1 ; Trench, Syn. liii. This VTTO/XOVT? is the opposite of
a<rravTai (ver. 13), and is not in Mt or Mk. Thus Lk. gives the
opposite of all three of the bad classes : Karcxovar^, non ut in via ;
KapirotftopovcTLv, non ut in spinis\ cv UTTO/AOVT?, non ut in petroso
(Beng.). Neither here nor in ver. 8 does Lk. give the degrees of
fruitfulness. Mt. and Mk. do so both in the parable and in the
interpretation. The suggestion that Lk. has mistaken three
numerals for a word which he translates Iv viropevfi seems to be a
little too ingenious (Expositor, Nov. 1891, p. 381). That Jesus
knew that all four of the classes noticed in the parable were to be
found in the audience before Him, is probable enough ; but we
have no means of knowing it We may safely identify the Eleven
and the ministering women with the fourth class. Judas is an
instance of the third. But all are warned that the mere receiving
of the word is not decisive. Everything depends upon how it is
received and how it is retained. Grotius quotes from the Magna
Moralia : <! ra ayaOa iravra ovra aya#a eortv, /cat viro TOVTW p,yj
Sia<#etpTcu, olov VTTO irXovVov KCU apxw TOIOVTOS KaAos /caJ
16-18. Practical Inference. The connexion with what pre-
cedes need not be doubted. By answering the question of the
disciples (ver. 9) and explaining the parable to them, Jesus had
kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see
that it spreads to others. Here we have the opposite of what was
noticed in the Sermon on the Mount Here Lk. has, gathered
into one, sayings which Mt has, scattered in three different places
(v. 15, x 26, xiii. 12 : comp. xiii. 12, xxv. 29). Mk. and Lk. are
here very similar and consecutive. Comp. xi. 33-36,
16. XUXVOK a\|ras icaXuimi aMv aKcrfei. " Having lighted a
lamp," rather than "a candle." Trench, Syn. xlvi. ; Becker,
Charities, iiL 86, Eng. tr. p. 130; Gallus^ ii. 398, Eng. tr. p. 308,
For fixjras see on xv, 8: it occurs again xi. 33, but not in the
parallels Mt xiii. 15 ; Mk. iv. at. Instead of cricciki Mt and Mk.
have th* more definite foro rbv jto&ov, which Lk. has xi. j^ As
16-ia] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 223
is a " lamp," Xux^a is a " lamp-stand," on which several
might be placed or hung : for, whereas the Aa/jwmjp was
fixed, the A^XI/OS was portable. Other forms of Xv^vlo, are Xv^i/cov
and Xvxvctov (Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Grk. p. 40). Comp. the
very similar passage xL 33. In both passages ot elcnropcvoficvoi,
the Gentiles, are mentioned instead of ot kv r OLK^ the Jews (Mt
xiii. 15).
17. The poetic rhythm and parallelism should be noticed.
Somewhat similar sayings are found in profane writers: cfyet 8^
wpds <o>s r^v oXrjOziav xp vo $ (Menander) ; comp. Soph. Ajax, 646,
and Wetst. on Mt x. 26. For fywepav y 6 ^ " 670 - 1 see on i v - 3^ \
Mt has cwroKoAu<0?}crTat, Mk. <avpa>0fl. For diroKpu^oy, " hidden
away" from the public eye, see Lft on CoL ii. 3. It was a
favourite word with the Gnostics to indicate their esoteric books,
which might not be published. Comp. the very similar passage
xii 2; and see S. Cox in the Expositor^ 2nd series, i. pp. 186,
372, and Schanz, ad loc.
18. j3XirT ouy TTWS ditouT. Because the doctrine received
must be handed on and made known to all, therefore it is all-im-
portant that it should be rightly heard, viz. with intelligence and
a "good heart" (ver. 15). Whoever gives a welcome to the word
and appropriates it, becomes worthy and capable of receiving
more. But by not appropriating truth when we recognize it, we
lose our hold of it, and have less power of recognizing it in the
future. There is little doubt that o SoKet ^iv means " that which
he thinketh he hath." Wic. has " weneth"; Tyn. and Cran. "sup-
poseth " j Cov. and Rhem. " thinketh." " Seemeth " comes from
Beza's videtur. It is ^^deception that is meant Those who
received the seed by the wayside were hi this condition ; they
failed to appropriate it, and lost it. Comp. xix. 26.
Mk. here inserts (iv. 24) the <5 /xcrpw /Aerpetrc, K.T.A., which
Lk. has already given in the sermon (vi. 38) : and both Mt. and
Mk. here add other parables, two of which Lk. gives later (xiii.
19-21. The Visit of His Mother and His Brethren. Christ's
true Relations. Mt (xii. 46-50) and Mk. (til 31-35) place this
incident before the parable of the Sower ; but none of the three
state which preceded in order of time. Comp. xi. 27, 28, and
see on xi. 29. On the "Brethren of the Lord" see Lange, Leben
fesu, ii. 2, 13, Eng. tr. L p. 329; Lft. Galatians, pp. 253-291,
in his Dissertations on the Apostolic Age^ pp. 3-45, Macmillan,
1892 ; J. B. Mayor, Epistle of S. James^ pp. v-xxxvi, Macmillan,
I892. 1 D.B? artt "Brother"; "James"; "Judas, the Lord's
Brother."
1 The work as a whole, and the dissertation on this question in particular,
deserve special commendation.
224 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VIH. 19-81.
19. FlapeyeVcro Se -rrpos aurbv i] /J^TTIP Kal ot dSeX<{>oi auroO.
For the verb, which is a favourite with Lk., see on vii. 4. Here
Mk. has epxavrai and Mt. tSov. In writing the sing. Lk. is think-
ing only of 77 /xT?T7?p. Such constructions are common, and do
not imply that the first in the series of nominatives was em-
phatic or specially prominent, except in the writer's thoughts.
Comp. Jn. xviii. 15, xx. 3; Acts xxvi. 30; Philem. 23.
The precise relationship to be understood from the expression
ot dSe\4>o! auToG will probably never be determined or cease to be
discussed. There is nothing in Scripture to warn us from what is
the antecedently natural view that they are the children of Joseph
and Mary, unless " I know not a man " (i. 34) is interpreted as
implying a vow of perpetual virginity. The "firstborn " in ii. 7
and the imperfect followed by "till" in Mt i. 25, seem to imply
that Joseph and Mary had children ; which is confirmed by con-
temporary belief (Mk. vi. 3 ; Mt. xiii. 55) and by the constant
attendance of the aJ8cX.<f>oC on the Mother of the Lord (Mt. xii.
46 ; Mk. iii. 32 ; Jn. ii. 12). The Epiphanian theory, which gives
Joseph children older than Jesus by a former wife, deprives Him
of His rights as the heir of Joseph and of the house of David.
It seems to be of apocryphal origin (Gospel according to Peter, or
Book of James) ; and, like Jerome's theory of cousinship, to have
been invented in the interests of asceticism and of a priori con-
victions respecting the perpetual virginity of Mary. Tertullian,
in dealing with this passage, seems to assume as a matter of
course that the a8eX<^ot are the children of Mary, and that she
and they were here censured by Christ {Marcion. iv. 19; De
Carne Christi, vii.). He knows nothing of the doctrine of a
sinless Virgin. Renan conjectures that James, Joses, Simon,
and Judas were the cousins of Jesus, but that the brethren who
refused to believe in Him were His real brethren ( V. de J. p. 23).
This solution remains entirely his own, for it creates more diffi-
culties than it solves. See Expositors Bible^ James and Jude> ch,
iii., Hodder, 1891.
Elsewhere in bibl. Grk. a Mac viii. 14 only.
A favourite word (w. 34, 36, 47, vii. 18, 22, ix. 36, xHL i,
etc.). Here Mt has etrer 84 nt and Mk. has X^yowrti'. The Xry6rw is
certainly spurious : om. K B D L A , Latt Goth, etc,
SI* jj^TY]p jxou KOI dSeX<f>o( fiou. Note the absence of the article
in all three accounts. This is the predicate, and ovrot, /C.T.X., is
the subject And the meaning is not are " My actual mother or
brethren," which would be ^ Mrrjp //,ov /cat ot dSeA^ot /AOV, but
" Mother to Me and brethren to Me," Le. equal to such, equally
dear. Mt and Mk. have the singular here : oSros or avros /xov
ic<u d5tA</>^ icat PTJTTJP IcmV. We cannot infer from xo)
V1XL 21-23. j THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 22$
T? that His sisters were present : they had settled at Nazareth
(Mt xiii. 56; Mk. vi. 3). The texts of Mk. iii. 32, which repre-
sent the multitude as telling Jesus that His sisters are with His
Mother and brethren, are probably the result of this inference.
AD and some Latin authorities insert "and Thy sisters";
K B C G K L and most Versions omit the words. Christ's reply
is not a denial of the claims of family ties, nor does it necessarily
imply any censure on His Mother and brethren. It asserts that
there are far stronger and higher claims. Family ties at the best
arc temporal; spiritual ties are eternal. Moreover, the closest
blood-relationship to the Messiah constitutes no claim to ad-
mission into the Kingdom of God. No one becomes a child of
God in virtue of human parentage (Jn. i. 13). Jesus does not
say irarrjp fiov, not merely because Joseph was not present, but
because in the spiritual sense that relationship to Christ is filled
by God alone. See on ver. n.
22-25. The Stilling of the Tempest on the Lake of Gennesaret
This is the first of a pair of miracles which appear in the same
order in all three Gospels (Mt. viii. 23 ff. ; Mk. iv. 35^".), the
second being the healing of the demoniacs in the country of the
Gadarenes. To these two Mk. and Lk. add the healing of the
woman with the issue and the raising of the daughter of Jairus,
which Mt. places somewhat later. The full series gives us a
group of representative miracles exhibiting Christ's power over
the forces of nature and the powers of hell, over disease and over
death.
22. 'EY^CTO Be iv ju r&v ^jicp&p KCU afrnSs. All these ex-
pressious are characteristic, and exhibit Aramaic influence. See
note at the end of ch. i., and comp. v. i, 12, 17, vi. 12. There is
nothing like them in Mk. iv. 35 or Mt viii. 23, and Iv pif ro>v
ypp&v is peculiar to Lk. (v. 17, xx. i). Comp. & /u$ TWV
7roA.a>y (v. 12) and fv /ucE TO>V <njvay<i>y<Sv (xiii. 10). Mt. tells us
that it was the sight of the multitudes around Him that moved
Jesus to order a departure to the other side of the lake; and
Mk. says that the disciples " leaving the multitude, take Him with
them, e/en as He was in the boat." This seems to imply that
He was utterly tired, overcome by the demands which the multi-
tude made upon Him, For 8t^\0wfjtK see on ii. r 5. The nautical
expression avdyeo-Qai is freq. in Lk. and pecuHar to him (Acfci
xiii. 13, xvi. n, xviiL 21, xx. 3, 13, xxi. 2, xxvii. 2, 4, 12, 21, xxviii,
10, II).
23. TT\e6vrwv SI afrrwv dcfHJWoio-eK. Excepting Rev. xviii. 17,
irXtlv is peculiar to Lk. (Acts xxi. 3, xxvil 2, 6, 24). In Anth.
PaL 9. 517, d<f>uw<5<i> means " awaken from sleep." Here it means
" fall off to sleep, * a use which seems to be medical and late
(Heliod. ix. 12). In class, Grk. we should rather have
224 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VIII. 19-01.
19. flapeyeVcro Be -rrpos auToy q Fl^P Ka ^ dScX^ol afirou.
For the verb, which is a favourite with Lk., see on vii. 4. Here
Mk. has epxovrai & n <i Mt. tSov. In writing the sing. Lk. is think-
ing only of y jjiyryp. Such constructions are common, and do
not imply that the first in the series of nominatives was em-
phatic or specially prominent, except in the writer's thoughts.
Comp. Jn. xviii. 15, xx. 3; Acts xxvi. 30; Philem. 23.
The precise relationship to be understood from the expression
ol dSX<j>ol auroG will probably never be determined or cease to be
discussed. There is nothing in Scripture to warn us from what is
the antecedently natural view that they are the children of Joseph
and Mary, unless " I know not a man " (i. 34) is interpreted as
implying a vow of perpetual virginity. The "firstborn" in ii. 7
and the imperfect followed by "till" in Mt. i. 25, seem to imply
that Joseph and Mary had children ; which is confirmed by con-
temporary belief (Mk. vi. 3 ; Mt. xiii. 55) and by the constant
attendance of the dScX^ot on the Mother of the Lord (Mt. xii.
46 j Mk. iii. 32 ; Jn. ii. 12). The Epiphanian theory, which givea
Joseph children older than Jesus by a former wife, deprives Him
of His rights as the heir of Joseph and of the house of David.
It seems to be of apocryphal origin (Gospel according to Peter, or
Book of James) ; and, like Jerome's theory of cousinship, to have
been invented in the interests of asceticism and of a priori con-
victions respecting the perpetual virginity of Mary. Tertullian,
in dealing with this passage, seems to assume as a matter of
course that the aSeX<ot are the children of Mary, and that she
and they were here censured by Christ (Marcion. iv. 19; De
Carne Christi^ vii.). He knows nothing of the doctrine of a
sinless Virgin. Renan conjectures that James, Joses, Simon,
and Judas were the cousins of Jesus, but that the brethren who
refused to believe in Him were His real brethren ( V. de J. p. 23).
This solution remains entirely his own, for it creates more diffi-
culties than it solves. See Expositors Bibk^ James and Jude^ chu
iii., Hodder, 1891.
Elsewhere in bibl. Grt 2 Mac. viii. 14 only.
A favourite word (m. 34, 36, 47, vii. 18, 22, ix. 36> zili I,
etc.). Here Mt has etirer 84 rtt and Mk. has X/yowu>. line \iy6vrwv is
certainly spurious : om. tfBDLASf, Latt. Goth. etc.
fxou Kal &Se\<|>o fiou. Note the absence of the article
in all three accounts. This is the predicate, and oSrot, K.T.X., is
the subject And the meaning is not are " My actual mother or
brethren," which would be ^ /^i^p pov /cat ot dSeX</>ot /AQV, but
" Mother to Me and brethren to Me," /.<?. equal to such, equally
dear. Mt and ML have the singular here : o&ros or ovros
ico* dfaXfirj *al fMTJnjp AmV. We cannot infer from
VHI. 21-23, j THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 22$
that His sisters were present : they had settled at Nazareth
(Mt xiiL 56 ; Mk. vi. 3). The texts of Mk. iii. 32, which repre-
sent the multitude as telling Jesus that His sisters are with His
Mother and brethren, are probably the result of this inference.
AD and some Latin authorities insert "and Thy sisters";
K B C G K L and most Versions omit the words. Christ's reply
is not a denial of the claims of family ties, nor does it necessarily
imply any censure on His Mother and brethren. It asserts that
there are far stronger and higher claims. Family ties at the best
arc temporal; spiritual ties are eternal. Moreover, the closest
blood-relationship to the Messiah constitutes no claim to ad-
mission into the Kingdom of God. No one becomes a child of
God in virtue of human parentage (Jn. i. 13). Jesus does not
say irarfip / iov not merely because Joseph was not present, but
because in the spiritual sense that relationship to Christ is filled
by God alone. See on ver. n.
22-25. The Stilling of the Tempest on the Lake of Gennesaret
This is the first of a pair of miracles which appear in the same
order in all three Gospels (Mt viii. 23 fF. ; Mk. iv. 35 IF.), the
second being the healing of the demoniacs in the country of the
Gadarenes. To these two Mk. and Lk. add the healing of the
woman with the issue and the raising of the daughter of Jairus,
which Mt. places somewhat later. The full series gives us a
group of representative miracles exhibiting Christ's power over
the forces of nature and the powers of hell, over disease and over
death.
22. 'EY^CTO 84 & ju$ r&v ^p^y KCU afl-nfc. All these ex-
pressions are characteristic, and exhibit Aramaic influence. See
note at the end of ch. L, and comp. v. i, 12, 17, vi. 12. There is
nothing like them in Mk. iv. 35 or Mt viii. 23, and Iv pt$ r&v
^/Krcpeoi' is peculiar to Lk. (v. 17, xx. i). Comp. hr /u r&v
7roA.OH> (v. 12) and e> pla, T&V crwaywy&v (xiii. 10). Mt tells us
that it was the sight of the multitudes around Him that moved
Jesus to order a departure to the other side of the lake ; and
Mk. says that the disciples " leaving the multitude, take Him with
them, eren as He was in the boat" This seems to imply that
He was utterly tired, overcome by the demands which the multi-
tude made upon Hun. For 5i^X06)jjLej> see on ii. r 5. The nautical
expression dvayscrtfai is freq. in Lk. and peculiar to him (Acts
xiii. 13, xvL n, xviil 21, xx. 3, 13, xxi. 2, xxvii. 2, 4, 12, 21, xxviii,
10, n).
23. ir\<5rrwv 81 afirwK A^rf-nrwcreH. Excepting Rev. xviiL 17,
irXctK is peculiar to Lk. (Acts xxi. 3, xxvii. 2, 6, 24). In Anth*
Pal. 9. 517, d^umxfo means " awaken from sleep." Here it means
" fall off to sleep, ' a use which seems to be medical and late
(Heliod. ix. 12). In class. Grk. we should rather have /
15
226 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VTTL
(Lob. Phryn. p. 224). This is the only passage in which we read
of Jesus sleeping.
Kare'pT] XaZXcujj (Wfiou. " There came down a violent squall of
wind," from the heights which surround the lake. These are
furrowed with ravines like funnels, down which winds rush with
great velocity. See Thomson, Land & Book^ p. 375; Keirn,
iv. p. 179, who quotes Rusegger, Retsen^ iii. p. 136. For Xal\a\|i
comp. Job xxi. 18, xxxviii. i ; Wisd. v. 14, 23; Ecclus. xlviii. 9;
Horn. //. xii. 375, xvii. 57. Mt gives the effect of it as <reicrp.o<s
fieyas kv rjj flaAcurcrfl. For the accent COmp. KaX.avpoi[/y KAifto,
JC.T.X, and see Chandler, 668.
o-uvc-rrX^pourro. The verb occurs only here, ix. 51, and Acts
ii. i. 'Note the imperf. in contrast to /care/fy. The squall came
down with a single rush; the rilling of the boat continued and
was not completed. What was true of the boat is stated of the
crew. In class. Grk. the act. is used of manning ships thoroughly
(Thuc. vi. 50. 2).
24. 'EmcrrrfTa, ImortiTa, See on v. 5. The doubling of the
name is here peculiar to Lk. Comp. x, 41, xxii. 31 ; Acts ix. 4,
xxii. 7, xxvi. 14. Mt. has Kupte, Mk. AtSacr/coAc. Augustine has
some good remarks as to the differences between the exclama-
tions attributed to the disciples in the three narratives. " There is
no need to inquire which of these exclamations was really uttered.
For whether they uttered some one of these three, or other words
which no one of the Evangelists has recorded, yet conveying the
same sense, what does it matter?" (De Cons. Euang. ii. 24, 25).
lirei-i^crey TW cWjio) KCU T& KXifSom. This does not prove that
Lk. regarded the storm as a personal agent : both the wind and
its effect are "rebuked," a word which represents the disciples'
view of the action. See on iv. 39. A icXuSwy (/cAviv, "wash
against ") is larger than a Kvp& ( Jas. i. 6 ; Jon. i. 4, 12; Wisd,
xiv. 5 ; i Mac. vi. ii ; 4 Mac. vii. 5, xv. 31).
yotX^ni]. Mt. and Mk. add /ieyoAi? : the word is common
elsewhere, but in N.T. occurs only in this narrative. The sudden
calm in the sea showed the reality of the miracle. Wind may
cease suddenly, but the water which it has agitated continues to
work for a long time afterwards. In Mk., as here, the stilling of
the tempest precedes the rebuke : Mt transposes the order of the
two incidents. In both the rebuke is sharper than in Lk., who
"ever spares the Twelve" (Schanz). See on vi. 13 and xxii. 45.
485. flou ^ m'<rns fywK; They might have been sure that the
Messiah would not perish, and that their prayer for help would be
answered It is not their praying for succour that is blamed, but
their want of faith in the result of their prayer : they feared that their
prayer would be vain. Comp. His parents' anguish, and see on ii, 48,
rtf Spa OUTOS eorriKj Mt has irorairos. There is nothing in*
VHLS6.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
credible in the question. Their ideas of the Christ and His
powers were very imperfect ; and this was probably the first time
that they had seen Him controlling the forces of nature. Their
experience as fishermen told them how impossible it was in the
natural course that such a storm should be followed immediately
by a great calm. The fear which accompanies this question or
exclamation is not that which the storm produced, but that which
was caused by a sudden recognition of the presence of super-
natural power of a kind that was new to them. Comp. v. 26,
vii. 1 6. For the apa comp. xxii. 23 ; Acts xii. 18.
One conjectures that the framer of a legend would have made the disciples
accept the miracle as a matter of course : comp. v. 8, 9* Keim opposes Strauss
for rejecting the whole as a myth, although he himself by no means accepts the
whole as historical. " Unquestionably there rests upon this brief and pregnant
narrative a rare majesty, such as does not reappear in the other nature-miracles.
With a few masterly strokes there is here sketched a most sublime picture from
the life of Jesus, and a picture full of truth. . . . Even His rising up against
weather and sea is told by Mt. and Lk. quite simply, without any ostentation ;
and the tentative query of the disciples, after their deliverance was accomplished,
Who is this ? is the slightest possible, the only too modest and yet the true
utterance of the impression which they must at that time have received " (Je s.
of Naz. iv. p. 180). See Gould on Mk. iv. 41.
20-39. The Healing of the Demoniac in the Country of the
Gerasenes.
Gerasenes seems to be the true reading both here and Mk, v. I, while
Gadarenes is best attested Mt. viii. 28 ; but in all three places the authorities
vary between Gerasenes, Gadarenes, and Gergesenes. The evidence here is
thus summarized-
v, ART A AH etc., Syrr. (Cur-Pesh-Sin-Harcl txt) Goth.
v, B C* (ver. 37, hiat ver. 26) D, Latt. Syr-Hard mg.
&v, K LXJsJ mmusc. stx, Syr-Hier. Boh. Arm. Aeth. See WH.
ii. Aj>p. p. II. If Lk. viii. 26 stood alone, one might adopt Tcpy^-
aryvQv as possibly correct there ; but the evidence in ver. 37 is con-
clusive against it
These Gerasenes are probably not the people of the Gerasa
which lay on the extreme eastern frontier of Persea, over thirty
miles from the lake : even in a loose description to foreigners Lk.
would not be likely to speak of the shore of the lake as in the
country of these Gerasenes., Rather we may understand the
town which Thomson rediscovered (Land & Book, ii. 34-38)
under the name of Gersa or Kersa on the steep eastern bank,
Gergesa is merely a conjecture of Origen, adopted upon topo-
graphical grounds and not upon textual evidence. It may be
rejected in all three narratives. There is no real difficulty of
topography, whichever reading be adopted. The expression rty
X<*>pw TOJV T. gives considerable latitude, and may include a great
deal more than the immediate vicinity of the town. Nor is there
any difficulty in the fact that Mt knows of two demoniacs,
228 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE \VUL 26-39
whereas Lk. and Mk. mention only one. The real difficulties in
the miracle, for those who believe in the fact of demoniacal
possession, are connected with the swine, i. Can beings which
are purely spiritual enter and influence beings which are purely
animal? 2. How can we justify the destruction of the swine,
which were innocent creatures, and which belonged to persons
who do not seem to have merited such a heavy loss ?
On the first of these two questions our ignorance is so great
that we do not even know whether there is a difficulty. Who can
explain how mind acts upon matter, or matter upon mind ? Yet
the fact is as certain, as that mind acts upon mind or that matter
acts upon matter. There is nothing in experience to forbid us
from believing that evil spirits could act upon brute beasts ; and
science admits that it has " no CL priori objection to offer " to such
an hypothesis. And if there is no scientific objection to demoniacal
possession of brutes, & fortiori there is none to that of men,
seeing that men have both bodies and spirits to be influenced.
The influence may have been analogous to that of mesmerism os
hypnotism. The real difficulty is the moral one. As Huxley puts
it, " the wanton destruction of other people's property is a mis-
demeanour of evil example." The answers are very various,
i. The whole story is a myth. 2. The healing of the demoniacs
and the repulse of the Healer by the inhabitants are historical, but
the incident of the swine is a later figment. 3. The demoniacs,
frightened the swine, and the transfer of demons from them to the
swine was imagined, 4. The drowning of the swine was an
accident, possibly simultaneous with the healing, and report mixed
up the two incidents. 5. The demoniacs were mere maniacs,
whom Jesus cured by humouring their fancies ; and His giving
leave to imaginary demons to enter into the swine, produced the
story of the disaster to the herd. All these explanations assume
that the Gospel narratives are wholly or in part unhistorical. But
there are other explanations. 6. Like earthquakes, shipwrecks,
pestilences, and the like, the destruction of the swine is part of the
mystery of evil, and insoluble.* 7. \As the Creator of the universe^
the inotrnate Word had the right to do what He pleased with His
own| 8.^. visible effect of the departure of the demons was!
necessary tb convince the^demoniacs and their neighbours of the
completeness of the cure/ Brutes and private property may be
sacrificed, where the sanity and lives of persons are concerned.
9. The keepers of the swine were Jews, who were breaking the
Jewish law, \rhich was binding on them, and perhaps on the whole
district "In the enforcement of a law which bound the con-
science, pur Lord had an authority such as does not belong to the
private individual" (W. E. Gladstone, Nineteenth Century r , Feb.
1891, p. 357). Against this it is contended that the swineherds
VUL 26-28.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
were probably pagans, and that the district was not under Jewish
law (N. C. Dec. 1890, p. 967 j March 1891, p. 455). Certainty is
not attainable, but it is probable that one of the last two reasons
is the true explanation. See Expositor , 3rd series, 1889, ix. 303.
Godet's conclusion seems to be sound, that it is one of those cases
in which the power to execute the sentence guarantees the right
of the judge. 1 Contrast the liealing of a demoniac woman as
recorded in the Gospel of the Infancy r , xiv.
26. KaT^TrXeucrav els Tf\v )(<opav TWI> repacnqywy ^TIS early dvriirepa.
" They landed at the country of the Gerasenes, which is in such a"
position as to be opposite Galilee." The verb is quite class, of
coming to land from the high seas, but is found here only in N.T.
Not in LXX. See Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck of S. Paul, p. 28,
and refT. in Wetst The statement tells us nothing as to the
position of the country of the Gerasenes, for " opposite " would
apply to the whole of the east shore. Lk. alone mentions its
being " opposite Galilee " ; perhaps to justify its inclusion in the
Galilean ministry.
Some texts have vfyav from Mt. or Mk<, while others have &vTivtp&v, of
which dvrtTT^oa is a later form. Another form is fornrtpas. For the accent
see Chandler, 867.
27. UTnrjiTTr]cr> d^p TLS IK TYJS TrroXews. The man belonged to
the city, but he came out of the tombs to meet Jesus : IK rrjz
ffoAetos belongs to dvijp rts, not to v-TnJi/r^o-ev. For this force of
VTTO in composition comp. 7ro/cpiVo//,ai, "answer back"; 71-0X0-
yto/uu, " reckon per contra "; V7roo"rpe<a>, "turn &?>." For IKCU/U
see on vii. 12 ; and for ei/eSucraTo see Burton, 48. Lk. alone
mentions that the demoniac wore no clothes; but Mk. implies it
by stating that he was clothed after he was cured. All three
mention the tombs ; and near the ruins of Khersa there are many
tombs hewn in the rocks. Excepting Mk. v. 3, 5 and Rev. xi. 9,
fjtrJjfjia is peculiar to Lk. (xxiii 53, xxiv. i ; Acts ii. 29, vii. 16);
but he more often uses /tv^etoj/. With epzvev comp. xix. 5, xxiv, 29.
OS. Tt jjiol KCX! o-oi ; See on iv. 34.
'lujcrou ute TOU 0eoG TOU U\|HOTOU. This expression rather indicates
that the man is not a Jew, and therefore is some evidence that the
owners of the swine were not Jews. " The Most High " (.Elyon)
is a name for Jehovah which seems to be usual among heathen
nations. It is employed by Melchisedek, the Canaanite priest and
king (Gen. xiv. 20, 22). Balaam uses it (Num. xxiv. 16). Micah
puts it into the mouth of Balaam (vi. 6) ; Isaiah, into the mouth
of the king of Babylon (xiv. 14). It is used repeatedly in the
Babylonian proclamations in Daniel (iii. 26, iv. 24, 32, v. 18, 21,
1 See some valuable remarks by Sattday in the Contemp. Rev, Sept 1892, *j
348. He inclines to the second explanation, but with reserve*
230 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VHL2S-8O.
vii. 1 8, 22, 25, 27). The girl with a spirit of divination at Philippl
employs it (Acts xvi. 17). It is found in Phoenician inscriptions
also. See Chadwick, St. Mark, p. 144, and Wsctt. on Heb. vii. i.
For <f>w$ fJ^ydXfl see on i. 42, and for S&>p.cu see on v. 12 : with
d^aKpatas of demoniac cries comp. iv. 41 ; Acts viii. 7.
jjirj fie (3aora^LOTT]s. Neither the verb nor its cognate substantive
is ever used in N.T. of testing metals, or of obtaining evidence by
torture, but simply of pain or torment The demoniac identifies
himself with the demon which controls him, and the torment
which is feared is manifest from vei. 31.
29. irapTqyyeXXev y&P T< ? irvevjiaru Authorities are very evenly
divided between the imperf. and the aor. If irapfiyyeLKev be right, it almost
means " He had ordered." Burton, 29, 48. We should have expected rots
TTveijfjLa<nj>, for both in ver. 27 and ver. 30 we have dai^dyca. But the inter-
change of personality between the man and the demons is so rapid, that it
becomes natural to speak of the demons in the sing. Note that while Lk.
has his characteristic eeX0eo' d?r6 (w. 33, 38, iv. 35, 41, v. S, etc.)i Mk.
has the more usual t-e\6eiv IK.
iroXXots yap xpovois (rw^pirdKeu O/IIT<$V. *' Many times," i.e. on many
occasions, multis temporibus (Vulg.), "it had seized him," or "carried him
away" : comp. Acts xxvii. 15. Mk. has 7r6AXa/as. Others explain "within
a long time. See Win. xxxi. 9, p. 273. The verb is quite class., but in
N.T. peculiar to Lk. (Acts vi. 12, xix. 28, xxvii. 15). Hobart counts it as
medical (p. 244). In LXX, Prov, vi. 25 ; 2 Mac. iii. 27, iv. 41.
Both Lk. and Mk. use these two words
to distinguish the " handcuffs and fetters," manicss, et fedicas,^ with
which he was bound. See Lft PhiL p. 8. The former is used of
the chain by which the hand of a prisoner was fastened to the
soldier who had charge of him. Like " chains," oXwras are of
metal, whereas ire'Sat might be ropes or withes. Both dXvcreis and
-n-eSat are included in ra 6W/xa. The imperfects tell of what
usually took place. During the calmer intervals precautions were
taken to prevent the demons "carrying him away with" them;
but these precautions always proved futile.
els T&S Ip^jULous. In order to take the man away from humane
influences. But the wilderness is regarded as the home of evil
spirits. See on xi. 24 ; and for the plural see on i. 80.
80. TL o-ot oi/ojjici ivnv ; In order to recall the man to a sense
of his own independent personality, Jesus asks him his name. It
was a primary condition of his cure that he should realize that he
is not identical with the evil powers which control his actions*
Perhaps also Christ wished the disciples to know the magnitude of
the evil, that the cure might increase their faith (ver. 25) : and this
purpose may have influenced Him in allowing the destruction of
the swine. The peculiar word teyi6v, 1 which is preserved in Mk.
1 That the man had ever seen a Roman legion, "at once one and many,
cruel and inexorable and strong," is perhaps not probable, But see Trend:
Mn & fa, p. j/l, 8th ed. For other Latin words comp. x. 35, XL 33, xbc. 20,
30-32.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 231
v. 9 also, is a mark of authenticity. As Sanday points out, it is
more probable that this strange introduction of a Latin word
should represent something which really took place, than that it
should be pure invention (Contemp. Rev. Sept. 1892, p. 349).
The words <m clo-TjXOey Saijjioi/ia iroXXa els a.Mv are the remark
of the Evangelist: comp. ii. 50, iii. 15, xxiii. 12.
31. TrapeKdXouy aurdi/. "They kept beseeching Him." The
plurality of those who ask is emphatically marked : with 8at/*oVia
we might have expected irape/caXei, as in Mk. The plur. would
have been less noticeable in Mk., because the masc. plur., TroAAot
ler/t>, precedes.
That irci/w/rdXow (K B C D F L S, Latt. Goth.) and not *apX is right
here, need not be doubted.
cts T?JI> apuo-ow. In class. Grk. a/Sucro-os is always an adj.,
"bottomless, boundless," and is mostly poetical. In LXX fj
afiwo-os is used of the sea (Gen. L 2, vii. n; Job xli. 22, 23);
without the art. (Job xxviii. 14, xxxvi. 16; Ecclus. r 3, xvi. 18);
of the depths of the earth (Ps. Ixxi. 20 ; Deut. viii. 7) ; but per-
haps nowhere of Hades. In N.T. it means Hades (Rom. x. 7),
and esp. the penal part of it which is the abode of demons (Rev.
ix. i-n, xi. 7, xvii. 8, xx. i, 3). The latter is the meaning here.
The demons dread being sent to their place of punishment. See
Cremer, Lex. sub v. In Mk. the petition is " that He will not
send them out of the country" ; but the verb is sing, and the man
is the petitioner. He still confuses himself with the demons, and
desires to stay where he feels at home. This is their wish and
his also. The persistent confusion of personality renders it
necessary that the man should have some decisive evidence of
the departure of the evil spirits from him. In this way his cure
will be effected with least suffering, Prof. Marshall thinks that efe
TTJV aftvo-crov and !o> rfj<; xwpas may represent Aramaic expressions
so nearly alike as readily to be confounded by copyist or trans-
lator (Expositor^ Nov. 1891, p. 377). See footnote on v. 31.
32. dy^Xt] \oipw iKafwy. This illustrates the fondness of Lk.
for I Kavo^s in this sense: Mt. has ay. -^oiptav TroXXtov and Mk. ay.
xotpw /xeyaX^. With characteristic love of detail Mk. gives the
number as <us StorxtXtot, which may be an exaggeration of the
swineherds or of the owners, who wished to make the most of
their loss. Had the number been an invention of the narrator,
we should have had 4000 or 5000 to correspond with the legion.
It is futile to ask whether each animal was possessed. If some
of them were set in motion, the rest would follow mechanically.
For the lirirpcfyfv avrots of Lk. and Mk. we have the direct
vTraytre in Mt., which need mean no more than "depart, be gone."
But the distinction between commanding and allowing what He
232 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VUL 3S-37.
might have forbidden is not very helpful. Whatever the motive of
the demons may have been, Jesus uses it for a good end, and
secures the easy and effectual cure of their victim,
83. Gjpjuqcrci' TJ a.yl\t] Kara TOU KpTjp.i'oG. These words also are
in all three. The word K/JT^VOS need not mean an abrupt pre-
cipice: a steep and rocky slope suffices. MacGregor, Stanley,
Tristram, Wilson, and others believe that the spot which suits the
description can be identified. The art implies that it was well
known. Comp. 2 Chron. xxv. 12. The use of dTreiwyt] for
suffocation by drowning is classical (Dem. p. 883).
34. TO yeyoyos. Chiefly the destruction of the swine. In ver.
36 01 tSoVres means the disciples and others near to Jesus, not the
swineherds,
35-39. Note how the characteristics of Lk.'s diction stand out in these
verses. For rbv fodpuirov d(f> o5 r. 5. %TJ\6p (see on ver. 29) Mk. has rto>
Satfjiovffifj.evov, and irapA rods ir65as (see on vii. 38) has no equivalent in
Mk, For dvi/jyyci\av (see on ver. 20) Mk. has 8iyyTJ<raj>To t while <2irar
(see on iii. 21), r6 ir\ij0os (see on i. 10), <j>bp y jueydXy (see on i. 42, vii. 16),
(rvvtt'x.ovTo (see on iv. 38), and tiTr<rTpei//ev (see on i. 56) have no
equivalents. For $elTo (see on v. 12) Mk. has Ta/>eKcX ; for 6 dvfyp d<f>'
o5 t\r}\8i (see on ver. 29) Mk. has the less accurate & daipovifffffts ; for
atfp (see on i 56) Mk. has perd ; and for virfarpefa (see on L 56) Mk. has
35. Ijjicmtrfi^oi'. Some of the bystanders maf have given him
clothing ; but there would have been time to fetch iL The verb
is found neither in LXX nor in profane writers, but only here and
Mk. v. 15. The irap& rods -rroSas implies an attitude of thankful-
ness rather than that he has become a disciple. It is the last of
the four changes that have taken place in the man. He is
KaOri^vov instead of restless, IparuTiLsvov instead of naked, <r<o<po-
vovvrct instead of raging, and irapa rovs TroSas rov "I. instead of
shunning human society. Baur would have it that he is meant to
represent the conversion of the Gentiles. We are not sure that
he was a Gentile ; and this would have been made clear if he was
intended as a representative. For Trapd with the ace. after a verb
of rest comp. Acts x. 6; Mt xiii. i, xx. 30; Mk. v. 21, x. 46.
36. &irr\yy<:ii\w 8e aurols. This is not a repetition of ver. 34,
but a statement of additional information which was given to the
townspeople after they arrived on the scene.
37. airap TO ir\T)0o$. The desire that He should depart was
universal, and all three narratives mention it. The people feared
that His miraculous power might lead to further losses : and this
feeling was not confined to the inhabitants of the Tro'Afcs close at
hand (ver. 34) ; it was shared by the whole district* Comp. iv, 29,
ix. 53, and contrast iv. 42 ; Jn. iv. 40. Although Keim rejects
the incident of the swine, yet he rightly contends tha* this request
37-39.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 233
that Jesus should leave the place gives the impression of a sober
historical fact. There is nothing like it elsewhere in the history
of Jesus; and neither it nor the locality is likely to have been
invented Why should a myth take Jesus across to Gerasa?
Some historical connexion with the locality is much more
probable.
88. eSeiTo Se aurou 6 dnqp. The Se marks the contrast between
Him and the rest. Mk. says that the request was made as Jesus
was stepping into the boat. Mt. omits the whole incident The
man fears the unfriendly populace, and clings to his preserver.
39. Si-qyou oaa croi e-iroiTjcrcy 6 0eos. In Galilee and Judaea,
where Jesus and His disciples preached, He commonly told those
who were healed to be silent about their cures. In this half-
heathen Peraea there were no other missionaries, and the man was
not fitted for permanent work with Christ elsewhere. Moreover,
here there was no danger of the miracle being used for political
purposes. Lastly, it might be beneficial to a healed demoniac to
have free converse with all after his gloomy isolation. The 6 ee<5$
is last with emphasis. Jesus shows the man that he must attribute
his deliverance to God. Both Lk. and Mk. preserve the highly
natural touch that, in spite of this command, the man proclaimed
what Jesus had done for him. Note also that **ff oX>;i/ rty iro\w
is much in excess of cts rov OIKQV <rov, and Krjp-ucro-wv of Sirjyov, See
on ix. 10.
Ka0 s SXijv T?JV ir<5Xi,v. With Kypfoa'wv, not with &TT7j\0ev : Win. xlix, <L
a, p. 499. Mk. has tv T$ Ae/cair6X. Nowhere else in N.T. does Ka$
8\vv occur : Lk. commonly writes /ca0' 8Kq$ (iv. 14, xxiii. 5 ; Acts ix. 31, 42,
x. 37). He nowhere mentions Decapolis.
40-56. The Healing of the Woman with the Issue and the
Raising of the Daughter of Jairus. Mt ix. 18-26 ; Mk. v. 21-43.
The name of Bernice (Veronica) for this woman first appears in
the Acts of Pilate, Gospel of Nicodemus, Pt I. ch. vii. Respecting
the statues, which Eusebius saw at Cesarea, and which he believed
to represent Christ and this woman, see H. E. vii. 18. 1-3.
Sozomen says that Julian removed the statue of Christ and sub-
stituted one of himself, which was broken by a thunderbolt (v. 21).
Philostorgius says the same (vii. 3). Malalas gives the petition
in which the woman asked Herod Antipas to be allowed to erect
the memorial (Chrongr. x. 306-8). That the statues existed, and
that Christians thus misinterpreted their meaning, need not be
doubted. Pseudo-Ambrosius would have it that the woman was
Martha the sister of Lazarus.
40-48. In these verses also the marks of Lk.'s style are very conspicuous
(see above on w. 35-39). In ver. 40 we have to Sk rf c. infin* (see on iii. 21),
#iro0"r/)^0eij' (see on i. 56)1 dxe^aro (see on ver. 40), tftratf c. particip*
(see on i. 10), rirj (see on ix. 43), and rpo<r$o#t5vrey (see on iii. 15). In
234 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [YZEL
rer. 41, /eaJ otf (see on i. 20), *a2 o$ror (i. 36), {nrfjpxer (see on fcr. 41;,
rapd ros ir65as (see on vii. 38). In ver. 42, real aflrij (see on i. 17) and *
ry c. infin. In ver. 44, n-apaxp^a (see on v. 25). In ver. 45, vdvrtaw
(vi. 30, vii. 35) and ^Tuyrdra (v. 5). In ver. 46, ^e\6elv dv6 (see on iv.
35). In ven 47, dr^^yetXei' (see on ver. 20), tv^iriov (see on i. 15),
TttVT^s 1 , rou XaoO, idOr}, and v a pax pi) pa. Not one of these expressions is
found in the parallel passages in Mt. and Mk. See on ix. 28-36.
40. d/ireB^aTo. Peculiar to Lk. (ix. n ; Acts iL 41, xviii. 27,
xxL 17, xxiv. 3, xxviii. 30, and possibly xv. 4). The meaning is
they "received Him with pleasure, welcomed Him" (Euthym.
Theophyl. Schanz). See on iv. 42 and on xi. 29. In class. Grk.
the verb means " accept as a teacher, as an authority," or " admit
arguments as valid " : so in Xen. Plat. Arist. etc.
41. s l<etpos. The same name as Jair (Num. xxxii. 41 ; Judg.
x. 3). It is strange that the name ( = " he will give light ") should
be used as an argument" against the historical character of the
narrative. It is not very appropriate to the circumstances.
uTrfjpX 6 "' Very freq. in Lk., esp. in Acts : not in Mt. Mk. or Jn.
The use of this verb as almost equivalent to tlva is the beginning
of the modern usage. But the classical meaning of a present
state connected with a previous state still continues in N.T. (ix.
48, xi. 13, xvi 14, 23, xxiii. 50). See Sp. Comm* on i Cor. vii.
26, Here also Christ does not refuse the homage (iv* 8), as Peter
(Acts x. 26) and the Angel (Rev. xix. 10) do.
42. jAouoyen^s. As in the cases of the widow's son and the
lunatic boy (vii. 1 2, ix. 38), this fact may have influenced Christ
On all three occasions Lk. alone mentions the fact
CTWC ScSSeica. A critical time in a girl's life. Not only Lk.,
who frequently notes such things (ii. 36, 37, 42, iii. 23, xiii. n),
but Mk. also gives the age. All three mention that the woman
with the issue had been suffering for twelve years. For dTr^0^<jKi'
Mk. has eVxarwg l^et and Mt. cfym IreXeur^crcv. The reason for
the difference between Mt. and the others is plain. Lk. and Mk.
give the arrivals, both of the father, who says, " She is dying," and
of the messenger, who says, " She is dead." Mt condenses the
two into one.
awl-nviyov, Mk. has (rweQXi/Sov, which is less strong : see on
ver. 14. In both cases the crw- expresses the pressing together all
round Him. The crowd which had been waiting for Him (ver. 40)
now clings to Him in the hope of witnessing a miracle.
43. o\<ra Iv ^VCTCL. "Being in a condition of hemorrhage.** The
constr. is quite simple and intelligible ; comp. & <f>9opg, 9 & ticffrdrci, 9 3ocB>
fy tKrevdg,, fr tx6p$* The form frfais is from the unused /Mo>, from which
come the late forms tppvtra, and %>i/*tt, and /te?<ris is often a v./. Win. xxix.
3. b, p. 230.
larpots TrpocravaXcScracra oXov T&V piov. " Having, in addition to all
k*r suff*rings 9 spent all her resources on physicians/' or " fox physicians,* of
fin. 43-45.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 235
in physicians." This use of plos for "means of living " is fireq* in N.T.
(xv. 12, 30, xxi. 4 ; Mk. xii. 44 ; I Jn. iii. 17) and in class. Grk. In
cjtss. Grk. /3i'os is a higher word than *u>^, the former being that which is
peculiar to man, the latter that which he shares with brutes and vegetables.
In N.T. ptos retains its meaning, being either the "period of human life," as
I Tim. ii, 2 ; 2 Tim. ii. 4, or "means of life," as here. But an$ is raised
above /3o, and means that vital principle which through Christ man shares
with God. Hence files is comparatively rare hi N.T., which is not much
concerned with the duration of temporal life or the means of prolonging it.
Whereas fa-l} occurs more than a hundred times. See Trench, Syn. xrvii. ;
Crem. Lex. p. 272 ; Lft. on Ign. ad Rom. vii. 3.
\VH. follow B D., Arm. in omitting tarpois . . , fttov. Treg. and RV
indicate doubt in marg. Syr-Sin, omits.
OUK wrxuo-ei>. This use of lo-^y^ for " be able " is freq. in Lk.
See on vi. 48, It is natural that " the physician " does not add,
as Mk. does, that she had suffered much at the hands of the
physicians, and was worse rather than better for their treatment
The remedies which they tried in such cases were sometimes very
severe, and sometimes loathsome and absurd. See Lightfoot,
p. 614; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands ^ pp. 22, 23.
44. irpocreXOouo-a omo-Oey TJ^a-ro. She came from behind that
He might not see her. Her malady made her levitically unclean,
and she did not wish to own this publicly. Her faith is tinged
with superstition. She believes that Christ's garments heal magic-
ally, independently of His will. In other cases those who touched
Him in faith seem to have done so openly. Comp. vi. 19 ; Mt.
xiv. 36 ; Mk. iii. 10, vi. 56.
For faurffcv & has de retro : comp. Baruch vi. 5> *&& itaqitc turba dt retro
(Vulg.). Hence the French derrilre.
TOU Kpacm^Sou TOU tjxariou. "The tassel" rather than "the
fringe" or "hem of His garment" The square overgarment or
Tallith had tassels of three white threads with one of hyacinth at
each of the four corners. Edersh, Z. 6* 71 i. p. 624 (but see
Z>.j??. 2 art "Hem of Garment"). Of the four corners two hung
in front, and two behind. It was easy to touch the latter without
the wearer feeling the touch,
eo-rrj 3\ puons. It "stood still, ceased to flow." Mk. has
l^pav^. "This is the only passage in the N.T. in which tcrravat
is used in this sense. It is the usual word in the medical writers
to denote the stoppage of bodily discharges, and especially such as
are mentioned here" (Hobart, p. 15). Both -rrapaxp^jxa, for which
Mk. has evOvs, and Trpo<rai>aX(i5<ra<ra, for which Mk. has Sa-arav^cracra,
are also claimed as medical (pp. 16, 96).
45. There is no reason for supposing that the miracle was
wrought without the will of Jesus. He knew that someone had
been healed by touching His garment ; and we may believe that
He read *he woman's heart as she approached Him in the belief
236 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VHI. 45-5O,
that He could heal her. Lk. evidently dates fc* cure from her
touching His garment j Mt seems to place it in Christ's words to
her ; Mk. in both places.
Tts 6 dxf'ajjiei'os jxou ; This does not seem to be one of those
cases in which Christ asked for information. He knew that He
had been touched with a purpose, and He probably knew who
had done it. Mk.'s Trepte/SAeTrero tSetv TT)J/ rovro Tronjo-oicrav rather
implies that He knew where to look. For the woman's sake she
must be induced to avow her act. Note the masc., which makes
the question all the more general : Mk. has rts JJLOV faa. T&V
i^cmW. The verb implies more than touching, " laying hold of."
For other cases in which Jesus asked questions of whicn He knew
the answer comp. xxiv. 17; Mk. ix. 33. See some good remarks
in the S. P. C. K. Comm. on Lk. viii. 46.
dpyoufxeVcoy Se irdrrcuK This explains, and to some extent excuses,
Peter's characteristic interference. Lk. alone tells us that Peter
took the lead in this. See on ix. 20, and comp. Mk. i. 36. Note the
n-aj/Twi>, and see on ix. 43 and xi. 4. For emcrrdTa see on v. 5.
awe'xouo-iy <T. " Hold Thee in, keep Thee a prisoner " ; xix.
43, xxii. 63 ; comp. iv. 38. Here only in N,T. does d-rroOXifJeii'
occur : Lat* affligere (Vulg.), comprimere (f), contribulare (d) ; om.
abffj.
46. eyvw Suyajuy ^\Y]Xu0uTaK dir* cfiou. For the constr. see
Burton, 458, and comp. Heb. xiiL 23 ; and for SuVajus see on iv.
3 6 '
47. Tpe'fiouara Tj\0ei>. The Travrcov in ver. 45, if taken literally,
implies that she had previously denied her action. The ^A<9ev,
however, seems to show that she had gone a little way from Him
after being healed. But she may also have been afraid that she
had done wrong in touching His garment. Either or both would
explain the rp^ovcra. She is afraid that the boon may be with-
drawn. For the attraction SL yv alriav see small print on iii. 19,
and Burton, 350: rovAaovis also characteristic.
48. TJ moris orou ero-o>K<Ci> crc. All three record these words. It
was the grasp of her faith, not of her hand, that wrought the cure.
Thus her low view of the manner of Christ's healing is corrected.
49. e'pxsTcu ris irapa TOU dpxtowaycoyou. A member of his
household arrives and tells Jairus that it is now too late. The
delay caused by the incident with the woman must have been
agonizing to him. But this trial is necessary for the development
of his faith, as well as for that of the woman, and Jesus curtails no
item in His work. The r^YjKey is placed first with emphasis.
For o-KtjXXe see on vii. 6. See also Blass on Acts x. 44.
50. MTJ <f>o{3oG, fAooi> irioTcucroK Change of tense. " Cease to
fear; only make an act of faith." In ML v. 36 we have P.WQV
n'orcve, " only continue to believe." In either case the meaning
50-64.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 237
is, " In the presence of this new difficulty let faith prevail, and all
will be well." For jjwf 4>opoO see on i. 13.
51. ouic dcjnJKei' iaeX0eii> TLV& ow aurw. " Did not allow anyone
to enter with Him into the room? He and the disciples had
already entered the house, and the parents had been there from
the first Here, as in ver. 38, Lk. has o-vv where Mk. has /
see on i. 56.
nlrpov Kal 'iwdnrjy Kal 'IdK-tofiov. The chosen three (e
K\KOTpoi as Clem. Alex, calls them) are probably admitted for
the sake of the Twelve, whose faith would be strengthened by the
miracle. These three sufficed as witnesses. Moreover, they were
in character most fitted to profit by the miracle. Here, as in ix.
28 and Acts i. 13, John is placed before James. Elsewhere the
other order, which is almost certainly the order of age, prevails
(v. 10, vi. 14, ix. 51), and always in Mt. (iv. 21, x. 2, xvL i) and
Mk. (L 19, 29, iii. 17, v. 37, ix. 2, x. 35, 41, xiii. 3, xiv. 33).
Irenseus had a text which omitted Kal 'Iwdvyv. Quintus autent mgressus
Dominus ad mortuam puellam suscitamt cam, nullum enim^ inquit^ permisit
intrare nisi Petrum et Jacobum et patrem et matrem puellas, (ii. 24. 4). No
existing text makes this omission ; but many authorities transpose James and
John in order to have the usual order (ft A L S X L, Boh. Aeth. Arm. Goth. ).
But the evidence of B C D E F H K, a b c d e f ff a 1 q r Cod. Am. Cod. Brix.
etc. is decisive. There is similar confusion in ix. 28 and Acts i. 13.
52. eicXaioi' SI ircj>Ts Kal lic<$irTorro aurf\v. The mourners
(2 Chron. xxxv. 25; Jer. ix. 17) were not in the room with the
corpse : Mt. and Mk. tell us that Christ turned them out of the
house. The iravres is again peculiar to Lk.'s account: comp.
vv. 40, 45, 47. The ace. after KdVro/mt is class. (Eur. Tro. 623 ;
Aristoph. Lys. 396): "they beat their breasts for her, bewailed
her." Comp. xxiii. 27 ; Gen. xxiii. 2 ; i Sam. xxv. i.
ou Y&p &irQwev dXXct KaOeuSa. This declaration is in all three
narratives. Neander, Olshausen, Keim, and others understand it
literally ; and possibly Origen is to be understood as taking the
same view. A miracle of power is thus turned into a miracle of
knowledge. But the ciSo'rcs in ver. 53 is conclusive as to the
Evangelist's meaning: not * supposing," but "knowing that she
was dead." The /ca^WSei is rather to be understood in the same
sense as Aaapos /ceKoi/^rai (Jn. xL n). But the cases are not
parallel, far there Jesus prevents all possibility of misunderstanding
by adding Acapos owre0avev. Yet the fact that Jesus has power to
awaken explains in both cases why He speaks of sleep. We may,
however, be content, with Hase, to admit that certainty is unattain-
able as to whether the maiden was dead or in a trance.
54. Kpa-r^o-as -njs x l P$ aflTTjs. All three mention that He laid
hold of her, although to touch a dead body was to incur ceremonial
uncleannejss. In like manner He touched the leper ; see on v. 13.
238 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [VUL 64, 66.
This laying hold of her hand and the raised voice (e^coVqo-ev) are
consonant with waking one out of sleep, and the two may be
regarded as the means of the miracle. Comp. and contrast through-
out Acts ix. 36-42.
e H -nuts, eyeipc. "Arise, get up," not "awake." Mt omits
the command ; Mk. gives the exact words, Talitha cumi. For the
nom. with the art as voc. see on x. 21, xviii. n, 13. For l^oS^o-cr
comp. ver. 8, xvi. 24.
66. ir&rrpx|fy T weufia au-njs. There can be no doubt that
the Evangelist uses the phrase of the spirit returning to a dead
body, which is the accurate use of the phrase. Only the beloved
physician makes this statement. In LXX it is twice used of a
living man's strength reviving; of the fainting Samson (Judg.
xv. 19), and of the starving Egyptian (i Sam. xxx. 12). Note that
Lk. has his favourite TT ap a XP ??/*, where Mk. has his favourite
&&v$; and comp. ver. 44, v. 25, xviii. 43, xxii. 60.
8irafe> afrrfj 8061) mi ^ayeij'. This care of Jesus in command-
ing food after the child's long exhaustion would be of special
interest to Lk. In their joy and excitement the parents might
have forgotten it The charge is somewhat parallel to l&ofco/ avrov
rfi fjLtfjTpl avrov (vii. 15) of the widow's son at Nain. In each case
He intimates that nature is to resume its usual course : the old ties
and the old responsibilities are to begin again.
6 8e irap^YY 61 ^ 61 ' &UTOIS p.t|&6ia el-new TO yeyQv&$. The command
has been rejected as an unintelligible addition to the narrative.
No such command was given at Nain or at Bethany. The object
of it cannot have been to keep the miracle a secret Many were
outside expecting the funeral, and they would have to be told why
no funeral was to take place. It can hardly have been Christ's
intention in this way to prevent the multitude from making a bad
use of the miracle. This command to the parents would not have
attained such an object It was given more probably for the
parents' sake, to keep them from letting the effect of this great
blessing evaporate in vainglorious gossip. To thank God for it at
home would be far more profitable than talking about it abroad.
I3C 1-60. To the Departure for Jerusalem.
This is the last of the four sections into which the Ministry in
Galilee (iv. i4~ix. 50) was divided. It contains the Mission of the
Twelve (1-9), the Feeding of the Five Thousand (10-17), the
Transfiguration (28-36), the Healing of the Demoniac Boy (37-43),
and two Predictions of the Passion (18-27, 43-50),
1-0. The Mission of the Twelve and the Fears of Herod. Mt
. 1-15; Mk. vi 7-1 1. Mt is the most full LL gives no note
THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 239
of time or of connexion, and we may suppose that his sources gave
him no information. See Weiss, L.J. ii. p. 119, Eng. tr. ii. p. 306
For mention of "the Twelve" see vi. 13, viii. i, ix. 12, xviii. 31
xxii. 3, 47. All three mention this summons or invitation on tht
part of Jesus. Mt. and Mk. describe it by their usual 7rpoo-/coAeto-#at,
for which Lk. has owKaXeurOcu, which he more commonly uses in
his Gospel (ix. r, xv. 6, 9, xxiii. 13), while in the Acts he generally
Uses irpoo-KaXeicrOai (ii, 39, V, 40, vi. 2, xiii. 2, etc.).
1. Suvapiv KOI igoucrtcu>. Mt. and Mk. have ^ovcrtav only (see
on iv. 36) : Svvapts is the power, c^ovo-i'a the authority to use it
The Jewish exorcists had neither 8wo/us nor zgovo-Ca, and made
elaborate and painful efforts, which commonly failed. Elsewhere,
when the two are combined, tgovo-ia precedes Swa/xts (iv. 36 j
i Cor. xv. 24; Eph. i. 21; i Pet. iii. 22). The Trovra with
8ai/>Via is peculiar to Lk. It covers all that would come under
the head of possession.
The constr. is not really doubtful : vfoovt 0epa7retfr depends on
teal govfflap, and is co-ordinate with M irdyra $eu/t6wa, Others make v. 0ep.
depend on l^w/cey and be co-ordinate with $tfj>. K. . The least satisfactory
way is to couple vtoovs with Sai^wa, and make Qepairefaiv refer to both " :
" authority over all diseases and demons, to heal them." For this meaning
Lk. would almost certainly have written *v Oepairefaiv. He as usual men-
tions the curing of demoniacs separately from other healings (iv. 40, 41,
vi. 17, 18, vii, 21, viii. 2, xiii. 32).
2. After laff&ai C etc. ins. rods dotfeyowra* from Mt ; A D L H ins. ro&s
i : om. B, Syr-Cur, Syr-Sin.
2* KT]piWeii> T$)K pcunXciaf roG Geou Kal tacrGai. These two verbs
sum up the ministration to men's souls and bodies. See on v, 17.
Mt, adds that they were to raise the dead (x. 8). Mk. tells us that
they were sent out Svo, Suo. For diroor^XXa) see on iv. 18, p. 121.
3. |J^T ptlpW. Mk. has ec prj papfov p,6vov (vi. 8); and the
attempts to explain away this discrepancy in a small matter of
detail are not very happy. As between Mt. and Mk. it is possible
to explain that both mean " Do not procure (/cnjowfo) a staff for
the journey, but take (aipa><nv) the one which you have." But both
Mk. and Lk. use atpctv, and the one has " Take nothing except a
staff," while the other has "Take nothing, neither a staff," eta
Yet in all three the meaning is substantially the same ; " Make no
special preparations ; go as you are." From xxiL 35 we learn that
the directions were obeyed, and with good results. Lk. says
nothing about sandals, respecting which there is another discrep-
ancy between Mt and Mk., unless we are to suppose that urroo^ara
are different from o-avSaXio.
|iirJT dpyJptoK. Mk. has ^oX/cov and Mt. has both, \Lt$k apyvpo*-
ii^Sc X^XKOV. Thus Lk. is Greek, and Mk. is Roman, in choice of
Vordk In LXX dpyvptov is very common, apyupos comparatively
240 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 3-7
rare, while xaXicos is common as a metal, but not in the sense of
money.
jj/rjTe Sue- xn&va$ exeiy. As no mjpa was allowed, the second
tunic, if taken, would have to be worn. Hence the form in Mk.,
" Put not on two tunics." Comp. Jos. Ant. xvii. 5. 7.
In tyeiv we have an anacoluthon ; change from direct to oblique oration.
For it is scarcely admissible to take x 5tl> as infin. for imperat. The actual
imperat. both precedes (ampere) and follows (jw^ere). Win. xliii. 5. d, p. 397.
Mk. here is strangely abrupt in his mixture of constructions.
4. IKCI jxetvere KCU eKeiOey I^pxco-Oe. Vulg. has et inde ne exeatis.
But only one cursive has ^ (38). Cod. Brix. has donee exeatis fr.
Mt The meaning is " Go not from house to house," as He charges
the Seventy in x. 7, a passage which should be compared with this.
The mission both of the Twelve and of the Seventy was to be
simple and quiet, working from fixed centres in each place. This
is the germ of what we find in the apostolic age, " the church that
is in their house" (Rom. xvi. 5; i Cor. xvi. 19; Col. iv. 15;
Philem. 2).
5. For Se'x<orrcu see on viii. 13, and for ejepxty-cvoi diro see on
iv. 35. In Acts xiii. 51 we find Paul and Barnabas performing this
symbolical action of shaking off the dust. It signified that hence-
forth they had not the smallest thing in common with the place.
It is said that Pharisees performed this action when re-entering
Judsea from heathen lands. There and in Acts xviii. 6 Lk. uses
eKTH/acrcr., which Mt. and Mk. have here. For dirortroo-o-. comp.
Acts xxviii. 5. The eV aurou's means lit. "upon them," and so
"against them." Comp. 2 Cor. i. 23 and Acts xiiL 51, and
contrast 2 Thes. i. 10. Mk. here has avrots.
0. uayye\iojut,e/oi ica! Qepaireuorrcs. Comp. ver. 2. Union of
care for men's bodies with care for their souls is characteristic of
Christ and of Christian missions. The miraculous cures of the
apostolic age have given place to the propagation of medical and
sanitary knowledge, which is pursued most earnestly under Christian
influences. For Si^pxorro see on ii. 15, and for euayyeXij^jxeKoi see
on ii. 10. Excepting Mk. i. 28, xvi. 20, i Cor. iv. 17, irairaxoG
occurs only here and three or four times in Acts : here it goes with
both participles.
7-9. The Fears of Herod. Mt. places this section much later
(xiv. 1-13) ; but Mk. (vi. 14-16) agrees with Lk. in connecting it
with the mission of the Twelve. It was their going in all directions
up and down the villages (Stypxovro Kara ras Kayms) that caused the
Christ's work to reach He
fame of Christ's work to reach Herod <pavpov yap eylvero TO
avrov (Mk. vi. 14), or, at anyrate, excite his fears.
7. "HpwSrjs 6 TTp<pxos. So also Mt But Mk. gives him his
courtesy title of /fooriXevs. See on iii. i, p. 83.
|&. 7-9. j THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 241
means " all that was being done " by Jesus and His dfeciples.
There is no irdvra in Mt. or Mk., either here or in the parallels to
ver. i. See on viii. 45. The thoroughly classical word Bupopei
does not occur in LXX, nor in N.T. excepting in Lk. (Acts ii. 12,
v. 24, x. 17). Antipas was "utterly at a loss" as to what he was to
think of Jesus. Note the change of tense : he heard once for all ;
he remained utterly at a loss- He had no doubt heard of Christ
before. It was the startling theories about Him which perplexed
Herod.
9 lo>dnqs T}yp0ir] K veKpwy. This is strong evidence of the effect
of John's teaching. During his life he " did no sign," and yet they
think it possible that so great a Prophet has risen from the dead
and is working miracles. Comp. Mt. xvi. 14; Mk. viii. 28. For
K Kpwi> comp. xx. 35. For rjyepO?} (KBCLEi69) most MSS.
have ey^ycprat, which is not to be accepted because fjyGpOr} is found
in Mt
8. 'HXetas e<j)e^. The verb is changed from ^yep^, because
Elijah had not died. Mt. represents Antipas as saying that Jesus
is the risen Baptist, and omits the suggestions about Elijah and
other Prophets. The account of Lk. is intrinsically more exact.
He would obtain good information at Csesarea from Herod's
steward (viii. 3), and at Antioch from Herod's foster-brother (Acts
xiii. i).
Trpo<j>rjTTjs TIS T&V dpxauw. We know from Jn. vii. 40, 41 that
some Jews distinguished the great Prophet of Deut. xviii. 1 5 from
the Messiah. Comp. Jn. i; 21. And Mt. xvi. 14 seems to show
that there was an expectation that Jeremiah or other Prophets
would return at some future crisis. The r&v apxatw is peculiar to
Lk. (comp. ver. 19). It may be opposed either to a new Prophet
(vii. 1 6), or to the later Prophets as compared with Moses and
Samuel. The former is more probable.
9. 'Itodwiv eyw direic<|>dXicra. "As for John, / beheaded him."
Mt and Mark represent Herod as saying of Christ, "This is
John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead"; and some in-
terpret this remark as meaning much the same : " Seeing that I
put him to death, he may have risen again." But this is very
unnatural. Rather, " I thought that I had got rid of this kind of
trouble when I beheaded John ; and here I am having it all over
again." Perhaps, as Bede suggests, Antipas afterwards came to
the conclusion that the Baptist had risen from the dead, a view
which to his guilty conscience was specially unwelcome. Lk. men-
tions the imprisonment of the Baptist by anticipation (iii. 20) ; but,
excepting in this remark of Antipas, he does not record his death.
Toiaura. This may refer either to the works of Christ or to
the speculations of the multitude respecting Him. Although
John had wrought o miracles during his ministry (John x. 41)
16
242 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 9, 1
yet, if he had risen From the ds&d, such things might be expected
of him (Mt xiv. a).
The &Y& of TR. before footo is of very doubtful authority (A D X T etc,)*
Treg. brackets, Tisch. WH. RV. omit. It would bave no point
^TGI "Seiif auTSn. Not merely "he desired" (AV.), but "he
continued s^king to see Him." He made various attempts to
apply a test which would have settled the question. Herod knew
the Baptist ; and he could soon determine whether this was John
or not, if only he could see Him. Comp. xxiii. 8, where the
gratification of this desire is recorded. No doubt it was not
merely the wish to settle the question of identity which led Antipas
to try to see Jesus. That he was a Sadducee is a guess of Scholten.
10-17. The Feeding of the Five Thousand. This is the one
miracle which is recorded by all four Evangelists (Mt xiv. 13;
Mk. vi. 30 ; Jn. vi. i). In all four it is the climax of the ministry.
Henceforward attention is directed more and more to the death
which will bring Christ's work to a close. From S. John we learn
that it took place shortly before the Passover. All four accounts
should be compared. Each contributes some special features,
and each appears to be to a large extent independent The marks
of Lk.'s style are abundant in his narrative.
10. uTTooTp^j/anres. See small print on L 56. Lk. connects the
miracle with the return of the Twelve ; but he gives no hint as to
the time of their absence. We may perhaps allow a few weeks. He
does not often call the Twelve ot d-n^oroXoi (vi. 13, xvii. 5. xxii
14, xxiv. 10).
ScTjy^crcuTo aurw o<ra eiroitjcrav. What this was has already
been recorded in brief (ver. 6). It is strange that anyone should
infer from Lk.'s not expressly mentioning, as Mk. does (vi. 12, 13),
the casting out of demons, "that Lk. wishes us to believe that
they had failed in this respect," and " had evidently been able to
i^rry out only a part of their commission." Lk. records the suc-
cess of the Seventy in exorcizing demons (x. 17) : why should he
wish to insinuate that the Twelve had failed ? Excepting Mk. v.
16, ix. 9; Heb. xi. 32, SiyycicrOat occurs only in Lk. (viii. 39;
Acts viii. 33, ix. 27, xii. 17). Comp. ver. 49. Lk. perhaps wishes
us to understand that it was the report which the Apostles brought
of their doings that led to Christ's taking them apart, as Mk. says,
for rest Mt states that it was the news of the Baptist's death
which led to the withdrawal, Jn. has only a vague /ACTO- ravro.
All may be correct ; but there can have been no borrowing.
ircipoXapbv afiroJs. Comp. ver. 28, xviiL 31.
fiTrex^p'no'c^ Kar* IBiay. The verb occurs only here and v. 16
in NT. Comp. Ecclus. xiii. 9 (12). Lk. does not seem to bo
aware that Christ and His disciples went by boat across the lake
DC. 10-13.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 243
(Mt Mk. Jn.), while the multitude went round by land. Hence
5t is possible that he supposed that the miracle took place near
Bethsaida on the west shore, and not at Bethsaida Julias on the
Jordan near the north-east end of the lake. See D*B? art.
u Bethsaida." Mt. Mk. and LL all have KQ.T
The common reading, els r6irov ^/Mjjooy 6Xewj
(ACEGHKMSUV etc., Aeth. Arm. Goth.), seems to be an ingenious
conflation- of the original text^ els v6\ty KaKoujj^v^v J$7]9<ra,idd (B L X S 33
Boh. Sah. ), which is supported by D [only K^TJV for v6\iy] t with a corrcc*
tion of it 9 els rbirov p7]fj,ov (&$*)> or els rdirov tfrrjuov Brjdfcutid (b c fF 2 1 g
Vulg. Syr. ), or els roirov Zpripov KaXo^vov Bi]d<rai$d (a e ) These corrections
would be suggested by ver. 12 and Mt. and Mk. and the difficulty of associat-
ing the miracle with a ir6\ts. See WH. ii. Intr. p. 102, and also Wordsw.
Vulg. in loco. For other apparent instances of conflation see xi 54, xii. 1 8,
xxiv. 53. Note Lk.'s favourite /caXou /j. vr\v.
11. ot 81 ox\oi yv&vTts ^KoXouO^a-ay aurai. The Baptist was
dead and the Twelve had returned to Jesus, so that there was no
longer any counter-attraction. No Evangelist tells us how long
Jesus and the disciples enjoyed their privacy before the multitudes
arrived.
diroSef <]u,i>os aurou's. " He gave them a welcome," as they had
given Him (see on viii. 40), although their arrival destroyed the
retirement which He had sought. As Jn. states, it was Hi$
miracles of healing which attracted them rather than His teaching.
For aTroSefa/xgvos (tfBDLXE i 33 69) AC etc. have Sea/*ei/os;
the compound is peculiar to Lk. It corresponds to ecrTrXayxvtcr^if
in Mt. and Mk.
e\d\i aurots ircp! -njs |3a<r. T. ., K.T.\. " He continued speak-
ing to them about the kingdom of God ; and those who had need
of cure He healed." See on v. 17 and ix. 6. Neither Mt nor
Jn. say anything about His teaching the multitudes, or about His
healing any of them.
O icXCvciv. Comp. Jer* vi. 4; Judg. xix. ii> ix. 3?
I Sam. iv. 2, In N.T. Lk, alone uses KKlvew intransitively (xxiv. 29),
Comp. 4KK\lverc dbr* afrruv (Rom. xvi. 17). In Att. Grk. K\iveiv is genei
ally trans., diroK\lveiv intrans. Win. xxxviii. I, p. 315.
Se ol ScSScKa. In the three it is the Twelve wh*
take the initiative ; in Jn. it is the Lord who does so.
els ras KVK\W KSp,as Kal dypov?. Being similar in meaning, the nouni
have only one article, although they differ in gender : comp. i 6 and adv. 23*
and contrast x. 21 and xiv. 26. See on i. 6.
emoriTi<rji,<$i>. Here only in N.T., but quite class. It h speci-
ally used of provisions for a journey : Gen. xliL 25, xlv. 21 ; Josh.
b 5, ii ; Judith ii. 18, iv. 5 ; Xen. Anab. i. 5. 9, vii. i. 9.
13. Both cTTrcv 84 and wpos are in Lk.'s style, and ^ithei
occurs in the parallels. The same is true of warro, an^ m vec
244 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 13-16.
14 of irpos and the second uxretL Note the emphatic u/jieis.
" Ye are to find food for them, not they." There is no need to
supply anything after d \L-r\Ti ifjjAeis dyopdcrwjjLei'. " We have no more
than five loaves," leads quite naturally to " unless we are to go
and buy," eta j and then the sentence is complete. The state-
ment expresses perplexity (Weiss), not sarcasm (Schanz).
OUK iar\v ^fi/lv -n-Xetov ^ tr^vrc. The TrXetoy 4} T&TC is virtually plur.
and has a plur. verb. For the subjunct. after el /M? comp. I Cor. xiv. 5,
and see Win. xii. 2. b, p. 368, and Burton, 252, 253. The subjunct. after
el is not rare in late Grk, But this is rather a delib. subjunct
Jn. tells us that it was Andrew who pointed out the lad with
the loaves, and that they were of barley-bread. On the whole,
his narrative is the most precise. The iqpas, like the preceding
is emphatic.
14. Ao-et o^Spes irerraiciarxiXioi. They were roughly counted
as about a hundred companies with about fifty men in each.
Note the at/Spes : not avOpwrroi. The women and children, as
Mk. tells us, were not included in the reckoning. They would be
much less numerous than the men. Lk. says nothing about the
grass, which all the others mention, and which made the com-
panies in their Oriental costumes look like flower-beds (Trpacrtat),
as Mk. indicates.
KaraicXfrarc a-&rots K\ura$. The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (vii.
36, xiv. 8, xxiv. 30) ; in LXX Num. xxiv. 9 ; Exod. xxi. iB ; Judg. v. 27 ;
Judith xii. 15. The /cXtcr/as is cogn. ace. It occurs here only in bibl, Grk.
Comp. Jos. Ant, xii. 2. 1 1 ; Phit. Sertor. xxvi.
<&ore! drcl ire^jcorra. In the spaces between the groups the
Apostles would be able to move freely and distribute the food.
That the arrangement (50, 5000) has any relation to the five loaves
is not likely. The &vd is distributive : comp. x, i ; Mt. xx. 9 -
Jn. ii. 6 ; Rev. iv. 8.
16. Here Mt. Mk. and Lk. are almost verbatim the samp
All three mention the taking the loaves and fishes, the looking up
to heaven, the blessing, and the breaking, and the giving to the
disciples. For euXoyiqo-ci' Jn. has evxaptorijcra?. This blessing or
thanksgiving is the usual grace before meat said by the host or the
head of the house. The Talmud says that " he who enjoys augb t
without thanksgiving is as though he robbed God." We art
probably to understand that this blessing is the means of the
miracle. Comp. Jn. vi. 23; and of feeding the four thousand
(Mt xv. 36; Mk. viii. 6); and of the eucharist (Mt. xxvi 26 ,
Mk. xiv. 22; Lk. xxii. 17, 19; i Cor. xi. 24). The manner of
the miracle cannot be discerned : it is a literal fulfilment of Mt, vi
33. Lk alone mentions that Jesus blessed the loaves^ cv\6yrjcrw
The preceding articles, rods TTCVTC aprovs *at tods Svo
IX. 16, 17.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 245
tX^'as, mean those which had been mentioned before in ver. 13,
where the words have no article.
eSiBou TOIS jxct0?]Tais. " Continued giving them to the disciples *'
The imperf. in the midst of aorists is graphic. Comp. xxiv. 30 ;
Mk. viii. 6, and contrast xxii. 19; Mk. xiv. 22.
17. The verbal resemblance between the three accounts con-
tinues. For exopTdo-O-rjcray see on vi. 21, and take tcXao-jxdTwi/ after TO
TTptcro-i5o-a]/ (De W. Hahn). All four mention the twelve Kofavoi.
as also does Mt. in referring to this miracle (xvi. 9) ; whereas at
the feeding of the four thousand (Mt xv. 37 ; Mk. viii. 8), and in
referring to it (Mt. xvi. 10), the word used for basket is cnrvpis. It
is the more remarkable that Lk. and Jn. both have KO^LVOL because
they do not mention the other miracle. The cnrupk was large, cap-
able of holding a man (Acts ix. 25). The KO<U/OS was the wallet
carried by every travelling Jew, to avoid buying food from Gentiles :
fud&is quorum cophinus fanumque supellex (Juv. Sat. iii. 14).
Comp. nupsisti, Geltia, cistifero, "thou hast married a Jew" (Mart.
Epig. v. 17. 4). These exact details would scarcely have been
maintained so consistently in a deliberate fiction or in a myth.
Still less would either fiction or myth have represented one who
could multiply food at will as giving directions that the fragments
should not be wasted (Jn. vi. 12). The possessor of an in-
exhaustible purse is never represented as being watchful against
extravagance.
Note the climax in ver. 17. They not only ate, but were
satisfied, all of them ; and not only so, but there was something
over, far more than the original supply.
Weiss well remarks that "the criticism which is afraid of miracles finds
itself in no small difficulty in the presence of this narrative. It is guaranteed
by all our sources which rest upon eye-witness; and these show the inde-
pendence of their tradition by their deviations, which do not affect the kernel
of the matter, and cannot be explained by any tendencies whatever. In the
presence of this fact the possibility of myth or invention is utterly inad-
missible. . . . Only this remains absolutely incontrovertible, that it is the
intention of all our reports to narrate a miracle ; and by this we must abide, if
the origin of the tradition is not to abide an entirely inexplicable riddle " (L. J+
ii. pp. 196-200, Eng. tr. ii. pp. 381-385). The explanation that Christ's
generosity in giving away the food of His party induced others who had food
to give it away, and that thus there was enough for all, is plainly not what
the Evangelists mean, and it does not explain their statements. Would such
generosity suggest that He was the Messiah^ or induce them to try to make
Him king ? Still more inadequate is the suggestion of Renan : Grace ct, une
extreme frugality la tr&upe sainte y vcut ; on crut naturellement -voir en
cela un miracle ( V. dej* p. 198).
18-22. The Confession of Peter and First Announcement of
the Passion. Mt. xvi. 13-21; Mk. viii, 27-31. No connexion
with the miracle just related is either stated or implied. Lk.
omits the sequel of the miracle, the peremptory dismissal of the
246 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 18-20.
disciples and gradual dismissal of the people, the storm, the walk
ing on the sea, the discourse on the Bread of Life, the Syro-
phenician woman, the Ephphatha miracle, the feeding of the
four thousand, the forgetting to take bread, and the healing of a
blind man at Bethsaida Julias (Mt. xiv. 22-xvi. 12 j Mk. vi. 45-
viiL 26; Jn. vi. 14-71). Can he then have seen either Mt. or
Mk. ? So also here : both the others mention that the incident took
place near Csssarea Philippi, on the confines of heathenism. Lk.
mentions no place. It is a desperate expedient to suppose with
Reuss, that the copy of Mk. which Lk. knew chanced to omit
these sections. From ver. 18 to ver. 50 Lk. is once more parallel
in the main to the other two.
18. Kal cy^ero Iv TW et^ai auToy irpocreuxo'jJLefoi'. See note at
the end of ch. i. and on iii. 21. For the periphrastic infinitive
comp. xi. i, and Burton, 97. Jesus Patrem rogarat^ ut distipulis
se revelaref* Nam argumentum precum Jesu colligi potest ex ser-
monibus actionibusque insecutis ; vi. 12, 13 (Beng.).
KaTci (x<5vas. Perhaps %cipay was originally understood. But the ex-
pression is used as a simple adv. and is sometimes written as one word, Kara-
/i<Ws. In N.T. only here and Mk. iv. 10. In LXX Ps. iv. 9, xxxii. 15 ;
Jer. xv. 17 ; Lam. iii. 28.
cruwjo-aK auT ot fiaO^rau This almost amounts to a contra-
diction of what precedes. "When He was alone praying, His
disciples were with Him." " Alone " no doubt means " in pri-
vate," or " in a solitary spot," and may be taken with vwrjorav : so
that the contradiction is only on the surface. Moreover we are
perhaps to understand that His prayer was solitary : His disciples
did not join in it. In either case Kara juovas is quite intelligible,
although the disciples may have been close to Him. But it is
possible that the true reading is crw^vr^o-ai/, meaning, "His disciples
met Him, fell in with Him," as He was engaged in prayer. This
is the reading of B*, which a later scribe has corrected to crwijo-av.
And B* is here supported by the Old Latin f (occurrerunf) and
one excellent cursive (157), besides two less important authorities.
Nevertheless, it is on the whole more probable that (rvvTJvrrjcrav is
an early attempt to get rid of the apparent contradiction involved
in Kara jnovas crwTJcrav. See Expositor ^ 3rd series, iv. p. 159.
Elsewhere in N.T. crwetvat occurs only Acts xxii. n.
SO. "YfAets 1. With great emphasis : " But ye who do ye say
that I am?" The impulsiveness of Peter, and his position as
spokesman for the Twelve, are here conspicuous. He is crro/m rov
Xopov: viii. 45, xii. 41, xviii. 28. Licet c&teri apostoli sctant^ Petrus
tamen respondit pr& c&teris (Bede).
t^f XpurroK TOU coG. "Whom God hath anointed " and sent :
fie on ii * Here ML has simply 6 Xpioros, and ML 6 Xpunr&f
IX. SO-22.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 247
6 wos rov eoO TOV fcovros. See Keim on this confession, as "a
solemn event of the very highest character " (Jes. of Naz* iv.
p. 263). Lk. and Mk. omit the praise bestowed on Peter for
this confession, and the much discussed promise made to him
(Mt. xvi. 17-19). Can it be of supreme importance?
21. pjSeyl X^Y II; TO " T0 ' Because of the grossly erroneous
views about the Messiah which prevailed among the people.
Shortly before this they had wished to take Him by force and
make Him king (Jn. vi. 15). Hence Jesus never proclaimed
Himself openly to the multitude as the Messiah ; and here, when
He does to the Twelve, He explains the nature of His Kingdom,
and strictly forbids them to make His Messiahship known. The
nearest approach to exceptions to this practice are the Samaritan
woman (Jn. iv. 26), and the outcast from the synagogue (Jn. ix. 37),
Others explain the command to keep silence as prompted by the fear lest the
guilt of those who were about to put Jesus to death should be increased by the
disciples proclaiming Him as the Messiah. Others again suggest the fear lest
the people, if they knew that He was the Messiah, should attempt to rescue
Him from the death which it was necessary that He should undergo. Neither
of these appears to be satisfactory. In any case the 8^ is adversative. What
Peter said was quite true : " but He charged them, and commanded."
22. Lk. does not tell us, as Mk. does, and still more plainly
Mt, that this was the beginning of Christ's predictions respecting
His Passion: YJPCITO SiSaovcav avrm>s on. Act, K.r.A. (Mk. viii. 31);
dir6 TOTC T]paTo Set/cvvetv, K.r.X (Mt xvi. 21). The first announce-
ment of such things must have seemed overwhelming. Peter's
protest perhaps expressed the feeling of most of them.
ehr&p OTI Act. The on is recitative, not argumentative. The
Aei is here in all three; but elsewhere Lk. uses it much more
often than any other Evangelist. It expresses logical necessity
rather than moral obligation (c^eiXa/, Heb. ii. 17) or natural fitness
(rp7rev, Heb. ii. 10). It is a Divine decree, a law of the Divine
nature, that the Son of Man must suffer. Prophecy had repeatedly
intimated this decree. Comp. xiii. 33, xviL 25, xxii. 37, xxiv. 7, 26,
44; Jn. iii. 14, etc. For T&I> ulo> TOU dv6p<6irou, file title which
suggested, while it veiled, His Messiahship, see on v. 24.
diroSoKip-aarO^mi diro r&v, K.T.\. " Be rejected after investigation
at the hands of the," etc. The SoKifjuurta was the scrutiny which
an elected magistrate had to undergo at Athens, to see whether he
was legally qualified to hold office. The hierarchy held such a
scrutiny respecting the claims of Jesus to be the Christ, and
rejected Him : xvii. 25, xx. 17 ; i Pet ii. 4, 7. For the dir<5, "at
the hands of," comp. Ecclus. xx, 20 ; LL vii 35 ; Acts ii. 22 j
Jas. i. 13 ; Rev. xii. 6.
TWK Trpeo-puT^pwy ical dpxpit>v KCU ypafx/AaT/wr. The three
aouns, as forming one body, have one article. So also in Mt
248 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 23-28,
xvi. 21. In ML xiv. 43, 53, where the Sanhedrin is spoken of
with similar fulness, all three nouns have the article. The ap^te-
pels are rarely placed second: comp. xx. 19; Mt xvi. 21; Mk.
viii. 31. The common formulae are apx-> yp ^, ^pecr/?, or apx*,
8., ypa/A. and apx- wpecr/5. or dp^
The pass, of AiroKrelvw is late Grk Classical writers use
w. For rfl r^r?; ^/> Mk. has the less accurate pc*ri
rpets yptpas. He also has foaffTyvai, while Mt. has tyepOTJvai, which is
probably right here ; but dvao-n^cu (A C D, Just. Orig.) is well supported.
Lk. omits Peter's protest against the declaration that Christ
must suffer, and the severe rebuke which he received. His omission
of " Get thee behind Me, Satan," is sufficient answer to those who
assert that it is out of ill-will to Peter that Lk. omits " Blessed art
thou, Simon Bar-Jonah." See on v. 10 and xxii. 54-62.
2B-&7. The Self-Renouncement required in Christ's Followers.
Mt. xvi. 24-28; Mk. viii. 34-ix. i. Although the manner of intro-
ducing the words is different in all three, the similarity between the
reports of the words is very close throughout, especially in the
words quoted m 23, 24. Throughout the Gospels it is in
the records of Christ's sayings that the closest resemblances are
found. Comp. xviii. 16, 17, 25, 27.
23. -rrpos -irarras. Both words are characteristic : see on ver. 43
and i. 13. The Travras represents Mk/s rov o^Xov <rvv rots /Aa&y-
rat?. The necessity of self-denial and self-sacrifice was made
known to all, although for the present the supreme example of the
necessity was a mystery revealed gradually to a very few.
dptitTw TW oraupoi/ <xuTou icdO* TJjiji^paj'. This is the first mention
of the cross in Lk. and Mk. Its associations were such that this
declaration must have been startling. The Jews, especially in
Galilee, knew well what the cross meant. Hundreds of the
followers of Judas and Simon had been crucified (Jos. Ant
xviii. 10. 10). It represents, therefore, not so much a burden as an
instrument of death, and it was mentioned because of its familiar
associations. Comp. xiv. 27 ; Mt. x. 38. The Ka0 9 Tfjjj^pav here is
peculiar to Lk. : comp. i Cor. xv. 31. We must distinguish be-
tween <xKoXou0emt> JJLOI, " follow Me loyally," and omcrw p,ou epxeo-Gat,
" become My disciple." There are three conditions of discipleship:
self-denial, bearing one's cross, and obedience.
24. 8s yap av 0<?\fl. Here, as in ver. 23, " will " (AV.) is too wenk as
a translation of Qt\ew, being too like the simple future: "desireth" or
"willeth" is better: si quis vult^ qui enim voluerit. Such inadequate
renderings of B\eiv are common in AV. (xix. 14 ; Jn. vL 67, vii 17, viii, 44).
See small print on x. 22. Comp. xvii. 33.
06. Tt yotp <&4>\nrai otj/Opwiros. The same verb is used by all
three; but AV. obliterates this by rendering " profit " in Mt and
IX. 25-87.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE
Mk., and "advantage" in Lk. Again, ^pa^ai is common to
all three : yet AV. has " lose " in Mt. and Mk., and " cast away " in
Lk. The opposition between /cepSos and f?//ua is common in Grk.
See Lft. on Phil. iii. 7. In N.T. the act. fyfudta does not occur, but
only the pass, with either ace. of the thing confiscated (PhiL iii. 8),
or dat. with h (2 Cor. vii. 9), or absol. (i Cor. iii. 15). The
lauToV is equivalent to ryv faxyv in ver. 24 and in Mt and Mk.
To be excluded from eternal life is death. Lk. omits "What
should a man give in exchange for his life?" We must keep
' life " for fax?} throughout the passage : the context shows when
it means life as men desire it on earth, and when life as the blessed
enjoy it in the Kingdom. The Gospel has raised the meaning of
fax^t as f C W1 ?> to a higher power. Comp. Rev. xii. n. JFrumen-
tum st servas perdtS) si seminas renovas (Bede).
For the combination of aor. part, with fut indie, compb 3 Jn. 6, and
Burton, 141.
26. liTcuo'xui'frfl f* Ka ^ T0 "5 ifiods XcSyous. Mt omits. The
C-TTL in comp. means "on account of": this is the ground of his
shame: comp. xiii. 26, 27. For the constr. comp. Rom. i. 16;
2 Tim. i. 8, 16 ; Heb. xi. 16. The lv rfj 8oj] aujoG refers to the
Tra/Dovcrta, not to the Resurrection (xii. 36, xvii. 24, xviii. 8 ? xix. 15,
xxi. 27), and is the first mention by Lk. of Christ's promising to
return in glory. Lk. omits " in this adulterous generation " (Mk.}*.
27. dXT]0w$. With Xeyo), not with what follows. Mt. and ME*
have a/jirjv, which Lk. uses much less frequently than the others,
In xii. 44 and xxi. 3 Lk. has oA^ojs where Mt. has aptfv. For
a5roG, " here," comp. Acts xv. 34 ; Mt xxvi. 36. Mt and Mk.
have oJSe.
YeiJorwrrai Oaydrou. The expression is found in the Talmud,
but not in O.T. Comp. Mt. xvi. 28; Jn. viii. 52; Heb. ii. 9. It
implies experience of the bitterness of death. Comp. tSetv 66.va.rov
(ii. 26) and Odvarov 0G>/>tv (Jn. viii. 51). Foryevco-tfat in the sense
of " experience " comp. Heb. vi. 4, 5 ; Ps. xxxiv. 9.
TTJV (Sao-iXeiaF TOO coo. Mk. adds eXyXvOviav ev Swdpet, and
Mt. substitutes T, vlov TOV avflp. Ip^o^ci/or er T$ /Sa&tXeitji avrov.
The meaning is much disputed. The principal interpretations
are : i. The Transfiguration^ which all three accounts closely con-
nect with this prediction (most of the Fathers, Euthym. Theophyl.
Maldon.); 2. The Resurrection and Ascension (Cajetan, Calvin,
Beza) ; 3. Pentecost and the great signs which followed it (Godet,
Hahn) ; 4. The spread of Christianity (Nosgen) ; 5, The internal
development of the Gospel (Erasmus, Klostermann) ; 6. The destruc*
tion of Jerusalem (Wetstein, Alford, Morison, Plumptre, Mansel) {
7. The Second Advent (Meyer, Weiss, Holtzmann). No inter-
Dretation can be correct that does not explain curfr n^es, which
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 27, 2&
implies the exceptional privilege ofsome^ as distinct from the common
experience of all. This test seems to exclude all but the first and
the sixth of these interpretations ; and, if we must choose between
these two, the sixth must be right. " Shall not taste of death
until " cannot refer exclusively to an event to take place the next
week. But both may be right. The Transfiguration, witnessed
by only three of those present, was a foretaste of Christ's glory
both on earth and in heaven. The destruction of Jerusalem,
witnessed by S. John and perhaps a few others of those present,
swept away the remains of the Old Dispensation and left the
Gospel in possession of the field. Only so far as the destruction
of Jerusalem was a type of the end of the world is there a
reference to the Trapovwa (see on xxi. 32). A direct reference to
the Trapovo-ia is excluded by the fact that none of those present
lived to witness it, except in the sense that all men will witness it,
Jesus has told us that during His life on earth He was ignorant of
the date of the day of judgment (Mk. xiii. 32) : and we cannot
suppose that in spite of that ignorance He predicted that it was
near ; still less that He uttered a prediction which has not been
fulfilled. Moreover, the ou ^ y^wi/Tai Oa^(rou !wg implies that
the rives will experience death after seeing the fiacr* T. eov, which
would not be true of those who live to see the irapovaria (i Cor.
xv, 51).
28-36. The Transfiguration. Mt. xvii. 1-13; Mk. ix. 2-13.
Both Lk. (w. 31, 32) and Mt. (xvii. 6, 7) give details which Mk.
omits ; but Mk. has very little (part of ix. 3) which is not in either
of the others.
Here again (see on viii. 35-39, 40-48) the marks of Lk.'s diction are numer-
ous: tytvero, were/ (ver. 28); tytvcro, tv rf with infin. (29); &v8pes (30);
fftiv t dvdpas (32); ^ytveTQ, tv r<, elyrep irp6$, eTKrrdra (33); ev r< (34),
<pwvfy eytvero (35); ev rf t ta.1 atfro, d,injyyL\ap, tw Ixclvcut raZf
s, otdtv 3>v (36).
For comment see Tert. Adv. Martion. iv. 22 ; Trench, Studies
m the Gospels ^ pp. 184-214; Herzog, PRE. 1 art. Verkldrun&
omitted in 2nd ed. ; SchafPs Herzog, art. " Transfiguration."
28. Acre! i^dfpcu oKroS. A nom. without construction of any
kind. Comp. Acts v. 7; Mt. xv. 32 ; Mk. viii. 2, and irXiov in
ver. 13. Win. Iviii. 4, p. 648. The other two have "after six
days," which agrees with "about eight days." We can hardly say
that Lk. is " improving their chronology." It looks as if he had not
seen their expression. For trapa\a.$&v comp. ver. 10, and for the
order of the names see on viii. 51. Note that Lk. changes the
order of the names. He places John before James (viii. 51), which
may be because he wrote after John had become the better knowtu
ts TO opos. The others have eis opos vi/^AoV Both expressions
wauld fit Hermon, which is about 9200 feet high, and would easily
28-31.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 25 1
be reached in a week from Caesarea PhilippL It is still called
Jebel esh Sheikh, "the chief mountain." It is higher than Lebanon
(8500) or Anti-Lebanon (8700), and its isolated white summit is
visible from many eminences throughout Palestine (Conder, Hand-
book of the Bible, p. 205 ; D.B.^i. p. 1339 ; Tristram, Bible Places,
p. 280). A tradition, which is first mentioned by Cyril of Jeru-
salem (CatecL xii. 16), places the scene of the Transfiguration on
Tabor, 1 which at this time seems to have had a village or town on
the top, which Josephus fortified against Vespasian (B.J. iv. i. 8).
In that case the solitude (KO.T iSt'av) which is required for the
Transfiguration would be impossible. The -n-poo-eu^ao-Ocu is peculiar
to this account : see on iii. 21, a similar occasion.
29. ey^ero . . . erepc^. The Gentile Lk. writing for Gentiles
avoids the word ^r^op^O^ (Mt. xvii. 2 ; Mk. ix. 2), which might
be understood of the metamorphosis of heathen deities. Comp eV
ercpa popcfrfj ([ML] xvi. 12). The XCUKOS need not be made ad-
verbial. The asyndeton is not violent, if it be made co-ordinate
with cfacrrpaTTTcov, a word which occurs Ezek. i. 4, 7 ; Nah. iii. 3.
30. Both aySpcs and omi/es are peculiar to Lk. here : see ii. 4.
The three Apostles saw the forms of two men who were such as to
be recognized as Moses and Elijah, the representatives of the
Law and the Prophets. The power to recognize them was granted
with the power to see them ; otherwise the sight would have been
meaningless. In the same way S. Paul recognized Ananias in a
vision, although he had not previously known him (Acts ix. 12).
We might render the omi/es "who were no others than." That
Moses was to reappear as well as Elijah at the beginning of the
Messianic Kingdom, was a later dream of the Rabbis. See Lightfoot,
Hor. Heb. ad loc. See small print on ii. 22 for the form Mcowrfc.
31. 32. Peculiar to Lk. See on xxii. 43.
TV eo&oi> aurou. His departure from this world by means of
the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension. Comp. the use of
wro6\>$ in Acts xiii. 24. For e|o8os in the sense of death see
2 Pet i. 15 ; Wisd. iii. 2, vii. 6. That the Apostles heard this
subject being discussed explains part of the meaning of the
Transfiguration. It was to calm their minds, which had recently
been disturbed by the prediction of Christ's sufferings and death. 2
The ^fieXXeK corresponds to Set in ver. 22. It is all ordained by
God, and is sure to take place ; and when it takes place it may be
regarded as a fulfilment (wA^pow), and also as a filling full. There
were types and prophecies shadowing forth the Divine purpose,
every detail of which must be gone through.
1 In the Greek Church the Feast of the Transfiguration, Aug. 6th, is called
ti Qap&pLov* The combination in Ps. baadx, 12 may be noted.
1 In tramfguratione illud princtpaliter agebatur, ut <fo cordibus distipulorum
9candolum crucis tolltrctur (Leo the Great, Serm* xliv., Migne, liv. 310).
252 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 31-34,
It is peihaps to be regretted that RV. retains "accomplish," which is its
freq. rendering of reXeiiw (Jn. iv. 34, v. 36 ; Acts xx. 24 ; Jn. xvii. 4, etc ),
instead of substituting " fulfil," which is its freq. rendering of Tr\ijp6u (xxi. 24,
nil. 16, xsiv. 44; Acts i. 16, etc.). And why not "exodus" here, and
Heb. xi, 22, and 2 Pet. i. 15, for o5os ?
j3g(3apT]p.voi< -uirvw. In N.T. only the pass, of this verb is found, and
the best writers do not use the pres. of either voice. In Mt. xxvi. 43 it is
used of the eyes of these same three being heavy with sleep : comp. Lk. xxi.
34 $ 2 Cor. i. S 3 v. 4 ; I Tim. v. 16.
SiaypY)yopYJcran-es S " But having remained awake " in spite
of this sleepiness would be the common meaning of the word ; J
but perhaps here it means "having become thoroughly awake."
Syr-Sin, has " when they awoke." It is a late word, and occurs
nowhere else in N.T. or LXX. Lk. is fond of compounds with
Sta : Siayivaiovceiv, o\aSe;(0-#a,i, SiaA^wrew, SiaAuav, Siave/^iv, Sia-
o\a,7ropeti/, SiaTrpay/xa/reuecrtfai, etc.
As the invention of a later hand these two verses (31, 32) do pot explain
themselves. What is the motive for the invention? As a narrative of facts
they throw much light on the whole situation.
33. & T 8iaxwpio-0ai aurods dir" aurou. "As they were part-
ing from Him." This again is in Lk. only, and it explains Peter's
remark. His first impulse is to prevent Moses and Elijah from
going away. He wishes to make present glory and rapture
permanent.
iiri> 6 n&rpos. Mt. and Mk. add aKOKpiQeis. It is his response
to what he saw. For "Emcri-dra see on v. 5. He says that " it is
good for us to be here," not " it is better." There is no comparison
with any other condition. The Yjjmas probably means the Apostles,
not all six persons. The Apostles are ready to help in erecting
the ovc^vcu. If they were to remain there, they must have shelter.
ji$l i8&$ o Xeyei. We need not follow Tertullian in interpret-
ing this of a state of ecstasy (amentia), as of one rapt into another
world. Mk. tell us plainly why Peter " wist not what to answer,"
Kcf>ofioi yap eyevovro : and this he would have from Peter himself.
In any case, neither Peter's strange proposal nor the comment
upon it looks like invention.
34. ly^KTO Ke<|><-Xirj ical eir0-iaai> afirous. Mt calls it ^XUTCIVT;,
a "luminous cloud." Here there is perhaps an association of
ideas, suggested by similarity of sound, between lireo-KiaZw and
the Shechinah or 80^77 mentioned in ver. 31. Comp. iTrevKia&v
ri ryv crKyvyv % v<f*\vj (Exod. xl. 29). Strictly speaking a
luminous cloud cannot overshadow ; but it may veil. Light may
be as blinding as darkness. We cannot be sure whether the auroJs
includes the three Apostles or not It does not include them in
* Comp. ircwrijj rijs ywcr&s . . &a7/nryo/w}<rarref (Herodian, iii. 4* 8).
IX. 34-36.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 25$
ver. 33, and probably does not include them here. The reading
i<r<L\8<iiv (A D P R) is meant to exclude the Apostles ; but
v avrou's ( B C L) is right See D.B? art. " Cloud."
35. For <j>o>VT] IY^VCTO see on iii. 22, and comp. Exod. xxxiii. 9. The
reading ayairijTds (A CD PR) for iKXAryn&os (tfBLS) comes from Mt
and Mk. The Versions are divided, and in many copies of the Aeth. the two
readings are combined. Syr-Sin, has "the chosen."
36. & T& yw&Qai rqv $wf\v. "After the voice had come";
/.<?. when it had ceased: see on iii. 21. Syr-Sin, has "when there
was the voice." Peter had wished to make three tabernacles, as
if Moses and Elijah were to be as abiding as Christ ; but now the
Law and the Prophets pass away, ita dimissis^ quasi jam et officio
tt honore dispunctis (Tertul. Adv. Mardon. iv. 22), and
Kal aurol luiyv]0-a\f KCU ouSeia dTr^yyciXav iv IKCIVCUS Tal$ tjfipcus.
See on v. 14, on viii. 20, and on i. 39. Lk. tells us that they kept
silent ; Mt. tells us that Jesus charged them to tell no one until
the Son of Man was risen from the dead. Mk. relates both the
command and their observance of it. The prohibition to speak
of what they had seen is a strong confirmation of the incident as
an historical fact,, If the vision is an invention, how can we ex-
plain the invention of such a prohibition t The statement of all
three, that the Transfiguration took place a week after the preced-
ing incident, the characteristic impulsiveness of Peter, and the
healing of the demoniac boy immediately afterwards, are marks of
historical reality^
But, as in the case of other miracles, while we admit the fact, we must
remain in ignorance as to the manner. Were Moses and Elijah, who were
mysteriously removed from the earth, here present in the body t Or were their
disembodied spirits made visible ? Or was it a mere vision, in which they only
seemed to be present 1 We cannot say : the third alternative is not excluded by
the fact that all three saw it, whereas a mere vision is perceived by only one.
As Weiss well remarks, '* We are not here concerned with a vision produced by
natural causes, but with one sent directly by God 3> ; and he adds, " Our narrative
presents no stumbling-block for those who believe in divine revelation " (Z. f.
li. pp. 319, 320, Eng. tr. iii. p. 103). The silence of S. John respecting the
whole incident is thoroughly intelligible, (i) It had already been recorded
three times 5 (2) the glorification of Jesus as the Son of God, which is here set x
forth in a special incident, is set forth by him throughout his whole GospeL
v. With this form of the 3rd pers. plur. perf. comp.
and ^yyw/ca? (Jn. xvii. 6, 7), etpijiew (Rev. xix. 3), ytyovav (Rev. xxi. 6),
ctffe\TJ\v8ay (Jas. v. 4) ; also Rom* xvi. 7 ; Col. ii. I ; Rev. xviii. 3. Such
forms are common hi inscriptions and in the Byzantine writers. Win. xiii.
2 c, p. 90 ; Gregory, Frofegom* p. 124. In meaning the perfect seems here
to hi passing into the aorist ; Burton, 88, but see 78.
37-43. The Healing of the Demoniac Boy, Mt. xviL 14-18 ;
ML ix. 14-29. In all three this incident is closely connected with
254 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [ESL 37-4CX
the Transfiguration. The moral contrast between the peace and
glory on the mount and the struggle and failure down below is
intense, and is magnificently brought out by Raffaelle in the great
picture of the Transfiguration, which was his last work. The
combination of the two scenes is fatal to the unity of the subject,
which is really two pictures in one frame ; but it heightens the
moral and dramatic effect. It is perhaps even more instructive to
regard it as three pictures. Christ and the saints in glory; the
chosen three blinded by the light ; the remaining nine baffled by
the powers of darkness.
The marks of Lk.'s style continue with considerable frequency ; fytvcro,
^175 (ver. 37); teal Idot, ep6ij<rv, <?O/ACU, ^oyoyevjjs (38) ; KO.\ JSotf (39) 5
ederfdtiv (40) ; tt<raro (42) ; Tdvres (43). None of these are in the parallel
passages. See small print on viii. 35-39, 40-48.
37. rjj lfjs f\plpa. See on vii. n. The Transfiguration
probably took place at night. Lk. alone tells us that the descent
from the mountain did not take place until next day. Thus the
three Apostles had time to think over what they had seen and
heard, before receiving fresh experiences. Lk. omits the con-
versation about Elijah. Mk., who is here much more full than
either Lk. or Mt., tells us that this ox\os iroXrfs was gathered round
the other disciples, with whom scribes were disputing. The
opportune arrival of Christ caused great amazement ^
38. For Ip&jcrcv comp. iii, 4, xviii. 7, 38, and for S&pai see on v 12.
iiri|3Xi|rat. I aor. inf. act.; not vt(t\&l/<u 9 l aor. imper. mid., a tense
which perhaps does not occur. It means "to regard with pity"; i. 48;
I Sam. i. n, be. 16 ; Ps. xxiv. 1 6 ; Tobit iii. 3, 15 ; Judith xiii. 4. For the
third time Lk. is alone in mentioning that a child is povayevf)* 5 v& *2f
viii. 42. Comp. Heb. XL 17 ; Tobit iii. 15, viii. 17 ; Judg. xi. 34.
89. The three accounts differ in describing the symptoms. Mt
has creX^vta^crat /cat /ca/cais e^t. Mk. has afoifei /cat rp/a rovs
oSovras /cat fjypaiVerat. In Lk.'s description Hobart (pp. 17-20)
claims ife^s, jiera d<j>poG, and fjutyis diroxwpet as medical expres-
sions, together with the preceding ImpX^ai. 1 The /toyis occurs
here only in N.T. Comp. 3 Mac. vii. 6, But /jioXi?, which is
found Acts xiv. 18, xxvii. 7, 8, 16; Rom. v. 7; i Pet. iv. 18, may
be the right reading here also (B R etc.). Both poyos and /xoXot
mean " toil." The dTro^wpetv means cessation of convulsions*
40. i8eirj6Y)> . . . fra. See on iv. 3 and on x. 2. The disciples
who failed here need not be the Apostles, who were charged to
cast out demons (ver. r). If they were/ this one failure was
exceptional (ML vi. 12, 13).
1 Hobart adds, " It is worthy of note that Areteeus, a physician of about St.
Luke's time, in treating of Epilepsy, admits the possibility of this disease being
produced by diabolical agency (Sign. Morb. Diuturn. 27)."
IX. 41-43*] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 255
41. 5 ye^d- amoros. This probably is neither addressed to the
disciples, who had failed to cure the lad, nor includes them. It is
addressed to the father, and includes the multitude. Per unum
hominem Judxos arguit infidelitatis (Bede). As in the case of the
paralytic (v. 20), the faith of those who had charge of the afflicted
person is taken into account. This is more clearly brought out in
Mk. It was a wish to see what the disciples could do, rather than
faith in Divine power and goodness, which prompted the bringing
of the boy to them. Possibly it was a wish to see what the
disciples could not do that inspired some of them. The hierarchy
sometimes attacked Jesus through His disciples (Mk. ii. 16, 18,
24, vii. 5 ; comp. Lk. xiii. 14). In xii. 46 cknoros means " un-
faithful," and in Acts xxvi. 8 "incredible."
ical 8i<rrpafjL|jL^v^. Not in Mk. It is a strong expression : " distorted,
wrong-headed" (Acts xx. 30; Phil. ii. 15 ; Deut. xxxii. 5). Comp. 6 0v/jibs
&PXOVTCL? 3ca0T/>^0 xal robs dpla-rovs Avdpas (Arist. Pol* iii. 16. 5) ; etcrl 5'
atfrwi> al ^i^al dteffrpafi^M [a./. rape<rrpa.fi.] rqs icard $ti<7U> 2ews (viii.
7.7).
Trpos 6/xas ; The notion is that of being turned
towards a person for the sake of intercourse ; and the question
implies that Jesus is not of that generation, or that it is alienated
from Him. Comp. Is. Ixv. 2. For eos ITOT comp. Jn. x. 24 ; and
for irpos fijias, apud vos, comp. Mt xiii. 56 ; Mk. vi. 3, xiv. 49 ;
Jn. i. i, etc. Mt has /ie#* v/x-wr. Vita Jesu ferpetua tokrantia
(Beng.).
In N.T. and LXX d^e^at has the geru But in doss. Grk,, as some-
times In LXX, we have the ace. after dvfycffGat (Amos iv. 7 ; 4 Mac. xiii. 27).
42. Trpo<rf>xofi^ou aurou. This is to be understood of the lad's
approach to Jesus, not of His approach to the lad Jesus had just
said, " Bring thy son hither."
fpptl&y aMv TO 8ain<$j>iov. " The demon dashed him down."
The word is used of boxers knocking down, and of wrestlers
throwing, an opponent: and some distinguish pjjo-crw in this
sense from pyyvvfu. Comp. Wisd. iv. 19; Herm. Mand. xi. 3;
A fast. Const, vi i. There is also pao-oxo, like apao-o-co, in the
sense of dashing to the ground (Is. ix. 10). The expulsion of the
demon left the boy in a condition which still required healing.
Lk. gives each act separately. Comp. Mk. ix. 27. For tdo-aro see
small print on v. 17 ; and with dir^SwKcv aurov T irarpl aS-roD, which
Lk. alone mentions, comp. vii. 15 and viii. 55.
43. This also is peculiar to Lk., who omits the rebuke to the
disciples, thus again sparing them. The division of the verses is
unfortunate, half of ver. 43 belonging to one section and half to
another. For ficyaXeioT^Tt comp. Acts xix. 27; 2 Pet. i. 16:
Latin texts have magnitude (Vulg.), magnificentia (e), magnalia (d).
256 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 43-4$
The -rravrts in the first half of the verse, and the iravrw etA
irartv in the second half, strongly illustrate Lk.'s fondness for
rfs: see on vii. 35 and xL 4; and comp. Acts iv. 10, xvii. 30,
xxi. 28, xxiv. 3.
43-45. The Second Announcement of the Passion. Mt
xvii. 23; Mk. ix. 31, 32.
Besides the vivTtav and v&ffiv, we have as marks of Lk.'s style,
Qavpafbyrvy &vl, the attraction in va.<nv o?t, vp&s after elre? (ver. 43),
and the analytical %T> Trapa/eeAraXv/A/t^ov (ver. 45). See on ii. 33 and iii. 19.
43. 0aufiaovTo>j> Im ira<ni/ ots eiroiei. See small print on ii. 33 and
iii. 19. The imperfects include more than the preceding incident
It was because the people were so constantly in an attitude of
empty admiration and wonder at His miracles, that Jesus again
tells the disciples of the real nature of His Messiahship. He is
not going to reign as an earthly king, but to suffer as a criminal.
Here d has one of several attempts to reproduce the gen. abs. in Latin ;
omnium autem mirantium* Comp. et cogitantium omnium (iii. 15) ; audien*
Hum autem eorum (xix. ii); quorundam dicentium (xxi. 5)? a
autem eorum (xxiv. 31) ; ks&c autem eorum loqwntium (xxiv. 36).
44. 0&r0e OJICLS cts Ta <3ra ujjiwy. " Do ye lay up in your ears,"
in contrast to the gaping crowd. It perhaps means "Store My
words in your memories, even if you do not understand them."
Or again, " Do not let men's admiration of My miracles make you
forget or doubt My declarations. It is into men's hands that I
must be delivered." Comp. 56s cts TO. wra 'Irjarot (Exod. xvii. 14).
Cod. Am. and other MSS. of Vulg. here have in cordibus vestris.
All Grk. MSS. have eis ra Sra vfji&v. This is one of several
places in which Jerome seems to have had a Grk. text which is no
longer extant. Comp. erat Petrus (xxii. 55), hie nos esse (Mk.
ix. 5), Moses in quo vos speratis (Jn. v. 45) ; also Jn. vi. 12, vii. 25,
ix. 38, x. 1 6. The last (ovile^ ovile for auA^, votfivri) is crucial.
6 yap ulos TOU dyOpcSirou j/AXei. The y<p is almost " namely " :
" For what you may believe without doubting is this, that the Son
of Man," etc. The Tr<xpaiSoo-0ai perhaps does not refer to the act
of Judas, but to the Divine will. When His hour was come, the
plots against Him were allowed to succeed.
46. fy TrapaKeicaXujjLjJtei'OK dir* auiw. A Hebraism, occurring
here only in N.T. Comp. Ezek. xxii. 26, and the subst. Wisd.
xvii. 6. More often we have dbroKpwTeiv cwro : x. 2 1 ; Jer, xxxii. 1 7 ;
or /cpvjrrew aTro: Mt xi 25 ; Ps. xxxvii. 10. Lk. alone states that
this ignorance of the disciples was specially ordered for them.
The Iva, here has its full telic force. They were not allowed to
understand the saying then, in order that they might remember it
afterwards, and see that Jesus had met His surferi"^ with full
knowledge and free will. Comp. xvdi. 34, xxiv. 16.
IX. 45-47.] THE MINISTRY IN GALfLEB 257
It is strange that this mention of their want of onderstanding should be
attributed to a wish to abase the Twelve in the interests of S. Paul : for ( i ) it is
plainly stated that they were prevented by God from understanding ; and (2)
Mk. mentions their ignorance no less than Lk. We saw above that Lk. omits
the rebuke for want of faith addressed to the disciples who failed to heal the
demoniac boy. See on ver. 43 and viii. 24.
46-50. The Close of the Galilean Ministry. Two Lessons in
Humility. Mt xviiL 1-7 ; Mk. ix. 33-39. We learn from the
other two that this took place after the return from the neighbour-
hood of Csesarea Philippi to Capernaum (Mt. xvii. 24; Mk. ix. 33).
The dispute took place during the journey, the comment on it at
Capernaum. See notes on xxii. 24-30.
46. Eicrii\Qev 8e SiaXoytcr^os e^ aurots. See small print on i. 17
and vii. 1 7. It is not necessary to confine the StaAoyio>io's to their
thoughts (see on v. 22), and thus make a difference between Mk.
and Lk. But the desire of each to be pronounced the superior was
probably not expressed in the discussion ; and this thought Jesus
read and rebuked. Bede explains the occasion of the dispute to
be quia viderant Petrum, Jacobum, et Joannem seorsum ductos in
montem^ secretumque eis ibi aliquod esse creditum. The li> auroTs,
" among them," rather implies that the reasoning did not remain
unexpressed.
TO TIS &v cii]. " The question, who perchance might be," wer
wohl ware: see on iii. 15 and vi. n; also Burton, 179. For
this use of TO see on i. 62, and comp. xix. 48, xxii. 2, 4, 23.
jjLio>i' afiTwy. Although avrwv does not here immediately
follow rk as it does xxii. 24 (see notes), yet doubtless O.VT&V is the
gen. after rk and not after pei&v. Whether anyone outside their
company was greater than they were, was not a question which
interested them. The point in dispute was, who among them-
selves was greater than the rest of them ; who stood nearest to the
Christ, and had the highest place in the Kingdom (Mt). The
question illustrates the want of perception just mentioned (ver. 45).
47. -rijs fcapSias afiTwp. The discussion in words was, Who is
the greatest? The thought in their hearts was. Am not I the
greatest? Will the Master decide? Comp. v. 22, vi. 8.
!Tri\a|36*jji,i>os iraiSioi/. The action indicates that the child
belongs to Him, is one of His : it represents the humblest among
His followers. For other instances of Christ's attitude towards
children comp. x. 21, xvii. 2, xviii 16; Mk. x. 15, etc.
In N.T. and LXX the mid. only of &ri\afi.pdvu is used, sometimes with
the ace. (Acts ix. 27, xvi. 19, xviii. 17), sometimes with the een, (Acts
xvii. 19, xxi. 30, 33 ; with gen. always in LXX). Here and xxiii. 26 the
ace. is probably right (B C D, Orig.), but the reading is uncertain.
n-ap" laoTw. The place of honour, As Jesus was sitting with
His disciples round Him (Mk. ix. 35), Trap* cavrw would be the
17
25 8 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 47, 48.
same as & /u-ccrw avr&v (ML and ML). Syr-Sin, has "beside
them."
The late tradition, that Ignatius was the child who was thus taken up by our
Lord, probably arose from a misunderstanding of the name 0co06pos, which
means *' beanng God" in himself, and not "borne by God" (Qe6<popos). Even
if 8e60opos be the right accentuation, we must interpret "borne along and
inspired by God" rather than "carried in the Divine arms." The identifica-
tion was unknown to Eusebius, who does not mention ic, and to Chrysostom,
who states that Ignatius had not even seen Christ (Horn, in Ign. Mart. iv.).
It cannot be found earlier than the ninth century (Anastasius Bibliothecarius,
Migne, cxxix. 42 ; Nicephorus Callistus, H. E. ii. 35, Migne, cxliii. 848). See
Lfu Ignatius, i. p. 27, ii. p. 23,
48. In this saying of Christ there is again (comp. TO. 23, 24)
almost exact verbal agreement in the three reports.
TOUTO TO 7rcuSioj>. Or any similar little one, w IT. TOIOVTO (ML),
/ TCOP rotovr&v IT. (Mk.). The child is not the type of the
honoured disciple ; but the honoured disciple is he who welcomes
little children, not because he is fond of children, but because
they belong to Christ.
em TW cVojAcm jiou. " On the basis of My Name." He knows
that he is dealing with something which concerns Christ and
belongs to Him, and he welcomes it for Christ's sake. The
phrase is specially common in Lk. (ver. 49, xxi. 8, xxiv. 47 ; Acts
iv. 17, 18, v. 28, 40, xv. 14; comp. Lk. L 59); not in Jn. or
Paul.
fi Sexerai . . . tyl $i)T<u. The pronoun is emphatic.
6 yap fUKptSrepos, K.T.X. Not in Mk. or Mt. It explains how
it is that to welcome a child for Christ's sake is to welcome the
Father, for promotion in the Kingdom depends upon self-abase-
ment Both 6 jjuKporepos and /leyas are objective; really in a
lowly position, really exalted. He who does the humble work of
serving the insignificant is promoted by God. It is the chief
proof of the Messiah's presence that the poor have the Gospel
preached to them (vii. 22).
Iv irao-iK fywi>. " Among you all." The circle of the disciples
is the sphere in which this holds good. For dircpx*>K see on
viii. 41 and xxiii. 50.
lamv fjufyas. Already ipso facto "is great 11 ; not merely &rrai
(AD). Jesus does not say "is the greatest"; and He thus gives
no encouragement to the desire to be above others. It is possible
for all in the Kingdom to have this greatness, and there is no
need for anyone to measure himself against others. The standard
is Christ
Syr-Sin, reads, " He that is small and is a child to you, that one is gremt*
49, 50. A Second Lesson in Humility, the Humility of Tolera-
tion. Mk. ix. 38-40. The cbro/e/M0a's in ver. 49 shows that there
IX. 49, 50.] THE MINISTRY IN GALILEE 259
is connexion with what precedes, but the precise link is not
certain. The common explanation, that Christ's errl rw ovopaTi //.ov
suggests to John's mind the case of the stranger who cast out
demons kv r<3 ovo/jum, is possible. But it is perhaps more likely
that Christ's declaration about the blessedness of giving a welcome
to the humblest of His followers has aroused misgivings in John's
mind. His words are those of one who defends his conduct, or at
least excuses it, and might be paraphrased, " But the principle just
laid down must have limits, and would not apply to the case
which I mention " ; or, " But one who remains outside our body
is not really a follower of Thee, and therefore ought not to receive
a welcome." John does not mean that the man was not an
Apostle, but that he was not a professed disciple. Jealousy for
the credit of their Master, not jealousy for their own prerogatives,
prompted the Apostles l to forbid this man from making use of the
Name.
The reading Iv r$ Mfuirt erov (tf B L X A % I 33 69) is to be preferred to
4<rl r. <5x. (A C D), and is not to be discarded because it is also found in Mlc.
ix.38.
49. 'Emor-dra, etSaji^ wa. See on v. 5 and 26. Mk, has
AiSoovcoAe. The exorcist was not pretending to be a disciple of
Jesus when he was not one. But, in however faulty a way, he
believed in the power of the name of Jesus, and tried to make
use of it for good (Acts iii. 6, xvi. 18). Contrast the mere
jugglery of the Jewish exorcists who tried to use the formula *QpKt<a
v/jtas TOV 'l?<row ov IlavXos *o?pvercrt as a charm (Acts xix. 13-16).
Here the context shows that the exorcist was successful, and
therefore sincere. The iitwXdojicy may mean either " we tried to
forbid " or " we repeatedly forbade." The pres. dicoXoudel implies
persistence in such conduct For aKoXovBttv p*rd TWOS comp.
Rev. VL 8, xiv. 13 : the constr. is classical
6O. Mfy KwXrferc. "Cease to forbid," not only the person in
question, but any such. Comp. viL 13 and the reply of Moses
to the demand of Joshua, Kv/uc Mowcri/, KcoAwov CLVTOVS (Num.
xi. 29),
6s v^P " K ^criK itad* fijjLwv flirep fywK &TTIH. The reading
fliubv for v/xoiv in one or both of these places comes from Mk.
The saying, " He that is not with Me is against Me" (xi 23, where
see note; Mt xiL 30) should be compared with this. There
Christ gives a test by which His disciple is to try himself \ if
he cannot see that he is on Christ's side, he is against Him.
Here He gives a te$t by which His disciple is to try others : if he
1 It is possible that only John and one other were concerned in
The incident may have taken place while the Twelve were working two and
two, John's companion was probably James, and this may be another illustra-
tion of the brothers 1 fiery temper (ver. 54)*
26~0 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 50.
cannot see that they are against Christ's cause, he is to consider
them as for it. Renan hastily pronounces the two sayings to be
tout a fait opposes (V. de J. p. 229).
Here the fourth and last division (ix. 1-50) of the section
which treats of the Ministry in Galilee (iv. 14-ix. 50) comes to an
end, and with it the first main portion of the Third Gospel. The
solemn maxim stated in ver. 50 makes a good conclusion to the
Galilean ministry, and the narrative manifestly makes a new be-
ginning in ver. 51.
IX, 51-XIX. 28. THE JOTmNEYINGS TOWARDS
JERUSALEM.
We may regard this as a narrative of the second main period
of Christ's ministry. Galilee, with Capernaum as a centre, ceases
to be the almost exclusive sphere of His teaching, and we may
say that henceforward He has no centre. Although this period
is only one-third as long as the preceding one, it is described with
much greater minuteness, and the narrative of it is nearly one-
third longer. It is manifest that Lk. is here employing material
which was not used by Mk. or Mt., and we know neither its source
nor its character. A great deal of it must have been either in
writing or stereotyped in an oral form ; and a great deal of it
would seem to have had an Aramaic original, the translation of
which abounds in marks of Lk.'s own style. From ix. 51 to xviii.
14 he is almost alone, and he gives us information which we obtain
from no other source. Hence this large tract is sometimes called
the "great interpolation" or "intercalation." It is also the
"Peraean section" or "Samaritan section" (comp. ix. 51-56, x.
30-37, xvii. 11-19). An analysis, showing the parallels in Mt, is
given in Birks, Hor& Evang. pp. 132 fF. Jn. gives us several im-
portant incidents belonging to the same period, viz. that which
lies between the end of the Galilean ministry and the Passion ;
but we cannot be certain as to the way in which his narrative is
to be fitted into that of Lk.
If we had only Mt. and Mk., we might suppose that the journey from
Capernaum to Jerusalem for the last Passover occupied at most one or two
weeks. Few incidents are mentioned ; and, where distances are indicated, not
much time is required for traversing them. Lk. lets us see that the time
occupied must have been several months. We are constantly reminded that
Jesus is on His way to Jerusalem (ix. 51, 53, xiii. 22, 33, xvii. n, xviii. 31,
adx. 11, 28), but the progress is slow, because Jesus frequently stops to preach
IX. 51.] JOURNEYINGS TOWARDS JERUSALEM 26l
in different places. The dh action of the journeying is only indirectly inti-
mated, first eastwards along the southern part of Galilee, and then south waids
through Persea ; but, however long the time, and however circuitous the route,
:t is a journey from Capernaum to Jerusalem. Jesus seems never to have re-
turned to the neighbourhood of the lake until after His death. Jn. lets us
know that during this interval Jesus was twice in Jerusalem ; once at the latter
part of the Feast of Tabernacles, after which He healed the man born blind ;
and again at the Feast of the Dedication ; besides which there is the visit to
Bethany for the raising of Lazarus ; but, although there is room in Lk. 's
narrative for what Jn. tells, we do not know where to place it. We cannot
with any certainty show the correspondence between the two Gospels until
Jerusalem is entered for the last Passover. It seems best, therefoie, not to
follow Wieseler (Chron. Syn. iv., Eng. tr. pp. 289-303), Ellicott (Hidsean
Lectures tec 1859, pp. 242-343), and in the main Caspar! (Chron. EinL 126-
143, Eng. tr. pp. 167-189), in making Lk. narrate three distinct journeys to
Jerusalem, beginning respectively at ix. 51, xiii. 22, and xvii. n, but to 'take
nis narrative with the indistinctness which he has left. That the journeymgs
which Jn. has so clearly given really took place, we need not doubt ; and
nothing in Lk. contradicts Jn.'s narrative; but all interweaving of the two
Gospels must be taken as meiely tentative arrangement. The thoroughness of
Lk.'s investigation is once more shown by his giving us eight or nine long
chapters of material which is given by no one else ; while his honesty is con-
spicuous in the fact of his not attempting a precision which he did not find in
his sources. The whole is largely didactic.
The proposal of Halcombe, to transfer the whole of Lk. 3d. 14-2:111. 21
from the place which it occupies in all MSS. and Versions to the break between
viii. 21 and 22, is too violent c. method of arriving at harmony (Gospel Dijfi-
cultisS) or the Displaced Section of S. Luke, Camb. 1886). The amount of
harmony obtained in this way is trifling (Lk. xi. 14-26 with Mt. xii. 22 and
Mk. iii. 22-30, and perhaps Lk. xiii. 18, 19 with Mt. xiii. 31, 32 and Mk. iv.
30-32), and it is simpler to suppose that Lk. xi. 14-26 and xiii. 18, 19 are
given out of their chronological order, o* that the sayings of Christ there
recorded were uttered more than once-
The historical truth of this independent jr .tion of Lk/s
Gospel is guaranteed (i) by the absence of discrepancy with
the other Gospels, but chiefly (2) by the fact that it consists
almost entirely of discourses which it would have been altogether
beyond Lk.'s powers to invent. For convenience we may divide
this long section into three parts: ix. 5i-xiii. 35, xiv. i-xvii. 10,
xvii. n-xix. 28. See Herzog, PRE? &&. Jesus Christ, p. 659.
XX. 61-XUL 85. The Departure from Galilee and First
Period of the Journey.
This section begins, as the previous one ends, with a lesson ot
toleration. In the one case the Apostles were taught that they
were not to take upon themselves to hinder the work of an
apparent outsider who seemed to be friendly. Here they are
taught not to take upon themselves to punish professed outsiders
who are manifestly unfriendly. Moreover, as the ministry in
Galilee is made to begin with a typical rejection of Christ at
262 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO S. LUKE [IX. 51.
Nazareth (iv. 16-30), so this ministry outside Galilee begins with
a rejection of Him by Samaritans.
The thoroughly Hebrew cast of the opening sentence seems to show thai
the source here used was either an Aramaic^ original which Lk. translated, or a
translation from the Aramaic which he modified.
As marks of his style note tyhero, iv ry f. in/in.,
rij ?7/i<?/)as TTJS dva\Tfnj,\f>ec*)s, /caZ atfrtfs, ToC t. infin. (ver. 51)5
avro, Ijv iropevbpevov (ver. 53),
51-56. Rejection by the Samaritans and Rebuke to the
Disciples. Here we have what was perhaps a new departure in
our Lord's method, viz. the sending messengers in advance to
prepare for His arrival. The Baptist had prepared the way for
Christ's work as a whole, but he had not gone beforehand to the
places which Christ proposed to visit. The shortness of the time
which still remained may have made a system of preparatory
messengers necessary; and this is perhaps the meaning of the
opening words.
51. iv T o-ufjnrVqpoucrOeu ra$ Tjp.<?pas. "When the days were
being fulfilled"; i.e. when the number of days allotted to the
interval was drawing to a close. The verb occurs in N.T. only
viii. 23 and (exactly as here) Acts ii. i, but with crvwrX. for
o-ujjwrX. See Gregory, Prolegom. p. 74. Comp. cfe crv/wrX^pwow,
2 Chron. xxvi, 21 ; Dan. ix. 2 (TheocL). For the constr. see on
iii. 21 ; and for " the days of*' see on i. 39. See also on i. 57.
-n]s dm\YJfjw|rs aurou. " Of His assumption," /.*. the Ascen-
sion.
The substantive dvdXifjfi^ts does not occur elsewhere in N.T. or LXX. But
in Test. XJ 7. Pair. Levi xviii. it is found, and in this sense, of the new Priest
who is to be magnified in the world &*>y dvaK^ews otfrou. In Ps. Sot. iv. 20
it is used in a neutral sense of mere removal from the world. The wicked
man is to have his old age in the solitude of childlessness until he be taken
away (els dvdXrjTJ/w) ; which is perhaps the first appearance of the word in
extant Greek literature. See Ryle and James, ad foe. They show that this
neutral sense is exce 
