Skip to main content

Full text of "The expositor's Greek Testament;"

See other formats


Re wee 


a Mae 


Pree ih 


Ρο x 


Me ) η iS oh > Miran 


4 


η ση 


: πα ὰλ 
ώς, ο] mie 
a be 


ο te 


iy 
A 
peed Sh oe 


oe 


μαμα {ς one 


t 
να πι a fats 
1 Tart ine 
ΛΑ μί 


κα» 


i 7 
+ spt oneness et 
Man ph he ο Oot tele 


ΕΜ ΕΥΕ , 
η] = ited otis η! 
ἐ ον ιο] oy 


«μα ~ 


os eie on its 


diet cots) 
adinay Sty 
+ 


NIN 


μονος 


πας nines} i 


toe 


haat 
εαν 


ΩΙ lie / 
tinh ase 


o 
oe aves vl 
αν οι μήνας 
ΗΛ ty 
ΙΙ ΜκΡΗΜΑ 


ο ΜΗΝ 
40a) oe 


H a “4 
η 


ae 
aces 


iM 


Aoki iy) 4 
4 μή eis 


η ον 
Shs hebl ror 


I hat 
3S vi da Goh Mp, yeh eh Bal 
ας ο οάοτν ΄ 


μον Ἡι 
δη Ἐν! 4 
264 Pople aptiatete 
pipes tei πα νσνρλέν 
sams μη αφ 


~ hing ttt 
xe PP ee cabernet 
+ coun be i) αγ 


η att 


bs ot 
Treats User ων pape’ T 
η ere ον αν pabsvedpbenenobehtinad 
Ην m ipedevetnBon stevens 
φως 
ee at φον π 
J wen 4 as hey 
* She [το ην 


Ws 


ηλ όνος ways 
pty 9, Seen 


Maeter * 
fart vt tats heh bee Bors 
να καὶ 


et: mee 
Fan cov ay 
septs η 
pay SES me ais de 
ant αρένα 


ate rhaoetate 
vay 


che seis 

ρα κκη 

high i 43 y a 
fea: ἤ 

µ 


ο ή 
a a 
10 ‘ Rite Len 


Peat ζην ney 


τν 
Pre ολ 14, 


er) 
peo hale 
η. 
η 4.) 


a 
vd ise τω 
i it πι 

4 


rh 
eres 
tdi 


hoped 
. oye) Αν 


ia ae 
ay) 


4h 


ie ab 


ηλ 
ηδη 








BS2341 
- EV 


vl 


copy ! 











Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2009 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/expositorsgreekt01 nico 







oor VPP nMng 
ν΄ JAN 2 & 19: 
THE EXPOSITOR’S ~ 


ws, 
ogien, ge 


Seek k TESTAMENT 


W ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D. 


EDITOR OF ‘THE EXPOSITOR,” ''"ΤΗΕ EXPOSITOR’S BIBLE," ETC, 


VOLUME 1. 


HODDER AND STOUGHTON 
LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO 


σε, 4 νι 


a 7 - 


tule Bel ο. 


ον ο ο eaverNAS s0 


cae er 
HOMO Le 


ο δρ. | | 





THE EXPOSITORS 


Potion. Peo TAM ENT 


I 
THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS 


ΒΥ THE REV. 


ALEXANDER BALMAIN BRUCE, D.D. 


PROFESSOR OF APOLOGETICS, FREE CHURCH COLLEGE, GLASGOW 


Il 
Tie, Corn. Or Sly JOHN 


BY THE REV, 
MARCUS DODS, D.D. 


PROFESSOR OF EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY, NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH 


HODDER AND STOUGHTON 
LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO 


το... 


7 
r 
a 
= 
4 
οἱ 3 
; 
$ 





GENERAL EDITOR’S PREFACE 


Tue Expositor’s Greek Testament is intended to do for 
the present generation the work accomplished by Dean 
Alford’s in the past. Of the influence of Dean Alford’s ‘ 
book there is no need to speak. It is almost impossible 
to exaggerate the success and usefulness of Dean Alford’s 
commentary in putting English-speaking students into 
possession of the accumulated results of the labours of 
scholars up to the time it was published. He made the 
best critical and exegetical helps, previously accessible only 
to a few readers, the common privilege of all educated 
_Englishmen. Dean Alford himself would have been the 
first to say that he undertook a task too great for one 
man. Though he laboured with indefatigable diligence, 
twenty years together, from 1841 to 1861, were occupied 
in his undertaking. Since his time the wealth of material 
on the New Testament has been steadily accumulating, 
and no one has as yet attempted to make it accessible 
in a full and comprehensive way. 

In the present commentary the works have been 
committed to various scholars, and it is hoped that the 
completion will be reached within five years from the 
present date, if not sooner. As the plan of Alford’s 
book has been tested by time and experience, it has been 
adopted here with certain modifications, and it is hoped 
that as the result English-speaking students will have a 
work at once up to date and practically useful in ll 
its parts. 


vi GENERAL EDITOR’S PREFACE 


It remains to add that the commentators have been 
selected from various churches, and that they have in 
every case been left full liberty to express their own 
views. The part of the editor has been to choose them, 
and to assign the limits of space allowed to each book. 
In this assignment the judgment of Dean Alford has 
appeared to be sound in the main, and it has been generally 
followed. 


W. ROBERTSON NICOLL. 


PREFACE 


In this Commentary on the Synoptical Gospels I give to the 
public the fruit of studies carried on for many years. These 
Gospels have taken a more powerful and abiding hold of me 
than any other part of the Scriptures. I have learnt much 
from them concerning Christ in the course of these years ; 
not a little since I began to prepare this work for the press. 
] have done my best to communicate what I have learned to 
others. I have also laid under contribution previous com- 
mentators, ancient and modern, while avoiding the pedantic 
habit of crowding the page with long lists of learned names. 
I have not hesitated to introduce quotations, in Latin and 
Greek, which seemed fitted to throw light on the meaning. 
These, while possessing interest for scholars, may be passed 
over by English readers without much loss, as their sense is 
usually indicated. 

In the critical notes beneath the Greek Text I have aimed 
at making easily accessible to the reader the results of the 
labours of scholars who have made the text the subject of 
special study; especially those contained in the monu- 
mental works of Tischendorf and Westcott and Hort. 
Readers are requested to peruse what has been stated on 
that subject in the Introduction, and, in using the com- 
mentary, to keep in mind that I have always made what I 
regard as the most probable reading the basis of comment, 
whether I have expressly indicated my opinion in the critical 
notes or not. 

In these days one who aims at a competent treatment 
of ‘the Evangelic narratives must keep in view critical 


viii PREFACE 


methods of handling the story. I have tried to unite some 
measure of critical freedom and candour with the reverence 
of faith. If, in spite of honest endeavour, I have not suc- 
ceeded always in realising this ideal, let it be imputed to the 
\ack of skill rather than of good intention. 

I rise from this task with a deepened sense of the wisdom 
and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. If what I have written 
help others to a better understanding of His mind and heart, 
I shall feel that my labour has not been in vain. 

I enjoyed the benefit of Mr. MacFadyen’s (of the Free 
Church College, Glasgow) assistance in reading the proofs 
of the second half of the work, and owe him earnest thanks, 
not only for increased accuracy in the printed text, but for 
many valuable suggestions. 

The works of Dr. Gould on Mark and Dr. Plummer on 
Luke, in the /nternational Critical Commentary, appeared too 
late to be taken advantage of in this commentary. 


A. B. BRUCE. 


GLASGOW. 


THE GOSPELS 


ACCORDING TO 


MATTHEW, MARK AND LUKE 





INTRODUCTION. 


CHAPTER i. 
CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 


ΘΕΟΤΙΟΝ I, THE CONNECTION. 


1, The three first Gospels, bearing the names of Matthew, Mark 
and Luke, have, during the present century, been distinguished by 
critics from the fourth by the epithet synoptical. The term implies 
that these Gospels are so like one another in contents that they can 
be, and for profitable study ought to be, viewed together. That such 
is the fact is obvious to every reader. A single perusal suffices to 
shew that they have much in common in contents, arrangement and 
phraseology ; and a comparison with the fourth Gospel only deepens 
the impression. There everything appears different—the incidents 
related, the theughts ascribed to Jesus, the terms in which they are 
expressed, the localities in wh.ch Cae Great Personage who is the 
common subject of alf the four narratives exercised His remarkable 
teaching and healing ministries. 

2. Yet while these three Gospels present obtrusive resemblances, 
they also exhibit hardly less obtrusive differences. The differences 
are marked just because the books are on the whole so like one 
another. One cannot help asking: Seeing they are so like, why are 
they not more like? Why do they differ at all? Or the question 
may be put the other way: Seeing there are so many idiosyncrasies 
in each Gospel, how does it come about that notwithstanding these 
they all bear an easily recognisable family likeness? The idiosyn- 
crasies, though not always so obvious as the resemblances, are un- 
mistakable, and some of them stare one in the face. Each Gospel, 
e.g., has some matter peculiar to itself; the first and the third a 
great deal. . Then, while in certain parts of their narratives they 
follow the same order, in other places they diverge widely. Again, 
one cannot but be struck with the difference between the three 
records ir regard to reporting the words of Jesus. Mark gives com- 


4 INTRODUCTION 


paratively few: Matthew and Luke very many, and these for the 
most part very weighty and remarkable, insomuch that one wonders 
how any one undertaking to write a history of Christ’s life could 
overlook them. Matthew and Luke again, while both giving much 
prominence to the words of Jesus, differ very widely in their manner 
of reporting them. The one collects the sayings into masses, 
apparently out of regard to affinity of thought; the other disperses 
them over his pages, and assigns to them distinct historical occasions. 

3. These resemblances and differences, with many others not 
referred to, inevitably raise a question as to their cause. This is the 
synoptical problem, towards the solution of which a countless num- 
ber of contributions have been made within the last hundred years. 
Many of these have now only a historical or antiquarian interest, 
and it would serve no useful purpese to attempt here an exhaustive 
account of the literature connected with this inquiry. While not in- 
sensible to the fascination of the subject, even on its curious side, as 
an interesting problem in literary criticism, yet I must respect the 
fact that we in this work are directly concerned with επ matter 
only in so far as it affects exegesis. The statement .Aerefore now to 
be made must be broad and brief. 

4. All attempts at solution admit of being classified under four 
heads. First may be mentioned the hypothesis of oral tradition. 
This hypothesis implies that before our Gospels there were no 
written records of the ministry of Jesus, or at least none of which 
they made use. Their only source was the ginwritten tradition of 
the memorabilia of that ministry, having its ultimate origin in the 
public preaching and teaching of the Apostles, the men who had 
been with Jesus. The statements made by the Apostles from time 
to time, repeated and added to as occasion required, caught up by 
willing ears, and treasured up in faithful memories: behold all that 
is necessary, according to the patrons of this hypothesis, to account 
for all the evangelic phenomena of resemblance and difference. The 
resemblances are explained by the tendency of oral tradition, 
especially in non-literary epochs and peoples, to become stereotyped 
in contents and even in phraseology, a tendency much helped by the 
practice of catechetical instruction, in which the teacher dictates 
sentences which his pupils are expected to commit to memory.! 
The differences are accounted for by the original diversity in the 
memorabilia communicated by different Apostles, by the measure of 


1 On the function of catechists as helping to stereotype the evangelic tradition 
vide Wright, The Composition of the Four Gospels, 1890. Mr. Wright is a 
thorough believer in the oral tradition. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 5 


fluidity inseparable from oral tradition due to defective memory, 
and of course in part also by the peculiar tastes, aims and indi- 
vidualities of the respective evangelists. This hypothesis has been 
chiefly in favour among English scholars, though it can likewise 
boast of influential supporters among continental critics, such as 
Gieseler and Godet. It points to a vera causa, and cannot be 
wholly left out of account in an endeavour to explain how written 
records of the evangelic tradition arose. There was a time doubt- 
less when what was known of Jesus was on the lip only. How 
long that primitive phase lasted is matter of conjecture; some say 
from 30 to 60 a.p. It seems probable that the process of trans- 
ferring from the lip to the page began considerably sooner than the 
later of these dates. When Luke wrote, many attempts had been 
made to embody the tradition in a written form (Lukei. 1). This 
points to a literary habit which would naturally exert its power 
withort delay in reference to any matter in which men took an 
absorbing interest. And when this habit. prevails writers are not 
usually content to remain in ignorance of what others have done in 
the same line. They want to see each other’s notes. The pre- 
sumption therefore is that while oral tradition in all probability was 
a source for our evangelists, it was not the only source, probably 
not even the chief source There were other writings about the 
acts, and words, and sufferings of Jesus in existence before they 
wrote ; they were likely to know these, and if they knew them they 
would not despise them, but rather use them so far as serviceable. 
In Luke’s case the existence of such earlier writings, and his 
acquaintance with them, are not mere presumptions but facts; the 
only point on which there is room for difference of opinion is how 
far he took advantage of the labours of his predecessors. That he 
deemed them unsatisfactory, at least defective, may be inferred from 
his making a new contribution; that he drew nothing from them is 
extremely improbable. Much can be said for the view that among 
these earlier writings known to Luke was our Gospel of Mark, or a 
book substantially identical with it in contents, and that he used it 
very freely. 

5. The last observation naturally leads up to the second hypo- 
thesis, which is that the authors of the synoptical Gospels used each 
other’s writings, each successive writer taking advantage of earlier 
contributions, so that the second Gospel (in time) borrowed from 
the first, and the third from both first and second. Which borrowed 
from which depends of course on the order of time in which the 
three Gospels appeared. Six permutations are possible, and every 


6 {INTRODUCTION 


one of them has had its advocates. One of the most interesting, in 
virtue of the course it ran, is: Matthew, Luke, Mark. This arrange- 
ment was contended for by Griesbach, and utilised by Dr. Perdinand 
Christian Baur in connection with his famous Tendency-criticism. 
Griesbach founded on the frequent duality in Mark’s style, that is to 
say, the combination of phrases used separately in the same connec- 
tion in the other synoptical Gospels: ¢.g., “at even when the sun did 
set” (i. 82). In this phenomenon, somewhat frequently recurring, 
he saw conclusive proof that Mark had Matthew and Luke before 
him, and servilely copied from both in descriptive passages. Baur’s 
interest in the question was theological rather than literary. Accept- 
ing Griesbach’s results, he charged Mark not only with literary 
dependence on his brother evangelists, whence is explained his 
graphic style, but also with studied theological neutrality, eschewing 
on the one hand the Judaistic bias of the first Gospel, and on the 
other the Pauline or universalistic bias of the third; both charac- 
teristics, the literary dependence ana the studied neutrality, implying 
a later date. Since then a great change of view has taken place. 
Por some time the prevailing ορίπίοα has been that Mark’s Gospel 
is the earliest not the latest of the three, and this opinion is likely to 
hold its ground. Holtzmann observe. that the Mark hypothesis is 
a hypothesis πο longer,' mear..ng that it is an established fact. And 
he and many others recognise in Mark, either as we have it or in an 
earlier form, a source for both the other synoptists, thereby acknow- 
ledging that the hypothesis of mutual use likewise has a measure of 
truth. 

6. The third hypothesis is that of one primitive Gospel from 
which all three synoptists drew their material. The supporters of 
this view do not believe that the evangelists used each other’s 
writings. Their contention is that all were dependent on one original 
document, an Urevangelium as German scholars call it. This 
primitive Gospel was, ex hypothesi, comprehensive enough to cover 
the whole ground. From it all the three evangelists took much in 
common, hence their agreement in matter and language in so many 
places. But how about their divergencies? How came it to pass 
that with the same document before them they made such diverse 
use of it? The answer is: it was due to the fact that they used, not 
identical copies of one document, but different recensions of the 
same document. . By this flight into the dark region of conjectural 
recensions, whereof no trace remains, the Urevangelium hypothesis 


1 Hand-Commentar, p. 3. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 7 


was self-condemned to oblivion. With it are associated the honour- 
able names of Lessing and Eichhorn. 

7. The fourth and last hypothesis was propounded by Schleier- 
macher. He took for his starting-point the word διήγησις in the intro- 
duction of Luke’s Gospel, and found in it the hint that not in one 
primitive Gospel of comprehensive character was the source ex- 
ploited by our Gospels to be found, but rather in many Gospelets con- 
taining a record of some words or deeds of Jesus with which the 
writer had become acquainted, and which he specially desired to 
preserve. Each of our evangelists is to be conceived as having so 
many of these diegeses or Gospelets in his possession, and construct- 
ing out of them a larger connected story. In so far as they made 
use of copies of the same dtegesis, there would be agreement in con- 
tents and style; in so far as they used Gospelets peculiar to their 
respective collections, there would be divergence; and of course 
diversity in the order of narration was to be expected in writings 
compiled from a handful of unconnected leaflets of evangelic tradition. 
In spite of the great name of its author, this hypothesis has found 
little support as an attempt to account for the whole phenomena of 
the Gospels. As a subordinate suggestion to explain the presence 
in any of the synoptists of elements peculiar to himself, it is 
worthy of consideration. Some of the particulars, e.g., peculiar to 
Luke may have been found by him not in any large collection, but in 
a leaflet, as others may have been derived not fron. \itten sources 
large or small, but from a purely oral source in answer to local 
inquiries. 

8. None of the foregoing hypotheses is accepted by itself as a 
satisfactory solution of the synoptical problem by any large number 
of competent critics at the present time. The majority look for a 
solution in the direction of a combination of the second and third 
hypotheses under modified forms. Toa certain extent they recog- 
nise use of one Gospel in another, and there is an extensive agree- 
ment in the opinion that for the explanation of the phenomena not 
one but at least two primitive documents must be postulated. In 
these matters certainty is unattainable, but it is worth while making 
ourselves acquainted with what may be called the most probable 
working hypothesis. With this view I offer here a brief statement 
as to the present trend of critical opinion on the subject in question. 

9. It is a familiar observation that, leaving out of account the 
reports of the teaching of Jesus contained in the first and third 
Gospels, the matter that remains, consisting of narratives of actions 
and events, is very much the same in all the three synoptists. Not 


8 INTRODUCTION 


only so, the remainder practically consists of the contents of the 
second Gospel. It seems as if Matthew and Luke had made Mark 
the framework of their story, and added to it new material. This 
accordingly is now believed by many to have been the actual fact. 
The prevailing idea is that our Mark, or a book very like it in 
contents, was under the eye of the compilers of the first and third 
Gospels when they wrote, and was used by both as a source, not 
merely in the sense that they took from it this and that, but in the 
sense of adopting it substantially as it was, and making it the basis 
of their longer and more elaborate narratives. This crude statement 
of course requires qualification. What took place was not that the 
comp'‘lers of the first and third Gospels simply transcribed the 
second, page by page, as they found it in their manuscript, reproduc- 
ing its contents in the original order, and each section verbatim. If 
that had been the case the synvptical problem would have been 
greatly simplified, and thers would hardly have been room for 
difference of opinion. As the case stands the order of narration is 
more or less disturbed, and there are many variations in expression. 
The question is thus raised: On the hypothesis that Mark was a 
source for Matthew and Luke, in respect οί the matter common to 
all the three, how came it to pass that Πε writers of the first and 
third Gospels deviated so much, and in different ways, from their 
common source in the order of events and in style? The general 
answer to the question, so far as order is concerned, is that the 
additional matter acted as a disturbing influence. The explanation 
implies that, when the disturbing influence did not come into play, 
the original order would be maintained. Advocates of the hypothesis 
try to show that the facts answer to this view; that is to say, that 
Mark’s order is followed in Matthew and Luke, except when 
disturbance is explicable by the influence ofthe new material. One 
illustration may here be given from Matthew. Obviously the 
“Sermon on the Mount” exercised a powerful fascination on the 
mind of the evangelist. Prom the first he has it in view, and he 
desires to bring it in as soon as possible. Therefore, of the incidents 
connected with the commencement of the Galilean ministry reported 
in Mark, he relates simply the call of the four fisher Apostles, as if 
to furnish the Great Teacher with disciples who might form an 
audience for the great Discourse. To that call he appends a general 
description of the Galilean ministry, specifying as its salient 
features preaching or teaching and healing. Then he proceeds to 
illustrate each department of the ministry, the teaching by the 
Sermon on the Mount in chapters v.-vii., the healing by a group of 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 9 


miracles contained in chapters viii. and ix., including the cure of 
Peter’s mother-in-law, the wholesale cures on the Sabbath evening, 
and the healing of the leper, all reported in the first chapter of Mark. 
Of course, in regard neither to the sermon nor to the group of 
miracles can the first Gospel lay claim to chronological accuracy. 
In the corresponding part of his narrative, Luke follows Mark closely, 
reporting the cure of the demoniac in the synagogue of Capernaum, 
of Peter’s mother-in-law, of many sick people on the Sabbath 
evening, and of the leper in the same order. There is only one 
deviation. The call of Peter, which in Luke replaces that of the 
four, Peter and Andrew, James and John, comes between the 
Sabbath evening cures and the cure of the leper. 

The variations in style raise a much subtler question, which can 
only be dealt with adequately by a detailed comparative exegesis, 
such as that so admirably exemplified in the great work of 
Dr. Bernhard Weiss on the Gospel of Mark and its synoptical 
parallels." Suffice it to say here that it is not difficult to suggest 
a variety of causes which might lead to literary alteration in the use 
ofa source. Thus, if the style of the source was peculiar, markedly 
individualistic, colloquial, faulty in g.amme~, one can understand a 
tendency to replace these characteristics by smoothness and elegance. 
The style of Mark is of the character described, and instances of 
literary correction in the parallel accounts can easily be pointed out. 
Another cause in operation might be misunderstanding of the mean- 
ing of the source, or disinclination to adopt the meaning obviously 
suggested. Two illustrative instances may be mentioned. In 
reporting the sudden flight of Jesus from Capernaum in the early 
morning, Mark makes Him say to the disciples in connection with 
the reason for departure, “to this end came I forth,” 1.ε., from the 
town. In Luke this is turned into, “therefore was I sent,” i.e., into 
the world. In the incident of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, 
Mark makes Jesus bid the two disciples say to the owner of the colt, 
‘straightway He (Jesus) will send it back,” 1.ε., return it to its owner 
when He has had His use of it. In Matthew this is turned into, 
“ straightway he (the owner) will send them (the ass and her colt) ”’.° 
Yet another source of verbal alteration might be literary taste acting 
instinctively, leading to the substitution of one word or phrase for 
another, without conscious reason. 

10. Thus far of the matter common to the three Gospels, or what 
amay be called the triple tradition. But Matthew and Luke contain 


1 Das Marcusevangelium und seine synoptischen Parallelen, 1872. 
1 Mark i. 38, Luke iv. 43. 3 Mark xi. 3, Matthew xxi. 3. 


1Ο INTRODUCTION 


much more than this, the additional matter in both consisting mainly 
of words and discourses of Jesus. Each Gospel has not a little 
peculiar to itself, but there is a large amount of teaching material 
common to the two, and though this common element is very 
differently reproduced as to historic connection and grouping, yet 
there is such a pervading similarity in thought and expression as to 
suggest forcibly the hypothesis of a second source as its most 
natural explanation. Assuming that the first and third evangelists 
borrowed their narrative of events from Mark, and that what needs 
accounting for is mainly the didactic element, it would follow that 
this hypothetical second source consisted chiefly, if not exclusively, 
of sayings spoken by the Lord Jesus. Whether both evangelists 
possessed this source in the same form, and had each his own way 
of using it, as dictated by his plan, or whether it came into their 
hands in different recensions, formed under diverse influences, and 
meant to serve distinct purposes, are questions of subordinate 
moment. The main question is: Did there exist antecedent to the 
composition of our first and third Gospels a collection of the words 
of Christ, which both evangelists knew and used in compiling their 
memoirs of Christ’s public ministry? Modern critics, such as 
Weiss, Wendt, Holtzmann, Jilicher, concur in cnswering this 
question in the affirmative. «πε genera result is that for the 
explanation of the phenomena presented by the synoptical Gospels, 
modern criticism postulates two main written sources: a book like 
our canonical Mark, if not :dentical with it, as the source of the 
narratives common to the three Gospels, and another book contain- 
ing sayings of Jesus, as the source of the didactic matter common ta 
Matthew and Luke. 

11. These conclusions, which might be reached purely by interna) 
inspection, are confirmed by the well-known statements of Papias, 
who flourished in the first quarter of the second century, concerning 
books about Christ written by Mark and Matthew. They are to this 
effect: “Mark, being the interpreter of Peter, wrote carefully, 
though not in order, as he remembered them, the things spoken or 
done by Christ”. “Matthew wrote the Logia in the Hebrew 
language, and each one interpreted these as he could.”! The state- 
ments point to two books as the fountains of evangelic written tradi- 
tion, containing matter guaranteed as reliable as resting on the author- 
ity of two apostles, Peter and Matthew. The first of the two books is 
presumably identical with our canonical Mark. It is not against this 


1 Eusebii, Historia Ecclesiastica, lib. iii., c. 39. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS II 


that Papias represents Mark’s work as including things spoken as 
well as done by Christ. For this is true of canonical Mark. Though, 
by comparison with Matthew and Luke, Mark is extremely meagre 
in the didactic element, yet he does report many very remarkable 
sayings of Jesus. But what of the other book? Is it to be identi- 
fied with our Matthew? Prima facie one would say no, because 
the Matthew of Papias is a book of Logia, which we naturally take 
to mean a book of oracles, or weighty words spoken by the Lord 
Jesus. But, on the other hand, it might be argued that Logia is 
simply a designation from the more prominent or characteristic part, 
and by no means excludes such narratives of events as we find in 
canonical Matthew. Indeed, it might be said that it would be diffi- 
cult to compile a collection of sayings that should be interesting or 
even intelligible without the introduction of more or less narrative, 
if it were only by way of preface or historical settiny. Granting that 
the leading aim was to report words, a minimum amount of narrative 
would still be necessary to make the report effective. And it might 
be added that it is, in many instances, only a minimum of narrative 
that we find in canonical Matthew, his historic statements being 
generally meagre in comparison with those in Mark and Luke. 
Hence, not a few critics and apologists still hold by the old tradi- 
tion which practically ‘dentifie. the Logia of Papias with the 
Matthew of the New Testament. But the Logia, according to 
Papias, was written in Hebrew, and our canonical Matthew is in 
Greek which does not wear the aspect of a translation. This diffi- 
culty defenders of the old v*sw do not find insurmountable. Yet 
the impression left on one’s mind by such apologetic attempts is that 
of special pleading, or perhaps, one ought to say, of an honourable 
bias in favour of a venerable tradition, and of a theory which gives 
us, in canonical Matthew, a work proceeding directly from the hand 
of an apostle. If that theory could be established, the result would 
be highly satisfactory to many who at present stand in doubt. 
Meantime we must be content to acquiesce, provisionally, in a hypo- 
thesis, according to which we have access to the apostle Matthew’s 
contribution only at second hand, in a Gospel from another unknown 
author which has absorbed a large portion, if not the whole, of the 
apostolic document. Even on this view we have the satisfaction of 
feeling that the three synoptists bring us very near to the original 
eye and ear witnesses. The essential identity, amid much diversity 
in form, of the words ascribed to our Lord in the two Gospels which 
draw upon the Logia, inspires confidence that the evangelic reports 
of these words, though secondary, are altogether reliable. 


12 INTRODUCTION 


12. We cannot but wonder that a work so precious as the Logia 
of Matthew was allowed to perish, and earnestly wish that, if 
possible, it might even yet be restored. Attempts at gratifying this 
natural feeling have recently been made, and conjectural reconstruc- 
tions of the lost treasure lie before us in such works as that of 
Wendt on the Teaching of Fesus,) and of Blair on the Apostolic 
Gospel2 A critical estimate of these essays cannot here be given. 
Of course they are tentative; nevertheless they are interesting, and 
even fascinating to all who desire to get behind the existing records, 
and as near to the actual words of our Lord as possible. And, 
though an approach to a consensus of opinion may never be reached, 
the discussion is sure to bear fruit in a more intimate acquaintance 
with the most authentic forms of many of our Lord’s sayings. As 
another aid to so desirable a result, one must give a cordial welcome 
to such works as that of Resch on Extracanonical Parallel Texts to 
the Gospels.8 Resch believes it poesible, through the use of Codex 
Bezae, the old Latin and Syriac versions, and quotations from the 
Gospels in the early fathers, to get behind the text of our canonical 
Gospels, and to reach a truer reflection in Greek of the Hebrew 
original in the case of many sayings recorded in the Logia of 
Matthew. There will be various estimates of the intrinsic value of 
his adventurous attempt Personally, | am not sanguine that much 
will come out of it. But one cannot be sorry that it has been made, 
and by one who thoroughly believes that he is engaged in a fruitful 
line of inquiry. It is well to learn by exhaustive experiment how 
much or how little may be expected from that quarter. 

13. Among those who accept the hypothesis of the two sources 
a difference of opinion obtains on two subordinate points, vis., first, 
the relation between the two sources used in Matthew and Luke, 
and, second, the relation between these two Gospels. Did Mark 
know and use the Logia, and did Matthew know Luke, or Luke 
Matthew? Dr. Bernhard Weiss answers the former question in the 
affirmative and the latter in the negative. From certain pheno- 
mena brought to light by a comparative study of the synoptists, he 
thinks it demonstrable that in many parts of his narrative Mark leans 


1 Wendt, Die Lehre Fesu, Erster Theil. This part of Wendt’s work has not 
been translated. His exposition of Christ’s words has been translated by Messrs. 
T. & T, Clark, Edinburgh. 

2 The Apostolic Gospel, with a Critical Reconstruction of the Text, by J. Fulton 
Blair, 1896. Mr. Blair's critical position differs widely from Wendt's, and his 
Apostolic Gospel contains much more besides sayings. 

5 Aussercanonische Paralleltexte xu den Evangelien. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 13 


on an older written source, whose accounts of evangelic incidents are 
reproduced in a more faithful manner in the companion Gospels, and 
especially in Matthew. This source he takes to be the Logia of the 
apostle Matthew. It follows from this, of course, that the Logia 
was not a mere collection of sayings, but a book containing histories 
as well, such narratives, ¢.g., as those relating to the palsied man, 
the feeding of the 5000, and the blind man at Jericho. The pheno- 
mena on which Weiss rests his case are of two kinds. One group 
consists of minute agreements between Matthew and Luke against 
Mark in narratives common to the three, as, 6.5., in the use of the 
words ἰδού and ἐπὶ κλίνης in the opening sentence of the story of the 
palsied man. The inference is that these phrases are taken from the 
Logia, implying of course that the story was there for those who 
chose to use it. The other group consists of sayings of Jesus found 
in Mark’s Gospel, and reproduced also in Matthew and Luke in 
nearly identical form, yet not taken, it is held, from Mark, but from 
the Logia. The contention is that the close similarity can be 
accounted for only by the assumption that Mark, as well as his 
brother evangelists, took the words from the Logia. An instance in 
point may be found in the respective accounts of the reply of Jesus 
to the charge of being in league with Beelzebub. Wendt dissents 
from the inference of Weiss in but.) classes of cases. The one group 
of facts he explains by assuming that Luke had access to the first 
canonical gospel; in the second group he sees simply accidental 
correspondences between independent traditions preserved respec- 
tively in the Logia and in Mark.} 


SEcTION JI. HIsTorIicitTy. 


1. The Gospels prima facie wear the aspect of books aiming 
at giving a true if not a full account of the life, and more especially 
of the public career, of Jesus Christ, the Author of the Christian 
faith. For Christians, writings having such an aim must possess 
unique interest. There is nothing an earnest believer in Christ 
more desires to know than the actual truth about Him: what He 
said, did, and experienced. How far do the books, the study of 
which is to engage our attention, satisfy this desire? To what 
extent are they historically reliable ? 

2. The question has been recently propounded and discussed: 


1 Die Lehre $esu, Erster Theil, pp. 191-3. On the question whether the third 
evangelist used canonical Matthew, vide the Abhandlung of Edward Simons, 
Bonn, 1880. 


14 INTRODUCTION 


What interest did the apostolic age take in the evangelic history? 
and the conclusion arrived at that the earthly life of Jesus inter- 
ested it very little.1 Now, there can be no doubt that, comparing 
that age with the present time, the statement is true. We live in an 
age when the historical spirit is in the ascendant, creating an insati- 
able desire to know the origins of every movement which has affected, 
to any extent, the fortunes of humanity. Moreover, Christianity 
has undergone an evolution resulting in types of this religion which 
are, on various grounds, unsatisfactory to many thoughtful persons. 
Hence has arisen a powerful reaction of which the watchword is— 
“ Back to Christ,” and to which additional intensity has been given 
by the conviction that modern types of Christianity, whether eccle- 
siastical, philosophical, or pietistic, all more or less foster, if they do 
not avow, indifference to the historic foundations of the faith. We 
have thus a religious as well as a scientific reason for our desire to 
know the actual Jesus of history. Im the primitive era, faith was 
free to follow its native tendency to be content with its immediate 
object, the Risen Lord, and to rely on the inward illumination of the 
Holy Spirit as the source of all knowledge necessary for a godly life. 
This indifference might conceivably pass into hostility. Faith might 
busy itself in transforming unwelcome facts so as *> make the his- 
tory serve its purpose. For the historic interest and the religious 
are not identical. Science wants to know the actual facts; religion 
wants facts to be such as will serve its ends. It sometimes idealises, 
transforms, even invents history to accomplish this object. We are 
not entitled to assume, a priori, that apostolic Christianity entirely 
escaped this temptation. The suggestion that the faith of the primi- 
tive Church took hold of the story of Jesus and so transfigured it 
that the true image of Him is no longer recoverable, however scepti- 
cal, is not without plausibility. The more moderate statement that 
the apostolic Church, while knowing and accepting many facts about 
Jesus, was not interested in them as facts, but only as aids to faith, 
has a greater show of reason. It might well be that the teaching of 
Jesus was regarded not so much as a necessary source of the know- 
ledge of truth, but rather as a confirmation of knowledge already 
possessed, and that the acts and experiences of Jesus were viewed 
chiefly in the light of verifications of His claim to be the Messiah. 
It does not greatly matter to us what the source of interest in the 
evangelic facts was so long as they are facts; if the primitive 
Church in its traditions concerning Jesus was simply utilising and 

1 Vide Von Soden’s essay in the Theologische Abhandlungen, Cari von Weis- 
sdcker Gewidmet, 1892. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 15 


not manufacturing history. There is good reason to believe that in 
the main this is the true state of the case. Not only so, there are - 
grounds for the opinion that the historic spirit—interest in facts as 
facts—was not wanting even amid the fervour of the apostolic age. 
It may be worth while to mention some of these, seeing they make 
for the historicity of the main body of the evangelic tradition con- 
cerning the words, deeds, and sufferings of Jesus as these are re- 
corded, 6.Ρ., in the Gospel of Mark. 

3. In this connection it deserves a passing notice that there 
existed in the primitive Church a party interested in the fact-know- 
ledge of Jesus, the knowledge of Christ “after the flesh” in Pauline 
phrase, a Christ party. From the statement made by St. Paul in 
the text from which the phrase just quoted is taken, it has been in- 
ferred that the apostle was entirely indiff.vent to the historical 
element.! The inference seems to me hasty ; but, be this as it may, 
what I am now concerned to point out is that, if St. Paul under- 
valued the facts of the personal ministry, there were those who did 
aot. There was a party who made acquaintance with these facts a 
necessary qualification for the apostleship, and on this ground denied 
that St. Paul was an apostle. The assumption underlying the Tiibin- 
gen tendency-criticism is that there were two parties in the apostolic 
Church interested in misrepresenting Jesus in different directions, 
one virtually making Him a narrow Judaist, the other making Him a 
Pauline universalist, neither party being worthy of implicit trust. 
This hypothesis presents a somewhat distorted view of the situation. 
It would be nearer the truth to say that there was a party inter- 
ested in facts and another interested chiefly in ideas. The one 
valued facts without seeing their significance; the other valued 
ideas without taking much trouble to indicate the fact-basis. To the 
bias of the former party we might be indebted for knowledge of many 
facts in the life of Jesus, the significance of which was not under- 
stood by the transmitters of the tradition. 

4, Even within the Pauline party there were those who were 
interested in facts and in some measure animated by the historical 
spirit. So far from regarding Paulinists in general as idealists, we 
ought probably to regard St. Paul, in his passion for ideas and 
apparent indifference to biographic detail, as an excepticn; and to 
think of the majority of his followers as men who, while sympathising 
with his universalism, shared in no small measure the common 
Jewish realism. Of this type was Luke. The absence from his 


2 #Corinthians v. 16. 


ι6 INTRODUCTION 


Gospel of even the rudiments of a doctrine of atonement, so con- 
spicuous a topic in the Pauline epistles, will be remarked on here- 
after; meantime I direct attention simply to its opening sentence. 
That prefatory statement is full of words and phrases breathing the 
fact-loving spirit: Πεπληροφορημµένων πραγμάτων, dm ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ 
ὑπηρέται, ἀκριβῶς, ἀσφάλειαν. The author wants to deal with facts 
believed; he wishes, as far as possible, to be guided by the testimony 
of eye-witnesses; he means to take pains in the ascertainment of the 
truth, that the friend for whose benefit he writes may attain unto 
certainty. The question here is not how far he succeeded in his 
aim; the point insisted on is the aim itself, the historical spirit 
evinced. Luke may have been unconsciously influenced to a con- 
siderable extent by religious bias, preconceived opinion, accepted 
Christian belief, and therefore not sufficiently critical, and too easily 
satisfied with evidence; but he honestly wanted to know the historic 
truth. . And in this desire he doubtless represented a class, and 
wrote to meet a demand on tue part of Christians who felt a keen 
interest in the memorabilia of the Pounder, and were not satisfied 
with the sources at command on account of their fragmentariness, 
or occasional want of agreement with each other.! 

5. The peculiar character of the apostle who stood at the head 
of the primitive Jewish Church has an important bearing on the 
question of historicity. For our knowledge of Peter we are not 
wholly dependent on the documets whose historicity is in question. 
We have a rapid pencil-sketch of him in the epistles of St. Paul, 
easily recognisable as that of the same man of whom we have a 
more finished picture in the Gospels. A genial, frank, impulsive, 
outspoken, generous, wide-hearted man; not preoccupied with 
theories, illogical, inconsistent, now on one side, now on the other; 
brave yet cowardly, capable of honest sympathy with Christian 
universalism, yet under pressure apt to side with Jewish bigots. 
A most unsatisfactory, provoking person to deal with for such a man 
as St. Paul, with his sharply defined position, thorough-going 
adherence to principle, and firm resolute will. Yes, but also a very 
satisfactory source of first-hand traditions concerning Jesus; an 
excellent witness, if a weak apostle. A source, a copious fountain of 
information he was bound to be. We do not need Papias to tell us 
this. This disciple, open-hearted and open-mouthed, must speak 
concerning his beloved Master. It will not be long before everybody 
knows what he has to tell concerning the ministry of the Lord. 


1 Von Soden, in the essay above referred to, takes no notice of Luke's preface 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 17 


Papias reports that in Mark’s Gospel we have the literary record of 


* Peter’s testimony. The statement is entirely credible. Peter would 


say more than others about Jesus; he would say all in a vivid way, 
and Mark’s narrative reflects the style of an impressionable eye- 
witness. If it be a faithful report of Peter’s utterances the general 
truth of its picture of Jesus may be implicitly relied on. For Peter 
was not a man likely to be biassed by theological tendency. What 
we expect from him is rather a candid recital of things as they 
happened, without regard to, possibly without perception of, their 
bearing on present controversies; a rough, racy, unvarnished story, 
unmanipulated in the interest of ideas or theories, which are not in 
this man’s line. How far the narratives of the second Gospel bear 
out this character will appear hereafter. 

6. The other fact mentioned by Papias, viz., that the apostle 
Matthew was the source of the evangelic tradition relating to the 
words of Jesus, has an important bearing on historicity. Outside 
the Gospels we have no information concerning this disciple such as 
we have of Peter in the Pauline letters. But we may safely assume 
the truth of the Gospel accounts which represent him as having been 
a tax-gatherer before he was called to discipleship. The story of his 
call, under the name of Matthew or Levi, is told in all the three 
synoptists, as is also the significant incident of the feast following at 
which Jesus met with a large company of publicans. There is 
reason to believe that in calling this disciple our Lord had in view 
not merely ultimate service as an apostle, but immediate service in 
connection with the meeting with the publicans; that, in short, Jesus 
associated Matthew with Himself that He might use him as an 
instrument for initiating a mission to the class to which he had 
belonged. But if the Master might call a fit man to discipleship for 
one form of immediate service, He might call him for more than 
one. Another service the ex-publican might be able to render was 
that of secretary. In his old occupation he would be accustomed to 
writing, and it might be Christ’s desire to utilise that talent for 
noting down things worthy of record. The gift would be most in 
demand in connection with the teaching of the Master. The 
preservation of that element could not be safely trusted to memories 
quite equal to the retention of remarkable healing acts, accompanied 
by not less remarkable sayings. The use of the pen at the moment 
might be necessary. And of all the members%f the disciple-circle 
the ex-publican was the likeliest man for that service. We are not 
surprised, therefore, that the function assigned to Matthew in con- 


nection with the evangelic tradition is the preservation of the Logia. 
2 


18 INTRODUCTION 


That is just the part he was fitted to perform. As little are we 
surprised that Mark’s Gospel, based on Peter's recollections, contains 
so little of the teaching. Peter was not the kind of man to take 
notes, nor were discourses full of deep thought the kind of material 
he was likely to remember. What would make an indelible impres- 
sion on him would be, not thought, but extraordinary deeds, 
accompanied by striking gestures, original brief replies to embarrass- 
ing questions and the like; just such things as we find reported in 
the second Gospel. 

From Matthew the publican might be expected not only a record 
of Christ’s teaching as distinct from His actions, but an impartial 
record. We should not suspect him any more than Peter of 
theological bias; least of all in the direction of Judaism. As a 
Galilean he belonged to a half-Gentile community, and as a pub- 
lican he was an outcast for orthodox Jews. It was probably the 
humane spirit and wide sympathies of Jesus that drew him from the 
receipt of custom. If, therefore, we find in the Logia any sayings 
ascribed to Jesus of a universalistic character we do not feel in the 
least tempted to doubt their authenticity. If, on “he other hand, we 
meet with words of an apparently opposite character we are not 
greatly startled and ready to exclaim, Behold the hand of an inter- 
polator! We rather incline to see in the combination of seemingly 
incongruous elements the evidence of candid chronicling. It is the 
case of an honest reporter taking down this and that without asking 
himself whether this can be reconciled with that. That a deep, 
many-sided mind like that of Jesus might give birth to startling 
paradoxes is no wise incredible. Therefore, without undertaking 
responsibility for every expression, one may without hesitation en- 
dorse the sentiment of Jiilicher, “that Jewish and anti-Jewish, 
revolutionary and conservative, new and old, freedom and narrow- 
ness in judgment, sensuous hopes and a spiritualism blending 
together present and future, meet together, by no means weakens 
our impression that Jesus really here speaks”. 

7. The mere fact of the preservation of Mark’s Gospel is not 
without a bearing on the question of historicity. In its own way it 
testifies to the influence of the historic as distinct from the religious 
spirit in the early period of the Christian era. It would not have 
been at all surprising if that Gospel had fallen out of existence, 
seeing that its contents have been absorbed into the more compre- 
hensive Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Assuming the correctness 


1 Einleitung in das Neue Testament, p. 231. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 19 


of modern critical views, the Logia of the Apostle Matthew has dis- 
appeared; how did it come about that the second Gospel did not 
disappear also, especially in view of its defects, as they would be re- 
garded, comparing it with the longer narratives of the same type? 
Whether the authors of the first and third Gospels aimed at super- 
seding the Logia and Mark is a question that need not be discussed. 
From Luke’s preface it might plausibly be inferred that he did 
aspire at giving so full and satisfactory an account of the life of 
Jesus as should render earlier attempts superfluous. If he did, he 
was not successful. The Gospel without the story of the infancy, 
and the Sermon on the Mount, and the detailed appearances after the 
resurrection, survived. It might be undervalued. There is evidence 
of preference and partiality for one Gospel as against another in 
Patristic literature. Clement of Alexandria, true to his philosophy, 
undervalued all the synoptists as compared with the fourth Gospel, 
because they showed merely the body of Jesus, while the fourth 
Gospel showed His spivit. Augustine regarded Mark as a mere 
pedissequus to Matthew, en laquais, as D’Eichthal irreverently but 
not incorrectly renders the word.! Still Mark held his place, mere 
lackey to Matthew though some supposed him to be. The reason 
might be in part that he had got too strong a hold before the com- 
panion Gospels appeared, to be easily dislodged, and had to be 
accepted in spite of defects and apparent superfluousness. But I 
think there was also a worthier reason, a certain diffused thankful- 
ness for every scrap of information concerning the Lord Jesus, 
especially such as was believed to rest on apostolic testimony. 
Mark’s Gospel passed for a report of St. Peter’s reminiscences of 
the Master; therefore by all means let it be preserved, though it 
contained no account of the childhood of Jesus, and very imperfect 
reports of His teaching and of the resurrection. It was apostolic, 
therefore to be respected; as apostolic it was trustworthy, there- 
fore to be valued. In short, the presence of the second Gospel in 
the New Testament, side by side with Matthew and Luke, is a wit- 
ness to the prevalence in the Church of the first century of the 
historical spirit acting as a check on the religious spirit, whose in- 
stinctive impulse would be to obliterate traces of discrepancy, and to 
suppress all writings relating to the Christian origins which in their 
presentation of Jesus even seemed to sink below the level of the 
Catholic faith. 

8. The foregoing five considerations all tend to make a favour- 


1 Vide his work Les Evangiles, p. 66. 


20 INTRODUCTION 


able impression as to the historicity of the evangelic tradition in 
general. More special considerations are needful when the tradition 
is broken up into distinct divisions. The tradition consists of three 
layers. Faith would make three demands for information concern- 
ing its object: what did He teach? what did He do? how did 
He suffer? Some think that the first and most urgent demand 
would be for information concerning the teaching, and that only in 
the second place would there grow up a desire for narratives of facts 
and experiences. According to Holtzmann the order was: first the 
Logia, then the passion-drama, then the anecdotes of memorable 
acts. I should be inclined to invert the order of the first two items, 
and to say: the Passion, the Logia, the memorable incidents. But 
the more important question is: how far can the evangelic records 
concerning these three departments of the tradition be trusted? 
Only a few hints can be given by way of answer here. 

9. The narratives of the Passion, given in all the four Gospels 
with disproportionate fulness, have lately been subjected to a 
searching analysis in a sceptical spirit rivalling that of Strauss. 
Dr. Brandt,? after doing his utmost to shake our faith in the trust- 
worthiness of these pathetic records, still leaves to us eight par- 
ticulars, which even he is constrained to recognise as historical. 
These are: betrayal by one of the twelve; desertion by all of them; 
denial by Peter; death sentence under the joint responsibility of 
Jewish rulers and Roman procurator; assistance in carrying the cross 
rendered by Simon of Cyrene; crucifixion on a hill called Golgotha; 
the crime charged indicated by the inscription, “ King of the Jews” ; 
death, if not preceded by a prayer for the murderers, or by the 
despairing cry, ‘My God, my God,” at least heralded by a loud 
voice. In these particulars we have the skeleton of the story, all that 
is needful to give the Passion tragic significance, and even to form 
a basis for theological constructions. The items omitted, the 
process before the Sanhedrim, the interviews with Pilate and 
Herod, the mockery of the soldiers, the preferential release of 
Barabbas, the sneers of passers-by, the two thieves, the parting of the 
raiment, the words from the cross, the preternatural accompaniments 
of death, are all more or less of the nature of accessories, enhancing 
greatly the impressiveness of the picture, suggesting additional 
lessons, but not altering the character of the event as a whole. 

But even accessories are important, and not to be lightly given 


1 Vide Hand-Commentar, pp. 13-17. 
* Die Evangelische Geschichte und der Ursprung des Christenthums, 1893. 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 21 


over to the tender mercies of sceptical critics. The reasons assigned 
for treating them as unhistoric are not convincing. They come 
mostly under three heads: The influence of Old Testament prophecy, 
the absence of witnesses, and the bias manifest in the accounts of 
the trial against the Jews and in favour of the Gentiles. By 
reference to the first a whole group of incidents, including the cry, 
«ΕΙ, Eli,” are summarily disposed of. Texts taken from Psalm xxii. 
and Isaiah ΠΠ, created corresponding facts. This is a gratuitous 
assumption. The facts suggested the prophecies, the prophecies did 
not create the facts. The facts were there, and the primitive 
disciples looked out for Messianic oracles to suit them, by way of 
furnishing themselves with an apologetic for the thesis, Jesus is the 
Christ. In some cases the links of proof are weak; no one could 
have thought of the texts unless the facts had been there to suggest 
them. The plea of lack of witnesses applies to what took place 
between Jesus and the various authorities before whom He appeared : 
the High Priests, Pilate, Herod. Who, it is asked, were there to 
see or hear? Who likely to be available as witnesses for the 
evangelic tradition? We cannot tell; yet it is possible there was 
quite sufficient evidence, though also possible, doubtless, that the 
evangelists were not in all cases able to give exact verifiable informa- 
tion, but were obliged to give simply the best information obtainable. 
This, at least, we may claim for them, that they did their best to 
ascertain the facts. As to the alleged prejudice leading to unfair 
distribution of blame for our Lord’s death between the Jewish 
authorities and the Roman governor, we may admit that there were 
temptations to such partiality, arising out of natural dislike of the 
Jews and unequally natural desire to win the favour of those who 
held the reins of empire. Yet on the whole it may be affirmed that 
the representation of the evangelists is intrinsically credible as in 
harmony with all we know about the principal actors in the great 
tragedy. 

10. With regard to the teaz%ing, it is of course obvious that all 
recorded ‘sayings of Jesus do not possess the same attestation. Some 
words are found in all three synoptists, some in two, and not a few 
in only one. Yet in many instances we can feel as sure of the 
authenticity of sayings found in a single Gospel as of that of sayings 
occurring in allthe three. Who can doubt, ¢.g., that the word, “the 
Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath,” emanated 
from the great Master? It is well in this connection to have before 
our minds the rules by which judgment should be guided. The 
following canons may legitimately be relied on :— 


22 INTRODUCTION 


(a) Sayings supported by full synoptical attestation may be 
regarded as in substance authentic. 

(6) Sayings unsupported by full synoptical attestation may be 
regarded as authentic when their absence from a particular Gospel 
can be explained by its plan, or by the idiosyncrasy of its author. 
This covers not a few omissions by Luke. 

(c) Sayings found only in a single Gospel may be accepted as 
authentic when they sympathise with and form a natural complement 
to other well-attested sayings. This remark applies to the sayings in 
Luke vii. 47, xv. 7, concerning the connection between little forgive- 
ness and little love, and about the joy of finding things lost, which 
are complementary to the saying in all three synoptists: “the whole 
need not a physician ;”"’ the three sayings together constituting a full 
apology for the relations between Jesus and the sinful. 

(d) All sayings possess intrinsic credibility which suit the general 

historical situation. This applies to Christ's antipharisaic utterances, 
an element very prominent in Matthew, and very much restricted in 
Luke. 
(ε) All sayings may be accepted as self-attested and needing no 
other attestation which bear the unmistakable stamp of a unique 
religious genius, rise above the capacity of the reporters, and are 
reported by them simply as unforgettable memories of the great 
Teacher handed down by a faithful tradition. 

The chief impulse to collecting the sayings of Jesus was not a 
purely historical interest, but a desire to find in the words of the 
Master what might serve as a rule to believers for the guidance of 
their life. Hence may be explained the topical grouping of sayings 
in Matthew and Luke, especially in the former, ¢.g., in the tenth 
chapter, whose rubric might be: a directory for the mission work of 
the church; and in the eighteenth, which might be headed: how 
the members of the Christian brotherhood are to behave towards 
each other. The question suggests itself, Would the influence of 
the practical aim be confined to grouping ? Would it not extend to 
modifications, expansions, additions, even inventions, that the words 
of the Master might cover all present requirements and correspond 
fully to present circumstances and convictions? On this topic 
Weizsacker makes the following statement: “Prom the beginning 
the tradition consisted not in mere repetition, but in repetition 
combined with creative activity. And from the nature of the case 
this activity increased as time went on. Elucidations grew into text. 
The single saying was multiplied with the multiplication of its uses, 
or the words were referred to a definite case and correspondingly 


CONCERNING THE THREE GOSPELS 23 


modified. Finally, words were inserted into the text of Jesus’ 
sayings, especially in the form of instances of narrative, which were 
only meant to make His utterances more distinct.”? This may 
seem to open a door to licence, but second thoughts tend to allay our 
fears. The aim itself supplied a check to undue freedom. Just 
because disciples desired to follow the Master and make His words 
their law, they would wish to be sure that the reported sayings gave 
them the thoughts of Jesus at least, if not His ipsissima verba. 
Then there is reason to believe that the process of fixing the 
tradition was substantially completed when the memory of Jesus was 
recent, and the men who had been with Him were at hand to guide 
and control the process. Weizsacker remarks that very little of the 
nature of accretion originated elsewhere than in the primitive church, 
and that the great mass of the evangelic tradition was formed under 
the influence of the living tradition.2 That is to say, the freedom of 
the apostolic age was controlled by knowledge and reverence. It 
was known what the Master had taught, and great respect was 
cherished for His authority. If there was no superstitious concern 
as to literal accuracy, there was a loyal solicitude that the meaning 
conveyed by words should be true to the mind of Christ. 

11. The incidents of the Healing Ministry, which form the bulk 
of the narrative of events, are complicated with the question of 
miracle. Those for whom it is an axiom that a miracle is impossible 
are tempted to pronounce on that ministry the summary and sweep- 
ing verdict, unhistorical. This is not a scientific procedure. The 
question of fact should be dealt with separately on its own grounds, 
and the question of explicability taken up only in the second place. 
There are good reasons for believing that the healing ministry, mir- 
aculous or not miraculous, was a great fact in the public career of 
Jesus. Healing is associated with teaching in all general notices of 
our Lord’s work. Nine acts of healing, some of them very remark- 
able, are reported in all the synoptical Gospels. The healing element 
in the ministry is so interwoven with the didactic that the former 
cannot be eliminated without destroying the whole story. This is 
frankly acknowledged by Harnack, who, if he does not doubt the 
reality of miracles, attaches very little apologetic value to them.’ 
The occasional notices in the Gospels of contemporary opinions, 
impressions, and theories regarding Christ’s actions speak to some- 
thing extraordinary over and above the preaching and teaching. 


1The Apostolic Age, vol. ii., p. 62. 3 Ibid. 
3 History of Dogma, vol.i., p. 65, note 3. 


24 INTRODUCTION 


Mark’s graphic report of the impression produced by Christ's first 
appearance in the synagogue of Capernaum may be cited as an 
instance. ‘What is this? A new teaching!—with authority He 
commandeth even the unclean spirits, and they obey Him.”! This 
is a veritable reminiscence, and it points to a double surprise created 
by an original style of preaching, and by an unprecedented power. 
Still more significant are the theories invented to explain away 
the power. The Pharisees accounted for it, as displayed in the 
cure of demoniacs, by the suggestion of an alliance with Beelzebub. 
Herod said: “It is John whom I beheaded risen from the dead and 
exercising the power of the spirit world”. The one theory was 
malevolent, the other absurd, but the point to be noticed is the 
existence of the theories. Men do not theorise about nothing. 
There were remarkable facts urgently demanding explanation of 
some sort. 

The healing acts of Jesus then, speaking broadly, were to begin 
with facts. How they are to be explained, and what they imply as 
to the Person of the Healer, are questions for science and theology. 
It is not scientific to neglect the phenomena as unworthy of notice. 
As little is it scientific to make the solution easy by under-statement 
of the facts to be explained, as, ε.σ., by viewing demoniacal possession 
as an imaginary disease. Demoniacal possession might be an 
imaginary explanation of certain classes of diseases, but the dis- 
eases themselves were serious enough, as serious as madness and 
epilepsy, which appear to have formed the physical basis of the 
malady. 

Finally, it is not to be supposed that these healing acts, though 
indubitable facts, have no permanent religious value. Their use in 
the evidences of Christianity may belong to an antiquated type of 
apologetic, but in other respects their significance is perennial. 
Whether miraculous or not, they equally reveal the wide-hearted 
benevolence of Jesus. They throw a side light on His doctrine of 
God and of man, and especially on His conception of the ideal of 
life. The healing ministry was a tacit but effective protest against 
asceticism and the dualism on which it rests, and a proof that 
Jesus had no sympathy with the hard antithesis between spirit and 
flesh. 

12. Before leaving the topic of historicity, it may be well here to 
refer to a line of evidence which, though not worked out, has been 
suggestively sketched by Professor Sanday in his Bampton Lectures 


1 Mark i. 27. 


CONCERNING ΤΗΕ THREE GOSPELS 25 


on Inspiration. The thesis to be proved is “that the great mass of 
the narrative in the first three Gospels took its shape before the 
destruction of Jerusalem, {.ε., within less than forty years of the 
events”.! ‘Was there ever,” asks Dr. Sanday, “an easier problem 
for a critic to decide whether the sayings and narratives which lie 
before him came from the one side of this chasm or the other?” 
Among the instances he cites are such as these: “If, therefore, 
thou art offering thy gift at the altar, and then rememberest that 
thy brother hath aught against thee,” etc. “Woe unto you, ye blind 
guides, which say, whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing,’ 
etc. ‘See thou tell no man, but go thy way, show thyself to the 
priest,” etc. That is to say, the altar, the temple, the priesthood 
are still in existence. This is not decisive as to the date of our Gos- 
pels, but it is decisive as to much of the material contained in them 
having assumed fixed shape, either in oral or in written form, before 
the great crisis of Israel. 

13. Historicity, be it finally noted, is not to be confounded with 
absolute accuracy, or perfect agreement between parallel accounts. 
Harmonistic is a thing of the past. It was a well-meant discipline, 
but it took in hand an insoluble problem, and it unduly magnified the 
importance of a solution, even if it had been possible. Questions as 
to occasions on which reported words and acts of Jesus were spoken 
or done, as to the connections between sayings grouped together in 
one Gospel, dispersed in the pages of another, as to the diverse 
forms of sayings in parallel reports, are for us now secondary. The 
broad question we ask as to the words of Jesus is: have we here, in 
the main, words actually spoken by Jesus, once or twice, now or 
then, in this connection or in that, in separate aphorisms or in con- 
nected discourse, in the form reported by this or that evangelist, or 
in a form not exactly reproduced by any of them, yet conveying a 
sense sufficiently reflected in all the versions? Is the Lord’s prayer 
the Lord’s at whatever time given to His disciples? Is the “Sermon 
on the Mount” made up of real utterances of Jesus, whether all 
spoken at one time, as Matthew’s report seems to imply, or on 
various occasions, as we should infer from Luke’s narrative? Did 
Jesus actually say: ‘1 came not to call the righteous, but sinners,”’ 
whether with the addition, “to repentance,” as it stands in Luke, or 
without, as in the genuine text of the same Logion in Matthew and 
Mark? Did He speak the parable of the lost sheep—whether in 
Matthew’s form or in Luke’s, or in a form differing verbally from 


1 Page 283. 


26 INTRODUCTION 


both—to disciples, to Pharisees, or perhaps to neither, but to publi- 
cans, yet conveying in some form and to some audience the great 
thought that there was a passion in His heart and in the heart of 
God for saving lost men? It is greatly to be desired that devout 
readers of the Gospels should be emancipated from legal bondage to 
the theological figment of inerrancy. Till this is done, it is impos- 
sible to enjoy in full the Gospel story, or feel its essential truth and 
reality. 


CHAPTER II. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK. 


Section I. ΟΟΝΤΕΝΤΕ, 


1. The second Gospel has no account of the birth and infancy of 
Jesus. The narrative opens with the prelude to the public ministry, 
the preaching and baptism of the prophet John; and the sequel 
consists of a rapid sketch of that ministry in a series of graphic tab- 
leaux from its commencement in Galilee to its tragic close in Jerusa- 
lem. This fact alone raises a presumption in favour of Mark’s claim 
to be the earliest of the three synoptical Gospels. Other considera- 
tions pointing in the same direction are its comparative brevity and 
the meagreness of its account of Christ’s teaching. This Gospel 
wears the aspect of a first sketch of the memorable career of one 
who had become an object of religious faith and love to the circle of 
readers for whose benefit it was written. As such it is entitled to 
precedence in an introduction to the three synoptists, though, in our 
detailed comments, we follow the order in which they are arranged in 
the New Testament. It is convenient to take Mark first for this 
further reason, that from its pages we can form the clearest idea of 
the general course of our Lord’s history after He entered on His 
Messianic calling. In none of the three Gospels can we find a 
definite chronological plan, but it is possible from any one of them to 
form a general idea of the leading stages of the ministry, and most 
easily and clearly from the second. 

2. The first stage was the synagogue ministry. After His bap- 
tism in the Jordan and His temptation in the wilderness, Jesus 
returned to Galilee and began to preach the “Gospel of the King- 
dom of God”.! The synagogue was the scene of this preaching. 
The first appearance of Jesus in a synagogue was in Capernaum, 
where He at once made a great impression both by His discourse 
and by the cure of a demoniac.?, This was simply the commence: 


1 Mark i. 14. 2 Mark i. 27. 


28 INTRODUCTION 


ment of a preaching tour in the synagogues of Galilee. Jesus made 
no stay in Capernaum. He left the town the day after He preached 
in its synagogue, very early in the morning.’ He left so early in 
the day because He feared detention by the people. He left in such 
haste because He knew that He could preach in the synagogues 
only by the consent of the authorities, which might soon be with- 
held through sinister influence. This synagogue preaching naturally 
formed the first phase in Christ’s work. The synagogue presented 
a ready opportunity of coming into contact with the people. Any 
man might speak there with the permission of the ruler. But he 
could speak only so long as he was a persona grata, and Jesus, con- 
scious of the wide cleavage in thought and feeling between Himself 
and the scribes, could not but fear that He would not remain such 
long. It was now or never, at the outset or not at all, so far as the 
synagogue was concerned. 

3. How long this synagogue ministry lasted is not expressly in- 
dicated. A considerable period is implied in the statement: “ He 
preached in their synagogues throughout all Galilee”.? It is not 
necessary to take this strictly, especially in view of the populousness 
of Galilee and the multitude of its towns large and small, as indi- 
cated by Josephus. But the statement must be taken in earnest 
so far as to recognise that Jesus had a deliberate plan for a 
synagogue ministry in Galilee, and that He carried it out to a con- 
siderable extent. It is not improbable that it was interrupted by the 
influence of the scribes, whom we find lying in wait for Him on His 
return from the preaching tour to Capernaum.* 

4. With the anecdote in which the scribes figure as captious 
critics of Jesus a new phase in the story begins. The keynote of 
the first chapter is popularity ; that of the next is opposition. In 
this juxtaposition the evangelist is not merely aiming at dramatic 
effect, but reflecting in his narrative a real historical sequence. The 
popularity and the opposition were related to each other as cause 
and effect. It is true that having once entered on this second topic, 
he groups together a series of incidents illustrating the hostile atti- 
tude of the scribes, which have a topical rather than a temporal 
connection, in this probably following the example of his voucher, 
Peter. These extend from chap. ii. 1 to chap. iii. 6, constituting the 


1 Mark i. 35. 2 Mark i. 39. 


* Josephus gives the number of towns at 204, the smallest having 15,000 inhabi- 
tants. Wide his Vita, chap. xlv., and Bell. Fud., iii., 2, 3. 
* Chap. ii. 1. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK 29 


second division of the story, chap. i. 14-45 being the first. The two 
together set before us the two forces whose action and interaction 
can be traced throughout the drama, and whose resultant will be 
the cross: the favour of the people, the ill-will of their religious 
leaders. 

5. Within the second group of anecdotes illustrating the hos- 
tility of the scribes, a place is assigned to an incident which ought 
not to be regarded as a mere subordinate detail under that general 
category, but rather as pointing to another phase of our Lord’s 
activity co-ordinate in importance with the preaching in the 
synagogues. I refer to the meeting with the publicans, and in con- 
nection with that the call of Levi or Matthew.’ That action of 
Jesus had a decisive effect in alienating the scribes, but meantime 
this is not the thing to be emphasised. We have to recognise in 
this new movement a second stage in the ministry of Jesus. First, 
preaching in the synagogues to the Jews of respectable character 
and good religious habit; next, a mission to the practically excom- 
municated, non-synagogue-going, socially outcast part of the com- 
munity. Mark, more than his brother evangelists, shows his sense 
of the importance and significance of this new departure, especially 
by the observation: “there were many (publicans and sinners), and 
they followed Him”’.? That is to say, the class was large enough to 
demand special attention, and they were inviting attention and 
awakening interest in them by the interest they on their side were 
beginning to take in Jesus and His work. Without doubt this 
mission to the publicans bulked much larger in fact than it does in 
the pages of the evangelists or in the thoughts of average readers of 
the Gospels, and it must be one of the cares of the interpreter to 
make it appear in its true dimensions.’ There is nothing in the 
Gospels more characteristic of Jesus, or of deeper, more lasting sig- 
nificance as to the nature and tendency of the Christian faith. 

6. The third stage in the ministry of Jesus was the formation of 
a disciple-circle. Of the beginnings of this movement Mark gives us 
a glimpse in chap. i. 16-20, where he reports the call of the four 
fishermen, Peter and Andrew, James and John; and in the words 
Jesus is reported to have spoken to the first pair of brothers there 
is a clear indication of a purpose to gather about Him a band of men 
not merely for personal service but in order to training for a high 
calling. Levi’s call, reported in chap. ii., is another indication of 


} Chap. ii, 13-17. 2 Chap. ii, 15. 
3 Vide notes on this section in Matthew and in Mark. 


30 INTRODUCTION 


the same kind. But it is in the section of the Gospel beginning at 
chap. iii. 7, and extending to chap. vi. 13, that the disciples pro- 
perly come to the front. An intention on the part of the evangelist 
to give them prominence is betrayed in the pointed way in which he 
refers to them in iii. 7: “And Jesus with the disciples withdrew 
towards the sea”.* A little further on in the same chapter we read 
of the retirement of Jesus to the mountain with a band of disciples, 
out of which He selects an inner circle of ¢welve.2 And at various 
points in this division of the Gospel the disciple-band is referred to 
in a way to indicate that they are assuming a new importance to the 
mind of Jesus.* 

7. This importance was due in part to dissatisfaction with the 
result of the general ministry among the people. Jesus had preached 
often, and healed many, in synagogue and highway, and had become 
in consequence the idol of the masses who gathered in increasing 
numbers from all quarters, and crowded around Him wherever He 
went, as we read in chap. iii. 7-12. But this popularity did not 
gratify Him; it rather bored Him. He did not weary in well-doing, 
but He was disappointed with the outcome. This disappointment 
found expression in the parable of the sower, which was really a 
critical estimate of the synagogue ministry to this sad effect: much 
seed sown; little fruit. From this comparatively fruitless ministry 
among the many, Jesus turned with yearning to the susceptible few 
in hope to find in them a good soil that should bring forth ripe fruit, 
thirty, sixty, or even an hundred fold. After a long enough time had 
elapsed to make it possible to form an estimate of the spiritual 
situation, He judged that in a disciple-circle lay His only chance of 
deep permanent influence. Hence He naturally sought to extricate 
Himself from the crowd, and to get away from collisions with un- 
sympathetic scribes, that He might have leisure to indoctrinate the 
chosen band ir the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven. Leisure, 
quiet, retirement—that more and more was His aim. 

8. This desire for opportunity to perform the functions of a 
master is made more apparent by Mark than by the two other 
synoptists. He comes far short of them in his report of Christ's 
teaching, but he brings out much more clearly than they Christ's 
desire for undisturbed intercourse with the twelve, the reasons for 
it, and the persistent efforts of the Master to accomplish His object. 
It is from his pages we learn of the escapes of Jesus from the crowds 


1 μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν stands before ἀνεχώρησεν in the best texts. 
? Chap. iii. 13. 3 Vide iii. 31-35; iv. 10-25; vi. 7-13. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK 31 


and from the scribes. These escapes, as reported by Mark, take 
place in all directions possible for one whose work lay on the 
western shore of the Sea of Galilee: towards the hill behind, 
towards the eastern shore, towards the northern borderland. Five 
in all are mentioned: one to the hill;1 two to the eastern shore, 
first in an eastward,’ then in a northerly direction;* two to the 
north, first to the borders of Tyre and Sidon,‘ next to the neigh- 
bourhood of Caesarea Philippi. All had the same end in view: the 
instruction of the disciples. It was in connection with the first that 
the “Sermon on the Mount,” or the Teaching on the Hill, though 
not mentioned by Mark, was doubtless communicated. The second 
and third attempts, the flights across the lake, were unsuccessful, 
being frustrated in the first case by an accidental meeting with a 
demoniac, and in the second by the determination of the multitude 
not to let Jesus get away from the:~. Therefore, to make sure, the 
Master had to retire with His tisciples to the northern limits of the 
land, and even beyond them, into Gentile territory, that there He 
might, undisturbed, talk to His disciples about the crisis that He 
now clearly perceived to be approaching. 

9. These last flights of Jesus take us on to a point in the story 
considerably in advance of the end of the third section, chap. vi. 13. 
The material lying between this place and chap. viii. 27 shows us the 
progress of the drama under the ever-intensifying influence of the 
two great forces, popularity and hostility. The multitude grows 
ever larger till it reaches the dimensions of 5000,° and the enmity of 
the scribes becomes ever more acute as the divergence of the ways 
of Jesus from theirs becomes increasingly manifest, and His ab- 
horrence of their doctrines and spirit receives more unreserved 
expression.’ After the encounter with the scribes occasioned by 
the neglect of the disciple-circle to comply with Rabbinical customs 
in the matter of ceremonial ablutions, Jesus felt that it was a mere 
question of time when the enmity of His foes would culminate in an 
effort to compass His death. What He had now to do therefore 
was to prepare Himself and His disciples for the end. Accord- 
ingly, Mark reports that after that incident Jesus went thence 
into the borders of Tyre and Sidon, desiring that no one should 
know.® He could not be hid even there, and so to make sure 
of privacy He seems to have made a wide excursion into heathen 
territory, through Tyre and Sidon, possibly across the moun- 


1 Chap. iii. 13. 2 Chap. iv. 35. Σ Chap. vi. 30. ‘Chap. vii. 24. 
5 Chap. viii. 27. 6 Chap. vi. 44. 7 Chap. vii. 1-23. ® Chap. vii. 24. 


32 INTRODUCTION 


tains towards Damascus, and so through Decapolis back to 
Galilee Then followed, after an interval, the excursion to 
Caesarea Philippi, for ever memorable as the occasion on which 
Peter confessed his belief that his Master was the Christ, and the 
Master began to tell His disciples that He was destined ere long to 
suffer death at the hands of the scribes.’ 

10. From that point onwards Mark relates the last scenes in 
Galilee, the departure to the south, with the incidents on the way, 
the entry into Jerusalem, with the stirring incidents of the Passion 
Week, and, finally, the tragic story of the crucifixion. Throughout 
this fater part of his narrative it is evident that the one great theme 
of conversation between Jesus and His disciples was the cross: His 
cross and theirs, the necessity of self-sacrifice for all the faithful, 
the rewards of those who loyally bear their cross, and the penalties. 
appointed for those whose ruling spirit is ambition.’ 


Section I]. CHARACTERISTICS. 


1. The outstanding characteristic of Mark is realism. 1 have in 
view here, not the graphic, descriptive, literary style which is gene- 
rally ascribed to Mark, but the unreserved manner in which he pre- 
sents the person and character of Jesus and of the disciples. He 
states facts as they were, when one might be tempted not to state 
them at all, or to exhibit them in a subdued light. He describes 
from the life, avoiding toning down, reticence, generalised expression, 
or euphemistic circumlocution. In this respect there is a great con- 
trast between the second Gospel and the third, and it is only when 
we have made ourselves acquainted with the peculiarities of the two 
Gospels that we are able fully to appreciate those of either. The 
difference is this. Luke’s whole style of presentation is manifestly 
influenced by the present position of Jesus and the disciples: Jesus 
the risen and exalted Lord, the disciples Apostles. For Mark Jesus 
is the Jesus of history, and the disciples are simply disciples. Luke 
writes from the view-point of reverential faith, Mark from that of 
loving vivid recollection. It is impossible by rapid citation of in- 
stances to give an adequate idea of these distinguishing features ; 
all that can be done is to refer to a few examples in explanation of 
what I mean. In Mark's pages, Jesus before He begins His public 
career is a carpenter.* At the temptation He is driven by the Spirit 


1 Chap. vii. 31. 3 Chap. viii. 27-33. 
3 Vide chap. ix. 33-50 ; κ. 43-45. * Chap. vi. 3. 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK 33 


into the wilderness.’ His first appearance in the synagogue of 
Capernaum is so remarkable that people say to each other: “ What 
is this? A newteaching! With authority commandeth He even 
unclean spirits, and they obey Him.”* Early the following morning 
He makes what has the aspect of an unaccountable and undignified 
flight from Capernaum.* By-and-by, when He is fully engrossed 
in His teaching and healing ministries, His relatives come to 
rescue Him from His enthusiasm, deeming Him beside Himself.‘ 
On the day of the parable-discourse from the boat He makes 
another flight, He saying to the disciples : Let us go over to the other 
side; they promptly obeying orders suddenly given and carrying 
Him off from the crowd, even as He was. Towards the end, on the 
ascent to Jerusalem, Jesus goes before the disciples, and His 
manner is such that those who follow are amazed. When He 
sends for the colt on which He rides into the Holy City, He bids 
the two disciples promise to the owner that the colt will be re- 
turned when He has had His use of it.’ 

2. The realism of Mark makes for its historicity. It is a 
guarantee of first-hand reports, such 36 one might expect from 
Peter. Peter reverences his risen Lord as much as Luke or any 
other man. But he is one of the men who have been with Jesus, 
and he speaks from indelible impressions made on his eye and 
ear, while Luke reports at secord-hand from written accounts for 
the most part. The same realism is a strong argument in favour of 
Mark’s priority. It speaks +> an early date before the feeling of de- 
corum had become controlling as it is seen to be in Luke’s Gospel. 
Mark is the archaic Gospel, written under the inspiration not of 
prophecy like Matthew, or of present reverence like Luke, but of 
fondly cherished past memories. In it we get nearest to the true 
human personality of Jesus in all its originality and power, and as 
coloured by the time and the place. And the character of Jesus 
loses nothing by the realistic presentation. Nothing is told that 
needed to be hid. The homeliest facts reported by the evangelist 
only increase our interest and our admiration. One who desires to 
see the Jesus of history truly should con well the pages of Mark 
first, then pass on to Matthew and Luke. 

3. By comparison with the companion Gospels Mark lacks a 
conspicuous didactic aim. The purpose of the writer seems to be 


1 Chap. 1. 12. 2'Chap. 1.27. 3 Chap. i. 35-38. 4 Chap. iii. 21. 
> Chap. iv. 35. 5 Chap. x. 32. 7, Chap. xi. 3. 
8 Vide Holtzmann, Hand-Commentar, p. 7. 


5 


υ] 


14 INTRODUCTION 


mainly just to tell what he knows about Jesus. Some have tried 
to show that this Gospel is an endeavour to read into the evangelic 
history the ideas of Paulinism.t Others have maintained that the 
purpose of the writer is to observe a studied, calculated neutrality 
between Paulinism and Judaism. These opposite views may be 
left to destroy each other. Others, again, have found in the book 
a contribution towards establishing Christians in the faith that 
Jesus was the Messiah, when that faith was tried bya delayed 
second coming.’ A didactic programme has been supposed to be 
hinted at in the opening words: “The beginning of the Gospel of 
Jesus Christ, the Son of God,” and attem-ts have been made to 
show that in the sequel this programme is steadily kept in view. 1 
am by no means anxious to negative these last suggestions; all | 
say is that the didactic purpose is not prominent. The writer 
seems to say, not: “These are written that ye may believe that 
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,” but more simply: “ These are 
written that ye may know Jesus”. This also makes for the histori- 
city and early date of the archaic Gospel. 

4. Among the more obvious characteristics of Mark's literary 
style are the use of dual phrases in descriptive passages, a liking 
for diminutives, occasional Latinisms, the frequent employment of 
εὐθύς in narrative and of the historical present, both tending to 
vividness and giving the impression of an eye-witness. The rough 
vigour and crude grammar frequently noticeable in Mark's reports 
strengthen this impression. The style is colloquial rather than 
literary. To this in part is due the unsatisfactory state of the 
text. Mark's roughness and originality were too much for the 
scribes. They could not rest till they had smoothed down every- 
thing to commonplace. Harmonising propensities also are re- 
sponsible for the multiplicity of variants, the less important Gospel 
being forced into conformity with the more important. 


Section III. AvutTuor, Destination, Dare. 


1. The Gospel itself contains no indication as to who wrote it. 
That the writer was one bearing the name of Mark rests solely on 
an ecclesiastical tradition whose reliableness there has been no 
disposition to question. The Mark referred to has been from the 


1 So Pfleiderer in his Urchristenthum. 
2 So Baur and other members of the Tibingen school. 
5 So Bernhard Weiss, vide Das Marcusevangelium, Einleitung, p. 23. 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING ΤΟ MARK 35 


earliest times till now identified with the Mark named in Acts xii. 12, 
as the son of a Mary; in xiii. 5, 13, as the attendant of Paul and 
Barnabas on their mission journey; and in xv. 39, as the travelling 
companion of Barnabas alone after he had separated from Paul ; 
also, in Colossians iv. 10, as the cousin (ἀνεψιός) of Barnabas ; and, 
finally, in 2 Timothy iv. 11, and Philemon 24, as rendering useful 
services to Paul. 

2. The explanations of Jewish customs, 6.5., ceremonial washings 
(chap. vii. 3-4), and words such as Talitha cumi and Ephphatha, 
and the technical term “common” or “unclean” (v. 41, vii. 34, 
vii. 2), point to non-Jewish readers; and the use of Latinisms is 
most naturally accounted for by the supposition that the book was 
written among and for Roman Christians. 

3. The dates of the Gospels generally have been a subject of 
much controversy, and the endless diversity of opinion means that 
the whole matter belongs largely to the region of conjecture. The 
very late dates assigned to these writings by the Tibingen school are 
now generally abandoned. By many competent critics the Synopti- 
cal Gospels are placed well within the first century, say, between 
the years 60 and 80. Tocondescend upona precise year is im- 
possible. One cannot even determine with absolute confidence 
whether the earliest of them, z.e., Mark, was written before or after 
the destruction of Jerusalem. The point of practical importance 

“is not the date at which a Gospel was composed, but the historical 
value of its materials. In this respect the claims of Mark, as we 
have seen, stand high.! 


’ On the Appendix of Mark, chap. xvi. 9-20, vide Notes ad loc. 


CHAPTER III. 
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW. 


Section I. CONTENTS. 


1. As has been stated in chap. i., the bulk of Mark’s narrative 
is substantially taken up into Matthew's longer story. But to that 
narrative of the archaic Gospel is added much new material, con- 
sisting mainly of the teaching of our Lord. This teaching as 
reproduced in the first Gospel consists not of short pregnant sen- 
tences such as Mark has preserved, but of connected discourses of 
considerable length—the longest and the most important being that 
familiarly known as the “ Sermon on the Mount”. Whether this 
connected character is due to the Teacher or to the evangelist has 
been disputed, the bias of critical opinion being strongly in favour 
of the latter alternative. Extreme views on either side are to be 
avoided. That Jesus uttered only short pithy sayings is a gratuitous 
assumption. In connection with deliberate efforts to instruct the 
disciples, the presumption is in [αν ασ of continuous discourse. On 
the other hand, in some of the discourses reported in Matthew, ¢.g., 
that in chap. x. on apostolic duties and tribulations, agglomera- 
tion is apparent. To what Jesus said tu the twelve in sending them 
forth on their Galilean mission the evangelist, naturally and not 
inappropriately, adds weighty words which bear on the more mo- 
mentous mission of the apostles as the propagandists in the wide 
world of the Christian faith. A similar instance of editorial com- 
bination of kindred matter only topically connected may be found 
in the parabolic discourse (chap. χι). Matthew's seven parables 
were doubtless all spoken by Jesus, but not that day. The parables 
spoken from the boat were probably all of one type, presenting together 
a critical review of Christ’s past ministry among the people. On the 
other hand, I am inclined to think that the contents of chaps. xviii. 
and xxiii. for the most part belong to the respective occasions with 
which they are connected in the Gospel. The call for careful 
admonition to the twelve at Capernaum was urgent, and the Master 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 37 


would have much to say to His offending disciples. Then nothing 
could be more fitting than that Jesus should at the close of His 
life deliver a final and full testimony against the spurious sanctity 
which He had often criticiged in a fragmentary way, and which was 
now at last to cause His death. 

2. The main interest of the question now under consideration 
revolves around the “ Sermon on the Mount”. That a discourse 
of some length was delivered on the mountain Luke’s report proves. 
Luke, even in this case, breaks up much of Matthew’s connected 
matter into short separate utterances, but yet he agrees with 
Matthew in ascribing to Jesus something like an oration. Though 
much abbreviated, his report of the discourse is still a discourse. 
The only question is which of the two comes nearer the original in 
length and contents. Now, the feeling is a very natural one that 
Jesus could hardly have spoken so long a discourse as Matthew 
puts into His mouth at onetime, and to a popular audience. But 
two questions have to be asked here. Did Jesus address a popular 
audience ? Did He speak all at one time in the sense of a con- 
tinuous discourse of one hour or two hours’ length? I am strongly 
inclined to answer both questions in the negative. Jesus addressed 
Himself to disciples ; His discourse was teaching, not popular 
preaching—Didache, not Kerygma. And the time occupied in com- 
municating that teaching was probably a week rather than an hour. 
Matthew’s report, in chaps. v.-vii., in that case will have to be 
viewed as a summary of what the Great Teacher said to His dis- 
ciples in a leisurely way on sundry topics relating to the Kingdom 
of Heaven, during a season of retreat on the summit of the hills to 
the west of the Galilean Lake. Instead of calling it the Sermon 
on the Mount, we should more properly designate it the Teaching on 
the Hill. 

3. The insertion of great masses of didactic matter into the 
framework of Mark’s narrative weakens our sense of the progress 
of the history in reading Matthew. The didactic interest over- 
shadowed the historical in the evangelist’s own mind, with the 
result that his story does not present the aspect of a life-drama 
steadily moving on, but rather that of a collection of discourses 
furnished with slight historical introductions. The “ Sermon on 
the Mount” comes upon us before we are prepared for it. To 
appreciate it fully we must realise that before it was spoken Jesus 


1 For further remarks on this point vide Notes on the Sermon at the beginning 
and throughout. 


18 INTRODUCTION 


had preached in many synagogues and to many street crowds, and 
that a long enough time had elapsed for the Preacher to feel that 
His ministry had been to a large extent fruitless, and that to 
establish and perpetuate His influence He must now devote Himself 
to the careful instruction of a disciple-circle. The miscellaneous- 
ness of the parable-collection in chap. xiii. hides from us the fact 
that that day Jesus was sitting in judgment on His own past 
ministry and pronouncing on it the verdict: Much seed, little fruit ; 
so justifying Himself for attending henceforth less to the many and 
more to the few. 

4. While the connections of Matthew's discourses are topical 
rather than temporal, and the sense of progress in his narrative is 
comparatively weak, there is a manifest correspondence between 
the discourses he imputes to Jesus and the whole circumstances of 
the times in which Jesus lived. This remark applies especially to 
the criticism of Pharisaism, which occupies so prominent a place in 
the first Gospel, as compared, ¢.g., with the third, in which that 
element retires comparatively into the background. Keen conflict 
between our Lord and the Scribes and Pharisees was inevitable, and 
the amount of controversial material in the first Gospel speaks 
strongly in favour of its fidelity to fact in this part of its record, 
even as the unique quality of the anti-Pharisaic sayings ascribed to 
Jesus bears witness to their originality. In the Teaching on the 
Hill the references to Scribism and Pharisaism are, as was fitting, 
the criticised parties not being present, didactic rather than 
controversial, but there can be little doubt that Jesus would take 
occasion there to indicate the difference between His religious ideas 
and those in vogue at the time. Here it is not Matthew that adds, 
but Luke that omits. 

5. It has been maintained that Matthew's account of our Lord's 
teaching is not uniform in character—is, indeed, so discrepant as to 
suggest different hands writing in diverse interests and with con- 
flicting theological attitudes. D'’Eichthal, ¢.g., is of opinion that the 
primitive Matthew was the earliest written Gospel, and that its 
contents were much the same as those found in canonical Mark; 
but that, through being the earliest, it had exceptional authority, 
and was therefore liable to be added to with a view to furnishing it 
with support in the teaching of Christ for developing Christianity.’ 
D'Eichthal counts as many as forty-five “ Annexes” gradually in- 
troduced in this way, including the history of the infancy, many 


1 Les Evangiles. 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 39 


parables, numerous passages bearing on the Person of Christ, the 
Church, the Resurrection, the Second Advent, etc. From this 
questionable honour of becoming “a place of deposit” for new 
material, as Dr. Estlin Carpenter calls it,) Mark, according to 
D’Eichthal, was protected by its greater obscurity and inferior 
authority; hence its modest dimensions and superior reliableness 
in point of fidelity to actual historic truth. 

This theory is plausible, and we are not entitled to say a priori 
that it has no foundation in fact. Additions to the Gospels might 
creep in before they became canonical, as they crept in afterwards 
through the agency of copyists. The sayings about the indestructi- 
bility of the law (v. 17-19) and the founding of the Church (xvi. 18, 19) 
might possibly be examples in point. But possibility is one thing, 
probability another. To prove diversity of hand or successive 
deposits of evangelic tradition by men living at different times, 
and acting in the interest of distinct or even opposing tendencies, 
it is not enough to point to apparently conflicting elements and 
exclaim: “ Behold a Gospel of contradictions”.? On this topic | 
may refer readers to what has been already stated in discussing 
the subject of the historicity of the Gospels. And \ may here add 
that it would not be difficult to conceive a situation for which the 
Gospel might have been written by one man, as it now stands. 
Dr. Weiss, indeed, has successfully done this in his work on the 
Gospel of Matthew and its parallels in Luke. He conceives the 
Gospel, substantially as we have it, to have been written shortly 
after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish State, when the 
faith of Jewish Christians in the Messiahship of Jesus would be 
sorely shaken by the events: the promised messianic Kingdom 
passing away irretrievably from Israel and taking up its abode 
among Gentiles. The Gospel that was to meet this situation would 
have to show that Jesus was indeed the Messianic King, in whose 
history many prophetic oracles found their fulfilment; that He did 
His utmost to found the kingdom in Israel, but was frustrated by 
the unbelief of the people, and especially of its rulers; that, there- 
fore, the kingdom was driven forth from Jewish soil, and was now 
to be found mainly in the Gentile Church, and there Cad been left 
to Israel only an inheritance of woe; that though Jesus had pre- 
dicted this doom He nevertheless loved His people, had loyally and 


1 The First Three Gospels, p. 370. 


2 Dr. Estlin Carpenter, in the above work, p. 363, remarks: '* Truly has the 
first Gospel been called a ‘ Gospel of contradictions’ ”’. 


40 INTRODUCTION 


lovingly sought her good, had spoken with reverence of her God- 
given law (while treating with disrespect Rabbinical traditions), and 
honoured it by personal observance. This hypothesis fairly meets 
the requirements of the case. It covers the phenomena of the 
Gospel, and it is compatible with unity of plan and authorship.’ 


SecTION II]. CHARACTERISTICS. 


1. The most outstanding characteristic of the first Gospel is that 
it paints the life-image of Jesus in prophetic colours. While in 
Mark Jesus is presented realistically as a man, in Matthew He is 
presented as the Christ, verified as such by the applicability of many 
prophetic oracles to the details of His childhood, His public ministry, 
and His last sufferings. 

2. If the realism of Mark makes for the historicity of this Gospel, 
the prophetic colouring so conspicuous in Matthew need not detract 
from the historicity of its accounts. This fe-sture may be due in 
part to the personal idiosyncrasy of the writer and in part to his 
didactic aim. He may have set himself to verify the thesis, Jesus 
the Christ, for his own satisfaction, or it may have been necessary 
that he should do so in order to strengthen the faith of his first 
readers. In either case the presumption is that the operation he 
was engaged in consisted in discovering prophetic texts to answer 
facts ready to his hand, not in first making a collection of texts and 
then inventing facts corresponding to them. The facts suggested 
the texts, the texts did not create the facts, though in some instances 
they might influence the mode of stating facts. In this connection 
it is important to note that the evangelist applies his prophetic 
method to the whole of his material, including that which is common 
to him with Mark. He has his prophetic oracles ready to be attached 
as labels to events which Mark reports simply as matters of fact. 
Thus Mark's dry statement, “they went into Capernaum,”? referring 
to Jesus and His followers proceeding northwards from the scene of 
the baptism, in Matthew's hands assumes the character of a solemn 
announcement of an epoch-making event, whereby an ancient oracle 
concerning the appearing of a great light in Galilee of the Gentiles 
received its fulfilment. Again, Mark’s matter-of-fact report of the 
extensive healing function in Capernaum on the Sabbath evening is 
in Matthew adorned with a beautiful citation from Isaiah’s famous 


1 Vide Weiss, Das Matthaus-Evangelium und seine Lucas-parallelen, p. 39. 
2 Mark i, 21, * Matt. iv. 12-17, 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 41 


oracle concerning the suffering servant of Jehovah.’ Once more, 
to Mark’s simple statement that Jesus withdrew Himself to the sea 
after the collision with the Pharisees occasioned by the healing on 
a Sabbath of the man with a withered hand, the first evangelist 
attaches a fine prophetic picture, as if to show readers the true 
Jesus as opposed to the Jesus of Pharisaic imagination.» From 
these instances we see his method. He is not inventing history, 
but enriching history with prophetic emblazonments for apologetic 
purposes, or for increase of edification. Such is the fact, we observe, 
when we have it in our power to control his statements by compari- 
son with Mark’s; such we may assume to be the fact when we 
’ have not that in our power, as, é.g., in the narrative relating to the 
birth and infancy of Jesus, in which prophetic citations are unusually 
abundant. The question as to the historicity of that narrative has 
its own peculiar difficulties, into which ~ do not here enter. The 
point I wish to make is that the numerous prophetic references cast 
no additional shadow of doubt on its historicity. Here too the 
evangelist is simply attaching prophe*ic oracles to what he regards 
as historic data. If invention has been at work it has not been in 
his imagination. This is manifest even from the very weakness of 
some of the citations, such as “ Out of Egypt have I called my Son,” 
“Rachel weeping for her children,” and “He shall be called a 
Nazarene”. Who could ever have thought of these unless there 
had been traditional data accepted by the Christian community (and 
by the writer of the Gospel) as facts? The last citation is especially 
far-fetched. It is impossible to say whence it is taken; it could 
never have entered into the mind of any one unless the fact of 
the settlement in Nazareth had been there to begin with, creating a 
desire to find for it also, if at all possible, some prophetic antici- 
pation. 

These prophetic passages served their purpose in the apologetic 
of the apostolic age. For us now their value is not apologetic, 
except indeed in a way not contemplated by the evangelist. Their 
occasional weakness as proofs of the Messiahship of Jesus can be 
utilised in the manner above hinted at in support of the historicity 
of the evangelic tradition. But the chief permanent value of these 
citations lies in the light they throw on the evangelist’s own con- 
ception of Jesus. We see from them that he thought of Jesus as 
the Light of Galilee, the sympathetic Bearer of humanity’s heavy 
burden, the Beloved of God, the Peacemaker, the Friend of weak- 


1 Matt. viii. 17. 2 Matt. xii. 15-21, Cy. Mark iii. 7. 


42 INTRODUCTION 


ness, the Man who had it in Him by gifts and graces to perform a 
Christ’s part for all the world. Truly a noble conception, which 
lends perennial interest to the texts in which it is embodied. 

3. In the foregoing remarks I have anticipated to a certain 
extent what relates to the question of didactic aim. That the first 
Gospel has such an aim is obvious from the careful manner in whicl. 
the prophetic argument is elaborated. The purpose is to confirm 
Jewish Christians in the faith that Jesus is the Christ. The purpose 
is reveafed in the very first sentence and in the genealogy to which 
it forms a preface. ‘The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, 
the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.” The Son of David first, 
because on that hangs the Messianic claim; the Son of Abraham 
likewise, because that makes Him a Jew, a fellow-countryman of those 
for whose benefit the Gospel is written. The genealogy is the first 
contribution to the apologetic argument. The logic of it is this: 
“The Psalms and Prophets predict the coming of a great Messianic 
King who shall be a descendant of the house of David; this genealogy 
shows that Jesus possessed that qualification for Messiahship. He 
is the rod out of the stem of Jesse.” Whoever compiled the 
genealogy did it under the impression that physical descent from 
David was indispensable to Jesus being the Christ. But it does not 
follow that the genealogy was manufactured to serve that purpose. 
The descent from David might be a well-known fact utilised for an 
apologetic aim. For us, though a fact, it is of no vital consequence, 
Our faith that Jesus is the Christ does not rest on any such external 
ground, but on spiritual fitness to be ths world’s Saviour. We 
reverse the logic of the Jewish Church. They reasoned: because 
David's Son, therefore the Christ. We reason: because the Christ, 
therefore David's Son, at least in spirit. 

4. In speaking of the literary characteristics of Matthew it is 
necessary to keep in mind that some of these may come from the 
Logia of the apostle Matthew, and that others may be due to the 
evangelist. Critics ascribe to the apostolic source certain phrases 
of frequent recurrence, such as καὶ ἰδού, ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 6 πατὴρ ὁ ἐν 
τοῖς οὐρανοῖ». Among the features of the evangelist’s own style they 
recognise the frequent use of such words as τότε, λέγων, προσελθών, 
ὄχλοι, ἀποκριθείς, ἀναχωρεῖν, λεγόμενος, and such phrases as τί σοι δοκεῖ, 
συμβούλιον λαμβάνειν, κατ ὄναρ, ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρφ By comparison 
with Mark, the style of this Gospel is smooth and correct. 


1 Vide notes on Matt. i. * Vide Weiss, Matthdus-Evangelium, pp. 23-4. 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW 43 


Section III. AurTuor, DESTINATION, DaTE. 


1, If the views of modern critics as to the relation of the first 
Canonical Gospel to the Logia, compiled by the apostle Matthew, be 
well founded, then that apostle was not its author. Who the 
evangelist was is unknown. That he was a Jew is highly probable, 
that he was a Palestinian Jew has been generally assumed; but 
Weiss calls this in question. That he wrote in Greek is held to be 
proved by the use which he makes of the Septuagint in his citations 
of Old Testament prophecy, and by traces of dependence on the 
Greek Gospel of Mark. But the view that our Greek Gospel of 
Matthew is a translation by some unknown hand from a book with 
the same contents in the Hebrew tongue still has its advocates, 
among whom may be mentioned Schanz, of Tiibingen.! 

2. The destination of the Gospel was in all probability to a 
community of Jewish Christians, whose faith it was designed to 
strengthen. How it was fitted to serve this end has been indicated 
in Section I. § 5. 

3. The probable date is shortly after the destruction of the 
Jewish State. Some things have been supposed to imply a much 
later date, e.g., the commission to the disciples in chapter xxviii. 18, 
with its explicit Trinity, its pronounced universalism, and its doctrine 
of a spiritual presence. On these points the reader is referred to 
the commentary. 


1 Vide his Commentar iiber das Evangelium des heiligen Matthdus: Einleitung, 


CHAPTER IV. 
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE, 


Section I. ConrTeENTs. 


1. Luke’s Gospel includes much of the narrative of Mark and 
large portions of the didactic matter contained in Matthew. There 
are numerous omissions in both departments, but on the other 
hand also considerable additions, especially in the didactic element. 
The third evangelist has greatly enriched the treasure of the 
parables, for it is in this important division of our Lord’s teaching 
that his peculiar contribution chiefly lies. The amount of new 
matter suffices to raise the question as to its source. It can hardly 
be thought that the author of the first Gospel would have omitted 
so much valuable material, had it lain before his eye in the Logia. 
The hypothesis of a third source, therefore, readily suggests itself 
—a collection of reminiscences distinct from Mark and the book of 
Logia, whence Luke drew such beautiful parables as the Good 
Samaritan, the Selfish Neighbour amd the Unjust Fudge, the 
Prodigal Son, the Unjust Steward, Lazarus and Dives, and the 
Pharisee and Publican. The chapters on the infancy and on the re- 
surrection, so entirely different from the corresponding chapters in 
Matthew, might suggest a fourth source, unless we suppose that 
the third included these. 

2. The distribution of the material in this Gospel arrests atten- 
tion. In the early part of the history, from chapters iv. 31 to vi. 16, 
the author follows pretty closely in the footsteps of Mark. Then 
comes in a digression, extending from vi. 17 to viii. 3, containing a 
version of the Sermon on the Mount, the stories of the Centurion 
and the Widow of Nain, the Message of the Baptist with relative 
discourse, and the woman in Simon’s house. Thereafter Luke’s 
narrative again flows in Mark’s channel from the parable of the 
Sower onwards to the end of the Galilean ministry, as reported in 
the second Gospel (Mark iv. 1 to ix. 50. Luke viii. 4 to ix. 50), only 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING ΤΟ LUKE 45 


that the whole group of incidents contained in Mark vi. 45 to viii. 26 
is omitted in Luke. Then at ix. 51 begins another longer digression, 
extending from that point to xviii. 14, consisting mainly of didactic 
matter, and containing the larger number of Luke’s peculiar con- 
tributions to the evangelic tradition. Thereafter our author joins 
the company of Mark once more, and keeps beside him to the end 
of the Passion history.? 

3. This lengthy insertion destroys the sense of progress in the 
story. The stream widens out into a lake, within which any move- 
ment perceptible is rather circular than rectilinear. It is a dog- 
matic section, and any indications of time and place it contains are 
of little value for determining sequence or pointing out the suc- 
cessive stages of the journey towards Jerusalem mentioned in ix. 51. 
It may be affirmed, indeed, that throughout this Gospel the interest 
in historic sequence or in the causal connection of events is weak. 
Sometimes, as in the incident of Christ’s appearance in the syna- 
gogue of Nazareth, the author, consciously and apparently with 
deliberate intention, departs from the chronological order. What- 
ever, therefore, he meant by καθεξῆς in his preface, he cannot have 
intended to say that he had made it a leading aim to arrange his 
material as far as possible in. the true order of events. Still less 
can it have been his purpose so to set forth his story that it should - 
appear a historic drama in which all events prepare for and 
steadily lead up to tne final catastrophe. When at ix. 22 we 
find Jesus announcing for the first «πε that “the Son of Man must 
suffer many things,” it takes us by surprise. No reason has appeared 
in the previous narrative why it should come to that. It has indeed 
been made clear by sundry indications—at chapter v. 21; v. 30, 33; 
vi. 7-11; vii. 34, 50—that there was not a good understanding be- 
tween Jesus and the Scribes and Pharisees; but from Luke’s 
narrative by itself we could not have gathered that matters were so 
serious. Two important omissions and one transposition are largely 
responsible for this. Luke leaves out the collision between Jesus 
and the Pharisees in reference to the washing of hands (Mark vii. 
1-23. Matt. xv. 1-20), and the demand for a sign (Mark viii. 11. 
Matt. xvi. 1); and he throws the blasphemous insinuation of a league 
with Beelzebub into chapter xi., beyond the point at which he 
introduces the first announcement of the Passion. Therefore, the 


1 In the main, that is to say; for Luke’s Passion history contains a number of 
peculiar elements. 
2 Chap. iv. 16-30; vide v, 23. 


46 INTRODUCTION 


necessity (δεῖ) of that tragic issue is not apparent in the sense that 
it is the inevitable result of causes which have been shown to be in 
operation. For Luke the δεῖ refers exclusively to the prophetic 
oracles which predicted Messiah’s sufferings. Jesus must die if 
these oracles are to be fulfilled. And for him it is a matter of course, 
and so he treats it in his narrative. The announcement of the 
Passion is not brought in as a new departure in Christ’s communi- 
cation with His disciples, as in the companion narratives, with 
indication of the place and solemn introductory phrase: “ He 
began to teach them”. It is reported in a quite casual way, as if 
it possessed no particular importance. In connection with this it 
may be noted that Luke gives a very defective report of those 
words of our Lord concerning His death which may be said to 
contain the germs of a theory as to its significance. For particulars 
readers are referred to the notes. 


Section II. CHARACTERISTICS, 


1. One very marked feature of this Gospel is what, for want of 
a better word, may be called the idealisation of the characters of 
Jesus and the disciples. These are contemplated not in the light 
of memory, as in Mark, but through the brightly coloured medium 
of faith. The evangelist does not forget that the Personages of 
whom he writes are now the Risen Lord, and the Apostles of the 
Church. Jesus appears with an aureole round His head, and the 
faults of the disciples are very tenderly handled. The truth of this 
statement can be verified only by a detailed study of the Gospel, 
and readers will find indications of proof at appropriate places in 
the notes. It applies equally to the Master and to His disciples, 
though Von Soden, in the article already referred to, states that the 
tendency in question appears mainly in the presentation of the 
conduct of the disciples ; drawing from the supposed fact the pre- 
carious inference that the Apostolic Church cared little or nothing 
for the earthly history of Jesus.! The delicate treatment of the 
disciples is certainly very «pparent. Luke, as Schanz remarks, ever 
spares the twelve; especially Peter. The stern word, “Get thee 
behind me,” is not in this Gospel. The narrative of the denial is an 
interesting subject of study in this connection. But the whole body 
of the disciples are treated with equal consideration. Their faults— 
ignorance, weak faith, mutual rivalries—are acknowledged, yet 


1 Vide Theologische Abhandlungen, p. 138. 


ΤΗΕ GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE 47 


touched with sparing hand. Some narratives in which these faults 
appear very obtrusively, ¢.g., the conversation about the leaven of 
the Pharisees, the ambitious request of James and John, and the 
anointing in Bethany, are omitted, as is also the flight of all the 
disciples at the apprehension of their Master. The weak faith of 
the disciples is very mildly characterised. ‘ Where is your faith?” 
asks Jesus in the storm on the lake, in Luke’s version of the story, 
instead of uttering the reproachful word: “ Why are ye cowardly ? 
Have ye not yet faith?” Their failure to watch in the garden of 
Gethsemane is apologetically described as sleeping for sorrow. In 
his portraiture of the Lord Jesus the evangelist gives prominence to 
the attributes of power, benevolence, and saintliness. The pictorial 
effect is brought out by omission, emphasis, and understatement. 
Among the omissions are the realistic word about that which 
defileth, about “ dogs” in the story of tre woman of Canaan which 
is wholly wanting, and the awful cry op the Cross: “ΜΥ God, my 
God!” Among the things emphasised are those features in acts of 
healing which show the greatness of Christ’s might and of the benefit 
conferred. Peter’s mother-in-law suffers from a great fever; and 
the leper is full of leprosy. The hand restored on the Sabbath is the 
right hand, the centurion’s servant is one dear to him, the son of 
the widow of Nain is an only son, the daughter of Jairus an only 
daughter, the epileptic boy at the hill of Transfiguration an only 
child. The holiness of Jesus is made conspicuous by the prominence 
given to prayer in connection with critical occasions, and by under- 
statement where the incidents related might to ill-instructed minds 
seem to compromise that essential characteristic. Luke’s narratives 
of the cleansing of the temple and the agony in Gethsemane may be 
referred to as striking illustrative instances of the latter. To the 
same category may be referred the treatment by Luke of the anti- 
Pharisaic element in Christ’s teaching. Much is omitted, and what 
is retained is softened by being given, much of it, not as spoken 
about, but as spoken to, Pharisees by Jesus as a guest in their 
houses.! 

2. The influence of the Christian consciousness of the time in 
which he wrote is traceable not only in Luke’s presentation of the 
characters of Jesus and His disciples, but in his account of Christ’s 
teaching. He seems to have ip view|throughout the use of the Lord’s 
words for present guidance. Weizsacker has endeavoured to 
analyse the didactic element in the third Gospel into doctrinal 


1 Luke vii. 36-50; xi. 37«52; xiv. 1-24. 


48 INTRODUCTION 


pieces bearing on definite religious questions and interests of the 
primitive Church.! This may be carried too far, but the idea is not 
altogether baseless. In this Gospel the so-called “Sermon on the 
Mount” is really a Sermon (Kerygma not Didache) delivered to a 
Christian congregation with all the local and temporary matter 
eliminated and only the universal and perennial retained. The same 
adaptation to present and general use is apparent in the words, 
καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, added to the law of cross-bearing (ix. 23). 

3. The question may be asked whether this adaptation of the 
matter of the evangelic tradition to present conceptions and needs 
is to be set down to the account of Luke as editor, or is to be 
regarded as already existing in the documents he used. On this 
point there may be room for difference of opinion. J. Weiss in his 
commentary on Luke (Meyer, eighth edition) inclines to the latter 
alternative. Thus, in reference to Luke's mild version of Peter's 
denial, he remarks: “A monstrous minimising of the offence if 
Luke had Mark’s account before him”; and he accordingly thinks 
he had not, but used instead a Jewish Christian source, giving a 
mitigated account of Peter’s sin. Of such a source he finds traces 
throughout Luke’s Gospel, following in the footsteps of Dr. Paul 
Feine, who had previously endeavoured to establish the existence of 
a precanonical Luke, i.¢., a Orst attempt to work up into a single 
volume the evangelic traditions in Mark, the Logia, and other 
sources, after the manner of the third Gospel.2. This may be a 
perfectly legitimate hypothesis for solving certain literary problems 
connected with this Gospel, and the argument by which Feine seeks 
to establish it is entitled on its merits to serious consideration. But 
I hardly think it suffices to account for all the traces of editorial 
discretion in Luke’s Gospel. It does not matter what documents 
Luke used; he exercised his own judgment in using them. If he 
did not, his relation to the work of redacting the memoirs of Jesus 
becomes so colourless that one fails to see what occasion there was 
for that imposing prefatory announcement in the opening sentence. 
A primitive Luke was ready to his hand, and he did not even 
contribute to it the colour of his own religious personality. Inten- 
tion, bias, purpose to utilise the material for edification of believers 
were all there before he began. He did what? Added, perhaps, a 


. 
1 Vide his Umtersuchungen iiber die Evangelische Geschichte, and his Apostolic 
Age, vol. ii. 
2 Fine vorkanonische Uberlieferung des Lukas in Evangelium und Apostel- 
geschichte, 1891. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE 49 


few anecdotes and sayings gleaned from other sources, oral or 
written | 

4. Notwithstanding this pervading regard to what may be com- 
prehensively called edification, the author of the third Gospel cannot 
justly be charged with indifference to historic truth. He professes 
in his preface to have in view acribeia, and the profession is to be 
taken in earnest. But he is writing not as a mere chronicler, but as 
one seeking to promote the religious welfare of mose for whom he 
writes, and so must strive to combine accuracy, fidelity to fact, with 
practical utility. The task is a delicate one, and execution without 
error of judgment not easy. Even where mistakes are made, they 
are not to be confounded with bad faith. Nor should it be for- 
gotten that Luke’s peculiarities can be utilised for the apologetic 
purpose of establishing the general credibility of the evangelic 
tradition. Luke omits much. But it does not follow that he did 
not know. He may omit intentionally what he knows but does not 
care toreport. Luke often understates. What a writer tones down 
he is tempted to omit. By simply understating, instead of omitting, 
he becomes a reluctant and therefore reliable witness to the 
historicity of the matter so dealt with. Luke often states strongly. 
Either he adds particulars from fuller information or he exaggerates 
for a purpose. Even in the latter case he witnesses to the truth of 
the basal narrative. A writer who has ideas to embody is tempted 
to invent when he cannot find what will suit his purpose. Luke 
did not invent but at most touched up stories given to his hand 
in trustworthy traditions. 

5. The author of the third Gospel avowedly had a didactic aim. 
He wrote, so it appears from the preface, to confirm in the faith 
a friend called “most excellent (κράτιστε) Theophilus,” expecting 
probably that the book would ultimately be useful! for a wider circle. 
But there is no trace of a dominant theological or controversial aim. 
The writer, e.g., is not a Paulinist in the controversial sense of the 
word. He is doubtless in sympathy with Christian universalism, as 
appears from his finishing the quotation from Isaiah beginning with, 
«The voice of one crying in the wilderness,’ and ending with, 
“All flesh shall see the salvation of God” (iii. 6). Yet, in other 
places, ¢.g., in the history of the infancy, the salvation brought by 
Jesus is conceived of as belonging to Israel, the chosen people 
(τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ, i. 68; cf. ii. 10; vii. 16; xiii. 16; xix. 9). The author 
is not even Paulinist in a theological sense, as the absence from his 
pages of most of the words of Jesus bearing on a theory of atone- 
ment, already remarked on, sufficiently proves. He appears to be an 

4 


5ο INTRODUCTION 


eclectic, rather than a man whose mind is dominated by a great 
ruling idea. Distinct, if not conflicting, tendencies or religious types 
find houseroom in his pages: Pauline universalism, Jewish par- 
ticularism, Ebionitic social ideals, the blessedness of poverty, the 
praise of almsgiving. Geniality, kindliness of temper, is the personal 
characteristic of the evangelist. And if there is one thing more 
than another he desires to inculcate on his readers it is the 
graciousness of Christ. ‘ Words of grace” (iv. 22) is his compre- 
hensive title for the utterances of Jesus, and his aim from first to 
last is to show the Saviour as the friend of the sinful and the social 
outcast, and even of those who suffer justly for their crimes (vii. 36- 
50; xix. 1-10; xxiii. 39-43). 

6. The literary aspect of this Gospel is a complex phenomenon. 
At times, espccially in the preface, one gets the impression of a 
writer having at his command a knowledge of Greek possible only 
for one to whom it was his native tongue. an expert at once in the 
vocabulary and the grammatical structure of that language. But 
far oftener the impression is that of a Jew thinking in Hebrew and 
reflecting Hebrew idiom in phrase and construction. Hebraisms 
abound, especially in the first two chapters. Two explanations are 
possible: That the author was really a Jew, that his natural style 
was Hebrew-Greek, in which case it would have to be shown that 
the preface was no such marvellous piece of classicism after all; 
or that he was a Gentile well versed in Greek, but somewhat slavish 
in his copious use of Jewish-Christian sources, such as the primitive 
Luke for which Feine contends. 


Section III. Autnor, Destination, Date, 


1. The author of the third Gospel was also the author of the 
Acts of the Apostles, as appears in chap. i. 1 of the latter work, 
where the name of Theophilus recurs. Neither book bears the 
name of the writer, but uniform ancient tradition ascribes it to Luke, 
the companion of Paul, and by occupation a physician (Col. iv. 11). 
From the preface to the Gospel we gather that he had no personal 
knowledge of Jesus, but was entirely dependent on oral and written 
tradition. 

2. From the prefaces of the Gospel and the book of Acts we 
learn that the author wrote for the immediate benefit of a single 
individual, apparently a man of rank, say a Roman knight. It is 
not necessary to infer that a larger circle of readers was not con- 
templated either by the writer or by the first recipient of his work. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE 51 


3. The date cannot be definitely fixed. Opinion ranges from 
A.D. 63 to the early years of the second century. As late a date as 
say A.D. 90 is compatible with the writer being, in his younger 
years, a companion of St. Paul in his later missionary movements. 
The still later date of a.p. 100 or 105 would be required if it were 
certain, which it is not, that the writer used the Antiquities of 
Josephus, which were published about the year 93-94. Dr. Sanday, 
in his work entitled Inspiration, expresses the view that Acts was 
written about a.p. 80, and tne Gospei some time in the five years 
preceding. 


CHAPTER V. 


THE TEXT, CRITICAL LANDMARKS, CRITICAL TESTS OF 
READINGS. 


Section I. Tue Text. 


The Greek text given in this work is that known as the Textus 
Receptus, on which the Authorised Version of the New Testament 
is based. Representing the Greek text as known to Erasmus in the 
sixteenth century, and associated with the names of two famous 
printers, Stephen and Elzevir, whose editions (Stephen’s 3rd, 1550, 
Elzevir’s 2nd, 1633) were published when the apparatus at command 
for fixing the true text was scanty, and when the science of textual 
criticism was unborn, it may seem to be entirely out of date. But 
it is an important historical monument, and it is the Greek original 
answering to the English Testament still largely in use in public 
worship and in private reading. Moreover, while the experts in 
modern criticism have done much. to provide a purer text, their 
judgments in many cases do not accord, and their results cannot 
be regarded as final. It is certain, however, that the texts prepared 
by such scholars as Tischendorf, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and 
the company of experts to whom we are indebted for the Revised 
Version, are incomparably superior to that of Stephen or of Elzevir, 
and that they must be taken into account by every competent com- 
mentator. That means that to the text must be annexed critical 
notes showing all important various readings, with some indication 
of the documentary authority in their favour, and of the value 
attached thereto by celebrated editors. This accordingly has been 
done, very imperfectly of course, still it is hoped sufficiently for 
practical purposes. Variations not affecting the sense, but merely 
the spelling or grammatical forms of words, have been for the most 
part disregarded. There are many variations in the spelling of 
proper names, of which the following are samples :— 


ΤΗΕ TEXT, CRITICAL LANDMARKS, ETC. 53 


Ναζαρέτ Ναζαρέθ Γεθσημανὴ Γεθσημανεί 
Ματθαῖος Μαθθαῖος Ἰωάννης Ιωάνης 
Δαβίὸ Δαυείὸ ᾿Ιεριχώ ᾿Ιερειχώ 
Ηλίας Ηλείας Μωσῆς Μωυσῆς 
Καπερναού, Καφαρναούμ Πιλάτος Πειλᾶτος 


Among other insignificant variations may be mentioned the presence 
or absence of ν final in verbs (ἔλεγε, ἔλεγεν); the omission or in- 
sertion of µ (λήψομαι, λήµψομαι); the assimilation or non-assimilation 
of ἐν and σὺν in compound verbs (συζητεῖν, συνζητεῖν; ἐκκακεῖν, ἐνκα- 
kev) ; the doubling of p, ν, p or the reverse (μαμμωνᾶς, μαμωνᾶς; 
γέννημα, γένηµα : ἐπιρράπτει, ἐπιράπτει); the conjunction or disjunction 
of syllables (οὐκ ἔτι, οὐκέτι); οὕτως for οὕτω; the aorist forms εἶπον, 
ἦλθον, etc., replaced by forms in a (εἶπαν, ἦλθαν); single or double 
augment in certain verbs (ἐδυνάμην, ἠδυνάμην ; ἔμελλον, ἤμελλον). 


Section II. ΟΕΙΤΙΟΑΙ, LANDMARKS. 


1. Up till 1831 editors of the New Testament in Greek had been 
content to follow in the wake of the Textus Receptus, timidly adding 
_hotes indicating good readings which they had discovered in the 
documents accessible to them in their time. Lachmann in that year 
inaugurated a new critical era by printing a text constructed 
directly from ancient documents without the intervention of any 
printed edition. It is not given to pioneers to finish the work they 
begin, and Lachmann’s effort judged by present-day tests was far 
from perfect. “This great advance was marred by too narrow a 
selection of documents to be taken into account, and too artificially 
rigid an employment of them, and also by too little care in obtaining 
precise knowledge of some of their texts” (Westcott and Hort’s 
New Testament, Introduction, p. 13). Tischendorf in Germany and 
Tregelles in England worthily followed αρ Lachmann’s efforts, and 
made important contributions towards the ascertainment of the 
true text by adopting as their main guides the most ancient MSS., 
in place of the later documents which had formed the basis of the 
early printed editions. The critical editions of the Greek New 
Testament by these scholars appeared about the same time; 
Tischendorf's eighth edition (the important one which supersedes 
the earlier) bearing the date 1869, and the work of Tregelles being 
published in 1870. The characteristic feature of Tischendorf's 
edition is the predominant importance attached to the great Codex 
Sinaiticus (88). with the discovery of which his name is connected. 


54 INTRODUCTION 


The defect common to it with the edition of Tregelles is failure to 
deal on any clear principle with the numerous instances in which 
the ancient texts on which they placed their reliance do not agree. 
All goes smoothly when Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus (B) 
and Codex Bezae (D) and the most ancient versions bear the same 
testimony; but what is to be done when the trusted guides follow 
divergent paths 2 

2. It is by the answer which they have given to this question 
that Westcott and Hort have made an epoch-making contribution 
to the science of Biblical Criticism in the first volume of their 
monumental work, The New Testament in the Original Greek, 
published in 1881. Following up hints thrown out by earlier in- 
vestigators, like Bengel and Griesbach, they discriminated three 
types of text prevalent in ancient times, before the period of eclectic 
revision which fixed to a great extent the character of the text in 
actual use throughout the Middle Ages and on to the dawn of 
modern criticism. To these types they gave the names Western, 
Alexandrian, and Neutral. The last epithet is to be understood 
only when viewed in relation to the other two. The Western and 
Alexandrian types of text had very well-marked characteristics. The 
Western was paraphrastic, the Alexandrian literary. The tendency 
of the one was to alter the primitive tex. by explanatory additions 
with a view to edification, made by men who combined to a certain 
extent the functions of copyist and commentator. The tendency 
of the other was to improve the text fro a literary point of view by 
scholarly refinements. The neutral text is neutral in the sense of 
avoiding both these tendencies and aiming steadily at the faithful 
reproduction of the exemplar assumed to approach in its text as 
near as possible to the autographs. A text adhering honestly to 
this programme ought to be the most reliable guide to the original 
Greek Testament as it proceeded from the hands of the writers, 
making due allowance for errors in the exemplar and for mistakes 
in transcription. The result of investigation has been to justify 
this expectation. 

3. The main representative of the Western text is Codex Bezae 
(D), containing the Gospels and the Acts. Of the Alexandrian text 
there is no pure example. This divergent stream broke up into rills, 
and lost itself as a mere element in mixed texts, like those of Codex 
Sinaiticus and Codex Ephraemi (C). It is important to note by 
the way that these names do not denote local prevalence. The 
Western text was not merely Western. This divergent stream 
overflowed its banks and spread itself widely over the Church, 


THE TEXT, CRITICAL LANDMARKS, ETC. 55 


reaching even the East. Hence traces of its influence are to be 
found not merely in the old Latin versions, but also in the Syriac 
versions, ¢.g., in what is called the Curetonian Syriac, and in the 
recently discovered Syriac version of the Four Gospels, which may 
be distinguished as the Sinaitic Syriac. Of the neutral text, the 
great, conspicuous, honourable monument is Codex Vaticanus ( B), 
containing the Gospels, Acts, and Catholic epistles, and the epistles 
of St. Paul, as far as Heb. ix. 14; and being, especially in the 
Gospels, a nearly pure reproduction of a text uninfluenced by the 
tendencies of the Western and Alexandrian texts respectively. To 
this MS., belonging like Codex Sinaiticus to the fourth century, 
Westcott and Hort, after applying to it all available tests, assign 
the honour of being on the whole the nearest approach to the 
original verity in existence, always worthy of respect and often 
deserving to be followed when it stands alone against all comers. 
A very important conclusion if it can be sustained. 

4. In recent years a certain reaction against the critical rcsults 
of Westcott and Hort has been manifesting itself to the effect of 
imputing to them an overweening estimate of Codex B, analogous 
to that of Tischendorf for Codex 8. Some scholars, such as Resch 
in Germany and Ramsay in this country, are disposed to insist 
that more value should be set on Codex D; the former finding in it 
the principal witness for the text of the Gospels in their precanonical 
stage, the assumption being that when the four-Gospel canon was 
constructed the text underwent a certain amount of revision. The 
real worth of «Πΐ5 Codex is one of the unsettled questions of New 
Testament textual criticism. Irteresting contributions have been 
made to the discussion of the question, such as those of J. Rendel 
Harris, and more may be expected. 


Section III. Critica, Tests oF READINGS. 


1. The fixation of the true text is not a simple matter like that 
of following a single document, however trustworthy, like Codex B. 
Every editor may have his bias in favour of this or that MS., but 
all editors recognise the obligation to take into account all avail- 
able sources of evidence—not merely the great uncial MSS. of 
ancient dates, but the cursives of later centuries, and, besides Greek 
MSS. of both kinds containing the whole or a part of the New 
Testament, ancient versions, Latin, Syriac, Egyptian, etc., and 
quotations in the early Fathers. The evidence when fully adduced 
is a formidable affair, demanding much space for its exhibition 


56 INTRODUCTION 


(witness Tischendorf’ss eighth edition in two large octavos), and the 
knowledge of an expert for its appreciation. In such a work as the 
present the space cannot be afforded nor can the knowledge be 
expected even in the author, not to say in his readers. Full know- 
ledge of the critical data through first-hand studies belongs to 
specialists only, who have made the matter the subject of lifelong 
labour, All one can do is to utilise intelligently their results. But 
because all cannot be specialists it is mot profitless to have a 
juryman’s acquaintance with the relative facts. It is the aim of the 
critical notes placed beneath the Greek text to aid readers to the 
attainment of such an acquaintance, and to help them to form an 
intelligent opinion as to the claims of rival readings to represent the 
true text. Fortunately, this can be done without adducing a very 
long array of witnesses. 

2. For it turns out that there are certain groups of witnesses 
which often go together, and whose joint testimony is very weighty. 
Westcott and Hort have carefully specified these. They may here 
be indicated :— 

For the Gospels the most important and authoritative group is 
NBCDL 33. 

In this group L and 33 have hitherto not been referred to. L 
(Codex Regius), though belonging to the eighth century, represents 
an ancient text, and is often in agreement with N and B. 33 
belongs to the cursive class (which are indicated by figures), but 
is a highh, valuable Codex, though, like all cursives, of late date. 
In his Prolegomena to Tischendorfs New Testament, Dr. Caspar 
René Gregory quotes (p. 469) with approval the opinion of Eichhorn 
that this is the ‘‘queen of the cursives”. In the above group, it 
will be noticed, representatives of the different ancient types— 
Western, Alexandrian, Neutral (D, 8, C, B)—are united. When they 
agree the presumption that we have the true text is very strong. 

When D falls out we have still a highly valuable group in 
NBCL 33. 

When DC and 33 drop out there remains a very trustworthy 
combination in NBL. 

There are, besides these, several binary combinations of great 
importance. The following is the list given by Westcott and Hort 
for the Gospels :— 

BL, BC, BT, B=, BD, AB, BZ, B 33, and for St. Mark Ba. 

In these combinations some new documents make their appearance. 

T stands for the Greek text of the Graeco-Thebaic fragments of 
St. Luke and St. John (century v., ancient and non-Western). 


THE TEXT, CRITICAL LANDMARKS, ETC. 57 


= = fragments of St. Luke (cent. viii., comparatively pure, though 
showing mixture), 

A is the well-known Codex Alexandrinus of the fifth century, a 
chief representative of the ‘‘Syrian” text, that is, the revised text 
formed by judicious eclectic use of all existing texts, and meant to 
be the authoritative New Testament. This Codex contains nearly 
the whole New Testament except Matthew as far as chapter xxv. 5. 
For the Gospels it is of no independent value as a witness to the 
true text, but its agreements with B are important. 

A = Codex Sangallensis, a Graeco-Latin MS. of the tenth century, 
and having many ancient readings, especially in Mark. 

To these authorities has to be added, as containing ancient read- 
ings, and often agreeing with the best MSS., Codex Purpureus Ros- 
sanensis (Σ), published in 1883, edited by Oscar Von Gebhardt ; of the 
sixth century, containing Matthew and Mark in full. Due note has 
been taken of the readings of this MS. 

The foregoing represent the chief authorities referred to in the 
critical notes. In these notes I have not uniformly indicated my 
personal opinion. But in the commentary I have always adopted as 
the subject of remark the most probable reading. Reference to 
modern editors has been chiefly restricted to Tischendorf, and West- 
tott and Hort, meaning thereby no depreciation of the work done by 
others, but simply recognising these as the most important. 

MSS. were corrected from time to time. Corrected copies are 
referred to by critics by letters or figures: thus, N4 (4th cent.), &> (6th 
cent.), δὲς (7th cent.), B? (4th cent.), B® (10th cent.). 

Besides the above-named documents the following uncials are 
occasionally referred to in the critical notes :— 
cod. Basiliensis. 8th century (Gospels nearly entire). 
cod. Seidelii. gth or roth century (Gospels defective). 
cod. palimps. Petropolitanus. 5th and 6th centuries (fragments of Gospels). 
cod. Cyprius. gth century (Gospels complete). 
cod. De Camps, Paris. gth century (Gospels complete). 
cod. Purpureus. 6th century (fragments of all the Gospels). 
cod. Guelpherbytanus I. 6th century (fragments of all the Gospels). 
cod. Guelpherbytanus II. 5th century (fragments from Luke and John). 
cod. Nitriensis, London. 6th century (fragments of Luke). 
cod. Vaticanus 354. t1oth century (four Gospels complete). 
cod. Nanianus Venetus. gth or roth century (Gospels entire). 
cod. Mosquensis. gth century (contains Matt. and Mk., and Lk. nearly complete). 
ced. Monacensis. gth or roth century (fragments of all the Gospels). 
cod. Dublinensis. 6th century (fragments of Matthew). 
cod. Oxoniensis et Petropolitanus. t1oth century (four Gospels, Matthew and 

Mark defective). 
cod. Oxoniensis Tisch. gth century (Luke and John entire). 
cod. Petropolitanus Tisch. 9th century (Gospels nearly complete). 
cod. Beratinus. 5th century (Matthew and Mark with lacunae). 


Anke MnOWN Ze KRM AH 


ο τα ν- 


CHAPTER VI. 


LITERATURE. 


The following list of works includes only those chiefly consulted. 
Many others are occasionally referred to in the notes. 


1. To the pre-Reformation period belong— 


OricEn’s Commentary on Matthew. Books x.-xvii. in Greek (Matt. xiii, 36— 
xxii. 33), the remainder in a Latin translation (allegorical method of inter- 
pretation). 

Curysosiom’s Homilies on Matthew. The Greek text separately edited in three 
vols. by Dr. Field (well worth perusal). 

Jerome's Commentarius in Matthaeum (a hasty performanes, but worth consulting). 

Avucustine. De Sermone Domini in monte. 

ΤΗΕΟΡΗΥΙΑΟΤΟΒ (12th century, Archbishop in Bulgaria). Commentarii in quatuor 
Evangelistas, Graece. 

Eutnymius Zicasenus (Greek monk, rath century). Commentarius im quatuor 
Evangelia, Graece et Latine. Ed. C. F. Matthaei, 179 (a choice work). 


2. From the sixteentn century downwards— 


Catvin. Commentarii in Harmonian. x Evangelistis tribus . . . compositam. 


Beza. Annotationes in Novum Testamentum. 1556. 
MaLponaTus. Commentarii in quatuor Evangelistas (Catholic). 1596. 
ΡΑΙΕΑΕΙ (Price). Commentarii in varios Ν.Τ. libros (including Matthew and Luke ; 

philological, with classical examples, good). 1660. 
Grotius. Annotationes in N. T. (erudite and still worth consulting). 1644. 
LicutFoot. Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae. 1644. 
Hernsius. Sacrarum exercitationum ad N. Τ. libri xx. 166s. 
Ἐαρηει. Annotationes Philologicae in N. T., ex Xenophonte, Polybio, Arriano et 

Herodoto. 1747. 
Oxvearius. Observationes sacrae ad Evangelium Matthaei. 1713- 
Worr. Curae philologicae et criticae in N. T. Five vols, 1741. 
ΘΟΗὕΤΤΟΕΝ. Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae in N. Τ. 1733- 
WetTsTEIN. Novum Testamentum Graecum (full of classic citations). 1751. 
BENGEL. Gnomon Novi Testamenti (unique). 1734. 


Pavatret (French pastor at London, t 1765). Observationes philologico-criticae in 
sacros Ν. T. libros. 1752. 


LITERATURE 59 


ΚΥΡΚΕ. Observationes sacrae in N. T. libros. 1755. 
ELsner. Observationes sacrae in Ν. T. libros (the three last named, like Pricaeus, 

abound in classic examples). 1767. 
LogEsneR. Observationes ad N. T. ε Philone Alexandrino (of the same class as 

Raphel). 1777. 
KuInoEL. Commentarius in libros N. T. historicos. 1807. 
FRITZSCHE. Evangelium Matthaei recensuit. 1826. 
FrITZSCHE. Evangelium Marci recensuit (both philological). 1830. 
De WerTE. Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Ν. T. 1836-48. 
ΒΟΕΝΕΜΑΝΝ. Scholiae in Lucae Evangelium. | 1830. 
ΑΙΕΟΕΡ. The Greek Testament. Four vols. 1849-61. 
FIELD. Otium Norvicense. 1864. 
BLEEK. Synoptische Erkldrung der drei ersten Evangelien. 1862. 


MEYER. Commentary on the New Testament. Sixth edition (T. & T. Clark). 
Meyer. Eighth edition by Dr. Bernhard Weiss (Matthew and Mark, largely 


Weiss). 1890-92. 
Meyer. Eighth edition by J. Weiss (son of Bernhard Weiss ; Luke, also largely 
the editor’s work). 1892. 


Weiss. Das Marcusevangelium und seine synoptischen Parallelen (a contribution 
to comparative exegesis in the interest of his critical views on the synoptical 


problem). 1872. 
Weiss. Das Matthdusevangelium und seine Lucas-parallelen (a work of similar 
character). 1876. 
LuTTeroTH. Essai d’Interprétation de quelques parties de l’Evangile selon Saint 
Matthieu. 1864-76. 
ΒΟΗΑΝΖ. Commentar iiber das Evangelium des heiligen Matthdus, 1879. 
ScHANZ. Commentar iiber das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. 1881. 


ΒΟΗΑΝΖ. Commentar uber das Evangelium des heiligen Lucas (these three com- 
mentaries by Schanz, a Catholic theolngian, are good in all respects, specially 


valuable for patristic references). 1883. 
GopET. Commentaire sur lEvangile de Saint Lue. 3me edition. 1888-89. 
Haun. Das Evangelium des Lucas. Twovols. 1892-94. 
HoLtzMann. Die Synoptiker in Hand-C_mmentar sum Neuen Testament (advanced 

but valuable). 1892. 
The Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges ; Matthew, Mark, and 

Luke. 1891-93. 


The well-known lexical and grammatical helps, including Grimm, Cremer, 
Winer, and Buttman, have been consulted. Frequent reference has been made to 
Burton’s Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament (T. & T. Clark, 1894), 
both because of its excellence and its accessibility to students. 

A new edition of Winer’s Grammatik (the eighth) by Schmiedel is in course of 
publication; also of Kihner by Blass. 

In the notes, the matter common to the three Gospels is most fully treated in 
Matthew, the notes in the other two Gospels being at these points supplementary 
and comparative. 

The marginal references to passages of Scripture are simply supplementary to 
those in the notes. 

It is hoped that most abbreviations used will need no special explanation, but 
the following table may be helpful :— 


60 INTRODUCTION 


a 
Mt. = Matthew, ' 
Mk. = Mark. 

Lk. = Luke. 


O. T. = Old Testament 

N. T. = New Testament. 
Sept. = Septuagint. 

A. V. = Authorised Version. 
R. V. = Revised Version. 

C. N. T. = Cambridge New Testament. 

Tisch. = Tischendorf. 

Treg. = Tregelles. 
W. H. = Westcott and Hort. 
Ws. = Weiss (Dr. Bernhard), 

Egypt. = Egyptian versions (vis., the two following). 
Cop. = Coptic (called Memphitic by W. H.). 
Sah. = Sahidic (called Thebaic by W. H.). 
Syrr. = Syriac versions. 

Pesh. = Peshito (= Syrian Vulgate). 

Syr. Cur. = Curetonian Syriac. (For Greek equivalent vide Baeth 
gen’s Evangelienfragmente.) 

Syr. Sin. = Sinaitic Syriac (recently discovered). 

Latt. = Latin versions. 
Vulg. = Vulgate (Jerome's revision of old Latin version). 

Vet. Lat. = Vetus Latina (Old Latin, referred to also as It. = Itala). 
The codices of the old Latin are distinguished by 
the letters a, b, ε, etc. 

Adinusc. = Minusculi (Codices), anothe: name for cursives, 


TO ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ATION EYATTEAION.} 


I. 1. "ΒΙΒΛΟΣ *yevécews ΙΗΣΟΥ Χριστοῦ, "υἱοῦ Δαβίδ, υἱοῦ * Gen. ii. 4. 
» ΄ > \ + beet] yo > J ‘ Waa eat x Lk. iii. 9 
Ἀβραάμ. 2. ABpadp ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰσαάκ: ᾿Ισαὰκ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ο ted 4 


A _ b ver. 18. 
C Xil. 23; XXxi.g; xxii. 42. 


Gen. xxxi. 13; xxxii.9. Lk. i. 14. Jas. i. 23; iii, 6. 

1 The title in T.R. (as above) is late. QB have simply Kata Μαθθαιον. Other 
expanded forms occur. 

2 Λαβιδ is found only in minusc. WB have Aaved. This is one of several 
variations in spelling occurring in the genealogy, among which may be named Poof 
(ver. 5) = βοες in W.H.; QBnd (ver. 5) = lwByd, W.H.; Ματθαν (ver. 15) = Μαθθαν, 
W.H. For a list of such variations in the spelling of names in the three first 


Gospels vide p. 53. 


ΤΗΕ Tire. The use of the word ev- 
αγγέλιον in the sense of a book may be as 
old as the Teaching of the twelve Apostles 
(Didache, 8, 11, 15. Vide Sanday, Bamp- 
ton Lectures, 1893, Ρ. 317, n. 1). The 
word passed through three stages in the 
history of its use. First, in the older 
Greek authors (Hom., Od. &, 152, 166), a 
reward for bringing good tidings ; also a 
thank-offering tor good tidings brought 
(Arist., Eq. 656). Next, in later Greek, 
the good tidings itself (2 Sam. xviii. 20, 
22, 25, in Sept. In 2 Sam. iv. 10, εὖ- 
αγγέλια occurs in the earliest sense). 
This sense pervades the N. T. in re- 
ference to the good news of God, “he 
message of salvation. Finally, it came 
very naturally to denote the books in 
which the Gospel of Jesus was presented 
in historic form, as in the Didache and in 
Justin M., 4βοῖ. i. 66, Dial. con. Tryp. 
too. In the titles of the Gospels the 
word retains its second sense, while sug- 
gesting the third. evayy. κατὰ M. means 
the good news as reduced to writing by 
Μ. κατὰ is not=of, nor κατὰ Ματθαῖον 
Ξ Ματθαίου, as if the sense were: The 
book called a ‘‘ Gospel” written by Mat- 
thew. (Vide Fritzsche against this the 
older view, supported by Kuinoel.) 

CHAPTER I. THE GENEALOGY AND 
BirtuH oF JEsus.—The genealogy may 


readily appear to us a most ungenial 
beginning of the Gospel. A dry list of 
names! It is the tribute which the 
Gospel pays to the spirit of Judaism. 
The Jews set much store by genealogies, 
and to Jewish Christians the Messiah- 
ship of Jesus depended on its being 
proved that He was a descendant of 
David. But the matter can hardly be 
so vital as that. We may distinguish 
between the question of fact and the 
question of faith. It may be that Jesus 
was really descended from David—many 
things point that way; but even if He 
were not He might still be the Christ, 
the fulfiller of O. T, ideals, the bringer-in 
of the highest good, if He possessed the 
proper spiritual qualifications. What 
although the Christ were not David’s 
son in the physical sense? He was a 
priest after the order of Melchisedec, 
though ἀγενεαλόγητος; why not Messiah 
under the same conditions? He might 
still be a son of David in the sense in 
which John the Baptist was Elijah—in 
spirit and power, realising the ideal of 
the hero king. The kingdom of prophecy 
came only in a spiritual sense, why not 
also the king? The two hang together. 
Paul was not an apostle in the legitimist 
sense, not one of the men who had been 
with Jesus; yet he was a very real apostle. 


62 


Ιακώβ. 
ἆ similar ΄ 
const.in 3. 


KATA MATOAION 1. 


Ἰακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιούδαν καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ. 
Ιούδας δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Φαρὲς καὶ τὸν Ζαρὰ “ἐκ τῆς Θάμαρ: 


Gol, Wr apes δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ἐσρώμ' ᾿Εσρὼμ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Αράμ. 


So might Jesus be a Christ, though not 
descended from David. St. Paul writes 
(Gal. iii, 29): “If ye be Christ’s, then are 
ye Abraham's seed". So might we say: 
If Jesus was fit to be the Christ in point 
of spiritual equipment, then was He of 
the seed of David. There is no clear 
evidence in the Gospels that Jesus Him- 
self set value on Davidic descent; there 
are some things that seem to point the 
other way: ¢.g., the question, '' Who is 
my mother?” (Matt. xii. 45 ; Mk. iii. 33), 
and the other, “ What think ye of the 
Christ, whose son is He?” (Matt. xxii. 
42, et par.). There is reason to believe 
that, like St. Paul, He would argue from 
the spiritual to the genealogical, not vice 
versd: not Christ use from David, 
but from David, at least ideally, because 
Christ on oth-r higher grounds. 

Ver. 1. βίβλος κ.τ.λ. How 
much does this heading cover : the whole 
Gospel, the two first chapters, the whole 
of the first chapter, or only i. 1-17? All 
these views have been held. The first 
by Euthy. Zigab., who argued: the birth 
of the God-man was the important point, 
and involved all the rest; therefore the 
title covers the whole history named 
from the most important part (ἀπὸ τοῦ 
κνριωτέρον μα . Some moderns 
(Ebrard Keil, etc.) have defended the 
view on the ground that the correspond- 
ing title in O. T. (Gen. vi. 9; xi. 27, 
etc.) denotes not merely a genealogical 
list, but a history of the persons whose 
genealogy is given. Thus the expression 
is taken to ae un ολο Mallon}. 
Christ (liber de vita Christi, Maldon.). 

ainst the second view and the third 

eiss-Meyer remarks that at i. 18 a 
new beginning is made, while ii. r runs 
on as if continuing the same story. The 
most probable and most erally 
accepted opinion is that of Calvin, Beza, 
and Grotius that the expression applies 
only toi. 1-17. (Non est haec inscriptio 
totius libri, sed particulae primae quae 
velut extra corpus historiae prominet. 
Grotius.) 

᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Christ here is not an 
appellative but a proper name, in accord- 
ance with the usage of the Apostolic 
age. In the body of the evangelistic his- 
tory the word is not thus used ; only in 
the introductory parts. (Vide Mk. i, t; 
John i. 17.) 


facie, impolitic, reminding of a 


vlot Δ., vlot A. Of David first, because 
with his name was associated the more 
specific promise of a Messianic king; of 
Abraham also, because he was the 
patriarch of the race and first recipient 
of the promise. The genealogy goes 
no further back, because the Gospel is 
written for the Jews. Euthy. Zig. 
suggests that David is placed first 
because he was the better known, as the 
less remote, as oe es prophet and a 
renowned king. ( τοῦ γνωριµωτέ 
μᾶλλον vos, ἐπὶ τὸν walatdeaie’ 
ἀνῆλθεν.) The word νἱοῦ in both cases 
applies to Christ. It can refer gram- 
matically to David, as many take it, but 
th. other reference is demanded by the 
fact that νετ. 1 forms the superscription 
of the following genealogy. So Weiss- 


a hag 

v. 2-16. The geneal divides 
into three parts: from Abraham to 
David (vv. 2-6a); from David to the cap- 
tivity (vv. 6b-11); from the captivity to 
Christ. On closer inspection it turns out 
to be not so dry as it at first 

There are touches here and there which 
import into it an ethical significance, 
suggesting the idea that it is the work 
not of a dry-as-dust Jewish genealogist, 
but of the evangelist ; or at least worked 
over by him in a Christian spirit, if the 
skeleton was given to his To 
note these is the chief interest of non- 
Rabbinical exegesis. 

Vv. 2-Ga. καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ. 
This is not necessary to the genealogical 
line, but added to say by the way that 
He who belonged to the tribe of Judah 
belonged also to all the tribes of Israel. 
(Weiss, Mattha ν) ον oiVenrgi 
τὸν Φαρὲς καὶ ‘av Bane Zerah added 
to Perez the continuator of the line, to 
suggest that it was by a special provi- 
dence that the latter was first born (Gen. 
xxxviii. 27-30). The evangelist is on the 
outlook for the unusual or preternatural 
in history as prelude to the crowning 
marvel of the virgin birth (Gradus 
futurus ad credendum partum e virgine. 
Grot.).—éx τῆς Odpap. Mention of the 
mother wholly unnecessary and un- 
usual from a genealogical point of view, 
and in this case one would say, primd 
dly 
readable (Gen. xxxviii. 13-26). It 
is the first of four references to mothers 


3—10. 


4. “Apap δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾽Αμιναδάβ - 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


᾽Αμιναδὰβ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν 


Ναασσών ' Ναασσὼν δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Σαλμών. 5. Σαλμὼν δὲ ἐγέννησε 
τὸν Boot ἐκ τῆς Ῥαχάβ ' Βοὸζ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ‘QBS ἐκ τῆς ‘Poud - 
"QBS δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιεσσαί: 6. ᾿Ιεσσαὶ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Δαβὶδ 


τὸν βασιλέα. 


Δαβὶδ δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς 1 


ἐγέννησε τὸν Σολομῶντα * ἐκ 


τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου: 7. Σολομὼν δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ῥοβοάμ: “PoBodp 
δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾽Αβιά: ᾽Αβιὰ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ασά: 8. “Acad δὲ 
ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰωσαφάτ" ᾿Ιωσαφὰτ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰωράμ: ᾿Ιωρὰμ 
δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Οζίαν: 9. Ὀζίας δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰωάθαμ: ἸἸωάθαμ 
δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν "Axal- “Ayal δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Εζεκίαν: 10. Ἐεκίας 


1ο βασιλευς omitted in ΜΒ, found in C™.. 
Σολοµωνα in BCL and most uncials. 


*So in A. 


in the ancestry of Jesus, concerning 
whom one might have expected the 
genealogy to observe discreet silence: 
Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba; three 
of them sinful wemen, and one, Ruth, a 
foreigner. Why --ε they mentioned? 
By way of deferce against sinister mis- 
construction of the birth of Jesus? So 
Wetstein: Ut tacitz Judaeorum objec- 
tioni occurreretur. Doubtless there is a 
mental reference to that birth under some 
aspect, but it is not likely that the evan- 
gelist would condescend to apologise 
before the bar of unbelief, even though 
he might find means of doing so in the 
Jewish habit of glorying over the mis- 
deeds of ancestors (Wetstein). Much 
more probable is the opinion of the 
Fathers, who found in these names a 
foreshadowing of the gracious character 
of the Gospel of Jesus, as it were the 
Gospel in the genealogy. Schanz follows 
the Fathers, except that he thinks they 
have over-emphasised the sinful element. 
He finds in the mention of the four 
women a hint of God’s grace in Christ 
to the sinful and miserable: Rahab and 
Bathsheba representing the one, Tamar 
and Ruth the other. This view com- 
mends itself to many interpreters both 
Catholic and Protestant. Others prefer 
to bring the four cases under the cate- 
gory of the extraordinary exemplified by 
the case of Perez and Zerah. These 
women all became mothers in the line of 
Christ’s ancestry by special providence 
(Weiss-Meyer). Doubtless this is at least 
part of the moral. Nicholson (New 
Comm.) thinks that the introduction of 
Tamar and Ruth is sufficiently explained 
by Ruth iv. 11, 12, viewed as Messianic; 
of Rahab by her connection with the 
earlier Jesus (Joshua), and of Bathsheba 


Most modern editors omit. 


because she was the mother of a second 
line culminating in Christ, as Ruth of a 
first culminating in David.—Ver. δα. 
τὸν Δαβὶδ τὸν βασιλέα, David the King, 
the title being added to distinguish him 
from the rest. It serves the same pur- 
pose as if David had been written in 
large letters. At length we arrive at the 
great roy2l name! The materials for 
the first part of the genealogy are taken 
from Ruth iv. 18-22, and 1 Chron. ii. 
5-15. 

Vv. 6b-10, ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου, vide 
above. The chief feature in this second 
division of the genealogical table is the 
omission of three kings between Joram 
and Uzziah (ver. 8), viz., Ahaziah, Joash, 
Amaziah. How is the omission to 
be explained? By inadvertence, or by 
intention, and if the latter, in what view ? 
Jerome favoured the second alternative, 
and suggested two reasons for the inten- 
tional omission—a wish to bring out the 
number fourteen (ver. £7) in the second 
part of the genealogy, and a desire to 
brand the kings passed over with the 
stamp of theocratic illegality. In effect, 
manipulation with a presentable excuse. 
But the excuse would justify other omis- 
sions, ¢.g., Ahaz and Manasseh, who, 
were as great offendersas any. Onecan, 
indeed, imagine the evangelist desiring to 
exemplify the severity of the Gospel as 
well as its grace in the construction of 
the list—to say in effect: God resisteth 
the proud, but He giveth grace to the 
lowly, and even the low. The hypo- 
thesis of manipulation in the interest of 
symbolic numbers can stand on its own 
basis without any pretext. It is not 
to be supposed that the evangelist was at 
all concerned to make sure that no link 
in the line was omitted. His one concern 


64 


εαραῖη 
νε. 17. δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ἰωσίαν: 11. 
Also in 2 μὲ ο 

Kings 

xxiv.16; 1 


KATA ΜΑΤΟΘΔΙΟΝ I. 


δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Μανασσῆ : Μανασσῆς δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾽Αμών: ᾽Αμὼν 
ωσίας δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιεχονίαν καὶ 
τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ, ἐπὶ τῆς " µετοικεσίας Βαβυλῶνος. 


12. Μετὰ 


Chron. ν. δὲ τὴν µετοικεσίαν Βαβυλῶνος, ᾿Ιεχονίας ἐγέννησε τὸν Σαλαθιήλ ” 
22. The > 
verb (µε. Σαλαθιὴλ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ζοροβάβελ" 13. Ζοροβάβελ δὲ ἐγέννησε 


οικίζω) 


Acts vii. 4, 43- 


would be to make sure that no name 
appeared that did not belong to the line, 
He can hardly have imagined that his 
list was complete from beginning to end. 
Thus Nahshon (ver. 4) was the head of the 
tribe of Judah at the Exodus (Num. i. 7), 
yet between Hezron and him only two 
names occur—four names for 400 years. 
Each name or generation represents a 
century, in accordance with Genesis xv. 
13-16. The genealogist may have had 
this passage in view, but he must have 
known that the actual succession em- 
braced more links than four (vide Schanz 
on ver. 4). The hypothesis of inadver- 
tence or error in consulting the text 
of the O. T., favoured by some 
modern commentators, is not to be sum- 
marily negatived on the ground of an 
a priori theory of inerrancy. It is pos- 
sible that in reading 1 Chron. iii. rx in 
the Sept. the eye leapt from ᾿Οχοζίας to 
’O{ias, and so led to omission of it and 
the two following names. (᾿Αζαρίας, not 
’OLias, is the reading in Sept., but Weiss 
assumes that the latter, Azariah’s original 
name, must have stood in the copy used 
by the constructor of the genealogy.) 
The explanation, however, is conjectural. 
No certainty, indeed, is attainable on the 
matter. As a curiosity in the history of 


exegesis may be mentioned C tom's 
mode of dealing with this point. Having 
propounded several prob regarding 


the rere τὰ the omission of the three 
kings included, he leaves this one un- 
solved on the plea that he must not ex- 
lain everything to his hearers lest they 
come listless (ἵνα μὴ & , Hom. 
iv.). Schanz praises the prudence of 
the sly Greek orator. 

Ver. 11. ᾿Ιωσίας ἐγεν. τὸν ᾿Ιεχονίαν. 
There is an omission here also: Eliakim, 
son of Josiah and father of Jeconiah. 
It was noted and made a ground of 
reproach to Christians by Porphyry. 
Maldonatus, pressed by the difficulty, 
proposed to substitute for Jeconiah, Jeho- 
:akim, the second of four sons ascribed 
to Josiah in the genealogist’s source (1 
Chron. iii. 14), whereby the expression 
τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ would retain its 
natural sense. But, while the two names 


are perhaps similar enough to be mis- 
taken for each other, it is against the 
hypothesis as a solution of the difficulty 
that Jehoiakim did not share in the cap- 
tivity (2 Kings xxiv. 6), while the words 
of ver. 11 seem to imply that the descen- 
dant of Josiah referred to was associated 
with his brethren in exile. The words 
ἐπὶ τῆς µετοικεσίας Βαβνλῶνος probably 
supply the key to the solution. Josiah 
brings us tothe brink of the period of exile. 
With his name that doleful time comes 
into the mind of the genealogist. Who 
is to represent it in the line of succession? 
Not Jehoiakim, for though the deporta- 
tion began in his reign he was not 
himself a captive. It must be Jeconiah 
(Jehoiakin), his son xt the second re- 
move, who was among the captives (2 
Kings xxiv. 15). His ‘brethren ” are his 
uncles, sons of Josiah, his grandfather ; 
brethren in blood, and brethren also as 
representatives of a calamitous time— 
(vide Weiss-Meyer). There is a pathos 
in this second allusion to  brother- 
hood. “ Judah and his brethren,” par- 
takers in the promise (also in the sojourn 
in Egypt); ‘‘ Jeconiah and his brethren,” 
the generation of the promise eclipsed. 
Royalty in the dust, Dat not without 
hope. The omission of Eliakim (or 
Jehoiakim) serves the subordinate pur- 
pose of keeping the second division of the 
genealogy within the number fourteen.— 
Μετοικεσίας: literally change of abode, 
deportation, ‘carrying away," late Greek 
for µετοικία or pero λῶνος : 
genitive, expressing the terminus ad quem 
(vide Winer, § 30, 2 a, and cf. Matt. iv. 
15, ὁδὸν θαλάσσης, x. 5, δδὸν ).—tr 
7. p-, “at the time of, during,” the time 
being of some length; the process of de- 
portation went on for years. Cf. Mk. ii. 
26, ἐπὶ ᾿Αβιάθαρ, under the high priest- 
hood of Abiathar, and Mk. xii. 26 for a 
similar use of ἐπὶ in reference to place: 
ἐπὶ τοῦ Barov—at the place where the 
story of the bush occurs. Mera τ. p. in 
ver. 12 means after not during, as some 
have supposed, misled by taking µετοι- 
κεσία as denoting the stateofexile. Vide 
on this Fritzsche. 

Vv. 12-15. In the last division the 


1I—17. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


6 5 


* tov ᾿Αβιούδ: ᾿Αβιοὺὸ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ἐλιακείμ’ ᾿Ἐλιακεὶμ δὲ 


ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾽Αζώρ: 14. ᾽Αζὼρ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Σαδώκ: Σαδὼκ δὲ 
ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Αχείμ.: ᾿Αχεὶμ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ελιούδ” 15. Ελιοὺδ 
δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ελεάζαρ: ᾿Ελεάζαρ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν Ματθάν" 
Ματθὰν δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιακώβ: 16. ᾿Ιακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησε τὸν ᾿Ιωσήφ, { same ex- 


τὸν ἄνδρα Μαρίας, ἐξ ἣς ἐγεννήθη *’Inoods ὁ λεγόμενος Χριστός. 
17. Πᾶσαι οὖν αἱ γενεαὶ ἀπὸ ᾽Αβραὰμ ἕως Δαβίδ, γενεαὶ δεκατέσ- 
σαρες" καὶ ἀπὸ Δαβὶδ ἕως τῆς µετοικεσίας Βαβυλῶνος, γενεαὶ 


genealogical table escapes our control. 
After Zerubbabel no name occurs in 
the O. T. We might have expected 
to find Abiud in 1 Chron. iii. το, where 
the children of Zerubbabel are given, but 
Abiud is not among them. The royal 
family sank into obscurity. It does not 
follow that no pains were taken to pre- 
serve their genealogy. The priests may 
have been diligent in the matter, and re- 
cords may have been preserved in the 
temple (Schanz). The Messianic hope 
would be a motive to carefulness. In 
any case we must suppose the author of 
the genealogy before us to give here what 
he found. He did not construct an 
imaginary list. And the list, if not guar- 
anteed as infallibly accurate by its inser- 
tion, was such as might reasonably be 
expected to satisfy Hebrew readers. 
Amid the gloom of the night of leguiism 
which broods over all things belonging to 
the period, this genealogy included, it is 
a comfort to think that the Messiahship 
of Jesus does not depend on the absolute 
accuracy of the genealogical tree. 

Ver. 16. “laxoB... τὸν ᾿Ιωσὴφ: the 
genealogy ends with Foseph. It is then 
presumably his, not Mary’s. But for 
apologetic or dogmatic considerations, 
no one would ever have thought of 
doubting this. What creates perplexity 
is that Joseph, while called the husband 
(τὸν ἄνδρα) of Mary, is not represented 
as the father of Jesus. There is no 
ἐγέννησε in this case, though some sup- 
pose that there was originally, as the 
genealogy came from the hand of some 
Jewish Christian, who regarded Jesus as 
the Son of Joseph (Holtzmann in Η. Ο.). 
The S‘naitic Syriac Codex has “ Joseph, 
to whom was betrothed Mary the Vir- 
gin, begat Jesus,” but it does not alter 
the story otherwise to correspond with 
Joseph’s paternity. Therefore Joseph 
can only have been the legal father of 
Jesus. But, it is argued, that is not 
enough to satisfy the presupposition of 
the whole N. T., υἱ5., that Jesus was the 


5 


pression 
In XxvVii. 
17, 22 

(“* Jesus 
called the 
Christ’) 


actual son of David (κατὰ σάρκα, Rom. i. 
3); therefore the genealogy must be that 
of Mary (Nosgen). This conclusion can 
be reconciled with the other alternative 
by the assumption that Mary was of the 
same tribe and family as Joseph, so that 
the genealogy was common to both. 
This was the patristic view. The fact 


‘may have been so, but it is not indicated 


by the evangelist. His aim, undoubtedly, 
is to set forth Jesus as the legitimate son 
of Joseph, Mary’s husband, at His birth, 
and therefore the proper heir of David’s 
throne.—é€& ἣς ἐγεννήθη “I. The peculiar 
manner of expression is a hint that 
something out of the usual course had 
happened, and prepares for the following 
explanation: ὁ λεγόμενο Χριστός; not 
implying doubt, but suggesting that the 
claim of Jesus to the title Christ was 
valid if He were a legitimate descendant 
of David, as the genealogy showed Hin 
to be. 

Ver. 17. The evangelist pauses to point. 
out the structure of his genealogy: three 
parts with fourteen members each ; sym- 
metrical, memorable; πᾶσαι does not 
imply, as Meyer and Weiss think, that in 
the opinion of the evangelist no links. 
are omitted. He speaks simply of what 
lies under the eye. There they are, 
fourteen in each, count and satisfy your- 
self. But the counting turns out not to- 
be so easy, and has given rise to great 
divergence of opinion. The division 
naturally suggested by the words of the 
text is: from Abraham to David, termi- 
nating first series, 14; from David, head- 
ing second series, to the captivity as 
limit, z.¢., to Josiah, 14; from the 
captivity represented by Jeconiah to 
Christ, included as final term, 14. So- 
Bengel and De Wette. If objection be 
taken to counting David twice, the 
brethren of Jeconiah, that is, his uncles,. 
may be taken as representing the con- 
cluding term of series 2, and Jeconiah, 
himself as the first member of series 3. 
(Weiss-Meyer). The identical number 


66 


“= i 27 Ῥεκατέσσορες * 


h Le ee 
18. 1 Cor 
iv. 2. 

i again in 
xxiv. 
Lk.xx’ 


j Mt. =. ο -adrous, " εὑρέθη | ἐν γαστρὶ 


KALA ΜΑΊΙΘΑΙΟΝ i 


καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς µετοικεσίας Βαβυλῶνος ἕως τοῦ 
Χριστοῦ, γενεαὶ δεκατέσσαρες. 

18. ΤΟΥ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦ] Χριστοῦ ἡ γέννησις ” οὕτως ἦν. 
iz θείσης vie’: τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ Μαρίας τῷ ᾿Ιωσήφ, πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν 


© uvnoteu- 


€xovoa ἐκ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου. το 


Lise ο Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ὁ ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς, / δίκαιος Sv, καὶ μὴ θέλων αὐτὴν παρα. 


Rom. v. 7. 


1 B inverts the order of the names (X. 


1.). 1. X. in KCL, etc. Weiss (Meyer, 


Sth ed.) remarks that B has a preference for '' Christ Jesus’’. 


2 The best old MSS. read yeveous. . . 
scribe to bring the text into conformity wi 


ith ey 


ησις is doubtless a correction of the 
εγεννησε in the genealogy. 


yap omitted in BC}, etc. The sense is clearer without it. 


in the three parts is of no importance in 
itself. It is a numerical symbol uniting 
three periods, and suggesting comparison 
in other respects, ¢.g., 49 to different 
forms of government—judges, kings, 
priests (Euthy. Zig.), theocracy, mon- 
archy, hierarchy (Schanz), all summed 
up in Christ; or as to Israel's fortunes: 
growth, decline, ruin —redemption ur- 
gently needed. 

Vv. 18-25. ΤΗΕ ΒΙΑΤΗ ον Jesus. 
bie section gives the explanation which 


ἐγονήθη (νετ. 16) leads us to expect. 
η : be called the justification of the 
ta (Schanz), showing that while 


the birth was exceptional in nature it 
yet took place in such circumstances, 
that Jesus might justly be regaided as 
the legitimate son of Joseph, and there- 
fore heir of David's throne, The position 
of the name Τοῦ δὲ |, Χ. at the head of 
the sentence, and the recurrence of the 
word yéveons, point back to ver. 1 ; γένεσις, 
not is the true reading, the 
purpose being to express the general idea 
of origin, ortus, ps the δν gear idea of 
generation (8 peavers- 


oP am ee ate 
ga 1). 
er. 18 « « αὐτύς 


indicates the position of Mary in relation 
to J h when her pregnancy was dis- 
ανα λεν ἡ Briefly it was—betrothed, not 
married. Πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν means before 
they came together in one home as man 
and wife, it being implied that that would 
not take place before marriage. σννελθεῖν 
might refer to sexual intercourse, so far 
as the meaning of the word is concerned 

oseph. Antig. vii. 9, 5), but the evange- 
list would not think it necessary to state 
that no such intercourse had taken place 
between the betrothed. That he would 
regard as a matter of course. Yet most 


of the fathers so understood the word; 
and rome, Chrysostom, ¢.g., conceived 
Josepn and Mary to be living together 
before marriage, but sine concubitu, be- 
lieving this to have been the usual 
practice. Of this, however, there is no 
satisfactory evidence. The sense above 
assigned to σννελ. corresponds to the 
verb παραλαβάν, νετ. 20, παρέλαβε, ver. 
24, which means to take home, domum 
ducere. The supposed reason for the 
practice alleged to have existed by Chry- 
sost ym and others yrs the protection of 
the betrothed (δι dc Euthy.). 
Grammarians (vide Fritzsche) say 
πρὶν ἢ is not found in ancient Attic, 
though often in middle Attic. For other 
instances of it, with infinitive, vide Mk. 
xiv. ~ Acts vii. 2; without Μι, 
xxvi. 7. On the construction of 
πρὶν with ο various moods, vide Her- 
mann ed. Viger, Klotz ed. ae. ee and 
Goodwin's Syntax. — ονσα : 
ο iso ble Olearius, bserv. 
2. wt and other older inter- 
preters.) There was a disco and a 


surprise. It was ας. ων 
προσδόκητον ( a 

whom apparent not indicated.” Ἁ μίας 

says: '"Νοπ ab alio inventa est nisi a 


Joseph, qui pene licentia maritali futurae 
uxoris omnia noverat".—d& mv. ay. This 
was not apparent; it belon to the 
region of faith. The ev ist hastens 
to add this explanation of a painful fact 
to remove, as quickly as possible, all 
occasion for sinister conjecture. The 
expression points at once to immediate 
divine causality, and to the holy character 
of the effect: a solemn protest against 
profane rie ay 

Ver. 19 ὁ ἀνὴρ: proleptic, να’ 
ing possession of a Ἐν ιά s rights and 
responsibilities. The Motene ty re had 
a duty in the matter—BShemos . . . Seypa- 


Γὸ-- 22. 


δειγµατίσαι,ὶ ἐβουλήθη λάθρα 2 Χ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν. 
αὐτοῦ | ἐνθυμηθέντος, ἰδού, ἄγγελος Κυρίου ' κατ᾿ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ, 
λέγων. “'᾿Ιωσήφ, vids Δαβίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς " παραλαβεῖν Μαριὰμ ® 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


67 


20. ταῦτα δὲ ἕ VY: 3% 32; 
xix. 3) 

Mk. x. 12 

(in ref. to 


a hus- 
band). 


τὴν yuvaikd σου" τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ Πνεύματός ἐστιν | chap. ix. 4 


Αγίου. 


αὐτὸς γὰρ σώσει τὸν λαὸν αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν. 
Τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν, ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ’ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ ΄ Κυρίου διὰ 24- 
ο 


21. Τέξεται δὲ υἱόν, καὶ ’ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦν " 


m chap. ii. 
12, 13, 19, 
22; XXVit, 

οι χου: 

D again ver. 


a Loo Ma, 
p chap. ii. 15; iii, 3; xxii. 31 


1B and Ν2 have the simple verb (δειγµατισαι). 


2 λαθρᾳ in W.H. 


3 Μαριαν in BL (W.H. text). 
history of Christ’s birth in Luke i., ii. 


The Μαριαμ of the T. R. probably comes from the 


4 The article του before κυριου is omitted in the best MSS. 


τίσαι. He was ina strait betwixt two. 
Being δίκαιος, just, righteous, a respecter 
of the law, he sould not overlook the 
apparent fault; σπ the other hand, loving 
the woman, he desired to deal with her 
as tenderly as possible: not wishing to 
expose her (αὐτὴν in an emphatic posi- 
tion before Seyparlooat—the loved one. 
Weiss-Meyer). Some (Grotius, Fritz- 
sche, etc.) take δίκαιος in the sense of 
bonitas or benignitas, as if it had been 
ἀγαθός, so eliminating the element of con- 
βιος.---ἐβουλήθη . . . αὐτήν. He finally 
resolved on the expedient of putting her 
away privately. The alternatives were 
exposure by public repudiation, or quiet 
cancelling of the bond of betrothal. 
Affection chose the latter. δειγµατίσαι 
does not point, as some have thought, to 
judicial procedure with its penalty, death 
by stoning. λάθρα before ἀπολῖῦσαι is 
emphatic, and suggests a contrast be- 
tween two ways of performing the act 
pointed at by ἀπολῦσαι. Note the 
synonyms θέλων and ἐβουλήθη. The 
former denotes inclination in general, 
the latter a deliberate decision between 
different courses—maluit (vide on chapter 
xi. 27). 

va 20-21. Foseph delivered from his 
perplexity by angelic interposition. How 
much painful, distressing, distracting 
thought he had about the matter day and 
night can be imagined. Relief came at 
last ina dream, of which Mary was the 
subject.—ratra .. . ἐνθυμηθέντος: the 
genitive absolute indicates the time of 
the vision, and the verb the state of 
mind: revolving the matter in thought 
without clear perception of outlet. 
ταῦτα, the accusative, not the genitive 
with περί: ἐνθ, περί τινος = Cogitare de 
ve, ἐνθ. te=aliauid secum reputare. 


Kihner, § 417, ο.--ἰδού: often in Mt. 
after genitive absolute; vivid introduc- 
tion of the angelic appearance (Weiss 
Meyer).—kar’ ὄναρ (late Greek con- 
demne* by Phrynichus. Vide Lobeck 
Phryn., p. 423. 6vap, without pre- 
position, theclassic equivalent), during a 
dream reflecting present distractions.— 
vios Δαβίδ: the angel addresses Joseph 
as son of David to awaken the heroic 
mood. The title confirms the view that 
the genealogy is that of Joseph.—py 
φοβηθῇς: he is summoned to a supreme 
act of faith similar to those performed by 
the moral heroes of the Bible, who by 
faith made their lives sublime.—riv 
γυναῖκά wov:to take Mary, as thy wife, 
SO in ver.24.—d . . . ἁγίον: negativing 
the other alternative by which he was 
tormented. The choice lies between 
two extremes: most unholy, or the holi- 
est possible. What a crisis !—ver. 21. 
τέξεται---᾿Ιησοῦν: Mary is about to bear 
a son, and He is to bear the significant 
name of ¥esus. The style is an echo of 
Ο. T. story, Gen. xvii. 19, Sept., the 
birth of Isaac and that of Jesus being 
thereby placed side by side as similar in 
their preternatural «Ἱαταςίετ.-- καλέσεις ? 
a command in form of a prediction. But 
there is encouragement as well as com- 
mand in this future. It is meant to 
help Joseph out of his doubts into a mood 
of heroic, resolute action. Cease from 
brooding anxious thought, think of the 
child about to be born as destined toa 
great career, to be signalised by His name 
Jesus — Jehovah the helper.—airds 
yap... ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν: interpretation οἱ 
the name, still part of the angelic speech. 


‘avtosemphatic,heandnoother. ἁμαρτ., 


sins, implying a spiritual conception of 
Israel’s need. 


68 


KATA MATOAION 


I. 23—25. 


q Is. vii. 14. τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, 23. *“ 'I5od, ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ 
τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσι] τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ᾿Εμμανουήλ,, ὅ ἐστι 


r Mk. v. 41;* µεθερμηνευόµενον, MeO’ ἡμῶν ὁ Θεός. 
Ἰωσὴφ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕπνου ἐποίησεν ὡς προσέταξεν αὐτῷ ὁ ἄγγελος 


XV. 22, 34., 
John i. 42. 


24. Διεγερθεὶς ” δὲ 6° 


ΣΤΑ. 1. Κυρίου: καὶ παρέλαβε τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, 25. καὶ οὐκ * ἐγίνωσκεν 
αὐτήν, ἕως οὗ * ἔτεκε τὸν ὅ υἱὸν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον" καὶ ἐκάλεσε 


τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ᾿ΙΗΣΟΥΝ. 


}Ὦ has καλεσεις as in Sept. ver. of Is. vii. 14. 
* Here again, as in ver. 19, the simple verb eyepOas is used instead of the com- 


pound of T. R. in the best texts (NNBCZ). 


Σο omitted in KZA al., bracketed in W.H. 
+ ov is omitted in B and bracketed in W.H. 


5 Instead of the words τον wov a 
MSS., the Egyptian versions and 
phrase of T. 


Vv. 22-23. The prophetic reference. 
As it is the evangelist’s habit to cite 
O. T. prophecies in connection with 
leading incidents in the life of Jesus, it 
is natural, with most recent interpreters, 
to regard these words, not as uttered 
oa angel, but as a comment of 
t narrator. The ancients, Chry., 
Theophy., Euthy., etc., the for- 
mer view, and Weiss-Meyer concurs, 
while admitting that in expression they 
reveal the evangelist’s style. In support 
of this, it might be urged that the sug- 
gestion of the prophetic oracle to the 
mind of Joseph would be an aid to faith. 
It speaks of a son to be born of a virgin. 
Why should not Mary be that virgin, and 
her child that son? In favour of it also 
is the consideration that on the opposite 
view the hetic reference comes in 
too soon. should not the evangelist 
go on to the end of his story, and then 
* quote the prophetic oracle? Finally, if 
we assume that in the case of all objec- 
tive preternatural manifestations, there 
is an answering subjective psychological 
state, we must conclude that among the 
thoughts that were passing through 
Joseph’s mind at this crisis, one was 
that in his family asa “son 
of David,” something of great importance 
for the royal race and for Israel was 
about tohappen. The oracle in question 
might readily suggest itself — 
the nature of the coming event. On 
these grounds, it seems reasonable to 
ον that the evangelist, in this case, 
means the prophecy to form part of the 


Se 
er. 22. τοῦτο 8... ἵνα πληρωθῃ. 
ἵνα is to be taken here, and indeed al- 


τον πρωτοτοκον, WBZ 1, 33, some old Latin 
yr. Cur., have simply wev, The expanded 
., found in many copies, is doubtless imported from Lk, ii, 7. 


ways in such connections, in its strict 
telic sense. The interest of the evan- 
gelist, as of all N. T. writers, in prophecy, 
was purely religious. For him ο. 1’ 
oracles had exclusive reference to the 
events in the life of Jesus by which 
they were fulfilled. The virgin, 4 
παρθένος, supposed to be present to the 
eye of the ενα, is the young woman 
of Nazareth othed to Joseph the 
— now found to be with child.— 


‘i ν : in the oracle 
as ͵ (cf. ἔχονσα, ver. 18), 
is sabstitated ἐς λαο ανὰ κος μα 


changed into the impersonal καλέσονσι. 
Emmanuel = “ with us God,” implying 
that God's help will come through the 
child Jesus. It does not necessarily im- 
ο ορ idea of incarnation. 


BL. 


I] 2. fod δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦ γεννηθέντος ἐν Βηθλεὲμ τῆς 


ο 


marital intercourse, the sole purpose of 
the hastened marriage being to legitimise 
the child.—tws: not till then, and after- 
wards? Herecomes in a questio vexata 
of theology. Patristic and catholic 
authors say: not till then and never at 
all, guarding the sacredness of the virgin’s 
womb. ἕως does not settle the question. 
It is easy to cite instances of its use as 
fixing a limit up to which a specified 
event did not occur, when as a matter of 
fact it did not occur at all. E.g., Gen. 
viii. 7; the raven returned not till the 
waters were dried up; in fact, never re- 
turned (Schanz). But the presumption is 
all the other way in the case before us. 
Subsequent intercourse was the natural, 
if not the necessary, course of things. 
If the evangelist had felt as the Catholics 
do, he would have taken pains to prevent 
misunderstanding.—vidy: the extended 
reading (T. R.) is imported from Luke 
ii. 7, where there are πο variants. 
πρωτότοκον is not a stumbling-block to 
the champions of the perpetual virginity, 
because the jirst may be the only. 
Euthymius quotzs in proof Isaiah xliv, 6: 
6. Τ am the first, and I am the last, and be- 
side Me there is πο God.”—xal ἐκάλεσεν, 
he (not she) called the child Jesus, the 
statement referring back to the command 
of the angel to Joseph. Winsche says 
that before the Exile the mother, after 
the Exile the father, gave the name to 
the child at circumcision (Neue Beitraige 
zur Erlduterung der Evangelien, p. 11). 
ΟΗΑΡΤΕΚ II. History OF THE IN- 
FANCY CONTINUED. The leading aim of 
the evangelist in this chapter is not to 
give biographic details as to the time 
and place of Christ’s birth. These are 
disposed of in an introductory subordinate 
clause with a genitive absolute construc- 
tion: ‘Jesus being born in Bethlehem 
of Judaea in the days of Herod the 
King”: that is all. The main purpose 


is to show the reception given by the. 


world to the new-born Messianic King. 
Homage from afar, hostility at home; 
foreshadowing the fortunes of the new 
faith: acceptance by the Gentiles, re- 
jection by the Jews; such is the lesson 
of this new section. It is history, but 
not of the prosaic sort: history with a 
religious bias, and wearing a halo of 
poetry. The story forms a natural 
sequel to the preceding account. The 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ἡμέραις Ηρώδου τοῦ βασιλέως, ἰδού, "μάγοι ἀπὸ " ἀνατολῶν 


6ο 


Π , 9 : Fi 

loudaias, ἐνα again in 

NV aren XO 

(bis), Acts 
xiii. 6, 8. 
b chap. viii 11° xxiv. 27. Lk. xiii. 29 


δὲ in ver. 1, as in i. 18, is adversative 
only to the extent of taking the attention 
off one topic and fixing it on another 
connected and kindred. This, according 
to Klotz, who regards δὲ as a weak form 
of δὴ, is the original force of the particle. 
He says (in Devarius, p. 355): ‘‘Illa 
pazticula eam vim habet, ut abducat nos 
ab ea re, quae proposita est, transferat- 
que ad id quod, missa illa priore re, jam 
pro vero ponendum esse videatur”’. 

Vv. 1-12. Visit of the Magi. Ver. 
1, ἐν Βηθλεμ: The first hint of the 
birthplace, and no hint that Bethle- 
hem is not the home of the family.— 
τῆς Ἰουδαίας: to distinguish it from 
another Bethlehem in Galilee (Zebulon), 
named in Joshua xix. 15. Our Bethle- 
hem is called Bethlehem-Judah in 1 
Sam. xvii. 12, and Jerome thought it 
shouid be so written here—Bethlehem 
of Judah, not of Judaea, taking the latter 
for the name of the whole nation. The 
name means “house of bread,” and 
points to the fertility of the neighbour- 
hood ; about six miles south of Jerusalem. 
—é€v ἡμέραις “in the days,” a very 
vague indication of time. Luke aims at 
more exactness in these matters. It is 
enough for our evangelist to indicate 
that the birth of Jesus fell within the 
evil time represented by Herod, A name 
of evil omen; called the Great; great in 
energy, in magnificence, in wickedness ; 
a considerable personage in many ways 
in the history of Israel, and of the world. 
Not a Jew, his father Antipater an 
Edomite, his mother an Arabian—the 
sceptre has departed from Judah— 
through the influence of Antony ap- 
pointed King of Judaea by the Roman 
senate about forty years before the birth 
of Christ. The event here recorded 
therefore took place towards the close 
of his long reign; fit ending for a career 
blackened with many dark deeds.—t6ov 
payou: “Behold!” introducing in a 
lively manner the new theme, and a 
very different class of men from the 
reigning King of Judaea. Herod, Magi; 
the one representing the ungodly ele 
ment in Israel, the other the best element 
in the Gentile world; Magi, not kings 
as the legend makes them, but having 
influence with kings, and intermeddling 
much by astrological lore with the for- 
tunes of individuals and peoples. The 


79 


ς Acts xiii. 
14 (in 


sor βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων ; 
d vv. 7,9, 10; xxiv. 29. 1 Cor. xv. 41. 


ho of the Gentiles could not be 
offered by worthier representatives, in 
whom power, wisdom, and also error, 
superstition meet.—pdyo. ἀπὸ ἀνατ. 

., Magi from the east came—so 
the words must be connected: 
“came from the east”; from the east, 
the land of the sunrise ; vague indication 
of locality. It is vain to inquire what 
precise country is meant, though com- 
mentators have inquired, and are divided 
into hostile camps on the point: Arabia, 
Persia, Media, Babylon, Parthia are 
some of the rival suggestions, The 
evangelist does not know or care. The 
east generally is the suitable part of the 
word for Magi to come from on this 
errand.—ds ‘I vpa: they arrived 
at Jerusalem, the capital, the natural 
place for stran to come to, the precise 
spot connected with their errand to be 
determinea by further inquiry. Note 
the Greek form of the name, usual with 
Matthew, Mark and John. In Luke, 
the Hebrew form “Ἱερονσαλὴμ is ͵ 
Beforehand, one would have expected 
the first evangelist writing for Jews to 
have used the Hebrew form, and the 
Pauline evangelist the Greek. 

Ver. 2, ποῦ .. . ᾿Ἰονδαίων: the Ἱπ- 
quiry of the Magi. It is very laconic, 
combining an assertion with a question. 
The assertion is contained in Gels. 
That a king of the Jews had been born 
was their inference from the star they 
had seen, and what they said was in 
effect thus: that a king has been 
born somewhere in this land we know 
from a star we have seen arising, and 
we desire to know where he can be 
found: “‘insigne hoc concisae orationis 
exemplum,” Fritzsche. The Messianic 
hope of the Jews, and the aspiration 
after world-wide dominion connected 
with it, were known to the outside 
world, according to the testimony of 
non-Christian writers such as Josephus 
and Tacitus. The visit of the Magi in 
quest of the new-born king is not in- 
credible.—eiSopev . . . ἐν TH ἀνατολῇῃ, we 
saw His star in its rising, not in the east, 
as in A. V., the plural being used for 
that in ver. 1. Always on the outlook, no 
heavenly phenomenon escaped them; it 
was visible as soon as it appeared above 
the horizon.—éerépa, what was this 
celestial portent? Was it phenomenal 


KATA MATOAION 


IL 


ὀπαρεγένοντο eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, 2. λέγοντες, “Mod ἐστὶν ὁ τεχθεὶς 
εἴδομεν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὸν " ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ 


only? an appearance in the heavens 
miraculously produced to guide the wise 
men to Judaea and Bethlehem; or a 
real astronomical object, a rare con- 
junction of planets, or a new star 
appearing, and invested by men addicted 
to astrology with a certain significance ; 
or mythical, neither a miraculous nor a 
natural phenomenon, but a creation of 
the religious imagination working on 
slender κα such as the Star of Jacob 
in Balaam's prophecies? All these views 


have been hel Some of the fathers, 
especially C tom, advocated the 
first, vis., that it Ww > @ star, not φύσει, 
but Spa µόνον. H. \asons were such 


as these : it moved from north to south; 
it appeared in the daytime while the 
sun shone; it appeared and disappeared ; 
it descended down to the house where 
the child lay, and so indicated the spot, 
which could not be done by a star in 
the sky (Hom. vi.). Some modern com- 
mentators have laid under contribution 
the pling ay ο. of astronomers, and 
supposed the ἀστήρ to have been one 
of several rare conjunctions of planets 
occurring about the beginning of our 
era or a comet observed in China. Vide 
the elaborate note in Alford’s Greek 
Testament. The third view is in favour 
with students of comparative religion 
and of criticism, who lay stress on the 
tact that in ancient times the appearance 
of a star was ted at the birth of 
all great men ( Wette), and who 
expect mythological elements in the 
N. T. as well as in the Old. (Vide 
Fritzsche, Strauss, L. ¥., and Holtzmann 
inH.C.) These diverse theories will pro- 
bably always find their abettors; the Fest 
among the devout to whom the mirac- 
ulous is no stumbling-block, the second 
those who while accepting the 
miraculous desire to reduce it to a min- 
imum, or at least to avoid its unneces- 
sary extension, the third among men of 
naturalistic proclivities. I do not profess 
to be able to settle the question. 1 
content myself with expressing general 
acquiescence in the idea thrown out by 
Spinoza in his discussion on prophecy 
in the Tractatus theologico-politicus, that 
in the case of the Magi we have an 
instance of a sign given, 
to the false opinions of men, to guide 
them to the truth. The whole system 


2---δ. 


© ἀνατολῇ, καὶ ἤλθομεν προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ. 3. 
"Ἠρώδης 6 βασιλεὺς 1 ΄ ἐταράχθη, καὶ πᾶσα ἹἹεροσόλυμα pet αὐτοῦ " 
4. καὶ ” συναγαγὼν πάντας τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ γραμματεῖς τοῦ λαοῦ, ; 
»éxuvOdveto Tap αὐτῶν, ποῦ 6 Χριστὸς γεννᾶται. 
Ε chap. xxii. 10. John xi. 47. ‘Acts xiv. 37. 


iii. 14. 


19 βασιλευς Ηρωδης in BDZ. 


to that in ver. 1. 
Σειπαν in 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Ee 


ε again ver, 
g, and in 
Lk.i.78 (in 
the sense 


᾽Ακούσας δὲ 


ς. οἱ δὲ εἶπον 2 


In the T. R. the order of the words is conformed 


B. All such forms have been corrected in the text which the T. R. 


represents and need not be further noticed. 


of astrology was a delusion, yet it might 
be used by Providence to guide seekers 
after God. The expectation of an epoch- 
making birth was current in the east, 
spread by Babylonian Jews. That it 
might interest Magians there is no wise 
incredible; that their astrological lore 
might lead them to connect some un- 
known celestial phenomenon with the 
prevalent expectation is likewise credible. 
On the other hand, that legendary ele- 
ments might get mixed up in the Chris- 
tian tradition of the star-guided visit 
must be admitted to be possible. It 
remains to add that the use of the word 
ἀστήρ, not ἀστρόν, has been supposed 
to have an important bearing on the 
question as to the nature of the phe- 
nomenon. ἀστήρ means an individual 
star, ἀστρόν a constellation. But in the 
N. T. this distinction is not observed. 
(Vide Luke xxi. 25 ; Acts xxvii. 20; Heb. 
xi. 12; and Grimm’s Lexicon on the two 
words.) 

Ver. 3. 6 βασιλεὺς ᾿Ηρώδης ἐταράχθη: 
βασιλεὺς bebore the masoit ihe nsec 
in ver. 1, the emphatic position suggest- 
ing that it was as king and because king 
that Herod was troubled. The foreigner 
and usurper feared a rival, and the 
tyrant feared the rival would be wel- 
come. It takes little to put evil- 
doers in fear. He had reigned long, 
men were weary, and the Pharisees, 
according to Joseph (A. J. xvii. 2-4), 
had predicted that his family would 
ere long loseits place of power. His 
fear therefore, though the occasion may 
seem insignificant, is every way cred- 
ἴρ]ε.---καὶ πᾶσα L, doubtless an exag- 
geration, yet substantially true. The 
spirit of the city was servile and selfish. 
They bowed to godless power, and cared 
for their own interest rather than for 
Herod’s. Few in that so-called holy 
city had healthy sympathies with truth 
and right. Whether the king’s fears 
were groundless or not they knew not 
nor cated. It was enough that the fears 


existed. The world is ruled not by truth 
but by ορἰπίοη.- -πᾶσα: is ᾿ἱεροσόλυμα 
feminine here, or is ἡ πάλιφ understood ? 
or is it a construction, ad sensum, of the 
inhabitants ? (Schanz). 

Ver. 4. Herod’s 
συναγαγὼν . . . τοῦ λαοῦ. Was this a 
meeting of the Sanhedrim? Not likely, 
as the elders are not ~nentioned, who 
are elsewhere named as the repre- 
sentatives of the people, vide xxvi. 
3, ‘the chief priests, scribes and elders 
of the people”. Here we read only 
of the chief priests and scribes of the 
people. The article is not repeated 
before γραμματεῖς, the two classes being 
joined together as the theological ex- 
perts of the people. Herod called 
together the leading men among the 
priests and scribes to consult them as to 
the birth-place of Messiah. Holtzmann 
(Π. C.), 885. πρ that a meeting of the 
Sanhedrim is meant, uses the fact as an 
argument against the historicity of the 
narrative. The Herod of history slew 
the Sanhedrists wholesale, and did his 
best to lull to sleep Messianic hopes. It 
is only the Herod of Christian legend 
that convenes the Sanhedrim, and makes 
anxious inquiries about Messiah’s birth- 
place. But the past policy of the king 
and his present action, as reported by 
the evangelist, hang together. He dis- 
couraged Messianic hopes, and, now that 
they have revived in spite of him, he 
must deal with them, and his first step 
is to consult the experts in as quiet a way 
as possible, to ascertain the whereabouts 
of the new-born child—éavv@avero, etc. : 
it is not a historical question he submits 
to the experts as to where the Christ 
has been born, or shall be, but a theo- 
logical one: where, according to the ac- 
cepted tradition, is His birth-place 7 
Hence yevvarar, present tense. 

Vv. 5-6. The answer oy the experts.— 
οἱ δὲ εἶπον, etc. This is not a Chris- 
tian opinion put into the mouth or the 
scribes. It was the answer to be ex- 


measures, — καὶ 


72 


i here only. 
jin Heb.vii. 


KATA MATOAION 


Il. 


αὐτῷ, “Ev Βηθλεὲμ τῆς Ιουδαίας. οὕτω γὰρ γέγραπται διὰ τοῦ 


5 is same προφήτου, 6. ‘Kai σύ, Βηθλεέμ, γῇ Ιούδα, ' οὐδαμῶς ἐλαχίστη ef 


k Acts vii. 
10. C/.Lk. 
xxii. 26. 

1 John xxi. 


16. Acts λάθρα 1 καλέσας τοὺς pdyous, 
τοῦ Φαινομένου ἀστέρος, 8. καὶ πέµψας αὐτοὺς εἰς Βηθλεὲμ εἶπε, 


xx. 28. 1 
Pet. v. 2. 
m here and 


ἐν τοῖς ἡγεμόσιν Ιούδα" ἐκ god yap ἐξελεύσεται " ἡγούμενος, 
ὅστις | ποιμανεῖ τὸν λαόν µου τὸν Ισραήλ.” 


7. Τότε Ἡρώδης, 
” ἠκρίβωσε παρ) αὐτῶν τὸν χρόνον 


in ver. 16.“ Πορευθέντες " ἀκριβῶς "ἐξετάσατε” περὶ τοῦ παιδίου " Ρ ἐπὰν δὲ 


n Lk. i. 3 


Acts xviii. εὕρητε, ἀπαγγείλατέ pot, ὅπως κἀγὼ ἐλθὼν προσκυνήσω αὐτῷ.” 
25. ft 


ochap. x. 11. John xxi. 12. 


Thess. v. 2 


| λαθρᾳ as in i. 19 in W.H. 


p Lk. xi. 22, 34 (with aor. sub.). 


* ekeracare ακριβως in BCD, which accords with Mt.’s usual order. 


pected from them as reflecting the current 
opinion of the time. The Targum put 
upon the oracle in Micah a Messianic 
interpretation (Wetstein, and Winsche, 
Beitrage). Yet with the Talmudists the 
Messiah was the one who should come 
forth from a strange, unknown place 
(Weber, Die Lehren des Talmud, p. 342). 
Vide on this point Schanz, who quotes 
Schegg as denying the statement of 
Wetstein, and refers to Celsus as object- 
ing that this view about Messiah's birth- 
place was not current among the Jews. 
(Origen, c. Celsum, i. 51. Cf. John vii. 
27, and 42.) ap Ύεγραπται, etc. : 
The Scripture pr that Messiah's 
birth-place was Bethlehem 1s taken from 
Micah v. 2. The oracle put into the 
mouth of the experts consulted by Herod 
receives its shape from the hand of the 
evangelist. It varies very considerably 
both from the origi Hebrew and 
from the Sept. The “least’’ becomes 
‘“by no means the least,”’ “among the 
thousands" becomes ‘“‘among the 
princes,” and the closing clause, “ who 
shall rule my people Israel,’ departs 
from the prophetic oracle altogether, 
and borrows from 2 Sam. ν. 2, God's 
promise to David; the connecting link 
apparently being the poetic word de- 
scriptive of the kingly function common 
to the two places—wotpavet in Micah 
Vv. 3, ποιμανεῖς in 2 Sam. v. 2. 
The second variation arises from a 
different pointing of the same Hebrew 
word spon, by = among the 
thousands, Soya = among the heads 
of thousands. Such facts are to be 
taken as they stand. They do not cor- 


respond to modern ideas of Scripture 
proof, 


Vv. 7, 8. Herod's next step.—rére 
‘H . κος ἀστέρος: τότε, frequent 
formula of transition with our evangelist, 
cf. vv. 16, 17; iv. 1, 5, Τα, ete. Herod 
wished to ascertain precisely when the 
child the Magi had come to worship was 
born, He assumed that the event would 
synchronise with the ascent of the star 
which the M seen in its rising, 
and which still continued to be seen 

v). Therefore he made par- 
ticular inquiries ( ) as to the 
time of the s<sr, t.¢., the time of its first 
appearing. This was a blind, an affec- 
tation of t interest in all that related 
to the child, in whose destinies even the 
stars were involved.—Ver. 8. καὶ πέµψας 
. . . αὐτῷ: his hypocrisy went further. 
He bade the strangers go to Bethlehem, 
find out the whereabouts of the child, 
come back and tell him, that he also 
might go and worship Him. Worship, 
ie., murder! “Incredible motive!" 
(H.C.). Yes, as a real motive for a 
man like Herod, but not as a pretended 
one, and quite likely to be believed by 
these simple, guileless souls from the 
east.—épas εἶπε : the sending was 
synchronous with the directions accord- 
ing to De Wette, prior according to Meyer. 
It is a question of no importance here, 
but it is sometimes an important ques- 
tion in what relation the action 


by the aorist iple stands to that 
expressed by che silleniad finite verb. 
The rule certainly is that the iciple 
expresses an action going : one 
thing having ha: another there- 
after took place. But there is an impor- 
tant class of exceptions. The aorist 
participle ‘ may express time coincident 
with that of verb, when the actions 
of the verb and the participle are prac- 
tically one”. Goodwin, Syntax, p. 52, 
and vide article there referred to by 


ϐ---τα. 


9. Οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες τοῦ βασιλέως ἐπορεύθησαν ' καὶ ἰδού, 6 ἀστήρ, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΔΙΟΝ 


73 


q Mk. x. 32. 
Mt. xxi. g 


να. 3 ~ 3 a" @ a 3 , of > Δ 4 i.e 2 with TE 
ὃν εἶδον ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇῃ, “mpoiyev αὐτούς, ἕως ἐλθὼν ἔστη 1 "ἐπάνω (with, ai 


οὗ ἦν τὸ παιδίον. 10. 


μεγάλην "σφόδρα: 11. 


1 «σταθη in $$BCD. 


Σειδον in all uncials, ευρον only in minusc. 


Prof. Ballantine in Bibl. Sacra., 1884, 
on the application of this rule to the 
N. T., in which many instances of the 
kind occur. Most frequent in the Gospels 
is the expression ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε, which 
does not mean ‘“‘having first answered 
he then proceeded to say,” but ‘‘in 
answering he said”. The case before 
us may be one of this kind. He sent 
them by saying ‘‘ Go and search,” etc. 
Vv. 9, 10. The Magi go on their 
errand to Bethlehem. They do not know 
the way, but the star guides them. 
ἰδοὺ 6 ἀστὴρ: looking up to heaven as 
they set out on their journey, they once 
more behold their heavenly guide.—év 


εἶδον & τ. ἄνατολῃ: is the meaning: 


that they had seen the star only at its 
rising, finding their way to Jesus with- 
out its guidance, and that again it 
appeared leading them to Bethlehem? 
So Bengel, and after him Meyer. Against 
this is φαινομένου, ver. 7, which implies 
continuous visibility. The clause év 
εἶδον, etc., is introduced for the purpose 
of identification. It was their celestial 
guide appearing again.—mpojyev: it 
kept going before them (imperfect) all 
the way till, arriving at Bethlehem, it 
‘took up its position (ἐστάθη) right over 
the spot where the child was. The star 
seemed to go before them by an optical 
illusion (Weiss-Meyer) ; it really, in the 
view of the evangelist, went before and 
-stopped over the house (De Wette, who, of 
course, regards this as impossible in fact). 
Ver. το, ἰδόντες δὲ . . . χαρὰν μεγάλην 
«σφόδρα: seeing the star standing over 
the sacred spot, they were overjoyed. 
Their quest was at an end; they had 
at last reached the goal of their long 
journey. σφόδρα, a favourite word of 
our evangelist, and here very appropriate 
after μεγάλην to express exuberant glad- 
ness, ecstatic delight. On the convoy of 
the star, Fritzsche remarks: ‘‘ Fuit certe 
stellae pompa tam gravi tempore digna”’. 
Some connect the seeing of the star in 
ver. 10 with the beginning of the journey 
from Jerusalem to Bethlehem. They re- 
joiced, says Euthy. Zig. ὡς εὑρόντες τὸν 
ἀψευδέστατον ὁδηγόν 


καὶ ἐλθόντες εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, εὗρον 5 τὸ 


vW.H.) 


ἰδόντες δὲ τὸν ἀστέρα, ἐχάρησαν χαρὰν : Ch, v. 14, 


χα, αἱ, 
xxiii. 18. 

é s Ch, xvii. 6, 

23; xviii. 31; xix.25; xxvi. 22; xxvii. 54. 


Came in probably from ver. 8 (ευρητε). 


Ver. 11. The Magi enter and do homage. 
---καὶ ε. ε. τ. οἰκίαν : the house. In Luke 
the shepherds find the holy family in a 
stable, and the holy child lying in a man- 
ger; reconcilable by assuming that the 
Magi arrived after they had found refuge 
in a friend’s house (Epiphan. Theophy.). 
---εἶδοντ.π... . αὐτοῦ: εἶδον better than 
εὗρον, which seems to have been intro- 
duced by the copyists as not only in itself 
suitable to the situation, but relieving the 
monotopy caused by too frequent use of 
εἶδον (vv. 9, 10). The child with His 
mother, Joseph not mentioned, not in- 
tentionally, that no wrong suspicions 
might occur to the Gentiles (Rabanus 
in Aquin. Cat, Aur.).—kat πεσόντες... 
σμµύρναν. hey come, eastern fashion, 
with full hands, as befits those who enter 
into the presence of aking. They open 
the boxes or sacks (θησαυροὺς, some 
ancient copies seem to have read πήρας 
=sacculos, which Grotius, with proba- 
bility, regards as an interpretative gloss 
that had found its way into the text, vide 
Epiphanius Adv. Haer. Alogi., c. 8), and 
bring forth gold, frankincense and myrrh, 
the two latter being aromatic gums dis- 
tilled from Ίεες.---λίβανον: in classic 
Greek, the tree, in later Greek and 
N. T., the gum, τὸ θυμιώμενον = 
λιβανωτός, vide Phryn. ed. Lobeck, p. 
187. The gifts were of three kinds, hence 
the inference that the Magi were three in 
number. That they were kings was de- 
duced from texts in Psalms and Prophe- 
cies (e.g., Psalm Ixxii. 10, Isaiah Ix. 3), 

epredicting that kings would come doing 
homage and bringing gifts to Messiah. 
The legend of the three kings dates as far 
back as Origen, and is beautiful but base- 
less. It grew with time; by-and-by the 
kings were furnished with names. The 
legendary spirit loves definiteness. The 
gifts would be products of the givers’ 
country, or in high esteem and costly 
there. Hence the inference drawn by 
some that the Magi were from Arabia. 
Thus Grotius: ‘ Myrrha nonnisi in 
Arabia nascitur, nec thus nisi apud 
Jabaeos Arabum portionem: sed et auri- 
tera est felix Arabia”. Gold and incense 


74 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Il. 


παιδίον μετὰ Μαρίας τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ πεσόντες προσεκύνησαν 
Ἶ Cf. vi. 19° αὐτῷ, καὶ ἀνοίξαντες τοὺς ‘@noaupods αὐτῶν προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ 


Heb 


o Rev. xviii. εἰς τὴν χώραν αὐτῶν. 


xii. 33. Sapa, χρυσὸν καὶ "λίβανον καὶ ᾿ σμύρναν. 


12. καὶ χρηµατισθέντες 


36 (00m kat’ ὄναρ μὴ * ἀνακάμψαι πρὸς Ἠρώδην, δι’ ἄλλης ὁδοῦ * ἀνεχώρησαν 


13. ᾿Αναχωρησάντων δὲ αὐτῶν, ἰδού, ἄγγελος Κυρίου φαίνεται 


wi. x. 6 κατ’ ὄναρ ! τῷ Ιωσήφ, λέγων, ''᾿Εγερθεὶς παράλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ 


Acts xviii. , 


at. Heb. TY µητέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ φεῦγε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, καὶ ἴσθι ἐκεῖ ἕως ἂν 


x4. 15. 


rw. 4,22, εἴπω σοί: μέλλει γὰρ Ἡρώδης ζητεῖν τὸ παιδίον, τοῦ ἀπολέσαι 


iv. 12; ix. Μάο 


μασ. 


14. Ὁ δὲ ἐγερθεὶς παρέλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν µητέρα 


αὐτοῦ νυκτός. καὶ ἀνεχώρησεν εἰς Αἴγυπτον, 15. καὶ ην εκει έως 


‘ B has κατ ovap εφανη as in i. 20 (W.H. margin). 


(λίβανος) are mentioned in Isaiah Ix. 6 
among the gifts to be brought to Israel 
in the good time coming. The fathers 
delighted in assigning to these gifts of the 
Magi mystic meanings: gold as to a 
king, incense as to God, myrrh as to 
one destined to die (ὧφ µέλλοντι γεύσα- 

seh ete Grotius struck into a 
new line: gold = works of mercy ; incense 
= prayer; myrrh = purity—to the dis- 
gust of Fritzsche, who thought such 
mystic interpretations beneath so great 
a scholar. 

Ver. 12. Their — errand ο. 
Magi, warned to keep out of Herod's way, 
return home by another road.—ypyparur- 
Gévres points to divine guidance given in 
a dream (κατ ὄναρ); responso accepto, 
Vulg. The passive, in the sense of a 


divine oracle given, is found chiefly 
(Fritzsche after Casaubon). 


“ee? Fame Ὁ, 
Was the oracle given in answer to a 
rayer for guidance? Opinions differ. 
t may be assumed here, as in the case of 
pre 4 (i. 20), that the Magi had anxious 
thoughts corresponding to the divine 
communication. Doubts had arisen in 
their minds about Herod's intentions. 
They had, doubtless, heard something of 


his history and character, and his man- _ 


ner on reflection may have appeared 
suspicious. A skilful dissembler, yet not 
quite successful in concealing his hidden 

urpose even from these guileless men. 

ence a sense of need of guidance, if not 
a formal petition for it, may be taken for 
granted. Divine guidance comes only to 
prepared hearts. dream reflects the 
antecedent state of mind.— μὴ ἀνακάμψαι, 
not to turn back on their steps towards 
Jerus.and Herod. Fritzsche praises the 
felicity of this word as imp ying that 
to go by Jerusalem was a roundabout 


for travellers from Bethlehem to the east. 
Apart from the question of fact, such a 
thought does not scem to be in the mind 
of the evangelist. He is thinking, not of 
the shortest road, but of avoiding Herod 
--ἀνεχώρησαν, they withdrew not only 
homewards, but away from Herod's 
neighbourhood. A word of frequent 
occurrence in our Gospel, four times in 
this chapter (vv. 13, 14, 22). 

Vv. 13-23. Flight to Egypt, massacre in 
Bethlehem, return to Nazareth. These 
three stories have one aim. They indi- 
cate the omens which appear in =, 
nings—omina πα inesse solent 
(Ovid). The fortunes of Christianity 
foreshadowed in the experiences of the 
holy child: welcomed by Gentiles, evil 
entreated by Jews. ‘The real contents 
of these sections embody an ideal aim’ 
(Schanz). 

Vv. 13-15. Flight to Egypt. Ver. 13. 
φαίνεται: assuming that this ων cor- 
rect reading, the flight to pt is 
represented as following close on the 
departure of the Magi; the historic 
present, vividly introducing one scene 

an . A_ subjective state of 
anxiety is here also to be presumed. 
Whence arising we can only conjecture. 
Did the Magi give a hint, mentioning 
Herod’s name in a significant manner ? 
Be that as it may, Joseph also gets the 
necessary direction.—'Eyep@els . . . dls 
Alyvrrov: Egypt—near, friendly, and 
the refuge of Israel’s ancestors in days 
of old, if also their house of bon — 
Be, take with a view to taking 

care of (cf. John i. 11, ‘‘ His own re- 
ceived Him not,” παρέλαβον); benigne, 
Fritzsche—twg . . . σοί: either gene- 
rally, till I give thee further orders 
(Fritzsche) : or till I tell thee to return 


12---17. 


τῆς Στελευτῆς Ηρώδου" 


διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, μας “Εξ Αἰγύπτου ἐκάλεσα τὸν υἱόν pov.” 


16. Τότε Ἡρώδης, ἰδὼν ὅτι 


λίαν, καὶ ἀποστείλας ” 


καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ° 


τὸν χρόνον ὃν ἠκρίβωσε παρὰ τῶν μάγων. 


Gen. xxx. 2. 
only. Cf. Acts xxiv. 27. 


1 SSBCD, etc., omit τον. 


(Meyer, Schanz); sense the same; the 
time of such new direction is left vague 
(ἂν with sub.).—péAdeu γὰρ: gives reason 
of the command.—rod απολέσαι αὐτό: 
Herod’s first purpose was to kill Mary’s 
child alone. He afterwards killed many 
to make sure of the one. The genitive 
of the infinitive to express purpose 
belongs to comparatively late Greek. 
It occurs constantly in the Sept. and 
in N. T.—Ver. 14. 6 δὲ ἐγερθεὶς: Joseph 
promptly executes the command, νυκτός, 
before the day, indicating alarm as well 
as obedience. The words of the com- 
mand in ver. 13 are repeated by the 
evangelist in ver. 14 to emphasise the 
obedient spirit of Joseph.—Ver. 15. kal 
ἣν ἐκεῖ, etc.: the stay in Egypt cannot 
have been long, only a few months, 
probably, before the death of Herod 
(Νδεσεπ).- ἵνα πληρωθῃ: another pro- 
phetic reference, this time proceeding 
directly from the evangelist; Hosea xi. 
I, given after the Hebrew, not the Sept., 


which for555) has τέκνα αὐτοῦ. The oracle 


states a historical fact, and can therefore 
only be a typical prophecy. The event 
in the life of the infant Jesus may seem 
an insignificant fulfilment. Not so did 
it appear to the evangelist. For him all 
events in the life of the Christ possessed 
transcendent significance. Was it an 
event at all? criticism asks. Did the 
fact suggest the prophetic reference, or 
did the prophecy create the fact? In 
reply, be it said that the narratives in 
this chapter of the Infancy all hang 
together. If any one of them occurred, 
all might occur. The main question is, 
is Herod’s solicitude credible? If so, 
then the caution of the Magi, the flight 
to Egypt, the massacre at Bethlehem, 
the return at the tyrant’s death to 
Nazareth, are all equally credible. 

Vv. 16-18. The massacre. Τότε: 
ominous then. When he was certain 
that the Magi were not going to come 
back to report what they had found at 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


» ἐνεπαίχθη ὑπὸ τῶν μάγων, 
ἆ 45 έ Ped I, 
ὁρίοις αὐτῆς, ἀπὸ *SteTods καὶ κατωτέρω, κατὰ 4 


b Lk. xxii. 2; xxiii. 32 (Acts often). 


75 


ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ 1 Κυρίου y here only 


peel 
* é0u μώθη να 2) 


ἀνεῖλε πάντας τοὺς παῖδας τοὺς ἐν Βηθλεὲμ , for 13 


X.19; 


Τό λ 0 parall. 
17. Τότε ἐπ ὠ τὸ α Πετε only 
7 — in) Nod, 


ς Ch. iv. 13; viii. 34; xv. 22; xix.1. dhere 


Bethlehem, Herod was enraged as one 
who had been befooled (ἐνεπαίχθη). Mad- 
dened with anger, he resolves on more 
truculent measures than he at first in- 
tended: kill all of a certain age to make 
sure of the one—such is his savage order 
to his obsequious hirelings. Incredible ? 


Anything is credible of the man who 


murdered his own wife and sons. This 
deed shocks Christians; but it was a 
small affair in Herod’s career, and in 
contemporary history.—év Βηθ. καὶ ἐν 
Tact τοῖς ὁρίοις αὐτής, in Bethlehem, and 
around in the neighbourhood, to make 
quite sure.—amd διετοῦς καὶ κατωτέρω: 
the meaning is clear—all children from 
an hour to two years old. But διετοῦς 
may be taken either as masculine, agree- 
ing with παιδός understood=from a two- 
year-old child, or as a neuter adjective 
used as a noun=from the age of two 
years, a bimatu as in Vulg. There are 
good authorities on both sides. For a 
similar phrase, vide 1 Chron. xxvii. 23, ἀπὸ 
εἰκοσαετοῦς. Herod made his net wide 
enough; two years ensured an ample 
margin.—kata τ. χ.... payov. Euthy. 
Zig. insists that these words must be con- 
nected, not with διετοῦς, but with κατω- 
τέρω, putting a comma after the former 
word, and not after the latter. If, he 
argues, Herod had definitely ascertained 
from the Magi that the child must be 
two years old, he would not have killed 
those younger. They made Mary’s child 
younger; Herod kept their time and 
added a margin: πλάτος ἕτερον αὐτὸς 


προσέθηκε. It does not seem to matter 
very much. Herod would not be very 
scrupulous. He was likely to add a 


margin in either case; below if they 
made the age two years, above if they 
made it less.—Ver. 18: still another pro- 
phetic reference, Jerem. xxxi. 15, freely 
reproduced from the Sept.; pathetic and 
poetic certainly, if the relevance be not 
conspicuously apparent. ‘The evangelist 
introduces the prophetic passage in this 
case, not with ἵνα, but with τότε (ver. 17), 


76 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Il. 


ῥηθέν ὑπὸ] Ἱερεμίου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγονταν, 18. “«Φωνὴ ἐν ‘Papa 
© Ch. xiii. ἠκούσθη, θρῆνος Kai? *ndaudpis kal ‘éSuppds πολύς, “Paxhd 


(266i. κλαίουσα τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς: καὶ οὐκ ἤθελε 3 
19. Τελευτήσαντος δὲ τοῦ 'Ἠρώδου, ἰδού, ἄγγελος Κυρίου 
Ἰωσὴφ ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ, 20. λέγων, '' Ἐγερθεὶς 


g with oo εἰσί.'΄' 
here only. 
* κατ ὄναρ φαίνεται” τῷ 


παρακληθῆναι, ὅτι οὐκ 


παράλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν µητέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ πορεύου εἰς γῆν 


h Rom. xi. 3. 


Ἰσραήλ: τεθνήκασι γὰρ οἱ “{Lnrodvres τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.”' 


i Rev. v. 10 21. Ὁ δὲ ἐγερθεὶς παρέλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ 


(with ἐπέν 


and gen.). ἦλθεν ὃ εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ. 


22. ἀκούσας δὲ ὅτι Αρχέλαος ! βασιλεύει 


δια in NBCD ; νπο not acc. to style of Evang. (Weiss in Meyer). 
Άθρηνος και om. WBZ ; probably introduced to correspond with Sept. 


1ηθελησε in DZ. 
* φαινεται κατ ovap, NBDZ. 
5 κισηλθεν in NBC. 


suggesting a fulfilment not regarded as 
exclusive. The words, even in their 
original place, are highly imaginative. 
The scene of Rachel weeping for her 
children is one of several tableaux, which 
passed before the prophet’s eye in a 
vision, in a dream which, on awaking, 
he felt to be sweet. It was poetry to 
begin with, and it is poetry here. Rachel 
again weeps over her children; hers, 
because she was buried there, the pro- 
phet’s Ramah, near Gibeah, north of 
Jerusalem, standin 

to the south. prophetic passage 
did not create the massacre ; the tradition 
of the massacre recalled to mind the 
prophecy, and led to its being quoted, 
though of doubtful appositeness in a strict 
sense. Jacob’s beloved wife seems to 
have occupied an imaginative place also 
in Rabbinical literature. Winsche quotes 
this from the Midrasch : ‘‘ Why did Jacob 
bury Rachel on the way to Ephratah or 
Bethlehem? (Gen. xxxv. 16). Because 
he foresaw that the exiles would at some 
future time pass that way, and he buried 
her there that she might pray for them” 
(Beiirdge, p. 11). el was to the 
Hebrew fancy a mother for Israel in all 
time, sympathetic in all her children's 


misfortunes. 
Vv. 19-21. tae? i return. Τελεντ- 
ήσαντος δὲ τ. Herod died in 750 


u.c. in his ae year, at Jericho, of a 
horrible loathsome disease, rotten in 
body as in soul, altogether an unwhole- 
some man (vide oe Bell, i. 33, 
1-5; Antiq., xvii. 6, 5 

6, 8). The news of his death’ would fly 
swiftly, and would not take long to 
reach Egypt. There would be no need 


of an angel to inform Joseph of the fact. 
But his anxieties would not therefore be 
atanend. Who was to succeed Herod? 
Might he not be another of the same 
type? Might disorder and confusion 
not arise? Would it be safe or wise to 


return to Palestine? Guidance was 


(ear? iat The anxious thoughts of 
the daytime are reflected in the dream 
by night, and the angelic message comes 
to put an end to uncertainty.—ver. 20. 
"EyepOds . . . Ἰσραήλ: it is 
the same terms as those of the mettage 
directing flight to t, except ο 
course fiat th the tend f aifierent’ and 
the order not flee but return, ‘‘ Arise, 
take the child and His mother.” The 
words were as a refrain in the life of 
Joseph in those critical months.—rev4- 
κασι yap: in this general manner is the 
death of Herod referred to, as if in 
studious avoidance of the dreaded name. 
They are dead. The plural here (οἱ 
ζητοῦντες), as often, αν. - a general 
idea, a class, though only a single person 
is meant (vide Winer, § 27, 2, and 
Exodus iv. 19). But the manner of ex- 
pression may indicate a desire to dissi- 

te completely Joseph’s apprehensions. 
There is nothing, no person to fear: ol 
Ver. 21. ὁ δὲ ἐγερθεὶς . . . Ἴσρα 
prompt obedience forts but Parte 
(ver. 14) is omitted this time. Joseph 
may wait till day; the matter is not 
so urgent. Then the word was evye. 
It was a flight for life, every hour or 
minute important, 

Vv. 22-23, Settlement in Nazareth in 


18—22. 


evi! τῆς Ἰουδαίας ἀντὶ “HpwSou τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ,” ἐφοβήθη ) ἐκεῖ j der 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ig, 


ἐκεῖσε. 
« XVii. 20. 


ἀπελθεῖν > χρηματισθεὶς δὲ Kat ὄναρ, ἀνεχώρησεν εἰς τὰ " µέρη τῆς John xi. 8; 


XVili. 3. 


k Ch. xv. 21; xvi 13. Mk. viii. το. 


1 Omit επι NB and several cursives. With em the usual construction; therefore 


its omission here probably correct. 


2 SSBC place Ἡρωδου after τ. πατ. αυτον, 


Galilee. Joseph returns with mother 
and child to Israel, but not to Judaea 
and Bethlehem.—daxotoas . . . Ἠρῴδου: 
Archelaos reigns in his father’s stead. 
A man of kindred nature, suspicious, 
truculent (Joseph., Ant., 17, 11, 2), to be 
feared and avoided by such as had cause 
to fear his father.—Baotdever, reigns, not 
in the strict sense of the word. He 
exercised the authority of an ethnarch, 
with promise of a royal title if he con- 
ducted himself so as to deserve it. In 
fact he earned banishment. At Herod’s 
death the Roman emperor divided his 
kingdom into four parts, of which he 
gave two to Archelaus, embracing 
Judaea, Idumaea and Samaria; the other 
two parts were assigned to Antipas and 
Philip, also sons of Herod: to Antipas, 
Galilee and Peraea; to Philip, Batanea, 
Trachonitis and Auranitis. They bore 
the title of Tetrarch, ruler of a fourth 
part (Joseph., Ant., 17, 11, 4).---ἐφοβήθη 
éxet ἀπελθεῖν. It is implied that to 
settle in Judaea was the natural course to 
follow, and that it would have beer. 
followed but for a special reason. 
Schanz, taking a hint from Augustine, 
suggests that Joseph wished to settle in 
Jerusalem, deeming that city the most 
suitable home for the Messiah, but that 
God judged the despised Galilee a better 
training school for the future Saviour of 
publicans, sinners and Pagans. This 
hypothesis goes on the assumption that 
the original seat of the family was 
Nazareth.—éet; late Greek for ἐκεῖσε. 
In later Greek authors the distinction 
between ot ov, of οὗ, ὅποι ὅπου, 
éxet and ἐκεῖσε practically disappeared. 
Rutherford’s New Phrynichus, p. 114. 
Vide for another instance, Luke xxi. 2. 
Others explain the substitution as a case 
of attraction common in adverbs of 
place. The idea of remaining is in the 
mind = He feared to go thither to abide 
there. Vide Lobeck’s Phryn., p. 44, and 
Fritzsche.—ypypariodels τῆς Γαλιλαίας: 
again oracular counsel given in a dream, 
implying again mental perplexity and 
need of guidance. Going to Galilee, 
Judaea being out of the question, was 
not a matter of course, as we should 


» 


have expected. The narrative of the 
first Gospel appears to be constructed on 
the assumption that Nazareth was not 
the original home of the holy family, 
and to represent a tradition for which 
Nazareth was the adopted home, Beth- 
lehem being the original. ‘‘ The evan- 
gelist did not know that Nazareth 
was the original seat of the family.’’ 
Weiss, Matt. evang. Ῥ. 98. 
Ver. 23. κατῳκησεν. 


Sept. is used regularly for aw in the 


κατοικεῖν in 


sense of to dwell, and with év in Luke and 
Acts (Luke xiii. 4; Acts i. 20, etc.) in the 
same sense. "ere with eis it seems to 
mean going τς’ settle in, adopting as a 
home, the district of Galilee, the parti- 
cular town called Nazareth.—eis πόλιν is 
to be taken along with κατῴ. not with 
ἐλθὼν. Arrived in Galilee he transferred 
his familyto Nazareth, as afterwards Jesus 
migrated to Capernaum to carry on there 
His ministry (iv. 13, where the same form 
of expression recurs).—Nafapér, a town 
in lower Galilee, in the tribe of Zebulon, 
nowhere mentioned in O. T. or Josephus. 
---ὅπως πληρωθῇ, etc.: a fnal prophetic 
reference winding up the h‘story of the 
infancy. ὅπως not ἵνα, as usual, but with 
much the same meaning. It does not 
necessarily imply that a prophetic oracle 
consciously influenced Joseph in making 
his choice, but only that the evangelist 
saw in that choice a fulfilment of pro- 
phecy. But what prophecy ? Thereference 
is vague, not to any particular prophet, 
but to the prophets in general. In no 
one place can any such statement be 
found. Some have suggested that it 
occurred in some prophetic book or 
oracle no longer extant. ‘ Don’t ask,” 
says Euthy. Zig., ‘in what prophets; 
you will not find: many prophetic books 
were lost ” (after Chrys.). Olearius, in 
an elaborate note, while not adopting, 
states with evident sympathy this view 
as held by others. Jerome, following 
the Jewish scholars /erudit' Hebraeorum) 
of his time, believed the reterence to be 
Mainly to Isaiah xi., where mention is 


made of a branch (723) that shall 


78 


l with εἰς, 
h. iv. 13. 


KATA MATOAION 


II. 23 


Γαλιλαίας, 23. καὶ ἐλθὼν | κατώκησεν εἰς πόλιν λεγομένην Ναζαρέτ} 


Acts vi. , ὅπως πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν, Ὅτι Ναζωραῖος κληθή- 


(ew) 
σεται. 


1 This spelling is found in BDL and adopted by W.H. Nafap@in CX, Other 


forms occur, 


spring out of Jesse’s root. This view is 
accepted by most modern scholars, 
Catholic and Protestant, the name of the 
town being viewed as a derivative from 
the Hebrew word (a feminine form). The 
epithet Ναζωραῖος will thus mean: ‘the 
man of Nazareth, the town of the off- 
shoot”. De Wette says : “In the spirit of 
the exegetical mysticism of the time, and 
applying what the Jews called Midrasch, 
deeper investigation, the word is used in 
a double sense in allusion at once to 


“33, Isaiah xi, 1, sprout, and to the 


name of Nazareth”. There may be 
something in the su ion that the 
reference is to Judges xiii. 7: ὅτι Nalip- 
aiov θεοῦ ἔσται, and the idea: one living 
apart in a secluded town. (So Furrer 
in Die Bedeutung der bibl. Geographie 
ην ᾱ. bib, Exegese, p. 15.) 

This final prophetic reference in the 
history of the infancy is the weakest link 
in thechain. Itis wasted effort to try 
to show its value in the prophetic argu- 
ment. Instead of doing this, apologists 
would act more wisely by frankly recog- 
nising the weakness, and drawing from 
it an argument in favour of historicity. 
This may very legitimately be done. Of 
all the incidents mentionéd in this 
chapter, the settlement in Nazareth is 
the only one we have other means of 
verifying. Whether it was the original 
or the adopted home of Jesus may be 
doubtful, but from many references in 
the Gospels we know 
home from childhood till manhood, 
this case, therefore, we certainly know 
that the historic fact suggested the 
prophetic reference, instead of the pro- 
phecy creating the history. And the 

weakness of the prophetic reference 
in this instance raises a presumption 
that that was the nature of the connec- 
tion between prophecy ard history 

throughout. Itis a caveat against the 
critical theory that in the second chapter 
of Matthew we have an imaginary his- 
tory of the SU Jesus, compiled to 
meet a craving knowledge on the 
subject, and adapted to the requirements 
of faith, the rudiments of the story 
consisting of a collection of Messianic 


rophecies—the star of Jacob, agg 

inging gifts, Rachel weeping 
chil md etc. The last of the pro- 
phetic references would never have 
occurred to any one, whether the evan- 
gelist or any other unknown source of 
the tradition, unless there had been a 
fact going before, the settlement in 
Nazareth. But given the fact, there 
was a strong desire to find some allusion 
to it in the O. T. Faith was easily 
satisfied; the faintest allusion or hint 
would do. That was in this case, and 
presu™ably in most cases of the kind, 
the blem with which the Christian 
mind in the Apostolic age was occupied: 
not creating history, but discovering in 
evangelic facts even the most minute, 
prophetic fulfilments. The evangelist’s 
idea of fulfilment may κ a ae 
but it might also awaken a feelin 
thankfulness in view of what has 
stated. It is with the prophetic re- 
ferences in the Gospels as with songs 
without words. The composer has a 
certain scene or state of mind in his 
view, and writes under its inspiration. 
But you are not in his secret, and cannot 
tell when you hear the music what it 
means. But let the key be given, and 
immediately you find new meaning in 
the music. The prophecies are the 
music; the key is the history. Given 
the prophecies alone and you could with 
difficulty imagine the ee ee the 
history you can easily u how 
να fancy might discover corres- 
ponding prophecies. That the 
once suggested, might react on facts 
and lead to legendary modifications is of 
course not to be denied. 

CuapTer Ill. Tue MInistrRy or 
THE BAPTIST, AND THE Baptism OF 
Jesus. This chapter and part of the 
next, containing the narrative of the 
temptation (iv. 1-11), form the prelude to 
the public ministry of Jesus. John, of 
whom we have not heard before, appears 
as consecrating Jesus to His Messianic 
calling by baptism, and from the baptism 
Jesus passes to the scene of moral trial. 
In what year of Christ’s life these events 
happened is not indicated. The new 
narrative begins with the vague phrase, 


ΠΠ. 1—3. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΔΙΟΝ 


79 


III. τ. "Ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις * ἐκείναις  παραγίνεται Ιωάννης 6a Cf. Εκ. ii. 


κα», ἵς 


Βαπτιστής, "κηρύσσων ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω τῆς ‘loudaias, 2. kai! λέγων,, xx xviii. τ. 


‘““Metavoeite* Ἱἤγγικε yap ἡ βασιλεία τῶν odpavar.” 
c passim in Mt. Mk. & Lk. is ref. to the kingdom of God. 


solute use. 


Cf. Heb. 


3. Οὗτος ix. 11 for 
same ab- 
Cf. Ex. xxxii. 5. d Cf. 


eyyiGouer, Heb. vii. 19, and ἔγγνος, ver. 22 (=one who keeps us near to God), 


1 και omitted in $B and Egypt. verss, 


‘‘in those days”. But it is obvious 
from the contents that Jesus has now 
reached manhood; His thoughts and 
experiences are those of mature years. 
From childhood to manhood is an ab- 
solute blank in our Gospel. The evange- 
list gives a genesis of Christ's body, but 
no genesis of His mind. Δε we see it 
in the sequel, it is a miracle of wisdom. 
It too, doubtless, had its genesis and 
history, but they are not given or even 
hinted at. Christ is ushered on the 
scene an unexplained prodigy. One 
would like to know how He reached this 
unprecedented height of wisdom and 
grace (Luke ii. 52). The only pos=‘ble 
source of knowledge is reasoning back 
from the outcome in the full-grown man. 
Jesus grew, and the final result may 
reveal in part the means and process of 
growth. The anti-Pharisaic spirit and 
clean-cut descriptions of Pharisaic ways 
imply antecedent study, perhaps in 
Rabbinical schools. The parables may 
not have been so extempore as taey 
seem, but may be the ripe fruit of 
long brooding thought, things new and 
yet old. 

Vv. 1-6. Fohn the Baptist appears 
(Mark i. 1-6, Luke iii. 1-6). Ver. 1. 
ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις: the time 
when most vaguely indicated. Luke’s 
narrative here (iii. 1) presents a great 
contrast, as if with conscious intent to 
supply a want. John’s ministry is there 
dated with reference to the genera. 
history of the world, and Christ’s age at 
His baptism is given. Luke’s method is 
more Satistactory in a historical point of 
view, but Matthew’s manner of narra- 
tion is dramatically effective. He passes 
abruptly to the new theme, and leaves 
you to guess the length of the interval. 
A similarly indefinite phrase occurs in 
the story of Moses (Ex. ii. 11). There 
has been much discussion as to what 
period of time the evangelist had in 
view. Some say none, except that of 
the events to be related. ‘In those 
days,” means simply, ‘‘in the days 
when the following events hapened ” (so 
Euthy. Zig.). Others suggest explana- 
tions based on the relation of our Gospel 


to its sources, ¢.g., use of a source in 
which more was told about John, or 
anticipation of Mark i. 9, where the 
phrase is used in reference to Christ’s 
coming to be baptised. Probably the 
best course is to take it as referring back 
from the apostolic age to the great 
creative epoch of the evangelic history = 
‘In those memorable years to which we 
look back with wistful reverent gaze ”.— 
παραγίνεται 6 |.: John appears on the 
stage of history—historical present, used 
“to give a more animated statement of 
past events” (Goodwin’s Syntax, p. 11). 
John 6 βαπτιστής, well known by this 
epithet, and referred to under that de- 
signation by Josephus (Antiq., xviii. 5, 2, 
on which vide Schirer; ¥ewish History, 
div. i., vol. ii., p. 23). Its currency 
naturally suggests that John’s baptism 
was partly or wholly an originality, not 
to be confounded with proselyte baptism, 
which perhaps did not even exist at that 
time.— κηρύσσων, preaching, as well as 
baptising, heralding the approach of the 
Kingdom of Heaven, standing especially 
in N. T. for proclamation of the good 
news of God, distinct from διδάσκων (iv. 
23): a solemn word for a momentous 
matter.—év τῇ ἐρήμω τ. Ιουδαίας: scene 
of the ministry, the pasture lands lying 
between the central range of hills and 
the Jordan and the Dead Sea, not all 
belonging to Judaea, but of the same 
character; suitable scene for such a 
ministry. 

Ver. 2. λέγων introduces the burden 
of his preaching.—peravoeire, Repent. 
That was John’s great word. Jesus 
used it also when He began to preach, 
but His distinctive watchword was 
Believe. The two watchwords point to 
different conceptions of the kingdom. 
John’s kingdom was an object of awful 
dread, Jesus’ of glad welcome. The 
message of the one was legal, of the other 
evangelic. Change of mind John deemed 
very necessary as a preparation for 
Messiah’s advent.—f βασιλεία τῶν οὐ- 
ρανῶν, the Kingdom of Heaven. This 
title is peculiar to Matthew. In the 
other Gospels it is called the Kingdom 
of God. Not used either by John or by 


80 


5 Is. xl. 3. 
f here and 


KATA MATOAION © 


ΠΠ. 


γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ῥηθεὶς ὑπὸ] ᾿Ησαΐου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, ''"Φωνὴ 


in parall. βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, ' Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου: εὐθείας ποιεῖτε 


in sense oe 
of a worn τὰς *tpiBous αὐτοῦ.’ 
path (τρι- 


‘ 


4. Αὐτὸς δὲ 6 Ἰωάννης εἶχε τὸ 5 ἔνδυμα 


βω). αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τριχῶν καµήλου, καὶ ζώνην δερµατίνην περὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν 


g Ch. xxii. , 


11, xxviii, αὐτοῦ: ἡ δὲ τροφὴ αὐτοῦ Hv? Ἡ ἀκρίδες καὶ µέλι ! ἄγριον. 


; ¢cloth- 
ing generally in Mt. vi. 25, 28. 


h Mk.i.6. Rev. ix. 3, 7. 


i Mk. 1.6. Jude 13 (fierce). 


1 νπο here as in ii, 17, instead of δια in BCD. 


2 avrov after qv in BCD. 


Jesus, says Weiss, but to be ascribed to 
the evangelist. There does not seem to 
be any urgent reason for this judgment. 
In Daniel ii. 44 the kingdom is spoken 
of as to be set up by “the God of 
heaven,” and in the Judaistic period 
previous to the Christian era, when a 
transcendent conception of God began 
to prevail, the use of heaven as a syno- 
nym for God came in. Custom might 
cause it to be κος even by those 
who did not sympathise with the con- 
ception of God as transcendent, outside 
and far off from the world (vide note in 
H. C., Ρ. 55). 

Ver. 3. ἐστιν, etc.: the 
evangelist here speaks. He finds in John 
the man of prophecy who proclaims in the 
desert the near advent of Jehovah comin 
to deliver His people. He quotes Isaiah 
only. Mark (1. 2) quotes Malachi also, 
identifying John, not only with the vice 
in the desert, but with Elijah. Isamh's 
herald is not merely a type of John in 
the view of the evangelist; the two are 
identical. The quotation follows the 
Sept., except that for τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν is 
substituted αὐτοῦ. Note where Matthew 
stops. Luke, the universalist, goes on to 
the end of the oracle. The mode of 
introducing the prophetic citation is 
peculiar. ‘This is he,” not “that it 
might be fulfilled". Weiss (Meyer) 
thinks this an indication that the passage 
is taken from "' the apostolic source”’. 

Ver. 4. αὐτὸς 6°l. The story 
returns to the historical person, John, 
and identifies him with the herald of 

ophecy. “This same John.” Then 
follows a description of his way of life— 
his clothing and his food, the details con- 
veying a life-like picture of the manner 
of the man: his habits congruous to his 
vocation.—rd ἀπὸ τριχών καµή- 
λον: his characteristic (αὐτοῦ) piece of 
clothing was a rough rude garment woven 
out of camel’s hair, not as some have 
thought, a camel’s skin We read in 
Heb. xi. 37, of sheep sains and goat 


The T. R. is suspiciously smooth. 


skins worn by some of God's saints, but 
not of camel skins. Fritzsche takes 
the opposite view, and Grotius. Euthy., 
following Chrysostom, says: “Do not 
ask who wove his garment, or whence 
he got his girdle ; for more wonderful is 
it that he should live from childhood to 
manhood in so inhospitable a climate”. 
John took his fashion in dress from 
Elijah, described (2 Kings i. 8) as “an 
hairy man, and girt with a girdle of 
leather about his loins". It need not 
be doubted that the investment is histori- 
cal, not a legendary creation, due to the 
opinion that John was Elijah redivivus. 
The imitation in dress does not imply a 


desire to pass for Elijah, but ex 
similarity of mood.— δὲ τροφή; his 
diet as poor as his clothing was 


πιεαπ.---ἀκρίδες : the last of four Finds of 
edible locusts named in - xi, 22 
(Sept.), still it seems used by the poor 
in the east; legs and wings stripped off, 
and the remainder boiled or roasted. 
“The Beduins of Arabia and of East 
μπει land eat many locusts, roasted, 

iled or baked in cakes. In Arabia 
they are sold in the market. They 
taste not badly” (Benzinger, Hebraische 
Archdologie). Euthy. reports to the 
same effect as to his own time: many 
eat it in those parts τεταριχενµένον 
(pickled). Not pleasant food, palatable 
only to keen hun If we may trust 
Epiphanius, the Ebionites, in their aver- 
sion to animal food, grudged the Baptist 
even that poor diet, and restricted him 
to cakes made with honey ba pap ἐν 
µελίτι), or to honey alone, Vide Nichol- 
son’s Gospel according to the Hebrews, p. 
34, and the notes κας; also Suicer’s 
Thesaurus, sub, v. i : 
opinion is divided between bee θα 
and tree honey, i.¢., honey made by wild 
bees in trees or holes in the rocks, or a 
liquid exuding from palms and fig trees. 
(On this also consult Nicholson, Gospel 
of Hebrews, p. 35.) Both were used as 
food, but our decision should incline to 


ΕΥΔΓΙ ΕΛΙΟΝ 


SI 


5. Τότε ἐξεπορεύετο πρὸς αὐτὸν Ἱεροσόλυμα καὶ πᾶσα ἡ Ἰουδαία { Gen. xiii 


καὶ πᾶσα ἡ } περίχωρος τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου: 6. καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο] ἐν τῷ 
᾿Ιορδάνῃ ” ὑπ αὐτοῦ, Ἠ ἐξομολογούμενοι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 


io (same 


7. 35+ 


1, 28 al. 


᾿Ιδὼν δὲ πολλοὺς τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων ἐρχομένους ἐπὶ τὸ κ here and 


, A a A , 
βάπτισμα aitod,® εἶπεν ad.ois, “'᾿ Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ™ ὑπέδειξεν 


Similar sense in Acts xix. 18. James v. 16. 
const. and sense). 


1Ch. xii. 34; xxiii. 33. 


in Mk. i. 5 
=to con- 
fess sin. 


Lk. iii. 7. m Lk. iii. 7 (same 


1 Some copies (C? 33) have παντες after εβαπτ. 
27S8BCA al. have ποταµω after lop, which the scribes may have omitted as 


superfluous. 
3 avrov omitted in ΦΕΒ and by Origen. 


vegetable honey, on the simple ground 
that it was the poorer food. Bee honey 
was a delicacy, and is associated with 
milk in Scripture in descriptions of a 
fertile land. The vegetable product 
would suit best John’s taste and state. 
‘‘Habitatori solitudinis congruum est, 
non delicias ciborum, sed necessitatem 
humanae carnis explere.”” Jerome. 

Vv. 5-6. Effects of Fohn’s preaching. 
Remarkable by his appearance, his mes- 
sage, and his moral intensity, John made 
a great impression. They took him for 
a prophet, and a prophet was a novelty 
in those days. His message appealed to 
the common Messianic hope, and pro- 
claimed fulfilment to be at hand.—Tore, 
then, general note of time, frequent in 
this Gospel. ἐξεπορεύετο imperfect, de- 
noting continued action. The movement 
of course was gradual. It began on 
a small scale and steadily grew till 


it reached colossal dimensions. Each 
evangelist, in his own way, bears 
witness to this. Luke speaks of 


crowds (ili. 7), Mark and Matthew 
give graphic particulars, similar, but 
in diverse order. ‘All Judaea and all 
the Jerusalemites,” says Mark. ‘‘ feru- 
salem, Judaea and the Jordan country,” 
Matthew. The historical order was 
probably the reverse of that in Matthew’s 
narrative. First came those from the 
surrounding country—people living near 
the Jordan, on either side, in what is 
now called El-Ghor. Then the move- 
ment extended in widening circles into 
Judaea. Finally it affected conservative, 
disdainful Jerusalem, slow to be touched 
by new popular influences.—‘lepodoAv- 
pa: the Greek form here as in ii. 3, and 
generally in this Gospel. It is not said 
all Jerusalem, asin Mark. ‘The remark- 
able thing is that any came from that 
quarter. Standing first, and without the 
“all,” the reference means even Jerusa- 


lem. The πᾶσα in the other two clauses 
is of course an exaggeration. It implies, 
not that every human being went to the 
Jordan, but that the movement was 
general. The evangelist expresses him- 
self just as we should do in a similar 
case. Πᾶς with the article means ‘the 
whole,” without, ‘‘every”’.—Ver. 6. καὶ 
ἐβαπτίζοντο: the imperfect again. They 
were baptised as they came.—év τῷ ορ. 
ποταµφ. The word ποταμῷ, omitted in 
T. R., by all means to be retained. Dull 
prosaic scribes might deem it superfluous, 
as all men knew the Jordan was a river, 
but there is a touch of nature in it which 
helps us to call up the scene.—iz’ αὐτοῦ, 
by him, the one man. John would not 
want occupation, baptising such a crowd, 
one by οπε.-- ἐξομολογούμενοι: confes- 
sion was involved in the act of sub- 
mitting to baptism at the hands of one 
whose preaching had for its burden, 
Repent. But there was explicit confes- 
sion, frank, full (ἐκ intensifies), on the 
part of guilt-burdened men and women 
glad to get reliefso. General or special 
confession ? Probably both: now one. 
now the other, according to idiosyncrasy 
and mood. Confession was not exacted 
as a conditio sine qua non of baptism, 
but voluntary. The participle means, 
while confessing ; not, provided they 
confessed. This confession of sins by 
individuals was a new thing in Israel. 
There was a collective confession on the 
great day of atonement, and individual 
confession in certain specified cases 
(Numb. v. 7), but no great spontaneous 
self-unburdenment of penitent souls— 
every man apart, It must have been 2 
stirring sight. 

_ Vv. 7-10. Words of rebuke and warn- 
ing to unwelcome vistors (Luke iii. 7-0). 
Ver. 7. ᾿Ιδὼν δὲ, etc.: among those 
who visited the Jordan were some. 


_hot a few, many indeed (πολλοὺς) of the 


82 


nCf. Ie 
veil 


o for the 
idea of “ the coming wrath,” vide Rom. ii. 5. 
Lk. iii. 8. C/. Ps. iv. 5; x. 6; xiv. 1. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


“4 ὑμῖν " Φυγεῖν ἀπὸ "τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς ; 
Mk.xvi.8. ἀξίους 1 τῆς µετανοίας: ο. 
1 Thess. i. 10. 


Il. 


8. ποιήσατε οὖν καρποὺς 
καὶ μὴ ) δόξητε Ἀλέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, 
p Ch. vi. 7; xxvi.53. κα Ch. ix. 21. 


1 καρπον αξιον in BCD and many other uncials. The reading in T. R. (found 
in L) may have come in from Lk. iii. 8, where it is undisputed. 


Puarisgzes and Sappucees. The first 
mention of classes of whom the Gospels 
have much to say, the former being the 
legal precisians, virfuosi in religion, the 
latter the men of affairs and of the 
world, largely belonging to the sacer- 
dotal class (consult Wellhausen, Die 
Pharisder und die Sadducder), Their 
presence at the scene of John’s ministry 
is credible. Drawn doubtless by mixed 
motives, as persons of their type gene- 
rally are, moral simplicity not being in 
their line; partly curious, partly fasci- 
nated, partly come to spy; in an am- 
biguous state of mind, neither decidedly 
in sympathy nor pronouncedly hostile. 
In any case they cannot remain in- 
different to a movement so deep and 
widespread. So here they are; coming 
to (ἐπὶ) John’s baptism, not to be bap- 
tised, nor coming against, as some 
(Olearius, ¢.g.) have thought, as if to put 
the movement down, but coming to wit- 
ness the strange, novel phenomenon, and 
form their impressions. John did not 
make them welcome. His spirit was 
troubled by their presence. Simple, 
sensitive, moral natures instinctively 
shrink from the presence of insincerity, 
duplicity and craftiness.—t8ev: how did 
they come under his observation? By 
their position in the crowd or on the 
outskirts of it, and by their aspect? How 
did he identify them as Pharisees and 
Sadducees ? How did the hermit of the 
desert know there were such people? 
It was John’s business to know all the 
moral characteristics of histime. These 
were the matters in which he took 
supreme interest, and he doubtless had 
means of informing himself, and took 
pains to do so. It may be assumed 
that he knew well about the Essenes 
living in his neighbourhood, by the 
shores of the Dead Sea, somewhat after 
his own tashion, and about the other 
two classes, whose haunts were the 
great centres of population. There 
might be Essenes too in the crowd, 
though not singled out, the history other- 
wise having no occasion to mention 
them.—yervyjpara ἐχιδνῶν: sudden, ‘ir- 
repressible outburst of intense moral 


aversion. Why vipers? The ancient 
and medieval interpreters (Chrysos., 
Aug., Theophy., Euthy.) had recourse in 
explanation to the fable of the young 
viper eating its mother’s womb. The 
term ought rather to be connected with 
the following words about fleeing from 
the coming wrath. The serpents of all 
sorts lurking in the fields flee when the 
stubble is set on fire in harvest in pre- 
paration for the winter sowing. he 
Baptist likens the Pharisees and Sad- 
ducees to these serpents fleeing for their 
lives (Furrer in Zeitschrift fur Missions- 
kunde und Religionswissenschaft, 1890). 
Professor G. A. Smith, istorical 
Geography of the Holy Land, p. 495, 
suggests the fires among the dry scrub, 
in the higher stretches of the Jordan 
valley, chasing before them the scorpions 
and vipers, as the basis of the metaphor. 
There is grim humour as well as wrath 
in the similitude. The emphasis is not 
on vipers but on fleeing. But the felicity 
of the comparison lies in the fact that 
the epithet suits very well. It implies 
that the Pharisees and Sadducees are 
fleeing. They have caught slightly the 
infection of repentance; yet John does 
not believe in its depth or permanence.— 
τίς ὑπέδειξεν: there is surprise in the 
question. Can it be possible that even 
you have learned to fear the approaching 
crisis? Most unlikely scholars.—vyeiv 
ἀπὸ: pregnant for ‘flee and escape 
from" (De Wette). The aorist points to 
possibility, going with verbs of hoping 
and promising in this sense (Winer, 
§ xliv. 7 c.). The implied thought is 
that it is not possible = who encouraged 
you to expect deliverance? The aorist 
further signifies a momentary act: now 
or πενετ.- τῆς ὀργῆς, the day 
of wrath impending, preluding the 
advent of the Kingdom. The idea of 
wrath was prominent in John’s mind: 
the coming of the Kingdom an awful 
affair; Messiah's work largely a work of 
judgment. But he rose above ordinary 
Jewish ideas in this: they conceived of 
the judgment as concerning the heathen 
peoples ; he thought of it as concerning 
the godless in Israel—Ver. 8. ποιήσατα 


8—11. 


Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν “ABpadu- λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι δύναται 6 Θεὸς Ι 
ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ ᾿Αβραάμ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


83 


vide ver. 8 

and vii.17- 
ο ἑ 19; xiii. 26 

το. ἤδη δὲ 19 Ay 


καὶ] ἡ ἀξίνη πρὸς τὴν pilav τῶν δένδρων κεῖται: πᾶν οὖν δένδρον | Gen. i. rx 


μὴ " ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν 


» ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς wip βάλλεται. 


- Vil. 19; 
aneye,etc., 
ν. 30; ἐκ 


II. 


᾿Εγὼ μὲν βαπτίζω spas? ἐν ὕδατι εἰς petdvorav: 6 δὲ ὀπίσω µου τινος, 


3 / > , , 3 , Φ > "Τε 9 ᾳ 4 , 
ερχομενος ισχυροτερος μου εστιν, ου ουκ εἰιµι (κανος τα ὑποδήματα 


Rom. xi. 
24. 
t Mk. i. 7. 


Lk. iii. 16. 1 Cor. xv.g. 2 Cor. iii. 5 (=fit with inf.). 2 Cor. ii. 16 (πρός τι) 


1 και omitted in SBCDA and by most modern editors. 


Ἔβαπτιζω υμας inverted in YB 1, 33. 


οὖν, etc. ‘If, then, ye are in earnest 
about escape, produce fruit worthy of 
repentance; repentance means more 
than confession and being baptised.” 
That remark might be applied to all 
that came, but it contained an innuendo 
in reference to the Pharisees and 
Sadducees that they were insincere even 
now. Honest repentance carries amend- 
ment along with it. Amendment is not 
expected in this case because the repent- 
ance is disbelieved ἴπ.--καρπὸν, collec- 
tive, as in Gal. v. 22, fruit; the reading 
in T. R. is probably borrowed from 
Luke iii. 8. The singular is intrinsically 
the better word in addressing Pharisees 
who did good actions, but were not 
good. Yet John seems to have incul- 
cated retormation in detail (Luke iii. 
10-14). It was Jesus who proclaimed 
the inwardness of true morality. Fruit: 
the figure suggests that conduct is the 
outcome of essential character. Any one 
can do (ποιήσατε, vide Gen. i. 11) acts 
externally good, but only a good man 
can grow a crop oi right acts and habits. 

Vv. 9-10. Protest and warning. καὶ 
μὴ δόξητε.. . τ. Αβραάμ: the meaning is 
plain = do not imagine that having Abra- 
ham for father will do instead of repent- 
ance—that all children of Abraham are 
safe whatever betide. But the expression 
is peculiar: do not think to say within 
yourselves. One would have expected 
either: do not think within yourselves, 
or, do not say, etc. Wetstein renders: 
“ne animum inducite sic apud vosmet 
cogitare,” with whom Fritzsche sub- 
stantially agrees =do not presume to 
say, cf. Phil. iii. 4.—wartépa, father, in 
the emphatic position = we have as father, 
Abraham ; itis enough to be his children: 
the secret thought οι all unspiritual Jews, 
Abraham’s children only in the flesh. 
It is probable that these words (vv. 9, 
10) were spoken at a different time, and 
to a different audience, not merely to 
Pharisees and Sadducees, but to the 


people generally. Vv. 7-12 are a very 
condensed summary of α preaching 
ministry in which many weighty words 
were spoken (Luke iii. 18), these being 
selected as most representative and most 
relevant to the purpose of the evangelist. 
Vv. 7-8 contain a word for the leaders of 
the people; vv. 9-10 for the people at 
large; vv. 11-12 a word to inquirers 
about the Baptist’s own relation to the 
Messiah.—Ver. 1Ο. ἤδη δὲ ἡ ἀξίνη ... 
κεῖται: judgment is at hand. The axe 
has been placed (κεῖμαι = perfect passive 
of τίθηµι) at the root of the tree to lay it 
low as hopelessly barren. This is the 
doom of every non-productive fruit tree. — 
ἐκκόπτεται: the present tense, expressive 
not so much oi the usual practice 
(Fritzsche) as of the near inevitable 
event.—py ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν, in case 
it produce not (py conditional) good 
fruit, not merely fruit of some kind, 
degenerate, unpalatable.—eis mip βάλ- 
λεται: useless for any other purpose 
except to be firewood, as the wood of 
many fruit trees is. 

Vv. 11,12. Fohn defines his relation 
to the Messiah (Mark i. 7-8; Luke iii. 
15-17). This prophetic word would 
come late in the day when the Baptist’s 
fame was at its height, and men began 
to think it possible he might be the 
Christ (Luke iii. 15). His answer to 
inquiries plainly expressed or hinted 
was unhesitating. No, not the Christ, 
there is a Coming One. He will be here 
soon, I have my place, important in its 
own way, but quite secondary and sub- 
ordinate. John frankly accepts the posi- 
tion of herald and forerunner, assigned 
to him in ver. 3 by the citation of the 
prophetic oracle as descriptive of his 
ministry.—éy® μὲν, etc. ἐγὼ emphatic, 
but with the emphasis of subordination. 
My tunction is to baptise with water, 
symbolic of repentance.—6 δὲ o 4p. 
ἐρχόμενο. He who is just coming 
(present participle). How did John know 


δ4 


ο Lk. iii. 17. βαστάσαι: αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν Πνεύματι “Ayiw καὶ πυρί. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΠΠ. 


Lk. iii. 17. : 
w Ch. vi. 6; οὗ τὸ “ardov ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ " διακαθαριεῖ τὴν ἅλωνα αὐτοῦ, 
κ αἱ 1 καὶ συνάξει τὸν σῖτον αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν " ἀποθήκην,ὶ τὸ δὲ ἂχυρον 


x Mk. ix. 43. κατακαύσει πυρὶ * ἀσβέστῳ.' 


Lk. iii. 17. 


1 BL have avrov after αποθηκην (W.H. marg.). 


the Messiah was just coming? It was 
an inference from his judgment on the 
moral condition of the time. Messiah 
was needed; His work was ready for 
Him ; the nation was ripe for judgment. 
Judgment observe, for that was the 
function uppermost in his mind in con- 
nection with the Messianic advent. These 
two verses give us John's idea of the 
Christ, based not on personal knowledge, 
but on religious preconceptions. It 
differs widely from the reality. John 
can have known little of Jesus on the 
outer side, but he knew less of His 
spirit, We cannot understand his words 
unless we gr this fact. Note the 
attributes he ascribes to the Coming 
One. The main one is strength—toyv- 

fully unfolded in the sequel. 
Along with strength goes dignity—ot 
οὐκ εἰμὶ, etc. He is so great, august a 
personage, I am not fit to be His slave, 
carrying to and from Him, for and after 
use, His sandals (aslave's office in Judaea, 
Greece and Rome). An Oriental magnifi- 
cent exaggeration.—atrés ὑμᾶς βαπ- 
τίσει: returns to the Power of Messiah, as 
revealed in His work, which is described 
as a baptism, the better to bring out 
the contrast between Him and His 
humble forerunner.—ty πνεύµατι ἁγίφ καὶ 
πνρί. Notable here are the words, w 
πνεύματι ἁγίῳ. πα must be interpreted 
in harmony with John’s standpoint, not 


from what Jesus proved to be, or in the. 


light of St. Paul’s teaching on the 
Holy Spirit as the immanent source of 
sanctification. The whole baptism of 
the Messiah, as John conceives it, is 
a baptism of judgment. It has been 
generally supposed that the Holy Spirit 
here represents the grace of Christ, and 
the fire His judicial function; not a few 
holding that even the fire is gracious as 
purifying. I think that the grace of the 
Christ is not here at all. he πνεῦμα 
ἅγιον is a stormy wind of judgment ; 
holy, as sweeping away all that is light 
and worthless in the nation (which, after 
the O. T. manner, is conceived of as the 
subject of Messiah’s action, rather than 
the individual). The fire destroys what 
the wind leaves. John, with his wild 


L omits avrov after cirov. 


prophetic imagination, thinks of three 
elements as representing the functions 
of himself and of Messiah: water, wind, 
fire. He baptises with water, in the 
running stream of Jordan, to emblem 
the only way of escape, amendment. 
Messiah will baptise with wind and fire, 
sweeping away and consuming the im- 
penitent, leaving behind only the right- 
eous. Possibly John had in mind the 
prophetic word, “our iniquities, like the 
wind, have taken us away,” Is. lxiv. 6; 
or, as Furrer, who I find also takes 

vpa in the sense of “ wind,” suggests, 
the “wind of God,” spoken of in Is. xl. 
7: the strong east wind which blights 
the grass (Zeitschrift fur Missionskunde 
und Religionswissenschaft, 1890). Carr, 
Cambridge G. T., inclines to the same 
view, and refers to Is. xli. 16: “ Thou 
shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry 
them away". Vide also Is. iv. 4. 

Ver. 12. This ver. follows up νετ, 11, 
and explains the judicial action emblemed 
by wind and fire.—ot τὸ πτύον ἐ. τ. χ. 
αὐτοῦ. The construction is variously 
understood. Grotius takes it as a Hebra- 
ism for ἓν οὗ χειρὶ τὸ πτύον. Fritzsche 
takes ἓν τ. χειρὶ αὐτοῦ as epexegetical, 
and renders: ‘whose will be the fan, 
vis.,in His hand", Meyer and Weiss 
take οὗ as assigning a reason: “He 
(αὐτὸς of ver. 11) Wades fan is in hand 
and who is therefore able to perform the 
part assigned to Him”. Then follows an 
explanation of the modus operandi,— 


srg“ from διακαθαρίζω, late for 
classic αθαίρω. The idea is: He 


with His fan will throw up the wheat, 
mixed with the chaff, that the wind may 
blow the chaff away; He will then collect 
the straw, ἄχνρον (in Greek writers 
usually plural τὰ ἄχνρα, vide Grimm), 
and burn it with fire, and collect the 
wheat lying on the threshing floor and 
store it in His granary. So shall He 
thoroughly (δια intensifying) cleanse His 
floor. And the sweeping wind and the 
consuming fire are the emblems and 
measure of His power; stronger than 
mine, as the tempest and the devastating 
flames are mightier than the stream 
which I use as my element. --ὅλων, a place 


iz—15. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


85 


13. Τότε παραγίνεται 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ἐπὶ τὸν y here only; 


> , 7 a ? , A lol ry 3 3 ~ 
Ιορδάνην πρὸς τὸν Ιωάννην, τοῦ βαπτισθῆναι bw αὐτοῦ. 
Ιωάννης διεκώλυεν αὐτόν, λέγων, “"Eyo *xpelav ἔχω ὑπὸ σοῦ 59. 


Βαπτισθήναι, καὶ σὺ ἔρχῃ πρός pe;” 


εἶπε πρὸς αὐτόν,” “"Ades " ἄρτι' οὕτω γὰρ 


const.). a John xiii. 37. 
inf., 1 Cor. xi. 13. 


1 lwavvns omitted in NB sah. vers. 


in a field made firm by a roller, or ona 
rocky hill top exposed to the breeze.— 
ἀποθήκη means generally any kind of 
store, and specially a grain store, often 
underground. Bleek takes the epithet 
ἀσβέστῳ applied to the fire as signifying: 
inextinguishable till all the refuse be 
consumed, It is usually understood 
absolutely. 

Vv. 13-17. Fesus appears, His baptism 
and its accompaniments (Mark i. 9-11; 
Luke wii. 21-22). Ver. 13. Τότεπαρα. ὁ 
‘J... . Γαλιλαίας: then, after John had de- 
scribed the Messiah, appears on the scene 
(παραγίνεται, the historical presentagain, 
as in ver. I, with dramatic effect) from 
Galilee, where He has lived since child- 
hood, ¥esus, the real Christ; how widely 
different from the Christ conceived by 
the Baptist we know from the whole 
evangelic history. But shutting off know- 
ledge gathered from ‘other sources, we 
may obtain significant hints concerning 
the stranger from Galilee from the present 
narrative. He comes ἐπὶ τὸν |. πρὸς τὸν 
Ἰωαγ., τοῦ βαπτισθῆναι ὑπ) αὐτοῦ. These 
words at once suggest a contrast between 
Jesus and the Pharisees and Sadducees. 
They came to the baptism as a phenome- 
non to be critically observed. Jesus 
comes fo the Jordan (emt), towards the 
Baptist (πρὸς) to enter into personal 
friendly relations with him (vide John i. 
I, πρὸς τὸν θεόν), in order to be baptised 
by him (genitive of the infinitive express- 
ing purpose). Jesus comes thoroughly 
in sympathy with John’s movement, 
sharing his passion for righteousness, 
fully appreciating the symbolic signifi- 
cance of his baptism, and not only 
willing, but eager to be baptised; the 
Jordan in His mind from the day He 
leaves home. A very different person 
this from the leaders of Israel, Pharisaic 
or Sadducaic. But the sequel suggests 
acontrast also between Him and John 
himself. 


1 Cor. xiii. 12 (now, opp. to fut. time). 


for force 


14. ὁ δὲ of tense 
of. Lk. i. 
Acts 
2 vii. 26. 
15. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς z Ch. xiv. 
eer aye m6 16. John 
πρεπον εστιν ημιν xiii. Io 
(same 


b Heb. ii. 1ο. With acc. and 


(W.H. omit.) 


2 For προς αυτον B and it. vg. cop. versions have avr, 
this reading accords best with the usage of the Evangelist. 


Though weakly attested 
W.H. adopt it. 


Vv. 14-15. Fohn refuses. It is in- 
structive to compare the three synoptical 
evangelists in their respective narratives 
of the baptism of Jesus. Mark (i. g) 
simply states the fact. Matthew reports 
perplexities created in the mind of John 
by the desire of Jesus to be baptised, 
and presumably in the minds of Chris- 
tians for whom he wrote. Luke (iii. 
21) passes lightly over the event in 
a participial clause, as if conscious that 
he was on delicate ground. The three 
narratives exhibit successive phases of 
opinion on the subject, a fact not with- 
out bearing on the dates and relations of 
the three Gospels. Matthew represents 
the intermediate phase. His account 
is intrinsically credible.— Ver. 14. 
διεκώλυεν: imperfect, pointing to a 
persistent (note the διὰ) but unsuccess- 
ful attempt to prevent. His reason was 
a feeling that if either was to be baptised 
the relation ought to be inverted. To 
understand this feeling it is not necessary 
to import a fully developed Messianic 
theology into it, imputing to the Baptist 
all that we believe concerning Jesus as 
the Christ and the sinless one. It is 
enough to suppose that the visitor from 
Galilee had made a profound moral im- 
pression on him by His aspect and con- 
versation, and awakened thoughts, 
hopes, incipient convictions as to who 
He might be. Nor ought we to take two 
seriously the Baptist’s statement: ‘'I 
have need to be baptised of Thee”. 
Hitherto he had had no thought of being 
baptised himself. He was the baptiser, 
not one feeling need to be baptised ; the 
censor of sinners, not the sympathetic 
fellow-sinner. And just here lies the 
contrast between John and Jesus, and 
between the Christ of John’s imagina- 
tion and the Christ of reality. John 
was severe; Jesus was sympathetic. 
John was the baptiser of sinners; Jesus 
wished to be baptised, as if a sinner 


δ6 


c Lk. iii. a1. πληρῶσαι πᾶσαν δικαιοσύνην.᾽ 
Barriabeis! ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀνέβη εὐθὺς” ἀπὸ τοῦ Gatos: καὶ ἰδού, 
* ἄνεωχθησαν 3 αὐτῷ ἕ οἱ οὐρανοί, καὶ εἶδε τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ κατα- 


John 1.52. 
Acts x. 11 
(with δια, 
Acts vii. 
56). 


1 βαπτισθεις δε in SBC vg. sah. cop. 

3 For aveBy ευθυς NB have ενθνς ανέβη, 
Σ B has ηνεωχθησαν. 

* NB omit αντω. 


Himself, a brother of the sinful. In the 
light of this contrast we are to under- 
stand the baptism of Jesus. Many ex- 
planations of it have been given (for 
these, vide Meyer), mostly theological. 
One of the most feasible is that of Weiss 
(Matt.-Evan.), that in accordance with 
the symbolic significance of the rite as 
denoting death to an old life and rising 
to a new, Jesus came to be baptised in 
the sense of dying to the old natural 
relations to parents, neighbours, and 
earthly calling, and devoting Himself 
henceforth to His public Messianic voca- 
tion. The true solution is to be found 
in the ethical sphere, in the sympathetic 
spirit of Jesus which made Him main- 
tain an attitude of solidarity with the 
sinful rather than assume the position of 
critic and judge. It was impossible for 
such an one, on the ground of being the 
Messiah, or even on the ground of sin- 
lessness, to treat John’s baptism as a 
thing with which He had no concern. 
Love, not a sense of dignity or of moral 
faultlessness, must guide His action. 
Can we conceive sinlessness being so 
conscious of itself, and adopting as its 
policy aloofness from sinners? Christ's 
baptism might create misunderstanding, 
just as His associating with publicans 
and sinners did. He was content to be 
misunderstood. } 

Ver. 15. The reasoning with which 
Jesus replies to John’s scruples is char- 
acteristic. His answer is gentle, re- 
spectful, dignified, simple, yet deep.— 
"Ades Gpri—deferential, half-yielding, 
yet strong in its very gentleness. Does 
ἄρτι imply a tacit acceptance of the 
high position assigned to Him by John 
(Weiss-Meyer)? We may read that 
into it, but I doubt if the suggestion 
does justice to the feeling of Jesus.— 
οὕτω yap πρέπον: a mild word when a 

stronger might have been used, because 
it refers to John as well as Jesus: fitting, 
becoming, congruous; vide Heb. ii. το, 
where the same word is used in reference 
to the relation of God to Christ's suffer- 
ings. ‘It became Him.”—waeay δικαι- 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


11. 


Τότε ἀφίησιν αὐτόν. 16. Καὶ 


: this means more than meets 
the ear, more than could be explained to 
a man like John. The Baptist had a 
passion for righteousness, yet his concep- 
tion of righteousness was narrow, severe, 
legal. Their ideas of righteousness sepa- 
rated the two men by a wide gulf which 
is covered over by this general, almost 
evasive, phrase: all righteousness or 
every form of it. The ial form 
meant is not the mere compliance with 
the ordinance of baptism as administered 
by an accredited servant of God, but 
something far deeper, which the new era 
will unfold. John did not understand 
that love is the fulfilling of the law. But 
he saw that under the mild words of 
Jesus a earnest purpose was hid. 
So at length he yielded—rére ἀφίησιν 
αὐτόν. 

Vv. 16,17. The preternatural accom- 
paniments. These have been variously 
viewed as meant for the people, for the 
Baptist, and for Jesus. In my judgment 
they concern Jesus principally and in the 
first place, and are so viewed by the 
evangelist. And as we are now making 
the acquaintance of Jesus for the first 
time, and desiring to know the spirit, 
manner, and vocation of Him whose 
mysterious birth has occupied our 
attention, we may confine our comments 
to this aspect. Applying the peers 
that to all objective supernatural experi- 
ences there are subjective psychological 
experiences corresponding, we can learn 
from the dove-like vision and the voice 
from heaven the thoughts which had 
been passing through the mind of Jesus 
at this critical period. These hts 
it most concerns us to know; yet it is 
just these thoughts that both believers 
and naturalistic unbelievers are in danger 
of overlooking ; the one through regard- 
ing the objective occurrences as alone 
important, the other because, denying 
the objective element in the experience, 
they rush to the conclusion that there 
was no experience at all. Whereas the 
truth is that, whatever is to be said as to 
the objective element, the subjective at 


16—17. 


~ e x4 , Lae a / ae μμ; 
βαῖνον ὡσεὶ * περιστεράν, καὶ  ἐρχόμενον ἐπ αὐτόν. 
φωνὶὴ ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν λέγουσα, “'Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ vids µου ὁ ἀγαπητός, 


ἐν ᾧ "εὐδόκησα.” 2 


1 SSB omit και. 


ΕΥΑΙ FEAION 


87 


17. καὶ ἰδού, ἆ Ch. x. 16; 
xxi. 14. 
Lk. ii. 24. 

e Ch. xii. 18; 
μας 05 

Cor. x. 5- 

Heb. x. 38 (all with ev and dat.) 


2 SSCL have ηνδοκ., which Tischendorf follows. W.H. as in Τ. R. 


all events is real: the thoughts reflected 
and symbolised in the vision and the 
voice. 

Ver. 16. εὐθὺς may be connected 
with βαπτισθεὶς, with ἀνέβη, or with 
ἠνεῴχθησαν in the following clause by a 
hyperbaton (Grotius). It is commonly 
and correctly taken along with ἀνέβη. 
But why say straightway ascended? 
Euthy. gives an answer which may be 
quoted for its quaintness: ‘‘ They say 
that John had the people under water up 
to the neck till they had confessed their 
sins, and that Jesus having none to con- 
fess tarried not in the river”. Fritzsche 
laughs at the good monk, but Schanz 
substantially adopts his view. There 
might be worse explanations.—xai ἰδοὺ 
ἠνεῴχθησαν, etc. When Jesus ascended 
out of the water the heavens openedand He 
(Jesus) saw the spirit of God descending 
as adove coming upon Him. According 


to many interpreters, including many of . 


the Fathers, the occurrence was of the 
nature of a vision, the appearance of a 
dove coming out of the heavens. 6 
εὐαγγελιστὴς ovx εἶπεν ὅτι ἐν φύσει 
περιστερᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς--- 
Chrys. Dove-like: what was the point 
ofcomparison? Swift movement, accord- 
ing to some ; soft gentle movement as it 
sinks down on its place of rest, according 
to others. The Fathers insisted on the 
qualities of the dove. Euthy. sums up 
these thus: φιλάνθρωπον γάρ ἐστι καὶ 
ἀνεξίκακον' ἀποστερούμενον γὰρ τῶν 
νεοσσῶν ὑπομένει, καὶ οὐδὲν ἧττον τοὺς 
ἀποστεροῦντας προσίεται. Καὶ καθα- 
ρώτατόν ἐστι, καὶ τῇ εὐωδίᾳ χαίρει. 
Whether the dove possesses all these 
qualities—philanthropy, patient endur- 
ance of wrong, letting approach it those 
who have robbed it of its young, purity, 
delight in sweet smells—I know not; 
but I appreciate the insight into the 
spirit of Christ which specifying such 
particulars in the emblematic significance 
of the dove implies. What is the O. T. 
basis of the symbol? Probably Gen. 
vili.9, 10. Grotius hints at this without 
altogether adopting the view. Thus we 
obtain a contrast between John’s con- 
ception of the spirit and that of Jesus as 


reflected in the vision. For John the 
emblem of the spirit was the storm) 
wind of judgment; for Jesus the dove 
with the olive leaf after the judgment b- 
water was past. 

Ver. 17. οὗτός ἐστιν: ‘this is,”’ as if 
addressed to the Baptist; in Mk.i. 9, σὺ 
el, as if addressed to Jesus.—év ᾧ εὖδοκ.: 


a Hebraism, } 2 yor .—ev8dxqoa,a0r- 


ist, either to express habitual satisfac- 
tion, after the manner of the Gnomic 
Aorist (vide Hermann’s Viger, p. 169), or 
to denote the inner event=my good 
pleasure decided itself once for all for 
Him. So &chanz; cf. Winer, § 40, 5, on 
the use of the aorist. εὐδοκεῖν, according 
to Sturz, De Dialecto Macedonica et Alex- 
andrina, is not Attic but Hellenistic. The 
voice recalls and in some measure echoes 
Is. xlii. 1, ‘‘ Behold My servant, I uphold 
Him; My chosen one, My soul delights 
in Him. I have put My spirit upon Him.” 
The title “Son” recalls Ps. ii. 7. 
Taking the vision, the voice, and the 
baptism together as interpreting the 
consciousness of Jesus before and at this 
time, the following inferences are sug- 
gested. (1) The mind of Jesus had been 
exercised in thought upon the Messianic 
vocation in relation to His own future. 
(2) The chief Messianic charism appeared 
to Him to be sympathy, love. (3) His 
religious attitude towards God was that 
of a Son towards a Father. (4) It was 
through the sense of sonship and the 
intense love to men that was in His 
heart that He discovered His Messianic 
vocation. (5) Prophetic texts gave direc- 
tion to and supplied means of expression 
for His religious meditations. His mind, 
like that of John, was full of prophetic 
utterances, but a different class of oracles 
had attractions for Him. The spirit of 
John revelled in images of awe and ter- 
ror. The gentler spirit of Jesus delighted 
in words depicting the ideal servant of 
God as clothed with meekness, patience, 
wisdom, and love. 

CHAPTER IV. THE TEMPTATION, AND 
THE BEGINNING OF THE GALILEAN 
ΜΙΝΙΦΤΕΥ. It is in every way credible 
that the baptism of Jesus with its con- 


88 


a Lk. ii. 22; 
iv. 5. Acts | 
ix. 39. C/. 
Rom. x. 7. 

Heb. xiii. 20 (to lead up from the dead). 

sense). c Ch. vi. 10-.5; ix. 14. Acts xiii. 2 


| B omits 0; bracketed in W.H. 


nected incidents should be followed by a 
season Οἱ moral trial, or, to express it 
more generally, by a period of retirement 
for earnest thought on the future career 
so solemnly inaugurated. Retirement 
for prayer and meditation was a habit 
with Jesus, and it was never more likely 
to be put in practice than now. He had 
left home under a poweriul impulse with 
the Jordan and baptism in view. | The 
baptism was a decisive act. Whatever 
more it might mean, it meant farewell to 
the past life of obscurity and consecration 
to a new, high, unique vocation. It re- 
mained now to realise by reflection what 
this calling, to which He had been set 
apart by John and by heavenly omens, 
involved in idea, execution, and experi- 
ence. It was a large, deep, difficult sub- 
ject of study. Under powerful spiritual 
constraints Jesus had taken a great leap 
in the dark, if one may dare to say so. 
What wonder if, in the season of reflec- 
tion, temptations arose to doubt, shrink- 
ing, regret, strong inclination to look 
back and return to Nazareth ? 

In this experience Jesus was alone 
inwardly as well as outwardly. No 
clear, adequate account could be given of 
it. It could only be faintly shadowed 
forth in symbol or in parable. One can 
understand how in one Gospel (Mk.) no 
attempt is made to describe the Tempta- 
tion, but the fact is simply stated. And 
it is much more important to grasp the 
fact as a great reality in Christ's inner 
experience than to maintain anxiously 
the literal truth of the representation in 
Matt. and Luke. In the fight of faith 
and unbelief over the supernatural ele- 
ment in the story all sense of the inward 
psychological reality may be lost, and 
nothing remain but an external, miracu- 
lous, theatrical transaction which utterly 
fails to impress the lesson that Jesus 
was veritably tempted as we are, severely 
and for a length of time, before the open- 
ing of His public career, in a representa- 
tive manner anticipating the experiences 
of later date. All attempts to dispose 
summarily of the whole matter by refer- 
ence to similar temptation legends in the 
case of other religious initiators like 
Buddha are to be deprecated. Nor 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΤΗ, 


IV. 1. Τότε 6) Ιησοῦς * ἀνήχθη cis τὴν ἔρημον ὁπὸ τοῦ Πνεύματος, 
Ἀπειρασθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. 
ρα να 1 Cor. vii. 5. x Thess. iii. 5 (same 


3. καὶ "νηστεύσας ἡμέρας τεσσαρά- 


should one readily take up with the 
theory that the detailed account of the 
Temptation in Matt. and Luke is simply 
a composition suggested by O. T. 
parallels or by reflection on the critical 
points in Christ’s subsequent να 
(So Holtzmann in H.C.) We sho 
rather regard it as having its ultimate 
source in an attempt by Jesus to con 

to His disciples some faint idea of what 
He had gone through. 

Vv. 1-11. The Temptation (Mk. i. 12, 
13; Luke iv. 1-13). Ver. 1. Τότε, then, 
implying close connection with the events 
recorded in last chapter, es y the de- 
scent of the Βρίτίτ,---ἀνήχθη, was led up, 
into the higher, more solitary region of the 
wilderness, the haunt of wild beasts (Mk. 
i, 13) rather than of men.—trd τοῦ 
πνεύματος. The divine Spirit has to do 
with our darker experiences as well as 
with our bright, joyous ones. He is with 
the sons of Goa in their conflicts with 
doubt not less than in their moments 
of noble impulse and heroic resolve. 
The same Spirit who brought Jesus 
from Nazareth to the Jordan afterward 
led Him to the scene of trial. The 
theory of desertion hinted at by Calvin 
and adopted by Olshausen is based on a 
superficial view of religious experience. 
God's Spirit is never more aman 


than in his spiritual stru Jesus 
was mightily impelled by Spirit at 
this time (cf. Mk.’s βάλει). And as 
the exerted was not physical but 


moral, the fact points to intense mental 


experience of cheno days, but noting a 
specially important phase: to be samy 20 
sn at St ω: form for κα 

πειράω, in classic Greek, rimary mean 4 
to attempt, to try to do a thing (vide for 
this use Acts ix, 26, xvi. 7, xxiv. 6); then 
in an ethical sense common in O. T. 
and N. T., to try or tempt either with 
good or with bad intent, associated in 
some texts (ε.σ., 2 Cor. xiii. 5) with δοκι- 
water, kindred i in meaning. Note the 
omission of τοῦ before infinitive.—iwo 

τ. διαβόλον: in later Jewish theology 
the devil is the agent in all temptation 
with evil design. In the earlier period 


15 


κοντα 1 καὶ νύκτας τεσσάρακοντα.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


€. 
μμ. ἐπείνασε. 


89 


3. καὶ πρ d 6 πειρ. as 
a subst. in 


θὼν αὐτῷ δ *6 πειράζων εἶπεν," “Ei υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, εἰπὲ ἵνα οἱ x Thess. 


λίθοι οὗτοι ἄρτοι γένωνται. 


‘Ot ἐπ᾽ ἄρτω µόνω Lycerar* ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ 


”» 
κπορευοµένῳ διὰ στόματος Θεοῦ. 


ἐ 
5 διάβολος eis τὴν 5ἁγίαν πόλιν, καὶ ἵστησιν 


1 τεσσερ. both places in NBCL. 


2 reroap. before νυκτας in ND (Tisch.). 


4. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε, “ aloes ep e Cy. Bite ix. 


ὶ ὅ παντὶ "ῥήματις ch, XVii. 1. 


π. again 
5. Τότε Γπαραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν cor η 
6 53. Rev. 


αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ XL 2. 


3898 omit this αυτω and ΦΜΒΓ insert one after ειπεν (D with καν pete ειπεν). 


«ΝΒΟΡ, etc., insert ο before ανθρωπος. 


5 CD have εν; επι in Sept. and retained by Tisch. and W.H. 


5 εστησεν in NBCDZ 1, 33, 209 (Tisch., 


to παραλαμβανει. 


the line of separation between the divine 
and the diabolic was not so carefully de- 
fined. In2 Sam. xxiv. 11 God tempts 
David to number the people; in 1 Chron. 
xxi. 1 it is Satan.—ver. 2. καὶ νησ- 
τεύσας. The fasting was spontaneous, 
not ascetic, due to mental preoccupation. 
In such a place there was no food to be 
had, but Jesus did not desire it. The 
aorist implies that a period of fasting pre- 
ceded the sense of hunger. The period 
of forty days and nights may be a round 
number.—éretvacev, He at last felt 
hunger. This verb like διψάω contracts 
in a rather than η in later Greek. Both 
take an accusative in Matt. v. 6. 

Vv. 3-4. First temptation, through 
hunger. Ver.3. προσελθὼν, another of 
the evangelist’s favourite words, implies 
that the tempter is conceived by the 
narrator as approaching outwardly in 
visible form.—eizé ἵνα: literally ‘‘ speak 
in order that”. Some grammarians see 
in this use of tva with the subjunctive 
a progress in the later Macedonian 
Greek onwards towards modern Greek, 
in which va with subjunctive entirely 
supersedes the infinitive. Buttmann 
(Gram. of the .N. T.) says that the chief 
deviation in the N. T. from classic 
usage is that tva appears not only after 
complete predicates, as a statement of 
design, but after incomplete predicates, 
supplying their necessary complements 
(cf. Mk. vi. 25, ix. 30). εἰπὲ here may 
be classed among verbs of commanding 
which take ἵνα after them.—ot λίθοι 
οὗτοι, these stones lying about, hinting 
at the desert character of the scene.— 
ἄρτοι γέν., that the rude pieces of stone 
may be turned miraculously into loaves. 
Weiss (Meyer) disputes the usual view 
that the temptation of Jesus lay in the 


W.H.). The reading in T. R. conforms 


suggestion to use His miraculous power 
in His own behoof. He had no such 
power, and if He had, why should He 
not use it for His own benefit as well as 
other men’s? He could only call into 
play by faith the power of God, and the 
temptation lay in the suggestion that 
His Messianic vocation was doubtful it 
God did not come to His help at this 
time. This seems a refinement. Hunger 
represents human wants, απᾶ the 
question was: whether Sonship was to 
mean exemption from these, or loyal 
acceptance of them as part of Mes- 
siah’s experience. At bottom the issue 
raised was selfishness or self-sacrifice. 
Selfishness would have been shown 
either in the use of personal power or in 
the wish that God would use it.—Ver. 4. 
ὁ δὲ ἀποκ. εἶπεν: Christ’s reply in this 
case as in the others is taken from 
Deuteronomy (viii. 3, Sept.), which 
seems to have been one of His favourite 
books. Itshumane spirit, with laws even 
for protecting the animals, would com- 
mend it to His mind. The word quoted 
means, man is to live a life of faith in 
and dependence on God. Bread is a 
mere detail in that life, not necessary 
though usually given, and sure to be 
supplied somehow, as long as it is desir- 
able. Ziv ἐπὶ is unusual, but good 
Greek (De Wette). 

Vv. 5-7. Second temptation. TOTE 
παραλαμ. . , . τοῦ ἱεροῦ: τότε has the 
force of “«πεχε,’ and implies a closer 
order of sequence than Luke’s καὶ (iv. 5). 
παραλαμβάνει, historical present with 
dramatic effect ; seizes hold of Him and 
carries Him {ο.--τὴην ἁγίαν πόλιν: 
Jerusalem so named as if with affection 
(vide v. 35 and especially xxvii. 53, 
where the designation  recurs).-—To 


--- - 


p here απάἁ ® 
in Lk. iv 


KATA MATOAION 


- 


IV. 


πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ, 6. καὶ λέγει! αὐτω, “Ei υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, 


"βάλε σεαυτὸν κάτω: γέγραπται γὰρ, "Ὅτι τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ 


i Ch. ανή. ο.’ ἐντελεῖται περὶ σοῦ, καὶ ἐπὶ χειρῶν ἀροῦσί σε, µήποτε προσκόψῃς. 


Acts i. 


Heb αἱ 3. πρὸς λίθον τὸν πόδα 


j Lk. κ.α». Ὑέγραπται, “Οὐκ ) ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου. 


mare 


Ἰ. “Eon αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Πάλιν 
*" 8. Πάλιν 


"ο παραλαμβάνει αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς ὄρος ὑψηλὸν λίαν, καὶ δείκνυσιν 


κ Ch. vi. 
Lk. sil wy. 


For λεγα Z has awe. 


πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ: some part of the 
temple bearing the name of “the 
winglet,’’ and overhanging a precipice. 
Commentators busy themselves discuss- 
ing what precisely and where it was.— 
Ver. 6. βάλε ceavrdy κάτω: This 
suggestion strongly makes for the 
symbolic or parabolic nature of the 
whole representation. The mad pro- 
posal could hardly be a temptation to 
such an one as Jesus, or indeed to any 
man in his senses. The transit through 
the air from the desert to the winglet, 
like that of Ezekiel, carried by a lock of 
his hair from Babylon to Jerusalem, 
must have been “in the visions of God” 
(Ezek. viii. 3), and the suggestion to 
cast Himself down a parabolic hint at a 
class of temptations, as the excuses in 
the parable of the Supper (Lk. xiv. 16) 
simply represent the category of pre- 
occupation. What is the class repre- 
sented? Not temptations through 
vanity or presumption, but rather to 
reckless escape from desperate situa- 
tions. The second temptation, like the 
first, belongs to the category of need. 
The Satanic suggestion is that there can 
be no sonship where there are such 
inextricable situations, in proof of which 
the Psalter is quoted (Ps. xci. 11, 12).— 
γέγραπται, it stands written, not precisely 
as Satan quotes it, the clause τοῦ 
διαφνλάξαι σε ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ὁδοῖς σου 
being omitted. On this account many 
commentators charge Satan with 
mutilating and falsifying Scripture.— 
Ver 7. Jesus replies by another quota- 
tion from Deut. (vi. 16).---πάλιν, on the 
other hand, not contradicting but 
qualifying: ‘ Scriptura per scripturam 
interpretanda et concilianda,” Bengel. 
The reference is to the incident at 
Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 1-7), where the 
people virtually charged God with bring- 
ing them out of Egypt to perish with 
thirst, the scene of this petulant outburst 
receiving the commemorative name of 
Massah and Meribah because they 


αὐτῷ πάσας τὰς βασιλείας τοῦ κόσμου καὶ τὴν "δόξαν αὐτῶν, 9. καὶ 


tempted Jehovah, saying: “Is Jehovah 
among us or not?” An analogous 
situation in the life of Jesus may be 
found in Gethsemane, where He did not 
complain or tempt, but uttered the sub- 
missive, “If it be possible”. The leap 
down at that crisis would have consisted 
in seeking escape from the cross at the 
cost of duty. The physical fall from the 

innacle is an emblem of a moral fall. 

efore sapriany from this temptation I 
note that the hypothesis that it was an 
appeal to vanity presupposes a crowd at 
the foot to witness the performance, of 
which there is no mention. 

Vv. 8-10. Third temptation. als 
ὄρος ὑψηλὸν λίαν: a mountain high 
enough for the purpose. There is no 
such mountain in the world, not even in 
the highest ranges, “ not to be sought 
for in terrestrial geography,” says De 
Wette. The vision of all the kingdoms 
and their glory was not physical.—rot 
κόσμον. Whatworld? Palestine merely, 
or all the world, Palestine ? 
or all the world, Palestine included? 
All these alternatives have been sup- 
ported. The last is the most likely. 
The second harmonises with the ideas 
of contemporary Jews, who regarded 
the heathen world as distinct from the 
Holy Land, as belonging to the devil. 
The tempter points in the direction of a 
universal Messianic empire, and claims 
power to give effect to the dazzling 
prospect.—Ver. 9. ἐὰν πεσὼν προσ- 
κυνήσῃς pot. This is the condition, 
homage to Satan as the superior. A 
naive suggestion, but pointing toa subtle 
form of temptation, to which all am- 
bitious, selt-seeking men succumb, that 
of gaining power Ey compromise with 
evil. The danger is greatest when the 
end is good. ‘ The end sanctifies the 
means.” Nowhere is homage to Satan 
more common than in connection with 
sacred causes, the interests of truth, 
righteousness, and God. Nothing tests. 
purity οἱ motive so thoroughly as tempta- 


6—13. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ΟΙ 


λέγει! αὐτῷ, “"Ταῦτα πάντα σοι” δώσω, ἐὰν πεσὼν προσκυνήσῃς | very freq. 
1p ; 


ve. a ο a“ ° 
οι. 10. Τότελέγει αὐτῷ 6 Ιησοῦς, “!"Yraye,? Σατανᾶ : γέγραπται alwaysin- 
: ο ο, , γέγρ 


trans. 


, ‘ , x ΄ na , ‘ | a} , 2a , . 
yap, ΄ Κύριον τον Θεόν σου ~ προσκυνῆσεις, και αὔτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύ- Mm with acc. 


>»? 
σεις. 


προσῆλθον καὶ ᾿ διηκόνουν αὐτῷ. 


Il. Τότε ἀφίησιν αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος: καὶ ἰδού, ἄγγελοι in Lk. iv. 
η » ayy 


here and 
8, and in 
Rev 


12. ΑΚΟΥΣΑΣ δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 4 ὅτι Ἰωάννης ® παρεδόθη, ἀνεχώρησεν ii. 37; iv.8. 


eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν - 


, 3 6 ᾿ r 
κατωκησεν εἰς Καπερναοὺμ” την 


13. καὶ ἃκαταλιπὼν τὴν Ναζαρέτ, ἐλθὼν ρ Ch. 


ο Mk. i. 13. 

x. 10. 
, ο. ϱρ Mk. i. 14. 

παραθαλασσίαν, ἐν ὁρίοις  Ηεὺ, xi. 


27. 
r here only in N. T., in Sept. (¢.g., 2 Chron. viii. 17) 


1NBCDZ have ειπεν (most mod. edd.). 


2 παντα σοι tr. S$BCZ with several cursives. 
5 Some MSS. (DLZ) insert οπισω pov, obviously imported trom xvi. 23. 
4ρ |. omit SBCDZ; probably the insertion is due to ver. 12 commencing a lesson 


in Lectionaries. 


5 This name is spelt kadap. in the older MSS. (§§BDZ), which is adopted through- 


out by W.H. 


tions of this class. Christ was proof 
against them. The prince of the world 
found nothing of this sort in Him (John 
xiv. 30). In practice this homage, if 
Jesus had been willing to render it, 
would have taken the form of conciliating 
the Pharisees and Sadducees, and pander- 
ing to the prejudices of the people. He 
took His own path, and became a Christ, 
neither after the type imagined by the 
Baptist, nor according to the liking of 
the Jews and their leaders. So He 
gained universal empire, but at a great 
cost.—Ver. 10. ὕπαγε σατανᾶ. Jesus 
passionately repels the Satanic sug- 
gestion. The ὕπαγε σ. is true to His 
character. The suggestions of worldly 
wisdom always roused in Him passionate 
aversion. The ὀπίσω pov of some MSS. 
does not suit this place; it is imported 
from Matt. xvi. 23, where it does suit, 
the agent of Satan in a temptation of 
the same sort being a disciple. Christ’s 
final word to the tempter is an absolute, 
peremptory -Begone. Yet He _ con- 
descends to support His authoritative 
negative by a Scripture text, again from 
Deut. (vi. 13), slightly adapted, 
προσκυνήσεις being substituted for 
φοβηθήσῃ (the µόνῳ in second clause is 
omitted in Swete’s Sept.). It takes the 
accusative here instead of dative, as in 
ver. 9, because it denotes worship proper 
(Weiss-Meyer). The quotation states a 
principle in theory acknowledged by all, 
but how hard to work it out faithfully in 
life ! 

Ver.11. τότε ἀφίησιν: then, when 
the peremptory ὕπαγε had been spoken. 


Nothing was to be made of one who 
would not do evil that good might come. 
--καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄγγελοι. The angels were 
ministering to Him, with food, pre- 
sumably, in the view of the evangelist. 
It might be taken in a wider sense, as 
signifying that angels ministered con- 
stantly to one who had decidedly chosen 
the path of obedience in preference {ο 
that of self-pleasing. i 

Vv. 12-25. Beginnings of the Galilean 
ministry (Mk. i. 14, 15; Lk. iv. 14, 15). 
In a few rapid strokes the evangelist 
describes the opening of the Messianic 
work of Jesus in Galilee. He has in 
view the great Sermon on the Mount, 
and the group of wonderful deeds he 
means thereafter to report, and he gives 
first a summary description of Christ’s 
varied activities by way of introduction. 

Vv. 12, 13. ἀκούσας δὲ... Γαλιλαίαν: 
note ΟΕ time. Jesus returned to Galilee 
on hearing that John was delivered up, 
t.¢., in the providence of God, into the 
hands of his enemies. Further particu- 
lars as to this are given in chapter xiv. 
Christ’s ministry in Galilee began when 
the Baptist’s came to an end; how long 
after the baptism and temptation not in- 
dicated. Weiss (Meyer) thinks that in 
the view of the evangelist it was im- 
mediately after, and that the reference 
to John’s imprisonment is meant simply 
to explain the choice of Galilee as the 
sphere of labour.—Ver. 13. Ναζαρέτ. 
Jesus naturally went to Nazareth first, but 
He did not tarry there.—Katwxyoev eis 
Καπερναοὺμ, He went to settle (as in 
ii. 23) in Capernaum. This migration to 


92 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


IVs 


ree Ζαβουλὼν καὶ Νεφθαλείµ, 14. ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ “Hoatou 
- κ τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, 15. “TH Ζαβουλὼν καὶ yy Νεφθαλείμ, 


in- 
trans.). 
ν Ch. xi. 7, 


- *68dv θαλάσσης πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, Γαλιλαία τῶν ἐθνῶν, 16. ὁ 
λαὸς ὁ καθήµενος ἐν σκότει ] 


εἶδε φῶς  µέγα, καὶ τοῖς καθηµένοις 


20; xii. 1. ἐν χώρᾳ καὶ 'σκιᾷ θανάτου, pas " ἀνέτειλεν αὐτοῖς.' 


Mk. iv. 1. 


word vide 
Grimm's 


17. ᾽Απὸ τότε " ἤρξατο ὁ Ιησοῦς κηρύσσειν καὶ λέγειν, “ Metavoeite- 
ἤγγικε γὰρ» ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. 
* παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν τῆς Γαλιλαίας εἶδε δύο ἀδελφούς, Σίµωνα τὸν 


18. Περιπατῶν δὲ ὁ Ιησοῦς! 


w again xl λεγόμενον Πέτρον, καὶ “AvSpéay τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, βάλλοντας 
I ν 


αι. Cf. Acts x. 6. 


1 gxoria, BD. 


® dws before ade in ΝΒΟΣ (W.H.). 


* The Syr. Sin. and Cur. omit µετανοειτε before ηγγικε. 
{ο |. found in ELA; omit ΜΒΟΏ (beginning of a new lesson). 


Capernaum is not formally noted in the 
other Gospels, but Capernaum appears 
in all the synoptists as the main centre 
of Christ's Galilean ministry. — τὴν 
παραθαλασσίαν, etc. : sufficiently defined 
by these words, “on the sea (of 
Galilee), on the confines of Zebulun and 
Naphthali”. Well known then, now 
of doubtful situation, being no longer in 
existence. Tel Haim and Khan Minyeh 
eompete for the honour of the site. 
The evangelist describes the position not 
to satisfy the curiosity of geographers, 
but to pave the way for another prophetic 
reference. 

Vv. 14-16. Jesus chose Capernaum 
as best suited for His work. There He 
was in the heart of the world, in a busy 
town, and near others, on the shore of a 
sea that was full of fish, and on a great 
international highway. But the evan- 
gelist finds in the choice a fulfilment of 
prophecy—tva πληρωθῃ. The oracle is 
reproduced from Is. viii. 22, ix. 1, freely 
following the original with glances at 
the Sept. The style is very laconic: land 
of Zebulun and land of Naphthali, way of 
the sea (ὁδὸν absolute accusative for 


Ty = versus, vide Winer, § 23), 


7.7 
Galilee of the Gentiles, a place where 
races mix, a border population. The 
clause preceding, “ beyond Jordan,” is 
not omitted, because it is viewed as a 
reference to Peraea, also a scene of 
Christ’s ministry—Ver. 16. ἐν σκοτίφᾳ: 
the darkness referred to, in the view of 
the evangelist, is possibly that caused 
by the imprisonment of the Baptist 
(Fritzsche). The consolation comes in 
the form of a greater light, φῶς péya, 


eat, even the greatest. The thought 
is emphasised by repetition and by 
enhanced description of the benighted 
situation of those on whom the light 
arises: ‘“‘in the very home and shadow 
of death”; highly graphic and poetic, 
not applicable, however, to the land of 
Galilee more than to other parts of the 
land ; descriptive of misery rather than 
of sin. 

Ver. 17. ἀπὸ τότε . . . κηρύσσειν. 
After settling in Capernaum Jesus began 
to preach, The phrase ἀπὸ τότε offends 
in two ways, first as redundant, being 
implied in ἤρξατο (De Wette); next as 
not classic, being one of the degeneracies 
ofthe κοινή. Phrynichus forbids ἐκ rére, 
and instructs to say rather ἐξ ἐκείνον 
(Lobeck’s ed., p. 45).--κηρύσσειν, the 
same word as in describing the ministry 
of the Baptist (iii. 1). And the message 
is the same—Meravoeire, etc. “' Repent, 
for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” 
The same in word but not in thought, as 
will appear soon. It may seem as if the 


ev ist meant to represent Jesus as 
simply taking up and continuing the 
arrested ministry of the Baptist. He 


was in form and to outward appearance, 
but not in spirit. From the very first, 
as has been seen even in connection 
with the baptism, there was a deep- 
seated difference between the two 
preachers. Even Euthy. Zig. under- 
stood this, monk though he was. Repent, 
he says, with John meant ‘‘in so far as 
ye have erred” =amendment; with 
Jesus, “from the old to the new” (ἀπὸ 
τῆς παλαιᾶς ἐπὶ τὴν καινήν) =a change 
from within. For the evangelist this 
was the absolute beginning of Christ’s 


14—23. 


*dpudiBXnotpov eis τὴν θάλασσαν: ἦσαν γὰρ 7 ἁλιεῖς.ϊ 
λέγει αὐτοῖς, ''" Δεῦτε ὀπίσω µου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς ἁλιεῖς ἀνθρώπων. 
20. Οἱ δὲ εὐθέως ἀφέντες τὰ Ὀίκτυα ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ. 
προβὰς ἐκεῖθεν, εἶδεν ἄλλους δύο ἀδελφούς, ᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ζεβε- 
δαίου καὶ Ἰωάννην τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ μετὰ Ζεβεδαίου 


a a αν ᾱ μα i ΛΑ c 2A Sy A aha 
του πατρος αυτων, καταρτίζοντας τα δίκτυα αυτων" και ἐκάλεσεν 


αὐτούς. 
ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ. 
‘ 


23. Καὶ “περιῆγεν ὅλην τὴν Γαλιλαίαν 6 Ιησοῦς,2 διδάσκων ἐν ταῖς 
pny ην τη η 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


22. at δὲ εὐθέως ἀφέντες τὸ πλοῖον καὶ τὸν πατέρα αὐτῶν 


93 


IQ. καὶ χ here only 

aa, PING EAs; 
verb in 
Mk. i. 16 
in Sept. 

y Mk. 1. 16 
17. Lk.v.2 

z Ch. xi. 28; 
XXV. 34. 

a with ev 
here only 
(truetext); 
with acc 
of place 
ix. 35; 
XXili, 15. 
Mk. vi. 6. 


21. Kat 


συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας, καὶ 


1 ΝΟ have αλεεις, B a eters. 
3 NBC have εν ολη τη Γαλιλαια, 


ministry. He knows nothing of an 
earlier activity. 

Vv. 18-22. Call of four disciples. 
The preceding very general statement is 
followed by a more specific narrative 
relating to a very important department 
of Christ’s work, the gathering of dis- 
ciples. Disciples are referred to in the 
Sermon on the Mount (v. 1), therefore 
it is meet that it be shown how Jesus 
came by them. Here we have simply a 
sample, a hint at a process always going 
on, and which had probably advanced a 
considerable way before the sermon was 
ἀε]ινετεά. --- περιπατῶν δὲ: δὲ simply 
introduces a new topic, the time is inde- 
finite. One day when Jesus was walk- 
ing along the seashore He saw two men, 
brothers, names given, by occupation 
fishers, the main industry of the locality, 
that tropical sea (800 feet below level of 
Mediterranean) abounding in fish. He 
saw them, may have seen them before, and 
they Him, and thought them likely men, 
and He said to them, ver. ΙΟ: Δεῦτε . . . 
ἀνθρώπων. From the most critical point 
of view a genuine saying of Jesus; the 
first distinctively individual word of the 
Galilean ministry as recorded by Matthew 
and Mark. Full οι significance as a self- 
revelation of the speaker. Authoritative 
yet genial, indicating a poetic idealistic 
temperament and a tendency to figurative 
speech; betraying the rudiments of a 
plan for winning men by select men. 
Δεῦτε plural form of δεῦρο = δεῦρ᾽ ire, 
δεῦρο being an adverb of place with the 
force of command, a verb of command- 
ing being understood: here! after me; 
imperial yet kindly, used again in Matt. 
ri. 28 with reference to the labouring and 
heavy-laden. δεῦτε and ἁλιεῖς (= sea- 


The acc. (T. R. as in D, etc.) is the more 
usual construction, hence preferred by ancient revisers. 


B omits ο Ίησους. 


people) are samples of old poetic words re- 
vived and introduced into prose by later 
Greek writers.—Ver. 20. The effect was 
immediate : εὐθέως ἀφέντες. This seems 
surprising, and we naturally postulate 
previous knowledge in explanation. But 
all indications point to the uniquely 
impressive personality of Jesus. John 
felt it; the audience in the synagogue of 
Capernaum felt it on the first appearance 
of Jesus there (Mk. i. 27); the four fisher- 
men felt it.—8ixrva: ἀμφίβληστρον in 
ver. 18. In xiii. 47 occurs a third word 
for a net, σαγήνη ; δίκτυον (from δικεῖν, 
to throw) is the general name; ἀμφί- 
βληστρον (ἀμφιβάλλω), anything cast 
around, ¢.g.,a garment, more specifically 
a net thrown with the hand; σαγήνη, a 
sweep-net carried out in a boat, then 
drawn in from the land (vide Trench, 
Synonyms of N. T., § 64).—Ver. 21. 
ἄλλους 840, another pair of brothers, 
James and John, sons of Zebedee, the 
four together an important instalment of 
the twelve. The first pair were casting 
their nets, the second were mending 
them, (καταρτίζοντες), with their father. 
—Ver. 22. οἱ δὲ εὐθέως ἀφέντες. They 
too followed immediately, leaving nets, 
ship, and father (vide Mk. i. 20) 
behind. 

Vv. 23-25. Summary account of the 
Galilean ministry. A colourless general 
statement serving as a mere prelude to 
chapters v.-ix. It points to a ministry in 
Galilee, varied, extensive, and far-famed, 
conceived by the evangelist as antecedent 
to the Sermon on the Mount; not 
necessarily covering a long period of 
time, though if the expression ‘“ teaching 
in their synagogues” be pressed it must 
imply a good many weeks (vide on Mk.). 


94 


bCh. ἰχ.45 θεραπεύων πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν " µαλακίαν ἐν τῷ had. 


ΚΑΊΑ ΜΑΙΘΑΙΟΝ 


IV. 24—25. 


24. Kal 


¢ Ch. xiv. 1; ἀπῆλθεν 1 ἡ "ἀκοὴ αὐτοῦ cis ὅλην τὴν Συρίαν: καὶ προσήνεγκαν 


ν. 6. - » ‘ η 
4 Ch. viii. αὐτῷ πάντας τοὺς ἁκακῶς ἔχοντας, ποικίλαις νόσοις καὶ " βασάνοις 
16; ix. 12 .2 + κ , . 
συνεχοµένους, Kai? δαιµονιζομένους, καὶ ’ σεληνιαζομένους, Kai 
Lk. xvi. ‘ , > ’ . > 
°'8, Ὑπαραλυτικούς: καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτού. 25. καὶ ἠκολούθησαν 


Ε6, ανί]. 15. , - 
αὐτῷ 


ὄχλοι πολλοὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας καὶ Δεκαπόλεως καὶ ‘lepo- 


σολύμων καὶ Ἰουδαίας, καὶ πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου. 


1 So in BD (W.H.), εξηλθεν in NC. 


2 BC omit και, which isin C?D. The force of και = and especially. 


The ministry embraced three functions : 
διδάσκων, κηρύσσων, θεραπεύων (ver. 
23), teaching, preaching, healing. Jesus 
was an evangelist, a master, and a healer 
of disease. Matt. puts the teaching 
function first in accordance with the 
character of his gospel. The first gospel 
is weak in the evangelistic element com- 
pared with the third: διδαχή is more 
prominent than κήρνγµα. he healing 
function is represented as exercised on a 
large scale: πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν 
µαλακίαν, every form of disease and 
ailment. Euthy. Zig. defines νόσος as 
the chronic subversion of health (ἡ 

ονία παρατροπὴ τῆς τοῦ σώματος 
teas), μαλακία as the weakness in which 
it begins (4px) Χανγώσεως σώματος, 
προάγγελος νόσον). The subjects of 
healing are divided into two classes, ver. 
tg. ‘They brought to Him πάντας τ. 
«. ty. ποικίλαις νόσοις, all who were 
afflicted with various diseases (such as 
fever, leprosy, blindness); also those 
βασάνοις σννεχοµένους, seized with dis- 
eases of a tormenting nature, of which 
three classes are named—the καὶ in T. 
R. Ὀείοτεδαιμον. is misleading; the follow- 
ing words are epexegetical : vilopé- 
νους, σεληνιαζομένους, π ντικούς = 
demoniacs, epileptics (their seizures 
following the phases of the moon), 
paralytics. These forms of disease are 

aphically called torments. (βάσανος, 
ia, a touch-stone, {αρ Lydius, as in 
Pindar, Pythia, x. 105: Πειρῶντι δὲ καὶ 
χρυσὸς ἐν βασάνῳ πρέπει καὶ νόος ὀρθός; 
then an instrument of torture to extract 
truth; then, as here, tormenting forms of 
disease.) The fame, 4 ἀκοὴ, of such a 
marvellous ministry naturally spread 
widely, «lg ὅλην τὴν Σνρίαν, throughout 
the whole province to which Palestine 
belonged, among Gentiles as well as 
Jews. Crowds gathered around the 
wonderful Man from all quarters: west, 
east, north, south; Galilee, Decapolis 
on the eastern side of the lake, Jerusalem 


and Judaea, Peraea. With every allow 
ance for the exaggeration of a popular 
account, this speaks to an extraordinary 
impression. 

Cuapters V.-VII. THE SERMON ON 
THE Mount. This extended utterance 
of Jesus comes upon us as a surprise. 
Nothing goes before to prepare us to 
expect anything so transcendently great. 
The impressions made on che Baptist, the 
people in Capernaum Synagogue (Mk. i. 
27), and the four fishermen, speak to 
wisdom, power, and personal charm, but 
not so as to make us take the sermon 
as a thing of course. Our surprise is all 
the greater that there is so little ante- 
cedent narrative. By απ effort of 
imagination we have to realise that 
much went before—preaching, teaching, 
interviews with disciples, conflicts with 
Pharisees, only once mentioned hitherto 
(iii. 7), yet here the leading theme of 
discourse. 

The sermon belongs to the didache, 
not to the banana sone is here the 
Master, not the Evangelist. He ascends 
the hill to get away from the crowds 
below, and the disciples, now become a 
considerable band, gather about Him. 
Others may not be excluded, but the pa- 
θηταὶ are the audience proper. The dis- 
course may represent the teaching, not of 
a single hour or day, but of a period of 
retirement from an exciting, exhausting 
ministry below, and all over Galilee ; 
rest being sought in variation of work, 
evangelist and teacher alternately. A 
better name for these chapters than the 
Sermon on the Mount, which suggests a 
concio ad populum, might be The Teach- 
ing on the Hill. It may be a combina- 
tion of several lessons. One very 
outstanding topic is Pharisaic righteous- 
ness. Christ evidently made it His 
business in one of the hill lessons to 
define controversially His position in 
reference to the prevailing type οι piety, 
which we may assume to have been to 


Ὁ. I—3. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


95 


V. 1. ΙΔΩΝ δὲ τοὺς ὄχλους * ἀνέβη εἰς τὸ ὄρος: καὶ > καθίσαντος a same 


αὐτοῦ, προσῆλθον αὐτῷ ] οἱ "μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ: 2. καὶ “dvoigas τὸ 
στόµα αὐτοῦ, ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς, λέγων, 3. “*Maxdpror ot ’ πτωχοὶ 


in xiii. 48. Mk. ix. 35. 


-c frequent in Gospp. and Acts, nowhere else in N. T. 


OES PT κ. ας, f Ch. xi. 5. Lk. iv. 18. 


Lk. iv. 20 al., intrans., also Heb. i. 3; trans. 1 Cor. vi. 4. 


phrase 
ch. xiv. 
23; XV. 29. 
Mk. iii. 13. 
b here and 
Eph. ii. 6 (συνεκ). 


d again in xiii. 35. e Ch. xi. 6; xiii. 16. 


1 B omits avtw; bracketed as doubtful in W.H. 


Him a subject of long and careful study 
before the opening of His public career. 
The portions of the discourse which bear 
on that subject can be picked out, and 
others not relating thereto eliminated, 
and we may say if we choose that the 
resulting body of teaching is the Sermon 
on the Mount (so Weiss). Perhaps the 
truth is that these portions formed one 
of the lessons given to disciples on the 
hill in their holiday summer school. The 
Beatitudes might form another, instruc- 
tions on prayer (vi. 7-15) α third, 
admonitions against covetousness and 
care (vi. 19-34) a fourth, andsoon. As 
these chapters stand, the various parts 
cohere and sympathise wonderfully so as 
to present the appearance of a unity; 
but that need not hinder us from regard- 
ing the whole as a skilful combination 
of originally distinct lessons, possessing 
the generic unity of the Teaching on 
the Hill. This view I prefer to that 
which regards the sermon as a com- 
pendium of Christ’s whole doctrine (De 
Wette), or the magna charta of the 
kingdom (Tholuck), though there is a 
truth in that title, or as an ordination 
discourse in connection with the setting 
apart of the Twelve (Ewald), or in its 
original parts an anti-Pharisaic manifesto 
(Weiss-Meyer). For comparison of 
Matthew’s version of the discourse with 
Luke’s see notes on Lk. vi. 20-49. 

Chap. v. 1-2. Introductory statement 
by evangelist. Λ᾿Ιδὼν δὲ . . . εἲς τὸ 
ὄρος. Christ ascended the hill, accord- 
ing to some, because there was more 
room there for the crowd than below. I 
prefer the view well put by Euthy. Zig. : 
‘““He ascended the near hill, to avoid 
‘the din of the crowd (θορύβους) and to 
give instruction without distraction ; for 
«Πε passed from the healing of the body 
to the cure of souls. This was His habit, 
passing from that to this and from this 
‘to that, providing varied benefit.” But 
we must be on our guard against a 
double misunderstanding that might be 
suggested by the statement in ver. 1, 
‘that Jesus went up to the mountain, as 
af in ascetic retirement from the world, 


and addressed Himself henceforth to His 
disciples, as if they alone were the 
objects of His care, or to teach them an 
esoteric doctrine with which the multi- 
tude had no concern. Jesus was not 
monastic in spirit, and He had not two 
doctrines, one for the many, another for 
the few, like Buddha. His highest 
teaching, even the Beatitudes and the 
beautiful discourse against care, was 
meant for the million. He taught 
disciples that they might teach the 
world and so be its light. For this 
purpose His disciples came to Him when 
He sat down (καθίσαντος αὐτοῦ) taking 
the teacher’s position (cf. Mk. iv. 1, ix. 
35, xiii. 3). Lutteroth (Essai d’Interpré- 
tation, p. 65) takes καθίσαντος as mean- 
ing to camp out (camper), to remain for 
a time, as in Lk. xxiv. 49, Acts xviii. 11. 
He, I find, adopts the view I have 
indicated of the sermon as a summary 
of all the discourses of Jesus on the hill 
during a sojourn of some duration. The 
hill, τὸ ὄρος, may be most naturally 
taken to mean the elevated plateau 
rising above the seashore. It is idle to 
inquire what particular hill is intended. — 
Ver. 2. dvolfas τὸ ordpa: solemn 
description of the beginning of a weighty 
discourse.—é8i8ackev, imperfect, imply- 
ing continued discourse. 

Vv. 3-12. The Beatitudes. Some 
general observations may helpfully intro- 
duce the detailed exegesis of these 
golden words. 

1. They breathe the spirit of the scene. 
On the mountain tops away from the 
bustle and the sultry heat of the region 
below, the air cool, the blue sky over- 
head, quiet all around, and divine 
tranquillity within. We are near heaven 
here. 

2. The originality of these sayings 
has been disputed, especially by modern 
Jews desirous to credit their Rabbis 
with such good things. Some of them, 
é.g., the third, may be found in sub- 
stance in the Psalter, and possibly many, 
or all of them, even in the Talmud. But 
what then? They are in the Talmud as 
a few grains of wheat lost in a vast heap 


96 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


νε 


g the nameT® πνεύµατι' ὅτι αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ Ε βασιλεία τῶν "οὐρανῶν. 4. 


for the k 


of G. in µακάριοι 1 οἱ " πενθοῦντες: ὅτι αὐτοὶ παρακληθήσονται. 5. µακάριοι 


Mt., put 


into the Baptist’s mouth, in iii.2. His, not Christ's, acc. to Weiss εί al. 


b Ch. ix. 15. 


1 The 2nd and 3rd Beatitudes (vv. 4, 5) are transposed in D, most old Latin texts, 
and in Syr. Cur. Tisch. adopts this order. 


of chaff. The originality of Jesus lies in 
putting the due value on these thoughts, 
collecting them, and making them as 
prominent as the Ten Commandments. 
No greater service can be rendered to 
mankind than to rescue from obscurity 
neglected moral commonplaces. 

3. The existence of another version of 
the discourse (in Lk.), with varying 
forms of the sayings, has raised a 
question as to the original form. Did 
Christ, ¢.g., say ‘‘ Blessed the poor” 
(Lk.) or * Blessed the poor in spirit” 
(Matt.)? Thisraises a larger question as 
to the manner of Christ’s teaching on 
the hill. Suppose one day in a week of 
instruction was devoted to the subject 
of happiness, its conditions, and heirs, 
many things might be said on each lead- 
ing proposition. The theme would be 
announced, then accompanied with 
expansions. A modern biographer 
would have prefaced a discourse like 
this with an introductory account of the 
Teacher's method. There is no such 
account in the Gospels, but there are 
incidental notices from which we can 
learn somewhat. The disciples asked 
questions and the Master answered them. 
Jesus explained some of His parables to 
the twelve. From certain parts of His 
teaching, as reported, it appears that He 
not only uttered great thoughts in 
aphoristic form, but occasionally en- 
larged. The Sermon on the Mount 
contains at least two instances of such 
enlargement. The thesis, “I am not 
come to destroy but to fulfil” (ver. 17), 
is copiously illustrated (vv. 21-48). The 
counsel against care, which as a thesis 
might be stated thus: “ Blessed are the 
care-free,”’ is ergs ded (vv. 25-34). 
Even in one of eatitudes we find 
traces of explanatory enlargement; in 
the last, '' Blessed are the persecuted”. 
It is perhaps the most startling of all the 
paradoxes, and would need enlargement 
greatly, and some parts of the expansion 
have been preserved (vv. -- On 
this view both torms of the first 
Beatitude might be authentic, the one as 
theme, the other as comment. The 
theme would always be put in the tewest 
possible words ; the first Beatitude there- 


fore, as Luke puts it, Μακάριοι οἱ 
πτωχοί, Matthew preserving one of the 
expansions, not necessarily the only one. 
Of course, another view of the expansion 
is possible, that it proceeded not from 
Christ, but from the transmitters of His 
sayings. But this hypothesis is not a 
whit more legitimate or likely than the 
other. I make this observation, not in 
the spirit of an antiquated Harmonistic, 
but simply as a contribution to historical 
criticism. 

4. Each Beatitude has a reason an- 
nexed, that of the first being “ for theirs 
is the kingdom of heaven”. They vary 
in the different Beatitudes as reported. 
It is conceivable that in the original 
themes the reason annexed to the first 
was common to them all. It was under- 
stood to be repeated like the refrain of a 
song, or like the words, ‘‘him do I calla 
Brahmana,” annexed to many of the 
moral sentences in the Footsteps of the 
Law in the Buddhist Canon. “ He who, 
when assailed, does not resist, but speaks 
mildly to his tormentors—him do I calla 
Brahmana.” So ‘‘ Blessed the poor, for 
theirs is the kingdom of heaven”; 
“blessed they who mourn, for,” etc. ; 
“blessed the meek, the hungry, for,” etc. 
The actual reasons annexed, when they 
vary from the refrain, are to be viewed as 
explanatory comments. 

5. It has been maintained that only 
certain of the Beatitudes belong to the 
authentic discourse on the mount, the 
rest, possibly based on true logia of Jesus 
spoken at another time, being added 
by the evangelist, true to his it of 
massing the teaching of Jesus in topical 

oups. This is the view of Weiss (in 

att. Evan., and in Meyer). He thinks 
only three are authentic—the first, third, 
and fourth—all pointing to the righteous- 
ness of the kingdom as the summum 
bonum: the first to righteousness as 
not yet possessed; the second to the 
want as a cause of sorrow; the third to 
righteousness as an object of desire. 
This view goes with theory that 
Christ's discourse on the hill pry) files 
ence exclusively to the nature οι true and 
ialse righteousness. 

6. A final. much less important ques- 


«--6. 


οἱ ᾿ πραεῖς: ὅτι αὐτοὶ κληρονομήσουσι τὴν γῆν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


97 


6. µακάριοι oti Ch. xi. 29; 


τα αχ 


πεινῶντες καὶ διψῶντες τὴν δικαιοσύνην ΄ ὅτι αὐτοὶ χορτασθήσονται. Pet. iii. 4. 


tion in reference to the Beatitudes is that 
which relates to their number. One 
would say at a first glance eight, counting 
νετ. IO as One, vv. 11, 12 being an en- 
largement. The traditional number, 
however, is seven—vv. 10-12 being re- 
garded as a transition to a new topic. 
This seems arbitrary. Delitsch, anxious 
to establish an analogy with the Deca- 
logue, makes out ten—seven from ver. 3 
to νετ. 9, ver. IO one, νετ. II one, and 
νετ. 12, though lacking the µακάριοι, the 
tenth; its claim resting on the exulting 
words, χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε. This 
savours of Rabbinical pedantry. 

Ver. 3. . µακάριον. This is one of the 
words which have been transformed and 
ennobled by N. T. use; by association, 
as in the Beatitudes, with unusual con- 
ditions, accounted by the world miser- 
able, or with rare and difficult conduct, 
¢.g., in John xiii. 17, ‘if ye know these 
things, happy (µακάριοι) are ye if ye do 
them”. Notable in this connection is 
the expression in 1 Tim. i. 11, “The 
Gospel of the glory of the happy God”’. 
The implied truth is that the happiness 
of the Christian God consists in being a 
Redeemer, bearing the burden of the 
world’s sin and misery. How different 
from the Epicurean idea of God! Our 
word “ blessed”’’ represents the new con- 
ception of felicity.—ot πτωχοὶ: πτωχός 


in Sept. stands for Pars Ps. cix. 16, or 


‘IY Ps. xl. 18: the poor, taken even in 


the most abject sense, mendici, Tertull. 
adv. Mar. iv. 14. πτωχός and πένης 
originally differed, the latter meaning 
poor as opposed to rich, the former 
destitute. But in Biblical Greek πτωχοί, 
πένητες, πραεῖς, ταπεινοί are used indis- 
criminately for the same class, the poor 
of an oppressed country. Vide Hatch, 
Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 76. The 
term is used here in a pregnant sense, 
absolute and unqualified at least to begin 
with; qualifications come after. From 
πτώσσω, to cower in dispiritment and 
fear, always used in an evil sense till 
Christ taught the poor man to lift up his 
head in hope and self-respect; the very 
lowest social class not to be despaired of, 
a future possible even for the mendicant. 
Blessedness possible for the poor in every 
sense; they, in comparison with others, 
under no disabilities, rather contrari- 


Ch. xxv 


J 
34. Heb. vi. 12. k Ch. xiv. 20. 


wise—such is the first and fundamental 
lesson.—t@ mvevpatt. Possibilities are 
not certainties; to turn the one into the 
other the soul or will of the individual! 
must come in, for as Euthy. Zig. quaintly 
says, nothing involuntary can bless (οὐδὲν 


τῶν sh gn eho µακαριστόν). “In 
spirit’’ is, therefore, added to develop 
and define the idea of poverty. The 


comment on the theme passes from the 
lower to the higher sphere. Christ’s 
thought includes the physical and social, 
but it does not end there. Luke seems 
to have the social aspect in view, in 
accordance with one of his tendencies and 
the impoverished condition of most mem- 
bers of the apostolic Church. To limit 
the meaning to that were a mistake, but 
to include that or even to emphasise it 
in given circumstances was no error. 
Note that the physical and spiritual lay 
close together in Christ’s mind. He. 
passed easily from one to the other (John 
Iv. 7-10; Lk. x. 42, see notes there). 
τῷ tv. is, of course, to be connected with 
πτωχοὶ, not with µακάριοι. Poor in spirit 
is not to be taken objectively, as if spirit 
indicated the element in which the 
poverty is manifest—poor intellect: 
“‘homines ingenio et eruditione parum 
florentes”’ (Fritzsche) = the νηπίοι in 
Matt. xi. 25; but subjectively, poor in 
their own esteem.  Self-estimate is the 
essence of the mutter, 1nd is compatible 
with real wealth. Only the noble think 
meanly of themselves. The soul οἱ 
goodness is in tiie mau who is reallv 
humble. Poverty lxid to heart passe~« 
into riches. A high ‘dea of life li « 
beneath all. Ard ‘hat ideal \s the fin 
between the soeial aid the spirituai. 
The poor man patsew ir to the | ,lessedness 
of the kingdom as soon as he realises 
what a man is or ought to be ~—— Poor in 
purse or even in character, no mn is 
beggared who has a vision of man’s chief 
end and chief σοοά.-- αὐτῶν, emphatic 
position ; tieirs,note it well. τλο in the 
following verses αὐτοὶ and αὐτῶν.---έοτι, 
not merely in prospect, but in present 
possession. The kingdom of heaven is 
often presented in the Gospels apoca- 
lyptically as a thing in the future to be 
given to the worthy by way of externa! 
recompense. But this view pertains 
rather to the form of thought than to the 
essence of the matter, Christ speaks οἱ 
the kingdom here not as a known quan- 


98 


KATA MATOAION 


V. 


| Heb. ii.17. 7. µακάριοι οἱ ! ἐλεήμονες: ὅτι αὐτοὶ 3 ἐλεηθήσονται. 8. µακάριοι 


m Rom. 


Vim. i. 13, ; ies 
16 o1 Tim. i. §; 2Tim. ii. 22. 


tity, but as a thing whose nature He is in 
the act of defining by the aphorisms He 
utters. Τσο, then it consists essentially 
in states of mind. Itis within, It is our- 
selves, the true ideal human. 

Ver. 4. ol πενθοῦντε. Who are 
they? All who on any account grieve? 
Then this Beatitude would give utterance 
to a thoroughgoing optimism. Pessimists 
say that there are many griefs for which 
there is no remedy, so many that life is 
not worth living. Did Jesus mean to 
meet this position with a direct nega- 
tive, and to affirm that there is no 
sorrow without remedy? If not, then 
He propounds a puzzle provoking 
thoughtful scholars to ask: What grief 
is that which will without fail find com- 
fort? There can be no comfort where 
there is no grief, for the two ideas are 
correlative, But in most cases there 
‘is no apparent necessary connection. 
Necessary connection is asserted in this 
aphorism, which gives us a clue to the 
class described as οἱ πενθοῦντες. Their 
peculiar sorrow must be one which com- 
forts itself, a grief that bas the thing it 

ieves for in the very grief. The com- 
fort is then no outward good. It lies in 
a right state of soul, and that is given 
in the sorrow which laments the lack of 
it. The sorrow reveals love of the good, 
and that love is possession. In so far as 
all kinds of sorrow tend to awaken re- 
flection on the real good and ill of human 
life, and so to issue in the higher sorrow 
of the soul, the second Beatitude may be 
taken absolutely as expressing the tend- 
ency of all grief to pr consolation. — 
παρακληθήσονται, future. The comfort 
is latent in the very grief, but for the 
present there is no conscious joy, but 
only poignant sorrow. The 30% how- 
ever, will inevitably come to birth. No 
noble nature abides permanently in the 
house of mourning. The greater the 
sorrow, the greater the ultimate gladness, 
the “ joy in the Holy Ghost ” mentioned 
by St. Paul among the essentials of the 
Kingdom of God (Rom. xiv. 17). 


Ver. 5. ol πραεῖς: in Sept. for Dy 


in Ps. xxxvii. 11, of which this Beatitude 
is anecho. The men who suffer wrong 
without bitterness or desire for revenge, 
a class who in this world are apt to go to 
the wall. In this case we should have 
expected the Teacher to end with the 


ὃν of "καθαροὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ: ὅτι αὐτοὶ τὸν Θεὸν “ὄψονται. ϱ. µακάριοι 


ο Heb. xii. 14 (seeing God)- 


common refrain: theirs is the kingdom 
of heaven, that being the only thin 

they are likely to get. ean Pau 

Richter humorously said: ‘“ The French 
have the empire of the land, the English 
the empire of the sea; to the Germans 
belongs the empire of the air”. But 
Jesus promises to the meek the empire of 
the solid εατῖ-- κληρονομήσονσι τὴν 
γῆν. Surely a startling paradox! That 
the meek should find a foremost place in 
the kingdom of heaven is very intel- 
ligible, but “inherit the earth "’—the land 
of Canaan or any other part of this 
planet—is it not a delusive promise ? 
Not altogether. Itis at least true as a 
doctrine of moral tendency. Meekness 
after all isa power even in this world, a 
“world-conquering principle ” (Tholuck). 
The meek of England, driven from their 
native land by religious intolerance, 
have inherited the continent of America. 
Weiss (Meyer) is quite sure, however, 
that this thought was far (ganz fern) 
from Christ’s mind. I venture to think 
he is mistaken. 

The inverse order of the second and 
third Beatitudes found in Codex D, and 
favoured some of the Fathers, ε.ρ., 
Jerome, might be plausibl? justified if 
the affinity between of spirit and 
meekness, and the natural sequence of 
the two promises: possession of the 
kingdom of heaven and inheritance of 
the earth. But the connection beneath 
the surface is in favour of the order as it 
stands in T. R. 

Ver. 6. If the object of the hunger | 
and thirst had not been mentioned this 
fourth Beatitude would have been parallel 
in form to the second: Blessed the 
h , for they shall be filled. We 
should then have another absolute affir- 
mation requiring qualification, and 
raising the question: What sort of 
hunger is it which is sure to be satisfied 2 
That might be the original form of the 
aphorism as givenin Luke. The answer 
to the question it is similar to 
that given under titude 1, The 
hunger whose satisfaction is sure is that 
which contains its own satisfaction. It 
is the hunger for moral 
passion for righteousness is righteous- 
ness in the deepest sense of the word.— 
πεινῶντες καὶ διψῶντες. These verbs, 
like all verbs of desire, ordinarily take 
the genitive of the object. Here and in 


The | Y- 


7---το. 


c 3 aA 
οἱ ᾿εἰρηνοποιοί: ὅτι αὐτοὶ] Ἱυϊοὶ Θεοῦ κληθήσονται. 
ε = , A 
οἱ δεδιωγµένοι ἕνεκεν δικαιοσύνης: ὅτι αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν 


lavrot omitted in ΝΟ it. vul. syr., bracketed in W.H, 


EYATTEAION 


29 


©. µακάριοι p here only. 
κ ο % The verb 
Col. i. 20. 
q viol Θ. in 
Lk. xx. 36. Rom. viii. 14,19. Gal. iii. 26. 


It may have been 


omitted by home@oteleuton and it seems needed for emphasis. 


other places in N. T. they take the accusa- 

, tive, the object being of a_ spiritual 
\nature, which one not merely desires to 
/participate in, but to possess in whole. 
Winer, § xxx. 1ο, thus distinguishes the 
two constructions: διψᾶν φιλοσοφίας = 
to thirst after philosophy; διψ. 
Φιλοσοφίαν = to thirst for possession 
of philosophy as a whole. Some have 
thought that διὰ is to be understood 
before δικ., and that the meaning is: 
‘** Blessed they who suffer natural hunger 
and thirst on account of righteousness ”’. 
Grotius understands by Sux. the way or 
doctrine of righteousness. 

Ver. 7. This Beatitude states a self- 
acting law of the moral world. The 
exercise of mercy (ἔλεος, active pity) 
tends to elicit mercy from others—God 
and men. The chief reference may be 
to the mercy of God in the final awards 
of the kingdom, but the application need 
not be restricted to this. The doctrine 
of Christ abounds in great ethical prin- 
ciples of universal validity: ‘‘he that 
humbleth himself shall be exalted,” ‘ to 
him that hath shall be given,” etc. This 
Beatitude suitably follows the preceding. 
Mercy is an element in true righteous- 
ness (Mic. vi. 8). It was lacking in 
Pharisaic righteousness (Matt. xxiii. 23). 
It needed much to be inculcated in 
Christ’s time, when sympathy was killed 
by the theory that all suffering was 
penalty of special sin, a theory which 
fostered a pitiless type of righteousness 
(Schanz). Mercy may be practised by 
many means; ‘‘not by money alone,” 
says Euthy. Zig., ‘‘ but by word, and ifyou 
have nothing, by tears” (διὰ δακρύων). 

Ver. 8. ot καθαροὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ: τ. καρδ. 
may be an explanatory addition to indi- 
cate the region in which purity shows 
itself. That purity is in the heart, the 
seat of thought, desire, motive, not in 
the outward act, goes without saying 
from Christ’s point of view. Blessed 
the pure. Here there is a wide range of 
suggestion. The pure may be the spot- 
less or faultless in general; the continent 
with special reference to sexual indul- 
gence—those whose very thoughts 
are clean; or the pure in motive, the 
single-minded, the men who seek the 


kingdom as the summum bonum with 
undivided heart. The last is the most 
relevant to the general connection and 
the most deserving to be insisted on. 
In the words of Augustine, the mundum 
cor is above all the simplex cor. Moral 
simplicity is the cardinal demand in 
Christ’s ethics. The man who has 
attained to it is in His view perfect 
(Matt. xix. 21). Without it a large 
numerical list of virtues and good habits 
goes for nothing. With it character, 
however faulty in temper or otherwise, 
is ennobled and redeemed.—rév θεὸν 
ὄψονται: their reward is the beatific 
vision. Some think the reference is not to 
the faculty of clear vision but to the rare 
privilege of seeing the face of the Great 
King (so Fritzsche and Schanz). ‘The 
expression has its origin in the ways of 
eastern monarchs, who rarely show them- 
selves in public, so that only the most 
intimate circle behoid the royal counten- 
ance’’ (Schanz) = the pure have access 
to the all but inaccessible. This idea 
does not seem to harmonise with Christ’s 
general way of conceiving God. On the 
other hand, it was His habit to insist on 
the connection between clear vision and 
moral simplicity; to teach that it is the 
single eye that is full of light (Matt. vi. 
22). It is true that the pure shall have 
access to God’s presence, but the truth 
to be insisted on in connection with this 
Beatitude is that through purity, single- 
ness of mind, they are qualified for seeing, 
knowing, truly conceiving God and all 
that relates to the moral universe. It is 
the pure in heart who are able to see and 
say that ‘truly God is good” (Ps. Ixxiii. 
1) and rightly to interpret the whole 
phenomena of life in relation to Pro. 
vidence. They shall see, says Jesus 
casting His thought into eschatologica 
form, but He means the pure are th 
men who see; the double-minded, the 
two-souled (δίψυχος, James i. 8) man is 
blind. Theophylact illustrates the con- 
nection between purity and vision thus: 
ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ κάτοπτρον, ἐὰν ᾗ καθαρὸν 
τότε δέχεται τὰς ἐμφάσεις, οὕτω καὶ ἡ 
καθαρὰ ψυχὴἠ δέχεται ὄψιν θεοῦ. 

Ver. g. οἱ εἰρηνοποιοί: not merely 
those who have peace in their own souls 


1οο 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Vv. 


rRom.ix.1.odpav@v. ΣΙ. µακάριοί ἐστε, ὅταν ὀνειδίσωσιν ὑμᾶς καὶ διώξωσι, 
Heb. vi. 8 » η a - ‘ 7 
18. καὶ εἴπωσι πᾶν πονηρὸν ῥῆμα] καθ ὑμῶν Σ " ψευδόµενοι,ῖ ἕνεκεν 


ἐμοῦ. 
Ch. vi. 1 μα 


12. χαίρετε καὶ '" ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ " μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν 


α,5,είε τοῖς οὐρανοῖς' οὕτω γὰρ ἐδίωξαν τοὺς προφήτας τοὺς πρὸ ὑμῶν. 


1 This word (in ΟΔΣ) is omitted in ΜΒΓ. 


sense clear. 
2 kal υΌμων before way in D. 
? Omitted in D; found in SBC al, 


through purity (Augustine), or the peace- 
loving (Grotius, Wetstein), but the active 
heroic promoters of peace in a world full 
of alienation, party passion, and strife. 
Their efforts largely consist in keeping 
aloof from sectional strifes and the 
passions which beget them, and livi 

tranquilly for and in the whole. Su 

men have few friends. Christ, the ideal 
peace-maker, was alone in a time given 
up to sectarian division. But they have 
their compensation—vlol θεοῦ κληθή- 
σονται. God owns the disowned and 
distrusted as His sons. They shall be 
called because they are. They shall be 
called at the great consummation; nay, 


even before that, in after ations, 
when party strifes and passions have 
ceased, and men have come to see who 


were the true friends of the Divine 
interest in an evil time. 

Vv. 10-12. of εε,δικ. The 
original form of the Beatitude was pro- 
bably: Blessed the persecuted. The 
added words only state what is a matter 
of course. No one deserves to be called 
a persecuted one unless he suffers for 
righteousness. οἱ δεδιωγ. (perf. part.): 
the persecuted are not merely men who 
have passed through a certain experience, 
but men who bear abiding traces of it in 
their character. They are marked men, 
and bear the stamp of trial on their faces. 
It arrests the notice of the passer-by: 
commands his μμ and prompts 
question, Who whence? They are 
veteran soldiers of ri sness with an 
unmistakable air of dignity, serenity, and 
buoyancy about them.—atrév ἐστὶν ἡ β. 
τ. οὖρ. The common refrain of all the 
Beatitudes is expressly repeated here to 
hint that theirs emphatically is the 
Kingdom of Heaven. It is the proper 
guerdon of the soldier of righteous- 
ness. It is his now, within him in 
the disciplined spirit and the heroic 
temper developed το ο II. 
µακάριοί doe. Teacher εχ- 
patiates as if it were a favourite theme, 
giving a personal turn to His further re- 


It may have been added to make the 


flections—“ Blessed are ye.” Is it 
likely that Jesus would speak so early 
of this ic to disciples? Would He 
not wait till it came more nearly within 
the range of their experience? Nay, is 
the whole discourse about tion 
not a reflection back into the teaching of 
the Master of the later experiences of the 
apostolic age, that suffering disciples 
might be inspired by the thought that 
their Lord had so spoken? It is possible 
to be too incredulous here. If it was not 
too soon to speak of Pharisaic righteous- 
ness it was not too soon to speak of 
suffering for true righteousness. The 
one was sure to give rise to the other. 
The disciples may already have had ex- 
perience of Pharisaic disfavour (Mk. ii., 
iii.). In any case Jesus saw clearly what 
was coming. He had had an apocalypse 
of the dark future in the season of tempta- 
tion, and He deemed it fitting to lift the 
veil a little that His disciples might get 
a glimpse of it.—Srav ὀνειδίσωσιν .. . 
ἵνεκεν ἐμοῦ: illustrative details pointing 
to persistent relentless persecution 

word and deed, culminating in wilful, 
malicious, lying imputations of the gross- 
est sort—way πονηρὸν, every conceivable 
calumny—wWev8épevor, lying: not merely 
in the sense that the statements are 
false, but in the sense of deliberately 
inventing the most improbable lies; their 
only excuse being that violent prejudice 
leads the calumniators to think nothing 
too evil to be believed against the objects. 
of their malice.—évexev ἐμοῦ: for Him 
who has undertaken to make you fishers 
of men. Do you κ. ων following Him? 
No reason why.—Ver, 12. yalpere καὶ 
ay. In spite of all, joy, exultation is 
possible—nay, inevitable. I not only 
exhort you to it, but I tell you, youcannot 
help being in this mood, if once you 
throw yourselves enthusiastically into 
the warfare of God. ’A is a 
strong word of Hellenistic coinage, from 
ἄγαν and ἄλλομαι, to leap much, 9. 
ing irrepressible demonstrative gladness. 
This joy is inseparable from the heroic 


ΕΙ---13. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


IOI 


13. ''Ὑμεῖς ἐστε τὸ "ἅλας τῆς γῆς: ἐὰν δὲ τὸ ἅλας ” µωρανθῇ, υ Mk. ix, so. 


k. xiv. 


ἐν tive " ἁλισθήσεται; eis οὐδὲν ἰσχύει ἔτι, εἰ μὴ βληθῆναι] ἔξω, a4- Col. 


v Lk. xiv. 34. Rom. i. 22. 


lv 


1 Cor.i.20. where and in Mk. ix. 49. 


1βληθ v in NBC 1, 33, Origen, which carries along with it the omission of και 


after εξω, 


temper. It is the joy of the Alpine 
climber standing on the top of a snow- 
clad mountain. But the Teacher gives 
two reasons to help inexperienced dis- 
ciples to rise to that moral elevation.— 
ὅτι 6 μισθὸς .. . ovpavois. For evil 
treatment on earth there is a com- 
pensating reward in heaven. This hope, 
weak now, was strong in primitive 
Christianity, and greatly helped martyrs 
and confessors.—ottws yap ἐ. τοὺς 
προφήτας. If we take the γὰρ as giving 
areason for the previous statement the 
sense will be: you cannot doubt that the 
prophets who suffered likewise have 
feceived an eternal reward (so Bengel, 
Fritzsche, Schanz, Meyer, Weiss). But 
we may take it as giving a co-ordinate 
season for joy = ye are in good com- 
pany. There is inspiration in the 
“goodly fellowship: of the prophets,” 
quite as much as in thought of their 
posthumous reward. It is to be noted 
that the prophets themselves did not get 
much comfort from such thoughts, and 
more generally that they did not rise to 
the joyous mood commended to His 
disciples by Jesus; but were desponding 
and querulous. On that side, therefore, 
there was no inspiration to be got from 
thinking of them. But they were 
thoroughly loyal to righteousness at all 
hazards, and reflection on their noble 
career was fitted to infect disciples with 
their spirit.—rovs πρὸ ὑμῶν: words skil- 
fully chosen to raise the spirit. Before you 
not only in time but in vocation and 
destiny. Your predecessors in function 
and suffering; take up the prophetic 
succession and along with it, cheerfully, 
its tribulations. 

Vv. 13-16. Disciple functions. It is 
quite credible that these sentences 
formed part of the Teaching on the 
Hill. Jesus might say these things at a 
comparatively early period to the men 
to whom He had already said: I will 
make you fishers of men. The functions 
assigned to disciples here are not more 
ambitious than that alluded to at the 
time of their call. The new section 
rests on what goes before, and postulates 
possession of the attributes named in 
the Beatitudes. With these the disciples 


will be indeed the salt of the earth and 
the light of the world. Vitally important 
functions are indicated by the two 
figures. Nil sole et sale utilius was a 
Roman proverb (Pliny, H. N., 31, 9). 
Both harmonise with, the latter points 
expressly to, a universal destination of 
the new religion. The sun lightens all 
lands. Both also show how alien it was 
from the aims of Christ to be the teacher 
of an esoteric faith. 

_ Ver. 13. ἅλας, a late form for GAs, 
ἅλος, masculine. The properties of salt 
are assumed to be known. Com- 
mentators have enumerated four. Salt 
is pure, preserves against corruption, 
gives flavour to food, and as a manuring 
element helps to fertilise the land. The 
last mentioned property is specially 
insisted on by Schanz, who finds a 
reference to it in Lk. xiv. 35, and thinks 
it is also pointed to here by the expres- 
sion τῆς γῆς. The first, purity, is a 
quality of salt per se, rather than a con- 
dition on which its function in nature 
depends. The second and third are 
doubtless the main points to be insisted 
on, and the second more than the third 
and above all. Salt arrests or prevents 
the process of putrefaction in food, and 
the citizens of the kingdom perform the 
same function for the earth, that is, for 
the people who dwell on it. In Schanz’s 
view there is a confusion of the 
metaphor with its moral interpretation. 
Fritzsche limits the point of comparison 
to indispensableness= ye are as 
necessary an element in the world as 
salt is; a needlessly bald interpretations 
Necessary certainly, but why and for 
what ?—+7s γῆς might mean the land of . 
Israel (Achelis, Bergpredigt), but it is 
more natural to take it in its widest 
significance in harmony with κόσμον. 
Holtzmann (H. C.) sets κόσµου down to 
the account of the evangelist, and thinks 
γῆς in the narrow sense more suited to 
the views of Jesus.—Ver. 14. µωρανθῇ. 
The Vulgate renders the verb evanuerit. 
Better Beza and Erasmus, infatuatus 
fuerit. If the salt become insipid, so as 
to lack its proper preserving virtue— 
can this happen? Weiss and others 
reply: It does not matter for the poini 


102 


x Ch. vii. 6. καὶ]ὶ * 2 ὃ τῶ 4 
Lk viii. ς καὶ καταπατεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


γ. 


14. Ὑμεῖς ἐστε τὸ φῶς 


Heb. κ.20. τοῦ κόσμου" οὐ δύναται πόλις κρυβῆναι ἐπάνω dpous κειµένη" 1ς. 


y part. pass. 


in Lk. xii. οὐδὲ 7 καίουσι λύχνον καὶ τιθέασιν αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τὸν µόδιον, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ 


. Heb. 
i 18 al. 


1 Omitted in MSS. named in preceding note. 


of the comparison. Perhaps not, but it 
does matter for the felicity of the 
metaphor, which is much more strikingly 
apt if degeneracy can happen in the 
natural as well as in the spiritual sphere. 
Long ago Maundrell maintained that it 
om and modern travellers confirm his 
statement. Furrer says: ‘As it was 
observed by Maundrell 200 years ago, so 
it has often been observed in our time 
that salt loses somewhat of its sharpness 
in the storehouses of Syria and Palestine. 
Gathered in a state of impurity, it under- 
goes with other substances a chemical 
process, by which it becomes really 
another sort of stuff, while retaining its 
old appearance” (Ztscht. fur M. und 
R., 1890). A similar statement is made 
by Thomson (Land and Book, p. 381). 
There is no room for doubt as to whether 
the case supposed can happen in the 
spiritual sphere. The “ salt of the earth” 
can become not only partially but 
wholly, hopelessly insipid, losing the 
qualities which constitute its conservative 
power as set forth in the Beatitudes and 
in other parts of Christ's teaching (¢.g., 
Mat. xviii.) Erasmus gives a realistic 
description of the causes of degeneracy 
in these words; ** Si vestri mores fuerint 
amore laudis, cupiditate pecuniarum, 
studio voluptatum, libidine vindicandi, 
metu infamiae damnorum aut mortis 
infatuati,”’ etc. (Paraph. in Evan. Matt.). 
—dy rive ἅλις : ay υμα neher 
so necessary .saltin ocess done 

but, orth wheat shall the insipid salt be 
salted? The meaning is that the lost 
property is irrecoverable. A stern state- 
‘ment, reminding us of Heb. vi. 6, but 
true to the fact in the spiritual sphere. 
Nothing so hopeless as apostate disciple- 
ship with a bright past behind it to which 
it has become dead— in the spirit, 
ending in the flesh.—els οὐδὲν, useless 
for salting, good for nothing else any 
more (ἔτι).---εἶ μὴ βληθὲν, etc. This is a 
kind of humorous afterthought: except 
indeed, cast out as refuse, to be trodden 
under foot of man, i.¢., to make foot- 
paths of. The reading βληθὲν is much 
to be preferred to βληθηναι, as giving 
prominence to καταπατεῖσθαι as the 
main verb, pointing to a kind of use 
to which insipid salt can after all be put. 


But what a downcome: from being 
saviours of society to supplying materials 
for footpaths ! 

Ver, 14. τὸ φῶς 7. x., the light, the 
sun of the moral world conceived of as 
full of the darkness of ignorance and 
sin. The disciple function is now viewed 
as illuminating. And as under the figure 
of salt the danger warned against was 
that of becoming insipid, so here the 
danger to be avoided is that of obscuring 
the light. The light will shine, that is 
its nature, if pains be not taken to hide 
it.—ob δύναται πόλις, etc. As a city 
situate on the top of a hill cannot be 
hid, neither can a light fail to be seen 
unless it be pe reaped pty wae from 
shining. No pains need to be taken to 
secure that the light shall shine. For 
that it is enough to be a — But 
Christ knew that there would be strong 
temptation for the men that had it in 
them to be lights to hide their light. It 
would draw the world’s attention to 
them, and so them to the ill will 
of such as hate the light. Therefore He 
goes on to caution disciples against the 
policy of obscuration. 

Ver. 15. A parabolic word pointing 
out that such a policy in the natural 
sphere is unheard of and absurd.—xai- 
over, to kindle, accendere, ordinarily 
neuter = urere; not as Beza t,a 
Hebraism ; examples occur in late Greek 
authors (vide ay em. Obser. Sac.), The 
apes is taken from lowly co life. 
Hy was a projecting stone in wall 
on which the lamp wasset. The house 
consisted of a single room, so that the 
tiny light sufficed for all. It might now 
and then be placed under the modius, an 
earthenware grain measure, or under the 
bed (Mk. iv. 21), high to keep clear of 
serpents, therefore without ger of 
setting it on fire (Koetsveld, De Ge- 
lijkenissen, p. 305). But that would be 

¢ exception, not the rule—done occa- 
sionally for special reasons, dur- 
ing the hours of sleep. hanz says 
the lamp burned all night, and that when 
they wanted darkness they put it on the 
floor and covered it with the “ bushel”. 
Tholuck also thinks people might cover 
the light when they wished to keep it 
burning, when they had occasion to leave 


τή---1δ. 


τὴν λυχνίαν καὶ "λάμπει πᾶσι τοῖς ἐν τῇ oikia. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


103 


16. οὕτω λαμψάτω z Lk. xvii 


2 


” a a 24. 
τὸ φῶς ὑμῶν ἔµπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὅπως ἴδωσιν ὑμῶν τὰ "καλὰ Acts xii.7. 


ἔργα, καὶ δοξάσωσι τὸν πατέρα ὑμῶν τὸν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 


2 Cor. iv. 


a Cf. Mt. 


xxvi. 10, Mk. xiv. 6, for an example of a “ good work”. 


the room for a time. Weiss, on the 
other hand, thinks it would be put under 
a cover only when they wished to put it 
out (Matt.-Evan., p. 144). But was it 
ever put out? Not so, according to 
Benzinger (Heb. Arch., p. 124). 

Ver. 16. οὕτω. Do yeas they do in 
cottage life: apply the parable.—Aap- 
ψάτω, let your light shine. Don’t use 
means to prevent it, turning the rare 
exception of household practice into the 
rule, so extinguishing your light, or at 
least rendering it useless. Cowards can 
always find plausible excuses for the 
policy of obscuration—reasons of pru- 
dence and wisdom: gradual accustom- 
ing of men to new ideas; deference to 
the prejudices of good men; avoidance 
of rupture by premature outspokenness ; 
but generally the true reason is fear of 
unpleasant consequences to oneself. 
Their conduct Jesus represents as dis- 
loyalty to God.—érrws, etc. The shining 
of light from the good works of disciples 
glorifies God the Father in heaven. 
The hiding of the light means withhold- 
ing glory. The temptation arises from 
the fact—a stern law of the moral world 
it is—that just when most glory is likely 
to accrue to God, least glory comes to 
the light-bearer; not glory but dishonour 
and evil treatment his share. Many are 
ready enough to let their light shine 
when honour comes to themselves. But 
their “light” is not true heaven-kindled 
light; their works are not καλὰ, noble, 
heroic, but πονηρὰ (vii. 17), ignoble, 
worthless, at best of the conventional 
type in fashion among religious people, 
and wrought often in a spirit of vanity 
and ostentation. This is theatrical 
goodness, which is emphatically not what 
Jesus wanted. Euthy. Zig. says: ov 
κελεύει θεατρίζειν τὴν ἀρετὴν. 

Note that here, for the first time in the 
Gospel, Christ’s distinctive name for God, 
‘“Father,’”’ occurs. It comes in as a 
thing of course. Does it presuppose 
previous instruction? (So Meyer.) One 
might have expected so important a topic 
as the nature and name of God to have 
formed the subject of a distinct lesson. 
But Christ’s method of teaching was not 
scholastic or formal, He defined terms 
by discriminating use; Father, e.g., as a 
name for God, by using it as a motive to 


noble conduct. The motive suggested 
throws light on the name. God, we 
learn, as Father delights in noble conduct; 
as human fathers find joy in sons who 
acquit themselves bravely. Jesus may 
have given formal instruction on the 
point, but not necessarily. This first use 
of the title is very significant. It is ful, 
solemn, impressive: your Father, He 
who is in the heavens; so again in ver. 
45. It is suggestive of reasons for faith- 
fulness, reasons of love and reverence. 
It hints at a reflected glory, the reward 
of heroism. The noble works which 
glorify the Father reveal the wcrkers to 
be sons. The double-sided doctrine of 
this /ogion of Jesus is that the divine is 
revealed by the heroic in human conduct, 
and that the moral hero is the true son 
of God. Jesus Himself is the highest 
illustration of the twofold truth. 

Vv. 17-20. Fesus defines His position. 
At the period of the Teaching on the Hill 
Jesus felt constrained to define His ethi- 
cal and religious position all round, with 
reference to the O. T. as the recognised 
authority, and also to contemporary 
presentations of righteousness. The 
disciples had already heard Him teach in 
the synagogues (Matt. iv. 23) ina manner 
that at once arrested attention and led 
hearers to recognise in Him a new type 


of teacher (Mk. i. 27), entirely different 


from the scribes (Mk. i. 22). The sen- 
tences before us contain just such a 
statement of the Teacher’s attitude as 
the previously awakened surprise of His 
audiences would lead us to expect. 
There is no reason to doubt their sub- 
stantial authenticity though they may not 
reproduce the precise words of the 
speaker ; no ground for the suggestion of 
Holtzmann (H. C.) that so decided a 
position either for or against the law was 
not likely to be taken up in Christ’s time, 
and that we must find in these vv. an 
anti-Pauline programme of the Judaists. 
At a first glance the various statements 
may appear inconsistent with each other. 
And assuming their genuineness, they 
might easily be misunderstood, and give 
rise to disputes in the apostolic age, or 
be taken hold of in rival interests. The 
words of great epoch-making men gene- 
rally have this fate. Though apparently 
contradictory they might all proceed 


| 


ος an 
accus. with inf. 


Cor. v.17. James i. 10. ε here only. 


from the many-sided mind of Jesus, and 
be so reported by the genial Galilean 
publican in his Logia. The best guide to 
the meaning of the momentous declara- 
tion they contain is acquaintance with the 
general drift of Christ’s teaching (vide 
Wendt, Die Lehre Fesu, ii., 330). Verbal 
exegenis will not do much for us. We 
must bring to the words sympathetic 
insight ἵπτο the whole significance of 
Christ's ministry. Yet the 

itself, well weighed, is more luminous 
than at first it may seem. 

Ver. 17. Mn νοµίσητε: These words 
betray a consciousness that there was 
that in His teaching and bearing which 
might create such an impression, and 
are a protest against taking a surface 
impression for the truth.—xatradteat, to 
abrogate, to set aside in the exercise of 
legislative authority. What freedom of 
mind is implied in the bare suggestion 
of this as a possibility! To the ordinary 
religious Jew the mere conception would 
appear a profanity. A greater than the 
O. T,, than Moses and the prophets, is 
here. But the Greater is full of rever- 
ence for the institutions and sacred 
books of His people. He is not come 
to disannul either the law or the pro- 
phets, ἢ before τ. προφ. is not = καὶ. 
“Law” and ‘ Prophets” are not taken 
here as one idea = the O. T. Scriptures, 
as law, prophets and psalms seem to 
be in Lk. xxiv. 44, but as distinct parts, 
with reference to which different atti- 
tudes might conceivably be taken up. 
# implies that the attitude actually taken 
up is the same towards both. The pro- 
phets are not to be conceived of as 
coming under the category of law 
(Weiss), but as retaining their distinc- 
tive character as revealers of God's 
nature and providence, Christ's attitude 
towards them in that capacity is the 
same as that towards the law, though 
the Sermon contains no illustrations 
under that head. ‘The idea of God 
and of salvation which Jesus taught bore 
the same relations to the O. T. revelation 
as His doctrine of righteousness to the 
O. T. law” (Wendt, Die L. F., ii., 344). 
—trAnpe@cat: the common relation is ex- 
pressed by this weighty word. Christ 


KATA MATOAION 


c in same sense Acts v. 38, Rom. xiv. 20. 
πα 


Vv. 


17. “M} "νομίσητε ὅτι ἦλθον “καταλῦσαι τὸν νόµον ἢ τοὺς 
προφήτας ' οὐκ ἦλθον καταλῦσαι, ἀλλὰ πληρῶσαι. 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ἕως ἂν “παρέλθῃ ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ, "ἰῶτα ἓν ἢ µία 


18. ἀμὴν γὰρ 


d Ch. xxiv. Lk. xvi. 17. @ 
vi. 17 (xepéa in both pl. WHS. 


protests that He came not as an abro- 
tor, but as a fulfiller. What rdéle does 

e thereby claim? Such as belongs to 
one whose attitude is at once free and 
reverential. He fulfils by realising in 
theory and practice an ideal to ne 
O. T. institutions and revelations point, 
but which they do not adequately ex- 
press. Therefore, in fulfilling He neces- 
sarily abrogates in effect, while repudi- 
ating the spirit of a destroyer. He 
brings in a law of the spirit which 
cancels the law of the letter, a kingdom 
which realises prophetic ideals, while 
setting aside the crude details of their 
conception of the Messianic time. 

Vv. 18-19. These verses wear on first 
view a Judaistic look, and have been 
regarded as an interpolation, or set down 
to the credit of an over-conservative 
evangelist. But they may be reconciled 
with ver. 17, as above interpreted. Jesus 

esses here in the strongest manner 
His conviction that the whole O. T. is 
a Divine revelation, and pron: po µην 
every minutest precept has religious 
significance which must be recognised 
in the ideal fulfilment.—Aphy, formula 
of solemn asseveration, often used 
Jesus, never by apostles, found doubled 
only in fourth Gospel.—fws ἂν π θῃ, 
etc.: not intended to fix a period after 
which the law will pass away, but a 
strong way of saying never = Tholuck 
and Weiss).—léra, the smallest letter in 
the Hebrew alphabet.—xepa(a, the little 
projecting point in some of the letters, 
¢.g-, of the base line in Beth; both 
representing the minuti# in the Mosaic 
legislation. Christ, though totally op- 
posed to the spirit of the scribes, aha 
not allow them to have a monopoly of 
zeal for the commandments great and 
small, It was important in a polemical 
interest to make this εἶεατ.--- οὐ μὴ π., 
elliptical = do not fear lest. Vide Kihner, 
Gram., § 516, 9; also Goodwin's Syntax, 
Appendix ii.—fws ἂν π. yev., a second 
protasis introduced with ἕως explanatory 
of the first ἕως ἂν παρέλθῃ; vi 
Goodwin, § 510; not saying the same 
thing, but a kindred: eternal, lasting, 
till adequately fulfilled ; the latter the 
more exact statement of Christ's thought. 


17—20. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


105 


a cal - Ν 
1g. ὃς ἐὰν οὖν © λύσῃ µίαν τῶν " ἐντολῶν τούτων τῶν ἐλαχίστων, καὶ g Jobn v.18; 


διδάξῃ οὕτω τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ἐλάχιστος κληθήσεται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ 
τῶν οὐρανῶν: ὃς 8 ἂν ποιήσῃ καὶ διδάξῃ, οὗτος µέγας κληθήσεται 


ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν. 


nn a A 4 

ἱπερισσεύσῃ ἡ δικαιοσύνη ὑμῶν] πλεῖον τῶν / ypappatéwy καὶ 
, > x 3 3 x λ , a > a 1 
Φαρισαίων, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. 


20. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐὰν μὴ 


Vii. 23; x. 
35. 

Ch. xv. 3; 
xix. 17; 
XXxii. 40. 
Lk. i. 6. 
John xii. 
34. 

oath παρα 
in Eccles. 
11.19. Cf. 


Rom. ν.15. j sim. ellipt. const. 1 John ii. 2. 


1 ypov before η δικ. (= your righteousness) in QBLAal. T. R. as in SUZ. 


Ver. 19. ὃς ἐὰν οὖν λύσῃ, etc.: οὖν 
pointing to a natural inference from what 
goes before. Christ’s view being such 
as indicated, He must so judge of the 
setter aside of any laws however small. 
When a religious system has lasted long, 
and is wearing towards its decline and 
fall, there are always such men. The 
Baptist was in some respects such a man. 
He seems to have totally neglected the 
temple worship and sacred festivals. He 
shared the prophetic disgust at formal- 
ism. Note now what Christ’s judgment 
about such really is. A scribe or Phari- 
see would regard a breaker of even the 
least commandments as a miscreant. 
Jesus simply calls him the ᾖεασέ in the 
Kingdom of Heaven. He takes for 
granted that he is an earnest man, with 
a passion for righteousness, which is the 
key to his iconoclastic conduct. He 
recognises him therefore as possessing 
real moral worth, but, in virtue of his 
impatient radical-reformer temper, not 
great, only little in the scale of true 
mora! values, in spite of his earnestness 
in action and sincerity in teaching. John 
the Baptist was possibly in His mind, 
or some others not known to us from 
the Gospels.—és 8 ἂν ποιήσῃ καὶ διδάξῃ, 
etc. We know now who is least: who 
is great? The man who does and 
teaches to do all the commands great 
and small; great not named but under- 
stood—otros péyas. Jesus has in view 
O. T. saints, the piety reflected in the 
Psalter, where the great ethical laws and 
the precepts respecting ritual are both 
alike respected, and men in His own 
time living in their spirit. In such was 
a sweetness and graciousness, akin to 
the Kingdom as He conceived it, lacking 
in the character of the hot-headed law- 
breaker. The geniality of Jesus made 
Him value these sweet saintly souls. 

Ver. 20. Here is another type still, 
that of the scribes and Pharisees. We 
have had two degrees of worth, the little 
and the great. This new type gives us 


the moral zero.—A€yw yap. The γὰρ is 
somewhat puzzling. We expect δὲ, 
taking our attention off two types de- 
scribed in the previous sentence and 
fixing it on a distinct one. Yet there 
is a hidden logic latent in the yap. It 
explains the ἐλάχιστος of the previous 
verse. The earnest reformer is a small 
character compared with the sweet 
wholesome performer, but he is not a 
moral nullity. That place is reserved 
for another class. I call him least, not 
nothing, for the scribe is the zero.— 
πλεῖον τῶν yp. κ. Φ., a Compendious 
comparison, τῆς δικαιοσύνης being 
understood after πλεῖον. Christ’s state- 
ments concerning these classes of the 
Jewish community, elsewhere recorded, 
enable us to understand the verdict He 
pronounces here. They differed from 
the two classes named in ver. 18, thus: 
Class 1 set aside the least command- 
ments for the sake of the great; class 2 
conscientiously did all, great and small; 
class 3 set aside the great for the sake 
of the little, the ethical for the sake of 
the ritual, the divine for the sake of the 
traditional. That threw them outside 
the Kingdom, where only the moral has 
value. And the second is greater, higher, 
than the first, because, while zeal for 
the ethical is good, spirit, temper, dispo- 
sition has supreme value in the Kingdom. 
These valuations of Jesus are of great 
importance as a contribution towards 
defining the nature of the Kingdom as 
He conceived it. 

Nothing, little, great : there is a higher 
grade still, the highest. It belongs to 
Christ Himself, the Fulfiller, who is 
neither a sophistical scribe, nor an im- 
patient reformer, nor a strict performer 
of all laws great and small, walking 
humbly with God in the old ways, with- 
out thought, dream or purpose of change, 
but one who lives above the past and the 
present in the ideal, knows that a change 
is impending, but wishes it to come 
gently, and so as to do full justice to all 


106 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Vv. 


k Rom. iz. 21. ᾿Ηκούσατε ὅτι * ἐρρέθη 1 τοῖς | ἀρχαίοις, OF φονεύσεις: ὃς 8 ἂν 


again » pe. Φονεύση, ™ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ 


Ἀκρίσει: 22. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ἐμ, ὅτι πᾶς 


Wig. Ke Acts ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ εἰκῆ 2 ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει: ὃς δ᾽ 
Pet. ii, * sav εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ, ‘Paxd,® ο ἔσται τῷ "συνεδρίῳ" ὃς 


γε 
Ώ a the Cor σα, here only. 


m with dat. here four times; with gen. of 
Mk. xiv. 55. Lk.xxn.66 Often in Acts. 


ο Ch. xxvi. 59. 


ὰερρηθη in BD; text in LMA al. pl. (W.HL). 


Greek. 


Ch. xxvi.66. Mk. xiv. 64. 


ερρεθη was more usual in later 


2 axn is an ancient gloss found in many late MSS. but omitted in QB, Origen, 


Vulgate, and in the best modern editions. 


5 paxa in ΝΤ abe (Tisch.); text in §bBE (W.H.). 


that is divine, venerable, and of good 
tendency in the past. His is the unique 
greatness of the reverently conservative 
yet free, bold inaugurator of a new time. 
Vv. 21-26. First illustration of Christ's 
ethical attitude, taken from the Sixth 
Commandment. In connection with 
this and the following exemplifications of 
Christ's ethical method, the interpreter 
is embarrassed by the long-continued 
strifes of the theological schools, which 
have brought back the spirit of legalism, 
from which the great Teacher sought to 
deliver His disciples. It will be best to 
ignore these strifes and go steadily on 
our way.—Ver. 21. “Hxovoare. The 
common people knew the law by hearing 
it read in the syn ¢, not by 
reading it paca ag -- aorist εχ- 
presses what they were accustomed to 
hear, an instance of the ‘‘ gnomic”’ use. 
Tholuck thinks there may be an allusion 
to the tradition of the scribes, called 
Shema.—toig ἀρχαίοις might mean: in 
ancient times, to the ancients, or by the 
ancients. The second is in accord with 
Ni T; and is adopted by Meyer, 
Weiss and Holtzmann (H.C.). How far 
back does Christ in thought? To 
Moses Pps Ezra? The ession is 
vague, and might cover the whole past, 
and perhaps intended todoso. There 
is no reason ἃ i why the criticism 
should be restricted to the interpretation 
of the law by the scribes. Christ's 
position as fulfiller entitled Him to point 
out the defects of the law itself, and we 
must be prepared to find Him doing so, 
and there is reason to believe that in the 
sequel He --- does (so Wendt, L. F., 
ii., 332).—Od 
This is a correct statement, not only of 
the Pharisaic interpretation of the law, 
but of the law itself. Asa law for the 
life of a nation, it could forbid and punish 
only the outward act. But just here lay 
its defect as a summary of human duty. 


It restrained the end not the beginning 
of transgression (Euthy. Zig.).—évoyos = 
όµενος, with dative of the tribunal 
here.—Ver. 22. ἐγὼ δὲ ἡμῖν. 
Christ supplies the defect, as a painter 
fills in a rude outline of a_ picture 
(σκιαγραφίαν), says Theophy. He goes 
back on the roots of crime in the feel- 
ings: anger, contempt, etc.—was . . . 
αὐτοῦ. Every one; universal interdict 
of angry passion.—4&8eA¢@: not in blood 
(the classical meaning) or in faith, but 
by common humanity. The implied 
doctrine is that every man is my brother ; 
companion doctrine to the universal 
Fatherhood of God (νετ. 45).---εἰκῆ is of 
course a gloss ; Beng, 5 of the 
interdict against may be required, 
but it was not Christ's habit to supply 
qualifications. His aim was to impress 
the main idea, anger a deadly sin.— 
here as in ver. 21. The a an a 
is to the provincial court of seven (Deut. 
xvi. 18, 2 Chron, xix. 5, Joseph. Ant. iv. 
8, 14) possessing power to nish capital 
offences by the sword. Chri hrist’s words 
are of course not to be taken literally as 
if He were enacting that the an man 
be tried as a criminal. So understood 
He would be simply introducing an ex- 
tension of legalism. He deservesto go 
before the seven, He says, meaning he is 
as great an offender as the homicide 
who is actually tried by them. 

Ῥακά: left untranslated in A. V. and 
να. a word of little meaning, rendered 
by Jerome “‘inanis aut vacuus absque 
cerebro”. Augustine says a Jew told him 
it was not properly a word at all, but an 
interjection like Hem. Theophy. gives 
as an equivalent σὺ spoken by a Greek 
to aman whom he i And the 
man who commits this trivial offence (as. 
it seems) must go before, not the pro- 
vincial seven, but the supreme seventy, 
the Sanhedrim that tried the most heinous 
offences and sentenced to the severest 


21—25. 


δ᾽ ἂν εἴπῃ, Μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται eis τὴν Ὑέενναν τοῦ πυρός. 
᾿Εὰν οὖν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον, κἀκεῖ 


µνησθῇς ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου 2 ἔχει τὶ 


δῶρόν σου ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ ὕπαγε, πρῶτον * διαλλά- 
γηθι τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου. 


ττσθι 5 εὐνοῶν τῷ * 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


> , , ef @ ers A ες 
ἀντιδίκω σου ταχύ, "ἕως ὅτου εἶ ἐν TH ὁδῷ per 


107 


22. p ἔχειντικ. 
3 τινος here. 
Mk. xi. 25. 
Rev. ii. 4. 
Cf. Acts 
Xxiv. 19 
(προςτινα). 
q here only 
25- inN.T. 
21 ἴσθι with 
part. Lk. 


5 a ν Bahn Ti 
κατὰ σοῦ, 24. ἄφες έκει TO 


> al , , Vv me / A a Ni ia , xix. 17. 
αὐτοῦ, ποτέ σε παραδῷ ὁ ἀντίδικος TO κριτῇ, καὶ ὁ κριτής σεν here onl 
7 ρω α " ο. 

in 5 


t Lk. xii. 58; xviii.3. 1 Peter v. 8. 
34; xx. 18; xxvii. 2, etc. 


1} per αυτου before εν τ. 054, SEBDL. 


penalties, ¢.g., death by stoning! Trivial 
in appearance, the offence is deadly in 
Christ’s eyes. It means contempt for a 
fellow-man, more inhuman than anger— 
a violent passion, prompting to words 
and acts often bitterly regretted when 
the hot temper cools down. Μωρέ, if a 


b33 


fool, good for nothing, morally worthless. 
It may, as Paulus, and after him Nésgen, 


suggests, be a Hebrew word, my 


Greek word, the equivalent for 


(Num. xx. 24, Deut. xxi. 18), a rebel 
against God or against parents, the most 
worthless of characters. Against this 
Field (Otium Norvicense) remarks that it 
would be the only instance of a pure 
Hebrew word in the N. T. In either 
case the word expresses a more serious 
form of contempt than Κατα. Raca ex- 
presses contempt for a man’s head = you 
stupid! More expresses contempt for 
his heart and character = you scoundrel. 
The reckless use of such opproprious 
epithets Jesus regarded as the supreme 
offence against the law of humanity.— 
ἔνοχος . . . πυρός. He deserves to go, 
not to the seven or the seventy, but to 
hell, his sin altogether damnable. 
Kuinoel thinks the meaning is: He 
deserves to be burned alive in the valley 
of Ἠϊπποπι :. ἐς dignus est qui in valle 
Hinnomi vivus comburatur. This in- 
terpretation finds little approval, but it is 
not so improbable when we remember 
what Christ said about the offender of 
the little ones (Matt. xviii. 6). Neither 
burning alive nor drowning was actually 
practised. In these words of Jesus 
against anger and contempt there is an 
aspect of exaggeration. They are the 
strong utterance of one in whom all 
forms of inhumanity roused feelings of 
passionate abhorrence. They are of the 
utmost value as a revelation of character. 

Vv. 23,24. Holtzmann (Η. Ο.) regards 


U ἕως Grov=while, here only. 


Vv τινά τινι here and Ch. xviii. 


these verses, as well as the two following, 
as an addition by the evangelist. But 
the passage is at least in thorough 
harmony with what goes before, as well 
as with the whole discourse.—’Eav οὖν 
προσφέρῃς, if thou art in the very act of 
presenting thine offering (present tense) 
at the αἰίατ.--κἀκεῖ µνησθῇς . . . κατὰ 
gov, and it suddenly flashes through thy 
mind there that thou hast done some- 
thing to a brother man fitted to provoke 
angry feelingin him. What then? Get 
through with thy worship as fast as 
possible and go directly after and make 
peace with the offended? No, interrupt 
the religious action and go on that 
errand first.—ades ἐκεῖ. Lay it down on 
the spur of the moment before the altar 
without handing it to the priest to be 
offered by him in thy stead.—xal ὕπαγε 
πρῶτον. The πρῶτον is to be joined to 
ὕπαγε, not to the following verb as in A. 
V. and R. V. (πρῶτον stands after the 
verb also in chaps. vi. 33, ΥΠ. 5). First 
go: remove thyself from the temple, 
break off thy worship, though it may 
seem profane to ἆο5ο.-- διαλλάγηθι . 
καὶ τότε . . . πρόσφερε: no contempt 
for religious service expressed or implied. 
Holtzmann (H. C.) asks, did Jesus offer 
sacrifice ? and answers, hardly. In any 
case He respected the practice. But, 
reconciliation before sacrifice: morality 
before religion. Significant utterance, 
first announcement of a great principle 
often repeated, systematically neglected 
by the religion of the time. Placability 
before sacrifice, mercy before sacrifice, 
filial affection and duty before sacrifice ; 
so always in Christ’s teaching (Matt. ix. 
13, XV. 5). πρόσφερε: present; set about 
offering: plenty of time now for the 
sacred action. 

Vv. 25, 26. There is much more 
reason for regarding this passage as an 
interpolation. It is connected only ex- 
ternally (by the references to courts Οἱ 


108 


w ver 33. 
Ch. xviii. 


KATA MATOAION 


παραδῷ 1] τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ, καὶ εἰς φυλακὴν βληθήσῃ. 


γ. 


26. ἀμὴν λέγω 


151 xxii, σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν, ἕως ἂν "' ἀποδῶς τὸν ἔσχατον * κοδράντην. 


. 27. Ἡκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς dpxatots,? OF μοιχεύσεις: 28. ἐγὼ 
42. δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι was ὁ βλέπων γυναῖκα πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι αὐτῆς * 


1 This second σε παρ. is omitted in ΝΕΒ. Luke's text may have suggested the 


addition. 


2 ros αρχαιοις is wanting in MSS. except LMA. 
S emOupnoat without pronoun, $%* (Tisch.); with αντην, BDL al, (W.H. 


brackets). MZ have αντης. 
law) with what goes before, and it is out 
of keeping with the general drift of the 
teaching on the hill. It occurs in a 
different connection in Luke xii. 58, 
there as a solemn warning to the Jewish 
people, on its way to judgment, to re- 
pent. Meyer pleads that the logion 
might be repeated. It might, but only 
on suitable occasions, and the teachin 
on the hill does not seem to offer su 
anoccasion. Kuinoel, Bleek, Holtzmann, 
Weiss and others regard the words as 
foreign to the connection. Referring to 
the exposition in Luke, I offer here only 
a few verbal notes mainly on points in 
which Matthew differs from Luke.—tot 
«ὐνοῶν, be in a conciliatory mood, ready 
to come to terms with your opponent in 
a legal process (ἀντίδικος). It is a case 
of debt, and the two, creditor and debtor, 
are on the way to the court where they 
must appear together (Deut. xxi. 18, xxv. 
1). Matthew's expression implies will- 
ingness to come to terms amicably on 
the creditor's part, and the debtor is 
exhorted,to meet him half way. Luke's 
δὸς ἐ ν throws the willingness on 
the other side, or at least implies that the 
debtor will need to make an effort to brin 
the creditor to terms.— ®, a mu 
milder word than Luke's xaracvpp, which 
points to rough, rude handling, dragging 
an unwilling debtor along whither he 
would rather not ρο.--ὑπηρέτῃ, the officer 
of the court whose business it was to 
collect the debt and generally to carry 
out the decision of the judge; in Luke 
π ρ. ράντην = quadrans, less 
than a farthing. Luke has λεπτὸν, half 
the value of a κοδ., thereby strengthening 
the statement that the imprisoned debtor 
will not escape till he has paid all he 
owes. 

Vv. 27-30. Second illustration, taken 
from the seventh commandment. A 
grand moral law, in brief lapidary style 
guarding the married relation and the 
sanctity of home, Of course the Hebrew 
‘egislator condemned lust after another 


αντην is probably the true reading. 


man's wife; it is expressly prohibited in 
the tenth commandment. But in practical 
working as a public law the statute laid 
main stress on the outward act, and it 
was the tendency of the scribes to give 
exclusive prominence to this. Therefore 
Christ brings to the front what both 
Moses and the scribes left in the back- 
ground, the inward desire of which 
adultery is the fruit—Ver. 28.—é βλέπων: 
the looker is supposed to be a husband 
who by his look wrongs his own wife.— 
Ίκα: married or unmarried.—wpds τὸ 
ιθνµῆσαι. The look is supposed to 
be not casual but persistent, the desire 
not involuntary or momentary, but 
cherished with longing. Augustine, a 
severe judge in such matters, defines the 
offence thus : ‘‘ Qui hoc fine et hoc animo 
attenderit ut eam concupiscat; quod 
jam non est titillari delectatione carnis 
sed plene consentire libidini” (De ser. 
Domini). Chrysostom, the merciless 
scourge of the vices of Antioch, says: 
ὁ ἑαντῷ τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν σνλλέγων, ὁ 
ιόν ἀναγκάζοντος τὸ θηρίον ἐπεισ- 
μοῦντι τῷ λογισμφ. Hom. 

μάς τς er Rabbis also condemned 
unchaste looks, but in how coarse a 
style compared with Jesus let this 
quotation given by Fritzsche show: 
“Intuens vel in minimum digitum 
feminae est ac si intueretur in locum 
pudendum”. In better taste are these 
oy ay quoted by Winsche (Beitrage) : 
“The eye and the heart are the two 
brokers of sin"; “ Passions lodge only 
in him who sees "".—atrhy (brack as 
doubtful by W. ‘ge the accusative after 
ἐπιθ. is rare and late.—We cannot but 
think of the personal relations to woman 
of One who understood so well the subtle 
sources of sexual sin. Shall we say that 
He was tempted in all points as we are, 
but desire was expelled by the mighty 
power of a pure love to which every 
woman was as a daughter, a sister, or a 
betrothed: a sacred object of tender 


respect ? 


26—31. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


109 


ἤδη ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 29. εἰ δὲ ὁ ὀφθαλμός y Ch. xviii. 


σου ὁ δεξιὸς 7 οκανδαλίζει σε, Ζ ἔξελε αὐτὸν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ aod: 
Σσυμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται Ev τῶν μελῶν σου, καὶ py ὅλον τὸ 


σῶμά σου βληθῇ εἰς γέενναν. 


γέενναν.Ἡ 


31. “'Ἐρρέθη δέ, ὅτι ὃ Sg ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, δότω 


1 B has εαντου. 


ο. καὶ εἰ ἡ δεξιά σου χεὶρ σκαν- 
ἡ χεὶρ 


6,8, parall. 
1 Cor. viii. 
13 (= 
tempt). 
Ch, xv. 12; 
xvii. 27(to 
give 
offence). 


2 For the reading in text QB have εις yeevvav απελθη. The T. R. has doubtless 


been conformed to the reading in ver. 29. 


Had it stood here in the copies used by 


the scribes they would not have substituted the reading in QB, 


5 SSBDL omit οτι. 


Vv. 29, 30. Counsel to the tempted, 
expressing keen perception of the danger 
and strong recoil from a sin to be shunned 
et all hazards, even by excision, as it 
were, of offending members; two named, 
eye and hand, eye first as mentioned 
before.—6 ὀφ. 6 δεξιὸς: the right eye 
deemed the more precious (1 Sam. xi. 2, 
Zech. xi. 17). Similarly ver. 30 the right 
hand, the most indispensable for work. 
Even these right members of te body 
must go. But as the remaining feft eye 
and hand can still offend, it is obvious 
that these counsels are not meant to be 
taken literally, but symbolically, as ex- 
pressing strenuous effort to master 
sexual passion (vide Grotius). Mutila- 
tion will not serve the purpose; it may 
prevent the outward act, but it will not 
extinguish ἀεξίτε.--σκανδαλίζει, cause 
το stumble; not found in Greek authors 
but in Sept. Sirach, and in N. T. in a 
tropical moral sense. The noun σκάν- 
δαλον is also of frequent occurrence, a 
late form for σκανδάληθρον, a trap-stick 
with bait on it which being touched the 
trap springs. Hesychius gives as its 
equivalent ἐμποδισμός. It is used in a 
literal sense in Lev. xix. 14 (Sept.).— 
συμφέρει . . . ἵνα ἀπολ.: ἵνα with sub- 
junctive instead of infinitive (vide on 
ch. iv. 3). Meyer insists on tva having 
here as always its telic sense and praises 
Fritzsche as alone interpreting the 
passage correctly. But, as Weiss ob- 
serves, the mere destruction of the 
member is not the purpose of its ex- 
cision. Note the impressive solemn 
repetition in ver. 30 of the thought in 
ver. 29, in identical terms save that for 
Άληθῇ is substituted, in the true reading, 
ἀπέλδη. This /ogion occurs again in 


Matthew (xviii. 8, 9). Weiss (Marc.- 
Evang., 326) thinks it is taken here 
from the Apostolic document, {.ε., 
Matthew’s book of Logia, and there from 
Mark ix. 43-47. 

Vv. 31-32. Third .illustration, sub- 
ordinate to the previous one, connected 
with the same general topic, sex rela- 
tions, therefore introduced less formally 
with a simple ἐρρέθη δὲ. This instance 
is certainly directed against the scribes 
rather than Moses. The law (Deut. 
xxiv. I) was meant to mitigate an existing 
usage, regarded as evil, in woman’s 
interest. The scribes busied themselves 
solely about getting the bill of separation 
into due legal form. They did nothing 
to restrain the unjust caprice of 
husbands; they rather opened a wider 
door to licence. The law contemplated 
as the ground of separation a strong 
loathing, probably of sexual origin. The 
Rabbis (the school of Shammai excepted) 
recognised whimsical dislikes, even a 
fancy for another fairer woman, as 
sufficient reasons. But they were 
zealous to have the bill in due form that 
the woman might be able to show she 
was free to marry again, and they 
probably flattered themselves they were 
defending the rights of women, Brave 
men! Jesus raised the previous question, 
and asserted a more radical right of 
woman—not to be put away, except 
when she put herself away by unfaithful- 
ness. He raised anew the prophetic 
cry (Mal. ii. 16), 1 hate putting away. It 
was an act of humanity of immense signi- 
ficance for civilisation, and of rare cour- 
age; for He was fighting single-handed 
against widely prevalent, long - estab- 
lished opinion and custom.—4amodvey: 


110 KATA MATOAION Vv. 


b bere and αὐτῇ " ἀποστάσιον" 32. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ 1 τὴν 
xix.7.  γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, " παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας, ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχᾶσθαι 2 - 
c Acts xxvi. ‘ , ΄ - 
29. 2Cor. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἀπολελυμένην Ὑαμήσῃ, μοιχᾶται.Σ 33. Πάλιν ἠκούσατε 
d here only ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, Οὐκ * ἐπιορκήσεις, ἀποδώσεις δὲ τῷ Κυρίῳ 
twice in τοὺς ὅρκους σου” 34. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ »ὀμόσαι Shws* μήτε ἐν 
. rats τῷ οὐρανῷ ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ" 35. µήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι 


16-22(with ¢ « 


ἐν). Heb. * ὑποπόδιόν ἐστι τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ: pyre eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, ὅτι © wdhus 
ue «oth τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως: 36. µήτε ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ σου ὀμόσῃς, ὅτι 


«ara), ver. 


35 (with eis). f Lk. xx. 43. Heb.i-13 κε this title for J. here and in Ps. xivii. 3 


l πας ο απολνων in MBLAal. Text in D al. 


2 NBD have µοιχενθηναι. 
3 The clause Kat os εαν . . 
In B it runs ο απολελυµενην Ύαμησας. 


the corresponding word in Greek 
authors is ἀποπέμπειν.-- ἀποστάσιον 
= βιβλίον ἀποστασίον in Deut. xxiv. 
The husband is to give her her dismissal, 
with a bill stating that she is no longer 
his wife. The singular form in tov is to 
be noted. The tendency in later Greek 
was to substitute tow for τα, the plural 
ending. Vide Lobeck, Phryn., p. 517. 
παρ. λ. πορνείας: a most important 
exception which has given rise to much 
controversy that will probably last till 
the world's end. The first question is: 
Did Christ really say this, or is it not 
rather an explanatory gloss due to the 
evangelist, or to the tradition he 

jllowed? De Wette, Weiss, Holtz- 
mann (H. C.) take the latter view. It 
would certainly be in accordance with 
Christ’s manner of teaching, using 
strong, brief, unqualified assertions to 
drive home unfamiliar or unwelcome 
truths, if the word as He spoke it took 
the form given oh ok ty wy * Every 
one putting away his wife an ng 
another pte: ἄν adultery "’. This 
was the fitting word to be spoken by one 
who hated putting away, in a time when 
it was common and sanctioned by the 
authorities. A second question is: What 
does πορνεία mean ὃ hanz, a master, 
as becomes a Catholic, in this class of 

uestions, enumerates five senses, but 
decides that it means adultery committed 
by a married woman. Some, including 
Déllinger (Christenthum und Kirche: The 
First Age of Christianity and the Church, 
vol. ii., app. iii.), think it means fornica- 
tion commi before marriage. The 
predominant opinion, both ancient and 
modern, is that adopted by Schanz. A 
third question is: Does Christ, assuming 
the words to have been spoken by Him, 


- µοιχαται is wanting in D and bracketed in W.H. 


recognise adultery as a ground of absolute 
divorce, or only, as Catholics teach, of 
separation a toro et mensa ? Is it possible 
to be quite sure as to this point? One 
thing is certain. Christ did not come to 
be a new legislator making laws for 
social life. He came to set up a high 
ethical ideal, and leave that to work on 
men’s minds. The tendency of His 
teaching is to create deep aversion to 
rupture of married relations. That 
aversion might even go the length of 
shrinking from severance of the tie even 
in the case of one who had forfeited all 
claims. The last clause is bracketed b 

W. H. as of doubtful genuineness. It 
states unqualifiedly that to marry a dis- 
missed wife is adultery. Meyer thinks 
that the qualification “unjustly dis- 
missed,” i.e., not for adultery, is under- 
stood. Weiss (Meyer) denies this. 

Vv. 33-37- Fourth illustration: con- 
cerning oat A new theme, therefore 
formally introduced as in ver. 421. πάλιν 
points to a new series of illustrations 
(Weiss, Mt.-Evan., p. 165). The first 
series is based on the Decalogue. Thou 
shalt not swear falsely (Lev. xix. 12), 
and thou shalt perform unto the Lord 
thy vows (Num. xxx.3: Deut. xxiii. 22)— 
what is gs, these dicta ? Nothing 
save what is unsaid. The scribes 
misplaced the emphasis. They had a 
great deal to say, in sophistical style, of 
the oaths that were binding and not 
binding, nothing about the fundamental 
requirement of truth in the inward parts. 
Again, therefore, Jesus goes back on the 
previous question: Should there be any 
need for oaths? —Ver. 34. Srus: 
emphatic = παντελῶς, don’t swear at 
all, Again an unqualified statement, to 
be taken not in the letter as a new law, 


32—38. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ΤΙ 


οὐ δύνασαι µίαν τρίχα λευκὴν ἢ µέλαιναν ποιῆσαι. 37. Eorw? δὲ b 2 Cor. i. 
I 


ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν, "ναὶ ναί, of οὔ: τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τούτων ἐκ τοῦ 


-19. 
James v. 


πονηροῦ ἐστιν. 38. Ἡκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη, *’OpPbadpdy ἀντὶ ὀφθαλ- i Bx. xxi. 24. 


1 S8BL place ποιησαι before η µελαιναν. 


‘scribes to give a smoother reading. 


Lev. xxiv. 
20. Deut. xix. 21. 


The T. R. represents an effort by the 


2 For εστω (SDL al.) BE have εσται, which expresses the injunction in the 
strongest way and is to be preferred (W.H. on margin). 


but in the spirit as inculcating such a 
love of truth that so far as we are con- 
cerned there shall be no need of oaths. 
In civil life the most truthful man has to 
take an oath because of the untruth and 
consequent distrust prevailing in the 
world, and in doing so he does not sin 
against Christ’s teaching. Christ Him- 
self took an oath before the High Priest 
(Με, xxvi. 63). What follows (vv. 34- 
6) is directed against the casuistry which 
laid stress on the words τῷ κυρίῳ, and 
evaded obligation by taking oaths in 
which the divine name was _ not 
mentioned : by heaven, earth, Jerusalem, 
or by one’s own head. Jesus points out 
that all such oaths involved a reference 
to God. This is sufficiently obvious in 
the case of the first three, not so clear in 
case of the fourth.—Aevxhy ἢ µέλαιναν : 
white is the colour of old age, black of 
youth. We cannot alter the colour of 
our hair so as to make our head look 
young or old. <A fortiori we cannot 
bring on our head any curse by perjury, 
of which hair suddenly whitened might 
be the symbol. Providence alone can 
blast our life. The oath by the head is 
a direct appeal to God. All these oaths 
are binding, therefore, says Jesus; but 
what I most wish to impress on you is: 
do not swear at all. Observe the use of 
μήτε (not μηδέ) to connect these different 
evasive oaths as forming a homogeneous 
group. Winer, sect. lv. 6, endorses the 
view of Herrmann in Viger that οὔτε and 
pyre are adjunctival, οὐδέ and μηδέ dis- 
junctival, and says that the latter add 
negation to negation, while the former 
divide a single negation into parts. 
Jesus first thinks of these evasive oaths 
as a bad class, then specifies them one 
after the other. Away with them one 
and all, and let your word be vat vat, 
οὗ ov. That is, if you want to give 
assurance, let it not be by an oath, but 
by simple repetition of your yes and no. 
Grotius interprets: let your yea or nay in 
word be a yea or nay in deed, be as good 
sas your word even unsupported by ar 


oath. This brings the version of Christ's 
saying in Mt. into closer correspond- 
ence with Jas. ν. 12--ἤτω τὸ Ναί vai, 
καὶ τὸ OU ov. Beza, with whom Achelis 
(Bevgpredigt) agrees, renders, ‘‘ Let your 
affirmative discourse be a simple yea, 
and your negative, nay”’.—tTo δὲ περισ- 
σὸν, the surplus, what goes beyond these 
simple words.—ék τοῦ πονηροῦ, hardly 
“from the evil one,” though many 
ancient and modern interpreters, including 
Meyer, have so understood it. Meyer 
says the neuter “ of evil’ gives a very 
insipid meaning. I think, however, that 
Christ expresses Himself mildly out of 
respect for the necessity of oaths in a 
world full of falsehood. I know, He 
means to say, that in certain circum- 
stances something beyond yea and nay 
will be required of you. But it comes of 
evil, the evil of untruthfulness. See that 
the evil be not in you. Chrysostom 
(Hom. xvii.) asks: How evil, if it be. 
God’s law? and answers: Because the 
law was good in its season. God acted 
like a nurse who gives the breast to an 
infant and afterwards laughs at it when 
it wants it after weaning. 

Vv. 38-42. Fifth illustration, from the 
law of compensation. Ver. 38 contains 
the theme, the following vv. Christ’s 
comment.—O@@alpov ... ὀδόντος. An 
exact quotation from Ex. xxi. 24, Christ’s 
criticism here concerns a precept from the 
oldest code of Hebrew law. Fritzsche 
explains the accusatives, ὀφθαλμὸν, 
ὀδόντα, by supposing εἶναι to be under- 
stood: ‘* Ye have heard that Moses wrote 
that an eye shall be for an eye”. The 
simplest explanation is that the two 
nouns in the original passage are under 
the government of δώσει, Ex. xxi. 23. 
(So Weiss and Meyer after Grotius.) 
Tersely expressed, a sound principle Οἱ 
civil law for the guidance of the judge, 
acted on by almost all peoples: Christ 
does not condemn it: if parties come 
before the judge, let him by all means 
give fair compensation for injuries re- 
ceived. He simply leaves it on one side. 


112 


j Ch. Σαν. μοῦ, καὶ ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος ° 
. Sep 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Vv. 


39- ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ph ἀντιστῆναι τῷ 


κκ] πονηρῷ: GAN ὅστις σε ) ῥαπίσει ἐπὶ] τὴν δεξιάν σου * σιαγόνα," 
κ ie vi. a9. στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην: 40. καὶ τῷ θέλοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ 
a δε Χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἵμάτιον' 41. Kai ὅστις σε 


1 For 
to the parall. in Luke. 


ῥαπισει επι ΔΙΣ have ραπιζει (pres.) as. 


The em of the Τ. R. conforms 


2 For σον σιαγονα BD have σιαγονα σον. Tisch. (with §)) omits@ov. W.H. 


bracket it. 


“Though the judge must give redress 
when demanded, you are not bound to 
ask it, and if you take My advice you 
will not.” In taking up this position 
Jesus was in harmony with the law itself, 
which contains dissuasives inst vin- 
dictiveness, ¢.g., Lev. xix. 18: “ Thou 
shalt not escnae, nat wg grudge 
against the children o y people”. 
The fault of the scribes did not te in 
gainsaying this and introducing the jus 
talionis into private life, but in giving 
greater prominence to the legal than to 
the ethical element in the O. T. teaching, 
and in occupying themselves mainly wi 
discussing the casuistry of compensation, 
¢.g., the items to be compensated for in 
a case of wounding—the pain, the cure, 
the loss of time, the shame, etc., and the 
money value of the whole. Jesus turned 
the minds of His disciples away from 
these trivialities to the great neglected 
ethical commonplace. 

Ver. 39. μὴ ἀντιστῆναι: resist not, 
either by sp ne to prevent injury 
or by seeking redress for πα ῷ, 
not the devil, as Chrys. and annie 
thought ; either the evil doer or the evil 
doing or done. Opinion is much divided 
between the last two meanings. The 
sense is the same in either case. The 
A. V. takes πονηρῷ as neuter, the 
R. V. as masculine. The former is on 
the whole to be preferred. Instances 
of injury in various forms are next speci- 
fied to illustrate the general precept. 
These injuries have been variously dis- 
tinguished—to body, and property, and 
freedom, Tholuck; exemplum citatur in- 
juriae, privatae, forensis, curialis, Bengel; 
injuries connected with honour, material 
good, waste of time, Achelis, who points 
out that the relation of the three, Ex. in 
vv. 39-41, is that of an anti-climax, in- 
juries to honour being felt most, and 
those involving waste of time least.— ders 
. «+ ἄλλην. In the following instances 
there is a climax: injury proceeds from 
bad to worse, It is natural to expect 
the same in thisone. But when the right 


cheek has been struck, is it an va- 
tion to strike the left? Tholuck, Bleek, 
and Meyer suggest that the right cheek 
is only named first according to common 
custom, not supposed to be struck first. 
Achelis conceives the right cheek to be 
struck first with the back of the hand, 
then the left with a return stroke with 
the palm, Ya high than the first, and ex- 
pressing ina er measure intention to 
insult.—pam({e in class. Greek = to beat 
with rods; later, and in N. T., to smite 
with the palm of the hand; vide Lobeck, 
Phryn., p. 175-—Ver. 40, κριθῆναι = 
in 1 Cor. vi. 1, to sue at law as 
in A. . Grotius takes it as meaning 
extra-judicial strife, while admitting that 
the word is used in the judicial sense in 
the Sept., «.g., Job ix. 3, Eccles. vi. 
1ο. Beza had previously taken the same 
view.— x Téva, ἵμάτιον. The contention 
is supposed to be about the under gar- 
ment or the tunic, and the advice is, 
rather than go to law, let him have not 
only it but also, καὶ, the more costly 
upper robe, mantle, toga. The 
man might have several tunics or shicts 
for change, but only one upper garment, 
used for clothing by day, for bed-cover 
by night, therefore humanely forbidden 
to be retained over night as a pledge, Ex. 
xxii. 26. 
Ver. 41. Gyyapetou: compel thee to 
one mile in A. V. and R. V. Hatch 
Teepe in Biblical Greek, p. 37) thinks it 
means compel thee to carry his baggage, 
a very probable rendering in view of the 
history of the word as he gives it. A 
Persian word, originally, introduced into 
the Greek, Latin, and Rabbinic languages, 
it denoted first to requisition men, beasts, 
or conveyances for the courier system 
described in Herod. viii. g8, Xen. Cyr. 
viii. 6, 17; next in post-classical use 
under the successors of the Persians in 
the East, and under the Roman Em- 
pire, it was applied to the forced trans- 
port of military baggage by the inhabit- 
ants of a country through which troops 
were passing. Hatch remarks: ‘ The 


39—44- 


‘dyyapedoe: "' µίλιον ἕν, " ὕπαγε pet αὐτοῦ δύο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


113 


42. τῷ * αἰτοῦντί 1 Ch. xxvii 
32. 


σε Sidou!- καὶ τὸν θέλοντα ἀπὸ god Saveicacbar? μὴ ἀποστραφῇῆς. xv. 21. 


m here only. 


43. ᾿Ηκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη, ᾿Αγαπήσεις τὸν ° πλησίον σου, καὶ µισήσεις n followed 


τὸν ἐχθρόν σου’ 44. ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν», 
εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωµένους ὑμᾶς, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοὺς μισοῦντας 
ὑμᾶς,ξ καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐπηρεαζόντων Spas, καὶ * διωκόντων 


ο with acc. of person asked here, Ch. vi. 8 Lk. vi. 9ο. 


by pera 
and gen. 
here and 
in Lk. xii. 
58 (ἐπί 
τινα 

2 added). 

p Ch. xix. 19. Lk. x. 27. 


1 δος in NBD. διδου (T. R.) conforms to Luke (vi. 30). 


2.W.H. Ρὶνεδανισασθαι after SB*DA. 


* One of the more important various readings occurs here. 


From ευλογειτε to 


vpas is omitted in QB, some ancient versions (including Syr. Sin.), and some 


cursives. 
spirit from Lk. vi. 27. 


The omitted part may be regarded as an importation in a harmonistic 
It is left out by most modern editors. 


‘rev επηρεαζοντων υμας και also wanting in ${B, and also imported from Lk. 


(vi. 28). 


extent to which this system prevailed is 
seen in the elaborate provisions of the 
later Roman law: angariae came to be 
one of those modes of taxing property 
which, under the vicious system of the 
empire, ruined both individuals and com- 
munities’. An instance in N. T. of the 
use of the word in this later sense occurs 
in Mt. xxvii. 32, Mk. xv. 21, in reference to 
Simon compelled to carry Christ’s cross. 
We may conceive the compulsion in the 
present case to proceed from a military 
man.—p(Avoy, a Roman mile, about 1600 
yards, a late word.—8vo, in point of time, 
the additional mile = two, there and 
back, with proportional fatigue, a 
decided climax of hardship. But it is 
not merely a question of time, as Achelis 
thinks, The sense of oppression is in- 
volved, subjection to arbitrary military 
power. Christ’s counsel is: do not sub- 
mit to the inevitable in a slavish, sullen 
spirit, harbouring thoughts of revolt. Do 
the service cheerfully, and more than you 
are asked. The counsel is far-reaching, 
covering the case of the Jewish people 
subject to the Roman yoke, and of slaves 
serving hard masters. The three cases 
of non-resistance are not meant to foster 
an abject spirit. They point out the 
higher way to victory. He that mag- 
nanimously bears overcomes, 

Ver. 42. This counsel does not seem 
to belong to the same category as the 
preceding three. One does not think of 
begging or borrowing as an injury, but 
at most as a nuisance. Some have 
doubted the genuineness of the logion as 
a part of the Sermon. But it occurs in 
Luke’s redaction (vi. 30), transformed 
indeed so as to make it a case of the 


sturdy beggar who helps himself to what 
he does not get for the asking. Were 
there idle, lawless tramps in Palestine in 
our Lord’s time, and would He counsel 

uch treatment of them? If so, it is the 
extreme instance of not resisting evil.— 
μὴ ἀποστραφῇς with τὸν θέλοντα in 
accusative. One would expect the geni- 
tive with the middle, the active taking an 
accusative with genitive, ¢.¢., 2 Tim. iv. 
4, THY ἀκοὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀληθείας. But the 
transitive sense is intelligible. In turn- 
ing myself away from another, I turn 
him away from me. Vide Heb. xii. 25, 2 
Tim. i. 15. 

Vv. 43-48. Sixth and final illus- 
tration: from the Law of Love. Το απ 
old partial form of the law Jesus opposes 
a new universal one.—Ver. 43. ἠκούσατε 
ὅτι ἐρρέθη: said where, by whom, and 
about whom? The sentiment Jesus 
supposes His hearers to have heard is not 
found in so many words in the O. T. 
The first part, ‘“ Thou shalt love thy 
neighbour,”’ occurs in Lev. xix. 18. The 
contrary of thessecond part is found in 
Ex. xxiii. 4, where humanity towards 
the straying or overburdened beast of an 
enemy is enjoined. It is to be hoped 
that even the scribes did not in cold blood 
sin against the spirit of this precept by 
teaching men to love their private friends 
and hate their private enemies. Does 
πλησίον then mean an Israelite, and 
ἐχθρόν a Gentile, and was the fault of. 
the traditional law of love that it con- 
fined obligation within national limits ? 
The context in Lev. xix. 18 gives wh. that 
sense: ‘‘ Thou shalt not bear any grudge 
against the children of thy people”. On 


, the other hand, the tendency of Israel’s. 


114 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Vv. 


μας” 45. ὅπως γένησθε υἱοὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ὅτι 
only in Ν. τὸν ἥλιον αὐτοῦ Ἰ ἀνατέλλει ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθούς, καὶ * βρέχει 
Gen. iii. ἐπὶ δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους. 46. ἐὰν γὰρ ἀγαπήσητε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας 


Ἰ. Some editors, following DZ, prefer οντως to το αυτο. 


W.H., while retaining 


το αντο, which has the support of JBL, put οντως (DZ) in the margin. 


election, and of certain texts (vide Ex. 
xxiii., Deut. vii.), was to foster aversion 
to the outside nations, and from Ezra 
onwards the spirit of Judaism was ope of 
increasing hostility towards the goyim— 
vide Esther. The saying ο. by 
Jesus, if not an exact report of Rabbinical 
teaching, did no injustice to its general 
attitude. And the average Jew in this 
respect followed the guidance of his 
teachers, loving his own countrymen, 
regarding with racial and _ religious 
aversion those beyond the pale.—Ver. 
44. ἐχθροὺς may be taken in all senses: 
national, private, religious. Jesus abso- 
lutely negatives hatred as inh 

But the sequel shows that He has in 
view the enemies whom it is most diffi- 
cult to Ίονε--διωκόντων : those who 
persecute on account of μη. The 
clauses imported into the T. R. from 
Luke have a more general reference to 
enmities arising from any cause, although 
they also receive a very emphatic mean- 
ing when the cause of alienation is 
religious differences. There are no 
hatreds so bitter and ruthless as those 
originating therein. How hard to love 
the persecutor who thinks he does God 
service by igh upon you all manner 
of indignities. ut the man who can 
rejoice in persecution (ver. 12) can love 
and pray for the tor. The 
cleavage between Christians and un- 
believers took the place of that between 
the chosen race and the Gentiles, and 
tempted to the same sin. 

Vv. 45-47. Characteristically lofty in- 
ducements to obey the new law; like- 
ness to God (ver. 45); moral distinction 
among men (vv. 46, 47).—wlol τοῦ 
πατρὸς ὑμῶν: in order that ye may be 
indeed sons of God: noblesse oblige ; 
. God's sons must be Godlike. “ Father” 

i The new name for God occurs 
sixteen times in the Sermon on the Mount ; 
to familiarise by repetition, and define 
by discriminating use.—8r1, not = 3s, but 
meaning '' because’’: for so your Father 
acts, and not otherwise can ye be His 
sons.—ayv. “€AAe, sometimes intransitive, 


as in Μι, iv. 16, Lk. xii. 54, here 
transitive, also in Sept., Gen. iii. 18, 
etc., and in some Greek authors (Pindar. 
Isth. vi., 11ο, e.g.) to cause to rise. The 
use of καίειν (νετ. 15) and ἀνατέλλειν in 
an active sense is a revival of an old 

tic sy 4 in later brs (exx. of the 

er in Elsner). a= pluit(Vulg.), 
said of God, as fe de dy κοιν 
τοῦ Aids (Kypke, Observ. Sac.). The 
use Eas be ag gh also in this sense is a 
revi poetic usage. —-rovypois, 
ἀγαθούς; Sixalovs, a5ixovs, not pie 
repetition, Thereis a difference between 
ἀγαθός and Tees similar to that 
between generous and just. πονηροὺς 
may be rendered niggardly—vide on vi. 
23. The sentiment thus becomes: “ God 
makes His sun rise on niggardly and 
generous alike, and His rain on just 
and unjust”. A similar thought in 
Seneca, De benif. iv. 26: “Si deos 
imitaris, da et ingratis beneficia, nam et 
sceleratis sol oritur, et piratis patent 
maria”. The power of fact stated 
to influence as a motive is wholly 
destroyed by a pantheistic conception of 
God as indifferent to moral distinctions, or 
a deistic idea of Him as transcendent, 
too far above the world, in heaven, as it 
were, to be able to take note of such 
differences. The divine impartiality is 
due to magnanimity, not to indifference 
or i ce. Another important re- 
flection is that in this word of Jesus we 
find distinct recognition of the fact that 
in human life ε is a large sphere 
(sun and rain, how much these cover !) 
in which men are treated by Providence 
irrespectively of character; by no means 
a matter of course in a Jewish teacher, 
the tendency being to insist on exact 
correspondence between lot and charac- 
ter under a purely retributive conception 
of God's relation toman.—Ver. 46.μισθὸν: 
here, and three times in next chapter ; one 
of several words used in this connection of 


thought—+epiowdy (ver. 47), τέλειοι (ver. 
48)—having a legal sound, and capable 
of being mi The scribes 


and Rabbis had much to say about merit 


45—48. 


47. καὶ ἐὰν Sdomdonobe τοὺς ἀδελφοὺςλ ὑμῶν µόνον, τί περισσὸν # Ch. x. τα, 

= cS 4. 
ποιεῖτε; οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ τελῶναι οὕτω 3 ποιοῦσιν; 48. ἔσεσθε οὖν ὑμεῖς Cf. Heb. 
Ἐτέλειοι, ὥσπερ 3 ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς * τέλειός ἐστι. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


IIs 


4 


1 Many copies have φιλους, but αδελφους is the reading of BDZ. 


2 SSBDZ have εθνικοι instead of τελωναι and το avro for ουτω. 
ὥσπερ possibly a literary refinement of the scribes, 


3 ws in NBLZZ. 


x1. 13 (sal- 

uting the 

romises). 

t Ch, xix. 21. Jamesi.4; iii.a. Heb. v. 14, 
See below. 


* o ουρανιος instead of ο εν τ. ουρανοις in NBDPLZX. 


and reward—vide Weber, Die Lehren des 
Talmud, c. xix. § 59, on the idea of 
Sechith (merit). Totally opposed to 
Rabbinism, Jesus did not lose His 
‘balance, or allow Himself to be driven 
into extremes, after the usual manner 
of controversialists (Protestants and 
‘Catholics, ¢.g.). He speaks of μισθὸς 
without scruple (cf. on Lk. vi. 32).— 
τελῶναι (τέλος, tax, ὠνέομαι), first men- 
tion of a class often referred to in the 
Gospels, unpopular beyond their deserts ; 
therefore, like women unjustly treated by 
husbands, befriended by Jesus; the 
humble agents of the great farmers of 
taxes, disliked as representing a foreign 
yoke, and on account of too frequent 
acts of injustice, yet human and kindly 
within their own class, loving those that 
loved them. Jesus took advantage of 
this characteristic to win their love by 
friendly acts.—Ver. 47. ἀσπάσησθε, 
ες Salute,” a very slight display of love 
from our Western point of view, a mere 
civility; more significant in the East; 
symbolic here of friendly relations, hence 
Tholuck, Bleek and others interpret, “' to 
act in a friendly manner,” which, as 
Meyer remarks, is, if not the significatio, 
at least the αἀσίρπίβεαίίο,--περισσὸν, 
used adverbially, literally ‘‘ that which is 
over and above’’; A. V., ‘*more”; here, 
tropically = distinguished, unusually good 
= “quid magnum, eximium, insigne” 
(Pricaeus), soin Rom. iii. 1. In Plutarch, 
Romulus, xi., of one who excelled in cast- 
ing horoscopes. Christ would awaken 
in disciples the ambition to excel. He 
does not wish them to’ be moral 
mediocrities, men of average morality, 
but to be morally superior, uncommon. 
This seems to come perilously near to 
the spirit of Pharisaism (cf. Gal. i. 14, 
προέκοπτον), but only seems. Christ 
commends being superior, not thinking 
oneself superior, the Pharisaic charac- 
teristic. Justin, Apol. i. 15, mixes yv. 
46 and 47, and for περισσὸν puts καινὸν, 
and for τελῶναι, or ἐθνικοὶ, wopvoe ; “If 


ye love those who love you what new 
thing do ye? for even fornicators do 
this.” —2@vixol, here as elsewhere in the 
Gospels associated with τελῶναι (Mt. 
xviii, 17), A good many ofthe publicans 
would be Gentiles. For a Jew it was a 
virtue to despise and shun both classes. 
Surely disciples will not be content to 
be on a moral level with them! Note 
that Jesus sees some good even in 
despised classes, social outcasts. 

Ver. 48. Concluding exhortation. οὖν, 
from an ancient form of the participle of 
the verb εἶναι (Klotz, Devar.) = “things 
being so;”’ either a collective inference 
from all that goes before (vv. 21-47) or 
as a reflection on the immediately pre- 
ceding argument. Both come to the 
same thing. Godlike love is commended 
in vv. 44-47, but the gist of all the six 
illustrations of Christ’s way of thinking 
is: Love the fulfilling of the law; 
obviously, except in the tas Oaths, 
where it is truth that is enjoined. But 
ἀληδθεύοντες ἐν ἀγάπῃ, uthing it in 
rats ».,---ἔσεσθε, sores is ην te 
BE.— eis, ye, emphatic, in contrast with 
τελ. and ἐθν., who are content with 
moral commonplace and conventional 
standards.—TéAetou: in general, men who 
have reached the end, touched the ideal, 
that at least their purpose, not satisfied 
with anything short ofit. The τέλειοι are 
not men with a conceit of perfection, but 
aspirants—men who seek to attain, like 
Paul: διώκω εἰ καὶ καταλάβω, Phil. iii. 
12, and like him, single-minded, their 
motto: ἓν δέ. Single-mindedness is a 
marked characteristic of all genuine 
citizens of the kingdom (Mt. vi. 33), 
and what the Bible means by perfection. 
All men who attain have one great 
tuling aim. That aim for the disciple, 
as here set forth, is Godlikeness—os 6 
πατὴρ . . . τέλειός ἐστιν. Godis what 
His sons aspire to be; He never sinks 
below the ideal: impartial, benignant, 
gracious love, even to the unworthy ; for 


T16 


a followed 
by wi 


here, by µή- 


ποτε With οὐκ ἔχετε παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν τῷ ἐν τοῖς * οὐρανοῖς. 
»ἐλεημοσύνην, μὴ “σαλπίσῃς ἔμπροσθέν σου, ὥσπερ οἱ ὑπο- 
κριταὶ ποιοῦσιν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς "ῥύμαις, ὅπως 
δοξασθῶσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων: duty λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπέχουσι τὸν 
ἁτ Cor. xv. 52 and several times in Revel. 


subj. Lk. 
xxi.34. Tous 
h. xxiii. 


phrase 
Sir. vii. 10. Tobitiv.7. Acts x. 2; xxiv. 17. 
xiv.ar. Acts ix. 11; xii. 10. 


KATA MATOAION 


VI. 


ας VI. 1. “*MPOXEXETE! τὴν ἐλεημοσύνην: ὑμῶν μὴ ποιεῖν Ep- 
with inf. προσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, πρὸς τὸ "θεαθῆναι αὐτοῖς: εἰ δὲ µήγε, μισθὸν 


σ > 
2. οταν ουν 


eLk 


1 δε after προσεχετε in 4.7, inserted by Tisch. and by W.H. within brackets. BD 
have no δε It might have fallen out by similar ending (τε); on the other hand, 
it would stand here appropriately as a connecting particle of transition. 


2 SBD have δικαιοσυνην; doubtless the true reading, as a general caution against 
counterfeit righteousness was to be looked for first ; then particular examples: alms, 


prayer, fasting. 


* Tisch., on the authority of ΝΏ 1, 33, omits τοις. 


that, not all conceivable attributes, is 
what is in view. os, not in degree, that 
were a discouraging demand, but in 
kind. The kind very necessary to be 
emphasised in view of current ideas and 
practice, in which holiness was dis- 
sociated from love. The law ‘ Be holy 
for | am holy "’ (Lev. xi. 44) was taken 
negatively and worked out in separation 
from the reputedly sinful. Jesus gave it 
positive contents, and worked it out in 
gracious love. 

Cuapter VI. ΤΗΕ Sermon Con- 
TINUED. From Scribe law, the main 
theme of vv. 21-48, the Teacher passes to 
speak of Pharisaic practice. Ver. 1 
describes the general character of 
Pharisaic righteousness. Then follow 
three special examples: alms, vv. 2-4; 
prayer, vv. 5-6; fasting, vv. 16-18. The 
transition from the one theme to the 
other was almost inevitable, and we may 
be sure that what follows formed part of 
the instruction on the hill. 

Ver. α. © ere (τὸν νοῦν under- 
stood), to attend to; here, with μὴ 
following, take heed, be on your guard 
against.—Sixatoovryyy, not ύνην 
(T. R.), is the reading demanded in a gene- 
ral introductory statement. Alms formed 
a very prominent part of Pharisaic right- 
eousness, and was in Rabbinical dialect 


called righteousness, 77) TS (vide Weber, 


. 273), but it was not the whole, and it 
is a name for the whole category that is 
wanted in ver. 1. If Jesus spoke in 
Aramaic He might, as Lightfoot (Hor. 
Hebr.) suggests, use the word tsedakah 
both in the first and in the following 
three verses; in the first in the general 


sense, in the other places in the special 
sense of αἱπῃδ.---ἔμπροσθεν τ. ἀνθρώπων. 
In chap. v. 16 Christ commands 
disciples to let their light shine before 
men, Here He seems to enjoin the 
contrary. The contradiction is only 
apparent. The two places may be com- 
bined in a general rule thus: Show 
when tempted to hide, hide when 
tempted to show. The Pharisees were 
exposed, and yielded, to the latter 
temptation. They did their righteous- \ 
ness, 7 τὸ θεαθῆναι, to seen. 
Their virtue was theatrical, and that 
meant doing only things which in 
matter and mode were commonly ad- 
mired or believed by the doers to be. 
This spirit of ostentation Christ here and 
elsewhere represents as the leading 
feature of Pharisaism.—«l δὲ µήγε, a 
combination of four particles frequently 
occurring in the Gospels, meaning: if at 
least ye do not attend to this rule, then, 
etc. yéis a very expressive particle, de- 
rived by Klotz, Devar. ii. 272, from ΓΕΩ, 
i.¢., EAQ, or from ἄγε, and explained as 
meant to render the hearer attentive. 
Baumlein, dissenting from Klotz’s’ 
derivation, agrees substantially with his 
view of its meaning as isolating a thought 
from all else and placing it alone in the 
light (Untersuchungen uber Griechische 
Partikeln, p. 54) = ‘‘ Mark my words, 
for if you do not as I advise then,” etc.— 
αρ» οὐκ ἔχετε: on μισθὸν, vide ν. 46. 
he meaning is that theatrical virtue 
does not count in the Kingdom of God. 
Right motive is essential there. There 
may be a reward, there must be, else 
theatrical religion would not be so 
common ; but it is not παρὰ τῷ πατρί. 


a rod 


μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


117 


3. god δὲ ποιοῦντος ἔλεημοσύνην, μὴ γνώτω ἡ 


ἀριστερά σου τί ποιεῖ ἡ δεξιά σου, 4. ὅπως ᾖ σου ἡ ἐλεημοσύνη 1 ἐν 


τῷ “κρυπτῷ: καὶ ὁ πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ, αὐτὸς ” f Rom. ii.ag 


1 Tisch. has η σου ελεηµοσυνη η, following SD (η σ. ede η). 


editors as in text. 


2 %9BL omit αυτος, which is found in D. 


Vv. 2-4. Almsgiving. Ver 2. ἐλεημο- 
σύνην, mercy in general, but specifically 
alms, as a common mode of showing 
mercy. Compare our word charity.— 
σαλπίσῃς: to be understood metaphori- 
cally, as there is no evidence of the 
literal practice. Furrer gives this from 
Consul Wetstein to illustrate the word. 
When a man (in Damascus) wants to do 
a good act which may bring a blessing 
by way of divine recompense on his own 
family, ¢.g., healing to a sick child, he 
goes to a water-carrier with a good 
voice, gives him a piece of money, and 
says ‘“Sebil,” i.e, give the thirsty a 
fresh drink of water. The water-carrier 
fills his skin, takes his stand in the 
market, and sings in varied tones: “ο 
thirsty, come to the drink-offering,” the 
giver standing by, to whom the carrier 
says, as the thirsty drink, ‘* God forgive 
thy sins, O giver of the drink” (Zscht. 
fur M.und R., 1890. Vide also his Wand- 
erungen d. d. Η. L., p. 437).--ὑποκριταὶ, 
stage-players in classics, used in N. Τ, 
in a moral and sinister sense, and for the 
Christian mind heavily burdened with evil 
connotation—hypocrites / What a deep- 
ening of the moral sense is implied in 
the new meaning! The abhorrence of 
acting for effect in religion is due to 
Christ’s teaching. It has not yet quite 
banished the thing. There are religious 
actors still, and they draw good houses. 
—ovvaywyats : where alms were col- 
lected, and apparently also distributed.— 
ῥύμαις, streets, in eastern cities narrow 
lanes, a late meaning; in earlier Greek = 
impetus—onset. Vide Rutherford’s New 
Phryn., 488. Cf. πλατειῶν, ver. 5. 
πλατεῖα, supp. 6865 = a broad street.— 
δοξασθῶσιν: in chap. v. 16 God is 
conceived as recipient of the glory; 
here the almsgiver, giving for that 
purpose.—aphy: introducing a solemn 
statement, and a vety serious one for 
the parties concerned.—aréyova, they 
have in full; they will get no more, 
nothing from God: so in Lk. vi. 24, 
Phil. iv. 18 (vide on Mk. xiv. 41). The 
hypocrite partly does not believe this, 
partly does not care, so long as he gets 


(phrase). 


Most modern 


the applause of his public.—Ver. 43. μὴ 
γνώτω: in proverbial form a counsel to 
give with simplicity. Let not even thy 
left hand, if possible even thyself, know, 
still less other men; give without self- 
consciousness or self-complacency, the 
root of ostentation.—év τῷ κρυπτῷ: 
known to the recipient, of course, but 
to no other, so far as you are concerned, 
hardly even to yourself. ‘* Pii lucent, et 
tamen latent,’’ Beng.—é βλέπων ἐ. τ. κ., 
who seeth in the dark. ‘ Acquainted 
with all my ways.’’ Ps. cxxxix., a 
comfort to the sincerely good, not to 
the counterfeits.—amo8ece. σοι: a cer- 
tainty, and not merely of the future. 
The reward is present; not in the form 
of self-complacency, but in the form of 
spiritual health, like natural buoyancy, 
when all physical functions work well. 
A right-minded man is happy without 
reflecting why; it is the joy of living 
in summer sunshine and bracing moun- 
tain air. The ἐν τῷ φανερῷ here and in 
vv. 6 and 18, a gloss by some superficial 
copyist, ignores the inward present re- 
ward, and appeals in a new form to the 
spirit of ostentation. 

Vv. 5-6. Prayer, ὡς ol ὑποκριταί, 
as the actors. We shrink from the 
harshness of the term “hypocrite ’’. 
Jesus is in the act of creating the new 
meaning by the use of an old word in 
a new connection.—d rote. stands in 
place of an adverb. They love to, are 
wont, do it with pleasure. This con- 
struction is common in classics, even in 
reference to inanimate objects, but here 
only and in Mt. xxiii. 6-7 in N. T.— 
ἑστῶτες, ordinary attitude in prayer. 
στῆναι and καθῆσθαι seem to be used 
sometimes without emphasis to denote 
simply presence in a place (so Pricaeus). 
—ovvaywyais, γωνίαις T. πλατ.: usual 
places of prayer, especially for the 
‘‘actors,”’ where men do congregate, in 
the synagogue for worship, at the 
corners of the broad streets for talk οἱ 
business; plenty of observers in both 
cases. Prayer had been reduced to 
system among the Jews. Methodising, 
with stated hours and forms, began after 


118 


Ch. αν.27.Σ ἀποδώσει σοι ἐν τῷ φανερῷ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


νι. 


1 5. Καὶ ὅταν προσεύχη, οὐκ eon? 


n Ch, xxiii, ὥσπερ ® οἱ ὑποκμιταί, ὅτι Ά φιλοῦσιν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς καὶ ἐν ταῖς 


k. xx. 


hg γωνίαις τῶν πλατειῶν ἑστῶτες προσεύχεσθαι, ὅπως ἂν ΄ φανῶσι τοῖς. 
ἀνθρώποις: ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἀπέχουσι τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 6. 


iCh. xxiv. 
26. 

ΧΙΙ. 3, 24. 

Sir. xxix. 

12 al. in 


Sept. 


Lk. σὺ δέ, ὅταν προσεύχῃ, εἴσελθε eis τὸ  ταμιεῖόν ὃ σου, καὶ κλείσας 
τὴν θύραν σου, πρόσευξαι τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ: καὶ ὁ 


πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ ἀποδώσει σοι ἐν τῷ φανερῷ.Ἱ 


1 ΜΒΌ omit. This time L goes with the MSS. which have this reading. 


Doubtless a gloss, vide below. 


* For προσευχη ουκ ery WB have προσευχησθε ονκ εσίσθε, adopted by W.H. and 


other editors. 
2s in NBDZ. 
* av omitted in NBDL. 
δ οτι omitted in NBDZ. 


* ταμειον in W.H. So in (BDL (ταµιον, ND), 
7 NBDZ omit εν τω davepa, followed by most modern editors. 


Ezra, and grew in the Judaistic period; 
traces of it even in the later books of 
Ο. T., ¢.g., Dan. vi. το, 11 (vide Schultz, 
Alt. Theol.). The hour of prayer might 
overtake a man anywhere. The “actors "’ 
might, as De Wette suggests, be glad 
to overtaken, or even arrange for it, 
in some well-frequented place. — ὅπως 
φανῶσιν τ. a. in order that they may 
appear to men, and have it remarked : 
how devout! Ver. 6: true prayer in 
contrast to the theatrical type.—ovd δὲ, 
thou, my disciple, in opposition to the 
“actors "’.—8rav, when the spirit moves, 
not when the customary hour comes, 
freedom from rule in prayer, as in 
fasting (Mt. ix. 14), is taken for 
granted. — rd tov, late form for 
ταμιεῖον (Lobeck, Phryn., 493), first a 
store-chamber, then any place of privacy, 
a closet (Mt. xxiv. 26). Note the σον 
after rap. and θύραν and πατρί, all em- 
phasising isolation, thy closet, thy door, 
thy Father.—«Aeloas, carefully shutting 
thy door, the door of thine own retreat, 
to exclude all but thy Father, with as 
much secrecy as if you were about a 
guilty act. What delicacy of feeling, 
as well as ο is implied in all 
this ; greatly to respected, often 
sinned against.—r@ ἐν τῷ κρνπτφ, He 
who is in the secret place; perhaps 
with allusion to God’s presence in the 
dark holy of holies (Achelis). He is 
there in the place from which all fellow- 
men are excluded. Is social prayer 
negatived by this directory? No, but 
it is implied that social prayer will be 


a reality only in proportion as it pro- 
ceeds from a gathering of men accus- 
tomed to private prayer. 

Vv. 7-15. Further instruction in 
prayer. Weiss (Mt.-Evan.) regards 
this passage as an interpolation, having 
no proper place in an anti-Pharisaic dis- 
course. Both the opinion and its ground 
are doubtful. As regards the latter, it is 
true that it is Gentile practice in prayer 
that is formally criticised, but it does 
not follow that the Pharisees were not 
open to the same censure. They might 
make long prayers, not in ignorance, 
but in ostentation (Lutteroth), as a dis- 
play of devotional talent or zeal. But 
apart from the question of reference to 
the Pharisees, it is likely that prayer 
under various aspects formed one of the 
subjects of instruction in the course of 
teaching on the hill whereof these chap- 
ters are a digest. 

Ver. 7. βατταλογήσητε: a ἅπαξ λεγ. 
in N. T., rarely used anywhere, and of 
doubtful derivation. Some (Erasmus, 
e.g.) have thought it was formed from 
Battus, the stammerer mentioned 
Herod. (iv. 155), or from a feeble poet of 
the name who made hymns full of 
repetitions (Suidas, Lexicon), but most 
now incline to the view that it is onoma- 
topoetic. Hesychius (Lex.) takes this 
view of the kindred word Ba 
(ἐμοὶ μὲν δοκεῖ κατὰ µίµησιν τῆς η 
πεποιῆσθαι). It points to the iti 
without end of the same forms of words 
as a stammerer involuntarily repeats the 
same syllable, like the Baal worshippere 


5--9. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


119 


7+ Προσευχόµενοι δὲ ph Barrodoyjonte,) ὥσπερ of ) ἐθνικοί: 21 Ch. ν. 47 


δοκοῦσι γὰρ ὅτι ἐν τῇ πολυλογίᾳ αὐτῶν * εἰσακουσθήσονται. 
πατὴρ ὃ ὑμῶν ὧν ™ χρείαν ἔχετε, k 
ϱ. οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς' τζοτ.χῖν. 


οὖν } ὁμοιωθῆτε αὐτοῖς: οἶδε yap 6 
πρὸ τοῦ ὑμᾶς αἰτῆσαι αὐτόν. 
ν. 7. 


(in critical 
8. μὴ notes); 
XViii. 17. 
Lk. i. 13. 
Acts x. 31. 


21. Heb. 


1 Ch. vii. 24, 26; xiii. 24. m Ch. ix. 12; xxi. 3. 


1 NSB have βαττα., which Tisch. and W.H. follow. Lasintext. D has βλαττολ. 


3 B and Syr. Cur. have υποκριται͵, 


3 $9B Sah. version have ο θεος before ο πατηρ (W.H. within brackets). 


shouting from morning till noon, “ο 
Baal, hear us” (x Kings xviii. 26, cf. 
Acts xix. 34, “Great is Diana of the 
Ephesians”). This repetition is charac- 
teristic of Pagan prayer, and when it 
recurs in the Church, as in saying many 
Aves and Paternosters, it is Paganism 
redivivus.—éOvixol, the second of three 
references to Pagans (v. 47, vi. 32) in the 
Sermon on the Mount, not to be wondered 
at. The Pagan world was near at hand 
for a Jew belonging to Galilee with its 
mixed population. Pagan customs would 
be familar to Galileans, and it was 
natural that Jesus should use them as well 
as the theory and practice of scribes and 
Pharisees, to define by contrast true piety. 
—ohvioyia, epexegetical of βατταλογ. 
The Pagans thought that by endless 
repetitions and many words they would 
‘inform their gods as to their needs and 
weary them (‘fatigare deos”) into 
granting their requests. Ver. 8, οὖν, 
infers that disciples must not imitate the 
practice described, because it is Pagan, 
and because it is absurd. Repetition 
is, moreover, wholly uncalled for.— 
οἶδεν yap: the God whom Jesus 
proclaims—“ your Fatner ”—knows be- 
forehand your needs. Why, then, pray 
at all? Because we cannot receive un- 
less we desire, and if we desire, we will 
pray; also because things worth getting 
are worth asking. Only pray always as 
to a Being well informed and willing, in 
few words and in faith. With such 
thoughts in mind, Jesus proceeds to give 
a sample of suitable prayer. 

Vv. 9-13. The Lord’s Prayer. Again, 
in Lk. xi. 1-4—vide notes there. Here 
I remark only that Luke’s form, true 
reading, is shorter than Matthew’s. 
On this ground Kamphausen (Das Gebet 
des Herrn) argues for its originality. 
But surely Matthew’s form is short and 
elementary enough to satisfy all reason- 
able requirements! The question as to 
the original form cannot be settled on 
such grounds. The prayer, as here given, 


is, indeed, a model of simplicity. Be- 
sides the question as to the original form, 
there is another as to the originality of 
the matter. Wetstein says, ‘‘tota haec 
oratio ex formulis Hebraeorum concin- 
nata est”. De Wette, after quoting 
these words, asserts that, after all the 
Rabbinical scholars have done their ut- 
most to adduce parallels from Jewish 
sources, the Lord’s Prayer is by no 
means shown to be a Cento, and that it 
contains echoes only of well-known O. T. 
and Messianic ideas and expressions, 
and this only in the first two petitions. 
This may be the actual fact, but there is 
no need for any zeal in defence of the 
position. I should be very sorry to think 
that the model prayer was absolutely 
original. It would be a melancholy 
account of the chosen people if, after 
thousands of years of special training, 
they did not yet know what to pray for. 
Jesus made a new departure by inaugu- 
rating (1) freedom in prayer ; (2) trustful- 
ness of spirit; (3) simplicity in manner. 
The mere making of a new prayer, 
if only by apt conjunction of a few 
choice phrases gathered from Scripture 
or from Jewish forms, was an assertion 
of liberty. And, of course, the liberty 
obtains in reference to the new form as 
well as to the old. We may use the 
Paternoster, but we are not bound to use 
it. It is not in turn to become a fetish. 
Reformers do not arise to break old 

fetters only in order to forge new ones. 
Ver. 9. οὕτως, thus, not after the 
ethnic παηπετ.---προσεύχεσθε: present, 
pray so habitually.—tpets: as opposed 
to the Pagans, as men (1.6.) who believe in 
an intelligent, willing God, your Father. 
The prayer which follows consists of six 
petitions which have often been elabor- 
ately explained, with learned discussions 
on disputed points, leaving the reader 
with the feeling that the new form is any- 
thing but simple, and wondering how it 
ever came into universal use. Gospel 
has been turned into law, spirit into 
‘ 


120 


KATA” ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


VI. 


m 1 Pet: iii Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, " ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου" 1ο. 


15. 


Ch. P 
42. Acts xxi. 14 (same phrase). 


letter, poetry into prose. We had better 
let this prayer alone if we cannot catch 
its lyric tone.—Ndrep. In Luke’s form 
this name stands impressively alone, 
but the words associated with it in 
Matthew’s version of the address are 
every way suitable. Name and epithet 
together—Father, in heaven—express 
reverential trust.—Aytac@r)}Tw T. ο. σου: 
first petition—sanctified, hallowed be 
Thy name. Fritzsche holds that σου in 
this and the next two petitions is empha- 
tic, σοῦ not govenclitic. The suggestion 
gives a good direction for the expositor = 
may God the Father-God of Jesus be- 
come the one object of worship all the 
world over. A very natural turn of 
thought in view of the previous reference 
to the Pagans. Pagan prayer corre- 
sponded to the nature of Pagan deities 
—indifferent, capricious, unrighteous, 
unloving ; much speaking, iteration, dun- 
ning was needed to gain theirear. How 
blessed if the whole pantheon could be 
swept away or fall into contempt, and 
the one worshipful Divinity be, in fact, 
worshipped, ὡς by οὐ ᾧ καὶ επὶ γῆς; for 
this clause appended to the third petition 
may be conceived as common to all the 
first three. The One Name in heaven 
the One Name on earth, and reverenced 
on earth as in heaven. Universalism is 
latent in this opening petition. We 
cannot imagine Jesus as meaning merely 
that the national God of Israel may be 
duly honoured within the bounds of His 


own ple. 

Ver. 10. Ἐλθέτω ἡ ία gov: 
second petition. The prayer ofall Jews. 
Even the Rabbis said, that is no prayer 
in which no mention of the kingdom is 
made. All depends on how the kingdom 
is conceived, on what we want to come. 
The kingdom is as the King. It is the 
kingdom of the univ benignant 
Father who knows the wants of His chil- 
dren and cares for their interests, lower 
and higher, that Jesus desires to come. 
It will come with the spread of the wor- 
ship of the One true Divine Name; the 
paternal God ruling in grace over believ- 
ing, grateful men. Thus viewed, God's 
kingdom comes, is not always here, as 
in the reign of natural law or in the 
moral order of the ν/οτ]ἀ.---γενηθήτω τ. 6. 
σ.: third petition. Kamphausen, bent 
on maintaining the superior originality of 


8. , , 
9 mt 33) ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου" "γενηθήτω τὸ θέληµά σου, ’ ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ, 
Ρ Acts vii. 51 (ὡς καὶ). 


Luke’s form in which this petition is 
wanting, regards it as a mere pendant to 
the second, unfolding its meaning. And 
it is true in a sense that any one of the 
three first petitions implies the rest. 
Yet the third has its distinct place. The 
kingdom, as Jesus preached it, was a 
kingdom of grace. The second petition, 
therefore, is a prayer that God’s gracious 
will may be done. The third, on the 
other hand, is a prayer that God's com- 
manding will may be done; that the 
right as against the wrong may every- 
where prmelaw ἐν οὐρ. καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς. 
Σα, a μκν, not without application 
to three petitions, is specially appli- 
cable to this one. Translated a 
modern dialect, it means that the divine 
will may be perfectly, ideally done on 
this earth: as in heaven, so also, etc. 
The reference is probably to the angels, 
described in Ps. ciii., as doing God's 
commandments. In the Ο. T. the angels 
are the ts of God's will in nature as 
well as in Providence. The defining 
clause might, therefore, be taken as 
meaning : may God's will be done in the 
moral sphere as in the natural; exactly, 
always, everywhere. 

The foregoing petitions are regarded 
by Grotius, and him Achelis, as pia 
desideria, evyal, rather than itions 
proper—alryjpara, like the following 
three. The distinction is not gratuitous, 
but it is an exegetical refinement which 
may be disregarded. More important 
is it to note that the first group refers to 
the gon public interests of God and 
His kingdom, placed first here as in vi. 
33, the second to personal needs, There 
is a corresponding difference in the mode 
of expression, the verbs being in the 
third person in Group I., objective, im- 
personal; in the second in Group Π., 
subjective, personal. 

er. 11. Fourth petition. τὸν ted 
@v: whatever the adjective qualifying 

ν may mean, it may be taken for 
anted that it is ordinary bread, food 
or the body, that is intended. All 
spiritualising mystical meanin of 
ἐπιούσιον are to be discarded. is is 
the one puzzling word in the prayer. It 
isa ἅπ -, not only in O. oe 
but in Greek literature, as known not 
only to us, but even to Origen, who 
(De Oratione, cap. xxvii.) states that it 


πο---Ι2. 


καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς] γῆς: 11. τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν  ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν ᾳ here 
in 


, 


1QBZA and some cursives omit της. 


is not found in any of the Greeks, or 
used by private individuals, and that it 
seems to be a coinage (ἔοικε πεπλάσθαι) 
of the evangelists. It is certainly not 
likely to have proceeded from our Lord. 
This one word suffices to prove that, if 
not always, at least in uttering this 
prayer, Jesus spoke in Aramaean. He 
would not in such a connection use an 
obscure word, unfamiliar, and of doubt- 
ful meaning.. The problem is to account 
for the incoming of such a word into the 
Greek version of His doubtless simple, 
artless, and well-understood saying. 
The learned are divided as to the deriva- 
tion of the word, having of course 
nothing but conjecture to go on. Some 
derive it from ἐπὶ and οὐσία, or the parti- 
ciple of εἶναι; others from ἐπιέναι, or ἡ 
ἐπιοῦσα = the approaching day (jpépa 
understood), In the one case we get a 
qualitative sense—bread for subsistence, 
bread needed and sufficient (τὰ δέοντα 
καὶ αὐτάρκη. Prov. xxx. 8, Sept.); 
in the other, a temporal—bread of the 
coming day, panem quotidianum (Vulg., 
Lk., xi. 3), “daily bread’. Either 
party argues against the other on gram- 
matical grounds, ¢.g., that derived from 
οὐσία the word should be ἐπούσιος, and 
that derived from ἐπιοῦσα it should be 
ἐπιουσαῖος. In either case the dis- 
putants are ready with their answer. 
Another source of argument is suitable- 
ness of the sense. Opponents of the 
temporal sense say that to pray for 
to-morrow’s _ bread sins against the 
counsel, ‘‘ Take no thought for the 
morrow,” and that to pray, ‘ Give us 
to-day our bread of to-morrow,’ is 
absurd (ineptius, Suicer, Thesaurus, s.v. 
ἐπιούσιος). On the other side it is said: 
Granting that the sense ‘ sufficient” 
can be got from ἐπὶ, οὐσία, and granting 
its appropriateness, how comes it that 
a simpler, better-known word was not 
chosen to represent so plain a meaning ? 
Early tradition should have an important 
bearing on the question. Lightfoot, in 
the appendix on the words ἐπιούσιος 
and περιούσιος, in his work “ On a fresh 
Revision of the N. T.,” summarises the 
evidence to this effect: Most of the 
Greeks follow Origen, who favoured 
derivation from οὐσία. But Aramaic 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


121 


and 
Lk. πι. 


σήμερον 12. Kal ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ” ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς 3 (not 


ound in 


Greek literature). r Rom. iv. 4. 


So most modern editors. 


Christians put for ἐπιούσιος Mahar = 
crastinum. (Jerome comm. in Mt.) 
The Curetonian Syriac has words mean- 
ing, ‘‘ our bread continual of the day give 
us”. The Egyptian versions have 
similar readings. The old Latin ver- 
sion has quotidianum, retained by Jerome 
in revision of L. V. in Lk. xi. 2, while 
supersubstantialem is given in Mt. 
vi. 11. The testimony of these early 
versions is important in reference to the 
primitive sense attached to the word. 
Still the question remains: How account 
for the coinage of such a word in Greck- 
speaking circles, and for the tautology : 
give us to-day (orjpepov, Mt.) or daily 
(τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν, Luke), the bread of 
to-morrow? In his valuable study on 
‘“‘The Lord’s Prayer in the early 
Church” (Texts and Studies, 1891), 
Principal Chase has made an important 
contribution to the solution of this diffi- 
culty by the suggestion that the coinage 
was due to liturgical exigencies in con- 
nection with the use of the prayer in 
the evening. Assuming that the original 
petition was to the effect: ‘to us give, 
of the day, our bread,” and that the 
Greek equivalent for the day was 4 
ἐπιοῦσα, the adjective ἐπιούσιος was 
coined to make the prayer suitable 
at all hours. In the morning it 
would mean the bread of the day now 
begun, in the evening the bread of 
to-morrow. But devotional conserva- 
tism, while adopting the new word as 
convenient, would cling to the original 
“of the day’’; hence σήµερον in Matt. 
and τὸ καθ᾽ ἡμέραν in Luke, along with 
ἐπιούσιος. On the whole the temporal 
meaning seems to have the weight ot 
the argument on its side. For a full 
statement of the case on that side vide 
Lightfoot as above, and on the other 
the article on ἐπιούσιος in Cremer’s Bib. 
Theol., W. B., 7te Aufl., 1893. 

Ver. 12. Fifth petition. ὀφειλήματα, 
in classics literal debts, here moral! debts, 
sins (ἁμαρτίας in Lk, xi. 4). The more 
men desire God’s will to be done the 
more conscious they are of shortcoming. 
The more conscious of personal short- 
coming, the more indulgent towards the 
faults of others even when committed 
against themselves. Hence the added 


122 KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ VI. 


* Miiteral), ἀφίεμεν 1 τοῖς "ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν: 13. καὶ μὴ 'εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς eis 
qoaran. | THRE, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ. ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ 
αἱ ν.3 βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν. 14. 


(lo; 
coat br g γὰρ ἀφῆτε σα τν κα sg τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν, ἀφήσει 
t ας. καὶ ὑμῖν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος: 15. ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀφῆτε τοῖς ἀνθρώ-- 


Κοπ.ν. ποις τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν,” οὐδὲ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ἀφήσει τὰ παρα- 
Gal. νι πτώματα ὑμῶν. 16. Ὅταν δὲ νηστεύητε, μὴ γίνεσθε ὥσπερ" ot 
vl xxiv. ὑποκριταὶ ‘oxuOpwroi:  ἀφανίζουσι γὰρ τὰ πρόσωπα adray,> 
W WV. 19, 20 ὅπως Φφανῶσι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις νηστεύοντες' ἁἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὅ 


41. James iv. 14. 


1 NBZ have 
come in from Luke (xi. 4). 


2 The Doxology ort cov. . 


modern critics as an ancient liturgical insertion. 


Στα tr 
though found in BL. 

4 ws in NBDA. 4 

6 For αντων B has εαντων. 

6 T. R. has οτι with L al. 


words: ὡς καὶ ἡ. ἀφήκαμεν, etc. It is 
natural and comforting to the sincere 
soul to put the two things together. ὡς 
must be taken very generally. The 
prayer proceeds from child-like hearts, 
not from men trained in the distinctions 
of theology. The comment appended 
in vv. 14, 15 introduces an element of 
reflection difficult to reconcile with the 
spontaneity of the prayer. It is pro- 
bably imported from another connection, 
ε.ρ., Mt. xviii. 35 (so Weiss-Meyer). 
Ver. 13. Sixth petition: consists of two 
members, one qualifying or limiting the 
other.—py .- . - us 
not to mal trial. ΑΙ trial is of doubt- 
ful issue, and may therefore naturaily 
and innocently be shrunk from, even by 
those who know that the result may be 
ood, confirmation in faith and virtue. 
he prayer is certainly in a different key 
from the Beatitude in V. 10. There 
Jesus sets before the disciple a heroic 
temper as the ideal. But here He does 
not assume the disciple to have attained. 
The Lord’s Prayer is not merely for 
heroes, but for the timid, the inex- 
perienced. The teacher is considerate, 
and allows time for reaching the heights 
of heroism on which St. James stood 
when he wrote (i. 2) πᾶσαν χαρὰν 
ἡγήσασθε, ἀδελφοί pov, ὅταν πειρασμοῖς 
περιπέσητε ποικίλοις. ἀλλὰ, not purely 
adversative, cancelling previous clause, 
but confirming it and going further 


αμεν, adopted by modern editors. 


+ anny is wanting in NBDZ and is re 


NBD omit. 


αφιεμεν (T. R.) has probably 


ed by most 
It is found in LAE al, 


πτωµατα αντων wanting in ND, omitted by Tisch., bracketed by W.H., 


(Schanz, in accordance with original 
meaning of ἀλλὰ, derived from ἄλλο or 
ἄλλα, and signifying that what is going 
to be said is another thing, aliud, in 
relation to what has been said, Klotz, 
Devar. ii., p. 2)= Lead us not into 
temptation, or so lead us that we may 
be safe from evil: may the issue ever 
be beneficent.—pioa: ἀπὸ, not ἐκ; the 
latter would imply actual implication in, 
the former im lies danger merely. Both 
occur in Ν. T. (on the difference ¢f. 
Kamphausen, Das G. des Η.).-- τοῦ 
πονηροῦ, either masculine or neuter, 
which? Here again there isan elaborate 
debate on a comparatively unimportant 

tion. The probability is in favour 
of the masculine, the evil one. The 
Eastern naturally thought of evil in the 
concrete. But we as naturally think of 
it in the abstract; therefore the change 
from A. V. in R. V. is unfortunate. It 
mars the reality of the Lord’s Prayer on 
Western lips to say, deliver us from the 
evil one. Observe it is moral evil, not 
physical, that is deprecated.—8rs cov 
ἐστιν . . . Αμήν: a liturgical ending, 
no part of the original prayer, and tend. 
ing to turn a religious reality into a 
dgyotional form. 

On vv. 14-15 vide under ver. 12. 

Vv. 16-18. Fasting. Ver. 16. ὅταν 
δὲ: transition to a new related topic.— 
σκνθρωποί, of sad vi overdone of 
course by the “actors”. Fasting, like 


13—-22. 


EYAITEAION 


123 


ἀπέχουσι τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν. 17. σὺ δὲ νηστεύων ” ἄλειψαί σου τὴν x Mk. vi. 13 


k. vii. 38, 


κεφαλήν, καὶ τὸ πρόσωπόν σου νίψαι’ 18. ὅπως μὴ φανῇς τοῖς 46. James 
~ - ~ ~ .. 14- 
ἀνθρώποις νηστεύων,ὶ ἀλλὰ τῷ πατρί σου τῷ ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ”” καὶ 6 


πατήρ σου ὁ βλέπων ἐν τῷ κρυπτῷ Ἰ ἀποδώσει σοι ἐν τῷ φανερῷ.5 


109. ' Μὴ 7 θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅπου σὴς καὶ y Lk. κίι. αι. 


Rom. ii. 5. 


βρῶσις ἀφανίζει, καὶ ὅπου κλέπται  διορύσσουσι καὶ κλέπτουσι” 1 Cor. xvi. 


- a 2a 
20. θησαυρίζετε δὲ ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐν οὐρανῷ, ὅπου οὔτε σὴς oUTE z Ch. xxiv. 


= 43: 
βρῶσις ἀφανίζει, καὶ ὅπου κλέπται οὐ διορύσσουσιν οὐδὲ κλέπτουσιν. xii. 39. 


21. ὅπου γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θησαυρὸς ὑμῶν, ἐκεῖ ἔσται καὶ ὃ ἡ καρδία 


ὑμῶν." 


22. Ὁ λύχνος τοῦ σώματός ἐστιν ὁ ὀφθαλμός 5: ἐὰν οὖν ὁ 


1 B places νηστενων before τοις αγθρωποιφ. 


1κρυφαιω in NBD. 
3 SSBDL omit εν τω davepw. 


* S8B have-oov, which makes the reflection more pointed, 


5 B omits και. 
ϐ B adds σου. 


prayer, was reduced to a system ; twice a 
week in ordinary Pharisaic practice: 
Thursday and Monday (ascent and 
descent of Moses on Sinai), artificial 
gloom inevitable in such circumstances. 
In occasional fasting, in circumstances 
of genuine affliction, the gloom will be 
real (Lk. xxiv. 17).---ἀφανίζουσιν- ὅπως 
Φανῶσιν, a play upon words, may be 
endered in English “they disfigure 
that they may figure”. In German: 
Unsichtbar machen, sichtbar werden 
(Schanz and Weiss).—Ver.17. ἄλειψαι, 
γίψαι: not necessarily as if preparing 
for a feast (Meyer and Weiss), but 
performing the usual daily ablutions 
for comfort and cleanliness, so avoiding 
parade of fasting by neglect of them 
(Bleek, Achelis). 

The foregoing inculcations of sincerity 
and reality in religion contribute in- 
directly to the illustration of the divine 
name Father, which is here again defined 
by discriminating use. God as Father 
desires these qualities in worshippers. 
All close relations (father, son : husband, 
wife) demand real affection as distinct 
from parade. 

' Vv. 19-34. Counsels against covetous- 
ness and care (reproduced in Lk. xii. 22- 
34, with exception of vv. 22-23, which 
reappear in Lk. xi. 34-36). An inter- 
polation, according to Weiss. Doubtless, 
if the Sermon on the Mount was ex- 
clusively an anti-Pharisaic discourse. 
But this homily might very well have 
formed one of the lessons on the hill, in 
connection with the general theme of 


the kingdom, which needs to be defined 
in contrast to worldliness not less than 
to spurious types of piety. 


Vy. 19-21. Against hoarding. 
θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, treasures 
upon earth, and therefore earthly, 


material, perishable, of whatever kind.— 
σὴς, moth, destructive of costly garments, 
one prominent sort of treasure in the 
East.— Bp@ors, not merely “rust,’’ but a 
generic term embracing the whole class 
ofagents which eat or consume valuables 
(so Beza, Fritzsche, Bleek, Meyer, etc.). 
Erosionem seu corrosionem quamlibet 
denotat, quum vel vestes a tineis vel 
vetustate et putredine eroduntur, vel 
lignum a cossibus et carie, frumentum a 
curculionibus, quales τρῶγας Graeci 
vocant, vel metalli ab aerugine, ferrugine, 
eroduntur et corroduntur (Kypke, Οὐς, 
δαος.).--“διορύσσονσι», dig through (clay 
walls), easier to get in so than through 
carefully barred doors (again in Matt. 
xxiv. 43). The thief would not find 
much in such a house.—Ver. 20. θησ. ἐν 
οὐρανῷ: not = heavenly treasures, says 
Fritzsche, as that would require τοὺς 
before ἐν. Grammatically this is correct, 
yet practically heavenly treasure is 
meant.—Ver. 21. ὅπον Ono... . ἐκεῖ 
καρδία. The reflection goes back on 
the negative counsel in ver. 19. Do not 
accumulate earthly treasures, for then 
your heart will be there, whereas it 
ought to be in heaven with God and the 
Kingdom of God. 

Vv. 22-24. Parable of the eye. A 
difficult passage ; connection obscure, 


124 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


Vi. 


a Lk. xi. 34. ὀφθαλμός σου * ἁπλοῦς ᾖ,] ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου » φωτεινὸν tora >a 3 


b Ch. xvii. 5. 


Lk ai. 34, ἐὰν δὲ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου πονηρὸς ᾖ, ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου "σκοτεινὸν 


30. » 
c Lk. xi. 34, έσται. 


εἰ οὖν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἐν Gol σκότος ἐστί, τὸ σκότος πόσον; 


ο ὑΚ αν τα 24. Οὐδεὶς δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν: ἢ γὰρ τὸν ἕνα µισήσει, 
I 


hess. 


Vv. 14. 
Tit. i. 


καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ἀγαπήσει: ἢ ἑνὸς 3 ἀνθέξεται, καὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου "κατα- 


ε Ch, ανν, φρονήσει. οὐ δύνασθε Θεῷ δουλεύει καὶ ΄μαμμωνᾷ.' 25. διὰ 
10. 


xvi. 13. Rom. iigal.  f Lk. xvi. 13. 


1» before ο οφθαλμος σον am ous in HB. 


? papwva in all uncials. 


and the evangelic report apparently 
imperfect. The parallel passage in 
Luke (xi. 33-36) gives little help. The 
figure and its ethical meaning seem to 
be mixed up, moral attributes ascribed 
to the physical eye, which with these 
still gives light to the body. This con- 
fusion may be due to the fact that the 
eye, besides being the organ of vision, 
is the seat of expression, revealing inward 
dispositions. Physically the qualities 
on which vision depends are health and 
disease. The healthy eye gives light for 
all bodily functions, walking, working, 
etc. ; the diseased eye more or less fails 
in this service. If the moral is to be 
found only in last clause of ver. 23, all 
going before being parable, then ἁπλοῦς 
must mean sound and πονηρὸς diseased, 
meanings which, if not inadmissible, one 
yet does not expect to find expressed by 
these words. They seem to be chosen 
because of their applicability to the 
moral sphere, in which they might suit- 
ably to the connection mean “liberal” 
and “niggardly”. ἁπλότης occurs in 
this sense in Rom. xii. 8, and Hatch 
(Essays in Β. G., p. 80) has shown that 
πονηρός occurs several times in Sept. 
(Sirach) in the sense of niggardly, grudg- 
ing. He accordingly renders: “ The 
lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore 
thine eye be liberal thy whole body shall 
be full of light; but if thine eye be 
grudging, thy whole body shall be full 
of darkness.’ Of course this leaves the 
difficulty of the mixing of natural and 
moral untouched. he passage is 
elliptical, and might be paraphrased 
thus: The eye is the lamp of the body: 
when it is healthy we see to do our 
daily work, when diseased we are in 
darkness. So with the eye of the soul, 
the heart, seat of desire: when it is free 
from covetousness, not anxious to hoard, 
all goes well with our spiritual functions 
—we choose and act wisely. When 
sordid passions possess it there is dark- 


ness within deeper than that which 
afflicts the blind man. We mistake the 
relative value of things, choose the 
worse, neglect the better, or flatter our- 
selves that we can have both. 

Ver. 24. Parable of the two masters. 
Οὐδεὶς: In the natural sphere it is im- 
possible for a slave to serve two masters, 
for each claims him as his property, and 
the slave must respond to one or other of 
the claims with entire devotion, either 
from love or from interest.— yap... 
µισήσει... ἀγαπήσει: We may take this 
clause as referring to the case of honest 
preference. A slave has his likes and 
dislikes like other men. And he will not 
do things by halves. His preference will 
take the form of love, and his aversion 
that of hate.— ἑνὸς ἀνθέξεται, εἰς, : 
this clause may be taken as referring to 
the case of interest. The slave may not 
in his heart care for either of the rival 
masters. But he must seem to care, and 
the relative power or temper of one as 
compared to the other, may be the 

ound of his decision. And having 

ecided, he attaches himself, ἀνθέξεται, 
to the one, and ostentatiously disregards 
the other. In ordinary circumstances 
there would be no room for such a com- 
petition of masters. But a case might 
occur in time of war when the conquered 
were sold into slavery.—ob δύνασθε, etc. 
Application of the parable to God and 
earthly possessions.— ¢, wealth per- 
sonified = Plutus, a Chaldee, Syriac, and 
Punic word (‘*lucrum punice mammon 
dicitur,” Aug. de S. D.) derived from 


Ιοῦ = to conceal or 98 to trust 


(vide Buxtorf, Lex. Talm., p. 1217). 
The meaning is not, “ ye cannot serve 
God and have riches,” but “ ye cannot 
be faithful to God and make an idol of 
wealth”. ‘ Non dixit, qui habet divitias, 
sed qui servit divitiis,” Jerome. 

Vv. 25-34. Counsels against care. 
More suitable to the circumstances of the 


23—27. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


125 


τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν, ph 5 μεριμνᾶτε τῇ ψυχῇ ὑμῶν, τί φάγητε καὶ} tle Ch. x. 19, 


πίητε: μηδὲ τῷ σώµατι ὑμῶν, τί ™ ἐνδύσησθε. 


ah 9) € 5 ο dk. X. 41; 
οὐχὶ ἡ Wuxi) πλεῖόν aii. 45. 


ἐστι τῆς τροφῆς, καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἐνδύματος; 26. ' ἐμβλέψατε εἲς (various 


τὰ ) πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ὅτι οὐ * 


συνάγουσιν εἰς ἀποθήκας, καὶ 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος τρέφει αὐτά: 6. 
οὐχ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον | διαφέρετε αὐτῶν ; 27. τίς δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν μεριμνῶν δύνα- 


8 (last three exx. metaphorical). 
Χ.Ιο. kJohniv. 36, 37. 


1 η τι πιητε in Β. 
by W.H. 


disciples than those against amassing 
treasures. ‘‘ Why speak of treasures to 
us who are not even sure of the neces- 
saries of life? It is for bread and cloth- 
ing we are in torment” (Lutteroth).— 
Ver. 25, διὰ τοῦτο: because ye can be 
unfaithful to God through care as well as 
through covetousness.—p μεριμνᾶτε: 
péptpva from µερίς, µερίζω, because care 
divides and distracts the mind. The 
verb is used in N. T. in various construc- 
tions and senses; sometimes in a good 
sense, as in x Cor. vii. 32: ‘The un- 
married care for the things of the Lord,” 
and xii. 25 in reference to the members 
of the body having the same care for 
each other. But the evil sense predom- 
inates. What is here deprecated is not 
work for bread and raiment, but worry, 
“Labor exercendus est, solicitudo toll- 
enda,” Πετοπης.---οὐχὶ ἡ ψυχἠ . . . ἐνδύ- 
patos: the life not the soul; the natural 
life is more than meat, and the body more 
than the clothing which protects it, yet 
these greater things are given to you 
already. Can you not trust Him who 
gave the greater to give the less? But 
a saying like this, life is more than meat, 
in the mouth of Jesus is very pregnant. 
It tends to lift our thoughts above materi- 
alism to a lofty conception of man’s 
chiefend, It is more than an argument 
against care, it is a far-reaching principle 
to be associated with that other logion— 
a man is better than a sheep (Matt. xii. 
12).—Ver. 26. ἐμβλέψατε els, fix your 
eyes on,so as to take a good look at (Mk. 
X. 21, Χῖν. 67).---τὰ πετεινὰ 7. ov., the birds 
whose element is the air; look, not to 
admire their free, careless movements on 
the wing, but to note a very relevant 
{αοί---ὅτι, that without toil they get their 
food and live—omelpovotv, θερίζονσιν, 
συνάγονσι « ἆ.: the usual operations 
of the husbandman in producing the staff 
of life. In these the birds have no part, 
yet your Father feedeth them. The 
careworn might reply to this: yes; they 


σπείρουσι», οὐδὲ Χ θερίζουσιν, οὐδὲ h 


i Acts i. 11 (with εἰς). | sf 
1Ch. x. 31; xii. 12. Lk. xii. 24 (with μάλλον). 


const.). 

Ch. xxii. 
αι. Mk.i. 
Rom. 
xiii. 12. 

Eph.vi.11. 
1 Thess. v. 
j Ch. viii. 20; xiii. 4. Lk. viii. 5. Acts 


This clause is wanting in 3, omitted by Tisch., and bracketed 


feed themselves at the farmer’s expense, 
an additional source of anxiety to him. 
And the cynic unbeliever in Providence : 
yes, in summer ; but how many perish in 
winter through want and cold! Jesus, 
greatest of all optimists, though no 
shallow or ignorant one, quietly adds: 
οὐχ ὑμεῖς μᾶλλον διαφέρετε αὐτῶν: do 
not ye differ considerably from them 2 
They fare, on the whole, well, God’s 
humble creatures. Why should you fear, 
men, God’s children ῥ 

Ver. 27. τίς δὲ, etc. The question means: 
care is as bootless as it is needless. But 
there is much difference of opinion as to 
the precise point of the question. Does 
it mean, who by care can add a cubit to 
his height, or who can add a short space 
of time, represented by a cubit, to the 
length of his life? Ἁἡλικία admits of 
either sense. It means stature in Lk. 
xix. 3; agein John ix. 21, Heb. xi. rr. 
Most recent commentators favour the 
latter interpretation, chiefly influenced 
by the monstrosity of the supposition as 
referring to stature. Who could call 
adding a cubit, 1} feet, to his height a 
very small matter, the expression of Lk. 
(ἐλάχιστον, xii. 26)? The application of 
a measure of length to length of days is 
justified by Ps. xxxix. 5: “Thou hast 
made my days as handbreadths”. But 
Dr, Field strongly protests against the 
new rendering. Admitting, of course, 
that ἡλικία is ambiguous, and that in 
classic authors it oftener means age than 
stature, he insists that πῆχνς is decisive. 
“ wijxus,” he remarks (Ot. Nor.), “ is not 
only a measure of length, but that by 
which a man’s stature was properly 
measured.” Euthy, on this place 
remarks: “kal μὴν οὐδὲ σπιθαµήν (half 
a cubit) οὐδὲ δάκτυλον (a 24th part): 
λοιπὸν οὖν πῆχυν εἶπε, διότι κυρίως 
µέτρον τῶν ἡλικιῶν 6 πηχύς ἐστι. Thus 
a short man is τρίπηχνυς, a tall man 
τετράπηχυς.᾽ But how are we to get 
over the monstrosity of the supposition ? 


126 ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 
mLk xl ται προσθεῖναι ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ 
ο ty x 
otk xii. 27 αὐξάνει *+ οὐ xoma,! οὐδὲ νήθει 1: 
over ot. μὼν ἐν πάσῃ τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ περιεβάλετο ὡς ἓν τούτων. 


h. xiv. 


xii. 28. 
ee i. το 
of grass). 


Ch. xiii. 26. Mk. iv. a8 (of grain). 1 ig iii. τα (of hay). 


s Ch. viii. 26; xiv. 31; xvi. 8 Lk. xii. 


1 ΝΒ have plurals (W.H.). 


VL 


πῆχυν ἕνα; 28. καὶ περὶ 


, ἐνδύματος τί μεριμνᾶτε; καταµάθετε τὰ "κρίνα τοῦ ἀγροῦ, πῶς 


20. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐδὲ Σολο- 
30. εἰ δὲ 


Lk.xii.27 τὸν } χόρτον τοῦ ἀγροῦ, σήµερον ὄντα, καὶ αὔριον εἰς "κλίβανον 
19 Lk. βαλλόμενον, ὁ Θεὸς οὕτως " ἀμφιέννυσιν, οὗ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς, 
"ὀλιγόπιστοι; 31. μὴ οὖν µεριµνήσητε, λέγοντες, Τί φάγωµεν, ἢ 


q here and Lk. xii. 28. τ Ch. xi. 8. 


The singulars are a grammatical correction (κρινα 


neut. pl. nom.) wholly unnecessary. The lilies are viewed singly. 


Lutteroth helps us here by finding in the 
question of Jesus a reference to the 
growth of the human body from infancy’ 
to maturity. By that insensible process, 
accomplished through the aid of food, 
God#@ adds to every human body more 
than one cubit. ‘* How impossible for 
you to do what God has done without 
your thinking of it! And if He fed you 
during the period of growth, can you not 
trust Him now when you have ceased to 
grow?" Such is the thought of Jesus. 
Vv. 28-30, Lesson from the flowers. 
καταµάθετε, observe well that ye may 
learn thoroughly the lesson they teach. 
Here only in N.T., often in classics. 
Also in Sept., ¢.g., Gen. xxiv, 21: The 
man observed her (Rebekah), learnin 
her disposition from her ολη. | 
κρίνα, the lilium Persicum, Emperor's 
crown, according to Rosenmiller and 
Kuinoel; the red anemone, according to 
Furrer (Zscht. fir M. und R.) growing 
luxuriantly under thorn bushes. All 
flowers represented by the lily, said 
Euthy. Zig. long ago, and probably he 
is right. No need to discover a flower 
of rare berry! as the subject of remark. 
Jesus would have said the same thing of 
the snowdrop, the primrose, the blue 
or the ος After ἀγροῦ should come 
a pause. nsider these flowers! Then, 
after a few moments’ refiection: πῶς, 
not interrogative (Fritzsche), but ex- 
pressive of admiration ; ¢, doubtful 
whether the growth is ired as to 
height (Bengel), rapidity, or rate of mul- 
tiplication. Why refer to growth at all? 
Probably with tacit reference to question 
in ver. 27. Note the verbs in the plural 
(vide critical note) with a neuter nomi- 
native. The lilies are viewed individ- 
ually as living beings, almost as friends, 
and spoken of with affection (Winer, § 
58, 3). The verb αὐξάνω in active voice 
is transitive in class., intransitive only in 


later writers.—Kotiow, νήθονσιν: “il- 
lud virorum est, qui agrum colunt, hoc 
mulierum domisedarum "” (Rosenmiiller). 
The former verb seems to point to the 
toil whereby bread is earned, with back 
ward glance at the conditions of human 
growth ; the latter to the lighter work, 
whereby clothing, the new subject of 
remark, is prepared.—Ver. 29. ω δὲ : 
the speaker is conscious He makes a 
strong statement, but He means it.—ov8e, 
not even Solomon the pg es) ge most 
glorious of the kings of Israel, and on 
state occasions most gorgeously attired. 
---ἓν τούτων: the lilies are in view, and 
one of them is singled out to vie with 
Solomon.—Ver. 30. εἰ δὲ τὸν xédproyv. 
Application, The beautiful flowers now 
lose their individuality, and are merged 
in the generic grass: mere weeds to be 
cut down and used as fuel. The natural 
sentiment of love for flowers is sacrificed 
for the ethical sentiment of love for 
man, aiming at convincing him of God's 
care.—«A(Bavoy (Attic κρίβανος, vide 
Lobeck, Phryn., 179), a round ey: of 
earthenware, narrow at top, hea to a 
fire within, dough spread on the sides; 
beautiful ni Fa σωμα thus used 
to prepare br rmen! ὀλιγόπιστοι: 
several times in Gospels, not in classics ; 
not reproachful but encouraging, as if 
bantering the careworn into faith. The 
difficulty is to get the careworn to con- 
sider these things. They have no eye 
for wild flowers, no ear for the song of 
birds. Not so Jesus. He had an in- 
tense delight in nature. Witness the 
sentiment, “Solomon in all his 94 
applied to a wild flower! These golden 
words are valuable as revealing His 
genial poetic nature. They reflect also 
in an interesting way the holiday mood 
of the hour, up on the hill away from 
heat, and crowds, and human misery. 
Vv. 31-33. Renewed exhortation 


38---.34. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


127 


τί πίωµεν, ἢ τί περιβαλώμεθα; 32. πάντα γὰρ ταῦτα τὰ €Ovyt Lk. xii. 1ο. 


οὖν µεριµνήσητε εἰς τὴν αὔριον ' ἡ γὰρ αὔριον µεριμνήσει τὰ ἑαυτῆς.ὃ 


” ἀρκετὸν τῇ ἡμέρα ἡ Ἀ κακία αὐτῆς. 


19. wCh.x.25. 1 Pet. iv. 3 
1. Amos iii. 6. Sir. xix. 6. 


Rom. x1.7. 
Heb. xi. 


pers.). 2 


v Mk. iv. 24. 


1 Another grammatical correction (neut. pl. nom. ἔθνη). SQB have επιζητουσι. 
2788B omit του θεου, and B transposes the nouns and has την δικ. και την Bac. 


αντον. 


Tisch. and W.H. retain the order as in T. R., omitting του θεον. 


8 τα eavtTys in ΕΣ (A τα περι avrys). B*L have simply avrys. 


against care, Ver. 31. οὖν, goes back 
on ver. 25, repeating the counsel, re- 
inforced by intervening argument.—Ver. 
32. τὰ ἔθνη, again a reference to 
heathen practice ; in vi. 7 to their ‘‘ bat- 
tology” in prayer, here to the kind of 
blessings they eagerly ask (ἐπιζητοῦσιν) : 
material only or chiefly ; bread, raiment, 
wealth, etc. I never realised how true 
the statement of Jesus is till I read the 
Vedic Hymns, the prayer book and song 
book of the Indian Aryans. With the 
exception of a few hymns to Varuna, 
in which sin is confessed and pardon 
‘begged, most hymns, especially those to 
Indra, contain prayers only for material 
goods: cows, horses, green pastures, 
good harvests. 

To wifeless men thou givest wives, 

And joyful mak'st their joyless lives ; 

Thou givest sons, courageous, strong, 

To guard their aged sires from wrong, 

Lands, jewels, horses, herds of kine, 

All kinds of wealth are gifts of thine, 

Thy friend is never slain; his might 

Is never worsted in the fight. 

—Dr. Muir, Sanskrit Texts, vol. ν., p. 137. 


—olSev yap 6 πατὴρ ὑ.: Disciples must 
rise above the pagan level, especially as 
they worship not Indra, but a Father in 
heaven, believed in even by the Indian 
Aryans, in a rude way, under the name 
of Dyaus-Pitar, Heaven-Father. yap 
explains the difference between pagans 
and disciples. The disciple has a Father 
who knows, and never forgets, His 
children’s needs, and who is so regarded 
by all who truly believe in Him. Such 
faith kills care. But such faith is 
possible only to those who comply with 
the following injunction. — Ver. 33. 
ζητεῖτε πρῶτον. There is considerable 
variation in the text of this counsel. 
Perhaps the nearest to the original is 
the reading of B, which omits tot θεοῦ 


with §, and inverts the order of Bac. 
and δικαι. Seek ye His (the Father’s) 
righteousness and kingdom, though it 
may be against this that in Luke (xii. 31) 
the kingdom only is mentioned, πρῶτον 
also being omitted: Seek ye His king- 
dom. This may have been the original 
form of the logion, all beyond being in- 
terpretation, true though unnecessary. 
Seeking the kingdom means seeking 
righteousness as the summum bonum, 
and the πρῶτον is implied in such a 
quest. Some (Meyer, Sevin, Achelis) 
think there is no second, not even a 
subordinate seeking after earthly goods, 
all that to be left in God’s hands, our 
sole concern the kingdom. That is in- 
deed the ideal heroic attitude. Yet 
practically it comes to be a question of 
first and second, supreme and subordi- 
nate, and if the kingdom be indeed first 
it will keep all else in its proper place. 
The πρῶτον, like the prayer against 
temptation, indicates consideration for 
weakness in the sincere.—mpooreOyjcerat, 
shall be added, implying that the main 
object of quest will certainly be secured. 

Ver. 34. Final exhortation against 
care. Not in Luke’s parallel section, 
therefore regarded by Weiss as a re- 
flection appended by the evangelist, not 
drawn from apostolic doctrine. But it 
very fitly winds up the discourse. In- 
stead of saying, Care not about food and 
raiment, the Teacher now says finally, 
Care not with reference to to-morrow, 
εἰς τὴν αὔριον (ἡμέραν understood). It 
comes to the same thing. Το restrict 
care to to-day is to master it absolutely. 
It is the future that breeds anxiety and 
leads to hoarding.—pepipvyjoet: future, 
with force of an imperative = let it, with 
genitive (atrijs, W.H.) like other verbs of 
care ; in ver. 25, with accus.—apxerov: a 


128 


a Lk. vi. 37. 
Rom. ii. 
Iy 3) 273 
χῖν. 1. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


VIL. 


VII. 1. ΜΗ “kpivete, ἵνα μὴ κριθῆτε: 2. ἐν ᾧ γὰρ κρίµατι κρί- 
νετε, κριθήσεσθε" καὶ ἐν ᾧ µέτρῳ μετρεῖτε, ἀντιμετρηθήσεται) ὑμῖν. 


as. iv. 11.3. Τί δὲ βλέπεις τὸ Kd phos τὸ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου, 


b Lk. vi. 41, 
42. 


1 Most uncials have the simple µετρηθησεται. 


The compound (T. R.) is in 


minusc, and Σ. Doubtless it came in originally from Lk. (vi. 38), being there the 


most probable reading. 


neuter adjective, used as a noun; a 
sufficiency.—rq ἡμέρᾳ,ίοι each successive 
day, the article distributive.— κακία, 
not the moral evil but the physical, the 
misery or affliction of life (not classical 
in this sense). In the words of Chrys. 
H. xxii., κακίαν Φησι, οὐ τὴν πονηρίαν, 
μὴ γένοιτο, ἀλλὰ τὴν ταλαιπωρίαν, καὶ 
τὸν πόνον, καὶ τὰς συµφόρας. Every day 
has some such troubles: ‘“ suas afflic- 
tiones, quas nihil est necesse metu con- 
duplicare”. Erasmus, Paraph. Fritzsche 
pr a peculiar arrangement of the 
words in the second and third clauses. 
Putting a full stop after t, and 
retaining the ra of τει ο ο ὠνὴς, 
he brings out this sense: The things of 
itself are a sufficiency for each day, visz., 
the evil thereof. 

Cuapter VII. Tue Sermon Con- 
TINUED AND Ο108ΕΡ. The contents of 
this chapter are less closely connected and 
more miscellaneous than in the two pre- 
ceding. In wv. 1-12 the polemic against 
Pharisaism seems to be continued and 
concluded. Vv, 6-11 Weiss regards as 
an interpolation foreign to the connec- 
tion. It seems best not to be too 
anxious about discovering connections, 
but to take the weighty moral sentences 
of the chapter as they stand, as embody- 
ing thoughts of Christ at whatever time 
uttered, on the hill or elsewhere, or in 
whatever connection. Section 1-5 
certainly deals with a Pharisaic vice, 
that of exalting ourselves by disparaging 
others, a very cheap way of attaining 
moral superiority. Jesus would have 
His disciples rise above Pagans, 

ublicans, Sadducees, Pharisees, but not 
by the method of detraction. 


Vv. 1-5. Against judging. Ver. 1. 
ἡ κρίνετε, jules not, an absolute pro- 
pibition of a common habit, especially 


in religious circles of the Pharisaic type, 
in which much of the evil in human 
nature reveals itself. ‘What levity, 
haste, prejudice, malevolence, ignorance ; 
what vanity and egotism in most of the 
ju ts pronounced in the world” 
Lutteroth). Fudge not, said Christ. 
udge, it is your duty, said the Dutch 


pietists of last century through a literary 
spokesman, citing in proof Matt. xxiii. 
33, wherethe Pharisees are blamed for 
neglecting “judgment”. Vide Ritschl, 
Geschichte des Pietismus, i., p. 328. 
How far apart the two types !|—tva μὴ 
κριθῆτε: an important, if not the highest 
motive ; not merely a reference to the 
final judgment, but stating a law of the 
moral order of the wort : the judger 
shall be judged ; to which answers the 
other: who judges himself shall not be 
judged σ Cor. xi. 31). In Rom. ii. 1 
St. Paul tacitly refers to the Jew as 
ὁ κρίνων. The reference there and here 
defines the meaning of xplvav. It 
points to the habit of judging, and the 
spirit as evinced by the habit, censorious- 
ness leading inevitably to sinister judging, 
so that κρίνειν is practically tied to 
( 


perience, 

les (vide Grotius for examples). It 
is the lex talionis in a new form: 
character for character. Jesus may have 
learned some of these moral adages at 
school in Nazareth, as we have all when 
boys learned many good things out of 
our lesson books with their collections of 
extracts. The point to notice is what 
the mind of Jesus assimilated—the best 
in the wisdom of His and the 
emphasis with which He inculcated the 
best, so as to ensure for it permanent 
lodgment in the minds of His disciples 
and in their records of His teaching. 

Vv. 3-5. Proverb of the mote and 
beam. Also current among Jews and 
Arabs (vide fhe > ;a minute 
dry particle of chaff, w etc.— δοκός, 
a wooden beam (let in, from δέχομαι) or 
joist, a monstrous symbol a great 
fault. A beam in the eye is a natural 
impossibility; cf. the camel and the 
needle eye. ε Eastern = ame 
was prone to μ.ο is is a 
case of tu quoque ( . li. 2), or rather 


of “thou much more”. The faults may 


1—6. 


τὴν δὲ ἐν τῷ σῷ ὀφθαλμῷ «δοκὸν οὐ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


d 


129 


κατανοεῖς; 4. ἢ πῶς ἐρεῖς τῷ ο Lk. vi. 41, 
2 


ἀδελφῷ σου, “Ades ἐκβάλω τὸ κάρφος ἀπὸ 1] τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σου: Kald Lk. vi. 41; 


ἰδού, ἡ δοκὸς ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ σου; 5. 


δοκὸν ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σου,” καὶ τότε Ξδιαβλέψεις ἐκβαλεῖν τὸ κάρφος 


ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ τοῦ ἀδελφού σου. 


μηδὲ βάλητε τοὺς µαργαρίτας ὑμῶν ἔμπροσθεν τῶν χοίρων, µήποτε © a 
vi 


Ad XX. 23. 
ὑποκριτά, ἔκβαλε πρῶτον τὴν Acts xxvii. 
k. xi1.24, 
a a 27. Rom. 

6. Μὴ δῶτε τὸ ἅγιον τοῖς Kut: πο 


. Vili. 
Lk. 
2 


f Ch. xiii. 45. 1 Tim, ii.g, Rev. xvii. 4; xviii. 16 : mee αι. 


1ΝΒΣ have ex, which is preferred by most modern edd. Weiss suspects con- 


formity to the ex in εκβαλω. 


2 NBC place εκ του οφθ. σου before την δοκον, so giving to the censor’s own eye 


due emphasis. 


be of the same kind: κάρφος, a petty 
theft, δοκός, commercial dishonesty on 
a large scale—‘‘ thou that judgest doest 
the same things” (Rom. ii. 2); or of a 
different sort: moral laxity in the 
publican, pride and inhumanity in the 
Pharisee who despised him (Lk. xviii. ο- 
14).--βλέπεις, οὐ κατανοεῖς: the contrast 
is not between seeing and failing to see, 
but between seeing and not choosing to 
see; ignoring, consciously overlooking. 
The censorious man is not necessarily 
ignorant of his own faults, but he does 
not let his mind rest on them. It is more 
pleasant to think of other people’s faults. 
—Ver. 4. ἐκβάλω, hortatory conjunc- 
tive, first person, supplies place of im- 
perative which is wanting in first person ; 
takes such words as aye, φέρε, or as 
here ἄφες, before it. Vide Goodwin, 
section 255. For ἄφες modern Greek 
has ds, a contraction, used with the 
subjunctive in the first and _ third 
persons (vide Vincent and Dickson, 
Modern Greek, p. 322).—Ver. 5. 
ὑποκριτά: because he acts as no one 
should but he who has first reformed 
himself. ‘What hast thou to do to 
declare my statutes?”’ Ps. 1. 16.—81a- 
βλέψεις, thou will see clearly, vide Mk. 
viii. 24, 25, where three compounds of 
the verb occur, with avd, διά, and ἐν. 
Fritzsche takes the future as an im- 
perative and renders: se componere ad 
aliquid, curare ; 1.ε., set thyself then to 
the task of, etc. 

Ver. 6. A complementary counsel. 
No connecting word introduces this 
sentence. Indeed the absence of con- 
necting particles is noticeable throughout 
the chapter: vv. 1, 6, 7, 13, 15. Itis 
a collection of ethical pearls strung 
loosely together. Yet it is not difficult 
to suggest a connecting link, thus: I 
have said, ‘Judge not,” yet you must 
know people, else you will make great 


mistakes, such as, etc. 
is inevitable. Jesus Himself practised 
it. He judged the Pharisees, but in the 
interest of humanity, guided by the law 
of love. He judged the proud, pre- 
tentious, and cruel, in behalf of the weak 
and despised. All depends on what we 
judge and why. The Pharisaic motive 
was egotism; the right motive is de- 
fence of the downtrodden or, in certain 
cases, self-defence. So here.—xata- 
πατήσουσι: future well attested, vide 
critical note, with subjunctive, ῥήξωσι, 
in last clause; unusual combination, 
but not impossible. On the use of the 
future after µήποτε and other final 
particles, vide Burton, Syntax of the 
Moods and Tenses in N. T. Greek, § 
100.---τὸ ἅγιον, τοὺς µαργαρίτας: what 
is the 5 thing, ας καί are the 
pearls? In a moral aphorism special 
indications are not to be expected, and 
we are left to our own conjectures. The 
‘“‘holy” and the ‘ pearls”? must define 
themselves for each individual in his own 
experience. They are the things which 
are sacred and precious for a man or 
woman, and which natural feeling teaches 
us to be careful not to waste or expose to 
desecration. For this purpose knowledge 
of the world, discrimination, is necessary. 
We must not treat all people alike, and 
show our valuables, religious experiences, 
best thoughts, tenderest sentiments, to 
the first comer. Shyness, reserve, goes 
along with sincerity, depth, refinement. 
In all shyness there is implicit judgment 
of the legitimate kind. A modest woman 
shrinks from a man whom her instinct 
discerns to be impure; a child from 
all hard-natured people. Who blames 
woman orchild? It is but the instinct 
of self-preservation.—xvotv, χοίρων. The 
people to be feared and shunned are 
those represented by dogs and swine, 
regarded by Jews as shameless and 


9 


Moral criticism 


130 


ε Ch. ix. 1. καταπατήσωσιν] αὐτοὺς ἐν 
.1χ. 1 
Lk. ix. 42. ® ῥήξωσιν ὑμᾶς. 
Gal. iv. 2 
(to break εὑρήσετε * 
out into 


h si. 9, 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Ἀ κρούετε, καὶ ἀνοιγήσεται ὑμῖν. 
λαμβάνει, καὶ ὁ ἵητῶν εὑρίσκει, καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ἀνοιγήσεται.: 


VIL 


τοῖς ποσὶν αὐτῶν, καὶ στραφέντες 


7. Αἰτεῖτε, καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν: {ητεῖτε, καὶ 


8. was γὰρ ὁ αἰτῶν 


10; xii-36.9- ἢ τίς ἐστιν ἐξ ὑμῶν ἄνθρωπος, ὃν ἐὰν αἰτήσῃ ὁ vids αὐτοῦ 
is Rev. ἄρτον, μὴ λίθον ‘émBdca αὐτῷ; 10. καὶ ἐὰν ἰχθὺν airjoy,® μὴ 


iii. 20. 
i Lk. xi. 11; xxiv. 30, 44. Acts xv. 30; xxvii. 15. 


) xaTama 


tion of the fut. ind. with the subj. (ρηξωσι 
ov to a confusion of ov with w. Vide belo 


in BCLX%. Weiss against most critics thinks this combina- 
v) impossible. He ascribes the reading 
iW. 


3 ανοιγεται in B Cop. Syr. Cur. W.H.in margin. Weiss decides for this reading. 
3 BL omit εστιν, and among modern editors Treg. and W.H. 


* For εαν αιτησῃ NWECLA have αιτησει. 


Tisch. and W.H. adopt this. 


> For και εαν αιτηση WBC have η και αιτησει, which modern critics generally 


adopt. 


unclean animals. There are such people, 
unhappily, even in the judgment of 
charity, and the shrewd know them and 
po shy of them ; for no good can come 
of comradeship with them, Discussions 
as to whether the dogs and the swine 
represent two classes of men, or only 
one, are pedantic. If not the same they 
are at least similar; one in this, that 
they are to be avoided. And it is gratu- 
itous to limit the scope of the gnome to 
the apostles and their work in preaching 
the gospel. It applies to all citizens of 
the kingdom, to all who have a treasure 
to guard, a holy of holies to protect from 
profane intrusion.—prjmwore, lest per- 
chance. What is to be feared ἕ--κατα- 
πατήσονσιν͵, ῥήξωσιν: treading under 
foot (ἐν τ. π., instrumental, with, de 
Wette ; , Weiss) ur pearls 
(αὐτονς), πο vourdiiven: Here 
again there is trouble for the com- 
mentators as to the distribution of the 
trampling and rending between dogs and 
swine. Do both do , or the swine 
both, or the swine the trampling and the 
dogs the rending? The latter is the 
view of Theophylact, and it has been 
followed by some moderns, including 
Achelis. On this view the structure of 
the sentence presents an example of 
ἐπάνοδος or ὑστέρησις, the first verb 
referring to the second subject and the 
second verb to the first subject. The 
dogs—street dogs, without master, living 
on offal—rend, because what you have 
thrown to them, perhaps to propitiate 
them, being of uncertain temper at the 
best, is not to their liking; the swine 
trample under foot what looked like 

or acorns, but turns out to be uneatable. 


two curious opinions may be noted. (1 
That ἅγιον represents an Aramaic wor 
meaning ear-ornaments, answering to 
pearls. This view, once νο by 
Michaelis, Bolten, Kuinoel, etc., and 
thereafter discredited, has been revived 
by Holtzmann (H. C.). Bal ὀφθαλ- 
pos (vv. 3, 5) means, not the eye, but a 
village well. So Furrer. Strange, he 
says, that a man should need to be told 
by a neighbour that he has a mote in his 
eye, or that it should be a fault to propose 
to take it out! And what sense in the 
idea of abeamintheeye? But translate 
the Aramaic word used by Jesus, well, 
and all is clear and natural. A neighbour 
given to fault-finding sees a small im- 
purity in a villager’s well and tauntingly 
offers to remove it. Meantime his own 
boys, in his absence, throw a beam into 
his own well (Zeitsch. fir M. und R. 
Vide also W. ngen, Pp. 222). 

Vv. 7-11. Admonition to prayer: pre- 
supposes deferred answer to prayer, 
tempting to doubt as to its utility, and 
consequent discontinuance of the practice. 
A lesson more natural at a later stage, 
when the disciples had a more devel 
religious experience. The whole subject 
more adequately handled in Luke xi. 
1-13.—Ver. 7. Αἰτεῖτε, ζητεῖτε, κρούετε, 
threefold exhortation with a view to 
impressiveness ; first literally, then twice 
in figurative κ. seck as for an 
object lost, kn as at a barred door, 
ok pe arr after the parable of the 
neighbour in bed (Lk. xi. 5-8). The 
promise of answer is stated in corre- 
sponding terms.—So@jeerat, εὑρήσετε, 
ἀνοιγήσεται.- Ὑετ. 8, iteration in form 


Before passing from these verses “ay 


7—12. 


Sow ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; II. εἰ οὖν pets, πονηροὶ ὄντες, 
“Suara ἀγαθὰ διδόναι τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ὁ πατὴρ 


ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς δώσει ἀγαθὰ τοῖς αἰτοῦσιν αὐτόν; 12. Πάντα 


οὖν ὅσα ἂν 1 θέλητε ἵνα ! 


1ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς : οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν 6 νόμος καὶ ot προφῆται. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


- a a 65). 
ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν ot ἄνθρωποι, οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς k Lk. xi. 13. 
ph. iv. 8. 


141 


} οἴδατε j Lk. xii. 56. 
2 Pet. ii.9. 
(vide be- 
low, also 
Mt. xxvii. 


. iv. 
Phil. v. 


17. 
1Ch. xviii. 35; xx. 32; xxi. 40; xxv. 40,45. Mk. ν. 19,20. Lk. i. 49 αἱ. (with dat. of person in all 


cases cited. Not usual in classics). 


1 For av NC have εαν, which has been adopted by Tisch. and W.H. 


of a general proposition: was yap, for 
every one, etc.—Ver. 9. ἢ answers to a 
state of mind which doubts whether God 
gives in answer to prayer at all, or at 
least gives what we desire.—rtls ἐξ ὑμῶν 
av.: argument from analogy, from the 
human to the divine. The construction 
is broken. Instead of going on to say 
what the man of the parable will do, the 
sentence changes into a statement of 
what he will not do. Well indicated in 
W.H.’s text by a — after ἄρτον. The 
anacolouthon could be avoided by 
omitting the ἐστι of T. R. after τίς and 
μὴ before λίθον, when the sentence 
would stand: τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν ἀν., ov αἰτῄσει 
6 vids αὐτοῦ ἄρτον, λίθον ἐπιδώσει 
αὐτῷ. But the broken sentence, if 
worse grammar, is better rhetoric.—py 
A. ἐπιδώσει, he will not give him a stone, 
will he? Bread, stone; fish, serpent. 
Resemblance is implied, and the idea is 
that a father may refuse his child’s 
request but certainly will not mock him. 
Grotius quotes from Plautus: ‘ Altera 
manu fert lapidem, panem ostentat al- 
tera”. Furrer suggests that by dow is 
meant not a literal serpent, but a scale- 
less fish, therefore prohibited to be eaten 
(Lev. xi. 12); serpent-like, found in the 

ea of Galilee, three feet long, often 
caught in the nets, and of course thrown 
away like the dogfish of our waters.— 
Ver. 11, πονηροὶ, morally evil, a strong 
word, the worst fathers being taken to 
represent the class, the point being that 
hardly the worst will treat their children 
as described. There is no intention to 
teach a doctrine of depravity, or, as 
Chrysostom says, to calumniate human 
nature (ov διαβάλλων τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην 
φύσιν). The evil specially in view, as 
required by the connection, is selfish- 
ness, a grudging spirit: “If ye then, 
whose own nature is rather to keep what 
you have than to bestow it on others, 
etc.” (Hatch, Essays in B. Gr., p. 81).---- 
οἴδατε διδόναι soletis dare, Maldon. 
Wetstein; rather, have the sense to 
give; with the infinitive as in Phil. v. 


12, 1 Tim. iii. 5. Perhaps we should 
take the phrase as an elegant expression 
for the simple δίδοτε. So Palairet.— 
δόµατα, four times in N. T. for the attic 
δῶρον, δώρηµα ; Sop. ayaa, gifts good 
not only in quality μοι] not stone, etc.) 
but even in measure, generous, giving 
the children more than they αδἰς---πόσῳ 
μᾶλλον, a fortiori argument.—é6 πατὴρ, 
etc., the Father whose benignant nature 
has already been declared, v. 45.—aya0a, 
good things emphatically, insignia dona, 
Rosenm., and only good (Jas. i. 17, an 
echo of this utterance). This text is 
classic for Christ’s doctrine of the Father- 
hood of God. 

Ver. 12. The golden rule. οὖν 
here probably because in the source, cf. 
καὶ in quotation in Heb. i.6. The con- 
nection must be a matter of conjecture— 
with ver. 11, a, ‘‘ Extend your goodness 
from children to all,’ Fritzsche; with 
νετ. 11, b, “Imitate the divine good- 
ness,’ Bengel; with vii. 1-5, vv. 6-11 
being an interpolation, Weiss and Holtz. 
(H.C.). Lk. vi. 31 places it after the 
precept contained in Matt. v. 42, and 
Wendt, in his reconstruction of the logia 
(L. J., i. 61), follows that clue. The 
thought is certainly in sympathy with 
the teaching of Matt. v. 38-48, and 
might very well be expounded in that 
connection. But the meaning is not 
dependent onconnection. The sentence 
is a worthy close to the discourse begin- 
ning at v. 17. ‘Respondent ultima 
primis,” Beng. Here as there “law and 
prophets’’.—tva with subjunctive after 
θέλητε, instead of infinitive.—mwdvra οὖν 


» + ποιῖτε αὐτος. The law of 
nature, says Rosenmiiller. Not quite. 


Wetstein, indeed, gives copious instances 
of something similar in Greek and 
Roman writers and Rabbinical sources, 
and the modern science of comparative 
religion enables us to multiply them. 
But recent commentators (including 
Holtz., H.C.) have remarked that, in 
these instances, the rule is stated in 
negative terms. So, ¢.g., in Tobit, 


132 
m (with δια 


Lk. xiii. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ , 


13. “™ Εἰσέλθετε διὰ τῆς * 
καὶ 5 εὐρύχωρος ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἀπάγουσα εἰς τὴν ἀπώλειαν, καὶ πολλοί 


Υπ. 


στενῆς πύλης: ὅτι "πλατεῖα ἡ πύλη.) 


24. John εἶσιν οἱ εἰσερχόμενοι δι αὐτῆς: 14. ὅτι στενὴ ἡ πύλη,” καὶ Ἀτεθλιμ- 
n Lk xii, µένη ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἀπάγουσα cis τὴν ζωήν, καὶ ὀλίγοι εἰσὶν οἱ εὑρίσκοντες 


24- 
ο here only in N. Τ., several times in Sept. 
only in the sense of contracted. 


p here only in N. T., Sept. Ps. ciii. (iv.) 25. 


q here 


1 4 πυλη is wanting in $§ and many Fathers (Clem, Orig.), and omitted by W.H. 
and bracketed by Tisch. Weiss thinks it very suspicious. 

1 Some copies have τι for οτι and omit η πνλη, but the text as it stands is 
approved by W.H. Tisch. brackets η πνλη. 


iv. 15, 8 is, μηδενὶ ποιήσῃς, quoted 
by Hillel in reply to one who asked him 
to teach the whole law while he stood on 
one leg. So also in the saying of Con- 
fucius: ‘‘Do not to others what you 
would not wish done to yourself,” Legge, 
Chinese Classics, i. 191 f. The negative 
confines us to the region of fustice ; the 
positive takes us into the region of gener- 
osity or grace, and so embraces both law 

prophets. We wish much more 
than we can claim—to be helped in need, 
encouraged in struggles, defended when 
misrepresented, and befriended when 
our back is at the wall. Christ would 
have us do all that in 2 magnanimous, 
benignant way; to be not merely δίκαιος 
but όν μον καὶ προφῆται: per- 
haps to a certain extent a current phrase 
= all that is necessary, but, no doubt, 
seriously meant; therefore, may help us 
to understand the statement in v. 17, 
“‘T came not to destroy, but to fulfil”’. 
The golden rule was Law and Prophets 
only in an ideal sense, and in the same 
sense only was Christ a fulfiller.—Vide 
Wendt, L. J., ii. 341. 

Vv. 13, 14. The two ways (Lk. 
xiii, 23-25). From this pomt onwards 
we have what commentators call the 
Epilogue of the sermon, introduced with- 
out connecting particle, possibly no part 
of the teaching on the hill, placed here 
because that teaching was regarded as 
the best guide to the right way. The 
passage itself contains no clue to the 
right way except that it is the way of the 
few. The allegory also is obscure from 
its brevity. Is the gate at the beginning 
or end of the way, or are gate and 
way practically one, the way narrow 
because it passes through a narrow door- 
way? Possibly Christ’s precept was 
simply, “‘ enter through the narrow gate” 
or “door”? (θύρα, Luke’s word), all the 
rest being gloss.—wvAns, the large en- 
trance to an edifice or city, as distinct 
from θύρα, a common door; perhaps 


chosen by Lk. because in keeping with 
the epithet στενῆς.- ὅτι, etc.: explana- 
tory enlargement to unfold and enforce 
the precept.— 688s: two ways are con- 
trasted, either described by its qualities 
andend. The “way” in the figure is a 
common road, but the term readily 
suggests a manner of life. The Christian 
religion is frequently called “the way” 
in Acts (ix. 2, xix. 9, etc.). The ντο 
road is characterised as πλατεῖα an 
εὐρύχωρος, broad and roomy, and as 
leading to destruction (ἀπώλειαν). The 
right way (and gate, ἡ πύλη, is to be 
retai in ver. 14, though omitted in 
13) is described as 
τεθλιµµένη, narrow and contr » and 
as leading to life—{wyv, a pregnant 
word, true life, worth living, in which 
men realise the end of their being—the 
antithesis of ἀπώλεια. The one is the 
way of the many, πολλοί εἰσ.ν οἱ εἶσερ. ; 
the other of the few, ὀλίγοι . . . of 
εὑρίσκοντες. Note the word “ finding”. 
The way is so narrow or so untrodden 
that it may easily be missed. It has to 
be sought for. Luke su the idea 
of difficulty in squeezing in through the 
very narrow door. Both points of view 
have their analogue in life. The practi- 
cal application of this counsel requires 
spiritual discernment. No verbal direc- 
tory will help us. Narrow? Was not 
Pharisaism a narrow way, and the mon- 
astic life and pietism with its severe rules 
for separation from the “world” in 
amusement, dress, etc. ? 

Vv. 15-20. Warning against pseudo- 
prophets. Again, without connecting 
particle and possibly not a part of the 
Sermon on the Mount. But the more 
important question here is: Does this 
section belong to Christ's teaching at all, 
or hasit been introduced by the Evangelist 
that false teachers of after days appear- 
ing in the Church might be condemned 
under the authority of the Master? 
(Holtz., H.C.). What occasion had 


ver. καὶ 


13—I9. 


αὐτήν. 


ἔρχονται πρὸς Spas ἐν ἐνδύμασι προβάτων, ἔσωθεν δέ εἶσι "λύκοι 


ἅρπαγες. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


οκ 


’ 
15. "Προσέχετε S€! ἀπὸ τῶν "ψευδοπροφητῶν, oltiwesr Ch. x. 17; 


xvi. 6, 11. 
Lk. xx. 46 
(all with 


16. ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν " ἐπιγνώσεσθε αὐτούς: µήτι ἀπότινος). 


s Ch. xxiv. 


Youdhéyouow ἀπὸ ἀκανθῶν σταφυλήν,; amd τριβόλων σύκα; 17. 11, 24 al. 


οὕτω wav δένδρον ἀγαθὸν καρποὺς καλοὺς moret®- τὸ δὲ ” σαπρὸν 
18. οὗ δύναται δένδρον ἀγαθὸν 


δένδρον καρποὺς πονηροὺς ποιεῖ. 


t Acts xx. 29 
trop.,so in 
Sept. Jer. 
v. 6 al. 

u Ch. xi. 27. 


ν . ~ 4 Se Syd x η λοὺ 1. 
καρποὺς πονηροὺς ποιειν,' οὖδε ὀ9ένδρον σαπρὸν καρποὺς καλοὺς ν Ch. xiii. 


ποιεῖν. 19. wav δένδρον μὴ ποιούν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ 


1 S8B omit δε (so W.H.). 
2 SSBC have σταφυλας. 
8 B has ποιει καλονς (W.H. margin). 


28, 41 
(with ἐκ). 
a: w Ch. xii. 33; 
xiii. 48. Eph. iv. ag. 


The sing. comes from Lk. (vi. 44). 


* For ποιειν δὴ has ενεγκειν (Tisch. both places, W.H. rst place). 


Christ to speak of false prophets? The 
reference can hardly be to the Pharisees 
or the Rabbis. They were men of tradi- 
tion, not prophetic, either in the true or 
in the false sense. But, apart from 
them, there might be another class of 
men in evidence in our Lord’s day, who 
might be so characterised. It was a 
time of religious excitement; the force of 
custom broken, the deep fountains of the 
soul bursting forth; witness the crowds 
who followed John and Jesus, and the 
significant saying about the kingdom of 
heaven suffering violence (Matt. xi. 12). 
Such times call forth true prophets and 
also spurious ones, so far in religious 
sympathy with prevalent enthusiasms, but 
bent on utilising them for their own 
advantage in gain or influence, men of 
the Judas type. If such men, as is 
likely, existed, Jesus would have some- 
thing to say about them, as about all 
contemporary religious phenomena. 

Ver. 15. Προσέχετε ἀπὸ, take heed 
to and beware of.—oitwves, I mean, such 
as.—év ἐνδύμασι προβάτων. Grotius, 
Rosenm, and Holtz. (H.C.) take this as 
referring to the dress worn (ἐν μηλωταῖς, 
Heb. xi. 37) as the usual badge of a 
prophet, but not without reference to 
the plausible manner of the wearer; 
deceptive and meant to deceive (Zechar. 
xiii. 4); gentle, innocent as_ sheep; 
speaking with “unction,”’ and all but 
deceiving ‘‘ the very elect ”. The manner 
more than the dress is doubtless in- 
tended. ἔσωθεν δὲ: manner and nature 
utterly different ; within, λύκοι dpwayes ; 
greedy, sometimes for power, ambitious 
to be first ; often for gain, money. The 
Didache speaks of a type of prophet 
whom it pithily names a χριστέµπορος 
(chap. xii.), a Christ-merchant. There 


have always been prophets of this type, 
“each one to his gain” (Is. lvi. 11), 
Evangel-merchants, traders in religious 
revival.— Ver. 16. ἀπὸ 7. καρπῶν. 
By the nature of the case difficult to 
detect, but discernible from their fruit. 
---ἐπιγνώσεσθε. Ye shall know them 
through and through (ἐπί) if ye study 
carefully the outcome of their whole 
way of life. 

Vv. 16-20, An enlargement in parabolic 
fashion on the principle of testing by 
γή. Ver. 16. µήτι, do they perhaps, 
τι suggesting doubt where there is 
none = men never do collect, or think 
of collecting, grapes from thorns or figs 
from thistles. And yet the idea is not 
absurd. There were thorns with grape- 
like fruit, and thistles with heads like 
figs (Holtz., H.C.). But in the natural 
sphere these resemblances never de- 
ceived; men saw at a glance how the 
matter stood.—Ver. 17. Another illus- 
tration from good and bad trees of the 
same kind. ἀγαθὸν, sound, healthy; 
σαπρὸν, degenerate, through age or bad 
soil. According to Phryn., σαπρός was 
popularly used instead of αἰσχρός in a 
moral sense (σαπράν ot πολλοὶ ἀντὶ τοῦ 
αἰσχράν, p. 377). Each tree brings forth 
fruit answering to its condition.—Ver. 
18. οὐ δύναται, etc. Nothing else is 
possible or looked for in nature.—Ver. 
1g. Men look on this as so certain that 
they do not hesitate to cut down and 
burn a degenerate tree, as if it were 
possible it might bring forth good fruit 
next γεατ.---μὴ ποιοῖν, if it do not, that 
once ascertained. Weiss thinks this 
verse is imported from iii. 10, and foreign 
to the connection.—Ver. 20. ἄραγε: final 
inference, a very lively and forcible com- 
posite particle; again with similar effcct 


134 


3 A 
x Ch.xii.s0; €S Top βάλλεται. 


xxi. 31 αἶ. αὐτού 
y Ch. xxiv. bigs 
36. Lk. x. 
2 


12. 
. , ~ ~ 
Thess. i. βασιλείαν τῶν odpavay " 
Io al. 


KATA MATOAION 


Vil. 


20. ἄραγε ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιγνώσεσθε 


21. “Ob mas ὁ λέγων por, Κύριε, Κύριε, εἰσελεύσεται eis τὴν 
ἀλλ᾽ ὁ Σποιῶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πατρός µου. 


2 Mk. ix. 48. τοῦ ἐν] οὐρανοῖς. 22. πολλοὶ ἐρούσί jor ἐν 7 ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, 


as. V. IO, 
a 


ohn i. 20. Κύριε, Κύριε, οὗ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι mpoepytedoaper,” καὶ "τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι 


Heb. xi. 


13 (ru τι δαιμόνια ἐξεβάλθμεν, καὶ TH σῷ ὀνόματι δυνάµεις πολλὰς ἐποιή- 


οτι, Acts 


xxiv. 14). σαµεν; 23. καὶ τότε "ὁμολογήσω αὗτοῖς, ὅτι οὐδέποτε ἔγνων Spas - 


1 ΝΒΟ have τοις before ουρανοις, which T. R., following many MSS., omits. 
249BCLZ have the augment at the beginning (επροφ.); adopted by modern: 


editors. 


in Matt. xvii. 26. The ye should have 
its full force as singling out for special 
attention ; ‘at least from their fruits, if 
by no other means’’. It implies that to 
know the false prophet is hard. Ver. 
22 explains why. He has so much to 
say, and show, for himself: devils cast 
out, souls saved, spiritual if not physical 
miracles done. What other or better 
“ fruit’? would you have? What in 
short is the test? Doctrine, good moral 
life? Is the false prophet necessarily a 
false teacher or an immoral man? Not 
necessarily though not unfrequently. 
But he is always a self-seeking man. 
The true prophet is Christ-like, 1.6., 
cares supremely for truth, righteousness, 
humanity; not at all for himself, his 
pocket, his position, his life. None but 
such can effectively preach Christ. This 
repetition of the thought in ver. 16 is not 
for mere poetical effect, as Carr (Camb. 
G. T.), following Jebb (Sacred Litera- 
ture, p. 195), seems to think. 

Vv. 21-23. False discipleship. From 
false teachers the discourse naturally 
passes to spurious disciples. Luke’s 
version contains the kernel of this 
passage (Luke vi. 46). Something of 
the kind was to be expected in the teach- 
ing on the hill. What more likely than 
that the Master, who had spoken such 
weighty truths, should say to His 
hearers: ‘In vain ye call me Master, 
unless ye do the things which I say”? 
As it stands here the logion has pro- 
bably, as Weiss suggests (Matt. Evang., 

219), undergone expansion and 
modification, so as to give to the title 


‘“‘ Lord,” originally = “\7Q, Teacher, the 


full sense it bore when applied to Christ 
by the Apostolic Church, and to make 
the warning refer to false prophets 
of the Apostolic age using Christ’s 


name and authority in support of anti- 
Christian tendencies, such as_ anti- 
nomianism (ἀνομίαν, ver. 23).—Ver. 21. 
6 λέγων, 6 ποιῶν: Of all, whether disciples 
or teachers, the principle holds good with- 
out exception that not saying ‘‘ Lord” 
but doing God’s will is the condition of 
approval and admittance into the king- 
dom. Saying “Lord” includes taking 
Jesus for Master, and listening to His 
teaching with appreciation and admira- 
tion; everything short of carrying out 
His teaching in life. In connection 
with such lofty thoughts as the Beati- 
tudes, the precept to love enemies and 
the admonition against care, there ® a 
great temptation to substitute senti- 
mental or esthetic admiration for heroic 
conduct.—rd θέλημα τοῦ πατρός pov. 
Christ’s sense of His position as Master 
or Lord was free from egotism. He 
was simply the Son and Servant of the 
Father, whose will He and all who 
follow Him must obey ; my Father here 
for the first time.—Ver. 22. ἐν ἐκείνῃ 
7] ἡμέρᾳ, the great dread judgment 
day of Jehovah expected by all Jews, 
with more or less solemn awe; a very 
grave τε[ετεποε.---τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι: thrice 
repeated, the main ground of hope. 
Past achievements, prophesyings, exor- 
cisms, miracles are recited; but the 
chief point insisted on is: all was done 
in Thy name, honouring Thee, as the 
source of wisdom and power.—Ver 23. 
τότε. When they make this protesta- 
tion, the Judge will make a counter- 
protestation —épodoyjow αὐτοῖς, I will 
own to them. Bengel’s comment is: 
aperte. Magna fotestas hujus dicti. But 
there is a certain apologetic tone in the 
expression, ‘I will confess ”’ (‘‘ profess,’” 
A.V. and R.V.), as if to say: I ought to 
know men who can say so much for 
themselves, but I do ποῖ.-- ὅτι, recita- 


20---10. 


» ἀποχωρεῖτε dm’ ἐμοῦ οἱ ’ἐργαζόμενοι τὴν * ἀνομίαν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


135 


24. Mas οὖν b Lk. ix. 
4 . Acts χμ], 


ὅστις ἀκούει µου τοὺς λόγους τούτους, καὶ ποιεῖ αὐτούς, ὁμοιώσω eee 
c . XXVL 


αὐτὸν 3 ἀνδρὶ " φρονίµῳ, ὅστις ᾠκοδόμησε τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ 


03 ἐπὶ τὴν 10. | 
Ch. xiii. 


métpay* 25. καὶ κατέβη ἡ βροχὴ καὶ ἦλθον of ποταμοὶ καὶ 41. 1 John 


11, 4. 


a , , 
ἔπνευσαν οἱ ἄνεμοι, καὶ ‘ προσέπεσον τῇ οἰκίᾳ ἐκείνῃ, καὶ οὐκ ἔπεσε: e Ch. x. 16; 


τεθεµελίωτο γὰρ ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν. 


λόγους τούτους καὶ μὴ ποιῶν αὐτούς, ὁμοιωθήσεται ἀνδρὶ 5 μωρῷ, 


in sense of beat against. 


1 B omits τουτους, which is bracketed by W.H. 


fallen out by homeeot. 


27 NBZ have οµοιωθησεται for οµοιωσω αντον. 


26. καὶ πᾶς 6 ἀκούων µου τοὺς 


χχῖν. 45; 
XXV. 2, 4. 
Lk. xii. 
42. 
io f here only 
g Ch. xxiii.17, 19; xxv. 2, 8. 


It seems needed, and may have 


So W.H. 


3 avrov before την οικιαν in NNBCZYX, so giving the pronoun due emphasis—his 


house. 


tive, the exact words directly reported.— 
οὐδέποτε, never: at no point in that 
temarkable career when so many wonder- 
ful things were done in my name.— 
ἀποχωρεῖτε, etc.: an echo of Ps. vi. 9, 
and sentence of doom, like Matt. xxv. 41. 

Vv. 24-27. Epilogue (Lk. vi. 47-49, 
which see for comparative exegesis). 
οὖν, νετ. 24, may be taken as referring to 
the whole discourse, not merely to vv. 
21-23 (Tholuck and Achelis). Such a 
sublime utterance could only be the 
grand finale of a considerable discourse, 
or series of discourses. It is a fit ending 
of a body of teaching of unparalleled 
weight, dignity, and beauty. The τού- 
τους after λόγους (ver. 24), though 
omitted in B, therefore bracketed in 
W. H., is thoroughly appropriate. It 
may have fallen out through similar 
ending of three successive words, or have 
been omitted intentionally to make the 
statement following applicable to the 
whole of Christ’s teaching. Its omission 
weakens the oratorical power of the 
passage. It occurs in ver. 26. 

Ver. 24. Mas Sorts. Were the read- 
ing ὁμοιώσω adopted, this would be a 
case either of attraction was for πάντα 
to agree with ὅστις (Fritzsche), or of a 
broken construction: nominative, with- 
out a verb corresponding, for rhetorical 
effect. (Meyer, vide Winer, § lxiii., 2, d.) 
---ἀκούει, ποιεῖ: hearing and doing, both 
must go together ; vide James i. 22-25, for 
a commentary on this logion. “' Doing” 
points generally to reality, and what it 
means specifically depends on the nature 
of the saying. ‘‘ Blessed are the poor in 
spirit”’; doing in that case means being 
poor in spirit. To evangelic ears the 
word has a legai sound, but the doing 
Christ had in view meant the opposite 


of legalism and Pharisaism,—épo.w6y- 
σεται: not at the judgment day (Meyer), 
but, either shall be assimilated by his 
own action (Weiss), or the future passive 
to be taken as a Gerund = comparandus 
est (Achelis).—¢povinw: perhaps the best 
rendering is ‘‘thoughtful”. The type of 
man meant considers well what he is 
about, and carefully adopts measures 
suited to his purpose. The undertaking 
on hand is building a house—a serious 
business—a house not being meant for 
show, or for the moment, but for a 
lasting home. A well-selected emblem 
of religion.—rhv πέτραν: the article used 
to denote not an individual rock, but a 
category—a rocky foundation. 

Ver. 25. What follows shows his 
wisdom, justified by events which he had 
anticipated and provided for ; not abstract 
possibilities, but likely to happen every 
year—certain to happen now and then. 
Therefore the prudence displayed is not 
exceptional, but just ordinary common 
sense.—kal: observe the five καὶ in 
succession—an eloquent folysyndeton, 
as grammarians call it; note also the 
rhythm of the sentence in which the war 
of the elements is described: down came 
the rain, down rushed the rivers, blew 
the winds—sudden, fell, terrible.—pocé- 
πεσον, they fell upon that house; rain on 
root, river on foundation, wind on walls. 
And what happened? καὶ οὐκ ἔπεσεν. 
The elements fell on it, but it did not 
fall.—reBepeAlwro γὰρ: for a good reason, 
it was founded on the rock. The 
builder had seen to that. 

Vv. 26-27. pwp@, Jesus seems here to 
offend against His own teaching, v. 22, 
but He speaks not in passion or con- 
tempt, but in deep sadness, and with 
humane intent to prevent such folly. 


136 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


VII. 27—29. 


b Lk. ii, 34. ὅστις ᾠκοδόμησε τὴν οἰκίαν avrod! ἐπὶ τὴν ἄμμον: 27. καὶ κατέβη 


om. 
xi. 11. 
i Ch. xxii. 
33. Mk. i. κοψαν 2 
22; xi. 18. 


« ‘ κ, c ‘ 

ἡ βροχὴ καὶ ἦλθον of ποταμοὶ καὶ ἔπνευσαν οἱ ἄνεμοι, καὶ προσέ- 

τῇ οἱ , > , \ ο» , 9 ο κ lal 2 A παζλ ” 
η οἰκιᾳ εκεινη, και επεσε" και HVT TTWOLS αύτης µεΥςλη. 


Ξ ‘ a 
Lk. iv. 32 28. Kat ἐγένετο ὅτε συνετέλεσεν ὃ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τοὺς λόγους τούτους, 


(ail in ref. i 
to Christ's 
doctrine), 


j Mk. i.22. 


ἐξεπλήσσοντο οἱ ὄχλοι ἐπὶ τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ: 29. ἦν γὰρ διδάσκων 
αὐτοὺς ὡς | ἐξουσίαν ἔχων, καὶ οὐχ ὡς of γραμματεῖς." 


_l αυτον before την οικιαν in ΔΝ ΡΖΣ as in νετ. 24. 


2 Some copies have προσερρηξαν. 
* ετελεσεν In NBCZE. 


4 After ypapperets ΔΒΔΣ have avrew (W.H. and other editors). 


add και οι φαρισαιοι (W.H. margin). 


Wherein lay the second builder’s folly ? 
Not in deliberately selecting a bad 
foundation, but in taking no thought of 
foundation; in beginning to build at 
haphazard and anywhere; on loose sand 
(ἄμμος) near the bed of a mountain 
torrent. His fault was not an error in 
judgment, but inconsiderateness. It is 
not, as is commonly supposed, a question 
of two foundations, but of looking to, 
and neglecting to look to, the foundation. 
In the natural sphere no man in his 
senses commits such a mistake. But 
utterly improbable cases have to be 
supposed in parables to illustrate human 
folly in religion.— Ver. 27. kat... ἄνεμοι: 
exactly the same phrases as in ver. 25, to 
describe the oncome of the storm.— 
προσέκοψαν: a different word for the 
assault on the house—struck upon it 
with immediate fatal effect. It was not 
built to stand such rough handling. The 
builder had not thought of such an 
eventuality.—€weoev, καὶ ἦν ἡ πτῶσις 
αὐτῆς µεγάλη: not necessarily implying 
that it was a large building, or that the 
disaster was of large dimensions, like the 
collapse of a great castle, but that the 
ruin was complete. The fool’s house 
went down like a house of cards, not one 
stone or brick_left on another. 
Allegorising interprétation of the rain, 
rivers and winds, and of the foundations, 
is to be avoided, but it is pertinent to 
ask, what defects of character in the 
sphere of religion are pointed at in this 
impressive parabolic Jogion ? What kind 
of religion is it that deserves to be so 
characterised? The foolish type is a 
religion of imitation and without fore- 
thought. Children play at building 
houses, because they have seen their 
seniors doing it. There are people who 
play at religion, not realising what 
religion is for, but following fashion, 


Some copies 


doing as others do, and to be seen of 
others (Matt. vi. 1). Children build 
houses on the sea sand below high-tide 
mark, not thinking of the tide which will 
in a few hours roll in and sweep away 
their houselet. There are men who have 
religion for to-day, and think not of the 
trial to-morrow may bring. 

Ver. 28. Concluding statement as to 
the impression made by the discourse. 
A similar statement occurs in Mk. 1, 22, 
27, whence it may have been transferred 
by Matthew. It may be assumed that 
5ο unique a teacher as Jesus made a pro- 
found impression the very first time He 
spoke in public, and that the people 
would express their feelings of surprise 
and admiration at once. The words 
Mark puts into the mouth of the audience 
in the synagogue of Capernaum are to 
the life (vide comments there). They 
saw, and said that Christ’s way of speak- 
ing was new, not like that of the scribes 
to which they had been accustomed. 
Both evangelists make the point of 
difference consist in ‘‘authority”’. 

Ver. 29. ὡς ἐξουσίαν ἔχων: Fritzsche 
supplies, after ἔχων, τοῦ διδάσκειν, and 
renders, He taught as one having a right 
to teach, because He could do it well, 
“‘scite et perite,”? a master of the art. 
The thought lies deeper. It is an ethical, 
not an artistic or esthetical contrast that 
is intended. The scribes spake by 
authority, resting all they said on tradi- 
tions of what had been said before. 
Jesus spake with authority, out of His 
own soul, with direct intuition of truth ; 
and, therefore, to the answering soul of 
His hearers. The people could not quite 
explain the difference, but that was what 
they obscurely felt. 

Cuapters VIII., IX. THe HEALING 
MINISTRY OF JESUS. These two chap- 
ters consist mainly of miracle narratives, 


‘VIII. τ--3. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ο Ἡι 


VIII. 1. ΚΑΤΑΒΑΝΤΙ δὲ αὐτῷ 1 ἀπὸ τοῦ Spous, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ α Ch. x. 8; 


ὄχλοι πολλοί: 2. καὶ ἰδού, "λεπρὸς ἐλθὼν 3 προσεκύνει αὐτῷ, λέγων, 
ἁ Κύριε, ἐὰν θέλῃς, δύνασαί µε Ὁ καθαρίσαι.” 
χεῖρα, ἤψατο αὐτοῦ 6 “Inaods,® λέγων, “Θέλω, καθαρίσθητι. 


xvil. 14, 17. 


Xi. 5; XXVi. 


6. Lk. iv. 
27; xvii. 
3. Kat "ἐκτείνας τὴν 12. 
_b Ch. x. 8 
Kae xi 5). Lk 
iv. (277; 


ο with τὴν χειρα often in Sept. and frequently in the Gospels (Ch. xii. 13, 49, etc.). 


1 For καταβαντι δε αυτω (the reading of $§ al. adopted by Tisch.) κ Ρο have 


xataBavtos δε αυτου. 
_matical “«ἱπιρτονεπιεπί”.. 


2 For ελθων (in CKL, etc.) BAZ have προσελθων. 


fallen out through homeeot. (λεπρος). 


Z has the gen. also (και κατ. av.). 


The dative is a gram- 


The προς has probably 


5 NBCZ omit o Ἴησους, which T. R. often introduces. 


the greater number being reports of 
healing acts performed by Jesus, nine in 
all, being the second part of the pro- 
gramme sketched in chap. iv. 23-25. 
These wonderful works are not to be 
regarded, after the manner of the older 
apologists, as evidential signs appended 
‘to the teaching on the hill to invest it 
with authority. That teaching needed 
no external credentials; it spoke for 
itself then as now. These histories are 
an integral part of the self-revelation of 
Jesus by word and deed; they are de- 
monstrations not merely of His power, 
but above all, of ‘is spirit. Therein lies 
their chief permanent interest, which is 
entirely independent of all disputes as 
to the strictly miraculous character of 
the events. This collection is not 
arranged in chronological order. The 
connection is topical, not temporal. 
CuaPTER VIII. 1-4. The leper (Mk. 
i. 40-45; Lk. v. 12-16). This is the first 
individual act of healing reported in this 
Gospel, chap. iv. 23-24 containing only 
a general notice. Itis avery remarkable 
one. Notheory of moral therapeutics will 
avail here to eliminate the miraculous 
element. Leprosy is not a disease of 
the nerves, amenable to emotional treat- 
ment, but of the skin and the flesh, 
‘covering the body with unsightly sores. 
The story occurs in all three Synoptics, 
and, as belonging to the triple tradition, 
is one of the best attested. Matthew’s 
version is the shortest and simplest here 
as often, his concern being rather to re- 
port the main fact and what Christ said, 
than to give pictorial details. Possibly 
he gives it as he found it in the Apostolic 
Document both in form and in fosition, 
immediately after Sermon on Mount, so 
placed, conceivably, to illustrate Christ’s 
_ respectful attitude towards the law as 
‘stated in v. 17 (cf. viii. 4 and vide Weiss, 
Matt. Evan., p. 227). 
4 


Ver. 1. καταβάντος αὐτοῦ (for the 
reading vide above). Jesus descended 
from the hill towards Capernaum (ver. 5), 
but we must beware of supposing that 
the immediately following events all 
happened there, or at any one place or 
time. Mark seems to connect the cure 
of the leper with the preaching tour 
in Galilee (i. 40), and that of the palsied 
man with Christ’s return therefrom (ii. 1). 
Jesus had ascended the hill to escape the 
pressure of human need. He descends, in 
Matt.’s narrative, to encounter it again— 
ἠκολούθησαν, large crowds gather about 
and follow Him.—i6ov, the sign mark of 
the Apostolic Document according to 
Weiss; its lively formula for introducing a 
Narrative.—mpooekvver, prostrated him- 
self to the ground, in the abject manner 
of salutation suitable from an inferior to 
one deemed much superior, and also to one 
who had a great favour to ask.—Kupte: 
not implying in the leper a higher idea 
than that of Master or Rabbi.—éav 
θέλῃς: the leper’s doubt is not about the 
power, for he probably knows what mar- 
vellous things have been happening of late 
in and around Capernaum, but about the 
will, a doubt natural in one suffering 
from a loathsome disease. Besides, men 
more easily believe in miraculous power 
than in miraculous love. θέλῃς, present 
subjunctive, not aorist, which would ex- 
press something that might happen at a 
future time (vide Winer, § xlii., 2, b).— 
καθαρίσαι---οί course the man means to 
cleanse by healing, not merely to pro- 
nounce clean. This has an important 
bearing on the meaning of the word 
in next νετ.--ἤψατο, touched him, not 
to show that He was not under the 
law, and that tothe pure nothing is un- 
clean (Chrys., Hom. xxv.), but to evince 
His willingness and sympathy. The 
stretching out of the hand does not mean 
that, in touching, He might be as far off as 


138 


d here and εὐθέως ἐκαθαρίσθη 1 αὐτοῦ ἡ αλέπρα. 


in para 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


VIIt.. 


4. καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς.. 


e Ch. xviii. “°"Opa μηδενὶ eimys: GAN’ ὕπαγε, σεαυτὸν δεῖξον τῷ ἱερεῖ, καὶ 


1ο. Heb 
f Ch. x. 18; 


Heb. iii 
races 

vii. 30. s βέβληται ἐν τῇ 
h Lk. xi. 53. 


προσένεγκε” τὸ δῶρον ὃ προσέταξε Μωσῆς, *eis μαρτύριον avrots.” 

' 5. Εἰσελθόντι δὲ τῷ ᾿Ιησοί 3 eis Καπερναούµ., προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ 
43 ἑκατόνταρχος παρακαλῶν αὐτόν, 6. καὶ λέγων, “Κύριε, 6 παῖς µου 
οἰκίᾳ παραλυτικός, " δεινῶς βασανιζόμενος. 


1 BLX& have the less correct, but none the less likely, εκαθερισθη. 


2 BC have προσενεγκον. 
3 The dative is here also a correction, 


possible to avoid defilement and infection 
μας Mio It was action suited to 
the word.—@édw, “I will,’ pronounced 
in firm, cordial tone, carefully recorded 
by all the evangelists. καθαρίσθητι, 
naturally in the sense of the man’s 
request. But that would imply a real 
miracle, therefore naturalistic interpre- 
ters, like Paulus and Keim, are forced to 
take the word in the sense of pronounc- 
ing clean, the mere opinion of a shrewd 
observer. The narrative of Matthew 
barely leaves room for this hypothesis. 
The other evangelists so express them- 
selves as to exclude ἵε.-- ἐκαθαρίσθη: 
forthwith the leprosy disappeared as if by 
magic. The man was and looked per- 
fectly well. 

Ver. 4. Spa, see toit! Look you!— 
imperative in mood and tone (vide 
Mark’s graphic account). Christ feared 
the man would be content with being 
well without being ‘officially pronounced 
clean—physically healed, though not 
socially restored. Hence μηδενὶ εἴπῃς, 
GAN’ ὕπαγε, etc.: speak of it to nobody, 
but go at once and show thyself (δεῖξον), 
τῷ ἱερεῖ, to the priest who has charge of 
such matters. What was the purpose of 
this order? Many good commentators, 
including Grot., Beng. and Wetstein, say 
it was to prevent the priests hearing of 
the cure before the man came (lingering 
on the road to tell his tale), and, in spite, 
declaring that he was not clean. The 
truth is, Jesus desired the benefit to be 
complete, socially, which depended on 
the priest, as well as physically. Ifthe 
man did not go at once, he would not go 
at all_—rd δῶρου: vide Lev. xiv. 1Ο, 21; 
all things to be done according to the 
law; no laxity encouraged, though the 
official religion was little worthy of re- 
spect (cf. Matt. ν. 19).—eis µαρτύριον, as 
a certificate to the public (αὐτοῖς) from 
the constituted authority that the leper 
wasclean. The direction shows Christ’s 


ΔΝ as in Τ. R. 


SBCZ have the gen. as in ver. 1. 


confidence in the reality of the cure. 
The whole story is a picture of character. 
The touch reveals sympathy ; the accom- 
panying word, “I will, be clean,” 
prompt, cordial, laconic, immense energy 
and vitality; the final order, reverence 
for existing institutions, fearlessness, 
humane solicitude for the sufferer’s future 
well-being in every sense (vide on Mk.). 

Vv. 5-13. The centurion’s son or 
servant (Lk. vii. 1-10). Placed by both 
Matthew and Luke after Sermon on 
Mount, by the latter immediately after. 
—Ver. 5. εἰσελθόντος, aorist participle 
with another finite verb, pointing to 
a completed action. He had entered 
Capernaum when the following event 
happened. Observe the genitive ab- 
solute again with a dative of the same 
subject, αὐτῷ, following προσἢλθεν. 
ἑκατόνταρχος: a Gentile (ver. 10), pro- 
bably an officer in the army of Herod 
Antipas.—Ver. 6. Κύριε again, not 
necessarily expressing any advanced 
idea of Christ’s person.—mwats may mean 
either son or servant. Luke has δοῦλος, 
and from the harmonistic point of view 
this settles the matter. But many, in- 
cluding Bleek and Weiss (Meyer), insist 
that mats here means 50Π.--βέβληται, 
perf. pointing to a chronic condition; 
bed-ridden in the house, therefore not 
with the centurion.—qmapadvtidés: a 
disease of the nerves, therefore emotional 
treatment might be thought of, had the 
son only been present. But he could 
not even be brought on a stretcher as in 
another case (Matt. ix. 1) because not 
only παραλ., but δεινῶς βασανιζόµενος, 
not an ordinary feature of paralysis.— 
Ver. 7. This is generally taken as an 
offer on Christ’s part to go to the house. 
Fritzsche finds in it a question, arranging 
the words (T. R.) thus: καὶ, λέγει a. ὁ. 
Ἰω, Ἐγὼ ἐλθὼν θεραπεύσω αὐτόν; and 
rendering: “And,” saith Jesus to him, 
“shall I go and heal him?” = is that 


4—I0. 


7. Kat! λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ “Inoods,? “.᾿ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ay 


Εγὼ ἐλθὼν θεραπεύσω αὐτόν.” 


δ. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὃ ὁ ἑκατόνταρχος ἔφη, “ Κύριε, οὐκ εἰμὶ Ἡ ἱκανὸς ἵνα 1 with ἵνα 


µου ὑπὸ τὴν στέγην εἰσέλθῃς' ἀλλὰ µόνον εἰπὲ λόγον, καὶ ἰαθή- 


9. καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπός εἰμι ὑπὸ ἐξουσίαν,ὃ 


σεται ὁ παῖς µου. 


ἔχων ὑπ ἐμαυτὸν στρατιώτας' καὶ λέγω τούτῳ, Πορεύθητι, 


here and 
in Lk. vii 
6 wtde at 
Mt iii. rr. 

. j Lk. vii. 8. 
και 


A ” a 
πορεύεται καὶ ἄλλῳ, Ἔρχου, καὶ ἔρχεται" καὶ τῷ δούλῳ µου, 


Ποίησον τοῦτο, καὶ ποιεῖ.͵ 


1Ο. ᾽Ακούσας δὲ ὁ Ιησοῦς ἐθαύμασε, 


καὶ elie τοῖς ἀκολουθούσιν, “᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ 


1B and many vers. (including Syr. Sin. and Cur.) omit the και, so giving an 


expressive asyndeton. 
2 SOB, Syr. Sin. omit ο Ingovs. 
5 αποκριθεις Se in ΜΒ 33. 


4 SSBC have λογω, adopted by both Tisch. and W.H., and to be preferred. 


5 NSB al. add τασσοµενος, adopted within brackets by W.H. 


Lk.,” Weiss in Meyer. 


what you wish? The following verse 
then contains the centurion’s reply. 
This is, to say the least, ingenious.— 
Ver. 8, ἱκανὸς: the Baptist’s word, chap. 
iii. 11, but the construction different in 
the two places, there with infinitive, 
here with ἵνα: I am not fit in order 
that. This is an instance illustrating 
the extension of the use of ἵνα in later 
Greek, which-culminated in its super- 
seding the infinitive altogether in modern 
Greek. On the N. T. use of ἵνα, vide 
Burton, M. and T., §§ 191-222. Was it 
because he was a Gentile by birth, and 
also perhaps a heathen in religion, that 
he had this feeling of unworthiness, or 
was it a purely personal trait? If he 
was not only a Gentile but a Pagan, 
Christ’s readiness to go to the house 
would stand in remarkable contrast to 
His conduct in the case of the Syro- 
Pheenician woman. But vide Lk. vil. 5. 
—elwé Ady, speak (and heal) with a 
word. A bare word just where they 
stand, he thinks, will suffice.—Ver. 9, 
καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ: he argues from his own 
experience not with an air of self- 
importance, on the contrary making 
light of his position as a commander — 
ὑπὸ ἐξουσίαν, spoken in modesty. He 
means: I also, though a very humble 
person in the army, under the authority 
of more important officers, still have a 
command over a body of men who do 
implicitly as I bid them. Fritzsche 
rightly suggests that ἄνθρωπος ὑπὸ 
ἐξουσίαν does not express a single idea 
= ‘‘a man under authority”. He re- 
presents himself as a man with authority, 
though in a modest way. A comma 


‘“* Manifestly out of 


might with advantage be placed after 
eiut. The centurion thinks Jesus can 
order about disease as he orders his 
soldiers—say to fever, palsy, leprosy, 
go, and it will go. His soldiers go, his 
slaves do (Carr, C. G. T.). 

Ver. 10. In ver. 13 we are told that 
Jesus did not disappoint the centurion’s 
expectation. But the interest of the 
cure is eclipsed for the evangelist by the 
interest of the Healer’s admiration, 
certainly a remarkable instance of a 
noteworthy characteristic of Jesus: His 
delight in signal manifestations of faith. 
Faith, His great watchword, as it was St. 
Paul’s. This value set on faith was not 
a mere idiosyncrasy, but the result of 
insight into its nobleness and spiritual 
virtue.—xat εἶπε: Christ did not conceal 
His admiration ; or His sadness when 
He reflected that such faith as this 
Gentile had shown was a rare thing in 
Israel,—’ Apnv: He speaks solemnly, not 
without emotion.—wap’ οὐδενὶ: this is 
more significant than the reading of 
T. R., assimilated to Lk. vii. 9. The 
οὐδὲ implies that Israel was the home of 
faith, and conveys the meaning not even 
there. But wap’ οὐδενὶ means not even 
in a single instance, and implies that 
faith in notable degree is at a discount 
among the elect people. Such a sentiment 
at so early a period is noteworthy as show- 
ing how far Jesus was from cherishing 
extravagant hopes of setting up a theo- 
cratic kingdom of righteousness and 
godliness in Israel. 

Vv. 11-12. This logion is given by 
Luke (xiii. 28-29) in a different connec- 
tion, and it may not be in its historical 


140 


k Ch. xiv. τοσαύτην πίστιν] εὗρον. 
19, parall. 


KATA: MATOAION 


VIII, 


11. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, ὅτι πολλοὶ ἀπὸ ἄνα- 


ἀνακλιθήσονται μετὰ ᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ 


13. Καὶ εἶπεν 6 Ἰησοῦς 
ὡς ἐπίστευσας γενηθήτω cor.” 


η τολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν ἤξουσι, καὶ * 

ηλ ᾿Ισαὰκ καὶ ᾿Ιακὼβ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν: 12. of δὲ viol τῆς 
1 Ch, xxii, βασιλείας ἐκβληθήσονται εἰς ᾿τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον: ἐκεῖ ἔσται 

bd Wee ™6 κλαυθμὸς καὶ 6 βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων.” 
m'Ch. ii τῷ ἑκατοντάρχω, '΄Ὕπαγε, Kat? 

plans Καὶ ἰάθη 6 παῖς αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ὥρα éxeivy.* 

αν, 14. Καὶ ἐλθὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν Πέτρου, εἶδε τὴν πενθερὰν 
ην αὐτοῦ βεβλημένην καὶ πυρέσσουσαν, 15. καὶ ἤψατο τῆς χειρὸς 

ος αὐτῆς, καὶ ἀφῆκεν αὐτὴν ὁ 


1 Authorities are much divided between the reading ουδε εν τω |. . 


*mupetés* καὶ ἠγέρθη, καὶ διηκόνει 


+ + ευρον 


(T. R.), which is found in CLAS al. (Tisch.), and παρ ουδενι τοσαυτην πιστιν εν 
τω |. evpov, found in B, old Latin verss., Syr. Cur., Egypt. verss., and several cursives 


(W.H.). 
39 Ὦ omit και. Vide below. 
3 S8B omit avrov, also superfluous. 
4 απο της ωρας εκεινης in ΟΔΣ 33. 


place here. But its import is in thorough 
harmony with the preceding reflection on 
the spiritual state of Israel. One who 
said the one thing was prepared to say 
the other. At whatever time said it 
would give offence. It is one of the 
heavy burdens of the prophet that he 
cannot be a mere patriot, or say.com- 
plimentary things about his nation or his 
Church. ἀνακλιθήσονται: Jesus ex- 
presses Himself here and throughout 
this logion in the language of His time 
and people. The feast with the 
patriarchs, the outer darkness, the weep- 
ing and the gnashing of teeth (observe 
the article before σκότος, κλαυθμὸς, 
βρυγμὸς, implying that all are familiar 
ideas) are stock phrases. The imagery 
is Jewish, but the thought is anti-Jewish, 
universalistic, of perennial truth and 
value. - 

Ver. 14. ὕπαγε, etc.: compressed im- 
passioned utterance, spoken under 
emotion = Go, as thou hast believed be 
it to thee ; cure as thorough as thy faith. 
The καὶ before os in T. R. is the addition 
of prosaic scribes. Men speaking under 
emotion discard expletives. 

Weizsacker (Untersuchungen tiber die 
Evang. Gesch., p. 50) remarks on the 
felicitous juxtaposition of these two 
narratives relatively to one another and 
to the Sermon on Mount. “In the first 
Jesus has to do with a Jew, and demands 
of him observance of the law. In this 
respect the second serves as a com- 
panion piece, the subject of healing 


The former has probably come in from Lk. vii. 9, 


being a heathen, giving occasion for a 
word as to the position of heathens. 
The two combined are happily appended 
to a discourse in which Jesus states His 
attitude to the law, forming as comple- 
ments of each other a commentary on 
the statement.” 

Vv. 14-15. Cure of a fever: Peter's 
mother-in-law (Mark i. 29-31 ; Luke iv. 
38, 39). This happened much earlier, at 
the beginning of the Galilean ministry, 
the second miracle-history in Mark and 
Luke. Mark at this point becomes 
Matthew’s guide, though he does not 
follow implicitly. Each evangelist has 
characteristic features, the story of the 
second being the original.— Ver. 14. 
ἐλθὼν, coming from the synagogue on a 
Sabbath day (Mark i. 29) with fellow- 
worshippers not herenamed. The story 
here loses its flesh and blood, and is cut 
down to the essential fact.—eis τ. ο. 
Πέτρου: Peter has a house and is 
married, and already he receives his dis- 
ciple name (Simon in Ματ]ς).----πενθερὰν. 
It is Peter’s mother-in-law that is ill_— 
βεβλημένην καὶ πυρέσσουσαν, lying in 
bed, fevered. Had she taken ill since 
they left to attend worship, with the 
suddenness of feverish attacks in a 
tropical climate? βεβλημένην is against 
this, as it naturally suggests an illness 
of some duration; but on the other 
hand, in she had been ill for some time, 
why should they need to tell Jesus after 
coming back from the synagogue ? (Mark 
i. 30). πνρέσσ. does not necessarily 


1I—19. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 141 
adtois.! 16. °’Opias δὲ γενομένης προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ δαιµονιζο- Ὁ rere. 
µένους πολλούς: καὶ ἐξέβαλε τὰ πνεύματα λόγω, καὶ πάντας τοὺς ο ων 
κακῶς ἔχοντας ἐθεράπευσεν" 1]. ὅπως πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ xxv 57, 
‘Hoatov τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, ΄Αὐτὸς τὰς } ἀσθενείας ἡμῶν 3nd ο. 
ἔλαβε, καὶ τὰς νόσους ἐβάστασεν.᾽ plan σα 


18. ᾿Ιδὼν δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς πολλοὺς ὄχλους” περὶ αὐτόν, ἐκέλευσεν xxviii 9. 
I im. 


ἀπελθεῖν * cis τὸ 4 πέραν. 


19. καὶ προσελθὼν els γραμματεὺς εἶπεν ν. 23. 
in Mt. and Mk. (ver. 28, Ch. xiv. 22. 


q phr. freq. 
MK. iv. 35 αἰ.). 


laure in S$BCE al. αντοις (in LA) has come in from parall. 
2B has οχλον; δὴ οχλους, which once introduced was enlarged into πολλους 
οχλους (Ν ΟΙ.ΔΣ αἰ.), not a usual expression in Mt. 


imply a serious attack, but vide Luke iv. 
38.—Ver. 15. ἤὔψατο. He touched her 
hand ; here to cure, in Mark to raise her 
πΡ.---ἠγέρθη, διηκόνει: she rose up at 
once and continued to serve at the meal ; 
all present but Jesus only referred to 
here (ait, plural in Mark, but in- 
appropriate here). Not only the fever 
but the weakness it causes left her. 
“Ordinarily a long time is required for 
recovery, but then all things happened 
at once” (Chryst., Hom. xxvii.). Nota 
great miracle or interesting for anything 
said; but it happened at an early 
time and in the disciple circle; Peter 
the informant; and it showed Christ’s 
sympathy (ver, 17), the main point for Mt. 

Vv. 16-17. Events of that Sabbath 
evening (Mark i. 32-34; Luke iv. 4Ο, 41). 
A general statement, which, after iv. 
23 f., might have been dispensed with ; 
but it is in the source (Mark) in the same 
context, and it gives our evangelist a 
welcome opportunity of quoting a pro- 
phetic text in reference to Christ’s heal- 
ing work. Ver. 16. Ὀψίας yevouevys: 
vague indication of time on any day, but 
especially a Sabbath day. There were 
two evenings, an early and a late (Ex. 
xxx. 8). Which of them was it; before 
or after sunset? Mark is more exact.— 
δαιµον. πολλούς: why a crowd just then, 
and why especially demoniacs brought 
to be healed? For explanation we must 
goto Mark. The preaching of Jesus in 
the synagogue that Sabbath day, and the 
cure of a demoniac (Mark i. 21-28), had 
created a great sensation, and the result 
is a crowd gathered at the door of Peter’s 
house at sunset, when the Sabbath 
ended, with their sick, especially with 
demoniacs.—Ver. 17. Prophetic cita- 
tion, apposite, felicitous ; setting Christ’s 
healing ministry in a true light; giving 
prominence not to the thaumaturgic but 


. 


to the sympathetic aspect; from the 
Hebrew original, the Sept. making the 
text (Is. lili. 4) refer to sin. The 
Hebrew refers to sicknesses and pains. 
It is useless to discuss the precise mean- 
ing of ἔλαβεν and ἐβάστασεν: took and 
bore, or took and bore away ; subjective 
or objective? The evangelist would 
note, not merely that Jesus actually did 
remove diseases, but that He was minded 
to do so: such was His bent. 

Vv. 18-34. Excursion to the eastern 
shore with its incidents (Mark iv. 35—v. 
20; Luke viii. 22-39). These narratives 
make a large leap forward in the history. 
As our evangelist is giving a collection 
of healing incidents, the introduction of 
wy. 18-22, disciple interviews, and even 
of vv. 23-27, a natuve miracle, needs an 
explanation. The readiest is that he 
found these associated with the Gadara 
incident, his main concern, in his source 
or sources, the whole group in the Apos- 
tolic Document (so Weiss). We must 
not assume a close connection between 
§ 18-22 and the excursion to the eastern 
shore. Luke gives the meeting with the 
scribe, etc.. a different setting. Possibly 
neither is right. The scribe incident 
may belong to the excursion to the north 
(xv. 21). 

Ver. 18. ᾿Ιδὼν . . « περὶ αὐτόν. The 
evangelist makes a desire to escape from 
the crowd the motive of the journey. 
This desire is still more apparent in 
Mark, but the crowd and the time are 
different. The multitude from which 
Jesus escapes, in Mark’s narrative, is 
that gathered on the shore to hear the 
parable-discourse from a boat on the 
lake.—éxéXevorev ἀπελθεῖν. Grotius thinks 
this elliptical for: ἐκέλευσε πάντα ἐτοι- 
µάσαι εἷς τὸ ἀπ. Beza renders: indixit 
profectionem = He ordered departure. 
τοὺς µαθητάς is understood, not men- 


142 KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ VIII. 


r Lk, ix. 58; αὐτῷ, “ Διδάσκαλε, ἀκολουθήσω σοι, ὅπου ἐὰν amépyy.” 20. Kat 
xiii. 32. 3 : κ x 
& Lx. ir. 58 λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ai " ἀλώπεκες "φωλεοὺς ἔχουσι, καὶ τὰ 
 Ιχ. 6 α a ε ε A 
a Ch. xix. 8. πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ “κατασκηνώσεις: 6 δὲ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ 
. Vil, 


g2_(with ἔχει, TOU τὴν κεφαλὴν κλίνη. 21. Ἕτερος δὲ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ 1 
1n +). I A , ae . a , 

Cor. xvi. εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “ Κύριε, " ἐπίτρεψόν por πρῶτον ἀπελθεῖν καὶ " θάψαι τὸν 
7. Heb. vi. = A 

3 (absol.). πατέρα pov. 22. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 3 εἶπεν ὃ αὐτῷ, ““᾿Ακολούθει pou, 


ν Ch. xiv. : 
12. Lk. ix. 59; Xvi. 22. 


1 ΜΒ omit αυτου, which here as often 
required. 


2 On the authority of §§, Tisch. omits ο 
Σλεγει in NBC 33. 


tioned because they alone could be 
meant.—Ver. 19, els, either ‘tone, a 
scribe’ (Weiss and very decidedly Meyer, 
who says that els never in Ν. T. = τὶς), 
or ‘a certain scribe,” indefinite reference, 
so Fritzsche, falling back on Suicer, 
I., p. 1037, and more recently Bleek 
and others. Vide Winer, § xviii. 9, who 
defends the use of ets for tis as a feature 
of later Greek.—ypoppatetds, a scribe! 
even one of that most unimpressionable 
class, in spirit and tendency utterly op- 
posed to the ways of Jesus. A Saul 
among the prophets. He has actually 
become warmed up to something like 
enthusiasm. A striking tribute to the 
magnetic influence of Jesus.—axohov- 
θήσω: already more or less of a disciple— 
perhaps he had been present during the 
teaching on the hill or at the encounter 
between Jesus and the scribes in re 
washing (xv. 1 f.), and been filled with 
admiration for His wisdom, moral 
earnestness and courage; and this is 
the result. Quite honestly meant, but. 
—Ver. 20, λέγει αὐτῷ 6 |. Jesus dis- 
trusted the class, and the man, who 
might be better than the average, still 
he was a scribe. Christ’s feeling was 
not an unreasoning or invincible pre- 
judice, but a strong suspicion and aversion 
justified by insight and experience. 
Therefore He purposely paints the pro- 
spect in sombre colours to prevent a 
connection which could come to no 
good.—at ἀλώπεκες, etc.: a notable say- 
ing; one of the outstanding logia of 
Jesus, in style and spirit characteristic ; 
not querulous, as if lamenting His lot, 
but highly coloured to repel an undesir- 
able follower. Foxes have holes, and 
birds resting places, roosts (not nests, 
which are used only for breeding), but— 
ὁ δὲ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπον: a remarkable 
designation occurring here for the first 


elsewhere occurs in T. R., where it is not 


ἵησους found in BCLA al. 


time. It means much for the Speaker, 
who has chosen it deliberately, in con- 
nection with private reflections, at whose 
nature we can only guess by study of 
the many occasions on which the name 
is used. Here it seems to mean the 
man simpliciter (son of man = man in 
Hebrew or Syriac), the unprivileged Man: 
not only no exception to the rule of 
ordinary human experience in the way of 
being better off, but rather an exception 
in the way of being worse off; for the 
rule is, that αἱ] living creatures, even 
beasts, and still more men, have their 
abodes, however humble. If it be Mes- 
sianic, it is in a hidden enigmatical way. 
The whole speech is studiously enigma- 
tical, and calculated to chill the scribe’s 
enthusiasm. Was Jesus speaking in 
parables here, and hinting at something 
beyond the literal privations of His life 
as a wanderer with no fixed home? The 
scribe had his spiritual home in Rabbinical 
traditions, and would not be at ease in 
the company of One who had broken with 
them. Jesus had no place where He could 
lay His head in the religion of His time 
(vide my With Open Face, chap. ix.). 
Vv. 21-22. Another disciple. “Erepos, 
another, not only numerically (ἄλλος), 
but intype. The first was enthusiastic ; 
this one is hesitating, and needs to be 
urged; a better, more reliable man, 
though contrasting with his neighbour 
unfavourably.—_rav μαθητῶν: the ex- 
pression seems to imply that the scribe 
was, or, in spite of the repellent word of 
Jesus, had become, a regular disciple. 
That is possible. Ifthe scribe insisted, 
Jesus might suffer him to become a 
disciple, as He did Judas, whom doubtless 
He instinctively saw through from the 
beginning. But not likely. The in- 
ference may be avoided by rendering with 
Bleek ; ‘‘ another, one of the disciples”’.— 


«3ο ~25. 


καὶ ἄφες τοὺς νεκροὺς θάψαι τοὺς ἑαυτῶν νεκρούς. 
ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ εἰς τὸ 1 πλοῖον, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. Ch. 
24. καὶ ἰδού, " σεισμὸς µέγας ἐγένετο ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, ὥστε τὸ 
πλοῖον ” καλύπτεσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν κυμάτων ' αὐτὸς δὲ ἐκάθευδε. 
2 


καὶ προσελθόντες of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 


1 πο omitted in ΝΡΒΟ 33. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


143 


23- Kat w here only 
=tempest. 
xxiv. 


7; Xxvii. 
54 al. 
(earth- 
25. quake). 
. 5 x Lk. viii. 
ἤγειραν αὐτόν, λέγοντες, 16 (ri rem) 
26. 


axe 
2 Cor. iv. 3 (hide from knowledge). 


2 or µαθηται αυτου wanting in $B; added for clearness, but not needed. 


ἐπίτρεψόν pot: he wished, before setting 
out from home to enter on the career 
of discipleship, to attend to an urgent 
domestic duty; in fact to bury his 
father. In that climate burial had to 
take place on the day of death. Per- 
mission would have involved very little 
delay of the voyage, unless, with Chrysos- 
‘tom, we include under θάψαι all that 
goes along with death and burial, ar- 
ranging family affairs, distribution of 
inheritance, etc. There would not pro- 
‘bably be much trouble of that sort in the 
case of one belonging to the Jesus- 
circle.—Ver. 22. ᾿Ακολούθει pot: the 
reply is a stern refusal, and the reason 
apparently hard and unfeeling—ades 
τοὺς νεκροὺς . . . νεκρούς: word for 
word the same in Luke (ix. 60), an 
unforgettable, mystic, hard saying. The 
dead must be taken in two senses = let 
the spiritually dead, not yet alive to the 
claims of the kingdom, bury the naturally 
dead. Fritzsche objects, and finds in 
the saying the paradox: ‘let the dead 
bury each other the best way they can,” 
which, as Weiss says, is not a paradox, 
but nonsense. Another eccentric idea of 
some commentators is that the first 
ψεκροὺς refers to the vespillones, the 
ccorpse-bearers who carried out the bodies 
of the poor at night, in Hebrew phrase, 
the men of the dead. Take it as we 
will, it seems a hard, heartless saying, 
difficult to reconcile with Christ’s de- 
nunciation of the Corban casuistry, by 
which humanity and filial piety were 
sacrificed on the altar of religion (Matt. 
xv. 3-6). But, doubtless, Jesus knew to 
whom He was speaking. The saying 
can be understood and justified ; but it 
ean also very easily be misunderstood 
and abused, and woe to the man who 
does so. From these two examples we 
see that Jesus had a startling way of 
speaking to disciples, which would create 
reflection, and also give rise to remark. 
The disctple-logia are original, severe, 
fitted to impress, sift and confirm. 

Vv. 23-27. Storm on the lake (Mk. 


iv. 35-41, Lk. viii. 22-25). Ver. 23. 
ἐμβάντι αὐτῷ might be called a dative 
absolute ; if taken as dative after ἠκολού- 
θησαν, the αὐτῷ after this verb is 
superfluous. This short sentence is 
overcharged with pronouns (αὐτοῦ after 
μαθηταὶ).---τὸ πλοῖον (τὸ omitted in Lk.), 
the ship in readiness in accordance with 
previous instructions (ver. 18). Ver. 24, 


80d indicates sudden ΟΠΟΟΤΩΕ.-- σεισμὸς 


ἐν +. θ., literally an earthquake of the 
sea, the waters stirred to their depths by 
the winds referred to in vv. 26, 27; 
λαῖλαψ in Mark and Luke= hurricane, — 
Sore, here with infinitive, used also with 
finite moods {ε.ρ., Gal. ii. 13). In the 
one case ὥστε indicates aim or tendency, 
in the other it asserts actual result (vide 
Goodwin, p. 221, also Batimlein, Schul- 
grammatik, §§ 593,594). Klotz, Devar., 
li. p. 772, gives as the equivalent of 
ὥστε, with infinitive, ita ut; with in- 
dicative, itaque or ΦΗαγε).---καλύπτεσθαι, 
was covered, hidden, the waves rising 
high above the boat, breaking on it, and 
gradually filling it with water (cf. Mark 
and Luke).—avrdés δὲ ἐκάθευδεν: dramatic 
contrast = but He was sleeping (im- 
perfect), the storm notwithstanding. 
Like a general in time of war Jesus 
slept when He could. He had fallen 
asleep before the storm came on, pro- 
bably shortly after they had started (Lk. 
viii. 23, πλεόντων αὐτῶν ἀφύπνωσεν: 
while they sailed He went off to sleep), 
soothed by the gliding motion. It was 
the sleep of one worn by an intense life, 
involving constant strain on body and 
mind. The mental tension is apparent 
in the words spoken to the two disciples 
(vv. 20-22). Words like these are not 
spoken in cold blood, or without waste 
of nervous power. Richard Baxter de- 
scribes Cromwell as ‘of such vivacity, 
hilarity, and alacrity as another man 
hath when he hath drunken a cup too 
much” (Reliquiae Baxt.). ‘ Drunken, 
but not with wine,” with a great epoch- 
making enthusiasm. The storm did not 
wake the sleeper. A tempest, the sublime 


144 


y Mk. iv. 40. “ Κύριε, σῶσον 


KATA MATOAION 


ἡμᾶς, ἀπολλύμεθα.”' 


νι. 


26. Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Τί 
Τότε ἐγερθεὶς 7 ἐπετίμησε τοῖς. 


27. οἱ δὲ 


Rev. xxi. Ht 
Bs) Σδειλοί ἐστε, ὀλιγόπιστοι ;” 
z here an 
parall. of ἀνέμοις καὶ τῇ θαλάσσῃ, καὶ ἐγένετο "γαλήνη µεγάλη. 
the win A 
and sea ἄνθρωποι ἐθαύμασαν, λέγοντες, ““Ὁ Ποταπός ἐστιν οὗτος, ὅτι καὶ οἱ 
(Ps. εν. 9). y κ ε , ο 229 
here and ἄνεμοι καὶ ἡ θάλασσα ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ ; 
arall. 


b Mk. xiii, 1. Lk. i. 29; vii. 39. 1 John iii. 1. 


1 ημας, another addition for clearness, wanting in ${B ; more expressive without.. 
2 SOB transpose υπακ. avtw (so Tisch., W.H.). 


in nature, is a lullaby to a great spirit. 
The Fathers viewed the sleep and the 
storm theologically, both arranged for 
beforehand, to give time for cowardice 
to show itself (Chrys., Hom. xxviii.), to 
let the disciples know their weakness and 
to accustom them to trials (Theophyl.). 
A docetic Christ, an unreal man, a 
theatrical affair!—Ver. 25. προσελθόντες: 
one of our evangelist’s favourite words.— 
ἤγειραν: they would not have waked Him 
if they could have helped it. They were 
genuinely terrified, though experienced 
sailors accustomed to rough weather.— 
Κύριε, σῶσον . . . ἀπολλύμεθα: laconic 
speech, verbs unconnected, -utterance 
of fear-stricken men. Luke’s ἐπιστάτα, 
ἐπιστάτα is equally descriptive. Who 
could tell exactly what they said? All 
three evangelists report differently.—Ver. 
26, δειλοί, ὀλιγόπιστοι, He chides them 
first, then the winds, the chiding meant 
to calm fear. Cowards, men of little 
faith! harsh in tone but kindly meant ; 
expressive really of personal fearlessness, 
to gain ascendency ‘over panic-stricken 
spirits (cf. Luke).—7ére ἐγερθεὶς: He had 
uttered the previous words as He lay, 
then with a sudden impulse He rose and 
spoke imperial words to the elements: 
animos discipulorum prius, deinde mare 
composuit (Bengel).—avépots, θαλάσσῃ: 
He rebuked both. It would have been 
enough to rebuke the winds which caused 
the commotion in the water. But the 
speech was impassioned and poetic, not 
scientific.—yahyvq µεγάλη: antithetic to 
σεισμὸς µέγας, νετ. 24.—Ver. 27, ot 
ἄνθρωποι: who? Naturally one would 
say the disciples with Jesus in the boat, 
called men to suit the tragic situation. 
But many think others are referred to, 
men unacquainted with Jesus: “' quibus 
nondum innotuerat Christus” (Calvin) ; 
either with the disciples in the boat, and 
referred to alone (Jerome, Meyer) or 
jointly (De Wette, Bleek), or who after- 
wards heard the story (Hilary, Euthy., 
Fritzsche: “homines, quotquot hujus 


portenti nuntium acceperant,” and 
Weiss). Holtzmann (H. C.) says they 
might be the men in the other ships. 
mentioned in Mk. iv. 36, but in reality 
the expression may simply point to the 
contrast between the disciples as men 
and the divine power ἀϊερ]αγεά.---ποτα- 
πός . . . οὗτος, what manner of person 2 
The more classic form is ποδαπός = from 
what land? where born? possibly from 
ποῦ and ἄπο, with a euphonic 8 (Passow). 
ποταπός, in later use, = of what sort? 
vide Lobeck, Phryn., p. 56.—This story 
of the triple tradition is a genuine re- 
miniscence of disciple life. There was a 
storm, Jesus slept, the disciples awoke 
Him in terror. He rebuked the winds 
and waves, and they forthwith subsided. 
The only escape of naturalism from a 
miracle of power or Providence (Weiss, 
Leben Fesu) is to deny the causal 
sequence between Christ’s word and the 
ensuing calm and suggest coincidence. 
The storm sudden in its rise, equally 
sudden in its lull. 
Vv. 28-34. The demoniacs of Gadara 
(Mk. v. 1-20, Lk. viii. 26-39). This 
narrative raises puzzling questions of all 
sorts, among them a geographical or 
topological one, as to the scene of the 
occurrence, The variations in the read- 
ings in the three synoptical gospels 
reflect the perplexities of the scribes. 
The place in these readings bears three 
distinct names. It is called the territory 
of the Gadarenes, the Gerasenes, and the 
Gergesenes. The reading in Mk. v. 1 
in B, and adopted by W.H.., is Γερασηνῶν, 
and, since the discovery by Thomson 
(Land and Book, ii. 374) of a place 
called Gersa or Kersa, near the eastern 
shore of the lake, there has been a grow- 
ing consensus of opinion in favour of 
Gerasa (not to be confounded with 
Gerasa in Gilead, twenty miles east ot 
the Jordan) as the true name of the 
scene of the story. A place near the sea 
seems to be demanded by the circum- 
stances, and Gadara on the Hieromax 


26—29. 


EYATTEAION 


145 


28. Καὶ ἐλθόντι αὐτῷ] cis τὸ πέραν εἲς τὴν χώραν τῶν Γεργεσηνῶν, 3 ¢ Ch. xxviii. 


ce / 2A , / 3 AP. , > / 
ὑπήντησαν αὐτῷ δύο δαιμονιζόμενοι ἐκ τῶν ‘pynpetwy ἐξερχόμενοι 
ἁχαλεποὶ λίαν, ὥστε μὴ ἰσχύειν τινὰ παρελθεῖν διὰ τῆς ὁδοῦ ἐκείνης : 


. Lk. viii. 
27; xiv. 
I(ina 
ostile 
sense). 


29. καὶ ἰδού, ἔκραξαν, λέγοντες, “© Ti ἡμῖν καὶ col, Ιησοῦ,ᾶ υἱὲ τοῦ - here and 2 


Tim. iii. 1 


(Isa, xviii. 2), e Mk. i. 24. Lk. iv. 34. 


1 Dat. again by way of grammatical correction for the gen. abs. found in ΜΡΒΟ 


and adopted by Tisch., W.H., etc. 


2 So in 3 ΟΙ, al., Memph. vers., Origen. Γαδαρηνων in BC*MAX ai., adopted 


by Tisch., Treg., W.H., Weiss. 


Vide below. 


3 Ἰησου is wanting in BCL. Comes in from Mk. Modern editors omit. 


was too far distant. The true reading 
in Matthew (ver. 23) nevertheless is Γαδα- 
ρηνῶν. He probably follows Mark as 
his guide, but the village Gerasa being 
obscure and Gadara well known, he 
prefers to define the locality by a general 
reference to the latter. The name 
Gergesa was a suggestion of Origen’s 
made incidentally in his Commentary on 
John, in connection with the place 
named in chap. i. 28, Bethabara or 
Bethany, to illustrate the confusion in 
the gospel in connection with names. 
His words are: Γέργεσα, ad’ ἧς οἱ 
Γεργεσαῖοι, πόλις ἀρχαία περὶ τὴν viv 
καλουμένην Τιβερίαδα λίμνην, περὶ ἣν 
κρημνὸς παρακείµενος τῇ λίμνῃ, ad’ οὗ 
δείκνυται τοὺς χοιρούς ὑπὸ τῶν δαιμόνων 
καταβεβλῆσθαι (in Ev. Ioan., T. vi. c. 
24). Prof. G. A. Smith, Historical 
Geography, p. 459, note, pronounces 
Gerasa ‘‘impossible”. But he means 
Gerasa in Decapolis, thirty-six miles 
away. He accepts Khersa, which he 
identifies with Gergesa, as the scene of 
the incident, stating that it is the only 
place on the east coast where the steep 
hills come down to the shore. 

Ver. 28. -8vo, two, in Mark and Luke 
one. According to some, 6.5., Holtz- 
mann (H. C.), the two includes the case 
reported in Mk. i. 23-27, Lk. iv. 31-37, 
omitted by Matthew. Weiss’ hypothesis 
is that the two is an inference from 
the plurality of demons spoken of 
in his source (vide Matt.-Evan., p. 
239). The harmonists disposed of the 
difficulty by the remark that there might 
be two, though only one is spoken of in 
the other accounts, perhaps because he 
was the more violent of the two (so 
Augustine and Calvin).—é« τῶν μνημείων: 
the precipitous hills on the eastern shore 
are a limestone formation full of caves, 
which were doubtless used for burying 
the dead. There the demoniacs made 
their congenial Ποπῃς.--χαλεποὶ λίαν, 


fierce exceedingly; λίαν, one of our 
evangelist’s favourite words. These 
demoniacs were what one would call 
dangerous madmen; that, whatever 
more; no light matter to cure them, say 
by ‘‘moral therapeutics”.—dore μὴ 
ἰσχύειν: again ὥστε with infinitive (with 
μὴ for negative). The point is not that 
nobody passed that way, but that the 
presence of the madmen tended to make 
it a place to be shunned as dangerous. 
Nobody cared to go near them. Christ 
came near their lair by accident, but He 
would not have been scared though He 
had known of their presence. 

Ver. 29. ἰδοὺ ἔκραξαν: sudden, start- 
ling, unearthly cry, fitted to shock weak 
nerves. But not the cry of men about 
to make an assault. The madmen, whom 
all feared and shunned, were subdued 
by the aspect of the stranger who had 
arrived in the neighbourhood. Το be 
taken as a fact, however strange and 
mysterious, partly explained by the fact 
that Jesus was not afraid of them any 
more than He had been of the storm. 
They felt His power in the very look of 
His eye. τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί: an appropri- 
ate speech even in the mouth of one 
demoniac, for he speaks in the name of 
the legion of devils (Mk. v. 9) by which 
he conceives himself possessed. Identi- 
fying himself with the demons, he 
shrinks from the new comer with an 
instinctive feeling that He is a foe.—vié 
τοῦ θεοῦ: 6 ἅγιος τ. θ. in the Capernaum 
synagogue case ; strange, almost incred- 
ible divination. Yet ‘insanity is much 
nearer the kingdom of God than worldly- 
mindedness. There was, doubtless, 
something in the whole aspect and man- 
ner of Jesus which was fitted to produce 
almost instantaneously a deep, spiritual 
impression to which child-like, simple, 
ingenuous souls like the Galilean fisher- 
men, sinful, yet honest-hearted men 
like those who met at Matthew’s feast, 


IO 


146 


I 


XXX. 24). 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


5 (Sir. da” αὐτῶν © ἀγέλη χοίρων πολλῶν © βοσκοµένη. 


VIII. 


f same phe. Θεοῦ; ἦλθες ὧδε ’ πρὸ ‘katpod βασανίσαι ἡμᾶς; 30. Ἡν δὲ μακρὰν 


41. ot δὲ δαίµονες 


ghereand παρεκάλουν αὐτόν, λέγοντες, “Ei ἐκβάλλεις ἡμᾶς, ἐπίτρεψον ἡμῖν 


parall. 


h Mk. v. 14. ἀπελθεῖν 1 εἷς 
Lk. viii. Ξ 
2; XV. 15. Me Υπάγετε. 
ος χι ο oF 9 9 
15,17. Χοίρων”: καὶ 
iparall.and α | im 
Acts xix. TOU  κρηµνου 


29 (Acts 
Vii. 57, ἐπί τινα). 


j parall. 


τὴν ἀγέλην τῶν χοίρων. 


32. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 


οἱ δὲ ἐξελθόντες ἀπῆλθον eis τὴν ἀγέλην τῶν 
ἰδού, ' ὥρμησε πᾶσα ἡ ἀγέλη τῶν χοίρων 5 J κατὰ 
εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, καὶ ἀπέθανον ἐν τοῖς ὅδασιν. 


1 For the reading επιτρεψον ηµιν απελθειν in T. R. SB have αποστειλον; adopted 


by modern editors. 


The T. R. conforms to Lk. (viii. 32). 


2 For εις την αγελην των χοιρων NBC have τους χοιρους (Tisch., W.H.). 


ΣΝΒΟΔΣ omit των χοιρων. 


readily surrendered themselves. Men 
with shattered reason also felt the 
spell, while the wise and the strong- 
minded too often used their intellect, 
under the bias of passion or prejudice, to 
resist the force of truth. In this way 
we may account for the prompt recogni- 
tion of Jesus by the Gadarene demoniac. 
All that is necessary to explain it is the 
Messianic hope prevalent in Gadara as 
elsewhere, and the sight of Jesus acting 
pn an impressionable spirit ” (Bruce, The 
Miraculous Element in the Gospels p. 
187).---πρὸ καιροῦ: before the appointed 
time of judgment. The article wanting 
here before κ. as in other phrases in 
N. T., ¢.g., ἐν καιρῷ, Matt. xxiv. 45.— 
βασανίσαι, to torment with pain in 
Hades, described as a place of torment 
in Lk. xvi. 28, cf. ver. 23. 

’ Ver. 30. μακρὰν: the Vulgate renders 
non longe, as if ov had stood in the Greek 
before pak. But there are no variants 
here. Mark and Luke have ἐκεῖ, which 
gives rise to an apparent discrepancy. 
Only apparent, many contend, because 
both expressions are relative and elastic: 
at a distance, yet within view; there, in 
that neighbourhood, but not quite at 
hand. Elsner refers to Lk. xv. 20: 
μακρὰν, “et tamen in conspectu, ut, 
Luc. xv. 20: “Ett δὲ αὐτοῦ μακρὰν 
ἀπέχοντος, εἶδεν αὐτὸν 6 πατήρ”. On 
ἐκεῖ he remarks: ‘‘docet in ea regione 
et vicinia fuisse, nec distantiam descri- 
bit”. Weiss against Meyer denies 
the relativity of μακρὰν, and takes it as 
meaning ‘‘a long way off,” while visible. 
—Bookopévy: far removed from ἦν, and 
not to be joined with it as if the feeding 
were the main point, and not rather the 
existence of the herd there. The ill 
attested reading βοσκοµένων brings out 
the meaning better: a herd of swine 


which were feeding in the hill pastures. 
The swine, doubtless, belonged to Gen- 
tiles, who abounded in Perw#a.—Ver. 
81. ot δαίµονες: unusual designation, 
commonly απ. the 
request was made by the possessed in the 
name of the ἀεπιοη5.---ἀπόστειλον: the 
reading of the T. R. (ἐπίτρεψον ἀπελθεῖν) 
taken from Luke expresses, in a milder 
form, Christ’s share of responsibility ina 
transaction of supposed doubtful charac- 
ter. The demoniac would have no 
scruple on that score. His request was: 
if you are to cast us out, send us not 
to hell, but into the swine.—Ver. 32. 
ὑπάγετε: Christ’s laconic reply, usually 
taken to mean: go into the swine, but 
not necessarily meaning more than ‘‘be- 
gone”. So Weiss, who holds that 
Jesus had no intention of expressing 
acquiescence in the demoniac’s request. 
(Matt. Evan. and Weiss-Meyer, '' Hin- 
weg mit euch ’’.)—oi δὲ. .. χοίρους: the 
entrance of the demons into the swine 
could not, of course, be a matter of 
observation, but only of inference from 
what followed.—i8ot, introducing a sud- 
den, startling ενεηί-- ὥρμησεν πᾶσα ἡ 
ἀγέλη---ἔπε mad downrush of the herd 
over the precipice into the lake. Assum- 
ing the full responsibility of Jesus for the 
catastrophe, expositors have busied them- 
selves in inventing apologies. Euthy. 
gives four reasons for the transaction, 
the fourth being that only thereby could 
it be conclusively shown that the devils 
had left the demoniacs. Rosenmiller 
suggests that two men are worth more 
than ever so many swine. The lowest 
depth of bathos in this line was touched 
by Wetstein when he suggested that, by 
cutting up the drowned swine, salting the 
meat or making smoke-dried hams (fum- 
osas pernas), and selling them to Gen- 


30—34. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


147 


33. ot δὲ βόσκοντες ἔφυγον, καὶ ἀπελθόντες εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἀπήγγειλαν 


πάντα, καὶ τὰ τῶν δαιμονιζοµένων. 


ὅπως ὃ * µεταβῇ ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρίων αὐτῶν. 


34- καὶ ἰδού, maga ἡ πόλις 
ἐξῆλθεν εἰς συνάντησιν 1 τῷ” ᾿Ιησοῦ: καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτόν, παρεκάλεσαν 


k Ch. χὶ.τ͵, 
xii. 9; xv. 
ag (with 
ἐκεῖθεν). 


1 For συναντησιν (CLAZ) SB 1, 33, have υπαντησιν (Tisch., W.H.), a preferable 


word. Vide below. 


2 For tw (B) ΝΟ have τον, adopted by Tisch. and put in margin by W.C, 


3 For οπως B has wa. 


tiles who did not object to eat suffocated 
animals, the owners would escape loss. 
But the learned commentator might be 
jesting, for he throws out the suggestion 
for the benefit of men whom he describes 
as neither Jews, Gentiles, nor Christians. 

Vv. 33-34. The sequel. ἔφυγον: the 
swineherds fled. No wonder, in view of 
‘such a disaster. If the demoniacs, in 
the final paroxysm before return to 
‘sanity, had anything to do with bringing 
it about, the superstitious terror with 
which they were regarded would add to 
‘the Ῥαπίο.--ἀπήγγειλαν: they reported 
what had happened to their masters and 
to everybody they met in the town.— 
πάντα, what had befallen the swine.— 
καὶ τὰ τ. δαιμονιζοµένων: they could 
not know the whole truth about the 
demoniacs. The reference must be to 
some visible connection between the 
behaviour of the madmen and the 
destruction of the herd. They told the 
story from their own point of view, not 
after interviewing Jesus and His com- 
pany.—Ver. 34. πᾶσα ἡ πόλις: an ex- 
aggeration of course, cf. accounts in 
Mark and Luke.—eis ὑπάντησιν . . 
to a meeting with Jesus. The noun 
occurs again in Matt. xxv. 1, and John 
xii. 13; im Matt. xxv. 6 ἀπάντησιν is 
used instead of it. eis ἆπαν. occurs in 


Sept. for map. The two nouns 


are little used in Greek authors. The 
change from:one to the other in Matt. 
xxv.1,6impliesaslight difference in mean- 
ing; ὑπάντησις = accidental chance, or 
stealthy meeting ; ἀπάντησις = an open 
designed meeting. The stealthy charac- 
ter of the meeting implied in ὑπὸ is well 
illustrated in ὑπήντησαν, ver. 28, of this 
narrative. The statement that the whole 
city went out to meet Jesus implies a 
report laying the blame of the occurrence 
on Him. But Matthew’s account is 
‘very summary, and must be supple- 
mented by the statements in Mark and 
Luke, from which it appears that some 


came from the town to inquire into the 
matter, ‘“‘to see what had happened,” 
and that in the course of their inquiries 
they met Jesus and learned what they 
had not known before, the change that 
had come over the demoniac. It was 
on their giving in their report to their 
fellow-townsmen, connecting the cure 
with the catastrophe, that the action re- 
ported in ver. 34 took place.—Ver. 34. 
παρεκάλεσαν: same word as in ver. 31 
in reference to the demoniacs. They 
did not order or drive Him out. They 
besought in terms respectful and even 
subdued. They were afraid of this 
strange man, who could do such wonder- 
ful things; and, with all due respect, 
they would rather He would withdraw 
from their neighbourhood. 

This would be an oft-told tale, in 
which different versions were sure to 
arise, wherein fact and explanation of 
fact would get mixed up together. The 
very variations in the synoptical accounts 
witness to its substantial historicity. 
The apologist’s task is easy here, as 
distinct from that of the harmonist, 
which is difficult. The essential outline 
of the story is this. A demoniac, alias 
a madman, comes from the tombs in the 
limestone caves to meet Jesus, exhibiting 
in behaviour and conversation a double 
consciousness. Asked his name, he 
calls himself Legion. In the name of 
the ‘‘ Legion ” he begs that the demons 
may enter the swine. Jesus orders the 
demons to leave their victim. Shortly 
after a herd of swine feeding on the 
hills rushed down the steep into the sea 
and were drowned. Tradition connected 
the rush of the swine with the demons 
leaving their former victim and entering 
into them. But, as already remarked, 
the causal connection could not be a 
matter of observation but only of in- 
ference. The rush might, as Weiss 
suggests, be caused by the man, in his 
final paroxysm, chasing them. But 
that also is matter of conjecture. The 


vi. -idtay πόλιν. 
53. Lk. 


b Lk. ii. 3 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


IX, 


ΙΧ. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐμβὰς eis τὸ] πλοῖον "διεπέρασε καὶ AdOev eis τὴν 
2. καὶ ἴδού, προσέφερον αὐτῷ παραλυτικὸν ἐπὶ κλίνης 
βεβλημένον" καὶ ἰδὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τὴν πίστιν αὐτῶν εἶπε τῷ παρα- 


(in various λυτικῷ, “"Θάρσει, τέκνον, apéwvtat® σοι at ἁμαρτίαι σου.” 3 


c again ver. 22. Ch. xiv. 27 (plur., to the 12). Mk. x. 49. 


1 το omitted by $BLX. 


7 89B have the form αφιενται (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 The reading αφεωνται σοι at ap. σου in T. R. is from Lk. (ν. 20). 


σου αι αµαρ. D has σοι αι op. 

real cause of the catastrophe is a mystery. 
Rosenmiiller suggests that at a hot 
season of the year one in a herd of swine 
might undergo a morbid seizure, begin 
to run wildly about, and be followed 
sequaciously by the whole flock. He 
mentions an occurrence of the kind at 
Erfurt, recent when he wrote. Lutteroth, 
no rationalist, suggests ‘‘ vertigo,” per- 
mitted by Jesus to befall the swine, that 
the demoniac might have in their be- 
haviour a sensible sign of deliverance, 
and so be rid of his fixed idea (vide 
his Essai D’Interp., 3eme Partie, p. 27, 
note). On the nature of demoniacal 
possession, vide my Miraculous Element 
in the Gospels, pp. 172-190; vide also 
notes on Mark. 

CHAPTER IX. THE HEALING MINISTRY 
CONTINUED. Vv. 1-8. The palsied man 
(Mark ii. 1-12; Luke v. 17-26). Ver. 1. 
ἐμβὰς: Jesus complied with the request 
of the men of Gerasa, who had inti- 
mated so plainly that they did not want 
any more of Hiscompany. Whatever 
His purpose in crossing over to the 
eastern shore may have been, it was 
frustrated by an event which in some 
respects was an unexpected disaster. 
Was it rest only or a new sphere of 
work He was seeking there? Vide notes 
on Mark.—eis +. ἰδίαν π.: entering the 
boat which had been moored to the 
shore, Jesus returned with His disciples 
to His own city, to distinguish it from 
Gerasa, the city that shut its gates 
against Him; so named here only. 
When precisely the following incident 
happened cannot be ascertained. Luke’s 
indication of time is the vaguest possible ; 
‘on one of the days’. Matthew and 
Mark give it in different sequence, but 
their narratives have this in common, 
that they make the incident occur on 
arrival in Capernaum after an excursion ; 
in either case the first mentioned, though 
not the same in both. Vide notes on 
Mark. 


Ver. 2. καὶ ἰδοὺ: usual formula for 


SB have 


introducing an important incident.— 
προσέφερον, the imperfect, implying a 
process, the details of which, extremely 
interesting, the evangelist does not give. 
By comparison with Mark and Luke the 
narrative is meagre, and defective even 
for the purpose of bringing out the 
features to which the evangelist attaches 
importance, ¢.g., the value set by Jesus 
on the faith evinced. His eye is fixed 
on the one outstanding novel feature, 
the word of Jesus in ver. 6. In 
view of it he is careful, while omitting 
much, to mention that the invalid in this 
instance was brought to Jesus, ἐπὶ 
κλίνης βεβλημένον, lying on a couch. 
To the same cause also it is due that a 
second case of paralysis cured finds a 
place in this collection, though the two 
cases have different features: in the one 
physical torments, in the other mental 
ἀερτεςεῖοπ.-- πίστιν αὐτῶν, the faith of 
the men who had brought the sick man 
to Him. The common assumption that 
the sick man is included in the αὐτῶν 
is based on dogmatic grounds.—@dapoet, 
τέκνον: with swift sure diagnosis Jesus 
sees in the man not faith but deep 
depression, associated probably with sad 
memories of misconduct, and uttering 
first a kindly hope-inspiring word, such 
as a physician might address to a 
patient: cheer up, child! He deals first 
with the disease of the soul.—adtevrar: 
Jesus declares the forgiveness of his 
sins, not with the authority of an ex- 
ceptional person, but with sympathy and 
insight, as the interpreter of God’s will 
and the law of the universe. That law 
is that past error need not be a doom; 
that we may take pardon for granted ; 
forgive ourselves, and start anew. The 
law holds, Jesus believed, both in the 
physical and in the moral sphere. In 
combining pardon with healing of bodily 
disease in this case, He was virtually 
announcing a general law. ‘' Who 
forgiveth all thine iniguities, who healeth 
all thy diseases,” Ps. ciii. 3: 


i—7. 


EYATTEAION 


149 


3. Kat ἰδού, τινὲς τῶν Ὑραμμµατέων εἶπον ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, “ Οὗτος 4 βλασ- ἆ Ch. xxvi. 


ype.” 


“* Ἱνατί ὑμεῖς 2 ἐνθυμεῖσθε πονηρὰ ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις 
γάρ ἐστιν 5 εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν, ᾽Αϕέωνταί ὃ σοι” αἱ 
εἰπεῖν, Ἔγειραι ὅ καὶ περιπάτει; 6. ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε, ὅτι 
6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας,, (τότε λέγει τῷ 


4. Καὶ ἰδὼνὶ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τὰς "ἐνθυμήσεις 


μη 65. Mk. ii. 
αὐτῶν εἶπεν, 


ὑμῶν; 5, τί absolutely. 
e Ch. xii. 25. 
Heb. iv. 
3 / Ελ 12. 
ἐξουσίαν ἔχει ΕΟΝ, xxvii 
46. Lk. 
xii. 7. 1 
Cor. x. 29. 


ἁμαρτίαι " 


παραλυτικῷ;) ““ Ἐγερθεὶς ὃ ἀρόν σου τὴν κλίνην, Kal ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν ¢ Mk. iio. 


οἶκόν σου. 


1 For ιδων (SCD, Tisch.) BM have ειδως. 


7. Καὶ ἐγερθὶς ἀπῆλθεν eis τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ. 


Lk. v. 2 
(with inf.) 
J Mt. xix. 
24. Lk. xvi. 17 (with acc. and inf.), 


The tendency of the scribes would be 


to use the same word as in ver. 2. W.H. has ειδως in text but bracketed, ιδων in 


margin. 
* BCD omit υµεις, 
* αφιενται NB. 
4 gov in NBCDL. 
δεγειρε NBCDLE. 


6 εγειρε in B and D with και; the more forcible word. 


Ver. 3. Ἅτινὲς τ. γραμματέων: some 
scribes present on this occasion. Ominous 
fact duly introduced by ἰδοὺ ; its signifi- 
cance still more distinctly recognised by 
Luke, who gives it prominent mention 
at the beginning of his narrative (ver. 17). 
Sure sign of the extent, depth, and 
quality of Christ’s influence.--BrAaogypet: 
of course; the prophet always is a 
scandalous, irreverent blasphemer from 
the conventional point of view. The 
scribes regarded forgiveness purely under 
the aspect of prerogative, and in self- 
defence Jesus must meet them on their 
own ground. His answer covers the 
whole case. There is more than preroga- 
tive in the matter; there is the right, 
duty, privilege, and power of every man 
to promote faith in pardon by hearty 
proclamation of the law of the moral 
world. This is dealt with first.—Ver. 4. 
ἐνθυμήσεις: Jesus intuitively read their 
thoughts as He read the mental state of 
the sick man.—tva ti: elliptical for tva 
τί γένηται understood = in order that 
what may happen, do you, etc. (vide 
Baumlein, Schul. Gram., § 696, and 
Goodwin’s Syn., § 331).— Ver. 5. 
«εὐκοπώτερον (from εὖ and κόπος, whence 
εὔκοπος; in N.T. (Gospels) only the 
comparative neuter is found, as here). 
The question as to ability, δύναμις, is 
first disposed of ; which is easier — 
eimetv: they are both alike easy to 
say; the vital matter is saying with 
effect. Saying here stands for doing. 
And to do the one thing was to do the 


a 


other. To heal was to forgive. It is 
implied that it is easier to forgive than 
to make a palsied man strong. Christ 
means that the one is ordinary, the 
other extraordinary; the one is within 
the power of any man, the other belongs 
only to the exceptional man ; there is na 
assumption in declaring pardon, there is 
pretension in saying “‘arise and walk ’’.— 
Ver. 6. ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε: transition tc the 
other aspect, that of ἐξουσία, the point 
raised by the scribes when they looked a 
charge of blasphemy.--6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀν., 
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς: these two phrases point at 
supposed disabilities for forgiving. ‘‘ For- 
giveness takes place in heaven, and is 
the exclusive prerogative of God,” was 
the thesis of the scribes. ‘It may be 
exercised even on earth, and by the Son 
of Man,” is the counter thesis of Christ. 
Therefore ‘‘Son of Man” must be a 
title not of dignity but of humiliation. 
Here = one whom ye think lightly of ; 
even He can forgive.—rére A€yer, Jesus 
stops short in His speech to the scribes 
and turns to the sick man, saying: 
ἔγειρε, etc., also in ver. 6, intransitive. 
The reading ἔγειραι in T.R., νετ. 6, is a 
correction of style, the use of the active 
intransitively being condemned by 
grammarians. Hence this various read- 
ing always occurs. (Vide Suidas, s.v., 
and Buttmann, Gramm., Ῥ. 56.)—rThv 
κλίνην, a light piece of furniture, easily 
portable. —@aaye: all three actions, 
arising, lifting, walking, conclusive 
evidence of restored power. — Ver. 


81 (5 
passeth 
away). 

i hereandin 


” 
οι. 
j Mk. ii. the mas 
Lk. ν. 38. ἀνακειμένου 
(Hebrew ὃν 
idiom; cf. Num. xxii. 20). 


KATA MATOAION 


Καὶ Jdvaoras ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ. 


IX. 


8. ἰδόντες δὲ of ὄχλοι COadpacay,! καὶ ἐδόξασαν τὸν Θεόν, τὸν δόντα 
.. ἐξουσίαν τοιαύτην τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. 

9. Καὶ " παράγων 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐκεῖθεν εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον καθήµενον ἐπὶ 
τὸ τελώνιον, Ματθαῖον λεγόμενον, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, '"᾽Ακολούθει 


Io. Καὶ ἐγένετο αὐτοῦ 


ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, καὶ ” ἰδού, πολλοὶ τελῶναι καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ 


k Ch, xxii. 10; xxvi. 7,20. Mk. xiv. 18. Lk. xxii. 27. 


1 εφοβηθησαν in SBD (Tisch., W.H.) εθαυµασαν (CLA al.) gives a commonplace: 


idea more to the taste of the scribes. 
2 Ἴκολουθει in SD (Tisch.). 


ἕανακειμενου αυτον in 9 Ὁ, as in text in most MSS. 


4 και omitted in SD. 


7 Said, done; a convincing ar- 
gumentum ad hominem. Who would 
dispute the right to forgive to one who 
could do that, or persist in the charge of 
blasphemy against Him? At least those 
who do will get little sympathy from the 
mass of spectators.—Ver. 8. δόντες 
οἱ ὄχλοι. The people are free from the 
petty jealousies and pedantic theories of 
the professional class ; broad facts settle 
the matter for them. They probably 
had no scruples about the forgiving, but 
if they, hadthe miracle would put an end 
to them: the manifest authority and 
power a witness of the non-apparent 
(ποιεῖται THY φανερὰν [ἐξουσίαν] τεκµή- 
ριον τῆς ἀφανοῦῖς. ΕΙΙΊΥ.).--ἐφοβήθησαν, 
they feared; may point to a change of 
mind on the part of some who at first 
were influenced by the disapproving 
mood of the scribes. The solemn frown 
of those who pass for saints and wise 
men is a formidable thing, making many 
cowards. But now a new fear takes the 
place of the old, perhaps not without a 
touch of superstition. 

Vv. 9-13. The publican feast (Mk. 
ii. 13-17; Lk. v. 27-32). The point of 
interest for the evangelist in this narra- 
tive is not the call of the publican disci- 
ple, but the feast which followed, a 
feast of publicans and ‘ sinners” at 
which Jesus was present proclaiming 
by action what He formerly proclaimed 
by word: a sinful past no doom. The 
story, though not a miracle-history, 
finds a place here because it follows 
the last in Mark, in whose Gospel the 
incident of the palsied man forms the 
first ofa group serving one aim—to show 
the beginnings of the conflict between 
Jesus and the religious leaders. The 
same remark applies to the next section. 

Ver. 9. παράγων ἐκεῖθεν: passing 


along from the scene of the last incident, 
Jesus arrives at the custom-house of 
Capernaum (τελώνιογ).---εἶδεν . . . Ματ- 
θαῖον Aey.: there He saw a man named 
Matthew. (On the identity of Matthew 
with Levi in Mark and Luke, vide 
Mark.) Capernaum being near the 
boundary and on the caravan road be- 
tween Egypt and Damascus, Matthew 
would be a busy man, but, doubtless, 
Christ and he have met before.—’AxodA- 
ούθει por: Jesus acted on His own plans, 
but the recent encounter with the scribes. 
would not be without influence on this. 
new departure—the call of a publican. 
It was a kind of defiance to the party 
who cherished hard thoughts not only 
about pardon but about those who 
needed pardon. An impolitic step the 
worldly-wise would say; sure to create 
prejudice. But those who are too 
anxious to conciliate the prejudices of 
the present do nothing for the future.— 
ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν: prompt compli- 
ance, probably with some astonishment 
at the invitation. 

Ver.10. καὶ ἐγένετο, είο. The narra- 
tive of this incident in all three Syn- 
optists is condensed, and the situation 
not clear. What house is meant (ἐν τῇ 
olx.), and why so many (πολλοὶ) ? 
‘““There were many,’ Mark remarks, 
emphatically (ii. 15), and the ἰδοὺ here 
implies that something important took 
place. Luke infers (for we need not 
suppose independent information) that it 
is a feast (δοχὴν), and, doubtless, he is 
tight. But given by whom? Levi, 
according to Luke. It may have been 
so, but not necessarily as the prime 
mover; possibly, nay, probably, as the 
agent of his new Master. Our thoughts. 
have been too much biassed by the 
assumption that the call of Matthew in 


8—13. 


ἐλθόντες συνανέκειντο τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


151 


11. καὶ 


ἰδόντες of Φαρισαῖοι εἶπον 1 τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, “ Διατί μετὰ τῶν 


τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει ὁ διδάσκαλος ὑμῶν; 
"Ingots? ἀκούσας εἶπεν adtois,® “Od χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ἰσχύοντες 
13. πορευθέντες δὲ μάθετε τί | ἐστιν, 
οὗ γὰρ ἦλθον καλέσαι δικαίους, 


ἰατροῦ, ἀλλ᾽ οἱ κακῶς ἔχοντες. 
ἐπ Ἔλεον θέλω, καὶ οὐ θυσίαν :᾿ 


GAN ἁμαρτωλοὺς εἰς µετάνοιαν.͵ ὅ 


1 ελεγον NBCL (Tisch., W-H.). 
2 KBD omit Inoous (Tisch., W-H.). 

> 88BCD omit αντοις (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 SSBCD have ελεος. 


δεις µετανοιαν is wanting in NBDAZ. 
tion. 


this section is the main thing, and the 
feast an accompanying incident, a fare- 
well feast of Matthew’s in which Jesus 
passively partook. The truth, probably, 
is that the call was a preliminary to the 
feast, the first step in the working out of 
aplan. Jesus aims at a mission among 
the reprobated classes, and His first step 
is the call of Matthew to discipleship, 
and His second the gathering together, 
through him, of a large number of these 
classes to a social entertainment; the 
place of meeting being, possibly, not a 
private house, whether Christ’s or Mat- 
thew’s, but a public hall. If Matthew’s 
house or Simon’s (in which Jesus pro- 
bably had His home, vide Mark) was 
large enough to have a quadrangular 
court, the gathering might be there, 
where, according to Faber, Archdologie 
der Hebrder, p. 408, meetings of various 
sorts were held. In any case it was a 
great affair—scores, possibly hundreds, 
present, too large for a room in a house, 
a conventicle meeting, so to speak; a 
meeting with such people in the Syna- 
gogue not being possible. For further 
remarks vide on Mark.—reh@vat καὶ 
ἁμαρτωλοὶ: publicans naturally, if Mat- 
thew was the host, but why apap.? He 
was a respectable man; are the apap. 
simply the τελῶναι as viewed from the 
outside, so named in anticipation of the 
Pharisaic description of the party? If 
Jesus was the inviter, they might be a 
distinct class, and worse, very real sin- 
ners, for His aim was a mission among 
the social Pariahs. 

Ver. 11. iSdvres ot Pap. Here wasa 
god chance for the critics, really a 
scandalous affair !—rois μαθηταῖς, They 
spoke to the disciples, possibly, as Euthy. 


12. Ὁ δὲ 

1 Mk. ix. 10 
Lk. viii. 9. 
Acts x. 17 
(=means). 

m again in 
Ch. xii. 7 
fr. Hosea 
vi. 7. 


ειπον in D al. 


ελεον is a gram. cor. 


It is a clear case of harmonising assimila- 


Vide on Lk. v. 32 for its effect on the sense. 


Zig. suggests, to alienate them from the 
Master, possibly lacking courage to attack 
Him face to face. 

Ver. 12. 6 δὲ a. εἶπεν: to whom? 
Were the fault-finders present to hear? 
—ov xpetav, etc.: something similar can 
be cited from classic authors, vide in- 
stances in Grotius, Elsner, and Wetstein. 
The originality lies in the application = 
the physician goes where he is needed, 
therefore, I am here among the people 
you contemptuously designate publicans 
and sinners. The first instalment, this, 
of Christ’s noble apology for associating 
with the reprobates—a great word. 
Ver. 13. πορευθέντες µάθετε: acommon 
expression among the Rabbis, but they 
never sent men to learn the particular 
lesson that God prefers mercy to sacri- 
fice.—kai ov, does not imply that sacri- 
fice is of no account.—éXeos (ἔλεον in T. 
R., a correction by the scribes), accusa- 
tive neuter. Masculine nouns of 2nd de- 
clension are often neuter 3rd in N. T. and 
Ῥερί.---ἦλθον: Jesus speaks as one having 
a τηϊρεῖοη.---ἅμαρτωλούς: and it is to the 
sinful, in pursuance of the principle em- 
bodied in the prophetic oracle—a mission 
of mercy. The words ἰσχύοντες, ver. 
12, and δικαίους, ver. 13, naturally sug- 
gest the Pharisees as the class meant. 
Weiss, always nervously afraid ofallegor- 
ising in connection with parabolic utter- 
ances, protests, contending that it is 
indifferent to the sense of the parable 
whether there be any ‘whole’ or 
righteous. But the point is blunted if there 
be no allusion. καλέσαι here has the 
sense of calling to a feast. 

Vv. 14-17. The fast-question (Mk. 
ii. 18-22; Lk. v. 33-39). Τότε Our 
evangelist makes a temporal connection 


152 


n in parall. 
Vide also 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


IX. 


14. Τότε προσέρχονται αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου, λέγοντες, 


Tobit vi.“ Διατί ἡμεῖς καὶ ot Φαρισαῖοι νηστεύομεν πολλά,ὶ ot δὲ µαθηταί 


άν 17. > , Lad 
02 Pet.i.13 TOU οὐ νηστεύουσι ; 
(same 
phrase). 
p in parall. 
and Ch. 


XXV. I. A “ i 
Johnii.g; Καὶ TOTE νηστεύσουσιν. 
lil. 29. 


εἰς, 


δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ 3 νυμφῶνος πενθεῖν, * ep’ ὅσον pet αὐτῶν ἐστιν ὁ 


ς 


Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “My 


Pyupdios ; ἐλεύσονται δὲ ἡμέραι ὅταν " ἀπαρθῇ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν 6 νυµφίος, 


16. οὐδεὶς δὲ " ἐπιβάλλει " ἐπίβλημα 


Rev. xviii, *pdkous 3 ἀγνάφου ἐπὶ tpatiw παλαιῷ: “aipe γὰρ τὸ πλήρωμα 


23. 
q here and in parall. 
t same phr. in Mk. ii. 41. 


r here, in parall., in same sense. 
u without object here and in Mk. ii. 21. 


Cf. Mk. xi. 7. 5 here and in parall. 


1 πολλα is in a large number of uncials, including NWSCDLAX. Yet it looks like a 
gloss and is wanting in §*B 27, 71. Tisch. and W.H. omit. 


out of what in Mark is merely topical, 
another of the group of incidents showing 
Jesus in conflict with current opinion 
and practice. Where it happened can- 
not be determined, but it is brought in 
appositely after the feast of the publicans, 
serving with it to illustrate the free 
unconventional life of the Jesus-circle.— 
προσέρχονται ... of pad. Ιωάννου. The 
interrogants here are John’s disciples; 
in Mark, unknown persons about John’s 
disciples with the Pharisees; in Luke, 
who treats this incident as a continuation 
of the last, the fault-finders are the same 
as before (ot δὲ). Mark probably gives 
the true state of the case. Some persons 
unknown, at some time or other, when 
other religious people were fasting, and 
the Jesus-circle were observed not to be 
fasting, came and remarked on the dis- 
sidence.—8.arl: the interrogants wanted 
to know the reason. But the important 
thing for us is the fact, that Jesus and 
His disciples did not conform to the 
common custom of religious people, in- 
cluding the disciples of the Baptist. It 
is the first instance of an extensive 
breach with existing religious usage.— 
οὐ νηστεύουσι: the broad patent fact; if 
they did any fasting it was not apparent. 

Ver. 15. καὶ etwev: The question 
drew from Jesus three pregnant para- 
bolic sayings: bright, genial, felicitous 
impromptus; the first a happy apology 
for His disciples, the other two the 
statement of a general principle.—oi υἱοὶ 
τοῦ νυμφῶνος. The mere suggestion of 
this name for the disciples explains all. 
Paranymphs, friends of the bridechamber, 
companions of the bridegroom, who act 
for him and in his interest, and bring the 
bride to him. How can they be sad (μὴ 
δύνανται wevGeiv) ? The point to note is 
that the figure was apposite. The life 
of Jesus and His disciples was like a 


wedding feast—they the principal actors. 
The disciples took their tone from the 
Master, so that the ultimate fact was the 
quality of the personal piety of Jesus. 
Therein lay the reason of the difference 
commented on. It was not irreligion, as 
in the case of the careless; it was a 
different type of religion, with a Father- 
God, a kingdom of grace open to all, 
hope for the worst, and spiritual spon- 
taneity.—éAevoovrat ἡμέραι. While the 
Bridegroom is with them life will be a 
wedding feast; when He is taken from 
them it will make a great difference; 
then (τότε) they will grieve, and therefore 
fast: a hidden allusion to the tragic end 
foreseen by Jesus of this happy free life, 
the penalty of breaking with custom. 
Vv. 16,17. The substitution of νησ- 
τεύουσιν for πενθεῖν, in the close of ver. 
15, implicitly suggested a principle which 
is now explicitly stated in parabolic 
form: the great law ofcongruity ; practice 
must conform to mood; the spirit must 
determine the form. These sayings, 
apparently simple, are somewhat ab- 
struse. They must have been over the 
head of the average Christian of the 
apostolic age, and Luke’s version shows 
that they were diversely interpreted. 
Common to both is the idea that it is 
bootless to mix heterogeneous things, 
old and new in religion. This cuts two 
ways. It defends the old as.well as the 
new; the fasting of John’s-disciples as 
well as the non-fasting of Christ’s. Jesus 
did not concern Himself about Pharisaic 
practice, but He was concerned to defend 
His own disciples without disparagement 
of John, and also to prevent John’s way 
and the respect in which he was justly 
held from creating a prejudice against 
Himself. The double application of the 
principle was therefore present to His 
mind.—Ver. 16, οὐδεὶς ... παλαιῷ. No 


4—19Q. 


A y A Lal , 
αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἱματίου, καὶ χεῖρον oxiopa γίνεται. 17. οὐδὲ ” βάλ- ν here, 
Aoucw οἶνον νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς παλαιούς: εἶ δὲ µήγε, ῥήγνυνται ob 
ἀσκοί, καὶ ὁ οἶνος ἐκχεῖται, καὶ οἱ ἀσκοὶ ἀπολοῦνται]: ἀλλὰ βάλ- 
> / > > ‘ , eee , ον A 
λουσιν οἶνον νέον eis ἀσκοὺς καινούς, καὶ ἀμφότερα 3 " συντηροῦνται. 


, ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


453 


arall. 
ohn xiii. 
5 (of 
liquids). 
Ch. xxvi. 
12 (ἐπί 
τινος), 


18. Ταῦτα αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος αὐτοῖς, ἰδού, ἄρχων ἐλθὼν ὃ προσεκύνει w Lk. ν. 38 


αὐτῷ, λέγων, “Ὅτι ἡ θυγάτηρ µου ἄρτι ἐτελεύτησεν: ἀλλὰ ἐλθὼν x al 


Lal > 9 22 
Χ ἐπίθες τὴν χεῖρά σου ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν, καὶ 7 ζήσεται. 


ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἠκολούθησεν * 


ου 8 ε ο 3 A 
αὐτῷ καὶ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 


18. 
ix. 17 
(same 
const.). 
y Mk. xvi. 
Rom. xiv. 9. 


19. Καὶ ἐγερθεὶς μη 


11. John v.25. Acts ix. 41. 


1 For the future, in most MSS., $§B have απολλυνται (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 All uncials have αµφοτεροι. 


5 The reading is in confusion here. B has after apywv,qts προσελθων, probably 
‘the true reading out of which all variants arose (τις for εις; εις om.; ελθων for προσ»; 


εις ελθων, eADwv.)o —, 
4S8CD have the imp. B as in text. 


one putteth a patch of an unfulled, raw 
piece of cloth (ῥάκος from ῥήγνυμι) on 
an old garment.—ro πλήρωμα αὐτοῦ, the 
filling, the patch which fills; of it, z.¢., 
the old garment, not of the unfulled cloth 
(Euthy., Grotius, De W., etc.).—aiper 
ἀπὸ, taketh from = tears itself away by 
contraction when wetted, taking a part 
of the old garment along with it.—xat 
... ytverat, and so a worse rent takes 
place. This looks in the direction of an 
apology for John and his disciples (so 
Weiss) = they and we are in sympathy 
in the main, but let them not assimilate 
their practice to ours; better remain as 
they are; imitation would only spoil a 
good type of piety. What is to be done 
with the unfulled cloth is not indicated, 
‘but it goes without saying. Let it 
remain by itself, be fulled, and then 
turned into a good new garment. 

Ver. 17. The new parable of the 
‘wine and wine-skins is introduced, not 
merely because the Speaker is full of 
matter, but because it enables Him aptly 
‘to show both sides of the question, the 
twofold application of the principle.— 
οὐδὲ βάλλουσιν: nobody puts new wine 
into old skins; véos applied to wine, 
καινός to skins (ἀσκοὺς καινούς). νέος 
is new in time, καινός in quality. That 
which is new in time does not necessarily 
deteriorate with age; it may even im- 
prove. That which is new in quality 
always deteriorates with age, like skins 
or cloth, vide Trench’s Synonyms, 1x.— 
εἰ δὲ µήγε (vide ad vi. 1): two disastrous 
consequences ensue: skins burst, wine 
spilt. The reason not stated, assumed 
to be known. New wine ferments, old 


skins have lost their toughness and 
stretchableness. ‘‘ They have become 
hard leather and give no more” (Koets- 
veld, De Gelijkenissen, p. 99). That is 
the one side—keep the old to the old.— 
ἀλλὰ βάλλουσι . . . συντηροῦνται: this 
is the other—the new to the new; new 
wine in fresh skins, and both are pre- 
served as suiting one another. With 
reference to the two parables, Schanz 
remarks that, in the first, the point of 
comparison is the distinction between 
part and whole, in the second form and 
contents are opposed to each other. 
So after him, Holtzmann in H.C. 
Weiss takes both parables as explaining 
the practice of John’s disciples, Holtz- 
mann as giving reasons why Christ’s 
disciples differed from all others. The 
truth as above indicated lies between. 
Vv. 18-26. The\daughter of Fairus, 
with interlude (Mk. v. 21-43; Lk. viii. 
40-56). Given by Matthew in immediate 
connection with the discourse on fast- 
ing, but by Mark, and Luke following 
him, in connection with the return from 
the eastern shore, after the story of the 
demoniac. Ver. 18. ἰδοὺ . . . λέγων: 
exactly the same formula as in viii. 2.— 
ἄρχων, an important person, a ruler 
of synagogue, according to Ματ]ς,- -εἷς : 
peculiar here, but taken from Mark 
where it is intelligible, the suppliant 
being there described as one of the rulers 
of the synagogue. The word puzzled 
the scribes, and gave rise to many variants 
(vide crit. ποίε).---ἄρτι ἐτελεύτησεν: this 
statement of Matthew, compared with 
those of Mark and Luke, which make 
the father say his daughter was dying, 


z here only 
in N.T 


Lev.xv. 33. ὄπισθεν, ἤψατο τοῦ "κρασπέδου τοῦ tpartiou αὐτοῦ. 


a Ch. xiv. 


36; xxiii. ἐν ἑαυτῇ, “Edy µόνον ἄψωμαι τοῦ ἱματίου αὐτοῦ, σωθήσομαι.” 


5. 
ΝΑ 


, >? 
(Num. xv.) πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε. 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


IX. 


20. Καὶ iSov, yur) “aipoppootoa δώδεκα ἔτη, προσελθοῦσα. 


21. ἔλεγε yap: 
22. 


Mk. vi. la es 
36. Lk. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐπιστραφεὶς 1 καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὴν εἶπε, “Θάρσει, θύγατερ΄ 
Καὶ ἐσώθη ἡ γυνὴ ἀπὸ τῆς ὥρας ἐκείνης. 


8 . > ~ Lol 
3°) 23. Καὶ ἐλθὼν 6 ‘Ingots εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν τοῦ ἄρχοντος, καὶ ἰδὼν τοὺς. 


1 στραφεις NBDE (Tisch., W.H.). 


has created work for the harmonists. 
The patristic view (Chrys., Theophy., 
Euthy.), that the statement was an 
inference from the condition in which he 
left her, or a natural exaggeration, has 
been adopted by many. Probably it is 
an inaccuracy of the evangelist’s due to 
abbreviation. The girl was dead when 
Jesus arrived; that was all he cared 
about. The ruler thought Jesus could 
do anything short of raising from the 
dead, save even in articulo mortis. But 
our evangelist gives him credit for more 
faith ; that Jesus can bring back from the 
dead, at least when death has just taken 
place.—fjoerat, not remain living, but 
revive, come to life again (Fritzsche).— 
Ver. το. ἐγερθεὶς apparently refers back 
to ver. 10, implying close sequence— 
feasting, fasting, dying; such is life 
indeed. 

Vv. 20-22. The story is suspended at 
this point by an interlude.—Ver. 20, καὶ 
ἰδού:α new applicant for help appears on 
the scene, on the way to Jairus’ house.— 
γυνὴ . . . €ry,awoman who had suffered 
for twelve years from some kind of bloody 
Βυχ.- -ὄπισθεν: realistic feature; from 
womanly shame or the morbid shrinking 
of chronic ill-health, or out of regard to 
the law concerning uncleanness (Lev. 


xv.).—KpaoaréSou, Hebrew ny 3 (Num. 


xv. 38), fringes at the four corners of the 
outer garment, to remind of the com- 
mandments. In dress Jesus was not 
nonconformist. His mantle, tpartov, 
had its κράσπεδα like other people’s.— 
ἤψατο, touched one of the tassels; the 
least possible degree of contact enough 
to ensure a cure, without notice; faith, 
superstition and cunning combined. 


Ver. 21. ἔλεγε γὰρ ἐν ἑαυτῇ: such was 
her little private scheme. Ver. 22, 6 
δὲ |. στραφεὶς καὶ ἰδὼν. Matthew’s 


narrative here is simple as compared 
with that of Mark and Luke, probably a 
transcript from Apostolic Document, 
concerned mainly about the words of 
Jesus. So far as our evangelist is con- 


cerned the turning round of Jesus might. 
be an accident, or due to consciousness 
of a nervous jerk instinctively understood 
to mean something.—@dpoa, θύγατερ, 
again as in ix. 2, a terse, cordial sym- 
pathetic address; there child to a man, 
here daughter to a mature woman.— 
πίστις, no notice taken of the super- 
stition or the cunning, only of the good 
side; mark the rhythm: 4 πίστις cov 
σέσωκέν σε, again in Lk. vii. 50, where, 
with πορεύου eis εἰρήνην, it forms a 
οουρ]εῖ.---σέσωκεν, perfect, not future, 
to convey a feeling of confidence = you 
are a saved woman.—kat ἐσώθη, and so 
she was from that hour. A true story in 
the main, say Strauss and Keim, strictly 
a case of faith-cure. 

Vv. 23-26. The narrative returns to 
the case of Jairus’ daughter. Ver. 23, 
ἐλθὼν . . . καὶ ἰδὼν, circumstantial 
participles leading up to what Jesus 
said, the main fact.—rots αὐλητὰς, etc. : 
the girl was only just dead, yet already 
a crowd had gathered about the house, 
brought together by various motives, 
sympathy, money, desire to share in the 
meat and drink going at such a time (so: 
Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., ut ederent et 
biberent), and of course making a con- 
fused ἁῑπ.---θορυβούμενον, the part. = a 
relative with finite verb =the crowd 
which was making a din. The crowd, 
besides the αὐληταί, tibicines, flute- 
players, would include some hired 
mourning women (Jerem. ix. 17), prefice, 
whose duty it was to sing nenza in praise 
of the dead. Mourning, like everything 
else, had been reduced to system, two 
flutes and one mourning woman at the 
burial of a wife incumbent on the 
poorest man (Lightfoot, Hor. Heb.). 
The practice in Greece and Rome was 
similar ; proofs in Grotius, Elsner, Wet- 
stein. Vide also Marquardt, Handbuch 
der Rim. Alterthiimer, vol. vii., p. 341, 
where it is stated that by the twelve 
Tables the number of tibicines was 
limited to ten, and that before the Punic 
war, at least, prefice were employed.— 


ϱ0---31. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


155 


» αὐλητὰς καὶ τὸν ὄχλον θορυβούμενον, 24. λέγει adrois,! ’Ava-b Rev. xviii. 


χωρεῖτε' οὗ yap ἀπέθανε τὸ κοράσιον, ἀλλὰ ἆ καθεύδει.' 
25. “Ore δὲ "ἐξεβλήθη ὁ ὄχλος, εἰσελθὼν 5; xx. το 


κατεγέλων αὐτοῦ. 


1 ἐκράτησε τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῆς, καὶ ἠγέρθη τὸ κοράσιον. 
ἐξῆλθεν ἡ «φήμη αὕτη eis ὅλην τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην. 


. _ 22 
Katc Mk. v. 39. 
Acts XviL 


1 Thess. v. 


26. καὶ 1Ο (= to 


f Mk. i. 31. 


27. Καὶ παράγοντι ἐκεῖθεν τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ δύο ¢ Lk iv. 14. 
earls αλλη, η η 2 Ε 4 
τυφλοί, κράζοντες καὶ λέγοντες, “> Ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς, vie? Δαβίδ. h Ch. xv.22; 


’ , ar. jae a Died, A ων ας , \ , 
28. ᾿Ελθόντι δὲ eis τὴν οἰκίαν, προσῆλθον αὐτῷ οἱ τυφλοί, καὶ λέγει 
αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Πιστεύετε ὅτι δύναμαι τοῦτο ποιῆσαι ; 


- , a2 
αὐτῷ, “Nat, Κύριε. 


~ - 22 
“Kara τὴν πίστιν ὑμῶν γενηθήτω ὑμῖν. 
αὐτῶν οἱ ὀφθαλμοί: καὶ | ἐνεβριμήσατοά αὐτοῖς ὁ 


«« Ὁρᾶτε μηδεὶς γινωσκέτω. 
αὐτὸν ἐν ὅλη τῇ γῇ ἐκείνη. 
1 For λεγει αυτοις SBD have ελεγεν. 


2 For we B has utes. 
3 ηνεωχ. in BD. 


31. Ot δὲ ἐξελθόντες ) διεφήµισαν j Ch. xviii 
͵ 15, i 


XX. 30. 


Λέγουσιν 


20. Τότε Hato τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν, λέγων, 


ν 5 [ά 5 
39. Καὶ ἀνεῴχθησαν 
2 n 
Ingots, λέγων, 1 Mk. i. 43. 


ς 


κι 
45- 


4 ενεβριµηθη in SVB, a less usual form avoided by scribes. 


Ver. 24. Gvaxwpeite, retire! Hired 
mourners. distasteful to Jesus, who 
gladly avails Himself of this opportunity 
of dismissing them.—ov γὰρ ἀπέθανε: no 
need of you yet, for the maid (κοράσιον, 
dim. for κόρη, but = puella in late 
Greek) is not dead. A welcome word 
to naturalistic commentators, giving a 
plausible basis for the hypothesis of an 
apparent death or swoon (Schleier., Keim, 
etc.), not to be taken prosaically as 
meant to deny death. Yet Carr (C. G. 
T.) thinks it open to question whether 
it ought not to be taken literally, and 
doubtful whether κοιμᾶσθαι is ever used 
in a metaphorical sense in the N. T. or 
elsewhere. The derisive laughter of the 
crowd (κατεγέλων) is good evidence to 
the οοπίτατγ.---ἐξεβλήθη: not to be 
pressed as implying physical force, 
non vi et manibus, sed voce jussuque 
(Fritzsche); a tone and manner not to 
be resisted, the house therefore soon 
cleared of the noisy crowd.—Ver. 26, 
ἐξηλθεν ἡ ϕ., against the wish of Jesus, 
who did not desire raising the dead to be 
regarded as a part of His ordinary work. 
Perhaps that was why He said: ‘she 
sleepeth”’ (Weiss, L. J., Marcus-Evang.). 
---τὴν γῆν ἐκείνην: Weiss thinks the ex- 
pression implies that the evangelist is a 
stranger to Palestine (Weiss-Meyer). 

Vv. 27-31. Two blind men.—This 
miracle-narrative and the next 


paratively colourless and uninteresting. 
They bring under notice two new types 
of disease, blindness and possession 
accompanied with dumbness. The 
interest in both cases, however, lies not 
so much in the cures as in the words 
spoken.—Ver. 27. tvuddol: blindness. 
common from limestone dust in the air 
and changing temperature.—vids A., 
Messianic appellation, first time ad- 
dressed to Jesus, a point of interest for 
the evangelist; not welcome to Jesus, 
who feared the awakening of false ex- 
pectations. Therefore He took no notice 
of them on the way to His house, whither 
He retired after the last incident.—Ver. 
28. ἑλθόντι els τ. ο. προσἢλθον: they 
follow, and Jesus at last takes notice of 
them, asking if they have faith in His 
power. His previous conduct might 
throw doubt on His willingness, but that 
is dispelled by speaking to them.—vai: 
a prompt glad “tyes” is their answer.— 
Ver. 30. ἠνεῴχθησαν, a Hebraism. The 
Jews thought of blind eyes as shut, and 
of seeing eyes as ορεπ.--ἐνεβριμήθη, 
sternly enjoined (vide Mk. i. 43). The 
paraphrase of Euthy. Zig. gives a vivid 
idea of the meaning, “looked severely, 
contracting His eyebrows, and shaking 
His head at them, as they are wont to 
do who wish to make sure that secrets 
will be kept ”’.—Ver. 31. ἐν 6AnT. y. ἐκ. 
(vide remarks on ver. 26). 


156 


x o xii, 22. 
cts xvii. 
31. 1 Cor.*Kwpdv δαιμονιζόμενον. 

vi. 2; xiv. 


ai(same ἐλάλησεν 6 κωφός; 


use of εν, , 


vide also’ οὐδέποτε ἐφάνη οὕτως ἐν τῷ ᾿Ισραήλ.” 
661 Ἐν τῷ } ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιµονίων ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια. 
"Ingots τὰς πόλεις πάσας καὶ τὰς κώµας, 


Sir. xiii. 


4; XXX. 13). ἔλεγον, 

m Ch. iv. 23, A - μ 
but there 35- ΚΑΙ "περιῆγεν ὁ 
intrans., 


KATA MATOAION 


IX. 


32. Αὐτῶν δὲ ἐξερχομένων, ἰδού, προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ ἄνθρωπον ] 
33. καὶ ἐκβληθένος τοῦ δαιµονίου, 
καὶ ἐθαύμασαν ot ὄχλοι, λέγοντες, “ Ὅτι 3 


34. Οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι 
35 9 


here with διδάσκων ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον 


accus, 


149B omit ανθρωπον. 


Γον - ~ , 
τῆς βασιλείας, καὶ θεραπεύων πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν µαλακίαν ἐν 


2 88 BCD omit οτι. 


3D, a, k, Syr. Sin. omit ver. 34; W.H. bracket. 


Vv. 32-34. The dumb demoniac (Lk. 
xi. 14). A slight narrative, very meagre 
in comparison with the story of the Gera- 
sene demoniac, the interest centring in 
the conflicting comments of spectators 
which probably secured for it a place in 
the Logia of Matthew. Ver. 32. Αὐτῶν 
ἐξερχομένων: while the two blind men are 
going out they bring another sufferer to 
the great Healer; an incessant stream of 
applicants for aid flowing towards His 
ἆοοτ.--κωφὸν: dumbness the apparent 
symptom. Theword literally means blunt, 
and in Homer (11., ii. 390) is applied to a 
weapon. InN. T. it is used with refer- 
ence to the senses and faculties, here the 
faculty of speech (ver. 33, ἐλάλησεν), 
in xi. 5, that of hearing.— Satpovildpevov: 
the inferred cause. It was known that 
the dumbness was not due to any physi- 
cal defect. Speech seemed to be prevent- 
ed by some foreign spiritual power; the 
mental disease, possibly, melancholy.— 
Ver. 33. ἐλάλησεν: that cured, speech 
{ο]]οννεᾶ.-- ἐθαύμασαν: the crowd present 
wondered, hearing one speak whom they 
had so long known to be dumb.— ot8érrote 
ἐφάνη, etc.: thus they expressed their 
surprise; the like was never seen in 
Israel. ἐφάνη is impersonal, the refer- 
ence being to the change in the man; 
the manner of expression is colloquial, 
end it is idle to discuss the precise mean- 
ing of οὕτως, and what nominative is to 
be supplied to ἐφάνη. It is more to the 
purpose to inquire why this seemingly 
minor miracle should make so great an 
impression. Perhaps we should not 
isolate it, but take it along with the other 
marvels that followed in quick succession 
as joint causes of admiration. The 
people were worked up into a high 
measure of astonishment which, at last, 
found vent in these words. So in effect 
Euthy., also Rosenmiiller (‘‘ tot signa, tam 
admirabilia, tam celeriter, neque con- 
tactu tantum, sed et verbo, et in omni 


morborum genere”’).—Ver. 34. of δὲ Pap. 
ἔλεγον. The multitude admired, but the 
Pharisees said. They are watching 
closely the words and acts of Jesus and 
forming their theories. They have got 
one for the cures of demoniacs.—év τῷ 
ἄρχοντι τ. δ: He casts out demons in 
the power of the prince of demons. 
Probably they did not believe it, but it was 
plausible. How differently men view 
the same phenomenon (vide on Matt. 
xii. 22 f.). ; 

Vv. 35-38. These verses look both 
backwards and forwards, winding up the 
preceding narrative of words and deeds 
from chap. v. onwards, and introducing 
a new aspect of Christ’s work and experi- 
ence. The connection with what follows 
is strongest, and the verses might, with 
advantage, have formed the commence- 
ment of chap. x. Yet this general state- 
ment about Christ’s teaching and healing 
ministry (ver. 35) obviously looks back to 
iv. 23, 24, and, therefore, fitly ends the 
story to which the earlier summary 
description of the ministry in Galilee 
forms the introduction. It is, at the 
same time, the prelude to a second act 
in the grand drama (chap. ix. 35—xiv. 
12). In the first act Jesus has appeared 
as an object of general admiration; in 
the second He is to appear as an object 
of doubt, criticism, hostility. 

Ver. 36. ἰδὼν δὲ τοὺς ὄχλους: in the 
course of His wanderings Jesus had 
opportunities of observing the condition 
of the people, and at length arrived at a 
clear, definite view as to the moral and 
religious situation. It was very sombre, 
such as to move His compassion (ἐσπλαγ- 
χνίσθη, post classical, in Gospels only). 
The state of things suggested two 
pictures to His mind: a neglected flock 
of sheep, and a harvest going to waste 
for lack of reapers. Both imply, not 
only a pitiful plight of the people, but 
a blameworthy neglect of duty on the 


32—38. 


τῷ had.) 36. ἰδὼν δὲ τοὺς ὄχλους, 


ὅτι ἦσαν ἐκλελυμένοι ᾗ καὶ ἐρριμμένοιὸ ὡσεὶ πρόβατα μὴ ἔχοντα 


ποιμένα. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


37. τότε λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, ““ Ὁ μὲν θερισμὸς 14. 


7 


3 ἐσπλαγχνίσθη περὶ αὐτῶν, n here only 


with περὶ; 
with em, 
Ch. xiv. 
Mk. 


~ ο Vi. 841 
πολύς, οἱ δὲ ἐργάται ὀλίγοι: 38. δεήθητε οὖν τοῦ κυρίου τοῦ θερισ- νῆῖ ρα]. 


μοῦ, ὅπως Σ ἐκβάλῃ ἐργάτας εἰς τὸν θερισμὸν αὐτοῦ. 


1 ey τω λαω brought in probably from iv. 23. 


ο Ch. xiii. 
30, 30. 
Mk. iv. 2g 
John x.4 


Lk. x. 2. p Lk. x. 2. 


BCDAZ omit (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 exdeAupevor (T. R.) is a very weakly-supported reading, having only one im- 


portant uncial, L, on its side. 


S$ BCDAZ al. have eoxvApevo.—the true reading. 


° The variation here is simply a matter of spelling: ep. in BCL (Tisch., W.H.), 


ερρ. (T. R.) ΓΔ, pep. D. 


part of their religious guides—the shep- 
herds by profession without the shep- 
herd heart, the spiritual husbandmen 
without an eye for the whitening fields 
and skill to handle the sickle. The 
Pharisaic comments on the Capernaum 
mission festival (ix. 11) were sufficient to 
justify the adverse judgment. Their 
question on that occasion meant much, 
and would not be forgotten by Jesus.— 
ἐσκυλμένοι, ἐριμμένοι, graphic words, 
clear as to general import, though 
variously understood as to their precise 
meaning. The former may mean 
“flayed” (from σκὂλον, Holtz., H.C.), or 
‘*hunted ” and tired out (Weiss-Meyer), 
the practical sense is ‘exhausted by 
long, aimless wandering, foot-sore and 
fleece-torn”. The other points to the 
natural sequel—lying down, scattered 
about (ῥίπτω), here one, there another, 
on the hill side, just where they found 
themselves unable to go a step further. 
A flock can get into such a condition 
only when it has no shepherd to care for 
it and guide it to the pastures. 

Vv. 37, 38. θερισμὸς: a new figure 
coming in abruptly in the narrative, but 
not necessarily so close together in 
Christ’s mind. The one figure suits the 
mood of passive sympathy; the other, 
that of the harvest, suits the mood of 
active purpose to help. It would not be 
long in the case of Jesus before the one 
mood passed into the other. He could 
not be a mere pitying spectator. He 
must set on foot a mission of help. 
The Capernaum feast was the first stage ; 
the mission of the twelve the second. 
The word “harvest”? implies spiritual 
susceptibility. Weiss protests against 
this inference as allegorising interpre- 
tation of a parabolic saying which simply 
points to the want of suitable labourers 


(vide L. J,. ii. 119). So also Schanz 
maintains, against Euthy., that not sus- 
ceptibility but need is pointed to. But, 
as against Weiss, it is pertinent to ask: 
what suggested the figure of a harvest 
if not possibilities of gain to the 
kingdom of God, given sympathetic 
workers? This hopeful judgment as to 
the people of the land, contrasted with 
Pharisaic despair and contempt, was 
characteristic of Jesus (vide my Kingdom 
of God, chap. v.).—€pydtat ὀλίγοι: pro- 
fessional labourers, men busying them- 
selves with inculcation of moral and 
religious observances, abundant; but 
powerless to win the people because with- 
out sympathy, hope, and credible accept- 
able Gospel. Their attempts, if any, 
only make bad worse—(sub legis on- 
ere zgrotam plebem, Hilary). “Few” 
—as yet only one expert, but He is train- 
ing others, and He has faith in prayer for 
better men and times.—Ver. 38. δεήθητε: 
the first step in all reform—deep, devout 
desire out of a profound sense of need. 
The time sick and out of joint—God 
mend it !—Gmws ἐκβάλῃ, etc. The pray- 
er, expressed in terms of the parabolic 
figure, really points to the ushering in of 
a new era of grace and humanity— 
Christian as opposed to Pharisaic, legal, 
Rabbinical. Inthe old time men thought 
it enough to care for themselves even in 
religion ; in the new time, the impulse and 
fashion would be to care for others. 
ἐκβάλῃ, a strong word (cf. Mk. iv. 29, 
ἀποστέλλει), even allowing for the 
weakened force in later Greek, implying 
Divine sympathy with the urgent need. 
Men must be raised up who can help the 
time. Christ had thorough faith in a 
benignant Providence. Luke gives this 
logion in connection with the mission of 
the seventy (x. 2). 


158 


a Ch. xii. 43. 
κ. i. 23 


KATA MATOAION 


Χ. 


X. 1. Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος τοὺς δώδεκα μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, ἔδωκεν 


- , - 
261 iii. 11. αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν πνευμάτων " ἀκαθάρτων, ὥστε ἐκβάλλειν, αὐτά, καὶ 


Lk. iv. 
36 al. 
ref. to 


33, ο . 
(in θεραπεύειν πᾶσαν νόσον καὶ πᾶσαν µαλακίαν. 2. Τῶν δὲ δώδεκα 


demons.). ' ἀποστόλων τὰ ὀνόματά ἐστι ταῦτα" πρῶτος Σίμων 6 λεγόμενος 


b once only 


in Mt.and Πέτρος, καὶ ᾿Ανδρέας 6 ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ: “IdxwBos! 6 τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, 


Mk. ( 


30), often καὶ Ιωάννης & ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ: 3. Φίλιππος, καὶ Βαρθολομαῖος - 


in Lk. ς 


Θωμᾶς, καὶ Ματθαῖος ὁ 
1 SB have και before ἴακωβος. 


CHAPTER X. THE GALILEAN MISSION. 
The beginnings of the mission to the 
neglected ‘‘lost’’ sheep of Israel may be 
found in the Capernaum feast (ix. 10). 
As time went on Jesus felt increasingly 
the pressure of the problem and the need 
for extended effort. Matthew’s call was 
connected with the first stage of the 
movement, and that disciple was Christ’s 
agent in bringing together the gathering 
of publicans and sinners. He is now 
about to employ all the intimate dis- 
ciples He has collected about Him and 
through them to spread the movement 
all over Galilee. They will be a poor 
substitute for Himself, yet not wholly 
useless like the scribes, for they have 
heard His teaching on the hill and 
imbibed somewhat of His spirit of love. 

Vv. 1-15. The Twelve: their names, 
mission, and relative instructions (Mk. 
iii. 14-19, vi. 7-13, Lk. ix. 1-6). 

Ver. I. προσκαλεσάµενος: this does 
not refer to the call to become disciples, 
but to a call to men already disciples to 
enter on a special mission.—rovs δώδεκα, 
the Twelve. The article implies that a 
body of intimate disciples, twelve in 
number, already existed. The evangelist 
probably had Mk. iii. 14 in view. He 
may also reflect in his language the 
feeling of the apostolic age to which 
the Twelve were familiar and famous. 
Hitherto we have made the acquaintance 
of five of the number (iv. 18-22, ix. 9). 
Their calls are specially reported to 
illustrate how the body of twelve grew.— 
ἐξουσίαν, authority, not to preach, as we 
might have expected, but to heal. The 
prominence given to healing in this 
mission may surprise and disappoint, 
and even tempt to entertain the suspicion 
that the exalted ideas concerning the 
Twelve of after years have been read into 
the narrative. This element is certainly 
least prominent in Mark. Yet to some 
extent it must have had a place in the 
mission, The people in Galilee had all 
Ἀεατά of Jesus and His work, and it was 


τελώνης: ᾿Ιάκωβος ὁ τοῦ ᾽Αλφαίου, καὶ 


no use sending the Twelve unless they 
could carry with them something of His 
power.—_rveup.atey a., genitive objective, 
as in John xvii. 3, Rom. ix. 21. ὥστε 
ἐκ .. . καὶ θεραπεύειν, dependent also 
on ἐξουσίαν (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 5), ὥστε with 
infinitive indicating tendency of the 
power. πᾶσαν νόσον, etc., echo of iv. 
23. 

Ver. 2. τῶν δὲ δώδ. ἀποστόλων: εἴἲς,, 
the evangelist finds here a convenient 
place for giving the names of the Twelve, 
called here for the first and last time 
ἀπόστολοι, with reference at once to the 
immediate minor mission (from ἀποστέλ- 
λειν, vide νετ. 5) and to the later great 
one. One half of them are for us mere 
names, and of one or two even the names 
are doubtful, utterly obscure, yet, doubt- 
less, in their time and sphere faithful 
witnesses. They are arranged in pairs, 
as if following the hint of Mark that they 
were sent out by two and two, each pair 
connected with a καὶ (so in Luke, not in 
Mark).—p@tos: at the head of the list 
stands Peter, first not only numerically 
(Meyer) but in importance, a sure matter 
of fact, though priestly pretensions based 
on it are to be disregarded. He is first 
in all the lists.—6 Aey. Πέτρος: a fact 
already stated (iv. 18), here repeated 
probably because the evangelist had his 
eye on Mark’s list (iii. 16) or possibly to , 
distinguish this Simon from another in 
the list (No. 11). Ver. 3. Βαρθολομαῖος, 
the 6th, one of the doubtful names, com- 
monly identified with Nathanael (John 
i. 46).—MarOaios ὁ τελώνης, one of four 
in the list with epithets: Peter the first, 
Simon the zealot, Judas the traitor, 
Matthew the publican ; surely not with- 
out reason, except as echoing ix. g 
(Meyer). Matthew stands second in his 
pair here, before Thomas in Mark and 
Luke. Position and epithet agree, 
indicative, Euthy. suggests, of modesty 
and self-abasement.—Ver. 4. Σίμων o 
Καναναῖος: Luke gives τὸν kak. Ζηλωτὴν 
=the zealot, possibly a piece of in« 


ᾱ----δ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


159 


Λεββαῖος ὁ ἐπικληθεὶς Θαδδαῖος] 4. Σίµων ὁ Kavavirys,? καὶ ᾿Ιούδας 5 


ἰσκαριώτης 6 καὶ * παραδοὺς αὐτόν. 


i , . τεῖ to 
5. Τούτους τοὺς δώδεκα ἀπέστειλεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, παραγγείλας αὐτοῖς, Judas, 


c again in 


h. xxvi. 


λέγων, “ Eis ὁδὸν ἐθνῶν μὴ ἀπέλθητε, καὶ εἰς πόλιν Σαμαρειτῶν μὴ 15; xxvii. 
a > » 4 ab, 
«εἰσέλθητε: 6. πορεύεσθε δὲ μᾶλλον πρὸς τὰ ἀπρόβατα τὰ * ἀπολω- ἆ δν xv. 24. 


λότα *oikou Ισραήλ. 
ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὗρανῶν. 


2D has Λεββαιος (eos) alone. 


8. ἀσθενοῦντας θεραπεύετε, 


SB have Θαδδαιος alone. 


7+ πορευόµενοι δὲ κηρύσσετε, λέγοντες, Ὅτι e Ch. xv. 24. 


Acts ii. 36. 
Vii. 42. 


The reading in T. R. 


as above is simply a conflate reading combining the two by a connecting phrase, 


«ο επικληθεις. 


2 BCDL have Καναναιος, probably the true form. 


$ o before loxap. in BDA. 


formation based on an _ independent 
reliable source, or his interpretation of 


‘the Hebrew word 129. The form 


Kavavaios seems to be based on the idea 
that the word referred toa place. Jerome 
took it to mean ‘“‘of Cana,’ ‘“‘de vico 
Chana Galilaeae”’. Ιούδας 6 Ισκαριώτης: 
last in all the lists, as Peter is first. The 
epithet is generally taken as denoting the 
place to which he belonged: the man of 
Issachar (Grotius) ; but most render: the 
man of Kerioth (in Judah, Joshua xv. 25, 
Jer. xlviii, 41) ; in that case the one non- 
Galilean disciple. The ending, -ωτης, is 
Greek ; in Mark the Hebrew ending, -ωθ, 
is given. 

Vv. 5-15. Instructions to the missioners. 
Ver. 5. Τούτουςτ. 808: These, the Twelve, 
Jesus sent forth, under the injunctions 
following (mapayyethas).—eis ὁδὸν ἐθ. μὴ 
ἀπέλθητε. This prohibition occurs in 
Matthew only, but there is no reason to 
doubt its authenticity except indeed that 
it went without saying. The very pro- 
hibition implies a consciousness that one 
day the Gospel would go the way of the 
Gentiles, just as Mt. v. 17 implies con- 
sciousness that fulfilling, in the speaker’s 
sense, would involve annulling.—odov 
ἐθνῶν, the way fowards (Meyer), the 
genitive being a genitive of motion 
(Fritzsche, Kuhner, § 414, 4), or a way 
within or of, parallel to πόλιν Σαμαρειτῶν 
in next clause.—eis π. Σαμ., not even in 
Samaria should they carry on their 
mission. The prohibition is _ total. 
-woAtv does not refer to the chief city 
(Erasrnus, Annot., metropolis) or to the 
towns as distinct from the rural parts 
through which at least they might pass 
(Grotius). It means any considerable 
-centre of population. The towns and 
-villages are thought of as the natural 


sphere of work (ver. 11). The reason of 
the double prohibition is not given, but 
doubtless it lay in the grounds of policy 
which led Christ to confine His own 
work to Israel, and also in the crude 
religious state of the disciples.—Ver. 6. 
ἀπολωλότα, ‘‘the lost sheep,” an ex- 
pression consecrated by prophetic use 
(Jer. 1. 6, Swete’s ed., xxvii. 6), the epithet 
here first introduced, often occurring in 
Gospels, was used by Jesus not in blame 
but in pity. ‘ Lost” in His vocabulary 
meant “neglected” (ix. 36), in danger 
also of course, but not finally and hope- 
lessly given over to perdition, salvable 
if much needing salvation. The term is 
ethical in import, and implies that the 
mission had moral and religious improve- 
ment mainly in view, not mere physical 
benefit through healing agency; teaching 
rather than miraculous acts.—Ver. 7. 
πορευόµενοι κηρύσσετε, as ye go, keep 
preaching; participle and finite verb, 
both present. Preaching first in the 
Master’s thoughts, if not in the evangel- 
ist’s (νετ. τ).---ἤγγικεν 7 βασιλεία τ. ο.: 
the theme is, of course, the kingdom 
longed for by all, constantly on the lips 
of Jesus. The message is: It has come 
nigh to you and is here. Very general, 
but much more, it may be taken for 
granted, was said. The apprentice 
apostles could as yet make no intelligent 
theoretic statement concerning the King- 
dom, but they could teil not a little about 
the King, the Master who sent them, the 
chief object of interest doubtless for al! 
receptive souls. It was a house mission 
(not in synagogue) on which they were 
sent (ver. 12). They were to live as guests 
in selected dwellings, two in one, and 
two in another, for a time, and their 
preaching would take the form of familiar 
conversation on what they had seen and 


160 


KATA MATOAION x 


f Rom. iii. λεπροὺς καθαρίζετε, νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε,] δαιμόνια ἐκβάλλετε. "δωρεὰν 
Zhe 3 5 , . 3 
g Lk. xviii. ἐλάβετε, δωρεὰν δότε. 9. Mi) "κτήσησθε Χρυσὸν, μηδὲ ἄργυρον, 


πα Ἵκχι, 


το. Αοἰς]. μηδὲ χαλκὸν εἰς τὰς ζώνας ὑμῶν, 10. μὴ πήραν eis ὁδόν, μηδὲ δύο 


18; viii. 
20; Xxii. 
28. 


1 γεκρους εγειρετε is wanting in L, but well attested by RBCDz. 


Χιτῶνας, μηδὲ ὑποδήματα, μηδὲ ῥάβδον: ἄξιος γὰρ 6 ἐργάτης τῆς 


The position 


varies in MSS., after Sap. εκβαλλ. in PA, before Aer. καθαρ. in BCD. 


heard Jesus do and say. They would 
talk by the hour, healing acts would be 
very occasional, one or two in a village. 

Ver.8. νεκροὺς ἐγείρετε. This clause 
is wanting in several Codd., including L, 


so often associated with §§B in good read- 


ings. It is, however, too well attested to 
be omitted. It must either have founda 
place in the autograph, or it must have 
crept in as a gloss at avery early period. 
The evangelist’s aim seems to be to 
represent Christ as empowering the 
disciples to do the works He is reported 
to have done Himself in chaps. viii., ix. 
That purpose demands the inclusion of 
raising the dead as the crowning miracle 
of the group (raising of daughter of 
Jairus). Yet it is hard to believe that 
Jesus would give power to the disciples 
to do, as an ordinary part of their 
mission, what He Himself did only on 
one or two exceptional occasions. The 
alternatives seem to be either an early 
gloss introduced into the text, or an 
inaccuracy on the part of the evangelist. 
Meyer takes the former view, Weiss 
apparently the latter. We cannot take 
the phrase in a spiritual sense, the other 
clauses all pointing to physical miracles. 
This clause is not in the accounts of 
Mark and Luke. The seventy on their 
return (Luke x. 17) make no mention of 
raising the dead. 

Ψετ.ο. μὴ κτήσησθε: Vulgate: nolite 
possidere. But the prohibition is directed 
not merely against possessing, but 
against acquiring (κέκτηµαι, perfect = 
possess). The question is as to the scope 
of the prohibition. Does it refer merely to 
the way, or also to the mission? Inone 
case it will mean: do not anxiously pro- 
cure extensive provision for your journey 
(Meyer) ; in the other it will mean, more 
comprehensively: do not procure for the 
way, or during the mission, the things 
named. In other words, it will be an 
injunction to begin and carry on the 
mission without reward. Though the 
reference seems to be chiefly to the 
starting point, it must be in reality to 
sheir conduct during the mission. There 


was no need to say: do not obtain gold 
before starting, for that was practically 
impossible. There was need to say: 
do not take gold or silver from those 
whom you benefit, for it was likely to be 
offered, and acceptance of gifts would be 
morally prejudicial. That, therefore, is 
what Jesus prohibits, true to His habit 
of insisting on the supreme value of 
motive. So Jerome (condemnatio avari- 
tiae), Chrys., Hilary, etc. So also 
Weiss. Holtz. (H.C.), while concurring 
in this interpretation, thinks the pro- 
hibition suits better the conduct of the 
Christ-merchants in the Didache than 
the circumstances of the disciples.— 
χρυσὸν, ἄργυρον, χαλκὸν: an anti- 
climax, not gold, not silver, not even a 
copper.—eis τὰς ζώνας, in your girdles, 
used for this purpose as well as for 
gathering up the loose mantle, or in 
purses suspended from the girdle. ‘It 
was usual for travellers to carry purses 
(ᾠασκώλια) suspended from their girdles, 
in which they carried the pence” (Euthy.). 
—Ver. 10. πήραν, a wallet for holding 
provisions, slung over the shoulder 
(Judith xiii. το, πήραν τῶν Bpopatev).— 
δύο χιτῶνας: not even two under-gar- 
ments, shirts ; one would say very neces- 
sary for-comfort and cleanliness in a hot 
climate, and for travellers along dusty 
toads. In Mark the prohibition seems 
to be against wearing two at the same 
time (vi. 8); here against carrying a 
spare one for a change. Possibly we 
ought not to take these instructions 
too literally, but in their spirit.—t7ody- 
pata: this does not mean that they 
were to go barefooted, but either without 
a spare pair, or without more substantial 
covering for the feet (shoes) than the 
light sandals they usually wore—mere 
soles to keep the feet off the hard road. 
Lightfoot (Hor. Heb.) distinguishes 
between the two thus: “ usus delicatoris 
fuerunt calcei, durioris atque utilioris 
sandalia”. He states that there were 
sandals, whose soles were of wood, and 
upper part of leather, the two joined by 
nails, and that they were sometimes 
made of rushes or the bark of palms. 


9—14. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 161 


τροφῆς αὐτοῦ ἐστιν. 11. Eis ἣν δ᾽ ἂν πόλιν ἢ κώµην εἰσέλθητε, 
* ἐξετάσατε τίς ἐν αὐτῇ ἄξιός ἐστι: κἀκεῖ µείνατε, ἕως ἂν ἐξέλθητε. hCh. ii. 8 


12. εἰσερχόμενοι δὲ εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, ἀσπάσασθε αὐτήν. 


John xxi. 


δε 
13. και εαν jo. 


μὲν ᾖ ἡ οἰκία ἀξία, ἐλθέτω ἡ εἰρήνη ὑμῶν ew αὐτήν: ἐὰν δὲ μὴ Wi Ch. xii. 44. 
1 


ἀξία, ἡ εἰρήνη ὑμῶν πρὸς Spas | ἐπιστραφήτω. 

A ς - ia iy 
δέξηται ὑμᾶς, μηδὲ ἀκούσῃ τοὺς λόγους ὑμῶν, ἐξερχόμενοι ὃ τῆς 
οἰκίας ἢ τῆς πόλεως ἐκείνης, ἐκτινάξατε τὸν ) κονιορτὸν 


1 S8BCL omit εστιν. 
4 SSC add ex (Tisch.). 


—péBdov: not even a staff! That can 
hardly be meant. Even from the 
romantic or picturesque point of view 
the procession of pilgrim missioners 
would not be complete without a staff 
each in their hand. Ifnot a necessity, 
at least, it was no luxury. Mark allows 
the staff, creating trouble for the har- 
monists. Grotius suggests: no second 
staff besides the one in hand! Glassius, 
quoted by Fritzsche in scorn, suggests a 
staff shod with iron (scipio) for defence. 
Ebrard, with approval of Godet, thinks 
of two different turns given to the 


2a i ας 


either “if you take one staff it is 
enough,” or ‘‘if, etc., itis too much”. 
Really the discrepancy is not worth all 
this trouble. Practically the two ver- 
sions come to the same thing: take only 
a staff, take not even a staff; the latter 
is a little more hyperbolical than the 
former. Without even a staff, is the ne 
plus ultra of austere simplicity and self- 
denial. Men who carry out the spirit of 
these precepts will not labour in vain. 
Their life will preach the kingdom better 
than their words, which may be feeble 
and helpless.. ‘‘ Nothing,” says Euthy., 
‘*creates admiration so much as a simple, 
contented life” (βίος ἄσκευος καὶ ὁλι- 
yapkys). — ἄξιος .. . τ. τροφῆς: a 
maxim universally recognised. A labourer 
of the type described is not only worthy 
but sure of his meat; need have no con- 
cern about that. This is one of the few 
sayings of our Lord referred to by St. 
Paul (x Cor. ix. 14), whose conduct as 
an apostle well illustrates the spirit of 
the instructions to the Twelve. 

Vv. 11-15. ἐξετάσατε (ἐκ ἑτάζω, from 
ἐτεός, true; to inquire as to the truth of 
a matter). A host to be carefully sought 
out ineach place: not to stay with the first 
who offers.—aétos points to personal 
moral worth, the deciding consideration 
to be goodness, not wealth (worth so 


Aramaic original 


II 


2 av in NWBDL. 
BD omit (with T. R.). 


ΜΕ ος Pet. ii. 
14. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν μη 25. 
Xili. 51; 


4 Ε 
XXii. 23. 


τῶν ποδῶν 


3 SBD add εξω. 
W.H. have it on margin. 


much). The host to be a man generally 
respected, that no prejudice be created 
against the mission (ne praedicationis 
dignitas suscipientis infamid deturpetur, 
Jerome).—petvare: having once secured a 
host, abide with him, shift not about 
seeking better quarters and fare, hurting 
the feelings of the host, and damaging 
your character, as self-seeking men— 
Ver. 12. τὴν οἰκίαν, the house selected 
after due ΙπαΙΙΤΥ.--ἀσπάσασθε, salute it, 
not asa matter of formal courtesy, but 
with a serious mind, saying: “‘ peace be 
with you,” thinking the while of what 
peace the kingdom can bring.—Ver. 13. 
ἐὰν μὲν ᾖ 0. ἀξία: after all pains have 
been taken, a mistake may be made; 
therefore the worthiness of the house 
is spoken of as uncertain (ᾖ, in an 
emphatic position, so μὴ ᾖ, in next 
εἰαμςε).---ἐλθέτω ἡ εἰρήνη ἐπισ- 
τραφήτω. The meaning is: the word of 
peace will not be spoken in vain; it will 
bless the speaker if not those addressed. 
It is always good to wish peace and good 
for others, however the wish may be 
received. There is a tacit warning 
against being provoked by churlish treat- 
ment. Ver. 14. ὃς ἐὰν μὴ δέξηται: Christ 
contemplates an unfavourable result of 
the mission in the host’s house, or in the 
town or village generally. The con- 
struction of the sentence is anacolouthi- 
stic, beginning one way, ending another - 
rhetorical in effect, and suitable to emo- 
tional speech; cf. Lk. xxi. 6: “these 
things ye see—days will come in which 
not one stone will be left upon another” 
(vide Winer, § 63, on such constructions). 
---“ἐξερχόμενοι: when an_unreceptive 
attitude has once been decidedly taken 
up, there is nothing for it but to go 
away. Such a crisis severely tests the 
temper and spirit of promoters of good 
causes. —extiwdfate τὸν κονιορτὺν: a 
symbolic act practised by the Pharisees 
on passing from heathen to Jewish soil, 
the former being regarded as unclean 


162 


k Ch. xi. 22, ὑμῶν. 


KATA MATOAION 


x 


15. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, Ἡ ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται γῇ Σοδόµων καὶ 


ia 14.  Tondppaw ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως, ἢ τῇ πόλει ἐκέίνῃ. 
«ΧΙ. 10; ry , Sus . = > , 
xxiii. 34. 16. “Ιδού, ἐγὼ ᾿ ἀποστέλλω Spas ὡς πρόβατα ἐν µέσῳ λύκων " 


Rom. x. 15 


πι Rom. xvi. γίνεσθε οὖν φρόνιμοι ὡς οἱ ὄφεις, καὶ ™ ἀκέραιοι ὡς αἱ περιστεραί. 


19. Phil. 

ii. 15. 
nvideat Ch. 

vii. 15. 
oCh. xx. 19; 


xxiii. 34. Mk. x. 34. Lk. xviii. 33. John xix. 1. 


(Light., Hor. Heb.): Easy to perform, 
not easy to perform in a right spirit; too 
apt to be the outcome of irritation, dis- 
appointment, and wounded vanity =they 
did not appreciate me, I abandon them 
to their fate. Christ meant the act to 
symbolise the responsibility of the in- 
habitants for the result=leave the place, 
feeling that you have done your duty, 
not in anger but in sadness. The act, 
if performed, would be a last word of 
warning (eis μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς, Mark and 
Luke). Grotius and Bleek understand it 
as meaning: ‘‘we have nothing more to 
do with you ”’.—Ver. 15. yf Σ. καὶ Γ.: 
ῥοάοπι and Gomorrah, a byword for 
στεαί iniquity and awful doom (15. i. 9), 
yi, land for people.—avexrérepov: yet 
the punishment of these wicked cities, 
tragic though it was, or the punishment 
still in store, more endurable than that 
of city or village which rejects the 
message of the kingdom. This may 
seem an exaggeration, the utterance of 
passion rather than of sober judgment, 
and a dangerous thing to say to raw 
disciples and apprentice missionaries, 
But the principle involved is plain: the 
greater the privilege rejected the greater 
the criminality. The utterance reveals 
the high value Jesus set on the good 
tidings He commissioned the Twelve to 
preach. 

Vv. 16-39. Prophetic picture of future 
apostolic tribulations. An interpolation 
of our evangelist after his manner of 
grouping logia of kindred import. The 
greater part of the material is given in 
other connections in Mark, and especially 
in Luke. No feeling of delicacy should 
prevent even the preacher from taking 
this view, as it destroys all sense of the 
natural reality of the Galilean mission 
to suppose that this passage formed part 
of Christ’s instructions to the Twelve in 
connection therewith. Reading into the 
early event the thoughts and experiences 
of a later time was inevitable, but to get 
a true picture of the life of Jesus and His 
disciples, we must keep the two as 
distinct as possible. There may be a 

\ 


17. "προσέχετε δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ' παραδώσουσι γὰρ ὑμᾶς εἰς 
συνέδρια, καὶ ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν " µαστιγώσουσιν Spas: 


Heb. xii. 6. 


doubt as to ver. 16. It stands at the 
beginning of the instructions to the 
Seventy in Luke (x. 2), which, according 
to Weiss (Matth. Evang., p. 263), are 
really the instructions to the Twelve 
in their most original form. But it is 
hard to believe that Jesus took and 
expressed so pessimistic a view of the 
Galilean villagers to whom He was 
sending the Twelve, as is implied in the 
phrase, ‘‘sheep among wolves,” though 
He evidently did include occasional un- 
receptivity among the possible experiences 
of the mission. He may indeed have 
said something of the kind with an 
understood reference to the hostility of 
Pharisaic religionists, but as it stands 
unqualified, it seems to bear a colouring 
imported from a later period. 

Ver. 16. ἰδού, something important is 
going to be said.—éya, emphatic: Jesus 
is conscious that connection with Him 
will be a source not only of power, but 
of trouble to the Twelve.—ev péow: not fo 
wolves (πρὸς λύκους, Chrys.). They were 
not sent for that purpose, which would 
be a mission to destruction, but on an 
errand of which that would be an inci- 
dent. év is used here as often, especially 
in later Greek writers, with a verb of 
motion to indicate a subsequent chronic 
state, ‘‘the result of a love of concise- 
ness” (Winer, § 50, 4, a).—ylveoOe .. . 
mepiotepal. The serpent, the accepted 
emblem of wisdom (Gen. iii. 1; Ps. lviii. 
5)—wary, sharp-sighted (Grotius); the 
dove of simplicity (Hos. vii. r1, ‘silly 
dove,”’ ἄνους, Ξερῖ.).-- ἀκέραιοι (a, κεράν- 
νυµι), unmixed with evil, purely good. 
The ideal resulting from the combina- 
tion is a prudent simplicity; difficult to 
realise. The proverb seems to have 
been current among the Jews. ‘“ God 
says: ‘with me the Israelites are simple 
as the dove, but against the heathen 
cunning as the serpent’” (Wiinsche, 
Beitrdége).—Ver. 17. τῶν ἀνθρώπων: 
Weiss, regarding ver. 17 as the beginning 
of an interpolation, takes τῶν generi- 
cally=the whole race of men conceived 
of as on the whole hostile to the truth= 


π5- 13. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


161 


18. καὶ ἐπὶ ἡγεμόνας δὲ καὶ βασιλεῖς ἀχθήσεσθε ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, eis p Ch. xx. 23 


μαρτύριον αὗτοῖς καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. 


μὴ µεριμνήσητε πῶς ἢ τί λαλήσητε΄ ’ δοθήσεται γὰρ ὑμῖν ἐν ἐκείνῃ 
τῇ ὥρᾳ τί λαλήσετεΣ: 20. οὐ γὰρ ὑμεῖς ἐστε of λαλοῦντες, ἀλλὰ 
τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τὸ λαλοῦν ἐν ὑμῖν. 


Mk. xiii. 


19. ὅταν δὲ παραδιδῶσιν 1 Spas, τα. 2 Cor. 


iv. 11(same 
phrase). 
. xiii. 
12. (Deut. 
xix.II.- 


21. Παραδώσει δὲ Micah vii. 


ἀδελφὸς ἀδελφὸν Seis θάνατον, καὶ πατὴρ τέκνον' καὶ " ἐπαναστή-ε καν 


> ~ 
σονται τέκνα ἐπὶ γονεῖς, καὶ "θανατώσουσιν αὐτούς. 


; XXvii. 
22. καὶ ἔσεσθε 29° ους. 


µισούμενοι ὑπὸ πάντων διὰ τὸ ὄνομά pour ὁ δὲ !ὑπομείνας “cist Ch xxiv. 


. 


xii. 13, 


1 ΜΒ have παραδωσιν (Tisch., W.H.). 


13. Rom. 
u Ch. xxiv. 13. Lk. xviii. 5. John xiii. τ. 


7 SBC have λαλησητε-- what ye ought to speak. The fut. ind. (T. R.) = what 
ye will speak. The former is to be preferred. DL omit the whole clause from 
δοθησεται to λαλησητε, an error of similar ending, 


κόσμος in the fourth Gospel (xv. το; 
xvii. 14). It seems more natural to find 
in it areference to the λύκοι of ver. 16. 
Beware of the class of men I have in 
view. So Eras., Elsner, Fritzsche.— 
συνέδρια, the higher tribunals, selected 
<o represent courts of justice of all grades, 
to denote the serious nature of the 
danger.—cvvaywyais. The synagogue 
is referred to here, not merely as a place 
of worship, but as a juridical assembly 
exercising discipline and inflicting penal- 
ties (Grotius). Among these was scourg- 
ing (μαστιγώσουσιν, vide Acts xxii. 10; 
xxvi. 11; 2 Cor. xi. 24).—Ver. 18. ἡγεμό- 
vas, provincial governors, including the 
three degrees: Propraetors, Proconsuls, 
and Procurators. From the point of 
view of the evangelist, who conceives the 
‘whole discourse as connected with the 
Galilean mission confined to Jews, 
the reference can only be to Roman 
governors in Palestine. But in Christ’s 
mind they doubtless had a larger scope, 
and pointed to judicial tribulations in the 
larger, Gentile world.—eis µαρτύριον. 
The compensation for the incriminated 
will be that, when they stand on their 
defence, they will have an opportunity 
of witnessing for the Master (ἕνεκεν 
ἐμοῦ) and the Cause. Observe the com- 
bination καὶ δὲ in first clause of this 
verse, καὶ before ἐπὶ ἡγεμόνας, δὲ after 
it. It introduces a further particular 
under a double point of view, with καὶ 
so far as similar, with δὲ so far as different 
(Baumlein, Schulgram., § 675, also Gr. 
Partikeln, 188, 9). A more formidable 
experience. 

Vv. 19-22. μὴ µεριμνήσητε, etc.: a 
second counsel against anxiety (Matt. 
vi. 25), this time not as to food and 
taiment, but as to speech at a critical 


hour. With equal emphasis: trouble not 
yourselves either as to manner or matter, 
word or thought (πῶς ἢ τί).---δοθήσεται : 
thought, word, tone, gesture—every- 
thing that tends to impress—all will be 
given at the critical hour (ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ 
ὥρᾳ). In the former instance anxiety 
was restricted to the day (Matt. vi. 34). 
Full, absolute inspiration promised for 
the supreme moment.— οὐ yap ἡμεῖς, etc.: 
not you but the divine Spirit the speaker. 
οὐ, ἀλλὰ, non tam quam, interprets 
Grotius, followed by Pricaeus, Elsner, 
Fritzsche, etc. = not so much you as; 
as if it were an affair of division of 
labour, so much ours, so much, and 
more, God’s. It is, however, all God’s, 
and yet all ours. It is a case of 
immanent action, τὸ λαλοῦν ἐν ὑμῖν, 
not of a transcendent power coming in 
upon us to help our infirmity, eking 
out our imperfect speech. Note the 
Spirit is called the Spirit τοῦ πατρὸς 
ἡμῶν, echo of vi. 32. Some of the 
greatest, most inspired utterances have 
been speeches made by men on trial for 
religious convictions, A good con- 
science, tranquillity of spirit, and a sense 
of the greatness of the issue involved, 
make human speech at such times touch 
the sublime. Theophy. distinguishes 
the human and the divine in such utter. 
ances thus: ours to confess, God’stomake 
a wise apology (τὸ μὲν ὁμολογεῖν ἡμέ- 
τερον, τὸ δὲ σοφῶς ἀπολογεῖσθαι Θεοῦ). 
—Ver. 22. eis τέλος, to the end (of the 
tribulations) described (vv. 21-22) ; to the 
end, and not merely at the beginning 


‘(Theophy., Beza, Fritzsche, Weiss, etc.). 


No easy thing to do, when such in- 
humanities and barbarities are going on, 
all natural and family affections out- 
raged. But it helps to know, as is here 


164 


” here only τὴ p 
rite τέλος, οὗτος σωθήσεται. 


sense of 
going over. 

Similar 

phrases in 

Greekand ἀγθρώπου. 

Latin 

authors. 


KATA MATOAION x 


23. ὅταν δὲ διώκωσιν ὑμᾶς ἐν TH πόλει 
ταύτῃ, Φεύγετε εἰς τὴν ἄλλην.ὶ 


ἁμὴν γὰρ λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ 


. Ἱτελέσητε τὰς πόλεις Tod? ᾿Ισραήλ, ἕως Bv® ἔλθη ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ 
24. Οὐκ gor. μαθητὴς ὑπὲρ τὸν διδάσκαλῶν, οὐδὲ 


1 ετεραν in ΔΡ (W.H., αλλην in margin). 


2 BD omit the article. 


indirectly intimated, that there will be 
an end, that religious animosities will 
not last for ever. Even persecutors and 
guillotineers get weary of their savage 
work. On eis τέλος Beza remarks : 
declarat neque momentaneam neque per- 
petuam hance conditionem {οτε.- οὗτος 
σωθήσεται, he, emphatic, he and no 
other, shall be saved, in the day of final 
award (James i. 12, ‘‘shall receive the 
crown of life”); also, for the word is 
pregnant, shall be saved from moral ship- 
wreck. How many characters go miser- 
ably down through cowardice and lack 
of moral fibre in the day of trial ! 

Ver. 23. ὅταν δὲ: the thought takes 
a new comforting turn, much needed 
to reconcile disciples to the grim 
prospect. With courage and loyalty 
effort for self-preservation is quite 
compatible. Therefore, when they per- 
secute here flee there.—év τῇ πόλει 
ταύτῃ, in this city, pointing to it, this 
standing for οπε.---φεύγετε, flee, very un- 
heroic apparently, but the bravest 
soldier, especially an old campaigner, 
will avail himself of cover when he can. 


eis τὴν ἑτέραν: the reading of SVB is 


to be preferred to ἄλλην of the T.R., the 
idea being: flee not merely to another 
city numerically distinct, but to a city 
presumably different in spirit (vide vi. 24 
and xi. 16), where you may hope to 
receive better treatment. Thus the 
flight, from being a mere measure of 
self-preservation, is raised to the dignity 
of a policy of prudence in the interest of 
the cause. Why throw away life here 
among a hostile people when you may do 
good work elsewhere ?—Apiyv yap: reason 
for the advice solemnly given; an im- 
portant declaration, and a perplexing 
one for interpreters.—od μὴ, have no 
fear lest, ye will certainly not have 
finished—redéonre. In what sense? 
“‘ gone over ” (A.V.) in their evangelising 
tour, or done the work of evangelising 
thoroughly ? (ad fidei et evangelicae vir- 
tutis perfectionem—Hilary). The former 
is the more natural interpretation. And 
yet the connection of thought seems to 


3 BX omit αν. 


demand a mental reference to the quality 
of the work done. Why tarry at one 
place as if you were under obligation to 
convert the whole population to the 
kingdom? The thing cannot be done. 
The two views may be combined thus: 
ye shall not have gone through the 
towns of Israel evangelising them in 
even a superficial way, much less in a 
thorough-going manner. Weiss takes 
the word τελ. as referring not to mission 
work but to flight = ye shall not have 
used all the cities as places of refuge, z.e., 
there will always be some place to flee 
to. This is beneath the dignity of the 
situation, especially in view of what 
follows.—éws ἔλθῃ 6 vids τ. & Here 
again is the peculiar title Son of Man: 
impersonal, but used presumably as a 
synonym for “I”. What does it mean 
in this connection? And what is the 
coming referred to? ‘The latter ques- 
tion can be best answered at a later 
stage. It has been suggested that the 
title Son of Man is here used by Christ 
in opposition to the title Son of David. 
The meaning of ver. 23 on that view is 
this: do not think it necessary to tarry 
at all hazards in one place. Your work 
anywhere and everywhere must be very 
imperfect. Even success will mean 
failure, for as soon as they have re- 
ceived the tidings of the kingdom they 
will attach wrong ideas to it, thinking of 
it as a national kingdom and of me as 
the “Son of David”. No thorough 
work can be done till the Son of Man 
has come, {.ε., till a universal Gospel for 
humanity has begun to be preached 
(Lutteroth). This is a fresh suggestion, 
not to be despised, on so obscure a sub- 
ject. We are only feeling our way as to 
the meaning of some of Christ’s sayings. 
Meantime, ali that we can be sure of is 
that Christ points to some event not far 
off that will put a period to the apostolic 
mission. 

Vv. 24, 25 point to another source of 
consolation—companionship with the 
Master in tribulation. <A hard lot, but 
mine as well as yours; you would not 
expect to be better off than the Master 


23—27. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


165 


δοῦλος ὑπὲρ τὸν κύριον αὐτοῦ. 25. " ἀρκετὸν τῷ µαθητῇ "ἵνα γένηται w tn Ch. 


ὡς 6 διδάσκαλος αὐτοῦ, καὶ & Ώοῦλος ds 6 


ὁ εἰ τὸν x ινα after 
αρκ. 


4 > a 
KUPLOS GUTOU. 


ον α 
7 οἰκοδεσπότην 1 Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐκάλεσαν,; πόσῳ μᾶλλον τοὺς οἰκιακοὺς» Similar 


αὐτοῦ; 26. Mh οὖν φοβηθῆτε αὐτούς: οὐδὲν γάρ ἐστι Kexadup- 
µένον, ὃ οὐκ ἀποκαλυφθήσεται: καὶ κρυπτόν, ὃ οὗ γνωσθήσεται. 


phrases in 
Ch. v. 29, 
30 ; XViii. 6. 
Lk. xvii. 2 


a ~ ~ > Be 
27. ὃ λέγω ὑμῖν ἐν τῇ " σκοτίᾳ, εἴπατε ἐν τῷ *uti- Kal ὃ “eis τὸ y Ch. <x. τ, 


1B has οικοδεσποτη (dat.). 


11. 
z Lk. xii. 3. a Lk.i. 44. Acts xi. 22. 


W.H. put this reading in the margin. 


3 ewexadeoay in Ν ΒΟΔΣ al., adopted by most editors. δὴ has the middle voice. 


8 B has the dative here also. 


and Lord.—Ver. 25. ἀρκετὸν, not as in 
vi. 34 a neuter adjective used as a noun, 
but a predicate qualifying the clause tva 
yev., etc., aS noun to verb ἐστι under- 
stood. ἵνα γένηται instead of the infini- 
tive; ὁ δοῦλος instead of τῷ SovAw de- 
pendent like τῷ µαθητῇ on ἀρκετὸν, by 
attraction of the nearer word γένηται 
(vide Winer, § 66,5).—oixoSeowérny (-τῃ, 
B.) points to a more intimate relation 
between Jesus and the Twelve, that of a 
head of a house to a family, implying 
greater honour for the latter, and suggest- 
ing an added motive for patient endur- 
ance of the common 1Ο0Ε.- οἰκοδεσπότης 
is a late form. [Earlier writers said 
οἰκίας δεσπότης, Lob., Phryn., p. 373. 
---Ἠεελζεβοὺλ: an opprobrious epithet ; 
exact form of the word and meaning of 
the namie have given more trouble to 
commentators than it is all worth. Con- 
sult Meyer ad lec. Weiss (Meyer) re- 
marks that the name of the Prince of the 
demons is not yet sufficiently explained. 
A question of interest is: did the enemies 
of Jesus call Him Beelzebul (or Beelze- 
bub), or did they merely reproach Him 
with connection with Beelzebub? Weiss, 
taking ver. 25 b as an explanatory gloss 
of the evangelist, based on ix. 3, ΧΙΙ. 24, 
adopts the latter view; De Wette and 
Meyer the former. The reading of Co- 
dex B, οἰκοδεσπότῃ, favours the other 
alternative. The dative requires the 
verb ἐπεκάλεσαν to be taken in the sense 
of to cast up to one. Assuming that 
the evangelist reports words of Jesus 
instead of giving a comment of his own, 
they may quite well contain the informa- 
tion that, among the contemptuous 
epithets applied to Jesus by His enemies, 
was this name. It may have been a 
spiteful pun upon the name, master 
of the house.—wéa@ μᾶλλον implies that 
still worse names will be applied to the 
Twelve. Dicetis respondet eventus, remarks 


\ 


Grotius, citing in proof the epithets 
γόητας, impostores, applied to the apos- 
tles and Christians by Celsus and Ulpian, 
and the words of Tacitus: convictos in 
odio humani generis, and the general use 
of ἄθεοι as a synonym for Christians.— 
οἰκιακοὺς (again in ver. 36), those belong- 
ing to a household or family (from οἰκία, 
whence also the more common οἰκεῖος 
bearing a similar meaning). 

Vv. 26, 27. μὴ οὖν φοβηθῆτε: “fear 
not,” and again ‘fear not” in ver. 28, 
and yet again, 31, says Jesus, knowing 
well what temptation there would be to 
fear. οὖν connects with wv. 24, 25; fear 
not the inevitable for all connected with 
me, as you are, take it calmly. γάρ sup- 
plies a reason for fearlessness arising out 
of their vocation. It is involved in the 
apostolic calling that those who exercise 
it should attract public attention. There- 
fore, fear not what cannot be avoided if 
you would be of any use. Fear suits not 
an apostle any more than a soldier or a 
sailor, who both take coolly the risks of 
their calling.—exahvuppcvov, ἀποκαλυφ- 
θήσεται; κρυπτὸν, γνωσθήσεται: the two 
pairs of words embody a contrast be- 
tween Master and disciples as to relative 
publicity. As movements develop they 
come more under the public eye. 
Christ’s teaching and conduct were not 
wholly covered and hidden. There was 
enough publicity to ensure ample criti- 
cism and hostility. But, relatively, His 
ministry was obscure compared to that 
ofthe apostles in after years to which the 
address looks forward. Therefore, more 
not less, tribulation to be looked for. The 
futures ἀποκαλ. yvwo. with the relative 
virtually express intention; ¢f. Mk. iv. 
22, where tva occurs; the hidden is hidden 
in order to be revealed. That is the law 
of the case to which apostles must recon- 
cile themselves.—Ver. 27. σκοτίᾳ, the 
darkness of the initial stage; the begin- 


166 


17. 


b Ch. σαν. οὓς ἀκούετε, κηρύξατε ἐπὶ τῶν ” δωµάτων. 
ἀπὸ τῶν ἁποκτεινόντων 2 τὸ σῶμα, τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν μὴ δυναµένων 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ x. 


28. καὶ ph ° poBn bare * 


oy Bate πατρὸς ὑμῶν: 30 ὑμῶν δὲ καὶ ai τρίχες τῆς κεφαλῆς πᾶσαι 


I; Iv. 9. 
f Lk. xii. 7. 
Rev. va. 4 Σἠριθμημέναι εἰσί. 


31. μὴ οὖν φοβηθῆτε΄": πολλῶν στρουθίων δια- 


1 So in Ώ9Σ, adopted by W.H. ΝΒΟΙ/Δ al. have φοβεισθε (Tisch.). 
2 s$CDAZ have the Alexandrian form αποκτεννοντωγ. 


3 φοβεισθε here in SBC against D. 


4 φοβεισθε in BDL (Tisch., W.H ai.). 


nings of great epoch-making movements 
always obscure.—owrf, the light of pub- 
licity, when causes begin to make a noise 
in the wide world.—eis τὸ ots: a phrase 
current among Greeks for confidential 
communications. For such communica- 
tions to disciples the Rabbis used the term 
wn, to whisper. λαληθέν may be 
understood = what ye hear spoken into 
the ear.—Swpdatev, on the roofs; not a 
likely platform from our western point 
of view, but the flat-roofed houses of 
the East are in view. δῶμα in classics 
means house; in Sept. and N. T., the 
flat roof of a house; in modern Greek, 
terrace. Vide Kennedy, Sources of N. Τ. 
Greek, p. 121.-- κηρύξατε, proclaim with 
loud voice, suitable to your commanding 
position, wide audience, and great theme. 

Vv. 28-31. New antidote to fear 
drawn from a greater fear, and from the 
paternal providence of God. Φφοβήθητε 


ἀπὸ like the Hebrew ‘2 NV, but 


also one of several ways in which the 
Greeks connected this verb with its 
object.—ré o@pa: that is all the persecu- 
tor as such can injure or destroy. He 
not only cannot injure the soul, but the 
more he assails the physical side the 
safer the spiritual.—rov δυνάµενον καὶ 
w. καὶ o Who is that? God, say 
most commentators. Not so, I believe. 
Would Christ present God under this 
aspect in such close connection with the 
Father who cares even for the sparrows ? 
What is to be greatly feared is not the 
final condemnation, but that which leads 
to it—temptation to forsake the cause of 
God out of regard to self-interest or self- 
preservation. Shortly the counsel is: 
fear not the persecutor, but the tempter, 
not the man who kills you for your fidel- 
ity, but the man who wants to buy you 


off, and the devil whose agent he is.— Ver. 
29 στρουθία, dim. for στρονθός, small 
birds in general, sparrows in particu- 
lar.—aaoapiov, a brass coin, Latin as, 
py Οἱ a δραχμή = about 34. The small- 
ness of the price makes it probable that 
Sparrows are meant (Fritzsche). Weare 
apt to wonder that sparrows had a price 
at all.év . . . ov looks like a Hebra- 
ism, but found also in Greek writers, 
‘cannot be called either a Graecism or a 
Hebraism; in every case the writer 
aims at greater emphasis than would 
be conveyed by οὐδείς, which properly 
means the same thing, but had become 
weakened by usage’’ (Winer, § 26).-- ἐπὶ 
τὴν γῆν. Chrys. paraphrases: els παγίδα 
(Hom. 34), whence Bengel conjectured 
that the primitive reading was not γῆν 
but πάγην, the first syllable of a little 
used word falling out. But Wetstein 
and Fritzsche have pointed out that ἐπὶ 
does not suit that reading. The idea is 
that not a single sparrow dies from any 
cause on wing or perch, and falls dead. 
to the earth —Gvev τ. πατρὸς ὑ. Origen 
(ο. Celsum, i. 9) remarks: ‘nothing use- 
ful among men comes into existence 
without God” (ἀθεεί). Christ expresses 
a more absolute faith in Providence: 
“the meanest creature passes not out of 
existence unobserved of your Father ”.— 
Ver. 30. ὑμῶν, emphatic position: your 
hairs.—tptxes: of little value all together, 
can be lost without detriment to life or 
health.— aoa, all, every one without 
exception.—7prOpnpdvar, counted. Men 
count only valuable things, gold pieces, 
sheep, etc. Note the perfect participle. 
They have been counted once for all, and 
their number noted; one hair cannot go 
amissing unobserved.—Ver. 31. π. σ. 
διαφέρετε: once more, as in vi. 26, a 
comparison between men and birds as. 
to value: ye of more worth than many 


28—37. 


Φέρετε ὑμεῖς. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


167 


32. Mas οὖν ὅστις " ὁμολογήσει ἐν ἐμοὶ ἔμπροσθεν Ε also in Lt. 


xii. 8 (with 


τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ ἔµπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός µου «εν and 
a 


- 3 1 3 ~ 
του εν οὐρανοις. 


ἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαι αὐτὸν κἀγὼ 3 ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός µου τοῦ 


ἐν > οὐρανοῖς. 


γῆν” οὖκ ἦλθον βαλεῖν εἰρήνην, ἀλλὰ µάχαιραν. 
διχάσαι ἄνθρωπον κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, καὶ θυγατέρα κατὰ τῆς 


34. Μὴ νοµίσητε ὅτι ἦλθον 


33. ὅστις 8 ἂν " ἀρνήσηταί µε ἔμπροσθεν τῶν hb ο σοι 


7ο, 72. Lk. 
Xii. ο. 
i is leat >a 

βαλεῖν Spiny ἐπὶ τὴν i Lea az 
35. ἦλθον 3. Rev. 


xiv. 16, 19. 


μητρὸς αὐτῆς, καὶ νύµφην κατὰ τῆς πενθερᾶς αὐτῆς: 36. καὶ ἐχθροὶ 


τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οἱ οἰκιακοὶ αὐτοῦ. 


37. Ὁ Φφιλῶν πατέρα ἢ µητέρα 


ὑπὲρ ἐμέ, οὐκ ἔστι µου ἄξιος: καὶ ὁ giddy υἱὸν ἢ θυγατέρα ὑπὲρ 


1 τοις before ονρανοις in BC, 


7 xayw αυτον in BDA. 


3 τοις before ουρ. in BX (W.H. adopt the art. both in 1 and in 3). 


sparrows; one hair of your head as much 
worth to God as one sparrow. “It isa 
litotes to say that there is a great 
difference between many sparrows and 
a human being” (Holtz., H.C.). There 
is really no comparison between them. 
It was by such simple comparisons that 
Jesus insinuated His doctrine of the 
absolute worth of man. 

Vv. 32, 33: Solemn reference to the 
final Fudgment. οὖν points back to 
νετ. 27, containing injunction to make 
open proclamation of the truth.—was 
ὅστις: nominative absolute at the head 
of the sentence.—év ἐμοὶ, ἐν αὐτῷ: 
observe these phrases after the verb in 
ver. 32, compared with the use of the 
accusative µε, αὐτὸν in the following 
verse: ‘“‘confess in me,” “deny me,” 
“confess iz him,” ‘‘deny him”. Chry- 
sostom’s comment is: we confess by the 
grace of Christ, we deny destitute of 
grace. Origen (Cremer, Catenae, i. p. 
80) interprets the varying construction 
as indicating that the profit of the faith- 
ful disciple lies in fellowship with Christ 
and the loss of the unfaithful in the lack 
of such fellowship. (Spa δὲ, el μὴ τὸ 
πλεονέκτημα τοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ ὁμολογοῦν- 
τος, ἤδη ὄντως ἐν χριστῷ δηλοῦται, 
ἐκ τοῦ, “Kaya ἐν αὐτῷ” ὁμολογεῖν : τὸ 
δὲ κακὸν τοῦ ἀρνουμένου, ἐκ τοῦ μὴ 
συνῆφθαι τῇ ἀρνήσει τὸ "ἐν ἐμοὶ,' ἢ 
τὸ “‘év αὐτῷ ”.) 

Vv. 34-39. The whole foregoing dis- 
course, by its announcements and con- 
solations, implies that dread experiences 
are in store for the apostles of the faith. 
To the inexperienced the question might 
naturally suggest itself, why? Can the 
new religion not propagate itself quietly 
and peaceably? Jesus meets the ques- 
tion of the surprised disciple with a de- 


cided negative.—Ver. 34. μὴ νοµίσητε, do 
not imagine, as you are very likely to do 
(cf. v. 17).---ἦλθον βαλεῖν: the use of the 
infinitive to express aim is common in 
Matt., but Christ has here in view result 
rather than purpose, which are not 
carefully distinguished in Scripture. For 
βαλεῖν Luke has δοῦναι, possibly with a 
feeling that the former word does not 
suit εἰρήνην. It is used specially with re- 
ference to µάχαιραν. The aorist points 
to a sudden single action. Christ came 
to bring peace on earth, but not in an 
immediate magical way; peace at last 
through war (Weiss, Matt. Evang.).— 
µάχαιραν : Luke substitutes διαµερισμόν. 
The connecting link may be that the 
sword divides in two (Heb. iv. 12). 
Grotius says that by the word there 
should be understood : ‘‘non bellum sed 
dissidium ”’.—Ver. 35. Description of 
the discord.—8tyaoat, to divide in two 
(δίχα), to separate in feeling and in- 
terest, here only in N.T.; verifies the 
truth of Grotius’ comment as to the 
‘‘ sword ”’.—avOpwrov κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς 
αὐτοῦ. In this and the following 
clauses it is the young that are set 
against the old. ‘In all great revolu- 
tions of thought the change begins from 
the young” (Carr, Cambridge Gr. T.).— 
vupoyny, a young wife, here as opposed 
to πενθερᾶς, a daughter+in-law.—Ver. 36. 
ἔχθροὶ: the predicate standing first for 
emphasis ; enemies, not friends as one 
would expect, the members of one’s 
family (οἰκιακοὶ, as in νετ. 25). The 
passage reproduces freely Micah vii. 6.— 
Ver. 37. Such a state of matters imposes 
the necessity of making a very painful 
choice between relatives and truth.— 
φιλῶν : this verb denotes natural affee- 
tion as distinct from ἀγαπάω, which 


168 ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION Χ. 38—42. 
ἐμέ, οὐκ ἔστι µου ἄξιος: 38. καὶ ὃς οὗ λαμβάνει τὸν σταυρὸν 
αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀκολουθεῖ ὀπίσω µου, οὐκ ἔστι µου ἄξιος. 39. 6 εὑρὼν 
τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπολέσει αὐτήν' καὶ 6 ἀπολέσας τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ 

ον. ἕνεκεν ne εὑρήσει αὐτήν. 40. Ὁ dexdpuevos ὑμᾶς ἐμὲ δέχεται : 

δν pel καὶ ὁ ἐμὲ μονος ae Kerss τὸν ἀποστείλαντά pe. 41. 6 δεχό- 
ses x HERDS πβῤῥηην εἰς i at Mena ᾽μμρδὸν is asi λήψεται - 

Lk, κ. 15 καὶ 6 Barnes δίκαιον eis ὄνομα δικαίου μισθὸν δικαίου λήψεται - 

ο... 42. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν] Ἡ ποτίσῃ ἕνα τῶν μικρῶν τούτων ποτήριον ' ψυχροῦ 

1 Rev. iil. ~ “4 - ' a 5 n 

rs (here µόνον €is ὄνομα μαθητοῦ, ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὗ μὴ ἀπολέσῃ τὸν 


only = N a» 
cold Prater): μισθὸν αὐτοῦ. 


1o5 avin BD 33. 


points to love of an ethical kind. The 
distinction corresponds to that between 
amare and diligere. Vide Trench, Syno- 
nyms, and Cremer, s. ν., ἀγαπάω. - 
µου ἄξιος. The Master is peremptory ; 
absolutely demands preference of His 
cause to all claims of earthly relations. 
—Ver. 38. στανρὸν. There is here no 
necessary allusion to the death of Jesus 
Himself by crucifixion, though one 
possessing such insight into the course 
of events, as this whole discourse indi- 
cates, must have known quite well 
when He uttered the words what 
awaited Himself, the worst possible pro- 
bable if not certain. The reference is to 
the custom of the condemned person 

carrying his own cross. Death by cruci- 
fixion, though not practised among the 
Jews, would be familiar to them through 
Roman custom. Vide Grotius for Greek 
and Roman phrases, containing figura- 
tive allusions to the cross. This sentence 
and the next will occur again in this 
Gospel (Matt. xvi. 24, 25).—Ver. 309. 


cupov . . ἀπολέσει, ἀπολέσας. .. . 
εὑρήσει: crucifixion, death ignominious, 


as’ a criminalhorribles ; but horrible 
though it be it means salvation. This 
paradox i is one of Christ’s great, deep, yet 
ever true words. It turns on a double 
sense of the term ψυχή as denoting now 
the lower now the higher life. Every 
wise man understands and acts on the 
maxim, “ dying to νε 

Vv. 40-42. The following sentences 
might have been spoken in connection 
with the early Galilean mission, and are 
accordingly regarded by Weiss as the 
conclusion of the instructions then given. 
Luke gives their gist (x. 16) at the close 
of the instructions to the seventy. After 
uttering many awful,stern sayings, Jesus 
rakes care to make the ‘last cheering. 
He. promises great rewards to those 


who receive the missionaries, thereby 
‘ opening the houses of the whole world 
to them,” Chrysos.—Ver. 40. ἐμὲ δέχεται: 
first the principle is laid down that to 
receive the messenger is to receive the 
Master who sent him (Matt. xxv. 49), as 
to receive the Master is to receive God. 
—Ver. 41. Then in two distinct forms 
the law is stated that to befriend the re- 
presentative of Christ and God ensures 
the reward belonging to that representa- 
tive.—eis ὄνομα, having regard to the 
fact that he is a prophet or righteous 
man. The prophet is the principal object 
of thought, naturally, inconnection with 
a mission to preach truth. But Christ 
knows (vii. 15) that there are false 
prophets as well as true; therefore from 
vocation He falls back on personal 
character. Here as everywhere we see 
how jealously He made the ethical in- 
terest supreme. ‘See,’ says Chrys., 
commenting on ver. 8, “‘ how He cares 
for their. morals, not less than for the 
miracles, showing that the miracles 
without the morals are nought” (Hom. 
32). So here He says in effect: let the 
prophet be of no account unless he be 
a just, good man. The fundamental 
matter is character, and the next best 
thing is sincere respect for it. To the 
latter Christ promises the reward of the 
former.—6 Sexdpevos δίκαιον ... μισθὸν 
δ. λήψεται: a strong, bold statement 
made to promote friendly feeling towards 
the moral heroes of the world in the 
hearts of ordinary people ; not the utter- 
ance of a didactic theologian scientifi- 
cally measuring his words. Yet there is 
a great principle underlying, essentially 
the same as that involved in St. Paul’s 
doctrine of justification by faith. The 
man who has goodness enough to 
reverence the ideal of goodness approxi- 
mately or perfectly realised in another, 


‘XI. 1—3. 


EYATTEAION 


169 


ΧΙ. 1. Καὶ ἐγένετο ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς διατάσσων τοῖς δώδεκα 
μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, " μετέβη ἐκεῖθεν τοῦ διδάσκειν καὶ κηρύσσειν ἐν α Ch. κ. ο; 


a LA 7. A 
Tals πόλεσιν αὐτῶν. 


xv. 29 (with 
ἐκείθεν). 


2. “O ΔΕ Ἰωάννης ἀκούσας ἐν τῷ ὃ δεσµωτηρίῳ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ b Acts v.21, 


Χριστοῦ, πέµψας δύο] τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, 3. εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Σὺ 


1 ΑΦΒΟΡΔΣ have δια. 


though not in himself, shall, in the 
moral order of the world, be counted as 
a good man.—Ver. 42. The last word, 
and the most beautiful; spoken with 
deep pathos as an aside; about the 
disciples rather than to them, though 
heard by them. ‘‘ Whosoever shall do 
the smallest service, were it but to give 
a drink to one of these little ones (ἕνα 
τῶν μικρῶν τούτων, cf. Matt. xxv. 49) 
in the name of a disciple, I declare 
solemnly even he shall without fail have 
his appropriate reward.”— Wpuypov: ex- 
pressive word for water, indicating the 
quality valued by the thirsty ; literally a 
cup of the cool, suggesting by contrast 
the heat of the sun and the fierce thirst 
of the weary traveller. No small boon 
that cup in Palestine! ‘In this hot 
and dry land, where one can wander for 
hours without coming on a brook or an 
accessible cistern, you say ‘thank you’ for 
a drink of fresh water with very different 
feelings than we do at home”? (Furrer, 
Wanderungen durch das Heilige Land, 
p. 118).— Fritzsche remarks on the 
paucity of particles in vv. 34-42 as indi- 
cating the emotional condition of the 
speaker. 

CuHaPTER ΧΙ. JESUS JUDGED BY AND 
Jupcinc His CoNTEMPORARIES. We 
are not to suppose any close connection 
in time between the events related in this 
chapter and the Galilean mission. The 
reverse is implied in the vague introduc- 
tory statement, that when Jesus had 
completed His instructions to the Twelve 
He went away on a teaching and preach- 
ing tour among the towns. The impor- 
tant thing is to realise that all that is re- 
lated here must have taken place after 
there had been time for the methods, 
aims, spirit, and way of life of Jesus to 
manitest themselves, and so to become 
the subject of general remark. It wasa 
matter of course that a man of such 
depth, originality, unconventionality, 
energy and fearless independence would 
sooner or latter provoke criticism of all 
shades; from mild, honest doubt, to de- 
cided reprobation. However popular at 
first, He must become at last compara- 


23; Xvi. 26. 


δυο is a harmonistic assimilation to Lk. 


tively isolated. By the time the events 
here related occurred, the reaction had 
fully set in, and the narrative shows how 
extensive it was, embracing within its 
sphere of influence the best in the land 
represented by the Baptist; the com- 
mercial class represented by three cities 
named ; the professional class—the “ wise 
and understanding ”’; and the zealots in 
religion. 

Ver. I. ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν διατάσσων. The 
participle here with a verb signifying to 
cease as often with verbs signifying to 
begin, continue, persevere, etc., vide 
Goodwin, § 879. ἐκεῖθεν, from that place, 
the place where the mission was given to 
the Twelve. Where that was we do not 
know; probably in some place of retire- 
ment (dans la retraite, Lutteroth).—7wé- 
λεσιν αὐτῶν: the pronoun does not refer 
to the disciples (μαθηταῖς) as Fritzsche 
thinks, but to the people of Galilee. 
While He sent out the Twelve to preach, 
He continued preaching Himself, only 
avoiding the places they visited, “' giving 
room to them and time to do their work, 
for, with Him present and healing, no 
one would have cared to go near them,”’ 
Chrysos., Hom. 36. 

Vv. 2-6. Message from the Baptist 
(Lk. vii. 18-23). Ver. 2. Seopwrnpio 
(from δεσµόω, δεσµός, a bond), in prison 
in the fortress of Machzrus by the Dead 
Sea (Joseph., Antiq.,18, 5, 2),a factalready 
alluded to in iv. 12. By this time he has 
been a prisoner a good while, long 
enough to develop a prison mood.—éxov- 
σας: not so close a prisoner but that 
friends and followers can get access to 
him (cf. Matt. xxv. 36, 43).---τὰ ἔργα τοῦ 
χριστοῦ: this the subject in which the 
Baptist is chiefly interested. What is Jesus 
doing? But the evangelist does not 
say the works of ¥esus, but of the Christ, 
i.e., of the man who was believed to be 
the Christ, the works which were sup- 
posed to point Him out as the Christ. 
In what spirit reported, whether simply 
as news, with sympathy, or with jealousy, 
not indicated.—wéepias: the news set 
John on musing, and led to a message of 
inquiry—81a τ. μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, by his 


17ο ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ ΧΙ. 

Fle vi et ὁ "ἐρχόμενος, ἢ ἕτερον SmpocSoxdpuev; 4. Kal ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ 

ε x. 37, 2 “"Inoois εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε “lwdvvg, & ἀκούετε 
vii. 19; Καὶ βλέπετε" 5. τυφλοὶ "ἀναβλέπουσι, καὶ] χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσι - 
viii. 40. 


Acts x.24. λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, καὶ K@pol ἀκούουσι " 


2 Pet. iit. 
12, 14 (all with accus.). 


νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, καὶ 


e Ch. κκ. 34. Mk. x. 51. Lk. xviii. 41 (= to recover sight). 


1 The texts show some unimportant variations in ref. to the και in this and the 


following clauses. 


disciples, possibly the same men who 
brought the news. There would be con- 
stant coming and going between Galilee 
and Machzrus. The construction is 
Hebraistic = sent by the hand of.—Ver. 
3. εἶπεν αὐτῷ, said to Jesus, by them, 
of οουτςε.- -Σὺ el: the question a grave 
one and emphatically expressed: Thou, 
art Thou 6 épxydpevos? Art Thou He 
whom I spoke of as the One coming after 
me when I was baptising in the Jordan 
(iii. rr)? It is a question whether Jesus 
be indeed the Christ. Lutteroth, basing 
on the hypothesis that for popular Jewish 
opinion the Christ and the coming One 
(a prophet like Moses) were different per- 
sons, interprets the question thus: “ Art 
Thou, Jesus, whom I know to be the 
Christ, also the coming Prophet, or must 
we expect another to fill that réle ?””"—4 
ἕτερον, not ἄλλον, which would have 
been more appropriate on Lutteroth’s 
view =a numerically distinct person. 
ἔτ. suggests a different kind of person.— 
προσδοκῶμεν: may be present indicative 
(for future) as Beza and Fritzsche take it, 
or present subjunctive deliberative = 
ought we to look ? (Meyer-Weiss, Holtz., 
H.C.), the latter preferable. What was 
the animus or psychological genesis of 
the question? Doubt in John’s own 
mind, or doubt, bred of envy or jealousy, 
in the minds of his disciples, or not doubt 
on Baptist’s part, but rather incipient 
faith? Alternative (2), universal with 
the fathers (except Tertullian, vide de 
prescrip., 8, de baptis., 10); (1) common 
among modern commentators; (3) fav- 
oured by Keim, Weizsacker, and Holtz., 
H.C.: ‘“beginnende Disposition zum 
Glauben an Jesu Messianitat”. The 
view of the fathers is based on a sense of 
decorum and implicit reliance on the 
exact historical value of the statements 
in fourth Gospel; No. (3), the budding 
faith hypothesis, is based on too scepti- 
cal a view as to the historic value of even 
the Synoptical accounts of John’s early 
relations with Jesus; No. (1) has every- 
thingin its favour. The effect of con- 
finement on John’s prophetic temper, the 


In the best MSS. there is a και before νεκροι. 


general tenor of this chapter which obvi- 
ously aims at exhibiting the moral isola- 
tion of Jesus, above all the wide differ- 
ence between the two men, all make for 
it. Jesus, it had now become evident, 
was a very different sort of Messiah from 
what the Baptist had predicted and de- 
siderated (vide remarks on chap. iii. 11- 
15). Where were the axe and fan and 
the holy wind and fire of judgment? 
Too much patience, tolerance, gentle- 
ness, sympathy, geniality, mild wisdom 
in this Christ for his taste. 

Vv. 4-6. Answer of Fesus. Ver. 4. 
ἀπαγγείλατε |.: go back and report to 
Fohn for his satisfaction —& ἀκ. καὶ 
βλέπετε, what you are hearing and see- 
ing, not so much at the moment, though 
Luke gives it that turn (vii. 21), but 
habitually. They were not to tell their 
master anything new, but just what they 
had told him before. The one new ele- 
ment is that the facts are stated in terms. 
fitted to recall prophetic oracles (Isaiah 
xxxv. 5, lxi. 1), while, in part, a historic 
recital of recent miracles (Matt. viii., ix.). 
Probably the precise words of Jesus are 
not exactly reproduced, but the sense is 
obvious. Tell John your story over again 
and remind him of those prophetic texts. 
Let him study the two together and draw 
his own conclusion. It was a virtual in- 
vitation to John to revise his Messianic 
idea, in hope he would discover that after 
all love was the chief Messianic charism. 
—Ver. 5. ἀναβλέπονσιν: used also in 
classics to express recovery of sight.— 
κωφοὶ, here taken to mean deaf, though 
in ix. 32, 33, it means dumb, showing that 
the prophecy, Isaiah xxxv. 5, is in the 
speaker’s thoughts. —wrwxol: vague 
word, might mean literal poor (De W.} 
or spiritual poor, or the whole people in 
its national misery (Weiss, Matt. Evan.), 
best defined by such a text as ix. 36, and 
such facts as that reported in ix. 10-13.— 
εὐαγγελίζονται: might be middle = the 
poor preach, and so taken by Euthy. 
Zig. (also as an alternative by Theophy.), 
for ‘“‘what can be poorer than fishing 
(ἀἁλιευτικῆς) 2’ The poor in that case= 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


4—I0. 


171 


πτωχοὶ ΄εὐαγγελίζονται : 6. καὶ µακάριός ἐστιν, ὃς ἐὰν] μὴ ἔσκανδα- { Heb. iv. 5 


(passive 
a a A 
λισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί. 7. Τούτων δὲ πορευοµένων, ἤρέατο ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς κἰςο) 
: ΡΕ ο... Fi Ta > = g Ch. xiii. 
λέγειν τοῖς ὄχλοις περὶ ᾿Ιωάννου, “Ti ἐξήλθετε εἰς Thy ἔρημον 57; xxvi 
Β 5 ew ν Fs iy, : , < , 31. Mk. vi. 
θεάσασθαι ; κάλαμον ὑπὸ ἀνέμου | σαλευόμενον; 8. ἀλλὰ τί 3. Lk. vii 


ἐξήλθετε ἰδεῖν; ἄνθρωπον ἐν μαλακοῖς ἱματίοις” ἠμφιεσμένον; with ἐν). 
id , ε a RA | A > a 3 a > a Jip et h. xii. 
ἰδού, ot τὰ μαλακὰ ’ φοροῦντες ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις τῶν βασιλέων εἰσίν 20 (Is. 
A A xlii. 3). 

ϱ ἀλλὰ τί ἐξήλθετε ἰδεῖν; mpodytyy*; ναί, λέγω ὑμῖν, καὶ περισ- ἐν Hh 

, / 2 6 2 4 Φ , ¢? , iCh. xxiv. 

σότερον προφήτου’ 1Ο. οὗτος γάρ” ἐστι περὶ οὗ γέγραπται, Ιδού, 2ο, parall 

Beas BY >» ν , a eb. xii 

ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν µου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ὃς κατα- 27. 
jjJohn xix.s5. 


1 αν in BD (W.H.). 


Rom. xiii. 4. 1 Cor. xv. 49. Jas. ii. 3. 


7 NBDZ omit ιµατιοις, which has come in from Lk. (vii 25). 


598 omit εισιν. 


4ΝΒΖ have προφητην ew forming “a 2nd question. 


So Tisch. and W.H. 


ΣΝΒΡΖ omit yap, which has been introduced to clear the sense which it rather 


obscures. 


the Twelve sent out to preach the king- 
dom. That, too, was characteristic of 
the movement, though not the character. 
istic intended, which is that the poor, the 
socially insignificant and neglected, are 
evangelised (passive, as in Heb. iv. 2). 
—vVer. 6. µακάριος (vide v. 3), possessed 
of rare felicity, The word implies that 
those who, on some ground or other, did 
not stumble over Jesus were very few. 
Even John not among them! On σκαν- 
δαλίζω vide ad. v.29. ἐν ἐμοί, in any- 
thing relating to my public ministry, as 
appearing inconsistent with my Messianic 
vocation. 

Vv. 7-15. Fudgment of Fesus concern- 
ing the Baptist (Lk. vii. 24-30). Charac- 
teristically magnanimous, while letting it 
be seen that He is aware of John’s limits 
and defects. Ver. 7. τούτων δὲ πορ- 
ευοµένων : while John’s messengers were 
in the act of going, Jesus began at once, 
without any delay, to make a statement 
which He deemed necessary to prevent in- 
jurious inferences from the message of 
the Baptist; or the construction He had 
put on it as implying doubt regarding 
Himself.—rots ὄχλοις : the interrogation 
had taken place in presence of many. 
Jesus was always in a crowd, except 
when He took special steps to escape. 
The spectators had watched with interest 
what Jesus would say about the famous 
man. Therefore, more must be said; a 
careful opinion expressed.—ri ἐξήλθετε 
.. . θεάσασθαι: it might be taken for 
granted that most of them had been there. 
The catechetical method of stating His 


opinion of John lively and impres- 
sive to such an audience. They had 
gone to see as well as hear and be bap- 
tised, curiosity plays a great part in 
popular religious movements.—xaAapov. 
Plenty of reeds to be seen. ‘What a 
vast space of time lies between the days 
of the Baptist and us! How have the 
times changed! Yet the stream flows 
in the old bed. Still gently blows the 
wind among the sighing reeds.” —Furrer, 
Wanderungen, 185. Many commenta- 
tors (Grot., Wet., Fritzsche, De W.) in- 
sist on taking καλ. literally = did ye go, 
etc., to see a reed, or the reeds on the 
Jordan banks shaken by the wind? This 
is flat and prosaic. Manifestly the indi- 
vidualised reed is a figure of an incon- 
stant, weak man; just enough in John’s 
present attitude to suggest such a 
thought, though not to justify it.—Ver. 
8. ἀλλὰ assumes the negative answer 
to the previous question and elegantly 
connects with it the following = “ No; 
well, then, did you, εἰς, ? "—év μαλακοῖς, 
neuter, ἵματίοις not necessary : in preci- 
ous garments of any material, silk, 
woollen, linen; the fine garments sugges- 
tive of refinement, luxury, effeminacy. — 
ἰδοὺ of τ. µ. φοροῦντες: ἰδοὺ points to a 
well-known truth, serving the same pur- 
pose as δή here; those accustomed to 
wear, φορ., frequentative, as distinct from 
φέροντες, which would mean bearing 
without reference to habit.—otkxois τ. 
βασ., in palaces which courtiers frequent. 
Jesus knows their flexible, superfine ways 
well; how different from those of the 


172 


k Ch. xxiv. σκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου ἔμπροσθέν σου. 


11,24. Lk. 
vil. 16. 
John vii. 
52. 

1 hereand in 
Lk. vii. 


rudely clad and rudely mannered, un- 
compromising Baptist!—Ver. 9. ἀλλὰ 
τί ἐξ.: one more question, shorter, abrupt, 
needing to be supplemented by another 
(Weiss-Meyer)—why then, _ seriously, 
went ye out? προφήτην l8civ;—to see 
a Prophet ?—vat, yea! right at last; a 
prophet, indeed, with all that one expects 
in a prophet—vigorous moral conviction, 
integrity, strength of will, fearless zeal 
for truth and righteousness; utterly free 
from the feebleness and time-serving of 
those who bend like reeds to every 
breath of wind, or bow obsequiously be- 
fore greatness.—xal περισσότερον π., 
a prophet and more, something above the 
typical prophet (vide on v. 47). The 
clause introduced by vat, as λέγω ὑμῖν 
shows, expresses Christ’s own opinion, 
not the people’s (Weiss). — Ver. το, 
οὗτος .. . Ὑέγραπται. The περισσό- 
τερον verified and’ explained by a pro- 
phetic citation. The oracle is taken 
from Malachi iii., altered so as to 
make the Messianic reference apparent— 
pov changed into gov. By applying the 
oracle to John, Jesus identifies him ‘with 
the messenger whom God was to send to 
prepare Messiah’s way. This is his dis- 
tinction, περισσότερον, as compared with 
other prophets. But, after all, this is an 
external distinction, an accident, so to 
speak. Some prophet must be the fore- 
runner, if Messiah is to come at all, the 
last in the series who foretell His coming, 
and John happens to be that one—a 
matter of good fortune rather than of 
merit. Something more is needed to 
justify the περισσότερον, and make it a 
proper subject foreulogy. That is forth- 
coming in the sequel. 

Vv. 11-12. This is the further justifi- 
cation of the περισσ. desiderated. Ver. 
11. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν. First Christ ex- 
presses His personal conviction in 
solemn terms. What follows refers to 
John’s intrinsic worth, not to his historic 
position as the forerunner. The latter 
rests on the prophetic citation. Christ’s 
aim now is to say that the Baptist’s 
character is equal to his position: that 
he is fit to be the forerunner. For 
Christ, being the forerunner is no matter 
of luck. God will see that the right 
man occupies the position; nay, none 
but the right man can successfully per- 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΙ. 


11. ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὖκ 


» ἐγήγερται ἐν | γεννητοῖς γυναικῶν μείζων Ἰωάννου τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ - 

3 Sm > / Αα 2 a ’ > a 3 

ὁ δὲ ™ μικρότερος ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν peiLwv αὐτοῦ ἐστιν - 
m Ch. xiii. 32. Mk. ἵν. 41. Lk. vii. 28; ix. 48 


form the ρατί.--- οὐκ ἐγήγερται, there 
hath not arisen; passive with middle 
sense, but the arising non sine numine, 
“‘surrexit divinitus, quomodo existunt 
veri Prophetae,” Elsner; cf. Mt. xxiv. 
11, Lk. vii. 16, vide also Judges ii. 18, 
lil. 9.—év yevvytots γυναικῶν = among 
mankind, a solemn way of expressing 
the idea. The meaning, however, is not 
that John is the greatest man that ever 
lived. The comparison moves within 
the sphere of Hebrew prophecy, and 
practically means: John the greatest of 
all the prophets. A bold judgment not 
easily accepted by the populace, who 
always think the dead greater than the 
living. Christ expresses Himself strongly 
because He means to say something 
that might appear disparaging. But He 
is in earnest in His high estimate, only 
it is not to be understood as asserting 
John’s superiority in all respects, e¢.g., 
in authorship. The point of view is 
capacity to vender effective service to the 
Kingdom of God.—é δὲ puxpdrepos. 
Chrysostom took this as referring to 
Jesus, and, connecting ἐν τ. B. τ. οὐρ. 
with μείζων, brought out the sense: He 
who is the less in age and fame is greater 
than John in the Kingdom of Heaven. 
The opinion might be disregarded as an 
exegetical curiosity, had it not been 
adopted by so many, not only among 
the ancients (Hilar., Ambr., Theophy., 
Euthy.), but also among moderns (Eras., 
Luth., Fritzsche). In the abstract it is 
a possible interpretation, and it expresses 
a true idea, but not one Jesus was likely 
to utter then. No doubt John’s in- 
quiry had raised the question of Christ's’ 
standing, and might seem to call for 
comparison between questioner and ques- 
tioned. But Christ’s main concern was 
not to get the people to think highly of 
Himself, but to have high thoughts of 
the kingdom. What He says, therefore, 
is that any one in the kingdom, though 
of comparatively little account, is greater 
than John. Even the least is; for 
though μικρότερος, even with the article, 
does not necessarily mean µικρότατος 
(so Bengel), it amounts to that. The 
affirmative holds even in case of the 
highest degree of inferiority. The im- 
plication is that John was not in the 
kingdom as a historical movement (a 


ΕΙ---Ι4. 


~ ~ fol A , 
12. ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν Ἰωάννου τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ ἕως ἄρτι, ἡ βασιλεία a here 
τῶν οὐρανῶν ” βιάζεται, καὶ βιασταὶ ᾿ ἁρπάζουσιν αὐτήν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ατα 


and 
in Lk. xvi. 
16 (middle 


13. πάντες 
3 there). 


γὰρ οἱ προφῆται καὶ ὁ νόμος ἕως ‘Iwdvvou προεφήτευσαν 1: 14. καὶ 0 ¢f. Phil. i. 


(ἁρπαγ- 
μός). 


1Μ9ΡΟΡΖ have the augment at the beginning (επροφ.). A has no augment. 


simple matter of fact), and the point of 
comparison is the dominant spirit. The 
moral sternness of John was his great- 
ness and also his weakness. It made 
him doubt Jesus, kept him aloof from the 
kingdom, and placed him below any one 
who in the least degree understood 
Christ’s gracious spirit, ¢.g., one of the 
Twelve called in x. 42 ‘‘ these little ones ”. 

Ver. 12. The statement just com- 
mented on had to be made in the in- 
terests of truth and the Kingdom of God, 
but having made it Jesus reverts with 


pleasure to a tone of eulogy. This verse 


has created much diversity of opinion, 
which it would take long to recount. I 
find in it two thoughts: one expressed, 
the other implied. (1) There has beena 
powerful movement since John’s time 
towards the Kingdom of God. (2) The 
movement derived its initial impetus 
from John. The latter thought is 
latent in ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν ἡμ. ἰωάν. The 
movement dates from John ; he has the 
credit of starting it. This thought is 
essential to the connection. It is the 
ultimate justification of the περισσότερον 
(ver. 9). The apostle Paul adduced as 
one argument for his apostleship, called 
in question by Judaists, success, which in 
his view was not an accident but God- 
given, and due to fitness for the work 
(2 Cor. ii. 14, iii. 1-18). So Christ here 
in effect proves John’s fitness for the 
position of forerunner by the success of 
his ministry. He had actually made 
the kingdom come. That was the true 
basis of his title to the honourable 
appellation, “preparer of the way”; 
without that it had been an empty title, 
though based on any number of pro- 
phecies. That success proved fitness, 
adequate endowment with moral force, 
and power to impress and move men. 
This being seen to be Christ’s meaning, 
there is no room for doubt as to the 
animus of the words βιάζεται, βιασταὶ. 
They contain a favourable, benignant 
estimate of the movement going on, not 
an unfavourable, as, among others, Weiss 
thinks, taking the words to point toa 
premature attempt to bring in the king- 
dom by a false way as a political crea- 
tion (Weiss-Meyer). Of course there 


were many defects, obvious, glaring, in 
the movement, as there always are. 
Jesus knew them well, but He was not 
in the mood just then to remark on 
them, but rather, taking α broad, 
generous view, to point to the move- 
ment as a whole as convincing proof of 
John’s moral force and high prophetic 
endowment, The two words frat., 
βιασ. signalise the vigour of the move- 
ment. The kingdom was being seized, 
captured by a storming party. The 
verb might be middle voice, and is so 
taken by Beng., ‘‘sese vi quasi obtrudit,”’ 
true to fact, but the passive is demanded 
by the noun following. The kingdom 
is forcefully taken (βιαίως κρατεῖται, 
Hesychius) by the βιασταὶ. ‘There is 
probably a tacit reference to the kind of 
people who were storming the kingdom, 
from the point of view, not so much of 
Jesus, as of those who deemed themselves 
the rightful citizens of the kingdom. 
“ Publicans and sinners ” (ix. 9-12), the 
ignorant (xi. 25). What a rabble! 
thought Scribes and Pharisees. Cause 
of profound satisfaction to Jesus (ver. 25). 

Vv. 13-15. Conclusion of speech about 
John. Ver. 13. The thought here is 
hinted rather than fully expressed. It 
has been suggested that the sense would 
become clearer if vv. 12 and 13 were 
made to change places (Maldonatus). 
This inyersion might be justified by 
teference to Lk. xvi. 16, where the two 
thoughts are given in the inverse order. 
Wendt (L. J., i. 75) on this and other 
grounds arranges the verses 13, 14, 12. 
But even as they stand the words can 
be made to yield a fitting sense, har- 
monising with the general aim, the 
eulogy of John. The surface idea is 
that the whole O. T., prophets of course, 
and even the law in its predictive aspects 
(by symbolic rites and foreshadowing in- 
stitutions) pointed forward to a Kingdom 
of God. The kingdom coming—the 
burden of O. T. revelation. But what 
then? To what end make this observa- 
tion? To explain the impatience of the 
stormers: their determination to have 
at last by all means, and in some form, 
what had so long been foretold ? (Weiss). 
No; but to define by contrast John’s 


174 


εἰ θέλετε δέξασθαι, αὐτός ἐστιν Ἡλίας 6 µέλλων ἔρχεσθαι. 
ἔχων Gta ἀκούειν,ὶ ἀκουέτω. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


πι. 


15.6 
16. Tim δὲ ὁμοιώσω τὴν γενεὰν 


ταύτην; ὁμοία ἐστὶ παιδαρίοις 3 ἐν ἀγοραῖς καθηµένοις,ὸ καὶ προσ- 


2 i ; a μ 

φωνοῦσι τοῖς ἑταίροις αὐτῶν, 17. καὶ λέγουσιν, Ηὐλήσαμεν ὑμῖν, 
a a 

καὶ οὐκ ὠρχήσασθε' ἐθρηνήσαμεν ὑμῖν, καὶ οὐκ ἐκόψασθε. 


1 BD omit ακονειν, which has come in from Mk. and Lk. where the addition of 


this word to the phrase is usual. 
? παιδιοις in all uncials. 


3 xa@ypevors before ev in NBCDL, etc., with ταις before αγοραις in BZ. 


“SQBDZ have a προσφωνουντα . . 
have ετεροις. (Tisch., W.H.). 


- λεγουσιν, and for εταιροις BCDLAZ al. 


* S$BDZ omit υμιν, which may have been added to assimilate with first clause. 


position. Observe ἕως |. goes not with 
the subject, but with the verb Prophets 
{and even law) till John prophesied. The 
suggestion is that he is not a mere con- 
tinuator of the prophetic line, one more 
repeating the message: the kingdom 
will come. His function is peculiar and 
exceptional. Whatisit? Ver. 14 ex- 
plains. He is the Elijah of Malachi, 
herald of the Great Day, usherer in of 
the kingdom, the man who says not 
merely “the kingdom will come,” but 
“the kingdom is here”; says it, and 
makes good the saying, bringing about a 
great movement of repentance.—ei θέλετε 
δέξασθαι : the identification of John with 
Elijah to be taken cum grano, not as a 
prosaic statement of fact. Here, as 
always, Christ idealises, seizes the 
essential truth. John was all the Elijah 
that would ever come, worthy to repre- 
sent him in spirit, and performing the 
function assigned to Elijah vedivivus in 
prophecy. Some of the Fathers dis- 
tinguished two advents of Elijah, one in 
spirit in the Baptist, another literally at 
the second coming of Christ. Servile 
exegesis of the letter. δέξασθαι has no 
expressed object: the object is the state- 
ment following. Lutteroth supplies 
‘“him’’ = the Baptist. In the θέλετε 
Weiss finds a tacit allusion to the im- 
penitence of the people: Ye are not 
willing because ye know that Elijah’s 
coming means a summons to repentance. 
—Ver. 15. A proverbial form of speech 
often used by Jesus after important 
utterances, here for the first time in 
Matt. The truth demanding attentive 
and intelligent ears (ears worth having ; 
taking in the words and theiy import) is 
that John is Elijah. It implies much— 
that the kingdom is here and the king, 
and that the kingdom is moral not 
political. 


Vv. 16-19. FYudgment of Fesus on 
His religious contemporaries (Lk. vii. 
31-35). It is advisable not to assume as 
a matter of course that these words were 
spoken at the same time as those going 
before. The discourse certainly appears 
continuous, and Luke gives this utter- 
ance in the same connection as our 
evangelist, from which we may infer 
that it stood so in the common source. 
But even there the connection may 
have been topical rather than temporal ; 
placed beside what goes before, because 
containing a reference to John, and 
because the contents are of a critical 
nature. Ver. 16. tive ὁμοιώσω: the 
parable is introduced by a question, as if 
the thought had just struck Ἠίτη.---τὴν 
γενεὰν ταύτην. The occasion on which 
the words following were spoken would 
make it clear who were referred to. Our 
guide must be the words themselves. 
The subjects of remark are not the 
βιασταὶ of ver. 12, nor the ὄχλοι to 
whom Jesus had been speaking. Neither 
are they the whole generation of Jews 
then living, including Jesus and John 
(Elsner) ; or even the bulk of the Jewish 
people, contemporaries of Jesus. It was 
not Christ’s habit to make severe 
animadversions on the “ people of the 
land,” who formed the large majority of 
the population. He always spoke of 
them with sympathy and pity (ix. 37, 
x. 6). γενεά might mean the whole body 
of men then living, but it might also 
mean a particular class of men marked 
out by certain definite characteristics. 
It is so used in xii. 39, 41, 42, 453 xvi. 
4. The class or “ race ’’ there spoken of 
is in one case the Scribes and Pharisees, 
and in the other the Pharisees and 
Sadducees. From internal evidence the 
reference here also is mainly to the 
Pharisees. It is a class who spoke of 


a 5— Ig. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


E75 


18. ΄Ἠλθε γὰρ Ἰωάννης µήτε ἐσθίων µήτε πίνων, καὶ λέγουσι, 


Δαιμόνιον ἔχει. 19. ἦλθεν ὁ 


4 , 
καὶ λέγουσιν, Ιδού, ἄνθρωπος Ppdyos καὶ 3 οἰνοπότης, ρ 
καὶ ἐδικαιώθη ἡ σοφία ἀπὸ τῶν τέκνων 1 


Φίλος καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν. 


1 Μ4Β have εργων, which Tisch. and W.H. adopt. 


υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων, 


τελωνῶν p Lk. vil. 34. 
Lk. vii. 34. 


Though supported by a great 


array of MSS. (including CDL) τεκνων may be suspected of assimilation to the 


reading in Lk. 


Jesus as reported in ver. ΙΟ. Who can 
they have been but the men who asked: 
Why does He eat with publicans and 
sinners (ix, 11)? These vile calumnies 
are what have come out of that feast, in 
the same sanctimonious circle. Luke 
evidently understood the Pharisees and 
lawyers (νομικοὶ) to be the class referred 
to, guided probably by his own im- 
pression as to the import of the passage 
(vide Lk. vii. 39). --- παιδίος . . . 
ἀγοραῖς: Jesus likens the Pharisaic 
Ὕενεά to children in the market-place 
playing at marriages and funerals, as He 
had doubtless often seen them in Naza- 
reth. The play, as is apt to happen, has 
ended in a quarrel.—mpoo®. τοῖς ἑτέροις 
. « λέγουσιν. There are two parties, 
the musicians and the rest who are ex- 
pected to dance or mourn according to 
the tune, and they are at cross purposes, 
the moods not agreeing: ἑτέροις, the 
best attested reading, may point to this 
discrepancy in temper = a set differently 
inclined.—qvAjoapev : the flute in this 
case used for merriment, not, as in ix. 23, 
to express grief.—20pyvycapev: we have 
expressed grief by singing funeral dirges, 
like the mourning women hired for the 
purpose (vide ad ix. 23).--ἐκόψασθε: and 
ye have not beat your breasts in re- 
sponsive sorrow. This is the parable to 
which Jesus adds a commentary. With- 
out the aid of the latter the general 
import is plain. The γενεά animadverted 
on are like children, not in a good but 
in a bad sense: not child-like but childish. 
They play at religion; with all their 
‘seeming earnestness in reality triflers. 
They are also fickle, fastidious, given to 
peevish fault-finding, easily offended. 
These are recognisable features of the 
Pharisees. They were great zealots and 
precisians, yet not in earnest, rather 
haters of earnestness, as seen in different 
ways in John and Jesus. They were hard 
to please: equally dissatisfied with John 
and with Jesus; satisfied with nothing 
but their own artificial formalism. 
They were the only men in Israel of 
whom these things could be said with 
emphasis, and it may be taken for 


granted that Christ’s animadversions 
were elicited by pronounced instances of 
the type.—Ver. 18. The commentary on 
the parable showing that it was the 
reception given to John and Himself that 
suggested {ε.---μήτε ἐσθ. µήτε πιν.: eat- 
ing and drinking, the two parts of diet ; 
not eating nor drinking = remarkably 
abstemious, ascetic, that his religious 
habit; µήτε not οὖτε, to express not 
merely the fact, but the opinion about 
John. Vide notes on chap. v. 34.---δαι- 
µόνιον ἔχει: is possessed, mad, with 
the madness of a gloomy austerity. 
The Pharisee could wear gloomy airs in 
fasting (vi. 16), but that was acting. The 
Baptist was in earnest with his morose, 
severely abstinent life. Play for them, 
grim reality for him; and they disliked it 
and shrank from it as something weird. 
None but Pharisees would dare to say 
such a thing about a man like John. 
They are always so sure, and so ready to 
judge. Ordinary people would respect 
the ascetic of the wilderness, though they 
did not imitate him.—Ver. το. 6 vids τ. 
a-: obviously Jesus here refers to Him- 
self in third person where we might have 
expected the first. Again the now famil- 
iar title, defining itself as we go along by 
varied use, pointing Jesus out as an ex- 
ceptional person, while avoiding all con- 
ventional terms to define the exceptional 
εἰεπιεπί.---ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων: the ‘Son 
of Man” is one who eats and drinks, {.ο., 
non-ascetic and social, one of the marks 
interpretative of the title=human, frater- 
nal.—«ai λέγουσι, and they say: what? 
One is curious to know. Surely this 
genial, friendly type of manhood will 
please | --ἰδοὺ, lo! scandalised sancti- 
moniousness points its finger at Him 
and utters gross, outrageous calumnies.— 
Φάγος, οἰνοπότης, φίλος, an eater with 
emphasis = a glutton (a word of late 
Greek, Lob., Phryn., 434), a wine-bibber ; 
and, worse than either, for φίλος is used 
in a sinister sense and implies that Jesus 
was the comrade of the worst characters, 
and like them in conduct. A malicious 
nick-name at first, it is now a name of 
honour: the sinner’s lover. The Son of 


176 


e Mk. xvi. 


yes 20. Τότε ἤρξατο 


αὐτῆς. 


accus. of at πλεῖσται δυνάµεις αὐτοῦ, ὅτι οὗ µετενόησαν. 


thing). 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XI. 


Σὀνειδίζειν τὰς πόλεις, ἐν ats ἐγένοντο 


21. “Οὖαί σοι, 


, [ή .. ~ 
5 Lk. x. 13 Χοραζίν, οὖαί σοι, βηθσαϊδάν, ὅτι ci ἐν Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἐγένοντο 


(long ago). 


> - 
αΟοτ. xii, αἱ δυνάµεις αἱ γενόµεναι ἐν ὑμῖν, "πάλαι ἂν ἐν "σάκκῳ καὶ 


το (‘all κ 
this time,” ' σποδῷ µετενόησαν. 


R.V 


AE ο) Ε] ε / ε 
t Lk. κ. 1 τερον ἔσται ἐν ἡμέρα κρίσεως, ἢ ἡμῖν. 
ἕως τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὑψωθεῖσα,ὶ ἕως adou καταβιβασθήσῃ”: ὅτι εἰ ἐν 


(Jonah iii. ς 
6) ἡλ 


Ch. xviii. 
7; Xxvi. 


64 
--- in LE.). 


22. πλὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, Τύρῳ καὶ Σιδῶνι ἀνεκτό- 


23. Καὶ σύ, Καπερναούμ., 


Σοδόµοις eyevovto® ai δυνάμεις ai γενόμεναι ἐν gol, ἔμειναν” ἂν 


1Ν9ΒΟΡΙ, Syr. Cur. read µη εως ουρανου υψωθηση, which recent editors adopt. 
Weiss thinks it has no sense, as µη implies a negative answer, and gives as the true 


reading 4 ἕως οὐρ. ὑψώθης. 
2 BD have καταβηση (W.H.). 


2 S8BCD have εγενηθησαν (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 εμεινεν in SBC 33 (W.H.). 


Man takes these calumnies as a thing of 
course and goes on His gracious way. 
It is not necessary to refiect these char- 
acteristics of Jesus and john back into 
the parable, and to identify them with 
the piping and wailing children. Yet 
the parable is so constructed as to ex- 
hibit them very clearly in their distinctive 
petuliarities by representing the children 
not merely employed in play and quarrel- 
ling over their games, which would have 
sufficed as a picture of the religious Jews, 
but as playing at marriages and funerals, 
the former symbolising the joy of the 
Jesus-circle, the latter the sadness of the 
Baptist-circle (vide my Parabolic Teach- 
ing of Christ, p. 429).---καὶ ἐδικαιώθη, 
etc. This sentence wears a gnomic or 
proverbial aspect (‘verba proverbium 
redolere videntur,” Kuinoel, similarly, 
Rosenmiller), and the aorist of ἐδικ. may 
be taken as an instance of the gnomic 
aorist, expressive of what is usual ; a law 
in the moral sphere, as elsewhere the 
aorist is employed to express the usual 
course in the natural sphere, ¢.g., in 
James i. 11. Weiss-Meyer strongly 
denies that there are any instances of 
such use of the aoristin the N. T. (On 
this aorist vide Goodwin, Syntaz, p. 53, 
and Baumlein, § 523, where it is called the 
aorist of experience, ‘‘der Erfahrungs- 
wahrheit ”'.)---ἀπὸ, in, in view of (vide 
Buttmann’s Gram., p. 232, on ἀπὸ in 


N. Τ.).--ἔργων: the reading of QB, and 


likely to be the true one just because 
τέκνων is the reading in Luke. It is an 
appeal to results, to fruit (vii. 20), to the 
future. Historical in form, the state- 


ment is in reality a prophecy. Resch, 
indeed (Agrapha, p. 142), takes ἐδικ. as 
the (erroneous) translation of the Hebrew 
prophetic future used in the Aramaic 
original = now we are condemned, but 
wait a while. The καὶ at the beginning 
of the clause is not=‘“‘ but”’. It states a 
fact as much a matter of course as is the 
condemnation of the unwise. Wisdom, 
condemned by the foolish, is always, of 
course, justified in the long run by her 
works or by her children. 

Vv. 20-24. Reflections by Fesus on 
the reception given to Him by the towns 
of Galilee (Lk. x. 13-15). Ver. 20. τότε, 
then, cannot be pressed. Luke gives 
the following words in instructions to the 
Seventy. The real historical occasion is 
unknown. It may be a reminiscence 
from the preaching tour in the syna- 
gogues of Galilee (Mt. iv. 23). The 
reflections were made after Jesus had 
visited many towns and wrought many 
wonderful works (Svvdpers).—od µετε- 
νόησαν: this the general fact; no deep, 
permanent change of mind and heart. 
Christ appearing among them a nine 
days’ wonder, then forgotten by the 
majority preoccupied with material inter- 
ests.—Ver. 21. Xopaliv, Βηθσαϊδάν: the 
former not again mentioned in Gospels, 
the latter seldom (vide Mk. vi. 45, viii. 
22; Lk. ix. 10), yet scenes of important 
evangelic incidents, probably connected 
with the synagogue ministry in Galilee 
(iv. 23). The Gospels are brief records 
of a ministry crowded with events. 
These two towns may be named along 
with Capernaum because all three were 
in view where Christ stood when He 


ε 


τ,---25. 


᾿ "μέχρι τῆς σήμερον. 


5 3 , ..”. 
τερον ἔσται ἐν ἡμέρα κρίσεως, ἢ σοί. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


177 


24. πλὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι γῇ Σοδόµων ἀνεκτό- v Ch. xxviii. 


η : (same 
phrase). 


> > , a cat 
25. Ev ἐκείνω TO καιρῶ 
5 Sai Pe w Ch. xii. 


“ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιηοοῦς εἶπεν, “'"᾿Εξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, κύριε 38; xVv.15; 


τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἀπέκρυψαςὶ ταῦτα ἀπὸ ” σοφῶν καὶ 


ding to speak). 
i Cor. i. 26 (Pagan). 


1 S§BD have the simple expuipas. 


uttered the reproachful words, say on 
the top of the hill above Capernaum : 
Bethsaida on the eastern shore οἱ Jordan, 
just above where it falls into the lake; 
Chorazin on the western side on the road 
to Tyre from Capernaum (Furrer, Wan- 
devungen, p.370). They may also have 
been prosperous business centres selected 
to represent the commercial side of 
Jewish national life. Hence the refer- 
ence to Tyre and Sidon, often the subject 
of prophetic animadversion, yet not so 
blameworthy in their impenitence as the 
cities which had seen Christ’s works.— 
ἐν σάκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ: in black sackcloth, 
and with ashes on the head, or sitting 
in ashes like Job (ii. 8).— Ver. 22. 
πλὴν: contracted from πλέον = more- 
over, for the rest, to put the matter 
shortly; not adversative here, though 
sometimes so used.— Ver. 23. The 
diversity in the reading μὴ or ἡ ἕως, etc., 
does not affect the sense. In the one 
case the words addressed to Capernaum 
contain a statement of fact by Jesus; in 
the other a reference to a feeling prevail- 
ing in Capernaum in regard to the facts. 
The fact implied in either case is dis- 
tinction on some ground, probably be- 
cause Capernaum more than all other 
places was favoured by Christ’s presence 
and activity. But there may, as some 
think (Grotius, Rosen., De Wette, etc.), 
be a reference to trade prosperity. 
“ Blorebat C. piscatu, mercatu, et quae 
alia esse solent commoda ad mare sitar- 
um urbium”’ (Grot.). The reference to 
Tyre and Sidon, trade centres, makes 
this not an idle suggestion. And it is 
not unimportant to keep this aspect in 
mind, as Capernaum with the other two 
cities then become representatives of the 
trading spirit, and show us by sample 
how that spirit received the Gospel of the 
kingdom. Capernaum illustrated the com- 
mon characteristic most signally. Most 
prosperous, most privileged spiritually, 
and—most unsympathetic, the population 
being taken as a whole. Worldliness 
as unreceptive as counterfeit piety re- 
presented by Pharisaism, though not so 


x Lk x.21. Rom. xiv. 11; xv. 9. 


Χαν. 4 al. 
(in sense 

of begin- 
y Lk. x. 21 (Jewish). Mt. xxiii. 34 (Christian). 


offensive in temper and language. No 
calumny, but simply invincible indiffer- 
ence.—€ws οὐρανοῦ, ἕως ἆδου : proverbia! 
expressions Ίος the greatest exaltation 
and deepest degradation. The reference 
in the latter phrase is not to the future 
world, but to the judgment day of Israel 
in which Capernaum would be invoived. 

The prophetic eye of Jesus sees Caper- 
naum in ruins as it afterwards saw the 
beautiful temple demolished (chap. xxiv. 
2) 

My. 25-27. Fesus worshipping (Lk. 
Xx. 21, 22). It is usual to call this golden 
utterance a prayer, but it is at once 
prayer, praise, and self-communing in a 
devout spirit. The occasion is unknown. 
Matthew gives it in close connection 
with the complaint against the cities 
(ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ), but Luke sets it in 
still closer connection (ἐν αὐτῃ τῇ Spa) 
with the return of the Seventy. Accord- 
ing to some modern critics, it had no 
occasion at all in the life of our Lord, 
but is simply a composition of Luke’s, 
and borrowed from him by the author 
of Matthew: a hymn in which the 
Pauline mission to the heathen as the 
victory of Christ over Satan’s dominion 
in the world is celebrated, and given 
in connection with the imaginary mis- 
sion of the Seventy (vide Pfleiderer, 
Urchristenthum, Ῥ. 445). But Luke’s 
preface justifies the belief that he 
had here, as throughout, a tradition 
oral or written to go on, and the 
probability is that it was taken both 
by him and by Matthew from a com- 
mon document. Wendt (L. J., pp. go, 
QI) gives it as an extract from the 
book of Logia, and supposes that 
it followed a report of the return of 
the disciples (the Twelve) from their 
mission. 

Νεος σε ἀποκριθείς, answering, 
not necessarily to anything said, but 
to some environment provocative of 
such thoughts.—éEopodoyotpai σοι (= 


b mn, PS,) lexy: 2 jjetcs)s) init, 6 
: τ 
this compound means to make full con- 


12 


178 


z Lk. κ. ατ." συνετῶν, καὶ " ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ "νηπίοις. 


Acts xiii. 7. ή 

1 Cor.i.19. οὕτως ἐγένετο 
az Cor. u 
10. 


KATA MATOAION 


εὐδοκία] ἔμπροσθέν σου. 
u. CREE. a 
Phil. ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός pour καὶ οὖδεὶς 


xi. 


26. val 6 wathp, ὅτι 
27. Πάντα por παρεδόθη 


3 
Σἐπιγινώσκει τὸν υἱόν, εἰ μὴ ὁἆ 


iii. 15. > 
b LE. x, 2x. πατήρ οὐδὲ τὸν πατέρα τις ἐπιγινώσκει, εἰ μὴ 6 υἱός, καὶ ᾧ ἐὰν 


Rom. ii. 20. 


1 Cor. iii. 1. Heb. v. 13. 


c Eph. i. 5,9. Phil. ii. 13. 


dt Cor. xiii. 12. 


1 ευδοκια eyevero in 38 33, making ενδοκια more emphatic. 


fession (of sin). Here it=to make 
frank acknowledgment of a situation in 
a spirit partly of resignation, partly of 
thanksgiving.—éxpuipas. The fact stated 
is referred to the causality of God, the 
religious point of view; but it happens 
according to laws which can be ascer- 
tained.—ratra: the exact reference un- 
known, but the statement holds with 
reference to Christ’s whole teaching and 
healing ministry, and the revelation of 
the kingdom they contained.—cogoév 
καὶ συνετῶν: the reference here doubt- 
less is to the Rabbis and scribes, the 
accepted custodians of the wisdom of 
Israel. Cf. σοφὸς καὶ ἐπιστήμων in 
Deut. iv. 6 applied to Israel. The ren- 
dering ‘“‘ wise and prudent” in A. V. is 
misleading ; “‘ wise and understanding ” 
in R. V. is Ῥεΐετ.- νηπίοις (ff. νη and 
ἔπος, non-speaking) means those who 
were as ignorant of scribe-lore as babes 
(cf. John vii. 49 and Heb. v. 13). Their 
ignorance was their salvation, as thereby 
they escaped the mental preoccupation 
with preconceived ideas on moral and 
religious subjects, which made the scribes 
inaccessible to Christ’s influence (vide my 
Parabolic Teaching, pp. 333, 334). Jesus 
gives thanks with all His heart for the 
receptivity of the babes, not in the same 
sense or to the same extent for the non- 
receptive attitude of the wise (with De 
Wette and Bleek against Meyer and 
Weiss). No distinction indeed is ex- 
pressed, but it goes without saying, and 
the next clause implies it.—Ver. 26. vat 
reaffirms with solemn emphasis what 
might appear doubtful, viz., that Jesus 
was content with the state of matters 
(vide Klotz, Devar., i. 140). Cf. νετ. 9.— 
πατήρ: nominative for vocative.—ét, 
because, introducing the reason for this 
contentment.—otrws, as the actual facts 
stand, emphatic (“ sic maxime non aliter,” 
Fritzsche).—evSoxfa, a pleasure, an 
occasion of pleasure; hence a purpose, 
a state of matters embodying the Divine 
Will, a Hellenistic word, as is also the 
verb εὐδοκέω (cf. 1 Cor. i. 21, where the 
whole thought is similar), Christ re- 
signs Himself to God’s will. But His 


tranquillity is due likewise to insight 
into the law by which new Divine 
movements find support among the 
νήπιοι rather than among the σοφοί.--- 
Ver. 27. πάντα, all things necessary 
for the realisation of the kingdom (Holtz., 
H.C.). The πάντα need not be restricted 
to the hiding and revealing functions 
(Weiss, Nosgen). Hiding, indeed, was 
no function of Christ’s. He was always 
and only a revealer. For the present 
Jesus has only a few babes, but the 
future is His: Christianity the coming 
religion.—arape8d6y, aorist, were given. 
We might have expected the future. It 
may be another instance of the aorist 
used for the Hebrew prophetic future 
(vide ad ver. το). In Mt. xxviii. 18 
ἐδόθη again to express the same thought. 
The reference probably is to the eternal 
purpose of God: on the use of the 
aorist in N. T., vide note on this pas- 
sage in Camb. G. Τ.--ἐπιγινώσκει, 
thoroughly knows.—rov υἱὸν .. . πατήρ. 
Christ’s comfort amid the widespread 
unbelief and misunderstanding in re- 
ference to Himself is that His Father 
knows Him perfectly. No one else does, 
not even John. He is utterly alone in 
the world. Son here has a Godward 
reference, naturally arising out of the 
situation. The Son of Man is called an 
evil liver, He lifts up His heart to 
heaven and says: God my Father knows 
me, His Son. The thought in the first 
clause is connected with this one thus: 
the future is mine, and for the present 
my comfort is in the Father’s know- 
ledge of me.—ov8é τὸν πατέρα . . . 6 
vids: a reflection naturally suggested 
by the foregoing statement. It is igno- 
rance of the Father that creates mis- 
conception of the Son. Conventional, 
moral and religious ideals lead to mis- 
judgment of one who by all He says and 
does is revealing God as He truly is and 
wills. The men who know least about 
God are those supposed to know most, 
and who have been most ready to judge 
Him, the “wise and understanding”’. 
Hence the additional. reflection, καὶ ¢ 
ἐὰν Βούληται o ν. ἀποκαλύψαι. Jesus 


26—29. 
βούληται °6 υἱὸς ἀποκαλύψαι. 


xxiv. 36; αχν]]. 1ο. Mk. xiii. 32. 


Philem. 20 (Sir. li. 27, the noun). 


here asserts His importance as the re- 
vealer of God, saying in effect: ‘‘ The 
wise despise me, but they cannot do 
without me. Through me alone can 
they attain that knowledge of God 
which they profess to desire above all 
things.” This was there and then the 
simple historic fact. Jesus was the one 
person in Israel who truly conceived 
God. Theuse of βούληται is noticeable: 
not to whomsoever He reveals Him, but 
{ο whomsoever He is pleased to reveal 
Him. The emphasis seems to lie on 
the inclination, whereas in Mt. i. 1ο 
θέλων appears to express the wish, and 
ἐβονλήθη rather the deliberate purpose. 
Jesus meets the haughty contempt of 
the ‘‘ wise” with a dignified assertion 
‘hat it depends on his inclination whether 
chey are to know God or not. On the 
distinction between βούλομαι and θέλω, 
vide Cremer, Wé6rterbuch, s. v. βού- 
λομαι. According to him the former re- 
presents the direction of the will, the 
latter the will active (Affect, Trieb). 
Hence βουλ. can always stand for θελ., 
but not vice versa. 

Vv. 28-30. The gracious invitation. 
Full of O. T. reminiscences, remarks 
Holtz., H.C., citing Isaiah xiv. 3 ; xxviii. 
solv, 1-95, Her-9 Vil 16); xxx) 20265, 
and especially Sirach vi. 24, 25, 28, 29; 
li. 23-27. De Wette had long before 
referred to the last-mentioned passage, 
and Pfleiderer has recently (Urch., 513) 
made it the basis of the assertion that 
this beautiful logion is a composition out 
of Sirach by the evangelist. The passage 
in Sirach is as follows: ἐγγίσατε πρὸς 
μὲ ἀπαίδευτοι, καὶ αὐλίσθητε ἐν οἴκῳ 
παιδείας. διότι ὑστερεῖτε ἐν τούτοις, 
καὶ αἱ ψυχαὶ ὑμῶν διψῶσι σφόδρα; 
ἤνοιξα τὸ. στόµα μον, καὶ ἐλάλησα, 
κτήσασθε ἑαυτοῖς ἄνευ ἀργυρίου. τὸν 
τράχηλον ὑμῶν ὑπόθετε ὑπὸ Cvyov, καὶ 
ἐπιδεζάσθω ἡ ψυχη ὑμῶν παιθείαν" 
ἐγγύς ἐστιν εὑρεῖν αὐτήν' ἴδετε ἐν 
ὀφθαλμοῖς ὑμῶν ὅτι ὀλίγον ἐκοπίασα, 
καὶ εὗρον ἐμαυτῷ πολλὴν ἀνάπανσιν." 


* Of the above the R.V. gives the follow- 
ing translation: ‘‘ Draw near unto me, ye 
unlearned, and lodge in the house of in- 
struction. Say wherefore are ye lacking in 
these things, and your soulsare very thirsty ? 
I opened my mouth and spake. Get her 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


28. 
Σκοπιῶντες καὶ πεφορτισµένοι, κἀγὼ 3 ἀναπαύσω ὑμᾶς. 


f vide Ch. iv. το. 
the sense of weariness, cf. Is. xl. 31, ov κοπιάσουσι. 


179 


‘Acire πρός pe πάντες οἱ ε ὁ Αι 
20. ἄρατε here and 
in Ch 


g here and in John iv. 6. Rev. ii. 3 (with 
Sir. li. a7, ἐκοπίασα). h τ Cor. xvi. 18. 


There are unquestionably kindred 
thoughts and corresponding phrases, as 
even Kypke points out (“‘ Syracides magna 
similitudine dicit’”’), and if Sirach had 
been a recognised Hebrew prophet one 
could have imagined Matthew giving 
the gist of this rhetorical passage, pre- 
faced with an “‘as it is written”. It is 
not even inconceivable that a reader of 
our Gospel at an early period noted on 
the margin phrases culled from Sirach as 
descriptive of the attitude of the one 
true σοφός towards men to show how 
willing he was to communicate the know- 
ledge of the Father-God, and that his 
notes found their way into the text. 
But why doubt the genuineness of this 
logion ? It seems the natural conclusion 
of Christ’s soliloquy; expressing His 
intense yearning for receptive scholars 
at a time when He was painfully con- 
scious of the prevalent unreceptivity. 
The words do not smell of the lamp. 
They come straight from a saddened 
yet tenderly affectionate, unembittered 
heart ; simple, pathetic, sincere. He 
may have known Sirach from boyhood, 
and echoes may have unconsciously 
suggested themselves, and been used 
with royal freedom quite compatibly with 
perfect originality of thought and phrase. 
The reference to wisdom in ver. 19 makes 
the supposition not gratuitous that Jesus 
may even have had the passage in Sirach 
consciously present to His mind, and 
that He used it, half as a quotation, half 
as a personal manifesto. The passage 
is the end of a prayer of ¥esus, the Son 
of Sirach, in which that earlier Jesus, 
personating wisdom, addresses his fellow- 
men, inviting them to share the benefits 
which σοφία has conferred on himself. 
Why should not Jesus of Nazareth close 
His prayer with a similar address in the 
name of wisdom to those who are most 
likely to become her children—those 
whose ear sorrow hath opened? This 
view might meet Martineau’s objection 
to regarding this logion as authentic, that 





for yourselves without money. Put your 
neck under the yoke, and let your soul 
receive instruction. She is hard at hand to 
find. Behold with your eyes how thai | 
laboured but a little, and found for myself 
much rest.”’ 


180 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΙ. 30. 


i Acta xv. το. τὸν 'Luydv µου ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς, καὶ µάθετε ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ, ὅτι πρβός 1 εἰμι καὶ 


Gal. ν. i. 


1 Ch. xii. 43. ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ' καὶ εὑρήσετε } ἀνάπαυσιν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑμῶν. 


Rev. xiv. ‘4 
αι (Wis- 30. 0 
dom iv. 7). 


k Lk. vi.39. Rom. ii. 4. 


1 πρανυς in $BCD (Tisch., W.H.). 


it is not compatible with the humility of 
Jesus that He should so speak of Him- 
self (Seat of Authority, p. 583). Why 
should He not do as another Jesus had 
done before Him: speak in the name of 
wisdom, and appropriate her attributes? 

Ver. 28. Δεῦτε: vide ad iv. 19, again 
authoritative but kindly.—xoma@vres καὶ 
πεφορτισµένοι, the fatigued and bur- 
dened. This is to betaken metaphorically. 
The kind of people Jesus expects to be- 
come “disciples indeed” are men who 
have sought long, earnestly, but in vain, 
for the ο ninboala., the knowledge of 
God. There is no burden so heavy as 
that of truth sought and not found. 
Scholars of the Rabbis, like Saul of 
Tarsus, knew it well. In coming thence 
to Christ’s school they would find rest 
by passing from letter to spirit, from 
form to reality, from hearsay to cer- 
tainty, from traditions of the past to the 
present voice of οἀ.- -κἀγὼ, and I, em- 
phatic, with side glance at the reputed 
‘“‘wise” who do not give rest (with 
Meyer against Weiss).—Ver. 29. {vydv: 
current phrase to express the relation of 
a disciple to a master. The Rabbis 
spoke of the “ yoke of the law”. Jesus 
uses their phrases while drawing men 
away from their influence.—paQete am’ 
ἐμοῦ: not merely learn from my example 
(Buttmann, Gram., p. 324: on, that is, 


from the case of), but, more compre-. 


hensively, get your learning from me; 
take me as your Master inreligion. The 
thing to be learned is not merely a moral 
lesson, humility, but the whole truth 
about God and righteousness. But 
the mood of Master and scholar must 
correspond, He meek as they have be- 
come by sorrowful experience. Hence 
ὅτι πραὺύς . . . τῇ καρδίᾳ: not that, 
but for I am, etc. What connection 
is there between this spirit and know- 
ledge of God? This: a proud man 
cannot know God. God knoweth the 
proud afar off (Ps. cxxxviii. 6), and 
they know God afar off. God giveth 
the grace of intimate knowledge of 
Himself to the lowly.—avamavotv: rest, 
such as comes through finding the 
true God, or through satisfaction of 
desire, of the hunger of the soul.—Ver. 


γὰρ Τυγός µου * xpnotés, καὶ τὸ φορτίον µου ἐλαφρόν ἐστιν. 


30. Χχρηστός, kindly to wear. Christ’s 
doctrine fits and satisfies our whole 
spiritual nature—reason, heart, con- 
science, “the sweet reasonableness of 
Christ ”’.—d@opriov, the burden of obliga- 
tion.—éAadpéy: in one respect Christ’s 
burden is the heaviest of all because His 
moral ideal is the highest. But just on 
that account it is light. Lofty, noble 
ideals inspire and attract ; vulgar ideals 
are oppressive. Christ’s commandment 
is difficult, but not like that of the Rabbis, 
grievous. (Vide With Open Face.) 

CuapTER XII. CONFLICTS WITH THE 
PHARISEES. ‘This chapter delineates the 
growing alienation between Jesus and 
the Pharisees and scribes. The note of 
time (ἐν ἐκείνῷ τῷ καιρῷ, ver. 1) points 
back to the situation in which the prayer 
xi. 25-30 was uttered (vide ver. 25, where 
the same expression is used). ΑΙ the 
incidents recorded reveal the captious 
mood of Israel’s ‘saints and sages”’. 
They have now formed a thoroughly bad 
opinion of Jesus and His company. 
They regard Him as immoral in life 
(xi. 19); irreligious, capable even of 
blasphemy (assuming the divine pre- 
rogative of forgiving sin, ix. 3); an 
ally of Satan even in His beneficence 
(xil. 24). He can do nothing right. 
The smallest, most innocent action is 
an offence. 

Vv. 1-8. Plucking ears of corn on the 
Sabbath (Mk. ii. 23-28; Lk. vi. 1-5). 
Sabbath observance was one of the lead- 
ing causes of conflict between Jesus and 
the guardians of religion and morality. 
This is the first of several encounters 
reported by the evangelist. According 
to Weiss he follows Mark, but with say- 
ings taken directly from the Apostolic 
Source. : 

Vv.1,2. σάββασιν: dative plural, as 
if from σάββατ-ος, other cases (genitive, 
singular and plural, dative, singular, 
accusative, plural) are formed from σάβ- 
βατον (vide ver. 2).--διὰ τῶν σπορίµων 
might mean through fields adapted for 
growing grain, but the context requires 
fields actually sown; fields of corn.— 
ἐπείνασαν: for the form wide iv. 2. 
This word supplies the motive for the 
action, which Mark leaves vague.— 


XII. 1—5. 


EYATTEAION 


181 


XII. τ. ΕΝ ἐκείνω τῷ καιρῷ ἐπορεύθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς σάββασι a bere and 


διὰ τῶν ὃ σπορίµων: of δὲ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐπείνασαν, 


, 
Ὀτίλλειν Sotdxuas καὶ ἐσθίειν. 


~ ~ a ” a > 
αὐτῷ, “Ιδού, οἱ µαθηταί σου ποιοῦσιν, ὃ οὐκ ἔξεστι ποιεῖν ἐν 


σαββάτῳ.” 


Αα [ 
3. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Οὐκ " ἀνέγνωτε τί ἐποίησε 


dl Yap in parall. 
καὶ ἤρξαντο b here and 
in paral. 


2. ot δὲ Φαρισαῖοι ἰδόντες εἶπον c here, 


parall. and 
Mk. iv. 28. 
d Ch. xix. 4; 
Xx. 16,42; 
xxiv. 15 al. 


Δαβίδ, ὅτε ἐπείνασεν αὐτὸς] καὶ ot pet αὐτοῦ; 4. πῶς εἰσῆλθεν e Heb. ix. 2. 


cis τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ τοὺς ἄρτους "τῆς προθέσεως ἔφαγεν,” 


f Acts xxiv. 
6 (often in 


= A a A a Sept.). 
οὓς > οὐκ ἐξὸν ἦν αὐτῷ φαγεῖν, οὐδὲ τοῖς μετ αὐτοῦ, εἰ μὴ τοῖς κας Lee 


ες A , 3, 9 sou 3 A , ς al , 
ἱερεῦσι µόνοις; 5+ Ἡ οὔκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῷ νόµῳ, ὅτι τοῖς σάββασιν 


in ver. 7. 


οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ 18 σάββατον *BeByrodar, καὶ 5 ἀναίτιοί εἶσι ; 


1 The αυτος (Τ/Σ) comes from Mk. (ii. 25) ; it is omitted in ΞΒ07Δ al. 
2εφαγον in $B—probably the true reading. 
39in BD. The reading of T. R. (έφαγεν ους) is from Mk. 


ἤρξαντο: perhaps emphasis should be 
laid on this word. No sooner had they 
begun to pluck ears than fault was found. 
Pharisees on the outlook for offences. 
So Carr, Camb. G. T.—Ver. 2. ὃ οὐκ 
ἔξεστιν π. ε. σαββάτῳ. The emphasis 
here lies on the last word. Tohelp one- 
self, when hungry, with the hand was 
humanely allowed in the Deuteronomic 
law (Deut. xxiii. 25), only to use the 
sickle was forbidden as involving waste. 
But according to the scribes what was 
lawful on other days was unlawful on 
Sabbath, because plucking ears was 
veaping. ‘* Metens Sabbato vel tantillum, 
reus est’? (Lightfoot rendering a passage 
from the Talmud). Luke adds ψώχοντες, 
rubbing with the hands. He took the 
offence to be threshing. Microscopic 
offence in either case, proving prima 
facie malice in the fault-finders. But 
honest objection is not inconceivable to 
one who remembers the interdict placed 
by old Scottish piety on the use of the 
razor on Sabbath. We must be just 
even to Pharisees. 

Vv. 3-8. Christ's defence. It is two- 
fold. (1) He shields disciples by examples: 
David and the priests ; to both the fault- 
finders would defer (vv. 3-5); (2) He 
indicates the principles involved in the 
examples (vv. 6-8). The case of David 
was apposite because (a) it was a case of 
eating, (b) it probably happened on 
Sabbath, (c) it concerned not only David 
but, as in the present instance, followers ; 
therefore οἱ pet’ αὐτοῦ, ver. 3, carefully 
added. (b) does not form an element in 
the defence, but it helps to account for 
the reference to David’s conduct. In 
that view Jesus must have regarded the 
act of David as a Sabbatic incident, and 


that it was may not unnaturally be in- 
ferred from 1 Sam. xxi. 6. Vide Light- 
foot, ad loc.—This was probably also the 
current opinion. The same remark 
applies to the attendants of David. 
From the history one might gather that 
David was really alone, and only pre- 
tended to have companions. But if, as 
is probable, it was usually assumed that 
he was accompanied, Jesus would be jus- 
tified in proceeding on that assumption, 
whatever the fact was (vide Schanz, ad 
loc).—Ver. 4. εἰσῆλθεν, ἔφαγον, ie 
entered, they ate. Mark has ἔφαγεν. 
Weiss explains the harsh change of sub- 
ject by combination of apostolic source 
with Mark. The two verbs point to two 
offences against the law: entering a holy 
place, eating holy bread. The sin of the 
disciples was against a holy time. But 
the principle involved was the same = 
ceremonial rules may be overruled by 
higher considerations.—6 οὐκ ἐξὸν jy. 
οὓς in Mark and ‘Luke agreeing with 
ἄρτους, and here also in T. R., but 6 
doubtless the true reading; again pre- 
senting 2 problem in comparative exegesis 
(vide Weiss-Meyer). 6 ought to mean 
‘‘ which thing it was not lawful to do,” 
but it may be rendered ‘‘ which kind of 
bread,” etc.—el μὴ, except; absolutely un- 
lawful, except in case of priests.—Ver. 5. 
This reference to the priests naturally 
leads on to the second instance taken 
from their systematic breach of the 
technical Sabbath law in the discharge 
of sacerdotal duty.—% οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε, 
have ye not read? not of course the 
statement following, but directions on 
which such a construction could be put, 
as in Numb. xxviii. 9, concerning the 
burnt offering of two lambs. They had 


182 


Ἠέστι- 6. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, ὅτι τοῦ ἱεροῦ μείζων] ἐστὶν be. 


means, 

vide Lk. 

WI 011. . 
i Lk. vi. 37. τοὺς ἀναιτίους. 

jJas.v.6 , : “5 

(the pass. ἀνθρώπου. 

in ver. 37). 


1 µειζον in NBD al. 


κειτε τί ® 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


, , > a 
8. κύριος γάρ ἐστι καὶ 


XII. 


4, εἰ δὲ ἐγνώ- 


” 9 , ; 
ἐστιν, « Ἔλεον ” θέλω καὶ οὐ θυσίαν͵ οὐκ ἂν ἱκατεδικάσατε 


τοῦ σαββάτου ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ 


µειζων (LA) is a misjudged attempt at correction, 


3 This is another grammatical correction (vide ix. 13), ελεος in NBCD33. 


3 xat omitted in ΜΒΟΓΡ, etc. 


read often enough, but had not under- 
stood. As Euthy. Zig. remarks, Jesus 
reproaches them for their vain labour, as 
not understanding what they read (μὴ 
ἐπιγινώσκουσιν & ἀναγινώσκουσι).---βε- 
βηλοῦσι, profane, on the Pharisaic view 
of the Sabbath law, as an absolute pro- 
hibition of work. Perhaps the Pharisees 
themselves used this word as a technical 
term, applicable even to permissible 
Sabbath labour. So Schanz after Schott- 


gen. 

Vv. 6-8. The principles involved. The 
facts stated raise questions as to the 
reasons. The Pharisees were men of 
rules, not accustomed to go back on 
principles. The passion for minutiz 
killed reflection. The reasons have 
been already hinted in the statement of 
the cases: ὅτε ἐπείνασεν, ver. 3; ἐν τῷ 
ἱερῷ, νετ. 5: hunger, the temple; human 
needs, higher claims. These are referred 
to in inverse order in vv. 6-7.—Ver. 6. 
λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν: solemn affirmation, with 
a certain tone in the voice.—tov ἱεροῦ 
μεῖζον. Though they might not have 
thought of the matter before, the claim 
of the temple to overrule the Sabbath 
law would be admitted by the Pharisees. 
Therefore, Jesus could base on it an 
argument a fortiori. The Sabbath must 
give way to the temple and its higher 
interests, therefore to something higher 
still. What was that something? Christ 
Himself, according to the almost unani- 
mous opinion of interpreters, ancient and 
modern; whence doubtless the μείζων of 
T. R. But Jesus might be thinking 
rather of the kingdom than of the king; 
a greater interest is involved here, that 
of the kingdom of God. Fritzsche takes 
μεῖζον as = teaching men, and curing 
them of vice then going on. It may be 
asked: How did the interest come in? 
The disciples were following Jesus, but 
what was He about? What created 
the urgency? Whence came it that the 
disciples needed to pluck ears of standing 
corn? Wedonot know. That is one 
of the many ασια in the evangelic 
history. But it may be assumed that 


It comes in from the parall. 


there was something urgent going on 
in connection with Christ’s ministry, 
whereby He and His companions were 
overtaken with extreme hunger, so that 
they were fain to eat unprepared food 
(ἀκατέργαστον σῖτον, Euthy. Zig. on 
νετ. 7).—Ver. 7. The principle of human 
need stated in terms of a favourite pro- 
phetic oracle (ix. 13).—et δὲ ἐγνώκειτε 
εκ. οὐκ ἂν κατεδικάσατε: the form of 
expression, a past indicative in protasis, 
with a past indicative with ἂν in apodosis, 
implies that the supposition is contrary 
to fact (Burton, N. T. Moods and Tenses, 
§ 248). The Pharisees did not know 
what the oracle meant; hence on a pre- 
vious occasion Jesus bade them go and 
learn (ix. 13). If their pedantry blinded 
them to distinctions of higher and lower 
in institutions, or rather made them 
reckon the least the greatest command, 
minutiz testing obedience, it still more 
deadened their hearts to the claims of 
mercy and humanity. Of course this 
idolatry went on from bad to worse. 
For the Jews of a later, templeless time, 
the law was greater than the temple 
(Holtz., in H.C., quoting Weber).— 
ἀναιτίους: doubly guiltless: as David 
was through imperious hunger, as the 
priests were when subordinating Sabbath, 
to temple, requirements.—Ver. 8. This 
weighty Jogion is best understood when 
taken along with that in Mark ii. 27 = 
the Sabbath for man, not man for the 
Sabbath. The question is: Does it © 
merely state a fact, or does it also con- 
tain the rationale of the fact? That 
depends on the sense we give to the 
title Son of Man. Asa technical name = 
Messiah, it simply asserts the authority 
of Him who bears it to determine how 
the Sabbath is to be observed in the 
Kingdom of God. Asaname of humility, 
making no obtrusive exceptional claims, 
like Son of David or Messiah, it suggests 
a reason for the lordship in sympathy 
with the ethical principle embodied in 
the prophetic oracle. The title does not 
indeed mean mankind, or any man, 
homo quivis, as Grotius and Kuinoel 


6—11. 


. Καὶ ) μεταβὰς ἐκεῖθεν, ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν συναγωγὴν αὐτῶν. 
9 Pp η πῃ yor 


EYATTEAION 


183 


χο. j Ch. xi.1. 


καὶ ἴδού, ἄνθρωπος ἦν τὴν] χεῖρα ἔχων “inpdv- καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν kparall.and 


αὐτόν, λέγοντες, “Ei ἔξεστι τοῖς σάββασι θεραπεύειν2; 


γορήσωσιν αὐτοῦ. 


is John v. 3. 
ινα κατη- 


11. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Tis ἔσται ὃ ἐξ ὑμῶν 


ἄνθρωπος, ὃς ἕξει πρόβατον ἕν, καὶ ἐὰν ἐμπέσῃ τοῦτο τοῖς σάββασιν 


SSBC omit ην την. 
Mk. (iii. 1). 


The text of Mt. as in T. R. has been influenced by that in 


2 So in BC (W.H.), θεραπευσαι in SDL (Tisch.), 
3 εσται is omitted in CLX&, and bracketed in W.H.; it is found in SBA al. 


think. It points to Jesus, but to Him not 
as an exceptional man (“der einzigartige,” 
Weiss), but as the representative man, 
maintaining solidarity with humanity, 
standing for the human interest, as the 
Pharisees stood for the supposed divine, 
the real divine interest being identical 
with the human. The radical anti- 
thesis between Jesus and the Pharisees 
lay in their respective ideas of God. It 
is interesting to find a glimpse of the 
true sense of this Jogion in Chrysostom: 
περὶ ἑαυτοῦ λέγων. ‘O δὲ Μάρκος καὶ 
περὶ τῆς κοινῆς φύσεως αὐτὸν τοῦτο 
εἰρηκέναι φησίν. Hom. χκχἰχ.- «κύριος, 
not to the effect of abrogaticn but of in- 
terpretation and restoration to true use. 
The weekly rest is a beneficent institu- 
tion, God’s holiday to weary men, and 
the Kingdom of Heaven, whose royal law 
is love, has no interest in its abolition. 
Vv. 9-14. A Sabbath cure (Mk. iii. 
1-6; Lk. vi. 6-11): not necessarily 
happening immediately after. Matthew 
and Luke follow Mark’s order, which is 
topical, not historical; another instance 
of collision as to Sabbath observance.— 
Ψετ.ο. καὶ μεταβὰς . . . αὐτῶν. The 
αὐτῶν seems to imply that our evangel- 
ist takes the order as one of close tem- 
poral sequence (Mark says simply “‘ into 
a synagogue,” iii. 1). In that case the 
αὐτῶν would refer to the fault-finding 
Pharisees of the previous narrative, 
piqued by Christ’s defence and bent on 
further mischief (vide Weiss-Meyer). 
The narrative comes in happily here as 
illustrating the scope of the principle of 
humanity laid down in connection with 
the previous incident.—Ver. το. καὶ 
ἰδοὺ, here, as in viii. 2, ix. 2, introducing 
in a lively manner the story.—tnpdv, a 
dry hand, possibly a familiar expression 
in Hebrew pathology (De Wette) ; use- 
less, therefore a serious enough affliction 
for a working man (a mason, according 
to Hebrew Gospel, Jerome ad loc.), 
especially if it was the right hand, as 


Luke states. But the cure was not 
urgent for a day, could stand over; 
therefore a good test case as between 
rival conceptions of Sabbath law.—éanpo- 
τησαν. The Pharisees asked a question 
suggested by the case, as if eager to 
provoke Jesus and put Him to the proof. 
Mark says they observed Him, waiting 
for Him to take the initiative. The 
former alternative suits the hypothesis 
of immediate temporal sequence. —ei 
ἔξεστιν, etc. After λέγοντες we expect, 
according to classic usage, a direct ques- 
tion without ei. The εἰ is in its place in 
Mark (ver. 2), and the influence of his 
text may be suspected (Weiss) as ex- 
plaining the incorrectness in Matthew. 
But εἰ in direct questions is not un- 
usual in N. T. (Mt. xix. 3; Lk. xiii. 
23, xxil. 49), vide Winer, § 57, 2, and 
Meyer ad loc. In Mark’s account 
Christ, not the Pharisees, puts the ques- 
tion. 

Vv. 11, 12. Christ’s reply, by two 
home-thrusting questions and an irre- 
sistible conclusion.—ris . . . ἄνθρωπος. 
One is tempted here, as in vii. 9, to put 
emphasis on ἄνθρωπος: who of you not 
dead to the feelings of a man? Such 
questions as this and that in Lk. xv. 4 
go to the root of the matter. Humanity 
was what was lacking in the Pharisaic 
character.—mpéBarov ἕν: one sheep 
answering to the one working hand, 
whence perhaps Luke’s ἡ δεξιὰ (vi. 6).— 
ἐὰν ἐμπέσῃ. The case supposed might 
quite well happen; hence in the protasis 
éav with subjunctive, and in the apodosis 
the future (Burton, N. T. Moods and 
Tenses, § 250). A solitary sheep might 
fall into a ditch on a Sabbath; and that 
is what its owner would do if he were an 
ordinary average human being, viz., lift 
it out at once. What would the Pharisee 
do? It is easy to see what he would be 
tempted to do if the one sheep were his 
own. But would he have allowed such 
action as a general rule? One would 


184 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XII. 


I Gh. xv. 14 εἰς ' βόθυνον, οὐχὶ κρατήσει αὐτὸ καὶ ἐγερεῖ; 12. πόσῳ οὖν διαφέρει 
z ‘! 39- - - Lal 
mhereand ἄνθρωπος προβάτου; ὥστε ἔξεστι τοῖς σάββασι καλῶς orev.” 


in parall. au a 

insame 13. Τότε λέγει τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, ““Ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρά aout” Καὶ 
sense, Ch. ς a 

xvii. tz. ἐξέτεινε, καὶ "' ἀποκατεστάθη 3 ὑγιὴς ὡς ἢ ἄλλη. 14. οἱ δὲ 
Mk. iy. 12 


(torestore Φαρισαῖοι > συμβούλιον * ἔλαβον kar αὐτοῦ ἐξελθόντες ὃ ὅπως αὐτὸν 


social 


state), Heb. xiii. 19 (to friends). 


' SQBL have σου before την χειρα. 
2 ager. in ΔΒΙ ΔΣ al. 


n Ch. xxii. 15; xxvii. 1,7; xxviii. τα. 


D has αποκ. as in T. R. 


3 KSBCDE place εξελθοντες at the beginning of the sentence (= with καν before 


εξελθοντες). ἳ 


infer so from the fact that Jesus argued 
on such questions ¢z concesso. In that 
case the theory and practice of con- 
temporary Pharisees must have been 
miider than in the Talmudic period, when 
the rule was: if there be no danger, 
leave the animal in the ditch till the 
morrow (vide Buxtorf, Syn. Jud., c. xvi.). 
Grotius suggests that later Jewish law 
was made stricter out of hatred to 
Christians, —Ver. 12. πόσῳ οὖν διαφέρει, 
etc. This is another of those simple yet 
far-reaching utterances by which Christ 
suggested rather than formulated His 
doctrine of the infinite worth of man. 
By how much does a human being differ 
from a sheep? That is the question 
which Christian civilisation has not even 
yet adequately answered. This illustra- 
tion from common life is not in Mark 
and Luke. Luke has something similar 
in the Sabbath cure, reported in xiv. 1-6. 
Some critics think that Matthew com- 
bines the two incidents, drawing from his 
two sources, Mark and the Logia.—éove, 
therefore, and so introducing here rather 
an independent sentence than a depen- 
dent clause expressive of result.—kxadds 
ποιεῖν : in effect, to do good = εὖ ποιεῖν, 
i.¢., in the present case to heal, θερα- 
πεύειν, though in Acts x. 33, 1 Cor. vii. 
37, the phrase seems to mean to do the 
morally right, in which sense Meyer and 
Weiss take it here also. Elsner, and 
after him Fritzsche, take it as = preclare 
ageyé, pointing to the ensuing miracle. 
By this brief prophetic utterance, Jesus 
sweeps away legal pedantries and 
casuistries, and goes straight to the 
heart of the matter. Beneficent action 
never unseasonable, of the essence of 
the Kingdom of God; therefore as per- 
missible and incumbent on Sabbath as 
on other days. Spoken out of the 
depths of His religious consciousness, 
and a direct corollary from His benignant 


er of God (vide Holtz., H. Ο., 
Ρ. 91). 

Vv. 13, 14. The issue: the hand 
cured, and Pharisaic ill-will deepened. 
Ver. 13. τότε λέγε. He heals by a 
word: sine contactu sola voce, quod ne 
speciem quidem violati Sabbati habeve 
poterat (Grotius).—Extewév σου τ. x. 
Brief authoritative word, possessing both 
physical and moral power, conveying 
life to the withered member, and in- 
spiring awe in spectators.—xat ἐξέτ. καὶ 
ἀπεκατ. The double καὶ signifies the 
quick result (‘‘celeritatem miraculi,”’ 
Elsner). Grotius takes the second verb 
as a participle rendering: he stretched 
out his restored hand, assuming that not 
till restored could the hand be stretched 
out. The healing and the outstretching 
may be conceived of as contemporaneous. 
--ὑγιὴς ὡς 7 ἄλλη: the evangelist adds 
this to ἀπεκατ. to indicate the complete- 
ness. We should have expected this 
addition rather from Luke, who ever 
aims at making prominent the greatness 
of the miracle, as well as its benevolence. 
—Ver. 14. ἐξελθόντες: overawed for the 
moment, the Pharisaic witnesses of the 
miracle soon recovered themselves, and 
went out of the synagogue with hostile 
intent.—ovpBovAtov ἔλαβον, consulted 
together = συμβουλεύεσθαι.--κατ᾽ αὐτοῦ, 
against Him. Hitherto they had been 
content with finding fault; now it is 
come to plotting against His life—a 
tribute to His Ροννετ.-- ὅπως, etc.: this 
clause indicates generally the object of 
their plotting, viz., that it concerned 
the life of the obnoxious one. They 
consulted not how to compass the 
end, but simply agreed together that it 
was an end to be steadily kept in 
view. The murderous will has come to 
birth, the way will follow in due course. 
Such is the evil fruit of Sabbath contro- 
versies. 


Ἕ2---2Ι. 


ἀπολέσωσιν. 


16. καὶ "ἐπετίμησεν αὐτοῖς, ἵνα μὴ Ἡ Φανερὸν αὐτὸν ” ποιήσωσιν: 
17. ὅπως  πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ 'Ἡσαΐου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, 
18. “Ιδού, 6 wats µου, ὃν ἠρέτισα: 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


185 


ε s 5 A AY > , Baer) « \ o Ch. xvi. 20 
15. Ὁ δὲ ημουν μα ἀνεχώρησεν ἐκεῖθεν, καὶ (W.H.). 
ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ ὄχλοι 1 πολλοί, καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτοὺς πάντας’ 


Mk. viii. 
30 (with 
ινα). Mk. 
iii. 12 
(with ἵνα 
ag ό αθώος” Hol Ap here)- 
6 απητ ου, εἰς ὃ ere an 
προ SERPS E raeate ep 


αεὐδόκησεν ἡ ψυχή pou’ θήσω τὸ πνεῦμά pou ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, καὶ κρίσιν q with 


A A , 
τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἀπαγγελεῖ: 19. οὐκ *épicer, οὔδὲ "κραυγάσει’ οὐδὲ 
[ ~ 
ἀκούσει τις ἐν ταῖς πλατείαις THY φωνὴν αὐτοῦ. 


accus. as 


20. κάλαμον x. 6,8. 
τ here only. 


ry - 
Σσυντετριμμένον οὐ κατεάξει, καὶ λῖνον τυφόµενον οὗ σβέσει’' ἕως s John xi. 


a? η 3 ~ , ο δι ή, (na νὰ 9 ~ 
ἂν “exBady ets νῖκος Thy κρίσιν. 21. καὶ ἐν" τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ 


ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσι. 


1 $9B omit οχλοι, which is inconsistent with παντας. 


* SB have simply ον. 


Vv. 15-21. Yesus retires; prophetic 
fortraiture of His character. Verses 15 
and 16 are abridged from Mk. iii. 7-12, 
which contains an account of an ex- 
tensive healing ministry. The sequel of 
the Sabbatic encounter is very vague. 
The one fact outstanding and note- 
worthy is the withdrawal of Jesus, con- 
scious of having given deep offence, but 
anxious to avoid tragic consequences 
for the present. It is to that fact mainly 
that the evangelist attaches his fair 
picture of Jesus, in prophetic language. 
It is happily brought in here, where it 
gains by the contrast between the real 
Jesus and Jesus as conceived by the 
Pharisees, a miscreant deserving to die. 
It is not necessary to suppose that the 
historical basis of the picture is to be 
found exclusively in vv. 15, 16, all the 
more that the statement they contain is 
but @ meagre reproduction of Mk. iii. 
7-12, omitting some valuable material, 
¢.g., the demoniac cry: ‘‘ Thou art the 
Son of God”. The historic features 
answering to the prophetic outline in 
the evangelist’s mind may be taken from 
the whole story of Christ’s public life as 
hitherto told, from the baptism onwards. 
Luke gives his picture of Jesus at the 
beginning (iv. 16-30) as a frontispiece, 
Matthew places his at the end ofa con- 
siderable section of the story, at a 
critical turning point in the history, and 
he means the reader to look back over 
the whole for verification. Thus for the 
evangelist ver. 18 may point back to 
the baptism (iii. 13-17), when the voice 
from heaven called Jesus God’s beloved 
Son ; ver. 19 to the teaching on the hill 


43.. Acts 
xxii. 23. 

t Mk. v. 4; 
xiv. 3. Lk. 


ix. 39. 
u ver. 35. Ch. xiii. 52. John x. 4. 


2 SSBCD have ινα. 


* Most uncials omit ev, which is found in D it. vg. 


(v.-vii.), when the voice of Jesus was 
heard not in the street but on the 
mountain top, remote from the crowd 
below ; ver. 20 to the healing ministry 
among the sick, physically bruised reeds, 
poor suffering creatures in whom the 
flame of life burnt low; ver. 21 to such 
significant incidents as that of the cen- 
turion of Capernaum (viii. 5-13). Broad 
interpretation here seems best. Some 
features, ¢.g., the reference to judgment, 
ver. 20, second clause, are not to be 
pressed. 

The quotation is a very free repro- 
duction from the Hebrew, with occasional 
side glances at the Sept. It has been sug- 
gested that the evangelist drew neither 
from the Hebrew nor from the Sept., but 
from a Chaldee Targum in use in his 
time (Lutteroth). It is certainly curious 
that he should have omitted Is. xlii. 4, 
“He shall not fail nor be discouraged,” 
etc., a most important additional feature 
in the picture = Messiah shall not only 
not break the bruised reed, but He 
shall not be Himself a bruised reed, but 
shall bravely stand for truth and right 
till they at length triumph. Admirable 
historic materials to illustrate that pro- 
phetic trait are ready to our hand in 
Christ’s encounters with the Pharisees 
(ix. 1-17, xii. 1-13). Either Matthew has 
followed a Targum, or been misled by 
the similarity of Is. xlii. 3 and 4, or he 
means ver. 20 to bear a double reference, 
and read: He shall neither break nor be 
a bruised reed, nor allow to be quenched 
either in others or in Himself the feeble 
flame: a strong, brave, buoyant, ever- 
victorious hero, helper of the weak, Him- 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ITE 


, ΄ ~ / % 
22. Τότε προσηνέχθη 1 αὐτῷ δαιμονιζόμενος τυφλὸς καὶ κωφός: 
καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτόν, ὥστε τὸν τυφλὸν Kal? κωφὸν καὶ λαλεῖν καὶ 


ν Mk. ii. x2, βλέπειν. 
Lk. viii. 
<6 Acts οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς Δαβίὸ ;” 
ii. 7, 

wirCont δα 
13; Vii.34. τῶν δαιµονίων. 

x Lk. xi. 17 


23. καὶ ᾿ ἐξίσταντο πάντες of ὄχλοι καὶ ἔλεγον, “Myre 


c 7 - 
24. Ot δὲ Φαρισαῖοι ἀκούσαντες εἶπον, 


124]. εεΟῦτος οὐκ ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια, εἰ μὴ ἐν τῷ BeehLeBodd ἄρχοντι 
25. Εἰδὼς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς δ τὰς ἐνθυμήσεις αὐτῶν 


Rev.. xvii, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Maca βασιλεία  μερισθεῖσα kal’ ἑαυτῆς * ἐρημοῦται: 


16; αν. 
16. 


καὶ πᾶσα πόλις ἢ οἰκία μερισθεῖσα Kab’ ἑαυτῆς, οὗ σταθήσεται. 


1B Cur. Syr. Cop. have προσηνεγκαν with SatpoviLopevov τυφλον και κωφον. 
Most MSS. asin T.R. W.H. adopt the reading of B, putting T. R. in the margin. 


2 S$BD and some versions omit τυφλον και, also the και before λαλειν. 


> SBD omit o Ίησους. 


self a stranger to weakness. ---ἠρέτισα 
(ver. 18), an Ionic form in use in Hellen- 
istic Greek, here only in N. T., often 
in Sept. = αἱρέομαι. Hesychius under 
ἠρετισάμην gives asequivalents ἠγάπησα, 
ἐπιθύμησα, ἠθέλησα, ἠράσθην.- κραυγά- 
σει (ver. 19), late form for κράζω. Phry- 


nichus, p. 337, condemns, as illiterate, - 


use of κραυγασµός instead οΓκεκραγµός. 
On the words οὐδὲ kp. Pricaeus remarks : 
‘“‘Sentio clamorem intelligi qui nota est 
animi commoti et effervescentis”. He 
cites examples from Seneca, Plutarch, 
Xenophon, εἰς. --- ἀκούσει is late for 
ἀκούσεται. Verbs expressing organic 
acts or states have middle forms in the 
future (vide Rutherford, New Phrynichus, 
pp. 138, 376-412).—€ws, ver. 20, followed 
by subjunctive, with ἄν, asin classics, in 
a clause introduced by ἕως referring to a 
future contingency. —7@ ὀνόματι, ver. 
21, dative after ἐλπιοῦσιν; in Sept., Is. 
xlii. 4, with ἐπί. This construction here 
only in N. T. 

Vv. 22-37. Demoniac healed and 
Pharisaic calumny repelled (Mk. iii. 
22-30; Lk. xi. 14-23—cf. Mt. ix. 
32-34). The healing of a blind and 
dumb demoniac has its place here not 
for its own sake, as a miracle, but 
simply as the introduction to another 
conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees. 
It is a story of wicked calumny repelled. 
The transition from the fair picture of 
the true Jesus to this hideous Pharisaic 
caricature is highly dramatic in its effect. 

Vv. 22, 23. τυφλὸς καὶ κωφός, blind 
5 wellasdumb. The demoniac in ix. 32 
dumb only. But dumbness here also is 
the main feature; hence in last clause 
κωφὸν only, and λαλεῖν before βλέπειν.--- 
ὥστε with infinitive, expressing here not 
merely tendency but result.—Ver. 23. 
ἐξίσταντο: not implying anything ex- 


ceptionally remarkable in the cure; a 
standing phrase (in Mark at least) for 
the impression made on the people. 
They never got to be familiar with 
Christ’s wonderful works, so as to take 
them as matters of course. —pyjre im- 
plies a negative answer: they can 
hardly believe what the fact seems to 
suggest = can this possibly be, etc. 2 
Not much capacity for faith in the 
average Israelite, yet honest-hearted 
compared with the Pharisee.—6 vtds 
Δαβιδ: the popular title for the Messiah. 

Ver. 24. Οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι. They of 
course have a very different opinion. 
In Mark these were men come down 
from Jerusalem, to watch, not to lay hold 
of Jesus, Galilee not being under the 
direct jurisdiction of the Sanhedrim 
then (vide on Mark).— Otros οὐκἐκβάλλει, 
etc. : theory enunciated for second time, 
unless ix. 34 be an anticipation by the 
evangelist, or a spurious reading. What 
diversity of opinion! Christ’s friends, 
according to Mark, thought Him “ beside 
himself ”’—mad, Messiah, in league with 
Beelzebub! Herod had yet another 
theory: the marvellous healer was John 
redivivus, and endowed with the powers 
of the other world. All this implies that 
the healing ministry was a great fact. — 
οὐκ . . . et μὴ: the negative way of 
putting it stronger than the positive. 
The Pharisees had to add εἰ py. They 
would gladly haveesaid: ‘‘ He does not 
cast out devils at all”. But the fact was 
undeniable; therefore they had to in- 
vent a theory to neutralise its signifi- 
cance.—Gpxovrt, without article, might 
mean, as prince, therefore able to com- 
municate such power. So Meyer, Weiss, 
et al. But the article may be omitted 
after Βεελζεβοὺλ as after βασιλεύς, or 
on account of the following genitive. 


22—28 


EYATTEAION 


187 


26. καὶ εἰ 6 Σατανᾶς τὸν Σατανᾶν ἐκβάλλει, ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἐμερίσθη - πῶς 


οὖν σταθήσεται ἡ βασιλεία αὐτοῦ ; 


2]. καὶ εἰ ἐγὼ ἐν Βεελζεβοὺλ y Rom. _ ix. 


2 Cor. 


a x 31. } 
ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια, οἱ υἱοὶ ὑμῶν ἐν tive ἐκβάλλουσι ; διὰ τοῦτο x. 14. Phil. 


αὐτοὶ ὑμῶν ἔσονται κριταί.ῖ 28, εἰ δὲ ἐγὼ ἐν Πνεύµατι Θεοῦ” 
ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια, dpa 7 ἔφθασεν ep Spas ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


1$SBD have κριται εσονται vpwv. 


iii. 16. 

1 Thess. ii. 
16(inall= 
to reach). 


3 Most uncials have eye after εν Πνευµατιθεου, on which the emphasis ought to lie. 


So Schanz. Whether the Pharisees 
believed this theory may be doubted. It 
was enough that it was plausible. To 
reason with such menis vain. Yet Jesus 
did reason for the benefit of disciples. 
Vv. 25-30. The theory shown to 
be absurd.—Ver. 25. εἰδὼς τὰς ἐνθυ- 
pyoes. Jesus not only heard their 
words, but knew thew thoughts, the 
malicious feelings which prompted their 
words, and strove so to present the case 
as to convict them of bad faith and dis- 
honesty.—_waoa βασιλεία, etc.: state- 
ment of an axiom widely exemplified in 
human affairs: division fatal to stability 
in kingdoms and cities. — σταθήσεται: 
Ist future passive with an intransitive 
sense, vide Winer, § 38, 1.—Ver. 26 
applies the axiom to Satan. ¢, intro- 
duces a simple particular supposition 
without reference to its truth.—épepio8y : 
the aorist has the force of a perfect. 
Satan casting out Satan means self- 
stultification ; ipso facto, self-division re- 
sults. Against the argument it might be 
objected: Kingdoms and cities do 
become divided against themselves, re- 
gardless of fatal consequences, why 
not also Satan? Why should not that 
happen to Satan’s kingdom which has 
happened even to the Christian Church? 
Jesus seems to have credited Satan with 
more astuteness than is possessed by 
states, cities, and churches. Satan may 
be wicked, He says in effect, but he is 
not a fool. Then it has to be considered 
that communities commit follies which 
individuals avoid. Men war against 
each other to their common undoing, 
who would be wiser in their own affairs. 
One Satan might cast out another, but 
no Satan will cast out himself. And 
that is the case put by Jesus. Some, 
e.g., De Wette and Fritzsche, take 6 
Σατανᾶς 7. Σ. ἐκβάλλει as = one Satan 
casting out another. But that is not 
Christ’s meaning. He so puts the case 
as to make the absurdity evident. Ex 
hypothesi He had a right to put it so; 
for the theory was that Satan directly 
empowered and enabled Him to deliver 


men from his (Satan’s) power.—Ver 27. 
To the previous convincing argument 
Jesus adds an argumentum ad hominem, 
based on the exorcism then practised 
among the Jews, with which it would 
appear the Pharisees found no fault.—ot 
viol ὑμῶν, not of course Christ’s disciples 
(so most of the Fathers), for the Pharisaic 
prejudice against Him would extend to 
them, but men belonging to the same 
school or religious type, like-minded. 
By referring to their performances Jesus 
put the Pharisees in a dilemma. Either 
they must condemn both forms of dis- 
possession or explain why they made a 
difference. What they would have said 
we do not know, but it is not difficult tc 
suggest reasons. The Jewish exorcists 
operated in conventional fashion by use 
of herbs and magical formula, and the 
results were probably insignificant, The 
practice was sanctioned by custom, and 
harmless. But in casting out devils, as 
in all other things, Jesus was original, 
and His method was too effectual. His 
power, manifest to all, was His offence.— 
κριταῖ. Jesus now makes the fellow- 
religionists of the Pharisees their judges. 
On a future occasion He will make John 
the Baptist their judge (xxi. 23-27). Such 
home-thrusts were very inconvenient. 
Ver. 28. The alternative: if not by 
Satan then by the Spirit of God, 
with an inevitable inference as to the 
worker and His work.—év πνεύματι θεοῦ. 
Luke has ἐν δακτύλφῳ ϐθ. The former 
seems more in keeping with the connec- 
tion of thought as defending the ethical 
character of Christ’s work assailed by 
the Pharisees. If, indeed, the spirit of 
God were regarded from the charismatic 
point of view, as the source of miraculous 
gifts, the two expressions would be 
synonymous. But there is reason to 
believe that by the time our Gospel was 
written the Pauline conception of the 
Holy Spirit’s influence as chiefly ethical 
and immanent, as distinct from that of 
the primitive apostolic church, in which 
it was charismatic and transcendent, 
had gained currency (vide my St. Paul's 


188 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΙ. 


29. ἢ πῶς δύναταί τις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν οἴκίαν τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ καὶ τὰ 


σκεύη αὐτοῦ διαρπάσαι,} 


1 BCXE have the simple αρπασαι. 
Mk. or to the next clause. 


3 ~ 

ἐὰν μὴ πρῶτον δήση τὸν ἰσχυρόν; καὶ 
” ‘ a ae 2 
τότε τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ διαρπάσει. 


30. 6 μὴ Gv per ἐμοῦ, κατ ἐμοῦ 


διαρπασαι (ΝΓΙ.Δ al.) conforms either te 


2 SD (Tisch.) have διαρπαση. BCL al. p/. have διαρπασει, as in Τ.Ε. (W.H.). 


Conception of Christianity, chap. xiii.). 
A trace of the new Pauline view may be 
found in Mt. x. 20: ‘It is not ye that 
speak, but the Spirit of your Father 
speaking in you’. The influence is 
within, and the product is not unintelli- 
gible utterance, like that of the speaker 
with tongues (1 Cor. xii., xiv.), but wise, 
sincere apology for the faith. But why 
then did Luke not adopt this Pauline 
phrase? Because one of his main aims 
was to bring out the miraculousness of 
Christ’s healing works; that they were 
done by the very finger of God (Exod. 
viii. το).---ἔφθασεν. Fritzsche takes this 
word strictly as signifying not merely: 
the kingdom of God has come nigh you 
(ἤγγικεν, Lk. x. ο), but: has come 
nigh sooner than you expected. The 
more general sense, however, seems 
most suitable, as it is the usual sense in 
the N. T. The point at issue was: do 
the events in question mean Satan’s 
kingdom come or God’s kingdom come ? 
It must be one or other; make up your 
minds which.—Ver. 29. To help them 
to decide Jesus throws out yet another 
parabolic line of thought.—%!if all that 
I have said does not convince you con- 
sider this. The parable seems based on 
Is. xlix. 24, 25, and like all Christ’s 
parabolic utterances appeals to common 
sense. The theme is, spoiling the 


spoiler, and the argument that the enter-- 


prise implies hostile purpose and success 
in it superior power. The application 
is: the demoniac is a captive of Satan; 
in seeking to cure him I show myself 
Satan’s enemy ; in actually curing him 
I show myself Satan’s master.—rov 
ἰσχυροῦ: the article is either generic, 
or individualising after the manner of 
parabolic speech. Proverbs and parables 
assume acquaintance with their charac- 
ters.—oxevn, household furniture (Gen. 
xxxi. 37); ἁρπάσαι, seize (Judges xxi. 
21).--διαρπάσει, make a clean sweep of 
all that is in the house, the owner, 
bound hand and foot, being utterly help- 
less. The use of this compound verb 
points to the thoroughness of the cures 
wrought on demoniacs, as in the case of 
the demoniac of Gadara: quiet, clothed, 


sane (Mk, v. 15).—Ver. 30. One begins 
at this point to have the feeling that 
here, as elsewhere, our evangelist groups 
sayings of kindred character instead of 
exactly reproducing Christ’s words as 
spoken to the Pharisees. The connec- 
tion is obscure, and the interpretations 
therefore conflicting. On first view 
one would say that the adage seems 
more appropriate in reference to luke- 
warm disciples or undecided hearers than 
to the Pharisees, who made no pretence 
of being on Christ’s side. Some accord- 
ingly (¢.g., Bleek, after Elwert and 
Ullmann) have so understood it. Others, 
including Grotius, Wetstein, De Wette, 
take the ἐγώ of the adage to be Satan, 
and render ; he who, like myself, is not 
with Satan is against him, Kypke, Ob- 
serv. Sac., says: ‘‘ Prima persona posita 
est a servatore pro quacunque alia, pro- 
verbialiter, hoc sensu: qui socius cujus- 
dam bella cum alio gerentis non est, is 
pro adversario censeri solet. Cum igitur 
ego me re ipsa adversarium Satanae esse 
ostenderim, nulla specie socius ejus potero 
vocari.”” This certainly brings the say- 
ing into line with the previous train of 
thought, but if Jesus had meant to say. 
that He surely would have expressed 
Himself differently. The Fathers (Hilary, 
Jerome, Chrys.) took the ἐγώ to be Jesus 
and the 6 μὴ ὢν to be Satan. So under- 
stood,the adage contains a fourth con- 
cluding argument against the notion of 
a league between Jesus and Satan. Most 
modern interpreters refer the 6 µ. w. to the 
Pharisees. Schanz, however, under- 
stands the saying as referring to the 
undecided among the people. The only 
serious objection to this view is that it 
makes the saying irrelevant to the situa- 
tion.—oKoptife.: late for the earlier 
σκεδάννυµι, vide Lob., Phryn., p. 218. 
As to the metaphor of gathering and 
scattering, its matural basis is not 
apparent. But in all cases, when one 
man scatters what another gathers their 
aims and interests are utterly diverse. 
Satan is the arch-waster, Christ the 
collector, Saviour. 

Vv. 31, 32. Fesus changes His tone 
from argument to solemn warning. Ver. 


29—32. 


3 
εστι. 


καὶ ὁ μὴ συνάγων μετ ἐμοῦ, 


λέγω ὑμῖν, Πᾶσα ἁμαρτία καὶ " βλασφημία ἀφεθήσεται τοῖς ἀνθρώ- 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


"σκορπίζει. 


189 


31. Διὰ τοῦτο 2 Lk. xi. 23. 

John x. 12; 
XVL. 32. 2 
Cor. ix. 9. 


ποις: ἡ δὲ τοῦ Πνεύματος βλασφημία οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται τοῖς ἀνθρώ- α Ch. xv. 19. 


mots.! 32. καὶ ὃς ἂν 3 εἴπῃ λόγον κατὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, 
~ > A , gt , 
ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ ' ὃς 8 ἂν εἴπῃ κατὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ “Aytou, 
A ~ a 4 > ~ 
οὐκ deOjcerar? αὐτῷ, οὔτε ἐν τούτῳ τῷ αἰῶνι οὔτε ἐν τῷ µέλλοντι. 


Mk. iii. 28; 
vii. 22. 
Eph. iv 
31 (evil 
speaking 
generally). 
h. xxvi. 


65. Mk. ii. 7; xiv. 64. John x. 33 (against God). 


1$9B omit τοις ανθρωποις, which seem to be simply an echo of τ. αν. in the 


previous clause. 
2 os εαν in most uncials. 


D has ος αν, as in T. R. 


3 For ουκ αφεθησεται found in most uncials B has ov µη αφεθη, which W.H. 


place in the margin. 


31. διὰ τοῦτο connects not merely with 
preceding verse, but with the whole 
foregoing argument. Mark more im- 
pressively introduces the blasphemy- 
logion with a solemn ἁμὴν λέγω tpiv.— 
πᾶσα ἁμαρτία, etc. A broad preliminary 
declaration of the pardonableness of 
human sin of all sorts, and especially of 
sins of the tongue, worthy and charac- 
teristic of Jesus, and making what 
follows more impressive.— δὲ τ. Π. 
βλασ. οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται: pointed, emphatic 
exception. Evidently the Spirit here is 
taken ethically. He represents the 
moral ideal, the absolutely good and 
holy. Blasphemy against the Spirit so 
conceived, unpardonable—that is our 
Lord’s deliberate judgment.—-BAaogpypia, 
injurious speech (from βλάπτω and φήμη), 
in such a case will mean speaking of the 
holy One as if He were unholy, or, in 
the abstract, calling good evil, not by 
misunderstanding but through antipathy 
to the good.—Ver. 32. So serious a 
statement needs to be carefully guarded 
against misapprehension ; therefore Jesus 
adds an explanatory declaration.—Adyov 
κατὰ τ. υ. τ. ἀνθρώπον. Jesus dis- 
tinguishes between a word against the 
Son of Man and a word against the Holy 
Ghost. The reference in the former is 
to Himself, presumably, though Mark at 
the corresponding place has ‘‘ the sons 
of men,” and no special mention of a 
particular son of man. Christ gives the 
Pharisees to understand that the grava- 
men of their offence is not that they have 
spoken evilof Him. Jesus had no ex- 
ceptional sensitiveness as to personal 
offences. Nor did He mean to suggest 
that offences of the kind against Him 
were more serious or less easily pardon- 
able than such offences against other 
men, say, the prophets or the Baptist. 
Many interpreters, indeed, think other- 


wise, and represent blasphemy against 
the Son of Man as the higher limit of 
the forgiveable. A grave mistake, I 
humbly think. Jesus was as liable to 
honest misunderstanding as other good 
men, in some respects more liable than 
any, because of the exceptional originality 
of His character and conduct. All new 
things are liable to be misunderstood 
and decried, and the best for a while to 
be treated as the worst. Jesus knew this, 
and allowed for it. Men might there- 
fore honestly misunderstand Him, and 
be in no danger of the sin against the 
Holy Ghost (e.g., Saul of Tarsus). On 
the other hand, men might dishonestly 
calumniate any ordinary good man, and 
be very near the unpardonable sin. It 
is not the man that makes the difference, 
but the source of the blasphemy. If the 
source be ignorance, misconception, ill- 
informed prejudice, blasphemy against 
the Son of Man will be equally pardon- 
able with other sins. If the source be 
malice, rooted dislike of the good, selfish 
preference of wrong, because of the ad- 
vantage it brings, to the right which the 
good seek to establish, then the sin is 
not against the man but against the 
cause, and the Divine Spirit who inspires 
him, and though the agent be but 2 
humble, imperfect man, the sinner is 
perilously near the unpardonable point. 
Jesus wished the Pharisees to understand 
that, in His judgment, that was their 
position.—ovre, οὔτε analyse the nega- 
tion of pardon, conceived as affecting 
both worlds, into its parts for sake of 
emphasis (vide on V. 34-36). Dogmatic 
inferences, based on the double negation, 
to possible pardon after death, are pre- 
carious. Lightfoot (Hor. Heb.) explains 
the double negation by reference to the 
Jewish legal doctrine that, in contrast 
to other sins, profaning the name of God 


190 


KATA MATOAION 


XII. 


a - 
33. Ἡ ποιήσατε τὸ δένδρον καλόν, καὶ τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ καλόν. ἢ 
ποιήσατε τὸ δένδρον σαπρόν, καὶ τὸν καρπὸν αὐτοῦ σαπρόὀν’' ἐκ γὰρ 


τοῦ καρποῦ τὸ δένδρον γινώσκεται. 


34- Γεννήματα ἐχιονῶ», πῶς 


b Lk, vi. 45. δύνασθε ἀγαθὰ λαλεῖν, πονηροὶ ὄντες; ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ ” περισσεύµατος 


Mk. viii, =, a 
8. 2 Οοτ τῆς καρδίας τὸ στόµα λαλεῖ. 
Vill. 14. 

ς Ch. xili. 
52. Lk. x 


sense). a 


«5 (insame πος ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ θησαυροῦ ἐκβάλλει πονηρά. 


35. ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ 


θησαυροῦ τῆς καρδίας} ᾿ἐκβάλλει Ta? ἀγαθά : καὶ 6 πονηρὸς ἄνθρω- 


36. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, 


) A = 
d Lk. xvi. 2. ὅτι πᾶν ῥῆμα ἀργόν, ὃ ἐὰν λαλήσωσιν ® οἱ ἄνθρωποι, * ἀποδώσουσι 


Acts 


X1x. ‘ > nm @\2 3 ε , , 
jo. 1 Pet, περὶ αὐτοῦ *édyov ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως. 
δικαιωθήση, καὶ ἐκ τῶν λόγων σου καταδικασθήσῃ. 


iv. 5. 


} Most uncials omit της καρδιας. 


37. ἐκ γὰρ τῶν λόγων σου 


It comes from Lk. (vi. 45). 


2 BD al. omit ta, which, however, is found in ΝΟΤΔΣ and retained by W.H. on 


the margin. 


3 For ο εαν λαλησωσιν SQBC have ο λαλησονσιν, D λαλουσιν. 


could be expiated only by death, un- 
pardonable in this life. Blasphemy 
against the Holy Ghost, says Jesus, in 
conscious antithesis, pardonable neither 
here nor there: ‘‘neque ante mortem, 
neque per mortem’”’. 

Vv. 33-37. Kindred Logia. With the 
word concerning blasphemy the self- 
defence of Jesus against Pharisaic 
calumny reached its culmination and 
probably (as in Mark’s report) its close. 
The sentences following seem to be 
accretions rather than an organic part of 
the discourse. They substantially re- 
produce sayings found in Sermon on 
Mount (vii. 16-20), there directed against 
false prophets, here against false re- 
ligionists. Ver. 35 is found in Luke’s 
version of the Sermon (vi. 45). They 
might have been remarks made to the 
disciples about the Pharisees, as in 
xvi. 6, though in their present form 
direct address is implied (vide ver. 34). 
Their essential import is that the nature 
or heart of a man determines his speech 
and action. Given the tree, the fruit 
follows.—Ver. 33. ποιήσατε = εἴπατε 
(Euthy. Zig.), judge, pronounce; call 
both tree and fruit good, or evil; they 
must both be of one kind, in fact and 
in thought (vide Kypke, ad loc.). The 
reference of the adage has_ been 
much discussed: to the Pharisees or to 
Christ? Kypke replies: to Christ if 
you connect with what goes before, to 
the Pharisees if with what follows. As 
an adage the saying admits of either 
application. The Fathers favoured the 
reference to Ciirist, whom Meyer follows. 
—Ver. 34. Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, vide ili. 
7. John and Jesus agree in thinking 


the Pharisees a viper-brood. Both con- 
ceive them as morally hopeless. The 
Baptist wonders that they should come 
to a baptism of repentance. Jesus thinks 
them far on the way to final impeni- 
tence. But the point He makes here is 
that, being what they are, they cannot 
but speak evil. The poison of their 
nature must come out in their words. 
—Ver. 35. 6 ἀγαθὸς a.: good in the 
sense of benignant, gracious, kindly, the 
extreme moral opposite of the malignant 
viper-nature.-—@yoavpod : in ver. 34 the 
heart is conceived as a fountain, of 
which speech is the overflow, here as a 
treasure whose stores of thought and 
feeling the mouth freely distributes.— 
ἐκβάλλει suggests speech characterised 
by energy, passion. There was no lack 
of emphasis in Pharisaic comments on 
Jesus. They hissed out their malevolent 
words at Him, being not heartless but 
pad-hearted. But cf. texts referred to on 
margin.—Ver 36. πᾶν p. ἀργὸν: speech 
being the outcome of the heart, no word 
is insignificant, not even that which is 
ἀργόν, ineffectual (a, ἔργον), insipid, 
‘‘idle”. It is an index of thoughtless- 
ness if not of malice. This verse con- 
tains an important warning, whether 


spoken at this time or not.—Ver. 37. ἐκ 
yap τ. λόγων σου. Judgment by words 
here taught; in Mt. xxv. 31-46 


judgement by the presence or absence of 
kind deeds. No contradiction, for words 
are viewed as the index of a good or bad 
heart: bad positively, like that of the 
Pharisees, who spoke wickedly; bad 
negatively, like that of the thoughtless, 
who speak senselessly. On the teaching 
of this passage cf. James iil. 


93-41. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


τοί 


38. Τότε ἀπεκρίθησάν 1 τινες τῶν Ὑραμματέων καὶ Φαρισαίων, 


λέγοντες, “Διδάσκαλε, θέλοµεν ἀπὸ σοῦ σημεῖον ἰδεῖν.' 


39. Ὁ δὲ 


ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Teved πονηρὰ καὶ "μοιχαλὶς σημεῖονε Ch. xvi. 4, 


k. viii. 


Σἐπιζητεῖ : καὶ σημεῖον of δοθήσεται αὐτῇ, εἶ μὴ τὸ σημεῖον ‘lava 38. Jas. 
~ a a“ 1ν 74 
τοῦ προφήτου. 40. ὥσπερ γὰρ Fv ἸΙωνᾶς ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους { videat Ch, 
η ~ ε i ~ νι. 32. 
τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας, οὕτως ἔσται 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν 


τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς γῆς τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας. 


41. Άνδρες 


ο ~ , ~ ~ λ 

Δινευῖται ἀναστήσονται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, καὶ 
A > ~ 

κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτήν": ὅτι µετενόησαν εἲς τὸ κήρυγμα ‘IwvG: καὶ 


1 ΜΝΒΟΡΤΣ insert avtw before τινες. 


Vv. 38-45. A sign asked and refused, 
with relative discourse (Lk. xi. 16, 
29-36). Both Matt.’s and Luke’s re- 
ports convey the impression that the 
demand for a sign, and the enunciation 
of the Satanic theory as to Christ’s 
cures of demoniacs, were synchronous. 
If they were, the demand was impudent, 
hypocritical, insulting. Think of the 
men who could so speak of Christ’s heal- 
ing ministry wanting a sign that would 
satisfy them as to His Messianic claims! 
—Ver. 38. σημεῖον: what kind of a 
sign? They thought the cure of de- 
moniacs a sign from fell. Elsewhere 
we read of their asking a sign from 
heaven (xvi. 1). From what quarter was 
the sign now asked to come from? 
Perhaps those who made the demand 
had no idea; neither knew nor cared. 
Their question really meant: these signs 
won’t do; if you want us to believe in 
you you must do something else than 
cast out devils. The apparent respect 
and earnestness of the request are 
feigned: ‘teacher, we desire from you 
(emphatic position) to see a sign”. It 
reminds one of the mock homage of the 
soldiers at the Passion (xxvii. 27-31).— 
Ver. 30. γενεὰ, as in xi. 16, a moral class, 
‘‘quae in omni malitia et improbitate 
vivit,” Suicer, 6. v. yeved.—porxadts, un- 
faithful to God as a wife to a husband, 
apt description of men professing godli- 
ness but ungodly in heart.—émf{yret, 
hankers after, as in vi. 32 ; characteristic ; 
men that have no light within crave ex- 
‘ternal evidence, which given would be of 
no service to them. Therefore: od 
δοθήσεται: it will not be given either by 
Jesus or by any one else. He declines, 
knowing it to be vain. No sign will 
convince them; why give one ?—éei μὴ, 
etc.: except the sign of Jonah the 
prophet, which was no sign in their 
‘sense. What is referred to? But for 


what follows we should have said: the 
preaching of repentance by Jonah to the 
Ninevites. So Lk. xi. 30 seems to 
take it. Jonah preached repentance to 
the men of Nineveh as the only way of 
escape from judgment. Jesus points to 
that historic instance and says: Beware! 
Jonah was not the only prophetic 
preacher of repentance ; but, as Nineveh 
is held up as a reproach to the persons 
addressed, to single him out was fitting. 
—Ver. 40 gives an entirely different 
turn to the reference. The verse cannot 
be challenged on critical grounds. If it 
is an interpolation, it must have become 


‘an accepted part of the text before the 


date of our earliest copies. If it be 
genuine, then Jesus points to His re- 
surrection as the appropriate sign for an 
unbelieving generation, saying in effect: 
you will continue to disbelieve in spite 
of all I can say or do, and at last you 
will put me to death. But I will rise 
again, a sign for your confusion if not 
for your conversion. For opposite views 
on this interpretation of the sign of 
Jonah, vide Meyer ad loc. and Holtzmann 
in H.C.—Ver. 41. Application of the 
reference in ver. 39. The men of 
Nineveh are cited in condemnation of 
the Jewish contemporaries of Jesus. Cf. 
similar use of historic parallels in xi. 
20-24.---πλεῖον *lwva, more than Jonah, 
of. ver. 6; refers either to Jesus per- 
sonally as compared with Jonah, or to 
His ministry as compared with Jonah’s. 
In the latter case the meaning is: there 
is far more in what is now going on 
around you to shut you up to repentance 
than in anything Jonah said to the men 
of Nineveh (so Grotius).—Ver. 42. 
βασίλισσα νότου is next pressed into 
the service of putting unbelievers to 
shame. The form βασίλισσα was con- 
demned by Phryn., but Elsner cites in- 
stances from Demosthenes and οἶιας 


192 


KATA ΜΑΤΟΑΙΟΝ 


XII. 


« Lk. xi. αχ. ἴδού, πλεῖον "lava ὧδε. 42. "βασίλισσα νότου ἐγερθήσεται ἐν τῇ 


Acts viii. 


"πλεῖον Σολομῶντος ὧδε. 


‘ > ε 0 
καὶ OUX εὑρίσκει. 


&1 Cor. vii. 
5 (to have 


leisure). k Lk. xi. 25; xv. 8. 


1S9BDZ read ets τον οικον pov επιστρεψω. 


to Lk. (xi. 24). 


good writers. J. Alberti also (Observ. 
Philol.) cites an instance from Athenzus, 
lib. xiii. 595: βασίλισσ᾽ ἔσει Βαβυλῶνος. 
The reference is to the story in 1 Kings 
x. and 2 Chron. ix. concerning the 
Queen of Sheba visiting Solomon.—é« 
τῶν περάτων τῆς γῆς. Elsner quotes in 
illustration the exhortation of lsocrates 
not to grudge to go a long way to hear 
those who profess to teach anything 
useful.—rAetov Σ., again a claim of 
superiority for the present over the great 
persons and things of the past. On the 
apparent egotism of these comparisons, 
vide my Apologetics, p. 367; and re- 
member that Jesus claimed superiority. 
not merely for Himself and His. work, 
but even for the least in the Kingdom of 
Heaven (xi. 11). 

Vv. 43-45. A comparison. Cf. Lk. 
xi. 24-26. Formerly Jesus had likened 
the evil race of Pharisaic religionists to 
children playing in the market-place (xi. 
16-19). Now He uses expelled demons 
to depict their spiritual condition. The 
similitude moves in the region of popular 
opinion, and gives a glimpse into the 
superstitions of the time. We gather 
from it, first, that the effects of the arts 
of exorcists were temporary ; and, second, 
the popular theory to explain the facts: 
the demon returned because he could 
not find a comfortable home anywhere 
else. On this vide Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. 
The parable was naturally suggested by 
the cure of the demoniac (ver. 22).— 
Ver. 43. δι ἀνύδρων τόπων: the haunts 
of demons, as popularly conceived, were 
places uninhabited by men, deserts and 
graveyards. Thedemon in Tobit viii. 3 
flies to the uppermost parts of Egypt; 
and in Baruch iv. 35 a land desolated by 
fire is to become tenanted by demons.— 
διέρχεται ζητοῦν: the spirit keeps moving 
on in quest of a resting place; like a 
human being he feels ill at ease in the mo- 
notonous waste of sand.—ovx« εὑρίσκει: 


43- 


.,, Rev. κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, καὶ κατακρινεῖ αὐτήν : ὅτι ἦλθεν ἐκ 
«τῶν Ἡ περάτων τῆς γῆς ἀκοῦσαι τὴν σοφίαν Σολομῶντος καὶ ἴδού. 
Ὅταν δὲ τὸ ἀκάθαρτον πνεῦμα ἐξέλθῃ 
«ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, διέρχεται δι | ἀνύδρων τόπων, ζητοῦν ἀνάπαυσιν, 
44. τότε λέγει, ᾿Επιστρέψω eis τὸν οἶκόν pou,! 
ὅθεν ἐξῆλθον: καὶ ἐλθὸν εὑρίσκει ) σχολάζοντα, 


* σεσαρωμµένον καὶ 
The reading in T. R. is assimilated 


in Luke εὑρίσκον The change from 
participle to finite verb is expressive. 
The failure to find a resting place was an 
important fact, as on it depended the re- 
solve to return to the former abode.— 
Ver. 44. σχολάζοντα σ. καὶ x. = un- 
tenanted and ready for a tenant, invit- 
ing by its clean, ornamented condition. 
The epithets simply describe in lively 
pictorial manner the risk of repossession. 
But naturally commentators seek spiritual 
equivalents for them. Ornamented how? 
With grace, say some (Hilary, Chrys., 
Godet), with sim, others (Orig., Jer., 
Euthy., Weiss, etc.). The ornamenta- 
tion must be to the taste of the tenant. 
And what is that? Neither for sin nor 
for grace, but for sin counterfeiting 
grace; a form of godliness without the 
power ; sanctity which is but a mask for 
iniquity. The house is decorated re- 
putedly for God’s occupancy, really fo: 
the devil’s—cecapwpévov; σαροῦν is 
condemned by Phryn.; ‘‘ when you hear 
one say σάρωσον bid him say παρα- 
Képyngov”’.—Ver. 45. ἑπτὰ ἕτερα πνεύ- 
para, etc. This feature is introduced 
to make the picture answer to the moral 
condition of the Pharisees as conceived 
by Jesus. The parable here passes out 
of the region of popular imagination and 
natural probability into a region of 
deeper psychological insight. Why 
should the demon want associates in 
occupancy of the house? Why not 
rather have it all to himself as before ?— 
οὕτως ἔσται, etc. Ethical application. 
The general truth implied is: moral and 
religious reform may be, has been, 
succeeded by deeper degeneracy. The 
question naturally suggests itself: what 
is the historical range of the application ? 
It has been answered variously. From 
the lawgiving till the present time (Hil., 
Jer.); from the exile till now (Chrys., 
Grotius, etc.); from the Baptist till now 
(Weiss. etc.). Christ gives no hint of: 


42—50. 


' xexoopnpevoy. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


193 


45. τότε πορεύεται καὶ ™ παραλαμβάνει pel ἑαυτοῦ 1 Lk. xi. 25. 


h. αχ]. 


ἑπτὰ ἕτερα πνεύματα " πονηρότερα ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ εἰσελθόντα κατοικεῖ 29 (of 


ἐκεῖ: καὶ γίνεται τὰ ἔσχατα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκείνου χείρονα τῶν το 
~ ~ a 7? 

οὕτως ἔσται καὶ τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ τῇ πονηρᾷ. 
- A a ‘ A 
αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος τοῖς ὄχλοις, ἰδού, ἡ µήτηρ Kal οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ 


πρώτων. 


tombs). 
Ch. xvii. 


τ. 
46. Ἔτι δὲ1 n compar. 
here and 
in Lk. xi. 


A a a 26. 
εἰστήκεισαν ἔξω, °Lntodvtes αὐτῷ λαλῆσαι. 47. εἶπε δέ τις αὐτῷ, ο Ch. xxi. 


“Ιδού, ἡ µήτηρ σου καὶ ot ἀδελφοί σου ἔξω ἑστήκασι, ζητοῦντές 


σοι λαλῆσαι.” 3 


” 
ἐστιν ἡ µήτηρ µου; καὶ tives εἰσὶν οἱ ἀδελφοί µου; 
ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ ΄ ἐπὶ τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ εἶπεν, “Ιδού, ή 


µήτηρ µου καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί µου. 


48. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε τῷ εἰπόντι 3 αὐτῷ, “Τίς 


46. Mk. 
xii. 12. 
Lk. v. 18. 
John v. 18 
. (with inf. 
49. Καὶ = toen- 
deavour). 


50. ὅστις γὰρ ἂν ποιήσῃ τὸ θέλημα 


τοῦ πατρός µου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, αὐτός µου ἀδελφὸς καὶ ἀδελφὴ καὶ 


µήτηρ ἐστίν. 
1 SSB omit δε (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 The whole of ver. 47 is wanting in BL and is omitted by W.H. Tisch. puts 


it within brackets. 
δλεγοντι in NBDZ. 
4 ΓΣ omit αυτου (Tisch.). 


what period was in His thoughts, unless 
we find one in the epithet μοιχαλὶς 
(ver. 39), which recalls prophetic charges 
of unfaithfulness to her Divine Husband 
against Israel, and points to the exile as 
the crisis at which she seriously re- 
pented of that sin. It is not at all likely 
that Christ’s view was limited to the 
period dating from John’s ministry. 
Moral laws need large spaces of time for 
adequate exemplification. The most in- 
structive exemplification of the degene- 
racy described is supplied by the period 
from Ezra till Christ’s time. With Ezra 
ended material idolatry. But from that 
period dates the reign of legalism, which 
issued in Rabbinism, a more subtle and 
pernicious idolatry of the letter, the 
more deadly that it wore the fair aspect 
of zeal for God and righteousness. 

Vv. 46-50. The relatives of Fesus 
(Mk. iii. 31-35; Lk. viii. 19-21). 
Matthew and Mark place this incident 
in connection with the discourse occa- 
sioned by Pharisaic calumny. Luke 
gives it in a quite different connection. 
The position assigned it by Matthew 
and Mark is at least fitting, and through 
it one can understand the motive. Not 
vanity: a desire to make a parade of 
their influence over their famous relative 
on the part of mother and brethren 
(Chrys., Theophy., etc.), but solicitude 
on His account and a desire to extricate 
Him from trouble. This incident should 


It is an explanatory gloss. 


BC retain it (W.H. within brackets), 


be viewed in connection with the state- 
ment in Mk. iii. 21 that friends thought 
Jesus beside Himself. They wished to 
rescue Him from Himself and from men 
whose ill-will He had, imprudently, 
they probably thought, provoked.—Ver. 
46. ἀδελφοὶ, brothers in the natural 
sense, sons of Mary by Joseph?  Pre- 
sumably, but an unwelcome hypothesis 
to many on theological grounds.— 
εἰστήκεισαν, pluperfect, but with sense 
of imperfect (Fritzsche). They had 
been standing by while Jesus was speak- 
ing.юۤw, on the outskirts of the crowd, 
or outside the house into which Jesus 
entered (Mk. iii. 19).—Ver. 47 (wanting 


in NBL) states what is implied in ver. 


48 (τῷ λέγοντι), that some one reported 
to Jesus the presence of His relatives. — 
Ver. 48. τίς ἔστιν ἡ µήτηρ pov. One 
might have expected Jesus, out of deli- 
cacy, to have spoken only of His 
brethren, leaving the bearing of the 
question on His mother to be inferred. 
But the mention of her gave increased 
emphasis to the truth proclaimed. The 
question repels a well-meant but ignorant 
interference of natural affection with the 
sovereign claims of duty. It reveals a 
highly strung spirit easily to be mistaken 
for a morbid enthusiasm.—Ver. 49. 
ἐκτείνας τ. χ.: an eloquent gesture, 
making the words following, for those 
present, superfluous.—i8ov, etc. There 


13 4 


194 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIII. 


Μι 
a Ch. xxvii XIII. 1. "EN δὲ] τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκεινῃ ἐξελθὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπὸ τῆς 
iv. 1; vi. οἰκίας ἐκάθητο παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν: 2. καὶ " συνήχθησαν πρὸς αὐτὸν 


30; VIL. 


il. I 
(with πρὸς ὄχλοι πολλοί, ὥστε αὐτὸν eis τὸ 5 πλοῖον ἐμβάντα καθῆσθαι: καὶ 


τινα]. 


1 ΜΦΒΣ omit δε, which the ancient revisers seem to have inserted regularly as a 


transitional particle. 


2 SZ have εκ (Tisch.). 
margin). 
5 SBCLZE omit το. 


are idealists, promoters of pet schemes, 
and religious devotees whom it would 
cost no effort to speak thus; not an ad- 
mirable class of people. It did cost 
Jesus an effort, for He possessed a 
warm heart and unblighted natural 
affections. But He sacrificed natural 
affection on the altar of duty, as He 
finally sacrificed His life—Ver. 50. 
Definition of spiritual kinsmanship. The 
highest brotherhood based on spiritual 
affinity.—3o7ts γὰρ ἂν ποιήσῃ: a general 
present supposition expressed by the sub- 
junctive with ἂν followed by present in- 
dicative.—r16 θέλημα τ. πατρός p. τ. ἐν 
οὐρανοῖς: this probably comes nearest to 
Christ’s actual words. Insuch a solemn 
utterance He was likely to mention His 
Father, whose supreme claims His filial 
heart ever owned. Mark has ‘‘ the will 
of God’’; Luke ‘‘those who hear and 
do the word of God ”—obviously second- 
ary. 

CHAPTER XIII. JESUS TEACHING IN 
PARABLES. The transition from the 
sultry, sombre atmosphere of chap. xii. 
into the calm, clear air of Cnhrist’s 
parabolic wisdom would be as welcome 
to the evangelist as it is to us. Yet even 
here we do not altogether escape the 
shadow of unbelief or spiritual insus- 
ceptibility. We read of much good seed 
wasted, bad seed sown among good, fish 
of all sorts caught in the net. The 
adoption of the parabolic method of 
teaching, indeed, had its origin in part 
in disappointing experiences; truths 
misapprehended, actions misunderstood, 
compelling the Teacher to fall back on 
natural analogies for explanation and 
self-defence. Al! the synoptists recog- 
nise the importance of this type of teach- 
ing by their formal manner of introducing 
the first of the group of seven parables 
contained in Matthew’s collection. Cf. 
Mt. xiii. 3; Mk. iv. 2; Lk. viii. 4. 
Matthew’s way of massing matter of the 
same kind most effectually impresses us 
with the significance of this feature in 
Christ’s teaching ministry. That Jesus 


B has neither εκ nor απο (W.H. omit απο and have ex in 


κ. 


spoke all the seven parables grouped 
together in this chapter at one time is 
not certain or even likely. In the cor- 
responding section Mark gives only two 
of the seven (Sower and Mustard Seed). 
Luke has the Sower only. The Sower, 
the Taves, and the Drag net may have 
formed a single discourse, as very closely 
connected ἵπ structure and import. 
Perhaps we should rather say had a 
place in the discourse from the boat, 
which seems to have been a review of 
the past ministry of Jesus, expressing 
chiefly disappointment with the result. 
Much besides parables would be spoken, 
the parables being employed to point the 
moral: much seed, little fruit, and yet 
a beginning made destined to grow; the 
situation to be viewed with patience and 
hope. Just how many of the parables 
reported by the evangelists were spoken 
then it is impossible to determine. 

Vv. 1-9. The Parable of the Sower 
(Mk. iv. 1-9; Lk. viii. 4-8). Ver. 1. 
ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ. The parable stands 
in the same connection in Mark (not in 
Luke), but not as following in immediate 
temporal sequence. No stress should 
be laid-on Matthew’s phrase ‘‘on that 
day ”.---ἐξελθὼν τῆς οἰκίας: the house 
in which Jesus is supposed to have been 
when His friends sought for Him, 
though Matthew makes no mention of 
it (vide Mk. iii. 19).—éxa@yro: as at 
the teaching on the hill (v. 1), suggestive 
of lengthened discourse. The Teacher 
sat, the hearers stood.—Ver. 2. ὄχλοι 
πολλοί, great numbers of people in all 
the accounts, compelling the Teacher to 
withdraw from the shore into the sea, 
and, sitting in a boat, to address the 
people standing on the margin. Much 
interest, popularity of the Teacher still 
great, and even growing; yet He has 
formed a very sober estimate ofits value, 
as the parable following shows.—Ver. 3. 
ἐν παραβολαῖς: this method of teaching 
was not peculiar to Jesus—it was 
common among Easterns—but His use 
of it was unique in felicity and in the 


I—Io, 


was 6 ὄχλος ἐπὶ τὸν ” αἰγιαλὸν εἰστήκει. 
πολλὰ ἐν “παραβολαῖς, λέγων, “Ιδού, ἐξῆλθεν 6 σπείρων τοῦ σπείρειν. 


a 


τὰ πετεινά, καὶ “xatépayey αὖτά. 


Σπετρώδη, ὅπου οὐκ εἶχε γῆν πολλήν’ καὶ εὐθέως ἐξανέτειλε, διὰ τὸ 
μὴ ἔχειν βάθος” γῆς: 6. ἡλίου δὲ ἀνατείλαντος * ἐκαυματίσθη, καὶ 


διὰ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν pilav, 5 ἐξηράνθη. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


195 


3. καὶ ἐλάλησεν αὗτοῖς > ver 48. 


Heb. ix. 
9; Xi. το. 
d Lk. xv. 30. 


7. ἄλλα δὲ ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ τὰς Jobnii. 17. 


6 ver. 20. 


ἀκάνθας, καὶ ἀνέβησαν at ἄκανθαι, καὶ ἀπέπνιζαν ὃ aitd. 8. ἄλλα Mk. iv. s, 
1 


δὲ ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν τὴν καλήν, καὶ ἐδίδου καρπόν, ὃ μὲν ἑκατόν, f Mk. iv. 6. 


ὃ δὲ ἑξήκοντα, ὃ δὲ τριάκοντα. 


10. Καὶ προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ εἶπον αὐτω, “ Διατί ἐν παραβολαῖς ον 2ο. 
ο 


Rev. xvi. 


ϱ. 6 ἔχων Sta dxovew* ἀκουέτω. 8, 9. 


g Ch. xxi. 


nxv.6. 
Jas. i. 11. 


1B has ελθοντα τα πετεινα κατεφαγεν, which W.H. putin the text, placing ηλθον 


+. π. και in the margin. 
3 B has της before γης. 


3 ND have επνιξαν (Tisch.). 
with επνιξαν in margin). 


BCZX al. and many min. have απεπνιξαν (W.H. 


4S9BL omit ακονειν, which comes from parall. 


importance of the lessons conveyed. 
Abstract a priori definitions of the word 
serve little purpose; we learn best what 
a parable is, in the mouth of Jesus, by 
studying the parables He spoke. Thence 
we gather that to speak in parables 
means to use the familiar in nature or in 
human life (in the form of a narrative or 
otherwise) to embody unfamiliar truths 
of the spiritual world. 

Vv. 3-9. The Parable.—Ver. 3. 6 
σπείρων: either 6 generic, or the Sower 
of my story.—rod σπείρειν: the infinitive 
of purpose with the genitive of article, 
very frequent in N. T. and in late Greek. 
—Ver. 4. παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν: not the 
highway, of which there were few, but 
the footpath, of which there were many 
through or between the fields.—Ver. 5. 
ἐπὶ τὰ πετρώδη, upon shallow ground, 
where the rock was near the surface (οὐκ 
εἶχεν γῆν πολλήν).--Ψετ. 6. éxavpa- 
τίσθη, it was scorched (by the sun) (cf. 
Rev. xvi. 8), which had made it spring 
earliest: promptly quickened, soon 
killed.—Ver. 7. ἐπὶ τὰς ἀκάνθας. 
Fritzsche prefers the reading ἐις because 
the seed fell not on thorns already 
sprung up, but on ground full of thorn 
seeds or roots. But the latter idea, 
which is the true one, can be expressed 
also by ἐπὶ.- ἀνέβησαν: the thorns 
sprang up as well as the corn, and grow- 
ing more vigorously gained the upper 
hand.—énvitav. Euthy. Zig. finds this 
idea in ἀνέβησαν, for which he gives as 


synonym ὑπερίσχυσαν.- Ψετ. 8. καλὴν, 
genuinely good land free from all the 
faults of the other three: soft, deep, 
clean.—é8(Sev, yielded. In other texts 
(iii, 8, 10; vii. 17) ποιεῖν is used.— 
ἑκατόν, ἑξήκοντα, τριάκοντα: all satis- 
factory; 30 good, 60 better, 100 best 
(Gen. xxvi. 12).—Ver. 9. 6 ἔχων Ora ax. 
ἀκ. An invitation to think of the hidden 
meaning, or rather a hint that there was 
sucha meaning. The description of the 
land in which the sower carried on his 
operations would present no difficulties 
to the hearers: the beaten paths, the 
rocky spots, the thorny patches were all 
familiar features of the fields in Palestine, 
and the fate of the seed in each case was 
in accordance with common experience. 
But why paint the picture? What is 
the moral of the story? That Jesus left 
them to find out. 

Vv. 10-17. The disciples ask an ex- 
planation. There is some difficulty in 
forming a clear idea of this interlude. 
Who asked? The Twelve only, or they 
and others with them, as Mark states 
(iv. ro)? And when? Immediately 
after the parable was spoken, or, as was 
more likely, after the teaching of the day 
was over? The one certain point is that 
an explanation was asked and given.— 
Ver.10, διατί ἐν παραβολαῖς: Matthew 
makes the question refer to the method 
of teaching, Mark and Luke to the 
meaning of the parables spoken. The 
two questions were closely connected, 


196 


λαλεῖς αὐτοῖς; 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIII, 


11. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ὅτι ὑμῖν 


δέδοται γνῶναι τὰ μυστήρια τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν, ἐκείνοις δὲ 


οὐ δέδοται. 


a n 
12. ὅστις γὰρ ἔχει, δοθήσεται αὐτῷ καὶ περισσευθή- 
σεται΄ ὅστις δὲ οὐκ ἔχει, καὶ ὃ ἔχει, ἀρθήσεται dm αὐτοῦ. 


10. 


h Gal. vi. α. διὰ τοῦτο ἐν παραβολαῖς αὐτοῖς λαλῶ, ὅτι βλέποντες οὗ βλέπουσι, 


Phil. ii. 30. 


iActsxxviil. καὶ ἀκούοντες οὐκ ἀκούουσιν, οὐδὲ συνιοῦσι. 


27, 


.. 


14. καὶ  ἀναπληροῦται 


jActsxxviii. ἐπ᾽ } αὐτοῖς ἡ προφητεία Ἡσαΐου, ἡ λέγουσα, “᾿Ακοῇ ἀκούσετε, καὶ 


27. 
k Acts 
XXViii. 


Lk. xxii. , 


οὐ μὴ συνῆτε: καὶ βλέποντες βλέψετε, καὶ οὐ μὴ ἴδητε. 
1 Mk. iv. 12.' ἐπαχύνθη γὰρ ἡ καρδία τοῦ λαοῦ τούτου, 


τα, 


καὶ τοῖς dct { βαρέως 


32. Acts ἤκουσαν, καὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν * ἐκάμμυσαν: µήποτε ἴδωσι τοῖς 


ili. 19; 
XXVIM. 27 
(absol. = 
reform). 


ὀφθαλμοῖς, καὶ τοῖς ὠσὶν ἀκούσωσι, καὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ συνῶσι, καὶ 
| ἐπιστρέψωσι, καὶ ἰάσωμαι 3 


αὐτούς. 16. Ὑμῶν δὲ µακάριοι of 


1 88BC omit επι, which may have been added by the grammarians to make the 


const. clearer. 
? tawopat in most uncials. 


and both doubtless in the minds of the 
disciples. A more serious difficulty 
arises in connection with Christ’s answer 
to their question, which seems to say 
that He adopted the parabolic method in 
order to hide the truths of the kingdom 
from unspiritual minds. Nothing is 
more certain than that Jesus neither did 
nor could adopt any such policy, and if 
the evangelists ascribed it to Him, then 
we should have no alternative but to 
agree with those who, like Holtzmann 
(H. C.) and Jilicher (Die Gletchnissreden 
Fesu, pp. 131, 149, vide also his 
Einleitung in das Ν. Τ., p. 228), main- 
tain that the evangelists have mistaken 
His meaning, reading intention in the 
light of result. It is much better to 
impute a mistake to them than an in- 
human purpose to Christ. 

Ver. 11. τὰ puvorypia: the word, as 
here used, might suggest the idea of a 
mysterious esoteric doctrine concerning 
the Kingdom of God to be taught only to 
a privileged inner circle. But the term 
in the N. T. means truths once hidden 
now revealed, made generally known, 
and in their own nature perfectly in- 
telligible. So, e.g., in Eph. iii. 9, Col. i. 
26. Jesus desired to make the truths of 
the kingdom of God known to all; by 
parables if they could not be understood 
otherwise. His aim was to enlighten, 
not to mystify.—Ver. 12. This moral 
apothegm is here given only in Matt. 
It contains a great truth, whether spoken 
or not on this occasion. For the con- 
struction, vide at x. 14.--περισσευθή- 
σεται: again in Mt. xxv. 29, where 


Reading of T.R. in XA, 


the saying is repeated. This use of the 
passive in a neuter sense belongs to late 
Greek.—Ver. 13. διὰ τοῦτο ὅτι. Mark 
and Luke have tva, the former assigning 
a reason, the latter ascribing a purpose. 
In Matt. Jesus says: I speak in parables 
because seeing they do not see, etc. ; 
which ought naturally to mean: they are 
dull of apprehension, therefore I do my 
best to enlighten them.—Vvy. 14, 15. 
The prophetic citation, given as such by 
Matthew only, may be due to him, though 
put into the mouth of Jesus. It is con- 
ceivable, however, that Jesus might use 
Isaiah’s words in Isaiah’s spirit, i.e., 
ironically, expressing the bitter feeling 
of one conscious that his best efforts to 
teach his countrymen would often end 
in failure, and in his bitterness repre- 
senting himself as sent to stop ears and 
blind eyes. Such utterances are not to 
be taken as deliberate dogmatic teach- 
ing. If, as some allege, the evangelists 
so took them, they failed to understand 
the mind of the Master. The quotation 
exactly follows the Sept. The verb 
καμμύω (ver. 15, ἐκάμμνυσαν) is con- 
demned by Phryn. as barbarous, the, 
right word being xatapvew.—Vv. 16, 17. 
In Mk. (iv. 13) Jesus reproaches the 
disciples for their ignorance; here He 
congratulates them on their faculty of 
seeing and hearing (spiritually).—tpov: 
in emphatic position, suggesting contrast 
between disciples and the multitude.— 

ακάριοι, vide on chap. v. 3.--ὅτι βλ., 
ecause, not for what, they 5εε.---ἁμὴν 
γὰρ λέγω: introducing an important 
εἰαίεππεηῖ.---προφῆται καὶ δίκαιοι, same 


ΧΙ1--20. 


ὀφθαλμοί, ὅτι βλέπουσι’ καὶ τὰ dra ὑμῶν, ὅτι ἀκούει.Σ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


197 


17. ἀμὴν 


γὰρ λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι πολλοὶ προφῆται καὶ δίκαιοι ἐπεθύμησαν ἰδεῖν & 

βλέπετε, καὶ οὐκ εἶδον' καὶ ἀκοῦσαι ἃ ἀκούετε, καὶ οὐκ ἤκουσαν. 

18. Ὑμεῖς οὖν ἀκούσατε τὴν παραβολὴν τοῦ σπείροντος.» 19. Παντὸς 

> , , A , Q a , ” 

ἀκούοντος τὸν λόγον τῆς βασιλείας καὶ μὴ συνιέντος, ἔρχεται ὁ 
πονηρός, καὶ "' ἁρπάζει τὸ ἐσπαρμένον ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ: οὗτός m Acts viii. 


ἐστιν 6 παρὰ τὴν ὁδὸν σπαρείς. 


20. Ὁ δὲ ἐπὶ τὰ πετρώδη σπαρείς, 


οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὸν λόγον ἀκούων, καὶ εὐθὺς μετὰ χαρᾶς λαμβάνων 


1 B omits υΌµων (bracketed in W.H.). 


? ακονουσι in ΝΒΟΡΧΣ. ακονει a grammatical correction (neut. pl. nom. wra). 


Σσπειραντος in HBX. 33- 


combination as in x. 41. The felicity 
now consists in the things seen and 
heard. The perceiving senses and the 
things to be perceived imply each other, 
neither by themselves yield enjoyment. 
This passage is given by Lk. (x. 23, 24) 
in a more suitable connection (report on 
their mission by the Seventy). Here it 
creates an exaggerated impression as 
to the extent of the new departure. 
The parabolic teaching of Jesus, as 
exemplified in the Sower and other 
parables here collected, was not an 
absolutely new feature. He had always 
been speaking more or less in parables 
(6 Fishers of Men,” iv. το; “‘ Salt of the 
Barth,” ‘City on a Hill,” v. 13, 14; 
‘““Two Builders,” vii. 24-27; ‘Whole 
need not a Physician,” ix. 12; “Νεν 
Garment and New Wine,” ix. 16, 17, 
etc.). Some of the parables in this 
connection, the Treasure and the Pearl, 
¢.g., may be gems preserved from some 
otherwise forgotten synagogue  dis- 
courses, say those delivered in the 
preaching tour through Galilee. 

Vv. 18-23. Interpretation of the Sower 
(Mk. iv. 14-20; Lk. viii. 11-15). Ver. 18. 
ἡμεῖς, emphatic, ye privileged ones.— 
οὖν referring to the happiness on which 
they have been congratulated.—Ver. 18. 
ἀκούσατε τ. π.: not, hear it over again, 
but, what it means.—owefpavtos, aorist, 
of the man who sowed in the story just 
told.—Ver. 19. παντὸς ἀκούοντος, in 
the case of any one who hears, “‘ for the 
classical ἐάν τις axovoy ” (Camb. G. T.). 
It may be a case of interrupted construc- 
tion, the sentence beginning with the 
intention to make the genitive de- 
pendent on an ἐκ τῆς καρδίας before 
ἁρπάζει (so Weiss).—rov λόγον τῆς βα- 
σιλείας: the Sower, unlike the other 
parables in this chapter, contains no 
hint that it concerns the kingdom. But 


σπειροντος Conforms to ver. 3. 


in Christ’s discourses that almost went 
without saying.—py συνιέντος: “ not 
taking it in,” a phrase which happily 
combines the physical fact of the parable 
with the figurative sense.—6 πονηρός, 
the evil one, Satan, represented by the 
innocent birds of the parable. Whata 
different use of the emblem from that in 
vi. 26 !—év τῇ καρδίᾳ: we should hardly 
say of truth not understood that it had 
been sown in the heart. But heart is 
used in Scripture in a wide sense, as the 
seat of intellect as well as of feeling. 
The word in the case supposed is in the 
mind, as the seed is in the ground: on 
it, if not in it; in it as words, if not as 
truth.—otrés ἐστιν, etc., this is he 
sown, etc., said of the man, not of the 
seed. Sign and thing signified iden- 
tified, cf. ‘this is my body”. Properly, 
the seed sown, etc., represents the case 
of such a man. So throughout the in- 
terpretation.—Ver. 20. μετὰ χαρᾶς λ.: 
this is the new feature in the second type 
added to the hearing of the first ; hearing 
and receiving. with joy characteristic of 
quick emotional shallow natures, but not 
of them only. Deep earnest natures 
also have joy in truth found, but with a 
difference.—Ver. 21. οὐκ ἔχει: instead 
of the participle ἔχων under the influence 
of Mk.’s text (Weiss).—mpécKatpos, tem- 
porary, cf. 2 Cor. iv. 18.—Ver. 22. ἀκούων, 
hearing alone predicated of the third 
type, but receiving both intellectually 
and emotionally implied; everything 
necessary present except purity of heart, 
singleness of mind. Hearing is to be 
taken here in a pregnant sense as distinct 
from the hearing that is no hearing (ver. 
13).---μέριμνατ. α.,ἀπάτητ.π.: together 
Ξ worldliness. Lust for money and 
care go together and between them 
spoil many an earnest religious nature. 
---ἅκαρπος may refer either to the man 


198 


KATA MATOAION 


XIII. 


n Mk.iv.17.adrév> 41. οὐκ ἔχει δὲ ῥίζαν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, ἀλλὰ 3 πρόσκαιρός ἐστι: 


2 Cor. iv. 


18. Heb. γενομένης δὲ θλίψεως ἢ διωγμοῦ διὰ τὸν λόγον, εὖθὺς σκανδαλίζεται. 


Xi. 25 


ο. viii, 22. Ὁ δὲ eis τὰς ἀκάνθας σπαρείς, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὸν λόγον ἀκούων, 


14; xxi. 


34. 2 Cor. καὶ ἡ "μέριμνα τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου 


xi. 28. 


p Mk. iv.19. συμπνίγει τὸν λόγον, Kal ἄκαρπος γίνεται. 


Eph. iv.22. , 


1 καὶ ἡ Ρ ἁπάτη τοῦ πλούτου 


23. Ὁ δὲ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν 


Col. ii. 8. τὴν καλὴν 3 σπαρείς, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τὸν λόγον ἀκούων καὶ συνιών 5 - 


2 Thess. 


ii. 10. Heb. ὃς 78 καρποφορεῖ, καὶ ποιεῖ ὁ 4 μὲν ἑκατόν, ὁ δὲ ἑξήκοντα, 6 δὲ 


ili. 13. 


2 
Pet. ii,  TptdKovTa.” 


?). 
q Ee aia in Lk. ii. 15. Acts xiii. 4; xv. 36. x Cor. wvi.a20o. 2 Cor. xii.1(?). Heb. ii. 16 (with πον). 


1 \8BD omit rovrov, which is an explanatory addition of the scribes. 
2 SSBCLAE have επι την καλην γην instead of the reading in T.R., which echoes 


ver, 8. 
5 cuviets in SQBD. 


(Meyer) or to the word (λόγον just 
before; Bengel, Weiss) ; sense the same. 
There is fruit in this case; the crop does 
not wither in the blade: it reaches the 
green ear, but it never ripens.—Ver. 23. 
ἀκούων καὶ συνιείς. The specific feature 
of the fourth and alone satisfactory type 
is not brought out either in Mt. or in 
Mk. but only in Lk. by his happy 
phrase: ἐν καρδίᾳ καλῇ καὶ ἀγαθῇῃ. 
The third type understands (Mt.) and 
receives into the heart (Mk.), but the 
fourth in addition receives into a clean, 
i.e.,a ‘*good and honest,’’ heart.—és δη: 
δὴ occurs here for the first time in Mt., 
and only a few times altogether in the 
N. T., but always with marked expres- 
siveness. According to Passow and 
Baimlein (Grammatik, § 669, and Unter- 
suchungen iber G. Partikeln, p. 98), 
connected with δῆλος in origin and 
meaning, and signifying that the thing 
stated is clear, specially important, 
natural in the given circumstances.—6s 
δὴ here = who, observe, or of course. 
Given such conditions, fruitfulness cer- 
tainly results. — καρποφορεῖ, bringeth 
forth fruit such as is desired: ripe, use- 
ful.—é in last clause may be pointed 
either 6 μὲν, 6 δὲ (T. R.) or 6 μὲν, ὃ δὲ 
(W. H.). Inthe former case the meaning 
is: this man brings forth 1oo fold, that 
man, etc.; in the latter, ὃ is accusative 
neuter after ποιεῖ, and refers to the fruit. 
Opinion very much divided, sense the 
same. 

This interpretation of the Sower raises 
two questions: Was it needed? Does it 
really explain the parable? which is in 
effect to ask: Does it proceed from 
Jesus? As to the former: could not 
even the general hearer, not to speak of 


* Vide below. 


the Twelve, understand the parable well 
enough? True, no hint that it related 
to the kingdom was given, but, as already 
remarked, that might go without saying. 
Jesus had all along been using similitudes 
explaining His meaning rather than need- 
ing explanation. Then parabolic speech 
was common even in Rabbinical circles, 
a source at once of entertainment and of 
light to hearers. In Mt.’s report the 
disciples do not even ask an explanation, 
so that that given comes on us as a 
surprise (Holtz. in H. C.).  Christ’s 
audience might at least carry away the 
general impression that He was dis- 
satisfied with the result of His ministry, 
in many cases in which His teaching 
seemed to Him like seed cast on unpro- 
ductive places. It might require further 
reflection, more than the majority were 
capable of, to comprehend the reasons 
of failure. Self-knowledge and observa- 
tion of character were needed for this. 
As to the interpretation given, it has 
been objected (Weiss, Julicher, etc.) 
that it is allegorical in method, and 
that, while going into details as to the 
various persons and things mentioned in 
the parable and their import, it fails to 
give the one main lesson which it, like 
every parable, is designed to teach; in 
short, that we cannot see the wood for 
the trees. As to this it may be remarked: 
(1) There is a tangible difference between 
allegory and parable. Allegory and inter- 
pretation answer to each other part by 
part ; parable and interpretation answer 
to each other as wholes. (2) Christ’s 
parables are for the most part not 
allegories. (3) It does not follow that 
none of them can be. Why should the 
use of allegory be interdicted to Him? 


21—25. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ μα 


199 


24. ΆἌλλην παραβολὴν " παρέθηκεν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, « Ὡμοιώθη ἡ r again ver. 


βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν ἀνθρώπῳ σπείροντι 


1 καλὸν σπέρμα ἐν τῷ 


ἀγρῷ αὐτοῦ: 25. ἐν δὲ τῷ καθεύδειν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ἦλθεν αὐτοῦ ὁ ς Mk. vii 


ἐχθρὸς καὶ ἔσπειρεΣ ζιζάνια "ἀνὰ µέσον τοῦ σίτου, καὶ ἀπῆλθεν. 


4 
1 NBMXANE have σπειραντι. 


31. Rev. 
vii. 17. 


? BND it. vg. several cursives have the compound επεσπειρεν (Tisch., W.H.). 


May the Sower not be an exception? 
That it is has been ably argued by Feine 
in $ahrbiicher fir Prot. Theologie, 1888, 
4. v. (4) The exclusion of so-called 
allegorising interpretation may be carried 
to a pedantic extreme in connection with 
all the parables, as it is, indeed, in my 
opinion, especially by Weiss. Thus we 
are told that in the saying ‘‘ the whole 
need not a physician,” Jesus did not 
mean to suggest that He was a physician 
but only to hint the special claims of a 
class on His attention. But the question 
may be asked in every case: What was 
the genesis of the parable? How did it 
grow in Christ’s mind? The Sower, 
e.g-? Was it not built up of likenesses 
spontaneously suggesting themselves 
now and then; of Himself to a sower, 
and of various classes of hearers to 
different kinds of soil? In that case 
the “allegorical” interpretation is simply 
an analysis of the parable into its genetic 
elements, which, on that view, have more 
than the merely descriptive value assigned 
to them by Weiss. (5) As to missing 
the main lesson amid details: is it not 
rather given, Eastern fashion, through 
the details: the preaching of the kingdom 
not always successful, failure due to the 
spiritual condition of hearers? That 
is how we Westerns, in our abstract 
generalising way, put it. The Orientals 
conveyed the general through concrete 
particulars. Jesus did not give an 
abstract definition of the Fatherhood of 
God. He defined it by the connections 
in which He used the title Father. That 
Jesus talked to His disciples about the 
various sorts of hearers, their spiritual 
state, and what they resembled, I think 
intrinsically likely. It is another ques- 
tion whether His interpretation has 
been exactly reproduced by any of the 
Synoptists. 

Vv. 24-30. The Tares. This parable 
has some elements in common with that 
in Mk. iv. 26-29, whence the notion of 
many critics that one of the two has been 
formed from the other. As to which is 
the original, opinion is much divided. 
(Vide Holtz., H.C.) Both, I should say. 


The resemblance is superficial, the lesson 
entirely different—The Sower describes 
past experiences ; the Tares is prophetic 
of a future state of things. But may 
it not be a creation ~f apostolic times 
put into the mouth of Jesus? No, 
because (1) it is too original and wise, 
and (2) there were beginnings of the 
evil described even in Christ’s lifetime. 
Think of a Judas among the Twelve, 
whom Jesus treated on the principle laid 
down in the parable, letting him remain 
among the disciples till the last crisis. 
It may have been his presence among 
the Twelve that suggested the parable. 
Ver. 24. Ἀπαρέθηκεν, again in ver. 31, 
usually of food, here of parable as a 
mental entertainment; used with refer- 
ence to Jaws in Ex. xxi. 1, Deut. iv. 44. 
---ὼμοιώθη, aorist used proleptically for 
the future ; cf. 1 Cor. vii. 2δ.--ἀνθρώπῳ, 
likened to a man, inexactly, for: ‘to 
the experience of a man who,” etc., 
natural in a popular style.—o7e(lpayrt, 
aorist because the seed had been sown 
when the event of the parable took place. 
---καλὸν, good, genuine, without mixture 
of other seeds.— Ver. 25. ἐν τῷ καθεύδειν 
= during the night.—a. 6 ἐχθρὸς, his 
enemy. Weiss (Matt.-Evang., 347) thinks 
this feature no part of the original parable, 
but introduced to correspond with the 
interpretation (ver. 39), no enemy being 
needed to account for the appearance of 
the ‘“‘tares,” which might grow then as 
now from seed lying dormant in the 
ground. Christ’s parables usually com- 
ply with the requirements of natural 
probability, but sometimes they have to 
depart from them to make the parable 
answer to the spiritual fact; e¢.g., when 
all the invited are represented as refusing 
to come to the feast (Lk. xiv. 16-24). 
The appearance of the ‘“‘tares” might 
be made a preternatural phenomenon 
out of regard to the perfect purity of the 
seed, and the great abundance of bad 
men in a holy society. A few scattered 
stalks might spring up in a natural 
way, but whence so many ὃ--ἐπέσπειρεν. 
deliberately sowed over the wheat seed 
as thickly as if no other seed were there. 


=< 


~ 


200 


KATA MAT@AION 


ΧΙΙ. 


t Mk. iv. 27. 26. ὅτε δὲ ἵ ἐβλάστησεν ὁ Χόρτος, καὶ καρπὸν ἐποίησε, τότε ἐφάνη 


Heb. ix. 4. 
Jas. ν. 18. καὶ τὰ Luldvea. 


27. προσελθόντες δὲ οἱ δοῦλοι τοῦ οἰκοδεσπότου 


εἶπον αὐτῷ, Κύριε, οὐχὶ καλὸν σπέρµα ἔσπειρας ἐν τῷ σῷ ἀγρῷ; 
πόθεν οὖν ἔχει τὰ 1 ζιζάνια; 28. Ὁ δὲ ἔφη αὐτοῖς, Ἐχθρὸς ἄνθρω- 


wn , 
Tos τοῦτο ἐποίησεν. 


οἱ δὲ δοῦλοι εἶπον αὐτῷ,3 Θέλεις οὖν ἀπελθόντες 


συλλέξωμεν αὖτά; 29. Ὁ δὲ ἔφη» Οὔ: µήποτε συλλέγοντες τὰ 
a Ch. xv. 13. ζιζάνια, " ἐκριζώσητε ἅμα αὗτοῖς τὸν σῖτον. 30. ἄφετε συναυξάνεσθαι 


Lk. xvii. 6. 


Jude x2. ἀμφότερα µέχρι ΄ τοῦ θερισμοῦ : καὶ ἐν τῷ ὅ καιρῷ τοῦ θερισμοῦ ἐρῶ 
v 


ere and 


in ver. 39. τοῖς “Oeptotats, Συλλέξατε πρῶτον τὰ Cildva, καὶ δήσατε αὐτὰ 


w here an > 


in Exod, εἰς ὁ ¥ δέσµας πρὸς τὸ κατακαῦσαι αὐτά ' τὸν δὲ σῖτον cuvaydyere’ 


xii. 22. 


εἰς τὴν ἀποθήκην µου.” 


1 The art. ra in Τ.Ε. (81) is wanting in ΝΡΒΟΡ al. 
2B omits δουλοι (W.H.) and BC have αντω λεγουσιν for evrov αντω (T.R.). 


ND have λεγ. αυτω (Tisch.). 
Σφησιν in SBC. 


“BD have ews, which W.H. adopt, putting αχρι and µεχρι in margin. 
5 tw (in SCL) is omitted in most uncials. 

6 εις omitted in LXA and bracketed in W.H. 

7 B has συναγετε (W.H. with συναγαγετε in margin). 


--ζιζάνια = bastard wheat, darnel, lolium 
temulentum, common in Palestine (Furrer, 
Wanderungen, p. 293), perhaps a Semitic 
word. Another name for the plant in 
Greek is αἷρα (Suidas, Lex.).—Ver. 26. 
τότε ἐφάνη: not distinguishable in the 
blade, not till it reached the ear, then 
easily so by the form, the ear branching 
out with grains on each twig (Koetsveld, 
De Gelijk., p. 25).—Ver. 27. οὐχὶκ.σ. 
ἔσπειρας, etc.: the surprise of the work- 
people arises from the extent of the 
wild growth, which could not be ex- 
plained by bad seed (with so careful a 
master) or natural growth out of an 
unclean soil. The tares were all over 
the field.—Ver. 28. ἐχθρὸς ἄν.: an 
inference from the state of the field— 
fact not otherwise or previously known.— 
θέλεις . . . συλλέξωμεν, deliberative sub- 
junctive in 1st person with θέλεις, 2nd 
person ; no tvaused in such case (Burton, 
M.and T.,§171). The servants propose 
to do what was ordinarily done, and is 
done still (vide Stanley, Sinai and Pales- 
tine, p. 426, and Furrer, Wanderungen, 
293: ‘men, women and children were 
in many fields engaged in pulling up 
the weeds,”’ in which he includes ‘den 
Lolch”). — Ver. 29. οὔ, emphatic ; 
laconic ‘‘no,” for good reason.—py- 
ποτε: the risk is that wheat and 
‘‘tares’? may be uprooted together.— 
ἅμα, with dative (αὐτοῖς) but not a pre- 


- 


position, the full phrase is ἅμα σὺν: 
‘‘at the same time with,’ as in 1 Thess. 
iv. 17, ν. Io. On this word vide Bos, 
Ellip. Graec., p. 463, and Klotz, Devar., 
ii. 97. The roots being intertwined, and 
having a firm hold of the soil, both wheat 
and tares might be pulled up together. 
—Ver. 30. Συλλέξατε πρῶτον: before or 
after cutting down the crop? Not said 
which; order of procedure immaterial, 
for now the wheat is rife.—8yoare els 
δέσµας; the eis, omitted in some MSS., 
is not necessary before a noun of same 
meaning with the verb. Fritzsche thinks 
the expression without preposition more 
elegant. Meyer also omits, with appeal 
to Kiihner on verbs with double accusa- 
tives.—This parable embodies the great/ 
principle of bad men being tolerated for 
the sake of the good. It relegates to the 
end the judgment which the contem- 
poraries of Jesus, including the Baptist, 
expected at the beginning of the Messianic 
kingdom (Weiss-Meyer). ς 

Vv. 31-35. The Mustard Seed and the 
Leaven (Lk. xiii. 18-21 (both); Mk. iv. 
30-32 (Mustard Seed)). A couplet of 
brief parables of brighter tone than the 
two already considered, predicting great 
extensive and intensive development of 
the Kingdom of God; from Luke’s narra- 
tive (xiii, το), apparently part of a 
synagogue discourse. It is intrinsically 
probable that Jesus in all His addresses 


26—35. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 201 


31. Ἄλλην παραβολὴν παρέθηκεν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, “ Ὁμοία ο Ch: aril, 


A ~ a A 3 
ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν 3 κόκκῳ σινάπεως, ὃν λαβὼν ἄνθρωπος 


xvii. 6 
(same 


ἔσπειρεν ἐν TH ἀγρῷ αὐτοῦ: 32. ὃ µικρότερον µέν ἐστι πάντων τῶν phrase). 


John xii. 


~ a a , 
σπερµάτων: ὅταν δὲ αὐξηθῇ, μεῖζον τῶν 7 λαχάνων ἐστί, καὶ γίνεται 24. 1 Cor. 


xv. 37 (the 


a - A λ A 
δένδρον, ὥστε ἐλθεῖν τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ " κατασκηνοῦν 1 ἐν word). 


τοῖς κλάδοις αὐτοῦ. 


33. Ἄλλην παραβολὴν ἐλάλησεν αὐτοῖς,2' Ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία 2. 


y Mk. iv. 32. 
Lk. xi. 42. 
Rom. xiv. 


z parall. 


τῶν οὐρανῶν "ζύμῃ, ἣν "λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἐνέκρυψεν εἰς ἀλεύρου σάτα Actsii. 26 


” 
πρία, ἕως οὗ “ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον. 


(Ps. ciii. 
(iv.) 12). 
a Gh. ¥vi..6, 


34. Ταῦτα πάντα ἐλάλησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν παραβολαῖς τοῖς ὄχλοις, 1, 12. 


Mk. viii. 


καὶ χωρὶς παραβολῆς odk® ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς: 35. ὅπως πληρωθῇ τὸ 15. Lk. 


xii. I (fig.). 


ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, ΄᾿Ανοίξω ἐν παραβολαῖς τὸ στόµα 1 Cor.v.6. 


in Gal. v.9 
µου: ἐρεύξομαι κεκρυµµένα ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου." (proverb- 
ially). 
b same use of word in ver. 31. c1 Cor. v.6. Gal. v. ο. 


1 κατασκηνοιν in BD. 


2 D, Syr. Sin. and Cur. omit ελ. αυτοις. W.H. bracket. 


* ονδεν in SBCA; ουκ in Mk. iv. 34, hence here in Τ.Ε. 
*B (and ΔΡ) omits κοσµου. So Tisch., W.H. al. Weiss suggests that the 


omission in B is an oversight. 


in the synagogue and to the people used 
more or less the parabolic method. To 
this extent it may be literally true that 
“‘without a parable spake He not unto 
them ”’ (ver. 34). 

Ver. 31. σινάπεως: from oivant, 
late for νάπυ in Attic, which Phryn. re- 
commends to be used instead (Lobeck, 

’ 288).—Ver. 32. 6, neuter, by attraction 
of σπερµάτων, instead of ὃν in agree- 
ment with κόκκῳ, masculine. — puxpé- 
τερον, not less perhaps than all the seeds 
in the world. An Americancorrespondent 
sent me a sample of the seeds of the 
cotton tree, which he thinks Christ would 
have made the basis of His parable had 
He spoken it in America.—pet{ov τῶν 
λαχάνων, greater than (all) the herbs. 
The comparison implies that it too is 
an herb. There would be no point in 
the statement that a plant of the nature 
of a tree grew to be greater than all 
garden herbs. This excludes the mus- 
tard tree, called Salvadora Persica, to 
which some have thought the parable 
reiers.—SévSpov, not in nature but in 
size; an excusable exaggeration in a 
popular discourse. Koetsveld remarks 
on the greatly increased growth attained 
by a plant springing from a single seed 
with plenty of room all round it (De 
Gelijk., p. 5Ο).--ὥστε here indicates at 
once tendency and result, large enough 
to make that possible, and it actually 
happened. The birds haunted the plant 


like a tree or shrub. Mark refers only 
to the possibility (iv. 32).---κατασκηνοῦν 
(cf. κατασκηνώσεις, viii. 20), not xidulari, 
to make nests (Erasmus), but to “ lodge,” 
asin A.V. The mustard plant is after 
all of humble size, and gives a very 
modest idea of the growth of the king- 
dom. But it serves admirably to ex. 
press the thought of a growth beyond ex- 
pectation. Who would expect so tiny a 
seed to produce such a large herb, a 
monster in the garden?—Ver. 33. ὁμοία 
- .. ζύμῃ, like in respect of pervasive 
influence. In Rabbinical theology leaven 
was used as an emblem of evil desire 
(Weber, p. 221). Jesus had the courage 
to use it as an emblem of the best thing 
in the world, the Kingdom of God coming 
into the heart of the individual and the 
community.—évékpuwey, hid by the pro- 
cess of kneading.—éws οὗ ἐζυμώθη : ἕως 
with the indicative, referring to an 
actual past occurrence. 

Both these parables show how 
thoroughly Jesus was aware that great 
things grow from minute beginnings. 
How different His idea of the coming of 
the kingdom, from the current one of a 
glorious, mighty empire coming suddenly, 
full grown! Instead of that a mustard 
seed, a little leaven ! 

Vv. 34, 35 contain a reflection more 
suitable for the close of the collection of 
parables in this chapter, brought in here 
apparently because the evangelist has 


% 


202 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΟΑΙΟΝ 


XIII. 


36. Τότε ἀφεὶς τοὺς ὄχλους, ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν 6 "Ingots !+ καὶ 


προσῆλθον αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, λέγοντες, ““Φράσον 2 ἡμῖν τὴν 


παραβολὴν τῶν Γιζανίων τοῦ ἀγροῦ.” 


37. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν 


αὐτοῖς,ὃ “*O σπείρων τὸ καλὸν σπέρμα ἐστὶν 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου - 


d same 
phrase in 
Ch. viii. 
12. 

€ νετ. 49. 
Ch. xxiv. om 
3; xxviii, TOU 
20. Heb. 
ix. 26. 


συντελείαᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου. 


f Ch. xvi. 


4 αἰῶνός ἐστιν: οἱ δὲ θερισταὶ ἄγγελοί εἶσιν. 


38. ὁ δὲ ἀγρός ἐστιν 6 κόσμος: τὸ δὲ καλὸν σπέρµα, οὗτοί 4 εἶσιν ot 
viol τῆς βασιλείας: τὰ δὲ ζιζάνιά εἶσιν οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ πονηροῦ: 39. ὁ 
δὲ ἐχθρὸς ὁ σπείρας αὖτά ἐστιν ὁ διάβολος: ὁ δὲ θερισμὸς * συντέλεια 


40. ὥσπερ οὖν 


συλλέγεται τὰ ζιζάνια, καὶ πυρὶ κατακαίεται οὕτως ἔσται ἐν τῇ 


41. ἀποστελεῖ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 


23; xviii, τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ, καὶ συλλέξουσιν ἐκ τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ πάντα 


7. Rom. 
Xiv. 13. 

6 Rev. i.15; 
ix. 2. 


1S8BD omitol. 3 SB have διασαφησον. 
* SBD omit τον. 


3 SSBD omit αυτοις. 


under his eye Mark’s narrative, in which 
a similar reflection is attached to the 
parable of the mustard seed (iv. 33-34). 
Ver. 34. χωρὶς παραβολῆς, etc. : if this 
remark apply to Christ’s popular preach- 
ing generally, then the parables reported, 
like the healing narratives, are only a 
small selection from a large number, a 
fragrant posy culled from the flower 
garden of Christ’s parabolic wisdom.— 
ἐλάλει: imperfect, pointing to a regular 
practice, not merely to a single occasion. 
—Ver. 35. Prophetic citation from Ps. 
Ixxviii. 2, suggested by παραβολαῖς in 
Sept., second clause, free translation 
from Hebrew.—épevfopat in Sept. for 


YA in Ps. xix. 2, etc. (not in lxxviii. 


2), a poetic word in Ionic form, bearing 
strong, coarse meaning ; used in softened 
sense in Hellenistic Greek. Chief value 
of this citation: a sign that the parabolic 
teaching of Jesus, like His healing 
ministry, was sufficiently outstanding to 
call for recognition in this way. 

Vv. 36-43. Interpretation of the Tares. 
Not in Apostolic Document; style that 
of evangelist; misses the point of the 
parable—so Weiss (Matt.-Evang., p. 
351). But if there was any private 
talk between Jesus and the Twelve as to 
the meaning of His parables, this one 
was sure to be the subject of conversa- 
tion. Itis more abstruse than the Sower, 
its lesson deeper, the fact it points to 
more mysterious. The interpretation 
given may of course be very freely re- 
produced.—Ver. 36. φράσον (διασ- 


τὰ “σκάνδαλα καὶ τοὺς ποιοῦντας τὴν ἀνομίαν, 42. καὶ βαλοῦσιν 
αὐτοὺς εἲς τὴν ἕκάμινον τοῦ πυρός: ἐκεῖ ἔσται 6 κλαυθμὸς καὶ 6 


φρασον probably comes from xv. 15. 
> SBD omit τουτον. 


άφησον NB) again in xv. 15: observe 
the unceremonious style of the request, 
indicative of intimate familiar relations. 
Hesychius gives as equivalents for 
dpaler, δεικνύει, σηµαίνει, λέγει, etc.— 
διασάφ. in Deut. i. 5 = make clear, a 
stronger expression.—Ver. 37. 6 σπεί- 
ρων: identified here with the Son of man 
(not so in interpretation of Sower).— 
Ver. 38. 6 κόσμος, the wide world; uni- 
versalism.—o7méppa, not the word this. . 
time, but the children of the kingdom. — 
ζιζάνια, the sons of the wicked one (τοῦ 
πονηροῦ, the devil).—Ver. 39. συντέλεια 
αἰῶνος, the end of the world; phrase 
peculiar to this Gospel.—Oepiorai. 
ἄγγελοι. . Weiss thinks this borrowed 
from Mt. xxiv. 31, and certainly not 
original. Perhaps not as a dogmatic 
interpretation, but quite possibly as a 
poetic suggestion.—Ver. 4ο. This and 
the following verses enlarge on the final 
separation.— Ver. 41. ἀποστελεῖ: cf. 
chap. xxiv. 31.--συλλέξουσιν, collect, 
and so separate.—ra σκάνδαλα: abstract 
for concrete ; those who create stumbling 
blocks for others.—xai, epexegetical, 
not introducing a distinct class, but ex- 
plaining how the class already referred 
to cause others to stumble.—ro.ovvras. 
τ. ἀνομίαν: cf. vii. 23, where for ποι. 
stands ἐργαζόμενοι. Has ἀνομίαν here the 
technical sense of religious libertinism, 
or the general sense of moral trans- 
gression? Assuming the former alterna- 
tive, some critics find here the sign-mark 
of a later apostolic time.—Ver. 42. éxet 
ἔσται. etc.: held to be inappropriate 


35—46. 


Βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 
ἐν τῇ βασιλεία τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῶν. 
κ . 


ἀγρὸν ἐκεῖνον. 


sp 
QuTOY. 


EYATTEAION 203 
43. τότε οἱ δίκαιοι ἐκλάμψουσιν ὡς 6 ἥλιος 
‘Oo » > > , 1 / 
έχων @Ta ἀκούειν  ἀκουέτω. 
“cc 2 « , 3 ‘ , ~ > - ~ 
44. “Mddw? ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν θησαυρῷ 
κεκρυµµένῳ ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ, ὃν εὑρὼν ἄνθρωπος ἔκρυψε, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς 
A 3 ae , 9 @ ” a 8 ‘ , a 
Χαρᾶς αὐτοῦ ὑπάγει, καὶ πάντα ὅσα ἔχει πωλεῖ,ὃ καὶ ἀγοράζει τὸν 
« ε πρ 28 , a 5 A A 4 b Rev. xvii. 
45. “Mddw ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν avOpdmw* (4 times). 
κε, a η , a εν 5 @ i , i John xii. 3. 
ἐμπόρῳ, ζητοῦντι καλοὺς papyapitas: 46. ὃς εὑρὼν ὃ ἕνα ᾿ πολύ- “x Pet. i> 
’ Ν , 9 » S > / (compar.). 
τιµον µαργαρίτην, ἀπελθὼν πέπρακε πάντα ὅσα εἴχε, καὶ ἠγόρασεν Cy. Ch. 
XXVi. 7 
(βαρνυτ.). 


1 SSB omit ακονειν. 


3 BD omit παλιν. 


ὅπωλει before παντα in SD. ὮἙ gives πωλει the same position but omits παντα. 


So W.H. with παντα in margin. 
4 SSB omit. 


W.H. relegate to margin. 


5 evpov δε in BDL verss. (Tisch., W.H.). 


here, because the gnashing of teeth is 
caused by cold, not by fire (Holtz., H. C.); 
appropriate in viii. 12, where the doom 
is rejection into the outer darkness.— 
Ver. 43. ἐκλάμψουσι: vide Dan. xii. 2, 
which seems to be in view; an ex- 
pressive word suggestive of the sun 
emerging from behind a cloud. The 
mixture of good and evil men in this 
world hides the characters of both. 

Vv. 44-53. Three other parables: 
the Treasure, the Pearl, the Net. Ver. 
36 would seem to imply that the 
evangelist took these as spoken only 
to disciples in the house. But as the 
Net is closely connected in meaning 
with the Ταγες, it is more probable that 
these parables also are extracts from 
popular discourses of Jesus, which, like 
all the others, would gain greatly if seen 
in their original setting. The Treasure 
and the Pearl would have their fitting 
place in a discourse on the kingdom of 
God as the highest good (Mt. vi. 33). 
—Ver. 44. tv τῷ ἀγρῷ: the article may 
be generic, indicating the field as the 
locality, as distinct from other places 
where treasures were deposited.—éxpuwe, 
he hid once more what some one had 
previously hidden; the occurrence 
common, the occasions νατῖοις.---χαρᾶς 
αὐτοῦ, in his joy rather than through 
joy over it, as many take the genitive, 
though both are admissible. The joy 
natural in a poor peasant; not less so 
the cunning procedure it inspired; 
ethically questionable, but parables are 
not responsible for the morality of their 
characters.—twayet, πωλεῖ, etc., four 


historic presents one after the other, in 
sympathy with the finder, and with lively 
effect.—mavra Soa:all required for the 
purpose, yet the all might not amount 
to much: the field minus the treasure 
of no great value. Worth while, the 
treasure being a pure gain. The point 
of the parable is that the kingdom of 
heaven outweighs in value all else, 
and that the man who understands 
this will with pleasure part with all. 
It helps to show the reasonableness 
of the sacrifice for the kingdom Jesus 
demanded, 

Ver. 45. ἐμπόρῳ ἵ. κ. p. A pearl 
merchant who went to the pearl fisheries 
to purchase from the divers, of course 
selecting the best; a connoisseur in 
valuables.—Ver. 46. πολύτιμον: precious 
because exceptionally large, well-shaped, 
and pure; such rare, but met with now 
and then.— dev: he is taken by sur- 
prise, has not as much with him as will 
purchase it on the spot, sees it is worth 
his whole stock, agrees to buy and 
promises to return with the price.— 
πέπρακε, ἠγόρασεν, a perfect with an 
aorist. Not to be disposed of by saying 
that the former is an “ aoristic” perfect 
(Burton, § 88).—érpaxe points to 
a momentous step, taken once for all 
and having lasting effects. A great 
venture, a risky speculation. The 
treasure in the field was a sure gain 
for the finder, but it remained to be 
seen what the pearl merchant would get 
for his one pearl. After the sale of his 
stock the purchase of the one pearl was 
a matter of course. In the former of 


204 


j here onaly 
in N.T. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIII. 


47. “"Πάλιν ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν σαγήνῃ 


βληθείσῃ ets τὴν θάλασσαν, καὶ ἐκ παντὸς γένους συναγαγούσῃ - 
k here only. 48. ἤν, ὅτε ἐπληρώθη, “dvaBiBdoartes ἐπὶ τὸν αἰγιαλόν, καὶ 


καθίσαντες, συνέλεξαν τὰ καλὰ eis ‘dyyeta,! τὰ δὲ σαπρὰ ἔξω 


5Ι. Λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 
Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “Nat, κύριε.'3 


x. 34 
(επιβιβ.). >» x is 9 

Ι λετε only ἔβαλον " 49. οὕτως ἔσται ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος: ἐξελεύσονται 
(αγγειον. ε » λ ‘ a πι 5 , a , 
Ch. xxv, Οἱ ἄγγελοι, καὶ ἀφοριοῦσι τοὺς πονηροὺς ἐκ µέσου τῶν δικαίων, 
4), vide ‘ x a 2 8 3 9 a , 9. A 
critical 5Ο. καὶ βαλοῦσιν αὐτοὺς εἰς τὴν κάµινον τοῦ πυρός: ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁ 
note I. A 

κλαυθμὸς καὶ 6 βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 
> a 2 «6 , A , >» 
Ιησοῦς,” “‘XuvyKate ταῦτα πάντα; 

m vide 52. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ata τοῦτο πᾶς ypappateds "'µαθη- 
below and . 3 5 PS Be ising > » @ > , 
atCh, τευθεὶς eis τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν ὅμοιός ἐστιν ἀνθρώπω 
XXVii. . 3 A - A ‘ 

57° οἰκοδεσπότῃ, ὅστις ἐκβάλλει ἐκ τοῦ θησαυροῦ αὐτοῦ καινὰ καὶ 
παλαιά. 
1 ayyn in SBC. 2 NBD omit λεγει a. ο. |., also κυριε after vat. 


3 SSBCE have τη βασιλεια. The reading in Τ.Ε. is a grammatical correction. 


these two parables the Kingdom of 
Heaven appears as the object of a glad 
though accidental finding of a sure 
possession ; in the latter as the object of 
systematic quest and venturesome faith. 
The difference between seekers and 
finders must not be exaggerated. The 
pearl merchant was also a finder. No 
one would set out on a journey to seek 
one unique pearl (Koetsveld). The 
spiritual class he represents are seekers 
after God and wisdom, finders of the 
Kingdom of God, of a good beyond their 
hope. Such seekers, however, are on 
the sure way to find. 

Vv. 47-50. The Net. σαγήνῃ, vide 
on iv. 21.—ék παντὸς γένους συν.: a 
matter of course, not intended but in- 
evitable ; large movements influence all 
sorts of people.—Ver. 48. καθίσαντες 
συνέλεξαν: equally a matter of course; 
a thing to be done deliberately, of which 
the sitting attitude is an emblem. There 
is a time for everything; the time for 
sorting is at the end of the fishing.— 
σαπρὰ, vide on vii. 17. Vv. 49, 50 con- 
tain the interpretation in much the same 
terms as in 41, 42. 

Vv. 51, 52. Conclusion of the parabolic 
collection.—Ver. 52 contains an im- 
portant logion of Jesus preserved by 
Matthew only, and connected by him 
with the parabolic teaching of Jesus. 
In this connection καινὰ καὶ παλαιά of 
course points to the use of the old familiar 
facts of nature to illustrate newly revealed 
truths of the kingdom. But we should 
not bind ourselves too strictly to this 


connection, keeping in mind Matthew’s 
habit of grouping ; all the more that, as 
Wendt has pointed out (Die Lehre Fesu, 
ii. 349), the idea expressed by γραμματεὺς 
does not get justice. It naturally points 
to acquaintance with the O. T., and 
combined with μ.αθητευθεὶς ε.τ. B. teaches 
that that knowledge may be usefully 
united with discipleship in the lore of 
the kingdom. In Wendt’s words: ‘One 
remains in possession of the old, recog- 
nised as of permanent value, yet is not 
restricted to it, but along with it possesses 
a precious new element '.---μαθητεύειν is 
here used transitively as in xxviii. 19, 
Acts xiv. 21.--ἐκβάλλει points to free 
distribution of treasures by the house- 
holder. He gives out new or old 
according to the nature of the article. 
The mere scribe, Rabbinical in spirit, 
produces only the old and stale. The 
disciple of the kingdom, like the Master, 
is always fresh-minded, yet knows how 
to value all old spiritual treasures of 
Holy Writ or Christian tradition. 

Vv. 53-58. Visit to Nazareth (Mk. vi. 
1-6, cf. Lk. iv. 16-30). In Mk. this is 
the next section after the parables, 
deducting what had previously been 
reported in Mt. (chaps. viii. and ix.), a 
pretty sure sign that our evangelist has 
Mk. under his eye. We can here see 
how he handles his source—substantial 
reproduction of the contents, no slavish 
copying of style, editorial discretion in 
reporting certain details. No attempt 
should be made to connect with the 
foregoing passage, except perhaps by 


47—58. 


53- Καὶ ἐγένετο ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν ὁ 


η ἐκεῖ it ἐλθὰ a ίδ ὐτοῦ. ἐδίδ n here a 
. ίδα αὐτοῦ, ἐδίδασκεν 
μετῆρεν ἐκεῖθεν 54. καὶ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν rie re Suite 
Αα ~ ~ > 
αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ αὐτῶν, ὥστε ἐκπλήττεσθαι } αὐτοὺς καὶ 1.4 
α 
λέγειν, * Πόθεν τούτῳ ἡ σοφία αὕτη καὶ αἱ δυνάµεις; 55. οὐχ οὗτός 24. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


2ος 


᾿Ιησοῦς τὰς παραβολὰς ταύτας, 


nd 
Vi. 


Lk. iv. 23, 
John 


δν ἐν η νο Neyer: Μορώ μο et 
ἐστιν 6 τοῦ τέκτονος υἱός; οὐχί ἡ µήτηρ αὐτου Λέγεται Μαριάμ, eb. xi. 14. 


οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ Ιάκωβος καὶ ᾿Ιωσῆς ” 


καὶ Σίµων καὶ Ιούδας; 56. 


A A , > ΄ 
καὶ at ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ οὐχὶ πᾶσαι πρὸς ἡμᾶς eior; πόθεν οὖν τούτῳ 


ταῦτα πάντα; 57. Καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. 


Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν 


αὐτοῖς, “Οὐκ ἔστι προφήτης  ἄτιμος, εἰ μὴ ἐν τῇ πατρίδι αὐτοῦ ὃ ο Mk. vi. 4. 


να a Ελ te > nm 55 
καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 
, ~ 
διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν. 


1 εκπλησσ. in most uncials. 
2 ]ωσηφ in ΒΟΣ. 


3 BD omit avrov. 
in margin. 


the general category of prevalent un- 
receptivity to which also the following 
narrative (xiv. 1-12) may be relegated. — 
Ver. 53. petipev: in classics to transfer 
something from one place to another. 
Hellenistic, intransitive = to remove one- 
self; one of Matthew’s words (xix. 1).— 
Ver. 54. πατρίδα, in classics father- 
land. Here and in parallels evidently = 
native town, home. Vide ver. 56 and 
Lk. iv. 16.—ovvaywyj, singular, not 
plural, as in Vulgate. One syn. index 
of size of town (Grotius).—éoere, with 
infinitive: tendency and actual result. 
They were astonished and said: πόθεν 
. .. δννάμεις, wisdom and marvellous 
works ; of the latter they had heard, of 
the former they had had a sample. 
Whence? that is the question; not 
from schools, parentage, family, 
social environment, or mere surround- 
ings and circumstances of any kind.— 
Ver. 55. 6 τ. τέκτονος vids: Mk. has 
6 τέκτων, which our evangelist avoids; 
the son of the carpenter, one only in the 
town, well known to all—Mapuap . . . 
Ιάκωβος, etc., names given of mother 
and brothers, to show how well they 
know the whole family. And this other 
man just come back is simply another of 
the family whose name happens to be 
Jesus. Why should He be so different ? 
It is an absurdity, an offence, not to be 
commonplace. The irritation of the 
Nazareans is satisfactory evidence of the 
extraordinary in Jesus.—Ver. 57. Proverb, 
not Jewish merely, but common property 
of mankind; examples from Greek and 
Roman authors in Pricaeus and Wetstein, 


1 Gor, Ἱν. 


58. Καὶ οὐκ ἐποίησεν ἐκεῖ δυνάµεις πολλάς, 10; xii.23. 


lwons is probably from Mk. 
N$Z have ιδια before πατριδι. which Tisch. and W.H. place 


L omits και εν T. οικ. GUTOV. 


including one from Pindar about fame 
fading at the family hearth (Olymp. Ode, 
xii, 3).—Ver. 58. Here also editorial 
discretion is at work. Mark states that 
Jesus was not able to work miracles in 
Nazareth, and that He marvelled at their 
unbelief. Matthew changes this into a 
statement that He did few miracles there 
because of their unbelief, and passes 
over the marvelling in silence. 

CHAPTER XIV. DEATH OF THE 
Baptist: COMMENCEMENT OF A NEw 
DIVISION OF THE EVANGELIC HisTory. 

Vv. 1-12. Death of the Baptist (Mk. 
vi. 14-29, Lk. ix. 7-9). This section 
might with advantage have been given 
as a short chapter by itself, and a new 
start made with the feeding of the 
thousands which forms the first of a 
series of narratives together giving the 
story of the later Galilean ministry (xiv. 
13—xx. 16). In this section (1-12) 
Matthew still has his eye on Mark, the 
story of the fate of the Baptist being 
there the next after the section in 
reference to mother and_ brethren, 
excepting the mission of the Twelve 
(Mk. vi. 7-13) already related in Mt. (x. 
5-15). Indeed from this point onwards 
Matthew follows Mark’s order. In the 
foregoing part of this Gospel the 
parallelism between it and Mark has 
been disturbed by the desire of the 
evangelist to draw largely on his other 
source, the Logia, and introduce teach- 
ing materials bearing on all the topics 
suggested in his introductory sketch of 
Christ’s early Galilean ministry: Didache, 
chaps. v.-vil.; apostolic mission (iv. 18- 


206 


a vide iv. 24. 
b Ch. ee XIV. I. 


KATA ΜΑΤΟΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIV. 


"EN éxeivw τῷ καιρῷ ἤκουσεν “Hpddys 6 τετράρχης 1 τὴν 


. iii, @ 2 ‘ > ~ a a 8 
$4; ΧΧΝΗ * ἀκοὴν ᾿Ιησοῦ, 2. καὶ εἶπε τοῖς παισὶν αὐτοῦ. “ Οὗτός ἐστιν Ἰωάννης 


7 (with 
ἀπὸ). 
ο Mk. vi. 14. 


ὁ Βαπτιστής: αὐτὸς ’ ἠγέρθη ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ai 


Gal. ν. 6. δυνάμεις "ἐνεργοῦσιν ἐν αὐτῷ.” 3. Ὁ γὰρ Ἡρώδης κρατήσας τὸν 
με cit Ἰωάννην ἔδησεν adtov? καὶ ἔθετο ἐν φυλακῇι διὰ Ἡρωδιάδα τὴν 


vi 18. 1 γυναῖκα Φιλίππου τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ. 


Cor. v. 1; 
Vil. 2, 29. 


3 , > 3 , 
lwdvvyns,* “«Οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι 
e Ch. xxi. 26. bl ξ 


ο... ἀποκτεῖναι, ἐφοβήθη τὸν ὄχλον, ὅτι ὡς “προφήτην αὐτὸν 


32. il 
il, 20. 


”, 
ἔχειν ἅ αὐτήν. 


4. ἔλεγε γὰρ αὐτῷ 6 
5. Καὶ θέλων αὐτὸν 
εἶχον. 


1 τετρααρχης in ΔΟ0ΖΔ. So Tisch. and W.H., though BD spell as in Τ.Ε. 
2 88B omit αντον, which is an undisputed reading in Mk., whence it may have 


been imported. 


3 SB read ev φυλακη απεθετο, which Tisch. and W.H. adopt. 
“SSD omit art. before |. and BZ place αυτω after l. 


22), chap. x.; Baptist (chap. iii.), chap. 
xi.; Pharisees (chap. iii. 7-9), chap. xii. ; 
popular preaching (iv. 23), chap. xiii. 
Chaps. viii., ix. disturb the order by 
grouping incidents illustrating the heal- 
ing ministry. 

Ver. 1. ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ. Mk. 
connects with return of Twelve from 
. their mission (vi. 14), Mt. apparently 
with immediately preceding section. But 
the phrase recalls xi. 25, xii. 1, and it 
may be the evangelist is thinking 
generally of a time of prevailing in- 
susceptibility (Weiss-Meyer).—Hpw8ns : 
Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and 
Peraea for many years (4-39 A.D.), married 
to the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia; 
like his father Herod the Great in 
cunning, ambition, and love of splendour 
in building and otherwise, whereof the 
new city of Tiberias was a monument 
(Schiirer, Gesch., i. 350).--ἀκοὴν, vide iv. 
24. The fame of Jesus penetrated at 
last even into the royal palace, where 
very different matters occupied the atten- 
tion, ordinarily.—Ver. 2. παισὶν αὐτοῦ: 
not his sons, but his servants, 7.¢., the 
courtiers, great men in their way, not 
the menials in the palace. The king 
would propound his odd theory in 
familiar talk, not in solemn conclave.— 
οὗτός ἐστιν, etc. It is this theory we 
have to thank for the narrative following, 
which in itself has no special connection 
with the evangelic history, though doubt- 
less Christians would naturally read with 
interest the fate of the forerunner of 
Jesus. The king has the Baptist on the 
brain; and remarkable occurrences in 
the religious world recall him at once to 
mind. It is John! he (αὐτὸς) is risen; 


theory begotten of remorse; odd enough, 
but better than Pharisaic one begotten 
of malevolence ; both witnessing to the 
extraordinary in Christ’s career.—éa 
τοῦτο: the living John did no miracles, 
but no saying what a dead one rvedivivus 
can do 2---ἐνεργοῦσιν, not: he does the 
mighty works, but: the powers (δυνάμεις) 
work in him, the powers of the invisible 
world, vast and vague in the king’s 
imagination. 

Ver. 3. γὰρ implies that the following 
story is introduced to make the king’s 
theory intelligible. ‘‘ Risen” implies 
previous death, and how that came about 
must be told to show the psychological 
genesis of the theory. It is the super- 
stitious idea of a man who has murder 
on his conscience.—kpatyoas, etc. : fact 
referred to already in iv. 12, xi. 2; here 
the reason given. Of course Herod 
seized, bound, and imprisoned John 
through his agents.—8.a Ἡρωδιάδα: a 
woman here, as so often, the cause of 
the (ταρεάγ.-  Ὑνναῖκα Φ.: vide on Mk. 
—Ver. 4. Eheye yap 6 |. The pro- 
gressive imperfect, with force of a 
pluperfect. John had been saying just 
before he was apprehended (Burton, 
Moods and Tenses, § 29).—ovx ἔξεστιν : 
doubly unlawful; as adultery, and as 
marriage within prohibited degrees (Lev. 
xvili. 16, xx. 21).—Ver. 5. θέλων: of. 
i. 19. Mark gives a fuller statement as 
to Herod’s feelings towards John. No 
injustice is done Herod here by ascribing 
to him a wish to get rid of John. There 
are always mixed feelings in such cases. 
Compare the relations of Alcibiades to 
Socrates as described by Plato (Zup- 
πόσιογ).- ἐφοβήθη τ. ὁ.: that for one 


I—Iz. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


207 


6. Σγενεσίων δὲ ἀγομένων] τοῦ “Hpddou, ὠρχήσατο ἡ θυγάτηρ Tijs £ Cf. Gen. 


"Ἡρωδιάδος ἐν τῷ µέσῳ, καὶ Ίρεσε τῷ Ἡρώδῃ ' 7. ὅθεν pel” ὅρκου ἡμέρα 


ὡμολόγησεν αὐτῇ δοῦναι 6 


cal a fol 9? , 
βασθεῖσα ὑπὸ τῆς μητρὸς αὐτῆς, “Ads po,” Φησίν, “ὧδε ἐπὶ 
a a? 
4 πίνακι τὴν κεφαλὴν Ιωάννου τοῦ Βαπτιστοῦ. 


ὧν ὦᾳ ea 2 
εαν αιτησηται. 


ενεσιὼς, 
8. Ἡ δὲ “προβι- ς Acts xix. 
33(σνν- ἵτ 
W.#H.). 


g. Καὶ ἐλυπήθη * 6b Lk. xi. 39. 


βασιλεύς, διὰ δὲ ᾽ τοὺς Spxous καὶ τοὺς συνανακειµένους ἐκέλευσε 


δοθῆναι : 10. καὶ πέµψας ᾿ ἀπεκεφάλισε τὸν" Ἰωάννην ἐν τῇ φυλακῇ. i Mk. vi. 16, 
7 


II. καὶ ἠνέχθη ἡ κεφαλὴ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ πίνακι, καὶ ἐδόθη τῷ κορασίω: ο. 


καὶ ἤνεγκε τῇ μητρὶ αὐτῆς. 


αὐτοῦ ἦραν τὸ σῶμα,ὃ καὶ ἔθαψαν αὐτό 


27. Lk. ix. 


12. καὶ προσελθόντες of μαθηταὶ 


δ. καὶ ἐλθόντες ἀπήγγειλαν 


1$3BDLZ have the dat. γενεσιοις and yevopevors for αγοµενων; the reading in 


T.R. is a grammatical correction. 
2 avin BD. 
3 BD have λυπηθεις and omit δε. 


The reading of the T.R. is an attempt by 


gesolution of the construction to make the meaning clear. 


4 S8BZ omit τον. 


5 \$BCDLE several cursives have πτωµα, for which σωµα has been substituted as 


more delicate. 
6 8B have αυτον. 


thing; also feared God and his con- 
science a little, not enough. It is well 
when lawless men in power fear any- 
thing.—6r . . . εἶχον: they took John 
to be, regarded him as, a prophet.— 
εἶχον does not by itself mean to hold in 
high esteem (in pretio habere, ΚΥΡΚΕ). 
The point is that John for the people 
passed for a prophet, belonged to a 
class commanding religious respect (so 
Fritzsche, Meyer, etc.). Vide xxi. 46. 
Ver. 6. Ὑενεσίοις γενομένοις: one ex- 
pects the genitive absolute as in T.R., 
which just on that account is to be sus- 
pected. The dative of time. But cf. 
Mk. vi. 21, where we have γενομένης 
and Ὑενεσίοις occurring together, and 
vide Weiss, Mk.-Evang., p. 221, on the 
literary connection between the two 
texts. Most commentators take γεγεσίοις 
as referring to Herod’s birthday. Some, 
e.g., Grotius, think of the anniversary of 
the accession to the throne = birthday 
of his reign. In classic Greek it means 
a feast in honour of the dead on their 
birthday, γενέθλια being the word for a 
birthday feast, vide Lobeck, Phryn., 103. 
Loesner, Observ. ad N. T. e. Phil. Alex., 
cites instances from Philo of the use of 
both words in the sense of a birthday 
feast.— 4 θυγάτηρ τ. Ἡρῳδ.: Salome by 
name.—ev τῷ péow, implies a festive 
assembly, as fully described in Mk.— Ver. 
7... ὡμολόγησεν, confessed by oath; 
obligation to keep a promise previously 


αυτο in Mk. (vi. 29). 


given. Cf. Mk. vi. 22, where the fact is 
more fully stated. The account in Matt. 
seems throughout secondary.—Ver. 8. 
προβιβασθεῖσα : not ‘ before instructed,” 
as in A. V., but ‘‘ brought to this point ”’ ; 
urgedon. It should require a good deal of 
“educating” to bring a young girl tomake 
such a grimrequest. But she had learnt 
her lesson well, and asked the Baptist’s 
head, as if she had been asking a favour- 
ite dish (ὡς περί τινος ἐδέσματος διαλε- 
γοµένη, Chrys., Hom. xlviii.). Kypke cites 
two instances of the rare use of the word 
in the sense of instruction. —&8e here and 
now, on the spot, ἐξαντῆς in Mk. That 
was an essential part of the request. No 
time must be left for repentance. If not 
done at once under the influence of wine 
and the momentary gratification given 
by the voluptuous dance, it might never 
be done at all. This implies that the 
Baptist was at hand, therefore that the 
feast was at Machaerus, where there was 
a palace as well as a fortress.—Ver. g. 
λυπηθεὶς : participle used concessively, 
though grieved he granted the request , 
the grief quite compatible with the 
truculent wish in ver. 5.--βασιλεύς : 
only by courtesy.—épkovs, plural, sin- 
gular in ver. 7; spoken in passion, more 
like profane swearing than deliberate 
utterance once for all of a solemn oath, 
—Ver. 10. ἀπεκεφάλισε: expressive 
word, all too clear in meaning, though 
not found in Attic usage, or apparently 


208 


a? - Ν { 1 
τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 13. καὶ ἀκούσας 


εἰς ἔρημον τόπον κατ ἰδίαν. 


j Mk. vi. 33. αὐτῷ ; πεζῇ ” ἀπὸ τῶν πόλεων. 
14. Καὶ ἐξελθὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ® 
k Mk. vi. 5, ἐπ᾽ αὐτούς,' καὶ ἐθεράπευσε τοὺς Χ ἀρρώστους αὐτῶν. 


13; Xvi. 18 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIV. 


3 nw ~ 

6 ‘Inoois ἀνεχώρησεν ἐκεῖθεν ἐν πλοίῳ 
‘ 

καὶ ἀκούσαντες of ὄχλοι ἠκολούθησαν 


εἶδε πολὺν ὄχλον, καὶ ἐσπλαγχνίσθη 
κά 15. Ὀψίας 


x Cor. xi. δὲ γενομένης, προσῆλθον αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὅ λέγοντες, ““Ἔρημός 
30. “hed ε ῃ κ χε ὧν nd 1 AO 4 ό 6 AY * λ 
| Acts xxvii. ἐστιν ὁ τόπος, καὶ ἡ ὥρα ἤδη ' παρῆλθεν ' ἀπόλυσον ὃ τοὺς ὄχλους, 


9 (same 
sense). 


ἵνα ἀπελθόντες εἰς τὰς κώµας ἀγοράσωσιν ἑαυτοῖς Bpdpata.” 


16. 


Ὅ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Οὖ Χρείαν ἔχουσιν ἀπελθεῖν: δότε 


1 axovoas δε NBDLZ. 


Ἄπεζοι 91.7. 


5ΑΦΒΓ omit ο |. 


4 αντοις in most uncials; ew αντους only in minusc.; from Mk. 


5 9BZ omit αυτον. 


much used at all; a plebeian word, 
according to Salmasius cited by Kypke, 
who gives instances from late authors.— 
Ver. 11. ἠνέχθη, not expressly said 
“there and then,” but all points to im- 
mediate production of the head on a 
platter in the banqueting hall before the 
guests; gruesome sight !—é860n, ἤνεγκε: 
what a nerve the girl must have had! 
her mother’s nature in her; the dancing 
and the cool acceptance of the horrible 
gift well matched.—kopaci@: not to be 
taken strictly ; a young unmarried 
woman, say, of twenty (Holtz., Η. C.). 
The dancing of a mere girl would have 
been no entertainment to the sensual 
revellers. The treat lay in the indecency. 
—vVer. 12. πτῶμα: carcase, used abso- 
lutely in this sense only in late writers. 
Earlier writers would say πτῶμα νεκροῦ. 
Lobeck, Phryn., 375. 

Vv. 13-21. Fesus retires; feeding of 
thousands (Mk. vi. 30-44; Lk. ix. 10-17). 
—Ver.13. ἀκούσας, having heard of the 
fate of John from John’s disciples (ver. 
12). —avexdpynoev ἐκεῖθεν: withdrew from 
where He was when the report reached 
Him ; locality not indicated. Mark con- 
nects the retirement with the return of 
the Twelve from their mission, and the 
report they gave, and assigns as motive 
rest for the missionaries. The two 
events might synchronise, and escape 
from Herod’s dangerous neighbourhood 
might be a joint motive for retirement. 
But against this is the speedy return 
(ver. 34).—év πλοίῳ: naturally suggests 
a place near the sea as starting-point. 
But it may be rather intended to indi- 
cate in what direction they were going— 
to the eastern side of the lake.—eis ἐ. τ. 
«kar ἰδίαν. These phrases have cer- 
tainly more point in Mk. as referring to 


8 S3CZ add ουν, which W.H. place in margin. 


a multitude from which they wished to 
escape.—ot ὄχλοι: no previous mention 
of the crowds, and no hint that Jesus 
wished to get away from them; looks 
like a digest of a fuller narrative, such as 
that in Mk.—weLq (or πεζοὶ), on foot, but 
not implying that all literally walked; 
there were sick among them who could 
not. The contrast is between going by 
sea and going by land. Cf. Acts xx. 13. 
Classical instances in philological com- 
mentaries (Wetstein, Kypke, Elsner, 
etc.).—Ver. 14. ἐξελθὼν, in this place, 
naturally means going forth from His re- 
treat, in Mk. (vi. 34) going out of the 
ship, the crowd having arrived on the 
spot before Him. To escape from the 
people always difficult, now apparently 
more than ever. Evidently a time of 
special excitement, popularity at its 
height, though according to Fourth Gos- 
pel about to undergo a speedy decline. 
---ἐσπλαγχνίσθη, deponent passive, 
pitied; Hellenistic, and based on the 
Hebrew idea of the bowels as the seat of 
compassion; used by Symmachus in 
translation of Deut. xiii. Ο.---ἐθεράπευσε: 
Mark gives prominence to the element of 
instruction ; healing alone mentioned 
here. 

Vv. 15-21. The feeding.—Ver. 15. 
ὀψίας yevopevns: might mean sunset as 
in viii. 16, but from the nature of the 
case must mean afternoon from 3 to 6, 
the first of the ‘two evenings ”.—€pnpos, 
comparatively uninhabited, no towns 
near.—7 apa ἤδη παρῆλθεν : the meaning 
not clear. Mk. has: ἤδη Spas πολλῆς 
= already the hour is advanced. Various 
suggestions have been made: eating 
time (Grot.), healing and teaching time 
(Fritzsche), daytime (Meyer) is past. 
Weiss, with most probability, takes dpa 


‘ 


κ1--23. 


a ς ~ Lal ”» 
αύτοις ὑμεις Φαγει». 
εἰ μὴ πέντε ἄρτους καὶ δύο ἰχθύας.' 
αὐτοὺς ade.” 1 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


209 


17. Οἱ δὲ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, ““Οὐκ ἔχομεν ὧδε 


18. Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “ Φέρετέ por 


19. Καὶ κελεύσας τοὺς ὄχλους ἀνακλιθῆναι ἐπὶ τοὺς 


χόρτους. καὶ ὃ λαβὼν τοὺς πέντε ἄρτους καὶ τοὺς δύο ἰχθύας, 


ἀναβλέψας eis τὸν οὐρανόν, ™ εὐλόγησε: καὶ 
μαθηταῖς τοὺς ἄρτους, οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ τοῖς ὄχλοις. 


Ἀκλάσας ἔδωκε τοῖς m Ch. xxvi. 
κ. 26. 1 Cor. 

20. καὶ έφαγον κ. 16. 
n Ch. xxvi. 


πάντες, καὶ ἐχορτάσθησαν ' καὶ ἦραν τὸ περισσεῦον τῶν κλασμάτων, 26. Acts 


δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις. 


πεντακισχίλιοι, χωρὶς γυναικῶν καὶ παιδίων. 
"«ἠνάγκασεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς Α τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ > ἐμβῆναι εἰς T° πλοῖον, 
καὶ Ρ προάγειν αὐτὸν eis τὸ πέραν, ἕως οὗ ἀπολύσῃ τοὺς ὄχλους. 
23. καὶ ἀπολύσας τοὺς ὄχλους, ἀνέβη cis τὸ ὄρος κατ ἰδίαν ᾖ, 


1 @Se αυτους in 987. 
3 BLAZ omit και. 


21. ot δὲ ἐσθίοντες ἦσαν ἄνδρες ὡσεὶ 


li. 46 al. 


A 
Καὶ εὐθέως ο Acts xxvi. 
11. Gal. ii. 
3, 14. 
p Ch. xxi. 
31; ΧχνΙ. 
. Mk. 
X. 32. 


22. 


2 SSBC have επι του χορτον; D the sing. also, but accus. 
4ο |. wanting in NBCDAZ. 


5 Most uncials omit, but BXZ retain αυτου. 


® B and several cursives (I, 33, 124) omit το. 


= time for sending them away to get 
food.—amédvoov: though late for the 
purpose, not too late ; dismiss them forth- 
with.—-Ver. 16. οὐ Χρείαν ἔχουσιν 
ἀπελθεῖν, etc.: even if, as some think, 
what happened was that under the 
moral influence of Jesus the people 
present generously made the provisions 
they had brought with them available for 
the company at large, the character of 
Jesus appears here in a commanding 
light. No situation appears to Him 
desperate, no crisis unmanageable. No 
need to go. Give ye them to eat, 
resources will be forthcoming (cf. Exod. 
xiv. 15). And they were, how we cannot 
tell. The story is a fact supported by 
the testimony of all four evangelists, not 
a baseless legend, or a religious allegory. 
—Ver. 17. πέντε ἄρτους κ. 8. ἰχ. A 
very modest supply even for the disciple 
circle. They seem, under the influence 
of Jesus, to have been a care-free com- 
pany, letting to-morrow look after itself. 
‘‘Learn the philosophy of the Twelve, 
and how they despised food. Being 
twelve they had only so much, and they 
readily gave up these” (Chrysos., H. 
xlix.). Five loaves and two fishes, all 
that was known to be in that vast 
gathering.—Ver. 18. φέρετε, etc.: 
Christ’s imperial way in critical situa- 
tions often arrests attention. ‘‘ Stretch 
forth thine hand” (xii. 13). ‘‘ Bring 
them hither to me.”—Ver. 19. κελεύσας, 
λαβὼν, ἀναβλέψας, participles without 
copula all leading up to εὐλόγησεν, the 
central chief action: rapid, condensed 


W.H. place in margin. 


narrative, briefly, simply, recounting an 
amazing event.—«vAdyyoev with accusa- 
tive (ἄρτους) understood. He blessed 
the loaves and fishes.—xat κλάσας 
ἔδωκεν, then dividing them gave them to 
the disciples, who in turn gave to the 
multitude.—r@ λόγῳ καὶ τῇ εὐλογίᾳ 
αὔξων καὶ πληθύνων αὐτούς, Origen.— 
Ver. 20, δώδεκα κοφ. πλ. is in appos. 
with τὸ περισσεῦον τ. κ. They took 
the surplus of the broken pieces to the 
extent of twelve baskets.—kodivous, 


answering to the Rabbinical 912) 8 


basket of considerable size (‘‘ ein grosses 
Behaltniss,” Winsche). Each of the 
Twelve had one. The word recalls the 
well-known line of Juvenal (Sat. iii. 14): 
‘“‘ Judaeis, quorum cophinus foenumque 
suppellex,”’ on which and its bearing on 
this place vide Schottgen (Hor. Tal.) and 
Elsner.—Ver. 21. πεντακισχίλιοι, 5000 
men, not counting’ women and children. 
This helps us to attach some definite 
meaning to the elastic words, ὄχλος, 
ὄχλοι, so frequently occurring in the 
Gospels. Doubtless this was an excep- 
tionally great gathering, yet the inference 
seems legitimate that ὄχλος meant 
hundreds, and πολὺς ὄχλος thousands. 
Vv. 22-36. The return voyage (Mk. 
vi. 45-56).—Ver. 22. Ἅἠνάγκασεν: 2 
strong word needing an explanation not 
here given, supplied in John vi. 15. Of 
course there was no physical compulsion, 
but there must have been urgency on 
Christ’s part, and unwillingness on the part 
of disciples. Fritzsche objects to special 


I4 ‘ 


210 


προσεύξασθαι. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Ὀψίας δὲ γενομένης, µόνος ἦν ἐκεῖ. 


ΧΙΝ. 


24. τὸ δὲ 


ρε πλοῖον ἤδη µέσον τῆς θαλάσσης fv! "βασανιζόμενον ὑπὸ τῶν 


(there 
the men, 
here of 


κυμάτων" ἦν γὰρ ἐναντίος 6 ἄνεμος. 


25. Τετάρτῃ δὲ φυλακῇ 


the ship). τῆς νυκτὸς ἀπῆλθεΣ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς,δ περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς 


θαλάσσης." 


ς Mk. vi. 49 


περιπατοῦ ἐ 
My wi-49 περιπατοῦντα ἐταράχθησαν, 


*Ingois,® λέγων, “Θαρσεῖτε' ἐγώ εἶμι, μὴ φοβεῖσθε. 


26. καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ ὃ ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν ὃ 


λέγοντες, “Ore 
27. εὐθέως Ἰ δὲ 


Γφάντασµά ἐστι.’ 
ἐλάλησεν αὐτοῖς ὁ 
28. ᾽Αποκρι- 


θεὶς δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Πέτρος εἶπε» ““ Κύριε, εἰ σὺ εἶ, κέλευσόν µε πρός σε 


20. “O δὲ εἶπεν, “EOE.” 


Καὶ καταβὰς 


ἀπὸ τοῦ πλοίου 61! Πέτρος περιεπάτησεν ἐπὶ τὰ ὕδατα, ἐλθεῖν 13 πρὸς 


wn 4 καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ φόβου ἔκραξαν. 
15)). 

ἐλθεῖν 19 ἐπὶ τὰ ὕδατα. 
1 For µεσον . . 


- ην B, some verss. and minuss. have here σταδιους πολλους απο 


της γης απειχεν, which W.H. adopt, putting in margin the reading of T.R., which 


is the undisputed reading in Mk. 
* n\Gev in QB verss. 


+ ΒΔ several cursives have the accus. here. 


6 της θαλασσης in BCD. 


Ίενθυς in NBD here as always in Mk., whence it may have come. 
It need not be again referred to. 


is a standing variation. 


3 Omit o |. KBCD. 
ὅ οι δε pad. ιδοντες a. in BD. 


In Mk. this 


8ο |. before αυτοις in B, omitted in SD, bracketed in W.H. 


9 The order of words varies here. 


W.H., after B, have αποκ. Se o [Π. ειπεν a. 


© S8BCDAZ many cursives have ελθειν προς σε. 


1 Art, omitted in KBD. 


emphasis, and renders: “auctor fuit 
discipulis, ut navem conscenderent ’’.— 
ἕως οὗ ἀπολύσῃ, subjunctive, here used 
where optative would be used in classic 
Greek. Cf. xviii. 30, and vide Burton, 
§ 324.—Ver. 23. ἀνέβη els τὸ Spos. 
After dismissing the crowd Jesus retired 
into the mountainous country back from 
the shore, glad to be αἶοπε-- κατ’ ἰδίαν, 
even to be rid of the Twelve for a season. 
--προσεύξασθαι: ‘‘ Good for prayer the 
mountain, and the night, and the soli- 
tude (µόνωσις), affording quiet, freedom 
from distraction (τὸ ἀπερίσπαστον), and 
calm” (Euthy. Zig.).—éwlas γεν. refers, 
of course, to a later hour than in ver. 15. 
—Ver. 24. μέσον, an adjective agreeing 
with πλοῖον (Winer, § 54, 6), signi- 
fies not merely in the middle strictly, 
but any appreciable distance from shore. 
Pricaeus gives examples of such use. 
But the reading of B, probably to be pre- 
ferred, implies that the boat was many 
stadii (25 or 30, John vi. 19 = 3 to 4 
miles) from the eastern shore.—t1ro τῶν 
κυμάτων: not in Mk., and goes without 
saying; when there are winds there will 
be waves.—évavrlog 6 ἄνεμος: what 
wind? From what quarter blowing? 


13 και ηλθεν in BD. 


What was the starting-point, and the 
destination? Holtz. (H. C.) suggests 
that the voyage was either from Beth- 
saida Julias at the mouth of the upper 
Jordan to the north-western shore, or 
from the south end of the plain Εἰ- 
Batiha towards Bethsaida Julias, at the 
north end, citing Furrer in support of 
the second alternative, vide in Mk.—Ver. 
25. τετάρτῃ @vA.=3 to 6, in the early 
morning, wpet.—éwt τ. θ.: the readings 
in this and the next verse vary between 
genitive and accusative. The sense is 
much the same. The evangelist means 
to represent Jesus as really walking on 
the sea, not on the land above the sea level 
(Paulus, Schenkel). Holtz. (H. C.), re- 
garding it as a legend, refers to O. T. 
texts in which God walks on the sea.— 
Ver. 26. φάντασμα: a little touch of 
sailor superstition natural in the circum- 
stances ; presupposes the impression that 
they saw something walking on the sea. 
—Ver. 27. ἐλάλησεν: Jesus spoke; the 
words given (θαρσεῖτε, etc.), but the 
mere sound of His voice would be 
enough. 

Vv. 28-33. Peter-episode, peculiar to 
Mt. The story is true to the character 


34---36. 


κ 2 a 
τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


30. βλέπων δὲ τὸν ἄνεμον ἰσχυρὸν } ἐφοβήθη ’ καὶ 


ἀρέάμενος Ἱκαταποντίζεσθαι ἔκραξε, λέγων, “Κύριε, σῶσόν pe.” 8 Ch. xviii 


31. Εὐθέως δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα ἐπελάβετο αὐτοῦ, καὶ 
λέγει αὐτῷ, “' Ὀλιγόπιστε, εἰς τί * ἐδίστασας; 


< 


αὐτῶν εἰς τὸ πλοῖον, " ἐκόπασεν 6 


ἐλθόντες ὃ προσεκύνησαν αὐτῷ λέγοντες, ''᾽Αληθῶς Θεοῦ vids ef.” 
34. Καὶ διαπεράσαντες ἦλθον εἰς τὴν γῆν * Γεννησαρέτ. 


6 only. 


2. Kat ἐμβάντων 2 t Ch. xxviii. 
3 μβ 17 only. 


ἄνεμος: 33. οἱ δὲ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ u Mk. iv. 39; 


vi. 51. 


35. καὶ 


ἐπιγνόντες αὐτὸν οἱ ἄνδρες τοῦ τόπου ἐκείνου ἀπέστειλαν εἰς ὅλην ν Lk. vii. 3 


Acts xxiii 


τὴν περίχωρον ἐκείνην, καὶ προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ πάντας τοὺς κακῶς 24; xxvii. 


έχοντας " 


κρασπέδου τοῦ ἱματίου αὐτοῦ" καὶ ὅσοι ἤψαντο, ᾿ διεσώθησαν. 


1 Omitted in NB 33. 


36. καὶ παρεκάλουν αὐτόν, ἵνα µόνον ἄψωνται τοῦ 


2 αᾳναβαντων in SBD 33. 


43) 44; 
XXViil. I, 4. 
1 Pet. iit. 
20. 


5 Wanting in NB. 


* SBD al. have επι instead of εις and omit την γην. 


of Peter.—Ver. 30. 
seeing the wind, that is, the effects of it. 
It is one thing to see a storm from the 
deck of a stout ship, another to see it in 
midst of the ν΄ανες.- -καταποντίζεσθαι : 
he walked at first, now he begins to sink; 
so at the final crisis, so at Antioch (Gal. 
ii. 11), so probably allthrough. A strange 
mixture of strength and weakness, bravery 
and cowardice ; a man of generous im- 
pulses rather than of constant firm will. 
“Peter walked on the water but feared 
the wind: such is human nature, often 
achieving great things, and at fault in 
little things.” — (woAAdnus τὰ peyada 
κατορθοῦσα, ἐν τοῖς ἐλάττοσι ἐλέγχεται, 
Chrys., H. 1.)—Ver. 31. ἐδίστασας: 
again in xxvili. 17, nowhere else in N. T., 
from δίς, double, hence to be of two 
minds, to doubt (cf. δίψυχος, James i. 8). 
—Ver.32. ἀναβάντων αὐτῶν: Jesus and 
Peter.—é€xétragev: used in narrative of 
first sea-anecdote by Mk., iv. 39 = ex- 
hausted itself (from kémwos).—Ver. 33. ot 
ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ: cf. ot ἄνθρωποι in viii. 27; 
presumably the disciples alone referred 
το.---ἀληθῶς 6. v. et, a great advance on 
ποταπός (viii. 27). The question it im- 
plies now settled: Son of God. 

Vv. 34-36. Safe arrival.—8vawepa- 
σαντες, having covered the distance 
between the place where Jesus joined 
them and the shore.—émt τὴν γῆν: they 
got to land; the general fact important 
after the storm.—els Γεννησαρέτ, more 
definite indication of locality, yet not 
very definite; a district, not a town, the 
rich plain of Gennesaret, four miles long 
and two broad.—Ver. 35. καὶ ἐπιγνόν- 
τες, etc.: again popular excitement with 
its usual concomitants. The men of the 


βλέπων τὸν ἄνεμον, 


place, when they recognised who had 
landed from the boat, sent round the 
word: Jesus has come! They bring 
their sick to Him to be healed.—Ver. 36. 
παρεκάλουν, etc.: they have now un- 
bounded confidence in Christ’s curative 
powers ; think it enough to touch (µόνον 
ἄψωνται) the hem of His mantle.—dieoo- 
θησαν: they are not disappointed; the 
touch brings a complete cure (διὰ in com- 
position). The expression, ὅσοι ἤψαντο, 
implies that all who were cured touched : 
that was the uniform means. Mk.’s 
expression, ὅσοι ἂν ἤ., leaves that open. 

CHAPTER XV. WASHING OF HANpDs; 
SYROPHGNICIAN WOMAN; SECOND FEED- 
ING. The scene changes with dramatic 
effect from phenomenal popularity on the 
eastern shore, and in Gennesaret, to 
embittered, ominous conflict with the 
jealous guardians of Jewish orthodoxy 
and orthopraxy. The relations between 
Jesus and the religious virtuosi are be- 
coming more and more strained and the 
crisis cannot be far off. That becomes 
clear to Jesus now, if it was not before 
(xvi. 21). 

Vv. 1-20. Washing of hands (Mk. vii. 
I-23).—Ver. 1. τότε connects naturally 
with immediately preceding narrative 
concerning the people of Gennesaret 
with unbounded faith in Jesus seeking 
healing by mere touch of His garment. 
Probably the one scene led to the other: 
growing popular enthusiasm deepening 
Pharisaic Ἡοε]έγ.-- προσέρχονται (ot) 
&. Ἱ. If of be omitted, the sense is that 
certain persons came to Jesus from Jeru- 
salem. If it be retained, the sense is: 
certain persons belonging to Jerusalem 
came from it, the preposition ἐν being 


212 


a Acts i. 25 
(with ἀπὸ). 


b Mk. vii. 3, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι,” 


5, 9, 13. 


. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XV. 


XV. 1. ΤΟΤΕ προσέρχονται τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ of! ἀπὸ “Ἱεροσολύμων 


λέγοντες, 2. “Atari οἱ µαθηταί σου 


1 Cor. xi.* παραβαίνουσι τὴν  παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ; οὗ γὰρ νίπτονται 


2. Gali 


14. Col. τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν," ὅταν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν.͵ 3. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν 


Thess. ii. αὐτοῖς, “ Διατί καὶ ὑμεῖς παραβαίνετε τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ τὴν 


τς; ΠΠ. 6. 


cme ae παράδοσιν ὑμῶν; 4. ὍὉ γὰρ Θεὸς ἐνετείλατο, λέγων, ‘Tipa τὸν 
Acts xix. 9 πατέρα cov,° καὶ τὴν μητέρα: καί, ΄Ὁ *kaxohoyav πατέρα ἢ 


24. 
26 ; 


xiii. 9 al. 


148BD omit οι. 


4 For ενετειλατο λεγων BD have simply ειπεν. 


. XVi. > 
26; xxvii. µητέρα θανάτῳ teheuTaTw : 

-Vve ‘ a , A ra > a . > . 

Heb. πατρὶ ἢ τῇ µητρί, Δῶρον, ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ἃ ὀφεληθῇς, καὶ ὅ οὗ μὴ 


2 Φαρ. και γραμ. in NBD. 


5. ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε, “Os ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ 
B Y πῃ τῷ 


5 SBA Orig. omit αντων. 
> &8BCD omit σον. 


® K8BCD omit και, which affects the construction; vide below. 


changed into ἀπὸ by attraction of the 
verb.—?ap. καὶ yp.-, usually named in 
inverse order, as in Τ.Ε. Our evangelist 
makes the whole party come from Jeru- 
salem; Mk., with more probability, the 
scribes only. The guardians of tradition 
in the Capital have their evil eye on Jesus 
and co-operate with the provincial rigor- 
ists.—Ver. 2. διατί of pad. cov παραβ.: 
no instance of offence specified in this 
case, as in ix. 1Ο and xii. 1. The zealots 
must have been making inquiries or 
playing the spy into the private habits 
of the disciple circle, seeking for grounds 
of fault-finding (cf. Mk. vii. 2).---παρα- 
βαίνουσι: strong word (Mk.’s milder), 
putting breach of Rabbinical rules on a 
level with breaking the greatest moral 
laws, as if the former were of equal 
importance with the latter. That they 
were, was deliberately maintained by the 
scribes (vide Lightfoot).—rhv παράδοσιν 
τ. π.: not merely the opinion, dogma, 
placitum, of the elders (Grotius), but 
opinion expressed ex cathedra, custom 
originated with authority by the ancients. 
The “elders” here are not the living 
rulers of the people, but the past bearers 
of religious authority, the more remote 
the more venerable. The “tradition” 
was unwritten (ἄγραφοφ διδασκαλία, 
Hesych.), the “law upon the lip” 
reaching back, like the written law (so it 
was pretended), to Moses. Baseless asser- 
tion, but believed ; therefore to attack the 
παράδοσις a Herculean, dangerous task. 
The assailants regard the act imputed as 
an unheard-of monstrous impiety. That 
is why they make a general charge before 
specifying the particular form under which 
the offence is committed, so giving the 
latter as serious an aspect as possible.— 
οὐ γὰρ νίπτονται, etc. : granting the fact 


it did not necessarily mean deliberate 
disregard of the tradition. It might be 
an occasional carelessness on the part of 
some of the disciples (τινὰς, Mk. vii. 2) 
which even the offenders would not care 
to defend. A time-server might easily 
have evaded discussion by putting the 
matter on this ground. The Pharisees 
eagerly put the worst construction on the 
act, and Jesus was incapable of time- 
serving insincerity; thus conflict was 
inevitable.—vlwreo@at, the proper word 
before meat, aoviwreo@at, after, 
Elsner, citing Athenaeus, lib. ix., cap. 
1δ.---ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν, Hebrew idiom for 
taking food. The neglect charged was 
not that of ordinary cleanliness, but of the 
technical rules for securing ceremonial 
cleanness. These were innumerable and 
ridiculously minute. Lightfoot, referring 
to certain Rabbinical tracts, says: ‘lege, 
si vacat, et si per taedium et nauseam 
potes’’. 

Vv. 3-6. Christ's reply ; consists of a 
counter charge and a prophetic citation 
(vv. 7-9) in the inverse order to that of 
Mk.—Ver. 3. καὶ ὑμεῖς: the retort, if 
justifiable, the best defence possible of 
neglect charged = “we transgress the 
tradition because we want to keep the 
commands of God: choice lies between 
these; you make the wrong choice”’. 
Grave issue raised; no compromise 
possible Πετε.-- διὰ τ. π. ὑμῶν : not rules 
made by the parties addressed (Weiss- 
Meyer), but the tradition which ye 
idolise, your precious paradosis.—Ver. 4. 
6 yap Geos: counter charge substantiated. 
The question being the validity of the 
tradition and its value, its evil tendency 
might be illustrated at will in connection 
with any moral interest. It might have 
been illustrated directly in connection. 


α--ο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


213 


τιµήσῃ 1 τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ ἢ τὴν µητέρα αὐτοῦ: 6. καὶ ' ἠκυρώσατε e Mk. vii. 13, 


τὴν ἐντολὴν 2 τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν. 


‘ 3 al. iii. 17. 
7- Ὑποκριται, f Mk. a 6; 


‘ ~ xii. 28. 
*kahds προεφήτευσε ὃ περὶ ὑμῶν “Hoatas, λέγων, 8. “᾿Εγγίζει µοι 6 Lk. xx. 39. 


λαὸς οὗτος τῷ στόµατι αὐτῶν, καὶ τοῖς χείλεσί µε Tipat ἡ δὲ 
s > , a > aA 
καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ. 


1ΝΘΟΡΔΣ have τιµησει. 
on ος αν by και is part of the protasis. 


Johniv. 17, 
ασ 
in . Vil. 

9. " µάτην δὲ σέβονταί µε, ο. 2 Cor. 


χα 
g here and in Mk. vii. 7 (from Is. xxix. 13). 


τιµηση answers to ειπη, and being made dependent 


2 rov λογον in BD (W.H.); τον vopov in SC (Tisch., W.H. marg.). 


ὃ Augment at beg., επροφ, in SBCDL. 


4 The Τ.Ε. gives the quotation in full. 


ΝΒΡΙ, have ο λαος ουτος τοις χειλεσι 


pe tipa: Tisch., W.H. (οντος ο λαος and αγαπη for type in margin). 


with moral purity versus ceremonial. 
The actual selection characteristic of 
Jesus as humane, and felicitous as ex- 
ceptionally clear.—ripa . .. τελεντάτω: 
fifth commandment (Ex. xx. 12), with its 
penal sanction (Ex. xxi. 17).—Ver. 5 
shows how that great law is compro- 
mised.—tpeis δὲ λέγ.: the emphatic 
antithesis of ὑμεῖς to θεὸς a pointed τε- 
buke of their presumption. The scribes 
tivals to the Almighty in legislation. 
“Ye say”: the words following give 
not the zpsissima verba of scribe-teaching 
or what they would acknowledge to be 
the drift of their teaching, but that drift 
as Jesus Himself understood it = ‘‘ This 
is what it comes to.”—‘‘ A@pov”’ = let it 
be a gift or offering devoted to God, to 
the temple, to religious purposes, {.6., a 
Corban (Mk. vii. τα); magic word τε- 
leasing from obligation to show honour 
to parents in the practical way of contri- 
buting to their support. Of evil omen 
even when the “ gift ” was bond fide, as 
involving an artificial divorce between 
religion and morality ; easily sliding into 
disingenuous pretexts of vows to evade 
filial responsibilities ; reaching the lowest 
depth of immorality when lawmakers 
and unfilial sons were in league for 
common pecuniary profit from the 
nefarious transaction. Were the fault- 
finders in this case chargeable with re- 
ceiving a commission for trafficking in 
iniquitous legislation, letting sons off for 
a percentage on what they would have to 
give their parents? Origen, Jerome, 
Theophy., Lutteroth favour this view, 
but there is nothing in the text to justify 
it. Christ’s charge is based on the 
practice specified even at its best: honest 
pleading of previous obligation to God 
as a ground for neglecting duty to 
parents. Lightfoot (Hor. Heb.) under- 
stands the law as meaning that the word 


Corban, even though profanely and 
heartlessly spoken, bound not to help 
parents, but did not bind really to give 
the property to sacred uses, ‘ Ad 
dicanda sua in sacros usus per haec 
verba nullatenus tenebatur, ad non 
juvandum patrem tenebatur  inviola- 
biliter."—ovd μὴ τιµήσει, he shall not 
honour = he is exempt from obligation 
to: such the rule in effect, if not in words, 
of the scribes in the case. The future 
here has the force of the imperative as 
often in the Sept. (vide Burton, M. and 
T., § 67). If the imperative mean- 
ing be denied, then οὐ μὴ +. must be 
taken as a comment of Christ’s. Ye say, 
‘whosoever,’ etc.; in these circum- 
stances of course he will not, etc. As 
the passage stands in T.R. the clause 
καὶ ov μὴ τιµήσῃ, etc., belongs to the 
protasis, and the apodosis remains un- 
expressed = he shall be free, or guiltless, 
as in A. V.—Ver. 6. ἠκυρώσατε, ye in- 
validated, by making such a rule, the 
aorist pointing to the time when the rule 
was ‘made. Or it may be a gnomic 
aorist: so ye are wont to, etc. The 
verb ἀκυρόω belongs to later Greek, 
though Elsner calls the phrase “bene 
Graeca”’.— διὰ . . . ὑμῶν: an account 
of your tradition, again to mark it as 
their idol, and as theirs alone, God 
having no part in it, though the Rabbis 
taught that it was given orally by God to 
Moses.—Ver,. 7. ὑποκριταί: no thought 
of conciliation ; open war at all hazards. 
“ Actors,”’ in their zeal for God, as illus- 
trated in the case previously cited. God 
first, parents second, yet God not in all 
their thoughts.—xalés, appositely, to the 
purpose. Isaiah might not be thinking 
of the Pharisees, but certainly the quo- 
tation is very felicitous in reference to 
them, exactly describing their religious 
character. Mt. follows Mk. in quoting ; 


214 ΚΑΤΑ. ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ XV. 

bh ory διδάσκοντες "διδασκαλίας, |! ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων. ” 10. Καὶ 
in Gospp. προσκαλεσάµενος τὸν ὄχλον, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““᾿Ακούετε καὶ συνίετε. 
frequent i 4 i F A e 

Μι, νὰ 7 II. οὐ τὸ εἰσερχόμενον eis τὸ στόµα κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον: ἀλλὰ 
Col ii 2273 ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ τοῦ στόµατος, τοῦτο κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.᾿ 
profane 12. Τότε προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 1 etwov? αὐτῷ, “Οἶδας ὅτι 


authors). 


j here only of Φαρισαῖοι ἀκούσαντες τὸν λόγον ἐσκανδαλίσθησαν; ” 
in Be a 


13. Ὁ δὲ 


k Ch. xxiii, ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε, “Maca ) φυτεία, ἣν οὐκ ἐφύτευσεν ὁ πατήρ µου ὁ 


16, 24. 
Acts i, 16. οὐράνιος, ἐκριζωθήσεται. 
Rom. ii. το. 


14. ἄφετε αὐτούς *68yyot εἶσι τυφλοὶ 


1 here only τυφλῶν ὃ: τυφλὸς δὲ τυφλὸν ἐὰν ὁδηγῇ, ἀμφότεροι eis βόθυνον 
“a 36, πεσοῦνται. 15. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 Πέτρος εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ““Ι Φράσον 
Τ.Ε). 


1 S9BD and several cursives omit αντου. 
τυφλων BDLZ have τυφλοι εισι οδηγοι (W.H.). SS hae 


3 Instead of οδηγοι ... 
the same inverted, 08. εισι τυφ. 


neither follows closely the Sept. (Is. xxix. 
13).—Ver. 8. 7 δὲ καρδία, etc. : at this 
point the citation is particularly apposite. 
They were far from the true God in 
their thoughts who imagined that He 
could be pleased with gifts made at the 
expense of filial piety. Christ’s God 
abhorred such homage, still more the 
hypocritical pretence of it. 

Vv. το, 11. Appeal to the people: a 
mortal offence to the Pharisees and 
scribes, but made inevitable by publicity 
of attack, the multitude being in the back- 
ground and overhearing all.—daxovere 
καὶ συνίετε: abrupt, laconic address; a 
fearless, resolute tone audible.—Ver. 
11. Simple direct appeal to the moral 
sense of mankind ; one of those emanci- 
pating words which sweep away the cob- 
webs of artificial systems; better than 
elaborate argument. It is called a 
parable in ver. 15, but it is not a parable 
in the strict sense here whatever it may 
be in Mk. (vide notes there). Parables 
are used to illustrate the ethical by the 
natural. This saying is itself ethical: τὸ 
ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ τοῦ στόματος refers 
to words as expressing thoughts and de- 
sires (νετ. 19).— ov τὸ εἰσερ. εἰς τὸ στόμα: 
refers to food οἱ all sorts ; clean 100d taken 
with unclean hands, and food in itself 
unclean. The drift of the saying there- 
fore is: ceremonial uncleanness, how- 
ever caused, a small matter, moral un- 
cleanness the one thing to be dreaded. 
This goes beyond the tradition of the 
elders, and virtually abrogates the 
Levitical distinctions between clean and 
unclean. A sentiment worthy of Jesus 
and suitable to an occasion when He 
was compelled to emphasise the supreme 
importance of the ethical in the law— 


? λεγονσιν in BD. 


the ethical emphatically the law of God 
(τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ, ver. 3). 

Vv. 12-14. Disciples report impression 
made on Pharisees by the word spoken to 
the people. Not in Mark.—vVer. 12. 
ἐσκανδαλίσθησαν: double offence—(z) 
appealing to the people at all; (2) uttering 
sucha word, revolutionary in character.— 
Ver. 13. © δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς, etc.: the 
disciples were afraid, but Jesus was in- 
dignant, and took up high ground.— 
gute(a for Φύτευμα, a plant, “not a 
wild flower but a cultivated plant” 
(Camb. G. T.), refers to the Rabbinical 
tradition; natural figure for doctrine, 
and so used both by Jesus and Greeks 
(vide Schottgen and Kypke). Kypke re- 
marks: “pertinet huc parabola περὶ τοῦ 
σπείροντος”'.--ὃ πατήρ pov: the state- 
ment in the relative clause is really the 
main point, that the tradition in question 
was a thing with which God as Jesus 
conceived Him had nothing todo. This 
is an important text for Christ’s doctrine 
of the Fatherhood as taught by dis- 
criminating use ofthe term πατήρ. The 
idea of God implied in the Corban tradi- 
tion was that His interest was antago- 
nistic to that of humanity. In Christ’s 
idea of God the two interests are coinci- 
dent. This text should be ‘set beside 
xii. 50, which might easily be misunder- 
stood as teaching an opposite view.— 
ἐκριζωθήσεται. This is what will be, 
and what Jesus wishes and works for: 
uprooting, destruction, root and branch, 
no compromise, the thing wholly evil. 
The response of the traditionalists was 
crucifixion.—Ver. 14. ἄφετε: the case 
hopeless, no reform possible; on the 
road to ruin.—rtvu@dol εἶσιν ὁδηγοί: the 
reading in B is very laconic = blind mer 


10—2I. 


EYATTEAION 


τς 


ἡμῖν τὴν παραβολὴν Ἰωήτην.͵ 1 16. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 1 εἶπεν, ''"'᾽Ακμὴν ™bere only. 


n Rom. 1.21, 


καὶ ὑμεῖς " ἀσύνετοί ἐστε; 17. οὕπω 3 νοεῖτε, ὅτι πᾶν τὸ εἴσπορευό- bat eno 


µενον εἷς τὸ στόµα εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν χωρεῖ, καὶ Eis ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκβάλ- 
λεται; 18. τὰ δὲ ἐκπορευόμενα ἐκ τοῦ στόµατος ἐκ τῆς καρδίας 
ἐξέρχεται, κἀκεῖνα κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον. 


11. Lk. i 
353 1x. 47; 
xxiv. 38. 

1 Cor. iii. 


19. ἐκ γὰρ τῆς καρδίας 20. Jas. 


a µ . 4- 
ἐξέρχονται ᾿διαλογισμοὶ πονηροί, "φόνοι, ) μοιχεῖαι, πορνεῖαι, κλοπαί, p These are 


ψευδοµαρτυρίαι, βλασφημίαι. 


ἄνθρωπον : τὸ δὲ ἀνίπτοις χερσὶ φαγεῖν οὗ κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.’ 
21. Καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἐκεῖθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀνεχώρησεν eis τὰ µέρη Τύρου 


1 49BZ omit ταντην and Ἰησους (D also omits |.). 


are the leaders, the suggestion being: 
we know what happens in that case. 
The point is the inevitableness of ruin. 
What follows expresses what has been 
already hinted.—rv@dds δὲ +. ἐ. 65.: if 
blind blind lead; 68nyg, subjunctive, 
with éav as usual in a present general 
supposition.—apdérepor, both: Rabbis 
or scribes and their disciples. Christ 
despaired of the teachers, but He tried to 
rescue the people; hence vv. 10, 11. 

Vv. 15-20. Interpretation of saying in 
ver. 11.—Ver. 15. Πέτρος, spokesman 
as usual (6 θερὸς καὶ πανταχοῦ 
προφθάνων, Chrys., Hom. li.).—mapa- 
βολήν, here at least, whatever may be 
the case in Mk., can mean only a dark 
saying, σκοτεινὸς λόγος (Theophy. in 
Mk.), ‘‘oratio obscura’’ (Suicer). The 
saying, ver. 11, was above the understand- 
ing of the disciples, or rather in advance 
of their religious attainments; for men 
often deem thoughts difficult when, 
though easy to understand, they are 
hard to receive. The Twelve had been 
a little scandalised by the saying as well 
as the Pharisees, though they did not 
like to say So (καὶ αὐτοὶ ἠρέμα θορυβού- 
pevot, Chrys.).—Ver. 16. ἀκμὴν, accusa- 
tive of ἀκμή, the point (of a weapon, 
etc.)=Kat’ ἀκμὴν χρόνον, at this point 
* of time, still; late Greek, and con- 
demned by Phryn., p. 123 (ἀντὶ τοῦ ἔτι). 
--ἀσύνετοί εστε. Christ chides the 
Twelve for making a mystery of a plain 
matter (‘‘ quare parabolice dictum putet 
quod perspicue locutus est,’’ Jerome). 
Very simple and axiomatic to the Master, 
but was it ever quite clear to the 
disciples? In such matters all depends 
on possessing the requisite spiritual 
sense. Easy to see when you have eyes. 
—Ver. 17. ἀφεδρῶνα: here only, pro- 
bably a Macedonian word = privy; a 
vulgar word and a vulgar subject which 


20. ταῦτά ἐστι τὰ κοινοῦντα τὸν 


the only 
words 
common 
to this list 
with that 
in Gal. v. 
19; both 
doubtful there. 


2 ov in BDZ 33. 


Jesus would gladly have avoided, but He 
forces Himself to speak of it for the sake 
of His disciples. Theidea is: from food 
no moral defilement comes to the soul; 
such defilement as there is, purely 
physical, passing through the bowels 
into the place of discharge. Doubtless 
Jesus said this, otherwise no one would 
have put it into His mouth. Were the 
Twelve any the wiser? Probably the 
very rudeness of the speech led them to 
think.—Ver. 18. ἐκπορενόμενα: words 
representing thoughts απά desires, 
morally defiling, or rather revealing 
defilement already existing in the heart, 
seat of thought and passion.—Ver. 19. 
Φόνοι, etc.: breaches of Sixth, Seventh, 
Eighth, and Ninth Commandments in 
succession.—Ver. 20. Emphatic final 
reassertion of the doctrine. 

Vv. 21-28. Woman of Canaan (Mk. 
vii. 24-30). This excursion to the north 
is the result of a passionate longing to 
escape at once from the fever of popu- 
larity and from the odium theologicum of 
Pharisees, and to be alone for a while 
with the Twelve, with nature, and with 
God. One could wish that fuller details 
had been given as to its duration, extent, 
etc. From Mk. we infer that it had a 
wide sweep, lasted for a considerable 
time, and was not confined to Jewish 
territory. Vide notes there. 

Ver. 21. ἀνεχώρησεν, cf. xii. 15.— 
eis τὰ µέρη T. καὶ Σ.: towards or into? 
Opinion is much divided. De Wette cites 
in favour of the latter, Mt. ii. 22, xvi. 13, 
and disposes of the argument against it 
based on ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρίων ἐκείνων (ver. 22) 
by the remark that it has force only if 
ὅρια, contrary to the usage of the evan- 
gelist, be taken as = boundaries instead 
of territories. On the whole, the con- 
clusion must be that the narrative leaves 
the point uncertain. On psychological 


216 


καὶ Σιδῶνος. 


ἐξελθοῦσα ἐκραύγασεν } αὐτῷ, λέγουσα, 
Δαβίδ" ἡ θυγάτηρ µου κακῶς δαιμονίζεται. 


__ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῇ λόγον. 
Ελ cys 3-4 ΡΜ ae 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XV. 


‘ ΄ a 
22. καὶ ἰδού, γυνὴ Χαναναία ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρίων ἐκείνων 


““Ελέησόν µε, κύριε, vic 5 


23. Ὅ δὲ οὐκ 


καὶ προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἠρώτων “ 


26 (with αὐτόν, λέγοντες, '“᾿Απόλυσον αὐτήν, ὅτι κράζει Ἱὄπισθεν ἡμῶν.) 


gen. as 
here). 

r Mk. ix. 22 
24. Acts τὰ ἀπολωλότα οἴκου Ισραήλ. 
XVI. Q ; Xxi. 


28. 2 Cor, λέγουσα, “Κύριε, " βοήθει prov.” 


vi.2. Heb. » 
ii. 18, 
1 &paley in BDZ (W.H.). 
The imperfect is truer to life, 


2 S8BCZz omit αυτω. 


3 wos in BD. 


24. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν, “"Οὐκ ἀπεστάλην εἰ μὴ cis τὰ πρόβατα 


> 


« > - lol 
25. Ἡ δὲ ἐλθοῦσα προσεκύνει αὐτῷ, 
26. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν, “Οὖκ 


ἔστι καλὸν ὅ λαβεῖν τὸν ἄρτον τῶν τέκνων, καὶ βαλεῖν τοῖς κυναρίοις.᾽ 


The aor. εκραξεν in $QZ (Tisch. and W.H. marg.). 


4 ηρωτουν in SBCDX. 


5 ουκ εστι καλον is so weightily supported (all the great uncials with exception 
of D) that one can hardly refuse to accept it as the true reading. Yet the reading 
of D, ουκ εξεστι, has strong claims, just on account of the severity it implies and 


because the other reading is that of Mk. 


grounds the presumption is in favour of 
the view that Jesus crossed the border 
into heathen territory. After that inter- 
view with sanctimonious Pharisees who 
thought the whole world outside Judea 
unclean, it would be a refreshment to 
Christ’s spirit to cross over the line and 
feel that He was still in God’s world, 
with blue sky overhead and the sea on 
this hand and mountains on that, all 
showing the glory of their Maker. He 
would breathe a freer, less stifling atmo- 
sphere there.—Ver. 22. Χαναναία: the 
Phoenicians were descended from a 
colony of Canaanites, the original in- 
habitants of Palestine, Gen. x. 15 (vide 
Benzinger, Heb. Arch., p. 63). Vide 
notes on Mk.—#éA. µε, pity me, the 
mother’s heart speaks.—vié A. The title 
and the request imply some knowledge 
of Jesus. Whence got? Was she a 
proselyte? (De Wette.) Or had the 
fame of Jesus spread thus far, the report 
of a wonderful healer who passed among 
the Jews for a descendant of David? 
The latter every way likely, cf. Mt. iv. 
24. There would be some intercourse 
between the borderers, though doubtless 
also prejudices and enmities.—Ver. 23. 
. 6 δὲ οὐκ ἀπ.: a new style of behaviour 
‘on the part of Jesus. The réle of in- 
difference would cost Him an effort.— 
ἠρώτων (ουν W. and H. as if contracted 
< from ἐρωτέω), besought; in classics the 
verb means to inquire. In N. T. the 
two senses are combined after analogy of 


byw. The disciples were probably 
surprised at their Master’s unusual 


behaviour; a reason for it would not 
occur to them. They change places 
with the Master here, the larger-hearted 
appearing by comparison the narrow- 
hearted.—améAvooyv, get rid of her by 
granting her request.—ért κράζει: they 
were moved not so much by pity as by 
dread of a sensation. There was far 
more sympathy (though hidden) in 
Christ’s heart than in theirs. Deep , 
natures are often misjudged, and shallow 
men praised at their expense.—Ver. 24. 
οὐκ ἀπεστάλην: Jesus is compelled to 
explain Himself, and His explanation is 
bond fide, and to be taken in earnest as 
meaning that He considered it His duty 
to restrict His ministry to Israel, to be a 
shepherd exclusively to the lost sheep of 
Israel (τὰ πρόβατα τ. ἀ., cf. ix. 36), as 
He was wont to call them with affec- 
tionate pity. There was probably a 
mixture of feelings in Christ’s mind at 
this time; an aversion to recommence 
just then a-healing ministry at all— 


‘a craving for rest and retirement; a 


disinclination to be drawn into a ministry” 
among a heathen people, which would 
mar the unity of His career as a prophet 
of God to Israel (the drama of His life to 
serve its purpose must respect the limits 
of time and place); a secret inclination 
to do this woman a kindness if it could 
in any way be made exceptional; and last 
but not least, a feeling that her request 
was really not isolated but representative 
=the Gentile world in her inviting Him, a 
fugitive from His own land, to come over 
and help them, an omenofthetransference | 
of the kingdom from Jewish to Pagan soil. 


22—31. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


217 


27. Ἡ δὲ εἶπε, “Ναί, κύριε: καὶ yap! τὰ κυνάρια ἐσθίει ἀπὸ τῶν 


ψιχίων τῶν * 


28. Τότε ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῇ, ““Ὦ γύναι, µεγάλη σου 


ἢ mlotis> γενηθήτω σοι ὡς θέλεις. 
ἀπὸ τῆς ὥρας ἐκείνης. 


, y a t ~ , Αα 22 ae 
πιπτοντων ἀπὸ της τραπεζης των κυριων αὐτων. s Mk. vii. 


28, Lk. 
ΧΝΥΙ. 21 

: ji ΚΕ). 
Καὶ ἰάθη ἡ θυγάτηρ abrist same phr. 
in Lk. xvi. 
21. 


20. Καὶ μεταβὰς ἐκεῖθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἦλθε παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν τῆς 


Γαλιλαίας: καὶ ἀναβὰς εἰς τὸ ὄρος, ἐκάθητο ἐκεῖ. 


ο 
και 


30. 


προσῆλθον αὐτῷ ὄχλοι πολλοί, ἔχοντες pel ἑαυτῶν χωλούς, τυφ- 


Rous, κωφούς, "κυλλούς,” καὶ ἑτέρους πολλούς, καὶ ἔρριψαν αὐτοὺς u Ch. xviii. 


παρὰ τοὺς πόδας τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ Σ καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτούς' 31. ὥστε 43. 


Mk. ix 


τοὺς ὄχλους  θαυμάσαι, βλέποντας κωφοὺς Aadodvtas,® κυλλοὺς 
ὑγιεῖς δ χωλοὺς περιπατοῦντας, καὶ τυφλοὺς βλέποντας: καὶ 


1B omits yap, which therefore W H. bracket. 


fallen out per incuriam, 


by late MSS. 
3 avtov for του |. in SBDL. 


5 B has ακονοντας. 


Vv. 25-28. Entreaty renewed at close 
quarters with success—Ver. 25. ἡ δὲ 
ἐλθοῦσα, etc. Probably the mother read 
conflict and irresolution.in Christ’s face, 
and thence drew encouragement.—Ver. 
26. οὐκ ἔστιν καλὸν, etc.: seemingly a 
hard word, but not so hard as it seems. 
First, it is not a simple monosyllabic 
negative, leaving no room for parley, 
but an argument inviting further dis- 
cussion. Next, it is playful, humorous, 
bantering in tone, a parable to be taken 
cum grano. Third, its harshest word, 

' «xvvaptots, contains a loophole. κυνάρια 
does not compare Gentiles to the dogs 
without, in the street, but to the house- 

, hold dogs belonging to the family, which 
got their portion though not the chil- 
dren’s.—-Ver. 27. vat, κύριε’ καὶ γὰρ, 
etc.: eager assent, not dissent, with a 
gleam in the eye on perceiving the 
advantage given by the comparison = Yes, 
indeed, Lord, for even, etc. Kypke cites an 
instance from Xenophon of the combina- 
tion ναί καὶ yap in the same sense.— 

4 ψιχίων, dimin. from wig, a bit, crumb, 
found only in N. T. (here and Mk. vii. 28, 
Lk. xvi. 21 T. R.), another diminutive 
answering to κυνάρια = the little pet 
dogs, eat of the minute morsels. Curi- 
ously felicitous combination of ready 
wit, humility and faith: wit in seizing 
on the playful κυνάρια and improving on 
it by adding ψιχία, humility in being 
content with the smallest crumbs, faith 


As Weiss suggests it may have 


It seems needed, vide below. Yet vide Mk. 


3 The order in which these four words (χωλους, etc.) are given varies. 
κυλλους before τυφλους, which W.H. adopt. 


B has 
The order of T.R. is supported only 


4 τον οχλον in NCDA. 
® 88 omits this clause. 


in conceiving of the healing asked as 
only such a crumb for Jesus to give.— 
Ver. 28. Immediate compliance with 
her request with intense delight in her 
faith, which may have recalled to mind 
that of another Gentile (Mt. viii. 10).— 
ὦ γύναι: exclamation in a tone enriched 
by the harmonies of manifold emotions. 
What a refreshment to Christ’s heart to 
pass from that dreary pestilential tradi- 
tionalism to this utterance of a simple 
unsophisticated moral nature on Pagan 
soil! The transition from the one scene 
to the other unconsciously serves the 
purposes of consummate dramatic art. 
Vv. 29-31. Return to the Sea of 
Galilee (Mk. vii. 31-37).—Ver. 20. παρὰ 
τ. 0. +. Γαλ., to the neighbourhood of 
the Sea of Galilee; on which side? 
According to Mk., the eastern, ap- 
proached by a circuitous journey through 
Sidon and Decapolis. Weiss contends 
that Mt. means the western shore. The 
truth seems to be that he leaves it vague. 
His account is a meagre colourless re- 
production of Mk.’s. He takesno interest 
in the route, but only in the incidents at 
the two termini. He takes Jesus north 
to the borders of Tyre to meet the woman 
of Canaan, and back to Galilee to feed 
the multitude a second time.—eis τὸ 
ὄρος, as in ν. 1, and apparently for the 
same purpose: ἐκάθητο é., sat down 
there to teach. This ascent of the hill 
bordering the lake is not in Mk.—Ver. 
ν 


218 ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΟΘΑΙΟΝ XV.. 


v Mk. viii. 2 


ὤμιραι. ἐδόξασαν τὸν Θεὸν σραήλ. 


32. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς προσκαλεσάµενος. 


true read- τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ etme, “Σπλαγχνίζομαι ἐπὶ τὸν ὄχλον, ὅτι ἤδη: 


ing as 


here). Ο/. 7 ἡμέρας 1 tpets  προσµένουσί por, καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσι τί φάγωσι. καὶ 


Lk. 1x. 28, 


Acts ν. 7 ἀπολῦσαι αὐτοὺς "νήστεις οὐ θέλω, µήποτε ἐκλυθῶσιν ἐν τῇ 630. 


for const. 


a 55 


w Mk. viii, 33, Καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, “Πόθεν ἡμῖν ἐν ἐρημία 


2. Acts 


{ος ” an « ά ” Xr a May 
Xi. 23; αρτοι τοσουτοι, ωστε Χορτασαι οχλον τοσουτον; 


ΧΙΙ. 43. 1 


Tim. v. 5. αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Πόσους ἄρτους ἔχετε; 


x Mk. viii. 3. rn 
y Mk. viii.7. καὶ ὀλίγα 7 ἰχθύδια. 
z Mk. vi. 40 


34. Καὶ λέγει 
Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “ Ἑπτά, 


35. Καὶ ἐκέλευσε τοῖς ὄχλοις 5 * ἀναπεσεῖν 


4 . ε + 
(absol.); ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν: 36. καὶ λαβὼν ΄ τοὺς ἑπτὰ ἄρτους καὶ τοὺς ἰχθύας,5 


viii. 6 


(ἐπὶτῆς γ.). εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασε, καὶ ESwxe® τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, οἱ δὲ 


Lk. xi. 37 ; 
(Ξ ἀνακλίνομσι). John xxi. 20 al. 


1 ημεραι in most uncials. 
obviously a grammatical correction. 


$$ and Origen have the accus. (ηµερας Τ.Ε.), 


299B omit avtov. 3 For εκελ. τοις ox. NBD have παραγγειλας τω οχλω. 


4 For και λαβων SBD have ελαβε. 
δ εδιδου in NBD. 


30. χωλούς, etc.: the people wanted 
healing, not teaching, and so brought 
their sick and suffering to Jesus.—é€p- 
ριψαν: they threw them at His feet 
either in care-free confidence, or in haste, 
because of the greatness of the number. 
Among those brought were certain classed 
as κυλλούς, which is usually interpreted 
“bent,” as with rheumatism. But in 
xviii. 8 it seems to mean ‘“ mutilated”’. 
Euthy. takes κυλλοὶ = οἱ ἄχειρες, and 
Grotius argues for this sense, and infers 
that among Christ’s works of healing 
were restorations of lost limbs, though 
we do not read of such anywhere else. 
On this view ὑγιεῖς, ver. 31, will mean 
ἀρτίους, integros.—Ver. 31. λαλοῦντας: 
this and the following participles are used 
substantively as objects of the verb βλέ- 
ποντας, the action denoted by the parti- 
ciples being that which was seen.— 
ἐδόξασαν τ. θ. Ἰσραήλ. The expression 
suggests a non-Israelite crowd and seems 
to hint that after all for our evangelist 
Jesus is on the east side and in heathen 
territory. But it may point back to ver. 
24 and mean the God who conferred 
such favours on Israel as distinct from 
the heathen (Weiss-Meyer). Reh 

Vv. 32-38. Secoyd feeding (Mk. viii. 
1-9).—Ver. 32. omdayxvilopat, with ἐπὶ 
as in xiv. 14, Mk. viii. 2, with περὶ in ix. 
36. In the first feeding Christ’s com- 
passion is moved by the sickness among 
the multitude, here by their hunger.— 
ἡμέραι τρεῖς: that this is the true reading 
is guaranteed by the unusual construction, 
the accusative being what one expects. 


5 $8BD insert και before ευχαριστησας. 
TS&SBD omit αυτου. 


The reading of D adopted by Fritzsche, 
which inserts elot καὶ after τρεῖς, though 
not to be accepted as the true reading, 
may be viewed as a solution of the 
problem presented by the true reading 

vide Winer, § 62, 2.--νήστεις, fasting 
(vm, ἐσθίω similar to νήπιος from vq, 
ἔπος), here and in parallel text in Mk. 
only. The motive of the miracle is not 
the distance from supplies but the ex- 
hausted condition of the people after 
staying three days with Jesus with quite 
inadequate provision of food. Mk. states 


that some were far from home (viii. 3), - 


implying that most were not. But even 
those whose homes were near might faint 
(ἐκλυθῶσι, Gal. vi. ϱ) by the way through 
long fasting.—Ver. 33. τοσοῦτοι, ὥστε 
χορτάσαι. ὥστε with infinitive may be 
used to express a consequence involved 
in the essence or quality of an object or 
action, therefore after τοσοῦτος and 
similar words ; vide Ktihner, § 584, 2, aa. 
—Ver.34. πόσους ἄρτους: the disciples 
have larger supplies this time than the 
first, after three days, and when the 
supplies of the multitude are exhausted: 
seven loaves and several small fishes.— 
Ver. 36. ἐὐχαριστήσας, a late Greek’ 
word (‘‘does not occur before Polybius 
in the sense of gratias agere’’—Camb. 
N. T.), condemned by Phryn., who 
enjoins χάριν εἰδέναι instead (Lobeck, 
Ρ. 18). Elsner dissents from the judg- 
ment of the ancient grammarians, citing 
instances from Demosthenes, etc.—Ver. 
37. ἕπτά σπνρίδας: baskets different 
in number and in name. Hesychius 


32—39. XVI.1. 


μαθηταὶ τῷ dxhw.} 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


219 


47. Καὶ ἔφαγον πάντες, καὶ ἐχορτάσθησαν: 


καὶ ἦραν 3 τὸ περισσεῦον τῶν κλασμάτων. ἑπτὰ "σπυρίδας πλήρεις. BCR are 


Mk. viii. 8, 


38. ot δὲ ἐσθίοντες ἦσαν τετρακισχίλιοι ἄνδρες, χωρὶς γυναικῶν καὶ 20. Acts 


παιδίων. 


ix. 45. 


30. Καὶ ἀπολύσας τοὺς ὄχλους ἐνέβη Eis τὸ πλοῖον, καὶ ἦλθεν eis 


τὰ ὅρια Μαγδαλά.ὃ 


XVI. 1. Καὶ προσελθόντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ Σαδδουκαῖοι πειρά- 
ἵοντες ἐπηρώτησαν “ αὐτὸν σημεῖον ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἐπιδεῖξαι αὐτοῖς. 


1 τοις οχλοις In NBL al. 


2 npav after κλασµατων in BD. 


5 Μαγαδαν in NBD, adopted in Tisch., W.H., etc., and doubtless the true 
reading. Μαγδαλα is 2 known substituted for an unknown. 


4 επηρωτων in δν (Tisch. and W.H. marg.). 


defines σπυρίς: τὸ τῶν πυρῶν ἄγγος = 
wheat-basket; perhaps connected with 
σπείρω, suggesting a basket made of 
rope-net; probably larger than κόφινος, 
for longer journeys (Grotius). Or does 
the different kind of basket point to 
different nationality; Gentiles? Hilary 
contends for Gentile recipients of the 
second blessing, with whom Westcott 
(Characteristics of Gospel Miracles, p. 
13) agrees.—Ver. 39. Μαγαδάν: the 
true reading, place wholly unknown, 
whence probably the variants. 

CHAPTER XVI. SIGN SEEKERS: 
CAESAREA ΡΗΙΙΙΡΡΙ. Again a dramati- 
cally impressive juxtaposition of events. 
First an ominous encounter with ill- 
affected men professedly in quest of a 
sign, then in a place of retreat a first 
announcement in startlingly plain terms 
of an approaching tragic crisis. 

Vv. 1-12. Demand for a sign (Mk. 
viii, 11-21).—Ver. 1. προσελθόντες: 
one of Mt.’s oft-recurring descriptive 
words.—ap. καὶ Σαδδ.: a new com- 
bination, with sinister purpose, of classes 
of the community not accustomed to act 
together; wide apart, indeed, in social 
position and religious tendency, but 
made allies pro tem. by common dislike 
to the movement identified with Jesus. 
Already scribes by themselves had asked 
a sign (xii. 38). Now they are joined by 
a party representing the priestly and 
governing classes among whom the 
‘“* Sadducees”’ were to be found (Well- 
hausen, Die Pharisder und die Sadducaer). 
Mk. mentions only the Pharisees (ver. 
11), but he makes Jesus refer to the 
leaven of Herod in the subsequent con- 
versation with the disciples, whence 
might legitimately be inferred the 
Epes of representatives of that 
eaven. These Mt. calls ‘‘ Sadducees,”’ 


probably the better-known name, and 
practically identical with the Herod 
leaven. The ‘Herodians” were, I 
imagine, people for whom Herod the 
Great was a hero, a kind of Messiah, 
all the Messiah they cared for or believed 
in, one who could help worldly-minded 
Israelites to be proud of their country 
(vide Grotius on Mt. xvi. 6). It was 
among Sadducees that such ἍΆετο- 
worshippers were likely to be found.— 
ἐπηρώτησαν: here like the simple verb 
(xv. 23) =requested, with infinitive, 
ἐπιδεῖξαι, completing the object of 
desire.—onpetov ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ : before 
a 38) only a sign. Now a sign from 
caven. What might that be? Chrys. 
(Hom. liii.) suggests: to stop the course 
of the sun, to bridle the moon, to pro- 
duce thunder, or to change the air, or 
something of that sort. These sugges- 
tions will do as well as any. Probably 
the interrogators had no definite idea 
what they wanted, beyond desiring to 
embarrass or nonplus Christ. 

Vv. 2-4. Reply of Fesus.—Vv. 2 and 
3, though not in B and bracketed by W. 
H., may be regarded as part of the text. 
Somewhat similar is Lk. xii. 54-56. On 
some occasion Jesus must have con- 
trasted the shrewd observation of His 
contemporaries in the natural sphere 
with their spiritual obtuseness.—Ver 2. 
εὐδία, fine weather | (εὖ, Διός genitive of 
Zevs).—wuppafe yap 6 ὁ.: that the sign 
= a ruddy sky in the evening (πυῤῥίζειν 
in Lev. xiii. 19, 24).—Ver. 3. yeupov, a 
storm to-day; sign the same, a ruddy 
sky in the morning. —orvyvalwy, late but 
expressive = triste coelum. No special 
meteorological skillindicatedthereby,only 
the average power of observation based 
on experience, which is common to man. 
kind. Lightfoot credits the Jews with 


220 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVI 


a Sir. ifi. 15.2. 8 δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “΄Ὀψίας] γενομένης λέγετε, "Εὐδία. 


Ρ Acts xxvii. πυρράζει γὰρ ὁ οὐρανός. 
20 (same 


By χχιν. τς mn . 
20 (winter) ούρανου γιγωσ κετε 


3. καὶ πρωΐ, Σήµερον " χειµών' πυρράζει 
γὰρ στυγνάζων ὁ οὐρανός. 
διακρίνει», τὰ δὲ σημεῖα τῶν καιρῶν οὐ δύνασθε;} 


ὑποκριταί,” τὸ μὲν πρόσωπον τοῦ 


c Mk. x. αα.4- Ὑενεὰ πονηρὰ καὶ μοιχαλὶς σημεῖον ἐπιζητεῖ: καὶ σημεῖον οὐ 
δοθήσεται αὐτῇ, εἰ μὴ τὸ σημεῖον Ιωνᾶ τοῦ προφήτου. ὃ Kai 


d spk καταλιπὼν αὐτούς, ἀπῆλθε. 


νι. 10; λ = 
xiii. 2,16 ἄρτους λαβειν. 
(with gen.). p αν A β 
Phil. iii. 13 ἀπὸ τῆς 
(accus.). 


6. 6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὗτοῖς, 
, n , Δ / 2» 
Ἱύμης τῶν Φαρισαίων και Σαδδουκαίων. 


5. Καὶ ἐλθόντες ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ πέραν “ἐπελάθοντο 


“ Ὁρᾶτε καὶ προσέχετε 


7. Οἱ δὲ διελογί- 


1 From οψιας to 8υνασθε, end of νετ. 3, is bracketed as doubtful by modern editors. 
The passage is wanting in ΝΒΝΥΧΓ, Syr. Cur., and Syr. Sin., Orig., etc. 


2 DLA omit. 


special interest in such observations, and 
Christ was willing to give them full 
credit for skill in that sphere. His com- 
plaint was that they showed no such 
skill in the ethical sphere; they could 
not discern the signs of the times (τῶν 
καιρῶν: the reference being, of course, 
chiefly to their own time). Neither 
Pharisees nor Sadducees had any idea 
that the end of the Jewish state was so 
near. They said εὐδία when they should 
have said yeupov. They mistook the 
time of day ; thought it was the eve of 
a good time coming when it was the 
morning of the judgment day. For a 
historical parallel, vide Carlyle’s French 
Revolution, book ii., chap. 1., Astraea 
Redux.—Ver. 4. Vide chap. xii. 39. 

Vv. 5-12. The one important thing 
in this section is the reflection of Jesus 
on what had just taken place. The 
historical setting is not clear. Jesus left 
the sign seekers after giving them their 
answer. ‘The disciples cross the lake; 
in which direction? With or without 
their Master? They forget to take 
bread. When? On setting out or after 
arrival at the other side? ἑλθόντες els 
7. π., ver. 5, naturally suggests the 
latter, but, as Grotius remarks, the verb 
ἔρχεσθαι in the Gospels sometimes 
means ire not venire (vide, e.g., Lk. xv. 
20). Suffice it to say that either in the 
boat or after arrival at the opposite side 
Jesus uttered a memorable word.—Ver. 
6. ὁρᾶτε καὶ προσέχετε: an abrupt, 
urgent admonition to look out for, in 
order to take heed of, a phenomenon of 
very sinister import; in Scottish idiom 
“see and beware of”. More impressive 
still in Mk.: ὁρᾶτε, βλέπετε, a duality 


3 SSBDL omit του προφητον. 


*SBCD omit αυτον. 


giving emphasis to the command 
(ἀναδίπλωσις, ἐμφαίνουσα ἐπίτασιν 
τῆς παραγγελίας, Euthy.). — ζύμης, 
leaven, here conceived as an evil in- 
fluence, working, however, after the same 
manner as the leaven in the parable (xiii. 
33). It is a spirit, a settgeist, insinuat- 
ing itself everywhere, and spreading 
more and more in society, which Jesus 
instinctively shrank from in horror, and 
from which He wished to guard His 
disciples.—ra@v Φαρ. καὶ 2a: one 
leaven, of two parties viewed as one, 
hence no article before Σαδ. Two 
leavens separately named in Mk., but 
even there juxtaposition in the warning 
implies affinity. The leaven of Pharisaism 
is made thoroughly known to us in the 
Gospels by detailed characterisation. 
Sadducaism very seldom appears on the 
stage, and few words of Jesus concerning 
it are recorded; yet enough to indicate 
its character as secular or “worldly”. 
The two classes, antagonistic at many 
points of belief and practice, would be 
at one in dislike of single-hearted 
devotion to truth and righteousness, 
whether in the Baptist (iii. 7) or in 
Jesus. This common action in reference 
to either might not be a matter of 
arrangement, and each might come 
with its own characteristic mood: the 
Pharisee with bitter animosity, the 
Sadducee with good-natured scepticism 
and in quest of amusement, as when 
they propounded the riddle about the 
woman married to seven brothers. Both 
moods revealed utter lack of appreciation, 
no friendship to be looked for in either 
quarter, both to be dreaded.—Ver. 7. ἐν 
ἑαυτοῖς: either each man in his own 


2—Iz. 


ἵοντο ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, λέγοντες, “΄ Ὅτι ἄρτους οὐκ éAdBouer.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


221 


8. Γνοὺς 


δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν abtois,! “Τί διαλογίζεσθε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, ὀλιγόπιστου 
> γ 


ὅτι ἄρτους οὐκ ἐλάβετε2; 9. οὕπω νοεῖτε, οὐδὲ Ὁ μνημονεύετε τοὺς ει Thess. ii, 


πέντε ἄρτους τῶν πεντακισχιλίων, καὶ πόσους κοφίνους ἐλάβετε; 
1Ο. οὐδὲ τοὺς ἑπτὰ ἄρτους τῶν τετρακισχιλίων, καὶ πόσας σπυρίδας 


ἐλάβετε ; 


Χεινὃ ἀπὸ τῆς ἵύμης τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων ; 
συνῆκαν, ὅτι οὐκ εἶπε προσέχειν ἀπὸ τῆς ἵύμης τοῦ ἄρτου,ό GAN 
ἀπὸ τῆς διδαχῆς τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων. 


1ΜΝΒΡΙΙΔΣ ai. omit αυτοις. 
Σσφυριδας in BD. 


6 For προσεχειν NBCL have προσεχετε δε. 


mind (Weiss), or among themselves, 
apart from the Master (Μεγετ).-- ὅτι 
may be recitative or = “because”. He 
gives this warning because, etc. ; sense 
the same. They take the Master to 
mean: do not buy bread from persons 
belonging to the obnoxious sects! or 
rather perhaps: do not take your direc- 
tions as to the leaven to be used in 
baking from that quarter. Vide Light- 
foot ad loc. Stupid mistake, yet pardon- 
able when we remember the abruptness 
of the warning and the wide gulf between 
Master and disciples: He a prophet with 
prescient eye, seeing the forces of evil 
at work and what they were leading to; 
they very commonplace persons lacking 
insight and foresight. Note the solitari- 
ness of Christ.—Ver. 8. ὁλιγόπιστοι: 
always thinking about bread, bread, 
instead of the kingdom and its fortunes, 
with which alone the Master was 
occupied.—Vv. 9,10. And with so little 
excuse in view of quite recent experiences, 
of which the vivid details are given as if 
to heighten the reproach.—Ver. 11. 
προσέχετε, etc.: warning repeated with- 
out further explanation, as the meaning 
would now be self-evident.—Ver. 12. 
ρυνῆκαν, they now understood, at least 
to the extent of seeing that it was a 
question not of loaves but of something 
spiritual. One could wish that they had 
understood that from the first, and that 
they had asked their Master to explain 
more precisely the nature of the evil 
influences for their and our benefit. 
Thereby we might have had in a sentence 
a photograph of Sadducaism, ε.β.--- 
διδαχῆς, “doctrine”; that was in a 
general way the import of the ζύμη. 
But if Jesus had explained Himself He 
would have had more to say. The 
: 


ΙΙ. πῶς οὐ νοεῖτε, ὅτι οὐ περὶ ἄρτου * εἶπον ὑμῖν προσέ- 


g. 2 Tim. 
Ἡ. 8. Rev. 
g αν, 5 
(with 
accus.). 
Gal. ii. το. 
Col. iv. 18. 
Heb. xi. 
15; xiii. 7 
(with 
gen.). 


12. Τότε 


2 NBD have εχετε (W.H.). 
* aprev in NBCL. 
ὅ των αρτων in BL. 


dogmas and opinions of the two parties 
in question were not the worst of them, 
but the spirit of their life: their dislike 
of real godliness. 

Vv. 13-28. At Caesarea Philippi (Mk. 
vili, 27-—ix. 1; Lk. ix, 18-27). The 
crossing of the lake (ver. 5) proved to be 
the prelude to a second long excursion 
northwards, similar to that mentioned in 
xv. 21; like it following close on an en- 
counter with ill-affected persons, and 
originating in a kindred mood and 
motive. For those who regard the two 
feedings as duplicate accounts of the 
same event these two excursions are of 
course one. ‘The idea of two journeys 
on which Jesus oversteps the boundaries 
of Galilee is only the result of the 
assumption of a twofold feeding. The 
two journeys are, in truth, only parts of 
one great journey, on which Jesus, 
coming out of heathen territory, first 
touches again the soil of the holy land, 
in the neighbourhood of Caesarea 
Philippi.” Weiss, Leben Fesu, ii. 256. 
Be this as it may, this visit to that 
region was an eventful one, marking a 
crisis or turning-point in the career of 
Jesus. We are at the beginning of the 
fifth act in the tragic drama: the shadow 
of the cross now falls across the path. 
Practically the ministry in Galilee is 
ended, and Jesus is here to collect His 
thoughts and to devote Himself to the 
disciplining of His disciples. Place and 
time invite to reflection and forecast, 
and afford leisure for a calm survey of 
the whole situation. Note that at this 
point Lk. again joins his fellow-evan- 
gelists in his narrative. We have missed 
him from xiv. 23 onwards (vide notes on 
Lk.). 


Ver. 13. ᾿Ελθὼν: here again this verb 


222 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVI. 


13. Ἐλθὼν δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς eis τὰ µέρη Καισαρείας τῆς Φιλίππου 
ἠρώτα τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, λέγων, “Τίνα µε] λέγουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι 


εἶναι, τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ; ” 


14. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “Ot μὲν Ιωάννην 


τὸν Βαπτιστήν" ἄλλοι δὲ Ἡλίαν: ἕτεροι δὲ Ἱερεμίαν, ἢ ἕνα τῶν 


1 SSB and most versions omit µε, which has probably come in from the parallels. 
The omission of pe requires the , after ειναι to be deleted. 


may mean not arriving at, but setting 
out for, or on the way: unterwegs, Schanz. 
So Grotius : cum proficisceretur, non cum 
venisset. Fritzsche dissents and renders : 
postquam venerat. Mk. has ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ to 
indicate where the conversation began. 
On the whole both expressions are 
elastic, and leave us free to locate the 
ensuing scene at any point on the road 
to Caesarea Philippi, say at the spot 
where the city and its surroundings came 
into view.—Ka.oapelas τ. Φ.: a notable 
city, romantically situated at the foot of 
the Lebanon range, near the main 
sources of the Jordan, in a limestone 
cave, in the province of Gaulonitis, ruled 
over by the Tetrarch Philip, enlarged 
and beautified by him with the Herodian 
passion for building, and furnished with 
a new name (Paneas before, changed 
into Caesarea of Philip to distinguish 
from Caesarea on the sea). ‘A place of 
exceedingly beautiful, picturesque. sur- 
roundings, with which few spots in the 
holy land can be compared. What a 
rush of many waters; what a wealth 
and variety of vegetation!” Furrer, 
Wanderungen, 414. Vide also the de- 
scription in Stanley’s Sinai and Palestine, 
and in Professor G. A. Smith’s Historical 
Geography of the Holy Land.—triva 
λέγουσιν, etc.: with this grand natural 
scene possibly or even probably (why 
else name it?) in view, Jesus asked His 
disciples a significant question meant to 
lead on to important disclosures. The 
question is variously reported by the 
synoptists, and it is not easy to decide 
between the forms. It would seem 
simpler and more natural to ask, ‘“‘ whom 
do, etc., that Jam?” (µε εἶναι, Mk. and 
Lk.). But, on the other hand, at a 
solemn moment Jesus might prefer to 
speak impersonally, and ask: ‘‘ whom 
εως thatthe Son of Manis?” (Mt.). That 
title, as hitherto employed by Him, 
would not prejudge the question. It 
had served rather to keep the question 
who He was, how His vocation was to 
be defined, in suspense till men had 
learned to attach new senses to old 
words, It is intrinsically unlikely that 
He would combine the two forms of the 


question, and ask: ‘‘ whom, etc., that J, 
the Son of Man, am?’ as in the T. R. 
That consideration does not settle what 
Mt. wrote, but it is satisfactory that the 
best MSS. leave out the µε. The ques- 
tion shows that Jesus had been thinking 
of His past ministry and its results, and 
it may be taken for granted that He had 
formed His own estimate, and did not 
need to learn from the Twelve how He 
stood. He had come to the conclusion 
that He was practically without reliable 
following outside the disciple circle, and 
that conviction is the key to all that 
follows in this memorable scene. How 
the influential elasses, the Pharisees, and 
the priests and political men = Sadducees, 
were affected was apparent. Nothing 
but hostility was to be looked for there. 
With the common people on the other 
hand He had to the last been popular. 
They liked His preaching, and they took 
eager advantage of His healing ministry. 
But had they got a definite faith about 
Him, as well as a kindly feeling towards 
Him; an idea well-rooted, likely to be 
lasting, epoch-making, the starting-point 
of a new religious movement? He did 
not believe they had, and He expected 
to have that impression confirmed by the 
answer of the Twelve, as indeed it was. 
Ver. 14. Reply of disciples: the 
general effect being: opinions of the 
people, favourable but crude, without re- 
ligious definiteness and depth, with no 
promise of future outcome.—'lody., 
Ἠλίαν., “Ἱερμ. Historic characters, 
recent or more ancient, redivivi—that 
the utmost possible: unable to rise to 
the idea of a wholly new departure, or a 
greater than any character in past his- 
tory ; conservatism natural tothe common 
mind. All three personages whose re- 
turn might be expected; the Baptist to 
continue his work cut short by Herod, 
Elijah to prepare the way and day of the 
Lord (Mal. iv. 5), Jeremiah to bring back 
the ark, etc., which (2 Maccab. ii. 1-12) 
he had hid in a cave. Jeremiah is 
classed with the other well-known 
prophets (ἢ ἕνα τ. π.), and the supporters 
of that hypothesis are called ἕτεροι, as 
if to distinguish them not merely numeri- 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


U3-—I17. 223 

προφητῶν. 15. Λέγει αὐτοῖς, ““Ypets δὲ τίνα µε λέγετε εἶναι ;”” f Ch. καὶ. 

16. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ Σίμων Πέτρος εἶπε, “Eb ef ὅ Χριστός, ὁ vids τοῦ iil 12; ix. 

>? e - aa 14, X. 32 

Θεοῦ τοῦ *Lavtos.” 17. Καὶ doxpideis? 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, (an ati 
ute ο 


“‘Maxdptos et, Σίμων Bap “lava, ὅτι Soaps καὶ fatwa οὐκ Ἀἀπεκάλυψέ God). 


50. Gal.i.16. Eph. vi.1z. Heb. ii. 14 (the same phrase in all), 


1 αποκριθεις δε in ΜΒ ΓΡ, cursives. 


cally (ἄλλοι) but generically: a lower 
type who did not connect Jesus with 
Messiah in any way, even as forerunner, 
but simply thought of Him as one in 
whom the old prophetic charism had 
been revived. 

Vv. 15, 16. New question and answer. 
—Ver. 15. ὑμεῖς δὲ, and you? might 
have stood alone, perhaps did originally. 
Jesus invites the Twelve to give Him 
their own view. The first question was 
really only introductory to this. Jesus 
desires to make sure that He, otherwise 
without reliable following, has in His 
disciples at least the nucleus of a com- 
munity with a definite religious con- 
viction as to the meaning of His ministry 
and mission.—Ver. 16. Σίμων Πέτρος: 
now as always spokesman for the Twelve. 
There may be deeper natures among 
them (John 2), but he is the most ener- 
getic and outspoken, though withal 
emotional rather than intellectual; strong, 
as passionate character is, rather than 
with the strength of thought, or of a will 
steadily controlled by a firm grasp of 
great principles: not a rock in the sense 
in which St. Paul was οπς.- σὺ el... 
τοῦ ζῶντος: ‘ Thou art the Christ, the 
Son of the living God,” in Mk. simply 
“Thou art the Christ,” in Lk. ‘the 
Christ of God”. One’s first thought is 
that Mk. gives the original form of the 
reply; and yet in view of Peter’s 
vehement temperament one cannot be 
perfectly sure of that. The form in Mt. 
certainly answers best to the reply of 
Jesus, vide on ver. 17. In any case the 
emphasis lies on that which is common to 
the three reports: the affirmation of the 
Christhood of Jesus. That was what 
differentiated the disciples from the 
favourably disposed multitude. The 
latter said in effect : at most a forerunner 
of Messiah, probably not even that, only 
a prophet worthy to be named alongside 
of the well-known prophets of Israel. 
The Twelve through Peter said: not 
merely a prophet or a forerunner of the 
Messiah, but the Messiah Himself. The 
temainder of the reply in Mt., whether 
spoken by Peter, or added by the evan- 


61 Cor. xv. 
h Ch, xi. 25. Gal. i. 16. 


gelist (to correspond, as it were, to Son 
of Man in ver. 13), is simply expansion 
or epexegesis. If spoken by Peter it 
serves to show that he spoke with 
emotion, and with a sense of the gravity 
of the declaration. The precise theo- 
logical value of the added clause cannot 
be determined. 

Vv. 17-19. Solemn address of $esus to 
Peter, peculiar to Mt., and of doubtful 
authenticity in the view of many modern 
critics, including Wendt (Die Lehre 
Fesu, i., p. 181), either an addendum by 
the evangelist or introduced at a later 
date by areviser. This question eannot 
be fully discussed here. It must suffice 
to say that psychological reasons are in 
favour of something of the kind having 
been said by Jesus. It was a great 
critical moment in His career, at which 
His spirit was doubtless in a state of 
high tension. The firm tone of con- 
viction in Peter’s reply would give Him 
a thrill of satisfaction demanding ex- 
pression. One feels that there is a 
hiatus in the narratives of Mk. and Lk.: 
no comment on the part of Jesus, as if 
Peter had delivered himself of a mere 
trite commonplace. We may be sure 
the fact was notso. The terms in which 
Jesus speaks of Peter are characteristic 
—warm, generous, unstinted. The style 
is not that of an ecclesiastical editor lay- 
ing the foundation for Church power 
and prelatic pretensions, but of a 
noble-minded Master eulogising in im- 
passioned terms a loyal disciple. Even 
the reference to the “Church” is not 
unseasonable. What more natural than 
that Jesus, conscious that His labours, 
outside the disciple circle, have been 
fruitless, so far as permanent result is 
concerned, should fix His hopes on that 
circle, and look on it as the nucleus of a 
new regenerate Israel, having for its 
raison d’étre that it accepts Him as the 
Christ? And the name for the new 
Israel, ἐκκλησία, in His mouth is not an 
anachronism. It is an old familiar name 
for the congregation of Israel, found in 
Deut. (xviii. 16; xxiii. 2) and Psalms 
(xxii. 26), both books well known ta 


224 


ihereandin σοι, GAN’ 6 πατήρ pou 6 ἐν Tots! οὐρανοῖς. 


xviii. 17 in 


XXxiii. 23. 


k Lk. xi. νο. σοὶ τὰς ἅ κλεῖς ® τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν : 


Rev.i.18; . 


iii. 7; ix. τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεµένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς: καὶ ὃ ἐὰν ὅ ὶλύσῃς 


αν αχ.Ἱ. 
1 Ch. xviii. 18. 


1 B omits τοις, which W.H. bracket. 
Ύκλειδας in NBL (W.H.). 


Jesus.—Ver. 17. µακάριος: weighty 
word chosen to express a rare and high 
condition, virtue, or experience (‘‘ hoc 
vocabulo non solum beata, sed etiam 
rara simul conditio significatur,” Βεπρ.). 
It implies satisfaction with the quality of 
Peter’s faith. Jesus was not easily satis- 
fied as to that. He wanted no man to 
call Him Christ under a misappre- 
hension ; hence the prohibition in ver. 
20. Hecongratulated Peter not merely 
on believing Him to be the Messiah, 
but on having an essentially right con- 


ception of what the title meant.—z%._ 


Βαριωνᾶ: full designation, name, and 
patronymic, suiting the emotional state 
of the speaker and the solemn character 
of the utterance, echo of an Aramaic 
source, or of the Aramaic dialect used 
then, if not always, by Jesus.—oap§ καὶ 
αἷμα: synonym in current Jewish speech 
for ‘‘man”’. ‘‘Infinita frequentia hanc 
formulam loquendi adhibent Scriptores 
Judaici, eaque homines Deo opponunt.” 
Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. Vide ver. 23. 
There is a tacit contrast between Peter’s 
faith and the opinions of the people just 
recited, asto source. Flesh and blood 
was the source of these opinions, and 
the fact is a clue to the meaning of the 
phrase. The contrast between the two 
sources Of inspiration is not the very 
general abstract one between creaturely 
weakness and Divine power (Wendt, 
Die Begriffe Fleisch und Geist, p. 60). 
“ Flesh and blood” covers all that can 
contribute to the formation of religious 
opinion of little intrinsic value—tradition, 
custom, fashion, education, authority, 
regard to outward appearance. Hilary, 
and after him Lutteroth, takes the re- 
ference to be to Christ’s flesh and blood, 
and finds in the words the idea: if you 
had looked to my flesh you would have 
called me Christ, the Son of David, but 
higher guidance has taught you to call 
me Son of God.—é πατήρ µου: this is 
to be taken not in a merely ontological 
sense, but ethically, so as to account for 


KATA MATOAION 


44 av in BD. 


XVI. 


18. Κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω, 


ὅτι σὺ et Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω µου τὴν 
' ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ πύλαι adou οὗ ) κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς, 19. καὶ’ δώσω 


ΣΜΝΒΕΏ omit και. (W.H.). 
δρ avin D. 


the quality of Peter’s faith. The true 
conception of Christhood was inseparable 
from the true conception of God. Jesus 
had been steadily working for the trans- 
formation of both ideas, and He counted 
on the two finding entrance into the 
mind together. Noone could truly con- 
ceive the Christ who had not learned to 
think of God as the Father and as His 
Father. There were thus two revelations 
in one: of God as Father, and of Christ 
by the Father. Peter had become a 
Christian. 

Ver. 18. κἀγὼ: emphatic, something 
very important about to be said to Peter 
and about him.—érpos, πέτρᾳ, a happy 
play of words. Both are appellatives to 
be translated ‘‘thou art a rock and on 
this rock,” the two being represented by 


the same word in Aramaean (8903). 


Elsewhere in the Gospels Πέτρος is a 
proper name, and πέτρα only is used in 
the sense of rock (vii. 24). What 
follows is in form a promise to Peter as 
reward of his faith. It is as personal 
as the most zealous advocates of Papal 
supremacy could desire. Yet it is as 
remote as the poles from what they 
mean. It is a case of extremes meeting. 
Christ did not fight to death against one 
form of spiritual despotism to put 
another, if possible worse, in its room. 
Personal in form, the sense of this 
famous logion can be expressed in 
abstract terms without reference to 
Peter’s personality. And that sense, if 
Christ really spoke the word, must be 
simple, elementary, suitable to the 
initial stage; withal religious and ethical 
rather than ecclesiastical The more 
ecclesiastical we make it, the more we 
play into the hands of those who main- 
tain that the passage is an interpolation. 
I find in it three ideas: (1) The ἐκκλησία. 
is to consist of men confessing Jesus to 
be the Christ. This is the import of ἐπὶ 
τ. τ. π. οἰκοδομήσω µου τ. ἐκ. Peter, 
believing that truth, is the foundation, 


18—21. 


τῆς γῆς, ἔσται λελυμένον ἐν τοῖς ovpavois.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


225 


20. Τότε διεστείλατο} 


τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ 3 ἵνα μηδενὶ εἴπωσιν, ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς»δ ὁ 


Χριστός. 


21. ''᾿Απὸ τότε ἠρξατο ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς  δεικνύειν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, mCh. iv.17; 


XXVi. 16. 


ὅτι δεῖ αὐτὸν ἀπελθεῖν eis Ἱεροσόλυμα,ὃ καὶ πολλὰ παθεῖν ἀπὸ τῶν Lk. xvi. 16. 
πρεσβυτέρων καὶ ἀρχιερέων καὶ Ὑραμμµατέων, καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι, καὶ 


1 επετιµησεν in BD. W.H. place it in text with διεστειλατο in margin. 


Mk. 


has επετιµησεν in the corresponding place. 
2 KSBCD omit αντου, which so often stands in T. R. where the best texts want it. 


> SSBLXIA omit Inoovs. 


4 For ο Ingovs $B, Cop. have Ίησους Χριστος; D Inoovs without the art. 


Vide below. 


δεις |. before απελθειν in ${BD cursives. 


and the building is to be of a piece with 
the foundation. Observe the emphatic 
position of pov. The ἐκκλησία is Christ’s; 
confessing Him as Christ in Peter’s 
sense and spirit = being Christian. (2) 
The new society is to be = the kingdom 
realised on earth. This is the import of 
ver. I9, clause 1. The keys are the 
symbol of this identity. They are the 
keys of the gate without, not of the doors 
within. Peter is the gate-keeper, not 
the οἰκονόμος with a bunch of keys that 
open all doors in his hands (against 
Weiss) ---κλειδούχου ἔργον τὸ εἰσάγειν, 
Euthy. Observe it is not the keys of the 
church but of the kingdom. The mean- 
ing is: Peter-like faith in Jesus as the 
Christ admits into the Kingdom of 
Heaven. A society of men so believing 
= the kingdom realised. (3) In the new 
society the righteousness of the kingdom 
will find approximate embodiment. This 
is the import of ver. 19, second clause. 
Binding and loosing, in Rabbinical 
dialect, meant forbidding and permitting 
to be done. The judgment of the 
Rabbis was mostly wrong: the reverse 
of the righteousness of the kingdom. 
The judgment of the new society as to 
conduct would bein accordance with the 
truth of things, therefore valid in heaven. 
That is what Jesus meant to say. Note 
the perfect participles δεδεµένον, 
λελυμένον = shall be a thing bound or 
loosed once for all. The truth of all 
three statements is conditional on the 
Christ spirit continuing to rule in the 
new society. Only on that condition is 
the statement about the πύλαι adov, 
ver. 18, clause 2, valid. What precisely 
the verbal meaning of the statement is— 
whether that the gates of Hades shall 
not prevail in conflict against it, as 


15 


ordinarily understood; or merely that 
the gates, etc., shall not be stronger 
than it, without thought of a conflict 
(Weiss), is of minor moment; the point 
is that it is not an absolute promise. 
The ἐκκλησία will be strong, enduring, 
only so long as the faith in the Father 
and in Christ the Son, and the sfirit of 
the Father and the Son, reign in it. 
When the Christ spirit is weak the 
Church will be weak, and neither creeds 
nor governments, nor keys, nor ecclesi- 
astical dignities will be of much help to 
her. 

Ver. 20. διεστείλατο (T.R.), “charged” 
(A. V.) not necessarily with any special 
emphasis = graviter interdicere, but = 
monuit (Loesner and Fritzsche). Cf. 
Heb. xii. 20, where a stronger sense 
seems required. For ἐπετίμησε in BD 
here and in Mk. Euthy. gives κατη- 
σφαλίσατο = to make sure by injunc- 
Ποπ.---τοῖς μαθηταῖς: all the disciples 
are, supposed to say amen to Peter’s 
confession, thinking of God and of Jesus 
as he thought, though possibly not with 
equal emphasis of conviction.—tva . . . 
6 Χριστός: no desire to multiply hastily 
recruits for the new community, supreme 
regard to quality. Jesus wanted no man 
to call Him Christ till he knew what he 
was saying: no hearsay or echoed con- 
fession of any value in His eyes.—airés, 
the same concerning whom current 
opinions have just been reported (ver. 
14). It was hardly necessary to take 
pains to prevent the faith in His Messiah- 
ship from spreading prematurely in a 
crude form. Few would cail such an 
one as ¥esus Christ, save by the Holy 
Ghost. The one temptation thereto lay: 
in the generous heneficence of Jesus. 
Vv. 21-28. Announcement of the 


226 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVI. 


a Mk. viii. τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἐγερθῆναι. 22. καὶ ™ προσλαβόµενος αὐτὸν 6 Πέτρος 
Kets rit Aptato ἐπιτυμᾷν αὐτῷ λέγων, “°"INeds σοι, κύριε: οὐ μὴ ἔσται σοι 


5; xviii. 
26. 

o Cf. Heb. 
viii. 12. 
p Mk. viii, 

33. Rom. vill. 5. 


a ” 
τουτο. 


Phil. ii. 5; iii. 19. 


23. Ὁ δὲ στραφεὶς εἶπε τῷ Nétpw, ““Yraye ὀπίσω µου, 
Σατανᾶ, σκάνδαλόν µου εἶ ΄: ὅτι οὗ P φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὰ 


1 For np. επιτιµαν a. λεγων, which conforms to Mk., B has λεγει a. επιτιµω» 


(W.H. marg.). 
ει εµου in SB (Tisch., W.H.). 


Passion with relative conversation (Mk. 
viii. 31—ix. 1 ; Lk. ix. 22-27).—Ver. 21. 
ἀπὸ τότε ἤρξατο (vide iv. 17) marks 
pointedly a new departure in the form of 
explicit intimation of an approaching 
final and fatal crisis. Time suitable. 
Disciples could now bear it, it could not 
be much longer delayed. Jesus could 
now face the crisis with composure, 
having been satisfied by Peter's con- 
fession that His labour was not going to 
be in vain. He then began to show, 
etc., for this was only the first of several 
communications of the same kind.— 


Χριστὸς after Ιησοῦς in ΝΒ is an in- 


trinsically probable reading, as suiting 
the solemnity of the occasion and greatly 
enhancing the impressiveness of the 
announcement. Jesus, the Christ, to be 
crucified! But one would have expected 
the article before Χρ.- πολλὰ παθεῖν, the 
general fact.—awd . . . γραμματέων, the 
three constituent parts of the Sanhedrim— 
elders, priests, 5οτῖθες.-- ἀποκτανθῆναι : 
one hard special fact, be killed.— 
ἐγερθῆναι: this added to make the 
other fact not altogether intolerable. 
Ver. 22. Peter here appears in a new 
character; a minute ago speaking under 
inspiration from heaven, now under, in- 
spiration from the opposite quarter.— 
ἤρξατο, began to chide or admonish. He 
did not get far. As soon as his meaning 
became apparent he encountered prompt, 
abrupt, peremptory contradiction.—ta- 
εώς σοι: Elsner renders sis bono placi- 
doque animo, but most (Erasmus, Grotius, 
Kypke, Fritzsche, etc.) take it = absit/ 
God avert it! Vehement utterance of a 
man confounded and horrified. Perfectly 
honest and in one sense thoroughly 
creditable, but suggesting the question: 
Did Peter after all call Jesus Christ in 
the true sense? The answer must be: 
Yes, ethically. He understood what 
kind of man was fit to be a Christ. But 
he did not yet understand what kind of 
treatment such a man might expect from 
the world. A noble, benignant, really 


* 


righteous man Messiah must be, said 
Peter; but why a man of sorrow he 
had yet to learn.—od μὴ ἔσται, future 
of perfect assurance: it will not, cannot 
be.—Ver. 23. ὕπαγεό.μ. Σ.: tremendous 
crushing reply of the Master, showing 
how much He felt the temptation; calm 
on the surface, deep down in the soul a 
very real struggle. Some of the Fathers 
(Origen, Jerome) strive to soften the 
severity of the utterance by taking 
Satanas as an appellative = ἀντικείμενος, 
adversarius, contrarius, and pointing out 
that in the Temptation in the wilderness 
Jesus says to Satan simply ὕπαγε = 
depart, but to Peter tw. ὀπίσω pov = 
take thy place behind me and be fol- 
lower, not leader. But these refinements 
only weaken the effect of a word which 
shows that Jesus recognises here His 
old enemy in a new and even more 
dangerous form. For none are more 
formidable instruments of temptation 
than well-meaning friends, who care 
more for our comfort than for our 
εΠαταςίετ.---σκάνδαλον: not “ offensive 
to me,” but ‘“‘a temptation to me to 
offend,’’ to do wrong; a virtual apology 
for using the strong word Σατανᾶ.- -οὐ 
φρονεῖς τὰ, etc., indicates the point of 
temptation = non stas a Dei partibus 
(Wolf), or ppovetv, etc. = studere rebus, 
etc. (Kypke), to be on God’s side, or to 
study the Divine interest instead of the 
human. The important question is: 
What precisely are the two interests ? 
They must be so conceived as not 
entirely to cancel the eulogium on Peter’s 
faith, which was declared to be not of 
man but of God. Meyer's comment on 
τὰ τ. &—concerned about having for 
Messiah a mere earthly hero and prince 
(so Weiss also)—is too wide. We must 
restrict the phrase to the instinct of self- 
preservation = save your life at all 
hazards. From Christ’s point of view 
that was the import of Peter’s suggestion ; 
preference of natural life to duty = God’s 
interest. Peter himself did not see that . 
these were the alternatives; he thought 


22—28, 


τῶν ἀνθρώπων.” 


“Bl τις θέλει ὀπίφω µου ἐλθεῖν, Ἱ ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαυτόν, καὶ ἀράτω 
τὸν " σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀκολουθείτω por. 


Ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, εὑρήσει αὐτήν: 26. τί γὰρ ὠφελεῖται" 

ἑκόσμον 'ὅλον κερδήσῃ, τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ Biv. a7. 
8 . 

Ἁζημιωθῇ; ἢ τί δώσει ἄνθρωπος ἀντάλλαγμα τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ; 


ἄνθρωπος, ἐὰν τὸν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


a7 


pare - > Lal a > aA Mk. see 
24. Τότε 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, 9 ο δν 


XXVi. 34 
(of Peter’s 


25. ὃς γὰρ ἂν] θέλῃ 


Lk. ix. 23; 


Lk. 


27. μέλλει γὰρ 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεσθαι ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς xvii. 33. 


Ch. xxvi. 


“ - lel t 
αὐτοῦ μετὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων αὐτοῦ: καὶ τότε ἀποδώσει ἑκάστω κατὰ 13. Rom. 


τὴν " πρᾶξιν αὐτοῦ. 


28. ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, εἶσί τινες τῶν ὥδει Mb viii. 


36. Lk.ix. 


ἑστηκότων,ὃ οἵτινες οὗ μὴ ' γεύσωνται θανάτου, ἕως ἂν ἴδωσι τὸν 22 (ἑαντόν). 


wildy τοῦ ἀνθρώπου * ἐρχόμενον ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ αὐτοῦ. 


Rom. viii, 19. 


1 εαν in WBC. 


the two opposite interests compatible, 
and both attainable. 

Vv. 24-28. General instruction on the 
subject of the two interests.—Ver. 24. 
εἶπε τοῖς µαθ.: in calm, self-collected, 
didactic tone Jesus proceeds to give the 
disciples, in a body, a lesson arising out 
of the situation.—et τις θέλει: wishes, 
no compulsion; οὐ βιάζομαι, Chrys., 
who remarks on the wisdom of Jesus in 
leaving every man free, and trusting to 
the attraction of the life: αὐτὴ τοῦ πράγ- 
µατος ἤ φύσις ixavy ἐφελκύσασθαι.--- 
ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαντὸν: here only, in- 
timates that discipleship will call for 
self-denial, or self-subordination. Chrys. 
illustrates the meaning by considering 
what it is to deny another = not to 
assist him, bewail him or suffer on his 
account when he is in distress.—rov 
σταυρὸν looks like a trait introduced 
after Christ’s passion. It need not be, 
however. Punishment by crucifixion 
was known to the Jews through the 
Romans, and it might be used by Jesus 
as the symbol of extreme torment and 
disgrace, even though He did not then 
know certainly that He Himself should 
meet death in that particular form. It 
became a common expression, but the 
phrase ἀράτω τ. o would sound harsh 
and startling when first used. Vide on 
Mt. x. 38.—Ver. 25. Vide x.39. The 
Caesarea crisis was the most appropriate 
occasion for the first promulgation of 
this great ethical principle. It was 
Christ’s first contribution towards un- 
folding the significance of His suffering, 
setting it forth as the result of a fidelity 
to righteousness incumbent on all. 


3 ωφεληθησεται in 9 ΒΙ, cursives. 


ν Lk. xxiii 
51. Acts 
xix. 18. 


w John viii. 52. Heb. ii. ο. X Lk, xxiii, 42. 


3 εστωτων in SBCDLE. 


Ver. 26. This and the following verses 
suggest aids to practice of the philo- 
sophy of ‘‘dying to live”. The state- 
ment in this verse is self-evident in the 
sphere of the lower life. It profits not 
to gain the whole world if you lose your 
life, for you cannot enjoy your possession ; 
a life lost cannot be recovered at any - 
price. Jesus wishes His disciples to under- 
stand that the same law obtains in the 
higher life: that the soul, the spiritual 
life, is incommensurable with any out- 
ward possession however great, and if 
forfeited the loss is irrevocable, This is 
one of the chief texts containing Christ’s 
doctrine of the absolute worth of man as 
amoral subject. For the man who grasps 
it, it is easy to be a hero and face any 
experience. To Jesus Christ it was a 
self-evident truth.—{ypiw09, not suffer 
injury to, but forfeit. Grotius says that 
the verb in classics has only the dative 
after it = mulctare morte, but Kypke and 
Elsner cite instances from Herod., Dion., 
Hal., Themis., etc., of its use with accus- 
ative.—avrdAAaypa: something given in 
exchange. Cf. 1 Kings xxi. 2, Job xxviii. 
15 (Sept.), a price to buy back the life 
lower or higher; both impossible.—Ver. 
27. μέλλει points to something near and 
certain; note the emphatic position.— 
ἔρχεσθαι ἐν τ. δ., the counterpart ex- 
perience to the passion; stated objec- 
tively in reference to the Son of Man, 
the passion spoken of in the second person 
(νετ. 21). In Mk. both are objectively 
put; but the disciples took the reference 
as personal (Mk. viii. 32).—Ver. 27. 
This belongs to a third group of texts 
to be taken into account in an attempt 


220 


a Mk. ix. 4. 


KATA MATOAION 


XVII. 


XVII. 1. ΚΑΙ μεθ) ἡμέρας ἓξ παραλομβάνει 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τὸν Πέτρον 


κ ον... ‘ gh oe : 
51 (TR). καὶ Ιάκωβον καὶ Ιωάννην τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ * ἀναφέρει αὐτοὺς 


b Mk. ix. 


. 1x. 4. a 
Rom. χῇ εἰς ὄρος ὑψηλὸν Kat ἰδίαν. 2. Kai” μετεμορφώθη ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, 


2. 


to fix the import of the title—those which 
refer to apocalyptic glory in terms drawn 
from Daniel vii. 13.--τότε ἀποδώσει: 
the Son of Man comes to make final 
awards. The reference to judgment 
comes in to brace up disciples to a 
heroic part. It is an aid to spirits not 
equal to this part in virtue of its intrinsic 
nobleness; yet not much of an aid to 
those to whom the heroic life is not in 
itself an attraction. The absolute worth 
ofthe true life is Christ’s first and chiefline 
of argument; this is merely subsidiary.— 
Ver. 28. A crux interpretum, supposed 
by some to refer to the Transfiguration 
(Hilary, Chrys., Euthy., Theophy., etc.) ; 
by others to the destruction of Jerusalem 
(Wetstein, etc.) ; by others again to the 
origins of the Church (Calvin, Grotius, 
etc.). The general meaning can be 
inferred with certainty from the purpose 
to furnish an additional incentive to 
fidelity. It is: Be of good courage, 
there will be ample compensation for 
trial soon ; for some of you even before 
you die. This sense excludes the Trans- 
figuration, which came too soon to be 
compensatory. The uncertainty comes 
in in connection with the form in which 
the general truth is stated. As to that, 
Christ’s speech was controlled not merely 
by His own thoughts but by the hopes 
of the future entertained by His disciples. 
He had to promise the advent of the 
Son of Man in His Kingdom or of the 
Kingdom of God in power (Mk.) within 
a generation, whatever His own forecast 
as to the future might be. That might 
postulate a wider range of time than 
some of His words indicate, just as some 
of His utterances and His general spirit 
postulate a wide range in space for the 
Gospel (universalism) though He con- 
ceived of His own mission as limited to 
Israel. If the logion concerning the 
Church (ver. 18) be genuine, Jesus must 
have conceived a Christian era to be at 
least a possibility, for why trouble about 
founding a Church if the wind-up was 
to come in a few years? The words of 
Jesus about the future provide for two 
possible alternatives: for a near advent 
and for an indefinitely postponed advent. 
His promises naturally contemplate the 
former; much of His teaching about the 
kingdom easily fits into the latter.-— 


Cor. a ς a 
ii, 18. καὶ ἔλαμψε τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ὡς 6 ἥλιος, τὰ δὲ ipdria αὐτοῦ 


γεύσωνται θ.: a Hebrew idiom, but not 
exclusively so. For examples of the figure 
of tasting applied to experiences, vide 
Elsner in Mk. For Rabbinical use, vide 
Schéttgen and Wetstein.—éws ἂν ἴδωσι, 
subjunctive after ἑ. ἄν as usual in classics 
and N. T. in a clause referring to a 
future contingency depending on a verb 
referring to future time. 

CHAPTER XVII. THE TRANSPIGURA- 
TION; THE EPILEPTIC Boy; THE 
TEMPLE TRIBUTE. Three impressive 
tableaux connected by proximity in 
time, a common preternatural aspect, 
and deep moral pathos. 

Vv. 1-13. The Transfiguration (Mk. 
ix. 2-13, Lk. ix. 28-36).—Ver. 1. μεθ) 
ἡμέρας ἐξ. This precise note of time 
looks like exact recollection of a strictly 
historical incident. Yet Holtzmann 
(H. C.) finds even in this a mythical 
element, based on Exodus xxiv. 16: the 
six days of Mt. and Mk. and the eight 
days of Lk., various expressions of the 
thought that between the confession of 
the one disciple and the experience of the 
three a sacred week intervened. Of these 
days we have no particulars, but on the 
principle that in preternatural experiences 
the subjective and the objective corre- 
spond, we may learn the psychological 
antecedents of the Transfiguration from 
the Transfiguration itself. The thoughts 
and talk of the company of Jesus were 
the prélude of the vision. A thing in 
itself intrinsically likely, for after such 
solemn communications as those at 
Caesarea Philippi it was not to be ex- 
pected that matters would go on in the 
Jesus-circle as if nothing had happened. 
In those days Jesus sought to explain 
from the Ο.Τ. the δεῖ of xvi. 21, showing 
from Moses, Prophets, and Psalms (Lk. 
xxiv. 44) the large place occupied by 
suffering in the experience of the 
righteous. This would be quite as help- 
ful to disciples summoned to bear the 
cross as any of the thoughts in xvi. 25- 
28.—Neér., lax., lwdv.: Jesus takes with 
Him the three disciples found most 
capable to understand and sympathise. 
So in Gethsemane. Such differences 
exist in all disciple-circles, and they 
cannot be ignored by the teacher.— 
ἀναφέρει, leadeth up; in this sense not 
usual; of sacrifice in Jas. ii. 21 and in 


1—6, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


229 


ἐγένετο λευκὰ ὡς τὸ φῶς. 3. καὶ ἴδού, ὤφθησαν] αὐτοῖς Μωσῆς © Acts xxv 


καὶ Ἠλίας, pet αὐτοῦ συλλαλοῦντες.2 
εἶπε τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, "Κύριε, “καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι: εἰ θέλεις, 
ποιήσωµεν ὃ ὧδε τρεῖς σκηνάς, col µίαν, καὶ Μωσῇ µίαν, καὶ µίαν 


ἩἨλίᾳ” 


5, Ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, ἰδού, νεφέλη Φωτεινὴ ἐπεσκίασεν 


13 (µετά 
τινος). 
Mk. ix. 4. 
Lk. ix. 30; 
Xxii. 4 
(dat.). Lk. 
iv. 36 
(πρὸς ἆλ- 
λήλους). 


4. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Πέτρος 


αὐτούςο καὶ ἰδού, Φωνὴ ἐκ τῆς νεφέλης, λέγουσα, ''Οὗτός ἐστιν 64 Ch. xviii. 


vids µου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα: αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε.” 4 


1ωφθη ΔΒΓΡ, which, the verb coming before the two nom., is legitimate. 


8 parall. ; 


6. Καὶ xxvi. 24. 
om. xiv. 


αι. 1 Cor. vii. 8; ix. 15. 


The 


T. R. is a grammatical correction of ancient revisers. 


2 SSB place per’ avrov after σνλλαλονντες. 


Σποιησω in BC. Vide below. 

Heb. vii. 27, xiii. 15.—8pog ὑψηλὸν: 
Tabor the traditional mountain, a tradi- 
tion originating in fourth century 
with Cyril of Jerusalem and Jerome. 
Recent opinion favours Hermon, All 
depends on whether the six days were 
spent near Caesarea Philippi or in con- 
tinuous journeying. Six days would 
take them far. ‘‘The Mount of Trans- 
figuration does not concern geography”’ 
—Holtz. (H. G).—Ver. 2. perepop abn, 
transfiguratus est, Vulgate; became 
altered in appearance. Such trans- 
formation in exalted states of mind is 
predicated of others, e.g., of Iamblichus 
(Eunapius in I. Vita 22, cited by Elsner), 
and of Adam when naming the beasts 
(Fabricius, Cod. Pseud. V. T., p. 10).— 
ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, so as to be visible 
to them, vide vi. 1. Luke’s narrative 
seems to imply that the three disciples 
were asleep at the beginning of the 
scene, but wakened up before its close. 
--καὶ ἔλαμψε .. . φῶς: these words 
describe the aspect of the transformed 
person; face sun-bright, raiment pure 
white.—Ver. 3. καὶ ἰδού introduces a 
leading and remarkable feature in the 
scene: ὤφθη αὐτοῖς, there appeared to 
the three disciples, not necessarily an 
absolutely real, objective presence of 
Moses and Elias. All purposes would 
be served by an appearance in vision. 
Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by 
the vision being enjoyed by all the three, 
which would have been improbable if 
purely subjective. Recognition of Moses 
and Elias was of course involved in the 
vision. For a realistic view of the 
occurrence the question arises, how was 
recognition possible? Euthy. Zig. says 
the disciples had read descriptions of 
famous men, including Moses and Elias, 
in old Hebrew books Another sugges- 


“axovete αυτου in NBD 33. 


tion is that Moses appeared with the law 
in his hand, and Elias in his fiery 
ολατίοῖ.---συλλαλοῦντες p. ἀ., convers- 
ing with Jesus, and, it goes without 
saying (Lk. does say it), on the theme 
uppermost in all minds, the main topic 
of recent conversations, the cross; the 
vision, in its dramatis persone and their 
talk, reflecting the state of mind of the 
seers.—Ver. 4. ἀποκριθεὶς 6 Π. Peter 
to the front again, but not greatly to his 
credit.—xahéy ἐστιν, etc., either it is 
good for us to be here =.the place is 
pleasant—so usually; or it is well that 
we are here—we the disciples to serve 
you and your visitants—Weiss and 
Holtzmann (H. C.). Pricaeus, in illus- 
tration of the former, cites Anacreon: 

Napa τὴν σκιὴν Βάθυλλε 

Κάθισον" καλὸν τὸ δένδρον, 

Τίς ἂν οὖν ὁρῶν παρέλθοι 

Καταγώγιον τοιοῦτον. 

—Ode 22. 
This sense—amoenus est, in quo com- 
moremur, locus, Fritzsche—is certainly 
the more poetical, but not necessarily on 
that account the truer to the thought of 
the speaker, in view of the remark of 
Lk. omitted in Mt., that Peter did not 
know what he was 5ανίης.- ποιήσω, 
deliberative substantive with θέλεις pre- 
ceding and without ἵνα; the singular— 
shall I make ?—suits the forwardness of 
the man; it is his idea, and he will 
carry it out /imself.—rpeig σκηνάς: 
material at hand, branches of trees, 
shrubs, etc. Why three? One better 
for persons in converse. The whole 
scheme a stupidity. Peter imagined 
that Moses and Elias had come to stay. 
Chrys. suggests that Peter here in- 
directly renews the policy of resistance 
to going up to Jerusalem (Hom. lvi.). 
Vv. 5-8. γεφέλη φωτεινὴ, a luminous 


230 


e Ch, xxvi. 
39. Lk. v. 
13; XVii. 
16 (same 
const.). 

f Ch. xxvii. 
=, a a 

g Ch. xxviii. 
5, ΤΟ. 

h Ch. viii. i. 


ἀκούσαντες οἱ μαθηταὶ 


θησαν σφόδρα. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


εἶπεν, '' Ἐγέρθητε καὶ Sp φοβεῖσθε.᾽ 
ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτῶν, οὐδένα εἶδον, εἰ μὴ τὸν Ιησοῦν µόνον. 
9. Καὶ  καταβαινόντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ 2 τοῦ Spous, ἐνετείλατο αὗτοῖς 


ΧΝΥΙΙ. 


ἔπεσον ἐπὶ πρόσωπον αὐτῶν, καὶ * ἐφοβή- 
7. καὶ προσελθὼν1 ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἤψατο αὐτῶν, καὶ 


8. ᾿Ἐπάραντες δὲ τοὺς 


(with ἀπὸ, ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, λέγων, “MnSevi εἴπητε τὸ «ὅραμα, ἕως οὗ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ 
η πη ρ 


more com- a - 05) 
monly ἀνθρώπου ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇῃ. ὃ 
with éx,as 

here in 


W.H,). 
i here only in Gospels and in Acts (vii. 31, etc.). 


10. Καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτὸν ot 


μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ," λέγοντες, “Ti οὖν ot γραμματεῖς λέγουσιν, ὅτι 


1 προσηλθεν ο |. και in NBD; αψαµενος αντων ειπεν in ΜΒ. 


2 ex in $BCD al.; απο in Σ. 


S εγερθη in BD; αναστη in ΝΟ. W.H. place the former in the text and the 


latter in margin. 


4 avrov in BCD but wanting in ALZ 33. 


cloud, still a cloud capable of casting a 
shadow, though a faint one (“non 
admodum atram,” Fritzsche). Some, 
thinking a shadow incompatible with 
the light, render ἐπεσκίασεν tegebat, cir- 
cumdabat. lLoesner cites passages from 
Philo in support of this meaning.— 
αὐτούς. Whom? the disciples? Jesus, 
Moses, and Elias? all the six? or the 
two celestial visitants alone? All these 
views have been held. The second the 
more probable, but impossible to be 
certain.—kat ἱδού, again introducing a 
main feature: first the visitants, now 
the voice from heaven. Relation of the 
ear to the voice the same as that of the 
eye to the visitants.—otros: the voice 
spoken this time about Jesus; at the 
baptism to Him (Mk. i. 11), meant for 
the ear of the three disciples. The voice 
to be taken in connection with the 
announcement of the coming passion. 
Jesus God’s well-beloved as self-sacrific- 
ing.—akovere αὐτοῦ: to be taken in the 
same connection = hear Him when He 
speaks to you of the cross. Hunc audite, 
nempe solum, plena fide, perfectissimo 
obsequio, universi apostoli et pastores 
praesertim, Elsner.—Ver. 6. καὶ ἀκού- 
σαντες, etc.: divine voices terrify poor 
mortals, especially when they echo and 
reinforce deep moving thoughts within. 
—Ver. 7. ἀψάμενος . . . εἶπεν: atouch 
and a word, human and kindly, from 
Jesus, restore strength and composure.— 
Ver. 8. And so ends the vision.— 
ἐπάραντες τ. 6., etc., raising their eyes 
they see no one but Jesus. Moses and 
Elias gone, and Jesus in His familiar 
aspect; the dazzling brightness about 
face and garments vanished. 


Vv. 9-13. Conversation while de- 
scending the hill.—Ver. 9. μηδενὶ εἴπητε: 
injunction of secrecy. The reason of the 
injunction lies in the nature of the ex- 
perience. Visions are for those who are 
prepared for them. It boots not to re- 
late them to those who are not fit to 
receive them. Even the three were 
only partially fit; witness their terror 
(νετ. ϐ).---τὸ ὅραμα, the vision, justifying 
the view above given of the experience, 
held, among others, by Elsner, Herder, 
Bleek and Weiss. Herder has some 
fine remarks on the analogy between the 
experiences of Jesus at His baptism and 
on the Mount, six days after the 
announcement at Caesarea Philippi, and 
those of other men at the time of moral 
decisions in youth and in the near pre- 
sence of death (vide his Vom Erléser der 
Menschen, §§ 18, 19).—€ws οὗ, followed 
by subjunctive without ἄν: in this case 
(cf. xvi. 28) one of future contingency at 
a past time. The optative is used in 
classics (vide Burton, § 324). Not ΙΙ 
the resurrection. It is not implied that 
Jesus was very desirous that they should 
then begin to speak, but only that they 
could then speak of the vision intelli- 
gently and intelligibly. Christ’s tone 
seems to have been that of one making 
light os the recent experience (as in Lk. 
x. 20).—Ver. ΙΟ. τί οὖν, etc.: does the 
οὖν refer to the prohibition in ver. 9 
(Meyer), or to the appearance of Moses 
and Elias, still in the minds of the three 
disciples, and the lateness of their coming 
(Euthy., Weiss), or to the shortness of 
their stay ? (Grotius, Fritzsche, Olsh., 
Bleek, etc.). Difficult to decide, owing 
to fragmentariness of report; but it is 


7—14. 


ἩἨλίαν δεῖ ἐλθεῖν πρῶτον ;” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


231 


II. Ὁ δὲ Ιησοῦς] ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν 


adtois,2 “ Ἠλίας μὲν ἔρχεται πρῶτον,ὃ καὶ ) ἀποκαταστήσει πάντα :{ vide at Ch. 


12. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἩἨλίας ἤδη HAGE, καὶ οὐκ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτόν» 


xii. 13. 


GAN ἐποίησαν ἐν αὐτῷ ὅσα ἠθέλησαν : οὕτω καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 


A 2? 
µέλλει πάσχειν ot αὐτῶν. 


13. Τότε συνῆκαν οἱ µαθηταί, ὅτι 


περὶ Ιωάννου τοῦ Βαπτιστοῦ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς. 


14. Καὶ ἐλθόντων αὐτῶν * πρὸς τὸν ὄχλον, προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ ἄνθρω- 


~ 


1 SSBDLZ omit Ἰησους. 


2 BD omit αντοις. 


3 SBD omit πρωτον, which probably has come in from νετ. 10. 


4 S$BZ sah. omit avtev. 


most natural to take οὖν in connection 
with preceding verse, only not as τε- 
ferring to the prohibition of speech pro 
tem., but to the apparently slighting tone 
in which Jesus spoke. If the recent 
occurrence is not of vital importance, 
why then do the scribes say etc.? To 
lay the emphasis (with Weiss) on πρῶτον, 
as if the disciples were surprised that 
Moses and Elias had not come sooner, 
before the Christ, is a mistake. The 
advent would appear to them soon enough 
to satisfy the requirements of the scribes— 
just at the right time, after they had re- 
cognised in Jesus the Christ = Thou art 
the Christ we know, and lo! Elias is 
here to prepare the way for Thy public 
recognition and actual entry into 
Messianic power and glory. The sudden 
disappearance of the celestials would tend 
to deepen the disappointment created by 
the Master’s chilling tone, so that there 
is some ground for finding in οὖν a 
reference to that also. Ver 11. ἔρχεται : 
present, as in ii. 4, praesens pro futuro, 
Raphel (Annotationes in S.S.), who cites 
instances of this enallage temporis from 
Xenophon. Wolf (Curae Phil.), referring 
to Raphel, prefers to find in the present 
here no note of time, but only of the 
order of coming as between Elias and 
Christ. It is a didactic, timeless present. 
So Weiss.—amoxatacryoe πάντα. This 
word occurs in Sept., Mal. iv. 5, for which 
stands in Lk. i. 17: ἐπιστρέψαι; the 
reference is to restitution of right moral 
relations between fathers and children, 
etc. Raphel cites instances of similar 
use from Polyb. The function of Elias, 
as conceived by the scribes, was to lead 
Israel to the Great Repentance. Vide 
on this, Weber, Die Lehren des T., pp. 
337-8.—Ver2. λέγω δὲ: Jesus finds 
the prophecy as to the advent of Elias 
fulfilled in John the Baptist, so still 
further reducing the significance of the 


late vision. The contrast between the 
mechanical literalism of the scribes and 
the free spiritual interpretation of Jesus 
comes out here. Our Lord expected no 
literal coming of Elijah, such as the 
Patristic interpreters (Hilary, Chrys., 
Theophy., Euthy., etc.) supposed Him 
to refer to in ver. 11. The Baptist was 
all the Elijah He looked {οτ.- οὐκ ἐπέ- 
γνωσαν: they did not recognise him as 
Elijah, especially those who _profes- 
sionally taught that Elijah must come, 
the scribes.—aAN’ ἐποίησαν ἐν αὐτῷ, 
etc. Far from recognising in him Elijah, 
and complying with his summons to 
repentance, they murdered him in re- 
sentment of the earnestness of his 
efforts towards a moral ἀποκατάστασις 
(Herod, as representing the Zeitgeist.).— 
ἐν αὐτῷ: literally, in him, not classical, 
but similar construction found in Gen. 
xl. 14, and elsewhere (Sept.).—otrws: 
Jesus reads His own fate in the Baptist’s, 
How thoroughly He understood His 
time, and how free He was from 
illusions !—Ver. 13. τότε συνῆκαν: the 
parallel drawn let the three disciples see 
who the Elijah was, alluded to by their 
Master. What a disenchantment: not 
the glorified visitant of the night vision, 
but the beheaded preacher of the wilder- 
ness, the true Elijah ! 

Vv. 14-21. The epileptic boy (Mk. 
ix. 14-29; Lk. ix. 37-43).—Very brief 
report compared with Mk.—Ver. 14. 
ἐλθόντων: the αὐτῶν of T. R. might 
easily be omitted as understood from 
the οοππεοίοπ.--γονυπετῶν, literally, 
falling upon the knees, in which sense it 
would naturally take the dative (T. R., 
αὐτῷ); here used actively with accusa- 
tive = to beknee him (Schanz, Weiss).— 
Ver. 15. σεληνιάζεται, he is moon- 
struck; the symptoms as described are 
those of epilepsy, which were supposed 
to become aggravated with the phases of 


93 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVII. 


k with τινα πος * γονυπετῶν adTa,! καὶ λέγων, 15. “Κύριε, ἐλέησόν µου τὸν υἱόν, 


here (W. 


H.) and in ὅτι σεληνιάζεται καὶ κακῶς πάσχει 1: πολλάκις γὰρ πίπτει εἰς τὸ 
. X. Π 


Mk. x. 17; 
with 
ἔμπροσθέν 


τινος, Ch. μαθηταῖς σου, καὶ οὐκ ἠδυνήθησαν αὐτὸν θεραπεῦσαι.’ 


XXVii. 29. 


wip, καὶ πολλάκις eis τὸ ὕδωρ. 


16. καὶ προσήνεγκα αὐτὸν τοῖς 
17. Απο 


1 Phil. ii. 15. κριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, '"Ὦ γενεὰ ἄπιστος καὶ | διεστραµµένη, 


(Deut. 

XXXii. 5). 
m Mk. ix. 19. 

Lk. ix. 41. BOL αὐτὸν OSE.” 

2 Cor. xi 


ἕως πότε ἔσομαι pel ὑμῶν ὃ 


3 ἕως πότε "' ἀνέξομαι ὑμῶν; φέρετέ 
18. Καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτῷ ὅ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν 


19. Eph. ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ τὸ δαιµόνιον, καὶ ἐθεραπεύθη 6 παῖς ἀπὸ τῆς ὥρας ἐκείνης. 


iv. 2. Col. 

iii. 13 (all ΤΟ. 

with gen., ¢¢ 
accus. more 

common 


ον : κ 
inclassics). εἶπεν ὃ αὐτοῖς, “ Aca τὴν ἀπιστίαν © ὑμῶν. 


1 αυτον in nearly all uncials. 
previous avTw. 


Διατί ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἠδυνήθημεν ἐκβαλεῖν adtd;” 


Τότε προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ κατ ἰδίαν εἶπον, 


20. Ὁ δὲ “Ingots * 
ἁμὴν γὰρ λέγω ὑμῖν, 


avtw is a “mechanical repetition’ (Weiss) of the 


2 eye. in NBLZ; as the more usual word it is to be suspected. W.H. introduce 


it with hesitation. 
μεθ υΌµων εσοµαι in $BCDZ 33. 
5 SSBD 33, etc., have λεγει. 


* SBD 33, omit Ingovs. 


8 ολιγοπιστιαν in 3 Β cursives, and adopted by most editors, though απιστιαν 
in CD and other uncials, as involving a severer reflection, has much to recommend 


it. The tendency would be to tone down. 


the moon (cf. iv. 24).—KaK@s πάσχει 
(ἔχει W. H. text), good Greek. Raphel 
(Annot.) gives examples from Polyb.= 
suffers badly.—Ver. 16. τοῖς μαθηταῖς: 
the nine left behind when Jesus and the 
three ascended the Mount. The fame of 
Jesus and His disciples as healers had 
reached the neighbourhood, wherever it 
was. —ov« ἠδυνήθησαν: the case baffled 
the men of the Galilean mission.—Ver. 
17. ὦ γενεὰ: exclamation of impatience 
and disappointment, as if of one weary 
in well-doing, or averse to such work 
just then. Who are referred to we can 
only conjecture, and the guesses are 
various. Probably more or less all pre- 
sent: parent, disciples, scribes (Mk. ix. 
14). Jesus was far away in spirit from 
all, lonely, worn out, and longing for the 
end, as the question following (ἕως 
πότε, etc.) shows. It is the utterance of 
a fine-strung nature, weary of the dul- 
ness, stupidity, spiritual imsuscepti- 
bility (ἄπιστος), not to speak of the 
moral perversity (διεστραμµένη) all 
around Him. But we must be careful 
not to read into it peevishness or un- 
graciousness. Jesus had not really 
grown tired of doing good, or lost 
patience with the bruised reed and 
smoking taper. The tone of His voice, 
gently reproachtul, would show that. 
Perhaps the complaint was spoken in an 
undertone, just audible to those near, 


and then, aloud: φέρετέ pou: bring him 
to me, said to the crowd generally, there- 
fore plural.—Ver. 18, τὸ δαιµόνιον: the 
first intimation in the narrative that it is 
a case of possession, and a hint as to 
the genesis of the theory of possession. 
Epilepsy presents to the eye the aspect 
of the body being in the possession of a 
foreign will, and all diseases with which 
the notion of demoniacal possession was 
associated have this feature in common. 
εν Judaeis usitatissimum erat morbos 
quosdam  graviores, eos _ praesertim, 
quibus vel distortum est corpus vel mens 
turbata et agitata phrenesi, malis 
spiritibus attribuere.” Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb., ad loc. The αὐτῷ after ἐπετί- 
µησεν naturally refers to the demon. 
This reference to an as yet unmentioned 
subject Weiss explains by the influence 
of Mk. 

Ver. 19. kar ἰδίαν: the disciples 
have some private talk with the Master 
as to what has just Παρρεπεά.---διατί 
οὐκ ἠδυνήθημεν: the question implies 
that the experience was exceptional ; in 
other words that on their Galilean 
mission, and, perhaps, at other times, 
they had possessed and exercised healing 
power.—Ver. 20. διὰ τὴν ὀλιγοπιστίαν, 
here only, and just on that account to be 
preferred to ἀπιστίαν (T. R.); a word 
coined to express the fact exactly: too 
little faith for the occasion (cf. xiv. 31), 


15—23. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


233 


ἐὰν ἔχητε πίστιν ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως, ἐρεῖτε TH Sper τούτῳ Μετάβηθι 
” évredbev! *éxet, καὶ µεταβήσεται: καὶ οὐδὲν 5 ἀδυνατήσει ὑμῖν. α ota 
.) ner 


21. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ γένος οὐκ ἐκπορεύεται, εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ and ite. 
xvi. 


4 , oe 2 
νηστεία. 


(vide 
* critical 


22. ΑΝΑΣΤΡΕΦΟΜΕΝΩΝ ὃ δὲ αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς note there). 


vide Ch. il. 


ς A ε A > α ο 
6 "Ingots, “ὁΜέλλει ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοσθαι eis χεῖρας 22 for 


similar use. 


ἀνθρώπων, 23. καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν αὐτόν, καὶ τῇ τρίτη ἡμέρᾳ ἐγερθή- ρ Lk. i. 37 


4 


setar. * Καὶ ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα. 


1 µεταβα in NB; ενθεν in NBD. 


(Gen. xviii. 
14). 


2 This whole verse is wanting in ΑΒ 33, some Latin verss., Syrr. verss. (Cur. 


Hier. Sin.). 
foisted into the text. 


CDLAZz and many other uncials have it. 


It is doubtless a gloss 


ΜΒ 1 it. vg. have συστρεφοµενων; changed into the more easily understood 


αναστρ. (T. R.). 
4B has αναστησεται (W.H. margin). 


That was a part of the truth at least, 
and the part it became them to lay to 
Πεατί.- -ἀμὴν, introducing, as usual, a 
weighty saying.—éav ἔχητε, if ye have, 
a present general supposition.—kéKKov 
σινάπεως proverbial for a small quantity 
(xiii. 31), a minimum of faith. The 
purpose is to exalt the power of faith, 
not to insinuate that the disciples have 
not even the minimum. Schanz says 
they had no miracle faith (‘‘ fides miracu- 
lorum”),—1@ Sper τούτῳ, the Mount of 
Transfiguration visible and pointed to. 
—peraBa (-βηθι T. R.), a poetical form 
of imperative like ἀνάβα in Rev. iv. 1. 
Vide Schmiedel’s Winer, p. 115.—€vOev 
éxet for ἐντεῦθεν ἐκεῖσε.--μεταβήσεται : 
said, done. Jesus here in effect calls 
faith an ‘“‘uprooter of mountains,” a 
phrase current in the Jewish schools for 
a Rabbi distinguished by legal lore or 
personal excellence (Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb., ad Mt. xxi. 21, Winsche).— 
ἀδυνατήσει used in the third person 
singular only in N. T. with dative = to 
be impossible; a reminiscence of Mk. 
ix. 23 (Weiss).—Ver. 21. Vide on Mk. 
ix. 20. 

Vv. 22-23. Second announcement of 
the Passion (Mk. ix. 30, 31; Lk. ix. 44, 
45)-—Ver. 22. συστρεφοµένων a., while 
they were moving about, a reunited band. 
—év τ. Γ.: they had got back to Galilee 
when the second announcement was 
made, Mk. states that though returned 
to familiar scenes Jesus did not wish to 
be recognised, that He might carry on 
undisturbed the instruction of the 
Twelve.—péAde, etc. : the great engross- 
ing subject of instruction was the 


doctrine of the εγοῦ».--παραδίδοσθαι: a 
new feature not in the first announce- 
ment. Grotius, in view of the words εἰς 
χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων, thinks the reference is 
to God the Father delivering up the Son. 
It is rather to recent revelations of dis- 
affection within the disciple-circle. For 
if there were three disciples who showed 
some receptivity to the doctrine of the 
cross, there was one to whom it would 
be very unwelcome, and who doubtless 
had felt very uncomfortable since the 
Caesarea announcement.—wapad. con- 
tains a covert allusion to the part He is 
to play.—Ver. 23. ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα, 
they were all greatly distressed; but no 
one this time ventured to remonstrate or 
even to ask a question (Mk. ix. 32). The 
prediction of resurrection seems to have 
counted for nothing. 

Vv. 24-27. The temple tax.—In Mt. 
only, but unmistakably a genuine historic 
reminiscence in the main. Even Holtz- 
mann (H. C.) regards it as history, only 
half developed into legend.—Ver. 24. εἰς 
Καπ.: home again after lengthened wan- 
dering with the satisfaction home gives 
even after the most exhilarating holiday 
excursions.—Ver. 24. mpoo7\Goyv oi, etc. : 
home-coming often means return to 
care. Here are the receivers of custom, 
as soon as they hear of the arrival, de- 
manding tribute. From the Mount of 
Transfiguration to money demands 
which one is too poor to meet, what a 
descent! The experience has been often 
repeated in the lives of saints, sons of 
God, men of ρεπίας.- τὰ δίδραχµα: a 
δίδραχµον was a coin equal to two Attic 
drachmae, and to the Jewish half shekel 


234 


q here only 
in 


24. “ENOdvtwv δὲ αὐτῶν 


KATA MATOAION 


XVII. 


εἲς Καπερναούμ, προσῆλθον ot τὰ. 


Frequent 3 δίδραχµα λαμβάνοντες τῷ Πέτρω, καὶ εἶπον, '΄Ὁ διδάσκαλος 


25. Λέγει, “Nat.” Kat ὅτε 


"Ingots, λέγων, “Τί 


es ὑμῶν οὗ *Tedet τὰ] Sidpaypa;” 

. ie. εἰσῆλθεν 2 εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, προέφθασεν αὐτὸν 6 

υμα. δοκεῖ, Σίµων; οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς ἀπὸ τίνωνΣ λαμβάνουσι 
17. Mk. τέλη ἢ 


xii. 14. 


Acts να. 
6. Heb. xi. 9, 34. 


"κῆνσον; ἀπὸ τῶν υἱῶν αὐτῶν, ἢ ἀπὸ τῶν *addoTpiov ;” 
4 “~ Lal 
t John x. 5. 26. Λέγει αὐτῷ 6 Πέτρος, ''᾿Απὸ τῶν ἀλλοτρίων.” 


” aim ας 
Εφη αὐτῷ ὁ 


1 ΝΜΦΓ omit τα here (Tisch.) ; BC retain it (W.H.). 
2 εισελθοντα in δὴ (-te D); ελθοντα in B. Tisch. adopts the former; W.H. the: 


latter, with εισελθοντα in margin. 


3 B has τινος, which W.H. place in the margin. 


4 For λεγειν . , - 
grammatical correction. 
instead of a full stop as in T. R. 


= about fifteen pence; payable annually 
by every Jew above twenty as a tribute 
to the temple. It was a tribute of the 
post-exilic time based on Exodus xxx. 
13-16. After the destruction of the 
Temple the tax continued to be paid to 
the Capitol (Joseph. Bel. I. vii. 6, 7). The 
time of collection was in the month 
Adar (March).—7r@ Π. Peter evidently 
the principal man of the Jesus-circle for 
outsiders as well as _ internally.—ovd 
τελει. The receivers are feeling their 
way. Respect for the Master (διδάσκαλος) 
makes them go to the disciples for in- 
formation, and possibly the question was 
simply a roundabout hint that the tax 
was overdue.—Ver. 25. vat: this 
prompt, confident answer may be either 
an inference from Christ’s general bear- 
ing, as Peter understood it, or a state- 
ment of fact implying past payment.— 
ἐλθόντα é. τ. 6. The meeting of the tax 
collectors with Peter had taken place 
outside; it had been noticed by Jesus, 
and the drift of the interview instinctively 
understood by Him.—rpoéd0acev, antici- 
pated him, here only in N. T. Peter 
meant to report, but Jesus spoke first, 
having something special to say, and a 
good reason for saying it. In other 
circumstances He would probably have 
taken no notice, but left Peter to manage 
the matter as he pleased. But the 
Master is aware of something that took 
place among His disciples on the way 
home, not yet mentioned by the evan- 
gelist but about to be (xviii. 1), and to be 
regarded as the key to the meaning of 
this incident. The story of what Jesus 
said to Peter about the temple dues is 


Π. SYBCL have ειποντος δε (Tisch., W.H.). 


The T. R. is a. 


The adoption of ειποντος requires a comma before εφη 


really the prelude to the discourse follow- 
ing on humility, and that discourse in 
turn reflects light on the prelude.—rt ou. 
δοκεῖ; phrase often found in Mt. (xviii. 
12, xxi. 28, etc.) with lively colloquial 
effect: what think you ὃ-- τέλη ἢ κῆνσον, 
customs or tribute; the former taxes on 
wares, the latter a tax on persons = in- 
direct and direct taxation. The question: 
refers specially to the Ιαξίετ.- -ἀλλοτρίων, 
foreigners, in reference not to the nation, 
but to the royal family, who have the 
privilege of exemption.—Ver. 26. ἄραγε 
on the force of this particle vide at vii. 
zo. The ye lends emphasis to the 
exemption of the viot. It virtually 
replies to Peter’s ναί -- then you must 
admit, what your answer to the collectors 
seemed to deny, that the children are 
free. The reply is a jeu d’esprit. Christ’s. 
purpose is not seriously to argue for 
exemption, but to prepare the way for 
a moral lesson. 

Ver. 27. ἵνα μὴ σκανδαλ., that we may 
not create misunderstanding as to our 
attitude by asking exemption or refusing 
to pay. Nosgen, with a singular lack of 
exegetical insight, thinks the scandal 
dreaded is an appearance of disagree- 
ment between Master and disciple! It 
is rather creating the impression that 
Jesus and His followers despise the 
temple, and disallow its claims. And 
the aim of Jesus was to fix Peter’s 
attention on the fact that He was 
anxious to avoid giving offence thereby, 
and in that view abstained from insist- 
ing on personal claims. Over against 
the spirit of ambition, which has begum 
to show itself among His disciples, He 


24-- 27. 


"Ingots, “Άραγε 
λίσωµεν 1 αὐτούς, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


235 


ἐλεύθεροί εἶσιν οἱ viol. 27. ἵνα δὲ μὴ σκανδα-α τον 
in N.1. 

πορευθεὶς eis τὴν θάλασσαν, βάλε "ἄγκιστρον, v here only 
in i. 


~ ή a 
καὶ τὸν ἀναβάντα πρῶτον ἰχθὺν ἄρον: καὶ dvoigas τὸ στόµα αὐτοῦ, w Cf. ἀντὶ 


Pe a - = Perr 
εὑρήσεις Y στατῆρα : ἐκεῖνον λαβὼν δὸς αὐτοῖς " ἀντὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ σοῦ. 


πολλῶν, 


Ch. xx. 28. 


1 σκανδαλιζωµεν in $$LX, adopted by Tisch. and placed in marg. by W.H. 


? Many uncials (BLA al.) omit την. 


sets His own spirit of self-effacement 
and desire as far as possible to live 
peaceably with all men, even with those 
with whom He has no religious affinity. 
---πορενθεὶς €. 8. Generally the instruc- 
tion given is: go and fish for the money 
needful to pay the (ἴΑχ.- -ἄγκιστρον, a 
hook, not a net, because very little would 
suffice ; one or two fish at most.— 
πρῶτον ἰχθὺν: the very first fish that 
comes up will be enough, for a reason 
given in the following εἶαιςε.- -ἀνοίξας 
. . στατῆρα: the words point to some- 
thing marvellous, a fish with a stater, 
the sum wanted, in its mouth. Paulus 
sought to eliminate the marvellous by 
rendering εὑρήσεις not “find” but 
“‘ obtain,” i.¢., by sale. Beyschlag (Das 
Leben Fesu, p. 304) suggests that the 
use of an ambiguous word created the 
impression that Jesus directed Peter to 
catch a fish with a coin in its mouth. 
Ewald (Geschichte Christus, p. 467) 
thinks Jesus spoke very much as re- 
ported, but from the fact that it is not 
stated that a fish with a coin in its 
mouth was actually found, he infers that 
the words were not meant seriously as a 
practical direction, but were a spirited 
proverbial utterance, based on rare 
examples of money found in fishes. 
Weiss is of opinion that a simple direc- 
tion to go and fish for the means of pay- 
ment was in the course of oral tradition 
changed into a form of language imply- 
ing a miraculous element. This view 
assumes that the report in Mt. was 
derived from oral tradition (vide Weiss, 
Das Leben Fesu, ii. 47,andmy Miraculous 
Element in the Gospels, pp. 231-5). In 
any case the miracle, not being reported 
as having happened, cannot have been 
the important point for the evangelist. 
What he is chiefly concerned about is to 
report the behaviour of Jesus on the 
occasion, and the words He spoke re- 
vealing its motive.—avtt ἐμοῦ καὶ cod: 
various questions occur to one here. 
Did the collectors expect Jesus only to 
pay (for Himself and His whole com- 
pany), or did their question mean, does 
He also, even He, pay? And why pay 


only for Peter along with Himself? 
Were all the disciples not liable: 
Andrew, James and John there, in 
Capernaum, not less than Peter? Was 
the tax strictly collected, or for lack of 
power to enforce it had it become prac- 
tically a voluntary contribution, paid by 
many, neglected by not afew? In that 
case it would be a surprise to many that 
Jesus, while so uncompromising on 
other matters, was so accommodating in 
regard to money questions. He would 
not conform to custom in fasting, 
Sabbath keeping, washing, etc., but He 
would pay the temple tax, though refusal 
would have had no more serious result 
than slightly to increase already existing 
ill-will. This view sets the generosity 
and nobility of Christ’s spirit in a clearer 
light. 

CHAPTER XVIII. Morat Trarinine 
OF THE DiscipLes. In this and the 
next two chapters the centre of interest 
is the spiritual condition of the Twelve, 
and the necessity thereby imposed on 
their Master to subject them to a stern 
moral discipline. The day of Caesarea 
had inaugurated a spiritual crisis in the 
disciple-circle, which searched them 
through and through, and revealed in 
them all in one form or another, and in 
a greater or less degree, moral weak- 
ness: disloyalty to the Master (xvii. 22), 
vain ambition, jealousy, party spirit. 
The disloyal disciple seems to have 
taken to heart more than the others the 
gloomy side of the Master’s predictions, 
the announcement of the Passion ; his 
more honest-hearted companions let 
their minds rest on the more pleasing 
side of the prophetic picture, the near 
approach of the kingdom in power and 
glory, so that while remaining true to 
the Master their hearts became fired with 
ambitious passions. 

Vv. 1-14. Ambition rebuked (Mk. ix. 
33-50; Lk. ix. 46-50, xv. 3-7, xvii. 1-4).— 
Ver. 1. ἐν ἐκ. τ. Spq, in that hour ; the 
expression connects what follows very 
closely with the tax incident, and shows 
that the two things were intimately asso- 
ciated in the mind of the evangelist.— 


236 


a Ch. xi. rz; 
Mic easy NE 

«ΙΧ. 34. OVTES 

ieee λλλδΜὰ 

b John xii. 2. 

40 (επιστ. , 
T.R 


Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος 6 


Acts vii. 
29. Pe 
ς Ch. xxiii. 
12. Lk. 
xiv. II; 
XVili. 14. 
d Ch. xxiv. 5 
parall, 


οὐρανῶν. 


φις 
οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ 


1 ΝΝΒΙ, al. omit ο |. 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


XVIII. 


XVIII. 1. "EN ἐκείνῃ τῇ Spa προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ “Inood, 
“Tis dpa "μείζων ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν ; 
᾿Ιησοῦς 1 παιδίον ἔστησεν αὐτὸ ἐν µέσῳ 
αὐτῶν, 3. καὶ εἶπεν, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ ὃ στραφῆτε καὶ 
Ὑένησθε ὡς τὰ παιδία, οὗ μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἲς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν 
4. ὅστις οὖν “ταπεινώσῃ " ἑαυτὸν ὡς τὸ παιδίον τοῦτο, 
µείζων ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τῶν οὐρανῶν. 
δέξηται παιδίον τοιοῦτον ἓν ὃ “ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί µου, ἐμὲ δέχεται: 


5. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν 


} ταπεινωσει in all uncials. 


3 ev before παιδιον in BDLZ; τοιοντο in S$§BLA for the more usual τοιοντον in 
T. R. (ev παιδιον τοιουτο in Tisch. and W.H.). 


τίς ἄρα μείζων: who then is greater, etc. ? 
The dpa may be taken as pointing back 
to the tax incident as suggesting the 
question, but not to it alone, rather to it 
as the last of a series of circumstances 
tending to force the question to the 
front: address to Peter at Caesarea 
Philippi; three disciples selected to be 
with the Master on the Hill of Trans- 
figuration. From Mk. we learn that 
they had been discussing it on the way 
home.—v τ. βασ.τ. ovp.,inthe Kingdom 
of Heaven; this is wanting in Mk., 
where the question is a purely personal 
one; who is the greater (among us, 
now, in your esteem)? In Mk. the 
question, though referring to the present, 
who is, etc., points to the future, and 
presents a more general aspect, but 
though it wears an abstract look it too 
is personal in reality = which of us now 
is the greater for you, and shall there- 
fore have the higher place in the king- 
dom when it comes? It is not necessary 
to conceive every one of the Twelve 
fancying it possible he might be the 
first man. The question for the majority 
may have been one as to the respective 
claims of the more prominent men, 
Peter, James, John, each of whom may 
have had his partisans in the little band. 
—Ver.2. παιδίον: the task of Jesus is 
not merely to communicate instruction 
but to rebuke and exorcise an evil 
spirit, therefore He does not trust to 
words alone, but for the greater im- 
pressiveness uses a child who happens to 
be present as a vehicle of instruction. 
The legendary spirit which dearly loves 
certainty in detail identified the child 
with Ignatius, as if that would make 
the lesson any the more valuable |--- 
Ver. 3. ἐὰν μὴ στραφῆτε: unless ye 
turn round so as to go in an opposite 
direction. “' Conversion”? needed and 


demanded, even in the case of these men 
who have left all to follow Jesus! How 
many who pass for converted, regenerate 
persons have need to be converted over 
again, more radically! Chrys. remarks: 
“We are not able to reach even 
the faults of the Twelve; we ask not 
who is the greatest in the Kingdom of 
Heaven, but who is the greater in the 
Kingdom of Earth: the richer the more 
powerful” (Hom. lviii.). The remark is 
not true to the spirit of Christ. In His 
eyes vanity and ambition in the sphere 
of religion were graver offences than the 
sins of the worldly. His tone at this 
time is markedly severe, as much so as 
when He denounced the vices of the 
Pharisees. It was indeed Pharisaism 
in the bud He had to deal with. Resch 
suggests that στραφῆτε here simply τε- 
presents the idea of becoming again 
children, corresponding to the Hebrew 


idiom which uses 3\5t2) = πάλιν (Ausser- 


canonische Paralleltexte su Mt. and Mk., 
Ρ. 213).—@s τὰ παιδία, like the children, 
in unpretentiousness, A _ king’s child 
has no more thought of greatness than a 
beggar’s.—od μὴ εἰσέλθητε, ye shall 
not enter the kingdom, not to speak of 
being great there. Just what He said to 
the Pharisees (vide on chap. v. 17-20).— 
Ver. 4. ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν: the most 
difficult thing in the world for saint as 
for sinner. Raphel (Amnot.in S.S.) dis- 
tinguishes three forms ef self-humiliation: 
in mind (Phil. ii. 3), by words, and by 
acts, giving classical examples of the latter 
two. It is easy to humble oneself by 
self-disparaging words, or by symbolic 
acts, as when the Egyptian monks wore 
hoods, like children’s caps (Elsner), but to 
be humble in sfirit, and so child-like !— 
6 µείζων. The really humble man is as 
great in the moral world as he is rare. 


τα. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ο 


6. ὃς & ἂν σκανδαλίσῃ ἕνα τῶν "μικρῶν τούτων τῶν πιστευόντων ο Cf. ἑλαχί- 


στων in 


eis ἐμέ, Ἰσυμφέρει αὐτῷ, ἵνα κρεµασθῇ μύλος ὀνικὸς ἐπὶ] τὸν Ch. xxv. 
~ a Αα n ο. 

τράχηλον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἕ καταποντισθῇ ἐν τῷ ™ πελάγει τῆς θαλάσσης. { Ch. ν. 29, 
> na > A > a ο. 

7, Οὐαὶ τῷ κόσµῳω ἀπὸ τῶν σκανδάλων: ἀνάγκη Ὑάρ ἐστιν } ἐλθεῖν ᾳ here and 


τὰ σκάνδσλα. 


πλὴν οὐαὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ,ὸ δι οὗ τὸ σκάνδαλον το, 


in Ch. xiv, 


h here and 


Acts xxvii. 5. The phrase ἐντ. w. 7. θαλάσσης here only 


+ For επι SBLZ have περι. 


2 Omitted in BL (W.H.); found in ΝΤ (Tisch.). 


δεκεινω wanting in S§DLZ:; 


found in B but not adopted by W.H. 


It looks 


like an echo of xxvi. 24, yet it answers well to the solemn tone of our Lord’s 


utterance on this occasion. 


Vv. 5-7.—Ver. 5. δέξηται: the dis- 
course passes at this point from being 
child-like to gracious treatment of a 
child and what it represents. —év παιδίον 
τοιοῦτο: the real child present in the 
room passes into an ideal child, repre- 
senting all that the spirit of ambition in 
its struggle for place and power is apt to 
trample under foot. So in effect the 
majority of commentators; a few, in- 
cluding Bengel, De Wette, Bleek, 
Weiss, hold that the reference is still to 
a real child. In favour of this view is 
Luke’s version: ‘* Whoso receiveth this 
child,” etc. (ix. 48). But the clause ἐπὶ 
τῷ ὀνόματί µου raises the child into the 
ideal sphere. The reception required 
does not mean natural kindness to 
children (though that also Christ valued), 
but esteeming them as fellow-disciples in 
spite of their insignificance. A child 
may be such a disciple, but it may also 
represent such disciples, and it is its 
representative function that is to be em- 
phasised.—Ver. 6. σκανδαλίσῃ: the 
opposite of receiving; treating harshly 
and contemptuously, so as to tempt to 
unbelief and apostasy. The pride and 
selfish ambition of those who pass for 
eminent Christians make many infidels. 
—éva tT. µ. τ.: one of the large class of 
little ones; not merely child believers 
surely, but all of whom a child is the 
emblem, as regards social or ecclesias- 
tical importance. Those who are caused 
to stumble are always little ones: 
‘* majores enim scandala non recipiunt,”’ 
Jerome. One of them: “ frequens unius 
in hoc capite mentio,” Bengel. This is 
the one text in which Jesus speaks of 
Himself as the object of faith (vide The 
Kingdom of God, p. 263).--συµφέρει .. . 
ἵνα: vide on v. 29. Fritzsche finds 
here an instance of attraction similar to 
that in x. 2---καὶ 6 δοῦλος, ds 6 κ. a. 
Instead of saying συμφέρει a. κρεµα- 


σθῆναι . .. ἵνα καταποντισθῃ, the 
writer puts both verbs in the subjunctive 
after ἵνα.- μύλος dvixds. The Greeks 
called the upper millstone ὄνος the ass 
(6 ἀνῶτερος λίθος, Hesychius), but they 
did not use the adjective ὀνικὸς. The 
meaning therefore is a millstone driven 
by an ass, i.e.,a large one, as distinct 
from smaller-sized ones driven by the 
hand, commonly used in Hebrew houses 
in ancient times. ‘Let such a large 
stone be hung about the neck of the 
offender to make sure that he sink to 
the bottom to rise no more’’—such is 
the thought of Jesus; strong in con- 
ception and expression, revealing intense 
abhorrence.—év τῷ πελάγει τ. θ.: in 
the deep part of the sea. So Kypke, 
who gives examples; another signifi- 
cantly strong phrase. Both these ex- 
pressions have been toned down by 
ΏυΚε.--καταποντισθῇ: drowning was 
not a form of capital punishment in use 
among the Jews. The idea may have 
been suggested by the word denoting 
the offence, σκανδαλίσῃ. Bengel τε- 
marks : ‘‘ apposita locutio in sermone de 
scandalo, nam ad lapidem offensio est” = 
“let the man who puts a stone in the 
path of a brother have a stone hung 
about his neck,” etc. Lightfoot suggests 
as the place of drowning the Dead Sea, 
in whose waters nothing would sink 
without a weight attached to it, and in 
which to be drowned was a mark of 
execration.—Ver. 7. oval τῷ κόσµω, 
woe to the world, an exclamation of 
pity at thought of the miseries that 
come upon mankind through ambitious 
passions. Some (Bleek, Weiss, etc.) 
take κόσμος in the sense of the ungodly 
world, as in later apostolic usage, and 
therefore as causing, not suffering from, 
the offences deplored. This interpreta- 
tion is legitimate but not inevitable, and 
it seems better to take the word in the 


238 


ἔρχεται. 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


XVIII. 


, < » 
8. Et δὲ ἡ χείρ σου ἢ 6 πούς σου σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔκκοψον 


αὐτὰ ] καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ cod: καλόν σοι ἐστὶν εἰσελθεῖν eis τὴν ζωὴν 
χωλὸν ἢ κυλλόν,” ἢ δύο χεῖρας ἢ δύο πόδας ἔχοντα βληθῆναι eis τὸ 


a κ μή μα 
πυρ TO αιωνιογ. 


9. καὶ εἰ 6 


ὀφθαλμός σου σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔξελε 


ihereandin αὐτὸν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ: καλόν σοι ἐστὶ ' μονόφθαλμον cis τὴν ζωὴν 


Mk. ix. 47. 
j Mk. v. 5. 
Lk. xxiv. 5 
53. Actsii. πυρος. 
25. Rom 
xi. 1Ο al. 


1 αυτον in NBDL2. 


εἰσελθεῖν, ἢ δύο ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντα βληθῆναι eis τὴν γέενναν τοῦ 
10. Ὁρᾶτε μὴ καταφρονήσητε ἑνὸς τῶν μικρῶν τούτων" 
᾿λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτῶν ἐν οὐρανοῖς ; διὰ / παντὸς 


αυτα a grammatical correction. 


2 κνλλον η χωλον in NB (Tisch., W.H.). 


more general sense of humanity con- 
ceived of as grievously afflicted with 
“scandals ” without reference to who is 
to blame. They area great fact in the 
history of mankind, by whomsoever 
caused.—amo τ. σ.: by reason of; points 
to the ultimate source of the misery.— 
τῶν σκανδάλων : the scandals ; a general 
category, and a black οπε.---ἀνάγκη γάρ: 
they are inevitable ; a fatality as well as 
a fact, on the wide scale of the world; 
they cannot be prevented, only deplored. 
No shallow optimism in Christ’s view of 
life.—wAhv: adversative here, setting 
the woe that overtakes the cause of 
offences, over against that of those who 
suffer from them. Weiss contends that 
it is not adversative here any more than 
in xi. 24, but simply conducts from the 
general culpability of the world to the 
guilt of every one who is a cause of 
scandal, even when he does not belong 
to the world. 

Vv. 8, ο. These verses are one of 
Mt.’s dualities, being found with some 
variations in the Sermon on the Mount 
(vv. 29-30). Repetition perhaps due to 
use of two sources, but in sympathy 
with the connection of thought in both 
places. Since the offender is the greater 
loser in the end, it is worth his while 
to take precautions against being an 
offender.—Ver. 8. yelp, πούς: men- 
tioned together as instruments of 
νιο]εηος.-- καλόν ... 4: the positive 
for the comparative, or ἢ used in sense 
of magis quam. Raphel and Kypke cite 
instances of this use from classics. It 
may be an imitation of Hebrew usage, 
in which the comparative is expressed 
by the positive, followed by the preposi- 
tion min. ‘A rare classical usage tends 
to become frequent in Hellenistic Greek if 
it be found to correspond to a common 
Hebrew idiom ” (Carr, in Camb. N. T.). 
—xvA\bv: with reference to hand, muti- 


lated; wanting one or both hands.— 
χωλόν: in a similar condition regarding 
the feet (cf. xi. 5; xv. 30).—Ver. ο. 
ὀφθαλμός, the eye, referred to as the 
means of expressing contempt ; in chap. v. 
29 as inciting to /ust.—povédOadpov, 
properly should mean having only one 
eye by nature, but here = wanting an 
eye, for which the more exact term is 
ἑτερόφθαλμος, vide Lobeck, Phryn., p. 
136. 

Vv. 10-14. Still the subject is the 
child as the ideal representative of the 
insignificant, apt to be despised by the 
ambitious. From this point onwards 
Mt. goes pretty much his own way, 
giving logia of Jesus in general sympathy 
with the preceding discourse, serving the 
puspose of moral discipline for disciples 
aspiring to places of distinction.—Ver. 
1Ο. ὁρᾶτε μὴ καταφ. : μὴ with the 
subj. in an object clause after a verb 
meaning to take heed; common N. T. 
usage; vide Matt. xxiv. 4; Acts xiii. 
40, etc.—évds, one, again.—éyw γὰρ: 


something solemn to Ῥε said.—oi 
ἄγγελοι αὐτῶν, etc. In general abstract 
language, the truth Jesus solemnly 


declares is that God, His Father, takes a 
special interest in the little ones in all 
senses of the word. This truth is ex- 
pressed in terms of the current Jewish 
belief in guardian angels. In the later 
books of O. T. (Daniel), there are guar- 
dian angels of nations ; the extension of 
the privilege to individuals was a further 
development. Christ’s words are not to 
be taken as a dogmatic endorsement of 
this post-exilian belief exemplified in the 
story of Tobit (chap. v.). The same 
remark applies to the passages in which 
the law is spoken of as given through 
angelic mediation (Acts vii. 53; Gal. iii. 
19; Heb. ii.2). The λέγω yap does not 
mean ‘this belief is true,” but ‘‘ the 
idea it embodies, God’s special care for 


‘8—16, 


Ἀβλέπουσι τὸ Ἐ πρόσωπον τοῦ πατρός µου τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς.ὶ 
p pés µ ρ 
ἦλθε γὰρ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου σῶσαι τὸ ἀπολωλός.» 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


239 


ΤΙ. kthis phrase 
A oe we nexcionly, 
12. Τί ὑμῖν 


ι ~ 33 a ld 3 tA ς 9 , 9 aad 
δοκεῖ; ἐὰν γένηταί τινι ἀνθρώπῳ ἑκατὸν πρόβατα, καὶ πλανηθῇ ay, | es xx, 16. 


ἐξ αὐτῶν : οὐχὶ ἀφεὶς τὰ ἐννενηκονταεννέα, ἐπὶ τὰ Spy * πορευθεὶς 
{ητεῖ τὸ πλανώμενον; 13. καὶ ἐὰν | γένηται εὑρεῖν αὐτό, ἀμὴν λέγω 
ὁμῖν, ὅτι χαίρει éw αὐτῷ μᾶλλον, ἢ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἐννενηκονταεννέα τοῖς 


μὴ πεπλανημένοις. 


πατρὸς ὑμῶν ὃ τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ἵνα ἀπόληται els © τῶν μικρῶν τούτων. 
15. Ἐὰν δὲ ἁμαρτήσῃ εἰς σὲ ὁ ἀδελφός σου, ὕπαγε καὶ ὃ " ἐλεγξον 


al. vi. 14 
(same 
const. 
with inf. 
as here, 
cf. in ver. 


> ” ne 12). 
14. οὕτως οὐκ ἔστι θέληµα "' ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ m Ch. xi 26 


. X. 2I. 


n Lk. iii. το, 
1 Tim. v. 


re a A ‘ 3 a 27 9 , ο 5 20. 
αὐτὸν μεταξὺ σοῦ καὶ αὐτοῦ µόνου. ἐάν σου ἀκούσῃ, ° ἐκέρδησας ο 1 Cor. ix 


2 A 19-22. 
τὸν ἀδελφόν σου” 16. ἐὰν δὲ μὴ ἀκούσῃ, παράλαβε μετὰ σοῦ ἔτι ἕνα Pet. iii. 


I 
I, 


1 B has εν tw ovpavw (W.H. margin, bracketed). 
2 Ver. 11 is wanting in NBL, 1, 13, 33, Egyptian verss., Syrr. Jerus. Sin., Orig., 


etc.; doubtless imported from Lk. xix. 1o. 

3 αφησει in BL (Tisch., W.H.); D has αφιησιν. 
δεν in NBDL. 
8 SSBD omit και. 


5 pov in B al. 
7 SB omit εις σε. 


the little, is true”. This is an important 
text for Christ’s doctrine of the Father- 
hood. It teaches that, contrary to the 
spirit of the world, which values only 
the great, the Father-God cares specially 
for that which is apt to be despised.— 
βλέπουσι τ. πρ. In Eastern courts it is 
the confidential servants who see the 
face ofthe king. The figure is not to be 
pressed to the extent of making God like 
an Eastern despot.—Ver. 11 an inter- 
polation from Lk. xix. 1ο, 4. v. 

Vv. 12-14. Parable of straying sheep 
(Lk. xv. 4-7) ; may seem less appropriate 
here than in Lk., but has even here a 
good setting, amounting to a climax = 
God cares not only for the lowly and 
little but even for the low—the morally 
erring. In both places the parable 
teaches the precious characteristically 
Christian doctrine of the worth of the 
individual at the worst to God.—Ver. 12. 
τί ὑ. δοκεῖ as in xvii. 25.—éav γένηταί τ. 
a. ἐ, πρόβατα: if a man happen to have 
as large a number, yet, etc.—kal π. év: 
only one wanderer, out of so many.— 
-wopevOeis ζητεῖ: does he not go and 
seek the one ?—Ver. 13. kat. . . αὐτό: 
if it happen that he finds it. In Lk. he 
searches till he finds it. —aphv λέγω: 
specially solemn, with a view to the 
application to the moral sphere of what 
in the natural sphere is self-evident.— 
Ver. 14, application of the parable less 
emphatic than in Lk.—6éAnpa, a will, 
for an object of will.—éumpoo@ev τ. π. 
.: before the face of = for, etc. 


* και after ορη in BL. 
εις is a grammatical correction. 


Vv. 15-17. How to deal with an 
erring brother.—The transition here is 
easy from warning against giving, to 
counsel how to receive, offences. The 
terms are changed: μικρὸς becomes 
ἀδελφός, giving offence not suiting the 
idea of the former, and for σκανδαλίζειν 
we have the more general ἁμαρτάνειν. 
—Vv. 16 and 17 have something 
answering to them in Lk. xvii. 3, coming 
in there after the group of parables in 
chaps, xv. and xvi., in which that of the 
Shepherd has its place; whence Wendt 
recognises these verses as an authentic 
logion probably closely connected with 
the parable in the common source. Ver. 
17 he regards as an addition by the 
evangelist or a later hand. Holtzmann 
(H. C.) regards the whole section (15-17) 
as a piece of Church order in the form of 
a logion of the Lord. 

Ver. 156. ἁμαρτήσῃ: apart from the 
doubtful εἰς σὲ following, the reference 
appears to be to private personal offences, 
not to sin against the Christian name, 
which every brother in the community 
has a right to challenge, especially 
those closely connected with the offender. 
Yet perhaps we ought not too rigidly to 
draw a line between the two in an ideal 
community of Ίονε.---μεταξὺ σ. κ. a. p. : 
the phrase implies that some one has 
the right and duty of taking the initia- 
tive. So far it is a personal affair to 
begin with. The simpler and more 
classical expression would be µόνος 
µόνον.- -ἀκούσῃ, hear, in the sense of 


240 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVIII, 


δύ ε/ 4. ρ δύ , - a a cn 
ἡ δύο, ἵνα ἐπὶ στόματος δύο μαρτύρων ἢ τριῶν σταθῇ wav ῥῆμα. 
p here only 17. ἐὰν δὲ Ῥ παρακούσῃ αὐτῶν, εἰπὲ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ: ἐὰν δὲ καὶ τῆς 


(Esther 
iii. 3, 8). 


ἐκκλησίας παρακούσῃ, ἔστω σοι ὥσπερ 6 ἐθνικὸς καὶ ὁ τελώνης. 


18. ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅσα ἐὰν δήσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται δεδεµένα 
q Ch, κκ. α, ἐν τῷ 1 οὐρανῷ: καὶ ὅσα ἐὰν λύσητε ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἔσται λελυμένα 


14. Lk.v. a 
33. Acts ἐν TO} οὐρανῷ. 
Vo ο) αν 


15. 


19. πάλιν 2 λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐὰν δύο ὑμῶν * συμφωνή- 
Ἴσωσιν ὃ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς περὶ παντὸς πράγματος οὗ ἐὰν αἰτήσωνται, 


1 B omits τω first time and 398 second time. 
2 B and many other uncials add αµην after παλιν (W.H. in brackets). 


ὃσυμφωνησονσιν in SBDLA (Tisch.). 


submitting to admonition.—éxépdyaas : 
gained as a friend, as a fellow-member 
of the Kingdom of God, or as a man = 
saved him from moral ruin? All three 
alternatives find support. Is it necessary 
or possible to decide peremptorily 
between them ?—Ver. 16. ἐὰν δὲ μὴ a. 
After a first failure try again, with added 
influence.—mwapddaBe . .. ἕνα ἢ δύο. 
This bears a juridical aspect (Schanz), 
but it does not really pass out of the 
moral sphere: ethical influence alone 
contemplated ; consensus in moral judg- 
ment carries weight with the conscience. 
—tva ἐπὶ ordpartos, etc. : reference to 
the legal provision in Deut. xix. 15 in a 
literary rather than in a legal spirit.— 
Ver. 17. ἐὰν δὲ π.ᾱ. Try first a mini- 
mum of social pressure and publicity, and 
if that fail have recourse to the maximum. 
—eiwé TH ἐκκλησίᾳ: speak to the 
‘“‘ Church ’—the brotherhood of believers 
in the Christ. This to be the widest 
limit for. the ultimate sphere of moral 
influence, as ex hypothesi the judgment 
of this new community will count for 
more to its members than that of all the 
world Ῥεγοπά.- ἔστω σοι, etc.: this 
failing, the offender puts himself outside 
the society, and there is nothing for it 
but to treat him as a heathen or a pub- 
lican ; which does not mean with in- 
difference or abhorrence, but carefully 
avoiding fellowship with him in sin, and 
seeking his good only as one without. 
There is no reference in this passage to 
ecclesiastical discipline and Church cen- 
sures. The older interpreters, in a 
theologico-polemical interest, were very 
anxious to find in it support for their 
‘developed ideas on these topics. The 
chief interest of historic exegesis is to 
divest it of an ecclesiastical aspect as 
much as possible, for only so can it suit 
the initial period, and be with any pro- 
bability regarded as an utterance of 


Jesus. As such it may be accepted, 
when interpreted, as above. If, as we 
have tried to show, it was natural for 
Jesus to speak of a new community of 
faith at Caesarea, it was equally natural 
that He should return upon the idea in 
the Capernaum lesson on humility and 
kindred virtues, and refer to it as an in- 
strument for promoting right feeling and 
conduct among professed disciples. — 
Ver. 18. Renewed promise of power to 
bind and loose, this time not to Peter 
alone, 45 in xvi. το, but to all the 
Twelve, not gua apostles, with ecclesias- 
tical authority, but qua disciples, with 
the ethical power of morally disciplined 
men. The Twelve for the moment are 
for Jesus = the ecclesia : they were the 
nucleus of it. The binding and loosing 
generically = exercising judgment on 
conduct ; here specifically = treating sin 
as pardonable or the reverse—a particu- 
lar exercise of the function of judging. 
Vv. το, 20. Promise of the power and 
presence of God to encourage concord.— 
Ver. 19. πάλιν ἀἁμὴν: a second amen, 
introducing a new thought of parallel 
importance to the former, in ver. 18. 
---ἐὰν δύο: two; not the measure of 
Christ’s expectation of agreement among 
His disciples, but of the moral power 
that lies in the sincere consent of even 
two minds. It outweighs the nominal 
agreement of thousands who have no 
real bond of υπίοη.--συμφωνήσωσιν : 
agree, about what ? not necessarily only 
the matters referred to in previous con- 
text, but anything concerning the King- 
dom of ἄοἀ.- περὶ παντὸς mpdyparos : 
concerning every or any matter, offences 
committed by brethren included of 
course.—yevyoerat: it shall be; what 
absolute confidence in the laws of the 
moral world !—apa τ. π. p.: from my 
Father. The Father-God of Jesus is 
here defined as a lover of peace and 


17—22. 


γενήσεται αὐτοῖς παρὰ τοῦ πατρός µου τοῦ ἐν obpavois. 
γάρ εἶσι δύο ἢ τρεῖς συνηγµένοι "εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα, ἐκεῖ εἰμὶ ἐν 


A ” 
µέσῳ αὐτῶν. 1 


21. Τότε προσελθὼν αὐτῷ ὁ Πέτρος εἶπειλ “Κύριε, "ποσάκις 
ἁμαρτήσει εἰς ἐμὲ ὁ ἀδελφός µου, καὶ ἀφήσω αὐτῷ; ἕως ὶἑπτάκις ; 
a a > 8 

22. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ‘ Οὐ λέγω σοι ἕως ἑπτάκις, GAN ἕως 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


241 


20. οὗ r Ch, xxviii 
190. Acts 
Vili. 16; 
xix. 5. 1 
Cor, i. 13 
(all of bap- 
tism into 
—eis—a 
name}. 
αμ. 
yey ak, 
xiii. 34. 
t Lk. xvii. 4. 


1 This verse in Codex Bezae runs “for there are not (ουκ εισιν yap), etc., with 


whom (παρ᾽ ots) I am πο’ in the midst of them”’. 
2 αντω after ειπε in BD (Tisch., W.H., bracketed). 


fraternal concord. In this verse we 
have a case of attraction, of the main 
subject into the conditional clause. 
Resolved, the sentence would run: πᾶν 
πρᾶγμα, ὃ ἐὰν αἰτήσωσιν, ἐὰν συµφω- 
νήσουσιν περὶ αὐτοῦ, γεγήσεται αὐτοῖς.--- 
Ver. 20. δύο ἢ τρεῖς. Jesus deals in 
small numbers, not from modesty in His 
anticipations, but because they suit the 
present condition, and in jealousy for the 
moral quality of the new society.— 
συνηγµένοι eis, etc., not gathered to con. 
fess or worship my name, but gathered 
as believers in me. It is a synonym for 
the new society. The ecclesia is a body 
of men gathered together by a common 
relation to the name of the Christ: a 
Christian synagogue as yet consisting of 
the Twelve, or as many of them as were 
really one in heart.—éxet εἰμὶ ἐν, etc. : 
there am I, now, with as many of you, 
my disciples, as are one in faith and 
brotherly love ; not with any more even 
of you: far away from the man of am- 
bitious, not to say traitorous, mind, 
There am I in reference to the future. 
His presence axiomatically certain, 
therefore expressed as a present fact, 
even with reference to a future time—a 
promise natural from One looking forward 
to an early death. Similar in import to 
Mt. xxviii. 20. For similar sayings of 
the Rabbis concerning the presence of 
the Divine Majesty, or the Shechinah, 
among two or three sitting in judgment 
or studying the law, vide Lightfoot and 
Schottgen. 

Vv. 21, 22. Peter’s question about for- 
giving.—The second of two interpella- 
tions in the course of Christ’s discourse 
(vide Mk. ix. 38-41; Lk. ix. 49, 50). 
Such words touch sensitive consciences, 
and the interruptions would be wel- 
comed by Jesus as proof that He had 
not spoken in vain.—Ver. 21. ποσάκις, 
etc. : the question naturally arose out of 
the directions for dealing with an offend- 


Syr. Sin. has a similar reading. 
$$ omits αυτων 


ing brother, which could only be carried 
out by one of placable disposition. ‘Their 
presupposition is that a fault confessed is 
to be forgiven. But how far is this to 
go? In Lk. xvii. 3 the case is put of 
seven offences in a day, each in turn re- 
pented of and confessed. Is there not 
reason for doubting the sincerity of 
repentance in such a case? Or is this 
not at least the extreme limit? Such 
is Peter’s feeling.—épaprice, ἀφήσω: 
two futures instead of woo. ἁμαρτόντι 
ἀφήσω: Hebrew idiom instead of Greek. 
--ἕως ἑπτάκις: Peter meant to be 
generous, and he went considerably 
beyond the Rabbinicak measure, which 
was three times (Amos i. 6) : “‘ quicunque 
remissionem petit a proximo, ne ultra 
quam ter petat,” Schdttgen.—Ver. 22. 
ov: emphatic “no” to be connected 
with ἕως ἑπτάκις. Its force may be 
brought out by translating: ‘no, I tell 
you, not till, etc.—aAAa é. é. €.: Christ’s 
reply lifts the subject out of the legal 
sphere, where even Peter’s suggestion 
left it (seven times and no more—a hard 
tule), into the evangelic, and means: 
times without number, infinite placability. 
This alone decides between the two 
renderings of ἑβδομηκοντάκις ἑπτά : 
seventy-seven times and seventy times 
seven, in favour of the latter as giving a 
number (490) practically equal to infini- 
tude. Bengel leans to the former, taking 
the termination -κις as covering the 
whole number seventy-seven, and τε- 
ferring to Gen. iv. 24 as the probable 
source of the expression. Similarly 
some of the Fathers (Orig., Aug.), De 
Wette and Meyer. The majority adopt 
the opposite view, among whom may be 
named Grotius and Fritzsche, who cite 
the Syriac version in support. On 
either view there is inexactness in the 
expression. Seventy times seven re- 
quires the termination -κις at both words. 
Seventy-seven times requires the -κις at 


16 


242 


u ae only * ἑβδομηκοντάκις ἑπτά. 


24). 4 

v here an 

inCh.xxv. δούλων αὐτοῦ. 
Ig (same 
const.). 

w here and 


αὐτῷ εἲς 3 ὀφειλέτης µυρίων 


KATA MATOAION 


XVIII. 


43. Διὰ τοῦτο ὡμοιώθη ἡ βασιλεία τῶν 
οὐρανῶν ἀνθρώπῳ βασιλεῖ, ὃς ἠθέλησε “ συνᾶραι λόγον μετὰ τῶν 
24. ἀρξαμένου δὲ αὐτοῦ συναίρειν, προσηνέχθη } 
ταλάντων. 


25. μὴ ἔχοντος δὲ αὐτοῦ 


inCh.xxv. ἀποδοῦναι, ἐκέλευσεν αὐτὸν ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ δ πραθῆναι, καὶ τὴν 


15. bas αν > ~4 
x Lk. xviii, γυναικα QUTOU 
σ. 1 Cor. 
Kili. 4. 


καὶ τὰ τέκνα, καὶ πάντα ὅσα εἶχε ὃ καὶ ἀποδοθῆναι. 
26. πεσὼν οὖν ὁ δοῦλος προσεκύνει αὐτῷ, λέγων, Kupte,® * µακρο- 


Jamesv.7. θύμησον ἐπ᾽ ἐμοί,ῖ καὶ πάντα σοιὃ ἀποδώσω. 27. σπλαγχνισθεὶς δὲ 


1 προσηχθη in BD (W.H.); as in T. R., SLA al. (Tisch.) 


2 ug αντω in 398 (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 NQBDL omit αυτον. 


4%8B omit this αυτον also (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 B has εχει, which, just ybecause of its singularity as a present among preterites, 
is to be preferred to ειχε, though found in most uncials. 


5 BD omit. 7 DL have em’ ewe. 


the end of the second word rather than 
at end of first: either ἑπτὰ καὶ ἕβδο .. . 
κις, or €BSop . . . τα ἑπτάκις. 

Vv. 23-35. Parable of unmerciful ser- 
vant.—Ver. 23. διὰ τοῦτο suggests 
that the aim of the parable is to justify 
the apparently unreasonable demand in 
ver. 22: unlimited forgiveness of in- 
juries. After all, says Jesus, suppose 
ye comply with the demand, what do 
your remissions amount to compared to 
what has been remitted to you by God? 
---ἀνθρώπῳ Baciket: a man, a king; 
king an afterthought demanded by the 
nature of the case. Only a great 
monarch can have such debtors, and 
opportunity to forgive such debts.— 
συνᾶραι λόγον (found again in xxv. 19), 
to hold a reckoning.—8ovAwyv: all alike 
servants or slaves in relation to the 
king. So human distinctions are 
dwarfed into insignificance by the dis- 
tance between all men and God.—Ver. 
24. εἷς: one stood out above all the 
rest for the magnitude of his debt, who, 
therefore, becomes the subject of the 
story.—devhérns µ. τε: a debtor of, or 
to the extent of, a thousand talents—an 
immense sum, say millions sterling ; 
payment hopeless; that the point ; exact 
calculations idle or pedantic. It may 
seem to violate natural probability that 
time was allowed to incur such a debt, 
which speaks to malversation for years. 
But the indolence of an Eastern monarch 
must be taken into account, and the 
absence of system in the management 
of finance. As Koetsveld (De Gelik., 
p. 286) remarks: ‘A regular control is 
not in the spirit of the Eastern. He 
trusts utterly when he does trust, and 


8 go.after αποδωσω in NBL. 


when he loses confidence it is for ever.” 
—Ver. 25. Ἠπραθῆναι . .. ἔχει: the 
order is given that the debtor be sold, 
with all he has, including his wife and 
childven; hard lines, but according to 
ancient law, in the view of which wife 
and children were simply property. 
Think of their fate in those barbarous 
times! But parables are not scrupulous 
on the score of morality—«at ἀποδο- 
θῆναι: the proceeds of sale to be applied 
in payment of the debt.—Ver. 26. µακ- 
Ρροθύµησον: a Hellenistic word, some- 
times used in the sense of deferring 
anger (Prov. xix. 11 (Sept.), the corre- 
spending adjective in Ps, Ixxxvi. 15; cf. 
I Cor. xiii. 4; 1 Thess. ν. 14). That sense 
is suitable here, but the prominent idea 
is: give me time; wrath comes in at a 
later stage (νετ. 34).- πάντα ἀποδώσω: 
easy to promise; his plea: better wait 
and get all than take hasty measures 
and get only a part.—Ver. 27. σπλαγ- 
χνισθεὶς : touched with pity, not un- 
mixed perhaps with contempt, and asso- 
ciated possibly with rapid reflection as 
to the best course, the king decides on 
a magnanimous policy.—améAvoev, τὸ 
δάνειον ἀφῆκεν: two benefits conferred ; 
set free from imprisonment, debt abso- 
lutely cancelled, not merely time given 
for payment. A third benefit implied, 
continuance in office. The policy adopted 
in hope that it will ensure good be- 
haviour in time to come (Ps. cxxx. 4); 
perfectly credible even in an Eastern 
monarch. 

Vv. 28-34. The other side of the pic- 
ture.—Ver. 28. ἕνα τ. συνδούλων a.: 2 
fellow-slave though a humble one, which 
he should have remembered, but did not. 


23--3 I. 


EYATTEAION 


243 


ὁ κύριος τοῦ δούλου ἐκείνου 1 ἀπέλυσεν αὐτόν, καὶ τὸ 7 δάνειον ἀφῆκεν y here only 


αὐτῷ. 


λέγων, ᾿Απόδος por? ὅ τι» ὀφείλεις. 


αὐτοῦ εἰς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ * παρεκάλει αὐτόν, λέγων, Μακροθύμησον 


ἐπ᾽ ἐμοί,ὃ καὶ πάντα ὃ ἀποδώσω σοι. 


(Deut. xv. 


28. ᾿Εξελθὼν δὲ 6 δοῦλος exeivos! εὗρεν ἕνα τῶν συνδούλων 8; xxiv. 
A - 11). 
αὐτοῦ, ὃς ὤφειλεν αὐτῷ ἑκατὸν δηνάρια, καὶ κρατήσας αὐτὸν "ἔπνιγε, z here and 

in M 


k. ν. 
13 (of 
drown- 
ing). 


29. πεσὼν οὖν ὁ σύνδουλος 


30. ὁ δὲ οὐκ ἤθελεν, ἀλλὰ 


ἀπελθὼν ἔβαλεν αὐτὸν eis φυλακήν, ἕως οὗ ” ἀποδῷ τὸ ὀφειλόμενον. 
34. ἰδόντες δὲ 5 of σύνδουλοι αὐτοῦ τὰ γενόµενα ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα” 


1 B omits εκεινου here (W.H. in brackets) and εκεινος in νετ. 28. 


7 NBDL omit por. 


3 SSBCD and other uncials have ει τι. 


modern editors. 


οτι (Τ. R.) onlyin minus., rejected by 


4 eis τ. π. αυτου omitted in NBCDL and by modern editors. 


5 So in ΑΒ and many uncials. 


CDL have en’ epe. 


6 παντα is feebly attested and unsuitable to the case. 


7 ews in SBCL. 


---ἑκατὸν δηνάρια: some fifty shillings ; 
an utterly insignificant debt, which, 
coming out from the presence of a king, 
who had remitted so much to him, he 
should not even haves remembered, far 
less been in the mood to exact.— 
κρατήσας a. ἔπνιγε: seizing, he choked, 
throttled him, after the brutal manner 
allowed by ancient custom, and even by 
Roman law. The act foretokens merci- 
less treatment: no remission of debt to 
be looked for in this quarter.—améSos εἴ 
τι ὀφ. In the et τι some ingenious com- 
mentators (Fritzsche, ε.ρ.) have dis- 
covered Greek urbanity! (‘* Non sine 
urbanitate Graeci a conditionis vinculo 
aptarunt, quod a nulla conditione sus- 
pensum sit.”) Weiss comes nearer the 
truth when he sees in it an expression 
of ‘merciless logic”. He will have 
payment of whatever is due, were it 
only apenny.—Ver. 20. μµακροθύμησον, 
etc.: the identical words he used him- 
self just a few minutes ago, reminding 
him surely of his position as a pardoned 
debtor, and moving him to like conduct. 
—Ver. 30. ovx7edev: no pity awakened 
by the words which echoed his own 
petition. ‘‘He would not.’ Is such 
conduct credible? Two remarks may 
be made on this. In parabolic narra- 
tions the improbable has sometimes to be 
resorted to, to illustrate the unnatural 
behaviour of men in the spiritual sphere, 
é.g., in the parable oi the feast (Lk. xiv. 
16-24) all refuse; how unlikely! But 
the action of the pardoned debtor is not 
so improbable as it seems. He acts on 


8ουν in NBD 33 e. 


the instinct of a base nature, and also 
doubtless in accordance with long habits 
of harsh tyrannical behaviour towards 
men in his power. Every way a bad 
man: greedy, grasping in acquisition of 
wealth, prodigal in spending it, un- 
scrupulous in using what is not his awn. 
—Ver. 31. idvres of σ. ἐλυπήθησαν: 
the other fellow-servants were greatly 
vexed or grieved. At what? the fate of 
the poor debtor? Why then not pay 
the debt ? (Koetsveld). Not sympathy 
so much as annoyance at the unbecoming 
conduct of the merciless one who had 
obtained mercy was the feeling.—S8veod- 
φησαν: reported the facts (narraverunt, 
Vulg.), and so threw light on the charac- 
ter of the man (cf. Mt. xiii. 36, W. and 
H.)—7@ κ. ἑαυτῶν, to their own master, 
to whom therefore they might speak on 
a matter affecting his interest.—Ver. 32. 
8. πονηρέ: the king could understand 
and overlook dishonesty in money 
matters, but not such inhumanity and 
villainy. τ. ὀφειλὴν, ἐ.: huge, un- 
countable.—érrel παρεκάλεσάς pe, when 
you entreated me. In point of fact he 
had not, at least in words, asked re- 
mission but only time to pay. Ungenerous 
himself, he was incapable of conceiving, 
and therefore of appreciating such mag- 
nificent generosity.—Ver. 33. οὐκ ἔδει; 
was it not your duty? an appeal to the 
sense of decency and gratitude.—xai σὲ 
ἠλέησα. There was condescension 
in putting the two cases together as 
parallel. Ten thousand acts of forgive- 
ness such as the culprit was asked to 


eee 


244 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XVIII. 32---35. 


Ν A a ‘ 4 
καὶ ἐλθόντες διεσάφησαν τῷ κυρίῳ αὐτῶν] πάντα τὰ γενόµενα. 


32. Τότε προσκαλεσάµενος αὐτὸν ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ λέγει αὐτῷ, Δοῦλε 
= ziti πονηρέ, πᾶσαν τὴν "ὀφειλὴν ἐκείνην ἀφῆκά σοι, ἐπεὶ παρεκάλεσάς 


vii. 3. 


µε' 33. οὐκ ἔδει καὶ σὲ ἐλεῆσαι τὸν σύνδουλόν σου, ὡς καὶ ἐγώ σε 


ἠλέησα; 34. καὶ ὀργισθεὶς ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν τοῖς 


b here only. βασανισταῖς, ἕως οὗ ἀποδῷ wav τὸ ὀφειλόμενον αὐτῷ. 


35. Οὗτω 


καὶ 6 πατήρ pou 6 ἐπουράνιος ὃ ποιήσει ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ ἀφῆτε ἕκαστος 


τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τῶν καρδιῶν ὑμῶν τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν.” 


1 εαντων in BC. D has αυτων asin Τ. R. Vide below. 


2 αντω omitted in BD (W.H.). 
5 ovpavtos in BDL. 


επονρανιος is not found elsewhere in Mt, 


‘ra παρ. αντων are wanting in $$BDLX and most editors omit them. 


perform would not have equalled in 
amount one act such as he had got the 
benefit of. The fact in the spiritual sphere 
corresponds to this.—Ver. 34. ὀργισθεὶς: 
roused to just and extreme anger.—Baca- 
νισταῖς: not merely to the gaolers, but 
to the tormentors, with instructions not 
merely to keep him safe in prison till the 
debt was paid, but still more to make 
the life of the wretch as miserable as 
possible, by place of imprisonment, 
position of body, diet, bed, etc., if not by 
instruments of pain. The word, chosen 
to suit the king’s mood, represents a 
subjective feeling rather than an objective 
fact. 

Ver. 35. Application. —otrws: 990, 
mutatis mutandis, for feelings, motives, 
methods rise in the moral scale when 
we pass to the spiritual sphere. So in 
general, not in all details, on the same 
principle; merciless to the merciless.— 
ὁ πατήρ p. 6 οὐρ.: Jesus is not afraid to 
bring the Father in in such a connection. 
Rather He is here again defining the 
Father by discriminating use of the 
name, as One who above all things abhors 
mercilessness.—pov: Christ is in full 
sympathy with the Father in this.— 
ὑμῖν: to you, my own chosen disciples. 
- ἕκαστος: every man of you.—da7o 
τῶν καρδιῶν: from your hearts, no sham 
or lip pardon; real, unreserved, thorough- 
going, and in consequence again and 
again, times without number, because 
the heart inclines that way. 

CHAPTER XIX. FAREWELL TO GALI- 
LEE. In Mt.’s narrative the journey of 
Jesus to the south, reported in ver. 1, 
marks the close of the Galilean ministry. 
Not so obviously so in Mk.’s (see notes 
there), though no hint is given of a return 
to Galilee. It is not perfectly clear 


whether the incidents reported are to be 
conceived as occurring at the southern 
end of the journey, or on the way within 
Galilee or without. The latter alterna- 
tive is possible (vide Holtz., H.C., p. 214). 
The incidents bring under our notice 
a variety of interesting characters: 
Pharisees with captious questions, 
mothers with their children, a man in 
quest of the summum bonum, with words. 
and acts of Jesus corresponding. But 
the disciplining of the Twelve still holds 
the central place ofinterest. Last chap- 
ter showed them at school in the house, 
this shows them at school on the way. 
Vv. 1,2. Introductory, cf. Mk. x. 1.— 
Ver.1. καὶ ἐγένετο. . . λόγους τούτους: 
similar formulae after important groups 
of logia in vii. 28,. xi. I, xiii. 53.— 
µετῆρεν: also in xiii. 53, vide notes 
there; points to a change of scene 
worthy of note, as to Nazareth, which 
Jesus rarely visited, or to Judaea, as here. 
--ἀπὸ τ. Γαλιλαία. The visit to 
Nazareth was a movement within Gali- 
lee. This is a journey out of it not 
necessarily final, but so thought of to all 
appearance by the evangelist.—els τὰ ὅρια 
τ. ’l.a. τ. l.; indicates either the desti- 
nation = to the coasts of Judaea beyond 
the Jordan; or the end and the way = 
to the Judaea territory by the way οἱ 
Peraea, 1.6., along the eastern shore of 
Jordan. It is not likely that the writer 
would describe Southern Peraea as a 
part of Judaea, therefore the second 
alternative is to be preferred. Mk.’s 
statement is that Jesus went to the 
coasts of Judaea and (καὶ, approved read- 
ing, instead of διὰ τοῦ in T. R.) beyond 
Jordan. Weiss thinks that Mt.’s version 
arose from misunderstanding of Mk. 
But his understanding may have been a 


ΙΧ, IS: 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


24.5 


XIX. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν 5 ᾿Ιησοῦς τοὺς λόγους τούτους, 


* weripev ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς τὰ ὅρια τῆς Ιουδαίας aCh. xiii.s3. 


Ὀπέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου. 
> , > a a 
ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ. 


2. καὶ ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ ὄχλοι πολλοί, καὶ b Ch. iv. 15. 
4. Καὶ προσῆλθον αὐτῷ ot! Φαρισαῖοι 


πειράζοντες αὐτόν, καὶ λέγοντες αὐτῷ, “Ei ἔξεστιν ἀνθρώπῳ 5 


a A A , , 
ἀπολῦσαι τὴν yuvatka αὐτοῦ κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν ;”’ 


4. Ὁ δὲ 


ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “OuK ἀνέγνωτε ὅτι ὁ ποιήσαςδ ἀπ 


a » \ a eel Tener} \ 3 κ“ 
ἀρχῆς ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς, 5. καὶ εἶπεν, ΄ Ἕνεκεν 


τούτου “καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα: καὶ 
dX θή 6 a 9 κος \» ς δύ > , 
προσκολληθήσεται ὃ τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἷς σάρκα 


1 οι omitted in BCLA al. 
5 SSBL omit ανθρωπω. 


2 autw omitted in NBCLE ai. 
*S8BDL omit αυτοις. 


c Mk. x. 7. 
Eph. v. 31, 
fr. Gen. ii. 
24. 


D has it. 


ὄκτισας in B, 1, 22, 33, 124, sah. cop. (W.H.). 


5 The simple κολληθησεται in BD al. (modern editors). 


from the Sept. 


true one, for Mk.’s statement may mean 
that Peraea was the first reached station 
(Holtz., H. C.), implying a journey on the 
eastern side. The suggestion that the 
writer of the first Gospel lived on the 
eastern side, and means by πέραν the 
western side (Delitsch and others), has 
met with little favour.—Ver. 2. ἠκολού- 
θησαν: the crowds follow as if there 
had been no interruption, in Mt.; in 
Mk., who knows of a time of hiding 
(ix. 30), they reassemble (x. 1).---ἐθερά- 
πευσεν a. éxet: a healing ministry com- 
mences in the south; in Mk. a teaching 
ministry (x. 1). 

Vv. 3-9. The marriage question (Mk. x. 
2-9).—Ver. 3. Φ. πειράζοντες: Pharisees 
again, tempting of course; could not ask 
a question at Jesus without sinister 
motives.—el ἔξεστιν: direct question in 
indirect form, vide on xii. 1Ο.---ἀπολῦσαι 
... κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν: the question 
is differently formulated in the two 
accounts, and the answer differently 
arranged. In Mk. the question is abso- 
lute = may aman put away his wife at 
all? in Mt. relative = may,etc. . . . for 
every reason? Under the latter form 
the question was an attempt to draw 
Jesus into an internal controversy of the 
Jewish schools as to the meaning of 
Deut. xxiv. 1, and put Him in the 
dilemma of either having to choose the 
unpopular side of the school of Shummai, 


who interpreted YJ NYY strictly, 


or exposing Himself to a charge of 
laxity by siding with the school of 
Hillel. It was a petty scheme, but 


The compound (T.R.) is 


characteristic. Whether the interrogants 
knew what Jesus had taught on the sub- 
ject of marriage and divorce in the 
Sermon on the Mount is uncertain, but 
in any case all scribes and Pharisees 
knew by this time what to expect from 
Him. For κατὰ in the sense of propter, 
vide instances in Hermann’s Viger, 632, 
and Kypke.—Ver. 4. οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε: the 
words quoted are to be found in Gen. i. 
27, ii. 24.—6 κτίσας: the participle with 
article used substantively = the Creator. 
--ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς goes along with what 
follows, Christ’s purpose being to em- 
phasise the primitive state of things. 
From the beginning God made man, male 
and female; suited to each other, need- 
ing each other.—dpoev καὶ θῆλυ: “one 
male and one female, so that the one 
should have the one; for if He had 
wished that the male should dismiss one 
and marry another He would have made 
more females at the first,’”? Euthy.— 
Ver. 5. καὶ εἶπεν: God said, though the 
words as they stand in Gen. may be a 
continuation of Adam’s reflections, or a 
remark of the writer.—é€vexey τούτου : 
connected in Gen. with the story of the 
woman made from the rib of the man, 
here with the origin of sex. The sex 
principle imperiously demands that all 
other relations and ties, however inti- 
mate and strong, shall yield to it. The 
cohesion this force creates is the greatest 
possible.—ol δύο: these words in the 
Sept. have nothing answering to them 
in the Hebrew, but they are true to the 
spirit ot the original.—eis σάρκα plav: 
the reference is primarily to the physical 


246 ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ ΧΙΧ. 
µίαν; 6. ὥστε οὐκέτι εἰσὶ δύο, ἀλλὰ σὰρξ µία: ὃ οὖν ὁ Θεὸς 
a here and ¢ συνέζευξεν, ἄνθρωπος μὴ xwptlérw.” 7. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, ‘Ti οὖν 
Wik. Χ. , A 8 S05 oe 

ο Μωσῆς ἐνετείλατο δοῦναι βιβλίον ἀποστασίου, καὶ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτήν1; 


e Mk. x. 518. Λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Ore Μωσῆς πρὸς τὴν ᾿ σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν ἐπέ- 


Xvi. 14. 


(Deut'x. τρεψεν ὑμῖν ἀπολῦσαι τὰς γυναῖκας ὑμῶν: ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς δὲ οὐ γέγονεν 


ται ος | dives 
xvi. 10,) OUTG. 
f John xviii. 


λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, Stu? ὃς ἂν ἀπολύ ἣν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, ei 
M4 µ ση την Y 


14 (accus. μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ,ὸ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην, μοιχᾶται ’ καὶ ὁ ἀπολελυμένην 


and inf.). ‘ 


2 Cor. xii. Ὑαμήσας μοιχᾶται. * 1ο. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ avTod,> “ Ei 


1 (inf. as 
here). 


‘SSDLZ omit αντην. 


οὕτως ἐστὶν  aitia τοῦ ἀνθρώπου μετὰ τῆς γυναικός, οὗ * συμφέρει 


2 BDZ old Lat. verss. omit οτι. 


* um for εν µη in most uncials. The explanatory ει (T. R.) is only in minus. 
BD have παρεκτος λογου πορνειας, followed by ποιει αυτην µοιχευθηναι in B. 


4 The clause και ο απολ. yapnoas µοιχαται is omitted in SDL but found in 
BCAZ. The true reading is doubtful and the passage has puzzled editors. 


5 KSB omit αυτον, found in the greater number of uncials. 


fleshly unity. But flesh in Hebrew 
thought represents the entire man, and 
the ideal unity of marriage covers the 
whole nature. Itis a unity of soul as 
well as of body: of sympathy, interest, 
purpose.—Ver. 6,“ ὥστε with indicative, 
expressing actual result as Christ views 
the matter. /They ave no longer two, 
but one flesh, one spirit, one person.— 
8 οὖν: inference from God’s will to 
man’s duty.| The creation of sex, and 
the high doctrine as to the cohesion it 
produces between man and woman, laid 
down in Gen., interdict separation. Let 
the Divine Syzygy be held sacred! 
How small the Pharisaic disputants must 
have felt in presence of such holy teach- 
ing, which soars above the partisan 
views of contemporary controversialists 
nto the serene region of ideal, universal, 
eternal truth! ; 
Vv. 7-9. τί οὖν, etc.: such doctrine 
could not be directly gainsaid, but a 
difficulty might be raised by an appeal to 
Moses and his enactment about a bill of 
divorce (Deut. xxiv. 1): The Pharisees 
seem to have regarded Moses as a 
patron of the practice of putting away, 
rather than as one bent on mitigating its 
evil results. Jesus corrects this false 
impression.—Ver. 8. πρὸς τ., with 
reference to.—oxKAnpokapdSiay: a word 
found here and in several places in O. T. 
(Sept.), not in profane writers; points to 
a state of heart which cannot submit to 
the restraints of a high and holy law, 
literally uncircumcisedness of heart 
(Deut. x. 16; Jer. iv. 4).—éwérpewev, 
permitted, not enjoined. Moses is re- 
spectfully spoken of as one who would 


gladly have welcomed a better state of 
things; no blame imputed except to the 
people who compelled or welcomed such 
imperfect legislation (ὑμῶν twice in ver 
8).—am’ ἀρχῆς, etc. : the state of things 
which made the Mosaic rule necessary 
was a declension from the primitive 
ideal.—Ver. 9, vide notes on Mt. v. 31, 32. 
Vv. 10-12. Subsequent conversation 
with the disciples.—Christ’s doctrine on 
marriage not only separated Him toto 
celo from Pharisaic opinions of ali 
shades, but was too high even for the 
Twelve. It was indeed far in advance of 
all previous or contemporary theory and 
practice in Israel. Probably no one 
before Him had found as much in what 
is said on the subject in Gen. It 
was a new reading of old texts by one 
who brought to them a new view of 
man’s worth, and still more of woman’s. 
The Jews had very low views of woman, 
and therefore of marriage. A wife was 
bought, regarded as property, used as a 
household drudge, and dismissed at’ 
pleasure—vide Benzinger, Heb. Arch., 
pp- 138-146.—Ver. το. αἰτία: a vague 
word. We should say: if such be the 
state of matters as between husband and 
wife, and that is doubtless what is 
meant. So interpreted, αἰτία would = 
res, conditio. (So Grotius.) Fritzsche 
regards the phrase 4 αἶτία τ. a. p. τ. y- 
as in a negligent way expressing the 
idea: if the reason compelling a man to 
live with a wife be so stringent (no 
separation save for adultery). If we inter- 
pret αἰτία in the light of ver. 3 (κατὰ 7. 
αἰτίαν) the word will mean cause of 
separation. The sense is the same, but 


6—14. 


yopijou.” 
τοῦτον, ἀλλ᾽ ots δέδοται. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


13. εἰσὶ γὰρ ” εὐνοῦχοι, οἵτινες ἐκ Ἡ 


247 


11. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “OU πάντες " χωροῦσι τὸν λόγον g 2 Cor. vil. 


3 (ἡμᾶς). 
Acts vii! 


κοιλίας μητρὸς ἐγεννήθησαν οὕτω: καί εἶσιν εὐνοῦχοι, οἵτινες εύνου- 


χίσθησαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων”: καί εἶσιν εὐνοῦχοι, οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν 


ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. 


χωρείτω.” 


13. Τότε προσηνέχθη ? αὐτῷ παιδία, ἵνα τὰς χεῖρας ἐπιθῇ αὐτοῖς, 
Ν lA ς A , > ο) A 
καὶ tmpocedénrar> οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ἐπετίμησαν autoise 14. 6 δὲ 
Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν, ““Adete τὰ παιδία, καὶ μὴ ᾿κωλύετε αὐτὰ ἐλθεῖν 


1B Orig. omit τουτον (W.H.). 


2$8BCDL and most other uncials have the pl. προσηνεχθησαν. 


ὅ δυνάµενος χωρεῖν 


i Lk. xxiii.2 
Acts xvi. 
6; xxiv.23. 
Heb. vii. 
23 (same 
const.,acc. 
and inf.). 


The sing. (T. 


R. after late uncials) is a gram. cor. to correspond with neut. pl. nom, (παιδία). 
ΣΝΟΡΙ. add αντοις. (Tisch., W.H. in margin), 


in any view the manner of expression is 
somewhat helpless, as was not unnatural 
in the circumstances, Euthy. gives both 
meanings = αἰτία συζυγίας and αἰτία 
διαζευγνύουσα, with a preference for the 
former.—avOpaémov here = vir, maritus ; 
instances of this use in Kypke, Palairet, 
etc. 

Ver. 11. &Séetwev. Jesus catches up 
the remark of the disciples, and attaches 
to it a deeper sense than they thought 
of. Their idea was that marriage was 
not worth having if a man must put up 
with all the faults and caprices ofa woman, 
without possibility of escape, except by 
gross misconduct. He thinks of the 
celibate state as in certain cases desirable 
or preferable, irrespective of the draw- 
backs of married life, and taking it even 
at the best.—rév λόγον thus will mean: 
what you have said, the suggestion that 
the unmarried condition is preferable.— 
χωροῦσι = capere, receive, intellectually 
and morally, for in such a case the two 
are inseparable. No man can understand 
as a matter of theory the preferableness 
of celibacy under certain circumstances, 
unless he be capable morally of appre- 
ciating the force of the circumstances.— 
ἀλλ” ols δέδοται: this phrase points 
chiefly to the n.oral capacity. It is not 
a question of intelligence, nor of a 
merely natural power of continence, but 
of attaining to such a spiritual state that 
the reasons for remaining free from 
married ties shall prevail over all forces 
urging on to marriage. Jesus lifts the 
whole subject up out of the low region 
of mere personal taste, pleasure, or con- 
venience, into the high region of the 
Kingdom of God and its claims.—Ver. 
12 is an explanatory commentary on 


δέδοται.---εὐνοῦχος: keeper of the bed- 
chamber in an Oriental harem (from 
εὐνή, bed, and ἔχω), a jealous office, 
which could be entrusted only to such 
as were incapable of abusing their trust; 
hence one who has been emasculated. 
Jesus distinguishes three sorts, two 
physical and one ethical; (1) those born 
with a defect (ἐγεννήθησαν οὕτως) ; (2) 
those made such by art (εὐνουχίσθησαν 
ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων); (3) those who 
make themselves eunuchs (εὐνούχισαν 
ἑαυτοὺς).---διὰ τὴν β. τ. ο., for the King- 
dom of Heaven’s sake. This explains 
the motive and the nature of ethical 
eunuchism. Here, as in xv. 17, Jesus 
touches on a delicate subject to teach 
His disciples a very important lesson, 
viz,, that the claims of the Kingdom of 
God are paramount; that when necessary 
even the powerful impulses leading to 
marriage must be resisted out of regard 
to them.—é Suvdpevos χωρεῖν χωρείτω: 
by this final word Jesus recognises the 
severity of the demand as going beyond 
the capacity of all but a select number. 
We may take it also as an appeal to the 
spiritual intelligence of His followers = 
see that ye do not misconceive my mean- 
ing. Is not monasticism, based on vows 
of life-long celibacy, a vast baleful mis- 
conception, turning a military requirement 
to subordinate personal to imperial in- 
terests, as occasion demands, into an 
elaborate ascetic system ? 

Vv. 13-15. Children brought for a 
blessing (Mk. x. 13-16; Lk. xviii. 15-17). 
—Ver. 13. τότε: if the order of the 
narrative reflect the order of events, 
this invasion by the children was a 
happy coincidence after those words 
about the sacred and indissoluble tie of 


248 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIX. 


, ~ ~ ~ 
jfor const. πρός µε]: τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν odpavav.” 


cf. 1 Cor. 
ili, 21; Vi- 
19. 

k here and 
in ver. 29 
and parall. 

h. x 


ἀγαθὸν ποιήσω, ἵνα ἔχω 5 Σζωὴν * αἰώνιον ;” 


15. Καὶ ἐπιθεὶς αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας,” ἐπορεύθη ἐκεῖθεν. 
16. ΚΑΙ ἰδού, eis προσελθὼν εἶπεν αὐτῷ,” “Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ,ξ τί 


17. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 


46. Lk. x. 25 for the summum bonum in Synop. Gospels. 


1pein BCD; εµε in NLA. 


2 NQBDLA place avrots after χειρας (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 NB have αντω ειπεν. 


4 NBDL Orig. Hil. omit αγαθε, which probably comes in from the parall., to which, 
indeed, Mt.’s version has been assimilated throughout (ver. 17) in T.R. 


5 σχω in BD Orig. (W.H.). 


marriage and the duty of subordinating 
even it to the claims of the kingdom. 
---προσηνέχθησαν, passive, by whom 
brought not said, the point of the story 
being how Jesus treated the children.— 
ἵνα τ. x. ἐπιθῇ, that he may lay His 
hands on them: the action being con- 
ceived of as present (Klotz ad Devar, 
Ρ. 61ὲ).--καὶ προσεύξηται: the imposi- 
tion of hands was a symbol of prayer 
and blessing, possibly in the minds of 
those who brought the children it was 
also a protection from evil spirits (Orig.). 
--“ἐπετίμησαν αὐτοῖς: the αὐτοῖς ought 
in strict grammar to mean the children, 
but it doubtless refers to those who 
brought them. The action of the dis- 
ciples was not necessarily mere officious- 
ness. It may have been a Galilean 
incident, mothers in large numbers 
bringing their little ones to get a parting 
blessing from the good, wise man who 
is leaving their country, unceremoniously 
crowding around Him, affectionately 
mobbing Him in a way that seemed to 
call for interference. This act of the 
mothers of Galilee revealed how much 
they thought of Jesus.—Ver. 14. ἄφετε, 
μὴ κωλύετε: visits of the children never 
unseasonable; Jesus ever delighted to 
look on the living emblems of the true 
citizen of the Kingdom of God; pleased 
with them for what they were naturally, 
and for what they βἱρπ]Πεά.---τοιούτων, 
of such, 7.¢., the child-like; repetition 
of an old lesson (xviii. 3).—Ver. 15. 
ἐπορεύθη ἐκεῖθεν; He departed thence, 
no indication whence or whither. The 
results of this meeting are conceivable. 
Christians may have come out of that 
company. Mothers would not forget 
Him who blessed their children on the 
way to His cross, or fail to speak of the 
event to them when they were older. 
Vv. 16-22.—A man in quest of the 
““summum bonum” (Mk. κ. 17-22; Lk. 
xviii. 18-23). A phenomenon as welcome 


to Jesus as the visit of the mothers with 
their children: a man not belonging to 
the class of self-satisfied religionists of 
whom He had had ample experience; 
with moral ingenuousness, an open 
mind, and a good, honest heart; a mal- 
content probably with the teaching and 
practice of the Rabbis and scribes coming 
to the anti-Rabbinical Teacher in hope 
of hearing from Him something more 
satisfying. The main interest of the 
story for us lies in the revelation it 
makes of Christ’s method of dealing 
with inquirers, and in the subsequent 
conversation with the disciples. 

Ver. 16. ἰδού, lo! introduces a story 
worth telling.—efs: one, singled out 
from the crowd by his approach towards 
Jesus, and, as the narrative shows, by 
his spiritual οκίαΐε.--Διδάσκαλε: this 
reading, which omits the epithet ayaée, 
doubtless gives us the true text of Mt., 
but in all probability not the exact terms 
in which the man addressed Jesus. Such 
a man was likely to accost Jesus 
courteously as ‘‘good Master,” as Mk. 
and Lk. both report. The omission of 
the epithet eliminates from the story the 
basis for a very important and charac- 
teristic element in Christ’s dealing with 
this inquirer contained in the question: 
‘‘Why callest thou me good?” which 
means not ‘‘the epithet is not applicable 
to me, but to God only,” but “do not 
make ascriptions of goodness a matter of 
mere courtesy or politeness”. The case 
is parallel to the unwillingness of Jesus 
to be called Christ indiscriminately. He 
wished no man to give Him any title of 
honour till he knew what he was doing. 
He wished this man in particular to think 
carefully on what is good, and who, all 
the more that there were competing 
types of goodness to choose from, that 
of the Pharisees, and that exhibited in 
His own teaching.—tl ἀγαθὸν ποιήσω. 
the ἀγαθὸν is omitted in the parallels, 


a 5—20, 


“Ti µε λέγεις ἀγαθόν; οὐδεὶς dyads, εἰ μὴ εἷς, ὁ Θεός.ὶ 
θέλεις εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν ζωήν," !' τήρησον ὃ τὰς ἐντολάς. 


A , a? c 
αὐτῷ, “em Ποίας; O Se 


porxevcets* οὗ κλέψεις' οὐ eudopaptupyaets - 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


249 


ei δὲ 
18. ΛέγειΙ Ch, xxiii. 


2 3; XXVili. 


*Ingods εἶπε, “Td, οὐ φονεύσεις’ ου 20(insense 


5 ,  ofobserve). 
IQ. τιµα τονπι ee xxil. 


πατέρα cout καὶ τὴν pytépa* καί, ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς 


. 5 
σεαυτογ. 


20. Λέγει αὐτῷ 6 νεανίσκος, '' Πάντα ταῦτα ὃ ἐφυλαξά- 


1 For the clause ‘re µε λεγεις . . . θεος in T. Κ., BDL, many verss. (including 
Syr. Cur. and Sin.) Orig. read τι µε ερωτας περι του αγαθον; εἰς εστιν ο αγαθος, 


which the R. V. and most modern editors adopt. 


probably responsible for the T. R. 
2 SSBCDL place euoedOer after ζωην. 
Στηρει in BD. 


but it is implied; of course it was some- 
thing good that would have to be done 
in order to obtain eternal life. What 
good shallJ do? Fritzsche takes this as 
not = quid boni faciam? but = quid, 
quod bonum sit, faciam? that is, not = 
what particular good action shall, etc., 
but = what in the name of good, etc. 
This is probably right. The man wants 
to know what the good really is. . 

that by doing it he may attain eternal 
life. It was a natural question for a 
thoughtful man in those days when the 
teaching and practice of the religious 
guides made it the hardest thing possible 
to know what the good really was. Itis 
a mistake to conceive of this man as 
asking what specially good thing he 
might do in the spirit of the type of 
Pharisee who was always asking, What is 
my duty and I will do it? (Schdottgen). 
Would Jesus have loved such a man, or 
would such a man have left His presence 


sorrowful ὃ---ζωὴν αἰώνιον: an alternative 


name for the summum bonum in Christ’s 
teaching, and also in current Jewish 
speech (Wiinsche, Beitrdge). The King- 
dom of God is the more common in the 
Synoptics, the other in the fourth Gospel. 
—Ver.17. ‘ti µε ἐρωτάς, etc. : it seems 
as if Jesus thought the question super- 
fluous (so Weiss and Meyer), but this 
was only a teacher’s way of leading on 
a pupil = ‘‘of course there is only one 
answer to that: God is the one good 
being, and His revealed will shows us 
the good He would have us do”. A 
familiar old truth, yet new as Christ 
meant it. How opposed to current 
teaching we know from Mt. xv. 4-9.— 
εἰ δὲ θέλεις, etc., but, to answer your 
question directly, 15, εἰο.----τήρ-ει (-ησον) 
τ. év.; a vaguer direction then than it 
seems to us now. We now think only 


“N8BCD omit σον. 


Harmonistic assimilation is 


5 παντα παντα in BD. 


of the Ten Words. Then there were 
many commands of God besides these; 
and many more still of the scribes, 
hence most naturally the following ques- 
tion.—Ver. 18. molas; not =Tivas 
(Grotius), but what sort of commands: 
out of the multitude of commands divine 
and human, which do you mean? He 
had a shrewd guess doubtless, but 
wanted to be sure. Christ’s reply 
follows in this and subsequent verse, 
quoting in direct form prefaced with τό 
the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and 
fifth commands of the Decalogue with 
that to love a neighbour as ourselves 
from Lev. xix. 18. This last Origen τε- 
garded as an interpolation, and Weiss 
thinks that the evangelist has introduced 
it from xxii. 39 as one that could not be 
left out. Ifit be omitted the list ends with 
the fifth, a significantly emphatic position, 
reminding us of Mt. xv. 4, and giving to 
the whole list an antithetic reference to 
the teaching of the scribes. In sending 
the inquirer to the second table of the 
Decalogue as the sum of duty, Jesus 
gave an instruction anything but common- 
place, though it seem so tous. He was 
proclaiming the supremacy of the 
ethical, a most important second lesson 
for the inquirer, the first being the 
necessity of using moral epithets care- 
fully and sincerely. From the answer 
given to this second lesson it will appear 
whereabouts the inquirer is, a point 
Jesus desired to ascertain. 

Vv. 20-22, 6 νεανίσκος, the youth; 
whence known ? from a special tradition 
(Meyer) ; an inference from the expression 
ἐκ νεότητός µου in Mk. x. 20 (Weiss).— 
ἐφύλαξα (-άμην). Kypke and Elsner take 
pains to show that the use of this verb 
(and of τηρεῖν, ver. 17) in the sense of 
obeying commands is good Greek. More 


250 


µην ἐκ νεότητός µου1: τί ἔτι ὑστερῶ; 


nvids Ch. v. “Ei θέλεις ™tédevos εἶναι, 


48. él 
oCh. xili.44. καὶ δὸς πτωχοῖς 
p Ch. iv. 19; 2 pe 
xi. 28 (pl. ἀκολούθει prot. 
form 
δεῦτε). 


23. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, 


q here and ο 


KATA MATOAION 


XIX. 


21. Ἔφη αὐτῷ ὁ Ιησοῦς, 
ὕπαγε, "πώλησόν σου τὰ ὑπάρχοντα, 


καὶ ἕξεις θησαυρὸν ἐν οὐρανῷ 2: καὶ ” δεῦρο, 
22. ᾽Ακούσας δὲ ὁ νεανίσκος τὸν λόγον, ἀπῆλθε 
λυπούμενος: ἦν γὰρ ἔχων κτήµατα ” πολλά. 


Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 


in ρατα]]. ὅτι  δυσκόλως πλούσιος δ εἰσελεύσεται eis τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν 


1 For εφυλαξαμην εκ νεοτητος pov (from the parall.) 9 ΒΙ; have simply εφυλαξα. 


2 ev ουρανοις in BCD. 


3 τον λογον (as in T. R.) in CD; τον λογον τουτον in B (W.H. in brackets). 
* B has xpypara, which even W.H. have disregarded. 


5 rhovc.os δυσκολως in SBCDLZ 33. 


important is it to note the declaration 
the verb contains: all these I have kept 
from youth. To be taken as a simple 
fact, not stated in a self-righteous spirit 
(Weiss-Meyer), rather sadly as by one 
conscious that he has not thereby reached 
the desired goal, real rest in the highest 
good found. The exemplary life plus 
the dissatisfaction meant much: that he 
was not a morally commonplace man, 
but one with affinities for the noble and 
the heroic. No wonder Jesus felt in- 
terested in him, “‘ loved him ” (Mk. x. 21), 
and tried to win him completely. It may 
be assumed that the man appreciated 
the supreme importance of the ethical, 
and was not in sympathy with the 
tendency of the scribes to subordinate 
the moral to the ritual, the commands of 
God to the traditions of the elders.— 
τί ἔτι ὑστερῶ: the question interesting 
first of all as revealing a felt want: a 
good symptom ; next as betraying per- 
plexity = I am on the right road, accord- 
ing to your teaching ; why then do I not 
attain the rest of the true godly life? 
The question, not in Mk., is implied in 
the tone of the previous statement, 
whether uttered or not.—Ver. 21. «4 
θέλες τέλειος εἶναι (on τέλειος vide ν. 
48): if you wish to reach your end, the 
true life and the rest it brings.—tmaye, 
etc.: go, sell off, distribute to the poor, 
and then come, follow me—such is the 
advice Christ gives: His final lesson for 
this inquirer. It is a subjective counsel 
relative to the individual. Jesus sees he 
is well-to-do, and divines where the evil 
lies. Itis doubtful if he cares passionately, 
supremely for the true life; doubtful if 
he be τέλειος in the sense of single- 
mindedness. It is not a question of one 
more thing to do, but of the state of the 
heart, which the suggestion to sell off 


will test. The invitation to become 2 
disciple is seriously meant. Jesus, who 
repelled some offering themselves, thinks 
so well of this man as to desire him fora 
disciple. He makes the proposal hope- 
fully. Why should so noble a man not 
be equal to the sacrifice? He makes it 
with the firm belief that in no other way 
can this man become happy. Noblesse 
oblige. The nobler the man, the more 
imperative that the heroic element in 
him have full scope. A potential apostle, 
a possible Paul even, cannot be happy as 
a mere wealthy merchant or landowner. 
It is “a counsel of perfection,’’ but not 
in the ascetic sense, as if poverty were 
the sure way to the higher Christian 
life ; rather in the sense of the adage : of 
him to whom much is given shall much 
be required—Ver. 22. ἀπῆλθεν: he 
would have to go away in any case, even 
if he meant to comply with the advice in 
order to. carry it into effect. But he 
went away λυπούμενος, in genuine dis- 
tress, because placed in a dilemma 
between parting with wealth and social 
position, and forfeiting the joy of dis- 
ciplehood under an admired Master. 
What was the final issue? Did “the 
thorns of avarice defile the rich soil of 
his soul”’ (Euthy.), and render him per- 
manently unfruitful, or did he at last 
decide for the disciple life? At the 
worst see here the miscarriage ofa really 
noble nature, and take care not to fall 
into the vulgar mistake of seeing in this 
man a Pharisee who came to tempt 
Jesus, and who in professing to have 
kept the commandments was simply a 
boastful liar. (So Jerome: ‘‘ Non voto 
discentis sed tentantis interrogat . . « 
mentitur adolescens ”’.) 

Vv. 23-27. Conversation ensuing (Mk. 
x. 23-27; Lk. xviii. 24-27)—Ver. 23- 


21—27. 


οὐρανῶν. 


τρυπήµατος1 ῥαφίδος διελθεῖν,; ἢ πλούσιον eis τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ 
25. ᾿Ακούσαντες δὲ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὃ ἐξεπλήσ- 


Θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν.' 


σοντο σφόδρα, λέγοντες, “Tis dpa δύναται σωθῆναι; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


257 


- 


24. πάλιν δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, εὐκοπώτερόν ἐστι " κάµηλον διὰ τ Ch. iii. 4 


xxiii. 24. 


26. ᾿Ἐμβλέ- 


as δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “*NMapad ἀνθρώποις τοῦτο ἀδύνατόν 


ἐστι, ' παρὰ δὲ Θεῴ πάντα δυνατά ἐστι. 4 
27. Τότε ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος εἶπεν αὐτῷ, '΄ Ιδού, ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν 


1 τρηµατος in SB. 


5 Rom. ii. 13 
(Gen. xviii. 
14). 


2 The majority of uncials have εισελθειν (‘Tisch.), but BDX have διελθειν as in Τ. R. 
This reading requires εισελθειν in the next clause (so in BD). 


3 avrov wanting in NBCDLZA. 
4 εστι is omitted in BCA al. 


Though found in parali. (Lk.), from which it has 


probably been imported, the sentence is more impressive without it. 


ἀμὴν, introduces as usual a solemn utter- 
ance.—rAovotos: the rich man is brought 
on the stage, not as an object of envy or 
admiration, which he is to the worldly- 
minded, but as an object of commiseration. 
—8voxddws εἰσελεύσεται, etc.: because 
with difficulty shall he enter the Kingdom 
of Heaven. This is stated as a matter of 
observation, not without sympathy, and 
not with any intention to pronounce 
dogmatically on the case of the inquirer 
who had just departed, as if he were an 
absolutely lost soul. His case suggested 
the topic of wealth as a hindrance in the 
divine life—Svoxédws: the adjective 
δύσκολος means difficult to please as to 
food (Sus, κόλον), hence morose; here 
used of things, occurs only in this saying 
in N. T.—Ver. 24. πάλιν δὲ λέγω: τε- 
iteration with greater emphasis. The 
strong language of Jesus here reveals a 
keen sense of disappointment at the loss 
ofso promising a man to the ranks of 
disciplehood. He sees so clearly what 
he might be, were it not for that miserable 
ΠΠΟΠΕΥ.---εὐκοπώτερον, etc. : a comparison 
to express the idea of the impossible. 
The figure of a camel going through a 
needle-eye savours of Eastern exaggera- 
tion. It has been remarked that the 
variation in the parallel accounts in 
respect to the words for a needle and its 
eye shows that no corresponding proverb 
existed in the Greek tongue (Camb. 
G. T.). The figure is to be taken as it 
stands, and not to be “civilised” (vide 
H.C.) by taking κάµηλος (or κάµιλος, 
Suidas) = a cable, or the wicket of an 
Oriental house. It may be more legiti- 
mate to try to explain how so grotesque 
a figure could become current even in 
Palestine. Furrer suggests a camel 
driver leaning against his camel and 


trying to put a coarse thread through 
the eye of a needle with which he sews 
his sacks, and, failing, saying with 
comical exaggeration: I might put the 
camel through the eye easier than this 
thread (Tscht., fir M. und Ἐ.).--τρήµατος 
from τιτράω, to pierce.—fadisos, a 
word disapproved by Phryn., who gives 
βελόνη as the correct term. But vide 
Lobeck’s note, p. go. It is noticeable 
that Christ’s tone is much more severe 
in reference to wealth than to wedlock. 
Eunuchism for the kingdom is optional ; 
possession of wealth on the other hand 
seems to be viewed as all but incom- 
patible with citizenship in the kingdom. 

Ver. 25. ἐξεπλήσσοντο σφόδρα : the 
severity of the Master’s doctrine on 
wealth as on divorce (ver. 12) was more 
than the disciples could bear. It took 
their breath away, so to speak.—tis 
ἄρα, etc. : it seemed to them to raise the 
question as to the possibility of salva- 
tion generally. The question may re- 
present the cumulative effect of the 
austere teaching of the Master since the 
day of Caesarea. The imperfect tense of 
ἐξεπλήσσοντο may point to a continuous 
mood, culminating at that moment.—Ver. 
26. ἐμβλέψας denotes a look of observa- 
tion and sympathy. Jesussees that He has 
made too deep an impression, depressing 
in effect, and hastens to qualify what He 
had said: ‘with mild, meek eye sooth- 
ing their scared mind, and relieving their 
distress ” (Chrys., Hom. Ixiii.).—wapa 
ἀνθρώποις, etc.: practically this re- 
flection amounted to saying that the 
previous remark was to be taken cum 
grano, as referring to tendency rather 
than to fact. He did not mean that it 
was as impossible for a rich man to be 
saved as for a camel to pass through a 


252 


πάντα, καὶ ἠκολουθήσαμέν σοι: τί dpa ἔσται ἡμῖν; 
,᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὑμεῖς ot ἀκολουθήσαντές 


> a 


"Ingods εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XIX. 28—3o. 


28. Ὁ δὲ 


t Titusiii.s. por, ἐν τῇ "παλιγγενεσίᾳ, ὅταν καθίσῃ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ 
θρόνου δόξης αὐτοῦ, καθίσεσθε καὶ ὑμεῖςὶ ἐπὶ δώδεκα θρόνους, 


uLk. xxii. "κρίνοντες τὰς δώδεκα φυλὰς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. 


8ο. 1 Cor. 
vi. 2, 3. 


29. Kal πᾶς os? 


ἀφῆκεν oixias, ἢ ἀδελφούς, ἢ ἀδελφάς, ἢ πατέρα, ἢ pytépa, ἢ 


vLk.xxi.12. yuvatka,® ἢ τέκνα, ἢ ἀγρούς, Ἰ ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός µου,’ ἑκατοντα- 


πλασίονα ὅ λήψεται, καὶ ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσει. 


30. πολλοὶ 


δὲ ἔσονται πρῶτοι ἔσχατοι, καὶ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι. 


TNQDLZ have και αυτοι (Tisch.), και υΌμεις in BCX, which Weiss thinks 


a mechanical conformation to υμεις in first clause. 


brackets. 
2 sorts in most uncials, 
«του εµου ονοµατος in NB. 


needle-eye, but that the tendency of 
wealth was to act powerfully as an ob- 
structive to the spiritual life. 

Vv. 27-30. A reaction (Mk. x. 28-31; 
Lk. xviii. 28-30).—Ver. 27. εἶπεν δὲ Π.: 
from depression the disciples, repre- 
sented by Peter, pass to self-complacent 
buoyancy—their natural mood.—idod 
points to a fact deserving special notice 
in view of the recent Ιποίάεητ.---ἡμεῖς, 
we, have done what that man failed to 
do: left all and followed Thee.—ri dpa, 
etc.: a question not given in Mk. and 
Lk., but implied in Peter’s remark and 
the tone in which it was uttered: what 
shall be to us by way of recompense ? 
Surely we shall attain what seems so 
hard for some to reach.—Ver. 28. ἀμὴν: 
introducing a solemn statement.—wpeis 
οἱ ἀκ.: not a nominative absolute 
(Palairet, Observ.), but being far from 
the verb, tpets is repeated (with καὶ) 
after καθίσεσθε.- ἐν τ. παλινγενεσίᾳ to 
be connected with καθίσεσθε following. 
This is a new word in the Gospel vocabu- 
lary, and points to the general renewal 
—‘‘re-genesis (nova erit genesis cui 
praeerit Adamus ii., Beng.)’’—in the end 
of the days, which occupied a prominent 
place in Jewish apocalyptic hopes. The 
colouring in this verse is so strongly 
apocalyptic as to have suggested the 
hypothesis of interpolation (Weizsacker), 
or of a Jewish-Christian source (Hilgen- 
feld). It is not in the parallels, but 
something similar occurs in Lk. xxii. 30. 
Commentators translate this promise, so 
strongly Jewish in form, into Christian 
ideas, according to their taste, reading 
into it what was not there for the 
disciples when it was spoken.—Ver. 29. 
General promise for all faithful ones.— 


W.H. retain νυµεις, but in 


Σ BD omit η yuvatxa—a most probable omission. 
ὁπολλαπλασιονα in BL. 


ἀδελφούς, etc.: detailed specification of 
the things renounced for Christ.—zoA\a- 
πλασίονα λήψεται: shall receive mani- 
foldly the things renounced, {.ε., in the 
final order of things, in the new-born 
world, as nothing is said to the con- 
trary. Mk. and Lk. make the com- 
pensation ῥγεσεπέ.---καὶ ζωην αἰώνιον : 
this higher boon, the summum bonum, 
over and above the compensation in 
kind. Here the latter comes first; in 
chap. vi. 33 the order is reversed.—Ver. 
30. πολλοὶ δὲ ἔσονται, etc., but many 
first ones shall be last, and last ones 
first. Fritzsche reverses the meaning = 
many being last shall be first, so making 
it accord with xx. 16. The words are so 
arranged as to suggest taking πρῶτ. ἔσχ. 
and ἔσχ. πρῶτ. as composite ideas, arid 
rendering: many shall be first-lasts, and 
last-firsts = there shall be many reversals 
of position both ways. This aphorism 
admits of many applications. There are 
not only many instances under the same 
category but many categories: ¢.g., first 
in this world, last in the Kingdom of 
God (e.g., the wealthy inquirer and the 
Twelve) ; first in time, last in power and 
fame (the Twelve and Paul); first in 
privilege, last in Christian faith (Jews 
and Gentiles); first in seal and self- 
sacrifice, last in quality of service through 
vitiating influence of low motive (legal 
and evangelic piety). The aphorism is 
adapted to frequent use in various con- 
nections, and may have been uttered on 
different occasions by Jesus (cf, Lk. xiii. 
30: Jew and Gentile), and the sphere of 
its application can only be determined 
by the context. Here itis the last of 
those above indicated, not the first, as 
Weiss holds, also Holtzmann (H. Ο.), 


KX. τ —6. 


τὸν ἀμπελῶνα αὐτοῦ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 2533 
XX. 1. Ὁμοία γάρ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλ-΄α τῶν οὗὖρανῶν ἀνθρώπω 
οἰκοδεσπότῃ, ὅστις ἐξῆλθεν ἅμα πρωὶ µισθώσασθαι ἐργάτας eis 
2. συµφωνήσας δὲ μετὰ τῶν ἐργατῶν "ἐκα Cf. oe 
ΧΧΝΙ. 7. 
"δηναρίου τὴν ἡμέραν, ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς eis τὸν ἀμπελῶνα αὐτοῦ. Lk. xvi. 9 
cts 1.1 


3. Καὶ ἐξελθὼν περὶ τὴν] τρίτην ὥραν, εἶδεν ἄλλους ἑστῶτας évb Ch. xxvii. 


τῇ ἀγορᾷ "ἀργούς: 4. κἀκείνοις ” εἶπεν, Ὑπάγετε καὶ ὑμεῖς eis τὸν 
ἀμπελῶνα, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν ᾖ δίκαιο δώσω ὑμῖν. 
5. Πάλιν ὃ ἐξελθὼν περὶ ἕκτην καὶ ἐννάτην ὥραν ἐποίησεν ὡσαύτως. 


46. Acts 
X. 0. 

c Ch. xii. 36. 
1 Tim. ν. 
13. Titus 
i, 14. 


ot δὲ ἀπῆλθον. 


6. Περὶ δὲ τὴν ἑνδεκάτην ὥραν  ἐξελθών, εὗρεν ἄλλους ἑστῶτας 


ἀργούς,ὃ καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, Τί ὧδε ἑστήκατε " ὅλην τὴν ἡμέραν ἀργοί ; 


d Rom. viii. 
36; x. 21. 


1 την (T. R.), found in A, is omitted in BCD. 
390 in CDLZ; και εκεινοις in NB and many others. 


3 Se after παλιν in NCDL 33. 
4 S8BDL omit wpav (Tisch., W.H.). 


though admitting that there may be 
reference also to the self-complacent 
mood of Peter. The δὲ after πολλοὶ 
implies that this is the reference. It 
does not introduce a new subject, but a 
contrasted view of the same subject. 
The connection of thought is: self- 
sacrifice such as yours, Peter, has a 
great reward, but beware of self-com- 
placency, which may so vitiate the 
quality of service as to make one first in 
sacrifice last in the esteem of God. 

CHAPTER XX. PARABLE OF THE 
Hours; Two Sons oF ZEBEDEE ; 
BuIND MAN AT JERICHO. 

Vv. 1-16. Parable of the hours, peculiar 
to Mt., and, whatever its real connection 
as spoken by Jesus, to be interpreted 
in relation to its setting as here 
given, which is not impossible. The 
parable is brought in as illustrating the 
aphorism in xix. 30.—Ver. 1. ὁμοία 
yap etc.: yap points back to previous 
sentence about first-lasts and last-firsts. 
---ἀνθ. oikod. : vide xiii. 52.- dpa πρωϊ: at 
early dawn (similar use of ἅμα in classics), 
at the beginning of the day, which was 
reckoned from six to δἱχ.---μισθώσασθαι : 
hiring has a prominent place in this 
parable, at the first, third, sixth, ninth, 
eleventh hour. Whyso many servants 
wanted that day? This feature obtains 
natural probability by conceiving that it 
is the season of grape-gathering, which 
must be done at the proper time and 
promptly; the more hands the better 
(Koetsveld, De Gelijk.).—Ver. 2. ἐκ 
δηναρίον: on the basis of a penny; the 
agreement sprang out of the offer, and 
acceptance, of a denarius as a day’s wage 


BX omit δε (W.H. in brackets). 


5 SSBDL omit αργους (Tisch., W.H.). 


(so Meyer, Weiss, etc.).— Tv ἡμέραν = per 
diem, only a single day is contemplated 
in the parable.—Ver.3. tpirny &.: the 
article τὴν before τρίτην in T. R., omitted 
in W. H., is not necessary before an 
οτάϊπα].---ἑστῶτας ἐ. τ. Gy.: the market- 
place there as here, the place where 
masters and men met.—apyots (a and 
ἔργον), not = idle in habit, but unem- 
ployed and looking for work.—Ver. 4. 
καὶ ἡμεῖς: he had got a fair number of 
workers in the morning, but he is pleased 
to have more for an urgent piece of 
work. The expression has reference to 
the Master’s mood rather than to the 
men’s knowledge of what had taken 
place at the first hour.—6 ἐὰν δίκαιον : 
no bargain this time, only a promise of 
fair equitable dealing, will be just at 
least, give in proportion to length of 
service; privately intends to do more, or 
at least is that way inclined.—Ver. 5. 
ἐποίησεν ὡσαύτως: repetition of the 
action at sixth and ninth hours; more 
men still on similar footing.—Ver. 6. 
περὶ δὲ τὴν évSex.: the δὲ marks this 
final procedure as noteworthy. We 
begin to wonder at all this hiring, when 
we see it going on even at the last hour. 
Is the master a humorist hiring out of 
benevolence rather than from regard to 
the exigencies of the work? Some have 
thought so (Olshausen, Goebel, Koets- 
veld), and there seems good ground for 
the suggestion, though even this un- 
usual procedure may be made to appear 
probable by conceiving the master as 
anxious to finish the work on hand that 
day, in which case even an hour’s work 
from a sufficient number of willing hands 


254 


¢ Lk. viii. 3.7. λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, Ὅτι οὐδεὶς ἡμᾶς ἐμισθώσατο. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧ. 


λέγει αὗτοῖς, 


«ΓΚ. xxiii. 5; Ὑπάγετε καὶ ὑμεῖς εἰς τὸν ἀμπελῶνα, καὶ ὃ ἐὰν ᾖ δίκαιον λήψεσθε.! 


Gal. iv. 2. 
XXIV. 27, 
47. 


ry οἷο Μο όυα 
g Lk. ix. 3; αὔτου, 
Χ.1. John 
ii, 6. Rev, PEVOS 
iv. 8; xxi. 
21. 
b Lk. v. 30 a 


σοι α A 3 ra A , 
ἀπὸ τῶν ἐσχάτων ἕως τῶν πρώτων. 
τὴν ἑνδεκάτην ὥραν ἔλαβον © ava 5 δηνάριον. 


Acts 8. ᾿Οψίας δὲ γενομένης λέγει ὁ κύριος τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος τῷ ° ἐπιτρόπῳ 
Κάλεσον τοὺς ἐργάτας, καὶ ἀπόδος αὐτοῖς 3 τὸν µισθόν, * ἀρξά- 


ϱ. καὶ ἐλθόντες ὃ of περὶ 
10. ἐλθόντες δὲ οἱ 


(πρός τινα). πρῶτοι ἐνόμισαν ὅτι πλείονα ὃ λήψονται: καὶ ἔλαβον καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀνὰ 


ohn vi. , 
i 6x (περί δη νάριον.6 
τινος); 
43 (µετ 
ἀλλήλων). » 

τ σος XK. 
10 (absol.). 

i Acts xv. 33- 


2 Cor xi. 25. James iv. 13. 


1 The words και ο εαν . . 
WBDLZ. 


II. λαβόντες δὲ " ἐγόγγυζον κατὰ τοῦ οἰκοδεσπότου, 
“i yo, λέγοντε, “Ore? οὗτοι of ἔσχατοι play Spay ! ἐποίησαν, καὶ 
ἴσους ἡμῖν αὐτοὺς ὃ ἐποίησας, τοῖς βαστάσασι τὸ βάρος τῆς ἡμέρας 


.ληψεσθε come in from ver. 4, and are wanting in 


Σαντοις wanting in $CLZ, but found in BD and many other uncials (W.H. in 


margin). 


8 So in ΜΟΙ, and many other uncials ; ελθοντες δε in BD (W.H.). 


4 καν ελθοντες in BCD (W.H.). 
6 ava Syv. καὶ αντοι in KNBLZ. 


ὄπλειον in ΒΟΝ2Σ. 
7S8BD omit οτι. 


8 αυτους ηµιν in $DLZ. BCN asintext. W.H., former in text, latter in mar- 


gin. 


may be of value.—rt ὧδε ἑστήκατε, etc., 
why stand ye here (ἑστήκ., perfect 
active, neuter in sense, and used as a 
present) all the day idle? The question 
answers itself: no man would stand all 
the day in the market-place idle unless 
because he wanted work and could not 
get it—Ver. 7. ὑπάγετε καὶ ὑμεῖς: 
these words said this time with marked 
emphasis =you too go, though it be so late. 
This employer would probably be talked 
of among the workers as a man who had 
a hobby—a character; they might even 
laugh at his peculiar ways. The clause 
about payment in Τ. R. is obviously out 
of place in this case. The pay the last 
gang were entitled to was not worth 
speaking about. 

Vv. 8-12. The evening settlement.— 
Ver. 8. ἀρξάμενος: a pregnant word, 
including not only the commencement of 
the process of paying but its progress. 
There is an ellipsis, καὶ ἐλθὼν being 
understood before €ws (Kypke). Grotius 
thinks this does not really mean 
beginning with the last comers, but 
without regard to order of coming in, 
so that no one should be overlooked. 
He fails to see that the idiosyncrasy of 
the master is a leading point, indeed the 
key to the meaning of the parable. This 
beginning with the last is an eccentricity 
from an ordinary everyday-life point of 


view. The master chooses to do so: 
to begin with those who have no 
claims.—Ver. 9. ἀνὰ δηνάριον, a denarius 
each; ava is distributive = “ accipiebant 
singulidenar.”. For this use of ava vide 
Herrmann’s Viger, p. 576.—Ver. 10. oi 
πρῶτοι: the intermediates passed over, 
as non-essential to the didactic purpose, 
we arrive at the first, the men hired on 
a regular bargain in the morning.— 
ἐνόμισαν: they had noticed the paying 
of the last first, and had curiously 
watched to see or hear what they got, 
and they come with great expectations: 
twelve hours’ work, therefore twelve times 
the sum given to the one-hour men.—xai 
αὐτοί: surprising! only a penny | What 
a strange, eccentric master! He had 
seen expectation in their faces, and 
anticipated with amusement their chagrin. 
The money was paid by the over- 
seer, but he was standing by enjoying 
the scene.—Ver. 11. ἐγόγγυζον: im- 
perfect; the grumbling went on from 
man to man as they were being paid; to 
the overseer, but at (κατὰ) the master, 
and so that he could overhear.—Ver. 12, 
Their grievous complaint.—etrat, these, 
with a workman’s contempt for a sham- 
worker.—éroincay. Some (Wetstein, 
Meyer, Goebel, etc.) render, spent = 
they put in their one hour: without 
doing any work to speak of, The verb 


97—16. 


καὶ Tov? καύσωνα. 
οὐκ 


καὶ ὕπαγε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ἀδικῶ σε: οὐχὶ δηναρίου συνεφώνησάς por; 


255 


13. ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν ἑνὶ αὐτῶν, Ἑταῖρε, j Lk. xii.55 


2 jas. i. αχ. 
14. dpov τὸ σὸν 


θέλω Se} τούτῳ τῷ ἐσχάτῳ δοῦναι ds καὶ σοί" 


15. 47 οὐκ ἔξεστί por ποιῆσαι ὃ θέλω» ἐν τοῖς ἐμοῖς; εἰ" ὁ 


ὀφθαλμός σου πονηρός ἐστιν, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἀγαθός εἰμι ; 


16. 


οὕτως 


»” ε a a ε lal »” 9 
ἔσονται οἱ ETXATOL πρῶτοι, καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι έσχατοι’ πολλοὶ γάρ 


..”. 
εἶσι κλητοί, ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί.’ ὅ 


1 θελω εγω in B (W.H. in margin). 


? BDLZ omit q. 


* 9 θελω ποιησαι in $$BDLZ, so giving to ο θελω due emphasis (Tisch., W.H.). 


«η in ΝΒΟΡΝΣ (Tisch., W.H.). 


"πολλοι γαρ . . . εκλεκτοι wanting in $BLZ; brought in from chap. xxii. 14. 


is used in this sense (e.g., Acts xv. 33), 
and one is strongly tempted to adopt 
this rendering as true to the con- 
temptuous feeling of the twelve-hour men 
for the one-hour men. Kypke remarks 
against it that if ἐποίησαν had been 
meant in this sense = ‘‘ commorati sunt,” 
the word ὧδε = ἐν τῷ ἀμπελῶνι would 
have been added. Perhaps the strongest 
reason against it is that the one-hour 
men had worked with such good will 
(that goes without saying) that even pre- 
judiced fellow-workers could not ignore 
the fact. So we must take ἐποίησαν = 
ννοτ]εἀ.----τὸ βάρος, τὸν καύσωνα: these 
the points of their case: not that they 
had worked hard while the others had 
not, but that they had borne the burden 
of a whole day’s work, and worked 
through the heat of the day, and now 
came to be paid, weary and sweat- 
stained. (Some take καύσωνα as re- 
ferring to the sirocco or south-east 
wind ; hot, dry and dust-laden. On the 
winds of Palestine, vide Benzinger, Heb. 
Arch., p. 30.) What was one hour in 
the late afternoon, however hard the last 
comers worked, to that! And yet they 
are made equal (icovs)! Surely good 
ground for complaint! 

Vv. 13-15. The master’s reply.—Ver. 
13. évi, toone of them. It would have 
been undignified to make a speech in 
self-defence to the whole gang. That 
would have been to take the matter too 
seriously, The master selects a man, 
and quietly speaks his mind to him.— 
éraipe, friend, comrade; familiar and 
kindly. Cf. Lk, xv. 31.—Ver. 14. Gpov 
τὸ σὺν, take thine, thy stipulated 
denarius. It looks as if this particular 
worker had refused the penny, or was 
saucily handing it back.—@éAw, I choose, 
it is my pleasure; emphatically spoken. 
Summa hijus verbi potestas, Beng.— 


τούτῳ τ. ἐσχ.: one of the eleventh-hour 
men singled out and pointed to.—Ver. 
15. οὐκ ἔξεστι: right asserted to act 
as he chooses in the matter.—év τοῖς 
ἐμοῖς, in matters within my own dis- 
cretion—a truism ; the question is: what 
belongs to that category? Fritzsche and 
De Wette render: in my own affairs; 
Meyer: in the matter of my own property. 
— (W.H.) introduces an alternative 
mode of putting the case, which explains 
how the complainants and the master see 
the matter so differently, they seeing in 
it an injustice, he a legitimate exercise of 
his discretion.—ovnpds, vide on vi. 22-24. 
--ἀγαθός, generous; doing more than 
justice demands. So Bengel. Cf. Rom. 
v. 7 for the distinction between δίκαιος 
and ἀγαθός. 

Ver. 16. Christ here points the moral 
of the parable = xix. 30, the terms 
ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι changing places, the 
better to suit the story. The meaning is 
not: the last as the first, and the first as 
the last, all treated alike. True, all get 
the same sum; at least the last and 
first do, nothing being said of those 
between ; but the point of the parable is 
not that the reward is thesame. The 
denarius given to all is not the central 
feature of the story, but the will of the 
master, whose character from a com- 
mercial point of view is distinctly 
eccentric, and is so represented to make 
it serve the didactic purpose. The 
method of this master is commercially 
unworkable ; combination of the two 
systems of legal contract and benevolence 
must lead to perpetual trouble. All 
must be dealt with on one footing. And 
that is what it will come to with a 
master of the type indicated. He will 
abolish contract, and engage all on the 
footing of generously rewarding generous 
service. The parable does not bring 


256 


KATA MATOAION 


XX.. 


17. ΚΑΙ ἀναβαίνων ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς] eis ἹἹεροσόλυμα παρέλαβε τοὺς 
δώδεκα μαθητὰς κατ’ ἰδίαν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, kal? εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 18. “Ιδού, 


ἀναβαίνομεν eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, καὶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδοθήσεται 


A ~ A ~ a 
τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι καὶ ypappaTevor’ καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτὸν θανάτω, 


A ~ an 
IQ. καὶ παραδώσουσιν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν eis τὸ ἐμπαῖξαι καὶ µασ- 


- 4 lal A ~ ΄ 
τιγῶσαι καὶ σταυρῶσαι: καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναστήσεται. 


20. Τότε προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ 


ἡ µήτηρ τῶν υἱῶν Ζεβεδαίου μετὰ TOY 


’ 1B begins this section thus: µελλων δε αναβαινειν |», which W.H. adopt and Tr. 
places on margin, Weiss approving, viewing the reading in T. R. as a reminiscence. 


of Mk. 


2 kat ev τη οδω in KBLZ (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 εις θανατον in δὲ (Tisch.). 


this out fully, as it gives the story only 
of a single day. It suggests rather than 
adequately illustrates its own moral, 
which is that God does not love a legal 
spirit. In the parable the men who 
worked on contract, and, as it came out 
at the end, in a legal temper, got their 
penny, but what awaits them in future is 
not to be employed at all. Work done 
in a legal spirit does not count in the 
Kingdom of God. Inreward it is last, or 
even nowhere. This is the trend of the 
parable, and so viewed it has a manifest 
cqnnection with Peter’s self-complacent 
question. On this parable wide my 
Parabolic Teaching of Christ. 

Vv. 17-19. Third prediction of the 
passion (Mk. x. 32-34; Lk, xviii. 31-34).— 
The first in xvi. 21 ; the second in xvii. 
22. Inthe first it was stated generally 
that Jesus was about πολλὰ παθεῖν. 
Here the πολλα are detailed. In the 
second mention was made of betrayal 
(παραδίδοται, xvii. 31) into the hands of 
men. Here the “men” resolve into 
priests, scribes, and Gentiles.—Ver. 17. 
ἀναβαίνων: going up from Peraea to the 
ridge on which the Holy City stood. 
The reading µέλλων avaB. may indicate 
that they are already on the west side of 
the Jordan, and about to commence the 
ascent (Weiss-Meyer).—els Ἱεροσόλυμα: 
face being now turned directly towards 
Jerusalem, thought naturally turnsto what 
is going to happen there.—xar’ ἰδίαν : 
there is a crowd of pilgrims going ti:e 
same way, so Jesus must take aside His 
disciples to speak on the solemn theme 
what is specially meant for their ear.— 
ἐν τῇ 680, in the way, vide Mk.’s 
description, which is very graphic.—Ver. 
18. ἰδού, ἀναβαίνομεν  α memorable 
fateful anabasis! It excites lively ex- 
pectation in the whole company, but 


B omits (W.H. θανατω within brackets). 


how different the thoughts of the Master 
from those of His followers ---κατα- 
κρινοῦσι, they shall sentence Him to 
death ; a new feature.—Ver. 19. ἐμπαῖξαι, 
μαστιγῶσαι, σταυρῶσαι, mock, scourge, 
crucify ; all new features, the details of 
the πολλὰ παθεῖν. Note the parts 
assigned to the various actors: the Jews 


condemn, the Gentiles scourge and 
crucify. 
Vv. 20-28. The two sons of Zebedee 


(Mk. x. 35-45).—Ver. 20. τότε (in Mk. 
the vaguer καὶ), then; let us hope not 
quite immediately after, but it need not 
have been long after. How soon children 
forget doleful news and return to their 
play; a beneficent provision of nature 
in their case, that grief should be but a 
summer shower. Or did James and 
John with their mother not hear the sad 
announcement, plotting perhaps when 
the Master was predicting ?—y µήτηρ: 
in Mk. the two brothers speak for them- 
selves, but this representation is true to 
life. Mothers can be very bold in their 
children’s interest.—alrotoa, begging ; 
the petitioner a woman and a near rela- 
tive, not easy to resist.—rt: vague; no 
verbal indication as yet what is wanted ; 
her attitude showed she had a request to 
make, the manner revealing that it is 
something important, and also perhaps 
that it is something that should not be 
asked.—Ver. 21. εἰπὲ ἵνα: vide on 
iv. 3.--καθίσωσιν, etc. = let them have 
the first places in the kingdom, sit- 
ting on Thy right and left hand re- 
spectively. After ἐκ δεξιῶν, ἐξ εὐωνύμων, 
μερῶν is understood = on the right and 
left parts. Vide Bos, Ellipses Graecae, 
p- 184, who cites an instance of the latter 
phrase from Diod. Sic. So this was all that 
came out of the discourse on child-like- 
ness! (xviii. 3 Π.). But Jesus had alsa: 


17—24. 


υἱῶν αὐτῆς, προσκυνοῦσα καὶ αἰτοῦσά τι παρ] αὐτοῦ. 
Λέγει αὐτῷ,” “Εἰπὲ ἵνα καθίσωσιν 


εἶπεν αὐτῇ, “Tt θέλεις; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


257 
41. ὁ δὲ 


οὗτοι of δύο υἱοί µου, ets “ex δεξιῶν σου,” καὶ eis ἐξ εὐωνύμων," ἐν κ Ch. σκι. 


lt , 1” 
τῇ βασιλείᾳ σου. 
οἴδατε τί αἰτεῖσθε. 


καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα, ὅ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι, βαπτισθῆναι ;᾿ 
23. Καὶ ὃ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “TS μὲν ποτήριόν µου 


αὐτῷ, “ Δυνάμεθα.” 


22. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ 
δύνασθε πιεῖν τὸ ποτήριον, ὃ ἐγὼ µέλλω πίνειν, 


+ XXVi 
Heb. 


> A 
6 ‘Ingots εἶπεν, “΄Οὐκ 64. 
i, 13. 


15 Λέγουσιν 


a 
πίεσθε, καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα, ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζοµαι, βαπτισθήσεσθε: τὸ 
Se καθίσαι ἐκ δεξιῶν µου καὶ ἐξ εὐωνύμων μου,ὸ οὐκ ἔστιν epdy® Ich. xxv. 2, 


δοῦναι, ἀλλ᾽ ots Ἰ ἠτοίμασται ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός pou.” 


παρ’ in NCNXZ al, (Tisch.). 

2 » δε ειπεν in B, 

4 gov added in SBCNZ al. 

5 The clause και το βαπτισµα . 
omitted in NBDLZ. 

5 BDZ omit και. 


4]. 1 Cor 


ii. 9. 


24. Kat 


απ᾿ in BD (W.H. text, wap margin). 
3 gov wanting in NB. 
Wanting nD. 
. » βαπτισθηναι in this and the next verse is 
It has doubtless been mported from Mk. 


7 και in SCDZ (Tisch.), η in BL, Lat. verss. 1, 33 (W.H. margin), 


§ μον omitted in BCDL al. 


spoken of thrones in the new Genesis, 
and that seems to have fired their imagi- 
nation and stimulated their ambition. 
And “ the gentle and humble ” John was 
in this plot! Conventional ideas of 
apostolic character need revision. 

Ver. 22. Jesus meets this bold petition 
as He met the scribe’s offer of disciple- 
ship (viii. το), aiming at disenchantment 
by pointing out what it involved ; throne 
and suffering going together. — τὸ 
ποτήριον, the cup, emblem of both good 
and evil fortune in Hebrew speech 
(Ps. xi. 6; xxiii. 5); here of suffering. 
---δυνάµεθα, we are able; the prompt, 
decided answer of the two brothers to 
whom Jesus had addressed His question. 
Had they then laid to heart what Jesus 
had said shortly before concerning His 
passion, and subsequent resurrection, 
and made up their minds to share His 
sufferings that they might so gain a high 
place in the kingdom? Had they 
already caught the martyr spirit? It is 
possible. But it is also possible that 
they spoke without thinking, like Peter 
on the hill.—Ver. 23. τὸ μὲν π. p. πίεσθε, 
as for my cup, ye shall drink of it: pre- 
dictive of the future fact, and also con- 
ferring a privilege = I have no objection 
to grant you ccmpanionship in my 
sufferings; that favour may be granted 
without risk of abuse.—ro δὲ καθίσαι,͵ 
etc., but as for sitting on right and left 
hand, that is another affair.—ovx ἔστιν 


CDA insert τοντο before δουναι. 


ἐμὸν δοῦναι = is not a matter of mere 
personal favour: favouritism has no 
place here; it depends on fitness. That 
is the meaning of the last clause, οἷς 
ἠτοίμασται ὑ. τ. π. µ. = it is not an 
affair of arbitrary favour on the part of 
the Father any more than on my part. 
Thrones are for those who are fit to sit 
on them, and prepared by moral trial and 
discipline to bear the honour worthily : 
τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων δυναµένοις γενέσθαι 
λαμπροῖς--ΟΠ1Υ8., Hom. Ιχν. The same 
Father illustrates by supposing an ἀγωνο- 
θέτης to be asked by two athletes to 
assign to them the crowns of victory, and 
replying: “Τε is not mine to give, but 
they belong to those for whom they 
are prepared by struggle and sweat” 
(ἀπὸ τῶν πόνων καὶ τῶν ἱδρώτων). 

_ Vv. 24-28. Commotion in the disciple- 
ciycle..-Ver. 24. ot δέκα: the Twelve 
were all on one moral level, not one 
superior to ambitious passion, or jealousy 
of it in another. Therefore the conduct 
of the two greatly provoked the ten.— 
ἠγανάκτησαν Passow derives from ἄγαν 
and ἄγω, and gives as original sense to 
be in a state of violent excitement like 
new wine fermenting. The ten were 
“mad” at the two; pitiful exhibition in 
the circumstances, fitted to make Jesus 
doubt His choice of such men. But 
better were not to be found.—Ver. 25. 
προσκαλεσάµενος: Jesus had to call 
them to Him, therefore they had bad 


17 


258 


m Ch. xxi, ἀκούσαντες ot δέκα "' ἠγανάκτησαν περὶ τῶν δύο ἀδελφῶν. 


15; XXvi. 


KATA MATOAION 


XX. 


25. 6 δὲ 


8.’ Mk.x. Ἰησοῦς προσκαλεσάµενος αὐτοὺς εἶπεν, “ Οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ ἄρχοντες τῶν 


14ν 41 


xiv.4. Lk. ἐθνῶν " κατακυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν, καὶ οἱ μεγάλοι ° κατεξουσιάζουσιν 


xiii. 14. να 
n Mk. x. 42, αυτων. 
1 Pet. ν. 3 


26. οὐχ οὕτως δὲ] ἔσται ἐν ὑμῖν: GAN ὃς ἐὰν θέλῃ ἐν 


(Acts xix, ὑμῖν µέγας γενέσθαι, ἔστω 5 ὑμῶν διάκονος: 27. καὶ ὃς ἐὰν θέλῃ ἐν 


16=to 
gain the 
mastery, 


ὑμῖν εἶναι πρῶτος, ἔστωλ ὑμῶν δοῦλος: 28. ὥσπερ ὁ vids τοῦ 


overpower). ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθε διακονηθῆναι, ἀλλὰ διακονῆσαι καὶ δοῦναι 


Heb. ii. ro. ix. 48. 


5 ντ «τὴν Wuxi αὐτοῦ ” λύτρον ἀντὶ  πολλῶν.' 
(Ex. xxi. η 
30. Levit. xix.20. Num. xxxv. 31). 


1 SBDZE omit δε. 


q Rom. viii. 29. 


Σεστιν in BDZ (W.H.). 


3 Some MSS. have εσται, which is adopted by W.H. in both places. 


the decency not to quarrel in His 
presence. Magistro non praesente, Beng. 
-. κατακυριεύουσιν: in the Sept. used 
in the sense of rule, Gen. i. 28, Ps. Ixxil. 
8; here the connection requires the idea 
of “lording it over,” the κατὰ having 
intensive force; so also in the Gm. λεγ. 
κατεξονσιάζονσιν, following = play the 
tyrant.—rév ἐθνῶν : from these occasional 
references to the outside Ρεορίες we get 
Christ’s idea of the Pagan world; they 
seek material good (vi. 32), use repetition 
in prayer (vi. 7), are subject to despotic 
rule.—ot μεγάλοι, the grandees.—avtav 
after the two verbs in both cases refers to 
the ἐθνῶν. Grotius takes the second as 
referring to the ἄρχοντες, and finds in 
the passage this sense: the rulers, 
monarchs, lord it over the people, and 
their grandees lord it over them, the 
rulers, in turn; a picture certainly often 
true to life. Perhaps the intention is to 
suggest that the rule of the magnates is 
more oppressive than that of their royal 
masters: they strain their authority. 
““Ipsis saepe dominis imperantiores,” 
Beng.—Ver. 26. οὐχ οὕτως ἐστὶν é. v. 
It is not so among you. The ἔσται of 
T.R. is probably conformed to the two 
following ἔσται, but it is true to the 
meaning. Jesus speaks of a state of 
matters He desires, but which does not 
yet exist. The present spirit of the 
Twelve is essentially secular and pagan. 
—péyas, διάκονος: greatness by service 
the law of the Kingdom of God, whereby 
greatness becomes another thing, not 
self-asserted or arrogated, but freely 
conceded by others.—Ver. 27. πρῶτος 
may be a synonym for péyas = μέγιστος 
(De W.) and δοῦλος for διάκονος; or in 
both cases increased emphasis may be 
intended, πρῶτος pointing to a higher 
place of dignity, δοῦλος to a lower depth 


of servitude. Burton (M. and T. in 
N.T., § 68) finds in the two ἔσται in vv. 
26 and 27 probable instances of the third 
person future used imperatively. 

Ver. 28. ὥσπερ, καὶ yap in Mk.; 
both phrases introducing reference to the 
summum exemplum (Bengel) in an 
emphatic way.—ep lends force to as= 
even as, observe.—6 ὑ. τ. ἀνθρώπου: an 
important instance of the use of the title. 
On the principle of defining by dis- 
criminating use it means: the man who 
makes no pretensions, asserts no claims. 
—ovk ἦλθε points to the chief end of His 
mission, the general character of His 
public life: not that of a Pretender but 
that of a Servant.—S8otvar τὴν ψυχὴν, to 
give His life, to that extent does the 
service go. Cf. Phil. ii. 8: µέχρι 
θανάτον, there also in illustration of the 
humility of Christ. It is implied that in 
some way the death of the Son of Man 
will be serviceable to others. It enters 
into the life plan of the Great Servant.— 
λύτρον, a ransom, characterises the 
service, another new term in the evan- 
gelic vocabulary, suggesting rather than 
solving a theological problem as to the 
significance of Christ’s death, and ad- 
mitting of great variety of interpretation, 
from the view of Origen and other Fathers, 
who regarded Christ’s death as a price 
paid to the devil to ransom men from 
bondage to him, to that of Wendt, who 
finds in the word simply the idea that 
the example of Jesus in carrying the 
principle of service as far as to die tends 
by way of moral influence to deliver 
men’s minds from every form of spiritual 
bondage (Die Lehre Fesu, ii. 510-517). 
It is an interesting question, What clue 
can be found in Christ’s own words, as 
hitherto reported, to the use by Him on 
this occasion of the term Avrpoy, and ts 


35-34. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


259 
29. ΚΑΙ ἐκπορευομένων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ Ἱεριχώ, ἠκολοόθησεν αὐτῶτ Ch. xxvi. 
30. καὶ ἰδού, δύο τυφλοὶ καθήµενοι παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, λἱ 


23° - 
iii, 4; ix. 


Sx os πολύς. 


ἀκούσαντες ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς παράγει, ἔκραξαν, λέγοντες, “ Ἐλέησον a: a 
ἡμᾶς, κύριεᾷ uids? Δαβίδ.” 31. Ὁ δὲ ὄχλος ἐπετίμησεν αὐτοῖς ἵνα Eset 


᾿σιωπήσωσιν. οἱ δὲ μεῖζον ἔκραζον, λέγοντες, '"Ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς, , Ch. xxvi 
κύριε, υἱὸς Δαβίδ. 32. Καὶ στὰς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ' ἐφώνησεν αὐτούς, καὶ η 
etme, “Ti θέλετε ποιήσω ὑμῖν; 33. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “ Κύριε, ἵνα όλα τν 
ἀνοιχθῶσιν ὃ ἡμῶν οἱ ὀφθαλμοί.” 34. Σπλαγχνισθεὶς δὲ ὁ "Ingots πώ, 
ἤψατο τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν ὃ αὐτῶν" καὶ εὐθέως ἀνέβλεψαν αὐτῶν οἱ ch ts 
ὀφθαλμοί,ὸ καὶ ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ. apne 
(to call to 


oneself, with acc.). Lk. xiv. 12 (to invite). 


1 κυριε ελεησον ηµας in BLZ. $QD omit κυριε (Tisch.). Same order in ver. 31in 
NBDLZ. 

7 we in SCDLE (Tisch., W.H. margin). 

3 avotywou in NBDLZ 33. 4 οι of. ημων in NBDLZ 33. 

> ouppatev in BDLZ. T. R. follows $§CN in using the more common word 


οφθαλμωγ. 


5 αντων οι οφθαλμοι wanting in $$BDLZ and omitted by modern editors, 


the sense in which He uses it? Wendt 
contends that this is the best method of 
getting at the meaning, and suggests as 
- the most congenial text Mt. xi. 28-30. 
agree with him as to method, but think 
a better clue may be found in Mt. xvii. 
27, the word spoken by Jesus in reference 
to the Temple Tax. That word began 
the striking course of instruction on 
humility, as this word (xx. 28) ends it, 
and the end and the beginning touch in 
thought and language. The didrachmon 
was a λύτρον (Exodus xxx. 12), as the 
life of the Son of Man is represented to 
be. The tax was paid ἀντὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ cov. 
The life is to be given ἀντὶ πολλῶν. Is 
it too much to suppose that the 
Capernaum incident was present to 
Christ’s mind when He uttered this 
striking saying, and that in the earlier 
utterance we have the key to the 
psychological history of the term λύτρον 2 
On this: subject vide my book The 
Kingdom of God, pp. 238-241. 

Vv. 29-34. Blind men (man) at Fericho 
(Mk. x. 46-52, Lk. xviii. 35-43). The 
harmonistic problems as to the locality 
of this incident (leaving Jericho, Mt. and 
Mk. ; entering, Lk.) and the number of 
persons healed (one Mk. and Lk., two 
Mt.) may be left on one side, as also the 
modern critical attempts to account for 
the origin of the discrepancies. Those 
interested may consult for the former 
Keil and Nosgen, for the latter Holtz., 


H.C., and Weiss-Meyer.—Ver. 29. awd 
εριχὼ, from Jericho, an important town 
every way ; ‘‘the key—the ‘ Chiavenna’ 
—of Palestine to any invader from this 
quarter” (Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, 
p. 305; the whole account there given 
should be read), situated in an oasis in 
the Judaean desert, caused by streams 
from the mountains above and springs 
in the valley; with a flourishing trade 
and fine buildings, Herod’s palace in- 
cluded; two hours distant from the Jor- 
dan ; from thence to the summit a steep 
climb through a rocky ravine, haunt of 
robbers.—6xAog πολύς, a great crowd 
going to the feast in Jerusalem.—Ver. 30. 
ἀκούσαντες, etc. Luke explains that the 
blind man learnt that Jesus was passing 
in answer to inquiry suggested by the 
noise of a crowd. He knew who Jesus 
was: the fame of Jesus the Nazarene 
(Mk. and Lk.), the great Healer, had 
reached his ear.—vids Δ.: popular Mes- 
Sianic title (ix. 27, xv. 22).—Ver. 31. 
ἐπετίμησεν: same word as in xix. 13, 
and denoting similar action to that of 
the disciples in reference to the children, 
due to similar motives. Officious reve- 
rence has played a large part in the his- 
tory of the Church and of theology.— 
μεῖζον ἔκραζον, they cried out the more; 
of course, repression ever defeats itself; 
μεῖζον, adverb, hereonlyin N.T.—Ver. 32. 
ἐφώνησεν might mean “‘addressed them” 
(Fritzsche), but ‘‘called them’’ seems to 


260 


KATA MATOAION 


ΧΧΙ. 


ΧΧΙ. 1. ΚΑΙ ὅτε ἤγγισαν eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, καὶ ἦλθον εἰς Βηθφαγὴ 
πρὸς ] τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν, τότε 57 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπέστειλε δύο µαθητάς, 
2. λέγων αὐτοῖς, “΄ Πορεύθητε 5 εἰς τὴν κώµην τὴν ἀπέναντι” ὑμῶν: 
καὶ εὐθέως εὑρήσετε ὄνον δεδεµένην, καὶ πῶλον pet αὐτῆς ' λύσαντες 


ἀγάγετέ ὃ por. 


3. καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ τι, ἐρεῖτε, Ὅτι ὁ Κύριος 


1 Β has evs for προς, which Weiss thinks has come from the parall. 


Σο is wanting in BD (Tisch., W.H.). 


> πορενεσθε in SBDLZ Orig. (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 κατεναντι in NBCDLZ (Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 


> ayere in BD (W.H. in margin). 


suit the situation better ; cf. the parallels. 
—rt θέλετε, etc., what do you wish me 
to do for you? Not a superfluous ques- 
tion; they were beggars as well as blind ; 
they might want alms (vide Mk. x. 46). 
Mt. says nothing about their being beg- 
gars, but the question of Jesus implies 
it.—Ver. 33. ἵνα ἀνοιγῶσιν ot ὀφ. They 
desire the greater benefit, opening of 
their eyes, which shows that the eyes of 
their mind were open as to Christ’s 
power and will.—évoryao.v, 2nd aorist 
subjunctive, for which the T. R. has the 
more common ist aorist. — Ver. 34. 
σπλαγχνισθεὶς. Note the frequent refer- 
ence to Christ’s pity in this gospel (ix. 
36, xiv. 14, xv. 32, and Πετε).- τῶν 
ὀμμάτων, a2 synonym for ὀφθαλμῶν, as 
if with some regard to style which the 
scribes might have been expected to 
appreciate, but have not (ὀφθ., thrice, 
T.R.). ὄμμα is poetic in class. Greek.— 
ἠκολούθησαν, they followed Him, like the 
rest, without guide (sine hodego, Beng.), 
so showing at once that their eyes were 
opened and their hearts grateful. 
CHapTER XXI. ENTRY INTO JERU- 
SALEM, ETC.—Vv. I-11. The entry (Mk. 
xi. I-11, Lk. xix. 29-44).—Ver. I, ὅτε 
ἤγγισαν ἐ. ‘l., when, etc. The evangelist 
does not, like a modern tourist, make 
formal announcement of the arrival at a 
point near Jerusalem when the Holy 
City came first into view, but refers to 
the fact in a subordinate clause. The 
manner of entry is the more important 
matter for him.—els Βηθφαγὴ, to Beth- 
phage = the house of figs, mentioned 
here and in the synoptical parallels, no- 
where else in Ο. or N. T., but from Tal- 
mudic sources appears to have been a 
better known and more important place 
than Bethany (Buxtorf, Talm. Lex., p. 
1691). No trace of it now.—els τ. Ο. τ. 
Ἐλαιῶν, to the Mount of Olives; the εἰς, 
in all the three phrases used to define 


the position, means near to, towards, not 
into.—rére, then, introducing what for the 
evangelist is the main event. Bengel’s 
comment is: vectura mysterii plena in- 
nuitur. It is possible to import too much 
mystery into the incident ftollowing.— 
Ver. 2. els τὴν κώµην: that is, naturally, 
the one named, though if we take eis 
before Βηθφαγὴ as = into, it might be 
Bethany, on the other side of the valley. 
Some think the two villages were prac- 
tically one (Porter, Handbook for Syria 
and Palestine, p. 180).—6vov δ. καὶ 
πῶλον, a she-ass with her foal, the latter 
alone mentioned in parall.; both named 
here for a reason which will appear.— 
λύσαντες ἀγάγετε, loose and bring; with- 
out asking leave, as if they were their 
own.—Ver. 3. ἐάν τις, etc. Of course it 
was to be expected that the act would be 
challenged.—épeire, ye shall say, future 
with imperative force.—6rt, recitative, in- 
troducing in direct form the words of the 
Master.—6 Κύριος, the Lord or Master ; 
not surely = Jehovah (Alford, G. T.), but 
rather to be taken in same sense as in 
Mt. viii. 25, or in ver. 30 of this chap.— 
αὐτῶν χρείαν ἔχει, hath need of them; in 
what sense? Looking to the synop. 
narratives alone, one might naturally 
infer that the need was physical, due to 
the fatigue of a toilsome, tedious ascent. 
But according to the narrative in 4th 
Gospel the starting point of the day’s 
journey was Bethany (xii. 1, 12). The 
prophetic reference in ver. 4 suggests a 
wholly different view, vis., that the 
animals were needed to enable Jesus to 
enter Jerusalem in a manner conformable 
to prophetic requirements, and worthy of 
the Messianic King. One is conscious 
of a certain reluctance to accept this as 
the exclusive sense of the χρεία. Lutte- 
roth suggests that Jesus did not wish to 
mix among the crowd of pilgrims on foot 
lest His arrival should be concealed and 


ζ---δ. 


αὐτῶν Χρείαν ἔχει εὐθέως δὲ ἀποστελεῖ αὐτούς.͵ 
τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, 


ὅλον 1 γέγονεν, ἵνα πληρωθῇ 


5. "Εἴπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σιών, Ιδού, 6 βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι, 
πραύς καὶ "ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὄνον καὶ; πῶλον υἱὸν Ὁ ὑποζυγίου. 
6. Πορευθέντες δὲ of µαθηταί, καὶ ποιήσαντες καθὼς προσέταξεν ὃ 
3 La) «3 A 3 1 ‘ a A Ags 
αὐτοῖς 6 ‘Ingots, 7. ἤγαγον τὴν Gvoy καὶ τὸν πῶλον, καὶ ἐπέθηκαν 
ἐπάνω ” αὐτῶν τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτῶν,» καὶ ἐπεκάθισεν ἐπάνω αὐτῶν. 
δὲ "πλεῖστος ὄχλος  ἔστρωσαν ἑαυτῶν τὰ ἵμάτια ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ: ἄλλοι δὲ 
ἔκοπτον κλάδους ἀπὸ τῶν δένδρων, καὶ ἐστρώννυον ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ. 


great). 


ISQCDLZ omit ολον, which is found in ΒΝΣ. 


22 (Weiss) (W.H. omit). 


EYATTEAION 


1 Cor. xiv. 27 (=at most, adv.). 


261 


4. Τοῦτο δὲ κα here only 
in sense of 
mounting 
(cf, ¢m- 
βιβάζω in 
Lk, x. 34; 
xix. 35. 
Acts xxiii. 
24). 
b here and 
in) 2. Pet. 
ii. 16. 
here only 
(=greatest 
art of), 
k. iv. x 
(W.H.) 
(avery 
ἆ Mk. xiv. 15. Lk. xxii.12. Acts ix. 34. 


8. 6, 


It is probably an echo of Ch. i. 


2 «at επι in BLN. CD with many others omit the επι as in T. R. (ἐπὶ 
ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον in Zech. ix. g, Sept.). 


3 ovveragev in BCD. 


the interest awakened by His presence 
lessened.—Ver. 4. ἵνα πληρωθῇ: ἵνα is 
to be taken here as always in this Gospel, 
in its strictly final sense. Such is the 
view of the evangelist and the view he 
wishes his readers to take. But it does 
not follow from this that Christ’s whole 
action proceeded from a conscious inten- 
tion to fulfil a prophecy. On the con- 
trary, the less intention on His part the 
greater the apologetic value of the corre- 
spondence between prophecy and fact. 
Action with intention might show that 
He claimed to be, not that He was, the 
Messiah. On the other hand, His right 
to be regarded as the Messiah would 
have stood where it was though He had 
entered Jerusalem on foot. That right 
cannot stand or fall with any such purely 
external circumstance, which can at best 
possess only the value of a symbol of 
those spiritual qualities which constitute 
intrinsic fitness for Messiahship. But 
Jesus, while fully aware of its entirely 
subordinate importance, might quite con- 
ceivably be in the mood to give it the 
place ofa symbol, all the more that the act 
was in harmony with His whole policy of 
avoiding display and discouraging vulgar 
Messianic ideas andhopes. There was no 
pretentiousness in riding into Jerusalem 
on the foal of an ass. It was rather the 
meek and lowly One entering in character, 
and in a character not welcome to the 
proud worldly - minded Jerusalemites. 
The symbolic act was of a piece with 
the use of the title ‘‘Son of Man,” 
shunning Messianic pretensions, yet 
making them in a deeper way.—Ver. 5. 


4 ex avtov in NBDLZ. 


5 SSBD omit αντων. 


The prophetic quotation, from Zech. ix. 
9, prefaced by a phrase from Isaiah Ixii. 
11, with some words omitted, and with 
some alteration in expression as com- 
pared with Sept. 

Vv. 7-11. τὴν ὄνον καὶ τὸν πῶλον : 
that both were brought is carefully 
specified in view of the prophetic oracle 
as understood by the evangelist to refer 
to two animals, not to one under two 
parallel names. —éwé@nxav: the two 
disciples spread their upper garments 
on the two beasts, to make a seat for 
their Master.—xal ἐπεκάθισεν ἐπ. αὐτῶν : 
if the second αὐτῶν be taken to have the 
same reference as the first the meaning 
will be that Jesus sat upon both beasts 
(alternately). But this would require 
the imperfect of the verb instead of the 
aorist. It seems best, with many ancient 
and modern interpreters, to refer the 
second αὐτῶν tothe garments, though on 
this view there is a certain looseness in 
the expression, as, strictly speaking, 
Jesus would sit on only one of the 
mantles, if He rode only on one animal. 
Fritzsche, while taking the second 4. as 
referring to ἱμάτια, thinks the evangelist 
means to represent Jesus as riding on 
both alternately.— Ver. 8. ὁ δὲ πλεῖστος 
ὄχλος, etc., the most part of the crowd, 
follow the example of the two disciples, 
and spread their upper garments on 
the way, as it were to make a carpet for 
the object of their enthusiasm, after the 
manner of the peoples honouring their 
kings (vide Wetstein, ad [ος.).---ἄλλοι δὲ 
ἔκοπτον: Others, a small number com- 
paratively, took to cutting down branches 


262 


here, 
ε parall.and 


k. ii. 14. λέγοντες, “ Ὡσαννὰ τῷ vid Δαβίδ: εὐλογημένος 6 
Ὡσαννὰ ἐν τοῖς ὑψίστοις. 
1Ο. Καὶ εἰσελθόντος αὐτοῦ eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, ’ ἐσείσθη πᾶσα ἡ 


fCh. xxvili. , 
4(metaph. ὀνόματι Κυρίου - 
as here). 
Ch. xxvii. 


(literally). 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Heb. 
πόλις, λέγουσα, “Tis ἐστιν οὗτος; 


XXI. 


g. οἱ δὲ ὄχλοι of mpodyovres! καὶ of ἀκολουθοῦντες ἔκραζον, 


ς 


ἐρχόμενος ἐν 


11. Οἱ δὲ ὄχλοι ἔλεγον, 


ge Mk. χιτ. Οὗτός ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς ὁ προφήτης,; 6 ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ τῆς Γαλιλαίας. 


Johnii.15. 
h Mk. xi. 15 

(Hag. ii. 

22. Job 


τό anit. τῶν © KoNAUBLoTOV Ἡ κατέστρεψε, καὶ τὰς 


1 Μ9ΒΟΡΙ, add αντον. 
3 o omitted in NBCA. 


of trees and scattering them about on the 
way. Had they no upper garments, or 
did they not care to use them in that 
way? The branches, if of any size, 
would not improve the road, neither 
indeed would the garments. Lightfoot, 
perceiving this—‘ hoc forsan equitantem 
prosterneret’’—thinks they used gar- 
ments and branches to make booths, as 
at the feast of tabernacles. It was well 
meant but embarrassing homage.—Ver. 9. 
ot ὄχλοι: the crowd divided into two, 
one in front, one in rear, Jesus between. 
—éxpafov: lip homage followed the 
carpeting of the way, in words borrowed 
from the Psalter (Ps. cxviii. 25, 26), and 
variously interpreted by commentators. 
—Qeavva τῷ vig A. Hosanna (we 
sing) to the son of David (Bengel).— 
εὐλογημένος, etc. (and we say), ‘‘ Blessed, 
etc.,”’ repeating words from the Hallel 
used at the passover season.— Ὡσαννὰ ἐν 
τοῖς ὑψίστοις = may our Hosanna on 
earth be echoed and ratified in heaven! 
All this homage by deed and word speaks 
to a great enthusiasm, the outcome of 
the Galilean ministry; for the crowd 
consists of Galileans. Perhaps the 
incident at Jericho, the healing of the 
blind men, and the vociferated title Son 
of David with which they saluted the 
Healer, gave the keynote. A little 
matter moves a crowd when it happens 
at the right moment. The mood of a 
festive season was on them.—Ver. Io. 
ἐσείσθη: even Jerusalem, frozen with 
religious formalism and socially un- 
demonstrative, was stirred by the 
popular enthusiasm as by a mighty wind 
or by an earthquake (σεισμός), and 
asked (ver. 11), τίς οὗτος:- ὁ προφή- 
της, etc.: a circumstantial answer 
specifying name, locality, and vocation ; 
not a low-pitched answer as Chrys. (and 


12. KAI εἰσῆλθεν ὁ ὃ "Ingods εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ," καὶ ἐξέβαλε 
πάντας τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράζοντας ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, καὶ τὰς τραπέζας 


Σκαθέδρας τῶν πωλούντων 


2 o προφητης Ίησους in NBD sah. cop. 
4 του θεον omitted in Δ9ΒΙ, verss. (W.H. omit in text). 


after him Schanz) thought (xapatZn dos 
ἦν αὐτῶν ἡ γνώμη, καὶ ταπεινὴ καὶ 
σεσυρµένη, Hom. Ixvi.), as if they were 
ashamed of their recent outburst of 
enthusiasm. Rather spoken with pride 
=the man to whom we have accorded 
Messianic honours is a countryman of 
ours, Jesus, etc. 

Vv. 12-17. Fesus visits the Temple 
(Mk. xi. 11, 15-19, Lk. xix. 45-48).— 
Ver. 12. κεἰσῆλθεν, etc. He entered 
the Temple. When? Nothing to show 
that it was not the same day (vide Mk.). 
—ééBadev. The fourth Gospel (ii. 14 f.) 
reports a similar clearing at the beginning 
of Christ’s ministry. Two questions have 
been much discussed. Were there one 
or two acts of this kind? and if only one 
was it at the beginning or at the end 
as reported by the Synop.? However 
these questions may be decided, it may 
be regarded as one of the historic 
certainties that Jesus did once at least 
and at some time sweep the Temple clear 
of the unholy traffic carried on there. 
The evangelists fittingly connect the act 
with the first visit of Jesus to Jer. they re- 
port—protestat first sight !—mavras τοὺς 
πωλ. καὶ ay.: the article not repeated 
after kai. Sellers and buyers viewed as 
one company—kindred in spirit, to be 
cleared out wholesale.—ras τραπέζας, 
etc.: these tables were in the court of 
the Gentiles, in the booths (tabernae) 
where all things needed for sacrifice 
were sold, and the money changers sat 
ready to give to all comers the didrachma 
for the temple tax in exchange for 
ordinary money at a small profit.— 
κολλυβιστῶν, from κόλλυβος, a small 
coin, change money, hence αρίο; hence: 
our word to denote those who traded in 
exchange, condemned by Phryn., p. 440, 
while approving κόλλνβος. Theophy. 


9—17. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


261 


τὰς περιστεράς. 13. καὶ λέγει αὗτοῖς, ''Γέγραπται, ΄ Ὁ οἶκός µου 


οἶκος προσευχῆς κληθήσεται"΄ ὑμεῖς δὲ αὐτὸν ἐποιήσατε] ) σπήλαιον iJ 
14. Καὶ προσῆλθον αὐτῷ τυφλοὶ καὶ χωλοὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ : 
15. ᾿Ιδόντε δὲ οἱ ἀρχιερες καὶ οἱ 


ληστῶν.” 
καὶ ἐθεράπευσεν αὐτούς. 


γραμματεῖς τὰ θαυμάσια ἃ ἐποίησε, καὶ τοὺς παῖδας  κράζοντας 
ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, καὶ λέγοντας, '΄ Ὡσαννὰ τῷ vid Δαβίδ, ἠγανάκτησαν, 
16. καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, ''᾿Ακούεις τί οὗτοι λέγουσιν ; 
λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Ναί: οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε, ‘OT. ἐκ στόµατος νηπίων 
καὶ * θηλαζόντων κατηρτίσω αἶνον; 
ἐξῆλθεν έξω τῆς πόλεως εἰς Βηθανίαν, καὶ ηὐλίσθη ἐκεῖ. 


1 πονειτε in ΝΒΙ. (Tisch., W.H.). 


ohn xi. 38. 
Heb.xi.38. 
Rev. vi. 15. 


k here in- 
trans. 
Lk. xi. a7 
(with µασ- 
τούς). Ch. 
xxiv. 19. 
Mk. xiii. 
17. Lk. 
Xxi. 23 (to 
suckle). 


Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


17. καὶ καταλιπὼν αὐτοὺς 


Στονς after παιδας as well as before in NBDLN. 


says: κολλυβισταί elow of wap’ ἡμῖν 
λεγόμενοι τραπεζῖται" κόλλυβος γὰρ 
εἶδός ἐστι νομίσματος εὐτελῆς, ὥσπερ 
ἔχομεν τυχὸν ἡμεῖς τοὺς ὀβολοὺς ἢ τὰ 
ἀργύρια (vide Hesychius and Suicer).— 
τὰς περιστεράς, doves, the poor man’s 
offering. The traffic was necessary, and 
might have been innocent; but the 
trading spirit soon develops abuses 
which were doubtless rampant at that 
period, making passover time a Jewish 
‘“« Holy Fair,” a grotesque and offensive 
combination of religion with shady 
morality.—Ver. 13. γέγραπται, it stands 
written, in Isaiah lvi. 7; from the Sept. 
but with omission of πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, 
retained in Mk., and α peculiarly 
appropriate expression in the circum- 
stances, the abuse condemned having 
for its scene the court of the Gentiles.— 
σπήλαιον λῃστῶν, a den of robbers, a 
strong expression borrowed from another 
prophet (Jer. vii. 11), pointing probably 
to the avarice and fraud of the traders 
(τὸ γὰρ ΄ φιλοκερδὲς ληστρικὸν πάθος 
ἐστί, Theophy.), taking advantage of 
simple provincials. This act of Jesus 
has been justified by the supposed right 
of the zealot (Num. xxv. 6-13), which is 
an imaginary right: ‘‘ein unfindbar 
Artikel” (Holtz., H. C.), or by the re- 
forming energy befitting the Messiah 
(Meyer). It needed no other justifica- 
tion than the indignation of a noble soul 
at sight of shameless deeds. Jesus was 
the only person in Israel who could do 
such a thing. All others had become 
accustomed to the evil. 

Vv. 14-17, peculiar to Mt.—Ver. 14. 
τυφλοὶ καὶ χωλοὶ: that the blind and 
lame in the city should seek out Jesus is 
perfectly credible, though reported only 
by Mt. They would hear of the recent 


healing at Jericho, and of many other 
acts of healing, and desire to get a bene- 
fit for themselves, —Ver. 15. τὰ θαυμάσια: 
here only in N.T., the wonderful things, 
a comprehensive phrase apparently 
chosen to include all the notable things 
done by Jesus (Meyer), among which 
may be reckoned not only the cures, and 
the cleansing of the temple, but the en- 
thusiasm which He had awakened in the 
crowd, to the priests and scribes perhaps 
the most offensive feature of the situa- 
Ποπ.- τοὺς παῖδας, etc.: the boys and 
girls of the city, true to the spirit.of youth, 
caught up and echoed the cry of the pil- 
grim crowd and shouted in the temple pre- 
cincts: ‘‘Hosanna,etc.”. ἠγανάκτησαν, 
they were piqued, like the ten (xx. 24).— 
Ver. 16. Gxovets, etc.: the holy men at- 
tack the least objectionable phenomenon 
because they could do so safely ; not the 
enthusiasm of the crowd, the Messianic 
homage, the act of zeal, all deeply offen- 
sive to them, but the innocent shouts of 
children echoing the cry of seniors. They 
were forsooth unseemly in such a place! 
Hypocrites andcowards! No fault found 
with the desecration of the sacred pre- 
cincts by an unhallowed traffic.—vat, 
yes, of course: cheery, hearty, yea, not 
without enjoyment of the ridiculous dis- 
tress of the sanctimonious guardians of 
the temple.—ov8. ἀνέγνωτε as in xix. 4: 
felicitous citation from Ps. viii. 3, not to 
be prosaically interpreted as if children 
in arms three or four years old, still being 
suckled according to the custom of 
Hebrew mothers, were among the shout- 
ing juniors. These prompt happy cita- 
tions show how familiar Jesus was with 
the O. T.—Ver. 17. Βηθανίαν, Bethany, 
15 stadia from Jerusalem (John xi. 18), rest- 
ing place of Jesus in the Passion week— 


264 KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


18. Npwtas ! δὲ ἐπανάγων ? 


ΧΧΙ. 


εἰς τὴν πόλιν, ἐπείνασε: 19. καὶ ἰδὼν 


συκῆν play ἐπὶ τῆς ὁδοῦ, ἦλθεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν, καὶ οὐδὲν εὗρεν ἐν αὐτῇ 
et μὴ φύλλα µόνον: καὶ λέγει αὐτῇ,; “ Μηκέτι ἐκ od καρπὸς γένηται 


lhere twice, εἲς τὸν aiova.” 
frequently 


Καὶ ἐξηράνθη ᾿ παραχρῆμα ἡ συκῆ. 


20. Καὶ 


in Τ.Κ. and ἰδόντες of μαθηταὶ ἐθαύμασαν, λέγοντες, “Mas παραχρῆμα ἐξηράνθη 


Acts. A a 5) 
η συκη; 


21. ᾿᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ “Ingots εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω 


m Acts x.20. ὑμῖν, ἐὰν ἔχητε πίστιν, καὶ μὴ ™ διακριθῆτε, οὗ µόνον τὸ τῆς συκῆς 


Rom. iv. 


20; xiv.23. ποιῄσετε, ἀλλὰ Kav τῷ Sper τούτῳ εἴπητε, "Ἀρθητι καὶ βλήθητι eis 


Jamesi. 6. 


τὴν θάλασσαν, γενήσεται' 22. καὶ πάντα ὅσα ἂν αἰτήσητε ἐν τῇ 


προσευχῇ, πιστεύοντες, λήψεσθε.᾽ 
23. ΚΑΙ ἐλθόντι αὐτῷ ' cis τὸ ἱερόν, προσῆλθον αὐτῷ διδάσκοντι 


A . , - ~ 
οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ aod, λέγοντες, “΄ Ἐν ποίᾳ 
β , aA a ‘ , 3 ” 
ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα ποιεῖς; καὶ τίς σοι ἔδωκε τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ; 


1 πρωι in NBD. 


3 επαναγαγων in NBL. 


Σον before µηκετι in BL, Wanting in SCD. 
«ελθοντος αντον in NBCDL. The reading in T. R. (dat.) is a grammatical 


correction. 


true friends there (vide Stanley, S. and P.). 
-ηὐλίσθη, passed the night; surely not 
in the open air, as Wetstein and Grotius 
think. At passover time quarters could 
not easily be got in the city, but the 
house of Martha and Mary would be open 
to Jesus (cf. Lk. xxi. 37). 

Vv. 18-22. The barren fig tree (Mk. 
xi. 12-14, 19-26). —The story of two morn- 
ing journeys from Bethany to Jerusalem 
(vide Mk.) is here compressed into one.— 
Ver. 18. ἐπείνασε, He felt hungry. The 
fact seems to favour the hypothesis of a 
bivouac under the sky overnight. Why 
should one be hungry leaving the hospitable 
house of friends? (vide Mk.). This was 
no difficulty for the Fathers who regarded 
the hunger as assumed (σχηματίζεται 
πεινᾶν, Euthy.).—Ver. 19. συκῆν plav: 
els in late Greek was often used for tts, 
but the meaning here probably is that 
Jesus looking around saw a solitary fig 
πεε.- ἐπὶ τῆς 6500, by the wayside, not 
necessarily above (Μεγετ).--ἦλθεν ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτήν, came close to it, not climbed it 
(Fritzsche).—et μὴ Φύλλα: leaves only, 
no fruit. Jesus expected to find fruit. 
Perhaps judging from Galilean experi- 
ence, where by the lake-shore the fig 
time was ten months long (Joseph., Bell. 
J., iii. 108. Vide Holtz., H. C.), but 
vide on Mk. xi. τ3.--οὐ µηκέτι, etc. : ac- 
cording to some writers this was a pre- 
diction based on the observation that the 
tree was diseased, put in the form of a 
doom. So Bleek, and Furrer who ~~ 


marks: ‘Then said He, who knew na- 
ture and the human heart, ‘ This tree 
will soon wither’; for a fig tree with full 
leaf in early spring without fruit is a dis- 
eased tree”’ (Wanderungen, p. 172).— 
καὶ ἐξ. παραχρῆμα, cf. Mk.’s account. 
—Ver. 20. of μαθηταὶ, etc.: the disciples 
wondered at the immediate withering of 
the tree. Did they expect it to die, asa 
diseased tree, gradually ?—Ver. 21 con- 
tains a thought similar to that in xvii. 
20, q.U.—7T6 τῆς συκῆς, the matter of the 
fig tree, as if it were a small affair, not 
worth speaking about. The question of 
the disciples did not draw from Jesus ex- 
planations as to the motive of the male- 
diction. The cursing of the fig tree has 
always been regarded as of symbolic im- 
port, the tree being in Christ’s mind an 
emblem of the Jewish people, witha great 
show of religion and no fruit of real 
godliness, This hypothesis is very 
credible. 

Vv. 23-27. Interrogation as to authority 
(Mk. xi. 27-33, Lk. xx. 1-8), wherewith 
suitably opens the inevitable final conflict 
between Jesus and the religious leaders 
of the people.—Ver. 23. ἐλθόντος αὐτοῦ 
é. τ. i.: coming on the second day to 
the temple, the place of concourse, where 
He was sure to meet His foes, nothing 
loath to speak His mind to them.— 
διδάσκοντι: yet He came to teach, to do 
good, not merely to fight.—év ποία 
ἐξουσίᾳ, by what sort of authority? the 
auestion ever asked by the representa- 


1δ---αδ, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


265 


24. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ] 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ''Ερωτήσω ὑμᾶς κἀγὼ 


λόγον ἕνα, ὃν ἐὰν εἴπητέ µοι, κἀγὼ ὑμῖν ἐρῶ ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα 


ποιῶ. 


ἀνθρώπων; 


25. τὸ βάπτισμα 5 Ἰωάννου πόθεν ἦν; ἐδ οὐρανοῦ, ἢ ἐξ 
Οἱ δὲ διελογίζοντο map’? ἑαυτοῖς, λέγοντες, “'᾿Εὰν 


εἴπωμεν, ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, ἐρεῖ ἡμῖν, Διατί οὖν οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ ; 
μ. > ρ > ρ ημ. ’ 5 2 


26. ἐὰν δὲ εἴπωμεν, ἐξ ἀνθρώπων, φοβούμεθα τὸν ὄχλον : 
A ο ν 9 3 ε , ”” 
γὰρ "ἔχουσι τὸν Ιωάννην ὡς προφήτην. 
τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ εἶπον, “'Οὐκ οἴδαμεν. “Edy αὐτοῖς καὶ αὐτός, “Οὐδὲ 
9 , ε ”-. 92 , > , a ~ 
ἐγὼ λέγω ὑμῖν ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα ποιῶ. 


πάντες 


27. Καὶ ἀποκριθέντες α vide Ch. 
xiv. 5. 


4 


28. Τί δὲ ὑμῖν δοκεῖ ; 


ἄνθρωπος εἶχε τέκνα δύο, καὶ δ προσελθὼν τῷ πρώτω εἶπε, Τέκνον, 


1 Some copies omit δε. 
2 ro before Iwavvov in NBCZ 33. 


SBCD have it. 


> BL have ev (W.H. in brackets). 


4 ως προφητην before εχουσι in $BCLZ 33 (so in modern editions). 


5 So in ΝΟΡΙ, al. 


δυο τεκνα in B (W.H. in margin). 


6 και is found in BCD and other uncials but wanting in LZ. Tisch. omits and 


W.H. relegate to the margin. 


tives of established order and custom 
at epoch-making initiators. So the 
Judaists interrogated St. Paul as to his 
right to be an apostle.—ratra, vague (cf. 
xi, 25) and comprehensive. They have 
in view all the offences of which Jesus 
had been guilty, throughout His ministry 
—all well known to them—whatever He 
had done in the spirit of unconventional 
freedom which He had exhibited since 
His arrival in Jerusalem.—«xai τίς: the 
second question is but an echo of the 
first: the quality of the authority (ποίᾳφ) 
depends on its source.—ravrny, this au- 
thority, which you arrogate, and which 
so many unhappily acknowledge. It was 
a question as to the legitimacy of an un- 
deniable influence. That spiritual power 
accredits itself was beyond the compre- 
hension of these legalists.— Ver. 24. 
Jesus replies by an embarrassing counter- 
question as to the ministry of the Baptist. 
—)édyov ἕνα, hardly: ome question for 
your many (Beng.) rather: a question, or 
thing, one and the same (cf. for els in 
this sense Gen. xli. 25, 26; 1 Cor. iii. 8, 
xi. 5), an analogous question as we should 
say; one answer would do for theirs and 
for His.—Ver. 25. τὸ βάπτισμα τὸ ’I., 
the baptism as representing John’s whole 
ministry.—é§& ovp. ἢ ἐξ av@., from heaven 
or from men? The antithesis is foreign 
to legitimist modes of thought, which 
would combine the two: from heaven 
but through men; if not through men 
not from heaven. The most gigantic 
and baleful instance of this fetish in 
modern times is the notion of church 


sacraments and orders depending on ordi- 
nation. On the same principle St. Paul 
was no apostle, because his orders came 
to him “not from men nor by man,” 
Gal. 1. 1.—éav εἴπωμεν, etc. The audible 
and formal answer of the scribes was 
οὐκ otdapev, in νετ. 27. All that goes be- 
fore from ἐὰν to προφήτην is the reasoning 
on which it was based, either unspoken 
(παρ᾽ or ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, Mt.) or spoken to 
each other (πρός, Mk. xi. 31); not likely 
to have been overheard, guessed rather 
from the puzzled expression on their 
faces.—ovx ἐπιστεύσατε: the reference 
here may be to John’s witness to Jesus, 
or it may be general = why did ye not re- 
ceive his message as a whole ?—Ver. 26. 
ἐὰν δὲ, etc.: the mode of expression here 
is awkward. Meyer finds in the sentence 
an aposiopesis=‘‘ if we say of men—we 
fear the people”. What they mean is: 
we must not say of men, because we fear, 
etc. (cf. Mk.).—Ver. 27. οὐδὲ ἐγὼ, etc. : 
Jesus was not afraid to answer their 
question, but He felt it was not worth 
while giving an answer to opportunists. 
Vv. 28-32. Parable of the two sons, 
in Mt. only, introduced by the familiar 
formula, τί δὲ ὑμῖν δοκεῖ (xvii. 25, xviii. 
12), and having for its aim to contrast 
the conduct of the Pharisees towards the 
Baptist with that of the publicans. And 
as the publicans are simply used as a 
foil to bring out more clearly the Pharisaic 
character, the main subject of remark, it 
is highly probable that the son who 
represents the Pharisee was mentioned 
first, and the son who represents the 


266 


o Lk. xiii. ὕπαγε, σήµερον ° ἐργάζου ἐν τῷ ἀμπελῶνί pov.) 


14. John 


v.17;ix.4. εἶπεν, OF θέλω": ὕστερον δὲ ” µεταμεληθείς, ἀπῆλθε. 


2 Thess. 


Vil. a 
3.. 2 Cor. KUpLE* καὶ οὐκ ἀπῆλθε. 


vii. 8. > 
Heb. vii. πατρός ; 
41. 


τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


' προσελθὼν τῷ δευτέρω εἶπεν ὡσαύτως. 


31: 


Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ,δ ““O πρῶτος.” 4 


XXI.. 


29. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς. 
30. Καὶ 
ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν, Εγώ, 
Τίς ἐκ τῶν δύο ἐποίησε τὸ θέληµα τοῦ 
Λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾽μησοῦς, 


“Apa λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι οἱ τελῶναι καὶ αἱ πόρναι προάγουσιν ὑμᾶς εἲς 
HAD x x ε > 5 2 
32. Ίλθε γὰρ πρὸς ὑμᾶς Ἰωάννης” ἐν 


1 pov is wanting in ΝΟΡΤΙΔΣ. Tisch., Trg., omit, W.H. relegate to margin. 


2 B inverts the order of the two answers, so that verses 29, 30 stand thus: εγω, 
κυριε, και ουκ απηλθεν. προσελθων δε τω δευτερω ειπεν woavTws. o Se αποκριθεις. 


ειπεν. 


ov θελω: υστερον µεταµεληθεις απηλθε. 


Though supported only by some 


cursives and versions this reading of B commends itself as the true one, and it has 


been adopted by W.H. and Weiss. 
3 S8BDL omit αυτω. 


4 Of course this should be 6 ὕστερος on B’s reading of vv. 29, 30. 


Vide below. Syr. Sin. is not on the side of B. 


So in B. 


® Ίωαννης before προς v. in NBCL 33. ® ovSe in B. Some cursives and versions, 


publican second; the order in which 
they stand in B, and adopted by W. and 
H. The parable, therefore, should read 
thus: “A certain man had two sons. 
He said to one, Go work, etc. He re- 
plied, Yes, sir, and went not. To the 
other he said the same. He replied, I 
will not, and afterwards went.”’—Ver. 28. 
τῷ ἀμπελῶνι: constant need of work in 
a vineyard, and of superintendence of 
workers.—Ver. 29. ἐγώ: laconic and em- 
phatic as if eager to obey—xvpte, with 
all due politeness, and most filial recogni- 
tion of paternal authority, the two 


words = our ‘ Yes, sir’’.—Ver. 30. οὐ 
θέλω, I will not, I am not inclined; rude, 
sulky, unmannerly, disobedient, and 


making no pretence to filial loyalty.— 
Ver. 31. To the question, Who did the 
will of the father? the answer, when the 
parable is arranged as above, must, of 
course, be 6 ὕστερος; the may-sayer, 
not the yea-sayer. It is a wonder any 
answer was given at all when the pur- 
port of the parable was so transparent.— 
ἁμὴν λέγω ὁ.: introducing here, as 
always, a very important assertion. The 
statement following would give deadly 
offence to the Pharisees.—reA@vat, πόρ- 
vat, the publicans and the harlots, the 
two socially lowest classes. Jesus speaks 
here from definite knowledge, not only 
of what had happened in connection 
_with the Baptist ministry, but of facts 
connected with Hisown. He has doubt- 


less reminiscences of the ‘‘ Capernaum 
mission’ (chap. viii. g-13) to go upon.— 
am podyovotv,70 before, anticipate (rpoAap- 
βάνουσιν, Euthy.), present tense: they 
are going before you now; last first, first 
last. Chrysostom, in Hom. Ixvii., gives 
an interesting story of a courtesan of 
his time in illustration of this.—Ver. 32. 
ἐν 680 δικαιοσύνης: not merely in the 
sense of being a good pious man with 
whose life no fault could be found 
(Meyer; the Fathers, Chrys., Euthy., 
Theophy.), but in the specific sense of 
following their own legal way. John 
was a conservative in religion not less 
than the Pharisees. He differed from 
them only by being thoroughly sincere 
and earnest. They could not, therefore, 
excuse themselves for not being sympa- 
thetic towards him on the ground of his 
being an innovator, as they could with 
plausibility in the case of Jesus. The 
meaning thus is: He cultivated legal 
piety like yourselves, yet, etc.—tpeis δὲ 
ἰδόντες, when ye saw how the sinful took 
John’s summons to repent ye did not 
even late in the day follow their ex- 
ample and change your attitude. They 
were too proud to take an example from. 
publicans and harlots.—rot πιστεῦσαι, 
inf, of result with τοῦ. 

Vv. 33-46. Parable of the rebellious: 
vine-dressers (Mk. xii. 1-12, Lk. xx. 0-10). 
—Ver. 33. ἄλλην π. ἀ., hear another 
parable ; spoken at the same time, and) 


29—38. 


33. 'Άλλην παραβολὴν ἀκούσατε. 
πότης, ὅστις ἐφύτευσεν ἀμπελῶνα, καὶ " φραγμὸν αὐτῷ περιέθηκε, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


267 


ἄνθρωπός τις] ἦν οἴκοδεσ- 


r Mk. xii. 1. 
Lk. xiv. 


λος > > α ϐ / ‘ 3 a / \ 2¢7 2 23. Eph 
καὶ " ὤρυξεν ἐν αὐτῷ "ληνόν, καὶ ᾠκοδόμησε " πύργον, καὶ ἐξέδοτο”. 23 pen 


αὐτὸν γεωργοῖς, καὶ ἀπεδήμησεν. 


καρπῶν, ἀπέστειλε τοὺς δούλους αὐτοῦ πρὸς τοὺς γεωργούς, λαβεῖν 


34. ὅτε δὲ ἤγγισεν ὁ καιρὸς τῶν 5 Ch. xxv. 


18% Mk. 
xii. 1. 
t Rev. xiv. 


τοὺς καρποὺς αὐτοῦ: 35. καὶ λαβόντες οἱ γεωργοὶ τοὺς δούλους 19, 20; 


xix. 15. 


αὐτοῦ, ὃν μὲν ἔδειραν, ὃν δὲ ἀπέκτειναν, ὃν δὲ ” ἐλιθοβόλησαν. υ Mk. xii. τ. 


36. πάλιν ἀπέστειλεν ἄλλους δούλους πλείονας τῶν πρώτων: καὶ 


ἐποίησαν αὐτοῖς ὡσαύτως. 


τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, λέγων, ' ᾿Εντραπήσονται τὸν υἱόν µου. 


k. xili. 4; 
xiv. 28. 
v Ch. xxiii. 


37. ὕστερον δὲ ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτοὺς 37. Lk. 


ΧΙ, 34. 
Acts vii. 


38. οἱ δὲ 


λος) x ey - 9 ς a ο τρ Sek ό 58. Ns 
γεωργοι ἰδόντες τον υιον εἰπον εν EQUTOLS, Outos εστι οκ ηρον μος *“w Lk. xviii. 


Seite, ἀποκτείνωμεν αὐτόν, καὶ Katdoxwpev ὃ τὴν κληρονοµίαν αὐτοῦ. 


1 vis wanting in many uncials. 
3 εξεδετο in BCL. 


2,4. Heb. 
xii. 9. 


εξεδοτο is a grammatical correction. 


ὅσχωμεν in $BDLZ 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


of kindredimport. The abrupt introduc- 
tion betrays emotion. Jesus is aware 
that He has given mortal offence, and 
here shows His knowledge by fore- 
shadowing His own doom. The former 
parable has exposed the insincerity of 
the leaders of Israel, this exposes their 
open revolt against even divine authority. 
--ἀμπελῶνα: it is another vineyard par- 
able. They were both probably extem- 
porised, the one suggesting the other, 
the picture of mondoing calling up the 
companion picture of misdoing.—dpaypov 
a. περιέθηκε, etc,: detailed description 
of the pains taken by the landlord in the 
construction of the vineyard, based on 
Isaiah’s song of the vineyard (chap. v. 2), 
all with a view to fruitfulness, and to 
fruit of the best kind; for the owner, at 
least, is very much in earnest: a hedge 
to protect against wild beasts, a press 
and vat that the grapes may be squeezed 
and the juice preserved, a tower that the 
ripe fruit may not be stolen.—éééSero, 
let it out on hire; on what terms—whether 
for a rent in money or on the metayer 
system, produce divided between owner 
and workers—does not here appear. The 
latter seems to be implied in the parallels 
(Mk. xii. 2, ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν, Lk. xx. το, 
ἀπὸ τοῦ καρποῦ).-- ἀπεδήμησεν, went 
abroad, to leave them freedom, and also 
to give them time; for the newly planted 
vines would not bear fruit for two or 
three years. No unreasonableness in 
this landlord.—Ver. 34. καιρὸς: not 
merely the season of the year, but the 
time at which the new vines might be 
expected to Ῥεατ.- τοὺς καρποὺς: the 


whole, apparently implying a money rent. 
The mode of tenure probably not thought 
of by this evangelist.—avrov should prob- 
ably be referred to the owner, not to the 
vineyard = “‘his fruits,” as in A. V.— 
Ver. 35. λαβόντες of y., etc. The 
husbandmen treat the messengers in the 
most barbarous and truculent manner: 
beating, killing, stoning to death; highly 
improbable in the natural sphere, but 
another instance in which parables have 
to violate natural probability in order to 
describe truly men’s conduct in the 
spiritual sphere. On ἐδείραν Kypke re- 
remarks: the verb Sépew for verberare is 
5ο rare in profane writers that some have 
thought that for ἔδειραν should be read 
ἔδῃραν, from Saipw.—Ver. 36. πλείονας 
τ. π., more than the first. Some take 
πλ. as referring to quality rather than 
number: better than the former (Bengel, 
Goebel, etc.), which is a legitimate but 
not likely rendering. The intention is 
to emphasise the number of persons sent 
(prophets).—a@cavtws: no difference in 
the treatment; savage mood chronic.— 
Ver. 37. ὕστερον, not afterwards merely, 
but finally, the last step was now to be 
taken, the mission of the son and heir ; 
excuses conceivable hitherto: doubt as to 
credentials, a provoking manner in those 
sent, etc.; not yet conclusively proved 
that deliberate defiance is intended. 
The patient master will make that clear 
before taking further steps.—évtpam7- 
σονται (pass. for mid.), they will show 
respect to. It is assumed that they will 
have no difficulty in knowing him.—Ver. 
38. iSdévres: neither have they; they 


268 


KATA MATOAION 


ΧΧΙ. 


490. καὶ λαβόντες αὐτὸν ἐξέβαλον ἔξω τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος καὶ ἀπέκτειναν. 
40. ὅταν οὖν ἔλθῃ ὁ κύριος τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος, τί ποιήσει τοῖς γεωργοῖς 


x Ch. xxvi. ἐκείνοις 5 ss 
54- k. 


XIV. 49. 
Lk. xxiv. 


αγ. John αὐτῷ τοὺς καρποὺς ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν. 


41. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “Kaxods κακῶς ἀπολέσει αὐτούς : 
καὶ τὸν ἀμπελῶνα ἐκδόσεται ! 


ἄλλοις γεωργοῖς, οἵτινες ἀποδώσουσιν 
42. Λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ 


Vv. 3 2 A A - 
y ME viii. Ἰνησοῦς, “ Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε év ταῖς * ypadais, ‘Ao ὃν 7 ἀπεδοκί- 


31; xii. Io. 


LE. ix. 22, µασαν OL οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας’ παρὰ 


Heb. xii. 
17 al. 


1 εκδωσεται in all uncials nearly. 


recognise at once the son and heir, and 
resolve forthwith on desperate courses, 
which are at once carried out. They 
eject the son, kill him, and seize the in- 
heritance. The action of the parable is 
confined to a single season, the mes- 
sengers following close on each other. 
But Jesus obviously has in His eye the 
whole history of Israel, from the settle- 
ment in Canaan till His own time, and 
sees in it God’s care about fruit (a holy 
nation), the mission of the successive 
prophets to insist that fruit be forth- 
coming, and the persistent neglect and 
disloyalty ofthe people. Neglect, for there 
was no fruit to give to the messengers, 
though that does not come out in the 
parable. The picture is a very sombre 
one, but it is broadly true. Israel, on 
the whole, had not only not done God’s 
will, but had badly treated those who 
urged her to do it. She killed her 
prophets (Mt. xxiii. 37). 

Vv. 40-46. Application—érav οὖν 
ἔλθῃ 6 κ., etc.: what would you expect 
the owner to do after such ongoings 
have been reported to him? Observe 
the subjunctive after ὅταν compared with 
the indicative ἤγγισεν after ὅτε, ver. 34. 
ὅτε points to a definite time past, ὅταν 
is indefinite (vide Hermann, Viger, p. 
437)-—Ver. 41. λέγονσι, they say: who? 
the men incriminated, though they could 
not but see through the thin veil of the 
allegory. In Mk. and Lk. the words 
appear to be put into Christ’s mouth.— 
κακοὺς κακῶς ἀπολέσει: a solemn fact 
classically expressed ("επ Graeci ser- 
monis peritiam in Matthaeo ’’—Raphel, 
Annot.) = He wili badly destroy bad 
men.—ottwes, such as; he will give out 
the vineyard to husbandmen of a different 
stamp.—t. κ. ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς αὐτῶν: 
the fruits in their (the fruits’) seasons, 
regularly year by year.—Ver. 42. 
οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε, etc.: another of 
Christ’s impromptu felicitous quotations ; 


Κυρίου ἐγένετο αὕτη, καὶ ἔστι θαυμαστὴ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν ;᾽ 


εκδοσεται in minusc. only. 


from Ps. cxvili. 22, 23 (Sept.). This quota- 
tion contains, in germ, another parable, 
in which the ejected and murdered heir 
of the former parable becomes the re- 
jected stone of the builders of the theo- 
cratic edifice ; only, however, to become 
eventually the accepted honoured stone 
of God. It is an apposite citation, 
because probably regarded as Messianic 
by those in whose hearing it was made (it 
was so regarded by the Rabbis—Schétt- 
gen, ad loc.), and because it intimated 
to them that by killing Jesus they would 
not be done with Him.—Ver. 43. διὰ 
τοῦτο, introducing the application of the 
oracle, and implying that the persons 
addressed are the builders = therefore.— 
ἡ βασιλεία τ. θ.: the doom is forfeiture 
of privilege, the kingdom taken from 
them and given to others.—é@va, to a 
nation; previously, as Paul calls it, a 
no nation (οὐκ ἔθνει, Rom. x. 19), the 
reference being, plainly, to the heathen 
world.—rovotv7t τ. κ. α.: cf. ili. 8, 10; 
vii. 17, bringing forth the fruits of it (the 
kingdom). The hope that the new 
nation will bring forth the fruit is the 
ground of the transference. God elects 
with a view to usefulness; a useless 
elect people has no prescriptive rights.— 
Ver. 44. This verse, bracketed by W.H., 
found in the same connection in Lk. 
(xx. 18), looks rather like an interpola- 
tion, yet it suits the situation, serving as 
a solemn warning to men meditating 
evil intentions against the Speaker.—o 
πεσὼν: he who falls on the stone, as if 
stumbling against it (Is. viii. 14).— 
συνθλασθήσεται, shall be broken in 
pieces, like an earthen vessel falling ona 
rock. This compound is found only in 
late Greek authors.—颒 ὃν 8° ἂν πέσῃ, 
on whom it shall fall, in judgment. The 
distinction is between men who believe 
not in the Christ through misunderstand 
ing and those who reject Him through 
an evil heart of unbelief. Both suffer in 


39—46. 


EYATTEAION 


269 


43. Διὰ τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἀρθήσεται ἀφ ὑμῶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ 


Θεοῦ, καὶ δοθήσεται ἔθνει ποιοῦντι τοὺς καρποὺς αὐτῆς. 


44. καὶ ὁ 


πεσὼν ἐπὶ τὸν λίθον τοῦτον " συνθλασθήσεται: ἐφ ὃν 8 ἂν πέσῃ, «ΙΙ. xx.18 


λικμήσει αὐτόν '' 


1 45. Καὶ ἀκούσαντες οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ ota Lk xx. 18 


Φαρισαῖοι τὰς παραβολὰς αὐτοῦ ἔγνωσαν ὅτι περὶ αὐτῶν λέγει" 
46. καὶ {nrodvres αὐτὸν κρατῆσαι, ἐφοβήθησαν τοὺς ὄχλους, 


ἐπειδὴ 3 ὡς ὃ προφήτην αὐτὸν εἶχον. 


1 This whole ver. (44) is omitted in D, 33, old Latin versions, Orig., etc. Tisch. 
omits and W.H. bracket. Weiss regards it as genuine, and thinks that if it had come 
in from Lk. it would have stood after ver. 42. 


3 ewer in NBDL 33. 


consequence, but not in the same way, 
or to the same extent. The one is 
broken, hurt in limb; the other crushed 
to powder, which the winds blow away. 
—Aucpyjoe, from Ἀικμός, a winnowing 
fork, to winnow, to scatter to the winds, 
implying reduction to dust capable of 
being so scattered = grinding to powder 
(conteret, Vulg.). For the distinction 
taken in this verse, cf. chaps. xi. 6; xii. 
31, 32.—Ver. 45. The priests and 
Pharisees of course perceived the drift of 
these parabolic speeches about the two 
sons, the vine-dressers, and the rejected 
stone, and (ver. 46) would have appre- 
hended Him on the spot (Lk. xx. το) 
had they not feared the people.—éwei, 
since, introducing the reason of the fear, 
same as in ver. 26.—eis προφήτην = as 
π., ver. 26, and in xiv. 5, also in reference 
to John. On this use of εἰς vide Winer, 
§ 32, 4, ὃν 

CHAPTER XXII. PARABLE OF ΤΗΕ 
WEDDING FEAST AND ENCOUNTERS 
WITH OPPONENTS.— Vv. 1-14. The 
royal wedding.—This parable is peculiar 
to Mt.; and while in some respects very 
suitable to the situation, may not un- 
reasonably be suspected to owe its place 
here to the evangelist’s habit of grouping 
kindred matter. The second part of the 
parable referring to the man without a 
wedding robe has noconnection with the 
present situation, or with the Pharisees 
who are supposed to be addressed. An- 
other question has been much discussed, 
viz., whether this parable was spoken by 
Jesus at all on any occasion, the idea of 
many critics being that it is a parable of 
Christ’s reconstructed by the evangelist 
or some other person, so as to make it 
cover the sin and fate of the Jews, the 
calling of the Gentiles, and the Divine 
demand for righteousness in all recipients 
of His grace. The resemblance between 


δεις in NBL (Tisch., W.H.). 


this parable and that of the Supper, in 
Lk. xiv. 16-24, is obvious. Assuming 
that Jesus uttered a parable of this type, 
the question arises: which of the two 
forms given by Mt. and Lk. comes 
nearer to the original? The general 
verdict is in favour of Luke’s. As to the 
question of the authenticity of Mt.’s 
parable, the mere fact that the two 
parables have a common theme and 
many features similar is no proof that 
both could not proceed from Jesus. Why 
should not the later parable be the same 
theme handled by the same Artist with 
variations so as to make it serve a 
different while connected purpose, the 
earlier being a parable of Grace, the 
later a parable of ¥udgment upon grace 
despised or abused? If the didactic 
aim of the two parables was as just in- 
dicated, the method of variation was 
preferable to the use of two parables 
totally unconnected. ‘* What is common 
gives emphasis to what is peculiar, and 
bids us mark what it is that is judged ” 
(The Parabolic Teaching of Christ, p. 
463). The main objections to the 
authenticity of the parable are its 
allegorical character, and its too distinct 
anticipation of history. The former ob- 
jection rests on the assumption that 
Jesus uttered no parables of the allegorical 
type. On this, vide remarks on the 
parable of the Sower, chap. xiii. 

Ver. I. ἐν παραβολαῖς, the plural does 
not imply more than one parable, but 
merely indicates the style of address = 
parabolically.—Ver. 2. ydpous, a 
wedding feast; plural, because the 
festivities lasted for days, seven in 
Judges xiv. 17. The suggestion that the 
feast is connected with the handing over 
of the kingdom to the son (‘‘ quem pater 
successorem declarare volebat,’’ Kuinoel) 
is not to be despised. The marriage 


270 


a here sev- 
eraltimes; 
XXV. I0. 
Lk. xii. 36; 


KATA MATOAION 


XXII. 


XXII. 1. ΚΑΙ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς πάλιν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ἐν παρα- 
Bodais,! λέγων, 2. “" Ὡμοιώθη ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν ἀνθρώπω 


xiv. 8 Gin βασιλεῖ, ὅστις ἐποίησε "γάμους τῷ vid αὐτοῦ» 3. καὶ ἀπέστειλε 


all plural). 

b vide Ch. 
ix; 1. I ; a 
Cor. x.27. οὐκ ἤθελον ἐλθεῖν. 

c Lk. xi. 38; 
xiv. 12. 

ἆ Acts xiv. Fy 
13. 
ix.13;X.4. 

ε here only yapous. 


Εἴπατε τοῖς κεκληµένοις, Ιδού, τὸ * ἄριστόν µου ἠτοίμασα, οἱ 


τοὺς δούλους αὐτοῦ " καλέσαι τοὺς KexAnpévous εἰς τοὺς γάμους, καὶ 


4. Πάλιν ἀπέστειλεν ἄλλους δούλους, λέγων, 


d A , 
ταῦροί 


Heb. µου καὶ τὰ ᾿σιτιστὰ τεθυµένα, καὶ πάντα ἔτοιμα Seite εἰς τοὺς 
5. Ot δὲ ἀμελήσαντες ἀπῆλθον, ὁ μὲν ὃ εἰς τὸν ἴδιον 


in Ν. . a 
(Joseph, ἀγρόν, 6 δὲ δ εἰς * τὴν ἐμπορίαν αὐτοῦ: 6. οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ κρατήσαντες 


Ant., Viii. i 
2,4. Cf. ovrevros in Lk. xv. 23, 27, 30). 


1 αντοις after παραβολαις in BDL (modern editors). 
2 ητοιµακα in ΝΒΟΡΙ,Σ and adopted by modern editors, 
3 og pev, ος Se in BCL, several cursives. 


4 em in $BCD, 13, 33, 69, etc. 


and recognition of the son as heir to the 
throne might be combined, which would 
give to the occasion a political signifi- 
cance, and make appearance at the 
marriage a test of loyalty. Eastern 
monarchs had often many sons by 
different wives, and heirship to the 
throne did not go by primogeniture, but 
by the pleasure of the sovereign, deter- 
mined in many cases by affection for a 
favourite wife, as in the case of Solomon 
(Koetsveld, de Gelijk.)—Ver.3. καλέσαι 
τοὺς κεκληµένους, to invite the already 
invited. This second invitation seems 
to accord with Eastern custom (Esther 
vi. 14). The first invitation was given 
to the people of Israel by the prophets 
in the Messianic pictures of a good time 
coming. This aspect of the prophetic 
ministry was welcomed. Israel never 
responded to the prophetic demand for 
righteousness, as shown in the parable of 
the vine-dressers, but they were pleased to 
hear of God’s gracious visitation in the 
latter days, to be invited to a feast in the 
indefinite future time. How they would 
act when the feast was due remained to 
be seen.—rovs δούλους, the servants, are 
John the Baptist and Jesus Himself, 
whose joint message to their generation 
was: the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand, 
feast time at length arrived.—ovx ἤθελον 
ἐλθεῖν. Israel in all her generations had 
been willing in a general way, quite in- 
tending to come; and the generation of 
John and Jesus were also willing in a 
general way, if it had only been the 
right son who was going to be married. 
How could they be expected to accept 
the obscure Nazarene for Bridegroom 


a ΄ 
αριστόν 


and Ἠεῖτ ?—Ver. 4. ἄλλους δούλους 
refers to the apostles whose ministry 
gave to the same generation a second 
chance.—etware: the second set of 
messengers are instructed what to say ; 
they are expected not merely to invite to 
but to commend the feast, to provoke 
desire.—t8ov, to arrest attention.— 
pov, the midday meal, as 
distinct from δεῖπνον, which came later 
in the day (vide Lk. xiv. 12, where both 
are named = early dinner and supper). 
With the ἄριστον the festivities begin.— 
ἠτοίμακα, perfect, I have in readiness.— 
ταῦροι, σιτιστὰ, bulls, or oxen, and fed 
beasts: speak to a feast on a vast scale. 
---τεθυμένα, slain, and therefore must be 
eaten without delay. The word is often 
used in connection with the slaying of 
sacrificial victims, and the idea of 
sacrifice may be in view here (Koetsveld). 
—wayvra, etc.: all things ready, come to 
the feast. This message put into the 
mouths of the second set of servants 
happily describes the ministry of the 
apostles compared with that of our Lord, 
as more urgent or aggressive, and pro- 
claiming a more developed gospel. 
“They talked as it were of oxen and 
fed beasts and the other accompaniments 
of a feast, with an eloquence less 
dignified, but more fitted to impress the 
million with a sense of the riches of 
Divine grace” (The Parabolic Teaching 
of Christ). 

Vv. 5-7. οἱ δὲ ἀμελήσαντες ἀπῆλθον. 
The Vulgate resolves the participle and 
translates: ‘‘ neglexerunt et abierunt,” so 
also the A.V. and R.V.; justly, for the 
participle points out the state of mind 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


απ---το. 


oly fe 


τοὺς δούλους αὐτοῦ ‘UBpicay καὶ ἀπέκτειναν. 7. ᾽Ακούσας δὲ 61 Lk. xi. 45; 
βασιλεὺς 1 ὠργίσθη, καὶ πέµψας τὰ Ε στρατεύματα 3 αὐτοῦ ἀπώλεσε Actsxiv.s. 


a a & 
τοὺς φονεῖς ἐκείνους, καὶ τὴν πόλιν αὐτῶν “evémpyoe. 8. Τότελέγει ττ. 
a / 2 a ¢ = , J , > c 8 , 3 
τοῖς δούλοις αὐτοῦ, “O μὲν γάμος ἔτοιμός ἐστιν, οἱ δὲ κεκληµένοι οὐκ 


ἦσαν ἄξιοι. 


@ 4 , > 4 , 

ὥσους ἂν εὕρητε, καλέσατε εἰς τοὺς ydpous. 
οἱ δοῦλοι ἐκεῖνοι εἷς τὰς ὁδοὺς συνήγαγον πάντας ὅσους ὃ εὗρον, 
πονηρούς )τε καὶ ἀγαθούς' καὶ ἐπλήσθη ὁ γάμος” ἀνακειμένων. 


ds rare in Mt.; here, Ch. xxvii. 48, xxviii. 12. 


1 For ακονσας Se 0 Bao. NBL have ο δε βασιλευς. 


3 Ὦ has το στρατευµα (Trg. in margin). 


3 ovs in ND (W.-H). 


xviii. 32. 
kk. xxiii. 
Acts 

XXiii. το, 
27. Pach 
ϱ. πορεύεσθε οὖν ἐπὶ τὰς | διεξόδους τῶν ὁδῶν, καὶ 119. 

2 h hi 

1Ο. Καὶ ἐξελθόντε in NT 
i here only 

in N. T. 
[ρα, 1. ᾱ, 
CXix. 136). 
j This part. 

Often in Acts and Heb, 
* vupgdov in NBL (Tisch., W.H.). 

Jerusalem; πο argument against 


which gave rise to the conduct specified. 
They treated the pressing invitations 
and glowing descriptions of the servants 
with indifference.—és μὲν, ὃς δὲ: this 
one to his own (ἴδιον for αὐτοῦ = proprius 
for suus) field, that one to his trading 
(ἐμπορίαν here only in N. T. Cf. Lk. at 
this point).—Ver. 6. λοιποὶ, the rest, as 
if ot ἀμελήσαντες were only a part, the 
greater part, of the invited, while the 
expression by itself naturally covers the 
whole. Weiss finds in λοιποὶ a trace of 
patching: the parable originally referred 
to the people of israel as a whole, but 
Mt. introduced a reference to the San- 
hedrists and here has them specially 
in view as the λοιποι Koetsveld 
remarks on the improbability of the 
story at this point : men at a distance— 
rulers of provinces—could not be invited 
in the morning with the expectation of 
their being present at the palace by mid- 
day. So far this makes for the hypothesis 
of remodelling by a second hand. But 
even in Christ’s acknowledged parables 
improbabilities are sometimes introduced 
to meet the requirements of the case ; 
e.g., in Lk.’s version of the parable all 
τείαςα. ---κρατήσαντες . . . UB. καὶ 
ἀπέκτειναν: acts of open rebellion in- 
evitably leading to war. This feature, 
according to Weiss, lies outside the 
picture. Not so, if the marriage feast 
was to be the occasion for recognising 
the sonasheir. Then refusal to come 


meant withholding homage, rebellion in | 


the bud, and acts of violence were but 
the next step.—Ver. 7. τὰ στρατεύματα: 
the plural appears surprising, but the 
meaning seems to be, not separate 
armies sent one after another, but forces. 
---ἁπώλεσε, ἐνέπρησεν: the allegory here 
evidently refers to the destruction of 


authenticity, if xxiv. 2 be a word of 
Jesus. Note that the destruction of 
Jerusalem is represented as taking place 
before the calling of those without = the 
Gentiles. This is not according to the 
historic fact. This makes for authenticity, 
as a later allegorist would have been 
likely to observe the historical order 
(vide Schanz). 

Vv. 8-10. τότε: after the second set of 
servants, aS many as survived, had τε- 
turned and reported their ill-success.— 
λέγει, he says to them.—é@rowos, ready, 
and more.—Ver. 9. ἐπὶ τὰς διεξόδους 
is variously interpreted: at the crossing- 
places of the country roads (Fritzsche, 
De Wette, Meyer, Goebel); or at the 
places in the city whence the great roads 
leading into the country start (Kypke, 
Loesner, Kuinoel, Trench, Weiss). ‘‘Ac- 
cording as we emphasise one or other 
prep. in the compound word, either; the 
places whence the roads run out, or 
Oriental roads passing into the city 
through gates” (Holtz, H. C.). The 
second view is the more likely were it 
only because, the time pressing, the 
place where new guests are to be found 
must be near at hand. In the open 
spaces of the city, strangers from the 
country as well as the lower population 
of the town could be met with; the 
foreign element = Gentiles, mainly in 
view.—Ver. 1Ο. πονηρούς Te kat ἀγαθούς: 
not in the mood to make distinctions. 
τε connects tov. and ἀγαθ. together as 
one company = all they found, of all 
sorts, bad or good, the market-place 
swept «ἶεαῃ.---ἐπλήσθη, was filled ; satis- 
factory after the trouble in getting guests 
at all.—vupdaov, the marriage dining- 
hall; in ix. 15 the brideshamber. 


272 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXII. 


κ Lk. xxiii, 11. εἰσελθὼν δὲ 6 βασιλεὺς "θεάσασθαι τοὺς ἀνακειμένους εἶδεν 


55- 


ἐκεῖ ἄνθρωπον otk ἐνδεδυμένον ἔνδυμα γάμου: 12. καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, 


Ἑταῖρε, πῶς εἰσῆλθες ὧδε μὴ ἔχων ἔνδυμα γάμου; Ὁ δὲ | ἐφιμώθη. 


1 ver. 34. 


13. τότε εἶπεν ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῖς διακόνοις, Δήσαντες αὐτοῦ. 


k. 1.25; - 2s 
iv.so. Lk. πόδας καὶ χεῖρας, ἄρατε αὐτὸν καὶ ἐκβάλετεΣ εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ. 


1ν. . 


35. 1 a a 
Tim. v.18, ἐξώτερον΄ ἐκεῖ ἔσται 6 κλαυθμὸς καὶ 6 βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων- 


14. πολλοὶ γάρ εἶσι κλητοί, ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί. 


1 ειπεν after βασιλευς in NBL, cursives (33, etc.). 
2 For αρατε a. και εκβ. SYBL have simply εκβαλετε αντον (Tisch., W.H.). 


Vv. 11-14. The man without a wedding 
garment.—Though this feature has no 
connection with the polemic against the 
Sanhedrists, it does not follow, as even 
Weiss (Matthaus-Evang.) admits, that 
it was not an authentic part of a parable 
spoken by Jesus. It would form a suit- 
able pendant to any parable of grace, as 
showing that, while the door of the king- 
dom is open to all, personal holiness 
cannot be dispensed with.—Ver. 11. θεά- 
σασθαι: we are not to suppose that the 
king came in to look out for offenders, 
but rather to show his countenance to his 
guests and make them welcome.—av@pw- 
πον, etc.: while he was going round 
among the guests smiling welcome and 
speaking here and there a gracious word, 
his eye lighted on a man without a 
wedding robe. Only one? More might 
have been expected in such a company, 
but one suffices to illustrate the principle. 
—oix ἐνδεδ.: we have here an example of 
occasional departure from the rule that 
participles in the N. T. take pas the 
negativein all relations.—Ver. 12. ἑταῖρε, 
as in xx. 13.--πῶς εἰσῆλθες ὧδε: the 
question might mean, By what way did 
you come in? the logic of the question 
being, had you entered by the door you 
would have received a wedding robe like 
the rest, therefore you must have come 
over a wall or through a window, or 
somehow slipped in unobserved (Koets- 
veld). This assumes that the guests 
were supplied with robes by the king’s 
servants, which in the circumstances is 
intrinsically probable. All had to come 
in a hurry as they were, and some would 


have no suitable raiment, even had there 


been time to put iton. What the custom 
was is not very clear, The parable 
leaves this point in the background, and 
simply indicates that a suitable robe was 
necessary, however obtained. Theking’s 
question probably means, how dared you 
come hither without, etc. 2—pi ἔχων: μὴ 


this time, not ov, as in ver. 11, implying 
blame. Euthymius includes the ques- 
tion as to how the man got in among the 
matters not to be inquired into, διὰ τὴν 
αὐτονομίαν (freedom) τῆς παραβολῆς.--- 
6 δὲ ἐφιμώθη, he was dumb, not so much 
from a sense of guilt as from confusion 
in presence of the great king finding 
fault, and from fear of punishment.— 
Ver. 13. τοῖς διακόνοις, the servants. 
waiting on the guests, cf. Lk. xxii. 27, 
John ii. 5.—8yjoavres, ἐκβάλετε: dispro- 
portionate fuss, we are apt to think, 
about the rude act of an unmannerly 
clown. Enough surely simply to turn 
him out, instead of binding him hand 
and foot as a criminal preparatory to 
some fearful doom. But matters of eti- 
quette are seriously viewed at courts, 
especially in the East, and the king’s 
temper is already ruffled by previous 
insults, which make him jealous for his 
honour. And the anger of the king 
serves the didactic aim of the parable, 
which is to enforce the lesson: sin not 
because grace abounds. After all the 
doom of the offender is simply to be 
turned out of the festive chamber into the 
darkness of night outside.—éket ἔσται, 
etc.: stock-phrase descriptive of the 
misery of one cast out into the darkness, 
possibly no part of the parable. On 
this expression Furrer remarks: ‘‘ How 
weird and frightful, for the wanderer 
who has lost his way, the night, when 
clouds cover the heavens, and through 
the deep darkness the howling and teeth- 
grinding of hungry wolves strike the ear 
of the lonely one! Truly no figure could 
more impressively describe the anguish of 
the God-forsaken” (Wanderungen, p. 
181),—Ver. 14. πολλοὶ yap: if, as yap 
might suggest, the concluding aphorism 
referred exclusively to the fate of the 
unrobed guest, we should be obliged to 
conclude that the story did not supply a. 
good illustration of its truth, only one- 


1I—16. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


273. 


15. Τότε πορευθέντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι συμβούλιον ἔλαβον ὅπως αὐτὸν πι here only 


Ἀπαγιδεύσωσιν ἐν λόγῳ. 


αὐτῶν μετὰ τῶν Ἡρωδιανῶν, λέγοντες,! “Διδάσκαλε, οἴδαμεν ὅτι 
ἀληθὴς εἶ, καὶ τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν ἀληθείᾳ διδάσκεις, καὶ od 
μέλει σοι περὶ οὐδενός, οὐ γὰρ βλέπεις cis πρόσωπον ἀνθρώπων. 


16. καὶ ἀποστέλλουσιν αὐτῷ τοὺς μαθητὰς vide below. 


n Mk. xii.14. 
John x. 13; 
αι. 6:)) FX 
Ῥει ν 7 
(with περί 
τινος). 

092 Cor, x.7 

(τὰ κατὰ πρόσωπον). 


1 λεγοντας in NQBL in agreement with µαθητας. The reading λεγοντες has CDAZ 
al, in its favour, but modern editors prefer the other. 


out of many guests called being rejected. 
But the gnome really expresses the 
didactic drift of the whole parable. From 
first to last many were called, but com- 
paratively few took part in the feast, 
either from lack of will to be there or 
from coming thither irreverently. 

Vv. 15-22. The tribute question 
(Mk. xii. 13-17, Lk. xx. 20-26).—In this 
astute scheme the Sanhedrists, according 
to Mk., were the prime movers, using 
other parties as their agents. Here the 
Pharisees act on their own motion.— 
Ver. 15. τότε, then, with reference to 
xxi. 46, when the Sanhedrists were at a 
loss how to get Jesus into their power.— 
συμβούλιον ἔλαβον may refer either to 
process: consulting together; or to 
result: formed a Ρ]απ.--ὅπως, either 
how (quomodo, Beza, wie, H. C.), which, 
however, would more naturally take the 
future indicative (Fritzsche), or, better, 
in order ἐλαί.--'παγιδεύσωσιν, they might 
ensnare, an Alexandrine word, not in 
classics, here and in Sept. (vide Eccl. 
ix. 12).—év λόγῳ, by a word, either the 
question they were to ask (δι ἐρωτήσεως, 
Euthy.), or the answer they hoped He 
would give (Meyer). For the idea, cf. 
Is. xxix. 21.—Ver. 16. ἀποστέλλουσιν, 
as in Mk. xii. 13; there intelligible, here 
one wonders why the sent of Mk. should 
be senders of others instead of acting 
themselves. The explanation may be 
that the leading plotters felt themselves 
to be discredited with Jesus by their 
notorious attitude, and, therefore, used 
others more likely to succeed. More 
than fault-finding is now intended—even 
to draw Jesus into a compromising 
πείεταπςε.-- τοὺς μαθητὰς 4., disciples, 
apparently meant to be emphasised ; {.ε., 
scholars, not masters ; young men, pre- 
sumably not incapable of appreciating 
Jesus, in whose case a friendly feeling 
towards Him was not incredible, as in 
the case of older members of the 
party.—pera 7. Ἡρῳδιανῶν, with 
Herodians, named here only in Mat., 


-associated with Sadducees in Mk. viii. 


15; why so called is a matter of con- 
jecture, and the guesses are many: 
soldiers of Herod (Jerome) ; courtiers of 
Herod (Fritzsche, following Syr. ver.) ; 
Jews belonging to the northern tetrar- 
chies governed by members of the Herod 
family (Lutteroth); favourers of the 
Roman dominion (Orig., De W., etc.) ; 
sympathisers with the desire for a national 
kingdom so far gratified or stimulated 
by the rule of the Herod family. The 
last the most probable, and adopted by 
many: Wetstein, Meyer, Weiss, Keil, 
Schanz, etc. The best clue to the 
spirit of the party is their association 
with the Pharisees here. It presumably 
means sympathy with the Pharisees in 
the matter at issue; ᾖ2.6., nationalism 
versus willing submission to a foreign 
yoke; only not religious or theocratic, as 
in case of Pharisees, but secular, as 
suited men of Sadducaic proclivities. 
The object aimed at implies such sym- 
pathy. To succeed the snare must be 
hidden. Had the two parties been on 
opposite sides Jesus would have been 
put on His guard. The name of this 
party probably originated in a kind of 
hero-worship for Herod the Great. Vide 
on xvi. 1.—Aéyovras, etc., the snare set 
with much astuteness, and well baited 
with flattery, the bait coming first.— 
διδάσκαλε, teacher, an appropriate ad- 
dress from scholars in search of know- 
ledge, or desiring the solution ofa knotty 
question.—otSamev, we know, everybody 
knows. Even Pharisees understood so 
far the character of Jesus, α5 here 
appears; for their disciples say what 
they have been instructed to say. There- 
fore their infamous theory of a league 
with Beelzebub (xii. 24) was a sin against 
light; i.¢e., against the Holy Ghost. 
Pharisaic scholars might even feel a 
sentimental, half-sincere admiration for 
the character described, nature not yet 
dead in them as in their teachers. The- 
points in the character specified are— 


18 


274 


i 


KATA MATOAION 


XXII. 


- Lal - - , 
p here only 17. ete! οὖν ἡμῖν, τί σοι δοκεῖ; ἐἔξεστι δοῦναι κῆνσον Καΐσαρι, 
in Ne Ῥ. 


q here, 
parall., ‘ é } 
Rom. i.23; πειράζετε, ὑποκριταί ; 
viii. 29 al. 
Heb. x. 1. 

τ Mk. xii. 16. . 


ἢ οὔ ;’ 


Οἱ δὲ προσήνεγκαν αὐτῷ δηνάριον. 


18. Γνοὺς δὲ & ᾿Ιησοῦς τὴν πονηρίαν αὐτῶν εἶπε, “Ti µε 
19. ἐπιδείξατέ por τὸ 5 νόμισμα τοῦ κήνσου.΄ 


20. καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς,' “ Tivos 


” = , ” 
Lk. xx. a4.) Celkdy αὕτη καὶ ἡ "ἐπιγραφή; ΄ 21. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ," “Katoapos. 


Mk. xv. 26. 


a x A 
Lk. xxiii, Τότε λέγει αὐτοῖς, “**AmdédoTe οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίΐσαρι: καὶ τὰ τοῦ 


38. mt oe Pa) 
s parall, and Θεοῦ TO Θεῷ. 

Rote. xiii. & 

7 in same & ov. 

sense. 


22. Καὶ ἀκούσαντες Oavpacav: καὶ ἀφέντες αὐτὸν 


1 ειπον in LZ 33: adopted by Tisch. and W.H., though ειπε is found in ΝΕΡΟ. 
2 DLZ add ο Inoovs alter αντοις and W.H. put it in margin. 


3 s9B omit αντω ; found in DLZA, etc. 


(z) sincerity—éAnOjs ; (2) fidelity, as a 
telizious teacher—xal τ. 6 7. 0, ἐν ἀληθείᾳ 
διδάσκεις; (3) fearlessness—ov pede, 
etc.; (4) no respecter of persons—ov 
βλέπεις, etc. = will speak the truth to 
ali and about all impartially. The 
compliment, besides being treacherous, 
was insulting, implying that Jesus was a 
reckless simpleton who would give Him- 
self away, and a vain man who could be 
flattered. But, in reality, they sinned in 
ignorance. Such men could not under- 
stand the character of Jesus thoroughly: 
e.g-., His humility, His wisdom, and His 
superiority to partisan points of view.— 
Ver. 17. εἰπὸν οὖν, etc.: the snare, a 
question as to the lawfulness in a 
religious point of view (eor:—fas est, 
Grotius) of paying tribute to Caesar. 
The question implies a possible antago- 
nism between such payment and duty to 
God as theocratic Head of the nation. 
Vide Deut. xvii. 15.—% οὔ: yes or no? 
they expect or desire a negative answer, 
and they demand a plain one—responsum 
rotundum, Bengel; for an obvious reason 
indicated by Lk. (xx. 20). They de- 
manded more than they were ready to 
give, whatever their secret leanings ; no 
fear of them playing a heroic part. 
Vv. 18-22.  Christ’s reply and its 
effect.—Ver. 18. πονηρίαν, ὑποκριταί, 
wickedness, hypocrites; the former the 
evangelist’s word, the latter Christ’s, 
both thoroughly deserved. It was a 
wicked plot against His life veiled under 
apparently sincere compliments of young 
inquirers, and men of the world who posed 
as admirers of straightforwardness.— Ver. 
1g. τὸ νόµισµα (Latin numisma, here 
only in N. T.) τοῦ κήνσον, the current 
coin of the tribute, z.e., in which the 
tribute was paid, a roundabout name for 
a denarius (Mark).—8nvdpiov, a Roman 


coin, silver, in which metal tribute was 
paid (Pliny, N. H., 33, 3,15; Marquardt, 
Rom. Alt., 3, 2, 147).—Ver. 20. 7 εἰκὼν : 
the coin produced bore an image; perhaps 
not necessarily, though Roman, as the 
Roman rulers were very considerate of 
Jewish prejudices in this as in other 
matters (Holtzmann, H. C.), but at 
passover time there would be plenty of 
coins bearing Caesar’s image and in- 
scription to be had even in the pockets 
of would-be zealots.—Ver. 21. ἀπόδοτε, 
the ordinary word for paying dues 
(Meyer), yet there is point in Chrysos- 
tom’s remark: οὐ γάρ ἐστι τοῦτο δοῦναι, 
GAN’ ἀποδοῦναι: καὶ τοῦτο καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς 
εἰκόνος, καὶ ἀπὺ τῆς ἐπιγραφῆς δείκνυται 
(H. Ἱκκ.). The image and inscription 
showed that giving (ver. 17) tribute to 
Caesar was only giving back to him 
his own. This was an unanswerable 
argumentum ud hominem as addressed 
to men who had no scruple about using 
Caesar’s coin for ordinary purposes, but 
of course it did not settle the question. 
The previous question might be raised, 
Had Caesar a right to coin money for 
Palestine, z.e., to rule over it? The coin 
showed that he was ruler de facto, but 
not necessarily de jure, unless on the 
doctrine that might is right. The really 
important point in Christ’s answer is, 
not what is said but what is implied, 
viz., that national independence is not 
an ultimate good, nor the patriotism that 
fights for it an ultimate virtue. This 
doctrine Jesus held in common with the 
prophets. He virtually asserted it by 
distinguishing between the things of 
Caesar and the things of God. To have 
treated these as one, the latter category 
absorbing the former, would have been 
to say: The kingdom of God means the 
kingdom restored toIsrael. By treating 


17—29. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


275 


23. Ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ πρησῆλθον αὐτῷ Σαδδουκαῖοι, ot! λέγοντες 


μὴ εἶναι ἀνάστασιν, καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτόν, 24. λέγοντες, “'Διδά- 


σκαλε, Μωσῆς εἶπεν, ‘Edy τις ἀποθάνῃ μὴ ἔχων τέκνα, * ἐπιγαμ- ε here only 
in N. T. 


ς ~ a “a in N. 
βρεύσει ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀναστήσει σπέρµα (Gen. 


τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ. 
t 


25. Ἠσαν δὲ παρ ἡμῖν ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοί: καὶ 6 


ε XXXiV. 9; 
XYXViii. 8). 


πρῶτος γαµήσας 3 ἐτελεύτησε" καὶ μὴ ἔχων σπέρµα, ἀφῆκε τὴν u Mk xii. 24, 


γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ. 


26. ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ δεύτερος, καὶ ὁ 


27. 10οΓ. 
νι. 9; XV. 
Gal. 


τρίτος, ἕως τῶν ἑπτά. 27. ὕστερον δὲ πάντων ἀπέθανε καὶ ὃ ἡ γυνή. viz. Heb. 


a Aa v.2. 
28. ἐν τῇ οὖν ἀναστάσει,' τίνος τῶν ἑπτὰ ἔσται γυνή; πάντες γὰρ jamesi. 


ἔσχον αὐτήν. 


1 SQBDZ omit οι (Tisch., W.H.). 
word. Vide below. 


20. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “" Ma- 


16 (all in- | 
trans.), 


It might fall out by similar ending of previous 


2 ynpas in BLE, several cursives. γαμησας has probably been substituted as the 
more usual word: it is the reading of D, etc. 
* και omitted in S9BLA, found in D; may have come in from Mk. 


4 ovy after αναστασει in BDL. 


them as distinct Jesus said in effect: The 
kingdom of God is not of this world, 
it is possible to be a true citizen of the 
kingdom and yet quietly submit to the 
civil rule of a foreign potentate. This 
is the permanent didactic significance of 
the shrewd reply, safe and true (tutum et 
verum, Bengel), by which Jesus outwitted 
His crafty foes.—Ver. 22. ἐθαύμασαν, 
wondered ; the reply a genuine surprise, 
they had not thought it possible that He 
could slip out of their hands so com- 
pletely and so easily. 

Vv. 23-33. The Sadducaic pussle 
(Mk. xii. 18-27, Lk. xx. 27-38).—Ver. 23. 
προσἢλθον, approached, but with different 
intent, aiming at amusement rather than 
deadly mischief. Jesus was of no party, 
and the butt of all the parties.—eyovres, 
with oi, introduces the creed of the 
Sadducees ; without it, what they said to 
Jesus. They came and said: We do not 
believe in the resurrection, and we will 
prove to you its absurdity. This is 
probably Mt.’s meaning. He would 
not think it necessary to explain the 
tenets of the Sadducees to Jewish readers. 
—Ver. 24. Μωσῆς εἶπεν, what is put into 
the mouth of all is a free combination 
of Deut. xxv. 5, 6, with Gen. xxxviii. 8. 
In the latter text the Sept. has ἐπιγαμ- 


βρεύσαι for the Heb. 0 = to perform 


the part of a Jevir (Latin for brother-in- 
law) by marrying a deceased brother’s 
widow having no children, An ancient 
custom not confined to Israel, but 


practised by Arabians and other peoples 
(vide Ewald, Alterthiimer, p. 278; 
Benzinger, H. A., p. 345).—Ver. 25. 
παρ᾽ ἡμῖν: this phrase ‘with us,” in 
Matthew only, seems to turn an ima- 
ginary case into a fact (Holtz., H. C.). 
A fact it could hardly be. As Chrys. 
humorously remarks, after the second 
the brothers would shun the woman as 
a thing of evil omen (οἰωνίσαντο ἂν τὴν 
γνναῖκα, H.1xx.).—Ver. 26. ἕως τῶν ἑπτά 
till the seven, {.ε., till the number was 
exhausted by death. ‘“ Usque eo dum 
illi septem extincti essent”’ (Fritzsche).— 
Ver. 28. οὖν, introducing the puzzling 
question based on the case stated.—yuvy 
either subject = whose will the woman be ? 
or better, the article being wanting, pre- 
dicate = whose wife will she be? Cf. 
Luke, where γυνή is used twice. —advres 
γὰρ ἐ. α., all had her, and therefore (such 
is the implied thought) all had equal 
rights. Very clever puzzle, but not 
insuperably difficult even for Taimudists 
cherishing materialistic ideas of the 
resurrection life, who gave the first 
husband the prior claim (Schéttgen). 
Vv. 29-33. Christ’s answer.—One at 
first wonders that He deigned to answer 
such triflers; but He was willing meekly 
to instruct even the perverse, and He 
never forgot that there might be receptive 
earnest people within hearing. The 
Sadducees drew from Him one of His 
great words.—Ver. 20. πλανᾶσθε, ye err, 
passionless unprovocative statement, as 
if speaking indulgently to ignorant men.— 


276 


νᾶσθε, μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς, μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXII. 


30. ἐν 


γὰρ τῇ ἀναστάσει οὔτε γαμοῦσιν, οὔτε ἐκγαμίζονται,] ἀλλ᾽ ὡς ἄγγελοι 


τοῦ Θεοῦ év? οὐρανῷ εἶσι. 


31. περὶ δὲ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν νεκρῶν, 


οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑμῖν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ, λέγοντος, 32. :᾿Εγώ εἰμ. 


ὁ Θεὸς ᾽Αβραάμ, καὶ 6 Θεὸς Ισαάκ, καὶ 6 
έστιν ὅ ὃ Θεὸς Θεὸς ” νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ ζώντων. 


Θεὸς Ιακώβ; Οὐκ 


33. Καὶ ἀκούσαντες 


οἱ ὄχλοι ἐξεπλήσσοντο ἐπὶ τῇ διδαχῆ αὐτοῦ. 


34. Οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι, ἀκούσαντες ὅτι ἐφίμωσε τοὺς Σαδδουκαίους, 


v Lk vil. 30; fs 
X. 25; xi. TUVY) 
45; Χιν 


θησαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό, 35. καὶ ἐπηρώτησεν els ἐξ αὐτῶν " νομικός, 
Fit. Π 13, πειράζων αὐτόν, καὶ λέγων, 36. “Διδάσκαλε, ποία ἐντολὴ μεγάλη 


1 γαμµιζονται in ΝΒΗΙ,; the compound in many uncials, 


2 S9BL have τω before ουρανω. 
3 NQD (Tisch.) omit ο. 


meaning clear. Tisch. and W.H. omit. 


5 και λεγων is probably a mechanical addition. 


DAZ omit. 
W.H. in brackets, 
* The second θεος is wanting in BDA al. 


It has been added to make the 


It is wanting in NBL 33, Egypt. 


verss.; found in DAZ. Tisch. and W.H. omit. 


μὴ εἰδότες, etc.: doubly ignorant ; of the 
Scriptures and of God’s power, the latter 
form of ignorance being dealt with first.— 
Ver. 30. ἐν yap τ. ἀναστάσει might be 
rendered, with Fritzsche, in the re- 
surrection life or state, though in strict- 
ness the phrase should be taken as in 
νετ. 28.—as ἄγγελοι, as angels, so far as 
marriage is concerned, not necessarily 
implying sexlessness as the Fathers 
supposed.—év τῷ οὐρανῷ refers to the 
resurrected dead (Weiss), not to angels 
(Meyer) = they live an angelic life in 
heaven; by the transforming power of 
God.—Ver. 31. Thus far of the mode, 
now of the fact of resurrection.—oix 
ἀνέγνωτε, have ye not read? Many 
times, but not with Christ’s eyes. We 
find what we bring.—ré ῥηθὲν ὑμῖν, that 
said to you; to Moses first, but a word 
in season for the Sadducaic state of 
mind.—Ver. 32. ᾿Εγώ ely, etc., quoted 
from Ex. iii. 6. The stress does not lie 
on εἶμι, to which there is nothing corre- 
sponding in the Hebrew, but on the 
relation implied in the title: God of 
Abraham. Note in this connection the 
repetition of the Divine name before each 
of the patriarchal names, and here the 
article 6 before θεὸς each time (not so in 
Sept.). The idea is that the Eternal 
could not stand in such intimate con- 
nection with the merely temporal. The 
argument holds a fortiori in reference to 
Christ’s name for God, Father, which 
compels belief in human immortality, and 


in the immortality of all, for God is 
Father of all men, whereas the text quoted 
might avail in proof only of the immor- 
tality of the great ones, the heroes of the 
race.—ovx ἔστιν 6 θεὸς, with the article 
θεὸς is subject, and the idea: God does 
not belong to the dead ; without, it would 
be predicate = He is not a God of the 
dead. Onsecond θεὸς vide critical notes. 

Vv. 34-40. The great commandinent 
(Mk. xii. 28-34).—In a still more marked 
degree than in the case of the man in 
quest of eternal life, Mk.’s account pre- 
sents the subject of this incident in a 
more favourable light than that of Mt. 
The difference must be allowed to stand. 
Mk.’s version is welcome as showing a 
good side even in the scribe or Pharisee 
world.—Ver. 34. ἀκούσαντες, hearing ; 
not without pleasure, if also with annoy- 
ance, at the uniform success of Jesus.— 
ἐφίμωσεν: silenced, muzzled, from φιµός, 
a muzzle (ver. 12, used in literal sense in 
Deut. xxv. 4).—Ver. 35. εἷς ἐξ αὐτῶν 
one of the men who met together to con- 
sult, after witnessing the discomfiture 
of the scribes, acting in concest with 
them, and hoping to do better.—voptrds : 
here only in Mt., several times in Lk. 
for the scribe class = a man weli up in 
the law.—Ver. 36. mola ἐντολὴ; what 
sort of a commandment ? it is a question 
not about an individual commandment, 
but about the qualities that determine 
greatness in the legal region. This was 
a question of the schools. The dis- 


30—42. 


2p τῶ , Add 
ἐν τῷ νόµῳ ; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


277 


37. Ὁ δὲ ἸΙησοῦς εἶπεν 1 αὐτῷ, ''᾿Αγαπήσεις Κύριον 


τὸν Θεόν σου, ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ σου, καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Wuxi σου, καὶ ἐν w with ἐν 


e ~ , 
ὅλῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου. 


σεαυτόν. 


προφῆται  κρέµανται. ὅ 


41. Συνηγμένων δὲ τῶν Φαρισαίων, ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτοὺς ὁ Ιησοῦς, 
42. λέγων, “Tt ὑμῖν δοκεῖ περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ; 


38. αὕτη ἐστὶ πρώτη καὶ µεγάλη 3 ἐντολή. 
39. δευτέρα δὲδ ὁμοία αὐτῇ,' ᾽Αγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς 
40. ἐν ταύταις ταῖς δυσὶν ἐντολαῖς ὅλος ὁ νόμος καὶ ot 


τινι here 
only; with 
ex and 
gen. in 
Acts 
XXVili. 4; 
with επι 
and gen., 
Gal. ili. 13 
(of one 
hanging 


, cy 5 ” 
τινος ULOS εστι ; on a cross). 


1 For ο δε Ίησους ειπεν NEBL, Egypt. verss., have ο δε εφη. So Trg., Tisch., 


W.H., Ws. 


1 µεγαλη και πρωτη in $$BDLZ. The scribes would be apt to introduce the 
inverted order (as in T. R.) as the more natural. ' 


3 9 Β omit δε. 


* For οµοια αυτη B has simply οµοιως, which W.H. place in the margin. 


Perhaps it is the true reading. 


°> In $$BDLZE the verb comes before Φι προφηται and is singular ; doubtless the 


true reading. 


tinction between little and great was re- 
cognised (vide chap. v. Ig), and the 
grounds of the distinction debated (vide 
Schéttgen, ad loc., who goes into the 
matter at length). Jesus had already 
made a contribution to the discussion by 
setting the ethical above the ritual (xv. 
1-20, cf. xix. 18-22).—Ver. 37. ἄγαπ- 
ήσεις, etc. Jesus replies by citing Deut. 
vi. 5, Which inculcates supreme, devoted 
love to God, and pronouncing this the 
great (µεγάλη) and greatest, first (πρώτη) 
commandment. The clauses referring 
to heart, soul, and mind are to be taken 
cumulatively, as meaning love to the 
uttermost degree; with “all that is 
within ”’ us (πάντα τὰ ἐντός pov, Ps. ciii. 
1). This commandment is cited not 
merely as an individual precept, but as 
indicating the spirit that gives value to 
all obedience.—Ver. 39. δευτέρα: a 
second commandment is added from 
Lev. xix. 18, enjoining loving a neigh- 
bour as ourselves. According to T. R., 
this second is declared like to the first 
(ὁμοία αὐτῃ). The laconic reading of B 
(δευτ. ὁμοίως) amounts to the same 
thing = the second is also a great, first 
commandment, being, though formally 
subordinate to the first, really the first 
in another form: love to God and love to 
man one. Euthy. Zig. suggests that 
Jesus added the second commandment 
in tacit rebuke of their lack of love to 
Himself.—Ver. 40, 6. 6 vépos κρέµαται. 
Jesus winds up by declaring that on 


these two hangs, is suspended, the whole 
law, also the prophets = the moral drift 
of the whole O. T. is love; no law or 
performance of law of any value save as 
love is the soul of it. So Jesus soars 
away far above the petty disputes of the 
schools about the relative worth of 
isolated precepts; teaching the organic 
unity of duty. 

Vv. 41-46. Counter question of Fesus 
(Mk. xii. 35-37; Lk. xx. 41-44).—Not 
meant merely to puzzle or silence foes, 
or even to hint a mysterious doctrine as 
to the Speaker’s person, but to make 
Pharisees and scribes, and Sanhedrists 
generally, revise their whole ideas of the 
Messiah and the Messianic kingdom, 
which had led them to reject Him.— 
Ver. 42. Th ὑμῖν Soxet; what think 
you? first generally of the Christ (περὶ 
τ. X.); second more particularly as to 
His descent (τίνος vids ἐστι). --- τοῦ 
Δαβίδ, David’s, the answer expected. 
Messiah must be David’s son: that was 
the great idea of the scribes, carrying 
along with it hopes of royal dignity and 
a restored kingdom.—Ver. 43. πῶς οὖν, 
etc.: the question is meant to bring out 
another side of Messiah’s relation to 
David, based on an admittedly Messianic 
oracle (Ps, cx, 1), and overlooked by the 
scribes. The object of the question is 
not, as some have supposed, to deny in 
toto the sonship, but to hint doubt as to 
the importance attached to it. Think 
out the idea of Lordship and see where 


278 


~ - > 
Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “Tod AaBisd.’ 


KATA ΜΑΤΟΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXII. 43—46. 


43. Λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Mas οὖν Δαβὶδ 


x Cf. nvev-* ἐν * πνεύµατι κύριον αὐτὸν καλεῖ]; λέγων, 44. ‘ Eiwev 6? Κύριος 


ματι in . - 
Gal. v. 5. τῷ κυρίῳ µου, 


ὑποπόδιον ὃ τῶν ποδῶν σου. 
y here, πῶς vids αὐτοῦ ἐστι ; 
parall., 


Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν µου, ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου 
45. Ei οὖν Δαβὶδ καλεῖ αὐτὸν κύριον, 
46. Καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδύνατο αὐτῷ ἀποκριθῆναι * 


John xxi. Ἀόγον' οὐδὲ 7 ἐτόλμησέ τις dw ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας ἐπερωτῆσαι 


12 al. Se a) 
(with inf.). αυτον OUKETL. 


1S$BDLZ put καλει first, but differ in the order of κυριον αυτον. 


20 omitted in NBDZ. 
4 αποκ. αντω in NBDLZAS. 


it will lead you, said Jesus in effect. 
The scribes began at the wrong end: at 
the physical and material, and it landed 
them in secularity. Ifthey had begun 
with Lordship it would have led them 
into the spiritual sphere, and made them 
ready to accept as Christ one greater 
than David in the spiritual order, though 
totally lacking the conventional grandeur 
of royal persons, only an unpretending 
Son of Man. 

CHAPTER XXIII. THe Great ANTI- 
PHarisaic Discourse. This is one of 
the great discourses peculiar to the first 
Gospel. That some such words were 
spoken by Jesus in Jerusalem in the 
Passion week may be inferred from Mk. 
xii. 38-40, Lk. xx. 45-47. The few sen- 
tences there reported look like a frag- 
ment, just enough to show that there 
must have been more—too meagre (gar 
zu durftig., De W.) to have been all that 
Jesus said on such a large topic at such 
a solemn time. A weighty, deliberate, 
full, final statement, in the form of a 
dying testimony, was to be expected from 
One who had so often criticised the pre- 
vailing religious system in an occasional 
manner in His Galilean ministry—a 
summing up in the head-quarters of 
scribism of past prophetic censures 
uttered in the provinces. In sucha final 
protest repetitions might be looked for 
(Nésgen). In any case, whether all the 
words here brought together were spoken 
at this time or not, the evangelist did 
well to collect them into one body, and 
he could not have introduced the collec- 
tion at a more appropriate place. 

Vv. 1-12. Introduction to the dis- 
course.—Ver. I. Tots ὄχλοις καὶ τ. 
μαθηταῖς: the discourse is about scribes 
and Pharisees, but the audience is con- 
ceived to consist of the disciples and the 
people. Meyer describes the situation 
thus: in the foreground Jesus and His 


3 wroxate in SBDL al. 


disciples ; a little further off the ὄχλος; 
in the background the Pharisees.—Ver. 
2. ἐπὶ τ. Μ. καθέδρας, on the seat of 
Moses, short for, on the seat of a teacher 
whose function it was to interpret the 
Mosaic Law. The Jews spoke of the 
teacher’s seat as we speak of a professor’s 
chair.—éxd@toav, in effect, a gnomic 
aorist = solent sedere (Fritzsche), not a 
case of the aorist used as a perfect = have 
taken and now occupy, etc. (Erasmus). 
Burton (Syntax) sees in this and other 
aorists in N. T. a tendency towards use 
of aorist for perfect not yet realised: 
‘‘ rhetorical figure on the way to become 
grammatical idiom, but not yet become 
such,” § 55.—ot Gap. Wendt (L. ., i., 
186) thinks this an addition by the evan- 
gelist, the statement strictly applying only 
to the scribes.—Ver. 3. εἴπωσιν, say, in 
the sense of enjoining; no need therefore 
of τηρεῖν as in T. Ἐ.- ποιήσατε καὶ 
τηρεῖτε: The natural order if the pre- 
vious τηρεῖν be omitted. The diverse 
tenses are significant, the former pointing 
to detailed performance, the latter to 
habitual observance. Christ here recog- 
nises the legitimacy of the scribal func- 
tion of interpretation in a broad way, 
which may appear too unqualified and 
incompatible with His teaching at other 
times (Mt. xv. 1-20) (so Holtz., H. C.). 
Allowance must be made for Christ’s 
habit of unqualified statement, especially 
here when He is going to attack in an 
uncompromising manner the conduct of 
the Jewish doctors. He means: as 
teachers they have their place, but be- 
ware of following their example.—Ver. 
4 illustrates the previous statement.— 
Seopevovor, etc., they bind together, 
like sheaves, heavy backloads of rules. 
Think, e¢.g., of the innumerable rules for 
Sabbath observance similar to that pro- 
hibiting rubbing ears of corn as work— 
threshing. — δνσβάστακτα may be a 


XXIII. τ--6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


279 


XXIII. 1. ΤΟΤΕ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐλάλησε τοῖς ὄχλοις καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς a here only 


in this 


αὐτοῦ, 2. λέγων, Ἐπὶ τῆς Μωσέως καθέδρας ἐκάθισαν οἱ γραμματεῖς sense(Gen. 


καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι : 3. πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἂν 1 
Ν ο) 8 a a , 3 7 A 3 - λέ 4 A 
καὶ moteite °- κατὰ δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν μὴ ποιεῖτε' λέγουσι γὰρ καὶ 


οὐ ποιοῦσι. 


a 
καὶ ἐπιτιθέασιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ” 


A =e, 
αὑτῶν οὐ θέλουσι "κινῆσαι αὐτά. 


ποιοῦσι πρὸς τὸ θεαθῆναι τοῖς ἄνθρώποις. 
"φυλακτήρια αὐτῶν, καὶ µεγαλύνουσι τὰ κράσπεδα τῶν ἱματίων 
αὐτῶν ὃ" 6. Φιλοῦσί te® τὴν ' πρωτοκλισίαν ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις, καὶ 


Acts xxiv. 5 (to excite, metaph.). 
ε here only in N. T. f Lk. xiv. 7, 8. 


4. "δεσμεύουσι yap* φορτία βαρέα καὶ δυσβάστακτα,ὸ 
ὤμους τῶν ἀνθρώπων" τῷ δὲ δακτύλῳ © 
5. πάντα δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν 


XXXVii. 7. 
Judith viii. 
3 δράγ- 
para). Lk. 
Vili. 29. 
Acts xxii 
4 (to put 
in chains) 
b here and 
in Lk. xv. 
ἁπλατύνουσι 8€7 τὰς eh. xxvii. 
39. Mk. 
Xv. 29 (to 
move the 
head to 
and fro). 


εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν thpelv,? τηρεῖτε 


d a Cor. vi. 11, 13 (of the broadening or enlarging of the heart). 


1 εαν in NLZAZ; αν in BD (Tisch., W.H. have εαν). 


2 SBDLZ omit τηρειν. 


3 SBDLZ invert the order of the two verbs. 


+ Se in NBLAX 33. 
5 SOL omit και δυσβαστακτα (Tisch.). 


D has ποιειτε, the rest ποιησατε. 


BDA have the words, which may have 


come in from Lk. (xi. 46), but may also be a genuine reading (W.H. in margin). 


ὃ For tw δε δακτυλω ΜΒ ΓΙ, read αυτοι δε τω Sak. 


8 SBD omit των ιµατιων αντωγ. 


spurious reading imported from Lk. xi. 
46, but it states a fact, and was doubtless 
used by Jesus onsomeoccasion. it shows 
by the way that He had no thought of un- 
qualified approval of the teaching of the 
scribes.—émt τ. ὤμους, on the shoulders, 
that they may feel the full weight, de- 
manding punctual compliance.—avtot 
δὲ +. δακτύλῳ, etc., they are not willing 
to move or touch them with a finger; 
proverbial (Elsner) for “will not take the 
smallest trouble to keep their ownrules’’. 
A strong statement pointing to the subtle 
ways of evading strict rules invented by 
the scribes. ‘‘The picture is of the 
merciless camel or ass driver who makes 
up burdens not only heavy, but unwieldy 
and so difficult to carry, and then placing 
them on the animal’s shoulders, stands 
by indifferent, raising no finger to lighten 
or even adjust the burden” (Carr, 
ο αι τω. 

Vv. 5-7. The foregoing statement is 
of course to be taken cum grano. 
Teachers who absolutely disregarded 
their own laws would soon forfeit all 
respect. In point of fact they made a 
great show of zeal in doing. Jesus 
therefore goes on to tax them with acting 
from low motives.—Ver. 5. πάντα δὲ, 
etc., in so far as they comply with their 
rules they act with a view to be seen of 


7 yap in BDL, curs. verss. 
5 & in NBDLAX. 


men. This is a repetition of an old 
charge (Mt. νΙ.).---πλατύνουσι γὰρ, etc. : 
illustrative instances drawn from the 
phylacteries and the tassels attached to 
the upper garment, the former being 
broadened, the latter lengthened to 
attract notice. The phylacteries (Φνλακ- 
τήρια) were an admirable symbol at once 
of Pharisaic ostentation and Pharisaic 
make-believe. They were little boxes 
attached to the forehead and the left arm 
near the heart, containing pieces of 
parchment with certain texts written on 
them (Ex. xiii. 1-10, 11-16; Deut. vi. 
4-10; xi. 13-22) containing figurative 
injunctions to keep in memory God’s 
laws and dealings, afterwards mechani- 
cally interpreted, whence these visible 
symbols of obedience on forehead and 
arm. The size of the phylacteries indexed 
the measure of zeal, and the wearing of 
large ones was apt to take the place of 
obedience. It was with the Pharisees as 
with Carlyle’s advertising hatter, who 
sent a cart through the street with a huge 
hat in it instead of making good hats, 
For details on phylacteries and fringes 
consult works on Jewish antiquities. 
Lund, Fiidischen Heiligthiimer (1701), has 
a chapter (p. 796) on the dress of the 
Pharisees with pictorial illustrations. It 
has been discussed whether the name 


280 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXIII. 


gparall.and τὰς 5 πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς, 7. καὶ τοὺς ἀσπασμοὺς ἐν 
ταῖς ἀγοραῖς, καὶ καλεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ῥαββί, ῥαββί 1: 
δ. ὑμεῖς δὲ μὴ κληθῆτε, ῥαββί : ets γάρ ἐστιν ὑμῶν 6 καθηγητής, 


Lk. xi. 43. 


ὁ Χριστός”: 


πάντες δὲ ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί ἐστε. 


9. καὶ πατέρα μὴ 


καλέσητε ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς" els γάρ ἐστιν ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν,ὲ 6 ἐν τοῖς 
b here only οὐρανοῖς.ά 1ο. μηδὲ κληθῆτε, "KaOnyntal: els γὰρ ὑμῶν ἐστιν 6 


in N. T 


καθηγητής,» 6 Χριστός. 


1. ὁ δὲ µείζων ὑμῶν ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος. 


12. ὅστις δὲ ὑψώσει ἑαυτόν, ταπεινωθήσεται' καὶ ὅστις ταπεινώσει 


ἑαυτόν, ὑψωθήσεται. 


13. “Οὐαὶ δὲ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι 
a ‘ 
κατεσθίετε τὰς οἰκίας τῶν χηρῶν, Kal προφάσει μακρὰ προσευχό- 


1 9 ΒΤ,ΔΣ omit the second ραββι. 


2 BU, several cursives, have ο διδασκαλος instead of ο καθ. ο Χριστος, which 


seems a gloss from ver. Το. 


ἅνμων before ο πατηρ in RBZ 33. 


* o ονρανιος for 9 ev τ. ουρανοις in NBL 33. 


δοτι καθηγ. vp. εστιν εις in BDL 33. 


Φυλ. points to the keeping of the law or 
to the use of these things as amulets to 
ward off harm. The former was doubt- 
less originally in view, but the super- 
stitious abuse would soon creep in. The 
word is the equivalent in Hellenistic 


Greek for the Chaldee ρθω, prayers. 


—Ver.6. πρωτοκλισίαν: with religious 
ostentation goes social vanity, love of the 
first place at feasts, and first seats 
(πρωτοκαθεδρίας) in synagogues; an 
insatiable hunger for prominence.—Ver. 
7. τοὺς ἀσπασμοὺς, the (usual) saluta- 
tions, in themselves innocent courtesies, 
but coveted because offered in public 
places, and as demonstrations of respect. 
--ῥαββί, literally, my great one, like the 
French monsieur ; in Christ’s time a new 
title of honour for the Jewish doctors 
(vide Lightfoot, Ewald. Gesch. Christi, 
p. 305; Schiirer, ii., p. 315, who says the 
title came into use after the time of 
Christ).—Ver. 8. tpeis, you, emphatic: 
the Twelve, an earnest aside to them in 
especial (an interpolation by the evan- 
gelist, Weiss-Meyer), be not ye called 
Rabbi.—p.} κληθῆτε, ‘Do not seek to be 
called, if others call you this it will not 
be your fault”. Euthy. Zig.—Ver. 9. 
πατέρα = abba, another title of honour 
for the Rabbis (Schéttgen). The clause 
is to be translated: a father of you call 
not upon earth = do not pronounce this 
sacred name with reference to men. 
Vide Winer, § 64, 4, and cf. Heb. iii. 13. 


—Ver. ro. καθηγηταί, kindred with 
ὁδηγοὶ (ver. 16), guides, leaders in 
thought, desiring abject discipleship 


from followers. Gradatio: Rabbi, pater, 
ductor, Beng. The threefold counsel 
shows the intensely anti-prelatic spirit 
of Jesus. In spite of this earnest warn- 
ing the love of pre-eminence and leader- 
ship has prevailed in the Church to the 
detriment of independence, the sense of 
responsibility, and loyalty to God.— 
6 Χριστός: in this place though not in 
ver. 8 a part of the true text, but possibly 
an addition by the evangelist (“a proof 
that Matthew here speaks, not Jesus,” 
H. C.).—Vv. 11, 12, repeat in substance 
the teaching of xx. 26: xvili. 4; worth 
repeating and by no means out of place 
here. 

Vv. 13-31. The seven woes.—There 
are eight, if we count that in ver. 13 of 
T. R., but as this ver. is omitted in the 
best MSS. and appears to be a gloss from 
Mk. and Lk. I do not count it. Vide 
notes on Mk. xii. 40. These woes seem 
to be spoken directly to the scribes and 
Pharisees. Weiss regards this as a 
rhetorical apostrophe, the disciples being 
the real audience throughout.—Ver. 14. 
ὑποκριταί. Vide at vi.2. This epithet 
is applied to the scribes and Pharisees 
in each of the woes with terrific iteration. 
--κλείετε, ye shut the gates or the doors 
of the Kingdom of God, conceived as a 
city or palace. This the real effect of 
their action, not the ostensible. They 


7—16. 


µενοι: διὰ τοῦτο λήψεσθε περισσότερον κρίμα.ὶ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


~ A , [ή 
Ὑραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι κλείετε τὴν βασιλείαν 


~ > α΄ ὃν ~ > 6 2 ς A Δ > ο θ 
των ουρανων ἔμπροσθεν των ανγύρωπων * υμεις γαρ ουκ εισερχεσ' €, 


, a 
οὐδὲ τοὺς εἰσερχομένους ἀφίετε εἰσελθεῖν. 
ματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι περιάγετε τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ 


281 

14. Odat? ὑμιν, 

τς. Ovat ὑμῖν αμ- 
5 HE ite i Heb. xi. 19 
(without 


x i A a 2 j AX λα , ο σον 2a Fi 
τὴν ᾿ξηρὰν ποιῆσαι ἕνα ’ προσήλυτον, καὶ ὅταν γένηται, ποιεῖτε αὐτὸν R., with 


υἱὸν γεέννης διπλότερον ὑμῶν. 


λέγοντες, Ὃς ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ ναῷ, οὐδέν ἐστιν" ὃς δ ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν 


s in T. 
hes es in 'W.H.). 
16. Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, ὁδηγοὶ τυφλοί, οἱ | Actsii. το; 


Vi. 5; xiii. 
43. 


1 Ver. 13 omitted in $$BDLZ, some cursives, versions (including Syr. Sin.), 


Fathers, and by modern editors. 


2 $< must be supplied here if ver. 13 be omitted. 


claimed to be opening the Kingdom 
while really shutting it, and therein lay 
their Ἀγροοτίδγ.--ἔμπροσθεν τ. a.: as it 
were in men’s faces, when they are in 
the act of entering.—tpeis yap, etc. Cf. 
ν. 20. They thought themselves 
certainly within, but in the judgment of 
Jesus, with all their parade of piety, 
they were without.—r. εἰσερχομένους, 
those in the mood to enter, in the act of 
entering; the reference is to sincere 
seekers after God, and the statement is 
that the scribes were the worst advisers 
such persons could go to: the effect of 
their teaching would be to keep them 
out. This is the position implied 
throughout the Sermon on the Mount 
and in xi. 28-30.—Ver. 15. The second 
woe is the complement of the first: it 
represents the false guides, as, while 
utterly incompetent for the function, 
extremely eager to exercise it.—7epid- 
Ὕετε, ye move about, intransitive, the 
accusative following being governed by 
περὶ.---τ. ξηρὰν, the dry (land), some- 
times typa@ is similarly used for the sea 
(examples in Elsner). Cf. ψνυχρόν for 
cold water in x. 42. To compass sea 
and land is proverbial for doing anything 
with great Ζεα].---π. ἕνα προσήλυτον, to 
makea single proselyte. The zeal here 
ascribed to the Pharisees seems in one 
sense alien to their character as described 
in Lk. xviii. 11. One would expect them 
rather to be pleased to be a select few 
superior to all others than to be animated 
with a burning desire to gain recruits 
whether from Jews or from Gentiles. 
For an elaborate discussion of the 
question as to the existence of the 
proselytising spirit among the Jews vide 
Danz’s treatise in Meuschen, Nov. Test. 
ex Tal. illustratum, p. 649. Vide also 
Wetstein, ad loc. Wiunsche (Beitrage, 
p- 285) cites passages from the Talmud 


to prove that the Pharisees, far from 
being addicted to proselytising, were 
rather reserved in this respect. He con- 
cludes that Mt. xxiii. 15 must refer not 
to making proselytes to Judaism from 
Gentiles, but to making additions to 
their sect from among Jews (Sectirerei). 
This, however, is against the meaning 
of προσήλυτος. Assuming the fact to 
have been as stated, the point to be 
noted is that the Pharisees and scribes 
aimed chiefly, not at bringing men into 
the Kingdom of God, but into their own 
coterie.—8imddtepov v., twofold more, 
duplo quam, Vulgate. Kypke, while 
aware that the comparative of διπλοῦς 
(διπλότερος) does not occur in profane 
writers, thinks it is used here in the 
sense of deceitful, and renders, ye make 
him a son of gehenna, more fraudulent, 
more hypocritical than yourselves. 
Briefly the idea is: the more converted 
the more perverted, “je bekehrter desto 
verkehrter ” (Holtz., H. C.). 

Vv. 16-22. The third woe refers to 
the Jesuitry of the scribes in the matter 
of oaths ; the point emphasised, how- 
ever, is their stupidity in this part of 
their teaching (cf. Mt. v. 33 f.), where 
Christ’s teaching is directed against the 
use of oaths at all.—Ver. 16. ὁδηγ. 
τυφλοί, blind guides, not only deceivers 
but deceived themselves, lacking spiritual 
insight even in the simplest matters. 
Three instances of their blindness in 
reference to oaths are directly or in- 
directly indicated: oaths by the temple 
and the gold of the temple, by the altar 
and the offerings on it, by heaven and 
the throne of God therein. The principle 
underlying Rabbinical judgments as to 
the relative value of oaths seems to have 
been: the special form more binding 
than the general; therefore gold of the 
temple more than the temple, sacrifice on 


282 


kabsol. here τῷ 
and in ver. 


KATA MATOAION 


Χρυσῷ τοῦ vaod, * ὀφείλει. 


XXIII. 


17. μωροὶ καὶ τυφλοί: τίς γὰρ 


only. μείζων ἐστίν, ὁ Χρυσός, ἢ 6 vads ὁ ἁγιάζων ὶ τὸν Χρυσόν / 


, a > ~ 
18. καί, “Os ἐὰν dudon ἐν τῷ θυσιαστηρίω, οὐδέν ἐστιν: ὃς 8 ἂν 


1 Lk. xiii. 4 


(W.H.). ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ Sdpw TO ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ, ὀφείλει. 


Acts i. 19; 
li. 9, 14, 
and other. . 
places  δῶρον; 
(with acc. , 
of place). 
m Ch.xxviil. 
2, with 
επανω 
and gen. 


αὐτῷ καὶ ἐν τῷ 1 κατοικοῦντι 


1 αγιασας in NBDZ. 


10. μωροὶ καὶ 


, , - lal 
tupdot: τί γὰρ μεῖζον, τὸ δῶρον, ἢ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τὸ ἁγιάζον τὸ. 
20 ς 2 ὀ , α ἐν a θ s > , 5 σπα ‘ 
. 6 οὖν ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ ὀμνύει ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ 


» a a 9 a a 
ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ: 21. καὶ 6 ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ ναῷ ὀμνύει ἐν 


, ~ ~ 
αὐτόν: 22. καὶ 6 ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ 


an [ο a ‘ ~ A 
ὀμνύει ἐν τῷ θρόνω τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ ™ καθηµένῳ ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ. 


2 µωραι και omitted in RDLZ. ΒΟΔΣ asin Τ, R.; Tisch. omits; W.H. relegate 


to margin. 
3 κατοικησαντι in CDLZAZ al. 
κατοικησαντι in margin. 


altar more than altar, throne of God in 
heaven more than heaven. Specialising 
indicated greater earnestness. Whether 
these forms of oath were actually used 
or current, and what precisely they 
meant, e.g., gold of the temple: was it 
ornament, utensil, or treasure? is 
immaterial. They may have been only 
hypothetical forms devised to illustrate 
an argument in the schools.—ov8év ἐστι, 
ὀφείλει: the formulae for non-binding 
and binding oaths; it is nothing (the 
oath, viz.); he is indebted, bound to 


performance = 9f},—Ver. 17. 


γὰρ peiLwv: Jesus answers this question 
by asserting the opposite principle to 
that laid down by the Rabbis: the 
general includes and is more important 
than the particular, which He applies to 
all the three cases (vv. 17, το, 22). This 
is the more logical position, but the 
main point of difference is moral. The 
tendency of the Rabbis was to enlarge 
the sphere of insincere, idle, meaningless 
speech. Christ’s aim was to inculcate 
absolute sincerity = always mean what 
you say; let none of your utterances be 
merely conventional generalities. Be 
as much in earnest when you say ‘‘ by 
the temple’? as when you say “ by the 
gold of the temple” ; rather be so truth- 
ful that you shall not need to say either. 

Vv. 23-24. The fourth woe refers to 
tithe-paying (Lk. xi. 42).---ἀποδεκατοῦτε: 
a Hellenistic word=ye pay tithes, as in 
Gen. xxviii. 22; to take tithes from in 
Heb. vii. 5, 6.---ἠδύοσμον, ἄνηθον, κύμι- 
vov: garden herbs—mint (literally, sweet 
smelling), dill, also aromatic, cumin 
(Kiimmel, German) with aromatic seeds. 


τίς 


κατοικουντι in δ 8 it. vul. 


Tisch., W.H., with 


All marketable commodities, used as con- 
diments, or for medicinal purposes, pre- 
sumably all tithable, the point being 
not that the Pharisees were wilful in 
tithe-paying, but that they were ex- 
tremely scrupulous. Vide articles in 
Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible. The 
Talmud itself, however, in a sentence 
quoted by Lightfoot (‘‘decimatio oleorum 
esta Rabbinis’) represents tithing of herbs 
as arefinement of the Rabbis.—ra βαρύ- 
τερα: either, the weightier, in the sense 
of xxii. 36 (Meyer), or the more difficult 
to do, in the sense of ver. 4 (Weiss after 
Fritzsche). The idea seems tobe: they 
made a great show of zeal in doing what 
was easy, and shirked the serious and 
more arduous requirements of duty.—r. 
κρίσιν, righteous judgment, implying and 
=the love of righteousness, a passion for 
justice.—ro ἔλεος, neuter, after the fashion 
of later Greek, not τὸν ἔλεον, as in T. 
R.: mercy; sadly neglected by Phari- 
sees, much insisted on by Jesus.—r. 
πίστιν͵ faith, in the sense of fidelity, true- 
heartedness. As a curiosity in the history 
of exegesis may be cited the use of this 
text by Schortinghuis, a Dutch pietist of 
the eighteenth century, in support of the 
duty of judging the spiritual state of 
others (κρίσιν) | Vide Ritschl, Geschichte 
des Pictismus, i., 320.--- ταῦτα the greater 
things last πιεπεϊοπεά.---ἔδει, it was your 
duty to do.—ka&xeiva, and those things, 
the tithings, etc.: this the secondary 
duty; its subordinate place might be 
brought out by rendering: ‘“‘ while not 
neglecting to pay tithes as scrupulously 
as you please”. Bengel thinks ταῦτα 
and ἐκεῖνα here refer not to the order 
of the words but to the relative import- 


17---26. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


283 


«ς BUA Eh “A ‘ Ἆ « , oe a : ᾿ 
23. “Odat ὑμῖν, γραμματείς καὶ Φαρισαιοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι ” ἀπο- Ἡ Lk. xi. 42; 


χν]]. 12. 


A ‘ oe 
δεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ ἄνηθον καὶ τὸ κύμινον, καὶ ἀφήκατε Heb. vii.s. 


A Ul A , ‘ , 4 9 ex af ‘ 4 ’ s 
τὰ βαρύτερα τοῦ νόµου, Thy κρίσιν καὶ τὸν ENeov! καὶ τὴν πίστιν 
ταῦτα” ἔδει ποιῆσαι, κἀκεῖνα ph ἀφιέναι.ὸ 
oi* Οδιζλίζοντες τὸν Ρκώνωπα, τὴν δὲ κάµηλον “ καταπίνοντες. 


ο here only 
a νο. 

, (Amos vi. 

24. ὁδηγοὶ τυφλοί, 6). 

p here only 
in N. T. 
Rev. xii. 


n ~ 4 q 
25. Oval ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι καθαρίζετε © 16 (same 


τὸ ἔξωθεν τοῦ ποτηρίου καὶ τῆς παροψίδος, ἔσωθεν δὲ γέµουσιν ἐξ ὅ 


τε a \s2 , 
ἁρπαγῆς καὶ " ἀκρασίας. 


Xu. 3 9 a / Ν lel id 6 Y, , ‘ wee! ν 
το εντος του ποτηριου και της παροψί ος, ινα γεγνηται και TO εκτος 


αὐτῶν Ἰ καθαρόν. 


1 το ελεος in NBDL. 
2δε after ταντα in BCLAX. 
Σαφειναι in NBL. 


26. Φαρισαῖε τυφλέ, καθάρισον πρῶτον 


sense). I 
Cor. xv. 
54. 2 Cor. 
v.4. Heb. 
xi. 29 (to 
swallow 


LE xd 

r Lk. xi. 39. 
Heb. x. 34. 

6 1 Cor. vii. 5. 


τον ελεον a grammatical correction. 


αφιεναι in CDA al. 
* ot omitted in NBL, by oversight, Weiss thinks. 


Tisch. retains, W.H. omit. 


5 CD omit εξ, which, however, is in §$BLAX, and is retained by Tisch., W.H., 


and other editors. 


5 kat της παροψιδος is in SBCLAE al., but is omitted by D, and may be a 
mechanical repetition from ver. 25 (Tisch. omits, W.H. bracket). 


7avrov in BD and several cursives, the natural reading if και της παροψ. be 


omitted. 


ance of the things (‘‘non pro serie ver- 
borum, sed pro ratione rerum”’). On this 
view ‘these’? means tithe-paying. — 
Ver. 24. διλίζοντες (διὰ and An, 
Passow), a little used word, for which 
Hesychius gives as a synonym, διηθέω, 
to strain through.—Tév κώνωπα, τὴν 
κάµηλον, the gnat, the camel: article 
as usual in proverbial sayings. The 
proper object of the former part. is οἶνον : 
straining the wine so as to remove the 
unclean midge. Swallowing the camelisa 
monstrous supposition, but relevant, the 
camel being unclean, chewing the cud 
but not parting the hoof (Lev. xi. 4). 
The proverb clinches the lesson of the 
previous verse. 

Vv. 25-26. Fifth woe, directed against 
externalism (Lk. xi. 30-41).---τῆς παροψί- 
Sos, the dish, on which viands were served. 
In classics it meant the meat, not the dish 
(τὸ Sov οὐχὶ δὲ τὸ ἀγγεῖον, Phryn., p. 
176). Rutherford (New Phryn., p. 265) τε- 
marks that our word “dish” has the 
same ambiguity.—éo-wOev δὲ γέµονσιν ἐξ: 
within both cup and plate are full of, or 
from. ἐκ is either redundant or it points to 
the fulness as resulting from the things 
following : filled with wine and meat pur- 
chased by the wages of unrighteousness : 
luxuries acquired by plunder and licence. 
The verb γέµουσι occurs again in ver. 27 


without ἐκ, and this is in favour of the 
second view. But on the other hand in 
ver. 26 the vessels are conceived’ of as 
defiled by ἁρπαγή and ἀκρασία, there- 
fore presumably as filled with them. Here 
as in vi. 22, 23, the physical and ethical 
are mixed in the figure.—Ver. 26. Φαρι- 
wate τυφλέ: change from plural to 
singular with increased earnestness, and 
a certain friendliness of tone, as of one 
who would gladly induce the person ad- 
dressed to mend his ways.—xaOdpioov : if 
ἐξ, ver. 25, is taken = by, then this verb will 
mean: see that the wine in the cup be 
no more the product of robbery and un- 
bridled desire for other people’s property 
(Weiss and Meyer). On the other view, 
that the cup is filled with these vices, the 
meaning will be, get rid of them.—iva 
γένηται, etc., in order that the outside 
may become clean. The ethical clean- 
ness is conceived of as ensuring the cere- 
monial. Or, in other words, ethical 
purity gives all the cleanness you need 
(‘all things are clean unto you,” Lk. xi. 
41). Practically this amounts to treating 
ceremonial cleanness as of little account. 
Christ’s way of thinking and the Phari- 
saic were really incompatible. 

Vv. 27-28. Sixth woe, referring to no 
special Pharisaic vice, but giving a 
graphic picture of their hypocrisy in 


284 


KATA MATOAION 


XXIII. 


A “ ~ - 
27. “Oval ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι παρ- 
t Che xxvii. οµοιάζετε] "τάφοις "κεκονιαµένοις, οἵτινες ἔξωθεν μὲν φαίνονται 


61, 64, 66; 


ος " ὡραῖοι, ἔσωθεν δὲ Ὑέμουσιν ὀστέων νεκρῶν καὶ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας. 
. iii. 4 nm = 
13. 28. οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔξωθεν μὲν Φαίνεσθε τοῖς ἀνθρώποις δίκαιοι, 


w Acts xxiii. . κ. 9 
3. ἔσωθεν δὲ µεστοί ἐστε 
ν Acts iii. 2, 


ς , Ν , 
ὑποκρίσεως καὶ ἀνομίας. 


20. Odal ὑμῖν, 


κ 4 x 
το. Rom. γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί, ὅτι οἰκοδομεῖτε τοὺς τάφους 
Χ. 1 A a \ a - PS 

τῶν προφητῶν, καὶ κοσμεῖτε τὰ μνημεῖα τῶν δικαίων, 30. καὶ 


λέγετε, Ei ἦμεν ὃ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν, οὐκ ἂν ἦμεν > 


Ww ‘ ων 4 
w Lk. v.10, KOLYWVOL αυτων 


1 Cor. x 
18, 20. 
Heb. x. 33. 


ἐν τῷ αἵματι τῶν προφητῶν. 


πληρώσατεδ τὸ µέτρον τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν. 


31. ὥστε μαρτυρεῖτε 


. - a c , - 
ἑαυτοῖς, ὅτι υἱοί ἐστε τῶν φονευσάντων τοὺς προφήτας: 32. καὶ ὑμεῖς 


33. ὄφεις, γεννήµατα 


1B τ have the simple opovafere, which W.H. place in the margin. 


Σεστε µεστοι in NBCDL 13, 33, 69 al. 


3 ηµεθα in both places in most uncials, including &BCDL. 


* αυτων before κοινωνοι in BD (W.H.). 


* a@Anpwcere in B 60, επληρωσατε in D; both, according to Weiss, arising from 
inability to understand the sense of the imperative (W.H. have B’s reading in 


margin). 


general (cf. Lk. xi. 44).—Ver.27. παρο- 
µοιάζετε, in B ὁμοιάζετε, under either form 
an hapax leg.—Kexoviapévots (from Kovia, 
dust, slaked lime), whitewashed, referring 
to the practice of whitewashing the sepul- 
chres in the month Adar, before passover 
time, to make them conspicuous, inad- 
vertent approach involving uncleanness. 
They would be wearing their fresh coat 
just then, so that the comparison was 
seasonable (vide Wetstein, ad loc.).— 
ἔξωθεν, ἔσωθεν, again a contrast between 
without and within, which may have 
suggested the οοπιρατίδοη.---ὡραῖοι, fair, 
without; the result but not the intention 
in the natural sphere, the aim in the 
spiritual, the Pharisee being concerned 
about appearance (chap. vi.).— ὀστέων, 
etc., revolting contrast: without, quite 
an attractive feature in the landscape ; 
within, only death-fraught -loathsome- 
ness.—Ver. 28. οὕτω, etc.: the figure 
apposite on both sides; the Pharisaic 
character apparently saintly; really in- 
wardly, full of godlessness and iinmorality 
(ἀνομίας), the result being gross syste- 
matic hypocrisy. 

Vv. 29-33. Final woe (Lk. xi. 47-48), 
dealing with yet another phase of hypoc- 
risy and a new form of the contrast 
between without and within; apparent 
zeal for the honour of deceased prophets, 
real affinity with their murderers.—Ver. 
29. οἰκοδομεῖτε, may point to repair or 
extension of old buildings, or to new 
edifices, like some modern monuments, 


the outcome of dilettante hero-worship.— 
τάφους, μνημεῖα, probably synonyms, 
though there may have been monuments 
to the dead apart from burying places, 
to which the former word points.— 
προφητῶν and δικαίων are also practi- 
cally synonymous, though the latter is 
a wider category.—koopetre points to de- 
coration as distinct from building opera- 
tions. Firrer (Wanderungen, p. 77) 
suggests that Jesus had in view the 
tomb of Zechariah, the prophet named .in 
the sequel, in the valley of Jehoshaphat, 
which he describes as a lovely little 
temple with ornamental half and quarter 
pillars of the Ionic order.—Ver. 3Ο. λέ- 
γετε; they not merely thought, or said by 
deed, but actually so pointed the moral 
of their action, not trusting to others 
to draw the inference.—jjpe@a, not in 
classics, ἥμην the usual form of sing. in 
N. T. being also rare; the imperfect, but 
must be translated in our tongue, ‘if we 
had been”. For the imperfect, used 
when we should use a pluperfect, vide 
Mt. xiv. 4, and consult Burton, § 29.— 
οὐκ ἄν ἤμεθα, the indicative with ἂν, as 
usual in suppositions contrary to fact, 
vide Burton, § 248.—Ver. 31. ὥστε, with 
indicative expressing result = therefore. 
—€avtois, to and against yourselves. 
Jesus reads more meaning into their 
words than they intended : ‘‘ our fathers ”’; 
yes! they are your fathers, in spirit as 
well as in blood.—Ver. 32. καὶ, and, as 
ye have called yourselves their sons, 


27—36. 


ἐχιδνῶν, πῶς φύγητε ἀπὸ τῆς κρίσεως τῆς γεέννης; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


285 


34. Διὰ τοῦτο, 


(Sou, ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω πρὸς ὑμᾶς προφήτας καὶ σοφοὺς καὶ "γραμµα- x vide Ch. 


τεῖς: καὶ] ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀποκτενεῖτε καὶ σταυρώσετε, καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν 


xiii. 52. 


µαστιγώσετε ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς ὑμῶν, καὶ διώξετε ἀπὸ πόλεως 


eis πόλιν: 35. ὅπως ἔλθῃη Ef Spas πᾶν αἷμα δίκαιον ἐκχυνόμενον 7 


eA an ~ 3 9 lol o ” A , o A a 
επι τῆς γῆς, ἀπὸ τοῦ alwaTos Αβελ τοῦ δικαίου, ἕως τοῦ αίματος 


, cia ΄ a > U A ~ lol ΔΝ A 
Ζαχαρίου υἱοῦ Βαραχίου, ov ἐφονεύσατε μεταδὺ του ναοῦ και τοῦ 


θυσιαστηρίου. 


36. ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἦξει ταῦτα πάντα ὃ ἐπὶ τὴν 


I SSBAX 1, 13, 33, 69 al. omit καν, found in CDL. 
Ξ εκχυννοµενον in S§BCDAYX al., 1, 33 al. 
* q@avtTa Tavta in ΒΧΔΣ (W.H. in margin); as in Τ. R., in SCDL, Vul. Cop. 


(Tisch., W.H. in text). 


so show yourselves to be such indeed 
(Weiss).—tAnpdéocate. The reading πλη- 
ῥώσετε is due to shrinking from the idea 
conveyed by the imperative. To the 
same cause is due the permissive (Grotius 
al.) or ironical (De W.) senses put 
upon the imperative. Christ means what 
He says: ‘ Fill up the measure of your 
fathers ; crown their misdeeds by killing 
the prophet God has sent to you. Do at 
last what has long been in your hearts. 
The hour is come.”—Ver. 33. Awful 
ending to a terrific charge, indicating 
that the men who are predestined to 
superlative wickedness are appropriately 
doomed to the uttermost penalty.—ddets, 
γεν. ἐχιθνῶν : already stigmatised as 
false, fools, blind, they are now described 
as venomous, murderous in thought and 
deed. Cf. iii. 7.--πῶς φύγητε, the de- 
liberative subjunctive. ‘‘ The verb of a 
deliberative question is most frequently 
in the first person, but occasionally in 
the second or third. Mt. xxiii. 33, Rom. 
x. 14.’’—Burton, § 17ο. 

Vv. 34:36. Peroration (Lk. xi. 49-51). 
—Ver. 34. διὰ τοῦτο. The sense requires 
that this be connected with both νν. 32 
and 33. ‘The idea is that all God’s deal- 
ings with Israel have been arranged from 
the first so as to ensure that the genera- 
tion addressed shall fill up the measure 
of Israel’s guilt and penalty. The refer- 
ence of ἀποστέλλω is not confined to 
what had been done for that generation. 
It covers all the generations from Abel 
downwards. The form in which the 
thought is expressed at first creates a 
contrary impression: ᾿Ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλω. 
But either the ἐγὼ is used in a supra- 
historical sense, or it must be regarded 
as a somewhat unsuitable word, and the 
correct expression of the source found in 
Luke’s σοφία τοῦ θεοῦ εἶπεν, what fol- 


lows becoming thus a quotation, either 
in reality from some unknown writing, 
as many think, or in the conception of 
the speaker. I see no insuperable diffi- 
culty in taking Mt.’s form as the original. 
Olshausen conceives of Jesus as speak- 
ing, not as a personality involved in the 
limits of temporal life, but as the Son of 
God, as the essential wisdom of God. 
The éy® might be justified without this 
high reference to the Divinity of Jesus, 
as proceeding from His prophetic con- 
sciousness in an exalted state of mind. 
The prophet habitually spoke in the 
name of God. Jesus alsoat sucha great 
moment might speak, as it were imper- 
sonally, in the name of God, or of wisdom. 
Resch, Agrapha, p. 274 ff., endeavours 
to show that “the wisdom of God” 
was, like ‘the Son of Man,” one of the 
self-designations of Jesus. Whether that 
be so or not, I think it is clear from this 
passage, and also from Mt. xi. 28-30 
(vide remarks there), that He did some- 
times, as it were, personate wisdom. 
The present ἀποστέλλω, regards the his- 
tory of Israel sub specie acternitatis, for 
which the distinction of present and past 
does not exist.—mpopyrtas, etc.: these 
names for the Sent clearly show that 
past and present are both in view. It is 
not merely the bd γραμματεῖς (cf. 
xiii. 52) -- ἀποστόλους, Lk. xi. 49, that are 
in view.—oravpecere, 2 hint at the im- 
pending tragic event, the Speaker one of 
the Sent.—x«at ἐξ αὐτῶν, etc. : a glance at 
the fortunes of the Twelve. Cf. chap. x. 
16-23.—Ver. 35. ὅπως ἔλθῃ: divine in- 
tention read in the light of result. God 
sent messengers that they might be 
killed, and that Israel by killing them 
might deserve to suffer in the final gene- 
ration wrath to the uttermost. Vide on 
Mt. xxii. 7.--αἵμα, thrice named: “' ter 


286 


KATA MATOAION 


XXIII. 37—39. 


γ ee ani. yevedy ταύτην. 37. Ἱερουσαλήμ, Ἱερουσαλήμ, ἡ ἀποκτείνουσα τοὺς 


xiii. 27. 
Lk. xiii.34; 


προφήτας καὶ λιθοβολοῦσα τοὺς ἀπεσταλμένους πρὸς αὐτήν, ποσάκις 


ss. : 3 σι os BS , a , 
a Mk ἠθέλησα 7 ἐπισυναγαγεῖν τὰ τέκνα σου, "ὃν τρόπον ἐπισυνάγει 


xii. I; 
xvii. 37. 
z same 
phrase in 
Lk. xiii. 
34. Acts, , op 
i. τα; vii. OvOMaTL Κυρίου. 
28. 2 Tim. 
iii.8. a here and in Lk. xiii. 34. 
ix. 9; xii. 14. 


b here in N. T. (Ρε, Ixxxiv. 3). 


“*Spust τὰ > νοσσία ἑαυτῆς Σ ὑπὸ τὰς πτέρυγας, καὶ οὐκ ἠθελήσατε ; 
_ 38. Bod, ἀφίεται ὑμῖν ὁ οἶκος ὑμῶν ἔρημος 3: 39. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, 
Od py µε ἴδητε ἀπ᾿ ἄρτι, ἕως ἂν εἴπητε, Εὐλογημένος ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἐν 


ς Lk. xiii. 34. Rev. iv. 8; 


? ορνις before επισυναγει in SBDL 1, 33, 69 al. 


2 αυτης in NDA 33 (Tisch.). 
αντης, but within brackets). 


5 BL omit ερηµος, found in very many uncials (ΝΟΡΔΣ al.) and versions. 


B has neither avrys nor εαντης (W.H. have 


The 


omission might be an assimilation to Lk. (xiii. 35), where the word is wanting in 


many of the best MSS., but it is more likely to be an explanatory gloss. 


below. 


hoc dicitur uno hoc versu magna vi,” 
Bengel.—aré τ. ἆ., etc., from the blood 
of Abel, the first martyr, mentioned in 
the first book of the Hebrew Bible, to 
the blood of Zechariah, the prophet 
named in the last book (2 Chron. xxiv. 
20-22).—viot Βαραχίον, the designation 
of the last but one of the minor prophets, 
applied here to the other Zechariah, by 
inadvertence either of the evangelist or 
of an early copyist.—év ἐφονεύσατε, 
whom ye (through your spiritual ances- 
tors) slew; fact as stated in 2 Chron. 
xxiv. 21.—Ver. 36. ἁμὴν: solemn intro- 
duction of a statement terrible to think 
of: sins of countless generations accum- 
ulating for ages, and punished in a final 
representative generation ; true, however 
terrible. 

Vv. 37-39. Apostrophe to the Holy 
City (Lk. xiii. 34) —Etra πρὸς τὴν πόλιν 
ἀποστρέφει τὸν λόγον. Chrys., H. Ixxiv. 
—Ver. 37. “Ἱερουσαλήμ, the Hebrew 
form of the name, exceptional in Mt., 
very appropriate to the solemn situation. 
Twice spoken; why? ‘It is the fashion 
of one pitying, bewailing, and greatly 
loving,” 0Ἠτγς. ---ἀποκτείνουσα, λιθο- 
βολοῦσα: present participles, denoting 
habit and repute, now and always be- 
having so—killing, stoning.—mpos αὐτήν, 
to her, not to thee, because the participles 
are in the nominative, while “Ἱερουσαλήμ 
is vocative: ‘‘exemplum compellationis 
per vocativum ad quam deinceps non 
amplius spectatur”’ (Fritzsche). Grotius 
regards the transition from second to 
third person as an _ Orientalism.— 
ποσάκις, how often; on this word has 
been based the inference of frequent 


Vide 


visits to Jerusalem not mentioned in the 
Synoptics. But the allusion may be to 
the whole history of Israel (so Orig., 
Hil., Jer.,) and to the whole people, as 
the children of the metropolis, the 
Speaker still continuing to speak in the 
name of God, as in ver. 34, and including 
Himself among God’s agents.—épvis, a 
bird or fowl; after Plato, a hen; so 
here, the emblem of anxious love. θερμὸν 
τὸ ζῶον περὶ τὰ ἔκγονα, Chrys. She 
gathers her chickens under her wings for 
protection against impending danger. 
This Jesus and all the prophets desired 
to do; a truth to be set over against the 
statement in vv. 34-35, which seems to 
suggest that God’s aim was Israel’s 
damnation.—ra νοσσία (Attic, νεοσσία: 
form disapproved by Phryn., p. 206), her 
brood of young birds. Cf. Ps. lxxxiv. 4, 
where, as here, a pathetic use is made 
of the emblem.—ovx ἠθελήσατε, ye 
would not, though I would (ἠθέλησα). 
Μαπ consent necessary.—Ver. 38. 
ἰδοὺ, etc., solemn, sorrowful abandon- 
ment of the city to its fate.—dadterar 
ὑμῖν, spoken to the inhabitants of 
Israel.—6 οἶκος ὑ., your house, 2.ε., the 
city, not the temple; the people are 
conceived of as one family.—é€pypos, 
wanting in BL, and omitted by W.H., 
is not necessary to the sense. The 
sentence is, indeed, more impressive 
without it: ‘Behold your house is 
abandoned to your care: those who 
would have saved you giving up further 
effort”. What will happen left to be 
imagined ; just what ἔρημος expresses— 
desolation.—Ver. 39. am ἄρτι, from 
this moment, Christ’s prophetic work 


XXIV. 1—3. 


XXIV. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐἐελθὼν ὁ 


προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐπιδεῖξαι αὐτῷ τὰς οἰκοδομὰς τοῦ ἱεροῦ. 
2. ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ” εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Od βλέπετε πάντα ταῦτα ὃ; ἀμὴν 
λέγω ὑμῖν, οὗ μὴ ἀφεθῇ ὧδε λίθος ἐπὶ λίθον, ὃς οὐ μὴ * " καταλυθή- ϱ 


2» 
σεταιν. 


> ~ c ‘ 3 297 , ές 3 A ς a) ’ lol 
αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ κατ ἰδίαν, λέγοντες, '' Εἰπὲ ἡμῖν, πότε ταῦτα 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


3 + 3 ΄ κ. ae al 
Ιησοῦς ἐπορεύετο Gro του ἱερου 


3. Καθημένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τοῦ ὄρους τῶν ἐλαιῶν, προσῆλθον 


287 


καὶ a parall. Ch. 
XXvi. 61. 
Acts vi. 
14. 2Cor. 
ν.1. Gal. 
ii. 18. 
again vv 
27, 37, 39; 
nowhere 
else in 
Gospp., 
frequent 


a ~ A , 4 ~ ΄ 
ἔσται; καὶ τί τὸ σημεῖον τῆς σῆς ” παρουσίας, καὶ τῆς ὅ "συντελείας {η Epistles. 


¢c vide Ch. 
xiii. 39. 


1 απο τον tepov επορευετο in $$BDI_AZ (so modern editors), 


3 For ο δε Ιησους NBDL ai. versions have 9 δε αποκριθεις without Incovs. 


ὅταντα παντα in SBCLX ail. 
‘ un wanting in NBCDLXAZ al. 


done now: it remains only to die.—éws 
av εἴπητε: a future contingency on 
which it depends whether they shall ever 
see Him again (Weiss in Meyer). He 
will not trouble them any more till their 
mood change and they be ready to re- 
ceive Him with a Messianic salutation. 

The exquisite finish of this discourse, 
in the case of ordinary orators, would 
suggest premeditation and even writing. 
We have no means of knowing to what 
extent Jesus had considered beforehand 
what He was to say on this momentous 
occasion. The references to the whited 
sepulchres and the tombs of the prophets 
show that the speech was in part at 
least an extempore utterance. 

CHAPTER XXIV. THE APOCALYPTIC 
Discourse. This chapter and _ its 
synoptical parallels (Mk. xiii., Lk. xxi.) 
present, in many respects, the most 
difficult problem in the evangelic records. 
Many questions may be, have been, 
asked concerning this discourse on things 
to come. Which of the three versions 
comes nearest to what Jesus said? Did 
He say all that is here reported on this 
occasion, or have we in all the versions, 
more or less, a combination of words 
spoken at different times? Were the 
words here collected, all of them, or even 
the greater number of them, ever spoken 
by Jesus at any time; have the evan- 
gelists not worked up into the discourse 
a Jewish, or Jewish-Christian, apoca- 
lypse, or given us a composition of 
their own, consisting of certain logia of 
the Master, as the nucleus, with addi- 
tions, modifications, and comments in 
the light of subsequent events? Finally, 
what is the didactic significance of the 
discourse, what did Jesus mean to teach 
His disciples respecting the themes 
treated: the Ruin of the Holy City, 


D has the words in same order as T. R, 


5 της omitted in SBCL 1, 33 al. 


the Coming of the Son of Man, and the 
End of the Age, and the connection 
between these things? A history of 
opinion on these topics cannot here be 
given; aconfident attempt at answering 
the questions propounded I am not pre- 
pared to make; perhaps a final satis- 
factory solution of the problem is not 
attainable. I offer only a few general 
considerations which may, at least, help 
readers to assume aright attitude towards 
the problem, and to bring to the study of 
the discourse a sympathetic spirit. 

αχ. The time was suitable for some 
such utterance. The situation was this: 
Jesus expecting death in a few days; 
convinced that the moral and religious 
condition of the Jewish people is hope- 
lessly bad, and that it must ere long end 
in disaster and ruin; surrounded by 
friends who are to be, after the decease 
of their Master, the missionaries of a 
new faith in a troublous time, when an 
old world is going down and a new 
world is coming into being. Here surely 
is an occasion to provoke the prophetic 
mood! At such supreme crises pro- 
phetic utterances, apocalyptic forecasts, 
are inevitable. Here they are, whom- 
soever we have to thank forthem, From 
whom are they more likely to have pro- 
ceeded than from Him who had such 
clear insight into the moral forces at 
work, and into the spiritual phenome- 
nology of the time ? 

2. The aim of any prophetic discourse 
Jesus might deliver at this crisis, like that 
of all true prophecy, would be ethical ; 
not to foretell, like a soothsayer, but to 
forewarn and forearm the representatives 
of a new faith, so that they might not 
lose their heads or their hearts in an evil 
perplexing time—not to gratify curiosity 
but to fortify against coming trial. 


288 


. - 3A oe 
dwithxy TOU αἰωνος; 

and aor. ῥ άν. . 
sub. Mk. µή τις ὑμᾶς πλανήσῃ. 


xiii. 5. 


KATA MATOAION 


XXIV. 


4 αι, a ~ 
4. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ * Βλέπετε, 
5. πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐλεύσονται ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί 


Lk. xxi. 8. wou, λέγοντες, ᾿Εγώ εἶμι ὁ Χριστός: καὶ πολλοὺς πλανήσουσι. 


Acts xiii. 
40. 


3. Prophetic utterance with such an 
aim would not need to be exact in state- 
ments as to dates and details, but only to 
be true as to the sequence and general 
character of events. From all we know 
of Hebrew prophecy it was to be ex- 
pected that the prophesying of Jesus 
would possess only this latter kind of 
truth, instead of being like a “ history of 
events before they cometo pass’”’. The 
version of the evangelic apocalypse that 
least resembles the description of pro- 
phecy now quoted from Butler’s Analogy 
(part ii., chap. vii.) will come nearest to 
the original utterance. This considera- 
tion tells in favour of Mt. and Mk. 

4. All prophetic or apocalyptic utter- 
ances have much in common; phraseo- 
logy and imagery tending to become 
stereotyped. The prophetic literature 
of the O. T. had indeed provided a 
vocabulary, which by the Christian era 
had become normative for all speech 
concerning the future. Hence Jewish, 
Jewish-Christian, and Pauline utterances 
of this kind would in many particulars 
resemble one another, and it might be 
difficult to decide by mere internal evi- 
dence from what circle any particular 
utterance emanated. But it is not pro- 
bable that the evangelists would introduce 
into a professed report of a discourse 
by Jesus a current apocalypse of known 
Jewish origin unless they had reason to 
believe that Jesus had adopted it, or en- 
dorsed its forecast of the future (vide 
Weizsacker, Untersuchungen tuber die 
Evang. Gesch., pp. 126, 551). 

5. As we have seen reason to believe 
that in previous reports of our Lord’s 
Discourses (¢.g., of the Sermon on the 
Mount and of the Mission Discourse, 
chap. x.) grouping of kindred material 
irrespective of historical occasion has 
taken place, so we cannot be surprised if 
traces of a similar procedure present 
themselves here. The remark applies 
especially to the latter part of the 
chapter, vv. 37-51, which contain logia 
given by Lk. in other connections (chaps. 
xii. and xvii.). 

Vv. 1-3. Introduction (cf. Mk. xiii. 
1-4; Lk. xxi. 5-7).—Ver. 1. ἐξελθὼν, 
going out from the temple, within whose 
precincts the foregoing anti-Pharisaic 
manifesto had been spoken. The position 


1 Cor. viii.9; x. 12. Gal.v.15. Heb. xii. 25; with μὴ and fat. ind. Col. ii.8. Heb. iii. τα. 


assigned to ἀπὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ before the 
verb, ἐπορ. in the best MSS., suggests 
connection with ἐξελθὼν. Some, however 
(Weiss, Schanz, etc.), insist that the 
words must be taken with ἐπορ. to give 
to the latter a definite sense. In reality 
they go along with both, the full meaning 
being: going out from the temple. He 
was going away from it, when, etc.— 
ἐπορεύετο: the imperfect, indicating an 
action in progress when something else 
happened. ‘There is an emphasis on the 
idea of the verb. He was going away, 
like one who did not mean to return. 
Hence the action of the disciples next 
τεροτίεά.---ἐπιδεῖξαι: they came to their 
Master, going before in a deeply pre- 
occupied mood, and tried to change the 
gloomy current of His thoughts by in- 
viting Him to look back at the sacred 
structure ; innocent, woman-like but 
vain attempt.—ras οἰκοδομὰς: the 
whole group of buildings belonging to 
the holy house; magnificent, splendid, 
as described by Josephus (B. J., v., 5, 
6), appearing to one approaching from a 
distance like a snow mountain (ὄρει 
χιόνος πλήρει) topped with golden 
pinnacles, which for forty years, in his 
Napoleonic passion for architecture, 
Herod the Great had been building to 
the glory of God and of himself.—Ver. 
2. ὁ δὲ ἀποκ., but, adversatively. He 
answered, in a mood entirely different 
from theirs.—ov βλέπετε; do you not see 
all these things ? = you ask me to look 
at them, let me ask you in turn to take a 
good look at {πεπι.-- ταῦτα : these things, 
not buildings, implying indifference to 
the splendours admired by the disciples. 
--οὺ μὴ ἀφεθῃῇ, etc.: mot an exact 
description ex eventu, but a strong state- 
ment of coming destruction (by fire) in 
prophetically coloured language (Micah 
iii. 12; Jer. xxvi. 18). So Holtz., H.C.— 
Ver. 3. An interval of silence would 
naturally follow so stern a speech. This 
verse accordingly shows us Jesus with 
His disciples now on the other side of 
the Kidron, and sitting on the slope 
of Olivet, with face turned towards 
Jerusalem ; Master and disciples sitting 
apart, and thinking their own thoughts. 
Satisfied that the Master means what 
He has said, and not daring to dispute 
His prophetic insight, they accept the 


I~}. 


6. Μελλήσετε δὲ ἀκούειν πολέμους καὶ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


289 


*dxods πολέμων. ὁρᾶτε, ¢ vide Ch. 


μὴ “θροεῖσθε: δεῖ γὰρ πάντα 1 γενέσθαι. GAN’ οὕπω ἐστὺ τὸ τέλος. {Μις xiii. 7. 


Ἰ. ᾿Ἐγερθήσεται γὰρ ἔθνος ἐπὶ ἔθνος, 


καὶ ἔσονται λιμοὶ καὶ λοιμοί” καὶ σεισμοὶ Σκατὰ ἕτόπους. 


2 Thess. 


καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν: ii. z. 
g saine 

hrase in 

k. xiii. 8. 


1 παντα omitted in DBL 1, 33, 209. The sentence is more impressive without. 


7 NBD a be fF? omit και λοιμοι possibly by similar ending (Weiss). 
Mod. editions omit (Trg. 


are in CAX al. 


fate predicted for Jerusalem, and now 
desire to know the when and how.—xar’ 
ἰδίαν looks as if borrowed from Mk., 
where it refers to four of the disciples 
coming apart from the rest. It goes 
without saying that none but the Twelve 
were there.—rl τὸ σημεῖον τ. σ. π., etc. 
The questioners took for granted that 
all three things went together: destruc- 
tion of temple, advent of Son of Man, 
end of the current age. Perhaps the 
association of the three helped them to 
accept the first as a fact. Weizsacker 
(Untersuchungen, p. 549, note 1) suggests 
that the second and third questions are 
filled in by the evangelist to correspond 
with the answer. So also Weiss in 
Meyer. The main subject of interroga- 
tion is the predicted ruin: when will it 
happen, and how shall it be known when 
itis at hand, so as to be prepared for 
it? Cf. Mk. and Lk., where this alone 
is the subject of αιμεδίίοηῃ.-- παρουσία 
(literally presence, second presence) and 
συντέλεια τοῦ αἰῶνος are the technical 
terms of the apostolic age, for the second 
advent of Christ and the close of the pre- 
sent order of things, and they occurin Mt. 
only, so far as the Gospels are concerned. 
Do not the ideas also belong to that age, 
and are not the questions here put into 
the mouth of the Twelve too advanced 
for disciples? 

Vv. 4-14. Signs prelusive of the end. 
(Mk. xiii, 5-13, Lk. xxi. 8-19).—Ver 4. 
Βλέπετε: again (vide ver. 2), but here= 
see to it, take heed. Cf. Heb. iii. 12.— 
mAavyoy, lest any one deceive you; 
striking the practical ethical keynote of 
the whole discourse: its aim not to 
gratify curiosity, but to guard against 
deception and terror (μὴ θροεῖσθε, ver. 6) 
—heads cool, hearts brave, in a tragic 
epoch.—Ver. 5. πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐλεύσονται, 
etc., the first omen the advent of pseudo- 
Messiahs. This first mentioned, quite 
naturally. Ruin of Jerusalem and the 
nation will come through revolt against 
Rome, and the deepest cause of revolt 
will be the Messianic hope as popularly 
understood. Volcanic outbursts of 


The words 
in margin). 


Messianic fanaticism inevitable, all the 
more that they have rejected the true 
spiritual Christ.. Josephus testifies that 
this was the chief incentive to war 
against Rome (B. J., vi. 54). The aim 
of the popular Messianic hope was inde- 
pendence, and all leaders of movements 
having that goal in view came in the 
name of ‘Christs,” whether they 
formally assumed that name or not. It 
is doubtful if any did before the destruc- 
tion of Jerusalem, but that does not 
falsify Christ’s prediction, which is ex- 
pressed in terms of an idea rather than 
in technical terms suggested by fact. It 
is not a vaticinium ex eventu; yet 
strictly true, if we understand by one 
coming in the name of Christ a leader of 
the fight for liberty (vindicem libertatis, 
Grotius).—troAdovs πλανήσουσιν. The 
political Christs, leaders of the ar 
against Rome, deceived the bulk of the 
people. Jesus wished His followers to 
hold entirely aloof from the movement. 
To warn them against sympathising with 
it was by no means superfluous (vide Lk. 
xxiv. 31, Acts i. 6).—Ver. 6. Second 
sign: wars.—mrohépovs καὶ αἀκοὰς π. : 
vague phrase suitable to the prophetic 
style, not ex eventu; well rendered in 
A. V. “wars and rumours of wars” = wars 
near and remote (Bengel, Meyer), or 
better: ‘‘actual and _ threatened” 
(Speaker’s Com.). The reference is not 
to wars anywhere in the world, but to 
those in the Holy Land, arising, as they 
were sure sooner or later to do, out of 
Messianic fanaticisms. Christ speaks 
not out of foreknowledge of the actual 
facts as reported by contemporary 
historians and collected by modern 
commentators (Grotius, etc.), but by 
prophetic logic: given Messianic hopes 
misdirected, hence wars, hence ruin.— 
µελλήσετε, future of a verb, whose very 
meaning points to the future: ye will be 
about to hear, by-and-by, not for a 
while; often delusive times of peace 
before tragic times of war. Vide 
Carlyle’s French Revolution, book i.— 
ὁρᾶτε, μὴ θροεῖσθε, see, be not scared 


~19 


290 


Mk.xiii.8. 8. πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ἀρχὴ * 


Acts 11.44. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ὠδίνων. 


XXIV. 


ϱ. Τότε παραδώσουσιν Spas 


«Τμεςςν. εἲς θλίψιν, καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν Spas: καὶ ἔσεσθε μισούμενοι ὑπὸ 


3. 


πάντων τῶν ἐθνῶν διὰ τὸ ὄνομά µου. 


1Ο. καὶ τότε σκανδαλισθή- 


σονται πολλοί, καὶ ἀλλήλους παραδώσουσι, καὶ µισήσουσιν ἀλλήλους; 


out of your wits (θροέω, originally = cry 
aloud ; later use = to terrify, as if with 
a scream ; here passive in neuter sense). 
This reference to coming wars of libera- 
tion was natural, and necessary if the 
aim was to fortify disciples against 
future events. Nevertheless at this point, 
in the opinion of many critics, begins 
the so-called ‘‘ Jewish apocalypse,” which 
Mk. and after him Mt. and Lk. have 
interwoven with the genuine utterance 
of Jesus. The latter embraces all about 
false Christs and apostolic tribulations 
(4-5, 9-14, 22-23), the former all about 
war, flight, and the coming of the Son 
of Man with awful accompaniments (7-8, 
15-22, 20-31). Vide Wendt, L. J.,i., p. 
10 f., where the two series are given 
separately, from Mk., following in the 
main Weiffenbach. This critical 
analysis is ingenious but not convinc- 
ing. Pseudo-Christs in the sense ex- 
plained and wars of liberation went 
together in fact, and it was natural they 
should go together in prophetic thought. 
The political Messiahs divorced from the 
politics become mere ghosts, which 
nobody need fear.—Set γὰρ y. Their 
eventual coming is a divine necessity, 
let even that consideration act as a 
sedative ; and for the rest remember that 
the beginning of the tragedy is not the 
end —dAN’ οὕπω τ.τ.: the end being the 
thing inquired about—the destruction of 
the temple and all that went along with 
it.—Ver. 7. Further development of the 
war-portent, possibly here the prophetic 
range of vision widens beyond the 
bounds of Palestine, yet not necessarily. 
In support of limiting the reference to 
Palestine Kypke quotes from Josephus 
words describing the zealots as causing 
strife between people and people, city 
and city, and sap | the nation in 
civil war (B. J., iv., 6).—Atpot καὶ λοιµοί, 
famines and pestilences, the usual 
accompaniments of war, every way likely 
to be named together as in T. R.—kai 
σεισμοὶ, and earthquakes, representing 
all sorts of unusual physical phenomena 
having no necessary connection with the 
political, but appealing to the imagina- 
tion at such times, so heightening the 
gloom. Several such specified in com- 
mentaries (vide, ¢.g., Speaker’s C., and 
Alford, from whom the particulars are 


quoted), but no stress should be laid on 
them.—kara τόπους: most take this as 
meaning not earthquakes passing from 
place to place (Meyer) but here and 
there, passim. Vide Elsner and Raphel, 
who cite classic examples. Grotius 
enumerates the places where they 
occurred.—Ver. 8. πάντα δὲ: yet all 
these but a beginning of pains. It is 
not necessary to find here an allusion to 
the Rabbinical idea of the birth pangs of 
Messiah, but simply the use of a 
natural and frequent Biblical emblem 
for distress of any sort. As to the date 
of the Rabbinical idea vide Keil. The 
beginning: such an accumulation of 
horrors might well appear to the in- 
experienced the end, hence the remark to 
prevent panic. 

Vv. 9-14. Third sign, drawn from 
apostolic experiences. This passage 
Weiss regards as an interpolation into 
the prophetic discourse by Matthew 
following Mark. It certainly resembles 
Mt. x. 17-22 (much less, however, than 
the corresponding passage in Mk.), and 
individual phrases may be interpolations : 
but something of the kind was to be ex- 
pected here. The disciples were not to 
be mere spectators of the tragedy of the 
Jewish nation destroying itself. They 
were to be active the while, preaching 
the gospel of the kingdom, propagating 
the new faith, bringing in a new world. 
Jesus would have them go on with their 
work undistracted by false enthusiasms, 
or warlike terrors, and to this end assures 
them that they will have both to do and 
to suffer a great deal before the final 
crisis of Jerusalem comes. The ground 
of this prophetic forecast as to their 
experience is faith that God will not 
allow the work He (Jesus) has inaugu- 
rated to perish. The gospel will be 
preached widely, with whatever tribula- 
tions to the preachers.—Ver. 9. θλίψιν, 
from θλίβω, originally pressure (wrévacis, 
Hesychius), in N. T. tropical, pressure 
from the evils of life, affliction. Again 
in ver. 29, in reference to the Jewish 
people. The apostles also are to have 
their thlipsis.—amoxrevotow ὑμᾶς, they 
will kill you. Lk. xxi. 16 has “some of 
you” (ἐξ ὑμῶν). Some qualification of 
the blunt statement is needed ; such as: 
they will be in the mood to kill you (cf. 


3—I5. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


291 


11. καὶ πολλοὶ ψευδοπροφῆται ἐγερθήσονται, καὶ πλανήσουσι πολ- ἶ here and 


in Acts vi. 


Rods: 12. καὶ διὰ τὸ ' πληθυνθῆναι τὴν ἀνομίαν ) ψυγήσεται ἡ 7; vii. 17; 


ἀγάπη τῶν πολλῶν 13. ὁ δὲ ὑπομείνας εἰς τέλος, οὗτος σωθήσεται. 


ix. 31; χι. 


14. καὶ κηρυχθήσεται τοῦτο τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας ἐν ὅλῃ TH in Ν.Τ. 


οἰκουμένῃ, εἰς μαρτύριον πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσι. 
15. Ὅταν οὖν ἴδητε τὸ ' βδέλυγµα τῆς ™ ἐρημώσεως, τὸ ῥηθὲν 


τέλος. 
Lk. xvi. 15. 


John xvi. 2).--τῶν ἐθνῶν: not in Mark, 
universalising the statement = hated by 
all the nations, not Jews only.—Ver. 
1Ο. σκανδαλισθήσονται: natural sequel 
of apostolic tribulation, many weak 
Christians made to stumble (vide xiii. 
21); this followed in turn by mutual 
treachery and hatred (καὶ aAAnAovs, 
etc.).—Ver. II. Ψψευδοπροφῆται, false 
prophets. The connection requires that 
these should be within the Christian 
community (otherwise in ver. 24), giving 
false presentations of the faith with 
corrupt motives. A common feature in 
connection with new religious move- 
ments (vide on vii. 15).—Ver. 12. ἀνομίαν. 
Weiss and Holtzmann (H. C.) take this 
in the specific sense of antinomianism, 
a kbertine type of Christianity preached 
by the false prophets or apostles, the 
word in that sense of course to be credited 
to the evangelist. The word as used by 
Christ would naturally bear the general 
sense of godlessness or iniquity. We 
may wonder at the use of such a word 
in connection with nascent Christianity. 
It would require a considerable time to 
make room for such degeneracy. But 
the very point Jesus wishes to impress 
is that there will be room for that before 
the final crisis of Israel comes.—yvyfo- 
erat, etc., will cool the love of many. 
w. is an hapax leg. 2nd future passive 
of ψύχω, to breathe. One of the sad 
features of a degenerate time is that 
even the good loose their fervour.— 
ἀγάπη, love of the brotherhood, here 
only in this sense in Synoptical Gospels, 
the distinctive virtue of the Christian, 
with a new name for a new thing.—Ver. 
13. 6 ὑπομείνας, he that endureth ; the 
verb used absolutely without object. 
The noun ὑπομονή is another of the 
great words of the N. T. Love and 
Patience, primary virtues of the 
Christian: doing good, bearing ill. 
The endurance called for is not merely 
in love (Fritzsche), but in the faith and 
_ life of a Christian in face of all the evils 
enumerated.—eis τέλος, to the end, {.ε., 
of the θλίψις, as long as there are trials 


Rev. xvii. 4, 5; xxi. 27. 


k Cf. 1 Cor. 

καὶ τότε ἥξει “75 of. 24 (τὸ 
τέλος ab- 

solutely). 

Mk. xiii. 14. 


m Mk. xiii. 14. Lk. xxi. 20. 


to endure.—ow@qcerat, shall be saved in 
the sense of xvi. 25. The implied truth 
underlying this test is that there will be 
ample time for a full curriculum of trial 
testing character and sifting the true 
from the false or temporary Christian.— 
Ver. 14 asserts the same thing with 
regard to the preaching of the gospel of 
the kingdom: time for preaching it in 
the whole world, to all nations, before 
the end. Assuming that the terminus 
is the same this statement seems incon- 
sistent with that in x. 23. But the aim 
is different in the two cases. On the 
earlier occasion Jesus wished to ensure 
that all Israel should hear the gospel 
before the end came; therefore He 
emphasised the shortness of the time. 
Here He wishes to impress on the 
disciples that the end will not be for a 
good while; therefore He emphasises 
the amount of preaching that can be 
done, Just on this account we must 
not strain the phrases ἐν ὅλῃ τ. oik., 
πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθ. They simply mean: 
extensively even in the heathen world. 
But they have the merit of setting before 
the disciples a large programme to occupy 
their minds and keep them from thinking 
too much of the coming catastrophe. 
Vv. 15-22. The end at last (Mk. 
ΧΙΙ, 14-20, Lk. xxi. 20-24).—érav οὖν, 
when therefore, referring partly to the 
preceding mention of the end, partly to 
the effect of the whole preceding state- 
ment: “This I have said to prevent 
premature alarm, not, however, as if the 
end will never come; it will, when 
therefore, etc.”’ ; the sequel pointing out 
the sign of the end now near, and what 
to do when it appears.—rd βδέλυγµα 
τῆς ἐρημώσεως: this the awful portent; 
what? The phrase is taken from Daniel 
as expressly stated in following clause 
(τὸ ῥηθὲν, etc.), vide Dan. ix. 27, xi. 31, 
xii. 11. There and in 1 Mace. i. 54 it 
seems to refer to some outrage on Jewish 
religious feeling in connection with the 
temple (ᾠκοδόμησαν β. ép. ἐπὶ τὸ θυσια- 
στήριον are the words in 1 Macc. 1. 54, 
similarly in vi. 7). In a Jewish apoca- 


292 


b Acts vi 13 διὰ Δανιῆλ τοῦ προφήτου, ἑστὸς ἐν "τόπῳ ἁγίῳ: 
16. τότε of ἐν τῇ “loudaia φευγέτωσαν ἐπὶ] τὰ ὄρη - 
17. ὁ ἐπὶ τοῦ δώµατος μὴ καταβαινέτω2 dpai τι» ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας 
18. καὶ ὁ ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ μὴ ἐπιστρεψάτω ὀπίσω dpa τὰ μάτια" 
10. οὖαὶ δὲ ταῖς ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσαις καὶ ταῖς θηλαζούσαις 
20. προσεύχεσθε δὲ ἵνα μὴ γένηται ἡ 


(of the . 
temple); νοειτω ) 
cf. John 
xi. 48 
(rowos,of ,. . 
the land). αυτου ' 


αὐτοῦ. 
ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις. 


les in BDAE al. 
be the true reading. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXIV.. 


(8 ἀναγινώσκων 


The parall. have εις, and just on that account επι (NNLZ) may 


2 karaParw in NBDLZZ al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


Στα ἵπ BLZAX al. min D. 
‘ro ιµατιον in SBDLZZ al. 


lypse, which this passage is by some 
supposed to form a part of, it might be 
expected to bear a similar meaning, a 
technical sense for a stereotyped ex- 
pression. Not so on the lips of Jesus, 
who was not the slave of phrases but 
their master, using them freely. Then 
as employed by Him it must point to 
some broad, easily recognisable fact, 
which His followers could at once see 
and regard as a signal for flight; a fact 
not merely shocking religious feeling but 
threatening life, which He would have 
no disciple sacrifice in a cause with 
which they could have no sympathy. 
Then finally, true to the prophetic as 
distinct from the apocalyptic style, it 
must point to something revealing pro- 
phetic insight rather than a miraculous 
foresight of some yery special circum- 
stance connected with the end. This 
consideration shuts out the statue of 
Titus or Caligula or Hadrian (Jerome), 
the erection of a heathen altar, the 
atrocities perpetrated in the temple by 
the Zealots, etc. Luke gives the clue 
(νετ. 20). The horror is the Roman army, 
and the thing to be dreaded and fied 
from is not any religious outrage it may 
perpetrate, but the desolation it will 
inevitably bring. That is the emphatic 
word in the prophetic phrase.—épypacews 
is genitive of apposition = the horror 
which consists in desolation of the land. 
The appearance of the Romans in 
Palestine would at once become known 
to all. And it would be the signal for 
flight, for it would mean the end near, 
inevitable and terrible.—év téw@ ἁγίῳ, 
one naturally thinks of the temple or the 
holy city and its environs, but a '' holy 
place” in the prophetic style might mean 
the holy Jand. And Jesus can hardly 
have meant that disciples were to wait 
till the fatal hour had come.—é avayw- 


The plural is pointlesa. 


ώσκων, etc.: this is most likely an 
interpolated remark of the evangelist 
bidding his readers note the corres- 
pondence between Christ’s warning word 
and the fact. In Christ’s own mouth it 
would imply too much stress laid on 
Daniel’s words as a guide, which indeed 
they are not. In Mark there is no 
reference to Daniel, therefore the re- 
ference there must be to the gospel (on 
this verse consult Weiss-Meyer). 

Ver. 16. ot ἐν τῇ ἸΙ., those in Judaea 
who have no part in the struggle, with 
special reference to disciples of Jesus. 
There would naturally be some in the 
city, therefore the counsel to fly must 
refer to a point of time antecedent to the 
commencement of the siege.—émi τὰ pn, 
to the mountains outside of Judaea, {.ε., 
east of the Jordan; general as befits 
prophetic speech. The actual place of 
refuge was Pella, as we learn from 
Eusebius, H. E., iii., 5, 3.—Vv. 17, 18 
vividly express the urgency of the flight. — 
6 ἐπὶ τ. δ., etc., the man on the house 
top must fly without stopping to get 
articles of value in the house down the 
outside stair and off.—ra ἐκ τ. oik., 
elliptical = the things in his house, 
from his house.—6 ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ, let the 
man in the field, on hearing the fatal 
report, fly in his tunic, not returning 
home for his upper robe. “Νο man 
works in his mantle, the peasant leaves 
it at home, now as in Christ’s time”’ 
(Furrer, Wanderungen, p. 117).—VV. 19, 
20 describe the pathos of the situation: 
woe to women with child, they cannot 
get rid of their burden; and to women 
nursing, they cannot abandon their 
children as men can their money or 
their clothes (διὰ τὸν δεσμὸν τῆς φύσεως, 
Euthy. Cf. Chrys. and Theophy.). A 
touch this worthy of Jesus, sign mark of 
genuineness.— Ver. 20. προσεύχεσθε, 


16---25. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


300 


uy} ὑμῶν "χειμῶνος, μηδὲ ἐν} σαββάτῳ. 21. Ἔσται γὰρ τότε ο vide Che 


θλίψις µεγάλη, ola οὗ γέγονεν dm’ ἀρχῆς κόσµου ἕως τοῦ viv, οὐδ p ες and 
in . 


οὐ μὴ γένηται. 


αἱ ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι. 
ἢ ὧδε, μὴ πιστεύσητε. 


πλανῆσαι,; εἰ δυνατόν, καὶ τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς. 


22. καὶ εἰ μὴ ) ἐκολοβώθησαν αἱ ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι xiii. 2ο in 


οὐκ ἂν ἐσώθη πᾶσα σάρξ: διὰ δὲ τοὺς Ἡ ἐκλεκτοὺς κολοβωθήσονται ice 

23. Τότε ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ, ᾿Ιδού, ὧδε 6 Χριστός, αμ hii, 

24. Εγερθήσονται γὰρ ψευδόχριστοι καὶ αμ 

ψευδοπροφῆται, καὶ " δώσουσι "σημεῖα µεγάλα καὶ "τέρατα, ὥστε ο πλ 
25. ἰδού, προείρηκα eee 

τ Acts ii. 19 


(Deut. xiii. 1). 


1 ΜΒΔΣ al. omit εν. 


2 πλανησαι is the reading of BXA® al., and probably the true one. 
LZ have πλανασθαι (W.H. with πλανησαι in margin). 


πλαγηθηναι (Tisch.). 


etc. (ἵνα μὴ with subjunctive instead of 
infinitive as often in N. T. after verbs of 
exhorting, etc.), pray that your flight be 
not in winter (χειμῶνος, gen. time in wh.) 
or on the Sabbath (σαββάτῳ, dat., pt. of 
time). The Sabbatarianism of this 
sentence is a sure sign that it was not 
uttered by Jesus, but emanated from a 
Jewish source, say many, e¢.g., Weizsacker 
{Untersuchungen, p. 124), Weiffenbach 
(Wiederkunftsgedanke, i., p. 103) ap- 
proving. But Jesus could feel even 
for Sabbatarians, if they were honest, as 
for those who, like John’s disciples, 
fasted.—Vv. 21, 22. The extremity of 
the distress.—Ver. 21 represents it as 
unparalleled before or after, in terms re- 
calling those of Daniel xii. 1; ver. 22 as 
intolerable but for the shortness of the 
ΑΡΟΠΥ.---ἐκολοβώθησαν (from κολοβός, 
κόλος, mutilated) literally to cut off, ¢.g., 
hands or feet, as in 2 Sam. iv. 12; here 
figuratively to cut short the time: nisi 
breviati fuissent (Vulgate). The aorist 
here, as in next clause (ἐσώθη), is used 
proleptically, as if the future were past, 
in accordance with the genius of pro- 
phecy.—ovx« ἂν, etc.: the οὐκ must be 
joined to the verb, and the meaning is: 
all flesh would be not saved ; joined to 
πᾶσα the sense would be not all flesh, 
i.e., only some, would be δανεά.---ἐσώθη 
refers to escape from physical death; in 
ver. 13 the reference is to salvation in a 
higher sense. This is one of the reasons 
why this part of the discourse is regarded 
as not genuine. But surely Jesus cared 
for the safety both of body and soul 
(vide x. 22,30). Theepistle of Barnabas 
{iv.) contains a passage about shortening 
of the days, ascribed to Enoch. Weiz- 
sacker (Untersuchungen, p. 125) presses 
this into the service of the Jewish apoca- 


s always plural and coupled with σημεῖα (John iv. 48. Acts ii. το, 43, etc.). 


SD have 


lypse hypothesis.—81a. δὲ τ. ἐκλεκτοὺς : 
the use of this term is not foreign to the 
vocabulary of Jesus (vide xxii. 14), yet it 
sounds strange to our ears as a designa- 
tion for Christians. It occurs often in 
the Book of Enoch, especially in the 
Similitudes. The Book begins: ‘‘ The 
words of the blessing of Enoch, where- 
with he blessed the elect and righteous 
who will be living in the day of tribula- 
tion when all the wicked and godless are 
removed” (vide Charles, The Book of 
Enoch, p. 58). The idea attaching to 
the word here seems to be: those 
selected for deliverance in a time of 
general destruction = the preserved. 
And the thought expressed in the clause 
is that the preserved are to be preservers. 
Out of regard to their intercessions away 
amid the mountains, the days of horror 
will be shortened. A thought worthy of 
Jesus. 

Vv. 23-28. False Christs again (Mk. 
xiii, 21-23, Lk. xvii. 23, 24, 37).—Ver. 24. 
ψευδόχριστοι, in the same sense as in 
ver. 5; there referred to as the cause 
of all the trouble, here as promising 
deliverance from the trouble they, or 
their like, have created. What would 
one not give for a Deliverer, a Messiah 
at such a dire crisis! The demand 
would create the supply, men offering 
themselves as Saviours from Rome’s 
power, with prophets (ψευδοπροφῆται) 
preaching smooth things, and assuring a 
despairing people of deliverance at the 
last hour.—py πιστεύσητε, says Jesus 
(ver. 23), do not believe them: no salva- 
tion possible; listen not, but flee.—xai 
δώσονσιν, etc., and will give great signs 
and wonders. The words recall Deut. 
xiii. 1. Desperate situations require a 
full use of all possible powers of persua- 


294 


Ch. xxviii. ὑμῖν. 
3. Lk. x. 28 BN) 

18; xi. 36 έξε τε” 
(of the η 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


Ἰδού, ἐν τοῖς ταµείοις, μὴ πιστεύσητε. 


XXIV. 


26. ἐὰν οὖν εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν, Ιδού, ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω ἐστί, μὴ 


27. ὥσπερ γὰρ 


gleam of ἡ ᾿ ἀστραπὴ ἐξέρχεται ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ φαίνεται ἕως δυσμῶν, 


a lamp); 
xvii. 24; 
several 
times in 
Rev. (pl.). 
a Lk. xvii. 


37- Rev. iv 
iv. 7; viii. 13 (W.H.); xii. 14. 
1 Most uncials (SBD, etc.) omit και. 


sion: signs and wonders, or the pretence 
of them: easily accepted as such by a 
fanaticised multitude, and sometimes so 
clever and plausible as to tempt the wise 
to credence.—@ovre, with infinitive to 
express tendency; often inclusive of 
result, but not here.—el δυνατὸν, if pos- 
sible, the implication being that it is not. 
If it were the consequence would be 
fatal. The “elect” (τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς)--- 
selected by Providence for safety in the 
evil day—would be involved in the 
general calamity. Christians, at Israel’s 
great crisis, were to be saved by unbelief 
in pseudo-messiahs and pseudo-prophets. 
—Ver.25. ἰδοὺ π. ὑ., emphatic nota bene, 
showing that there will be real danger 
of misplaced fatal confidences. Hence 
further expatiation on the topic in vv. 
26-28 in graphic, pithy, laconic speech. 
—Ver. 26. ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, a likely place 
for a Christ to be (Moses, Israel’s first 
deliverer).—py ἐξέλθητε, go not out (cf. 
xi. 7, 8, 9).—év τοῖς ταµείοις (vide vi. 6), 
in the secret chambers, the plural in- 
dicating the kind of place, not any 
particular place. Both expressions—in 
the desert, in the secret recesses—point 
to non-visibility. The false prophets bid 
the people put their faith in a Messiah 
not in evidence, the Great Unseen = 
“The hour is come, and the man is 
somewhere, out of view, not far away, 
take my word for it’. Interpreters who 
seek for exact historical fulfilments point 
to Simon son of Gioras, and John of 
Giscala: the former the Messiah in the 
desert of Tekoah, gathering a confiding 
multitude about him; the latter the 
Messiah in the secret places, taking pos- 
session of the interior part of the temple 
with its belongings in the final struggle 
(vide Josephus, B. J., iv., 9, 5 and 7; 
vy. 6, 1, and Lutteroth, ad loc.).—Ver. 
27. ὥσπερ yap, etc.: the coming of the 
true Messiah, identified with the Son of 
Man, compared to the lightning, to sug- 
gest a contrast between Him and the 
false Christs as to visibility, and enforce 


o η πλ κε , a ca A , 
οὕτως ἔσται καὶ ἡ παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 
2 a a 
yap? ἐὰν ᾖ τὸ πτῶμα, ἐκεῖ συναχθήσονται of * ἀετοί. 


28. ὅπου 
20. Εὐθέως 


δὲ μετὰ τὴν θλίψιν τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐκείνων, ὁ ἥλιος σκοτισθήσεται, καὶ 


Σ38 ΒΡΙ, omit γαρ. 


the counsel to pay no heed to those who. 
say: He is here, or He is there.— 
Ver. 28. πτῶμα, carcase, as in xiv. 12, 
6.υ.---ἀετοί, eagles, doubtless the carrion 
vultures are meant. The reference of 
this proverbial saying, as old as the 
book of Job (xxxix. 30), in this place is 
not clear. In the best text it comes in 
without connecting particle, the yap of 
T. R. being wanting. If we connect it 
with ver. 27 the idea will be that 
Messiah’s judicial function will be as 
universal as His appearance (Meyer and 
Weiss). But does not ver. 28 as well as 
ver. 27 refer to what is said about the 
false Christs, and mean: heed not these 
pretended Saviours; Israel cannot be 
saved: she is dead and must become the 
prey of the vultures? (So Lutteroth.) In 
this view the Jewish people are the 
carcase and the Roman army the eagles. 

Vv. 20-31. The coming of the Son of 
Man (Mk. xiii. 24-27, Lk. xxi. 25-28).— 
Thus far the eschatological discourse has 
been found to bear on the predicted 
tragic end of Jerusalem. At this point 
the παρουσία, which, according to the 
evangelist, was one of the subjects on 
which the disciples desired information, 
becomes the theme of discourse. What is 
said thereon is so perplexing as to tempt 
a modern expositor to wish it had not 
been there, or to have recourse to 
critical expedients to eliminate it from 
the text. But nothing would be gained 
by that unless we got rid, at the same 
time, of other sayings of kindred char- 
acter ascribed to Jesus in the Gospels. 
And there seems to be no reason to 
doubt that some such utterance would 
form a part of the eschatological dis- 
course, even if the disciples did not ask 
instruction on the subject. The revela- 
tion as to the last days of Israel naturally 
led up to it, and the best clue to the 
meaning of the Parusia-logion may be to 
regard it as a pendant to that revelation. 

Ver. 20. εὐθέως. Each evangelist ex- 
presses himself here in his own way, 


26—31. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


295 


ἡ σελήνη οὗ δώσει τὸ ᾿ φέγγος αὐτῆς, καὶ of ἀστέμες πεσοῦνται ν Mk. xiii. 


ἀπὸ} 


~ > ~ A © 3 , ~ 3 ~ , 
τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ at δυνάµεις τῶν οὐρανῶν σαλευθήσονται. 
30. καὶ τότε φανήσεται τὸ σημεῖον τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν Ta? 


24. Lk. 


οὐρανῷ : καὶ τότε κόψονται πᾶσαι ai φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ ὄψονται 


τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ μετὰ 


δυνάµεως καὶ δόξης πολλῆς. 


31. καὶ ἀποστελεῖ τοὺς ἀγγέλους 


αὐτοῦ μετὰ ' σάλπιγγος φωνῆς 5 µεγάλης, καὶ ἐπισυνάξουσι τοὺς κ Cor xv. 
ἐκλεκτοὺς αὐτοῦ ἐκ τῶν τεσσάρων ἀνέμων, dm’ ἄκρων οὐρανῶν ἕως Thess. iv. 


ἄκρων αὐτῶν. 
IND have ex (Tisch.). 


al have it and it is doubtless genuine. 


απο in BLXAX (W.H.). 
3 SLA omit φωνης (Tisch., W.H. relegate to the margin). 


16. Heb. 
xii. 1g, etc. 


7 88BL omit τω. 
BD (και φωνης) XZ 


4B 1, 13, 69 add των after ews (W.H. insert, but bracketed). 


Lk. most obviously adapting his words 
to suit the fact of a delayed parusia. 
Mt.’s word naturally means: immedi- 
ately, following close on the events 
going before, the thlipsis of Jerusalem. 
One of the ways by which those to 
whom εὐθέως is a stumbling block strive 
to evade the difficulty is to look on it as 
an inaccurate translation by the Greek 


Matthew of ONMD , Supposed to be in 


Hebrew original.” So Schott, Comm. 
Ex. Dog.—é ἥλιος . . . σαλευθήσονται: 
a description in stock prophetic phrases 
(Is. xili. 9, xxxiv. 4, Joel ili. 15, etc.) of 
what seems to be a general collapse of 
the physical universe. Is that really 
what is meant? I doubt it. It seems 
to me that in true prophetic Oriental 
style the colossal imagery of the physical 
universe is used to describe the political 
and social consequences of the great 
Jewish catastrophe : national ruin, break- 
ing up of religious institutions and social 
order. The physical stands for the 
social, the shaking of heaven for the 
shaking of earth (Haggai ii. 6); or in 
the prophetic imagination the two are 
indissolubly blended: stars, thrones, 
city walls, temples, effete religions 
tumbling down into one vast mass of 
ruin. If this be the meaning εὐθέως is 
to be strictly taken.—¢éyyos, applicable 
to both sun and moon, but oftener 
applied to the moon or stars; φῶς 
oftenest to the sun, but also to the 
moon. Vide Trench, Syn., p. 163.—Ver. 
30. καὶ τότε. Amid the general crash 
what longing would arise in Christian 
hearts for the presence of the Christ! 
To this longing the announcement in- 
troduced by these words ‘“‘and then”’ 


responds.—r6 σημεῖον τ. vi. r. a. The 
question what is this sign has greatly 
perplexed commentators, who make 
becoming confessions of ignorance. 
‘“‘ We must not be positive in conjectur- 
ing,” Morison. ‘ What this shall be 
it is vain to conjecture,” Cambridge 
N.T. Is the reference not to Daniel vii. 
13, “one like the Son of Man,”’ and the 
meaning: the sign which zs the Son of 
Man, t vu τ. & being genitive of 
appos.? So Weiss after Storr and 
Wolf.—(“ σημεῖον viod, similis est illis 
quibus profani passim utuntur quandc di- 
cunt Bia “Hpakdéos,” 1.ε., “‘ vis Herculis 
seu ipse Hercules,” Wolf, Curae Phil.) 
Christ His own sign, like the lightning 
or the sun, self-evidencing.—xai τότε 
κόψονται, etc.: a clause not in Mk. and 
obscure in meaning; why mourn? 
because they recognise in the coming 
One their Judge? or because they see 
in Him one who had been despised and 
rejected of men, and penitently (taking 
the sin home to themselves) acknow- 
ledge His claims ? (“‘@elieved on in the 
world,” x Tim. iii. 16).—épydpevov . . 

πολλῆς, description of the coming, here 
as in xvi. 27, xxvi. 64, in terms drawn from 
Daniel vii. 13.—Ver. 31. μετὰ σάλπιγγος 
¢. p., with a trumpet of mighty sound, an- 
other stock phrase of prophetic imagery 
(Is. xxvii. 13).-- καὶ ἐπισννάξουσι τοὺς 
ἐκλεκτοὺς α., and they (the angels or 
messengers) shall collect the elect (as in 
vv. 22, 24), showing that the advent is 
described in terms suited to the situa- 
tion previously depicted. The Christ 
comes for the comfort of those preserved 
from the general ruin.—éx τῶν τ. ἀνέμων : 
not merely from the mountains east of 
the Jordan, but from every quarter of the 


296 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXIV. 


32. “Ard δὲ τῆς συκῆς µάθετε τὴν παραβολήν: ὅταν ἤδη ὁ 
εις and κλάδος αὐτῆς γένηται Ἀ ἁπαλός, καὶ τὰ φύλλα ἐκφύῃ, γινώσκετε 


xiii. 28. 
here and 
28. Lk. 
Xxi. 30 | 
(Gen. viii. 


vi 


in Mk.xiii. γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐγγύς ἐστιν ἐπὶ θύραις. 
παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη, ἕως ἂν πάντα ταῦτα γένηται. 
ag καὶ ἡ yh mapededcovrar,? οἱ δὲ λόγοι µου οὗ μὴ παρέλθωσι. 


ὅτι ἐγγὺς τὸ 7 θέρος: 33. οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς, ὅταν ἴδητε πάντα ταῦτα, 


34. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν,ὶ οὗ μὴ 
35. O οὐρανὸς 


36. Περὶ δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης καὶ τῆς ὃ Spas οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, οὐδὲ 


οἱ ἄγγελοι τῶν odpavay,* εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ µου δ μόνος. 


37. Ὥσπερ 


Se αἱ ἡμέραι τοῦ Νῶε, οὕτως ἔσται καὶ; ἡ παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ 


1 BDL add οτι after υμιν (W.H.). 
2 BDL read παρελευσεται. 
3 SSBDA al. omit της before ωρας. 


The plural (T. R.) is a grammatical correction. 


4 After ονρανων $QBD, old Latin vers., and some cursives add ουδε ο wos. 


t hich is adopted by most modern editors. 
6 yap in BD. 


5 SN BDLAZ_ omit pov. 


:arth where faithful souls are found; 
: cho of Is. xxvii. 13 again audible here. 
--am’ ἄκρων, etc., echo of phrases in 
Deut. xxx. 4, Ps. xix. 7. This Parusia- 
logion is not to be regarded as a didactic 
statement, but simply as a λόγος 
παρακλήσεως for the comfort of anxious 
spirits. With that aim it naturally 
places the Parusia within the reach of 
those it is designed to comfort.. After 
the ruin of Israel there is no history ; 
only the wind-up. Jerusalem destroyed, 
the curtain falls. Christ’s didactic words 
suggest another aspect, a delayed 
Parusia, vide on xvi. 28. From the fore- 
going exposition it appears that the 
‘coming of the Son of Man is not to be 
identified with the judgment of Jerusalem, 
but rather forms its preternatural back- 
pcound. 

Vv. 32-36. Parabolic close (Mk. xiii. 
28-32, Lk. xxi. 29-33).—Ver. 32. ἀπὸ 
τῆς συκῆς, etc., fom the fig tree learn 
its parable, rapid condensed speech 
befitting the tense state of mind; learn 
from that kind of tree (article generic) 
the lesson it can teach with regard to 
the moral order: Tender branch, young 
leaf = summer nigh. Schott, Comm. Ex. 
Dog., p. 125, renders ἀπὸ τ. σ. ope ficus 
= ficum contemplando. On the form 
εκφνη vide notes on Mk.—Ver. 33. 
οὕτως κ. ¥, so do ye also when ye see 
all these things, recognise that it is nigh, 
at the doors. What are “these things”? 
what ‘it’? ? The former are the things 
mentioned in vv. 15-21 (ὅταν οὖν ἴδητε, 
ver. 15), the latter is the wapovota.— 
Ver. 34, Solemn assurance that the 


ΤΝ ΒΙ, omit και. 


predicted will come to pass.—wavra 
ταῦτα is most naturally taken to mean 
the same things as in νετ, 33, the main 
subject of the discourse, the impending 
destruction of the Jewish state. Jesus 
was quite certain that they would happen 
within the then living generation (4 
γενεὰ αὕτη), not merely through 
miraculous foresight but through clear 
insight into the moral forces at work.— 
Ver. 35. Declaration similar to that in 
chap. v. 18 concerning the validity of 
the law.—Ver. 36. περὶ δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας 
ἐκείνης καὶ τῆς ὥρας, of that day and 
hour. The reference is to the coming of 
the Son of Man, the expression through- 
out the N. T. having the value of an 
“indisputable fixed terminus technicus,” 
Weiffenbach, Wéiederkunftsgedanke, p. 
1ς7.--οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, πο one knows, a 
statement made more emphatic by appli- 
cation to the angels of heaven, and even 
to the Son (οὐδὲ 6 vids). The meaning 
is not that Jesus disclaims even for 
Himself knowledge of the precise day, 
month, or year of what in ver. 34 He 
has declared will happen within the 
present generation; whether, e¢.g., the 
crisis of the war would be in 69 or 70 
a.D. That is too trivial a matter to be 
the subject of so solemn a declaration. 
It is an intimation that all statements 
as to the time of the παρουσία must be 
taken in a qualified sense as referring to 
a subject on which certain knowledge is 
not attainable or even desirable. It looks 
like Jesus correcting Himself, or using 
two ways of speaking, one for comfort 
(it will be soon), and one for caution (it 


32—43: 


ἀνθρώπου. 


Σκατακλυσμοῦ, "τρώγοντες καὶ πίνοντες, γαμοῦντες καὶ exyapiLovtes,” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


297 


38. ὥσπερ] γὰρ ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταῖς mpd τοῦς Lk. xvii. 


27. 2Pet. 
iii. 6. 
a here and 


ἄχρι ἧς ἡμέρας εἰσῆλθε Νῶε εἰς thy  κιβωτόν, 39. καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωσαν, in John, 


ἕως ἦλθεν ὁ 
, - ε A ΄ 
παρουσία τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 


καὶ 65 eis ἀφίεται. 
παραλαμβάνεται, καὶ µία ἀφίεται. 


42.“ Γρηγορεῖτε οὖν, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδατε Tota 
ἔρχεται: 43. ἐκεῖνο δὲ γινώσκετε, ὅτι εἰ δει ὁ 


¢ refi. 


υ 
κατακλυσμὸς καὶ ἠρεν ἅπαντας, οὕτως ἔσται καὶ ὃ ἡ  belowand 
» η ? 


remarks. 


b Lk. xvii. 

κ " 4 27. Heb. 

40. “Τότε δύο Ecovrart ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ: ὁδ els παραλαμβάνεται, iz οἱρᾶί. 
ee Bh 

41. δύο "ἀλήθουσαι ἐν τῷ µύλωνιδ: pia 7 2° 

Rev.xi.19. 

πράος 

ὥρα Ἰ ὁ κύριος ὑμῶν ΄ Acts xiv, 

ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης ποίᾳ 10 a He 

φυλακῇ ὁ κλέπτης ἔρχεται, ἐγρηγόρησεν ἄν, καὶ οὐκ ἂν “ εἴασε of person 

and inf.). 


L ws in NBL 33. 
5 BD omit και, 


®uvdw in SBLAZ. D has µνλωνι, 
may not be so soon as even 1 think or 
you expect). 
speaking concerning the second advent 
seems to have two faces; providing on 
the one hand for the possibility of a 
Christian era, and on the other for an 
accelerated Parusia. 

Vv. 37-42. Watch therefore (cf. Lk. 
xvii. 26-30, 34-36).—Ver. 37. αἱ ἡμέραι 
+. Noe, the history of Noah used to illus- 
trate the uncertainty of the Parusia.— 
Ver. 38. ἦσαν with the following parti- 
ciples is not an instance of the peri- 
phrastic imperfect. It rather stands by 
itself, and the particles are descriptive 
predicates. Some charge these with 
sinister meaning: τρώγοντες, hinting at 
gluttony because often used of beasts, 
though also, in the sense of eating, of men 
(John vi. 58, xiii. 18). So Beza and 
Grotius; γαμοῦντες καὶ γαμίζοντες, eu- 
phemistically pointing at sexual licences 
on both sides (Wolf, “‘omnia vagis libi- 
dinibus miscebantur”). The idea rather 
seems to be that all things went on as 
usual, as if nothing were going to happen. 
In the N. T., and especially in the fourth 
Gospel, τρώγω seems to be used simply 
as a synonym for ἐσθίω. In like manner 
all distinction between ἐσθίειν and χορτά- 
τεσθαι (= to feed cattle in classics) has 
disappeared. Vide Mk. vii. 27, 28, and 
consult Kennedy, Sources of New Testa- 
ment Greek, p. 82,—Ver. 39. οὐκ ἔγνω- 
σαν, they did not know, scil., that the 
flood was coming till it was on them.— 
Ver. 40, 41 graphically illustrate the 
suddenness of the Parusia.—els els (νετ. 
40) instead of els ἑτέρος, so pia µία in 
ver. 41. Of these idioms Herrmann in 


His whole manner of 


29D 33 have the simple γαμιζοντες (Tisch., W.H.). 
* εσονται δυο in NB. 


§ 0 in both places omitted in BDL. 
7 ημερα in ΝΒΓΔΣ, cursives. 


Viger (p. 6) remarks: “' Sapiunt Ebrais- 
mum '.--- παραλαμβάνεται, ἀφίεται, one 
is taken, one left. The reference may 
either be to the action of the angels, ver. 
31 (Meyer), or to the judicial action of 
the Son of Man seizing some, leaving 
free others (Weiss-Meyer). The sen- 
tences are probably proverbial (Schott), 
and the terms may admit of diverse 
application. However applied, they point 
to opposite ἀεςεπίες.---ἀλήθουσαι, grind- 
ing: ἀλήθω, late for ἀλέω, condemned by 
Phryn., Ρ. 151.—év τῷ μύλωνι (T. Ε.), in 
the mill house.—2. τ. μύλῳ (W.H.), in or 
with the millstone. The reference is to a 
handmill, which required two to work it 
when grinding was carried on for a con- 
siderable time—women’s work (vide 
Robinson, i., 485 ; Furrer, Wand., p. 97; 
Benzinger, p. 85, where a figure is 
given).—Ver. 42. γρηγορεῖτε, watch, a 
frequently recurring exhortation, imply- 
ing not merely an uncertain but a delayed 
Parusia, tempting to be off guard, and so 
making such repeated exhortations neces- 
Sary.—roig. ἡμέρᾳ, on what sort of a day, 
early or late; so again in ver. 43, at 
what sort of a watch, seasonable or un- 
seasonable. 

Vv. 43-51. Two parables: the Thief 
and the Two Servants, enforcing the 
lesson: Watch !|—Ver. 43. γινώσκετε, 
observe, nota bene.—ei ἤδει: supposition 
contrary to fact, therefore verbs in prot. 
and apod. indicative.—é κλέπτης, admir- 
ably selected character. It is the thiet’s 
business to keep people in the dark as to 
the time of his coming, or as to his 
coming at αἱ].---οἰκοδεσπότης suggests 
the idea of a great man, but in reality it 


208 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΟΑΙΟΝ 


XXIV. 44—51.. 


διορυγῆναι 1 τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ. 44. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ὑμεῖς γίνεσθε 
ἔτοιμοι" ὅτι ᾗ Spa οὐ δοκεῖτε ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεται. 
45. Τίς ἄρα ἐστὶν ὁ πιστὸς δοῦλος καὶ φρόνιµος, ὃν κατέστησεν ὁ 
κύριος αὐτοῦ ὃ ἐπὶ τῆς θεραπείας” αὐτοῦ, τοῦ διδόναι 5 αὐτοῖς τὴν ΄ 
e Lk. xii. 42 τροφὴν "ἐν °xatp@; 46. µακάριος 6 δοῦλος ἐκεῖνος, ὃν ἐλθὼν ὁ 


᾿κύριος αὐτοῦ εὑρήσει ποιοῦντα οὕτως.5 


f Ch. xxv. 5. 


ἐπὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ὑπάρχουσιν αὐτοῦ καταστήσει αὐτόν. 


4]. ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι 
48. ᾿Εὰν δὲ 


Lk. i. αι εἴπῃ 6 κακὸς δοῦλος ἐκεῖνος ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ, ‘ Χρονίζει ὁ κύριός 


(to tarry, 


with ἐν); rou” ἐλθεῖν,ὃ 49. καὶ ἄρξηται τύπτειν τοὺς curdoddous,° ἐσθίειν δὲ καὶ 


xii. 45. 


Heb. x.37. πίνειν 29 μετὰ τῶν µεθυόντων, 50. ἥξει ὁ κύριος τοῦ δούλου ἐκείνου 


6 here and 


in Lk. xii. ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ᾗ οὐ προσδοκᾷ, καὶ ἐν Gpa ᾗ οὗ γινώσκει, 51. καὶ * διχο- 


46. 
h same 
phrase in 


, Si. uP ‘ xh , > ~ x A ς A h 64 Sy ~ 
TOPN TEL QUTOV, και TO μερος αυτου μετα των υποκριτων ησει εκει. 


Lk. xii. 46. ἔσται 6 κλαυθμὸς καὶ 6 βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 


1 διορυχθηναι KEDIL 33; as in Τ. R. in BAX. 


2 4 ov δοκειτε ωρα in SgBDI. 
4 ouxeteras in BILAZ (W.H.). 


3 S8BDIL 1, 33 al. omit αυτου. 


θεραπειας in D ail, 


ὕδουναι in SBCDILAZ. διδοναι is from Lk. 


© ovtws ποιουντα in KEBCDIL. 
® ΜΒ 33 omit ελθειν. 
10 εσθιη δε και πινη in SBCDIL. 


is a poor peasant who is in view. He 
lives in a clay house, which can be dug 
through (sun-dried bricks), vide διορυχθῆ- 
ναι in last clause. Yet he is the master 
in his humble dwelling (cf. on vi. 19).— 
Ver. 45. τίς, who, taken by Grotius, 
Kuinoel, Schott, etc. = εἴ τις, sz quis, 
supposing a case. But, as Fritzsche 
points out, the article before π. δοῦλος is 
inconsistent with this sense.—mtorés, 
φρόνιµος: two indispensable qualities in 
an upper servant, trusty and judicious.— 
θεραπείας (T. R.), service = body of ser- 
vants, οἰκετείας (Β., W.H.), household 
=domestics.—Ver. 46 answers the ques- 
tion by felicitation.—paxdptos, implying 
that the virtue described is rare (vzde on 
chap. v. 3): a rare servant, who is not 
demoralised by delay, but keeps stead- 
fastly doing his duty.—éwt π. τ. ὑπάρ- 
χουσι, this one among a thousand is fit 
to be put in charge of the whole of his 
master’s estate.—Ver. 48. The other side 
of the picture—éav δὲ .. . ἐκεῖνος: not 
the same individual, but a man placed in 
the same fost (‘cui eadem provincia sit 
demandata,” Schott).—xpovifer (again in 
xxv. 5): the servant begins to reflect on 
the fact that his lord is late in coming, 
and is ἀεπιοτα]ϊςεά.---ἄρξηται, he (now) 
begins to play the tyrant (τύπτειν) and 


µου before ο κυριος in SBCDIL al, 


® S$BCDIL add αυτον. 


to indulge in excess (ἐσθίῃ καὶ πίνῃ.. 
etc.). Long delay is necessary to pro- 
duce such complete demoralisation.— 
Ver. 50. ἥξει: the master comes at last, 
and of course he will come unexpected. 
The delay has been so long that the un- 
worthy servant goes on his bad way as if 
the master would never come at αἱ].--- 
Ver. 51. διχοτοµήσει, he will cut him in 
sunder as with a saw, an actual mode of 
punishment in ancient times, and many 
commentators think that this barbarous 
penalty is seriously meant here. But this 
can hardly be, especially as in the follow- 
ing clause the man is supposed to be still 
alive. The probable meaning is: will 
cut him in two (so to speak) with a whip 
= thrash him, the base slave, unmerci- 
fully. It is a strong word, selected in sym- 
pathy with the master’s rage. So Schott: 
“verberibus multis eam castigavit’’. 
Koetsveld, De Gelijk., p. 246, and Grimm 
(Thayer) but with hesitancy. Beza and 
Grotius interpret: will divide him from 
the family = dismiss him.—pera τῶν 
ὑποκριτῶν, with the hypocrites, {.ε., eye- 
servants, who make a great show of zeal 
under the master’s eye, but are utterly 
negligent behind his back. In Lk. the: 
corresponding phrase is τῶν ἀπίστων, the 
unfaithful. 


XXV. 1—5. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


299 


XXV. 1. “ΤΟΤΕ ὁμοιωθήσεται ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν δέκα a John xviii. 


Acts 


~ ‘ See if ia 3. 
παρθένοις, αἴτινες λαβοῦσαι τὰς "λαμπάδας αὐτῶν] ἐξῆλθον εἲς xx.8. Rev. 


ἀπάντησιν ” τοῦ νυμφίου.3 


2. πέντε δὲ ἦσαν ἐξ αὐτῶν ὃ φρόνιµοι," 


iv. 5; Viii. 
10. 


καὶ αἱ ὃ πέντε µωραί. 3. αἵτινες ὃ µωραί, λαβοῦσαι τὰς λαμπάδας ή sf Eva 
ἑαυτῶν,” οὐκ ἔλαβον μεθ) ἑαυτῶν Ὁ ἔλαιον: 4. ai δὲ φρόνιμοι ἔλαβον tor healt 
ἔλαιον ἐν τοῖς ἀγγείοις adtav® μετὰ τῶν λαμπάδων αὐτῶν. ie 
5. χρονίζοντος δὲ τοῦ vupdiou, ‘évuctagay πᾶσαι καὶ ἐκάθευδον. ως i. 4 

feasts for 


anointing). 


* eavtwv in BDL (W.H.). 


? vravtnow in $$BC-(Tisch., W.H.). 
ΡΣ it. vul., Syr. Sin., Or., Hil. W.H. 
for further discussion. 


3εξ αυτων ησαν in ΜΒΟΡΤΙΖΔΣ. 


Lk. xvi6. Rev. vi. 6; xviii. 13 (commerce). 


c 2 Pet. ii. 3 (Ps. Ixxvi. 7). 


After vupduiov is added και της νυµφης in 
place this reading in margin, and it calls 
Vide below for Resch’s view. 


4 pwpar, dpovipor in S$ BCDLZ¥, several cursives including 33. 


> at omitted in NBCDLZZ, 33 al. 
δὅ αι γαρ for αιτινες in RBCLE 33. 


7 αυτων in BCDA. WSL have neither αντ. nor εαντ. (Tisch.). 
8 First αντων omit BDLZ. For second NB have εαντων. 


CHAPTER XXV. THREE ESCHATO- 
LOGICAL PARABLES. These parables 
(especially the first and third) are appro- 
priately introduced by Mt. at this place, 
whether actually uttered in immediate 
connection with the Olivet discourse, or 
during the Passion week, or otherwise. 
In his reproduction of the book of 
Logia, Wendt gives the group of parables 
inculcating constant preparedness for the 
Parusia, including the Waiting Servants 
(Lk. xii. 35-38) ; the Thief (Mt. xxiv. 43, 
44; Lk. xii. 39, 40); the Upper Servant 
(Mt. xxiv. 45-51; Lk. xii. 42, 48), and 
the Ten Virgins (Mt. xxv. 1-12; Lk. 
xiii. 25), a somewhat earlier place (L. J., 
i., pp. 118-122). 

Vv. 1-13. Parable of the Ten Virgins, 
in Mt. only.—Ver. 1. tére, then, con- 
necting what follows in the evangelist’s 
mind with the time referred to in the 
previous parable, {.ε., with the Parusia. 
—8éxa παρθένοις: ten virgins, not as 
the usual number—as to that no infor- 
mation is available—but as one coming 
readily to the mind of a Jew, as we 
might in a similar case say a dozen.— 
aitives, such as; at mifht have been 
used, but the tendency in N. T. and late 
Greek is to prefer Sorts to ὅς.--τὰς 
λαμπάδας α., their torches consisting of 
a wooden staff held in the hand, with a 
dish at the top, in which was a piece of 
cloth or rope dipped in oil or pitch (vide 
Lightfoot, Hor. Heb.). Rutherford (New 
Phrynicus, p. 131) says that λαμπάδας is 


here used in the sense of oil lamps, and 
that in the common dialect λαμπάς 
became equivalent to λύχνος. — εἰς 
ὑπ(άπ-)άντησιν: vide at viil. 34.—rod 
νυµφίου: the bridegroom, who is con- 
ceived of as coming with his party to the 
house of the bride, where the marriage 
feast is to take place, contrary to the 
usual though possibly not the invariable 
custom (Judges xiv. 10). The parable at 
this point seems to be adapted to the 
Spiritual situation—the Son of Man 
coming again. Resch thinks καὶ τῆς 
νύμφης a true part of the original 
parable, without which it cannot be 
understood (Aussercanonische Parallel- 
texte zu Mt. und Mk., p. 300).—Ver. 2. 
πέντε pwpal, πέντε φρόνιμοι: equal num- 
bers of both, not intended to represent 
the proportion in the spiritual sphere; 
foolish, wise, not bad and good, but im- 
prudent and prudent, thoughtless and 
thoughtful. Even the “ foolish ” might 
be very attractive, lovable girls; per- 
haps might have been the favourites at 
the feast: for wisdom is apt to be cold; 
foolish first named in best MSS., and 
properly, for they play the chief 7éle in 
the story, and are first characterised in 
the sequel.—Ver. 3. €Aatov: the state- 
ment about the foolish, indicating the 
nature or proof of their folly, is that 
they took their lamps but did not take 
oil. None? or only not a supply suffi- 
cient for an emergency—possible delay ? 
Goebel (Die Parabeln $esu) decides for 


300 : 
d here only 6, 
Si 
of trim. ἐξέρχεσθε εἰς ἀπάντησιν αὐτοῦ." 


¢ Ch. iii. 9; 


xvi. 8; παρθένοι ἐκεῖναι, καὶ “ ἐκόσμησαν τὰς λαμπάδας αὐτῶν.5 


xxiii. 381." 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXV. 


µέσης δὲ νυκτὸς κραυγὴ Ὑέγονεν, Ιδού, & νυµφίος epxerat,! 


7. Τότε ἠγέρθησαν πᾶσαι αἱ 
8. αἱ δὲ 


Rom. viii. μωραὶ ταῖς φρονίµοις εἶπον, Δότε ἡμῖν ἐκ τοῦ ἐλαίου ὑμῶν, ὅτι αἱ 


23. 1 0οΟΓ. 


xi. 31 (αἱ λαμπάδες ἡμῶν σβέννυνται. 


instances 


9. “AmexplOncay δὲ ai φρόνιμοι, 


of the τε-λέγουσαι, Μήποτε οὐκ” ἀρκέσῃ ἡμῖν καὶ ὑμῖν: πορεύεσθε δὲ δ 


flex. pron. 


used in ref, μᾶλλον πρὸς τοὺς πωλοῦντας, καὶ ἀγοράσατε " ἑαυταῖς. 


to τδί and 
and pers.), 


1Ο. ἆπερ- 


2 ερχεται omit NBCDLZ (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 Omit αντον NB (Tisch., W.H.). 


Σεαντων in NABLZX. 


4 ov µη in ΒΟΡΧΔΣ (W.H.), ουκ in QALZ (Tisch., W.H., in margin). 


5 The best authorities omit δε. 


the former view. His idea of the whole 
situation is this: the virgins meet at the 
bride’s house, there wait the announce- 
ment of the bridegroom’s approach, 
then for the first time proceed to light 
their lamps, whereupon the foolish find 
that there is nothing in the dish except 
a dry wick, which goes out shortly after 
being lighted. In favour of this view he 
adduces the consideration that the other 
alternative makes the wise too wise, pro- 
viding for a rare occurrence. Perhaps, 
but on the other hand Goebel’s view 
makes the foolish too foolish, and also 
irrelevantly foolish, for in the case 
supposed they would have been at fault 
even if the bridegroom had not tarried. 
But the very point of the parable is to 
illustrate the effect of delay. On the 
various ways of conceiving the situation, 
vide The Parabolic Teaching of Christ.— 
Ver. 4. ἐν τοῖς ἀγγείοις: the wise took 
oil in the vessels, i.e., in vessels, with an 
extra supply, distinct from the cups at 
the top of the torches containing oil.— 
Ver. 5. χρονίζοντοςτ. ν.: nO reason given 
for delay, a possibility in natural life, 
the point on which the spiritual lesson, 
«δε ready,” hinges. —évierafav, they 
nodded, aorist, because a transient state ; 
ἐκάθευδον, and remained for some time 
in slumber, imperfect, because the state 
continuous. Carr (Camb. N. T.) cites 
Plato, Afol. Socr., as illustrating the 
discriminating use of the two verbs in 
reference to the two stages of sleep.— 
πᾶσαι, all, sleep in the circumstances 
perfectly natural and, everything being 
ready, perfectly harmless.—Ver. 6. ἰδοὺ 
6 vupdios: at length at midnight a cry 
is raised by some one not asleep—lo / 
the bridegroom ; laconic, rousing, heard by 
all sleepers.—é&épxeode els ἀπάντησιν, 
go forth to meeting: no words that can 


be dispensed with here either. Go forth 
whence? from the bride’s house (Goebel) ; 
from some inn, or private dwelling on 
the way, whither they have turned in 
on finding that the bridegroom tarried 
(Bleek, Meyer, Weiss). On this point 
Goebel’s view is to be preferred.—Ver. 
7. ἐκόσμησαν, trimmed, or proceeded 
to trim, for which the imperfect would 
have been more suitable. In the case of 
the five foolish it was an action attempted 
rather than performed, begun rather than 
completed.—Ver. 8. σβέννυνται, are 
going out, as in R.V.—Ver. 9. µήποτε, 
lest, implying, and giving a reason for, 
an umexpressed declinature. Kypke 
renders, perhaps, fortasse, citing examples 
from classics, also Loesner, giving ex- 
amples from Philo. Elsner suggests that 
ὁρᾶτε or βλέπετε is understood before 
µήποτε. Schott, putting a comma after 
ὑμῖν, and omitting δὲ after πορεύεσθε, 
translates thus: lest perchance there be 
not enough for us and you, go rather to 
them that sell, etc. (‘ne forte oleum neque 
nobis neque vobis sufficiat, abite potius,” 
εἴο.).--πορεύεσθε, etc.: this seems 
a cold, ungenerous suggestion on the 
part of the wise, and apparently untrue 
to what was likely to occur among girls 
atsuch atime. Could the oil really be 
got at such a time of night? and, 
supposing it could, would going not 
throw them out of the festivities? 
Augustine says: “ποπ consulentium sed 
irridentium est ista responsio” (Serm. 
xC., iii.,8). More humanely, in the modern 
spirit, Koetsveld suggests that the 
Marriage procession to music and song 
was very slow, and that there was a fair 
chance of overtaking it after the pur- 
chase (De Gelijk., p. 220). Let us 
hope so; but I fear we must fall back on 
the fact that ‘‘ sudden emergencies bring 


6—15. 


κύριε, ἄνοιξον ἡμῖν. 
ὑμῖν, οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς. 


ἡμέραν οὐδὲ τὴν ὥραν, év ᾗ 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεται.] 


ΕΥΑΕΓΙ ΕΛΙΟΝ 30% 
Χομένων δὲ αὐτῶν ἀγοράσαι, ἦλθεν 6 νυµφίος" καὶ ai ἔτοιμοι 
εἰσῆλθον pet αὐτοῦ εἰς τοὺς Ὑάμους, καὶ ἐκλείσθη ἡ θύρα. 
II. ὕστερον δὲ ἔρχονται καὶ at λοιπαὶ παρθένοι, λέγουσαι, Κύριε, 
12. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν, ᾽Αμὴν λέγω 
13. Γρηγορεῖτε οὖν, ὅτι οὖκ οἴδατε τὴν 

δω, f Ch. xxi. 33. 

14. “Ὥσπερ yap ἄνθρωπος " ἀποδημῶν ἐκάλεσε τοὺς ἰδίους Mic. xi 

ντα, 


a A * 
δούλους, καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτοῖς τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ" 15. καὶ ᾧ μὲν 
δὲ ἕν, ἑκάστῳ Ε κατὰ τὴν ἰδίαν 


ἔδωκε πέντε τάλαντα, ᾧ δὲ δύο, ᾧ 


χαχα. 
g 2 Cor. viii. 
3. 


1 The words εν η ο vios 7. a. ερ. are omitted in MABCDLXAZ 33 al. plur., and 


by modern editors. 


into play a certain element of selfish- 
ness,” and take the advice of the wise as 
simply a refusal to be burdened with 
their neighbours’ affairs. 

Ver. 10. ἀπερχομένων,είο. Thefoolish 
took the advice and went to buy, and 
in so doing acted in character ; foolish in 
that asin not having a good supply of 
oil. They should have gone on without 
oil, the great matter being to be in time. 
By reckoning this as a point in their folly 
we bring the foolish virgins into analogy 
with the foolish builder in chap. vii. 26. 
Vide notes there, and also The Para- 
bolic Teaching of Christ, p. 505 f. Of 
course, on this view the oil has no signi- 
ficance in the spiritual sphere. It plays 
a great part in the history of interpreta- 
tion. For Chrys. and Euthy., the lamp 
=virginity, and-the oil=pity, and the 
, moral is: continence without charity 
worthless ; a good lesson. ‘ Nothing,” 
says the former, ‘‘is blinder than vir- 
ginity without pity ; thus the people are 
used to call the merciless dark (σκο- 
tewovs),” Hom. Ixxviii.—éxAcio On ἠθύρα, 
the door was shut, because all the guests 
were supposed to be within; no hint 
given by the wise virgins that more were 
coming. This improbable in the natural 
sphere.—- Ver. II. κύριε, κύριε, etc., 
master, master, open to us; a last, 
urgent, desperate appeal, knocking hav- 
ing preceded (Lk. xiii. 25) without result. 
The fear that they are not going to be 
admitted has seized their hearts.—Ver. 
12. οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς, I do not know you; 
in the natural sphere not a judicial penalty 
for arriving too late, but an inference from 
the late arrival that those without cannot 
belong to the bridal party. The solemn 
tone, however (ἀμὴῆν λ. ὑ.), shows that 
the spiritual here invades the natural. 
Pricaeus refers to Lk. xi. 7 as helping 
to understand the temper of the speech 


from within = do not trouble me, the 
door is shut.— Ver. 13. The moral, 
γρηγορεῖτε, watch ; not directed against 
sleep (ver. 5) but against lack of fore- 
thought. The reference of the parable 
to the Parusia, according to Weiss 
(Meyer), is imposed upon it by the evan- 
gelist. 

Vv. 14-30. Parable of the Talents (cf. 
Lk, xix. 11-28), according to Weiss (Mt.- 
Ev., 535) and Wendt (L. J., i., 145) not 
a Parusia-parable originally, but spoken 
at some other time, and inculcating, like 
the parable of the unjust steward, skill 
and fidelity in the use of earthly goods. 
—Ver. 14. ὥσπερ: suggests a compari- 
son between the parabolic history and 
the course of things in the kingdom, but 
the apodosis carrying out the comparison 
is omitted.—yap implies that the point of 
comparison is in the view of the evan- 
gelist the same as in the preceding para- 
Ῥ]ε.---ἀποδημῶν, about to go abroad.— 
ἐκάλεσε, etc., called his own servants and 
delivered to them his means; not an un- 
natural or unusual proceeding intro- 
duced against probability for the sake of 
the moral lesson; rather the best thing 
he could do with his money in his ab- 
sence, dividing it among carefully selected 
slaves, and leaving them to do their best 
with it. Investments could not then be 
made as now (vide Koetsveld, p. 254).— 
Ver. 15. πέντε, δύο, ἕν: the number of 
talents given in each case corresponded 
to the master’s judgment of the capacity 
(δύναμιν) of each man. All were sup- 
posed to be trustworthy and more or less 
capable. Even one talent represented a 
considerable sum, especially for that 
period when a denarius was a day’s wage. 
—ral ἀπεδήμησεν, and then he went 
away. So ends the account of the 
master’s action.—ev8éws should be con- 
nected with πορευθεὶς, whereby it gains 


302 KATA MATOAION XXV. 


δύναμιν: καὶ ἀπεδήμησεν εὐθέως. 16. πορευθεὶς δὲ] ὁ τὰ πέντε 


τάλαντα λαβὼν εἰργάσατο ” ἐν αὐὗτοῖς, καὶ ἐποίησεν ἄλλα πέντε 


τάλαντα." 17. ὡσαύτως καὶ ὅ 6 τὰ δύο ἐκέρδησε καὶ αὐτὸς ὃ ἄλλα 
δύο. 18. ὁ δὲ τὸ ἓν λαβὼν ἀπελθὼν ὥρυδεν ἐν τῇ yi,” καὶ ἀπέ- 


κρυψε δ τὸ ἀργύριον τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ. 19. Meta δὲ χρόνον πολὺν 3 
ἔρχεται ὁ κύριος τῶν δούλων ἐκείνων, καὶ συναίρει μετ αὐτῶν 
λόγον. 2ο. καὶ προσελθὼν 6 τὰ πέντε τάλαντα λαβὼν προσήνεγκεν 
ἄλλα πέντε τάλαντα, λέγων, Κύριε, πέντε τάλαντά µοι παρέδωκας : 


ἴδε, ἄλλα πέντε τάλαντα ἐκέρδησα ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς.] 21. Ἔφη δὲ 17 αὐτῷ 


1 SSB omit δε, the insertion of which is due to the ενθεως being taken as belong- 


ing to απεδηµησεν. 
2 mpyacato in ΝΒΡΙ.. 
3 εκερδησεν in BCDLZ (W.H.). 


It should be taken with πορευθεις (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὃν has εποιησεν (Tisch.). 
‘ BL omit this second ταλαντα (W.H.). 


5 και omitted in SCL (Tisch., W.H., in text, insert in margin), 


6 καί αυτος omit BCL. 
8 εκρυψεν in ΝΔΑΒΟΡΙ, 33. 
10 λογον before per αυτων in $BCDLE. 


Ἰγην in ΕΙ, (Tisch., W.H.). 
9 wohvy χρονον in SBCDL. 
11 επ αντοις omit RBDL. 


12 δε omitted in ΝΝΒΟΓΡΙ.Σ, also in ver. 22 after προσελθων in NB. 


significance as indicating the temper of 
the servant. He lost no time in setting 
about plans for trading, with the talents 
entrusted to him (so Fritzsche, Weiss, 
Schanz, and Holtz., H. C.).—Ver. 16. 
εἰργάσατο ἐν αὐτοῖς, traded in or with 
them, used in classics also in this sense 
but without any preposition before 
the dative of the πιβίετῖα].---ἄλλα πέντε, 
other five, which speaks to a considerable 
period in the ordinary course of trade.— 
Ver. 17. ὡσαύτως, in like manner ; that 
absolutely the same proportion between 
capital and gain should be maintained in 
the two cases was not likely but possible, 
and the supposition is convenient for the 
application.—Ver. 18. ὥρυξεν γῆν, dug 
up the earth, and hid the silver of his 
master. Not dishonest—the master had 
not misjudged as to that—but indolent, 
unenterprising, timid. What he did was 
often done for safety. The master might 
have done it himself, but he wanted in- 
crease as well as safety. In Lk.’s para- 
ble the same type of man buries his 
pound in a napkin. A talent was too 
large to be put up that way. 

Vv. 19-23.—Ver. 19. πολὺν χρόνον: 
the master returns after α long time, 
an important expression in a parable 
relating to the Parusia, as implying 
long delay.—ovvaipe. λόγον, maketh 
a reckoning, as in xviii. 23.—Ver. 20. 
The first servant gives his report: 


bringing five and five, he presents them 
to his master, and says: te, as if in- 
viting him to satisfy himself by count- 
ing.—Ver. 21. ev, welldone! excellent! 
=evye in classics, which is the approved 
reading in Lk. xix. 17. Meyer takes it 
as an adverb, qualifying πιστός, but 
standing in so emphatic a position at the 
head of the sentence and so far from the 
word it is supposed to qualify it inevi- 
tably has the force of an interjection— 
ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, devoted and faithful : 
two prime virtues in the circumstances. 
On the sense of ἀγαθός, vide xx. 15.---ἐπὶ 
π. σε καταστήσω, I will set thee over 
many things. The master means to 
make extensive use of the talents and 
energy of one who had shown himself so 
enthusiastic and trustworthy in a limited 
sphere.—etoehOe ε. τ. χαρὰν τ. κ. σ. 
This clause seems to be epexegetical of the 
previous one, or to express the same idea 
under a different form. χαρά has often 
been taken as referring to a feast given 
on the occasion of the master’s return 
(so De Wette, Trench, etc.). Others 
(Reuss, Meyer, Weiss, Speaker’s Com.) 
take it more generally as denoting the 
master’s state of joy. Thus viewed, the 
word takes us into the spiritual sphere, 
the joy of the Lord having nothing in 
common with the affairs of the bank 
(Reuss, Hist. Ev.). Weiss thinks this 
second description of the reward pro- 


πθ---28. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


303 


ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ, “EG, δοῦλε ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, ἐπὶ ὀλίγα ἧς πιστός, b here 


ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω: εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν χαρὰν τοῦ κυρίου σου. . 
22. Προσελθὼν δὲ καὶ ὁ τὰ δύο τάλαντα λαβὼν 1 etme, Κύριε, δύο. 
τάλαντά po παρέδωκας; ἴδε, ἄλλα δύο τάλαντα ἐκέρδησα ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς.ὶ 
23. Ἔφη αὐτῷ 6 κύριος αὐτοῦ, Ed, δοῦλε ἀγαθὲ καὶ πιστέ, ἐπὶ ὀλίγα 


and in ver, 


- ~ t 
ἧς πιστός, ἐπὶ πολλῶν σε καταστήσω: εἴσελθε εἰς τὴν χαρὰν τοῦ | Ch. xvi. 


κυρίου σου. 


24. Προσελθὼν δὲ καὶ ὁ τὸ ἓν τάλαντον εἰληφὼς εἶπε, 
Κύριε, ἔγνων σε ὅτι ' σκληρὸς εἶ ἄνθρωπος, θερίζων ὅπου οὐκ ἔσπειρας, 
καὶ συνάγων ὅθεν οὐ } διεσκόρπισας' 25. καὶ φοβηθείς, ἀπελθὼν 
έκρυψα τὸ τάλαντόν σου ἐν τῇ yh° ἴδε, ἔχεις τὸ σόν. 


3 

xiv. 27 (of 

a flock). 

Lk. xv. 13; 

xvi. 1 (of 

property). 
k here and 


> 
26. “Atro-* jo Ῥομι, 


\ ας , > ag ἴψ. 2A κ) a \k> 2 xii. 11. 
κριθεὶς δὲ ο κυριος αυτου ειπεν αυτω; Πονηρε δοῦλε και ΟΚΝΊΡΕ, | here only. 


δεις ὅτι θερίζω ὅπου οὐκ ἔσπειρα, καὶ συνάγω, ὅθεν οὗ διεσκόρπισα - 
27. ἔδει οὖν σε” βαλεῖν τὸ ἀργύριον ὃ µου τοῖς ᾿τραπε[ίταις: καὶ 
ἐλθὼν ἐγὼ "' ἐκομισάμην ἂν τὸ ἐμὸν σὺν ” τόκω. 


1 ABCLAE omit λαβων. 


2 ge ovy in ΝΒΟΙ, 33. 


ceeds from the evangelist interpreting 
the parable allegorically of Messiah’s re- 
turn. But we escape this inference if 
we take the phrase “the joy of thy lord ”’ 
as=the joy of lordship (herilis gaudi, 
Grotius, and Elsner after him). The 
faithful slave is to be rewarded by ad- 
mission to fellowship in possession, part- 
nership. Cf. péroxot τοῦ χριστοῦ in 
Heb. tii. 14=sharers (‘fellows ’’) with 
Christ, not merely ‘‘ partakers of Christ”. 
—Ver. 23. Praise and recompense 
awarded to the second servant in identi- 
cal terms: reward the same in recogni- 
tion of equal devotion and fidelity with 
unequal ability a just law of the King- 
dom of God, the second law bearing on 
‘‘ Work and Wages’’ there. For the 
first, vide on xx. 1-16. Euthymius re- 
marks toy ἢ τιμὴ διότι καὶ ton ἡ σπουδή. 

Vv. 24-30.—Ver. 24. εἰληφώς, the 
perfect participle, instead of λαβὼν in 
ver. 20, because the one fact as to him is 
that he is the man who has received a 
talent of which he has made no use. 
(So Weiss in Meyer.)—€yvwv σε ὅτι, for 
ἔγνων ὅτι ov, by attraction.—oxAnpos, 
‘‘hard”’; grasping, ungenerous, taking 
all to himself, offering no inducements 
to his servants, as explained in the pro- 
verbial expressions following: θερίζων, 
etc., reaping where you do not sow, and 
gathering where (ὅθεν instead of ὅπου, a 
word signifying de loco, instead of a 
word signifying in loco; vide Kypke for 
-other examples) you did not scatter 


SD have it. 
{wanting in BDL) at the end of ver. 22. 


m Heb. xi 
Ig (in 
same 
sense). 


28. ἄρατε οὖν ἀπ᾿ © Lk. xix.23. 


Probably a gloss, as is also ew αυτοις 


Στα αργνρια in NB. 


with the fan = appropriating everything 
produced on his land by the labour of his 
servants, without giving them any share 
—no inducement to work for such a 
curmudgeon of a master: all toil, no 
pay. Compare this with the real char- 
acter as revealed in: ‘‘ Enter thou into 
the joy oflordship ”.—Ver. 25. φοβηθεὶς, 
etc., fearing: loss of the talent by trade; 
he thought the one thing to make sure 
of, in the case of such a master, was 
that what he had got might be safe.— 
ἐν τῇ Yq: the primitive bank of security. 
Vide xili. 44.—U5e ἔχεις τὸ σόν, see you 
have what belongs to you; no idea that 
the master was entitled not only to the 
talent, but to what it might earn.— 
Ver. 26. wovnpé (vide on vi. 23), 
‘“‘wicked” is too general a meaning: 
mean-spirited or grudging would suit the 
connection better. —2ovnpos is the fitting 
reply to σκληρὸς, and the opposite of 
ἀγαθὸς. You call me hard, I call you a 
churl: with no heart for your work, un- 
like your fellow-servant who put his whole 
heart into his work.—éxvnpé, slothful ; 
a poor creature altogether: suspicious, 
timid, heartless, spiritless, idle.—jSets, 
etc.: a question, neither making an 
admission nor expressing surprise or 
anger, but leading up to a charge of 
inconsistency = If that was your idea of 
me, why then, etc.—Ver. 27. ἔδει, etc., 
you ought in that case to have cast my 
silver to the money-changers, or bankers. 
That could have been done without 


304 KATA MATOAION XXV. 
αὐτοῦ τὸ τάλαντον, καὶ δότε τῷ ἔχοντι τὰ δέκα τάλαντα. 29. TS 
γὰρ ἔχοντι παντὶ δοθήσεται, καὶ περισσευθήσεται: ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ 1 μὴ 

o Lk. xvii. ἔχοντος, καὶ ὃ ἔχει, ἀρθήσεται dw αὐτοῦ. 30. Καὶ τὸν ’ ἀχρεῖον 

Io 


δοῦλον ἐκβάλλετε2 εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον. 


ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁ κλαυθ- 


μὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 

31. “Ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ, καὶ 
πάντες ot ἅγιοι ὃ ἄγγελοι pet’ αὐτοῦ, 32. τότε καθίσει ἐπὶ θρόνου 
δόξης αὐτοῦ, καὶ συναχθήσεται ΄ ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, 
καὶ ἀφοριεῖδ αὐτοὺς dm’ ἀλλήλων, ὥσπερ ὁ ποιμὴν ἀφορίζει τὰ 


1 For απο δε του NBDL have τον δε (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 exBadere in HABCLXAZ. 


7 SSBDL omit αγιοι. 


4 συναχθησονται in $BDL. The singular is a grammatical correction. 
Σαφορισει in $QLA (Tisch., W.H.). BD have αφοριει as in T. R. (Weiss). 


trouble or risk, and with profit to the 
master.—éya, apparently intended to be 
emphatic, suggesting a distribution of 
offices between servant and master= 
yours to put it into the bank, mine to 
take it out. So Field (Otium ΝΟ.) 
who, following a hint of Chrys., trans- 
lates: ‘And I should have gone (ἐλθὼν) 
to the bank and received back mine own 
(or demanded it) with interest”.—ociv 
τόκῳ, literally, with offspring: a figura- 
tive name for interest on money.—Ver. 28. 
ἄρατε, etc., take the one talent from the 
man who made no use of it, and give it 
to the man who will make mos¢ use of it. 
—Ver. 29. General principle on which 
the direction rests pointing to a law of 
life, hard but inexorable——Ver. 30. 
ἀχρεῖον, useless. Palairet renders in- 
juriosum; Kypke, improbum, Being 
useless, he was both injurious and un- 
just. The useless man does wrong all 
round, and there is no place for him 
either in this world or in the Kingdom 
of God. His place is in the outer dark- 
ness. 

Difference of opinion prevails as to 
whether this parable refers to the use of 
material goods for the Kingdom of God, 
or to the use of spiritual gifts. It is not, 
perhaps, possible to decide in ignorance 
of the historical occasion of the parable, 
nor is it necessary, as the same law 
applies. 


ως Ὑν. 31-46. The fudgment programme. 


—Much diversity of opinion has prevailed 
in reference to this remarkable passage ; 
as to the subjects of the judgment, and 
the authenticity of this judgment pro- 
gramme as a professed Jogion: of Jesus. 
Are the judged all mankind, Christian 
and non-Christian, or Christians only, or 


non-Christian peoples, including un- 
believing Jews, or the Jewish people 
excluded? Even as early as Origen it 
was felt that there was room for doubt 
on such points. He says (Comm. in Ev. 
M.): ‘‘Utrum segregabuntur gentes 
omnes ab omnibus qui in omnibus genera- 
tionibus fuerint, an illae tantum quae 
in consummatione fuerint derelictae, aut 
illae tantum quaecrediderunt in Deum per 
Christum, et ipsae utrum omnes, an non 
omnes, non satis est manifestum. Tamen 
quibusdam videtur de differentia eorum, 
quae crediderunt haec esse dicta.” 
Recent opinion inclines to the view 
that the programme refers to heathen 
people only, and sets forth the principle 
on which they shall be judged. As to 
the authenticity of the logion critics hold 
widely discrepant views. Some regard 
it as a composition of the evangelists. 
So Pileiderer, e.g., who sees in it simply 
the literary expression of a genial humane 
way of regarding the heathen on the part 
of the evangelist, an unknown Christian 
author of the second century, who had 
charity enough to accept Christlike love 
on the part of the heathen as an equiva- 
lent for Christian faith (Urchristenthum, 
Ρ. 532). Holtzmann, H.C., also sees 
in it a second-hand composition, based 
on 4 Esdras vii. 33-35, Apoc. Bar, Ixxxiii. 
12. Weiss, on the other hand, recog- 
nises as basis an authentic logion of 
Jesus, setting forth love as the test of 
true discipleship, which has been worked 
over by the evangelist and altered into 
a judgment programme for heathendom. 
Wendt (L. ¥., p. 186) thinks that the 
logion in its original form was such a 
programme. This seems to be the most 
probable opinion. 


20---3δ. 


εὐλογημένοι τοῦ πατρός µου, κληρονοµήσατε τὴν ἠτοιμασμένην ὑμῖν τ 
βασιλείαν ἀπὸ Ἱκαταβολῆς "κόσμου. 
ἐδώκατέ por φαγεῖν : ἐδίψησα, καὶ ἐποτίσατέ µε: ᾿ ξένος ἤμην, καὶ 

"συνηγάγετέ µε" 36. γυμνός, καὶ περιεβάλετέ µε" ἠσθένησα, καὶ 
Σἐπεσκέψασθέ µε" év φυλακῇ ἤμην, καὶ ἤλθετε πρός µε. 
ἀποκριθήσονται αὐτῷ οἱ δίκαιοι, λέγοντες, Κύριε, πότε σὲ εἴδομεν 
πεινῶντα, καὶ ἐθρέψαμεν; ἢ δυψῶντα, καὶ ἐποτίσαμεν - 
ἢ Ὑγυμνόν, καὶ περιεβάλομεν ; 


σε εἴδομεν ξένον, καὶ συνηγάγοµεν ; 


Ver. 31. ὅταν δὲ, the description 
following recalls xxiv. 30, to which the 
ὅταν seems to refer.—Ver. 32. πάντα τὰ 
ἔθνη naturally suggests the heathen 
peoples as distinct from Jews, though 
the latter may be included, notwith- 
standing the fact that in one respect 
their judgment day had already come 
(xxiv. τ5-22).--ἀφοριεῖ: first a process 
of separation as in the interpretation of 
the parable of the tares (xiii. 49).--τά 
πρόβατα ἀπὸ τῶν ἐρίφων, the sheep from 
the young goats. Sheep and goats, 
theugh feeding together under the care 
of the same shepherd, seem of their own 
accord to separate into two companies. 
Tristram and Furrer bear witness to this. 
—Ver. 33. καὶ στήσει, etc., the bare plac- 
ing of the parties already judges, the good 
on the right, the evil on the left; sheep, 
emblems of the former; goats, of the 
latter. Why? No profit from goats, 
much from sheep ; from their wool, milk, 
lambs, says Chrys., Hom. Ixxix. Lust 
and evil odour secure for the goat its 
unenviable emblematic significance, say 
others: ‘‘id animal et libidinosum et 
olidum” (Grotius). Lange suggests 
stubbornness as the sinister quality. 
More important is the point made by 
Weiss that the very fact that a separation 
is necessary implies that all were one 
flock, z.e., that the judged in the view of 
Jesus are all professing Christians, dis- 
ciples true or false. 

Vv. 34-40. of εὐλογημένοι τοῦ πατρός 
pov, my Father’s blessed ones, the 
participle being in effect a substantive. 
---“κληρονομήσατε, etc.: this clause Weiss 
tegards as a proof that the parable 
originally referred to disciples, as for 
them only could the kingdom be said 
to be prepared from the foundation of 
the world. Wendt, holding the original 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


305 


XVii. 21. 

Eph. ii. 19. 
Heb.xi.13. 
here and 


35. ἐπείνασα γάρ, καὶ 


in vv. 38, 
43 (Deut. 
xxii. 2. 
osh.ii.18. 

udges 
xix. 18). 
Lk. i. 68, 
78; vii. 16. 
Acts vii. 
23. Jas.i. 
27. 


37. Τότε 


38. πότε δέι 


reference to have been to the heathen, 
brackets the words from οἱ εὐλογ. to 
κόσμου as of doubtful authenticity.~- 
Ver. 35. ἐπείνασα, ἐδίψησα, ξένος ἥμην: 
hungry, thirsty, a stranger. The claims 
created by these situations are universally 
recognised though often neglected; to 
respond to them is a duty of ‘common 
humanity ”.—ovuvnydayeré pe, ye received 
me (into your house) (cf. Judges xix. 18, 
—ovk ἔστιν avip συνάγων µε εἰς οἰκίαν] 
Meyer, Weiss, and others, with stricter 
adherence to the literal meaning of the 
word, render: ye gathered me into the 
bosom of your family; Fritzsche: ye 
admitted me to your table (‘simul con- 
vivio adhibuistis’’).—Ver. 36. yupvas, 
ἠσθένησα, ἐν φΦυλακῇ: deeper degrees of 
misery demanding higher degrees of 
charity ; naked = ill clad, relief more 
costly than in case of hunger or thirst ; 
sick, calling for sympathy prompting to 
visits of succour or consolation; in 
prison, a situation at once discreditable 
and repulsive, demanding the highest 
measure of love in one who visits the 
prisoner, the temptation being strong to 
be ashamed of one viewed as a criminal, 
and to shrink from his cell, too often 
dark and Ιοαίῃεοπια.---ἐπεσκέψασθέ µε, 
this verb is often used in the O. T. and 
N. Τ. in the sense of gracious visitation 


on the part of God (for Ἴρ8 in Sept.) 


(vide Lk. i. 78, and the noun ἐπισκοπή 
in Lk. xix. 44).—Ver. 37. κύριε: not 
necessarily spoken by disciples supposed 
to know or believe in Jesus (Weiss). 
The title fits the judicial dignity of the 
person addressed by whomsoever used. 
In disclaiming the praise accorded, those 
who call the Judge κύριος virtually deny 
personal acquaintance with Him.—‘er. 
40 ἐφ᾽ ὅσον, in so far as = καθ’ ὅσον 


20 


\ 


306 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


παν. 39—46. 


39. πότε δέ σε εἴδομεν ἀσθενῆ,ὶ ἢ ἐν Φυλακῇ, καὶ ἤλθομεν πρός σε; 
49. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς. 6 βασιλεὺς ἐρεῖ αὐτοῖς, ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐφ᾽ 
ὅσον ἐποιήσατε ἑνὶ τούτων τῶν ἀδελφῶν pou? τῶν ἐλαχίστων, ἐμοὶ 


[4 
ἐποιήσατε. 


4Ι. “Τότε ἐρεῖ καὶ τοῖς ἐξ εὐωνύμων, Πορεύεσθε ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ, ot 3 


u Mk. xi. 11. 
ον αδι Le 
Rom. xii. καὶ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. 
14. Jas 


ii. ϱ. 


Ἀκατηραμένοι, εἲς τὸ wip τὸ αἰώνιον, τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ 
42. ἐπείνασα γάρ, καὶ οὐκ ἐδώκατέ por 
φαγεῖν ' ἐδίψησα, καὶ οὐκ ἐποτίσατέ µε: 43. ξένος ἤμην, καὶ οὗ 


συνηγάγετέ µε' Ὑυμνός, καὶ οὗ περιεβάλετέ µε: ἀσθενής, καὶ ἐν 


Φυλακῇ, καὶ οὐκ ἐπεσκέψασθέ µε. 


, > , >= <4 
44. Τότε ἀποκριθήσονται αὐτῷ 


a , - - 
καὶ αὐτοί, λέγοντες, Κύριε, πότε σὲ εἴδομεν πεινῶντα, ἢ διψῶντα, ἢ 


a 


in 1 John 


here and ξένον, ἢ γυμνόν, ἢ ἀσθενῆ, ἢ ἐν φυλακῇ, καὶ οὐ διηκονήσαµέν σοι; 
iv. 18 im 45- Τότε ἀποκριθήσεται αὐτοῖς, λέγων, ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐφ᾽ ὅσον 


: ese > > Ul ae ΄ a 3 , 39) > 7 > , 
(Ezek.xiv, OUK εποιησατε ενι TOUTWY των ἐλαχίστων, οὐδὲ εμ.οι εποιησατε. 


3. Wis- 


7 
dom χίαᾳ; 46. Kat dt “λεύσονται οὗτοι εἰς “Kddacw aidviov: οἱ δὲ δίκαιοι εἰς 


xvi. 24 al. 


in Sept.). ζωὴν αἰώνιων.. 


1 BD have ασθενονντα (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 B omits των αδελφων µου, probably an error of similar ending. 


3 ΕΙ, 33 omit οι, a significant omission. 


4 αυτω has only minus. to support. it. 


(Heb. vii. 20), used of time in Με. ix. 
5. ----ἑνὶ . . . ἐλαχίστων, the Judge’s 
brethren spoken of as a body apart, not 
subjects, but rather instruments, of judg- 
ment. This makes for the non-Christian 
position of the judged. The brethren 
are the Christian poor and needy and 
suffering, in the first place, but ultimately 
and inferentially any suffering people 
anywhere. Christian sufferers represent 
Christ, and human sufferers represent 
Christians.—7év ἐλαχίστων seems to be 
in apposition with ἀδελφῶν, suggesting 
the idea that the brethren of the Son of 
Man are the insignificant of mankind, 
those likely to be overlooked, despised, 
neglected (cf. x. 42, xviii. 5). 

Vv. 41-46. κατηραµένοι, cursed, not 
the cursed (ot wanting), and without 
τοῦ πατρός pov. God has no cursed 
ones.—eis τὸ wip, etc., the eternal fire 
is represented as prepared not for the 
condemned men, but for the devil and 
his angels. Wendt brackets the clause 
κατηραµένοι . . . ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ to 
suggest that as Jesus spoke it the 
passage ran: go away from me, for I 
was hungry, etc.—Vv. 42, 43, simply 
negative all the statements contained in 
vv. 35, 36.-—Ver. 44 repeats in summary 
form the reply of the δίκαιοι, mutatis 
mutandis, rapidly enumerating the states 


Vide below. 


of need, and disclaiming, with reference 
to all, neglect of service, οὐ διηκονήσαµέν 
σοι; ver. 45 repeats ver. 40 with the 
omission of τῶν ἀδελφῶν µου and the 
addition of οὐκ before éwoujoare.—Ver. 

6. κόλασιν, here and in 1 John iv. 18 
(6 φόβος κόλασιν ἔχει), from κολάζω = 
mutilation or pruning, hence suggestive 
of corrective rather than of vindictive 
punishment as its tropical meaning. 
The use of this term in this place is one 
of the exegetical grounds rested on by 
those who advocate the ‘‘ larger hope’’. 
Another is the strict meaning of αἰώνιος : 
agelong, not everlasting. From the 
combination results the phrase: age- 
long, pruning, or discipline, leaving 
room for the hope of ultimate salvation. 
But the doctrine of the future states 
must ultimately rest on deeper con- 
siderations than those supplied by verbai 
interpretation. - Weiss (Mt.-Evang.) 
and Wendt (L. ¥.) regard νετ. 46 as an 
interpolation by the evangelist. 

The doctrine of this passage is that 
love is the essence of true religion and 
the ultimate test of character for all men 
Christian or non-Christian. All who 
truly love are implicit Christians. For 
such everywhere the kingdom is pre- 
pared. They are its true citizens and 
God is their Father. In calling those 


ΧΧΝΙ. τ--. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


307 


XXVI. τ. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ὅτε ἐτέλεσεν ὁ “Ingots πάντας τοὺς λόγους 
τούτους, εἶπε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, 2. “Οἴδατε ὅτι μετὰ δύο ἡμέραςα vv. 58, 69. 


τὸ πάσχα yiverat, καὶ 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται eis τὸ 
3. Τότε συνήχθησαν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς] 
καὶ ot πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ λαοῦ eis τὴν " αὐλὴν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως τοῦ 
λεγομένου Καϊάφα, 4. καὶ συνεβουλεύσαντο ἵνα τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν κρατή- 


~ ” 
σταυρωθῆναι. 


, Χιν. 
54,66; xv. 
16. Lk. 
χε αχ. 
XXii. 55. 
John xviii. 
15. Vide 
below. 


' και ot γραμματεις omitted in SABDL (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


who love the Father’s blessed ones 
Jesus made an important contribution to 
the doctrine of the Fatherhood, defining 
by discriminating use the title “‘ Father ”’. 

CHaPTers XXVI.-XXVII. THE 
Passion History. These chapters 
give with exceptional fulness and 
minuteness of detail the story of Christ’s 
last sufferings and relative incidents. 
The story finds a place in all four 
Gospels (Mk. xiv., xv.; Lk. xxii., xxiii. ; 
John xviii., xix.), showing the intense 
interest felt by Christians of the apostolic 
age in all that related to the Passion of 
their Lord. Ofthethree strata of evangelic 
tradition relating respectively to what 
Jesus taught, what He did, and what He 
suffered, the last-named probably came 
first in origin. Men could wait for the 
words and deeds, but not for the awful 
tale of suffering. Even Holtzmann, who 
puts the teaching first, recognises the 
Passion drama as the nucleus of the 
tradition as to memorable facts and 
experiences. In the formation of the 
Passion chronicle the main facts would 
naturally come first ; around this nucleus 
would gather gradually accretions of 
minor incidents, till by the time the 
written records began to be compiled 
the collection of memorabilia had 
assumed the form it bears, say, in the 
Gospel of Mark; the historic truth on 
the solemn subject, at least as far as it 
could be ascertained. The passionless 
tone of the narrative in all four Gospels 
is remarkable ; the story is told in sub- 
dued accent, in few simple words, as if 
the narrator had no interest in the matter 
save that of the historian: ἁἀπαθῶς 
ἅπαντα διηγοῦνται, καὶ µόνης τῆς 
ἀληθείας φροντίζονσι. Euthy. Zig. ad 
Mt. xxvi. 67. 

Chapter xxvi. and parallels contain the 
anointing, the betrayal, the Holy Supper, 
the agony, the apprehension, the trial, 
the denial by Peter. 

Vv. 1-5. Introductory (Mk. xiv. 1, 2, 
Lk. xxii. 1, 2).—Vv. 1-2 contain a pre- 
diction by Jesus two days before Passover 


of His approaching death; vv. 3-5 a 
notice of a consultation by the authorities 
as to how they might compass His 
death. In the parallels the former item 
appears as a mere date for the latter, the 
prediction being eliminated.—Ver. r. 
πάντας τ. λόγους τούτους, all these say- 
ings, most naturally taken as referring 
to the contents of chaps, xxiv., xxv., 
though a backward glance at the whole 
of Christ’s teaching is conceivable. Yet 
in case of such a comprehensive retro- 
spect why refer only to words? Why 
not to both dicta et facta -—Ver. 2. τὸ 
πάσχα, used both of festival, as here, 
and of victim, as in ver. 17. The Passover 
began on the r4th of Nisan; itis referred 
to here for the first time in our Gospel. 
---παραδίδοται, present, either used to 
describe vividly a future event (Burton, 
M. T., § 15) or to associate it with the 
feast day as a fixture (γίνεται), ‘‘ calendar 
day and divine decree of death fixed 
beyond recall’’ (Holtz., H. C.), or to 
imply that the betrayal process is already 
begun in the thought of the false-hearted 
disciple.—Ver. 3. τότε, two days before 
Ῥαδδονετ.---συνήχθησαν points to a 
meeting of the Sanhedrim.—els τὴν 
αὐλὴν denotes the meeting place, either 
the palace of the high priest in accord- 
ance with the use of αὐλή in later Greek 
(Weiss), or the court around which the 
palatial buildings were ranged (Meyer) 
= atrium in Vulgate, followed by Calvin. 
In the latter case the meeting would be 
informal. In any case it was at the 
high priest’s quarters they met: where- 
upon Chrys. remarks: “' See the inex- 
pressible corruption of Jewish affairs. 
Having lawless proceedings on hand 
they come to the high priest seeking 
authority where they should encounter 
hindrance” (Hom. _ Ixxix.).—Kaiada, 
Caiaphas, surname, Joseph his name, 
seventeen years high priest (vide Joseph. 
Ant., 18, 2, 2; 4, 3).—Ver. 4. ἵνα with 
subjunctive after a verb of effort or plan ; 
in classic Greek oftener ὅπως with future 
indicative (Burton, § 205).—8d\w by, 


408 


σωσι δόλω,ὶ καὶ ἀποκτείνωσιν. 


a 25 


μὴ θόρυβος γένηται ἐν τῷ had. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧΥΙ. 


5. ἔλεγον δέ, “ Mi ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, ἵνα 


6. Tod δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦ γενοµένου ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ἐν οἰκίᾳ Σίμωνος τοῦ 


bMk.xiv.3. Nempod, 7. προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ γυνὴ " ἀλάβαστρον ” µύρου ἔχουσα 


Lk. vii. 
doubtful). 


2 


«ΜΗ, xiv.3 8- ἰδόντες δὲ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὅ ἠγανάκτησαν, λέγοντες, “Eis τί 


σ τα ή ἀπώλεια αὕτη; 


9. ἠδύνατοδ γὰρ τοῦτο τὸ μύρονΊ πραθῆναι 


1 δολω κρατησωσι in ΝΑΒΡΙ.ΔΣ (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). T.R. supported only by 


minusc. 


2εχουσα before αλαβαστρον pupov in BDL 13, 33, 69, etc. 


3 πολυτιµον in ΜΑΡΙ, (Tisch.) as in T. R. in ΒΓΑΣ (W.H.). 


probably comes from John xii. 3. 


4 ew. της κεφαλης in KBD 1, 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 
ΤΝΑΒΡΙ, al. omit το µνρον (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


6 eSuvaro in NBLA. 


craft, a method characteristic of clerics ; 
indigna consultatio (Bengel); cowardly 
and merciless—Ver. 5. ἔλεγον δὲ: δὲ 
points back to ver. 1, which fixes the 
passion in Passover time, while the 
Sanhedrists thought it prudent to keep 
off the holy season for reason given.— 
μὴ, etc., to avoid uproar apt to happen 
at Passover time, Josephus teste (B. J., 
Ἱ αν 3]: 

Vv. Ba Anointing in Bethany (Mk. 
xiv. 3-9, ef. John xii. r-r1). Six days 
before Passover in John; no time fixed 
in Mt. and Mk. Certainly within 
Passion week. The thing chiefly to be 
noted is the setting of this pathetic scene, 
between priestly plotting and false 
discipleship. ‘* Hatred and baseness on 
either hand and true love in the midst ” 
a raining of the Twelve).—Ver. 6. τοῦ 

2 ᾿Ιησοῦ, etc.: indicates the scene, in 
Bethany, and in the house of Simon 
known as the leper (the one spoken of 
in viii. 2?). The host of Lk. vii. 36 ff. 
was a Simon. On the other hand, the 
host of John xii. 1 f., or at least a pro- 
minent guest, was Lazarus, brother of 
Martha and Mary. ‘This and other 
points of resemblance and difference 
raise the question: do all the four 
evangelists tell the same story in 
different ways? On this question end- 
less diversity of opinion has prevailed. 
The probability is that there were two 
anointings, the one reported with 
variations by Mt., Mk., and John, the 
other by Lk.; and that the two got 
somewhat mixed in the tradition, so 
that the precise details of each cannot 
now be ascertained. Happily the ethical 
or religious import of the two beautiful 


πολντιµον 


5 ΦΕΓΙ, omit αυτου. 


stories is clear.—Ver. 7. ἀλάβαστρον, an 
“alabaster” (vase), the term, originally 
denoting the material, being transferred 
to the vessel made of it, like our word 
‘“olass ” (Speaker’s Com.), in common use 
for preserving ointments (Pliny, N.H.., iii., 
3). An alabaster of nard (μύρου) was a 
present for a king. Among five precious 
articles sent by Cambyses to the King of 
Ethiopia was included a µύρου ἀλάβ. 
(Herod., iii., 20). On this ointment and 
its source vide Tristram, Natural 
History of the Bible, p. 484 (quoted in 
notes on Mk.).—Bapvutipov (here only in 
N. T.), of great price; this noted to 
explain the sequel.—regadjjs : she broke 
the vase and poured the contents: on 
the head of Jesus, feet in John; both 
possible; must be combined, say the 
Harmonists.—Ver. 8. ἠγανάκτησαν, as 
in xx. 24. The disciple-circle experienced 
various annoyances from first to last: 
Syrophenician woman, mothers and 
children, ambition of James and John, 
Mary of Bethany. The last the most 
singular of all. Probably all the disciples 
disapproved more or less. It was a 
woman’s act, and they were men. She 
was a poet and they were somewhat 
Ρτοβαίο.--ἀπώλεια, waste, a precious 
thing thrown away. To how many 
things the term might be applied on 
similar grounds! The lives of the 
martyrs, ¢.g., cui bono? That is the 
question; not so easily answered as 
vulgar utilitarians think. Beside this 
criticism of Mary place Peter’s revolt 
against the death of Jesus (xvi. 22).— 
Ver. 9. δοθῆναι, etc., to be given (the 
proceeds, subject easily understood) to 
the poor. How much better a use than 


9 δι 


πολλοῦ, καὶ δοθῆναι πτωχοῖς. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


660 


10. Γνοὺς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν 


αὐτοῖς, “Ti ἁκόπους ἆ παρέχετε τῇ Ὑυναικί; ἔργον γὰρ καλὸν ἆ Lk. xi. 7; 


εἰργάσατο εἰς ἐμέ. 


Νο κ πρ 4 m4 
ἐμὲ δὲ οὗ πάντοτε ἔχετε. 


XViil. 5. 


“II. πάντοτε γὰρ τοὺς πτωχοὺς ἔχετε μεθ’ ἑαυτῶν ' Gal. vi.17. 
12. βαλοῦσα γὰρ αὕτη το μύρον τοῦτο 

Εμ A , , a ϱ 32 3 / 

ἐπὶ τοῦ σώματός µου πρὸς τὸ ᾿ ἐνταφιάσαι µε ἐποίησεν. 


13. ἁμὴν ο John xix 
40 (Gen 


κ ey) a 2h a a > ~ > 9 2 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅπου ἐὰν κηρυχθῇ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦτο ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσµῳ, 1. 2). 


λαληθήσεται καὶ ὃ ἐποίησεν αὕτη, eis ' μνηµόσυνον αὐτῆς. 
14. Τότε πορευθεὶς els τῶν δώδεκα, ὁ λεγόμενος Ιούδας Ἰσκαριώ- 
της, πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς, 15. etme, “ Τί θέλετέ µοι δοῦναι, κἀγὼ 


1 ηργασατο in SD (Tisch., W.H.). 


to waste it in the expression of a senti- 
ment!—Ver. 10. Ὑγνοὺς, perceiving 
though not hearing. We have many 
mean thoughts we would be ashamed to 
speak plainly out.—ri κόπους παρέχετε, 
etc., why trouble ye the woman? a 
phrase not frequent in classic authors, 
though similar ones occur, and even this 
occasionally (vide Kypke); found not 
only here but in Lk. xi. 7, xviii. 5, Gal. 
vi. 17, the last place worthy to be 
associated with this; St. Paul and the 
heroine of Bethany kindred spirits, liable 
to ‘*troubles’’ from the same sort of 
people and for similar reasons.—xadév, 
noble, heroic: a deed done under in- 
spiration of uncalculating love.—Ver. 11 
suggests a distinction between general 
ethical categories and duties arising out 
of special circumstances. Common men 
recognise the former. It takes a genius 
or a passionate lover to see and swiftly 
do the latter. Mary saw and did the 
rare thing, and so achieved an ἔργον 
καλὸν.- -ἐμὲ δὲ οὐ π., “a melancholy 
litotes”? (Meyer).—Ver. 12. πρὸς τὸ 
ἐνταφ., to prepare for burial by embalm- 
ing; so near is my death, though ye 
thought not of it: effect of the woman’s 
act, not her conscious purpose. The 
Syriac version introduces a quasi. “She 
meant nothing but to show her love, 
quickened possibly by instinctive fore- 
boding of ill. But an act done in that 
spirit was the best embalming of Christ’s 
body, or rather of His act in dying, for 
the two acts were kindred. Hence 
naturally the solemn declaration follow- 
ing, an essential part of the story, of 
indubitable authenticity.—Ver. 13. τὸ 
εὖ, τοῦτο, this gospel, the gospel of my 
death of love.—év 6A@ τῷ κόσµῳ: after 
ὅπου ἐὰν might seem superfluous; not 
so, however: it serves to indicate the 
range of the ‘“‘wheresoever”’: wide as 
the world, universality predicted for 


f Mk. xiv. 9. 
Acts x. 4 
(Sir. xlv. 
16 αἰ.). 


ep. in BL. 


Christianity, and also for the heroine of 
the anointing. Chrysostom, illustrating 
Christ’s words, remarks: Even those 
dwelling in the British Isles (Βρεττανικὰς 
νήσους) speak of the deed done in a 
house in Judaea by a harlot (Hom. Ixxx.: 


Chrys. identifies the anointing here 
with that in Lk. vii.). 
Vv. 14-16. Fudas offers to betray 


SFesus (Mk. xiv. to, 11, Lk. xxii. 3-6).— 
Ver. 14. τότε, then; the roots of the 
betrayal go much further back than the 
Bethany scene—vide on xvii. 22, 23— 
but that scene would help to precipitate 
the fatal step. Death at last at hand, 
according to the Master’s words. Then 
a base nature would feel uncomfortable 
in so unworldly company, and would be 
glad to escape to a more congenial 
atmosphere. Judas could not breathe 
freely amid the odours of the ointment 
and all it emblemed.—eis τ. δ., one of 
the Twelve (!).—Ver. 15. τί θέλετε, etc., 
what are ye willing to give me? Mary 
and Judas extreme opposites: she freely 
spending in love, he willing to sell his 
Master for money. What contrasts in 
the world and in the same small circle! 
The mercenary spirit of Judas is not so 
apparent in Mk. and Lk.—xaya, etc.: 
καὶ introducing a co-ordinate clause, 
instead of a subordinate clause, intro- 
duced by ὥστε or ἵνα ; a colloquialism or 
a Hebraism: the traitor mean in style as 
in spirit—é€ornoav, they placed (in 
the balance) = weighed out. Many 
interpret: they agreed = συνεφώνησαν. 
So Theophy.: ‘“ Not as many think, 
instead of ἐζυγοστάτησαν”. This cor- 
responds with Mk. and Lk., and the 
likelihood is that the money would not 
be paid till the work was done (Fritzsche). 
But Mt. has the prophecies ever in view, 
and uses here a prophetic word (Zech. 
xi. 12, ἔστησαν τὸν µισθόν pov τρι. ἀργ., 
Sept.), indifferent as to the time when 


310 


g here only ὑμῖν παραδώσω αὐτόν; 
in this 
sense, 

bh Lk. xxii. 6 


KATA MATOAION 


XXVI. 


Oi δὲ © ἔστησαν αὐτῷ τριάκοντα ἀργύρια : 
16. καὶ ἀπὸ τότε ἐζήτει 3 εὐκαιρίαν ἵνα αὐτὸν παραδῶ. 
17. THe δὲ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων προσῆλθον οἱ μαθηταὶ τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, 


λέγοντες αὐτῷ, “Mod θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμέν σοι φαγεῖν τὸ πάσχα; 
ihere only. 18. “O δὲ εἶπεν, ΄΄ Ὑπάγετε eis τὴν πόλιν πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα, καὶ εἴπατε 


jHeb.xi.28. αὐτῷ, Ὁ διδάσκαλος λέγει, Ὁ καιρός µου ἐγγύς ἐστι: πρὸς σὲ ) ποιῶ 


τὸ ) πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν pov.” 


19. Καὶ ἐποίησαν ot μαθηταὶ 


ὡς συνέταξεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἠτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα. 


20. Ὀψίας δὲ γενομένης ἀνέκειτο μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα. 


41. καὶ 


ἐσθιόντων αὐτῶν εἶπεν, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ets ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει 


με.” 
1 Δ9ΒΏΓΙ,Δ omit avre. 


payment was made. Coined money was 
in use, but the shekels may have been 
weighed out in antique fashion by men 
careful to do an iniquitous thing in the 
most orthodox way. Or there may have 
been no weighing in the case, but only 
the use of an ancient form of speech 
after the practice had become obsolete 
(Field, Ot. Nor.). The amount = about 
three or four pounds sterling, a small 
sum for such a service; too small thinks 
Meyer, who suggests that the real 
amount was not known, and that the 
sum was fixed in the tradition to suit 
prophecy.—Ver. 16. εὐκαιρίαν, a good 
occasion, the verb, εὐκαιρέω (Mk. vi. 31), 
belongs to late Greek (Lobeck, Phryn., 
παρ]. 
ς eae Arrangements for Paschal 
Feast (Mk. xiv. 12-16, Lk. xxii. 7-13).— 
Ver. 17. τῇ δὲ πρώτῃτ.ἀ. The sacred 
season which began on the 14th Nisan 
and lasted for seven days, was two feasts 
rolled into one, the Feast of the Passover 
and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, 
and it was called by either name in- 


differently.—arod, where? A much more> 


perplexing question is: when? Was it 
on the evening of the 13th (beginning of 
14th), as the Fourth Gospel seems to say, 
or on the evening of the following day, as 
the synoptical accounts seem to imply, 
that Jesus kept the Paschal Feast? This 
is one of many harmonistic problems 
arising out of the Gospel narratives from 
this point onwards, on which an immense 
amount of learned labour has been spent. 
The discussions are irksome, and their 
results uncertain; and they are apt to 
take the attention off iar more important 
matters: the essentials ot the moving 
tale, common to all the evangelists. 
We must be content to remain in doubt 


22. Καὶ λυπούμενοι σφόδρα ἤρξαντο λέγειν αὐτῷ ἕκαστος 


as to many Ροϊηίς.-- θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμεν, 
the deliberative subjunctive, without 
ἵνα after @éXers.—Ver. 18. ὑπάγετε, go 
ye into the city, t.e., Jerusalem.—mpos 
τὸν δεῖνα, to such a one, evidently no 
sufficient direction. Mk. and Lk. are 
more explicit. Mt. here, as often, 
abbreviates. Doubtless a previous under- 
standing had been come to between Jesus 
and an unknown friend in Jerusalem. 
Euthy. suggests that a roundabout 
direction was given to keep Judas in 
ignorance as to the rendezvous.—6 καιρός 
pov., my time (of death). Some (Grotius, 
Speaker’s Com., Carr, Camb. N.T.) find 
in the words a reason for anticipating the 
time of the Paschal Feast, and so one of 
the indications, even in the Synoptics, 
that John’s date of the Passion is the true 
οπ8.-- ποιῶ +. π., I make or keep (pre- 
sent, not future), a usual expression in 
such a connection. Examples in Raphel. 
--μετὰ τ. p.: making thirteen with the 
Master, a suitable number (justa φρατρία, 
Grotius), between the prescribed limits 
of ten and twenty. The lamb had to be 
entirely consumed (Ex. xii. 4, 43). Did 
Jesus and the Twelve eat the Paschal 
lamb ? 

Vv. 20-25. The presence of a traitor 
announced (Mk. xiv. 18-21, Lk. xxii. 
21-23).—Vv. 20, 21. ὀψίας δὲ y. It is 
evening, and the company are at supper, 
and during the meal (ἐσθιόντων av., ver. 
21) Jesus made a startling announce- 
ment. At what stage is not indicated. 
Elsner suggests a late stage: ‘“*Cum 
fere comedissent; vergente ad finem 
coena,” because an early announcement 
would have killed appetite.—Ver. 21. 
παραδώσει pe, shall betrayme. General 
announcement, without any clue to the 
individual, as in Mk. νετ, 18.—Ver. 22. 


16—26. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


«et 


Ὁ ἐμβάψας pet ἐμοῦ ἐν τῷ τρυβλίῳ τὴν xeEtpa,? οὗτός pe wapa-k here and 


ei in parall. 
δώσει. 24. 6 μὲν υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου } ὑπάγει, καθὼς γέγραπται! here and 
ne ος Pre eee 5 πώ ας eae £3 P in Mk. xiv. 
περὶ αὐτοῦ” ovat δὲ TH ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνω, δι οὗ 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου αι in 
/ 9 2 κι ο κά κ εν ig D ε mn yc: x» sense of 
παραδίδοται: καλὸν ἦν αὐτῷ, εἰ οὐκ ἐγεννήθη 6 ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος.; dying. 
25. ᾿Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ᾿Ιούδας ὁ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν εἶπε, '΄Μήτι ἐγώ 
εἰμι, paBBi;” Λέγει αὐτῷ, “™ Xd " εἶπας." hal ver δν 
26. ᾿Εσθιόντων δὲ αὐτῶν, λαβὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς tév® ἄρτον, καὶ εὐλογή- 
σας, ἔκλασε καὶ ἐδίδου ΄ τοῖς μαθηταῖς, καὶ “ εἶπε, ΄' Λάβετε, φάγετε: 
1 εις εκαστος without αυτων in NBCLZ 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 την χειρα before ev τω τρυβλιω in NABLZ. 
7 SBCDLZ omit τον. 
* For εδιδου τ. p. και ειπε SEBDLZ, cursives, have Sous τ. p. ειπεν. 
λυπούμενοι Seems a weak word, and the the beginning of the meal. More pro- 


addition of the evangelist’s pet word 
σφόδρα does not make it strong. 
None of the accounts realistically ex- 
press the effect which must have been 
produced.—yjpéavro helps to bring out 
the situation: they began to inquire 
after some moments of mute astonish- 
ment.—pytt ἐγώ, etc., can it be I? 
expecting or hoping for a negative 
answer; yet not too sure: probably 
many of them were conscious of fear; 
even Peter might be, quite compatibly 
with his boldness a little later.—Ver. 23. 
ὁ ἐμβάψας, he who dipped, dips, or shall 
have dipped. The aorist participle de- 
cides nothing as to time, but merely 
points to a single act, as distinct from a 
process (cf. the present in Mk.). The 
expression in Mt. does not necessarily 
identify the man unless we render: 
who has just dipped, and conceive of 
Jésus as dipping immediately after. (So 
Weiss.) In favour of this view it may 
be said that there was no sense in refer- 
ring to a single act of dipping, when there 
would be many in the course of the 
meal, unless the circumstances were such 
as to make it indicate the individual 
disciple. The mere dipping in the same 
dish would not identify the traitur, be- 
cause there would be several, three or 
four, doing the same thing, the company 
being divided into perhaps three groups, 
each having a separate dish.—riv χεῖρα. 
The ancients used their hands, not 
knives and forks. So still in the East.— 
τρυβλίφ. Hesychius gives for this word 
ὀξοβάφιον = acetabulum, a vessel for 
vinegar. Hence Elsner thinks the re- 
ference is to a vessel full of bitter herbs 
steeped in vinegar, a dish partaken of at 


bably the words point to a dish containing 
a mixture of fruit—dates, figs, etc.— 
vinegar and spices, in which bread was 
dipped, the colour of bricks or mud, to 
remind them of the Egyptian bondage 
(vide Buxtorf, Lex. Talm., p. 831). The 
custom of dipping here referred to is 
illustrated by the following from Furrer 
(Wanderungen, p. 133): ‘Before us 
stood two plates, one with strongly spiced 
macaroni, the other with a dish of fine 
cut leeks and onions. Spoons there were 
none. There were four of us who dipped 
into the same dish.”—Ver. 24. ὑπάγει, 
goeth, a euphemism for death. Cf. John 
xili, 33.--καλὸν ἦν without the ἄν, not 
unusual in conditional sentences of this 
sort: supposition contrary to fact (vide 
Burton, M. T., §§ 248-9). 

Vv. 26-29. The Lord’s Supper (Mk. 
xiv. 22-25; Lk. xxii. 19, 20).—Ver. 26. 
ἐσθ. δὲ αὐτῶν: same phrase as in ver. 
21, with δὲ added to introduce another 
memorable incident of the paschal supper. 
No details are given regarding that meal, 
so that we do not know how far our 
Lord followed the usual routine, for 
which consult Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., or 
Smith’s Dictionary, article Passover. 
Neither can we with certainty fix the 
place of the Holy Supper in the paschal 
meal, or in relation to the announcement 
of the traitor. The evangelists did not 
concern themselves about such subordi- 
nate matters.—AaPav, etc., having taken 
a cake of bread and given thanks He 
broke it. The benediction may have 
been an old form put to a new use, or 
original.—etAoyyoas has not ἄρτον for 
its object, which would in that case have 
been placed after ἰ.--δοὺς, etc., giving 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧΝΙ. 


27. Καὶ λαβὼν τὸ} ποτήριον, καὶ 


29. λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, ὅτι + 


~ 


312 
τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά pou.” 
εὐχαριστήσας, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, “ Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες : 
28. τοῦτο Ὑάρ ἐστι τὸ αἷμά µου, τὸ τῆς καινῆς δ διαθήκης, τὸ περὶ 
πολλῶν ἐκχυνόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. 
οὗ μὴ πίω ἀπ᾿ ἄρτὶ ἐκ τούτου τοῦ γεννήµατος ὅ τῆς ἀμπέλου, ἕως 
aCh. xiii, τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης, ὅταν αὐτὸ πίνω μεθ ὑμῶν καινὸν ἐν "τῇ 
oer βασιλεία τοῦ " πατρός µου." 


1 SSBLZAX omit το (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


2 και is in SBD, but wanting in CLZAX 1, 33. 


W.H. put it in brackets. 


3 For pov, το της καινης SBLZ have pov της, omitting καινης. D has the sane 


with καινης. 


4 ΝΤ ΖΣ omit οτι (Tisch., W.H., Ws.) ; 


ὅγενηµατος in SABCDL al. pl. 


to the disciples ; the cake broken into as 
many morsels, either in the act of giving 
or before the distribution Όεραπ.---λάβετε 
φάγετε, take, εαῖ.---λάβετε only in Mk. 
(W. and Ἠ.)ι---φάγετε probably an inter- 
pretative addition, true but unnecessary, 
by our evangelist.—rotré ἐστιν τὸ σῶμά 
pov, this is my body. The ἐστι is the 
copula of symbolic significance. Jesus 
at this sacred moment uses a beautifully 
simple, pathetic, and poetic symbol of 
His death. But this symbol has had the 
fate of all religious symbolism, which is 
to run into fetish worship ; in view of 
which the question is raising itself in 
some thoughtful minds whether discon- 
tinuance, at least for a time, of the use 
of sacraments would not be a benefit to 
the religion of the spirit and more in 
harmony with the mind of Christ than 
their obligatory observance.—Ver. 27. 
ποτήριον, a Cup, the article being 
omitted in best MSS. It is idle, and in 
spirit Rabbinical, to inquire which of 
the four cups drunk at the paschal feast. 
The evangelist had no interest in such a 
απεςείοπ.---εὐχαριστήσας: a different 
word from that used in reference to the 
bread, but similar in import = having 
given thanks to God. Observe, Jesus 
was in the mood, and able, at that hour, 
to thank and praise, confident that good 
would come out of evil. In Gethsemane 
He was able only to submit.—éyov, 
etc.: Mk.’s statement that all drank of 
the cup, Mt. turns into a direction by 
Jesus to do so, liturgical practice in- 
fluencing the report here as in φάγετε. 
Jesus would use the fewest words possible 
at such an hour.—Ver. 28. τὸ αἷμά pov: 
the very colour of the wine suggestive ; 
hence called αἷμα σταφυλῆς in Deut. 


ABCLA have οτι. 


xxxii, 14; my blood, pointing to the 
passion, like the breaking of the bread.— 
τῆς διαθήκης (for the two gen. pov 
τ. 8. dependent on atpa, vide Winer, 
30, 3, 3), the blood of me, of the covenant. 
The introduction of the idea appropriate 
to the circumstances: dying men make 
wills (διατίθενται οἱ ἀποθνήσκοντες, 
Euthy.). ΈΤΠε epithet καινῆς in T. R. is 
superfluous, because involved in the 
idea. The covenant of course is new. 
It is Jeremiah’s new covenant come 
at last. The blood of the covenant 
suggests an analogy between it and the 
covenant with Israel ratified by sacrifice 
(Ex. xxiv. ϐ).---τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνό- 
µενον: the shedding for many suggests 
sacrificial analogies; the present parti- 
ciple vividly conceives that which is 
about to happen as now happening; 
περὶ πολλῶν is an echo of ἀντὶ πολλῶν 
in xx. 28.—eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν: not in 
Mk., and may be a comment on Christ’s 
words, supplied by Mt.; but it is a true 
comment. For what else could the 
blood be shed according to Levitical 
analogies and even Jeremiah’s new 
covenant, which includes among its 
blessings the complete forgiveness of 
sin ?—Ver. 29 contains an express state- 
ment of the fact implied in the preceding 
actions, viz., that death is near. It is 
the last time I shall drink paschal (τούτου 
τ.γ., etc.) wine with you. I am todie at 
this passover. The second half of the sen- 
tence is not to be taken prosaically. It is 
the thought of meeting again, brought 
in to brighten the gloom of the leave- 
taking (‘‘ so tritt zu dem Lebewohl ein 
Gedanke an das Wiedersehen,”’ Holtz., 
H.C.). To disentangle figure from fact 
in this poetic utterance about the new 


4/3. 


30. Καὶ ᾿ὑμνήσαντες ἐξῆλθον εἷς τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν. 
λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 “Ingots, “Πάντες ὑμεῖς σκανδαλισθήσεσθε ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


353 


31. τότε ο Mk. xiv. 26 
(absol. as 
here). 


τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτῃ. Ὑέγραπται γάρ, ‘ Πατάξω τὸν ποιμένα, καὶ διασκορ- 


πισθήσεται] τὰ πρόβατα τῆς ποίµνης.᾽ 


µε, προάξω ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν.” 


32. μετὰ δὲ τὸ ἐγερθῆναί 
33. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 Πέτρος 


lol , 
εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Ei kal? πάντες σκανδαλισθήσονται ἐν gol, ἐγὼ οὐδέποτε 


σκανδαλισθήσοµαι.” 


3 , ~ , ‘ Pp ἀλέ ~ ‘ a , 2 

-ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ VUKTL, πρὶν ” ἀλέκτορα φωνῆσαι, τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ µε. 
, να ες / (κε Ἀ / 8, ὢ ον > , 

35. Λεγει αὐτῷ ο Πέτρος, “ Kav δέῃη µε σὺν σοι ἀποθανεῖν, οὗ µή σε 


> , 32 
ἀπαρνήσομαι. 


Ὁμοίως καὶ πάντες ot μαθηταὶ εἶπον. 


34. "Eby αὐτῷ 6 Ιησοῦς, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτι p νετ. 74. 


fk. xiv. 
30, 68. Lk. 
xxii. 34,60. 
John xiii. 
38; xviii. 


1 διασκορπισθησονται in SABCIL2. The sing. a correction. 


2 «at omitted in most uncials. 


wine is impossible. Hence such com- 
ments as those of Bengel and Meyer, to 
the effect that καινὸν points to a new 
kind of wine (‘novitatem dicit plane 
singularem,” Beng.), serve no purpose. 
They turn poetry into prose, and pathos 
into bathos. 

The remarkable transaction narrated 
in vy. 26-29 was an acted parable pro- 
claiming at once the fact and the epoch- 
making significance of the approaching 
passion. It sets in a striking light the 
personality of Jesus; His originality, 
His tenderness, His mastery of the situa- 
tion, His consciousness of being through 
His life and His death the inaugurator of 
a new era.—Was Judas present? Who 
can tell? Lk.’s narrative seems to imply 
that he was. Mt. and Mk. give no sign. 
They cannot have regarded his absence 
as of vital importance. 

Vv. 30-46. Gethsemane (Mk. xiv. 26-42, 
Lk. xxii. 39-46).—Ver. 30. ὑμνήσαντες. 
With this participle, referring to the last 
act within the supper chamber—the sing- 
ing of the paschal hymn (the Hallel, part 
2, Ps. 115-118, or possibly a new song, 
Grotius)—we pass without, and after talk 
between Jesus and the disciples, arising 
out of the situation, arrive at the scene 
of another sacred memory of the passion 
eve. If, as is said (Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb.), it was required of Jews that they 
should spend passover night in Jeru- 
salem, the spirit of Jesus led Him else- 
where—towards the Mount of Olives, to 
the garden of the agony.—Ver. 31. τότε, 
then, on the way through the valley be- 
tween the city and Olivet, the valley of 
Jehoshaphat (Kedron), suggestive of pro- 
phetic memories (Joel iii., Zech. xiii., 
xiv.), leading up, as well as the present 
situation, to the topic.—zavres, all ; one 


false-hearted, all without exception weak. 
—év ἐμοὶ, in what is to befal me.—év τῇ 
ν.τ. So near is the crisis, a matter of 
hours. The shadow of Gethsemane is 
beginning to fail on Christ’s own spirit, 
and He knows how it must fare with 
men unprepared for what is coming.— 
γέγραπται γάρ: in Zech. xiii. 7, freely 
reproduced from the Hebrew.—Ver. 32 
predicts a brighter future to alleviate the 
gloom. The Shepherd will yet again go 
before His flock (προάξω, pastoris more, 
Grotius), leading {πεπι.---εἰςτ.Γαλιλαίαν, 
the place of reunion. This verse is want- 
ing in the Fayum Fragment, which 
Harnack regards as a sign of its great 
antiquity. Resch, Agrapha, p. 495.— 
Ver. 33. εἶ πάντες σκανδαλισθήσονται, 
if, or although, all shall be offended; the 
future implies great probability of the case 
supposed ; Peter is willing to concede the 
likelihood of the assertion in reference to 
all the rest.—éya® οὐδέποτε, I, never, 
vehemently spoken and truly, so far as 
he knows himself ; sincere in feeling, but 
weaker than he is aware of.—Ver. 34. ἐν. 
7. T. ν., repetition of statement in ver. 31, 
with added emphasis (ἀμὴν, etc.), and = 
never ? this night I tell γοι.-- πρὶν ἀλέ- 
κτορα φωνῆσαι: more exact specifica- 
tion of the time to make the statement 
more impressive = before the dawn.— 
ἀλέκτωρ, poetic form for ἀλεκτρυών. This 
fowl not mentioned in O. T.; probably 
introduced into Palestine after the exile, 
possibly from Babylon (Benzinger, pp. 
38, 94). Not allowed to be kept in Jeru- 
salem according to Lightfoot, but this 
is contradicted by others (Schéttgen, 
Winsche). In any case the prohibition 
would not apply to the Romans. Though 
no hens had been in Jerusalem, Jesus 
might have spoken the words to mark 


314 


q Mk. xiv. 
b 


KATA MATOAION 


XXVI. 


36. ΤΟΤΕ ἔρχεται pet αὐτῶν ὁ “Ingots eis "χωρίον λεγόμενον 


2. a a a , a a 
ὧν. μην ; Γεθσημανῆ, καὶ λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς, “'Καθίσατε αὐτοῦ, ἕως οὗ 1 


Acts i. 18, 


19; iv. 34 ἀπελθὼν προσεύξωμαι ἐκεῖ." 


(pl.lands); , . 


11. 26. 
5 parall. 
Mk. vi. 


2 3Ί. Καὶ παραλαβὼν τὸν Πέτρον 
καὶ τοὺς δύο υἱοὺς Ζεβεδαίου, ἤρξατο λυπεῖσθαι καὶ * ἀδημονεῖν. 
““ 38. τότε λέγει αὐτοῖς, ''' Περίλυπός ἐστιν ἡ ψυχή µου ἕως θανάτου - 
."Ῥμῃ, µείνατε ὧδε καὶ γρηγορεῖτε pet ἐμοῦ. 49. Καὶ προελθὼν ὃ μικρόν, 
ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ προσευχόµενος, καὶ λέγων, “ Πάτερ µου, 


26. Lk, εἰ δυνατόν ἐστι, ' παρελθέτω ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο: πλὴν οὐχ 


αν. 33 ὡς ἐγὼ θέλω, ἀλλ ὡς ov.” 


40. Καὶ ἔρχεται πρὸς τοὺς µαθητάς, 


ος εὑρίσκει αὐτοὺς καθεύδοντας, καὶ λέγει τῷ Πέτρω, “'Οὕτως οὐκ 


in Mk. xiv. 
35: 


1 The reading varies here, some MSS. having ews ov (B, etc.), some ews av (DLA), 


some εως (SYCM). 
2 exer προσευξωµαι in SBDL 33 al. 
So in BE (W.H. in text). 
margin). 
προελθων the true reading. 


the time of night.—*rpis, thrice, sugges- 
tive of denial in aggravated form; on 
which, not on the precise number of 
times, as an instance of miraculous pre- 
diction, stress should be laid.—Ver. 35: 
intensified protestation of fidelity—kat 
before édv (kav) intensive, introducing an 
extreme case, death for the Master.—ovd 
µή, making the predictive future em- 
phatically negative=I certainly will not. 
---ὁμοίως, similarly, weaker than Mk.’s 
ὡσαύτως. Very improbable, thinks De 
Wette. But the disciples were placed in 
a delicate position by Peter’s protesta- 
tions, and would have to say something, 
however faint-heartedly. 

Vv. 36-46. The agony (so called from 
the word ἀγωνία in Lk. xxii. 44, a ἅπαξ 
Aey.).—Ver. 36. χωρίον, a place in the 
sense of a property or farm = villa in 
Vulgate, ager, Hilary, Grundstick, 
Weizsacker’s translation.—Te@onpava, 


probably = ου Ka, απ΄ oil press. 


Descriptions of the place now identified 
with it in Robinson’s Researches, Furrer’s 
Wanderungen, and Stanley’s Sinai and 
Palestine. — καθίσατε αὐτοῦ: Jesus 
arranges that a good distance shall be 
between Himself and the body of the 
disciples when He enters the valley of 
the shadow of death. He expects no 
help from them.—éxet, there! pointing 
to the place visible in the moonlight.— 
Ver. 37. παραλαβὼν: He takes the 
same three as at the transfiguration 
along with Him that they may be near 
enough to prevent ρ feeling of utter 


Most uncials read προσελθων (Tisch., W.H., in 
Weiss thinks this an assimilation to Mt.’s usual expression, and 


isolation.—pfaro, He began. This 
beginning refers to the appearance of 
distress; the inward beginning came 
earlier. He hid His feelings till He had 
reduced His following to three; then 
allowed them to appear to those who, 
He hoped, could bear the revelation and 
give Him a little sympathy.—a8npoveiv, 
of uncertain derivation. Euthy. gives 
as its equivalent βαρυθυμεῖν, to be 
dejected or heavy-hearted.—Ver. 38. 
τοτὲ λέγει avr. : He confides to the three 
His state of mind without reserve, as if 
He wished it to be known. Cf. the use 
made in the epistle to the Hebrews of 
this frank manifestation of weakness as 
showing that Christ could not have 
usurped the priestly office, but rather 
simply submitted to be made a priest 
(chap. v. 7, ϐ).--“περίλυπος, overwhelmed 
with distress, ‘‘iber und tiber traurig” 
(Weiss).—é€ws θανάτου, mortally = death 
by anticipation, showing that it was the 
Passion with all its horrors vividly 
realised that was causing the distress. 
Hilary, true to his docetic tendency, 
represents Christ as distressed on accoun’ 
of the three, fearing they might altogethe: 
lose their faith in οά.--ὧδε: the three 
stationed nearer the scene of agony to 
keep watch there.—Ver. 39. μικρὸν, a 
little space, presumably near enough for 
them to hear (cf. Lk. xxii. 41).—éqi 
πρόσωπον, on His face, not on knees, 
summa demissio (Βεηρ.).- πάτερ, Father! 
Weiss in Markus-Evang. seems to think 
that the one word Abba was all the three 
heard, the rest of the prayer being an 


36—46. 


ἰσχύσατε play ὥραν γρηγορῆσαι μετ 
προσεύχεσθε, ἵνα μὴ εἰσέλθητε eis πειρασμόν. 
42. Πάλιν "ἐκ "δευτέρου ἀπελθὼν α Mk. xiv. 


πρόθυµον, ἡ δὲ σὰρξ ἀσθενής.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ο ο 


41. γρηγορεῖτε καὶ 
τὸ μὲν πνεῦμα 


3 lel 
ἐμοῦ ; 


72. John 


προσηύξατο, λέγων, “Mdrep µου, εἰ οὗ δύναται τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον1 ix. 24. 


παρελθεῖν ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ, ἐὰν μὴ αὐτὸ πίω, γενηθήτω τὸ θέληµά σου.” 


Acts xi. 9. 
Heb. ix. 
28. 


43. Kat ἐλθὼν εὑρίσκει αὐτοὺς πάλιν ὃ καθεύδοντας:. ἦσαν γὰρ 


αὐτῶν οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ ᾿ βεβαρημένοι. 


40 (T. 
πάλιν," προσηύξατο ἐκ τρίτου, τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπών. 45. τότε Lk. ix. 32; 
ἔρχεται πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ,ό καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, ΄΄ Καθεύδετε τὸ Ἰ 


44. Καὶ ἀφεῖς αὐτούς, ἀπελθὼν v Μι, xiv. 


Ε.). 


Xxi. 34. 2 
Cor. 1. 8; 


λοιπὸν καὶ ἀναπαύεσθε' ἰδού, ἤγγικεν ἡ ὥρα, καὶ 6 vids τοῦ 


ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται εἰς χεῖρας ἁμαρτωλῶν. 


ἄγωμεν. 


1 S$ABCILA omit το ποτηριον (Tisch. 


2 NBDL omit απ εµου (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 wadwy απελθων in SBCDIL. 
6 Most uncials omit αυτου. 


expansion and interpretation by the 
evangelist. But if they heard one word 
they could hear more. ‘The prayer 
uttered in such a state of distress would 
be a loud outburst (cf. μετὰ κραυγῆς 
ἰσχνρᾶς, Heb. v. 7), at once, therefore 
before the disciples had time to fall asleep 
or even get drowsy.—rd ποτήριον τ., 
this cup (of death).—Any, etc., howbeit 
not as | wish, but as Thou, expressively 
elliptical; no doubt spoken in a calmer 
tone, the subdued accent suggestive of a 
change of mood even if the very words did 
not distinctly reach the ear of the three. 
Grotius, from theological solicitudes, 
takes θέλωξθέλοιμι, “ vellem” (‘more 
Hebraeorum, qui neque potentialem 
neque optativum modum habent”’).— 
Ver. 40. ἔρχεται: not necessarily immedi- 
ately after uttering the foregoing prayer. 
Jesus may have lain on the ground for a 
considerable time silent.—ro Πέτρῳ: all 
three were asleep, but the reproach 
was most fitly addressed to Peter, the 
would-be valiant and loyal disciple.— 
οὕτως: Euthy. puts a mark of interroga- 
tion after this word, whereby we get this 
sense: So? Is this what it has come 
to? You were not able to watch with 
me one hour! A spirited rendering in 
consonance with Mark’s version. 

Vv. 42-46. Further progress of the 
agony.—That Jesus had not yet reached 
final victory is apparent from His com- 
plaint against the disciples. He came 
craving, needing a sympathy He had 
not got. When the moment of triumph 


46. ἐγείρεσθε, 


ἰδού, ἤγγικεν 6 παραδιδούς pe.” 


, W.H,). 


3 παλιν ευρεν αυτους in SBCDILZ. 
5 SSBL have a second παλιν after ειπων. 
? ro omitted in BCL. 


comes He will be independent of them. 
—Ver. 42. λέγων, saying; whereupon 
follow the words. Mark simply states 
that Jesus prayed to the same effect.— 
οὐ δύναται: οὐ not wy. He knows that 
it is not possible, yet the voice of nature 
says strongly: would that it were !—Ver. 
43. καθεύδοντας: again! surprising, one 
would say incredible on first thoughts, 
but not on second. It was late and they 
were sad, and sadness is soporific.— Ver. 
44. Jesus leaves them sleeping and goes 
away again for the final struggle, praying 
as before.—Ver. 45. καθεύδετε λ. κ. 
ἀναπαύεσθε, sleep now and rest; not 
ironical or reproachful, nor yet seriously 
meant, but concessive = ye may sleep 
and rest indefinitely so far as I am con- 
cerned; I need no longer your watchful 
interest. The Master’s time of weakness 
is past; He is prepared to face the worst. 
—7 dpa: He expects the worst to begin 
forthwith: the cup, which He prayed 
might pass, to be put immediately into 
His Ἠαπάφ.- -παραδίδοται, betrayal the 
first step, on the point of being taken.— 
&paptwrov,the Sanhedrists, with whom 
Judas has Ῥεεπ bargaining. — ἐγείρ. 
ἄγωμ.: sudden change of mood, on 
signs of a hostile approach: arise, let us 
go; spoken as if by a general to his army. 
—6 παραδιδούς, the traitor is seen to be 
coming. It is noticeable that throughout 
the narrative, in speaking of the action 
of Judas, the verb παραδίδωµι is used 
instead of προδίδωµι: the former ex- 
presses the idea of delivering to death, 


316 


KATA MATOAION 


XXVI. 


47+ Καὶ ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, ἰδού, “loddas εἷς τῶν δώδεκα ἦλθε, 


where and καὶ μετ αὐτοῦ ὄχλος πολὺς μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ "ξύλων, ἀπὸ τῶν 


ip ρατα]]. 


=cudgels, ἀρχιερέων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων τοῦ λαοῦ. 


48. 6 δὲ παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν 


ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς σημεῖον, λέγων, ““Ov ἂν φιλήσω, αὐτός ἐστι: κρατή- 


Φον 
σατε αυτον. 


ῥαββί, καὶ κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν. 


c a 2. «4 , 35 
“ Ἑταῖρε, ep ᾧ } πάρει ; 


49. Καὶ εὐθέως, προσελθὼν τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ εἶπε, “'Χαῖρε, 


5ο. ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 


Τότε προσελθόντες ἐπέβαλον τὰς χεῖρας 


1 «hb ο in NABCDLA, etc. (modern editors). 


the latter of delivering into the hands of 
those who sought His life (Euthy. on 
νετ. 21). 

The scene in the garden is intrinsically 
probable and without doubt historical. 
The temptation was to suppress rather 
than to invent in regard both to the 
behaviour of Jesus and to that of His 
disciples. It is not the creation of theo- 
logy, though theology has made its own 
use of it. It is recorded simply beeause 
it was known to have happened. 

Vv. 47-56. The apprehension (Mk. xiv. 
43-52, Lk. xxii. 47-53).--εἷς τ. δώδεκα, as 
in ver. 14, repeated not for information, 
but as the literary reflection of the 
chronic horror of the apostolic church 
that such a thing should be possible. 
That it was not only possible but a fact 
is one of the almost undisputed cer- 
tainties of the passion history. Even 
Brandt, who treats that history very 
sceptically, accepts it as fact (Die Evan- 
gelische Geschichte, p. 18).--μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, 
etc.: the description of the company to 
whom Judas acted as guide is vague ; 6x. 
πολ. is elastic, and might mean scores, 
hundreds, thousands, according to the 
standard of comparison.—éxAos does 
not suggest soldiery as its constituents, 
neither does the description of the arms 
borne—swords and staves. Lk. (xxil. 
52, στρατηγοὺς τ. ἱεροῦ) seems to have 
in his mind the temple police, consisting 
of priests and Levites with assistants, 
and this view appears intrinsically pro- 
bable, though Brandt (E. G., p. 4) scouts 
it. The Jewish authorities would make 
arrangements to ensure their purpose ; the 
temple police was at their command, and 
they would send a sufficiently large 
aumber to overpower the followers of 
their victim, however desperate their re- 
sistance.—Ver. 48. ἔδωκεν: the traitor, 
as he approached the place where he 
shrewdly guessed Jesus would be, gave 
(dedit, Vulg.), not had given. His plan 
was not cut and dry from the first. It 
flashed upon him as he drew near and 
began to think how he would meet 
his Master. The old charm οἱ the Master 


reasserts itself in his soul, and he feels 
he must salute Him affectionately. At 
the same instant it flashes upon him that 
the kiss which both smouldering love 
and cowardice compel may be utilised as 
a sign. Inconsistent motives? Yes, but 
such is human nature, especially in the 
Judas type: two-souled men, drawn 
opposite ways by the good and evil in 
them ; betraying loved ones, then hang- 
ing themselves.—Ver. 48. αὐτός ἐστιν, 
He and no other is the man.—Ver. 49. 
κατεφίλησεν, kissed Him heartily. In 
late Greek there was a tendency to use 
compounds with the force of the simple 
verb, and this has been supposed to be a 
case in point (De Wette). But coming 
after Φφιλήσω, ver. 48, the compound 
verb is plainly used with intention. It 
occurs again in Lk. vii. 38, 45, xv. 20, 
obviously with intensive force. Whata 
tremendous contrast between the woman 
in Simon’s house (Lk. vii.) and Judas! 
Both kissed Jesus fervently: with strong 
emotion ; yet the one could have died for 
Him, the other betrays Him to death. 
Did Jesus remember the woman at that 
moment ?—Ver. 50. ἑταῖρε: so might a 
master salute a disciple, and disciple or 
companion is, I think, the sense of the 
word here (so Elsner, Palairet, Wolf, 
Schanz, Carr,Camb. N. T.). It answers 
to ῥαββί in the salute of Judas.—éq’ ὃ 
πάρει, usually taken as a question: ‘‘ad 
quid venisti 2” Vulg. Wherefore art thou 
come? A.V. ‘ Wozubistduda?” Weiz- 
sacker. Against this is the grammatical 
objection that instead of 6 should have 
been τὶ. Winer, § 24, 4, maintains that 
Ss might be used instead of τίς in a 
direct question in late Greek. To get 
over the difficulty various suggestions 
have been made: Fritzsche renders: 
friend, for what work you are come! 
taking 6= οἷον. Others treat the sen- 
tence as elliptical, and supply words 
before or after: ¢.g., say for what you 
are come (Morison), or what you have 
come for, that do, R. V., Meyer, Weiss. 
The last is least satisfactory, for Judas 
had already done it, as Jesus instinctively 


47—55- 


ἐπὶ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἐκράτησαν αὐτόν. 


Ἰησοῦ, ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα, " ἀπέσπασε τὴν µάχαιραν αὐτοῦ, καὶ * 


πατάξας τὸν δοῦλον τοῦ ἀρχιερέως 


, >A 
52. τότε λέγει αὐτῷ 6 


ἀπολοῦνται. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ησοῦς, “"᾽Απόστρεψόν σου τὴν µάχαιραν 1 
cis τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς: πάντες γὰρ ot λαβόντες µάχαιραν ἐν µαχαίρα 
53. Ἠ δοκεῖς ὅτι οὗ δύναμαι ἄρτιΖ παρακαλέσαι τὸν 


τη 


51. Καὶ ἰδού, ets τῶν μετὰ 

here only 
in same 
sense. 
(Mk. sim- 
ple verb). 
ος Lk. 
XXii. 41. 
Acts zx. 
30; xxi. 1. 
Mk. xiv. 


ἀφεῖλεν αὐτοῦ τὸ 7 dtiov. 


να Ἡ 
πατέρα µου, καὶ παραστήσει por πλείους ἢδ δώδεκα λεγεῶνας᾽ 47 (T-R). 


ἀγγέλων; 


2 35 
γενέσθαι ; 


55. Ev ἐκείνη τῇ ὥρα εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς ὄχλοις, "Os 
λῃστὴν ἐξήλθετε μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ ξύλων *ouhdaPetv µε; 


1 gov after την µαχαιραν in NBDL. 
ἔαρτι after παραστησει por in NBL 33 
ὅ For πλειους η SBD have πλειω. 


54. πῶς οὖν πληρωθῶσιν at ypadai, ὅτι οὕτω δεῖ στ. 


k. xxii. 


John 
XViii. 1ο 
(T. Ε.). 
>. Z parall. 
επι Actsi. 16; 
3 χι, 33 
καθ Xxiil. 27. 


al, (Tisch., W.H.). 


The reading in T. R. is a grammatical 


correction, uncalled for as the construction in whew 8. λεγεωνας is good Greek. 


knew.  Fritzsche’s suggestion is in- 
genious, and puts a worthy thought into 
Christ’s mouth. Perhaps the best solu- 
tion is to take the words as a question in 
effect, though not in form. Disciple, 
for which, or as which you are present ? 
Comrade, and as a comrade here? So 
Judas pretended, and by the laconic 
phrase Jesus at once states and exposes 
the pretence, possibly pointing to the 
crowd behind in proof of the contrary. 
So in effect Beng.: ‘‘hoccine illud est 
cujus causa ades?”’; also Schanz. The 
point is that the Master gives the false 
disciple to understand that He does not 
believe in his paraded affection. 

Vv. 51-54. Blood drawn.—i8ov, intro- 
ducing a second scene connected with 
the apprehension (cf. ver. 47) ; the use of 
a weapon by one of Christ’s disciples. A 
quite likely occurrence if any of them 
happened to have weapons in their 
hands, though we may wonder at that. 
It might be a large knife used in connec- 
tion with the Paschal feast. Who used 
the weapon is not said by the Synop. 
Did they know? The article before 
µάχαιραν might suggest that the whole 
party were armed, each disciple having 
his sword. The fear that they might be 
explains the largeness of the band fol- 
lowing Judas.—Ver. 52. ἀπόστρεψον : 
Jesus could not encourage the use of 
arms by His disciples, and the order to 
sheathe the weapon He was sure to give. 
The accompanying word, containing a 
general legal maxim: draw the sword, 
perish with the sword (the subsequent 
history of the Jewish people a tragic 


exemplification of its truth), suitably en- 
forces the order. Weiss thinks that this 
word recorded here was spoken by Jesus 
at some other time, if at all, for it appears 
to be only a free reproduction of Rev. 
xiii. 10 (Meyer, ed. Weiss). This and 
the next two verses are wanting in Mk. 
and Lk.—Ver. 53 gives another reason 
for not using the sword: if it were God’s 
will that His Son should be rescued it 
could be done in a different way. The 
way suggested is described in military 
language, the verbs παρακαλεῖν and 
παριστάναι being both used in classics in 
connection with military matters, and the 
word λεγεῶνας suggesting the battalions 
of the Roman ΑτΠΙΥ.- δώδεκα, twelve 
legions, one for each of the twelve dis- 
ciples.—mwdetw, even more than that vast 
number, Divine resources boundless. The 
free play of imagination displayed in this 
conception of a great army of angels 
evinces the elasticity of Christ’s spirit 
and His perfect self-possession at a criti- 
cal moment.—Ver. 54. πῶς οὖν: refers 
to both forms of aid, that of the sword 
and that of angels (Grotius, Fritzsche) ; 
rescue in any form inconsistent with the 
predicted destiny of Messiah to be a 
sufferer.—6r. οὕτω, etc., the purport of 
all prophetic scripture is that thus it 
should be: apprehension and all that is 
to follow. 

Vv. 55, 56. Fesus complains of the 
manner of His apprehension.—év ἐκ. τ. 
ὥρᾳ, connects with ἐκράτησαν αὐτόν in 
ver. 50. Having said what was necessary 
to the bellicose disciple, Jesus turns to 
the party which had come to arrest Him, 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧΝΙ. 


ἡμέραν πρὸς Spas! ἐκαθεζόμην διδάσκων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, καὶ οὐκ 


ἐκρατήσατέ µε. 
γραφαὶ τῶν προφητῶν.” 
ἔφυγον. 


56. τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον Ὑέγονεν, ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν at 
Τότε οἱ μαθηταὶ Σ πάντες ἀφέντες αὐτὸν 


57- ΟΙ δὲ κρατήσαντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἀπήγαγον πρὸς Καϊάφαν τὸν 
ἀρχιερέα, ὅπου οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι συνήχθησαν, 
58. Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ ἀπὸ ά µακρόθεν, ἕως τῆς αὑλῆς 
τοῦ ἀρχιερέως: καὶ εἰσελθὼν ἔσω ἐκάθητο μετὰ τῶν ὑπηρετῶν, ἰδεῖν 


2 BL 33 omit προς υμας (Tisch., W.H.). 
Σεν τω ἱερω before εκαθεζοµην in NBL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
3B has αυτον after µαθηται (W.-H. in margin). 


4 BD have απο (W.H. in brackets). 


here called τοῖς ὄχλοις.- as ἐπὶ λῃστὴν, 
etc. : the words may be taken either asa 
question or as a statement of fact. In 
either case Jesus complains that they 
have arrested Him as if He were a 
robber or other criminal. A robber as 
distinct from a thief (vide Trench, 
Synonyms) is one who uses violence to 
possess himself of others’ property, and 
Christ’s complaint is in the first place 
that they have treated Him as one who 
meant to offer resistance. But the 
reference to His past habit in the sequel 
seems to show that He has another com- 
plaint in His mind, viz., that they have 
regarded Him as one hiding from justice. 
The allusion is to the invasion of His 
privacy in the garden, and the implied 
suggestion that they have put a false 
construction on His presence there. 
They think He has been seeking escape 
from His fate when in fact He has been 
bracing Himself up for it! To what 
misconstruction the holiest and noblest 
actions are liable, and how humiliating 
to the heroic soul! It was thoroughly 
characteristic of Jesus that He should 
feel the humiliation, and that He should 
at once give expression to the feeling. 
This against Brandt (p. 6), who thinks 
this utterance in no respect appropriate 
to the situation.—xaé’ ἡμέραν, etc. : 
Jesus asks in effect why they did not 
apprehend Him while, for several days 
in succession, He sat in the temple pre- 
cincts teaching. To this it might be 
replied that that was easier said than 
done, in midst of a miscellaneous crowd 
containing not a few friends of the ob- 
noxious teacher (so Brandt). But what 
Jesus is concerned to point out is, not 
the practicability of arrest in the temple, 
but that His behaviour had been fear- 


S$CLA omit (Tisch.). 


less. How could they imagine that a 
man who spoke His mind so openly 
could slink away into hiding-places like 
an evil-doer? Brandt remarks that the 
complaint is addressed to the wrong 
persons: to the underlings rather than 
to the hierarchs. It is addressed to 
those who actually apprehended Jesus, 
whoever they were. Who composed 
that crowd it would not be easy in the 
dark to know.—Ver. 56. τοῦτο δὲ, etc. : 
a formula of the evangelist, introducing 
another reference by Jesus to the pro- 
phecies in these terms, ἵνα πληρωθῶσιν, 
etc. Jesus reconciles Himself to the in- 
dignity in the manner of His arrest, as 
to the arrest itself, and all that it in- 
volved, by the thought that it was in 
His ‘‘cup” as described by the prophets. 
The prophetic picture of Messiah’s ex- 
perience acted as a sedative to His 
spirit.—véte, then, when the appre- 
hension had been effected, and meekly 
submitted to by ]εσις.--πάντες, Peter 
included.—égvyov, fled, to save them- 
selves, since their Master could not be 
saved. This another bitter drop in the 
cup: absolute loneliness. 

Vv. 57-68. Before Caiaphas (Mk. xiv. 
53-65; Lk. xxii. 54, 66-71).—mpos Καιά- 
φαν, to Caiaphas, who sent them forth, 
and who expects their return with their 
victim.—déaov, where, {.ε., in the palace 
of Caiaphas.—yp. καὶ πρ.: scribes and 
presbyters, priests and presbyters in ver. 
3. Mk. names all the three; doubtless 
true to the {αοῖι.- συνήχθησαν, were 
assembled, waiting for the arrival of the 
party sent out to arrest Jesus, In Mk. 
the coming together of the Sanhedrim 
appears to be synchronous with the 
arrival of Jesus. This meeting happens 
when the world is asleep, and when 


$6—62. 


τὸ τέλος. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


5ο. Οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of πρεσβύτεροι1 καὶ τὸ συνέδριον 


319 


a Ch. xv. το. 


ὅλον ἐζήτουν "ψευδοµαρτυρίαν κατὰ τοῦ Ιησοῦ, ὅπως αὐτὸν θανατώ- b Ch. xii. 43. 


~ c 
σωσι, 60. cat? οὐχ “eipov- καὶ πολλῶν *Weudopaptipwy προσελ- 


1 Cor. xv. 
15. 


θόντων, οὐχ εὗρον. ὕστερον δὲ προσελθόντες δύο ψευδοµάρτυρες ® 61. rg he 


εἶπον, “Οὗτος ἔφη, Δύναμαι καταλῦσαι τὸν ναὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ * διὰ 


ἳ a de a > 5 a > F γι 
τριων Ὄηὖμ.ε ρω» OLKOOOLN GAL αυτον. 


9 ΑΕ τω κε 208 Πα ΄ ε κ 4 4 9 a . 
εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “ Οὐδὲν ἀποκρίνῃη; τί οὗτοί σου * καταμαρτυροῦσιν ; 


Acts xxiv 


17. Gal. 


62. Καὶ ἀναστὰς 6 ἀρχιερεὺς e Ch. xxvii. 


13. Mk. 
χιν. 6ο. 


I1SSBDL 6ο it. vg., Egypt. verss., omit ot πρεσβντεροι, which comes in from 


ver. 57. 
° For the passage και ουκ ευρον . . . 


ουκ ευρον SYBCL verss. have και ουκ ενρον 


πολλων προσελθοντων ψευδοµαρτνρων (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


> SBL omit ψευδοµαρτυρες. 


judicial iniquity can be perpetrated 
quietly.—Ver. 58 is the prelude to the 
story of Peter’s denial, which is resumed 
at ver. 69 after the account of the trial. 


Similarly in Mk. Lk. gives the story’ 


without interruption.—paxpd@ev, from 
afar: Peter followed his Master, having 
after a while recovered from the general 
panic ; more courageous than the rest, 
yet not courageous enough; just enough 
-of the hero in him to bring him into the 
region of temptation.—éws τ. av. Cf. 
Mk., ver. 54.—idetv τὸ τέλος, to sce the 
end; a good Greek phrase. Motives: 
curiosity and honest interest in the fate 
of his loved Master. Jerome puts these 
‘alternatively: ‘‘vel amore discipuli vel 
humana curiositate”’. 

Vv. 59-68. The trial.—Ver. 59. τε 
“συν. ὅλον, the whole Sanhedrim, cf. 
πάντες in Heb. iii. 16, the statement in 
both cases admitting of a few exceptions. 
— WevSopaptupiav, false evidence, of 
course in the first place from the evan- 
gelist’s point of view (µαρτυρίαν in 
Mk.), but substantially true to the fact. 
They wanted evidence for a foregone 
conclusion ; no matter though it was false 
if it only looked true and hung fairly well 
together. Jesus was apprehended to be 
put to death, and the trial was only a 
blind, a-form rendered necessary by the 
fact that there was a Procurator to be 
satisfied.— Ver. 60. οὐχ εὗρον: they found 
not false witness that looked plausible 
and justified capital punishment,— 
πολλῶν π. W.: it was not for want of 
witnesses of a kind; many offered them- 
selves and made statements, but they did 
not serve the purpose: either trivial or 
inconsistent ; conceivable in the circum- 
stances: coming forward on the spur of 
the moment from the crowd in answer 
‘to an invitation from prejudiced judges 


4 B omits αντον (W.H.). 


eager for damnatory evidence. Those 
who responded deserved to be stigma- 
tised as false. None but base, mean 
creatures would have borne evidence in 
such a case.—8vo, only two had anything 
to say worth serious attention.—Ver. 61. 
οὗτος ἔφη, this person said: then follows 
a version of a word really spoken by 
Jesus, of astartling character, concerning 
destroying and rebuilding the temple. 
An inaccurate report of so remarkable a 
saying might easily go abroad, and the 
version given by the two witnesses seems 
from xxvii. 40 to have been current. They 
might, therefore, have borne wrong evi- 
dence without being false in intention.— 
δύναμαι, in an emphatic position, makes 
Jesus appear as one boasting of preter- 
natural power, and τὸν ναὺν τοῦ θεοῦ, 
as irreverently parading His power in 
connection with a sacred object.—8ra τ. 
ἡ», literally throug’ three days = after : 
for similar use of the preposition, vide 
Gal. ii. 1. The meaning is: after three 
days I will complete the rebuilding, so 
that διὰ in effect is=év in John ii. 19.— 
Ver. 62. ἀναστὰς 6 ἀρ.: the high priest 
rose up not because he felt the evidence 
just led to be very serious, rather in irri- 
tation because the most damaging state- 
ments amounted to nothing more serious. 
A man could not be sentenced to death 
for a boastful word (τοξις).-- οὐδὲν 
ἀποκρίνῃ . . . καταμαρτυροῦσιν: either 
one question as in Vulg.: “nihil τε- 
spondes ad ea quae isti adversum te 
testificantur ?’’ or two asin A. V. and 
R. V., so also Weizsacker: answerest 
Thou nothing? what do these witness 
against Thee? It is an attempt of a 
baffled man to draw Jesus into explana- 
tions about the saying which will make 
it more damaging as evidence against 
Him. What about this pretentious word 


320 

63. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐσιώπα. 
{ here only. ‘¢?? 

ὁ Χριστός, 6 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
g Mk. xiv. P * ig 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 1 6 


ΧΧΝΙ.. 


ἀρχιερεὺς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 


Εξορκίζω σε κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος, ἵνα ἡμῖν εἴπῃς, εἰ σὺ εἶ 


64. Λέγει αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Xb εἶπας. 


63. Acts πλὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀπ᾿ ἄρτι ὄψεσθε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καθήµενον 
xiv. 14. Mint? , κο... A 
b Mk. xiv. ἐκ δεξιῶν τῆς δυνάµεως καὶ ἐρχόμενον ἐπὶ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ odpavod.” 


iit, 29 (Τ. 65. Τότε ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς διέρρηξε τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, λέγων, “Ὅτι 2 


R.), with 
gen. of 
penalty 
(Gen. 
XXVi. 11). 


τὴν βλασφημίαν αὐτοῦ.» 


I 
iMk.xiv.65. εἶπον, “ Ἔνοχος θανάτου ἐστί. 


1 Cor. iv. , Aa 
11. 2Cor, πρὀσωπον aUTOU, 


its τ 


66. τί ὑμῖν δοκεῖ; 


, ~ 
éBraodiypnoe’ τί ἔτι Χρείαν ἔχομεν μαρτύρων; ie, viv ἠκούσατε 


Οἱ δὲ ἀποκριθέντες 
67. Τότε ἐνέπτυσαν εἰς τὸ 


καὶ | ἐκολάφισαν αὐτόν: ot δὲ ἐρράπισαν, 68. 


/ ~ , >» 
Petitiant λέγοντες, "Προφήτευσον ἡμῖν, Χριστέ, τίς ἐστιν ὁ παίσας σε; 


1 BLZ vul. copt. al. omit αποκριθεις. 
= ScBDLZE 33 omit οτι. 


of yours; is it true that you said it, and 
what does it mean ?—Ver. 63. ἐσιώπα: 
Jesus seeing the drift of the questions 
gave the high priest no assistance, but 
continued silent.—éfopxilw (éfopxéw more 
common in classics), The high priest 
now takes a new line, seeing that there 
is no chance of conviction any other 
way. He puts Jesus on His oath as to 
the cardinal question of Messiahship.— 
ei σὺ εἶ 6 Χριστὸς, etc.: not two ques- 
tions but one, Son of God being exe- 
getical of the title Christ. If He was 
the one He was the other ifso facto.— 
Ver. 64. σὺ εἶπας: in current phrase= 
Iam. Was Jesus morally bound to an- 
swer? Why not continue silent? First, 
the whole ministry of Jesus had made 
the question inevitable. Second, the 
high priest was the proper person to ask 
it. Third, it was an important oppor- 
tunity for giving expression to His Mes- 
sianic self-consciousness. Fourth, silence 
would, in the cirumstances, have amount- 
ed to ἀεπια].--- πλὴν not=“ neverthe- 
less,” but rather = nay more: I have 
something more startling to tell you. 
What follows describes the future of the 
Son of Man in apocalyptic terms, and 
is meant to suggest the thought: “the 
time is coming when you and I shall 
change places; I then the Judge, you 
the prisoners at the bar”’. 

Vv. 65-68. τότε: At last they have, 
or think they have, Him at their mercy. 
—8.éppnéev, etc.: a very imposing act as 
the expression of true emotion ; in reality 
a theatrical action demanded by custom 
and performed in accordance with rule: 
length and locality of rent, the garments 
to be rent (the nether ; all of them, even 


> $8BDLZ omit avrov. 


if there were ten, said the Rabbinical 
rule: note the plural here, τὰ ἵμάτια), all 
fixed. A common custom among Eastern 
peoples. It was highly proper that holy 
men should seem shocked immeasurably 
by ‘blasphemy ”. — ἐβλασφήμησεν : 
Was it blasphemy for a man to call Him- 
self Messiah in a country where a mes- 
siah was expected? Obviously not. It 
might be to call oneself Messiah falsely. 
But that was a point for careful and de- 
liberate examination, nct to be taken for 
granted. The judgment of the high 
priest and the obsequious vote of the 
Sanhedrim were manifestly premature. 
But it does not follow from this that the 
evangelist’s account of the trial is un- 
historical (Brandt, p. 62). The Sanhe- 
drists, as reported, behave suo more.— 
Ver. 66. €voxos θανάτου: death the 
penalty of blasphemy, Lev. xxiv. 15, and 
of being a false prophet, Deut. xviii. 20. 
—Vv. 67-68: to judicial injustice suc- 
ceed personal indignities: spitting in the 
face (ἐνέπτυσαν), smiting with the fist 
(ἐκολάφισαν, not Attic, κονδυλίζω used 
instead), or with the open hand 
(ἐρράπισαν, originally to beat with 
rods). Euthy. Zig. distinguishes the two 
last words thus: κολαφισμὸς is a stroke 
on the neck with the hollow of the hand 
so as to make a noise, ῥαπισμὸς a stroke 
on the face. The perpetrators of these 
outrages in Mk. are τιγὲς and οἱ ὑπη- 
pérat, the former word presumably point- 
ing to some Sanhedrists. In Mt. the 
connection suggests Sanhedrists alone. 
Incredible that they should condescend 
to so unworthy pro eedings, one is in- 
clined to say. Yet it was night, there 
was intense dislike, and they might feel 


63—75. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


321 


69. Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ἔξω ἐκάθητο] ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ, καὶ προσῆλθεν αὐτῷ 
pia? παιδίσκη, λέγουσα, “Kai σὺ ἦσθα μετὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ τοῦ Γαλιλαίου.” { parall. Lk. 


70. Ὁ δὲ ἠρνήσατο ἔμπροσθεν πάντων, λέγω», “ OdK οἶδα τί λέγεις.” 
71. Ἐξελθόντα δὲ αὐτὸν Ἄ eis τὸν " πυλῶνα, εἶδεν αὐτὸν ἄλλη, καὶ 


73. Μετὰ μικρὸν δὲ προσελθόντες οἱ ἑστῶτες εἶπον τῷ Πέτρῳ, 


xii. 45. 


a A a m John iv. 
“"AdnBGs καὶ σὺ ἐξ αὐτῶν ef- καὶ yap ἡ ™Aahid σου "δῆλόν σε ΓΑ 


a7 
ποιει. 


» 
οὐκ οἶδα τὸν ἄνθρωπον. 


74. Τότε ἤρξατο καταναθεµατίζειν καὶ ὀμνύειν, “Or 
Καὶ εὐθέως ἀλέκτωρ ἐφώνησε. 


n 1 Cor. xv 


ἐμνήσθη ὁ Πέτρος τοῦ ῥήματος τοῦ ὃ ᾿Ιησοῦ εἰρηκότος αὐτῷ,δ “ “Or 
ο 


πρὶν ἀλέκτορα Φωνῆσαι, τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ pe. 


“ἔκλαυσε πικρῶς. 


}εκαθητο εξω in SBDLZ. 
3 88BD omit και before ουτος. 


5 The article is wanting in most uncials. 


they did God service by disgracing a 
pretender. Hence the invitation to the 
would-be christ to prophesy (προφήτεν- 
gov) who smote him when he was struck 
behind the back or blindfolded (Mk. xiv. 
65). Thus did they fill up the early hours 
of the morning on that miserable night. 
Sceptical critics, ¢.g., Brandt, p. 69, 
also Holtz., H. C., suggest that the 
colouring of this passage is drawn from 
O. T. texts, such as Micah iv. 14 (Sept. 
Wont; Ae Va), τοι Ἱ ο lit. (3-55) τ Kanes 
xxii. 24, and that probably the texts 
created the “facts”. That of course is 
abstractly possible, but the statement 
of the evangelist is intrinsically pro- 
bable, and it is to be noted that not even 
in Mt. is there a “that it might be ful- 
filled rice: 

Vv. 69-75. Peter’s denial (Mk. xiv. 66- 
72, Lk. xxii. 54-62). The discrepancies 
of the four accounts here are perplexing 
but not surprising. It would be difficult 
for any one present in the confused 
throng ‘gathered within the palace gate 
that night to tell exactly what happened. 
Peter himself, the hero of the tale, had 
probably only hazy recollections of some 
particulars, and might not always relate 
the incident in the same way. Har- 
monistic efforts are wasted time. Com- 
parative exegesis may partly explain how 
one narrative, say Mt.’s, arose out of 
another, ¢.g., Mk.’s (Weiss, Marcus- 
Evang.). But on the whole it is best 
to take each version by itself, as one way 
of telling a story, which in the main is 


27. Gal. 
ο παντα, 
75. και 
ο Ch. ii. 18. 
καὶ ἐδελθὼν ἔξω Mx. v. 38, 
39. Lk. vi. 
21, 25. 


? SSBLZ omit this αντον. 
_ ΤΠΕ mass of uncials have καταθεµ.ατιζειν. 


® SBDL omit αυντω. 


accepted even by writers like Brandt 
as one of the certainties of the Passion 
history. 

Ver. 69. 6 δὲ M1. : δὲ resumes the Peter- 
episode introduced at ver. 58.—éxd@nrTo, 
was sitting, while the judicial proceed- 
ings were going on.—avAq, here means 
the court, atrium; the trial would take 
place in a chamber within the buildings 
surrounding the court.—pia π., one 
servant girl, to distinguish from another 
referred to in νετ. 71 (GAAn).—xai σὺ, 
you too, as if she had seen Jesus in com- 
pany with His disciples, Peter one of 
them, recognisable again, perhaps during 
the last few ἆαγς.- “Γαλιλαίου: He a 
Galilean; you, too, by your tongue.— 
Ver. 70. οὐκ οἶδα, etc.: affectation of 
extreme ignorance. So far from know- 
ing the man I don’t even know what you 
are talking about. This said before ali 
(ἔμπ. πάντων). First denial, entailing 
others to follow.—Ver. 71. εἰς τ. 
πυλῶνα, to or towards the gateway, 
away from the crowd in the court.— 
ἄλλη (παιδίσκη), another saw him, and 
said, not to him, but to others there (not 
easy to escape !).—otros, etc., this per- 
son, pointing to him, was, etc.—Ver, ο. 
μεθ) ὅρκου: second denial, more em- 
phatic, with an oath, and more direct: I 
know not the man (τὸν Gv.).—Ver. 73. of 
ἑστῶτες, loungers; seeing Peter’s con- 
fusion, and amusing themselves by 
tormenting him.— ἀληθῶς, beyond 
doubt, you, too, are one of them; of the 
notorious gang.—) λαλιά: They had 


2t 


322 


KATA MATOAION 


XXVILI. 


XXVITI. 1. ΠΡΩΙΑΣ δὲ γενομένης, συμβούλιον ἔλαβον πάντες οἱ 
ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ aod κατὰ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ὥστε 


θανατῶσαι αὐτόν: 2. καὶ δήσαντες αὐτὸν ἀπήγαγον, καὶ παρέδωκαν 


θὰ oy mike 
αὐτὸν Ποντίῳ 1 Πιλάτῳ τῷ ἡγεμόνι. 


3. Τότε ἰδὼν Ιούδας 6 παραδιδοὺς Σ αὐτόν, ὅτι κατεκρίθη, µετα- 


μεληθεὶς ἀπέστρεψε» τὰ τριάκοντα ἀργύρια τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι καὶ 


4 αντον Ποντιω omitted in ΔΝ Β.Σ; C omits αυτον. 


gicss. 
* wapadovs in BL 33. 


heard him speak in his second denial, 
which so leads up to a third. Galilean 
speech was defective in pronouncing the 


gutturals, and making {jj = Γ]---Ύει. 74. 


καταθεµ.ατίζειν (here only, καταναθ. in 
T. R., probably belonging to vulgar 
speech, Meyer), to call down curses on 
himself, sign of irritation and despera- 
tion; has lost self-control completely. 
—kal εὐθὺς: just after this passionate 
outburst a cock crew.—‘‘ Magna circum- 
stantia,” Beng.—Ver. 75. καὶ ἐμνήσθη: 
The cock crowing caused a sudden re- 
vulsion of feeling, and flashed in on 
Peter’s mind the light of a vivid recollec- 
tion: the word his Master had spoken.— 
πρὶν, etc., repeated as in ver. 34.— 
ἐξελθὼν, going out, neither in fear of 
apprehension (Chrys., Euthy.) nor from 
shame (Orig., Jer.), but that he might 
give free rein to penitent feeling.— 
ἔκλαυσεν, wept loudly, as distinct from 
δακρύειν (John xi. 35), to shed tears. 
CHaPpTER XXVII. THE PASSION 
History CONTINUED.—VvVv. 1,2. Morn- 
ing meeting of the Sanhedrim (Mk. xv. 
1, Lk. xxii.’ 66, xxiii. 1).—Ver. 1. 
συμβούλιον ἔλαβον: this consultation 
took place at a meeting of Sanhedrim, 
which was probably only a continuation 
of the night meeting, though regarded as 
formally a second meeting, to keep right 
with the law which humanely required, 
at least, two sittings in a grave criminal 
case; the Sanhedrists in this, as in all 
things, careful to observe the letter, 
while sinning against the spirit of the 
law. Those who were present at the 
night meeting would scarcely have time 
to go home, as the hearing of many 
witnesses (xxvi. 59) would take hours. 
Absent members might be summoned to 
the morning meeting (Elsner), or might 
come, knowing that they were expected. 
--“πάντες points to a full meeting, as 
does also tot λαοῦ after πρεσβύτεροι. 
The meeting was supremely ‘mportant, 


The words are an explanatory 


5 εστρεψε in NBL (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


though in one respect pro Γογπιά. The 
law or custom required a death sentence 
to be pronounced during day-time. 
Therefore, the vote of the night meeting 
had to be formally confirmed. Then they 
had to consider in what shape the case 
was to be put so as to ensure the consent 
ot Pilate to the execution of their sen- 
tence ; a most vital matter.—dorte θανα- 
τῶσαι αὐτόν, so that they might compass 
His death; the phrase seems meant to 
cover both aspects of the business on 
hand: the formal sentence of death, 
and the adoption ot means for securing 
that it might be carried into effect.— 
ὥστε, with infinitive, here expresses 
tendency: that He should die, the drift 
ofall done. ‘The result as yet remained 
uncertain.—Ver. 2. δήσαντες: no men 
tion of binding before in Mt.’s narrative, 
If Jesus was bound at His apprehension 
the fetters must have been taken off 
during the Ἱτία].---ἀπήγαγον, etc., they 
led Him away and delivered Him to 
Pontius Pilate. No mention at this 
point what they had resolved to say to 
Pilate. That comes out in Pilate’s 
questioning. Pilate was a very undesir- 
able judge to come to with such a cause 
a poor representative of Roman authority ; 
as described by Philo. and Josephus, as 
destitute of fear of God or respect for 
justice, as the unjust judge of the 
parable ; but, like him, accessible on the 
side of self-interest, as, no doubt, the 
Sanhedrists knew very well.—7@ Ἠγεμόνι. 
the governor; a general title for one 
exercising supreme authority as repre 
senting the emperor. The more specific 
title was ἐπίτροπος, procurator. The 
ordinary residence of procurators was 
Caesarea, on the sea coast, but it was 
their custom to be in Jerusalem at 
passover time, with a detachment of 
soldiers, to watch over the public peace. 

Vv. 3-10. The despair of Fudas.— 
Peculiar to Matthew ; interesting to the 
evangelist as a testimony even from the 





ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


s—Io, 323 
τοῖς 1 πρεσβυτέροις, 4. λέγων, ““Hpaptov παραδοὺς αἷμα * aQdov.” a here and 
οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “Ti πρὸς ἡμᾶς; od der.” 5. Kat ῥίψας τὰ ἀργύρια μή 
ἐν τῷ ναῷ, ἀνεχώρησε΄ καὶ ἀπελθὼν " ἀπήγξατο. 6. Οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς b here only 
λαβόντες τὰ ἀργύρια εἶπον, “Odx ἔξεστι βαλεῖν αὐτὰ eis τὸν (Tobit ii, 
*xopBavay, ἐπεὶ Ἱτιμὴ αἵματός ἐστι. 7. Συμβούλιον δὲ λαβόντες,ς re ony. 


here, ver. 
g. Acts 


ἠγόρασαν ἐξ αὐτῶν τὸν ἀγρὸν τοῦ *kepapéws, εἰς ΄ταφὴν τοῖς ξένοις. 
3 ς su ra Ε] A lv. αν Ἐ 

8. διὸ ἐκλήθη ὁ ἀγρὸς ἐκεῖνος ἀγρὸς αἵματος, ἕως τῆς σήμερον. Cor. vi ο 
> ς a A a. 

ϱ. τότε ἐπληρώθη τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ Ιερεμίου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος, α Rom. iz. 

“Kai ἔλαβον τὰ τριάκοντα ἀργύρια, τὴν τιμὴν τοῦ τετιµημένου, ὃν ς here Galy. 


ἐτιμήσαντο ἀπὸ υἱῶν Ισραήλ” 10. καὶ ἔδωκαν αὐτὰ εἰς τὸν ἀγρὸν 


τοῦ κεραµέως, καθὰ συνέταξέ pot Κύριος. 


1 SSBCL 33 omit τοις. 


? o:y in the most important uncials, 


3 evs τον ναον in NBL 33, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


false disciple to the innocence of Jesus, 
and the wickedness of His enemies, and 
as a curious instance of prophecy ful- 
filled.—Ver. 3. τότε connects the re- 
pentance of Judas with the leading of 
Jesus away to Pilate which he regarded 
as sealing his fate. What happened was 
but the natural result of the apprehension 
which he himself had brought about, and 
he doubtless had the natural issue in 
view at the moment of apprehension. 
But reaction had set in, partly as a 
matter of course in a ‘‘two-souled”’ 
man, partly at sight of the grim reality: 
his Master led to death by his assistance 
(ὅτι κατεκρίθη).--μεταμεληθεὶς, regret- 
ting, rueing what he had done: wishing 
it were undone.—améorpee (ἔστρεψε 
W.H. as in Is. xxxviii. 8), returned the 
thirty pieces of silver, a sign in such a 
nature that the repentance as far as it 
went was very real.—Ver. 4. ἥμαρτον, 1 
sinned, L did wrong.—apaSots a. a. ex- 
plainshow. Thesinningand the betraying 
are one, therefore the participle does not 
point to an act antecedent to that of the 
main verb.—alpa ἀθῶον, innocent blood, 
for the blood of an innocent person, So 
in Deut. xxvii. 25. Palairet cites ex- 
amples to prove that Greek writers used 
αἷμα as = GvOpwros.—ti πρὸς ἡμᾶς: 
that is not our concern.—od ὄψει, look 
thou to that = ‘‘tu videris,” a Latinism. 
The sentiment itself a Cainism. “ Ad 
modum Caini loquuntur vera progenies 
Caini”’ (Grotius).—Ver. 5. εἰς τὸν ναόν: 
not in that part of the temple where the 
Sanhedrim met (Grotius), or in the 
temple at large, in a place accessible to 
laymen (Fritzsche, Bleek), or near the 
temple (Kypke), but in the holy place 


itself (Meyer, Weiss, Schanz, Carr, 
Morison); the act of a desperate man 
determined they should get the money, 
and perhaps hoping it might be a kind 
of atonement for his δἱη.--ἀπήγξατο, 
strangled himself; usually reconciled 
with Acts i. 18 by the supposition that 
the rope broke. The suggestion of 
Grotius that the verb points to death from 
grief (“non laqueo sed moestitia ’’) has 
met with little favour.—Ver.6. κορβανᾶν, 
the treasury, referred to by this name by 
Joseph. (B. J. il. 9, 4).--τυμὴ αἵματός 
ἐστι: exclusion of blood money from the 
treasury, an extension of the law against 
the wages of harlotry (Deut. xxiii. 18).— 
Ver. 7. τὸν ἀγρὸν τ. κεραµέως, the field 
ofthe potter. The smallness of the price 
has suggested to some (Grotius, ¢.g.) that 
it was a field for potter’s clay got cheap 
because worked out. But in that case it 
would naturally be called the field of the 
potters.—évors most take as referring to 
Jews from other lands dying at Jerusalem 
at passover time.—Ver.8. ἀγρὸς αἵματος 
= aceldama, Acts i. 18, name otherwise 
explained there.—ws τῆς σήμερον: 
phrase frequent in Ο. T. history; sign 
of late date of Gospel, thinks De Wette. 

Vv.9, 10. Prophetic reference, τότε, 
as in ii, 17, not ἵνα or ὅπως.--διὰ 
Ἱερεμίου, by Jeremiah, in reality by 
Zechariah (xi. 13), the reference to 
Jeremiah probably due to there being 
somewhat similar texts in that prophet 
(xvill. 2, 3, xxxii. 6-15) running in the 
evangelist’s mind. A pettyerror. More 
serious is the question whether this is 
not a case gf prophecy creating ‘“‘facts,”’ 
whether the whole story here told is not 
a legend growing out of the O. T. text 


324 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧΝΠΙ. 


11. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἔστη 1 ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ ἡγεμόνος: καὶ ἐπηρώτησεν 
αὐτὸν ὁ ἡγεμών, λέγων, “2d ef ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων; Ὁ δὲ 


Ἰησοῦς ἔφη αὐτῷ," “Xd λέγεις.” 


12. Καὶ ἐν τῷ κατηγορεῖσθαι 


αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, οὐδὲν ἀπεκρίνατο- 


13. τότε λέγει αὐτῷ ὅ Πιλάτος, “Odx ἀκούεις πόσα cod καταµαρ- 


τυροῦσι ; 
θαυμάζειν τὸν ἡγεμόνα λίαν. 


14. Καὶ οὐκ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ πρὸς οὐδὲ ev ῥῆμα. ὥστε 


1 ΜΒΟΙ,Σ have εσταθη, for which the scribes substituted the more usual εστη. 
2 avrw has the support of ΑΒΧΔΣ, but Tisch. and W.H. (in text) on the authority 


of SL omit it. 


quoted. So Brandt, who thinks the 
betrayal the only fact in the story of 
Judas, all the rest legendary (E. G., p. 
11). The truth rather seems to be that 
facts, historical traditions, suggested 
texts which otherwise would never have 
been thought of. This may be inferred 
from the manipulation necessary to make 
the prophecy correspond to the facts: 
ἔλαβον, ist person singular in Sept., 
3rd person plural here = they took; the 
expression ‘the children of Israel” 
introduced with apparent intention to 
make the nation responsible for the 
betrayal ; the substitution of the phrase 
“the field of the potter ’’ for ‘‘ the house 
of the Lord”. And after all the mani- 
pulation how different the circumstances 
in the two cases! In the one case it is 
the prophet himself, valued at a petty 
sum, who cast his price into the House of 
the Lord; in the other, it is the priests, 
who bought the life of the prophet of 
Nazareth for a small sum, who give the 
money for a potter’s field. The only 
real point of resemblance is the small 
value set upon a prophet in either case. 
It is a most unsatisfactory instance of 
prophetic fulfilment, almost as much so 
as that in Mt. ii. 23. But its very un- 
satisfactoriness makes for the historicity 
of the story. That the prophetic text, 
once associated with the story in the 
minds of believers, reacted on the manner 
of telling it, ε.σ., as to the weighing of 
the price (xxvi. 15), and the casting of 
the money into the holy place (xxvii. 5), 
is conceivable. 

Vv. 11-26. Fesus before Pilate (Mk. 
xv. 2-15, Lk. xxiii. 2-7, 13-25).—Ver. 11. 
6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς: δὲ resumes an interrupted 
story (ver. 2).—ov el, etc.: Art Thou the 
King of the Jews? ‘The question reveals 
the form in which the Sanhedrists pre- 
sented their accusation. They had 
translated ‘‘ Christ” into ‘‘ King of the 


Jews” for Pilate’s benefit, so astutely 
giving a political aspect to what under 
the other name was only a question of 
religion, or, as a Roman would view it, 
superstition. A most unprincipled pro- 
ceeding, for the confession of Jesus that 
He was the Christ no more inferred a 
political animus than their own Messianic 
expectations.—ov λέγεις = yes. One is 
hardly prepared for such a reply to an 
equivocal question, and there is a 
temptation to seek escape by taking 
the words interrogatively = dost thou 
say so? or evasively, with Theophy. = 
you say, I make no statement. Ex- 
planations such as are given in John 
xviii. 33-37 were certainly necessary.— 
Ver. 12. The accusations here referred 
to appear to have been made on the back 
of Pilate’s first question and Christ’s 
answer. Mark indicates that they were 
copious. In Lukethechargeis formulated 
before Pilate begins to interrogate (κα. 
z). The purpose of their statements 
would be to substantiate the main charge 
that Jesus claimed to be King of the 
Jews in a sense hostile to Roman 
supremacy. What were the materials 
of proof? Possibly perverse construc- 
tion of the healing ministry, of the con- 
sequent popularity, of Christ’s brusquely 
independent attitude towards Rabbinism, 
suggesting a defiant spirit generally.— 
οὐδὲν ἀπεκρίνατο (note use of Ist aorist 
middle instead of the more usual ἄπεκ- 
ρίθη). Jesus made no reply to these 
plausible mendacities, defence vain in 
such a case.—Ver. 13. Pilate noting 
His silence directs His attention to what 
they have been saying.—Ver. 14. καὶ 
οὐκ ἀπεκρίθη: still no reply, though 
no disrespect to the governor intended. 
--ὥστε θαυμάζειν, etc., the governor 
was very much (λίαν, at the end, 
emphatic) astonished: at the svzlence, 
and at the man; the silence attracting 


1Ί1---20Ο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


κο 


15. Kata δὲ ἑορτὴν Σεἰώθει ὁ ἡγεμὼν " ἀπολύειν ἕνα τῷ ὄχλῳ ε Μι.κ.ι. 


δέσµιον, ὃν ἤθελον. 
Βαραββᾶν. 


«Τίνα θέλετε ἀπολύσω ὑμῖν; Βαραββᾶν, ἢ ᾿Ιησοῦν τὸν λεγόμενον 


Χριστόν; 


19. Καθηµένου δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος, ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ 


16. εἶχον δὲ τότε δέσµιον } ἐπίσημον, 


18. ᾖδει γὰρ ὅτι "διὰ "Φθόνον παρέδωκαν αὐτόν. 


2 Lk. iv. 16. 
λεγόμενον Acts xvii. 


s pe 2. 
17. συνηγµένων οὖν αὐτῶν, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ Πιλάτος, hActsiii.r3. 


i here and 
in Mk. xv. 
6in Gospp. 
Acts xvi. 
25, 27. 
Eph. iii. τ 
al 


aA + ~ , , 5 
yur, αὐτοῦ, λέγουσα, '"Μηδέν σοι καὶ τῷ δικαίῳ ἐκείνω' πολλὰ | Rom.xvi.7 


4 ” ’ > 7 > Cpe 3» 
γὰρ ἔπαθον σήµερον κατ ὄναρ δι αὐτόν. 
οἱ πρεσβύτεροι έπεισαν τοὺς ὄχλους, ἵνα αἰτήσωνται τὸν Βαραββᾶν, 


attention to the Silent Οπε.--Α new 
type of Jew this. The result of his 
observation is a favourable impression ; 
how could it be otherwise? Pilate was 
evidently not alarmed by the charge 
brought against Jesus. Why? Appa- 
rently at first glance he saw that the 
man before him was not likely to be a 
pretender to royalty in any sense that he 
need trouble himself about. The σὺ in 
an emphatic position in ver. 11 suggests 
this = You the King of the Jews! Then 
there was nothing to bear out the pre- 
tension: no position, prestige, wealth, 
following; no troops, etc. (Grotius). 

Vv. 15-18. Appeal to the people.— 
Pilate, not inexperienced in Jewish affairs, 
nor without insight into the ways of the 
ruling class, suspects that there are two 
sides to this matter. The very accusa- 
tion suggests that the accused may be 
innocently popular, and the accusers 
jealous. An existing custom gives the 
opportunity of putting this to the test.— 
Ver. 15. κατὰ ἑορτὴν, at feast time 
(singulis festis, Hermann, Viger, p. 633), 
not all feasts, but the passover meant.— 
εἰώθει, was accustomed; time and cir- 
cumstances of the origin of this custom 
unknown; a custom likely to arise 
sooner or later, as it symbolised the 
nature of the passover as a passing over 
(Weiss-Meyer), and helped to make the 
governor’s presence at that season wear 
a gracious aspect; on that account pro- 
bably originating under the Romans.— 
Ver. 16. εἶχον: they, the people (ὄχλῳ, 
ver 15).—émionpov: pointing not to the 
magnitude of his crime, but to the fact 
that for some reason or other he was an 
object of popular Ιπίετεςί.-- Βαραββᾶν, 
accusative of Βαραββᾶς =son of a 
father, or with double p, and retaining 
the v at the end, Bar-Rabban = son of 
a Rabbi. Jerome in his Commentary on 
Mt. mentions that in the Hebrew Gospel 
the word was interpreted filius magistri 
zorum. Origen mentions that in some 





(in a good 
sense), 
k Phil. i. τς. 


20. Οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ 


MSS. this man bore the name ¥esus, an 
identity of name which makes the con- 
trast of character all the more striking. 
But the reading has little authority.— 
Ver. 17. thva θέλετε ἀπολύσω. Here 
Pilate seems to take the initiative; in 
Mk. he is first reminded of the custom 
(xv. 8). Mk.’s whole account is fuller 
and clearer.—Bap. 4 “Inc. The two 
names put before the people, as pre- 
sumably both popular more or less, 
Barabbas for some unknown reason, 
Jesus by inference from being called 
“Christ”. | No favouritism implied. 
Pilate is feeling his way, wants to do the 
popular thing as safest for himself.—Ver. 
18. Ser, he knew, perhaps too strong 
a word, the fact being that he shrewdly 
suspected—knew his men, and instinc- 
tively divined that if Jesus was a popular 
favourite the Pharisees would be jealous. 
This explains his sang froid in reference 
to the title “‘ King of the Jews,” also his 
offering the name of Jesus to the people. 

Vv. 19-20. Interlude of Pilate’s wife, 
in Mt. alone, probably introduced to ex- 
plain the bias of Pilate in favour of 
Jesus apparent in the sequel (Weiss- 
Meyer).— Ver. 19. µμηδὲν, etc., nothing 
to thee and that just one = have nothing 
to do with proceedings against Him.— 
πολλὰ γὰρ: reason for the advice, an un- 
pleasant dream in the morning (σήμερον, 
to-day, early). The historicity of this 
incident is of course doubted, the use 
made of it, with embellishments, in 
apocryphal writings (Acta Pilati) being 
pressed into the service. But it is quite 
credible nevertheless. First, the wife of 
Pilate might be there, for it had become 
customary for wives to accompany pro- 
vincial governors. Tacitus, Ann. iii. 33, 
34, mentions απ unsuccessful attempt in 
the senate to put down the practice. 
Second, she had a husband that much 
needed good advice, and would often get 
it from a good wiie. Third, it was a 
womanly act. 


326 


τὸν δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦν ἀπολέσωσιν. 
αὐτοῖς, “Tiva θέλετε ἀπὸ τῶν δύο ἀπολύσω ὑμῖν; 


“ BapaBBav.” 1 
τὸν λεγόμενον Χριστόν ; ” 
xv. 14 (W. 


H.). Acts 
XXVi. 11. 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


σῶς ἔκραζον, λέγοντες, “ Σταυρωθήτω.” 


ΧΧΥΠΙ. 


21. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἡγεμὼν εἶπεν 
οἱ δὲ εἶπον, 


22. Λέγει αὗτοῖς 6 Πιλάτος, “ Τί οὖν ποιήσω ᾿Ιησοῦν 
Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ 3 πάντες, “Σταυρωθήτω.” 
ΙΜΚ. x. 26; 23. Ὁ δὲ ἡγεμὼν ἓ ἔφη, “Ti γὰρ κακὸν ἐποίησεν; 


οἱ δὲ | περισ- 
24. ᾿Ιδὼν δὲ ὁ Πιλάτος, 


mhere only. ὅτι οὐδὲν ὠφελεῖ, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον θόρυβος γίνεται, λαβὼν ὕδωρ, ™ ἀπενί- 


ato τὰς χεῖρας ἀπέναντι “ τοῦ ὄχλου, λέγων, “:᾿Αθῶός εἰμι ἀπὸ τοῦ 


αἵματος τοῦ δικαίου ὅ 


τούτου: ὑμεῖς ὄψεσθε.” 


25. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 


mas ὁ ads εἶπε, “TS αἷμα αὐτοῦ ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ τέκνα ἡμῶν.” 
n here and 26. Τότε ἀπέλυσεν αὐτοῖς τὸν Βαραββᾶν : τὸν δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦν " φραγελλώ- 


in Mk. xv. 
15. 


1 τον before Bap. in NBL 1, 33. 
2 αντω omitted in NABDAZ. 


4 κατεναντι in BD (W.H. in text bracketed). 


σας παρέδωκεν ἵνα σταυρωθῇ. 


3 SB 33, 69 omit ηγεμων. 
SLA have απεναντι (Tisch.). 


5 BD omit του δικαιου, which probably has crept in from ver. 19. 


Vv. 20-26. Result of the appeal to the 
people.—Ver. 20. ot δὲ ἀρχ., etc.: the 
Sanhedrists saw the danger, and set 
themselves to bias the popular judgment, 
not sure what might otherwise happen— 
with success, ἔπεισαν. So when, after 
due interval, the governor put the. ques- 
tion, the reply was (ver. 21) τὸν Βαραβ- 
Bav, and to the further question what 
then was to be done with Jesus: the 
unanimous (πάντες) reply was Στανρω- 
θήτω. Where were the men who had 
a few days ago shouted Hosanna? If 
there, how fickle; if absent, why? Or 
were they silent, cowed by the prevailing 
mood ?—Ver. 23. τί γὰρ κακὸν: ellipti- 
cal, implying unwillingness to carry out 
the popular will. (Fritzsche, Grotius.) 
Some, Palairet, Raphel, etc., take yap 
as τεἀυπάαπῖ.--περισσῶς ἔκραζον, they 
kept crying out more loudly. Cf. Mk., 
where the force of περισσῶς comes out 
more distinctly.—Ver. 24. ὅτι οὐδὲν 
ὠφελεῖ, that it was no use, but rather 
only provoked a more savage demand, 
as is the way of πιοῦς.--λαβὼν ὕδωρ, 
etc.: washed his hands, following a 
Jewish custom, the meaning of which 
all present fully understood, accompany- 
ing the action with verbal protestations 
ofinnocence. This also, with the grim 
reply of the people (ver. 25), peculiar to 
Mt.; a ‘*traditional addition ’’ (Weiss). 
—Ver. 26. τότε ἀπέλνσεν: Pilate, lack- 
ing the passion for justice, judges not 
according to the merits but according to 
policy. When he discovered that Jesus 


was not a popular favourite, in fact had no 
friends, he had no more interest in Him, 
but acted as the people wished, loosing 
Barabbas and delivering Jesus to be 
crucified, after having first subjected 
Him {ο scourging (φραγελλώσας = 
flagello, a Latinism probably borrowed 
from Mk.). Such was the barbarous 
practice of the Romans. It is alluded to 
by Josephus (B. J., v. 11, 1) in these 
terms : paorryovpevor δὴ καὶ προβασανι- 
ἵόμενοι τοῦ θανάτον πᾶσαν αἰκίαν 
ἀνεσταυροῦντο τοῦ τείχους ἀντικρύ. 
Brandt thinks that the alleged custom of 
releasing a prisoner had no existence, and 
that the story in the Gospels arose out 
of an occurrence at a later time, the 
release of a prisoner the son of a Rabbi 
concerned in a tumult. The Christians 
said: they release the son of the Scribe 
and they crucified our Jesus, and at last 
the incident was read back into the story 
of the Passion (Ε. G., pp. 94-105). 

Vv. 27-31. YFesus the sport of the 
soldiery (Mk. xv. 16-20).—Ver. 27. τότε: 
when Jesus had been sentenced to cruci- 
fixion.—oi στρατιῶται τ. ἣ., the soldiers 
of the governor, {.ε., his bodyguard.— 
παραλαβόντες, etc.: they conducted 
Jesus from the scene of judgment (with- 
out) to the πραιτώριον, {.ε., the official 
residence ofthe procurator, either Herod’s 
palace, or more probably a palace con- 
nected with the fort Antonia, with 
barracks attached. The word has various 
meanings: a general’s tent, a governor’s 
residence, the barracks of the Praetorian 


21-32. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΔΙΟΝ 


327 


27. ΤΟΤΕ οἱ στρατιῶται τοῦ ἡγεμόνος, παραλαβόντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν 


eis τὸ “ πραιτώριον, συνήγαγον ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ὅλην τὴν σπεῖραν: 28. καὶο Mk. αν. 


ἐκδύσαντες 1 αὐτόν, περιέθηκαν αὐτῷ χλαμύδα κοκκίνην2: 29. καὶ 
πλέξαντες στέφανον ἐξ ἀκανθῶν, ἐπέθηκαν ἐπὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν ὃ αὐτοῦ, 
καὶ κάλαμον ἐπὶ τὴν δεξιὰν ΄ αὐτοῦ: καὶ γονυπετήσαντες ἔμπροσθεν 


αὐτοῦ, ἐνέπαιζον 5 αὐτῷ, λέγοντες, 


16. John 
xviii, οἳ- 
33; XIX. 9. 
Acts xxiii. 
45. Phil. 
1, τη, 


“Xatpe, 6 βασιλεὺς ὃὅ τῶν 


3 
Ιουδαίων '”' 30. καὶ ἐμπτύσαντες eis αὐτόν, ἔλαβον τὸν κάλαµον, 


‘ - 
καὶ ἔτυπτον eis τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ. 


31. Καὶ ὅτε ἐνέπαιξαν αὐτῷ, 


ἐξέδυσαν αὐτὸν τὴν χλαμύδα, καὶ ἐνέδυσαν αὐτὸν τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτοῦ - 


‘ , ολ 3 x a 
και ἀπήγαγον αυτον εἰς το σταυρώσαι. 


32. ᾿Ἐξερχόμενοι δὲ εὗρον 


1 BD and some old Latin codd. have ενδυσαντες, which Weiss thinks has been 


changed into ex. from not being understood. 


Vide below. 


® Χλαμυδα κοκκινην Ῥείοτεπεριεθηκαν in BDL 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὅ επι της κεφαλης in NBL 69. 
* ev τη δεξια in NABDLE 1, 33, 69 al. 
° ενεπαιζαν in $BDL 33. 


6 BDA have βασιλευ (W.H. in brackets, ο Bao. in margin). 


guard, the Praetorian guard itself.— 
συνήγαγον, etc.: gathered about Him 
(for sport) the whole σπεῖραν, at most a 
cohort of 600, more probably a maniple 
of 200. (“ σπεῖρα, anything twisted 
vound like a ball of thread, is a transla- 
tion of ‘manipulus’; a wisp of hay.” 
Carr in Cam. N. T., ad loc.) A large 
number to assemble for such a purpose, 
but Roman soldiers at passover time 
would always be on the alert for serious 
work or sport, and here was no ordinary 
chance of both, a man sentenced to be 
crucified who passed for King of the 
Jews. What more natural than to make 
sport of Him, and through Him to show 
their contempt for the Jewish people? 
(Holtzmann, H.C.).—Ver. 28. ἐκδύσ- 
αντες (or ἐνδ.) a.: taking off (or putting 
on) His clothes. If we adopt the former 
reading, the implied situation will be 
this: Jesus first stripped for scourging, 
then reclothed; then stripped again at 
the commencement of the mocking pro- 
cess. If the latter, this: Jesus after 
scourging led naked to the praetorium, 
there clothed, all but His upper gar- 
ment, instead of which they put on 
χλαμύδα κ. (Meyer).— yAap. κοκκίνην, a 
scarlet cloak, probably a soldiex’s sagum. 
Carr renders asoldier’s scarf, and suggests 
that it may have been a worn-out scarf 
of Pilate’s (Herod’s, Elsner). The ridi- 
cule would be more lifelike if it was 
really a fine article that might be, or had 
been, worn by a Ροϊεπίαϊο.-- πλέξαντες 
στ. ἐξ ἀ., weaving out of thorns a crown ; 


not, say Meyer and Weiss, hard and 
sharp, so as to cause great pain, but 
young, flexible, easily plaited, the aim 
being to ridicule not to inflict torture. 
Possibly, but the soldiers would not 
make a point of avoiding giving pain. 
They would take what came first to 
Ἠαπά.- -κάλαµον, a reed; apparently 
under the gov. of ἐπέθηκαν, but really 
the object of ἔθηκαν, understood.—yovv- 
πετήσαντες: after the investiture comes 
the homage, by lowly gesture and wor- 
shipful salutation: χαῖρε βασιλεῦ τ. Ἰ. 
Hail, King of the Jews. A mockery of 
the nation in intention quite as much as 
of the particular victim. Loesner (Ob- 
serv, ad N. T.) adduces from Philo. (in 
Flaccum, 6) a historic parallel, in which 
the youth of Alexandria treat similarly a 
half-witted person, Karabas, the real 
design being to insult Herod Agrippa. 
Schanz and Holtzmann also refer to this 
incident.—Ver. 30. At this point rough 
sport turns into brutal treatment, as the 
moment for execution of the sentence 
approaches.—_éprrTveavtes: spitting, sub- 
stituted for kissing, the final act of 
homage, followed by striking with the 
mock sceptre (ἔτυπτον ε. τ. «.).—Ver. 
31. ἐξέδυσαν, etc.: they took off the 
mock royal robe, and put on again His 
own garments (τὰ ἵἱμάτια, the upper 
garments, but why the plural 2). No 
mention of the crown; left on according 
to some of the ancients, Origen, e.g.: 
‘*semel imposita et nunquam ἀείταοία 
and, according to the same Father, con- 


328 ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ ΧΧΥΙΠ, 
5 Ch ν. a1. ἄνθρωπον Κυρηναῖον, ὀνόματι Σίμωνα: τοῦτον 5 ἠγγάρευσαν ἵνα apy 
q John iv. Tov σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ. 

{ Acts viii. 33- ΚΑΙ ἐλθόντες εἲς τόπον λεγόμενον Γολγοθᾶ, Ss! ἐστι λεγόμενος 
«Τὰ. xiii, 1 κρανίου τόπος, 34. Ἱἔδωκαν αὐτῷ Απιεῖν ὄξος μετὰ "χολῆς 


(same 
const.). 


1ο in most uncials. 


Σοινον in NBDL (Tisch., W.H.). 
from Mk. 


* ηθελησεν in BDL. 


sumed by the head of Jesus (‘‘ consumpta 
a capite Jesu’). Taken off doubtless 
along with the rest, for there must be no 
mockery of Jesus or Jews before the 
public. Such proceedings only for the 
barracks (Holtz., H.C.). 

Vv. 32-38. Crucifixion (Mk, xv. 21-27 ; 
Lk. xxiii. 26, 35-38).—This part of the 
story begins with the closing words of 
νετ. 31: ‘they led Him away to be 
crucified ”.—Ver. 32. ἐξερχόμενοι: going 
out (of the city) according to later 
Roman custom, and in harmony also 
with Jewish usage (Num. xv. 35, I 
Kings xxi. 23, Acts vii. 58).—av@p. Κυρ.: 
a man of Cyrene, in Libya, presumably 
recognisable as a stranger, with whom 
liberties might be taken.—jyydpeveav, 
compelled; a military requisition. Cf. 
at chap. v. 41.—tva ἄρῃ τ. o Jesus, 
carrying His cross according to the cus- 
tom, has broken down under His burden; 
Gethsemane, betrayal, the ordeal of the 
past sleepless night, scourging, have 
made the flesh weak. No compassion 
for Him in finding a substitute; the 
cross must be carried, and the soldiers 
will ποξ.--σταυρὸν: see on νετ. 35.— 
Γολγοθᾶ: Weiss remarks on the double 
λεγόμενον-- Ὀείοτα the name, and in the 
following interpretation—and thinks it a 
sign that Mt. is copying from Mk. One 
wonders indeed why Mt., writing for 
Jews, should explain the word at all.— 
κρανίου τόπος, place of a skull (“ Cal- 
variae locus,” Vulg., whence ‘ Calvary ” 
in Lk., A. V.), of skulls rather, say many 
interpreters; a place of execution, skulls 
lying all about (Jerome started this view). 
Recent interpreters (including Schanz) 
more naturally take the word as pointing 
to the shape of the hill. The locality is 
quite uncertain. 

Ver. 34. olvov μετὰ χολῆς µ., wine 
mingled with gall. Mk. has ἐσμυρνισ- 
pévov otv., wine drugged with myrrh, a 
drink given by a merciful custom before 
execution to deaden the sense of pain. 


. ΄ ‘ ΄ > ne 4 a 
μεμιγμενον * και γευσαμενος ουκ η ελε πιειν. 


35. Σταυρώσαντες 


? kpaviov τοπος Aeyopevos in NBL 1, 33 al. 
Weiss thinks it possible that owos has come 


The wine would be the sour wine or 
ῥοσεα used by Roman soldiers. In Mk. 
Jesus declines the drink, apparently with- 
out tasting, desiring to suffer with clear 
mind. In Mt. He tastes (yevodpevos) 
and then declines, apparently because 
unpalatable, suggesting a different motive 
in the offerers, not mercy but cruelty; 
maltreatment in the very drink offered. 
To this view of the proceeding is ascribed 
the μετὰ χολῆς of Mt.’s text, not without 
the joint influence of Ps. Ixix. 22 (Meyer 
and Weiss). Harmonists strive to re- 
concile the two accounts by taking χολή 
as signifying in Hellenistic usage any 
bitter liquid (quamvis amaritiem, Els- 
ner), and therefore among other things 
myrrh, Prov. v. 4, Lament. iii. 15 
(Sept.), in which χολή stands for worm- 


wood, ον” , are cited in proof of this. 


Against the idea that Mt.’s text has been 
altered from Mk.’s under the influence of 
Ps. Ixix. 22, is the retention of otvos (£05 
in Ps. and in T. R.) and the absence ot 
any reference to the passage in the 
usual style—‘‘ that it might be fulfilled,” 
etc. 

Ver. 35. σταυρώσαντες (from σταν- 
pow, to drive stakes; in later Greek, and 
in Ν. Τ., to impale on a stake, στανρός). 
All the evangelists touch lightly the 
fact of crucifixion, hurrying over the 
painful subject as quickly as possible; 
Mt., most of all, disposing of it in a 
participial clause. Many questions on 
which there has been much discussion 
suggest themselves, ¢.g., as to the struc- 
ture and form of the cross: did it consist 
of an upright beam (fpalus, stipes) and a 
cross beam (patibulum, antenna), or of 
the former only, the hands being nailed 
to the beam above the head? (so Fulda, 
Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung, 1878). 
Was Christ’s cross a crux commissa (T) 
or a crux immissa (t)? Or is this dis- 
tinction a purely imaginary one, as Fulda 
(p. 126) maintains against Justus Lip- 


33—38. 


EYATTEAION 


329 


δὲ αὐτόν, * διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, " βάλλοντες 1 "κλῆρον " ἵνα t Lk. xi. 17, 


πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ προφήτου, ‘ Διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἵμάτιά µου 
ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν µου ἔβαλον κλῆρον. 3 


καθήµενοι ᾿ ἐτήρουν αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ. 


"Ingots ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων. 


"αὐτῷ δύο λῃσταί, eis ἐκ δεξιῶν καὶ els ἐξ εὐωνύμων. 


1 βαλοντες in NAD (W.H. in margin). 


2 From wa πλη΄ωθη to end of ver. 35 is omitted in NABDL2. 


come in from John xix. 24. 


sius, till Fulda the great authority on the 
subject of crucifixion? The work of the 
more recent writer should certainly be 
consulted before coming to a final de- 
cision on the form of the cross or the 
method of crucifixion. Another question 
is, what did Jesus carry to the place of 
execution: the upright post or the cross 
beam? (the latter according to Mar- 
quhardt, Rom. Alter.vii.1, 1). And how 
was His body fixed to the cross: were 
the feet, ¢.g., nailed as well as the hands, 
or only tied to the beam with a rope or 
with wands or left free? The passages 
cited from ancient authors bearing on 
the subject, Artemidorus, Plautus, Seneca, 
are diversely interpreted, and the practice 
does not seem to have been invariable. 
Crucifixion was at best a rude mode of 
executing justice, and, especially in time 
of war, seems to have been performed by 
soldiers in diverse fashions, according to 
their whim (ἄλλον ἄλλῳ σχήµατι πρὸς 
χλεύην, Joseph., v.11, 1; plates showing 
various forms in Fulda). Still there 
would be a normal mode, and in the case 
of Jesus, when only one or two were put to 
death, it would probably be followed. His 
cross has generally been supposed to have 
been a crux tmmissa, with the accusation 
on the point of the upright post above the 
cross beam, with a peg whereon to sit. 
Whether. His feet were pierced with 
nails cannot be certainly determined. 
Paulus took the negative side in the 
interest of the hypothesis that Jesus did 
not really die on the cross; Meyer 
strongly maintains the contrary, vide ad 
loc. ‘The fragment of the Gospel of 
Peter speaks of nails in the hands only: 
“then they drew the nails from the 
hands of the Lord”. Fulda takes the 
same view, representing the hands as 
nailed, the feet as tied to the beam.—ra 
ἵμάτια: the probability is that Jesus had 
been stript absolutely naked (γυμνοὶ 


37. Καὶ ἐπέθηκαν ἐπάνω τῆς 
κεφαλῆς αὐτοῦ τὴν “aitiay αὐτοῦ yeypappevny, 'Οὗτός ἐστινν 


18 ; xii. 52, 
53; xxii. 
17. Acts 
ii, 3, 45. 
u the phrase 
here and 
in parall. 
ver. 54. 
Ch. xxviii. 
4. Acts 
xii. 5, 6 
(same 
sense), 
w Mk. xv. 26. Acts xxv. 18, 27. 


36. Kat 


38. Τότε σταυροῦνται σὺν 


It has probably 


σταυροῦνται, Artemid., Oneirocritica, ii. 
58). On the dividing of the garments 
vide John xix. 23 f. The prophetic refer- 
ence iva πληρωθῃ in T. R. has little 
authority, and seems inserted from John 
xix. 24, by a scribe who thought it what 
the first evangelist should say. This is 
a second instance where a chance of 
prophetic citation is not taken advantage 
of.—Ver. 36: this statement about the 
executioners sitting down to watch Jesus 
takes the place of a statement as to the 
time of execution in Mk. The purpose 
apparently was to guard against a rescue. 
—Ver. 37: this fact is mentioned out of 
its proper place. It is probable that the 
placard with the accusation was fixed up 
before the cross was erected. As it 
stands in Mt.’s narrative, it looks like an 
after-thought of the soldiers as they sat 
keeping watch, their final jest at the 
expense of their victim and the nation to 
which He belonged. What the custom 
was as to this is not known. Of the 
various versions of the inscription Mk.’s 
is the shortest: THE KING OF THE JEWS; 
to this Mt. prefixes: This is Jesus.—Ver. 
38: τότε introduces the fact mentioned as 
an accompaniment of the crucifixion of 
Jesus, without indicating its precise place 
in the course of events.—oravpovvrat, 
the historical present with lively effect ; 
and passive, probably to imply that this 
act was performed by other soldiers. 
This very slight notice grows into a 
considerable incident in the hands of 
Luke. 

Vv. 39-44. Taunts of spectators (Mk. 
XV. 20-32; Lk. xxiii. 35-37, 39). The 
last drop in Christ’s bitter cup. To us 
it may seem incredible that even His 
worst enemies could be guilty of any- 
thing so brutal as to hurl taunts at one 
suffering the agonies of crucifixion. But 
men then ielt very differently from us, 
thanks to the civilising influence of the 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION XXVII.. 


339 


x vide Ch. 39. Οἱ δὲ παραπορευόµενοι ἐβλασφήμουν αὐτόν, * κινοῦντες τὰς. 
xxiii. 4. 
κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν, 40. καὶ λέγοντες, ““O καταλύων τὸν ναὸν καὶ ἐν 
‘4 > ὃ ~ ~ ό > ea = ~ a 1 
τρισὶν ἡμέραις οἰκοδομῶν, σῶσον σεαυτόν: εἰ υἱὸς ef τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
κατάβηθι ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ.”. 41. Ὁμοίως δὲ nat? οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς ἐμπαί- 
Loves μετὰ τῶν γραμματέων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων ἔλεγον, 42. '"Άλλους. 
ἔσωσεν, ἑαυτὸν οὗ δύναται σῶσαι. εἰξδ βασιλεὺς Ισραήλ ἐστι, 
καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ, καὶ πιστεύσοµεν αὐτῷ." 43. πέποιθεν 
ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν δ: ῥυσάσθω νῦν αὐτόν, εἰ θέλει αὐτόν. etme γάρ, Ὅτι 
y Kom. Vi. Yay cr 35 . 92 5 λε A ite , 
6. Gal. ii, Θεοῦ ele vids.” 44. Τὸ 8 αὐτὸ καὶ οἱ λησταὶ οἱ ᾿"συσταυρωθέντες 
29 (in fig. 


ας ae , A 
sense), QUTO! ὠνείδιζον αὐτῷ." 


1 ει νιος θεου ει in B (W.H. in margin). 


2 opovws simply in NAL (Tisch.). οµοιως και in BK (W.H. in brackets). 


3 S8BDL omit ει (Tisch., W.H.). 
5 ert τω θεω in B (W.H. in margin). 
7 ov αντω in BDL. 


Christian faith, which has made the 
whole details of the Passion history so 
revolting to the Christian heart. These 
sneers at the great Sufferer are not in- 
vented fulfilments of prophecy (Ps. xxii. 
7, 8; so Brandt), but belong to the 
certainties of the tragic story as told by 
the synoptists.— Ver. 39. ot παραπορευό- 
pevou, the passers by: the place of cruci- 
fixion therefore near a road; going to or 
from the temple services (Speaker’s Com.) ; 
or on work-day business, the 13th not 
the 14th of the month? (Fritzsche, De 
Wette).—kuwodvtes τ. κ. α., Shaking or 
nodding the head in the direction of the 
cross, as if to say: that is what it has 
come to.—Ver. 40. 6 καταλύων (cf. ἡ 
ἀποκτείνουσα, xxiii. 37), this and the 
other taunts seem to be echoes of words 
said to or about Jesus at the trial, of 
which a report has already gone abroad 
among the populace. Whether the say- 
ing about destroying the temple was 
otherwise known can only be a matter of 
conjecture,—el vids εἶ τ. θ.: Jesus had 
confessed Himself to be the Son of God 
at the trial (xxvi. 64).--κατάβηθι: the 
God of this world and all men of the 
world have but one thought as to Son- 
ship; of course it means exceptional 
privilege. What can a Son of God have 
to do with a cross?—Ver. 41. ὁμοίως, 
εἰςο.: one might have expected the digni- 
taries, priests, scribes, elders, to have 
left that low-minded work to the mob. 
But they condescend to their level, yet 
with a difference. They speak about the 
Sufferer, not to Him, and in a tone of 
affeeted seriousness and fairness.—Ver. 


4 επ αυτον in NBL. 
® BL 33 omit αυτον. 
8 αυτον in all uncials, 


42.  Gddovs ἔσωσεν, etc., He saved 
others, Himself He cannot save. Both 
facts ; the former they can now afford to 
admit, and they do so all the more 
readily that it serves as a foil to the 
other fact patent to everybody. — 
βασιλεὺς “1. Messianic King —the 
claim involved in the confession before 
the Sanhedrim, refuted by the cross, for 
who could believe that Messiah would. 
be crucified ?—xataBatw viv, etc.: yet 
let Him come down now from the cross, 
and we will believe on Him at once. 
These pious scoffers profess their readi- 
ness to accept descent from the cross as 
the conclusive sign from heaven they had 
always been asking for.—Ver. 43. This 
looks like a mere echo of Ps. xxii. 9 (not 
a literal quotation from the Sept., how- 
ever, rather recalling 15. xxxvi. 5) rather 
than a word likely to be spoken by the 
Sanhedrists. What did they know about 
the personal piety of Jesus? Probably 
they were aware that He used to call 
God “Father,” and that may be the 
basis of the statement, along with the 
confession of Sonship before the San- 
hedrim: θεοῦ εἰμι vids.—viv, now is the 
time for testing the value of His trust; a 
plausible wicked sneer.—et θέλει αὐτόν, 
if He love Him, an emphatic if, the love 
disproved by the {αοῖ.-- θέλει is used in 
the sense of love in the Sept. (Ps. xviii. 
20; ΧΙΙ. 12). Palairet gives examples of 
a similar use in Greek authors.—Ver. 44: 
the co-crucified brigands join with the 
mob and the priests in ribaldry.—ro 
αὐτὸ: Fritzsche supplies ἐποίουν after 
this phrase and renders: the same thing 


39—49. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Bg 


45. Awé δὲ ἕκτης ὥρας σκότος ἐγένετο ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ἕως 
ὥρας ἐννάτης' 46. περὶ δὲ τὴν ἐννάτην ὥραν ἀνεβόησεν 1 ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
Φωνῇ µεγάλη, λέγων, “HAL, HAL? λαμὰ ὃ σαβαχθανί; τοῦτ ἔστι, 


«Θεέ µου, Θεέ µου, ἵνατί µε " ἐγκατέλιπες ;” 
ἑστώτων * ἀκούσαντες ἔλεγον, “OT. Ἡλίαν Φφωνεῖ οὗτος.” 
εὐθέως δραμὼν ets ἐξ αὐτῶν, καὶ λαβὼν "σπόγγον, πλήσας τε ὄξους, 
καὶ περιθεὶς καλάμῳ, ἐπότιζεν αὐτόν: 49. ot δὲ λοιποὶ Edeyov,° 2 
“"Ades, ἴδωμεν εἰ ἔρχεται Ἠλίας σώσων αὐτόν. 6 


47+ Τινὲς δὲ τῶν ἐκεῖ z Mk. xv. 34. 
. 2 Cor. iv. 
48. Καὶ ο. 2 Tim. 
iv. 1ο, 16. 
Heb. x. 
25; Xili. 5. 
ΜΚ. xv. 


1 εβοησεν in BL 33, 69 (Trg., W.H.) from Mk.? 


ΣΕλωι, EXwt in B (W.H. in text). 


ἅλεμα in S$BL; there are other variants. 


4 εστηκοτων in SBCL 33. 
5 BD have ειπαν (W.H. in brackets). 


6 S8BCL add αλλος δε λαβων λογχην ενυξεν αυτου την πλευραν και εξηλθεν νδωρ 
και αιμα (W.H. in double brackets). It is an early addition from John xix. 34. 


πιά the robbers, for they too reproached 
Him (‘‘ idem vero etiam latrones fecerunt, 
nempe ei conviciati sunt”). It seems 
simpler to take αὐτὸ as one of two ac- 
cusatives, depending on ὠνείδιζον, αὐτόν 
following (the true reading) being the 
other. Vide Winer, § 32, 4. 

Vv. 45-49. Darkness without and 
within (Mk. xv. 33-36, Lk. xxiii. 44-46). 
—Ver. 45. ἀπὸ δὲ ἕκτης Spas: three 
hours, according to Mark (νετ. 25, cf. 
33), after the crucifixion the darkness 
came on. This is the first reference in 
Matthew toatime of day. The definite- 
ness of the statement in this respect 
seems to vouch for the historicity of the 
fact stated. Those who find in it legend 
or myth point to the Egyptian darkness, 
and prophetic texts such as Amos viii. 9, 
Joel ii. 31, etc. (none of which, however, 
are cited by the evangelist), as explaining 
the rise of the story. The cause of this 
darkness is unknown (vide notes on 
Mark). It could not, of course, be an 
eclipse of the sun at full moon. Origen 
saw this and explained the phenomenon 
by the hypothesis of dense masses of 
cloud hiding the sun. Others (Paulus, 
De Wette, etc.) have suggested a darken- 
ing such as is wont to precede an earth- 
quake. To the evangelist the event 
probably appeared supernatural.—éai π. 
τ. γῆν, Origen and many after him 
restrict the reference to Palestine. The 
fragment of the Gospel of Peter limits it 
to Judaea (πᾶσαν +. ᾿Ιουδαίαν). In the 
thought of the evangelist the expression 
had probably a wider though indefinite 
range of meaning, the whole earth 
(Weiss) or the whole Roman world 


(Grotius).—€ws &. ἐννάτης: the end as 
exactly indicated as the beginning, 
another sign of historicity. The fact 
stated probably interested the evangelist 
as an emblem of the spiritual eclipse 
next to be related.—Ver. 46. At, ἠλί, 
etc.: the opening words of Ps. xxii., but 
partly at least in Aramaic not in Hebrew, 
wholly so as they stand in Codex B 
(W.H.), ἐλωί, ἐλωί, etc., corresponding 
exactly to the version in Mark.— ἡλί, 
At, if the true reading in Matthew, 
seems to be an alteration made to suit 
what follows, whereby the utterance of 
Jesus becomes a mixture of Hebrew and 
Aramaic. It is not likely that Jesus 
would so express Himself. He would 
speak wholly either in Hebrew or in 
Aramaic, saying in the one case: “eli 
eli lamah asavtani’’; in the other: ‘ eloi 
eloi lema savachtani”. The form the 
utterance assumed in the earliest evan- 
gelic report might be an important 
clue. This Resch finds in the reading of 
Codex D, which gives the words in 
Hebrew. Resch holds that D often pre- 
serves the readings of the Urevangelium, 
which, contrary to Weiss, he believes to 
have contained a Passion history in 
brief outline (Agvapha, p. 53). Brandt 
expresses a similar view (EZ. G., pp. 
228-232). The probability is that Jesus 
spoke in Hebrew. It is no argument 
against this that the spectators might 
not understand what He said, for the 
utterance was not meant for the ears of 
men. The historicity of the occurrence 
has been called in question on the ground 
that one in a state of dire distress would 
not express his feelings in borrowed 


332 

b here only 
in N.T. 
(Gen. 
xxxv. 18). 

c here in 
parall. and 


in Heb. 
V1.1; αχ. 


KATA MATOAION 


XXVII. 


5ο. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς πάλιν κράξας φωνῇ µεγάλῃ Ὁ ἀφῆκε τὸ > πνεῦμα. 
51. Καὶ ἴδού, τὸ "καταπέτασμα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη εἰς δύο] ἀπὸ 
ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω" καὶ ἡ γῆ ἐσείσθη, καὶ αἳ πέτραι ἐσχίσθησαν : 
52. καὶ τὰ μνημεῖα ἀνεῴχθησαν, καὶ πολλὰ σώματα τῶν * κεκοιµη- 


2; x.20. µένων " ἁγίων ἠγέρθη;" 53. καὶ ἐξελθόντες ἐκ τῶν μνημείων, μετὰ τὴν 
18, 20. 1 ἔγερσιν αὐτοῦ, εἰσῆλθον eis τὴν ἁγίαν πόλιν, καὶ * ἐνεφανίσθησαν 


d 1 Cor. xv. 
Thess. iv. a 
13, 15 al. πολλοῖς. 
e here only 4 
in Gospp. f Heb. ix. 24 (pass. as here). 


1 εις ὃνο after κατω in BCL (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 ηγερθη is as usual the sing. to suit a neut. pl.nom. Ίγερθησαν in BDL. 


phrases. The alternative is that the 
words were put into the mouth of Jesus 
by persons desirous that in this as in all 
other respects His experience should 
correspond to prophetic anticipations. 
But who would have the boldness to 
impute to Him a_ sentiment which 
seemed to justify the taunt : “ Let Him 
deliver Him if He love Him”? Brandt’s 
reply to this is: Jewish Christians who 
had not a high idea of Christ’s Person 
(Ε. G., p. 245). That in some Christian 
circles the cry of desertion was an offence 
appears from the rendering of ‘“‘elieli” in 
Evang, Petri—f δύναµίς pov ἡ 8. p. = 
my strength, my strength. Its omission 
by Luke proves the same thing.—Ver. 
47. ties δὲ: not Roman soldiers, for 
they knew nothing about Elias; might 
be Hellenistic Jews who did not under- 
stand Hebrew or Aramaean (Grotius) ; 
more probably heartless persons who 
only affected to misunderstand. It was 
poor wit, and showed small capacity for 
turning to advantage the words spoken. 
How much more to the purpose to have 
said: Hear Him! He actually confesses 
that His God in whom He trusted has 
forsaken Him.—Ver. 48. els ἐξ αὐτῶν, 
one of the bystanders, not one of the 
τινὲς, with some human pity, acting 
under the impression, how got not 
indicated, that the sufferer was afflicted 
with thirst.—é§ovus, sour wine, fosca, the 
drink of Roman soldiers, with sponge 
and reed at hand, for use on such 
occasions.—Ver. 49. Ges: either re- 
dundant coalescing with ἴδωμεν = let us 
see (cf. chap. vii. 4), age videamus, 
Grotius (vide also Burton, M. T., § 
161), or meaning: hold, stop, don’t give 
Him the drink, iet us see whether Elias 
will come (ἔρχεται, comes without fail) 
to help Him. The latter is the more 
probable. The λοιποὶ belong to the 
scoffing crew. The remainder of this 


verse about the spear thrust—another, 
final, act of mercy, though attested by 
important MSS., seems to be imported 
from John xix. 34. It is omitted in R. V. 

Vv. 50-56. Death and its accompani- 
ments (Mk. xv. 37-41, Lk. xxiii. 46-40). 
—Ver. 50. πάλιν, pointing back to the 
cry in ver, 46.—wvq µεγάλῃ. The 
Fathers found in the loud cry a proof 
that Jesus died voluntarily, not from 
physical exhaustion. Some modern 
writers, on the contrary, regard the cry 
as the utterance of one dying of a 
ruptured heart (Dr. Stroud on The 
Physical Cause of Christ’s Death ; 
Hanna, The Last Day of Our Lord’s 
Passion). Mt.’s narrative, like Mk.’s, 
gives the impression that the cry was 
inarticulate. Brandt recognises this 
cry as historical.—Ver. 51. καὶ ἰδοὺ, 
introducing solemnly a series of preter- 
natural accompaniments, all but the first 
peculiar to Μτ.-- τὸ καταπέτασµα, the 
veil between the holy place and the most 
Πο]γ.--ἐσχίσθη: this fact, the rending 
of the veil, is mentioned by all the 
Synoptists, though Lk. introduces it at 
an early point in the narrative. It might 
have happened, as a natural event, an 
accidental coincidence, though it is not 
so viewed by the evangelist. A symbolic 
fiction, according to Brandt. The 
legendary spirit took hold of this event, 
magnifying the miracle. In the Hebrew 
Gospel the rending of the veil is trans- 
formed into the fracture of the lintel of 
the temple: “ Superliminare templi in- 
finitae magnitudinis fractum esse atque 
divisum ” (Jerome, Com.).—kat ἡ γῆ, etc. : 
an earthquake, preceding and condition- 
ing the greatest marvel of all, the opening 
of the graves and the resurrection of 
many saints (vv. 52 and 53). We seem 
here to be in the region of Christian 
legend. Certainly the legendary spirit 
laid hold of this feature with great eager- 


50—58. 


54. Ὁ δὲ ἑκατόνταρχος καὶ ot μετ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


333 


αὐτοῦ τηροῦντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, 


ἰδόντες τὸν σεισμὸν καὶ τὰ yevdueva,! ἐφοβήθησαν σφόδρα, λέγοντες, 


“ec? 


Αληθῶς Θεοῦ υἱὸς 2 Fv οὗτος.” 


55- Ἠσαν δὲ ἐκεῖ γυναῖκες πολλαὶ ἀπὸ µακρόθεν θεωροῦσαι, 


αἵτινες ἠκολούθησαν τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας, διακονοῦσαι αὐτῷ " 
56. ἐν ats ἦν Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή, καὶ Μαρία ἡ τοῦ Ιακώβου καὶ 
‘loo µήτηρ, καὶ ἡ µήτηρ τῶν υἱῶν Ζεβεδαίου. 

57. ὌΟΨΙΑΣ δὲ γενομένης, ἦλθεν ἄνθρωπος πλούσιος ἀπὸ ᾿Αριμα- 
θαίας, τοὔνομα Ιωσήφ, ὃς καὶ αὐτὸς ἐμαθήτευσεξ τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ : 
58. οὗτος προσελθὼν τῷ Πιλάτω, ἠτήσατο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


1 γινοµενα in BD 33. 


2 BD have wos θεου (W.H. in margin). 


3So in BLA. SCD have εµαθητευθη, which, though adopted by Tisch and 
W.H. (text), may be suspected of assimilation to the form used in Chap. xiii. 52, 


xxviii. 19. Vide below. 

ness, expanding and going into details, 
giving, é.g., the names of those who rose: 
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, ete. (Vide Evang. 
Nicod., ο. 17, and The Acts of Pilate in 
Thilo’s Codex Apocryphus, N. T., p. 810). 
—Ver.53. μετὰ τὴν ἔγερσιν αὐτοῦ, after 
the raising (active) of Jesus (by God), ἐ.ε., 
after Christ’s own resurrection : not after 
the raising (of them) by Him, as if αὐτοῦ 
were genitive subjective. So Fritzsche, 
who, however, brackets the phrase as a 
doubtful reading. ἔγερσιν occurs here 
only in Ν. T.—Ver. 54. ἑκατόνταρχος = 
κεντυρίων in Mk., the officer in charge 
of the detachment entrusted with the 
execution, not hitherto mentioned.— 
oi pet αὐτοῦ, etc.: the whole military 
party make pious reflections in Mt.; in 
Mk., with more probability, the centurion 
only.—Kat τὰ γινόμενα, and (generally) 
the things happening, the earthquake 
included. For a similar use of καὶ vide 
XXVi. 5ο.---υἱὸς θεοῦ: Lk. substitutes for 
this ‘‘a just man’’. In the centurion’s 
mouth the words would mean more than 
that and less than the sense they bear for 
a Christian =a hero, an extraordinary 
man. Yet Lk.’s rendering is to the point, 
because the Roman soldier is conceived 
as seeing in the events the anger of the 
gods at the treatment of an innocent 
man.—Ver. 55. ‘yuvatkes, women, bolder 
than men, love casting out fear. Lk. 
associates with them others called ot 
γνωστοὶ αὐτῷ, His acquaintance, which 
might include the disciples. Though 
they fled panic-stricken they may have 
tallied and returned to see the end, 
either along with the women or mixed in 
the crowd, and so have become qualified 
afterwards for witnessing to what hap- 


pened. It is no argument against this 
that no mention is made of them in the 
narratives. Itis no part of the plan of 
the evangelists to indicate the sources 
of their information. The women are not 
mentioned for this purpose, but because 
they have a part to play in the sequel. 
If they had been introduced as witnesses 
it would not have been made so clear 
that they stood “afar off”’ (ἀπὸ µακρόθεν). 
In like manner that Peter followed his 
Master to the judgment hall is told, not 
that he may be available as a witness, 
but because there is a story of denial to 
relate about him.—odAai, many, a 
tribute to the impression made on 
feminine hearts by the Galilean ministry ; 
for it was from Galilee they came, as the 
following clause states (αἵτινες, etc., 
defining them as women who knew Him 
well, loved Him warmly, and served 
Him devotedly).—Ver. 56. ἐν ais: three 
out of the many named, with a reference 
to the sequel, or as the best known. 
Mary of Magdala (first mention in 
Mt.), Mary, the mother of a well-known 
pair of brothers, and the mother of the 
sons of Zebedee (Salome in Mk.). 

Vv. 57-66. Burial (Mk. xv. 42-47, 
Lk. xxiii. 50-56). ἠλθεν, etc., there came 
(to the place of crucifixion, the centre of 
interest in the preceding narrative) a 
man (unknown to readers), vich (this fact 
put in the forefront by Μι.---εὐσχήμων 
βουλευτής in Mk. On εὐσχήμων 
Phrynichus remarks that the vulgar take 
it as = rich, or in good social position, 
while the ancients took it as applying to 
the noble or symmetrical. Mt. may be 
following vulgar usage, but also with 
an eye to Is. ΠΠ. ο: ‘‘ with the rich in 


334 


τότε ὁ Πιλάτος ἐκέλευσεν ἀποδοθῆναι τὸ copa.) 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


ΧΧΥΤΙ 


59. καὶ λαβὼν τὸ 


a > S > , ey  } a 5 
g here and σῶμα ὅ ἸἸωσὴφ " ἐνετύλιξεν αὐτὸ σινδόνι καθαρᾷ, 6ο. καὶ έθηκεν 


XXiii. 53. 
John xx.7. 


> Yeh [ol ~ > ~ , é : ~ 
αὐτὸ ἐν τῷ καινῷ αὐτοῦ µνηµείῳ, ὃ " ἐλατόμησεν ἐν τῇ πέτρᾳ" καὶ 


HMM x¥. 46 προσκυλίσας λίθον µέγαν τῇ θύρᾳ τοῦ μνημείου, ἀπῆλθεν. O61. ἦν 


(Ex, xxi. 
33). 

i Mk. xi. 12. 2 on 
John i. 29. TOU τάφου. 
Acts x. 9 
al. 

j 2 Cor. vi. 


δὲ ἐκεῖ Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή, καὶ ἡ ἄλλη Μαρία, καθήµεναι ἀπέναντι 


62. THe δὲ !' ἐπαύριον, ῆτις ἐστὶ μετὰ τὴν παρασκευήν, συνήχθησαν 


8, 1 Tim, οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι πρὸς Πιλάτον, 63. λέγοντες, “ Κύριε, 


iv. I (adj.). 
2 John 7. 


1SQBL omit το cope (Tisch., W.H.). 


ἐμνήσθημεν ὅτι exetvos’s 4 πλάνος εἶπεν ἔτι Lov, Μετὰ τρεῖς ἡμέρας 


3 BD have εν before σινδονι (W.H. in brackets). 


His death”) ; from Arimathaea (Ramath- 
aim Zophim, 1 Sam. i. 1); the name 
¥oseph, and the relation to Jesus that of 
a disciple (ἐμαθήτευσε, which, if the 
correct reading, is an instance of the use 
of this verb‘in a neuter sense. C/. xiii. 52, 
xxviii. 19, Acts xiv. 21).—Ver. 58. 
προσελθὼν: from the cross Joseph re- 
turns, and approaches Pilate to beg the 
body of Jesus for burial. In the case of 
the crucified such a request was neces- 
sary, but was generally granted (“‘ Eorum 
in quos animadvertitur corpora non aliter 
sepeliuntur quam si fuerit petitum et 
permissum”’. Ulpian. de Cadav. punit. 
in Justinian, Corpus Fur. Civ. xlviii. 
24,1). The general practice was to leave 
the bodies to waste. The privilege of 
burial was sometimes granted for money. 
There is nothing to show that Pilate con- 
descended to such meanness, at least in the 
present instance, though Theophy. sug- 
gests that he ἀῑά.---ἐκέλευσεν ἀποδοθῆναι, 
he ordered it to be delivered.—Ver. 59. 
ἐνετύλιξεν (little used, found in Aristo- 
phanes), wrapped.—owSéve καθαρῷ, in 
clean, i.e., never before used linen.— 
σινδών is of uncertain derivation and 
varying sense, being applied to cloths of 
diverse material, but here generally 
understood as meaning linen cloth, 
wrapped in strips round the body as in 
the case of mummies in Egypt, the body 
being first washed (Acts ix. 37). As to 
this way of preparing dead bodies for 
burial we have no details in O. T. 
(Benzinger, p. 163).—Ver. 60. ἐν τῷ 
καινῷ αὐτοῦ µνηµείῳ, in his own new 
tomb, recently prepared for himself. 
This not brought out ἵπ parallels.— 
ἐλατόμησεν (λᾶς τέµνω): the aorist for 
the pluperfect, as in ver. 55; he had 
hewn out of the rock = ἐν τῇ πέτρᾳ, the 
article pointing to the custom of making 


+ 


sepulchres in τοε]ς.---λίθον µέγαν: the 
usual mode of shutting the door of the 
tomb; the Jews called the stone golal, 
the το]]ετ.---ἀπῆλθεν: the entombment 
over, Joseph went away; but the Dead 
One was not left alone.—Ver. 61. jv δὲ 
éxet, etc., but, in contrast to Joseph, there 
was there Mary, the woman of Magdala, 
also the other Mary, sitting in front of 
the tomb.—ragov here, as in xxiii. 27, 29, 
used of a place of burial, not of the act 
of burial. The word is peculiar to Mt. 
in the N. T. 

Vv. 62-66. Precautions against theft of 
the body ; peculiar to Mt., and among the 
less. certain elements of the Passion 
history, owing its origin and presence 
in this Gospel apparently to the exigen- 
cies of the primitive Christian apologetic 
against Jewish unbelief, which, as we 
gather from ver. 64, must have sought 
to invalidate the faith in the resurrection 
of Jesus by the hypothesis of theft 
accounting for an empty grave. The 
transactions here recorded effectually 
dispose of that hypothesis by making 
theft impossible. Is the story true, or 
must we, with Meyer, relegate it to the 
category of unhistorical legend? Meyer 
founds largely on the impossibility of 
Christ predicting so distinctly as is here 
implied, even to His own disciples, His 
resurrection. That means that the priests 
and Pharisees could have had no such 
solicitude as is ascribed to them. All 
turns on that. If they had such fears, 
so originating, it would be quite natural 
to take precautions against a trick. 1 
think it quite possible that even inde- 
pendently of the saying in chap. xii. 40, 
given as spoken ¢o Pharisees, it had some- 
how reached their ears that Jesus had 
predicted His Passion, and in speaking 
of it was wont to connect with it the idea 


59—66. 


ἐγείρομαι. 


τρίτης ἡμέρας: µήποτε ἐλθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


335 


64. κέλευσον οὖν * ἀσφαλισθῆναι τὸν τάφον ἕως Tijsk Acts xvi. 


1 ψυκτὸς 3 κλέψωσιν 


«αι x ” ~ [a 3 , ο 4 A - Αν ε 
αυτον, και ειπωσι τῷ λαῶ, Ηγέρθη ato των νγεκρων ᾽ και εσται η 


ἐσχάτη | πλάνη χείρων τῆς πρώτης.” 


“«Ἔχετε "' κουστωδίαν: ὑπάγετε, ἀσφαλίσασθε ὡς oidare.” 


65. Ἔφη δὲ δ αὐτοῖς ὁ Πιλάτος, | here only 


in Gospels, 
66. Οἱ frequent 
in Epp. 


δὲ πορευθέντες ἠσφαλίσαντο τὸν τάφον, σφραγίσαντες τὸν λίθον πι here and 


μετὰ τῆς κουστωδίας. 


in Ch. 
XKVil1. II, 


1398 omit αντον, found in CDL al. (W.H. place it in margin). 
2 yukros wanting in many uncials (Tisch., W.H. omit). 
3 BL and other uncials omit Se (Tisch., W.H., in margin). 


of rising again, and it was natural that at 
such a time they should not despise such 
reports. 

Ver. 62. τῇ ἐπαύριον, the next day, i.e., 
‘the Jewish Sabbath, curiously described 
as the day (ἤτις) μετὰ τὴν παρασκευήν, 
the more important day defined by refer- 
ence to the less important, suggesting 
that Mt. has his eye on Mk.’s narrative 
(xv. 42). So Weiss-Meyer.—Ver. 63. 
ἐκεῖνος: contemptuous reference, as to 
one not worthy to be named, and far 
off, a thing of the past removed for ever 
by death.—6é πλάνος: a wanderer in the 
first place, then derivatively, from the 
character of many wanderers, in N. T. a 
deceiver.—éyeipopat, present for future, 
expressing strong confidence.—Ver. 64. 
ἕωςτ.τρίτης ἡμέρας: the definite specifica- 
tion of time here and in ver. 63 may have 
been imported into the story in the course 
of the tradition.—H ἐσχάτη πλάνη, the 
last delusion = faith in the resurrection, 
belief in the Messiahship of Jesus being 
the first.—yetpwv, worse, not so much 
in character as in consequences, more 
serious.—Ver. 65. ἔχετε: probably im- 
perative, not indicative = have your watch, 
the ready assent of a man who thinks 
there is not likely to be much need for it, 
but has no objections to gratify their 
wish in a small matter. So most recent 
interpreters— Meyer, Weiss, Holtz., Weiz- 
sacker, Morison, Spk., Com., Alford. The 
Vulgate takes it as indicative = habetis, 
which Schanz follows. This rendering 
implies that Pilate wished them to be 
content with what they had already, 
either their own temple watch or soldiers 
already put at their disposal. Carr (Camb. 
N. T.) doubts the correctness of the 
modern interpretation on the ground that 
no clear example of the use of ἔχειν in 
“the sense of “to take’’ occurs in either 
classical or Hellenistic Greek.—xove- 
-twdtav, a cuard, a Latinism, a natural 


word for the Roman Pilate to use.— 
ὑπάγετε ἀσφαλίσασθε, the three verbs: 
ἔχ. ὑπάγ. ἀσφαλ., following each other 
without connecting particles form an 
asyndeton “ indicating impatience on the 
part of Pilate” (Camb. N. T.).—ds 
οἴδατε, as ye know how.—Ver. 66. ἦσ- 
φαλίσαντο is to be taken with the last 
clause-—peta τῆς κουστωδίας, which 
points to the main means of securing the 
tomb against plunder. The participial 
clause—ogpayioavtes τὸν AiPov—is a 
parenthesis pointing to an additional 
precaution, sealing the stone, with a 
thread over it and sealed to the tomb 
at either end. The worthy men did their 
best to prevent theft, and—the resur- 
rection | 

CHAPTER XXVIII. THE ReEsur- 
RECTION AND THE GREAT COMMISSION. 

Vv. I-10. The open grave (Mk. xvi. 
1-8, Lk. xxiv. 1-11).—Ver. 1. 6We ... . 
σαββάτων, a curious and puzzling note 
of time, inconsistent with itself if trans- 
lated “late on Sabbath, towards day- 
break on the first day of the week,” and 
on the assumption that the day is sup- 
posed to begin and end at sunset. That 
would give, as the time at which the events 
to be narrated happened, the atternoon 
of one day and the early morning of the 
next. Of course the two clauses are meant 
to coincide in meaning, and a way out 
of the difficulty must be sought. One is 
to take ὀψὲ as = post, after the Sabbath, 
or late in comparison with the Sabbath, 
σαββάτων in clause 1 being in effect a 
genitive of comparison. So Euthy. and 
Grotius, who take σαββ. as = the whole 
passover week, De Wette, Weizsiacker, 
etc. Another is to take ὀψὲ as = not later 
than, but late on, and to assume that the 
day is conceived to begin and end with 
sunrise according to the civil mode of 
reckoning. So Kypke, Meyer, Weiss, 
Morison. Authorities are divided as to 


336 


a Lk, xxii. 
54, vide 
notes 
there, 


τάφον. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΟΑΙΟΝ 


XXVIII. 1. “OWE δὲ σαββάτων, τῇ 
βάτων, ἦλθε Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή, καὶ ἡ ἄλλη Μαρία, θεωρῆσαι τὸν 
2. Καὶ ἰδού, σεισμὸς ἐγένετο µέγας' ἄγγελος γὰρ Κυρίου 


XXVIII. 


" ἐπιφωσκούση εἰς µίαν σαβ- 


καταβὰς ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, προσελθὼν 1 ἀπεκύλισε τὸν λίθον ἀπὸ τῆς θύρας, 


b here only καὶ ἐκάθητο ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ. 3. tv δὲ ἡ °idda αὐτοῦ ὡς ἀστραπή, 
in Ν 1 


no Ν.Ί. αμ 
(Gen.v.3). καὶ τὸ ἔνδυμα αὐτοῦ λευκὸν ὡσεὶ ὃ χιών. 


4. ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ φόβου 


3 a 3 , θ ς A 8 9 4 ε 13 , 
αὐτοῦ ἐσείσθησαν ot τηροῦντε καὶ ἐγένοντο" ὡσεὶ ὃ νεκροί. 


ς. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπε ταῖς γυναιξί, “Mi Φφοβεῖσθε 


ὑμεῖς: οἶδα γὰρ ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦν τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον [ητεῖτε. 
ἔστιν ὧδε' ἠγέρθη γάρ, καθὼς εἶπε. 


1 και before προσελθων in SBCL. 


6. οὐκ 
” 3 9 ή 5 
δεῦτε, ἴδετε τὸν τόπον ὅπου 


159ΒΤ omit απο της θυρας (so Tisch. and W.H.). 
3 SBD have as here, and with these LA in end of ver. 4. 


4 εγενηθησαν in ΝΒΟΡΙ, 33. 


Greek usage, Meyer and Weiss, e.g., con- 
tending that ὀψὲ always means lateness 
of the period specified, and still current. 
Holtzmann, H. C.,remarks that only from 
the second clause do we learn that by 
the first is not meant the evening of the 
Sabbath, but the end of the night follow- 
ing, conceived as still belonging to 
the Sabbath.—rq ἐπιφωσκούσῃ, supply 
ἡμέρᾳ or Spq.—eis µίαν. σ., towards day 
one of the week (Sabbath in first clause). 
---Άλθε, came, singular though more than 
one concerned, as in xxvii. 56,61. Mary 
of Magdala, evidently the heroine among 
the women.—@ewpjjcat τ. τ., to see the 
sepulchre ; mo word of anointing, that 
being excluded by the story of the watch. 
—Ver. 2. The particulars in this and the 
following two verses are peculiar to Mt.: 
first, an earthquake (σεισμὸς), as in xxvii. 
51; second, an angel descending from 
heaven ; third, the angel rolling away the 
stone; fourth, the.angel sitting on the 
stone as guard.—Ver. 3. ἰδέα (here only 
in Ν. T.; in Sept., Dan. i. 13, 15), the ap- 
pearance, aspect (of the countenance of 
the angel). Vide Trench, Syn., p. 262, on 
µορφή, σχῆμα, ἰδέα.--ὡς ἀστραπὴ (xxiv. 
27), as lightning—brilliant, ἀαζζ]ηρ.---- 
τὸ ἔνδυμα α., his raiment as distinct from 
his face—ds χιών, white as snow (cf. Mt. 
xvii. 2).—Ver. 4. ὡς νεκροί: the keepers, 
through fear of the angel, were shaken as 
by an earthquake, and became as dead 
men—stupefied, helpless, totally incapaci- 
tated for action by way of preventing 
what is assumed, though not directly 
stated, to have happened. The resur- 
rection is not described. 

Vv. 5-7. The angel speaks to the 


women.—ph Φοβεῖσθε tpets, fear not 
ye, with tacit reference to the guards.— 
οἶδα γὰρ: γὰρ gives a reason for the 
soothing tone of the address. The 
angel recognises them as friends of the 
Crucified.—Ver. 6. οὐκ ἔστιν, etc.: with 
what sublime simplicity and brevity is 
the amazing story told! ‘‘ Versus hic 
incisa habet perquam apta” (Beng.). The 
last clause is better without the epithet 
6 κύριος, more in keeping with the rest. 
Bengel calls it gloriosa appellatio, but, 
as Meyer remarks, just on that account 
it was more liable to be added than 
omitted.—Ver. 7. ταχὺ πορευθεῖσαι: 
introducing ‘quite in his own (the 
evangelist’s) manner of expression ” 
(Weiss) the command of the angel = 
go quickly and tell, etc.—mpodye: pre- 
sent; He is even now going before you 
into Galilee; in accordance with the pre- 
diction in xxvi. 32 the risen Shepherd is 
on His way to the pre-appointed rendez- 
νους.--ὄψεσθε, there shall ye see Him, 
and be able to satisfy yourselves that He 
is indeed risen. With this word ends 
the message to the disciples.—i8od εἶπον 
ὑμῖν, behold I said it to you = note what 
I say, and see if it do not come true. 
Mark has καθὼς εἶπεν ὑμῖν = as He said 
to you, referring to the promise of Jesus, 
and forming part of the message to the 
disciples. 

Vv. 8-10. Appearance of Fesus to the 
women on the way to deliver their 
message.— Ver. 8. ἀπελθοῦσαι: the 
reading of T. R. (ἐξελθ.) implies that they 
had been within the tomb, of which no 
mention is made in Matthew. They 
went away from, not out of, the tomb. -- 


κ---το. 


ἔκειτο ὁ Κύριος.ὶ 


3 a ο > [ή 
αὐτοῦ, ὅτι 

3 i 
TadtNatavy: ἐκεῖ αὐτὸν ὄψεσθε. tdod, 


6 ~ . κκ σι A, A , ετὰ 
ουσαι “ ταχυ απο TOU μνημειου μ. 


ἕδραμον ἀπαγγεῖλαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ. 


> - - - > - 8 QA 
ἀπαγγεῖλαι τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ," καὶ 

Lal 35 
αὐταῖς, λέγων, “ Χαίρετε. 


τοὺς πόδας, καὶ προσεκύνησαν αὐτῶ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


337 


7. καὶ ταχὺ πορευθεῖσαι εἴπατε τοῖς μαθηταῖς 


ἠγέρθη ἀπὸ τῶν νεκρῶν: καὶ ἰδού, προάγει ὑμᾶς ets τὴν 


εἶπον ὑμῖν. 8. Καὶ ἐξελ- 
φόβου καὶ χαρᾶς μεγάλης, 
9. ds δὲ ἐπορεύοντο 


ἰδού, 64 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπήντησεν 5 


Αἱ δὲ προσελθοῦσαι ἐκράτησαν αὐτοῦ 


10. τότε λέγει αὐταῖς 6 


᾽νησοῦς: “Mi φοβεῖσθε: ὑπάγετε, ἀπαγγείλατε τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς µου, 


ἵνα ἀπέλθωσιν eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, κἀκεῖ 


µε ὄψονται.” 


1 ΣΜΦΒ 33 omit ο κυριος (W.H. relegate to margin). 
2 απελθουσαι in BCL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 From ως δ. επορ. to αντον is omitted in BD 33, 69 and many versions, and 


left out by modern editors. 
(avTov—avTov). 


ΑΝΑΒΟΔ omit 0; found in DL. 


ἀπὸ τ. µν., depending on ἀπελθοῦσαι, in 
Mark on ἔφυγον.- peta φόβου καὶ χαρᾶς 
μεγάλης, with fear and great joy. This 
union of apparently opposite emotions is 
true to human nature. All powerful 
tides of gladness cause nervous thrills 
that feel like fear and trembling. Cf. 
Isaiah lx. 5 and Phil. ii. 12. The fear 
and ον ορ St. Paul speaks of are the 
result of an exhilarating consciousness 
of having a great solemn work in hand 
—a race to run, a prize to win.—Ver, ο. 
καὶ ἰδοὺ, and behold, another surprise 
(ver. 2). They are on the way to tell 
the disciples that they are to be favoured 
with a meeting in Galilee, and lo! they 
are themselves privileged to meet the 
risen Όπε.--- ὑπήντησεν, cf. chap. viii. 
34, Χχν. I, 6.---ἐκράτησαν, etc., they took 
hold of His feet and cast themselves 
before Him; the gesture befitting the 
circumstances, an unlooked-for meeting 
with one who has been crucified and 
whose aspect is greatly changed. Im- 
possible to resume the old familiar 
relations as if nothing had happened.— 
Ver. το. μὴ doBetobe: kindly in word 
and tone, meant to remove the embarrass- 
ment visible in their manner.—imayere, 
ἀπαγγείλατε, another asyndeton as in 
χχν]. 65. The instructions to the women 
simply repeat, in much the same words, 
those given by the angel (ver. 7f, with the 
exception that the disciples are spoken of 
by the kindly name of *‘ brethren ”.. 

The similarity of vv. 9, 10 to John xx. 
14-18 has been remarked on (vide Weiss, 
Meyer, on ver. 9). It has been lately 


The passage may have fallen out by similar ending 


° SBC have υπηντησεν. 


commented on in connection with the 
theory of a ‘‘four-gospel Canon”’ pre- 
pared by the Presbyters of Asia Minor 
in the beginning of the second cen- 
tury. Vide Der Schluss des Marcus-Ev- 
angeliums der Vier-Evangelien-Kanon 
und die Kleinasiatischen Presbyter, by 
Dr. Paul Rohrbach. Rohrbach’s idea is 
that when this Canon was prepared the 
editors altered more or less the state- 
ments of the Synoptists as to the visions 
of the Risen Christ so as to bring them 
somewhat into harmony with those of 
the fourth Gospel. For this purpose 
Mark’s original ending was cancelled 
and the present one, vv. 9-20, put in its 
place. The editorial procedure in the 
case of Matthew consisted in inserting 
vv. 9, 10 in the narrative, thus prowiding 
for at least one vision in Jerusalem, and 
making room for more, and so cancelling 
the impression otherwise produced that 
Jesus was seen only in Galilee. In 
support of the view that vv. 9, Io are 
an editorial addition at a later date 
Rohrbach adduces the fact that the 
narrative has an appearance of con- 
tinuity when they are omitted, and also 
that the instructions of Jesus to the 
women are a mere echo of those given 
by the angel. 

Vv.11-15. The guards and the priests. 
—Ver. 11. πορενομένων δὲ a., while the 
women go on their errand, the guards, 
crestfallen, play their poor part. Some 
of them (τινὲς) go into the city and 
report in their own way to the priests all 
that has happened.—Ver. 12. ἀργύρια: 


22 


438 


ΚΑΤΑ MATOAION 


XXVIII. 


I1. Πορευοµένων δὲ αὐτῶν, ἰδού, τινὲς τῆς κουστωδίας ἐλθόντες 


εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἀπήγγειλαν τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσιν ἅπαντα τὰ γενόμενα. 


12. καὶ συναχθέντες μετὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, συμβούλιόν τε λαβόντες 


ἀργύρια ἱκανὰ ἔδωκαν τοῖς στρατιώταις, 13. λέγοντες, 
“Ore of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ νυκτὸς ἐλθόντες ἔκλεψαν 
µένων, 14. καὶ ἐὰν ἀκουσθῇ τοῦτο ἐπὶ 
.. > 2 κ a 8 / / 3» 

c 1 Cor. vii. αὐτόν, καὶ ὑμᾶς  ἀμερίμνους ποιήσοµεν. 
ἀργύρια ἐποίησαν ὁ ἐδιδάχθησαν. 
παρὰ Ἰουδαίοις pj. τῆς σήμερον." 


32 (Wis- 
dom vi. 
16; vii. 23). 


-* 
“ "lrare, 


“τὸν ἡμῶν κοιµω- 
1 τοῦ ἡγεμόνος, ἡμεῖς πείσοµεν 
15. Οἱ δὲ λαβόντες τὰ 


καὶ διεφημίσθη ὃ ὁ λόγος οὗτος 


τ6. Οἱ δὲ ἕνδεκα μαθηταὶ ἐπορεύθησαν εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, εἲς τὸ 


1 BD have υπο instead of επι (W.H. in margin), probably because ὐὔκουσθη was 


understood in the usual sense. 
2 SOB omit αυτον. 


Vide below. 
3 So in ABCDL (W.H. brackets) ; εφηµ. in HA 33 (Tisch.). 


4 BDL vulg. add npepas (W.H. in brackets), which just because it is unusual is 
probably genuine (Tisch. omits after RATA, etc.). 


the holy men thoroughly understand the 
power of money; silver pieces, shekels 
are meant.—ixava probably means here 
a considerable number, not a number 
sufficient to bribe the soldiers (Meyer 
and Weiss). They gave with a free 
hand. This sense of ixavés is frequent 
in the Ν. Τ. Vide, e.g., Mk. x. 46, of the 
crowd following Jesus at Jericho, and 
Acts xxvii. g (of time).—Ver. 13. εἴπατε, 
introducing the lie they put into the 
mouths of the soldiers. The report to 
be set abroad assumes that there is a 
fact to be explained, the disappearance 
of the body. And it is implied that the 
statement to be given out as to that was 
known by the soldiers to be false: {.ε., 
they were perfectly aware that they had 
not fallen asleep at their post and that 
no theft had taken place. The lie for 
which the priests paid so much money 
is suicidal; one half destroys the other. 
Sleeping sentinels could not know what 
happened.—Ver. 14. ἐὰν ἀκουσθῇ, 
either: if this come to the ears of, etc., 
as in A. V., or: if this come toa hearing, 
a trial, before, etc., as in R. V. margin. 
The latter is preferred by many modern 
commentators. The reading ἐπὶ τ. ἡ. 
suits the second sense best. Cf. 1 Cor. 
vi. 1, 1 Tim. v. το.--ἡμεῖς, emphatic, 
implying a great idea of their influence, 
on their part.—wetoopev, will persuade 
him; how not said, money concéivably 
in their minds. Kypke renders: will 
appease; so also Loesner (‘‘aliquem 
pacare vel precibus vel donis”), citing 
examples from Philo. The ordinary 
punishment for falling asleep on the 
watch was death. Could soldiers be 


persuaded by any amount of money to 
run such arisk? Of course they might 
take the money and go away laughing 
at the donors, meaning to tell their 
general the truth. Could the priests 
expect anything else? If not, could 
they propose the project seriously? 
The story has its difficulties.—dapepip- 
vous, free from grounds of anxiety; 
guaranteed against all possible un- 
pleasant consequences. Bengel’s com- 
ment on this verse is: ‘‘ Quam laboriosum 
bellum mendacii contra veritatem !”— 
Ver. 15. This verse states that the 
soldiers did as instructed, so originating 
a theft theory, which, according to our 
evangelist, was current in his day-in 
Jewish circles at the time he wrote. 
Vv. 16-20. The meeting in Galtlee, 
peculiar to Mt.—Ver. 16. of δὲ évdexa 
µ. the eleven, not merely to discount 
Judas, but to indicate that what follows 
concerns the well-known Twelve (minus 
one), the future Apostles of the faith.— 
elg τὸ ὄρος, to the mountain, a more 
specific indication of the locality than any 
previously reported. Conjectures have 
been made as to the mountain meant, 
é.g., that on which the hill teaching was 
communicated. An interesting suggestion 
but unverifiable-—ot, an adverb = ubi, 
used pregnantly so as to include quo: 
whither Jesus had bid them go, and 
where He wished them to remain.— 
ἑτάξατο : if this points to an instruction 
given expressly by Jesus, it is strange 
that the evangelist has not recorded it. 
It rather seems to presuppose an under- 
standing based on experiences of the 
Galilean ministry as to the rendezvous. 


1I—I9Q. 


ὄρος οὗ ἐτάξατο αὐτοῖς 6 Ιησοῦς. 
ψησαν αὐτῷ]: ot δὲ ἐδίστασαν. 


καὶ 4 ἐπὶ 7 γῆς. 


1 NBD 33 it. omit aura. 
Σεπι γης in NAA al. (Tisch.). 
δουν in BAM, verss. (W.H.). 


The meeting place would be some 
familiar haunt, recalling many past asso- 
ciations and incidents, only imperfectly 
recorded in the Gospels. If there was 
such a retreat among the mountains 
often resorted to, it would doubtless be 
the scene of the hill teaching, as well as 
of other unrecorded disciple experiences. 
The disciples would need πο express 
direction to go there. Instinct would 
guide them.—Ver. 17. A very meagre 
statement, the whole interest of the 
evangelist being absorbed by the words 
spoken by Ἱ]εδις.- προσεκύνησαν as in 
ver. 9, but the men less demonstrative 
than the women ; no mention of seizing 
Jesus by the feet.—oi δὲ ἐδίστασαν: but 
some doubted (cf. xiv. 31, in reference to 
Peter). This clause seems to qualify 
and limit the previous statement as to 
the worshipping, giving this sense: they 
worshipped, z.¢., the most of them, for 
some were in doubt. So Meyer, who 
cites in support Klotz, Ad Devar, whose 
statement is to the effect that in passages 
of this kind containing a clause with δὲ 
without a pév preceding, a universal 
affirmation is first made and then a 
division follows, which shows that a uni- 
versal affirmation was not really in- 
tended (p. 358). Various methods have 
been adopted to get rid of the unwel- 
come conclusion that some of the eleven 
did not do homage, e¢g., by taking 
ἐδίστασαν as a pluperfect (Fritzsche, 
Grotius), or by finding the doubters 
among the 500 mentioned by St. Paul 
(x Cor. xv. 6), or even by altering the 
text οἱ δὲ into οὐδέ (Beza). The whole 
narrative is so brief and vague as to lend 
support to the hypothesis that in the 
appearance of Jesus here recorded we 
have not one particular occurrence, 
but a general picture of the Christo- 
phanies, in which mingled conflicting 
feelings of reverent recognition and hesi- 
tation as to the identity of the person 
played their part. Such is the view 
ef Keil, Steinmeyer, and Holtzmann 
{H, C.). 


EYATTEAION 


17. 
18. καὶ προσελθὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς d Ch, vi. 10; 
ἐλάλησεν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, '΄ Ἐδόθη pot πᾶσα ἐξουσία “ἐν οὐρανῷ 
1g. πορευθέντες οὖν ® 


339 


καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτόν, προσεκύ- 


Xvi. 19; 
xviii. 18 
(similar 
phrases). 


padntevcate πάντα τὰ ἔθνη/ 


επι της γης in BD (W.H in brackets), 
$A and other uncials omit (Tisch.). 


Vv. 18-20. The final commission.— 
Ver. 18. προσελθὼν, approaching; the 
speech of Jesus is majestic, but His bear- 
ing is friendly, meant to set them free 
from doubt and fear.—éAddnoe: this 
may seem a word not sufficiently digni- 
fied for the communication made, But 
it is often used, especially in Hebrews, 
in reference to divine revelations (vide, 
e.g., Chap. i. 1).---ἐδόθη pot, there was 
given to me; the aorist as in xi. 27, the 
thought of which earlier text this utter- 
ance reiterates and amplifies. The refer- 
ence may be to the resurrection, and the 
meaning that that event ipso facto placed 
Jesus in a position of power. Cf. Rom. 
i, 4.--πᾶσα ἐξουσία, every form of 
authority ; command of all means neces- 
sary for the advancement of the King- 
dom of God.—év οὐρανῷ: this points to 
session on His celestial throne at the 
right hand of God. Jesus speaks as one 
already in heaven. There is no account 
of the ascension in Mt. It is conceived 
as involved in the resurrection. —éi γῆς : 
upon earth, the whole earth. The two 
phrases together point to a universal 
cosmic dominion. But so far as earth 
is concerned, the dominion is only a 
matter of right or theory, a problem to 
be worked out. Hence what follows.— 
Ver. 19. Ἠπορευθέντες οὖν: the οὖν 
omitted in many texts aptly expresses 
the connection. The commission to the 
Apostles arises out of the power claimed 
= all power has been given to me on 
earth, go ye therefore, and make the 
power a τεα]1έγ.---μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ 
ἔθνη: make disciples (act., cf. at xxvii. 
57) of all the nations (cf. x. 5, “go not 
into the way of the Gentiles ”’”).—Bamrio- 
αντες: baptism the condition of disciple- 
ship = make disciples by baptising; the 
sole condition, circumcision, and every- 
thing particularistic or Judaistic tacitly 
negatived. Christian baptism referred 
to here only in this Gospel.—aitois 
refers to ἔθνη, a constr. ad sensum, as in 
Acts xv. 17; Rom. ii. 14. In the 
anabaptist controversy αὐτοὺς was taken 


340 


e Acts viii. 
16; Xix.5. α 
Rom. vi. Tou 
3 


KATA ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 


XXVIII. 20. 


βαπτίζοντες] αὐτοὺς "εἰς τὸ "ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ 
a "Ἁγίου Πνεύματος, 20. διδάσκοντες αὐτοὺς *rypeiv πάντα ὅσα 
λα Τ. α ατα A ε ~ > 3 ε 

i.13; x.2. ἐνετειλάμην ὑμῖν: καὶ ἰδού, ἐγὼ pel” ὑμῶν εἰμι πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας 


᾽Αμήν."Σ 


Gal. fii. 27 - ri a 

(al with ἕως τῆς © συντελείας τοῦ © αἰῶνος. 
εις an 

aceus.). f vide at Ch. xix. 17. g vide at Ch. xiii. 39. 


1 Bawruravres in BD (W.H. margin). 


βαπτιζοντες (T.R., W.H., text). The 


reading of Τ.Ε. (ΝΔΣ) is probably a conformation to διδασκοντες in next clause. 
2 The Αµην is not found in SABD 1, 33, and is left out by modern editors. 


by the opponents of infant baptism as 
referring to μαθητὰς in μαθητεύσατε, 
and the verb was held to mean ‘teach ”. 
For some references to this extinct con- 
troversy vide Wetstein, ad loc., and Her- 
mann’s Viger, p. 61.—eis τὸ ὄνομα, into 
the name, 1.6., as confessing the name 
which embodies the essence of the 
Christian creed.—rot πατρὸς, etc.: it is 
the name not of one but of three, form- 
ing a baptismal Trinity—Father, Son, 
and Holy Ghost. It is not said into the 
names of, etc., nor into the name of the 
Father, and the name of the Son, and 
the name of the Holy Ghost.—Hence 
might be deduced the idea ofa Trinity 
constituting at the same time a Divine 
Unity. But this would probably be 
reading more into the words han was 
intended.—Ver. 20. διδάσκοντες a., 
teaching them, present participle, im- 
plying that Christian instruction is to be 
a continuous process, not subordinate to 
and preparing for baptism, but con- 
tinuing after baptism with a view to 
enabling disciples to walk worthily of 
their vocation.—rmpetv : the teaching is 
with a view not to gnosis but to practice ; 
the aim not orthodox opinion but right 
Ἠνίης.-- πάντα ὅσα ἐνετειλάμην ἡμῖν: 
the materials of instruction are to be 
Christ’s own teaching. This points to 
the desirableness for the Church’s use of 
an oral or written tradition of Christ’s 
words: these to be the rule of faith and 
practice.—kat ἰδοὺ, introducing an im- 
portant promise to the missionaries of 
the new universal religion to keep them 
in courage and good hope amid all diffi- 
culties.—éy@ ped’ ὑμῶν, J the Risen, 
Exalted, All-powerful One, with you my 
apostles and representatives engaged in 
the heroic task of propagating the faith.— 
εἰμὶ, am, not will be, conveying the feel- 
ing of certainty, but also spoken from 
the eternal point of view, sub specie 
aeternitatis, for which distinctions of here 
and there, now and then, do not exist. 


Cf. John viii. 58, ‘‘ before Abraham was 
Iam”. Inthe Fourth Gospel the cate- 
gories of the Absolute and the Eternal 
dominate throughout. —mwdoas τὰς 
Ἠμέρας, all the days, of which, it is 
implied, there may be many; the vista of 
the future is lengthening.—éws τῆς 
συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος, until the close of 
the current age, when He is to come 
again; an event, however, not indispens- 
able for the comfort of men who are to 
enjoy an uninterrupted spiritual presence. 
This great final word of Jesus is 
worthy of the Speaker and of the 
situation. Perhaps it is not to be taken 
as an exact report of what Jesus said to 
His disciples at a certain time and place. 
In it the real and the ideal seem to be 
blended ; what Jesus said there and 
then with what the Church of the 
apostolic age had gradually come to 
regard as the will of their Risen Lord, 
with growing clearness as the years 
advanced, with perfect clearness after 
Israel’s crisis had come. We find here 
(1) a cosmic significance assigned to 
Christ (all power in heaven and on 
earth); (2) an absolutely universal 
destination of the Gospel; (3) baptism 
as the rite of admission to discipleship ; 
(4) a rudimentary baptismal Trinity ; (5) 
a spiritual presence of Christ similar to 
that spoken of in the Fourth Gospel, 
To this measure of Christian enlighten- 
ment the Apostolic Church, as repre- 
sented by our evangelist, had attained 
when he wrote his Gospel, probably 
after the destruction of Jerusalem. 
Therein is summed up the Church’s 
confession of faith conceived as uttered 
by the lips of the Risen One. ‘“ Ex- 
pressly not as words of Jesus walking 
on the earth, but as words of Him who 
appeared from heaven, the evangelist 
here presents in summary form what the 
Christian community had come to re- 
cognise as the will and the promise of 
their exalted Lord” (Weiss-Meyer). 


TO ΚΑΤΑ MAPKON 


ATION ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ. 


I. τ. "APXH rod εὐαγγελίου “Inood Χριστοῦ, υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ 1: 
2. ὡς” γέγραπται ἐν τοῖς προφήταις,ὃ “Ιδού, ἐγὼέ ἀποστέλλω 
τὸ» ἄγγελόν µου πρὸ προσώπου σου, ὃς κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν 


1 The ΕἶΕΙε υιον +. ©. is wanting in Ν απά omitted by Tisch. and W.H. (in text). 


Most uncials and many verss. have it. 
ing. BDL omit tov. 


2 kaQws in SQBLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


Its omission is probably due to similar end- 


3 For ev τοις π. in many uncials BDLA 33, Lat. and Syr. verss., have εν τω 


The T.R. is a gram. cor. 


ἰσαια Tw π. 


* εγω is in ΔΝΤ ΔΣ (Tisch.), but wanting in BD (W.H.). 


CuapTteR I. ΤΗΕ Baptist. THE 
BAPTISM AND TEMPTATION OF JESUS. 
BEGINNINGS OF THE GALILEAN MINIS- 
TRY.—Vv. 1-8. The appearance and 
ministry of the Baptist (Mt. iii. 1-12, 
Lk. iii. 1-18).—Ver. 1. ἀρχὴ, etc.: This 
verse may best be taken as the super- 
scription of the whole Gospel, and as 
meaning: Here begins the Gospel con- 
cerning Jesus Christ the Son of God. 
So viewed it should be made to stand 
apart, ver. 2 beginning a new section 
as in the Greek Testament of W. and 
H. If we connect ver. x closely with 
vv. 2-4 it will contain the statement that 
the Gospel of Jesus Christ began with 
the ministry of the Baptist. On this 
view the connection of the sentences 
may be taken in two ways: either ver. 1 
may be joined closely to ver. 2, the 
resulting sense being: the beginning of 
the Gospel (was) as it is written = was 
in accordance with the prophetic oracle 
predicting the introduction of Messiah 
by a forerunner, the story of the Baptist 
then following as the fulfilment of the 
prophecy; or vv. 2, 3 may be bracketed 
as a parenthesis, and νετ. 1 connected 
with ver. 4, yielding this sense: the 
beginning of the Gospel was or became 
ἐγένετο) John the Baptist. All three 


ways give a perfectly good meaning. 
In favour of the first view is the absence 
of the article before ἀρχὴ - against it 
has been alleged (Holtzmann, H. C.) 
that καθὼς in Matthew and Mark always 
connects with what goes before, never 
introduces a protasis as in Lk. vi. 31.— 
τοῦ εὐαγγελίου “I. X., the good news 
concerning, not preached by, Ἰ. X. being 
genitive objective; not quite the evangelic 
record, but on its way to that final mean- 
ing οξεὐαγγέλιον. ‘Christ’? here appears 
as a proper name, as in Mt. i. 1.—viod Τ. 
Θεοῦ: this title, even if omitted, is implicit 
in the title Christ, but it is every way 
likely to have formed a part of the 
original text, as indicating the point of 
view in which Jesus is to be presented 
to readers of the Gospel. Without 
assuming any acquaintance on the part 
of the evangelist with the Gospel of the 
Infancy in Matthew and Luke we may 
say that this title takes the place of the 
opening chaptersin these Gospels. It is 
all that Mark offers to gratify the curiosity 
to which these chapters owe their origin. 
Who is this remarkable Personage of 
whom you write? He is “the Son of 
God”. How much that was meant to 
convey cannot be certainly: determined. 
Vv. 2-4. καθὼς introduces a prophetic 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ i 


σου ἔμπροσθέν σου. 3. Φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω, ΄ Ἔτοιμά- 


gate τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου: εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους αὐτοῦ. 


- 35 25 


4. Ἐγένετο Ἰωάννης βαπτίζων ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, Kai? κηρύσσων 


, , > ” ~ 
Βάπτισμα µετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. 


5. καὶ ἐξεπορεύετο 


πρὸς αὐτὸν πᾶσα ἡ Ιουδαία χώρα, καὶ οἱ Ἱεροσολυμῖται: καὶ 


ἐβαπτίζοντο πάντες * ἐν τῷ ᾿Ιορδάνῃ ποταμῷ bn’ αὐτοῦ, ἐξομολογού- 


µενοι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 


6. ἦν δὲ ὃ Ἰωάννης 6 ἐνδεδυμένος τρίχας 


καµήλου, καὶ ζώνην δερµατίνην περὶ τὴν ὀσφὺν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐσθίων Ἰ 


ἀκρίδας καὶ µέλι ἄγριον. 


a John viii. 


7. Kat ἐκήρυσσε, λέγων, “"Epxetar ὁ 


6, 8 ἰσχυρότερός µου ὀπίσω µου, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς “Kipas λῦσαι τὸν 


7 O- 


1 εμπροσθεν σου omitted in SBDL al. 


It is probably from Mt. xi. ro. 


Ἔο before βαπτιζων in $BLA (Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 
* «at in S$DL al. (Tisch.), but wanting in B 33 al. (W.H. omit). 


4 παντες before και εβαπ. in NBDLA. 


6 και ην in SBL 33, and e before I. in BLE. 


citation as protasis to the historical 
statement about John in ver. 4 =in 
accordance with, etc., John appeared. 
The prophetic reference and the historical 
statement are given in inverse order in 
Matthew.—év τῷ Ἠσαίᾳ, in Isaiah, the 
actual quotation being from Isaiah and 
Malachi (ver. 2) conjointly. An in- 
accuracy doubtless, but not through an 
error of memory (Meyer and Weiss), but 
through indifference to greater exact- 
ness, the quotation from Isaiah being 
what chiefly occupied the mind. It is 
something analogous to attraction in 
grammar. It is Mark’s only prophetic 
citation on his own account.—i8ov begins 
the quotation from Mal. iii. 1, given as in 
Mt. xi. 1ο, with µου, after προσώπου 
and ὁδόν, changed into oov.—Ver. 3. 
Quotation from Is. xl. 3 as in Mt. ili. 
3.—Ver. 4. ἐγένετο “I.: in accordance 
with, and in fulfilment of, these prophetic 
anticipations, appeared Fohn.—é βαπτί- 
twv = the Baptist (substantive participle), 
that the function by which he was best 
known. — els ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν: this 
clause (in Luke, not in Matthew) may 
plausibly be represented as a Christianised 
version of John’s baptism (Weiss), but 
of course John’s preaching and baptism 
implied that if men really repented they 
would be forgiven (Holtz., H. C.). 

Vv. 5-8. Ver. 5 describes the wide- 
spread character of the movement much 
as in Mt., only that Judaea comes 
before Jerusalem, and the district of the 
Jordan is not mentioned.—Ver. 6 
describes John’s way of life as in Mt., 


5 wr αντου before εν τω |. in BBL 33. 
Τεσθων in BLA 33. 


ἐνδεδυμένος standing for εἶχεν τὸ ἔνδυμα, 
and ἔσθων for η τροφὴ ἠἦν.--Ψετ. 7. καὶ 
ἐκήρυσσεν, introducing a special and 
very important part of his kerygma: 
inter alia he kept saying—anxious to 
prevent men from forming a wrong im- 
pression of his position. This is what 
makes mention of his ministry relevant 
in the evangelic record.—Atoat τὸν 
ἵμάντα, to loose the latchet of, instead 
of τὰ ὑποδ. βαστάσαι; a stronger ex- 
pression of subordination, practically the 
same idea,—Ver. 8. πνεύματι ἁγίῳ: 
καὶ πυρί omitted, whereby the view pre- 
sented of Messiah’s function becomes 
less judicial, more Christian. Mt.’s 
account here is truer to John’s con- 
ception of the Messiah. Mk.’s was pro- 
bably influenced by the destination of 
his Gospel for Gentile readers. 

Vv. g-11. The baptism of F¥esus (Mt. 
iii. 13-17; Lk. iii. 21, 22).—Ver. 9. ἐν 
ἐκείναις τ. ἡ. = in those days; an in- 
definite note of time = while John was 
carrying on his ministry of preaching 
and baptising.—aAGev “Ingots, came 
Jesus, with what feelings, as compared 
with Pharisees and Sadducees, vide notes 
on Μι.--ἀπὸ Naf. 7. Γαλ., from Nazareth, 
presumably His home; of Galilee, to 
define the part of the country for out- 
siders; only Galilee mentioned in Mt.— 
eis τὸν Ἰ.: ἐν with dative in ver. 5. The 
expression is pregnant, the idea of 
descending into the river being latent in 
εἰς.--ὑπὸ Ἰωάν., by John; no hesitation 
indicated ; cf. remarks on three synoptical 
narratives on this point in Mt. It does 


. 


3-5. 


Σἵμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ. 


ὕδατι: αὐτὸς δὲ βαπτίσει ὑμᾶς ev? Πνεύματι “Ayiw.” 
ἐγένετο ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις, ἦλθεν ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπὸ Ναζαρὲτ τῆς 
Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἐβαπτίσθη ὑπὸ Ιωάννου eis τὸν ᾿Ιορδάνην." 
εὐθέως ὅ ἀναβαίνων ἀπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος, εἶδε σχιζοµένους τοὺς οὐρανούς, 
καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα ὡσεὶ ὃ περιστερὰν καταβαῖνον ἐπ᾽ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


S43 


8. ἐγὼ μὲν] ἐβάπτισα ὑμᾶς év?b here. Lk. 


8 iii. 16. 
Ο. Και John AEC oF 


(Acts xxii. 
25 of 
. thongs 
1Ο. καὶ το bind 
prisoners), 


> , x 
QuTOv’ 11. και 


φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν, ''Σὺ ef ὁ vids µου 6 ἀγαπητός, ἐν 


ᾧ ὃ εὐδόκησα.” 
έρηµον. 


13. καὶ ἦν exer? ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω ἡμέρας τεσσαράκοντα,ὸ 


12. Kat εὐθὺς τὸ Πνεῦμα αὐτὸν ' ἐκβάλλει εἰς τὴν cof. in Mt. 


1x. 38. 
John x. 4. 


΄ ς 3 a a ας Λ ~ ή Ν ς 
πειραζόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ Σατανᾶ, καὶ ἦν μετὰ τῶν θηρίων - καὶ οἱ 


ἄγγελοι διηκόνουν αὐτῷ. 


1 NBL 33, 69 verss. omit µεν, doubtless a gram. cor. to answer to δε. 
3 The first ev not in ὃν ΒΔ cursives, the second not in BL (Tisch. omits first, W.H. 


both), 
* Ὦ omits και (W.H., in margin). 


5 The best texts have ευθυς uniformly in Mk. 


7 ets αυτον in BD 13, 60. 


* es τον |. υπο lw. in NBDL 33, 69 al. 
5 ws in SABDLA. 
§ σον in SBBLAX (Tisch., W.H.). 


® SABDL 33 omit εκει, meant originally perhaps as a substitute for ev τη ερηµω 


following. 
10 τεσσ. ημερας in KIBL 33. 


not even appear whether John had any 
suspicion that the visitor from Nazareth 
was 6 ἰσχυρότερος, of whom he had 
spoken. The manner in which the bap- 
tism of Jesus is reported is the first in- 
stance of the realism of this Gospel, 
facts about Jesus stated in a naked 
manner as compared, e.g., with Lk., 
who is influenced by religious decorum. 
—Ver. 10. ev@ds, straightway, a 
favourite. word of Mk.’s, to be taken 
with cide = as soon as He had ascended, 
etc., He saw. For similar usage in 
reference to εἶτα vide Hermann, Viger, 
P- 772.--σχιζοµένους, being rent asunder, 
a sudden event; a stronger word than 
that used in Mt. and Lk. (ἀνεῴχθησαν 
--Ώναι).. The subject of εἶδε is Jesus.— 
εἰς αὐτόν: this reading suggests the 
idea of a descent not merely upon (ἐπὶ) 
but into Him, as if to take up its abode; 
henceforth the immanent spirit of Jesus. 

Vv. 12,13. The temptation (Mt. iv. 
1-11; Lk. iv. 1-13).—Ver. 12. ἐκβάλλει: 
historic present, much used in Mk. with 
lively effect ; introduces a new situation. 
The first thing the Spirit does (εὐθὺς) is 
to dvive Jesus into the wilderness, the 
expression not implying reluctance of 
Jesus to go into so wild a place (Weiss), 
but intense preoccupation of mind. 
Allowing for the weakening of the sense 


in Hellenistic usage (H. C.), it is a very 
strong word, and a second instance of 
Mk.’s realism: Jesus thrust out into the 
inhospitable desert by force of thought. 
De Wette says that the ethical signifi- 
cance of the temptation is lost in Mk.’s 
meagre narrative, and that it becomes a 
mere marvellous adventure. I demur to 
this. The one word ἐκβάλλει tells the 
whole story, speaks as far as may be the 
unspeakable. Mt. and Lk. have tried to 
tell us what happened, but have they 
given us more than a dim shadow of the 
truth ?—Ver. 13. πειραζόμενος, being 
tempted, presumably the whole time; 
doubtless the real truth. Two powers at 
work all through, the Spirit of God and 
the spirit of εν]].---ἦν μετὰ τ. θηρ.: not 
merely pictorial or intended to hint 
danger; meant rather to indicate the un- 
inhabited nature of the place ; no supplies 
obtainable there, hunger therefore a part 
of the experience.—oi ἄγγελοι: angels 
as opposed, not to devils (Schanz), but to 
human beings, of whom there were 
ΠΟΠΕ.---διηκόνουν, ministered ; in what 
way not said, but implying exhaustion. 
These few touches of Mk. suggest a 
vivid picture of a spiritual crisis: intense 
preoccupation, instinctive retreat into 
congenial grim solitudes, temptation, 
struggle, fierce and protracted, issuing 


344 


KATA MAPKON 1. 


14. ΜΕΤΑ δὲ 1 τὸ παραδοθῆναι τὸν ἸἸωάννην, ἦλθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς 

τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, κηρύσσων τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας 3 τοῦ Θεοῦ, 

16. καὶ λέγων,Σ “Ότι πεπλήρωται ὁ καιρός, καὶ ἤγγικεν ἡ βασιλεία 
dJohniii.15 τοῦ Θεοῦ" μετανοεῖτε, καὶ 4 πιστεύετε 4 ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ.” 


(with εν). 


16. Περιπατῶν δὲ” παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν τῆς Γαλιλαίας, cide 


Σίµωνα καὶ ᾽Ανδρέαν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, βάλλοντας ἀμφίβληστρον 5 
3 ~ 3 x © η ‘ 3 > ο) «> A 

ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ : ἦσαν γὰρ ἁλιεῖς: 17. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
“Aeite ὀπίσω µου, καὶ ποιήσω ὑμᾶς γενέσθαι ἁλιεῖς ἀνθρώπων.” 


18. Καὶ εὐθέως ἀφέντες τὰ δίκτυα αὐτῶν Ἱ ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ. 


10. Καὶ προβὰς ἐκεῖθεν ὃ ὀλίγον, εἶδεν ᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, 


A A ~ 
καὶ Ιωάννην τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ καταρτί- 


5 , 
ἵοντας τὰ Sixtua. 


20. καὶ εὐθέως ἐκάλεσεν αὐτούς: καὶ ἀφέντες 


τὸν πατέρα αὐτῶν Ζεβεδαῖον ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ μετὰ τῶν μισθωτῶν, 


~ , lel 
ἀπῆλθον ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ. 


1 wera δε in SLAZ (Tisch.). 


kat pera in BD (W.H.). 


2 ras Bao. omit BL 33; brought in by scribes as the usual phrase. 
* kav λεγων omitted in δὲ (Tisch., W.H., in brackets); found in BLA. 


4 kat παραγων in NBDL 13, 33, 69 al. 


> Σιµωνος in NBL. 


T.R. assimilated to Mt. iv. 18. 


6 For βαλλ. αμφιβλ. (from Mt. iv. 18) BL have αμφιβαλλοντας (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 avtwy omitted in BCL. 


in weakness, calling for preternatural 
aid. 

Vv. 14-20. The Galilean ministry 
begins (Mt. iv. 12-22; Lk. iv. 14).—Ver. 
14. TO εὐαγγ. τ. θεοῦ: the Gospel of 
God, the good news sent by God to men 
through Jesus, a strong name for Christ’s 
message.—Ver. 15. % βασιλεία τ. θ.: 
this defines more precisely the gospel 
Jesus preaches. It is the gospel of the 
Kingdom of God. But even this is 
vague. The kingdom may be differently 
conceived: as an awful thing or as a 
beneficent thing. The summons follow- 
ing throws light on its nature.—pera- 
νοεῖτε καὶ πιστεύετε: “repent ”’ echoes 
John’s preaching, and savours of awe, 
but “ believe” is a new word, and pre- 
sumably the watchword of the new 
ministry. And the name for the message 
to be believed settles the nature of the 


kingdom. Its coming is good news (ἐν 
τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ). For πιστεύειν ἐν, vide 
Gal. 11. 26, Eph. i. 13.—Ver. 16. 


ἀμφιβάλλοντας, just because different 
from Mt.’s expression, to which the T. R. 
assimilates Mk.’s, \s likely to be the true 
reading, and is very expressive: casting 
about (their nets understood, here only). 
—Ver. 17. γενέσθαι : I will make you 


8 BDL omit εκειθεν. 


become, implying a gradual process of 
training ; therefore the disciples called 
as early as possible-—Ver. 20. μετὰ 
μισθωτῶν: they left their father with the 
hired assistants. This is taken by some 
as a merely pictorial trait, but others 
justly regard it as a touch of humanity. 
It comforted Mk. and probably his 
voucher Peter that the two brothers did 
not need to leave their father alone. He 
could do without them. 

Vv. 21-28. First appearance in the 
synagogue; first impressions (Lk. iv. 
31-37)-—Ver. 21. εἰσπορεύονται: Jesus 
and the four newly acquired disciples 
enter or arrive at.—Kaw., Capernaum; 
first mention. From Mk.’s narrative alone 
we should gather that Jesus arrived at 
Capernaum on His way northwards from 
the south—from the Jordan to Galilee, 
then along the shore of the lake to 
Capernaum.—ev@éws: seems to imply 
arrival on Sabbath.—odBBacow: dative 
plural as if from odBBas; plural, after 
analogy of names for feast days (τὰ 
ἄζυμα, τὰ yevéora, τὰ ἐγκαίνια).--- 
ἐδίδασκε: Mt. in his general summary 
of the Galilean ministry applies both this 
word and κηρύσσω to Christ’s synagogue 
utterances. These, addressed to a 


44—27. 


- 


: ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


345 


21. Καὶ εἰσπορεύονται els Καπερναούμ.: καὶ εὐθέως τοῖς σάββασιν 


εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὴν συναγωγήν, ἐδίδασκε.ὶ 


22. καὶ ἐξεπλήσσοντο ἐπὶ 


τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ: ἦν γὰρ διδάσκων αὐτοὺς ὡς ἐξουσίαν ἔχων, καὶ 


οὐχ ὡς οἱ γραμματεῖς. 


23. Kat? ἦν ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ αὐτῶν ἄνθρωπος 


¢ again in 


"ἐν πνεύµατι ᾿ ἀκαθάρτῳ, καὶ ἀνέκραξε, 24. λέγων, “"Ea,® τί ἡμῖν Ch. v.z. 


καὶ cot, ᾿Ιησοῦ Ναζαρηνέ; 


ἦλθες ἀπολέσαι ἡμᾶς; 


f same exp. 


οἶδά σε τίς in John 


ες cal ~ ” ~ vi. 69 
ci, 6 ἅγιος τοῦ Θεοῦ. 25. Καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτῷ 6 “Ingots, λέγων, (W.-H). 


ἑεΦιμώθητι, καὶ ἔξελθε ἐξ αὐτοῦ.” 


1 εισελθων . . . εδιδασκε (T.R.) is the reading of BD (W.H. text). 


Ch. ix. 20, 


26. Kat Somapdgav αὐτὸν τὸ © Tivis. 30. 
ο] ~ 267 > > ~ bh 

πνεῦμα τὸ ἀκάθαρτον, καὶ κράξαν ὅ φωνῇ µεγάλη, ἐξῆλθεν ἐξ αὐτοῦ. 

27. καὶ " ἐθαμβήθησαν πάντες, ὥστε συζητεῖν πρὸς αὐτούς,ῖ 


h. x. 24, 
32 (Wis- 
dom xvii. 
3). 


Some copies 


omit εισελθων, and place εδιδασκε before εις τ. συν.; sO NL (Tisch., W.H., in 


margin. Ws. retains, T.R.). 


2 kat ενθυς in HBL 33; ευθυς left out because not understood. 


% ea not in NBD, 


It probably comes in from Lk. (iv. 34). 


4 οιδαµεν in SLA (Tisch., W.H., in margin), οιδα in BCDZ—probably correct. 


ὅ φωνησαν in NBL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


6 απαντες in NBL; παντες in CDA al. 
7 S8CDAZ have προς εαντους (W.H. marg.). 


W.H., text. Ws.). 

popular audience, would come more pro- 
perly under the head of kerygma than of 
didache,—Ver. 22. ἐξεπλήσσοντο : they 
were amazed; a strong word, several 
times in Mk. (Mt. vii. 28).--ὡς ἐξουσίαν 
ἔχων, etc.: a similar remark in Mt. vii. 
29 (see notes there) appended to Sermon 
on Mount. Mk. gives no discourse, but 
only notes the impression made. “A 
poor substitute for the beautiful Sermon 
on the Mount” (Schanz). Doubtless, 
but let us be thankful for what we do 
get: a record of the impression made by 
Christ’s very first appearance in the 
synagogue, witnessing to a striking in- 
dividuality. Mk. omits much, and is in 
many ways a meagre Gospel, but it 
makes a distinctive contribution to the 
evangelic history in showing by a few 
vealistic touches (this one of them) the 
vemarkable personality of Fesus. 

Vv. 23-28. The demoniac.—Ver. 23. 
εὐθὺς: almost = ἰδοὺ, Matthew’s word 
for introducing something important.— 
αὐτῶν, in theiy synagogue, i.e., the 
synagogue of the same men who had 
been surprised at Christ’s preaching. 
They are to get a new surprise, though 
one would have been enough for one 
day. Wealso get asurprise, tor nothing 
in Mark’s narrative thus far has prepared 
us to expect such an event as is reported. 
In his general sketch of the Galilean 


NB have simply αντους (Tisch., 


ministry (iv. 23-25) Matthew combines 
the three features: preaching, teaching, 
and healing.—év π. a. = with an unclean 
spirit (Maldonatus, Holtz., H.C.), in the 
power of, possessed by, Meyer, Weiss, 
Keil, etc. An unclean spirit is Mark’s 
standing name for what Matthew com- 
monly calls δαίµων or δαιµόνιον.---Ψετ. 
24. τί ἡμῖν καὶ oof; what to us and to 
Thee ? The diseased man speaks for the 
demon in him, and the demon speaks for 
the fraternity as all having one interest. 
For the phrase used in a similar sense 
vide τ Kings xvii. 1δ.---Ναζαρηνέ: first 
certain intimation (cf. ver. g) that Jesus 
belonged to Nazareth. The correspond- 
ing adjective in Matthew is Ναζωραῖος 
(ii. 23).--ἦλθες ᾱ. ἡ. may be either a 
question or an assertion, the sense of the 
whole passage being: Thou art come to 
destroy us, for I know well who Thou art 
—the Holy One of God (Fritzsche). The 
epithet, ἅγιος, applied to Jesus is in an- 
tithesis to dxafdp7w.—Ver. 25. φιμώθητι: 
vide at Mt. xxil. 12.—Ver. 26. σπαρά- 
αν, convulsing, throwing into a spasm. 
This reveals a characteristic of the 
malady under which the man suffered. 
He appears to have been an epileptic. 
The Gadarene demoniac was a madman. 
This was the final fit before recovery.— 
Ver. 27. ἐθαμβήθησαν: another strong 
word peculiar to Mark = they were 


346 


” - 
λέγοντας, “ Τί ἐστι τοῦτο ; 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ νὰ 


τίς ἡ διδαχὴ ἡ καινὴ αὕτη, ὅτι] κατ 


’ nw ”~ 
ἐξουσίαν καὶ τοῖς πνεύµασι τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις ἐπιτάσσει, καὶ ὕπα- 


, 2A 2 
κουουσιν QUTW ; 


28. ᾿Εξῆλθε SE? ἡ ἀκοὴ αὐτοῦ εὐθὺς ὃ cis ὅλην 
τὴν περίχωρον τῆς Γαλιλαίας. 


20. Καὶ εὐθέως ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς ἐξελθόντες, ἦλθον εἰς τὴν 


, , 
jhereand in οἰκίαν Σίμωνος καὶ ᾿Ανδρέου, μετὰ ᾿Ιακώβου καὶ Ἰωάννου. 


Mt. viii. 


πενθερὰ Σί έ 
14. ρὰ Σίμωνος κατέκειτο 


πυρέσσουσα. 


30. ἡ δὲ 
καὶ εὐθέως λέγουσιν 


1 The scribes have flattened the text here into commonplace, and left only one 


cause of wonder instead of two. 


The true reading, because realistic, true to life, is 


doubtless that of BBL: διδαχη καινη κατ εξουσιαν και, in which κατ εξ. may be 
joined either to what goes before or to what follows. 


2 kau εξηλθεν in SBCDLAZ 33. 


° BCL add πανταχον after evOus. It may have fallen out by similar ending (αντου). 


4 εξελθων ηλθεν in BDZ old Latin verss. (W.H. marg.). 


by SACL (Tisch.). 


astonished, i.e., at the sudden and com- 
plete recovery. They saw at a glance 
that the attack had not run its usual 
course.—@ore with the infinitive here 
expressing result.—ov{nretv, to seek 
together; in N. T. tropical = to inquire 
of one another, to discuss. The word 
occurs several times in Ματζ.---τί ἐστι 
τοῦτο; The question refers to the whole 
appearance of Jesus in the synagogue 
that day. One surprise following close 
on another provoked wondering inquiry 
as to the whole phenomenon. The words 
following state the twofold ground of 
their astonishment: (1) διδαχὴ καινή 
«at ἐξουσίαν, a style of teaching new 
as to authoritativeness (entirely different 
from the familiar type of the scribes) ; 
(2) καὶ τοῖς πνεύµασι τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις 
ἐπιτάσσει, etc., also He commandeth 
the unclean spirits so that they obey 
Him. Both equally unlooked for: the 
former a moral miracle, the latter a 
physical; both revealing an imperial 
spirit exercising sway over the minds 
and bodies of men.—Ver. 28. ἡ akon, 
the report, as in Mt. xiv. 1, xxiv. 6.— 
εὐθὺς, expressive of the lightning speed 
with which rumour travels = πανταχοῦ 
= πανταχοῖ, in every direction.—eis 
ὅλην τ. π. τ. Γαλ.  α vague phrase 
suggestive of a wide range of circula- 
tion, even beyond the boundaries of 
Galilee. But that can hardly be meant. 
Recent interpreters take it as meaning 
that the fame spread into the Galilean 
environment of Capernaum, along the 
lake north and south, and back into the 
hill country. : [ 

Similarity at certain points in this 
incident to the story of the Gadarene 


The T.R. is supported 


demoniac, especially in the deprecatory 
speech (ver. 24, Mt. viii. 29), has 
suggested the hypothesis of borrowing 
on one side or other. Keim thinks this 
not a real history but an acted pro- 
gramme, like the change of water into 
wine in John ii., and like the preaching 
programme in Lk. iv. (L. ., ii. 165, 
203), a mere duplicate of the Gadara 
story. Weiss thinks the words spoken 
by the demoniac (ver. 34) are borrowed 
from that story, and that Mark repro- 
duces the features with which Peter was 
wont to describe such cases. The life- 
like reflections of the spectators (ver. 27) 
powerfully witness for the reality of the 
occurrence. 

Vv. 29-31. Cure of Peter’s mother-in- 
law (Mt. viii. 14, 15; Lk. iv. 38, 39).— 
ἐξελθόντες ἦλθον: even if the reading of 
B (participle and verb singular) be the 
true one, as it probably is just because 
the more difficult, the implied fact is 
that Jesus left the synagogue accom- 
panied by His disciples, probably all 
four, Simon and Andrew as well as 
James and John. Jesus came from the 
synagogue to the house of Simon and 
Andrew, with them, and with James and 
John.—Ver. 30. πυρέσσουσα (same 
word in Matthew), fevered, or feverish, 
doubtless a common occurrence in the 
damp, marshy flats by the lake.—Aéyovor 
αὐτῷ π. α., forthwith they tell Him about 
her, not necessarily as expecting Him to 
heal her, but to account for her absence, 
or as one naturally tells a friend of family 
troubles.—Ver. 31. Ἅἤγειρεν, etc., He 
took hold of her hand and so raised her 
up, the cure taking place simultaneously. 
In Matthew the touch (Πψατο) is the 


2δ---36. 


αὐτῷ περὶ αὐτῆς. 
Χειρὸς αὐτῆς ! 


αὐτοῖς. 


ς 


: καὶ ἀφῆκεν αὐτὴν 6 


αὐτὸν πάντας τοὺς κακῶς ἔχοντας καὶ τοὺς δαιμονιζοµένους” 
33. καί ἡ πόλις ὅλη ἐπισυνηγμένη ἦν πρὸς τὴν θύραν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


32. Ὀψίας δὲ γενομένης, ὅτε 


347 
31. καὶ προσελθὼν ἤγειρεν αὐτήν, κρατήσας τῆς 

} πυρετὸς εὐθέως.” καὶ διηκόνει ] ην. 
ky ge σ 4 BY 2. Acts 

ἔδυ ὃ 6 ἥλιος, ἔφερον πρὸς δε 

k here and 
9 in ae iv. 

40 (Gen. 

oA: XxViii. 11) 


ἐθεράπευσε πολλοὺς κακῶς ExovTas ποικίλαις vocois* καὶ δαιμόνια 


πολλὰ ἐξέβαλε, καὶ οὖκ Hore λαλεῖν τὰ δαιμόνια, ὅτι ῄδεισαν αὐτόν. 
35. Καὶ πρωὶ ἔννυχον ὅ λίαν ἀναστὰς ἐξῆλθε, καὶ ἀπῆλθεν eis 


ἔρημον τόπον, κἀκεῖ προσηύχετο. 


1 SSBL omit αυτης. 


36. καὶ 


lh ] 
Ἱκατεδίωξαν 6 αὐτὸν 67 ONT) 


3ΑΝΒΟΙ, 33 al. omit ευθεως. 


5 BD have εδυσε, which being used transitively by the Greeks was likely to be 


corrected into ev by the ancient revisers. 


4 For η wokts . . 


δεννυχα in S$BCDL (modern editions). 


«ην ΝΒΟΡΙ. 33 have ην ολη η πολις επεσυνηγµενη (Tisch., 


6 κατεδιωξεν in 398, which revisers would readily change into the plural. 


Ἰ 9 ΒΤ, omit ο. 


means of cure. Holtz. (H. C.) thinks 
Jesus took hold of her hand simply by 
way of greeting, and that the result was 
unexpected, Jesus thus discovering an 
unsuspected power. 

Vv. 32-34. Cures on Sabbath evening 
(Mt. vili. 16, 17; Lk. iv. 40, 41).—Ver. 
32. ὀψίας, etc.: exact indication of time 
by two phrases, on the arrival of evening 
when the sun set; evening a vague phrase 
= late afternoon, It was Sabbath, and 
the people would wait till sunset when 
Sabbath closed. Hence the double note 
of time. So most recent commentators, 
also Victor Ant. in Cramer’s Catenae 
(ἐπειδὴ ἐνόμιζον μὴ ἐξεῖναί τινι θεραπ- 
εύειν σαββάτῳ, τούτου χάριν τοῦ σαβ- 
Barov τὸ πέρας ἀνέμενον). Matthew and 
Luke divide Mark’s phrases between 
them. The first sufficed for Matthew 
because he says nothing of its being 
Sabbath. This instance of duality in 
expression in Mark has done service in 
connection with Griesbach’s hypothesis 
that Mark is made up from Matthew and 
Luke.—xakés ἔχοντας, such as were 
ailing, peculiar to Mark.—rovs δαιµονι- 
ζομένους: them specially, because of what 
happened in the synagogue.—Ver. 33. 
ὅλη ἡ ἡ πόλις, a colloquial exaggeration.— 
πρὸς τ. θύραν: the door of Peter’s house. 
Meyer thinks that in the interval Jesus 
had gone to His own house, and that it 
was there the people gathered. But 
does Mark’s gospel think of Jesus as 
having a residence in Capernaum? 
Weiss answers in the negative.—Ver. 


34. πολλοὺς, many; not all? In 
Matthew many are brought and ail are 
healed.—¢re, allow, imperfect, as if from 
ἀφίω with augment on preposition, again 
in xi. 16; prorsus barbara (Fritzsche).— 
ὅτι ἤδεισαν α., because they knew Him. 
On the insight of demoniacs cf. at Mt. 
vili. 28 ff. 

Vv. 35-30. Flight from Capernaum 
(Lk. iv. 42-44).—Ver. 35. ampwt, early, an 
elastic word, the last watch from three to 
six, defined more exactly by évvvya λίαν 
= much in the night, at the beginning of 
the watch, or at the dark hour before 
dawn. .—évvvxa is the neuter plural of 
ἔννυχος, nocturnal, used as an adverb 
(here οη]γ).--ἀναστὰς, etc.: He rose 
up, went out of Capernaum, went away 
to a desert, solitary place, and there 
engaged in prayer. It was a kind of 
flight from Capernaum, the scene of 
those remarkable occurrences; “‘ flight 
from the unexpected reality into which 
His ideal conception of His calling had 
brought Him,” Holtz., H.C. The real 


‘reason of the flight was doubtless a 


desire to preach in as many synagogues 
as possible before the hostility of the 
scribes, instinctively dreaded, had time 
to act obstructively. Jesus had a plan 
of a preaching tour in Galilee (vide ver. 
38), and He felt He could not begin too 
soon. He left in the night, fearing 
opposition from the people.—Ver. 36. 
κατεδίωξεν: followed Him up; almost 
pursued Him as a fugitive; verb sin- 
gular, though more than one followed, 


348 — 


Σίμων καὶ ol peT αὐτοῦ: 37. καὶ εὑρόντες αὐτόν, λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, 


~ , 35 
“"On πάντες ἵητοῦσί σε. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


I. 


~ 


t 
> 


38. Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, 'Αγωμεν” eis 


m here only τὰς ἐχομένας ”' κωμοπόλεις, ἵνα κἀκεῖ κηρύξω" εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ 


in N.T. 


ἐξελήλυθα.” ὃ 


2 K hae Same | , > a A Ὁ Sei 
30. αι ην κηρυσσων εν ταις συναγωγαις αυτων, 


eis ὅλην τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, καὶ τὰ δαιμόνια ἐκβάλλων. 


~ 9 
40. Καὶ ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτὸν λεπρός, παρακαλῶν αὐτὸν καὶ yovu- 


a ο eee} απλό 
πετων αυτον, και εγων 


, 3. 
καθαρίσαι. 


Hato αὐτοῦ," 


καὶ λέγει atta, “Θέλω, καθαρίσθητι." 


A [ή 
atte, “On, ἐὰν θέλῃς, δύνασαί µε 


41. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὃ σπλαγχνισθείς, ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα, 


42. Καὶ 


εἰπόντος αὐτοῦ, ]. εὐθέως. ἀπῆλθεν dm αὐτοῦ ἡ λέπρα, καὶ ἐκαθαρίσθη. 
> 


1SSBL have ευρον αυτον και. 


3ΞΝΒΟΙ, 33 add αλλαχου, a rare word (here only in Mk.), and apparently 
superfluous, therefore likely to be omitted. 


3 S8BCL 33 have εξηλθον, doubtless the true reading, changed into εξεληλυθα 
because the meaning was not understood and under the influence of Lk. Jesus is 


explaining why He left Capernaum so hastily. 
+ ηλθεν in NBL Cop. Aeth. verss. (Tisch., W.H.). 


Vide below. 
mv is from Lk. (iv. 44). 


δεις T. συναγωγας in SABCDLA curs. (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 BD omit και γονυπετων αυτον, possibly by homoeot. 


out αυτον. 
7S$B 69 omit και. 
Ῥαντου ηψατο in NBL. 


Peter, the chief of them, being thought of 
mainly. A strong term like ἐκβάλλει, 
ver. 12, all allowance made for weakened 
force in Hellenistic usage.—Ver. 37. 
πάντες ζητοῦσί σε, all seek Thee, not 
merely all the people of Capernaum, but 
all the world: ‘‘nemo non te quaerit,” 
Fritzsche; a colloquial exaggeration.— 
Ver. 38. ἄγωμεν: let us go, intransitive ; 
not so used in Greek authors.—kepomé- 
λεις, village towns; towns as to extent 
of population, villages as without walls 
(Kypke) ; Oppidula (Beza) ; here only in 

. T., found in Strabo.—kxypvge: that 
there I may preach, no word of healing; 
because no part of His vocation (Kloster- 
mann) ; because subordinate to the preach- 
ing (Schanz).—é&q\8ov: I came out (from 
Capernaum, ver. 35). This may seem 
trivial (Keil), but it appears to be the 
real meaning, and it is so understood by 
Meyer, Weiss, Holtz., and even Schanz. 
The Fathers understood the words as 
meaning: ““Ι am come from heaven’’. 
So Keil. In this clause Weiss finds evi- 
dence that in Mk.’s narrative Jesus has no 
home in Capernaum. He has visited it, 
done good in it, and now He wants to go 
elsewhere.—Ver. 39. ἠἦλθεν (vide critical 
notes).—eis T. συν. may be connected with 
ἦλθεν, and the sentence will run thus: 
He came, preaching, to their synagogues, 


SSL have και γονν. with- 


8 For ο δε |. S$BD have simply και (Tisch., W.H.). 
10 evr. αντου is a gloss, omitted in BDL. 


all over Galilee ; also casting out devils, 
the healing ministry being referred to as 
subordinate to the teaching. If we con- 
nect els τὰς συν. with κηρύσσων the 
word “synagogues” will refer to the 
assemblies rather than to the places = 
preaching to their synagogues, as we 
might say “' preaching to their churches ”’ 
or “congregations”. For similar ex- 
pressions cf. xiii. 10, xiv. 9, John viii. 
26. This short verse contains the record 
of an extensive preaching tour, of which 
not a single discourse has been pre- 
served. Doubtless some of the parables 
were spoken on these occasions. Note 
the synagogue, not the market place, was 
the scene of Christ’s addresses; His 
work religious, not political (Schanz). 
Vv. 40-45. The leper (Mt. viii. 1-4; 
Lk. v. 12-16).—Ver. 40. καὶ ἔρχεται, 
etc., and there cometh to Him, historic 
present as so often; where this happened 
not said, probably an incident of the 
preaching tour; ‘in one of the cities,” 
says Lk.—éav θέλῃς δύν.: the leper has 
seen or heard enough of Christ’s healing 
ministry to be sure as to the power. He 
doubts the will, naturally from the nature 
of the disease, especially if it be the first 
cure of the kind, or the first so far as the 
man knows.—Ver. 41. σπλαγχνισθεὶς, 
having compassion. Watch carefully 


37-45. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


349 


43. Καὶ ἐμβριμησάμενος αὐτῷ, εὐθέως ἐξέβαλεν αὐτόν, 44. καὶ λέγει 
αὐτῷ, ““Opa, μηδενὶ μηδὲν εἴπῃς: GAN’ ὕπαγε, σεαυτὸν δεῖξον τῷ 
ἱερεῖ, καὶ προσένεγκε περὶ τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ σου ἃ προσέταξε Μωσῆς, 


3 , 3 a. 35 
εις µαρτυριον αυτοις. 


45. Ὁ δὲ ἐξελθὼν ἤρέατο κηρύσσειν πολλὰ 


καὶ διαφηµίζειν τὸν λόγον, ὥστε µηκέτι αὐτὸν δύνασθαι " φανερῶς n John vit 


εἰς πόλιν 1 εἰσελθεῖν: GAN’ ἔξω ev? ἐρήμοις τόποις ἦν, καὶ ἤρχοντο 


πρὸς αὐτὸν πανταχόθεν.Σ 


To. Acts 
x. 3. 


1 The order of the words varies in the MSS. 


Σεπ in BLA. 


3 παντοθεν in many uncials (Tisch., W.H.). 


the portraiture of Christ’s personality in 
this Gospel, Mk.’s speciality.—Ver. 42. 
ἀπήῆλθεν, etc.: another instance of 
duality, the leprosy left him, and he or it 
was cleansed. Lk. has the former of the 
two phrases, Mt. the latter.—xa@apifew 
is Hellenistic for καθαίρειν.---Ψετ. 43. 
ἐμβριμησάμενος, etc. : assuming a severe 
aspect, vide notes on the word at Mt. 
ix. 30, especially the quotation from 
Euthy. Zig.—egéBadev a., thrust him 
out of the synagogue or the crowd. It 
is not quite certain that the incident 
happened in a synagogue, though the in- 
ference is natural from the connection 
with ver. 39. Lepers were not inter- 
dicted from entering the synagogue. 
These particulars are peculiar to Mk., 
and belong to his character-sketching. 
He does not mean to impute real anger 
to Jesus, but only a masterful manner 
dictated by a desire that the benefit 
should be complete = away out of this, 
to the priest; do what the law requires, 
that you may be not only clean but re- 
cognised as such by the authorities, and 
so received by the people as a leper no 
longer.—Ver. 44. εἰς μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς : 
for a testimony from priest to people, 
without which the leper would not be 
received as clean.—Ver. 45. What Jesus 
feared seems to have happened. The 
man went about telling of his cure, and 
neglecting the means necessary to obtain 
social recognition as cured.—roy λόγον : 
“the matter,” A. V. Perhaps we should 
translate strictly the word, i.e., the 
word Jesus spoke: “I will, be thou 
clean’’. So Holtz. after Fritzsche. So 
also Euthy. Zig. (διεφηµίζε τὸν λόγον, 
ὃν εἴρηκεν αὐτῷ 6 χριστὸς, δηλαδὴ τὸ 
θέλω, καθαρίσθητι, os per’ ἐξουσίας 
yevopevov).—ets πόλιν: the result was 
that Jesus could not enter openly into a 
sity, a populous place, but was obliged 
a remain in retired spots, This cure 


and the popularity it caused may have 
co-operated to bring Christ’s synagogue 
ministry to an abrupt termination by 
stirring up envy. Jesus was between 
two fires, and His order to the leper, ‘Go, 
show thyself,” had a double reference: 
to the man’s good and to the conciliation 
of the scribes and synagogue rulers,— 
καὶ ἤρχοντο, etc, : and (still) they kept 
coming from all quarters, Popularity at 
its height. There is nothing correspond- 
ing to ver. 45 in Mt. . 

CHAPTER II, INCIPIENT CONFLICT. 
This chapter and the first six verses of 
the next report incidents which, though 
not represented as happening at the 
same time, have all one aim: to exhibit 
Jesus as becoming an object of disfavour 
to the religious classes, the scribes and 
Pharisees. Sooner or later, and soon 
rather than later, this was inevitable. 
Jesus and they were too entirely different 
in thought and ways for good will to 
prevail between them for any length of 
time. It would not be long before the 
new Prophet would attract their attention. 
The comments of the people in Caper- 
naum synagogue, doubtless often re- 
peated elsewhere, on the contrast between 
His style of teaching and that of the 
scribes, would soon reach their ears, and 
would not tend to promote a good under- 
standing. That was one definite ground 
of offence, and others were sure to arise. 

Vv. 1-12. The palsied man (Με. ix. 
1-8; Lk. v. 17-26).—Ver.1. Thereading of 
NBL (W.H.) with εἰσελθὼν for εἰσῆλθεν 
in T. R., and omitting καὶ before ἠκούσθη, 
gives a ruggedly anacolouthistic con- 
struction (‘‘and entering again into 
Capernaum after days it was heard that 
He was at home”), which the T. R. 
very neatly removes. The construction 
of the sentence, even as it stands in the 
critically approved text, may be made 
smoother by taking ἠκούσθη not im- 


350 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


αμ, 


II. 1. Καὶ πάλιν εἰσῆλθεν 1 eis Καπερναοὺμ δι ἡμερῶν : Kal? 


ἠκούσθη ὅτι εἰς οἶκόν ὃ ἐστι: 4. καὶ εὐθέως συνήχθησαν πολλοί, 


a John ii.6; ὥστε µηκέτι "χωρεῖν μηδὲ τὰ πρὸς τήν θύραν" καὶ " ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς 
ΧΧΙ. 45. Sb ES λ ὐτό ἃ 4 
b Ch. iv. 33. τὸν ᾿ λόγον. 3. Καὶ έρχονται πρὸς αὐτόν, παραλυτικὸν Φέροντες, 


ο λα. 9 
ε Mt.iv.6.  αἱρόμενον ὑπὸ τεσσάρων. 
d here only. 


4. καὶ μὴ δυνάµενοι προσεγγίσαι 5 


ter 
ε Gal. iv. 15 αὐτῷ διὰ τὸν ὄχλον, *dweotéyacay τὴν στέγην ὅπου ἦν, καὶ * ἐξορύ- 


(to dig out 


nw 3 2 
the eyes). ξαντες χαλῶσι τὸν κράββατον,ὃ ἐφ᾽ ᾧἸ 6 παραλυτικὸς Κκατέκειτο. 


* εισελθων παλιν in S$BDL; probably correct just because of the halting const. 


which the T.R. rectifies. 


315581, omit και; for the connection of the words vide below. 


7 SBDLE have εν οικω (Tisch., W.H. in text). 


preferred as the more difficult. 


But εις οικον (CA αἱ ) is to be 


“NBL have φεροντες προς αυτον παραλνυτικον. 
ὕπροσενεγκαι in ΔΕΒΙ, 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


6 Spelt κραβαττον in most uncials. 
Τοπον in NBDL. 


personally, but as referring to Jesus. 
He entering, etc., was heard of as being 
at home (Schanz and Holtzmann alter- 
natively).—mddw, again, a second time, 
i. 2I mentioning the first. He has not 
been there apparently since He left it 
{i. 35) on the preaching tour in Galilee. 

t ἡμερῶν, after days, cf. Gal. ii. 1; 
classical examples of this use of διὰ in 
Wetstein and Elsner. The expression 
suggests a short period, a few days, 
which seems too short for the time re- 
quired for the preaching tour, even if it 
had been cut short by hostile influence, 
as is not improbable. The presence 
of scribes at this scene is very signifi- 
cant. They appear hostile in attitude 
on Christ’s return to Capernaum. They 
had probably been active before it. 
Fritzsche translates: interjectis pluribus 
diebus. For a considerable time διὰ 
χρόνου would be the appropriate phrase. 
We get rid of the ‘difficulty by connect- 
ing δι ἡμερῶν with ἠκούσθη (Kloster.), 
the resulting meaning being that days 
elapsed after the arrival in Capernaum 
before people found out that Jesus was 
there. He had been absent possibly for 
months, and probably returned quietly.— 
ἐν οἴκῳ or εἰς οἶκον (Τ. R.) = at home 
(in Peter’s house presumably) ; εἰς οἶκον 
suggests the idea of entrance.—Ver. 2. 
συνήχθησαν πολλοὶ: with the extra- 
ordinary incidents of some weeks or 
months ago fresh in their memory, a 
great gathering of the townspeople was 
inevitable.—Gore, etc.: the gathering 
was phenomenal; not only the house 
filled, but the space round about the 


ep ω (T.R.) is explanatory, 


door crowded—no room for more people 
even there (μηδὲ), not to speak of within. 
---τὸν λόγον: the phrase has a secondary 
sound, as if an echo of the speech of the 
apostolic church, but the meaning is 
plain. Jesus was preaching the gospel 
of the kingdom when the following inci- 
dent happened. Preaching always first. 
—Ver. 3. €pxovrat: historic present 
with lively effect. The arrival creates a 
stir.—pépovtes: this may mean more 
than the four who actually carried the 
sick man (ὑπὸ τεσσάρων), friends accom- 
panying. ‘The bearers might be servants 
(Schanz).—Ver. 4. The particulars in 
this verse not in Mt., who did not care 
how they found their way to Jesus; 
enough for him that they succeeded 
somehow.—mpoceyyioar (T. R.): here 
only in N. T. to approach; προσενέγκαι 
(W.H.), to bring near (the sick man 
understood) to Him, Jesus.—dameoréya- 
σαν τ. σ., removed the roof, to which 
they would get access by an outside 
stair either from the street or from the 
οουτί.---ὅπου ἦν, where He was; where 
was that? in an upper room (Lightfoot 
and Vitringa), or in a room in a one- 
storied house (Holtz., H. C.), or not in a 
room at all, but in the atyium or com- 
pluvium, the quadrangle of the house 
(Faber, Archdol., Jahn, Archdol.). In 
the last-mentioned case they would have 
to remove the parapet (battlement, 
Deut. xxii. 8) and let the man down into 
the open space.—éfopvgavres : not some- 
thing additional to but explanatory of 
ἀπεστέγασαν = they unroofed by digging 
through the material—tiles, laths, and 


I—g. 


5. ἰδὼν δὲ1 6 


“Téxvov, ἀφέωνται 3 σοι at ἁμαρτίαι σου.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ο. 


‘Ingots την πίστιν αὐτῶν λέγει τῷ παραλυτικῷ, 


8 6. Ἠσαν δέ τινες τῶν 


γραμματέων ἐκεῖ καθήµενοι, καὶ διαλογιζόμενοι ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις 


αὐτῶν, 7. “Tit οὗτος οὕτω λαλεῖ βλασφημίας ὅ; 
ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας, εἰ μὴ els, 6 Θεός; 


, ΄ 
τίς δύναται 
8. Καὶ εὐθέως ἐπιγνοὺς 


ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἕτῷ πνεύµατι αὐτοῦ, ὅτι οὕτως 6 διαλογίζονται ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, f Ch. viii. r2, 


A ld ” aA 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖςἹ “Ti ταῦτα διαλογίζεσθε ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν ; 


9. τί ἐστιν εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν τῷ παραλυτικῷ, ᾽Αϕφέωνταί ὃ cor? ai 


Ἰ και ιδων in SBCL 33. 
2 B 33 have αφιενται. 


αφεωνται conforms to Lk. (v. 20), and is to be suspected. 


* For σοι αι ap. σου (from Lk.) BDLA have gov αι αμ. 


*ortin B (W.H. marg.). 


* In the T.R., ovros ουτω λαλει βλασφημιας, we detect the hand of harmonising 
and prosaic revisers once more. The true reading is τι (B, οτι) ουτος ουτως λαλει ; 


Βλασφημει (NBDL). Vide below. 
δ B omits οντως (W.H. in brackets). 


Τλεγει in NBL 33. 
® advevrat in NB. 


plaster.—xpaBarrov: a small portable 
couch, for the poor, for travellers, and 
for sick people; condemned by Phryn., 
p- 62; σκίµπους the correct word, Latin 
grabatus, which may have led Mk. to 
use the term in the text.—Ver. 5. τὴν 
πίστιν α., their faith, that of the bearers, 
shown by their energetic action, the sick 
man not included (οὐ τὴν πίστιν τοῦ 
παραλελυμένου ἀλλὰ τῶν κοµισάντων, 
Victor Ant., Cramer, Οαἴ.).--τέκνον, 
child, without the cheering θάρσει of Mt. 

Vv. 6-12. Thus far of the sick man, 
how he got to Jesus, and the sympathetic 
reception he met with. Now the scribes 
begin to play their part. They find their 
opportunity in the sympathetic word of 
Jesus: thy sins be forgiven thee; a word 
most suitable to the case, and which 
might have been spoken by any man.— 
τινες τ. yp»: Lk. makes of this simple 
fact a great affair: an assembly of 
Pharisees and lawyers from all quarters— 
Galilee, Judaea, Jerusalem, hardly suit- 
able to the initial stage of conflict.— 
ἐκεῖ καθήµενοι: sitting there. If the 
posture is to be pressed they must have 
been early on the spot, so as to get near 
to Jesus and hear and see Him dis- 
tinctly.—év ταῖς καρδίαις α.: they looked 
like men shocked and disapproving. The 
popularity of Jesus prevented free utter- 
‘ance of their thought. But any one 
could see they were displeased and why. 
It was that speech about forgiveness.— 
Ver. 7. τί οὗτος οὕτω Adder; βλασφημεῖ. 


B omits avtots (W.H. in brackets), 
9 gov in SBL al, 


This reading of S$BDL is far more life- 
like than that of the T. R., which 
exemplifies the tendency of copyists to 
smooth down into commonplace what- 
ever is striking and original = why does 
this person thus speak? He blasphemes. 
The words suggest a gradual intensifica- 
tion of the fault-finding mood: first a 
general sense of surprise, then a feeling 
of impropriety, then a final advance to 
the thought: why, this is blasphemy! 
It was nothing ofthe kind. What Jesus 
had said did not necessarily amount to 
more than a declaration of God’s willing- 
ness to forgive sin to the penitent. They 
read the blasphemy into it.—Ver. 8. 
εὐθὺς ἐπιγνοὺς: Jesus read their thoughts 
at once, and through and through (ἐπὶ). 
---τῷ πνεύµατι, by His spirit, as distinct 
from the ear, they having said nothing.— 
Vv. 9, το, vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 11. 
σοὶ λέγω, I say to thee, a part of Christ’s 
speech to the man in Mk., not likely to 
have been so really ; laconic speech, the 
fewest words possible, characteristic of 
Jesus.—€yetpe, means something more 
than age (Fritzsche) = come, take up 
thy bed. Jesus bids him do two things, 
each a conclusive proof of recovery : 
rise, then go to thy house on thine own 
feet, with thy sick-bed on thy shoulder. 
—Ver. 12 tells how the man did as 
bidden, to the astonishment of all spec- 
tators.—wdvras, all, without exception, 
scribes included? (Kloster.) It might 
have been so had the sentence stopped 


352 


KATA MAPKON il. 


ἁμαρτίαι, ἢ εἰπεῖν, Ἔγειραι.ὶ Kat? ἄρόν σου τὸν xpdBBatov,® κα 
περιπάτει; 10. ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε, ὅτι ἐξουσίαν ἔχει ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώποε 
ἀφιέναι ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς 4 ἁμαρτίας, (λέγει τῷ παραλυτικῷ;) 11. Σοὶ λέγω, 
” 5 ΔΝ 6 ἆ a ά , aa ἆ > a a , ” 
ἔγειραι,ὸ καὶ ὃ ἄρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου. 

12. Καὶ ἠγέρθη εὐθέως, kal” ἄρας τὸν κράββατον, ἐξῆλθεν ἐναντίον ἓ 
πάντων: ὥστε ἐξίστασθαι πάντας, καὶ δοξάζειν τὸν Θεόν, λέγοντας," 


«Ὅτι οὐδέποτε οὕτως 10 εἴδομεν.” 
13. Καὶ ἐξῆλθε πάλιν παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν: καὶ mwas ὁ ὄχλος 


ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς. 


14. Καὶ παράγων εἶδε 


Λευϊν τὸν τοῦ ᾽Αλϕαίου, καθήµενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, 


««᾿Ακολούθει μοι.” 


1 εγειρε in ΝΟ Τ al, (Tisch.). 


Καὶ ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ. 


15. Καὶ ἐγέ- 


εγειρον in BL (W.H.). 


2 kat in ΒΔ (Tisch.), omit CDL (W.H. in brackets). 


3 τον κραβ. σου in NBCDLE. 


4 emt της γῆς αφιεναι in NCDLAZ (Tisch.), αφ. apap. επι τ. γ. in B (W.H. text; 


5 εγειρε in most uncials. 
7 και ευθυς in BCL. 


5 B omits (W.H. in brackets). D has και Aeyew. 


there. For no doubt the scribes were as 
much astonished as their neighbours at 
what took place. But they would not 
join in the praise to God which followed. 
—otras οὐδέποτε εἴδομεν: elliptical, 
but expressive, suited to the mental 
mood = so we never saw, 7.¢., we never 
saw the like. 

N.B.—The title “‘ Son of Man” occurs 
in this narrative for the first time in 
Mk.’s Gospel; vide on Mt. viii. 20, ix. 6. 

Vy. 13-17. Call of Levi, feast follow- 
ing (Mt. ix. 9-13; Lk. v. 27-32). This 
incident is not to be conceived as follow- 
ing immediately after that narrated in 
the foregoing section.—Ver. 13 interrupts 
the continuity of the history. It states 
that Jesus went out again (cf. i. 16) 
alongside (παρὰ) the sea, that the multi- 
tude followed Him, and that He taught 
them. A very vague general notice, 
serving little other purpose than to place 
an interval between the foregoing and 
following incidents.—Ver. 14. Aeviv. 
Levi, the son of Alphaeus, the name 
here and in Lk. different from that given 
in first gospel, but the incident mani- 
festly the same, and the man therefore 
also; Levi his original name, Matthew 
his apostle name. Mk. names Matthew 
in his apostle list (iii. 18), but he fails to 
identify the two, though what he states 
about Levi evidently points to a call to 
apostleship similar to that to the four 
fishermen (i. 16, 20). The compiler of 


§ και omit SBBCDL. 
8 εµπροσθεν in NBL. 
10 outws ουδεποτε NBDL. 


the first Gospel, having Mk. before him, 
and, noticing the omission, substituted 
the name Matthew for Levi, adding to it 
λεγόμενον (ix. 9) to hint that he had 
another name.—a«odovOer por: a call to 
apostleship (in terms identical in all 
three Synoptics), and also fo immediate 
service in connection with the mission to 
the publicans (vide on Mt.).—Ver. 15. 
ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ attov: whose house? Not 
perfectly clear, but all things point to 
that of Levi. There is no mention of a 
return to Capernaum, where Jesus dwelt. 
The custom house may have been out- 
side the town, nearer the shore. Then if 
the house of Jesus (Peter’s) had been 
meant, the name of Jesus should have 
stood after οἰκία instead of at the close 
of the verse. The main point to note is 
that whatever house is meant, it must 
have been large enough to have a hall or 
court capable of accommodating a large 
number of people. Furrer assumes as a 
matter of course that the gathering was 
in the court. ‘“ Here in the court of one 
of these ruined houses sat the Saviour of 
the lost in the midst of publicans and 
sinners” (Wanderungen, p. 375).— 
πολλοὶ, etc.: many to be taken in 
earnest, not slurred over, as we are apt 
to do when we think of this feast as a 
private entertainment given by Mt. to 
his quondam friends, Jesus being nothing 
more than a guest.—jjoav yap πολλοὶ 
καὶ ἠκολούθουν αὐτῷ: Mk. here takes 


1ο---17. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


353 


veto ἐν τῷ 1 κατακεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ οἶκίᾳ αὐτοῦ, καὶ πολλοὶ τελῶναι 
a « ‘ a 32 ~ | -~ A a 
καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ συνανέκειντο τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ» 


Ά- 5) ’ 43 ΄ 9 [ο 
ἦσαν γὰρ πολλοί, καὶ ἠκολούθησαν 3 αὐτῷ. 


16. καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς 


καὶ ot Φαρισαῖοι," ἰδόντες αὐτὸν ἐσθίοντα μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν καὶ 
ἁμαρτωλῶν,;ὸ ἔλεγον τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, “΄Τίδ ὅτι μετὰ τῶν τελωνῶν 


καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐσθίει καὶ πίνει; Ἱ 


17. Καὶ ἀκούσας 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 


λέγει αὐτοῖς, “OU χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ἰσχύοντες ἰατροῦ, ἀλλ᾽ of κακῶς 


έχοντες. 


νοιαν. 8 


οὐκ ἦλθον καλέσαι δικαίους, ἀλλὰ ἁμαρτωλοὺς eis µετά- 


1 Instead of εγενετο ev τω ΔΝ ΒΙ, 33 have simply γινεται (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 ηκολουθουν in SBLA (modern editors). 
3 For και οι Φ. BLA have των Φαρισαιων, which doubtless the ancient scribes 


stumbled at as unusual. 


‘For avrov εσθιοντα B 33 have οτι εσθιει (W.H., R.G.T.), SDL οτι ησθιε 


(Tisch.). The Τ.Ε. follows ACAZ. 


> αµαρτωλων και τελωνων in BDL 33, to be preferred just because unusual. 


6 Omit te BL 33 (W.H.). 


7S8BD omit και πινει, which the scribes would be ready to insert. 
8 SABDLASX al. verss. omit εις µετανοιαν, which has been imported from Lk. 


pains to prevent us from overlooking the 
πολλοὶ of the previous clause = for they, 
the publicans, and generally the people 
who passed for sinners, were many, and 
they had begun to follow Him. Some 
(Schanz, Weiss, etc.) think the reference 
is to the disciples (μαθηταῖς), mentioned 
here for first time, therefore a statement 
that they were numerous (more, ¢.g., 
than four), quite apposite. But the 
stress of the story lies on the publicans, 
and Christ’s relations with them. (So 
Holtz., H.C.) It was an interesting 
fact to the evangelist that this class, of 
whom there was a large number in the 
neighbourhood, were beginning to show 
an interest in Jesus, and to follow Him 
about. To explain the number Elsner 
suggests that they may have gathered 
from various port towns along the shore. 
Jesus would not meet such people in 
the synagogue, as they seem to have 
been excluded from it (vide Lightfoot 
and Winsche, ad Mt. xviii. 17). Hence 
the necessity for a special mission.— 
Ver. 16. ἔλεγον: the scribes advance from 
thinking (ii. 6) to speaking ; not yet, how- 
ever, to Jesus but about Him to His 
disciples. They note, with disapproval, 
His kindly relations with ‘“ sinners ’”’. 
The publicans and other disreputables 
had also noted the fact. The story of 
the palsied man and the “‘ blasphemous ” 
word, ‘“‘thy sins be forgiven thee,” had 


got abroad, making them prick up their 
ears, and awakening decided interest in 
these tabooed circles, in the ‘ Blas- 
phemer ’’.—Ver. 17. καλέσαι: to call, 
suggestive of invitations to a feast 
(Fritzsche, Meyer, Holtz.), and making 
for the hypothesis that Jesus, not 
Matthew, was the real host at the social 
gathering: the whole plan His, and 
Matthew only His agent ; vide notes on 
Mt. He called to that particular feast as 
to the feast of the kingdom, the one a 
means to the other as the end.—8.xafovs, 
ἁμαρτωλούς: Jesus preferred the com- 
pany of the sinful to that of the righteous, 
and sought disciples from among them 
by preference. The terms are not 
ironical. They simply describe two 
classes of society in current language, 
and indicate with which of the two His 
sympathies lay. 

Vv. 18-22. Fasting (Mt. ix. 14-17, 
Lk. v. 33-39).—Ver. 18. καὶ, and, con- 
nection purely topical, another case of 
οοπβ]οῖ.--ἦσαν νηστεύοντες, either : 
were wont to fast (Grotius, Fritzsche, 
Schanz, etc.), or, and this gives more 
point to the story: were fasting at that 
particular time (Meyer, Weiss, Holtz., 
H. C.).—€pyovrat καὶ λέγ., they come 
and say, quite generally ; they = people, 
or some representatives of John’s dis- 
ciples, and the Pharisees.—Ver. το. μὴ 
δύνανται, etc.: the question answers 


23 


354 


KATA MAPKON II. 


18. Kat ἦσαν οἱ μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου καὶ οἱ τῶν Φαρισαίων } νηστεύ- 
ovres* καὶ ἔρχονται καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “ Διατί ot μαθηταὶ Ἰωάννου 
καὶ οἱ τῶν Φαρισαίων νηστεύουσιν, ot δὲ cot μαθηταὶ οὐ νηστεύ- 
ουσι;. 19. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ ἸΙησοῦς, “Mi δύνανται οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ 
νυμφῶνος, ἐν ᾧ ὁ vupdios pet αὐτῶν ἐστι, νηστεύειν; ὅσον χρόνον 
μεθ) ἑαυτῶν ἔχουσι τὸν vupdioy,® οὐ δύνανται νηστεύειν: 29. ἐλεύ- 
σονται δὲ ἡμέραι ὅταν ἀπαρθῇ dx’ αὐτῶν ὁ νυµφίος, καὶ τότε 
νηστεύσουσιν ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις.' 21. καὶ ὅ οὐδεὶς ἐπίβλημα 
ῥάκους ἀγνάφου ἐπιρράπτει ἐπὶ ipatiw παλαιῷ 5: εἰ δὲ µή, αἴρει τὸ 
πλήρωμα αὐτοῦ” τὸ καινὸν τοῦ παλαιοῦ, καὶ χεῖρον σχίσμα γίνεται. 
22. καὶ οὐδεὶς βάλλει οἶνον νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς παλαιούς: et δὲ py, 
ῥήσσει ὅ ὁ olvos ὁ νέος) τοὺς ἀσκοὺς, καὶ ὁ οἶνος ἐκχεῖται καὶ οἱ 


2» 
ἀσκοὶ ἀπολοῦνται 19: ἀλλὰ οἶνον νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς βλητέον. 


11 


4 For των Φαρισαιων SABCD ail. verss. have Φαρισαιοι. 


2 S8BCL have µαθηται after οι. 


3 SSBCL arrange thus: εχουσι τον v. µετ αντων. 


{εν εκεινη τη ηµερα in NABCDLAZ, etc. 


> και omit NABCLA 33. 


* cart ysatiov παλαιον in SBCDL. The dat. conforms to Mt. 


‘at αντου in NBL. 
*SSBCDL 13, 69 al. omit ο νεος. 


8 ρηξει in NBCDL 33. 


‘0 BL (D in part) read ο ow. απολλυται kat οι ασ. Τ.Ε. conforms to Mt. 
“SSB omit βλητεον (from Lk.). Ὦ and old Lat. verss. omit the whole clause 


itself, and is allowed to do so in Mt. 
and Lk. Mk. at the expense of style 
answers it formally in the negative.— 
ὅσον χρόνον, etc. For all this the 
Syriac Vulgate has a simple no.—Ver. 
20. Here also the style becomes bur- 
dened by the sense of the solemn 
character of the fact stated: there will 
come days when the Bridegroom shall 
be taken from them, and then shall they 
fast—in that day! This final expression, 
ἐν ἐκείνῃ ἡμέρᾳ, singular, for plural in 
first clause, is very impressive, although 
Fritzsche calls it prorsus intolerabile. 
There is no ground for the suggestion 
that the phrase is due to the evangelist, 
and refers to the Friday of the Passion 
Week (Holtz., H. C.). It might quite 
well have been used by Jesus.—Ver. 21. 
ἐπιρράπτει, sews upon, for ἐπιβάλλει 
in Mt. and Lk.; not in Greek authors, 
here only in N. T.; in Sept., Job xvi. 
15, the simple verb.—et δὲ py: vide on 
ei δὲ µήγε in Mt. ix. 17.--αἴρει, etc.: 
that which filleth up taketh from it (ἀπ᾽ 
avrov)—the new, viz., from the old; 
the second clause explanatory of the 
first.—kal χ. σ. y-, and a worse rent 
takes place.—Ver. 22. ῥήξει. Pricaeus 


(ad Mt. ix. 17) quotes from Seneca (83 
Epist.): ‘‘musto dolia ipsa rumpuntur”’ 
—of course, a fortiori, old skins.—xat 6 
οἶνος, etc.: and the wine is lost, also 
the skins.—déAAa, etc.: this final clause, 
bracketed in W. and H., with the 
Βλητέον, probably inserted from Lk., 
gives very pithy expression to the prin- 
ciple taught by the parable: but new 
wine into new skins! As to the bearing 
of both parables as justifying both John 
and Jesus, vide notes on Mt., ad loc. 
Vv. 23-28. The Sabbath question (Mt. 
xii. 1-8, Lk. vi. 1-5).—Ver. 23. καὶ ἐγ.: 
connection with foregoing topical, not 
temporal; another case of conflict. — 
αὐτὸν παραπορεύεσθαι: ἐγένετο is fol- 
lowed here by the infinitive in first clause, 
then with καὶ and a finite verb in second 
clause. It is sometimes followed by in- 
dicative with καὶ, and also without καὶ 
(vide Burton’s Syntax, § 369).---παραπορ. 
stands here instead of διαπορ. in Lk., 
and the simple verb with διὰ after it in 
Mt. It seems intended to combine the 
ideas of going through and alongside. 
Jesus went through a corn field on a 
footpath with grain on either side.— 
ὁδὸν ποιεῖν is a puzzling phrase. In 


«8—28. 


23. Καὶ ἐγένετο παραπορεύεσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν 
σπορίµων, καὶ ἤρξαντο οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 
24. καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἔλεγον 


τοὺς στάχυας. 
ἐν" τοῖς σάββασιν, ὃ οὐκ ἔξεστι ; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


355 


τοῖς σάββασι 1 διὰ τῶν 
ὁδὸν ποιεῖν ὃ τίλλοντες 
αὐτῷ, “"lSe, τί ποιοῦσιν 


25. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἔλεγεν ὅ αὗτοῖς, 


, 
««Οὐδέποτε ἀνέγνωτε, τί ἐποίησε Δαβίδ, ὅτε χρείαν ἔσχε καὶ ἐπεί- 


> 9 4 ς 3 3 A 
νασεν GUTOS και OL µετ αυτου, 


26. πῶς ὃ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον 


τοῦ Θεοῦ «ἐπὶ 5᾿Αβιάθαρ τοῦ] ἀρχιερέως, καὶ τοὺς ἄρτους THS g Lk. iii. 2; 


προθέσεως ἔφαγεν, οὓς οὐκ ἔδεστι Φαγεῖν εἰ μὴ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι.ὸ καὶ 
27. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “TS 


3. AY Lal a ar = > 
ἔδωκε καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ ovat; 


1ν. 47 Acts 
xi. 23. 


σάββατον διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐγένετο, obx® ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τὸ 


σάββατον. 
σαββάτου.” 


28. ὥστε κύριός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ τοῦ 


1 BCD have διαπορ. (Lk.). ΝΒΟΡΙ.Δ place αυτον εν τοις σαββασι before the 


verb. 


2 ot pad. before ηρξαντο in $BCDL 33, 69 ai. 


3 B has οδοποιειν (W.H. margin). 


5 SBCL omit αυτος (most modern editions. 


4 SSABCDALZ it. vulg. omit ev. 


Ws. after Meyer dissents). For 


ελεγεν ΜΟΙ, it. vulg. have λεγει (Tisch., W.H., Ws.). 


6 BD omit πως (W.H. in brackets). 
5 τους vepets in NBL, 


classic Greek it means to make a road = 
viam sternere, ὁδὸν ποιεῖσθαι meaning 
to make way =iter facere. If we 
assume that Mk. was acquainted with 
and observed this distinction, then the 
meaning will be: the disciples began to 
make a path by pulling up the stalks 
(τέλλοντες τοὺς στάχυας), or perhaps 
by trampling under foot the stalks after 
first plucking off the ears. The ἤρξαντο 
in that case will mean that they began 
todo that when they saw the path was 
not clear, and wished to make it more 
comfortable for their Master to walk on. 
But it is doubtful whether in Hellenistic 
Greek the classic distinction was ob- 
served, and Judges xvii. 8 (Sept.) 
supplies an instance of ὁδὺν ποιεῖν = 
making way, ‘‘as he journeyed”. It 
would be natural to Mk. to use the 
phrase in the sense of iter facere. If we 
take the phrase in this sense, then we 
must, with Beza, find in the passage a 
| απαέρια verborum collocatio, and trans- 
ate as if it had run: ὁδὸν ποιοῦντες 
τίλλειν: ‘began, as they went, to 
pluck,” etc. (R. V.). The former view, 
however, is not to be summarily put 
aside because it ascribes to the disciples 
an apparently wanton proceeding. If 
there was a right of way by use and 
wont, they would be quite entitled to 


7 S$BL omit του. 
9 και ουχ in NBCLAZ 33 verss. 


actso. The only difficulty is to under- 
stand how a customary path could have 
remained untrodden till the grain was 
ripe, or even in the ear. On this view 
vide Meyer. Assuming that the disciples 
made a path for their Master by pulling 
up the grain, with which it was over- 
grown, or by trampling the straw after 
plucking the ears, what did they do with 
the latter? Mt. and Lk. both say or 
imply that the plucking was in order to 
eating by hungry men. Meyer holds 
that Mk. knows nothing of this hunger, 
and that the eating of the ears came into 
the tradition through the allusion to David 
eating the shewbread. But the stress 
Mk. lays on need and hunger (duality of 
expression, ver. 25) shows that in his 
idea hunger was an element in the case 
of the disciples also.—Ver. 24. ἔλεγον 
αὐτῷ. In this case they speak {ο Christ 
against His disciples; indirectly against 
Him.—6 οὐκ ἔξεστιν: the offence was 
not trampling the grain or straw, but 
plucking the ears—reaping on a small 
scale; rubbing = threshing, in Lk.— 
xpelay ἔσχε καὶ ἐπείνασεν: another 
example of Mk.’s duality, intelligible 
only if hunger was the point of the 
story. The verbs are singular, because 
David (αὐτὸς) is the hero, his followers 
in the background. — Ver. 26. ἐπὶ 


356 


KATA MAPKON 


Ti. 


III. τ. ΚΑΙ εἰσῆλθε πάλιν eis τὴν] συναγωγή», καὶ ἦν ἐκεῖ 


a 
b 
20. Acts 
ix. 24. 
“"Everpar* εἲς τὸ μέσον.” 


σάββασιν ἀγαθοποιῆσαι, ἢ κακοποιῆσαι ; 


Ch. ix. 18. ἄνθρωπος " ἐξηραμμένην ἔχων τὴν χεῖρα, 2. καὶ Ρπαρετήρουν 7 
eld αὐτὸν εἰ τοῖς σάββασι θεραπεύσει αὐτόν, ἵνα κατηγορήσωσιν αὐτοῦ. 
4. καὶ λέγει τῶ ἀνθρώπῳ τῷ ἐξηραμμένην ἔχοντι τὴν xetpa,? 


4. Καὶ λέγει αὗτοῖς, “"Egeott τοῖς 
ψυχὴν σῶσαι, ἢ ἀπο- 


1 S$B omit την, which may have come in from Lk. (Tisch., W.H.). 
2Soin BL. CDA have the middle (Lk.). 
3 τω την χειρα εχοντι Enpav in BL (W.H.). SCA have την ξηραν χειρα exovTs 


(Tisch.). 

4 εγειρε in most uncials. 

5 αγαθον ποιησαι in ΝΤ) (Tisch.). 
assimilated to κακοποιησαι, W.H.). 


Ἀβιάθαρ ἀρ.: under A., a note of time, 
also implying his sanction: the sanction 
of a distinguished sacerdotal character = 
of Abiathar as priest. But Ahimelech 
was the priest then (x Sam. xxi. 2 f.). 
Either a natural error arising from the 
close connection of David with Abiathar, 
the well-known high priest, or we must 
adopt one or other of the solutions pro- 
posed: father and son, Ahimelech and 
Abiathar, both bore both names (1 Sam. 
xxii. 20, 2 Sam. viii. 17, 1 Chron. xviii. 
16)—so the Fathers ; Abiathar, the 
son, Ahimelech’s assistant at the time, 
and mentioned as the more notable as 
approving of the conduct of his own 
father and of David (Grotius) ; ἐπὶ taken 
in the sense it bears in Mk. xii. 26 (ἐπὶ 
βάτου)---ἴπ the passage about Abiathar— 
not a satisfactory suggestion.—Ver. 27. 
καὶ ἔλεγεν, etc., and He said to them ; this 
phrase is employed to introduce a saying 
of Jesus containing a great principle. 
The principle is that the Sabbath is only 
a means towards an end—man’s highest 
good. Strange that Mk. should have 
been allowed to havea monopoly of this 
great word! For this saying alone, 
and the parable of gradual growth (iv. 
26-29), his Gospel was worth preserving. 
—Ver. 28. ὥστε: wherefore, so then, 
introducing a thesis of co-ordinate im- 
portance, while an inference from the 
previous statement.—é vids τ. a.: the 
Son of Man, as representing the human 
interest, as opposed to the falsely con- 
ceived divine interest championed by the 
Pharisees.—kai τ. o., even of the Sab- 
bath, so inviolable in your eyes. Lord, 
not to abolish but to interpret and keep 
in its own place, and give it anew name. 
No disparagement of Sabbath meant. 


BCLAE have αγαθοπ. as in T.R. (possibly 


CHAPTER III. Tue SABBATH QuUEs- 
TION CONTINUED. THE DISCIPLE- 
ΟΙΕΟΙΕ. Another Sabbatic conflict com- 
pletes the group of incidents (five in all) 
designed to illustrate the opposition of 
the scribes and Pharisees to Jesus. 
Then at v. 7 begins a new section of 
the history, extending to vi. 13, in which 
the disciples of Jesus are, speaking 
broadly, the centre of interest. First 
the people, then their religious heads, 
then the nucleus of the new society. 

Vv. 1-6. The withered hand(Mt. xii.g-14, 
Lk. vi. 6-11).—Ver. 1. καὶ: connection 
simply topical, another instance of colli- 
sion in re Sabbath οὔδετναπος.-- πάλιν: as 
was His wont on Sabbath days (i. 21, 39). 
--συναγωγήν: without the article (8 ΕΒ), 
into a synagogue, place not known.— 
ἐξηραμμένην, dried up, the abiding re- 
sult of injury by accident or disease, not 
congenital—“‘ non ex utero, sed morbo 
aut vulnere; haec vis participii,” Beng.— 
Ver. 2. παρετήρουν, they were watch- 
ing Him; who, goes without saying: 
the same parties, 1.6., men of the same 
class, as those who figure in the last 
section. This time bent on finding 
Jesus Himself at fault in γε the Sabbath, 
instinctively perceiving that His thoughts 
on the subject must be wholly diverse 
from theirs.—Ver. 3. €yepe eis: preg- 
nant construction = arise and come forth 
into the midst. Then, the man standing 
up in presence of all, Jesus proceeds to 
catechise the would-be fault-finders.— 
Ver. 4. ἀγαθὸν ποιῆσαι ἢ κακοποιῆσαι, 
either: to do good or evil to one, or to 
do the morally good or evil. Recent 
commentators favour the latter as essen- 
tial to the cogency of Christ’s argument. 
But the former seems more consonant to 


κτεῖναι; Ot δὲ ἐσιώπων. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


5, καὶ. 


357 


ὀργῆς, SouhduTroUpevos ἐπὶ τῇ "πωρώσει τῆς καρδίας αὐτῶν, λέγει timeselse- 


τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, ““Extewov τὴν χεῖρά σου. 

a ε ε in mi 

τεστάθη ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ ἄλλη." 6. Καὶ ἐξελθόντες οἱ ἆ here 
a A ς -- > 1 . 

Φαρισαῖοι εὐθέως μετὰ τῶν Ἡρωδιανῶν συμβούλιον ἐποίουν ὃ Kat e Rom. xi. 


αὐτοῦ, ὅπως αὐτὸν ἀπολέσωσι. 


περιβλεψάμενος αὐτοὺς μετ ο Lk. vi. 10, 
where; in 
"1 Kat ἐξέτεινε, καὶ άποκα- Mk. always 


a 
only 
£5 


25. Eph. 


7. ΚΑΙ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀνεχώρησε μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ * πρὸς τὴν 
θάλασσαν ’ καὶ πολὺ πλῆθος ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ἠκολούθησαν ὅ αὐτῷ, 
καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς Ιουδαίας, 8. καὶ ἀπὸ ἹἹεροσολύμων, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς 


᾿Ιδουμαίας, καὶ πέραν τοῦ Ιορδάνου: καὶ ot ὃ περὶ Τύρον καὶ Σιδῶνα, 


1B omits σου (W.H. χειρα without σου in marg.). 


2 vyins ws η αλλη has little attestation ; 


comes from Mt. 


3 εδιδουν in BL; unusual and therefore altered into εποιουν, or εποιησαν. 
4 μετα T. µ. a. ανεχωρησεν in SBCDLA al. ; the true reading, vide below. 


> So in CA (Tisch.); -ησεν in BL (W.H.). 


sentence varies. 
5 Omit οι KBCLA. 


the situation. It was a question of per- 
forming an act of healing. Christ 
assumes that the ethically good coincides 
with the humane (Sabbath made for man). 
Therein essentially lay the difference 
between Him and the Pharisees, in whose 
theory and practice religious duty and 
benevolence, the divine and the human, 
were divorced. To do good or to do 
evil, these the only alternatives: to omit 
to do good in your power is to do evil ; 
net to save life when you can is to 
destroy Ἱε.--ἐσιώπων, they were silent, 
sullenly, but also in sheer helplessness. 
What could they reply to a question 
which looked at the subject from a 
wholly different point of view, the ethical, 
from the legal one they were accustomed 
to? There was nothing in common 
between them and Jesus.—Ver. 5. περι- 
βλεψάμενος, having made a swift, in- 
dignant (μετ) ὀργῆς) survey of His foes. 
--συνλλυπούμενος: this present, the pre- 
vious participle aorist, implying habitual 
pity for men in such a condition of blind- 
ness. This is a true touch of Mk.’s in 
his portraiture of Christ.—rfjs καρδίας : 
singular, as if the whole class had but 
one heart, which was the fact so far as 
the type of heart (hardened) was con- 
cerned.—Ver. 6, ἐξελθόντες: the stretch- 
ing forth of the withered hand in 
obedience to Christ’s command, con- 
clusive evidence of cure, was the signal 
for an immediate exodus of the cham- 
pions of orthodox Sabbath-keeping ; full 
of wrath because the Sabbath was 


The position of the verb in the 


broken, and especially because it was 
broken by a miracle bringing fame to 
the transgressor—the result plots (συµ.- 
βούλιον ἐδίδουν, here only) without 
delay (εὐθὺς) against His life—pera τῶν 
Ἡρῳδιανῶν, with the Herodians, peculiar 
to Mk.; first mention of this party, A 
perfectly credible circumstance. The 
Pharisaic party really aimed at the life 
of Jesus, and they would naturally re- 
gard the assistance of people having 
influence at court as valuable. 

Vv. 7-12. The fame of F$esus spreads 
notwithstanding (vide Mt. iv. 25, xii. 
15 f.; Lk. vi. 17-19).—Ver. 7. μετὰ τῶν 
μαθητῶν, with the disciples: note—they 
now come to the front. We are to hear 
something about them to which the 
notice of the great crowd is but the pre- 
lude, Hence the emphatic position 
before the verb.—mpds τὴν θάλασσαν : 
as ifto a place of retreat (vide ver. ο). 
πολὺ πλῆθος: πολὺ, emphatic, a vast, 
exceptionally great crowd, ἵπ spite, 
possibly in consequence, of Pharisaic 
antagonism. Of course this crowd did 
not gather inan hour. The history is 
very fragmentary, and blanks must be 
filled up by the imagination. Two 
crowds πιεεί-- (1) πολὺ πλῆθος from 
Galilee; (2) from more remote parts: 
Judaea, Jerusalem, Idumaea, Peraea, 
and the district of Tyre and Sidon— 
πλῆθος πολύ (νετ. 8): a considerable 
crowd, but not so ῥρτεαί.-- ἀπὸ τ. 
Ἰδουμαίας: Idumaea, mentioned here 
only, ‘then practically the southern 


358 


in sense of 


KATA MAPKON 


fhere only πλῆθος πολύ, ἀκούσαντες 1 ὅσα ἐποίει,] ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτόν. 


ΠΠ. 


ϱ. καὶ 


crowding. εἶπε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, ἵνα πλοιάριον προσκαρτερῇ αὐτῷ, διὰ τὸν 


Cf. Mt. 

Vii. 14. 

Elsewhere σ 
meta- 

phorical. 

g here only 


in same 2 
sense. πιπτεν 


ὄχλον, ἵνα μὴ ᾿θλίβωσιν αὐτόν. 


1Ο. πολλοὺς γὰρ ἐθεράπευσεν, 


, a A 
ὥστε 5 ἐπιπίπτειν αὐτῷ, ἵνα αὐτοῦ ἄψωνται, ὅσοι εἶχον µάστιγας : 
a 
It. καὶ τὰ πνεύματα τὰ ἀκάθαρτα, ὅταν αὐτὸν ἐθεώρει,” προσέ- 
‘ ~ ~ 
αὐτῷ, καὶ ἔκραζε,; λέγοντα, ““Ort σὺ ef 6 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ.” 


Ἡ Ἠετε απά 12. Καὶ πολλὰ ἐπετίμα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα μὴ αὐτὸν Ἡ φανερὸν ποιήσωσι.Σ 


in Mt. xii. 
16 (=to 
make one 


known). Kat ἀπῆλθον πρὸς αὐτόν. 


, a“ 
13. Καὶ ἀναβαίνει eis τὸ ὄρος, καὶ προσκαλεῖται οὓς ἤθελεν αὐτός : 
14. καὶ ἐποίησε δώδεκα," ἵνα ὧσι μετ 


αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτοὺς κηρύσσειν, 15. καὶ ἔχειν ἐξουσίαν 


θεραπεύειν τὰς νόσους, καὶ ἐκβάλλειν τὰ δαιμόνια: 16. καὶ 


1 ακονοντες in NBA; CD have ακουσαντες; ποιει in BL (W.H.). 
Ξεθεωρουν, προσεπιπτον, εκραζον in best MSS. The sing. a gram. cor. (neut. pl. 


nom.). 


ὅποιωσι in B*DL; as in Τ.Κ. in $$BCAE (Tisch. former, W.H. latter). 
“SQBCA add ους και αποστολους ωνοµασε, probably an importation from Lk. 


° Gepatrevety Tas νοσους και Omitted in NBCLA. 


Shephelah, with the Negeb.’—G. A. 
Smith, Historical Geography of the Holy 
Land, p. 239. Mentioned by Josephus 
(B. J., lii. 3-5) as a division of Judaea.— 
Ver. 9g. Ὦἕἵνα πλοιάριον προσκαρτερῇ: a 
boat to be always in readiness, to get 
away from the crowds. Whether used 
or not, not said; shows how great the 
crowd was.—Ver. ΙΟ. ὥστεἐπιπίπτειν: 
so that they knocked against Him; one 
of Mk.’s vivid touches. They hoped to 
obtain a cure by contact anyhow brought 
about, even by rude collision.—_paorryas, 
from µάστιξ, a scourge, hence tropically 
in Sept. and N. T., a_providential 
scourge, a disease ; again in v. 29, 34.— 
Ver. 11. ὅταν ἐθ. In a relative clause 
like this, containing a past general 
supposition, classical Greek has the 
optative without ἄν. Here we have the 
imperfect indicative with ἄν (ὅτε ἄν). 
Vide Klotz., ad Devar, p. 690, and Burton, 
M. and T., § 315. Other examples in 
chap. vi. 56, xi. 10.--προσέπιπτον, 
fell before (ἐπιπίπτειν, above, to fall 
against).—2¥ el 6 v. τ. θ.: again an in- 
stance of spiritual clairvoyance in 
demoniacs. Vide at Mt. viii. 29.—Ver. 
12. This sentence is reproduced in Mt. 
xii. 16, but without special reference to 
demoniacs, whereby it loses much of its 
point. 

Vv. 13-19a. Selection of the Twelve 
(cf. Mt. κ. 2-4, Lk. vi. 12-16).—Ver. 13. 
€is Td Spos. He ascends fo the hill ; 
same expression as in Mt. v. 1; reference 
not to any particular hill, but to the hill 


country flanking the shore of the lake; 
might be used from whatever point 
below the ascent was made.—zpooxa- 
λεῖται, etc., He calls to Him those 
whom He Himself (αὐτός after the verb, 
emphatic) wished, whether by personal 
communication with each individual, or 
through disciples, not indicated. It was. 
an invitation to leave the vast crowd and 
follow Him up the hill; addressed to a 
larger number than twelve, from whom 
the Twelve were afterwards selected.— 
ἀπήῆλθον π. a.: they left the crowd and 
followed after Him.—Ver. 14. He is 
now on the hill top, surrounded by a 
body of disciples, perhaps some scores, 
picked out from the great mass of 
followers.—xat ἐποίησε δώδεκα: and He 
made, constituted as a compact body, 
Twelve, by a second selection. For use: 
of ποιεῖν in this sense vide 1 Sam. xii. 
6, 7Acts  Π. 36, Με ted 
“made” ou as Jesus “made” the 
Twelve. What the process of ‘‘ making” 
in the case of the Twelve consisted in we 
do not know. It might take place after 
days of close intercourse on the hill.— 
ἵνα dow per αὐτοῦ, that they might be 
(constantly) with Him; first and very 
important aim of the making, mentioned 
only by Mk—training contemplated.— 
ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ: to send them out ona 
preaching and healing mission, also in 
view, but only after a while. This verb 
frequent in Mk. Note the absence of 
τοῦ betore κηρύσσειν and ἔχειν (ver. 15). 
—Ver. 16. καὶ ἐποίησεν τ. δ., and He 


ο---21: 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


359 


‘er€Onne! τῷ Σίµωνι ὄνομα 7 Πέτρον" 17. καὶ ᾿Ἰάκωβον τὸν τοῦ ‘here and in 


Ζεβεδαίου, καὶ Ιωάννην τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ ᾿Ιακώβου: καὶ ἐπέθηκεν 
αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα Βοανεργές,Σ 6 ἐστιν, Υἱοὶ βροντῆς ' 18. καὶ ᾿Ανδρέαν, 
καὶ Φίλιππον, καὶ Βαρθολομαῖον, καὶ Ματθαῖον, καὶ Θωμᾶν, καὶ 


ver. 17 
only in 
sense of 
adding a 
name. 


᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν Tou ᾽Αλφαίου, καὶ Θαδδαῖον, καὶ Σίμωνα τὸν Kavavitny,* . 


Ig. καὶ Ιούδαν Ισκαριώτην,ὃ ὃς καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτόν. 
Καὶ ἔρχονται 6 εἲς οἶκον: 20. καὶ συνέρχεται πάλιν Ἰ ὄχλος, ὥστε 
μὴ δύνασθαι αὐτοὺς µήτεξὃ ἄρτον Φαγεῖν. 


1 the phrase 
here only 
in N.T. 
(1 Macc. 
1. 17 ; xiii. 


21. καὶ dxovcavtes? ol 52), 


1 Το και επέθηκε SBCA prefix και εποιησε τους δ.; a probable reading, vide below. 


2 ovopa τω Σιµονι in NBCLA. 
* Καναναιον in S$ BCDLA 33 it. vulg. 


3 Βοανηργες in NABCLA? 33. 
5 Ισκαριωθ in NBCLA 33. 


6 ερχεται ἵπ NB. The plural (T.R.) is a correction. 
7 9 before οχλος in BDA (W.H. bracketed). 
8 pyre in CDE (Tisch.). pyde in BLA 33 (W.H.). 


appointed as the Twelve—the following 
persons, the twelve names mentioned 
being the object of ἐποίησε, and τοὺς &. 
being in apposition.—Mérpov is the first 
name, but it comes in very awkwardly as 
the object of the verb ἐπέθηκε We 
must take the grammar as it stands, 
content that we know, in spite of crude 
construction, what is meant. Fritzsche 
(after Beza, Erasmus, etc.) seeks to 
rectify the construction by prefixing, on 
slender critical authority, πρῶτον Σίμωνα, 
then bracketing as a parenthesis «ai 
ἐπέθηκε . . . Πέτρον = first Simon (and 
He gave to Simon the name Peter).— 


Ver. 17.  Boavepyés = wry) 13 as 


pronounced by Galileans; in Syrian = 
sons of thunder; of tumult, in Hebrew. 
Fact mentioned by Mk. only. Why the 
name was given not known. It does not 
seem to have stuck to the two disciples, 
therefore neglected by the other evan- 
gelists. It may have been an innocent 
pleasantry in a society of free, unre- 
strained fellowship, hitting off some 
peculiarity of the brothers. Mk. gives 
us here a momentary glimpse into the 
inner life of the Jesus-circle—Peter, 
whose new name did live, doubtless the 
voucher. The traditional interpretation 
makes the epithet a tribute to the 
eloquence of the two disciples (διὰ τὸ 
µέγα καὶ διαπρύσιον ἠχῆσαι τῇ οἰκουμένῃ 
τῆς θεολογίας τὰ δόγματα. Victor Ant.). 
—Ver.18. Ματθαῖον. One wonders why 
Mk. did not here say: Levi, to whom 
He gave the name Matthew. Or did 
this disciple get his new name inde- 
pendently of Jesus? This list of names 
shows the importance of the act of 


selecting the Twelve. He gives the 
names, says Victor Ant., that you may 
not err as to the designations, lest any 
one should call himself an apostle ‘iva 
μὴ ὁ τυχὼν εἴπῃ ἀπόστολος γεγονέναι). 

Vv. τοὺ-21. The friends of Fesus 
think Him out of His senses ; peculiar to 
Mk. One of his realisms which Mt. and 
Lk. pass over in silence.—Ver. ΤΟΡ. καὶ 
ἔρχεται els οἶκον, and He cometh home 
(“‘nach Haus,’’ Weizs.) to house-life as 
distinct from hill-life (εἰς τὸ ὄρος, ver. 13). 
The formal manner in which this is 
stated suggests a sojourn on the hill of 
appreciable length, say, for some days. 
How occupied there? Probably in 
giving a course of instruction to the 
disciple-circle ; say, that reproduced in 
the ‘“*Sermon on the Mount” = the 
“Teaching on the Hill,” vide intro- 
ductory notes on Mt. v.—Ver. 20. The 
traditional arrangement by which clause 
b forms part of ver. 19 is fatal to a true 
conception of the connection of events. 
The R. V., by making it begin a new 
section, though not a new verse, helps 
intelligence, but it would be better still 
if it formed a new verse with a blank 
space left between. Some think that 
in the original form of Mk. the Sermon 
on the Mount came in here. It is cer- 
tainly a suitable place for it. In accord- 
ance with the above suggestion the text 
would stand thus :— 

Ver.19. And Judas Iscariot, who also 
betrayed Him. 





Ver. 20. And He cometh home. 

Ver. 21. And the multitude cometh 
together again, etc. 

συνέρχεται: the crowd, partially dis 


360 


13 


1 Ch. ix. 29; ςς 
XVi. 17. 


persed, reassembles (implying lapse of 
an appreciable interval). Jesus had 
hoped they would go away to their 
homes in various parts of the country 
during His absence on the hill, but He 
was disappointed. They lingered on.— 
ὥστε, etc.: the crowding about the 
house and the demand for sight and 
succour of the Benefactor were so great 
that they (Jesus and His companions) 
could not find leisure, not even (μηδὲ) to 
take food, not to speak of rest, or giv- 
ing instruction to disciples. Erasmus 
(Adnot.) thinks the reference is to the 
multitude, and the meaning that it was 
so large that there was not bread for all, 
not to speak of kitchen (obsonia).—Vet. 
21 introduces a new scene into the lively 
drama. The statement is obscure partly 
owing to its brevity (Fritzsche), and 
it is made obscurer by a piety which is 
not willing to accept the surface mean- 
ing (so Maldonatus—‘‘hunc locum 
difficiliorem pietas facit”), which is 
that the friends of Jesus, having heard of 
what was going on—wonderful cures, 
great crowds, incessant activity—set out 
from where they were (ἐξῆλθον) with 
the purpose of taking Him under their 
care (κρατῆσαι αὐτόν), their impression, 
not concealed (ἔλεγον yap, they had 
begun to say), being that He was in an 
unhealthy state of excitement bordering 
on insanity (ἐξέστη). Recent com- 
mentators, German and English, are in 
the main agreed that this is the true 
sense.—ot map’ αὐτοῦ means either 
specifically His relatives (“‘sui” Vulg., 
ot οἰκεῖοι a.—Theophy.), 5ο Raphel, 
Wetstein, Kypke, Loesner, with citations 
from Greek authors, Meyer and Weiss, 


KATA MAPKON 


ΠΙ. 


k 2 Cor. ν.παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐξῆλθον κρατῆσαι αὐτόν: ἔλεγον γάρ, “΄Ὅτι * ἐξέστη.” 
22. Καὶ of γραμματεῖς οἱ ἀπὸ “Ἱεροσολύμων καταβάντες ἔλεγον, 
Ὅτι Βεελζεβοὺλ ἔχει, καὶ 


- ~ 
“"On ἐν τῷ ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιµονίων 


messengers who brought them news of 
what was going on (Bengel), or it might 
refer quite impersonally toa report that had 
gone abroad (‘rumor exierat,”’ Grotius), 
or it might even refer to the Pharisees. 
But the reference is almost certainly to 
the friends. Observe the parallelism 
between ot wap’ αὐτοῦ, ἔλεγον γὰρ, ὅτι 
ἐξέστη and of γραμματεῖς, οἱ... ἔλεγον, 
ὅτι Βεελ. ἔχει in νετ. 22 (Fritzsche points 
this out in a long and thorough dis- 
cussion of the whole passage).—eféorn : 
various ways of evading the idea 
suggested by this word have been re- 
sorted to. It has been referred to the 
crowd = the crowd is mad, and won't 
let Him alone. Viewed as referring to 
Jesus it has been taken = He is ex- 
hausted, or He has left the place = they 
came to detain Him, for they heard that 
He was going or had gone. Both these 
are suggested by Euthy. Zig. Doubtless 
the reference is to Jesus, and the mean- 
ing that in the opinion of His friends 
He was in a state of excitement border- 
ing on insanity (cf. ii. 12, v. 42, vi. 51). 
δαίµονα ἔχει (Theophy.) is too strong, 
though the Jews apparently identified 
insanity with possession, Festus said 
of St. Paul: ‘‘ Much learning doth make 
thee mad”. The friends of Jesus thought 
that much benevolence had put Him into 
a state of enthusiasm dangerous to the 
health both of body and mind. Note: 
Christ’s healing ministry created a need 
for theories about it. Herod had his 
theory (Mt. xiv.), the friends of Jesus 
had theirs, and the Pharisees theirs: 
John redivivus, disordered mind, Satanic 
possession. That which called forth so 
many theories must have been a great 


identifying the parties here spoken of fact. 


with those referred to in ver. 31: Or, 
more generally, persons well disposed 
towards Jesus, an outer circle of 
disciples (Schanz and Keil),—éaxov- 
σαντες: not to be restricted to what is 
mentioned in ver. 20; refers to the 
whole Galilean ministry with its cures 
and crowds, and constant strain. There- 
fore the friends might have come from a 
distance, Nazareth, e¢.g., starting before 
Jesus descended from the hill. That 
their arrival happened just then was a 
coincidence.—éXeyov yap: for they were 
saying, might refer to others than those 
who eame to iay hold of Jesus—to 


Vv. 22-30. Pharisaic theory as to the 
cures of demoniacs wrought by Fesus 
(Mt. xii. 22-37, Lk. xi. 17-23).—Ver. 
22. ot γραμ. οἱ ἀπὸ ‘I., the scribes from 
Ferusalem. The local Pharisees who 
had taken the Herodians into their mur- 
derous counsels had probably also com- 
municated with the Jerusalem authorities, 
using all possible means to compass 
their end. The representatives of the 
southern scribes had probably arrived on 
the scene about the same time as the 
friends of Jesus, although it is not in- 
conceivable that Mk. introduces the 
narrative, regarding them here because 


22—28, 


ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


361 


23. Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος αὐτούς, ἐν 


παραβολαῖς ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “Nas δύναται Σατανᾶς Σατανᾶν ἐκβάλ- 


λειν; 


24. καὶ ἐὰν βασιλεία ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὴν µερισθῇ, οὐ δύναται 


σταθῆναι ἡ βασιλεία ἐκείνη : 25. καὶ ἐὰν οἰκία ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὴν µερισθῇ, 


οὗ δύναται} σταθῆναι ἡ οἰκία ἐκείνη»: 26. καὶ εἰ 


ὁ Σαταγᾶς 


ἀνέστη ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὸν καὶ µεµέρισται, ob δύναται σταθῆναι, ἀλλὰ 


τέλος ἔχει. 


27. οὗ © δύναται οὐδεὶς τὰ 6 σκεύη τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ, εἰσελθὼν 


eis τὴν οἰκίαν ὃ αὐτοῦ, διαρπάσαι, ἐὰν μὴ πρῶτον ἰσχυρὸν dijon, 


9 , A 3) αν |) θὰ 
καὶ τότε τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ διαρπάσει. 
πάντα ἀφεθήσεται τὰ ”' ἁμαρτήματα τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων;" καὶ ὃ 


1 δυνησεται in SBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


28. ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτιπι Rom. iii 
25. 1 Cor. 
vi. 18, 


δυναται conforms to ver. 24. 


2 η οικια εκεινη στηναι in BL (Trg., W.H.) ; σταθηναι in SCD (Tisch.). 
ὅ και epeptoOy in BL (W.H.), εµερισθη και in S§CA (Tisch.). 


* orynvat in SBCL (Tisch., W.H.). 
5 aA before ov in ΝΒΟΙ ΙΔ 33 al. 


5 es την οικιαν του LoXUpOV εισελθων τα σκευη αντου in SYBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
77a apap. after ανθρωπων in SABCDL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


δαι after και in NABCEGLAZ (Tisch., 


of the resemblances and _ contrasts 
between their theory and that of the 
friends. Mt. sets the incident in different 
relations, yielding a contrast between 
Pharisaic ideas and those of the people 
respecting the cure of demoniacs by 
Jesus (xii. 22 {).---Βεελζεβοὺλ ἔχει, He 
hath Beelzebub, implying that Beelzebub 
hath Him, using Him as his agent. The 
expression points to something more 
than an alliance, as in Mt., to possession, 
and that on a grand scale; a divine 
possession by a base deity doubtless, 
god of flies (Beelzebub) or god of dung 
(Beelzebul), still a god, a _ sort of 
Satanic incarnation; an involuntary 
compliment to the exceptional power 
and greatness of Jesus.—év τῷ ἄρχοντι 
7. δ.: the assumption is that spirits are 
cast out by the aid of some other spirit 
stronger than those ejected.—Ver. 23. 
προσκαλεσάµενος: Jesus, not overawed 
by the Jerusalem authorities, invites 
them to come within talking distance, 
that He may reason the matter with 
them.—év παραβολαῖς, in figures: king- 
dom, house, plundering the house of a 
strong man. Next chapter concerning 
the parabolic teaching of Jesus casts its 
shadow on the page here. The gist of 
what Jesus said to the scribes in refuta- 
tion of their theory is: granting that 
Spirits are cast out by aid of another 
spirit, more is needed in the latter than 


W.H.)- 


superior strength. There must be quali- 
tative difference—in nature and interest. 
The argument consists of a triple move- 
ment of thought. 1. The absurdity of 
the theory is broadly asserted. 2. The 
principle on which the theory is wrecked 
is set forth in concrete form. 3. The 
principle is applied to the case in hand. 
--οπῶς δύναται, etc., how can Satan 
cast out Satan? It is not a question of 
power, but of motive, what interest can 
he have? A stronger spirit casting out 
a weaker one of the same kind ? (so 
Fritzsche).—Vv. 24, 25 set forth the 
principle or rationale embodied in two 
illustrations. The theory in question is 
futile because it involves suicidal action, 
which is not gratuitously to be imputed 
to any rational agents, to a kingdom 
(ver. 24), to a house (ver. 25), and there- 
fore not to Satan (ver. 26).—Ver. 27 by 
another figure shows the true state of 
the case. Jesus, not in league with 
Satan or Beelzebub, but overmastering 
him, and taking possession of his goods, 
human souls. The saying is given by 
Mk. much the same as in Mt. 

Vv. 28, 29. Fesus now changes His 
tone. Thus far He has reasoned with 
the scribes, now He solemnly warns to 
this effect. ‘‘You do not believe your 
own theory ; you know as weil as I how 
absurd it is, and that I must be casting 
out devils by a very different spirit from 


362 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


ΠΠ. 


βλασφημίαι ὅσας] ἂν βλασφημήσωσιν: 29. ὃς δ ἂν βλασφημήσῃ. 


3 a aA ao 
εἰς τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Άγιον, ok ἔχει ἄφεσιν eis τὸν αἰῶνα, ἀλλ᾽ ἔνοχός 


ἐστιν” αἰωνίου Kpicews*-” 
” ”» 
ἔχει. 


ἑστῶτες ὃ ἀπέστειλαν πρὸς 


30. ὅτι ἔλεγον, “΄ Πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον 


31. Ἔρχονται οὖν 4 ot ἀδελφοὶ καὶ ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ ® καὶ ἔξω 


“A 
αὐτόν, φωνοῦντεςἸ αὐτόν. καὶ 


am 


ἐκάθητο ὄχλος περὶ αὐτόν :ὃ εἶπον S€% αὐτῷ, “Ιδού, ἡ µήτηρ σου 


άοσα in NBDA. οσας α gram. cor. 


2 erat in DLA (Tisch.), εστιν in BC (W.H.). 


S apapryparos in SBLA 33 Lat. Codd. 


difficult word. 


κρισεως (T.R.) is explanatory of a 


* For ερχ. ουν ABCLA have και ερχονται (W.H.). $§D have και ερχεται. 
5m µητηρ a. και ot αδελφοι in NBCDLA. The plural verb gave rise to the 


transposition in T.R. 
8 στηκοντες in BCA (Tisch., W.H.). 
ὅπερι αυτον οχλος in ABCLAZ. 


Beelzebub. You are therefore not 
merely mistaken theorists, you are men 
in a very perilous moval condition. 
Beware!’’—\er.28. dpnv:solemn word, 
introducing a solemn speech uttered in a 
tone not to be forgotten.—mavra ἀφεθή- 
σεται, all things shall be forgiven; 
magnificently broad proclamation of the 
wideness of God’s mercy. The saying 
as reproduced in Lk. xii. ro limits the 
reference to sins of speech. The original 
form, Weiss thinks (in Meyer), but this 
is very doubtful. It seems fitting that 
when an exception is being made to the 
pardonableness of sin, a broad declara- 
tion of the extent of pardon should be 
uttered.—rois υἱοῖς τ. ἀ., to the sons of 
men; this expression not in Mt., but in 
its place a reference to blasphemy against 
the Son of Man. To suspect a literary 
connection between the two is natural. 
Which is the original form? Mk.’s? 
(Holtz., Η. Ο., after Pfleiderer.) Mt.’s ? 
(Weiss in Meyer.) The latter the more 
probable. Vide on νετ. 3ο.- τὰ Gpap. 
καὶ αἱ βλ.: either in apposition with and 
explicative of πάντα, or Ta Gpap., the 
subject which πάντα qualifies. The 
former construction yields this sense : 
all things shall be forgiven to, etc., the 
sins and the blasphemies wherewith 
soever they shall blaspheme. The last 
clause qualifying βλασφημίαι (ὅσα ἐὰν 
βλ.) which takes the place of πάντα in 
relation to Gpapr. is in favour of the 
latter rendering = all sins shall be for- 
given, etc., and the blasphemies, etc.— 
Ver. 29. The great exception, blas- 
phemy against the Holy Ghost.—eis τὸν 
aigva: hath not forgiveness for ever. 


7 καλουντες in SBCL. 
ὃ kat λεγουσιν in SBCDLA, 


Cf. the fuller expression in Mt.—éAd’ 
ἔνοχός ἐστιν, but is guilty of. The 
negative is followed by a positive state- 
ment of similar import in Hebrew 
fashion.—aiwviov ἁμαρτήματος, of an 
eternal sin. As this is equivalent to 
*‘hath never forgiveness,” we must con- 
ceive of the sin as eternal in its guilt, 
not in itselfasasin. The idea is that 
of an unpardonable sin, not of a sin 
eternally repeating itself. Yet this may 
be the ultimate ground of unpardonable- 
ness: unforgivable because never re- 
pented of. But this thought is not 
necessarily contained in the expression. 
—Ver. 30. ὅτι ἔλεγον, etc., because 
they said: ‘‘ He hath an unclean spirit,” 
therefore He said this about blasphemy 
against the Holy Ghost—such is the 
connection. But what if they spoke 
under a misunderstanding like the friends, 
puzzled what to think about this strange 
man? That would be a sin against the 
Son of Man, and as such pardonable. 
The distinction between blasphemy 
against the Son of Man and blasphemy 
against the Holy Ghost, taken in Mt. 
xll. 341, is essential to the understanding 
of Christ’s thought. The mere saying, 
“He hath an unclean spirit,” does not 
amount to the unpardonable sin. It 
becomes such when it is said by men 
who know that it is not true; then it 
means calling the Holy Spirit an unclean 
spirit. Jesus believed that the scribes 
were in that position, or near it. 

Vv. 31-35. The relatives of Fesus* 
(Mt. xii. 46-50, Lk. viii. 19-21).—Ver. 
31. €pxovrar, even without the οὖν 
following in T. R., naturally points back 


20— Ι5. 


καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί cou! ἔξω [ητοῦσί σε”. 
λέγων, “Tis ἐστιν ἡ µήτηρ µου 7% οἱ ἀδελφοί pout ;” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


363 


33. Καὶ ἀπεκρίθη αὗτοῖς, 
34. Καὶ 


περιβλεψάμενος ” κύκλω τοὺς περὶ αὐτὸν ὅ καθηµένους, λέγει, “΄Ἴδε. n Ch. vi. 6. 
Pp μ. : Pp ημ yet, 


ἡ µήτηρ µου καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί µου. 


θέλημα Ἰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὗτος ἀδελφός µου καὶ ἀδελφή µου ὃ καὶ µήτηρ 


3 3 


Lk. ix. 11. 


35. ὃς γὸρῦ ἂν ποιήσῃ τὸ 


1D adds και αι αδελφαι σον, which may have fallen out by similar ending in 


SBCLA (W.H. margin). 


2 kat αποκριθεις a. λεγει in SBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 kat in NBCLA. 
5 rous περι a. κυκλω in NBCLA. 
7 τα θεληµατα in B (W.H. margin). 


to ver. 21. The evangelist resumes the 
story about Christ’s friends, interrupted 
by the encounter with the scribes (so 
Grotius, Bengel, Meyer, Weiss, Holtz. ; 
Schanz and Keil dissent).—oryxovres, 
from στήκω, a late form used in present 
only, from ἕστηκα, perfect of ἵστημι.--- 
Ver. 32. The crowd gathered around 
Jesus report the presence of His rela- 
tives. According to a reading in several 
MSS., these included sisters among those 
present. They might do so under a 
mistake, even though the sisters were 
not there. Ifthe friends came to with- 
draw Jesus from public life, the sisters 
were not likely to accompany the party, 
though there would be no impropriety in 
their going along with their mother. 
They are not mentioned in ver. 31. On 
the other hand, ἀδελφῆ comes in appro- 
priately in ver. 35 in recognition of 
female disciples, which may have 
suggested its introduction here.—Ver. 
33. τίς ἐστιν, etc., who is my mother, 
and (who) my brothers? an apparently 
harsh question, but He knew what they 
had come for.—Ver. 34. περιβλεψάμενος, 
as in ver. 5, there in anger, here with a 
benign οαπη]]ε.---κύκλῳ: His eye swept 
the whole circle of His audience ; a good 
Greek expression.—Ver. 35. ὃς ἂν, etc.: 
whosoever shall do the will of God (* of 
my Father in heaven,” Mt.), definition 
of true ἀῑδοιρ]εςΗίρ.---ἀδελφός, ἀδελφή, 
µήτηρ: without the article, because the 
nouns are used figuratively (Fritzsche). 
This saying and the mood it expressed 
would confirm the friends in the belief 
that Jesus was in a morbid state of mind. 

CuaPTER IV. PARABOLIC TEACHING. 
In common with Mt., Mk. recognises 
that teaching in parables became at a 
given date a special ieature of Christ’s 


4 BD omit this pov. 
ὅ yap omitted in B. 
ὃ µου omitted in ABDLA, 


didactic ministry. He gives, however, 
fewer samples of that type than the first 
evangelist. Two out of the seven in 
Mt., with one peculiar to himself, three in 
all; in this respect probably truer to the 
actual history of the particular day. 
Teaching in parables did not make an 
absolutely new beginning on the day on 
which the Parable of the Sower was 
spoken. Jesus doubtless used similitudes 
in all His synagogue discourses, ot 
which a few samples may have been 
preserved in the Mustard Seed, the 
Treasure, and the Pearl. 

Vv. 1-9. The Sower (Mt. xiii 1-9, 
Lk. viii. 4-8).—Ver. 1. πάλιν ἤρξατο. 
After spending some time in teaching 
disciples, Jesus resumes His wider 
ministry among the people in the open 
air: at various points along the shore ot 
the sea (παρὰ τ. @.). Speaking to larger 
crowds than ever (ὄχλος πλεῖστος), 
which could be effectively addressed 
only by the Speaker getting into a boat 
(πλοῖον, τὸ πλοῖον would point to the 
boat which Jesus had asked the disciples 
to have in readiness, iii. 9), and sailing 
out a little distance from the shore, the 
people standing on the land as close to 
the sea as possible (πρὸς τ. 0.).—Ver. 2. 
πολλά: a vague expression, but imply- 
ing that the staple of that day’s teaching 
consisted of parables, probably all more 
or less of the same drift as the parable of 
the Sower, indicating that in spite of the 
ever-growing crowds Jesus was dissatis- 
fied with the results of His popular 
ministry in street and synagogue = much 
seed-sowing, little fruit. The tormation 
of the disciple-circle had revealed that 
dissatisfaction in another way.  Pro- 
bably some of the parables spoken in the 
boat have not been preserved, the Sower 


KATA MAPKON IV 


364 
IV. 1. ΚΑΙ πάλιν ἧρέξατο διδάσκειν παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν: καὶ 

συνήχθη 1 πρὸς αὐτὸν ὄχλος πολύς, ὥστε αὐτὸν ἐμβάντα εἰς τὸ 

πλοῖον ὃ καθῆσθαι ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ' καὶ πᾶς 6 ὄχλος πρὸς τὴν 
θάλασσαν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἦν". 2. καὶ ἐδίδασκεν αὐτοὺς ἐν παραβολαῖς 

πολλά, καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ, 3. “'᾿Ακούετε. ἰδού, 


ἐξῆλθεν 6 σπείρων τοῦ ὅ σπεῖραι: 4. καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ σπείρειν, ὃ 


μὲν ἔπεσε παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, καὶ ἦλθε τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ 6 καὶ 
κατέφαγεν αὐτό. 5. ἄλλο Se? 
εἶχε γῆν πολλήν: καὶ εὐθέως ἐξανέτειλε, διὰ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν βάθος ὃ 


γῆς: 6. ἡλίου δὲ ἀνατείλαντος ὃ ἐκαυματίσθη,]Ὀ καὶ διὰ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν 


” 3 


‘ a 9 > 
ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ τὸ πετρῶδες, ὅπου οὐκ 


1 σνναγεται in ΔΒΟΙ:Δ (modern editors). 

Άπλειστος in S$BCLA (Tisch., W.H., al.), 

3 ets πλοιον εµβαντα in BCL. DA have same order with το before πλοιον. 
4noav in NBCLA 33. ην is a gram. cor. 


549B omit tov, found in CLA. 
6 Omit του ovpavov ΝΑΒΟΙΙΔΣ. 
7 και αλλο (αλλα D 33) in NBCLA. 


8 βαθος γης in SACLAYX, but B has της y., and perhaps this is the true read. 


ing, though recent editors adopt the other. 


9 και οτεανετειλεν ο ηλιος in NBCLA. 


Τ.Ε. conforms to Mt. 


10 BD have εκαυµατισθησαν (W.H. margin). 


serving as a sample.—év τῇ διδαχῇ a. 
In the teaching of that day He said 
inter alia what follows,—Ver. 3. axovere: 
hear! listen! a summons to attention 
natural for one addressing a great crowd 
from a boat, quite compatible with ἰδού, 
which introduces the parable (against 
Weiss in Meyer). The parable is given 
here essentially as in Mt., with only 
slight variations: σπεῖραι (νετ. 3) for 
σπείρειν; ὃ μὲν (ver. 4) for ἃ pev, ἄλλο 
(vv. 5, 7) for ἄλλα. To the statement 
that the thorns choked the grain (συνέ- 
πνιξαν αὐτό), Mk. adds (ver. 7) καὶ 
καρπὸν οὐκ ἔδωκεν, an addition not 
superfluous in this case, as it would have 
been in the two previous, because the 
grain in this case reaches the green ear. 
To be noted further is the expansion in 
ver. 8, in reference to the seed sown on 
good soil. Mt. says it yielded fruit 
(ἐδίδου καρπὸν), Mk. adds ἀναβαίνοντα 
καὶ αὐξανόμενα, καὶ ἔφερεν, all three 
phrases referring to ἄλλα at the be- 
ginning of the verse. The participles 
taken along with ἐδίδου καρπὸν dis- 
tinguish the result in the fourth case 
from those in the three preceding. The 
first did not spring up, being picked up 
by the birds, the second sprang up but 
did not grow, withered by the heat, the 


third sprouted and grew up but yielded 
no (ripe) fruit, choked by thorns (Grotius). 
---καὶ ἔφερεν introduces a statement as 
to the quantity of fruit, the degrees 
being arranged in a climax, 30, 60, τοο, 
instead of in an anti-climax, as in Mt., 
100, 60, 30.—Ver. 9. καὶ ἔλεγεν: this 
phrase is wanting in Mt., and the 
summons to reflection is more pithily 
expressed there = who hath ears let him 
hear. The summons implies that under- 
standing is possible even for those with- 
out. 

Vv. 10-12. Disciples ask an explana- 
tion of the parable (Mt. xiii. 10-17, Lk, 
Vili. 9-10). Ver. 10. κατὰ µόνας (ὁδούς 
or χώρας understood), alone—oi περὶ 
αὐτὸν, those about Him, not = of παρ᾽ 
αὐτοῦ (iii. 21), nor =the Twelve, who 
are separately mentioned (σὺν τ. δωδ.); 
an outer circle of disciples from which the 
Twelve were chosen.—tas παραβολάς, 
the parables, spoken that day. They 
asked Him about them, as to their mean- 
ing. ‘The plural, well attested, implies 
that the parables of the day had a common 
drift. To explain one was to explain 
all. They were a complaint of the com- 
parative fruitlessness of past efforts.— 
Ver. 11. ἡμῖν, to you has been given, so 
as to be a permanent possession, the 


τς. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 365 


γ- 
ῥίζαν ἐξηράνθη. 
ai ἄκανθαι, καὶ συνέπνιξαν αὐτό, καὶ καρπὸν οὐκ ἔδωκε. 8. 
ἄλλο 1 έπεσεν eis τὴν γῆν τὴν καλήν: καὶ ἐδίδου καρπὸν ἀναβαίνοντα 
καὶ αὐξάνοντα, } καὶ ἔφερεν ἓν ὃ τριάκοντα, καὶ ἓν ὃ ἑξήκοντά, καὶ 


0. Καὶ ἔλεγεν adtois,* “‘O éxwv® Gra ἀκούειν 
7 


7. καὶ ἄλλο ἔπεσεν eis τὰς ἀκάνθας: Kal ἀνέβησαν 
A 
καὶ 


ἓν δ ἑκατόν. 
ἀκουέτω.. 10, “Ore δὲ δ ἐγένετο "καταμόνας, ἠρώτησαν 
περὶ αὐτὸν σὺν τοῖς δώδεκα τὴν παραβολήν.ὃ 11. καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, 18. 
“Vuiv δέδοται γνῶναι τὸ µυστήριον) τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ: 
ἐκείνοις δὲ τοῖς ἔξω, ἐν παραβολαῖς τὰ πάντα γίνεται: 12. ἵνα βλέπον- 
τες βλέπωσι, καὶ μὴ wore καὶ ἀκούοντες ἀκούωσι, καὶ μὴ συνιῶσι : 
µήποτε ἐπιστρέψωσι, καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς τὰ ἁμαρτήματα." 19 13. Καὶ 
λέγει αὐτοῖς, “ Οὐκ οἴδατε τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην; καὶ πῶς πάσας 
14. 6 σπείρων τὸν λόγον σπείρει. 


αὐτὸν ota here and 
in Lk. ix. 


τὰς παραβολὰς γνώσεσθε; 
15. οὗτοι δέ εἶσιν of παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, ὅπου σπείρεται ὁ λόγος, καὶ 


1 αλλα in ΜΒΟΙ,. αλλο conforms to that in ver. 7. 


2 avgavopevov in ACDLA (Tisch.). 
αλλα. 


5 Most uncials have εν thrice (= &). 


SSCA have es thrice (Tisch., Trg.). 


αυξανοµενα in ΜΒ (W.H.) agreeing with 


BL 


have es ev ev (W.H. text), out of which the other readings probably grew. 
4 Most uncials and many verss. omit αντοις. 


5 SBCDA have ος εχει., ο εχων is from parall. 


7 ηρωτων ABLA 33 (-ovv SNC, Tisch.). 


ό και ore in NBCDLA. 
8 τας παραβολας in NBCLA. 


° ro µνστηριον SiSorar (without γνωναι) in BL (Tisch., W.H.). 
10 S§$BCL omit τα αµαρτηµατα, which is an explanatory gloss. 


mystery of the Kingdom of God. They 
have been initiated into the secret, so 
that for them it is a secret no longer, 
not by explanation of the parable 
(Weiss), but independently. This true 
of them so far as disciples; disciple- 
ship means initiation into the mystery. 
In reality, it was only partially, and by 
comparison with the people, true of the 
disciples.—yvévat in T. R. is superfluous. 
—rots ἔξω refers to the common crowd. 
---ἐν παραβολαῖς: all things take place as 
set forth in parables. This implies that 
the use of parables had been a standing 
feature of Christ’s popular kerygma, in 
synagogue and street.—Ver. 12 seems 
to state the aim of the parabolic method 
of teaching as being to keep the people 
in the dark, and prevent them from being 
converted and forgiven. This cannot 
really have been the aim of Jesus. Vide 
notes on the parable of the Sower in 
Mt., where the statement is softened 
somewhat. 

Vv. 13-20. Explanation of the Sower 
(Mt. xiii, 18-23, Lk. viii. 11-15), prefaced 


by a gentle reproach that explanation 
should be needed.—Ver. 13. οὐκ οἴδατε 
» + + Ὑνώεσθε: not one question = 
know ye not this parable, and how ye 
shall know all, etc. (so Meyer and 
Weiss), but two=know ye not this 
parable ? and how shall ye, etc. (so most), 
the meaning being, not: if ye know not 
the simpler how shall ye know the more 
difficult? but rather implying that to 
understand the Sower was to understand 
all the parables spoken that day (macas 
τὰς wap.). They had all really one 
burden: the disappointing result of 
Christ’s past ministry—Ver. 14, in 
effect, states that the seed is the word.— 
Ver. 15. of παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν: elliptical 
for, those in whose case the seed falls 
along the way = the “ way-side” men, 
and so in the other cases.—@rov for eis 
οὓς, Euthy. Zig.—Ver. 16. ὁμοίως would 
stand more naturally before οὗτοι = on 
the same method of interpretation.— 
σπειρόµενοι: this class are identified 
with the seed rather than with the soil, 
but the sense, though crudely expressed: 


366 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ a 


ὅταν ἀκούσωσιν, εὐθέως έρχεται 6 Σατανᾶς καὶ αἴρει τὸν λόγον τὸν 
ἐσπαρμένον ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν. 16. καὶ οὗτοί εἶσιν ὁμοίως 
ε ὲ ‘ 9 55 , ϱ ο > , a , 3-0 
οἱ ἐπὶ τὰ πετρώδη σπειρόµενοι, Ot, ὅταν ἀκούσωσι τὸν λόγον, εὐθέως 
a 
μετὰ χαρᾶς λαμβάνουσιν αὐτόν, 17. καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσι ῥίζαν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, 
ἀλλὰ πρόσκαιροί εἶσιν: εἶτα γενομένης θλίψεως ἢ διωγμοῦ διὰ τὸν 
λόγον, εὐθέως σκανδαλίζονται. 18. καὶ οὗτοί2 εἶσιν ot eis τὰς 
ἀκάνθας σπειρόµενοι, οὗτοί εἶσιν ot τὸν λόγον ἀκούοντες,” 19. καὶ 
4 


ε A JA , Αι αμα A , x ς 
at µέριμναι τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου," καὶ ἡ ἁπάτη τοῦ πλούτου, καὶ at 


[ 
περὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ἐπιθυμίαι εἰσπορευόμεναι συμπνίγουσι τὸν λόγον, καὶ 
» , 9 ο η eae ‘ ~ ‘ ‘ 
ἄκαρπος γίνεται. 20. καὶ οὗτοί ὃ εἶσιν οἱ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν τὴν καλὴν 
σπαρέντες, οἵτινες ἀκούουσι τὸν λόγον καὶ παραδέχονται, καὶ καρ- 
ποφοροῦσιν, ἓν τριάκοντα, καὶ ἓν ἑξήκοντα, καὶ ἓν ἑκατόν. 


21. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “Myte® & λύχνος ἔρχεται,ῖ ἵνα ὑπὸ τὸν 


‘For εν τ. κ.α. (T.R.) B has εις αντους (Trg., W.H.), CLA εν αντοις (Tisch.). 


2 ado. in RBCDLA. 


Φακουσαντες in SBCDLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 τουτου is an explanatory gloss not found in the best MSS. 


> εκεινοι in SSBCLA. 


6 ort before µητι in BL (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 ερχεται before ο Avxvos in NBCDLA 33. 


is plain. They are the “ rocky ground” 
men.—Ver. 18. ἄλλοι eiciv, there are 
others; ἄλλοι, well attested (οὗτοί in 
T. R.), is significant. It fixes attention 
on the third type of hearers as calling 
for special notice. They are such as, 
lacking the thoughtlessness of the first 
and shallowness of the second class, and 
having some depth and earnestness, 
might be expected to be fruitful; a less 
common type and much more interesting. 
—Ver. 19 specifies the hindrances, the 
choking thorns-—péptpvat τ. a., cares of 
life, in the case of thoughtful devout 
poor (Mt. vi. 25 {.-- ἁπάτη τ. πλ., the 
deceitfulness of wealth in the case of the 
commercial class (Chorazin, Bethsaida, 
Capernaum: Mt. xi, 21-23. Vide notes 
there).—ai π. τ. A. ἐπιθυμίαι, the lusts 
for other things—sensual vices in the 
case of publicans and sinners (chap. ii. 
13-17). Jesus had met with such cases 
in His past ministry.—Ver. 20. παρα- 
δέχονται, receive, answering to συνιείς 
in Mt. This does not adequately 
differentiate the fourth class from the 
third, who also take in the word, but not 
it alone. Lk. has supplied the defect.— 
ev might be either ἕν = this one 30, that 
one 60, etc., or ἐν = in 30, and in 60, and 
in 100 = good, better, best, not inferior, 
respectable, admirable. The lowest 


degree is deemed satisfactory. On the 
originality of the interpretation and on 
the whole parable vide in Mt. 

Vv. 21-25. Responsibilities of disciples 
(Mt. v. 15, x. 26, vii. 2; Lk. viii. 16-18). 
True to His uniform teaching that privi- 
leges are to be used for the benefit of 
others, Jesus tells His disciples that if 
they have more insight than the multi- 
tude they must employ it for the common 
benefit. These sentences in Mk. re- 
present the first special instruction of the 
disciples. Two of them, vv. 31, 24, are 
found in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt. 
ν. 15, vil. 2). The whole of them come 
in appositely here, and were probably 
spoken at this time. (Cf. Lk. viii. 16-18, 
where they are partially given in the 
same connection.) In any case, their 
introduction in connection with the 
parables is important as showing that Mk. 
can hardly have seriously believed, what 
hecertainly seems to say, that Jesus spoke 
parables to blind the people.—Ver. 21. 
µήτι ἔρχεται, does the light come, for is 
it brought, in accordance with classic 
usage in reference to things without life ; 
examples in Kypke, ε.”.,οὐκ ἔμειν᾽ ἐλθεῖν 
τράπεζαν νυµφίαν. Pindar, Pyth., iii., 
28 = “non exspectavit donec adferretur 
mensa sponsalis”.—t. τ. κλίνην: not 
necessarily a table-couch (Meyer), might 


16—26, 


µόδιον τεθῇ ἢ ὑπὸ τὴν κλίνην ; 


22. οὗ γάρ ἐστί τι κρυπτόν, ὃ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


367 


οὐχ ἵνα ἐπὶ τὴν λυχνίαν ἐπιτεθῇ 1; 
ἐὰν pi? Φανερωθῇ' οὐδὲ ἐγένετο 


ἄπόκρυφον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα eis Φανερὸν ἔλθη ὃ: 23. εἴ τις ἔχει Gta ἀκούειν, 


2 ῃ 3» 
σακουετω. 


24. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “Βλέπετε τί ἀκούετε. 


3 η 
ἐν ω 


µέτρῳ μετρεῖτε, µετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν, καὶ προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν τοῖς 


Φκούουσιν." 


235 


«καὶ ὃ ἔχει ἀρθήσεται ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ. 


26. Kat ἔλεγεν, '' Οὕτως ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὡς ἐὰν 


1 τεθη in BBCDLA al. 


25. ὃς γὰρ ἂν éxn,° δοθήσεται αὐτῷ; καὶ ὃς οὐκ ἔχει, 


6 


2 Instead of ο εαν µη WBA have εαν µη ινα (Tisch., W.H.). 


δελθη εις φαν. in RCDLA. 
5 For αν εχη ΝΒΟ1,Δ have εχει. 


be a bed, high enough to be in no danger 
of being set on fire. Vide on Mt. ν. 15. 
The moral: let your light shine that 
others may know what ye know.—Ver. 
22. Double statement of the law that 
the hidden is to be revealed; rst, pre- 
dictively : there is nothing hidden which 
shall not be revealed; 2nd, interpreta- 
tively, with reference to the purpose of 
the hider: nor did anything become con- 
cealed with any other view than that it 
should eventually come to manifestation. 
---ἀπόκρυφον (ἀποκρύπτω), here and in 
Lk. viii. 17, Col. ii. 3.—@AX’: in effect =et 
μὴ nisi, but strictly ἐγένετο ἀπόκρυφον is 
understood to be repeated after it = 
nothing becomes concealed absolutely, 
but it is concealed in order that, etc. 
This is universally true. Things are hid 
because they are precious, but precious 
things are meant to be used at some 
time and in some way. All depends on 
the time and the way, and it is there 
that diversity of action comes in. 
Christ’s rule for that was: show your 
light when it will glorify God and benefit 
men; the world’s ταῖς iss when safe and 
beneficial to self.—Ver. 23. 
summons to try to understand the 
parable ; here a summons to those who 
have understood, or shall understand, 
the parable, or the great theme of all the 
parables, to communicate their know- 
ledge. Fritzsche, after Theophy. and 
Grot., thinks that in vv. 21, 22, Jesus 
exhorts His disciples to the culture of 
piety or virtue, not to the diffusion of 
their light, giving, as a reason, that the 
latter would be inconsistent with the 
professed aim of the parables to prevent 
enlightenment !—Ver. 24. βλέπετε, etc., 
take heed what you hear or how (πῶς, 
Lk.), see that ye hear to purpose.—év 


In ver.ga 


4 tous ακονουσιν is a gloss, omitted in SBCDLA, 
5 sSBDLA 33 al. omit εαν. 


ᾧ µέτρῳ, etc. = careful hearing pays, the 
reward of attention is knowledge (ἐν ᾧ 
µέτρῳ μετρεῖτε τὴν προσοχὴν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ 
µετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν ἡ γνῶσις, Euthy. 
Zig.). In Mt. vii. 2 the apothegm is 
applied to judging. Such moral maxims 
admit of many applications. The idea 
of measuring does not seem very ap- 
propriate here. Holtz. (H. C.) thinks 
ver. 24 interrupts the connection.— 
προστεθήσεται implies that the reward 
will be out of proportion to the virtue; 
the knowledge acquired to the study 
devoted to the subject. There shall be 
given over and above, not to those who 
hear (T. R., τοῖς ἀκούουσιν), but to those 
who think on what they hear. This 
thought introduces ver. 25, which, in 
this connection, means: the more a man 
thinks the more he will understand, and 
the less a man thinks the less his power 
of understanding will become. ‘‘ Whoso 
hath attention, knowledge will be given 
to him, and from him who hath not, the 
seed of knowledge will be taken. For 
as diligence causes that seed to grow, 
negligence destroys it,’’ Euthy. 

Vv. 26-29. Parable of the Blade, the 
Ear, and the Full Corn.—Peculiar to Mark 
and beyond doubt a genuine utterance of 
Jesus, the doctrine taught being over the 
head of the reporter and the Apostolic 
Church generally.—Ver. 26. καὶ ἔλεγεν, 
and He said, to whom? The disciples 
in private, or the crowd from the boat 2 
The absence of αὐτοῖς after ἔλεγεν (cf. 
vv. 21, 24) is not conclusive against the 
former, as Weiss and Meyer think. On 
the latter view vv. 21-25 are a parenthesis. 
In any case this new parable refers to the 
disciples as representing the fertile soil, 
and is a pendant to the parable of the 
Sower, teaching that even in the case of 


oS) 
ον 
co 


KATA MAPKON 


IV. 


ἄνθρωπος βάλη τὸν σπόρον ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, 27. καὶ καθεύδῃ καὶ ἐγείρηται, 
νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν, καὶ ὅ σπόρος βλαστάνῃ 1 καὶ µηκύνηται ὡς οὐκ 


΄ 3 
bhereandin otdev αὐτός. 


Acts xii. 
10. 


[ε] 


in the 
sense of 
being pre- 
sent. 


στηκεν 6 θερισμός.” 


> 9 Ul Le a 
etra* στάχυν, εἶτα" πλήρη σῖτονὃ ἐν τῷ στάχυϊ. 


28. " αὐτομάτη γὰρ * ἡ yi καρποφορεῖ, πρῶτον χόρτον, 


20. ὅταν δὲ 


here only παραδῷ ὃ ὁ καρπός, εὐθέως ἀποστέλλει τὸ δρέπανον, ὅτι "παρέ- 


30. Καὶ ἔλεγε, “Tin? ὁμοιώσωμεν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
ἢ ἐν ποίᾳ παραβολῇ παραβάλωμεν αὐτήν ὃ; 


31. ὡς κόκκω σινά- 


πεως, Os, ὅταν σπαρῇ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, μικρότερος ) πάντων τῶν σπερµά- 


! βλαστα in BCDLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 unkuverat in BD, implying that βλαστα is also indicative. 


3 yop omit SABCL. 


4 ειτεν in NBLA. 
ὅ πληρης otros in BD (Alford, Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 


CZ have πληρης σιτον, 


which W.H. (appendix) regard as probably the true reading, πληρης being an in- 


declinable adjective as in Acts vi. 5. 
ing of ΟΣ as a half correction. 


6 παραδοι ἵπ SBDA. CL have παραξω. 


7 πως in $$BCLA (Tisch., W.-H. αἰ.). 


Weiss, on the other hand, regards this read- 


8εν τινι αυτην παραβολη θωµεν in NBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
9 µικροτερον ον in NBL(wyv)A 33, εστι (in T.R. supplying the place of ον) being 


omitted (Tisch., W.H.). 


the fourth type of hearers the production 
of fruit is a gradual process demanding 
time. Put negatively it amounts to say- 
ing that Christ’s ministry has as yet 
produced no fruit properly speaking at 
all, but only in some cases met with a 
soil that gives promise of fruit (the 
disciples). The parable reveals at once 
the discrimination and the patience of 
Jesus. He knew the difference between 
the blade that would wither and that 
which would issue in ripe grain, and He 
did not expect this result in any case 
per saltum., A parable teaching this 
1esson was very seasonable after that 
of the Sower.—Ver. 27. καθεύ Bile 
ἡμέραν, sleep and rise night and day, 
suggestive of the monotonous life of a 
man who has nothing particular to do 
beyond waiting patiently for the result 
of what he has already done (seed sown). 
The presents express a habit, while βάλῃ, 
ver. 26, expresses an act, done once for 
all._Bdaorg (the reading in BDL, etc., 
as if from βλ ὐτάω) may be either in- 
dicative or subjunctive, the former if we 
adopt the reading µηκύνεται (BD., etc.) 
= and the seed sprouts and lengthens.— 
ὡς οὐκ οἶδεν αὐτός, how knoweth not 
(nor careth) he, perfectly indifferent to 
the rationale of growth; the fact enough 
for him.—Ver. 28. αὐτομάτη (αὐτός and 
µέμαα from absolute µάω, to desire 


eagerly), self-moved, spontaneously, 
without external aid, and also beyond 
external control; with a way and will, 
so to speak, of its own that must be 
respected and waited for. Classical 
examples in Wetstein, Kypke, Raphel, 
etc.—Kaprodopet, beareth fruit, intran- 
sitive. The following nouns, χόρτον, 
στάχυν, are not the object of the verb, 
but in apposition with καρπὸν (καρπὸν 
Φέρει) or governed by φέρει, understood 
(φέρει, quod ex καρποφορεῖ petendum, 
Ἐτίεζςς]ε).---πλήρης σῖτος, this change 
to the nominative (the reading of BD) 
is a tribute to the importance of the 
final stage towards which the stages of 
blade and ear are but preparatory steps 
= then is the full εαν. Full = ripe, 
perfect, hence the combination of the 
two words in such phrases as πλήρη καὶ 
τέλεια τἀὰγαθὰ quoted by Kypke from 
Philo. The specification of the three 
stages shows that gradual growth is the 
point of the parable (Schanz).—Ver. 29. 
παραδοῖ (παραδόω), when the fruit yields 
itself, or permits (by being ripe). The 
latter sense (for which classical usage 
can be cited) is preferred by most recent 
commentators. 

Vv. 30-32. The Mustard Seed (Mt. 
xiii. 31-32, Lk. xiii. 18, 19).—Ver. 30. πῶς 
εν, θῶμεν (vide above). This introductory 
question, especially as given in the text: 


27---35. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


369 


5 \ a 9 4 ο ~ Va ~ , a 
των εστι των επι Της γης Ἰ 32. και οταν σπαρη, ἀναβαίνει, και 


γίνεται πάντων τῶν λαχάνων petLwr,! καὶ ποιεῖ κλάδους μεγάλους, 


ὥστε δύνασθαι ὑπὸ τὴν σκιὰν αὐτοῦ τὰ 


A 35 
κηνούν. 


πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ κατασ- 


33. Καὶ τοιαύταις παραβολαῖς πολλαῖς ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς 


τὸν λόγον, καθὼς ἠδύναντο ἀκούειν: 34. χωρὶς δὲ παραβολῆς οὐκ 


:: ἔλάλει αὐτοῖς: κατ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ 
35. ΚΑΙ λέγει αὐτοῖς ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρα ὀψίας γενομένης, “Δι- 


1 µειζον παντων των λαχ. in REBCL 33. 
* rows ιδιοις pad. in KEBCLA. 


of W.H., is very graphic = how shall we 
liken the Kingdom of God, or in (under) 
what parable shall we place it? The 
form of expression implies that some- 
thing has been said before creating a 
need for figurative embodiment, some- 
thing pointing to the insignificance of 
the beginnings of the Kingdom. The 
two previous parables satisfy this τε- 
quirement = the word fruitful only in a 
few, and even in them only after a time. 
What is the best emblem of this state 
of things?—Ver. 31. @s κόκκῳ: ὡς 
stands for ὁμοιώσωμεν = let us liken it 
to a grain, etc.; κόκκον would depend 
on θῶμεν.- ὃς ὅταν σπαρῇ . . . καὶ ὅταν 
σπαρῇ: the construction of this passage 
as given in critical texts is very halting, 
offering a very tempting opportunity for 
emendation to the scribes who in the 
T. R. have given us a very smooth read- 
able text (vide A. V.). Literally it runs 
thus: ‘‘ which when it is sown upon the 
earth, being the least of all the seeds 
upon the earth—and when it is sown,” 
etc. The R. Ὑ. improves this rugged 
sentence somewhat by substituting 
**yet” for ‘‘and” in last clause. It is 
hardly worth while attempting to con- 
strue the passage. Enough that we see 
what is meant. In the twice used ὅταν 
σπαρῇ, the emphasis in the first instance 
lies on ὅταν, in the second on σπαρῇ 
(Bengel, Meyer). By attending to this 
we get the sense: which being the least 
of all seeds when it is sown or at the 
time of sowing, yet when it is sown, 
after sowing, springs up, etc.—pixpétepov 
ὃν is neuter by attraction of σπερµάτων, 
though κόκκῳ going before is masculine. 
—Ver. 32. μεῖζον π. τ. λαχάνων, the 
greatest of all the herbs, still only an herb; 
no word of a tree here as in Matthew and 
Luke, though comparatively tree-like in 
size, making great boughs (κλάδους 


G* ἐπέλυε πάντα. d cf. Acts 


XIX. 30. 


D has the same order with µειζων. 


μεγάλους), great relatively to its kind, 
not to forest trees. Mark’s version here 
is evidently the more original. 

Vv. 33, 34. Conclusion of the parable 
collection (Mt. xiii. 34, 35).—Ver. 33. 
τοιαύταις π. π., with such parables, 
many of them, He was speaking to 
them the word, implying that the three— 
sower ; blade, ear and full corn; mustard 
seed—are given as samples of the utter- 
ances from the boat, all of one type, 
about seed representing the word, and 
expressing Christ’s feelings of disappoint- 
ment yet of hope regarding His ministry. 
Many is to be taken cum grano.—xabas 
ἠδύναντο ἀκούειν = as they were able to 
understand, as in 1 Cor. xiv. 2, implying 
that parables were employed to make 
truth plain (De Wette).—Ver. 34. χωρὶς 
παραβολῆς, etc., without a parable He 
was not wont to speak to the people, 
not merely that day, but at any time.— 
ἐπέλνε, etc., He was in the habit of 
interpreting all things (vzz., the parables in 
private to His own disciples, the Twelve, 
cf. ἐπιλύσεως, 2 Peter i. 20). This does 
not necessarily imply that the multitude 
understood nothing, but only that Jesus, 
by further talk, made the disciples under- 
stand better. Yet on the whole it must 
be admitted that in his account of 
Christ’s parabolic teaching Mark seems 
to vacillate between two opposite views 
of the function of parables, one that 
they were used to make spiritual truths 
plain to popular intelligence, the other 
that they were riddles, themselves very 
much needing explanation, and fitted, even 
intended, to hide truth. This second 
view might be suggested and fostered 
by the fact that some of the parables 
express recondite spiritual truths. 

Vv. 35-41. Crossing the lake (Mt. 
viii. 18, 23-27, Lk. viii. 22-25).—év éxetvy 


τ. ἣ., on that day, the day of the parable 


24 


379 


έλθωµεν εἰς τὸ πέραν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


IV. 36—4r. 


36. Καὶ ἀφέντες τὸν ὄχλον, wapadap- 


εκαὶ sein βάνουσιν αὐτὸν ὡς ἦν ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ;' "καὶ ἄλλα δὲ} πλοιάρια 3 ἦν 


Mt. x. 18. 


John vi, μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ. 37. καὶ γίνεται λαϊλαψ ἀνέμου µεγάλη 5: τὰ δὲ” κύματα 
le = i * ἐπέβαλλεν εἰς τὸ πλοῖον, ὥστε αὐτὸ ἤδη γεμίζεσθαι. 38. καὶ ἦν 
here only 


in same 
sense. 


αὐτὸς ὃ ἐπὶῖ τῇ πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ ἕπροσκεφάλαιον καθεύδων: καὶ 


[ή Φιν ‘ ’ 2 A . 
g here only. διεγείρουσιν ὃ αὐτόν, καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “'Διδάσκαλε, οὐ ™ peer 


Lk. x. 
παω. σοι ὅτι ἀπολλύμεθα ; 


39. Καὶ διεγερθεὶς ἐπετίμησε τῷ ἀνέμω, 


καὶ εἶπε τῇ θαλάσση, ““Σιώπα, πεφίµωσο.” Καὶ ἐκόπασεν 6 ἄνεμος, 


ihere. Μι. καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη µεγάλη. 


Vili. 46... = 
Rev. xxl. εστε OUTW 5 


~ ο 3 , 2 
πως ουκ εχετε πιστιν; 


40. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti ! δειλοι 
AI. Καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν 


φόβον µέγαν, καὶ ἔλεγον πρὸς ἀλλήλους, “Tis dpa οὗτός ἐστιν, ὅτι 


καὶ ὁ ἄνεμος καὶ ἡ θάλασσα ὑπακούουσιν 


1 S8BCLA omit δε, found in D; no other instance of και . 


Άπλοια in ΝΑΒΟΡΑΣ. 
4 και τα for τα Se in SBCDLA. 


10 αὐτῷ ; 


. . Sein Mk 


3 peyadn ανεµου in BDLA. 


5 wore ηδη γεμιζεσθαι το πλοιον in N*BCDLA: rugged style, but none the less 


likely to be true. 
6 αντος ην in NRBCLA. 
δεγειρουσιν in Β0Δ. 
10 νπακονει in BL (W.H.). 


discourse, the mare to be noted that 
Mark does not usually trouble himself 
about temporal connection.—8rédA@wpev, 
let us cross over, spoken to the Twelve, 
who are in the boat with Jesus.—Ver. 
36. This verse describes the manner in 
which Christ’s wish was carried out—it 
was in effect a flight along the only line 
of retreat, the shore being besieged by 
the crowd = leaving (ἀφέντες, not dis- 
missing) the crowd they carry Him off 
(avehunt, Grotius) as He was in the 
ship (ὡς ἦν = ὡς εἶχεν) sine apparatu 
(Bengel) and sine mord; but there were 
also other boats with Him, ἐ.ε., with His 
boat. This last fact, peculiar to Mark, 
is added to show that even seawards 
escape was difficult. Some of the people 
had got into boats to be nearer the 
Speaker. The δὲ after ἄλλα, though 
doubtful, helps to bring out the sense. 
This is another of Mark’s realisms.— 
Ver. 37. ylverat λαϊλαψ: cf. Jonah i. 
4, ἐγένετο κλύδων µέγας.--ἐπέβαλλεν, 
were dashing (intransitive) against and 
into (eis) the ship.—yepileo@ar, so that 
already (ἤδη) the ship was getting full. 
—Ver. 38. τὸ προσκεφάλαιον, the 
pillow, a part of the ship, as indicated 
by the article (Bengel) ; no soft luxurious 
pillow, probably of wood (Theophy., 
Euthy.); ‘the leathern cushion of the 
steersman” (Maclear, Camb. N. T.); 


So SCA, but with αντω before verb. 


Τεν in NABCDLA. 
® ovre in NBDLA (W.H.). 
Vide below. 


the low bench at the stern on which the 
steersman sometimes sits, and the captain 
sometimes rests his head to sleep (Van 
Lennep, Bible Lands, p. 62).—Ver. 39. 
Observe the poetic parallelism in this 
verse: wind and sea separately addressed, 
and the corresponding effects separately 
specified: lulled wind, calmed sea. The 
evangelist realises the dramatic character 
of the situation.— cra, πεφίµωσο, 
silence! hush! laconic, majestic, pro- 
bably the very words. —éxéwaceyv, ceased, 
as if tired blowing, from κόπος (vide at 
Mt. xiv. 32).—Ver. 40. τί δειλοί, etc., 
duality of expression again. Matthew 
gives the second phrase, Luke the gist 
of both.—Ver. 41. ἐφοβήθησαν >. µ.: 
nearly the same phrase as in Jonah i. 
16.—tis ἄρα οὗτός, who then is this? 
One would have thought the disciples 
had been prepared by this time for any- 
thing. Matthew indeed has οἱ ἄνθρωποι, 
suggestive of other than disciples, as if 
such surprise in them were incongruous. 
But their emotional condition, arising 
out of the dangerous situation, must be 
taken into account. For the rest Jesus 
was always giving them surprises; His 
mind and character had so many sides. 
—traxove, singular, the wind and the 
sea thought of separately, each a wild 
lawless element, not given to obeying: 
even the wind, even the sea, obeys Him! 


V. τ---6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


3011 


V. 1. ΚΑΙ ἦλθον εἰς τὸ πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης, εἰς τὴν χώραν τῶν 
Γαδαρηνῶν.! 2. καὶ ἐξελθόντι αὐτῴ 3 ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου, εὐθέως ἀπήν- 
τησεν 3 αὐτῷ ἐκ τῶν μνημείων ἄνθρωπος ἐν πνεύµατι ἀκαθάρτῳ, 3. ὃς 


τὴν "κατοίκησιν εἴχεν ἐν τοῖς µνηµείοις έ: καὶ οὔτε ἁλύσεόιν οὖδεὶς 5 a here only 


-~ ‘ η. in N.4. 
ἠδύνατο αὐτὸν δῆσαι, 4. διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν πολλάκις πέδαις καὶ ἁλύσεσι b here and 


δεδέσθαι, καὶ 


συντετρίφθαι, καὶ οὐδεὶς αὐτὸν ἴσχυεδ "δαμάσαι’ 5. καὶ διαπαντὸς 


Ρδιεσπᾶσθαι ὑπ αὐτοῦ τὰς ἁλύσεις, καὶ τὰς πέδας 


in Acts 
Xxiili. 1ο. 
c ναι iii. 7, 


d here only 


9 x a ιά A> A 2 τις , 
νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας ἐν τοῖς ὄρεσι καὶ ἐν τοῖς µνήµασιν΄ ἦν κράζων in N.T 


καὶ ἆκατακόπτων ἑαυτὸν λίθοις. 


6. “av δὲξ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἀπὸ 


1 Γερασηνων in BD it. vg. (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 εξελθοντος αυτου in SBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 νπηντησεν in SBCDLA; B omits ευθυς. 


ἄμνημασι in RABCLAS. 


5 ovde ἆλυσει ουκετι Ovders in BCL; for ουδε and overs ovSerg the consensus is 


greater (+ SDA). 
6 vex vev αυτον in many uncials. 


Τεν τοις µν. και εν τοις op. in the best copies. 


CHAPTER V. THE GERASENE DE- 
ΜΟΝΙΑΟ. THE DAUGHTER OF JAIRUS. 
ΓΗΕ WoMAN WITH ΑΝ IssuE. This 
group of incidents is given in the same 
order in all three synoptists, but in 
Matthew not in inimediate sequence. 
—Vv. 1-20. The Gevasene Demoniac 
(Mt. viii. 28-34, Lk. viii. 26-39).—Ver. 1. 
εἰς τὴν χῶραν τ. Γερασηνῶν : on the pro- 
per name to the place vde at the parallel 
place in Mt.—Ver. 2. ἐξελ. αὐτοῦ... 
ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ ; note the correction of 
style in Luke. Mark’s incorrectness is 
to be preferred as emphasising the fact 
that the meeting with the demoniac 
took place immediately after leaving the 
boat. Just on that account the εὐθὺς 
before ὑπήντησεν (omitted in B) is un- 
necessary.—ék τ. μνημείων, from the 
tombs, as in. Mt., ἐκ τῆς πόλεως in Lk. ; 
the former doubtless the fact. Luke’s 
phrase probably means that he belonged 
to the city, not necessarily implying that 
he came from it just then (vide Lk. 
viii. 27, last clause).— Vv. 3-5 elaborately 
describe the man’s condition, as if the 
evangelist or rather his informant (Peter) 
were fascinated by the subject; not a 
case of idle word-painting, but of realistic 
description from vivid, almost morbid, 
recollection. Holtzmann (H. C.) refers to 
Is. Ixv. 4, 5, as if to suggest that’ some 
elements of the picture—dwelling in 
tombs, eating swine’s flesh—were taken 
ἔπεπος.-- τὴν κατ., the, i.e. his dwell- 
ing, implying though not emphasising 
constant habit (perpetuum, Fritzsche), 
Lk., “for a long time ”’.—ov8e, οὐκέτι, 


8 kat ιδων in NBCLA. 


οὐδεὶς: energetic accumulation of neg- 
atives, quite in the spirit of the Greek 
language. At this point the sentence 
breaks away from the relative construc- 
tion as if in sympathy with the untam- 
able wildness of the demoniac.—Ver. 4 
tells how they had often tried to bind 
the madman, feet (πέδαις) and hands 
(ἁλύσεσι, with chains, for the hands here, 
in contrast to πέδαις, chains for the feet ; 
usually it means chains in general).— 
συντετρῖφθαι : the use of a distinct verb 
in reference to the fetters suggests that 
they were of different material, either 
cords (Meyer) or wooden (Schanz), and 
that we should render σνυντετ., not 
‘broken in pieces” (A.V.), but rubbed 
through as if by incessant friction.— Ver. 
5. As the previous verse depicts the 
demoniac strength, so this the utter 
misery of the poor sufferer.—8.a. παντὸς 
vuk. κ. ἡμέρ., incessantly night time and 
day time, even during night when men 
gladly get under roof (Weiss, Mc.- 
Evang.) and when sleep makes trouble 
cease for most: no sleep for this wretch, 
or quiet resting-place.—év τ. µνήµασι κ. 
ἐ. τ. ὄρεσι, in tombs or on mountains, in 
cave or out in the open, there was but 
one occupation for him: not rest or 
sleep, but ceaseless outcry and self- 
laceration (κράζων, κατακόπτων ἑαυτ. 
λίθοις). 

Vv. 6-13. Meeting with Fesus. This 
desperate case will test Christ’s power to 
heal. Madness, as wild and untamable 
as the wind or the sea. What is going 
to happen ?—Ver. 6, ἀπὸ µακρόθεν, from 


373 


µακρόθεν, ἔδραμε καὶ προσεκύνησεν αὐτῷ] 7. 
µεγάλῃ εἶπε,; “Ti ἐμοὶ καὶ ool, Ἰησοῦ, υἱὲ τοῦ 
"ὁρκίζω σε τὸν Θεόν, py µε βασανίσῃς. 8. 
{«Ἔξελθε, τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἀκάθαρτον ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.” 
ἐπηρώτα αὐτόν, “Τί σοι ὄνομα ὃ;' 
ὄνομά por,® ὅτι πολλοί ἐσμεν. 
ἵνα μὴ αὐτοὺς ἀποστείλῃ © ἔξω τῆς χώρας. 


ε Acts xix. 
13 (same 
const.). 


KATA MAPKON 


Vv. 


καὶ κράξας φωνῇ 
Θεοῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου ; 
ἔλεγε γὰρ αὐτῷ, 
ϱ. Καὶ 
Καὶ ἀπεκρίθη, λέγων, “ Λεγεὼν" 
10. Καὶ παρεκάλει αὐτὸν πολλά, 
II. ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ πρὸς τὰ 


Spy” ἀγέλη χοίρων µεγάλη βοσκοµένη: 12. καὶ παρεκάλεσαν αὐτὸν 
πάντες οἱ δαίμονες ἓ λέγοντες, “ Πέμψον ἡμᾶς εἰς τοὺς χοίρους, ἵνα 


cis αὐτοὺς εἰσέλθωμεν.”' 


13. Καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοῖς εὐθέως ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς.» 


καὶ ἐξελθόντα τὰ πνεύματα τὰ ἀκάθαρτα εἰσῆλθον εἰς τοὺς Χοίρους - 
καὶ ὥρμησεν ἡ ἀγέλη κατὰ τοῦ κρημνοῦ εἲς τὴν θάλασσαν : ἦσαν δὲ 10 


1 αντον in NBCLA instead of the more usual αντω of T.R. 


Σλεγει in NABCLAY. 
Σονοµα σοι in most uncials, 


D has σοί ον. (so in Lk.). 


4 και λεγει αντω Acytav in SBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 BD add εστιν. 
7 πω ope in all uncials, 
* SSBCLA omit ευθεως ο |. 


afar, a relative expression, a favourite 
pleonasm in Mk. (xiv. 54, xv. 40).— 
προσεκύνησεν: worshipful attitude, as 
of one who feels already the charm or 
spell of Him before whom he kneels; 
already there is a presentiment and com- 
mencement of cure, though not yet wel- 
come.—Ver. 7. τ. θ. τοῦ ὑψίστου:; Mt. 
has τοῦ θεοῦ only. Luke gives the full 
expression =the Son of: God Most High. 
Which is the original?’ Weiss (Meyer) 
says Mt.’s, Mk. adding τ. i. to prepare 
for the appeal to One higher even than 
Jesus, in ὁρκίζω following. But why 
should not the demoniac himself do that ? 
—épxifw: in classics to make swear, in 
N. T. (here and in Acts xix. 13) to adjure 
with double accusative; not good Greek 
according to Phryn.; ὁρκόω the right 
word.—py pe βασανίσῃς: no πρὸ 
καιροῦ as in Mt., the reference ap- 
parently to the present torment of de- 
moniac or demon, or both; either shrink- 
ing from cure felt to be impending.— 
Ver. 8. ἔλεγεν γὰρ, for He was about to 
say: not yet said, but evident from 
Christ’s manner and look that it was on 
His tongue ; the conative imperfect 
(Weiss).—Ver. 9. τί σοι ὄνομα ; instead 
of saying at once what He had meant 
to say, Jesus adopts a roundabout 
method of dealing with the case, and 
asks the demoniac his name, as if to 


δαντα αποσ, in BCA. D has avrovs. 
® παντες οι δαιµ. omit NBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
10 SBCDLA omit yoav δε. 


bring him into composure.—Aeytov : 
from the Roman legion not a rare sight 
in that region, emblem of irresistible 
power and of a multitude organised into 
unity ; the name already naturalised into 
Greek and Aramaean. The use of it by 
the demoniac, like the immediate recog- 
nition of Jesus as a God-like person, 
reveals a sensitive, fine-strung mind 
wrecked by insanity.—Ver. 10. παρεκά- 
Ae: he, Legion, in the name of the de- 
mons, beseeches earnestly (πολλὰ) that 
He would not send them (αὐτὰ) out of 
the region (χώρας). Decapolis, beloved 
by demons, suggests Grotius, because 
full of Hellenising apostate Jews, teste 
Joseph. (A. J., xvii., 11).—Ver. 11. ἐκεῖ, 
there, near by. Cf. Mt. viii. 3ο.--- πρὸς 
τῷ Sper; on the mountain side.—Ver., 12. 
πέµψον: send us into the swine; no 
chance of permission to enter into men ; 
no expectation either of the ensuing 
catastrophe.—Ver. 13. καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν: 
permission, not command, to enter; in 
Mt. not even that, simply a peremptory : 
Depart! Vide notes (πετε.---εἰσῆλθον : 
an inference from the sequel ; neither 
exit nor entrance could be seen. | There 
was doubtless a coincidence between the 
cure and the catastrophe.—ds δισχίλιοι : 
about 2000, an estimate of the herds 
possibly exaggerated. —éaviyovro (rviyw, 
to choke), were drowned, used in this 


7—19. EYATTEAION 

ὡς δισχίλιοι: καὶ ἐπνίγοντο ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ. 14. Οἱ δὲ βόσκοντες 
τοὺς χοίρους] ἔφυγον, καὶ ἀνήγγειλαν  εἲς τὴν πόλιν καὶ eis τοὺς 
ἀγρούς. καὶ ἐξῆλθον 2 ἰδεῖν τί ἐστι τὸ γεγονός: 15. καὶ ἔρχονται 
πρὸς τὸν Ιησοῦν, καὶ θεωροῦσι τὸν δαιμονιζόμενον καθήµενον Kai? 
ἱματισμένον καὶ σωφρονοῦντα, τὸν ἐσχηκότα τὸν λεγεῶνα : καὶ ἐφο- 
βήθησαν: 16. καὶ διηγήσαντο αὐτοῖς οἱ ἰδόντες, πῶς ἐγένετο τῷ 


378 


, Ν A.’ a , 
δαιμονιζοµένω, καὶ περὶ τῶν χοίρων. 
A A , a 
αὐτὸν ἀπελθεῖν ἀπὸ τῶν ὁρίων αὐτῶν. 


τὸ πλοῖον, παρεκάλει αὐτὸν ὁ δαιµονισθείς, ἵνα pet αὐτοῦ.ὅ 


17. καὶ ἤρξαντο παρακαλεῖν 
18. Καὶ ἐμβάντος * αὐτοῦ eis 
Ig. 6 


δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὅ οὐκ ἀφῆκεν αὐτόν, ἀλλὰ λέγει αὐτῷ, ““Ymaye eis τὸν 
οἶκόν σου πρὸς τοὺς cous, καὶ ἀνάγγειλον ἵ αὐτοῖς ὅσα σοι 6 Κύριος ὃ 


1 και οι Boo. αντους in NBCDLA. 


Σαπηγ. and ηλθον in BL (CD have απηγ.). 


> και omitted in NBDLA. 
5 wer αντον η in NABCLA. 
Ταπαγ. in SBCA. 


sense in Joseph., A. J.,x., 7, 5, regarding 
Jeremiah in the dungeon. 

Vv. 14-20. Sequel of the story.—Ver. 
14. εἰς τὴν πόλιν, εἴο.: the herds of 
course ran in breathless panic-stricken 
haste to report the tragedy in the city 
and in the neighbouring farms (ἀγρούς). 
—ai 7AGov, etc.: and the people in 
town and country as naturally went to 
see what had happened. Their road 
brings them straight to Jesus (ver. 15), 
and they see there a sight which 
astonishes them, the well-known and 
dreaded demoniac completely altered in 
manner and aspect: sitting (καθήµενον) 
quiet, not restless ; clothed (ἱματισμένον 
here and in Lk. viii. 35), implying pre- 
vious nakedness, which is expressly 
noted by Lk. (viii. 27), sane (σωφρον- 
ovvra), implying previous madness, For 
this sense of the verb vide 2 Cor. v. 13. 
Some take the second and third participle 
as subordinate to the first, but they 
may be viewed as co-ordinate, denoting 
three distinct, equally outstanding, 
characteristics: ‘*sedentem, vestitum, 
sanae mentis, cum antea fuisset sine 
quiete, vestibus, rationis usu” (Bengel) 
—all this had happened to the man who 
had had the Legion! (τὸν ἐσχ. τ. 
λεγιῶνα)- ἐσχηκότα, perfect in sense 
of pluperfect. Burton, § 156.---ἐφοβή- 
θησαν: they were afraid, of the sane 
man, as much as they had been of the 
insane, ἐ.6., of the power which had pro- 
duced the change.—Ver. 16. The eye- 
witnesses in further explanations to their 


4 εµβαινοντος in SABCDLAS 33. 
5 For ο δε |. the same authorities have simply και, 
δο κυριος σοι in BCA, 


employers now connect the two events 
together—the cure and the catastrophe— 
not representing the one as cause of the 
other, but simply as happening close to 
each other. The owners draw a natural 
inference: cure cause of catastrophe, 
and (ver. 17) request Jesus, as a dangerous 
person, to retire.—ijptavro, began to 
request, pointing to transition from 
vague awe in presence of a great change 
to desire to be rid of Him whom they 
believed to be the cause both of it and of 
the loss of their swine. Fritzsche takes 
ἤρξαντο as meaning that Jesus did not 
need much pressure, but withdrew on 
the first hint of their wish.—Ver. 18. 
ἐμβαίνοντος, embarking, the same day ? 
Jesus had probably intended to stay 
some days on the eastern shore as on 
the hill (iii. 13), to let the crowd dis- 
perse.—itva per’ αὐτοῦ ᾖ: an object 
clause after verb of exhorting with tva, 
and subjunctive instead of infinitive as 
often in N. T., that he might be with 
Him (recalling iii. 14). The man desired 
to become a regular disciple. Victor of 
Ant., Theophy., Grotius, and partly 
Schanz think his motive was fear lest 
the demons might return.—Ver. το. 
Jesus refuses, and, contrary to His usual 
practice, bids the healed one go and 
spread the news, as a kind of missionary 
to Decapolis, as the Twelve were to 
Galilee. The first apostle of the heathen 
(Holtz. (H. C.) after Volkmar). Jesus 
determined that those who would not 
have Himself should have His repre- 


374 


émoinge,’ καὶ ἠλέησέ ce.” 


KATA MAPKON ¥v 


20. Καὶ ἀπῆλθε καὶ ἤρξατο κηρύσσειν 


ἐν τῇ Δεκαπόλει, ὅσα ἐποίησεν αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς . καὶ πάντες ἐθαύμαζον. 
21. ΚΑΙ διαπεράσαντος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ πάλιν εἰς τὸ πέραν, 


συνήχθη ὄχλος πολὺς ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, καὶ ἦν παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν. 


22. 


Καὶ ἰδού,” ἔρχεται εἷς τῶν ἀρχισυναγώγων, ὀνόματι Ἰάειρος, καὶ ἰδὼν 


αὐτόν, winter πρὸς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ: 23. καὶ παρεκάλει ὃ αὐτὸν 


f again 
vii. 25, 


ἐπιθῇς αὐτῇ τὰς χεῖρας, ὅπως ὃὅ σωθῇ καὶ ζήσεται.' 5 


πολλά, λέγων, “΄Ὅτι τὸ “θυγάτριόν µου ἐσχάτως ἔχει: ἵνα ἐλθὼν 


24. Καὶ 


ἀπῆλθε pet αὐτοῦ: καὶ ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ ὄχλος πολύς, καὶ συνέθλιβον 


g Lk. xv. 14. αὐτόν. 
Acts xxi. 
24. 2Cor. 
xii. 15. 
Jas. iv. 3. 


1 πεποιηκεν in NABCLYE. 


5 παρακαλει in SACL (Tisch., W.H., text). 


4 τας χειρας αντη in NBCLA. 


25. Kat γυνή tis® οὖσα ἐν ῥύσει αἵματος ern δώδεκα.’ 26. καὶ πολ- 
γυνή pice aip η 


ha παθοῦσα ὑπὸ πολλῶν ἰατρῶν, καὶ ἕδαπανήσασα τὰ Tap ἑαυτῆς ὃ 


2 Omit t8ov ΝΒΡΙΔ. 
παρεκαλει in BDA (W.H. margin). 


> iva σωθη και Lyon in SBCDLA (ζησεται is from Mt.). 


δ Omit tus NABCLA (found in D2). 


Ἰ δωδεκα ετη in NBCLA. 


S avtys in BL2 (W.H. text), εαυτης in CDA (Tisch., W.H., margin). 


sentative.—emotnxev, perfect, the effect 
abiding: hath done for me, as you see.— 
ἠλέησέν σε: pitied thee at the time of 
cure. ὅσα may be understood before 
mA. = and how, etc., or καὶ ἠλ. may be 
a Hebraising way of speaking for 
ἐλεήσας oe (Grotius).—Kvpids: the sub- 
ject to the two verbs = God, as in O. T. 
Sept.—Ver. 20. ἐν τῇ Δεκαπόλει: he 
took a wide range; implying probably 
that he was known throughout the ten 
cities as the famous madman of Gerasa. 
What was the effect of his mission in 
that Greek world? Momentary wonder 
at least (ἐθαύμαζον), perhaps not much 
more. 

Vv. 21-43. The daughter of Fairus 
and the woman with bloody issue (Mt. 
ix. 18-26, Lk. viii. 40-56).—Ver. 21. 
ὄχλος πολὺς: the inescapable crowd, in 
no hurry to disperse, gathers again about 
Jesus, on His return to the western 
shore.—ém’ αὐτόν: not merely to, but 
after Him, the great centre of attraction 
(cf. πρὸς a., ii. 13, iv. 1).—mwapa τ. θ., 
by the sea (here and there); how soon 
after the arrival the incident happened 
not indicated (cf. Mt. ix. 18 for sequence 
and situation), nor is the motive of the 
narrative. Weiss suggests that the 
Jairus story is given as another instance 
of unreceptivity, ver. 40 (Meyer).—Ver. 
22. εἷς τ. &.: might imply a plurality 


of synagogues, each having its chief ruler. 
But in Acts xii 14, 15, one syn. has its 
apxiowvaywlor.—Ver.23. θυγάτριόν p.: 
an instance of Mk.’s love of diminutives, 
again in vii, 25.--ἐσχάτως ἔχει, is ex- 
tremely ill, at death’s door (in Mt. dead), 
stronger than κακῶς ἔχει; a late Greek 
phrase (examples in Elsner, Wetstein,. 
Kypke, etc.), disapproved by Phryn. 
(Lobeck, p. 389).—tva ἐλθὼν ἐπιθῇς: 
either used as an imperative (cf. 1 Tim. 
i. 3, ἵνα παραγγείλῃς), or dependent on 
some verb understood, e.g., δεόµαί cov 
(Palairet), ἥκω (Fritzsche); better 
παρακαλῶ σε, the echo of παρεκάλει 
ree before (Grotius. Similarly Euthy. 
Zig.). 

Ὑν. 25-34. The woman with an issue. 
—Ver. 25. dy pice a. = αἱμορροοῦσα 
of Mt.: in or with a flux of blood. ‘So 
in Lk. also.—Ver. 26. Details about the 
case, similarly in Lk., not in Mt.: 
either they expand or Mt. abbreviates.— 
πολλὰ παθοῦσα: no wonder, remarks 
Lightfoot, in view of the endless pre- 
scriptions for such a case, of which he 
gives samples (Hor. Heb.); physicians 
of the empiric or prescientific type.—ra 
Tap αὐτῆς, her means, cf. οἱ wap’ αὐτοῦ, 
ili, 21.---μηδὲν oped: nothing profited, 
the subjective negative, μηδὲν, implies. 
disappointed expectation.—Ver. 27. 
axoveaca* to simplify the constructiom 





«ΑΒ ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

πάντα, καὶ μηδὲν ὠφεληθεῖσα, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον εἰς τὸ χεῖρον ἐλθοῦσα, 
27. ἀκούσασαλ περὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ἐλθοῦσα ἐν τῷ ὄχλω ὄπισθεν, 
φ ac , > - , κ. - ε , 
ἤψατο τοῦ ἱματίου αὐτοῦ: 28. Eheye γάρ, “Or κἂν τῶν ἱματίων 
αὐτοῦ ἄψωμαι,; σωθήσομαι.” 29. Καὶ εὐθέως ἐξηράνθη ἡ πηγὴ τοῦ 
αἵματος αὐτῆς, καὶ ἔγνω τῷ σώματι ὅτι " 
30. καὶ εὐθέως ὁ "Ingots ἐπιγνοὺς ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὴν ἐξ αὐτοῦ δύναμιν 
ἐξελθοῦσαν, ἐπιστραφεὶς ἐν τῷ ὄχλω, ἔλεγε, “Tis pou ἤψατο τῶν 
41. Καὶ ἔλεγον αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, “Βλέπεις τὸν 
32. Καὶ 


ἱματίων ; 
ὄχλον συνθλίβοντά σε, καὶ λέγει, Τίς µου ἤψατο;” 


375 


ἴαται ἀπὸ NS µάστιγος. h cf. Johni. 
iin. γ 40 (μένει). 


> ~ a ~ , 
περιεβλέπετο ἰδεῖν τὴν τοῦτο ποιήσασαν. 
ΔΝ ρ id ο) a > 2? 8 
καὶ τρέµουσα, εἰδυῖα ὃ yéyovey ἐπ' 
ὐτῷ Let ὐτῷ πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθ 
αὐτῷ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 


“ @uyatep,* ἡ 


πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε: 


33- ἡ δὲ yur, φοβηθεῖσα 
auth, ἦλθε καὶ προσέπεσεν 
34. 6 δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, 
ὕπαγε εἲς εἰρήνην, καὶ ἴσθι 


1 τα after ax. in SBCA 33 (Tisch., W.H. See below). 


2 ort εαν αψωμαι καν τ. t. in NBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


a simplification. 
7 SBCDL omit ew (in ΑΣ α].). 


of this long sentence (vv. 25, 26, 27) we 
may, with Fritzsche, connect this parti- 
ciple with γυνὴ, ver. 25, and treat all 
between as a parenthesis = a certain 
woman (whose case was, etc.) having 
heard, etc.—ra περὶ τ. |. he im- 
portance of the τὰ (8 860”Δ. W.H.) 
here is that with it the expression means 
not merely that the woman had heard of 
the return of Jesus from the east side, 
but that she had for the first time heard 
of Christ’s healing ministry in general. 
She must have been a stranger from a 
distance, ¢.g., from Caesarea Philippz, 
her home, according to Eusebius (Hist. 
Eccl., vii., 18), her house identifiable with 
a statue reproducing the gospel incident 
before the door; possibly a heathen, but 
more probably, from her behaviour, a 
Jewess—stealing a cure by touch when 
touch by one in her state was forbidden 
(Lev. xv. 19-27).—Ver. 29. ἐξηράνθη ἡ 
πηγὴ: perhaps this means no more 
than Lk.’s statement that the flux was 
stopped, but the expression seems chosen 
to signify a complete permanent cure— 
not merely the stream but the fountain 
dried.—%yvw +. σ.: she was conscious 
that the flow had ceased (ἔγνω διὰ τοῦ 
THpatospyKéeTL ῥαινομένου τοῖς σταλαγ- 
pots, Euthy. Zig.).—Ver- 30. ἐπιγνοὺς 

nv... δύναμιν ἐξελθοῦσαν, conscious 
of the going forth ot the healing virtue; 
ἐξελθ. is the substantive participle as 
object of the verb Ἐπιγνοὺς. The state- 
ment as given by Mk. (and Lk.) implies 


A has εν. 


The reading in T.R. is 
4 θυγατηρ in BD (W.H.). 


that the cure was not wrought by the 
will of Jesus. But it may nevertheless 
have been so. Jesus may have felt the 
touch, divined its meaning, and con- 
sented to the effect. Vide on Mt., ad loc, 
—tis µου ἤψατο τῶν ἱματίων: who 
touched me on ΠΠΥ clothes? This verb 
here, as usual, takes genitive both of 
person and thing (Buttmann’s Grammar, 
N. Τ., p. 167).—Ver. 31. τὸν dx. συνθλί- 
βοντά σε, the crowd squeezing Thee, as 
in ver. 24. The simple verb in iii. 9. 
The compound implies a greater crowd, 
or a more eager pressure around Jesus. 
How exciting and fatiguing that rude 
popularity for Him!—Ver. 32. µπεριε- 
Βλέπετο: Jesus, knowing well the 
difference between touch and touch, 
regardless of what the disciples had 
plausibly said, kept looking around in 
quest of the person who had touched 
Him meaningfully.—thv τ. ποιήσασαν: 
feminine, a woman’s touch. Did Jesus 
know that, or is it the evangelist choosing 
the gender in accordance with the now 
known fact ? (Meyer and Weiss). The 
former possible, without preternatural 
knowledge, through extreme sensitive- 
ness.—Ver. 33. Φοβ. καὶ τρέµ., fearing 
and trembling, the two states closely 
connected and often combined (2 Cor. 
vii. 15, Eph. vi. 5, Phil. ii. 12).— 
εἰδνῖα, etc., explains her emotion: she 
knew what had happened to her, and 
thought what a dreadiul thing it would 
be to have the surreptitiously obtained 


176 


ὑγιὴς ἀπὸ τῆς µάστιγός cou.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


Vv. 


35. Ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, ἔρχονται 


ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀρχισυναγώγοψ, λέγοντες, “"Ὅτι ἡ θυγάτηρ σου ἀπέθανε: 


τί ἔτι σκύλλεις τὸν διδάσκαλον; 


36. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εὐθέως 1 


ἀκούσας 3 τὸν λόγον λαλούμενον λέγει τῷ ἀρχισυναγώγῳ, “My 


i Ch. xv.32; φοβοῦ, µόνον ! πίστευε. 
Xvi. 16, 17 
(absol.). 


ἀδελφὸν ᾿Ιακώβου. 


37. Καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκεν οὐδένα αὐτῷ 3 
συνακολουθῆσαι, εἰ μὴ Métpov* καὶ ᾽Ιάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην τὸν 
38. καὶ ἔρχεται ὅ eis τὸν οἶκον τοῦ ἀρχισυνα- 


/1 Cor. xiii. γώγου, καὶ θεωρεῖ θόρυβον,ὃ κλαίοντας καὶ / ἀλαλάζοντας πολλά. 
bMtie 23.39. καὶ εἰσελθὼν λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Ti Ἐθορυβεῖσθε καὶ κλαίετε; 


Acts xvii. ς 
5; xx. Io, TO 


αὐτοῦ. 


παιδίον οὐκ ἀπέθανεν, ἀλλὰ καθεύδει. 


40. Καὶ κατεγέλων 


ὁ δὲἹ ἐκβαλὼν ἅπανταςὃ παραλαμβάνει τὸν πατέρα τοῦ 


παιδίου καὶ τὴν µητέρα καὶ τοὺς μετ αὐτοῦ, καὶ εἰσπορεύεται ὅπου 


1 Omit ευθεως ΝΕ ΓΙ:Δ. 


2 παρακουσας in ΝΒΙ:Δ, changed into ακουσας because not understood. 


3 per αντον in SBCLA. 


4 rov before Π. in SBCA, omitted to conform with lak. lway. 
δ ερχονται in $,ABCDA, changed into ερχεται to agree with θεωρει (LE al.) 


6 και before κλαιοντας in many uncials. 
8 wavtas in RRABCLAS ai. 


7 avros Se in NBCDLA 33. 


benefit recalled by an offended bene- 
factor disapproving her secrecy and her 
bold disregard of the ceremonial law.— 
πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, the whole truth, 
which would include not only what she 
had just done, but her excuse for doing 
it—the pitiful tale of chronic misery. 
From that tale impressively told, heard 
by disciples, and not easily to be for- 
gotten, the particulars in ver. 26 were in 
all probability derived.—Ver. 34. The 
woman had already heard the fame of 
Jesus (ver. 27). From what Jesus said 
to her she would for the first time get 
some idea of His exquisite sympathy, 
delicately expressed in the very first 
word: θύγατερ, daughter, to a mature 
woman, probably not much, if at all, 
younger than Himself! He speaks not 
as man to woman, but as father to child. 
Note how vivid is Mark’s story com- 
pared with the meagre colourless version 
of Με! A lively impressionable eye- 
witness, like Peter, evidently behind it. 
Vv. 35-43. The story of Fairus’ 
daughter resumed.—Ver. 35. ἀπὸ τ. 
ἀρχισ., from the ruler of the synagogue, 
i.e., from his house, as in A.V. (ἀπὸ τῆς 
οἰκίας τ. σ., Euthy.). The ruler is sup- 
posed to be with Jesus all the time.— 
Ver. 36. παρακούσας: might mean to 
disregard, as in Mt. xviii. 17 (with 
genitive). So Meyer; but here probably 


D omits. 


it means overhearing a word not spoken 
directly to Him. The two senses are 
quite compatible. Jesus might overhear 
what was said and disregard its import, 
i.é., act contrary to the implied sugges- 
tion that nothing could now be done in 
the case. The latter He certainly did — 
πίστευε, present, continue in a believing 
mood, even in presence of death.—- 
Ver. 37. συνακολουθῆσαι: here with 
µετά, in xiv. 51, and Lk. xxiii. 49 with 
dative.—rév Πέτρον, etc., Peter, James, 
and John; earliest trace of preference 
within the disciple-circle. Not in Mt., 
but followed by Lk. The three chosen 
to be witnesses of a specially remarkable 
event. Perhaps the number of disciples 
was restricted to three not to crowd the 
house.—Ver. 38. θεωρεί: what was 
going on within the house appealed to 
both eye and ear; here the scene is 
described from the spectacular side—a 
multitude of people seen making a con- 
fused din (θόρνβον), in which sounds of 
weeping and howling without restraint 
(πολλά) are distinguishable.—xat after 
θόρυβον is epexegetic, and κλαίοντας and 
ἀλαλάζοντας special features under it as 
a general. Flute playing (Mt. ix. 23) not 
referred to.—Ver. 40. κατεγέλων: this 
the point of the story for the evangelist, 
thinks Weiss, hence related after the 
demoniac—common link, the unbelief of 


35—43. VI. 1—2. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

Al. καὶ κρατήσας τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ 
παιδίου, λέγει αὐτῇ, “ TadtOd, κοῦμιΣ:” ὅ ἐστι µεθερμηνευόµενον, 
“TS κοράσιον, (cot λέγω) ἔγειραι..ὃ 42. Καὶ εὐθέως ἀνέστη τὸ 
κοράσιον καὶ περιεπάτει, ἦν γὰρ ἐτῶν δώδεκα; καὶ ἐξέστησαν * 
ἐκστάσει µεγάλη. 43. καὶ διεστείλατο αὐτοῖς πολλά, ἵνα μηδεὶς 


ἦν τὸ παιδίον ἀνακείμενον.ὶ 


Ὕνῷ ὅ τοῦτο” καὶ etre δοθῆναι αὐτῇ Φαγεῖν. 

VI. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν, καὶ ἦλθεν ὃ cis τὴν πατρίδα αὐτοῦ - 
καὶ ἀκολουθοῦσιν αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ: 2. καὶ yevouevou σαβ- 
βάτου, ἤρξέατο ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ διδάσκεινἸ καὶ πολλοὶ ὃ ἀκούοντες 
καὶ τίς ἡ σοφία ἡ 
ὅτι καὶ δυνάµεις τοιαῦται διὰ τῶν χειρῶν αὐτοῦ 


ἐξεπλήσσοντο, λέγοντες, ' Πόθεν τούτῳ ταῦτα ; 


δοθεῖσα αὐτῷ,» 


377 


1 SSBDLA omit ανακειµενον, an explanatory gloss. 


2 koup in SSBCLE 33. 
Tisch., Trg., W.H. 


Σεγειρε in most uncials. 


κουµι in DA, which Weiss thinks the true reading against 


4 Add ευθυς after εξεστησαν NBCLA 33. 


5 you in ABDL (Tisch., W.H.). Ύνω in ΝΟΔΣ. 
6 ερχεται in S$BCLA, changed into ηλθεν to conform to εζηλθεν. 


7 &Sac. εν τη συν. in SBCDLA. 


° rourw in SBCLA, changed into avrw to improve the style. 


life-like. 


the people, But surely in this case in- 
credulity was very excusable!—rév 
πατέρα, etc.: father, mother, and the 
three disciples taken into the sick 
chamber, the former as parents, the 
latter as witnesses.—Ver. 41. Ταλιθά, 
xoup, maiden, rise! first instance in 
which the words of Jesus, as spoken in 
Aramaic, are given. Jesus may have 
been a bilingual, sometimes using Greek, 
sometimes Syriac. He would use the 
vernacular on a pathetic occasion like 
this. The word Ταλιθά, feminine of 


Teli (9), is found in the Hebrew only 
in the plural (orssbuo).—ver. 42. 


περιεπάτει, etc.: the diminutive κοράσιον 
might suggest the idea of a mere child, 
therefore, after stating that she walked 
about, it is added that she was twelve 

ears old. In Mk. only.—Ver. 43. 
ποδια that the girl had recovered 
could not be hid, but that she had been 
brought back from death might be. 
Jesus wished this, not desiring that ex- 
pectations of such acts should be 
awakened.—8o0fvat Φαγεῖν: she could 
walk and eat; not only alive, but well: 
6 στανῖτετ aegroti vix solent cibum 
sumere,’”’ Grotius.—etmev here takes the 
infinitive after it, not, as often, ἵνα with 
subjunctive. 


8οι πολλοι in BL (Tisch., W.H.). 
The two τοντω 


CHapTerR VI. AT NAZARETH. MIs- 
SION OF THE TWELVE. HEROD AND 
Joun. FEEDING OF THE THOUSANDS. 
SEA INcIDENT. The first two of the 
miscellaneous group of narratives con- 
tained in this chapter (vv. I-13) are re- 
garded by some (Weiss, Schanz, etc.) as 
forming the conclusion of a division of 
the Gospel beginning at iii. 7, having 
for its general heading: The disciple- 
circle versus the unreceptive multitude. 
Such analysis of the Gospels into distinct 
masses is useful provided it be not over- 
done. 

Vv. 1-6a. esus at Nazareth (Mt. 
xiii. 53-58, cf. Lk. iv. 16-30).—Ver. 1. 
ἐξῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν. It is not said, but it is 
very probable, that this was another of 
Christ’s attempts to escape from the 
crowd into a scene of comparative quiet 
and rest (the AiJl, iii. 13, the eastern shore, 
v. 1, Nazareth, vi. 1). Mt. gives this 
incident at the close of the parable col- 
lection; Lk. at the beginning of the 
Galilean ministry. Mk.’s connection is 
the most historical, Lk.’s is obviously an 
anticipation. It is the same incident 
in all three Gospels.—warpida: vide 
notes on Mt., ad loc.—oit μαθηταὶ a. Mt. 
omits this.—Ver. 2. ἤρξατο διδάσκειν͵ 
etc.: Jesus did not go to Nazareth for 
the purpose of preaching, rather for rest ; 
but that He should preach was inevit- 


378 


γίνονται 1; 


δὲ δ Ιακώβου καὶ ᾿Ιωσῆ ” καὶ Ιούδα καὶ Σίμωνος ; 
ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ ὧδε πρὸς ἡμᾶς; 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


VI. 


3. οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τέκτων, ὁ υἱὸς Mapias,® ἀδελφὸς 


‘ > > A c 
καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν at 
‘ ~ 
Καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. 


4- ἔλεγε δὲ ὅ αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, '"Ὅτι οὐκ ἔστι προφήτης ἄτιμος, εἰ. 


μὴ ἐν τῇ πατρίδι αὑτοῦ, καὶ ἐν τοῖς συγγενέσι ὃ καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ 
αὐτοῦ. 5 5. Καὶ οὐκ ἠδύνατο ἐκεῖ οὐδεμίαν δύναμιν ποιῆσαι;ῖ εἰ 


μὴ ὀλίγοις ἀρρώστοις ἐπιθεὶς τὰς χεῖρας, ἐθεράπευσε. 


6. καὶ 


a Ch. iii. 34 ἐθαύμαζε ὃ διὰ τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν: καὶ περιῆγε τὰς κώµας " κύκλω 


req. 


διδάσκων. 


1 Ῥος οτι . . . Ύινονται should stand και αι δυναμεις τοι. δια τ, Xo Ύινομεναι as in 


NB (W.H.). 


The crude construction suits the mood of the speakers. 


2 S$BCLA before Μαρ. have της, omitted to assimilate to following names. 


ἔκαι αδελ. in NBCDLA. 


§ συγγενενσιν αντου in BLZ (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 ]ωσητος in BDLA 33. 


5 kat ελεγεν in NBCDLA 33. 
7 ποιησαι ovd. Suv. in SBCLA.. 


® Gavpacey in 34 Β (Tisch., W.H., text). Τ.Ε. as in CDL (W.H. margin). 


able; therefore, the Sabbath coming 
round, He appeared in the synagogue, 
and spoke.—1é0ev τούτῳ ταῦτα: laconic ; 
comprehensive, vague question, covering 
the discourse just heard and all that had 
been reported to them about their towns- 
man, with the one word ταῦτα: such 
speech, such wisdom (τίς ἡ σοφία), such 
powers (δυνάµεις, not wrought there), in 
such a well-known person (τούτῳ).--- 
Ver. 3. ὁ τέκτων: avoided by Mt., who 
says the carpenter’s son: one of Mk.’s 
realisms. The ploughs and yokes of 
Justin M. (c. Trypho., 88) and the apocry- 
phal Gospels pass beyond realism into 
vulgarity.—éoxavSahilovro: what they 
had heard awakened admiration, but the 
external facts of the speaker’s connec- 
tions and early history stifled incipient 
faith ; vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 4. ἐν τοῖς 
συγγενεῦσιν a., among his kinsmen. 
This omitted in Mt., ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ a. 
covering it.—Ver. 5. οὐκ ἠδύνατο, etc., 
He was not able to do any mighty work, 
which is qualified by the added clause, 
that He placed His hands on a few 
ailing persons (ἀρρώστοις); quite minor 
cures, not to be compared with those 
reported in the previous chapter. For 
this statement Mt. substitutes: He did 
not there many mighty works.—Ver. 6. 
ἐθαύμασεν, etc. Jesus marvelled at the 
faith of the centurion, Nazareth sup- 
plied the opposite ground for astonish- 
ment. There Jesus found an amount of 
stupid unreceptivity for which His ex- 
perience in Decapolis and elsewhere had 
not prepared Him. It was the ne plus 
ultra in that line. This wonder Mt. 


omits, merely noting the unbelief as. 
cause of the non-performance of miracles. 
We are to conceive of it as bringing: 
about this result, not by frustrating 
attempts at healing, but by not giving 
Jesus an opportunity. The people of 
Nazareth were so consistently unbeliev- 
ing that they would not even bring their 
sick to Him to be healed (Klostermann), 
and, as Euthy. Zig. remarks, it was not 
fitting that Jesus should benefit them 
against their will (οὐκ ἔδει βιαίως εὖερ- 
γετεῖν αὐτούς). 

Vv. 60-13. Mission of the Twelve 
(Mt. x. 1-15, Lk. ix. 1-6).—Ver. 6b 
may either be connected with the fore- 
going narrative, when it will mean that 
Jesus, rejected by the Nazareans, made 
a teaching tour among the villages 
around (Fritzsche, Meyer), or it may be 
taken as an introduction to the following 
narrative = Jesus resumes the véle of a 
wandering preacher in Galilee (i. 38, 39) 
and associates with Himself in the work 
His disciples (Schanz, Weiss, Kloster- 
mann, εἴο.). This brief statement in 
Mark: and He went round about the 
villages in a circle teaching, answers to 
Matt. ix. 35-38, where the motive of the 
mission of the Twelve is more fully ex- 
plained.—Ver. 7. ἤρξατο, etc.: Jesus 
calling to Him (προσκαλεῖται, vide iii. 
13) the Twelve began at length to do: 
what He had intended from the first 
(Weiss), viz., to send them forth as 
missioners (ἀποστέλλειν).---δύο δύο, two 
(and) two, Hebraic for κατὰ or ava δύο; 
two together, not one by one, a humane 
arrangement.—edidov, imperiect, as 


3—13- 


EYATTEAION 


379 


7. ΚΑΙ προσκαλεῖται τοὺς δώδεκα, καὶ ἤρξατο αὐτοὺς ἀποστέλλειν 
"δύο δύο, καὶ ἐδίδου αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τῶν πνευμάτων τῶν ἀκαθάρτων. b here only 
> a > ς 3 ε im “nay 
8. καὶ παρήγγειλεν αὐτοῖς, ἵνα μηδὲν αἴρωσιν εἰς ὁδόν, εἰ μὴ ῥάβδον (Gen. vi 


µόνον’ μὴ πήραν, μὴ ἄρτον,! μὴ eis τὴν ζώνην “χαλκόν: 9. GAN’ 
ἁὑποδεδεμένους ᾿ σανδάλια" καὶ “un ἐνδύσησθε” δύο Χιτῶνας.᾽ 
10. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, ΄΄ Ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθητε εἰς οἰκίαν, ἐκεῖ µένετε 


ἕως ἂν ἐξέλθητε ἐκεῖθεν. 


II. καὶ ὅσοι ὃ ἂν μὴ δέξωνται ξ spas, 


1ο, 20). 
c Ch. xii. 41 
> d Acts xii. 8. 
Eph. vi. 15. 
e Acts xii. 8 
(Is. xx. 2. 
Judith x. 
4; Xvi. ϱ)- 


μηδὲ ἀκούσωσιν ὑμῶν, ἐκπορευόμενοι ἐκεῖθεν, ἐκτινάξατε τὸν * χοῦν { Rev. xviii. 


τὸν ὑποκάτω τῶν ποδῶν ὑμῶν, eis μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς. 


diy λέγω 19(=dust). 


ὑμῖν, ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται Σοδόµοις ἢ Γομόρροις ἐν ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως, ἢ 


τῇ πόλει éxeivy.” 4 


12. Kat ἐξελθόντες ἐκήρυσσον ὃ ἵνα µετανοή- 


σωσιδ: 13. καὶ δαιμόνια πολλὰ ἐξέβαλλον, καὶ ἤλειφον ἐλαίῳ 


πολλοὺς ἀρρώστους καὶ ἐθεράπευον. 


1 µη αρτον µη πηραν in SBCLA. The order of Τ.Ε. conforms to Lk. (so in D). 
2 (νδνσασθαι is the reading of W.H. (text), on slight authority. LE have 


ενδεδυσθαι. “The Τ.Κ. is supported by $,ACDA, and is adopted by Tisch., Trg. 


(text), Weiss (W.H. margin). 


3 os av τοπος µη δεξηται in SBLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


The T.R. is an adaptation 


to ακουσωσιν in next clause, which refers to the people in the place. 
4 From apny λεγω υμιν to εκεινη is an importation from Mt. not found in NBCDLA. 
5 εκηρυξαν in S$BCDLA. The imperfect (T.R.) is an assimilation to εξεβαλλον in 


ver. 13. 


6 µετανοωσιν in BDL (Tisch., W.H.). 


εκηρυξαν. 


specifying an accompaniment of the 
mission, not pointing to separate em- 
powerment of each pair.—é£ovclay τ. π. 
τ. @., power over unclean spirits, alone 
mentioned by Mark, cf. Matthew and 
Luke.—Ver. 8. εἰ μὴ ῥάβδον µόνον: 
vide in Matthew, ad Ίοε.--χαλκόν: no 
mention of gold and silver, brass the 
only money the poor missionaries were 
likely to handle.—Ver. 9. ἄλλα... 
σανδάλια, but shod with sandals.— 
μηδὲ ὑποδήματα, says Matthew, recon- 
cilable either by distinguishing between 
sandals and shoes (vide on Matthew), or 
by understanding μηδὲ before ὑποδεδεμέ- 
νους (Victor Ant.).—8to χιτῶνας: In 
Mark the prohibition is not to wear 
(ἐνδύσησθε) two tunics, in Matthew and 
Luke not to possess a spare one. The 
sentence in vv. 8, 9 presents a curious 
instance of varying construction : first tva 
with the subjunctive after παρήγγειλεν 
(ver. 8), then ὑποδεδεμένους, implying an 
infinitive with accusative (πορεύεσθαι 
understood), then finally there is a 
transition from indirect to direct narra- 
tion in μὴ ἐνδύσησθε.---Ἱετ. το. ἐκεῖ, 
ἐκεῖθεν, there, in the house; thence, 


µετανοησωσι (SSCA) sympathises with 


from the village.—Ver, 11. καὶ ὃς ἂν τ. 
- . . ὑμῶν: another instance of incon- 
sequent construction beginning with a 
relative clause and passing into a con- 
ditional one = and whatever place does 
not receive you, if (ἐάν understood) they, 
its people, do not listen to you (so 
Schanz and Weiss in Μεγετ).---ὑποκάτω, 
the dust that is under your feet, instead 
of ἐκ and ἀπὸ in Matthew and Luke. 
The dust of theiy roads adhering to your 
feet, shake it off and leave it behind you. 
Vv. 12, 13 report the carrying out of the 
mission by the Twelve through preach- 
ing and healing.—tva μετανοῶσιν: the 
burden of their preaching was, Repent. 
Luke has the more evangelic term, 
εὐαγγελιζόμενοι,, The other aspect of 
their ministry is summed up in the 
expulsion of many demons, and the cure 
of many suffering from minor ailments, 
G&ppworous (cf. ver. 5). In Mark’s account 
the powers of the Twelve appear much 
more restricted than in Matthew (c/. x. 
8). The use of oil in healing (ἐλαίῳ) is 
to be noted. Some have regarded this 
as a mark of late date (Baur). Others 
(Weiss, Schanz) view it as a primitive 


380 


¢ 1 Cor, iii. 


KATA MAPKON 


VI. 


14. Καὶ ἤκουσεν ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἡρώδης, (5 φανερὸν yap © ἐγένετο τὸ 


13; Xiv. be 
25. Phil. ὄνομα αὐτοῦ,) καὶ edeyer,! “΄ Ὅτι Ιωάννης ὁ βαπτίζων ἐκ νεκρῶν 
μ γ νη ρ 


. 13. , κ 3 a ε 
h vide Mt. ἠγέρθη,: καὶ διὰ τοῦτο " ἐνεργοῦσιν αἱ δυνάµεις ἐν αὐτῷ. 


χιν. 4. 


ἐστίν, 44 ὡς εἲς τῶν προφητῶν.” 


“Or. ὃ ὃν ἐγὼ ἀπεκεφάλισα 
ἐκ νεκρῶν.” 7 


ἔλεγον, “Ὅτι Ἡλίας ἐστίν 


a 35 


15. Άλλοι 5 
ἄλλοι δὲ ἔλεγον, “΄ Ὅτι προφήτης 
16. ᾽Ακούσας δὲ ὁ Ἠρώδης εἶπεν,ὃ 


Ἰωάννην, οὗτόςἸ ἐστιν: αὐτὸς ἠγέρθη 
17. Αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ Ἡρώδης ἀποστείλας ἐκράτησε τὸν 


Ἰωάννην, καὶ ἔδησεν αὐτὸν ἐν TH® Φφυλακῇ, διὰ Ἡρωδιάδα τὴν 


γυναῖκα Φιλίππου τοῦ 


1 So in ΜΑΟΙ. ΔΣ (Tisch., W.H., margin). 


2 εγηγερται εκ νεκρων in SBDLA 33. 
’ Many uncials add δε. 
δελεγεν in NBCLA 33. 
7 For ovros ... 
8 ry is found only in minusc. 


practice (vide James v. 14). Many con- 
jectural opinions have been expressed 
as to the function or significance of 
the oil. According to Lightfoot and 
Schéttgen it was much used at the time 
by physicians. 

The instructions to the Twelve present 
an interesting problem in criticism and 
comparative exegesis. It is not, im- 
probable that two versions of these 
existed and have been drawn upon by 
the synoptists, one in the Logia of 
Matthew, reproduced, Weiss thinks, sub- 
stantially in Lk. x. (mission of Seventy), 
the other in Mk. vi., used (Weiss) in 
Lk. ix. 1-6. Matthew, according to the 
same critic, mixes the two. Similarly 
Holtzmann, who, however, differs from 
Weiss in thinking the two versions 
entirely independent. Weiss recon- 
structs the original version of the Logia 
thus :— 

τ. Mt. ix. 38 = Lk. x. 2, prayer for 
labourers. 

2. Lk. x. 3 = go forth, I send you as 
lambs among wolves. , 

3. Mt. x. 5, 6, go not to Samaria, 
but to Israel only. 

4. Lk. x. 4-11, detailed instructions. 

Vv. 14-16. Herod and Fesus (Mt. xiv. 
I, 2, Lk. ix. 7-9).—Ver. 14. Ὀκουσεν: 
Herod heard, what? Christ’s name, τὸ 
ὁ. a. (φανερὸν γὰρ ἐγέν., a parenthesis) ? 
Or all that is stated in vv. 14, 15, court 
opinion about Jesus (from Φανερὸν to 
προφητῶν, a parenthesis)? Both views 
have been held, but the simplest view is 
that Herod heard of the doings of the 
Twelve, though it is difficult to believe 


ἀδελφοῦ 


αὐτοῦ, ὅτι αὐτὴν ἐγάμησεν. 


Vide below. 


4 8ΒΟΙ, omit εστιν η (Tisch., W.H.). 
6 οτι omit NBDL 33. 


εκ vex. NBLA have simply οντος ηγερθη. 


that the report of their mission was the 
first tidings he had received of the great 
work of Jesus, especially in view of the 
understanding between the Pharisees 
and Herodians mentioned in iii. 6. In 
the reports which reached Herod the 
Twelve were merged in their Master. 
He was the hero of the whole Galilean 
movement. Such is the import of the 
statement that His name had become 
known.—Baowreds: strictly, Herod was 
only a tetrarch (Matthew and Luke), but 
it was natural for Mark writing for the 
Roman world to use this title, as it was 
applied freely in Rome to all eastern 
rulers.—éAeyev, he said, {.ε., Herod. 
ἔλεγον, the reading of BD, and adopted 
by W.H., puts the saying into the mouth 
of the court people. Matthew has taken 
it the former way, Luke the latter. The 
theory that Jesus was John risen looks 
more like the creation of a troubled 
conscience than the suggestion of light- 
minded courtiers, unless indeed it was 
thrown out by them as a jest, and yet it 
appears to be the aim of the evangelist 
first to report the opinions of others and 
then to give the king’s, emphatically 
endorsing one of the hypotheses.— 
ἐγήγερται, is risen, and is now alive and 
active, the latter the point emphasised.— 
ἐνεργοῦσιν at δ.: vide notes on Matthew. 
—Ver. 15. Ἠλίας, Elias vedivivus, with 
extraordinary power and mission.—zpo- 
φήτης, etc., a prophet like one of the 
old prophets, not any of them redivivus. 
Luke understands it in the latter sense. 
—Ver. 16. ᾿Ἰωάννην: the accusative 
incorporated with the relative clause by 


14—21. 


18. ἔλεγε γὰρ 6 Ἰωάννης τῷ ‘Hpddy, 
19. Ἡ δὲ Ἡρωδιὰς ἐνεῖχεν i Lk. xi. 53. 


τὴν Ὑγυναῖκα τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου.” 


αὐτῷ, καὶ ἤθελεν αὐτὸν ἀποκτεῖναι: καὶ οὐκ ἠδύνατο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


38h 
% 


@ 
“Ore οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι ἔχειν 


20. 6 γὰρ 


Ἡρώδης ἐφοβεῖτο τὸν Ἰωάννην, εἰδὼς αὐτὸν ἄνδρα δίκαιον καὶ ἅγιον, 
καὶ συνετήρει αὐτόν: καὶ ἀκούσας αὐτοῦ, πολλὰ ἐποίει,ὶ καὶ ἡδέως 


> a» 
αὐτοῦ ἤκουε. 
γενεσίοις αὐτοῦ δεῖπνον ἐποίει Σ τοῖς 


1 ηπορει in WBL. 
εποιει (T.R.) in ΑΟΡΔΠΣΦ, etc. 


Ἄεποιησεν in NBCDLA. 


attraction both in position and in con- 
struction; vide Winer, § xxiv. 2, and 
Viger, p. 33. The king’s statement is 
very emphatic = the man whom I be- 
headed, John, he is risen (that is what it 
all means). 

Vv. 17-29. Story of Herod and the 
Baptist (Mt. xiv. 3-12). Herod’s en- 
dorsement of the theory that Jesus is 
John redivivus gives 4 convenient 
opportunity for reporting here post 
eventum the Baptist’s fate. The report 
is given in aorists which need not be 
translated as pluperfects (as in A. V. 
and R. V.).—Ver. 17. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ Ἡ., 
for the same Herod, whe made the 
speech just reported, etc.—rhv γυναῖκα 
Φιλίππον: some have supposed that 
the mistake is here made of taking 
Herodias for the wife of Philip the 
tetrarch, who in reality was husband of 
her daughter Salome (so Holtz. in H. C.). 
Herodias had previously been the wife of 
a rich man in Jerusalem, step-brother of 
Herod Antipas, referred to by Josephus 
(Ant. J., xviii., 5, 4) by the name of 
Herod, the family name. He may, of 
course, have borne another name, such 
as Philip: Even if there bea slip it isa 
matter of small moment compared to the 
moral interest of the gruesome story,— 
Ver.19. ἡ δὲ Ἡρ.: the murderous mood 
is by Mark ascribed to Herodias ; in her 
it would certainly be strongest and un- 
checked by any other feeling. In Herod, 
if the mood was there, it was accompanied 
by worthier impulses (vide on Matthew). 
—vetyev, had a grudge (χόλον under- 
stood, so Fritzsche al.) against him 
(αὐτῷ, dative of disadvantage); or, kept 
in mind what John had said, treasured 
up against him, with fixed hate and 
purpose of revenge.—kal οὐκ ἠδύνατο, 
and was not able, to compass her end 
for a while.—Ver. 20 gives the reason.—- 
ἐφοβεῖτο, feared, a mixture of reverence 
and superstitious dread towards the 


21. καὶ γενομένης ἡμέρας εὐκαίρου, ὅτε Ἡρώδης τοῖς 
 μεγιστᾶσιν αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῖς 


j Rev. vi.15; 
XViil. 23. 


Memph. vers. (R.V., Tisch., Trg., marg., W.H., Ws.). 
Lat. and Syr. verss. 


prophet and man of οά.-- συνετήρει, 
not merely observed him (A. V.)—this, 
too neutral and colourless—kept him 
safe (R. V.) from her fixed malice often 
manifested but not likely to have its way 
with him in ordinary circumstances,— 
ἀκούσας πολλὰ implies frequent meet- 
ings between the Baptist and the king, 
either at Machaerus or at Tiberias.— 
ἠπόρει, the true reading, not only on 
critical grounds (attested by $§BL), but 
also _on_ psychological, corresponding 
exactly to the character of the man— 
a δίψυχος avinp—drawn two ways, by 
respect for goodness on the one hand, 
by evil passions on the other. He was 
at a loss what to do in the ,matter of his 
wife’s well-known purpose,  shiftless 
(ἀπορεῖν, to be without resources) ; half 
sympathised with her wish, yet could 
not be brought to the Ρροῖηῖ.---ἠδέως a. 
ἤκονεν, ever heard him with pleasure; 
every new _ hearing exorcising the 
vindictive demon, even the slightest 
sympathy with it, for a time. 

Vv. 21-29. The fatal day.—Ver. 21. 
εὐκαίρου, a day convenient for the long 
cherished purpose of MHerodias; so 
regarded by her as well as.by the 
evangelist. She had a chance then, if 
ever, and might hope that by wine, love, 
and the assistance of obsequious guests, 
her irresolute husband would at last be 
brought to the point (Grotius). The 
word occurs again in the N. T., Heb. 
iv. 16, εὔκαιρον βοήθειαν = seasonable 
5πςςου.---μεγιστᾶσιν (μεγιστᾶνες from 
μέγιστος), magnates. A word belonging 
to Macedonian Greek, condemned by 
Phryn. (p. 196: péya δνυναμένοι the right 
expression), frequent in Sept. With 
these magnates, the civil authorities, are 
named the chief military men (χιλιάρχοις) 
and the socially important persons’ of 
Galilee (πρώτοις)---απ imposing gather- 
ing on Herod’s birthday.—Ver. 22. 
ἤρεσεν, it, the dancing, pleased Herod 


382 


KATA MAPKON 


VI. 


Χιλιάρχοις καὶ τοῖς πρώτοις τῆς Γαλιλαίας, 32. καὶ εἰσελθούσης τῆς 
θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς τῆς 1 Ἡρωδιάδος, καὶ ὀρχησαμένης, καὶ ἀρεσάσης 3 
τῷ ᾿Ηρώδῃ καὶ τοῖς συνανακειµένοις, εἶπεν ὁ βασιλεὺς ὃ τῷ κορασίῳ, 


“ Αἴτησόν µε ὃ ἐὰν θέλῃς, καὶ δώσω σοί 


23. καὶ ὤμοσεν αὐτῇ, 


““On ὃ édv* µε αἰτήσῃς, δώσω coi, ἕως ἡμίσους τῆς βασιλείας pou.” 


24. Ἡ δὲδ ἐξελθοῦσα εἶπε 
Ἡ δὲ εἶπε, “Thy κεφαλὴν 


τῇ μητρὶ αὐτῆς, “Ti αἰτήσομαι  ;” 


3 A a“ 
Ἰωάννου τοῦ Bawtierod.”7 25. Καὶ 


k Rom. xii. εἰσελθοῦσα εὐθέως μετὰ Ἔ σπουδῆς πρὸς τὸν βασιλὲα, ἠτήσατο, 


8. ᾳ Cor. 


vii.11,12; M€youga, '' Θέλω ἵνα por δῷς ἐξ αὐτῆς ὃ ἐπὶ πίνακι τὴν κεφαλὴν 


viii. 7, 8 a a) 
feb. Ἰωάννου τοῦ Βαπτιστοῦ. 


16. Heb. 
σι ας. ο 
Pet“i:y 5: 


Jude 3. 


ἐπέταξεν ἐνεχθῆναι 1” τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ. 


26. Καὶ περίλυπος γενόμενος 6 βασιλεύς, 
διὰ τοὺς ὅρκους καὶ τοὺς συνανακειµένους ) οὐκ ἠθέλησεν αὐτὴν 
ἀθετῆσαι.ῖὈ 27. καὶ εὐθέως ἀποοτείλας ὁ βασιλεὺς σπεκουλάτωρα 11 


6 δὲ15 ἀπελθὼν ἄπε- 


κεφάλισεν αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ φυλακῇ, 28. καὶ ἤνεγκε τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ 


Cpa , ‘ 2. ~ , 4 9 34. 
επι πινακι, και ἔδωκεν αύντην τῷ κορασίῳ ' και TO κοράσιον ἔδωκεν 


1 For αντης της NBDLA have αντον (omitting της), adopted by W.H. contrary, 
Weiss thinks, to all history, all grammar, and the context (vide in Meyer). 


2 For και αρεσ. BCL 33 have ηρεσεν. 


Σο δε βασιλ. ειπεν in SBCLA 33. 


4 BA have ο τι εαν, the most probable reading (W.H. text). 


5 For η δε BLA 33 have και. 
7 BamrifLovros in BLA. 

° avakxetpevous in BCLA. 

1 σπεκονλατορα in SABL al, 
18 For ο δε BCLA have και. 


and his guests.—t. κορασίῳ, to the girl, 
as in v. 41-2, not necessarily a child; 
the word was used familiarly like the 
Scotch word ‘‘lassie’”’; disapproved by 
Phryn., Ρ.73.--αἴτησόν µε . . . ὤμοσεν: 
promise first, followed by oath after a 
little interval, during which the girl 
naturally hesitated what to ask.—Ver. 
23. Ἠἡμίσους, genitive of ἥμισυς, like 
ἡμίση (τὰ, plural), a late form = the 
half, of my kingdom: maudlin amorous 
generosity.—Ver. 24. She goes out to 
ask advice of her mother, implying that 
she had not previously got instructions 
as Matthew’s account suggests.—Ver. 
25. εὖθὺς μετὰ σπουδῆς, without delay 
and with quick step, as of one whose 
heart was in the business. There had 
been no reluctance then on the girl’s 
part, no need for much educating to 
bring her to the point; vide remarks on 
προβιβασθεῖσα in Mt. xiv. δ. Her 
mother’s child.—étaurjs (supply Spas), 
on the spot, at once; request proffered 
with a cool pert impudence almost out- 


5 αιτησωµαι in SABCDGLA 33. 
δεξαντης Sws por in SBCLA. 

19 αθετ. αντην in SBCLA. 

19 εγεγκαι in BCA (Τ.Ε. in DL). 


doing the mother.—Ver. 26. περίλνπος 
γενόμενος: a concessive clause, καίπερ 
understood = and the king, though ex- 
ceedingly.sorry, yet, etc.—Spxovs: there 
might be more oaths than one (vide on 
Matthew), but the plural was sometimes 
used for a single oath. Schanz cites 
instances from Aeschylus and Xenophon. 
---ἀθετῆσαι α., to slight her, by treating 
the oath and promise as a joke; a late 
word, used, in reference to persons, in 
the sense of breaking faith with (here 
only). Kypke renders the word here: 
‘noluit fidem illi datam fallere,” citing 
instances from Diod., Polyb., and Sept. 
—Ver. 27. σπεκονλάτορα = speculator 
in Latin, literally a watcher, a military 
official of the empire who acted partly as 
courier, partly as a police officer, partly 
as an executioner ; illustrative citations 
in Wetstein. The word found its way 
into the Jewish language (here only).— 
Ver. 29 relates how the disciples of John 
buried the carcase of their master.—éy 
µνηµείῳ, inatomb. The phrase recalls 


22-—33. 


αὐτὴν τῇ μητρὶ αὐτῆς. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


351 


20. Καὶ ἀκούσαντες οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 


A A 3 A , 
ἦλθον, καὶ ἦραν τὸ πτῶμα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἔθηκαν αὐτὸ ἐν τῷ] pyypeto. 
ο ” a 
30. Καὶ συνάγονται οἱ ἀπόστολοι πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἀπήγ- 


a 4 λο / 
γειλαν αὐτῷ πάντα, Kai? ὅσα ἐποίησαν καὶ ὅσα ἐδίδαξαν. 


31. καὶ 


εἶπεν 3 αὐτοῖς, “ Δεῦτε ὑμεῖς αὐτοὶ κατ ἰδίαν εἰς ἔρημον τόπον, καὶ 
ἀναπαύεσθε΄ ὀλίγον. ΊἨσαν γὰρ οἱ ἐρχόμενοι καὶ οἱ ὑπάγοντες 


- ’ 
πολλοί, καὶ οὐδὲ φαγεῖν ηὐκαίρουν.ὁ 


32. καὶ ἀπῆλθον εἰς ἔρημον 


~ A Φι 3 A ς 
τόπον τῷ πλοίῳ ὃ κατ ἰδίαν. 33. Καὶ εἶδον αὐτοὺς ὑπάγοντας οἱ 
ὄχλοι,ῖ καὶ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτὸν ὃ πολλοί: καὶ wel) ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν i Actaiii. 11, 


a > 8 
πόλεων ὴ συνέδραµον ἐκεῖ, καὶ '' προῆλθον αυτούς, καὶ συνῆλθον πρὸς 


1 Omit τω most uncials (D has it). 
3 Keyes in NBCLA 33. 

5 ενκαιρουν in most uncials. 

7 Omit ot ox. NABDLAZ al. 


m Lk. xxii 
47. 

1 Omit και NBCDLAS. 

* αναπαυσασθε in BCA. 


Sree πλ. εις ep. τοπον in NBLA. 


8 BD have eyvwoav and without an object (αντον or avrovs). 


to mind the burial of Jesus. Did the 
evangelist wish to suggest for the re- 
flection of his readers a parallel between 
the fate of the Baptist and that of Christ ? 
(So Klostermann). 

Vv. 30-33. Return of the Twelve (Mt. 
xiv. 13, Lk. ix. 1ο, rr).—Ver. 30 transfers 
us from the past date of the horrible 
deed just related to the time when the 
fame of Jesus and His disciples recalled 
the deed of guilt to Herod’s mind.— 
συνάγονται ot ἀπόστολοι πρὸς τὸν 
Ἰησοῦν, the apostles (here only, and not 
in the technical sense of after days, 
but = the men sent out on the Galilean 
mission, the missioners) gather to Jesus. 
Where? after how long? and what has 
Jesus been doing the while? No answer 
is possible. These are gaps in the 
evangelic history.—wavra ὅσα ἐπ.: sug- 
gests that they had great things to tell, 
though vv. 12, 13 create very moderate 
expectations. The repetition of ὅσα be- 
fore ἐδίδαξαν -- how much they had 
taught (‘‘ quanta docuerant,” Fritzsche), 
may surprise. The teaching element 
could not be extensive in the range of 
topics. Yet, if it took the form of fer- 
sonal narrative concerning Fesus, it 
might be copious enough, and really the 
principal feature of the mission, Vide 
notes on Mt., chap. x.—Ver. 31. tpeis 
αὐτοὶ, either: you yourselves, vos ipsi, 
without the crowd (Meyer, Schanz), or, 
better: you the same men who have been 
hard at work and need rest (Weiss in 
Meyer, Holtz.,H.C.). This sympathy of 
Jesus with the Twelve reflects His own 
craving for rest which He often un- 


successfully strove to obtain.—davarav- 
σασθε, aorist—only a breathing space in 
a life of toil._—ot ἐρ. καὶ ot uray. Many 
coming and going: a constant stream of 
people on some errand; no sooner done 
with one party than another presented it- 
self—no leisure.—ovSe φαγεῖν εὐκαίρουν : 
no leisure (cf. εὔκαιρος, ver. 21), even to 
eat; imperfect, implying that it was not 
a solitary occurrence. What was the 
business on hand? Probably a political 
movement in Christ’s favour with which 
the Twelve sympathised. Vide John vi. 
15.—Ver. 32. τῷ πλοίφ. The boat 
which stood ready for service (iii. 9).— 
kat’ ἰδίαν, privately, z.c., with Jesus only 
in the boat, and without other boats 
accompanying. As to the reason for 
this withdrawal into privacy cf. Mk.’s 
account with Mt.’s (xiv. 13), who con- 
nects with the report of John’s death. 
Beyond doubt, Mk.’s is the correct ac- 
count. The excursion was an attempt 
to escape from the crowd and from 
dangerous illusions ; again without suc- 
cess.—Ver. 33 explains why.—et8oy, etc., 
they (the people) saw them departing.— 
ἐπέγνωσαν (or ἔγνωσαν, BD) is better 
without an object (αὐτοὺς or αὐτὸν) = 
they knew, not who they were, but what 
they were after, where they were going, 
doubtless from the course they were 
steering.—welq (from πεζός, adjective, 
68, understood), on foot, by land 
round the end of the lake.—ovvédpapoy, 
they ran together, excited and exciting, 
each town on the way contributing its 
till to the growing stream of eager 
human beings; what a picture! The 


KATA MAPKON νι. 


384 
αὐτόν. 34. καὶ ἐξελθὼν εἶδεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς Σ πολὺν ὄχλον, καὶ ἐσπλαγ- 
χγίσθη én’ avrois,® ὅτι ἦσαν ὡς πρόβατα μὴ ἔχοντα ποιμένα: καὶ 
ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτοὺς πολλά. 35. Καὶ ἤδη ὥρας πολλῆς 
γενομένης, προσελθόντες αὐτῷ ά οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ \éyouow,** “Ore 
ἔρημός ἐστιν ὁ τόπος, καὶ ἤδη Spa πολλή: 36. ἀπόλυσον αὐτούς,, 
ἵνα ἀπελθόντες eis τοὺς κύκλῳ ἀγροὺς καὶ κώµας, ἀγοράσωσιν ἑαυτοῖς 
dptous®+ τί γὰρ φάγωσιν οὐκ ἔχουσιν ὅ 37. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Δότε αὐτοῖς ὑμεῖς φαγεῖν. Kai λέγουσιν αὐτῶ, 
““᾽Απελθόντες ἀγοράσωμεν διακοσίων δηναρίων 8 ἄρτους, καὶ δῶμεν ἴ 
αὐτοῖς payeiv.” 38. Ὁ δὲ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Méaous ἄρτους ἔχετε ; 
ὑπάγετε καὶ ὃ tere.” Καὶ γνόντες λέγουσι, “Πέντε, καὶ δύο ἰχθύας.” 
39. Καὶ ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι ὃ πάντας συμπόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ 
τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ. 40. καὶ ἀνέπεσον πρασιαὶ πρασιαί, ἀνὰ 10 ἑκατὸν 
καὶ ἀνὰ 10 πεντήκοντα. 41. καὶ λαβὼν τοὺς πέντε ἄρτους καὶ τοὺς 
δύο ἰχθύας, ἀναβλέψας εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν, εὐλόγησε: καὶ κατέκλασε 
τοὺς ἄρτους, καὶ ἐδίδου τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ” : ἵνα παραθῶσιν 13 αὐτοῖς - 
καὶ τοὺς δύο ἰχθύας ἐμέρισε πᾶσι' 42. καὶ ἔφαγον πάντες, καὶ 
ἐχορτάσθησαν : 43. καὶ ἦραν κλασμάτων δώδεκα κοφίνους πλήρεις, ὃ 


1 SSBLA omit kat συνηλθον προς αυτον (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 In BA, omitted in KD. 
. εχουσιν SBLA have simply τι φαγωσιν (Tisch., W.H.). 


° επ αντους in NBD. 
° For αρτονς . 
6 δην. Stax. in HABLA. 


ὃ και omit SBDL 33. 
10 κατα in SBD (Tisch., W.H.). 
12 παρατιθωσιν in BLA. 


ultimate result, a congregation of 5000. 
This the climax of popularity, and, from 
the fourth Gospel we learn, its crisis 
(chap. vi.).—mpoq\ov, “outran”’ (A. V.), 
anticipated = Φθάνειν in classics. 

Vv. 34-44. The feeding (Mt. xiv. 14-21, 
Lk. ix. 11-17).—Ver. 34. ἤρξατο διδά- 
σκειν, He began to teach, constrained 
by pity (ἐσπλαγχνίσθη), though weary 
of toil and of popularity. To teach ; 
Mt. says to heal. There could be few, 
if any, sick in a crowd that had come in 
such a hurry.—Ver. 35. pas πολλῆς, 
it being late in the day.—roAvg was ex- 
tensively used by the Greeks in all sorts 
of connections, time included; examples 
in Kypke and Hermann’s Viger, p. 137 f. 
The phrase recurs in last clause of this 
verse (ὥρα πολλή).--Ὑδτ. 37. δηναρ. 
διακ. ἄρτους, loaves of (purchasable 
for) 200 denarii; the sum probably sug- 
gested by what the Twelve knew they 
were in possession of at the time = seven 
pounds in the purse of the Jesus-circle 


? Omit o |. NAB al. pl. 
4” eheyoy in BLA. 


7 δωσωμεν ἵπ NBD. «-ομεν LA (W.H.). 
2 ανακλιθηναι in NB. ανακλιναι DLA. 
11 αντον omit RELA. 


15 B has κλασματα δ. κοφινων rAnpwpata (W.H.). 


(Grotius, Holtz., H. C.).—Ver. το. 
συμπόσια συµ. Hebraistic for ava συμ. 
(cf. δύο δύο, νετ. 7)=in dining com- 
panies.—éwt τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ, on the 
green grass; a reedy, marshy place near 
the mouth of the Jordan at the north end 
of the lake. Vide Stanley’s description 
(Sinai and Palestine).—Ver. 40. πρασιαὶ 
πρασιαὶ-- ἀνὰ πρασίας, in garden flower 
plots, or squares, picturesque in fact and in 
description, bespeaking an eye-witness 
ef an impressionable nature like Peter.— 
Ver. 43. καὶ ἡραν, etc., and they took 
up, as fragments (κλάσματα, BL), the 
fillings (πληρώματα) of twelve baskets.— 
καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων, and of the fishes, 
either over and above what was in the 
twelve baskets (Fritzsche), or some 
fragments of the fishes included in them 
(Meyer).—Ver. 44. πεντακισχίλιοι ἄν- 
Spes, 5000 men: one loaf for τοοο! Mt. 
adds: ywpls γυναικῶν καὶ παιδίων, 
women and children: not counted. Of 
these, in the circumstances, there would 


34-51. 


καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἰχθύων. 
πεντακισχίλιοι ἄνδρες. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


385 


44. καὶ ἦσαν οἱ φαγόντες τοὺς ἄρτους ὡσεὶ 1 
45. Καὶ εὐθέως ἠνάγκασε τοὺς μαθητὰς 


αὐτοῦ ἐμβῆναι eis τὸ πλοῖον, καὶ προάγειν εἰς τὸ πέραν πρὸς 


Βηθσαϊδάν, ἕως αὐτὸς ἀπολύσῃ 3 τὸν ὄχλον. 


46. καὶ ™ ἀποταξά- n Lk. ix. 61; 


κ Ξ xiv. 33. 
µενος αὗτοῖς, ἀπῆλθεν εἰς τὸ ὄρος προσεύξασθαι. 47. Καὶ ὀψίας Acts xviii 


yevonévns, ἦν τὸ πλοῖον ἐν µέσῳ «Τῆς 
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. 


θαλάσσης, καὶ αὐτὸς μόνος 


48. Καὶ εἶδεν ὃ αὐτοὺς βασανιζοµένους ἐν τῷ 


ἐλαύνειν: ἦν γὰρ ὁ ἄνεμος ἐναντίος αὐτοῖς. καὶ ὃ περὶ τετάρτην 


φυλακὴν τῆς νυκτὸς ἔρχεται πρὸς 


θαλάσσης: καὶ ἤθελε παρελθεῖν αὐτούς. 


> , ~ 8 lol 
αὐτούς, περιπατῶν ἐπὶ τῆς 
49. οἱ δὲ ἰδόντες αὐτὸν 


περιπατοῦντα ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης," ἔδοξαν φάντασμα εἶναι ῦ καὶ 


ἀνέκραξαν: 50. πάντες γὰρ αὐτὸν εἶδον, καὶ ἐταράχθησαν. 


NY 
και 


εἰθέωςϐ ἐλάλησε per αὐτῶν, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, -' Θαρσεῖτε: ἐγώ 


εἰμι, μὴ φοβεῖσθε.” 


51. Καὶ ἀνέβη πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ πλοῖον, καὶ 


A ” LA 4 
ἐκόπασεν 6 ἄνεμος ’ καὶ λίαν ἐκ περισσοῦ T ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἐξίσταντο, καὶ 


'SBDLA omit ωσει. 


2 απολνει in NBL. 


απολνση is from Mt. 


5 .8wv in $$BDLA, which (D excepted) also omit και before περι τεταρτην 


φυλακην. 
4 επι τ. θ. περιπ. in NBLA 33. 


ειδεν και is a simplification of the construction. 


> ort φαγτασμµα εστιν in SBLA 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


8 o Se ευθυς in NBLA. 


7SSBLA omit ex περισσου (W.H.). It suits the situation and may have fallen 
out by oversight, or been omitted as superfluous, though really not so. 


be few, therefore probably not referred to 
by Mk. 

Vv. 45-52. Another sea-anecdote (Mt. 
xiv. 22-33). Luke drops out here and 
does not join his brother evangelists till 
we come to viii. 27.—Ver. 45. εὐθὺς: no 
time to lose; it was getting late.— 
ἠνάγκασε, vide on Mt.—eis τὸ πέραν : 
we are apt to take this as a matter of 
course as = to the other (western) side 
of the lake, and consequently to assume 
that πρὸς Βηθσαϊδάν points to a Beth- 
saida there, distinct from Bethsaida 
Julias (John i. 44). But the expression 
εἰς τ. π. may mean from the south end 
of the plain El Batiha, on the eastern 
side, to the north end towards Bethsaida 
Julias, the rendezvous for the night. In 
that case the contrary wind which over- 
took the disciples would be the prevailing 
wind from the north-east, driving them 
in an opposite direction away from 
Bethsaida towards the western shore. 
This is the view advocated by Furrer. 
Vide Zeitschrift des Paldstina-Vereins, 
B. ii. (1879). Holtz., H. C., thinks that 
either this view must be adopted or the 
true reading in the clause referring to B. 

ip 


~ 


must be that represented in some Latin 
copies: ‘“‘trans fretum a Bedsaida,” C. 
Veron. ; ‘a Bethsaida,”’ C. Monac.—Ver. 
46. ἀποταξάμενος, having dismissed 
them, {1.6., the multitude; late Greek 
condemned by Phryn., p. 23 (ἔκφυλον 
πάνυ).---Ύετ. 48. ἐν τῷ ἐλαύνειν, in pro- 
pelling (the ship with οα19).-- περὶ τετ. 
Φυλ., about the fourth watch, between 
three and six in the morning, towards 
ἀαννη.---ἤθελε παρελθεῖν, He wished to 
pass them—‘ praeterire eos,” Vul. ; it ap- 
peared so to them.—Ver. 50. Not quite 
an instance of Mark’s habit of iteration: 
explains how they came to think it was a 
phantasm. All saw what looked like 
Jesus, yet they could not believe it was 
He, areal man, walking on the water ; 
therefore they took fright and rushed to 
the conclusion: a spectre!—Ver. 51. 
ἑκόπασεν, asin iv. 30---λίαν ἐκ περισσοῦ. 
very exceedingly, a double superlative, 
a most likely combination for Mark, 
though ἐκ περ. is wanting in some im- 
portant MSS. and omitted in W.H. 
Cf. ὑπερεκπερισσοῦ in Eph. iii. 2ω.--- 
Ver. 52 reflects on the astonishment of 
the Twelve as blameworthy in view of 


5 


186 ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ VI. 52—s6. 


3 , 3 ~ ae a , 

ἐθαύμαζον.ὶ 52. οὐ γὰρ συνῆκαν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἄρτοις' ἦν γὰρ ἡ καρδία 

ο Ch. viii. 
17. John 
Xii. 40. 
Rom. xi. 
7. 2 Cor. 
tii. 14. 


αὐτῶν 3 "πεπωρωμένη. 

54. ΚΑΙ διαπεράσαντες ἦλθον ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν > Γενησαρέτ," καὶ 
προσωρµίσθησαν. 54. καὶ ἐξελθόντων αὐτῶν ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου, εὐθέως 
ἐπιγνόντες αὐτόν, 55. περιδραµόντες > ὅλην τὴν περίχωρον ὃ ἐκείνην, 
ἤρξαντο ἐπὶ τοῖς κραββάτοις .τοὺς κακῶς ἔχοντας ” περιφέρειν, 
7 . 9 > , > 

56. καὶ ὅπου ἂν εἰσεπορεύετο eis 


p 2 Cor. iv. 
ιο. Eph. 
iv. 14. 


9 ” @ ee | 2 
οπου YKOUOV οτι εκει εστι. 


κώµας ἢ ὃ πόλεις ἢ ὃ ἀγρούς, ἐν ταῖς ἀγοραῖς ἐτίθουν ® τοὺς ἀσθενοῦν- 
τας, καὶ παρεκάλουν αὐτόν, ἵνα κἂν τοῦ κρασπέδου τοῦ ἱματίου αὐτοῦ 


ἄψωνται 


χα Ad 
καὶ ὅσοι ἂν ἤπτοντο 


10 αὐτοῦ, ἐσώζοντο. 


1 S9BLA omit και εθαυµαζον, which is superfluous. 


2 For nv yop - . 
Σεπι τ. γ. ηλθον in NBLA 33. 
4 es before Γεν. in NBLA 33. 


. avtwy BLA have αλλ ην, etc., and ANB αντων η Kap. 


5 περιεδραµον in BLA 33 (with και before ηρξαντο). 


5 χωραν in BLA 33. 


7 εκει omit NBLA. 


8 εις before wodes and αγρους in BDA. 


Φετιθεσαν in BLA. 


the recent feeding of the multitude. 
One might rather have expected a re- 
ference to the stilling of the storm in 
crossing to Decapolis. But that seems 
to have appeared a small matter com- 
pared with walking on the sea. The 
evangelist seems anxious to show how 
much the Twelve needed the instruction 
to which in the sequel Jesus gives Him- 
self more and more. 

Vv. 53-56. The landing (Mt. xiv. 34- 
36).—Ver. 53. προσωρµίσθησαν (πρὸς 
ὁρμίζω from ὅρμος), they came to anchor, 
or landed on the beach; here only in 
N. T.—Ver. 55. ἐπὶ τοῖς κραββάτοις, 
upon their beds, vide ii. 4---περιφέρειν, 
to carry about from place to place. If 
they did not find Jesus at one place, they 
were not discouraged, but carried their 
sick to another place where He was 
likely tobe. Their energy, not less than 
the word κραββάτοις, recalls the story 
in ii. 1-12.- ὅπου ἤκουον ὅτι ἔστιν, not : 
wherever He ννας-- ὅπου ἦν, but: wher- 
ever they were told He was; ἐστιν, 
present, from the point of view of those 
who gave the information in indirect 
discourse. Vide on this, Burton, M. and 
T., § 351-—Ver. 56. κώµας, πόλεις, 
ἀγρούς : point probably to awider sphere 
of activity than the plain of Gennesaret. 
This was practically the close of the 
healing ministry, in which the expecta- 
tion and faith of the people were wound 
up to the highest pitch. 


19 ηψαντο in SBDLA 33 al. 


WASHING OF HAnps. 
SYROPHENICIAN Woman. A _ DEar- 
MuTE HEALED.—VV. 1-23. Concerning 
ceremonial ablutions (Mt. xv. 1-20).— 
Ver. 1. καὶ connects what follows very 
loosely with what goes before: not tem- 
poral sequence but contrast between 
phenomenal popularity and hostility οι 
the religious leaders of the people, in the 
view of the evangelist.—rwvés τῶν γραμ., 
etc., some of the scribes who had come 
from Jerusalem, ϱ/. iii. 22, and remarks 
there.—Ver. 2. καὶ ἰδόντες: the sen- 
tence beginning with these words pro- 
perly runs on to the end of ver. 5, but 
the construction of so long a sentence 
overtaxes the grammatical skill of the 
writer, so it is broken off unfinished 
after the long explanatory clause about 
Jewish customs, vv. 3-4—a kind of 
parenthesis—and a new sentence begun 
at ver. 5=and seeing, etc. (for the 
Pharisees, etc.), and the Pharisees and 
scribes ask; instead of: they ask, etc. 
The sense plain enough, though gram- 
mar crude.—rtiwas τ. µαθ., some of the 
disciples, not all. When? On_ their 
evangelistic tour? (Weiss ; Holtz., 
H. C.) We have here, as in i. 24, a 
case of attraction=seeing some that 
they eat (ὅτι ἐσθίουσι, W.H.), for seeing 
that some eat (ὅτι tivés ἐσ.).---ἀνίπτοις, 
unwashed, added to explain for Gentile 
readers the technical term «owwats=pro- 
fane (cf. Rom. xiv. 14).—Vv. 3-4. Ex- 


CuHapTER VII. 


VII. τ---6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


387 


VII. 1. ΚΑΙ συνάγονται πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, καί ties τῶν 
γραμµατέων, ἐλθόντες ἀπὸ Ἱεροσολύμων: 2. καὶ ἰδόντες τινὰς τῶν 


~ 3 A a A 1 , α 5 # 3-4 , 
μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ "κοιναῖς] χερσί, τοῦτ) ἔστιν ἀνίπτοις, ἐσθίοντας 
ἄρτους 2 ἐμέμψαντο ὃ: 3. (οἱ γὰρ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ πάντες οἱ Ιουδαῖοι, 
ἐὰν μὴ Ὁ πυγµῇ νίψωνται τὰς χεῖρας, οὐκ ἐσθίουσι, κρατοῦντες τὴν 


la ver. 5. 
Acts x. 14. 
Rom. xiv. 
14. Heb. 
X. 29. 

b here only. 


παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων: 4. καὶ ἀπὸ ἀγορᾶς, ἐὰν μὴ "βαπτί- © Lk αἰ. 58. 
σωνται,” οὐκ ἐσθίουσι" καὶ ἄλλα πολλά ἐστιν ἃ παρέλαβον κρατεῖν, 


ἁβαπτισμοὺς ποτηρίων καὶ ξεστῶν καὶ Χαλκίων καὶ κλινῶν ὅ») 


d Col. ii. 12. 
Heb. vi.2; 


ba 6-2 a 28 € a 8 « a ix. Io. 
5: επειτα επερωτωσιν αντον OL Φαρισαιοι και οι γραμματείς, ε Acts xxi. 


“Avatt ot μαθῆταί σου οὗ περιπατοῦσιΊ κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν 
πρεσβυτέρων, ἀλλὰ ἀνίπτοις ὃ χερσὶν ἐσθίουσι τὸν ἄρτον ; 


21. Rom, 
γι. 4. 


6. Ὁ δὲ 


ἀποκριθεὶς Ὁ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, '' Ὅτι καλῶς προεφήτευσεν Ἡσαΐας περὶ 


-ὐμῶν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, ὡς γέγραπται, ‘Odtos ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσί µε 


1 ort before κοιναις with εσθιουσι in BLA 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


- 2 sous before αρτους in ΜΕΡΙ ΝΔΣ. 


3 Omit epepavto NRABLA. It was doubtless introduced to help the construction. 


4 NSB have ραντισωνται (W.H. text). 


5 και κλινων is omitted in BLA (W.H. marg.), but found in D. 


It might fall 


out by similar ending, and was hardly likely to be added as a gloss. 


§ και in NBDL 33. 


7 ov περι. ot pad. σον in BLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
8 κοιναις in NBD for ανιπτοις, which seems an explanatory substitute, 
® Omitted in NBLA 33, also οτι before καλωφ. i 


planatory statement about Jewish cus- 
toms, not in Mt.—wavres ot “lovd.: the 
Pharisees, the thorough-going virtuosi 
in religion, were a limited number; but 
in this and other respects the Jews 
generally followed ancient custom. The 
expression reminds us of the Fourth 
Gospel in its manner of referring to the 
people of Israel—the Jews—as foreigners. 
Mark speaks from the Gentile point of 
νιεν.---πυγμῇ., with the fist, the Vulgate 
has here crebro, answering to πυκνά, a 
reading found in §. Most recent inter- 
preters interpret πυγµῇ as meaning that 
they rubbed hard the palm of one hand 
with the other closed, so as to make sure 
that the part which touched food should 
be clean. (So Beza.) For other inter- 
pretations vide Lightfoot, Bengel, and 
Meyer.—Ver. 4. ἀπ᾿ ἀγορᾶς, from mar- 
ket (coming understood=értav ἔλθωσι 
in D), a common ellipsis, examples in 
Raphel, Kypke, and Bos, ΕΙ. Gr., p. 98. 
--ῥαντίσωνται (SVB), they sprinkle. The 
reading, βαπτίσωνται (T.R.), may be in- 
terpreted either as=dipping of the hands 
(mersionem manuum, Lightfoot, Wet- 
stein), or, bathing of the whole body. 
(Meyer. “The statement proceeds by 


* 

way of climax: before eating they wash 
the hands always. When they come 
from market they take a bath before 
eating.” )—oryplwv, ξεστῶν, χαλκίων : 
the evangelist explains how the Jews not 
only cleansed their own persons, but also 
all sorts of household utensils—alto- 
gether a serious business, that of pre- 
serving ceremonial purity. The two 
first articles, cups and jugs, would be 
of wood; earthen vessels when defiled 
had to be broken (Lev. xv. 12). The 
second word, ξεστῶν, is a Latinism= 
sextus or sextarius, a Roman measure = 
14 English pints; here used without 
reference to contents=urceus in Vulg. 
—xarxtov=vessels of brass. The καὶ 
κλινῶν, added in some MSS., will mean 
couches for meals on which diseased 
persons may have lain (lepers, etc.). 
—Ver. 5. At last we come to the point, 
the complaint of the jealous guardians οἱ 
Jewish custom, as handed down fron 
the elders (κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τ. π.), 
against the disciples of Jesus, and in- 
directly against Jesus Himself - διατί 
οὐ περιπατοῦσι κατὰ: for this Mt. 
substitutes δ. παραβαίνουσι. 

Vv. 6-13. The reply of J esus. It con- 


488 


τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ. 
σέβονταί µε, διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας, ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων.᾽ 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


ΥΠ. 


7. µάτην δὲ 
8. 


᾽Αφέντες yap! τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ, κρατεῖτε τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν 
ἀνθρώπων, βαπτισμοὺς ξεστῶν καὶ ποτηρίων, καὶ ἄλλα παρόμοια 


{1 Cor.i.19. τοιαῦτα πολλὰ ποιεῖτε. 3 


Gal.ii.21; , 


τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἵνα τὴν 


ili. 15. 
Heb. x. 28. 


γὰρ εἶπε, ‘Tipa τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν µητέρα gou-” καί, 


g. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “ Καλῶς * ἀθετεῖτε 


παράδοσιν ὑμῶν τηρήσητε. 10. Μωσῆς 


°6 


κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ pytépa θανάτῳ τελευτάτω:᾽ 11. Ὑμεῖς δὲ 
λέγετε, "Edy εἴπῃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ µητρί, Κορβᾶν, (ὅ ἐστι. 


δῶρον,) ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς:' 12. καὶ 


8 οὐκέτι ἀφίετε αὐτὸν οὐδὲν 


a a ‘ 9 ~4 a ‘ 3 4 A 9 
ποιῆσαι τῷ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ τ ἢ τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ, 13. ἀκυροῦντες τὸν 


λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ τῇ παραδόσει ὑμῶν ᾗ παρεδώκατε' καὶ παρόμοια 


τοιαῦτα πολλὰ ποιεῖτε. 


ὄχλον, ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, ''᾽Ακούετέδ µου πάντες, καὶ συνίετε.ὃ 


14. Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος πάντα ὃὅ τὸν 


τς. 


οὐδέν ἐστιν ἔξωθεν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς αὐτόν, ὃ δύναται 


1 γαρ omitted in BLA. 


2 All after ανθρωπων is omitted in ΝΡΒΙ.Δ, and is obviously a gloss taken from 


ver. 4. 
3 Omit και MBDA. 


ὅ παλιν instead of παντα (substituted 
Vuig. Cop. 


“SSBDL omit αντον in both places. 


for a word not understood) in $BDLA, 


6 axovrarein BDL and συνετε in BLA, The presents in Τ.Ε. are from Mt. 


sists of a prophetic citation and a counter- 
charge, given by Mt. in an inverted 
order. Commentators, according to 
their bias, differ as to which of the two 
versions is secondary.—Ver. 6. καλῶς: 
twice used in Mk. (ver. 9), here = appo- 
sitely, in ver. ο ironically = bravely, 
finely, The citation from Isaiah is 
given in identical terms in the two 
accounts.—Ver. 8. At this point Mk.’s 
account seems secondary as compared 
with Mt.’s. This verse contains Christ’s 
comment on the prophetic oracle, then, 
ver. 9, He goes on to say the same 
thing over again.—Ver. 10. Μωσῆς, 
Moses; God in Mt., the same thing in 
Jewish esteem.—Ver. 11. Κορβᾶν: Mk. 
gives first the Hebrew word, then its 
Greek equivalent.—Ver. 12. Here again 
the construction limps; it would have 
been in order if there had been no λέγετε 
after ὑμεῖς at beginning of νετ. 11 = but 
ye, when a man says, etc., do not allow 
him, etc.—Ver. 13. Y παρεδώκατε, 
which ye have delivered. The receivers 
are also transmitters of the tradition, 
adding their quota to the weight of 
authority.—wapépora τοιαῦτα πολλὰ : 
many such similar things, a rhetorically 


redundant phrase (such, similar) ex- 
pressive of contempt. Cf. Col. ii. 21, 


Heb. ix. ro. 
Vv. 14-16. The people taken into the 
discussion. — προσκαλεσάμενος: the 


people must have retired a little into the 
background, out of respect for the 
Jerusalem πιᾶρηαίες.---ἀκούσατέ pov, 
etc., hear me all ye, and understand; a 
more pointed appeal than Mt.’s: hear 
and understand.—Ver. 15. This saying 
is called a parable in ver. 17, and Weiss 
contends that it must be taken strictly as 
such, {.6., as meaning that it is not foods 
going into the body through the mouth 
that defile ceremonially, but corrupt 
matters issuing from the body (as in 
leprosy). Holtzmann, H. C., concurs. 
Schanz dissents on the ground that on 
this view the connection with unclean 
hands is done away with, and a quite 
foreign thought introduced. Mt., it is 
clear, has not so understood the saying 
(xv. 11), and while he also calls it a 
parable (ver. 15) he evidently means 
thereby an obscure, enigmatical saying, 
needing explanation. Why assume that 
Mk. means anything more? True, he 
makes Jesus say, not that which cometh. 


7—23. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


359 
αὐτὸν κοινῶσαι 1: ἀλλὰ τὰ ἐκπορευόμενα ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, ἐκεῖνά 3 ἐστι 
τὰ κοινοῦντα τὸν ἄνθρωπον. 16. et τις ἔχει Gra ἀκούειν, ἀκουέτω.5 
17. Καὶ ὅτε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς οἶκον ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου, © ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν οἱ ¢ Ch. xi. 1ο. 
μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ τῆς παραβολῆς. τμ 


18. καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, (τινά τι). 
“Odtw καὶ ὑμεῖς Ἀ ἀσύνετοί ἐστε; 


οὐ νοεῖτε ὅτι Tay τὸ ἔξωθεν bh Rom.i.2t, 
εἰσπορευόμενον eis τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐ δύναται αὐτὸν κοινῶσαι; 2° ™ 
19. ὅτι οὐκ εἰσπορεύεται αὐτοῦ eis τὴν καρδίαν, GAN’ εἰς τὴν 
κοιλίαν’ καὶ εἷς τὸν ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκπορεύεται, καθαρίζον ὅ πάντα τὰ 
βρώματα.” 20. Ἔλεγε δέ, ''᾿ ο 


2 A a 9 ” 
ἐκεῖνο κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον. 


Ότι τὸ ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενον, 
21. ἔσωθεν γὰρ ἐκ τῆς καρδίας τῶν 
ἀνθρώπων οἱ διαλογισμοὶ οἱ κακοὶ ἐκπορεύονται, μοιχεῖαι, πορνεῖαι, 
φόνοι, 22. κλοπαί,ὸ πλεονεξίαι, πονηρίαι, δόλος, ἀσέλγεια, ὀφθαλμὸς 


πονηρός, βλασφημία, ὑπερηφανία, ἀφροσύνη. 


23. πάντα ταῦτα 


a 4 4 > , a es ‘ 3 2 
τὰ πονηρὰ ἔσωθεν ἐκπορεύεται, καὶ κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον. 


| κοινωσαι αυτον in SLA (B το κοινουν α.). 
27a εκ Tov ανθ. εκπορ. in ΜΕΒΓΙ,Δ 33, and εκεινα omitted in BLA. 


3 Omit whole verse NBDL. 


It is probably a gloss. 


4 την παραβολην for περι της. W. in NBDLA 33. 
ὃκαθαριζων in SABLA al., Orig. (modern editions). 
® wopverat, κλοπαι, Φονοι, µοιχειαι in Β.Δ. 


‘out of the mouth, but the things which 
come out of the man. But if He had 
meant the impure matters issuing from 
the body, would He not have said ἐκ τοῦ 
σώματος, so as to make His meaning 
unmistakable? On the whole, the most 
probable view is that even in ver. 15 the 
thought of Jesus moves in the moral 
sphere, and that the meaning is: the only 
defilement worth serious consideration is 
that caused by the evil which comes out 
of the heart (ver. 21). 

Vv. 17-23. Conversation with the 

isciples.—elg οἶκον ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλον = 
alone, apart from the crowd, at home, 
wherever the home, pro tem., might be. 
Whatever was said or done in public 
became habitually a subject of con- 
versation between Jesus and the Twelve, 
and therefore of course this remarkable 
saying.—Ver. 18. Here, as in vi. 52, 
Mk. takes pains to make prominent the 
stupidity and consequent need of in- 
struction of the Twelve.—otrw καὶ ¥., 
etc.: are ye, too, so unintelligent as not 
to understand what I have said: that 
that which goeth into the man from 
without cannot defile ?—Ver. 19. ὅτι 
οὐκ . . . els τὴν καρδίαν: this negative 
statement is not in Mt. The contrast 
makes the point clearer. The idea 


throughout is that ethical defilement is 
alone of importance, all other defilement, 
whether the subject of Mosaic cere- 
monial legislation or of scribe tradition, 
a trivial affair. Jesus here is a critic ot 
Moses as well as of the scribes, and in- 
troduces a religious revolution.—xaQ@a- 
ῥίζων (not -ov) is accepted generally as 
the true reading, but how is it to be con- 
strued? as the nominative absolute 
referring to ἀφεδρῶνα, giving the sense: 
evacuation purges the body from all 
matter it cannot assimilate? So most 
recent commentators. Or ought we not 
to terminate the words of Jesus at ἐκ- 
πορεύεται with a mark of interrogation, 
and take what follows as a comment of 
the evangelist? = ἐκπορεύεται ;—xala- 
ρίζων, etc.: this He said, purging all 
meats ; making all meats clean, abolish- 
ing the ceremonial distinctions of the 
Levitical law. This view was adopted 
by Origen and Chrysostom, and is 
vigorously defended by Field, Oteum 
Nor., ad loc., and iavoured by the Spé., 
Commentary. Weizsacker adopts it in 
his translation: “9ο sprach er alle 
Speisen rein’”’.—Ver. 20. ἔλεγεν δὲ: the 
use of this phrase here favours the view 
that καθαρίζων, etc., is an interpolated 
remark of the evangelist (Field).-—Ver. 


399 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


ΥΠ. 


24. Καὶ ἐκεῖθενὶ ἀναστὰς ἀπῆλθεν εἰς τὰ µεθόριαΣ Τύρου καὶ 


Σιδῶνος.5 


: Lk. viii.47. οὐκ ἠδυνήθη ὅ ' λαθεῖν. 
Acts xxvi. 


καὶ εἰσελθὼν εἰς thy* οἰκίαν, οὐδένα ἤθελε γνῶναι, καὶ 
25. ἀκούσασα γὰρδ yur περὶ αὐτοῦ, ἧς 


26. 2 Pet. εἶχε τὸ θυγάτριον αὐτῆς πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον, ἐλθοῦσα ) προσέπεσε 


iii. 5, with 


part. Heb.J πρὸς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ: 26. ἦν δὲ ἡ γυνὴ Ἰ Ἑλληνίς, Συροφοί- 


xiii. 2. 


2 a AY 
j with προς viooa® τῷ γένει" καὶ ἠρώτα αὐτὸν ἵνα τὸ δαιµόνιον ἐκβάλλῃ 5 ἐκ 


andaccus. ,~ . λος 
here only. τῆς θυγατρὸς αὐτῆς. 


} εκειθεν δε in ΜΕ]:Δ. 


27. 6 δὲ Ιησοῦς εἶπεν 19 αὐτῇ, ““"Άφες πρῶτον 


* peBopia is an interpretative harmonising (Mt. xv. 22) substitute for ορια in 


NBDLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 DLA omit και Σ. (Tisch.), found in QB (W.H. bracket), 


4 Omit την NABLA, etc. 
ὅ ySuvacOy in NB (Tisch., W.H.). 


«ήθη DA (Trg., R.V.). 


6 add’ ευθυς before axoveaca instead of yap in BLA 33. 


7 η δε γννη ην in NBDLA 33. 


8 Συραφοινικισσα in B and many other uncials = Zvpa Φοινικισσα. 


® exBadyn in SABDLASZ al. 


10 For ο δε |. ειπεν S$BLA 33 have και ελεγεν. 


41. An enumeration of the things which 
come out of the man, from the heart; 
first six plurals, πορνεῖαι, etc.; then six 
singulars, δόλος, etc. (ver. 22).—Ver. 23. 
Concluding reflection: all these bad 
things come out from within and defile 
the man. Commonplace now, what a 
startling originality then ! 

Vv. 24-30. The Syrophenician woman 
(Mt. xv. 21-28).---ἐκεῖθεν δὲ ἀναστὰς 
points to a change from the comparatively 
stationary life by the shores of the lake 
to a period of wandering in unwonted 
scenes. Cf. x. 1, where ἀναστὰς is used 
in reference to the final departure from 
Galilee to the south. The δὲ, instead of 
the more usual καὶ, emphasises this 
change.—els τὰ ὅρια T., not towards 
(Fritzsche), but into the borders of Tyre. 
There can be no doubt that in Mk.’s 
narrative Jesus crosses into heathen 
territory (cf. ver. 31). In view of the 
several unsuccessful attempts made by 
Jesus to escape from the crowd into quiet 
and leisure, so carefully indicated by 
Mk., this almost goes without saying. 
Failing within Jewish territory, He is 
forced to go without, in hope to get 
some uninterrupted leisure for confidential 
intercourse with the Twelve, rendered 
all the more urgent by scenes like that 
just considered, which too plainly show 
that His time will be short.—eis οἰκίαν, 
into a house; considering Christ’s desire 
for privacy, more likely to be that of a 


heathen stranger (Weiss) than that of a 
friend (Meyer, Keil). — ot8éva ἤθελε 
γνῶναι, He wished no one to know (He 
was there); to know no one (Fritzsche), 
comes to the same thing: desires to be 
private, not weary of well-doing, but 
anxious to do other work hitherto much 
hindered,—ovx ἠδυνάσθη λαθεῖν, He was 
not able to escape notice ; not even here! 
—Ver. 25. εὐθὺς: does not imply that 
the woman heard of Christ’s arrival as 
soon as it happened, but that, after 
hearing, she lost no time in coming = as 
soon as she heard. Yet sorrow, like the 
demoniacs, was quick to learn of His 
presence.—@vydrptov: another of Mk.’s 
diminutives.—Ver. 26. Ἑλληνὶς, Σύρα, 
Φοινίκισσα, a Greek in religion, a Syrian 
in tongue, a Phenician in race (Euthy. 
Zig.). The two last epithets combined 
into one (Συροφ.) would describe her as 
a Syrophenician as distinct from a 
Phenician of Carthage. Mk. is careful 
to define the nationality and religion of 
the woman to throw light on the sequel. 
—Ver. 27. ἄφες πρῶτον, etc. : a milder 
word than that in Mt. (ver. 26); it is 
here a mere question of order: first Jews, 
then Gentiles, St. Paul’s programme, 
Rom. i. 16. In Mt. we read, οὐκ ἔστι 
καλὸν, it is not right, seemly, to take 
the children’s bread and to throw it to: 
the dogs. Mk. also has this word, but 
in a subordinate place, and simply as a 
reason for the prior claim of the children. 


24—32. ΕΥΑΓΙΕΛΙΟΝ 
Χορτασθῆναι τὰ τέκνα: οὐ γὰρ καλόν ἐστι] λαβεῖν τὸν ἄρτον τῶν 
τέκνων, καὶ βαλεῖν τοῖς ᾿κυναρίοις. 1 28. Ἡ δὲ ἀπεκρίθη καὶ λέγει 
αὐτῷ, “Nat, κύριε: καὶ yap? τὰ κυνάρια ὑποκάτω τῆς τραπέζης 
ἐσθίει } ἀπὸ τῶν ψιχίων τῶν παιδίων. 29. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, “Ara 
τοῦτον τὸν λόγον, ὕπαγε- ἐξελήλυθε τὸ δαιµόνιον ἐκ τῆς θυγατρός 
σου. 43ο. Καὶ ἀπελθοῦσα εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτῆς, εὗρε τὸ δαιμόνιον 
ἐξεληλυθός, καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα βεβλημένην ἐπὶ τῆς κλίνης.5 

31. ΚΑΙ πάλιν ἐξελθὼν ἐκ τῶν ὁρίων Τύρου καὶ ὃ Σιδῶνος, ἦλθε 
πρὸς ὃ τὴν θάλασσαν τῆς Γαλιλαίας, ava µέσον τῶν ὁρίων Δεκαπόλεως. 


32. καὶ φέρουσιν αὐτῷ κωφὸν µογιλάλον,; καὶ παρακαλοῦσιν αὐτὸν 


391 


1 εστι καλον in SBDLA and βαλειν after τοις κυν. in NB. 


2 yap omitted in NBD 33. 


It comes from Mt. 


3 eo Ore. a grammatical correction for εσθιουσιν in BDLA ai. 


* NBLA have ro Sau. after ex της Avy. σον. 


5 S9BLA invert the order of the facts, ro Sau. εξελ. at the end. The order in 
T.R. is due to the feeling that it was more natural: cure first, quiet resting in bed 


following. For +. θυγ. βεβληµενην SBLA 33 have ro παιδιον βεβληµενον (Tisch., 


W.H.). 
6 ηλθε δια Σιδωνος εις in NBDLA. 


We note also that Mk., usually so full in 
his narratives compared with Mt., omits 
the intercession oftheT welve with Christ’s 
reply (Mt. vv. 23,24). Yet Mk.’s, “first 
the children,” is really equivalent to “1 
am not sent,” etc. The former implies: 
‘‘ your turn will come”; the latter: ‘‘to 
minister to you is not my vocation”. 
This word, preserved in Mt., becomes 
less harsh when looked at in the light of 
Christ’s desire for quiet, not mentioned 
in Mt. Jesus made the most of the 
fact that His commission was to Jews. 
It has been thought that, in comparison 
with Mt., Mk.’s report of Christ’s words 
is secondary, adapted purposely to 
Gentile readers. Probably that is the 
case, but, on the other hand, he gives us 
a far clearer view of the extent and aim 
of the excursion to the North, concerning 
which Mt. has, and gives, no adequate 
conception.—Ver. 28. ἀπεκρίθη, aorist, 
hithertoimperfect. Wecome now to what 
Mk. deems the main point of the story, 
the woman’s striking word.— moxdrte τ. 
τραπ., the dogs under the table, waiting 
for morsels, a realistic touch.—rov 
Ψιχίων τ. π., not merely the crumbs 
which by chance fall from the table, but 
morsels surreptitiously dropt by the chil- 
dren(‘‘qui panem saepe prodigunt,” Beng.) 
to their pets. Household dogs, part of 
the family, loved by the children; hard 
and fast line of separation impossible.— 
Ver. 29. διὰ τ. τ. λόγον, for this word, 


7 SSBDA have και before μογιλαλον. 


which showed the quick wit of the faith, 
which Mt. specifies as the reason of the 
exception made in her favour.—Ver. 30. 
BeBAnpévov: the emphasis lies on this 
word rather than on παιδίον (Bengel), as 
expressing the condition in which the 
mother found her daughter : lying quzetly 
(‘‘in lecto molliter cubantem sine ulla 
jactatione,” Grotius). 

It is probable that this interesting in- 
cident cannot be fully understood without 
taking into consideration circumstances 
not mentioned in the narratives, and 
which, therefore, it does not fall to the 
expositor to refer to. On this vide my 
book, With Open Face, chap. vii. 

Vv. 31-37. Cure of a deaf-mute, 
peculiar to Mk. Mt. has, instead, a 
renewal of the healing ministry on an 
extensive scale, the thing Jesus desired 
to avoid (xv. 29-31).—-Ver. 31. After the 
instructive episode Jesus continued His 
journey, going northwards through (διὰ, 
vide critical notes) Sidon, then making a 
circuit so as to arrive through Decapolis 
at the Sea of Galilee. The route is not 
more definitely indicated ; perhaps it was 
along the highway over the Lebanon 
range to Damascus; it may conceiv- 
ably have touched that ancient city, 
which, according to Pliny (H. N., v., 
16), was included in Decapolis (vide 
Holtz., H. C., and Schirer, Div., ii., 
vol. i., p. 95).—Ver. 32. µογιλάλον, 
speaking with difficulty; but here for 

“ 


393 


. 3 - 2A AY = 
ινα επι αυτω ν χειρα. 
k Ch. viii. ϱῇ μμ 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


ΥΠ. 33—37. 


33. καὶ ἀπολαβόμενος αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ 


a3. | John ὄχλου κατ ἰδίαν, ἔβαλε τοὺς δακτύλους αὐτοῦ εἲς τὰ Gra αὐτοῦ, 
ix. 6. : Σ x 
I Lk. vii. αχ. καὶ  πτύσας ἤψατο τῆς γλώσσης αὐτοῦ, 34. καὶ ἀναβλέψας eis 


Acts xvii. 
20. 
ν. 11 (pl. 
= organs 
of hearing). 
m cf. the 
verb in 


votx@ntt.” 


ἐλύθη 6 δεσμὸς τῆς γλώσσης αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλει ὀρθῶς. 


Heb. τὸν οὐρανόν, ἐστέναξε, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, 'Ἐφφαθά,” ὅ ἐστι, “Δια- 
35. Καὶ εὐθέως Ἰ διηνοίχθησαν 2 αὐτοῦ αἱ | ἀκοαί: καὶ 


36. καὶ 


Rom. v.20 διεστείλατο αὐτοῖς ἵνα μηδενὶ εἴπωσιν : ὅσον δὲ αὐτὸς" αὐτοῖς 


αηάνπερεκ- 


in Thess, διεστέλλετο, μᾶλλον περισσότερον ἐκήρυσσον: 37. καὶ ™ ὑπερπερισ- 


Vai. aA - 

nconst. Ch. σῶς ἐξεπλήσσοντο, λέγοντες, “'Καλῶς πάντα πεποίηκε: καὶ τοὺς 
1.17. Act a a 3 
ελ κωφοὺς "ποιεῖ ἀκούειν, καὶ τοὺς ὅ ἀλάλους λαλεῖν. 


1 ενθεως is omitted here in BDL 33 and inserted before ελνθη in SLA; wanting 


here also in BD zt. (W.H. omit both). 


1γνοιγησαν in BDA. Τ.Ε. assimilates to ver. 34. 


4S8BLA omit avros and insert an αυτοι before µαλλον (Tisch., W.H.). 
T.R. is an attempt at improving the style. 


5 τους omit NBLA 33. 


dumb. Cf. ἀλάλονς, ver. 37, used in 
Sept., Is. xxxv.6, for O° δα, dumb, here 


only in N.T.—Ver. 33. ἀπολαβόμενος, 
etc., withdrawing him from the crowd 
apart. Many reasons have been assigned 
for this procedure. The true reason, 
doubtless, is that Jesus did not wish to 
be drawn into a new ministry of healing 
on a large scale (Weiss, Schanz).— 
ἔβαλε τοὺς δακτύλους, etc. : one finger of 
the right hand into one ear, another of 
the left hand into the other, on account 
of the narrowness and depth of the hear- 
ing faculty, that He might touch it 
(διὰ τὸ στενὸν καὶ Bald τῆς ἀκοῆς ἵνα 
θίξῃ ταύτης, Euthy. Zig.). Deafness is 
first dealt with ; it was the primary evil. 
---πτύσας, spitting; on what, the tongue 
of the dumb man as on the eyes of the 
blind (viii. 23) 2 So Meyer. Or on His 
own finger, with which He then touched 
the tongue? So Weiss, Schanz, 
Kloster., Holtz. (H. C.), Keil. Mk. 
leaves us here to our own conjectures, 
as also in reference to the import ot 
these singular acts of Jesus. Probably 
they were meant to rouse interest and 
aid faith in the dull soul of the sufferer. 
(Vide Trench, Notes on the Miracles.) 
Ver. 34. ἀναβλέψας, ἐστέναξε: Jesus 
looked up in prayer, and sighed or 
groaned in sympathy. In this case a 
number of acts, bodily and mental, are 
specified. Were these peculiar to it, or 
do we here get a glimpse into Christ’s 
modus operandi in many unrecorded 
cases? On the latter view one can 


Σλεγωσιν in NBL 33. 
The 


understand the exhausting nature of the 
healing ministry. It meant a great 
mental strain.—éppabd, an Aramaic 
word =as Mk. explains, διανοίχθητι; 
doubtless the word actually spoken = Be 
opened, in reference to the ears, though 
the loosing of the tongue was part of the 
result ensuing.—Ver. 35. at akoai, 
literally, the hearings, here the instru- 
ments of hearing, the ears. So often in 
εἰαδεῖος.- -ἐλάλει ὀρθῶς, he began to 
speak in a proper or ordinary manner, 
implying that in his dumb condition he 
had been able only to make inarticulate 
sounds.—Ver. 36. μᾶλλον περισσότερον, 
a double comparative, forcibly rendezed 
in A.V.,“*So much the more, a great 
deal”. Cf. 2 Cor. vii. 13. This use of 
μᾶλλον to strengthen comparatives is 
found in classics, instances in Raphel, 
Annon., ad loc., and Hermann’s Viger, 
Ρ. 719.—Ver. 37. ὑπερπερισσῶς, super- 
abundantly, a double superlative; here 
only.—xahas π. wemoinxe, He hath 
done all things well. This looks like a 
reflection on past as well as present ; the 
story of the demoniac, e.g. Observe the 
ποιεῖ, present, in next clause, referring to 
the cure just effected. It happened in 
Decapolis, and we seem to see the in- 
habitants of that region exhibiting a 
nobler mood than in chap. v. 17. Οἱ 
course, there were no swine lost on this 
occasion. Their astonishment at the 
miracle may seem extravagant, but it 
must be remembered that they have had 
little experience of Christ’s healing work ; 
their own fault. 


VIII. τ---6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


393 


VIII. 1. ’EN ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις, παµπόλλου 1 ὄχλου ὄντος, 
καὶ μὴ ἐχόντων τί φΦάγωσι, προσκαλεσάµενος ὁ Ιησοῦς 3 τοὺς μαθητὰς 
αὐτοῦ λέγει αὐτοῖς, 2. 'Σπλαγχνίζομαι ἐπὶ τὸν ὄχλον: ὅτι ἤδη 
ἡμέρας ὃ τρεῖς προσµένουσί por, καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσι τί φάγωσι: 3. καὶ 
ἐὰν ἀπολύσω αὐτοὺς νήστεις εἰς οἶκον αὐτῶν, ἐκλυθήσονται ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ" 


τινὲς γὰρ αὐτῶν µακρόθεν ἤκασι.” 4 


a , a tia, ¢ 
4. Kat ἀπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ 


μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, ““ Πόθεν ὅ τούτους δυνήσεταί τις ὧδε χορτάσαι ἄρτων 


ἐπ᾽ ἐρημίας ; * 
Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “΄ Ἑπτά.” 


5. Καὶ ἐπηρώτα ὃ αὐτούς, “΄Πόσους ἔχετε ἄρτους ;* 
6. Καὶ παρήγγειλε] τῷ ὄχλῳ ἀναπεσεῖν 


3758 [ον A ‘ a AY « α > / ” 
ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς' καὶ λαβὼν τοὺς ἑπτὰ ἄρτους, εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασε 
καὶ ἐδίδου τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, ἵνα παραθῶσι ὃ καὶ παρέθηκαν τῷ 


1 παλιν πολλου in SBDLAZ 33. 


παµπολλου is a conjectural emendation 


suggested by the fact of a great crowd, and perplexity caused by παλιν here as in 


vil. 14. 


2 SABDLAE 33 it. vulg. cop. omit ο Ίησους, also DLA omit αντον after 


αθητας. 


3 ημερας = a grammatical correction for ημεραι (NL, etc.), or ηµεραις τρισιν in Β. 
‘For τινες yap... ηκασι read και τινες (SSBLA) αυτων απο paxpoder 


(SBDLA), εισιν (BLA). 
5 ort before ποθεν in BLA. 
7 παραγγελλει in ΝΕΡΙ ΙΔ. 


Οπαρτεκ VIII. Ὦ3ΒΕΟΟΝΡ FEEDING. 
SIGN FROM HEAVEN. CURE AT ΒΕΤΗ- 
‘SAIDA. CAESAREA PHILIPPI.—VvV. I-10. 
Second feeding (Mt. xv. 32-39).—Ver. 
I. ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις: a vague 
phrase, used only once again in this 
Gospel (i. 9, in reference to Jesus going 
from Nazareth to be baptised), indicating 
inability to assign to the following 
incident a precise historical place. Cf. 
Mt. iii. t for similar vague use of the 
expression.—mdAw πολλοῦ 6 ὄ. This 
well-attested reading is another indica- 
tion of the evangelist’s helplessness as 
to historical connection: there being 
again a great crowd. Why? where? 
not indicated, and we are not entitled to 
assert that the scene of the event was 
Decapolis, and the occasion the healing 
of the deaf-mute. The story is in the 
air, and this is one of the facts that have 
to be reckoned with by defenders of the 
reality of the second feeding against 
those who maintain that it is only a 
literary duplicate of the first, due to the 
circumstance that the Petrine version of 
it differed in some particulars from that 
in the Logia of Matthew. On this 
subject I do not dogmatise, but I cannot 
pretend to be insensible to the difficulties 
connected with it.—éyAov, a great crowd 


όηρωτα in SBLA. 
§ παρατιθωσιν in NBCLA 33. 


again. How often the crowd figures in 
the evangelic story! It is the one 
monotonous feature in narratives of 
thrilling interest—Ver. 2. Vide on 
Mt. xv. 32.—Ver. 3. ἐκλυθήσονται, 
they will faint. This verb is used in 
N. T. in middle or passive in the sense 
of being faint or weary in body or mind 
(Gal. vi. 9, Heb. xii. 3).---καί τινες .. 

εἶσίν, and some of them are from a 
distance, peculiar to Mark. The mean- 
ing is that such, even if in vigour at 
Starting, would be exhausted before 
reaching their destination. But could 
they not get food by the way ?—Ver. 4. 
πόθεν, whence? This adverb was used 
by the Greeks, in speaking of food, in 
reference to the source of supply— 
πόθεν oaynte = “unde cibum petituri 
sitis”. Examples in Kypke, Raphel, 
Palairet.—ém’ ἐρημίας, in a desert. The 
scene of the first feeding is a desert place 
also (chap. vi. 32). But in that case 
food was purchasable within a reason- 
able distance; not so here.—Ver. 6. 
Compare the meagre statement here 
with the picturesque description in vi. 
38-40, The evangelist seems to lack 
interest in the twice-told tale. Ver. 7. 
ἰχθύδια: another of Mark’s diminutives, 
but Matthew has it also (xv. 34), copied 


394 


ὄχλω. 


‘ > 35] 
και αυτα. 


pata κλασμάτων, ἑπτὰ σπυρίδας. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


VIII. 


\ - 
7. καὶ εἶχον ἰχθύδια ὀλίγα: καὶ εὐλογήσας εἶπε παραθεῖναι 


9 
8. ἔφαγον δέ,” καὶ ἐχορτάσθησαν’ καὶ ἦραν περισσεύ- 


9. ἦσαν δὲ οἱ φαγόντες ὃ ὡς 


τετρακισχίλιοι’ καὶ ἀπέλυσεν αὐτούς. 
10. Καὶ εὐθέως ἐμβὰς εἲς τὸ πλοῖον μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ» 


ἦλθεν εἰς τὰ µέρη Δαλμανουθά. 


11. καὶ ἐξῆλθον οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, καὶ 


a 2) μη A A ο) ~ 
ἤρξαντο συζητεῖν αὐτῷ, Lytodvres παρ) αὐτοῦ σημεῖον ἀπὸ τοῦ. 


οὐρανοῦ, πειράζοντες αὐτόν. 
αὐτοῦ λέγει, “Τί ἡ yeved αὕτη σημεῖον ἐπιζητεῖ”; 
ὑμῖν” εἰ δοθήσεται τῇ γενεᾷ ταύτῃ σημεῖον. 


12. καὶ ἀναστενάξας τῷ πνεύµατι 
ἀμὴν λέγω 
13. Καὶ ἀφεὶς 


αὐτούς, ἐμβὰς πάλιν ὃ eis τὸ πλοῖον,ὃ ἀπῆλθεν εἰς τὸ πέραν. 


14. Καὶ ἐπελάθοντο λαβεῖν ἄρτους, καὶ εἰ μὴ ἕνα ἄρτον οὐκ 


εἶχον µεθ᾽ ἑαυτῶν ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ. 


156. καὶ διεστέλλετο αὐτοῖς, λέγων, 


1 Read καὶ ευλογησας αυτα ειπεν και ταυτα παρατιθεναι as in W.H. 


2 και εφαγον in ΝΒΟΡΙΔ. 
4 ζητει σηµειον in SBCDLA 33. 


3 Omit οι day. NBLA 33. 
5 BL omit υμιν (W.H. put in margin). 


6 Read παλιν εµβας, and omit εις το πλ. (NSBCLA, Tisch., W.H.). 


probably from Mark. In these two 
places only.—Ver. 8. περισσεύµατα 
κλασμάτων, the remainders of the broken 
pieces. Matthew uses the singular neuter, 
τὸ περισσεῦον, in both feedings.—omvpt- 
Sas: in both accounts of second feeding, 
κοφίνους in both accounts of first (Κόφινοι 
in Luke). On the difference in meaning, 
vide notes on Mt. xv. 37.—Ver. Io. 
Here as in case of first feeding there is a 
crossing of the lake immediately after 
(εὐθὺς, which has an obvious reason in 
first case). This time Jesus and the 
Twelve enter the boat together, at least 
in Mark’s narrative (μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν).--- 
Δαλμανουθά, in Matthew Μαγαδάν; both 
alike unknown: another of the features 
in this narrative which give a handle to 
critical doubt. Some place it on the 
western shore in the plain of Gennesaret 
(Furrer, “On the site of Khan Minyeh 
lay once Dalmanutha,” Wanderungen, 
p. 369); others to the south-east of the 
lake near the junction of the Yarmuk 
with the Jordan (Delhemiyeh, Robinson, 
B. R., iii. 264). Weiss (in Meyer) adopts 
this view. Holtzmann (Η. Ο.), while 
leaning to the former alternative, leaves 
the matter doubtful. f 
Vv. 11-12. Pharisees seek α sign 
(Mt. xvi. 1-4).—Ver. 11. ἐξῆλθον οἱ Φ., 
the Pharisees went out, from their seat 
in the Holy Land into the heathen 
Decapolis, otherwise carefully shunned, 
in their zeal against Jesus. So Weiss 
(im Meyer).—Ver. 12. ἄναστενάξας, 


fetching a deep sigh, here only in Ν. T.; 
in Sept., Lament. i. 4, Sirach. xxv. 18, 
εἰο.---τῷ mvevpatt a., in His spirit. The 
sigh physical, its cause spiritual—a sense 
of irreconcilable enmity, invincible un- 
belief, and coming doom.—et δοθήσεται, 
if there shall be given = there shall not 
(ov) be given’ a Hebraistic form οἱ 
emphatic negative assertion. The sup- 
pressed apodosis is: may I die, or God 
punish me. Other instances in Heb. iii. 
II, iv.3,5. In Mark there is an absolute 
refusal of asign. In Matthew the refusal 
is qualified by offer of Jonah. But that 
was an-absolute refusal of signs in their 
sense. 

Vv. 13-21. Warning against evil 
leavens (Mt. xvi. 4b-12).—Ver. 13. els τὸ 
πέραν, to the other side; which, east or 
west? Here again opinion is divided. 
The reference to Bethsaida, ver. 22, 
might be expected to decide, but then 
there is the dispute about the two 
Bethsaidas; Bethsaida Julias, and 
Bethsaida on the western shore. These 
points are among the obscurities of the 
Synoptical narratives which we are 
reluctantly compelled to leave in twilight. 
—Ver. 14. εἰ μὴ ἕνα ἄρτον: a curiously 
exact reminiscence where so much else 
that seems to us more important is left 
vague. But it shows that we have to do 
with reality, for the suggestion of the 
Tiabingen critics that it is a mere bit of 
word painting is not credible. The one 
loaf seems to witness to a Christ-like 


7—23. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


395 


““Opare, βλέπετε ἀπὸ τῆς ΤἸύμης τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ τῆς ζύμης 


Ηρώδου.” 
ἄρτους οὐκ ἔχομεν. 17. Καὶ γνοὺς 
διαλογίζεσθε, ὅτι ἄρτους οὐκ ἔχετε; 


16. Καὶ διελογίζοντο πρὸς ἀλλήλους, λέγοντες,α “ Ὅτι 
ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς δ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Τί 


a” ~ > a [ή 
οὕπω νοεῖτε, οὐδὲ συνίετε; 


ἔτι” πεπωρωµένην ἔχετε τὴν καρδίαν ὑμῶν; 18. ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντες 


οὐ βλέπετε; 


καὶ Gta ἔχοντες οὖκ ἀκούετε; καὶ οὗ μνημονεύετε; 


10. ὅτε τοὺς πέντε ἄρτους ἔκλασα εἰς τοὺς πεντακισχιλίους, πόσους 


κοφίνους πλήρεις κλασμάτων > ἤρατε; 
eis τοὺς τετρακισχιλίους, 


20. “Ὅτε δὲ τοὺς ἑπτὰ 


σπυρίδων πληρώματα κλασμάτων ἤρατε; 


Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “ Δώδεκα.” 
πόσων 
Οἱ δὲ εἶπον,ὃ ““Ἑπτά.” 


21. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “Mas οὐ Ἰ συνίετε; ” 
22. ΚΑΙ ἔρχεται ὃ eis Βηθσαϊδάν: καὶ φέρουσιν αὐτῷ τυφλόν, καὶ 


παρακαλοῦσιν αὐτὸν ἵνα αὐτοῦ ἄψηται. 


23. καὶ ἐπιλαβόμενος τῆς 
3 BP τη 


1 Omit λεγοντες (an explanatory word) KBD. 
2B has εχουσιν, adopted by Trg. (text), W.H. Ws., Tisch., and R.V. retain 


εχοµ.εν. 
ὃ Omit o |. BA. 
ὅκλασματων mAnpes in NBCLA 33. 


7 B has πως ov νοειτε. 
(D), as expressive of vexation. 


* SBCDLAZX omit ετι. 
ὃ και λεγουσιν in NBCLA. 


πως ov is to be preferred to ουπω (ΝΟ1.Δ) or πως ουπω 
Tisch. and W.H. adopt ουπω. 


S ερχονται in BCDLA. The sing. (T.R.) is an adaptation to avrm. 


easymindedness as to food in the 
disciple-circle. Let to-morrow look 
after itself!—Ver. 15. ἀπὸ τῆς ζύμης, 
etc.: two leavens, one of Pharisees, 
another of Herod, yet placed together 
because morally akin and coincident in 
practical outcome. Vide notes on Μι. 
xvi. 1-6.—Ver. 16. πρὸς ἀλλήλους. 
Mt. has ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. The mind of Jesus 
was profoundly preoccupied with the 
ominous demand of the sign-seekers, and 
the disciples might talk quietly to each 
other unnoticed by Him.—Ver. 17. 
γνοὺς: He does notice, however, and 
administers a sharp rebuke for their pre- 
occupation with mere temporalities, as 
if there were nothing higher to be 
thought of than bread.—werwpopévyy, 
in a hardened state; the word stands in 
an emphatic position. For the time the 
Twelve are wayside hearers, with hearts 
like a beaten path, into which the higher 
truths cannot sink so as to germinate.— 
Ver. 18 repeats in reference to the 
Twelve the hard saying uttered concern- 
ing the multitude on the day of the 
parables (iv. 12).’ In vv. 19, 20 Jesus 
puts the Twelve through their catechism 
in reference to the recent feedings, and 
then in ver. 21 (according to reading in 
B) asks in the tone of a disappointed 


Master: How do you not understand ? 
If we may emphasise the imperfect 
tense of ἔλεγεν, He said this over and 
over again, half speaking to them, half 
to Himself; another of Mk.’s realistic 
features. All this shows how much the 
Twelve needed special instruction, and 
it is obviously Mk.’s aim to make this 
prominent. Desire for leisure to attend 
to their instruction is in his narrative the 
key to the excursions in the direction 
of Tyre and Sidon and to Caesarea 
Philippi. 

Vv. 22-26. A blind man cured at 
Bethsaida, peculiar to Mk.—Ver. 22. 
Βηθσαϊδάν. If there were two Beth- 
saidas, which of the two? If only one 
of course it was Bethsaida Julias. But 
against this has been cited the term 
κώμη twice applied to the town (wv. 23, 
26), which, however, may be regarded 
as satisfactorily explained by the remark : 
it had been a village, and was first made 
a town by Philip, who enlarged and 
beautified it and called it Julias in 
honour of the daughter of Augustus 
(Joseph., B. J., ii., 9, 1, etc.). So Meyer 
and others.—Ver. 23. ἔξω τῆς κώµης, 
outside the village, for the same reason 
as in vii. 33, to avoid creating a run on 
Him for cures. Therefore Jesus becomes 


VILI. 


396 KATA MAPKON 


χειρὸς τοῦ τυφλοῦ, ἐξήγαγεν 1 αὐτὸν ἔξω τῆς κώµης ' Kal πτύσας εἰς 
τὰ ὄμματα αὐτοῦ, ἐπιθεὶς τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῷ, ἐπηρώτα αὐτὸν et τι 
βλέπει. 24. καὶ ἀναβλέψας ἔλεγε, ΄'Βλέπω τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, ὅτι 
ὡς δένδρα ὁρῶ περιπατοῦντας., 25. Εἶτα πάλιν ἐπέθηκεδΣ τὰς χεῖρας 
ἐπὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐποίησεν αὐτὸν dvaBhépar* καὶ 
ἀποκατεστάθη,» καὶ ἐνέβλεψεδ τηλαυγῶς] ἅἄπανταςξ 26. 
ἀπέστειλεν αὐτὸν εἰς Tov? οἶκον αὐτοῦ, λέγων, “' Μηδὲ εἰς THY κώμη» 
εἰσέλθῃς, μηδὲ εἴπῃς τινὶ ἐν τῇ κώμῃ.” 2° 

27. Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς κώµας 
Καισαρείας τῆς Φιλίππου: καὶ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐπηρώτα τοὺς μαθητὰς 
αὐτοῦ, λέγων αὐτοῖς, “' Τίνα µε λέγουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι εἶναι; 


‘ 
και 


1 εξηνεγκεν in S$BCL 33, replacedin T.R. by a more common word. 

2 Bderets in BCDA (W.H. text) more expressive than βλεπει (SQL, Tisch.). 
Σεθηκεν in BL (W.H.). 

4 For the explanatory gloss και επ. a. αναβλεψαι SBCLA cop. have και διεβλεψεν. 
5 απεκατεστη in SBCLA (Β αποκ.). 6 ενεβλεπεν (imp.) BLA. 

7 S$CLA have δηλανγως (Tisch.). τηλ. in BD (W.H. text, δηλ. margin). 


ἕαπαντα in NBCDLA. 
10 All after εισελθης omit NBL. 


conductor of the blind man Himself, 
though he doubtless had one (Weiss- 
Μεγετ).- πτύσας, spitting, in this case 
certainly on the diseased parts. Spittle 
was regarded as a means of cure by the 
ancients. Holtzmann (H. Ο.) cites the 
story of Vespasian in Alexandria narrated 
by Tacitus (Hist., iv., 81). The prince 
was asked to sprinkle the eyes of a blind 
man “ oris excremento ’.—et τι βλέπεις, 
do you, possibly, see anything? el witha 
direct question, vide Winer, lvii., 2.—Ver. 
24. ἀναβλέψας: the narrative contains 
three compounds of βλέπω (ava, διὰ, ἐν) ; 
the first denotes looking up in the 
tentative manner of blind men, the 
second looking through (a mist as it 
were) so as to see Clearly, the third look- 
ing into so as to see distinctly, as one 
sees the exact outlines of a near object 
(cf. Mk. xiv. 67).---ὡς δένδρα, as trees, so 
indistinct was vision as yet; yet not 
trees, but men because moving (‘‘non 
arbores, quia ambulent,” Bengel). He 
knew what a man is like, therefore he 
had once seen, not born blind. —Ver. 25. 
A second touch brings better vision, 
so that διέβλεψεν, and he was now 
restored to full use of his eyes; the 
result being permanent perfect vision— 
ἐνέβλεπεν, ἱπιρετίεοί.---διέβλεψεν points 
to the first act of distinct seeing.— 
τηλαυγῶς (τῆλε, αὐγή here only), shining 


5 Omit τον many uncials. 


from afar. He saw distant objects 
distinctly as if they were near; did not 
need to go near them to see them.—Ver. 
26. els οἶκον, Ποπῃς.-- μηδὲ, etc., go 
not into the village; to avoid creating a 
sensation. It has been suggested that 
the gradual restoration of sight in this 
case was meant to symbolise the slow- 
ness of the Twelve in attaining spiritual 
insight. They got their eyes opened 
very gradually like the blind man of 
Bethsaida. So Klostermann. 

Vv. 27-ix. 1. At Caesarea Philippi 
(Mt. xvi. 13-28, Lk. ix, 18-27).—Ver. 27. 
καὶ ἐξῆλθεν: the καὶ connects very 
loosely with what goes before, but 
presumably ἐξῆλθεν refers to Bethsaida. 
They leave it and go northwards towards 
Caesarea Philippi, up the Jordan valley, 
a distance of some twenty-five or thirty 
miles.—é ᾿Ιησοῦς: that Jesus is here 
expressly named is a hint-that some- 
thing very important is to be narrated, 
and the mention of the disciples along 
with Him indicates that it closely con- 
cerns them.—els τὰς κώµας K. τ. Φ., to 
the villages of Caesarea Philippi, not to 
Caesarea Philippi itself Mt. has τὰ 

py. Apparently they did not enter 
the city itself. Jesus seems to have 
avoided the towns in which the Herodian 
passion for ambitious architecture was 
displayed. Besides at this time He 


24—32. 


EYATTEAION 


28. Οἱ δὲ ἀπεκρίθησαν,ὶ “"lwdvyny? τὸν Βαπτιστήν: καὶ ἄλλοι 


ἩἨλίαν: ἄλλοι δὲ ἕνα > τῶν προφητῶν. 


29. Καὶ αὐτὸς λέγει adtois,* 
9 Y 


««Ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνα µε λέγετε εἶναι; ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὅ ὁ Πέτρος λέγει 


αὐτῷ, “Σὺ ef ὁ Χριστός. 30. Καὶ 
λέγωσι περὶ αὐτοῦ. 


31. ΚΑΙ ἤρξατο διδάσκειν αὐτούς, 


ἐπετίμησεν αὐτοῖς, ἵνα μηδενὶ 


ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 


πολλὰ παθεῖν, καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ἀπὸ δ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ 
ἀρχιερέων καὶ Ὑραμματέων, καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι, καὶ μετὰ τρεῖς 


ἡμέρας ἀναστῆναι: 32. καὶ παρρησίᾳ τὸν λόγον ἐλάλει. 


Καὶ 


1 εικαν αντω λεγοντες in S$BCLA (D has απεκ. αντω λεγ.). 


2 οτι before |. in ΝΕ. 
4 επηρωτα αντους in NBCDLA. 


3 For eva ΔΒΟΙ, have οτι εις. 
δ Omit δε BL (Tisch., W.H.). 


® vwo in NBCDL ; with των before αρχ. (NSBCD), and before γραμ. (ΝΒΟΡΙ;). 


desired solitude.—év τῆ 680, on the way, 
probably when the city of Caesarea 
Philippi came into view. Vide on Mt. 
xvi. 13. But conversation leading up to 
the critical subject might begin as soon 
as they had got clear of Bethsaida, No 
time to be lost now that the Master had 
got the Twelve by themselves. 
the Master, very silent on that journey, 
preparing His own mind for what was 
coming ?—éwnpora, imperfect, because 
subordinate to the reply of the disciples, 
the main thing.—riva µε, etc.: on the 
form of the question vide on Mt. xvi. 13. 
—Ver. 28. οἱ δὲ εἶπαν a. λέγοντες, they 
said, saying; tautology, somewhat like 
the vulgar English idiom: He said, says 
he; fixing attention on what is said.— 
Ιωάννην τ. Β.: the accusative depending 
on λέγουσιν of ἄνθρωποί σε εἶναι under- 
stood. This infinitive construction 
passes into direct speech in the last 
clause: ὅτι cis (el) τ. προφητῶν. The 
opinions reported are much the same as 
in vi, 14,15.—Ver. 29. pets δὲ, etc.: a 
very pointed question given by all the 
Synoptists in the same terms. The 
reply, on the other hand, is different in 
each. Vide on Mt. xvi. 16.--ἀποκριθεὶς 
λέγει: we have here an aorist participle 
of identical action with a finite verb in 
the present tense. It usually goes with 
the aorist (cf. Mt. xvi. 17, ἀποκριθεὶς 
cimev).—Ver. 30. ἐπετίμησεν, He 
threatened them, spoke in a tone of 
menace, as if anticipating foolish talk— 
περὶ avrov—about Him, {.ε., about His 
being the Christ, as in Mt. The pro- 
hibition might have a double reference: 
to the people, to prevent the spread of 
crude ideas as to the Messiahship of 


Or was” 


Jesus; to the disciples, that they might 
keep the new faith to themselves till 
it took deep root in their own souls. 
Recall Carlyle’s counsel to young men: 
if thou hast an idea keep it to thyself, 
for as soon as thou hast spoken it it is 
dead to thee ai. Oratory, in Latter 
Day Pamphlets). 

Vv. 31-33. First announcement of the 
Passion.—Ver. 31. καὶ: Mt. has the 
more emphatic ἀπὸ τότε, indicating that 
then began an entirely new way of 
speaking as to the coming fate of Jesus. 
—8.ddoKewv, to teach, more appropriate 
is Mt.’s word, δεικνύειν, to show. It 
was a solemn intimation rather than in- 
struction that was given.—Sei, it must 
be; in all three evangelists. It points to 
the inevitableness of the event, not to 
the rationale of it. On that subject 
Jesus gave in the first place no in- 
struction.—aoAAa παθεῖν: where not 
indicated, as in Με.--ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι : 
an expressive word taken from Ps. cxviii. 
22, fitly indicating the precise share ot 
the religious authorities in the coming 
tragedy. Their part was solemnly to 
disapprove of the claimant to Messiah- 
ship. All else was the natural sequel of 
their act of rejection.—rév πρ., τῶν ἀρ., 
τῶν yp.: the article before each of the 
three classes named, saddling each with 
its separate responsibility—WVer. 32. 
παρρησίᾳ: He spoke the word plainly, 
unmistakably. This remark was rendered 
almost necessary by the choice of the 
word διδάσκειν in νετ. 31. Mt.’s δεικ- 
νύειν implies παρρησίᾳ. This word (from 
πᾶς, ῥῆσις) in ordinary Greek usage 
means frank, unreserved speech, as 
opposed to partial or total silence, Here, 


3085. 


προσλαβόµενος αὐτὸν ὁ Πέτρος} ἤρξατο ἐπιτιμῶν αὐτῷ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


VIII. 33—38. 


33. 6 δὲ 


ἐπιστραφείς, καὶ ἰδὼν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, ἐπετίμησε TO? Πέτρῳ, 
σ aA ο) A -. 
λέγων,” “Ὕπαγε ὀπίσω µου, Σατανᾶ; ὅτι οὗ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, 


ἀλλὰ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων.” 


34. Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος τὸν ὄχλον σὺν τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Ootis* θέλει ὀπίσω µου ἐλθεῖν, ἀπαρνησάσθω 
« , A a a > ~ ΔΝ ” 
ἑαυτόν, καὶ ἁράτω τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀκολουθείτω por. 
35. ὃς γὰρ ἂν θέλῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ σῶσαι, ἀπολέσει αὐτήν. 
a > s 5 a 9 3 ~ ευ) > - 4 - 3 
ds 8 ἂν ἀπολέσῃὃ τὴν Puxny αὐτοῦ ένεκεν ἐμοῦ και τοῦ εὔαγ- 


γελίου, οὗτος ὃ σώσει αὐτήν. 


36. τί γὰρ ὠφελήσει' ἄνθρωπον, 


ἐὰν κερδήσῃ ὃ τὸν κόσμον ὅλον, καὶ ζημιωθῇ ὃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ; 
37. ἢ τί δώσει ἄνθρωπος 3 ἀντάλλαγμα τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ; 38. ὃς 
oLkix. 6 yap ἂν " ἐπαισχυνθῇ µε καὶ τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους ἐν τῇ yeved ταύτῃ 


Εοπι. 1. 16. 
2 Tim. i. 
8, 16. 
ἀγγέλων τῶν ἁγίων.” 
191M. αυτον in BL. 
3 και λεγει in NBCLA. 


τῇ μοιχαλίδι καὶ ἁμαρτωλῷ, καὶ 6 
σεται αὐτόν, ὅταν ἔλθη ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ μετὰ τῶν 


υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπαισχυνθή- 


, 


2 Omit τω NBDL. 
4a τις in NBCDLA (W.BH.). 


δ απολεσει in SBCA al. ; a mechanical conformation to the preceding απολεσει, 


thinks Weiss. 


(Tisch., W-H.), of course omitting εαν. 


Tisch, and W.H. adopt it. 
8 ovros (from Lk.) omit SABCDLA verss. 
Sknpdynon, ἵημιωθη come from Mt. ; 


Τωφελει in HBL. 
read κηρδησαι, ζημιωθηναι with BL 


9 ῃ τι δωσει av. is another conformation to Mt., read τι yap So a. with $B 


(Tisch., W.H.). 


as in John xi. 14, xvi. 25, 20, it means 
plain speech as opposed to hints or 
veiled allusions, such as Jesus had pre- 
viously given; as in Mk. ii. 20 (bride- 
groom taken away). In this sense St. 
Paul (2 Cor. iii. 12) claims παρρησία for 
the Christian ministry in contrast to the 
mystery connected with the legal dis- 
pensation as symbolised by the veil of 
Moses. The term was adopted into the 
Rabbinical vocabulary, and used to sig- 
nify unveiled speech as opposed to 
metaphorical or parabolic speech 
(Wiinsche, Beitraége, ad loc.).—mpooha- 
Bépevos 6 Π.: what Peter said is not 
given, Mk’s aim being simply to show 
that Jesus had so spoken that misunder- 
standing of what He said was im- 
possible. That the news should be 
unwelcome is regarded as a matter of 
course.—Ver. 33. ἐπιστραφεὶς: the 
compound instead of the simple verb in 
Mt., which Mk. does not use.—lt8ev r. 
µαθ.: the rebuke is administered for the 
benefit of all, not merely to put down 
Peter. This resistance to the cross 


must be grappled with at once and 
decisively. What Peter said, all felt. 
In Mk.’s report of the rebuke the words 
σκάνδαλον εἶ ἐμοῦ are omitted. On the 
saying vide in Mt. 

Vv. 34-38. First lesson on the cross.— 
Ver. 34. Tov ὄχλον, the crowd, Even 
here! A surprise; is it not a mistake? 
So appears to think Weiss, who (in 
Meyer) accounts for the reference to a 
crowd by supposing that the words of 
Mt. x. 38 are in his mind, which are 
given in Lk, xiv. 25 as spoken to a crowd, 
probably because they were so given in 
his source. Jesus certainly desired to be 
private at this time, and in the neigh- 
bourhood of Caesarea Philippi ought to 
have succeeded.—Ver. 35. τοῦ evayye- 
λίον: for my sake and the Gospel’s, an 
addition of Mk.’s, possibly a gloss.— 
σώσει, instead of the more enigmatical 
εὑρήσει of Mt.—Ver. 38 reproduces the 
logion in Mt. x. 33 concerning being 
ashamed of Jesus, which does not find a 
place here in Mt.’s version. In Mt.’s 
form it is the outward ostensible act of 


EX. τ-.5. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

IX. 1. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “'᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι εἰσὶ τινὲς τῶν 
ὣὼδὲ 1 ἑστηκότων, οἵτινες οὗ μὴ γεύσωνται θανάτου, ἕως ἂν ἴδωσι τὴν 
βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐληλυθυῖαν ἐν δυνάμει.” 

2. Καὶ μεθ ἡμέρας ἓξ παραλαμβάνει 6 
τὸν ᾽Ιάκωβον καὶ τὸν Ιωάννην, καὶ ἀναφέρει αὐτοὺς eis ὄρος ὑψηλὸν 
rar ἰδίαν μόνους: καὶ μετεμορφώθη ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, 3. καὶ τὰ 
ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο” στίλβοντα, λευκὰ λίαν ὡς χιών,δ οἷα γναφεὺς 
4. καὶ ὤφθη αὐτοῖς Ἠλίας σὺν 


"Ingots τὸν Πέτρον καὶ 


ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς οὐ δύναται { λευκᾶναι. 


Μωσεῖ, καὶ ἦσαν συλλαλοῦντες τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 5. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 
Πέτρος λέγει τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ““ Ῥαββί, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι : 


Δ , 4 lal 5 a [ 3 A [ a , 
και ποιῄσωμµεν σκηνᾶς τρεις, TOL play, και Μωσει pay, καὶ Ηλία 


392 


1 wSe των in BD; 


των woe a correction of style. ‘ 


ΣΝΒΟΔ al. pl. have eyevero as in T.R., which nevertheless is probably a 
correction of εγενοντο in DL to suit the neut. pl. nom. 


3 ws χιων is a gloss (Mt. xxviii. 3); not in QBCLA. 
* οὕτως follows in $BCLA, omitted as superfluous in T.R. 


5 tpas σκηνας in NBCLA 33. 


‘denial that is animadverted on; here the 
feeling of shame, which is its cause— 
ix. I.—kKat ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς: with this 
phrase Mk. makes a new start, and 
turns the close of the Caesarea Philippi 
conversation into an introduction to the 
following narrative concerning the trans- 
figuration, apparently suggesting that in 
the latter event the words found their 
fulfilment. This impression, if it existed, 
does not bind the interpreter.—apjy, 
intreducing a solemn statement.—é€ws ἂν 
ἴδωσιν, etc.: the promised vision is 
differently described in the three accounts, 
as thus :— 

Till they see: the Son of Man coming 
in His Kingdom (Mt.). 

Till they see: the Kingdom of God 
come (ἐληλνθυῖαν) in power (Mk.). 

Till they see: the Kingdom of God 
(Lk.). 

CHAPTER IX, THE TRANSFIGURATION. 
THE EPILEPTIC. SECOND ANNOUNCE- 
MENT OF ‘THE PASSION. RETURN TO 
CAPERNAUM AND CONVERSATION THERE. 
—Vv. 2-13. The transfiguration (Mt. 
xvii. 1-13, Lk. ix. 28-36).—Ver. 2. 
ἀναφέρει with accusative of person=to 
lead, a usage unknown to the Greeks. 
So in Mt.; Lk. avoids the expression. 
—xar’ ἰδίαν μόνους, apart alone, a pleo- 
nasm, yet μόνους, in Mk. only, is not 
superfluous. It emphasises the kar’ 
idiav, and expresses the passion for 
solitude. Strictly, it refers only to the 
‘three disciples as opposed to the nine, 


but it really reflects the feeling of Jesus, 
His desire to be alone with three 
select companions for a season.—Ver. 3. 
στίλβοντα, glittering ; here only in N.T., 
common in classics; in Sept. of bright 
brass (Ezra viii. 27) ; ‘‘ flashing sword” 
(R. V., Nahum iii. 3); sunshine on 
shields (1 Macc. vi. 39).—Aevka λίαν, 
white very. All the evangelists become 
descriptive. Mk., as was to be expected, 
goes beyond the two others.—as χιών 
(T.R.) isa tempting addition, especially 
if Hermon was the scene, but it so 
adequately expresses the highest degree 
of whiteness, that alongside of it λίαν 
and the following words, ota, etc., 
would have been superfluous.—yvadets, 
a fuller, here only in N. T. (ἀγνάφου in 
ii. 21).---ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, suggesting a con- 
trast between what fullers on this earth 
can do in the way of whitening cloth, 
and the heaven-wrought brightness of 
Christ’s garments (Schanz).—Ver. 4. 
ἩἨλίας σὺν M.: Elijah first, not as the 
more important, but because of his 
special significance in connection with 
Messiah’s advent, which was the subject 
of subsequent conversation (ver. ο ff.).— 
Ver. 5. Ῥαββί, Rabbi: each evangelist 
has a different word here.—xadév, etc. 

On this vide notes in Με.-- ποιήσωµεν : 

let ws make, not let me make as in Mt. 
(vide notes there).—ooi µίαν καὶ Μωσεῖ, 
είο.: Moses now comes before Elijah.— 
Ver. 6. τί ἀποκριθῃ, what he should 
; he did not know 





400 


μίαν.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


6. OU γὰρ ᾖδει τί λαλήσῃη ]: ἦσαν γὰρ ἔκφοβοι.: 7. 


IX. 


ο 
και 


alk. 1.45. ἐγένετο νεφέλη " ἐπισκιάζουσα αὐτοῖς' καὶ ἦλθεῖ φωνὴ ἐκ τῆς 


Acts v. 15. 


νεφέλης, A€youga,* ‘‘ Οὗτός ἐστιν 6 vids pou 6 ἀγαπητός: αὐτοῦ 


ἀκούετε. 5 8. Καὶ ἐξάπινα περιβλεψάμενοι, οὐκέτι οὐδένα εἶδον, 


ἀλλὰ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν µόνον μεθ ἑαυτῶν. 


ϱ. Καταβαινόντων δὲ ὃ αὐτῶν 


ἀπὸ 7 τοῦ Spous, διεστείλατο αὐτοῖς ἵνα μηδενὶ διηγήσωνται & εἶδον,» 


3 
et μὴ ὅταν ὁ 


vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇῃ. 


IO. καὶ τὸν 


λόγον ἐκράτησαν πρὸς ἑαυτούς, συζητοῦντες τί ἐστι τό, ἐκ νεκρῶν 


ἀναστῆναι. 


γραμματεῖς, ὅτι Ἠλίαν δεῖ ἐλθεῖν πρῶτον; ” 


| αποκριθη in NBCLA 33. 


11. Kat ἐπηρώτων αὐτόν, λέγοντες, '΄ Ὅτι λέγουσιν ot 


132. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθείς, 


3 For ησαν yap εκ. ΝΒΟΡΙ;Δ have εκφοβοι yap εγενοντο. 
3 εγενετο again in ΔΒΟΙ;Δ; ηλθε a correction of style. 


4 ΜΒΟ al. omit λεγονσα (from parall.). 
5 axovere avtov in NBCDL 33. 
7 BD 33 have ex. 


what else to make of it than that Moses 
and Elijah had come to stay. This is 
probably an apologetic remark added by 
the evangelist to the original narrative. 
Lk. reproduces it in a somewhat altered 
{οττῃ.---ἔκφοβοι : they were frightened 
out of their wits (again in Heb. xii. 21): 
explains the stupidity of Peter. The 
fear created by the sudden preternatural 
sight made him talk nonsense. Mt. 
makes the fear follow the Divine voice. 
—Ver. 7. καὶ ἐγένετο, before νεφέλη, 
and again before wv}, in each place 
instead of Mt.’s ἰδοὺ; in both cases 
pointing to something remarkable: an 
overshadowing cloud, and a mysterious 
voice from the cloud.—Ver. 8. ἐξάπινα, 
suddenly, a form belonging to late Greek 
Ξ-ἐξαπίνης-- ἐξαίφνης : here only in 


N. T.; several times in Sept. Kypke 
cites examples from the Psalms of 
Solomon and Jamblichus. The word 


here qualifies not περιβλεψάμενοι, but 
the change in the state of things which 
they discovered (εἶδον) on looking around. 
—ovxért οὐδένα ἀλλὰ, etc. ; no longer 
any one except (4AAG=el μὴ after a 
negative).—rév “Incotv, etc.: Jesus 
alone with themselves: the whole ce- 
lestial vision gone as quickly as it came. 

Vv. 9-13. Conversation during the 
descent, not given in Lk.—Ver.10/ τὸν 
λόγον ἐκράτησαν, they kept the word ; 
i.e., if the verb be taken in the sense of 
vii. 3, 4, 8, gave heed to the Master’s 
prohibition of speech concerning what 
had just happened, at least till after the 


6 και καταβ. in SBCDLA 33. 
δᾳ ειδον before Suny. in SBCDLA. 


resurrection—strictly complied with His 
wish. If we connect πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς with 
ἐκράτ., the meaning will be: they kept 
the saying to (with) themselves (A. V.), 
or rather, taking λόγον in the sense of 
“thing,” they kept the matter—what 
had happened—to themselves: did not 
speak about it. The sense is the same 
in effect, but the latter is perhaps the 
better connection of words, as if πρὸς €. 
were intended to go with συζητοῦντες 
it would more naturally have come after 
it.—rt ἐστι τὸ, etc.: the reference to the 
resurrection in the prohibition of the 
Master puzzled and troubled the three 
disciples : resurrection—His own, and 
soon, in our time; but that implies 
death ; whereof, indeed, He lately spoke 
to us, but how hard to receive! Peter’s 
resistance, sympathised with by his 
brethren, not yet overcome. They speak 
of it to one another, though not again to 
the Master.—Ver. ΙΙ. ὅτι λέγουσιν, etc. : 
this may be taken as an indirect or 
suggested rather than expressed ques- 
tion, ὅτι being recitative, as in ii. 16 = 
the Pharisees and scribes say, etc.,— 
how about that? (Weiss in Meyer), or, 
writing not ὅτι but ὅ, τι (neuter of 
ὅστις), as an instance of the use of this 
pronoun as an interrogative in a direct 
question (Meyer, Schanz, vide also Bur- 
ton, M.and Τ.,δ 349). De Wette takes ὅτι 
= ὅτι after Beza and Grotius (who 
calls it one of Mk.’s Hebraisms).—Ver. 
13. The construction of this sentence 
also is somewhat puzzling. After Ἠλίας 


ὃ---τ6, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


401 


εἶπεν  αὐτοῖς, '' Ἡλίας μὲν ἐλθὼν πρῶτον, ἀποκαθιστᾷ 2 πάντα: 
καὶ πῶς γέγραπται ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ἵνα πολλὰ πάθῃ 


καὶ ἐξουδενωθῇ.” 


13. ἀλλὰ λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι καὶ “HAlas ἐλήλυθε, 


καὶ ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ ὅσα ἠθέλησαν," καθὼς γέγραπται én αὐτόν.” 
14. Καὶ ἐλθὼνδ πρὸς τοὺς µαθητάς, εἶδεν 5 ὄχλον πολὺν περὶ 


αὐτούς, καὶ γραμματεῖς συζητοῦντας αὐτοῖς.6 


15. καὶ εὐθέως πᾶς 


ὁ ὄχλος ἰδὼν Ἰ αὐτόν, ἐξεθαμβήθη,: καὶ προστρέχοντες ἠσπάζοντο 


ο. 
αυτογ. 


16. καὶ ἐπηρώτησε τοὺς γραμματεῖς,ὃ ‘Ti συζητεῖτε πρὸς 


1 For αποκ. ειπεν SSBCLA have simply εφη. 
? αποκαθιστανει in ALA (-τισ- in B, W.H., -tag- in D). 


3 Vide below. 
5 ελθοντες, ειδον in NBLA. 


4 ηθελον in ΔΒΟΡΙ.. 
5 προς αυτους in $KEBCILA.. 


7 Wovres, εξεθαµβηθησαν in SQBCILA (εθαµβησαν {ῃ D). ®SgBDLA have avrovs. 


comes μὲν in the best MSS., raising 
expectation of a δὲ in the apodosis, 
instead of which we have καὶ (πῶς 
γέγραπται). Examples of such sub- 
stitution occur in classic authors; con- 
cerning which Klotz, Devar., p. 659, re- 
marks: when καὶ, τὲ, or the like are 
put for δὲ after μὲν, it is not properly 
a case of construction, but rather: 
‘“‘quaedam quasi legitima orationis ava- 
κολουθία ”. Perhaps we are at a loss 
from merely reading the words instead 
of hearing them spoken with a pause 
between first and second half of sen- 
tence, thus: Elias, indeed, coming first, 
restoreth all things (so teach the scribes) 
—and how stands it written about the 
Son of Man?—that He should suffer 
many things and be set at nought! The 
aim is to awaken thought in the mind of 
the disciples by putting together things 
incongruous. All things to be restored 
in preparation for Messiah; Messiah 
Himself to suffer and be set at nought: 
what then can the real function and fate 
of Elijah the restorer be ? Whois Elijah? 
---ἐξονδενηθῇ: this form, found in BD 
and adopted by W.H., is rare. The 
verb occurs in three ἔοττῃς- -ἐξουδενέω, 
ἐξουδενόω (T.R.), ἐξουθενέω ; the latter 
two in more common use. The word in 
any form is late Greek. Vide Grimm’s 
Lexicon, and Lobeck, Phryn., p. 181 (from 
ἐξ, οὐδέν or οὐθέν--{ο treat as nought).— 
Ver. 13 contains Christ’s own view of 
Elijah’s coming, which differs both from 
that of the scribes and from that of the 
disciples, who found it realised in the 
vision on the hill_—Ka0as γέγραπται ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτόν: the reference is to the persecu- 
tion of Elijah by Jezebel, the obvious 
intention being to suggest the identifica- 


tion of the expected prophet with the 
Baptist. All pointing to one conclusion 
—suffering the appointed lot of the 
faithful servants of God in this evil 
world; Elijah, John, Jesus. That, the 
lesson Jesus wished by all means to in- 
culcate : the Sei πολλὰ παθεῖν, now, 
and henceforth, to the end. 

Vv. 14-29. The epileptic boy (Mt. 
xvii. 14-21, Lk. ix. 37-43). The story is 
told in Mark with much greater fulness 
than in the parallels.—Ver. 14. ὄχλον 
πολὺν: the great crowd and the fact 
that the disciples at the foot of the hill, 
the nine, had been asked to heal the 
sufferer, are in favour of the view that 
the scene of the transfiguration was less 
remote than Hermon from the familiar 
theatre of the healing ministry of Jesus 
and His disciples.—ypap.partets συζητοῦν- 
τας π. a., scribes wrangling with them, 
the nine. This is peculiar to Mark, but 
the situation is easily conceivable: the 
disciples have tried to heal the boy and 
failed (ver. 18); the scribes, delighted 
with the failure, taunt them with it, and 
suggest by way of explanation the 
waning power of the Master, whose 
name they had vainly attempted to 
conjure with. The baffled nine make 
the best defence they can, or perhaps 
listen in silence.—Ver. 15. ἐξεθαμβήθ- 
ησαν, were utterly amazed, used by 
Mark only in N, T., here, and in xiv. 33 
and xvi. 5 in connections which demand 
a very strong sense. What was there in 
common in the three situations: the 
returned Master, the agony in the 
garden, and the appearance of the angel 
at the resurrection? A surprise ; which, 
whether sorrowful or joyful, always gives 
a certain emotional shock. The Master: 


26 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ ΙΧ. 


17. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 1 ets ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου, εἶπε,ὶ “΄ Διδάσκαλε, 
18. καὶ 


19. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς αὐτῷ," 


20. Καὶ ἤνεγκαν αὐτὸν 


492 
3 , » 
αὐτούς ; 
A} 3 4 ce ό ” a ν 
b Ch. vii. ὤνεγκα τὸν υἱόν µου πρός σε, ἔχοντα πνεῦμα ” ἄλαλον. 
37. 
chereand ὅπου ἂν αὐτὸν καταλάβῃ, ῥήσσει αὐτόν: καὶ ᾿ἀφρίζει, καὶ * tpiter 
ver. 20. 4 , A ’ a 
dhere only. τοὺς ὀδόντας αὐτοῦ,” καὶ *Enpatverar: καὶ εἶπον τοῖς μαθηταῖς σου 
e Ch. ili. 1. ο ip TAs a 3 ” 35 
ἵνα αὐτὸ ἐκβάλωσι, καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσαν. 
3” a 
f pera λέγει, 'Ὢ yeved ἄπιστος, ἕως πότε πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἔσομαι; ἕως πότε 
ohn x. 24. ; Μι 
ο vi. ἀνέξομαι ὑμῶν; Φέρετε αὐτὸν πρός pe. 
10 (ews 
πότε]. 


πρὸς αὐτόν: καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτόν, εὐθέως τὸ πνεῦμα ἐσπάραξεν * αὗτόν - 
4 a ~ , 

καὶ πεσὼν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ἐκυλίετο ἀφρίζων. 21. Kal ἐπηρώτησε τὸν 

πατέρα αὐτοῦ, “ Πόσος χρόνος ἐστίν, ὡς τοῦτο Ὑέγονεν αὐτῷ; 


Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “΄ Παιδιόθεν.” 22. καὶ πολλάκις αὐτὸν καὶ eis tip ὃ 


ἔβαλε καὶ eis ὕδατα, ἵνα ἀπολέσῃ αὐτόν: GAN εἴ τι δύνασαι, 


T 


1 απεκριθη αντω without ειπε in SHBDLA 33. 


2 Omit αντον ΞΒΟΡΙ/Δ 33. 


4 ro mv. evdus cuveotmapatey in SBCLA 33. 


6 αντον after και εις πυρ in SBCLA. 


reappears, when He is not looked for, 
when He is needed, and when His name 
is being taken in vain, perhaps not with- 
out a certain sympathy on the part of the 
volatile crowd not accustomed hitherto 
to miscarriage of attempts at healing 
when the name of Jesus was invoked. 
In that case their feeling would be a 
compound of confusion and gladness— 
ashamed and yet delighted to see Him, 
both betrayed in their manner.—Ver. 16. 
ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτούς, He asked them, t.é., 
the people who in numbers ran to meet 
Him. Jesus had noticed, as He drew 
near, that there was a dispute going on 
in which the disciples were concerned, 
and not knowing the composition of the 
crowd, He proceeds on the assumption 
that they had all a share in it = the 
crowd as a whole versus the nine.—Ver. 
17. The father of the sick boy answers 
for the company, explaining the situation, 
laying the main stress of course on the 
deplorable condition of his child.—apés 
σε, to thee, not aware that Jesus was 
absent.—mvevpa ἅλαλον, a dumb spirit ; 
the boy dumb, and therefore by inference 
the spirit.—Ver. 18. 
λάβῃ, wherever it happens to seize him. 
The possession (ἔχοντα, ver. 17) is con- 
ceived of as intermittent; “the way of 
the spirit inferred from the characteristic 
phenomena of the disease” (Zhe Mira- 
culous Element in the Gospels, p. 181). 
Then follows a graphic description of the 
ensuing symptoms: spasms (ῥήσσει, a 
late form of ῥήγνυμι), foaming (ἀφρίζει 


ὅπου ἂν a. κατα--- 


3 avtots in ΝΑΒΡΙ Δ 33. 
5 ex παιδ. in SBCILA 33. 
Τδυνη in SBDILA. 


from ἀφρός: he, the boy, foameth), 
grinding of the teeth (. pifer 7. 68.), then 
the final stage of motionless stupor 
graphically described as withering (ξη- 
paiverat), for which Euthy. gives as an 
equivalent ἀναισθητεῖ, and Weizsacker 
‘und wird starr’’. 

Ver. 19. The complaint of Fesus, 
vide on Matthew.—Observe the πρὸς 
ὑμᾶς instead of Matthew’s μεθ ὑμῶν. = 
how long shall I be in relations with you, 
have to do with you?—Ver. 20. ἰδὼν 
may be taken as referring to the boy 
(Schanz), in which case we should have 
an anacolouthistic nominative for the 
accusative, the writer having in view to 
express his meaning in passives (ἐκυλ-. 
fero) ; or to the spirit (πνεῦμα) by a con- 
struction ad sensum = the spirit seeing 
Jesus made a last attack (Weiss in Meyer, 
et al.). This is most in keeping with the 
mode of conceiving the matter natural to 
the evangelist. The visible fact was a 
fresh fit, and the explanation, from the 
possession point of view, that the spirit, 
seeing Jesus, and knowing that his power 
was at an end, made a final assault.— 
Ver. 21>, ὥς: a particle of time, here as 


“frequently in Luke and John = since, or 


when.—éxk Ἠπαιδιόθεν, ἐκ redundant, 
similar to ἀπὸ µακρόθεν (ν. 6).—Ver. 
22. et τι δύνῃ, if Thou canst do any- 
thing (A, and R. Vv.), or better, if any- 
how Thou canst help. The father speaks 
under the impression that the case, as he 
has just described it, is one of peculiar 
difficulty ; therefore while the leper said 


α7---20. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


βοήθησον ἡμῖν, σπλαγχνισθεὶς ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς. 23. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν 


> - nw 
αὐτῷ, "Τό, et δύνασαι motedoat,! 


πάντα δυνατὰ τῷ πιστεύοντι.' 
24. Kal? εὐθέως κράξας 6 πατὴρ τοῦ παιδίου, μετὰ δακρύων ὃ ἔλεγε, 
«Πιστεύω, Κύριε," βοήθει µου τῇ ἀπιστία. 25. Ιδὼν δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
32 η ry η 
OTL ἐπισυντρέχει ὄχλος, ἐπετίμησε τῷ πνεύματι TO ἀκαθάρτῳ, λέγων 
X ο Ὀ +? Y 
αὐτῷ, “TS πνεῦμα τὸ ἄλαλον καὶ Kwhédv,” ἐγώ σοι ἐπιτάσσω,ὸ ἔξελθε 
ἐξ αὐτοῦ, καὶ µηκέτι εἰσέλθῃς eis αὐτόν. 26. Καὶ κράξαν, καὶ 
πολλὰ σπαράξαν αὐτόν, ἐξῆλθε: καὶ ἐγένετο ὡσεὶ νεκρός, ὥστε 
> Pos, 


403 


πολλοὺς Ἰ λέγειν ὅτι ἀπέθανεν. 


27. 6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς κρατήσας αὐτὸν 


er 8 2) 7 \ D 
της χειρος, ΌΏγειρεν αυτον ᾽ και ἀνέστη. 


28. Καὶ εἰσελθόντα αὐτὸν ὃ εἰς οἶκον, of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐπηρώτων 


ϱ a aA 
αὐτὸν Kat’ ἰδίαν,, “"Ὅτι ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἠδυνήθημεν ἐκβαλεῖν αὐτό ;* 


290. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, '' Τοῦτο τὸ γένος ἐν οὐδενὶ δύναται ἐξελθεῖν, 


3 ‘ > Αα ΔΝ , 5» 10 
εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστείᾳ. 


1 e. ὄννη without πιστενσαι (a gloss) in BDA (CL δυνασαι without πισ.). 


2 Omit και BLA. 
4 Omit Κνριε RBCDL. 


3 Omit pera Sax. SBCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 το πνευμα after κωφον, and σοι after επιτασσω in SBCLA 33. 
6 SSBCDL have κραξας, σπαραξας, and omit αντον. 


7 tous πολ. in SABLA 33. 


8 της χειρος αυτον in RBDLA, 


ὃ εισελθοντος αυτου in $$BCDLA, also κατ ιδιαν before επηρωτων. 
10 ΝΔ Β omit και νηστεια, which comes from Mt. (T.R.). 


“if Thou wilt,” he says “if Thou canst”. 
With reference to the form δύνῃ, Phryn. 
says that it is right after ἐὰν, but that at 
the beginning of a sentence δύνασαι must 
be used (p. 359).—Ver. 23. τὸ εἰ δύνῃ, 
nominative absolute: as to the ‘if Thou 
canst”.—dmavra δυν., all, in antithesis 
to the tt of the father.—-Ver. 24. κράξας: 
eager, fear-stricken cry ; making the most 
of his little faith, to ensure the benefit, 
and adding-a prayer for increase of faith 
(βοήθει, etc.) with the idea that it would 
help to make the cure complete. The 
father’s love at least was above suspicion. 
Meyer and Weiss render “' help me even 
if unbelieving,” arguing that the other, 
more cOmmon rendering is at variance 
with the meaning of βοήθησον in ver. 22. 

Vv. 25-20. The cure.—émiovvrpéxer 
(ἄπ. λεγ.) indicates that the crowd was 
constantly increasing, so becoming a new 
crowd (ὄχλος without art.) ; natural in the 
circumstances. Jesus seeing this proceeds 
to cure without further delay. The spirit 
is now described as unclean and, with re- 
ference to the boy’s symptoms, both dumb 
and ἀεαί[.- -μηκέτι εἰσέλθῃς, enter not 
again. This was the essential point ina 
case of intermittent possession. The spirit 


went out at the end of each attack, but re- 
turned again.—Ver. 26 describes a final 
fit, apparently worse than the preceding. 
It was evidently an aggravated type of 
epilepsy, fit following on fit and pro- 
ducing utter exhaustion. Mark’s ela- 
borate description seems to embody the 
recollections of one on whom the case 
had made a great impression.—Ver. 28. 
ets οἶκον: into a house, when or whose 
not indicated, the one point of interest 
to the evangelist is that Jesus is now 
alone with His disciples.—6r1, recitative, 
here as in ver. 11, introduces a suggested 
question: we were not able to cast it 
out—why ?—Ver. 29. τοῦτο τὸ yévos, 
etc.: This is one of the texts which very 
soon became misunderstood, the ascetic 
addition, καὶ νηστείᾳ, being at once a 
proof and a cause of misunderstanding. 
The traditional idea has been that Jesus 
here prescribes a certain discipline by 
which the exorcist could gain power to 
cope successfully with the most obstinate 
cases of possession, a course of prayer 
and fasting. This idea continues to 
dominate the mind even when the 
ascetic addition to the text has come to 
be regarded as doubtful; witness this 


404 


KATA ΜΑΝΚΟΝ 


IX. 


30. ΚΑΙ ἐκεῖθεν ἐξελθόντες παρεπορεύοντο] διὰ τὴς Γαλιλαίας - 


καὶ οὐκ ἤθελεν ἵνα τις γνῷ.Σ 


31. ἐδίδασκε γὰρ τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, 


καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, ΄΄ Ὅτι ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται eis χεῖρας 


ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν αὐτόν: καὶ ἀποκτανθείς, τῇ τρίτῃ 


ἡμέρᾳ ὃ ἀναστήσεται.” 
αὐτὸν ἐπερωτῆσαι. 


32. Οἱ δὲ ἠγνόουν τὸ ῥῆμα, καὶ ἐφοβοῦντο 


33. Καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς Καπερναούμ" καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ γενόμενος, 
ἐπηρώτα αὐτούς, “Ti ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ πρὸς EauTods® διελογίζεσθε; 


1 BD have επορενυοντο (W.H. text), παρεπ. in ΝΟΙ.Δ (Tisch.). 


2 you in NBCDL. 


4 So in CLA, ηλθον in $B (Tisch., W.H.). 


remark: ‘The authorisation, however 
(for omitting καὶ νησ.), is not sufficient. 
But even if it were overwhelming, fast- 
ing would, tn its essence, be implied” 
(Morison on Mark). What Jesus said 
doubtless was: ‘‘ This kind can go out 
in ‘(on the ground of) nothing except 
prayer,” and His meaning that there was 
no hope of success except through a 
believing (of course faith is implied) 
appeal to the almighty power of God. 
It was a thought of the same kind as 
that in Mt. xix. 26 (Mk. x. 27): the 
impossible for man is possible for God. 
Of course in the view of Christ, prayer, 
faith (vide Mt. xvii. 20), both in healer 
and in healed, was needful in ail cases, 
but He recognised that there were certain 
aggravated types of disease (the present, 
one of them) in which the sense of 
dependence and trust was very specially 
required. In the case of the epileptic 
boy this had been lacking both in the 
father and in the disciples. Neither he 
nor they were hopeful of cure. 

Vv. 30-32. Second announcement of 
the Passion (Mt. xvii. 22, 23, Lk. ix. 
43-45).—Ver. 30. καὶ ἐκεῖθεν ἐξελθόντες, 
going forth from thence, {.6., from the 
scene of the last cure, wherever that was: 
it might be north or south of their des- 
tination (Capernaum)—Caesarea Philippi 
or Tabor.—waperopevovro, they passed 
along without tarrying anywhere. Some 
take the παρὰ in the compound verb 
to mean, went along by-ways, to avoid 
publicity: ‘‘diverticulo ibant, non via 
regia,’ Grotius. "ΤΕ is certainly true that 
Jesus had become so well known in 
Galilee that it would be difficult for Him 
on the thoroughfares to escape recogni- 
tion as He wished (οὐκ ἤθελεν ἵνα τις 
yvoi).—Ver. 31. ἐδίδασκε yap, etc. : 
gives the reason for this wish. It was 


ὅ pera τρεις ηµερας in NBCDLA. 
5 Omit προς εαν. ΝΒΟΡΙ.. 


the reason for the whole of the recert 
wandering outside Galilee: the desire 
to instruct the Twelve, and especially to 
prepare them for the approaching crisis. 
---καὶ ἔλεγεν introduces the gist or main 
theme οἱ these instructions. The words 
following: ὅτι 6 vids, etc., are more than 
an announcement made in so many words 
once for all: they are rather the text of 
Christ’s whole talk with His disciples as 
they went along. He was so saying 
(ἔλεγεν, imperfect) all the time, in effect. 
—wapadiSorat, is betrayed, present; it 
is as good as done. The betrayal is the 
new feature in the second announcement. 
—Ver. 32. ἠγνόουν: they had heard the 
statement before, and had not forgotten 
the fact, and their Master had spoken too 
explicitly for them to be in any doubt 
as to His meaning. What they were 
ignorant of was the why, the δεῖ, With 
all He had said, Jesus had not yet been 
able to. make that plain. They will 
never know till the Passion has become 
a fact accomplished.—pjjpa, a solemn 
name for the utterance (vide Mt. iv. 4)= 
the oracular, prophetic, and withal 
weird, mysterious word of doom.—édo- 
βοῦντο, they feared to ask, they did not 
wish to understand, they would live on 
in hope that their Master was under a 
hallucination; true to human nature. 
Vv. 33-50. The Twelve at school (Mt. 
XViii. I-10, Lk. ix. 46-50, etc.).—Ver. 33. 
Καπερναούμ: home? ‘This statement, 
more than anything else in Mk., gives 
the impression that Capernaum was a 
kind of home for Jesus.—év τῇ οἰκίᾳ, in 
the house, opposed to ἐν rp 686, but pro- 
bably pointing to a particular house in 
which Jesus was wont to stay.—tt . . . 
διελογίζεσθε, what were ye discussing ? 
Jesus did not always walk beside His 
disciples (vide x. 32). He went before, 


yo—4o. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


405 


34. Οἱ δὲ ἐσιώπων: πρὸς ἀλλήλους γὰρ ’διελέχθησαν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, g here in 


, ΄ 
τίς µειζων. 
ὐτοῖς, “ θέλ a if 
αὐτοῖς, “Et τις θέλει πρῶτος εἶναι, 


>? 
ππάντων διάκονος. 


αὐτῶν : καὶ ΄ ἐναγκαλισάμενος αὐτό, εἶπεν αὗτοῖς 
- , ,. Γι. a , ανα 
τῶν τοιούτων παιδίων δέξηται ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί µου, ἐμὲ δέχεται: κ 


35. καὶ καθίσας " ἐφώνησε τοὺς δώδεκα, καὶ λέγει 


36. Καὶ λαβὼν παιδίον, ἔστησεν αὐτὸ ἐν µέσῳ 


Gospels. 
Several 
times in 
Acts and 
in Heb. 
h eal 
videa 
47. “Ὃς dav) ἓν Mt. xx. 32. 
«1. Ch.x. 16. 
αι 


a” ” 4 
έσται πάντων ἔσχατος, καὶ 


ὃς ἐὰν 1 ἐμὲ δέξηται,” οὐκ ἐμὲ δέχεται, ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀποστείλαντά pe.” 
38. ᾽Απεκρίθη δὲ ὃ αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰωάννης, λέγων,ὃ “Διδάσκαλε, εἴδομέν 


τινα τῷ ὀνόματί " σου ἐκβάλλοντα δαιμόνια, ὃς οὐκ ἀκολουθεῖ ἡμῖν 5: 


n A 3 
καὶ ἐκωλύσαμεν © αὐτόν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀκολουθεῖ ὃ ἡμῖν. 


39 Ὁ δὲ᾽Ιησοῦς 


| 
εἶπε, “Mi κωλύετε αὐτόν ' οὐδεὶς ydp ἐστιν ὃς ποιήσει δύναμιν ἐπὶ 


gt μα , ‘ , i ο ΄ a x 
τῷ ὀνόματι µου, και δυνήσεται ταχὺ κακολογῆσαί µε. 40. ὃς γὰρ 


1 BDLA have αν in both places, δ9Ο in the first place. 


2 So in CDAZ al. 


NBL have δεχηται (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 For amex. δε NBA have εφη and omit λεγων. 


4 With ev prefixed in RBCDLAZ. 


5 This clause ος 
modern editors. 
οτι ουκ, etC.). 


εν. ημιν is omitted in ΔΝΕΒΟΙ:Δ, and treated as doubtful by 
It may have been omitted to avoid redundancy (vide last clause, 
But such redundancy is characteristic of Mk. 


ὃ exwAvopev in $$BDLA, and ηκολουθει in SBCLA. 


thinking His deep thoughts, they followed 
thinking their vain thoughts. The 
Master had noticed that something 
unusual was going on, divined what 
it was, and now asks.—Ver. 34. ἐσιώ- 
πων, they kept silent, ashamed to tell.— 
Ver. 35. καὶ καθίσας, etc.: every word 
here betokens a deliberate attempt to 
school the disciples in humility. The 
Master takes His seat (καθίσας), calls His 
scholars with a magisterial tone (ἐφώ- 
νησεν, for various senses in which used, 
vide references, Mt. xx. 32)-—the Twelve 
(τοὺς δ.), called to an important vocation, 
and needing thorough discipline to be of 
service in it.—et τις θέλει, etc. ; the direct 
answer to the question under discussion— 
who the greatest ? = greatness comes by 
humility (ἔσχατος), and service (6tdKevos). 
—Ver. 36. The child, produced at the 
outset in Mt., is now brought on the 
scene (λαβών), not, however, as a model 
(that in x. 15), but as an object of kind 
ureatment.—évaykahtodpevos: in Mk. 
only = taking it into His arms, to sym- 
bolise how all that the child represents 
should be treated.—Ver. 37. δέξηται in 
the first member of the sentence, δέχηται 
in the second; the former (aorist sub- 
junctive with ἂν), the more regular in a 
clause expressing future possibility. 
Winer, xlii. 3b (a). The second member 


of the sentence is not in the correspond- 
ing place in Mt., but is given in Mt. x. 40. 

Vv. 38-41. A reminiscence (Lk. ix. 
49-50). Probably an incident of the 
Galilean mission, introduced without 
connecting particle, therefore (Weiss) 
connection purely topical ; suggested 
(Holtz., H. C.) to the evangelist by the 
expression ἐπὶ τ. ὀνόματί µου in νετ. 37, 
answering to ἐν τ. 6. σ, in ver. 38.— 
ἐκβάλλοντα δ.: exorcists usually conjured 
with some name, Abraham, Solomon; 
this one used the name of Jesus, im- 
plying some measure of faith in His 
worth and power.—éxw)vopev, imperfect, 
taken by most as implying repeated in- 
terdicts, but it may be the conative 
imperfect = we tried to prevent him.— 
οὐκ ἠκολούθει, he did not follow us; the 
reason for the prohibition. The aloof- 
ness of the exorcist is represented as still 
continuing in the words ὃς οὐκ ἀκολουθεῖ 
(T. R.).—Ver. 39. Jesus disallows the 
interdict for a reason that goes deeper 
than the purely external one of the 
disciples = not of our company? well, 
but with us at heart.—8vvyjoerar ταχὺ: 
points to moral impossibility: use of 
Christ’s name in exorcism incompatible 
with hostile or inappreciative thought 
and speech of Him.—rayv softens the 
assertion: not soon; he may do it, but 


406 KATA MAPKON IX. 


οὐκ ἔστι καθ’ ὑμῶν,' ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 1 ἐστιν. 41. ὃς γὰρ ἂν ποτίσῃ Spas 
ποτήριον ὕδατος ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pou,? ὅτι Χριστοῦ ἐστε, ἀμὴν λέγω 
ὑμῖν, οὐ μὴ ἀπολέσῃ ὃ τὸν μισθὸν αὐτοῦ. 42. Καὶ ὃς ἂν σκανδαλίσῃ 
ἕνα τῶν μικρῶν * τῶν πιστευόντων εἰς ἐμέ,δ καλόν ἐστιν αὐτῷ μάλλον, 

j Lk. xvii. 2. ή }περίκειται λίθος μυλικὸς © περὶ τὸν τράχηλον αὐτοῦ, καὶ βέβληται 
Eg Heb. εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν. 43. Καὶ ἐὰν oxavdadily” σε ἡ χείρ σου, ἀπό- 
κοψον αὐτήν: καλόν σοι ἐστὶ ὃ κυλλὸν εἰς τὴν ζωὴν εἰσελθεῖν,) ἡ 

τὰς δύο χεῖρας ἔχοντα ἀπελθεῖν eis τὴν γέενναν, eis τὸ wap τὸ 
ἄσβεστον, 44. ὅπου ὁ 
σβέννυται.10 


σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὐ τελευτᾷ, καὶ τὸ mip ob 

45. καὶ ἐὰν ὅ πούς σου σκανδαλίζῃ σε, ἀπόκοψον 
αὐτόν: καλόν ἐστί σοι 1} εἰσελθεῖν eis τὴν ζωὴν χωλόν, ἢ τοὺς δύο 
πόδας ἔχοντα βληθῆναι eis τὴν γέενναν, eis τὸ πῦρ τὸ ἄσβεστον,ι2 
46. ὅπου ὁ σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὗ τελευτᾷ, καὶ τὸ tip οὗ σβέννυται.ἰθ 
47. καὶ ἐὰν ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου σκανδαλίζη σε, ἔκβαλε αὐτόν: καλόν 
σοι ἐστὶ 15 μονόφθαλμον εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἢ δύο 
ὀφθαλμοὺς ἔχοντα βληθῆναι εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός, 48. ὅπου ὁ 


1 ημων in both places in $$BCD. 


Σεν ονοµατι simply in BCLE (W.H.), ev ον. pov in SDA (Tisch.). 


3 ott before ov µη in NBCDLA. 


4 τοντων after µικρων in SBCDLA. 


δεις εµε may come from Mt., though it is in ΜΒΙΙΣ; wanting in ΝΔ (Tisch., 


W.H.) 


ὅ µνλος ονικος in S$BCDLA may be a conforming to Mt., but Τ.Ε. more probably 1 


conforms to Lk. 
7 σκανδαλιση in NBLA. 
}εισελθειν before εις in $BCDLA. 


8εστιν oe in SSBCLA. 


19 Ver. is wanting in S§BCLA, some minusc. and verss., also ver. 46 (Tisch. 
44 8 4 ᾽ 


W.H. om.). 
1 ge in KABCLA. 


5 ge εστιν in NB. 


it will mean a change of mind, and dis- 
use of my name.—Ver. 40. The counter- 
part truth to that in Mt. x. 30._ Both 
truths, and easily harmonised. _ It is in 
both cases a question of tendency; a 
little sympathy inclines to grow to more, 
so also with a lack of sympathy. Vide 
on Mt. xii. 30.—Ver. 41 = Mt. x. 42, but 
a later secondary form of the saying: 
ποτήριον ὕδατος for π. ψυχροῦ, and ὅτι 
Χριστοῦ ἐστέ instead of εἰς ov. μαθητοῦ. 

Vv. 42-48. After the episode of the 
exorcist the narrative returns to the dis- 
course broken off at ver. 38. From 
receiving little children and all they re- 
present, Jesus passes to speak of the sin 
of causing them to stumble.—Ver. 42. 
καλόν, etc. ; well for him ; rather = better. 
Each evangelist has his own word here : 
Mt. συμφέρει, Lk. (xvii. 2) λυσιτελεῖ; 
but Mk., according to the best attested 


2 Omit eis To. . - 
14 του πυρος omit BDLA (BL omit την before γεενναν). 


ασβεστον WBCLA. 


reading, has the strong phrase μύλος 
ὀνικὸς in common with Mt. He is con- 
tent, however, with the expression “in 
the sea,’’ instead of Mt.’s “in the deep 
part of the sea,” the faithful reproduction, 
probably, of what Jesus actually said.— 
Ver. 43. The offender of the little ones 
is still more an offender against himself, 
hence the discourse by an easy transition 
passes to counsels against such folly. In 
Mk.’s version these are given in a most par- 
ticular way, hand, foot and eye being each 
used separately to illustrate the common 
admonition. In Mt. hand and foot are 
combined. In the third illustration εἰς 
τὴν ζωὴν is replaced by εἰς τ. βασιλείαν 
τ.θ. The refrain: ‘ where the worm, 
etc.,” is repeated in T. R. with solemn 
effect after each example, but the best 
MSS. have it only after the third, vx 
44, 46 being thus omitted (R. V.). 


41--50. 


σκώληξ αὐτῶν οὗ τελευτᾷ, καὶ τὸ Top οὗ σβέννυται. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


407 


49. Nas yap 


πυρὶ ἁλισθήσεται, καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἁλὶ ἁλισθήσεται.! το. καλὸν τὸ 


ἅλας: ἐὰν δὲ τὸ ἅλας ἄναλον γένηται, ἐν tiv, αὐτὸ * ἀρτύσετε ; k Lk. xiv. 


ἔχετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς Gas,” καὶ εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἀλλήλοις.” 


34. Col. 
iv. 6. 


1 This last clause is omitted in BLA, many minusc. (Tisch., W.H., vide below). 


2 ada in $ABDLA. 


Salting inevitable and 
indispensable. ‘These verses appear only 
in Mk. as part of this discourse. The 
logion in ver. 50 corresponds to Mt. v. 
13, Lk. xiv. 34-35.—Ver. 49 is a crux 
interpretum, and has given rise to great 
diversity of interpretation (vide Meyer, 
ad loc.). Three questions may be asked. 
(α) What is the correct form of the say- 
ing? (2) Was it spoken at this time by 
Jesus? (3) If it was, how is it to be 
connected with the previous context ? 
As to (1) some important MSS. ( 
and the new Syr. Sin.) omit the second 
half of the sentence, retaining only 
‘every one shall be salted with fire”. 
D and some copies of the old Lat. omit 
the first part and retain the second. W. 
and H. retain only part1. Weiss and 
Schanz think that the text must be taken 
in its entirety, and that part 2 fell out by 
homoeoteleuton, or was omitted because of 
its difficulty. Holtzmann, Η. C., is in- 
clined to favour the reading of D. It is 
difficult to decide between these alterna- 
‘tives, though I personally lean to the 
first of the three, not only because of 
the weighty textual testimony, but, as 
against D, on account of the startling 
character of the thought, salted with 
fire, its very boldness witnessing for its 
authenticity. As to (2) I think it highly 
probable that such thoughts as vv. 49-50 
contain were spoken at this time by 
Jesus. The two thoughts, salting in- 
evitable and salting indispensable, were 
thoroughly apposite to the situation: a 
master teaching men in danger of moral 
shipwreck through evil passion, and 
unless réformed sure to prove unfit for 
the work to which they were destined. 
I cannot therefore agree with Holtzmann 
(H. C.) that Mk., misled by the word 
mvp in ver. 48, has brought in here a 
logion spoken at some other time. As 
to (3) I see no necessity to regard γὰρ, 
ver. 49, as binding us down to a close 
exclusive connection with ver. 48, re- 
quiring us to interpret ver. 49a thus: 
every one that does not cut off the 
offending member shall be salted by the 
fire of hell; itself quenchless, and not 


Vv. 49-50. 


BLA 


destroying its victim, as it is the nature 
of ordinary fire to do, but rather. pre- 
serving him for eternal torment, like 
salt. Thus viewed, ver. 49a is a mere 
comment on the words ov σβέννυται. 
The saying should rather be taken in 
connection with the whole course of 
thought in vv. 43-48, in which case it 
will bear this sense: ‘“‘ every one must be 
salted somehow, either with the un- 
quenchable fire of gehenna, or with the 
fire of severe self-discipline. Wise is he 
who chooses the latter alternative.” If 
we ignore the connection with ver. 48, 
and restrict was to the disciple-circle, 
this alternative rendering will be avoided, 
and the idea will be: every man who is 
to come to any good, will, must, be 
salted with fire. In that case, however, 
it is difficult to account for the unusual 
combination of salt and fire, whose 
functions are so opposed. gb is of 
quite subordinate importance, merely at 
best a parabolic aid to thought. Grotius 
and others divide the sacrifices into two 
classes answering to the two forms of 
salting: burnt offerings typilying those 
consumed in hell, peace offerings those 
preserved by self-discipline.—Ver. 50 
sets forth the other great truth: salting 
in the form of self-discipline indispen- 
sable.—xahév ‘7d Gras, an excellent 
thing is salt; a most seasonable truth 
just then. What follows seems less so, 
as it stands in Mk.’s text. As spoken by 
Jesus, if we may assume that it was 
spoken on this occasion, it might come 
in quite naturally. The three thoughts 
in this verse: salt good, care must be 
taken that it lose not its virtue, have 
salt in yourselves, may be merely themes 
packed together in a single sentence, on 
which Jesus discoursed at length.— 
ἄναλον, ἅπ. λεγ. in N. T., used in later 
Greek; µωρανθῇ in Mt. and Lk.— 
ἔχετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ada, have salt in your- 
selves. Inthe two former clauses dis- 
ciples are thought of, as in Mt. v. 13, as 
themselves salt for the world. Here 
they are viewed as the subject of the 
salting process. They must be salted in 
order to be salt to the world, their 


408 


KATA MAPKON 


Χ. 


Χ. 1, ΚΑΚΕΙΘΕΝ 1 ἀναστὰς ἔρχεται εἰς τὰ ὅρια τῆς Ιουδαίας, 
διὰ τοῦ * πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου : καὶ συμπορεύονται πάλιν ὄχλοι πρὸς 


αὐτόν: καὶ ὡς εἰώθει, πάλιν ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς. 


2. Καὶ προσελθόντες 


οἱ  Φαρισαῖοι ἐπηρώτησαν ἕ αὐτόν, εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀνδρὶ γυναῖκα ἀπολῦσαι, 


πειράζοντες αὐτόν. 
ἐνετείλατο Μωσῆς; 


εἶπεν > 


1 και εκειθεν in ΜΒΟΔ. 


3. ὅ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti ὑμῖν 
4. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, ΄΄ Μωσῆς ἐπέτρεψε” βιβλίον 
> , s \ a 2? 
ἀποστασίου γράψαι, καὶ ἀπολῦσαι. 


5. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


αὐτοῖς, '" Πρὸς τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν τὴν 


2 και instead of δια του in $BCL; περαν without και ἵῃπ DA. The και caused 
trouble to scribes, some omitted it after Mt., some substituted δια του as in Τ.Ε. 


3 BLA omit ot (added here as usual), and S&BCDLA have the imperfect 
επηρωτων instead of the aorist so often substituted for it in Τ.Ε. (again in ver. το)- 


4 επετρεψεν M. in NBDLA. 


5 For και ... 


ulterior vocation. Meantime a more 
immediate effect of their being salted is 
pointed out in the closing words.— 
εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἀλλήλοις: be at peace 
with one another; which they were not. 
The cause of dispeace was ambition. 
The salting would consist in getting rid 
of that evil spirit at whatever cost.— 
εἰρηνεύετε: a Pauline word, remarks 
Hoitz. (H.C.). | True, but why not also 
a word of Jesus? certainly very apposite 
to the occasion. 

Note.—Salting of disciples imports 
suffering pain, but is not to be con- 
founded with the cross-bearing of faith- 
ful disciples (viii. 34). The former is the 
discipline of self-denial necessary to 
make a mana follower of Christ worthy 
of the name. The latter is the tribulation 
that comes on all who follow closely in 
the footsteps of Christ. The one is 
needful to make us holy, the other over- 
takes us when and because we are holy. 

CHAPTER X. MARRIAGE QUESTION. 
LITTLE CHILDREN. QUEST AFTER 
ETERNAL LiFE. Two SONS _ OF 
ZEBEDEE. BARTIMAEUS.— Ver. 1. The 
departure from Galilee (Mt. xix. 1).— 
ἐκεῖθεν dvacras, asin vii. 24, g.v.; there, 
of a departure from Galilee which was 
followed by a return (ix. 33), here, of a 
final departure, so far as we know. 
Beza finds in the expression a Hebraism 
—to sit is to remain in a place, to rise is 
to depart from it. Kypke renders, et inde 
discedens, and gives classic examples of 
theusage.—els τὰ Spia T. |. καὶ πέραν, etc., 
into the borders of Judaea and of Peraea ; 
how reached not indicated. The read- 
ing of T. R. διὰ τοῦ πέραν 7.'l. gives the 
route. Vide on Mt., ad loc., where the 


ειπεν read with NBCLA ο δε |. ειπεν. 


καὶ (of S$BCL) is omitted.—ovpmopev- 
ονται πάλιν, crowds again gather.— 
ὄχλοι, plural; here only, with reference 
to the different places passed through.— 
ὡς εἰώθει, as He was wont; remarked 
on, because the habit had been suspended 
for a season during which the whole 
attention of Jesus had been devoted to 
the Twelve. That continues to be the 
case mainly still. In every incident the 
Master has an eye to the lesson for the 
disciples. And the evangelist takes 
pains to make the lesson prominent. 
Possibly his incidents are selected and 
grouped with that in view: marriage, 
children, money, etc. (so Weiss in 
Meyer).—édiSacxev, He continued teach- 
ing, so also in vi. 34. In both places 
Mt. (xiv. 14, xix. 2) speaks of heal- 
ing. Yet Mk.’s Gospel is a gospel of 
acts, Mt.’s of words. Each is careful 
to make prominent, in general notices, 
what he comparatively neglects in 
detail. 

Vv. 2-12. The question of divorce (Mt. 
xix. 3-12).--ἀπολῦσαι: the question is 
put absolutely, the qualifying clause 
κατὰ πᾶσαν aitiay in Mt. being omitted. 
Thus put the question presupposes 
knowledge of Christ’s high doctrine as 
to marriage, and is an attempt to bring 
Him into collision with the Mosaic law, 
as absolutely interdicting what it allowed. 
—Ver. 3. τί ὑμῖν ἐνετείλατο Μ.: here 
Jesus has in view not what Moses 
allowed in Deut. xxiv. 1, but what he in 
Genesis enjoined as the ideal state of 
things (Moses from the Jewish point of 
view author of the Pentateuch and all its 
legislation). They naturally supposed He 
had in view the tormer (ver. 4).—Ver. 5 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


I—I4. 409 
ἐντολὴν ταύτην ' 6. ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως, ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν 

αὐτοὺς 6 Θεός. 7. ‘ ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα 
αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα: καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα 


αὐτοῦ,” 8. καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα play. dore οὐκέτι εἰσὶ 


2 


δύο, ἀλλὰ µία σάρξ. 9g. ὃ οὖν ὁ Θεὸς συνέζευξεν, ἄνθρωπος μὴ 


‘ ~ 2 9 ς ‘4 A - 
Το. Καὶ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ ὃ πάλιν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ τοῦ 


t 


Χωριζέτω.” 
αὐτοῦ ἐπηρώτησαν * αὐτόν. 11. καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, ““Os ἐὰν ἀπολύσῃ 
τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην, μοιχᾶται ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν: 12. καὶ 
ἐὰν γυνὴ > ἀπολύσῃ τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς καὶ ὅ γαµηθῇ ἄλλῳ,ό μοιχᾶται. 

13. Καὶ προσέφερον αὐτῷ παιδία, ἵνα ἄψηται αὐτῶν: οἱ δὲ 
14. ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
ἠγανάκτησε, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Agete τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός 
pe, kai’ μὴ κωλύετε αὖτά : τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ 


μαθηταὶ ἐπετίμων τοῖς προσφέρουσιν.ὃ 


1 Omit ο θεος ΝΒΟΙΙΔ. D has ο ϐθ., and omits αντους (W.H. omit ο Θ. and 


bracket αυτους). 


Άκαι προσκ.. .. 


Sept. 
δεις την οικιαν in NBDLA. 


αυτον, omitted in §QB, is probably an addition from Mt. or 


* ot pad. περι TovTov επηρωτων in SX (τουτων) BCLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 For yuvyn απ. SBCLA have αντη απολυσασα without και, and for γαμηθη 
αλλω, yapnon αλλον (so also D: Tisch., W.H.). 


® RSBCLA have αυτων before αψηται, επετιµησαν for επιτιµων, and avrots for 


τοις προσφερουσι (W.H.). 


7 BAZ omit και, which comes from parall., and weakens the force: of the words. 


Vide below. 


Both evangelists, while varying consider- 
ably in their reports, carefully preserve 
this important logion as to legislation 
conditioned by the _ sklerokardia.— 
ταύτην: at the end, with emphasis ; 
this particular command in contradiction 
to the great original one.—Ver. 6: ‘* But 
from the beginning of the creation (it 
runs) ‘male and female made He them,’ ”’ 
ἄρσεν καὶ, etc., being a quotation from 
Sept. (Gen. i. 27), vv. 7,8 being another 
(vide Gen, ii. 24), with Christ’s comment 
in the last clause of ver. 8 and in ver. 9 
appended. On the import of the words 
vide in Mt., ad loc.—Vv. 10-12 report as 
spoken to the Twelve in the house (as 
opposed to the way in which the 
Pharisees are supposed to have en- 
countered Jesus) what in Mt.’s version 
appears as the last word to the in- 
terrogants (ver. 9g). Two variations are 
noticeable: (1) the absence of the 
qualifying clause εἰ μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ, and 
(2) the addition of a clause (ver. 12) 
stating the law in its bearing on the 
woman = if she put away her husband 
and marry another, she is an adulteress. 


In the former case Mk. probably reports 
correctly what Christ said, in the latter 
he has added a gloss so as to make 
Christ’s teaching a guide for his Gentile 
readers. Jewish women could not divorce 
their husbands. The én’ αὐτήν at the 
end of ver, ΙΙ may mean either against, 
to the prejudice of, her (the first wife), 
or with her (the second). The former 
view is taken by the leading modern 
exegetes, the latter by Victor Ant., 
Euthy., Theophy., and, among moderns, 
Ewald and Bleek. 

Vv. 13-16. Suffer the children (Mt. 
xix. 13-15, Lk. xviii. 15-17).—Ver. 13. 
παιδία as in Mt. Lk. has βρέφη = 
infants carried in arms. Note the use of 
the compound προσέφερον; elsewhere 
the simple verb. The word is commonly 
used of sacrifices, and suggests here the 
idea of dedication—aynrar, touch, 
merely, as if that alone were enough to 
bless ; prayer mentioned in Mt.—roie¢ 
προσφέρουσιν (Τ. R.), probably interprets 
the αὐτοῖς (W.H.) after ἐπετίμησαν.-- 
Ver. 14. ἠγανάκτησε, “was moved 
with indignation”’ (R. Ψ.) is too strong, 


410 


KATA MAPKON 


x. 


Θεοῦ: τς. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὃς ἐὰν ph δέξηται τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ 


Θεοῦ ὡς παιδίον, οὗ μὴ εἰσέλθη eis αὐτήν. 


35 


16. Καὶ ἐναγκαλισά- 


µενος αὐτά, τιθεὶς τὰς χεῖρας ἐπ᾽ αὐτά, ηὐλόγει αὖτά.ὶ 


17. Καὶ ἐκπορευομένου αὐτοῦ εἰς ὁδόν, προσδραμὼν εἷς καὶ 


γονυπετήσας αὐτὸν ἐπηρώτα αὐτόν, “΄Διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ, τί ποιήσω 


9 ‘ 27 , 35 
ἵνα ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω; 


“Ti µε λέγεις ἀγαθόν ; 


οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός, εἰ μὴ els, ὁ Θεός. 


18. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 
10. τὰς 


ἐντολὰς οἶδας, Mi μοιχεύσης' μὴ ΦονεύσηςΣ: pi κλέψης' μὴ 
ψευδοµαρτυρήσῃς' μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς" τίµα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν 


μητέρα.” 


a cf.Ch.xiv. πάντα ἐφυλαξάμην ἐκ νεότητός pou.” 


67. Lk. xx. 


ε 4 x lal ~ 
20. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς eitev® αὐτῷ, “ Διδάσκαλε, ταῦτα 


21. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς * ἐμβλέψας 


17; xxii.61. "αὐτῷ ἠγάπησεν αὐτόν, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Ev σοι 3 ὑστερεῖ: ὕπαγε, 
ὅσα ἔχεις πώλησον, καὶ δὸς τοῖς ὅ πτωχοῖς, καὶ ἕξεις θησαυρὸν ἐν 
1 Instead of τιθεις . . . ηυλογει αυτα ΦΒΟΙ;Δ have κατευλογει τιθεις τας χειρας 


επ. αντα (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 µη Φονευσης before µη µοιχευσης in BCA (W.H. text). 
3 For ο Se αποκ. ειπεν SBCA have ο δε edn. : 


4 ge in ΝΒΟΔ. 


‘was much displeased” (A. V.) is better, 
‘was annoyed ” is better still (*‘ ward un- 
willig,” Weizsacker).— pj κωλύετε, καὶ 
of T. R. before μὴ is much better left 
out: suffer them to come; donot hinder 
them; an expressive asyndeton.. This 
saying is the main point in the story for 
the evangelist, hence the imperfects in 
ver. 13. It is another lesson for the 
still spiritually crude disciples.—Ver. 
15 answers to Mt. xviii. 3. As Jesus 
gave several lessons on humility and 
kindred virtues, in Capernaum, here, and 
on the way to Jericho (x. 35 f.), it is not 
to be wondered at if the sayings spoken 
in the several lessons got somewhat 
mixed in the tradition. It does not 
greatly matter when they were uttered. 
The thing to be thankful for is their pre- 
servation.—Ver. 16. ἐναγκαλισάμενος, as 
in ix. 36. Jesus took each child in His 
arms, one by one, and blessed it: 
κατευλόγει, imperfect. The process 
would last a while, but Jesus would not 
soon weary in such work. The com- 
pound verb κατευλόγει (SQBCL, etc.), 
here only, has intensive force like 
καταφιλέω in Mt. xxvi. 49 (vide notes 
there and Maclear in Ο. G. Τ.). 

Vv. 17-27. Quest after eternal life 
(Με. xix. 16-30, Lk. xviii. 18-30).—Ver. 
17. ἐκπορευομένου a. εἷς ὁδὸν: the 
incident to be related happens as Jesus 
is coming out from some house into the 
highway, at what precise point on the 


5 BA al. omit τοις (W.H. in brackets). 


journey Mk. neither knows nor cares. 
The didactic significance of the story 
alone concerns him.—8.8dacKode ayabe : 
that the epithet ἀγαθός was really used 
by the man is highly probable. Vide on 
Mt.—Ver. 18. τί µε λέγεις ἄγαθόν: on 
the import of this question vide notes on 
Mt.—Ver. 19. The commandments of 
the second table enumerated are ex- 
pressed by subjunctives with μὴ, instead 
of future indicatives with ov. While Mt. 
has the supernumerary, “love thy neigh- 
bour,” Mk. has μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς, which 
probably has in view the humane law in 
Deut. xxiv. 14, 15, against oppressing or 
withholding wages from a hired servant ; 
a more specific form of the precept: 
love thy neighbour as thyself, and a 
most apposite reminder of duty as ad- 
dressed to a wealthy man, doubtless an 
extensive employer of labour. It should 
be rung in the ears of all would-be 
Christians, in similar social position, 
in our time: defraud not, underpay 
not.—Ver. 21. ἠγάπησεν α.: on the 
import of the statement in reference to 
the man vide on Mt. Jesus loved this 
man. Grotius remarks: Jesus loved not 
virtues only, but seeds of virtues (‘‘et 
semina virtutum”’). Field (Otium Nor.) 
renders “caressed”. Bengel takes 
ἐμβλέψας ἠγάπησεν as a ἓν διὰ δυοῖν, 
and renders, amanter aspexit = lovingly 
regarded him—év σε torepet. In Mk. 
Jesus, not the inquirer, remarks on the: 


15---27. 


οὐρανῷ : καὶ δεῦρο, ἀκολούθει por, ἄρας τὸν σταυρόν. | 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


4ΙΙ 


22. O δὲ 


στυγνάσας ἐπὶ τῷ λόγω ἀπῆλθε λυπούμενος' ἦν γὰρ ἔχων κτήματα 


ο 


πολλά. 23. Καὶ περιβλεψάμενος 


Ιησοῦς λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς 


αὐτοῦ, “Mas δυσκόλως οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν 


τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσελεύσονται. 
λόγοις αὐτοῦ. 


24. Οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ἐθαμβοῦντο ἐπὶ τοῖς 
Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς πάλιν ἀποκριθεὶς λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Τέκνα, 


πῶς "δύσκολόν ἐστι τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐπὶ τοῖς χρήµασιν 3 εἲς τὴν b here only. 


βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν. 


25. εὐκοπώτερόν ἐστι κάµηλον διὰ 


τῆς ὃ τρυμαλιᾶς tis? ῥαφίδος εἰσελθεῖν ἢ πλούσιον cis τὴν 


βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν. 


26. Οἱ δὲ περισσῶς ἐξεπλήσ- 


σοντο, λέγοντες πρὸς ἑαυτούςὸ “Kal τίς δύναται σωθῆναι;” 
27. Ἐμβλέψας δὲδ αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς λέγει, “Mapa ἀνθρώποις 
ἀδύνατον, ἀλλ᾽ οὗ παρὰ τῷἸ Θεῷ: πάντα γὰρ δυνατά ἐστι ὃ παρὰ 


1 αραςτ. σσ. is a gloss from Ch. viii. 34, omitted in ΝΒΟΡΔ. 


2 τους πεπ. 


- + + Χρηµασιν is a gloss wanting in SBA; vide below. 


Omission 


by similar ending (Alford) is abstractly possible. 
’ rys is found in B in both places (W.H. margin), but omitted in many uncials. 


4 διελθειν in some copies (W.H.). 
5 αυτον in NBCA. 


6 Omit δε SBCA. 


7 Omit τω NBCA. B omits the second τω at end of sentence (W.H. in brackets). 
8 εστι Omitted in ΡΟ al. ; more expressive without. 


lack; in Mt. the reverse is the fact: the 
man is conscious of his defect, an im- 
portant point in his spiritual condition. 
--δεῦρο, etc.: from the invitation to join 
the disciple band Weiss (Meyer) infers 
that the incident must have happened be- 
fore the circle of the Twelve was com- 
plete. He may have been meant to take 
the place of the traitor. The last clause 
in T. R. about the cross is an obvious 
gloss by a scribe dominated by religious 
commonplaces.—Ver. 22. στυγνάσας: 
in ΜΕ. xvi. 3, of the sky, here, of the face, « 
‘hutrovpevos, following, referring to the 
mind: with sad face and heavy heart. 
Vv. 23-27. The moral of the story given 
Sor the benefit of the disciples, περιβλε- 
apevos (iii. 5, 34), looking around, to see 
what impression the incident had made 
on the Twelve.—d@s = ἀληθῶς, Euthy. 
---πῶς δυσ., with what difficulty !—ra 
χρήματα, wealth collectively held by the 
rich class (Meyer).—Ver. 24. ἐθαμβοῖν- 
το, were οοπ{ουπάεἀ.---πάλιν ἀποκριθεὶς 
preparesus for repetition withunmitigated 
severity, rather than toning down, which 
is what we have in T. R., through the 
added words, τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐπὶ τοῖς 
χρήµασιν, suggesting an idea more 
worthy of a scribe than of Jesus; for it 
is not merely difficult but impossible for 


_ one trusting in riches to enter the King- 


dom. Yet this is one of the places 
where the Sin. Syriac agrees with the 
Τ. R.—Ver. 25. In this proverbial saying 
the evangelists vary in expression in 
reference to the needle and the needle- 
eye, though one might have looked for 
stereotyped phraseology in a proverb. 
The fact points to different Greek render- 
ings of a saying originally given in a 
Semitic tongue.—tpvpadtas, from τρύω, 
to rub through, so as to make a hole. 
According to Furrer, proverbs about the 
camel and the needle-eye, to express the 
impossible, are still current among the 
Arabs. E.g., ‘hypocrites go into paradise 
as easily as a camel through a needle- 
eye”; «Πε asks of people that they con- 
duct a camel through a needle-eye” 
(Wanderungen, p. 339).—Ver. 26. The 
disciples, amazed, ask: καὶ τίς δύναται 
σωθῆναι; τίς ἄρα, etc., in Mt. The καὶ 
resumes what has been said, and draws 
from it an inference meant to call its 
truth in question (Hoitz., H. C.) = who, 
in that case, can be saved ?—Ver. 27. 
This saying is given diversely in the 
three parallels; most pithily in Mt., and 
perhaps nearest to the original. For 


«πε meaning vide on Mt, 


Vv. 28-31. Peter’s question (Mt. xix. 


412 KATA MAPKON X. 


τῷ Θεῷ.' 28. Καὶ ἤρέξατο ὁ Πέτρος λέγειν] αὐτῷ, “'Ιδού, ἡμεῖς 
ἀφήκαμεν πάντα, καὶ ἠκολουθήσαμέν 3 σοι. 20. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 
"Ingots εἶπεν, “-᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὗδείς ἐστιν, ὃς ἀφῆκεν οἰκίαν, ἢ 
ἀδελφούς, ἢ ἀδελφάς, ἢ πατέρα, ἢ μητέρα, ἢ γυναῖκαιὃ ἢ τέκνα, 
ἢ ἀγρούς, ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ Kal® τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, 30. ἐὰν μὴ λάβη 
ἑκατονταπλασίονα νῦν ἐν τῷ "καιρῷ τούτῳ, οἰκίας καὶ ἀδελφοὺς 
καὶ ἀδελφὰς καὶ μητέρας Ἰ καὶ τέκνα καὶ ἀγρούς, μετὰ διωγμῶν, 
καὶ ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τῷ ἐρχομένω ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 31. πολλοὶ δὲ ἔσονται 


ς Rom. iii. 
26 ; viii. 18. 


πρῶτοι ἔσχατοι, καὶ οἱ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι.” 

32. ᾿ΗΣΑΝ δὲ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἀναβαίνοντες cis Ἱεροσόλυμα : καὶ ἦν 
προάγων αὐτοὺς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἐθαμβοῦντο, καὶ ἀκολουθοῦντες 
ἐφοβοῦντο. καὶ παραλαβὼν πάλιν τοὺς δώδεκα, ἤρξατο αὐτοῖς 
λέγειν τὰ μέλλοντα αὐτῷ συµβαίνειν' 33. “Om, ἰδού, ἀναβαίνομεν 


ς 


eis ἹἹεροσόλυμα, καὶ 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδοθήσεται τοῖς 


ἀρχιερεῦσι καὶ τοῖς γραμματεῦσι, καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτὸν θανάτω, 


1 λεγειν before ο Π. and without και before ηρξ. in SBCA. 


2 yxodovOynKkapev in BCD. 
3 For αποκ. . 
4 untepa η πατερα in BCA. 


. « ειπεν ΒΔ cop. have εφη ο |. 


> SBDA omit η Ύνναικα, which probably comes from Lk. 

6 και ενεκεν in SCDA (W.H. in brackets). 

7 So in BA, but $¢2CD have µητερα, a correction (W.H. margin). 

8 ot Se in SBCLA; not understood, therefore και substituted in late uncials, 


27-30, Lk. xviii. 28-30).—Ver. 28 in- 
troduces the episode without any con- 
necting word such as τότε in Mt. ἰδού 
betrays self-consciousness, also the fol- 
lowing ἡμεῖ Yet, with all his self- 
consciousness, Peter, in Mk.’s account, 
has not courage to finish his question, 
stopping short with the statement ot fact 
on which it is based = behold! we have 
left all and followed Thee ?—aoyxapev, 
aorist, refers to an act done once for all, 
ἠκολουθήκαμεν, to an abiding condition. 
—Ver. 29. Jesus, seeing Peter’s mean- 
ing, proceeds to give, first, a generous 
answer, then a word of warning. In the 
enumeration of persons and things for- 
saken, ‘“‘ wife”? is omitted in important 
MSS. (W.H.). The omission is true to 
the delicate feeling of Jesus. It may have 
to be done, but He would rather not say 
it—rod εὐαγγελίου: a gloss to suit 
apostolic times and circumstances.— 
Ver. 30. viv: the present time the 
sphere of compensation; ἑκατονταπλα- 
σίονα (Lk. viii. 8): the measure character- 
istically liberal ; 
natural qualification, seeing it is in this 


μετὰ διωγμῶν: the. 


world that the moral compensation takes 
place, yet not diminishing the value of the 
compensation, rather enhancing it, as a 
relish ; a foreshadowing this, perhaps a 
transcript, of apostolic experience.—Ver. 
31. On this apothegm vide on Mt. 
Vv. 32-34. Third prediction of the 
Passion (Mt. xx. 17-19, Lk. xviii. 31-34).— 
wVer. 32. eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, to Jerusalem | 
The fact that they were at last on the: 
march for the Holy City is mentioned to 
explain the mood and manner of Jesus.— 
προάγων: Jesus in advance, all the rest 
following at a respectful distance.— 
ἐθαμβοῦντο: the astonishment of the 
Twelve and the fear of others (ot ἀκολ. 
ἐφοβοῦντο) were not due to the fact that 
Jesus had, against their wish, chosen to 
go to Jerusalem in spite of apprehended 
danger (Weiss). These feelings must 
have been awakened by the manner of 
Jesus, as of one labouring under strong 
emotion. Only so can we account for 
the fear of the crowd, who were not, like 
the Twelve, acquainted with Christ’s 
forebodings of death. Memory and ex- 
pectation were both active at that 


L 
. 


28—4l. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 413 
καὶ παραδώσουσιν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἔθνεσι, 34. καὶ ἐμπαίξουσιν αὐτῷ, 

καὶ µαστιγώσουσιν αὐτόν, καὶ ἐμπτύσουσιν αὐτῷ,] καὶ ἀποκτενοῦσιν 

αὐτόν ' καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ hepa? ἀναστήσεται." 

35. Kat " προσπορεύονται αὐτῷ Ιάκωβος καὶ Ἰωάννης οἱ υἱοὶ ἆ here only, 
Ζεβεδαίου, λέγοντες,» ““Διδάσκαλε, θέλομεν ἵνα ὃ ἐὰν αἰτήσωμεν," 
Ἱποιήσῃς ἡμῖν. 36. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti θέλετε ποιῆσαί µεδ 
ὑμῖν; 37. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Ads ἡμῖν, ἵνα eis ἐκ δεξιῶν σου 6 
καὶ ets ἐξ εὐωνύμων cou’ καθίσωµεν ἐν τῇ δόξῃ σου. 38. Ὁ δὲ 
‘Ingots εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ''Οὐκ οἴδατε τί αἰτεῖσθε. δὈύνασθε πιεῖν τὸ 
ποτήριον ὃ ἐγὼ πίνω, καὶ ὃ τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζοµαι, βαπ- 
τισθῆναι;” 39. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῷ, ''Δυνάμεθα. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “TS μὲν ὃ ποτήριον ὃ ἐγὼ πίνω, πίεσθε: καὶ τὸ 
βάπτισμα 'Ὁὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζοµαι, βαπτισθήσεσθε: 40. τὸ δὲ καθίσαι ἐκ 
δεξιῶν µου καὶ ἐξ εὐωνύμων pou,!? οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸν δοῦναι, GAN’ ois. 


ε , 35 
ἠτοίμασται. 41. 


Καὶ ἀκούσαντες οἱ δέκα ἤρξαντο ἀγανακτεῖν 


1 εμπτυσονσιν in first place, µαστιγ. second, in $BCLA. 


2 wera τρεις ηµερας in SBCDLA. 
3 SBCDLA add αντω. 
5 For ποιησαι pe B has pe ποιησω. 


“SABCLA add σε. 
CD correct by omitting pe, ALAZ by 


changing into infinitive with accusative as in T.R. 


§ gov εκ δεξιων in NBCLA. 
7 εξ αριστερων (without σον) in BLA. 


84 in ΝΒΟΡΙΔ. 


* ev wanting in §BCLA. Τ.Κ. is a grammatical correction, 
10 η for καν, and pov after ευων. omitted, in $BDLA. Besides these ACE al. 


omit second pov. 


moment, producing together a high- 
strung state of mind: Peraea, John, 
baptism in the Jordan, at the beginning ; 
Jerusalem, the priests, the cross, at the 
end! Filled with the varied feelings 
excited by these sacred recollections and 
tragic anticipations, He walks alone by 
preference, step and gesture revealing 
what is working within and inspiring 
awe—‘‘muthig απά entschlossen,” 
Schanz; with “majesty and heroism,” 
Morison ; “tanto animo  tantaque 
alacritate,” Elsner; ‘‘more  intrepidi 
ducis,” Grotius. This picture of Jesus 
in advance on the way to Jerusalem is 
one of Mk.’s realisms.—Ver. 33. ὅτι 
ἰδοὺ, etc.: the third prediction has for 
its specialties delivery to the Gentiles 
(τοῖς ἔθνεσι), and an exact specification 
of the indignities to be endured: mock- 
ing, spitting, scourging. Jesus had been 
thinking of these things before He spoke 
of them; hence the excitement of His 


manner. 
Vv. 35-45. The sons of Zebedce (Mt. 


xx. 20-28), shuwing the comic side of the 
drama.—Ver. 35. In Mk., James and 
John speak for themselves: Διδάσκαλε 
θέλοµεν, etc. In Mt. the mother speaks 
for them.—Ver. 36. τί θέλετέ pe ποιήσω: 
this reading of B is accredited by its very 
grammatical peculiarity, two construc 

tions being confused together; an 
accusative (pe) followed, not as we expect 
by the infinitive, ποιῆσαι (T. Ε }, but by 
the subj. delib., ποιήσω.---ετ. 38. τὸ 
βάπτισμα: in Mk. there is a double 
symbolism for the Passion, a cup and a 
baptism; in Mt.’s true text only the 
former. The cupis an Old Testament 
emblem; the baptism not so obviously, 
yet it may rest on Ps. xlii. 7, lxix. 2, 
cxxiv. 4-5. The conception of Curistian 
baptism as baptism into death is Pauline 
(Rom. vi.).— Ver. 4ο. ἠτοίμασται 
stands alone in Mk. without the reference 
to the Father, which is in Mt.—Ver. 42. 
οἱ δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν, those who pass for, 
are esteemed as, rulers: ‘‘quos gentes 
habent et agnoscunt” (Beza); “απ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ Χ. 


414 


περὶ “laxdBou καὶ Ἰωάννου. 42. 6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς προσκαλεσάµενος 
αὐτοὺς ] λέγει αὐτοῖς, “΄Οἴδατε ὅτι οἱ δοκοῦντες ἄρχειν τῶν ἐθνῶν 
κατακυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν: καὶ ot μεγάλοι αὐτῶν κατεξουσιάζουσιν 
43. οὐχ οὕτω δὲ ἔσται ” ἐν ὑμῖν: GAN’ Gs ἐὰν θέλῃ γενέσθαι 
μέγας 5 ἐν ὑμῖν, ἔσται διάκονος ὑμῶν δ- 44. καὶ ὃς ἂν Oy ὑμῶν 


γενέσθαι ” πρῶτος, ἔσται πάντων δοῦλος: 45. καὶ γὰρ 6 


αὐτῶν. 


υἱὸς τοῦ © 
ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθε διακονηθῆναι, ἀλλὰ διακονῆσαι, καὶ δοῦναι τὴν 
ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ λύτρον ἀντὶ πολλῶν.” 

46. Καὶ ἔρχονται eis Ἱεριχώ καὶ ἐκπορευομένου αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ Ἱεριχώ, 
καὶ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὄχλου ἱκανοῦ, υἱὸς ὅ Τιµαίου Βαρτίμαιος 
ὁ τυφλὸς ἐκάθητο παρὰ τὴν ὁδὸν προσαιτῶν.» 47. καὶ ἀκούσας ὅτι 
"Ingots 6 Ναζωραῖός ὃ ἐστιν, ἤρξατο κράζειν καὶ λέγειν, “‘O vids? 
Δαβίδ, ᾿Ιησοῦ, ἐλέησόν pe.” 48. Καὶ ἐπετίμων αὐτῷ πὀλλοί, ἵνα 
σιωπῄήσηῃ' & δὲ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἔκραζεν, ““Υἱὲ Δαβίδ, ἐλέησόν µε.” 


49. Kat στὰς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτὸν φωνηθῆναι ὃ: καὶ φωνοῦσι τὸν 
50. Ὁ δὲ 


ἀποβαλὼν τὸ ἵμάτιον αὐτοῦ ἀναστὰς 1) ἦλθε πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν : 


τυφλόν, λέγοντες αὐτῷ, “Odpoe- ἔγειραι, φωνεῖ ce.” 


Σεστιν in NBCDLA Lat. vet. Vulg 
{εν νμιν ειναι in RBCLA. 


1 και προσκαλ. αυτους ο |. in ΝΒΟΡΙ.Δ. 
3 µεγας γεν. in $BCLA, also υµων διακ. 


5ΈΟΣ vos... 
παρα την οδον (Tisch., W.H.). 


προσαιτων SBLA have ο wos T. Β. τυφλος προσαιτης εκαθ. 


6 Ναζαρηνος in BLA. B places εστιν after Ίησους. 


7 we (for ο v.) in BCL. 


8 φωνησατε αντον in S{BCLA changed in Τ.Ε. into the more commonplace 


αντον Φωνηθηναι. 


9 εγειρε in SABCDLAZ. 


10 A tame substitute for αναπηδησας in S$BDLA, so characteristic of Mk. 


honorem habent imperandi” (Grotius). 
Some, ¢.g., Palairet, regard δοκοῦντες as 
redundant, and take the phrase in Mk. 
as = Mt.’s of ἄρχοντες. Kypke resolves 
it into ot ἐκ δόγµατός τινος ἄρχοντες = 
“qui constituti sunt ut imperent ”’.— 
Ver. 43. éorw (W.H.), is; the “is” 
not of actual fact, but of the ideal state 
of things.—Ver. 45. Vide on Mt. 

Vv. 46-52. Bartimaeus (Mt. xx. 29-34, 
Lk. xviii. 35-43).—Ver. 46. ἔρχονται, 
historical present for effect. Fericho an 
important place, and of more interest to 
the narrator; the last stage on the 
journey before arriving at Ferusalem 
(Weiss in Μεγετ).---ἐκπορευομένου a. : 
Jesus mentioned apart as the principal 
person, or as still going before, the 
disciples and the crowd mentioned also, 
as they have their part to play in the 
sequel, πορευοµένων understood.—ox. 
ἱκανοῦ : not implying that the erowd was 


of very moderate dimensions, but = a 
large crowd, as we say colloquially 
‘*pretty good’? when we mean “ very 
good”. This use of ἱκαγός probably 
belonged to the colloquial Greek of the 
period. Vide Kennedy, Sources of N. Τ. 
Greek, Ρ. 79.— vids T. B. Mk. knows 
the name, and: gives both name, Barti- 
maeus, and interpretation, son οἱ 
Timaeus.—Ver. 47. υἱὲ Δαβίδ: this in 
all three narratives, the popular name for 
Messiah.—Ver. 49. φωνήσατε, φωνοῦσι, 
φωνεῖ: no attempt to avoid monotony 
out of regard to style. It is the appro- 
priate word all through, to call in a loud 
voice, audible at a distance, in the open 
air (vide ix. 35).--θάρσει, ἔγειρε, φωνεῖ, 
courage, rise, He calls you; pithy, no 
superfluous words, just how they would 
speak.—Ver. 50. Graphic description 
of the beggar’s eager response—mantle 
thrown off, jumping to his feet, he 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


* 


42 —52. XI. 1—3. 


SU. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ “Inaods,) “Ti θέλεις ποιήσω σοί 2 ;” 
Ὁ δὲ τυφλὸς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ““PaBBovi, ἵνα ἀναβλέψω.” 52. Ὁ δὲ5 
3 A α 9 α «ες ε , , D 3 4 
Ingots εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ““Yraye> ἡ πίστις cou σέσωκέ σε. καὶ 
εὐθέως ἀνέβλεψε, καὶ ἠκολούθει τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ + ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ. 

ΧΙ. 1. ΚΑΙ ὅτε ἐγγίζουσιν eis Ἱερουσαλήμ,” εἰς Βηθφαγὴ καὶ 
Βηθανίαν ὃ πρὸς τὸ ὄρος τῶν ᾿Ελαιῶν, ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν 
αὐτοῦ, 2. καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, '΄ Ὑπάγετε eis τὴν κώµην τὴν κατέναντι 
con \ 5η > 3 πμ ο νὰ an , 
ὑμῶν " καὶ εὐθέως εἰσπορευόμενοι eis αὐτὴν εὑρήσετε πῶλον δεδεµένον, 
ἐφ᾽ ὃν οὐδεὶςῖ ἀνθρώπων κεκάθικεὃ: λύσαντες αὐτὸν ἀγάγετε.ὸ 


415 


3. καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ, Τί ποιεῖτε τοῦτο ; 


1 αντω ο I. ειπεν in SBCDLA. 


¢ 
εἴπατε, Ὅτι 10 6 κύριος 


* tt σοι θελεις ποιησω in $$BCLA, obviously preferable to the smooth reading in 


ὃ και ο l.in BLA cop. (W.H.). 


4 αυτω for τω |. in SABCDLA al. Lat. vet. Vulg. 
> Ἱερουσαλημ is not used in Mk. The true form here is Ἱεροσολυμα as in 


ἨΒΟΡΟΔΣ. 


δΏ vet. Lat. Vulg. have simply και εις Βηθανις which Tisch. adopts. 


The 


reading in T.R. is supported by SABCLAZ al. 
7 Add ουπω, following ουδεις in BLA; after ανθρωπων in NC, before ovders in KNE 


(W.H. order 1, Tisch. 2). 
8 εκαθισεν in SEBCLA. 


ὃλνσατε a. και Pepete in NBCLA. The Τ.Ε. conforms to Lk. 


10 Omit οτι with BA vet. Lat. 


comes, runs, to Jesus. Though blind 
he needs no guide (Lk. provides him 
with one); led by his ear.—Ver. 51. τί 
σοι θέλεις, etc.: what do you want: 
alms or sight ὃ---ῥαββονί: more respect- 
ful than Rabbi (here and in John xx. 16). 
—iva ἀναβλέψω: sight, of course, who 
would think of asking an alms of One 
who could open blind eyes! 

CHAPTER ΧΙ. ENTRY INTO JERUSA- 
LEM. OTHER INCIDENTS. Vv. I-II. 
The solemn entry (Mt. xxi. 1-11; Lk. 
xix. 29-44).—Ver. 1. It is first stated 
generally that they approach Jerusalem, 
then Bethphage and Bethany are named 
to define more exactly the whereabouts. 
Both villages named; partly because 
‘close together, partly because, while 
Bethphage was the larger and better 
known place, and therefore might have 
stood alone as an indication of locality, 
Bethany was the place where the colt 
was to be got.—Ver. 2. κατέναντι v., 
opposite you. This adverb (from κατά 
ἔναντι) is not found in Greek authors, but 
occurs frequently in Sept.—éq¢’ ὃν ovdeis 
«οὔπ. av. ἐκάθισεν : this point, that the colt 


had never been used, would seem of 
vital importance afterhand, from the 
Christian point of view, and one cannot 
wonder that it took a sure place in the 
tradition, as evinced by the narrative 
in Mk. followed by Lk. But it is per- 
missible to regard this as an expansion 
of what Jesus actually said. The idea 
underlying is that for sacred purposes 
only unused animals may be employed 
(vide Numb. xix. 2, 1 Sam. vi. 7).— 
λύσατε, φέρετε: aorist and present; the 
former denoting a momentary act, the 
latter a process.—Ver. 3. 6 κύριος a. x. 
ἔχει, the Master hathneed of him. Vide 
on this at Mt. xxi. 3.— Kal εὐθὺς, etc., and 
straightway He returneth him (the colt) 
again.—wadtw, a well-attested reading, 
clearly implies this meaning, 7.¢., that 
Jesus bids His disciples promise the 
owner that He will return the colt with- 
out delay, after He has had His use of 
it. So without hesitation Weiss (in 
Meyer) and Holtzmann (H. C.). Meyer 
thinks this a paltry thing for Christ to 
say, and rejects πάλιν as an addition 
due to misunderstanding. Biassed by 


416 KATA MAPKON χι. 


αὐτοῦ χρείαν ἔχει" καὶ εὐθέως αὐτὸν ἀποστελεῖ 1 ὧδε. 4. ᾿Απῆλθον 
δέ καὶ εὗρον τὸν Δ πῶλον δεδεµένον πρὸς τὴν ὃ θύραν ἔξω ἐπὶ τοῦ 
5. καί τινες τῶν ἐκεῖ ἑστηκότων 
6. οἱ δὲ εἶπον 
7. καὶ 


ἀμφόδου, καὶ λύουσιν αὗτόν. 
ἔλεγον αὐτοῖς, “Ti ποιεῖτε λύοντες τὸν πῶλον; 
αὐτοῖς καθὼς ἐνετείλατο” ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς: καὶ ἀφῆκαν αὐτούς. 
ἤγαγον © τὸν πῶλον πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἐπέβαλον © αὐτῷ τὰ ἵμάτια 
αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐκάθισεν em αὐτῷ. 8. πολλοὶ δὲδ τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτῶν 
ἔστρωσαν eis τὴν ὁδόν' ἄλλοι δὲ στοιβάδας ὃ ἔκοπτον 1 ἐκ τῶν 
δένδρων, καὶ ἐστρώννυον εἰς τὴν ὁδόν.! ο. καὶ ot προάγοντες καὶ 
οἱ ἀκολουθοῦντες ἔκραζον, λέγοντες,] “ Ὡσαννά: εὔλογημένος ὁ 


1 αποστελλει in very many uncials. The most important various reading is 
παλιν after αποστελλει in NBC*DLA al. Orig.; doubtless a true reading, though 


omitted for harmonistic reasons in many copies. 


παλιν a. (W.H. marg.). 
2 kat απηλθον in BLA. 


B places αυτον last, αποσ. 


3 BDL omit τον before πωλον (SCA have it, Tisch.), and BLA omit την beiore 


θυραν (in SCD, Tisch.). 
4 ειπεν in SEBCLA. 


 φερουσιν instead of ηγαγον (from parall.) in BLA. 
6 επιβαλλουσι in SBCDLA for επεβαλον, which conforms to ηγαγον. 


7 επ αντον in SBCDLA. 


8 kat πολλοι in NBCLA. 


® στιβαδας in most uncials (NBDLA, etc.). 


10 For εκοπτον ... 
1 Omit λεγοντες NBCLA. 


the same sense of decorum—‘“ below 
the dignity of the occasion and of 
the Speaker”—the Speaker’s Comm. 
cherishes doubt as to πάλιν, sheltering 
itself behind the facts that, while the 
MSS. which insert “‘again’”’ are gener- 
ally more remarkable for omissions than 
additions, yet in this instance they lack 
the support of ancient versions and early 
Fathers. I do not feel the force of the 
argument from decorum. It judges 
Christ’s action by a conventional stand- 
ard. Why should not Jesus instruct 
His disciples to say “‘ it will be returned 
without delay” as an inducement to 
lend it? Dignity! How much will have 
to go if that is to be the test of histori- 
city! There was not only dignity but 
humiliation in the manner of entering 
Jerusalem: the need for the colt, the use 
of it, the fact that it had to be borrowed 
all enter as elements in the lowly state 
of the Son of Man. On the whole sub- 
ject vide notes on Mt. This is another 
of Mk.’s realisms, which Mt.’s version 
obliterates. Field (Otium WNor.), often 
bold in his interpretations, here succumbs 


οδον (cf. Mt.) BLA have simply κοψαντες ex των αγρων. 


to the decorum argument, and is biassed 
by it against the reading πάλιν contained 
in so many important MSS. (vide above). 
—Ver. 4. ἀμφόδου (ἄμφοδον and -ος 
from ἀμφί and odds, here only in Ν. T.), 
the road round the farmyard. In Jer. 
Xvii. 27, Sept., it seems to denote some 
part of a town: ‘ the palaces of Jerusa- 
lem” (R. V.).—Vv. 5-6. Mk. tells the 
story very circumstantially: how the 
people of the place challenged their 
action ; how they repeated the message 
of Jesus; and the satisfactory result. Mt. 
(xxi. 6) is much more summary.—Ver. 8. 
στιβάδας (στιβάς from στείβω, to tread, 
hence anything trcdden, such as straw, 
reeds, leaves, etc.; here only in N. T.) ; 
“layers of leaves,” R. V., margin ; or 
layers of branches (κλάδους, Mt.) οἳ- 
tained, as Mk. explains, by cutting from 
the fields (κόψαντες ἐκ τ. Gyp@v).—orTor 
Bas (στοιβάδας, T. R.) is probably a cor- 
tupt form ΟΓστιβάς. Hesychius defines 
στιβάς as a bed of rods and green grass 
and leaves (ἀπὸ ῥάβδων καὶ χλωρῶν 
χόρτων στρῶσις, καὶ φύλλων).---Ψετ. 9. 
ot προάνοντες, those going before; pro- 


4—14. 


ἐρχόμενος ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


417 


1Ο. εὐλογημένη ἡ ἐρχομένη βασι- 


λεία ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου 1 τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Δαβίδ: Ὡσαννὰ ἐν τοῖς 


ὑψίστοις. 


ΙΙ. Καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς ἹἹεροσόλυμα 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, nai? eis 


τὸ ἱερόν: καὶ περιβλεψάµενος πάντα, ὀψίας ὃ ἤδη οὔσης τῆς Spas, 


ἐξῆλθεν cis Βηθανίαν μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα. 


12. Kai τῇ ἐπαύριον ἐξελθόντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ Βηθανίας, ἐπείνασε" 


13. καὶ ἰδὼν συκῆν µακρόθεν,' ἔχουσαν φύλλα, ἦλθεν εἰ dpa εὑρήσει 
τι» ἐν αὐτῇ : καὶ ἐλθὼν ἐπ᾽ αὐτήν, οὔδὲν εὗρεν εἰ μὴ Φύλλα: οὗ 6 


BY > 6 Uy 
γαρ ην καιρος " σύκων. 


“"Μηκέτι ἐκ σοῦ eis τὸν αἰῶνα ὃ μηδεὶς καρπὸν payou.” 


1 Omit this second εν ον. Κ. with NBCDLA. 


14. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 ᾿ΙησοῦςἸ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, 


Καὶ ἤκουον 


? Omit ο |. και with NBCDLA. 


*SCLA, Orig., have owe (Tisch., W.H., text, brackets), but BD and other 


uncials have οψιας. B omits της ωρας. 


* ato pak. in many uncials (NBD, εἰς.). 


ὅτι ενρησει in SBCLA. 


δο yap καιρος ουκ ην in SBCLA cop. syr. 


Το |. omit S$BCDLA; also in ver. 15. 


δεις τον arava before ex cov in SBCDLA. 


bably people who had gone out from the 
city to meet the procession.—Ver. 11. 
εἰσῆλθεν, etc.: the procession now 
drops out of view and attention is fixed 
on the movements of Jesus. He enters 
Jerusalem, and especially the temple, 
and surveys all (περιβλεψάμενος πάντα) 
with keenly observant eye, on the out- 
look, like St. Paul at Athens, not for the 
picturesque, but for the moral and re- 
ligious element. He noted the traffic 
going on within the sacred precincts, 
though He postponed action till the 
morrow. Holtzmann (H. C.) thinks that 
the περιβλεψάμενος πάντα implies that 
Jesus was a stranger to Jerusalem. But, 
as Weiss remarks (in Meyer), Mk. can- 
not have meant to suggest that, even 
if Jesus had never visited Jerusalem 
since the beginning of the public 
ministry. 

Vv. 12-14. The fig tree on the way 
(Mt. xxi. 18-19).—Ver. 12 tells how 
Jesus coming frori1 Bethany, where He 
had passed the night with the Twelve, 
felt hunger. This is surprising, con- 
sidering that He probably spent the 
night in the house of hospitable friends. 
Had the sights in the temple killed sleep 
and appetite, so that He left Bethany 
without taking any food ?—Ver. 13. εἰ 
apa, if in the circumstances; leaves there, 
creating expectation.—etpyoe: future 
indicative; subjunctive, more regular.— 
© γὰρ καιρὸς, etc., for it was not the 
season of figs. This in Mk. only. The 


proper season was June for the first-ripe 
figs. -One may wonder, then, how Jesus 
could have any expectations. But had 
He? Victor Ant. and Euthy. viewed 
the hunger as feigned. It is more reason- 
able to suppose that the hope of finding 
figs on the tree was, if not feigned, at 
least extremely faint. He might have a 
shrewd guess how the fact was, and yet 
go up to the tree as one who had a right 
to expect figs where there was a rich 
foliage, with intent to utilise it for a par- 
able, if He could not find fruit on it. In 
those last days the prophetic mood was 
on Jesusin a high degree, and His action 
would be only very partially understood 
by the Twelve.—Ver.14. Φάγοι: the op- 
tative of wishing with μὴ (µηκέτι), as in 
classic Greek (Burton, M. T., § 476). 
The optative is comparatively rare in the 
N. Τ.--ἤκουον : the disciples heard 
(what He said); they were not inob- 
servant. His manner would arrest atten- 
tion. The remark prepares for what is 
reported in νετ. 20; hence the imperfect. 

Vv. 15-19. Cleansing of the temple 
(Mt. xxi. 12-17, Lk. xix. 45-48). The 
state of things Jesus saw in the temple 
yesterday has been in His mind ever 
since: through the night watches in 
Bethany; in the morning, killing appetite ; 
on the way, the key to His enigmatical 
behaviour towards the fig tree.—Ver. 15. 
εἰς τὸ ἱερόν, into the temple, that is, the 
forecourt, the court of the Gentiles, — 
τοὺς π. καὶ τοὺς a., the sellers and the 


27 


418 


KATA MAPKON ΧΙ. 
οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 15. Καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ' καὶ εἰσελθὼν 
ὁ Ιησοῦς εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν ἤρξατο ἐκβάλλειν τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ dyo- 
ῥράζοντας 1 ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ' καὶ τὰς τραπέζας τῶν κολλυβιστῶν, καὶ τὰς 
καθέδρας -;ῶν πωλούντων τὰς περιστερὰς κατέστρεψε" 16. καὶ οὖκ 


ἥφιεν ἵνα τις διενέγκῃ σκεῦος διὰ τοῦ ἱεροῦ. 17. καὶ ἐδίδασκε, 


ς 


λέγων 2 αὐτοῖς, “Od γέγραπται, ΄ Ὅτι & οἶκός µου οἶκος προσευχῆς 


κληθήσεται πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν᾽; pets δὲ ἐποιήσατε ® αὐτὸν σπή- 
λαιον λῃστῶν. 18. Καὶ ἤκουσαν of γραμματεῖς καὶ ot ἀρχιερεῖς,' 
καὶ ἐζήτουν πῶς αὐτὸν ἀπολέσουσινὅ: ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ αὐτόν, ὅτι 
was 6 6 ὄχλος ἐξεπλήσσετο ἐπὶ τῇ διδαχῆ αὐτοῦ. 

19. Καὶ Ste? ὀψὲ ἐγένετο, ἐξεπορεύετο  ἔξω τῆς πόλεως. 20. 
Καὶ pot παραπορευόµενοι,’ εἶδον τὴν συκῆν ἐξηραμμένην ἐκ ῥιζῶν. 


21. καὶ ἀναμνησθεὶς 6 Πέτρος λέγει αὐτῷ, “ Ῥαββί, ἴδε, ἡ συκῆ ἣν 


1 τους before ayop. in ΝΒΟΙ, al. 


B omits αυτοις. 


2 For λεγων SSBCLA have και ελεγε. 
3 πεποιηκατε in BLA (Tisch., W.H.). 
5 απολεσωσιν in SABCDL, εἰς. 
7 erav in NBCLA33. 

9 wapamw. πρωι in $BCDLA 33. 


buyers: article before both (not so in 
Mt.), both put in the pillory as alike 
evil in their practice.—Ver. 16. ἥφιεν : 
vide i. 34. The statement that Jesus 
did not allow any one to carry anything 
(σκεῦος, Lk. viii. 16) through the temple 
court is peculiar to Mk. It does not 
point to any attempt at violent pro- 
hibition, but simply to His feeling as to 
the sacredness of the place. He could 
not bear to see the temple court made a 
bypath or short cut, not to speak of the 
graver abominations of the mercenary 
traffic He had sternly interrupted. In this 
feeling Jesus was at one with the Rabbis, 
at least in their theory. ‘‘ What reverence 
is due to the temple? That no one go 
into the mountain of the house (the 
court of the Gentiles) with his staff, 
shoes, purse, or dust on his feet. Let no 
one make a crossing through it, or 
degrade it into a place of spitting” 
(Babyl. Jevamoth, in Lightfoot, ad loc.). 
—Ver. 17. ἐδίδασκε covers more than 
what He said just then, pointing to a 
course of teaching (cf. ver. 18 and Lk. 
xix. 47). Here again we note that while 
Mt. speaks of a healing ministry in the 
temple (xxi. 14) Mk. gives prominence to 
teaching. Yet Mt. gives a far fuller 
report of the words spoken by Jesus 
during the last week.—waor τοῖς 
Ἄνεσιν, to all the Gentiles, as in Is. lvi. 


6 αρχ. before γραμ. in S$BCDLA al, 
ὅπας yap in SBCA. 


8 BA have εξεπορευοντο (W.H.., text, brackets). 


7, omitted in the parallels; very suitable 
in view of the fact that the traffic went 
on in the court of the Gentiles. A fore- 
shadowing of Christian universalism.— 
πεποιήκατε, ye have made it and it now 
is.—Ver. 18. πῶς, the purpose to get 
rid of Jesus fixed, but the how puzzling 
because of the esteem in which He was 
held.—Ver. 19. ὅταν (ὅτε, Τ.Ε.) implies 
repetition of the action. We have here av 
with the indicative instead of the optative 
without ἄν as in the classics. Field 
(Ot. Nor.) regards ὅταν ὀψὲ ἐγένετο as a 
solecism due probably to Mk. himself 
(as in iii. 11, ὅταν ἐθεώρουν), and holds 
that the connection in Mk.’s narrative is 
decidedly in favour of a single action 
instead of, as in Lk., a daily practice. 
Vv. 20-25. The withered fig tree and 
relative conversation (ME: xxi. 20-22).— 
Ver. 20. παραπορευόµενοι, passing by 
the fig tree (on the way to Jerusalem 
next morning).—mpwt: the position of 
this word after παραπ., instead of before 
as in T.R., is important. It gives it 
emphasis as suggesting that it was in 
the clear morning light that they noticed 
the state of the tree. It might have 
been in the same condition the previous 
evening, but it would be dark when they 
passed the spot.—Ver. 21. ἀναμνησθεὶς, 
remembering (what the Master had said 
the previous morning).—é Πέτρος: 


r15—28. EYAITEAION 

22. Kal ἀποκριθεὶς Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὗτοῖς, 
“«Ἔχετε πίστιν Θεοῦ. 23. ἀμὴν yap! λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ 
ὄρει τούτω, ρθητι, καὶ βλήθητι cis τὴν θάλασσαν, καὶ μὴ διακριθῇ 
ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ πιστεύσῃ ὅτι ἃ λέγει3 γίνεται: ἔσται 
24. διὰ τοῦτο λέγω ὑμῖν, Πάντα ὅσα ἂν 


κατηράσω ἐξήρανται.” 


αὐτῷ ὃ ἐὰν clin? 
προσευχόµενοι ΄ αἰτεῖσθε, πιστεύετε ὅτι λαμβάνετε,» καὶ ἔσται ὑμῖν. 
25. Καὶ ὅταν στήκητε ὃ προσευχόµενοι, ἀφίετε εἴ τι ἔχετε κατά τινος * 
ἵνα καὶ 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν 6 ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς Api ὑμῖν τὰ παραπτώματα 
ὑμῶν. 26. ei δὲ ὑμεῖς οὐκ ἀφίετε, οὐδὲ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς 
οὐρανοῖς ἀφήσει τὰ παραπτώματα ὑμῶν." 7 

27. ΚΑΙ έρχονται πάλιν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ' καὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ περι- 
πατοῦντος αὐτοῦ, ἔρχονται πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς 
καὶ ot πρεσβύτεροι, 28. καὶ λέγουσιν ὃ αὐτῷ, “Ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ 
ταῦτα ποιεῖς; καὶ τίς σοι τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἔδωκεν, 10 ἵνα ταῦτα 


1 yap omitted in NBD. 


419 


2 For πιστευση οτι a Acyes ELA have πιστενη οτι ο λαλει (Tisch., W.H.), 


3 Omit 0 εαν ειπη NNBCDLA. 


* For οσα αν προσευχοµενοι SBCDLA have ova προσευχεσθεκαι (Tisch., W.H.) 
5 ehaBere in NBCLA. Τ.Ε. is a correction. 

ὃστηκετε in ΟΡ, (Tisch., W.H.), but B has στηκητε. 

7 Ver. 26 is omitted in S$BLA (Tisch., W.H.). Weiss thinks it has fallen out by 


similar ending. 
8 SBCLA have ελεγον. 
δη in NBLA. 


spokesman as usual; the disciples 
generally in Mt.—Ver. 22. έχετε πίστιν, 
have faith. The thoughts of Jesus here 
take a turn in a different direction to 
what we should have expected. We 
look for explanations as to the real 
meaning of an apparently unreasonable 
action, the cursing of a fig tree. Instead, 
He turns aside to the subject of the faith 
necessary to perform miraculous actions. 
Can it be that the tradition is at fault 
here, connecting genuine words of the 
Master about faith and prayer with a 
comparatively unsuitable occasion? 
Certainly much of what is given here is 
found in other connections—ver. 23 in 
Mt. xvii. 20, Lk. xvii. 6; ver. 24 in Mt. 
vii. 7, Lk. xi. 9: ver. 25 in Mt. xviii. 35; 
of course in somewhat altered form. 
Mk. seems here to make room for some 
important words of our Lord, as if to 
compensate for neglect of the didache 
which he knew to be an important 
feature in His ministry, doing this, how- 
ever, as Meyer remarks, by way of 
thoughtful redaction, not by mere 


λεγονσι conforms to ερχονται in ver. 27. 
W εδωκεν before την εξ. τ. in NBCLA. 


random insertion.—miorw Θεοῦ, faith in 
God, genitive objective as in Rom. iii. 22 
and Heb. vi. 2 (βαπτισμῶν διδαχὴν).--- 
Ver. 24. ἐλάβετε: this reading (NSBCLA) 
Fritzsche pronounces absurd. But its 
very difficulty as compared with λαμβά- 
vere (T.R.) guarantees its genuineness. 
And it is not unintelligible if, with 
Meyer, we take the aorist as referring to 
the divine purpose, or even as the aorist 
of immediate consequence, as in John 
xv. 6 (ἐβλήθη). So De Wette, vide 
Winer, sec. xl. 5 b. 

Vv. 27-33. By what authority ? (Mt. 
xxi, 23-27, Lk, xx. 1-8).—Ver. 27. πάλιν, 
again, for the third time: on the day of 
arrival, on the day of the temple cleans- 
ing, and on this day, the event of which 
is the questioning as to authority.— 
περιπατοῦντος αὐτοῦ, while He is walk- 
ing about, genitive absolute, instead of 
accusative governed by πρὸς; probably 
simply descriptive (Schanz) and not im- 
plying anything offensive in manner— 
walking as if He were Lord of the place 
(Kloster.); nor, on the other hand, meant 


420 


Σ Omit αποκριθεις SBCLA 33. 


KATA MAPKON XI. 29—33. ΧΙΙ. 


ποιῇς; 29. Ὁ δὲ “Ingots ἀποκριθεὶς 1 εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “΄Ἐπερωτήσω 
ὑμᾶς κἀγὼ ” ἕνα λόγον, καὶ ἀποκρίθητέ por, καὶ ἐρῶ ὑμῖν ἐν ποίᾳ 
ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα mod. 30. Τὸ βάπτισμα Ἰωάννου ἓ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἦν, ἢ 
ἐξ ἀνθρώπων; ἀποκρίθητέ μοι. 31. Καὶ ἐλογίζοντο” πρὸς έαυ- 
τούς, λέγοντες, “Edy εἴπωμεν, “Ef οὐρανοῦ, ἐρεῖ, Atari οὖν οὐκ 
ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; 32. GAN ἐὰν ὅ εἴπωμεν, "EE ἀνθρώπων, ἐφο- 
βοῦντο τὸν λαόν, ἅπαντες γὰρ εἶχον τὸν Ἰωάννην, ὅτι ὄντως Ἰ 
προφήτης ἦν. 33. καὶ ἀποκριθέντε λέγουσι τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ,δ “ Odx 
οἴδαμεν” Καὶ ὁ ᾽Ιησοῦς ἀποκριθεὶς ὃ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Odd ἐγὼ 
λέγω ὑμῖν ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα mod.” 

XII. 1. ΚΑΙ ἤρέατο αὐτοῖς ἐν παραβολαϊῖς λέγειν,1Ό ““᾽Αμπελῶνα 
ἐφύτευσεν ἄνθρωπος, καὶ περιέθηκε φραγµόν, καὶ ὥρυξεν ὑπολήνιον, 
καὶ ᾠκοδόμησε πύργον, καὶ ἐξέδοτο 11 αὐτὸν γεωργοῖς, καὶ ἀπεδήμησε. 
2. καὶ ἀπέστειλε πρὸς τοὺς γεωργοὺς τῷ καιρῷ δοῦλον, ἵνα παρὰ 


1 καγω (from parall.) omitted in BCLA. 


Στο before |. in $BCDLA 33. 
* Omit εαν SABCLA. Vide below. 
7 οντως οτι in BCL. 

5 Omit αποκριθεις SEBCLA 33. 


4 διελογιζοντο in BCDLA. 


δοχλον in NBC (W.H.). 
8 tw |. λεγουσι in RBCLA 33. 
10 λαλειν in BLA. 


1 εξεδετο in S$ABCL, changed into the more correct εξεδοτο (T.R.). 


to convey the idea that Jesus was giving 
no fresh cause of offence, simply walking 
about (Weiss).—Ver. 28. va ταῦτα 
ποιῇς: ἵνα with subjunctive after 
ἐξουσίαν instead of infinitive found in 
ii. το, iii. 15.—Ver: 29. The grammatical 
structure of this sentence, compared 
with that in Mt. xxi. 24, is crude—xai 
ἀποκρίθητέ pot instead of ὃν ἐὰν εἴπητέ 
pot. It is colloquial grammar, the 
easy-going grammar of popular con- 
versation.—éva λόγον, vide at Mt. xxi. 
24.—Ver: 30. ἀποκρίθητέ pot, answer 
me; spoken in the confident tone of one 
who knows they cannot and will not try. 
—WVv. 31-32 give their inward thoughts 
as divined by Jesus. Their spoken 
answer was a simple οὐκ οἴδαμεν (ver. 
33).—Ver. 32. ἀλλὰ εἴπωμεν, ἐξ ἀνθρώ- 
πων: = but suppose we say, from men ? 
---ἐφοβοῦντο τὸν ὄχλον. Here Mk. 
thinks for them instead of letting them 
think for themselves as in Mt. (ver. 26, 
φοβούμεθα) -- —they were afraid of the 
multitude.—a@wavres yap, etc.: here 
again the construction is somewhat 
crude—'lwavvny by attraction, object of 
the verb εἶχον instead of the subject of 
ἦν, and ὄντως by trajection separated 
from the verb it qualifies, ἦν, giving this 
sense: for all held John truly that he 


was a prophet = for all held that John 
was indeed a prophet. . 

CHAPTER XII. A PARABLE AND 
Sunpry CaprTious QuESTIONS.—Vv. 
1-12. Parable of the wicked vinedressers 
(Mt. xxi. 33-46, Lk. xx. 9-19).—Ver. 1. 
ἐν παραβολαῖς: the plural may be used 
simply because there are more parables 
than one even in Mk., the main one and 
that of the Rejected Stone (vv. 10, 11), 
but it is more probably generic = in 
parabolic style (Meyer, Schanz, Holtz., 
H. C.). Jesus resumed (ἤρξατο) this 
style because the circumstances called 
forth the parabolic mood, that of one 
“whose heart is chilled, and whose 
spirit is saddened by a sense of loneli- 
ness, and who, retiring within himself, 
by a process of reflection, frames for his 
thoughts forms which half conceal, half 
reveal them ”—The Parabolic Teaching 
of Christ, p. 20.---ἀμπελῶνα: a vineyard, 
the theme suitably named Πτςί.---ἄἅμπελος 
is the usual word in Greek authors, but 
Kypke cites some instances of ἀμπελὼν 
in late authors.—tmoAyviov (here only), 
the under vat of a wine press, into which 
the juices trampled out in the ληνὸς 
flowed.—eééSero (W.H.), a defective 
form, as if from δίδω. Cf. ἀπέδετο, 
Heb. xii, 16.—Ver. 2. τῷ καιρῷ: at 


ος ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

τῶν γεωργῶν λάβῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ καρποῦ] τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος: 3. ot δὲ 3 
καὶ πάλιν 
᾽ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἄλλον δοῦλον" κἀκεῖνον λιθοβολήσαντες 5 
5. καὶ πάλιν * ἄλλον 
᾽ἀπέστειλε" κἀκεῖνον ἀπέκτειναν' καὶ πολλοὺς ἄλλους, τοὺς ὅ μὲν 


λαβόντες αὐτὸν ἔδειραν, καὶ ἀπέστειλαν κενόν. 4. 
ἐκεφαλαίωσαν, καὶ ἀπέστειλαν ἠτιμωμένον.Σ 
δέροντες, τοὺς 5 δὲ ἀποκτείνοντε. 6. ἔτιδ οὖν ἕνα υἱὸν ἔχων 
ἀγαπητὸν αὐτοῦ, ἀπέστειλε καὶ αὐτὸν πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἔσχατον,ὃ λέγων, 
ow “~ 

Ότι ἐντραπήσονται τὸν υἱόν pou. 7. ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ot γεωργοὶ εἶπον 
: - a 

πρὸς éautous,” Ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ κληρονόμος: δεῦτε, ἀποκτείνωμεν 


421 


> , ‘ ε ~ » ε ΄ 
αὐτόν, καὶ ἡμῶν ἔσται ἡ κληρονοµία. 
ἀπέκτειναν, καὶ ἐξέβαλον ὃ ἔξω τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος. 


ὁ κύριος τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος ; 
καὶ δώσει τὸν ἀμπελῶνα ἄλλοις. 
ἀνέγνωτε; 
sis κεφαλὴν γωνίας. 


1 των καρπων in NBCLA 33. 


8. καὶ λαβόντες αὐτὸν 


ϱ. τί οὖν ὃ ποιήσει 


ἐλεύσεται καὶ ἀπολέσει τοὺς γεωργούς, 
1ο. Οὐδὲ τὴν γραφὴν ταύτην 
ἑλίθον, ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη 
II. παρὰ Κυρίου ἐγένετο αὕτη, καὶ ἔστι 


2 και for οι δε in NBDLA 33. 


3 S8BDLA 33 omit λιθοβολησαντες; NBL have εκεφαλιωσαν; and for καν 


απεστειλαν ητιµωµενον, NBL have και ητιµασαν (so also DA, but with varying 
spelling of verb). λιθοβολησαντες comes from Mt. 


4 Omit παλιν SBCDLA 33. 


5 ous in both places $$BLA. D has ους in first, αλλους in second place. 


6 For ετι ow.. 
εσχατον προς αυτους with BLA. 
7 προς εαν. ειπαν in ΔΝΒΟΙ.Δ 33. 


. εσχατον read ett ενα ειχεν νιον αγαπ. απεστειλεν αντον 


8 ΑΦΒΟ place αυτον after απεκτειναν and insert another αντον after εξεβαλον. 
Ρ 


° Omit ουν BL cop. 


the season of fruit, or at the time agreed 
on; the two practically coincident.— 
δοῦλον: a servant, one at a time, three 
in succession, then many grouped 
together, and finally the son. In Mt. 
first one set of servants are sent, then a 
larger number, then the son.—amé τῶν 
καρπῶν : a part of the fruits, rent paid in 
kind, a share of the crop.—Ver. 4. 
ἐκεφαλί (al, Τ.Ε.) avav: ought to mean, 
summed up (κεφάλαιον, Heb. viii. 1 = 
the crown of what has been spoken), 
but generally taken to mean ‘‘ smote on 
the head” (‘‘in capite vulneraverunt,” 
Vulg.). A “veritable solecism,” Meyer 
(*“Mk. confounded κεφαλαιόω with 
xehadife ”). Field says: ‘‘ We can only 
conjecture that the evangelist adopted 
ἐκεφαλαίωσαν, a known word in an un- 
known sense, in preference to ἐκεφάλ- 
ωσαν, of which both sound and sense 
were unknown”.—Ver. 5. πολλοὺς 
ἄλλους, many others. The construction 
is very loose. We naturally think of 


πολ. GA. as depending on ἀπέστειλεΞ 
he sent many others, and possibly that 
was really what the evangelist had in his 
mind, though the following participles, 
δέροντες ἀποκτέννοντες, suggest a verb, 
having for its subject the agents these 
participles refer to = they maltreated 
many others, beating some and killing 
some. So most recent writers. Vide 
Buttmann, Ν. Τ. G., p. 293. Elsner sug- 
gests ἀπεσταλμένους after πολλ. GAA. = 
and many others, sent, they either beat 
or slew.—Ver. 8. Mk. says: the son and 
heir they killed and cast out of the vine- 
yard. Mt. and Lk. more naturally, as 
it seems: they cast out and killed. We 
must understand Mk. to mean cast out 
dead (Meyer, Weiss, Schanz), or with 
Grotius we must take καὶ ἐξέβαλον as = 
éxBAnOévta.—Ver. 11. παρὰ κυρίον, 
etc., from or through the Lord it (the 
rejected stone) became this very thing 
(αὕτη), viz., the head of the corner— 
κεφαλὴ yevias.—Ver. 12. καὶ ἐφοβή- 


422 


KATA MAPKON XII. 
θαυμαστὴ ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς ἡμῶν.” 
καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν τὸν ὄχλον: ἔγνωσαν γὰρ ὅτι πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν 
παραβολὴν εἶπε": καὶ ἀφέντες αὐτὸν ἀπῆλθον. 

13. Καὶ ἀποστέλλουσι πρὸς αὐτόν τινας τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ τῶν 
Ἡρωδιανῶν, ἵνα αὐτὸν ἀγρεύσωσι λόγω. 14. οἱ δὲ] ἐλθόντες 
λέγούσιν αὐτῷ, ““Διδάσκαλε, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀληθὴς cf, καὶ οὗ µέλει 
σοι περὶ οὐδενός : οὗ γὰρ βλέπεις eis πρόσωπον ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπ᾽ 
ἀληθείας τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ διδάσκεις. 
δοῦναι 2 ἢ οὔ; 


12. Καὶ ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν κρατῆσαι, 


” ὺ , 

ἔξεστι κῆνσον Καίΐσαρι 
15. δῶμεν, ἢ μὴ δῶμεν; 
τὴν ὑπόκρισιν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti µε πειράζετε; φέρετέ por δηνάριον, 


Ὁ δὲ εἰδὼς αὐτῶν 


ἵνα i8w.” 
— αὕτη καὶ ἡ ἐπιγραφή ; 


ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ 


Καίσαρι, καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Oca.” 


16. Οἱ δὲ ἤνεγκαν. 
Οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “ Καίσαρος.” 


Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “ Tivos ἡ εἰκὼν 
17. Καὶ 


"Ingots εἶπεν αὐτοῖςὃ “'᾿Απόδοτε τὰ Καίσαρος 


a - 
Καὶ ἐθαύμασαν ὅ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ. 


18. Καὶ ἔρχονται Σαδδουκαῖοι πρὸς αὐτόν, οἵτινες λέγουσιν 


1 και for οι δε in SBCDLA 33. 


Έδουναι before κηνσον in $BCLA. For κηνσον D has επικαιφαλαιονε 


3 For και αποκ. . .. 


αυτοις B has simply ο δε |. ειπεν. 


“7a Κ. αποδοτε K. in $BCLA. T.R. conforms to Mt. 


δ εξεθαυμαἷον in QB. T.R. = Mt. 


θησαν: xalis to all intents adversative 
here, though grammarians deny that it 
is ever so used (vide Winer, sec. liii. 3 b) 
= they sought to lay hold of Him, but 
they feared the people.—éyvecay refers 
tothe Sanhedrists (Weiss, Holtz.), not to 
the ὄχλος (Meyer). It gives a reason at 
once for their desire to lay hold of Jesus, 
and for their fear of the people. They 
must be careful so to act as not to appear 
to take the parable to themselves, while 
they really did so. 

Vv. 13-17. Tribute to Caesar (Mt. 
xxii. 15-22, Lk. xx. 20-26).—Ver. 13. 
τινὰς: according to Mt. the representa- 
tives of the Pharisees were disciSles, not 
masters; a cunning device in itself. 
Vide on Mt. xxii. 16.---ἀγρεύσωσι (here 
only in N.T.), that they might Aunt or 
catch Him, like a wild animal. Mt.’s ex- 
pression, παγιδεύσωσι, equaliy graphic. 
Lk. avoids both.—Aédy: either, their 
question, or His reply ; the one involves 
the other.—Ver. 14. The flattering 
speech is differently and more logically 
(Schanz) given in Mt. Vide notes there 
on the virtues specif.ed.—éeorvwy, etc. : 
the question now put, and in two forms 
in Mk. First, as in Mt., is it lawful, 
etc, ; second, in the added words, δῶμεν 
ἢ μὴ δῶμε; These have been dis- 


tinguished as the theoretical and the 
practical form of the question respectively 
(Meyer, Weiss, Schanz), but there is no 
real difference. Yet it is not idle re- 
petition. The second question gives 
urgency tothe matter. They speak as 
men who press for an answer for their 
guidance (Holtz., H. C.).—Ver. 15. 
δηνάριον: instead of Mt.’s νόμισμα τοῦ 
κήνσου ; as a matter of fact the denarius 
was the coin of the tribute.—iva ἴδω, 
that I may see: as if He needed to study 
the matter, a touch of humour. The 
question was already settled by the 
existence of a coin with Caesar’s image 


on it. This verb and the next, ἤνεγκαν, 
are without object; laconic style.— 
Ver. τ7. Christ’s reply is given here 


very tersely =the things of Caesar 

render to Caesar, and those of God to 

God.—éfeBavpaloy: the compound, in 

place of Mt.’s simple verb, suggests the 

idea of excessive astonishment, though © 
we must always allow for the tendency 

in late Greek to use compounds. Here 

only in N. T., occasionally in Sept. 

Vv. 18-27. The resurrection question 
(Mt. xxii. 23-33, Lk. xx. 27-30).—Ver. 19. 
The case is awkwardly stated here as 
compared with Mt., though Lk. retains 
the awkwardness = if the brother of any 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


12---26. 423 
ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι: καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν] αὐτόν, λέγοντες, 19. “Διδάσ- 
καλε, Μωσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν, ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ, καὶ 
καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα, καὶ τέκνα μὴ ἀφῇ.; ἵνα λάβῃ 6 ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ 
τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ. καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ : 
20. ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν: καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλαβε γυναῖκα, καὶ ἀποθ- 
νῄσκων οὐκ ἀφῆκε σπέρμα 21. καὶ 6 δεύτερος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, καὶ 
ἀπέθανε, καὶ οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀφῆκε σπέρµα”: καὶ 6 τρίτος ὡσαύτως" 
ἐσχάτη ® 
οὖν ” ἀναστάσει, ὅταν 


22. καὶδ ἔλαβον αὐτὴν οἱ ἑπτά, καὶ οὐκ ἀφῆκαν σπέρμα.» 
πάντων ἀπέθανε καὶ ἡ Ὑυνή. 23. ἐν 
8 τίνος αὐτῶν ἔσται γυνή; 


~ 


5 A 3” 22s 
ot γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν 
24. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν adtois,® “Od διὰ 


ἀναστῶσι, 
γυναῖκα. 
τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε, μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφάς, μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ Θεοῦ; - 
25. ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν, οὔτε γαµίσκονται,ὸ 

> > ee Πα 3ψ ο Lal 9 cal Αα. 9 - - 

GAN εἰσὶν ὡς ἄγγελοι ot ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς. 26. περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν, 
ὅτι ἐγείρονται, οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωσέως, ἐπὶ τῆς Ἡ 
βάτου, ὡς 12 εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 Θεός, λέγων, ‘Ey 6 Θεὸς “ABpadp, καὶ 


1 επηρωτων in SBCDLA 33. Τ.Ε. = parall. 
5 Omit αντον NBCLA, 
. σπερµα SBCLA 33 have µη καταλιπων σ. 


2 un αφη τεκνον in BLA. 
4 For και ovde . . 
> For και ελαβον . . 
6 For εσχατη . . - Ύννη read with BCLA 33 εσχατον και η γννη απεθανεν. 
7 Omit ovwy NBCLA, 


8 The oldest uncials omit οταν αναστωσι, which may, as Weiss suggests, have 
fallen out by similar ending (αναστασει) (Tisch. inserts, W.H. omit). 


9 For και . . . αυτοις read εφη αντοις ο |. with RBCLA 33. 
10 γαμιζονται in SBCLA (γαµιζουσι Ὦ). 

11 τον in $ABCLA al. της in D (= Lk.). 

12 πως in NBCLA. as in D, al. 


. σπερµα SBCLA 33 have και οι επτα ουκ αφηκαν σπερµα. 


one die, and leave a wife, and leave not due, in turn, to ignorance of Scripture 


children, let his (the brother’s) brother 
take his wife and raise up seed to his 
brother. Mk. avoids the word ἐπιγαμ- 
Βρεύσει (in Mt.).— Ver. 2ο: abrupt 
statement of the case, without connect- 
ing particle, and ἑπτὰ placed first for 
emphasis = seven brothers there were (in 
a case supposed, or pretendedly real, 
wap’ ἡμῖν, Mt.).—Ver. 23. τίνος αὐτῶν, 
etc., of which of them shall she be the 
wife ? (γυνή, without the article, vide notes 
on Mt.).—Ver. 24. οὐ πλανᾶσθε, do ye 
not err? not weaker but stronger than a 
positive assertion: ‘* pro vehementi affir- 
matione,”’ Grotius.—8.a τοῦτο usually 
refers to something going before, and it 
may do so here, pointing to their question 
as involving ignorant presuppositions 
tegarding the future state, an ignorance 


teaching and the power of God. But it 
is more natural to connect it with the 
following clause, as in cases when the 
expression precedes ὅτι, ἵνα, ὅταν, etc., 
for μὴ εἰδότες is = ὅτι οὐκ οἴδατε. So De 
Wette and others, vide Winer, sec. xxiii. 5. 
—Ver. 26. ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μ.: a general 
reference to the Pentateuch, the follow- 
ing phrase, ἐπὶ τοῦ Barov, supplying a 
more definite reference to the exact place 
in the book, the section relating to the 
bush. ‘At the bush,” z.¢., Ex. iii., 
similarly reference might be made to 
Ex. xv., by the title: ‘“‘at the song of 
Moses”’.—Bdros is masculine here ac- 
cording to the best reading ; feminine in 
Lk. xx. 37. The feminine is Hellenistic, 
the masculine Attic. Vide Thayer’s 
Grimm. The word occurs in Aristo- 


424 ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XII, 
5) Θεὸς Ἰσαάκ, καὶ 6! Θεὸς Ιακώβ; 27. Οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ Σ Θεὸς νεκρῶν, 
ἀλλὰ Θεὸς > ζώντων: ὑμεῖς οὖν * πολὺ πλανᾶσθε. 

28. Καὶ προσελθὼν ets τῶν Ὑραμματέων, ἀκούσας αὐτῶν συζητούν- 
των, εἰδὼς ὅτι καλῶς αὐτοῖς ἀπεκρίθη,» ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτόν, “Nota 
ἐστὶ πρώτη πασῶν ἐντολή 5,” 29. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπεκρίθη atta,’ 
“Or πρώτη πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν,ὃ “Ἄκουε, Ισραήλ: Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς 
ἡμῶν Κύριος ets ἐστί. 30. καὶ ἀγαπήσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου ἐξ 
ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς 
διανοίας σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. αὕτη πρώτη ἐντολή., 31. 
καὶ δευτέρα ὁμοία αὕτη,]ὸ “᾿Αγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν.᾽ 


1 BD omit the article in these two places. 

2? BDLA omit o, which has been introduced through θεος being taken as subject. 
3 Omit Geos NABCDAZ. 
“SSBCLA K cop. omit vpets ουν. 
δαπεκριθη avrots in NBCLA 33. 
6 εντολη πρωτη παντων in SBCLA. Τ.Ε. is a grammatical correction, 


Vide be} ow. 


7 απεκριθη ο |. in BLA 33. 


8 Forem... 


εντολων read with BLA οτι πρωτη εστι. 


Φ Omit αντη π. εν. (a gloss from νετ. 28) with 981ΙΔ. 


19 For και . 


phanes and in the N. T.; possibly collo- 
quial (Kennedy, Sources of N.T.G., p.78). 
—Ver. 27. πολὺ πλανᾶσθε, much ye 
err. This new and final assertion of 
ignorance is very impressive; severe, 
but kindly; much weakened by adding 
ἡμεῖς οὖν. 

Vv. 28-34. The great commandment 
(Mt. xxii. 34-40). The permanent value 
of this section lies in the answer of Jesus 
to the question put to Him, which is 
substantially the same in both Mt. and 
Mk. (The accounts vary in regard to 
( the motive of the questioner. In Mt. he 
’ comes to tempt, in Mk. in hope of getting 
confirmation in a new way of thinking 
on the subject, similar to that of the man 
in quest of eternal life—that which put 
the ethical above the ritual. No anxious 
attempt should be made to remove the 
discrepancy.— Ver. 28. προσελθὼν, 
ἀκούσας, εἰδὼς : the second and third of 
these three participles may be viewed asthe 
ground of the first = one of the scribes, 
having heard them disputing, and being 
conscious that He (Jesus) answered them 
well, approached and asked Him, etc.— 
ποία, what sort of; it is a question, not 
of an individual commandment, but of 
characteristic quality. The questioner, 
as conceived by Mk., probably had in 
view the distinction between ritual and 


. . αντη BLA have simply δεντερα αντη (Tisch., W.H.). 


ethical, or positive and moral. The 
prevalent tendency was to attach special 
importance to the positive, and to find 
the great matters of the law in circumci- 
sion, Sabbath-keeping, the rules respect- 
ing phylacteries, etc. (Lightfoot). The 
opposite tendency, to emphasise the 
ethical, was not unrepresented, especially 
in the school of Hillel, which taught that 
the love of our neighbour is the kernel. 
of the law. The questioner, as he 
appears in Mk., leant to this side.—Ver. 
20. ἄκουε, ᾿Ισραήλ, etc.: this mono- 
theistic preface to the great command- 
ment is not given by Mt. Possibly Mk. 
has added it by way of making the 
quotation complete, but more probably 
Jesus Himself quoted it to suggest that 
duty, like God, was one, in opposition to 
the prevailing habit of viewing duty as 
consisting in isolated precepts. Mt. 
compensates for the omission by preserv- 
ing the reflection: ‘‘On these. two com- 
mandments hangeth the whole law and 
the prophets”. In Mk. the bond of 
unity is God; in Με. ἴουε---Ψετ. 30. 
Heart, soul; mind, strength (to vos) ; in 
Mt.: heart, soul, mind; in Lk. (x. 27): 
heart, soul, strength, mind; in Deut. 
(vi. 4): heart, soul, strength (δυνάµεως) ; 
all varied ways of saying ‘to the utter- 
most degree” = ‘all that is within’’; 


α7--37. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

Μείζων τούτων ἄλλη ἐντολὴ οὐκ Eon.” 32. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 
γραμμµατεύς, “Kaas, διδάσκαλε, ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας εἶπας, ὅτι εἷς ἐστι 
Θεός,ὶ καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ. 33. καὶ τὸ ἀγαπᾷν αὐτὸν 
ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς συνέσεως, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς 
ψυχῆς, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος, καὶ τὸ ἀγαπᾶν τὸν πλησίον ὡς 
ἑαυτόν, πλεῖόν ὃ ἐστι πάντων τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων καὶ τῶν θυσιῶν.' 
34. Καὶ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἰδὼν αὐτόν, ὅτι νουνεχῶς ἀπεκρίθη, εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 
“Od μακρὰν ef ἀπὸ τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
ἐτόλμα αὐτὸν ἐπερωτῆσαι. 


Καὶ οὐδεὶς οὐκέτι 


c 


35. Kat ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἔλεγε, διδάσκων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, “ Πῶς 
λέγουσιν of γραμματεῖς, ὅτι ὁ Χριστὸς vids ἐστι Δαβίδ”; 36. 
αὐτὸς γὰρ δ Δαβὶδ εἶπεν ἐν τῷ Πνεύματι τῷ “Aylw, ΄Εἶπεν ὅ Κύριος 


τῷ κυρίῳ µου, KdBou® ἐκ δεξιῶν µου, ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς 


425 


-souv ὑποπόδιον Ἰ τῶν ποδῶν σου. 


κύριον: καὶ πόθεν vids αὐτοῦ ἐστι; 


αὐτοῦ ἡδέως. 


1 SABLA al. omit θεος. 


37. Autos οὖν ὃ Δαβὶδ λέγει αὐτὸν 


Καὶ ὁ πολὺς ὄχλος ἤκουεν 


1 Omit this clause imported from νετ. 30, and found in ADE af, 


}περισσοτερον in SQBLA 33. 

4 Δαβιὸδ before εστιν in BDL. 

6 καθισον in B (Trg., W.H., πιατρ.). 
5 BLA omit ουν. 


and with the full potency of that 
‘all’’.—Ver. 32. καλῶς, ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας: 
to be taken together = well indeed |---εἷς 
ἐστὶν: He is one (God understood, 
supplied in T.R.).—Ver. 33: the manner 
of loving God is stated by the scribe in 
yet another form of language: heart, 
understanding (συνέσεως), might.— 
"“περισσότερόν ἐστιν, etc., is more, far, 
than all the burnt offerings and the 
sacrifices (meat offerings) = the whole 
Levitical ritual. There is a ring of con- 
viction in the words. The varied expres- 
sion of the law of love to God (συνέσεως) 
also bears witness to sincerity and in- 
dependent thought. — ὁλοκαυτωμάτων 
(ὁλοκαυτόω, from ὅλος, καίω), here and 


in Heb. x. 6, from Sept., for T} DY. —Ver. 


34. νουνεχῶς, intelligently, as one who 
had a mind (of his own), and really 
thought what he said, a refreshing thing 
to meet with at any time, and especially 
there and then. Here only in N.T, = 
νουνεχόντως in classics.—od μακρὰν, not 
far ; near by insight into its nature (the 
~ethical supreme), and in spirit—a sincere 
thinker.—avSels οὐκέτι, εἴο.: question- 
‘ing given up because seen to be vain, 


5 SS BLA omit γαρ. 
Ἰνποκατω in BD sah. cop, 
5 αντου εστιν νιος in BL. 


always ending either in the confusion or 
in the acquiescence of questioners (cf. 
Lk. xx. 40). 

Vv. 35-37. David’s Son and David's 
Lord (Mt. xxii. 41-46, Lk. xx. 41-44). 
On the aim and import of this counter- 
question vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 35. 
ἀποκριθεὶς, διδάσκων ἐ.τ. i.: these two 
participles describe the circumstances 
under which the question was asked— 
addressed to silenced and disheartened 
opponents, and forming a part of the 
public instruction Jesus had been giving 
in the temple; a large body of people 
present.—Ver. 36. αὐτὸς A. Over 
against the dogma of the scribes, stated 
in ver. 35 as something well known (in 
Mt. Jesus asks for their opinion on the 
topic), is set the declaration of David 
himself, introduced without connecting 
particle. David, who ought to know 
better than the scribes.—év τῷ π. 7. 4.: 
especially when speaking, as they would 
all admit, by inspivation.—eimev, etc.: 
the quotation as given in T.R. exactly 
reproduces the Sept. The omission of ἆ 
before Κύριος in BD turns the latter into 
a proper name of God.—x«d@ov (κάθισον 
in B) is a late or “ popular ” form of the 


426 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XII. 


38. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ, “Bhéwere ἀπὸ τῶν 
γραμµατέων, τῶν θελόντων ἐν στολαῖς περιπατεῖν, καὶ ἀσπασμοὺς ἐν 
ταῖς ἀγοραῖς, 39. Kal πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς, καὶ 
πρωτοκλισίας ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις: 40. οἱ κατεσθίοντες2 τὰς οἶἰκίας 
τῶν χηρῶν, καὶ προφάσει μακρὰ προσευχόµενοι: οὗτοι λήψονται 


” 
περισσότερον κρίμα. 


41. Καὶ καθίσας ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 8 
πῶς 6 ὄχλος βάλλει χαλκὸν εἰς τὸ γαζοφυλάκιον. 


Σεν τη διδ. αυτου ελεγεν in NBLA 33. 
1 B has κατεσθοντες. 


present imperative of κάθηµαι.--Ψετ. 37. 
καὶ 6 πολὺς ὄχλος, etc.: this remark 
about the large crowd which had been 
witness to these encounters, as it stands 
in our N. T. at end of ver. 37, seems to 
refer merely to the closing scene of the 
conflict. Probably the evangelist meant 
the reflection to apply to the whole = 
the masses enjoyed Christ’s victory 
over the classes, who one after the 
other measured their wits against His. 
The remark is true to the life. The 
people gladly hear one who speaks 
felicitously, refutes easily, and escapes 
dexterously from the hands of designing 
men. (ὡς ἡδέως διαλεγοµένου, καὶ 
εὐχερῶς αὐτοὺς ἀνατρέποντος, καὶ ὡς 
αὐτὸς ἀπηλλαγμένος τῆς βασκανίας-- 
Euthy. Zig.) 

Vv. 38-40. Warning against the in- 
fluence of the scribes (Lk. xx. 45-47). As 
if encouraged by the manifest sympathy 
of the crowd, Jesus proceeds to warn 
them against the baleful influence of 
their religious guides.—Ver. 38. ἐν τῇ 
διδαχῇ α.: this expression alone suffices to 
show that what Mk. here gives is but a 
fragment ofa larger discourse of the same 
type—an anti-scribal manifesto. Here 
again the evangelist bears faithful 
witness to a great body of διδαχή he 
does not record. Mt. xxiii. shows how 
much he omits at this point.—éAeyev : 
the imperfect here may be taken as 
suggesting that what follows is but a 
sample = He was saying things like this. 
--βλέπετε ἀπὸ as in vill. 15.—OeAdvrev, 
desiring, not so much claiming as their 
privilege (Meyer) as taking a childish 
pleasure in = φιλούντων, Lk. xx. 46.—év 
στολαῖς, in long robes, worn by persons 
of rank and distinction (‘ gravitatis 
index,” Grotius), possibly wern specially 
long by the scribes that the tassels 
attached might trail on the ground. 


κατέναντι * τοῦ γαζοφυλακίου ἐθεώρει 
Δ Δ 
καὶ πολλοὶ 


2 SBLA cop. omit ο |. 
¢ So in ΒΑΡΔΣ (Tisch., W.H., text, brackets). 


απεναντι in B (W.H. marg.). 


So Winsche, ad loc. Vide picture 
of Pharisee in his robes in Lund, 
Heiligthimer, — περιπατεῖν: infinitive, 
depending on θελόντων followed by 
accusatives, ἀσπασμοὺς, etc., depending 
on same word: oratio variata, vide Mt. 
xxili. 6.—Ver. 40. οἱ κατεσθίοντες: 
this verse is probably still to be regarded 
as a continuation of the description ot 
the scribes commencing with τῶν 
θελόντων, only the writer has lost the 
sense of the original construction, and 
instead of the genitive puts the nomina- 
tive, so giving to what follows the force 
of an independent sentence (so Weiss). 
Grotius, Meyer, and Schanz take ver. 
40 as a really independent sentence. 
Lk. set the precedent for this; for, 
apparently having Mk.’s text before him, 
he turns οἱ κατεσθίοντες into of κατεσθί- 
ουσι. Holtzmann, H.C., is undecided 
between the two views. As to the sense, 
two facts are stated about the scribes: 
they devoured the houses, the property 
of widows, and they made long (μακρὰ,. 
vide on Lk. xx. 47) prayers in the homes 
of, and presumably for, these widows.— 
προφάσει: the real aim to get money, 
the long seemingly fervent prayers a 
blind to hide this aim. It is not 
necessary to suppose that the money- 
getting and the praying were connected 
by regular contract (so apparently 
Fritzsche, and Weiss in Meyer). For 
πρόφασις cf. Phil. i. 18 and especially 
1 Thess. il. 5.—otrot λήψονται, etc. : 
this remark applies specially to the 
conduct just described : catching widows’ 
substance with the bait of prayer, which 
Jesus characteristically pronounces ex- 
ceptionally damnable in view of its sleek 
hypocrisy and low greed. The append- 
ing of this reflection favours the view 
that ver. 40 is after all an independent 
sentence. In it and the two preceding: 


38—44. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


427 


πλούσιοι ἔβαλλον πολλά: 42. καὶ ἐλθοῦσα µία χήρα πτωχὴ ἔβαλε 


λεπτὰ δύο, ὅ ἐστι κοδράντης. 


43. καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος τοὺς 


μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, λέγει] αὐτοῖς, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἡ χήρα αὕτη 
i) πτωχὴ πλεῖον πάντων βέβληκε τῶν βαλόντων 3 cis τὸ γαζοφυλάκιον. 


44. πάντες γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ περισσεύοντος αὐτοῖς ἔβαλον ' αὕτη δὲ ἐκ τῆς 


ὑστερήσεως αὐτῆς πάντα ὅσα εἶχεν ἔβαλεν, ὅλον τὸν βίον αὐτῆς. 


1 ειπεν in ΔΑΒΡΙ,ΔΣ. 


2 For βεβληκε, ΑΒΡΙ.ΔΣ 33 have εβαλεν, and for βαλοντων NABDLAE have 


βαωλλοντων. 


we have a very slight yet vivid picture of 
Pharisaic piety in its vanity, avarice, 
and hypocrisy. 

Vv. 41-44. The widow’s offering (Lk. 
xxi. I-4). This charming story comes in 
with dramatic effect, after the repulsive 
picture of the greedy praying scribe. 
The reference to the widows victimised 
by the hypocrites may have suggested it 
to the evangelist’s mind, It bears the 
unmistakable stamp of an authentic re- 
miniscence, and one can imagine what 
comfort it would bring to the poor, who 
constituted the bulk of the early Gentile 
Church (Schanz).—Ver. 41. καθίσας: 
Jesus, a close and keen observer of all 
that went on (xi. 11), sits down at a spot 
convenient for noticing the people casting 
their contributions into the temple 
treasury.—yalodvAaktov (γάζα, Persian, 
φΦυλακή--Ξθησαυροφυλάκιον, Hesychius). 
Commentators are agreed in thinking 
that the reference is to the treasury in 
the court of the women, consisting of 
thirteen brazen trumpet-shaped τεςερ- 
tacles, each destined for its distinctive 
gifts, indicated by an inscription, so 
many for the temple tribute, and money 
gifts for sacrifice ; others for incense, 
wood, etc. ;. all the gifts having reference 
to the service carried on. The gifts were 
people’s offerings, generally moderate in 
amount: “the Peter’s pence of the 
Jews” (Holtzmann, H. C.).—yaAxév may 
be meant for money in general, copper 
representing all sorts (Fritzsche, Grotius, 
etc.); but there seems to be no good 
reason why we should not take it strictly 
as denoting contributions in copper, the 
ordinary, if not exclusive, money gifts 
(Meyer Holtzmann, H. Ο.).--πολλοὶ 
πλούσιοι, etc., many rich were casting 
in much: Jesus was near enough to see 
that, also to notice exactly what the 
widow gave. Among the rich givers 
might be some of the praying scribes 
who had imposed on widows by their 
show of piety, suggesting reflections on 


Tisch. reads βεβληκεν τ. βαλλ., W.H. εβαλεν τ. Badd. 


where wealthy givers get the money 
they bestow for pious purposes. That 
is not a matter of indifference to the 
Kingdom of God, whatever it may be to 
beneficiaries.—Ver. 42. µία χ. π., one 
poverty-stricken widow. With what in- 
tense interest Jesus would watch her 
movements, after His eye fell on her! 
How much will she give ?—\erra δύο, 
“two mites’; minute, of course, but 
two: she might have kept one of them 
(Bengel).—Aewrév, so called from its 
smallness ; smallest of brass coins—sig- 
nificant of deep poverty ; two given, of 
a willing mind.—Ver. 43. ἢ πτωχὴ, em- 
phatic—the poverty-stricken; manifest 
from her dress and wasted look.—Ver. 
44.--ἔκ τῆς ὑστερήσεως, from her state 
of want, cf. on Lk.—torépyots, here 
and in Phil. iv. 11.—rdvra ὅσα : this 
not visible to the eye; divined by the 
mind, but firmly believed to be true, as 
appears from the repetition of the state- 
ment in another form.—éAov τὸν βίον, 
her whole means of life. For the use of 
βίος in this sense vide Lk. viii. 43, xv. 
12, 30; similarly in classics. 

Though it has nothing to do with 
strict exegesis, I am tempted to give here 
a prayer by that felicitous interpreter and 
devout monk, Euthymius Zigabenus, 
based on this beautiful Gospel story : 
‘‘ May my soul become a widow casting 
out the devil to which it is joined and 
subject, and casting into the treasury of 
God two {εβία, the body and the mind; 
the one made light (λεπτυνθέντα) by 
temperance, the other by humility ’’. 

CnaPTeR XIII.' THE ΑΡΟΟΑΙΥΡΤΙΟ 
Discourse. This is the solitary in- 
stance in which the second evangelist 
has given at length a discourse of Jesus. 
The fulness with which the apocalyptic 
discourse is recorded is all the more 
striking, when contrasted with the very 
meagre reproduction of the anti-pharisaic 
discourse (xii, 38-40). The exception 
made in its favour was doubtless due to 


-.- 


428 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XIII. 


XIII. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐκπορευομένου αὐτοῦ ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, λέγει αὐτῷ εἷς 
τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, “ Διδάσκαλε, ie, ποταποὶ λίθοι καὶ ποταπαὶ 


3 soe 
οἰκοδομαί. 


ταύτας τὰς µεγάλας οἰκοδομάς ; 


ὃς οὐ μὴ καταλυθῇῃ.” 


2. Kai ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀποκριθεὶς] εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Βλέπεις 


οὗ μὴ ἀφεθῇ ” λίθος ἐπὶ λίθῳ,Σ 


3- Καὶ καθηµένου αὐτοῦ eis τὸ ὄρος τῶν 


᾿Ελαιῶν κατέναντι τοῦ ἱεροῦ, ἐπηρώτων“ αὐτὸν κατ ἰδίαν Πέτρος 


καὶ Ιάκωβος καὶ Ἰωάννης καὶ Ανδρέας, 4. “Etre ὅ ἡμῖν, πότε ταῦτα 


ἔσται; καὶ τί τὸ σημεῖον ὅταν µέλλῃ πάντα ταῦτα συντελεῖσθαι ὃ; ” 
5. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀποκριθεὶς αὐτοῖς ἤρξατο λέγειν, “Βλέπετε pH τις 
ὑμᾶς πλανήσῃ. 6. πολλοὶ γὰρ ὃ ἐλεύσονται ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί µου, 


1 Omit αποκριθεις with NBL 33. 
3 λιθον in BLA 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
5 evrov in BDL 33. 


2 Add ωδε with BDLAEX (W.H.). 
6 επηρωτα in NBL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
8 ravta συντελ. παντα in NBL. 


TSNBL 33 have ηρξατο λεγειν αντοις without αποκριθεις (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 Omit yap NBL. 


Mk.’s estimate of its interest and value 
for his first readers. Perhaps he was in- 
fluenced in part by the fascinations of 
prediction. ‘The real interest of the dis- 
course and the key to its interpretation 
are to be found, as pointed out in the 
notes on the corresponding chapter in 
Mt., in its ethical aim—‘ to forewarn and 
forearm the representatives of a new 
faith, so that they might not lose their 
heads or their hearts in an evil perplexing 
time”: notes on Mt. For a full exposi- 
tion of the discourse in the light of this 
aim readers are referred to these notes. 
Vv. 1-4. The introduction (Mt. xxiv. 
1-3; Lk. xxi. 5-7).—Ver. 1. ls τ. 
μαθητῶν, one of the disciples; the dis- 
ciples generally in Mt.; who, not said, 
nor for what motive; probably to divert 
the Master from gloomy thoughts.— 
ποταποὶ λίθοι, etc.: what stones and 
what buildings! the former remarkable 
for size, as described by Josephus (Antiq., 
xv., II, 3); the latter for beauty. On 
ποταπός vide at Mt. viii. 27.—Ver. 2. 
βλέπεις: a question, do you see? to fix 
attention on an object concerning which 
a startling statement is to be made.— 
µεγάλας, great buildings, acknowledging 
the justness of the admiration and point- 
ing to a feature which might seem in- 
compatible with the statement following : 
that vast strong pile surely proof against 
destruction !—Ver. 3. els τὸ ὄρος: im- 
plying previous motion towards, before 
sitting down on the Mount of Olives.— 
κατέναντι τ. ἵ., opposite the temple, 
with the admired buildings ἵπ full 
view; this graphic touch in Mk. only. 


--ἐπηρώτα (NBL), singular: Peter in 
view as the chief speaker, though ac- 
companied by other three; imperfect, 
as subordinate to ἤρξατο in ver. 5 ex- 
plaining the occasion of the discourse 
Jesus then began to deliver.—é Πέτρος, 
etc.: the well-known three, and a fourth 
—Andrew; a selection found only here. 
Were these all the disciples with Jesus, 
all who went with Him to Bethany in 
the evenings, the rest remaining in 
Jerusalem? The two pairs of brothers 
were the first called to discipleship (Mk. 
i, 16-20). This reminiscence points to 
internal relations in the disciple-circle 
imperfectly known to us.—kar ἰδίαν, 
apart, z.¢., from the rest of the disciples. 
Mt. has the same phrase, though he 
assumes all the disciples to be present, 
which is suggestive of literary depend- 
ence.—Ver. 4. The question of the four 
has exclusive reference to the predicted 
destruction of the sacred buildings. In 
Mt. three questions are mixed together: 
vide notes there. 

Vv. 5-8. Signs prelusive of the end 
(Mt. xxiv. 4-8, Lk. xxi. 8-11). Jerusalem’s 
judgment-day not to come. till certain 
things have happened: advent of false 
Messiahs, rise of wars.—BAéqere, take 
heed that no one deceive you; the 
ethical key-note struck at once; the aim 
of the whole discourse to help disciples 
to keep heads cool, and hearts brave in a 
perilous evil time (vide on Mt.).—Ver. 6. 
ἐγώ εἰμι, I am (He, the Christ), In what 
sense to be understood videon Mt. The 
Messianic hope misconceived was the 
ruin of the Jewish people.—Ver. 7 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


I—I2. 


λέγοντες, Ὅτι ἐγώ εἶμι' καὶ πολλοὺς πλανήσουσιν. 7. ὅταν δὲ 
ἀκούσητε πολέμους καὶ ἀκοὰς πολέμων, μὴ θροεῖσθε: δεῖ yap! 
γενέσθαι: GAN οὕπω τὸ τέλος. 8. ᾿Εγερθήσεται γὰρ ἔθνος ἐπὶ 
ἔθνος, καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν: Kai? ἔσονται σεισμοὶ κατὰ 
τόπους, Kat? ἔσονται λιμοὶ καὶ ταραχαί.Σ ἀρχαὶ  ὠδίνων ταῦτα. 
90. Βλέπετε δὲ ὑμεῖς ἑαυτούς. παραδώσουσι γὰρ 2 ὑμᾶς εἰς συνέδρια, 
καὶ εἲς συναγωγὰς δαρήσεσθε, καὶ ἐπὶ ἡγεμόνων καὶ βασιλέων 
σταθήσεσθε ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, εἰς μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς 1Ο. καὶ eis πάντα 
τὰ ἔθνη δεῖ πρῶτον ὃ κηρυχθῆναι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον. 11. ὅταν δὲ 
ἀγάγωσιν Ἰ ὑμᾶς παραδιδόντες, μὴ προμεριμνᾶτε τί λαλήσητε, μηδὲ 
μελετᾶτε ὃ GAN’ ὃ ἐὰν δοθῇ ὑμῖν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ Spa, τοῦτο λαλεῖτε” 
οὐ ydp ἐστε ὑμεῖς οἱ λαλοῦντες, ἀλλὰ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Άγιον. 12. 
παραδώσει δὲ ἀδελφὸς ἀδελφὸν εἰς θάνατον, καὶ πατὴρ τέκνον” 


1 NSB sah. cop. omit γαρ. Vide below. 


429. 


2 SSBDL omit the first και and BL the-second. Vide below. 


3 SBDL vet. Lat. vulg. cop. omit και ταραχαι (so Trg., Tisch., W.H.), but these- 
words may have fallen out by similar ending (apxat, so Weiss). 


4 αρχη in NBDLA (Trg., Tisch., W.H.), which may be an assimilation to Mt. 


αρχαι in AEFGXI® al. (Weiss). 
5 Omit yap BL cop. 
7 και οταν αγωσιν in SBDL. 
9 και παραδωσει in NBDL. 


πολέμους: first pseudo-Messiahs preach- 
ing national independence; then, natur- 
ally, as a second σημεῖον, wars, actual 
or threatened (ἀκοὰς πολ.).---μὴ θροεῖσθε: 
good counsel, cheerful in tone, laconic 
in expression = be not scared; they 
must happen; but the end not yet. The 
disconnected style, no yap after δεῖ 
(88), suits \the emotional prophetic 
mood.—76 τέλος, the crisis of Jerusalem. 
—Ver. 8. ἔσονται σεισμοὶ, etc., there 
will be earthquakes in places; there will 
be famines. Here again the briefest 
reading without connecting particles 
(καὶ, καὶ) is to be preferred, as suiting 
the abrupt style congenial to the pro- 
phetic mood. The καὶ ταραχαί after 
λιμοὶ may have fallen out of BDL 
by homoeoteleuton (ἀρχαὶ following im- 
mediately after), but after earthquakes 
and famines disturbances seems an anti- 
climax. 

Ver. 9-13. Third sign, drawn from 
apostolic experiences (Mt. xxiv. 9-13, Lk. 
xxi. 12-10). On the hypothesis that this 
is an interpolation into the discourse, 
having no organic connection with it, 
videon Mt. The contents of this section, 
especially in Mk.’s version, correspond 
closely to Mt. x. 17-22. But the ques- 


6 πρωτον δει in SBD. LA = T.R. 
® SSBDL omit µηδε µελετατε. 


tion, in which of the two discourses the 
logion has the more historical setting, is 
not thereby settled. Some utterance of 
the sort was certainly germane to the 
present situation.—Ver. 9. βλέπετε, 
είο.: not meant to strike a depressing 
note, but to suggest that the most in- 
teresting omens should be found in their 
own experiences as the Apostles of the 
faith, which, however full of tribulation, 
would yet be, on the whole, victorious.— 
παραδώσουσι, etc.: the tribulations are 
not disguised, but the blunt statement 
only lends emphasis to the declaration 
in ver. 1ο that, notwithstanding, the 
Gospel must (δεῖ) and shall be proclaimed 
on a wide scale.—eis συναγωγὰς δαρή- 
σεσθε: the eis here is pregnant = you, | 
delivered to the synagogues, shall be 

maltreated. Bengel renders: “in syna- 
gogas inter verbera agemini’’ = ye shall 
be driven into the synagogues with clubs. 
So Nésgen.—Ver. 11 gives counsel for 
Apostles placed at the bar of kings and 
rulers, They are not to be anxious before- 
hand (προμεριμνᾶτε, here only in N.T.) 
even as to what they shall say, not to 
speak of what shall happen to them as 
the result of the trial. Their apologia will 
be given to them. They will not be the 


430 


KATA MAPKON XIII. 


καὶ ἐπαναστήσονται τέκνα ἐπὶ γονεῖς, καὶ θανατώσουσιν αὐτούς - 
13. καὶ ἔσεσθε μισούµενοι ὑπὸ πάντων διὰ τὸ ὄνομά µου: ὁ δὲ 
ὑπομείνας εἰς τέλος, οὗτος σωθήσεται. 

14. “ Ὅταν δὲ ἴδητε τὸ βδέλυγµα τῆς ἐρημώσεως, τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ 
Δανιὴλ τοῦ προφήτου,) ἑστὸς * ὅπου οὐ δεῖ : (6 ἀναγινώσκων νοείτω ") 
τότε οἱ ἐν τῇ ᾿Ιουδαίᾳ Φευγέτωσαν cis τὰ Spy: 15. ὁ δὲ ὃ ἐπὶ τοῦ 
δώµατος μὴ καταβάτω ets τὴν οἰκίαν," μηδὲ εἰσελθέτω ἃραί τι» ἐκ 
τῆς οἰκίας αὐτοῦ: 16. καὶ 6 εἰς τὸν ἀγρὸν ὢν ὃ μὴ ἐπιστρεψάτω 
17. οὐαὶ δὲ ταῖς ἐν 


eis τὰ ὀπίσω, ἃραι τὸ ἵμάτιον αὐτοῦ. 


γαστρὶ ἐχούσαις καὶ ταῖς θηλαζούσαις ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις. 
18. προσεύχεσθε δὲ ἵνα μὴ γένηται ἡ guy ὑμῶν] χειμῶνος. 
19. ἔσονται γὰρ at ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι θλίψις, ota οὐ γέγονε τοιαύτη 
ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως ἣς ὃ ἔκτισεν ὁ Θεός, ἕως τοῦ νῦν, καὶ οὗ μὴ 


1S8BDL omit το ρηθεν . . . προφητον, which comes from Mt, 


2 exrnkora in SBL (vide below). 
3 B sah. cop. omit δε. 
* NBL omit εις την οικιαν, a gloss. 
ὅτι αραι in BL. 


ΤΝ ΒΕΠ, omit η φνγη vey. 
Vide below. 


8 mv in BCL. 


real speakers (οὗ ydp ἔστε ὑμεῖς οἱ 
λαλοῦντες), but the Holy Spirit. Lk. 
has ‘*I”’ here: Christ = the Holy Ghost. 
This comforting word is wanting in Mt., 
and whether it was really spoken at this 
time must remain uncertain. Mt. de- 
scribes with more detail the internal 
troubles of the Christian community— 
mutual treachery, false prophets (within, 
not without, like the false Messiahs of 
ver. 5), lawlessness, chilling of early 
enthusiasm—all implying the lapse of a 
considerable time, and all to happen 
before the end of Jerusalem. (Vv. 10-12.) 
For all this Mk. gives only the brief 
statement in ver. 12.—Ver. 13 answers 
in its first part to Mt. xxiv. gb, and in its 
second to Mt. xxiv. 13. 

Vv. 14-23. The Y¥ewish catastrophe 
(Mt. xxiv. 15-25, Lk. xxi. 20-24).—Ver. 
14. τὸ βδέλυγµα τ.ἐ. The horror is the 
Roman army, and it is a horror because 
of the desolation it brings. Vide on Mt. 
The reference to Daniel in T.R. is im- 
ported from Mt.—éoryxéra, the reading 
in the best texts, masculine, though re- 
ferring to βδέλυγµα, because the horror 
consists of soldiers (Schanz) or their 
general. (Cf. 6 κατέχων, 2 Thess. ii. 7.) 

που ov δεῖ, where it ought not, in- 
stead of ἐν τόπῳ ἁγίῳ in Mt.—a graceful 


More expressive without. 


® SSBDLA omit ων. 
More impressive without. 


What meant obvious. 


circumlocution betraying the Jewish 
Christian writing for heathen Christians, 
abstaining from making claims that 
might be misunderstood for his native 
country by calling it the “holy land” 
(Schanz).—6 ἀναγινώσκων v. The re- 
ference here cannot be to Daniel, which 
is not mentioned in Mk., but either to 
the Gospel itself or to a separate docu- 
ment which it embodies—a Jewish or 
Jewish-Christian Apocalypse (vide on 
Mt.). The words may be taken as a 
direction to the reader in synagogue or 
church to explain further the meaning to 
hearers, it being a matter of vital prac- 
tical concern. Vide Weizsacker, Das 
Apos. Zeit., p. 362.—Ver. 15. δώµατος, 
he who is on the roof. Vide at Mt. x. 27. 
The main point to be noted in Mk.’s 
version of the directions for the crisis as 
compared with Mt.’s (q.v.) is the omis- 
sion of the words μηδὲ σαββάτῳ, prob- 
ably out of regard to Gentile readers.— 
Ver. 18. ἵνα μὴ γένηται, that {έ may 
not be; what not said, φυγὴ (T.R.) 
being omitted in best texts = the name- 
less horror which makes flight impera- 
tive, the awful crisis of Israel.—Ver. το. 
ἔσονται yap at ἡμέραι, etc., for (not {η 
those days, but) those days (themselves) 
shall be a tribulation. So we speak of 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


13—27.- 


εἰ μὴ Κύριος ἐκολόβωσεϊ τὰς ἡμέρας, οὐκ ἂν 
ἀλλὰ διὰ τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς οὓς ἐξελέξατο, ἐκολό- 


γένηται. 20. καὶ 
ἐσώθη πᾶσα odpé - 
βωσε τὰς ἡμέρας. 

Χριστός, ἢ idov,? ἐκεῖ, μὴ πιστεύσητε.ὸ 


21. Καὶ τότε ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ, ᾿Ιδού. ὧδε 6 
22. ἐγερθήσονται yap 
ψευδόχριστοι καὶ ψευδοπροφῆται, καὶ δώσουσι * σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα, 
23. ὑμεῖς 
24. Αλλ ἐν ἐκείναις 
ταῖς ἡμέραις, μετὰ τὴν θλίψιν ἐκείνην, ὁ ἥλιος σκοτισθήσεται, καὶ 


πρὸς τὸ ἀποπλανᾶν, et δυνατόν, καὶ 5 τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς. 
5 2 8 .6 , een ΄ 
δὲ βλέπετε: ἰδού, προείρηκα ὑμῖν πάντα. 


ἡ σελήνη οὐ δώσει τὸ Φφέγγος αὐτῆς, 25. καὶ ot ἀστέρε τοῦ 
οὐρανοῦ ἔσονται ἐκπίπτοντες,! καὶ at δυνάµεις at ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς 


431 


σαλευθήσονται. 


ἐρχόμενον ἐν νεφέλαις μετὰ δυνάµεως πολλῆς καὶ δόξης. 
καὶ τότε ἀποστελεῖ τοὺς ἀγγέλους αὐτοῦ,» 


ἐκλεκτοὺς αὐτοῦ ὃ 


ἄκρου οὐρανοῦ. 


1 εκολ. Κ. in NBL. 


26. καὶ τότε ὄψονται τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 


2η, 


Δ > , a 
καὶ ἐπισυνάξει τοὺς 


3 - δι : ee 4 ~ o 
εκ των τεσσάρων ανεμ.ων, απ σοσκρου yysS εως 


2ΜΦΕΙ, have ιδε both times; for η before second ιδε B has και, which has been 
changed into η (as in Mt.) in DAZ al. ; omitted in SQL (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὄπιστευετεῖηῃ ΝΑΒΟΡΙΔ. 


ἁδωσουσι in ΝΔΑΒΟΙΙΣ al. ποιησουσι in D (Tisch.). 


5 Omit και NBD (from Mt.). 


6 Omit ιδου BL cop. aeth. (Tisch., W.H.). 
7 εσονται εκ τ. ουρ. πιπτοντες SYBC (Tisch., W.H.). 


8 Omit first αυτου BDL (Tisch., W.H.), DL second, which is found in NBCA. 
Tisch. omits both. W.H. have second in brackets, omitting first. 


«εν days,” and in Scotland of the 
“killing times ”.—ota οὐ Ὑέγονεν, etc.: 
a strong statement claiming for the crisis 
of Israel a unique place of tragic distinc- 
tion in the whole calamitous experience 
of the human race, past and to come.— 
οἵα τοιαύτη, pleonastic, cf. x Cor. xv. 48, 
2 Cor. x. 11.—Ver. 20. The merciful 
shortening of the days, out of regard to 
the elect, is here directly ascribed to 
God. Mt.uses the passive construction, 
where vide as to the idea of shortening 
and the τεᾶςοη.-- τοὺς ἐκλεκτοὺς οὓς 
ἐξελέξατο, the elect whom He elected, 
recalling ‘‘the creation which God 
created’’ in νετ. 19; but more than a 
. mere literary idiosyncrasy, emphasising 
the fact that the elect are God’s elect, 
whom He loves and will care for, and 
whose intercessions for others He will 
hear.—Ver. 22. Ψψευδόχριστοι, evdo- 
προφῆται, false Christs, and false 
prophets; again, as in ver. 6, here as 
there without, not within, the Church; 
political Messiahs, in ver. 6 spoken of as 


the prime cause of all the calamities, here 
as at the last hour promising deliverance 
therefrom.—mpis τὸ ἀποπλανᾶν, with a 
view to mislead; the compound verb 
occurs again in x Tim. vi. 10, in passive. 
—Ver. 23. ὑμεῖς δὲ, etc., now you look 
out! 1 have told you all things before- 
hand; forewarned, forearmed. 

Vv. 24-31. The coming of the Son of 
Man (Mt. xxiv. 29-35, Lk. xxi. 25-33). 
—Ver. 24. ἀλλὰ, opposes to the false 
Christs who are not to be believed in, 
the coming of the true Christ.—éy 
ἐκείναις τ. ἡμέραις, in those days, for 
Mt.’s εὐθέως, a vaguer phrase, yet making 
the parusia synchronise with the thlifsis. 
—Ver. 25. ot ἀστέρες, etc., the stars 
shall be in process of falling (one after 
the other)—écovrat with πίπτοντες in- 
stead of πεσοῦνται in Mt.—ai δυνάµεις, 
etc. : the powers in heaven = the powers 
of heaven (Mt.) = the host of heaven 
(Is. xxxiv. 4), a synonym for the stars. — 
Ver. 26. tov tov τ. a.: the Son of 
Man, not the sign of, etc., as in Mt.: 


433 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XIII. 


28. “Awd δὲ τῆς συκῆς µάθετε τὴν παραβολήν : ὅταν αὐτῆς ἤδη 
ὁ κλάδος] ἁπαλὸς γένηται, καὶ ἐκφυῇ τὰ φύλλα, γινώσκετε ὅτι 
ἐγγὺς τὸ θέρος ἐστίν' 29. οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς, ὅταν ταῦτα ἴδητε” γινό- 


μενα, γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐγγύς ἐστιν ἐπὶ θύραις. 


30. ᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 


ὅτι οὗ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη, μέχρις οὗ πάντα ταῦτα ἓ γένηται. 


31. ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ παρελεύσονται Μ: οἱ δὲ λόγοι µου οὐ μὴ 


παρέλθωσι." 


32. “Περὶ δὲ τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης καὶ ὃ 


τῆς Spas, οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, 


οὐδὲ οἱ ἄγγελοι οἱ © ἐν οὐρανῷ, οὐδὲ ὁ υἱός, εἰ μὴ 6 πατήρ. 


33. “Βλέπετε, ἀγρυπνεῖτε καὶ προσεύχεσθε,΄ οὐκ οἴδατε γὰρ πότε 


ὅ καιρός ἐστιν. 


34. ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἀπόδημος ἀφεὶς τὴν οἰκίαν αὐτοῦ, 


καὶ δοὺς τοῖς δούλοις αὐτοῦ τὴν ἐξουσίαν, καὶ  ἑκάστω τὸ ἔργον 


1 The order of the words varies in MSS. ΝΑΒΟΡΙ, have ηδη ο KA. αυτης 


(W.H.; Tisch., as in T.R.). 
2 SnTe ταντα in ΝΑΒΟΙ.. 


3 ravtTa παντα in KBCLA. 


4 παρελευσονται in $8BD; sing. in LAX (from Mt.); for παρελθωσι in second 
clause (ACD = Mt.) ΜΒΙ, have παρελευσονται; BD omit µη, which does not else- 
where occur in Mk, with ov and fut. indic. (Tisch., W.H. = B in both clauses). 


5 yin $BCLAZ. WD have και. 
® s9DL omit οι after αγ. CA have it. 
7 BD omit και προσευχεσθε; a gloss. 


B reads αγγελος (W.H. marg.). 


® SSBCDL omit και, a connecting particle added by scribes. 


Christ His own sign, vide on Mt.—Ver. 
27. ἀπ᾿ ἄκρου γῆς, etc. (cf. expression 
in Mt.), from the extremity of the earth 
to the extremity of heaven. The earth 
is conceived as a flat surface, and the 
idea is—from one end of the earth to the 
other, where it touches the heavens. 
But they touch at both ends, so that 
Mt.’s expression is the more accurate. 
Either from one end of the earth to the 
other end of the earth, or from one end 
of the heaven to, etc.—Ver. 28. Parable 
of the fig tree, as in Μι.--ἐκφύῃ: this 
verb without accent might either be 
present subjunctive active of ἐκφύω = 
ἐκφύῃ = it putteth forth its leaves; or 
2nd aorist subjunctive intransitive = 
ἐκφυῇ, from ἐξεφύην, later form of 2nd 
aorist indicative instead of ἐξέφνν = the 
leaves shoot out. The former is pre- 
ferred by most commentators. 

Vv. 32-37. Concluding exhortation 
(Mt. xxiv. 36).—Ver. 32. The words 6 
vids are an undoubted reading in Mk., 
and there can be little doubt they form a 
part of the true text in Mt. also. As to 
the import of the solemn declaration of 
nescience Jesus here makes, I need only 
refer to what has been said on the cor- 
responding textin Mt. It is not a dis- 


claimer of knowledge as to the precise 
day, month, or year of what it is certain 
will happen within the then present 
generation, but rather an intimation that 
all statements (that regarding the genera- 
tion included) as to the time of the 
parusia must be taken in a qualified 
sense. Jesus had, I still feel, two ways 
of speaking on the subject, one for com- 
fort (it will be soon), and one for caution 
(it may not be so soon as even I think or 
you expect).—Ver. 33. ἀγρυπνεῖτε: 
watch, be sleepless (a priv. and ὕπνος).--- 
οὐκ οἴδατε, etc., ye know not the time or 
season (καιρός) of the parusia. If even 
the Son knows not, sti: less His disciples; 
therefore let them watch.—Ver. 24. 
Enforcement of the exhortation to watch 
by a brief parable. At this point each 
of the synoptical evangelists goes his 
own way. In Mt. Jesus presses home 
the lesson by historical and prophetical 
pictures of the surprises brought by un- 
expected crises; in Lk. by general state- 
ments; in Mk. by a comparison which 
seems to be the germ of the parable in 
Mt. xxv. 14-3 .—av@pwmos ἀπόδημος 
(here only), a travelling man, cf. ἄνθ. 
ἔμπορος, a πι rchant man, in Mt. xiii. 
45.--ἀφεὶς, οὓς: these participles 


28—37. 


αὐτοῦ, καὶ τῷ θυρωρῷ ἐνετείλατο ἵνα 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


433 


γρηγορῇ. 35. γρηγορεῖτε 


οὖν: οὐκ οἴδατε γὰρ πότε ὁ κύριος τῆς οἰκίας ἔρχεται, ὀψέ, ἢ 
µεσονυκτίου,] ἢ ἀλεκτοροφωνίας, ἢ πρωῖ: 36. μὴ ἐλθὼν ἐξαίφνης 


εὕρῃ ὑμᾶς καθεύδοντας. 
ρεῖτε. 


37. ἃ 3 δὲ ὑμῖν λέγω, πᾶσι λέγω, Γρηγο- 


i µεσονυκτιον in ΝΡΟΙΔ. T.R. (-ον) conforms to the following genitive 


29 in ΝΒΟΙΙΔ. 


specify the circumstances under which 
the command to the porter, the main 
point, was given; it was when the 
master was leaving, and when he gave 
to all his servants his parting instructions. 
--τὴν ἐξουσίαν, his (the master’s) 
authority, distributed among the servants 
when he could no longer exercise it him- 
βε]{.---τὸ ἔργον a., to each one his work, 
in apposition with ἐξουσίαν. In the 
master’s absence each man became his 
own master; put upon his honour, the 
seat of the ἐξουσία, and prescribing care- 
ful performance of the ἔργον entrusted to 
each.—xat τ. θυρωρῷ, also, among the 
rest, and very specially, to the porter (he 
gave instructions). The καὶ here is em- 
phatic, as if it had been καὶ δὴ καὶ.- ἵνα 
yenyopy, that he should watch: note 
that in this parable the function of 
watching becomes the business of one— 
the porter. Each servant has his appro- 
priate task; the porter’s is to watch. 
Yet in the moral sphere watching is the 
common duty of all, the temper in which 
all are to discharge their functions. All 
have to be porters, waiting at the gate, 
ready to open it to the returning master. 
Hence the closing exhortation in ver. 37. 
What I say to you, the four disciples 
(ver. 3), I say to all: watch. This had 
to be added, because it was not said or 
suggested by the parable; a defect 
which makes it doubtful whether we 
have here a logion of Jesus in authentic 
form, and which may account for its 
omission by Lk.—Ver. 35. ὀψὲ 4, etc. : 
the night divided, Roman fashion, into 
four watches: 6-9, 90-12, 12-3, 3-6. 
Before the exile the Jews divided the 
night into three Ρατί5.- -μεσονύκτιον: 
vide at Lk. xi. 5 on this word, found also 
in Acts xvi, 25, xx. 7.--ἀλεκτοροφωνία 
is a ἅπαξ ey. in Ν. T.—Ver. 36. 
ἐξαίφνης, suddenly, here in Lk. ii. 13, 
and four times in Αοΐς.- -καθεύδοντας : 
this applies to all the servants, not 
merely to the porter ; therefore all must 
watch as well as work. In the case ofa 
master absent on a journey, the servants 


cannot know even the day, not to speak 
of the hour or watch of the night, as 
they could in the cases supposed in Lk. 
xii. 36, Mt. xxv. 1. Therefore they must 
keep awake not merely one night, but 
many nights, an incongruity which again 
suggests that we have not here an 
original utterance of Jesus, but a com- 
posite logion with elements borrowed 
from several parables. 

CHAPTER XIV. THE  PassIoN 
History.—Vv. 1-2. Introduction (Mt. 
xxvi. 1-5, Lk. xxii. 1-2).—Ver. 1. ἣν δὲ 
τὸ π.;: the first hint that the visit of 
Jesus to Jerusalem took place at passover 
season. πάσχα καὶ τὰ ἄζυμα: full 
name of the feast, which consisted of the 
passover proper beginning on the 14th 
Nisan, and the seven days of unleavened 
bread. Mt. and Lk. give each only one 
of the designations; Mt. the former, Lk. 
the latter. Mk.’s dual designation a 
manifest combination of Mt. and Lk., 
say the followers of Griesbach.—pera 
δύο ἡμέρας, indicates the point of time at 
which the Sanhedrists began seriously to 
consider how they could safely get rid of 
Jesus. Mt. turns this into an announce- 
ment by Jesus. Lk. generalises the 
precise note of time into a statement 
that the feast was approaching (ἤγγιζεν). 


—év δόλῳ, in or with craft. ἐν = Ὢ in 


Heb. Mt. has simply δόλῳ, the dative 
instr.—Ver. 2. ἔλεγον γάρ is a more 
difficult reading than ἔλ. δὲ of Mt., 
hence the correction in T.R. The yap 
presupposes that the murder of Jesus 
during the feast was from the first 
regarded as out of the question, and the 
clause following partly makes that fact 
explicit, partly assigns a reason for it. 
They wanted to compass His death, but 
they were in a difficulty, for they felt and 
said to one another: it may not be on 
the feast, lest there be a popular dis- 
ἑατραποε.---μήποτε ἔσται: the fut. ind. 
instead of the more usual subjunctive 
after µήποτε (cf. Col. ii. 8, Heb. iii. 12), 
implying the almost certain occurrence 


28 


434 


KATA MAPKON 


XIV. 


XIV. 1. HN δὲ τὸ πάσχα καὶ τὰ ἄζυμα μετὰ δύο ἡμέρας: καὶ 
ἐζήτουν ol ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς, πῶς αὐτὸν ἐν δόλῳ κρατή- 
σαντες ἀποκτείνωσιν" 2. ἔλεγον δέ1 “Mi ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, µήποτε 


θόρυβος ἔσται 3 τοῦ λαοῦ. 


3. Καὶ ὄντος αὐτοῦ ἐν Βηθανίᾳ, ἐν τῇ 


at JP. xi ~ λ A ’ 3 - AAO x ” 
οἰκίᾳ Σίμωνος τοῦ Λλεπροῦ, κατακειµεένου αὐτοῦ, Ίλθε γυνη εχουσα 


ἀλάβαστρον µύρου νάρδου πιστικῆς πολυτελοῦς: καὶ ὃ συντρίψασα 


τὸ” ἀλάβαστρον, κατέχεεν αὐτοῦ κατὰ ὅ τῆς κεφαλῆς. 


4. ἦσαν δέ 


τινες ἀγανακτοῦντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς, καὶ λέγοντες,ὃ “ Eis τί ἡ ἀπώλεια 


1 yap in ΝΒΟΡΙ,; δε in T.R. is from Mt. 


3 Omit και NBL cop. 


Σεσται θορυβος in SBCDL. 


4 The article is found in all the genders; το in GM cursives; τον in NADZ and 
many other uncials (Tisch.); την in BCLA (Trg., W.H.). 


5 KSBCLA omit κατα (introduced because usual). 
§ SSBCL omit και λεγοντες, which may come from Mt. 


of a θόρυβος if an attempt were made on 
the life of Jesus during the feast. This 
shows how highly the Sanhedrists esti- 
mated the influence of Jesus. 

Vv. 3-9. The anointing in Bethany 
(Mt. xxvi. 6-13).—Ver. 3. ὄντος αὐτοῦ, 
κατακειµένυ αὐτοῦ: two genitive 
absolute clauses whereof Weiss makes 
critical use (Marcus-Evang.); in which 
Schanz sees simply an instance of Mk.’s 
helplessness in style. The first indicates 
generally the time and place, the second 
the position of Jesus (at table) when the 
woman approached Him (ἠλθεν).--- 
ἀλάβαστρον. Vide in Μι.-- πιστικῆς: 
a puzzling word recurring in the fourth 
Gospel (xii. 3). It has been variously 
explained. (1) As one of Mk.’s Latinisms 
= spicatus, turned into πιστικὸς like 
Sextarius into ξέστης (Mk. vii. 4). In 
favour of this view is the Vulgate nardi 
spicati reproduced in “spikenard” 
(spiked-nard), A. V., and it has been 
adopted by Wetstein, Grotius, Rosen- 
miller, etc. (2) As meaning liquid, 
potable, from πίω, πιπίσκω, Fritzsche and 
others. (3) As derived from the name of 
a place whence the ointment was ob- 
tained, Augustine; also Bengel: “ Pista 
urbs Indorum in regione Cabul; qua ex 
regione pleraque aromata jam tum 
petebantur”. But he adds: “‘ Ex nomine 
proprio potius formaretur πισταῖος”. 
(4) As = πιστός, trusty, genuine, to dis- 
tinguish it from spurious imitations 
which abounded (Pliny, H. Ν., xii., 26). 
Instances of the use of the word in this 

» sense are cited from Greek authors, ¢.g., 
from Artemidorus, ii., 32: πιστικὴ γυνὴ 
καὶ οἰκουρὸς (vide Beza and Kypke). 
The choice lies between (1) and (4); 


most modern commentators (following 
Theophy. and Euthy.) adopt the latter. 
The following account of nard from 
Tristram’s Natural History of the Bible 
is interesting: “Απ Indian product pro- 
cured from the Nardostachys Jatamansi, 
growing on the Himalaya Mountains in 
Nepaul and Bhotan, It was well known 
to the Greeks and Romans, and is 
mentioned by classic authors as derived 
from the hills on the banks of the 
Ganges. One peculiarity of the plant 
which is mentioned by old writers aids in 
its identification, viz., that it has many 
hairy spikes shooting from one root. 
These shaggy stems are caused by the 
root leaves shooting up from the ground 
and surrounding the stalk. It is from 
this part of the plant that the perfume is 
procured and prepared simply by drying 
it.” —aPoAvteAots (£ Tim. ii. g, 1 Pet. iii. 
4), dear, hence the temptation to produce 
cheap counterfeits.—ovvrpipaoca: she 
broke the narrow-necked vase that the 
contents might be poured out quickly, 
not drop by drop, and perhaps that the 
vessel used for so sacred a purpose 
might never be employed again (Kloster., 
Weiss, Schanz, etc.).—Ver. 4. tives, 
certain persons ; who, not indicated; Mt. 
says the disciples, John singles out 
Judas.—rod pupov yéyovev: these words 
omitted in Mt. Observe the repetition 
in ver. 5, τοῦτο τὸ pvpov (BCL, etc.). 
Mt. simply has τοῦτο (so here in T.R.). 
Mt. more elegant in style, but Mk. truer 
to life = “To what purpose this waste 
of the myrrh? For this myrrh might, 
etc.”—the style of men speaking under 
emotion.—Ver. 5. ἐπάνω, etc., for above 
three hundred pence. The cardinal 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 435 


qI—I. 


αὕτη τοῦ µύρου yéyovey; 5. ἠδύνατο γὰρ τοῦτο] πραθῆναι ἐπάνω 
τριακοσίων δηναρίων,” καὶ δοθῆναι τοῖς πτωχοῖς ’᾽ καὶ ἐνεβριμῶντο 
auth. 6. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, ''Ἄφετε αὐτήν: τί αὐτῇ κόπους 
παρέχετε; καλὸν ἔργον εἰργάσατο εἰς ἐμέ. 7. πάντοτε γὰρ τοὺς 
πτωχοὺς ἔχετε μεθ ἑαυτῶν, καὶ ὅταν θέλητε, δύνασθε αὐτοὺς “ εὖ 
ποιῆσαι' ἐμὸ δὲ οὗ πάντοτε ἔχετε. 8. ὃ εἶχεν αὕτηιὃ ἐποίησε” 
προέλαβε μµυρίσαι µου τὸ σῶμα ὃ eis τὸν ἐνταφιασμόν. 9g. ἀμὴν Ἰ 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅπου ἂν κηρυχθῇ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦτο” εἰς ὅλον τὸν 
κόσμον, καὶ ὃ ἐποίησεν αὕτη λαληθήσεται eis µνηµόσυνον αὐτῆς.) 
10. Καὶ 6 Ἰούδας ὁ Ἰσκαριώτης, eis 9 τῶν δώδεκα, ἀπῆλθε πρὸς τοὺς 


ἀρχιερεῖς, ἵνα παραδῶ αὐτὸν 10 αὐτοῖς. 
> , “ 3 ίλ Βία Ε] , 8 aA π 397 
ἐχάρησαν, καὶ ἐπηγγείλαντο αὐτῷ ἀργύριον δοῦναι: καὶ ἐζήτει 


a , η A 
πῶς εὐκαίρως " αὐτὸν Tapada.|! 


1 τουτο το µυρον ABCLA al. 


II. Οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες 


a 2 Tim, 
iv. Is 


Vide below. 


Ἔδην. τριακ. in \QCDL (Tisch.). T.R. as in ΑΒΔΣ al. (W.H. πιατρ.). 
εν εµοι in SABCDLAZ al. (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 autos with παντοτε following in BL sah. cop. (W.H. with παν. in brackets), 


ὃν omits both (Tisch.). 


αντους in ΑΣ al, 


δεσχεν in RABCDLAZ al. ; omit αντη SQBL cursives. 


ὅ το σωμα pov in BDL (W.H.). 
7 $e after αµην in SBDLA al. 


8S S8BDL omit τουτο, inserted, as δε is omitted, after Mt. 
® For ο |. ο Io. εις $SRBCD have |. Io., and ΜΒΟΤ, ο εις. 


10 αντον παραδοι in B (D προδοι). 


SBCLA also place αυτον first. 


11 παραδοι in BD; αυτον before ευκαιρως in SABCLA. 


number is here in the genitive of price 
after πραθῆναι. In 1 Cor. xv. 6 ἐπάνω 
is followed by a dative depending on 
ὤφθη.---Ψετ. 6. ἐν ἐμοί, in me (cf. Mt. 
xvii. 12), for the more usual eis ἐμέ (in Mt., 
and imported into Mk. in T.R.).—Ver. 
7. καὶ ὅταν θέλητε, etc., and when ye 
wish ye can do thema kindness; a 
thought implied in the previous clause 
(the poor ye have always), and probably 
an expansion by Mk. (cf. Mt.), yet not 
superfluous: suggesting the thought 
that expenditure in one direction does 
not disqualify for beneficent acts in 
another. The _ willing-minded - will 
always have enough for all purposes.— 
Ver. 8. ὃ ἔσχεν (suppl. ποιεῖν), what 
she had to do she did; the reference 
being not to the measure of her power 
(wealth) but to her opportunity: she did 
what lay to her hand, and could only 
be done then.—mpoéAaBe pupioat, she 
anticipated the anointing; the latter 
verb here only, the former in 1 Cor. xi. 
31, Gal. vi. τ.---ἐγταφιασμόν : the noun 


answering to the verb in Mt., here and 
in John and in one place in the classics. 
—Ver. 9. εἰς ὅλον τ. κ. for ἐν ο., etc., in 
Mt. ; α constr. praeg., the idea of going to 
all parts of the world with the gospei 
being understood. 

Vv. 10-11. $¥udas offers to betray his 
Master (Mt. xxvi. 14-16, Lk. xxii. 3-6).— 
Ver. 11. ἐχάρησαν, they rejoiced ; when 
one of the twelve companions of Jesus 
unexpectedly turned up ready to deliver 
his Master into their hands. A most 
vivid feature omitted by Mt. in his 
summarising way. Well might they 
rejoice, as but for this windfall they 
might have been totally at a loss how to 
compass their end.—émnyyeiAavro, they 
promised to pay, did not actually pay on 
the spot, as Mt.’s statement implies 
(ἔστησαν, ver. 15).---ἐζήτει, cf. ἐζήτουν, 
νετ. I, in reference to the Sanhedrists. 
They were seeking means of getting rid 
of Jesus; Judas was nowon theoutlook tor 
achanceof betraying Himintotheirhands. 
---εὐκαίρως here and in 2 Tim. iv. 1, the 


436 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XIV. 

12. ΚΑΙ τῇ πρώτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν ἀζύμων, ὅτε τὸ πάσχα ἔθυον, 
λέγουσιν αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, “Mod θέλεις ἀπελθόντες ἑτοιμά- 
σωμµεν ἵνα φάγῃς τὸ πάσχα; 13. Καὶ ἀποστέλλει δύο τῶν μαθητῶν 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, '΄Ὑπάγετε eis τὴν πόλιν: καὶ ἀπαντήσει 
ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράµιον ὕδατος βαστάζων' ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ, 
14. καὶ ὅπου ἐὰν εἰσέλθη, εἴπατε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ, “OTe 6 διδάσκαλος. 
λέγει, Mod ἐστι τὸ κατάλυµα,ὶ ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν 
µου φάγω; 15. καὶ αὐτὸς ὑμῖν δείξει ἀνώγεον ” µέγα ἐστρωμένον 
ἔτοιμον: éxet® ἑτοιμάσατε ἡμῖν. 16. Καὶ ἐξῆλθον of μαθηταὶ 
αὐτοῦ," καὶ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ 


ἠτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα. 


17. Kat ὀψίας γενομένης ἔρχεται μετὰ τῶν δώδεκα: 18. καὶ 


ἀνακειμένων αὐτῶν καὶ ἐσθιόντων, εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
ὑμῖν, ὅτι els ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει µε, ὁ ἐσθίων ὃ pet ἐμοῦ." 


ε 5 «6c? 


Αμὴν λέγω 
1g. Οἱ 


δὲ Ἰ ἤρξαντο λυπεῖσθαι, καὶ λέγειν αὐτῷ εἲς καθ’ eis, “My τι ἐγώ; '' 


1 pov after καταλυµα in ΜΒΟΡΙΙΔΣ. Vide below. 


2 αναγαιον in NABCDL al. 
4 Omit αυτον NBLA. 
6 B has των εσθιοντων (W.H. marg.). 


adjective and verb in Mk. vi. 21, 31, the 
noun in Mt. xxvi. 16. 

Vv. 12-16. Arrangements for paschal 
feast (Mt. xxvi. 17-19, Lk. xxii. 7-13). 
Mk. is much more circumstantial in this 
section than Mt., his apparent aim being 
to explain how Judas did not find his 
opportunity at the paschal supper, the 
place of celebration being carefully con- 
cealed beforehand.—Ver. 12. τῇ π. 
ἡμέρᾳ τ. a. ὅτετ. πάσχα ἔθυον: again a 
double note of time, the second clause 
indicating precisely that by the first day 
is meant the 14th Nisan. Schanz, 
following the Greek Fathers, takes 
πρώτῃ in the first clause as = προτέρᾳ, 
yielding the same sense as πρὸ T. ἑορ. Τ. 
πάσχα in John xiii. τ.--ποῦ θέλεις; : 
the disciples would ask this question in 
good time, say in the forenoon of the 
14th.—Ver. 13. δύο: more exact than 
Mt.; of course all the disciples would 
not be sent on such an errand. Lk. 
names the two.—tmdyere, etc.: the in- 
structions in Mk. are sufficient to guide 
the messengers. Mt.’s πρὸς τὸν δεῖνα is 
manifestly too vague, and could not have 
been spoken by Jesus.—av@pwrros: water- 
carrying was generally the occupation 
of women; hence a man performing the 
office would be more noticeable.— 
κεράµιον (neuter of adjective κεράµιος, 
earthen), an earthen pitcher, here and in 


3 και before εκει in SBCDL. | 
5 o |. ειπεν in BCL. 
7 οι δε omitted in ΜΒΙ, cop. 


Lk. xxii. 10.—Ver. 14. τὸ κατάλυµά. 
pov, my guest chamber. This pov of 
the best texts is interesting as suggesting 
a previous understanding between Jesus 
and the householder. It is not necessary 
to import the miraculous into the 
narrative.—Ver. 15. ἀνάγαιον (ava, 
γαῖα = γῆ), a room above the earth, an 
upper room.—péya, large, enough for the 
company.—éorpwpévov, furnished with 
table-cushions. — ἔτοιμον, perhaps a 
synonym for ἐστρωμένον = furnished, all 
ready; possibly pointing to the removal 
of leaven (C.G.T.). 

Vv. 17-21. The presence of a traitor 
announced (Mt. xxvi. 20-25, Lk. xxii. 21- 
23).—Ver. 17. ἔρχεται: after sunset He 
cometh to the place appointed for the 
feast, presumably after the two who had 
been sent to make arrangements had 
rejoined the company.—Ver. 18. 6 
ἐσθίων per’ ἐμοῦ : this clause, omitted in 
Mt., is designed to indicate, not the 
culprit, but the gravity of his offence = 
one of you, one who eats bread with me, 
a table companion.—Ver. 19. els κατὰ 
els, one by one = els ἕκαστος in Mt.; 
kata is used adverbially, and hence is 
followed by els instead of ἕνα. For 
other instances of this usage of late 
Greek vide John viii. 9, Rom. xii. 5, and 
cf. Winer, § xxxvii. 3.—Ver. 20. To the 
anxious questioning of the disciples Mk 


α2--25. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

Καὶ ἄλλος, “My τι ἐγώ1;” 20. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς Σ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
“Eis ék® τῶν δώδεκα, ὁ ἐμβαπτόμενος μετ ἐμοῦ εἰς τὸ τρυβλίον.4 
21. 6 μὲν υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑπάγει, καθὼς γέγραπται περὶ αὐτοῦ 5: 
οὐαὲὶ δὲ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνω, δι’ οὗ ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδοται : 
εκαλὸν ἦν ὃ αὐτῷ, et οὐκ ἐγεννήθη ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος." 


22. Καὶ ἐσθιόντων αὐτῶν, λαβὼν ὁ ΙησοῦςἸ ἄρτον εὐλογήσας 
«ἔκλασε, καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ele, “ Λάβετε, φάγετε. τοῦτό ἐστι 
23. Καὶ λαβὼν 16° ποτήριον εὐχαριστήσας ἔδωκεν 
αὐτοῖς: καὶ ἔπιον ἐξ αὐτοῦ πάντες: 24. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Τοῦτό 
εἐστι τὸ αἷμά µου, τὸ τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης,0 τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυνό- 
µενον.]] 25. ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐκέτι οὗ μὴ πίω ἐκ τοῦ γεννήµατος 
τῆς ἀμπέλου, ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ἐκείνης, ὅταν αὐτὸ πίνω καινὸν ἐν τῇ 


τὸ σῶμά pov.” 


437 


Ιβασιλείᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


1 και αλλος µη τι εγω (ADZ al.) omitted in RCLPA, possibly by similar ending 


domit Tisch., W.H.). 


2 Omitted in SBCDL; a mere mechanical expletive. 
‘3 SSBCL sah. cop. omit ex (it comes from ver. 18). 


3 BC have το ev τρυβ. (W.H. brackets: 


ἓν). 


5 οτι introduces this clause (ο µεν νιος, etc.) in ΔΜΒΙ, sah. cop. 


6 BL sah. omit ην. 


7 BD omit ο |. (from Mt.). 


ὃ φαγετε only in later uncials (Tisch., W.H., omit). 


9 SSBCDLAZ omit το (from Lk.). 


10 For το τ. καινης δ. SBCL have της διαθ. (D omits καινης). 


1 SSBCDLA have εκχνννοµενον υπερ πολλων. 


‘makes Jesus reply: one of the Twelve ; 
he who dippeth with me in the dish. A 
repetition of the original declaration with 
variations: the Twelve for you, and 
dipping in the dish for eating ; the former 
bringing out the gravity of the fact, the 
Twelve chosen to be Apostles of the faith, 
one of them the traitor of its Author; 
the latter narrowing the circle within 
which the traitor is to be found. Twelve 
ate with Jesus, only three or four would 
dip with Him.—épBarrdpevos, middle, 
dipping with his own hand: “Ἠαες vis medii 
verbi,” Bengel.—Ver. 21. ὅτι, assigns a 
reason for the fact just stated. To fulfil 
Scripture (Ps. xli. ϱ) the Son of Man 
must go from the earth through betrayal 
by an intimate. 
instance in Mk. of the construction μὲν 
δὲ (again in νετ. 38 and in xvi. 10, 20).— 
καλὸν αὐτῷ, good for him, without the ἦν 
asin Mt. For the construction vide on 
Mt. and Burton, M. and T. in N. T., § 
248.—5 ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖνος : this repetition 
(vide τῷ a. ἐκ. above) gives a tragic 
solemnity to the utterance = good for 
fim, if he had not been born, that man! 


This verse contains an 


T.R. from Mt. 


Cf. Mk. ii. 20, ‘‘days will come, etc., 
and then shall they fast, in that day”. 
Vv. 22-25. The Lord’s Supper (Mt. 
xxvi. 26-29, Lk. xxii. 19-20), vide notes 
on Mt.’s account, to which Mk.’s closely 
corresponds.—Ver. 22. ἐσθιόντων a., while 
they were eating, as in ver. 18; a very 
general indication of time. This and 
the announcement of the betrayal are 
for Mt. and Mk. the two memorabilia of 
the paschal feast of Jesus with His dis- 
ciples, and all they know is that they 
happened during feast-time. — AaPere, 
take, without φάγετε, as in Mt.; the 
more laconic expression likely to be the 
original. ‘“‘ Take” implies ‘‘ eat ’’.—Ver. 
23. καὶ ἔπιον, etc., and they drank of 
it, all, In Mt.’s account Jesus bids them 
drink, as He had previously bidden them 
eat. Mk.’s version strikes one as the 
more primitive ; Mt.’s as influenced by 
liturgical usage.—Ver. 24. καὶ εἶπεν: 
while they drank the cup (not after they 
had drunk it, De Wette: nor before 
they began to drink, as Mt.’s narrative 
by itself would suggest), Jesus ex- 
plained to them the symbolic import of 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XIV. 


438 
26. Kai ὑμνήσαντες ἐξῆλθον εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν “EXaay. 27. καὶ 

λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ὅτι πάντες σκανδαλισθήσεσθε ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐν 

τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτῃ 1" ὅτι γέγραπται, ΄ Πατάξω τὸν ποιμένα, καὶ διασκορ- 
πισθήσεται τὰ πρόβατα. 28. ᾽Αλλὰ μετὰ τὸ ἐγερθῆναί µε, προάξω 

Spas eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. 29. Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ἔφη αὐτῷ, “Καὶ εἰ 3 

πάντες σκανδαλισθήσονται, ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ ἐγώ.’ 30. Καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ 6 

᾽μησοῦς, “'᾽Αμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτι” σήμερον ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτῃ.» πρὶν ἢ 
Sis ἀλέκτορα φωνῆσαι, τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ µε. © 31. Ὁ δὲ ἐκ περισσοῦ 
ἔλεγε μᾶλλον, “Edy pe δέῃ συναποθανεῖν σοι, οὗ µή σε ἀπαρνή- 


5» 
σομαι. 


Ὡσαύτως δὲ ὃ καὶ πάντες ἔλεγον. 


32. ΚΑΙ ἔρχονται εἷς χωρίον οὗ τὸ ὄνομα Γεθσημανῆ : καὶ λέγει 


τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, -' Καθίσατε ὧδε, ἕως προσεύξωμαι."' 


7 BCDLA al. omit εν εµοι .. . 


33. Καὶ 


ταντη, which comes from Mt. 


Στα προβ. διασκορπ. in SBCDL; διασκορπισθησονται in $BCDLAL. 


Se. και in $BCGL (Tisch., W-H.). 


4 Add ov ABL3 al., omitted in ΜΟΔ (Tisch., W.H., adopt ; vide below). 
ὅταντη τ. ν., Without ev, in $$BCDL (Tisch., W.H.). 

6 µε before απαρ. in $BCDA (T.R. = Mt.). 

7 εκπερισσως in $BCD; ελαλει in $BDL; omit µαλλον SRBCDL. 


ξ B omits δε (W.H. brackets). 


the cup. The important point in Mk.’s 
account of the words, as compared with 
Mt.’s, is the omission of the expression, 
eis ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν. 

Vv. 26-31. On the way to Gethsemane 
(Mt. xxvi. 30-35, Lk. xxii. 39).—Ver. 26, 
exactly as in Mt. xxvi. 30, states that 
after singing the paschal hymn the 
company went forth towards the 
Mount of Olives.—Ver. 27. πάντες 
σκανδαλισθήσεσθε, ye all shall be made 
to stumble; absolutely, without the addi- 
tion of ἐν ἐμοὶ ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ταύτῃ im- 
ported into the text from Mt. in T.R. 
It was a startling announcement in 
broad general terms that the disciple- 
circle was about to experience a moral 
breakdown. The announcement was 
made not by way of reproach, but rather 
as a preface toa more cheering prophecy 
of an early reunion.—Ver. 28. ἀλλὰ p. : 
stronger than Mt.’s p. S€=ye shall be 
offended, but (be of good cheer) after 
my resurrection I will go before you, as 
your Shepherd (προάξω ὑμᾶς) into Gali- 
lee.—Ver. 29. It is the former part of the 
Master’s speech that lays hold of Peter’s 
mind; hence he promptly proceeds to 
make protestations of fidelity.—ei καὶ, 
etc.: even if (as is likely) all the rest 
shall be offended (the future, because the 
case put is conceived to be probable), yet 


certainly (ἀλλ᾽ strongly opposing what 
follows to what goes before; vide Klotz, 
p. 93, on the force of ἀλλὰ in the apo- 
dosis of a conditional proposition) not 
I.—Ver. 30. To this over-confident 
GAN’ οὐκ ἐγώ of the disciple, the Master 
returns a very pointed and peremptory 
reply : I tell thee that thou (σὺ emphatic) 
to-day (σήμερον), on this night (more 
precise indication of time), before the cock 
crow twice (still more precise indication 
of time), shall deny me, not once, but 
again and again and again (tpis).—Ver. 
31. ἐκπερισσῶς, abundantly in matter 
and manner, with vehemence and itera- 
tion; a ἅπαξ λεγ.--ἐλάλει, kept saying : 
that he would not deny his Master even 
if he had to die for Ἱε.---ὡσαύτως, a 
stronger word than Mt.’s épolws=in the 
same way, and probably in the same 
words. But the words of the others 
were simply a faint echo of Peter’s 
vehement and copious talk. They feebly 
said once (ἔλεγον = εἶπον) what he said 
strongly again and again (ἐλάλει). 

Vv. 32-42. In Gethsemane (Mt. xxvi. 
36-46, Lk. xxii. 40-46).—Ver. 33. Πρξατο, 
introduces the description of our Lord’s 
awful experience in the garden.— 
ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι, to be amazed; in Mk. 
only, first in ix. 15, where see remarks. 
on its meaning. Though Jesus had long 


26—40, ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 439 
παραλαμβάνει τὸν Πέτρον καὶ τὸν ᾿Ιάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην: μεθ 
ἑαυτοῦ. Καὶ ἤρέατο ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι καὶ ἀδημονεῖν. 34. καὶ λέγει 
αὐτοῖς, “' Περίλυπός ἐστιν ἡ ψυχή µου ἕως θανάτου: µείνατε ὧδε καὶ 
γρηγορεῖτε.᾽ 35. Καὶ προελθὼν 3 μικρόν, ἔπεσεν * ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ 
προσηύχετο, ἵνα, et δυνατόν ἐστι, παρέλθη ἀπ αὐτοῦ ἡ dpa- 
36. καὶ ἔλεγεν, ''᾿Αββᾶ, ὁ πατήρ, πάντα δυνατά σοι. παρένεγκε 
τὸ ποτήριον dm ἐμοῦ τοῦτοδ- ἀλλ᾽ οὗ τί ἐγὼ θέλω, ἀλλὰ τί σύ.” 
37. Καὶ ἔρχεται καὶ εὑρίσκει αὐτοὺς καθεύδοντας, καὶ λέγει τῷ 
Πέτρῳ, “Σίμων, καθεύδεις; οὐκ ἴσχυσας µίαν Spay γρηγορῆσαι; 
38. γρηγορεῖτε καὶ προσεύχεσθε, ἵνα μὴ εἰσέλθητε ® cis πειρασµόν. 
τὸ μὲν πνεῦμα πρόθυµον, ἡ δὲ σὰρξέ ἀσθενής.᾽ 39. Καὶ πάλιν 
ἀπελθὼν προσηύξατο, τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον εἰπών. 40. καὶ ὑποστρέψας 
εὗρεν αὐτοὺς πάλιν Ἰ καθεύδοντας - ἦσαν γὰρ οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτῶν 


βεβαρημένοι,” 


καὶ οὐκ ἤδεισαν τί αὐτῷ ἀποκριθῶσι.ὸ 


Ἰ B has τον before each name (W.H.). Many MSS. have the article only with 


Πετρον. 
2 pet auTov in SBCD. 


> CDLA have προσελθων, but προελθων, found in SB al., seems to be the word 
needed. προσελθων is a frequent mistake of the scribes. 


4 ewumrev in SSBL (επεσεν from Mt.). 
δελθητε in NB (Tisch., W.H.). 
very frequent mistake in the old MSS. 


7 For υποστρεψας . . 
αντους (W.H.). 


© rouTo απ. εµου in MABCLAX ai. 


Weiss rejects the omission of ets before ελθ.;: a 


- wahty (ACA, Tisch.) BL have παλιν ελθων ευρεν 
D the same, omitting παλιν. 


Savtwv before οι οφ. in SYBCLA, and καταβαρννοµενοι in ABLA; κατα- 


Bapovpevor in D. 
9 amox. before aurw SABCDL. 


known, and had often with realistic 
plainness spoken of, what was to befall 
Him, yet the vivid sense of what it all 
meant came upon His soul at this hour, 
as a sudden appalling revelation. The 
other two words used by Mk. to de- 
scribe Christ’s state of mind (ἀδημονεῖν. 
περίλυπος) occur in Mt. also.—Ver. 35. 
ἔπιπτεν (SQBL, ἔπεσεν T.R. as in Mt.), 
imperfect: He fell again and again on 
the ground. It was a protracted des- 
perate struggle.—xai προσηύχετο ἵνα: 
Mk. first’ indicates the gist of Christ’s 
prayers (=that if possible the hour might 
pass from Him), then reports what Jesus 
said (ver. 36). In the prayer of, Jesus 
the experience dreaded is called the cup, 
asin Mt. The Hour and the Cup—both 
alike solemn, suggestive names.—Ver. 
36. ᾽Αββᾶ 6 πατήρ: in the parallels 
simply πάτερ. In the Apostolic Church 
the use of the double appellation among 
Gentile Christians was common (vide 
Rom: viii. 15, Gal. iv. 6), ᾿Αββά having 


become a proper name and πατὴρ being 
added as its interpretation=God our 
Father. Mk. imparts into the prayer of 
our Lord this apostolic usage. Jesus 
doubtless would use only one of the 
names, probably the Aramaic.—apéveyxe 
τ. π. το, remove this cup ; equivalent to 
παρέλθῃ in ver. 35 (Lk. xxii. 42).—a@AX’ 
ov, etc. ; ‘ but not what (τέ for 8) I will, 
but what Thou”? ; elliptical but clear and 
expressive : Ὑενήσεται or γενέσθαι δεῖ 
(not γενέσθω which would demand py 
before θέλω) is understood (vide Holtz- 
mann, H.C., and Weiss in Meyer).— 
Ver. 37. τῷ Πέτρῳ: to the disciple who 
had been so confident of his loyalty, but 
also from whom Jesus expected most in 
the way of sympathy.—Zipev: the old, 
not the new, disciple, name ; ominous.— 
Ver. 38. This exhortation to watch and 
pray is given in almost identical terms 
in Mt. and Mk. It looks like a second- 
ary version of what our Lord actually 
said.—Ver. 39. Mk., like Mt., divides 


XIV. 


4Ι. Kai ἔρχεται τὸ τρίτον, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “΄ Καθεύδετε τὸ } 


ἀπέχει' ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα: ἰδού, παραδίδοται 


42. ἐγείρεσθε, 


43. Καὶ εὐθέως, ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, παραγίνεται Ιούδας, eis 


440 KATA MAPKON 
λοιπὸν καὶ ἀναπαύεσθε. 
ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἰς τὰς χεῖρας τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν. 
ἄγωμεν : ἰδού, 6 παραδιδούς µε ἤγγικε.͵ 

b Ch. x 


dv? τῶν δώδεκα, καὶ μετ αὐτοῦ ὄχλος πολὺς ὃ μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ 


ro, John ξύλων, παρὰ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ τῶν γραμµατέων καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων. 


xi. 57 
(omission 44. 
of aug- 
ment: 

usual in 


᾿δεδώκει δὲ 6 παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν σύσσημον αὗτοῖς, λέγων, “Ὃν 
ἂν Φιλήσω, αὐτός ἐστι" κρατήσατε αὐτόν, καὶ ἀπαγάγετε" ἀσφαλῶς,' 


N. T.). 45. Καὶ ἐλθών, εὐθέως προσελθὼν αὐτῷ λέγει, “ Ῥαββί, ῥαββί5 :’΄ 


1 το is found in BAZ; omitted in CDL (Tisch. retains, W.H. in brackets). 


2 Omit ων NABCDLZ. 


3 s$BL omit πολυς found in CDA (comes from Mt.). 


4 amayete in BDL. 


.-he agony into three acts, but he reports 
the words spoken by Jesus in prayer 
only in the first. Mt. gives the prayer 
of Jesus in the second act, as well as in 
the first, generalising in the third, where 
he repeats the formula here used by 
Mk.: τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον elrrav.—Ver. 40. 
καταβαρυνόµενοι, “their eyes were very 
heavy’; R. V., weighed down with 
irresistible sleep.—xaraBaptve, here and 
occasionally in the Sept. =the more usual 
καταβαρέω (from the simple verb βαρέω 
comes BeBapynpévor in Τ.Ε.).--καὶ οὐκ 
ἤδεισαν, etc.: this remark recalls the 
experience of the same three on the hill 
of transfiguration (cf. ix. 6). But in the 
earlier instance the reference is to the 
stupidity produced by sleep, here probably 
to shame on account of unseasonable 
sleep. They felt that they ought to have 
kept awake during their Master’s hour of 
trial, and knew not how to excuse them- 
selves. —Ver. 41. ἀπέχει, “itis enough,” 
A. V.=sufficit in Vulgate; one of the 
puzzling words in Mk.’s vocabulary to 
which many meanings have been given. 
Beza, in doubt as to Jerome’s interpreta- 
tion, was satisfied at last by a quotation 
from Anacreon coming into his mind, in 
which the poet, giving instructions to 
a painter for the portrait of his mistress, 
concludes: ἀπέχει. βλέπω γὰρ αὐτήν: 
τάχα, κηρέ, καὶ λαλήσεις--'' Enough! 
the girl herself I view: so like, ’twill 
soon be speaking, too”. Elsner and 
Raphel follow Beza. Kypke dissents 
and renders: ἀπέχει, ἦλθεν ἡ Spa, as if 
it were ἦλθε καὶ ἀπ. ἡ =the hour (of 
my passion) is come and calls you and 
me away from this scene. Most modern 


5 Ῥαββει once only in NBCDLA. 


commentators accept the rendering, “ it 
isenough”. Vide an interesting note 
in Field’s Otium Nor. The meaning is: 
I have conquered in the struggle; I 
need your sympathy no longer; you 
may sleep now if you will. 

Vv. 43-02. The apprehension (Mt. 
xxvi. 47-56, Lk. xxii. 47-53).—Ver. 43. 
εὐθὺς, etc. (ἰδοὺ in Mt.), straightway, 
even while He is speaking, appears 
Judas, who is carefully defined by sur- 
name and position as one of the Twelve. 
At what point of time the traitor left the 
company on his nefarious errand is not in- 
dicated. According to Weiss (in Meyer) 
the evangelist conceives of Judas as 
going with the rest to Gethsemane and 
stealing away from the nine, after the 
three had been taken apart, having now 
satisfied himself as to the Master’s 
whereabouts.—apa τ. ἀρχ., etc.: παρὰ 
goes along with παραγίνεται, and im- 
plies that Judas and those with him 
had an official commission from the 
authorities, the three classes of whom 
are carefully specified.—Ver. 44. δεδώ- 
wet: the pluperfect, but without augment, 
vide Winer, § xii. Ο.---σύσσημον (neuter 
of adjective cvoonpos: σύν,σμα): a sign 
previously agreed on (σημεῖον in Mt.), 
a late word severely condemned by 
Phrynichus, p. 418, here only in N. T. 


In Sept. for DJ an “ensign” (Is. v. 26). 


--ἀσφαλῶς may mean either: lead Him 
away with an easy mind (He will not 
attempt escape), or: lead, etc., cautiously, 
carefully— He may slip out of your 
hands as He has done before (Lk. iv. 30). 
Judas was just the kind of man to have 


415.53. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 
καὶ κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν. 46. Οἱ δὲ ἐπέβαλον ἐπ αὐτὸν τὰς χεῖρας 
αὐτῶν,ὶ καὶ ἐκράτησαν αὐτόν. 

47. Ets δέ τις” τῶν παρεστηκότων σπασάµενος τὴν µάχαιραν 
ἔπαισε τὸν δοῦλον τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, καὶ ἀφεῖλεν αὐτοῦ τὸ ὠτίον.δ 
48. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 “Ingots εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Ὡς ἐπὶ λῃηστὴν ἐξήλθετε 
μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ ξύλων, συλλαβεῖν µε; 49. καθ ἡμέραν juny 
πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ διδάσκων, καὶ οὐκ ἐκρατήσατέ µε: ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα 
πληρωθῶσιν at γραφαί. 50. Καὶ ἀφέντες αὐτὸν πάντες ἔφυγον." 
51. Kat els τις νεανίσκος > ἠκολούθει δ αὐτῷ, περιβεβληµένος σινδόνα 
ἐπὶ γυμνοῦ. καὶ κρατοῦσιν αὐτὸν ot νεανίσκοιἹ: 52. 6 δὲ κατα- 
λιπὼν τὴν σινδόνα γυμνὸς ἔφυγεν dw αὐτῶν .ὃ 

ων επ αυτον T. χ. αντων BDL have simply τας χειρας αντω, the most probable 
weading. 

2 eus δε without τις in NAL (W.H. have τις bracketed) ; BCA have τις. 


3 wraptov in NBD ; ωτιον in CLA (probably from Mt.). 

4 εφυγον παντες in SBCLA, preferable reading. Vide below. 
5 Instead of εις τις νεαν. (ΑΔΣ al.) SSBCL have veay. τις. 
ὄσυνηκ. in NBCL. D=T.R. A συνηκολουθησεν. 


7 SBCDLA omit οι veav. 


5 BCL omit απ αντων (a gloss found in ADAZ al.). 


a superstitious dread of Christ’s preter- 
natural power.—Ver. 45. ἐλθὼν εὐθὺς 
“προσελθὼν = arrived on the spot he 
without delay approaches Jesus; no 
hesitation, promptly and adroitly done.— 
Ραββί: without Mt.’s χαῖρε, and only 
once spoken (twice in T.R.), the fervour 
of false love finding expression in the 
kiss (κατεφίλησεν, vide notes on Mt.) 
rather than in words. 

Vv. 47-52. Attempt at rescue.—Ver. 
47. εἷς τ. παρ., one of those standing 
by, ἐ.ε., one of the three, Peter according 
to the fourth gospel (xviii. το).-- τὴν 
µάχ., the sword = his sword, as if each 
disciple was armed; vide on Mt.— 
ὠτάριον  ὠτίον, T.R., diminutive of 
οὓς; the use of diminutives for the mem- 
bers of the body was common in popular 
speech. Wide Lobeck, Phryn., p. 211.— 
Ver. 48. On this and the following 
verse vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 49. tva 
πληρωθῶσιν at γ.: this may be a case of 
iva with the subjunctive used as an im- 
perative = let the Scriptures be fulfilled. 
Cf. 2 Cor. viii. 7, last clause, and consult 
Winer, § xliii. 5d.— Ver. 5ο. καὶ 
ἀφέντες, etc., and deserting Him fled 
all (πάντες last, vide above): the nine 
with the three, the three not less than 
the nine—all alike panic-stricken.—Ver. 
51 introduces a little anecdote peculiar 


to Mk., the story of an unknown friend, 
not one of the Twelve, who had joined 
the company, and did not fly with the 
τεςβε.--συνηκολούθει α., was following 
Jesus; when He was being led away, 
and after the disciples had Πεά.--περι- 
βεβλημένος σινδόνα ἐπὶ yupvod: this 
suggests that the youth, on hearing some 
sudden report, rose out of his bed and 
rushed out in his night-shirt, or, being 
absolutely naked, hurriedly threw about 
his body a loose cotton or linen sheet. 
The statement that on being laid hold 
of he cast off the garment favours the 
latter alternative.—Ver. 52. Ὑγυμνὸς ἔφ., 
fled naked, in the literal sense, whereon 
Bengel remarks: ‘‘on a night not with- 
out a moon; fear conquers shame in 
great danger”. (A few years ago a 
young wife chased a thief, who had been 
stealing her wedding presents, through 
the streets of Glasgow, in the early 
hours of the morning, in her night-gown ; 
not without success. Her husband 
modestly stayed behind to put on his 
clothes.)\—Who was this young man? 
Mk. the evangelist, say many, arguing: 
the story was of no interest to any one 
but the hero of it, therefore the hero was 
the teller of the tale. A good argument, 
unless a motive can be assigned for the 
insertion of the narrative other than 


442 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XIV.. 
53. ΚΑΙ ἀπήγαγον τὸν Ιησοῦν πρὸς τὸν ἀρχιερέα: καὶ συνέρχονται. 
1 πάντες ot ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι καὶ ot γραμματεῖς. 
54. Kal 6 Πέτρος ἀπὸ µακρόθεν ἠκολούθησεν αὐτῷ ἕως ἔσω εἰς τὴν 
αὐλὴν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως: καὶ ἦν συγκαθήµενος μετὰ τῶν ὑπηρετῶν, καὶ. 
θερµαινόµενος πρὸς τὸ Hs. 55. Οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερες καὶ Sov τὸ. 
συνέδριον ἐζήτουν κατὰ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ µαρτυρίαν, eis τὸ θανατῶσαι 
αὐτόν: καὶ οὐχ εὕρισκον. 56. πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐψευδομαρτύρουν κατ 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἴσαι at µαρτυρίαι οὐκ ἦσαν. 


2A 
αυτῷ 


, yd 
57. καί τινες ἀναστάντες 
3 A - 
ἐψευδομαρτύρουν Kat αὐτοῦ, λέγοντες, 58. “΄Ὅτι ἡμεῖς ἠκούσαμεν 
- J ~ 
αὐτοῦ λέγοντος, “Ort ἐγὼ καταλύσω τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον τὸν χειροποίητον, 


καὶ διὰ τριῶν ἡμερῶν ἄλλον ἀχειροποίητον οἰκοδομήσω.” 


59. Κα) 


1 S8DLA omit αντω, found in BE al. pler. (W.H. πιατρ.). 


merely personalinterest. Schanz suggests 
a desire to exhibit in a concrete instance 
the danger of the situation, and the 
ferocity of the enemies of Jesus. On the 
whole one feels inclined to acquiesce in 
the judgment of Hahn, quoted by Holtz., 
H.C., that in this curious incident we 
have ‘‘the monogram of the painter 
(Mk.) ina dark corner of the picture ”. 
Brandt, however (Dze Ev. Gesch., p. 28), 
dissents from this view. 

Vv. 53-65. Before Caiaphas (Mt. xxvi. 
57-68, Lk. xxii. 54, 66-71).—Ver. 53. 
συνέρχονται α. πάντες, etc.: again all 
the three orders ot the Sanhedrists are 
named, who have been summoned to 
meet about the time the party sent to 
apprehend Jesus might be expected to 
arrive.—Ver. 54. 06 Πέτρος: the story 
of Peter’s denial begins here, and, after 
being suspended by the account of the 
trial, isresumed at νετ.66.--ἀπὸ µακρόθεν, 
from afar (ἀπὸ redundant here as else- 
where), fearful, yet drawn on by love 
and curiosity.—ws ἔσω εἰς: a redundant 
but expressive combination, suggesting 
the idea of one stealthily feeling his way 
into the court of the palace, venturing 
further and further in, and gaining 
courage with each step (vide Weiss, 
Mk.-Evan., p. 470).—Oeppatvopevos : 
nights cold even at Easter in Palestine ; 
a fire in the court welcome in the early 
hours of morning, when something un- 
usual was going on. ‘ However hot it 
may be in the daytime, the nights in 
spring are almost always cold ”—Furrer, 
Wanderungen, p. 241.---πρὸς τὸ φῶς, at 
the fire; here called light, because it was 
there to give light as well as heat. Elsner 
and Raphel cite instances of the use of 
φῶς for fire from Xenophon. Hesychius 
gives wip as one of its meanings. 


Vv. 55-65. The trial and condemna- 
tion.—Ver. 55. µαρτυρίαν: Mt. Πας. 
ψευδοµαρτυρίαν, justly so characterised, 
because the Sanhedrists wanted evidence 
for a foregone conclusion: evidence that 
would justify a sentence of death.—Ver. 
56. ἴσαι, equal, to the same effect, as. 
the testimonies of true witnesses would, 
of course, be. Grotius takes the word as 
meaning, not equal to one another, but 
equal to the demands of weighty evidence 
and justifying condemnation. Elsner 
agrees, arguing from the use of the word 
again, in reference to the evidence about 
the temple lJogion of Jesus. These 
witnesses, he holds, are not represented. 
as making conflicting statements, but 
simply as making statements not suffici- 
ently weighty —not equal to the occasion. 
There is some force in this.—Ver. 57. 
τινες, some, for which Mt. has the more 
definite δύο, the smallest number neces- 
sary to establish a matter.—Ver. 58. 
ὅτι, etc.: Mk.’s version of the testimony- 
borne by the witnesses differs in im- 
portant respects from that of Mt.; v7s.,. 
by the insertion of the words τὸν 
χειροποίητον and ἄλλον ἀχειροποίητον. 
Mt.’s form doubtless comes nearest to- 
what the witnesses actually said. Mk.’s 
puts into their mouths, to a certain ex- 
tent, the sense in which he and his 
fellow-Christians understood Christ’s 
saying, viz., as a prophecy that the 
material temple would be superseded by 
a spiritual temple = the community of 
believers in Jesus. If they had really 
spoken, as here reported, the talsehood 
would have lain rather in the animus of 
their statement than in its meaning: 
the animus of men who regarded it as 
impious to speak of the temple of God 
being destroyed, as contemptuous to: 


53--66. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

οὐδὲ οὕτως ton ἦν ἡ μαρτυρία αὐτῶν. 60. Καὶ ἀναστὰς ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς 
eis τὸ 1 µέσον ἐπηρώτησε τὸν Ἰησοῦν, λέγων, “OdK ἀποκρίνῃ οὐδέν ; 
τί οὗτοί σου καταμαρτυροῦσιν; 
9 


61. Ὁ δὲ ἐσιώπα, καὶ οὐδὲν 

, « ~ 
Gmexpivato.2 Πάλιν ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ἐπηρώτα αὐτόν, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, 
“$0 ef ὁ Χριστός, 6 vids τοῦ εὐλογητοῦ ; ” 


«ς 2 


62. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, 
Εγώ εἰμι. καὶ ὄψεσθε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καθήµενον ἐκ 
δεξιῶν ὃ τῆς δυνάµεως, καὶ ἐρχόμενον μετὰ τῶν νεφελῶν τοῦ οὐρανοῦ.” 
63. Ὁ δὲ ἀρχιερεὺς διαρρήξας τοὺς χιτῶνας αὐτοῦ λέγει, “Ti ἔτι 
Χρείαν ἔχομεν μαρτύρων; 64. ἠκούσατε τῆς βλασφημίας: τί ὑμῖν 
φαίνεται; Ot δὲ πάντες κατέκριναν αὐτὸν εἶναι ἔνοχον { θανάτου. 
6ς. Καὶ ἠρξαντό τινες ἐμπτύειν αὐτῷ, καὶ περικαλύπτειν τὸ πρόσω- 


ο a lot , 
πον αὐτοῦ,» καὶ κολαφίζειν αὐτόν, καὶ λέγειν αὐτῷ, “ Προφήτευσον -’ 


445 


καὶ ot ὑπηρέται ῥαπίσμασιν αὐτὸν ἔβαλλον.5 


66. Καὶ ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου ἐν τῇ αὐλῇ κάτω, ἔρχεται pia τῶν 


1 ssABCLAS al. fl. omit το found in D. 


2 For ουδεν amex. (ADA al.) SBCL 33 sah. cop. have ουκ amex. ουδεν. 


Σεκ Sef. καθ. in SBCDLAZ al. 
® avtov το προσ. in SBCLA 33. 


4 ενοχον ειναι in SBCLA 33. 


6 ελαβον in ΜΑΒΟΙΙΙΔ. εβαλλον substituted in later MSS. for a word not under 


stood. 


7 κατω εν τ. avd. in NBCL. DI omit κατω. 


characterise it as hand-made, and as 
blasphemous to suggest that another 
could take its place.—Ver. 60. eis 
µέσον: a graphic feature in Mk., suggest- 
ing that the high priest arose from his 
seat and advanced into the semi-circle 
of the council towards Jesus—the action 
of an irritated, baffled man.—ovx ἄπο- 
κρίνῃ: on the high priest’s question vide 
notes on Mt.—Ver. 61. ἐσιώπα καὶ, 
etc.: one of Mk.’s dualisms, yet not idle 
repetition = He maintained the silence 
He had observed up to that point (im- 
perfect), and He answered nothing to 
the high oppriest’s pointed question 
(aorist).—waAw : the high priest makes 
another attempt to draw Jesus into some 
self-condemning utterance, this time 
successfully.—rod εὐλογητοῦ, the Blessed 
One, here only, absolutely, as a name for 
God. Usually, an epithet attached to 
Κύριος (Wiinsche, Beitrage).—Ver. 62. 
Ἐγώ εἰμι. On Christ’s reply to the high 
priest affirming the Messianic claim, 
vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 63. τοὺς 
χιτῶνας, his tunics, or undergarments, of 
which persons in good position wore two. 
-—Ver. 64. τί ὑμῖν φαίνεται, what ap- 
pears to you to be the appropriate penalty 
of such blasphemous speech?=7l ὑμῖν 


δοκεῖ in Mt. Ndosgen denies the equi- 
valence, and renders Mk.’s_ peculiar 
phrase: what lies for you on the hand, 
what is now your duty? with appeal to 
Xenophon, Anab., v., 7, 3.—Ver. 65. 
τινες: presumably Sanhedrists. — περι- 
καλύπτειν: Mt. says nothing of this, but 
he as well as Mk. represents them as 
asking Jesus to prophesy. Mt.’s version 
implies that Jesus was struck from be- 
hind, Mk.’s in front.—ot ὑπηρέται: fol- 
lowing the example of their masters.— 
ῥαπίσμασιν αὐτὸν ἔλαβον, received Him 
with slaps of the open hand: a phrase 
recalling the Latin, accipere aliquem 
verberibus. 

Vv. 66-72. Peter’s denial (Mt. xxvi. 
69-75, Lk. xxii. 54-62).—Ver. 66. κάτω 
ἐ. τ. a., below in the court, implying 
that the trial of Jesus had taken place in 
a chamber on ahigher level.—épyerat pia, 
etc., cometh one of the maids of the high 
priest—a servant in his palace, on some 
errand that night when all things were 
out of their usual course. That a maid 
should be astir and on duty at that un- 
seasonable hour was itself a sign that 
something extraordinary was going on.— 
Ver. 67. ἰδοῦσα: Peter, sitting at the 
fire, catches her eye, and she sees at once 


444 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XIV. 


παιδισκῶν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, 67. καὶ ἰδοῦσα τὸν Πέτρον θερµαινόµενον, 
ἐμβλέψασα αὐτῷ λέγει, “Καὶ σὺ μετὰ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἦσθα.” 1 
68. Ὁ δὲ ἠρνήσατο, λέγων, “Οὐκ»Σ οἶδα, οὐδὲ ” ἐπίσταμαι τί σὺ 3 
λέγεις. Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἔέω εἰς τὸ προαύλιον: καὶ ἁλέκτωρ ἐφώνησε.' 
6ο. Καὶ ἡ παιδίσκη ἰδοῦσα αὐτὸν πάλιν ἤρξατο ὅ λέγειν τοῖς παρε- 


omxdow,® “ Ὅτι οὗτος ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐστιν." 


70. Ὁ δὲ πάλιν ἠρνεῖτο. 


Καὶ μετὰ μικρὸν πάλιν οἱ παρεστῶτες ἔλεγον τῷ Πέτρῳ, ''᾽Αληθῶς 


1 ησθα before |. with τον prefixed in BCL. The readings vary much here, but 
that of BCL (Tisch., W.H., Weiss) is the most like Mk.’s graphic style. Vide below. 


2 ovre ovre in NBDL. 


2 ov TL in ΜΒΟΙ/ΔΣ 33, altered by the scribes into the smoother τι ov. 
4 και αλεκτωρ εφωνησεν omitted in BL; found in CDIA al. Vide below. 


δηρξατο παλιν in SCLA (Tisch.. W.H., text). 


ing has ειπεν (W.H. πιατρ.). 
6 παρεστωσιν in SBCILA 


that heisastranger. Going closer to him, 
and looking sharply into his face in the 
dim fire-light (ἐμβλέψασα), she comes at 
once to her οοπε]αδίοπ.---καὶ σὺ, etc., 
thou also wert with the Nazarene—that 
Jesus; spoken in a contemptuous 
manner, a faithful echo of the tone of 
her superiors. The girl had probably 
seen Peter in Christ’s company in the 
streets of Jerusalem, or in the temple 
during the last few days, and doubtless 
she had heard disparaging remarks about 
the Galilean prophet in the palace.— 
Ver. 68. οὔτε οἶδα, etc., I neither know 
nor understand, thou, what thou sayest. 
--οὔτε-οῦτε connect closely the two 
verbs as expressing inability to compre- 
hend what she means. The unusual 
emphatic position of σὺ (σὺ τί λέγεις, 
smoothed down into τί σὺ A. in T.R.) 
admirably reflects affected astonishment. 
---ἐξῆλθεν: he slunk away from the fire 
into the forecourt—arpoavaAfoy, here only 
in N. Τ.--καὶ ἀλέκτωρ ἐφώνησε: these 
words, omitted in \gBL, are of very 
dubious authenticity. Weiss and Holtz- 
mann think they were inserted by copyists 
under the impression that the words of 
Jesus to Peter, ver. 30, meant that the 
cock was to crow twice in close 
succession, whereas the δὶς referred to 
the second time of cock-crowing, the 
beginning of the second watch after 
midnight. Schanz, while regarding this 
explanation of δὶς as unnatural, admits 
that it is difficult to understand how this 
first crow did not remind Peter of the 
Lord’s warning word.—Ver. 69. ἡ 
παιδίσκη: the article naturally suggests 
that it is the same maid, and probably 


B omits, and for λεγειν follow- 


but for harmonistic interests there would 
have been no doubt on the subject. Yet 
the fact that Mt. makes it another 
obliges us to ask whether Mk.’s ex- 
pression necessarily means the same 
person. Grotius, whom Rosenmiller 
follows, says 4 may here, as occasionally 
elsewhere = τις. Of more weight is the 
suggestion that it means the maid on 
duty in that particular place, the fore- 
court (Schanz and Klostermann; the 
remarks of the latter specially worthy ot 
notice). On first thoughts one might 
deem πάλιν decisive as to identity, but 
(1) it is wanting in B, and (2) its most 
probable position is just before λέγειν, 
and the meaning, that Peter was a second 
time spoken to (or at) on the subject of 
his connection with Jesus, not that the 
same person spoke in both cases. On 
the whole a certain element of doubt 
remains, which cannot be eliminated by 
exegetical considerations. In favour of 
one maid is the consideration that two 
able to recognise Peter is more unlikely 
than one. Yet the two might be 
together when they saw Peter previously, 
or the one might point him out to the 
other that night. In Mt.’s narrative the 
standers-by seem also to have inde- 
pendent knowledge of Peter. In Mk. 
the maid gives them information. On 
the whole, Mk., as was to be expected, 
gives the clearer picture of the scene.— 
τοῖς παρεστῶσιν, to those standing by ; 
pointing to Peter, and speaking so that 
he could hear.—Ver. 70. Now, it is the 
bystanders who persecute Peter with the 
charge of being a disciple.—éaAnQas : 
they are quite sure of it, for two reasons * 


67—72. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


445 


ἐξ αὐτῶν ef: καὶ γὰρ Γαλιλαῖος ef, καὶ ἡ λαλιά σου ὁμοιάζει.΄ 1 
71. Ὁ δὲ ἤρξατο ἀναθεματίζειν καὶ ὀμνύειν, '"Ὅτι οὐκ οἶδα τὸν 


A , 
ἄνθρωπον τοῦτον, ὃν λέγετε.᾽ 


ἐφώνησε. 


ἸΙησοῦς, “Ὅτι πρὶν ἀλέκτορα Φωνῆσαι Sis,> ἀπαρνήσῃ µε Tpis.” 


καὶ ἐπιβαλὼν © ἔκλαιε. 


72. Καὶ ὃ ἐκ δευτέρου ἀλέκτωρ 
Καὶ ἀνεμνήσθη ὁ Πέτρος τοῦ ῥήματος οὗ “ εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 


1 και η λαλ. σ. οµοιαζει is imported from Mt.; omitted in ΝΒΟΡΙ, (Tisch., 


W.H., Weiss). 
2 opvuvas in BL al. (οµννειν in Mt.). 


3 xat in S8BLD followed by ευθυς omitted in ACNXA, etc., which insert και 


αλεκ. εφωνησε in ver. 68. 


4 +o pnpa ως in SABCLA, corrected into the more usual του ρηµατος in some 


copies. 


5 B places δις before φωνησαι, and ΜΒΟΙ.Δ have τρις µε απαρνηση instead of 


the order in T.R. 


6 For επιβαλων εκλαιε D has ηρξατο κλαιειν, and is followed by Latin, Egyptian, 


and Syriac verss., including Syr. Sin. 


(4) the maid’s confidence not specified 
but implied in the καὶ yap, which in- 
troduces an additional reason; (2) 
Γαλιλαῖος εἶ = you are (by your speech) 
a Galilean. The addition in some MSS., 
καὶ 7 λαλία σ., etc., explanatory of the 
term Galilean, would be quite in Mk.’s 
manner, but the best authorities omit it.— 
Ver. 71, ἀναθεματίζειν : used absolutely, 
to call down curses on himself in case he 
was telling lies. Mt. has καταθ., which 
is probably a contraction from καταναθ. 
(in T.R.).—Ver. 72. εὐθὺς: omitted in 
the MSS. which insert a first cock-crow 
in ver. 68, as implying that this was the 
first crow at that hour, as in Mt.—é« 
δευτέρου (omitted in NL because appa- 
tently implying a first cock-crow during 
the denial, which they omit) must be 
understood with Weiss as referring to 
the second time of cock-crowing (three 
in the morning), the first being at mid- 
night.—émBakeov: another puzzle in 
Mk.’s vocabulary; very variously inter- 
preted. Most modern interpreters adopt 
the rendering in the A. V. and R. V., 
‘‘when he thought thereon” (ἐπιβαλὼν 
τὸν νοῦν). Weizsacker : ‘‘ er bedachte es 
und weinte”. Theophylact took ἐπιβ = 
ἐπικαλυψάμενος τὴν κεφαλήν, having 
covered his head (that he might weep 
unrestrainedly), a rendering which 
Fritzsche and Field (Otium Nor.) 
decidedly support. Field remarks: ‘‘it 
may have been a trivial or colloquial 
word, such as would have stirred the 
bile of a Phrynichus or a Thomas 
Magister, who would have inserted it 
in their Index Expurgatorius, with a 


caution: ἐπιβαλὼν μὴ λέγε ἀλλὰ ἐγκα- 
λυψάµενος ἢ ἐπικαλυψάμενος ”. Brandt 
(Die Ev. Gesch., p. 31), adopting a 
suggestion by Holwerda, thinks the 
original word may have been ἐκβαλὼν = 
going out, or flinging himself out. 
Klostermann ingeniously suggests : 
‘stopped suddenly in his course of denial, 
like a man, running headlong, knocking 
suddenly against an obstacle in his way”. 
The choice seems to lie between the 
renderings: ‘thinking thereon” and 
“covering his head”. 

CHAPTER XV. THE Passion History 
CONTINUED. — Vv. 1-5. Before Pilate 
(Mt. xxvii. 1-14, Lk. xxiii, 1-10).—Ver. 
I. εὖθὺς, mpwt, without delay, quam 
primum, in the morning watch, which 
might mean any time between three and 
six, but probably signifies after sunrise. 
--συμβούλιον will mean either a con- 
sultation or the result, the resolution 
come to, according as we adopt the 
reading: ποιήσαντες (Τ.Ε. = BA) or 
ἑτοιμάσαντες (39ΟΙ;).- καὶ ὅλον τὸ 
συνέδριον : the καὶ simply identifies= 
even the whole Sanhedrim, and does 
not imply that, besides the three classes 
previously mentioned, some others were 
present (¢.g., στρατηγοὺς τοῦ ἱεροῦ: Lk. 
xxii. 52). This added clause signifies 
that it was a very important meeting, 
as, in view of its aim, to prepare the case 
for Pilate, it obviously was. The San- 
hedrists had accomplished nothing till 
they had got the matter put in sucha 
form that they might hope to prevail 
with the procurator, with whom lay the 
jus gladit, to do their wicked will, and 


446 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XV. 


XV. 1. ΚΑΙ εὐθέως ἐπὶ τὸ mpwt! συμβούλιον ποιήσαντες ? ot 
ἀρχιερεῖς μετὰ τῶν πεσβυτέρων καὶ Ὑραμματέων, καὶ ὅλον τὸ 


συνέδριον, δήσαντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἀπήνεγκαν καὶ παρέδωκαν τῷ 
2. καὶ ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτὸν ὁ Πιλάτος, “2d εἶ ὁ βασιλεὺς 
Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Xd λέγεις.᾿ 


Πιλάτῳ. 
, 


~ , 
τῶν Ιουδαίων; 


3. Καὶ κατηγόρουν αὐτοῦ ot ἀρχιερεῖς πολλά: 4. 6 δὲ Πιλάτος 


πάλιν ἐπηρώτησεν ” αὐτόν, λέγων, “OdK ἀποκρίνῃ οὐδέν; 
ο 


πόσα σου καταμαρτυροῦσιν 


ἴδε, 


5. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς οὐκέτι οὐδὲν 


ἀπεκρίθη, ὥστε θαυμάζειν τὸν Πιλάτον. 


‘ ‘ S 3 > ο 9 2 > a 
6. Kara δὲ ἑορτὴν ἀπέλυεν αὐτοῖς ἕνα δέσµιον, ὄνπερ ἠτοῦντο. 


7 


7. ἦν δὲ ὁ λεγόμενος Βαραββᾶς μετὰ τῶν συστασιαστῶν ὃ δεδεµένος, 


ἔπρωι without επι το in ΝΒΟΡΙ.. 
2 So in BA al. 
5 Omit τω ΝΒΟΡΙΔ. 


SCL have erowpacavres(Tisch., W.H., margin). 
4 επηρωτα in B 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


° 88 omits λεγων (Tisch., W.H., in brackets). 


6 κατηγορουσιν in S$BCD (Tisch., W.H.). 
7 ov παρητουντο in SAB (Tisch., Trg., marg., W.H.). 


nowhere else in the N.T. Vide below. 


καταµαρ. in Τ.Ε. is from Mt. 
ονπερ (T.R.) is found 


8 στασιαστων in SBCD. Weiss thinks the συσ- (T.R.) has been omitted per 


incuriam in these MSS. 


of course that Jesus claimed to be the 
Christ would not serve that purpose. 
Vide notes on Mt.—fluAar@: without 
the article in best MSS. on this the first 
mention; with, in subsequent reference. 
Mk. does not think it necessary to say 
who or what Pilate was, not even men- 
tioning, as Mt., that he was the governor. 
—Ver.2. σὺ εἶ ὁβ. Pilate’s question 
reveals the secret of the morning meet- 
ing. The crafty Sanhedrists put a po- 
litical construction on the confession of 
Jesus. The Christ, therefore a pretender 
to the throne of Israel. Vide on Mt.— 
Ver. 3. πολλά: either an adverb=much, 
or the accusative after κατηγόρουν. As 
to the matter of these accusations vide 
on Mt. But to what end, when Jesus 
had confessed that He was King; giving 
Himself away, so to speak? The San- 
hedrists must have seen from Pilate’s 
manner, a smile on his face perhaps, 
that he did not take the confession 
seriously, For the reason of this vide 
on Mt.—Ver. 4. πόσα, answering to 
πολλά in νετ. 3, might mean ‘how 
grave,’’ Thayer’s Grimm, but probably 
=how many, as in vi. 38, viii. 5, 19.— 
Ver. 5. ὥστε θαυμ. τ. Π. Mt. adds 
λίαν. The governor had never seen a 
prisoner like this before. He does not 
believe Him to be a political pretender, 
but he sees that He is a remarkable 


man, and feels that he must proceed 
cautiously, groping his way amid the 
parties and passions of this strange 
people. 

Vv. 6-15. Fesus or Barabbas ? (Mt. 
xxvii. 15-26, Lk. xxiii. 16-25).—Ver. 
6. ἀπέλνεν, imperfect = Mt.’s εἰώθει 
ἀπολύειν, pointing to a practice of the 
governor at passover season ; on which 
vide on Mt.—évrep ᾖτοῦντο, '΄ whomso- 
ever they desired,” A. V. The R. V. 
adopts the reading preferred by W.H., 
ὃν παρῃτοῦντο, and translates “' whom 
they asked of him”. It is difficult to 
decide between the two readings, as the 
περ might easily be changed into παρ, 
and vice versé. In favour of the Τ.Ε. 
is the fact that παρῃτοῦντο ordinarily in 
N. T., as in the classics, means to refuse, 
and also that ὄνπερ very strongly em- 
phasises the finality of the popular choice 
—they might ask the release of any one, 
no matter whom—such is. the force of 
περ; it would be granted. On these 
grounds Field (Otium Nor.) decides for 
the T. R.—Ver.7. στασιαστῶν(συστασ., 
T.R.): this word (here only in N. T.) con- 
tains an interesting hint as to the nature of 
the offence committed by Barabbas and 
his associates. They were no mere band 
of brigands (λῃστής: John xviii. 40), but 
men engaged in an insurrection, pro- 
bably of a political character, rising out 


I—1I3. 


9 ~ , , 
οἵτινες ἐν τῇ στάσει φόνον πεποιήκεισαν. 
4 “~ - 
Όχλος ἠρέατο αἰτεῖσθαι, καθὼς dei? ἐποίει αὐτοῖς. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


447 


8. καὶ ἀναβοήσας} 6 
9. ὁ δὲ Πιλάτος 


ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς, λέγων, “'Θέλετε ἀπολύσω ὑμῖν τὸν βασιλέα τῶν 


Ιουδαίων ; 
CY ς aS 
αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς. 


1Ο. ᾿Εγίνωσκε yap ὅτι διὰ φθόνον παραδεδώκεισαν 
II. ot δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς ἀνέσεισαν τὸν ὄχλον, ἵνα 


μᾶλλον τὸν Βαραββᾶν ἀπολύσῃ αὐτοῖς: 12. 6 δὲ Πιλάτος ἀποκριθεὶς 


πάλιν εἶπεν “ αὐτοῖς, “Ti οὖν θέλετε > ποιήσω ὃν ὃ λέγετε βασιλέα Ἰ 


- 3 ΄ 2 
τῶν Ιουδαίων ; 


1 αναβας in NBD sah. cop. (Tisch., W.H.). 


13. Ot δὲ πάλιν ἔκραξαν, “Σταύρωσον αὐτόν. 


Σαει wanting in Ν ΒΔ sah. cop. (Tisch. and W.H. omit). 


3 B omits οι αρχ. (W.H. in brackets). 


4 For αποκ. παλ. ειπεν NBC have παλ. amok. ελεγεν. 


> @eXere, found in D, is omitted in BCA 33. 
Vide below. 


6 B omits ov (W.H. in brackets). 
7 τον before Bao. in ABCA. 


of the restless desire of many for in- 
dependence, and in connection with that 
guilty of murder (@évov), at least some 
of them (οἵτινες), Barabbas included.— 
τῇ στάσει: the article refers back to 
στασιαστῶνζξ{1ε insurrection implied 
in there being insurrectionists. Mk. 
therefore does not refer to the insurrec- 
tion as known to his readers. Perhaps 
he knew nothing about it himself, nor 
do we.—Ver. 8. avaBas, etc.: Mk. 
assigns the initiative to the people. So 
Lk. ; Mt. and John to Pilate. The 
difference is not important to the course 
of the history. The custom existing, this 
incident was bound to come about some- 
how. Nor does it greatly affect the 
question as to the attitude of Pilate. In 
‘either case he was simply feeling his 
way. ‘The custom gave him a chance of 
feeling the popular pulse, a most im- 
portant point for a ruler of his oppor- 
tunist type.—KaQas, here=that which. 
—Ver.g. θέλετε, etc.: Pilate makes the 
tentative suggestion that the favoured 
person should be Jesus; whom he de- 
signates “King of the Jews,” to see 
how the people would take a title which 
the Sanhedrists regarded as a mortal 
offence.—Ver. 1Ο. ἐγίνωσκεν, it gradually 
‘dawned upon him. Pilate would see the 
animus of the Sanhedrists in their many 
accusations (ver. 3), from which it would 
appear that Christ’s real offence was 
His great influence with the people. 
Hence the attempt to play off the one 
party against the other: the people 
‘against the priests.—Ver. 11. ἀνέσεισαν, 
‘the aorist implies that the priests stirred 


Tisch. retains, W.H. omit. 


up the people with success, to the effect 
that their request to Pilate was in favour 
of Barabbas. One may wonder how 
they so easily gained their purpose. But 
Barabbas, as described by Mk., repre- 
sented a popular passion, which was 
stronger than any sympathy they might 
have for so unworldly a character as 
Jesus—the passion for political liberty. 
The priests would know how to play on 
that feeling. What unprincipled charac- 
ters they were! They accuse Jesus to 
Pilate of political ambition, and they re- 
commend Barabbas to the people for the 
samereason. But a ‘“ holy ” end sancti- 
fies the means ! On the contrast between 
Jesus and Barabbas vide Klostermann. 
—Ver. 12. It is presupposed that the 
people have intimated their preference 
for Barabbas perhaps by the cry: not 
Jesus, but Barabbas. Hence Pilate pro- 
ceeds to ask: ‘‘ what, then, am I to do 
with Him whom ye call (λέγετε) the 
King of the Jews?” That whom ye call 
was very astute. It ought to bring out 
the real feeling of the people, as from 
the next verse we learn that it did.— 
Ver. 13. πάλιν: they had intimated 
their will already by a popular shout = 
Barabbas, not Jesus ; now they intimate 
their feeling about Jesus by a second 
shout with the unmistakable ring of re- 
probation in it: Cruciry Him! That 
is what Pilate’s ὅν λέγετε has brought 
out. It has been taken as an insult. 
The sense is the saine if, with B, we 
omit dy. Pilate’s question then =what 
then shall I do, tell me, to the King 
of the Jews? The sting lies in the 


445 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XV. 


14. Ὁ δὲ Πιλάτος ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti γὰρ κακὸν énoincey!;” 
Οἱ δὲ περισσοτέρως Ζ ἔκραξαν, “'Σταύρωσον αὐτόν. 15. Ὁ δὲ 
Πιλάτος βουλόμενος τῷ ὄχλῳ τὸ ἱκανὸν ποιῆσαι, ἀπέλυσεν αὗτοῖς 
τὸν Βαραββᾶν: καὶ παρέδωκε τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, φραγελλώσας, ἵνα 
σταυρωθῇ. 

16. Οἱ δὲ στρατιῶται ἀπήγαγον αὐτὸν ἔσω τῆς αὐλῆς, ὅ ἐστι 
πραιτώριον, καὶ συγκαλοῦσιν ὅλην τὴν σπεῖραν, 17. καὶ ἐνδύουσιν 3 
αὐτὸν πορφύραν, καὶ περιτιθέασιν αὐτῷ πλέδαντες ἀκάνθινον στέ- 
Φανον, 18. καὶ ἤρέαντο ἀσπάζεσθαι αὐτόν, “Χαΐρε, βασιλεῦ τῶν 
Ιουδαίων: 19. καὶ ἔτυπτον αὐτοῦ τὴν κεφαλὴν καλάμω, καὶ 
ἐνέπτυον αὐτῷ, καὶ τιθέντες τὰ γόνατα προσεκύνουν αὐτῷ. 20. Καὶ 
ὅτε ἐνέπαιξαν αὐτῷ, ἐδέδυσαν αὐτὸν τὴν πορφύραν, καὶ ἐνέδυσαν 
αὐτὸν τὰ ἵμάτια τὰ rat: καὶ ἐξάγουσιν αὐτόν, ἵνα σταυρώσωσιν 


αὐτόν. 


21. καὶ ἀγγαρεύουσι παράγοντά τινα Σίμωνα Κυρηναῖον, 


ἐρχόμενον ἀπ᾿ ἀγροῦ, τὸν πατέρα ᾽Αλεξάνδρου καὶ Ῥούφου, ἵνα apn 


τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ. 


22. ΚΑΙ φέρουσιν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ Γολγοθᾶ ὅ τόπον, ὅ ἐστι µεθερµηνευό- 


1 εποι. κακον in BCA. 


ὂπερισσως in ΝΑΒΟΡΔ. Vide below. 


Σενδιδυσκουσιν in SBCDA. Vide below. 
4 For τα ιδια BCA have αυτον (W.H.); δν reads τα ιδια ιµατια avrov (Tisch.). 


5 τον Γολγοθαν in SBLAZ. 


title.—Ver. 14. This final speech of 
Pilate presents a subtle combination of 
honesty and craft. He says what he 
really thinks: that Jesus is innocent, 
and he makes sure that the people really 
mean to stand to what they have said. 
--περισσῶς, beyond measure: the po- 
sitive here is stronger than the com- 
parative περισσοτέρως (T.R.), and it is 
far better attested. Ver. 15. Pilate was 
now quite sure what the people wished, 
and so, as an opportunist, he let them 
have their way.—r6 ἱκανὸν ποιῆσαι : to 
satisfy (here only in N. T.)=satisfacere in 
Vulg., perhaps a Latinism (vide Grotius), 
but found in later Greek (vide Raphel and 
Elsner).—payeAddoas : certainly a 
Latinism, from flagellare. : 
Vv. 16-20. Mocked by the soldiers 
(Mt. xxvii, 27-31).—Ver. 16. The 
soldiers in charge of the prisoner con- 
duct Him into the barracks (ἔσω τῆς 
αὐλῆς, ὅ ἐστιν πραιτώριον = into the 
court, that is, the praetorium—Weiz- 
sacker), and call together their comrades 
to have some sport.—6Anv τὴν σπεῖραν: 
“a popular exaggeration” (Sevin); at 
most 200 men,—Ver. 17. ἐνδιδύσκουσιν 
for ἐνδύουσιν, T.R.: a rare word. not in 


classics, found in Sept. and Joseph. (and 
in Lk. viii. 27, xvi. 19), and because rare, 
the more probable reading.—opovupav, 
a purple garment, for Mt.’s yAapvda 
κοκκίνην = ‘ scarlet robe ᾿..---ἀκάνθινον 
σ.: here and in John xix. 5. η 
Vv. 21-26. The crucifixion (Mt. 
XXVii. 32-37, Lk. xxiii. 26, 33-38).—Ver. 
21. Gyyapevovow: on this word vide 
on Mt. v. 41.—aqm’ ἀγροῦ: this detail in 
Mk. and Lk. has been taken as an un- 
intentional hint that the crucifixion took 
place a day earlier than the synoptical 
statements imply. Coming from the 
country, 7.¢., from his work. But even 
Holtzmann, H. C., disallows the in- 
ference: ‘as if nine in the morning 
were evening after work time, and εἰς 
ἀγρὸν in Mk. xvi. 12 meant ploughing or 
reaping ”.—Adeg., Ῥούφ.: these names 
imply interest in the persons referred to 
within the circle of Mk.’s first readers, 
presumably well-known Christians. 
Rufus in Rom. xvi. 13? Alexander in 
Acts xix. 33 ?—Ver. 22. Φέρουσιν α., 
they carry Him: ‘“ferunt, non modo 
ducunt,” Bengel. It would appear that 
Jesus was so weak through the strain of. 
the last few days, and the scourging, 


14—32. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

23. Καὶ ἐδίδουν αὐτῷ πιεῖν 3 ἐσμυρνισμένον 
οἶνον : ὁ δὲ 5 οὐκ ἔλαβε. 24. Καὶ σταυρώσαντες * αὐτόν, διεµέριζον ὅ 
τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτοῦ, βάλλοντες κλῆρον ἐπ᾽ αὐτά, τίς τί ἄρη. 25. ἦν δὲ 
Spa τρίτη, καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν. 26. Καὶ jv ἡ ἐπιγραφὴ τῆς 
αἰτίας αὐτοῦ ἐπιγεγραμμένη, “΄ Ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων. 27. Καὶ 
σὺν αὐτῷ σταυροῦσι δύο λῃστάς, ἕνα ἐκ δεξιῶν καὶ ἕνα ἐξ εὐωνύμων 
28. καὶ ἐπληρώθη ἡ γραφὴ ἡ λέγουσα, ‘Kai μετὰ ἀνόμων 
ἐλογίσθη. 29. Kat ot παραπορευόµενοι ἐβλασφήμουν αὐτόν, 
κινοῦντες τὰς κεφαλὰς αὐτῶν, καὶ λέγοντες, “Odd, ὁ καταλύων 


µενον,] Κρανίου τόπος. 


αὐτοῦ. 


τὸν vadv, καὶ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις οἰκοδομῶν,! 30. σῶσον σεαυτόν, καὶ 
31. Ὁμοίως S€9 καὶ of ἀρχιερεῖς 
ἐμπαίζοντες πρὸς ἀλλήλους μετὰ τῶν γραμµατέων ἔλεγον, “"Ἄλλους 
32. 6 Χριστὸς 6 βασιλεὺς τοῦ 19 


A a? 
κατάβα ὃ ἀπὸ τοῦ otaupou.” 


” « x > , lal 
ἔσωσεν, ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται σῶσαι. 
, A , a a A a ο 3 ‘ , aD 
lopayd καταβάτω νῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ, ἵνα ἴδωμεν καὶ πιστεύσωμεν. 


449 


1 µεθερµηνευοµενος in SBE. 
3 os δε in WB 33. 


2 SBCLA omit πιειν. 


‘For the participle BL have σταυρονσιν αντον και. 


5 For διεµεριζον (in minusc. only) read διαµεριζονται. 


© S$ABCD sah. omit this verse, which i 


s interpolated from Lk. xxii. 37. 


7 οικοδοµων before tpt. np. in BDL. ev is wanting in D and other uncials (Tisch. 


omits, W.H. brackets). 


8 For και καταβα SSBDLA have καταβας. 


9 $e omitted in NBCLAail. verss. 


that He was unable to walk, not to 
speak of carrying His cross. He had to 
be borne as the sick were borne to Him 
(Mk. i. 32).—Ver. 23. éSi5o0uv: the 
conative imperfect = they tried to give, 
offered. — ἐσμυρνισμένον οἶνον, wine 
drugged with myrrh, here only in N. T. 
Cf. Mt.’s account.—otk ἔλαβεν: Mt. 
says Jesus tasted the drink. He would 
not take it because He knew that it was 
meant to stupefy.—Ver. 24. τίς τί ἄρῃ, 
who should receive what; two questions 
pithily condensed into one, another 
example in Lk. xix. 15, vide Winer, 
§ Ixvi., 5, 3-—Ver. 25. Gpa τρίτη, the 
third hour = nine o’clock as we reckon ; 
raising a harmonistic problem when 
compared with John xix. 14. Grotius 
comments: “id est, jam audita erat 
tuba horae tertiae, quod dici solebat 
donec caneret tuba horae sextae”’ (they 
called it the third hour till the sixth was 
sounded).—xat = when, Hebraistic, but 
also not without example in classics in 
similar connections : the fact stated con- 
nected with its time by a simple καὶ ; 
instances in Meyer.—Ver. 26. ἐπιγραφὴ 
ἐπιγεγραμμένη: awkwardly expressed ; 
Με, and Lk. have phrases which look 


2 


NEDLA omit τον before Ισραηλ. 


like corrections of style.—é Bac. τῶν 


*lov8.: the simplest form of the in- 
scription. 
Vv. 29-32. Taunts of spectators (Mt. 


xxvii. 39-44, Lk. xxiii. 35, 37, 39).—Ver. 
29. ova = Latin, vah, expressing here 
ironical admiration: ‘‘ admirandi vim 
cum ironia habet,” Bengel. Raphel re- 
marks that this word was not given in the 
Greek Lexicons, but that it is not there- 
fore to be regarded as a Latinism peculiar 
to Mk., but rather as a word which had 
been adopted and used by the later 
Greeks, e.g., Arrian. Here only in 
N. T.—Ver. 30. καταβὰς (καὶ κατάβα, 
T.R.), etc.,save Thyself, having descended, 
etc., or by descending = descend and so 
save Thyself.—Ver. 31. οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς : 
both in Mt. and in Mk. the priests lead 
in the unhallowed chuckling, scribes and 
elders (Με) being mentioned only 
subordinately (pera, etc.).—ampds ἀλλή- 
λους: a common fear gives place to a 
common sportiveness in this unholy 
brotherhood, now that the cause of their 
fear is removed.—Ver. 32. ἵνα ἴδωμεν 
that we may see (in the descent from the 
cross) an unmistakable sign from heaven 
of Messiahship, and so believe in Thee.— 


9 


459 


Καὶ οἱ συνεσταυρωµένοι 1 αὐτῷ ὠνείδιζον αὐτόν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ 


XV, 


33- Γενομένης δὲ 


Spas ἕκτης, σκότος ἐγένετο eh ὅλην τὴν γῆν, ἕως ὥρας ἐννάτης. 
34. καὶ τῇ Spa τῇ ἐννάτῃ 3 ἐβόησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς puri µεγάλῃ, λέγων, 


««Ελωῖ, ᾿Ελωίΐ, λαμμᾶ σαβαχθανίδ, 
««Ὁ Θεός µου, ὁ Θεός µου, eis τί µε ἐγκατέλιπες 5; ” 


ὅ ἐστι µεθερμηνευόµενον, 
35. Καὶ τινὲς 


τῶν παρεστηκότων Ἰ ἁκούσαντες ἔλεγον, “Ιδού. Ἡλίαν duvet.” 


36. Δραμὼν δὲ εἲς, καὶ 10 yepioas σπόγγον ὄξους, περιθείς τε |! 
καλάμω, ἐπότιζεν αὐτόν, λέγων, ““Adete, ἴδωμεν et ἔρχεται Ἡλίας 


καθελεῖν αὐτόν. 


47. Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀφεὶς φωνὴν μεγάλην ἐξέπνευσε. 


38. καὶ τὸ 


καταπέτασµα τοῦ ναοῦ ἐσχίσθη eis δύο, ἀπὸ ἄνωθεν ἕως κάτω. 


1 συν after συνεστανρωµενοι in NBL. 
3 τη ενατη ωρα in NBDL. 


2 kat γεν. in S$BDLA 33. 
4 Omit λεγων NBDL. 


> The spelling of the words Aap. σαβ. varies much in the MSS. 


6 µε after εγκατελ. in NBL. 
8 We in NBLA 33. 


9 wus in BLA. 


7 B has εστηκοτων. 
10 BL omit και. 


1 ΜΦΒΓΙ, 33-omit τε (W.H. read Δραμων δε τις yep. σ. ο. περιθεις καλ.). 


οἱ συνεσταυρωµένοι, the co-crucified. 
Mk., like Mt., knows nothing of the con- 
version of one of the robbers reported 
by Lk. How different these fellow- 
sufferers in spirit from the co-crucified in 
St. Paul’s sense (Rom. vi. 6, Gal. ii. 
20) ! 

Vy. 33-36. Darkness without and 
within (Mt. xxvii. 45-49, Lk. xxiii. 44-46). 
—Ver. 33. Ὑενομένης, ἐγένετο: another 
awkwardness of style variously amended 
in Mt. and Lk.—oxéros: on this dark- 
ness vide on Μι. Furrer (Wanderungen, 
pp. 175-6) suggests as its cause a storm 
of hot wind from the south-east, such as 
sometimes comes in the last weeks of 
spring. ‘“ The heavens are overcast with 
a deep gray, the sun loses his bright- 
ness, and at last disappears. Over the 
darkened land rages the storm, so that 
the country, in the morning like a flower- 
carpet, in the evening appears a waste. 
. .. On the saddest day in human his- 
tory swept such a storm at noon over 
Jerusalem, adding to the terrors of the 
crucifixion.”—Ver. 34. é@Awt, ἐλωέ: the 
Aramaic form of the words spoken by 
Jesus, Mt. giving the Hebrew equiva- 
lent. On this cry of desertion vide re- 
marks on the parallel place in Mt.— 
ὁ Θεός pov. 6 Θ. p.: as in Sept. Mt. 
gives the vocative.—els τί, for what 
end? ἵνα τί in Mt. and Sept.—Ver. 35. 
Ἠλίαν: the name of Elijah might be 
suggested by either form of the name of 
God—Eli or Eloi. Who the τινες were 


that made the poor pun is doubtful, 
most probably heartless fellow-country- 
men who only affected to misunder- 
stand.—Ver. 36. δραμὼν δὲ: if the 
wits were heartless mockers, then δὲ will 
imply that this person who offered the 
sufferer a sponge saturated with posca 
(vide Mt.) was a friendly person touched 
by compassion. For the credit of human 
nature one is very willing to be con- 
vinced of this.—émdérifev might, like 
ἐδίδουν (ver. 23), be viewed as a conative 
imperfect = offered Him a drink, but 
John’s narrative indicates that Jesus 
accepted the drink (xix. 30).—A€ywv 
refers to the man who brought the 
drink. In Mt. it is others who speak 
(xxvii. 49), and the sense of what was 
said varies accordingly—adges in Mt. 
naturally, though not necessarily, means: 
stop, don’t give Him the drink (vide on 
Mt.)—adgere in Mk., spoken by the man 
to the bystanders, means naturally : 
allow me (to give Him the drink), the 
idea being that thereby the life of the 
sufferer would be prolonged, and so as 
it were give time for Elijah to come 
(ἴδωμεν et ἔρ. ’H.) to work an effectual 
deliverance by taking Him down from 
the cross (καθελεῖν a.).—ei ἔρ.: eb with 
the present indicative instead of the 
more usual ἐὰν with subjunctive in a 
future supposition with probability (vide 
Burton, M. and T. in N. T., § 251). 

Vv. 37-41. Death and its accompani- 
ments (Mt. xxvii. 50-56, Lk. xxiii. 46-49).— 


33—42. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


451 


39. ἸΙδὼν δὲ ὁ κεντυρίων ὁ παρεστηκὼς ἐξ ἐναντίας αὐτοῦ, ὅτι οὕτω 
κράξας Ἰ ἐξέπνευσεν, εἶπεν, ''᾽Αληθῶς ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος Σ υἱὸς ἦν 


22 


Θεοῦ. 


40. Ἠσαν δὲ καὶ γυναῖκες ἀπὸ µακρόθεν θεωροῦσαι, ἐν 


ais ἦν ὃ καὶ Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή, καὶ Μαρία ἡ τοῦ * Ιακώβου τοῦ 
μικροῦ καὶ ᾿Ιωσῆ ὅ µήτηρ, καὶ Σαλώμη, 41. at καί, ὅτε ἦν ἐν τῇ 
Γαλιλαία, ἠκολούθουν αὐτῷ, καὶ διηκόνουν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἄλλαι πολλαὶ 


αἱ συναναβᾶσαι αὐτῷ eis Ἱεροσόλυμα. 


42. Καὶ ἤδη ὀψίας γενομένης, ἐπεὶ ἦν παρασκευή, 5 ἐστι προσάβ- 


1 NBL cop. omit κραξας, found in ΑΟΔΣ al. 
* The order of the words varies: οντος ο ανθ. in $$BDLA 33 (Tisch., W.H.); 
νιος ην θ. in AC al. (Tisch.) ; νιος 0. ην in BLA (W.H.). 


3 yv (from Mt.) omitted in BL. 
4 SSBCAZ omit τον. 


δ]ωσητος in BDLA. 


® SSB 33 omit kat; ACLA omit at. Perhaps both omissions are due to similar 


ending. 


Ver. 37. Φωνὴν μεγάλην: asecond great 
-voice uttered by Jesus (vide ver. 34), the 
fact indicated in Mt. by the word πάλιν. 
At this point would come in John’s 
τετέλεσται (xix, 30). — ἐξέπνευσεν, 
-breathed out His life, expired; aorist, the 
main fact, to which the incident of the 
drink (ἐπότιζεν, imperfect) is subor- 
dinate ; used absolutely, here (and in Lk. 
xxiii, 46), as often in the classics. Bengel 
remarks: ‘‘spirare conducit corpori, ex- 
Spirare spiritui”.—Ver. 38. The fact of 
the rending of the veil stated as in Mt., 
with omission of Mt.’s favourite ἰδοὺ, and 
‘the introduction of another of Mk.’s 
characteristic pleonasms, am’ ἄνωθεν.--- 
Ver. 39. µκεντυρίων, a  Latinism = 
centurio, for which Mt. and Lk. give 
the Greek ἑκατόνταρχος.- ἐξ ἐναντίας 
(χώρας), right opposite Jesus, so that he 
could hear and see all distinctly. The 
thing that chiefly impressed him, accord- 
ing to Mk., was the manner of His death. 
—ovtws ἐξέπνευσεν = with a loud voice, 
as if life were still strong, and so much 
sooner than usual, as of one who, needing 
no Elijah to aid Him, could at will set 
Himself free from misery. This was a 
natural impression on the centurion’s 
part, and patristic interpreters endorse 
jit as true and important. Victor Ant. 
says that the loud voice showed that 
Jesus died κατ᾽ ἐξουσίαν, and Theophy- 
lact applies to the ἐξέπνευσεν the epithet 
Φδεσποτικῶς. But it may be questioned 
whether this view is in accord either 
with fact or with sound theology. What 
of the φέρουσι in ver. 22? And is there 
not something docetic ἵπ self-rescue 


from the pangs of the cross, instead of 
leaving the tragic experience to run its 
natural course? Mt.’s explanation of 
the wonder of the centurion, by the ex- 
ternal events—earthquake, etc.—is, by 
comparison, secondary. Schanz char- 
acterises Mk.’s account as ‘“schéner 
psychologisch” (psychologically finer). 
—Ver. 40. On the faithful women 
who looked on from afar, vide on 
Mt. Mk. singles out for special men- 
tion the same three as Mt.: Mary of 
Magdala, Mary the mother of James and 
Joses, and the mother of Zebedee’s 
children. Mk. distinguishes James, the 
brother of Joses, as τοῦ μικροῦ = either 
the little in stature (Meyer and Weiss), 
or the less in age, the younger (Schanz). 
Mk. refers to the mother of Zebedee’s 
children by her own name, Salome. 
Neither evangelist mentions Mary, the 
mother of Jesus.—Ver. 41. This in- 
teresting reference to service rendered 
to Jesus in Galilee, given here by Mk. 
only, applies to the three named, hence the 
honourable mention of them. Mt. sub- 
stitutes service on the way from Galilee 
to Jerusalem rendered by all—evidently 
a secondary account.—dAAat πολλαὶ, 
others, many; also worthy of honour, 
but of an inferior order compared with 
the three. They made the journey from 
Galilee to Jerusalem with Jesus. 

Vv. 42-47. Burial (Mt. xxvii. 57-66, 
Lk. xxiii. 50-56).— Ver. 42. ἤδη: omitted 
by Mt., but important, as indicating that 
the business Joseph had on hand—that of 
obtaining and using permission to take 
down and bury the body of Jesus—must 


452 


KATA MAPKON XV. 43—47- 
βατον, 43. ἦλθεν 1 Ἰωσὴφ ὁ ἀπὸ ᾿Αριμαθαίας, εὐσχήμων βουλευτής, 
ὃς καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν προσδεχόµενος τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ: τολµήσας. 
εἰσῆλθε πρὸς ” Πιλάτον, καὶ ᾖἠτήσατο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 44. 6 δὲ 
Πιλάτος ἐθαύμασεν ὃ εἰ ἤδη τέθνηκε' καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος τὸν 
κεντυρίωνα, ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτὸν ei πάλαι « ἀπέθανε" 45. καὶ γνοὺς. 
ἀπὸ τοῦ κεντυρίωνος, ἐδωρήσατο τὸ σῶμαῦ τῷ Ἰωσήφ. 46. καὶ 
ἀγοράσας σινδόνα, καὶ ὃ καθελὼν αὐτόν, ἐνείλησε τῇ σινδόνι, καὶ. 
κατέθηκεν Ἰ αὐτὸν ἐν μνημείῳ;ὃ ὃ ἦν λελατομημένον ἐκ πέτρας: καὶ 


προσεκύλισε λίθον ἐπὶ τὴν θύραν τοῦ μνημείου. 
Μαγδαληνὴ καὶ Μαρία ἸΙωσῆ ® 


1 ελθων in NABCLA, etc., ηλθεν in D. 


47. ἡ δὲ Μαρία % 
ἐθεώρουν ποῦ τίθεται.10 


2 arpos τον in NBLA 33. 


® NOD have εθαυµαζεν (Tisch.), aor. (T.R.) in BCLA (W.H.). 

4 παλαι in SCL (Tisch.), ηδη in BD (W.H. text, παλαι marg.). 

5 πτωµα in BDL; changed into σωµα from a feeling of decorum. 
6 S8BDL cop. omit και, added as a connecting particle. 


7 εθηκεν in SBDL (W.H.). 


5 SQB have µνηµατι, instead of µνηµειω in CDLA. Tisch. and W.H. adopt 


reading of SB. 


δη before loo. in BCA; lwontos in BLA. 


be gone about without delay. It was 
already the afternoon of the day be- 
fore the Sabbath, προσάββατον, called 
παρασκευή (here and in the parallels 
in this technical sense). It must, 
therefore, be done at once, or it could 
not be done till Sabbath was past.— 
Ver. 43. εὐσχήμων: Mt. has πλούσιος; 
vide there for remarks on the two 
epithets.—BovAeurys, a councillor, not 
in the provincial town, Arimathaea, 
which would have been mentioned, but 
in the grand council in Jerusalem.—kat 
αὐτὸς: not in contrast to the Sanhedrists 
generally (Weiss), but in company with 
the women previously named (Schanz) ; 
he, like them, was an expectant of the 
Kingdom of God.—roApyoas: a graphic 
word, in Mk. only, giving a vivid idea of 
the situation. Objections to be feared 
on Pilate’s part on score of time—dead 
so soon? possibly surly indifference to 
the decencies of burial in the case of a 
crucified person, risk of offence to the 
religious leaders in Jerusalem by sym- 
pathy shown to the obnoxious One, even 
in death. Therefore to be rendered: 
“taking courage, went in unto Pilate” 
(vide Field, Ot. Nor., ad loc.).—Ver. 44. 
Omitted by Mt., whose narrative through- 
out is colourless compared with Mk.’s.— 
et τέθνηκε: ef = ὅτι, after a verb of 
wonder (vide Burton, M.and Τ., § 277, and 
Winer, § Ix., 6).—ei ἀπέθανε: τέθνηκε 


10 τεθειται in BCDLA 33. 


has reference to the present of the 
speaker, ἀπέθανε to the moment of 
death.—wdhat: opposed to ἄρτι, and not 
implying a considerable time before, but 
only bare priority to the present. Pilate’s. 
question to the centurion was, did He die 
before now? =is He actually dead ?— 
—Ver. 45. Satisfied on the point Pilate 
freely gives (ἐδωρήσατο) the carcase 
(πτῶμα, SBDL, corrected from feelings 
of reverence into σῶμα in many MSS.). 
—Ver. 46. ἀγοράσας, having purchased 
linen ; therefore purchases could be made. 
This word, and the reason given for 
Joseph’s haste (ver. 42), have, not with- 
out a show of reason, been regarded as 
unintentional evidence in favour of the 
Johannine Chronology of the Passion. 
So Meyer, Weiss, and Holtzmann.— 
καθελὼν;: καθαιρεῖν was the technical 
term for taking down from the cross. 
Proofs in Elsner, Raphel, Kypke, and: 
Loesner.—évelAnoev: hereonly in N. T.— 
ἐν µμνηµείῳ (uvypart, SB): no indication 
in Mk. as in Mt. that it was new, and 
Joseph’s own.—Ver. 47. τέθειται: from 
the perfect Meyer and Weiss infer that 
the women were not present at the 
burial, but simply approached and took 
note where Jesus lay after burial. 
Schanz dissents, and refers to the καὶ 
before ὅτε in ver. 41 in some MSS., as 
proving that they had come to render the 
last office to Jesus. 


MEX. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


XVI. 1. ΚΑΙ διαγενοµένου τοῦ σαββάτου, Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ 
καὶ Μαρία ἡ τοῦ Ιακώβου καὶ Σαλώμη ἠγόρασαν ἀρώματα, ἵνα 
ἐλθοῦσαι ἀλείψωσιν αὐτόν. 2. καὶ λίαν mpwi τῆς μιᾶς 1 σαββάτων 
Έρχονται ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον, ἀνατείλαντος ξ τοῦ ἡλίου. 3. καὶ 
Έλεγον πρὸς ἑαυτάς, “Tis ἀποκυλίσει ἡμῖν τὸν λίθον ἐκ τῆς θύρας 
τοῦ μνημείου; 4. Καὶ ἀναβλέψασαι θεωροῦσιν ὅτι ἀποκεκύλισται 4 
6 λίθος ἦν yap µέγας σφόδρα. 5. καὶ εἰσελθοῦσαιδ eis τὸ 
μνημεῖον, εἶδον νεανίσκον καθήµενον ἐν τοῖς δεδιοῖς, περιβεβλη- 
µένον στολὴν λευκήν : καὶ ἐξεθαμβήθησαν. 6. 6 δὲ λέγει αὐταῖς, 


“Mi ἐκθαμβεῖσθε. ᾿Ιησοῦν ζητεῖτε τὸν Ναζαρηνὸν τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον: 


453 


1 τη µια in NBLA 33 (Β omits τη, W.H. brackets). 


2 So in BDLA (W.H.). 
5 ανατελλοντος in D (W.H. marg.). 


4 ανακεκυλισται in NBL. 
Ψ ελθουσαι in B (W.H. πιατρ.). 


CHAPTER XVI. THE RESURRECTION. 
Vv. 1-8. The open grave (Mt. xxviii I-10, 
Lk. xxiv. I-12).—Ver. 1. διαγενοµένου 
rou σαββάτον, the Sabbath being past ; 
similar use of διαγ- in Acts xxv. 13, 
xxvii. g, and in late Greek authors; 
examples in Elsner, Wetstein, Raphel, 
¢.g., διαγενοµένων πάλιν ἐτῶν δέκα, 
Polyb., Hist., Π., 1Ο.---ἠγόρασαν ap., pur- 
chased spices; wherewith, mingled with 
oil, more perfectly to anoint the body 
of the Lord Jesus. The aorist implies 
that this purchase was made on the first 
day of the week. Lk. (xxiii. 56) points 
to the previous Friday evening. Har- 
monists (Grotius, e.g.) reconcile by tak- 
ing ἠγόρ. 45 α Ρ]αρετ{εοί. ‘After sunset 
there was a lively trade done among 
the Jews, because no purchase could 
‘be made on Sabbath ”’ (Schanz).—Ver. 
2. λίαν wpwt, very early in the morn- 
ing, suggesting a time hardly consistent 
with the qualifying clause : ἀνατείλαντος 
τοῦ jAtov=when the sun was risen, 
which again does not harmonise with 
the ‘deep dawn” of Lk. and the “ yet 
dark” of John. Mk.’s aim apparently 
is to emphasise the fact that what he is 
going to relate happened in broad day- 
light ; Lk.’s to point out that the pious 
women were at their loving work as early 
on the Sunday morning as possible.— 
Ver. 3. ἔλεγον πρὸς ἑαυτάς: as they 
went to the sepulchre, they kept saying 
to each other (ad invicem, Vulg., πρὸς 
ἀλλήλας, Euthy.).— tis ἀποκυλίσει : 
their only solicitude was about the stone 
at the sepulchre’s mouth : no thought of 
the guards in Mk.’s account. The pious 


SNC have µνηµα (Tisch.). 


αποκεκ. conforms to ver. 3. 


women thought not of angelic help. 
Men had rolled the stone forward and 
could roll it back, but it was beyond wo- 
man’s strength.—Ver. 4. ἀναβλέψασαι, 
looking up, as they approached the 
tomb; suggestive of heavy hearts and 
downcast eyes, on the way thither.— 
ἦν γὰρ µέγας σφόδρα: this clause seems 
out of place here, and it has been 
suggested that it should be inserted 
after pwnpelov in νετ. 3, as explaining 
the women’s solicitude abcut the removal 
of the stone. As it stands, the clause 
explains how the women could see, even 
at a distance, that the stone had already 
been removed. It was a sufficiently large 
object. How the stone was rolled away 
is not said. 

Vv. 5-8. The women enter into the 
tomb through the open door, and experience 
a greater surprise.—veavioxov, a young 
man. In Mt.’s account it is an angel, 
and his position is not within the tomb, 
as here, but sitting on the stone without. 
Lk. has two men in shining apparel.— 
στολὴν λευκήν, in a white long robe, 
implying what is not said, that the youth 
is an angel. Wo such robe worn by 
young men on earth.—Ver. 6. μὴ 
ἐκθαμβεῖσθε, “be not affrighted’’ (as 
they had been by the unexpected sight 
of a man, and wearing heavenly apparel) ; 
no ὑμεῖς after the verb here, as in Mt. 
after φοβεῖσθε, where there is an implied 
contrast between the women and the 
guards (vide on Mt.).—lygoidv, etc., 
Fesus ye seek, the Nazarene, the cruci- 
fied. Observe the objective, far-off style 
of description, befitting a visitor from 


454 


ce ον 


KATA MAPKON 


γέρθη, οὐκ ἔστιν GSe- ἴδε, ὁ τόπος ὅπου ἔθηκαν αὗτόν. 
πάγετε, εἴπατε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ τῷ Πέτρῳ, ὅτι προάγει 


XVI. 


7. ἀλλ᾽ 


ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν: ἐκεῖ αὐτὸν ὄψεσθε, καθὼς εἶπεν ὑμῖν. 
8. Καὶ ἐξελθοῦσαι ταχὺ 1 ἔφυγον ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου : εἶχε δὲ 2 αὐτὰς 
τρόμος καὶ ἔκστασις' καὶ οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπον, ἐφοβοῦντο ydp.® 

1 SSABCDLAZ omit ταχν (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 yap for δε in SBD vet. Lat. cop. syr. verss (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 On verses 9-20, in relation to the Gospel, vide below. 


another world.—yép6n, etc. : note the 
abrupt disconnected style: risen, not 
here, see (ἴδε) the place (empty) where 
they laid Him. The empty grave, the 
visible fact; resurrection, the inference; 
when, how, a mystery (ἄδηλον, Euthy.). 
—Ver. 7. ἀλλὰ, but; change in tone 
and topic; gazing longer into the empty 
grave would serve no purpose: there is 
something to be done—go, spread the 
news! Cf. John xiv.31: But... 
arise, let us go hence!—xai τῷ Πέτρῳ, 
and to Peter in particular: why? to 
the disciple who denied his Master? 
so the older interpreters—to Peter, with 
all his faults, the most important man 
in the disciple band? so most recent 
interpreters: ut dux Apfostolici coetus, 
Grotius.—6r1, recit., introducing the 
very message of the angel. The message 
recalls the words of Jesus before His 
death (chap. xiv. 28).---ἐκεῖ, there, point- 
ing to Galilee as the main scene of the 
reappearing of Jesus to His disciples, 
creating expectation of a narrative by the 
evangelist of an appearance there, 
which, however, is not forthcoming,— 
Ver. 8. ἐξελθοῦσαι, going out—of the 
sepulchre into which they had entered 
(ver. 5).--ἔφυγον, they Πεά, from the 
scene of such surprises. The angel’s 
words had failed to calm them; the 
event altogether too much for them.— 
τρόμος Kal ἔκστασις, trembling, caused 
by fear, and stupor, as of one out of his 
wits. — Tpdpos = “tremor corporis ” : 
ἔκστασις = “stupor animi,” Bengel.— 
οὐδενὶ οὐδὲν εἶπον: an unqualified state- 
ment as it stands here, no ‘“‘on the 
way,” such as harmonists supply : ‘‘ obvio 
scilicet,” Grotius.—éhoBotvro yap gives 
the reason of this reticence so unnatural 
in women: they were in a state of fear. 
When the fear went off, or events 
happened which made the disciples in- 
dependent of their testimony, their 
mouths would doubtless be opened. 





So ends the authentic Gospel of Mark, 
‘without any account of appearances of 


the risen Jesus in Galilee or anywhere 
else. The one thing it records is 
the empty grave, and an undelivered 
message sent through three women to 
the disciples, promising a reunion in 
Galilee. Strange that a story of such 
thrilling interest should terminate so 
abruptly and unsatisfactorily. Was 
there originally a continuation, unhappily 
lost, containing, e.g., an account of a 
meeting of the Risen One in Galilee 


‘with His followers? Or was the evange- 


list prevented by some unknown cir- 
cumstances from carrying into effect an 
intention to bring his story to a suitable 
close? Wecannot tell. All we know 
(for the light thrown on the question by 
criticism, represented, e.g., by Tischen- 
dorf, Nov. Test., G. Ed., viii., vol. i., pp. 
403-407; Hahn, Gesch. des. N. Kanons, 
ii., p. gto ff.; Westcott and Hort, Intro- 
duction, Appendix, pp. 29-51, approaches 
certainty) is that vv. 9-20 of Mk, xvi. in 
our N. T. are not to be taken as the ful- 
filment of any such intention by the 
author of the second Gospel. The ex- 
ternal evidence strongly points this 
way. ‘The section is wanting in 9B and 
in Syr. Sin. Jerome states (Ep. cxx., 
quaest. 3) that it was wanting in nearly 
all Greek copies (‘omnibus Graecis 
libris pene”), and the testimony of 
Eusebius is to the same effect. The in- 
ternal evidence of style confirms the 
impression made by the external : charac- 
teristic words of Mk. wanting, words 
not elsewhere found in the Gospel 
occurring (e.g., ἐθεάθη, v. 11), the narra- 
tive a meagre, colourless summary, a 
composition based on the narratives of 
the other Gospels, signs ascribed to 
believers, some of which wear an apoc- 
typhal aspect (vide ver. 18). Some, in 
spite of such considerations, still regard 
these verses as an integral part of Mk.’s 
work, but for many the question of 
present interest is: what account is to 
be given of them, viewed as an indubi- 
table addendum by another hand? Who 
wrote this conclusion, when, and with 


7—II. 


EYATTEAION 


455 


9. ᾽Αναστὰς δὲ mpwt πρώτῃ σαββάτου ἐφάνη πρῶτον Μαρίᾳ τῇ 


Μαγδαληνῇ, ah fis? ἐκβεβλήκει ἑπτὰ δαιμόνια. 


10. ἐκείνη 


πορευθεῖσα ἀπήγγειλε τοῖς pet αὐτοῦ γενοµένοις, πενθοῦσι καὶ 


κλαίουσι. 
1 παρ ης in CDL 33 (W.H.). 


what end in view? We wait for the 
final answers to these questions, but 
important contributions have recently 
been made towards a solution of the pro- 
blem. In an Armenian codex of the 
Gospels, written in 986 Α.Ρ., the close 
of Mk. (vv. 9-20), separated by a space 
from what goes before to show that it is 
distinct, has written above it: ‘‘ Of the 
Presbyter Aristion,”’ as if to suggest that 
he is the author of what follows. (Vide 
Expositor, October, 1893. Aristion, the 
Author of the last Twelve Verses of Mark, 
by F. C. Conybeare, M.A.) More 
recently Dr. Rohrbach has taken up this 
fact into his interesting discussion on 
the subject already referred to (vide on 
Mt. xxviii. g, 10), and appreciated its sig- 
nificance in connection with the prepara- 
tion of a four-gospel Canon by certain 
Presbyters of Asia Minor in the early 
part of the second century. His hypo- 
thesis is that in preparing this Canon 
the Presbyters felt it necessary to bring 
the Gospels into accord, especially in 
reference to the resurrection, that in 
their preaching all might say the same 
thing on that vital topic. In performing 
this delicate task, the fourth Gospel was 
taken as the standard, and all the other 
Gospels were to a certain extent altered 
in their resurrection sections to bring 
them into line with its account. In Mt. 
and Lk. the change made was slight, 
simply the insertion in the former of two 
verses (xxviii. 9, 10), and in the latter of 
one (xxiv. 12). In Mk., on the other 
hand, it amounted to the removal of the 
original ending, and the substitution for 
it of a piece taken from a writing by 
Aristion the Presbyter, mentioned by 
Papias. The effect of the changes, if 
not their aim, was to take from Peter 
the honour of being the first to see the 
risen Lord, and from Galilee that of 
being the exclusive theatre of the 
Christophanies. It is supposed that the 
original ending of Mk. altogether ig- 
nored the Jerusalem appearances, and 
represented Jesus, in accordance with 
the statement of St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5), 
as showing Himself (in Galilee) first to 
Peter, then to the Twelve. The in- 
ference is based partly on Mk. xvi. 7, 


II. κἀκεῖνοι ἀκούσαντες ὅτι ἵῇ καὶ ἐθεάθη Sm” αὐτῆς 


and partly on the relative section of the 
Gospel of Peter, which, following pretty 
closely Mk.’s account as far as ver. 8, goes 
on to tell how the Twelve found their way 
sad of heart to their old homes, and re- 
sumed their old occupations. In all this 
Rohrbach, a pupil of Harnack’s, is simply 
working out a hint thrown out by his 
master in his Dogmengeschichte, vol. i., 
Ρ. 346, 3 Ausg. It would be premature 
to accept the theory as proved, but it is 
certainly entitled to careful considera- 
tion, as tending to throw some light on 
an obscure chapter in the early history 
of the Gospels, and on the ending of the 
canonical Gospel of Mark in particular. 

Vv. g-20 may be divided into three 
parts corresponding more or less to 
sections in Σο, Luke, and Matthew, 
and not improbably based on these; wv. 
9-11, answering to John xx. 14-18; vv. 
12-14, answering to Lk. xxiv. 13-35; 
vv. 15-18, answering to Mt. xxviii. 19. 
Vv. το, 20 wind up with a brief reference 
to the ascension and the subsequent 
apostolic activity of the disciples. 

Vv. 9-11. ἀναστὰς δὲ refers to Jesus, 
who, however, is not once named in the 
whole section. This fact with the δὲ 
favours the hypothesis that the sectior 
is a fragment of a larger writing.—apwt 
πρώτῃ σαβ.: whether these words are 
to be connécted with ἀναστὰς, indicat- 
ing the time of the resurrection, or with 
ἐφάνη, indicating the time of the first 
appearance, cannot be decided (vide 
Μεγετ).- πρῶτον Μαρίᾳ τ. M., first to 
Mary of Magdala, as in John (xx. 14).— 
wap 7s, εἴο.: this bit of information, 
taken from Lk. viii. 2, is added as if this 
woman were a stranger never mentioned 
before in this Gospel, a sure sign of 
another Παπά.---ἐφάνη, in this verse = 
appeared to, does not elsewhere occur 
in this sense.—Ver. 10. ἐκείνη, she, 
without emphasis, not elsewhere so 
used.—tropevOeioa: the simple verb 
πορεύεσθαι, three times used in this 
section (vv. 12, 15), does not occur any- 
where else in this Gospel.—rots per’ 
αὐτοῦ γενοµένοις: the reference is not 
to the disciples in the stricter sense who 
are called the Eleven (ver. 14), but to 
the friends of Jesus generally, an ex- 


456 


ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΡΚΟΝ XVI. 


ἠπίστησαν. 12. Meta δὲ ταῦτα δυσὶν ἐξ αὐτῶν περιπατοῦσιν 
ἐφανερώθη ἐν ἑτέρᾳ µορφῇ, πορευοµένοις εἰς ἀγρόν. 13. κἀκεῖνοι 
ἀπελθόντες ἀπήγγειλαν τοῖς λοιποῖς: οὐδὲ ἐκείνος ἐπίστευσαν. 
14. “Yotepov! ἀνακειμένοις αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἕνδεκα ἐφανερώθη, καὶ 
ὠνείδισε τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν καὶ σκληροκαρδίαν, ὅτι τοῖς θεασα- 
µένοις αὐτὸν ἐγηγερμένον οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν. 15. Καὶ εἶπεν adtois, 
“'Πορευθέντες εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἅπαντα, κηρύξατε τὸ εὐαγγέλιον πάση 
τῇ κτίσει. 16. ὅ πιστεύσας καὶ βαπτισθεὶς σωθήσεται: ὁ δὲ 
ἀπιστήσας κατακριθήσεται. 17. σημεῖα δὲ τοῖς πιστεύσασι ταῦτα 
παρακολουθήσει : ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου δαιμόνια ἐκβαλοῦσι: γλώσσαις 
λαλήσουσι Kawais*- 18. ὄφεις ἀροῦσι: Kav θανάσιµόν τι πίωσιν, οὐ 
μὴ αὐτοὺς βλάψει ὅ- ἐπὶ ἀρρώστους χεῖρας ἐπιθήσουσι, καὶ καλῶς 


a? 
ἔξουσιν. 


1 ADE al. add δε after υστερον. 


2 ACA add εκ νεκρων after εγηγερµενον (W.H. brackets). 
3 ακολουθησει ταυτα in CL (W.H. text; as in Τ.Ε. margin), 
4CLA omit καιναις, and have in this place και εν tats χερσιν (W.H. text, 


brackets, with καιναις in margin). 


ὅβλαψη in ACLA al. (Tisch., W.H. Τ.Ε. only in minusc.). 


pression not elsewhere occurring in any 
of the Gospels.—Ver. 11. ἐθεάθη, was 
seen. This verb, used again in νετ. 14, 
is foreign to Mk., as is also ἀπιστεῖν, 
also twice used here (ἠπίστησαν, νετ. 11; 
ἀπιστήσας, ver. 16). 

Vv. 12-14. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα, afterwards 
(only here in Mk.) ; vaguely introducing 
a second appearance in the neighbour- 
hood of Jerusalem.—8votv ἐξ αὐτῶν, to 
two of the friends of Jesus previously 
referred to, not of the Eleven. Cf. with 
Lk. xxiv. 13. It is not onky the same 
fact, but the narrative» here seems 
borrowed from Lk.—év ἑτέρᾳ µορφῇ, in 
a different form. Serving no purpose 
here, because the fact it accounts for, 
the non-recognition of Jesus by the two 
disciples (Lk. xxiv. 16), is not mentioned. 
—eis ἀγρόν: for eis ray in Lk. The 
use of φανεροῦσθαι in the sense of being 
manifested to, in ver. 12, is peculiar to 
this section (again in ver. 14).—Ver. 14. 
ὕστερον, at a later time; vague indica- 
tion, here only. It is difficult to identify 
this appearance with any one mentioned 
in the other Gospels. What follows in 
νετ. 15, containing the final commission, 
seems to point to the farewell appear- 
ance in Galilee (Mt. xxviii. 16), but the 
ἀνακειμέγοις (ver. 14) takes us to the 
scene related in Lk. xxiv. 36-43, though 
more than the Eleven were present on 
that occasion. The suggestion has been 


made (Meyer, Weiss, etc.) that the 
account here blends together features 
taken from various appearances. The 
main points for the narrator are that 
Jesus did appear to the Eleven, and that 
He found them in an unbelieving mood. 

Vv. 15-18. The Commission (Mt. 
xxviii. 18-20).—els τὸν κόσμον ἅπαντα, 
added to Mt.’s πορευθέντες.- κηρύξατε 
τ. εὖ.: this more specific and evangelic 
phrase replaces Mt.’s µαθητεύσατε, and 
πάσῃ τῇ κτίσει gives more emphatic 
expression to the universal destination of 
the Gospel than Mt.’s πάντα τὰ ἔθνη.--- 
Ver. 16 is a poor equivalent for Mt.’s 
reference to baptism, insisting as it does, 
in an ecclesiastical spirit, on the necessity 
of baptism rather than on its significance 
as an expression of the Christian faith in 
God the Father, Son, and Spirit. Jesus 
may not have spoken as Mt. reports, but 
the words put into His mouth by the 
first evangelist are far more worthy of the 
Lord than those here ascribed to Him. 
—vVer. 17. Here also we find a great 
lapse from the high level of Mt.’s version 
of the farewell words of Jesus: signs, 
physical charisms, and thaumaturgic 
powers, taking the place of the spiritual 
presence of the exalted Lord. Casting 
out devils represents the evangelic 
miracles; speaking with tongues those of 
the apostolic age; taking up venomous 
serpents and drinking deadly poison 


12—20. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


457 


19. Ὁ μὲν οὖν Kuptos,! μετὰ τὸ λαλῆσαι αὐτοῖς, ἀνελήφθη εἰς τὸν 
οὐρανόν, καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ: 20. ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ἐξελθόντες 
ἐκήρυξαν πανταχοῦ, τοῦ Κυρίου συνεργοῦντος, καὶ τὸν λόγον βεβαιοῦν- 


τος διὰ τῶν ἐπακολουθούντων σημείων. 


᾽Αμήν.: 


1 CLA have Ίησους after Κυριος (W.H. brackets). 
? Auny is found in CLA among other uncials (W.H. πιαηρ.). 


seem to introduce us into the twilight of 
apocryphal story. Healing of the sick 
by laying on of hands brings us back to 
apostolic times. θανάσιμον is a ar. 

Vv. 19, 20. The story ends with a 
‘brief notice of the ascension of the Lord 
Jesus on the one hand (μὲν), and of the 


apostolic activity of the Eleven on the 
other (δὲ). Lk., who means to tell the 
story of the acts of the Apostles at 
length, contents himself with reporting 
that the Eleven returned from Bethany, 
his scene of parting, to Jerusalem, not 
with sadness but with joy, there to 
worship and wait. 


το ΚΑΤΑ 


AOTKAN 


ATION EYATTEAION. 


Ἱ. 1. ᾿ΕΠΕΙΔΗΠΕΡ πολλοὶ ἐπεχείρησαν ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν 


περὶ τῶν πεπληροφορηµένων 


Cuapter I, ΤΗΕ ΕΑΕΙΥ History. 
Vv. 1-4. The preface.—Ver. 1. ἔπειδ- 
ήπερ: three particles, ἐπεί, δή, περ, 
blended into one word, implying that 
the fact to be stated is well known (δή), 
important (wep), and important as a 
reason for the undertaking on hand 
(ἐπεί) = secing, as is well known. Hahn 
thinks the word before us is merely a 
temporal not a causal particle, and that 
Luke means only to say that he is not 
the first to take such a task on hand. 
But why mention this unless because it 
entered somehow into his motives for 

riting? It might do so in various 
ways: as revealing a widespread im- 
pulse to preserve in writing the evangelic 
memorabilia, stimulating him to do the 
same; as meeting an extensive demand 
for such writings on the part of Chris- 
tians, which appealed to him also; as 
showing by the number of such writings 
that no one of them adequately met the 
demand, or performed the task in a final 
manner, and that therefore one more 
attempt was not superfluous. ᾿Ἐπειδήπερ, 
a good Greek word, occurs here only in 
Ν. Τ.--πολλοὶ: not an exaggeration, 
but to be taken strictly as implying 
extensive activity in the production of 
rudimentary “Gospels”. The older 
exegetes understood the word as re- 
ferring to heretical or apocryphal gospels, 
of course by way of censure. This view 
is abandoned by recent commentators, 
for whom the question of interest rather 
is: were Mt.’s Logia and Mk.’s Gospel 
among the earlier contributions which 
Lk. had in his eye? This question 
cannot be decided -by exegesis, and 
answers vary according to the critical 
theories of those who discuss the topic. 
All that need be said here is that there is 


ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων, 2. καθὼς παρέ- 


no apparent urgent reason for excluding 
Mt. and Mk. from the crowd of early 
essayists.—émeyeipnoav, took in hand; 
here and in Acts ix. 29, xix. 13. Itisa vox 
ambigua, and might or might not imply 
blame = attempted and did not succeed, 
or attempted and accomplished their 
task. It is not probable that emphatic 
blame is intended. On the other hand, 
it is not likely that ἐπεχ. is a mere ex- 
pletive, and that ἐπεχ. ἀνατάξασθαι is 
simply = ἀνετάξαντο, as, after Casaubon, 
Palairet, Raphel, etc., maintained. The 
verb contains a gentle hint that in some 
respects finality had not yet been reached, 
which might be said with all due respect 
even of Mt.’s Logia and Mk.’s Gospel. — 
ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν, to set forth in 
order a narrative; the expression points 
to a connected series of narratives 
arranged in some order (τάξις), topical 
or chronological, rather than to isolated 
narratives, the meaning put on διήγησις 
by Schleiermacher. Both verb and noun 
occur here only in N. T.—wepi... 
πραγμάτων indicates the subject of these 
narratives. The leading term in this 
phrase is πεπληροφορημένων, about the 
meaning of which interpreters are much 
divided. The radical idea of πληροφορέω 
(πλήρης, φέρω) is to bring or make full. 

he special sense will depend on the 
matter in reference to which the fulness 
takes place. It might be in the region 
of fact, in which case the word under 
consideration would mean ‘become a 
completed series,” and the whole phrase 
“concerning events which now lie before 
us as a complete whole”. This view is 
adopted by an increasing number of 
modern commentators (vide R. V.). Or 
the fulness may be in conviction, in 
which case the word would mean ‘“ most 


—_ 


I—3. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


459 


δοσαν ἡμῖν οἱ dm ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ ὑπηρέται γενόµενοι τοῦ a cf. ins 


Im, Iv. 


λόγου, 3. ἔδοξε κἀμοί, παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς, 6; 2 Tim. 


surely believed’ (A. V.).. This sense of 
complete conviction occurs several times 
απ ΝΤ ποσα Iv. στ Feb. Vi. I, 
x. 22), but with reference to persons not 
to things. A very large number of in- 
terpreters, ancient and modern, take the 
word here in this sense (‘‘ bei uns 
beglaubigten,” Weizsacker). Holtz., 
H. C., gives both without deciding 
between them (“ vollgeglaubten oder voll- 
brachten”’), Neither meaning seems 
quite what is wanted. The first is too 
vague, and does not indicate what the 
subject-matter is. The second is ex- 
plicit enough as to that = the matters 
which form the subject of Christian 
belief; but one hardly expects these 
matters to be represented as the subject 
of sure belief by one whose very aim in 
writing is to give further certainty con- 
cerning them (ἀσφάλειαν, ver. 4). What 
if the sphere of the fulness be knowledge, 
and the meaning of the clause: ‘ con- 
cerning the things which have become 
widely known among us Christians”? 
Then it would be plain enough what 
was referred to. Then also the phrase 
would point out the natural effect of the 
many evangelic narratives—the uni- 
versal diffusion of a fair acquaintance 
with the leading facts of Christ’s life. 
But have we any instance of such use of 
the word ?—w)npodopia is used in re- 
ference to understanding and knowledge 
in Col. ii. 2. Then in modern Greek 
πληροφορῶ means to inform, and as the 
word is mainly Hellenistic in usage, 
and may belong to the popular speech 
preserved throughout the centuries, τῶν 
πεπλ. May mean, “those things of 
which information has been given” 
(Geldart, The Modern Greek Language, 
p- 186), or those things generally known 
among Christians as such. 

Ver. 2. καθὼς implies that the basis 
of these many written narratives was the 
παράδοσις of the Apostles, which, by 
contrast, and by the usual meaning of 
thg word, would be mainly though not 
necessarily exclusively oval (might in- 
clude, ¢.g.,the Logia of Mt.).— of . . . τοῦ 
λόγον describes the Apostles, the ulti- 
mate source of information, as men 
‘‘who had become, or been made, eye- 
witnesses and ministers of the word’’, 
Both αὐτόπτ. and ὑπηρ. may be con- 
nected with τοῦ λόγου, understood to 
mean the burden of apostolic preaching 


11. 10. 


= the facts of Christ’s earthly history. 
Eye-witnesses of the facts from the 
beginning (ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς), therefore com- 
petent to state them with authority ; 
servants of the word including the facts 
(= ‘all that Jesus began both to do and 
to teach”’), whose very business it was to 
relate words and facts, and who there- 
fore did it with some measure of fulness. 
Note that the ἡμῖν after παρέδοσαν im- 
plies that Lk. belonged to the second 
generation (Meyer, Schanz). Hahn in- 
fers from the ἡμῖν in νετ. 1 that Lk. 
was himself an eye-witness of Christ’s 
public ministry, at least in its later stage. 

Ver. 3. ἔδοξε κἀμοὶ: modestly intro- 
ducing the writer’s purpose. He puts 
himself on a level with the πολλοὶ, and 
makes no pretensions to superiority, 
except in so far as coming after them, 
and more comprehensive inquiries give 
him naturally an advantage which makes 
his work not superfluous.—mapykodov- 
θηκότι ἄν. π.: having followed (in my 
inquiries) all things from the beginning, 
i.é., not of the public life of Jesus (ἀπ᾽ 
ἀρχῆς, ver. 2), but of His life in this 
world. The sequel shows that the start- 
ing point was the birth of John. This 
process of research was probably gone 
into antecedent to the formation of his 
plan, and one of the reasons for its 
adoption (Meyer, also Grimm, Das 
Proomium des Lukasevangelium in $ ahr- 
biicher f. deutsche Theologie, 1871, p. 
48. Likewise Calvin: omnibus exacte 
pervestigatis), not merely undertaken 
after the plan had been formed (Hahn). 
---ἀκριβῶς, καθεξῆς o yp. explain how 
he desired to carry out his plan: he 
wishes to be exact, and to write in an 
orderly manner (καθεξῆς here only in 
N. T., ἐφεξῆς in earlier Greek). Chrono- 
logical order aimed at (whether success- 
fully or not) according to many (Meyer, 
Godet, Weiss, Hahn). Schanz main- 
tains that the chronological aim applies 
only to the great turning points of the 
history, and not to all details; a very 
reasonable view. These two adverbs, 
ἀκρ., καθ., may imply a gentle criticism of 
the work of predecessors. Observe the 
historical spirit implied in all Lk. tells 
about his literary plan and methods: 
inquiry, accuracy, order, aimed at at 
least; vouchers desired for all statements. 
Lk. is no religious romancer, who will 
invent at will, and say anything that 


46ο 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 1. 


καθεξῆς σοι Ὑράψαι, κράτιστε Θεόφιλε, 4. ἵνα ἐπιγνῷς περὶ dv 
κατηχήθης λόγων τὴν ἀσφάλειαν. 

5. ΕΓΕΝΕΤΟ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡρώδου τοῦ 1 βασιλέως τῆς Ἰουδαίας 
ἱερεύς τις ὀνόματι Ζαχαρίας, ἐξ ἐφημερίας ᾽Αβιά : καὶ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ 3 


1 ΝΝΒΤΙΞ omit τον. 


3 For η γννη αντον ΝΡΒΟΡΧΞ 33 have yuvy αντω (Tisch., W.H.). 1, Π8ς ηγ.αντω. 


suits his purpose. It is quite compatible 
with this historic spirit that Lk. should 
be influenced in his narrations by re- 
ligious feelings of decorum and reverence, 
and by regard to the edification of his 
first readers. That his treatment of 
materials bearing on the characters of 
Jesus and the Apostles reveals many 
traces of such influence will become 
apparent in the course of the exposition. 
--κράτιστε Θεόφιλε. The work is to be 
written for an individual who may per- 
haps have played the part of patronus 
libri, and paid the expenses of its pro- 
duction. The epithet κράτιστε may 
imply high official position (Acts xxiii. 
26, xxvi. 25). On this see Grotius. 
Grimm thinks it expresses only love and 
friendship. 

Ver. 4. Indicates the practical aim: 
to give certainty in regard to matters of 
Christian Ῥε]]εξ--- περὶ dv κ. λόγων: an 
attraction, to be thus resolved: περὶ τῶν 
λόγων ots κατηχήθης. λόγων is best 
taken = matters (mpaypdtwv, ver. 1), 
histories (Weizsacker), not doctrines. 
Doubtless this is a Hebraistic sense, but 
that is no objection, for after all Lk, is 
a Hellenist and no pure Greek, and even 
in this preface, whose pure Greek has 
been so often praised, he is a Hellenist 
to alarge extent. (So Hahn, Einleitung, 
Ρ. 6.) The subject of instruction for 
young Christians in those early years 
was the teaching, the acts, and the ex- 
perience of Jesus: their “catechism” 
historic not ἁοσαῖϊπα].--κατηχήθης: is 
this word used here in α technical 
sense = formally and systematically in- 
structed, or in the general sense of ‘‘ have 
been informed more or less correctly ”? 
(So Kypke.) The former is more pro- 
bable. The verb (from κατὰ, ἠχέω) is 
mainly Hellenistic in usage, rare in pro- 
fane authors, notfoundinO. T. The N.T. 
usage, confined to Lk. and Paul, points 
to regular instruction (vide Rom. ii. 18). 

This preface gives a lively picture of 
the intense, universal interest felt by the 
early Church in the story of the Lord 
Jesus: Apostles constantly telling what 
they had seen and heard; many of their 


hearers taking notes of what they said 
for the benefit of themselves and others: 
through these gospelets acquaintance 
with the evangelic history circulating 
among believers, creating a thirst for 
more and yet more; imposing on sucha 
man as Luke the task of preparing a 
Gospel as full, correct, and well arranged 
as possible through the use of all avail- 
able means—previous writings or oral 
testimony of surviving eye-witnesses. 

Vv. 5-25. The birth of the Baptist 
announced. From the long prefatory 
sentence, constructed according to the 
rules of Greek syntax, and with some 
pretensions to classic purity of style, we 
pass abruptly to the Protevangelium, 
the prelude to the birth of Christ, con- 
sisting of the remainder of this chapter, 
written in Greek which is Hebraistic in 
phrase and structure, and Jewish in its 
tone ofpiety. The evangelist here seems 
to have at command an Aramaic, Jewish- 
Christian source, which he, as a faith- 
ful collector of evangelic memorabilia, 
allows to speak for itself, with here and 
there an editorial touch. 

Vv. 5-7. The parents of Fohn.— 
ἐγένετο, there was, or there lived.—év 
Tats ἡ., etc.: in the days, the reign, of 
Herod, king of Judaea. Herod died 
750 Α.Ο., and the Christian era begins 
with 753 A.c. This date is too late by 
three or four years.—é& ἐφημερίας ᾽Αβιά: 
ἐφημερία (a noun formed from ἐφημέ- 
ptos -ov, daily, lasting for a day), not in 
profane authors, here and in ver. 8 in 
N. T., in Sept., in Chron. and Nehemiah, 
= (1) a service lasting for a day, or for 
days—a week ; (2) a class of priests pet- 
forming that service. The priests were 
divided into twenty-four classes, the 
organisation dating according to the 
tradition in Chronicles (1 Chron. xxiv.) 
from the time of David. The order of 
Abia was the eighth (1 Chron. xxiv. 1ο). 
Josephus (Ant., vii., 14, 7) uses ἐφημερίς 
and πατρία to denote a class. On the 
priesthood and the temple worship and 
the daily service, consult Schiirer’s His- 
tory, Div. ii., vol. i., pp. 207-298.—yvuv7 : 
a daughter of Aaron; John descended 


4—13. EYATTEAION 461 


ἐκ τῶν θυγατέρων ᾽Ααρών, καὶ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτῆς Ελισάβετ. 6. ἦσαν 
δὲ δίκαιοι ἀμφότεροι ἐνώπιον 1 τοῦ Θεοῦ, πορευόµενοι ἐν πάσαις ταῖς 
ἐντολαῖς καὶ δικαιώµασι τοῦ Κυρίου ἄμεμπτο. 7. καὶ οὐκ ἦν 
αὐτοῖς τέκνον, καθότι ἡ ᾿Ελισάβετ fv? στεῖρα, καὶ ἀμφότεροι 
προβεβηκότες ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις αὐτῶν ἦσαν. 8. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν 
τῷ ἱερατεῦειν αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ τάξει τῆς ἐφημερίας αὐτοῦ ἕναντι τοῦ 


Θεοῦ, 9. "κατὰ τὸ "ἔθος τῆς “ἱερατείας, 'ἔλαχε τοῦ "θυμιάσαι b again in ii. 
εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὸν ναὸν τοῦ Κυρίου: 1ο. καὶ πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος τοῦ 44° im 
λαοῦ ἦν ὃ προσευχόµενον ἔξω τῇ Gpa τοῦ θυµιάµατος. 11. ὤφθη Bia cee oe 
αὐτῷ ἄγγελος Κυρίου, ἑστὼς ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου τοῦ θυµιά- nara 
patos: 12. καὶ ἐταράχθη Ζαχαρίας ἰδών, καὶ φόβος ἐπέπεσεν ἐπ᾽ ας 
ΤΙΝ, Ee 


αὐτόν. 13. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος, “Mi φοβοῦ, Ζαχαρία” 
διότι εἰσηκούσθη ἡ δέησίς σου, καὶ ἡ γυνή σου Ελισάβετ γεννήσει 
1 SSBC have εναντιον; ενωπιον in DLA. 


? qv before η Ελ. in $BDLAS (Tisch., W.H.). B 69 omit η (W.H. brackets). 
3 mv του λαου in NBLA (Tisch., W.H.). 


from priestly parents on both sides.— 
Ver. 6. δίκαιοι: an O. T. term, and ex- 
pressing an O. T. idea of piety and good- 
ness, as unfolded in the following clause, 
which is Hebrew in speech as in senti- 
ment: walking in all the commandments 
and ordinances (equivalent terms, not to 
be distinguished, with Calvin, Bengel, 
and Godet, as moral and ceremonial) 
blameless (relatively to human judgment). 
—Ver. 7. καὶ οὐκ ἦν, etc.: childless, a 
calamity from the Jewish point of view, 
and also a fact hard to reconcile with 
the character of the pair, for the Lord 
loveth the righteous, and, according to 
O. T. views, He showed His love by 
granting prosperity, and, among other 
blessings, children (Ps, cxxviii.).—«a@dtt: 
a good Attic word: in Lk.’s writings only 
in N. T. = seeing, inasmuch α5.---προβε- 
βηκότες ἐν τ. ἡμ.: “advanced in days,” 
Hebraistic for the classic ‘‘ advanced in 
age” (τὴν ἡλικίαν) or years (τοῖς ἔτεσιν) : 
childless, and now no hope of children. 

Vv. 8-10. Hope preternaturally re- 
vived.—év τῷ ἱερατεύειν: Zechariah was 
serving his week in due course, and it 
fell to his lot on a certain day to per- 
form the very special service of burning 
incense in the holy place. A great 
occasion in a priest’s life, as it might 
never come to him but once (priests said 
to be as many as 20,000 in our Lord’s 
time). ‘The most memorable day in 
the life of Zechariah ” (Farrar, C. G. T.). 
—Ver. 9. κατὰ τὸ ἔθος is to be connected 
with ἔλαχε : casting lots, the customary 


manner of settling who was to have the 
Ποποι.-- εἰσελθὼν is to be connected 
with θυµιάσαι, not with ἔλαχε. The 
meaning is that entering the sanctuary 
was the necessary preliminary to offer- 
ing incense: in one sense a superfluous 
remark (Hahn), yet worth making in 
view of the sacredness of the place. A 
great affair to get entrance into the 
vads.—Ver.10. πλῆθος: there might be 
a crowd within the temple precincts at 
the hour of prayer any day of the week, 
not merely on Sabbath or on a feast day 
(‘dies solennis, et fortasse sabbatum,” 


Bengel). 
Vv. 11-17. A celestial visitant.—Ver. 
11. ὤφθη: the appearance very par- 


ticularly described, the very position of 
the angel indicated: on the right side of 
the altar of incense; the south side, the 
propitious side say some, the place of 
honour say others. The altar of incense 
is called, with reference to its function, 
θυµιατήριον in Heb. ix. 3.—Ver. 12. 
ἐταράχθη describes the state of mind 
generally = perturbed, φόβος specifically. 
Yet why afraid, seeing in this case, as 
always, the objective appearance answers 
to the inward state of mind? This fear of 
the divine belongs to O. T. piety.—Ver. 
13. δέησις : all prayed at that hour, there- 
fore of course the officiating priest. The 
prayer of Zechariah was very special— 
δέησις implies this as compared with 
προσευχή, vide Trench, Synonyms—and 
very realistic: for offspring. Beneath. 
the dignity of the occasion, say some- 


462 


KATA AOYKAN 1 
υἱόν σοι, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰωάννην. 14. καὶ ἔσται 
’ ‘ > / ‘ το 39 ~ , η. 3 a 
Χαρά σοι καὶ ἀγαλλίασις, καὶ πολλοὶ ἐπὶ τῇ yervqcer*> αὐτοῦ 
, ” 4 > [ή a9 , 4 Φ 
Χαρήσονται. 15. ἔσται γὰρ µέγας ἐνώπιον Tod? Κυρίου" καὶ οἶνον 
‘ s a , ‘ , 5ς , , ” > 
καὶ σίκερα οὗ ph τίς, καὶ Πνεύματος “Ayiou πλησθήσεται ἔτι ἐκ 
κοιλίας μητρὸς αὐτοῦ. 16. καὶ πολλοὺς τῶν υἱῶν Ισραῆλ ἐπιστρέψει 
ἐπὶ Κύριον τὸν Θεὸν αὐτῶν: 17. καὶ αὐτὸς προελεύσεται ὃ ἐνώπιον 
αὐτοῦ ἐν πνεύµατι καὶ δυνάµει ἩἨλίου," ἐπιστρέψαι καρδίας πατέρων 
ἐπὶ τέκνα, καὶ ἀπειθεῖς ἐν φρονήσει δικαίων, ἑτοιμάσαι Κυρίῳ λαὸν 
18. Καὶ εἶπε Ζαχαρίας πρὸς τὸν ἄγγελον, 
ἐγὼ γάρ εἶμι πρεσβύτης, καὶ ἡ γυνή 
µου προβεβηκυῖα ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις αὐτῆς. 190. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 
ἄγγελος εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ''᾿Εγώ εἰμι Γαβριὴλ ὁ παρεστηκὼς ἐνώπιον τοῦ 
Θεοῦ: καὶ ἀπεστάλην λαλῆσαι πρός σε, καὶ εὐαγγελίσασθαί σοι 


> 

κατεσκευασμένον.᾽ 
, A 

“Kata τί γνώσομαι τοῦτο; 


ταῦτα. 


1 γενεσει in most uncials, 
2 SACL 33 omit του (Tisch.). 


20. καὶ ἰδού, ἔσῃ σιωπῶν καὶ μὴ δυνάµενος λαλῆσαι, ἄχρι 


BDA have it (W.H. in marg.). 


3 προσελευσεται in BCL (W.H. marg.), probably an unintentional error. 


4 Hera in NBL. 


interpreters ; a very superficial criticism. 
True to human nature and to O. T. piety, 
and not unacceptable to God. That the 
prayer was for offspring appears from the 
angelic message, objective and subjective 
corresponding. — yewvyjoet, shall bear; 
originally to beget.—lodvvyny : the name 
already mentioned to inspire faith in the. 
reality of the promise: meaning, God is 
gracious.—Ver. 14. χαρά, ἀγαλλίασις, 
a joy, an exultation; joy in higher, 
highest degree : joy over a son late born, 
and such a son as he will turn out to be. 
-πολλοὶ: a joy not merely to parents 
as a child, but to many as a man.—Ver. 
15. µέγας, a great man before the 
Lord; not merely in God’s sight = true 
greatness, but indicating the sphere or 
type of greatness: in the region of ethics 
and religion.—xat οἶνον, etc., points to 
the external badge of the moral and re- 
ligious greatness: abstinence as a mark 
of consecration and separation —a 


devotee.—oixepa = 196) (not Greek), 


strong drink, extracted from any kind of 
fruit but grapes (here only in N. T.).— 
Πνεύματος ‘Ayiou : in opposition to wine 
and strong drink, as in Eph. v.18. But 
the conception of the Holy Spirit, formed 
from the Johannine type of piety, is very 
different from that of St. Paul, or 
suggested by the life of our Lord.—Ver. 
16 describes the function of the Baptist. 
--ἐπιστρέψει: repentance, conversion, 


his great aim and watchword.—Ver. 
17. προελεύσεται ἐν. α.: not a refer- 
ence to John’s function as forerunner oi 
Messiah, but simply a description of his 
prophetic character. He shall go before 
God (and men) = δε, in his career, an 
Elijah in spirit and power, and function; 
described in terms recalling Malachi 
iv. 6. 

Vv. 18-20. Zechariah doubts. The 
angel’s dazzling promise of a son, and 
even of ason with such a career, might 
be but a reflection of Zechariah’s own 
secret desire and hope; yet when his 
day-dream is objectified it seems too 
good and great to be true. This also is 
true to human nature, which alternates 
between high hope and deep despair, 
according as faith or sense has the upper 
hand.—Ver. 19. ἀποκριθεὶς : the very 
natural scepticism of Zechariah is treated 
as a {αυ]ε---Γαβριὴλ: the naming of 
angels is characteristic of the later stage 
of Judaism (vide Daniel viii. 16, x. 21).— 
Ver. 20. σιωπῶν καὶ μὴ δ. λ., silent and 
not able to speak; a temporary dumb- 
ness the sign asked, a slight penalty; 
not arbitrary, however, rather the almost 
natural effect of his state of mind—a 
kind of prolonged stupefaction resulting 
from a promise too great to be believed, yet 
pointing toa boon passionately desired.— 


av@ ὧν: a phrase of Lk. = ns, 
because, (Also in 2 Thess. ii. το.) 


14—28. 


EYATTEAION 


463 


As ἡμέρας γένηται ταῦτα: ἀνθ ὧν οὐκ ἐπίστευσας τοῖς λόγοις µου, 


οἵτινες πληρωθήσονται εἰς τὸν καιρὸν αὐτῶν.” 


21. Καὶ ἦν ὁ λαὸς 


προσδοκῶν τὸν Zaxapiav: καὶ ἐθαύμαῖον ἐν τῷ χρονίζειν αὐτὸν ἐν 
τῷ ναῷ. 22. ἐξελθὼν δὲ οὖκ ἠδύνατο λαλῆσαι αὐτοῖς: καὶ ἐπέ- 
(νωσαν ὅτι ὁπτασίαν ἑώρακεν ἐν τῷ vad- καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν διανεύων 


αὐτοῖς, καὶ διέµενε κωφός. 


23. καὶ ἐγένετο ds ἐπλήσθησαν αἱ 


ἡμέραι τῆς λειτουργίας αὐτοῦ, ἀπῆλθεν εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ. {2 Cor. ix. 


24. Meta δὲ ταῦτας τὰς ἡμέρας συνέλαβεν ᾿Ελισάβετ ἡ γυνὴ ii 17-39, 
ευ. 


ο ου. 


αὐτοῦ, καὶ περιέκρυβεν ἑαυτὴν µῆνας πέντε, λέγουσα, 25. “' Ὅτι 5; ix. 2x. 
οὕτω µοι πεποίηκεν 67 Κύριος ἐν ἡμέραις, ats ἐπεῖδεν ἀφελεῖν 7d? 


ὄνειδός µου ἐν ἀνθρώποις.᾽ 


26. ΕΝ δὲ τῷ μηνὶ τῷ Extw ἀπεστάλη ὁ ἄγγελος Γαβριὴλ ὑπὸ 3 
τοῦ Θεοῦ eis πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας, ἡ ὄνομα Ναζαρέτ, 27. πρὸς 
παρθένον μεμνηστευμένην * ἀνδρί, ᾧ ὄνομα Ιωσήφ, ἐξ οἴκου Δαβίδ: 


καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τῆς παρθένου Μαριάμ. 


28. καὶ εἰσελθὼν ὁ ἄγγελος 5 


πρὸς αὐτὴν εἶπε, “'Χαΐρε  κεχαριτωµένη" & Κύριος μετὰ σοῦ, 


1 αντον after εν τω ν. in BLE (W.H.). Order as in T.R. in ΝΔΑΟΓΔ al. (Tisch.), 
2 S8CDL 33 omit ο (Tisch., W.H., text, ο in marg.). BA have it. NSBDL 1 


“omit το before ονειδος. 
3 απο in SRBL 1, 69. 


4 εμνηστ. in SABL. 


5 BLE 1, 131, cop. omit 9 αγγελος (W.H.). 


Vv. 21-22. The people without.—mrpoo- 
Φοκῶν, waiting; they had to wait. The 
priest was an unusually long time with- 
in, something uncommon must have 
happened. The thought likely to occur 
was that God had slain the priest as un- 
worthy. The Levitical religion a re- 
ligion of distance from God and of fear. 
So viewed in the Epistle to the Heb- 
rews. Illustrative quotations from Talmud 
in Winsche, Beitrdge, p. 413.—Ver. 22. 
ὁπτασίαν: from his dazed look they 
inferred that the priest had seen a 
vision (chap. xxiv. 23, 2 Cor. xii. 1).— 
Φιανεύων: making signs all he could do; 
he could not bless them, e.g., if that was 
part of his duty for the day, or explain 
his absence (here only). 

Vv. 23-25. Returns home. The week 
of service over, Zechariah went back to 
his own house.—Aetrovpyias : in Biblical 
‘Greek used in reference to priestly ser- 
vice ; elsewhere of public service rendered 
by a citizen at his own expense or of any 
sort of service.—Ver. 24. περιέκρυβεν: 
hid herself entirely (περὶ), here only; 
€xpuBov: alate form of 2nd aorist. Why, 
not said, nor whether her husband told 
her what had happened to him.—pijvas 
πέντε; after which another remarkable 


event happened. Whether she appeared 
openly thereafter is not indicated. 
Possibly not (J. Weiss).—étetSev: here 
and in Acts iv. 29 = took care, the 
object being ἀφελεῖν τὸ Sv. p. = to τε- 
move my reproach: keenly felt by a 
Jewish woman, ἐν is understood before 
ats (Bornemann, Scholia). 

Vv. 26-38. The announcement to 
Mary.—Ver. 26. Ναζαρέτ: the original 
home of Joseph and Mary, not merely 
the adopted home as we might infer from 
Mt. ii. 23.—Ver. 27. ἐξ οἴκου Δ.: 
Mary, Joseph, or both? Impossible to 
be sure, though the repetition of 
παρθένου in next clause (instead of 
αὐτῆς) favours the reference to Joseph.— 
Ver. 28. yatpe, κεχαριτωµένη: ave 
plena gratid, Vulg., on which Farrar 
(ο. G. T.) comments : “ not gratia plena, 
but gratia cumulata’’; much graced or 
favoured by God.—yaptréw is Hellenistic, 
and is found, besides here, only in Eph. i. 
6 in N. T.—é Κύριος μετὰ cov, the 
Lord (Jehovah) zs or be with thee, ἐστί 
or ἔστω understood ; the two renderings 
come practically to the same thing.— 
Ver. 20. διεταράχθη: assuming that 
ιδοῦσα (T.R.) is no part of the true 
text, Godet thinks that Mary saw nothing, 


464 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN id 
εὐλογημένη σὺ ἐν yuvacgiv.”} 29. Ἡ δὲ ἰδοῦσα διεταράχθη ἐπὶ. 
τῷ λόγῳ αὐτοῦ,” καὶ διελογίζετο ποταπὸς ein ὁ ἁἀσπασμὸς οὗτος. 
30. Καὶ εἶπεν 6 ἄγγελος αὐτῇ, “Mh φοβοῦ, Μαριάμ: εὗρες yap: 
χάριν παρὰ τῷ Ged. 31. καὶ ἰδού, συλλήψῃη ἐν γαστρί, καὶ τέξῃ 
υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. 32. οὗτός ἔσται µέγας, 
καὶ υἱὸς ὑψίστου κληθήσεται' καὶ δώσει αὐτῷ Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς τὸν 
θρόνον Δαβὶδ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ, 33. καὶ βασιλεύσει ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον 
᾿Ιακὼβ eis τοὺς αἰῶνας, καὶ τῆς βασιλείας αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔσται τέλος. 
34. Εἶπε δὲ Μαριὰμ πρὸς τὸν ἄγγελον, “Mas ἔσται τοῦτο, ἐπεὶ. 
ἄνδρα οὐ γινώσκω;” 35. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ἄγγελος εἶπεν αὐτῇ, 
««Πνεῦμα Άγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμµις ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει. 


1 ευλογημ. . « . Ύνναιξιν comes from ver. 42; wanting in BL. 
2 For ιδουσα . . . αντου NBDL have em τ. A. διεταραχθη (Tisch., W.H.). 


and that it was only the word of the 
angel that disturbed her. It is certainly 
the latter that is specified as the cause 
of trouble. The salutation troubled 
her because she felt that it meant some- 
thing important, the precise nature of 
which (ποταπὸς) did not appear. And 
yet on the principle that in supernatural 
experiences the subjective and the ob- 
jective correspond, she must have had a 
guess.—Ver. 31. ‘“Ingotv: no interpre- 
tation of the name here as in Mt. i. 21; 
a common Jewish name, not necessarily 
implying Messianic functions. There 
may have been ordinary family reasons 
for its use.—Ver. 32 foreshadows the 
future of the child.—péyas, applied also 
to John, ver. 15.- κληθήσεται, shall be 
called = shall be.—rév θρόνον A. τ. 
πατρὸς a.: the Messiah is here con- 
ceived in the spirit of Jewish expectation: 
a son of David, and destined to restore 
his kingdom.—Ver. 34 : Mary’s per- 
plexity, how a mother and yet a virgin! 
J. Weiss points out that this perplexity 
on the part of a betrothed woman is 
surprising. Why not assume, as a 
matter of course, that the announce- 
ment had reference to a child to be born 
as the fruit of marriage with the man to 
whom she was betrothed? ‘“ These 
words betray the standpoint of Lk., who 
knows what is coming (ver. 35).” J. 
Weiss in Meyer.—Ver. 35. Πνεῦμα 
Άγιον: without the article because a 
proper name =the well-known Holy 
Spirit, say some (Meyer, Farrar), but 
more probably because the purpose is 
not to indicate the person by whom, 
etc., but the kind of influence: sfirit as 
opposed to flesh, holy in the sense of 


separation from all fleshly defilement 
(Hofmann, J. Weiss, Hahn).—8vvapis 
uplorov: the power of the Most High, 
also without article, an equivalent for 
π. &. and more definite indication of the 
cause, the power of God. Note the use 
of ὕψιστος as the name of God in ver. 
32, here, and in) νου 76.5) seine 
(Vorkanonische Uberlieferung des Lukas, 
p- 17) includes 6 ὕψιστος, 6 δυνατός 
(i. 49), 6 δεσπότης (ii. 29), 6 κύριος (i. 
6,9, II, etc.), all designations of God, 
among the instances of a Hebraistic 
vocabulary characteristic of chaps. i. 
and ii. The first epithet recurs in vi. 
35 in the expression ‘sons of the 
Highest,” applied to those who live 
heroically, where Mt. has “ childrén of 
your Father in heaven”’.—éedevoerau, 
ἐπισκιάσει: two synonyms delicately 
selected to express the divine substitute 
for sexual intercourse. Observe the 
parallelism here: ‘sign of the exaltation 
of feeling. The language becomes a 
chant,”’ Godet. Some find poetry 
throughout these two first chapters of 
Lk. ‘These songs . . . doubtless re- 
present reflection upon these events by 
Christian poets, who put in the mouths 
of the angels, the mothers and the 
fathers, the poems which they com- 
posed” (Briggs, The Messiah of the 
Gospels, p. 42. Even the address of 
Gabriel to Zechariah in the temple, 
i. 13-17, is, he thinks, such a poem).— 
τὸ γεννώµμενον ἅγιον, the holy thing— 
holy product of a holy agency—which is 
being, or about to be, generated = the 
embryo, therefore appropriately neuter. 
—vids Θεοῦ, Son of God; not merely 
because holy, but because brought into: 


20-41. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

σοι’ διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον κληθήσεται Υἱὸς Θεοῦ. 36. καὶ 
ἰδού, Ελισάβετ ἡ συγγενής] σου, καὶ αὐτὴ συνειληφυῖα Σ υἱὸν ἐν 
γήρα 3 αὐτῆς: καὶ οὗτος μὴν ἕκτος ἐστὶν αὐτῇ τῇ καλουµένῃ 
στείρα" 37. ὅτι οὐκ ἀδυνατήσει παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ: way ῥῆμα." 
38. Εἶπε δὲ Mapidp, ''Ιδού, ἡ δούλη Κυρίου" Ὑένοιτό µοι κατὰ 
τὸ ῥῆμά σου. Καὶ ἀπῆλθεν dw αὐτῆς ὁ ἄγγελος. 

39. ᾽Αναστᾶσα δὲ Μαριὰμ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις ἐπορεύθη εἰς 
τὴν ὀρεινὴν μετὰ σπουδῆς, εἰς πόλιν Ιούδα, 49. καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸν 
οἶκον Ζαχαρίου, καὶ ἠσπάσατο τὴν Ελισάβετ. 41. καὶ ἐγένετο ὡς 
ἤκουσεν ἡ µἘλισάβετ τὸν ἀσπασμὸν τῆς Μαρίας ὃ ἐσκίρτησε τὸ 


465 


βρέφος ἐν τῇ 


1 συγγενις in SBDLA al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὄγηρει in all uncials. 


κοιλίᾳ αὐτῆς: καὶ ἐπλήσθη Πνεύματος "Αγίου ἡ 


2 cuverAndev in BLE 
4 rov Θεου in NBDLE. 


(W.HL). 


ὅτον ασπ. της Μ. η Ελ. in SBCDLE and some cursives. 


being by the power of the Highest.— 
Ver. 36. καὶ ἰδού, introducing a re- 
ference to Elizabeth’s case to help 
Mary’s faith.—eovyyevis, late form for 
συγγενής (T.R.), a blood relation, but 
of what degree not indicated, suggesting 
that Mary perhaps belonged to the tribe 
of Levi.—ynpes: Ionic form of dative for 
γήρᾳ (T.R.). Hellenistic Greek was an 
eclectic language, drawing from all 
dialects as from the poets, turning their 
poetic expressions to the uses of prose.— 
καλουμένῃ: Elizabeth is described as 
one who is still being called barren, 
though six months gone in pregnancy, 
because people have had no means of 
knowing her state.—Ver. 37. dadvva- 
τήσει;: the verb means, in classic Greek, 
to be weak, of persons. In Sept. and 
N. T. (here andin Mt. xvii. 20) it means to 
be impossible, of things. Commentators 
differ as to whether we should render : no 
word of God shall be weak, inoperative, 
or no thing, with, on the part of, God, 


shall be impossible.—fyjpa = \Q77 may 
Ti α 


be rendered either word or thing. The 
reading παρὰ τοῦθεοῦ (BDL) seems to de- 
mand the ‘former of the two translations. 
Field, Otium Nor., discusses this passage. 
Adopting the above reading, and adhering 
to the sense of ἀδυνατ. in reference to 
things, he translates: ‘‘ for from God no 
word (or no thing) shall be impossible”. 
Some recent critics find in this sec- 
tion two different views of the birth 
of Jesus, one implying natural pater- 
nity, the other supernatural causality, 
the former being the view in the 
original document, the other introduced 
= 


by the evangelist, the former ¥ewish 
in its tendency of thought, the latter 
heathen-Christian. The subject is dis- 
cussed by Hillmann in Fahrb. fiir prot. 
Theol., 1891, and Usener, Religions- 
geschictliche Untersuchungen, 1888. J. 
Weiss, in his ed. of Meyer, p. 303, 
note, seems inclined to favour this view, 
and to see in vv. 31-33 the one version, 
and in vv. 34, 35 the other, due to Lk. 
Against this view vide Feine, Vork. 
Oberlief. 

Vv. 39-45. Mary visits Elizabeth.— 
Ver. 39. ἐν τ. ἡ, ταύταις in these (not 
those = ἐκείναις, A. V.) days = at the 
time of the angelic ν]εῖε.---μετὰ σπουδῆς : 
no time lost, a most natural visit from 
one woman with a high hope, to another, 
a friend, in a similar state of mind.— 
els τὴν ὀρεινὴν (χώραν, again ver. 65) : 
into the hill country, referring to the 
southern hill country of Judah, Ben- 
jamin and Ephraim. Galilee had a hill 
country too. The expression has been 
supposed to point to the origin of Lk.’s 
document in Judaea (Hillmann).—eis 
πόλιν ᾿Ιούδα, to a city of Judah, not 
particularly named. Reland (Palaestina) 
conjectures that we should read $utta, 
the name of a priestly city mentioned 
twice in Joshua (xv. 55, xxi. 16).—Ver. 
41. ἐσκίρτησε: commentators discuss 
the connection between the maternal 
excitement and the quickening of the 
child—which was cause and which effect. 
Let this and all other questions in re- 
ference to the movement denoted be 
passed over in respectful silence.—Ver. 
42. ἀνεφώνησεν : here onlyin N.T. The 
verb, with the following words, κραυγῇ, 


οἱ 


466 


g cf. Heb. 
Vii. 11. 


h cf. use in 


Mt. xxiii. 


5 


1 κρανγη in BL= (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 peyada in RBDL (Tisch., W.H.). 


KATA AOYKAN 1. 


Ἐλισάβετ, 42. καὶ ἀνεφώνησε φωνῇ 1 µεγάλη, καὶ εἶπεν, “ Εὔλογη- 
µένη σὺ ἐν γυναιξί, καὶ εὐλογημένος ὁ καρπὸς τῆς κοιλίας σου. 
43. καὶ πόθεν por τοῦτο, ἵνα ἔλθῃ ἡ µήτηρ τοῦ Κυρίου µου πρός 
pe*; 44. ἰδοὺ γάρ, ὡς ἐγένετο ἡ φωνὴ τοῦ ἀσπασμοῦ σου εἰς τὰ 
Grd µου, ἐσκίρτησεν ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει τὸ βρέφος ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ µου. 
45. καὶ µακαρία ἡ πιστεύσασα, ὅτι ἔσται ἕτελείωσις τοῖς λελαλη- 
µένοις αὐτῇ παρὰ Κυρίου.” 

46. Καὶ εἶπε Mapidp, “™Meyaddver ἡ ψυχή µου τὸν Κύριον, 
47. καὶ ἠγαλλίασε τὸ πνεῦμά µου ἐπὶ τῷ Θεῷ τῷ σωτῆρί µου" 
Sod 


a A af A 
γάρ, ἀπὸ τοῦ viv μακαριοῦσί µε πᾶσαι at γενεαί: 49. ὅτι ἐποίησέ 


48. ὅτι ἐπέβλεψεν ἐπὶ τὴν ταπείνωσιν τῆς δούλης αὐτοῦ. 


por μεγαλεῖα  ὁ δυνατός, καὶ ἅγιον τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ: 50. καὶ τὸ 
"eos αὐτοῦ eis γενεὰς γενεῶν * τοῖς φοβουμένοις αὐτόν. 51. ἐποί- 
ye κράτος ἐν βραχίονι αὐτοῦ: διεσκόρπισεν ὑπερηφάνους διανοίᾳ 
καρδίας αὐτῶν. 52. καθεῖλε δυνάστας ἀπὸ θρόνων, καὶ ὕψωσε 


ταπεινού. 53. πεινῶντας ἐνέπλησεν ἀγαθῶν, καὶ πλουτοῦντας 


2 ewe in NB. 
µεγαλεια (CAE al.) occurs in Acts ii. 11. 


4 eis yeveas και yeveas in BCL= (Tisch., W.H.). 


µεγάλῃ, point to an unrestrained utter- 
ance under the influence of irrepressible 
feeling, thoroughly true to feminine 
nature: ‘‘ blessed thou among women (a 
Hebrew superlative), and blessed the 
fruit of thy womb,”’ poetic parallelism 
again, answering to the exalted state of 
feeling. The reference to the Holy 
Spirit (in ver. 41) implies that Elizabeth 
spoke by prophetic inspiration.—Ver. 43. 
ἵνα ἔλθῃ: subjunctive instead of infin. 


with art., the beginning of a tendency, — 


which ended in the substitution of va 
with the subjunctive for the infinitive in 
modern Greek.—Ver. 44. yap: implies 
that from the movement of her child 
Elizabeth inferred that the mother of 
the Lord stood before her.—Ver. 45. 
µακαρία, here, as elsewhere, points to 
rare and high felicity connected with 
heroic moods and achievements.—ért, 
because or that, which? great conflict of 
opinion among commentators. The 
former sense would make ὅτι give the 
reason for calling Mary blessed = 
blessed because the things she hopes for 
will surely come to pass. The latter 
makes ὅτι indicate the object of faith = 
blessed she who believes that what God 
has said will come to pass, with possible 
allusion to her own husband’s failure in 
faith, 

Vv. 46-56. Mary’s song.—peyadvver : 


magnificat, Vulg., whence the ecclesias- 
tical name for this hymn, which has 
close affinities with the song of Hanna 
in 1 Sam. ii. I-10; variously regarded by 
critics: by some, 6.Ρ., Godet and Hahn, 
as an extemporised utterance under in- 
spiration by Mary, by others as a rem. 
nant of old Jewish-Christian Hymnology 
(J. Weiss, etc.), by others still as a purely 
Jewish Psalm, lacking distinctively 
Christian features (Hillmann). There 
are certainly difficulties connected with 
the first view, ¢g., the conventional 
phraseology and the presence of elements 
which do not seem to fit the special 
situation.—uxy, πνεῦμα: synonyms in 
parallel clauses.—Ver. 48. This verse 
and the two preceding form the first of 
four strophes, into which the song natur- 
ally divides. The first strophe expresses 
simply the singer’s gladness. The 
second (vv. 49-50) states its cause. The 
third (vv. 51-53) describes in gnomic 
aorists the moral order of the world, for 
the establishment of which God ever 
works in His holy and wise Providence, 
overturning the conventional order, 
scattering the proud, upsetting thrones, 
and exalting them of low degree, filling 
the hungry, and sending the rich away 
empty. It is this third part of the hymn 
which on first view seems least in keep- 
ing with the occasion. And yet on a 


42—62. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ἐξαπέστειλε κενού. 54. ἀντελάβετο Ἰσραὴλ παιδὸς αὐτοῦ, µνησ- 
θῆναι ἐλέους, 55. καθὼς ἐλάλησε πρὸς τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τῷ 
᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ τῷ σπέρµατι αὐτοῦ eis τὸν aidva.” 56. Ἔμεινε δὲ 
Μαριὰμ, σὺν αὐτῇ ὡσεὶ λ µῆνας tpets> καὶ ὑπέστρεψεν eis τὸν οἶκον 
αὐτῆς. 

5]. TH δὲ Ελισάβετ ἐπλήσθη ὃ χρόνος τοῦ τεκεῖν αὐτήν, καὶ 
ἐγέννησεν υἱόν: 58. καὶ ἤκουσαν ot περίοικοι καὶ οἱ συγγενεῖς 
αὐτῆς, ὅτι ἐμεγάλυνε Κύριος τὸ ἔλεος αὐτοῦ pet αὐτῆς, καὶ συνέ- 
χαιρον αὐτῃ. 59. Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῇ ὀγδόῃ ἡμέρᾳ,” ἦλθον περιτεμεῖν 
τὸ παιδίον" καὶ ἐκάλουν αὐτὸ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ 
6ο. καὶ ἀποκριθεσα ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ εἶπεν, ““Οὐχί, 
61. Καὶ εἶπον πρὸς αὐτήν, “΄Ὅτι 


Ζαχαρίαν. 
ἀλλὰ κληθήσεται Ἰωάννης,” 

ὐὸ ΄ 3 3 ~ fg ΘΑ λ le A Pe fi sa 
οὖδείς ἐστιν ἐν τῇ συγγενείᾳ ὃ σου, ὃς καλεῖται τῷ ὀνόματι τούτῷ. 


62. ᾿Ενένευον δὲ τῷ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ, τὸ τί ἂν θέλοι καλεῖσθαι αὐτόν." 


467 


λως in BLE 1. 
Σεκ της σνγγενειας in ΝΑΒΟΙ ΔΞ33. 


1ατρε view this strophe exactly describes 
the constant tendency of Christ’s in- 
duence in the world: to turn things 
apside down, reverse judgments, and 
alter positions. The last strophe (vv. 
54, 55) sets forth the birth about to 
happen as a deed of divine grace to 
[srael— Ver. 54. ἀντελάβετο: laid hold 
of with a view to help, as in Isaiah xli. 
4, 9, Acts xx. 35, 1 Tim. vi. 2. Cf. 
ἐπιλαμβάνεται, Heb. ii. 16.---μνησθῆναι 
ἐλέους, καθὼς ἐλάλησεν: what is about 
to happen is presented as fulfilling a pro- 
mise made to the Fathers long, long 
ago, but not forgotten by God, to whom 
{000 years, so far as remembering and 
being interested in promises are con- 
cerned, are as one day.—r@ ᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ 
ft. o α. The construction is a little 
joubtful, and has been differently under- 
stood. It is perhaps simplest to take 
AB., etc., as the dative of advantage = 
to remember mercy for the benefit of 
Abraham and his seed. The passage is 
an echo of Micah vii. 20. 

Ver. 56. Mary returns to her home,— 
ἔμεινε: the time of Mary’s sojourn 
with her kinswoman is given as ‘‘ about 
three months”. This would bring her 
departure near to the time of Elizabeth’s 
confinement. Did she remain till the 
event was over? That is left doubtful. 

Vv. 57-66. Birth of ¥ohn.—Ver. 57. 
ἐπλήσθη, was fulfilled, the time for 
giving birth arrived in due course of 
nature.—Ver. 58. περίοικοι (περί, οἶκος), 
dwellers around, neighbours, here only in 


4 


Στη ηµερα τη oySon in NMBCDLE 33. 
* avro in NBD 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


Ν. Τ., severai timesin Sept. Named first 
because nearest; some of the relatives 
would be farther away and would arrive 
later. This gathering of neighbours and 
kinsfolk (συγγενεῖς) presents a “ gracious 
tableau of Israelite life,” Godet.—per’ 
αὐτῆς: a Hebraism = πρὸς αὐτήν.--- 
συνέχαιρον α., they congratulated her: 
congratulabantur εἰ, Vulg.; or, better, 
they rejoiced with her (ver. 14).—Ver. 
59. ἠλθον, on the eighth, the legal day, 
they came, to circumcise the child; {.ε., 
those who were concerned in the function 
—the person who performed the opera- 
tion, and the relatives of the family.— 
ἐκάλουν may be the imperfect of τε- 
peated action = they took for granted by 
repeated expressions that the name was 
to be Zechariah, or the conative imper- 
fect indicating a wish which was frus- 
trated.— Ver. 6ο. Ἰωάννης, ohn; pre- 
sumably the mother had learned this 
from the father, by writing on a tablet 
as on the present occasion. The older 
commentators (Meyer also) supposed a 
Divine revelation.—Ver. 61. συγγε- 
velas, kinsmanship. In Lk. only in 
Ν. T. Cf. Acts vii. 3, 14.—Ver. 62. 
ἐνένενον (here only in N. T.): they made 
signs, which seems to imply that 
Zechariah is supposed to be deaf as well 
as dumb. Various suggestions have 
been made to evade this conclusion ; 
é.g., that men are very apt to treat a 
dumb person as if he were also deaf 
(Bengel, De Wette, Godet); that they 
communicated by signs instead of by 


468 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ es 


63. καὶ αἰτήσας πινακίδιον ἔγραψε, λέγων, “' Ιωάννης oti τὸ ὄνομα. 


αὐτοῦ :”' καὶ ἐθαύμασαν πάντες. 


64. ᾽Ανεώχθη δὲ τὸ στόµα αὐτοῦ 


παραχρῆμα καὶ ἡ γλῶσσα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐλάλει εὐλογῶν τὸν Θεόν. 
65. Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ πάντας φόβος τοὺς περιοικοῦντας αὐτούς: καὶ. 
ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ὀρεινῇ τῆς Ιουδαίας διελαλεῖτο πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα - 
66 καὶ ἔθεντο πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῶν, λέγοντες, 


“Ti ἄρα τὸ παιδίον τοῦτο ἔσται ;” 


Καὶ } χεὶρ Κυρίου ἦν pet αὐτοῦ. 


67. Καὶ Ζαχαρίας 6 πατὴρ αὐτοῦ ἐπλήσθη Πνεύματος Ἁγίου, καὶ 
προεφήτευσε,ὶ λέγων, 68. '“Εὐλογητὸς Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς τοῦ Ισραήλ, 

i Ch. ii. 38. ὅτι ἐπεσκέψατο καὶ ἐποίησε 'AUtpwow τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ: 69. καὶ 
12. ἤγειρε κέρας σωτηρίας ἡμῖν, ἐν τῷ 3 οἴκω Δαβὶδ τοῦ ® παιδὸς αὐτοῦ - 
70. (καθὼς ἐλάλησε διὰ στόµατος τῶν ἁγιῶν τῶν ὃ ἀπ᾿ αἰῶνος προφη- 


1 και γαρ in NBCDL (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 expod. in NABCL 1, 33. 


3 Omit re NBCDL 33: also τον before παιδος SSBDL; also των after αγιων 


NBLA 33. 


speech to spare the feelings of Elizabeth, 
whose judgment was being appealed 
from (Meyer); that a sign was all that 
was needed, Zechariah having heard all 
that was said (Bleek, J. Weiss, Hahn). 
—ré before the clause following—rf ἂν 
θέλοι, viewed as a substantive, is very 
appropriate in a case where the question 
was not spoken but signalled.—4v θέλοι : 
the optative with ἂν, implies diverse 
possibilities; found in Lk.’s writings 
only in N. T.—Ver. 63. Ἠπινακίδιον 
(dim. from πίναξ), here only in N. T.: a 
little tablet probably covered with wax, 
used like a slate; pugillarem in Vulg.— 
λέγων is used here, Hebrew fashion = to 
the effect.—éypawe λέγων: hypallage pro 
γράφων ἔλεγε (Pricaeus) = he said by 
writing.—20avpacav: they wondered, at 
this consent of the parents in giving a 
strange name, and felt there must be 
something under it—an omen.—Ver. 64. 
στόμα, γλῶσσα: both connected with 
ἀνεώχθη, though the idea of opening is 
applicable only to the former—a case of 
zeugma. ‘The return of speech a second 
marvel or rather a third: (1) a child of 
old parents; (2) the singular name; (3) 
the recovery of speech, much marked, 
and commented on among the denizens 
of the hill country of Judah (διελαλεῖτο). 
--φόβος, not terror, but religious awe in 
presence of the supernatural—charac- 
teristic of all simple people.—Ver. 66. 
τί dpa, etc.: what, in view of all these 
unusual circumstances, will this child 
come to? A most natural question. 
They felt sure all things portended an 
uncommon future for this child : ‘‘ omina 


principiis inesse solent ”.—xat γὰρ, etc. : 
a reflection of the evangelist justifying 
the wistful questioning of the hill folk = 
they might well ask, for indeed the hand 
of the Lord was with him. 

Vv. 67-79. The song of Zechariah, 
called from the first word of it in the 
Vulgate the Benedictus. It is usually 
divided into five strophes, but it is more 
obviously divisible into two main parts, 
vv. 67-75, vv. 76-79. (Briggs, The 
Messiah of the Gospels, calls these 
divisions strophes, thus recognising only 
two.) Hillmann (¥ahrb. f. prot. Theol., 
1891) regards the first part as a purely 
Jewish Psalm, having no reference to 
the birth of the Baptist ; furnished with 
a preface, ver. 67, and an epilogue re- 
ferring to the Baptist as the forerunner 
of Jesus by the evangelist. J. Weiss (in 
Meyer) seems to accept this conclusion, 
only suggesting that the second part 
(vv. 76-79) might be in the source used 
by Lk., appended to the Psalm by the 
Jewish-Christian redactor. 

Ver. 67. ἐπροφήτευσεν, prophesied, 
when? At the circumcision, one naturally 
assumes. Hahn, however, connects the 
prophesying with the immediately pre- 
ceding words concerning the hand of the 
Lord being with the boy. That is, 
Zechariah prophesied when it began to 
appear that his son was to have a re- 
markable career.—Ver. 68. ἐπεσκέψατο, 
visited graciously {vide on Mt. xxv. 36), 
occasionally used in Sept. in the sense 
of judicial visitation (Ps. lxxxix. 33). 
Note the use of the aorist here, which 
runs through vv. 68-75, in vv. 76-79 


63—79. 


ΕΥΑΙΤΕΛΙΟΝ 


469 


τῶν αὐτοῦ») 71%. σωτηρίαν ἐξ ἐχθρῶν ἡμῶν, καὶ ἐκ χειρὸς πάντων 
τῶν μισούντων ἡμᾶς: 72. ποιῆσαι ἔλεος μετὰ Tov πατέρων ἡμῶν, 
καὶ µνησθῆναι διαθήκης ἁγίας αὐτοῦ, 73. ὅρκον ὃν ὤμοσε πρὸς 
᾿Αβραὰμ τὸν πατέρα ἡμῶν, 74. τοῦ δοῦναι ἡμῖν, ἀφόβως, ἐκ χειρὸς 
τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἡμῶν Ἰ ῥυσθέντας, λατρεύειν αὐτῷ 75. ἐν ὁσιότητι καὶ 
δικαιοσύνη ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς Lwis? ἡμῶν. 
76. Καὶ σύ, παιδίον, προφήτης ὑψίστου κληθήσῃ: ) προπορεύσῃ j here and 


in Acts 


γὰρ πρὸ προσώπου * Κυρίου, ἑτοιμάσαι ὁδοὺς αὐτοῦ: 77. τοῦ δοῦναι vii. κο. 
γνῶσιν σωτηρίας τῷ λαῷ αὐτοῦ ἐν ἀφέσει ἁμαρτιῶν αὐτῶν, 78. διὰ 
σπλάγχνα ἐλέους Θεοῦ ἡμῶν, ἐν ols ἐπεσκέψατο ὅ ἡμᾶς ἀνατολὴ ἐξ 
ὕψους, 79. ἐπιφᾶναι τοῖς ἐν σκότει καὶ σκιᾷ θανάτου καθηµένοις: 


1 εκ χειρος εχθρων in BDL 33. 


2 πασαις Tats ηµεραις in BL and της ζωης omitted in ΜΒΟΡΙ, al. 
3 και ov δε in NBCDL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 For προ προσωπου SB Orig. have evwmiov (W.H.). 


5 SSBL have επισκεψεται (W.H.). 


futures occur. The object ΟΓἐπεσκέψατο 
is latent in τῷ λαῷ (τὸν λαὸν, cf. vii. 
16; λαός applied to Israel as the chosen 
people, ἔθνος to the other nations).—Ver. 
69. κέρας σ. = βασιλείαν, because kings 
were anointed with a horn of oil, or = 
δύναμιν, because in their horn all horned 
animals have their power (Euthy. Zig.) ; 
a thoroughly Hebrew symbol.—év οἴκῳ 
Δ., pointing toa descendant of David, 
who has wrought signal deliverance for 
Israel.— Ver. Το. ayiwv: a predicate 
applied in reverence to the prophets, as 
to the apostles in Eph, iii. 5.—Ver. 71. 
σωτηρίαν, in apposition with κέρας σ., 
resuming and developing the thought 
interrupted by ver. 70, which is paren- 
thetical.—_éyx@pav, τῶν μισούντων: not 
to be anxiously distinguished; poetic 
synonyms.—Ver. 72. ποιῆσαι: in effect 
epexegetical of salvation, though for- 
mally indicating the aim of the salva- 
Εοπ.---μετὰ τ. Wey 88 in ver. 58, to make 
mercy with, for to show mercy to.— 
aytas, holy, applied to another of Israel’s 
sacred inheritances: the covenant.— 
Ver. 73. ὅρκον for ὅρκου, depending on 
µνησθῆναι, a case of inverse attraction, 
the noun by the relative (ὃν, object of 
ὤμοσεν) instead of the relative by the 
noun. Cf. Lk. κκ. 17. Examples from 
Greek authors in Bornemann, Scholia. 
—Ver. 75. ὁσιότητι: the Godward, τε- 
ligious aspect of conduct (Eph. iv. 24).— 
δικαιοσύνῃ: the manward, ethical aspect. 

Vv. 76-79. From the general thanks- 
giving for Divine mercy the song turns 
to the special cause of gladness afforded 


by the birth of Fohn.—ov, παιδίον : this 
address supposes the Baptist to be still a 
child, and all that is said of him is a 
prophetic forecast of the future, in 
literary {οττη.-- ὑψίστου: once more, for 
God. In the circle which produced this 
hymn, and these early records, the 
idea of Divine transcendency charac- 
teristic of later Judaism seems to have 
prevailed.— Ver. 77. τοῦ δοῦναι, the in- 
finitive of purpose, to be connected with 
προπορεύσῃ in νετ. 76 = John will go 
before the Lord (Jehovah), with the view 
of giving the knowledge of salvation in 
the forgiveness of sins. This is a very 
general description of John’s ministry, 
hardly differentiating it from that of 
Christ. The knowledge of salvation in 
forgiveness ts salvation = Christ’s gift.— 
Ver. 78. διὰ σπλάγχνα, etc., on account 
of, etc., indicating the fountain-head of 
salvation—the mercy of God, described 
in Hebrew phrase as the bowels of 
mercy of our «οᾶ.-- ἐπισκέψεται: the 
future (aorist in T.R.), though in few 
MSS. (NBL), is doubtless the true read- 
ing. In the second great strophe the 
verbs are all future, and describe what 
is to be.—davarody: happily rendered 
‘“‘dayspring”’? in A, V. The reference is 
undoubtedly to a light, star, or sun, not 
to a branch from Jesse’s stem, as it 
might be so far as usage in Sept. is con- 
cerned (vide Jer. xxiii. 5, Zechar. iii. 8, 
vi. 12), for its function is ἐπιφᾶναι, to 
appear as a light to those in darkness 
(σκότει).--σκιῷ θανάτον: vide on Mt. 
iv, 16. 


47ο 


τοῦ κατευθῦναι τοὺς πόδας ἡμῶν εἰς ὁδὸν εἰρήνης.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


I, 8ο. II. 


80. Τὸ δὲ 


παιδίον ηὔξανε καὶ ἐκραταιοῦτο πνεύµατι"' καὶ ἦν ἐν ταῖς ἐρήμοις, 


in 
Sir. xliii. 
6. 


The Benedictus is steeped in O. T. 
language; ‘‘an anthology from Psalms 
and Prophets,’’ Holtz., H. Ο. 

Ver. 80. Conclusion: being a sum- 
mary statement on John’s history from 
childhood to manhood.—mvevpare: the 
growing strength of John’s spirit, the 
development of a remarkable moral in- 
dividuality, the main point in the view of 
the evangelist.—éy ταῖς ἐρήμοις, in the 
desert places : not far to go from his home 
to find them ; visits to them frequent in 
early boyhood; constant abode when 
youth had passed into manhood; love 
of solitude grown into a passion. Meet 
foster-mother for one who is to be the 
censor of his time. Essenes not far off, 
but no indication of contact, either out- 
wardly or inwardly, with them. 

CuaPTeR II. ΤΗΕ BIRTH AND ΒΟΥ- 
HOOD OF JESUS.—Vv. 1-5. Foseph and 
Mary go up to Bethlehem. In these 
verses Luke makes a historical state- 
ment, which one might have been in- 
clined to regard as an illustration of the 
ἀκρίβεια (1. 1), at which he aimed, as 
well as of his desire, in the spirit of 
Pauline universalism, to connect the 
birth of Jesus with the general history of 
the world. In the former respect the 
experience of the exegete is very dis- 
appointing. The passage has given rise 
to a host of questions which have been 
discussed, with bewildering conflict of 
opinion, in an extensive critical and 
apologetic literature. The difficulty is 
not so much as to the meaning of the 
evangelist’s words, but rather as to their 
truth. As, however, the apologetic 
and the exegetical interests have been 
very much mixed up in the discussions, it 
may be well at the outset to indicate 
briefly the chief objections that have 
been taken to the passage on the score 
of historicity. On the face of it, Lk.’s 
statement is that the Roman Emperor 
at the time of Christ’s birth ordered a 
universal census, that this order was 
carried out by Quirinius, governor of 
Syria, and that the execution of it was 
the occasion of Joseph and Mary going 
to Bethlehem. To this it has been 
objected :— 

1. Apart from the Gospel, history 


i here only ἕως ἡμέρας * ἀναδείξεως αὐτοῦ πρὸς τὸν Ισραήλ. 
ΠΠ. 1. ἘΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις, ἐξῆλθε δόγμα παρὰ 
Καίσαρος Αὐγούστου, ἀπογράφεσθαι πᾶσαν τὴν οἰκουμένην: 2. αὕτη 


knows nothing of a general imperial 
census in the time of Augustus. 

2. There could have been no Roman 
census in Palestine during the time of 
Herod the Great, a rex socius. 

3. Such a census at such a time could 
not have been carried out by Quirinius, 
for he was not governor in Syria then, 
nor till ten years later, when he did 
make a census which gave rise to a 
revolt under Judas of Galilee. 

4. Under a Roman census it would 
not have been necessary for Joseph to 
go to Bethlehem, or for Mary to accom- 
pany him.—With these objections in 
our view we proceed with the exposi- 
tion, noting their influence, as we go 
along, on the details of interpretation. 

Ver. 1. ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις: the 
days of Herod (i. 5), and of the events 
related in the previous chapter: the 
birth of John, etc.—8éypa (δοκέω) = 
δεδογµένον, an opinion as of philosophers ; 
here a decree, as in Acts xvii. 7.--ἀπογρά- 
Φεσθαι (here and in Heb. xii. 23): the 
decree concerned exroiment or registra- 
tion of the population (the verb might 
be either middle or passive—enrol itself, 
or be enrolled; the latter the more 
probable). For what purpose—taxation, 
or general statistical objects—not indi- 
cated, and not to be taken for granted as 
in the rendering “taxed” in A. V., but 
the former most probably intended. The 
hypothesis that the registration had 
reference to statistics meets objec- 
tions 1 and 2, because Augustus did 
make or complete a descriptio orbis of 
that sort, and such a census would give 
no offence to the Jews or their king. 
Vide Hahn, ad loc. The Greek word for 
taxing is ἀποτίμησις.---πᾶσαν τὴν οἶκου- 
µένην: the whole habitable world, orbis 
terrarum =the Roman empire, not 
merely the provinces (Italy excluded), or 
Palestine, as has been suggested in an 
apologetic interest to get rid of the diffi- 
culties connected with a universal cen- 
sus. The usual meaning of the phrase, 
and the reference to Augustus as the 
source of the order, favour the larger 


sense. Augustus reigned from 30 B.c. 
to 14 A.D. 
Ver. 2. This verse looks like a paren- 


I—5. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


471 


i) ἀπογραφὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο 7 ἡγεμονεύοντος τῆς Συρίας Κυρηνίου. 
3: καὶ ἐπορεύοντο πάντες ἀπογράφεσθαι, ἕκαστος eis τὴν ἰδίαν 3 


πόλιν. 


4- ᾿Ανέβη δὲ καὶ Ιωσὴφ ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας, ἐκ πόλεως 


Ναζαρέτ, eis τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν, eis πόλιν Δαβίδ, ἥτις καλεῖται Βηθλεέμ, 
διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν ἐξ οἴκου καὶ πατριᾶς Δαβίδ, 5. ἀπογράψασθαι 
σὺν Μαριὰμ τῇ μµεμνηστευµένῃ αὐτῷ yuvarxi,® οὔσῃ ἐγκύω. 


1η omitted in BD 131 ; found in CLA (om. Tisch., W.H.). 


2 eyev. before πρωτη in SYD Orig. lat. (Tisch.). 


difficulty, thinks J. Weiss. 
3 εαντον in ΝΕΒΡΙ.Ξ (Tisch., W.H.). 


An exegetical device to meet a 


As in Τ.Ε. ABCLA (W.H.). 


* epynor. in NBCDLE. 


5 Omit γνναικι NBCDLE 1, 131 (Tisch., W.H.), 


thetical explanation, and is actually 
bracketed in W.H. One could almost 
wish it had been omitted, or that there 
were reason to believe, as has been 
suggested by several writers, that it is a 
gloss that has found its way into the 
text, and that Lk. is not responsible for 
it—so much trouble has it given to com- 
mentators. Text and sense have alike 
been disputed.—avrn has been taken as 
αὐτή = self, not αὕτη = tla, the same, 
to make room for a distinction between 
the decree and its execution or com- 
pletion ten years after by Quirinius, so 
meeting difficulty No. 3. This device is 
now generally discarded. πρώτη has 
been taken as = προτέρα, meaning ; this 
census took place before Quirinius was 
governor, a possible but very improbable 
rendering, not to say that one fails to 
see the object of such a statement. The 
true text is αὕτη ἀπογ. πρώτη ἐγέν., and 
the meaning: that census took place, as 
a first, when, etc. But why as a first 2 
Because, reply many, there was a second, 
under the same Quirinius, ten years 
later, known to Lk. (Acts v. 37), 
disastrous in its consequence, and which 
he was anxious his readers should not 
confound with this one (so Hahn and 
others).—nyepovevovros: this raises a 
question of fact. Was Quirinius 
governor. then? He was, admittedly, 
governor of Syria ten years later, when 
he made the census referred to in Acts 
v. 37- Either there is a mistake here, or 
Quirinius was governor twice (so A. W. 
Zumpt, strenuously supported by Farrar, 
C.G. T., ad loc.), or at least present in 
Syria, at the time of Christ’s birth, in 
some capacity, say as a commissioner 
in connection with the census. 

Ver. 3. πάντες: not all throughout 
the world, but all in Palestine—the execu- 
tion of the decree there being what the 


evangelist is interested in.—eis τὴν ἰδίαν 
πόλιν (or ἑαυτοῦ π., W.H.). Does this 
mean to the city of his people, or to the 
city of his abode? If the former, what 
a stir in Palestine, or in the world if 
πάντες be taken widely! A regular 
“ Volkerwanderung” (Holtzmann in 
H.C.). Sensible of this, some (Hahn, 
e.g.) take the reference to be to the 
place of residence (Wohnort not Stamm- 
ort), implying that Bethlehem was for 
Lk. as for Mt. Joseph’s home, and that 
they merely happened to have been 
living in Nazareth just before. But ver. 
7 implies that Joseph and Mary had no 
house in Bethlehem. Feine quotes, 
with a certain amount of approval, the 
view of Schneller (Kennst du das Land) 
that Joseph was not a carpenter but a 
mason, and that Bethlehem was there- 
fore his natural home, being the head- 
quarters of that craft then as now. On 
this view, Joseph had simply been in 
Nazareth building a house, not at home, 
but away from home for a time as an 
artisan. 

Vv. 4, 5. Joseph and Mary and 
Nazareth are here referred to, as if they 
had not been mentioned before (i. 26, 27), 
implying that Lk. is here using an inde- 
pendent document (Holtz., H. Ο.).---ἀπὸ 
τ.Γαλ., ἐκπόλ.: used with classical accur- 
acy: @wdo=direction from, ἐκ from within 
(C. G. T.).—é§ οἴκου καὶ πατριᾶς, ‘‘ of 
the house and family,” R. V.—otxos, 
πατριαί, φυλαί represent a series of 
widening εἴτε]ες.---ἀπογράψασθαι, to be 
enrolled. If Bethlehem was Joseph’s 
home, he would have gone to Bethlehem 
sooner or later in any case. Because of 
the census he went just then (Hahn).— 
σὺν Μαριὰμ, coming after ἀπογράψ., 
naturally suggests that she had to be 
enrolled too. Was this necessary ? Even 
if not, reasons might be suggested for 


472 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ Il. 


6. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ, ἐπλήσθησαν at ἡμέραι 
τοῦ τεκεῖν αὐτήν. Je καὶ ἔτεκε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον, 
καὶ ἐσπαργάνωσεν αὗτόν, καὶ ἀνέκλινεν αὐτὸν ἐν rh! φάτνῃ " διότι 
οὐκ ἦν αὐτοῖς τόπος ἐν τῷ καταλύµατι. 

8. Καὶ ποιμένες ἦσαν ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ τῇ αὐτῇ ἀγραυλοῦντες καὶ 
φυλάσσοντες φυλακὰς τῆς νυκτὸς ἐπὶ τὴν ποίµνην αὐτῶν. 9g. καὶ 
ἰδού,” ἄγγελος Κυρίου ἐπέστη αὐτοῖς, καὶ δόξα Κυρίου περιέλαµψεν 
αὐτούς" καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν φόβον µέγαν. 10 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ 
ἄγγελος, “Mi φοβεῖσθε' ἰδοὺ γάρ, εὐαγγελίζομαι ὑμῖν χαρὰν 
μεγάλην, ἥτις ἔσται παντὶ τῷ Aad: 11. ὅτι ἐτέχθη ὑμῖν σήµερον 


σωτήρ, ὃς ἐστι Χριστὸς Κύριος, ἐν moder Δαβίδ. 


12. καὶ τοῦτο 


ὑμῖν τὸ δ onpetov: εὑρήσετε βρέφος ἐσπαργανωμένον, κείµενον ἐν 


τῇ” φάτνη.” 
1 Omit 7m ΝΑΒΡΙ Ξ, 


13. Καὶ ἐξαίφνης ἐγένετο σὺν τῷ ἀγγέλω πλῆθος 


2 NBLE omit ιδον. 


Στο is omitted in B= 130 (W.H. relegate to margin). 


4 For κειµενον ev τη φατνη WD 68 read simply ev φατνη (Tisch.). 
Most MSS. omit τη before gar. 


have και κειµενον (W.H.). 


her going with her husband: her con- 
dition, the intention to settle there as 
their real home, she an heiress, etc.— 
tyxv@ (here only in N. T.), preparing for 
what follows. 

With reference to the foregoing state- 
ment, it is generally agreed that a census 
of some kind must have taken place. 
Meyer and Weiss, following Schleier- 
macher and Olshausen, think that the 
event was something internal to Judaea, 
and concerned the revision of - family 
genealogical registers, and that Lk. was 
misled into transforming this petty 
transaction into an affair of world- 
historical significance. This is not satis- 
factory. It would be much more satis- 
factory if it could be shown that Lk.’s 
historic framing of the birth of Jesus is 
strictly accurate. But most satisfactory 
of all is it to know that such a demon- 
stration, however desirable, is not vital 


to faith. 

Vv. 6, 7. The birth.—éwhijctycayv αἱ 
ἡ., asin i.57. In this case, as in that 
of John, the natural course was run.— 
ἐσπαργάνωσεν (here and ver. 12), ἀνέκ- 
λινεν: the narrative runs as if Mary did 
these things herself, whence the patristic 
inference of painless birth.—arvp, in 
a manger (in a stall, Grotius, εί al.).— 
καταλύµατι, in the inn, not probably a 
acavSoxetov (x. 34), with a host, but 
simply a khan, an enclosure with open 
recesses. The meaning may be, not 
that there was absolutely no room for 
Joseph and Mary there, but that the 


BLE 1, 33 al. 


place was too crowded fora birth, and 
that therefore they retired to a stall or 
cave, where there was room for the 
mother, and a crib for the babe (vide 
ch. xxii. 11). 

Vv. 8-13. The shepherds and the 
angels.—Ver. 8. Ἠποιμένες, shepherds, 
without article ; no connection between 
them and the birthplace.—daypavdotvres 
(ἀγρός, αὐλή, here only), bivouacking, 
passing the night in the open air ; imply- 
ing naturally a mild time of the year 
between March and November. In 
winter the flocks were in fold.—Ver. 9. 
ἐπέστη, used elsewhere by Lk, in re- 
ference to angelic appearances, eighteen 
times in his writings in all = stood 
beside ; one more than their number, 
suddenly.—wepiéAapwev: here and in 
Acts xxvi. 13, only, in N. T. = shone 
around.—égoByOnoav, they feared 
greatly; yet they were not utterly un- 
prepared, their thoughts had been of a 
Divine gracious visitation—waiting for 
the consolation of Israel ; subjective and 
objective corresponding.— Ver. to. 
εὐαγγελίζομαι, etc., I bring good news 
in the form of a great joy (cf. i. 19).— 
παντὶ τῷ Lag, not merely to you, but to 
the whole people (of Israel, vide i. 68).— 
Ver. I1.—owtyp: a word occurring 
(with σωτηρία) often in Lk. and in St. 
Paul, not often elsewhere in N. T.— 
Κύριος: also often in Lk.’s Gospel, 
where the other evangelists use Jesus, 
The angel uses the dialect of the 
apostolic age.—Ver. 12. σημεῖον, the 


6—18. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


473 


στρατιᾶς οὐρανίου,ὶ αἰνούντων τὸν Θεόν, καὶ λεγόντων, 14. “ Δόξα 
ἐν ὑψίστοις Θεῷ, καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς εἰρήνη: ἐν ἀνθρώποις εὐδοκία.' ; 
15. Καὶ ἐγένετο, ὡς ἀπῆλθον ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν eis τὸν οὐρανὸν οἱ ἄγγελοι, 
καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι οἱ ποιμένες 3 εἶπον” πρὸς ἀλλήλους, “΄ Διέλθωμεν 
δὴ ἕως Βηθλεέμ, καὶ ἴδωμεν τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο τὸ γεγονός, ὃ ὁ Κύριος 


ἐγνώρισεν ἡμῖν.” 


16. Καὶ ἦλθον σπεύσαντες, καὶ ἀνεῦρον τήν τε 


Μαριὰμ καὶ τὸν Ιωσήφ, καὶ τὸ βρέφος κείµενον ἐν τῇ φάτνη. 
17. ἰδόντε δὲ διεγνώρισαν» περὶ τοῦ ῥήματος τοῦ λαληθέντος 


a ~ , 
αὐτοῖς περὶ τοῦ παιδίου τούτου. 


1 ουρανον in BD (Trg., W.H., margin), 
2The documents are divided between ενδοκια and evSox.as. 


18. καὶ πάντες ot ἀκούσαντες 


Most recent 


editors favour the latter, following ΝΑΕΒΕΡ, vet. Lat. Vulg., Iren. lat., Orig. lat. 
W.H. place ενδοκιας in text and evdoxra in margin. 


3 NQBLE 1 omit οι ανθρωποι found in ADA al. pler. 


Tisch., W.H., om. J. 


Weiss suggests that ot ποιµενες is an ancient gloss which in one branch of the 
wtradition crept into the text, in another displaced οι av@. 


4 ελαλουν in NB. 


sign just that which might, but for fore- 
warning, have been a stumbling block; 
the Saviour and Lord lying in a crib, in 
a cattle stall, or cave! So Hahn, but 
Godet and Schanz take “ sign” merely 
in the sense of means of identification. 

Ver. 14. The angels’ song.—If we re- 
gard the announcement of the angel to 
the shepherds (vv. I0-12) as a song, 
then we may view the gloria in excelsis 
as a refrain sung by a celestial choir 
(πλῆθος στρατιᾶς οὐρανίου, ver. 13). 
With the reading εὐδοκίας, the refrain 
is in two lines :— 

1. ‘* Glory to God in the highest.” 

2. “‘And on earth peace among men, 
in whom He is well pleased.” 
εἰρήνη in 2 answering to’ δόξα in 1; 
ἐπὶ γῆς to ἐν ὑψίστοις; ἀνθρώποις to 
Θεῷ. With the reading εὐδοκία (T.R.), 
it falls into three :— 

1. Glory to God in the highest. 

2. And on earth peace (between man 
and man). 

3. Good will (of God) among men. 
ἐν ὑψίστοις, in the highest places, proper 
abode of Him who is repeatedly in these 
early chapters called ‘‘the Highest”. 
The thought in 1 echoes a sentiment in 
the Psalter of Solomon (18, 11), µέγας 6 
Θεὸς ἡμῶν καὶ ἔνδοξος ἐν ὑψίστοις.--- 
«εὐδοκίας is a gen. of quality, limiting ἆν- 
@pairovg = those men who are the objects 
of the Divine εὐδοκία. They may or 
may not be all men, but the intention is 
not to assert that God’s good pleasure 
ests on all, J. Weiss in Meyer says = 
τοῖς ἐκλεκτοῖς, 


δ εγνωρισαν in NBDL= 


Vv. 15-20. The shepherds go to 
Bethlehem.—drEbopev δή, come! let 
us go. The force of δή, a highly 
emotional particle (the second time we 
have met with it, vide at Mt. xiii. 23), 
can hardly be expressed in English. 
The rendering in A. V. (and R. V.), 
“Let us now go,’ based on the 
assumption that δὴ has affinity with 
ἤδη, is very tame, giving no idea of the 
mental excitement of the shepherds, and 
the demonstrative energy with which 
they communicated to each other, com- 
rade-fashion, the idea which had seized 
their minds. ‘‘ The δὴ gives a pressing 
character to the invitation,’? Godet. 
Similarly Hahn = “agedum, wohlan, 
doch”. Cf. δὴ in Acts xiii. 2. The 


«διὰ in διέλθωµεν suggests the idea of 


passing through the fields.—@ws (con- 
junction used as a preposition) may 
imply that it was a considerable distance 
to Bethlehem (Schanz).—pyjpa, here = 
“thing”? rather than ‘ word’”’.—Ver. 
16. σπεύσαντες, hasting; movement 
answering to mood revealed by δή.---τήν 
τε Μαριὰμ, etc., mother, father, child, 
recognised in this order, all united 
together in one group by τε The 
position of the babe, in the manger, 
noted as corresponding to the angelic 
announcement; hence in ver. 17 the 
statement that the shepherds recognised 
the correspondence.—Vv. 18, 19. The 
shepherds of course told what they had 
seen in Bethlehem, and how they had 
been led to go there, and these verses 
state the effect produced by their story. 


474 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ ii. 


ἐθαύμασαν περὶ τῶν λαληθέντων ὑπὸ τῶν ποιμένων πρὸς αὐτούς. 
19. ἡ δὲ Μαριὰμ πάντα συνετήρει τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα, συµβάλλουσα. 
ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς. 20. καὶ ἐπέστρεψαν 1 of ποιμένες, δοξάζοντες 
καὶ αἰνοῦντες τὸν Θεὸν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν οἷς ἤκουσαν καὶ εἶδον, καθὼς 
ἐλαλήθη πρὸς αὐτούς. 

21. ΚΑΙ ὅτε ἐπλήσθησαν ἡμέραι ὀκτὼ τοῦ περιτεμεῖν τὸ παιδίον,” 
καὶ ἐκλήθη τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦς, τὸ κληθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀγγέλου πρὸ 
τοῦ συλληφθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ κοιλία. 

22. ΚΑΙ ὅτε ἐπλήσθησαν at ἡμέραι τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ αὐτῶν, κατὰ 
τὸν νόµον Μωσέως, ἀνήγαγον αὐτὸν eis Ἱεροσόλυμα, παραστῆσαι τῷ 
Κυρίῳ, 23. καθὼς γέγραπται ἐν νόµῳ Κυρίου, ΄Ὅτι πᾶν ἄρσεν' 
διανοῖγον µήτραν ἅγιον τῷ Κυρίῳ κληθήσεται 24. καὶ τοῦ δοῦναι. 


a here only 
in N. T. 

b here only 
in N. T. 


1 νπεστρεψαν in all uncials. 


2 αυτον in ABLAZE al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


δ τω before νοµω in BDL. 


4γοσσους in ΜΒ; νεοσσους in ADLA. 


All wondered, but Mary thought on all 
the wonderful things that had happened 
to herself and to the shepherds; keep- 
ing them well in mind (συνετήρει), and 
putting them together (συµβάλλουσα, 
conferens, Vulg.), so as to see what they 
all meant. The wonder of the many 
was a transient emotion (aorist); this re- 
collecting and brooding of Mary was an 
abiding habit (συνετήρει, imperfect). 

Vv. 21-24. Circumcision and pre- 
sentation in the temple.—Ver.21. ἐπλήσ- 
θησαν, as in i. 57, ii. 6, and again in 
ii. 22; in the first two places the re- 
ference is to the course of nature, in the 
second two to the course prescribed by 
the law.—rod περιτεμεῖν, the genitive 
not so much of purpose (Meyer, J. 
Weiss), but of more exact definition 
(Schanz; vide Burton, M.and T., § 400, 
on the use of τοῦ with infinitive to 
limit nouns).—k«at ἐκλήθη: the καὶ may 
be taken as ‘‘also”? = He was circum- 
cised (understood), and at the same time 
His name was called Jesus, or as intro- 
ducing the apodosis: and = then (so 
Godet and Hahn). It might have been 
dispensed with (superfluit, Grotius).— 
Ver. 22. κατὰ τὸν νόµον M. The law 
relating to women after confinement is 
contained in Leviticus xii.—éavyyayov : 
at the close of these forty days of purifi- 
cation His parents took Jesus up to 
Jerusalem from Bethlehem. The Greek 


δύο  νεοσσοὺς * περιστερῶν.᾽ 


θυσίαν, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον ἐν νόµω ὃ Κυρίου, ΄Ζεῦγος "τρυγόνων ἢ 


D has το παιδιον, 


torm of the name for Jerusalem, Ἱερο- 
oédvpa, occurs here and in a few other 
places in Lk. “Ἱερουσαλήμ is the more 
common {ΟΙΠι.--παραστῆσαι, a word 
used by Lk. and St. Paul (Rom. xii. 1), 
in the sense of dedication. This act 
was performed in accordance with the 
legal conception that the first-born 
belonged to God, His priestly servants. 
before the institution of the Levitical 
order (Num. viii. 18, 19). J. Weiss 
suggests that the narrative is modelled 
on the story of the dedication of Samuel 
(1 Sam..-i. 21-28).—Ver. 23. yéypamrat: 
the reference is to Ex. xiii. 2, and the 
statement implies that every first-born 
male child, as belonging to God, must 
be ransomed (Ex. xxxiv. 19, Num. xviii. 
15, 16).—Ver. 24. τοῦ δοῦναι: parallel 
to παραστῆσαι, indicating another of 
the purposes connected with the visit to- 
Jerusalem. The mother went to offer 
her gift of thanksgiving after the days of 
purification were ended.—roe εἰρημένον, 
in Lev. xii., where alternative offerings 
are specified: a lamb, and a turtle dove 
or a young pigeon; and in case of the 
poor two turtle doves, or two young 
pigeons, the one for a burnt offering, 
the other for a sin offering. Mary 
brought the poor woman’s offering. The 
question has been asked, why any purifi- 
cation in this case ? and the fact has beer: 
adduced in proof that the original docu- 


I9—30. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


475 


25. Καὶ ἰδού, ἦν ἄνθρωπος} ἐν ἹἹερουσαλήμ, © ὄνομα Συμεών, 


καὶ 6 ἄνθρωπος οὗτος δίκαιος καὶ "εὐλαβής, προσδεχόµενος wapd-c Acts ii 5; 


κλησιν τοῦ Ισραήλ, καὶ Πνεῦμα Άγιον ἦν 3 ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν: 26. καὶ ἣν 


Viii. 2; 
xxii. 14. 


αὐτῷ Kexpnpatiopevoy ὑπὸ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ “Ayiou, μὴ 4 ἰδεῖν d Heb. χἰ.5. 


*@dvatov πρὶν ἢ ὃ i8 τὸν Χριστὸν Κυρίου. 


27. Καὶ ἦλθεν ἐν τῷ 


, > ac Ld a > ~ > α a ~ a [ 
Πνεύματι εις TO ιερον᾽ και εν τῷ εισαγαγειν τους Yovets το παιδίον 


> a“ ~ a > ‘ By > ae ‘ 3 A 
Ιησοῦν, τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτοὺς κατὰ τὸ εἰθισμένον τοῦ νόµου περὶ αὐτοῦ, 


28. καὶ αὐτὸς ἐδέξατο αὐτὸ εἰς τὰς ἀγκάλας αὐτοῦ," καὶ εὐλόγησε 


τὸν Θεόν, καὶ εἶπε, 29. “Nov ἀπολύεις τὸν δοῦλόν σου, δέσποτα, 


κατὰ τὸ ῥῆμά σου, ἐν εἰρήνη" 30. ὅτι εἶδον οἱ ὀφθαλμοί µου τὸ 


1 ανθρωπος before ην in ΝΕΒ (Tisch., W.H.). 


marily rejected, J. Weiss). 
2 nv before αγιον in BLA αἰ., e. 


ην αν. in ADLA (not to be sum- 


T.R..=,D. 


ὅπριν η in ADA; πριν av in BF 36 (W.H. bracket η and read πριν αν); πριν 


η αν in L 33 (Tisch.). 
ΑΝ ΒΙ, omit αντον (Tisch., W.H.). 


ment used by Lk. knew nothing of the 
virgin birth.—yoveis, ver. 27, has been 
used for the same purpose (vide Hill- 
mann, ¥ahrb. f. pr. Theol., 1891). 

Vv. 25-28. Simeon.—Zvpedv, intro- 
duced as a stranger (ἄνθρωπος ἦν). The 
legendary spirit which loves definite par- 
ticulars about celebrities of Scripture 
has tried to fill up the blank. The 
father of Gamaliel the son of Hillel, 
one of the seventy translators of the 
Hebrew Bible, are among the suggestions. 
A bracketed passage in Euthy. Zig. says, 
in reference to the latter suggestion, 
that Simeon alone of the company ob- 
jected to the rendering of Isaiah vii. 14: 
“the virgin shall conceive,” and that an 
angel told him he should live to take the 
virgin’s son into his arms.—8{xatos καὶ 
εὐλαβής. The evangelist is careful to 
make known what this man was, while 
giving no indication who he was (‘‘ who 
they were no man knows, what they 
were all men know,” inscription on a 
tombstone in a soldiers’ graveyard in 
Virginia), just and God-fearing, a saint 
of the type.—mpoo Sex dpevos 
παράκλησιν τ. Ἰ.: an earnest believer 
in the Messianic hope, and fervently 
desiring its early fulfilment. Its fulfil- 
ment would be Israel’s consolation. The 
Messianic hope, the ideal of a good time 
coming, was the child of present sorrow 
—sin and misery prevalent, all things 
out of joint. The keynote of this view 
is struck in Is. xl. i. : ‘comfort ye”.— 
παρακαλεῖτε. The Rabbis called Messiah 
the Comforter, Menahem. Cf. προσδεχ. 


λύτρωσιν in νετ. 38.—Ver. 26. fv 
κεχρηµατισµένον, it had been revealed 
(for the verb vide Mt. ii. 12), how long 
before not indicated. —pij ἰδεῖν: we have 
here an instance of the aorist infinitive 
referring to what is future in relation to 
the principal verb. In such a case the 
aorist is really timeless, as it can be in 
dependent moods, vide Burton, M. and 
T., § 114.—mpiv ἢ ἂν ἵδῃ: πρὶν here 
and in Acts xxv. 16 with a finite verb, 
usually with the infinitive, vide Mt. i. 
18, xxvi. 34.—Ver. 27. ἐν τῷ Πνεύματι : 
observe the frequent reference to the 
Spirit in connection with Simeon, vide 
vv. 25 and 26.---εὔθισμέγον (ἐθίζω), here 
only in N. T.: according to the estab- 
lished custom of the law.—Ver. 28. καὶ, 
as in ver. 21, before ἐκλήθη, introducing 
the apodosis “then” in A. V. and R. V. 
---αὐτὸς, not necessarily emphatic (Keil, 
Farrar), vide i. 22. 

Vv. 29-32. Nunc dimittis.—Ver. 29. 
νῦν, now, at last, of a hope long 
cherished by one who is full of years, 
and content to ἀῑε.---ἀπολύεις, Thou τε- 
leasest me, present for the future, death 
near, and welcome.—8otAov, δέσποτα : 
slave, master ; terms appropriate at all 
times to express the relation between 
God and men, yet savouring of legal 
piety.—év εἰρήνῃ, in peace; he has had 
enough of life and its service, and the 
purpose of life has been fulfilled by the 
crowning mercy of a sight of the Christ: 
death will be as a sleep to a labouring 
man.—Ver. 30 gives the reason for this 
tranquil attitude towards ἀεαίῃ.---τὸ 


476 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


IL. 


σωτήριόν σου, 31. ὃ ἠτοίμασας κατὰ πρόσωπον πάντων τῶν λαῶν - 
32. as εἲς ἀποκάλυψιν ἐθνῶν, καὶ δόξαν λαοῦ σου σραήλ.” 
33. Καὶ ἦν Ἰωσὴφ καὶ ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ] θαυμάζοντες ἐπὶ τοῖς 


λαλουμένοις περὶ αὐτοῦ. 


34. καὶ εὐλόγησεν αὐτοὺς Συμεών, καὶ 


9 ΡΗΠ. 1.1. εἶπε πρὸς Μαριὰμ τὴν µητέρα αὐτοῦ, “Ιδού, οὗτος "κεῖται εἰς 


1 Thess. 
tii. 3. 


fal ‘ [ο al 2 U ‘ > a 
πτῶσιν καὶ ἀνάστασιν πολλῶν ἐν τῷ ‘Iopand, καὶ εἰς σημεῖον 


ἀντιλεγόμενον: 35. (καὶ cod δὲ αὐτῆς τὴν ψυχὴν διελεύσεται 
ῥομφαία:) ὅπως ἂν ἀποκαλυφθῶσιν ἐκ πολλῶν καρδιῶν διαλο- 


γισμοί.” 
f Rev. ii. a0. 


36. Καὶ ἦν “Awa *mpoditis, θυγάτηρ Φανουήλ, ἐκ φυλῆς ᾽Ασήρ: 


αὕτη προβεβηκυῖα ἐν ἡμέραις πολλαῖς, ζήσασα ἔτη μετὰ ἀνδρὸς ὃ 


1 Ῥοτην . 


. - θαυμ. read ην ο πατηρ αντον και η µητηρ θαυμ. with BDL 1, 


131. ΜΜ, retain second αυτον. The substitution of ἰωσηφ for ο πατηρ explains itself. 


3δε omitted in BLE. 


σωτήριον = τὴν σωτηρίαν, often in Sept. 
—Ver. 31. πάντων τῶν adv: 
peoples concerned in the salvation, at 
least as spectators. —Ver. 32. φῶς εἰς a. 
ἐ.: the Gentiles are to be more than 
spectators, even sharers in the salvation, 
which is represented under the twofold 
aspect of a light and a glory.—d@s and 
:δόξαν may be taken in apposition with 6 
as objects of ἠτοίμασας: salvation pre- 
pared or provided in the form of a 
light for the Gentiles, and a glory for 
Israel. Universalism here, but not of 
the pronounced type of Lk. (Holtz., 
H. Ο.), rather such as is found even in 
O. T. prophets.—Ver. 33. ἦν: the con- 
struction is peculiar, the verb singular, 
and the participle, forming with it a 
periphrastic imperfect, plural = was the 
father, and was the mother, together 
wondering. Vide Winer, § 58, p. 
651. The writer thinks of the two 
parents first as isolated and then as 
united in their wonder.—Ver. 34. 
εὐλόγησεν: “the less is blessed of the 
better”. Age, however humble, may 
bless youth. Jacob blessed Pharaoh.— 
κεῖται, is appointed—els πτῶσιν, etc. : 
generally, this child will influence His 
time in a decided manner, and to opposite 
effects, and with painful consequences to 
Himself; a forecast not necessarily be- 
yond prophetic ken, based on insight into 
the career of epoch-making men. It is 
so more or less always. The blessing of 
being father or mother of such a child is 
great, but not unmixed with sorrow.— 
Ver. 35. καὶ σοῦ, singles out the mother 
for a special share in the sorrow con- 
mected with the tragic career of one 


3 pera ανδρος before ery in NBLA 13, 33, 60, 131. 


destined to be much spoken against 
(ἀντιλεγόμενον) ; this inevitable because 
of a mother’s intense love. Mary’s 
sorrow is compared vividly to a sword 
(ῥομφαία here and in Rev. i. 16, and in 
Sept., Zech. xiii. 7) passing through her 
soul. It is a figure strong enough to 
cover the bitterest experiences of the 
Mater Dolorosa, but it does not 
necessarily imply prevision of the cross. 
There is therefore no reason, on this 
account at least, for the suggestion that 
ver. 35a is an editorial addition to his 
source by the evangelist (J. Weiss).— 
ὅπως introduces a final clause which 
can hardly refer to the immediately pre- 
ceding statement about the sword 
piercing Mary’s soul, but must rather 
indicate the purpose and result of the 
whole future career of the child, whereof 
the mother’s sorrow is to be an inci- 
dental effect. Theconnection is: κεῖται 
εἰς πτ., etc... . ὅπως ἂν ἀποκαλ. The 
general result, and one of the Divine 
aims, will be the revelation of men’s 
inmost thoughts, showing, 6.5., that the 
reputedly godly were not really godly. 
Observe the ἂν in this pure final clause. 
It does not affect the meaning. Godet 
says that it indicates without doubt that 
the manifestation of hidden thoughts 
will take place every time occasion 
presents itself, in contact with the 
Saviour. 

Vv. 36-38. Anna.—Another aged 
saint of the O. T. type comes on the 
stage speaking thankful prophetic words 
concerning the Holy Child.—Ver. 36. 
ἦν: either there was there, aderat (Meyer, 
Godet, Weizsacker), or there was, there 


31---49. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


477 


ἑπτὰ ἀπὸ τῆς "wapOevias αὐτῆς: 37. καὶ αὕτη χήρα as! ἐτῶν € here only 
n . . 
ὀγδοηκοντατεσσάρων, ἢ οὐκ ἀφίστατο ἀπὸ 2 τοῦ ἱεροῦ, νηστείαις 


καὶ δεήσεσι "λατρεύουσα νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν: 38. καὶ αὕτη ὃ αὐτῇ h Acts xxvi, 

° > a a ~ ri 4 .y > A H 
τῇ Spa ἐπιστᾶσα ἀνθωμολογεῖτο τῷ Kupiw,* καὶ ἐλάλει περὶ αὐτοῦ 
πᾶσι τοῖς προσδεχοµένοις λύτρωσιν ἐν ὅ Ἱερουσαλήμ. 


' ek. 
acy 
30. Καὶ ὡς η, 


ἐτέλεσαν ἅπαντα τὰ ὅ κατὰ τὸν νόµον Κυρίου, ὑπέστρεψαν Ἰ εἰς τὴν 


Γαλιλαίαν, εἰς τὴν πόλιν αὐτῶν ὃ Ναζαρέτ. 


40. Τὸ δὲ παιδίον 


ηὔξανε, καὶ ἐκραταιοῦτο πνεύµατι, πληρούμενον σοφίας 1ο. καὶ 


Χάρις Θεοῦ ἦν ἐπ᾽ αὐτό. 


1 εως in NABLE 33. 


2 SABDLE 33 al. omit this αντη (Tisch., W.H.). 


2? BDL omit απο (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 Gew in $BDLE. 


5 SBE minusc. omit εν (Tisch., W.H.) found in DLA al. 
6 παντα and without τα in NL (Tisch.); παντα with τα in B= (W.H.); απαντα. 


without τα in D. 
7 επεστρεψαν in B=. 


§ For ets T. 7. αυτων SBD have ets π. cautTwyv. 
T.R.=NDA (Tisch.). 


10 σοφια in BL 33 (W.H.). 


lived (De Wette, J. Weiss, Schanz, 
Hahn).—Awa = T3071, 1 Sam. i. 20 


(Άννα in Sept.) = grace. Of this woman 
some particulars are given, ¢.g., her 
father and her tribe, which makes the 
absence of such details in Simeon’s case 
more noteworthy. The two placed side 
by side give an aspect of historicity to 
the narrative.—atry (or αὐτή, the sense 
much the same) introduces some further 
details in a loosely constructed sentence, 
which looks like biographic notes, with 
verbs left out = she advanced in years, 
having lived with a husband, seven years 
from virginity, the same a widow till 
eighty-four years—all which may be 
regarded, if we will, as a parenthesis, 
followed by a relative clause contain- 
ing a statement of more importance, 
describing her way of life = who 
departed not from the temple, serving 
(God) by fasts and prayers, night and 
day.—Ver. 37. ἕως: either a widow for 
eighty-four years (Godet), or, as most 
think, a widow till the eighty-fourth 
year of her life. The former rendering 
would make her very old: married, say, 
at sixteen, seven years a wife, eighty- 
four years a widow = 107; not im- 
possible, and borne out by the πολλαῖς 
after ἡμέραις (ver. 36, advanced in days 
—many).—vnorelars: the fasting might 
be due to poverty, or on system, which 
would suggest a Judaistic type of piety. 
---γύκτα κ. ἣ.: did she sleep within the 


υπεσ. conforms to the common usage in Lk. 


* NBDL omit πνευµατι. 


temple precincts ?—Ver. 38. The T.R. 
has yet another αντη here (the third), 
before αὐτῇ, which really seems wanted 
as nominative to the verb following, but 
which one can imagine scribes omitting 
to relieve the heaviness and monotony 
of the style.—av@wpodoyetro (here only 
in N. T.): perhaps no stress should be 
laid on the preposition ἀντὶ, as the com- 
pound verb occurs in the sense of the 
simple verb in Sept. (Ps. lxxix. 13). The 
suggestion of an antiphony between 
Anna and Simeon (Godet; vicissim, 
Bengel) is tempting = began in turn to 
give thanks. The ἀντὶ may refer to 
spectators = began to praise God openly 
before all (Hahn). The subject of her 
praise of course was Jesus (περὶ αὐτοῦ), 
and its burden that He was the Saviour. 
---ἐλάλει points to an activity not con- 
fined to a single utterance; she spoke 
again and again on the theme to all 
receptive spirits. The omission of év 
before ‘lep. in NOB, etc., gives us a 
peculiar designation for the circle to 
whom the prophetess addressed herself= 
those waiting for the redemption of 
Ferusalem (instead of Israel in ver. 25). 
Yet Isaiah xl. 2—‘‘ speak ye comfortably 
to Jerusalem ”—makes such a turn of 
thought intelligible. And there might 
be discerning ones who knew that there 
was no place more needing redemption 
than that holy, unholy city. 

Vv. 39, 40. Return to Nasareth.—- 
πόλιν ἑαυτῶν, their own city, certainly 


478 


KATA AOYKAN 


II, 


41. ΚΑΙ ἐπορεύοντο οἱ yovets αὐτοῦ Kat’ Eros eis Ἱερουσαλὴμ τῇ 


ἑορτῇ τοῦ πάσχα. 


42. καὶ ὅτε ἐγένετο ἐτῶν δώδεκα, ἀναβάντων 


1 


αὐτῶν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα 3 κατὰ τὸ ἔθος τῆς ἑορτῆς, 43. καὶ τελειω- 
σάντων τὰς ἡμέρας, ἐν τῷ ὑποστρέφειν αὐτούς, ὑπέμεινεν ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 


mats ἐν ἹἹερουσαλήμ: καὶ οὐκ ἔγνω Ἰωσὴφ καὶ ἡ µήτηρ»Σ αὐτοῦ. 
4 Ν ον > a , * ατα ς , coer 
44. νοµίσαντες δὲ αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ συνοδίᾳ εἶναι, ἦλθον ἡμέρας ὁδόν, 
καὶ ἀνεζήτουν αὐτὸν ἐν τοῖς συγγενέσι καὶ év® τοῖς γνωστοῖς : 
45. καὶ μὴ εὑρόντες αὐτόν, ὑπέστρεψαν eis Ἱερουσαλήμ, [ ητοῦντες Ἰ 


9 
αυτογ. 


46. Καὶ ἐγένετο μεθ) ἡμέρας τρεῖς, εὗρον αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, 


καθεζόµενον ἐν µέσῳ τῶν διδασκάλων, καὶ ἀκούοντα αὐτῶν, καὶ 


1 αναβαινοντων in ΝΑΡΒΙ, 33 al. 


2 S$BDL omit εις |., an explanatory addition. 
3 For εγνω |. και η µ. NBDL 1, 33 al. have εγνωσαν οι Ύονεις. 


4 ειναι before εν τη συν. in NBDL 1, 33. 


6 Omit αντον ΝΡΒΟΡΙΠ.. 


suggesting that Nazareth, not Bethlehem, 
had been the true home of Joseph and 
Mary.—Ver. 40. ηὔξανε καὶ ἐκραται- 
οὔτο, grew, and waxed strong, both in 
reference to the physical nature.—wvev- 

att in T.R. is borrowed from i. 80; a 
αν, vigorous child, an important 
thing to note in reference to Jesus.— 
πληρούμενον: present participle, not = 
plenus, Vulg., full, but in course of being 
filled with wisdom—mind as well as 
body subject to the law of growth.— 
χάρις: a great word of St. Paul’s, also 
more used by Lk. than by either of the 
other two synoptists (vide i. 30, iv. 22, 
vi. 32, 33, 34); here to be taken broadly 
= favour, good pleasure. The child 
Jesus dear to God, and the object of His 
paternal care. 

Vv. 41-52. -When twelve years old. 
Lk. here relates one solitary, significant 
incident from the early years of Jesus, as 
if to say: from this, learn all. The one 
story shows the wish to collect anecdotes 
of those silent years. There would 
have been more had the evangelist had 
more to tell. The paucity of informa- 
tion favours the historicity of the 
tradition.—Ver. 41. κατ ἔτος: law- 
observing people, piously observant of 
the annual feasts, especially that of the 
passover.—Ver. 42. ἐτῶν δώδεκα: this 
mention of the age of Jesus is meant to 
suggest, though it is not directly stated, 
that this year He went up to Jerusalem 
with His parents ; ἀναβαιγόντων includes 
Him. At twelve a Jewish boy became a 
son of the law, with the responsibility of 
a man, putting on the phylacteries which 


5 B 33 omit this ev (Tisch., W.H.). 
T αναζ. in BCDL. 


reminded of the obligation to keep the 
law (vide Winsche, Beitrage, ad loc.),.— 
Ver. 43. Ἅµτελειωσάντων τ. 4 This 
naturally means that they stayed all the 
time of the feast, seven days. This 
was not absolutely incumbent; some 
went home after the first two days, but 
such people as Joseph and Mary would 
do their duty thoroughly.—tmépewvev, 
tarried behind, not so much intentionally 
(Hahn) as by involuntary preoccupation 
—His nature rather than His will the cause 
(Acts xvii. 14).— Ver. 44. ἐν τῇ συνοδίᾳ, 
in the company journeying together (ovwv, 
ὁδός, here only in N. T.), a journeying 
together, then those who so journey. 
A company would be made up of people 
from the same neighbourhood, well 
acquainted with one another.—ipépas 
ὁδὸν, a day’s journey. It is quite con- 
ceivable how they should have gone on 
so long without missing the boy, without 
much or any blame to the parents; not 
negligence, but human infirmity at 
worst.—ovyyevéot, γνωστοῖς: kinsfolk 
and acquaintances. Had there been less 
acquaintance and intimacy there had 
been less risk of losing the child. Friends 
take up each other’s attention, and mem- 
bers of the same family do not stick so 
close together, and the absence of one 
excites πο surprise.—Ver. 45. ἀναζητοῦν- 
veg: the present participle, expressing 
the purpose of the journey back to 
Jerusalem, where (not on the road) the 
search took place (cf. Acts xi. 25). The 
ava here (as in ἀνεζήτουν, ver. 44) im- 
plies careful, anxious search.—Ver. 46. 
ἡμέρας τρεῖς, three days, measured from 


- 


40—52. 


ἐπερωτῶντα αὐτούς. 


ἐπὶ τῇ συνέσει καὶ ταῖς ἀποκρίσεσιν αὐτοῦ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


479 


47. ἐξίσταντο δὲ πάντες οἱ ἀκούοντες αὐτοῦ, 


48. Καὶ ἰδόντες αὐτόν, 


a [ή 
ἐξεπλάγησαν: καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ εἶπε,ὶ “΄Τέκνον, τί 


3 , e “a J > ατα , ας Αι 3 , 3 a , 
εποιησας PLY ούτως; ἰδού, ο πατηρ σου καγω ὀδυνώμενοι ἐζητοῦμέν 


35 
σε. 


σ > ” , A LJ , 2 
ὅτι ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός µου δεῖ εἶναί pe; 


συνῆκαν τὸ ῥῆμα ὃ ἐλάλησεν αὐτοῖς. 


καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς Ναζαρέτ καὶ ἦν ὑποτασσόμενος αὐτοῖς. 


49. Καὶ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “Ti ὅτι ἐζητεῖτέ µε; 


3 
οὐκ δειτε 
5ο. Καὶ αὐτοὶ οὗ 
51. Καὶ κατέβη pet αὐτῶν, 
καὶ ἡ µήτηρ 


αὐτοῦ διετήρει πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα» ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτῆς. 


a 9 A i , a4 a aX a Δ ά a 
52. καὶ Ingots ᾿προέκοπτε copia * kat ἡλικίᾳα, καὶ χάριτι παρὰ 


Θεῷ καὶ ἀνθρώποις. 


1 ειπεν before προς αυτον in ΝΒΟΡΙ,. 
2B has ζητουμεν (W.H.). 


i Rom. xiii. 
12. Gal. i, 
14. 2 Tim. 
ii. 16; iii. 9. 


3 SBD omit ταυτα (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 ev τη σ. in WL (Tisch.) ; τη without ev in B (W.H.). 


the time they had last seen Him, not 
implying three days’ search in Jerusalem. 
The place where they had lodged and the 
temple would be among the first places 
visited in the search.—év τῷ ἱερῷ: pro- 
bably in a chamber in the temple court 
used for teaching and kindred purposes. 
Some think it was in a synagogue 
beside the temple.— Ver. 46. καθεζόµ.ενον, 
sitting ; therefore, it has been inferred, as 
a teacher, not as a scholar, among (ἐν 
Μέσῳ) the doctors, for scholars stood, 
teachers only sitting. An unwelcome 
‘conclusion, to which, happily, we are not 
shut up by the evidence, the posture- 
rule on which it rests being more than 
doubtful (vide Vitringa, Synag., p. 167). 
—érepwtovta: nothing unusual, and 
nothing unbecoming a thoughtful boy.— 
Ver. 47. ἐξίσταντο, were amazed, not 
at His position among the doctors, or at 
His asking questions, but at the intelli- 
gence (σννέσει) shown in His answers to 


«πε questions of the teachers; some- 


thing of the rare insight and felicity 
which astonished all in after years 
appearing in these boyish replies.—Ver. 
48. t8dvres refers to the parents. This 
astonishment points to some contrast 
between a previous quiet, reserved manner 
of Jesus and His present bearing ; sudden 
flashing out of the inner life.—n µήτηρ: 
the mother spok@paturally ; a woman, 
and the mother’s heart more keenly 
touched. This apart fypm the peculiar 
relation referred to inj, Bengel’s major 
evat necessitudo matris.~Ver. 49. ἐν 
τοῖς τοῦ πατρός pov, insthe things of 
my Father (‘about mysFather’s busi- 
mess,” A. V.); therefore in a let or 


house of my Father (R. Y.); the former 
may be the verbal translation, but the 
latter is the real meaning Jesus wished 
to suggest. In this latter rendering 
patristic and modern interpreters in the 
main concur. Note the new name for 
God compared with the ‘“ Highest ” and 
the “ Despotes” in the foregoing narra- 
tive. The dawn of a new era is here.— 
Ver. 50. ov συνῆκαν, they did not 
understand; no wonder! Even we do 
not yet fully understand.—Ver. 51. 
κατέβη, He went down with them, gentle, 
affectionate, habitually obedient (ὕποτασ- 
σόµενος), yet far away in thought, and 
solitary.—®rerjper: she did not forget, 
though she did not understand.—Ver, 
52. προέκοπτε, steadily grew, used in- 
transitively in later Greek.—év τῇ σοφίᾳ 
και ἡλικίᾳ, in wisdom and (also as, the 
one the measure of the other) in stature, 
both growths alike real. Real in body, 
apparent in the mind: growth in mani- 
festation of the wisdom within, complete 
from the first—such is the docetic gloss 
ot ecclesiastical interpreters, making the 
childhood of Jesus a monstrum, and His 
humanity a phantom.—ydpitt π. Θ. καὶ 
a., in favour with God and men: beloved 
of all; no division even among men while 
the new wisdom and the new religion 
lay a slumbering germ in the soul of the 
heaven-born boy. 

CuHapTeR III. ΤΗΕ ΜΙΝΙΞΤΕΥ oF 
THE New Era OPENS. Having related 
the beginnings ot the lives of the two 
prophets of the new time (chapters i. 
and ii.), the evangelist now introduces 
us to the beginnings of their prophetic 
ministries, or rather to the ministry of 


480 


a here only 


KATA AOYKAN 


Ht. 


III. 1. "EN ἔτει δὲ πεντεκαιδεκάτῳ τῆς "ἡγεμονίας Τιβερίου 


Ν. T. ὗ 
bCh. ii. 2. Καΐσαρος, ’ ἡγεμονεύοντος Ποντίου Πιλάτου τῆς Ἰουδαίας, καὶ 
τετραρχοῦντος 1 τῆς Γαλιλαίας Ἡρώδου, Φιλίππου δὲ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ. 
αὐτοῦ τετραρχοῦντος τῆς Ἰτουραίας καὶ Τραχωνίτιδος χώρας, καὶ 


1 The spelling of this word varies in MSS. B has it asin T.R. ΝΟ τετρααρ- 
χονντος (ter), which Tisch. and W.H. adopt. 


John as the prelude to the evangelic 
drama. In regard to the ministry of 
Jesus he gives us merely the date of its 
beginning (iii. 23), attaching thereto a 
genealogy of Jesus. Bengel has well 
expressed the significance of this chapter 
by the words: Hic quasi scena N. T. 
panditur. 

Vv. 1-2. General historic setting of 
the beginnings. For Mt.’s vague “in 
those days” (iii. 1), which leaves us 
entirely in the dark at what date and age 
Jesus entered on His prophetic career, 
Lk. gives a group of dates connecting 
his theme with the general history of the 
world and of Palestine ; the universalistic 
spirit here, as in ii, 1, 2, apparent. This 
spirit constitutes the permanent ethical 
interest of what may seem otherwise dry 
details: for ordinary readers of the 
Gospel little more than a collection of 
names, personal and_ geographical. 
Worthy of note also, as against those 
who think Lk. was toa large extent a 
free inventor, is the indication here 
given of the historical spirit, the desire 
to know the real facts (i. 3). The his- 
toric data, six in all, define the date of 
John’s ministry with reference to the 
reigning Roman emperor, and the civil 
and ecclesiastical rulers of Palestine. 

Ver.1. ἐν ἔτει, etc., in the fifteenth 
year of the reign of Tiberius as Caesar. 
This seems a very definite date, render- 
ing all the other particulars, so far as 
fixing time is concerned, comparatively 
superfluous. But uncertainty comes in 
in connection with the question: is the 
fifteenth year to be reckoned from the 
death of Augustus (το Aug., 767 A.U.Cc.), 
when Tiberius became sole emperor, or 
from the beginning of the regency of 
Tiberius, two years earlier? The former 
mode of calculation would give us 28 or 
29 A.D. as the date of John’s ministry 
and Christ’s baptism, making Jesus then 
thirty-two years old; the latter, 26 
A.D., making Jesus then thirty years 
old, agreeing with iii, 23. The former 
mode of dating would be more in 
accordance with the practice of Roman 
historians and Josephus; the latter lends 


itself to apologetic and harmonistic in- 
terests, and therefore is preferred by 
many (¢.g., Farrar and Hahn).—Novriov 
Πιλάτου. Pilate was governor of the 
Roman province of Judaea from 26 Α.Ρ. 
to 36 Α.Ὀ., the fifth in the series of 
governors. His proper title was ἐπί- 
τροπος (hence the reading of D: ἐπιτρο- 
πενοντος π. π.); usually ἡγεμὼν in Gos- 
pels. He owes his place here in the historic 
framework to the part he played in the last 
scenes of our Lord’s life. Along with him 
are named next two joint rulers of other 
parts of Palestine, belonging to the 
Herod family ; brought in, though of no 
great importance for dating purposes, 
because they, too, figure occasionally in 
the Gospel story.—tetpapxotvros, act- 
ing as tetrarche The verb means 
primarily: ruling over a fourth part, 
then by an easy transition acting as a 
tributary ῥΡείπος.- Γαλιλαίας: about 
twenty-five miles long and broad, divided 
into lower (southern) Galilee and upper 
(northern). With Galilee was joined 
for purposes of government Peraea.— 
Ἡρώδον, Herod Antipas, murderer of 
the Baptist, and having secular authority 
over Jesus as his ςα0]εοῖ.- Φιλίππον, 
Herod Philip, brother of Antipas, whose 
name reappears in the new name of 
Paneas,; rebuilt or adorned by him, 
Caesarea Philippii—rjfs “Irovpaias καὶ 
Τραχωνίτιδος χώρας: so Lk. designates 
the territory ruled over by Philip. The 
words might be rendered: the Ituraean 
and Trachonitic territory, implying the 
identity of Ituraea and Trachonitis (as 
in Eusebius. For a defence of this view, 
vide article by Professor Ramsay in 
Expositor, February, 1894); or, as in 
A. V., of Ituraea and of the region of 
Trachonitis. The former was a moun- 
tainous region to the south of Mount 
Hermon, inhabited by a hardy race, 
skilled in the use of the bow; the latter 
(the rough country) = the modern Ε]- 
Lejah, the kingdom of Og in ancient 
times, was a basaltic region south of 
Damascus, and east of Golan. It is pro- 
bable that only a fragment of Ituraea 
belonged to Philip, the region around 


I—4. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


481 


Λυσανίου τῆς ᾽Αβιληνῆς τετραρχοῦντος, 2. ἐπ᾽ ἀρχιερέων 1 Αννα καὶ 


Καϊάφα, ἐγένετο ῥῆμα Θεοῦ ἐπὶ Ιωάννην τὸν τοῦ 2 Ζαχαρίου υἱὸν ἐν 


τῇ ἐρήμῳ: 3. καὶ ἦλθεν eis πᾶσαν τὴν ἕ περίχωρον τοῦ Ιορδάνου, 


κηρύσσων βάπτισμα µετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν ' 4. ὡς γέγραπται 
ἐν βίβλω λόγων Ἡσαΐου τοῦ προφήτου, λέγοντος,' ΄Φωνὴ βοῶντος 


ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω, Ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ὁδὸν Κυρίου: εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς 


1 αρχιερεως in most uncials ; pl. in minusc. only. 


2 Omit του most uncials. 


3 την is in ΝΔ al. (Tisch.) ; wanting in ABL (W.H.). 
4 SSBDLA 1, 118, it. vulg. omit λεγοντος. 


Paneas. On the other hand, according 
to Josephus, his territories embraced 
more than the regions named by Lk.: 
Batanaea, Auranitis, Gaulonitis, and 
some parts about Jamnia (various places 
in Ant. and B. J.).—Avoaviov, etc. 
This last item in Lk.’s dating apparatus 
is the most perplexing, whether regard 
be had to relevancy or to accuracy. To 
what end this reference to a non-Jewish 
prince, and this outlying territory 
between the Lebanon ranges? What 
concern has it with the evangelic his- 
tory, or of what use is it for indicating 
the place of the latter in the world’s his- 
tory? By way of answer to this ques- 
tion, Farrar (C. G. T.) suggests that the 
district of Abilene (Abila the capital) is 
probably mentioned here ‘‘ because it 
subsequently formed part of the Jewish 
territory, having been assigned by Cali- 
gula to his favourite, Herod Agrippa I., 
in A.D. 36”. As to the accuracy: it so 
happens that there was a Lysanias, who 
ruled over Chalchis and Abilene sixty 
years before the time of which Lk. 
writes, who probably bore the title 
tetrarch. Does Lk., misled by the title, 
think of that Lysanias as a contemporary 
of Herod Antipas and Herod Philip, or 
was there another of the name really 
their contemporary, whom the evangelist 
has in his view? Certain inscriptions 
cited by historical experts make the 
latter hypothesis probable. Schirer 
(The F$ewish People, Div. I., vol. ii., 
appendix 1, on the History of Chalchis, 
Ituraea, and Abilene, p. 338) has no 
doubt on the point, and says: ‘the 
evangelist, Lk., is thoroughly correct 
when he assumes that in the fifteenth 
year of Tiberias there was a Lysanias 
tetrarch of Abilene ”. 

Ver. 2. ἐπὶ ἀρχιερέω Αννα καὶ 
Καιάφα, under the high priesthood of 
Annas and Caiaphas. The use of the 
singular ἀρχιερέως in connection with 
two names is peculiar, whence doubtless 


ία] 


3 


the correction into the easier ἀρχιερέων 
(T. R.); and the combination of two 
men as holding the office at the same 
time, is likewise somewhat puzzling. As 
Caiaphas was the actual high priest at 
the time, one would have expected his 
name to have stood, if not alone, at 
least first = under Caiaphas, the actual 
high priest, and the ex-high priest, Annas, 
still an influential senior. One can 
only suppose that among the caste of 
high priests past and present (there had 
been three between Annas and Caiaphas) 
Annas was so outstanding that it came 
natural to name him first. Annas had 
been deposed arbitrarily by the Roman 
governor, and this may have increased 
his influence among his own people. 
His period of office was A.D. 7-14, that 
of Caiaphas Α.Ρ. 17-35.—éyévero ῥῆμα, 


_etc., came the word of God to John; 


this the great spiritual event, so care- 
fully dated, after the manner of the O. T. 
in narrating the beginning of the career 
of a Hebrew prophet (vide, e.g., Jer. i. 
1). But the date is common to the 
ministry of John and that of Jesus, who 
is supposed to have begun His work 
shortly after the Baptist.—év τῇ ἐρήμῳ. 
From next verse it may be gathered 
that the desert here means the whole 
valley of the Jordan, El-Ghor. 

Vv. 3-6. Fohn’s ministry.—Ver. 3. 
ἠλθεν. In Mt. and Mk. the people come 
from all quarters to John. Here John 
goes to the people in an itinerant 
ministry. The latter may apply to 
the early stage of his ministry. He 
might move about till he had attracted 
attention, then settle at a place con- 
venient for baptism, and trust to the 
impression produced to draw the people 
to him.—xnpioowv, etc.: here Lk. 
follows Mk. verbatim, and like him, as 
distinct from Mt., connects John’s bap- 
tism with the forgiveness of sins, so 
making it in effect Christian.—Ver. 4. 
βίβλῳ λόγων: Lk. has his own wav of 


1 


452 
΄ > ~ 
τρίβους αὐτοῦ. 
c Ch. ae 
aS aa τραχεῖαι εἰς ὁδοὺς λείας. 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN III 
5. πᾶσα φάραγξ πληρωθήσεται, καὶ wav ὄρος καὶ 
° Bouvds ταπεινωθήσεται: καὶ ἔσται τὰ σκολιὰ εἰς εὐθεῖαν,. καὶ at 
6. καὶ ὄψεται πᾶσα σὰρξ τὸ σωτήριον 
τοῦ Θεοῦ. 7. Ἔλεγεν οὖν τοῖς ἐκπορευομένοις ὄχλοις βαπτισθῆναι 
ὑπ αὐτοῦ, “΄ Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς 
μελλούσης ὀργῆς; 8. ποιήσατε οὖν καρποὺς ἀξίους ? τῆς µετανοίας" 
καὶ μὴ ἄρέησθε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν ᾽᾿Αβραάμ : 
λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι δύναται 6 Θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι 
τέκνα τῷ ᾿Αβραάμ. ο. ἤδη δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀξίνη πρὸς τὴν ῥίζαν τῶν 
δένδρων κεῖται: πᾶν οὖν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπ- 


τεται καὶ εἰς wip βάλλεται.” 


10. Καὶ ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν οἱ ὄχλοι, λέγοντες, “Ti οὖν ποιήσομεν ὃ;”' 
II. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ λέγει ΄ αὐτοῖς, ““O ἔχων δύο χιτῶνας µεταδότω 


1 ενθειας in ΒΓΞξ. 


Σαξιους καρπους in B. Orig. (W.H. marg.). 


Τ.Ε. = CLA many verss. 


Most uncials as in T.R. (Tisch.}. 


3 rownowpev in most uncials (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 ελεγεν in NBCL 1, 33, 69 al. 


introducing the prophetic citation (‘in 
the book of the words’’), as he also 
follows his own course as to the words 
quoted. Whereas Mt. and Mk. are con- 
tent to cite just so much as suffices to 
set forth the general idea of preparing 
the way of the Lord, Lk. quotes in con- 
tinuation the words which describe 
pictorially the process of preparation 
(ver. 5), also those which describe the’ 
grand result: all mankind experiencing 
the saving grace of God (ver. 6). The 
universalistic bias appears here again.— 
Ver. 5. Φφάραγξ, a ravine, here only in 
N. T.—eis εὐθείας, the crooked places 
shall be (become) straight (ways, ὁδοὺς, 
understood)—at τραχεῖαι (680%), the 
rough ways shall become smooth. 

Vv. 7-9. Fohn’s preaching (cf. Mt. 
iii. 7-10).—Lk. gives no account of 
John’s aspect and mode of life, leaving 
that to be inferred from i. 80. On the 
other hand he enters into more detail in 
regard to the drift of his preaching. 
These verses contain Lk.’s version of 
the Baptist’s censure of his time.—Ver. 
7. ἐκπορευομένοις ὄχλοις: what Mt. 
represents as addressed specially to the 
Pharisees and Sadducees, Lk. less appro- 
priately gives as spoken to the general 
crowd. Note that here, as in the other 
synoptists, the crowd comes to John, 
though in ver. 3 John goes to them.— 
γεννήµατα ἐχιδνῶν: on this figure vide 
Mt. Lk.’s report of the Baptist’s severe 
words corresponds closely to Mt.’s, 


suggesting the use of a common source, 
if not of Mt. himself. The points of 
variation are unimportant.—Ver. 8. 
καρποὺς: instead of καρπὸν, perhaps to 
answer to the various types of reform 
specified in the sequel.—apéno8e instead 
of δόξητε (vide on Mt.), on which Ben- 
gel's comment is: “‘ omnem excusationis 
etiam conatum praecidit’’. While the 
words they are forbidden to say are the 
same in both accounts, perhaps the 
raising up children to Abraham has a 
wider range of meaning for the Pauline 
Lk. than for Mt.: sons from even the 
Pagan world. 

Vv. 10-14. Class counsels, peculiar to 
Lk. Two samples of John’s counsels to 
classes are here given, prefaced by a 
counsel applicable to all classes. The 
classes selected to illustrate the Baptist’s 
social preaching are the much tempted 
ones: publicans and soldiers.—Ver. το. 
ἐπηρώτων, imperfect. Such questions 
would be frequent, naturally suggested 
by the general exhortations to repentance. 
The preacher would probably give 
special illustrative counsels without 
being asked. Those here reported are 
meant to be characteristic. —roujowper : 
subj. delib.— Ver. 11. δύο χ.: two, one 
to spare, not necessarily two on the 
person, one enough; severely simple 
ideas of life. The χιτὼν was the under 
garment, vide on Mt. ν. 40.—Bpopara: 
the plural should perhaps not be em- 
phasised as if implying variety and 


5—16. 


ὢ μὴ ἔ > καὶ 6 ἔχων βρώματα ὁμοίως ποιείτω." 
τῷ μὴ ἔχοντι χων βρώμ, μοίως : 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


483 


12. Ἠλθον 


δὲ καὶ τελῶναι βαπτισθῆναι, καὶ εἶπον πρὸς αὐτόν, “ Διδάσκαλε, τί 


, 1 2 
TOLN TOME © 5 


13. Ὁ δὲ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “ Μηδὲν πλέον παρὰ 


τὸ διατεταγµένον ὑμῖν ἡ πράσσετε.' 14. ᾿Επηρώτων δὲ αὐτὸν καὶ ἅ Ch. xix. 
23. 


, λέ ες ‘ ς a , , 2.” 
στρατευόµενοι, λέγοντες, “Kai ἥμεις τι ποιήσοµεν”; 


Καὶ εἶπε 


πρὸς αὐτούςιδ “Mydéva διασείσητε, μηδὲ ᾿συκοφαντήσητε’ καὶ ε Ch. αἰκ.δ. 


ἁρκεῖσθε τοῖς * ὀψωνίοις ὑμῶν." 


15. Προσδοκῶντος δὲ τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ διαλογιζοµένων πάντων ἐν 
a , 7 A ‘ a 3 , ας ” ec , 
ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν περὶ τοῦ Ἰωάννου, µήποτε αὐτὸς εἴη ὁ Χριστός, 


f Rom. vi. 
23. 1 Cor. 
1x72 
Cor. xi. 8 


16. ἀπεκρίνατο 6 Ἰωάννης ἅπασι λέγων," “Eye μὲν ὕδατι βαπτίζω 
AOA ” Ss ς 5 , a PY aN) ce Q im σι 
ὑμᾶς: έρχεται δὲ ὁ ἰσχυρότερός µου, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς λῦσαι τὸν 


ἁμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ: αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν Πνεύματι 


1 Again ποιησωµεν in most uncials; also in ver. 14. 


2 +L ποι. και Ίμεις in SBCLE 1, 6ο. 


3 auvrots for προς αυτους in BDLE 33 (W.H.). 
4 SOBL have λεγων απασι ο |. (Tisch., W.H.). 


abundance (τὰ περισσεύοντα, Grotius). 
The counsel is: let him that hath food 
give to him that hath none, so inculcat- 
ing a generous, humane spirit. Here 
the teaching of John, as reported by 
Lk., touches that of Jesus, and is 
evangelical not legal in spirit.—Ver. 13. 
μηδὲν πλέον παρὰ: this mode of ex- 
pressing comparison (usual in mod. Grk.) 
is common to Lk. and the Ep. to Heb. (i. 
4, etc.), and has been used in support of 
the view that Lk. wrote Heb. ‘‘ Non 
improbabilis videtur mihi eorum opinio 
qui Lucae eam Ep. adjudicant,” Pricaeus. 
--πράσσετε, make, in a sinister sense, 
exact, exigite, Beza. Kypke quotes 
Julius Pollux on the vices of the pub- 
licans, one being tTapeompdtroyv, 
nimium exigens, and remarks that this 
word could not be better explained than 
by the phrase in Lk., πράττων π. π. τὸ 
Stat.—Ver. 14. στρατευόµενοι, “soldiers 
on service”. R. V. margin. So also 
Farrar. But Field disputes this render- 
ing. ‘ The advice seems rather to 
point to soldiers at home, mixing among 
their fellow-citizens, than to those who 
were on the march in an enemy’s 
country ” (Οἱ. Nor.). Schirer, whom J. 
Weiss follows, thinks they would be 
Ἠεαίπεῃ.-- διασείσητε: the verb (here 
only) means literally to shake much, 
here = to extort money by intimidation 
=concertio in law Latin. This mili- 
tary vice would be practised on the 
ΡοοΓ.- σνκοφαντήσητε: literally to in- 
form on those who exported figs from 
Athens; here =to obtain money by 


acting as informers (against the rich), — 
ὀψωνίοις (Gov, ὠνέομαι): a late Greek 
word, primarily anything eaten with 
bread, specially fish, ‘ kitchen”; salary 
paid in kind; then generally wages. 
Vide Rom. vi. 23, where the idea is, the 
“kitchen,” the best thing sin has to 
give is death. 

Vv. 15-17. Art thou the Christ ? (Mt. 
iii, απ, 12, ΜΕ. Ἱ. 7, 8).—Ver.’ 15, 
προσδοκῶντος: in Mt, and Mk. John 
introduces the subject of the Messiah of 
his own accord: in Lk. in answer to 
popular expectation and conjecture; an 
intrinsically probable account, vide on 
Μι.--µήποτε, etc., whether perhaps he 
might not himself be the Christ; ex- 
presses very happily the popular state of 
mind.—Ver. 16. ἅπασι: might suggest 
frequent replies to various parties, uni- 
form in tenor; but against this is the 
aorist ἀπεκρίνατο, which suggests a 
single answer given once for all, to a 
full assembly, a formal solemn public 
declaration. On the Baptist’s statement 
in this and the following verse, vide on 
Mt.—év Πνεύμµατι ‘Ayio καὶ πυρί : 
against the idea of many commentators 
that the Holy Spirit and fire represem 
opposite effects on opposite classes— 
saving and punitive—Godet and Hahn 
press the omission of ἐν before πυρί, and 
take Πνεῦμα and wip to be kindred = 
fire the emblem of the Spirit as a purifier. 
They are right as to the affinity but not 
as to the function. The function in 
both cases is judicial. John refers to 
the Holy Wind and Fire of Judgment 


484 


KATA AOYKAN 


It, 


‘Ayio καὶ wupt> 17. οὗ τὸ πτύον ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ διακαθαριεῖ ! 
τὴν ἅλωνα αὐτοῦ καὶ συνάξει] τὸν σῖτον eis τὴν ἀποθήκην αὐτοῦ, 


τὸ δὲ ἄχυρον κατακαύσει πυρὶ ἀσβέστῳ.” 
ἕτερα παρακαλῶν εὐηγγελίζετο τὸν λαόν. 


18. Πολλὰ μὲν οὖν καὶ 
19. ‘O δὲ ᾿Ἡρώδης 6 


τετράρχης, ἐλεγχόμενος Gm αὐτοῦ περὶ Ἡρωδιάδος τῆς γυναικὸς 
Φιλίππου 3 τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ, καὶ περὶ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησε πονηρῶν 


g Acta zxvi. 6 Ἠρώδης, 20. προσέθηκε καὶ τοῦτο ἐπὶ πᾶσι, καὶ ὃ 5 κατέκλεισε τὸν 


Ἰωάννην ἐν τῇ * φυλακῇ. 


21. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ βαπτισθῆναι ἅπαντα τὸν λαόν, καὶ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
βαπτισθέντος καὶ προσευχοµένου, ἀνεῳχθῆναι τὸν οὐρανόν, 22. καὶ 
a x a“ ασ a 3/: . 5 x 
καταβῆναι τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ "Άγιον σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡσεὶ ὃ περιστερὰν 
ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, καὶ φωνὴν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ γενέσθαι, λέγουσαν,ὸ “ Ed εἶ ὁ vids 


µου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν σοὶ ηὐδόκησα.” 


23. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν 6” ᾿Ιησοῦς. 


1 For και Stax. (from Mt.) ΜΒ have διακαθαραι, also συναγαγειν for συναξει. 


2 Omit Φιλιππου WBDLAE al. 
4 Omit ry NBDLE. 


6 Omit Aey. (expletive) with BDL verss. 


It is, however, not impossible that Lk. 
read an evangelic sense into John’s 


words. 

Vv. 18-20. Close of the Baptist’s 
ministry and life. Lk. gives here all he 
means to say about John, condensing 
into a single sentence the full narratives 
of Mt. and Mk. as to his end.—Ver. 18. 
πολλὰ μὲν οὖν καὶ ἕτερα, “ many things, 
too, different from these” (Farrar, who 
refers to John i. 29, 34, iii. 27-36, as illus- 
trating the*kind of utterances meant). 
The εὐηγγελίζετο following seems to 
justify emphasising €repa, as pointing to 
a more evangelic type of utterance than 
those about the axe and the fan, and the 
wrath to come. But it may be ques- 
tioned whether by such a representation 
the real John of history is not to a cer- 
tain extent unconsciously idealised and, 
Christianised.—peév οὖν: the οὖν may be 
taken as summarising and concluding 
the narrative about John and μὲν as 
answering to δὲ in ver. 19 = John was 
carrying on a useful evangelic ministry, 
but it was cut short; or μενοῦν may be 
taken as one word, emphasising πολλὰ 
καὶ ἕτερα, and preparing for transition 
to what follows (Hahn).—Ver. το. 
Ἠρώδης: the tetrarch named in νετ. 1.— 
περὶ πάντων, implying that John’s re- 
buke was not confined to the sin with 
Herodias. Probably not, but it was 
what John said on that score that cost 
him his head.—Ver. 20. ἐπὶ maou, 
added this also to all his misdeeds, and 


5 Omit this και (RBDE b, 6 (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 ws in BDL 33. 
TASBL 33 omit ο. 


above all the crowning iniquity, and yet 
Lk. forbears to mention the damning sin 
of Herod, the beheading of the Baptist, 
contenting himself with noting the im- 
prisonment. He either assumes know- 
ledge of the horrid tale, or shrinks from 
it as too gruesome.—katékAeroe: in- 
stead of the infinitive; the paratactic 
style savours of Hebrew, and suggests a 
Hebrew source (Godet). 

Vv. 21-22. The baptism of Fesus (Mt. 
iii. 13-17, Mk. i. 9-11).—év τῷ βαπτισ- 
θῆναι: the aorist ought to imply that 
the bulk of the people had already been 
baptised before Jesus appeared on the 
scene, 1.ε., that John’s ministry was draw- 
ing to its close (so De Wette; but vide 
Burton, M. and T., p. 51, § 109, on the 
effect of ἐν).---καὶ Ἰ. βαπτισθέντος: so Lk. 
refers to the baptism of Jesus, in a parti- 
cipial clause, his aim not to report the fact, 
but what happened after it. On the 
different ways in which the synoptists 
deal with this incident, vide on Mt.— 
προσευχοµένου: peculiar to Lk., who 
makes Jesus pray at all crises of His 
career; here specially noteworthy in 
connection with the theophany follow- 
ing: Jesus in a state of mind answering 
to the preternatural phenomena; sub- 
jective and objective corresponding.— 
σωματικῷ εἴδει, in bodily form, peculiar 
to Lk., and transforming a vision into 
an external event.—Zv el: the voice, as 
in Mk., addressed to Jesus, and in the 
same terms. 


‘I17-—29. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


485 


ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα dpxdpevos,! dv, ὡς ἐνομίζετο, υἱὸς 2 Ἰωσήφ, τοῦ 
Ἠλί,Σ 24. τοῦ Ματθάτ, τοῦ Aeut, τοῦ Μελχί, τοῦ Ἰαννά, τοῦ Ιωσήφ, 
25. τοῦ Ματταθίου, τοῦ ᾽Αμώς, τοῦ Ναούμ, τοῦ ᾿Εσλί, τοῦ Ναγγαί, 


36. τοῦ Μαάθ, τοῦ Ματταθίου, τοῦ Σεμεῖ, τοῦ Ιωσήφ, τοῦ Ιούδα, 
27. τοῦ Ἰωαννᾶ, τοῦ Ῥησά, τοῦ Ζοροβάβελ, τοῦ Σαλαθιήλ, τοῦ Νηρί, 
28. τοῦ Μελχί, τοῦ “ASSi, τοῦ Κωσάμ, τοῦ Ἐλμωδάμ, τοῦ “Hp, 


29. τοῦ ᾿Ιωσή, τοῦ Ἐλιέζερ, τοῦ ωρείμ, τοῦ Ματθάτ, τοῦ Λευέ, 


1 αρχοµενος before ωσει €. T. in NBL 1, 33, 131, ete. 


of ADA al. 
2 wos ως ενοµ. in NBL 1, 131 al. 


The order of T.R. = that 


3 The spelling of many of the names in this genealogy varies in the MSS. As 
these variations are of little importance I let the names stand as in T.R. without 
«emark, referring the curious to W.H. or Tisch. 


Vv. 23-38. The age of Fesus when He 
began His ministry, and His genealogy. 
—Ver. 23. καὶ αὐτὸς, etc., and He, 
Jesus, was about thirty years of age 
when He began. ‘The evangelist’s aim 
obviously is to state the age at which 
Jesus commenced His public career.— 
ἀρχόμενος is used in a pregnant sense, 
beginning = making His beginning in 
that which is to be the theme of the his- 
tory. There is a mental reference to 
am ἀρχῆς in the preface, i. 1; cf. Acts 
i. 1; «αἱ that Jesus began (ἤρξατο) 
both to do and to teach”’.—éaei, about, 
nearly, implying that the date is only 
approximate. It cannot be used as a 
fixed datum for chronological purposes, 
nor should any importance be attached 
to the number thirty as the proper age at 
which such a career should begin. That 
at that age the Levites began full ser- 
vice, Joseph stood before Pharaoh, and 
David began to reign are facts, but of 
no significance (vide Farrar in C. G. T.). 
God’s prophets appear when they get 
the inward.call, and that may come at 
any time, at twenty, thirty, or forty. In- 
spiration is not bound by rule, custom, 
or tradition. 

Vv. 24-38. The genealogy. One is 
surprised to find in Lk. a genealogy at 
all, until we reflect on his preface with 
its professed desire for accuracy and 
thoroughness, and observe the careful 
manner in which he dates the beginning 
of John’s ministry. One is further 
surprised to find here a genealogy so 
utterly different from that of Mt. Did 
Lk. not know it, or was he dissatisfied 
with it? Leaving these questions on 
one side, we can only suppose that the 
evangelist in the course of his inquiries 
came upon this genealogy of the 


_and others). 


Saviour and resolved to give it as a 
contribution towards defining the fleshly 
relationships of Jesus, supplying here 
and there an editorial touch. Whether 
this genealogy be of Jewish-Christian, 
or of Pauline-Christian origin is a 
question on which opinion differs. 

Ver. 24. dv, being, introducing the 
genealogical list, which ascends from 
son to father, instead of, as in Mt., 
descending from father to son, therefore 
beginning at the end and going back- 
wards.—as ἐνομίζετο: presumably an 
editorial note to guard the virgin birth. 
Some regard this expression with Ἰωσήφ 
following, as a parenthesis, making the 
genealogy in its original form run being 
son of Eli, etc., so that the sense, when 
the parenthesis is inserted, becomes: 
being son (as was supposed of Joseph 
but really) of Eli, etc., Eli being the 
father of Mary, and the genealogy 
being that of the mother of Jesus (Godet 
This is ingenious but not 
satisfactory. As has been remarked by 
Hahn, if that had been Lk.’s meaning it 
would have been very easy for him to 
have made it clear by inserting ὄντως δὲ 
before τοῦ Ἠλί. We must therefore 
rest in the view that this genealogy, 
like that of Mt., is Joseph’s, not Mary’s, 
as it could not fail to be if Jews were 
concerned in its compilation. 

Vv. 24-31. From Foseph back to 
David. Compared with the correspond- 
ing section of Mt.’s genealogy these 
differences are apparent: (1) in both 
sub-divisions of the section (David to 
captivity, captivity to Christ) there are 
considerably more names (ao, 14), a fact 
intelligible enough in genealogies 
through different lines; (2) they start 
from different sons of David (Nathan, 


486 


KATA AOYKAN 


III. 30—38. 


30. τοῦ Συμεών, τοῦ Ιούδα, τοῦ Ιωσήφ, τοῦ Ἰωνάν, τοῦ Ἐλιακείμ, 
41. τοῦ Μελεᾶ, τοῦ Μαϊνάν, τοῦ Ματταθά, τοῦ Ναθάν, τοῦ Δαβίδ, 
32. τοῦ ᾿Ιεσσαί, τοῦ ᾿Ωβήδ, τοῦ Βοόζ, τοῦ Σαλµών, τοῦ Ναασσών, 
33. τοῦ ᾽Αμιναδάβ, τοῦ ᾿Αράμ, τοῦ ᾿Εσρώμ, τοῦ Φαρές, τοῦ Ιούδα, 


34. τοῦ Ιακώβ, τοῦ Ἰσαάκ, 


τοῦ ᾿Αβραάμ, τοῦ Θάρα, τοῦ Naxwp, 


35. τοῦ Σαρούχ, τοῦ Ῥαγαῦ, τοῦ Φαλέκ, τοῦ Ἔβερ, τοῦ Σαλά, 36. τοῦ 
Καϊνάν, τοῦ ᾽Αρϕαξάδ, τοῦ Σήµ, τοῦ Νῶε, τοῦ Λάμεχ, 37. τοῦ Μαθου. 
adda, τοῦ ᾿Ενώχ, τοῦ “lapéd, τοῦ Μαλαλεήλ, τοῦ Καϊνάν, 38. τοῦ 
᾿Ενώς, τοῦ Σήθ, τοῦ "Addu, τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


Svlomon); (3) they come together at 
the captivity in Shealtiel and Zerubbabel ; 
(4) after running in separate streams 
from that point onwards they meet 
again in Joseph, who in the one is the 
son of Eli, in the other the son of Jacob. 
The puzzle is to understand how two 
genealogical streams so distinct in their 
entire course should meet at these two 
points. The earlier coincidence is 
accounted for by harmonists by the 
hypothesis of adoption (Jeconiah adopts 
Shealtiel, Shealtiel adopts Zerubbabel), 
the later by the hypothesis of a Levirate 
marriage. Vide Excursus ii. in Farrar’s 
work on Luke (C. G. T.). These 
solutions satisfy some. Others main- 
tain that they do not meet the difficulties, 
and that we must be content to see in 
the two catalogues genealogical attempts 
which cannot be harmonised, or at least 
have not yet been. 

Vv. 32-34a. From David back to 
Abraham. The lists of Mt. and Lk. in 
this part correspond, both being taken, 
as far as Pharez, from Ruth iv. 18-22. 

Vv. 34b-38. From Abraham to Adam. 
Peculiar to Lk., taken from Gen. xi. 12- 
26, v. 7-32, as given in the Sept., 
whence Canaan in ver. 36 (instead of 


rus in Gen. xi. 12, in Heb.). It is 


probable that this part of the genealogy 
has been added by Lk., and that his 
interest in it is twofold: (1) universalistie: 
revealed by running back the genealogy 
of Jesus to Adam, the father of the 
human vace; (2) the desire to give 
emphasis to the Divine origin of Jesus, 
revealed by the final link in the chain: 
Adam (son) of God. Adam’s sonship is 
conceived of as something unique, 
inasmuch as, like Jesus, he owed his 
being, not to a human parent, but to 
the immediate causality of God. By 
this extension of the genealogy beyond 
Abraham, and even beyond Adam up to 
God, the evangelist has deprived it of all 


vital significance for the original purpose 
of such tables: to vindicate the Messianic 
claims of Jesus by showing Him to be 
the son of David. The Davidic sonship, 
it is true, remains, but it cannot be vital 
to the Messiahship of One who is, in the 
sense of the Gospel, Son of God. It 
becomes like the moon when the sun is 
shining. Lk. was probably aware of 
this. 

This genealogy contains none of those 
features (references to women, etc.) 
which lend ethical interest to Mt.’s. 

CHAPTER IV, THE TEMPTATION AND 
BEGINNINGS OF THE MINISTRY.—VV. I- 
13. The Temptation (Mt. iv. 1-11, Mk. 
i. 12-13). Lk.’s account of the tempta- 
tion resembles Mt.’s so closely as to 
suggest a common source. Yet there 
are points of difference of which a not 
improbable explanation is editorial 
solicitude to prevent wrong impressions, 
and ensure edification in connection with 
perusal of a narrative relating to a 
delicate subject: the temptation of the 
Holy Jesus by the unholy adversary. 
This solicitude might of course have 
stamped itself on the source Lk. uses, 
but it seems preferable to ascribe it to 
himself. 

Ver. 1. δέ: introducing a new theme, 
closely connected, however, with the 
baptism, as appears from ἀπὸ τοῦ 
Ιορδάνον, the genealogy being treated 
as a parenthesis.—aAypys Mvevparos<A., 
full of the Spirit, who descended upon 
Him at the Jordan, and conceived of as 
abiding on Him and in Him. This 
phrase is adopted by Lk. to exclude the 
possibility of evil thoughts in Jesus: no 
voom for them; first example of such 
editorial solicitude.4-tméorpewev a. τ. "1. 
Hahn takes this as meaning that Jesus 
left the Jordan with the intention of 
returning immediately to Galilee, so 
that His retirement into the desert was 
the result of a change ot purpose brought 
about by the influence of the Spirit. 


IV. 1-6. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

IV. 1. ΙΗΣΟΥΣ δὲ Πνεύματος “Ayiou πλήρης] ὑπέστρεψεν ἀπὸ 
τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου: καὶ ἤγετο ἐν τῷ Πνεύματι cis τὴν ἔρημον ” 2. ἡμέρας 
τεσσαράκοντα πειραζόµενος ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου. καὶ οὖκ ἔφαγεν 
οὐδὲν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ἐκείναις: καὶ συντελεσθεισῶν αὐτῶν, ὕστερον ὃ 
ἐπείνασε. 3. καὶ εἶπεν" αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος, “Et vids ef τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
εἰπὲ τῷ λίθῳ τούτῳ ἵνα γένηται ἄρτος. 4. Καὶ ἀπεκρίθη “Inoods 
πρὸς αὐτόν, λέγων,ὸ ““ Γέγραπται, ΄ Ὅτι οὐκ ἐπ᾽ dptw µόνω ζήσεται 
ὁ ἄνθρωπος, GAN’ ἐπὶ παντὶ ῥήματι Θεοῦ. δ 5. Καὶ ἀναγαγὼν 
αὐτὸν ὁ διάβολος εἰς ὄρος ὑψηλὸν Ἰ ἔδειξεν αὐτῷ πάσας τὰς βασιλείας 
τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐν στιγµῇ χρόνου: 6. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος, 
“Sot δώσω τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην ἅπασαν καὶ τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν : ὅτι 


487 


1 πληρης before Mv. Ay. in $BDLE 1, 33 verss. (Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 
2 ev τη ερηµω in SKBDL vet. Lat. (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 SBDL vet. Lat. omit 


* ειπεν Se in SBDL 1, 33. 


5 SBL omit λεγων. 


δαλλ .. . θεου omitted in EBL sah. cop. (Tisch., W.H.). 
Το διαβ. . . . υψηλον omitted in SSBDL τ al. (from Μι.). 


The words do not in themselves convey 
this sense, and the idea is intrinsically 
unlikely. Retirement for reflection after 
the baptism was likely to be the first 
impulse of Jesus. Vide on Μτ.- -ἤγετο: 
imperfect, implying a continuous process. 
---ὲν τῷ Πν., im the spirit, suggesting 
voluntary movement, and excluding the 
idea of compulsory action of the Spirit 
on an unwilling subject that might be 
suggested by the phrases of Mt. and 
Mk. Vide notes there.—év τῇ ép.: this 
reading is more suitable to the continued 
movement implied in ἤγετο than els τὴν 
ἐ. of T.R.—Ver. 2. ἡμέρας τεσσ.: this 
is to be taken along with ἤγετο. Jesus 
wandered about in the desert all that 
time ; the wandering the external index 
of the absorbing meditation within 
(Godet).—wetpafépevos: Lk. refers to 
the temptation participially, as a mere 
incident of that forty days’ experience, 
in marked contrast to Mt., who repre- 
sents temptation as the aim of the retire- 
ment (πειρασθῆναι), again guarding 
against wrong impressions, yet at the 
same time true to the fact. The present 
tense of the participle implies that 
temptation, though incidental, was con- 
tinuous, going on with increasing 
intensity all the time.—ovx ἔφαγεν οὐδὲν 
implies absolute abstinence, suggestive 
of intense preoccupation. There was 
nothing there to eat, but also no inclina- 
tion on the part of Jesus. 

Vv. 3-4. First temptation.—r@ λίθῳφ 
π.: possibly the stone bore a certain 


resemblance to a loaf. Vide Farrar’s 
note (C. G. T.), in which reference is 
made to Stanley’s account (Sinai and 
Palestine, p. 154) of ‘‘ Elijah’s melons ” 
found on Mount Carmel, as a sample of 
the crystallisations found in limestone 
formations.—Ver. 4. καὶ ἀπεκρίθη, etc.: 
the answer of Jesus as given by Lk, 
according to the reading of $9BL, was 
limited to the first part of the oracle: 
man shall not live by bread only; 
naturally suggesting a contrast between 
physical bread and the higher food of 
the soul on which Jesus had been feed- 
ing (J. Weiss in Meyer). 

Vv. 5-8. Second temptation. Mt.’s 
third.—xal ἀναγαγὼν, without the added 
eis Spos ὑψ. of T.R., is an expression 
Lk. might very well use to obviate the 
objection: where is the mountain so 
high that from its summit you could see 
the whole earth? He might -prefer to 
leave the matter vague = taking Him 
up who knows how high!—rfs 
οἰκουμένης: for Mt.’s τοῦ κόσμου, as 
in ii. 1.—év στιγµῇ χ., in a point or 
moment of time (στιγµὴ from στίζω, to 
prick, whence στίγµατα, Gal. vi. 17, 
here only in N. T.).—Ver. 6. ἐξουσίαν, 
authority. Vide Acts i. 7, 8, where this 
word and δύναμιν occur, the one signify- 
ing authority, the other spiritual power. 
— re ἐμοὶ, etc.: this clause, not in Mt., 
is probably another instance of Lk.’s 
editorial solicitude; added to ard 
against the notion of a rival God with 
independent possessions and power. 


488 


ἐμοὶ παραδέδοται, καὶ ᾧ 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 


εα 


av θέλω δίδωμι αὐτήν: 7. σὺ οὖν ἐὰν 


προσκυνήσῃς ἐνώπιόν µου, ἔσται σου πάντα." 1 


IV. 


8. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 


αὐτῷ εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Yraye ὀπίσω µου, Σατανᾶ 2 γέγραπται ydp,? 
ὁΠροσκυνήσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου," καὶ αὐτῷ µόνω λατρεύσεις.᾽ ” 
9. Καὶ ἤγαγεν ὃ αὐτὸν eis Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἔστησεν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ 
πτερύγιον τοῦ ἱεροῦ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Ei 6° υἱὸς εἶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, βάλε 
σεαυτὸν ἐντεῦθεν κάτω: 10. γέγραπται γάρ, ΄ Ὅτι τοῖς ἀγγέλοις 
αὐτοῦ ἐντελεῖται περὶ gov, τοῦ διαφυλάξαι σε" 11. καὶ ὅτι ἐπὶ 


Χειρῶν ἀροῦσί σε, µήποτε προσκόψῃς πρὸς λίθον τὸν πόδα σου. 


32 


A 3 A 
12. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “΄ Ὅτι εἴρηται, ΄Οὐκ 


ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου. 


13. Καὶ συντελέσας πάντα 


πειρασμὸν 6 διάβολος ἀπέστη am’ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ. 


ς 


14. ΚΑΙ ὑπέστρεψεν 6 


᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν τῇ δυνάµει τοῦ Πνεύματος εἰς 


τὴν Γαλιλαίαν: καὶ φήμη ἐξῆλθε καθ ὅλης τῆς περιχώρου περὶ 


αὐτοῦ. 


1 πασα in SABDLAE. 


15. καὶ αὐτὸς ἐδίδασκεν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς αὐτῶν, δοξαζό- 


Άνπαγε . . . Lat. omitted in NBDLE 1, 33 al. (from ΜΕ.). 


3 yap omitted by the same authorities. 


4 S9BDL al. have Kup. τον θ. σ. προσκ. (W.H.). 
5 ηγαγεν δε in BLE, which also omit αυτον after εστησεν. 


6 Omit o NABDLAE. 


From the Jewish point of view, it is 
true, Satan might quite well say this 
(J. Weiss-Meyer).—Ver. 7. σὺ, emphatic; 
Satan hopes that Jesus has been dazzled 
by the splendid prospect and promise: 
Thou—all Thine (€o-rat cot πᾶσα).- Ver. 
8. ὕπαγε Zaravaisno part of the true text, 
imported from Mt.; suitable there, not 
here, as another temptation follows. 
Vv. 9-13. Third temptation. Mt.’s 
second.—‘lepovoahyp, instead of Mt.’s 
ἁγίαν πόλιν.--ἐντεῦθεν, added by Lk., 
helping to bring out the situation, 
suggesting the plunge down from the 
giddy height—Vv. το and 11 give 
Satan’s quotation much as in Mt., with 
τοῦ διαφυλάξαι σε added from the 
Psalm.—Ver. 12 gives Christ’s reply 
exactly as in Mt. The nature of this 
reply probably explains the inversion of 
the order of the second and third tempta- 
tions in Lk. The evangelist judged it 
fitting that this should be the last word, 
construing it as an interdict against 
tempting ¥esus the Lord. Lk.’s version 
of the temptation is characterised 
throughout by careful restriction of the 
devil’s power (vide vv. 1 and 6). The 
inversion of the last two temptations is 
due to the same cause. The old idea of 


Schleiermacher that the way to Jerusalem 
lay over the mountains is paltry. It is 
to be noted that Mt.’s connecting particles 
(τότε, πάλιν) imply sequence more than 
Lk.’s (καὶ, δὲ). On the general import of 
the temptation vide on Mt.—Ver. 13. 
πάντα π., every kind of temptation.— 
ἄχρι καιροῦ: implying that the same 
sort of temptations recurred in the ex- 
perience of Jesus. 

Vv. 14-15. Return to Galilee (cf. Mk. 
i. 14, 28, 39).—Ver. 14. ὑπέστρεψεν, as 
in ver. 1, frequently used by Lk.—év rq 
δυνάµει τ. Π., in the power of the 
Spirit; still as full of the Spirit as at the 
baptism. Spiritual power not weakened 
by temptation, rather strengthened : post 
victoriam corroboratus, Bengel.—dypy 
(here and in Mt. ix. 26), report, caused 
by the exercise of the Svvapts, implying 
a ministry of which no details are here 
given (so Schanz, Godet, J. Weiss, etc.). 
Meyer thinks of the fame of the Man 
who had been baptised with remarkable 
accompaniments; Hahn of the altered 
transfigured appearance of Jesus.—Ver. 
15. ἐδίδασκεν: summary reference to 
Christ’s preaching ministry in the 
Galilean ΥΠΑΡΟΡΙΕΣ.- αὐτῶν refers to 
Γαλιλαίαν, ver. 14, and means the 


-7—18. 


(µενος ὑπὸ πάντων. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


459 


16. καὶ ἦλθεν εἰς τὴν Ναζαρέτ] οὗ ἦν τεθραμ- 


/ ἃ -5δ A AY Le a 2A a ε , aA 
pévos?- καὶ εἰσῆλθε κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς αὐτῷ, ἐν TH ἡμέρᾳ τῶν σαββάτων, 


εἰς τὴν συναγωγήν, καὶ ἀνέστη ἀναγνῶναι. 


βιβλίον Ἡσαΐου τοῦ προφήτου 5 


17. καὶ ἐπεδόθη αὐτῷ 


καὶ ἀναπτύξας ” τὸ βιβλίον, εὗρε 


-τὸν ὃὅ τόπον οὗ ἦν γεγραμµένον, 18. “Πνεῦμα Κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμέ: οὗ 
ἦν γεγραμμ. pa Κυρ μ 
ἕνεκεν ἔχρισέ µε εὐαγγελίζεσθαι ὃ πτωχοῖς, ἀπέσταλκέ µε ἰάσασθαι 
Χρισέ µε εὐαγγ x μ 
«τοὺς συντετριµµένους τὴν καρδίαν Ἰ κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν, 
Ριμμ p ηρ χμ 
«καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν" ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσµένους ἐν ἀφέσει;" 


lew Ναζαρ. without την ΔΒΡΙ.Ξ. 


2 SLE minusc. have ανατεθ. (Tisch., W.H., marg.). 


+ tov προφ. Io. in NBLE 33, 60. 


4 So in NDA al. (Tisch.); ανοιξας in BLE 33 (ΥΝ.Η.). 


5 Omit tov SLE 33 (W.H. bracket). 
δευαγγελισασθαι in SBDLAE al, 
Ἰνασασθαι ... 


-Galileans; construction ad sensum.— 
δοξαζόµενος: equally summary statement 
of the result—general admiration. Lk. 
is hurrying on to the following story, 
which, though not the first incident in 
the Galilean ministry (vv. 14 and 15 
imply the contrary), is the first he wishes 
to narrate in detail. He wishes it to 
serve as the frontispiece of his Gospel, 
_as if to say: ex primo disce omnia. The 
historic interest in exact sequence is here 
subordinated to the religious interest in 
impressive presentation ; quite legitimate, 
due warning being given. , 

Vv. 16-30. esus in Nazareth (Mt. 
xiii. 53-58, Mk. vi. 1-6a). Though Lk. 
uses an editorial discretion in the placing 
of this beautiful story, there need be no 
suspicion as to the historicity of its 
main features. The visit of Jesus to 
His native town, which had a secure 
place in the common tradition, would be 
sure to interest Lk. and create desire for 
further information, which might readily 
be obtainable from surviving Nazareans, 
who had been present, even from the 
brethren of Jesus. We may therefore 
seek in this frontispiece (Programm- 
stick, J. Weiss) authentic reminiscences 
of a synagogue address of Jesus, 

Vv. 16-21. κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς: the re- 
ference most probably is, not to the 
custom of Jesus as a boy during His 
private life, but to what He had been 
-doing since He began His ministry. He 
used the synagogue as one of His chief 
opportunities. (So J. Weiss and Hahn 
-against Bengel, Meyer, Godet, etc.) 
That Jesus attended the synagogue as a 


Τ.Ε. in minusc. 
καρδιαν omit NBDLE 13, 33, 69 (Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 


boy and youth goes without saying.— 
ἀνέστη, stood up, the usual attitude in 
reading (‘ both sitting and standing 
were allowed at the reading of the Book 
of Esther,” Schiirer, Div. II., vol. ii., p. 
79); either as requested by the presi- 
dent or of His own accord, as a now 
well-known teacher.—Ver. 17. 'Ἡσαίου: 
the second lesson, Haphtarah, was from 
the prophets ; the first, Parashah, from 
the Law, which was foremost in 
Rabbinical esteem. Not so.in the mind 
of Jesus. The prophets had the first 
place in His thoughts, though without 
prejudice to the Law. No more con- 
genial book than Isaiah (second part 
especially) could have been placed in 
His hand. Within the Law He seems 
to have specially loved Deuteronomy, 
prophetic in spirit (vide the temptation). 
—etpe τόπον: by choice, or in due 
course, uncertain which; does not 
greatly matter. The choice would be 
characteristic, the order of the day 
providential as giving Jesus just the 
text He would delight to speak from. 
The Law was read continuously, the 
prophets by free selection (Holtz., 
H. C.).—Vv. 18, 19 contain the text, 
Isaiah lxi. 1, 2, free reproduction of the 
Sept., which freely reproduces the Heb- 
rew, which probably was first read, 
then turned into Aramaean, then preached 
on by Jesus, that day. It may have 
been read from an Aramaean version. 
Most notable in the quotation is the 
point at which it stops. In Isaiah after 
the ‘‘acceptable year” comes the ‘“‘ day 
of vengeance”. The clause referring to 


490 


19. κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν Κυρίου Sexrdv.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


IV. 


20. Καὶ πτύξας τὸ βιβλίον, 


ἀποδοὺς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ, ἐκάθισε: καὶ πάντων ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ οἱ 


ὀφθαλμοὶ 1 ἦσαν ἀτενίζοντες αὐτῷ. 


21. "Hpgato δὲ λέγειν πρὸς 


αὐτούς, “΄ Ὅτι σήμερον πεπλήρωται ἡ γραφὴ αὕτη ἐν τοῖς ὠσὶν 


€ ~ » 
ὑμῶν. 


22. Καὶ πάντες ἐμαρτύρουν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐθαύμαζον ἐπὶ τοῖς 


λόγοις τῆς χάριτος, τοῖς ἐκπορευομένοις ἐκ τοῦ στόµατος αὐτοῦ, 


καὶ ἔλεγον, “Odx οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς Ἰωσήφ3; 


23. Καὶ εἶπε 


πρὸς αὐτούς, “Πάντως ἐρεῖτέ µοι τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην, ᾿Ιατρέ, 


θεράπευσον σεαυτόν: ὅσα ἠκούσαμεν γενόµενα ἐν τῇ Καπερναούμ.ῖ 


ποίησον καὶ Ode ἐν τῇ πατρίδι σου.” 
24. Εἶπε δέ, “'᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὖὐδεὶς προφήτής δεκτός ἐστιν 


1 ον οφ. before εν τη συν. in NBL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 ουχι νιος εστιν |. οντος in SQBL (Tisch., W.H.). 
δεις την Κ. in ΝΕ; DL εις K. without την. 


the latter is omitted. —aoorethat τε- 
θραυσµένους ἐν ἀφέσει (ver. 19) is im- 
ported (by Lk. probably) from Is. lviii.6,the 
aim being to make the text in all respects 
a programme for the ministry of Jesus. 
Along with that, in the mind of the evan- 
gelist, goes the translation of all the 
categories named—poor, broken-hearted, 
captives, blind, bruised—from the 
political to the spiritual sphere. Legiti- 
mately, for that was involved in the 
declaration that the prophecy was ful- 
filled in Jesus.—Ver. 20. πτύξας, fold- 
ing, ἀναπτύξας in ver. 17 (T.R.) = un- 
folding.—tanpéry, the officer of the 
synagogue; cf. the use of the word in 
Acts xiii. 5.--- ἀτενίζοντε, looking 
attentively (ἀτενής, intent, from a and 
τείνω), often in Acts, vide, e.g., ΧΙ. 9.— 
Ver. 21. ἤρξατο: we may take what 
follows either as the gist of the dis- 
course, the theme (De Wette, Godet, 
Hahn), or as the very words of the open- 
ing sentence (Grotius, Bengel, Meyer, 
Farrar). Sucha direct arresting announce- 
ment would be true to the manner of 
Jesus. 

Vv.22-30. The sequel.—Ver. 22. épap- 
τύρουν a., bore witness to Him, not = δοξα- 
ἵόμενος in ver. 15; the confession was 
extorted from them by Christ’s unde- 
niable power.—é0avpaLov, not, admired, 
but, were surprised at (Hahn).—Adyots 
τῆς χάριτος, words of grace. Most take 
Χάρις here not in the Pauline sense, but 
as denoting attractiveness in speech 
(German, Anmuth), suavitas sermonis 
(Kypke, with examples from Greek 
authors, while admitting that χάριτος 
may be an objective genitive, “‘sermo de 


rebus suavibus et laetis”). In view of the 
text on which Jesus preached, and the 
fact that the Nazareth incident occupies 
the place of a frontispiece in the Gospel, 
the religious Pauline sense of χάρις is 
probably the right one = words about 
the grace of God whereby the prophetic 
oracle read was fulfilled. J. Weiss (in 
Meyer), while taking χάρις = grace of 
manner, admiis that Lk. may have 
meant it in the other sense, as in Acts 
xiv. 3, xx. 24. Words of grace, about 
grace: such was Christ’s speech, then 
and always—that is Lk.’s idea.—ovtyi 
vids, etc. : this fact, familiarity, neutral- 
ised the effect of all,.grace of manner 
and the gracious message. Cf. Mt. xiii. 
55, Mk. vi. 3.—Ver. 23. πάντως, doubt- 
less, of course—rapaBodjy = Hebrew 
mashal, including proverbs as well as 
what we call “‘ parables”. A proverb in 
this case.—'latpé, etc.: the verbal 
meaning is plain, the point of the 
parable not so plain, though what follows 
seems to indicate it distinctly enough = 
do here, among us, what you have, as 
we hear, done in Capernaum. This 
would not exactly amount to a physician 
healing himself. We must be content 
with the general idea: every sensible 
benefactor begins in his immediate 
surroundings. There is probably a 
touch of scepticism in the words = we 
will not believe the reports of your great 
deeds, unless you do such things here 
(Hahn). For similar proverbs in other 
tongues, vide Grotius and Wetstein. 
The reference to things done in Caper- 
naum implies an antecedent ministry 
there.—Ver. 24. ᾽Αμὴν: solemnly in- 


19—31. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ἐν τῇ πατρίδι αὐτοῦ. 25. ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, πολλαὶ χῆραι 
ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις Ἡλίου ἐν τῷ Ἰσραήλ, ὅτε ἐκλείσθη ὁ οὐρανὸς 
ἐπὶ 1 ἔτη τρία καὶ µῆνας ἕξ, ὡς ἐγένετο λιμὸς µέγας ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν 
γῆν: 46. καὶ πρὸς οὐδεμίαν αὐτῶν ἐπέμφθη ἩἨλίας, εἰ μὴ εἰς 
Σάρεπτα τῆς Σιδῶνος2 πρὸς γυναῖκα χήραν. 27. καὶ πολλοὶ 
λεπροὶ ἦσαν ἐπὶ ἘἙλισσαίου τοῦ προφήτου ἐν τῷ “lopand®- καὶ 
οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν ἐκαθαρίσθη, εἰ μὴ Νεεμὰν ὁ Σύρος. 28. Καὶ ἐπλήσ- 
θησαν πάντες θυμοῦ ἐν τῇ συναγωγῇ, ἀκούοντες ταῦτα, 29. καὶ 
ἀναστάντες ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω τῆς πόλεως, καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτὸν ἕως 
τῆς * ὀφρύος τοῦ ὅρους, ἐφ᾽ οὗ ἡ πόλις αὐτῶν ᾠκοδόμητοιὁ εἰς τὸ ὅ 


491 


Ακατακρημνίσαι αὐτόν: 30. αὐτὸς δὲ διελθὼν διὰ µέσου αὐτῶν a here only 
in N. T 


ἐπορεύετο. 


31. ΚΑΙ κατῆλθεν εἲς Καπερναοὺμ πόλιν τῆς Γαλιλαίας: καὶ ἦν 


1 emt, found in ΔΟΙ:Δ al. (Tisch.), is wanting in BD (W.H. text, επι marg.). 


2 Σιδωνιας in SBCDL 1, 13, 69, 131 al. 


3 ev τω lo. before επι EX. in SBCDL 1, 


4 Omit της NRABCLA al. 


13, 33, 69 al. 


5 wkoSopyto αυτων in $$BDL 33, altered into the more usual order in Τ.Β. 
6 ωστε for εις το in NBDL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


troducing another proverb given in Mt. 
and Mk. (xiii. 57, vi. 4) inslightly varied 
form.—Sexrés (vide ver. 19, also Acts 
x. 35), acceptable, a Pauline word (2 Cor. 
vi. 2, Phil. iv. 18).—Ver. 25. This verse 
begins, like ver. 24, with a solemn asse- 
veration. It contains the proper answer 
to νετ. 23. It has been suggested (J. 
Weiss) that vv. 22 and 24 have been in- 
terpolated from Mk. vi. 1-6 in the source 
Lk. here used.—érn τρία κ. p. ἕξ, three 
years and six months. The reference is 
to 1 Kings xvii. 1, xviii. 1, where three 
years are mentioned. The recurrence 
of the same number, three and a half 
years, in James v. 17 seems to point to a 
traditional estimate of the period of 
drought, three and a half, the half of 
seven, the number symbolic of misfortune 
(Daniel xii. 7).—Ver. 26. Zdpewra, a 
village lying between Tyre and Sidon = 
modern Surafend.—Ver. 27. 6 Σύρος. 
Naaman and the widow of Sarepta both 
Gentiles: these references savouring of 
universalism were welcome to Lk., but 
there is no reason to suspect that he put 
them into Christ’s mouth. Jesus might 
have so spoken (vide Mt. viii. 11).— 
Vv. 28-29. Unsympathetic from the 
first, the Nazareans, stung by these 
O. T. references, become indignant. 
Pagans, not to speak of Capernaum 
people, better than we: away with Him ! 


out of the synagogue, nay, out of the 
town (ἔξω τῆς wodews).—ews ὀφρύος τ. 
ὅ., etc., to the eyebrow (supercilium, here 
only in N. T.) of the hill on which the city 
was built, implying an elevated point 
but not necessarily the highest ridge. 
Kypke remarks: ‘‘non summum montis 
cacumen, sed minor aliquis tumulus sive 
clivus intelligitur, qui cum monte 
cohaeret, metaphora a superciliis ocu- 
lorum desumta, quae in fronte quidem 
eminent, ipso tamen vertice inferiora 
sunt”. Nazareth now lies in a cup, 
built close up to the hill surrounding. 
Perhaps then it went further up.—déove 
(eis τὸ, T.R.) with infinitive indicating 
intention and tendency, happily not 
result.—Ver. 30. αὐτὸς δὲ, but He, 
emphatic, suggesting a contrast: they 
infuriated, He calm and self-possessed. 
---διελθὼν: no miracle intended, but 
only the marvel of the power always 
exerted by a tranquil spirit and firm will 
over human passions. 

Vv. 31-37. In Capernaum ; the de- 
moniac (Mk. i. 21-28).---κατῆλθεν els Κ. 
He went down from Nasareth, not from 
heaven, as suggested in Marcion’s Gos- 
pel, which began here: ‘‘ Anno quinto- 
decimo  principatus Tiberiani Deum 
descendisse in civitatem Galilaeae 
Capharnaum,” Tertull. ο. Marc. iv. 7.— 
πόλιν τ. Γ.: circumstantially described 


493 


διδάσκων αὐτοὺς ἐν τοῖς σάββασι. 
διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ ἦν & λόγος αὐτοῦ. 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 


ΣΥ. 


32. καὶ ἐξεπλήσσοντο ἐπὶ τῇ 


33. Καὶ ἐν τῇ 


υναγωγῆ ἣν ἄνθρωπος ἔχων πνεῦμα δαιµονίου ἀκαθάρτου, καὶ 
συναγωγῇ ἦν ἄνθρωπος zx pa δαιµονίου ρτου, 


ἀνέκραξε φωνῇ µεγάλη. 34. λέγων.ὶ “"Ea, τί ἡμῖν καὶ col, Ιησοῦ 


Ναζαρηνέ; 
Θεοῦ.” 
καὶ ἔξελθε ἐξ 2 αὐτοῦ.” 


Ch. ν. 9. 
Acts iii. το. 


ἦλθες ἀπολέσαι ἡμᾶς; 
35. Καὶ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτῷ ὁ 


ἐξῆλθεν ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν. 


οἶδά σε τίς El, 6 
"Ingots, λέγων, “ Φιμώθητι, 


ἅγιος τοῦ 


ς 


Καὶ ῥίψαν αὐτὸν τὸ δαιµόνιον εἰς τὸ µέσον 


36. καὶ ἐγένετο ’ θάμβος 


ἐπὶ πάντας, καὶ συνελάλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, λέγοντες, “ Tis ὁ λόγος 


οὗτος, ὅτι ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ καὶ δυνάµει ἐπιτάσσει τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις πνεύµασι, 


καὶ ἐξέρχονται ; 
τόπον τῆς περιχώρου. 


37. Καὶ ἐξεπορεύετο ἦχος περὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς πάντα 


38. ᾽Αναστὰς δὲ ἐκδ τῆς συναγωγῆς, εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν 


Σίμωνος: ἡ " πενθερὰ δὲ τοῦ Σίμωνος ἦν συνεχοµένη πυρετῷ µεγάλῳ: 


Sit BS , 2 8 ‘ 7a 
και ἠρώτησαν aUTOY περι αὐτῆς. 


39. καὶ ἐπιστὰς ἐπάνω αὐτής, 


ἐπετίμησε τῷ πυρετῷ, καὶ ἀφῆκεν αὐτήν ' παραχρῆμα δὲ ἀναστᾶσα 


διηκόνει αὐτοῖς. 


40. Δύνοντος δὲ τοῦ ἡλίου, πάντες ὅσοι εἶχον ἀσθενοῦντας νόσοις 


1 Omit λεγων NBLE cop. Orig. 
3 aro in NBCDLE 33 al. 


as it is the first mention in Lk.’s own 
narrative. Yet the description is vague, 
as if by one far off, for readers in the 
same position. No mention here of the 
lake (vide v. 1).—Ver. 32. ἐν ἐξουσίᾳ: 
no reference to the scribes by way of 
contrast, as in Mk., whereby the charac- 
terisation loses much of its point.—Ver. 
33. Φωνῇῃ µεγάλῃ, added by Lk: in 
Lk.’s narratives of cures two tendencies 
appear—(1) to magnify the power dis- 
played, and (2) to emphasise the benevo- 
lence. Neither of these is conspicuous 
in this narrative, though this phrase and 
ῥίψαν, and μηδὲν βλάψαν αὐτόν in ver. 
35, look in the direction of (1).—Ver. 34. 
ἔα: here only (not genuine in Mk., Τ.Ε.) 
in N. T. =ha! Vulg., sine as if from é¢v; 
a cry of horror.—Naflapnvé: Lk. usually 
writes Ναζωραῖε. The use of this form 
here suggests that he has Mk.’s account 
lying before him.—Ver. 35. μηδὲν before 
βλάψαν implies expectation of a contrary 
result.—Ver. 36. 6 λόγος οὗτος refers 
either to the commanding word of Jesus, 
followed by such astounding results 
(«quid est hoc verbum?” Vulg.), or = 
what is this thing ? what a surprising 
affair! (‘quid hoc rei est?”’ Beza, and 
after him Grotius, De Wette, etc.). In 
either case Lk.’s version at this point is 


2 am in &BDLE minusc. 
4 Omit y NABDLE. 


altogether secondary and colourless as 
compared with Mk.’s, g.v.—Ver. 37. 
ἦχος (ἀκοὴ, Mk.), a sound, report; again 
in xxi. 25, Acts li. 2 = ἠχώ in classics. 

Vv. 38, 39. Peter’s mother-in-law 
(Mt. viii. 14, 15, Mk. i. 29-31).—Ztpevos : 
another anticipation. In Mk. the call of 
Peter and others to discipleship has 
been previously narrated. One wonders 
that Lk. does not follow his example in 
view of-his preface, where the apostles 
are called eye-witnesses, ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς.-- 
ἦν συνεχοµένη, etc.: Lk’.s desire to 
magnify the power comes clearly out 
here. ‘* The analytic imperfect implies 
that the fever was chronic, and the verb 
that it was severe,’ Farrar (C. G. T.). 
Then he calls it a great fever: whether 
using a technical term (fevers classed by 
physicians as great and small), as many 
think, or otherwise, as some incline to 
believe (Hahn, Godet, etc.), in either 
case taking pains to exclude the idea 
of a minor feverish attack.—Ver. 39. 
παραχρῆμα, immediately, another word 
having the same aim: cured at once, 
and perfectly ; able to serve. 

Vv. 40, 41. Sabbath evening cures 
(Mt. viii. 16, 17, Mk. i. 32-34).—8vvovros 
τ. %.: Lk. selects the more important 
part of Mk.’s dual definition of time. 


32—44- 


ποικίλαις ἤγαγον αὐτοὺς πρὸς αὐτόν - 
ἐθερά 9 μη 
ἐθεράπευσεν  αὐτούς. 


χεῖρας ἐπιθεὶς 1 


δαιμόνια ἀπὸ πολλῶν, κράζοντα καὶ λέγοντα, 
ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. Καὶ ἐπιτιμῶν οὐκ εἴα αὐτὰ λαλεῖν, 


Χριστὸς ὅ 


ὅτι ἤδεισαν τὸν Χριστὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι. 
ἐξελθὼν ἐπορεύθη εἰς ἔρημον τόπον, καὶ ot ὄχλοι ἐζήτουν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


493, 


6 δὲ ἑνὶ ἑκάστω αὐτῶν τὰς 
41. ἐξήρχετοξ δὲ καὶ 
“ Ὅτι σὺ et ὁ 


Γενομένης δὲ ἡμέρας 
6 


42. 


> , 
αὐτόν, 


καὶ ἦλθον ἕως αὐτοῦ, καὶ κατεῖχον αὐτὸν τοῦ μὴ πορεύεσθαι ἀπ 


αὐτῶν. 


εὐαγγελίσασθαί µε δεῖ τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ : 
44. Καὶ ἦν κηρύσσων ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς ° 


ἀπέσταλμαι,” § 
Γαλιλαίας. 


Σεπιτιθεις in BDE al. (Tisch., W.H.). 
ἄεθεραπευεν in BD (Tisch., W.H., 


‘So in many MSS. (NBCL, etc.). 


5 Omit ο Χριστος NBCDLE 33 (Tisch., 


5 a 
43. 6 δὲ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “ Ὅτι καὶ ταῖς ἑτέραις πόλεσιν 


τοῦτο 


τῆς . 


a > 7, 
οτι εις 


text). 


3 εξηρχοντο in SCX 1, 33 (Tisch., W.H., marg.). 
DA al, κραυγαζοντα (Tisch.). 


BD have the sing. (W.H. text).. 


W.H.). 


6 επεζητουν in very many uncials (NNBCDL, etc.). 


Τεπι in NBL. 


δαπεσταλην in NBCDL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


δεις τας συναγωγας in NBD, 


With sunset the Sabbath closed. δύνοντος 
is present participle of the late form 
δύνω = Svo.—évi ἑκάστῳ: laying His 
hands on each one, a touch peculiar to 
Lk., pointing, Godet thinks, to a separate 
source at Lk.’s command; much more 
certainly to Lk.’s desire to make pro- 
minent the benevolent sympathy of Jesus. 
Jesus did not heal ex masse, but one 
by one, tender sympathy going out from 
Him in each case. Intrinsically pro- 
bable, and worth noting. This trait in 
Lk. is in its own way as valuable as 
Mt.’s citation from Isaiah (viii. 17), and 
serves the same purpose.—Ver. 41. 
λέγοντα ὅτι, etc.: Lk. alone notes that 
the demons, in leaving their victims, 
bore witness in a despairing cry to the 
Divine Sonship of Jesus. God’s power 
in this Man, our power doomed. Again 
a tribute to the miraculous might of 
Jesus. 

Vv. 42-44. Withdrawal from Caper- 
naum (Mk. i. 35-39). ---γενομένης ἡμέρας, 
when it was day, {.6., when people were 
up and could see Jesus’ movements, and 
accordingly followed Him. In Mk, 
Jesus departed very early before dawn, 
when all would be in bed; a kind of 
flight.—oit ὄχλοι: in Mk. Simon and 
those with him, other disciples. But of 
disciples Lk. as yet knows nothing.— 


ἕως αὐτοῦ, to the place where He was. 
From the direction in which they had’ 
seen Him depart they had no difficulty 
in finding Him.—katetyov, they held 
Him back, from doing what He seemed 
inclined to do, z.e., from leaving them, 
with some of their sick still unhealed.— 
Ver. 43. ὅτι καὶ: the purpose of Jesus 
is the same in Lk. as in Mk., but 
differently expressed, in fuller, more 
developed terms, to preach the good 
news of the Kingdom of God. Of course 
all must hear the news; they could not 
gainsay that.—ameoradnv, I was sent, 
referring to His Divine mission; in 
place of Mk.’s ἐξῆλθον, referring to the 
purpose of Jesus in leaving Capernaum. 
Lk.’s version, compared with Mk.’s, is 
secondary, and in a different tone. Mk.’s 
realism is replaced by decorum: what it 
is fitting to make Jesus do and say. 
Flight eliminated, and a reference to 
His Divine mission substituted for an 
apology for flight. Vide notes on Mk. 
CHAPTER V. THE CALL OF PETER. 


ΤΗΕ LEPER. THE PALSIED Μαν, THE 
Catt oF LEvi. FastTinc.—Vv. 1-11. 
The call of Peter. This narrative, 


brought in later than the corresponding 
one in Mk., assumes larger dimensions 
and an altered character. Peter comes 
to the front, and the other three named. 


494 


a here only 
in same 


KATA AOYKAN 


γ. 


V. 1. ΕΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ ἐν τῷ τὸν ὄχλον " ἐπικεῖσθαι αὐτῷ too! 


a ρ 
sense in ἀκούειν τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν ἑστὼς παρὰ τὴν λίμνην 


N.T. 
Acts 
XXVii. 2 


0. a > A 
ἁλιεῖς ἀποβάντες ἀπ᾿ adtav® ἀπέπλυναν “ τὰ δίκτυα. 


᾿Γεννησαρέτ: 2. καὶ εἶδε δύο πλοῖα ” ἑστῶτα παρὰ τὴν λίμνην: ot δὲ 


3. ἐμβὰς δὲ 


| ee ~ λ 4 a 4 6 , ee 4 8, 9 [ο lol 
eis ἓν τῶν πλοίων, ὃ ἦν τοῦ ὅ Σίμωνος, ἠρώτησεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς 
ἐπαναγαγεῖν ὀλίγον: καὶ καθίσας ὃ ἐδίδασκεν ἐκ τοῦ πλοίου 7Ἰ τοὺς 


ὄχλους. 


4. Ὡς δὲ ἐπαύσατο λαλῶν, εἶπε πρὸς τὸν Σίμωνα, 


Ε here only  Επανάγαγε εἰς τὸ "βάθος, καὶ χαλάσατε τὰ δίκτυα ὑμῶν εἰς 


in same 
sense in 
N: τ. 


ἄγραν.” 


1 και for τον in NABL 1, 131. 

2B has πλοια δυο (W.H. text). 
marg.). 

3 amr αντων αποβαντες in BCDL 33. 

5 Omit του NBDL. 


5. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6° Σίµων εἶπεν αὐτῷ," “*Emortdra, δι 
ὅλης τῆς 10 νυκτὸς κοπιάσαντες οὐδὲν ἐλάβομεν: ἐπὶ δὲ τῷ ῥήματί 


NCL 33 al. min. have πλοιαρια (Tisch., W.H., 


6 επλυναν (-ov) in RBCDL. 
6 καθισας Se in NBL. 


Tex τ. πλ. εδιδασκεν in B (W.H.). ΝΤ have ev τ. wA.,also before εδιδ. (Tisch.). 


§ Omit o BLA. 


in Mk., James, John and Andrew, retire 
into the shade; the last-named, indeed, 
does not appear in the picture at all. 
This, doubtless, reflects the relative 
positions of the four disciples in the pub- 
lic eye in the writer’s time, and in the 
circle for which he wrote. The interest 
gathered mainly about Peter: Christian 
people wanted to be told about him, 
specially about how he became a dis- 
ciple. That interest had been felt before 
Lk. wrote, hence the tradition about his 
call grew ever richer in contents, till it 
became a lengthy, edifying story. Lk. 
gives it as he found it. Some think he 
mixes up the call with the later story told 
in John xxi. 1-8, and not a few critics 
find in his account a symbolic repre- 
sentation of Peter’s apostolic experience 
as narrated in the book of Acts. Such 
mixture and symbolism, if present, had 
probably found their way into the his- 
tory before it came into Lk.’s hands. 
He gives it bond fide as the narrative of 
a real occurrence, which it may quite 
well be. 

Vv. 1-7. ἐπικεῖσθα. In Mt. and 
Mk. (iv. 18, i. 16) the call of the four 
disciples took place when Jesus was 
walking alone. Here Jesus is surrounded 
by a crowd who pressed upon Him.— 
καὶ ἀκούειν, etc., and were hearing the 
word of God. The crowd, and their 
eagerness to hear the word of God 
(phraseology here secondary), serve in 
the narrative to explain the need of 
disciples (so Schanz and Hahn).—7wapa 


5 Omit αντω NB, ε, cop. 


19 Omit της NABL 33. 


τὴν λίµνην Γ. The position of Jesus in 
speaking to the crowd was on the mar- 
gin of the lake; called by Lk. alone 
Aipvy.—Ver. 2. ἑστῶτα: two boats 
standing by the lake, not necessarily 
drawn up on shore, but close to land, so 
that one on shore could enter them. 
They had just come in from the fishing, 
and were without occupants, their owners 
having come on shore to clean their nets. 
—Ver. 3. ἐμβὰς: this action of Jesus 
would be noticed of course, and would 
bring the owner to His side. It was 
Simon's boat, the man whose mother-in- 
law, in Lk.’s narrative, had been healed of 
fever.—émavayayetv, to put out to sea, 
here and in ver. 4 and Mt. xxi. 18 only. 
--ὀλίγον: just far enough to give com- 
mand of the audience.—ediSackev : this 
teaching from a boat took place again 
on the day of the parables (Mt. xiii. 2, 
Mk. iv. 1). But that feature does not 
appear in the corresponding narrative οἱ 
Lk. (viii. 4). Did Peter’s call attract 
that feature from the later occasion in 
the tradition which Lk. followed ?— 
Ver. 4. els τὸ βάθος, into the deep 
sea, naturally to be found in the centre, 
inside the shelving bottom stretching 
inwards from the shore.—yaddoare, 
plural, after ἐπανάγαγε, singular; the 
latter addressed to Peter as the master, 
the former denoting an act in which all 
in the boat would assist. Bornemann 
(Scholia) gives instances of similar usage 
in classics.—aypav, here and in νετ. 9 
only, in N. T.; in the first place may be 


I—II,. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


495 


-σου χαλάσω τὸ Siktuov.”! 6. Καὶ τοῦτο ποιήσαντες, συνέκλεισον 
ἐχθύων πλῆθος 3 πολύ: διερρήγνυτο δὲ τὸ δίκτυον ὃ αὐτῶν, 7. καὶ 
κατένευσαν τοῖς " μετόχοις τοῖς” ἐν τῷ ἑτέρῳ πλοίῳ, τοῦ ἐλθόντας c here and 


συλλαβέσθαι αὐτοῖς: καὶ ἦλθον, καὶ ἔπλησαν ἀμφότερα τὰ πλοῖα, 
ὥστε βυθίζεσθαι αὖτά. δ. ἰδὼν δὲ Σίµων Πέτρος προσέπεσε τοῖς 


several 
times in 
Heb. (i. 9, 
είς.). 


όνασι τοῦ ὅ Ἰησοῦ, λέγων, '΄Ἔξελθε ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ, ὅτι ἀνὴρ ἁμαρτωλός 


clipe, Κύριε.” 


9. Θάμβος γὰρ περιέσχεν αὐτὸν καὶ πάντας τοὺς σὺν 


2A aN α 3” ~ 3 , μα] . , Δ ‘ 
αὐτῷ, ἐπὶ τῇ dypa τῶν ἰχθύων 4° συνέλαβον: 1Ο. ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ 
᾿Ιάκωβον καὶ Ιωάννην, υἱοὺς Ζεβεδαίου, ot ἦσαν κοινωνοὶ τῷ Σίµωνι. 
Καὶ εἶπε πρὸς τὸν Σίµωνα 67 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Mi φοβοῦ": ἀπὸ τοῦ viv 


ἀνθρώπους Eon ζωγρῶν.” 


11. Καὶ καταγαγόντες τὰ πλοῖα ἐπὶ τὴν 


Ὑῆν, ἀφέντες ἅπαντα, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ. 


1 τα δικτυα in SBDL. 


2 πληθος ιχθυων in ΝΑΒΟΙ.. T.R. = D. 


3 S9BL have διερησσετο, and NBDL τα δικτυα (Tisch., W.H., adopt both), 


4 Omit tors NBDL. 
6 wv in BD instead of η (in SCL). 


used actively = for taking, in the second, 
passively = fora take. But the latter 
sense might suit both places. If so 
used here the word implies a promise 
(Hahn).—Ver. 5. ἐπιστάτα: Lk.’s 
name for Jesus as Master, six times; a 
Greek term for Gentile readers instead 
of Rabbi = (1) Master, then (2) Teacher, 
«qui enim magistri doctrinae erant, ii 
magistri simul vitae esse solebant,”’ 
Kypke.—émi τῷ ῥήματί σον, at Thy word 
or bidding. Success was doubly im- 
probable: it was day, and in deep 
water ; fish were got at night, and near 
shore. The order, contrary ἵο pro- 
bability, tempts to symbolic interpreta- 
tion: the deep sea the Gentile world; 
Peter’s indirect objection symbol of his 
reluctance to enter on the Gentile 
mission, overcome by a special revela- 
tion (Acts x.). So Holtz., Η. C.—Ver. 
6. διερήσσετο, began to break, or were 
on the point of breaking; on the sym- 
bolic theory = the threatened rupture of 
ainity though the success of the Gentile 
mission (Acts xv.).—Ver. 7. κατένευσαν, 
they made signs, beckoned, here only in 
N. T. (évévevov, i. 62); too far to speak 
perhaps, but fishers would be accustomed 
to communicate by signs to preserve 
needful stillness (Schanz).—ovAAaBéo Oar 
αὐτοῖς: this verb with dative occurs in 
Phil. iv. 3 =to help οΠθ8.--ὥστε, with 
infinitive = tendency here, not result.— 
βνθίζεσθαι, to sink in the deep (βυθός), 
here only in O. or N. T. in reference to 
aship; int Tim. vi. 9 in reference to 
cich men, 


5 SSB al. omit τον. 
7 Omit o BL... 


Vv. 8-11. Sequel of the miracle.— 
Ver. 8. Πέτρος: here for first time 
introduced without explanation, pre- 
sumably in connection with the great 
crisis in his history.—avnp ἁμαρτωλός : 
a natural exclamation especially for an 
impulsive nature in the circumstances. 
But the utterance, though real, might 
have been passed over in the tradition. 
Why so carefully recorded by Lk.? 
Perhaps because it was a fitting thing 
for any man to say on becoming a dis- 
ciple of the Holy Jesus—the sin of the 
disciple a foil to the holiness of the 
Master. Also to supply a justification 
for the statement in ver. 32, ‘‘I came 
not to call,’ etc. In this connection sin 
is ascribed to all the apostles when 
called, in very exaggerated terms in Ep. 
Barnab., v. g (ὄντας ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν 
ἁμαρτίαν ἀνομωτέρους). --- Ver. ro, 
᾿Ιάκωβον καὶ ᾿Ἰωάννην, dependent on 
περιέσχεν : fear encompassed them also, 
not less than Peter and the rest. This 
special mention of them is not expiained, 
unless inferentially in what follows.— 
μὴ φοβοῦ, fear not, addressed to Peter 
alone. He alone, so far as appears, is to 
become a fisher of men, but the other 
two are named, presumably, because 
meant to be included, and in matter of 
fact they as well as Simon abandon all 
and follow Jesus (νετ. 11).—{wypév : the 
verb means to take alive, then generally 
to take; here and in 2 Tim. ii, 26. The 
analytic form (ἔσῃ ζωγρῶν) implies per- 
Manent occupation = thou shall be a 
taker.—Ver. 11. καταγαγόντες τ. πλ., 


496 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ Vo. 

12. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτὸν ἐν μιᾷ τῶν πόλεων, καὶ (Sou, 
ἀνὴρ πλήρης λέπρας: καὶ ἰδὼν 1 τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, πεσὼν ἐπὶ πρόσωπον,. 
ἐδεήθη αὐτοῦ, λέγων, “Κύριε, ἐὰν θέλῃης, δύνασαί µε καθαρίσαι.” 
13. Καὶ ἐκτείνας τὴν χεῖρα, ἤψατο αὐτοῦ, εἰπών,; “Θέλω, καθαρίσ- 
Καὶ εὐθέως ἡ λέπρα ἀπῆλθεν ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ. 14. καὶ αὐτὸς 
παρήγγειλεν αὐτῷ μηδενὶ εἰπεῖν: “ἀλλὰ ἀπελθὼν δεῖξον σεαυτὸν 


θητι.” 


τῷ ἱερεῖ, καὶ προσένεγκε περὶ τοῦ καθαρισμοῦ σου, καθὼς προσέταξε 
Μωσῆς, eis μαρτύριον αὐτοῖς.' 15. Διήρχετο δὲ μᾶλλον ὁ λόγος 
περὶ αὐτοῦ: καὶ συνήρχοντο ὄχλοι πολλοὶ ἀκούειν, καὶ θεραπεύεσθαι 
ὑπ αὐτοῦ ὃ ἀπὸ τῶν ἀσθενειῶν αὐτῶν: 16. αὐτὸς δὲ ἦν ὑποχωρῶν ἐν' 
ταῖς ἐρήμοις, καὶ προσευχόµενος. 

17. Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν μιᾷ τῶν ἡμερῶν, καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν διδάσκων: καὶ 
ἦσαν καθήµενοι Φαρισαῖοι καὶ νοµοδιδάσκαλοι, ot ἦσαν ἐληλυθότες. 
ἐκ πάσης κώµης τῆς Γαλιλαίας καὶ Ιουδαίας καὶ Ἱερουσαλήμ: καὶ 


δύναμις Κυρίου ἦν eis τὸ ἰᾶσθαι αὐτούς." 


18. καὶ ἰδού, ἄνδρες 


φέροντες ἐπὶ κλίνης ἄνθρωπον ὃς ἦν παραλελυµένος, καὶ ἐζήτουν 


1 ιδων δε in NB, e, cop. 
3 Omit υπ αυτου SBCDL minuse. 


2 λεγων in NBCDL 33 al. 


4 αυτον in SBLE aeth. (Tisch., W.H.), not understood, hence corrected into: 


αυτους (T.R.). 


drawing up their ships on land; that 
work done for ever. Chiefly in Lk. and 
Acts. 

Vv. 12-16. The leper (Mt. vili. 1-4, 
Mk. i. 40-45).—Ver. 12. ἐν pug τ. π. for 
ἔν tut, one of the cities or towns of 
Galilee in which Jesus had been preach- 
ing (Mk. i. 39 Lk. iv. 44).--καὶ idov, 
after καὶ ἐγένετο, very Hebraistic.— 
πλήρης λέπρας, full of leprosy (λεπρὸς 
in parallels). Note here again the desire 
to magnify the miracle.—éav θέλῃς, etc., 
the man’s words the same in all three 
narratives. His doubt was as to the 
will not the power to heal.—Ver. 13. 
ἤψατο: this also in all three—a cardinal 
point; the touch the practical proof of 
the will and the sympathy. No shrink- 
ing from the loathsome disease.—% 
λέπρα ἀπῇῆλθεν: Lk. takes one of Mk.’s 
two phrases, Mt. the other. Lk. takes 
the one which most clearly implies a 
cure; ἐκαθερίσθη (Mt.) might conceiv- 
ably mean: became technically clean.— 
Ver. 14. ἀλλὰ, etc.: here the oratio 
indirecta passes into or. directa as in Acts 
i. 4, XiV. 22, εἴςο.---τῷ ἱερεῖ, to the priest ; 
not necessarily in Jerusalem, but to the 
priest in the province whose business it 
was to attend to such duties (Hahn).— 
Ver. 15. Gkovew, to hear, but not 
the word as in ver. 1, rather to hear 


about the wonderful Healer and to get 
healing for themselves (θεραπεύεσθαι).--- 
Ver. 16, To retirement mentioned in 
Mk. Lk. adds prayer (προσευχόµενος) ; 
frequent reference to this in Lk. 

Vv. 17-26. The paralytic (Mt. ix. 1-8, 
Mk. ii. 1-12).—Ver. 17. ἐν pig τῶν 
ἡμερῶν, a phrase as vague as a note of 
time as that in ver. 12 as a note of 
place.—tat αὐτὸς, etc., and He was 
teaching ; the Hebraistic paratactic con- 
struction so common in Lk. Note kai. 
ἦσαν and καὶ δύναµις K. ἦν following.— 
νοµοδιδάσκαλοι, teachers of the law, 
Lk.’s equivalent for ypapparets. The 
Pharisees and lawyers appear here for 
the first time in Lk., and they appear in 
force—a large gathering from every 
village of Galilee, from Judaea, and from 
Jerusalem, Jesus had preached in the 
synagogues of Galilee where the scribes 
might have an opportunity of hearing 
Him. But this extensive gathering of 
these classes at this time is not accounted’ 
for fully in Lk. Not till later does such 
a gathering occur in Mk. (iii. 22).— 
αὐτόν, the reading in $¥BL gives quite 
a good sense; it is accusative before 
ἰᾶσθαι = the power of the Lord (God) 
was present to the effect or intent that 
He (Jesus) should heal.—Ver. 18. 
παραλελυµένος, instead of παραλνυτικὀς: 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


12---26. 


αὐτὸν εἰσενεγκεῖν καὶ θεῖναι ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ: 19. καὶ μὴ εὑρόντες 
διὰ 1 ποίας εἰσενέγκωσιν αὐτὸν διὰ τὸν ὄχλον, ἀναβάντες ἐπὶ τὸ 
δῶμα, διὰ τῶν κεράµων καθῆκαν αὐτὸν σὺν τῷ κλινιδίῳ eis τὸ µέσον 
ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 29. καὶ ἰδὼν τὴν πίστιν αὐτῶν, εἶπεν αὐτῷ,” 
““AvOpunre, ἀφέωνταί σοι ai ἁμαρτίαι gov.” 21. Καὶ ἠρέαντο 
διαλογίζεσθαι οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ ot Φαρισαῖοι, λέγοντες, “ Tis ἐστιν 
οὗτος ὃς λαλεῖ βλασφημµίας; tis δύναται ἀφιέναι duaptias,® εἰ μὴ 
µόνος ὁ Θεός; 22. Ἐπιγνοὺς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τοὺς διαλογισμοὺς 
αὐτῶν ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “Ti διαλογίζεσθε ἐν ταῖς 
καρδίαις ὑμῶν; 23. τί ἐστιν εὐκοπώτερον, εἰπεῖν, ᾽Αϕέωνταί σοι αἱ 
ἁμαρτίαι σου, ἢ εἰπεῖν, Ἔγειραι ΄ καὶ περιπάτει; 24. ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε 
ὅτι ἐξουσίαν ἔχει ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὅ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀφιέναι ἅμαρ- 
tias,” εἶπε τῷ παραλελυμένω, “Zoi λέγω, Eyerpar,® καὶ ἄρας τὸ 
κλινίδιόν σου, πορεύου εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου. 25. Καὶ παραχρῆμα 
ἀναστὰς ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν, ἄρας ἐφ᾽ ᾧ Ἰ κατέκειτο, ἀπῆλθεν eis τὸν οἶκον 


497 


αὐτοῦ, δοξάζων τὸν Θεόν. 


26. καὶ ἔκστασις ἔλαβεν ἅπαντας, καὶ 


ἐδόξαζον τὸν Θεόν, καὶ ἐπλήσθησαν φόβου, λέγοντες, “΄Ὅτι εἴδομεν 


παράδοξα σήμερον.” 


1δια omitted in all uncials. 
5 αμαρ. αφιεναι in ΒΓΞ. 


2 SWBLE 33 omit αυτω. 
4 eyeipe in NABCDLE. 


δο ν. 7. αν. εξουσιαν εχει in BLE (Tisch., W.H.). 


6 εγειρε here again in many MSS. 


in the parallels, the former more in 
use among physicians, and the more 
classical.—é{yjrovv, imperfect, implying 
difficulty in finding access, due, one 
might think, to the great numbers ot 
Pharisees and lawyers present, no 
mention having as yet been made of 
any others. But the ὄχλος comes in in 
next verse,—Ver. 19. olas (διὰ ποίας 
6800), by what way.—o. τ. κλινιδίῳ: 
dim. of κλίνη (ver. 18, here only in N. Τ.). 
Lk. avoids Mk.’s κράββατος, though 
apparently following him as to the sub- 
stance of the story.—Ver. 20. ἄνθρωπε, 
man, instead of Mk.’s more kindly τέκνον 
and Mt.’s still more sympathetic θάρσει 
τέκνον; because (suggests J. Weiss) it 
was not deemed fitting that such a sinner 
should be addressed as son or child! 
This from Lk., the evangelist of grace! 
The substitution, from whatever reason 
proceeding, is certainly not an improve- 
ment. Possibly Lk. had a version of 
the story before him which used that 
word. Doubtless Jesus employed the 
kindlier expression.—Ver. 21. διαλογί- 
ἵεσθαι: Lk. omits the qualifying phrases 
ἐν ἑανυτοῖς, ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις of Mt. and 


7 εφ ο in NABCLAE al. 


Mk., leaving it doubtful whether they 
spoke out or merely thought.—héyovtes 
does not settle the point, as it merely 
indicates to what effect they reasoned.— 
Ver. 22. The expression “in your 
hearts” coming in here suggests that 
Lk. may have omitted it in ver. 21 
merely to avoid repetition.—Ver. 24. 
ἔγειρε καὶ ἄρας . . . πορεύου: by in- 
troducing the participle ἄρας Lk. im- 
proves the style as compared with Mk., 
but weakens the force of the utterance, 
‘* arise, take up thy bed and go”. The 
same remark applies to the words of the 
scribes, ver. 21, ‘‘who is this that 
speaketh blasphemies?” compared with, 
“why doth this person speak thus? 
He blasphemes.” Lk.’s is secondary, 
the style of an editor working over a 
rugged, graphic, realistic text.—Ver. 25. 
παραχρῆμα (παρὰ τὸ χρῆμα), on the 
spot, instantly; in Lk. only, magnifying 
the miracle.—Ver. 26. ἔκστασις might 
be taken out of Mk.’s ἐξίστασθαι.-- 
παράδοξα. Each evangelist expresses 
the comments of the people in different 
terms. All three may be right, and not 
one of them may give the ipsissima 


32 


498 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


γ. 


27. Καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐξῆλθε, καὶ ἐθεάσατο τελώνην, ὀνόματι Λευΐν, 
καθήµενον ἐπὶ τὸ τελώνιον, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ““᾿Ακολούθει por.” 


28. Καὶ καταλιπὼν ἅπαντα, ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθησεν 1 αὐτῷ. 


29. Καὶ 


ἐποίησε δοχὴν μεγάλην 6? Λευῖς αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ αὐτοῦ: καὶ ἦν 


ὄχλος τελωνῶν πολύς,” καὶ ἄλλων ot ἦσαν pet αὐτῶν κατακείµενοι. 


ο. καὶ ἐγόγγυζον ot γραμματεῖς αὐτῶν καὶ ot Φαρισαῖοι * πρὸς τοὺς 
Y°vY γραμμ Pp ρ 


μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, λέγοντες, “'Διατί μετὰ τελωνῶν καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν 


ἐσθίετε καὶ πίνετε; 


31. 


< 


Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπε πρὸς 
ρ η ρ 


αὐτούς, “Ob Χρείαν ἔχουσιν οἱ ὑγιαίνοντες ἰατροῦ, GAN’ ot κακῶς 


3” 
έχοντες. 


1 ηκολονθει in BDLE 6ο, a. 
3 πολυς before τελ. in NBCDLE 33 al. 
4 ov Pap. και ot yp. αυτων in ABCLA= 


verba. Lk.’s version is: We have seen 
unexpected things to-day. Here only in 
Ν. Τ 


Vv. 27-32. Call of Levi (Mt. ix. 9-13, 
Mk. ii. 13-17).—Ver. 27. ἐθεάσατο, 
instead of elSev. Hahn, appealing to 
John i. 14, iv. 35, xi. 45, assigns to it the 
meaning, to look with interest, to let 
the eye rest on with con.placency. But 
it is doubtful whether in later usage it 
meant more than to look in order to 
observe. If the view stated in Mt. on 
the so-called Matthew’s feast (g.v.) be 
correct, Jesus was on the outlook for a 
man to assist Him in the Capernaum 
mission to the publicans—ért τὸ 
τελώνιον, at “the tolbothe,” Wyclif. 
The tolls collected by Levi may have 
been either on highway traffic, or on 
the traffic across the lake. Mk.’s 
παράγων (ver. 14) coming after the 
reference to the sea (ver. 13) points to 
the latter.—Ver. 28. καταλιπὼν ἅπαντα, 
leaving all behind, in Lk. only; a 
specialty of the ebionitically inclined 
evangelist, thinks J. Weiss (in Meyer). 
But it merely predicates of Levi what all 
three evangelists predicate of Peter and 
his comrades.—Ver. 29. δοχὴν (from 
δέχοµαι here and in xiv. 13), a reception, 


a feast, in Sept. for MAW (Gen. 


xxvi. 30, Esther i. 3). That Mt. made a 
feast is directly stated only by Lk., 
perhaps as an inference from the phrases 
in Mk. which imply it: κατακεῖσθαι, 
συνανέκειντο (ver. 15), ἐσθίει καὶ πίνει 
(νετ. 16). That it was a great feast is 
inferred from πολλοὶ in reference to the 
number present. The expressions of the 
evangelists force us to conceive of the 
gathering as exceeding the dimensions 


32. οὐκ ἐλήλυθα καλέσαι δικαίους, ἀλλὰ ἁμαρτωλοὺς eis 


2 Omit e all uncials. 


alot Ό- 
of a private entertainment—a congrega- 
tion rather, in the court, to eat and to 
hear the gospel of the kingdom. Possibly 
none of the evangelists. realised the full 
significance of the meeting, though Lk. 
by the expression ὄχλος πολὺς shows 
that he conceived of it as very large.— 
ἄλλων stands for ἁμαρτωλῶν, which Lk. 
does not care to use when speaking for 
himself of the class, preferring the vague 
word ‘‘ others”. They were probably a 
very nondescript class, the ‘‘ submerged 
tenth’? of Capernaum.—Ver. 30. oi 
Φαρισαῖοι καὶ οἱ γραμ. αὐτῶν, the 
Pharisees, and the scribes connected with 
them, the professional men of the party. 
They were not of course guests, but 
they might if they chose look in: no 
privacy on such occasions in the East; 
or they might watch the strange com- 
pany as they dispersed.—éo@iete καὶ 
πίνετὲ: addressed to the disciples. In 
the parallels the question refers to the 
conduct of Jesus though put to the 
disciples.—Ver. 31. Jesus replies, under- 
standing that it is He who is put on His 
defence. His reply is given in identical 
terms in all three Synoptics; a remark- 
able logion carefully preserved in the 
tradition.—Ver. 32. εἷς µετάνοιαν: 
doubtless a gloss of Lk.’s or of a tradi- 
tion he used, defining and guarding the 
saying, but also limiting its scope.— 
καλέσαι is to be understood ‘in a festive 
sense =I came to call sinners to the 
feast of the Kingdom, as I have called to 
this feast the ‘‘ sinners’ of Capernaum. 
Vv. 33-39. Fasting (Mt. ix. 14-17, 
Mk. ii. 18-22).—Ver. 33. οἳ δὲ connects 
what follows with what goes before as a 
continuation of the same story. Not so 
in Mk.: commection there simply topical. 


37---36. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


499 


, « a 

µετάνοιαν. 33. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον πρὸς αὐτόν, “Atari! of μαθηταὶ 
[ A ε 

Ἰωάννου νηστεύουσι πυκνά, καὶ δεήσεις ποιοῦνται, ὅμοίως καὶ οἱ τῶν 


Ν , » 
apicaiwy: ot δὲ coi ἐσθίουσι καὶ πίνουσιν ; 


34. Ὁ Sé? εἶπε 


πρὸς αὐτούς, “Mh δύνασθε τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ νυμφῶνος, ἐν ᾧ 6 νυμφίος 


per αὐτῶν ἐστι, ποιῆσαι νηστεύειν ® ; 


35. ἐλεύσονται δὲ ἡμέραι, 


~ ~ , 
καὶ ὅταν ἀπαρθῇ ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν 6 vupdios, τότε νηστεύσουσιν ἐν ἐκείναις 


ταῖς ἡ pépats.” 


36. Ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ παραβολὴν πρὸς αὐτούς, ““On 


οὐδεὶς ἐπίβλημα ἱματίου καινοῦ” ἐπιβάλλει ἐπὶ ἱμάτιον παλαιόν ’ 


εἰ δὲ µήγε, καὶ τὸ καινὸν σχίζειι καὶ τῷ παλαιῷ οὗ συμφωνεῖ 


i Omit διατι BLE 33 cop. 


2 Add Inoous RBCDLE 33. 


3 yyorevorat in B= 28 (Tisch., W.H.). T.R.=SACDLA al. 
4 For up. καινου RBDLE 33 al. have απο ty. κ. σχισας (Tisch., W.H.). ACA 


al. omit σχισας. 
> σχισει in NBCDL 33. 


§ cupdovyce in S$ABCDLX 33 and many other minusc. 


The supposed speakers are the Pharisees 
and scribes (νετ. 39). In Mk. Phar. and 
John’s disciples. In Mt. the latter only. 
If the Pharisees and scribes were the 
spokesmen, their putting John’s dis- 
ciples first in stating the common practice 
-would be a matter of policy = John held 
in respect by Jesus, why then differ 
even from him ὃ---πυκνὰ (neuter plural, 
from πυκνός, dense), frequently.— 
δεήσεις ποιοῦνται, make prayers, on 
system ; added to complete the picture 
of an ascetic life; cf. ii. 37; referred to 
again in xi. 1; probably the question 
really concerned only fasting, hence 
omitted in the description of the life of 
the Jesus-circle even in Τ.Κ.---ἐσθίουσιν 
καὶ πίνονσι, eat and drink; on the 
days when we fast, making no distinction 
of days.—Ver. 34. μὴ δύνασθε... 
ποιῆσαι νησ., can ye make them fast? 
-In Mt. and Mk., can they fast? Lk.’s 
form of the question points to the futility 
of prescriptions in the circumstances. 
The Master could not make His dis- 
ciples fast even if He wished.—Ver. 35. 
καὶ ὅταν: Mt. and Mk. place the καὶ 
before τότε in the next clause. Lk.’s 
arrangement throws more emphasis on 
ἡμέραι: there will come days, and when, 
etc. The καὶ may be explicative ( = et 
guidem, Bornemann), or it may intro- 
duce the apodosis.—érav ἀπαρθῇ, the 
subjunctive with ἂν in a relative clause 
teferring to a probable future event. 

Vv. 36-39. Relative parabolic Logia.— 
Έλεγε . . . ὅτι: an editorial introduction 
to the parabolic sayings. The first of 
these, as given by Lk., varies in form 
from the version in the parallels, suggests 


somewhat different ideas, and is in itself 
by no means clear. Much depends on 
whether we omit or retain σχίσας in 
the first clause. If, with S8BDL, we re- 
tain it, the case put is: a piece cut out 
of a new garment to patch an old one, the 
evil results being: the new spoiled, and 
the old patched with the new piece pre- 
senting an incongruous appearance (ov 
συμφωνήσει). If, with AC, etc., we 
omit σχίσας, the case put may be: a 
new piece not cut out of a new garment, 
but a remnant (Hahn) used to patch an 
old, this new piece making a rent in the 
old garment; τὸ καινὸν in second clause 
not object of, but nominative to, σχίσει, 
and the contrast between the new patch 
and old garment presenting a grotesque 
appearance. The objection to this latter 
view is that there is no reason in the 
case supposed why the new patch should 
make a rent. In Mt. and Mk. the 
patch is made with unfulled cloth, which 
will contract. But the remnant of cloth 
with which a new garment is made 
would not be unfulled, and it would not 
contract. The sole evil in that case 
would bea piebald appearance. On the 
whole it seems best to retain σχίσας, 
and to render τὸ καινὸν σχίσει, he (the 
man who does so foolish a thing) will 
trend the new. Kypke suggests as an 
alternative rendering: the new is rent, 
taking σχίζει intransitively, of which use 
he cites an instance from the Testament 
of the twelve patriarchs. The sense on 
this rendering remains the same.—Ver. 
37. The tradition of the second logion: 
seems to have come down to Lk.’s time 
without variation; at all events he gives 


500 


ἐπίβλημα τὸ ἀπὸ τοῦ καινοῦ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


V. 37—39- 


37- καὶ οὐδεὶς βάλλει οἶνον νέον eis 


ἀσκοὺς παλαιούς: εἰ δὲ µήγε, ῥήξει ὁ νέος οἶνος 1 τοὺς ἀσκούς, καὶ 
αὐτὸς ἐκχυθήσεται, καὶ οἱ ἀσκοὶ ἀπολοῦνται: 38. ἀλλὰ οἶνον νέον 
εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς βλητέον, καὶ ἀμφότεροι συντηροῦνται.” 39. καὶ 
οὐδεὶς πιὼν παλαιὸν εὐθέως Σ θέλει vow: λέγει γάρ, Ὁ παλαιὸς 


χρηστότερός * ἐστιν. 


1 © otwos ο νεος in BCDL al. 


2 kat apd. σνντηρ. omitted in BL 1, 33 al. cop. (Tisch., W.H.); an addition 


from Mt. 
3 Omit ενθεως S$BCL minusc. cop. 


«χρηστος in $BL cop. D and some western codd. of vet. Lat. omit this verse. 


it substantially as in parallels. The diffi- 
culty connected with this parabolic word 
is not critical or exegetical, but scientific. 
The question has been raised: could 
even new, tough skins stand the process 
of fermentation? and the suggestion 
made that Jesus was not thinking at 
all of fermented, intoxicating wine, but 
of “ must,’ a non-intoxicating beverage, 
which could be kept safely in new 
leather bottles, but not in old skins, 
which had previously contained ordinary 
wine, because particles of albuminoid 
matter adhering to the skin would set 
up fermentation and develop gas with an 
enormous pressure. On this vide Farrar 
(C. G. T., Excursus, III.).—Ver. 38 gives 
the positive side of the truth answering 
to Mt. ix. 17b, only substituting the 
verbal adjective βλητέον for βάλλονσιν. 
—Ver. 39. The thought in this verse is 
peculiar to Lk. It seems to be a genial 
apology for conservatism in religion, 
with tacit reference to John and his 
disciples, whom Jesus would always 
treat with consideration. They loved 
the old wine of Jewish piety, and did 
not care for new ways. They found it 
good (χρηστός), so good that they did not 
wish even to taste any other, and could 
therefore make no comparisons. (Hence 
χρηστὸς preferable to χρηστότερος in 
Des Ἐκ This saying is every way 
worthy of Christ, and it was probably 
one of Lk.’s finds in his pious quest for 
traditions of the Personal Ministry. 

With reference to the foregoing para- 
bolic words, drawn from vesture and 
wine, Hahn truly remarks that they 
would be naturally suggested through 
association of ideas by the figure of a 
wedding feast going before. Bengel 
hints at the same thought: ‘ parabolam 
a vesie, a vino; inprimis opportunam 
convivio”’. 


SaBBATIC CONFLICTS. 
THE APOSTLES. THE SERMON ON THE 
Mount.—Vv. 1-5. The ears of corn 
(Mt. xii. 1-8, Mk. ii. 23-28).—év σαββάτῳ: 
Mk. makes no attempt to locate this in- 
cident in his history beyond indicating 
that it happened on Sabbath. Mt. uses 
a phrase which naturally suggests tem- 
poral sequence, but to which in view of 
what goes before one can attach no 
definite meaning. Lk. on the other 
hand would seem to be aiming at very 
great precision if the adjective qualifying 
caPBatrw—Sevteporpatw, were genuine. 
But it is omitted in the important group 
NBL, and in other good documents, 
and this fact, combined with the ex- 
treme unlikelihood of Lk.’s using a word 
to which it is now, and must always have 
been, impossible to attach any definite 
sense, makes it highly probable that 
this word is simply a marginal gloss, 
which found its way, like many others, 
into the text. How the gloss arose, and 
what it-meant for its author or authors, 
it is really not worth while trying to con- 
jecture, though such attempts have been 
made. Vide Tischendorf, N. T., ed. 
vili., for the critical history of the word. 
---ἤσθιον, ate, indicating the purpose of 
the plucking, with Mt. Mk. omits this, 
vide notes there.—wWoeyovtes τ. χ., 
rubbing with their hands; peculiar to 
Lk., indicating his idea of the fault (or 
that of the tradition he followed) ; 
rubbing was threshing on a small scale, 
an offence against one of the many 
minor rules for Sabbath observance. 
This word occurs here only in N. Τ., 
and is not classical—Ver. 2. tivés: 
more exact than Mt. and Mk., who say 
the Pharisees generally, but not neces- 
sary to make their meaning clear. Of 
course it was only some of the class.— 
Ver. 3. οὐδὲ, for Mk.’s οὐδέποτε and 


Ομαρτεε VI. 


VI. τ---δ. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

VI. τ. ἘΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτεροπρώτω } διαπορεύεσθαν 
αὐτὸν διὰ τῶν ” σπορίµων' καὶ ἔτιλλον of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ τοὺς 
στάχυας, καὶ ἤσθιονὸ Ψώχοντες ταῖς χερσί. 2. τινὲς δὲ τῶν 
Φαρισαίων εἶπον αὐτοῖς, “Ti ποιεῖτε ὃ οὐκ ἔξεστι ποιεῖν ἐν 
τοῖς σάββασι; 3. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
“ O58e τοῦτο ἀνέγνωτε, ὃ ἐποίησε Δαβίδ, ὁπότε ὃ ἐπείνασεν αὐτὸς καὶ 
ot pet αὐτοῦ ὄντεςτ; 4. ὣς ὃ εἰσῆλθεν eis τὸν οἶκον τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ 
τοὺς ἄρτους τῆς προθέσεως ἔλαβε, καὶ ἔφαγε, καὶ ἔδωκε καὶ 
τοῖς μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ, οὓς οὐκ ἔξεστι φαγεῖν εἰ μὴ µόνους τοὺς ἱερεῖς; 
5. Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, '' Ὅτι 10 κύριός ἐστιν ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ 


σοι 


τοῦ σαββάτου.” Ἡ 


1 S9BL 33 al. omit δευτεροπρωτω. Vide below. 


2 S8BL al. omit των (from parall.). 


3 και ησθιον τους σταχυας in BCL (W.H.; Tisch.=T.R. with 9). 

4 Omit αυτοις BCL minusc. a, c, e, cop. 

5 B omits ποιειν, and S$BL omit ev (W-H. omit both). 

6 ore in S$BCDL minusc. (W.H.; Tisch. has οποτε with less weighty witnesses, 


vide below). 


7 Omit οντες with BDL 33 al. (W.H.). 
8 B omits ws (W.H. in brackets), D also, reading εισελθων. 
9 For ελαβε και BCLX 33 have λαβων, and BL omit και after εδωκα, 


10 $B 1, 131 aeth. omit οτι (W.H.),. 


1 του σαβ., without και, before ο υ. τ. av. in $B cop. aeth. (W.H.). 


(Tisch.). 


Mt.’s οὐκ = not even; have ye so little 
understood the spirit of the O. T.? (De 
Wette). The word might be analysed 
into ov, δὲ, when it will mean: but have 
ye not then read this? So Hofmann, 
Nésgen, Hahn.—émére, here only in 
N. T., if even here, for many good 
MSS. have ὅτε (W.H.).—Ver. 4. Lk. 
contents himself with the essential fact: 
hunger, overruling a positive law con- 
cerning the shewbread. No reference 
to the high priest, as in Mk., and no 
additional instance of the Sabbath law 
superseded by higher interests, as in 
Mt. (xii. 5). The controversy no longer 
lives for him, and his accounts are apt 
to be colourless and secondary.—Ver. 5. 
καὶ ἔλεγεν : in Lk. this important logion 
about the Son of Man’s Lordship over 
the Sabbath is simply an external annex 
to what goes before = and He said: 
instead of arising out of and crowning 
the argument, as in Mt., and partly in 
Mk., though the latter uses the same 
phrase in introducing the logion peculiar 
to him about the Sabbath being made 
forman. If Lk. had Mk. before him, 


ΡΕ Ε.Ε. 


how could he omit so important a word ? 
Perhaps because it involved a contro- 
versial antithesis not easily intelligible 
to Gentiles, and because the Lordship 
of the Son of Man covered all in his 
view. How did he and his readers 
understand that Lordship ? 

Vv. 6-11. The withered hand (Mt. 
xii. 9-14, Mk. iii. 1-6).—Ver. 6. év 
ἑτέρῳ σαββάτῳ: simply intended to in- 
dicate that the following incident, like 
the one going before, happened on a 
Sabbath. Observe Lk. uses here, as in 
vi. 1, 5, the singular for the Sabbath.— 
τὴν συν.: the article here might point 
to a particular synagogue, as in Mt., or 
Ρερεπετῖς.-- διδάσκειν, present, εἰσελθεῖν, 
aorist: the entering an act, the preach- 
ing continuous. He was preaching 
when the following happened.—xai 4 
χεὶρ: by comparison with Mt. and Mk. 
Lk. is here paratactic and Hebraistic 
in construction. But Palairet, against 
Grotius emphasising the Hebraism, cites 
from Aelian, Hist. Anim. (lib. xii., ο. 24): 
ἐν τῇ θαλάττῃ τῇ ἜἘρυθρῷ ἰχθὺς γίνεται, 
καὶ ὄνομα αὐτῷ ὑγρὸς φοῖνιξ.--ἡ δεξιὰ, 


502 


KATA AOYKAN νι. 


6. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ καὶ] ἐν ἑτέρῳ σαββάτῳ εἰσελθεῖν αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν 
συναγωγὴν καὶ διδάσκειν: καὶ ἦν ἐκεὶ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ 
ἡ δεξιὰ ἦν ξηρά. 7. παρετήρουν ὃ δὲ αὐτὸν of γραμματεῖς καὶ ot 
Φαρισαῖοι, εἰ ἐν τῷ σαββάτω θεραπεύσει" ἵνα εὕρωσι κατηγορίαν ὅ 
αὐτοῦ. 8. αὐτὸς δὲ ᾖδει τοὺς διαλογισμοὺς αὐτῶν, καὶ εἶπε τῷ 
ἀνθρώπω ὃ τῷ ξηρὰν ἔχοντι τὴν χεῖρα, ““Ἔγειραι,” καὶ στῆθι εἰς τὸ 
μέσον. “O δὲδ ἀναστὰς ἔστη. 9g. Εἶπεν οὖν» & ᾿Ιησοῦς πρὸς. 
αὐτούς, ''Ἐπερωτήσω 0 ὑμᾶς, τί ἔξεστι τοῖς σάββασιν, 11 ἀγαθοποιῆσαι 
Wuxi σῶσαι ἢ ἀπολέσαι; 10. Καὶ περιβλεψά- 
µενος πάντας αὐτούς, εἶπε τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ,]” “΄Ἔκτεινον τὴν χεῖρά σου.” 
Ὁ δὲ ἐποίησεν οὕτω.” καὶ ἀποκατεστάθη 14 ἡ χεὶρ αὐτοῦ ὑγιὴς ὡς ἡ 
ἄλλη 15 
ἀλλήλους, τί ἂν ποιήσειαν 16 τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


ἢ κακοποιῆσαι ; 


II. αὐτοὶ δὲ ἐπλήσθησαν ἀνοίας: καὶ διελάλουν πρὸς. 


1 Omit και Δ9ΒΙ, min. 


2 ανθ. εκει in NBL 33 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


δ παρετηρουντο in ABDL 33 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 Qeparrever in ΔΑΡΙ, (Tisch., W.H., text). 


Τ.Ε. = Β (W.H. πιατρ.). 


5 κατηγορειν αυτου in 48 (D -γορησαι). 
6 ειπεν δε τω ανδρι in ΔΝ ΒΙ, 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 εγειρε in very many uncials. 
9 For ουν BDL 33 al. have δε. 


® For ο δε BDL have και, 
10 επερωτω in NBL. 


1 SYBDL have ει for τι, and τω σαββατω for τοις σαββασιν. 


13 αυντω in B and many other uncials. 
19 Omit ουντω BLA 33. 


T.R. = NDL 33. 


14 απεκατεσταθη in ADL al. fl., but B has αποκ. 


18 Omit vytys . .. 


αλλη (from Mt.) with NBL. 


16 ποιησαιεν in BLA 33 al. pl. (Tisch., W.H.). 


the right hand. This particular peculiar 
to Lk., with the Hebrew style, proves, 
some think (Godet, Hahn), a source dis- 
tinct from Mt. or Mk. Not necessarily. 
It may be an inference by Lk., added to 
magnify the beneficence of the miracle. 
The right hand the working hand, the 
privation great, the cure the more 
valuable-—Ver. 7. παρετηροῦντο, they 
kept watching, in a sly, furtive manner, 
ex obliquo et occulto, Bengel on Mk.—et 
θεραπεύει, whether He is going to heal, 
if that is to be the way of it.—Ver. 8. 
ἤδει: a participle might have been ex- 
pected here = He knowing their thoughts 
said, etc.—éyerpe καὶ στῆθι, etc.: this 
command was necessary to bring the 
matter under the notice of the audience 
present, who as yet knew nothing of the 
thoughts of the Pharisees, and possibly 
were not aware that the man_ with 
the withered hand was present.—Ver. 9. 
ἀγαθοποιῆσαι, κακοποιῆσαι: on the 
meaning of these words and the 


issue raised vide on Mk.—Ver. το. 
περιβλεψάμµενος. Lk. borrows this word 
from Mk., but omits all reference to the 
emotions he ascribes to Jesus: anger 
mixed with pity. He looks round merely 
waiting for an answer to His pointed 
question. None being forthcoming, He 
proceeds to heal: “qui tacet, con- 
sentit,’”” Bornemann.—Ver. 11. dvolas: 
they were filled with senseless anger. 
They were ‘‘ mad” at Jesus, because He 
had broken the Sabbath, as they con- 
ceived it, in a way that would make Him 
popular: humanity and _preternatural 
power combined.—rt ἂν ποιήσαιεν: ἂν 
with the optative in an indirect question, 
in Lk. only, following classic usage. 
This combination of occasional classicism 
with frequent Hebraism is curious. It 
is noticeable that Lk. does not impute 
murderous intentions to the opponente 
of Jesus at this stage, nor combination 
with politicians to effect truculent designs. 
(vide Mk. iii. 6). 


6—17. 


EYATTEAION 


593 


12. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταύταις, ἐξῆλθεν } ets τὸ ὄρος 
προσεύξασθαι’ καὶ ἦν διανυκτερεύων ἐν τῇ προσευχῆ τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
13. καὶ ὅτε ἐγένετο ἡμέρα, προσεφώνησε τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ " 
καὶ ἐκλεξάμενος ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν δώδεκα, οὓς καὶ ἀποστόλους ὠνόμασε, 
14. Σίμωνα ὃν καὶ ὠνόμασε Πέτρον, καὶ ᾽Ανδρέαν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, 
᾽άκωβον 3 καὶ Ιωάννην, Φίλιππον καὶ Βαρθολομαῖον, 15. Ματθαῖον 
καὶ Θωμᾶν, ᾿Ιάκωβον τὸν τοῦ ὃ ᾽Αλφαίου καὶ Σίμωνα τὸν καλούμενον 
Ζζηλωτήν, 16. ᾿Ιούδαν ᾿Ιακώβου, καὶ ᾿Ιούδαν ᾿Ισκαριώτην, ὃς καὶ 


ἐγένετο προδότης: 


17. καὶ καταβὰς per αὐτῶν, ἕστη ἐπὶ τόπου 


πεδινοῦ, καὶ ὄχλος ὅ μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ πλῆθος πολὺ τοῦ λαοῦ ἀπὸ 


1 εξελθειν αυτον in ΜΒΡΙ.. 


2 N8BDL have και before laxwBov, and there is MS. authority for και before 
every name (Tisch., W.H.: και in brackets before lax. Αλφ., omitted there only in 


B, probably by oversight). 
3 Omit τον του NBL 33. 


Vv. 12-19. On the hill (Mt. iv. 24-25, 
x. 2-4; Mk. iii. 7-19).—Ver. 12. ἐν ταῖς 
ἡμέραις ταύταις: a vague expression, 
but suggestive of some connection with 
foregoing encounters.—égeA@civ, went 
out; whence not indicated, probably 
from a town (Capernaum?) into the 
solitude of the mountains.—eis τὸ ὄρος: 
as in Mt. v. i. and Mk, iii. 13, to the 
hill near the place where He had been. 
---προσεύξασθαι, to pray, not in Mk. ; 
might be taken for granted. But Lk. 
makes a point of exhibiting Jesus as a 
devotional Model, often praying, and 
especially at critical times in His life. 
The present is viewed as a _ very 
special crisis, hence what follows.—jnv 
διανυκτερεύων, etc., He was spending 
the whole night in prayer to God; 
διανυκτερεύων occurs here only in N. T. 
---τοῦ θεοῦ is genitive objective : prayer of 
which God is the object ; but if προσευχὴ 
were taken as = a place for prayer in 
the open air, as in Acts xvi. 13, we 
should get the poetic idea of the 
proseucha of God—the mountains !|—Ver. 
13. τοὺς μαθητὰς, the disciples, of 
whom a considerable number have 
gathered about Jesus, and who have 
followed Him to the hill.—amoarodous, 
Apostles, used by Lk. in the later sense, 
here and elsewhere. The word is more 
frequent in his Gospel than in Mt. and 
Mk. (six times in Lk., once in Mt., twice 
in Mk.).—Ver. 14. Σίμωνα: here 
follows the list much the same as in Mt. 
and Mk. Lk., though he has already 
called Simon, Peter (v. 8), here 
mentions that Jesus gave him the name. 


4 Omit και NBL. 


5 oxAos πολυς in NBL. 


In the third group of four Judas Jacobi 
takes the place of Thaddaeus in Mk. 
and Lebbaeus in Mt. and Simon the 
Kananite is called Simon the Zealot. 
Of Judas Iscariot it is noted that he 
became a traitor, ‘turned traitor” 
(Field, Ot. Νογ.).---προδότης has no 
article, and therefore should not be 
rendered the traitor as in A. V. and R. V. 
When the verb is used it is always 
wapadiSdévar.—Ver. 17. καταβὰς, de- 
scending, with the Twelve, suggesting 
descent to the foot of the hills, the plain 
below. Yet the expression τόπον 
πεδινοῦ is peculiar; hardly what we 
should expect if the reference were to 
the plain beside the lake; rather sugges- 
tive of a flat space lower down the hill. 
---πεδινὸς, here only in N. T. The 
descent takes place in order to the 
delivery of a discourse which, with the 
choice of the Apostles, constitutes the 
occasion with reference to which Jesus 
had spent the night in prayer. The 
audience consists of three classes 
separately named (1) the Twelve, (2) the 
company of disciples described as an 
ὄχλος πολὺς, (3) a multitude (πλῆθος) 
gathered from a wide area. This is the 
same multitude from which in Mk.’s 
narrative Jesus escaped to the hill, 
taking His disciples with Him, to get 
rest, and presumably to devote some 
leisure time to their instruction. Of 
this desire to escape from the crowd, so 
apparent in Mk., there is no trace in 
Lk. In indicating the sources of this 
great human stream Lk. omits Galilee 
as superfluous, mentions Judaea and 


‘ 


504 


KATA AOYKAN 


VI. 


πάσης τῆς Ιουδαίας καὶ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ τῆς παραλίου Τύρου καὶ 
Σιδῶνος, ot ἦλθον ἀκοῦσαι αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἰαθῆναι ἀπὸ τῶν νόσων αὐτῶν, 
18. καὶ οἱ ὀχλούμενοι ὑπὸ] πνευμάτων ἀκαθάρτω», καὶ 3 ἐθεραπεύοντο. 
10. καὶ was ὁ ὄχλος ἐζήτειὃ ἅπτεσθαι αὐτοῦ: ὅτι δύναμις wap’ 
αὐτοῦ ἐξήρχετο, καὶ ἰᾶτο πάντας. 

20. Καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπάρας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ cis τοὺς μαθητὰς 
αὐτοῦ ἔλεγε, “΄ Μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοί, ὅτι ὑμετέρα ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία 


τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
µακάριοι ot κλαίοντες νῦν, 


41. µακάριοι οἱ πεινῶντες νῦν, ὅτι χορτασθήσεσθε. 


ὅτι Ὑελάσετε. 22. µακάριοί ἐστε, 


1 ενοχλουµενοι απο in ΔΝΑΡΒΙ, (D has απο). 


2 xat omitted in RABDL 33. 


Jerusalem, passing over Idumaea and 
Peraea (Mk. iii. 8), and winds up with 
Tyre and Sidon, defining the territory 
there whence people came by the ex- 
pression τῆς παραλίου (χώρας under- 
stood), the sea-coast. The people come 
from all these places to hear Jesus 
(ἀκοῦσαι αὐτοῦ) in the first place, as if 
in expectation of a great discourse, and 
also to be healed. The eagerness to get 
healing even by touch, of which Mk. 
gives so graphic a picture (ili. 10), is 
faintly indicated by ἐζήτουν (ἐζήτει, 
T. R.).—Ver. 19. δύναμις may be 
nominative both to ἐξήρχετο and to ἰᾶτο 
(A. V. and R. V.), or we may render: 
** power went forth from Him and He 
healed all”, 

Vv. 20-49. The Sermon (Mt. v.-vii.). 
That it is the same sermon as Mt. 
reports in chapters v.-vii. may be re- 
garded as beyond discussion. How, 
while the same, they came to be so 
different, is a question not quite easy to 
answer. There probably was addition 
to the original utterance in the case of 
Mt., and there was almost certainly 
selection involving omission in the case 
of Lk.’s version, either on his part or on 
the part of those who prepared the text 
he used. Retouching of expression in 
the parts common to both reports is, of 
course, also very conceivable. Asit stands 
in Lk. the great utterance has much 
more the character of a popular discourse 
than the more lengthy, elaborate version 
of Mt. In Mt. it is didache, in Lk. 
kerygma—a discourse delivered to a 
great congregation gathered for the 
purpose, with the Apostles and disciples 
in the front benches so to speak, a dis- 
course exemplifying the “words of 
grace” (iv. 22) Jesus was wont to speak, 
the controversial antithesis (Mt. v. 17- 


Σεζητονν in NBL. Τ.Ε. a correction. 


48) eliminated, and only the evangelic 
passages retained; a sermon serving at 
once as a model for ‘‘ Apostles '’ and as 
a gospel for the million. 

Vv. 20-26. First part of the discourse : 
Beatitudes and Woes (Mt. v. 1-12).— 
Ver. 20. éwdpas τ. ὀφ.: in Lk. the 
Preacher lifts up His eyes upon His 
audience (τ. μαθητὰς, who are them- 
selves a crowd), in Mt. He opens His 
mouth ; both expressions introducing a 
solemn set discourse. Lk.’s phrase 
suggests a benignant look, answering to 
the nature of the utterance.—paxdpvror : 
Lk. has only four Beatitudes, of which 
the poor, the hungry, the weeping, the 
persecuted are the objects; the sorrows 
not the activities of the children of the 
kingdom the theme.—rrwyot, πεινῶντες, 
κλαίοντες are to be taken literally as 
describing the social condition of those 
addressed. They are characteristics ο. 
those who are supposed to be children of 
the kingdom, not (as in Mt.) conditions 
of entrance. The description corresponds 
to the state of the early Church. It is 
as if Jesus were addressing a church 
meeting and saying: Blessed are ye, my 
brethren, though poor, etc., for in the 
Kingdom of God, and its blessings, 
present and prospective, ye have ample 
compensation. Note the use of the 
second person. In Mt. Jesus speaks 
didactically in the third person. Christ’s 
words: are adapted to present circum- 
stances, but it is not mecessary to 
suppose that the adaptation proceeds 
from an ebionitic circle, ascetic in spirit 
and believing poverty to be in itself a 
passport to the kingdom, and riches the 
way to perdition. 

Vv. 22, 23. In the corresponding 
passage in Mt. there is first an objective 
didactic statement about the persecuted, 


18—28. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ὅταν µισήσωσιν ὑμᾶς οἱ ἄνθρωποι, καὶ ὅταν ἀφορίσωσιν ὑμᾶς, 
καὶ ὀνειδίσωσι, καὶ ἐκβάλωσι τὸ ὄνομα ὑμῶν ὡς πονηρόν, ἕνεκα 
23. χαίρετεὶ ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳα 
σκιρτήσατε" ἰδοὺ γάρ, ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ 


τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 
καὶ 
κατὰ ταῦτα” γὰρ ἐποίουν τοῖς προφήταις of πατέρε αὐτῶν. 
24. Πλὴν οὐαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς πλουσίοις, ὅτι ἀπέχετε τὴν παράκλησι»ν 
ὑμῶν. 25. οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, ot ἐμπεπλησμένοι,Σ ὅτι πεινάσετε. 
ἡμῖν, οἱ γελῶντες νῦν, ὅτι πενθήσετε καὶ κλαύσετε. 


οὖαὶ 
26. οὐαὶ ὑμῖν," 
ὅταν καλῶς ὑμᾶς εἴπωσι πάντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι’ κατὰ ταῦτα ὅ γὰρ 


595 


ἐποίουν τοῖς ψευδοπροφήταις οἱ πατέρες αὐτῶν. 


27. “Αλλ) ὑμῖν λέγω τοῖς ἀκούουσιν, ᾽Αγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς 
7 μ. Y Y xp 


ὑμῶν, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς, 28. εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρω- 


1 χαρητε in all uncials, 
3 NSBLE 33 al. add ννν to εμπεπλ. 
4 Omit υμιν in both places BLE. 
5 τα aura again in Ν΄ BD=E 33. 


then an expansion in the second person. 
Here all is in the second person, and the 
terms employed are such as suited the ex- 
perience of the early Christians, especially 
those belonging to the Jewish Church, 
suffering, at the hands of taeir unbelieving 
countrymen, wrong in the various forms 
indicated—hatred, separation, calumny, 
ejection.—_aopiowo.v may point either 
to separation in daily life (Keil, Hahn) 
or to excommunication from the syna- 
gogue (so most commentaries) = the 


Talmudic rt. 


one naturally finds the culminating evil 
of excommunication in the last clause— 
ἐκβάλωσιν τὸ 6. ὑ. = erasing the name 
from the membership of the synagogue. 
In the latter case this clause will rather 
point to the vile calumnies afterwards 
heaped upon the excommunicated. 
*“Absentium nomen, ut improborum 
hominum, differre rumoribus,’’ Grotius.— 
Ver. 23. σκιρτήσατε, leap for joy; the 
word occurs in i. 41, 44, and this and other 
terms found in the sermon have led some 
to infer that Lk. uses as his source a 
version of the discourse emanating from 
a Jewish-Christian circle. Vide the list 
of words in J. Weiss, Meyer, note, p. 
387. Vide also Feine, Vork. Uberlief. 

Vv. 24-26. πλὴν, but, used here 
adversatively, a favourite word with Lk.,’ 
suggesting therefore the hypothesis that 
he is responsible for the ‘* woes”’ follow- 
ing, peculiar to his version of the sermon. 
---ἀπέχετε, ye have in full; riches and 


In the former case 


27a αυτα in BD (Tisch., W.H.), 


Many more omit the second. 


nothing besides your reward (cf. Mt. vi. 
2).—Ver. 25. ἐμπεπλησμένοι, the sated, 
a class as distinct in character as the 
δεδιωγµένοι of Mt. ν. 10, on whom vide 
remarks there. Readers can picture the 
sated class for themselves.—Ver. 26. 
This woe is‘addressed, not to the rich 
and full without, but to the disciples 
within, and points out to them that to be 
free from the evils enumerated in ver. 
22 isnot a matter of congratulation, but 
rather a curse, as indicative of a dis- 
loyalty to the faith and the Master, which 
makes them rank with false prophets. 
Vv. 27-35. The law of love (Mt. v. 
38-48).—Ver. 27. ὑμῖν λέγω: Lk. here 
uses the phrase with which Mt. intro- 
duces each dictum of Jesus in opposition 
to the dicta of the scribes. But of the 
many dicta of the Lord reported in Mt. 
he has preserved only one, that relating 
to the duty of loving (Mt. v. 44). The 
injunction to love enemies is much 
weakened in force by omission of the 
antithesis: love neighbours and hate 
enemies. As if to compensate Lk. gives 
the precept twice, (1) as a general head 
under which to collect sayings culled 
from the section of the discourse omitted 
(Mt. v. 17-42), (2) as a protest against 
limiting love to those who love us (ver. 
35, cf. νετ. 32).---τοῖς ἀκούουσιν, to you 
who hear; a phrase by which the dis- 
course is brought back to the actual 
audience from the rich and the false 
disciples apostrophised in the preceding 
verses. It is an editorial phrase.— 


506 


KATA AOYKAN γι. 


at Pet. ib µένους ὑμῖν] nat? προσεύχεσθε iwép? τῶν "ἐπηρεαζόντων spas, 
10. 


29. τῷ τύπτοντί σε ἐπὶ τὴν σιαγόνα, πάρεχε καὶ τὴν ἄλλην: καὶ. 
ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντός σου τὸ ἱμάτιον, καὶ τὸν Χιτῶνα μὴ κωλύσῃς. 
30. παντὶ δὲ τῷ 4 αἰτοῦντί σε, δίδου: καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντος τὰ σά, 
μὴ ἀπαίτει. 31. καὶ καθὼς θέλετε ἵνα ποιῶσιν ὑμῖν ot ἄνθρωποι, 
καὶ ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε αὐτοῖς ὁμοίως. 32. καὶ εἰ ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἀγαπῶν- 
τας ὑμᾶς, ποία ὑμῖν χάρις ἐστί; Kat γὰρ of ἁμαρτωλοὶ τοὺς 
ἀγαπῶντας αὐτοὺς ἀγαπῶσι. 33. καὶδ ἐὰν ἀγαθοποιῆτε τοὺς 
ἀγαθοποιοῦντας ὑμᾶς, ποία ὑμῖν χάρις ἐστί; καὶ γὰρ ὃ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ 
τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσι. 34. καὶ ἐὰν δανείζητεἸ map ὧν ἐλπίζετε ἀπολα- 
βεῖνιὃ ποία ὑμῖν χάρις ἐστί; καὶ γὰρ οἱ ) ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἁμαρτωλοῖς 
δανείζουσιν, ἵνα ἀπολάβωσι τὰ ἴσα. 35. πλὴν ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς 


ὑμῶν, καὶ ἀγαθοποιεῖτε, καὶ δανείἵετε μηδὲν 10 ἀπελπίζοντες: καὶ 
μη 


1 ypas in NBDE vet. Lat. 6. 
2 Omit και SBDLE al. 

4 Omit Se τω NB. 

6 Omit γαρ NB. 

8λαβειν in ΝΒΙ.Ξ. 


υμιν is a correction to classical usage, 
ὃ περι in $SBLE. 
5 $B have και γαρ εαν (Tisch., W.H., in brackets). 
7 δανισητε in SBE (Tisch., W.H.). 
* SBLE omit yap, and many uncials omit ον. 


10 unSev is the best attested reading (ABLA al., W.H. in brackets); pnSeva in 


NEN (Tisch.). 


καλῶς ποιεῖτε, etc.: Lk., in contrast 
with Mt. (true text), enlarges here, as if 
to say: you must love in,every conceiv- 
able case, even in connection with the 
most aggravated evil treatment. In the 
clause enjoining prayer for such as have 
done wrong Lk. substitutes ἐπηρεαζόντων 
(νετ. 28) for Mt.’s διωκόντων = those 
who insult you, the people it is hardest 
to pray for. Persecution may be very 
fierce, at the prompting of conscience, 
yet respectful.—Ver. 29 = Mt. v. 39, 40 
with some changes: τύπτειν for ῥαπίζειν, 
παρέχειν for στρέφειν ; αἴροντος suggests 
the idea of robbery instead of legal pro- 
ceedings pointed at by Mt.’s κριθῆναι ; 
ipatiov and ἈΧιτῶνα change places, 
naturally, as the robber takes first the 
upper garment; for Mt.’s ἄφες Lk. puts 
μὴ κωλύσῃς = withhold not (for the 
construction twa ἀπό τινος κωλύειν, 
which Bornemann thought unexampled, 
vide Gen. xxiii. 6, Sept.).—Ver. 30. Lk. 
passes over Mt.’s instance of compulsory 
service (v. 41), perhaps because it would 
require explanation, or was not a 
practical grievance for his readers, and 
goes on to the duty of generous giving, 
which is to be carried the length of 
cheerfully resigning what is taken from 
us by force.—Ver. 31. Lk. brings in 


here the law of reciprocity (Mt. vii. 12), 
hardly in its proper place, as the change 
from singular to plural shows, but in 
sympathy with what goes before, though 
not quite in line, and therefore inserted 
at this point as the best place to be 
found for the golden rule. It seems to- 
be meant as a general heading for the 
particular hypothetical cases following = 
you would like men to love you, there- 
fore love them whether they love you or 
not, etc.—Ver. 32. Χάρις, here and in 
the following verses stands for Mt.’s 
μισθὸς, as if to avoid a word of legal 
sound and substitute an evangelical 
term instead. Yet Lk. retains μισθὸς in 
νετ. 23.-- Χάρις probably means not 
‘“‘thanks”” from men but favour from 
God. It is a Pauline word, and’ 
apparently as such in favour with Lk. 
Vide on iv. 22.--ἁμαρτωλοὶ here and in 
vv. 33, 34 for τελῶναι and ἐθνικοὶ in Mt., 
a natural alteration, but much weaken- 
ing the point; manifestly secondary.— 
Ver. 33. For Mt.’s salutation Lk. sub- 
stitutes doing good (ἀγαθοποιῆτε).---Ψετ. 
34. This example is robbed of its point 
if it be supposed that Lk. had an ascetic 
bias. If a man despise money there is 
no merit in lending without expecting’ 
repayment.—Ver. 35. wAnv, Oui, iz 


29-39. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


507 


A a ” @ 
ἔσται ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολύς, καὶ ἔσεσθε υἱοὶ toi! ὑψίστου: ὅτι 


ce > fae 2 , ‘ , 
αὐτὸς χρηστός ἐστιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ἀχαρίστους καὶ πονηρούς. 


36. γίνεσθε 


9 A , 
otv? Yoixtippoves, καθὼς καὶΣ 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν οἰκτίρμων éott. b here and 


47. καὶ μὴ κρίνετε, καὶ οὗ μὴ κριθῆτε. 
ἀπολύετε, καὶ ἀπολυθήσεσθε' 38. δίδοτε, 


οὐ μὴ καταδικασθῆτε. 


Jas. ν. 17 
μὴ καταδικάζετε, καὶ 


a c here only 
καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν ' µέτρον καλόν, * wemecpévoy καὶ * σεσαλευµένον ia Ν. Τ. 
καὶ" ἆ ὑπερεκχυνόμενον δώσουσιν eis τὸν κόλπον ὑμῶν. τῷ γὰρ : vi. 25). 
A a ere an ; 
αὐτῷ µέτρῳ ᾧ ὅ μετρεῖτε, ἀντιμετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν." in Joel ii. 


39. Εἶπε δὲδ παραβολὴν αὐτοῖς, '΄ Μήτι δύναται τυφλὸς τυφλὸν 


1 Omit του NABDLAE al. pl. 
3 Omit και BLE. 


2 Omit ουν NBDLE 33 al. 


4 S8BL omit first και and $$BDLE= the second; more expressive without. 


° For tow yap . . 
6 Se και in SBCDLE 33. 


opposition to all these hypothetical 
cases.—pydev ἀπελπίζοντες, '' hoping for 
nothing again,” A. V., is the meaning 
the context requires, and accepted by 
most interpreters, though the verb in 
later Greek means to despair, hence the 
rendering ‘‘never despairing”? in R. V. 
The reading µηδένα ἀπ. would mean: 
causing no one to despair by refusing 
aid.—viot Ὑψίστον, sons of the Highest, 
a much inferior name to that in Mt. In 
Lk. to be sons of the Highest is the 
veward of noble, generous action; in 
Mt. to be like the Father in heaven is 
set before disciples as an object of 
ambition.—xpyords, kind; by generalis- 
ing Lk. misses the pathos of Mt.’s con- 
crete statement (ver. 45), which is doubt- 
less nearer the original. 

Vv. 36-38.  Mercifulness inculcated. 
God the pattern.—Ver. 36 corresponds 
to Mt. v. 48, which fitly closes the 
promulgation of the great law of love = 
be ye therefore perfect, as your Father in 
heaven is perfect (vide notes there). 
Lk. alters the precept both in its ex- 
pression (οἰκτίρμονες for τέλειοι), and in 
its setting, making it begin a new train 
of thought instead of winding up the 
previous one = be compassionate (otv 
omitted, BDL, etc.) as, etc.—the pre- 
cepts following being particulars under 
that σεπετα].---γίνεσθε, imperative, for 
the future in Μτ.---οἰκτίρμονες: a legiti- 
mate substitution, as the perfection in- 
culcated referred to loving enemies, and 
giving opportunity for setting forth the 
doctrine of God’s free grace.—xaas for 
Mt.’s ὡς, common in Lk. (twenty-eight 
times), witnessing to editorial revision.— 
6 πατὴρ ὑ.: without 6 οὐράνιος, which is 


.ω NBDLE 33 al. have w yap µετρω (Tisch., W.H.). 


implied in the epithet “the Highest” (ver. 
35)-—Ver. 37. In these special precepts 
it is implied throughout that God acts 
as we are exhorted to act. They give a 
picture of the gracious spirit of God.— 
καὶ, connecting the following precept as 
a special with a general. No καὶ in Mt. 
vii. 1, where begins a new division of 
the sermon. In Mt. the judging con- 
demned is referred to as a characteristic 
Pharisaic vice. Here it is conceived of 
as internal to the disciple-circle, as in 
James iv. 12.--ἀπολύετε, set free, as 
a debtor (Mt. xviii. 27), a prisoner, or 
an offender (τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἀπολυθῆναι, 
2 Macc. xii. 45).—Ver. 38. ῥδίδοτε: 
this form of mercy is suggested by Mt. 
vii. 2, év ᾧ µέτρῳφ μετρεῖτε, etc.: be 
giving, implying a constant habit, and 
therefore a generous nature.—pérpov 
καλὸν, good, generous measure ; these 
words and those which follow apply to 
man’s giving as well as to the recom- 
pense with which the generous giver 
shall be τεν/ατάεᾶ.-- πεπιεσµένον, etc., 
pressed down, shaken, and overflowing ; 
graphic epexegesis of good measure, all 
the terms applicable to dry goods, e.g., 
grain. Bengel takes the first as referring 
to dry (in avidis), the second to soft (in 
mollibus), the third to liquids (in liquidis). 
---κόλπον: probably the loose bosom of 
the upper robe gathered in at the waist, 
useful for carrying things (De Wette, 
Holtz., H. C., al.). It is implied that 
God gives so, e¢.g., “ plenteous τε- 
demption ” (Ps. cxxx. 7). 

Vv. 39-45. Proverbial lore.—Ver. 39. 
εἶπε δὲ: the Speaker is represented here 
as making a new beginning, the con- 
nection of thought not being apparent, 


508 


KATA AOYKAN VI. 


ὁδηγεῖν; οὐχὶ ἀμφότεροι eis βόθυνον πεσοῦνταιΣ; 40. οὐκ ἔστι 
μαθητὴς ὑπὲρ τὸν διδάσκαλον αὐτοῦ 3: κατηρτισµένος δὲ was ἔσται 
ὡς 6 διδάσκαλος αὐτοῦ. 41. τί δὲ βλέπεις τὸ κάρφος τὸ ἐν τῷ 
ὀφθαλμῷ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ σου, τὴν δὲ δοκὸν τὴν ἐν τῷ ἰδίω ὀφθαλμῷ οὐ 
κατανοεῖς; 42. ἢδ πῶς δύνασαι λέγειν τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, ᾿Αδελφέ, 
ἄφες ἐκβάλω τὸ κάρφος τὸ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ σου, αὐτὸς τὴν ἐν τῷ 
ὀφθαλμῷ σου δοκὸν οὗ βλέπων; ὑποκριτά, ἔκβαλε πρῶτον τὴν 
δοκὸν ἐκ τοῦ ὀφθαλμοῦ σου, καὶ τότε διαβλέψεις ἐκβαλεῖν τὸ 
κάρφος τὸ ἐν τῷ ὀφθαλμῷ τοῦ ἁδελφοῦ σου. 43. οὐ γάρ ἐστι 
δένδρον καλὸν ποιοῦν καρπὸν σαπρόν΄ οὐδὲ δένδρον σαπρὸν ποιοῦν 
καρπὸν καλόν. 44. ἕκαστον γὰρ δένδρον ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου καρποῦ 
γινώσκεται' οὗ γὰρ ἐξ ἀκανθῶν συλλέγουσι σῦκα, οὐδὲ ἐκ βάτου 
τρυγῶσι σταφυλήν.ὅ 45. ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ θησαυροῦ 
τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ προφέρει τὸ ἀγαθόν' καὶ ὁ πονηρὸς ἄνθρωπος 6 
ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ θησαυροῦ τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ ὃ προφέρει τὸ πονηρόν" 


ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ Ἰ περισσεύµατος τῆς Ἰ καρδίας λαλεῖ τὸ στόµα αὐτοῦ. 


Σαμπεσ. in BDL; πεσ. in CAE 33. 
5 Ἑ omits η. WY has πως δε. 


2 Omit αντου NBDLE 33. 


Most uncials = Τ.Ε. 


4 εκβαλειν at end of sentence in B 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


δσταφ. τρυγ. in SBCDLE 13, 33, 69. 


* kSBDL omit av@pwios and Ono. της καρδιας αντον (explanatory additions). 


7 SSABDE omit both articles. 


Grotius says plainly that there is no 
connection, and that Lk. has deemed it 
fitting to introduce here a Jogion that 
must have been spoken at another time. 
Mt. has a similar thought to that in ver. 
39, not in the sermon but in xv. 14.— 
τυφλὸς τυφλὸν: viewing the sermon as 
an ideal address to a church, this adage 
may apply to Christians trying to guide 
brethren in the true way (James v. 19), 
and mean that they themselves must 
know the truth.—Ver. 4ο. The con- 
nection here also is obscure; the adage 
might be taken as directed against the 
conceit of scholars presuming to criti- 
cise their teachers, which is checked by 
the reminder that the utmost height that 
can be reached by the fully equipped 
(κατηρτισµένος, a Pauline word, 1 Cor. 
i, το, of. 2 Tim. iii. 17, ἐξηρτισμένος) 
scholar is to be on a level with his 
teacher.—Ver. 41 introduces a thought 
which in Mt. stands in immediate con- 
nection with that in ver. 37 (Mt. vil. 1, 
2, 3). If the view of ver. 40, above 
suggested, be correct, then this and the 
mext verses may also be understood as 
referring still to the relations between 
teacher and taught in the Church, rather 


than to the vices ot the Pharisees, which 
in Lk.’s version of the sermon are very 
much left out of account. Censorious- 
ness is apt to be a fault of young con- 
verts, and doubtless it was rife enough 
in the apostolic age. On the parable of 
the mote and the beam vide on Mt. vii. 
3-5.—Ver. 42. ov βλέπων: this is one 
of the few instances in N. T. of par- 
ticiples negatived by ov. The ovin such 
cases may = μὴ, which in classical 
Greek has the force of a condition, οὐ 
being used only to state a fact (vide 
Burton, § 485).—Vv. 43-45. In Με. 
these parabolic sayings are connected 
with a warning against false prophets 
(Mt. vii. 15-19). Here the connection 
is not obvious, though the thread is pro- 
bably to be found in the word ὑποκριτά, 
applied to one who by his censorious- 
ness Claims to be saintly, yet in reality 
is a greater sinner than those he blames. 
This combination of saint and sinner is 
declared to be impossible by means of 
these adages.—Ver. 44. For τριβόλοι 
in Mt., Lk. puts βάτος = thorn bush, 
yubus, and for σνλλέγουσιν applied to 
both thorns and thistles in Mt., Lk. uses 
in connection with βάτου τρνγῶσιν, the 


40-- 49. VII. 1—2. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


599 


46. “Ti δέ µε καλεῖτε, Κύριε, Κύριε, καὶ of ποιεῖτε ἃ λέγω; 
47. πᾶς ὁ ἐρχόμενος πρός µε καὶ ἀκούων µου τῶν λόγων καὶ ποιῶν 


αὐτούς, ὑποδείξω ὑμῖν τίνι ἐστὶν ὅμοιος. 


48. ὅμοιός ἐστιν ἀνθρώπω 


οἰκοδομοῦντι οἰκίαν, ὃς ᾿ἔσκαψε καὶ ΄ ἑβάθυνε, καὶ ἔθηκε θεµέλιον ech. εἰ. δ; 


ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν’ πλημμύρας] δὲ γενομένης, προσέρρηξεν ὁ ποταμὸς si 
τῇ οἰκίᾳ ἐκείνῃ, καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσε σαλεῦσαι αὐτήν: τεθεμελίωτο γὰρ 


x 


Vi. 3. 
ere only 
Nor: 


ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν." 49. 6 δὲ ἀκούσας καὶ μὴ ποιήσας ὅμοιός ἐστιν 
ἀνθρώπῳ οἰκοδομήσαντι οἰκίαν ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν χωρὶς θεµελίου: Ff 
προσέρρήξεν 6 ποταμός, καὶ εὐθέως ἔπεσε, καὶ ἐγένετο τὸ ῥῆγμα 


τῆς οἰκίας ἐκείνης μέγα.” 


ΥΠ. 1. “ENE! δὲἁ ἐπλήρωσε πάντα τὰ ῥήματα αὐτοῦ eis τὰς 
ἀκοὰς τοῦ λαοῦ, εἰσῆλθεν eis Καπερναού. 2. Ἑκατοντάρχου δέ 


1 πληµμµνυρης in WBLE 33. 
2 For τεθ. yap... 
(-εισ-]θαι αυτην (Tisch., W.H.). 


. wetpav (from Mt.) BLE 33 have δια το καλως οικοδοµησ 


® συνεπεσεν in $BDL= 33 al., a stronger word = collapsed (Tisch., W.H.). 
‘ επειδη in ABC (Tisch., W.H., text) ; επει Se in SLE (W.H. πιατρ.). 


proper word for grape-gathering.—Ver. 
45. θησαυροῦ τῆς καρδίας: either, the 
treasure which is in the heart, or the 
treasure which the heart is (Hahn). In 
either case the sense is: as is the heart, 
so is the utterance. 

Ver. 46, introducing the epilogue, 
rather than winding up the previous train 
of thought, answers to Mt. vii. 21-23 ; 
here direct address (2nd person), there 
didactic (3rd person) ; here a pointed 
question, and paratactic structure as of 
an orator, in lively manner, applying his 
sermon, there a general statement as 
to what is necessary to admission into 
the Kingdom of Ἠεανεπ-- οὐ was 6 
λέγων, etc. 

Vv. 47-49. The epilogue (Mt. vii. 
24-27).—Ver. πᾶς 6 ἐρχόμενος, 
είο.: the style of address here corre- 
sponds to the idea of the discourse 
suggested by Lk.’s presentation through- 

. out, the historical Sermon on the Mount 
converted into an ideal sermon in a 
church = every one that cometh to me 
by becoming a Christian, and heareth 
my words generally, not these words in 
particular. — Ver. 48. ἔσκαψε καὶ 
ἐβάθυνε, dug, and kept deepening. A 
Hebraism, say Grotius and others = dug 
deeply. But Raphel produces an example 
from Xenophon of the same construction : 
σαφηνίζει τε καὶ ἀληθεύει for ἀληθῶς 
σαφηνίζει (Occonomict, cap. ΧΧ.).---πλημ- 
μύρης (from πίµπλημι, ἅπ. λεγ. in Ν,Τ.), 
a flood, ‘‘the sudden rush of a spate,” 


Farrar (C. G. T.); ‘ Hochwasser,” 
Weizsacker.--apooéppytev, broke against, 
here and in ver. 49 only, in N. T.— 
Ver. 49. ywpis θεµελίου, without a 
foundation ; an important editorial com- 
ment. The foolish builder did not make 
a mistake in choosing a foundation. 
His folly lay in not thinking of a founda- 
tion, but building at haphazard on the 
surface. Vide notes on Mt. for the 
characteristics of the two builders.—ré 
ῥῆγμα (πτῶσις in Mt.), the collapse, 
here only in N. T. This noun is used 
to answer to the verb προσέρρηξεν. 

The impression produced by the fore- 
going study is that Lk’s version of the 
Sermon on the Mount, while faithfully 
reproducing at least a part of our Lord’s 
teaching on the hill, gives us that teach- 
ing, not in its original setting, but 
readapted so as to serve the practical 
purposes of Christian instruction, either 
by Lk. or by some one before him. 

CuaPTerR VII. THE CENTURION OF 
CaPERNAUM. THE WiDow’s SON aT 
Nain. ΤΗΕ Baptist. IN THE House 
oF Simon.—Vv. 1-10. The Centurion of 
Capernaum (Mt. viii. 5-13).—Ver. 1. 
εἰς τὰς ἀκοὰς, into the ears = eis τὰ Ora 
in Sept. (Gen. xx. 8, 1. 4, Ex. x. 2). To 
show that it is not a Hebraism, Kypke 
cites from Dion. Hal.: eis τὴν ἁπάντων 
τῶν παρόντων ἀκοὴν.---εἴσῆλθεν, entered, 
not returned to, Capernaum.—Ver. 2. 
ὃς ἦν αὐτῷ ἔντιμος, who was dear to 
him ; though a slave, indicating that he 


510 


KATA AOYKAN 


VII. 


a (Ch. xiv. τινος δοῦλος κακῶς ἔχων Hpehde TedeuTav, ὃς ἦν αὐτῷ "ἔντιμος. 


8.) Phil 


ii. a9. 1 3. ἀκούσας δὲ περὶ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ἀπέστειλε πρὸς αὐτὸν πρεσβυτέρους 


Pet. ii. 4, 6. 


τῶν Ιουδαίων, ἐρ τῶν αὗτόν, ὅπως ἐλθὼν διασώσῃ τὸν δοῦλον αὐτοῦ. 


4. ol δὲ παραγενόµενοι πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν παρεκάλουν } αὐτὸν σπου- 
δαίως, λέγοντες, '' Ὅτι ἄξιός ἐστιν ᾧ παρέξει 3 τοῦτο: 5. ἀγαπᾷ γὰρ 


” lol - 
τὸ ἔθνος ἡμῶν, καὶ τὴν συναγωγὴν αὐτὸς ᾠκοδόμησεν ἡμῖν. 
δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐπορεύετο σὺν αὐτοῖς. 


6. Ὁ 
ἤδη δὲ αὐτοῦ οὐ μακρὰν ἀπέχοντος 


ἀπὸ 5 τῆς οἰκίας, ἔπεμψε πρὸς αὐτὸν ” ὁ ἑκατόνταρχος Φφίλους,ὸ λέγων 


~ , 
αὐτῷ,δ “' Κύριε, μὴ σκύλλου : οὐ γάρ εἶἰμι ἱκανὸς Ἰ ἵνα ὑπὸ τὴν στέγην 


pou εἰσέλθῃς: 7. διὸ οὐδὲ ἐμαυτὸν ἠξίωσα πρός σε ἐλθεῖν: ἀλλὰ 


εἰπὲ λόγῳ, καὶ ἰαθήσεται ὃ 


ὁ Taig µου. 


δ. καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπός 


3 ee) Fy ΄ ό ” ee Sra. a la ‘ 
ειµιν υπο ἐξουσίαν τασσοµενος, εχων υπ εµαυτον στρατιώταςξ, και 


λέγω τούτω, Πορεύθητι, καὶ πορεύεται" καὶ ἄλλω, Ἔρχου, καὶ 


19ο in BC al. 
88D min. omit απο (Tisch.). 

5 φιλους before ο ex. in NBCLE 33 al. 
Tux. expe in SB. 


was a humane master. Lk. has also in 
view, according to his wont, to enhance 
the value of the benefit conferred: the 
life of a valued servant saved.—Ver. 3. 
ἀκούσας: reports of previous acts of 
healing had reached him.—éméovreune : 
there is no mention of this fact or of the 
second deputation (in ver. 6) in Mt.’s 
version. Lk. is evidently drawing from 
another source, oral or written.— 
πρεσβυτέρους τῶν Ἰουδαίων, elders of 
the Jews; the reference is probably to 
elders of the city rather than to rulers of 
ihe synagogue. From the designation 
‘of the Jews” it may be inferred that 
the centurion was a Pagan, probably in 
the service of Antipas.—8.aceoq, bring 
safely through the disease which 
threatened life.—Ver. 4. σπονδαίως, 
earnestly ; though he was a Pagan, they 
Jews, for reason given.—Gé.os © παρέξῃ, 
for ἄξιος ἵνα αὐτῷ w. παρέξῃ is the 
2nd person singular, future, middle, in a 
relative clause expressing purpose in- 
stead of the more usual subjunctive 
(vide Burton, § 318).—Ver. 5. ayawa 
yap, etc., he loveth our race; a philo- 
Jewish Pagan, whose affection for the 
people among whom he lived took the 
form of building a synagogue. Quite a 
credible fact, which could easily be 
ascertained. Herod built the temple. 
Vide Lightfoot on this.—Ver. 6. ἔπορ- 
σύετο: no hint of scruples on the part of 
Jesus, as in the case of the Syrophenician 
woman.—ov μακρὰν, not far, z.¢., quite 


ηρωτων in DLE minusc. (Tisch.). ? παρεξη in NABCDLAE al. 


* Omit προς αυτον NB. 
6 S$ omits αυτω (Tisch.). 
® ante in BL. Τ.Ε. is from Με. 


near. Lk. often uses the negative with 
adjectives and adverbs to express strongly 
the positive. Hahn accumulates in- 
stances chiefly from Acts.—@fAovs : these 
also would naturally be Jews.—ixavos 
εἰμι ἵνα: here we have ἱκανὸς, followed 
by tva with subjunctive. In iii. 16 it 
is followed by the infinitive.—Ver. 7. 
εἰπὲ Ady, speak, {.ε., command, with a 
word.—Ver. 8. καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ: here 
follows the great word of the centurion 
reported by Lk. much asin Mt. But it 
seems a word more suitable to be spoken 
in propria persona than by deputy. It 
certainly loses much of its force by being 
given second hand. Lk. seems here to 
forget for the moment that the centurion 
is not supposed to be present. Schanz 
conjectures that he did come after all, 
and speak this word himself. On its 
import vide at Mt. viii. g—racodpevos : 
present, implying a constant state of 
subordination. 

Comparing the two accounts of this 
incident, it may be noted that Lk.’s 
makes the action of the centurion con- 
sistent throughout, as inspired by diffi- 
dent humility. In Mt. he has the 
courage to ask Jesus directly, yet he is 
too humble to let Jesus come to his 
house. In Lk. he uses intercessors, 
who show a geniality welcome to the 
irenic evangelist. Without suggesting 
intention, it may further be remarked 
that this story embodies the main 
features of the kindred incident of the 


318. 


ἔρχεται: καὶ τῷ δούλῳ µου, Ποίησον τοῦτο, καὶ ποιεῖ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


σ11 


9. ᾽Ακούσας 


- a a a 
δὲ ταῦτα 6 “Ingots ἐθαύμασεν adtév: καὶ στραφεὶς τῷ ἀκολουθοῦντι 
na 3 9 ες [αι > a 2 AY , , 
“αὐτῷ ὄχλῳ etre, “Adyw ὑμῖν, οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ ᾿Ισραὴλ τοσαύτην πίστιν 


2 35 
εὗρον. 
τὸν ἀσθενοῦντα ? δοῦλον ὑγιαίνοντα. 


10. Kat ὑποστρέψαντες οἱ πεμφθέντες eis τὸν οἶκον 1 εὗρον 


II. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῇ 3 ἑξῆς, ἐπορεύετοέ eis πόλιν καλουμένην 
x wh A , > A c . 3 asc , 5 om” 
Naty: καὶ συνεπορεύοντο αὐτῷ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ tkavol,® καὶ ὄχλος 


πολύς. 


12. ὡς δὲ ἤγγισε τῇ πύλῃ τῆς πόλεως, καὶ ἴἰδού, ἐξεκομίζετο 


τεθνηκώς, υἱὸς μονογενὴς δ τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ αὕτη ἦν χήρα: καὶ 


ὄχλος τῆς πόλεως ἱκανὸς Ἰ σὺν αὐτῇ. 


13. καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὴν 6 Κύριος 


1 εις τ. ο. before οι πεµφ. in BDL al. vet. Lat. (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 Omit ασθενουντα WBL. 


3 ev τω εξης in many MSS., including BL (W.H.). 
* erropev0y in NB 13, 69 (Tisch., W.H.). 


§ nov. νιος in BLE. 


Syrophenician woman, not reported 
by Lk. The excessive humility of the 
centurion = “we Gentile dogs”. The 
intercession of the elders = that of the 
disciples. The friendliness of the elders 
is an admonition to Judaists = this is 
the attitude you ought to take up towards 
Gentiles. All the lessons of the ‘‘ Syro- 
phenician woman ” are thus taught, while 
the one unwelcome feature of Christ’s 
refusal or unwillingness to help, which 
might seem to justify the Judaist, is 
eliminated. How far such considera- 
tions had an influence in moulding the 
tradition followed by Lk. it is impossible 
to say. Suffice it to point out that the 
narrative, as it stands, does double duty, 
and shows us :— 

τ. Gentile humility and faith. 

2. Jewish friendliness. 

3. Christ’s prompt succour, and ad- 
miration of great faith. 

Vv. 11-17. The son of the widow of 
Nain. In Lk. only.—év τῷ ἑξῆς (καιρῷ), 
in the following time, thereafter; vague. 
—év τῇ € would mean: on the following 
day (ἡμέρᾳ, understood), {.ε., the day 
after the healing of the centurion’s ser- 
vant in Capernaum. Hofmann defends 
this reading on the negative ground 
that no usage of style on the part of Lk. 
is against it, and that it better suits the 
circumstances. ‘*We see Jesus on the 
way towards the city of Nain on the 
north-western slope of the little Hermon, 
a day’s journey from Capernaum. It is 
expressly noted that His disciples, and, 
as txavot is well attested, in consider- 
bable numers, not merely the Twelve, 


T.R. = NCD (Tisch.). 
5 Omit txavor SBDLE (W.H.). 
7 Add ην after ux. NBL 33. 


were with Him, and many people besides ; 
a surrounding the same as on the hill 
where He had addressed His disciples. 
Those of the audience who had come 
from Judaea are on their way home.” 
The point must be left doubtful. W. 
and H. have ἐν τῷ é., and omit txavot.— 
Ναίν: there is still a little hamlet of the 
same name (vide Robinson, Palestine, ii. 
355, 301). Eusebius and Jerome speak 
of the town as not far from Endor. 
Some have thought the reference is to a 
Nain in Southern Palestine, mentioned 
by Josephus. But Lk. would hardly take 
his readers so far from the usual scene of 
Christ’s ministry without warning.—Ver. 
12. καὶ ἰδού, and lo! The καὶ introduces 
the apodosis, but is really superfluous; 
very Hebrew (Godet).—éexopifero, was 
being carried out (here only in N. T.); 
ἐκφέρειν used in the classics (Acts v. 
6). Loesner cites examples of the use 
of this verb in the same _ sense, 
from Philo.—povoyevns, χήρα : these 
words supply the pathos of the situation, 
depict the woe of the widowed mother, 
and by implication emphasise the bene- 
volence of the miracle, always a matter 
of interest for Lk.—Ver. 13. 6 Κύριος, 
the Lord, first time this title has been 
used for Jesus in the narrative. Lk. 
frequently introduces it where the other 
synoptists have “ Jesus”. The heavenly 
Christ, Lord of the Church, is in his 
mind, and perhaps he employs the title 
here because it is a case of raising from 


the dead. The ‘‘Lord” is Himself the 
risen Όπε.-- ἐσπλαγχνίσθη: express 
mention of sympathy, pity, as the 


512 KATA AOYKAN VII. 
ἐσπλαγχνίσθη ém αὐτῇ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, “Mi KAate.” 14. Kai. 


προσελθὼν ἤψατο τῆς σοροῦ: οἱ δὲ βαστάζοντες Eotyoay: καὶ εἶπε,. 
“Neavioxe, got λέγω, ἐγέρθητι. 15. Kat ἀνεκάθισεν 1 ὁ νεκρός, 
καὶ ἤρέατο λαλεῖν' καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτὸν τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ. 16. ἔλαβε 
δὲ φόβος ἅπαντας, καὶ ἐδόξαζον τὸν Θεόν, λέγοντες, ΄ Ὅτι προφήτης 
péyas ἐγήγερται 3 ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ 
αὐτοῦ. 17. Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ λόγος οὗτος ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ περὶ 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐν ὃ πάσῃ τῇ περιχώρω. 

18. ΚΑΙ ἀπήγγειλαν Ἰωάννῃ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ πάντων τούτων. 
10. καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος δύο twas τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ 6 Ιωάννης 
ἔπεμψε πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, λέγων, “Ed εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ἢ ἄλλον § 
προσδοκῶμεν; 20. Παραγενόµενοι δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ ἄνδρες εἶπον, 
«Ιωάννης 6 Βαπτιστὴς ἀπέσταλκεν ἡμᾶς πρός σε, λέγων, Σὺ et 6 


- 
"On ἐπεσκέματο 6 Θεὸς τὸν λαὸν 


ἐρχόμενος, ἢ ἄλλον ὃὅ προσδοκῶμεν ; ~ 


1B has εκαθισεν (W.H. marg.). 
3 ev omitted by NBLE 33. 


21. Ἐν αὐτῇ δὲδ τῇ ὥρα 


2 ηγερθη in NABCLE 33. 


4 κυριον in BLE 13, 33, 69, the most likely word for Lk. 


S ετερον in BLE 33 (W.H.); in second place ετερον in NDLE 


αλλον (W.H. text). 


33, B has 


6 εν εκεινη TH ωρα in NBL (Tisch., W.H.). 


motive of the miracle. Cf. Mk. i. 41.— 
μὴ κλαῖε, cease weeping, a hint of what 
was coming, but of course not under- 
stood by the widow.—Ver. 14. σοροῦ, the 
bier (here only in N. T.), probably an open 
coffin, originally an urn for keeping the 
bones of the ἀεαά.-- ἔστησαν: those who 
carried the coffin stood, taking the 
touch of Jesus as a sign that He wished 
this.—Ver. 15. ἀνεκάθισεν, sat up: the 
ava is implied even if the reading ἐκάθ- 
ισεν be adopted; to sit was to sit up for 
one who had been previously lying ; 
sitting up showed life returned, speaking, 
full possession of his senses; the reality 
and greatness ofthe miracle thus asserted. 
—Ver. 16. Φόβος: the awe natural to 
all, and especially simple people, in pre- 
sence of the Ρτείετπαξυτα].---προφήτης 
µέγας, a great prophet, like Elisha, who 
had wrought a similar miracle at Shunem, 
near by (2 Kings ἵν.).--ἐπεσκέψατο, 
visited graciously, as in i. 68, 78.—Ver. 
17. 6 λόγος otros, this story. Lk. 
says it went out; it would spread like 
wildfire far and wide.—év ὅλῃ τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ, 
in all Judaea. Some (Meyer, Bleek, J. 
Weiss, Holtzmann) think Judaea means 
here not the province but the whole 
of Palestine. But Lk. is looking for- 
ward to the next incident (message 
from John); therefore, while the story 


would of course spread in all directions, 
north and south, he lays stress on the 
southward stream of rumour (carried by 
the Judaean part of Christ’s audience, 
vi. 17) through which it would reach the 
Baptist at Machaerus.—rdoy τῇ περι- 
χώρῳ, the district surrounding Judaea, 
Peraea, {.ε., where John was in prison. 


Vv. 18-35. The Baptist’s message 
(Mt. xi. 2-19).—Ver. 18. ἀπήγγειλαν: 
John’s disciples report to him. Lk. 


assumes that his readers will remember 
what he has stated in iii. 20, and does 
not repeat it. But the reporting of the 
disciples tacitly implies that the master 
is dependent on them for information, 
i.é.,is in prison.—rept πάντων τούτων : 
the works of Jesus as in Mt., but τούτων 
refers specially to the two last reported 
(centurion’s servant, widow’s son).— 
Ver. το. δύο, two; more explicit than 
Mt., who has διὰ τ. μαθητῶν. The δύο 
may be an editorial change made on the 
document, from which both drew.—1pés 
τὸν κύριον (Ἰησοῦν, T. R.): a second 
instance of the use of the title ‘‘ Lord” 
in Lk.’s narrative.—ov el, etc. : question 
as in Mk., with the doubtful variation, 
ἄλλον for érepov.—Ver. 20. On their 
arrival the men are made to repeat the 
question.—Ver. 21. Lk. makes Jesus 
reply not merely by word, as in Mt. (xi. 


{4---2δ. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ἐθεράπευσε πολλοὺς ἀπὸ νόσων καὶ µαστίγων καὶ πνευμάτων 

22. καὶ 
ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς: εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “' Πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε 
Ἰωάννῃ ἃ εἴδετε καὶ ἠκούσατε: ὅτι} τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσι, χωλοὶ 


πονηρῶν, καὶ τυφλοῖς πολλοῖς ἐχαρίσατο τὸ} βλέπει». 


περιπατοῦσι, λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται, κωφοὶ ἀκούουσι, νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται, 
πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται: 23. καὶ µακάριός ἐστιν, ὃς ἐὰν μὴ σκαν- 
δαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί. 24. ᾽Απελθόντων δὲ᾽ τῶν ἀγγέλων Ιωάννου, 
ἤρέατο λέγειν πρὸς τοὺς ὄχλους περὶ Ἰωάννου, “Ti ἐξεληλύθατεά 
eis τὴν ἔρημον θεάσασθαι; µκάλαμον ὑπὸ ἀνέμου σαλευόµενον; 
25. ἀλλὰ τί ἐξεληλύθατε΄ ἰδεῖν ; 


ἄνθρωπον ἐν μαλακοῖς ἱματίοις 


ἠμφιεσμένον; iSou, ot ἐν ἱματισμῷ «ἐνδόξῳ καὶ τρυφῇ ὑπάρχοντες 
ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις εἰσίν. 26. ἀλλὰ τί ἐξεληλύθατε ά ἰδεῖν; προφή- 


την; vai, λέγω ὑμῖν, καὶ περισσότερον προφήτου. 27. οὗτός ἐστι 
περὶ οὗ γέγραπται, ’᾿Ιδού, ἐγὼ ὅ ἀποστέλλω τὸν ἄγγελόν µου πρὸ 
προσώπου σου, ὃς κατασκευάσει τὴν ὁδόν σου ἔμπροσθέν σου. 


28. Λέγω yap® ὑμῖν, µείζων ἐν γεννητοῖς γυναικῶν προφήτης 7 


513 


Ἰωάννου τοῦ Βαπτιστοῦ Ἰ 


1 Omit το most uncials. 
2 Omit οτι MBL (W.H.). 


οὖδείς ἐστι». 


ὁ δὲ μικρότερος ἐν τῇ 


2 Omit o |. NBDE, 


4 εξηλθατε in all three places in NABDLE= 69 (W.H.). 

5 Omit εγω SBDLE minusc. verss. (Tisch., W.H.). 

© Omit yap omitted in B= 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 

7 S9BLE al. pl. vet. Lat. omit προφ. and του B. ADA al. have both. 


5), but first of all by deeds displaying 
His miraculous power. That Jesus 
wrought demonstrative cures there and 
then may be Lk.’s inference from the 
expression ἀκούετε καὶ βλέπετε, which 
seems to point to something going on 
before their eyes.—éxapioato: a word 
welcome to Lk. as containing the idea 
of grace = He granted the boon (of 
sight).—Ver. 22 contains the verbal 
answer, pointing the moral = go and 
tell your master what ye saw and heard 
(aorist, past at the time of reporting), 
and leave him to draw his own con- 
clusion.—vexpot ἐγείρονται: this refers 
to the son of-the widow of Nain; raisings 
from the dead are not included in the 
list of marvels given in the previous 
verse. Lk. omits throughout the con- 
necting καὶ with which Mt. binds the 
marvels into couplets. On the motive 
of John’s message, vide notes of Mt., ad 
loc. 

Vv. 24-30. Encomium on the Baptist. 
—Ver. 24. tl: if we take rf = what, 
the question will be: what went ye out 
to see? and the answer: “a reed, etc.”’; 


if=why, it will be: why went ye out? 
and the answer: “‘ to see a reed, etc.” — 
ἐξεληλύθατε (T. R.): this reading, as 
different from Mt. (ἐξήλθατε), has a 
measure of probability and is adopted by 
Tischendorf, here and in wv. 25 and 26. 
But against this J. Weiss emphasises the 
fact that the ‘‘emendators” were fond 
of perfects. The aorists seem more 
appropriate to the connection as con- 
taining a reference to a past event, the 
visit of the persons addressed to the 
scene of John’s ministry.—Ver. 25. 
ἰδοὺ οἱ: Lk. changes the expression 
here, substituting for of τὰ μαλακὰ φορ- 
οῦντες (iMt.), οἱ ἐν ἱματισμῷ ἐνδόξῳ καὶ 
τρυφῇ ὑπάρχοντες = those living in 
(clothed with) splendid apparel and 
luxury.—Vv. 26 and 27 are = wv. 9 and 
to in Mt., with the exception that Lk. 
inverts the words mpogyrny, (ἰδεῖν, 
making it possible to render: why went 
ye out? to see a prophet ? or, what went 
ye out to see? a prophet? In Mt., only 
the former rendering is possible.—Ver. 
28. λέγω ὑμῖν: here as elsewhere Lk. 
omits the Hebrew ἀμὴν, and he other- 


33 


514 


βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ peiLwy αὐτοῦ ἐστι. 


KATA AOYKAN 


Vu 


29. Kat was 8 ads 


ἀκούσας καὶ οἱ τελῶναι ἐδικαίωσαν τὸν Θεόν, βαπτισθέντες τὸ 
βάπτισμα Ἰωάννου: 30. of δὲ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ οἱ νομικοὶ τὴν βουλὴν 


τοῦ Θεοῦ ἠθέτησαν eis ἑαυτούς, μὴ βαπτισθέντες ὑπ αὐτοῦ. 


3. 


εἶπε δὲ ὁ Κύριος, “Tine οὖν ὁμοιώσω τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τῆς γενεᾶς 


ταύτης; 


a , Ces | @ 
καὶ τίνι εἰσὶν ὅμοιοι ; 
ἀγορᾷ καθηµένοις, καὶ  προσφωνοῦσιν ἀλλήλοις, καὶ λέγουσιν, 


32. ὅμοιοί εἶσι παιδίοις τοῖς ἐν 
3 


Ηὐλήσαμεν ὑμῖν, καὶ οὖκ ὠρχήσασθε' ἐθρηνήσαμεν ὑμῖν," καὶ οὐκ 


ἐκλαύσατε. 


33. ἐλήλυθε γὰρ Ἰωάννης ὅ Βαπτιστὴς µήτε ἄρτον 


1 ειπε δε ο Κ. omitted in uncials, found in minusc.; a marginal direction in 


Lectionaries. 


ν 


3348 1 have the peculiar reading a λεγει, which W.H. adopt, 
3 Omit this second vptw (conforms to first) BDLE 13, 346. 


wise alters and tones down the remark- 
able statement about John, omitting the 
solemn ἐγήγερται, and inserting, accord- 
ing to an intrinsically probable reading, 
though omitted in the best MSS. (and in 
W.H.), προφήτης, so limiting the wide 
sweep of the statement. Lk.’s version 
is secondary. Mt.’s is more like what 
Jesus speaking strongly would say. 
Even if He meant: a greater prophet 
than John there is not among the sons 
of women, He would say it thus: 
among those born of women there hath 
not arisen a greater than John, as if 
he were the greatest man that ever 
lived.—6 δὲ pix. On this vide at Mt. 
—Vv. 20, 30 are best taken as a historical 
reflection by the evangelist. Its prosaic 
character, as compared with what goes 
before and comes after, compels this 
conclusion, as even Hahn admits. Then 
its absence from Mt.’s account points in 
the same direction. It has for its aim to 
indicate to what extent the popular 
judgment had endorsed the estimate 
just offered by Jesus. The whole people, 
even the publicans, had, by submitting 
to be baptised by John, acknowledged 
his legitimacy and power as a prophet of 
God, and so “justified” (ἐδικαίωσαν) 
God in sending him as the herald of the 
coming Messianic Kingdom and King, 
i.e., recognised him as the fit man for so 
high a vocation. To be strictly correct 
he is obliged, contrary to his wont, to 
refer to the Pharisees and lawyers as 
exceptions, describing them as making 
void, frustrating (ἠθέτησαν, cf. Gal. ii. 
21) the counsel of God with reference to 
themselves. The two words ἐδικ. and 
ἠθέτ. are antithetic, and help to define 
each other. The latter meaning to treat 


with contempt and so set aside, the 
former must mean te approve God’s 
counsel or ordinance in the mission of 
the Baptist. Kypke renders: laudarunt 
Deum, citing numerous instances of this 


sense from the Psalt. Solom.—eis 
ἑαυτοὺς after ἠθέτησαν has. been 
variously rendered = “against them- 


selves’’ (A. V.) and = “ for themselves,”’ 
i.e., in so far as they were concerned 
(R. V.; ‘‘quantum ab eis pendebat,”’ 
Bornemann). But the latter would re- 
quire τὸ εἰς ἑαυτούς. The meaning is 
plain enough. God’s counsel very speci- 
ally concerned the Pharisees and lawyers, 
for none in Israel more needed to repent 
than they. Therefore the phrase = they 
frustrated God’s counsel (in John’s 
mission), which was for (concerned) the 
whole Jewish people, and its religious 
leaders very particularly. 

Vv. 31-35. The children in the market 
βίαεε.---τοὺς av. τ. γενεᾶς ταύτης. The 
pointed reference in the previous verse 
to the Pharisees and 'awyers marks them 
out as, in the view of "he evangelist, the 
‘‘generation” Jesus has in His eye. 
This is not so clear in Mt.’s version, 
where we gather that they are the 
subject of animadversion from {πε 
characterisation corresponding to their 
character as otherwise known. Jesus 
spoke severely only of the religious 
leaders; of the people always pitifully.— 
Ver. 32. Sport εἶσιν: referring to 
ἀνθρώπους, ὁμοία in Mt. referring to 
γενεὰν. The variations in Lk.’s version 
from Mt.’s are slight: both seem to be 
keeping close to a common source— 
ἀλλήλοις for ἑτέροις, ἐκλαύσατε for 
ἐκόψασθε; in νετ. 33 ἄρτον is inserted 
after ἐσθίων and οἶνον after πίνων ; 


29—37- 


ἐσθίων µήτε οἶνον wivwy,! καὶ λέγετε, Δαιμόνιον ἔχει. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


515 
44. Ey ruber 


6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων, καὶ λέγετε, IS0U, ἄνθρωπος 


φάγος καὶ οἰνοπότης, τελωνῶν ΦίλοςΣ καὶ ἁμαρτωλῶν. 


45. καὶ 


ἐδικαιώθη ἡ σοφία ἀπὸ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς πάντων. ὃ 


36. Ἠρώτα δέ τις αὐτὸν τῶν Φαρισαίων, ἵνα Φάγῃ μετ αὐτοῦ" 


καὶ εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν" τοῦ Φαρισαίου ἀνεκλίθη.ὁ 37. Καὶ ἰδού, 
γυνὴ ἐν τῇ πόλει, ῆτις ἦν δ ἁμαρτωλός, ἐπιγνοῦσα Ἰ ὅτι ἀνάκειται ® 


1 Τη µητε αρτον . . . πινων B= have µη for first pyre, BD εσθων for εσθιων, 


SBLE apr. after εσθ. and οιν. after πινων. 


3 φιλος before τελων. in most uncials. 


W.H. adopt all these changes. 


3 παντων after απο in NB minusc. (W.H.). 


4 τον οικον in NBDLE 1, 33, 60 al. 


5 κατεκλιθη in BDLE 1, 33. 


$ aris ην εν TH πολει in NBLE (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 και before επιγ. in SAB al. pl. 


following a late tradition, think Meyer 
and Schanz. More probably they are 
explanatory editorial touches by Lk,, as 
if to say: John did eat and drink, but 
not bread and wine.—For ἤλθεν Lk 
substitutes in vv. 33 and 34 ἐλήλυθεν = 
is come, Thus the two prophets have 
taken their place once for all in the page 
of history: the one as an ascetic, the 
other as avoiding peculiarity—influenc- 
ing men not by the method of isolation 
but by the method of sympathy. The 
malignant caricature of this genial 
character in ver. 34—glutton, drunkard, 
comrade of publicans and sinners— 
originated doubtless in the Capernaum 
mission.—Ver. 35. καὶ, etc., and wisdom 
is wont to be justified by all her 
children; by all who are themselves 
wise, not foolish and unreasonable like 
the “generation” described. On this 
adage vide notes on Mt. xi. 19. Borne- 
mann thinks that this verse is part of 
what the adverse critics said, of course 
spoken in irony = their conduct shown 
to be folly by results; what converts 
they made: the refuse of the population! 

Vv. 36-50. The sinful woman. This 
section, peculiar to Lk., one of the 
golden evangelic incidents we owe to 
him, is introduced here with much tact, 
as it serves to illustrate how Jesus came 
to be called the friend of publicans and 
sinners, and to be calumniated as such, 
and at the same time to show the true 
nature of the relations He sustained to 
these classes. It serves further to 
exhibit Jesus as One whose genial, 
gracious spirit could bridge gulfs of 
social cleavage, and make Him the 
friend, not of one class only, but of all 


ὃ κατακ. in SNABDLE 33. 


classes, the friend of man, not merely of 
the degraded. Lk. would not have his 
readers imagine that Jesus dined only 
with such people as He met in Levi’s 
house. In Lk.’s pages Jesus dines with 
Pharisees also, here and on two other 
occasions. This is a distinctive feature 
in his portraiture of Jesus, characteristic 
of his irenical cosmopolitan disposition. 
It has often been maintained that this 
Narrative is simply the story of Mary of 
Bethany remodelled so as to teach new 
lessons. But, as will appear, there are 
original features in it which, even in the 
judgment of Holtzmann (H. C.), make it 
probable that two incidents of the kind 
occurred. 

Vv. 36-39. The situation.—rs τῶν Φ.: 
when or who not indicated, probably not 
known, but of no consequence to the 
story; the point to be noted that one 
of the Pharisaic class was the inviter.— 
τοῦ Φαρισαίου: the class indicated a 
second time to make prominent the fact 
that Jesus did not hesitate to accept the 
invitation. Euthy. Zig. remarks: He 
did not refuse that He might not give 
excuse for saying that He ate with 
publicans and sinners and avoided the 
Pharisees (βδελυσσόµενος).--Ύετ. 37. 
γυνη, etc., a woman who was in the 
city, a sinner. This arrangement of the 
words (ἥτις ἦν ἐν τῇ πόλει, W.H.) 
represents her as a notorious character ; 
how sinning indicated by expressive 
silence: aharlot. In what city? Various 
conjectures. Why not Capernaum? She 
a guest and hearer on occasion of the 
feast in Levi’s house, and this what came 
of it! Place the two dinners side by 
side for an effective contrast.—éstyvotga, 


516 


KATA AOYKAN VIL. 


5 here only ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ Φαρισαίου, "Kopicaca ἀλάβαστρον µύρου, 38. καὶ 


in sense of 


bearingor στᾶσα παρὰ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ ὀπίσωλ κλαίουσα, ἤρξατο βρέχειν 


bringing 
to, in 
N. T. 


τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ τοῖς δάκρυσι,Σ καὶ ταῖς θριξὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτῆς 
ἐξέμασσε, καὶ κατεφίλει τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἤλειφε τῷ µύρῳ. 
39. ἰδὼν δὲ ὁ Φαρισαῖος 6 καλέσας αὐτὸν εἶπεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ λέγων, 
“Οὗτος, εἰ ἦν προφήτης,δ ἐγίνωσκεν ἂν τίς καὶ ποταπὴ ἡ γυνή, ἥτις. 
ἅπτεται αὐτοῦ: ὅτι ἁμαρτωλός ἐστι.” 

40. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπε πρὸς αὐτόν, “Σίμων, ἔχω σού 
τι εἰπεῖν. ὍὉ δέ φησι, “Διδάσκαλε, eimé.”4 41. “Ato χρεω- 
Φειλέται ἦσαν δανειστῇ Tir: ὁ els ὤφειλε δηνάρια πεντακόσια, 6 δὲ 

42. ph ἐχόντων δὲδ αὐτῶν ἀποδοῦναι, ἆμφο- 
τίς οὖν αὐτῶν εἶπέ,δ πλεῖον αὐτὸν ἀγαπήσειῖ; 


ἕτερος πεντήκοντα. 
τέροις ἐχαρίσατο. 


} οπισω before παρα τ. π. in NBDLXA 1, 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 rors Sax. before ηρξατο in BDL 33, a very credible emphasis on the tears. 


3 BE have ο προφ. (W.H. in brackets). 


* διδασκ. ειπε φησιν in NBIL= 1 (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 Omit ειπε NBDLE. 


having learned, either by accident, or by 
inquiry, or by both combined.—dv τῇ 
οἰκίᾳ τ. Φ.: the Pharisee again, nota 
bene! A formidable place for one like 
her to goto, but what will love not dare ? 
—Ver. 38. στᾶσα ὀπίσω, standing 
behind, at His feet. The guests reclined 
on couches with their feet turned out- 
wards, a posture learned by the Jews 
from their various masters: Persians, 
Greeks, Romans. In delicacy Jesus 
would not look round or take any notice, 
but let her do what she would.— 
κλαίουσα: excitement, tumultuous 
emotions, would make a burst of weep- 
ing inevitable.—iptaro applies formally 
to βρέχει», but really to all the descrip- 
tive verbs following. She did not wet 
Christ’s feet with tears of set purpose; 
the act was involuntary.—Bpéxewv, to 
moisten, as rain moistens the ground: 
her tears fell like a thunder shower on 
Christ’s feet. Cf. Mt. v. 45.--ἐξέμασσε, 
she continued wiping. Might have 
been infinitive depending on ἤρξατο, 
but more forcible as an imperfect. Of 
late use in this sense. To have her hair 
flowing would be deemed immodest. 
Extremes met in that αοζ.--κατεφίλει, 
kissed fervently, again and again. ¥udas 
also kissed fervently. Vide Mt. xxvi. 49 
and remarks έπετε.---ἤλειφε: this was the 
one act she had come of set purpose to 
do; all the rest was done impulsively 
under the rush of feeling.—Ver. 390. 
ὁ Φαρισαῖος, for the fourth time; this 


5 Omit δε BDLE. 
7 αγαπ. αντον in NBLE 33. 


time he is most appropriately so 
designated because he is to act in 
character.—el ἦν προφήτης: not the 
worst thing he could have thought. 
This woman’s presence implies previous 
relations, of what sort need not be 
asked: not a prophet, but no thought of 
impurity ; simply ignorant like a common 
man.—tylvwoKev ἂν, indicative with ἂν, 
as usual in a supposition contrary to 
fact.—ris καὶ ποταπὴ, who and what 
sort of a woman; known to everybody 
and known for ενΙ].--ἅπτεται: touch of 
a man however slight by such a woman 
impossible without evil desire arising in 
her. So judged the Pharisee; any 
other theory of her action inconceivable 
to him. 

Vv. 40-50. Host and guest.—amoxpi- 
θεὶς, answering, to his thought written 
on his face.—Zi(pww: the Pharisee now 
is called by his own name as in friendly 
intercourse. The whole dialogue on 
Christ’s part presents an exquisite com- 
bination of outspoken criticism with 
courtesy.—€ye ool τι εἰπεῖν: comis 
praefatio, Βεπρε].---Διδάσκαλε: Simon’s 
reply equally frank and pleasant.—Ver. 
41. The parable of the two debtors, 
an original feature in the story.— 
χρεωφειλέται: here and in xvi. 5, only, in 
N.T.—8avaorq (hereonlyin N.T.): might 
mean a usurer, but his behaviour in the 
story makes it more suitable to think of 
him simply as a creditor.—é els ὤφειλε: 
even the larger sum was a petty debt, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 517 


38—50. 


43. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ 1 Σίµων εἶπεν, ''"Ὑπολαμβάνω ὅτι ᾧ τὸ πλεῖον ο Acts il. 15 
éxapicato.” ‘O δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ''᾿Ορθῶς ἔκρινας. 44. Καὶ 
στραφεὶς πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα, τῷ Σίµωνι ἔφη, “ Βλέπεις ταύτην τὴν 
γυναῖκα; εἰσῆλθόν σου εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν, ὕδωρ ἐπὶ τοὺς πόδας µου 3 
οὐκ ἔδωκας. att δὲ τοῖς δάκρυσιν ἔβρεξέ µου τοὺς πόδας, καὶ 
ταῖς θριξὶ τῆς κεφαλῆςδ αὐτῆς ἐξέμαδε. 45. Φίλημά por οὐκ 
ἔδωκας: αὕτη δέ, dh ἧς εἰσῆλθον, οὐ διέλιπεέ καταφιλοῦσά µου 
τοὺς, πόδας. 46. ἐλαίῳ τὴν κεφαλήν µου οὐκ ἤλειψας' αὕτη δὲ 
µύρῳ ἤλειψέ µου τοὺς πόδας. 47. οὗ χάριν, λέγω σοι, ἀφέωνται 
ai ἁμαρτίαι αὐτῆς ὃ ai πολλαί, ὅτι ἠγάπησε πολύ: ᾧ δὲ ὀλίγον 


a 2' 
ἀφίεται, ὀλίγον ἀγαπᾷ.” 
ς ιά 2 
ἁμαρτίαι. 


, » 
“Tis οὗτός ἐστιν ὃς καὶ ἁμαρτίας ἀφίησιν ; 


48. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῇ, ''᾿᾽Αϕφέωνταί σου αἱ 


49. Καὶ ἤρξαντο of συνανακείµενοι λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς, 


5ο. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς 


A 35 
τὴν γυναῖκα, ““H πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε" πορεύου εἰς εἰρήνην. 


1 Omit δε BD, and ο NBLE. 


2 pov before επι τ. π. in SQLE (Tisch., W.H., marg.). 


(W.H. text). 


μοι επι ποδας in B 


2 Omit της κεφ. NABDILE vet. Lat. vulg. cop. al. (Tisch., W.H.). 
4διελιπε in BD (W.H. text); διελειπεν in SYAILAE al. (Tisch., W.H., marg.) 


—a correction of style. 


ὅμον τ. π. in δὴ al., 1, 13, 69 al. (Tisch. = T.R.). 


τ. π. pov in BLE (W.H.). 


° avtys before at apap. in $¥, etc. (Tisch.). T.R. = BLE al. mul. (W.H.). 


whereby Simon would be thrown off his 
guard: no suspicion of a personal 
reference.—Ver. 42. éyaploaro: a 
warmer word than ἀφιέναι, welcome 
to Lk. as containing the idea of grace. 
---ὀρθῶς ἔκρινας, like the πάνυ ὀρθῶς of 
Socrates, but without his irony.—Vv. 
44-46. στραφεὶς: Jesus looks at the 
woman now for the first time, and asks 
His host to look at her, the despised one, 
that he may learn a lesson from her, by 
a contrast to be drawn between her 
behaviour and his own in application of 
the parable. A sharply marked antithesis 
runs through the description.—tdwp 
--δάκρυσιν; Φίλημα---καταφιλοῦσα;: 
ἐλαίῳ (common oil), pipe (precious oint- 
ment); κεφαλήν-- πόδας. There is a 
kind of poetic rhythm in the words, as is 
apt to be the case when men speak 
under deep emotion.—Ver. 47. οὗ 
χάριν, wherefore, introducing Christ’s 
theory of the woman’s extraordinary 
behaviour as opposed to Simon’s un- 
generous suspicions.—A¢yw σοι, I tell 
you, with emphasis ; what Jesus firmly be- 
lieves and what Simon very much needs 
to be told.—adéwvrat (Doric perf. pas.) at 
ἁμαρτίαι αὐτῆς, forgiven are her sins: 


tion implied in πολλαί; 


{.ε., it is a case, not of a courtesan acting 
in character, as you have been thinking, 
but of a penitent who has come through 
me to the knowledge that even such 
as she can be forgiven. That is the 
meaning of this extraordinary demon- 
stration of passionate affection.—at 
πολλαί, the many, a sort of afterthought : 
many sins, a great sinner, you think, 
and so I also can see from her behaviour 
in this chamber, which manifests intense 
love, whence I infer that she is conscious 
of much forgiveness and of much need 
to be forgiven.—ér. ἠγάπησεν πολύ: 
ὅτι introduces the ground of the asser- 
many sins 
inferred from much love ; the underlying 
principle: much forgiven, much love, 
which is here applied backwards, 
because Simon, while believing in the 
woman’s great sin, did not believe in 
her penitence. The foregoing interpre- 
tation is now adopted by most com. 
mentators. The old dispute between 
Protestants and Catholics, based on this 
text, as to the ground of pardon is now 
pretty much out of date.—«} δὲ ὀλίγον, 
etc. : this is the other side of the truth, 
as it applied to Simon: little (conscious) 


518 


KATA AOYKAN 


VIII. 


a Acts xvii, VIII. 1. Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ καθεξῆς, καὶ αὐτὸς " διώδευε κατὰ 


I en 


xiii. 17). πόλιν καὶ Kdpny, κηρύσσων καὶ εὐαγγελιζόμενος τὴν βασιλείαν 
τοῦ Θεοῦ" καὶ οἱ δώδεκα σὺν αὐτῷ, 2. καὶ γυναϊκές τινες at ἦσαν 
τεθεραπευµέναι ἀπὸ πνευμάτων πονηρῶν καὶ ἀσθενειῶν, Μαρία ἡ 
καλουμένη Μαγδαληνή, ad ἧς δαιμόνια ἑπτὰ ἐξεληλύθει, 4. καὶ 
Ιωάννα γυνὴ Χουζᾶ ἐπιτρόπου Ἡρώδου, καὶ Σουσάννα, καὶ ἕτεραι 


b const. 
(with dat.) 
Ch. xii. 


πολλαί, aitives διηκόνουν αὐτῷ 1 ἀπὸ 3 τῶν » ὑπαρχόντων ” adtais. 
4- Συνιόντος δὲ ὄχλου πολλοῦ, καὶ τῶν κατὰ πόλιν ἐπιπορευομένων 
ts x 9 a een ε , a 
πρὸς αὐτόν, εἶπε διὰ παραβολῆς, 5. ““Ἐξῆλθεν ὁ σπείρων τοῦ 


σπεῖραι τὸν σπόρον αὐτοῦ: καὶ ἐν τῷ σπείρειν αὗτόν, ὃ μὲν ἔπεσε 
παρὰ τὴν ὁδόν, καὶ κατεπατήθη, καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ κατ- 


1 αντοις for αντω in BD ai. fl. 


? «x for απο in NABDL 1, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H., adopt both changes). 


sin, little love. The doctrine here 
enunciated is another very original 
element in this story. It and the words 
in Lk. v. 31 and Lk. xv. 7 form together 
a complete apology for Christ’s relations 
with the sinful_—Ver. 48. ἀφέωνται : 
direct assurance of forgiveness, for con- 
firmation of her faith tried by an un- 
sympathetic surrounding of frowning 
Pharisees.—Ver. 49. τίς οὗτος: again 
the stupid cavil about usurpation of the 
power to pardon (v. 21).—Ver. 50. 
Concerned only about the welfare of the 
heroine of the story, Jesus takes no 
notice of this, but bids her farewell with 
‘thy faith hath saved thee, go into 
peace”. J. Weiss (Meyer) thinks νετ. 
49 may be an addition by Lk. to the 
story as given in his source. 

CHAPTER VIII. THE SoWER AND 
OTHER INCIDENTS.—VV. 1-3. Muinister- 
ing women; peculiar to Lk., and one of 
the interesting fruits of his industrious 
search for additional memorabilia of 
Jesus, giving us a glimpse into the way 
in which Jesus and His disciples were 
supported.—Ver. 1. ἐν τῷ καθεξῆς, 
‘“‘ afterwards,” A. V., not necessarily 
“soon afterwards,” R. V. (= ἐν τῷ ἑξῆς, 
vii. 11). The temporal connection with 
the preceding narrative is loose, but the 
connection of thought and sentiment is 
close. Lk. would show how penitent, 
suffering, sorrowful women who had 
received benefit in body or soul from 
Jesus went into peace and blessedness. 
They followed Him and served Him 
with their substance, and so illustrated 
the law: much benefit, much love.— 
διώδευε: of this itinerant preaching 
ministry Lk. knows, or at least gives, no 
particulars. The one thing he knows or 


states is that on such tours Jesus had 
the benefit of female devotion. Probably 
such service began very early, and was 
not limited to one tour of late date.— 
Ver. 2. Μαρία ἡ κ. Μαγδαληνή, Mary 
called the Magdalene, the only one οἱ 
the three named who is more than a 
name for readers of the Gospel; since 
the fourth century, identified with the 
sinful woman of the previous chapter, 
the seven demons from which she is said 
to have been delivered being supposed 
to refer to her wicked life; a mis- 
taken identification, as in the Gospels 
demoniacal possession is something 
quite distinct from immorality. Koets- 
veld, speaking of the place assigned in 
tradition and popular opinion to Mary as 
the patroness of converted harlots, 
remarks: ‘‘ All the water of the sea 
cannot wash off this stain from Mary 
Magdalene,” De Gelijkenissen, p. 366. 
The epithet Μαγδαληνή is usually taken 
as meaning “‘ of the town of Magdala”’. 
P. de Lagarde interprets it ‘the hair- 
curler,” Haarkiinstlerin (Nachrichten der 
Gesell. der Wissens., Gottingen, 1889, pp. 
371-375)- 

ν. 4-8. Parable of the sower (Mt. 
xiii. 1-9, Mk. iv. 1-9).—Ver. 4. ὄχλου : 
Lk., like the two other evangelists, pro- 
vides for the parable discourse a large 
audience, but he makes no mention of 
preaching from a boat, which has been 
forestalled in a previous incident (chap. 
ν. 3).--καὶ τῶν κατὰ πόλιν, etc.: this 
clause simply explains how the crowd 
was made up, by contingents from the 
various towns. This would have been 
clearer if the καὶ had been left out ; yet it 
is not superfluous, as it gives an enhanced 
idea of the size of the crowd = even 


I—12. EYATTEAION 

6. καὶ ἕτερον ἔπεσεν} ἐπὶ τὴν πέτραν, καὶ Φυὲν 
ἐξηράνθη, διὰ τὸ μὴ ἔχειν ἱκμάδα. 7. καὶ ἕτερον ἔπεσεν ἐν µέσῳ 
τῶν ἀκανθῶν, καὶ συμφυεῖσαι at ἄκανθαι ἀπέπνιξαν αὐτό. 8. καὶ 
ἕτερον ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ 3 τὴν γῆν τὴν ἀγαθήν, καὶ φυὲν ἐποίησε καρπὸν 
Ταῦτα λέγων ἐφώνει, ““O ἔχων Sta ἀκούειν 
9. ᾿Επηρώτων δὲ αὐτὸν ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, λέγοντες,» 
“Tis ety ἡ παραβολὴ αὕτηά;᾽ 1ο. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, ''Ὑμῖν δέδοται 
γνῶναι τὰ μυστήρια τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ: τοῖς δὲ λοιποῖς ἐν 
παραβολαῖς, ἵνα βλέποντες μὴ βλέπωσι, καὶ ἀκούοντες μὴ συνιῶσιν. 


έφαγεν αὗτό. 


ἑκατονταπλασίονα." 
> » 
ἀκουέτω. 


11. Ἔστι δὲ αὕτη ἡ παραβολή ' ὁ σπόρος ἐστὶν ὁ λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ - 

12. οἱ δὲ παρὰ τὴν ὁδὸν εἰσὶν of ἀκούοντες.ὅ εἶτα ἔρχεται ὁ διάβολος 
Q » 9 9 a , 2 A -΄ , 

καὶ αἴρει Tov λόγον ἀπὸ τῆς καρδίας αὐτῶν, ἵνα μὴ πιστεύσαντες 


5*9 


1 So in ND = parall. 
7 evs for επι in NABLE al. 41. 
3 Omit λεγοντες SBDLE verss., Orig. 


in T. 
5 ακονσαντες in ΜΕΡΙ Έ, 


* 


people from every city gathering to Him. 
---διὰ παραβολῆς: Lk. gives only a single 
parable in this place.—Ver. 5. ov 
σπόρον α.: an editorial addition, that 
could be dispensed with μὲν, one 
part, ὃ neuter, replied to by καὶ ἕτερον = 
ἕτερον δὲ in ver. 6.—Ver. 6. Φνὲν, 2nd 
aorist participle, neuter, from ἐφύην 
(Alex. form), the Attic 2nd aorist being 
epuv.—ixpada (ixpds), moisture, here 
only in N. T.—Ver. 7. ἐν péow τ. ἀ.: 
Mt. has ἐπὶ, Mk. ets. Lk.’s expression 
suggests that the thorns are already 
above ground.—Ver. 8. ἑκατογταπλα- 
σίονα, an hundredfold. Lk. has only 
one degree of fruitfulness, the highest, 
possibly because when 1οο is possible 
60 and 30-were deemed unsatisfactory, 
but an important lesson is missed by the 
omission. The version in Mt. and Mk. 
is doubtless the original. It was charac- 
teristic of Jesus, while demanding the 
undivided heart, to allow for diversity in 
the measure of fruitfulness. Therein 
appeared His ‘‘ sweet reasonableness”. 
This omission seems to justify the 
opinion of Meyer that Lk.’s version of 
the parable is secondary. Weiss on the 
contrary thinks it comes nearest to the 
original. 

Vv. 9-10. Conversation concerning 
the parable (Mt. xiii. 10-17, Mk. iv. 10- 
12).—Ver. 9. τίς etn, what this parable 
might be. The questionin Lk. refers 
n(t tu the parabolic method, as if they 


κατεπεσεν in BLRE (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 ΜΒ 33 have τις αντη ety η (B om.) παρ., changed into the smoother reading 
R. 


had never heard a parable before, but to 
the sense or aim of this particular 
parable. It simply prepares for the in- 
terpretation following.—Ver. το. The 
contrast between the disciples and 
others, as here put, is that in the case οί 
the former the mysteries of the kingdom 
are given to be known, in that of the 
latter the mysteries are given, but only 
in parables, therefore so as to remain 
unknown. The sense is the same in 
Mt. and Mk., but the mode of ex- 
pression is somewhat different.—rois δὲ 
λοιποῖς, a milder phrase than the 
ἐκείνοις τοῖς ἔξω of Mk.; cf. ἄλλων in 
chap. v. 29.—tva βλέποντεα, etc.: this 
sombre saying is also characteristically 
toned done by abbreviation as compared 
with Mt. and Mk., as if it contained an 
unwelcome idea. Vide notes on Mt. 
Vv. 11-15. Interpretation of the 
parable (Mt. xiii. 18-23, Mk. iv. 13-20).— 
Ver. 12. ot ἁκούσαντες: this is not a 
sufficient definition of the wayside 
hearers; all the classes described heard. 
The next clause, beginning with εἶτα, 
must be included in the definition = the 
wayside men are persons in whose case, 
so soon as they have heard, cometh, 
etc.—é διάβολος: each gospel has a 
different name for the evil one; 6 
πονηρὸς, Mt., 6 σατανᾶς, Mk.—iva μὴ 
πιστεύσαντες σωθῶσιν, lest believing 
they should be saved; peculiar to Lk., 
*nrd in expression an echo of St. Paul 


520 


σωθῶσιν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


VIII. 


13. οἱ δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς πέτρας,! ot ὅταν ἀκούσωσι, μετὰ χαρᾶς 


cagain in δέχονται τὸν λόγον, καὶ οὗτοι Σ ῥίζαν οὐκ ἔχουσιν, ot πρὸς * καιρὸν 


1 Cor. vii. 


5. πιστεύουσι, καὶ ἐν καιρῷ πειρασμοῦ ἀφίστανται. 


14. TO δὲ εἷς τὰς 


ἀκάνθας πεσόν, οὗτοί εἶσιν οἱ ἀκούσαντες, καὶ ὑπὸ μεριμνῶν καὶ 
πλούτου καὶ ἡδονῶν τοῦ βίου πορευόµενοι συµπνίγονται, καὶ οὗ 


τελεσφοροῦσι. 


15. τὸ δὲ ἐν τῇ Kad yi, οὗτοί εἶσιν οἵτινες ἐν 


καρδίᾳ καλῇ καὶ dya0f, ἀκούσαντες τὸν λόγον κατέχουσι, καὶ 


καρποφοροῦσιν ἐν ὑπομονῇ. 


16. “«Οὖδεὶς δὲ λύχνον ἄψας καλύπτει αὐτὸν σκεύει, ἢ ὑποκάτω 
κλίνης τίθησιν: GAN’ ἐπὶ λυχνίας ἐπιτίθησιν.Σ ἵνα ot εἰσπορευόμενοι 


lem της π. in BLA al. fl. (W.H. text). 


marg.). 
2 B has αντοι (W.H. marg.). 


επι την π. in ND al, (Tisch., W.H., 


3 \9BLE have the simple τιθησιν (D has τιθι, apparently an incomplete word = 


τιθισιν). 


and the apostolic age.—Ver. 13. μετὰ 
χαρᾶς: common to the three reports, a 
familiar and important feature of this 
type—emotional religion.—mpds καιρὸν 
πιστεύουσι, believe for a season, instead 
pf Mt.’s and Mk.’s, he (they) is (are) 
temporary.—_tv καιρῷ πειρασμοῦ: a 
more comprehensive expression than 
that common to Mt. and Mk., which 
points only to outward trial, tribulation, 
or persecution. The season of tempta- 
tion may include inward trial by dead- 
ness of feeling, doubt, etc. (Schanz).— 
Ver. 14. τὸ δὲ. There is a change 
here from the plural masculine to the 
neuter singular: from ‘those who” to 
‘that which ”.—rropevépevor : the use of 
this word, which seems superfluous 
(Grotius), is probably due to Lk. having 
under his eye Mk.’s account, in which 
εἰσπορευόμεναι comes in at this point. 
Kypke renders: ‘“illi a curis (ὑπὸ 
μεριμνῶν καὶ π. καὶ ἡ. τ. β.) occupati 
sive Ρεπείταεί ”' = they being taken pos- 
session of by, etc., the passive form of 
Mk.’s “cares, etc., entering in and taking 
possession”. This seems as good an 
explanation as can be thought of.— 
Bornemann takes ὑπὸ = µετά or σύν, 
and renders, they go or live amid cares, 
etc., and are checked.—ov τελεσφοροῦσι, 
they do not bring to maturity (here only 
in N. T.). Examples of this use in Wet- 
stein and Kypke from Strabo, Philo, 
Josephus, etc. Hesychius explains 
τελεσφόρος thus: ὁ τελεσφορῶν Kal’ 
ὥραν τοὺς καρποὺς, ἢ ὁ τελείους αὐτοὺς 
dépwv.— Ver. 15. ἓν καρδίᾳ καλῇ καὶ 
ἀγαθῇ, in a noble and generous heart, 
an important contribution by Lk. to the 


explanation of the conditions of fruitful- 
ness. The former epithet points to a 
lofty aim or ideal, the latter to enthu- 
siastic whole-hearted devotion to the 
ideal, the two constituting a heroic 
character. The phrase was familiar to 
the Greeks, and Lk. may have been 
acquainted with their use of it w 
describe a man comme il faut, but he 
brings to the conception of the καλὸς 
κἀγαθὸς new moral elements.—év ὑπο- 
povg, in patience, as opposed to πρὸς 
καιρὸν; and, it might be added, ἐν 
εἰλικρινείᾳ as opposed to the thorny- 
ground hearers. ὑπομ., again in xxi. 19, 
often in Epistles. : 

Vv. 16-18. Those who have light 
must let it shine (Mt. v. 15, x. 26, Mk. 
iv. 21-25). Lk. here seems to follow 
Mk., who brings in at the same point 
the parable of the lamp, setting forth 
the duty of those who are initiated into 
the mysteries of the kingdom to diffuse 
their light. A most important comple- 
ment to the doctrine set forth in ver. 
10, that parables were meant to veil the 
mysteries of the kingdom.—Ver. 16. 
ἄψας: Mt. has καίονσιν. ἅπτειν is the 
more classical word.—oxKeve.: any 
hollow vessel instead of the more definite 
but less familiar µόδιον in Mt. and Mk. 
---κλίνης, bed or couch, as in Mt. and 
Mk. Nobody puts the lamp under a 
vessel or a couch, as a rule ; it may be 
done occasionally when the light, which 
burns night and day in an eastern 
cottage, for any reason needs to be ob- 
scured for a while.—iva of εἰσπορευό- 
pevot, etc., that those entering in may 
see the light. The light is rather for 


13—23. 


βλέπωσι τὸ Gs. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


17. οὗ γάρ ἐστι κρυπτόν, ὃ 


521 


a 


οὗ φανερὸν γενή- 


σεται: οὐδὲ ἀπόκρυφον, ὃ οὐ γνωσθήσεται 1 καὶ eis φανερὸν ἔλθῃ 
18. βλέπετε οὖν πῶς ἀκούετε: ὃς γὰρ ἂν  ἔχῃ, δοθήσεται αὐτῷ 
καὶ ὃς ἂν μῆ ἔχῃ, καὶ ο δοκεῖ ἔχειν, ἀρθήσεται da αὐτοῦ." 
το. Παρεγένοντο ὃ δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ µήτηρ” καὶ of ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, 
καὶ οὐκ ἠδύναντο 4 συντυχεῖν αὐτῷ διὰ τὸν ὄχλον. 20. καὶ ἀπηγγέλη A here oaly 
αὐτῷ, λεγόντων,» ““H µήτηρ σου καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοί σου ἑστήκασιν ἔξω, πε 


ἰδεῖν σε θέλοντες., ὅ 


21. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, 


«Μήτηρ µου καὶ ἀδελφοί µου οὗτοί εἰσιν, οἱ τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ 


ἁ , A A > ῤ 27 
κούοντες και ποιουντες αὐτογ. 


22. Καὶ éyévero® ἐν μιᾷ τῶν ἡμερῶν, καὶ αὐτὸς ἐνέβη εἰς πλοῖον 
καὶ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “' Διέλθωμεν εἰς τὸ 


πέραν τῆς λίμνης: καὶ ἀνήχθησαν. 
καὶ κατέβη λαϊλαψ ἀνέμου εἰς τὴν λίμνην,, 


:ἀφύπνωσε. 


23. πλεόντων δὲ αὐτῶν 


«8 here only 
καν in N. T 


1 For 9 ov γνωσθησεται found in many texts NBL= 33 have ο ov µη γνωσθη 


(Tisch., W.H.). 


2 For yap αν in D al. BLE have av yap. 
3 wapeyevero in BDX 5ο, 71 cop. Τ.Κ. a grammatical correction. 


4 avtov after µητηρ in KD 69 (Tisch.). 


5 For και απ. NBDLE have απ. δε, and omit λεγοντων (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὅ oe after θελ. in BE (W.H.). 
δ eyev. Se in NABDL 1, 33, 69 al. 


7 Omit αντον NABDLAE al. 


® Ba have ανεµον after λιμνην (W.H. marg.). J. Weiss suggests that εις r. A. 


may be a gloss. 


the benefit of those who are within 
(τοῖς ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, Mt. v. 15), the in- 
mates. Is Lk. thinking of the Gentiles 
coming into the church ?—Ver. 17. 
γενήσεται: predictive = nothing hidden 
which shall not some day be revealed.— 
---Ύνωσθῇ, ἔλθῃ (NBL), the fut. ind. 
passes into aor. subj., with ov μὴ for οὐ 
=nothing hidden which is not bound to 
become known (Meyer).—Ver. 18 en- 
forces the duty thence arising, to be 
careful hearers ; hearing so as really to 
know ; shortcoming here will disqualify 
for giving light. Jesus has inculcated 
the duty of placing the light so that it 
may illuminate ; He now inculcates the 
prior duty of being lights.—8 δοκεῖ 
ἔχειν: the Soxet may be an editorial 
explanatory comment to remove the 
apparent contradiction between μὴ ἔχῃ 
and 6 ἔχει (Weiss, Mk.-evang., p. 157). 
Vv. 19-21. Mother and brethren (Mt. 
xii. 46-50, Mk. iii. 31-35). Given in a 
different connection from that in Mt. 
and Mk. The connection here seems 
purely topical: the visit of the friends of 
Jesus gives Him occasion to indicate 


who are they who represent the good, 
fruitful soil (ver. 21).—Ver. 19. διὰ τὸν 
ὄχλον: a crowd seems unsuitable here 
(though not in Mt. and Mk.), for just 
before, Jesus has been conversing with 
His disciples in private.—Ver. 21. Lk. 
omits the graphic touches—looking 
around, and stretching out His hands 
towards His disciples, concerned only 
to report the memorable word.—oi τὸν 
λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ, those hearing and 
doing the word of God. The expression 
here is somewhat conventional and 
secondary as compared with Mt. and 
Mk. Cf. chap. vi. 47, and λόγος τοῦ 
Θεοῦ, viii. 11. 

Vv. 22-25. The tempest on the lake 
(Mt. viii. 23-27, Mk. iv. 35-41). The 
voyage across the lake took place, 
according to Mk., on the day of the 
parables; it was an escape from the 
crowd, a very real and credible account. 
The whole situation in Lk. is different : 
no preaching from a boat, no escape 
when the preaching was over. It 
simply happened on one of the days 
(ἐν pig τῶν ἡμερῶν).- Ψετ. 22. τῆς 


§22 KATA AOYKAN VILL. 


{α Cor. xv. συνεπληροῦντο, καὶ * ἐκινδύνευον. 


ο 24. προσελθόντες δὲ διήγειραν- 
αὐτόν, λέγοντες, 


Επιστάτα, ἐπιστάτα, ἀπολλύμεθα., Ὁ δὲ 
ἐγερθεὶς  ἐπετίμησε τῷ ἀνέμῳ καὶ τῷ Εκλύδωνι τοῦ ὕδατος: καὶ 
ἐπαύσαντο, καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη. 25. etme δὲ αὐτοῖς, “Mod ἐστιν ΄ 
Φοβηθέντες δὲ ἐθαύμασαν, λέγοντες πρὸς ἀλλή- 
hous, “Tis dpa οὗτός ἐστιν, ὅτι καὶ τοῖς ἀνέμοις ἐπιτάσσει καὶ τῷ 


ce? 


g Jas. i. 6. 
ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν ;” 


ὕδατι, καὶ ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ; 

26. ΚΑΙ κατέπλευσαν εἰς τὴν χώραν τῶν Γαδαρηνῶν,ὲ τις ἐστὶν 
ἀντιπέραν ΄ τῆς Γαλιλαίας. 27. ἐξελθόντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν, 
ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἀνήρ tis® ἐκ τῆς πόλεως, ὃς εἶχεδ δαιμόνια ἐκ 
χρόνων ἱκανῶν, καὶ ἱμάτιον οὐκ ἐνεδιδύσκετο καὶ ἐν οἰκίᾳ οὐκ 
ἔμενεν, GAN’ ἐν τοῖς µνήµασιν. 
ἀνακράξας, προσέπεσεν αὐτῷ, καὶ φωνῇ µεγάλῃ εἶπε, “Ti ἐμοὶ καὶ 
σοί, ᾿Ιησοῦ, υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦῦ τοῦ ὑψίστου ; δέοµαί σου, µή µε: 


28. ἰδὼν δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ὃ 


1 διεγερθεις in NBL 13, 33 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 SABLX 1 al. omit εστιν. 


5 So in ARTAAN al. syr. verss. (including Sin.). [Γεργεσηνων in SLXE minusc. 6 


memph., etc. (Tisch.). 
reading (W.H.). 


“ αντιπερα in most uncials. 


Γερασηνων in BC*D vet. Lat. vulg.; the most probable 


5 Omit αντω ΜΒΕΞ 33. B has tis ανηρ. D, while retaining avrw, omits te. 


δ For ος ειχε NB 157 cop. have εχων. 
7 For εκ χρονων . 


. ενεδιδυσκετο SYBLE 1, 33, 131, 157 cop. al. have και 
χρονω ικανω ουκ ενεδυσατο ιµατιον (Tisch., W.H.). 


The true text is doubtful here, 


though I have assumed below that that adopted by Tisch. and W.H. is to be pre- 


ferred. 
8 Omit και NBDLXE 33 al. 


λίμνης: no need for this addition in 
Mk., or even in Mt., where Jesus is re- 
presented as in Capernaum. Lk. does 
not tell us where Jesus was at the time. 
—Ver. 23. ἀφύπνωσε, went off to 
sleep, fatigued with heat and speaking ; 
the storm implies sultry conditions ; 
ἀφυπνοῦν means both to awake = 
ἀφυπνίζειν, and to go to sleep  καθνπ- 
vouv ; vide Lobeck, ad Phryn., p. 224. 
---κατέβη, came down, from the nills.— 
συνεπληροῦντο, they (i.¢e., the boat) 
were getting full andin danger. Sea- 
men would naturally say, “ we were 
getting full,” when they meant the boat. 
Examples of such usage in Kypke.— 
Ver. 24. ἐπιστάτα: Lk.’s word for 
master, answering to διδάσκαλε, Mk., 
and κύριε, Mt.—r@ κλύδωνι τοῦ ὕδατος, 
the surge of the water.—Ver. 25. ποῦ, 
etc., where is your faith? a mild rebuke 
compared with Mt. and Mk. Note: 
Lk. ever spares the Twelve. ; 


® Omit τον θεον DE x (W.H. in brackets). 


Vv. 26-39. The demoniac of Gerasa 
(Mt. viii. 28-34, Mk. v. 1-20).—Ver. 26. 
κατέπλευσαν els τὴν χώραν, “they 
sailed down from the deep sea to the 
land, put in,” Grimm; appulerunt ad 
regionem, Raphel, who gives numerous 
examples of the use of this verb (here 
only in N. T.) in Greek authors.— 
τ. Γερασηνῶν, the Gerasenes, inhabi- 
tants of the town of Gerasa (Kersa, 
Thomson, Land and Book), near the 
eastern shore of the lake, a little south 
ot the mouth of Wadi Semach (Rob: 
Roy on the fordan, chap. xxiii.).— Ts 
ἐστὶν, etc.: this clause answers to Mk.’s. 
εἰς τὸ πέραν τ. @ By the relative 
clause Lk. avoids the double eis (J. 
Weiss in Meyer).—avtimepa τ. Γαλ., 
opposite Galilee, a vague indication; an 
editorial note for the benefit of readers. 
little acquainted with the country.— 
Ver. 27. ὀνὴρ ἐκ τῆς πόλεως, a man 
of, or from, the city; he did not come 


24—35. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

βασανίσῃς. 29. ΠαρήγγελλεΣ γὰρ τῷ mvedpan τῷ ἀκαθάρτα 
ἐξελθεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου: πολλοῖς γὰρ ἈΧβρόνοις συνηρπάκει 
αὐτόν, καὶ ἐδεσμεῖτο: ἁλύσεσι καὶ πέδαις Φυλασσόμενος, καὶ 
διαρρήσσων τὰ Seopa ἠλαύνετο ὑπὸ * τοῦ Saipovos* εἰς τὰς ἐρήμους. 
30. ἐπηρώτησε δὲ αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, λέγων,ὃ “Τί σοι ἐστὶν ὄνομα ® ;* 
‘O δὲ etme, “'Λεγεών'” ὅτι δαιμόνια πολλὰ εἰσῆλθεν Ἰ eis αὐτόν. 
31. καὶ παρεκάλει ὃ αὐτὸν ἵνα μὴ ἐπιτάξη αὗτοῖς eis τὴν ἄβυσσον 
ἀπελθεῖν. 32. ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ ἀγέλη χοίρων ἱκανῶν βοσκοµένων ® ἐν τῷ 
ὄρει: καὶ παρεκάλουν 10 αὐτὸν ἵνα ἐπιτρέψῃ αὐτοῖς εἰς ἐκείνους 
εἰσελθεῖν. καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοῖς. 33. ἐξελθόντα δὲ τὰ δαιμόνια 
ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἰσῆλθεν 1 εἰς τοὺς χοίρους: καὶ ὥρμησεν ἡ 
ἀγέλη κατὰ τοῦ κρημνοῦ εἰς τὴν λίμνην, καὶ ἀπεπνίγη. 34. ἰδόντες 
δὲ οἱ βόσκοντες τὸ γεγενημένον 1” ἔφυγον, καὶ ἀπελθόντες 15 ἀπήγγειλαν 
εἰς τὴν πόλιν καὶ Eis τοὺς ἀγρούς. 35. ἐξῆλθον δὲ ἰδεῖν τὸ γεγονός : 
καὶ ἦλθον πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ εὗρον καθήµενον τὸν ἄνθρωπον ad’ 


$23 


1 παρηγγειλεν in BE 69 (W.H. πιατρ.). 
2So in CD and other uncials. 


3 So in most uncials. 
4 δαιµονιον in NBCDE (Tisch., W.H.), 


NBLXZ 33 have εδεσµενετο. 
Seopevw are both rare (latter in Mt. xxiii. 4). 


BE have απο (W.H. text). 


δεσµεω and 


5 Omit Aeyov NB 1 al. vet. Lat. (W.H.) against CDL (Tisch.). 


6 ovopa εστιν in NBDLE 1, 33 al. 
8 παρεκαλουν in S&BCDL minusc. 


7 εισηλθεν before δαιµ. in NB. 


T.R. a correction. 


9 So in very many uncials, but BD have βοσκοµενη (W.H. text). 


10 παρεκαλεσαν in BCLE 1, 33 al. 
12 γεγονος in ΝΑΒΟΡΙ:Ξ al. fl. 


out of the city to meet Jesus.—éxwv 
δαιµ., having demons, a plurality with 
reference to ver. 30.—ovK ἐνεδύσατο, 
etc. : the description begun here is com- 
pleted in ver. 29. Mk. gives it all at 
once (v. 2-5). Lk. seems to follow Mk. 
but freely—unclothed, abode among the 
tombs, the two facts first mentioned.— 
Ver. 29. παρήγγελλεν yap: the com- 
mand caused the cry of fear, and the 
fear is explained in the clause following, 
introduced. by a second γὰρ----πολλοῖς 
χβόνοις, answers to πολλάκις in Mk. ν. 
4, therefore presumably used in the 
sense: oftentimes, frequently. So Eras- 
mus and Grotius, and most recent com- 
mentators. Meyer and others take it = 
during along time. Schanz combines 
the two senses. The disease was of an 
intermittent character, there were 
paroxysms of acute mania, and intervals 
of comparative quiet and rationality. 
When the paroxysms came on, the 
demon (one in ver. 29) was supposed to 


1 εισηλθον in most uncials. 
1 Omit απελθ. all uncials. 


seize him (συνηρπάκει). Then he had 
to be bound in chains and fetters, and 
kept under guard (Φνλασσόμενος, cf. 
A. V. and R. V. here), but all to no pur- 
pose, the demoniac force bursting the 
bonds and driving the poor victim into 
the deserts. The madman feared the 
return of an attack, hence his alarmed 
cry.—Ver. 30. ὅτι εἰσῆλθεν, etc.: Lk, 
gives this explanation of the name 
Legion ; in Mk. the demoniac gives it.— 
Ver. 31. eis τὴν ἄβυσσον, into the abyss 
(of Tartarus) instead of Mk.’s ἔξω 
τῆς χώρας, out of Decapolis.—Ver. 32. 
χοίρ. ἱκανῶν: for a large number, often 
in Lk.; his equivalent for Mk.’s 2000. 

Vv. 34-39. The sequel. Lk. tells the 
second part of the story very much as it 
is given in Mk., with slight stylistic 
variations. In ver. 36 he substitutes the 
expression πῶς ἐσώθη 6 δαιµονισθείς, 
how the demoniac was saved, for Mk.’s 
‘how it happened to the demoniac, and 
concerning the swine,” suggesting the 


524 


KATA AOYKAN VIII. 


οὗ τὰ δαιμόνια ἐξεληλύθει, ἱματισμένον καὶ σωφρονοῦντα, παρὰ 
τοὺς πόδας τοῦ Ἰησοῦ" καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν. 36. ἀπήγγειλαν δὲ αὐτοῖς 
cai? οἱ ἰδόντες πῶς ἐσώθη ὁ δαιµονισθεί. 37. καὶ ἠρώτησαν ® 
αὐτὸν ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος τῆς περιχώρου τῶν Γαδαρηνῶν 4 ἀπελθεῖν ἀπ᾿ 
αὐτῶν, ὅτι φόβῳ peyddw συνείχοντο: αὐτὸς δὲ ἐμβὰς eis τὸ ὃ 
πλοῖον ὑπέστρεψεν. 38. ἐδέετο δὲ αὐτοῦ ὁ ἀνὴρ ad’ οὗ ἐξεληλύθει 
τὰ δαιµόνια, εἶναι σὺν αὐτῷ. ἀπέλυσε δὲ αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, λέγων, 
39. ''Ὑπόστρεφε εἰς τὸν οἶκόν σου, καὶ διηγοῦ ὅσα ἐποίησέ cor? ὁ 
Θεός.” Καὶ ἀπῆλθε, καθ ὅλην τὴν πόλιν κηρύσσων ὅσα ἐποίησεν 


Φα ης 3 A 
αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησούς. 


40. ἘΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ ἐνδ τῷ ὑποστρέψαι» τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, ἀπεδέξατο 
αὐτὸν ὁ ὄχλος: ἦσαν γὰρ πάντες προσδοκῶντες αὐτόν. 


41. Καὶ ἰδού, ἦλθεν ἀνὴρ ᾧ ὄνομα Ἰάειρος, καὶ αὐτὸς 10 ἄρχων τῆς 


συναγωγῆς ὑπῆρχε, καὶ πεσὼν παρὰ τοὺς πόδας τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, παρεκάλει 


1 εξηλθεν in ΜΒ (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 Omit και NBCDL 33, 6ο al. 


3 So in DL al., and, as more difficult, preferable. ΔΕΟ al. have the sing. (W.H.). 


4 Vide at ver. 26. 


6 ΜΒΓΙ, omit ο I., an explanatory addition. 


5 Omit το BCL al. 
Τσοι εποι. in SBCDL minusc. 


8 εγεν. Se ev in S$CD and many other uncials (Tisch.). BL 33 al. have ev δε (W.H.). 


9 SSB have υνποστρεφειν (Tisch., W.H.). 


idea that the destruction of the swine 
was a part of the cure. They had to be 
drowned that he might be restored to 
sanity.—Ver. 37. Τε. is very careful to 
involve the whole population in the 
request that Jesus would leave the 
country—the whole multitude of the 
district of Gerasa, town and country, 
citizens and farmers. And he gives as 
the reason, ὅτι φόβῳ µεγάλῳ συνείχοντο, 
they were possessed with a great fear, 
panic-stricken.—Ver. 38. éd€ero, Ionic 
form of the imperfect of δέοµαι. W. 
and H. prefer ἐδεῖτο, the reading of BL. 
The healed man’s request, though not 
granted, would gratify Jesus, as a con- 
trast to the unanimous petition of the 
Gerasenes that He would leave the place. 
—Ver. 39. ὑπόστρεφε: it was good for 
the man that he should return to his 
home and people, and tell them what 
had befallen him through the mercy of 
God (ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεός). It was 
good for the people also. They needed 
a missionary greatly.—kxa@’ ὅλην τὴν 
πόλιν, over the whole city. Mk. says 
in Decapolis. 

Ver. 40. On the western side (Mk. v. 
αχ). Lk. still follows Mk. closely, 
mentioning the cordial welcome given 
Jesus on His arrival on the Galilean 


19 BD have ουτος (W.H. text), 


shore, and proceeding to narrate the 
incidents of the woman with a flux, and 
Jairus’ daughter.—o ὄχλος, the crowd. 
This crowd is unexplained by Lk., who 
says nothing of a crowd when he intro- 
duces his narrative of the voyage to the 
eastern shore (ver. 22). In Mk. the 
presence of a crowd is easily accounted 
for: Jesus had suddenly left the great 
congregation to which He had spoken 
in parables, and as His stay on the 
eastern side was cut short, when He 
returned to the western shore the crowd 
had hardly dispersed, or at least could 
reassemble on short notice.g Mk. does 
not say the crowd, but a great crowd.— 
ἀπεδέξατο implies a cordial reception. 
Cf. Acts xv. 4. Raphel gives examples 
of this sense from Greek authors. 
Euthy. took it in this sense, giving as 
the reason for the welcome: ὥς εὐεργέτην 
καὶ σωτῆρα. -- προσδοκῶντε: the 
parables, not to speak of recent healings, 
account for the expectation. 

Vv. 41-42. The story of Fairus’ 
daughter begins (Mt. ix. 18, 19, Mk. v. 
21-24).--ἄρχων τῆς συναγωγῆς instead of 
ἀρχισυνάγωγος (Mk.), as more intelligible 
to Gentile readers. But after having 
explained its meaning by the use of this 
phrase he employs the other in ver. 49. 


36- 48. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


αὐτὸν εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ: 42. ὅτι θυγάτηρ μονογενὴς ἦν 
αὐτῷ ὡς ἐτῶν δώδεκα, καὶ αὕτη ἀπέθνησκεν. Ἐν δὲ τῷ ὑπάγειν 
αὐτὸν οἱ ὄχλοι συνέπνιγον αὐτόν. 43. Kat yuri) οὖσα ἐν ῥύσει 
αἵματος ἀπὸ ἐτῶν δώδεκα, ἥτις eis ἰατροὺς προσαναλώσασα ὅλον τὸν 
βίον] οὐκ ἴσχυσεν bw’? οὐδενὸς θεραπευθῆναι, 44. προσελθοῦσα 
ὄπισθεν, ἤψατο τοῦ κρασπέδου τοῦ ἱματίου αὐτοῦ" καὶ παραχρῆμα 
ἕστη ἡ ῥύσις τοῦ αἵματος αὐτῆς. 45. καὶ εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Tis 6 
ἀψάμενός µου; ᾿Αρνουμένων δὲ πάντων, εἶπεν ὁ Πέτρος καὶ οἱ 
pet αὐτοῦ,ῖ “"᾿Ἐπιστάτα, οἱ ὄχλοι συνέχουσί σε καὶ ἀποθλίβουσι, 
καὶ λέγει, Τίς ὁ ἀψάμενός pout;” 46. Ὁ δὲ Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, 
“"Ἠψατό pou τίς: ἐγὼ γὰρ ἔγνων δύναμιν ἐξελθοῦσαν ὃ ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ.” 
47. Ἰδοῦσα δὲ ἡ γυνὴ ὅτι οὐκ ἔλαθε, τρέµουσα ᾖλθε, καὶ προσπε- 
σοῦσα αὐτῷ, δι ἣν αἰτίαν ἤψατο αὐτοῦ ἀπήγγειλεν αὐτῷ ® ἐνώπιον 


+ ee. 


παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ὡς ἰάθη παραχρῆμα. 48. 6 δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, 


“Odpoet,” θύγατερ;δ ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ σε: πορεύου εἰς εἰρήνην. 


525 


1 From εις tatpoug {ο βιον omitted in BD (W.H.); may be a gloss from Mk. 


2am in WBE. 


ὅ B some minusc. and vergs. omit οι pet. αυτον (W.H.). 
4 Omit και λεγεις . . . µου NBL minusc. verss. (Tisch., W.H.) ; comes from Mk.. 


5 εξεληλυθυιαν in KBL 33. 
6 αντω omitted in NABDLXE al. 


7 S$BDLE minusc. verss. omit θαρσει, which may come from Mt. 
8 So in most uncials; BKL have θυγατηρ (W.H.). 


—Ver. 42. povoyevns (as in vii. 12): 
peculiar to Lk. The name of the father, 
his rank, and the girl’s age (all lacking 
in Mt.) Lk. has in common with Mk. 
This feature he adds after his wont to 
enhance the benevolence of Jesus.— 
ἀπέθνησκεν, was dying. Mk.’s phrase, 
ἐσχάτως ἔχει, is avoided as not good 
Greek. In Mt. she is already dead. 
---συνέπνιγον, were suffocating Him; a 
very strong expression. Mk.’s word 
is sufficiently strong µ(συνέθλιβον, 
thronged), and if there was to be 
exaggeration we should hardly have 
expected it from Lk. But he uses the 
word to make Christ’s quick perception 
of the special touch from behind (ver. 
45) the more marvellous. 

Vv. 43-48. The woman with an issue 
(Mt. ix. 20-22, Mk. v. 25-34).—Ver. 43. 
ἀπὸ; indicating the terminus aquo. Mk. 
uses the accusative of duration.— 
προσαναλώσασα (here only in N. T.), 
having expended in addition: to loss of 
health was added loss of means in the 
effort to gain it back.—Bfov, means of 
life, as in xv. 12, 30, xxi. 4.—ovK ἴσχυσεν, 
etc., was not able to get healing from 


any (physician), a milder way of putting 
it than Mk.’s.—Ver. 44. κρασπέδον, 
the tassel hanging over the shoulder; 
this feature not in Mk., a curious 
omission in so graphic a writer.—rapa- 
χρῆμα: Lk.’s equivalent for εὐθὺς.--- 
ἔστη, the flow of blood (ῥύσις) stopped. 
ἱστάναι, the technical term for this 
experience.—Ver. 45. 6 Πέτρος: Mk. 
says “the disciples,” but one would 
speak for the rest, and Lk. naturally 
makes Peter the spokesman.—owvéyovot 
σε, hem thee ἵπ.-- ἀποθλίβουσιν, squeeze, 
like grapes (Joseph., Ant., ii., ν. 2).— 
Ver. 46. ἐγὼ ἔγνων: Lk. puts into the 
mouth of Jesus what in Mk. is a remark 
of the narrator. Vide notes on this in- 
cident in Mt. and Mk, 

Vv. 49-56. Previous narrative resumed 
(Mt. ix. 23-26, Mk. v. 35-43).—Ver. 49. 
τις: One messenger, several in Mk.; one 
enough for the purpose.—7rapa τ. ἀρχ., 
from the ruler = belonging to his house. 
Vide Mk. iii. 21: ob wap’ αὐτοῦ. Mk. has 
ἀπὸ here.—Ver. 50. ἀκούσας: Mk. has 
παρακούσας, the message being spoken 
not to Jesus but to Jairus: He over- 
heard it.—pdévov πίστενσον, etc., only. 


526 


KATA AOYKAN VIII. 49—56. 


49. Ἔτι αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, ἔρχεταί τις παρὰ τοῦ ἀρχισυναγώγου, 
λέγων αὐτῷ, “Ὅτι τέθνηκεν ἡ θυγάτηρ σου: μὴ” σκύλλε τὸν 
διδάσκαλον.; 50. Ὁ δὲ “Ingots ἀκούσας ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ, λέγων,ὰ 
“Mi φοβοῦ: µόνον πίστευε," καὶ σωθήσεται.᾿ 51. Εἰσελθὼν ὅ δὲ 
eis τὴν οἰκίαν, οὐκ ἀφῆκεν εἰσελθεῖν οὐδένα,ὸ εἰ μὴ Πέτρον καὶ 
Ἰάκωβον καὶ Ἰωάννην,: καὶ τὸν πατέρα τῆς παιδὸς καὶ τὴν μητέρα. 


53. ἔκλαιον δὲ πάντες, καὶ ἐκόπτοντο αὐτήν. 
κλαίετε: οὖκδ ἀπέθανεν, ἀλλὰ καθεύδει.. 


αὐτοῦ, εἰδότες ὅτι ἀπέθανεν. 
καὶ; κρατήσας τῆς χειρὸς 
ἐγείρου.” 10 


ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “Mi 
53- Καὶ κατεγέλων 
54. αὐτὸς δὲ ἐκβαλὼν ἔξω πάντας, 
αὐτῆς, ἐφώνησε, λέγων, ““H παῖς 


55. Καὶ ἐπέστρεψε τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτῆς, καὶ ἀνέστη 
παραχρῆμα” καὶ διέταξεν αὐτῇ δοθῆναι Φαγεῖν. 


5 6. καὶ ἐξέστη- 


σαν ot γονεῖς αὐτῆς: & δὲ παρήγγειλεν αὐτοῖς μηδενὶ εἰπεῖν τὸ 


γεγονός. 


1 Omit αυτω (expletive) QBLXE= 1, 33. 
2 pyKete in NBD. 

3 Omit λεγων with S$BLXAE 1, 33 al. 
4 πιστενσον in BLE. 

5 ελθων in most uncials and verss. 


6 For ovSeva BCDLX 33, 69 have τινα συν αντω (Tisch., W.H.). 


7 lwav. before lax. in BCD and many other uncials. 


T Ro =" NL 33 


8 For ουκ SBCDL have ov yap (W.H.; Tisch. = T.R.). 
® S$BDLX minusc. omit εκβαλων . . . και; imported from Mk. 


19 eyerpe in NBCDX 1, 33 (W.H.). 


believe and she shall be saved—Paulinism 
in the physical sphere.—Ver. οι. In B 
and other MSS. the usual order of the 
three disciples—Peter, James, John—is 
changed into Peter, John, James. —Ver. 
εἰδότες ὅτι ἀπέθανεν: Lk. is care- 
ful to add this remark to exclude the 
idea that it was not a case of real death; 
his aim here, as always, to magnify the 
power as well as the benevolence of 
Jesus.—Ver. 55. τὸ πνεῦμα, her spirit 
returned = Wuxi in Acts xx. 1ο.--φαγεῖν: 
the order to give the resuscitated child 
food is not peculiar to Lk., but he places 
it in a more prominent position than 
Mk. to show that as she had been really 
dead she was now really alive and well; 
needing food and able to take it. Godet 
remarks on the calmness with which 
Jesus gave the order after such a 
stupendous event. “As simply as & 
physician feels the pulse of a patient He 
regulates her diet for the day.” 
CHAPTER IX. THE CLOSE OF THE 
GaLILEAN Ministry. SETTING THE 
Facr TowarDs JERUSALEM.—VV. 1-50 


contain sundry particulars which together 
form the closing scenes of the Galilean 
ministry: the mission of the Twelve, 
the feeding of the thousands, the con- 
versation on the Christ and the cross, 
the transfiguration, the epileptic boy, the 
conversation on ‘“ who is the greatest ”. 
At ver. 51 begins the long division of the 
Gospel, extending to xviii. 14, which 
forms the chief peculiarity of Lk., some- 
times called the Great Interpolation or 
Insertion, purporting to be the narrative 
of a journey southwards towards Jeru- 
salem through Samaria, therefore some- 
times designated the Samaritan ministry 
(Baur and the Tibingen school), but in 
reality consisting for the most part of a 
miscellaneous collection of didactic 
pieces. At xviii. 15 Lk. rejoins the 
company of his brother evangelists, not 
to leave them again till the tragic end. 
Vv. 1-6. The mission of the Twelve 
(Mt. x. 1, 5-15, Mk. vi. 7-13).—Ver. 1. 
συγκαλεσάµενος δὲ: the δὲ turns atten- 
tion to a new subject, and the part 
συγκαλ. implies that it is a matter of 


ΙΧ. I—6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


527 


IX. 1. ΣΥΓΚΑΛΕΣΑΜΕΝΟΣ δὲ τοὺς δώδεκα μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, 
ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς δύναμιν καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ δαιμόνια, καὶ 


νόσους θεραπεύειν - 


βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἰᾶσθαι τοὺς ἀσθενοῦντας.»; 


2. καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς κηρύσσειν τὴν 


3. καὶ εἶπε 


πρὸς αὐτούς, '' Μηδὲν αἴρετε cis τὴν ὁδόν' μήτε ῥάβδους,ὃ µήτε 
πήραν, µήτε ἄρτον, µήτε ἀργύριον, µήτε ἀνὰ δύο χιτῶνας ἔχειν. 
4- καὶ eis ἣν ἂν οἰκίαν εἰσέλθητε, ἐκεῖ µένετε, καὶ ἐκεῖθεν ἐξέρχεσθε. 
5. καὶ ὅσοι ἂν μὴ δέδωνταιΣ ὑμᾶς, ἐξερχόμενοι ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως 
ἐκείνης καὶ ὃ τὸν κονιορτὸν ἀπὸ τῶν ποδῶν ὑμῶν ἀποτινάξατε;' eis 


, ὃν > 4. 2 
μαρτυριον ἐπ GuUTOUS. 


6. ᾿Εξερχόμενοι δὲ διήρχοντο κατὰ τὰς 


κώμας, εὐαγγελιζόμενοι καὶ θεραπεύοντες πανταχοῦ. 


1 Many uncials (BD, etc.) omit µαθ. 
«ποστολους. 


Some texts (ΝΟΙ.Ξ al.) have 


αντον. 


? B syrr. cur. and sin. omit τους ασθ. (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 ραβδον in NBCDLE 1, 33, 69 al. 


4 Omit ανα S$BCLE; found in Dand many other uncials. 


5 δεχωνται in SABCLE. T.R.=D al. 
6 Omit και NBCDLXE 1, 33 verss. 


7 αποτινασσετε in NB 1, 131, 157 (Tisch., W.H.). 


importance: calling together the Twelve, 
out of the larger company of disciples 
that usually followed Jesus, including 
the women mentioned in viii, 1-3.— 
δύναμιν καὶ ἐξουσίαν, power and right; 
power implies right. The man that can 
cast out devils and heal disease is 
entitled to do so, nay bound. This 
principle found an important application 
in St. Paul’s claim to be an apostle, 
which really rested on fitness, insight. I 
understand Christianity, therefore I am 
entitled to be an apostle of it. Lk. 
alone has both words to express un- 
limited authority (Hahn). Mt. and Mk. 
have ἐξουσίαν.---ἐπὶ πάντα, etc., over all 
the demons, and (also power and 
authority) to heal diseases, the latter a 
subordinate function; thoroughly to 
quell the demons (πάντα emphatic) the 
main thing. Hence the Seventy on their 
return speak of that alone (x. 17).—Ver. 
42. This might have been viewed as an 
incidental mention of preaching as 
another subordinate funetion, but for the 
reference to healing (ἱᾶσθαι), which 
suggests that this verse is another way 
of stating the objects of the mission, 
perhaps taken from another source.— 
Ver. 2. The instructions in this and the 
next two verses follow pretty closely the 
version in Mk.—pydév αἴρετε cis τὴν 
ὁδόν: as in Mk., but in direct speech, 


T.R. = parallels (aor.). 


while Mk.’s is indirect (ἵνα p. αἴρωσιν.) 
—pyre ῥάβδον: Lk. interprets the pro- 
hibition more severely than Mk. Nota 
staff (Mk. except a staff οη]γ).---ἀργύριον, 
silver, for Mk.’s χαλκόν: silver the 
common metal for coinage among the 
Greeks, copper among the Romans.— 
δύο χιτῶνας, two tunics each, one on and 
one for change.—éyew : infinitive, after 
αἴρετε, imperative. It may be a case of 
the infinitive used as an imperative, of 
which one certain instance is to be found 
in Phil. iii. 16 (στοιχεῖν = walk), or it 
may be viewed as a transition from 
direct to indirect speech (so most com- 
mentators). Bengel favours the first 
view.—Ver. 4. Thus far of material 
wants. We now pass to social relations. 
The general direction here is: stay in 
the same house all the time you are in a 
place; pithily put by Lk. = ἐκεῖ µένετε, 
ἐκεῖθεν ἐξέρχεσθε, there remain, thence 
depart, both adverbs referring to οἰκίαν. 
—Ver. 5. By omitting the ἀκούσωσιν 
ὑμῶν of Mk. Lk. gives the impression 
that non-receiving refers to the mission- 
aries not as preachers but as guests = It 
they will not take you into the house 
you select, do not try another house, 
leave the place (so Hahn). This would 
be rather summary action, and contrary 
to the spirit of the incident ix. 52-56,— 
Ver. 6. Brief statement, as in Mk.. as 


ς28 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


IX. 


7. Ἴκουσε δὲ "Ἡρώδης ὁ τετράρχης τὰ γινόμενα ὑπ αὐτοῦ 
πάντα" καὶ διηπόρει, διὰ τὸ λέγεσθαι ὑπό τινων, ““Ὅτι Ἰωάννης 
ἐγήγερται ” ἐκ vexpav-” 8. ὑπό τινων δέ, “Ὅτι Ἡλίας ἐφάνη 


ἄλλων δέ, '"Ὅτι προφήτης εἲς Σ τῶν ἀρχαίων ἀνέστη.” 


g. Καὶ 


εἶπεν 64 Ἡρώξης, ''Ἰωάννην ἐγὼ ἀπεκεφάλισα : τίς δέ ἐστιν οὗτος, 


περὶ οὗ ἐγὼ ὅ ἀκούω τοιαῦτα ;” 


4 - 
Καὶ ἐζήτει ἰδεῖν αὐτόν. 


1Ο. Καὶ ὑποστρέψαντες οἱ ἀπόστολοι διηγήσαντο αὐτῷ ὅσα 
ἐποίησαν: καὶ παραλαβὼν αὐτούς, ὑπεχώρησε κατ ἰδίαν εἰς τόπον 


ἔρημον πόλεως καλουµένης 5 Βηθσαϊδά. 11. οἱ δὲ ὄχλοι γνόντες 
ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῷ: καὶ Ἀ- ἑάμενος Ἱ αὐτούς, ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς περὶ τῆς 


, lol lod 4 
βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ τοὺς xpeiay ἔχοντας θεραπείας ἰᾶτο. 


1 Omit υπ αυτου NBCDLE 6ο al. 
Σηγερθη in SBCLE al. 
Στις in NBCLXAE 1, 13, 33. 


4 For και ειπεν SBCDLE 1, 33 al. have ειπεν δε, and SCD al. pl. omit ο found 


in BL. 
5 kSBCLE omit εγω. 


6 For εις T. ερ. π. καλουµενης BLXE 33 sah. cop. have εις πολιν καλουµενην, 
which seems inconsistent with retirement ; hence the introduction of τοπον 6ρηβον 
= the desert of the city (Tisch., W.H., follow BL, etc.). 


7 αποδεξ. in SBDLXE 33 al. 


to the execution of the mission, but 
wanting his reference to the use of oil in 
healing. 

Hahn states that this mission was 
purely pedagogic, for the benefit of the 
Twelve, not of the people. This is a 
mere unfounded assertion. The train- 
ing of the Twelve by no means appears 
a prominent aim of Jesus in the pages of 
Lk. ; much less so than in Mt. and Mk. 
Vv. 7-9. Herod’s interest in Fesus (Mt. 
xiv. 1-2, Mk. vi. 14-16).—é τετράρχης as 
in Mt., βασιλεὺς in Mk.—ra γινόμενα 
πάντα, all the things which were 
happening, most naturally taken as 
referring to the mission of the Twelve, 
though it is difficult to believe that 
Herod had not heard of Jesus till then. 
—Sinwdpe, was utterly perplexed, in 
Lk.’s writings οπ]γ.--διὰ τὸ λέγεσθαι 
ὑπὸ τινῶν. What Lk. represents as said 
by some, Mt. and Mk., doubtless truly, 
make Herod himself say. Vide notes on 
Mt. and Mk.—Ver. 8. ἐφάνη, appeared, 
the proper word to use ef one who had 
not died, but been translated.—Ver. 9. 
Ἰ. ἐγὼ ἀπεκεφάλισα: the fact stated in 
the form of a confession by the crimi- 
nal, but the grim story not {ο]ά.---ἐγὼ, 
emphatic, the “I” of a guilty troubled 
conscience.—rts: he has no theory, but is 


simply puzzled, yet the question almost 
implies suspicion that Jesus is John re- 
turned to life. Could there be two such 
men at the same period ὃ--καὶ ἐζήτει 
iSeiv αὐτόν: this points forward tc 
xxiii. 8. 

Vv. 10-17. Feeding of the multitude 
(Mt. xiv. 13-21, Mk. vi. 30-44, John vi. 
1-14).—Ver. 10. The Twelve return 
from their mission and report what they 
had done; Mk. adds and taught.— 
ὑπεχώρῆσε, withdrew, here and in v. 
16, only, in N. T. The reason of this 
retirement does not appear in Lk.’s 
narrative, nor whether Jesus with His 
disciples went by land or by sea.—Ver. 
II. ot ὄχλοι: no particular multitude 
is meant, but just the crowds that were 
wont to gather around Jesus. In Mt. 
and Mk. Jesus appears as endeavouring (in 
vain) to escape from the people. In Lk. 
this feature is not prominent. Even the 
expression τόπον ἔρημον in ver. 1ο is 
probably not genuine. What Lk. 
appears to have written is that Jesus 
withdsew privately into a city called 
Βεϊηφα]άα.- -ἰἀποδεξάμενος, the more 
probable reading, implies a willing recep- 
tion or the multitude. Vide viii. 40.— 
Ver. 12. κλίνειν, the day began to 
decline; the faci is alluded to here, not 


7—18, EYAITEAION 

12. Ἡ δὲ ἡμέρα ἤρξατο κλίνειν’ προσελθόντες δὲ οἱ δώδεκα εἶπον 
αὐτῷ, '᾽Απόλυσον τὸν ὄχλον, ἵνα ἀπελθόντες 1 eis τὰς κύκλωῳ κώµας 
καὶ τοὺς ἀγροὺς καταλύσωσι, καὶ εὕρωσιν ἐπισιτισμόν ' ὅτι Ode ἐν 
ἐρήμῳ τόπῳ ἐσμέν. 13. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὗτούς, “ Δότε αὐτοῖς ὑμεῖς 
φαγεῖν. 3. οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “'Οὐκ εἰσὶν ἡμῖν πλεῖον ἢ πέντε ἄρτοι καὶ 
δύο ἰχθύες, εἶ µήτι πορευθέντες ἡμεῖς ἀγοράσωμεν eis πάντα τὸν 
λαὸν τοῦτον Bpwpara.” 14. ΄Ἠσαν γὰρ ὡσεὶ ἄνδρες πεντακισχίλιοι. 
Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, “΄ Κατακλίνατε αὐτοὺς κλισίας 
ἀνὰ ὃ πεντήκοντα. 15. Καὶ ἐποίησαν οὕτω, καὶ ἀνέκλιναν * ἅπαντας. 
16. Λαβὼν δὲ τοὺς πέντε ἄρτους καὶ τοὺς δύο ἰχθύας, ἀναβλέψας εἰς 
τὸν οὐρανόν, εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς, καὶ κατέκλασε, καὶ ἐδίδου τοῖς 
μαθηταῖς παρατιθέναι ὃ τῷ ὄχλω. 17. καὶ ἔφαγον καὶ ἐχορτάσ- 
θησαν πάντες: καὶ ἤρθη τὸ περισσεῦσαν αὐτοῖς κλασμάτων κόφινοι 


929 


δώδεκα. 


18. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτὸν προσευχόµενον καταµόνας, 
lol - , 
συνῆσαν αὐτῷ of µαθηταί: καὶ ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτούς, λέγων, “Tiva 


Ἱπορευθεντες in KRABDE al, 


> dayew υμεις in B (Tisch., W.H., text), also with $§ αρτοι before πεντε, and 


with pgAC al. ιχθνες before Svo. 


3 woe. before ava in S$ BCDLRE 33 (W.H.). 


4 κατεκλιναν in SBLE 1, 33, 69 al. 
5 wapadewar in SBCX 1. 


in a participial clause, but in an inde- 
pendent sentence, as bringing an un- 
welcome close to the beneficent labours 
of Jesus. He went on teaching and 
healing, but (δὲ) the day, etc.—xatadv- 
σωσι: the disciples in Lk. are solicitous 
about the lodging as well as the feeding 
of the Ῥεορ]ε.---ἐπισιτισμόν, provisions, 
here only in N. T., but often in classics, 
e.g., With reference to the provisioning 
of an army (commeatus).—Ver. 13. 
πλεῖον ἢ: on the construction, vide 
Winer, § 58, 4 obs. 1.—eb µήτι... 
ἀγοράσωμεν, unless perhaps we are to 
buy, etc.; et with subjunctive is one of 
the forms of protasis in N. T. to express 
a future supposition with some pro- 
bability, εἰ takes also present and future 
indicative. Vide Burton, M. and T., § 
252. That Lk. did not regard this pro- 
posal as, if possible, very feasible, appears 
from his mentioning the number present 
at this stage—ver. 14. Hence also he 
does not think it worth while to mention 
the amount of money at their disposal 
(2οο denarii, Mk. vi. 37).--κλισίας, 
dining parties, answering to Mk.’s 
ouprogi. Mk.’s πρασιαὶ, describing 
the appearance to the eye, like flower 


Tare = Deal, 


beds, with their gay garments, red, blue, 
yellow, Lk. omits.—Ver. 16. εὐλόγησεν 
αὐτοὺς, He blessed them (the loaves), 
and by the blessing made them sufficient 
for the wants of all. In Mt. and Mk. 
εὐλόγησεν has no object. This is the 
only trait added by Lk. to enhance the 
greatness of the miracle, unless the 
position of πάντες after ἐχορτάσθησαν 
be another = they ate and were filled, 
all ; not merely a matter of each getting 
a morsel. 

Vy. 18-27. The Christ and the cross 
(Mt. xvi. 13-28, Mk. viii. 27-ix. 1). At 
this point occurs a great gap in Lk.’s 
narrative as compared with those of Mt. 
and Mk., all between Mt. xiv. 22 and 
xvi. 12 and between Mk. vi. 45 and viii. 
27 being omitted. Various explanations 
of the omission have been suggested: 
accident (Meyer, Godet), not in the copy 
of Mk. used by Lk. (Reuss), mistake of 
the eye, passing from the second feed- 
ing as if it were the first (Beyschlag). 
These and other explanations imply that 
the omission was unintentional. But 
against this hypothesis is the fact that 
the edges of the opposite sides of the 
gap are brought together in Lk.’s 


34 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 1x. 


530 
µε λέγουσιν οἱ Sxdor! etvar;” 19. Ot δὲ ἀποκριθέντες εἶπον, 
6 Ἰωάννην τὸν Βαπτιστήν > ἄλλοι δέ, Ἡλίαν. ἄλλοι δέ, ὅτι προφήτης 
τις τῶν ἀρχαίων ἀνέστη.” 20. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτοῖς, “΄ Ὑμεῖς δὲ τίνα µε 
᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Πέτρος 2 εἶπε, “΄Τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦ 
21. Ὁ δὲ ἐπιτιμήσας αὐτοῖς παρήγγειλε μηδενὶ εἰπεῖν 3 


λέγετε εἶναι ;” 
Θεοῦ.” 
τοῦτο, 22. εἰπών, ““Ore δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν, 
καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ ἀρχιερέων καὶ ypap- 
/ x a a ~ ή ς / 3 a 74 

µατέων, καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι, καὶ τῇ τρίτη ἡμέρα ἐγερθῆναι. 

23. Ἔλεγε δὲ πρὸς πάντας, “Et τις θέλει ὀπίσω µου ἐλθεῖν,Σ 
ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαυτόν, καὶ ἀράτω τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ καθ ἡμέραν, 


1 οἱ οχλοι λεγ. in SBLE 1, 131 sah. cop, 
2 Πετρος δε αποκ. in $$BCLE 1 sah. cop. 


ὄλεγειν in NABCDLE ai. pl. 
* So in most uncials. 
}ερχεσθαι in SYBCDLE al. 


ACD minusc. have αναστηναι (W.H. πιατρ.). 
The important authorities are divided between 


απαρνησασθω and the simple αρνησ. (W.H. former in margin, latter in text). 


narrative at ix, 18: Jesus alone praying, 
as in Mt. xiv. 23, Mk. vi. 45-46, yet the 
disciples are with Him though alone 
(κατὰ µόνας συνῆσαν a. ot padynrat), and 
He proceeds to interrogate them. This 
raises the question as to the motives for 
intentional omission, which may have 
been such as these: avoidance of 
duplicates with no new lesson (second 
feeding), anti-Pharisaic matter much 
restricted throughout (ceremonial wash- 
ing), Jewish particularism not suitable in 
a Gentile Gospel, not even the appearance 
of it (Syrophenician woman).—«ara 
µόνας, the scene remains unchanged 
in Lk.—that of the feeding of the 5000. 
No trace in this Gospel of Caesarea 
Philippi, or indeed of the great northerly 
journey (or journeys) so prominently 
recognised in Mk., the aim of which was 
to get away from crowds, and obtain 
leisure for intercourse with the Twelve 
in view of the approaching fatal crisis. 
This omission can hardly be without 
intention. Whether Lk. knew Mk.’s 
Gospel or not, so careful and interested 
an inquirer can hardly have been 
ignorant of that northern excursion. He 
may have omitted it because it was not 
rich in incident, in favour of the 
Samaritan journey about which he had 
much to tell. But the very raison d’éire 
of the journey was the hope that it might 
be a quiet one, giving leisure for inter- 
course with the Twelve. But this 
private fellowship of Jesus with His 
disciples with a view to their instruction 
is just one of the things to which justice 


is not done in this Gospel. Their need 
of instruction is not emphasised. From 
Lk.’s narrative one would never guess 
the critical importance of the conversa- 
tion at Caesarea Philippi, as regards 
either Peter’s confession or the announce- 
ment by Jesus of the coming passion.— 
Ver. 20. τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ: even 
the form of the confession, as here given, 
hides its significance. Peter speaks the 
language of the apostolic age, the Christ 
of God, a commonplace of the Christian 
faith. Mk.’s Thou art the Christ, laconic, 
emphatic, is original by comparison, and 
Mt.’s form still more sounds like the 
utterance of a fresh, strong conviction, a 
new revelation flashed into the soul of 
Peter. 

Vv. 21-27. The cross and cross-bear- 
ing.—Ver. 22. εἰπὼν introduces re- 
ference to the coming sufferings of Jesus 
in a quite incidental way as a reason 
why the disciples should keep silence as 
to the Messiahship of their Master, just 
confessed. The truth is that the con- 
versation as to the Christ was a mere 
prelude to a very formal, solemn, and 
plain-spoken’announcement on a pain- 
ful theme, to which hitherto Jesus had 
alluded only in veiled mystic language. 
Cf. the accounts in Mt. and Mk. (xvi. 
21, viii. 31).---ὅτι δεῖ, etc., the announce- 
ment is given in much the same words 
as in Mk.— Ver. 23. ἔλεγε δὲ πρὸς 
πάντας: with this formula Lk. smoothly 
passes from Christ’s statement concern- 
ing His own Passion to the kindred 
topic of cross-bearing as the law of 


bet on, EYATTEAION 

καὶ ἀκολουθείτω por. 24. ὃς γὰρ ἂν θέλῃη τὴν Wuxhy αὐτοῦ σῶσαι, 
ἀπολέσει αὐτήν: ὃς δ ἂν ἀπολέσῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, 
25. τί γὰρ ὠφελεῖται ἄνθρωπος, κερδήσας τὸν 
26. ὃς γὰρ ἂν 


οὗτος σώσει αὐτήν. 
κόσμον ὅλον, ἑαυτὸν δὲ ἀπολέσας ἢ ἵημιωθείς ; 
ἐπαισχυνθῇ µε καὶ τοὺς ἐμοὺς λόγους, τοῦτον ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 
ἐπαισχυνθήσεται, ὅταν ἔλθῃη ἐν τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ 
τῶν ἁγίων ἀγγέλων. 27. Λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν ἀληθῶς, εἰσί τινες τῶν ὧδεῖ 
ἑστηκότων, ot οὗ μὴ γεύσονται 3 θανάτου, ἕως ἂν ἴδωσι τὴν βασιλείαν 
τοῦ Θεοῦ. 

28. Ἐγένετο δὲ μετὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους ὡσεὶ ἡμέραι ὀκτώ, καὶ 
παραλαβὼν τὸν Πέτρονἁ καὶ Ἰωάννην καὶ ᾿Ιάκωβον, ἀνέβη εἰς τὸ 
ὄρος προσεύξασθαι. 29. καὶ ἐγένετο, ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι αὐτόν, 
τὸ εἶδος τοῦ προσώπου αὐτοῦ ἕτερον, καὶ 6 ἱματισμὸς αὐτοῦ λευκὸς 


53% 


1 For ωδε NBLE 1 have avrov, doubtless the true reading. Vide below. 


‘The 


same authorities have εστηκοτων, while CD and many others have εστωτων. 


2 yevowvrat in most texts, including NBCDL. 
3 SB some verss. omit και (W.H. relegate to margin), 


4 Omit τον before Π. all uncials. 


discipleship. The discourse on that 
theme is reproduced in much the same 
terms as in the parallel accounts. But 
it loses greatly in point by the omission 
of the Master’s rebuke to Peter for his 
opposition to the Passion. That rebuke 
gives to the discourse this meaning: 
you object to my suffering? I tell you 
not only must I suffer; it is the inevi- 
table lot of all who have due regard to 
the Divine interest in this world. Thus 
the first lesson Jesus taught the Twelve 
on the significance of His death was that 
it was the result of moral fidelity, and 
that as such it was but an instance of a 
universal law of the moral order of the 
world, This great doctrine, the ethical 
aspect of the Passion, is not made clear 
in Lk.—xa@’ ἡμέραν, daily, in Lk. only, 
a true epexegetical addition, yet restrict- 
ing the sense, directing attention to the 
commonplace trials of ordinary Christian 
life, rather than to the great tribulations 
at crises in a heroic career, in which the 
law of cross-bearing receives its signal 
illustration. This addition makes it pro- 
bable that wawras refers not only to the 
disciples, but to a larger audience: the 
law applies not to leaders only but to 
all followers of Jesus.—Ver. 25. ἑαυτὸν 
ἀπολέσας ἢ ἵημιωθείς = losing, or re- 
ceiving damage in, his own self (Field, 
Ot. Nor.). The idea expressed by the 
second participle seems to be that even 
though it does not come to absolute loss, 


yet if gaining the world involve damage 
to the self, the moral personality—taint, 
lowering of the tone, vulgarising of the 
soul—we lose much more than we gain. 
—Ver. 26. ἐν τῇ δόξῃ, etc., in the glory 
of Father, Son, and holy angels, a sort 
of trinitarian formula.—Ver. 27. ἀληθῶς 
= ἁμὴν in ρᾳτα]]εῖς.- αὐτοῦ, here = ὧδε 
in parallels.—thv Bac. τ. Θ., the King- 
dom of God, a simplified expression com- 
pared with those in Mt. and Mk., per- 
haps due to the late period at which Lk. 
wrote, probably understood by him as 
referring to the origination of the church 
at Pentecost. 

Vv. 28-36. The transfiguration (Mt. 
xvii. I-13, Mk. ix. 2-13).—Ver. 28. τοὺς 
λόγους τούτους: the words about the 
Passion and cross-bearing.—ocel ἡμέραι 
ὀκτώ: no real discrepancy between Lk, 
and the other evangelists (after six days). 
---“Πέτρον, etc., Peter, ohn and Fames, 
same order as in viii. 51 (BC, etc.).—eis 
τὸ ὄρος: the mountain contiguous to the 
scene of the feeding, according to the se- 
quence of Lk.’s narrative.—mpooevtac- 
θαι: prayer again (cf. νετ. 18). In Lk.’s 
delineation of the character of Jesus 
prayer occupies a prominent place.— 
Ver. 29. ἐν τῷ προσεύχεσθαι, while 
praying, and as the result of the exercise. 
--ἕτερον, different; a real objective 
change, not merely to the view of the 
three disciples. Lk. omits ἔμπροσθεν 
αὐτῶν. “λευκὸς may be viewed as an 


532 


KATA AOYKAN Dis 


ἐξαστράπτων. 30. Καὶ ἰδού, ἄνδρες δύο συνελάλουν αὐτῷ οἵτινες 
ἦσαν Μωσῆς καὶ Ἡλίας: 41. ot ὀφθέντες ἐν δόξη ἔλεγον τὴν ἔξοδον 
αὐτοῦ, ἣν ἔμελλε πληροῦν ἐν Ἱερουσαλήμ. 32. 6 δὲ Πέτρος καὶ ot 
σὺν αὐτῷ ἦσαν βεβαρημένοι ὕπνῳ: διαγρηγορήσαντες δὲ εἶδον τὴν. 
δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ τοὺς δύο ἄνδρας τοὺς συνεστῶτας αὐτῷ. 33. καὶ 
ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ διαχωρίζεσθαι αὐτοὺς ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, εἶπεν ὁ Πέτρος πρὸς 
τὸν Ιησοῦν, '΄ Ἐπιστάτα, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι: καὶ ποιήσωµεν 
σκηνὰς τρεῖς, µίαν got, καὶ Μωσεὶ μίαν, καὶ µίαν Ἡλία”:” μὴ 


εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει. 


34. ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ λέγοντος, ἐγένετο νεφέλη καὶ 


ἐπεσκίασεν 3 αὐτούς: ἐφοβήθησαν δὲ ἐν τῷ ἐκείνους εἰσελθεῖν ὃ εἰς 


τὴν νεφέλην. 


35. καὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐκ τῆς νεφέλης, λέγουσα, 
««Οὗτός ἐστιν 6 υἱός µου ὁ ἀγαπητός,' αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε.” 
τῷ γενέσθαι τὴν Φωνήν, εὑρέθη ὁδ ᾿Ιησοῦς μόνος. 


36. Καὶ ἐν 
Καὶ αὐτοὶ 


ἐσίγησαν, καὶ οὐδενὶ ἀπήγγειλαν ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς ἡμέραις οὐδὲν ὧν 


ἑωράκασιν.» 


1 nav before M. in all uncials. 


ADXA al. sah. 


3 erextaley in S$BL; aorist (T.R.) from Με, 
2 S8BCL cop. have εισελθειν αντους, which Tisch. and W.H. adopt. 


Paiva 


4 εκλελεγµενος in SBLE sah. cop. (Tisch., W.H.). Τ.Ε. = CD ai. pi. 


5 Omit o very many uncials. 


6 ewpaxay in ΜΑ ΒΙ, al. pl. (Tisch., W.H.). 


adverb in function, qualifying ἐξαστράπ- 
των (De Wette), but there is no reason 
why it should not be co-ordinate with 
ἐξασ.͵ καὶ being omitted = white, glister- 
ἵης.---ἐξαστράπτων: in N. T. here only, 
flashing like lightning.—Ver. 31. ἐν 
δόξῃ: this is peculiar to Lk.—éeyov, 
were speaking about. Kypke thinks 
more is meant: speaking with praise 
(cum laude aliquid commemorare). One 
could have accepted this sense had 
Peter’s opposition been reported.—rihy 
ἔξοδον, decease, death; so in 2 Peter i. 
15. Other words for death are ἔκβασις 
(Heb. xiii. 7), ἄφιξις (Acts xx. 20), 
avadvots (2 Tim. iv. 6). Perhaps the 
exodus here spoken of should be taken 
comprehensively as including death, re- 
surrection and ascension. (So Kypke, 
also Godet.) πληροῦν in that case will 
mean “pass through all the stages”. 
But against this wide sense is ἐν ‘lepov- 
cahyp.—Ver. 32. βεβαρ. trve: this 
particular, in Lk. only, implies that it was 
a night scene; so also the expression év 
τῇ ἑξης ἡμέρᾳ, ver. 37. The celestial 
visitants are supposed to arrive while the 
disciples are asleep. They fell asleep 
while their Master prayed, as at Geth- 
ΡΕΠΙΑΠΕ. -— διαγρηγορήσαντεε, having 


thoroughly wakened up, so as to be able 
to see distinctly what passed (here only in 
N.T.).—Ver. 33. While the two celestials 
were departing Peter made his proposal, 
to prevent them from going.—p% εἰδὼς, 
etc., not knowing what he said; an 
apology for a proposal to keep the two 
celestials from returning to heaven.— 
Ver. 34. Itis not clear who were en- 
veloped by the cloud. If the reading 
ἐκείνους before εἰσελθεῖν were retained it 
would imply that the three disciples were 
outside ; αὐτοὺς, the reading of B, etc., 
implies that all were within.—Ver. 35. 
ἐκλελεγμένος, the reading of BL, is to 
be preferred, because ἀγαπητός, T. R., 
is conformed to that in the parallels ; here 
only in N. T.—Ver. 36. ἐσίγησαν, they 
were silent ; ‘‘ in those days,” it is added, 
implying that afterwards (after the re- 
surrection) they spoke of the experience. 
Lk. does not mention the injunction of 
Jesus to keep silence, nor the conversa- 
tion on the way down the hill about 
Elijah and John the Baptist. 

Vv. 37-43. The epileptic boy (Mt. 
xvii. 14-21, Mk. ix. 14-29).—Ver. 38. 
ἐπιβλέψαι, to look with pity, as in i. 
48.—povoyevys, only son, as ir vii. 12, 
viii. 42. to bring out the benevolence of 


φις, ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

37. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν] τῇ ἑξῆς ἡμέρᾳ, κατελθόντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ 
ὅρους, συνήντησεν αὐτῷ ὄχλος πολύς. 38. Καὶ ἰδού, ἀνὴρ ἀπὸ τοῦ 
ὄχλου ἀνεβόησε,” λέγων, “'Διδάσκαλε, δέοµαί σου, ἐπίβλεψον ὃ ἐπὶ 
τὸν υἱόν µου, ὅτι µονογενής ἐστί port: 39. καὶ ἰδού, πνεῦμα 
λαμβάνει αὐτόν, καὶ ἐξαίφνης κράζει, καὶ σπαράσσει αὐτὸν μετὰ 
ἀφροῦ, καὶ µόγις ὅ ἀποχωρεῖ ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, συντρίβον αὐτόν. 49. καὶ 
ἐδεήθην τῶν μαθητῶν σου, ἵνα ἐκβάλλωσιν ὃ αὐτό, καὶ οὖκ ἠδυνή- 
θησαν.͵ 41. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, “°Q γενεὰ ἄπιστος 
καὶ διεστραµµένη, ἕως πότε ἔσομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς, καὶ ἀνέξομαι ὑμῶν ; 
προσάγαγε ὧδε τὸν υἱόν σου. 42. “Et. δὲ προσερχοµένου αὐτοῦ, 
ἔρρηξεν αὐτὸν τὸ δαιµόνιον καὶ συνεσπάραξεν' ἐπετίμησε δὲ ὁ 
"Ingots τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἀκαθάρτῳ, καὶ ἰάσατο τὸν παῖδα, καὶ 
ἀπέδωκεν αὐτὸν τῷ πατρὶ αὐτοῦ. 43. ἐξεπλήσσοντο δὲ πάντες ἐπὶ 
τῇ "µεγαλειότητι τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
ἐποίησεν & ᾿Ιησοῦς, etme πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, 44. “'Θέσθε 
ὑμεῖς εἰς τὰ Gta ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους τούτους ' ὁ γὰρ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου 
μέλλει παραδίδοσθαι eis χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων. 45. Ot δὲ ἠγνόουν τὸ 
ῥῆμα τοῦτο, καὶ ἦν παρακεκαλυμµένον ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, ἵνα μὴ αἴσθωνται 
αὐτό. καὶ ἐφοβοῦντο ἐρωτῆσαι αὐτὸν περὶ τοῦ ῥήματος τούτου. 
46. Εἰσῆλθε δὲ διαλογισμὸς ἐν αὐτοῖς, τό, τίς ἂν εἴη μείζων αὐτῶν. 


533 


Πάντων δὲ θαυμαζόντων ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ots α Acts xix. 
i’ 2 Pet. 


16, 


1 SSBL omit εν. 


2 eBoncev in NBCDL, 


Σεπιβλεψαι in BCL. SD have -ον = Τ.Ε. 


4 por εστι in NABCDLX 33 verss. 


5 μολις in B (W.H.); µογις in CD (Tisch.). 


6 εκβαλωσιν in most uncials. 


Not found elsewhere in N.T, 


7 For εποι. ο |. SBDLE have simply ewoues (Tisch., W.H.). 


the miracle.—Ver. 39. κράζει, he (the 
boy) crieth.—omapdooat, he (the demon) 
teareth him.—Ver. 42. προσερχομένον 
αὐτοῦ, while the boy was approaching 
Jesus, in accordance with His request 
that he should be brought to Him, the 
demon made a final assault on his 
victim, rending and convulsing him,— 
Ver. 43. ἐπὶ τῇ µεγαλειότητι τ. Θεοῦ, 
the people were astonished at the majesty 
of God, revealed in the power that could 
work such acure. In Acts ii. 22 God is 
represented as working miracles through 
Jesus. So the matter is conceived here. 
But Lk. thinks of the majesty of God as 
immanent in Jesus. 

Vv. 43b-45. Second prediction of the 
Passion (Mt. xvii. 22-23, Mk. ix. 30-32). 
---πάντων θαυμαζόντων, etc., while all 
were wondering at all the things which 
He did. The reference is to the cure of 
the epileptic, which led the multitude to 


see in Jesus the bearer of the majesty or 
greatness of the Almighty,—elwe. Jesus 
spoke a second time of His approaching 
death, in connection with this prevailing 
wonder, and His aim was to keep the 
disciples from being misled by it. The 
setting in Mt. and Mk. is different. 
There Jesus speaks of His passion, while 
He with the Twelve is wandering about 
in Galilee, endeavouring, according to 
Mk., to remain unnoticed, and He speaks 
of it simply because it is the engrossing 
theme with which His mind is constantly 
preoccupied. Here, on the other hand, 
the second announcement is elicited by 
an external occasion, the admiration of 
the people.—Ver. 44. t παραδί- 
δοσθαι, is about to be betrayed. Lk. 
gives the specialty of the second pre- 
diction as in the parallels. Where he 
fails in comparison with Mt. and Mk. is 
in grasping the psychological situation 


534 


KATA AOYKAN 


ΙΧ. 


47. ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἰδὼν 1 τὸν διαλογισμὸν τῆς καρδίας αὐτῶν, ἐπιλαβό- 


, = - 
µενος παιδίου. ἔστησεν αὐτὸ wap ἑαυτῷ, 48. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 


“ Ὃς ἐὰν δέξηται τοῦτο τὸ παιδίον ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί pou, ἐμὲ δέχεται " 


καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἐμὲ δέξηται, δέχεται τὸν ἀποστείλαντά µε. 


ὁ γὰρ 


μικρότερος ἐν πᾶσιν ὑμῖν ὑπάρχων οὗτος ἔσται δ μέγας.” 
40. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιωάννης εἶπεν, ''᾿Επιστάτα, εἴδομέν τινα 


ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί σου ἐκβάλλοντα τὰ ὃ δαιμόνια: καὶ ἐκωλύσαμεν ὃ 


ἔειδως in NB al. (Tisch., W.H., text). 


2 So in δ and very many MSS. (Tisch.). 


tSev in CDLE (W.H. margin). 
BCD have παιδιον (W.H.). 


3 egtiv in SBCLXE 1, 33 vet. Lat. vulg. D has εσται. 


4 ev in NBLXAE 1, 33 al. (W.H.). 
5 Omit τα most uncials. 


επι in CD, etc. 


6 S8BLE have εκωλνοµεν, which may be conformed to Mk. (Tisch. aor. = T.R., 


W.H. imp.). 


the emotional state of Christ’s mind. 
Cf. remarks on Mk., ad loc. Lk.’s Christ 
is comparatively passionless. 

Vv. 46-50. Who might be the greatest 
(Mt. xviii. 1-5, Mk. ix. 33-41).—Ver. 46. 
εἰσῆλθε διαλογισμὸς, now there entered 
in among them (the Twelve) a thought. 
Lk.’s way of introducing this subject 
seems to show a desire, by way of 
sparing the future Apostles, to make as 
little of it as possible. It is merely a 
thought of the heart (τῆς καρδίας, ver. 
47), not a dispute as in Mk., and én- 
ferentially also in Mt. It came into 
their minds, how or why does not 
appear. Mk.’s narrative leads us to con- 
nect the dispute with Christ’s fore- 
boding references to His Passion. While 
they walked along the way (ἐν τῇ 689), 
the Master thinking always, and speak- 
ing often, of His death, they, realising 
that a crisis of some sort was approach- 
ing but not knowing its nature, discussed 
the question τίς μείζων ; so supplying the 
comic side of the tragic drama.—76 τίς, 
etc., this, vis., who might be the greater 
of them, or, who might be greater than 
they. αὐτῶν may be taken either par- 
titively, or as a genitive of comparison. 
It is ordinarily taken in the former sense, 
whereby Lk.’s account is brought into 
line with the parallels ; but Weiss (Mk. - 
Evang., also J. Weiss in Meyer) con- 
tends for the latter. His idea is that 
the Twelve, in Lk.’s view, were all con- 
scious of their common importance as 
disciples of Jesus, and wondered if any- 
body could be greater than they all 
were. He connects the “thought” of 
the Twelve with the exorcist incident 
(νετ. 49) as evincing a similar self-im- 


portance. This view cannot be nega- 
tived on purely exegetical grounds.— 
Ver. 47. wap ἑαυτῷ, beside Himself, 
not ἐν µέσῳ αὐτῶν, as in Mt. and Mk., 
as if to say, here is the greater one.— 
Ver. 48. τοῦτο τὸ παιδίον, this par- 
ticular child—not such a child, or what 
such a child represents, the little and 
insignificant—as in Mt. and Mk. Yet 
Lk.’s expression practically means that 
= this child, for example.—8énrat: in 
Lk. the receiving of the little child is 
placed first in the discourse of Jesus, 
whereas in Mk. the general maxim that 
the man who is willing to be last is first, 
comes first. This position favours the 
view that not internal rivalry but a 
common self-exaltation in relation to 
those without is the vice in the view of 
Lk. Jesus says in effect: Be not high- 
minded } an appreciative attitude towards 
those you are prone to despise is what 
I and my Father value.—év πᾶσιν ὑμῖν : 
this phrase, on the other hand, seems to 
point to internal rivalries. There had 
been a question among them as to 
greater and less, to which the Master’s 
answer was: the least one is the great 
one. Lk.’s version of this important 
discourse is, as De Wette remarks, in- 
ferior in point and clearness to Mt.’s.— 
Ver. 49. ἐκωλύσαμεν (T. R.), aorist, in- 
stead of Mk.’s imperfect ; the former im- 
plies successful repression, the latter an 
attempt at it. Vzde notes on Mk., ad 
loc. —pe8’ ἡμῶν: Phrynichus objects to 
this construction after axoXov@etv, and 
says it should be followed by the dative. 
But Lobeck gives examples of the for- 
mer construction from good authors 
(vide p. 353). 


47--5χ. 


αὐτόν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀκολουθεῖ ped? ἡμῶν." 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


535 


‘50. Καὶ etme? πρὸς αὐτὸν 


ὁ ᾿ησοῦς, “Mh κωλύετε: ὃς γὰρ οὐκ ἔστι καθ ἡμῶν,ὶ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν 3 


ἐστιν. 


51. EFENETO δὲ ἐν τῷ συμπληροῦσθαι τὰς ἡμέρας τῆς ἀναλήψεως 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ αὐτὸς τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ὃ ἐστήριξε * τοῦ πορεύεσθαι eis 


1 ειπε δε in NNBCDLXE 33 ai. 


? yew bis in BCDLE vet. Lat. vulg. cop. syrr. cur. sin, (Tisch., W.H.). 
> BLE 1, 239 c omit avrov after προσωπον (W.H.). 


4 εστηρισεν in BCLXSE 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


Chapter ix., as Farrar remarks (C. 
G. T.), should have ended here, as with 
ver. 51 begins an entirely distinct, large, 
and very important division of Lk.’s 
Gospel. 

Vv. 51-56. Looking southward. 
Samaritan intolerance.—Ver. 51 forms 
the introduction to the great division, 
ix. 51—xviii. 15. It makes all that 
follows up to the terminus ad quem 
stand under the solemn heading: the 
beginning of the end. From this time 
forth Jesus has the close of His earthly 
career in view. His face is fixedly set 
towards Jerusalem and—heaven. This 
conception of Jesus, as from this point 
onwards looking forward to the final 
crisis, suggests various reflections. 

1. The reference to the last act of the 
drama comes in at a very early place in 
Lk.’s history. 

2. The part of the story lying behind 
us does not adequately account for the 
mood of Jesus. We do not see why He 
should be thinking so earnestly of a 
final crisis of a tragic character, or even 
why there should be such a crisis at all. 
That the religious guides of Israel more 
or less disapproved of His ways has 
appeared, but it has not been shown 
that their hostility was of a deadly 
character. The dinner in Simon’s house 
speaks to relations more or less friendly, 
and the omission of the sharp encounter 
in reference to hand-washing, and of the 
ominous demand for a sign from heaven, 
greatly tends to obscure the forces that 
were working towards a tragic end, and 
had the cross for their natural outcome. 
It does not seem to have entered into 
Lk.’s plan to exhibit Christ’s death as 
the natural result of the opinions, prac- 
tices, prejudices and passions prevalent 
in the religious world. He contem- 
plated the event on the Godward, theo- 
logical side, or perhaps it would be more 
correct to say on the side of fulfilment 
of O. T. prophecy. The necessity of 


WD as in Τ.Ε. 


Christ’s death, the δεῖ (ix. 22) = the 
demand of O. T. Scripture for fulfilment, 
vide xxiv. 26. 

3. In the long narrative contained in 
the next eight chapters, Jesus does not 
seem to be constantly thinking of the 
end. In Mk. and Mt. it is otherwise. 
From the period at which Jesus began 
to speak plainly of His death He appears 
constantly preoccupied with the subject. 
His whole manner and behaviour are 
those of one walking under the shadow 
of the cross. This representation is 
true to life. In Lk., on the other hand, 
while the face of Jesus is set towards 
Jerusalem, His mind seems often to be 
thinking of other things, and the reader 
of the story forgets about the cross as he 
peruses its deeply interesting pages. 

συμπληροῦσθαι, etc., when the days 
of His assumption were in course of ac- 
complishment, implying the approach of 
the closing scenes of Christ’s earthly ex- 
perience; here and in Acts ii. 1, only, of 
time ; in vili. 23 in the literal sense.— 
ἀναλήψεως a. His assumption into 
heaven, as in Acts i. 2. The substantive 
in this sense is a ἅπ. Aey.in N. T. It 
occurs in the Test., zit. Pair. The verb 
occurs in a similar sense in various 
places in the Sept. The assumption 
into heaven includes the crucifixion in 
Lk.’s conception, just as the glorification 
of Jesus includes the Passion in the 
Johannine conception. ‘“‘ Instabat adhuc 
passio, crux, mors, sepulchrum; sed per 
haec omnia ad metam prospexit Jesus, 
cujus sensum imitatur stylus evange- 
listae,” Bengel. The ἀνάληψις was an 
act of God.—éorjpicev, He made His 
face firm (from στῆριγξ, akin to στερεός, 
Thayer’s Grimm), as if to meet some- 
thing formidable and unwelcome, the 
cross rather than what lay beyond, here 
in view. Hahn, who does not believe 
that Lk. is here referring to Christ's 
final journey to Jerusalem, tones down 
the force of this word so as to make it 


536 


KATA AOYKAN 


IX. 


Ἱερουσαλήμ. 54. καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ἀγγέλους πρὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ - 
καὶ πορευθέντες εἰσῆλθον εἰς κώµην } Σαμαρειτῶν, ὥστε 3 ἑτοιμάσαι 


αὐτῷ. 


πορευόµενον εἰς Ἱερουσαλήμ. 


53. καὶ οὐκ ἐδέξαντο αὐτόν, ὅτι τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ ἦν 


54- ἰδόντές δὲ of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ 3 


Ιάκωβος καὶ Ιωάννης εἶπον, “Κύριε, θέλεις εἴπωμεν πρ καταβῆναι 


b Gal. ν. 15 ἀπὸ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ’ ἀναλῶσαι αὐτούς, ὡς καὶ Ἡλίας ἐποίησεέ ;” 


(2 Thess. 
ii. 8). 


55. Στραφεὶς δὲ ἐπετίμησεν αὐτοῖς, καὶ εἶπεν, “Οὖκ οἴδατε οἵου 


πνεύµατός ἐστε ὑμεῖς': 56. 6 γὰρ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦλθε 


ψυχὰς ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέσαι, ἀλλὰ σῶσαι." ὅ 


ἑτέραν κώµην. 


Καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν εἲς 


57. ᾿Ἐγένετο δὲδ πορευοµένων αὐτῶν, ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ εἶπέ τις πρὸς 


αὐτόν, '᾿Ακολουθήσω σοι ὅπου ἂν ἀπέρχῃ, κύριε. 7 


58. Καὶ εἶπεν 


αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “At ἀλώπεκες φωλεοὺς ἔχουσι, καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ 


οὐρανοῦ κατασκηνώσεις ὁ δὲ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἔχει ποῦ τὴν 


1 πολιν in Ν ΓΛ some minusc, (Tisch.). 
NB some vet. Lat. codd. have ως (ΥΝ.Η.). 


2So in CDL al. pl. (Tisch.). 
ΣΑΦΒ some minusc. omit αντον. 


4 S$BL= minusc. vulg. syrr. cur. sin. memph. omit ws και H. εποιησε, which is 


probably a gloss. 


5 From και ειπεν (ver. 55) to αλλα σωσαι (ver. 56) is probably also a gloss (found 
in FKMLA al, fl. D has ουκ οιδ. οι. πν. εστε vers; also in many verss.). 


SABCLAE al. syr. sin., etc., omit the whole passage (Tisch., Trg., R.V., W.H.). 
5 For εγεν. δε SBCLXE 33 60 al. verss, have simply και. 
7 SBDLE minusc. verss. omit κυριε (Tisch., W.H.) ; found in CA al. Fewer MSS. 


omit κυριε in ver. 59 (BDV 57, Orig.). 


margin). 


express in Oriental fashion the idea of 
Jesus addressing Himself to a journey 
not specially momentous. 

Vv. 52-56. Samaritan intolerance.— 
cis κώµην Σαμαρειτῶν: this indicates an 
intention to go southward through 
Samaritan territory. Not an unusual 
thing. Josephus (Antiq., xx., vi. 1) states 
that it was the custom for Galileans 
going to Jerusalem to the feasts to pass 
through Βαπηατία.---«ἑτοιμάσαι a., to pre- 
pare fer Him, z.e., to find lodgings for 
the night.—éere in view of the sequel 
can only express tendency or intention. 
—oix ἐδέξαντο a.: the aorist, implying 
“that they at once rejected Him,” 
Farrar (C. G. T.).—8re introduces the 
reason: Christ’s face was, looked like, 
going to Jerusalem. In view of what 
Josephus states, this hardly accounts for 
the inhospitable treatment. Perhaps 
the manner of the messengers had some- 
thing to do with it. Had Jesus gone 
Himself the result might have been 


WNCLE have it (Tisch. omits, W.H. put in 


different. Perhaps He was making an 
experiment to see how His followers and 
the Samaritans would get on together. 
In that case the result would make Him 
change His plan, and turn aside from 
Samaria into Peraea. If so then Baur’s 
idea of a Samaritan ministry is a mis- 
nomer.—Ver. 54. ᾿Ιάκωβος καὶ Ἰωάννης : 
their outburst of temper, revealed in 
their truculent proposal, probably indi- 
cated the attitude of the whole com- 
pany. In that case journeying through 
Samaria was hopeless.—xeraBfvat, in- 
finitive, instead of tva with subjunctive 
as often after eiwetv.— Ver. 55. στραφεὶς : 
an imposing gesture, as in vii. 9, 44.— 
Ver. 56. els ἑτέραν κώµην, to another 
village, probably in Galilee; both in the 
borderland. 

Vv. 57-62. New disciples.—év τῇ 686: 
the indication of time is not precise. It 
does not mean, on the way to the other 
village, mentioned just before (Meyer), 
but on the way to Jerusalem (ver. 51). 


‘52—62. 


κεφαλὴν κλίνῃ.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


537 


59- Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς ἕτερον, -΄᾿Ακολούθει por.” 


Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “Κύριε, ἐπίτρεψόν µοι ἀπελθόντι πρῶτον 1 θάψαι τὸν 


ς 


πατέρα pou.” 60, Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ 6 


*Ingois,? '“"Ἂφες τοὺς νεκροὺς 


Odor τοὺς ἑαυτῶν νεκρούς! σὺ δὲ ἀπελθὼν διάγγελλε τὴν βασιλείαν 


- a» 
“Tou Θεού. 


61. Εἶπε δὲ καὶ repos, ''᾽Ακολουθήσω σοι, κύριε" 


πρῶτον δὲ ἐπίτρεψόν pot ἀποτάξασθαι τοῖς eis τὸν οἶκόν µου.” 


62. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ὃ 6 


᾽Ιησοῦς, “Οὖδεὶς ἐπιβαλὼν τὴν χεῖρα 


αὐτοῦ * ἐπ᾽ 5 ἄροτρον, καὶ βλέπων eis τὰ ὀπίσω, εὔθετός ἐστιν εἰς τὴν c here only 
in N.T. 


Bacrretav > τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


l πρωτον απελθ. in NBD. 


2 Omit ο |. SBDLE 33 a cop. 


3 B omits προς αυτον (W.H. in brackets). 
4 Ἑ minusc. and some codd. of vet. Lat. omit αυτον. 


δ For εις την B. NOBLE 1, 33 vet. Lat. 


codd. have τη βασιλεια (Tisch., W.H.). 


D and some vet. Lat. codd. invert the order of the clauses = looking back and 


putting his hand to the plough. 


Grotius thinks the connection is purely 
topical. * Visum est Lucae connectere 
τὰ époyevéa.” The first two of the three 
cases are reported by Mt. (viii. 19-22).— 
τις: Mt. (viii. το) designates this cer- 
tain one a scribe.—amépyy implies a de- 
parture froma place. It would bea leav- 
ing of home for the disciple.—Ver. 58. 
This remarkable saying is given in iden- 
tical terms by Mt. and Lk. Vide on Mt. 

Vy. 59, 6ο. The second case (Mt. viii. 
21-22).--ἀκολούθει por. Jesus takes the 
initiative in this case. That He should 
not have done so in the first is intelli- 
gible if the aspirant was ascribe. Jesus 
did not look for satisfactory discipleship 
from that quarter.—ov δὲ, but thou, em- 
phatic, implying that the man addressed 
is not among the dead, but one who 
appreciates the claims of the kingdom.— 
διάγγελλε, keep proclaiming on every 
side the Kingdom of God ; that, thy sole 
business henceforth, to which everything 
else, even burying parents, must be 
sacrificed: seek first the kingdom. 

Vv. 61, 62. The third case, peculiar 
to Lk., and setting forth a distinct type. 
---ἀκολουθήδω σοι, I will follow Thee, 
implying that he also has been asked to 
do so, and that he is ready, but on a 
condition.—éwitpepév pot: this is a 
type of man who always wants to do 
something, in which he is himself 
specially interested first (πρῶτον), betore 
he addresses himself to the main duty to 
which he is called.—amwordgéac@ar: in 
this case it is to bid good-bye to friends, 
a sentimental business; that also charac- 
teristic.—rotn εἰς τὸν οἶκόν pov. The 


verb am. is used in later Greek both with 
the dative of a person to denote “‘to take 
leave οἱ,’ and with the dative of a thing 
Ξ to renounce (so in xiv. 33). Both 
senses are admissible here, as τοῖς may 
be either masculine or neuter, but the 
first sense is the only one suitable to the 
character (sentimental) and to the re- 
quest, as property could be renounced 
on the spot ; though this reason is not so 
conclusive, as some legal steps might be 
necessary to denude oneself of property. 
—Ver. 62. οὐδεὶς ἐπιβαλὼν, etc.: the 
necessity of self-concentration inculcated 
in proverbial language borrowed from 
agricultural life. Wetstein cites from 
Hesiod, “Epy., ver. 443, the well-known 
lines: ἰθεῖαν αὔλακ) ἐλαύνοι, Μηκέτι 
παπταίνων μεθ) ὁμήλικας, GAA’ ἐπὶ ἔργῳ 
Θυμὸν ἔχων. The ambition to make a 
straight furrow has been common to 
ploughmen in all ages and countries, 
and it needs, like the highest calling, 
steady intention and a forward-cast eye. 
Furrer compliments the Palestine fellah 
on his skill in drawing a long straight 
furrow (Wanderungen, 149). His 
plough is a very inferior article to that 
used in this country.—ed@erés, well 
fitted, apt; here and in chap. xiv. 35, 
Heb. vi. 7.—The first case is that of in- 
considerate impulse, the second that of 
conflicting duties, the third that of a 
divided mind. The incidents are re- 
lated by Lk., not so much possibly tor 
their psychological interest as to show 
how jesus came to have so many dis- 
ciples as chap. x. 1-16 implies, and yet 
how particular He was. 


538 


KATA AOYKAN 


χα, 


Χ. 1. ΜΕΤΑ δὲ ταῦτα ἀνέδειξεν ὁ Κύριος καὶ} ἑτέρους ἑβδομή- 
κοντα,” καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς ἀνὰ δύο πρὸ προσώπου αὐτοῦ, eis. 


πᾶσαν πόλιν καὶ τόπον οὗ ἔμελλεν αὐτὸς ἔρχεσθαι.” 


2. Ἔλεγεν 


οὖν ὃ πρὸς αὐτούς, “΄Ὁ μὲν θερισμὸς πολύς, οἱ δὲ ἐργάται ὀλίγοι ' 
δεήθητε οὖν τοῦ κυρίου τοῦ θερισμοῦ, ὅπως ἐκβάλλῃ ἐργάτας * eis 


. a > a 
τὸν θερισμὸν αὐτοῦ. 


4. Ὑπάγετε: ἰδού, ἐγὼ ὅ ἀποστέλλω Spas ὡς 


1 και, found in SCD al. Al. verss. (Tisch.), is omitted in BLE 33 (W.H.). 


2So in SACLAE al. b, f, q (Tisch.). 
«BS. δυο (W.H. in brackets). 


BD α,ς, e, 1, g vulg. syrr. cur. sin. have 


3 For ουν BCDLE 1, 33, 60 verss. have δε. 
4 εργατας exB.: this order in BDe. εκβαλη (aor.) in $ABCDL& al. 


5 Omit eye (from Mt.) SAB. 


CHAPTER Χ. THE SEVENTY. THE 
Good SAMARITAN. MARTHA AND Mary. 
—Vv. 1-12. The Seventy sent forth, 
peculiar to Lk. Many questions have 
been raised as to this narrative, ¢.g., as 
to its historicity, as to the connection 
between the instructions to the new 
missionaries and those to the Twelve, 
and as to the time and place of their 
election, and the sphere of their mission. 
On these points only the briefest hints 
can be given here. As to the first, the 
saying about the paucity of labourers, 
found also in Mt. (ix. 38), implies that 
Jesus was constantly on the outlook for 
competent assistants, and that He would 
use such as were available. The cases 
mentioned in the closing section of last 
chapter confirm this inference. Whether 
He would send them out simultaneously 
in large numbers, twelve, or seventy, or 
piecemeal, one or more pairs now, and 
another small group then, is a matter 
on which it is precarious to dogmatise, 
as is done by W. Grimm when he says 
(Das Proemium des Lucas-Evang.) 
that Jesus did not send out twelve all at 
once, but two and two now and then, and 
besides the Twelve others of the second 
order, and that these piecemeal missions 
consolidated in the tradition into two 
large ones of twelve and seventy. As to 
the instructions : there would be such in 
every instance, and they would be sub- 
stantially the same whether given once, 
twice, or twenty times, summed up in a 
few compact sentences, so racy and 
memorable as to be easily preservable 
even by oral tradition. It is, however, 
quite probable that versions of these in- 
structions were to be found in docu- 
ments, say in Mk. and in Mt.’s Logia; 
and Lk., as Weiss suggests, may have 
taken the instructions to the Twelve from 


the former, and those to the Seventy 
from the latter. Finally, as to time, 
place, and sphere, nothing certain can 
be determined, and there is room for 
various conjectures. Hahn, ¢.g., suggests, 
as the place of the appointment, 
Jerusalem; the time, the feast of 
tabernacles, mentioned in John vii. 2; 
and the sphere of the mission, the towns 
and villages of $udaea or southern 
Palestine. There was certainly need for 
a mission there. The mission of the 
Twelve was in Galilee. 

Ver. I. peta ταῦτα, after what has 
been narrated in ix. 51-62, but not 
necessarily implying close sequence.— 
ἀνέδειξεν (ἀναδείκνυμι). The verb means 
(z) to lift up so as to show, cf. the noun 
in Lk. i. 80; (2) to proclaim as elected, 
cf. Acts i. 24: (3) to elect, appoint, as 
here = designavit, Vulgate.—é Κύριος, 
the Lord, Jesus, here, as often in Lk. 
applied to Him in narrative.—érépovs, 
others, the reference being not to 
ἀγγέλους, ix. 52 (Meyer), but to τοὺς 
δώδεκα, ix. 1 = others besides the Twelve. 
--ἑβδομήκοντα, seventy (seventy-two in 
B), representing the nations of the earth, 
the number consciously fixed by the 
evangelist to symbolise Christian uni- 
versalism—according to Dr. Baur and the 
Tibingen School; representing in the 
mind of Jesus the seventy Sanhedrists, 
as the Twelve were meant to represent 
the tribes of Israel, the seventy disciples 
having for their vocation to do what the 
Sanhedrists had failed to do—prepare 
the people for the appearance of the 
Christ—according to Hahn. 

Vv. 2-12. The instructions.—Ver. 2. 
ὁ μὲν θερισμὸς: preliminary statement 
as to the need of men fit to take part in 
the work of preaching the kingdom, as 
in Mt. ix. 38, vide notes there; a true 


I—II. 


ΕΥΑΙΤΕΛΙΟΝ 
ἄρνας ἐν µέσῳ λύκων. 4. μὴ βαστάζετε βαλάντιον, μὴ πήραν, μηδὲ 
ὑποδήματα: καὶ µηδένα κατὰ τὴν ὁδὸν ἀσπάσησθε. 5. Eis ἣν 8 
ἂν οἰκίαν εἰσέρχησθε] πρῶτον λέγετε, Εἰρήνη τῷ οἴκῳ τούτω. 
6. καὶ ἐὰν μὲν ᾖ ἐκεῖ 1 υἱὸς εἰρήνης, ἐπαναπαύσεται 3 én’ αὐτὸν ἡ 
εἰρήνη ὑμῶν: ei δὲ µήγε, ep Spas ἀνακάμψει. 7. ἐν αὐτῇ δὲ τῇ 
οἰκίᾳ µένετε, ἐσθίοντες ! καὶ πίνοντες τὰ map’ αὐτῶν: ἄξιος γὰρ 6 
ἐργάτης τοῦ μισθοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐστιδ: μὴ µεταβαίνετε ἐξ οἰκίας εἰς 
οἰκίαν. 8. καὶ eis ἣν 8° ἂν πόλιν εἰσέρχησθε, καὶ δέχωνται ὑμᾶς, 
ἐσθίετε τὰ παρατιθέµενα ὑμῖν, 9. καὶ θεραπεύετε τοὺς ἐν αὐτῇ 
ἀσθενεῖς, καὶ λέγετε αὐτοῖς, Ἴγγικεν ed’ ὑμᾶς ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
To, εἰς ἣν δ ἂν πόλιν εἰσέρχησθε," καὶ μὴ δέχωνται ὑμᾶς, ἐξελθόντες 
εἰς τὰς πλατείας αὐτῆς, εἴπατε, 11. Καὶ τὸν κονιορτὸν τὸν κολληθέντα 
ἡμῖν ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ὑμῶν ὃ " ἀπομασσόμεθα ὑμῖν: πλὴν τοῦτο γινώσ- 


8 


539 


here only 
in N.T. 


1 εισελθητε in NBCDLE 1, 13, 60. 
? µεν is found only in minusc. 


B places εκει before η (W.H. text). 


* SSB have επαναπαησεται, to be preferred as the rarer form. 


4 BD have εσθοντες (Tisch., W.H.). 
® Se is wanting in NBCDE al. 


δεστι omitted in SBDLXE. 
7 εισελθητε in NBCDLE 1, 33 al. 


8 After υΌµμων NBD have εις τους ποδας, adopted by modern editors. 


logion of Jesus, whensoever spoken.— 
Ver. 3. ὑπάγετε, go, whither? Mt.’s 
version of the instructions to the Twelve 
sayS: not to Samaria, but to the lost 
sheep of Israel only; this omitted by 
Lk. with the one word, “ go,” retained. 
—@s Gpvas, etc., as Jambs among 
wolves ; sheep (πρόβατα) in Mt. x. 16; 
pathetic hint as to the helplessness of 
the agents and the risks they run; not 
imaginary, as the recent experience at 
the Samaritan village shows.—Ver. 4. 
Βαλάντιον, a purse, in Lk. only, in 
N. T.; often in classics, spelt there, as 
in MSS. of N. T., variously with one or 
two Ἀδ.---μηδέγα ἀσπάσησθε: salute no 
one, to be taken in the spirit rather than 
in the letter; hyperbolical for: be ex- 
clusively intent on your business: 
‘*negotio quod imposui vobis incumbite, 
praeterhabitis vel brevissimis obstaculis 
et moramentis,’”’ Pricaeus. Weiss (Mt.- 
Evangel.) thinks the prohibition is 
directed against carrying on their mission 
on the way. It was to be exclusively a 
house-mission (vide Mt. x. 12, where 
ἀσπάσασθε occurs).—Ver. 5. πρῶτον 
λέγετε: the first word to be spoken, 
peace, speech on the things of the king- 
dom to be prepared for by courteous, 
kindly salutations. A sympathetic heart 
is the best guide in pastoral visitation. 
‘The first word should not be: how is it 


with your soul?—Ver. 6. ἐπαναπαή- 
σεται (SSB), a form of the 2nd fut. ind. 
passive, probably belonging to the spoken 
Greek of the period. Again in Rev. xiv. 
13.--ἀνακάμψει: in any case the good 
wish will not be lost. If there be no 
“son of peace” in the house to receive 
it, it will come back with a blessing to 
the man who uttered it.—Ver. 7. ἐν 
αὐτῇ τῇ οἰκίᾳ: verbally distinct from ἐν 
τῇ αὐτῇ, etc., but really meaning the 
same thing = “in that same house,” 
R. V.—ra wap’ αὐτῶν, eating and drink- 
ing the meat and drink which belong to 
them, as if they were your own: libere 
et velut vestro jure, Grotius.—a£vos γὰρ 
assigns the reason: your food is your 
hire ; it belongs to you of right as wages 
for work done.—Ver. 8. ἐσθίετε τὰ 
παρατιθέµενα: mot a repetition. It 
means, be contented with your fare: 
contenti este quamvis frugali apparatu, 
Bengel. Holtz. (H. C.) thinks Lk. has 
in view heathen houses, and that the 
meaning is: put aside Jewish scruples. 
—Ver. g. The functions of the 
missionaries briefly indicated = heal the 
sick, and announce that the kingdom is 
at their doors (ἤγγικεν).---ν. το, 11. 
Direction how to act in case of churlish 
ἐτεαίπιεπέ.---ἐξελθόντες εἰς τὰς πλατείας 
a. Lk. expresses the action so as to 
make it vivid for Gentile readers to 


540 


KATA AOYKAN Χ. 


κετε, ὅτι ἤγγικεν ἐφ᾽ Spas! ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 12. λέγω Se? 
ὑμῖν, ὅτι Σοδόµοις ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται, ἢ τῇ πόλει 
ἐκείνῃ. 13. Οὐαί σοι, Χωραζίν, οὖαί σοι, Βηθσαϊδά : ὅτι εἰ ἐν Tipe 
καὶ Σιδῶνι ἐγένοντο ὃ αἱ δυνάµεις αἱ γενόµεναι ἐν ὑμῖν, πάλαι ἂν ἐν 
σάκκῳ καὶ σποδῷ καθήµεναι ΄ µετενόησαν. 
Σιδῶνι ἀνεκτότερον ἔσται ἐν τῇ κρίσει, 


14. πλὴν Τύρῳ καὶ 
ἢ ὑμῖν. 
ναούµ., ἡ ἕως τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὑψωθεῖσα, ἕως ἆδου καταβιβασθήσῃ.5 
16. Ὁ ἀκούων ὑμῶν ἐμοῦ ἀκούει: καὶ ὁ ἀθετῶν Spas ἐμὲ ἀθετεῖ: ὁ 
δὲ ἐμὲ ἀθετῶν ἀθετεῖ τὸν ἀποστείλαντά pe.” 17. Ὑπέστρεψαν δὲ 
ot ἑβδομήκοντα μετὰ χαρᾶς, λέγοντες, “' Κύριε, καὶ τὰ δαιμόνια 


15. καὶ σύ, Καπερ- 


ς , 3 [ο 3 As , , » 
υποτασσεται ημιν εν τῷ ονοµατι σου. 


LSBDLE 1, 13, 33 al. omit εφ vpas. 


18, Εἶπε δὲ αὐτοῖς, “΄ Ἐθεώ- 


1δε in NDE (Tisch.) is omitted in BCL al. pl. verss. (W.H.). 


Σεγενηθησαν in NBDLE 13, 33, 69. 
«καθημενοι in NABCLE al, 
* Porta: 2). 


-at in D with many others. 
. νψωθεισα NBDLE vet. Lat. 5 syr. cur. have µη . . . νψωθηση; 


for καταβιβασθηση (ΝΟΙ:Ξ al. pl. Tisch.) BD have καταβηση (W.H.). 


whom the symbolic significance of the 
act was not familiar = go out of the 
inhospitable houses into the streets, and 
then solemnly wipe off the dust that has 
been taken up by your feet since you 
entered the town; wiping off (ἄπομασ- 
σόµεθα) is more expressive than shaking 
off (ἐκτινάξετε, Mt. x. 14, Lk. ix 5), it 
means more thorough work, removing 
every speck οἱ dust.—iy, for the rest. 
The solemn symbolic act is to wind up 
with the equally solemn declaration that 
the Kingdom of God has come to them 
with its blessings, and that it is their 
own fault if it has come in vain. 

Vv. 13-16. Woe to thee, Chorasin 
(Mt. xi. 21-24).—While the terms in 
which the woes on the cities of Galilee 
are reported are nearly identical in Mt. 
and Lk., the connections in which they 
are given are different. In Mt. the con- 
nection is very general. The woes 
simply find a place in a collection of 
moral criticisms by Jesus on His time: 
on John, on the Pharisees, and on the 
Galilean towns. Here they form part 
of Christ’s address to the Seventy, when 
sending them forth on their mission. 
Whether they properly come in here has 
been disputed. Wendt (L. J., p. 89) 
thinks they do, inasmuch as they indi- 
cate that the punishment for rejecting 
the disciples will be the same as that of 
the cities which were unreceptive to the 
ministry of the Master. J. Weiss (in 
Meyer), on the other hand, thinks the 


woes have been inserted here from a 
purely external point of view, noting in 
proof the close connection between ver. 
12 and ver. 16. It is impossible to be 
quite sure when the words were spoken, 
but also impossible to doubt that they 
were spoken by Jesus, probably towards 
or after the close of His Galilean 
ministry.—xaOypevor, after σποδῷ, is an 
addition of Lk.’s, explanatory or pic- 
torial.—Ver. 16 = Mt. x. 40, 41, only Mt. 
emphasises and expands the positive 
side, while Lk. with the positive pre- 
sents, and with special emphasis, the 
negative (6 ἀθετῶν ὑμᾶς, etc.). 

Vv. 17-20. Return of the Seventy. No 
such report of the doings of the Twelve, 
and of their Master’s congratulations, is 
given in any of the Gospels (cf. Mk. vi. 
30, 31). It seems as if Lk. attached more 
importance to the later mission, as 
Baur accused him of doing under the in- 
fluence of theological tendency (Pauline 
universalism). But probably this report 
was one of the fruits of his careful re- 
search for memorabilia of Jesus: “a 
highly valuable tradition arising on 
Jewish-Christian soil, and just on account 
of its strangeness trustworthy” (J. 
Weiss in Meyer). Similarly Feine, and 
Resch, Agrapha, p. 414, note.—Ver. 17. 
καὶ τὰ Saipdvia, even the demons, sub- 
ject to our power; more than they had 
expected or been promised, hence their 
exultation (pera yapas).—Ver. 18. 
ἐθεώρουν: their report was no news to 


11-- 22. 


pour τὸν Σατανᾶν ὡς ἀστραπὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεσόντα. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


541 


19. ἰδού, 


δίδωμι 1 ὑμῖν τὴν ἐξουσίαν τοῦ πατεῖν ἐπάνω ὄφεων καὶ σκορπίων, 


καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶσαν τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ ἐχθροῦ: καὶ οὐδὲν ὑμᾶς οὗ μὴ 


» ἀδικήσῃ 3: 20. πλὴν ἐν τούτῳ μὴ χαίρετε, ὅτι τὰ πνεύματα ὑμῖν b in the 


ὑποτάσσεται: χαίρετε δὲ μᾶλλον ὃ ὅτι τὰ ὀνόματα ὑμῶν ἐγράφη * 


ἐν τοῖς οὖρανοῖς.” 


31. Ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ Spa ἠγαλλιάσατο τῷ πνεύµατι 
ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς,δ καὶ εἶπεν ''Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, πάτερ, Κύριε τοῦ 


sense of 
to hurt 
here and: 
several 
times in 
Rev. 


οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἀπέκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶν καὶ συνετῶν, 


καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις' ναί, ὁ πατήρ, ὅτι οὕτως ἐγένετο 


εὐδοκία δ ἔμπροσθέν σου.” 


22. Καὶ στραφεὶς πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς 


εἶπε, “Πάντα παρεδόθη μοι» ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός µου" καὶ οὐδεὶς ϱ 
, / e > , ‘ , ς ΄ 
γινώσκει τίς ἐστιν 6 vids, εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ, καὶ τίς ἐστιν 6 πατήρ, 


1 δεδωκα in NBCLX 1, vet. Lat. vulg. (Tisch., W.H.). 
αδικησει in NDL 1, 13, 33 al. mul. (Tisch., 


2 So in BCXA al. (W.H. margin). 
W.H., text). 


3 Most uncials and verss. omit μαλλον. 


D has διδωµι. 


4 ενγεγραπται in $BLX 1, 33; most uncials as in Τ.Ε. 


5 SBDE omit ο |., and NBCDLXE 1, 33 al. add τω αγιω to πνευµατι. 


and W.H. adopt both changes. 


Tisch. 


6 ευδ. εγεν. in BCLXE 33 some vet. Lat. codd. 


7 και oTpadets ... 


with ACA al. #i.). 
8 ot παρεδοθη in most uncials. 


Jesus. While they were working He 
saw Satan falling. There has been 
much discussion as to what is meant by 
this fall, and why it is referred to. It 
has been identified with the fall of the 
angels at the beginning of the world, 
with the Incarnation, with the temptation 
of Jesus, in both of which Satan sus- 
tained defeat. The Fathers adopted the 
first of these alternatives, and found the 
motive of the reference in a desire to 
warn the disciples. The devil fell 
through pride; take care you fall not 
from the same cause (ver. 20).—ds 
ἀστραπὴν, like lightning; the precise 
point of the comparison has been 
variously conceived: momentary bright- 
ness, quick, sudden movement, inevi- 
tableness of the descent—down it must 
come to the earth, είο.--πεσόντα, aorist, 
after the imperfect (ἐθεώρουν), fallen, a 
fact accomplished. Pricaeus refers to 
Acts xix. 20 as a historical exemplifi- 
cation of the fall—Satan’s kingdom 
destroyed by the rapid spread of @hris- 
tianity.—Ver. το reminds one of Mk. 
xvi. 18.—rod ἐχθροῦ, the enemy, Satan. 
---οὐδὲν, may be either nominative or 
accusative = either, “' nothing shall in 


ειπε Omitted in NBDLE 1, 13, 22, 33 verss. (Tisch. retains 


any wise hurt you,” R. V., or “‘in no 
respect shall he (the enemy) hurt γοι ”.. 
—Ver. 20. πλὴν has adversative force 
here = yet, nevertheless. The joy of 
the Seventy was in danger of becoming 
overjoy, running into self-importance; 
hence the warning word, which is best 
understood in the light of St. Paul’s 
doctrine of the Holy Spirit, which laid 
much more stress on the ethical than 
on the charismatical results of His in- 
fluence = rejoice not so much in possess- 
ing remarkable spiritual gifts as in being 
spiritual men. This text may be put 
beside Mt. vii. 21-23 as bearing on the 
separability of gifts and graces (χαρίσ- 
para and χάρις). 

Vv. 21-24. The exultation of Fesus 
(Mt. xi. 25-27).—The settingin Mt. gives 
to this great devotional utterance of 
Jesus a tone of resignation in connection 
with the apparent failure of His ministry. 
Here, connected with the fall of Satan, it 
has a tone of triumph (ἠγαλλιάσατο).--- 
ἐν τῷ πνεύµατι τῷ ἁγίφ: it was an in- 
spired utterance, ‘‘ a kind of glossolaly,” 
J. Weiss (Meyer).—Ver. 21 is almost 
verbatim, as in Mt. xi. 25, only that Lk. 
has ἀπέκρυψας for Mt.’s éxpuas.—Ver. 


542 


9 8 cr A @ οι /' 
ei μὴ ὁ vids, καὶ ᾧ ἐὰν βούληται ὁ 


KATA AOYKAN 


Xi 


ς 


vids ἀποκαλόψαι.,, 23. Καὶ 


στραφεὶς πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς κατ’ ἰδίαν εἶπε, “ Μακάριοι ot ὀφθαλμοὶ 


οἱ βλέποντες ἃ βλέπετε. 


24. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι πολλοὶ προφῆται 


καὶ βασιλεῖς ἠθέλησαν ἰδεῖν ἃ ὑμεῖς βλέπετε, καὶ οὐκ εἶδον: καὶ 
ἀκοῦσαι ἃ ἀκούετε, καὶ οὐκ ἤκουσαν. 
25. Καὶ ἰδού, νομικός τις ἀνέστη, ἐκπειράζων αὐτόν, kai! λέγων, 


“ Διδάσκαλε, τί ποιήσας ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω;” 


26. Ὁ δὲ 


εἶπε πρὸς αὐτόν, “Ev τῷ νόµῳ τί γέγραπται; πῶς ἀναγινώσκεις ; 
27. Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν, ''᾿Αγαπήσεις Κύριον τὸν Θεόν σου, ἐξ 
ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς 
ἰσχύος σου, καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς διανοίας σου" καὶ τὸν πλησίον σου 


« eee 
ὥς σεαυτογ. 


28. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ, -΄ Ορθῶς ἀπεκρίθης ' τοῦτο ποίει, 


1 και, found in ACD al., is omitted in ΝΕΡΙ.Ξ e syr. cur. cop. 
2 Instead of εξ with gen. in this and the two preceding phrases ΝΒΟΞ minusc. 


have ev with dative (D has ev all through). 


διανοιας. D omits this clause. 

22. This part of the devotional utterance, 
setting forth Christ’s faith in the pur- 
pose of His Father and the intimate 
fellowship subsisting between Father 
and Son, appears in some texts of Lk. 
as a declaration made to the disciples 
(στραφεὶς πρὸς τ. p. a, T. R.). The 
gesture implies that a solemn statement 
is to be made.—tig ἐστιν 6 vids, 6 
πατήρ: to know who the Son or the 
Father is = knowing the Son and the 
Father. The idea in Lk. is the same as 
in Mt., though the expression is 
different.—Ver. 23. στραφεὶς : a second 
impressive gesture, if that in ver. 22 be 
retained, implying that Jesus now more 
directly addresses the disciples. But the 
first στραφεὶς is altogether doubtful.— 
εἶπε: the word, spoken κατ’ ἰδίαν to the 
disciples, is substantially = Mt. xiii. 16, 
there referring to the happiness con- 
ferred on the disciples in being privi- 
leged to hear their Master’s parabolic 
teaching.—Baorrets: in place of Mt.’s 
δίκαιοι, which expresses an idea more 
intelligible to Jews than to Gentiles. 

Vv. 25-37. The lawyer's question, and 
the parable of the good Samaritan. 
Many critics (even Weiss, Mk.-Evang., 
p. 400) think that Lk. or his source has 
got the theme of this section from 
Mt. xxii. 35 ff., Mk. xii. 28 ff., and 
simply enriched it with the parable of 
the good Samaritan, peculiar to him. 
Leaving this critical question on one 
side, it may be remarked that this story 
seems to be introduced on the principle 
of contrast, the νομικός representing the 


t¢BL= have ev with dative for εξ a, τ. 


σοφοὶ καὶ συνετοὶ, to whom the things 
of the kingdom are hidden as opposed to 
the νήπιοι, to whom they are revealed, 
i.c., the disciples whom Jesus had just 
congratulated on their felicity. Simi- 
larly in the case of the anecdote of the 
woman in Simon’s house, vii. 36, vide 
notes there. J. Weiss remarks that this 
story and the following one about 
Martha and Mary form a pair, setting 
forth in the sense of the Epistle of James 
(ii. 8, 13, 14) the two main requirements 
of Christianity, love to one’s neighbour 
and faith (vide in Meyer, ad loc.).—Ver. 
25. ἀνέστη, stood up; from this ex- 
pression and the present tense of ava- 
γινώσκεις, how readest thou mow ? it has 
been conjectured that the scene may have 
been a synagogue.—tt ποιήσας: the 
vopixds, like the ἄρχων of xviii. 18, is 
professedly in quest of eternal life.—Ver. 
26. th γέγραπ., πῶς ἀναγιν., how 
stands it written ? how readest thou ? 
double question with a certain empresse- 
ment.—Ver. 27. Lk. here puts into the 
mouth of the lawyer an answer com- 
bining as co-ordinate the religious and 
the ethical, which in the later incident 
reported in Mt. xxii. 34-40, Mk. xii. 28- 
34, is ascribed to Jesus. The unity of 
these interests is, as Holtz. (H. C.) re- 
marks, the achievement and characteristic 
of Christianity, and one may legitimately 
doubt whether a man belonging to the 
clerical class in our Lord’s time had 
attained such insight. Divorce of re- 
ligion from morality was a cardinal vice 
of the righteousness of the time, and we 


23—33. 


καὶ Lyon.” 


, 
“Kai τίς ἐστί µου πλησίον ;” 


ἑ,"Ανθρωπός τις κατέβαινεν ἀπὸ Ἱερουσαλὴμ εἰς Ἱεριχώ, καὶ λησταῖς 
ἀπεριέπεσεν, ot καὶ ἐκδύσαντες αὐτόν, καὶ πληγὰς ἐπιθέντες ἀπῆλθον, 


ἀφέντες ἡμιθανῆ τυγχάνοντα.ὃ 


κατέβαινεν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐκείνῃ, καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὸν * ἀντιπαρῆλθεν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


30. 'Ὑπολαβὼν δὲ 3 ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, © it 


543 


29. Ὁ δὲ θέλων δικαιοῦν 1 ἑαυτὸν εἶπε πρὸς τὸν "Inoody, 


ς here only 

i N.T. 

in sense of 
replying. 

d Acts xxvii. 

41. Jas. i. 


41. κατὰ ᾿συγκυρίαν δὲ ἱερεύς tis. 2: 


¢ here only 
in N.T. 
32: f here (bis) 


ς / ‘ 3 x 4 > \ A 398 ῃ 
ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ Λευΐτης, γενόμενος ά κατὰ τὸν τόπον, ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν oan 


ἀντιπαρῆλθε. 


1 δικαιωσαι in SBCDLX=, 
3 Omit τνγχ. NBDLE 1, 33 al. 


see it exemplified in the following 
parable: priest and Levite religious but 
inhuman. In Lk.’s time the conception 
of religion and morality as one and in- 
separable had become a_ Christian 
commonplace, and he might have been 
unable to realise that there was a time 
when men thought otherwise, and so 
without any sense of incongruity made 
the lawyer answer as he does. But, on 
the other hand, it has to be borne in 
mind that even in our Lord’s time there 
were some in the legal schools who em- 
phasised the ethical, and Mk. makes the 
scribe (xii. 32, 33) one of this type.— 
ἀγαπήσεις, etc.: Deut. vi. 5 is here 
given, as in Mk. xii. 31, with a fourfold 
analysis of the inner man: heart, soul, 
strength, mind.—Ver. 29. δικαιῶσαι é., 
to keep up his character as a righteous 
man, concerned in all things to do his 
duty. Hence his desire for a definition 
of ‘“‘ neighbour,” which was an elastic 
term, Whether Lk. thinks of him as 
guilty of evasion and chicanery is doubt- 
ful. It was not his way to put the 
worst construction on the conduct even 
of scribes and Pharisees. —mAyotoy, with- 
out article, is properly an adverb = who 
is near me? But the meaning is the 
same as if 6 had been there. 

Vv. 30-37. The story of the good 
Samaritan, commonly called a parable, 
but really not such in the strict sense of 
natural things used as vehicle of spiritual 
truth ; an example rather than a symbol ; 
the first of several ‘‘ parables ” of this sort 
in Lk.—dv@pemds τις: probably a Jew, 
but intentionally not so called, simply a 
human being, so at once striking the 
keynote of universal ethics.—xaréBawvey, 
was descending; it was a descent in- 
deed.—. περιέπεσεν, ‘fell among” 
robbers, A. and R. VV.; better perhaps 
*‘feil in with,” encountered, so Field 
(Οἱ. Nor.). The verb is often joined 


33. Σαμαρείτης δέ τις ὁδεύων ἦλθε kat αὐτόν, καὶ Wisd. 


XVi. 1Ο, 


2 Omit δε NBC. 
* Omit γεν BLXE 1, 38, 118. 


with a noun singular (περιέπεσε χειμῶνι). 
Raphel cites from Polybius an instance 
in which robbers ‘ fall in with” the 
party robbed: τούτους (legatos) λῃσταί 
τινες περιπεσόντες ἐν TH πελάγει διέφ- 
θειραν = (Reliquiae, lib. xxiv. ττ).--- 
ἡμιθανῆ, half dead, semivivo relicto, 
Vulgate, here only in N. T.; he will 
soon be whole dead unless some one 
come to his help: cannot help himself 
or move from the spot.—Ver. 31. 
κατὰ συγκυρίαν (συγκυρία, from συν- 
kupéw), rare, late Greek = κατὰ συντυχίαν 
(Hesychius, συγκυρία, συντνυχία), by 
chance; the probabilities against succour 
being at hand just when sorely wanted: 
still more improbable that three possi- 
bilities of succour should meet just there 
and then. But the supposition, duly 
apologised for, is allowable, as the story 
must go on.—iepevs : Schanz infers from 
κατὰ ovy. that Jericho was nota sacer- 
dotal city, as, since Lightfoot, has been 
usually taken for granted. But the 
phrase has its full meaning inde- 
pendently of this inference, vide above.— 
ἀντιπαρῆλθεν, variously rendered either 
= passed by simply, or = passed the 
Opposite way (going up), Grotius; or 
passed with the wounded man in full 
view, staring him in the face, a sight fit 
to awaken compassion in any one 
(Hahn) ; or passed by on the other side 
of the road.—Ver. 32. ὅμοίως Λευίτης 
ἀντιπ., likewise a Levite . . . passed by, 
the repetition of ἀντιπαρῆλθεν has a 
thetorical monotony suggestive of the 
idea: such the way of the world—to pass 
by, “in nine cases out of ten that is 
what you may expect” (The Parabolic 
Teaching of Christ, p. 348).—Ver. 33. 
Σαμαρείτης, a Samaritan: will he 
a Gorton: pass by? No, he does not, that 
the surprise and the point of the story. 
The unexpected happens.—éSevuv, hex> 
only in N. T., making a journey, pre- 


S44 
4 sag abe ἰδὼν αὐτὸν 1 ἐσπλαγχνίσθη - 


Ἡ here on only * reuinore αὐτοῦ, ὀνίμένι ἔλαιον καὶ οἶνον : 
ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν εἰς ) πανδοχεῖον, καὶ ἐπεμελήθη 
35. καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν αὔριον ἐξελθών,” ἐκβαλὼν δύο δηνάρια 


ἔδωκε τῷ πανδοχεῖ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ,» Ἐπιμελήθητι αὐτοῦ: καὶ ὅ τι 


i Acts xxiii. ἐπὶ τὸ ἴδιον ' κτῆνος, ἤ 


24. I Cor. 
XV. 39. 
—- αν. 


αὐτοῦ . 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


Ms. 


34. καὶ προσελθὼν Sxarddnce τὰ 
Απιβηβόσης δὲ αὐτὸν. 


j here τὸ ἂν προσδαπανήσῃς, ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ ἐπανέρχεσθαί µε ἀποδώσω σοι. 
36. Τίς οὖν ἁ τούτων τῶν τριῶν δοκεῖ σοι πλησίον ὅ γεγονέναι τοῦ 


ἐμπεσόντος εἰς τοὺς λῃστάς; 
Εἶπεν οὖν δ αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Πορεύον, καὶ σὺ 


ἔλεος pet” αὐτοῦ." 
/ , » 
ποίει ὁμοίως. 


. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, “‘O ποιήσας τὸ. 
37 η 


κ Ch. xix. 6. > 4 aA , 2 , x SA 2A 
cn pit 38. ἘΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ év? τῷ πορεύεσθαι αὐτούς, καὶ αὐτὸς εἰσῆλθεν 
7. Jas. i, » , , 4 9 κε , 9 κ > 
25, εἰς κώµην τινά ' γυνὴ δέ τις ὀνόματι Μάρθα * ὑπεδέξατο αὐτὸν εἰς. 


1 Omit αυτον NBLE 
2 Omit εξ. SEBDLXE 1, 33 al. 


I, 33 vet. Lat. codd. 
B places εδωκεν before δυο δην. (W.H. margin). 


? BDLE 1, 33, 80 al. vet. Lat. codd. omit avrw. 


4 Omit ουν NBLE τ verss. 


"πλησιον δοκει σοι in NABCLE al. fl. D reads τινα ουν δοκεις πλ. γεγονεναι. 


8 δε for ουν in SBCDLXAE al. verss. 


7 For εγεν. δε εν. BLE 33 syrr. cur. sin. have simply εν δε, and omit και after 


αντουνς. 


sumably longer than from Jerusalem to 
Jericho, fully equipped for a long journey 
(Hahn), and so in possession of means 
for help, if he have the will.—éom)ay- 
χνίσθη, was touched with pity. That 
sacred feeling will keep Aim from passing 
by, though tempted by his own affairs to 
go on and avoid trouble and loss of 
time, as ships may pass by other ships in 
distress, so deserving ever after to have 
branded on them ΑΝΤΙΠΑΡΗΛΘΕΝ.-- 
Ver. 34. κατέδησε, ἐπιχέων: both 
technical terms in medicine. —éAatov καὶ 
οἶνον: not separately, but mixed; in use 
among Greeks and Romans as well as 
Jews (Wetstein).—xrijves = κτῆμα from 
κτάοµαι, generally a property, and 
specially a domestic animal: one’s 
beast.—aravSoxetoy (in classics πανδοκ.), 
a place for receiving all comers, an inn 
having a host, not merely a khan or 
caravanserai like κατάλυμα in ii, 7.—Ver. 
35. ἐκβαλὼν, casting out (of his girdle 
or purse).—8vo δην., two “ pence,” small 
sum, but enough for the present; will 
pay whatever more is needed ; known in 
the inn, and known as a trusty man to 
the innkeeper (τῷ πανδοκεῖ).- ὅτι ἂν, 
etc.: the speech of a man who in turn 
trusts the host, and has no fear of being 
overcharged in the bill for the wounded 
man.—éyo: with a slight emphasis 


which means: you know me.—érravép- 
χεσθαι: he expects to return to the place 
on his business, a regular customer at 
that i jinn. This verb, as well as προσδα- 
πανάω, is used here only i in N. T. —Ver. 
36. Application of the story.—yeyovevan : 

which of the three seems to you to have 
become neighbour by neighbourly action? 
neighbour is who neighbour does.—Ver. 
37. ὃ ποιήσας, etc. If the lawyer was 
captious to begin with he is captious no 
longer. He might have been, for his 
question had not been directly (though 
very radically) answered. But the moral 
pathos of the “ parable’? has appealed to 
his better nature, and he quibbles no 
longer. But the prejudice of his class 
tacitly finds expression by avoidance 
of the word “ Samaritan,” and the 
use instead of the phrase 6 ποιήσας τὸ 
ἔλεος pet’ αὐτοῦ. Yet perhaps we do 
him injustice here, for the phrase really 
expresses the essence of neighbourhood, 
and so indicates not only who is neigh- 
bour but why. For the same phrase vide 
i. 58, 72. This story teaches the whole 
doctrine of neighbourhood: first and 
directly, what it is to be a neighbour, 
viz., to give succour when and where 
needed ; next, indirectly but by obvious 
consequence, who is a neighbour, viz., 
any one who needs help and whom ἵ 


κ. 


34-42. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


545 


τὸν οἶκον αὐτῆς] 39. καὶ τῇδε ἦν ἀδελφὴ καλουµένη Μαρία, ἢ καὶ 
Παρακαθίσασα παρὰ τοὺς πόδας τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ 3 Kove τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ. 
40. ἡ δὲ Μάρθα περιεσπᾶτο περὶ πολλὴν διακονίαν: ἐπιστᾶσα δὲ 
εἶπε, “" Κύριε, οὐ µέλει σοι ὅτι ἡ ἀδελφή µου µόνην µε κατέλιπε» 
διακονεῖν; εἰπὲ 4 οὖν αὐτῇ ἵνα por συναντιλάβηται." 41. ᾿Αποκρι- 
Geis δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς,ὅ “ Μάρθα, Μάρθα, μεριμνᾶς καὶ 
τυρβάζῃ ὃ περὶ πολλά: 42. ἑνὸς δέ ἐστι χρείαἴ- Μαρία δὲ δ τὴν 
ἀγαθὴν μερίδα ἐξελέξατο, ἥτις οὐκ ἀφαιρεθήσεται ἀπ᾽ 9 αὐτῆς.” 


I NCLE 33 have εις την οικιαν and NWLE 


after υπεδεξατο αυτον (W.H. brackets). 


om. αυτης (Tisch.). B has nothing 


? From η και to Ίησου sundry variants occur: omit η MLE; SABCLE have 
παρακαθεσθεισα; for παρα $3BCL= have προς; and for Ιησον these with D have 


κνριον. 


ὃ κατελειπεν in ABCLE al. fl. 


“ evrov in DLE 1, 33 (Tisch., W.H.); ειπε in SABC al. fl, 


5 For ο |. S$BL have ο κυριος. 


5 θορυβαζη in SBCDL 1, 33. 


7 For ενος δε εστι xpeta (Tisch.) NBL Σ, 33 have ολιγων δε εστι χρεια η ενος, 


which commends itself on reflection. 
omits all between Μαρθα and Μαρια. 


8 yap in NBL. 


have opportunity and power to help, no 
matter what his rank, race, or religion 
may be: neighbourhood coextensive 
with humanity. 

Vv. 38-42. Martha and Mary.—Ver. 
38. ἐν τῷ πορεύεσθαι, in continuation 
of the wandering whose beginning is 
noted at ix. 52; when, where, not in- 
dicated.—eis κώµην τινά: either not 
known, or the name deemed of no im- 
portance. When it is stated that He 
(αὐτὸς) (Jesus) came to this village it is 
not implied that He was alone, though 
no mention is made of disciples in the 
narrative.—Madp0a = mistress, feminine 


of "\7.—Ver. 39. Μαρία, socially sub- 


ordinate (inferrible from the manner of 
reference), though the spiritual heroine 
of the tale-—# καὶ: the force of the καὶ 
is not clear, and has been variously ex- 
plained. Grotius regards it as simply an 
otiose addition to the relative. Borne- 
mann takes it = adeo = to such an extent 
did Mary disregard the customary duty of 
women, that of serving guests, ‘‘ quem 
morem adeo non observat M. ut docenti 
Jesu auscultet”. Perhaps it has some- 
thing of the force of 84 = who, observe! 
serving to counterbalance the social sub- 
ordination of Mary; the less important 
person in the house, but the more im- 
portant in the Kingdom of οἄ.--παρα- 


Vide below. D omits the clause. 


Syr. sin. 


9 Omit aw BDL. 


καθεσθεῖσα, first aorist passive participle, 
from παρακαθέζοµαι, late Greek form = 
sitting at the feet of Jesus. Posture 
noted as significant of a receptive mind 
and devoted spirit.—rot Κυρίου, the 
Lord, once more for ¥esus in narrative 
(Ἰησοῦ in T. Ε.).---ἤκουε τὸν λόγον α., 
continued hearing His word, a conven- 
tional expression as in viii. 21.—Ver. 4ο. 
ἡ δὲ Μάρ., but Martha, δὲ as if μὲν had 
gone before where καὶ is=Mary on the 
one hand sat, etc., Martha on the other, 
είο.---περιεσπᾶτο, was distracted, over- 
occupied, as if the visit had been un- 


expected, and the guests numerous. In 
use from Xenophon down. In Polybius 
with tq διανοίᾳ added. Holtzmann 


(H. C.) points out the correspondence 
between the contrasted picture of the 
two sisters and the antithesis between 
the married and unmarried woman in 
1 Cor. vii. 34, 35. The married woman 
caring for the world like Martha 
(µεριμνᾷς, ver. 41); the unmarried virgin: 
εὐπάρεδρον 7. κυρίῳ ἀπερισπάστως.--- 
ἐπιστᾶσα, coming up to and placing 
herself beside Jesus and Mary: in no 
placid mood, looking on her sister as 
simply an idle woman. A bustled worthy 
housewife will speak her mind in such a 
case, even though a Jesus be present 
and come in for a share of the blame.— 
συναντιλάβηται, bid her take a hand: 


35 


KATA AOYKAN 


XI. 


ΧΙ. τ. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εἶναι αὐτὸν ἐν τόπω τινὶ προσευχόµενον, 
ὡς ἐπαύσατο, εἶπέ τις τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ πρὸς αὐτόν, “Κύριε, 
δίδαξον ἡμᾶς προσεύχεσθαι, καθὼς καὶ Ιωάννης ἐδίδαξε τοὺς 


μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ.” 


2. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτοῖς, “΄ Ὅταν προσεύχησθε, λέγετε, 


Πάτερ ἡμῶν 6 ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς,' ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου: ἐλθέτω 
ἡ βασιλεία σου" γενηθήτω τὸ θέληµά σου, ds ἐν οὐρανῶ, καὶ ἐπὶ 


lypeov... 
doubtless from Mt. 


along with me in the work (cf. Rom. 
viii. 26)—Ver. 41. θορυβάζῃ (from 
θόρυβος, an uproar; τυρβάζῃ T. R., 
from τύρβη, similar in meaning, neither 
form again in N. T.), thou art bustled, 
gently spoken and with a touch of pity. 
—tept πολλά: a great day in that house. 
Every effort made to entertain Jesus 
worthily of Him and to the credit of the 
house.—Ver. 42. ὀλίγων δέ ἐστιν χρεία 
ἢ ἑνός. With this reading the sense is: 
there is need of few things (material) ; 
then, with a pause—or rather of one 
thing (spiritual). Thus Jesus passes, as 
was His wont, easily and swiftly from 
the natural to the spiritual. The notion 
that it was beneath the dignity of Jesus 
to refer to dishes, even as a stepping 
stone to higher things, is the child of 
conventional reverence.—rthy ἀγαθὴν 
µερίδα, the good portion, conceived of 
as a share in a banquet (Gen. xlili. 34). 
Mary, having chosen this good portion, 
may not be blamed (yap), and cannot be 
deprived of it, shall not with my sanction, 
in deference to the demands of a lower 
vocation. 

CHAPTER XI. LESSON ON PRAYER. 
DiscouRSES IN SELF-DEFENCE.—VV. 
1-13 contain a lesson on prayer, consist- 
ing of two parts: first, a form of prayer 
suggesting the chief objects of desire 
(vv. 1-4); Second, an argument enforc- 
ing perseverance in prayer (vv. 5-13). 
Whether the whole was spoken at one 
time or not cannot be ascertained ; all 
one can say is that the instructions are 
thoroughly coherent and congruous, 
and might very well have formed a 
single lesson. 

Vv. 1-4. The Lord’s Prayer with a 
historical introduction (Mt. vi. 7-15).— 
ἐν τόπῳ tit: neither the place nor the 
time of this incident is indicated with 
even approximate exactness. It is 
simply stated that it happened when 
Jesus was at acertain place, and when 
He was praying (προσευχόµενον). Why 
the narrative comes in here does not 


ουρανοις omitted in NBL 1, 22 al. Orig. Tert. syr. sin. ; comes in 


clearly appear. I have suggested else- 
where (The Parabolic Teaching of Christ, 
Preface to the Third Edition) that the 
parable of the Good Samaritan, the 
story of Martha and Mary and the 
Lesson on Prayer form together a group 
having for their common heading: “at 
school with Jesus,”’ exhibiting under three 
types the scholar’s burden, the Teacher’s 
meekness, and the rest-bringing lesson, 
so giving us Lk.’s equivalent for Mt.’s 
grucious invitation (chap. xi. 28-30). I 
am now inclined to think that Schola 
Christi might be the heading not merely 
for these three sections but for the whole 
division from ix. 51 to xviii. 14, the con- 
tents being largely didactic.—tts T. pad. : 
a later disciple, Meyer thinks, who had 
not heard the Teaching on the Hill, 
and who got for answer to his request a 
repetition of the Lord’s Prayer, given 
by Mt. as part of the Sermon on the 
Mount. This conjecture must go for 
what it is ν/οτίἩ.---καθὼς καὶ ᾿Ιωάννης: 
the fact here stated is not otherwise 
known: no trace of a Johannine liturgy ; 
but the statement in itselfis very credible: 
prayer like fasting reduced to system in 
the Baptist’s circle—Ver. 2. Aéyere, 
say, but not implying obligation to re- 
peat regularly the ipszssima verba. The 
divergence of Lk.’s form from that of 
Mt., as given in critical editions of the 
N. T., is sufficient evidence that the 
Apostolic Church did not so understand 
their Lord’s will, and use the prayer 
bearing His name as a formula. Inter- 
preters are not agreed as to which of the 
two forms is the more original. For my 
own part I have little doubt that Lk.’s 
is secondary and abbreviated from the 
fuller form of Mt. The very name for 
God—Father—without any added epithet 
is sufficient proof of this; for Jesus was 
wont to address God in fuller terms 
(vide x. 21), and was not likely to give 
His disciples a form beginning so 
abruptly. Lk.’s form as it stands in 
W.AH. is as follows: 


.--.. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


τῆς γῆς. 3. τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθ’ 
ἡμέραν: 4. καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν, καὶ γὰρ αὐτοὶ 


ἀφίεμεν  παντὶ ὀφείλοντι ἡμῖν: καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκης ἡμᾶς eis 


πονηροῦ. 5. Καὶ εἶπε 
καὶ πορεύσεται πρὸς αὐτὸν 


πειρασµόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ 
πρὸς αὐτούς, “Tis ἐξ ὑμῶν ἕξει Φίλον, 
µεσονυκτίου, καὶ etry αὐτῷ, Φίλε, χρῆσόν µοι τρεῖς ἄρτους, 6. ἐπειδὴ 
φίλος µου παρεγένετο ἐδ ὁδοῦ πρός µε, καὶ οὐκ ἔχω ὃ παραθήσω 
αὐτῷ: 7. κἀκεῖνος ἔσωθεν ἀποκριθεὶς εἴπῃ, Μή jor κόπους πάρεχε" 
ἤδη ἡ θύρα κέκλεισται, καὶ τὰ παιδία µου μετ ἐμοῦ εἰς τὴν κοίτην 
εἰσίν: of δύναµαι ἀναστὰς δοῦναί σοι. 8. Λέγω ὑμῖν, εἰ καὶ οὗ 
δώσει αὐτῷ ἀναστάς, διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτοῦ φίλον, διά γε τὴν ἀναίδειαν 


1 This petition, γενηθητω . . 
2 adtopev in NCABCD. T.R. as in $*L. 


547 


. επι της γης, Omitted in BL 1, 22 vulg. syr. sin. 


Σαλλα . . 


. Tovnpov omitted in ΔΜΒΙ, 1, 22 al. fl. vulg. syr. sin. 


These 


abbreviations in Lk.’s version of the Lord’s Prayer are accepted by most modern 


editors and scholars. 
4Φφιλον αντου in NBCLX 33 al. 


Father! Hallowed be Thy name. 
Come Thy kingdom. 
The bread of each day give us 
daily. 
And forgive our sins, for we 


also forgive every one 
owing us. 

And bring us not into tempta- 
tion. 


The third petition: Thy will be done, 
etc., and the second half of the sixth: 
but deliver us from evil, are wanting.— 
Ver. 3. τὸ καθ) ἡμέραν, daily, for Mt.’s 
σήμερον, this day, is an alteration cor- 
responding to the καθ ἡμέραν in the 
Logion concerning cross-bearing (ix. 
23).—8l8ou, for δὸς, is a change neces- 
sitated by the other.—Ver. 4. ἅμαρ- 
τίας: for Mt.’s ὀφειλήματα, but it is 
noticeable that the idea of sins is not 
introduced into the second clause. Lk. 
avoids making our forgiving and God’s 
parallel: we forgive debts, God sins. 
Whether the debts are viewed as moral 
or as material is not indicated, possibly 
both.—On the whole, vide Mt. 

Vv. 5-8. The selfish neighbour. This 
parable and that of the unjust judge 
(xviii. 1-8) form a couplet teaching the 
same lesson with reference to distinct 
spheres of life or experience: that men 
ought always to pray, and not grow 
faint-hearted when the answer to prayer 
is long delayed. They imply that we 
have to wait for the fulfilment of 
spiritual desires, and they teach that it 
is worth our while to wait: fulfilments 


will come, God is good to them that wait 
upon Him. ? 

Ver. 5. εἶπεν: the story is not called 
a parable, as the similar one in chap. 
xvili. is, but it {ἐς one. God’s ways in 
the spiritual world are illustrated by men’s 
ways in everyday life.—ris ἐξ ὑμῶν, etc. : 
the whole parable, vv. 5-8, is really one 
long sentence in which accordingly the 
construction comes to grief, beginning 
interrogatively (as far as Φφίλον, ver. 5, 
or παραθήσω αὐτῷ, ver. 6) and continu- 
ing conditionally, the apodosis beginning 
with λέγω ὑμῖν, ver. 8, and taking the 
form of an independent sentence.— 
µεσονυκτίου, at midnight, a poetic word 
in classic Greek, a prose word in late 
Greek. Phryn. says: μεσονύκτιον ποιη- 
τικόν, οὐ πολιτικόν. In hot climates 
travelling was largely done during night, 
therefore the hour was seasonable from 
the traveller’s point of view, while un- 
seasonable from the point of view of 
people at home. This is a feature in 
the felicity of the ραταῦ]ε.-- χρῆσον, rst 
aorist active imperative, from κίχρηµι, 
here only in N. T., to lend.—Ver. 6 
οὐκ ἔχω: this does not necessarily imply 
poverty: bread for the day was baked 
every morning. It is rather to be 
wondered at that a man with a family of 
children (ver. 7) had any over.—Ver. 7. 
µή pou, etc.: similar phrase in xviii. 5. 
Cf. Mt. xxvi. το, Mk. xiv. 6. Here = 
don’t bother me |---κέκλεισται, has been 
barred for the night, a thing done and 
not to be undone for a trifling cause.— 


548 


KATA AOYKAN XI. 
αὐτοῦ, ἐγερθεὶς δώσει αὐτῷ ὅσων ypyle. 9. Κάγὼ ὑμῖν λέγω, 
Αἰτεῖτε, καὶ δοθήσεται ὑμῖν: ζητεῖτε, καὶ εὑρήσετε" κρούετε, καὶ 
10. was γὰρ ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβάνει: καὶ 6 ζητῶν: 
11. τίνα δὲ ὑμῶν 3 τὸν 


ἀνοιγήσεται 1 ὑμῖν. 
εὑρίσκει. καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ἀνοιγήσεται.ὶ 
πατέρα αἰτήσει ὁ υἱὸς ἄρτον, ph λίθον ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ; εἰ καὶ 5 
ἰχθύν, μὴ ἀντὶ ἰχθύος ὄφιν ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ ά; 12. ἢ καὶ ἐὰν αἰτήσῃ 5 
ὠόν, μὴ ἐπιδώσει αὐτῷ σκορπίον; 13. et οὖν ὑμεῖς πονηροὶ ὑπάρχον- 
τες οἴδατε ἀγαθὰ δόµατα ὃ διδόναι τοῖς τέκνοις ὑμῶν, πόσω μᾶλλον 


ὁ πατὴρ 6 ἐξ οὐρανοῦ δώσει Πνεῦμα "Άγιον τοῖς αἰτοῦσιν αὐτόν ;” 
14. Καὶ ἦν ἐκβάλλων δαιµόνιον, καὶ αὐτὸ hv? κωφόν: ἐγένετο δέ, 


τοῦ δαιµονίου ἐξελθόντος, ἐλάλησεν 5 κωφός' καὶ ἐθαύμασαν οἱ 


1 ανοιχθ. in many MSS. (Tisch.); ανοιγ. in ΔΜΒΟΙ, al. pl. (W.H.) may have 


come from Mt. (so Tisch.). 
ανοιγεται (W.H. marg.). 


2εξ υΌµων in ΝΑΒΟΡΙ.. 


For the second ανοιγησεται (νετ. 10) BD have 


3 From αρτον to ει και is omitted in B verss. Orig. (W.H. text). 


4 autw before επιδ. in BDL. 


5 S9BL 1, 13, 33 omit εαν, and with CD al. have αιτησει. 


before επιδ. 
6 Son. ay. in SABCDL al. fl. 


cis τὴν κοίτην: they have gone to bed 
and are now sleeping in bed, and he 
does not want to risk waking them 
cn μὴ ἀφυπνίσῃ αὐτά, Euthym.).—od 
ύναμαι: οὐ θέλω would have been 
nearer the truth.—Ver. 8. λέγω ὑμῖν: 
introducing a confident assertion.—8vd 
ye τ. av., yet at least on account of, etc. 
He may give or not give for friendship’s 
sake, but he must give for his own sake.— 
ἀναίδειαν (here only in N.T.), the total dis- 
regard of domestic privacy and comfort 
shown by persistent knocking; very 
indecent from the point of view of the 
man in bed (ἀναίδειαν--τὴν ἐπιμονὴν τῆς 
αἰτήσεως, Euthym.). 

Vv. 9-13. The moral of the story (cf. 
Mt. vii. ΊΤ-ττ).--κἀγὼ ὑμῖν, etc., and I 
(the same speaker as in ver. 8) say to 
you, with equal confidence. What Jesus 
says is in brief: you also will get what 
you want from God, as certainly as the 
man in my tale got what he wanted ; 
therefore pray on, imitating his ἀναίδεια. 
The selfish neighbour represents God as 
He seems, and persistent prayer looks 
like a shameless disregard of His 
apparent indifference.—Vv. 9, 10 corre- 
spond almost exactly with Mt. vii. 7, 8. 
Vide notes there.—Ver. 11. τίνα δὲ: 
δὲ introduces a new parabolic saying: 
which of you, as a father, shall his son 
ask? etc. In the T.R. Lk. gives three 


BL also omit py 


7 και αυτο ην omit SBL ail. verss. 


examples of possible requests—Mt.’s 
two: a loaf, and a fish, and a third, an 
egg. Cod. B omits the first (W.H. 
put it on the margin).—dév, σκορπίον: 
in the two first instances there is re- 
semblance between the thing asked and’ 
supposed to be given: loaf and stone, 
fish and serpent ; in Lk.’s third instance 
also, the σκορπίος being a little round 
lobster-like animal, lurking in stone walls, 
with a sting in its tail. The gift of 
things similar but so different would be 
cruel mockery of which almost no father 
would be capable. Hens were not 
known in ancient Israel. Probably the 
Jews brought them from Babylon, after 
which eggs would form part of ordinary 
food (Benziger, Heb. Arch., p. 94).—Ver. 
13. 6 π. 6 ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, this epithet is 
attached to πατὴρ here though not in the 
Lord’s Prayer.—Mvetpa "Άγιον instead 
of Mt.’s aya@a. The Holy Spirit is 
mentioned here as the summum donum, 
and the supreme object of desire for all 
true disciples. In some forms of the 
Lord’s Prayer (Marcion, Greg. Nys.) a 
petition for the gift of the Holy Spirit 
took the place of the first or second 
petition. 

Vv. 14-16. Brief historical statement 
introducing certain defensive utterances 
of Fesus.—Vv. 14, 15 answer to Mt. 
ix. 33, 34, xii. 22-24, and ver. 16 to Mt. 


ϱ---33. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ὄχλοι, 15. τινὲς δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν εἶπον, “Ἐν Βεελζεβοὺλ ἄρχοντι 1 
τῶν δαιµονίων ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια. 16. Ἕτεροι δὲ πειράζοντες 


'σημεῖον Tap αὐτοῦ ἐζήτουν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ 3: 17. Αὐτὸς δὲ εἰδὼς αὐτῶν 


549 


τὰ "διανοήµατα εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Maca βασιλεία ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὴν διαµερισ-α here, onl 


θεῖσα ἐρημοῦται: καὶ οἶκος ἐπὶ οἶκον, πίπτει. 
Σατανᾶς ἐφ ἑαυτὸν διεµερίσθη, πῶς σταθήσεται ἡ βασιλεία αὐτοῦ ; 
ὅτι λέγετε, ἐν Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐκβάλλειν µε τὰ δαιμόνια. 19. εἰ δὲ 
ἐγὼ ἐν Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια, οἱ viol ὑμῶν ἐν tiv 
ἐκβάλλουσι; διὰ τοῦτο κριταὶ ὑμῶν αὐτοὶ ὃ ἔσονται. 20. et δὲ ἐν 
δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιµόνια, dpa ἔφθασεν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἡ 
βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 21. Ὅταν 6 ἰσχυρὸς καθωπλισµένος φΦυλάσσῃ 
τὴν ἑαυτοῦ αὐλήν, ἐν εἰρήνῃ ἐστὶ τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ: 22. ἐπὰν δὲ 
ς 4 3 , > Ain ιῶ Δ , > AS s > ~ 
ὁ ΄ ἰσχυρότερος αὐτοῦ ἐπελθὼν νικήσῃ αὐτόν, Thy πανοπλίαν αὐτοῦ 


" in 
19. εἰ δὲ καὶ ὁ (Is. lv. οἱ 


αἴρει, ἐφ᾽ 4 ἐπεποίθει, καὶ τὰ " σκύλα αὐτοῦ διαδίδωσιν. 
A > A A A 
ὢν pet ἐμοῦ kat ἐμοῦ ἐστι: καὶ 6 μὴ συνάγων pet ἐμοῦ σκορπίζει. 


1 τω αρχ. in ΝΑΒΟΙ,, 
Φ αυτοι before kp. vp. in BD (W.H.). 


xii. 38. The reproduction of these 
passages here is very summary: the 
reference to Isvael, Mt. ix. 33, and the 
question “is not this the Son of 
David?” xii. 23, ¢g., being omitted. 
Then, further, it is noticeable that the 
references to the Pharisees and scribes, 
as the authors of the malignant theory 
as to Christ’s cure of demoniacs and 
the persons who demanded a sign, are 
eliminated, the vague terms τινὲς (νετ. 
15) and ἕτεροι (ver. 16) being substituted. 
The historical situation in which Jesus 
spoke is wiped out, the writer caring 
only for what He said. 

Vv. 17-23. The Beelzebub theory (Mt. 
xii. 25-30, -Mk. iii. 23-27).—Ver. 17. 
διαμερισθεῖσα. Lk. has a preference 
for compounds; μερισθεῖσα in Mt.— 
καὶ οἶκος ἐπὶ οἶκον πίπτει, and house 
falls against house, one tumbling house 
knocking down its neighbour, a graphic 
picture of what happens when a kingdom 
is divided against itself. In Mt. kingdom 
and city are two co-ordinate illustrations 
of the principle. In Mk. a house takes 
the place of Mt.’s city. In Lk. the house 
is simply a feature in the picture of a 
kingdom ruined by self-division. Some 
(e.g., Bornemann and Hahn) render Lk.’s 
phrase: house upon house, one house 
after another falls. Others, in a har- 
monistic interest, interpret: a house 
being divided (διαμερισθεὶς understood) 
against itself (ἐπὶ οἴκον = ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὸν) 


3. ὁ μὴ b here only 
μη in N. T 


3 εξ ουρ. εἴητουν παρ αυτον in SABCDL 1, 33 al. 


4 Omit o NBDL, 


falls—Ver. 20. ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ; 
instead of Mt.’s ἐν πνεύµατι Θεοῦ, which 
is doubtless the original expression, 
being more appropriate to the connection 
of thought. Lk.’s expression emphasises 
the immediateness of the Divine action 
through Jesus, in accordance with his 
habit of giving prominence to the 
miraculousness of Christ’s healing acts. 
But the question was not as to the fact, 
but as to the moral quality of the miracle. 
The phrase recalls Ex. viii. ο.---ἔφθασεν : 
φθάνω in classics means to anticipate, in 
later Greek to reach, the idea of priority 
being dropped out.—Ver. 21. ὅταν: in- 
troducing the parable of the strong mar 
subdued by a stronger, symbolising the 
true state of the case as between 
Beelzebub and Jesus, probably more 
original in Lk. than in Mt. (xii. 29).—- 
καθωπλισµένος, fully armed, here onl_ 
in Ν.Τ.--αὐλήν, court, whose entrance 
is guarded, according to some; house 
castle, or palace according to other: 
(οἰκίαν in Mt.).—Ver. 22. πανοπλίαν 
panoply, a Pauline word (Eph. vi. 11, 
13).--διαδίδωσιν, distributes the spoils 
among his friends with the generosity 
and the display of victory, referring 
probably to the extensive scale of Christ’s 
healing ministry among demoniacs.— 
Ver. 23 = Mt. xii. 30. 

Vv. 24-26. The parable of the unclean 
spirit cast out and returning: given by 
Mt. in connection with the demand for a 


og 


KATA AOYKAN 


XI. 


24. Ὅταν τὸ ἀκάθαρτον πνεῦμα ἐξέλθῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, διέρχεται 
δι ἀνύδρων τόπων, Lytodv ἀνάπαυσιν: καὶ μὴ εὑρίσκον λέγει! 
Ὑποστρέψω εἰς τὸν οἶκόν µου ὅθεν ἐξῆλθον: 25. καὶ ἐλθὸν εὑρίσκει 3 


σεσαρωµένον καὶ κεκοσµηµένον. 


26. τότε πορεύεται καὶ παραλαμ- 


βάνει ἑπτὰ ἕτερα πνεύματα πονηρότερα ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ εἰσελθόντα 


aA 3 “~ a , ” α , , [ή 
κατοικεῖ ἐκεῖ: καὶ γίνεται τὰ ἔσχατα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκείνου χείρονα 


~ [η 3”. 
τῶν πρώτων. 


27. ᾿Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ λέγειν αὐτὸν ταῦτα, ἐπάρασά τις yur) 
ε here only φωνὴν * ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “ Μακαρία ἡ κοιλία ἡ "βαστάσασά 


in this 
sense. 


σε, καὶ μαστοὶ οὓς ἐθήλασας." 


28. Αὐτὸς δὲ εἶπε, “΄ Μενοῦνγε ® 


µακάριοι οἱ ἀκούοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ φυλάσσοντες αὐτόν. © 


dhere only 20. Tv δὲ ὄχλων * ἐπαθροιζομένων ἤρξατο λέγειν, “΄ Ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη 7 


in N. 


πονηρά ἐστι: σημεῖον émiLntet,® καὶ σημεῖον οὐ δοθήσεται αὐτῇ. εἰ 


1 BLXE 33 prefix τοτε, which implies that και µη ευρισκον is to be joined to 


ανσπανσιν (W.H. marg.). 


2 BCL al. verss. insert σχολαζοντα, which may come in from Mt. (W.H. brackets). 


ἕεπτα after εαντον in ΔΝ ΒΙ;Ξ 13, 69 al. ; a most appropriate position of emphasis, 


* φωνην before γυνη in NBL. A credible order, but apt to be altered by scribes 


into the smoother in T.R. 


ὅμενουν in SABLAE; µενουνγε in CDX al, 
The latter is found in Rom, ix. 20, x. 18. 


should be changed into the other. 
6 Omit αντον RaABCDLAE. 


There seems no reason why either 


7 yevea follows as well as precedes αυτη in NABDLXE (Tisch., W.H.). 


8 ζητει in SABLE al. T.R. from Mt. 


sign (xii. 43 ff.). Lk.’s version differs 
from Mt.’s chiefly in minute literary 
variations. Two omissions are notice- 
able: (1) the epithet σχολάζοντα in the 
description of the deserted house (a 
probable omission, the word bracketed 
in W. and H.), (2) the closing phrase of 
Mt.’s version: οὕτως ἔσται καὶ τῇ γενεᾷ 
τ. Te πονηρξ. On the import of the 
parable vide on Mt., ad loc. 

Vv. 27-28. The woman in the crowd. 
In Lk. only, though reminding one of 
Mt. xii. 46-50, Mk. iii. 32-35. It reports 
an honest matron’s blessing on the, to 
her probably unknown, mother of Jesus, 
who in this case, as in an earlier 
instance (viii. 19-21), treats the felicity 
of natural motherhood as entirely sub- 
ordinate to that of disciplehood.—Ver. 
27. κοιλία, μαστοὶ: ‘ Mulier bene sentit 
sed muliebriter loquitur ” (Bengel).—Ver. 
28. µμενοῦν might be confirmatory 
({utique) or corrective (imo vero), or a 
little of both ; the tone of voice would 
show which of the two the speaker 
meant to be the more prominent. Correc- 
tion probably was uppermost in Christ’s 


thoughts. Under the appearance of 
approval the woman was taught that she 
was mistaken in thinking that merely to 
be the mother of an illustrious son con- 
stituted felicity (Schanz). Viger (Ed. 
Hermann), p. 541, quotes this text as 
illustrating the use of μενοῦν in the 
sense of imo vero, rendering: ‘* Quin imo, 
vel imo vero, beati qui audiunt verbum 
Dei”. Its position at the beginning of 
the sentence is contrary to Attic use: 
“‘reperitur apud solos Scriptores Mace- 
donicos,’’ Sturz, De Dial. Mac. el Alezx., 
p. 203.—tdv λόγον τ. Θ., those who 
hear and keep the word of God, the 
truly blessed. Cf. ‘His word” in x. 39 ; 
an established phrase. : 

Vv. 29-32. The sign of Fonah (Mt. 
xii. 38-42).—T. &. ἐπαθροιζομένων, the 
crowds thronging to Him. The heading 
for the following discourse has been 
anticipated in ver. 16 ; ἕτεροι πειράζοντες, 
instead of Mt.’s scribes and Pharisees, 
asking a sign. In Lk,’s narrative Jesus 
answers their question in presence of a 
gathering crowd supposed to be referzed 
to in the expression ἡ yevea αὕτη. 


24-35. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

μὴ τὸ σημεῖον Ἰωνᾶ τοῦ προφήτου.! 30. καθὼς γὰρ ἐγένετο Ἰωνᾶς 
σημεῖον τοῖς Νινευΐταις,ὶ οὕτως ἔσται καὶ ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τῇ 
γενεᾷ ταύτῃ. 31. Βασίλισσα νότου ἐγερθήσεται ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετὰ 
τῶν ἀνδρῶν τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, καὶ κατακρινεῖ αὐτούς: ὅτι ἦλθεν 
ἐκ τῶν περάτων τῆς γῆς ἀκοῦσαι τὴν σοφίαν Σολομῶντος, καὶ idou, 
πλεῖον Σολομῶντος ὧδε. 32. ἄνδρες Νινευϊ ὃ ἀναστήσονται ἐν τῇ 
κρίσει μετὰ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, καὶ κατακρινοῦσιν αὐτήν: ὅτι 


55% 


µετενόησαν εἲς τὸ κήρυγµα “lava, καὶ ἰδού, πλεῖον Ιωνᾶ Ode. 
34. “ Οὖδεὶς δὲ ΄ λύχνον ἄψας εἰς κρυπτὸν ὅ τίθησιν, οὐδὲ ὑπὸ τὸν 
3 
µόδιον, GAN’ ἐπὶ τὴν λυχνίαν, ἵνα ot εἰσπορευόμενοι τὸ φέγγος δ 


βλέπωσιν. 


34. ὃ λύχνος τοῦ σώματός ἐστιν 6 


ς 


ὀφθαλμός Ἰ:. ὅταν 


οὖν ὃ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ἁπλοῦς ᾖ, καὶ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου Φωτεινόν 


A - 
ἐστιν" ἐπὰν δὲ πονηρὸς ᾖ, καὶ τὸ σῶμά σου σκοτεινόν. 


35. σκόπει 


1 Omit +. προφ. (from Mt.) with SBDLE codd. vet. Lat. 


2 onp. after Nu. in NBCLXE= 33. 
4 Omit δε SBCD 33 verss. 


6 For φεγγος in ALTA al. 1. (Tisch.). 
(W.H.). 


7 SNBCD have gov after οφθ. here also. 


ἐπαθροίζω occurs here only in N.T.— 
ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη, etc., this generation is 
an evil generation; said in reference to 
the crowd supposed to sympathise with 
and share the religious characteristics of 
their leaders. The epithet μοιχαλὶς 
(Mt. xii. 39) is omitted as liable to be 
misunderstood by non-Hebrew readers. 
—Ver. 30. The sign of Jonah is not 
further explained as in Mt. (xii. 49), and 
it might seem that the meaning intended 
was that Jonah, as a prophet and through 
his preaching, was a sign to the Ninevites, 
and that in like manner so was Jesus to 
His generation. But in reference to 
Jesus Lk. does not say “15” but ‘‘ shall be,” 
ἔσται, as if something else than Christ’s 
ministry, something future in His ex- 
perience, was the sign. Something is 
obscurely hinted-at-which is-not. further 
explained, as if to say: wait and you 
will get your sign.—Vv. 31, 32 ΜΕ. 
xii. 41, 22, only that the men of Nineveh 
and the Queen of Sheba change places. 
Mt.’s order seems the more natural, the 
discourse so passing from the sign of 
Jonah to the Ninevites, who had the 
benefit of it. 

Vy. 33-36 contain parabolic utterances 
concerning the placing of a light, and 
the conditions under which the eye sees 
the light.—Ver. 33 repeats viii. 16 in 
slightly varied language, and vv. 34-36 


3 Νινενιται in S$BL. D omits ver. 32. 
ὄκρυπτην in all uncials. 
SBCDX al. have the more usual φως 


8 SSBDLA verss. omit ουν. 


reproduce what Mt. gives in his version 
of the Sermon on the Mount (vi. 22, 23). 
The connection with what goes before 
is ποί apparent.—Ver. 33. KpvmrTny, a 
hidden place: crypt, vault, cellar, or 
press, to put a lamp in which is to make 
it useless.—Ver. 34. 6 Av xvos, etc., the 
lamp of the body is thine eye. This 
thought in connection with the foregoing 
one might lead us to expect some remark 
on the proper placing of the body’s 
lamp, but the discourse proceeds to 
speak of the single (ἁπλοΏς) and the 
evil (πονηρὸς) eye. The connection lies 
in the effects of these qualities. The 
single eye, like a properly placed lamp, 
gives light; the evil eye, like a lamp 
under a bushel, leaves one in darkness. 
On these attributes of the eye vide re- 
marks on Mt. vi. 22, 23.—Ver. 35. A 
counsel to take care lest the light in us 
become darkness, answering to that 
suggested in the parable: see that the 
lamp be properly placed.—_Ver. 36. This 
verse is very puzzling both critically and 
exegetically. As it stands in T.R. (and 
in W.H.) it appears tautological (De 
Wette), a fault which some have tried to 
surmount by punctuation, and some by 
properly placed emphasis—on ὅλον in 
the protasis and on Φφωτεινόν in the 
apodosis, giving this sense: if thy body 
be wholly lighted, having no part dark, 


552 


οὖν μὴ τὸ φῶς τὸ ἐν σοὶ σκότος ἐστίν. 


KATA AOYKAN 


XI. 


36. εἰ οὖν τὸ σῶμά σου 


ὅλον φωτεινόν, μὴ ἔχον TL µέρος σκοτεινόν, ἔσται φωτεινὸν ὅλον, ὡς 
ὅταν ὁ λύχνος τῇ ἀστραπῇ purify σε.” 1 
37. Ἐν δὲ τῷ λαλῆσαι, ἠρώτα 3 αὐτὸν Φαρισαῖός τις} ὅπως 


ἀριστήσῃ παρ) αὐτῷ" εἰσελθὼν δὲ ἀνέπεσεν. 
ἰδὼν ἐθαύμασεν ὅτι οὗ πρῶτον ἐβαπτισθη πρὸ τοῦ ἀρίστου. 


38. ὁ δὲ Φαρισαῖος 
39. 


εἶπε δὲ ὁ Κύριος πρὸς αὐτόν, “Nov ὑμεῖς οἱ Φαρισαῖοι τὸ ἔξωθεν 
τοῦ ποτηρίου καὶ τοῦ πίνακος καθαρίζετε: τὸ δὲ ἔσωθεν ὑμῶν γέµει 


' On νετ. 36 vide below, and W.H. (appendix) on νν. 35, 36. 


2 epwra in ABM 69 al, 


then will it be lighted indeed, as when 
the lamp with its lightning illumines 
thee (so Meyer). Even thus the saying 
seems unsatisfactory, and hardly such as 
Lk., not to say our Lord, could have 
been responsible for. The critical 
question thus forces itself upon us: is 
this really what Lk. wrote? Westcott 
and Hort think the passage contains ‘“‘a 
primitive corruption,” an opinion which 
1. Weiss (in Meyer, p. 476, note) en- 
dorses, making at the same time an 
attempt to restore the true text. Such 
attempts are purely conjectural. The 
verse is omitted in D, some Latin 
codd., and in Syr. Cur. The new 
Syr. Sin. has it in a form which Mrs. 
Lewis thus renders: ‘ Therefore also 
thy body, when there is in it no lamp 
that hath shone, is dark, thus while thy 
lamp is shining, it gives light to thee ’— 
a sentence as dark as a lampless body. 
Vv. 37-54. In the house of a Pharisee ; 
criticism of the religion of Pharisees and 
scribes (Mt. xxiii.), This section con- 
tains a selection of the hard sayings of 
Jesus on the “righteousness of the 
scribes and Pharisees,” given with much 
greater fulness in Mt.’s great anti- 
pharisaic discourse, the severity of the 
attack being further mitigated by the 
words being thrown into the form of 
table talk. This is the second time 
Jesus appears as a guest in a Pharisee’s 
house in this gospel, speaking His mind 
with all due freedom but without breach 
of the courtesies of life. The effect and 
probable aim of these representations is 
to show that if it ultimately came to an 
open rupture between Jesus and the 
Pharisees it was their fault, not His.— 
Ver. 37. ἐν τῷ λαλῆσαι, while He was 
speaking, as if it had been ἐ. τ. λαλεῖν. 
év goes most naturally with the present 
infinitive, but Lk., who uses év with in- 
finitive much more frequently than any 


> Omit tis NBL 1, 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


other N.T. writer, has ἐν with the 
aorist nine times. Vide Burton (M. and 
T., § 109), who remarks in reference to 
such cases: “' The preposition does not 
seem necessarily to denote exact co- 
incidence (of time), but in no case ex- 
presses antecedence. In 1 Cor. xi, 21 
and Heb. iii. 12 the action of the in- 
finitive cannot be antecedent to that of 
the principal verb.”—apioryoq: the 
meal was breakfast rather than dinner. 
—Ver. 38. ἐθαύμασεν: the cause of 
wonder was that Jesus did not wash 
(ἐβαπτίσθη) before eating. We have 
here Lk.’s equivalent for the incident in 
Mt. xv. 1 ff., Mk. vii. 1 ff., omitted by 
him. But the secondary character of 
Lk.’s narrative appears from this, that 
the ensuing discourse does not, as in 
Mt. and Mk., keep to the point in hand 
—neglect of ritual ablutions, but ex- 
patiates on Pharisaic vices generally.— 
Ver. 39. 6 Κύριος, once more this title 
in narrative.—vvv : variously taken as = 
igitur or = ecce, or as a strictly temporal 
particle = now “a silent contrast with a 
better πάλαι (Meyer). Hahn affirms 
that viv at the beginning of a sentence 
can mean nothing else than “now’’. 
But Raphel, in support of the second of 
the above senses (‘‘ admirationem quan- 
dam declarat”’), quotes from Arrian viv 
δύναταί τις ὠφελῆσαι καὶ ἄλλους, μὴ 
αὐτὸς ὠφελημένος (Epict., Jib. iii., cap. 
23, 1). Bengel cites 2 Kings vii. 6, 
Sept., where viv in the first position 


is the equivalent for 7] 3 7} (vide Sweet’s 


edition). Lo! ecce! seems best to suit 
the situation, which demands a lively 
emotional word. Godet happily renders: 
“Vous voila bien! Je vous prends sur 
le fait.”—+rivaxos for Mt.’s παροψίδος 
(xxiii. 25).---τὸ ἔσωθεν ὑμῶν, your inside, 
instead of the inside of the dishes in 
Mt. The idea is that the food they take 


ΑΕΕ ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


40. ἄφρονες, οὐχ ὁ ποιήσας τὸ ἔξωθεν καὶ 
41. πλὴν τὰ ἐνόντα δότε ἐλεημοσύνην: καὶ 


ρ 
᾽ἁρπαγῆς καὶ πονηρίας. 
. 3 , 
τὸ έσωθεν ἐποίησε; 
ἰδού, πάντα καθαρὰ ὑμῖν ἐστιν. 
ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἠδύοσμον καὶ τὸ πήγανον καὶ wav λάχανον, καὶ 


42. ἀλλ’ οὐαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς Φαρισαίοις, 


'παρέρχεσθε τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ Θεοῦ’ ταῦτα ἔδει ποιῆσαι, 
κἀκεῖνα μὴ ἀφιέναι.ὶ 43. οὐαὶ ὑμῖν τοῖς Φαρισαίοις, ὅτι ἀγαπᾶτε 
τὴν πρωτοκαθεδρίαν ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς, καὶ τοὺς ἀσπασμοὺς ἐν 
ταῖς ἀγοραῖς. 44. oval ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι, ὑποκριταί,' 
9 Ε] λα 9 . 3 Δ cm ε a 
ὅτι ἐστὲ ὡς τὰ μνημεῖα τὰ ἄδηλα, καὶ ot ἄνθρωποι οἱ περιπατοῦντες 
ἐπάνω οὐκ οἴδασιν. 45. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δέ τις τῶν νομικῶν λέγει 
ο aA ta a a , 35 ς 
αὐτῷ, “' Διδάσκαλε, ταῦτα λέγων καὶ ἡμᾶς ὑβρίτεις 46. Ὁ δὲ 
εεἶπε, “Kai ὑμῖν τοῖς νομικοῖς οὖαί, ὅτι φορτίζετε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους 
, ‘ > Avie Se a , τι > ΄ 
«φορτία δυσβάστακτα, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἑνὶ τῶν δακτύλων ὑμῶν οὐ προσψαύετε 


- / 2 ια ον. @ 3 a 8 -~ a 
τοις φορτίοις. 47. ovat υμιν, οτι οἰκοδομεῖτε τα µγνηµεια των 


553 


1 παρειναι in BL 13 (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 ypap. . . . νποκριται omitted in NBCL al. 


into their bodies is the product of plunder 
and wickedness (πογηρίας = ἀκρασίας, 
Mt.).—Ver. 40. ἄφρονες, stupid men! 
not so strong a word as μωροὶ (Mt. xxiii. 
17).—ovx 6 ποιήσας, etc.: either a 
question or an assertion. As an asser- 
tion = he that makes the outside (as it 
should be) does not thereby also make 
the inside: it is one thing to cleanse the 
outside, another, etc. On this view 
ποιήσας has a pregnant sense = purgare, 
which Kypke and others (Bornemann 
dissenting) claim for it in this place. As 
a question the reference will be to God, 
and the sense: did not the Maker of the 
world make the inside of things as well 
as the outside? Why therefore lay so 
exclusive stress on the latter? The 
outside and inside are variously taken as 
body and spirit (Theophy., Euthy., etc.), 
vessel and contents (Wolf, Hofmann), 
vessel and human spirit (Bengel).—Ver. 
4I. πλὴν, rather (instead of devoting 
such attention to the outside).—ra 
ἐνόντα, etc,, give, as alms, the things 
within the dishes. Others render as if 
the phrase were κατὰ τ. év.: according 
to your ability (Pricaeus, Grotius, etc.). 
Vv. 42-44. To this criticism of the 
externalism of the Pharisees, the only 
thing strictly relevant to the situation as 
described, are appended three of Mt.’s 
‘woes’ directed against their will- 
worship in tithing (Mt. xxiii. 23), their 
love of prominence (Mt. xxiii. 6, not 
formally put as a “ woe”), and their 
‘hypocrisy (Mt, xxiii. 27).---πήγανον, rue, 


Probably imported from Mt. 


instead of Mt.’s ἄνηθον, anise, here only 
in N.T.—wav λάχανον, every herb, 
general statement, instead of Mt.’s 
third sample, κύμινον.- την ἀγάπην τ. 
Θ., the love of God, instead of Mt.’s 
mercy and faith.—Ver. 43. Pharisaic 
ostentation is very gently dealt with 
here compared with the vivid picture in 
Mt. xxiii. 5-7, partly out of regard to 
the restraint imposed by the supposed 
situation, Jesus a guest, partly because 
some of the details (phylacteries, e.g.) 
lacked interest for Gentile readers. 
—Ver. 44. This “woe” is evidently 
adapted for Gentile use. In Mt. the 
sepulchres are made conspicuous by 
white-washing to warn passers-by, and 
the point is the contrast between the 
fair exterior and the inner foulness. 
Here the graves become invisible (ἄδηλα, 
in this sense here only in N.T.; cf. 1 Cor. 
xiv. 8) and the risk is that of being in 
the presence of what is offensive without 
knowing. Farrar (C. G. T.) suggests 
that the reference may be to Tiberias, 
which was built on the site of an old 
cemetery. 

Vv. 45-52. Castigation of the scribes 
present ; severe, but justified by having 
been invited.— Ver. 45. τις τῶν νομικῶν : 
a professional man, the Pharisees being 
laymen; the two classes kindred in 
spirit, hence the lawyer who speaks felt 
hit.—Ver. 46. Jesus fearlessly proceeds 
to say what He thinks of the class.— 
καὶ ὑμῖν, yes! to you lawyers also woes. 
Three are specified: heavy burdens (Mt. 


554 


KATA AOYKAN ΧΙ. 48—54.. 


48. dpa 
καὶ συνευδοκεῖτε τοῖς ἔργοις τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν: ὅτι 


προφητῶν, οἱδὲ 1 πατέρες ὑμῶν ἀπέκτειναν αὐτούς. 
μαρτυρεῖτε 2 
αὐτοὶ μὲν ἀπέκτειναν αὐτούς, ὑμεῖς δὲ οἰκοδομεῖτε αὐτῶν τὰ μνημεῖα. 
49. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἡ σοφία τοῦ Θεοῦ εἶπεν, ᾽Αποστελῶ εἰς αὐτοὺς 
προφήτας καὶ ἀποστόλους, καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀποκτενοῦσι καὶ ἐκδιώξ- 
ουσιν": 5ο. ἵνα ἐκζητηθῇ τὸ αἷμα πάντων τῶν προφητῶν τὸ 
ἐκχυνόμενον ὃ ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου ἀπὸ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης, 
51. ἀπὸ τοῦ αἵματος ᾿Αβελ ἕως τοῦ αἵματος Ζαχαρίου τοῦ. 
ἀπολομένου μεταξὺ τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου καὶ τοῦ οἴκου: ναί, λέγω ὑμῖν, 
ἐκζητηθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης. 
ὅτι ἤρατε τὴν κλεῖδα τῆς γνώσεως: αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσήλθετε, καὶ τοὺς 


52. Odat ὑμῖν τοῖς νομικοῖς, 


534. Λέγοντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα πρὸς 
> ‘.~6 2» c a X ς a 5 é έ 
αὐτούς, ἤρξαντο οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι δεινῶς ἐνέχειν, 


εἰσερχομένους exw toate.” 
Ρχομ 


καὶ ἀποστοματίζειν αὐτὸν περὶ πλειόνων, 54. ἐνεδρεύοντες αὐτόν, 
καὶ ζητοῦντες Ἰ θηρεῦσαί τι ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ, ἵνα κατηγορή- 


5 a8 
σωσιν αυτου. 


1 For οι δε SC have και οι (Tisch.). 


Vide below. 


? For µαρτυρειτε(ΑΟΡΧ al. £1.) ΝΕΤ, aeth. Orig. have µαρτυρες core. 


3 BDL codd. vet. Lat. omit avtev τα µνηµεια. 


* διωξουσιν in SBCLX al. (W.H.). 
6 For λεγοντος .. . 


Vide below. 


δεκκεχυμενον in B 33, 69 (W.H. text). 
προς αυτους, found in the Western type of text, NBCL 33 


have κακειθεν εξελθοντος αυτου: two quite distinct prefaces to the new section. 
Tisch., W.H., prefer that of B (2) to that of D (1). 


7 NBL 1, 118, 131 al. omit και ζητουντες (Tisch., W.H.). S¥X omit also αυτον 


after eveSpevovres (Tisch.). 
5 ΑΝ ΒΙ, cop. aeth. omit ινα . 


xxiil. 3), tombs of the prophets (Mt. xxiii. 
20-31), key of knowledge (Mt. xxiii. 14). 
—doprifere (with two accusatives only 
in N.T.), ye lade men with unbearable 
burdens.—poowavete, ye touch, here 
only in N.T.—Ver. 47. καὶ of πατέρες 
v., and your fathers. This reading of 
SSC is to be preferred on internal grounds 
to οἱ δὲ, as implying that the two acts 
were not contrasted but kindred = they 
killed, you build, worthy sons of such 
fathers.—Ver. 48 points the moral.— 
ἄρα: perhaps with Schleiermacher we 
should write ρα, taking what follows 
as a question.—oikodopetre, ye build, 
absolutely (without object, vide note 3 
above). Tomb-building in honour of dead 
prophets and killing of living prophets 
have one root: stupid superstitious rever- 
ence for the established order.—Ver. 40. 
ἡ σοφία τ. Θ.: vide notes on Mt. xxiii. 
34.---ἀποστόλους, apostles, instead of 
wise men and scribes in Με.---ἐκδιώξου- 
σιν, they shall drive out (of the land), in 


. . αντον (a gloss imitating Mt. xii. το). 


place of Με.’ oravpdocete.—Ver. 5ο. 
ἐκζητηθῇῃ, “a Hellenistic verb used in 
the sense of the Latin exquiro,” Farrar 
(6. G. T.).—Ver. 51. τοῦ ἀπολομένου 
who perished, in place of the harsher 
whom ye slew of Mt.—rod οἴκου = 
τοῦ ναοῦ in Mt., the temple.—Ver. 52. 
Final woe on the lawyers, a kind of anti- 
climax. Cf. Mt., where the pathetic 
apostrophe to Jerusalem follows and 
concludes the discourse.—riv κλεῖδα τῆς 
γνώσεως, the key which is knowledge 
(genitive of apposition) admitting to the 
Kingdom of God. Many take it = the 
key to knowledge. 

Ver. 53. The foregoing discourse, 
though toned down as compared with 
Mt., was more than the hearers could 
stand. The result is a more hostile 
attitude towards the free-spoken Prophet 
than the classes concerned have yet 
shown, at least in the narrative of Lk. 
They began δεινῶς ἐνέχειν, to be sorely 
nettled at Him (cf. Mk. vi. 1ο). Euthy. 


XII. I—4. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


559 


XII. 1. Ἐν οἷς ἐπισυναχθεισῶν τῶν µυριάδων τοῦ ὄχλου, ὥστε 
καταπατεῖν ἀλλήλους, ἤρξατο λέγειν πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ 
πρῶτον, ' Προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς ἀπὸ τῆς ἵύμης τῶν Φαρισαίων, ἥτις 


ἐστὶν ὑπόκρισις.ὶ 


2. οὐδὲν δὲ συγκεκαλυμµένον ἐστίν, ὃ οὐκ 
ἀποκαλυφθήσεται, καὶ κρυπτόν, ὃ οὗ γνωσθήσεται. 


3. ἀνθ dy 


ὅσα ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ εἴπατε, ἐν τῷ φωτὶ ἀκουσθήσεται: καὶ ὃ πρὸς τὸ 
4. , > ω , , \ ~ 

οὓς ἐλαλήσατε ἐν τοῖς ταµείοις, κηρυχθήσεται ἐπὶ τῶν δωµάτων. 
4. Λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν τοῖς φίλοις µου, Mi) φοβηθῆτε ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποκτεινόντων 
τὸ σῶμα, καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα μὴ ἐχόντων περισσότερόν τι ποιῆσαι. 


1 ῃτις . . . νποκ. before τ. Pap. in BL e (W.H.). 


gives as equivalents ἐγκοτεῖν, ὀργίζεσθαι. 
The Vulgate has graviter insistere, to 
press hard, which A.V. and R.V. 
follow. Field (Ot. Nor.) decides for the 
former sense = the scribes and Pharisees 
began to be very ΑΠΡΤΥ.- ἀποστομα- 
τίζειν: Grimm gives three meanings— 
to speak from memory (ἀπὸ στόματος); 
to repeat to a pupil that he may commit 
to memory ; to ply with questions so as 
to entice to offiand answers. In this 
third sense the word must be taken here 
as it is by Theophy. (and by Euthy.: 
ἀπαιτεῖν αὐτοσχεδίους καὶ ἀνεπισκέπ- 
τους ἀποκρίσεις ἐρωτημάτων δολερῶν = 
to seek offhand ill-considered answers to 
crafty questions).—Ver. 54 really gives 
the key to the meaning οΓἀποστοματίζειν 
(here only in Ν,Τ.). 

CHAPTER XII. MiIscELLANEOUs DIs- 
COURSES.—Vv. 1-12. Exhortation to 
fearless utterance, addressed to the 
disciples (cf. Mt. x. 17-33).—év ols, in 
these circumstances, 7.¢., while the 
assaults of the Pharisees and scribes 
on Jesus were going on (xi. 53).— 
µυριάδων: a hyperbolical expression for 
an “innumerable multitude,” pointing, 
if the words are to be taken in earnest, 
to the largest crowd mentioned any- 
where in the Gospels. Yet this immense 
gathering is not accounted for: it does 
not appear where or why it collected, 
but the év ols suggests that the people 
had been drawn together by the en- 
counter between Jesus and His foes.— 
πρῶτον from its position naturally 
qualifies προσέχετε, implying that 
hypocrisy was the first topic of discourse 
(Meyer). But it may also be taken 
with μαθητὰς, as implying that, while 
Jesus meant to speak to the crowd, He 
addressed Himself in the first place to 
His disciples (Schanz, J. Weiss, Holtz- 
mann). Bornemarn points out that 
while Mt. places πρῶτον after im- 


peratives, Lk. places it also before, as 
in ix. 61, x. 5.--ἀπὸ τῆς Cipns τ. Φ.: 
this is the Jogion reported in Mt, xvi. 6 
and Mk. viii. 15, connected there with 
the demand for-a sign ; here to be viewed 
in the light of the discourse in the 
Pharisee’s house (xi. 37 f.). In the two 
first Gospels the warning expresses 
rather Christ’s sense of the deadly 
character of the Pharisaic leaven; here 
it is a didactic utterance for the guidance 
of disciples as witnesses of the truth.— 
ἥτις ἐστὶν ὑπόκρισις: not in Mt. and 
Mk.; might be taken as an explanatory 
gloss, but probably to be viewed as part 
of the logion. Hypocrisy, the leading 
Pharisaic vice = wearing a mask of 
sanctity to hide an evil heart ; but from 
what follows apparently here to be taken 
in a wider sense so as to include dis- 
simulation, hiding conviction from fear 
of man as in Gal. ii. 13 (so J. Weiss in 
Meyer). In Lk.’s reports our Lord’s 
sayings assume a form adapted to the 
circumstances of the writer’s time. 
Hypocrisy in the sense of Gal. ii. 13 was 
the temptation of the apostolic age, 
when truth could not be spoken and 
acted without risk.—Ver. 2 = Mt. x. 26, 
there connected with a counsel not to 
fear men addressed to persons whose 
vocation imposes the obligation to speak 
out. Here = dissimulation, concealment 
of your faith, is vain; the truth will out 
sooner or later.—Ver. 3. av@ ὧν, either 
= quare, inferring the particular case 
following from the general statement 
going before, or = because, assigning a 
reason for that statement. This verse 
= Mt. x. 27, but altered. In Mt. it is 
Christ who speaks in the darkness, and 
whispers in the ear; in Lk. it is His 
disciples. In the one representation the 
whispering stage has its place in the 
history of the kingdom; in the latter it 
is conceived as illegitimate and tutile. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ ΧΙΙ, 


556 
5. ὑποδείξω δὲ ὑμῖν τίνα Φοβηθῆτε" φοβήθητε τὸν μετὰ τὸ ἀπο- 
κτεῖναι ἐξουσίαν ἔχοντα ϊ ἐμβαλεῖν eis τὴν γέενναν : ναί, λέγω ὑμῖν 

6. Οὐχὶ πέντε στρουθία πωλεῖται ἀσσαρίων 

καὶ ἓν ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔστιν ἐπιλελησμένον ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ - 

μὴ 

δ. Λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, 

a For ὁμολ. Mas ὃς ἂν "ὁμολογήσῃ ” ἐν ἐμοὶ ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ὁ υἱὸς 


, vide a Αα ~ ~ 
ae 32,700 ἀνθρώπου ὁμολογήσει ἐν αὐτῷ ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ 


with 
notes. 


τοῦτον φοβήθητε. 
δύο; 
7. ἀλλὰ καὶ αἱ τρίχες τῆς κεφαλῆς ὑμῶν πᾶσαι ἠρίθμηνται. 
οὖν Σ φοβεῖσθε: πολλῶν στρουθίων διαφέρετε. 


Θεοῦ: ϱ. ὁ δὲ ἀρνησάμενός µε ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀπαρνηθήσεται 
ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ Θεοῦ. 10. καὶ mas ὃς ἐρεῖ λόγον εἰς τὸν 


υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ: τῷ δὲ Eis τὸ Άγιον Πνεῦμα 


βλασφημήσαντι οὖκ ἀφεθήσεται. 
ἐπὶ τὰς συναγωγὰς καὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας, μὴ μεριμνᾶτε 


11. ὅταν δὲ προσφέρωσιν 5 ὑμᾶς 
6 


πῶς ἢ τί ἀπολογήσησθε, ἢ τί εἴπητε' 12. τὸ γὰρ Ἅγιον Πνεῦμα 


διδάξει ὑμᾶς ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ Opa, ἃ δεῖ εἰπεῖν.” 


1 εχοντα εξουσιαν in BDL, etc., verss. 


2 For πωλειται (a cor., as usual, neut. pl. nom.) NB 13, 69, 346 have πωλοννται. 


3 BLR 157 codd. vet. Lat. omit ουν. 
4 So in NL al. pl. (Tisch.). 
5εισφερωσιν in NBLX 1, 33 al. 


BDA al. have οµολογησει (W.H.). 


6 µεριμνησητε in SBLOQRX 1, 13, 33, 69. D and codd. vet. Lat. syr. cur., etc., 


omit η τι after πως (W.H. brackets). 


What you whisper will become known 
to all, therefore whisper not but speak 
from the housetop.—Ver. 4. λέγω δὲ, 
introducing a very important statement, 
not a mere phrase of Lk.’s to help out 
the connection oi thought (Ws., Mt.- 
Evang., 279).--τοῖς φίλοις pov, not a 
mere conventional designation for an 
audience, but spoken with emphasis 
to distinguish disciples from hostile 
Pharisees = my comrades, companions 
in tribulation.— ph Φοβηθῆτε, etc., down 
to end of ver. 5 = Mt. x. 28, with varia- 
tions. For Mt.’s distinction between 
body and soul Lk. has one between now 
and hereafter (μετὰ ταῦτα). The positive 
side of the counsel is introduced not with 
a simple “fear,” but with the more 


emphatic “I will show ye whom ye shall, 


fear”. Then at the end, to give still 
more emphasis, comes: “Yea, I say 
unto you, fear him”. Who is the un- 
named object of fear? Surely he who 
tempts to unfaithfulness, the god of 
this world !—Ver. 6. Ἠπέντε, five, for 
two farthings, two for one in Mt. (x. 29) ; 
one ‘into the bargain when you buy a 
larger number. They hardly have a 
price at αἲ! |---ἐπιλελησμέναν, forgotten, 


for Mt.’s “ falls not to the ground with- 
out”; the former more general and 
secondary, but the meaning plainer.— 
Ver. 7. ἠρίθμηνται, they remain 
numbered, once for all; number never 
forgotten, one would be missed. 

Vv. 8-12. Another solemn declara- 
tion introduced by a λέγω 8¢ = Mt. x. 
32, 33.--ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀγγέλων τ. Θ.: 
in place of Mt.’s ‘‘ before my Father in 
heaven”. In ver. 6 ‘‘God” takes the 
place of ‘‘ your Father” in Mt. It seem 
as if the Christian circle to which Lk. 
belonged did not fully realise the signifi- 
cance of Christ’s chosen designation for 
God.—Ver. 10. πᾶς ὃς ἐρεῖ, etc.: the 
true historical setting of the logion con- 
cerning blasphemy is doubtless that in 
Με, (xii. 31), and Mk. (iii. -28), where it 
appears as a solemn warning to the 
men who broached the theory of 
Beelzebub-derived power to cast out 
devils. Here it is a word of encourage- 
ment to disciples (apostles) to this effect : 
blaspheming the Holy Spirit speaking 
through you will be in God’s sight an 
unpardonable sin, far more heinous than 
that of prejudiced Pharisees speaking 
evil against me, the Son of Man, now.— 


. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


5—21. 


13. Εἶπε δέ τις αὐτῷ ἐκ τοῦ Sxdov,! “Διδάσκαλε, εἰπὲ τῷ ἀδελφῷ 
µου µερίσασθαι pet ἐμοῦ τὴν κληρονομίαν.” 
'“Ἄνθρωπε, τίς µε κατέστησε Sixacthv? ἢ μεριστὴν eh’ suas; ” 
15. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, “΄Ὁρᾶτε καὶ φυλάσσεσθε ἀπὸ τῆς» 


ε 4 
14. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 


πλεονεξίας: ὅτι οὐκ ἐν τῷ περισσεύειν Twi ἡ ζωὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ἐκ 
τῶν ὑπαρχόντων αὐτοῦ.” 16. Εἶπε δὲ παραβολὴν πρὸς αὐτούς, 
λέγων, “Ανθρώπου τινὸς πλουσίου εὐφόρησεν ἡ χώρα: 17. καὶ 
διελογίζετο ἐν ἑαυτῷ, λέγων, Τί ποιήσω, ὅτι οὐκ ἔχω ποῦ συνάξω 
τοὺς καρπούς µου; 18. καὶ εἶπε, Τοῦτο ποιήσω" καθελῶ µου τὰς 
ἀποθήκας, καὶ peiLovas οἰκοδομήσω, καὶ cuvdéw ἐκεὶ πάντα τὰ 
γενήµατά © µου, καὶ τὰ ἀγαθά µου, 19. καὶ ἐρῶ τῇ ux µου, Ψυχή, 
έχεις πολλὰ ἀγαθὰ κείµενα eis ἔτη πολλά: ἀναπαύου, φάγε, πίε,ῖ 
εὐφραίνου. 20. εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ Θεός, Αφρων, ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ τὴν 
ψυχήν σου ἀπαιτοῦσιν ὃ ἀπὸ σοῦ: ἃ δὲ ἠτοίμασας, tiv, ἔσται; 
21. οὕτως 6 θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ, καὶ μὴ eis Θεὸν πλουτῶν.” 9 


1 εκτ. ox. αυτω in NBL 33. : κριτην in NBDL τ, 13, 33 al. 


S57 


3 For της πλ. SSBDL al. verss. have waons πλ. (Tisch., W.H.), 
* αντω in BD preferred by Tisch., W.H., to αυτον (T.R. = SLA al. /i.). 


δεν αντω in BL. 


6 For τα γενηµατα BL and some verss. have τον σιτον (W.H. text), 
7 κειµενα . . . πιε is wanting in D, codd. vet. Lat., and bracketed in W.H. 


® So in NDA, etc. (Tisch.). 


BLQT 33 have αιτουσιν (W.H.). 


3 D a, b omit ver. 21, which is therefore bracketed in W.H.’s text. 


Ver. 11. τὰς ἀρχὰς καὶ τὰς ἐξουσίας: 
a general reference to heathen tribunals 
in place of Mt.’s συνέδρια (x. 17). 
“Synagogues,” representing Jewish 
tribunals, retained.— Ver. 12. τὸ "Άγιον 
Πνεῦμα: their utterances always Ἱπ- 
spired by the Holy Ghost (hence to 
contradict their word blasphemy), and 
specially when they are on their defence. 

Vv. 13-21. An interlude leading to a 
change of theme, in Lk. only.—Ver. 13. 
τις ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου: the crowd now comes 
to the front, and becomes the audience 
for at least a few moments.—eiwé here 
takes after it the infinitive, instead of ἵνα 
with subjunctive.—peploac@an, to divide, 
presumably according to law, one-third 
to the younger, two-thirds to the elder 
(Deut. xxi. 17). The references to 
tribunals in ver. 11 may have suggested 
this application to Jesus.—Ver. 14. 
ἄνθρωπε, man! discouraging, no sym- 
pathy with the object (cf. Rom. ii. 1, ix. 
20).--κριτὴν, a judge, deciding the right 
or equity of the case; μεριστὴν, an 
arbiter carrying out the judgment (here 
onlyin N.T.). The application was theless 


blameworthy that appeals to Rabbis for- 
such purposes seem to have been not in- 
frequent (Schanz).—Ver. 15: the moral 
pointed = beware of covetousness !— 
οὐκ ἐν τῷ περισσεύειν, etc.: the ex- 
pression here is peculiar and the mean- 
ing somewhat obscure, but apparently 
the idea is: not in the abundance enjoyed 
by any man is (consists) his life—not in 
(of) his possessions. Two ways οἱ 
saying the same thing, the second a 
kind of afterthought. If life, true life, 
meant possessions, then the more the 
better, but it means something far higher. 

Vv. 16-21. Parable of the rich fool, 
simply a story embodying in concrete 
form the principle just enunciated: 
teaching the lesson of Ps. xlix., and con- 
taining apparent echoes of Sirach xi. 
17-I9.—Ver. 16. εὐφόρησε, bore well; 
late and rare (here only in N.T.). 
Kypke gives examples from Josephus 
and Hippocrates.— χώρα, estate, farm = 
ἀγρός (ix. 12), so in John iv. 35.—Ver. 
18. τὸν σῖτον (Or τὰ γενήµατα): may 
refer to the fruits (καρπούς, νετ. 17) of 
the season, τὰ ἀγαθὰ to the accumulated: 


558 


KATA AOYKAN ΧΙΙ. 


22. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, “΄ Διὰ τοῦτο ὑμῖν λέγω, μὴ 
μεριμνᾶτε τῇ ψυχῇῆ ὑμῶν, τί φάγητε: μηδὲ τῷ σώµατι, τί ἐνδύσησθε. 
24. ἡ ” Wuxh πλεῖόν ἐστι τῆς τροφῆς, καὶ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ἐνδύματος. 
24. Κατανοήσατε τοὺς κόρακας, ὅτι οὐ ® σπείρουσιν, οὐδὲ ὃ θερίζου- 
gw οἷς οὐκ ἔστι ταμεῖον οὐδὲ ἀποθήκη, καὶ 6 Θεὸς τρέφει αὐτούς - 
25. τίς δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν 
μεριμνῶν δύναται προσθεῖναι ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν αὐτοῦ πῆχυν ἕνα," 
26. εἰ οὖν οὔτεδ ἐλάχιστον δύνασθε, τί περὶ τῶν λοιπῶν μεριμνᾶτε; 


πόσω μᾶλλον ὑμεῖς διαφέρετε τῶν πετεινῶν ; 


27. Κατανοήσατε τὰ κρίνα, πῶς adédver- οὗ κοπιᾷ, οὐδὲ νήθει : 6 
λέγω δὲ ὑμῖν, οὐδὲ Σολομὼν ἐν πάση τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ περιεβάλετο ὡς 
a , 3 A 4 ~ > ~ la ” 7 ‘ 
ἓν τούτων. 28. ei δὲ τὸν χόρτον ἐν τῷ ἀγρῷ σήμερον Svta,’ καὶ 


αὔριον εἷς κλίβανον βαλλόμενον, 6 Θεὸς οὕτως ἀμφιέννυσι, mécw 


μᾶλλον ὑμᾶς, ὀλιγόπιστοι ; 


1 Omit νµων NABDLQ al. 1η 


3 ov, ουδε in B (W.H. text). 


4 S8BD omit ενα (Tisch., W.H.). 
text). 
5 ονδε in NBLQ 1, 33 al. 


6 For πως αυξανει .. . 


29. Καὶ duets μὴ ζητεῖτε τί φάγητε, 


γαρ in ΔΒΡΤΙΧ (Trg., W.H.). 


ουτε, ουτε in NDLQ ε (Tisch., W.H., πιατρ.). 
B places προσθειναι just before πηχυν (W.H. 


νηθει D a syrr. cur. sin. have πως ουτε νηθει ουτε υφαινει 


(Tisch., W.H., marg.; ‘‘ worth considering,” J. Weiss). 
7 Ν ΒΙ, have ev αγρω tov χορ. οντα σηµερον (Tisch., W.H.). 


δαμϕιεζει (-αζει B) in BDLT. 


possessions of bygone years.—Ver. το. 
ἀναπαύου, etc., rest, eat, drink, be jolly : 
an epicurean asyndeton.—Ver. 20. εἶπε 
δὲ α., but God said to him, through 
conscience at the death hour (Euthy.).— 
ἀπαιτοῦσι, they ask thy life = thy life is 
asked.—tlvt ἔσται, whose ? Not thine 
at all events.—Ver. 21. εἰς Θεὸν πλουτῶν, 
rich with treasure laid up with God. 
Other interpretations are: rich in a way 
that pleases God, or rich in honorem Det, 
for the advancement of God’s glory. 
The last sense implies that the riches 
are literal, the first implies that they are 
spiritual. 

Vv. 22-31. Dissuasives against earthly 
care (Mt. vi. 25-33). The disciples again 
become the audience.—Ver. 23. ψυχὴ 
and σῶμα are to be taken in the physical 
Sense, the suggestion being that God 
has given us these the greater things, 
and therefore may be expected to give 
us food for the one and raiment for the 
other, the smaller things.—Ver. 24. 
κόρακας, the ravens, individualising, for 
Mt.’s πετεινὰ.---ὁ Θεὸς for 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν 
in Mt.—Ver. 26. ἐλάχιστον: the 
application of this epithet to the act of 
adding a cubit ἐπὶ τὴν ἡλικίαν at first 
appears conclusive evidence that for 


Lk. at least ἡλικία must mean length of 
life: as to add a cubit to one’s stature is 
so great a thing that no one thinks of 
attempting it (Hahn, similarly Holtz- 
mann, H. C.). But adding to one’s 
stature a cubit or an inch is of minimum 
importance as compared with lengthen- 
ing our days, Yet it must be owned 
that Lk.’s ἐλάχιστον puts us off the track 
of the idea intended, if we take ἡλικία 
= stature. The point is, we cannot do 
what God has done for all mature 
persons: added a cubit at least to the 
stature of their childhood, and this is 
the greater thing, not the least, greater 
than giving us the means of life now 
that we have reached maturity. Vide 
notes on Mt.—Ver. 29. µετεωρίζεσθε: 
a ἅπ. Ney. in N.T. and _ variously 
rendered. The meaning that best suits 
the connection of thought is that which 
finds in the word the figure of a boat 
tempest-tossed, but that which is best 
supported by usage points rather to high- 
mindedness, vain thoughts. The Vulgate 
renders nolite in sublime tolli = lift not 
yourselves up to lofty claims (Meyer) ; 
do not be ambitious, be content with 
humble things, a perfectly congruous 
counsel. Still the rendering: be not as 


22—35. 


ἢ 1 τί πίητε: καὶ μὴ µετεωρίζεσθε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


559 


30. ταῦτα γὰρ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη 


τοῦ κόσµου ἐπιζητεῖ 1”: ὑμῶν δὲ ὁ πατὴρ οἶδεν ὅτι χρήζετε τούτων: 
31. πλὴν ζητεῖτε τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ταῦτα πάντα“ 


προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν. 


»ς/ ς ‘ ce ον [ο ea x , 
εὐδόκησεν 6 πατὴρ ὑμῶν δοῦναι ὑμῖν τὴν βασιλείαν. 
τὰ ὑπάρχοντα ὑμῶν, καὶ δότε ἐλεημοσύνην. 


32. μὴ Φφοβοῦ, τὸ μικρὸν ποίµνιον- ὅτι 


33. Πωλήσατε 
ποιήσατε ἑαυτοῖς 


βαλάντια μὴ παλαιούμενα, θησαυρὸν ἀνέκλειπτον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, 


ὅπου κλέπτης οὐκ ἐγγίζει, οὐδὲ σὴς διαφθείρει: 34. ὅπου γάρ ἐστιν 


ς x ος a > a“ a < s een 34 
ὁ θησαυρὸς ὑμῶν, ἐκεῖ καὶ ἡ καρδία ὑμῶν ἔσται. 


1 και in NBLT. 


35. Ἔστωσαν 


2 For επιζητει (a cor., neut. pl. nom.) NBLT 13, 33, 69 al. have επιζητονσιν. 


Σαντον for τ. θ. in $BDL. 


tempest-tossed vessels, vexed with care, 
is a finer thought and more what we 


expect. Hahn renders: do not gaze 
with strained vision heavenwards, 
anxiously looking for help. Pricaeus: 
‘““ex futuro suspendi”. Theophylact 


gives a paraphrase which in a way 
combines the two senses. He defines 
meteorismus as distraction (περισπασμὸν), 
and a restless movement of the mind, 
thinking now of one thing now of 
another, leaping from this to that, and 
always fancying higher things (ἀεὶ τὰ 
ὑψηλότερα ᾠανταζομένου).--Ψετ. 30. Τ. 
ἔ. τοῦ κόσμον, the nations of the world ; 
this addition is peculiar to Lk., the 
expression here only in N.T., but 
frequent with the Rabbis (Lightfoot, ad 
loc.) ; meaning with them the peoples of 
the outside world as distinct from the 
Jews ; here probably all (Jews included) 
but Christians. On the thought wide 
on Mt.—Ver. 31. πλὴν, much rather 
(Schanz, Hahn).—{nreire, etc.: In his 
version of this great word of Jesus Lk. 
omits πρῶτον and τὴν δικαιοσύνην, so 
that it takes this simple and absolute 
form: seek His (the Father’s) kingdom: 
very probably the original form. As 
temporal things are added (προστεθή- 
σεται) they do not need to be sought. 
Mt.’s final word about not caring for 
to-morrow Lk. omits, either deeming it 
superfluous, or giving what follows as a 
substitute. 

Vv. 32-34. The little flock, in Lk. only. 
—roipviov (contracted from ποιµένιον), 
a flock (of sheep), a familiar designation 
of the body of believers in the apostolic 
age (Acts xx. 28, 1 Pet. v. 3); μικρὸν 
adds pathos. That Jesus applied this 
name to His disciples is very credible, 
though it may be that in the sense of 


‘in Meyer). 


‘Omit παντα S$BL al. verss. (from Mt.). 


the source from which Lk. drew, the 
little flock is the Jewish-Christian Church 
of Palestine subject to persecution from 
their unbelieving countrymen (J. Weiss 
The counsel ‘fear not” is 
Mt.’s ‘‘take no thought for to-morrow,” 
but the “to-morrow” refers not to 
temporal but to spiritual things; hence 
the declaration following. Paraphrased 
= Fear not future want of food and 
raiment, still less loss of the kingdom, 
the object of your desire. Your Father 
will certainly give it.—Ver. 33 counsels 
a heroic mood for which apprehension 
as to future temporal want has become 
an impossibility, such want being now 
viewed as a means of ensuring the one 
object of desire, eternal riches.— 
πωλήσατε, εἴς. : the special counsel to 
the man in quest of eternal life generalised 
(cf. xviii. 22).--βαλάντια, purses: con- 
tunens pro contento (De Wette).— 
παλαιούµενα: in Heb. viii. 13 applied 
to the Sinaitic covenant. Covenants, 
religions, wax old as well as purses, — 
ἀνέκλειπτον, unfailing. Cf. ἐκλίπῃ, xvi. 
9, in reference to death: ‘‘ vox rara, sed 
paris elegantiae cum altera ἀνεκλιπῆς, 
quam adhibet auctor libri Sapient., vii. 4, 
viii. 18, ubi habes θησαυρὸς ἀνεκλιπῆς et 
πλοῦτος ἀνεκλιπής,) Wolf. There is 
poetry in this verse, but also some think 
asceticism, turning the poetry of Jesus 
into ecclesiastical prose. I prefer to 
believe that even Lk. sees in the words 
not a mechanical rule, but a law for the 
spirit.—Ver. 34 = Mt. vi. 21, with σον 
turned into ὑμῶν. 

Vv. 35-38. Loins girt, lamps burning. 
Connection with what goes before is not 
apparent, but there is a latent affinity 
which makes the introduction of this 
logion here by Lk. or his source in- 


560 KATA AOYKAN XII. 
ὑμῶν at ὀσφύες περιεζωσμέναι, καὶ ot λύχνοι Katdpevor> 36. καὶ 
ὑμεῖς ὅμοιοι ἀνθρώποις προσδεχοµένοις τὸν κύριον ἑαυτῶν, πότε 
ἀναλύσει] ἐκ τῶν γάμων, ἵνα, ἐλθόντος καὶ κρούσαντος, εὐθέως 
ἀνοίξωσιν αὐτῷ. 37. µακάριοι οἱ δοῦλοι ἐκεῖνοι, οὓς ἐλθὼν ὁ κύριος 
εὑρήσει γρηγοροῦντα». ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι περιζώσεται καὶ 
ἀνακλινεῖ αὐτούς, καὶ παρελθὼν διακονήσει αὐτοῖς. 38. καὶ ἐὰν 
ἔλθη ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ φυλακῇ, καὶ ἐν τῇ τρίτῃ φυλακῇ ἔλθῃ, καὶ 
εὕρῃ οὕτω,” µακάριοί «iow οἱ δοῦλοιΣ ἐκεῖνι. 439. τοῦτο δὲ 
γινώσκετε, ὅτι εἰ δει ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης Tota Spa 6 κλέπτης ἔρχεται, 
ἐγρηγόρησεν ἄν, καὶ οὐκ ἂν" ἀφῆκε διορυγῆναι ὅ τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ. 
49. καὶ ὑμεῖς οὖν 6 γίνεσθε ἔτοιμοι: ὅτι ᾗ ὥρα οὐ δοκεῖτε, 6 υἱὸς. 


τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔρχεται. 41. 


Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ] 6 Πέτρος, “' Κύριε, 


πρὸς ἡμᾶς τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην λέγεις, ἢ καὶ πρὸς πάντας; 


1 αναλυση in SABDL and many others (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 For the words και εαν... 


ούτω NBLT 33, 131 have καν εν τη δευτ. καν εν 


τη τριτ. φυλ. ελθη και ενρη ούτως (Tisch., Trg., W.H.). 


δοι δουλοι Omit KaBDL syrr. cur. sin., 


4Foreypny---- 
marg.). 


etc. (W.H.). S* omits εκεινσι (Tisch.). 


ουκ αν WD e, i syrr. cur. sin. have simply ουκ αν (Tisch., W.H., 


5 διορυχθηναι in NBL 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


6 Omit ουν NBL minusc. 


telligible. The kingdom the summum 
bonum; all to be sacrificed for it; its 
coming (or the King’s) to be eagerly 
waited for.—Vv. 35, 36 contain the germ 
of the parable of the Ten Virgins (Mt. 
xxv. 1 f.). So De Wette, J. Weiss, 
Holtzmann, Schanz,_ etc. — ὀσφύες 
περιεζωσµέναι, loins girt, for service.— 
λύχνοι καιόµενοι, lamps burning, for 
reception of the master expected to 
return during the night. In the spiritual 
sphere the loins girt point to a noble 
purpose in life, and the burning lamp to 
the spirit of hope.—Ver. 36. ἀναλύσῃ, 
when (πότε-- ὁπότε) he shall return ; 
the figure is taken from sailors making 
the return voyage to the port whence 
they had sailed, Beza (vide Phil. i. 23, 
2 Tim. iv. ϐ).---ἐλθόντος καὶ κρούσαντος: 
the participles in the genitive absolute, 
though the subject to which they refer, 
αὐτῷ, is in the dative.—Ver. 37. µακάριοι;: 
here as always implying rare felicity the 
reward of heroic virtue.—apqv: the 
Hebrew word retained here contrary to 
custom, introducing a startling thought, 
the inversion of the relation of master 
and servants, lord and slaves, through 
joy over their fidelity. For the other 
side of the picture vide Lk. xvii. 7-10.— 
διακογνήσει αὐτοῖς: the master, in genial 


7 Omit αυτω (in $$ = Tisch.) BDL 33, (W.H.). 


mood, turns servant to his own slaves; 
makes them sit down, throws off his 
caftan, girds his under-garments, and 
helps them to portions of the marriage 
feast he has brought home with him, as 
a father might do for his children (De 
Wette, Koetsveld, p. 244). There is 
not necessarily an allusion either to the 
last supper (xxii. 27) or to the Roman 
Saturnalia (Grotius, Holtzmann, H. C.). 
—Ver. 38. ἐν τῇ δευτέρα, etc., second 
and third watches named as the times at 
which men are most apt to be overtaken 
with sleep (Hahn), the night being 
probably supposed to consist of four 
watches, and the first omitted as too 
early, and the last as too late for the 
return. 

Vv. 39-40. The thief (Mt. xxiv. 43, 44). 
A new figure is now employed to give 
pictorial embodiment to the counsel: be 
ever ready. The master returning from 
a wedding is replaced by a thief whose 
study it is to come to the house he 
means to plunder at an unexpected time. 
This logion is reproduced by Lk. sub- 
stantially as in Mt. with only slight 
stylistic variations. 

Vv. 41-46. A question by Peter and a 
reply (Mt. xxiv. 45-51). Some look on 
Peter’s question as a literary device of 


30—47. ΕΥΑΓΙΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

42. Εἶπε 8€1 ὁ Κύριος, “Tis dpa ἐστὶν ὁ πιστὸς οἰκονόμος καὶ 1 
Φρόνιµος, ὃν καταστήσει 6 κύριος ἐπὶ τῆς θεραπείας αὐτοῦ, τοῦ 
Ἱ 43. µακάριος ὁ δοῦλος ἐκεῖνος, 
44. ἀληθῶς 


διδόναι ἐν καιρῷ τὸ 8 σιτοµέτριον ; 
ὃν ἐλθὼν ὁ κύριος αὐτοῦ εὑρήσει ποιοῦντα οὕτως. 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐπὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ὑπάρχουσιν αὐτοῦ καταστήσει αὐτόν. 
re > PX 
45. ᾿Εὰν δὲ εἴπῃ ὁ δοῦλος ἐκεῖνος ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ, Χρονίζει 6 
κύριός µου ἔρχεσθαι: καὶ ἄρξηται τύπτειν τοὺς παῖδας καὶ τὰς 
παιδίσκας, ἐσθίειν τε καὶ πίνειν καὶ µεθύσκεσθαι’ 46. ἥξει 6 κύριος 
τοῦ δούλου ἐκείνου ἐν ἡμέρᾳ 1 οὗ προσδοκᾶ, καὶ ἐν Spa ᾗ οὐ 
γινώσκει΄ καὶ διχοτοµήσει αὐτόν, καὶ τὸ µέρος αὐτοῦ μετὰ τῶν 
ἀπίστων θήσει. 47. ᾿Ἐκεῖνος δὲ 6 δοῦλος ὁ γνοὺς τὸ θέλημα τοῦ 
/ ς a4 λ AY s δὲ 5 / ‘ Ν θέἐλ 
κυρίου ἑαυτοῦ," καὶ μὴ ἑτοιμάσας μηδὲ ὃ ποιήσας πρὸς τὸ θέληµα 


1 και ειπεν in NBDL 1, 13, 33, 69 al. 
* For και (NL, etc.) read ο with BD, ete. 


σόι 


3 BD 69 omit το (W.H. brackets). 
* αντου in NBDL. 


the evangelist either to connect his 
material (Weiss in Meyer; x. 29, xi. 45 
cited as similar instances), or to give 
what follows a special relation to the 
Apostles and to Peter as their head 
(Holtzmann, H. C., the passage thus 
becoming in his view a substitute for 
Mt. xvi. 18, 19).—Ver. 41. Peter’s 
question reminds us of Mk. xiii. 37: 
“What I say unto you, I say unto all, 
watch ’”’.—Ver. 42. 6 Κύριος, the Lord, 
in narrative.—rtis dpa, etc.: in Mt. this 
is connected immediately with the 
thought in ver. 40, so that Peter’s inter- 
pellation appears as an interruption of a 
continuous discourse. Some variations 
from Mt.’s text are noticeable in Lk.’s 
version: οἰκονόμος for δοῦλος, κατα- 
στήσει (future) for κατέστησεν (aorist), 
θεραπείας for οἰκετείας, σιτοµέτριον for 
τροφὴν. These changes, according to 
Weiss and Holtzmann (H. C.), are due 
to the parable being connected with 
the Apostles, and one can see some 
plausibility in the hypothesis so far as 
the first two variations are concerned. 
The question: who then, etc., is sup- 
posed to answer itself: who but each of 
you apostles, who especially but you 
Peter ?—Ver. 42. σιτοµέτριον, the due 
portion of food; a word of late Greek. 
Phryn., p. 383, forbids the use of 
σιτομετρεῖσθαι, and enjoins separation 
of the compound into its elements: σίτον, 
μετρεῖσθαι. The noun occurs here only; 
the verb in Gen. xlvii. 12 and occasionally 
in late Greek authors.—Ver. 44. ἀληθῶς 


5 For pyde NB 33 have η. 


here, as usual, for ἁμὴν (ver. 37 an ex- 
ception).—Ver. 45. ἐὰν δὲ: introducing 
supposition of an abuse of power, con- 
ceived possible even in the case of an 
apostle, of a Peter. Let no proud 
ecclesiastic therefore say, Is thy servant 
a dog ?—xpoviler: a delayed παρονσία, 
a prominent thought in our Lord’s later 
utterances, The delay may possibly be 
long enough to allow time for the 
utter demoralisation of even the higher 
officials. Vide on Mt.—rots παῖδας, 
etc., the men- and maidservants, instead 
of συνδούλους in Μ{.- διχοτοµήσει: the 
retention of this strong word by Lk., who 
seems to have it for one of his aims to 
soften harsh expressions, is noticeable, 
especially when he understands it as 
referring to the Apostles, and even to 
Peter. It makes for the hypothesis that 
the word means not to cut into two as 
with a saw, but either to lash unmerci- 
fully, to cut to pieces in popular parlance, 
or to separate from the household 
establishment (Beza, Grotius, etc.).— 
μετὰ τῶν ἀπίστων points to degradation 
from the confidential position οΓοϊκονόμος 
to a place among the unfaithful; dis- 
missed, or imprisoned, or set to drudging 
service. 

Vv. 47, 48. Degrees of guilt and 
punishment, in Lk. only, and serving as 
an apology for the severity of the punish- 
ment as described in ver. 46. That 
punishment presupposes anger. The 
statement now made is to the effect: 
penalty inflicted not as passion dictates 


36 


562 KATA AOYKAN XII, 
αὐτοῦ, δαρήσεται πολλάς: 48. ὁ δὲ ph γνούς, moujoas δὲ ἄξια 
πληγῶν, δαρήσεται ὀλίγας. παντὶ δὲ ᾧ ἐδόθη πολύ, πολὺ [ητηθή- 
σεται wap αὐτοῦ: καὶ ᾧ παρέθεντο πολύ, περισσότερον αἰτήσουσιν 
αὐτόν. 49. Mp ἦλθον βαλεῖν εἰς] τὴν γῆν, καὶ τί θέλω εἰ ἤδη 

b Acts »ἀνήφθη; 50. βάπτισμα δὲ ἔχω βαπτισθῆναι, καὶ πῶς συνέχοµαι 


XXVIii. 2. ο 


Jas. iii. 5. ἕως 06? τελεσθῇ; 51. δοκεῖτε ὅτι εἰρήνην παρεγενόµην δοῦναι ἐν 


a ~ Se / δν 7 AN ” a 

ε here only TH Υῆ; οὐχί, λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀλλ᾽ F 52. ἔσονται γὰρ 
in N. 3 9 A a > ” κ.α 8 , - 9 4 8 , ‘ 
ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν πέντε ἐν οἴκῳ ἑνὶ ὃ διαµεμερισμένοι, τρεῖς ἐπὶ δυσί, καὶ 

δύο ἐπὶ τρισί. 


Σδιαμερισμόν. 


53. διαµερισθήσεται ΄ πατὴρ ἐφ᾽ vid, καὶ vids ἐπὶ 
πατρί' µήτηρ ἐπὶ θυγατρί, καὶ θυγάτηρ ἐπὶ µητρίδ: πενθερά ἐπ 


τὴν νύµφην αὐτῆς, καὶ νύμφη ἐπὶ τὴν πενθερὰν αὐτῆς." © 


1 επι in ΜΑΒΙ, (εις in Τ). 
3 eve οικω in SBDL. 


2 ews οτου in NABDL. 
4 διαµερισθησονται in SBDL minuse, 


> sg EDL minusc, have θνγατερα, µητερα with or without the article. 


§ Omit αντης NBDL. 


but as principle demands.—é6 δοῦλος 6 
γνοὺς, etc.: describes the case of a 
servant who knows the master’s will 
but does not do it (μηδὲ ποιήσας), nay, 
does not even intend or try to do it (μὴ 
ἑτοιμάσας), deliberately, audaciously 
πεσ[σεπε.-- δαρήσεται πολλάς (πληγάς): 
many stripes justly his portion.—Ver. 
48. 6 δὲ μὴ γνοὺς: the opposite case is 
that of one who does not know. What 
he would do if he did know is another 
question ; but it is not to be gratuitously 
supposed that he would neglect his duty 
utterly, like the other, though he does 
commit minor faults. He is a lower 
servant in the house to whom the master 
gave no particular instructions on leav- 
ing, therefore without special sense of 
responsibility during his absence, and 
apt like the average servant to take 
liberties when the master is away from 
home.—travrti δὲ ᾧ ἐδόθη, etc. : a general 
maxn further explaining the principle 
regulating penalty or responsibility (cf. 
Mt. xxv. 15 Π.). 

κ΄ Vv. 49-53. Not peace but division 
(Με. κ. 34-36). This section is intro- 
duced by no connecting particle. Yet 
there is a certain affinity of thought. 
Strict fidelity demanded under penalties, 
but fidelity not easy; times of fierce 
trial and conflict awaiting you. I fore- 
warn you, that ye may be forearmed.— 
Ver. 49. wtp: the fire of a new faith, 
or religion, a burning enthusiasm in 
believers, creating fierce antagonism in 
unbelievers ; deplorable but inevitable.— 
βαλεῖν, used by Mt. in reference to peace 
and war, where Lk. has Sotvat.—ri θέλω 


el, etc., how much I wish it were already 
kindled; τί = ὡς and ei after θέλω to 
express the object of the wish, as in 
Sirach xxiii. 14 (θελήσεις εἰ μὴ ἐγεννήθης, 
you will wish you had not been born),— 
Ver. 5ο. βάπτισμα: before the fire can 
be effectually kindled there must come 
for the kindler His own baptism of blood, 
of which therefore Jesus naturally speaks 
here with emotion.—és συνέχοµαι, how 
am I pressed on every side, either with 
fervent desire (Euthy., Theophy., De 
Wette, Schanz, etc.), or with fear, 
shrinking from the cup (Meyer, J. 
Weiss, Holtzmann, Hahn).—Ver. 51. 
διαµερισμόν : instead of Mt.’s µάχαιραν, 
an abstract prosaic term for a concreté 
pictorial one ; exactly descriptive of the 
fact, however, and avoiding possible 
misapprehension as to Christ’s aim = 
Jesus not a patron of war.—Ver. 52. 
τρεῖς ἐπὶ δυσὶν, etc.: three against two 
and two against three; five in all, not 
six though three pairs are mentioned, 
mother and mother-in-law (µήτηρ and 
πενθερὰ) being the same person. This 
way of putting it is doubtless due to Lk. 
—émi with dative = contra, only here 
in N.T.; κατὰ with genitive in Mt. 

Vv. 54-59. A final word to the crowd 
(cf. Mt. xvi. 2 Ε., v. 25 f.).—rots ὄχλοις : 
in Mt. Jesus speaks to the Pharisees and 
Sadducees, in reply to their demand for 
a sign, which gives a more definite 
occasion. But the words might quite 
appropriately have been addressed to the 
people at large. The weather-skill 
ascribed to the audience is such as any 
one might possess, and all Jews needed 


48--59. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


563 


54: Ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ τοῖς ὄχλοις, ““Oray ἴδητε τὴν 1 νεφέλην ἀνατέλ- 
λουσαν ἀπὸ " δυσμῶν, εὐθέως Aéyere,® Ὄμβρος ἔρχεται: καὶ γίνεται d here only 
in N.T 


οὕτω. 


γίνεται. 


a 
55. καὶ ὅταν νότον πνέοντα, λέγετε, Ὅτι καύσων ἔσται: καὶ 
56. ὑποκριταί, τὸ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς καὶ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ 


in Ν.Τ. 


οἴδατε δοκιµάζειν ~ τὸν δὲ καιρὸν τοῦτον πῶς οὗ δοκιμάζετε"; 57. τί 


δὲ καὶ ἀφ ἑαυτῶν οὐ κρίνετε τὸ δίκαιον ; 


58. ὡς γὰρ ὑπάγεις μετὰ 


τοῦ ἀντιδίκου σου ἐπ᾽ ἄρχοντα, ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ δὸς ἐργασίαν ἀπηλλάχθαι 
ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ: µήποτε κατασύρῃ σε πρὸς τὸν κριτήν, καὶ ὁ κριτής σε 


παραδῷ ὁ τῷ “πράκτορι, καὶ ὁ πράκτωρ σε βάλλῃ ὃ eis φυλακήν. ο here only 
, a bigs: 2A 26 WAC Va | A in Ν.Τ. 
59- λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν, ἕως οὗ ὃ καὶ τὸ ἔσχατον λεπτὸν 


ἀποθῷῶς.” 


1 Omit την NABLXA 1, 33, 69 ai. 
2 em in NBL 64. 
3 ort after λεγετε in ΜΑ ΒΙ,, etc. 


4 For Soxupafere (ADA al.) BLT verss. have ουκ οιδατε δοκιµαζειν (W.H.). 


5 rapadwoe in SBD minusc. (L = T.R.). 


βαλλη. 
6 Omit ov NBL τ Orig. 


the warning. The precise circumstances 
in which this logion was spoken are un- 
certain.—émi δυσμῶν, in the west, the 
region of the setting sun, and of the 
Mediterranean. A cloud rising up from 
that quarter meant, of course, rain (1 
Kings xviii. 44, 45).—Ver. 55. καύσων, 
the sirocco, a hot wind from the desert, 
blighting vegetation (Jas. i. 11), equally 
a matter of course.—Ver. 56. ὑποκριταί 
seems too strong a term to apply to the 
people, and more appropriate to a 
Pharisaic or professional audience (Mt. 
xvi. 3). Raphel, after Erasmus Schmidt, 
translates harioli, weather prophets, 
citing a passage from Lucian in support 
of this sense. This is certainly one 
meaning of the word (vide Passow), but, 
as Hahn remarks, the usage of the N.T. 
does not support it here.—Ver. 57. aq’ 
ἑαυτῶν, from or of yourselves (sua sponte, 
Palairet); without needing any one to 
tell you the right; implying that the 
persons addressed were destitute of the 
average moral insight (¢f. Lk. xxi. 30).— 
Ver. 58. ὥς yap: introducing a legal 
scene from natural life to illustrate a 
similar situation in the moral world. It 
is implied that if they had the necessary 
moral discernment they would see that 
a judgment day was at hand, and under- 
stand that the duty of the hour was to 
come to terms with their adversary by 
timely repentance. That is hew they 
would all act if it were an ordinary case 


The same authorities have βαλει for 


of debtor and creditor.—8és ἐργασίαν 
(phrase here only): usually interpreted 
give diligence, give thine endeavour =da 
operam,aLatinism. Theophylact renders 
it: give interest (of the sum owed); 
Hofmann, offer work, labour, in place of 
money.—katacvpy (here only in Ν.Τ.), 
lest he drag thee to the judge, stronger 
than Mt.’s παραδῷ (v. 25), realistic and 
not exaggerated.—r@ πράκτορι, the man 
whose business it was to collect the 
debts after the judge had decreed pay- 
ment, or to put the debtor in prison till 
the debt was paid. Kypke defines 
πράκτορες: “exactores qui mulctas 
violatorum legum a judice irrogatas 
exigunt,” citing an instance of its use 
from Demosthenes.—Ver. 59. λεπτὸν, 
the half of a κοδράντης (Mt.’s word), 
making the necessity of full payment in 
order to release from prison still more 
emphatic. 

CuapTeR XIII. JuDGMENT To CoME. 
This chapter continues the sombre 
judicial strain of xii. 54-59. Beginning 
with a general reference to the impend- 
ing doom of Israel, as foreshadowed by 
a reported tragedy which had befallen 
certain individuals, it ends with a specific 
prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem 
similar to that which closes the great 
anti-Pharisaic discourse in Mt. xxiii. 
The dramatic effect of the prediction 
there is entirely lost in Lk.’s narrative, 
which in subsequent chapters continues 


564 


KATA AOYKAN 


XH. 


XIII. 1. ΠΑΡΗΣΑΝ δέ τινες ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ καιρῷ ἀπαγγέλλαντες 
αὐτῷ περὶ τῶν Γαλιλαίων, ὢν τὸ αἷμα Πιλάτος ἔμιξε μετὰ τῶν 


θυσιῶν αὐτῶν. 


2. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ "Ingots! εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Δοκεῖτε, 


ὅτι οἳ Γαλιλαῖοι οὗτοι ἁμαρτωλοὶ παρὰ πάντας τοὺς Γαλιλαίους 


ἐγένοντο, ὅτι τοιαῦτα ” πεπόνθασιν; 


3. οὐχί, λέγω ὑμῖν: ἀλλ᾽ ἐὰν 


μὴ µετανοῆτε, Πάντες ὡσαύτως ὃ ἀπολεῖσθε. 4. ἢ ἐκεῖνοι ot δέκα 
wat’ ὀκτώ, ἐφ᾽ οὓς ἔπεσεν 6 πύργος ἐν' τῷ Σιλωάμ, καὶ ἀπέκτεινεν 
αὐτούς, δοκεῖτε, ὅτι οὗτοι ὅ ὀφειλέται ἐγένοντο παρὰ πάντας ἀνθρώ- 


mous τοὺς κατοικοῦντας év® Ἱερουσαλήμ ; 


] 
ΣΜΕΙ,Τ verss. omit ο |. 


8 opotes in NBDLT 1, 13, 33, 69 al. 
§ avrot in NABKLT 33, 69 al. 


its report of the teaching of Christ as if 
the end were still a great way off. 

Vv. 1-5. The Galilean tragedy, 
peculiar to Lk., as is the greater part of 
what follows, on to xviii. 14.—Ver. 1. 
παρῆσαν δέ, etc.: The introduction to 
the gruesome story naturally implies.a 
temporal connection between what 
follows and what goes before: i.e., some 
present when Jesus spoke as reported in 
xii. 54-59 took occasion to tell Him this 
piece of recent news, recalled to their 
minds by what He had said about judg- 
ment and how to avertit. There is no 
good reason to suppose that the connec- 
tion is merely topical, and that the 
preface is simply a literary device of Lk. 
τῶν Γαλ.: the article implies that the 
story was current.—dév τὸ aipa, etc.: So 
the story was told among the horrified 
people: the blood of the poor Galilean 
victims ruthlessly shed by Pilate while 
they were in the very act of offering 
sacrifice. Perfectly credible in those 
times under such a ruler, and in reference 
to such victims, Galileans, free in spirit, 
restive under the Roman yoke. Similar 
incidents in Josephus, though not this 
precise occurrence.—Ver. 2. ἀποκριθεὶς: 
Jesus answered to an implied question. 
Those who told the story expected Him 
to make some remarks on it; not such 
doubtless as He did make.—Soxeire, 
think ye; probably that was just what 
they did think. The fate of the Galileans 
awakened superstitious horror prone to 
impute to the victims special criminality. 
---παρὰ πάντας τ. Γ., in comparison 
with all Galileans. To make the point 
more vivid the victims are compared 
with men of their own province, dis- 
position, and temptations.—éyévovro, 
became, were shown to Ῥε.-- πεπόνθασι, 


5. οὐχί, λέγω ὑμῖν: 


2 ταντα in NBDL. 
6 Omit και BDL. 
6 BDLX al. omit ev. 


: 

have suffered, an irrevocable fact.—Ver. 3. 
οὐχί, an emphatic “no,” followed by a 
solemn “I say to you”. The prophetic 
mood is on the speaker. He reads in the 
fate of the few the coming doom of the 
whole nation.—époiws, in a similar way. 
ὡσαύτως, the reading in T.R., is stronger 
=in the same way. Jesus expresses 
Himself with greater intensity as He 
proceeds = ye shall perish likewise ; nay, 
in the same way (ver. 5, ὡσαύτως), your 
towers and temples falling about your 
ears.—Ver. 4. Jesus refers to another 
tragic occurrence, suggesting that He 
was acquainted with both. His ears 
were open to all current news, and His 
mind prompt to point the moral. The 
fact stated, otherwise unknown to us.— 
ὀφειλέται, word changed, in meaning the 
same as ἁμαρτωλοὶ, moral debtors pay- 
ing their debt in that dismal way. 

he utterances of Jesus on this 
occasion do not bear on the general 
question: how far may lot be viewed 
as an index of character ? which was not 
then before His mind. He assumed that 
the sufferers in the two catastrophes 
were sinners and even great sinners, 5ο 
acquiescing in the popular view, because 
He wanted to point a lesson for the 
whole nation which He regarded as fast 
ripening for judgment. From the say- 
ing in the Teaching on the Hill con- 
cerning the Father in Heaven giving 
sunshine and rain to evil and good alike, 
it is evident that He had risen not only 
above popular current opinion, but even 
above the O.T. view as to the connec- 
tion between physical and moral good 
andevil. That saying implies that there 
is a large sphere of Divine action within 
which moral distinctions among men are 
overlooked, that good may come to bad 


τς --πΟ. 


GAN’ ἐὰν μὴ µετανοῆτε, πάντες ὁμοίως ” ἀπολεῖσθε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


565 
6. Ἔλεγε δὲ 


'ταύτην τὴν παραβολήν: “Suny εἶχέ τις ἐν τῷ ἀμπελῶνι αὐτοῦ 
πεφυτευµένην + καὶ ἦλθε καρπὸν ζητῶν” ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ οὐχ εὗρεν. 
7. εἶπε δὲ πρὸς τὸν ἀμπελουργόν, Ιδού, τρία ἔτη ὅ ἔρχομαι [ητῶν 
καρπὸν ἐν τῇ συκῇ ταύτῃ, καὶ οὐχ εὑρίσκω, ἔκκοψον αὐτήν: ἵνατί 


καὶ τὴν γῆν καταργεῖ ; 


8. ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς λέγει αὐτῷ, Κύριε, ἄφες 


αὐτὴν καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἔτος, ἕως ὅτου σκάψω περὶ αὐτήν, καὶ βάλω 
κοπρίαν δ: g. κἂν μὲν ποιήσῃ καρπόν: et δὲ µήγε, εἰς τὸ µέλλον 


ἐκκόψεις αὐτήν.” 


1Ο. "Hy δὲ διδάσκων ἐν μιᾷ τῶν συναγωγῶν ἐν τοῖς σάββασι» 


1 µετανοησητε in SDLT. 
3 πεφντ. before εν τω apm. in SBDLX. 


5 After ern SBDLT have αφ ov (Tisch., 
ὅκοπρια in ΝΔΒΙ.Τ al. pl. (Tisch., W.H.). 


marg.). 


ωσαντως in BLM 1, 33 al. (vide below). 


4 ζητων καρπον in all uncials. 
D has κοφινον κοπριων (W.H, 


Τεις το μελλον before ει δε µηγε in BLT 33, 69, a better arrangement. 


men and evil to good men. To our Lord 
it would not have appeared impossible 
that some of the best men in Israel 
might be involved in the two calamities 
here mentioned. 

Vv. 6-9. Parable of the barren fig 
tree, peculiar to Lk., probably extem- 
porised to embody the moral of the 
preceding narratives; takes the place in 
Lk, of the cursing of the fig tree in Mt. 
and Mk.—Ver. 6. Συκῆν εἶχέν τις: a 
fig tree, quite appropriate and common in 
corners of a vineyard, yet not the main 
plant in such a place; selected rather 
than a vine to represent Israel, by way 
of protest against assumed inalienable 
privilege. ‘* Perish,’ Jesus had _ said 
once and again (vv. 3 and 5). Some 
hearers might think: What! the Lord’s 
elect people perish? Yes, replies Jesus 
in effect, like a barren fig tree cast out 
of a vineyard, where at best it has but a 
subordinate place.—Ver. 7. ἀμπελουργόν, 
the vine-dresser (ἄμπελος, ἔργον) here 
only in N.T.—i8ov, lo! as of one who 
has a right to οοπιρ]α]π.--- τρία ἔτη, three 
years, reckoned not from the planting of 
the tree (it is three years after planting 
that it begins to bear fruit), but from the 
time that it might have been expected in 
ordinary course to yield a crop of figs. 
Three years is not a long period, but 
enough to determine whether it is going 
to be fruit-bearing, the one thing it is 
there for. In the spiritual sphere in 
national life that cannot be determined 
so soon. It may take as many thousand 


years.—€pxopat, I keep coming, the 
progressive present. The master comes 
not merely once a year, but again and 
again within the year, at the seasons 
when fruit may be found on a fig tree 
(Hahn). Cf. δουλεύω in xv. 20.---οὐχ 
εὑρίσκω, I do not find it. I come and 
come and am always disappointed. 
Hence the impatient ἔκκοψον, cut it out 
(from the root).—tva τί καὶ: καὶ points 
to a second ground of complaint. 
Besides bearing no fruit it occupies 
space which might be more profitably 
filled.i—katapyet (here and in Paul’s 
epistles), renders useless; Vulgate, 
occupat, practically if not verbally the 
right rendering. A barren fig tree 
renders the land useless by occupying 
valuable space.—Ver. 8. τοῦτο τὸ ἔτος, 
one year more; he has not courage to 
propose a longer time to an impatient 
owner.—xémpta (neuter plural from 
adjective κόπριος), dung stufis. A 
natural proposal, but sometimes fertility 
is better promoted by starving, cutting 
roots, so preventing a tree from 
running to wood.—Ver. 9. eis τὸ 
µέλλον: if it bear the coming year—well 
(ed ἔχει ιπάετείοοά).--ἐκκόψεις, if not, 
thou shalt cut it down—thou, not I. It 
depends on the master, though the vine- 
dresser tacitly recognises that the de- 
cision will be just. Hesympathises with 
the master’s desire for fruit. Of course 
when the barren tree is removed another 
will be planted in its place. The parable 
points to the truth taught in ver. 20. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ ΧΙΠ 


II. καὶ ἰδού, γυνὴ ἦν} πνεῦμα ἔχουσα ἀσθενείας ἔτη δέκα καὶ” 
ὀκτώ, καὶ ἦν συγκύπτουσα, καὶ μὴ δυναµένη ἀνακύψαι eis τὸ 
παντελέ.. 12. ἰδὼν δὲ αὐτὴν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς προσεφώνησε, καὶ εἶπεν 
αὐτῇ, “Γύναι, ἀπολέλυσαι τῆς ἀσθενείας σοῦ. 13. Καὶ ἐπέθηκεν 
αὐτῇ τὰς χεῖρας ' καὶ παραχρῆμα ἀνωρθώθη, καὶ ἐδόξαζε τὸν Θεόν. 
14. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἀρχισυνάγωγος, ἀγανακτῶν ὅτι τῷ σαββάτῳ 
ἐθεράπευσεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἔλεγε τῷ ὄχλῳ,ξ ““EE ἡμέραι εἰσίν, ἐν als 
δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι: ἐν ταύταις " οὖν ἐρχόμενοι θεραπεύεσθε, καὶ μὴ τῇ 
ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ σαββάτου., 15. ᾽Απεκρίθη οὖν ὅ αὐτῷ ὁ Κύριος, καὶ 
εἶπεν, “' Ὑποκριτά,» ἕκαστος ὑμῶν τῷ σαββάτῳ οὐ Aver τὸν βοῦν 
αὐτοῦ ἢ τὸν ὄνον ἀπὸ τῆς φάτνης, καὶ ἀπαγαγὼν Ἰ ποτίξει; 16. 
ταύτην δέ, θυγατέρα ᾿Αβραὰμ οὖσαν, ἣν ἔδησεν 6 Σατανᾶς, ἰδού, 
δέκα καὶ ὀκτὼ Eryn, οὐκ Eder λυθῆναι ἀπὸ τοῦ δεσμοῦ τούτου τῇ 


? Omit ην NBLT 33 al. verss. 

5 After οχλω SQBL insert οτι. 

5 For ουν S$BDL 1, 69 al. have δα. 
7 $$B have απαγων (W.H. text). 


Vv. 10-17. Cure in a synagogue on a 
Sabbath day, peculiar to Lk.—Ver. το. 
ἐν τοῖς σάββασι: may mean on Sabbaths 
(Hahn, who refers to the discriminating 
use of singular and plural in Lk.) and 
imply a course of instruction in a 
particular synagogue for weeks.—Ver. 
II. πνεῦμα ἀσθενείας: the Jews saw the 
action of a foreign power in every form 
of disease which presented the aspect of 
the sufferer’s will being overmastered. In 
this case the woman was bent and could 
not straighten herself when she tried.— 
συγκύπτουσα, bent together, here only 
in N.T.—els τὸ παντελέ goes with 
ἀνακύψαι, and implies either that she 
could not erect her head, or body a¢ all, 
or entirely. The former is more in keep- 
ing with the idea of bondage to a foreign 
spirit (Schanz). Similar use of the 
phrase in Heb. vii. 25.—Ver. 12. 
προσεφώνησε: Jesus, ever prompt to 
sympathise, called her to Him when 
His eye lit upon the bent figure.— 
ἀπολέλυσαι: perfect for future, the 
thing as good as done; spoken to 
cheer the downcast woman while she 
approaches. The cure was consum- 
mated by touch when she came up to 
Jesus (ver. 13), whereupon the eighteen 
years’ sufferer burst into praise: ἐδόξαζε 
τὸν Θεόν. A lifelike moving scene.— 
Ver. 14. But religious propriety in the 
person of the ruler of the synagogue is 
once more shocked: it is a Sabbath cure. 


2 Omit και NBT 1, 209. 
4 αυταις in NRABLT. 
6 νποκριται in SBLT, etc. 


--ἔλεγε τῷ ὄχλφ: He spoke to the 
audience at Jesus—plausibly enough; 
yet, as so often in cases of religious zeal, 
from mixed motives. Christ’s power and 
the woman’s praise annoyed him.—Ver. 
15. ὑποκριταί: plural less personal than 
the singular (T.R.), yet severe enough, 
though directed against the class. The 
case put was doubtless according to the 
prevailing custom, and so stated as to 
make the work done prominent (λύει, 
looses, that one bit of work: ἀπάγων, 
leading the animal loosed to the water, 
that another, vide Bengel).—orife, 
gives him drink, at least to the extent of 
drawing water from the well, if not of 
carrying it to the animal’s mouth (the 
former allowed, the latter disallowed in 
the Talmud, vide Lightfoot and Wiunsche). 
—Ver. 16. The case of the woman 
described so as to suggest a parallel 
and contrast: a daughter of Abraham 
versus an ox or ass; bound by Satan, 
not merely by a chain round the neck ; 
for eighteen years, not for a few hours. 
The contrast the basis of a strong a 
fortiori argument. The reply is 
thoroughly in the spirit of Jesus, and 
the whole incident, though peculiar to 
Lk., is a credible reminiscence of His 
ministry; whether placed in its true 
historical setting is a matter of minor 
moment.—Ver. 17. The religious leaders 
and the people behave according to their 
character ; the former ashamed, not ae 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


1I—22, 

ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ caBBdrou;™ 17. Καὶ ταῦτα λέγοντος αὐτοῦ, κατῃσχύ- 
νοντο πάντες of ἀντικείμενοι αὐτῷ: καὶ was 6 ὄχλος ἔχαιρεν ἐπὶ 
πᾶσι τοῖς ἐνδόξοις τοῖς γινοµένοις ὑπ αὐτοῦ. 

18. Ἔλεγε δέ, “Tin ὁμοία ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ; καὶ 
tive ὁμοιώσω αὐτήν; 19. Ὁμοία ἐστὶ κόκκῳ σινάπεως, ὃν λαβὼν 
ἄνθρωπος ἔβαλεν eis κῆπον ἑαυτοῦ: καὶ ηὔξησε, καὶ ἐγένετο eis 
δένδρον μέγα, καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ κατεσκήνωσεν ἐν τοῖς 


567 


κλάδοις αὐτοῦ." 
τοῦ Θεοῦ ; 


20. Καὶ πάλιν εἶπε, “Tin ὁμοιώσω τὴν βασιλείαν 
21. ὁμοία ἐστὶ ζύμη, ἣν λαβοῦσα γυνὴ ἐνέκρυψεν ® εἲς 


ἀλεύρου σάτα τρία, ἕως οὗ ἐζυμώθη ὅλον.” 
22. ΚΑΙ διεπορεύετο κατὰ πόλεις καὶ κώµας διδάσκων, καὶ 


1 For δε NBL 1, 13, 69 al. have ουν. 


2S8BDLT codd. vet. Lat. syr. cur. omit µεγα, added by scribes in a spirit of 


exaggeration. 


3 expuev in BL minusc. (Tisch., W.H.). 


convinced but as confounded, the latter 
delighted both by the works and by the 
words of Jesus. 

Vv. 18-21. The parables of the mustard 
seed and the leaven (Mt. xiii. 31-33, Mk. iv. 
30-32). Lk. may have introduced these 
parables here either because the joy of 
the people was in his view the occasion 
of their being spoken, Jesus taking it as 
a good omen for the future, or because 
he found in his source the two things, 
the cure and the parabolic speech, re- 
corded together as incidents of the same 
meeting in the synagogue. In either 
case it is implied that the parables were 
spoken in a synagogue, in the latter case 
as a part of a regular synagogue address. 
This is the interesting feature in Lk.’s 
report of these parables. It is the only 
instance in which parables are con- 
nected with synagogue addresses as 
their occasion. The connection is every 
way credible, both from the nature of 
the two parables, and from the fact that 
Jesus was wont to speak to the people 
in parables. How many unrecorded 
parables He must have spoken in His 
synagogue addresses on His preaching 
tour through Galilee, ¢.g. (Mk. i. 39) — 
Ver. I9. κῆπον, garden, more exact in- 
dication of place than in Mt. and Mk.— 
δένδρον, a tree; an exaggeration, it 
remains an herb, though of unusually 
large size.—Ver. 20. The parable of the 
leaven is given as in Mt. The point of 
both is that the Kingdom of Heaven, in- 
significant to begin with, will become 
great. 
both have probably a reference to 
Gentile Christianity. 


In the mind of the evangelist. 


Vv. 22-30. Are there few that be 
saved? This section is a mosaic of 
words found dispersed in the pages of 
Μι.: the strait gate (ver. 24) in Mt. vii. 
14; the pleading for admission (vv. 26, 
27) recalls Mt. vii. 21-23; the exclusion 
from the kingdom (vv. 28, 29) reproduces 
Mt. viii. τα, 12; the apothegm in ver. 30 
= Mt. xix. 30, xx. 16. The parabolic 
word concerning the master of the house 
(ver. 25) seems to be an echo from the 
parable of the ten virgins. The question 
as to the number of the saved introduc- 
ing the group need not be an artificial 
heading furnished by Lk. or the compiler 
of his source. 

Ver. 22 is a historical notice serving to 
recall the general situation indicated in 
ix. 51. So again in xvii. 11. “ Luke 
gives us to understand that it is always 
the same journey which goes on with 
incidents analogous to those of the pre- 
ceding cycle,” Godet. Hahn, however, 
maintains that here begins a new division 
of the history and a new journey to 
Jerusalem, yet not the final one. This 
division extends from this point to xvii. 
1ο, and contains (1) words of Jesus on 
the way to Jerusalem (xiii. 22-35), (2) 
words spoken probably in Jerusalem (xiv. 
1-24), (3) words spoken after the return 
to Galilee.—8iddonwv, teaching; the 
main occupation of Jesus as He went 
from village to village. The long section 
from ix, 51 to xviii. 14 is chiefly didactic 
in contents, though an occasional heal- 
ing is recorded.—kat πορ. ποι., the καὶ 
is epexegetic = and at the same time; 
His face set towards Jerusalem as He 
taught. 


πορείαν ποιούµενος εἰς Ἱερουσαλήμ.Ι 
«Κύριε, εἰ ὀλίγοι οἱ σωζόμενοι ;” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


ΧΙΙ. 


23. εἶπε δέ τις αὐτῷ, 
Ὅ δὲ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, 


24. ᾿Αγωνίζεσθε εἰσελθεῖν διὰ τῆς στενῆς πύλης Σ' ὅτι πολλοί, 


λέγω ὑμῖν, ζητήσουσιν εἰσελθεῖν, καὶ οὐκ ἰσχύσουσιν. 


25. "Ad οὗ 


ἂν ἐγερθῇ ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης, καὶ ἀποκλείσῃ τὴν θύραν, καὶ ἄρξησθε 
ἔξω ἑστάναι καὶ κρούειν τὴν θύραν, λέγοντες, Κύριε, Κύριε, ἄνοιδον 
ἡμῖν: καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ἐρεῖ ὑμῖν, Οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς, πόθεν ἐστέ' 26. τότε 
ἄρξεσθε * λέγειν, ᾿Εφάγομεν ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ ἐπίομεν, καὶ ἐν ταῖς 


1 Ἱεροσολυμα in δΡΙ». 


2 @upas in ΒΓΕΙ, 1, 131 Orig. 


8 Omit second κυρ. NBL 157 Lat. and Egypt. verss. 
4B has αρξεσθε (Tisch., W.H., text), but ΓΙ. Τ and many more have αρξησθε 


(W.H. marg.). 


Vv. 23-24. εἰ dd. of σωζ.: εἰ intro- 
duces a direct question as in Mt. xii. το 
and Lk. xxii. 49: are those who are 
being saved few ὃ---πρὸς αὐτούς, to them, 
not to the questioner merely but to all 
present, as the reply was of general 
concern.—Ver. 24. ἀγωνίζεσθε εἰς.: 
stronger than Mt.’s εἰσέλθετε, suggest- 
ing the idea of a struggle or prize-fight 
(τ Cor. ix. 25) in which only a few can 
win, so virtually answering the question 
in the affirmative—8ia τ. σ. θύρας, 
through the narrow door (πύλης, gate, in 
Mt.) : no interpretation of the door here 
any more thanin Mt. But the connec- 
tion suggests repentance (vv. 23, 25). 
The Kingdom of Heaven is here conceived 
of as a Πομβε.-- πολλοί: the idea is that 
many shall desire admission and shall 
not obtain it. The reason in the parable 
is the narrowness of the door, making it 
impossible for so many to get in in a 
short time. All are in earnest; no stress 
is to be laid on ζητήσουσιν, shall seek, 
as if it meant something less than 
ἀγωνίζεσθε (Godet). All strive, but 
success is for the strongest who can 
push the weaker aside. So in the 
parable. In the interpretation the one 
point to be insisted on is: be in dead 
earnest. 

Vv. 25-27. Here begins a new 
parable and a new sentence, though 
some (Beza, Lachmann, W. and H.) 
connect with what goes before, putting a 
comma after ἰσχύσουσιν. Against this 
is net only the change from the third 
person to the second (ἄρξησθε), but the 
fact that the cause of exclusion is 
different: not the narrowness of the 
door, but coming too late. The case 
put now is that of the master of a house 
who is giving an entertainment, He 


waits for a certain time to receive his 
guests. At length, deeming that all are, 
or ought to be, present, he rises and 
shuts the door, after which no one can 
be admitted. Some, however, come later, 
knock at the door, and are refused ad- 
mission. The moral of this parable is 
distinct ; of the former parable it was: 
be in earnest ; of this it is: be not too 
late.—éordvat καὶ κρούειν: both verbs 
depend on ἄρξησθε: ye begin to stand 
without and to knock. Some take 
ἑστάναι as = a participle, but it is better 
to take it as denoting a first stage in the 
action of those arriving late. At first 
they expect that the door will be opened 
soon as a matter of course, and that they 
have nothing to do but to stepin. By- 
and-by they find it will be necessary to 
knock, and finally, being refused ad-. 
mission even when the door is opened, 
they are fain to plead (ver. 26).--καὶ 
ἀποκριθεὶς: the καὶ here has the force 
of then. The sense would have been 
clearer had it been omitted. Here 
properly begins the apodosis of the 
sentence and the close of the parable 
proper = then he answering will say: 
I do not know γοι.--πόθεν ἐστέ: 
these added words rather weaken than 
strengthen the laconic οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς of 
Mt. xxv. 12 = you must be strangers, not 
of those invited.—Ver. 26. This verse 
is viewed by many as the apodosis of a 
long sentence beginning with ad’ ot 
(ver. 25), and the emotional character of 
the passage, in which parable and moral 
are blended, goes far to justify them. 
But it is better on the whole to find here 
a new φίατῖ.--ἐνώπιόν σον, before thee, 
either, as thy guests or hosts (Capernaum 
feast, dinners in the houses of Pharisees), 
i.e., with thee; or. under thine eye—in- 


4-31. 


πλατείαις ἡμῶν ἐδίδαξας. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


569 


27. καὶ ἐρεῖ  Λέγω] ὑμῖν, οὐκ οἶδα 


ipas,? πόθεν ἐστέ: ἀπόστητε dw ἐμοῦ πάντες ot? ἐργάται τῆς 5 


ἀδικίας. 


28. ἐκεῖ ἔσται 6 κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων, 


ὅταν ὄψησθε“ ᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ ᾿Ισαὰκ καὶ ᾿Ιακὼβ καὶ πάντας τοὺς 


προφήτας ἐν τῇ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὑμᾶς δὲ ἐκβαλλομένους ἔξω" 


29. καὶ ἤξουσιν ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν καὶ δυσμῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ βορρᾶ καὶ 


νότου, καὶ ἀνακλιθήσονται ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


30. καὶ ἰδού, 


- A a » 
εἰσὶν ἔσχατοι ot ἔσονται πρῶτοι, καί εἰσι πρῶτοι ot ἔσονται ἔσχατοι. 


31. Ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ 5 προσῆλθόν τινες Φαρισαῖοι, λέγοντες 
αὐτῷ, “Ἔξελθε καὶ πορεύου ἐντεῦθεν, ὅτι Ἡρώδης θέλει σε ἀπο- 


1 For λεγω BT have λεγων (W.H.). 


3 SSBDL al. omit ot, and SBLR omit της. 


άοψεσθε in BDX 6ο al. 


volving a claim simply of neighbour- 
hood. The former is the more likely, 
because it puts the case more strongly in 
their favour.—Ver. 27. οὐκ οἶδα, εἴο. : 
the same answer, iteration cum emphasi 
(Βεηρε][).--ἀπόστητε, εἴο.: nearly as in 
Mt. vii. 23. 
out of the parable intd the moral sphere. 
In the parable exclusion is due to arriving 
too late; in the spiritual sphere to 
character.—dé8uxtas, Mt. has ἀνομίαν, 
lawlessness. Against the tendency- 
criticism Schanz remarks: “ a@vopia in 
Mt. is Jewish-Christian but not anti- 
Pauline, ἀδικία Pauline but not anti- 
jewish”. . 

Vv. 28-30. Concluding reflections.— 
Ver. 28. ἐκεῖ, there; then, according to 
Euthy. Zig. (τότε, ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ καιρῷ). 
Kuinoel also takes it as an adverb of 
time in accordance with Hebraistic 
usage, and Bornemann cites instances 
from Greek authors of the same use of 
adverbs of place as adverbs of time. But 
there is not only verbally correct, but 
graphic: there, outside the door of the 
house where patriarchs and prophets 
ieast, shall the excluded weep and gnash 
their teeth, all the more because they 
think they have a right, as belonging to 
the chosen race, to be within.—Ver. 29 
points to an aggravation of the misery 
of the outcasts: men coming from every 
quarter of the globe to join the festive 
company and finding admission. The 
shut door and the too late arrival are 
now out of view, and for the private 
house of the parable is substituted the 
Kingdom of God which it represents. It 
is needless to ask whether Mt. or Lk. 
has given this saying in its true place. 
Perhaps neither has The important 


This answer goes entirely 


? Omit vpas BLRT minusc, 
So D also, but with ανοµιαςφ. 


5 wpa in SBDLX al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


point is their joint testimony to the say- 
ing as a true utterance of Jesus.—Ver. 
30. The same remark applies to this 
saying. As it stands here it refers to 
Jews as the first who become last, and 
to Gentiles as the last who become first, 
and the distinction between first and last 
is not one of degree, but absolute = 
within and without. 

Vv. 31-33. Warning against Herod 
by Pharisees, peculiar to Lk., but Mk. 
(iii. 6, vili. 15) has prepared us for com- 
bined action of court and religious 
coteries against Jesus similar to that 
against Amos (vii. 10-13), both alike 
eager to be rid of Him as endangering 
their power.—Ver. 31. ἔξελθε: xvii. 11 
shows that Lk. did not attach critical 
importance to this incident as a cause of 
Christ’s final departure from Galilee.— 
θέλει σε ἀποκτεῖναι: was this a lie, an 
inference, a message sent by Herod in 
order to intimidate, or a fact which had 
somehow come to the knowledge of the 
reporters? It is impossible to ascertain. 
The answer of Jesus seems to imply 
that He regarded the Pharisees as 
messengers, and also innocent tools of 
the crafty king. But He answers 
according to the ex facie character of 
the message, that of friends warning 
against a foe, while probably having His 
own thoughts as to where the craft and 
the enmity lay. The one thing certain 
is that there was low cunning some- 
where. The king was using the 
Pharisees, or the Pharisees the king, or 
perhaps they were both playing the same 
game. Possibly the evangelist viewed 
the Pharisees as friends.—Ver. 32. 
τῇ ἀλώπεκι ταύτῃ, this fox; the fox 
revealed in this business, ostensibly the 


57° 


KATA AOYKAN XIII, 32—35. 


KTeivat.” 32. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Mopeubévres εἴπατε τῇ ἀλώπεκι 
ταύτῃ, ᾿Ιδού, ἐκβάλλω δαιμόνια καὶ ἰάσεις ἐπιτελῶ1 σήμερον καὶ 
αὔριον, καὶ τῇ τρίτη τελειοῦμαι. 33. πλὴν δεῖ µε σήμερον καὶ 
αὔριον καὶ τῇ ἐχομένῃη πορεύεσθαι: ὅτι οὐκ ἐνδέχεται προφήτην 
ἀπολέσθαι ἔξω “Ἱερουσαλήμ. 34. Ἱερουσαλήμ, ἹἹερουσαλήμ, ἡ 
ἀποκτείνουσα τοὺς προφήτας, καὶ λιθοβολοῦσα τοὺς ἀπεσταλμένους 
πρὸς αὐτήν, ποσάκις ἠθέλησα ἐπισυνάξαι τὰ τέκνα σου, ὃν τρόπον 
ὄρνις τὴν ἑαυτῆς νοσσιὰν ὑπὸ τὰς πτέρυγας, καὶ οὐκ ἠθελήσατε. 
35. ἰδού, ἀφίεται ὑμῖν 6 οἶκος ὑμῶν ἔρημος”: ἀμὴν δὲ λέγω ® ὑμῖν, 
ὅτι οὗ py μεῦ Wyre ἕως ἂν ἤδῃ, ὅτε» εἴπητε, Εὐλογημένος ὁ 
ἐρχόμενος ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου. 


1 αποτελω in NBL 33, 124 (Tisch., W.H.). 
* S$ABKL al. verss. omit ερηµος, found in DXA 33 al. 
Σλεγω Se (for αµην δε λεγ. in minusc.) in BDX al. (W.H. with δε in brackets). 


Simply λεγω in ΜΜ], (Tisch.). 
6 Omit οτι NBDL (W.H.). 


5 For pe ιδητε SB have ιδητε µε; for 


ote, which may be conformed to Mt. 


king, but in a roundabout way the 
would-be friends may be hit at (Euthy. 
Zig.). The quality denoted by the name 
is doubtless cunning, though there is no 
clear instance of the use of the fox as the 
type of cunning in the Scriptures else- 
where.—o7pepov, etc.: this note of time 
is not to be taken strictly. Jesus is in 
the prophetic mood and speaks in 
prophetic style: to-day, to-morrow, and 
the third day symbolise a short time.— 
τελειοῦμαι as to form may be either 
middle or passive. If middle it will 
mean: finish my healing (and teaching) 
ministry in Herod’s territory (Galilee 
and Peraea). This meaning suits the 
connection, but against it is the fact that 
the verb is never used in a middle sense 
in N.T., and very rarely in classics. 
Taken passively it will mean: I am 
perfected by a martyr’s death (Heb. xi. 
40, xii. 23). Commentators are much 
divided between these meanings. —Ver. 
33. πλὴν, for the rest, or, on the other 
hand, introducing the other side of the 
case = I must work still for a little space, 
yet I must keep moving on southwards, 
as the proper place for a prophet to die 
is Jerusalem, not Galilee. The second 
note of time (σήμερον) coincides with 
the first: work and moving southwards 
go hand in hand.—ovx ἐνδέχεται, it is 
not fitting (here only in N.T., cf. xvii. 1). 
John was murdered in Machaerus, but 
that was an offence against the fitness of 


εως αν BDL have ews; NBL omit ηξη 


things. The reply of Jesus is full of 
dignity and pathos. In effect He says: 
I am not to be driven out of Galilee by 
threats. I will work till the hour comes. 
Nevertheless keep your minds easy, 
princes and Pharisees! I must soon 
endure a prophet’s fate, and not here. 
I go to meet it in the proper place, 
though not in fear of you. 

Vv. 34, 35. Apostrophe to Ferusalem 
(Mt. xxiii. 37, 38), suitably introduced 
here as in sympathy with the preceding 
utterance, though not likely to have 
een spoken at this time and place, as 
indeed it is not alleged to have been. 
It is given nearly as in Μι.-- τὴν νοσσιὰν 
(for τὰ νοσσία in Mt.) =a nest (nidum 
suum, Vulgate), hence the young in the 
nest. Vide remarks on Mt., ad loc. 

CHAPTER XIV. TaBLeE TALK AND A 
Concio ΑΡ PoPpULUM.—VV. I-24 contain 
a digest of sayings of Jesus at the table of 
a Pharisee, this being the third instance 
in this Gospel of such friendly inter- 
course between Him and members of the 
Pharisaic party. The remaining part of 
the chapter consists of solemn words on 
self-sacrifice and on counting the cost 
represented as addressed to the people. 

Vv. 1-6. The dvopsical man healed, 
with relative conversation, in Lk. only 
(cf. Mt. xii. g-14).—Ver. 1. ἐν τῷ ἐλθεῖν, 
etc.: the indication of place and time is 
very vague so as to lend plausibility to 
the suggestion that the introduction is- 


XIV. 1—6. 


ΕΥΑΓΤΕΛΙΟΝ 


571 


XIV. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἐλθεῖν αὐτὸν eis οἶκόν τινος τῶν 


ἀρχόντων τῶν Φαρισαίων σαββάτω φαγεῖν ἄρτον, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἦσαν 


παρατηρούµενοι αὐτόν. 


2. καὶ ἰδού, ἄνθρωπός τις ἦν ὑδρωπικὸς 


ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ: 3. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπε πρὸς τοὺς 


νομικοὺς καὶ Φαρισαίους, λέγων, “Ei! ἔξεστι τῷ σαββάτῳ θερα- 


πεύειν 2; 


καὶ ἀπέλυσε. 


4. Οἱ δὲ ἠσύχασαν. καὶ ἐπιλαβόμενος ἰάσατο αὐτόν, 
5. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς * πρὸς αὐτοὺς εἶπε, “Tivos ὑμῶν 


ὄνος * ἡ βοῦς eis φρέαρ ἐμπεσεῖταιὸ καὶ οὐκ εὐθέως ἀνασπάσει αὐτὸν 


ἐν τῇ ὃ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ σαββάτου ; ” 
αὐτῷ 7 πρὸς ταῦτα. 


1SSBDL 5ο omit εν, 


6. Καὶ οὔκ ἴσχυσαν ἀνταποκριθῆναι 


ΣΜΝΡΒΡΙ, 1, 13, 69 al. codd. Lat. vet..add η ov after θεραπενειν (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 BDL omit αποκριθεις. 


4 For ovos (SLX 1, 33) B al. have wos. 
Vide below. 


three: νιος η βους η ovos (Baethgen). 
ὄπεσειται in SABL 1, 13, 69 al. 
δ Omit τη NB. 


extracted from the parabolic speeches, 
vv. 7-24 (Holtzmann, H. Ο.).--ἀρχόντων 
τ. Φ., the house is described as that of 
one of the rulers of the Pharisees, an 
inexact expression, as the Pharisees as 
such had no rulers, being all on a level. 
Omitting the article before ap. (as in B) 
we might take this word as in apposition 
and render: one of the rulers, Pharisees ; 
tulers meaning the Sanhedrists, and 
Pharisees denoting their religious 
tendency (so Grotius, who therefore 
thinks the scene was in Jerusalem).— 
σαββάτῳ Φαγεῖν ἄρτον: feasting on 
Sabbath was common among the Jews, 
ex pietate et religione (Lightfoot), but the 
dishes were cold, cooked the day before. 
---καὶ, introducing the apodosis, and the 
main fact the suspicious observation of 
Jesus by those present at the meal 
(αὐτοὶ). Altogether a strange situation : 
Jesus the guest of a great man among 
the Pharisees, as if held in honour, yet 
there to be watched rather than treated 
as a friend; simple-hearted geniality on 
one side, insincerity on the other. 

Vv. 2-6. ὑδρωπικὸς (ὕδρωψ): here only 
in N.T., asolitary instance of this disease 
among the healing acts of Jesus. Nocon- 
ceivable reason for its being mentioned 
except that it was a [αοῖ.--ἔμπροσθεν 
αὐτοῦ, before Him, 5ο that He could not 
fail to see him; how there—as guest, 
as brought by the Pharisees to tempt 
Jesus, come there of his own motion in 
hope to be cured, though not asking out 


D has προβατον. Syr. cur. has all 


7 Omit αντω SBDL minusc. 


of reverence for the Sabbath and in fear 
of its strict guardians (Euthy. Zig.)—not 
indicated.—Ver. 3. ἀποκριθεὶς: Jesus 
addresses Himself to the double situa- 
tion ; on the one hand a sick man dumbly 
appealing for help, on the other jealous 
religionists aware of His free habit and 
expecting eccentric speech and action 
open to censure.—égeorvv, etc.: first He 
asks a question as to the legality of 
Sabbatic healing in a tone which amounts 
to an affirmative assertion, allowed to 
pass uncontradicted (ἠσύχασαν); then 
He proceeds to answer His own question 
by healing the man (ver. 4), and finally 
He offers an apology for the act.—Ver. 5. 
τίνος ὑμῶν, etc.: an awkward Hebraistic 
construction for τίς ὑμῶν οὗ, etc.—vids 
ἢ Bots, a son or (even) an ox, in either 
case, certainly in the former, natural 
instinct would be too strong for artificial 
Sabbatic rules.—opéap, a well, or cistern, 
an illustration as apt to the nature of the 
malady as that of the ox loosed from the 
stall in xiii. 15 (οἀεῖ).---εὐθέως, at once, 


unhesitatingly, without thought of 
Sabbath rules. The emphasis lies on 
this word.—Ver. 6. οὐκ ic. ἄντα- 


ποκριθῆναι (again in Rom. ix. 20): 
silenced but of course not convinced. 
The difference in the way of thinking 
too great to be overcome in a moment. 
Luke has three Sabbath cures. The 
present one has no very distinctive 
features. The accumulation may point 
to a desire to help weak Christians to 


$72 


a Acts iii. 5. 
x Tim. iv. 


16. 


KATA AOYKAN XIV. 


7. Ἔλεγε δὲ πρὸς τοὺς κεκληµένους παραβολή», *émexwv πῶς τὰς 
πρωτοκλισίας ἐξελέγοντο, λέγων πρὸς αὐτούς, 8. “'"Ὅταν κληθῇς 
ὑπό τινος ets γάμους, μὴ κατακλιθῇς eis τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν " µήποτε 
ἐντιμότερός σου ᾖ κεκληµένος ὑπ αὐτοῦ, g. καὶ ἐλθὼν 6 σὲ καὶ 
αὐτὸν καλέσας ἐρεῖ σοι, Ads τούτῳ τόπον: καὶ τότε ἄρξῃ per 


αἰσχύνης τὸν ἔσχατον τόπον 
πορευθεὶς ἀνάπεσον] eis τὸν 


b here only 
in N.T. 


~ , 
σοι δόξα ἐνώπιον ὃ τῶν συνανακειµένων got. 


κεκληκώς σε, etry” σοι, Φίλε, 


1Ο. add’ ὅταν κληθῇς, 
ἔσχατον τόπον: ἵνα, ὅταν ἐλθῃ ὁ 


κατέχειν. 


ὑπροσανάβηθι ἀνώτερον ' τότε ἔσται 
II. ὅτι πᾶς 6 ὑψῶν 


2 
ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται : καὶ 6 ταπεινῶν ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται. 


A 9 ~ 
12. Ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ τῷ κεκληκότι αὐτόν, ''"Ὅταν ποιῇς ἄριστον ἢ 


δεῖπνον, μὴ paver τοὺς φίλους σου, μηδὲ τοὺς ἀδελφούς σου, μηδὲ 


τοὺς συγγενεῖς σου, μηδὲ γείτονας πλουσίους' µήποτε καὶ αὐτοί σε 


| avatrece in NOB al. 


2 epet in SMBLX minusc. 


3 παντων after ενωπιον in SABLX verss. 


get above their scruples by an appeal to 
the Master (Schanz). In the first and 
second cases the principle of Christ’s 
defence is indicated; it is lawful to do 
good (vi. 9); you may do for a man, α 
fortiori, what it is lawful to do for a 
beast (xiii. τς). In the present case it is 
not indicated. It may be: you may do 
for another what you all do for your 
own, son or ox (Meyer, J. Weiss) ; or if 
need is a valid plea in any case, it is 
valid in all cases (Schanz). 

Vv. 7-11. Take the lowest seat. Here 
begins the table talk of Jesus, consisting 
of three discourses. The first addressed 
to the guests in general is really a parable 
teaching the lesson of humility pointed 
in ver. 11. ‘ Through the medium of a 
counsel of prudence relating to ordinary 
social life He communicates a lesson of 
true wisdom concerning the higher 
sphere of religion” (The Parabolic 
Teaching of Christ).—Ver. 7. ἐπέχων, 
observing. Euthy. renders: µεμφόμενος, 
blaming, in itself a legitimate meaning 
but not compatible with πῶς. The 
practice observed—choosing the chief 
places—was characteristic of Pharisees 
(Mt. xxiii. 6), but it is a vice to which all 
are prone.—Ver. 8. ydpovus, a marriage 
feast, here representing all great social 
functions at which ambition for distinc- 
tion is called into play.—évripérepds 
σου: this does not necessarily denote 
one of known superior social standing, 
but may mean simply one held in more 
honour by the host (Hahn).—Ver. 9. 
ἐλθὼν 6, etc. : the guests are supposed to 


. 


have taken their places before the host 
comes in.—apéy: the shame would be 
most acutely felt at the beginning of the 
movement from the highest to the lowest 
place (Μεγετ).- τ. ἔσχατον τ., the 
lowest place just vacated by the honoured 
guest, who is humble in spirit though 
highly esteemed, who therefore in his 
own person exemplifies the honour and 
glory of being called up by the host from 
the lowest to the highest place.—Ver. ΤΟ. 
προσανάβηθι ἀνώτερον : ‘go up higher,” 
A.V. and R.V.; better “‘come up 
higher,” which gives effect to the πρός. 
The master invites the host to come 
towards himself. So Field (Ot. Nor.).— 
Ver. 11: the moral of the parable; a 
great law of the Kingdom of God dear to 
the heart of the Pauline evangelist, re- 
curring in xvili. 14. 

Vv. 12-14. A word to the host, also 
parabolic in character in so far as it 
gives general counsel under a concrete 
particular form (Hahn), but not parabolic 
in the strict sense of teaching spiritual 
truth by natural examples.—Ver. 12. 
φωνεῖν used for καλεῖν in Hellenistic 
Greek (Farrar, C. G. T.), denoting formal 
ceremonious invitation as on a great 
occasion (Hahn).—rots φίλους, etc.: 
four classes likely to be asked on 
ordinary social grounds are named— 
personal intimates, brethren, relations 
(these two form one category), and rich 
neighbours. The epithet πλουσίους 
belongs to the last class alone. Friends 
and relatives are called because they 
are such. Mere neighbours are called 


να ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 
ἀντικαλέσωσι,} καὶ γένηταί σοι * ἀνταπόδομα.ϊ 
δοχήν,’ κάλει πτωχούς, ἀναπήρους, χωλούς, τυφλούς: 14. καὶ 
µακάριος Eon: ὅτι οὐκ ἔχουσιν ἀνταποδοῦναί σοι: ἀνταποδοθήσεται 
γάρ σοι ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει τῶν δικαίων.” 

15. ᾽᾿Ακούσας δέ τις τῶν συνανακειµένων ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 
«Μακάριος, ὃς ὃ φάγεται ἄρτον ἐν τῇ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 16. Ὁ 
δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ''"Ανθρωπός τις ἐποίησε΄ δεῖπνον µέγα, καὶ ἐκάλεσε 
πολλούς: 17. καὶ ἀπέστειλε τὸν δοῦλον αὐτοῦ τῇ ὥρα τοῦ δείπνου 
εἰπεῖν τοῖς κεκλημένοι», Ἔρχεσθε, ὅτι ἤδη ἔτοιμά ἐστιδ πάντα.δ 
18. Καὶ ἤρξαντο ἀπὸ μιᾶς παραιτεῖσθαι πάντες. 6 πρῶτος εἶπεν 
αὐτῷ, “Aypov ἠγόρασα, καὶ ἔχω ἀνάγκην ἐξελθεῖν καὶ ὃ ἰδεῖν αὐτόν - 
ἐρωτῶ σε, EXE µε παρῃτηµένον. 19. καὶ ἕτερος εἶπε, Ζεύγη βοῶν 
ἠγόρασα πέντε, καὶ πορεύομαι δοκιµάσαι αὖτά: ἐρωτῶ σε, ἔχε με 


13. ἀλλ᾽ ὅταν ποιῇς « Rom. zi.9 


1 σε after αντικαλ. in ΜΝΒΡΙ.Ε 1, 69 al., and σοι after ανταπ. 


2 ΜΒ have δοχην ποιης. 
ἔοστις in NaBLPRX 1, 13, 69 al. 


4 εποιει in NBR 1. 


δεισι in S{LR (Tisch., W.H., marg.); εστι (T.R.) in BDX (W.H. text). 


® Omit παντα SBLR. 


7 παντες παραι. in S$BDLRX 1 verss, 


5 For εξελθειν και SSBDL have simply εξελθων. 


only because they are rich, or, more 
generally, socially Ἱπιροτίαπε.---μήποτε, 
lest, presenting return invitations (ἄντι- 
καλεῖν, here only in N.T.) as an object 
of dread, a fear unknown to the world. 
(Hic metus mundo ignotus, Bengel.)— 
Ver. 13. δοχῆν, the same word used by 
Lk. in reference to the feast in Levi’s 
house, which was a gathering of the 
sort here recommended by Jesus.— 
µακάριος, here and always denoting rare 
virtue and felicity = the pleasure of doing 
a kindness not to be repaid, except at 
the resurrection of the just, or by the 
joy that every really beneficent action 
brings ποτυ.---τῶν δικαίων: in specifying 
the righteous as the subjects of the 
resurrection the Speaker has no intention 
of indicating an opinion as to the un- 
righteous: whether they rise at all, or 
when. . 

Vv. 15-24. The great feast (cf. Mt. 
xxii. I-14), very naturally introduced by 
the pious reflection of a guest whose 
religious sentiment had been touched by 
the allusion to the resurrection-felicity 
of the just. Like many other pious 
observations of the conventional type it 
did not amount to much, and was no 
guarantee of genuine godliness in the 
speaker. The parable expresses this 
truth in concrete form, setting forth that 
many care less for the Kingdom of God 


and its blessings than they seem to care, 
and teaching that these will be offered 
to those who do care indeed. 

Vv. 16-20. ἐκάλεσεν: it was a great 
feast and many were asked, with a 
long invitation.—Ver. 17. εἰπεῖν τοῖς 
κεκλημµένοις: a second invitation accord- 
ing to Eastern custom still prevailing 
(Rosenmiller, Morgenland, v. 192 ; Thom- 
son, Land and Book, vol. i. chap. ix.). 
—Ver. 18. ἀπὸ pias (supply γνώμης, 
ψυχῆς, Spas, or some such word im- 
plying with one mind, or at one time, or 
in the same manner, here only in Greek 
literature), with one consent.—rapa- 
τεῖσθαι: not to refuse, but in courteous 
terms to excuse themselves.—6é πρῶτος, 
the first; of three, simply samples, by no 
means exhausting the list of possible 
excuses.—aypov ἠγόρασα: a respectable 
excuse, by no means justifying absence, 
but excellently exemplifying preoccupa- 
tion, the state ofmind commontoall. A 
man who has purchased a farm is for a 


_while very much taken up with it and 


makes himself very busy about it; every- 
thing else for the moment secondary.— 
ἔχω ἀνάγκην : no fewer than three Latin- 
isms have been found in this sentence ; 
this, the use of épw7@ in the sense of rogo, 
and ἔχε pe παρῃτημµένον (Grotius). But 
parallels can be found in Greek authors 
for the first. Kypke cites an instance of ~ 


574 


KATA AOYKAN XIV. 
παρητηµένον. 20. καὶ ἕτερος εἶπε, Γυναῖκα ἔγημα, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο 
οὗ δύναμαι ἐλθεῖν. 21. καὶ παραγενόµενος 6 δοῦλος ἐκεῖνος] ἁπ- 
ήγγειλε τῷ κυρίῳ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα. Τότε ὀργισθεὶς ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης εἶπε 
τῷ δούλῳ αὐτοῦ, Ἔξελθε ταχέως eis τὰς πλατείας καὶ ῥύμας τῆς 
πόλεως, καὶ τοὺς πτωχοὺς καὶ ἀναπήρους καὶ χωλοὺς καὶ τυφλοὺς ” 
εἰσάγαγε ὧδε. 22. Καὶ εἶπεν ὁ δοῦλος, Κύριε, γέγονεν ὡς ἓ ἐπέταξας, 
καὶ ἔτι τόπος ἐστί. 23. Καὶ εἶπεν 6 κύριος πρὸς τὸν δοῦλον, 
Ἔξελθε εἰς τὰς ὁδοὺς καὶ φραγμούς, καὶ ἀνάγκασον εἰσελθεῖν, ἵνα 


γεµισθῇ ὁ οἶκός µου." 


24. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐδεὶς τῶν ἀνδρῶν 


> , a , , , aA , 35 
εκεινων των κεκληµένων γευσεται μου του δείπνου. 


1 Omit εκεινος NABDL al. 
% For os NBDLR i, e, etc., have ο. 


the second from Josephus. The third, 
if not a Latinism (Meyer and J. Weiss 
say no, Schanz and Hahn yes), is at 
least exactly = excusatum me habeto.— 
—Ver. 19. ἕτερος, another ; his excuse 
is also highly respectable, though nothing 
more than a decent excuse; the pre- 
occupation very real, though the apology 
lame. Five yoke of oxen a very important 
purchase in the owner’s eyes.—Ver. 20. 
γυναῖκα ἔγημα: most presentable excuse 
of all, therefore offered sans phrase ; 
preoccupation this time intense, and 
surely pardonable? In the natural 
sphere these are likely forms of: pre- 
occupation, but not necessarily either 
the only, or even the chief in the spiritual 
sphere, or those which kept the lawyers 
and Pharisees from accepting the teach- 
ing of Jesus. Their prepossessions were 
religious and theological. 

Not only these three but all decline to 
come. In the natural sphere this is 
highly improbable and unexampled. 
Jesus, from no fault on His part as a 
parable artist, had to make improbable 
suppositions to exemplify the fact in the 
spiritual sphere, which in this instance 
was that the bulk of the Jewish people 
were indifferent to the Kingdom as He 
presented it. On the other hand, in the 
parables spoken in justification of His 
own conduct, the case put has the 
highest measure of probability. Vide, 
e.g., those in next chapter. 


Vv. 21-24. The sequel.—Ver.21. The 


servant has done his duty and returns to 
make his strange τεροΓί.---ὀργισθεὶς, 
enraged ; no Ψοπάςτ.---ἔξελθε ταχέως, go 
out quickly ; no time to be lost, as all 
things are ready; but the thing chiefly 
to be noted is how the word answers 
to the master’s mood ---πλατείας καὶ 


2 τυφ. και χωλ. in BDL, είς. 
4 nov ο οικος in ΝΑΒΡΙ,Χ 157 € cop. 


ῥύμας, broad streets and narrow lanes 
(Mt. vi. 2, qg.v.); all sorts of people to be 
met with there and many of them: in- 
vitation to be broadcast, no one to be 
shunned however poor or unsightly ; the 
poor, maimed, blind, and halt rather to 
be preferred, therefore expressly named 
—such is the master’s mood in his 
disgust at the behaviour of the well-to-do, 
propertied, happy classes—a violent but 
natural reaction.—Ver. 22. ἔτι τόπος 
ἐστί, yet there is room, places for more ; 
many more, else the servant would hardly 
think it worth while to mention the fact, 
though he quite understands that the 
master wants the banqueting hall filled, 
were it only to show that he can do 
without those saucy recusants. Room 
after such a widespread miscellaneous 
invitation speaks to a feast on a grand 
scale, worthy emblem of the magnificence 
of Divine grace.—Ver. 23. ὁδοὺς καὶ 
paypors, “highways and hedges ” ; the 
main roads and the footpaths running 
between the fields, alongside of the 
hedges (Hahn); these, in the country, 
answering to the streets and lanes in the 
town. ‘The people to be found there are 
not necessarily lower down socially than 
those called within the city, perhaps not 
so low, but they are without, represent- 
ing in the interpretation the Gentiles.— 
ἀνάγκασον, compel; reflects in the first 
place the urgent desire of the master to 
have an absolutely full house, in the second 
the feeling that pressure will be needed 
to overcome the incredulity of country 
people as to the invitation to them being 
meant seriously. They would be apt to 
laugh in the servant’s face.—iva γεµισθῃ: 
the house must be full, no excuse to be 
taken; but for a curious reason.—Ver. 
24. ὅτι οὐδεὶς, etc.: to keep out the 


20—28. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 575 


25. Συνεπορεύοντο δὲ αὐτῷ ὄχλοι πολλοί; καὶ στραφεὶς εἶπε πρὸς 


αὐτούς, 26. “ Eitis ἔρχεται πρός µε, καὶ οὐ μισεῖ τὸν πατέρα ἑαυτοῦ,ὰ 


καὶ τὴν µητέρα, καὶ τὴν γυναῖκα, καὶ τὰ τέκνα, καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφούς, 


καὶ τὰς ἀδελφάς, ἔτι δὲ καὶ” τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ψυχήν, οὗ δύναταί µου 


μαθητὴς εἶναι. 27. καὶ ὅστις οὐ βαστάζει τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ," 
> d 

καὶ ἔρχεται ὀπίσω µου, οὐ δύναταί µου εἶναι µαθητής. 28. τίς γὰρ 

ἐξ ὑμῶν, θέλων πύργον οἰκοδομῆσαι, οὐχὶ πρῶτον καθίσας 3 ψηφίζει 


1 So in BL al. (W.H.). 


2 ert δε και in ND (Tisch.); ετι τε και in BLRA (W.H.). 
5 evar µου pa. in ΝΒΙ ΜΕΣ (Tisch., W.H.). 


order. 


Rev. xiii. 
18 (to ex- 
plain by 

counting). 


NDX, etc., 1, 13, 69 al. have αντον (Tisch.). 


Vide below. 
In ver. 27 $§BL have the same 


4SoinsgDL. B has εαυτον (Tisch., W.H.). 


first invited in case they should change 
their minds. Of course this is spoken by 
the master, and is no comment of Jesus, 
though we read ὑμῖν where we expect 
σοι, the application to the hearers of the 
parable intruding itself at this one point. 
The reason of the master for wishing 
his house filled is not a high one. But 
the ethics of parables belong to this 
world. They must not be transferred 
into the spiritual sphere. 

Vv. 25-35. Concio ad populum. Jesus 
now appears on the way, and followed 
by ‘‘many multitudes” (ὄχλοι πολλοί, 
ver. 25) to whom He speaks. Thus 
sayings which in Mt. and Mk. form part 
of disciple-instruction (διδαχή) assume 
the character of popular preaching, as in 
the case of the Sermon on the Mount (in 
Lk.), though the subject is the conditions 
of discipleship. 

Vv. 26-27. The requirements of true 
discipleship (Mt. x. 37-39).—Ver. 26. 
ἔρχεται πρός µε, Cometh to me, with a 
view to close and permanent discipleship. 
--μισεῖ: a stronger word than that 
used in Mt., where it is a question of 
loving less; surprising in Lk., whose 
general habit is to soften hard sayings. 
But the Jogion is presented in different 
lights in the two Gospels. In Mt. itisa 
question of being a disciple worthy of 
the Master (@étos); in Lk. of being an 
effective disciple (οὐ δύναται). Love οί 
friends makes discipleship difficult or 
impossible; on the other hand, hatred 
makes it easy. It is easy to be devoted 
to a master or cause when you hate all 
rival masters or interests. Therefore 
‘“‘hates ” is the appropriate word here, 
but the practical meaning is love less, 
which in experience signifies: hating 
other objects of affection in so tar as 
they present themselves as hindrances to 


the supreme love of the Master.—rhv 
γυναῖκα, (notin Mt.): to be most “‘ hated” 
just because most loved, and excercising 
the most entangling influence.—éru τε 
καὶ, and moreover. The te (BL) binds 
all the particulars named into one 
bundle of venuncianda.—wvyijv, life, 
oneself, most loved of all, therefore 
forming the climax, and also determin- 
ing the sense of piget. The disciple is 
to hate friends as he can hate himself— 
‘““secundam eam partem, secundum 
quam se zpsum odisse debet, a Christo 
aversam”’ (Bengel). This last item in the 
list of things to be hated represents the 
idea contained in Mt. x. 39.—Ver. 27 = 
Mt. x. 38, with the idea of ability sub- 
stituted for the idea of worth. 

Vv. 28-33. Parables illustrating the 
need of counting the cost, peculiar to 
Lk., but intrinsically probable as sayings 
of Jesus, and thoroughly germane to the 
foregoing discourse. The connection is: 
It is a serious thing to be a disciple, 
therefore consider well before you begin 
—the renunciations required, the cross 
to be borne—as you would, if wise, con- 
sider before building a tower or engaging 
in battle.—Ver. 28. θέλων: conditional 
participle, ‘‘ifhe wish” ; with the article it 
would = who wishes.—vpyov, a tower ; 
need not be magnified into a grand house 
with a tower. Doubtless, as Bengel 
temarks, Christianity is a great and 
arduous affair, and is fitly compared cum 
rebus magnis et arduis. But the great- 
ness of the undertaking is sufficiently 
represented by the second parable: the 
first emblem may be allowed to be less 
ambitious and more within the reach of 
ordinary mortals. A tower of observa- 
tion in a vineyard (Mt. xxi. 33) or for 
refuge in danger, or for ornament in a 
garden may be thought of.—xaGioas: 


576 KATA AOYKAN XIV. 29—35. 
τὴν δαπάνην, εἶ ἔχει τὰ πρὸς] ἀπαρτισμόν; 29. ἵνα µήποτε 

ε here only θέντος αὐτοῦ θεµέλιον, καὶ μὴ ἰσχύοντος ἐκτελέσαι, πάντες of 
a θεωροῦντες ἄρξωνται ἐμπαίζειν αὐτῷ,” 30. λέγοντες, Ὅτι οὗτος ὁ 

ἄνθρωπος ἤρξατο οἰκοδομεῖν, καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσεν ἐκτελέσαι. 31. "H τίς 

{λενε only βασιλεὺς πορευόµενος ΄ συμβαλεῖν ἑτέρῳ βασιλεῖ ὃ eis πόλεμον οὐχὶ 
insense Καθίσας πρῶτον βουλεύεται” εἰ δυνατός ἐστιν ἐν δέκα χιλιάσιν 


of fighting. 


ἀπαντῆσαι ὅ τῷ μετὰ εἴκοσι χιλιάδων ἐρχομένῳ ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν ; 


32. εἰ 


9 , ” > a ” , > > ~ . 6 
δὲ µήγε, ἔτι αὐτοῦ πόρρω Gyros, πρεσβείαν ἀποστείλας ἐρωτᾷ τὰ 


πρὸς εἰρήνην. 


33. οὕτως οὖν was ἐξ ὑμῶν, ὃς οὐκ ἀποτάσσεται 


A a ε ~ ε , 3 δύ s a 7 / 
Tact τοις εαυτου υπαρχουσι»ν, ου υναται μου ειναι μαθητής. 


34. Καλὸν ὃ τὸ ἅλας 5: ἐὰν 
σεται;; 
βάλλουσιν αὖτό. 


1 For τα προς BDLR 225 have simply εις. 


2 10 


τὸ Gas? µωρανθῇ, ἐν tiv, ἀρτυθή- 


” > a 4 3 / 3. , > ” 
35. οὔτε εἲς Ὑῆν, οὔτε εἰς κοπρίαν εὔθετόν ἐστιν: ἔξω 
5 4 > > / 3 , 35 
O εχων @Ta ἀκούειν ἀκουετω. 


2 αντω en. in NABLX al. 


Σετερω Bac. συµβ. in SABDLRX 33, 157 al. 
4Soin D; βουλευσεται in $B codd. vet. Lat. (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 Soin L al. 


6 B omits τα and reads ets. 
εις UV. τα προς in marg.). 


7 ειναι pov in NBLR. 
° adkas in BLR unc. and minusc. fl. 
10 εαν δε και in NBDLX al. 


the attitude appropriate to deliberate, 
leisurely consideration.—damavyv, the 
cost, here only in N.T.—ei ἔχει εἰς ἀ., if 
he has what is necessary for (ra δέοντα 
understood).—éamapticpév = for comple- 
tion, here only in N.T. and in Dion. 
Halic.; condemned by Phryn., p. 447. 
Cf. ἐξηρτισμένος in 2 Tim. ili. 17.—Ver. 
20. ἐμπαίζειν, to mock; an unfinished 
tower is specially ridiculous: height is 
essential.—otros, etc., this man, con- 
temptuously ; “this” stands for a proper 
name. ‘*Vulgo ponunt N. N.,” Bengel. 
Jesus here appeals with characteristic 
tact to one of the most sensitive feel- 
ings of human nature—shrinking from 
ridicule. Who would care to be spoken 
of all his days as the man who com- 
menced a tower and could not finish it? 

Vv. 31-33. The king going to fight. 
This is the affair of the few, a parable to 
be laid to heart by men aspiring to, or 
capable of, a grand career.—ovpBadety 
eis πόλεµον, to encounter in war (R.V.). 
or perhaps better ‘“‘to fight a battle” 
(Field, Ot. Nor.). πόλεμον is so rendered 
in x Cor. xiv. 8, Rev. ix. 9, in A.V. 
(altered in R.V. into “ war”). In 
Homer the idea of battle prevails, but in 


υπαντ. in SABDRXA 1, 33, 69, 346. 
δν omits τα and reads προς (W.H. προς in text with 


8 Add ουν to καλον NBLX 6ο al. 
WD have αλα (Tisch.). 


later writers that of war.—év δέκα, in, 
with, in the position of one who has 
only 10,000 soldiers at comma d.—pera 
εἴκοσι: to beat 20,000 with 10,000 is 
possible, but it is an unlikely event: 
the chances are against the king with 
the smaller force, and the case manifestly 
calls for deliberation. The implied truth 
is that-the disciple engages in a very un- 
equal conflict. Cf. St. Paul, “we 
wrestle against principalities,” etc., Eph. 
vi. 12. A reference in this parable to 
the relations between Herod Antipas (the 
“‘fox’’) and Ατείας, his father-in-law, 
is possible (Holtzmann, H. C.).—Ver. 
33 gives the application of the parable. 
Hofmann, Keil, and Hahn divide the 
sentence into two, putting a full stop 
after ὑμῶν and rendering: ‘‘So then 
every one of you! (do the same thing, 
i.e., consider). He who does not re- 
nounce all he hath is not able to be a 
disciple of mine.” This is very effective ; 
it may have been what Jesus actually 
said; but it is hardly how Lk. reports 
His words. Ha _ he meant the sentence 
to be read 5ο 1ε would have put γὰρ 
after ὃς. He runs the two supposed 
sentences into one, and so the counse!} 


XV. I—2. 


XV. 1. "HEAN δὲ ἐγγίζοντες αὐτῷ] πάντες of τελῶναι καὶ οἱ 


o£ , ο 8, 2) lol 
ἁμαρτωλοί, ἀκούειν αὐτοῦ. 


καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς, λέγοντες, “ Ὅτι οὗτος ἁμαρτωλοὺς " προσδέχεται, 


1 αντω εγγ. in NAB. Ὦ has eyy. a. 


to deliberate is left out or latent in the 
requirement of renunciation, which is the 
reason for deliberation. 

Vv. 34-35. The saying concerning 
salt (Mt. v. 13, Mk. ix. 5ο). This logion 
may have been repeatedly uttered by 
Jesus, but it does not seem to be 
5ο appropriate here as in its place in 
Mk. In this place the salt appears to 
denote disciples and the idea to be: 
genuine disciples are an excellent thing, 
valuable as salt to a corrupt world, but 
spurious disciples are as utterly worth- 
less as salt which has lost its savour.— 
Ver. 35. οὔτε εἰς γῆν οὔτε eis κοπρίαν, 
neither for land nor for dung (is it fit, 
εὔθετον as in ix. 62). The idea seems to 
be that savourless salt is neither earth 
nor manure.—é~w is emphatic = out 
they cast it, as worthless, good for 
nothing, mere refuse, a waste substance. 

CHAPTER XV. PARABLES TEACHING 
THE ΙΟΥ OF FINDING THINGS LOST. 
Nothing is gained by insisting anxiously 
on historical connection here. The in- 
troduction of these beautiful parables of 
grace at this point is a matter of tact 
rather than of temporal sequence, so far 
as the conscious motive of the evangelist 
is concerned. They are brought in as a 
set-off to the severe discourse in the 
closing section of the previous chapter, 
in which Jesus seems to assume a re- 
pellent attitude towards those who 
desired to follow Him. Here, in happy 
contrast, He appears as One who 
graciously received the sinful, regardless 
of unfavourable comments. The parables 
of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Coin, and 
the Lost Son are here given as a self- 
defence of Jesus against Pharisaic fault- 
finding. Whether they were first spoken 
in that connection, or uttered in that 
connection alone, cannot be determined. 
So far as their main drift is concerned 
they might have been spoken to any 
audience; to critical Pharisees, to 
disciples (the first is given in Mt. xviii. 
12-14 as spoken to the Twelve), to 
synagogue audiences, or to a gathering 
of publicans and sinners like that in 
Capernaum (LK. v. 29-32) ; controversial, 
didactic, or evangelic, as the case might 
be. Quite possibly the original setting 
of these parables was a synagogue dis- 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


$77 


Ch. xix. 7. 


c - a 
2. καὶ "διεγόγγυζον ot? Φαρισαῖοι b Rom. xvi. 


2. Phil. 
ii. 29. 


2 o. Te Min SBDL. 


course, or better still the address to the 
Capernaum gathering. That they are 
all three authentic utterances of Jesus 
need not be doubted. The first has 
synoptical attestation, being found in 
Mt. also; the second has value only as a 
supplement to the first, and was hardly 
worth inventing as an independent 
parable; the third is too good to have 
been an invention by Lk. or any other 
person, and can only have proceeded 
from the great Master. Wendt (L. J.) 
accepts all three as authentic, and taken 
from the Logia of Mt. 

Vv. 1, 2. Historic introduction.— 
ἦσαν ἐγγίζοντες: either were in the act 
of approaching Jesus at a given time 
(Meyer), or were in the habit of doing 
so. The position of αὐτῷ before 
ἐγγίζοντες in ΝΒ favours the latter 
(Schanz). On the other hand, it is not 
improbable that the reference is to the 
Capernaum gathering. We may have 
here, in fact, another version of that 
story taken from the Logia, the occasion 
slightly described, the words spoken 
carefully reported. In that case we may 
take πάντες following somewhat strictly, 
and not as a mere exaggeration of the 
evangelist’s. There were many at the 
feast. The aim was to have all the out- 
casts of the town present (vide on Mt. 
ix. 9-13). True, they came to feast 
according to the other report, whereas 
here stress is laid on the hearing 
(ἀκούειν). The festive feature is referred 
to in the complaint of the Pharisees 
(συνεσθίει, νετ. 2). Of course there 
would be hearing as well as eating, and 
probably what the guests heard was just 
these same parables in slightly different 
form. In that case they served first asa ΄ 
gospel and then as an apologia.—Ver. 2. 
διεγόγγυζον : the διὰ conveys the idea of 
a general pervasive murmuring. This is 
probably not an instance illustrating 
Hermann’s remark (ad Viger., p. 856) 
that this preposition in compound verbs 
often adds the notion of striving 
(διαπίνειν, certare bibendo).—ot τε Φ.: 
the τε (NQBL) binds Pharisees and scribee 
together as one: as close a corporation 
as ‘“‘publicans and sinners” (equivalent 
to ‘sinners’? in their conception, 
ἁμαρτωλοὺς, ver. 2). Note the order, 


37 


$78 KATA AOYKAN XV. 


. ο , > α » 
c Αεἰςχ.41; καὶ ᾿συνεσθίει αὐτοῖς. 
πε ο. κ 


Gal. ii. 12. a 
καὶ ἀπολέσας ἓν ἐξ abtav,! 


ἐρήμῳ, καὶ πορεύεται ἐπὶ τὸ ἀπολωλός, ἕως εὕρῃ αὐτό; 


3. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν παραβολὴν 
Cor. v.11. ταύτην, λέγων, 4. “Tis ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ὑμῶν ἔχων ἑκατὸν πρόβατα. . 
οὐ καταλείπει τὰ ἐννενηκονταεννέα ἐν τῇ 


4 b. A 
εὑρὼν ἐπιτίθησιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὤμους EauTod? yxaipwv, 6. καὶ ἐλθὼν eis 


τὸν οἶκον, συγκαλεῖ τοὺς φίλους καὶ τοὺς γείτονας, λέγων αὐτοῖς, 


Συγχάρητέ µοι, ὅτι εὗρον τὸ πρόβατόν µου τὸ ἀπολωλός. 


7. λέγω 


ea 9 @ Ἀ 6(e. > ~ > AR oN Ένα rat 
υμιν, OTL ουτω χαρα εσται εν τῷ ουρανῳ επι ενι ἁμαρτωλῷ μετα- 


~ az λα 3 , , 9 > , ” 
VOOUVTL, η επι εννενηκονταεννεα δικαίοις, OLTLVES ου Χχρείαν εχουσι 


1 For εν εξ a. SBD 1, 69 al. have εξ αντων ev. 
2 The texts are divided between eavrov (AEMA, etc.) απά αυτον (ΝΕΒΡΙ,: Tisch., 


W.H.). 
3 «vy τ. ovpavw εσται in NBL 33, 157. 


Pharisees and scribes; usually the other 
way. Pharisees answers to sinners, scribes 
to publicans; the two extremes in charac- 
ter andcalling: the holiest andunholiest; 
the most reputable and the most disreput- 
able occupations. And Jesus preferred 
the baser group !—mpooSexeran, receives, 
admits to His presence; instead of re- 
pelling with involuntary loathing.—kat 
συνεσθίει: not only admits but also eats 
with them. That was the main surprise 
and offence, and therefore just the thing 
done, because the thing which, while 
offending the Pharisees, would certainly 
gain the “sinners”. Jesus did what the 
reputedly good would not do, so winning 
their trust. 

Vv. 3-7. The first parable (cf. Μι. 
xviii. 12-14).—Ver. 3. Thy παραβ. 
ταύτην: the phrase covers the second 
parable (Lost Coin) as well as the first. 
The two are regarded as virtually one, 
the second a duplicate with slight varia- 
tions.—Ver. 4. ἐξ ὑμῶν, what man of 
you. Even the Pharisees and scribes 
would so act in temporal affairs. Every 
human being knows the joy of finding 
things lost. It is only in religion that 
men lose the scent of simple universal 
truths.—ékatév πρ.: a hundred a con- 
siderable number, making one by com- 
parison insignificant. The owner, one 
would say, can afford to lose a single 
erring sheep. Yet not so judges the 
owner himself, any owner. Losing only 
one (ἐξ αὐτῶν év) he takes immediate 
steps to recover it.—év TH ἐρήμῳ, in the 
untilled, unfenced pasture land; but of 
course not so as to run the risk of losing 
the whole flock: it is left under the care 
of an assistant, the master taking the 
more arduous task to himself.—éai after 
πορεύεται indicates not only direction 
but aim: goeth after in order to find. 


(Schanz; Kypke remarks that ἐπὶ with 
verbs of going or sending often indicates 
*‘scopum itionis’’ and is usually pre- 
fixed to the thing sought. Similarly 
Pricaeus.)—ws εὕρῃ: the search not 
perfunctory, but thorough; goes on till 
the lost one be found, if that be possible. 
—Ver. 5. ἐπιτίθησιν, etc., he places 
the found one on his shoulders; not in 
affection merely or in the exuberance of 
his joy, but from necessity. He must 
carry the sheep. It cannot walk, can 
only “‘ stand where it stands and lie where 
it lies’? (Koetsveld). This feature, pro- 
bable in natural life, is true to the 
spiritual. Such was the condition of the 
mass of Jews in Christ’s time (Mt. ix. 
36, cf. ‘‘ when we were without strength,” 
Rom. v. 6).—xatpwv: the carrying 
necessary, but not done with a grudge, 


rather gladly ; not merely for love of the 


beast, but in joy that a thing lost has 
been found, making the burden, in spite 
of the long way, light. He is a very 
poor shepherd that does not bear the 
sheep that stands still, unable to walk 
(vide Zech. xi. 16, margin).—Ver. 6. 
συγκαλεῖ: the point here is not the 
formal invitation of neighbours to sym- 
pathise, but the confident expectation that 
they will. That they do is taken for 
granted. Sympathy from neighbours 
and friends of the same occupation, 
fellow-shepherds, a matter of course in 
such a case. This trait hit the Pharisees, 
and may have been added to the original 
parable for their special benefit.—Ver. 7. 
ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, in heaven, that is, in the 
heart of God. Heaven is a synonym for 
God in vv. 18 and 21.—% = more than, 
as if πλέον had preceded, so often in 


N.T. and in Sept. = Hebrew 77}. The 
comparison in the moral sphere is bold, 


5. καὶ. 


3—I0. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


579 


µετανοίας. 8. Ἡ τίς γυνὴ “δραχμὰς ἔχουσα δέκα, ἐὰν ἀπολέσῃ d here only 
δραχμὴν µίαν, οὐχὶ ἅπτει λύχνον, καὶ σαροῖ τὴν οἰκίαν, καὶ ζητεῖ (thrice). 


»ἐπιμελῶς, ἕως ὅτου 1 εὕρῃ ; 


ϱ. καὶ εὑροῦσα συγκαλεῖται 3 τὰς « here only 


in N.T 


φίλας καὶ tas® γείτονας, λέγουσα, Συγχάρητέ pot, ὅτι εὗρον τὴν 


δραχμὴν ἣν ἀπώλεσα. 


10. οὕτω, λέγω ὑμῖν, χαρὰ γίνεται ΄ ἐνώπιον 


τῶν ἀγγέλων τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐπι ἑνὶ ἁμαρτωλῷ μετανοοῦντι.” 


1 For οτου NBLX al. have ov (W.H.). D has simply ews. 
2Soin D. συνκαλει in NBKLXA ai. (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 NBL omit this second τας. 


but the principle holds true there as in 
the natural sphere, even if the ninety- 
nine be truly righteous men needing no 
repentance. It 1s rational to have 
peculiar joy over a sinner repenting, 
therefore God has it, therefore Christ 
might haveit. This saying is the third 
great word of Christ’s apology for loving 
the sinful. For the other two vide on 
Mt. ix. 9-13 and Lk. vii. 36-50. 

Vv. 8-10. The second parable, a pen- 
dant to the first, spoken possibly to the 
Capernaum gathering to bring the ex- 
perience of joy found in things lost home 
to the poorest present. As spoken to 
Pharisees it is intended to exemplify the 
principle by a lost object as insigni- 
ficant in value as a publican or a sinner 
was in their esteem. A sheep, though 
one of a hundred, was a comparatively 
precious object. A drachma was a piece 
of money of inconsiderable value, yet of 
value to a poor woman who owned only 
ten drachmas in all; its finding therefore 
a source of keen joy to her.—Ver. 8. 
ἅπτει λ., lightsalamp. The verb used 
in this sense in N.T. only in Lk. No 
windows in the dwellings of the poor: 
a lamp must be lighted for the search, 
unless indeed there be one always burn- 
ing on the stand.—eapot: colloquial and 
vulgar for σαίρει, vide on Mt. xii. 44.— 
ζητεῖ ἐπιμελῶς: the emphasis in this 
parable lies on the seeking—dadre, 
σαροῖ, ζητεῖ; in the Lost Sheep on the 
carrying home of the found object of 
quest.—Ver.'9. συγκαλεῖ: this calling 
together of friends and neighbours (femi- 
nine in this case, τὰς @. καὶ τὰς y.) pe- 
culiarly natural in the case of a woman; 
hence perhaps the reading of T.R., ovy- 
καλεῖται, the middle being more subjec- 
tive. The finding would appeal specially 
to feminine sympathies, if the lostdrachma 
was not part of a hoard to meet some 
debt, but belonged to a string of coins 
worn as an ornament round the head, 
then as now, by married women in the 


«γινεται χαρα in SBLX 33. 


East, as Tristram suggests (Eastern Cus- 
toms in Bible Lands, p. 76). This view, 
favoured by Farrar, is ignored by most 
commentators.—Ver. 10 repeats the 
moral of ver. 7, but without comparison 
which, with a smaller number, would 
only weaken the εΠεοί.- -ἐνώπιον τῶν 
ἀγγέλων τ.θ.: the angels may be referred 
to as the neighbours of God, whose joy 
they witness and share. Wendt (L. F., 
i., 141) suggests that Luke uses the ex- 
pression to avoid anthropopathism, and 
because God has no neighbours. 

Vv. 11-32. The third parable, rather 
an example than a parable illustrating by 
an imaginary case the joy of recovering 
a lost human being. In this case care is 
taken to describe what loss means in the 
sphere of human life. The interest in 
the lost now appropriately takes the form 
of eager longing and patient waiting for 
the return of the erring one, that there 
may be room for describing the repent- 
ance referred to in vv. 7 and το, which 
is the motive for the return. Also in the 
moral sphere the subject of the finding 
cannot be purely passive: there must be 
self-recovery to give ethical value to the 
event. A sinning man cannot be brought 
back to God like a straying sheep to the 
fold. Hence the beautiful picture of the 
sin, the misery, the penitent reflections, 
and the return of the prodigal peculiar to 
this parable. It is not mere scene-paint- 
ing. It is meant to show how vastly 
higher is the significance of the terms 
“lost” and “found” in the human sphere, 
justifying increased interest in the find- 
ing, and so showing the utter unreason- 
ableness of the fault-finding directed 
against Jesus for His efforts to win to 
goodness the publicans and sinners, Je 
sus thereby said in effect: You blame in 
me a joy which is universal, that of 
finding the lost, and which ought to be 
greater in the case of human beings just 
because it is a man that is found and not 
a beast. Does not the story as I tell it 


ς δο ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN XV. 


11. Εἶπε δέ, ““AvOpwids τις εἶχε δύο υἱούς: 12. καὶ εἶπεν 6 ved-- 

τερος αὐτῶν τῷ πατρί, Πάτερ, δός µοι τὸ ἐπιβάλλον µέρος τῆς οὐσίας. 

{1 Cor. xii. kat! Σδιεῖλεν αὐτοῖς τὸν βίον. 13. καὶ μετ οὗ πολλὰς ἡμέρας 
(as συναγαγὼν ἅπαντα ὁ νεώτερος vids ἀπεδήμησεν εἰς χώραν µακράν,. 
καὶ ἐκεῖ διεσκόρπισε τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτοῦ, ζῶν ἁσώτως. 14. δαπανή- 

σαντος δὲ αὐτοῦ πάντα, ἐγένετο λιμὸς ἰσχυρὸς ” κατὰ τὴν χώραν 

ἐκείνην, καὶ αὐτὸς ἤρξατο ὑστερεῖσθαι. 15. καὶ πορευθεὶς ἐκολλήθη 

ἑνὶ τῶν πολιτῶν τῆς χώρας ἐκείνης: καὶ ἔπεμψεν αὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς 


ἀγροὺς αὐτοῦ βόσκειν χοίρους. 


g here only 


16. καὶ ἐπεθύμει γεµίσαι τὴν κοιλίαν 


ANT. αὐτοῦ ὃ ἀπὸ “ τῶν ἕ κερατίων ὧν ἤσθιον οἳ χοῖροι: καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐδίδου 


hereand ο ο 
in ver. το. αὐτῷ. 


17. Eis ἑαυτὸν δὲ ἐλθὼν εἶπειὃ Πόσοι " µίσθιοι τοῦ πατρός. 


1 For και (ND, Tisch.) BL cop. have ο 8¢€(W.H.). 


2 urxvpa in MABDL τ, 33, 131. 
3 -yepioar . . 


. avrov in ΑΡΩΧΓΔΛΠ, etc., codd. vet. Lat. vulg. syr. (Peshito) 


sin. (Tisch.). χορτασθηναι in S$BDLR minusc. ἆ ε f syr. cur. (R.V., W.H., text). 


4 εκ in texts which have χορτασθηναι. 
5 S9BL 13, 69 al. have εφη. 


rebuke your cynicism and melt your 
hearts? Yet such things are happening 
among these publicans and sinners you 
despise, every day. 

Vv. 11-13. The case put. δύο viovs: 
two sons of different dispositions here as 
in Mt. xxi. 28-31, but there is no further 
connection between the two parables. 
There is no reason for regarding Lk.’s 
parable as an allegorical expansion of 
Mt.’s Two Sons (Holtzmann in H. C.).— 
Ver. 12. 6 νεώτερος, the younger, with 
a certain fitness made to play the foolish 
part. The position of an elder son pre- 
sents more motives to steadiness.—ré 
ἐπιβάλλον µέρος, the portion falling or 
belonging to, the verb occurs in this sense 
in late authors (here only in N.T.). The 
portion of the younger when there were 
two sons, would be one third, the right of 
the first-born being two portions (Deut. 
xxi. 17).---διεῖλεν: the father complies, 
not as bound, but he must do it in the 
parable that the story may go on.—Btov 
Ξοὐσίαν, asin Mk. xii. 44, Lk. viii. 43.— 
Ver. 13. μετ οὐ πολλὰς ἡμέρας: to be 
joined to ἀπεδήμησεν: he went away as 
soon as possible, when he had had time 
to realise his property, in haste to escape 
into wild liberty or licence.—paxpdav: the 
farther away the better.—aoatws (a pr. 
and σώζω, here only in Ν.Τ.), insalvably ; 
the process of reckless waste, free rein 
given to every passion, must go on till 
nothing is left. This is what undis- 
ciplined freedom comes to. 


Vv. 14-19. The crisis: recklessness 
leads to misery and misery prompts re- 
flection.— Ver. 14. λιμὸς, a famine, an 
accident fitting into the moral history of 
the prodigal ; not a violent supposition ; 
such correspondences between the physi- 
cal and moral worlds do occur, and there 
is a Providence in them.—ioxvpa: the 
most probable reading if only because 
λιμὸς is feminine only in Doric and late 
Greek usage.—torepeto@ar: the result 
of wastefulness and prevalent dearth com- 
bined is dire want. What is to be done? 
Return home? Not yet; that the last 
shift.—Ver. 15. ἐκολλήθη, he attached 
himself: (pass. with mid. sense). The 
citizen of the far country did not want 
him, it is no time for employing super- 
fluous hands, but he suffered the wretch 
to have his way in good-natured pity.— 
βόσκειν χοίρους: the lowest occupation, 
a poor-paid pagan drudge; the position 
of the publicans glanced at.—Ver. 16. 
ἐπεθύμει, etc., he was fain to fill his belly 
with the horn-shaped pods of the carob- 
tree. The point is that he was so poorly 
fed by his new master (who felt the pinch 
of hard times, and on whom he had small 
claim) that to get a good meal of any- 
thing, even swine’s food, was a treat. 
γεµίσαι τ. κ., though realistic, is redeemed 
from vulgarity by the dire distress of the 
quondam voluptuary. Anything to fill 
the aching void within !—ovSels ἐδίδον, 
no one was giving him: this his ex- 
perience from day to day and week 


ατ---23. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

18. ἀναστὰς 
πορεύσομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα µου, καὶ ἐρῶ αὐτῷ, Πάτερ, ἥμαρτον eis 
τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ ἐνώπιόν σου: 19. καὶ ὃ οὐκέτι εἰμὶ ἄξιος κληθῆναι 
vids σου: ποίησὀν µε ὡς ἕνα τῶν µισθίων σου. 


(µου περισσεύουσιν 1 ἄρτων, ἐγὼ δὲ λυμῷ 2 ἀπόλλυμαι ; 
µ Pp Pp Y ο B 


20. καὶ ἀναστὰς 
ἦλθε πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἑαυτοῦ. “Er. δὲ αὐτοῦ μακρὰν ἀπέχοντος, 
a με Εμ” S > aon Ms , λ ‘ 225% 

εἶδεν αὐτὸν 6 πατὴρ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐσπλαγχνίσθη, καὶ δραμὼν ἐπέπεσεν 
ἐπὶ τὸν τράχηλον αὐτοῦ, καὶ κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν. 21. εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ 
καὶ § 
22. Εἶπε δὲ ὁ πατὴρ πρὸς 


τοὺς δούλους αὐτοῦ, ᾿Εξενέγκατεῖ τὴν στολὴν τὴν πρώτην, καὶ 


ς 


ερ 4 A 3 4 > ai ‘ 2-528. 4 
ὁ υἱός, Πάτερ, ἥμαρτον eis τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ ἐνώπιόν σου, 
οὐκέτι εἰμὶ ἄξιος κληθῆναι υἱός σου.5 


ἐνδύσατε αὐτόν, καὶ δότε δακτύλιον εἰς τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὑποδή- 


581 


1 So in NDL, etc. (Tisch.). 
2 After λιµω NBL have «δε. 
40 νιος before avrw in BL 1, 131 al. 


5 S8BD add ποιησον µε ws ενα των µισθιων σου (W.H. brackets). 


περισσενυονται in ABP 1, 94 (W.H.), 


3 Omit και $ABDL and many others. 
5 και omitted here also in SABDL, etc. 
Vide below. 


7 NBL prefix the expressive ταχυ (D ταχεως) and omit +qv before στολην. 


to week. Giving what? Not the pods, as 
many think, these he would take without 
leave, but anything better. His master 
gave him little—famine rations, and no 
other kind soul made up for the lack. 
Neither food nor love abounded in that 
country. So there was nothing for it 
but swine’s food or semi-starvation—or 
home !—Ver. 17. εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἐλθὼν = 
either, realising the situation; or, coming 
to his true self, his sane mind (for the use 
of this phrase vide Kypke, Observ.). Per- 
haps both ideas are intended. Heat last 
understood there was no hope for him 
there, and, reduced to despair, the 
human, the filial, the thought of home 
and father revived in the poor wretch.— 
περισσεύονται: passive, with gen. of the 
thing; here only in N.T.=are provided to 
excess, have more given them than they 
can use.—Ver. 18. ἀναστὰς: a bright 
hope gives energy to the starving man; 
home! Said, done, but the motive is not 
high. It is simply the last resource of a 
desperate man. He will go home and 
confess his fault, and so, he hopes, get at 
least a hireling’sfare. Wellto be brought 
out of that land, under home influences, 
by any motive. It is in the right direc- 
tion. Yet though bread is as yet the 
supreme consideration, foretokens of true 
ethical repentance appear in the premedi- 
tated speech :—MIdrep: some sense of the 
claims that long-disused word implies— 
ἤμαρτον, I erred; perception that the 
whole past has been a mistake and folly 
—eis τὸν οὐρανὸν, against heaven, God 


---ἐγώπιόν gov, in tiy sight, in thy judg- 
ment (Hahn)—he knows quite well 
what his father must think of his con- 
duct; what a fool he must think him 
(Ps. Ixxiii, 22)—ovnére εἰμὶ, etc. (ver. 
το), fully conscious that he has forfeited 
all filial claims. The omission of καὶ 
suits the emotional mood. 

Vv. 20-24. Return and reception.— 
ἦλθεν, etc., he came to his father; no 
details about the journey, the fact simply 
stated, the interest now centring in the 
action of the father, exemplifying the joy 
of a parent in finding a lost son, which 
is carefully and exquisitely described in 
four graphic touches—etéev: first recog- 
nition at a distance, implying, if not a 
habit of looking for the lost one (Gébel, 
Schanz, etc.), at least a vision sharpened 
by Ίονε-- ἐσπλαγχνίσθη: instant pity 
awakened by the woful plight of the 
returning one manifest in feeble step, 
ragged raiment possibly also visible— 
δραμὼν, running, in the excitement and 
impatience of love, regardless of Eastern 
dignity and the pace safe for advancing 
years—atepiknoev: kissing fervently 
and frequently the son folded in his arms 
(cf. Mt. xxvi. 49, Lk. vii. 38, 45). All 
signs these of a love ready to do anything 
to recover the lost, to search for him to 
the world’s end, if that had been fitting 
or likely to gain the end.—Ver. 21. The 
son repeats his premeditated speech, with 
or without the last clause; probably with 
it, as part of a well-conned lesson, re- 
peated half mechanically, yet not insin- 


582 


KATA AOYKAN 


XV. 


i here, three µατα εἰς τοὺς πόδας: 23. καὶ ἐνέγκαντες 1 τὸν µόσχον τὸν ' σιτευτὸν 


times. 


εὐφραίνεσθαι. 


in Ν.Τ. 
k here οπ]γ 26. 
in NE.) aS as 
εἴη ταῦτα. 


θύσατε, καὶ Φαγόντες εὐφρανθῶμεν ' 24. ὅτι οὗτος 6 vids µου νεκρὸς 
ἦν, καὶ ἀνέίησε: καὶ ἀπολωλὼς ἦν, καὶ εὑρέθη. 


Καὶ ἤρξαντο 


25. "Hv δὲ ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ ὁ πρεσβύτερος ἐν ἀγρῷ: 
. χα > / Ελ μες a j , .k An. 
jhere only καὶ ὧς ἐρχόμενος ἤγγισε τῇ οἰκίᾳ, ἤκουσε ) συμφωνίας καὶ " χορῶν 
καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος ἕνα τῶν παίδων αὐτοῦ, ἐπυνθάνετο τί" 
27. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἥκει: καὶ 


” ες Ul a , > ή ο ς , ο 
ἔθυσεν ὁ πατήρ σου τὸν µόσχον τὸν σιτευτὀν, OTL ὑγιαίνοντα αὐτὸν 


ἀπέλαβεν. 


28. Ώργίσθη δέ, καὶ οὐκ ἤθελεν εἰσελθεῖν. 


ὁ οὖν 5 


1 φερετε in $$BLRX, more suitable to emotional speech. 


2 For και απ. nv BL have ην απ. without και, which D also omits. 


8 Omit αυτου all uncials. 


47. αν in B al. (W.H.). 


5 For ο ουν NABDLRX τ, 33 al. have ο δε. 


cerely—as if to say: I don’t deserve this, 
I came expecting at most a hireling’s 
treatment in food and otherwise, I should 
be ashamed to be anything higher.—Ver. 
22. δούλους: their presence conceivable, 
the father’s running and the meeting 
noticed and reported by some one, so 
soon drawing a crowd to the spot, or to 
meet the two on the way to the house. 
To them the father gives directions which 
are his response to the son’s proposed 
selfdegradation. He shall not be their 
fellow, they shall serve him by acts sym- 
bolic of reinstatement in sonship.—ta xv, 
quick! a most probable reading (8981), 
and a most natural exclamation ; obliter- 
ate the traces of a wretched past as soon 
as possible; off with these rags! fetch 
robes worthy of my son, dressed in his 
best as on a gala ἆαγ.---ἐξενέγκατε, bring 
from the house—o7roAjv τ. πρώτην, the 
jirst robe, not in time, formerly worn 
(Theophy.), but in quality; cf. the second 
chariot, Gen. xli. 43 (currus secundus, 
Ῥεησε]).-- “δακτύλιον (here only in N.T.): 
no epithet attached, golden, e.g. (Wolff, 
golden ring for sons, ivon ring for slaves) ; 
that it would be a ring of distinction 
goes without saying.—trodipara, shoes ; 
needed—he is barefoot and footsore ; and 
worn by sons, not by slaves. Robe, ring, 
shoes: ali symbols of filial state—Ver. 
23. τὸν µόσχον τὸν σιτευτόν: always 
one fattening for high-tides; could not 
be used on a better occasion.—Ver. 24: 
reason for making this a festive day.— 
οὗτος, etc.: the father formally calls him 
his son, partly by way of recognition, and 
partly to introduce him to the attendants 
in case they might not know him.—vex- 
pds, dead, ethically 2 or as good as dead? 
the latter more probable in a speech to 


εἶανες.--ἁπολωλὼς, lost; his where- 
abouts unknown, one reason among 
others why there was no search, as in 
the case of the sheep and the coin. 

Vv. 25-32. The elder son, who plays 
the ignoble part of wet blanket on this 
glad day, and represents the Pharisees in 
their chilling attitude towards the mission 
in behalf of the publicans and sinners.— 
Ver.25. ἐν ἀγρῷ, on the farm; of course 
there every day, doing his duty, a most 
correct, exemplary man, only in his wis- 
dom and virtue so cold and merciless 
towards men of another sort. Being at 
his work he is ignorant of what has 
happened: the arrival and what followed. 
---ἐρχόμενος, coming home after the day’s 
work is over, when the merriment is in 
full swing, with song and dance Ailing 
the air.—Ver. 26. τί ἂν εἴη ταῦτα, not 
contemptuous, ‘‘ what all this was about” 
(Farrar, C. G. T.), but with the puzzled 
air of a man in the dark and surprised = 
what does this mean?—Ver. 27. In 
simple language the servant briefly ex- 
plains the situation, showing in his words 
neither sympathy nor, still less, the re- 
verse, as Hofmann thinks.—tyveivovra, 
in good health; home again and well, 
that is the whole case as he knows it; 
no thought in his mind of a tragic career 
culminating in repentance, or if he has 
any suspicion he keeps it to himself; 
thoroughly true to nature this —Ver 
28. ὠργίσθη, he was angry, a very 
slight description of his state of mind 
into which various bad feelings would 
enter: disgust, chagrin that all this merri- 
ment had been going on for hours and 
they had not thought it worth while to 
let him know—an impolitic oversight; a 
sense of wrong and general unfair treate 


23—32. 


πατὴρ αὐτοῦ ἐξελθὼν παρεκάλει αὐτόν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


583 


20. 6 δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπε 


τῷ πατρί,ῖ Ιδού, τοσαῦτα ἔτη δουλεύω σοι, καὶ οὐδέποτε ἐντολήν 
σου παρῆλθον, καὶ ἐμοὶ οὐδέποτε ἔδωκας ἔριφον,; ἵνα μετὰ τῶν φίλων - 


µου εὐφρανθῶ. 


39. ὅτε δὲ ὁ υἱός σου οὗτος 6 καταφαγών σου τὸν 


, x ~ a 
βίον peta πορνῶν ὃ ἠλθεν, ἔθυσας αὐτῷ τὸν µόσχον τὸν σιτευτόν." 


ς a a ο ~ 
31. 6 δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Τέκνον, σὺ πάντοτε pet ἐμοῦ et, καὶ πάντα τὰ 


ἐμὰ σά ἐστιν. 
σου CUTS νεκρὸς ἦν, καὶ ἀνέζησε >- 


32. εὐφρανθῆναι δὲ καὶ χαρῆναι Eder, ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός 
καὶ ἀπολωλὼς ἦν,ό καὶ εὑρέθη.” 


1 BD add αντου (W.H.), wanting in many copies (Tisch.). 


3 B has εριφιον (W.H. marg.). 


ἕτων πορ. in ADL (W.H. marg.). wopvwv in $B (Tisch., W.H., text). 
4 rov σιτ. µοσχον for τ. poo T. ott. in NBDLQR. 


δεζησεν in NBLRA. Τ.Ε. = D, etc. 


® For και απολ. ην NDX τ, 13, 69, etc., 


have simply απολωλως; with these BLR 


omit ην but retain και before απολ. (Tisch. has απολ., W.H., και απολ.). 


ment of which this particular neglect was 
but a specimen.—6 δὲ πατὴρ, etc.: the 
father goes out and presses him to come 
in, very properly; but why not send for 
him at once that he might stop working 
on the farm and join in the feasting and 
dancing on that glad day? Did they all 
fear he would spoil the sport and act 
accordingly? The elder son has got a 
chance to complain, and he makes the 
most of it in his bitter speech to his 
father.—Ver. 29. ἔριφον, a kid, not to 
speak of the fatted calf—pera τῶν φίλων 
µου: he would have been content if there 
had been any room made for the festive 
element in his life, with a modest meeting 
with his own friends, not to speak of a 
grand family demonstration like this. 
But no, there was nothing but work and 
drudgery for him.—Ver. 30. οὗτος: con- 
temptuous, this precious son of yours.— 
μετὰ πορνῶν: hard, merciless judgment ; 
the worst said and in the coarsest way. 
How did he know? He did not know; 
had no information, jumped at con- 
clusions. That the manner of his kind, 
who shirk work and go away to enjoy 
themselves.—Vv. 31, 32. The father 
answers meekly, apologetically, as if 
conscious that the elder son had some 
right to complain, and content to justify 
himself for celebrating the younger son’s 
return with a feast; not a word of re- 
taliation. This is natural in the story, 
and it also fits well into the aim of the 
parable, which is to illustrate the joy of 
finding the lost. It would serve no pur- 
pose in that connection to disparage the 
object ofthe lesser joy. There is peculiar 


joy over one sinner repenting even though 
the ninety-nine be truly righteous, and 
over a prodigal returned even though the 
elder brother be a most exemplary, blame- 
less, dutiful son. 

CuHaPpTER XVI. Two ADDITIONAL 
PARABLES ON THE RIGHT USE oF 
WEALTH. These two parables, the un- 
just steward and Dives, bear such a 
foreign aspect when compared with the 
general body of Christ’s teaching as to 
give rise to a doubt whether they have 
any claim to a place in an authentic 
record of His sayings. One at first won- 
ders at finding them in such company, 
forming with the preceding three a group 
of five. Yet Luke had evidently no sense 
of their incongruity, for he passes from 
the three to the two as if they were of 
kindred import (ἔλεγε δὲ καὶ). Doubt-_ 
less they appealed to his social bias by 
the sympathy they betray for the poor 
(cf. vi. 20, xi. 41), which has gained for 
them a place among the so-called Edion- 
itic sections of Luke’s Gospel (vide Holtz- 
mann in H.C.). ‘In favour of the authen- 
ticity of the first of the two parables is 
its apparently low ethical tone which has 
been such a stumbling-block to commen- 
tators. Who but Jesus would have had 
the courage to extract a lesson of wisdom 
from conduct like that of the unright- 
eous steward? The literary grace of the 
second claims for it the same origin and 
author. 

Vv. 1-7. The parable of the unjust 
steward.—Ver. 1. €deye δὲ καὶ: the 
same formula of transition as in xiv, 12. 
The καὶ connects with ἔλεγε, not with 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


XVI. 


XVI. 1. "EAEFE δὲ καὶ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, “'"Ανθρωπός 
τις ἦν πλούσιος, ὃς εἶχεν οἰκονόμον ‘Kat οὗτος διεβλήθη αὐτῷ ὡς 


id - 
διασκορπίζων τὰ ὑπάρχοντα αὐτοῦ. 
αὐτῷ, Τί τοῦτο ἀκούω περὶ σοῦ ; 


σου ' 


a Rom. xi. 
27 (mid.) 3) Js - 
aw ἐμοῦ ; 


οὐ γὰρ δυνήση 2 ἔτι οἰκονομεῖν. 
> , , , e ε een) a a 5 > , 

οἰκονόμος, Τι ποιήσω, OTL ὁ κύριός µου " ἀφαιρεῖται τὴν οἰκονομίαν 
σκάπτειν οὐκ ἰσχύω, ἐπαιτεῖν αἰσχύνομαι. 


2. καὶ φωνήσας αὐτὸν εἶπεν 
ἀπόδος τὸν λόγον τῆς οἰκονομίας 
3. Εἶπε δὲ ἐν ἑαυτῷ ὁ 


4. ἔγνων τί 


, o @ - 3 ~ 3 , / , > A 
ποιήσω, ἵνα, ὅταν μετασταθῶ ὃ τῆς οἰκονομίας, δέξωνταί µε εἰς τοὺς 


οἴκους αὐτῶν." 


5. Καὶ προσκαλεσάµενος ἕνα ἕκαστον τῶν χρεω- 


Φειλετῶν τοῦ κυρίου ἑαυτοῦ, ἔλεγε τῷ πρώτῳ, Πόσον ὀφείλεις τῷ 


1 Omit αντου NBDLR. 


2 So in L and many others; SQBDP have ὄννη. 
3 SBD 1, 69 al. have ex after µετασταθω. 


4 εαυτων in NBPRX. avrev in DL. 


πρὸς τ. μαθητὰς, and points not to 
change of andience (disciples now, Phari- 
sees before) but to continued parabolic 
discourse.—pebnrds, disciples, quite 
general ; might mean the Twelve, or the 
larger crowd of followers (xiv. 25), or the 
publicans and sinners who came to Him 
(xv.1,so Schleiermacher, εἴς.).---διεβλήθη, 
was accused, here only in N.T., often in 
classics and Sept.; construed with 
dative here; also with εἰς or πρὸς, with 
accusative. The verb implies always a 
hostile animus, often the accompaniment 
of false accusation, but not necessarily. 
Here the charge is assumed to be true.— 
ὡς διασκορπίζων, as squandering, that 
the charge; how, by fraud or by ex- 
travagant living, not indicated ; the one 
apt to lead to the other.—Ver. 2. τί 
τοῦτο, etc. τί may be exclamatory = 
what! do I hear this of thee? or in- 
terrogatory: what is this that I hear of 
thee? the laconic phrase containing a 
combination of an interrogative with a 
relative clause.—7rév λόγον : the reference 
may be either to a final account previous 
to dismissal, already resolved on (so 
usually taken), or to an investigation into 
the truth or falsehood of the accusation 
= produce your books that I may judge 
for myself (so Hahn). The latter would 
be the reasonable course, but not 
necessarily the one taken by an eastern 
magnate, who might rush from absolute 
confidence to utter distrust without 
taking the trouble to inquire further. 
As the story runs, this seems to be what 
happened.—Ver. 3. etme ἐν &: a 
Hebraism, as in Mt. iii. 9, ix. 3. The 
steward deliberates on the situation. He 


sees that his master has decided against 
him, and considers what he is to do 
next, running rapidly over all possible 
schemes.—oxamretvy, ἐπαιτεῖν: these 
two represent the alternatives for ths 
dismissed: manual labour and begging ; 
digging naturally chosen to represent the 
former as typical of agricultural labour, 
with which the steward’s position brought 
him much into contact (Lightfoot), But 
why these two only mentioned? Why 
not try to get another situation of the 
same kind? Because he feels that dis- 


_missal in the circumstances means degra- 


dation. Who now would trust him? 
ἐπαιτεῖν = προσαιτεῖν (Mk. x. 46, John 
ix. 8).—Ver. 4. ἔγνων: too weak to dig, 
too proud to beg, he hits upon a feasible 
scheme at last: I have it, I know now 
what to do.—éyvwv is the dramatic or 
tragic aorist used in classics, chiefly in 
poetry and in dialogue. It gives greater 
vividness than the use of the present 
would.—8¢fwvrat: his plan contemplates 
as its result reception of the degraded 
steward into their houses by people not 
named ; probably the very people who 
accused him. Weare not to suppose 
that permanent residence in other 
people’s houses is in view. _ Something 
better may. offer. The scheme pro- 
vides for the near future, helps to turn 
the next corner.—Ver. 5. ἕνα ἕκαστον: 
he sees them one by one, not all 
together. These debtors might be 
farmers, who paid their rents in kind, or 
persons who had got supplies of goods 
from the master’s stores; which of the 
two of no consequence to the point of 
the parable.—76 πρώτῳ, the first, in the 


ᾱ---δ. 


κυρίῳ µου; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


6. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, Ἑκατὸν βάτους ἐλαίου. 


585 


Kat! εἶπεν 


αὐτῷ, Δέξαι σου τὸ ypdupa,? καὶ καθίσας ταχέως γράψον πεντήκοντα. 


7. Ἔπειτα ἑτέρω etme, Σὺ δὲ πόσον ὀφείλεις ; 


κόρους σίτου. 
ε] / 
ὀγδοήκοντα. 


Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, Εκατὸν 


Καὶ ὃ λέγει αὐτῷ, Δέξαι σου τὸ γράμμα," καὶ γράψον 
8. Καὶ ἐπῄνεσεν ὁ κύριος τὸν οἰκονόμον τῆς ἀδικίας, 


here only 


9 b , 3 , 9 ς ey A 2A , , b he 
OTL φρονίµως εποιησεν * OTt οι ULOL TOU ALWYOS τουτου Φρονιμώτεροι in Ν.Τ. 


1 For και NABLR al. have ο δε. 


2 τα γραμματα in $BDLR 1 (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 Omit και BLR 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 Again τα γραμματα in SBDLR. 
e 


parable = to one. Two cases mentioned, 
a first and a second (étépw), two, out of 
many; enough to exemplify the method. 
It is assumed that all would take ad- 
vantage of the unprincipled concession ; 
those who had accused him and those 
who had possibly been already favoured 
in a similar manner, bribed to speak well 
of him.—Ver. 6. τὰ γράμματα: literally, 
the letters, then a written document; 
here a bill showing the amount of in- 
debtedness. The steward would have 
all the bills ready.—ypawov, write, 7.¢., 
write out a new bill with fifty in place of 
a hundred ; not merely change a hundred 
into fifty in the old bill.—rayéws, no 
‘time left for reflection—“‘is this right 2” 
Some think that the knavery had come 
in before, and that fifty was the true 
amount. That might be, but the steward 
would keep the fact to himself. The 
debtors were to take it that this was a 
bond fide reduction of their just debt.— 
Ver. 7. ὀγδοήκοντα, eighty, a small re- 
duction as compared with the first. Was 
there not a risk of offence when the 
debtors began to compare notes? Not 
much; they would not look on it as 
mere arbitrariness or partiality, but as 
policy: variety would look more like a 
true account than uniformity. He had 
not merely to benefit them, but to put 
himself in as good a light as possible 
before his master. 

Vv. 8-13. Application of the parable. 
There is room for doubt whether ver. 8 
should form part of the parable (or at 
least as far as bpovipws ἐποίησεν), or the 
beginning of the application. In the 
one Case 6 κύριος refers to the master of 
the steward, in the other to Jesus, who 
is often in narrative called Lord in Lk.’s 
Gospel. On the whole I now incline to 
the latter view (compare my Parabolic 
Teaching of Christ). It sins rather 
against natural probability to suppose 


the steward’s master acquainted with his 
new misconduct. The steward in his 
final statement, of course, put as fair a 
face as possible on matters, presenting 
what looked like a true account, so as to 
make it appear he was being unjustly 
dismissed, or even to induce the master 
to cancel his purpose to dismiss. And 
those who had got the benefit of his sharp 
practice were not likely to tell upon him. 
The master therefore may be supposed 
to be in the dark; it is the speaker of 
the parable who is in the secret. He 
praises the steward of iniquity, not for 
his iniquity (so Schleiermacher), but for 
his prudence in spite of iniquity. His 
unrighteousness is not glozed over, on 
the contrary it is strongly asserted: 
hence the phrase τὸν ο. τῆς ἀδικίας, 
which is stronger than τ. ο. τὸν ἄδικον. 
Yet however bad he still acted wisely for 
himself in providing friends against the 
evil day. What follows—étu ot vioi, 
etc.—applies the moral to the disciples = 
go ye and do likewise, with an implied 
hint that in this respect they are apt to 
come short. The counsel would be 
immoral if in the spiritual sphere it were 
impossible to imitate the steward’s 
prudence while keeping clear of his 
iniquity. In other words, it must be 
possible to make friends against the evil 
day by unobjectionable actions. The 
mere fact that the lesson of prudence is 
drawn from the life of an unprincipled 
man is no difficulty to any one who 
understands the nature of parabolic in- 
struction. The comparison between men 
of the world and the “sons of light” 
explains and apologises for the pro- 
cedure. If you want to know what 
prudent attention to self-interest means 
it is to men of the world you must look. 
Of course they show their wisdom suo 
more, in relation to men of their own 
kind, and in reierence ‘3 worldly matters 


@ ευ) 


ἵνα, ὅταν ἐκλίπητε,” δέξωνται buds εἰς τὰς αἰωνίους σκηνάς. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


a a en Lol a > A a a ε ~ 3 
σπερ τους ULOUS του φωτὸς εις την γενεαν την εαυτων εἰισι. 


XVI. 


9. Κάγὼ 


ὑμῖν λέγω, Ποιήσατε ἑαυτοῖς } φίλους ἐκ τοῦ μαμωνᾶ τῆς ἀδικίας, 


το. Ὁ 


~ , 
πιστὸς ἐν ἐλαχίστωῳ καὶ ἐν πολλῷ πιστός ἐστι, καὶ 6 ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ 


ἄδικος καὶ ἐν πολλῷ ἄδικός ἐστιν. 


, - 
πιστοὶ οὐκ ἐγένεσθε, τὸ ἀληθινὸν τίς ὑμῖν πιστεύσει ; 


κ A , m 

11. εἰ οὖν ἐν τῷ ἀδίκω papwrd 
Ν > > 

12. καὶ εἰ ἐν 


τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ πιστοὶ οὐκ ἐγένεσθε, τὸ ὑμέτερον ὃ τίς ὑμῖν δώσει 4; 
13. Οὖδεὶς οἰκέτης δύναται δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεύειν: ἢ γὰρ τὸν ἕνα. 
ισήσει, καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ἀγαπήσει: ἢ ἑνὸς ἀνθέξεται, καὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου 
μισή pov dy , 


ιά 
καταφρονήσει. 


1 εαντοις before ποιησατε in ΔΕΙΣ. 


οὐ δύνασθε Oc δουλεύειν καὶ μαμωνᾷ.” 


38Ο in NcaFPULA, etc., latt. (vet. vulg.) several Fathers; R*AB*DLRX syr. 
cur. sin. have εκλιπη (Tisch., W.H., and modern editors generally). 


3 So in NADA al. verss. Fathers. 
4 δωσει υμιν in DLR 33 a be, etc, 


(this the sense of εἰς τ. γενεὰν, etc.). 
Show ye your wisdom in your way and 
in reference to your peculiar generation 
(εἰς τ. γενεὰν, etc., applicable to both 
parties) with equal zeal. 

Ver.9. ἐγὼ: the use of the emphatic 
pronoun seems to involve that here 
begins the comment of Jesus on the 
‘parable, ver. 8 being spoken by the 
master and a part of the parable. But 
J. Weiss (in Meyer) views this verse as a 
second application put into the mouth of 
Jesus, but not spoken by Him, having 
for its author the compiler from whom 
Lk. borrowed (Feine’s Vork. Lukas). He 
finds in vy. 8-13 three distinct applica- 
tions, one by Jesus, ver. 8; one by the 
compiler of precanonical Lk., ver. 9 ; and 
one by Lk. himself, vv. 10-13. This 
analysis is plausible, and tempting as 
superseding the difficult problem of find- 
ing a connection between these sentences, 
viewed as the utterance of one Speaker, 
the Author of the parable. Ver. ϱ ex- 
plicitly states what ver. 8 implies, that 
the prudence is to be shown in the way 
of making friends.—iXovs: the friends 
are not named, but the next parable 
throws light on that point. They are 
the poor, the Lazaruses whom Dives did 
not make friends of—to his loss. The 
counsel is to use wealth in doing kind- 
ness to the poor, and the implied doctrine 
that doing so will be to our eternal 
benefit. Both counsel and doctrine are 
held to apply even when wealth has been 
ill- gotten. Friends of value for the 
eternal world can be gained even by the 
mammon of unrighteousness. The more 


BL have ηµετερον (W.H. text). 
B as in Τ.Ε. 


ill-gotten the more need to be redeemed 
by beneficent use; only care must be 
taken not to continue to get money by 
unrighteousness in order to have where- 
with to do charitable deeds, a not un- 
common form of counterfeit philanthropy, 
which will not count in the Kingdom of 
Heaven. The name for wealth here is 
very repulsive, seeming almost to imply 
that wealth per se is evil, though that 
Jesus did not teach.—é«Atwg, when it 
(wealth) fails, as it must at death, The 
other reading, ἐκλίπητε (T.R.), means 
‘“‘when ye die,’’ so used in Gen. xxv. 
8.—aiwvious σκηνάς, eternal tents, a 
poetic paradox = Paradise, the poor ye 
treated kindly there to welcome you! 
Believing it to be impossible that Jesus 
could give advice practically suggesting 
the doing of evil that good might come, 
Bornemann conjectures that an ov has 
fallen out before ποιήσετε (fut.), giving 
as the real counsel: do ot make, etc. 
Vv. 10-13. These verses contain not 
so much an application as a corrective 
of the parable, They may have been 
added by Lk. (so J. Weiss in Meyer, 
and Holtzmann, H. C.) to prevent mis- 
understanding, offence, or abuse, so 
serving the same purpose as the addition 
‘‘unto repentance ”’ to the saying, ‘I 
came not to call,’”’ etc. (v. 32); another 
instance of editorial solicitude on the 
part of an evangelist ever careful to 
guard the character and teaching of 
Jesus against misunderstanding. So 
viewed, their drift is: ‘‘ the steward was 
dishonest in money matters; do not 
infer that it does not matter whether you» 


g-18 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


587 


14. Ἴκουον δὲ ταῦτα πάντα καὶ] οἱ Φαρισαῖοι φιλάργυροι ὑπάρ- 


οντες, καὶ ἐξεμυκτήριζον αὐτόν. 
x μυκτήρ 


15. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Ὑμεῖις 


ἐστε οἱ δικαιοῦντες ἑαυτοὺς ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὃ δὲ Θεὺς 
γινώσκει τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν: ὅτι τὸ ἐν ἀνθρώποις ὑψηλὸν βδέλυγµα 
ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστιν2: 16. ‘O νόμος καὶ ot προφῆται ἕως 5 


Ἰωάννου: ἀπὸ τότε ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ εὐαγγελίζεται, καὶ πᾶς 


eis αὐτὴν βιάζεται. 


Av παρελθεῖν, ἢ τοῦ νόµου µίαν κεραίαν πεσεῖν. 
γη > η 


17. Εὐκοπώτερον δέ ἐστι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν 


18 Mas 6 


, ‘ ον > a Ν ~ e- £ , ‘ a 4 
ἀπολύων τὴν γυναικα αὐτοῦ καὶ Ὑαμῶν ἑτέραν PoLXEVEL* και πας 


1 Omit και ΝΔΒΡΙ.Ε 157. 


2 Omit εστιν ΦΑΡΒΡΙ, al. 


3 For ews (in D al.) SBLRX 1, 13, 69 al. have μεχρι (Tisch., W.H.), 


4 Omit was here BDL 67, 69 al, verss. 


be honest or not in that sphere. It is 
very necessary to be faithful even there. 
For faithful in little faithful in much, un- 
faithful in little unfaithful in mucn. He 
who is untrustworthy in connection with 
worldly goods is unworthy of being en- 
trusted with the true riches; the unjust 
administrator of another’s property will 
not deserve confidence as an adminis- 
trator even of his own. In the parable 
the steward tried to serve two masters, 
his lord and his lord’s creditors, and by 
so doing promoted his own interest. 
But the thing cannot be done, as even 
his case shows.” This corrective, if not 
spoken by Jesus, is not contrary to His 
teaching. (Ver. 10 echoes Mt. xxv. 21, 
Lk, xix. 17; ver. 13 reproduces verbally 
the Jogior in Mt. vi. 24.) Yet as it 
stands here it waters down the parable, 
and weakens the point of its teaching. 
Note the epithets applied to money: the 
little or least, the umjust, and, by impli- 
cation, the fleeting, that which belongs to 
another (τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ). Spiritual riches 
are the ‘‘ much,” the “‘ true ” 76 ἀληθινὸν, 
in the Johannine sense = the ideal as 
opposed to the vulgar shadowy reality, 
“ our own” (ἡμέτερον). 

Vv. 14-18 form a ‘‘ somewhat: heavily 
built bridge”? (H. C.) between the two 
parables, which set forth the right and 
the wrong ‘use of riches.—Ver. 14. 
Φιλάργυροι;: an interesting and very 
credible bit of information concerning 
the Pharisees (2 Tim. iii. 2).---ἐξεμυκτ- 
ήριζον (ἐκ and µύκτηρ, the nose), turned 
up the nose at, in contempt, again in 
xxiii, 35.—Ver. 15. ἐνώπιον T ἄ.: cf. 
the statements in Sermon on Mount (Mt. 
vi.) and in Mt. xxiii. 5.--ὅτι, εἴο.: a 
strong statement, but broadly true; con- 
ventional moral judgments are very often 


the reverse of the real truth: the con- 
ventionally high, estimable, really the 
low; the conventionally base the truly 
noble.—Ver. 16 = Mt. xi. 12 and 13, in- 
verted, introduced here in view of ver. 
31.—Ver. 17 = Mt. ν. 18, substantially. 
Ver. 18 = Mt. v. 32. Its bearing here 
is very obscure, and its introduction in a 
connection to which it does not seem to 
belong is chiefly interesting as vouching 
for the genuineness of the logion. J. 
Weiss suggests that its relevancy and 
point would have been more apparent 
had it come in after ver. 13. On the 
critical question raised by this verse, vide 
J. Weiss in Meyer. 

Vv. 19-31. Parable of the rich man 
and Lazarus. This story is hardly a 
parable in the sense of illustrating by an 
incident from natural life a truth in the 
spiritual sphere. Both story and moral 
belong to the same sphere. What is the 
moral? If Jesus spoke, or the evangelist 
reported, this story as the complement of 
the parable of the unfaithful steward, then 
for Speaker or reporter the moral is: see 
what comes of neglecting to make friends 
of the poor by a beneficent use of wealth. 
Looking to the end of this second 
‘“‘ parable,” νετ. 31, and connecting that 
with ver. 17, we get as the lesson: the 
law and the prophets a sufficient guide 
to a godly life. Taking the first part of 
the story as the main thing (vv. 19-26), 
and connecting it with the reflection in 
ver. 15 about that which is lofty among 
men, the resulting aim will be to exemplify 
by an impressive imaginary example the 
reversal of positions in this and the next 
world: the happy here the damned 
there, and vice versd. In that case the 
parable simply pictorially sets forth the 
fact of reversal, not its ground. if with 


$88 


ὁ ἀπολελυμένην ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς γαμῶν porxeder. 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 


XV1. 


19. Ἄνθρωπος δέ τις 


chereand ἦν πλούσιος, καὶ ἐνεδιδύσκετο πορφύραν καὶ "βύσσον, εὐφραινόμενος 


in Rev. 


xviii. 12 καθ ἡμέραν λαμπρῶς. 


20. πτωχὸς δέ τις ἦν} ὀνόματι Λάζαρος, 


(T.R.). a 3 a“ A a“ 
dhere only ὃς 2 ἐβέβλητο πρὸς τὸν πυλῶνα αὐτοῦ * ἡλκωμένος ὃ 21. καὶ ἐπιθυμῶν 


in N.T. 


χορτασθῆναι ἀπὸ τῶν uxiwv* τῶν πιπτόντων ἀπὸ τῆς τραπέζης τοῦ 


mAouctou ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ κύνες ἐρχόμενοι ἀπέλειχον ὅ τὰ ἕλκη αὐτοῦ. 


22. ἐγένετο δὲ ἀποθανεῖν τὸν πτωχόν, καὶ ἀπενεχθῆναι αὐτὸν ὑπὸ 
τῶν ἀγγέλων εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦδ ᾽Αβραάμ' ἀπέθανε δὲ καὶ 6 


1 τις without ην in $BDLX 33, 157, etc. 


2 Omit os NBDLX 33, 157. 


4 Omit των Ψιχιων ΔΕΙ, verss. (Tisch., 


ὁ επελειχον in NABLX 33. 


some (Weizsacker, Holtzmann, Feine, 
1. Weiss) we cut the story into two, an 
original part spoken by Jesus and an 
addition by a later hand, it will have two 
morals, the one just indicated, and 
another connecting eternal perdition with 
the neglect of the law and prophets by a 
worldly unbelieving Judaism, and eternal 
salvation with the pious observance of 
the law by the poor members of the 
Jewish-Christian Church. On this view 
vide J. Weiss in Meyer. 

Ver. 19. ἄνθρωπος δὲ, etc.: either 
there was a Certain rich man, or acertain 
man was rich, or there was a certain 
man—vich, this the first fact about him. 
—xal introduces the second, instead of 
ὃς, after the Hebrew manner.—wopovpav 
καὶ βύσσον: his clothing of the costliest : 
“‘ purple without, Egyptian byssus under- 
neath” (Farrar in C. G. Τ.).--λαμπρῶς 
(from Adparw), splendidly, characterising 
his style of living ; life a daily feast ; 
here only in N.T.—Ver. 20. Λάζαρος 
gives the impression of a story from real 
life, but the name for the poor man is in- 
troduced for convenience in telling the 
tale. He has to be referred to in the 
sequel (ver. 24). Χο symbolic meaning 
should be attached to the name.—zpés 
τὸν πυλῶνα αὐτοῦ: Lazarus is brought 
into relation with the rich man. This 
favours the view that the moral is the 
folly of neglecting beneficence. If the 
story were meant to illustrate merely the 
reversals of lot, why not describe 
Lazarus’ situation in this world without 
reference to the rich man? 15 he placed 
at his ‘door s:mply that he may know 
him in the next world ?—eiAkwpeévos : 
covered with ulcers, therefore needing to 
be carried to the rich man’s gate; 
supposed to be a leper, hence the words 


Σειλκ. in S$ABDL and many more, 


W.H.). 


6 Omit του all uncials. 


lazaretto, lazar, etc.—Ver.21. ἐπιθυμῶν, 
desiring, perhaps not intended to suggest 
that his desire was not gratified. Suppose 
morsels did come to him from the rich 
man’s table, not meant for him specially, 
but for the hungry without, including 
the wild street dogs, would that exhaust 
the duty of Dives to his poor brother ? 
But the trait is introduced to depict the 
poor man’s extreme misery rather than 
the rich man’s sin,—@AAG καὶ: no 
ellipse implied such as that supplied by 
the Vulgate: et nemo illi dabat. Borne- 
mann supplies: ‘‘ not only was he filled 
with the crumbs,” etc., but also, etc. (οὐ 
µόνον ἐχορτάσθη ἀπὸ τῶν ψιχίων-- 
πλουσίον, ἀλλὰ, εἴο.).--ἀλλὰ simply in- 
troduces a new feature, and heightens 
the picture of misery (so Schanz) = he 
was dependent on casual scraps for his 
food, and moreover, etc.—ézéAetxov, 
licked (here only in N.T.) ; was this an 
ageravation ora mitigation? Opinionis 
much divided. Or is the point that dogs 
were his companions, now licking his 
sores (whether a benefit or otherwise), 
now scrambling with him for the morsels 
thrown out? The scramble was as 
much a fact as the licking. Furrer speaks 
of witnessing dogs and lepers waiting 
together for the refuse (Wanderungen, 
p. 40).—Ver. 22. The end comes to the 
two ππεη.---ἀπενεχθῆναι: the poor man 
dies, and is carried by angels into the 
bosom of Abraham ; the man, body and 
soul (so Meyer), but of course this is 
poetry. What really happened to the 
carcase is passed over in delicate re- 
serve.—éragyn : of course Dives was 
buried with all due pomp, his funeral 
worth mentioning. (‘‘It is not said that 
the poor man was buried because of the 
meanness of poor men’s burial, but it is 


19—26. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

πλούσιος, καὶ ἐτάφη. 23. καὶ ἐν τῷ ady ἐπάρας τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς 
αὐτοῦ, ὑπάρχων ἐν βασάνοις, ὁρᾷ τὸν] ᾽Αβραὰμ ἀπὸ µακρόθεν, καὶ 
Λάζαρον ἐν τοῖς κόλποις αὐτοῦ: 24. καὶ αὐτὸς φωνήσας εἶπε, Πάτερ 
᾽Αβραάμ, ἐλέησόν µε, καὶ πέµψον Λάζαρον, ἵνα βάψῃ τὸ ἄκρον τοῦ 
δακτύλου αὐτοῦ ὕδατος, καὶ καταψύξῃ τὴν γλῶσσάν µου: ὅτι ὀδυνῶ- 
μαι ἐν τῇ Φλογὶ ταύτῃ. 25. Εἶπε δὲ ᾽Αβραάμ., Τέκνον, µνήσθητι 
ὅτι ἀπέλαβες od? τὰ ἀγαθά σου ἐν τῇ ζωῇ σου, καὶ Λάζαρος ὁμοίως 
τὰ κακά νῦν δὲ d8e° παρακαλεῖται, σὺ δὲ ὀδυνᾶσαι. 26. καὶ ἐπὶ “ 
πᾶσι τούτοις, μεταξὺ ἡμῶν καὶ ὑμῶν χάσμα µέγα ἐστήρικται, ὅπως 
οἱ θέλοντες διαβῆναι ἐντεῦθεν ὅ πρὸς ὑμᾶς, μὴ δύνωνται, μηδὲ οἱ © 


589. 


1 Omit τον RBDLX. 
2 Omit ov NBDL, etc., verss. 
Φοδε only in minusc. 


ωδε is the approved reading. 


4 ev πασι τ. in NBL bc ἆ fand vulg. cop. (Tisch., R.V., W.H.). 


5 ενθεν in NABLX al. D omits. 
6 Omit οι before εκειθεν NBD (W.H.). 


said expressly of the rich man, διὰ τὸ 
πολυτελὲς τῆς τῶν πλουσίων ταφῆς. 
Euthy. Zig.) 

Vv. 23-26. In the other world.—év 
τῷ ἅδῃ: from the Ο.Τ. point of view 
Hades means simply the state of the 
dead. Thus both the dead men would 
be in Hades. But here Hades seems = 
hell, the place of torment, and of course 
Lazarus is not there, but in Paradise.— 
ἀπὸ µακρόθεν: Paradise dimly visible, 
vet within speaking distance; this is 
not dogmatic teaching but popular de- 
scription ; so throughout.—év τοῖς κόλ- 
wots: plural here (cf. ver. 22); so often 
in classics.—Ver. 24. Πάτερ °A.: the 
tich man, like Lazarus, is a Jew, and 
probably, as a son of Abraham, very 
much surprised that he should find him- 
self in such a place (Mt. iii. 8, 9), and 
still hoping that the patriarch can do 
something for him.—katavéq (κατα- 
ψΨύχω, here only in N.T.): surely that 
small service will not be refused! Ifthe 
flames cannot be put out, may the pain 
they cause not be mitigated by a cooling 
drop of water on the tip of the tongue ? 
—a pathetic request.—Ver. 25. Tékvov: 
answering to Πάτερ, introducing in a 
kindly paternal tone a speech holding 
out no hope, all the less that it is so 
softly and quietly spoken.—ra ἆγαθά 
σου, τὰ κακά: you got your good things 
—what you desired, and thought you 
had a right to—Lazarus got the ills, not 
what he desired or deserved, but the ills 
to be met with on earth, of which he had 


a very full share (no αὐτοῦ after kaxa).— 
νῦν δὲ, but now, the now of time and of- 
logic: the reversal of lot in the state 
after death a hard fact, and equitable. 
The ultimate ground of the reversal, 
character, is not referred to; it is a mere 
question of fairness or poetic justice.— 
Ver. 26. The additional reason in this 
verse is supplementary to the first, as if 
to buttress its weakness. or the tor- 
mented man might reply: surely it is 
pressing the principle of equity too far to 
refuse me the petty comfort I ask. Will 
cooling my tongue increase beyond what 
is equitable the sum of my good things? 
Abraham’s reply to this anticipated ob- 
jection is in effect: we might not grudge 
you this small solace if it were in our 
power to bring it to you, but unfortu- 
nately that is impossible.—év (ἐπὶ, Τ.Ε.) 
πᾶσι τούτοις, in all those regions: the 
cleft runs from end to end, too wide to be 
crossed; you cannot outflank it and go 
round from Paradise to the place of tor- 
ment. With ἐπὶ the phrase means, “in 


‘addition to what I have said”.—ydopa 


péya, a cleft or ravine (here only in N.T.), 
vast in depth, breadth, and length; an 
effectual barrier to intercommunication. 
The Rabbis conceived of the two divisions 
of Hades as separated only by a wall, 
a palm breadth or a finger breadth 


(vide Weber, Lehre des Talmud, p. 


326 {.).- ὅπως implies that the cleft 
is there for the purpose of preventing 
transit e#ler way; location fixed and” 
final 


5390 


ἐκεῖθεν πρὸς ἡμᾶς διαπερῶσιν. 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 


XVI. 27—31. 


27. Εἶπε δέ, Ἐρωτῶ οὖν σειὶ πάτερ, 


ἵνα πέµψῃς αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν οἶκον τοῦ πατρός µου, 25. ἔχω γὰρ πέντε 
ἀδελφούς: ὅπως διαμαρτύρηται αὐτοῖς, ἵνα μὴ καὶ αὐτοὶ έλθωσιν 
εἰς τὸν τόπον τοῦτον τῆς βασάνου: 29. λέγει αὐτῷ” ᾽᾿Αβραάμ, 


Ἔχουσι Μωσέα καὶ τοὺς προφήτας: ἀκουσάτωσαν αὐτῶν. 


3ο. Ὁ δὲ 


εἶπεν, Οὐχί, πάτερ ᾽Αβραάμ: ἀλλ ἐάν τις ἀπὸ νεκρῶν πορευθῇ πρὸς 


αὐτούς, µετανοήσουσιν. 


~ Δ - 
31. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῶ, Ei Μωσέως καὶ τῶν 


προφητῶν οὐκ ἀκούουσιν, οὖδέ, ἐάν τις ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ, πεισθή- 


2» 
σονται. 


1 For ουν σε (Ι.Χ, etc., Tisch.) ABD 69 al. have σε ουν (W.H.). 


2 Many authorities (NJBDL, etc.) add δε after Aeyer, and $3BL omit αυτω. 


has ειπεν. 


Vv. 27-31. Dives intercedes for his 
brethren.—Ver. 27. ovvw=if no hope for 
me, there may be for those still dear to 
me. Possibility of transit from Paradise 
to earth is assumed. That this is desired 
reveals humane feeling. No attempt to 
show that Dives is utterly bad. Is such 
a man a proper subject for final damna- 
tion ?—Ver. 28. ἀδελφούς, brothers, in 
the literal sense. Why force on it an 
allegorical sense by finding in it a refer- 
ence to the Pharisees or to the Jewish 
people, brethren in the sense of fellow- 
countrymen? Five isarandom number, 
true to natural probability ; a large enough 
family to make interest in their eternal 
well-being on the part of a deceased 
member very intelligible.—S:apaprvpy- 
ται, urgently testify to, telling them how 
it looks beyond, how it fares with their 
brother, with the solemn impressiveness 
of one who has seen.—Ver. 29. Μωσέα, 
etc.: cf. xviii. 20, where Jesus refers the 
ruler to the commandments. Moses, or 
the law, and the prophets = the O.T., 
the appointed, reguiar means of grace.— 
Ver. 30. οὐχί, a decided negative = nay! 
that is not enough; so he knew from his 
own experience; the Scriptures very good 
doubtless, but men are accustomed to 
them.—tts ἀπὸ νεκρῶν: something un- 
usual, the preaching of a dead man 
returned to life, that might do.—Ver. 31. 
εἶπε δὲ: Abraham does not plead im- 
possibility as in reference to the first 
request ; he simply declares his unbelief 
in the utility of the plan for converting 
the five. The denizens of Paradise set 
little value on the unusual as a means 
of grace. Abraham does not say that a 
short-lived sensation could not be pro- 
duced ; he does say that they would not 
be persuaded (πεισθήσονται), z.¢., to re- 


D 


pent (Hahn). By taking πεισθήσονται 
as meaning something less than µετα- 
νοήσουσιν, and emphasising the differ- 
ence between ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ and ἀπὸ 
νεκρῶν πορευθῇ (ver. 30), Trench (Notes 
on the Parables) makes this point: “A 
far mightier miracle than you demand 
would be ineffectual for producing a far 
slighter effect”. It is doubtful if the 
contrast be legitimate in either case; 
certainly not as between “‘repent” and 
«λε persuaded’. In the other case 
there may be the difference between an 
apparition and a resurrected man. It 
may be noted that the resurrection of 
Christ and of Christians is spoken of as 
ἐκ νεκρῶν (vide Lk. xx. 35), while the 
general resurrection is ἡ ἀνάσ. τῶν νεκ- 
pov (e.g., 1 Cor. xv. 42). 

CHAPTER XVII. A COLLECTION ΟΕ 
SAYINGS, INCLUDING THE PARABLE ΟΕ 
Extra SERVICE. This chapter gives the 
impression of being a group of fragments 
with little connection in place, time, or 
topic, and nothing is gained for exegesis 
by ingenious attempts at logical or topi- 
cal concatenation. If we view the group 
of parables in chaps. xv., xvi. as a mass 
which has grown around the parable 
of the Lost Sheep as its nucleus, and 
reflect that that parable with the say- 
ings in xvii. 1-4 is found in Mt. xviil., 
we may with some measure of confidence 
draw the inference that the discourse 
on humility at Capernaum was the 
original locus of at least these elements 
of Luke’s narrative. That they are 
mixed up with so much matter foreign 
to Mt.’s record speaks to extensive 
transformation of the tradition of our 
Lord’s words by the time it reached 
Lk.’s hands (vide Weizsacker, Untier- 
suchungen, p. 177)+ 


ΧΝΠΙ. τ 5. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


591 


XVII. 1. ΕΙΠΕ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς pabnrds,! ''᾿Ανένδεκτόν ἐστι τοῦ μὴ 


ἐλθεῖν τὰ σκάνδαλα 2: οὐαὶ δὲ ὃ δι οὗ έρχεται. 


2. λυσιτελεῖ αὐτῷ, 


εἰ AN > κ. 4 , κ 5 / λ > a So» 
PUAOS ονικος ΄περικειται περι τον τραχηλον αυτου, και ερριπταιν 


3 an o ει ~ ~ . 
εἰς τὴν θάλασσαν, ἢ ἵνα σκανδαλίση ἕνα τῶν μικρῶν τούτων.” 


3. προσέχετε ἑαυτοῖς. 


3 , Fea. ‘ Ελ. , 3/ 3 αι 
επιτίµησον αὐτῷ καὶ ἐὰν µετανοήσῃ, ἄφες αὐτῷ. 


ἐὰν δὲ ἁμάρτη εἰς σὲ ὃ ὁ ἀδελφός σου, 


a 
4. καὶ ἐὰν 


ς , ~ ς / c , τό 3 , ‘ ς ῃ fol ς , 8 

ἑπτάκις τῆς ἡμέρας ἁμάρτῃ ΄ εἰς σέ, καὶ ἑπτάκις τῆς ἡμέρας 
/ ‘ ra ~ 

ἐπιστρέψῃ ἐπὶ σέ." λέγων, Μετανοῶ, ἀφήσεις αὐτῷ.” 


A a ς , ~ ων 
5. Καὶ εἶπον ot ἀπόστολοι τῷ Κυρίῳ, “΄ Πρόσθες ἡμῖν πίστιν.” 


1 SgABDL al. verss. add αυτου. 


* For µη ελ. τα ox. (conformed to Mt.) BLX ε have ra ox. µη ελθ. του is 


omitted in minusc. 
F arAnv ovat in BDL al. (W.H.). 


+ For pu. ονικος, the true reading in Mt. and Mk., read λιθος µυλικος with 


ΝΕΤ, ail. verss. (Tisch., W.H.). 


> Tov µικρ. τουτων eva in EBL (Tisch. 


Vide below. 
, W.H.). 


ὅεαν αµαρτη without δε and εις σε in ΜΒΙ, (Tisch., W.H.). DX 33 omit δε, 


and A 1, 42, 131, etc., omit εις σε. 


7 αµμαρτηση in ABDLXA al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


* Omit της ηµερας NEBDLX verss. 
° pos σε in SABDLX al. 


Vv. 1-4. Concerning offences and for- 
giving of offences (cf. Mt. xviii. 6, 7 ; 21, 
22).---ἀνένδεκτον: here only in N.T. and 
hardly found in classics; with ἐστι = οὐκ 
ἐνδέχεται (xiii. 33), it is not possible.— 
τοῦ μὴ ἐλθεῖν: the infinitive with the 
genitive article may depend on ἀνένδεκ- 
τον viewed as a substantive = an im- 
possibility of offences not coming exists 
(Meyer, J. Weiss), or it may be the sub- 
ject to ἐστι, avev. being the predicate = 
that offences should not come is impos- 
sible (Schanz; Burton, M.and T., inclines 
to the same view, vide § 405).—Ver. 2. 
λνσιτελεῖ (λύω, τέλος), it profits or pays; 
here only in N.T. = συμφέρει in Mt. 
xviii. 6.---λίθος µνλικός, a millstone, not 
a great millstone, one driven by an ass 
(μύλος ὀνικὸς, T.R.), as in Mt.: the 
vehement emphasis of Christ’s words is 
toned down in Lk. here as often else- 
where. The realistic expression of Mt. 
is doubtless truer to the actual utterance 
of Jesus, who would speak of the offences 
created by ambition with passionate ab- 
horrence.—epixerrat = perf. pass. of 
περιτίθηµι in sense = has been placed ; 
with ἔρριπται, another perfect, suggest- 
ing the idea of an action already complete 
—the miscreant with a stone round his 
neck thrown into the sea.— eis τὴν θάλασ- 


URS sia 


επι σε chiefly in minusc. 


σαν: here again a subdued expression 
compared with Mt.—% ἵνα σκανδαλίσῃ, 
than to scandalise; the subj. with tva=the 
infinitive. Vzde Winer, § 44, 8.—Ver. 3. 
προσέχετε €, take heed to yourselves 
(lest ye offend), a reminiscence of the 
original occasion of the discourse: ambi- 
tion revealing itself in the disciple-circle. 
—Ver. 4. ἑπτάκις τῆς ἡμέρας, seven 
timesaday. ‘The number recalls Peter’s 
question (Mt. xviii. 21), and the phrase 
seven times a day states the duty of 
forgiving as broadly as Mt.’s seventy 
times seven, but not in so animated a 
style: more in the form of a didactic 
rule than of a vehement emotional utter- 
ance; obviously secondary as compared 
with Mt. 

Vv. 5-6. The power of faith (cf. Mt. 
xvii. 20).—ot ἀπόστολοι instead of µαθη- 
ταὶ. Ver. 1. τῷ κυρίῳ: these titles for 
Jesus and the Twelve betray a narrative 
having no connection with what goes 
before, and secondary in its character.— 
πρόσθες ἡμῖν πίστιν, add faith to us, 
This sounds more like a stereotyped peti- 
tion in church prayers than a request 
actually made by the Twelve. How 
much more life-like the occasion for the 
utterance supplied by Mt.: ‘ Why could 
not we cast him out?’’—Ver. 6. εἰ ἔχετε. 





592 


KATA AOYKAN 


XVII. 


6. Εἶπε δὲ & Κύριος, “Et εἴχετε] πίστιν, ds κόκκον σινάπεως, 
ἐλέγετε ἂν τῇ ouKapivw ταύτῃ, ᾿Εκριζώθητι, καὶ φυτεύθητι ἐν τῇ 


θαλάσση καὶ ὑπήκουσεν ἂν ὑμῖν. 


7. Τίς δὲ ἐξ ὑμῶν δοῦλον ἔχων 


ar Cor. ix." ἀροτριῶντα ἢ ποιµαίνοντα, ὃς εἰσελθόντι ἐκ τοῦ ἀγροῦ ἐρεῖ,; Εὐθέως 
1ο. 2) Pee ; 
bCh. xxii. παρελθὼν ἀνάπεσαι δ: 8. ἀλλ᾽ οὐχὶ ἐρεὶ αὐτῷ ᾿Ετοίμασον τί "δειπ- 


20. 1 Cor. 


xi.25, Rev. νῄσω, καὶ περιζωσάμενος διακόνει pot, ἕως φάγω καὶ iw: καὶ μετὰ 


ill. 20. 


ταῦτα φάγεσαι καὶ πίεσαι σύ; 9. Μὴ χάριν ἔχει" τῷ δούλῳ ἐκείνῳ,ό 
ὅτι ἐποίησε τὰ διαταχθέντα αὐτῷ,» οὐ δοκῶ.5 


1Ο. οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς, 


ὅταν ποιήσητε πάντα τὰ διαταχθέντα ὑμῖν, λέγετε  Ὅτι δοῦλοι 
a δη Pee απ tr a , 32 
χρεῖοί ἐσμεν : Stu’ ὃ ὠφείλομεν ποιῆσαι πεποιήκαµεν. 


II. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ πορεύεσθαι αὐτὸν ἓ 


eis ἹἹερουσαλήμ, καὶ 


1 εχετε in NABLXA al. pl. (Tisch., W.H.). ειχετε in D al, 


2 8$BDLX al. verss. add αντω. 


3 αναπεσε in NBD al. Τ.Ε. = Lal. 


4 εχει χαριν in SBDL 124. 


5 Omit εκεινω NaABDLX, and SABLA al. omit αντω after διαταχθεντα. 
6 SSBLX 1, 28, 118, 131 al. verss. omit ov δοκω (Tisch., Trg., text, R.V., W.H.). 


7 Omit οτι here SABDL al. verss. 


εἰ with pres. in protasis, the imperf. in 
apodosis with ἄν. Possession of faith 
already sufficient to work miracles is here 
admitted. In Mt. the emphasis lies on 
the want of such faith. Another instance 
of Lk.’s desire to spare the Twelve.— 
συκαµίνῳ, here only in N.T. = συκο- 
popéa, xix. 4, the fig mulberry tree (vide 
there). <A tree here, a mountain in Mt. ; 
and the miraculous feat is not rooting it 
out of the earth but replanting it in the sea 
—a natural impossibility. Pricaeus cites 
a classic parallel: τὸ πέλαγος πρότερον 
οἴσει ἄμπελον. 

ὧν. 7-το. The parable of extra service, 
in Luke only. For this name and the 


view of the parable implied in it see my: 


Parabolic Teaching of Christ. Itis there 
placed among the theoretic parables as 
teaching a truth about the Kingdom of 
God, viz., that it makes exacting de- 
mands on its servants which can only be 
met by a heroic temper. ‘‘Christ’s pur- 
pose is not to teach in what spirit God 
deals with His servants, but to teach 
rather in what spirit we should serve 
God.”—Ver. 7. εὐθέως: to be connected 
not with ἐρεῖ but with παρελθὼν a. = he 
does not say: Go at once and get your 
supper.—Ver. 8. GAN’ οὐχὶ: ἀλλὰ im- 
plies the negation of the previous sup- 
position.—éws dye, etc., ‘till I have 
eaten,” etc., A.V.; or, while I eat and 
drink.—Ver. 9. μὴ ἔχει χάριν, he does 
not thank him, does he? the service taken 
as a matter of course, all in the day’s 


8 Omit αυτον 389 ΒΙ.. 


work,—Ver. το. οὕτως, so, in the King- 
dom of God: extremes meet. The ser- 
vice of the Kingdom is as unlike that of 
a slave to his owner as possible in spirit ; 
but it is like in the heavy demands it 
makes, which we have to take as a matter 
of course.—8.tatay@évta, commanded. 
In point of fact it is not commands but 
demands we have to deal with, arising 
out of special emergencies. — δοῦλοι 
ἀχρεῖοι: the words express the truth in 
terms of the parabolic representation 
which treats of a slave and his owner. 
But the idea is: the hardest demands of 
the Kingdom are to be met in a spirit of - 
patience and humility, a thing possible 
only for men who are as remote as pos- 
sible from a slavish spirit: heroic, gener 
ous, working in the spirit of free self- 
devotion. Such men are not unprofitable 
servants in God’s sight; rather He ac- 
counts them “good and faithful,” Mt. 
xxv, 21. Syr. Sin. reads simply ‘‘ we are 
servants’’, 

Vv. 11-19. The ten lepers.—Ver. 11. 
εἰς Ἱερ.: the note of time seems to take 
us back to ix. 51. No possibility of 
introducing historic sequence into the 
section of Lk. lying between ix. 51 and 
xvili. 15.---αὐτὸς, He without emphasis ; 
not He, as opposed to other pilgrims 
taking another route, directly through 
Samaria (so Meyer and (οάεί).-- διὰ 
µέσον = διὰ peoov (T.R.), µέσον being 
used adverbially as in Philip. ii. 15 = 
through between the two provinces. 


paket ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


αὐτὸς διήρχετο διὰ μέσου] Σαμαρείας καὶ Γαλιλαίας. 12. καὶ 
εἰσερχομένου αὐτοῦ εἴς τινα κώµην, ἀπήντησαν ὃ αὐτῷ ὃ δέκα λεπροὶ 
ἄνδρες, ot ἔστησαν " πόρρωθεν’ 13. καὶ αὐτοὶ ἦραν φΦωνήν, λέγοντες, 
“Ingo, ἐπιστάτα, ἐλέησον ἡμᾶς. 14. Καὶ ἰδὼν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
ἔεΠορευθέντες ἐπιδείξατε ἑαυτοὺς τοῖς ἱερεῦσι.” 
15. ets δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν, ἰδὼν ὅτι ἰάθη, 


Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ 

ς > , 3 ιό 

ὑπάγειν αὐτούς, ἐκαθαρίσθησαν. 
! 

ὑπέστρεψε, μετὰ φωνῆς μεγάλης δοξάζων τὸν Θεόν: 16. καὶ ἔπεσεν 

ἐπὶ πρόσωπον παρὰ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ, εὐχαριστῶν αὐτῷ καὶ αὐτὸς 

ἦν Lapapeitns: 17. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν, ““Οὐχὶ ὃ οἱ δέκα 


593 


ἐκαθαρίσθησαν; οἱ δὲ δ ἐννέα ποῦ; 
ς 


Wavtes δοῦναι δόξαν τῷ Θεῶ, εἰ μὴ 6 


, 


ἀλλογενὴς οὗτος ; ” 


1δ. οὐχ εὑρέθησαν ὑποστρέ- 
10. Καὶ 


, 


4 > -~ 66? a / ς a 2 
ειπεν AUT, Αναστὰς πορευου ᾽ η πιστις σου σεσωκε σε. 


1 δια µεσον in ΝΒΙ, (D µεσον alone) 1, 13, 69 al. ava µεσον. 


2 So in ABX al. (W.H. text). 
marg.). 

3 BL omit avrw (W.H.). 

4 BF 157 have ανεστησαν (W.H. text). 

δονχ in BLS 131. 


υπηντ. in NL 1, 13, 69, 131 al. (Tisch., W.H., 


6 Omit δε AD (Tisch., W.H., brackets), found in ${BLX, etc. 


named, on the confines of both, which 
explains the mixture of Jews and 
Samaritans in the crowd of lepers.—Ver. 
12. δέκα λεπροὶ: ten, a large number, 
the disease common. Rosenmiiller (das 
A. and N. Morgenland) cites from 
Dampier a similar experience; lepers 
begging alms from voyagers on the river 
Camboga, when they approached their 
village, crying to them from afar. They 
could not heal them, but they gave them 
a little rice.—Ver. 13. ἐπιστάτα: this 
word is peculiar to Lk., which suggests 
editorial revision of the story.—éAénoov : 
a very indefinite request compared with 
that of the leper in v. 12 f., whose 
remarkable words are given in identical 
terms by all the synoptists. The interest 
wanes here.—Ver. 14. ἐπιδείξατε ἕ.: 
the same direction as in the first leper 
Narrative, but without reason annexed.— 
ἱερεῦσι: plural, either to the priests of 
their respective nationalities (Kuinoel, J. 
Weiss, etc.) or to the priests of the 
respective districts to which they be- 
longed (Hahn).—év τῷ ὑπάγειν, etc., on 
the way to the priests they were healed. 
Did they show themselves to the priests ? 
That does not appear. The story is 
defective at this point (‘ negligently 
told,” Schleier.), either because the 
narrator did not know or because he 
took no interest in that aspect of the 
case. The priests might not be far off, 


—Ver. 15. δοξάζων +. Θ.: general state- 
ment, exact words not known, so also in 
report of thanksgiving to Jesus,—Ver. 
16. Lapapeirys: this, with the comment. 
of Jesus, the point of interest for Lk.— 
Ver. 17. οὐχ (οὐχὶ, T.R.): asking a 
question and implying an affirmative 
answer. Yet the fact of asking the 
guestion implies a certain measure of 
doubt, No direct information as to 
what happened had reached Jesus pre- 
sumably, and He naturally desires ex- 
planation of the non-appearance of all 
but one. Were not all the ten (ot δέκα, 
now a familiar number) healed, that 
you come back alone ὃ---ποῦ: emphatic 
position: the nine—where? expressing 
the suspicion that not lack of healing 
but lack of gratitude was the matter with 
the nine.—Ver. 18. οὐχ εὑρέθησαν, etc., 
best taken as another question (so R.V.). 
--ἀλλογενὴς, here only, in N.T.; also 
in Sept. = ἀλλόφυλος and ἀλλοεθνής in 
classics, an alien, Once more the Jew 
suffers by comparison with those without 
in respect of genuine religious feeling— 
faith, gratitude. It is not indeed said that 
all the rest were Jews. What is certain 
is that the one man who came back was 
not a Jew.—Ver. 19. ἀναστὰς πορεύου: 
that might be all that Jesus said (so in 
B), as it was the man’s gratitude, natural 
feeling of thankfulness, not his faith, that 
was in evidence. But Lk., feeling that 


38 


594 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


XVII. 


20. ᾿Ἐπερωτηθεὶς δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν Φαρισαίων, πότε ἔρχεται ἡ βασιλεία 

τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς, καὶ εἶπεν, “΄Οὐκ ἔρχεται ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ 

c here only Θεοῦ μετὰ "παρατηρήσεως: 21. οὐδὲ ἐροῦσιν, “ISod ὧδε, ἤ, ἰδοὺ 1 
19 N.i. 


πια 
εκει. 


ἰδοὺ γάρ, ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐντὸς ὑμῶν ἐστίν.” 


22. Εἶπε 


δὲ πρὸς τοὺς µαθητάς, ““᾿Ελεύσονται ἡμέραι, ὅτε ἐπιθυμήσετε µίαν 


1 The second ιδου in D and many other uncials is omitted in BL 157. 


it was an abrupt conclusion, might add 
ἡ πίστις σ. o σ. to round off the 
sentence, which may therefore be the 
true reading. 

Vv. 20-37. Concerning the coming of 
the Kingdom and the advent of the Son of 
Man. In this section the words of 
Jesus are distributed between Pharisees 
and disciples, possibly according to the 
evangelist’s impression as to the audience 
they suited. Weiffenbach (Wieder- 
kunftsgedanke Fesu, p. 217) suggests 
that the words in vv. 20, 2I were 
originally addressed to disciples who 
did not yet fully understand the inward 
spiritual character of the Kingdom of 
God. I am inclined to attach some 
weight to this suggestion. I am sure at 
any rate that it is not helpful to a true 
understanding of Christ’s sayings to lay 
much stress on Lk.’s historical introduc- 
tions to them. 

Vv. 20, 2Ι. μετὰ παρατηρήσεως: 
there is considerable diversity of opinion 
in the interpretation of this important 
expression. The prevailing view is that 
Jesus meant thereby to deny a coming 
that could be observed with the eye 
(έπος with observation”). The older 
interpretation “not with pomp” (μετὰ 
περιφανείας ἀνθρωπίνης is the gloss of 
Euthy. Zig.) is closely related to this 
view, because such pomp alone would 
make the kingdom visible to the vulgar 
eye. J. Weiss (Meyer) contends that it 
is not visibility but predictability that is 
negated. Παρατήρησις, he remarks, “is 
used of the observation of the heavenly 
bodies, from whose movements one can 
calculate when an expected phenomenon 
will appear. In a similar way the 
apocalyptists sought to determine by 
signs the moment when the kingdom 
should be set up. That was what the 
Pharisees expected of Jesus with their 
πότε ἔρχεται. And itis just this that Jesus 
declines. The Kingdom of God comes 
not so that one can fix its appearing by 
observation beforehand.”” The assump- 
tion is that when it does come the 
kingdom will be visible. It does not 
seem possible by mere verbal interpreta- 


tion to decide between the two views. 
Each interpreter will be influenced by 
his idea of the general drift of Christ’s 
teaching concerning the nature of the 
kingdom. My own sympathies are with 
those who find in Christ’s words a 
denial of vulgar or physical visibility. 
—Ver. 21. οὐδὲ ἐροῦσι, nor will they 
say ; there will be nothing to give occa- 
sion for saying: non erit quod dicatur, 
Grotius.— ae, éxet, here, there, implying 
a visible object that can be located.— 
ἐντὸς ὑμῶν, within you, in your spirit. 
This rendering best corresponds with 
the non-visibility of the kingdom. The 
thought would be a very appropriate one 
in discourse to disciples. Not so in dis- 
course to Pharisees. To them it would 
be most natural to say “among you” = 
look around and see my works: devils 
cast out (Lk. xi. 20), and learn that the 
kingdom is already here (ἔφθασεν ἐφ᾽ 
tpas). Kindred to this rendering is that 
of Tertullian (ο. Marcionem, L. iv., 35): 
in your power, accessible to you: in 
manu, in potestate vestra. The idea 
“among you”? would be more clearly 
expressed by ἤδη ἐν µέσῳ ὑμῶν. Cf. 
John i. 26. µέσος ὑ. στήκει, etc., one 
stands among you whom ye know not— 
cited by Euthy. to illustrate the meaning 
of our passage. Field (Ot. Nor.) con- 
tends that there is no clear instance ot 
ἐντὸς in the sense of ‘‘ among,” and cites 
as an example of its use in the sense of 
“within ”’ Ps. ciii. 1, πάντα τὰ ἐντός µου. 

Vv. 22-25. The coming of the Son of 
Man (Mt. xxiv. 26-28).-- πρὸς τ.µαθητάς: 
so in Mt., but at a later time and at 
Jerusalem; which connection is the 
more original cannot be decided.— 
ἐλεύσονται ἡμέραι, there will come days 
(of tribulation), ominous hint like that 
in v. 35.—piav τ. 7, etc., one of the 
days of the Son of Man; not past days 
in the time of discipleship, but days to 
come. Tribulation will make them long 
fer the advent, which will put an end to 
their sorrows. One of the days; why 
not the first, the beginning of the 
Messianic period? Hahn actually takes 
µίαν as = first, Hebraistic fashion, as in 


soso, ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

τῶν ἡμερῶν τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἰδεῖν, καὶ οὖκ ὄψεσθε. 23. καὶ 
ἐροῦσιν ὑμῖν, Ιδοὺ ὧδε, ἤ, ἰδοὺ ἐκεῖλ: μὴ ἀπέλθητε, μηδὲ Ἡ διώξητε. 
24. ὥσπερ γὰρ ἡ ἀστραπὴ ἡ ὃ ἀστράπτουσα ἐκ τῆς ὑπ οὐρανὸν “ εἰς 
τὴν bw οὐρανὸν λάμπει, οὕτως ἔσται καὶ ὅ 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐν 
τῇ ἡμέρᾳ αὐτοῦ. 25. πρῶτον δὲ δεῖ αὐτὸν πολλὰ παθεῖν, καὶ 
ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ἀπὸ τῆς γενεᾶς ταύτης. 26. καὶ καθὼς ἐγένετο 
ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις TOG” Νῶε, οὕτως ἔσται καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τοῦ υἱοῦ 
τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 27. ἤσθιον, ἔπινον, ἐγάμουν, ἐξεγαμίζοντοιὃ ἄχρι is 
ἡμέρας εἰσῆλθε Νῶε εἰς τὴν κιβωτόν, καὶ ἦλθεν 6 κατακλυσμός, 


καὶ ἀπώλεσεν ἅπαντας. 28. ὁμοίως καὶ as? ἐγένετο ἐν ταῖς 


ἡμέραις Adit ἤσθιον, ἔπινον, ἠγόραίον, ἐπώλουν, ἐφύτευον, «κοδό- 
µουν’ 29. ᾗ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ ἐξῆλθε Λὼτ ἀπὸ Σοδόµων, ἔβρεξε mip καὶ 


θεῖον ἀπ᾿ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ἀπώλεσεν ἅπαντας: 30. κατὰ ταῦτα 10 ἔσται 


595 


1 For ιδου wSe η ιδον εκει some copies have ιδου wie Sov εκει (DXM), some ιθου 
εκει ιδου ὡδε (L). Some have this order of εκει, ωδε, but retaining η (B). S$ has και, 
2 Omit απελθητε µηδε B 13, 69 (W.H. brackets), 


3 Omit this η NBLXT 169 al. 
4 vo τον ουρ. in NED al. 
5 Omit και NABLX al. 


8 BD 220 a b €i omit ev τη mp. a (W.H. text), 


7 Omit του all uncials. 
8 eyo. in RBDLX al. 
9 και ws in D al, 
0 κατα τα αντα in BDX al. 


Mt. xxviii. 1, Mk. xvi. 2.—ot« ὄψεσθε, 
ye shall not see, not necessarily an 
absolute statement, but meaning: the 
vision will be deferred till your heart 
gets sick; so laying you open to tempta- 
tion through false readers of the times en- 
couraging delusive hope.—Ver. 23. ἐκεῖ, 
Se: cf. the more graphic version in Mt. 
xxiv. 26, and notes thereon.—py διώξητε, 
do not follow them, give no heed to them. 
—Ver. 24. ἐκ τῆς, χώρας understood, 
so also χώραν after εἰς τὴν = from this 
quarter under heaven to that. Here 
again Mt.’s version is the more graphic 
and original.= from east to west.—Ver. 
25. πρῶτον δὲ δεῖ, etc.; the Passion 
must come before the glorious lightning- 
like advent. What you have to do 
ae is to prepare yourselves for 
that. 

Vv. 26-30. The advent will be a sur- 
prise (Mt. xxiv. 37-41).—Ver. 27. ἤσθιον, 
είο.: note the four verbs without con- 
necting particles, a graphic asyndeton; 
and note the imperfect tense: those 
things going on up to the very hour of 


καθως in SBLRX 13, 69 al, 
Τ.Ε. = SLA al. 


the advent, as it was in the days of 
Noah, or in the fateful day of Pompeii. 
—Ver. 28. ὁμοίως: introducing a new 
comparison = similarly, as it was in the 
days, etc.—so shall it be in the day of, 
etc. (ver. 30), Bornemann ingeniously 
connects ὁμοίως with ἅπαντας going 
before, and, treating it as a Latinism, 
renders perdidit omnes pariter.—ijo@vov, 
etc. : again a series of unconnected verbs, 
and a Jarger, six, and all in the imperfect 
tense. This second comparison, taken 
from Lot’s history, is not given in Mt. 
The suddenness of the catastrophe makes 
it very apposite—Ver. 29. ἕβρεξε 
(Βρέχω): an old poetic word used in late 
Greek for tev, to rain. βροχή is the 
modern Greek for rain (vide Mt. v. 45). 
—Ver, 30. κατὰ τὰ αὐτὰ, etc., the 
apodosis of the long sentence beginning 
νετ. 28. 

Vv. 31-34. Sauve qui peut (Mt. xxiv. 
17,18; Mk. xiii. 15, 16). The saying in 
ver. 31 is connected in Mt. and Mk. 
with the crisis of Jerusalem, to which in 
this discourse in Lk. there is no allusion. 


596 


KATA AOYKAN XVII. 31—37 


ᾗ ἡμέρᾳ ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀποκαλύπτεται. 31. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ 
ἡμέρα, ὃς ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ δώµατος, καὶ τὰ σκεύη αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ, 
μὴ καταβάτω ἄραι αὐτά ΄ καὶ ὁ ἐν τῷ] ἀγρῷ ὁμοίως μὴ ἐπιστρεψάτω 
32. μνημονεύετε τῆς Ὑυναικὸς Λώτ. 33. ὃς ἐὰν 
ζητήσῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ σῶσαι, ἀπολέσει αὐτήν' καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ὃ 
34. λέγω ὑμῖν, ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ 
ἔσονται δύο ἐπὶ κλίνης μιᾶς δ: 6° εἲς παραληφθήσεται, καὶ ὁ ἕτερος 
ἀφεθήσεται. 35. δύο ἔσονταιἹ ἀλήθουσαι ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό: pia® 
παραληφθήσεται, καὶ 1° ἑτέρα ἀφεθήσεται.' 37. Καὶ ἀποκριθέντες 


λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “Mod, κύριε; Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Ὅπου τὸ 
10 


εἷς τὰ ὀπίσω. 


ἀπολέσῃ αὐτήν,' ζωογονήσει αὐτήν. 


~ ~ , ε o> 
σῶμα, ἐκεῖ συναχθήσονται ot ἀετοι. 


1 Omit τω NBL 13, 69, 346. 


2 For σωσαι (Ν al.) BL vet. Lat. (4) have περιποιησασθαι (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 os δ av in NBL 69 al. 

“amwokeoyn in BD. 
αντην after απολ. 

> B omits µιας (W-H. brackets). 

6 All uncials except B omit o. 


απολεσει in WL (Tisch., W.H.). 


WED 1, 33, 131 omit 


7 εσονται δυο in NaBDL a cop. syr. cur. 


δη µια in NaBDR 1, 69. 
® For και η (D al.) NaBLR have η δε. 


.10 For cvvay, ot αετοι NBL have και οι αετοι επισυναχθησονται (Tisch., W.H.). 


The connection in Mt. and Mk. seems 
the more appropriate, as a literal flight 
was then necessary.—Ver. 32. μνημονεύ- 
ere, etc.: the allusion to Lot’s wife is 
prepared for by the comparison in ver. 
28. It is not in Mt. and Mk.,, being 
inappropriate to the flight they had in 
view. No fear of looking back when an 
invading army was at the gates. Lk. 
has in view the spiritual application, as 
is shown by the next ver., which repro- 
duces in somewhat altered form the 
word spoken at Caesarea Philippi con- 
cerning losing and saving life (ix. 24). 
-ζωογονήσει, will preserve alive, used 
literally in this sense in Acts vii. το. 

Vv. 34-37. The final separation. (Mt. 
xxiv. 40, 41).—Ver. 34. 7. τ. νυκτὶ, on 
that night; day hitherto, the Jewish day 
began with night (Hahn), and the refer- 
ence to night suits the following illustra- 
tion. No need to take night metaphori- 
cally = imago miseriae (Kuinoel).—éri 
κλίνης µ., in one bed; in the field in Mt. 
—Ver. 35. ἀλήθουσαι ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό, grind- 
ing at the same place; in the mill, Mt. 
Proximity the point emphasised in Lk.— 
near each other, yet how remote their 
destinies |—Ver. 37. σῶμα, the carcase = 


πτῶμα, Mt. xxiv. 28; so used in Homer, 
who employs δέµας for the living body. 
CHAPTER XVIII. 1-14. THE Para- 
BLES OF THE UNJUST JUDGE AND THE 
PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN.—Vv. I- 
8. The unjust judge, in Lk. only.—Ver. 
1. παραβολὴν: the story is a parable in 
so far as it teaches by an incident in 
natural life the power of perseverance 
with reference to the spiritual life.—pés, 
in reference to, indicating the subject or 
aim of the parable—de (so Kypke, with 
εχαπηρ]ες).-- πάντοτε: not continuously, 
but persistently in spite of temptation to 
cease praying through delayed answer 
= keep praying, notwithstanding delay. 
The whole raison d’étre of the parable is 
the existence of such delay. Some fail 
to see this and think that the difference 
between God and the judge is that He 
does not delay. Itisnotso. God is like 
the judge in this, only His delay has not 
the same cause or motive. The judge 
represents God as He appears in Provi- 
dence to tried faith—éxxakeivy: a Pauline 
word (Gal. vi.g; 2 Thess. iii. 13, etc.). 
This introduction to the parable is pro- 
bably due to Lk., who, it will be observed, 
takes care to make th* lesson of general 


Χ 


XVIII. r—6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


597 


XVIII. 1. "ΕΛΕΓΕ δὲ καὶ] παραβολὴν αὐτοῖς πρὸς τὸ δεῖν 
πάντοτε προσεύχεσθαι,: καὶ μὴ ἐκκακεῖν, 2. λέγων, “Κριτής τις 
ἦν ἔν τινι πόλει, τὸν Θεὸν μὴ φοβούμενος, καὶ ἄνθρωπον μὴ ἐντρεπό- 


μενος. 


3. χήρα δὲ ἦν ἐν τῇ πόλει ἐκείνῃ, καὶ ἤρχετο πρὸς αὐτόν, 
λέγουσα, "᾿Ἐκδίκησόν µε ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀντιδίκου µου. 
ἠθέλησεν 3 ἐπὶ χρόνον: μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα εἶπεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, Ei καὶ τὸν 
Θεὸν οὐ φοβοῦμαι, καὶ ἄνθρωπον οὐκ 


3 
4. Kat οὖκα Rom. xii. 
10. 2 Cor. 
x. 6. Rev 
vi. 10; 
xix. 2. 


évtpémopar’ 5. διά γε τὸ 


παρέχειν µοι κόπον τὴν χήραν ταύτην, ἐκδικήσω αὐτήν, ἵνα μὴ εἲς 


τέλος ἐρχομένη " ὑπωπιάζῃ pe.” 


b1 Cor. ix. 


6. Εἶπε δὲ ὁ Κύριος, '΄᾿Ακοόσατε 27, 


1 Omit και SBLM τ3, 69, 131 al. it. (4) cop. 


2 αντους after προσενχ. in NBL al, 
3 ηθελεν in NABDLX al. 
4 µετα ταντα δε in BLQ (W.H.). 


T.R=ND al. (Tisch). 


5 For και ανθ. ουκ (D al. pl.) SBLX 157 it. (8) vulg. have ουδε ανθρωπον. 


application, though the δὲ after ἔλεγε 
and the concluding reflection in ver. 8 
imply that the special subject of prayer 
contemplated both by Lk. and by our 
Lord was the advent referred to in the 
previous context. 

Vv. 2-5. The parable.—rov Θεόν, etc. : 
a proverbial description for a thoroughly 
unprincipled man (examples from classics 
in Wetstein).—évrpewépevos, having re- 
spect for, with accusative, as in late 
Greek ; in earlier writers with genitive.— 
Ver. 3. χήρα, a widow, such a suppliant 
tests a man’s character. Her weakness 
appeals to a generous, noble nature, and 
is taken advantage of by an ignoble.— 
ἤρχετο, presumably used in a frequenta- 
tive sense = ventitabat (Grotius), though 
not necessarily meaning more than ‘‘be- 
gan to come,” with possibility of recur- 
rence.—éxdiknodv pe, give me redress 
or satisfaction. ‘‘ Avenge me”’ is too 
strong.—Ver. 4. ἐπὶ χρόνον, for a con- 
siderable time. Per multum tempus 
(Vulgate) may be too strong, but it is in 
the right direction. The scope of the 
parable and the use of the word χρόνος 
if a pregnant sense implying πολὺς (vide 
examples in’ Kypke) demand a time suf- 
ficient to test the temper of the parties.— 
ἐν ἑαυτῷ, within himself. The characters 
in Lk.’s parables are given to talking to 
themselves (Prodigal, Unjust Steward).— 
Ver. 5. διά ye, etc.: similar expression in 
xi. 8. The parable before us is a com- 
panion to that of the Selfish Neighbour. 
The two should be studied together—vide 
The Parabolic Teaching of Christ.— 
κόπον: the power of the petitioner in 
both parables lies in their ability and 


determination to disturb the comfort of 
those they address. The neighbour and 
the judge are both selfish, care only for 
their own ease, and it is that very quality 
that gives the suppliants their oppor- 
tunity. They can annoy the reluctant 
into granting their requests—success cer- 
tain.—els τέλος: interpreters differ as to 
the meaning of this phrase, and whether 
it should be connected with ἐρχομένη or 
with ὑπωπιάζῃ. The two ways of ren- 
dering the last clause of ver. 5 are: lest 
coming continually, she weary me to 
death, or lest coming and coming, she at 
last give me black eyes; of course meant 
in a humorous sense. The latter render- 
ing does more justice to the humour of 
the situation, but the other seems more 
in harmony with the scope of the parable, 
which is to enforce persistence in prayer 
—continual coming. The present tense 
in participle and verb also seems to de- 
mand the first rendering: it points to a 
process in the coming and in its effect on 
the judge, the two keeping pace with each 
other. As she keeps coming, he gets 
more and more bored. Ifa final act, the 
use of fists (seriously or humorously 
meant) were pointed at by ὑπωπ., the 
aorist would have been more suitable. 
(So Field in Οὲ. Nor.) The philological 
commentators differ in regard to the sense 
of εἰς τέλος, some taking it = perpetuo, 
indesinenter (Grotius, Kypke); others = 
tandem (Palairet); others = omnino 
(Raphel) ; all citing examples. 

Vv. 6-8. The moral.—xpitijs τ. ἀδικίας, 
cf. οἰκονόμον τ. ἀ., xvi. 8.—Ver. 7. οὗ 
μὴ ποιήσῃ, etc., will not God avenge, 
etc,, the question implying strongly that 


598 


KATA AOYKAN XVIII. 


τί ὁ κριτὴς τῆς ἁδικίας λέγει: 7. ὁ δὲ Θεὸς οὗ μὴ ποιήσει] τὴν 
ἐκδίκησιν τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν αὐτοῦ τῶν βοώντων πρὸς αὐτὸν 2 ἡμέρας καὶ 
νυκτός, καὶ μακροθυμῶν > ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς; 8. λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι ποιήσει τὴν 
ἐκδίκησιν αὐτῶν ἐν τάχει. πλὴν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐλθὼν ἄρα 
εὑρήσει τὴν πίστιν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς; : 
Q. Εἶπε δὲ καὶ πρός τινας τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτοῖς ὅτι εἶσὶ 
δίκαιοι, καὶ ἐξουθενοῦντας τοὺς λοιπούς, τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην" 
10. Άνθρωποι δύο ἀνέβησαν εἰς τὸ ἱερὸν προσεύξασθαι: ὁ4 els 
Φαρισαῖος, καὶ ὁ ἕτερος τελώνης. ΙΙ. 6 Φαρισαῖος σταθεὶς πρὸς 
ἑαυτὸν ταῦτα ὅ προσηύχετο, Ὁ Θεός, εὐχαριστῶ σοι, ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ 
ὥσπερ © οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἅρπαγες, ἄδικοι, µοιχοί, ἢ καὶ ds 


+ So in L al. 
2 avTw in NBLQ. 


ποιηση in SBDQXA al. pl. 


3 paxpoOuper in ΝΑΒΡΤΩΧΗ 1, 157, 209 (modern editors). 
+0 εις in NALQ, etc. (Tisch.). εις in BDRX (W.H. text and in marg.). 


> ταυτα before προς ε. in BL 1, 131 ε vulg. (W.H. text). 


omit προς εαντον (Tisch.). 
§ So in SAB al. (Tisch., W.H., text). 


He will, but the emphasis is rendered 
necessary by appearances to the contrary, 
which strongly try men’s faith in His 
good will—long delays in answering 
prayer which wear the aspect of in- 
difference.—rav ἐκλεκτῶν a., His elect: 
standing in a close relation, so named to 
support the previous assertion. But in 
the dark hour of trial it is difficult to ex- 
tract comfort from the title. Then the 
doubt arises: is the idea of election not 
a delusion? What are we to the far-off 
Deity ὃ---τῶν βοώντων : from these words 
down to the end of the sentence (ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτοῖς) is a single clause meant to define 
the situation of “the elect”. They are 
persons who keep crying to God day, and 
night, while He seems to pay no heed to 
them, but delays action in their case, and 
in their interest. The words down to 
νυκτός describe the need of Divine inter- 
ference ; those which follow describe the 
experience which tempts to doubt whether 
succour will be forthcoming.—paxpo- 
θυμεῖ: this verb means to be slow, 
leisurely, unimpulsive in temper, whether 
in punishing or in succouring, or in any 
other form of action. Instances of the 
use of the verb in the first-mentioned 
occur in 2 Maccab. vi. 14 (cited by 
Pricaeus) and Sirach xxxv. 22 (od py 
βραδύνῃ οὐδὲ μὴ µακροθυµήσει ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτοῖς, frequently quoted). In James 
v. 7 it is applied to the husbandman 
waiting for harvest. Here it is applied 


ὃν and codd. Lat. vet. 


DLQ al pauc. have ως (W.H. marg.). 


to God’s leisureliness in coming to the 
help of tried saints. The construction 
καὶ μακροθυμεῖ is of the Hebraistic 
type.—Ver. 8. ἐν τάχει, quickly, quite 
compatible with delay; quickly when 
the hour comes = suddenly.—Any, yet; 
in spite of the alleged speed, the time 
will seem so long that, etc.—dpa, so to 
be taken (not dpa), as bearing a major 
force of reasoning, andinterrogative. The 
two words are one in essence, but dpa 
has more emphasis in utterance, and 
therefore the first syllable is lengthened, 
and it stands at the beginning of a sen- 
tence, here before εὑρήσει; cf. Gal. ii. 17. 
On the two particles vide Klotz in Dev., 
Ρ. 180.—miotw: not absolutely, but in 
reference to the second coming, hope 
deferred making the heart sick. 

Vv. 9-14. The Pharisee and the pub- 
lican.—Ver. 9. πρός τινας, with reference 
to certain persons; who not indicated, 
of what sort definitely described. This 
introduction is doubtless an editorial 
heading extracted from the story. It is 
true, but not necessarily the whole truth. 
The story may have been spoken to pub- 
licans to encourage them to hope in 
God’s mercy—at the Capernaum gather- 
ing, ε.ρ.---παραβολὴν: it is not really a 
parable, but simply an imaginary inci- 
dent within the sphere to which its 
moral belongs.—Ver. 11. σταθεὶς, having 
taken his stand; fidenter loco solito 
(Bengel); “a sign less of confidence 


7—15: 


οὗτος ὁ τελώνης. 
ὅσα κτῶμαι. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


599 


12. νηστεύω Sis τοῦ σαββάτου, drodcxata! πάντα 
13. Καὶ 6° τελώνης µακρόθεν ἑστὼς οὐκ ἤθελεν οὐδὲ 
τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐπᾶραι 5 
αὐτοῦ, λέγων, Ὁ Θεός, ἱλάσθητί µοι τῷ ἁμαρτωλῷ. 
κατέβη οὗτος δεδικαιωµένος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ, ἢ ἐκεῖνος.ὅ 


- ἀλλ᾽ ἔτυπτεν εἰς" τὸ στῆθος 
14. Λέγω ὑμῖν, 
ὅτι 


πᾶς 6 ὑψῶν ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται: ὁ δὲ ταπεινῶν ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθή- 


35 
σεται. 


15. Προσέφερον δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ τὰ βρέφη. ἵνα αὐτῶν ἅπτηται” 


1 αποδεκατευω in KB. 


2 For και o (ADQX al.) ΝΒΑΙ, 6ο al. have ο ὃς. 
3 επαραι εις T- ουρ. in RBLQX 33 verss. 


4 Omit this εις SSBDLQX it. vulg. 


5 For η εκεινος (found in minusc.) APQXA al. have η yap ex. (Tisch.). 


NBL ς 


94 al. sah. cop. Orig. have wap εκεινον (Alf., Trg., W.H.). 


than of self-importance” (J. Weiss in 
Meyer). Probably both qualities are 
aimed αἲ.- πρὸς ἑαυτὸν: whether these 
words should be taken with σταθεὶς or 
with προσηύχετο is disputed. If the 
position of ταῦτα before πρὸς ἑ. in 
BL be accepted, there is no room for 
doubt. Hahn contends that the proper 
meaning of πρὸς & προσηύχετο is 
‘* prayed to himself,” and that there is no 
instance of the use of πρὸς ἑ. in the 
sense of “‘ with himself”.  Godet takes 
the phrase as = to himself, and regards 
the so-called prayer as simply self-con- 
gratulation in God’s presence.—ot λοιποὶ 
7. @.: not necessarily all mankind, rather 
all the Jewish world outside his coterie 
=am haarez.—Gpmayes, etc.. these 
hard words recall the elder brother’s 
μετὰ πορνῶν (xv. 30).—% καὶ, or even, 
the publican pointed at as the ne plus 
ultva of depravity: the best foil to 
Pharisaic exemplariness.—Ver. 12. δὶς 
τ. σ., twice in the week: voluntary fasts 
on Mondays and Thursdays, ultra-legal 
in his zeal_—@woSexat-@ (-εύω, W. and 
H.) = δεκατεύω in Greek writers : tithing 
a typical instance of Pharisaic strictness. 
-- πάντα, all, great and small, even 
garden herbs, again ultra-legal.—xr@pat, 
all I get (R.V.).—Ver. 13. 6 τελώνης: 
the demeanour of the publican is drawn 
in vivid contrast to that of the Pharisee ; 
he stands aloof, not in pride but in acute 
consciousness of demerit, does not dare 
to lift his eyes towards the object of 
prayer, beats upon his breast in pungent 
grief for sin.—r@ ἁμαρτωλῷ, the sinner ; 
he thinks of himself only and of himself 
as the sinner, well known as such, the 
one fact worth mentioning about him, as 


one might speak about the drunkard of 
the village. Koetsveld remarks: ‘‘ The 
publican might see his own picture in 
the prodigal son; no doubt many a son 
out of a good house took to a publican’s 
trade as a last resort”’.—Ver. 14. δεδικαι- 
wpévos, justified (here only in Gospels), 
a Pauline word, but not necessarily used 
in a Pauline sense = pardoned.—-rap’ 
ἐκεῖνον (ἢ ἐκεῖνος, T.R.), in comparison 
with that one (the Pharisee). The read- 
ing ἢ yap ἐκεῖνος (QX) would have to be 
taken as a question—or was that one 
justified? The publican was the justi- 
fied man; you would not say the other 
one was 2---ὅτι, etc.: ὅτι introduces a 
moral maxim which we have met with 
already at xiv. τι. It stands here as the 
ethical basis of ‘‘ justification”. It is a 
universal law of the moral world, true 
both of God and of men, that self- 
exaltation provokes in others condemna- 
tion, and self-humiliation gentle judg- 
ment, 

CHAPTER XVIII. 15-43. Some ΘΥΝΟΡ- 
TICAL INCIDENTS OF THE LATER TIME. 
Lk., who has for some time followed his 
own way, now joins the company of his 
brother evangelists. The section follow- 
ing is skilfully connected with what goes 
before, the link being the supreme value 
of humility. 

Vv. 15-17. The little ones brought to 
Fesus μάς xix. 13-15, Mk. x. 13-16).— 
τὰ βρέφη: for παιδία in parallels = 
infants, sucklings, often in Lk.’s writings; 
the καὶ preceding naturally means 
‘*even,” suggesting the notion of great 
popularity or great crowding, and per- 
haps hinting an apology for the Twelve. 
The article before βρέφη means the in: 


600 


ἰδόντες δὲ ot μαθηταὶ ἐπετίμησαν] αὗτοῖς. 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN 


XVIII. 


16. ὅ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


προσκαλεσάµενος αὐτὰ εἶπεν, ““Adete τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός 


µε, καὶ μὴ κωλύετε αὖτά. 
Θεοῦ. 


τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἐστὶν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ 
17. ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὃς ἐὰν μὴ δέξηται τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ 


Θεοῦ ὡς παιδίον, οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτήν. 


18. Καὶ ἐπηρώτησέ τις αὐτὸν ἄρχων, λέγων, “Διδάσκαλε dyabe, 


τί ποιήσας ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω; 
᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ti µε λέγεις ἀγαθόν ; 


c 


19. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ 6 
οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός, εἰ μὴ els, ὁ ὃ Θεός. 


20. τὰς ἐντολὰς οἶδας, Mi) μοιχεύσης' μὴ Φφονεύσης' μὴ κλέψης: 
μὴ ψευδοµαρτυρήσῃς τίµα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν µητέρα cou. 4 
21. Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “΄ Ταῦτα πάντα ἐφυλαξάμην ὃ ἐκ νεότητός pou.” 6 


22. ᾿Ακούσας δὲ ταῦτα ”Ἰ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “'Ἔτι ἕν σοι λείπει - 


πάντα ὅσα ἔχεις πώλησον, καὶ διάδος πτωχοῖς, καὶ ἕξεις θησαυρὸν 


ἐν οὐρανῷ 8. 


περίλυπος ἐγένετο”: ἦν γὰρ πλούσιος σφόδρα. 


1 επετιµων in NBDGL 1, 13, 69 al. 


καὶ δεῦρο, ἀκολούθει por.” 


23. Ὁ δὲ ἀκούσας ταῦτα 
24. Ιδὼν δὲ αὐτὸν 


2 S9BL a have προσεκαλεσατο αυτα λεγων. 


3 Omit ο NB (Tisch., W.H., brackets). 


5 εφυλαξα in ΦΑΕΙ, 1, 209. 

7 Omit ravta SBDL τ, 33, 69, 131 al. 
8 ev ουρανοις in RABDLR al. ae cop. 
Φεγενηθη in NBL. 


fants of those who brought them = their 
infants.—Ver. 16. προσεκαλέσατο, called, 
speaking to those who carried the infants. 
Lk. omits the annoyance of Jesus at the 
conduct of the Twelve, noted by Mk. 
Decorum controls his presentation not 
only _of Jesus but of the Twelve. He 
always spares them (Schanz).—tTev 
τοιούτων, of such ; does this mean that 
children belong to the kingdom, or only 
that the childlike do so? Bengel, De 
Wette and Schanz take the former view, 
J. Weiss and Hahn the latter. Schanz 
says: “«τοιούτοι with the article means not 
similarity but likeness with respect to 
something going before or following 
after. Therefore the children as such 
are recognised by Jesus as worthy of the 
kingdom.”—Ver. 17, as in Mk. x. 15. 
With this reflection Lk. ends, his interest 
being mainly in the didactic element, 
humility the door into the kingdom. 
Vv. 18-23. The young ruler (Mt. xix. 
16-22, Mk. κ. 17-22). From a didactic 
point of view this narrative is closely 
connected with the two preceding. The 
three set forth conditions of entrance 
into the Kingdom of God—self-abase- 


4 Omit this second gov BDILX al, 
6 Omit pev BD. 


BD have also τοις after ev. 


ment, childlikeness, and single-minded- 
ness.—Ver. 18. ἄρχων, a ruler; this 
definite statement in Lk. only.—rt 
ποιήσας instead of τί ποιήσω.---Ψετ. 20. 
μὴ μοιχεύσῃς: the Seventh Com., first 
in Lk., the Sixth in Mt. and Mk. (W. 
Η.). Mk.’s μὴ ἀποστερήσῃς and Mt.’s 
ἀγαπήσεις τ. πλησίον σου, etc., are 
not found in Lk.—Ver. 21. ἕν σοι 
λείπει: ἕν σ. ὑστερεῖ in Mk. λείπει 
= fails, so in Tit. iii. 13.—Ver. 23. 
πλούσιος σφόδρα, yery rich. Lk.’s ex- 
pression differs from that of Mt. and Mk. 
(ἦν ἔχων κτήµατα πολλά). Lk. follows 
Mk. in the most important points—the 
words first spoken by the ruler to Jesus: 
good Master, etc., and the reply of Jesus 
to him: why callest thou me good? but 
he agrees with Mt. in omitting some 
vivid traits found in Mk.: the placing of 
the incident (‘‘ going forth into the 
way”), the action of the man as he 
approached Jesus (προσθραμὼν, γονυπε- 
τήσας), the title διδάσκαλε (Mk. x. 20), 
and, most remarkable feature of all, the 
statement in Mk. x, 21: ἐμβλέψας αὐτῷ 
ἠγάπησεν αὐτόν, which so clearly ex- 
cludes the notion entertained by many 


16—3% ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

ὁ "Incots! περίλυπον γενόμενον 2 εἶπε, “Mas δυσκόλως ot τὰ 
χρήματα ἔχοντες εἰσελεύσονται ὃ eis τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
25. Εὐκοπώτερον ydp ἐστι, κάµηλον διὰ τρυμαλιᾶς ῥαφίδοςά 
εἰσελθεῖν, ἢ πλούσιον eis τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσελθεῖν.” 26. 
Εἶπον δὲ ot ἀκούσαντες, “Kal τίς δύναται σωθῆναι;”. 27. Ὁ δὲ 
εἶπε, “TA ἀδύνατα παρὰ ἀνθρώποις δυνατά ἐστι παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ.' 5 
28. Εἶπε δὲ 6 Πέτροφ, “Ιδού, ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα, καὶ ὅ 
ἠκολουθήσαμέν gor. 29. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ''᾽Αμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 
ὅτι οὐδείς ἐστιν ὃς ἀφῆκεν οἰκίαν, ἢ γονεῖς, ἢ ἀδελφούς, ἢ yuvaika,” 
ἢ τέκνα, ἕνεκεν τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ Θεοῦ, 30. ὃς οὗ μὴ ἀπολάβηῃ ® 
πολλαπλασίονα ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τούτῳ, καὶ ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τῷ ἐρχομένῳ 


601 


‘ ρ 3» 
ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 


31. ΠΑΡΑΛΑΒΩΝ δὲ τοὺς δώδεκα, ele πρὸς αὐτούς, /' Ιδού, 
ἀναβαίνομεν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα,) καὶ τελεσθήσεται πάντα τὰ γεγραµ»- 


1ο before le is wanting in B (W.H. in brackets). 
ΣΝ ΕΙ. 1, 131 al. omit περιλ. γεν. (a gloss); found in ADIA al. 
® evomropevovrat in BL and after του θεου. ΝΟΕ 124 al. have 4ισελενσονται, but. 


in the same position. 


4 πρηµατος βελονης in NBD 49. L has τρυπηµατος with βελονης. Assimilation 
to parall. has been at work in producing the T.R. 


δεστι after θεω in NBDL 1, 28, 131 al. 


6 For adynxapev παντα και SCBDL 1, 13, 69 al. have αφεντες τα ιδια. 
7 S$BL have this order: yuv. αδελφ. yovets. 
® ovxt µη in SBL 1 al., and λαβη in BD al. (Tisch. adopts former, W.H. both, 


but λαβη in text with απολ. in marg.). 
91...Anp in NBDLR, 


that the man was a _ self-complacent 
Pharisee. I am glad to find Hahn 
decidedly repudiating this view (vide 
notes on Mt. and Mk.). Vide Mt. 

Vv. 24-30. Ensuing conversation (Mt. 
xix. 23-30, Mk. x. 23-31).—Ver. 24. 
εἰσπορεύονται: present, not future, as 
in parallels, indicating not what will 
happen but what is apt to happen from 
the nature of riches.—Ver. 25. τρήµατος 
βελόνης: each evangelist has his own 
expression here.—tpjjpa from τιτράω, 
τίτρηµι (or τράω), to pierce, bore 
through; hence τρανής, penetrating, 
clear; βελόνη, the point of a spear.— 
Ver. 26. ot ἀκούσαντες, those hearing, 
a quite general reference to the company 
present. In Mt. and Mk. the words are 
addressed to the disciples.—xat τίς 8. σ.: 
as in Mk., vide notes there.—Ver. 27. 
τὰ ἀθύνατα, etc. Mk. and Mt. have 
first a particular then a general state- 
ment. Lk. gives the general truth only: 
the impossibles for men possible for God. 


—Ver. 28. Peter’s remark about leaving 
all, as in Mk., without the question, 
what shall we have? appended to it in 
Mt.—Ver. 29. Ὑυναῖκα: as in xiv. 26, 
not in parallels.—yovets: parents, for 
father and mother in parallels ; the latter 


more impressive.—Ver. 30, πολλαπλα- 
σίονα, as in Mt. Mk. has the more 
definite ἑκατονταπλασίονα. The read- 


ing ἑπταπλασίονα (D, W.H., margin), 
though little supported, has intrinsic pro- 
bability as toning down an apparent 
exaggeration (hundred fold! say seven 
fold). Cf. ἑπτάκις in xvii. 4. 

Vv. 31-34. Third prediction of the 
Passion (Mt. xx. 17-19, Mk. x. 32-34). 
Vide notes on the account in Mk., which 
is exceptionally _realistic.—Ver. 31. 
τελεσθήσεται, shall be fulfilled. With 
this verb is to be connected τῷ vig τ. G. 
(not with yeypappéva). The sense is 
not “shall be fulfilled by the Son of 
Man”. So Bornemann (Scholia), “a 
dei filio perficientur, i.¢., satisfiet pro: 


602 


KATA AOYKAN XVII. 


µένα διὰ τῶν προφητῶν τῷ vid τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 32. παραδοθήσεται. 
γὰρ τοῖς ἔθνεσι, καὶ ἐμπαιχθήσεται, καὶ ὑβρισθήσεται, καὶ ἐμπτυσθή- 
σεται, 32. καὶ µαστιγώσαντες ἀποκτενοῦσιν αὐτόν: καὶ τῇ ἡμέρα τῇ. 
τρίτῃ ἀναστήσεται. 
τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦτο κεκρυµµένον ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκον τὰ λεγό-- 


34. Καὶ αὐτοὶ οὐδὲν τούτων συνῆκαν, καὶ ἦν 


μενα. 


35. Ἐγένετο δὲ ἐν τῷ ἐγγίζειν αὐτὸν eis Ἱεριχώ, τυφλός τις 


ἐκάθητο παρὰ τὴν ὁδὸν προσαιτῶν. 
pévou, ἐπυνθάνετο ti? ety τοῦτο. 
*Ingois 6 Ναζωραῖος παρέρχεται." 


υἱὲ Δαβίδ, ἐλέησόν pe.” 


1 36. ἀκούσας δὲ ὄχλου διαπορευο- 


37- ἀπήγγειλαν δὲ αὐτῷ, “Om 
38. Καὶ ἐβόησε, λέγων, ''Ιησοῦ, 


‘ « , > , Dw ie, 
30. Και οι προαάγοντες επετιµων GUTW ινα 


σεωπήσῃ ὃ: αὐτὸς δὲ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἔκραζεν, “Vie Δαβίδ, ἐλέησόν 


1 επαιτων in SBDL Orig. 
3 σιγηση in BDLPX 245 al. 


phetarum vaticiniis a dei filio”’. Nor is 
it necessary to insert ἐν before τ. ὑ. 7. d. 
The meaning is: all things shall happen 
to the Son of Man as written in the 
prophets.—reAeto- Bar stands for γίνεσθαι, 
being used because of the prophetic 
reference (in Lk. only). So Pricaeus: 
“ reXeto@ar hic esse quod Marc, xi. 23, 24 
εἶναι, quod 1 Cor. iv. 5 γίνεσθαι, quod 1 
Pet. v. 9 ἐπιτελεῖσθαι ”. In all these 
places the verb is followed by the dative. 
—Vvy. 32, 33. The details of the Passion 
are the same’as in Mk., except that no 
mention is made of the Jewish rulers, 
and that other particulars are given in a 
somewhat different order.—Ver. 34. This 
is peculiar to Lk. A similar statement in 
ix. 45 with the same curious repetition. 
‘An emphatic prolixity’’ is Meyer’s 
comment. J. Weiss (Meyer) from the 
facts that this verse repeats ix. 45 and 
that Lk. avoids repetition infers that the 
words must have been in his source. I 
rather think that we have here an effort 
on Lk.’s part to compensate by a general 
statement about the ignorance of the 
Twelve for the instructive narrative 
about the two sons of Zebedee which 
comes in at this point in Mt. and Mk., 
and which Lk. omits, doubtless by way 
of sparing the disciples an exposure. 
The iteration (same thing said three 
times) is in Lk.’s manner (Acts xiv. 8), 
but it is significant here. The aim is by 
repetition of a general statement to con- 
vey the impression made by the con- 
crete story—an utter impossibility. No 
wonder Lk. labours in expression, in 
view of that humiliating proof of 
ignorance and moral weakness! But 


- wv avin DL (W.H. marg.}, 
T.R. conforms to parall. 


the attempt to express the inexpressible: 
is interesting as showing that Lk. must 
have had the sons of Zebedee incident in 
his mind though he does not choose to 
record it. The omission of this incident 
carries along with it the omission of the 
second and most important saying of our 
Lord concerning the significance of His. 
death. Lk.’s gospel contains hardly any 
basis for a doctrine on that subject (ef. 
Mt. xx. 28, Mk. x. 45). 

Vv. 35-43. The blind man at Fericho 
(Mt. xx. 29-34, Mk. x. 46-52).---τυφλός 
τις: the blind man is not named, from 
which J. Weiss (Meyer) infers that the 
name cannot have been in Lk.’s source. 
A very precariousinference. Lk. deviates. 
from the tradition in the parallels as to the 
place of the incident : connecting it with 
the entrance into Jericho instead ot the 
exit from the town.—émattr@v as in xvi. 
3.—Ver. 36. adxovoas: in Lk. what he 
hears is the multitude passing through, 
which he would have seen if he had not 
been blind. In the parallels what is heard 
is that it was Jesus around whom the 
multitude had gathered, which even a 
seeing man might have had to learn by 
the ear. Lk. is careful to bring out the 
fact of Ῥ]πάπεςς.-- διαπορευοµένου is an 
instance of a participle serving as the 
object of a verb. What was heard was 
the passing of the crowd.—rt εἴη τ., 
the optative without ἄν in an indirect 
question makes the question definite (cf. 
ili. 15, viii. 9, xv. 26).—Ver. 37. Nat- 
ωραῖος: the usual form in Lk., an 
exception in iv. 34.—Ver. 38. ἐβόησεν: 
aorist, he cried out once.—Ver. 39. οἱ - 
προάγοντες, those in front, nearest him. 


x 


32—43. XIX. 1-4 


35 


με. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


603 


40. Σταθεὶς δὲ 51 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐκέλευσεν αὐτὸν ἀχθῆναι πρὸς 


, A 
αὐτόν" ἐγγίσαντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτόν, 41. λέγων,; “Ti 


σοι θέλεις ποιήσω; 


Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “' Κύριε, ἵνα ἀναβλέψω.” 


42. 


Καὶ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ““᾿Ανάβλεψον: ἡ πίστις σου σέσωκέ ve.” 
43- Καὶ παραχρῆμα ἀνέβλεψε, καὶ ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ δοξάζων τὸν 
Θεόν: καὶ mas 6 λαὸς ἰδὼν ἔδωκεν αἶνον τῷ Θεᾷῷ. 
XIX. τ. ΚΑΙ εἰσελθὼν διήρχετο τὴν Ἱεριχώ: 2. καὶ ἰδού, dvhp 
ὀνόματι καλούμενος Ζακχαῖος, καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν " ἀρχιτελώνης, καὶ a here only 


= = a A 
odtos ἦν ὃ πλούσιος: 3. καὶ ἐζήτει ἰδεῖν τὸν Ιησοῦν, τίς ἐστι, καὶ 
οὐκ ἠδύνατο ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου, ὅτι τῇ 


‘ in N.T. 


ἡλικίᾳ μικρὸς ἦν. 4. καὶ 


προδραμὼν ἔμπροσθεν" ἀνέβη ἐπὶ συκοµωραίαν, ἵνα ἵδῃ αὐτόν: 


1 Omit o BD (W.H.), found in ΜΙΤ, (Tisch.). 


? Omit λεγων NBDLX 57 e. 


2 SSL 245 omit ουτος (Tisch. ). 
και ην in marg.). 


4 ets το εµπρ. in NBL. 


He would hear the sound of the crowd 
before it came up to him; when it was 
close to him he would make inquiry τί 
εἴη.--σιγήσῃ: only in Lk. and St. Paul, 
showing editorial overworking of the 
source.—éxpafey: a stronger word than 
ἐβόησεν and imperfect, kept shouting 
louder than before.—Ver. 40. «ἀχθῆναι, 
to be led to Him; Lk. again careful to 
bring out the fact of blindness, all the 
more noticeable when his narrative is 
compared with parallels. The omission 
of the interesting particulars in Mk., vv. 
49, 50, has been remarked on (Hahn) as 
proving that Lk. did not know Mk. 
Again a precarious inference. It is Lk.’s 
habit to magnify the miracle, therefore 
he tells the story so as to bring out that 
it was a case of total blindness, which 
does not clearly appear in Mk., vide 
ver. 50.—Ver. 41. κύριε: in Mk. 
“PaBBovi.—Ver. 43. αἶνον, praise, a 
poetical word in Greek writers = (1) a 
saying, (2) a word of praise, frequent in 
Sept. διδόναι αἶνον, instead of αἰνεῖν, is 
Hellenistic. | 

CHAPTER XIX. ZACCHAEUS. PARABLE 
OF THE PouNnpDs. ENTRY INTO JERU- 
SALEM.—Vvy. 1-10. The story of 
Zacchaeus, in Lk. only, apparently 
derived from an Aramaic source—note 
the abundant use of καὶ to connect 
clauses—but bearing traces of editorial 
revision in the style (καθότι, ver. 9). 
Ver. 1. διήρχετο: the incident occurred 
when Jesus was passing through Jericho, 
precisely where, not indicated.— ὀνόματι 





B reads και αυτος without ην (W.H. text, with 


καλούµεγος, called by name, as in i. 61 ; 
a Hebraism, ὀνόματι superfluous.—Zax., 
ἀρχιτ., πλούσιος: mame, occupation, 
social standing. Zacchaeus = the pure 
one, but not so intended; chief publican ; 
probably a head man or overseer over 
the local collectors of taxes, of whom 
there might be a goodly number in 
Jericho, with its balsam trade, and traffic 
from the eastern to the western side of 
Jordan.—Ver. 3. ἐζήτει: imperfect, im- 
plying continuous effort, for a while un- 
successful, because of (ἀπὸ) the crowd, 
too dense to penetrate, and not to be 
seen over by him, being short of stature 
(ἡλικίᾳ as in Mt. vi. 27).—i8etv τὸν Ἰ. 
τίς ἐστι = ἰδεῖν τίς ἐστιν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, to 
see who Jesus is = de facie cognoscere 
(Kuinoel); ‘fama notum vultu noscere 
cupiebat”” (Grotius).—Ver. 4. eis τὸ 
ἔμπροσθεν, in front of the crowd, to 
make sure; stationed at any point 
opposite the crowd he might miss his 
«Παποε.- συκοµοραίαν, a fig mulberry 
tree, as many think = συκάµινος in xvil. 
6; but why then not use the same word 
in both places, the only two places in 
N.T. where they occur, both used by 
the same writer? To this it has been 
replied: ‘‘ Although it may be admitted 
that the sycamine is properly and in Lk. 
xvii. 6 the mulberry, and the sycamore 
the fig mulberry, or sycamore fig, yet the 
latter is the tree generally referred to 
in the O.T. and called by the Sept. 
sycamine, as 1 Kings x. 27, 1 Chron. 
xxvii. 28, Ps. Ixxviii. 47, Am. vii. 14. 


6ου ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ XIX, 


ὅτι δι’ ἐκείνης 1 ἤμελλε διέρχεσθαι. 5. καὶ ds ἦλθεν ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον, 
ἀναβλέψας ὅ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶδεν αὐτόν, kal? ele πρὸς αὐτόν, “ Zaxxate, 
σπεύσας κατάβηθι' σήµερον γὰρ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ σου δεῖ µε petvar.” 
6. Καὶ σπεύσας κατέβη, καὶ ὑπεδέξατο αὐτὸν xaipwv. 7. 
ἰδόντες ἅπαντες διεγόγγυζον, λέγοντες, "OTe παρὰ ἁμαρτωλῷ ἀνδρὶ 
εἰσῆλθε καταλῦσαι.” 


\ 
και 


8. Σταθεὶς δὲ Ζακχαῖος ete πρὸς τὸν Κύριον, 

«Ιδού, τὰ ἡμίση ὃ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων µου.’ κύριε, δίδωμι τοῖς πτωχοῖς ὃ 

b Ch. iii 14. καὶ εἴ τινός Te ἐσυκοφάντησα, ἀποδίδωμι “τετραπλοῦν.” 9g. Εἶπε 
c here only ος. . aR η = “ce , , σ-Ὁ , 

in N.T. δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ Ingots, “ Ότι σήμερον σωτηρια τῷ οἴκῳ τούτῳ 

ἐγένετο, καθότι καὶ αὐτὸς υἱὸς ᾽Αβραάμ ἐστιν.ὸ 


10. ἦλθε γὰρ ὁ 


υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου {ητῆσαι καὶ σῶσαι τὸ ἀπολωλός.” 


1 εκεινης without δι in ΝΑ ΒΤ/ΟΚΕ al. 


2 evSev αντον και omitted in NBL 1, 131 al. 

3 This word variously spelt, ηµισεια in NBLQ 382. 

4 pov before των υπ. in $BLQ 1, 209 al. 

5 rors (B omits) πτωχοις διδωμι in SBDLQ 1, 33, 209. 

6 Omit εστιν NLR (Tisch.) ; found in ΒΡΩ al. (W.H. brackets). 


Dioscorides expressly says Συκόμορον, 
ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ τοῦτο συκάµινον λέγουσι, 
lib. i., cap. 180” (Smith’s Dictionary of the 
Bible, s. v. Sycamore). This is in effect 
to say that through the influence of the 
Sept. and following common usage Lk. 
used the two words indifferently as syno- 
nyms.—éxetvys: supply 680, cf. ποίας, 
v. 19.—Ver. 5. Ζακχαῖε: Jesus knows 
his name, how not indicated.—oretoas, 
etc., uttered in cordial tone as if He were 
speaking to a familiar friend whom He is 
glad to see and with whom He means to 
stay that day. What a delightful sur- 
prise that salutation, and how irresistible 
its friendly frankness, ver. 6 shows. 
—Ver. 7. ἅπαντες: general muttered 
dissent (not even the Twelve excepted), 
which Jesus anticipated and disregarded. 
Note His courage, and how much pre- 
judice the uncommon in conduct has to 
reckon with.—apaptwA@ : no reason to 
think with some ancient and modern 
commentators that Zacchaeus was a 
Gentile, a son of Abraham only in a 
spiritual sense. They thought him unfit 
to be Christ’s host because he was a 
“sinner ” (Grotius). A sinner of course 
because a publican, a great sinner because 
a chief publican.—Ver. 8. σταθεὶς : like 
the Pharisees (xviii. 11) but in a different 
spirit—in self-defence, not self-laudation. 
J. Weiss thinks the word indicates the 
solemn attitude of a man about to make 
a vow (Meyer).—p. τ. ὑπαρχόντων, the 
half of my goods, earnings, not of my 


income (of πρόσοδοι) as Godet suggests. 
---δίδωμι, ἀποδίδωμι : presents, probably 
expressing not past habit but purpose 
for the future. This is the regenerating 
effect of that generous, brave word of 
Jesus. It has made a new man of him. 
Yet the desire to see Jesus, of whom he 
had heard as the publicans’ friend, shows 
that the germ of the new man was there 
before. A “sinner” doubtless in the 
way indicated, as the et τι mildly admits, 
but by no means, even in the past, a type 
of the hard, heartless, unscrupulous 
publican.—terpamAoiv, four fold, as in 
cases of theft (Exodus xxii. 1, four or five 
fold).—Ver. 9. πρὸς αὐτὸν, to him or 
with reference to him; probably both; 
the words meant for the ears of 
Zacchaeus and all who might be there 
to hear, or perhaps spoken half as a 
5οἱ]οα1γ.-- καθότι, inasmuch as; a word 
of Lk.’s; in his writings only in N.T.— 
vids °A., a son of Abraham in the natural 
sense, a Jew; a protest against popular 
prejudice, for which a publican was as a 
heathen. The more radical reason, un- 
expressed, but present doubtless to the 
mind of Jesus, was: because he also is a 
son of man, a human being.—Ver. Io. 
A great key-word to Christ’s idea of His 
own mission—a Saviour.—ro ἀπολωλός, 
the lost, a pathetic name for the objects 
of Christ’s quest; its shades of meaning 
to be learned from the parables in Lk. 
xv.: lost as a sheep, a coin, a foolish 
son may be lost. Here the term points 


5-13: 


EYATTEAION 


605 


11. ᾽ΑΚΟΥΟΝΤΩΝ δὲ αὐτῶν ταῦτα, προσθεὶς εἶπε παραβολήν, 


διὰ τὸ ἐγγὺς αὐτὸν εἶναι Ἱερουσαλήμ,1 


καὶ δοκεῖν αὐτοὺς ὅτι παρα- ἀ Acts xxi. 
e Acts xvii. 


χρῆμα μέλλει ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ 4 ἀναφαίνεσθαι: 12. εἶπεν οὖν, 11. 1 Cor. 


““AvOpwmds τις ᾿ εὐγενὴς ἐπορεύθη eis χώραν µακράν, λαβεῖν ἑαυτῷ ο. 
13. καλέσας δὲ δέκα δούλους ἑαυτοῦ, 


βασιλείαν, καὶ ὑποστρέψαι. 


ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς δέκα ΄ μνᾶς, καὶ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, Πραγματεύσασθε 


1 εγγυς ειναι |. αντον in NBL 157. 


to the social degradation and isolation of 
the publicans. They were social lepers. 
With reference to the conduct of Jesus 
in this case Euthy. Zig. remarks: “Τε 
is necessary to despise the little scandal 
when a great salvation comes to any one 
and not to lose the great on account ofthe 
little” (χρῆ γὰρ τοῦ μικροῦ σκανδάλου 
καταφρονεῖν, ἔνθα µεγάλη σωτηρία τινὶ 
προσγίνεται, καὶ μὴ διὰ τὸ μικρὸν 
ἀπόλλειν (sic) τὸ µέγα). The significance 
of Christ choosing a publican for His 
host in a town where many priests dwelt 
has beenremarkedon. Art. ‘ Publican ” 
in Smith’s Dictionary of the Bible. 

Vv. 11-27. Parable of the pounds, or of 
the nobleman who goes to find a kingdom 
(cf. Mt. xxv. 14-30). Into the vexed 
question of the connection between this 
parable and that of the talents in Mt. I 
cannot here go. That there is a resem- 
blance between them is obvious, and the 
hypothesis that the one has grown out of 
the other in the course of tradition can- 
not be treated as a mere impertinence. 
Yet that they are two distinct parables in 
their main features, both spoken by Jesus, 
is not improbable. They serve different 
purposes, and their respective details suit 
their respective purposes, and the kindred 
features may only show that Jesus did 
not solicitously avoid repeating Himself. 
The parable before us suits the situation 
as described by Luke, in so far as it cor- 
rects mistaken expectations with regard 
to the advent of the Kingdom. It is a 
prophetic sketch in parabolic form of the 
real future before them, the fortunes of 
the King and the various attitudes of 
men towards him. It is more allied to 
allegory than most of the parables, and 
on this ground, according to J. Weiss (in 
Meyer), it cannot have proceeded from 
Jesus. One fails to see why Jesus might 
not occasionally use allegory as a vehicle 
of truth as well as other teachers. 

Ver. αι. The introduction.—raira 
naturally suggests the words spoken to 
Zacchaeus by Jesus about salvation, as 
what was Πεατά.-- προσθεὶς εἶπε imitates 


(seven 

times) 

only in 
N.T. 


the Hebrew construction = He added 
and said, cf. Gen. xxxviii. 5, προσθεῖσα 
ἔτεκεν.--ἐγγὺς: about fifteen miles off.— 
παραχρῆμα: a natural expectation for 
friends of Jesus to entertain, and for all, 
friends and foes, to impute to Him, and a 
good occasion for uttering a parable to 
correct false impressions; comparable in 
this respect with the parable of the Sup- 
per in Lk. xiv.—saying in effect, “' not so 
soon as you think, nor will all be as well 
affected to the king and his kingdom as 
you may suppose”. 

Vv. 12-27. The parable.—evyevis, well- 
born, noble; of such rank and social 
position that he might legitimately aspire 
toakingdom. The Herod family might 
quite well be in view. Herod the Great 
and his son Archelaus had actually gone 
from Fericho on this errand, and Arche- 
laus had had the experience described in 
νετ. 14. Since the time of Clericus and 
Wolf, who first suggested it, the idea that 
the Herod family was in Christ’s mind 
has been very generally accepted. Schanz 
thinks Jesus would not have selected so 
bad a man as Archelaus to represent Him. 
Yet He selected a selfish neighbour and 
an unjust judge to represent God as He 
appears, and an unjust steward to teach 
prudence !——ets χώραν paxpav: implying 
lapse of time; Rome, in the case of Arche- 
laus.—troorpéat: the desired kingdom 
is in the land of his birth; Palestine in 
case of Archelaus.—Ver. 13. δέκα ὃ., 
ten, a considerable number, pointing to 
an extensive household establishment. 
---δέκα μνᾶς, ten pounds, not to each but 
among them (ver. 16). A Greek pound 
= about £3 or £4; a Hebrew = nearly 
double ; in either case a small sum com- 
pared with the amounts in Mt.xxv. The 
purpose in the two parables is entirely 
different. In the Talents the master di- 
vides his whole means among his servants 
to be traded with, as the best way οἱ 
disposing of them during his absence. 
In the Pounds he simply gives a moderate 
sum, the same to all, with a view to test 
fidelity and capacity, as he desires te- 


606 
ἕως} ἔρχομαι. 
g Ch, xiv. 
b Gh. x. 35. βασιλεῦσαι ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς. 


KATA AOYKAN XIX. 


14. Οἱ δὲ πολῖται αὐτοῦ ἐμίσουν αὗτόν, καὶ ἀπέ- 
στειλαν Επρεσβείαν ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ, λέγοντε OF θέλομεν τοῦτον 


b ἐπανελθεῖν αὐτὸν 


I5. Καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ 
λαβόντα τὴν βασιλείαν, καὶ εἶπε φωνηθῆναι αὐτῷ τοὺς δούλους 
τούτους, οἷς ἔδωκε ” τὸ ἀργύριον, ἵνα γνῷ ® τίς τί διεπραγµατεύσατο." 
16. παρεγένετο δὲ ὁ πρῶτος, λέγων, Κύριε, ἡ μνᾶ σου προσειργάσατο 
δέκα ὅ μνᾶς. 17. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Εὖ,δ ἀγαθὲ δοῦλε: ὅτι ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ 
πιστὸς ἐγένου, ἴσθι ἐξουσίαν ἔχων ἐπάνω δέκα πόλεων. 18. Καὶ 
ἦλθεν ὁ δεύτερος, λέγων, Κύριε, ἡ μνᾶ cou’ ἐποίησε πέντε μνᾶς. 


1ο. Εἶπε δὲ καὶ τούτῳ, Καὶ σὺ yivou ἐπάνω ὃ πέντε πόλεων. 20. 


1 For εως SABDL al. Orig. have ev o. 
2 δεδωκει in NBDL 1, 25, 131. 


Vide below. 
3 yvou in NBDL 33. 


4 For τις τι διεπραγµατευσατο in ΑΕΓΔΛΠ, etc. (Tisch.), S3BDL 157 ε have τν 


διεπραγµατευσαντο (W.H.). 


5 Sexa προσειργασατο in ΜΒ], 1, 131, 209 a e. 
§ ev in NALRA al. pl. (W.H. marg. = Mt.). evye in BD 56, 58, 6τ Orig. (Tisch., 


W.H.., text). 


7 κνριε after η µνα govin NBL. Τ.Ε. = D, etc. 
8 επανου yivov in BL 1, 131, 157, 209. BD has yewwov και σν em, 


have tested men for higher service when 
the time comes. The amount may suit 
the master’s finances, and though small 
it may just on that account the better 
test character and business talent.— 
πραγματεύσασθε, trade with, here only 
in the Scriptures, found in Plutarch. 
---ἔρχομαι: with ἕως (T.R.) = until 1 
come back, with ἐν ᾧ (W.H.) = while I 
go (to the far country) ; perhaps it is used 
pregnantly to include going and return- 
ing.—Ver. 14. πολῖται = συμπολῖται, 
fellow-citizens of the aspirant to kingship 
while a private citizen (as in Gen. xxiii. 
11, Sept., Heb. viii. rz, W.H.).—épt- 
σουν, hated habitually, showing some- 
thing far wrong in him, or in them.— 
πρεσβείαν: this actually happened in the 
case of Archelaus, on just grounds ; this, 
however, is no proof that he cannot have 
been in Christ’s mind. The point is, 
hatred just or unjust, in the case both of 
Archelaus and of Jesus very real.—ovd 
θέλοµεν, we don’t wish, an emphatic olu- 
mus, stronger than θέλοµεν τοῦτον οὐ, etc. 

Vv. 15 ff. After the return.—év τῷ 
ἐπανελθεῖν : ἐν with the aorist infinitive, 
usually with present, but frequently with 
aorist in Lk. = on his return, he takes 
action at once (vide Burton, M. and T., 
§ τοο).---εἶπε φωνηθῆναι = commanded 
(jussit, Vulgate) to be called; εἶπε with 
infinitive, instead of ἵνα with subjunctive, 


as in some places, eg., Mt. iv. 3.—tis 
τί διεπρ. (T.R.) is two questions in one : 
who had gained anything and what—ri 
dverpaypatevoavro (W.H.), what they 
had gained.—Ver. 16.  pva@ σου, thy 
pound, modestly, as if he had no hand or 
merit in the gain (Grotius).—8éka : a con- 
siderable increase, implying proportional 
length of time, the kingdom not near.— 
Ver.17. ἀγαθὲ without πιστέ, as in Mt., 
but πιστὸς in next clause = noble, devot- 
ed.—év ἐλαχίστῳ, in a very little. ἐπὶ 
ὀλίγα in Mt.—émdvw δέκα πόλεων, over 
ten cities, or a Decapolis (Holtzmann, H. 
C.). This is what the king has had in 
view all along—to get capable and trusty 
governors. A new king needs to take 
special pains about this. The trial of 
character through trade is not unsuitable, 
as governors would have much to do with 
the provincial revenues.—Ver. 18. πέντε, 
five, half as much, implying less capacity, 
diligence, conscientiousness, or luck 
which, however, is not taken into 
account.—Ver. 19. καὶ σὺ: this man 
also deemed trustworthy, but ofless capa- 
city, therefore appointed to a governor- 
ship, but of less extent. Also, note, there 
is no praise. He was honest, but might 
have done better. The new king is 
thankful to have honesty even with re- 
spectable, though not admirable adminis- 
trative qualities. . 


or 


14-28. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


607 


Καὶ ἕτερος 1 ᾖλθε, λέγων, Κύριε, ἰδού, ἡ μνᾶ σου, ἣν εἶχον ! ἁποκει- i Col. i. 5. 


µένην ἐν σουδαρίῳ: 21. ἐφοβούμην γάρ σε, 


a 


2 Lim. iv. 
ὅτι ἄνθρωπος αὐστηρὸς 8. Heb. 
νο). 


οὐκ ἔθηκας, καὶ θερίζεις ὃ οὐκ ἔσπειρας. 22. Λέγει 


δὲ” αὐτῷ, Ἐκ τοῦ στόµατός σου κρινῶ σε, πονηρὲ δοῦλε. ἥδεις ὅτι 


εἶ ΄ αἴρεις ὃ 
ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπος αὐστηρός εἰμι, αἴρων ὃ οὐκ ἔθηκα, καὶ θερίζων ὃ οὖκ 
ἔσπειρα: 23. καὶ διατί οὐκ ἔδωκας τὸ ἀργύριόν pou® ἐπὶ τὴν" 
24. Καὶ τοῖς 
παρεστῶσιν εἶπεν, “Apate ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ τὴν μνᾶν, καὶ δότε τῷ τὰς δέκα 
25. (Καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, Κύριε, ἔχει δέκα μνᾶς.) 


τράπεῖαν, καὶ ἐγὼ ἐλθὼν σὺν τόκῳ ἂν ἔπραξα αὐτόδ; 


μνᾶς ἔχοντι. 
26. Λέγω γὰρ” ὑμῖν, ὅτι παντὶ τῷ ἔχοντι δοθήσεται: ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ 
27. Πλὴν τοὺς 
ἐχθρούς µου ἐκείνους τοὺς μὴ θελήσαντάς µε βασιλεῦσαι ἐπ᾽ 


μὴ ἔχοντος, καὶ ὃ ἔχει ἀρθήσεται dw αὐτοῦ. 


αὐτούς, ἀγάγετε ὧδε, kai’ κατασφάξατε') ἔμπροσθέν pov.” 28. Καὶ | bene galy 
a 3 ς in a 
εἰπὼν ταῦτα, ἐπορεύετο ἔμπροσθεν, ἀναβαίνων cis Ἱεροσόλυμα. 


1ο ετερος in SCBDLR 60, 247. 

ἅμου To apy. in NABL 33. T.R. = D. 
5 avto επραξα in NBL. 

7 Omit απ αυτου ΕΙ, 36, 53 al. 


3 Omit δε 94 Β al. 1, 28, 131 al. pi. 
‘Omit την NABDLRA ai. pl. 
5 Omit yap NBL 1, 131, 209. 


8 For εκεινους (D, etc.) SBKLMN al. have rovrove. 


° autous after κατασφ. in SBFLR 33. 


Vv. 20-27. The useless servant. If in 
any part the parable has borrowed from 
the parable in Mt., it is here. The story 
might well have wound up with a state- 
ment as to what was to be done with the 
disaffected.—Ver. 27. Yet this feature is 
not inapposite, for there were likely to be 
three classes of people to be dealt with 
by the king: the honest and capable, the 
incapable and useless, and the disaffected, 
The chief objection to the part refening 
to the second class is that it gives the 
parable a too didactic aspect, aiming at 
theoretic exhaustiveness rather than in- 
sisting on the main points: how the king 
will deal with his friends and how with 
his foes.—Ver. 20. ἐν σονδαρίῳ, in a 
handkerchief; ἐν τῇ yj in Mt.—Ver. 21. 
αὐστηρὸς (here only in N.T.), harsh in 
flavour, then-in disposition.—afpets, etc., 
you lift what you did not deposit, and 
reap what you did not sow; accusing the 
master of an exorbitant demand for pro- 
fit. He despaired of pleasing him in that 
respect, therefore did nothing—a pretext 
of course..—Ver. 23. ἐπὶ τράπεζαν = 
τοῖς τραπεζίταις in Mt.—émpaga = ἐκο- 
µισάµην in Mt.—Ver. 24. ἄρατε, etc. : 
the pound given to him that had ten 
could only have the significance of a 
present, and a petty one, for he was no 


longer to be a trader but a ruler, there- 
fore not an important illustration of the 
principle stated in ver. 26, a sign that in 
this section of the parable Lk. is second- 
ary.—Ver. 25. Possibly an utterance 
from the crowd interested in the parable, 
the ‘‘Lord” being Jesus, or an addition 
by Lk., or not genuine (wanting in Ὦ). 
—Ver. 26. Deprivation the only penalty 
here, no casting out into outer darkness 
as in Mt.; merciless severity reserved 
for the enemies of the king.—Ver. 27. 
πλὴν, for the rest, winding up the trans- 
actions at the commencement of the 
king’s reign.—xataodagfare: barbarous, 
but true to Eastern life; the new king 
cannot afford to let them live. In the 
spiritual sphere the slaying wiil be done by 
the moral order of the world (destruction 
of the Jewish state), King Jesus weeping 
over their fate. Motive must not be. 
transferred from the parable to the appli- 
cation. 

Ver. 28. On the way to Ferusalem 
The Jericho incidents disposed of, the 
next centre of interest is the Holy City. 
Lk. connects the two parts of his narra- 
tive by a brief notice of the ascent from 
the smaller city at the foot of the pass to 
the larger and more famous at the top. 
—elwev ταῦτα refers naturally to the 


608 


KATA AOYKAN 


XIX. 


29. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ds ἤγγισεν eis Βηθφαγὴ καὶ Βηθανίαν πρὸς τὸ 


ὄρος τὸ καλούμενον ἐλαιῶν, 


ἀπέστειλε δύο τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, 


30. επών, “ Ὑπάγετε eis τὴν κατέναντι κώµην' ἐν ᾗ εἴσπορευόμενοι 
εὑρήσετε πῶλον δεδεµένον, ἐφ᾽ Sv οὐδεὶς πώποτε ἀνθρώπων ἐκάθισε: 
λύσαντες ὃ αὐτὸν ἀγάγετε. 31. καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμᾶς ἐρωτᾷ, Διατί λύετε; 


οὕτως ἐρεῖτε αὐτῷ, Ὅτι ὁ Κύριος αὐτοῦ χρείαν ἔχει." 


32. Απελ- 


θόντες δὲ οἱ ἀπεσταλμένοι εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς' 33. λυόντων δὲ 
αὐτῶν τὸν πῶλον, εἶπον οἱ κύριοι αὐτοῦ πρὸς αὐτούς, “Ti λύετε τὸν 


πῶλον ; 


34. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “‘O Κύριος αὐτοῦ Χρείαν ἔχει. 


35. Καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτὸν πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν: καὶ ἐπιρρίψαντες ἑαυτῶν ὅ 


τὰ ἵμάτια ἐπὶ τὸν πῶλον, ἐπεβίβασαν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 
δὲ αὐτοῦ " ὑπεστρώννυον τὰ μάτια αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ. 


k here only 
i Le 


36. πορευοµένου 
37- Ἐγγί- 


ii. Ὄοντος δὲ αὐτοῦ ἤδη πρὸς τῇ καταβάσει τοῦ Gpous τῶν ἐλαιῶν, 
ἤρξαντο ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος τῶν μαθητῶν Χαίροντες αἰνεῖν τὸν Θεὸν 


2 Omit αντου δ9ΒΙ, πιίπαςο. (found in D αἰ.). 


1λεγων in BDL 13, 69. 
4 Omit avtw SBDL minusc. 
6 avrwy in NBDLA 1, 13, etc. 


parable. Asa note of time the expression 
is sufficiently vague, for we do not know 
when or where the parable was spoken, 
nor how much time intervened between 
its utterance and the commencement of 
the ascent. It is simply one of Lk.’s 
formule of transition.—épmpooGev = eis 
τὸ ἔμπροσθεν, not before them, but for- 
wards: iter suum continuabat, Kypke.— 
ἀναβαίνων, going up. A constant ascent, 
steep and rugged. 

Vv. 29-38. The triumphal entry into 
Ferusalem (Mt. xx. 1-11, Mk. xi. 1-11).— 
Βηθφαγὴ. Following Lightfoot and 
Renan, Godet regards this as the name 
not of a village but of a suburban dis- 
trict included for passover purposes in 
the holy city, pilgrims to the feast find- 
ing quarters in it. The reference to the 
two places Bethphage and Bethany is 
obscure and confusing.—éAat@v, com- 
mentators dispute whether the word 
should be accentuated thus, making it 
genitive plural of ἑλαία, or ἐλαιών, making 
it nominative singular of a name for the 
place = Olivetum, olive grove. W. and 
H. print it with the circumflex accent, 
and Field (Οἱ. Nor.) and Hahn take the 
same view.—Vv. 31-34. The sending of 
two disciples for the colt is related as in 
Mt. and Mk., but with a little more of 
Greek in the style. The remark about 
the owners sending it (Mt.) or Jesus re- 
turning it (Mk.) is omitted. On the 


? BDL 157 prefix και. 
* ort before ο kup. in SABDL al. pl. 
7Soin SDL. B has here εαυτων. 


other hand, Lk. alone states that the two 
disciples found matters as the Master 
had said (ver. 32). In ver. 33 ot κύριοι 
suggests a plurality of owners.—Ver. 35. 
ἐπιρρίψαντες: the participle is used to 
relieve the monotony of the paratactic 
construction (καὶ, καὶ, καὶ in Mt. and 
Mk.) ; the word occurs here only and in 
1 Pet. v. 7, g.v.—émweBl(Bacav, helped to 
mount, as in Lk. x. 34, Acts xxili. 24; a 
technical term, possibly used here to add 
pomp to the scene.—Ver. 36. τὰ ἱμάτια, 
their garments, but no mention οἱ 
branches in Lk., possibly from a feeling 
that they would be an encumbrance.— 
Ver. 37. ἐγγίζοντος: Lk. is thinking ot 
Jerusalem = when He wasnearing thecity. 
The next clause, πρὸς τῇ καταβάσει, 
is added to define more precisely the 
point reached = at the descent of the 
mount. They had got over the ridge to 
the western slope.—xaraBaoet, here only 
in Ν.Τ.--ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος: Mt. and Mk. 
divide the crowd into those going before 
and those following.—Svvapewv: this 
reference to miracles as the occasion of 
praise is peculiar to Lk. That Galilean 
pilgrims should remember gratefully the 
healing ministry at that moment was 
very natural. Yet Lk.’s explanation of 
the popular enthusiasm, while true, may 
be far from exhaustive.—Ver. 38. A free 
reproduction of the popular acclaim as 
reported by Mt. and Mk., not without 


29—43. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

dori µεγάλη περὶ πασῶνὶ dy εἶδον δυνάμεων, 38. λέγοντες 
ἐρχόμενος βασιλεὺς ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου: εἰρήνη 
30. Kai τινες τῶν Φαρισαίων 


ς 


“ Edhoynpevos 6 
ἐν οὐρανῷ,; καὶ δόξα ἐν tipicrors.” 
ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου εἶπον πρὸς αὐτόν, “ Διδάσκαλε, ἐπιτίμησον τοῖς 
40. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς,ὸ “Adyw ὑμῖν, 
41. Καὶ ὡς 


μαθηταῖς σου.” 
ὅτι, ἐὰν οὗτοι σιωπήσωσιν," οἱ λίθοι κεκράξονται.᾿ 5 
ἤγγισεν, ἰδὼν τὴν πόλιν, ἔκλαυσεν em αὐτῇ.ὸ 42. λέγων, “ Ὅτι εἰ 
ἔγνως καὶ σύ, καί γε] ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ σου ταύτῃ, τὰ πρὸς εἰρήνην σου” 
viv δὲ ἐκρύβη ἀπὸ ὀφθαλμῶν σου’ 43. ὅτι ἤξουσιν ἡμέραι ἐπὶ σέ, 
καὶ περιβαλοῦσιν ὃ οἱ ἐχθροί σου χάρακά σοι, καὶ περικυκλώσουσί 


θου 


Ἱ παντων in BD, perhaps the true reading ; πασων a correction to agree with 


δυναµεων. 


2 ev ουρ. ειρ. in Δ39ΒΙ, Orig. (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 SBL omit αντοις. 


4 cuwTycover in SABLR al, 


5 For this form, common in Sept., NBL Orig. have κραξουσι. 


δ επ αυτην in $ABDL, etc. 


7 και ov και ye is probably a conflate reading; some western texts have the one 


some the other. $QBL (with D) omit και ye and read ει εγνως εν τη ημ. ταυτη (σου 
omitted) και ov, and omit σου after ειρηνην. 


5 So in B (W.H. marg.).' wapepBadovow in CL 33 (Tisch., W.H., text). 


variations even between them. The 
Hebrew Hosanna is omitted and trans- 
lated into equivalents which recall the 
gloria in excelsis (Lk. ii. 14), ‘already 
become a church hymn” (Holtz., H. C.). 
Lk.’s version runs : 

Blessed is He that cometh, the King, 
in the name of the Lord! 

In heaven peace, 

And glory in the highest. 

In comparison with Mt. and Mk. this 
version seems secondary. 

Vv. 30-44. Pharisees murmur and 
Fesus weeps, peculiar to Lk.—amd τοῦ 
ὄχλου, from within the crowd, or on 
account of the crowd and what they had 
been saying = prae turba as in ver. 3. 
Loesner cites from Philo instances of the 
use of ἀπὸ in this sense (but in reference 
to ver. 3).—Ver. 4Ο. ἐὰν σιωπήσουσιν: 
ἐὰν with future indicative instead of sub- 
junctive as in classic Greek, one of the 
divergent ways in which the N.T. ex- 
presses a future supposition with some 
probability (vide Burton, M. and T., §§ 
250-256).—ot λίθοι κράξουσιν͵ the stones 
will cry out ; possibly there is a reference 
to Hab. ii. 11, but the expression is pro- 
verbial (instances in Pricaeus, Wetstein, 
etc.) = the impossible will happen rather 
than the Messianic kingdom fail of re- 
cognition. Some, ¢.g., Stier and Nésgen, 
find in the words a reference to the 


destruction of the temple and the witness 
it bore to Jesus = if I receive not witness 
from the Jewish people the scattered 
stones of the ruined temple will witness 
forme. An attractive idea, not refuted 
by Hahn’s objection that if it had been 
in view we should have had ὅταν οὗτοι 
σιωπ. instead of ἐὰν, etc. ἐὰν with 
future may express a future supposition 
with some probability. 

Vv. 41-44. Fesus weeps at sight of 
the city and laments its doom.—ds = 
when, asin many places in Lk.—éxAavorev 
ἐπ) a., He wept aloud, like Peter (Mk. 
xiv. 72).— δακρύειν = to shed tears 
silently ; for a group of synonyms with 
their distinctive meanings vide under 
κλαίω in Thayer’s Grimm.—Ver. 42. εἰ 
ἔγνως: ei with the aorist indicative in 
a supposition contrary to fact, the 
apodosis being omitted by an impressive 
aposiopesis.—év +. ἡμέρα τ., in this (late) 
day, not too late yet.—xat σὺ, thou too, 
as wellas my disciples : their insight will 
save them, but not you and the nation ; 
you must know for yourselves,—xai ye 
T.R.): the combination καὶ σὺ καί γε 
vide critical notes) is suspicious. Coming 
before ἐν τ. ἡμέρᾳ, etc., as in T.R., it 
will mean: even at this late hour.—ra 
πρὸς εἰρήνην, the things tending to thy 
peace = thy salvation.—vtv δὲ, but now 
as things stand ; the day of grace there- 


39 


ότο 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


ΧΙΧ. 44—45. 


σε, καὶ συνέξουσί σε πάντοθεν, 44. καὶ ἐδαφιοῦσί σε καὶ τὰ τέκνα 
σου ἐν got, καὶ οὖκ ἀφήσουσιν ἐν σοὶ λίθον ἐπὶ λίθῳ1: dv ὧν οὐκ 


ἔγνως τὸν καιρὸν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς σου.” 


45. Καὶ εἰσελθὼν εἰς τὸ ἵερόν, ἤρξατο ἐκβάλλειν τοὺς πωλοῦντας 


ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ ἀγοράζοντας,” 46. λέγων αὗτοῖς, ““Γέγραπται, ‘“O 
οἶκός µου οἶκος προσευχῆς ἐστίν Σ. ὑμεῖς δὲ αὐτὸν ἐποιήσατε 


σπήλαιον λῃστῶν.” 


47. Καὶ ἦν διδάσκων τὸ καθ) ἡμέραν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ» οἱ δὲ ἀρχιερεῖς 
καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἀπολέσαι, καὶ οἱ πρῶτοι τοῦ λαοῦ - 


I here only 


Ne: - 
oe αὐτοῦ aKovwr. 


48. καὶ οὐχ εὕρισκον τὸ τί ποιήσωσιν, ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἅπας } ἐξεκρέματο" 


1 λιθον επι λιθον ev σοι in ΔΒΓΡΙ, (D with other texts have ev ολη σοι: e, in tota 


terra). 


2 S8BCL 1, 69, 209 al. omit εν αντω, and NBL 1, 209 syr. sin. Orig. omit και 
αγοραζοντας, which, in view of Lk.’s editorial peculiarities, is to be rejected. 


5 SSBLR 1, 13, 69 al. have και εσται ο o1k. µ. ok. προσευχης (Tisch., W.H.). 
4 εξεκρεµετο in KB (W.H., also Tisch., who remarks: a vulgari usu haud aliena 


videtur fuisse). 


fore is already past.—éxpvBy: judicial 
blindness has set in, the penalty of a long 
course of moral perversity.—Ver. 43. 
ὅτι, for, because, introducing a prophetic 
picture of coming ruin, either to explain 
the εἰ ἔγνως = what you would have 
escaped had you but known; or to sub- 
stantiate the assertion of judicial blind- 
ness Ξ Πο hope of your seeing now; 
your fate sealed; judgment days will 
surely come (ἤξουσιν ἡμέραι). Then 
follows an αγνή αἱ picture of these judgment 
days in a series of clauses connected by 
a fivefold καὶ, the first being = when. 
The description recalls Isaiah xxix. 3 so 
closely that the use of such definite 
phrases before the event is quite conceiv- 
able, although many critics think the 
prophecy so certainly ex eventu as to use 
it for fixing the date of the Gospel.— 
χάρακα, a palisade (here only in N.T.). 
Titus did erect a palisaded mound around 
Jerusalem, and, after it was destroyed by 
the Jews ina sortie, he built a wall.—Ver. 
44. ἐδαφιοῦσι: this verb (here only in 
N.T., Sept. several times) has both oe 
and τὰ τέκνα σ. for its objects and must 
have a meaning assigned to it suitable to 
each: (1) to raze to the ground—in 
reference to the city, (2) to dash to the 
ground—in reference to the children or 
population of the city. Here only in 
N.T., frequent in Sept.—réov καιρὸν τ. 
ἐπισκοπῆς σ., the season of thy gracious 
visitation.—émwioKomy and its correspond- 
ing verb have this meaning in N.T. In 


Sept. it is a vox media and is used with 
reference to visitations both in mercy 
and in judgment. 

Vv. 45-48. Ύεσις in the temple (Mt. 
xxi. 12-17, Mk. xi. 15-19). We have 
here two tableaux: Jesus reforming 
temple abuses (45-46), and Jesus teach- 
ing in the temple to the delight of the 
people and the chagrin of their religious 
and social superiors. Of the former we 
have but a slight and colourless presenta- 
tion from Lk., whose editorial solicitudes, 
now well known to us, here come into 
play. The story astold by Mt. and Mk. 
shows passion (of the true Divine pro- 
phetic type) and action bordering on 
violence. ‘This disappears from Lk.’s 
page in favour of a decorous but neutral 
picture. J. Weiss thinks it incredible 
that Lk. should have given us so in- 
adequate a statement had he had such 
an account as that in Mk. before him 
(Meyer, eighth edition, note, p. 584). It 
is perfectly intelligible, once we under- 
stand Lk.’s method of handling his 
material, Equally groundless, for the 
same reason, is the inference of Hahn 
from the omissions of Lk. between vv. 
44 and 45 (Mt. xxi. 10,11, Mk. xi. 11-14) 
that he cannot have known either Mt. or 
Mk. 

Ver. 45. τοὺς πωλοῦντας, the sellers, 
no mention of the buyers in the true text 
(W.H. after S9BL).—Ver. 46. καὶ ἔσται: 
the καὶ, a well-attested reading, does not 
occur in the text quoted (Is. lvi. 7). The 


XX. 1—6. 


EYATTEAION 


611 


XX. 1. ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο ἐν μιᾷ τῶν ἡμερῶν ἐκείνων διδάσκοντος 
αὐτοῦ τὸν λαὺν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ καὶ εὐαγγελιζομένου, ἐπέστησαν οἱ 
ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς σὺν τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις, 2. καὶ εἶπον 
πρὺς αὐτόν, λέγοντες,” “Εἰπὲ ὃ ἡμῖν, ἐν ποίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ ταῦτα ποιεῖς, 


{ τίς ἐστιν ὁ Sods σοι τὴν ἐξουσίαν ταύτην; 3. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 


εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, ΄΄Ἐρωτήσω ὑμᾶς κἀγὼ ἕνα ἤ λόγον, καὶ εἴπατέ 


μοι: 4. Τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ Ιωάννου ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ἦν, ἢ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων; 


5. Οἱ δὲ συνελογίσαντο ὃ πρὸς ἑαυτούς, λέγοντες, - Ὅτι ἐὰν εἴπωμεν, 


. lol 3 Cal ~ 
Εξ οὐρανοῦ, ἐρεῖ, Atari ody” οὐκ ἐπιστεύσατε αὐτῷ; 


6. ἐὰν δὲ 


εἴπωμεν, Εξ ἀνθρώπων, mas ὁ λαὸς ὃ καταλιθάσει ἡμᾶς: πεπεισμένος 


? Omit εκεινων NBDLQ ai. 


2 Neyovtes προς αυτον in NBL 1, 131, 209 verss, 


Σειπον in NABLR 1, 33. 


4 Omit ενα (from parall.) S$BLR 1, 33, 69, etc. 
Στο before |. in $$DLR (Tisch.), not in B (W.H.). 
6 συνελογιζοντο (imperfect in Mt. and Mk.) in $§CD. Tisch. and W.H. retain 


-OGavTO. 


7 SQBL al. pl. omit ουν. 


words πᾶσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, which do 
occur, are strangely omitted by Lk., the 
Gentile evangelist, perhaps to sharpen 
the contrast between the ideal—a house 
of prayer, and the reality—a den of 
robbers, t.e., of dishonest traders, or it 
may be because the temple was now in 
ruins. The last part of the saying is 
from Jerem. vii. 11. 

Vv. 47-48. τὸ καθ ἡμέραν, daily, as 
in xi. 3.--ἀρχιερῖς καὶ γραμματεῖς, 
priests and scribes, Sadducees and 
Pharisees, lax and strict, united against 
the Man who had nothing in common 
with either.—xat οἱ πρῶτοι: added as a 
kind of afterthought = the socially im- 
portant people who, though laymen, 
agreed with the professionals in their 
dislike of Jesus.—Ver. 48. τὸ τί 
ποιήσωσιν, “the what to do’’; the will 
to kill there, but the way dark (cf. i. 62, 
xxii. 24).—6 λαὸς, the people, the 
common mass, with their inconvenient 
liking for a true, outspoken, brave, 
heroic πιαη.---ἐξεκρέμετο α., hung upon 
Him (hearing), an expressive phrase, and 
classical; examples in Wetstein and 
Pricaeus and in Loesner from Philo. 
From the Latins they cite: 

Pendentque iterum narrantis ab ore.— 
Virg., Aen., v. 79. 

Narrantis conjux pendet ab ore viri.— 
Ovid., Her., 1, 30. 

Pricaeus suggests that the metaphor is 
taken from iron and the magnet. 


δο λαος απας in BDL 1, 33 al. 


CHAPTER XX. IN THE TEMPLE. 
PREACHING, CONFLICTS, AND PARABLE 
OF THE VINEDRESSERS.—Vy. 1-8. By 
what authority ? (Mt. xxi. 23-27, Mk. x1. 
27-33).---ἐν pig τ. 7, on one of the days, 
referred to in xix. 47; vague note of 
time.—evayyeAtLopeévov: Lk. wishes his 
readers to understand that Jesus was not 
engaged in heated controversy all the 
time, that His main occupation during 
these last days was preaching the good 
news, speaking ‘‘ words of grace”’ there as 
in Galilee and in Βατηατία,--ἐπέστησαν, 
came upon, with perhaps a suggestion of 
suddenness (examples in Loesner from 
Philo), and even of hostility (adorti 
sunt, Erasmus, Amnot.). In xxi. 34 Lk. 
uses a separate word along with the verb 
to express the idea of suddenness.—Ver. 
2. εἰπὸν ἡμῖν: peculiar to Lk., makes the 
question pointed.—raitra ought to refer 
to the preaching, not to the cleansing of 
the temple, which in Lk. is very slightly 
noticed.—ris ἐστιν, etc.: α direct 
question introduced by 4, not dependent 
on εἰπὸν, not altogether distinct from 
the first question; an alternative form 
putting it more specifically and more 
pointedly than in parallels = who is it 
that gives, who can it be? Authority ;. 
everything for the interrogants. Every 
Rabbi had his diploma, every priest his 
ordination (Farrar).—Ver. 3. λόγον: 
without the ἕνα of the parallels. Vide 
notes there.—Ver. 5. ovvedoyicayro | 


612 KATA AOYKAN XX. 
γάρ ἐστιν Ἰωάννην προφήτην εἶναι.” 


πόθεν. 


7. Καὶ ἀπεκρίθησαν μὴ εἰδέναι 
8. καὶ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Οὐδὲ ἐγὼ λέγω ὑμῖν ἐν ποίᾳ 
ἐξουσίαᾳ ταῦτα mow.” 

9. "Ἠρέατο δὲ πρὸς τὸν λαὸν λέγειν τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην" 
6 "Ανθρωπός τις ἐφύτευσεν ἀμπελῶνα,ὶ καὶ ἐξέδοτο 3 αὐτὸν γεωργοῖς, - 
καὶ ἀπεδήμησε χρόνους ἱκανούς. 1ο. καὶ ἐν ὃ καιρῷ ἀπέστειλε πρὸς 
τοὺς γεωργοὺς δοῦλον, ἵνα ἀπὸ τοῦ καρποῦ τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος δῶσιν 4 
αὐτῷ ' οἱ δὲ γεωργοὶ δείραντες αὐτὸν ἐξαπέστειλαν ὃ κενόν. 11. καὶ 
προσέθετο πέμψαι ἕτερον ὃ δοῦλον: of δὲ κἀκεῖνον δείραντες καὶ 


ἀτιμάσαντες ἐξαπέστειλαν κενόν. 12. καὶ προσέθετο πέµψαι τρίτον Ἱ - 


ahereand οἱ δὲ καὶ τοῦτον "τραυματίσαντες ἐξέβαλον. 13. εἶπε δὲ ὁ κύριος 
in Aets - - , , a ς ο. , 
xix.16. τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος, Τί ποιήσω; πέμψω τὸν υἱόν µου τὸν ἀγαπητόν: 


1ΝΒΟΡΙ, omit τις, and BL have εφυτ. αμπ. as in Τ.Ε. 


eput. D apr. εφυτ. avd. 


2 εξεδετο in ΜΒΟΙ, = parall. 
εξεδοτο found in D. 


3 Omit εν NBDL 33. 


4 Swcovow in RABLMQ (Tisch., W.H.). 


5εξαπεστειλαν a. δειραντες in NBL. 
5 erepov wepwat in SABLU. 


for the more usual διαλ.; here only in 
Ν.Τ.--πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς may be connected 
either with this verb or with λέγοντες. 
—Ver. 6. καταλιθάσει: in the parallels 
it is indicated generally that they feared 
the people; here it is explained why or 
what they feared: viz., that the people 
would stone them; to be taken cum grano. 
The verb is a ἅπαξ dey. ; synonyms are 
καταλιθοῦν (Joseph.), καταλιθοβολεῖν 
(Ex. xvii. 4).---πεπεισµένος points to a 
fixed permanent conviction, this the 
force of the perfect participle.—Ver. 7. 
μὴ εἰδέναι : the answer is given in de- 
pendent form = οὐκ οἴδαμεν in parallels. 

Vv. 9-19. The parable of the wicked 
vinedressers (Mt. xxi. 33-46, Mk. xii. τ- 
12). Between the last section and this 
comes, in Mt., the parable of the Two 
Sons. 

Ver. g. ἤρξατο: this word is less 
appropriate here than in Mk., where it 
means: made a beginning in teaching 
by parables by uttering this particular 
parable. Here it may signify turning 
to the people again after disposing of the 
question of the Pharisees concerning 
authority.—épirevoev ἀμπελῶνα: Lk. 
contents himself with this general state- 
ment, omitting the details given in 
parallels, which explain what planting a 
vineyard involves.—ypdévovs ixavovs : 


C has αμπ.ανθ. 


Tisch. and W.H. both adopt it, but Trg. retains 


CD have δωσιν. 


7 τριτον πεµψαι in NBL, 


literally, ‘‘for long times,” peculiar to 
Lk. here; similar phrases are of fre- 
quent occurrence in his writings. The 
“long times” cover the whole period ot 
Israel’s history. The absenteeism of 
God during these long ages represents 
the free scope given in providence to the 
will of man in the exercise of his moral 
responsibility.—Ver. 1Ο. καιρῷ means 
the fruit season each year; many such 
seasons at which God sent demanding 
fruit.—tva δώσονσιν : ἵνα with the future 
in a pure final clause; similar con- 
structions occur in classic Greek, but 
with ὅπως, not with ἵνα.---δείραντες : the 
gradation in indignities is well marked 
in Lk.—beating, beating with shameful 
handling (ἀτιμάσαντες), ejection with 
wounding (τραυµατίσαντες ἐξέβαλον), 
culminating in murder in the case of the 
son. In the parallels killing comes in 
sooner, which is true to the historical 
fact.—Ver. 12. προσέθετο πέµψαι, he 
added to send, a Hebraism, asin xix. 11. 
—Ver. 13. τί ποιήσω; deliberative sub- 
junctive, serving to make the step next 
taken appear something extraordinary. 
In Mt. it appears simply as the next 
(final) step in common course. In Mk. 
the son is the only person left to send. 
He had yet one, a beloved son, ‘‘ beloved” 
added to bring out the significance of 


7—19. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

tows τοῦτον ἰδόντες ὶ ἐντραπήσονται. 14. ᾿Ιδόντες δὲ αὐτὸν of 
γεωργοὶ διελογίζοντο πρὸς ἑαυτούς,; λέγοντες, Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ κληρο- 
νόμος: δεῦτε, ἀποκτείνωμεν αὐτόν, ἵνα ἡμῶν γένηται ἡ κληρονοµία. 
15. Καὶ ἐκβαλόντες αὐτὸν ἔξω τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος, ἀπέκτειναν. 
ποιήσει αὐτοῖς 6 κύριος τοῦ ἀμπελῶνος ; 


Τί οὖν 
16. ἐλεύσεται καὶ ἀπολέσει 
τοὺς γεωργοὺς τούτους, καὶ δώσει τὸν ἀμπελῶνα ἄλλοις.” 
3 9 «ες a , 3» 
σαντες δὲ εἶπον, “Mh γένοιτο. 


᾽Ακού- 
17. Ὁ δὲ ἐμβλέψας αὐτοῖς εἶπε, 
“Ti οὖν ἐστι τὸ γεγραμµένον τοῦτο, ΄Λίθον ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ 
οἰκοδομοῦντες, οὗτος ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας; 18. Mas ὅ 
πεσὼν ἐπ᾽ ἐκεῖνον τὸν λίθον συνθλασθήσεται; ἐφ ὃν 8 ἂν πέσῃ, 


613 


, > Ff 2 
λικμήσει αὐτόν. 


19. Καὶ ἐζήτησαν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of γραμματεῖς ! 


ἐπιβαλεῖν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν τὰς χεῖρας ἐν αὐτῇ TH ὥρα, καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν τὸν 
λαόν: ἔγνωσαν γὰρ ὅτι πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν παραβολὴν ταύτην εἶπε." 


‘ Gut Boorm 9 BCDLQ 1, 33, 131 verss. 


2 adAndous in NBDLR 1, 33 al. 


3 Omit Sevre B and other uncials (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 ov γραμ. και ot αρχ. in BL al. 1, 33 al. pl. verss. 


TR = ND. 


5 ειπεν before την παρ. in NB (D ειρηκεν) L 13, 69, etc. 


sending him. In Lk. the reference to 
the son has a theological colour: τὸν 
vidv µου τὸν ἀγαπητόν.- ἴσως: more 
than “‘ perhaps ” or “‘ it may be” (A.V., 
R.V.), and less than “ without doubt” 
(‘sine dubio,” Wolf). It expresses 
what may naturally and reasonably 
be expected τάχα (Hesychius), or 
οἶμαι (Bornemann) =I should think 
(they will reverence him). Here only 
in N.T.—Ver. 15. éxBadovres ἀπέκ- 
τειναν, casting out they killed him, in- 
verting the order of the actions in Mk.; 
perhaps with prospective reference (on 
Lk.’s part) to the crucifixion, when Jesus 
was led outside the city and crucified 
‘‘without the gate’’.—Ver. 16. 
Ὑένοιτο: here only in the Gospels, fre- 
quent in St. Paul’s Epistles (‘‘a Pauline 
phrase,” Holtzmann, H. C.), Sturz 
(De Dialecto Mac. et Alex.) reckons it an 
Alexandrine usage, because found in the 
sense of deprecation only in Sept., N.T., 
and late Greek writers. Raphel cites an 
example from Herodotus. This μὴ 
γένοιτο is put by Lk. into the mouth of 
the people, as unable to contemplate the 
doom pronounced on the husbandmen 
as described by Jesus. In Mt. (xxi. 41) 
the people themselves pronounce the 
doom. The sentiment thus strongly ex- 
pressed prepares the way for the reference 
to the ‘‘ rejected stone”. 

Vv. 17-19.—épBAeWas, looking  in- 
tently, to give impressiveness to what 


He is going to say in reply.—rf οὖν, etc., 
what then is (means) this Scripture? the 
οὖν implying that the words point to the 
very doom they deprecate. Yet the 
oracle does not directly indicate the fate 
of the builders, but rather the unex- 
pected turn in the fortunes of the re- 
jected and despised Stone. In Mt. and 
Mk. the citation is introduced, without 
any binding connection with what im- 
mediately goes before, to state a fact 
concerning the future of the ‘‘Son”’ 
lying outside the parable. They give 
the citation in full. Lk. omits the last 
clause: παρὰ κυρίου, etc.—Ver. 18 
points out the bearing of the turn in the 
fortunes of the ‘‘ Stone” on the fate of 
those who rejected Him. The thought 
is based on Daniel ii. 35. It is not in 
Mk., and it is a doubtful reading in Mt. 
It may have been a comment on the 
oracle from the Psalter suggested to 
believing minds by the tragic fate of the 
Jews. They first stumbled on the stone, 
then the stone fell on them with crushing 
judicial effect.—Ver. το states the effect of 
the parabolic discourse of Jesus on the 
men whom it satirised. They desired to 
apprehend the obnoxious Speaker on the 
spot.—év αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ, καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν, 
etc.: the καὶ here, as in ΜΠς., is in efiect 
= but; vide notes on Mk.—éyvocay, 
they, that is the Pharisees and scribes, 
knew.—rpbes αὐτούς = with reference to 
themselves. 


614 


KATA AOYKAN 


XX. 


20. Καὶ παρατηρήσαντες ἀπέστειλαν ἐγκαθέτους, ὑποκρινομένους 
ἑαυτοὺς δικαίους εἶναι, ἵνα ἐπιλάβωνται αὐτοῦ λόγου, eis τὸ 1 παρα- 


δοῦναι αὐτὸν τῇ ἀρχῇ καὶ τῇ ἐξουσίᾳ τοῦ ἠἡγεμόνος. 


21. καὶ 


ἐπηρώτησαν αὔτόν, λέγοντες, “ Διδάσκαλε, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ὀρθῶς λέγεις 
καὶ διδάσκεις, καὶ οὐ λαμβάνεις πρόσωπον, GAN ἐπ ἀληθείας τὴν 


ὁδὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ διδάσκεις. 


3” 
bx Cor, ΠΠ. ἢ οὔ; 
Ig. 2 Cor. 
iv. 2; χὶ,3 αὐτούς, “Ti µε Teipdtete § ; 
Eph. iv. 14. 


34. 3 ή. La > 
ἔχει εἰκόνα καὶ ἐπιγραφήν ; 


22. ἔξεστιν ἡμῖν  Καΐσαρι φόρον δοῦναι, 
23. Κατανοήσας δὲ αὐτῶν τὴν > πανουργίαν, εἶπε πρὸς 


24. ἐπιδείξατέ" por δηνάριον: τίνος 
᾽Αποκριθέντες δὲ εἶπον,ὸ “ Καίσαρος.” 


25. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν adtois,® “΄᾽Απόδοτε τοίνυν᾿ τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι, 


καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Oca.” 


a , 
αὐτοῦ, ἐσιγησαν. 


26. Καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσαν ἐπιλαβέσθαι αὐτοῦ ὃ 
ῥήματος ἐναντίον τοῦ aod : 


ν ῃ > 8 ae , 
και θαυμάσαντες επι τη σοποκρισει 


1 For εις το SBCDL have ωστε (Tisch., W.H.). 


Σημας in NABL 13, 33, 69 al. 


7 ποιγυν αποδοτε in 3 ΒΙ, 69. 


Vv. 20-26. The tribute question (Mt. 
xxii. 15-22, Mk. xii. 13-17).—Ver. 20, 
παρατηρήσαντες: used absolutely = 
watching, not Him, but their opportu- 
nity; so Grotius and Field (Ot. Nor.); 
watching with close cunning observation 
(accurate et insidiose observare, Kypke). 
---ἐγκαθέτους: some derive from ἐν and 
κάθηµαι = sitters down, lying in wait 
(subsessores, Grotius), others from κατα- 
τίθηµι. The most probable derivation 
is from KaOinpr, to place in ambush (so 
Kypke, Schanz, etc.). Pricaeus cites 
Sirach viii. 11: ἵνα μὴ ἐγκαθίσῃ ὡς 
ἔνεδρον τῷ στόµατί σον, as probably in 
the mind of Lk. Here only in N.T. = 
“spies” (A.V., R.V.), ‘“ Aufpasser ’’ 
(Weizsacker).—troxptvopévous €., pass- 
ing themselves off as; that was the trick 
they had been put up ἴο.--δικαίους, 
honest men, sincerely anxious to know 
and do their duty. They might pose as 
such with the better chance of success 
if they were as Mt. states ‘‘ disciples ”’; 
scholars of the scribes = ingenuous 
young men.—avrod λόγον: that they 
might lay hold either of a word of His, 
or of Him by a word (eum in sermone, 
Vulgate), or of Him, t.e., of a word 
spoken by Him; all three alternatives 
find support.—dore (eis τὸ T.R.), in- 
dicating aim and tendency.—+. ἀρχῇ καὶ 
τ. ἐξουσίᾳ: the repetition of the article 
taises a doubt whether both nouns refer 


CD have ηµιν. 
3 Omit Tt µεπειρ. 9 BL minusc. e cop. 
5 For αποκρ. δε ειπον NBL 33 have οι δε e. 


ὁδειξατε in NABDLMP ai. 
6 προς αντους in NBL 1, 13, 69. 
8 rov for αυτον in NBL 433 (W.H.). 


to τοῦ ἡγεμόνος. So construed the clause 
will mean ‘to the rule and especially to 
the authority of the governor,’ rule 
being general, and authority a more 
special definition of it. Some take ἀρχῇ 
as referring to the Sanhedrim. ‘The 
probability is that both refer to Pilate. 
On the aim thus said to be in view 
Grotius remarks: ‘ When _ disputes 
about religion do not suffice to oppress 
the innocent, matters relating to the 
state are wont to be taken up’’.—Ver. 
21. ὀρθῶς, rightly, as in vii. 43, pointing 
not tq sincerity in speech (λέγεις) and 
teaching (διδάσκεις) but to sound judg- 
ment = you always say the right thing ; 
the second clause points to impartiality 
= you say the same thing to all; the 
third to sincerity = you say what you 
think. They describe an ideal from 
which their own masters were as remote 
as possible. 

Ver. 22 f. The question.—dédpov = 
κῆνσον, a Latinism, in the parallels.— 
Ver. 23. πανουργίαν, craft, cunning, as 
in 2 Cor. iv. 2, which possibly the 
evangelist had in his eye. Each synoptist 
has his own word here (πονηρίαν Mt., 
ὑπόκρισιν Mk.) as if trying to describe 
the indescribable.—Ver. 24. Lk. repoits 
more briefly than Mt. and Mk., not 
thinking it necessary to state that the 
denarius asked for was handed to Jesus. 
—Ver. 25. τοίνυν, therefore, connecting 


20—36. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ όις 
27. Προσελθόντες δέ τινες τῶν Σαδδουκαίων, οἱ ἀντιλέγοντες | 

ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι, ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτόν, 28. λέγοντες, “ Διδάσκαλε, 

Μωσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν, ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ ἔχων γυναῖκα, καὶ 

οὗτος ἄτεκνος ἀποθάνῃ,; ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα, 

καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρµα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ. 290. ἑπτὰ οὖν ἀδελφοὶ 

ἦσαν: καὶ ὁ πρῶτος λαβὼν γυναῖκα ἀπέθανεν ἄτεκνος: 30. καὶ ὃ 

ἔλαβεν ὁ δεύτερος τὴν Ὑυναῖκα, καὶ οὗτος ἀπέθανεν ἄτεκνος 5" 

31. καὶ 6 τρίτος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν: ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ οἱ ἑπτὰ οὐ κατέ- 


λιπον τέκνα, καὶ ἀπέθανον - 


, 
youn: 
A 35 

γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν yuvatka. 


ς 32 A ες c ει A 2A [ή [ο κ - / 
ο. Ιησούς, Οι υιοὶ TOU αἰῶνος τουτου γαμουσι και εκγαµισκονται 


32. ὕστερον δὲ πάντων  ἀπέθανε καὶ ἡ 
33. ἐν τῇ οὖν ἀναστάσει,ὸ τίνος αὐτῶν γίνεται γυνή; οἱ 
. Καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ® εἶπεν αὐτοῖς 

ρ 


(he 


εςν a A a ele a PMs Wi . 
35. οἱ δὲ καταξιωθέντες τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐκείνου τυχεῖν καὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως 


lol a = A [ή 
τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν οὔτε Ὑαμοῦσιν οὔτε ἐκγαμίσκονται ὃ 


> 36. οὔτε γὰρ 


199ΒΟΓΡΙ, 1, 33 al. verss. have οι λεγοντες, which may be a conformation to 


parall, W.H. adopt this reading. 


2 For αποθανη NaBLP 1, 33 al. have η (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 For και ελαβεν .. . atexvos BDL have simply και ο δευτερος (Tisch., W.H.). 


4 Omit παντων and place απεθανε after γυνη SBDL minusc. 


SBD omit δε. 


ὅ For εν τη ουν αναστασει BL have η Ύννη ουν ev τη αναστ., yuvy thus occurring 


twice (Tisch., W.H.). 
6 Omit αποκριθεις BDL. 


(W.H. marg.). 


the dictum following with the fact stated 
before that the denarius bore Caesar’s 
image, and implying that by the dictum 
Jesus pronounced in favour of paying 
tribute to the Roman ruler.—Ver. 26. 
The reply of Jesus, baffling in itself, was 
doubly so, because it had made a favour- 
able impression on the people. Therefore 
the questioners deemed it best to make 
no attempt at criticism in presence of 
the people (ἐναντίον τοῦ Aaov). 

Vv. 27-39. The resurrection question. 
Sadducees speak (Mt. xxii. 23-33, Mk. 
κ. 1δ-27).--οἳ ἀντιλέγοντες in strict 
grammar ought to refer to τινες, but 
doubtless it is meant to refer to the 
whole party. It is a case of a nominative 
in loose apposition with a genitive— 
‘* outside the construction of the sentence 
—interposed as a pendent word, so to 
speak,” Winer, G. N. T., p. 66δ.---μὴ 
εἶναι: literally denying that there is not 
a resurrection, the meaning being really 
the reverse. After verbs of denying the 
Greeks repeat the negation. The read- 
ing λέγοντες, though well attested, looks 
like a grammatical correction.—Ver. 28. 


7 γαμισκονται in NBL 33. 
8 yaptfovrar in S¥DLQRA 1, 33 al. (Tisch., W.H., 


text), B has yapuokovras 


ἄτεκνος: here only in N.T. = py ἔχων 
τ. in Mt. and μὴ ἀφῇ v-in Mk.—Ver. 29. 
οὖν, therefore, carrying on the narrative 
(frequent in John) and implying that the 
law of Moses cited gave rise to the 
curious case stated and the difficulty 
connected with it.— Ver. 31. οὐ 
κατέλιπον τ. κ. ἀπέθανον, did not leave 
children and died, for died leaving no 
children, The emphasis is on the child- 
lessness, therefore it is mentioned first. 
That the seven died in course of time 
was a matter of course, but that seven in 
succession should have no children was 
marvellous.—Ver. 34. In giving Christ’s 
answer Lk. omits the charge of ignorance 
against the questioners found in Mt. 
and ΜΚ.--γαμίσκονται = yaplfovrar in 
ρηρκή here only in N.T.—Ver. 35. ot 
ἑ καταξιωθέντες, etc., those deemed 
worthy to attain that world. The 
thought could have been expressed 
without τυχεῖν, for which accordingly 
there is no equivalent in the Vulgate: 
“qui digni habebuntur seculo illo,” on 
which account Pricaeus thinks it should 
be left out of the Greek text. But the 


616 


KATA AOYKAN 


XX. 


ἀποθανεῖν ἔτι δύνανται: ἰσάγγελοι γάρ εἶσι, καὶ viel εἶσι roo! 


Θεοῦ, τῆς ἀναστάσεως υἱοὶ ὄντες. 


37. Ὅτι δὲ ἐγείρονται οἱ νεκροί, 


καὶ Μωσῆς ἐμήνυσεν ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου, ds λέγει Κύριον τὸν Θεὸν 


᾽Αβραὰμ καὶ τὸν  Θεὸν ἸΙσαὰκ καὶ tov! Θεὸν Ιακώβ. 
οὐκ ἐστι νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ ζώντων. 


38. Θεὸς δὲ 


πάντες γὰρ αὐτῷ [ῶσιν. 39. 


᾽Αποκριθέντες δέ τινες τῶν γραμματέων εἶπον, “Διδάσκαλε, καλῶς 
etwas.” 49. Οὖκ ἔτι δὲ Σ ἐτόλμων ἐπερωτῶν αὐτὸν οὐδέν. 
41. Εἶπε δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, “Mas λέγουσι τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν Δαβὶδ 


εἶναι ; 


42. καὶ αὐτὸς” Δαβὶδ λέγει ἐν βίβλῳ ψαλμῶν, ΄Εἶπεν ὁ 5 


Κύριος τῷ kupiw µου, Κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν µου, 43. ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς 


ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου. 


1 Omit του NABL. 
3 overt yap in NBL 33 al. 


* evar A. νιον in BL, and αυτος yap for και αυτος. 


§ avrov κυριον in ABKL, etc. (W.H.). 


use of this verb, even when it seems but 
an elegant superfluity, is common in 
Greek. Examples in Bornemann.—Ver. 
36. ἀποθανεῖν: marriage, birth, death, 
go together, form one system of things, 
that of this world. In the next they have 
no place. Here Lk. expatiates as if the 
theme were congenial. — ἰσάγγελοι, 
angel-like, here only in Ν.Τ.--καὶ viot 
εἶσιν, etc.: sons of God, being sons of 
the resurrection. This connection of 
ideas recalls St. Paul’s statement in 
Rom, i. 4 that Christ was declared or 
constituted Son of God with power by 
the resurrection.—Ver. 37. καὶ M.: 
the same Moses who gave the Levirate 
law. It was important in speaking to 
Sadducees to show that even Moses 
was on the side of the resurrection.— 
ἐμήνυσεν, made known, used in reference 
to something previously hidden (John xi. 
57).--ἐπὶ τῆς βάτου, as in Mk., vide 
notes there.—Ver. 38. θεὸς is predicate 
= Jehovah is not God of dead men.—8é 
has the force of the argumentative 
nonne.—wavTes yap αὐτῷ Lao, ‘for 
all live unto Him” (A.V., R.V.), is 
probably an editorial explanatory gloss 
to make the deep thought of Jesus 
clearer (notin parallels), The gloss itself 
needs explanation. Is ‘ all” to be taken 
without qualification ?—att@ may be 
variously rendered “ὃν Him,” 7.¢., by 
His power: quoad Dei potentiam 
(Grotius), “in Him” (Ewald), ‘‘ for 
Him,” z.e., for His honour (Schanz), or 
for “‘ His thought or judgment ” = He 
accounts them as living (Hahn). The 


44. Δαβὶδ οὖν κύριον αὐτὸν 5 


} Omit τον in second and third places NBDLR. 


5 BD omit o. 
Τ.Ε. = ND (Tisch.). 


sentiment in some measure echoes Rom. 
xiv. 7, 8.—Ver. 39. καλῶς εἶπας, Thou 
hast spoken well; complimentary, but 
insincere, or only half sincere. They are 
glad to have the Sadducees put down, 
but not glad that $¥esus triumphed.— 
Ver. 40. οὐκέτι yap: the γὰρ, if the true 
reading, must mean: The scribes could 
do nothing but flatter (ver. 39), for they 
were so conscious of His power that 
they dared no longer ask captious 
questions. 

Vv. 41-44. The counter question (Mt. 
xxii, 41-46, Mk. xii. 35-37). Lk., who 
had given something similar at an earlier 
stage (x. 25-37), omits the question -of 
the scribe concerning the great com- 
mandment, which comes in at this point 
in Mt. (xxii. 34-40) and Mk. (xii. 28-34), 
retaining only its conclusion (in Mk.), 
which he appends to the previous 
narrative (ver. 40).—Ver. 41. πρὸς 
αὐτούς, to them, {.6., the representatives 
of the scribes mentioned in ver. 39. In 
Mt. the Pharisees are addressed, in Mk. 
the audience is the people, and the 
question is about the scribes as in- 
terpreters.—m@s λέγουσι, how do they 
say? (not λέγετε). The controversial 
character of the question is not made 
clear in Lk.—Ver. 42. ἐν βίβλῳ ψΨ., in 
the book of Psalms, in place of ἐν τῷ 
Tvevpatt τ. ay. (in the Holy Spirit, Mk.), 
which one might have expected Lk. to 
retain if he found it in his source. But 
he probably names the place in O.T. 
whence the quotation is taken for the 
information of his readers. That what 


31-47. XXI. 1-4. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


καλεῖ, καὶ πῶς υἱὸς αὐτοῦ 1 ἐστιν; 45. ᾽Ακούοντος δὲ παντὸς τοῦ 
aod, εἶπε τοῖς μαθηταὶς αὐτοῦ, 46. “Mpocéxete ἀπὸ τῶν ypap- 
µατέων τῶν θελόντων περιπατεῖν ἐν στολαῖς, καὶ φιλούντων ἀσπασ- 
μοὺς ἐν ταῖς ἀγοραῖς, καὶ πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς, καὶ 
πρωτοκλισίας ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις' 47. ot κατεσθίουσι τὰς οἰκίας τῶν 
χηρῶν, καὶ προφάσει μακρὰ προσεύχονται. 
σότερον κρίμα.” 

ΧΧΙ. 1. ᾽ΑΝΑΒΛΕΨΑΣ δὲ εἶδε τοὺς βάλλοντας τὰ δῶρα αὐτῶν εἰς 
τὸ γαζοφυλάκιον ὃ πλουσίους: 2. εἶδε δὲ Kai* τινα χήραν πενιχρὰν 
βάλλουσαν ἐκεῖ δύο λεπτά,ὅ 3. καὶ εἶπεν, “΄᾽Αληθῶς λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι 


οὗτοι λήψονται περισ- 


- ο 
ἡ χήρα ἡ πτωχὴ αὕτηδ πλεῖονἸ πάντων ἔβαλεν: 4. ἅπαντες γὰρ 
οὗτοι ἐκ τοῦ περισσεύοντος αὐτοῖς ἔβαλον εἰς τὰ δῶρα τοῦ Θεοῦ," 
A a ” 3. 

αὕτη δὲ ἐκ τοῦ ὑστερήματος αὐτῆς ἅπαντα τὸν βίον ὃν εἶχεν ἔβαλε. 


617 


1 avrov υιος in ΔΕ, etc. (Tisch., W.H.). 


2 Omit avrov BD. 


nee => SDL. 


δεις το yal. τα Swpa a. in MBDLX 1, 33, 69 al. pl. 


4 Omit και RBKLMQ 33. 


5 Soin D al. (Tisch.). λεπτα δυο in BBLQX 33 (W.H.); conformed to Mk. ? 


6 αντη before η πτωχη in SBDLQ (W.H. = Mk.). 


7 πλειω in DQX minusc. (Tisch.). 
8 Omit του Θεου SBLX minusc. 


was written in the Psalms, was spoken 
by the Holy Spirit, was axiomatic for 
him.—tomddiov, as in the Psalms, for 
ὑποκάτω in Mt. and Mk. according to 
the approved readings. Lk. seems to 
have turned the passage up (Holtzmann, 
H..C.). 

Vv. 45-47- Warning against the 
scribes (Mk. xii. 38-40).—Either a mere 
fragment of the larger whole in Mt. xxiii., 
or the original nucleus around which Mt. 
has gathered much kindred matter—the 
former more likely.—Ver. 46. φιλούντων: 
while following Mk. in the main, Lk. 
improves the construction here by intro- 
ducing this participle before ἀσπασμοὺς, 
which in Mk. depends on θελόντων.--- 
Ver. 47. Another improvement is the 
change of ot, κατεσθίοντες (Mk. xii. 40) 
into ot κατεσθίουσι---υἰᾷεποῖες on Mk.— 
μακρὰ, at length, an adverb. Bengel (in 
Mt.) suggests µακρῷΥ to agree with 
προφάσει (‘ex orationibus suis fecere 
magnam πρόφασιν, praetextum come- 
dendidomos viduarum’’). Elsner adopts 
the same view. 

CHAPTER XXI. THE Wipow’s OFFER- 
Inc. THE ΑΡΟΟΑΙΥΡΤΙΟ DISCOURSE.— 
Vv. 1-4. The widow’s offering (Mk. xii. 
41-44), unfortunately placed at the begin- 


Τ.Ε.ΞΑΧΓΔ, etc. (Tisch.). 


T.R. = B = Mk. (W.H.). 


ning of this chapter, which should have 
been devoted wholly to Christ’s solemn 
discourse concerning the future. Yet 
this mal-arrangement corresponds to the 
manner in which Lk. introduces that 
discourse, by comparison with Mt. and 
Mk., markedly unemphatic.—Ver. 1. 
ἀναβλέψας, looking up, giving the impres- 
sion of a casual, momentary glance taken 
by one who had been previously pre- 
occupied with very different matters. 
Mk’s narrative conveys the idea of delib- 
erate, interested observation by one who 
took a position convenient for the pur- 
pose, and continued observing (καθίσας 
κατέναντι, ἐθεώρει).-- τὰ Sapa, instead of 
Mk’s χαλκὸν. Lk. has in view only the 
rich; Mk., in the first place, the multi- 
επάθ.-- πλουσίους: the whole clause from 
τοὺς may be taken as the object of εἶδε, 
saw the rich casting in, etc., or πλ. may be 
in apposition with τοὺς βάλλοντας = saw 
those casting in, etc., being rich men (so 
Hahn and Farrar). The former (A.V., 
Wzs.) is to be preferred.—Ver. 2. πενι- 
χρὰν, needy, from πένοµαι or πένης; 
a poetic word rarely used, here only in 
Ν.Τ. πτωχὴ, Mk.’s word, is stronger = 
reduced to beggary.—8vo λεπτά. Lk. 
does not think it necessary to explain 


618 


KATA AOYKAN 


ΧΧΙ. 


5. ΚΑΙ τινων λεγόντων περὶ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, ὅτι λίθοις καλοῖς καὶ 
ἀναθήμασι 1 κεκόσµηται, εἶπε, 6. “"Ταῦτα ἃ θεωρεῖτε, ἐλεύσονται 
ἡμέραι ἐν ats οὐκ ἀφεθήσεται λίθος ἐπὶ λίθῳ,2 ὃς οὗ καταλυθήσεται.. 
7. Ἐπηρώτησαν δὲ αὐτόν, λέγοντες, “΄Διδάσκαλε, πότε οὖν ταῦτα 
” Ce ar a 2 Hee” , 35 
ἔσται; καὶ τί τὸ σημεῖον, ὅταν µέλλῃ ταῦτα γίνεσθαι ; 

δ. Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “"Βλέπετε μὴ πλανηθῆτε: πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐλεύσονται 
ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί µου, λέγοντες, Ὅτι ὃ ἐγώ εἰμι: καί, Ὁ καιρὸς ἤγγικε. 


1 5ο in BLQAal.(W.H.). αναθεµασιν in SADX (Tisch.). 


2 S$BL minusc. add wSe (W.H.). 


what the coin was or what the contribu- 
tion amounted to. Mk. states its value 
in Roman coinage (κοδράντης).---Ψετ. 
3. εἶπεν: to whom not indicated. The 
narrator is concerned alone about the 
saying—@An@as, for Mk.’s Hebrew ἀμὴν, 
as nearly αἱν/αγς.- πτωχὴ : Lk. does not 
avoid this word: the use of the other 
term in his preliminary narrative is a 
matter of style. πτωχὴ implies that the 
widow might have been expected to beg 
rather than to be giving to the temple 
treasury.—Ver. 4. ἅπαντες οὗτοι, all 
these, referring to the rich and pointing 
to them.—torepyjpartos: practically = 
Mk.’s ὑστερήσεως, preferred possibly 
because in use in St. Paul’s epistles: not 
so good a word as ὑστέρησις to denote 
the state of poverty out of which she 
gave. Lk.’s expression strictly means 
that she gave out of a deficit, a minus 
quantity (“ ex eo quod deest illi,” Vulg.), 
a strong but intelligible way of putting 
it.—7t. βίον, her living, as in xv. 12, 30 = 
means of subsistence. Lk. combines 
Mk.’s two phrases into one. 

THE APOCALYPTIC DISCOURSE (vv. 5- 
38).—Vv. 5-7. Introduction to the dis- 
course (Mt. xxiv. 1-3, Mk. xiii. 1-4).—Kat 
τινων λεγόντων, and some remarking. A 
most unemphatic transition, as if what 
follows were simply a continuation of 
discourse in the temple on one of many 
topics on which Jesus spoke. No in- 
dication that it was disciples (any of the 
Twelve) who asked the question, or that 
the conversation took place outside. Cf. 
the narrative in Mk. The inference that 
Lk. cannot have known Mk.’s narrative 
(Godet) is inadmissible. Lk. omits many 
things he knew. His interest is obviously 
in the didactic matter only, and perhaps 
we have here another instance of his 
“sparing the Twelve”. He may not have 
cared to show them filled with thought- 
less admiration for a building (and a 
system) which was doomed to judicial 





3 Omit οτι NBLX. 


destruction. — Ai@o.s καλοῖς, beautiful 
stones: marble, huge; vide Joseph., 
B. J., ν.5,2.--καὶ ἀναθήμασι, and votive 
or sacred gifts, in Lk. only; the reference 
implies that the spectators are within 
the building. These gifts were many 


and costly, from the great ones of the 


earth: a table from Ptolemy, a chain 
from Agrippa, a golden vine from Herod 
the Great. The temple was famous for 
its wealth. Tacitus writes: ‘illic im- 
mensae opulentiae templum,” Hist., vi. 
8.—kexédopytat: perfect, expressing the 
permanent result of past acts of skilful 
men and beneficent patrons—a highly 
ornamented edifice, the admiration of 
the world, but marked for destruction by 
the moral order of the universe.—Ver. 6. 
ταῦτα ἆ § Some (Grotius, Pricaeus) 
take ταῦτα = τούτων: of these things 
which ye see a stone shall not be leit. 
Most, however, take it as a nominative 
absolute = as for these things which ye 
see (vide Winer, § lxiii. 2d). This suits 
better the emotional πιοοά.---ἐλεύσονται 
ἡμέραι: cf. v. 35, where a similar 
ominous allusion to coming evil days 
occurs.—Ver. 7. διδάσκαλε, Master, 
suggesting its correlate, disciples, but not 
necessarily implying that the question 
proceeded from the Twelve; rather the 
contrary, for they would not be so formal 
in their manner of speaking to Jesus (cf. 
Mt. and Mk.).—+ére οὖν ταῦτα, etc. : the 
question refers exclusively to the pre- 
dicted destruction of the temple= when, 
and what the sign? Soin Mk. Cf. Mt. 

Vv. 8-11. Signs prelusive of the end 
(Mt. xxiv. 4-8, Mk, xiii. 5-11).---βλέπετε, 
etc., take heed that ye be not deceived. 
This the keynote—not to tell when, but 
to protect disciples from delusions and 
terrors.—émt τῷ ὀνόματί pov, in my 
name, 2.6., calling themselves Christs. 
Vide at Mt. on these false Messiahs.—é 
καιρὸς ἤγγικε: the καιρὸς should natur- 
ally mean Jerusalem’s fatal day.—Ver. 9- 


5—15- 


μὴ οὖν 1 πορευθῆτε ὀπίσω αὐτῶν. 


ο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


619 


ὅταν δὲ ἀκούσητε πολέμους 


καὶ " ἀκαταστασίας, μὴ πτοηθῆτε: δεῖ γὰρ ταῦτα γενέσθαι πρῶτον, a x Cor. xiv. 


GAN οὐκ εὐθέως τὸ τέλος." 


ἔθνος ἐπὶ ἔθνος, καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν" 11. σεισμοί τε μεγάλοι 


10. Τότε ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, '΄ Ἐγερθήσεται 


33. 2 Cor. 
Vi. 5; χα 
20. Jas. 
iii, 16. 


κατὰ τόπους Kat? λιμοὶ καὶ λοιμοὶ 5 ἔσονται, φόβητρά τε καὶ 


σημεῖα dm οὐρανοῦ μεγάλα ἔσται. 


13. Πρὸ δὲ τούτων ἁπάντων 


ἐπιβαλοῦσιν ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν, καὶ διώξουσι, παραδιδόντες 


eis συναγωγὰς ΄ καὶ φυλακάς, ἀγομένουςῦ ἐπὶ βασιλεῖς καὶ ἡγεμόνας, 


ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός µου. 


13. ἀποβήσεται δὲ ὃ ὑμῖν eis μαρτύριον ’ 


14. θέσθε οὖν εἰς τὰς καρδίας Ἰ ὑμῶν, μὴ προμελετᾷν ἀπολογηθῆναι : 


15. ἐγὼ γὰρ δώσω ὑμῖν στόµα καὶ σοφίαν, ᾗ οὐ δυνήσονται ἀντειπεῖν 


1 Omit ουν NBDLX. 

3 dup. και λοιµ. in SDL (Tisch.). 
4 ras before συναγ. in BD. 

6 Omit δε NBD. 


ἀκαταστασίας, unsettled conditions, for 
ἀκοὰς πολέμων in Mt. and Mk., and per- 
haps intended as an explanation of that 
vague phrase. Hahn refers to the French 
Revolution and the Socialist movement 
of the present day as illustrating the 
πιεαπίηρ.---πτοηθῆτε = θροεῖσθε in par- 
allels ; here and in xxiv. 37.--δεῖ γὰρ, 
etc., ¢f. the laconic version in Mk. (W. 
and H.) and notes there.—mpGrov, οὐκ 
εὐθέως: both emphasising the lesson that 
the crisis cannot come before certain 
things happen, and the latter hinting that 
it will not come even then.—Ver. 1ο. 
τότε ἔλεγεν points to a new beginning in 
discourse, which has the effect of dis- 
sociating the repeated mention of politi- 
cal disturbances from what goes before, 
and connecting it with apostolic tribula- 
tions referred to in the sequel. In Mt. 
and Mk. the verse corresponding is sim- 
ply an expansion of the previous thought. 
—Ver. II. καὶ κατὰ τόπους: the καὶ 
thus placed (§QBL) dissociates κ. τ. from 
σεισμοί and connects it with λοιμοὶ καὶ 
λιμοὶ;: not earthquakes, but pestilences 
and famines here, there, everywhere. λ. 
καὶ A., a baleful conjunction common in 
speech and in fact.—oByrpa, terrifying 
phenomena, here only in N.T. (in Is. 
xix. 17, Sept.). The τε connects the 
Φόβητρα with the signs from heaven next 
mentioned. They are in fact the same 
thing (ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, Bengel). 

Vv. 12-19. Signs earlier still (Mt. xxiv. 
g-14, Mk. xiii. 9-13).—Ver. 12. πρὸ δὲ 
τούτων ἁπάντων: this phrase may be in- 
troduced here because Mk.’s account 


2 και before κατα 7. in 3981 33. 
λοιµ. και Aup. in B (W.H. text). 
δαπαγοµενους in $BDL minusc. 

7 Gere ουν ev ταις καρδιαις in NABDLX 33. 


lying under Lk.’s eye mentions the signs 
in the heaven at a later stage, ver. 24. 
Or it may be Lk.’s equivalent for “‘ these 
things are the beginning of birth pangs” 
(Mt. ver. 8, Mk. ver. 9), a Hebrew idea 
which he avoids.—amayopévous: a tech- 
nical term in Athenian legal language.— 
Ver. 13. ἀποβήσεται, it will turn out; as 
in Phil. i. 19.— piv εἰς μαρτύριον, for a 
testimony to you = to your credit or 
honour; = eis μαρτυρίου δόξαν, Theophy. 
So also Bleek. J. Weiss (Meyer), follow- 
ing Baur and Hilgenfeld, renders: it will 
result in your martyrdom. This meaning 
is kindred to that of Theophy., but can 
hardly be intended here (Schanz). The 
idea belongs to a later time, and the sense 
is scarcely consistent with ver. 18.—Ver. 
14. θέτε οὖν: not = consider, as in i. 66, 
but = resolve, as in Acts v. 4 (‘‘ settle it in 
your hearts,” A.V.).—py προμελετόν 
(here only in N.T.), not to study before- 
hand, with the inf.; not to be taken in the 
letter, as a rule, but in the spirit, therefore 
= Mk.’s προμεριμνᾶτε which counsels 
abstinence from anxious thought before- 
hand.—Ver. 15. éyw, I, emphatic, the ex- 
alted Lord, instead of ‘‘the Holy Spirit” 
in Mk. and “the Spirit of the Father ” in 
Mt.x. 20. The substitution bears witness 
to the inspiring effect of the thought of 
the Lord Jesus ruling in heaven on the 
minds of Christians enduring tribulation, 
at the time when Lk. wrote.—orépa, a 
mouth = utterance.—_-codiav: the wisest 
thing to say in the actual situation.— 
ἀντιστῆναι refers to στόμα, and ἀντειπεῖν 
to σοφίαν = '' They will not be able to 


ΧΧΙ. 


16. παραδοθήσεσθε 
Ig. ἐν 
20. Ὅταν δὲ ἴδητε 
21. Tote οἱ ἐν τῇ ουδαίᾳ φευγέτωσαν 


22. ὅτι ἡμέραι ἐκδικήσεως 


620 KATA AOYKAN 
οὐδὲ ἀντιστῆναι 1 πάντες ot ἀντικείμενοι ὑμῖν. 
δὲ καὶ ὑπὸ γονέων καὶ ἀδελφῶν καὶ συγγενῶν καὶ φίλων, καὶ θανατώ- 
σουσιν ἐξ ὑμῶν: 17. καὶ ἔσεσθε μισούμενοι ὑπὸ πάντων διὰ τὸ ὄνομά 
µου” 18. καὶ θρὶξ ἐκ τῆς κεφαλῆς ὑμῶν οὗ μὴ ἀπόληται. 
τῇ ὑπομονῇ ὑμῶν κτήσασθεΖ τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν. 
κυκλουµένην ὑπὸ στρατοπέδων thy? Ἱερουσαλήμ, τότε γνῶτε ὅτι 
ἤγγικεν ἡ ἐρήμωσις αὐτῆς. 
εἰς τὰ ὄρη ' καὶ ot ἐν µέσῳ αὐτῆς " ἐκχωρείτωσαν: καὶ οἱ ἐν ταῖς 
ὃ here only χώραις μὴ εἰσερχέσθωσαν εἲς αὐτήν. 


αὗταί εἶσι, τοῦ πληρωθῆναι ά πάντα τὰ γεγραµµένα. 23. οὐαὶ δὲ ὅ 
ταῖς ἐν γαστρὶ ἐχούσαις καὶ ταῖς θηλαζούσαις ἐν ἐκείναις ταῖς 
ἡμέραις : ἔσται γὰρ ἀνάγκη µεγάλη ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ ὀργὴ ἐνδ τῷ 
λαῷ τούτῳ. 24. καὶ πεσοῦνται στόµατι µαχαίρας, καὶ αἰχμαλω- 
τισθήσονται eis πάντα τὰ ἔθνη Ἰ καὶ ἹἹερουσαλὴμ ἔσται πατουµένη 


1 αντιστηναι η αντειπειν in NBL 13, 69 al, (Tisch., W.H.). 


? krnoeo Oe in AB minusc. (W.H.). 
2 Omit thy NBD. 


Τ.Ε. = NDLRX, etc. (Tisch.). 
4πλησθηναι in NABDLRA al. (Tisch., W.H.), 


5 BDL codd. vet. Lat. omit δε; unsuitable to the prophetic style, which makes 


abrupt transitions. 
6 Omit ev NABCDKL al. pl 


7 τα εθνη παντα in SBLR 124 cop. (Tisch., W.H.p 


ainsay your speech nor to resist your 
τος. (Farrar, C. G. T.).—Ver. 16. 
καὶ, even, by parents, etc.: non modo 
alienis, Beng.—é& ὑμῶν, some of you, 
limiting the unqualified statement of Mk., 
and with the facts of apostolic history in 
view.—Ver. 17. μισούμενοι ὑπὸ πάντων, 
continually hated (pres. part.) by all; 
dismal prospect! Yet—Ver. 18, θρὶξ, 
etc., a hair of your head shall not perish 
= Mt. x. 30, where it is said: “ your 
hairs are all numbered”. What! even 
in the case of those who die? Yes, Jesus 
would have His apostles live in this faith 
whatever betide; an optimistic creed, ne- 
cessary to a heroic life.—Ver. 19. κτήσ- 
εσθε or κτήσασθε, ye shall win, or win 
ye; sense the same. Similar various 
readings in Rom. v. 1, ἔχωμεν or ἔχομεν. 
Vv. 20-24. Ferusalem’s judgment day 
(Mt. xxiv. 15-21, Mk. xiii. 14-19).—Ver. 
20. κυκλουµένην, in course of being sur- 
rounded; pres. part., but not necessarily 
implying that for the author of this ver- 
sion of Christ’s words the process is actu- 
ally going on (J. Weiss—Meyer). Jesus 
might have so spoken conceiving Himself 
as Ρτεδεηῖ.-- στρατοπέδων, camps, or ar- 
mies, here only in N.T. This takes the 
place in Lk. of the βδέλυγµα in the 


parallels, avoided as at once foreign and 
mysterious.—q ἐρήμωσις α., her desola- 
tion, including the ruin of the temple, the 
subject of inquiry: when besieging armies 
appear you know what to look for.—Ver. 
21. τότε, then, momentous hour, time 
for prompt αοίῖοη.---φευγέτωσαν, flee! 
The counsel is for three classes: (1) those 
in Judaea at some distance from Jerusa- 
lem, (2) those who happen to be in 
Jerusalem (ἐν µέσῳ αὐτῆς) when the 
armies appear, (3) those in the fields or 
farms round about Jerusalem (ἐν ταῖς 
χώραις) who might be tempted to take 
refuge within the city from the invaders, 
thinking themselves safe within its walls, 
and who are therefore counselled not to 
enter. The corresponding counsel in the 
parallels, vv. 17, 18 in Mt., 15, 16 in Mk., 
vividly sets forth the necessity of immediate 
flight.—Ver, 22: peculiar to Lk., and set- 
ting,forth Jerusalem’s fate as the fulfilment 
(πλησθῆναι, for the more usual πληρω- 
θῆναι, here only in N.T.) of prophecy.— 
Ver. 23. ovat, etc.: as in parallels as far 
as ἡμέραις; then follow words ρεου]ίαι 
to Lk. concerning the ἀνάγκη and ὀργὴ. 
The use of the tormer word in the sense 
of distress is mainly Hellenistic; here 
and in St. Paul’s epistles. The latter 


ο ο. τν 


16—28. 


ὑπὸ ἐθνῶν, ἄχρι 1 πληρωθῶσι καιροὶ ἐθνῶν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


621 


25. Kat ἔσται 2 σημεῖα 


ἐν ἡλίῳ καὶ σελήνῃ καὶ ἄστροις, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς "συνοχὴ ἐθνῶν évc2Cor.ii.4, 
ἀπορίᾳ, ἠχούσης ὃ θαλάσσης καὶ σάλου, 26.  ἀποψυχόντων ἀνθρώ- ἆ here only 

> ~ > ~ > ς in sane. 
πων ἀπὸ pdBou καὶ προσδοκίας τῶν ἐπερχομένων τῇ οἰκουμένῃ : ai 


γὰρ δυνάµεις τῶν οὐρανῶν σαλευθήσονται. 


2]. καὶ τότε ὄψονται 


τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον ἐν νεφέλῃ μετὰ δυνάµεως καὶ δόξης 


πολλῆς. 


28. ''᾿Αρχομένων δὲ τούτων γίνεσθαι, ἀνακύψατε καὶ ἐπάρατε τὰς 


κεφαλὰς ὑμῶν: διότι ἐγγίζει ἡ "ἀπολύτρωσις ὑμῶν." 


e here only 
in Gospels. 


laxptovin SBCDLR ail. pl. B inserts after πληρωθωσιν και εσονται (W.-H. in 


brackets). 


3 The singular with a plural neuter nominative as usual in T.R. ; εσονται in NBD. 


3 yxovs in NABCLMRX ail, (Tisch., W.H.). 


change. 


“word expresses the same idea as that in 
t Thess. ii. 16.—Ver. 24: the description 
here becomes very definite (slaughter and 
captivity) and may be coloured by the 
event.—watoupéevy: usually taken as = 
καταπατουµένη: trodden under foot in 
a contemptuous way, but it may mean 
simply ‘“‘trodden’’ in the sense of being 
occupied by (Hahn).—katpot ἐθνῶν: the 
meaning of this suggestive phrase is not 
clear. ‘The connection of thought seems 
to require that it be taken = the times 
of Gentile action in execution of Divine 
judgment on Israel, or more generally the 
times of Gentile supremacy. Yet I 


strongly incline to side with those who’ 


find in the phrase a reference to a Gen- 
tile day of grace. The Jews had had 
their day of grace (vide xix. 44, Tov 
καιρὸν τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς) and the Gentiles 
were to have their turn. Such an idea 
would be congenial to Lk., the Pauline 
evangelist, and in sympathy with St. 
Paul’s own thought in Rom. xi. 25. It 
would also be Lk.’s equivalent for the 
thought in Mt. xxiv. 14, Mk. xiii. ro. 
The expression may have become 
current and so be used here as a vox 
signata. ἳ 

Vv. 25-28. Signs of the advent (Mt. 
xxiv. 29-31, Mk. xiii. 24-27).—Ver. 25. 
σημεῖα, εἴο.: the reference to the signs 
in heaven is very summary as compared 
with the graphic picture in the parallels. 
Lk. is more interested in the state of 
things on εατίῃ.--συνοχὴ ἐ., distress of 
nations, cf. συνέχοµαι in xii. 50.—éy 
ἀπορίᾳ may be connected with what 
follows or with ἐθνῶν = nations in per- 
plexity, in which case the last clause— 
ἠχοῦς, etc.—will depend on συνοχὴ = 


ὔχουσης (D, etc.) an exegetical 


distress from the noise and billows (σάλος 
= wave-movement: 4 τῆς θαλάσσης 
κλύδωνος κίνησις, Hesych.) of the sea 
(so Hahn). The main difficulty lies in 
the vagueness of the reference to the sea. 
Is it meant literally, or is it a metaphor 
for the disturbed state of the world? If 
the latter the force of the genitives ἠχοῦς, 
σάλου will be best brought out by sup- 
posing ὡς to be understood = in per- 
plexity like the state of the sea in a storm. 
So Heinsius (Exer. Sac.) : “ @moptav illam 
et calamitatem mari fore similem, quoties 
horrendum tonat atque commovetur,” 
citing in support Tertullian’s veluti a 
sonitu maris fluctuantis. The mode of 
expression is very loose: the sound of the 
sea and the waves, instead of ‘“ the sound- 
ing waves of the sea”. Yet the crude- 
ness of the construction suits the mood 
described. yous may be accented ἤχους 
(Tisch.) or ἠχοῦς (W.H.) according as it 
is derived from ἦχος (neuter like ἔλεος, 
vikos, etc., in N.T.) or from ἠχώ.---Ψετ. 
26. ἀποψυχόντων: literally, dying, pro- 
bably meant tropically = ὡς νεκροί, Mt. 
Xxvili. 4.-- ἀπὸ φόβου καὶ προσδοκίας, 
from fear and expectation, instead of 
fearful expectation as in Heb. x. 27 
(φοβερὰ ἐκδοχὴ). προσδοκία here and 
in Acts xii. 11.—Ver. 27. ἐν νεφέλῃ, 
in a cloud, sing., instead of the plural in 
parallels, making the conception more 
literal.—Ver. 28: instead of the graphic 
picture of the angels gathering the elect 
in Mt. and Mk., Lk. has a general state- 
ment that when these signs, terrible to 
the world, begin to appear the hour of 
redemption for believers is at hand. 
They may look up and raise their heads. 
Cf. 1 Thess. 1. 5-10, Jas. v. 7. 


622 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ πχ, 


29. Kat etme παραβολὴν αὗτοῖς, ''Ἴδετε τὴν συκῆν καὶ πάντα τὰ 
δένδρα. 30. ὅταν προβάλωσιν ἤδη, βλέποντες ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτῶν γινώσκετε 
ὅτι ἤδη ἐγγὺς τὸ θέρος ἐστίν. 31. οὕτω καὶ ὑμεῖς, ὅταν ἴδητε ταῦτα 
γινόμενα, γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐγγύς ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ. 32. ἀμὴν 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὗ μὴ παρέλθῃ ἡ γενεὰ αὕτη, ἕως ἂν πάντα γένηται. 
33. 6 οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ παρελεύσονται, οἱ δὲ λόγοι µου οὐ μὴ παρ- 
έλθωσι. 34. Προσέχετε δὲ ἑαυτοῖς, µήποτε βαρυνθῶσιν 3 ὑμῶν at 
καρδίαι ὃ ἐν κραιπάλῃ καὶ µέθη καὶ pepipvars βιωτικαῖς, καὶ αἰφνί- 
διος ἐφ᾽ ὑμᾶς ἐπιστῇ ΄ ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνη: 35. Os παγὶς γὰρ ἐπελεύ- 
cetar® ἐπὶ πάντας τοὺς καθηµένους ἐπὶ πρόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς. 
36. ἀγρυπνεῖτε οὖν ὅ ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ δεόµενοι, ἵνα καταδιωθῆτεῖ 
ἐκφυγεῖν ταῦτα πάντα τὰ μέλλοντα γίνεσθαι, καὶ σταθῆναι ἔμπροσθεν 


a ca A 93 , ”» 
τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 


1 παρελευσονται in BDL 13, 33. 


Συµ. αι Kap. in ΝΟΡΙ, (Tisch.). αι καρ. vp. in BX al. (W.H.). 


2 βαρηθωσι in ΜΑΒΟΙ, al. pl. 


4 erioty eh vp. αιφνιδιος in S$BDLR (Tisch., W.H.). 


ὕεπεισελευσεται yap in NBD. Vide below. 


6 δε for ουν (CL) in NBD. 


7 κατισχυσητε in SBLX 1, 33 al. (Tisch., W.H.). T.R. = CDA al. 


Vv. 20-33. Parabolic enforcement of 
the lesson (Mt. xxiv. 32-35, Mk. xiii. 28- 
31).—Ver. 29. καὶ πάντα τὰ δένδρα: 
added by Lk., generalising as in ix. 23: 
‘take up his cross daily”. The lesson 
is taught by all the trees, but parabolic 
style demands special reference to one 
particular tree.—mpoBddwouv, put forth 
(their leaves, τὰ Φύλλα understood). 
Similar phrases in Greek authors.—Bhe- 
ποντες, etc., when ye look (as who does 
not when spring returns!) ye know of 
‘yourselves, need no one to tell you.—Ver. 
31. ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ, explaining the 
elliptical but not obscure words in Mt. 
and Mk.: “ (it) is near,” z.e., the coming 
of the Son of man. For Lk. that is one 
with the coming of the Kingdom, which 
again = redemption in ver. 28.—Vv. 32, 
33: with slight change as in parallels, 
even to the retention of ἁμὴν usually re- 
placed by ἀληθῶς. Presumably ἡ yevea 
αὕτη means for Lk., as it must have done 
for the Twelve to whom the words were 
spoken, the generation to which Jesus 
Himself belonged. Hahn holds that airy 
refers to the generation within whose 
time the events mentioned in wv. 25, 26 
shail happen (so also Klostermann). 

Vv. 34-36. General exhortation to 
watchfulness, peculiar to Lk. ; each evan- 
gelist having his own epilogue.—év 
κραιπάλῄῃ καὶ µέθῃ: this seems to be a 
phrase similar to ἠχοῦς καὶ σάλου-- 


sound and wave for sounding wave (ver. 
25) =in headache (from yesterday’s in- 
toxication) and drunkenness, for :. in 
drunkenness which causes headache and 
stupidity. Pricaeus denies that κραιπάλη 
(here only in N.T.) means yesterday’s 
debauch (χθεσινὴ μέθη), and takes it = 
ἀδηφαγία, gluttony. That is what we 
expect certainly. The warning he under- 
stands figuratively. So also Bleek.— 
pepipvats βιωτικαῖς, cares of life, “' what 
shall we eat, drink?” etc. (xii. 22).—Ver. 
35. ὡς παγὶς, as a snare, joined to the 
foregoing clause in R.V. (‘‘and that day 
come upon you suddenly as a snare”’). 
Field objects that the verb following 
(ἐπεισελεύσεται) does not seem suff- 
ciently strong to stand alone, especially 
when the verb ἐπιστῇ is doubly em- 
phasised by ‘‘suddenly” and “as a 
snare’, He therefore prefers the T.R., 
which connects ὡς παγὶς with what 
follows, the arrangement adopted in all 
the ancient versions. The revisers, as 
if conscious of the force of the above 
objections, insert “so,” ‘‘ for so shall it 
come,” etc., which virtually gives as 
παγὶς a double connection. The figure 
of a snare, while expressive, is less 
apposite than that of a thief (xii. 39).— 
καθηµένους ε. π., etc., sitting on the face 
of the earth; the language here has a 
Hebrew colouring.—Ver. 36. ἐν παντὶ 
καιρῷ, in every 5εβ5οπ.--κατισχύσητε, 


Ee 


2g—38. XXII. 1—4. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


623 


37. “Hy δὲ τὰς ἡμέρας ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ SiSdonwv!- τὰς δὲ νύκτας 


ἐξερχόμενος ηὐλίζετο εἰς τὸ ὄρος τὸ καλούμενον ᾿Ελαιῶν. 
πᾶς ὁ λαὸς * ὤρθριζε πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἀκούειν αὐτοῦ. 
I. ᾿ἨΓΓΙΖΕ δὲ ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν ἀζύμων, ἡ λεγομένη πάσχα" 


XXII. 


38. Kat 


f here only 
in N.T 


‘ 297 ς aA ‘ ε ~ , fal 
2. καὶ ἐζήτουν ot ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ ot Ὑραμματεῖς, τό, πῶς ἀνέλωσιν 


αὐτόν: ἐφοβοῦντο γὰρ τὸν λαόν. 4. 


Εἰσῆλθε δὲ ὁ 2 Σατανᾶς eis 


᾿Ιούδαν τὸν ἐπικαλούμενον ὃ ᾿Ισκαριώτην, ὄντα ἐκ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ τῶν 


δώδεκα: 4. 


καὶ ἀπελθὼν συνελάλησε τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι καὶ τοῖς * 


1 διδ. εν τω ιερ. in BK codd. vet. Lat. (W.H. marg.). 


2 Omit o NABCDL, etc. 
* SABL, etc., omit this second τοις. 


that ye may have power, “ prevail ”’ 
(R.V.).—k«ataiiw0qTe (T.R.), “may be 
accounted worthy ” (A.V.), also gives a 
very good meaning, even in some respects 
preferable.—orafjvat, to stand—in the 
judgment (so, many), or to be presented 
to, placed before. So most recent com- 


mentators. Either gives a good sense 
(Bleek). 
Vv. 37-38. Concluding notice as to 


how Fesus spent His last days.—Ver. 
37. ἐν τ. ἱερῷ διδάσκων, teaching in the 
temple. The statement covers all that 
is related in chapters xx., xxi., including 
the Apocalyptic discourse = Jesus made 
the most of His short time for the 
spiritual instruction of the people.— 
nvatlero, lodged, imperfect, because done 
night after night. Some (e.g., Godet and 
Farrar) think Jesus with the Twelve 
slept in the open air. The word might 
mean this, though in Mt. xxi. 17 it 
appears to mean passed the night in a 
house in Bethany.—els τ. ὁ. : the use of 
eis is probably due to the influence of 
ἐξερχόμενος. But Tobit xiv. το has a 
similar construction: µηκέτι αὐλισθῆτε 
εἰς Nuvevy.—Ver. 38. ὤρθριζεν, came 
early, or sought Him eagerly (Meyer). 
ὀρθρεύω, the Greek form, always is used 
literally or temporarily. — ὀρθρίζω, its 
Hellenistic equivalent, seems sometimes 
to be used tropically, as in Ps. lxxviii. 34 
(‘‘ early,” R.V., ‘‘ earnestly ” in margin), 
Sirach iv. 12, vi. 36. The one meaning 
easily runs into the other: he who rises 
early to learn is in earnest. Earliness 
in the people implies earliness in Jesus, 
and corresponding devotion to the work. 

CHAPTER XXII. ΤΗΕ Passion His- 
tory. The Passion history, as told by 
Lk., varies considerably from the nar- 
ratives of Mt. and Mk. by omissions, 
additions, etc. J. Weiss (Meyer), follow- 
‘ing Feine, thinks that Lk. used as his 


Σκαλουµενον in BDLLX 69. 


main source for this part of his Gospel 
not Mk. but the precanonical Lk., whose 
existence Feine has endeavoured to 
prove. Lk.’s narrative at some points 
resembles that of the Fourth Gospel. 

Vv. 1-2. Introductory (Mt. xxvi. 1-5, 
Mk. xiv. τ-2).---ἤγγιζεν, drew near, for 
the more definite note of time in 
parallels.— ἑορτὴ, etc.: the Feast of 
Unleavened Bread and the Passover are 
treated as one. Mk. distinguishes them. 
Lk. writes for Gentiles; hence his 
‘“‘called”’ the passover (ἡ λεγομένη). — 
Ver. 2. τὸ πῶς, the how, that was the 
puzzle; that Jesus should be put out of 
the way by death (ἀνέλωσιν a.) ; some- 
how wasa settled matter. Cf. xix. 48 (τὸ 
τί, etc.).—éhoBotvro γάρτ.λ.: their fear 
of the people explains why the how was 
so perplexing a matter. The popularity 
of Jesus was very embarrassing. 

Vv. 3-6. $¥udas (Mt. xxvi. 14-16, Mk. 
xiv. 10, 11). At this point in Mt. (xxvi. 
6-13) and Mk. (xiv. 3-9) comes in the 
anointing at Bethany omitted by Lk. 
---εἰσῆλθεν Σατανᾶς, Satan entered into 
Judas. Lk. alone of the synoptists 
thus explains the conduct of Judas. Cf. 
John xiii. 2. Lk.’s statement is stronger 
even than John’s, suggesting a literal 
possession. Only so could he account 
for such behaviour on the part of a 
disciple towards such a Master. It was 
a natural view for a devout evangelist in 
the Apostolic Age, but, taken literally, it 
would be fatal to the moral significance 
of the act of the traitor, which, while 
presenting a difficult psychological pro- 
blem, doubtless proceeded from con- 
scious motives.—é« Tod ἀριθμοῦ, of the 
number, but how far from the spirit 
which became that privileged body !— 
Ver. 4. στρατηγοῖς: a military term 
which might suggest the captains of 
Roman soldiers, but doubtless pointing 


624 


KATA AOYKAN XXII. 


στρατηγοῖς, τό, πῶς αὐτὸν παραδῷ adtois.! 5. καὶ ἐχάρησαν, καὶ 
συνέθεντο αὐτῷ ἀργύριον δοῦναι: 6. καὶ ἐξωμολόγησε, καὶ ἐζήτει 
εὐκαιρίαν τοῦ παραδοῦναι αὐτὸν αὗτοῖς ἅτερ ὄχλου.3 

7+ ΄Ἠλθε δὲ ἡ ἡμέρα τῶν ἀζύμων, ἐν ὃ ᾗ ἔδει θύεσθαι τὸ πάσχα: 
8. καὶ ἀπέστειλε Πέτρον καὶ Ιωάννην, εἰπών, “΄ Πορευθέντες ἑτοιμά- 
cate ἡμῖν τὸ πάσχα, ἵνα φάγωμεν. ο. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Nod 
θέλεις ἑτοιμάσωμεν; 10. “O δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “΄ Ιδού, εἰσελθόντων 
ὑμῶν eis τὴν πόλιν, συναντήσει ὑμῖν ἄνθρωπος κεράµιον ὕδατος βασ- 
τάζων: ἀκολουθήσατε αὐτῷ εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν οὗ ΄ εἰσπορεύεται: 11. 
καὶ ἐρεῖτε τῷ οἰκοδεσπότῃ τῆς οἰκίας, Λέγει σοι 6 διδάσκαλος, Nod 
ἐστι τὸ κατάλυμα, ὅπου τὸ πάσχα μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν µου φάγω; 
12. Κάκεῖνος ὑμῖν δείξει dvdyeov® µέγα ἐστρωμένον: ἐκεῖ ἑτοιμά- 


35 
σατε. 
ε , a , 
ἠτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα. 


1 αντοις παραδω αυτον in ΝΒΟΙ, 116. 


13. ᾽Απελθόντες δὲ εὗρον καθὼς εἴρηκενὃ αὐτοῖς: καὶ 


2 αντοις after ar. ox. in NABCL. D omits αυτοιφ. 

3 Omit εν BCDL, found in WN, etc. (Tisch.). 

4 For ov (in D and many uncials) ΜΒΟ and codd. vet. Lat., etc., have εις ην. 
5 αναγαιον in NABDL, etc. (Tisch., W.H.). 


5 ειρηκει in SBCDL 69, 


to the heads of the temple watches 
(Levites) who kept order during the 
feast. They would be necessary to the 
carrying out of Judas’ plan. The Levites 
had to perform garrison duty for the 
temple (vide Numbers viii. 24, 25). In 
Acts iv. 2 weread of one στρατηγὸςτ. ἵ., 
who was doubtless the head of the 
whole body of temple police.—rd πῶς: 
a second reference to the perplexing 
how.—Ver. 5. ἐχάρησαν, they were 
glad, emphatically; and how piously 
they would remark on the providential 
character of this unexpected means of 
getting out of the difficulty as to the 
πῶς !—Ver. 6. ἐξωμολόγησε, he agreed, 
spopondit, for which the Greeks used the 
simple verb, The active of ἐξομ. occurs 
here only in Ν.Τ.---ἅτερ ὄχλον, without a 
crowd, the thing above all to be avoided. 
ἅτερ is a poetic word in Greek authors ; 
here and in ver. 35 only in N.T. 

Vv. 7-13. Preparation for the paschal 
feast (Mt. xxvi. 17-19, Mk. xiv. 12-16).— 
Ver. 7. 7A@e, arrived. A considerable 
number of commentators (Euthy. Zig., 
Godet, Schanz, J. Weiss (Meyer)) render, 
approached (ἐπλησίασε, Euthy.), hold- 
ing that Lk. with John makes Jesus antici- 
pate the feast by a day, so finding here one 
ofthe points in which the third Gospel is 


in touch with the fourth.—Ver. 8. ἀπέσ- 
τειλε: in Lk. Jesus takes the initiative; 
in Mt. and Mk. the disciples introduce 
the subject. Various reasons have been 
suggested for this change. Lk. simply 
states the fact as it was (Schanz). He 
thought it unsuitable that Jesus should 
seem to need reminding (Meyer, seventh 
edition). The change of day, from 14th 
to 13th Nisan, required Jesus to take the 
initiative (J. Weiss, Meyer, eighth edi- 
tion).—Nérpov καὶ Ἰ.: the two disciples 
sent out not named in parallels.—Ver. 
11. οἰκοδεσπότῃ τῆς οἰκίας: a pleo- 
nasm = the house-master of the house. 
Bornemann cites from Greek authors 
similar redundancies, οἰκοφύλαξ δομῶν, 
αἰπόλια αἰγῶν, αἰπόλος αἰγῶν, συβόσια 
συῶν, and from Sept., τὰ βουκόλια τῶν 
βοῶν (Deut. vii. 13). In the remainder 
of ver. 11 and in vv. 12, 13 Lk. follows 
Mk. closely. 

Vv. 14-18. Prelude to the Lord’s. 
Supper (Mt. xxvi. 20, Mk, xiv. 17).— 
Ver. 14. οἱ ἀπόστολοι, the apostles, for 
disciples in parallels. This designation 
for the Twelve, the initiative ascribed to 
Jesus (ver. 8), and the desire of Jesus 
spoken of in next ver. all fit into each 
other and indicate a wish on the part οί 
the evangelist to invest what he here 


6---ᾱχ. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 625 
14. Καὶ ὅτε ἐγένετο ἡ Spa, ἀνέπεσε, καὶ ot δώδεκα] ἁπόστολοι 

σὺν αὐτῶ. 15. καὶ εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “΄΄ Ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησα τοῦτο 

τὸ πάσχα φαγεῖν pel ὑμῶν, πρὸ τοῦ µε παθεῖν' 16. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, 

ὅτι οὐκέτι 2 οὗ μὴ φάγω ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ἕως ὅτου πληρωθῇ ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ 

17. Καὶ δεξάµενος ποτήριον, εὐχαριστήσας etme, “ Ad- 

18. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὅ οὐ 


τοῦ Θεοῦ.” 
Bete τοῦτο, καὶ διαµερίσατε ἑαυτοῖς 4: 
μὴ πίω δ ἀπὸ τοῦ γεννήµατος τῆς ἀμπέλου, ἕως ὅτου Ἰ ἡ βασιλεία 
τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐλθη. 19. Καὶ λαβὼν ἄρτον, εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασε, καὶ 
ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, “'Τοῦτό ἐστι τὸ σῶμά pou,® τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν 
διδόµενον" τοῦτο ποιεῖτε cis τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν.' 20. Ὡσαύτωφ 
καὶ τὸ ποτήριον μετὰ τὸ δειπνῆσαι, λέγων, ''Τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον, F 
καινὴ διαθήκη ἐν τῷ αἵματί µου, τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐκχυνόμενον.ὃ 21. 
Πλὴν ἰδού, ἡ χεὶρ τοῦ παραδιδόντος µε μετ ἐμοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης. 
1 Omit δώδεκα ΜΒΡ (Tisch., W.H.). LX omit awoe. Τ.Ε. = 6, εἰς, 
2 $SABL omit ουκετι (W.H.), found in D al. (Tisch.). 
3 For εξ avrov S$BL minusc. have αυτο. 


4 εις εαντους in ScBCLM 1, 13, 69 al. (Tisch., W.H.). D al have εαντοις =: 
T.R. 

5 Omit or. BCDGL al. (W.H.), found in S§XTA al. (Tisch.). 

6 After maw SBKLMN al. have απο tov νυν. DG 1 have the phrase, but before 
ov μη. 

7 So in DX al. (Tisch.). SQBL have ον (W.H.). 

8 From το νπερ v., νετ. 19, to the end of ver. 20, found in nearly all Greek codd. 
and verss., is omitted in D a ff, i; b e syrr. cur. sin. more or less rearrange the 
matter referring to the Supper. Syr. cur. has ver. 19 before vv. 17, 18. Syr. sin. 
has this order: 19, 20 a, 17, 20 b, 18 (‘‘And He took bread and gave thanks over it 
and brake, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which I give for you: thus 
do in remembrance of me. And after they had supped He took the cup and gave 
thanks over it, and said, Take this, share it among yourselves. This is my blood, the 
new Testament. For I say unto you that henceforth I will not drink of this fruit, 


until the Kingdom of God shall come,” Mrs. Lewis). 


narrates with great significance. He 
seems to write with the practice of the 
Apostolic Church in view in reference 
to the Holy Communion.—Ver. 15. πρὸ 
τοῦ µε παθεῖν: the last passover He will 
eat with them is looked forward to with 
solemn, tender feeling.—Ver. 16. λέγω 
yap: the words of Jesus here reported 
answer to words given in Mt. and Mk. 
at a later stage, {.ε., at the close of their 
narrative of the institution of the Supper. 
At this point Lk.’s narrative follows a 
divergent course.—Ver. 17. δεξάµενος, 
having received from the hand of another 
(different from λαβὼν, ver. 19), handed 
to Him that He might drink.—evyapio- 
τήσας, this solemn act gives to the hand- 
ing round of the cup here mentioned the 
character of a prelude to the Holy 
Supper: (‘quaedam quasi prolusio 5. 


Coenae,”’ Beng. in reference to vv. 15-18). 
If the reading of D and some Old Latin 
codd. which makes ver. 19 stop at σῶμά 
μον and omits ver. 20 be the true text 
(vide critical notes above), then Lk.’s 
account of the institution really begins in 
ver. 17, and what happened according to 
it was this: Jesus first sent round the cup, 
saying: take this and divide it among 
yourselves, then took bread, broke it, and 
gave it to the disciples, saying: this is 
my body. In this version two things are 
to be noted: first, the inversion of the 
actions; second, the omission of all re- 
ference to the blood in connection with 
the wine. The existence of such a read- 
ing as that of D and the Old Latin ver- 
sion raises questions, not only as to 
Lk.’s text, but as to church practice in the 
Apostolic age and afterwards; or, assum- 


40 


- 


626 ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN XXII. 
22. καὶ d μὲν vids! τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πορεύεται κατὰ τὸ ὠρισμένον”. 
πλὴν οὐαὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ, δι οὗ παραδίδοται.' 23. Καὶ αὐτοὶ 
ἤρξαντο συζητεῖν πρὸς ἑαυτούς, τό, τίς dpa ein ἐξ αὐτῶν 6 τοῦτα 
µέλλων πράσσειν. 24. ᾿Εγένετο δὲ καὶ φιλονεικία ἐν αὐτοῖς, τό, τίς 
αὐτῶν δοκεῖ εἶναι μείζων. 25. 6 δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Oi βασιλεῖς τῶν 


ἐθνῶν κυριεύουσιν αὐτῶν, καὶ οἱ ἐξουσιάζοντες αὐτῶν εὐεργέται καλ- 


οῦνται. 


< 


26. ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐχ οὕτως: GAN’ 6 μείζων ἐν ὑμῖν γενέσθω ὡς 
ὁ νεώτερος: καὶ ὁ ἡγούμενος ὡς ὁ διακονῶν. 


27. τίς γὰρ μείζων, 


~ ie 
ὁ ἀνακείμενος, ἢ 6 διακονῶν; οὐχὶ 6 ἀνακείμενος; ἐγὼ δέ εἰμι ἐν 


1 For καιο p. υ. ΜΒΙΙ, have ort, etc., and NcBL ο vos perv. 
2 κατα τ. ω. πορευεται in SBDGLT 13, 6g, etc. 


ing as a possibility that Lk. wrote as D 
represents, have we here another instance 
of editorial discretion—shrinking from 
imputing to Jesus the idea of drinking 
His blood? If with D we omit all that 
follows σῶμά µου, then it results that Lk. 
has left out all the words of our Lord 
setting forth the significance of His 
death uttered (1) at Caesarea Philippi; 
(2) on the occasion of the request of 
Zebedee’s sons; (3) the anointing at 
Bethany ; (4) the institution of the Sup- 
per. (2) and (3) are omitted altogether, 
and (1) is so reported as to make the 
lesson non-apparent. 

Vv. 19-20. The Supper.—Ver. 19. τὸ 
σῶμά pov, my body, broken like the 
bread, implying blood-shedding, though 
that is passed over in silence if the read- 
ing of D be accepted. Note that in 
Acts ii. 46 the communion of the faithful 
is called breaking Ότεαά.- “τὸ ὑ. ὑ. δι- 
δόµενον: what follows from these words 
to the end of ver. 20 resembles closely 
St. Paul’s account in 1 Cor. xi. 23-25. 
This resemblance is one of the argu- 
ments of W. and H. against the genuine- 
ness of the passage. On the whole sub- 
ject consult J. Weiss (Meyer, eighth 
edition) and Wendt, L. F., i., 173, both 
of whom adopt the reading of D. 

Vv. 21-23. The traitor (Mt. xxvi. 21- 
25, Mk. xiv. 18-21), placed after the 
Supper, instead of before, as in 
parallels.—wAjv : making a transition to 
an incident presenting a strong moral 
contrast to the preceding.— χεὶρ, the 
hand, graphic and tragic; the hand 
which is to perform such opposite acts, 
now touching the Master’s on the table, 
ere long tobe the instrument of betrayal. 
—Ver. 22. πλὴν, adversative, neverthe- 
less ; the Son of Man destined to go (to 
gd ath), but that does not relieve the in- 


strument of his responsibility.—Ver. 23. 
πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς, to one another, or among 
themselves, without speaking to the 
Master ; otherwise in parallels.—roiro: 
in an emphatic position = this horrible 
deed. 

Vv. 24-30. Strife among the disciples. 
Cf. on chap. ix. 46.—Ver. 24. Φιλονεικία, 
a contention, here only in N.T. The 
juxtaposition of this strife among the 
eleven with the announcement of the 
traitor gives to it by comparison the 
aspect of a pardonable infirmity in other- 
wise loyal men, and it is so treated by 
Jesus.—é tis α., etc., as to the who of 
them, etc. The topic of the earlier dis- 
pute (ix. 46) might be : who outside their 
circle was greater than they all, but here 
it certainly is: which of them is greater 
than his fellow. It is usual to connect 
this incident with the feet-washing in 
John xiii—®oxet, seems, looks like, 
makes the impression of being (Bleek 
and Hahn).—Vv. 25, 26: borrowed from 
the incident of the two sons of Zebedee 
(Mt. xx. 25, 26, Mk. x. 42, 43), which 
Lk. omits and somewhat alters in ex- 
pression.—Ver. 25. εὐεργέται: here 
only in N.T., either titular, like our 
‘your highness,” e.g., Ptolemy Euergetes 
(so, many), or = benefactors.—Ver. 26. 
ἡμεῖς δὲ, etc., but ye not so, elliptical, 
ἔσεσθε OF ποιήσετε understood.—é 
νεώτερος, the younger, ‘‘ who in Eastern 
families fulfils menial duties, Acts v. 6” 
(Farrar).—é ἡγούμενος, the leader or 
chief, the name of those in office in the 
Church in Heb. xiii. 7, also in the 
epistle of Clement; therefore viewed by 
some as a note of a late date, but with- 
out sufficient reason.—Ver. 27 adduces 
the example of Jesus to enforce the 
principle stated in ver. 26. He, the ad- 
mittedly greater, had assumed the position 





42-31. 
µέσω ὑμῶν] ὡς 6 διακονῶν. 


ς 


καθὼς διέθετό por 6 


δὲ 


1 expe after νµων in BLT. 
3εσθητε in BDT (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 καθησεσθε in ΝΑ ΒΣΙ, al. (Tisch., W.H., marg.). 


text). 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ς , , , a ~ ~ 
ὁ Κύριος,» “ Sipev, Σίμων, ἰδού, 6 Σατανᾶς ’ ἐξητήσατο ὑμᾶς, τοῦ 


627 


28. Ὑμεῖς δέ ἐστε οἱ διαµεμενηκότες 
μετ ἐμοῦ ἐν τοῖς πειρασμοῖς µου" 29. κἀγὼ "διατίθεμαι ὑμῖν,α 
πατήρ µου, βασιλείαν, 30. ἵνα ἐσθίητε” καὶ 
πίνητε ἐπὶ τῆς τραπέζης µου ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ µου, καὶ καθίσησθε” 
ἐπὶ θρόνων, κρίνοντες τὰς δώδεκα φυλὰς ” τοῦ Ισραήλ.” 


here only 

in Gospels. 
Acts fii. 
25 and 
several 
times in 
Heb. 

b here only 

in N.T. 


31. Εἶπε 


καθησθε in BTA (W.H. 


4 ras δωδ. pu. κρινοντες in BT (W.H.). 
5 Omit ειπε δε ο κ. BLT sah. cop. syr. sin. (Tisch., W.H.). 


of the less by becoming the serving man, 
6 διακονῶν, instead of the guest at table 
(6 ἀνακείμενος).. In what way Jesus 
had played the part of serving man Lk. 
does not indicate. The handing round 
of the cup might be viewed as service. 
By omitting the incident of the sons of 
Zebedee Lk. missed the supreme illus- 
tration of service through death (Mt. xx. 
28, Mk. x. 45).—Ver. 28. ὑμεῖς δέ, but 
ye, the δέ making transition from words 
of correction to a more congenial style 
of address.—ot διαµεµενηκότες, who 
have continued all through ; the perfect 
participle, pointing them out as in 
possession of a permanent character, a 
body of thoroughly tried, faithful men.— 
πειρασμοῖς, in my temptations, pointing to 
all past experiences fitted to try faith and 
patience, which were of daily occurrence: 
temptations even to the Master, but still 
more to the disciples (in view of their 
spiritual weakness) to lose confidence in, 
_and attachment to, One so peculiar, so 
isolated, and so much disliked and 
opposed by the people of repute and in- 
fluence.—Ver. 20. διατίθεµαι (διατίθηµι, 
middle only in N.T.), ‘‘ appoint,” make 
a disposition of. The corresponding 
noun 15 διαθήκη. In Heb. ix. 17 we find 
ὁ διαθέµενος, a testator, and the verb 
may be used here in the sense of 
bequeathing, though that sense is in- 
applicable to God’s gift of a kingdom to 
Jesus referred to in next clause.—Ver. 
30. καθήσεσθε, ye shall sit, the judicial 
function the main thing, the feasting a 
subordinate feature; hence stated in an 
independent proposition (καθήσεσθε not 
dependent on tva).—S8edexa, twelve 
tribes, and twelve to rule over them, the 
defection of Judas not taken into account. 
The promise is given in that respect as if 
spoken on another occasion (Mt. xix. 


28). This generous eulogy of the disciples 
for their fidelity has the effect of minimis- 
ing the fault mentioned just before. Lk. 
was aware of the fact. It is another 
instance of his ‘‘ sparing of the Twelve’”’. 

-Vv. 31-34. Peter’s weakness foretold, 
With John (xiii. 36-38) Lk. places this 
incident in the supper chamber. In Mt. 
and Mk. it occurs on the way to Geth- 
semane (Mt. xxvi. 31-35, Mk. xiv. 37-41). 
It is introduced more abruptly here than 
in any ofthe other accounts. The εἶπε δὲ 
ὁ κύριος of the T.R. is a natural attempt 
to mitigate the abruptness, but the pas- 
sage is more effective without it. From 
generous praise and bright promises 
κ passes suddenly, with perhaps a 

ight pause and marked change of tone, 
to the moral weakness of His much-loved 
companions and of Peter in particular.— 
Ver. 31. Σίμων, Σίμων: one can imagine, 
though not easily describe, how this was 
said—with much affection and just 
enough of distress in the tone to make it 
solemn.—6 Σατανᾶς. The reference to 
Satan naturally reminds us of the trial 
of Job, and most commentators assume 
that the case of Job is in the view of 
Jesus or the evangelist. The coming 
fall of Peter could not be set in a more 
advantageous light than by being 
paralleled with the experience of the 
famous man of Uz, with a good record 
behind him and fame before him, the 
two connected by a dark but profitable 
time of αἰα].--ἐξητήσατο, not merely 
‘“‘ degired to have” (A.V.) but, obtained 
by asking (R.V., margin). Careful Greek 
writers used ἐξαιτεῖν -- to demand for 
punishment, and ἐξαιτεῖσθαι = to beg off, 
deprecari. Later writers somewhat dis- 
regarded this distinction. The aorist 
implies success in the demand. It is an 
instance of the ‘‘ Resultative Aorist” 


628 ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


XXII, 


σινιάσαι ὡς τὸν σῖτον: 32. ἐγὼ δὲ ἐδεήθην περὶ σοῦ, ἵνα μὴ ἐκλείπη | 


ἡ πίστις σου" καὶ od ποτε ἐπιστρέψας στήριξον ” τοὺς ἀδελφούς 


35 


cou.” 33. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “' Κύριε, μετὰ σοῦ ἔτοιμός εἰμι καὶ εἲς 


φυλακὴν καὶ eis θάνατον πορεύεσθαι." 


34. Ὁ δὲ εἶπε, “ Λέγω σοι, 


Πέτρε, οὗ μὴ ὃ φωνήσει σήµερον ἀλέκτωρ, πρὶν ἢ  τρὶς ἀπαρνήσῃ 


μὴ εἰδέναι pe.” 5 


35. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, '΄ Ὅτε ἀπέστειλα ὑμᾶς ἅτερ 


Βαλαντίου καὶ πήρας καὶ ὑποδημάτων, ph τινος ὑστερήσατε; οἱ 


δὲ εἶπον, “ Οὐδενός.” 6 


κλιπη in SBDLT al, 


Seornpigov in SABKLT 1 (Tisch., W.H.). 


Σον without py in NBLTX. 


36. Εἶπεν οὖν Ἰ αὐτοῖς, “*ANAG νῦν 6 ἔχων 
Βαλάντιον ἀράτω, ὁμοίως καὶ πήραν ' καὶ ὁ μὴ ἔχων πωλησάτω τὸ 


T.R. = D, ete. 


« For πριν η SWBLT 60 al. have ews ( ews οτον). 
ρ 
δ For απαρ... µε SBLT 13, 131 al. have pe απαρνηση ειδεναι (W.H.), 


6 ουθενος in NBT al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


κ ΕΕ ΜΟΙ 


7 For ονν NcBLT have δε. SQ*D have ο δε ειπεν. 


(vide on this and other senses of the 
aorist, Burton, M. and T., § 35). Field 
(Ot. Nor.) cites from Wetstein instances 
of such use and renders ἐξητ. %. peri- 
phrastically ‘‘Satan hath procured you 
to be given up to him’’.—tpas, you, the 
whole of you (though not emphatic) ; 
therefore, Simon, look to yourself, and 
to the whole brotherhood of which you 
ave the leading man. Bengel remarks: 
«6 Totus sane hic sermo Domini praesup- 
ponit P. esse primum apostolorum, quo 
stante aut cadente ceteri aut minus aut 
magis periclitarentur”.—owdoar: a 
ἅπ. λεγ., but of certain meaning. 
Hesychius gives as equivalent κοσ- 
κιγεῦσαι, from κόσκινον, a sieve. Euthy. 
Zig. is copious in synonyms = θορυβῆσαι, 
κυκῆσαι, ταράξαι. He adds, ‘‘what we 
call κόσκινον is by some called σινίον,᾽ 
and he thus describes the function of 
the sieve: ἐν ᾧ 6 σῖτος THSe κἀκεῖσε 
µεταφερόμενος ταράσσεται. “Sifting 
points to the result of the process antici- 
pated by Jesus. Satan aimed at ruin.— 
Ver. 32. ἐγὼ δὲ ἐδεήθην, but J have 
prayed: I working against Satan, and 
successfully.—tva μὴ ἐκλίπῃ ἡ π. σ., 
that thy faith may not (utterly) fail or 
die (xvi. 9), though it prove weak or in- 
adequate for the moment. Job’s faith 
underwent eclipse. He did not curse 
God, but for the time he lost faith in the 
reality of a Divine government in human 
affairs. So Peter never ceased to love 
Jesus, but he was overpowered by fear 
and the instinct of self-preservation.— 


ἐπιστρέψας, having returned (to thy 
true self). Cf. στραφῆτε in Mt. xviii. 3. 
The word “converted,” as bearing a 
technical sense, should be allowed to 
fall into desuetude in this connection. 
Many regard ἐπιστρέψας as a Hebraism 
= vicissim: do thou in turn strengthen 
by prayer and otherwise thy brethren as 
I have strengthened thee. So, ¢.g., 
Grotius: “‘ Da operam ne in fide deficiant, 
nempe pro ipsis orans, sicut ego pro 
te oro”. Ingenious but doubtful.— 
στήρισον: later form for στήριξον; 
for the sense vide Acts xiv. 22 and 
1 Pet. v. 10.—Ver. 33. els Φυλακὴν καὶ 
εἷς θάνατον: more definite reference to 
the dangers ahead than in any of the 
parallels.— Ver. 34. σήμερον, to-day, as 
in Mk., but without the more definite 
ταύτῃ τῇ νυκτὶ.--μὴ εἰδέναι: μὴ after a 
verb of denial as often in Greek authors, 
6.Ρ., τὸν Tap ἀπαρνηθέντα μὴ χρᾶναι 
λέχη, Eurip., Hippol., 1. 1256. 

Vv. 35-38. Coming danger, peculiar 
to Lk. There is danger ahead physically 
as well as morally. Jesus turns now to 
the physical side. What He says about 
a sword is not to be taken literally. It 
is a vivid way of intimating that the su- 
preme crisis is at hand = the enemy 
approaches, prepare !—Ver. 35. ὅτε ἁπ- 
έστειλα: the reference is to ix. 3, or 
rather, so far as language is concerned, 
to x. 4, which relates to the mission of 
the seventy.—Grep as in ver. 6.—Ver. 36. 
ἀλλὰ viv, but now, suggesting an em- 


phatic contrast between past and present, © 





————eeeee 


3 2-—40. 


ἱμάτιον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀγορασάτω µάχαιραν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


625 


37. λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν, ὅτι 


ἔτι] τοῦτο τὸ γεγραµµένον δεῖ τελεσθῆναι ἐν ἐμοί, τό, ‘Kab μετὰ 


ἀνόμων ἐλογίσθη ”: 


«έ Ἰκαγόν ἐστι. 


καὶ γὰρ Ta? περὶ ἐμοῦ τέλος ἔχει. 
εἶπον, “' Κύριε, ἴἰδού, µάχαιραι ὧδε 8 


38. Οἱ δὲ 


Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 


4 35 
υο. 


30. ΚΑΙ ἐξελθὼν ἐπορεύθη κατὰ τὸ ἔθος εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν Ἐλαιῶν " 


ἠκολούθησαν δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 


1 Omit ετι NABDLTX. 


AO. γενόμενος δὲ 


2 For ra NBDLT 1 have το (Tisch., W.H.). 


3 Omit avrov NABDLT 1, 13, etc. (Tisch., W.H.). 


(W.H. brackets), 


or near future.—apdrw, lift it: if he has 
a purse let him carry it, it will be needed, 
either to buy a sword or, more generally, 
to provide for himself; he is going now 
not on a peaceful mission in connection 
with which he may expect friendly recep- 
tion and hospitality, but on a campaign 
in an enemy’s country.—é μὴ ἔχων, he 
who has not; either purse and scrip, or, 
with reference to what follows, he who 
hath not already such a thing as a sword 
let him by all means get ΟΠΕ.--πωλησάτω 
τὸ ἵμάτιον, let him sell his upper garment, 
however indispensable for clothing by day 
and by night. A sword the one thing 
needtul. This is a realistic speech true 
to the manner of Jesus and, what is rare 
in Lk., given without toning down, a 
genuine logion without doubt.—Ver. 37. 
τὸ γεγραμµένον: the words quoted are 
from Is. liii. 2, and mean that Jesus was 
about to die the death of a criminal.—8et, 
it is necessary, in order that Scripture 
might be fulfilled. No other or higher 
view than this of the rationale of Christ’s 
sufferings is found in Luke’s Gospel. Cf. 
xxiv. 26. A Paulinist in his universalism, 
he shows no acquaintance with St. Paul’s 
theology of the atonement unless it be in 
ver. 20.—16 (τὰ T.R.) περὶ ἐμοῦ, that 
which concerns me, my life course.— 
τέλος ἔχει is coming to an end. Some 
think the reference is still to the pro- 
phecies concerning Messiah and take 
τέλος ἔχει in the sense of ‘‘is being ful- 
filled,’’ a sense it sometimes bears: τελει- 
οὔται ἤδη, Euthy. Kypke renders: rata 
sunt, the phrase being sometimes used in 
reference to things whose certainty and 
authority cannot be questioned = ‘‘ my 
doom is fixed beyond recall’’—Ver. 38. 
µάχαιραι δύο: how did such a peaceable 
company come to have even so much as 
one sword? Were the two weapons 
really swords, fighting instruments, or 


B omits και before οι pad. 


large knives? The latter suggestion, 
made by Chrysostom and adopted by 
Euthym., is called ‘‘ curious” by Alford, 
but regarded by Field (Οἱ. Nor.) as 
‘* probable ’’.—ixavév, enough! {.ε., for 
one who did not meantofight. Itisa 
pregnant word = “ for the end I have in 
view more than enough ; but also enough 
of misunderstanding, disenchantment, 
speech, teaching, and life generally,” 
Holtzmann, H. Ο. 

Vv. 39-46. Gethsemane (Mt. xxvi. 36- 
46, Mk. xiv. 32-42). Lk.’s narrative here 
falls far short of the vivid realism of the 
parallels. Mt. and Mk. allow the in- 
firmity of the great High Priest of human- 
ity so graphically described in the Epistle 
to the Hebrews to appear in its appalling 
naked truth. Lk. throws a veil over it, 
so giving an account well adapted doubt- 
less to the spiritual condition of first 
readers, but not so well serving the deep- 
est permanent needs of the Church. This 
statement goes on the assumption that 
νν. 43, 44 are no part of the genuine © 
text, for in these, especially in ver. 44, 
the language is even more realistic than 
that of Mk., and is thus out of harmony 
with the subdued nature of Lk.’s narra- 
tive in general. This want of keeping 
with the otherwise colourless picture of 
the scene, which is in accord with Lk.’s 
uniform mode of handling the emphatic 
words, acts and experiences of Jesus, is, 
in my view, one of the strongest argu- 
ments against the genuineness of vv. 43, 


Ver. 39. ἐξελθὼν: no mention of the 
hymn sung before going out (Mt. ver. 30, 
Mk. ver. 26), Lk. makes prominent the 
outgoing of ¥esus. The parallels speak 
in the plural of the whole company.— 
κατὰ τὸ ἔθος: for the form vide ii. 42, 
and for the fact xxi. 37 and John xviii. 2. 
This is another point of contact between 


630 KATA AOYKAN XXII. 
ἐπὶ τοῦ τόπου, εἶπεν adtois, “ Προσεύχεσθε μὴ εἰσελθεῖν εἷς πειρασ- 
cActexxir. pov.” 41. Καὶ αὐτὸς "ἀπεσπάσθη dw αὐτῶν ὡσεὶ λίθου * βολήν, 
ἆ ΝΤ. καὶ θεὶς τὰ γόνατα προσηύχετο, 42. λέγων, “΄ Πάτερ, εἰ βούλει 
παρενεγκεῖν 1 τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο2 dw ἐμοῦ: πλὴν μὴ τὸ θέληµά 
µου, ἀλλὰ τὸ σὸν γενέσθω.; 5 43. Ὥφθη δὲ αὐτῷ ἄγγελος ax” 
ε Actexii.5. οὐρανοῦ ἐνισχύων αὐτόν. 
1 Pet. 1. 42. i < ς is 
τερον προσηύχετο. ἐγένετο δὲ 6 ἱδρὼς αὐτοῦ ὡσεὶ θρόµβοι αἵματος 
καταβαίνοντες ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν. 45. Καὶ ἀναστὰς ἀπὸ τῆς προσευχῆς, 


44. καὶ γενόμενος ἐν ἀγωνίᾳα, * ἐκτενέσ- 


1 For παρενεγκειν SQL, etc., have παρενεγκαι (Tisch.). BDT al. have παρενεγκε 
(W.H.). 


Άτουτο το ποτηριον in NWBDLT. 
5 γιν-(οτ γειν-)εσθω in SABL al. β]. Ὦ has γεν. = T.R. 


4 Verses 43, 44 are found in *DL and many other uncials, in codd. vet. Lat. 
vulg, Egypt. νετ. Syr. (cur. Pesh. Hier., but not sin.) Eus. Canons, etc., etc. 
They are wanting in aABRT, and Epiph. Hil. and Hier. mention that they were 
wanting in many codd. known to them. W.H. give them in double brackets, and 
regard them as no part of Lk.’s text, though a true element of the @hristian tradition. 


Vide their appendix. Cf. Blass’ theory of two recensions in Evang. sec. Lucam. 


these two Gospels. The reference to the 
habit of Jesus deprives this visit of special 
εΙσηίῇςαπος,- ἠκολούθησαν: the dis- 
ciples followed, no talk by the way of 
their coming breakdown, as in Mt. ver. 
31, and Mk. ver. 27. 

Vv. 40-46. ἐπὶ τοῦ τόπον, at the place, 
of usual resort, not the place of this 
memorable scene, for it is not Lk.’s pur- 
pose to make it specially prominent. Cf. 
John xviii. 2, τὸν τόπον previously de- 
scribed as a κῆπος across the brook 
Κεάτοπ.---προσεύχεσθε: Jesus bids the 
disciples pray against temptation. In 
Mt. and Mk. He bids them sit down 
while He prays. Their concern is to be 
wholly for themselves.—Ver. 41. ἄπεσ- 
πάσθη, He withdrew, secessit. Some 
insist on the literal sense, and render, 
“tore Himself away” = “avulsus est,” 
Vulg., implying that Jesus was acting 
under strong feeling. But did Lk. wish 
to make that prominent? The verb does 
not necessarily mean more than “ with- 
drew,” and many of the philological com- 
mentators (Wolf, Raphel, Pricaeus, Pal- 
‘airet, etc.) take it in that sense, citing 
late Greek authors in support.—am’ av- 
τῶν, from them (all); no mention of three 
taken along with Him, a very important 
feature as an index of the state of mind 
of Jesus. The Master in His hour of 
weakness looked to the three for sym- 
pathy and moral support; vide Mt. xxvi. 
40. But it did not enter into Lk.’s plan 
to make that apparent.—Aiov βολήν, a 
stone’s cast, not too distant to be over- 


heard. Bodnvis the accusative of measure. 
--θεὶς τὰ γόνατα: the usual attitude in 
prayer was standing; the kneeling pos- 
ture implied special urgency (‘in genibus 
orabant quoties res major urgebat,” 
Grot.), but not so decidedly as falling 
at full length on the ground, the attitude 
pointed at in the parallels—Ver. 42. 
πάτερ, Father! the keynote, a prayer of 
faith however dire the distress.—et βούλει, 
etc.: with the reading παρένεγκε the sense 
is simple: if Thou wilt, take away. With 
παρενεγκεῖν OF παρενέγκαι we have a 
sentence unfinished: ‘‘ apodosis sup- 
pressed by sorrow” (Winer, p. 750), or 
an infinitive for an imperative (Bengel, 
etc.). The use of wap. in the sense of 
‘‘remove” is somewhat unusual. Hesy- 
chius gives as synonyms verbs of the 
opposite meaning- παραθεῖναι, παραβαλ- 
ew. The ἀπ᾿ ἐμοῦ leaves no doubt what 
is meant. In Lk.’s narrative there is 
only a single act of prayer. The whole 
account is mitigated as compared with 
that in Mt. and Mk. Jesus goes to the 
accustomed place, craves no sympathy 
from the three, kneels, utters a single 
prayer, then returns to the Twelve. With 
this picture the statement in vv. 43, 44 is 


entirely out of harmony.—Ver. 44. év 


ἀγωνίᾳ, in an agony (of fear), or simply 
in ‘“‘a great fear”. So Field (Ot. Nor.); 
who has an important note on the word 
a&yevia, with examples to show that fear is 
the radical meaning of the word. Loes- 
ner supports the same view with ex- 
amples from Philo. Here only in N.T. 


41—52. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 

ἐλθὼν πρὸς τοὺς µαθητάς, εὗρεν αὐτοὺς κοιµωμµένους1 ἀπὸ τῆς 
λύπης, 46. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Ti καθεύδετε; ἀναστάντες προσ- 
εύχεσθε, ἵνα μὴ εἰσέλθητε eis πειρασμόν. 

47. Ἔτι δὲ αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος, ἰδού, ὄχλος, καὶ ὁ λεγόμενος 
Ιούδας, εἲς τῶν δώδεκα, προήρχετο αὐτῶν," καὶ ἤγγισε τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ 
Φιλῆσαι αὐτόν. 48. 6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς{ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “' Ιούδα, φιλήματι 
τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παραδίδως; ” 49. Ἰδόντες δὲ οἱ περὶ αὐτὸν 
τὸ ἐσόμενον εἶπον αὐτῷ," “Κύριε, εἰ πατάξοµεν ἐν paxaipa;” 5ο. 
Καὶ ἐπάταξεν cis τις ἐξ αὐτῶν τὸν δοῦλον τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, καὶ 


ς 


ἀφεῖλεν αὐτοῦ τὸ ots? τὸ δεξιό. 51. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


an , A“ n 
εἶπεν, '' Εᾶτε ἕως τούτου. Kat ἀψάμενος τοῦ ὠτίου αὐτοῦ.ὃ ἰάσατο 
αὐτόν. 52. Εἶπε δὲ 6° ᾿Ιησοῦς πρὸς τοὺς παραγενοµένους ἐπ᾽ 19 


3 μα > a x ‘ a ¢ a Ν , ce 
αὐτὸν ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ στρατηγοὺς τοῦ ἱεροῦ καὶ πρεσβυτέρους, “ Ὡς 


631 


1 koupwpevous αυτονς in SBDLT 6ο al. 
S avrovs in uncials. αντων in minuss. 
> Omit αντω SBLTX. 

7 το ους αντου in BLT 69, 346. 

® Omit ο before |. MABT. 
10 προς in 4, etc. (Tisch.). 


From this word comes the name ‘ The 
Agony in the Garden’’.—@pépBor, clots 
(of blood), here only in N.T. 

Vv. 45, 46. Return of $esus to His 
disciples.—amd τῆς προσευχῆς: Tising up 
from the prayer, seems to continue the 
narrative from νετ. 42.---ἀπὸ τῆς λύπης, 
asleep from grief, apologetic ; Hebraistic 
construction, therefore not added by Lk., 
but got from a Jewish-Christian docu- 
ment, says J. Weiss (in Meyer). Doubt- 
less Lk.’s, added out of delicate feeling 
for the disciples, and with truth to 
nature, for grief does induce sleep 
(‘‘ moestitia somnum affert,” Wolf).— 
Ver. 46. ἀναστάντες προσεύχεσθε : 
Jesus rose up from prayer. He bids 
His disciples rise up to prayer, as if 
suggesting an attitude that would help 
them against sleep.—iva, etc.: again a 
warning against temptation, but no word 
of reproach to Peter or the rest, as in 
parallels. 

Vv. 47-53. The apprehensson (Mt. 
xxvi. 47-50, Mk. xiv. 43-52).—Ver. 47. 
Φιλῆσαι α., to kiss Him; that the 
traitor’s purpose, its execution left to be 
inferred, also that it was the precon- 
certed signal pointing out who was to 
be apprehended.—Ver. 48. Φιλήματι, 
etc.. the question of Jesus takes the 
place of, and explains, the enigmatical 
ἐφ᾽ 5 πάρει of Mt. The simple φίλημα, 


2 Omit δε NABLT, είς, 

4 For o δε |. NBBLTX 157 have I. δε. 

+ του αρχ. Tov δουλον in SBLT 69, 346- 
8 Omit αντου SQBLRT 1, 131. 


επι (= Ὅ. Ε.) in ABDL (W.H.). 


unlike καταφιλέω, implies no fervour.— 
Ver. 49. οἱ περὶ αὐτὸν, those about 
Him, z.e., the disciples, though the word 
is avoided._r6 ἐσόμενον, what was 
about to happen, t.e., the apprehension. 
The disciples, anticipating the action of 
the representatives of authority, ask 
directions, and one of them (ver. 50) not 
waiting for an answer, strikes out. In 
the parallels the apprehension takes 
place first—Ver. 50. is τις, etc., a 
certain one of them, thus vaguely referred 
to in all the synoptists. John names 
Ῥεΐετ.- -τὸ δεξιόν, the right ear; so in 
Fourth Gospel. Cf. the right hand in 
vi. 6.—Ver. 53. ἐᾶτε ἕως τούτου: an 
elliptical colloquial phrase, whose mean- 
ing might be made clear by intonation 
or gesture. It might be spoken either to 
the captors = leave me free until I have 
healed the wounded man, or to the 
disciples == let them apprehend me, or: 
no more use of weapons. For the 
various interpretations put upon the 
words, vide Hahn. Perhaps the most 
likely rendering is : ‘‘ cease, it is enough,” 
desinite, satis est, as if it had stood, éare, 
ἕως τούτου ἱκανόν ἐστι, the disciples 
being addressed.—Ver. 52. ἀρχιερεῖς 
καὶ, etc.: Lk. alone represents the 
authorities as present with the ὄχλος--- 
priests, captains of the temple and elders 
—some of them might be, though it is 


612 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


XXII. 


ἐπὶ λῃστὴν ἐξεληλύθατε] μετὰ μαχαιρῶν καὶ ξύλων; 53. καθ 
ἡμέραν ὄντος µου μεθ ὑμῶν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, οὐκ ἐξετείνατε τὰς χεῖρας 


én’ ἐμέ. 


GAN’ αὕτη ὑμῶν ἐστιν } ἡ dpa, καὶ ἡ ἐξουσία τοῦ σκότους. 


54. ΣΥΛΛΑΒΟΝΤΕΣ δὲ αὐτὸν ἤγαγον, καὶ εἰσήγαγον αὐτὸν 5 εἰς 


τὸν οἶκον ΄ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως: ὅ δὲ Πέτρος ἠκολούθει µακρόθεν. 55. 


ἂψάντων ὅ δὲ wip ἐν µέσῳ τῆς αὐλῆς, καὶ συγκαθισάντων αὐτῶν,ό 


ἐκάθητο 6 Πέτρος ἐν µέσῳ Ἰ αὐτῶν. 


56. ἰδοῦσα δὲ αὐτὸν παιδίσκη 


fActsi. 10; TES καθήµενον πρὸς τὸ φῶς, καὶ ’ ἀτενίσασα αὐτῷ, etme, “Kai οὗτος 


ili. 4; Vi. 


AY isk a Ἡν ” 
τς εἰ. ἆ σὺν αὐτῷ ἦν. 
Cor. iii. ’ 
7.13. οἶδα αὐτόν. 9 


σὺ ἐξ αὐτῶν «i.” 


5]. Ὁ δὲ ἠρνήσατο αὐτόν,» λέγων, “Γύναι, οὐκ 
58. Καὶ μετὰ βραχὺ ἕτερος ἰδὼν αὐτὸν ἔφη, “Kai 
Ὁ δὲ Πέτρος εἶπεν,ο ““AvOpwrre, οὐκ εἰμί.᾽ 59. 


ε aoe ui. Καὶ διαστάσης ὡσεὶ ὥρας μιᾶς, ἄλλος τις " διϊσχυρίζετο, λέγων, 


ες 5 


1 εξηλθατε in NBDLRT, etc. (W.H.). 
3 Omit this αυτον SABDLT al. 

5 περιαψαντων in NBLT. 

7 µεσος for εν µεσω (3, etc.) in BLT 1, 
8 Omit αυτον NBD°LT (W.H.). 

® ovx οιδα αυτον γυναι in RBLTX. D 
10 εφη in SBLT al. pl. 


not likely. Farrar remarks: ‘‘these 
venerable persons had kept safely in the 
background till all possible danger was 
over ’’.—as ἐπὶ λῃηστὴν. Lk. gives the 
reproachful words of Jesus nearly as in 
the parallels.—Ver. 53. ἀλλ᾽ αὕτη ἐστὶν, 
etc.: the leading words in this elliptical 
sentence are τοῦ σκότους, which qualify 
both épa and ἐξουσία. Two things are 
said: your hour is an hour of darkness, 
and your power is a power of darkness. 
There is an allusion to the time they 
had chosen for the apprehension, night, 
not day, but the physical darkness is for 
Jesus only an emblem of moral dark- 
ness. He says in effect: why should I 
complain of being captured as a robber 
in the dark by men whose whole nature 
and ways are dark and false? 

Vv. 54-62. Peter's fall (Mt. xxvi. 57, 
58, 69-75, Mk. xiv. 53, 54, 66-72).—Lk. 
tells the sad story of Peter’s fall without 
interruption, and in as gentle a manner 
as possible, the cursing omitted, and the 
three acts of denial forming an anti- 
climax instead of a climax, as in 
parallels.—Ver. 54. ὁ δὲ Πέτρος ἠκολ- 
ούθει, Peier followed. What the rest did 
is passed over in silence ; fight left to be 
inferred.—Ver. 55. περιαψάντων, more 
strongly than ἀψάντων (T.R.) suggests 


En ἀληθείας καὶ οὗτος pet αὐτοῦ ἦν: καὶ γὰρ Γαλιλαῖός ἐστιν. 


2 εστιν Όμων in ΝΜΕΒΡΤ,Τ, etc. 
φεις την οικιαν in NBLT, etc., 1, 124 al. 
6 Omit avtev RBDLT. 

209 (Tisch., W.H.). 


omits γνναι. 


the idea of a well-kindled fire giving a 
good blaze, supplying light as well as 
heat. Who kindled it did not need to 
be said. It was kindled in the open 
court of the high priest’s house, and was 
large enough for the attendants to sit 
around it in the chilly spring night 
(συγκαθισάντωγ).--µέσος αὐτῶν. Peter 
sat among them. Was that an acted 
denial, or was he simply seeking warmth, 
and taking his risk ?—Ver. 56. darevé- 
σασα (a intensive, and τείνω), fixing the 
eyes on, with dative here, sometimes 
with eis and accusative, frequently used 
by Lk., especially in Acts.—otros, the 
maid makes the remark not to but about 
Peter in Lk. = this one also was with 
Him, of whom they were all talking.— 
Ver. 57. οὐκ οἶδα a. y.: a direct denial 
=I do not know Him, woman, not to 
speak of being a follower.—Ver. 58. μετὰ 
βραχὺ, shortly after (here only in N.T.), 
while the mood of fear is still on him, no 
time to recover himself.—é€repos, another 
of the attendants, a man.—é& αὐτῶν, of 
the notorious band, conceived possibly 
as a set of ἀεδρεταάοες.---ἄνθρωπε, οὐκ 
εἰμί,πιαη, I am not, with more emphasis 
and some irritation = denial of disciple- 
ship. Im one sense a strenger form ot 
denial, but in another a weaker. Peter 


OE EE νο... νο ..1µΛ....'....... ἴ-Ἄ'.''-............ 


53—65. 


60. Εἶπε δὲ 6 Πέτρος, ''"Άνθρωπε, οὐκ οἶδα ὃ λέγεις.᾽ 
χρῆμα, ἔτι λαλοῦντος αὐτοῦ, ἐφώνησεν 61 ἀλέκτωρ: 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


633 


Καὶ παρα- 


61. 


καὶ 


στραφεὶς ὁ Κύριος ἐνέβλεψε τῷ Nétpw- καὶ ὑπεμνήσθη 6 Πέτρος 
τοῦ λόγου τοῦ Κυρίου, ὡς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “"Ὅτι, πρὶν ἀλέκτορα 


Φωνῆσαι, ἀπαρνήσῃ µε τρίς. 
ἔκλαυσε πικρῶς. 


62. Καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἔξω ὁ Πέτρος4 


63. Καὶ ot ἄνδρες οἱ συνέχοντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν δ ἐνέπαιζον αὐτῷ, 


δέροντες" 64. καὶ περικαλύψαντες αὐτόν, ἔτυπτον αὐτοῦ τὸ πρόσ- 
ωπον, καὶ ὃ ἐπηρώτων αὐτόν, λέγοντες, “ Προφήτευσον, τίς ἐστιν ὁ 


, oe 
παίσας σε; 
αὐτόν. 


1 Omit o NABDL, εἰς, 
2 pnpatos in SBLTX 124 al. (W.H.). 


65. Καὶ ἕτερα πολλὰ βλασφημοῦντες ἔλεγον εἰς 


Τ.Ε. = AD (Tisch.). 


3 Add onpepov after Φωνησαι SBKLMT al. 


4Omit ο Π. NSBDLT, etc. 
brackets). 


Some codd. of vet. Lat. omit νετ. 62 (W.H. in 


5 For τον |. SBDLT, etc., 157 al. have avrov. 


Serumwrov... 


7 Omit this αυτον BKLMTX. 


might have known Jesus without being a 
disciple. To deny all knowledge was 
the strongest form of denial. Besides it 
was less cowardly to deny to aman than 
to a woman.—Ver. 59. διαστάσης Spas, 
at the distance of an hour; the verb 
here used of time, in xxiv. 51 and Acts 
xxvii. 28 of place. This interval of an 
hour is peculiar to Lk. Peter in the 
course of that time would begin to think 
that no further annoyance was to be 
looked {οτ.---δεϊσχυρίζετο, ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας: 
these expressions imply that the previous 
denials had partly served their purpose 
for a time, and put the attendants off 
the idea that Peter was of the company 
of Jesus. After watching Peter, and 
listening to his speech, a third gains 
courage to reaffirm the position = I am 
sure he is after all one of them, for, etc. 
—Ver. 60. ἄνθρωπε, etc., man, I don’t 
know what you are saying—under shelter 
of the epithet Γαλιλαῖος, pretending igno- 
ance of what the man said—an evasion 
vather than a denial, with no cursing 
and protesting accompanying. A mon- 
strous minimising of the offence, if Lk. 
had Mk.’s account before him, thinks J. 
Weiss ; therefore he infers he had not, 
but drew from a Jewish-Christian source 
with a milder account. What if he had 
both before him, and preferred the 
milder ?—2evygev Gdex., immediately 
after the cock crew ; but in Lk.’s account 


και omitted in SBKLT al, 1, 209. 


the reaction is not brought about thereby. 
In the parallels, in which Peter appears 
worked up to a paroxysm, a reaction 
might be looked for at any moment on 
the slightest occasion, the crowing of 
the cock recalling Christ’s words abund- 
antly sufficient. But in Lk. there is no 
paroxysm, therefore more is needed to 
bring about reaction, and more accord- 
ingly is mentioned.—Ver. 61. στραφεὶς, 
etc., the Lord, turning, looked at Peter ; 
that look, not the cock crowing, recalled 
the prophetic word of Jesus, and brought 
about the penitent reaction.—trep.vycOn, 
remembered, was reminded, passive here 
only in N.T.—Ver. 62 exactly as in Mt. 

Vv. 63-65. Indignities (Mt. xxvi. 67- 
68, Mk. xiv. 65). In Mt. and Mk. these 
come after the trial during the night 
which Lk. omits. In his narrative the 
hours of early morning spent by Jesus 
in the palace of the high priest are filled 
up by the denial of Peter and the out- 
rages of the men who had taken Jesus 
into custody (οἱ συνέχοντες αὐτὸν).--- 
Ver. 63. ἐνέπαιζον, mocked, in place of 
the more brutal spitting in parallels.— 
δέροντες, smiting (the whole body), 
instead of the more special and insulting 
slapping in the face (κολαφίζειν).---Ψετ. 
64. περικαλύψαντες, covering (the face 
understood, τὸ πρόσωπον in Mk.)— 
προφήτευσον, Ths, etc. : Lk. here follows 
Mt., not Mk., who has simply the verb 


634 


KATA AOYKAN 


XXII. 66—71.. 


66. Καὶ ὡς ἐγένετο ἡμέρα, συνήχθη τὸ πρεσβυτέριον τοῦ aod, 


ἀρχιερεῖς τε καὶ ypappareis, καὶ ἀνήγαγον] αὐτὸν eis τὸ συνέδριον 


ἑαυτῶν,” 67. λέγοντες, “Ei σὺ et ὁ Χριστός, εἰπὲ ὃ ἡμῖν. 


Εἶπε δὲ 


αὐτοῖς, “Edy ὑμῖν εἴπω, οὗ μὴ πιστεύσητε: 68. ἐὰν δὲ καὶ ἐρω- 


τήσω, οὐ μὴ ἀποκριθῆτέ por, ἢ ἀπολύσητε.δ 


6ο. ἀπὸ τοῦ viv® 


ἔσται ὅ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καθήµενος ἐκ δεξιῶν τῆς δυνάµεως τοῦ 


- 0 


Θεού. 


πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἔφη, “΄ Ὑμεῖς λέγετε, ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι. 


- ~~ > 
70. Εἶπον δὲ πάντες, “‘ 0 οὖν εἶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ; Ὁ δὲ 


71. Οἱ δὲ εἶπον, 


“Ti ἔτι χρείαν ἔχομεν paptupias’; αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἠκούσαμεν ἀπὸ τοῦ 


στόματος αὐτοῦ. 


1απηγαγον in ΝΒΡΚΤ (Tisch., W.H.). 
3 evrov in NBLT. 


2 αυτων in SBDLT al. 


6 $gBLT omit pot η απολυσητε (Tisch., 
7 exopev pap. χρειαν in BLT (Tisch., W.H.). 


ϐγυν Se in NABDLTX. 


προφ. without the question following.— 
Ver. 65. ἕτερα πολλὰ, many other 
shameful words, filling up the time, 
which Lk. would rather not report 
particularly, even if he knew them. 

Vv. 66-71. Morning trial, the pro- 
ceedings of which, as reported by Lk., 
correspond to those of the night meeting 
reported by Mt. and Mk. (Mt. xxvi. 5ο- 
66, Mk. xiv. 55-64), only much abridged. 
No mention of the attempt to get, 
through witnesses, matter for an accusa- 
tion, or of the testimony concerning the 
word about destroying the temple. The 
Messiah question is alone noticed. 
Perhaps Lk. omitted the former because 
of their futility, though they were im- 
portant as revealing the animus of the 
judges.—Ver. 66. els τὸ σνυνέδριον, to 
the council chamber, in which the San- 
hedrim met.—déyovrtes, introducing the 
proceedings, in a very generalising way. 
Cf. the graphic account of the high 
priest rising up to interrogate Jesus, 
after the first attempt to incriminate 
Him had failed, in parallels (Mt. xxvi. 62 f., 
Mk. xiv. 60 f.).—Ver. 67. et σὺ cio Χ. 
εἰπὸν ἡμῖν: either, art Thou the Christ? 
tell us, or tell us whether Thou be the 
Christ. Christ sivzpuicitey without any 
epithet as in parallels (Son of God, Son 
of the Blessed).—etwe δὲ α.: Jesus first 
answers evasively, saying in effect: it is 
vain to give an answer to such people. 
In parallels He replieswith a direct ‘‘yes” 
(‘‘thou sayst,” Mt.; “1 am,” Mk,).— 
Ver. 69. What Jesus now says amounts 
to an affirmative answer.—am6 τοῦ viv 
ἔσται, etc.: Jesus points to a speedy 
change of position from humiliation to 


Τ.Ε. = ALX al. 
4 Omit και NBLT. 
W.H.). 


exaltation, without reference to what 
they will see, or to a second coming.— 
Ver. 70. πάντες, all, eagerly grasping at 
the handle offered by Christ’s words.— 
6 vies τ. Θ. This is supposed to be in- 
volved in the exalted place at the right 
hand.—éyo® εἰμι, the direct answer at 
last.—Ver. 71. paptupias: instead of 
μαρτύρων, no mention having been pre- 
viously made of witnesses. 

J. Weiss (in Meyer, eighth edition). 
finds in this section clear evidence of the 
use of a Jewish-Christian source from 
the correspondence between the account 
it gives of the questions put to Jesus 
and His replies and the Jewish-Christian 
ideas regarding the Messiahship. These 
he conceives to have been as follows: In 
His earthly state Jesus was not Messiah 
or Son of Man; only a claimant to these 
honours. He became both in the state 
of exaltation (cf. Acts ii. 36: ‘‘ God hath 
made Him both Lord and Christ”). He 
was God’s Son in the earthly state 
because He was conscious of God’s 
peculiar love and of a Messianic com- 
mission. So here: Jesus is to become 
(ἔσται) Messianic Son of Man with 
glory and power (δόξα and δύναμις) ; 
He is Son of God (ἐγώ εἰμι). On this 
view Sonship is lower than Christhood. 
Was that Lk.’s idea? On the contrary, 
he evidently treats the Christ question 
as one of subordinate importance on 
which it was hardly worth debating. 
The wider, larger question was that as 
to Sonship, which, once settled, settled 
also the narrower question. If Son, then 
Christ and more: not only the Jewish 
Messiah, but Saviour of the world. The 


XXIII. 1—6. 


XXIII. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


635 


1. ΚΑΙ ἀναστὰν ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος αὐτῶν, Hyayev! αὐτὸν 


ἐπὶ τὸν Πιλάτον. 2. ἤρέαντο δὲ κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ, λέγοντες, “ Τοῦτον 
εὕρομεν διαστρέφοντα τὸ ἔθνος, καὶ κωλύοντα Καΐσαρι φόρους 5 


διδόναι, λέγοντα ἑαυτὸν ΄ Χριστὸν βασιλέα εἶναι. 


3. Ὁ δὲ Πιλά- 


τος ἐπηρώτησεν ὅ αὐτόν, λέγων, “Ed ef ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων ;” 


Ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς αὐτῷ ἔφη, “Ed λέγεις. 


4. Ὁ δὲ Πιλάτος εἶπε 


πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ τοὺς ὄχλους, '΄ Οὐδὲν εὑρίσκω αἴτιον ἐν τῷ 


ἀνθρώπω τούτῳ. 
κ t 


. Οἱ δὲ ἐπίσχυον, λέγοντες. “΄ Ὅτι * ἀνασείει τὸν λαόν, διδάσκων a here and 
σχυον, λέγοντες, , 


καθ ὅλης τῆς ‘loudaias,® ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ἕως abe.” 


in Mk 
XV. II 


, ” 3 ς ” δι ° i 
6. Πιλάτος δὲ ἀκούσας ΓαλιλαίανἸ ἐπηρώτησεν εἰ ὁὃ ἄνθρωπος αμ ῳ 


1 ηγαγον in uncials, ηγαγεν in minusc. 
3 Add ηµων to εθνος SBDLT, etc. 


3 popous K. in BLT, which also have και before λεγονταν 


4 So in ADL (Tisch.). 


αυτον in BGT. 


5 npwrncev in BRT. Τ.Ε. = DL, ete. 
8 και before αρξαµενος in SBLT, not in D, etc., probably omitted because 


difficult. 
7 Omit Γαλ. NBLT. 


account of the trial runs on the same 
lines as the genealogy, in which Davidic 
descent is dwarfed into insignificance by 
Divine descent (vids . . . τοῦ θεοῦ). 
CHAPTER XXIII. ΤΗΕ ΕΡΑΒΒΙΟΝ 
History CONTINUED.—Vv. 1-5. Before 
Pilate (Mt. xxvii. 1, 2, 11-14, Mk. xv. 
1-5). At the morning meeting of the 
Sanhedrim (in Mt. and Mk.) it had 
doubtless been resolved to put the con- 
fession of Jesus that He was the Christ 
into a shape fit to be laid before Pilate, 
{.ε., to give it a political character, and 
charge Him with aspiring to bea king. 
To this charge Lk. adds other two, 
meant to give this aspiration a sinister 
character.—Ver, 1. ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος, the 
whole number. The Jewish authorities 
go to Pilate in full strength to make as 
imposing an appearance as possible and 
create the impression that something 
serious was on Παπά.- -ἤγαγεν: nothing 
is said about leading Jesus bound, as in 
Mt. and Mk.—Ver. 2. διαστρέφοντα, 
perverting, causing disaffection and dis- 
loyalty to Rome.—kwAvovra, doing His 
best to prevent (people from paying 
tribute to Caesar); false, and they pro- 
bably knew it to be so, but it was a 
serviceable lie.—fac.dda: in apposition 
with Χριστὸν = saying that He was 
Christ—a King /—Ver. 3. σὺ et, εἰς. : 
Pilate’s question exactly as in Mt. and 
Μ]ς.--σὺ λέγεις: this reply needs some 


8 B and a few others omit ο (W.H. brackets). 


such explanation as is given in John; 
vide notes on Mt.—Ver. 4. αἴτιον, 
blameworthy, punishable (neuter of 
αἴτιος) = αἰτία. Pilate arrived at his 
conclusion very swiftly. A glance sufficed 
to satisfy him that Jesus was no dangerous 
character. Probably he thought him a 
man with a fixed idea.—Ver. 5. ἐπίσχνον 
(here only in N.T.), they kept insisting, 
used absolutely =“‘invalescebant,” Vulg. 
--ἀνασείει, stirs up, a stronger word 
than S.aorpederv.—brddoKnwv, teaching, 
the instrument of excitement. Jesus 
did, in fact, produce a great impression 
on the people by His teaching, and one 
not favourable to the Pharisees, but He 
did not set Himself to stir up the people 
even against them.—«a@’ ὅλης τ. ‘I: 
κατὰ with the genitive of place as in iv. 
14 = in the whole of Judaea. This, con- 
sidering the purpose, should mean 
Judaea strictly, Pilate’s province, and so 
taken it bears witness to more work 
done by Jesus in the south than is re- 
corded in the Synoptists. But the 
testimony is of little value. The accusers 
said what suited their purpose, true or 
{αΐφα.- καὶ ἀρξάμενος: the καὶ is a 
difficult reading, and just on that account 
probably correct. It gives the impression 
of an unfinished sentence, something left 
out = and beginning from Galilee He 
has spread His mischievous doctrine over 
the land even to this holy city. The 


616 


b Acts xxv, 


KATA AOYKAN XXIII. 


Γαλιλαϊός ἐστι: 7. καὶ ἐπιγνοὺς ὅτι ἐκ τῆς ἐξουσίας Ἡρώδου ἐστίν, 
5 ἀνέπεμψεν αὐτὸν πρὸς Ἡρώδην, ὄντα καὶ αὐτὸν ἐν ἹἹεροσολύμοις ἐν 
ταύταις ταῖς ἡμέραις. 8. ὁ δὲ Ἠρώδης ἰδὼν τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐχάρη λίαν - 
ἦν γὰρ θέλων ἐξ ἱκανοῦ1 ἰδεῖν αὐτόν, διὰ τὸ ἀκούειν πολλὰ 3 περὶ 
αὐτοῦ: καὶ ἥλπιζέ τι σημεῖον ἰδεῖν ὑπ αὐτοῦ γινόμενον. 9g. ἔπηρ- 
ta δὲ αὐτὸν ἐν λόγοις ἱκανοῖς: αὐτὸς δὲ οὐδὲν ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτῶ. 
1Ο. εἰστήκεισαν δὲ of ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς, εὐτόνως κατη- 
γοροῦντες αὐτοῦ. 11. ἐξουθενήσας δὲ αὐτὸν ὃ ὁ Ἡρώδης σὺν τοῖς 
στρατεύµασιν αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐμπαίξας, περιβαλὼν αὐτὸν ” ἐσθῆτα λαμ- 
πράν, ἀνέπεμψεν αὐτὸν τῷ Πιλάτω. 12. ἐγένοντο δὲ Φίλοι ὅ τε 
Πιλάτος καὶ ὁ Ἠρώδης ὅ ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ μετ ἀλλήλων: προῦ- 


πῆρχον yap ἐν ἔχθρα ὄντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς.5 


13. Πιλάτος δὲ συγ- 


1 εξ ικανων χρονων θελων in NBT. D also has εξ τκανων χρ., but θελων ina 


different position. L omits θελων. 
8 Omit πολλα SSBDLT 1, 131 al. 


3 και before ο H. in SLTX 13, 69 (Tisch., W.H., marg.). 


4 Omit αυτον BLT. 


5 Hp. and Πιλ. change places in BLT. 


words from καὶ to Γαλιλαίας are omitted 
in some MSS., and it is not inconceivable 
that they are an early gloss to explain 
ver. 6 (so Weiss in Meyer). 


Vv. 6-12. Before Herod, peculiar to 
Lk.—Ver. 7. ἀνέπεμψεν, remitted Him 


= remisit, sent Him to, not the higher 
(Meyer), but the proper tribunal: a 
Galilean, to the tetrarch of Galilee; a 
technical term.—év ‘lepoo. Herod would 
be in Jerusalem to keep the Passover, 
though that is not stated.—Ver. 8. ἐχάρη 
λίαν, was much pleased, “ exceeding 
glad” (A.V. and R.V.) is too grave a 
phrase to express the feeling of this worth- 
less man, who simply expected from the 
meeting with Jesus a “‘ new amusement ”’ 
(Schanz), such as might be got from a 
conjurer who could perform some clever 
tricks (τι onpetov).—Ver. 9. ἐν λόγοις 
ἱκανοῖς: suggesting the idea of a de- 
sultory conversation, in which the king 
introduced topic after topic in a random, 
incoherent manner, showing no serious 
interest in any of his questions.—ovdév 
ἀπεκρίνατο, answered nothing, which 
would greatly astonish and pique this 
kingling, accustomed to courtier-ser- 
vility. The fact that Jesus said nothing, 
and that nothing of importance came 
out of the appearance before Herod, 
may explain its omission by the other 
evangelists.—Ver. Io. of ἀρχιερεῖς, etc., 
priests and scribes, there too, having 
followed Jesus, afraid that the case 


BD omit. 


6 αντους in NBLT. 


might take an unfavourable turn in their 
absence.—evtévws, eagerly (Acts xviii. 
28).—Ver. 11. ἐξουθεήσας: on this 
verb and kindred forms, vide at Mk. ix. 
12. Herod, feeling slighted by Jesus, 
slights Him in turn, inciting his body- 
guards (τοῖς στρατεύµασιν, which cannot 
here mean armies) to mock Him, and 
having Him invested with a costly robe, 
probably a cast-off royal mantle of his 
own, and so sending Him back a mock 
king to Pilate, a man to be laughed at, 
not to be feared or punished.—éo@jjrTa 
λαμπρὰν, a splendid robe; of what 
colour, purple or white, commentators 
vainly inquire.—évéwepwev, “sent Him 
again” (A.V.), or “back” (Κ.Υ... 
The verb may mean here, as in ver. 7, 
sent Him to Pilate as the proper person 
totry the case. The two magnates com- 
pliment each other, and shirk unpleasant 
work by sending Jesus hither and thither 
from tribunal to tribunal, the plaything 
and sport of unprincipled men.—Ver. 
12. éyévowro φίλοι: that the one posi- 
tive result of the transaction—two rulers, 
previously on bad terms, reconciled, at 
least for the time. Sending Jesus to 
Herod was a politic act on Pilate’s 
part. It might have ended the case so 
far as he was concerned; it pleased a 
jealous prince, and it gave him a free 
hand in dealing with the matter: nothing 
to fear in that quarter.—pet’ ἀλλήλων 
for ἀλλήλοις (Euthy. Zig., who also sub- 


len ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 
καλεσάμµενος τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ τοὺς ἄρχοντας καὶ τὸν adv, 14. 
εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “' Προσηνέγκατέ por τὸν ἄνθρωπον τοῦτον, ds 
ἀποστρέφοντα τὸν λαόν" καὶ ἰδού, ἐγὼ ἐνώπιον ὑμῶν ἀνακρίνας 
ὐδὲ Al a > lol ἀ 8 , , ” an “A > 
οὐδὲν ΄ εὗρον ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ τούτῳ αἴτιον, Gy κατηγορεῖτε κατ 
. t 

fol 3 aA 

αὐτοῦ: 15. GAN’ οὐδὲ Ἡρώδης: ἀνέπεμψα γὰρ ὑμᾶς πρὸς αὐτόν, 
ΔΝ 3 , > A > , 3 ‘ , > n 

καὶ ἰδού, οὐδὲν ἄδιον θανάτου ἐστὶ πεπραγµένον αὐτῷ. 16. παι- 
δεύσας οὖν αὐτὸν ἀπολύσω.” 17. ᾿Ανάγκην δὲ εἶχεν ἀπολύειν 
αὐτοῖς κατὰ ἑορτὴν ἕνα.» 18. ἀνέκραξαν “ δὲ παµπληθεί, λέγοντες, 
“Aipe τοῦτον, ἀπόλυσον δὲ ἡμῖν τὸν BapaBBav-” 19. ὅστις ἦν διὰ 
στάσιν Twa yevoudvyy ἐν τῇ πόλει καὶ Φόνον βεβλημένος eis 


o>) 


φυλακήν.ὅ 


1.ο9υθεν in ΝΡΤ 1x. 


20. Πάλιν οὖν ὁ Πιλάτος προσεφώνησε,δ θέλων ἀπολῦσαι 


Ἀανεπεμψε yap αυτον προς ηµας in NBKLMT. Τ.Ε. = ADX is perhaps a 


correction by the scribes. 


3 Ver. 17 is omitted in ABKLTN (Tisch. W.H.). 

4 ανεκραγον in BLT 124, 157. T.R. = ADX, ete. 

δβληθεις ev τη Φυλακη in BLT (Tisch., W.H.). Shas βεβλ. ev τ. φυλ. 
® SSBLT have παλιν Se o Π. προσεφ. αντοις. 


stitutes πρὸς ἀλλήλους for πρὸς ἑαυτούς). 
---ὄντες after προῦπῆρχον might have 
been omitted, as in Acts viii. 9, but it 
serves to convey the idea of continued 
bad relations. 

Vv. 13-16. Pilate proposes to release 
Fesus.—Ver. 14. ἀποστρέφοντα, turn- 
ing away (the people from their 
allegiance). In Acts iii. 26, of turnin 
men from their iniquities—évémiov v 
ἀνακρίνας, having made an inquiry in 
your presence. In John, Pilate’s inquiry 
is private. ‘* He says this,” remarks 
Pricaeus, ‘lest they should think he 
was setting Jesus free by favour or in- 
trigue”’ (gratid aut ambitu). ἀνακρίνας 
is used absolutely here as in Acts xxiv. 8. 
—Ver. 15. αὐτῷ: some have taken this 
as referring: to. Herod = Herod did 
nothing in the case, implying that it 
was of a serious, capital nature. Most 
take it as referring to Jesus = behold, 
the result of sending to Herod is that in 
his judgment nothing has been done 
deserving death by the accused.—air@ 
instead of ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ; vide on this con- 
struction Winer, § xxxi., 10.—Ver, 16, 
παιδεύσας: doubtless used here in the 
Hellenistic sense of chastise, scourge— 
a mild name for an ugly thing. The 
policy of the proposal Euthy. thus ex- 
plains: ‘‘ a moderate flagellation (µετρίαν 
µαστίγωσιν) to mitigate their wrath, 
that thinking they had gained their 
point they might cease from further 


madness ’’. A weak, futile policy. “« Hic 
coepit nimium concedere’’ (Bengel). 
Fanaticism grows by concession (Schanz). 

Vv. 17-25. Pilate finally succumbs 
(Mt. xxvii. 15-26, Mk. xv. 6-τς).---Ψετ. 
17, which states that Pilate was under a 
necessity (why, not explained) to release 
one (prisoner) at feast time, is almost 
certainly imported from the parallels by 
a later hand, though it fills up an ob- 
vious hiatus in Lk.’s meagre narrative. — 
Ver. 18. παμπληθεί: adverb, from wap- 
πληθής (here only in N.T.) =in the whole- 
mob style, giving a vivid idea of the 
overpowering shout raised.—aipe τοῦτον, 
take away this one, 1.6., to the cross.— 
ἀπόλυσον, release; if ye willrelease some 
one (ver. 16, ἀπολύσω) let it be Barabbas. 
Lk. makes this demand the voluntary 
act of the people. In the parallels (vide 
there) it is suggested to them by Pilate 
(Mt.), and urged on them by the priests. 
In Lk. s narrative the behaviour of the 
people is set in a dark light, while both 
Pilate and the priests are treated with 
comparative mildness. In view of 
Israel’s awful doom, Lk. says in effect: 
the people have suffered for: theiy own 
sin.—Ver. 19. ὅστις seems to be = Gs 
here, following the growing usage of 
later Greek (Schanz, vide Buttmann, 
Gram., p. 115).--διὰ στάσιν . . . καὶ 
Φφόνον = διὰ Φφόνον ἐν στάσει πεποι- 

µένον, Ῥτίσαευς.---ἠν βληθείς: instead 
of ἔβληθη, the analytic form is unusuai, 


638 KATA AOYKAN XXII 


τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 21. ot δὲ ἐπεφώνουν, λέγοντες, “ Σταύρωσον, σταύρω- 

22. Ὁ δὲ τρίτον εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “Τί γὰρ κακὸν 
> , 2 x ὐδὲ ” 6 , Φ > ο κε 9 , 5 
ἐποίησεν οὗτος; οὐδὲν αἴτιον θανάτου εὗρον ἐν αὐτῷ παιθεύσας οὖν 
αὐτὸν ἀπολύσω.” 


gov! αὐτόν. 


23. Οἱ δὲ ἐπέκειντο φωναῖς µενάλαις, αἰτούμενοι 
αὐτὸν σταυρωθῆναι: καὶ κατίσχυον αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν «αἱ τῶν ἄρχιερ- 
έων.' 44. Ὁ δὲδ Πιλάτος ἐπέκρινε γενέσθαι τὸ αἴτημα αὐτῶν : 
25. ἀπέλυσε δὲ αὐτοῖς " τὸν διὰ στάσιν καὶ φόνον βεβλημένον eis 
τὴν ὃ φυλακήν, ὃν Πτοῦντο: τὸν δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦν παρέδωκε τῷ θελήµατι 
αὐτῶν. 

26. Καὶ ὡς ἀπήγαγον ὃ αὐτόν, ἐπιλαβόμενοι Σίµωνός τινος Κυρη 
ναίου τοῦ ἐρχομένου 7 


dw’ ἀγροῦ, ἐπέθηκαν αὐτῷ τὸν σταυρόν, Φέρει’ 
ὄπισθεν τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


27. ᾿Ηκολούθει δὲ αὐτῷ πολὺ πλῆθος τοῦ λαοῦ, 


1 σταυρον, στανρου in SBD. Τ.Ε. = ALX, etc. 

3 Omit kat των αρχ. NBL (Tisch., W.H.). 

3 For ο δε BL have και. 4 Omit αυτοις NABDX, etc 
5 Omit την NBD 6g al. 6 απηγον in B (W.H. πιατρ.). 


7 Ῥιμωνα τινα K—ov ερχ--ον in SBCDLX 13, 33 al. (Tisch., W.H.). 


with the aorist (here only in N.T.), 
hence probably the reading of T.R., 
BeBXnpevos.—Ver. 20. πάλιν, again, a 
second time. Lk. carefully enumerates 
the friendly attempts of Pilate, hence 
τρίτον in ver. 22. The first is in νετ. 
10.—Ver. 21. ἐπεφώνουν, shouted (Boa 
κράζει, Hesych.), in Lk. only, and in 
reference to the people (Acts xii, 22).— 
σταύρου (active, not middle = orav- 
pov}, '' crucify,” repeated, with passion ; 
thoughtless, foolish, impulsive mob !— 
Ver.22. τρίτον: third and final attempt, 
showing some measure of earnestness on 
Pilate’s part.—ri γὰρ κακόν: the yap 
answers to the hostile mood of the people 
= I cannot respond to your demand for, 
etc. ; the “‘ why, what evil,” etc., of the 
A.V. is a happy rendering. In this 
final appeal, Pilate states most distinctly 
his opinion that Jesus is innocent.—Ver. 
23. ἐπέκειντο, ‘they were instant,” 
A.V. The verb is used absolutely.— 
κατίσχνον, were Overpowering ; ‘‘ ecce 
gentis ingenium!”’ Pricaeus.—\er. 24. 
ἐπέκρινεν, decided, gave judgment; here 
only in N.T. and in 2 Maccab. iv. 47, 
3 Maccab. iv. 2. It was not a con- 
demnation but simply a sentence to 
death under pressure.—atrypa, desire, 
here and in Phil. iv. 6 in this sense.— 
Ver. 25. τὸν διὰ σ.: the repetition of 
this description, instead of giving the 
mame, is very expressive.—T@® θελήµατι 
α., to their will Weak man and wicked 
people! 


Vv. 26-32. On the way to the cross 
(Mt. xxvii. 31-34, Mk. xv. 21).—Ver. 
26. ἀπήγαγον: who led Jesus away is 
not indicated. It might seem it was the 
mob, to whose will Jesus had just been 
delivered. But Lk. does not mean that. 
He simply continues the story, asin Mk., 
omitting the mockery of the soldiers 
(Mk. xv. 16-20), who, that brutal sport 
ended, led Him out (ἐξάγουσιν, Mk. xv. 
20). Lk. omits also the scourging, which 
even Mt. and Mk. hurry over (¢@payeAh- 
ώσας).- -ἐπιλαβόμενοι: a Greek word 
substituted for the foreign technical ayya- 
ρεύειν in the parallels (usually takes the 
genitive in the Gospel, here also in 
T.R., accusative in W. and H.’s text, 
vide Acts xvii. το, xviii. 17).--ὄπισθεν 
του ᾿Ιησοῦ does not mean that Simon 
helped Jesus to bear the cross, carrying 
the end behind Jesus. They laid the 
whole cross on him. 

V. 27 f. This incident of the women 
following in the crowd is peculiar to Lk. 
---καὶ γυναικῶν, and of women ; they are 
the part of the crowd in which the story 
isinterested. They were mainly women 
of Jerusalem (νετ. 28).— at ἐκόπτοντο, 
etc.: they indulged in demonstrative 
grief by gesture and voice (ἐθρήνουν), 
contrary to rule it would appear (‘‘ non 
planxerunt eductum ad supplicium, sed 
interius luxerunt in corde,” Lightfoot on 
Mt. xxvii. 31), but great grief heeds not 
rules.—Ver. 28. ἐπ᾽ ἐμέ, ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὰς are 
brought close together to emphasise the 


2134. 


x ~ a SS Mie ee ‘ 26 , > 6 
και γνναικωνν αι KGL” εκοπτοντο και ενρηνουν αυτον. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


639 


28. στραφεὶς 


δὲ πρὸς αὐτὰς 62 Ιησοῦς εἶπε, “ Θυγατέρες Ἱερουσαλήμ, μὴ κλαίετε 


, ‘ - 
ew ἐμέ, πλὴν ἐφ ἑαυτὰς κλαίετε καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ τέκνα ὑμῶν. 


20. ὅτι 


3 ΄ 36 ε 3 δν 3 [ο , ς fal ‘ 
ἐδού, ἔρχονται ἡμέραι ἐν ats ἐροῦσι, Μακάριαι ai στεῖραι, καὶ 


κοιλίαι ὃ at οὐκ ἐγέννησαν, καὶ μαστοὶ ot οὐκ ἐθήλασαν." 


30. τότε 


ἄρξονται λέγειν τοῖς ὄρεσι, Πέσετε ἐφ ἡμᾶς: καὶ τοῖς * Bouvois, c Lk. iii. ς 


a5 ἆ 


, (ear 4 2: ν 
Καλύψατε ἡμᾶς. 31. ὅτι, εἰ ἐν τῷ 


(late Gr }, 


ὑγρῷ ξύλῳ ταῦτα π vodawv, ἐν ἆ here only 


in N.T. 


n ~ , s Β "HH Se ΠΑΛΙ) δύ 9 a ‘ 
τῷ ξηρῶ τί γένηται; 32. ἩΗγοντο 0€ καὶ έτεροι, 9ύο "κακοῦργοι σὺν ¢ here, wy. 


2 - 3 a 
αὐτῶ ἀναιρεθῆναι. 


33, 30, and 
2 Tim. ii. ϱ. 


33. Καὶ ὅτε ἀπῆλθον 6 ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον τὸν καλούμενον Κρανίον, ἐκεῖ 


ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν, καὶ τοὺς κακούργους, ὃν μὲν ἐκ δεξιῶν, ὃν δὲ ἐξ 


ἀριστερῶν. 
51: , aA 27 
οἴδασι TL ποιοῦσι. 


1 Omit και ABCDLX 28, 

3 at κοιλιαι in SBCX 1, 28, 60, etc. 
}εθρεψαν in SQBCL 141. 
5 Omit τω BC (W.H. text). 


. 6 δὲ Ingots ἔλεγε, -΄ Πάτερ, ἄφες αὐτοῖς: οὗ ya 
η γ P von 
Διαμεριζόμενοι δὲ τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτοῦ, ἔβαλον 


2 Omit o NBL, 


D has εξεθρεψαν. 
6 ηλθον (-αν) in BCL (W.H.). | 


7 Ver. 34, from ο δε |. to ποιουνσι, is omitted in ΝΑΒΕΡ minusc. (2) ab ἆ Egypt. 


verss, Syt. sin. 


Tisch. retains, but W.H. only in double brackets, regarding this as 


one of D’s non-interpolations, {.ε., where the interpolation is on the side of those 


who have the clause. 


‘contrast = weep not for me, but for 
yourselves weep, hinting at the tragedies 
of Jerusalem’s fatal day. At such times 
the greatest joy, that of motherhood, is 
turned into the greatest misery (Holtz- 
mann, H.C.). The mothers ever have 
the worst of it (J. Weiss in Meyer).— 
Ver. 29. pakdpra,etc.: blessed the 
women that have no children, barren, or 
unmarried : nobody to care for but them- 
selves. The reflection implies keen 
sympathy with human feeling.—Ver. 30. 
τοῖς ὄρεσι, τοῖς βουνοῖς: the reference 
is to Palestine, a land of mountains and 
hills, and the prayer of the miserable 
that a hill may fall on them and bury 
them under its ruins (quoted from 
Hosea x. 8).—Ver. 31. The sense of 
this proverbial phrase is obscure, but 
the connection demands this general 
idea: what is happening to me now is 
nothing to what is going to happen to 
‘this people. The green tree represents 
innocence, the dry tree guilt, ripe for the 
fire of judgment. Vide Ezekiel xx. 47, 
xxi. 3. Pricaeus cites as a parallel from 
Catullus: ‘‘quid facient crines quum 
ferro talia cedant ?’? The Rabbinical 
proverb, “‘si duo fuerint ligna arida et 
unum viride, arida illud lignum viride 
exurunt,’’ does not seem to bear the 


Vide their appendix. 


same meaning.—év ὑγρῷ ξύλῳ, in the 
wet tree, in ligno humido, Grotius. ξύλον 
χλωρὸν = lignum viride, in Ezekiel.— 
Ver. 32. ἕτεροι δύο κακοῦργοι, other 
two malefactors, as if Jesus was one 
also. Butthis isnot meant. “It is a 
negligent construction, common to all 
languages, and not liable to be mis- 
understood,” remarks Field (Οἱ. Nor.), 
who gives an example from the Com- 
munion service. ‘If he require further 
comfort or counsel let him come to me, 
or to some other discreet and learned 
minister of God’s word.” If κακοῦργοι 
were meant to include Jesus it would be 
used in reference to what men thought, 
δοξαστικῶς (Kypke) = pro tali habitus 
in reference to Jesus (Kuinoel), On this 
use of ἕτερος and ἄλλος, vide Winer, p. 
665. 

Vv. 33-38. Crucifixion (Mt. xxvii. 35- 
38, Mk. xv. 24-27).--κρανίον, a skull, 
for the Hebrew Γολγοθά in Mt. and Mk. 
—Ver. 34. [ldrep, etc.: a prayer 
altogether true to the spirit of Jesus, 
therefore, though reported by Lk. alone, 
intrinsically credible. It is with sincere 
regret that one is compelled, by its 
omission in important MSS., to regard its 
genuineness as subject to a certain 
amount of doubt. In favour of it is its 


640 KATA AOYKAN XXII 
f here and khijpov.2 35. καὶ εἰστήκει 6 λαὸς θεωρῶν. “᾿Εξεμυκτήριζον δὲ καὶ 
a ος ἄρχοντες σὺν αὗτοῖς,; λέγοντες, ''Ἄλλους ἔσωσε, σωσάτω ἑαυτόν, 


εἰ οὗτός ἐστιν 6 Χριστός, ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκλεκτός. 8 


36. ᾿Ενέπαιζονά 


δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται, προσερχόµενοι καὶ 5 ὄξος προσφέροντες 
αὐτῷ, 37. καὶ λέγοντες, “Ei σὺ ef ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων, σῶσον 


. 
σεουτον. 


38. “Hy δὲ καὶ ἐπιγραφὴ γεγραμµένη ὃ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ γράµ- 


µασιν Ἑλληνικοῖς καὶ Ῥωμαϊκοῖς καὶ Ἑβραϊκοῖς,Ἰ “Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ 


βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων. § 


39. Ets δὲ τῶν κρεµασθέντων κακούργων ἐβλασφήμει αὐτόν, 


λέγων, “EL! σὺ et ὁ Χριστός, σῶσον σεαυτὸν καὶ ἡμᾶς." 


40. 


᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ ἕτερος ἐπετίμα αὐτῷ, λέγων, “OdSe φοβῇ σὺ τὸν 


1κληρους in AX 1, 33 al. (Tisch., who thinks κληρον an assimilation to parall.). 
2 Omit συν αντοις S$BCDLOX 33, 69, etc. (Tisch., W.H.). 
8 In WBL 1, 118, 209 the last clause stands thus: et ουτος εστιν ο Χ. του Θεον ο 


εκλεκτος. 


4 ενεπαιζαν in NBL. 


John (Tisch., W.H. omit). 
8ο Bac. των |. ovros in NBL a 
10 ουχι in SRBCL. 


conformity with the whole aim of Lk. 
in his Gospel, which is to exhibit the 
graciousness of Jesus.—8rapepifdpevor, 
etc., and parting His garments they cast 
lots = they divided His garments by 
casting lots.—Ver. 35. θεωρῶν: the 
people are now mere spectators. Have 
they begun to rue already when they 
see what their demand has come to? 
Observe the words θεωρίαν and θεωρή- 
σαντες in ver. 48. When they had 
gazed long enough it came to decided 
poignant regret. Fickle mob!—ot 
ἄρχοντες: they alone, the rulers of the 
people, mock and sneer. The σὺν αὐτοῖς 
(T.R.) is a badly attested reading and 
clearly contrary to the spirit of the 
narrative.—6 ἐκλεκτός, the Elect One, 
and come to this? Incredible? No! 
thus all the truest sons and elect of God 
have fared in this evil world.—Ver. 36. 
οἱ στρατιῶται, the soldiers ; first mention 
of them, whether there as executioners 
or as keeping order does not appear in 
Lk.’s narrative. They too mock in their 
own rough way, offering the sufferer 
vinegar by way of grim joke (Meyer). 
So Lk. understands the matter. Note 
how he hurries over these brutalities. 
Cf. Mt. and Mk.—Ver. 37. The taunt 
put into the mouth of the soldiers is a 
pointless echo of the sneers of the rulers. 
The crucified one might be a King, yet be 


5 Omit και NABCL. 
7 All after επ avtw is omitted in BCL a sah. cop. syrr. cur. sin. 


6 Omit γεγρ. WEL. 
It comes from 


5 Omit λεγων BL. 
D επιτιµων αντω εφη in SBCLX. 


unable to save Himself. The Christ, 
elect of God, might be conceived en- 
dowed with supernatural power.—Ver. 
38. ἐπ) αὐτῷ, over Him, i.e., above His 
head; or in reference to Him (Bleek). 
The ἐπιγραφὴ is viewed by Lk. as also an 
insult, crowning the others (ἦν δὲ καὶ), 
to which answers its form as in W. and 
H.: ὁ βασιλεὺς τ. “1. οὗτος = the King 
of the Jews this (crucified person). 

Vv. 39-43. The penitent malefactor, 
peculiar to Lk. and congenial to the 
spirit of the Gospel of the sinful.—Ver. 
30. ἐβλασφήμει: the wretched man 
caught up the taunt of the rulers and, 
half in coarse contempt, half by way of 
petition, repeated it, with καὶ ἡμας 
added, which redeemed the utterance 
from being a gratuitous insult.—Ver. 4o. 
οὐδὲ φοβῇῃ σὺ τ. θ.: οὐδὲ may be con- 
nected with, and the emphasis may fall on, 
either Φοβῇῃ, σὺ, or θεόν = (1) dost thou 
not even fear God, not to speak of any 
higher religious feeling? (2) dost not 
even thou, in contrast to these mockers 
of misery, fear, etc.? (3) dost thou not 
fear God, at least, if thou hast no regard 
for men? The position of οὐδὲ just 
before φοβῇ, casts the scale in favour of 
(1).—Ver. 41. ἄτοπον (a pr. and τόπος): 
primarily out of place, unfitting, absurd, 
often in Plato; in later usage bearing a 
moral sense—wrong, wicked (ἄτοπα 


35-- 47. ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 641 
Θεόν, ὅτι ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ κρίµατι ef; 41. καὶ ἡμεῖς μὲν δικαίως. ἄξια 

γὰρ ὧν ἐπράξαμεν ἀπολαμβάνομεν: οὗτος δὲ οὐδὲν ἄτοπον ἔπραξε.” 

42. Καὶ ἔλεγε τῷ] ᾿Ιησοῦ, “ Μνήσθητί µου, Κύριε, ὅταν ἔλθῃς ἐν 

τῇ βασιλεία ὃ cov.” 43. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς," ““᾽Αμὴν λέγω 
σοι,» σήµερον pet ἐμοῦ Eon ἐν τῷ παραδείσω.” 

44. "Hv δὲ 6 ὡσεὶ dpa ἕκτη, καὶ σκότος ἐγένετο ἐφ᾽ ὅλην τὴν γῆν, 
ἕως ὥρας ἐννάτης. 45. καὶ ἐσκοτίσθη 6 ἥλιος, καὶ ἐσχίσθη Ἰ τὸ 
καταπέτασµα τοῦ ναοῦ μέσον" 46. καὶ φωνήσας φωνῇ µεγάλη ὁ 
"Ingots εἶπε, “ Πάτερ, εἰς χεῖράς σου παραθήσοµαι ὃ τὸ πνεῦμά μου.” 
Καὶ ταῦτα ὃ εἰπὼν ἐξέπνευσεν. 47. ᾿Ιδὼν δὲ ὁ ἑκατόνταρχος 1° τὸ 
γενόµενον ἐδόξασε 1] τὸν Θεόν, λέγων, '΄Ὄντως ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὗτος 


1 S8BCL omit τω; based on mistaken interpretation. Vide below. 

3 Omit κνριε NBCDLM. 2 eis την β. in BL (W.H. text). 

4 Omit ol. SBL. ὅσοι λεγω in BCL. 

6 For ην δε SBC*DL 255 have και nv, to which BC*L add ηδη. 

7 For και εσκ. o nA. και εσχ. S$ BC*L minusc. have τον ηλιον εκλιποντος εσχισθη δε. 


ἕπαρατιθεμαι in SABC, etc. 
10 εκατονταρχης in 398 1, 131, 209. 


πονηρὰ, αἰσχρὰ, Hesych.); of persons 
2 Thess. iii. 2, in the sense of physically 
hurtful in Acts xxviii. 6.—Ver. 42. καὶ 
éXeyev* Ιησοῦ, and he said: Jesus! not 
to Jesus as T. R. signifies—év τῇ 
βασιλείᾳσ.: when Thou comest in Thy 
kingdom = when Thou comest as King 
to earth again, the petition meaning: 
may I be among those whom Thou shalt 
raise from the dead to share its joys! 
The reading of BL, εἴς τὴν β. σ., might 
point to an immediate entering into the 
Kingdom of Heaven, the prayer mean- 
ing: may I go there to be with Thee 
when I die!—Ver. 43. oypepov: to be 
connected with what follows, not with 
λέγω = to-day, as opposed to a boon ex- 
pected at some future time (which makes 
for the reading ἐν τῇ B. in ver. 42). Or 
the point may be: this very day, not to- 
morrow or the next day, as implying 
speedy release by death, instead of a 
slow lingering process of dying, as often 
in cases of crucifixion.—év τῷ παραδείσῳ, 
in paradise ; either the division of Hades 
in which the blessed dwell, which would 
make for the descensus ad inferos, or 
heaven ; vide at xvi. 23, and cf. 2 Cor. 
xii. 4, where it is a synonym for heaven, 
and Rev. ii. 7, where it denotes the 
perfected Kingdom of God, the ideal 
state of bliss realised. The use of 
‘‘ paradise’ in this sense is analogous to 
the various representations in Hebrews 


® For και ταυτα S¥BC*D have τουτο δε. 
11 εδοξαζεν in BDL. 


of the perfect future drawn from the 
primeval condition of man; lordship in 
the world to come, deliverance from the 
fear of death, a Sabbatism (Heb. ii. 8, 
14; iv. 9). The use of the term 
παράδεισος by St. Paul makes its use by 
our Lord credible. 

Vv. 44-49. After crucifixion (Mt. 
xxvii. 45-56, Mk. xv. 33-41).—Ver. 44. 
ἐφ᾽ ὅλην τὴν γῆν: though Lk. writes 
for Gentiles this phrase need not mean 
more than over the whole land of Israel. 
—Ver. 45. τοῦ HAtov ἐκλιπόντος : this 
phrase (a well-attested reading as against 
the T.R. ἐσκοτίσθη 6 Π.) ought to mean 
the sun being eclipsed, an impossibility 
when the moon is full. If all that was 
meant was the sun’s light totally failing, 
darkened, e.g., by a sand storm, the 
natural expression would be ἐσκοτίσθη. 
—Ver. 46. φωνῇ µεγάλῃ : this expression 
is used in Mt. and Mk. in connection 
with the “ΜΥ God, My God,” which 
Lk. omits. In its place comes the 
‘Father, into Thy hands”. Here as in 
the agony in the garden Lk.’s account 
fails to sound the depths of Christ’s 
humiliation. It must not be inferred 
that he did not know of the * Eli, Eli’’. 
Either he personally, or his source, or 
his first readers, could not bear the 
thought of it.—waparibewat tT. 7. p.: an 
echo of Psalm xxxi. 6, and to be under- 
stood in a similar sense, as an expression 


41 


642 


KATA AOYKAN XXUL. 


δίκαιος Hv.” 48. Καὶ πάντες οἱ συμπαραγενόµενοι ὄχλοι ἐπὶ τὴν 
θεωρίαν ταύτην, θεωροῦντες] τὰ Ὑενόμενα, τύπτοντες ἑαυτῶν ” τὰ 

, ς / 5 ιά 8 c ‘4 3 - 8 
στήθη ὑπέστρεφον. 49. εἴστήκεισαν δὲ πάντες οἱ γνωστοὶ αὐτοῦ 
µακρόθεν," καὶ γυναῖκες αἱ συνακολουθήσασαι ὅ αὐτῷ ἀπὸ τῆς Γαλι- 
λαίας, ὁρῶσαι ταῦτα. 

50. Καὶ ἰδού, ἀνὴρ ὀνόματι Ιωσήφ, βουλευτὴς ὑπάρχων, ἀνὴρ 
ἀγαθὸς καὶ δίκαιος, 51. (οὗτος οὐκ ἦν συγκατατεθειµένος τῇ βουλῇ 
καὶ τῇ πράξει αὐτῶν,) ἀπὸ ᾿Αριμαθαίας πόλεως τῶν Ἰουδαίων, ὃς καὶ 
πμοσεδέχετο καὶ αὐτὸς ὅ τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, 52. οὗτος προσ- 
ελθὼν τῷ Πιλάτῳ ἠτήσατο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 53. καὶ καθελὼν 

. [η . 

x , , \ om” ος Υ , nm 

aité? ἐνετύλιξεν αὐτὸ σινδόνι, καὶ ἔθηκεν αὐτὸ ὃ ἐν µνήµατι hageuTa, 


1 θεωρησαντες in NBCDL 33. 
3 aurw in NBLP 33, 64. 


5 συνακολουθουσαι in NBCLRX al. T.R. = AD, ete. 


2 Omit εαυτων SABCDL minusc. 
4 απο pak. in BDL al. 
B has αι before γυναικες. 


5 S8BCDL 69 verss. have ος προσεδεχετο without και before προσεδ., or και 


αντος after it. 


7 αντο omitted in NBCDL 13, 33, 69, etc. 


of trust in God in extremis. Various 
shades of meaning have been put on the 
words, among which is that Jesus died 
by a free act of will, handing over His 
soul to God as a deposit to be kept safe 
(Grotius, Bengel, Hahn, etc.).—Ver. 47. 
6 ἑκατοντάρχης, the centurion, in com- 
mand of the soldiers named in ver. 36.— 
δίκαιος, righteous, innocent; in the 
parallels he confesses that Jesus is a Son 
of God. Lk. is careful to accumulate 
testimonies to Christ’s innocence; first 
the robber, then the centurion, then the 
multitude (ver. 48) bears witness.—Ver. 
48. θεωρίαν, sight, here only (3 Macc. 
ν. 24).---τὰ γενόµενα, the things that had 
happened; comprehensively, including 
the crucifixion and all its accompani- 
ments. They had looked on and listened, 
and the result was regret that they had 
had anything to do with bringing such a 
fate on such a τηᾶπ.-- τύπτοντες τ. σ., 
beating their breasts. Lk. has in mind 
Zechariah’s ‘‘they shall look on me 
whom they have pierced and mourn” (xii. 
Το).---ὑπέστρεφον, kept going away, in 
little groups, sad-hearted.—Ver. 49. ot 
γνωστοὶ, His acquaintances, Galileans 
mostly, who stood till the end, but far 
away. Mt. and Mk. do not mention this. 
No word of the eleven.—kat γυναῖκες: 
warm-hearted Galileans they too, and 
women, therefore bolder where the heart 
was concerned; nearer presumably, 
therefore “seeing ’’ predicted of them 
specially (ὁρῶσαι). The men stood at a 


δαντον in BCD. 


safe distance, the women cared more for 
seeing than for safety. 

Vv. 50-56. The burial (Mt. xxvii. 57- 
61, Mk. xv. 42-47).—Ver. 50. καὶ ἰδού: 
introducing the bright side of the tragic 
picture, a welcome relief after the 
harrowing incidents previously related : 
the Victim of injustice honourably buried 
by a good man, who is described with 
greater fulness of detail than in Mt. and 
Mk.—avnp ἀγαθὸς καὶ δίκαιος, a man 
generous or noble and just. Instead of 
the epithets εὐσχήμων (Mk. xv. 43) and 
πλούσιος (Mt. xxvii. 57), indicative ot 
social position, Lk. employs words 
descriptive of moral character, leaving 
βουλευτὴς to serve the former purpose. 
ἀγαθὸς has reference to the generous 
act he is going to perform, δίκαιος to his 
past conduct in connection with the trial 
of Jesus; hence the statement following: 
οὗτος οὐκ ἦν, etc., which forms a kind 
of parenthesis in the long sentence.— 
Ver. 51. οὐκ ἦν συγκατατεθειµένος, was 
not a consenting party, here only in N. 
T. Alford thinks the meaning is that he 
absented himself from the meeting. Let 
us hope it means more than that: present 
at the meeting, and dissenting from its 
proceedings.—r. βουλῇ καὶ τ. πράξει, 
their counsel and their subsequent action 
in carrying that counsel into effect.— 
ὃς προσεδέχετο, etc.: this describes his 
religious character, Thus we have first 
social position, a counsellor; next 
ethical character, generous and just: 

74 


48—56. XXIV. 1—3, 


οὗ οὐκ ἦν οὐδέπω οὐδεὶς 1 κείµενος. 
καὶ σάββατον ἐπέφωσκε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


643 


54. καὶ ἡμέρα ἦν παρασκευή,ὰ 


55. Κατακολουθήσασαι δὲ καὶ ὃ γυναῖκες, αἴτινες ἦσαν συνεληλυ- 
θυῖαι αὐτῷ ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας," ἐθεάσαντο τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ ὡς ἐτέθη 


τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ. 56. ὑποστρέψασαι 


a 
δὲ ἠτοίμασαν ἀρώματα καὶ 


µύρα καὶ τὸ μὲν σάββατον ἠσύχασαν κατὰ τὴν ἐντολήν, XXIV. 

I. τῇ δὲ μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων "ὄρθρου Babdos,® ἦλθον ἐπὶ τὸ μνῆμα,ό a Acts v.21. 
Φέρουσαι & ἠτοίμασαν ἀρώματα, καί τινες σὺν αὐταῖς.ῖ 

' 2. ΕΥΡΟΝ δὲ τὸν λίθον ἀποκεκυλισμένον ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου, 3. και 


1 ονδειξ ουδεπω in 39Ο (Tisch.); ovders ουπω in NBL (W.H.). 


? wmapackeuys in NBC*L 13, 346. 
3 Omit και NAC al. (Tisch.). 


For δε και BLPX 33 al. have δε αι (W.H. text). 


D codd. Lat. vet. have δε δυο (W.H. marg.). 


4 αντω after Γαλ. in BL. 
6 επι το µνηµα ηλθαν in NBL. 


ὅβαθεως in NABCDL, εἰς, 


7 και τ. συν αυταις Omitted in ΔΜΝΒΟΙ, 33 Lat. vet. vulg. cop. 


finally religious character, one who was 
waiting for the Kingdom of God.—Ver./ 
53. λαξευτῷ, cut out ofstone, here only, 
and in Deut. iv.49.—ovx, οὐδέπω, οὐδεὶς, 
an accumulation ofnegativesto emphasise 
the honour done to Jesus by depositing 
His body in a previously unused tomb. 
—Ver. 54. ἐπέφωσκε, was about to 
dawn, illucescebat, Vulgate. The even- 
ing is meant, and the word seems in- 
appropriate. Lk. may have used it as if 
he had been speaking of a natural day 
(as in Mt. xxviii. 1) by a kind of inad- 
vertence, or it may have been used with 
reference to the candles lit in honour of 
the day, or following the Jewish custom 
of calling the night light justified by the 
text, Ps. cxlviii. 3, ‘‘ Praise Him, all ye 
stars of light” (vide Lightfoot, Hor. 
Heb.). Or it may be a touch of poetry, 
likening the rising of the moon to a 
dawn. So Casaubon, Exercit. anti- 
Baronianae, p. 416.—Ver. 55. αἵτινες: 
possibly = at, but possibly meant to 
suggest the idea of distinction: Galilean 
women, and such in character as you 
would expect them to be: leal-hearted, 
passionately devoted to their dead 
Friend.—dpwpara, spices, dry.—pupa, 
ointments, liquid. Ver. 56. κατὰ τὴν 
ἐντολήν: they respected the Sabbath 
law as commonly understood. The 
purchase of spices and ointments is 
viewed by some as a proof that the day 
of Christ’s crucifixion was an ordinary 
working day. 

CHAPTER XXIV. THE RESURREC¥ 
Tion. In this narrative Lk. diverges 


widely from Mt. and Mk. both as to the 
appearances of the Risen Christ he re- 
ports and as to the scene of these. 
Specially noticeable is the limitation of 
the Christophanies to the neighbourhood 
of Jerusalem, Galilee being left out of 
account. 

Vv. 1-11. The women at the tomb (Mt. 
xxviii. 1-10, Mk, xvi. 1-8).—Ver. 1. τῇ δὲ 
µ.τ.σ.;: the δὲ answers to the μὲν in the 
preceding clause (xxiii. 56) and carries the 
story on without any break. The T.R. 
properly prints the clause introduced by 
τῇ δὲ as part of the sentence beginning 
with καὶ τὸ μὲν, dividing the two clauses 
by a comma.—@pOpov βαθέως (Babdos, T. 
R., a correction), at deep dawn = very 
early. βαθέως is either an adverb or an 
unusual form of the genitive of βαθύς. 
This adjective is frequently used in refer- 
ence to time. Thus Philo says that the 
Israelites crossed the Red Sea περὶ βαθὺν 
ὄρθρον. The end of the dawn was called 
ὄρθρος ἔσχατος, as in the line of Theo- 
critus: ὄρνιχες τρίτον ἄρτι τὸν ἔσχατον 
ὄρθρον ἄειδον (Idyll xxiv., ν., 63).--ἀρώ- 
para: the μύρα omitted for Ὀτενίίγ.--- 
Ver. 2. τὸν λίθον, the stone, not previ- 
ously mentioned by Lk., as in Mt. and 
Mk. ; nor does he (as in Mk.) ascribe to 
the women any solicitude as to its re- 
moval: enough for him that they found 
it rolled away.—Ver. 3. εἰσελβοῦσαι δὲ: 
this is obviously a better reading than καὶ 
εἰσ. (T.R.), which implies that they 
found what they expected, whereas the 
empty grave was a surprise.—Ver. 4. 
ἄνδρες, two men in appearance, but with 


ΚΑΤΑ AOYKAN XXIV. 


644 


εἰσελθοῦσαι Σ ody εὗρον τὸ σῶμα τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ. 4. καὶ ἐγένετο 
ἐν τῷ διαπορεῖσθαι ὃ αὐτὰς περὶ τούτου, καὶ ἰδού, δύο ἄνδρες ΄ ἐπέσ- 


» ἐμφόβων δὲ 


γενοµένῳν αὐτῶν, καὶ κλινουσῶν τὸ πρόσωπον ὃ εἰς τὴν γῆν, εἶπον 


ΑΑοΐχ.«.τησαν αὐταῖς ἐν ἐσθήσεσιν ἀστραπτούσαιςδ 5. 


πχὶν. 25. 
Pav. xi. 1 
πρὸς aitds, “Ti ζητεῖτε τὸν ζῶντα μετὰ τῶν νεκρῶν; 6. οὖκ ἔστιν 
Bde, ἀλλ᾽ ἠγέρθη 7+ µνήσθητε ds ἐλάλησεν ὑμῖν, ἔτι Gv ἐν τῇ Γαλι- 
λαίᾳα, 7. λέγων, Ὅτι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὃ παραδοθῆναι eis 
A , e - . ~ a / c 
χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων ἁμαρτωλῶν, καὶ σταυρωθῆναι, καὶ τῇ τρίτη ἡμέρα 
ἀναστῆναι. 9. Καὶ ἐμνήσθησαν τῶν ῥημάτων αὐτοῦ: 9g. καὶ ὕπο- 
στρέψασαι ἀπὸ τοῦ μνημείου, ἀπήγγειλαν ταῦτα πάντα 19 τοῖς ἔνδεκα 
καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς λοιποῖς. 1Ο. ἦσαν δὲ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ Μαρία καὶ 
Ἰωάννα καὶ Μαρία Ιακώβου, 1 καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ σὺν αὐταῖς, αἳ 1” ἔλεγον 


1 εισελθ. δε in ΔΒΟΓΥ, 1, 33 al. 


Στου κνριον |. is found in ΔΑΒΟΙ, al. pl. (Tisch.). 
omit the whole; f. syrr. cur. sin. omit κυριον. 


D and some codd. vet. Lat. 
W.H. count this one of the 


‘«« Western non-interpolations,’”’ remarking that the combination ο κυριος Ιησους is 
not found in the genuine text of the Gospels. 


3 απορεισθαι in ΝΒΟΡΙ.. 
δεν εσθητι αστραπτουνση in KBD. 


4 ανδρες δυο in ΝΑΒΟΙ,. Τ.Ε. =D. 
ὅ τα προσωπα in NBCDL, 33, etc. 


7 ovk εστιν woe αλλα ηγερθη wanting in D a be ff,, a ‘“‘ Western non-interpola- 


Ποπ: 
W.H. App. 


“‘comes from Mt. xxviii. 6 = Mk. xvi. 6 thrown into an antithetic form,” 


8 οτι δει after ανθρωπου in N*BC*L (Tisch., W.H.), 
*Dabce ff?1 omit απο. τ. pv. (W.H. brackets). 


ιο So in BL (W.H.). 
1 ῃ lax. in SABD al. pl. 


angelic raiment (ἐν ἐσθῆτι ἀστραπτούσῃ). 
—Ver. 5. ἐμφόβων, fear-stricken, from 
ἔμφοβος, chiefly in late writers, for ἐν 
φΦόβῳ εἶναι. Vide Hermann, ad Viger., 
p. 6ο7.---τὸν Lavra, the living one, simply 
pointing to the fact that Jesus was risen : 
no longer among the dead.—peta τῶν 
νεκρῶν, among the dead. The use of 
pera in the sense of among, with the 
genitive, is common in Greek authors, as 
in Pindar’s line (Pythia, v., 127): µάκαρ 
μὲν ὠνδρῶν µέτα ἔναιεν. Wolf mentions 
certain scholars who suggested that μετὰ 
+. νεκρῶν should be rendered “with the 
things for the dead,” i.e., the spices and 
mortuaria. But of this sense no example 
has been cited.—Ver. 6. µνήσθητε, etc.: 
the reference is to what Jesus told the 
disciples in the neighbourhood of Cae- 
sarea Philippi (ix.). There is no indica- 
tion elsewhere that women were present 
on that occasion—és: not merely 
“that,” but ‘“how,” in what terms.—év 
τῇῃ Γαλιλαίᾳ: this reference to Galilee 
suggests that Lk. was aware of another 


παντα ταυτα in $§D (Tisch.). 
13 Omit αι NABDL, εἰς, 


reference to Galilee as the place of 
rendezvous for the meeting between the 
disciples and their risen Master (Mt. xxvi. 
32, Mk. xiv. 28, to which there is nothing 
corresponding in Lk.).—Ver. 7. τὸν viov 
τ. d.: standing before ὅτι δεῖ may be 
taken as an accusative of reference = 
saying as to the Son of Man that, etc.— 
ἀνθρώπων ἁμαρτωλῶν, sinful men, not 
necessarily Gentiles only (Meyer, J. 
Weiss, etc.), but men generally (Hahn) 
Jesus actually expressed Himself in much 
more definite terms.—Ver. 9. ἀπήγγει- 
λαν, etc.: cf. the statement in Mk. xvi. 
8, according to which the women said 
nothing to any person.—Ver. 10: here 
for the first time Lk. gives names, adding 
to two of those named by Mk. (xv. 47, 
xvi. 1) Joanna, mentioned in viii. 3. Mary 
Magdalene is here called the Magdalene 
Ματγ.-- καὶ at λοιπαὶ, etc., also the other 
women with them. The emphasis must 
lie on the persons named as those who 
took the chief hand in informing the 
Apostles.—ovv αὐταῖς describes the other 


4—I5. 


ν > Ay a 
προς TOUS ἀποστολους ταυτα. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


645 


Δ A 
11. Kat ἐφάνησαν ἐνώπιον αὐτῶν 
ε ‘ lol 5 ev wey em | ΝΑ UEARE 3 a 
ὡσεὶ λῆρος τὰ ῥήματα αὐτῶν, Kal ἠπίστουν αὐταῖς. 


12. 6 δὲ 


Πέτρος ἀναστὰς ἕδραμεν ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ "παρακύψας βλέπει «]οῦπακ.», 


τὰ ἃ ὀθόνια κείµενα μόνα" καὶ ἀπῆλθε πρὸς ἑαυτὸν θαυµάζων τὸ σ5. 


γεγονός.» 


11. Jas.i. 


d John xix. 
40; XX. 5, 


13. Καὶ ἰδού, δύο ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν πορευόµενοι ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ® 


eis κώµην ἀπέχουσαν σταδίους ἑξήκοντα ἀπὸ Ἱερουσαλήμ, ᾗ ὄνομα 
Ἐμμαούς: 14. καὶ αὐτοὶ ᾿ ὠμίλουν πρὸς ἀλλήλους περὶ πάντων τῶν « Acts κκ. 


συµβεβηκότων τούτων. 


ΔΝ 3 3 a ες a) > κα ‘ 
15. καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ὁμιλεῖν αὐτοὺς Kal 26. 


II; xxiv. 


1 παντα for αυτων in BDL codd. vet. Lat. 
2 Ver. 12 is another “' Western non-interpolation,” wanting in D abe 1 (Tisch. 


omits, W.H. double brackets). 


εαντογν. 


5 ησαν πορ. after εν a. T. np. in NB. 


women as, in a subordinate way, joint- 
informants. The at before ἔλεγον in T. 
R. makes the construction easier, and just 
on that account may be regarded as a 
correction by the scribes.—Ver. 11. ἐφά- 
νησαν: plural with a neuter pl. nom. (τὰ 
ῥήματα), denoting things without life 
(vide John xix. 31), because the ‘‘ words,” 
reports, are thought of in their separate- 
ness (vide Winer, § lviii., 3 α).---λῆρος: 
here only in N.T. = idle talk, not to be 
taken seriously. 

Ver. 12. Peter runs to the sepulchre. 
This verse, omitted in D and some copies 
of the old Latin version, is regarded by 
some as an interpolation. For Rohr- 
bach’s theory vide notes on the appendix 
to Mark’s Gospel (xvi. 9-20).—dvaeras, 
rising up, suggesting prompt action, like 
the man; asif after all he at last thought 
there might be something in the women’s 
story.—Tapakvas may mean: stooping 
down so as to look in, but in many 
passages in which the verb is used the 
idea of stooping is not suggested, but 
rather that of taking a stolen hasty 
glance with outstretched neck. Kypke 
gives as its meaning in profane writers 
exserto capite prospicere (examples there). 
Field (Ot. Nor.) quotes with approval 
these words of Casaubon against Baren- 
ius (p. 693): ** Male etiam probat humili- 
tatem sepulchri ex eo quod dicitur Joannes 
se inclinasse ; nam Graeca veritas habet 
παρακύψαι, quod sive de fenestra sumatur 
sive de janua, nullam inclinationem cor- 
poris designat, qualem sibi finxit B., sed 
protensionem colli potius cum modica 
corporis incurvatione ”’.—péva, alone, 
without the Ροάγ.--- πρὸς ἑαυτὸν (or av- 
τὸν): most connect this with ἀπῆλθεν = 


SB omit κειµενα, and BL have προς αυτον for π. 


went away to his home, as in John xx. 
10 (πρὸς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ διαγωγήν, Euthy. 
Zig.). The Vulgate connects with @av- 
µάζων = secum mirans, and is followed 
by not a few, including Theophyl. and 
Grotius; Wolf also, who lays stress on 
the fact that the ancient versions except 
the Coptic so render.—@avp.dfwv, wonder- 
ing; for, remarks Euthy., he knew that 
the body had not been carried off, for 
then the clothes would have been carried 
off also. 

Vv. 13-35. On the way to Emmaus: 
in Lk. only, and one of the most beauti- 
ful and felicitous narratives in his Gospel, 
taken, according to J. Weiss (in Meyer), 
from Feine’s precanonical Luke. Feine, 
after Holtzmann, remarks on the affinities 
in style and religious tone between it and 
Lk. i. and ii. 

Vv. 13 ff. δύο ἐξ αὐτῶν, two of them. 
The reference ought naturally to be to the 
last-named subject, the Apostles (ver. 
10) ; yet they were evidently not Apostles. 
Hence it is inferred that the reference is 
to τοῖς λοιποῖς in ver. g. Feine (also 
J. Weiss) thinks the story had been 
originally given in a different connection. 
—Eppaots: now generally identified 
with Kalonieh, the Emmaus of Josephus, 
B. J., vii. 6, 6, lying to the north-west of 
Jerusalem (vide Schirer, Div. I., vol. ii., 
p- 253, note 138, and Furrer, Wan- 
derungen, pp. 168-9).—Ver. 15. συζητεῖν. 
This word, added to ὁμιλεῖν to describe 
the converse of the two disciples, suggests 
lively discussion, perhaps accompanied 
by some heat. One might be sceptical, 
the other more inclined to believe the 
story of the resurrection.—Ver. 16. 
ἐκρατοῦντο, their eyes were held, from 


646 


KATA AOYKAN XXIV. 


συζητεῖν, καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ 1 Ιησοῦς ἐγγίσας συνεπορεύετο αὐτοῖς: 16. ot 
17. Εἶπε 
δὲ πρὸς αὐτούς, “ Tives οἱ λόγοι οὗτοι, οὓς ἀντιβάλλετε πρὸς ἀλλή- 


δὲ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτῶν ἐκρατοῦντο τοῦ μὴ ἐπιγνῶναι αὐτόν. 
hous περιπατοῦντες, καί ἐστε σκυθρωποί 2; 18. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ 6 
εἷς,ὃ ᾧ ὄνομα " Κλεόπας, εἶπε πρὸς αὐτόν, “EO µόνος παροικεῖς ἐν δ 
“Ἱερουσαλήμ. καὶ οὐκ ἔγνως τὰ γενόµενα ἐν αὐτῇ ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις 
ταύταις; 10. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Ποῖα;” Οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Ta 
περὶ Ἴησου τοῦ Ναζωραίου,ό ὃς ἐγένετο ἀνὴρ προφήτης, δυνατὸς ἐν 
ἔργω καὶ Adyw ἐναντίον τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ παντὸς τοῦ λαοῦ: 20. ὅπως τε 
παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν OL ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ OL ἄρχοντες ἡμῶν els κρίµα 
βῥανάτου, kat ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν: 21. ἡμεῖς δὲ ἠλπίζομεν ὅτι αὐτός 
ἐστιν 6 µέλλων λυτροῦσθαι τὸν Ισραήλ. ἀλλά γε] σὺν πᾶσι τούτοις 


1 SABL omit ο. 
> kat εσταθησαν σκ. in $B e sah. cop. 
5 For o εις SQBDL 1, 13 al. have εις. 


D retains ο but omits αυτος. 


D has simply σκνυθρωποι. 


4 For ω ονοµα (AD, etc., Tisch.) SBLNX have ονοµατι (W.H.). 


> Omit εν S$ABDIL and many others. 


ὃ Ναζαρηνου in SBIL. 


7 adda ye και in SBDL 1, 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 


recognising Him (here only in this 
sense). Instances of the use of the verb 
in this sense in reference to the bodily 
organs are given by Kypke. It is not 
necessary, with Meyer, to suppose any 
special Divine action or purpose to pre- 
vent knowledge of Jesus.—Ver. 17. 
ἀντιβάλλετε: an expressive word (here 
only in N.T.), confirming the impression 
of animated and even heated conversa- 
tion made by συζητεῖν. It points to an 
exchange of words, not simpiy, but with 
a certain measure of excitement. As 
Pricaeus expresses it: “‘ fervidius aliquanto 
et commotius, ut fieri amat ubi de rebus 
novi; mirisque disserentes nullamque 
expediendi nos viam invenientes, alter- 
camur’’. The question of the stranger 
quietly put to the two wayfarers is not 
without a touch of kindly humour.— 
καὶ ἐστάθησαν, σκυθρωποί: this well- 
attested reading gives a good graphic 
sense = ‘they stood still, looking sad ”’ 
(R.V.). A natural attitude during the 
first moments of surprise at the in- 
terruption of their talk by an unknown 
person, and in a puzzling tone.—Ver. 
18. ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ: at last after τε- 
covering from surprise one of them, 
Cleopas, finds his tongue, and explains 
fully the subject of their conversation.— 
Σὺ pdvos, etc.: he begins by expressing 
his surprise that the stranger should 
need to be told. What could they be 


talking about but the one supreme topic 
of the hour? The verb παροικεῖς might 
mean; live near, and the point of the 
question be: dost thou live near 
Jerusalem (in the neighbourhood of 
Emmaus, a few miles distant), and not 
know, etc. So Grotius; Rosenmiller, 
Bleek, etc. The usual meaning of the 
verb in Sept. and N.T. (Heb. xi. ϱ) is to 
sojourn as a stranger, and most take it in 
that sense here = art thou a stranger 
sojourning in Jerusalem (at passover 
time), and therefore ignorant? The 
μόνος implies isolation over and above 
being a stranger. There were many 
strangers in Jerusalem at passover 
season ; the two friends might be among 
them; but even visitors from Galilee 
and other places knew all about what 
had happened = do you live alone, 
having no communication with others— 
a stranger in Jerusalem so as to be the 
only man who does not know? (pévos 
qualifies ἔγνως as well as παροικεῖς).--- 
Ver. 19, ποῖα, what sort of things? 
with an affected indifference, the feign- 
ing of love—ot δὲ εἶπον: both speak 
now, distributing the story between 
them,—avip προφήτης, a prophetic man, 
a high estimate, but not the highest.— 
ἀνὴρ may be viewed as redundant— 
‘‘eleganter abundat,’’ Kypke.—Ver. 20. 
ὅπως τε, and how; ὅπως here = πῶς, 
used adverbially with the indicative, here 


κ6---26. 


τρίτην ταύτην ἡμέραν ayer σήμερον, ad οὗ ταῦτα ἐγένετο. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ: 


647 


22. 


ἀλλὰ καὶ γυναϊκές τινες ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐξέστησαν ἡμᾶς, γενόµεναι ὄρθριαι 3 
ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον: 23. καὶ μὴ εὑροῦσαι τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, ἦλθον, λέγου- 


σαι καὶ ὁπτασίαν ἀγγέλων ἑωρακέναι, ot λέγουσιν αὐτὸν Liv. 


24-. 


ae er / a Ν en, yoy x ο) A 2 Lj 
καὶ ἀπῆλθόν τινες τῶν σὺν ἡμῖν ἐπὶ τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ εὗρον οὗτις 


καθὼς καὶ ὃ αἱ γυναῖκες εἶπον ’ αὐτὸν δὲ οὐκ εἶδον. 


25. Kat αὐτὸς 


εἶπε πρὸς αὐτούς, “"Q ” ἀνόητοι καὶ © βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ τοῦ πει-{ here only 


in Gospels. 


, 9 A e > 5 ~ ο αν a a” 
τεύειν ἐπὶ πᾶσιν ois ἐλάλησαν οἱ προφῆται" 26. οὐχὶ ταῦτα ἔδει ᾳ Jas. i. το. 


1 Omit σηµερον NBL 1. 


only in N.T. The. τε connects what 
follows with what goes before as together 
constituting one complete tragic story: 
the best of men treated as the worst by 
the self-styled ροοά.--καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν: 
this confirms the idea suggested in the 
previous narrative of the crucifixion that 
Lk. regarded that deed as the crime of 
the Jewish people, and even as executed 
by them.—Ver. 21. ἡμεῖς δὲ, but we, on 
the other hand, as opposed to the priests 
and rulers.—Amilopev, were hoping; 
the hope dead or in abeyance now. But 
how wide asunder these disappointed 
ones from the rulers, ethically, in that 
they could regard such an one as Jesus 
as the Redeemer of Israel! λυτροῦσθαι 
is to be taken in the sense of i. 68, 74.— 
ἀλλά ye: these two particles stand 
together here contrary to the ordinary 
usage of Greek writers, who separate 
them by an intervening word, It is not 
easy to express the turn of feeling they 
represent. Does the ἐστιν in the pre- 
vious clause mean that they think of 
Him as still living, hoping against hope 
on the ground of the women’s report, 
mentioned in the following clause, and 
does the ἀλλά ye express a swing of 
feeling away in the opposite direction of 
hopelessness ? = we hoped, we would 
like to hope still; yet how can we? He 
is dead three days, and yet again on the 
other hand. (ἀλλὰ καὶ, ver. 22) there is 
a story going that looks like a re- 
surrection.. How true to life this 
alternation between hope and despair ! 
σὺν πᾶσι τούτοις, in addition to ail 
these things, 7.e., all that caused them 
to hope: prophetic gifts, marvellous 
power in word and work, favour with 
the people: there is the hard fact 
making hope impossible.—dye.: pro- 
bably to be taken impersonally = 
agitur, one lives this third day since. So 
Grotius and many others. Other sug- 
gestions are that χρόνος or 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς is 


believe the report.—Ver. 24. 


2 opPpwas in SRABDL al. 5 Omit και BD (W.H.). 


to be understood (cf. Acts xix. 38).— 
Ver. 22. ἀλλὰ καὶ y. τ.: introducing 
another hope-inspiring phase of the 
5ίοτΥ.---ἐξέστησαν ἡ., astonisned us.— 
ὀρθριναὶ: ὀρθρινός is a late form for 
ὄρθριος, and condemned by Phryn.; the 
adjective instead of the adverb = early 
ones, a common classical usage.—Ver. 
23. μὴ εὑροῦσαι, etc.: that part of the 
women’s story—the body gone—is 
accepted as a fact ; their explanation οἱ 
the fact is regarded as doubtful, as 
appears from the cautious manner of ex- 
ΡΙΕΡΘΙΟΠ.---λέγουσαι, etc., they came 
saying that they had also seen a vision of 
angels who say. Yet the use of the 
present indicative, λέγονσιν, in reporting 
what the angels said, shows a wish to 
τινες των 
σὺν ἡμῖν : a general reference to the 
Apostles, though the phrase covers all 
the lovers of Jesus. The tives were 
Peter and John (John xx. 3).---αὐτὸν δὲ 
οὐκ εἶδον, but Him they saw not, as 
surely, think the two friends, they ought 
to have done had He really been alive. 
from the dead. 

Ver. 25 f. Fesus speaks.—avdnror, 
‘*fools”? (A.V.) is too strong, “ foolish 
men” (R.V.) is better. Jesus speaks not 
so much to reproach as by way of en- 
couragement, As used by Paul in Gal. 
iii. 1the word is harder. ‘ Stupid” might 
be a good colloquial equivalent for it here. 
---πιστεύειν ἐπὶ π.: ἐπὶ with dative of 
person after πιστεύειν is common, with 
dative of the thing only here.—Ver. 26. 
ἔδει: here as always in Lk. pointing to 
the necessity that O.T. prophecy should 
be fulfilled. Accordingly Jesus is repre- 
sented in the next verse as going on to 
show that prophecy demanded the course 
of experience described : first the passion, 
then entrance into Ρ]οτγ.---καὶ εἰσελθεῖν :. 
the passion is past, the entering into 
glory is still to come, therefore it seems 
unfit to make eioeA. dependent with 


648 


KATA AOYKAN 


XXIV. 


παθεῖν τὸν Χριστόν, καὶ εἰσελθεῖν eis τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ; 27. Καὶ 
ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ Μωσέως καὶ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν προφητῶν, διηρµήνευεν 1 


αὐτοῖς ἐν πάσαις ταῖς γραφαῖς τὰ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ. 


28. Καὶ ἤγγισαν 


2 - 
als τὴν κώμµην οὗ ἐπορεύοντο " καὶ αὐτὸς προσεποιεῖτο ” πορρωτέρω 


, 
πορεύεσθαι. 


29. καὶ παρεβιάσαντο αὐτόν, λέγοντες, “ Μεῖνον μεθ 


ἡμῶν, ὅτι πρὸς ἑσπέραν ἐστί, καὶ κέκλικεν ἡ ἡμέρα.”δ Καὶ εἰσῆλθε 


+o μεῖναι σὺν αὐτοῖς. 


30. 


A , ~ ~ 
καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ κατακλιθῆναι αὐτὸν 


per αὐτῶν, λαβὼν τὸν ἄρτον εὔλόγησε, καὶ κλάσας ἐπεδίδου αὐτοῖς. 
ο) ῤ 
41. αὐτῶν δὲ διηνοίχθησαν οἱ ὀφθαλμοί, καὶ ἐπέγνωσαν αὐτόν: καὶ 


αὐτὸς ἄφαντος ἐγένετο ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν. 


33. Καὶ εἶπον πρὸς ἀλλήλους, 


* Οὐχὶ ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν καιοµένη ἦν ἐν ἡμῖν, ὡς ἐλάλει ἡμῖν ἐν τῇ 


* Ἀνερμήηνευσεν in BL (Tisch., W.H. text). 


spjyvevery (W.H. πιατρ.). 


D has ην before αρξαµενος with 


“προσεποιησατο in SABDL 1, for πορρωτερω (in SDL) AB 382 have 


πορρωτερον (W.H.).. 
* ηδη before η np. in NBL 1, 33 al. 


*So in WALX ail, pl. 
µενη (W.H. πιατρ.). 


παθεῖν on ede. Meyer supplies δεῖ, 
Bornemann ταῦτα παθόντα, the Vulgate 
οὕτω = et ita intrave—Ver. 27. καὶ 
ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ, etc.: there is a 
grammatical difficulty here also. He 
might begin from Moses, but how could 
He begin from Moses and all the 
prophets? Hahn, after Hofmann, 
suggests that Moses and the prophets 
together are set in contrast to the rest of 
the O.T. But Lk. seems to have in 
mind not so much where Jesus began as 
what He began to do, viz., teach = 
beginning (to instruct them) from Moses, 
etc.—Ver. 28. προσεποιήσατο, He 
assumed the air of one going farther. 
The verb in the active means to bring 
about that something shall be acquired 
by another, in middle, by oneself = 
“‘meum aliquid facio” (Alberti, Observ. 
Phil., ad loc.). Jesus wished to be in- 
vited to stay.—Ver. 20. παρεβιάσαντο, 
they constrained by entreaty, again in 
Acts xvi. 15, found in Gen. xix. Ο.---μεθ᾽ 
ἡμῶν, with us, presumably in their home 
or lodgings. If they were but guests 
they could not well invite another.— 
πρὸς ἑσπέραν, κέκλικεν 4 ἤ.: two phrases 
where one was enough, by way of press- 
ing their fellow-traveller. They make 
the most of the late hour, which is not 
their real reason.—Ver. 30. λαβὼν τ. a., 
etc.: Jesus possibly by request assumes 
the position of host, prepared for by the 
previous exercise of the function of 
Master. By this time a suspicion of who 


BD omit ev ap. (W.H.). 


For καιοµενη D has kexahup- 


He was had dawned upon. the two 
disciples. While He spoke old impres- 
sions of His teaching were revived 
(Pricaeus).—Ver. 31. διηνοίχθησαν οἱ 
ὀφ., their eyes were at length opened, a 
Divine effect, but having its psychological 
causes. Euthy. suggests the use of the 
well-known blessing by Jesus as aiding 
recognition. The opening of the mind 
to the prophetic teaching concerning 
Messiah’s suffering was the main pre- 
paration for the opening of the eyes 
The wonder is they did not recognise 
Jesus Ἅδ5οοπεΓ.- ἄφαντο: απ early 
poetical and late prose word = ἀφανής, 
not in Sept., here only in N.T. After 
being recognised Jesus became invisible, 
ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, not to them (αὐτοῖς) but from 
them, implying departure from the house. 
Some take ἄφαντος adverbially as qualify- 
ing the departure = He departed from 
them in an invisible manner. 

Vv. 32-35. After Fesus’ departure.— 
Ver. 32. Ἡ καρδία καιοµένη, the heart 
burning, a beautiful expression for the 
emotional effect of new truth dawning 
on the mind; common to sacred writers 
(vide Ps. xxxix. 4, Jerem. xx. 9) with 
profane. Their heart began to burn 
while the stranger expounded Scripture, 
and kept burning, and burning up into 
ever clearer flame, as He went on— 
‘valde et diu,” Bengel. It is the heart 
that has been dried by tribulation that 
burns so. This burning of the heart 
experienced by the two disciples was 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


27—42. 
680, kal? ὡς διήνοιγεν ἡμῖν τὰς γραφάς; 33. Καὶ ἀναστάντες 
αὐτῇ τῇ dpa, ὑπέστρεψαν eis Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ εὗρον συνηθροισ- 
µένους τοὺς ἔνδεκα καὶ τοὺς σὺν αὐτοῖς, 34. λέγοντας, “΄ Ὅτι 
ἠγέρθη 6 Κύριος dvtws,® καὶ ὤφθη Σίµωνι.' 35. Καὶ αὐτοὶ ἐξη- 
γοῦντο τὰ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, καὶ ὡς ἐγνώσθη αὗτοῖς ἐν τῇ κλάσει τοῦ ἄρτου. 


36. Ταῦτα δὲ αὐτῶν λαλούντων, αὐτὸς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς" ἔστη ἐν µέσῳ 


αὐτῶν, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “΄ Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν.» 
ἔμφοβοι γενόµενοι ἐδόκουν πνεῦμα θεωρεῖν. 


ἐς τ/ η > , 
Τι τεταραγµένοι EOTE ; 
ταῖς καρδίαις Ἰ ὑμῶν ; 


37. Πτοηθέντες ὃ δὲ καὶ 
38. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 


καὶ διατί διαλογισμοὶ ἀναβαίνουσιν ἐν 
39. Were τὰς χεῖράς µου καὶ τοὺς πόδας 


µου, ὅτι αὐτὸς ἐγώ εἰμι ὃ: " ψηλαφήσατέ µε καὶ ἴδετε: ὅτι πνεῦμα Η Acts xvii. 


σάρκα καὶ ὀστέα οὐκ ἔχει, καθὼς ἐμὲ θεωρεῖτε ExovTa.” 
τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἐπέδειξεν αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τοὺς πόδας.» 


27. Heb, 
40. Καὶ xii. 18, 1 
41 δν Joha i. 1 


δὲ ἀπιστούντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς καὶ θαυμαζόντων, εἶπεν adtois, 


“Eyeté τι βρώσιµον ἐνθάδε; 


1 NBDL 33 omit και, 
2 ηθροισµενους in NBD 33. 
3 Omit o |. BDL 6τ al. 


42. Οἱ δὲ ἐπέδωκαν αὐτῷ ἰχθύος 


ὅ οντως nyep. ο K. in ΜΒ ΓΙ, 1, 131, 


5 kat λεγει αυτοις ειρ.υµιν wanting in D a be ff?1; α΄. Western non-interpola. 
tion,” W.H. App. Omitted also by Tisch. 


ὃ B has θροηθεντες (W.H. marg.). 
? τη καρδια in BD. 
°D a be ff? syr. cur. omit ver. 49. 


typical of the experience of the whole 
early Church when it got the key to the 
sufferings of Jesus (Holtzmann, H. Ο.). 
Their doubt and its removal was common 
to them with many, and that is why the 
story is told so carefully by Lk.—das 
ἐλάλει, ὡς διήνοιγεν (without καὶ), as He 
spoke, as He opened, etc.; first the 
general then the more specific form of 
the fact.—Ver. 33. αὐτῇ τῇ dpa: no 
time lost, meal perhaps left half finished, 
no fear of a night journey; the eleven 
must be told at once what has happened. 
‘‘ They ran the whole way from overjoy” 
(ὑπὸ περιχαρείας), Euthy. Zig.—Ver. 
34. λέγοντας: the apostolic company 
have their story to tell: a risen Lord 
seen by one of their number. The two 
from Emmaus would not be sorry that 
they had been forestalled. It would be 
a welcome confirmation of their own ex- 
perience. On the other hand, the com- 
pany in Jerusalem would be glad to hear 
their tale for the same reason. So they 
told it circumstantially (τὰ ἐν τῇ 086, 
νετ. 35). 

Vv. 36-43. Fesus appears to the eleven 
(cf. Mk. xvi. 14, John xx. 19-23).—Ver. 


δ εγω ειµι αυτος in NBL 33. 


A ‘Western non-interpolation,” W.H. 


36. ἔστη ἐν µέσῳ a. suggests an appear- 
ance as sudden as the departure from the 
two brethren.—Ver. 37. πνεῦμα, a spirit, 
i.¢., a form recognisable as that of Jesus, 
but of Jesus not risen but come from the 
world of the dead disembodied or only 
with an apparent body ; therefore they 
were terrified at the sight, notwithstand- 
ing what they had heard.—Ver. 38. τί 
τεταραγµένοι ἐστέ; why are ye disturbed ? 
or about what are ye disturbed? taking 
τί as object of τεταρ. (Schanz).—Ver. 39. 
τὰς χεῖράς pov, etc.: Jesus shows His 
hands and feet with the wounds to 
satisfy them of His identity (ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι 
αὐτός). Then He bids them touch Him 
(Ψηλαφήσατέ pe) to satisfy themselves 
of His substantiality.—iSere, see with 
the mind; with the eye in case of the 
preceding ἴδετε.- ὅτι: either that, or 
because.—Ver. 40. Very nearly John xx. 
20 and possibly an interpolation. It 
seems superfluous after ver. 39.—Ver. 41. 
ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς, a psychological touch 
quite in Lk,’s manner. Cf. xxii. 45: 
there asleep from grief, here unbelievers 
from joy. Hahn takes χαρά objectively. 
--τι βρώσιµον, anything eatable, here 


650 


ὁπτοῦ µέρος, καὶ ἀπὸ µελισσίου Knypiou.! 


αὐτῶν ἔφαγεν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΛΟΥΚΑΝ 


ΧΧΙΝ. 


43. καὶ λαβὼν ἐνώπιον΄ 


44. Εἶπε δὲ αὗτοῖς,” “ Οὗτοι οἱ λόγοι, οὓς ἐλάλησα 


πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἔτι dv σὺν ὑμῖν, ὅτι δεῖ πληρωθῆναι πάντα τὰ γεγραμμµένα. 
ἐν τῷ νόμῳ Μωσέως καὶ προφήταις” καὶ ψαλμοῖς περὶ ἐμοῦ... 45. 
Τότε διήνοιξεν αὐτῶν τὸν νοῦν, τοῦ συνιέναι τὰς γραφάς: 46. καὶ 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Or. οὕτω γέγραπται, καὶ οὕτως ἔδειδ παθεῖν τὸν 
Χριστόν, καὶ ἀναστῆναι ἐκ νεκρῶν τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ, 47. καὶ κηρυχ- 
θῆναι ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ µετάνοιαν Kal® ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν εἰς 
πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, ἀρξάμενονἸ ἀπὸ ἹἹερουσαλήμ. 48. ὑμεῖς δέ ἐστεδ 


} και απο µελ. κηρ. omitted in NABDL (Tisch.; W.H., text, with the words in 


marg.). 
2 pos αντους in NBLX 33. 
3 Add pov ABDL 33. 


A Syrian and Western interpolation. 


‘ B has τοις προφ. (W.H.). 


ὅ kat ουτως εδει omitted in BCDL a bce ff?; an explanatory addition. 


δεις in $QB (Tisch., W.H., text). 


CD have και (W.H. πιατρ.). 


7 αρξαµενοι in NBCLNX 33 (Tisch., W.H.). 
® REBCL have vpets without δε, and BD omit εστε. 


only in N.T.—Ver. 42. ἀπὸ µελισσίου 
κηρίου, of a bee-comb. The adjective 
µελ. occurs nowhere else. κηρίον is the 
diminutive of κηρό. The words are 
probably a gloss.—Ver. 43. That Jesus 
ate is carefully stated. The materiality 
thus evinced seems inconsistent with 
the pneumatic nature of Christ’s body as 
suggested by sudden appearing arid de- 
parture, and with the immortal form of 
embodied life generally. Hahn suggests 
that the materiality was assumed by 
Jesus for the moment to satisfy the 
disciples that He had a body, and that 
He was risen. Euthy. Zig. expresses a 
similar view, stating that Jesus ate and 
digested supernaturally (ὑπερφνῶς), and 
that what He did to help the faith of the 
disciples was exceptional in reference to 
the immortal condition of the body, 
which can have nothing to do with 
wounds or food (οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἕτερος μετὰ 
τὴν ἀφθαρσίαν τοῦ σώματος ὠτειλὰς 
ἕξει, ἢ βρῶσιν προσήσεται). 

Vv. 44-49. Parting words.—etwe δὲ 
avrots: it is at this point, if anywhere, 
that room must be made for an extended 
period of occasional intercourse between 
Jesus and His disciples such as Acts i. 3 
speaks of. It is conceivable that what 
follows refers to another occasion. But 
Lk. takes no pains to point that out. 
His narrative reads as if he were still 
relating the incidents of the same meet- 
ing. In his Gospel the post-resurrection 
scenes seem all to fall within a single 
day, that of the resurrection.—otrot οἱ 


λόγοι, etc., these are the words. With: 
Euthy. Zig. we naturally ask: which ? 
(οὗτοι: ποῖοι; and there he leaves it). 
Have we here the concluding fragment 
of a longer discourse not given by Lk., 
possibly the end of a document contain- 
ing a report of the words of Jesus 
generally (so J. Weiss in Meyer)? As- 
they stand in Lk.’s narrative the sense 
must be: these events (death and 
resurrection) fulfil the words I spoke to 
you before my death. If that be the 
meaning the mode of expression is 
peculiar.—év τ. ν. Μωσέως, etc.: Moses, 
Prophets, Psalms, a unity (no article 
before προφήταις or Ψψαλμοῖς) = the 
whole Ο.Τ, canon. So most. Or, these 
three parts of the O.T. the main sources 
of the Messianic proof(Meyer, Hahn,etc.). 
The latter the more likely.—Ver. 45 
points to detailed exposition of Messianic 
texts, generally referred to in ver. 44, as 
in the case of the two brethren.—Ver. 
46 gives the conclusion of the expository 
discourse in Christ’s own words (καὶ 
εἶπεν, ὅτι) = the gist of prophecy is: the 
suffering and resurrection of the Christ, 
and the preaching in the name of the Risen 
One, to all nations, of repentance unto the 
remission of sins.—Ver. 47. ἄρξάμενοι: 
this well-approved reading gives a satis- 
factory sense. We have to suppose a 
pause and then Jesus resuming says to 
the eleven—“ beginning,” the implied 
though not expressed thought being: 
this preaching of repentance to the 
nations is to be your work; or go ye- 


43—53- 


µάρτυρες τούτων. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


651 


49. καὶ ἰδού, ἐγὼ ἀποστέλλωΣ τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν 


τοῦ πατρός µου eh’ ὑμᾶς :' ὑμεῖς δὲ καθίσατε ἐν τῇ πόλει Ἱερουσαλήμ.” 


ἕως οὗ ἐνδύσησθε δύναμιν ἐξ cous.” 3 


5ο. ᾿Εξήγαγε δὲ αὐτοὺς ἔξω 4 ἕως εἰς ὅ Βηθανίαν» καὶ ἐπάρας τὰς 


χεῖρας αὐτοῦ, εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς. 


51. καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εὐλογεῖν 


αὐτὸν αὐτούς, διέστη dw αὐτῶν, καὶ ἀνεφέρετο eis τὸν οὐρανόν.6 


‘ 
52. καὶ αὐτοὶ προσκυνήσαντες αὐτόν,ῖ 


ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς Ἱερουσαλὴμ 


μετὰ χαρᾶς μεγάλης: 53. καὶ ἦσαν διαπαντὸς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, αἰνοῦντες 


καὶ εὐλογοῦντες ὃ τὸν Θεόν. Αμήν.» 


1 και ιδου εγω in ABC al. (W.H.); omit ov SDL (Tisch.). NQcBLXA 33 have 


εξαποστελλω (Tisch., W.H.). 
2 Omit lep. NBCDL codd. vet. Lat. 
4 Omit εξω NBCL 1, 33. 


3 εξ vious δυναµιν in NBCL 33. 
5 For εις NBCDL 1, 33 have προς. 


6 και ανεφ. εις T. ουρ. is wanting in $*Dabcelff%. A‘ Western non-interpola 


tion,” W.H. App. 


Ἰπροσκυν. αυτον wanting in Da be βλ, 


W.H. App. 


8 awouvtes only in D a b e ff? (Tisch.). 


text). 
9 Auny is wanting in $§C*DL 1, 33 al. 


and do this—beginning at Jerusalem.— 
Ver. 48. padprupes τ., the witnessing 
function refers mainly to the resurrec- 
tion, not exclusively as i. 2 shows.— 
Ver. 49. τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν τ. π.: the 
promise is the Spirit spoken of in pro- 
phetic oracles (Is. xliv. i., Joel ii. 28, 
etc.).—ka@loate, sit still, patiently but 
with high hope.—éws οὗ: without ἄν, 
because the power is expected to come 
without fail.évdvonobe: till ye be in- 
vested, a natural figure, and no mere 
Hebraism. Cf. Rom. xiii. 14, Gal. iii. 
27. There may bea reference to warlike 
armour (δίκην πανοπλίας, Euthy. Zig.). 

Vv. 50-53. Farewell! (cf. Mk. xvi. 
19, 20, Acts i. g-12).—Ver. 50. ἐξήγαγε: 
does this imply that Jesus walked 
through the streets of Jerusalem towards 
Bethany visible to all? Assuming that 
it does, some (e.g., Holtz. in H. C.) find 
here a contradiction of the statement in 
Acts x. 41 that Jesus was manifested 
after His resurrection only to chosen 
witnesses.—é&w: the best MSS. leave 
this out, and it seems superfluous after 
ἐξήγ.; but such repetitions of the pre- 
position are by no means uncommon in 
Greek (examples in Bornemann).—éws 
πρὸς (eis T.R.): this reading adopted 
by the revisers they render: “' until they 
were over against,” which brings the in- 
dication of place into harmony with that 
in Acts i. 12. Possibly harmonistic 


A ‘Western non-interpolation,” 


SBC*L have ευλογουντες only (W.H. 


considerations influenced transcription, 
leading, e¢.g., to the adoption of πρὸς 
instead of eis (in AC®X, etc.). Bethany 
lay on the eastern slope of Olivet, about 
a mile beyond the summit.—Ver. 51. 
διέστη, parted; taken by itself the verb 
might point merely to a temporary 
separation, but even apart from the next 
clause, referring to the ascension, it is 
evidently meant to denote a final leave- 
taking.—xal ἀνεφέρετο, etc. : the absence 
of this clause from $§D and some old 
Latin codd. may justify suspicion of a 
gloss, meant to bring the Gospel state- 
ment into line with Acts. But on the 
other hand, that the author of both 
books should make a distinct statement 
concerning the final departure of Jesus 
from the world in the one as well as in 
the other was to be expected.—Ver. 52. 
μετὰ χαρᾶς μεγάλης, with great joy, the 
joy of men convinced that their Lord 
was risen and gone up to glory, and that 
great events were impending in connec- 
tion with the promise of the Spirit.— 
Ver. 53. διὰ παντὸς (χρόνου understood), 
continually, i.e., at the hours of worship 
when the temple was open. By frequent- 
ing the temple the disciples remained 
faithful to the programme ‘“ beginning at 
Jerusalem”. Το the Jew first, and with 
the Jew as far and as long as possible: 
such was Lk.’s habitual attitude; manifest 
throughout in the Gospel and in Acts. 


{ 


γή ή πο, a 
i revit, a μα νο ᾿ [ 
δν παν μη ! 


4 ’ ρ' “a 
14 i κ) 


Μο. 


Ὃ ο ο 
Loy Cena Dott baie 
Al aie συ 


ayy 





THE GOSPEL 
ACCORDING TO 


JOHN 


149200 HHT 


ar ovicwoopa 


AHO 





INTRODUCTION. 


AuTHorsHiP. The importance of ascertaining the authorship of 
the Fourth Gospel can hardly be exaggerated. In no other Gospel 
have we the direct testimony of an eye-witness. Luke expressly 
informs us that his information, although carefully sifted, is at 
second hand. If in Mark we have the reminiscences of the Apostle 
Peter, these are related not by himself but by his companion and 
interpreter John Mark. In the first Gospel we probably have in a 
more or less original form the collection of our Lord’s sayings 
which Papias tells us was made by Matthew; but certainly the 
original work of Matthew did not exactly coincide with our present 
Gospel, and to what extent alteration has been made upon it, it is 
not easy to say. But the Fourth Gospel professes to be the work 
of an eye-witness, and of an eye-witness who enjoyed an intimacy 
with our Lord allowed to none besides. If this claim be true, and if 
the Gospel be indeed the work of the Apostle John, then we have 
not only the narrative of one who saw and was a part of what he 
records, but we have a picture of our Lord by one who knew Him 
better than any one else did. 

On examination the contents of this Gospel are found to be of 
such a character as to make it imperative that we should know 
whether we can trust its statements or not. The author of the 
Gospel not only expresses his own belief in our Lord’s divinity, but 
he puts words into the mouth of Jesus which even on close scrutiny 
seem to many to form an explicit claim to pre-existence and thus to 
imply a claim to divinity. If these claims and statements merely 
reflect the belief and opinion of the third or fourth generation and 
not the very mind of Christ Himself, then they are important mainly 
as historical evidence of a growing tradition and not as giving us the 
firm basis on which the Church may build. But if an apostle was 
responsible for the Gospel, then the probability is that the utterances 
which are referred to Christ nearly, if not absolutely, represent His 
very words, and that the doctrinal position of the author himself is 
not one we can lightly set aside. For, although apostolic author- 


656 INTRODUCTION 


ship does not guarantee absolute accuracy in detail, and although we 
cannot determine the relation of the record tc the words actually 
spoken by Jesus until we have ascertained the object and point of 
view of the writer, yet apostolic authorship not only fixes the date 
within certain limits, but also determines to a considerable extent 
the probable spirit, attitude, means, and object of the writer. 

Critics who find themselves unable to admit apostolic authorship 
lay stress upon the value of the Gospel as exhibiting the faith of the 
Church in the early part of the second century and the grounds on 
which that faith rested. Thus Weizsacker declares that the debates 
regarding the divinity of Christ are a mere reflex of the time in 
which the evangelist lived—a time when, according to Pliny, 
Christians were accustomed to sing hymns to Christ as God and 
were creating a fuller dogma of His divinity. The Johannine Christ 
occupies no relation to the Law, because for the Church of the 
evangelist’s day the Law was no longer of present interest as it had 
been in a former generation. The strife exhibited in the Gospel did 
not belong to the life of Christ, but is a strife of the Ἐρίσοπί. 

Holtzmann is of the same opinion. The Gospel has value as a 
mirror of the times in which the writer lived and of the experiences 
through which the Church had reached that period ; but when we 
proceed to use the Gospel as a record of our Lord’s life we must 
bear in mind that the author meant to portray the image of Christ 
as that image lived in his own soul and in the Church for which he 
wrote ; and as, in his view, it should live in the Church of all times 
as the image of the Godhead. Oscar Holtzmann (Das Fohannes- 
evangelium, 1887, p. 137) believes that the writer sought to write. a 
life of Jesus which should be in keeping with the thought of his 
time; and with this object he used the material furnished by the 
Synoptists and by the oral tradition of his day, correcting and 
amplifying to suit his purpose. 

Schiirer (Vortrige d. theol. Konferenz zu Giessen, 1889, Uber d. 
gegenwartigen Stand d. Fohanneischen Frage) maintains that the 
worth of the fourth Gospel lies, not in its historical narrative, but in 
its expression of the conviction that in Jesus Christ God revealed 
Himself. This is the essence of Christianity ; and this is the funda- 
mental thought of the Gospel. Nowhere in the New Testament is 
it presented with such clearness, with such ardent faith, with such 
victorious confidence. Accordingly, though this Gospel as a source 
of history must take a lower place than the synoptic Gospels, it 
must always have its worth as a witness of the Christian faith. 

Doubtless the Gospel has a value, whoever is its author, and 


INTRODUCTION 657 


whatever its date. But if it is not historically reliable and if the 
utterances attributed to our Lord were not really uttered by Him 
but are merely the creation of the writer and ascribed to the 
Pounder of the Church to account for and justify some of its 
developments, plainly its value is widely different from that which 
attaches to a reliable record of the words and actions of Jesus. 
The faith and life of the Church of the second century is not 
normative ; and if in this Gospel all that we have is a reflex of that 
life given in terms of the life of Christ, we have, no doubt, a very 
interesting document, but not a document on which we can build 
our knowledge of our Lord. Nay, professing, as this record does, to 
be historically reliable, the Church has been throughout its history 
gravely in error regarding the claims of its Founder, and this error 
lies at the door of the author of the Gospel. It is of the first 
importance, therefore, that we ascertain whether the writer had the 
means of being historically trustworthy, whether he was an eye- 
witness or was entirely dependent on others for his information. 

1. External evidence in favour of Fohannine authorship. In 
examining the Christian literature of the second century with a view 
to ascertain the belief of the Church regarding the authorship of 
the Fourth Gospel, it must be borne in mind that there are many 
instances in which the classical writers of antiquity were not quoted 
for some centuries after their works were published. The character 
and position of the New Testament writings, however, made it likely 
that they would at once and frequently be referred to. But although 
the second century was prolific of Christian writings, their extant 
remains are unfortunately scanty. We might have expected definite 
information from the exegetical writings of Papias and Basileides, 
and possibly some allusions in the histories of Hegesippus, but of 
these and other important documents only the names and a few 
extracts survive. It is also to be borne in mind that the mode of 
quotation in vogue at that time was different from our own. Books 
were not so plentiful, and they were more cumbrous. Accordingly 
there was more quotation from memory and little of the exactness 
which in our day is considered desirable. It was a common practice 
with early writers to weave Scriptural language into their own text 
without pausing to say whence these allusions were derived. The 
consequence is that while such allusions may seem to one reader to 
carry evidence that the writer is making use of such and such a 
book of Scripture, it is always open to a more sceptical reader to 
say that the inexactness of the allusion is rather a proof that the 
book of Scripture had not been seen, and that some traditional 

: 42 


658 INTRODUCTION 


saying was the source of the quotation. And even where explicit 
quotations occur, no light may be thrown on the authorship of the 
book quoted, except in so far as they indicate the date of its com- 
position. 

It is not questioned that in the last quarter of the second century 
the Fourth Gospel was accepted by the Church as the work of the 
Apostle John, and was recognised as canonical. This is a fact not 
questioned, but its importance may easily be underrated and its 
- significance missed. Opponents of the Johannine authorship have 
declared it to be “totally unnecessary to account” for this remark- 
able consent of opinion. But the very fact that a Gospel so 
obviously different from the synoptic Gospels should have been 
unanimously received as Apostolic is a weighty testimony. Its 
significance has been admirably summarised by Archdeacon Watkins 
(Bampton Lectures, p. 47): “It is not that the Fourth Gospel was 
known and read as the work of St. John in the year Α.Ρ. 190 or 180 
or 170; but that it was known and read through all the extent of 
Christendom, in churches varying in origin and language and history, 
in Lyons and Rome, in Carthage and Alexandria, in Athens and 
Corinth, in Ephesus and Sardis and Hierapolis, in Antioch and 
Edessa; that the witness is of Churches to a sacred book which was 
read in their services, and about which there could be no mistake, 
and of individuals who had sacrificed the greatest good of temporal 
life, and were ready to sacrifice life itself as a witness to its truth ; 
that these individual witnesses were men of culture and rich mental 
endowment, with full access to materials for judgment, and full power 
to exercise that judgment; that their witness was given in the face 
of hostile heathenism and opposing heresy, which demanded caution 
in argument and reserve in statement; and that this witness is clear, 
definite, unquestioned ”. 

To this universal consent the sole exceptions were Marcion and 
the Alogi, and possibly Gaius.! During the decade Α.Ρ. 160-170 
there existed in Asia Minor some persons who discovered in the 
Gospel traces of Gnostic and Montanistic teaching. They held their 
place in the Christian Church, but discarded the Johannine writings 
and ascribed them to Cerinthus. Epiphanius gives them the name 
of "Ἄλογοι [unreasonable, irrational] because they did not accept the 
Logos proclaimed by John.2- Harnack justly maintains that this is 


1 See Rendel Harris’ Hermas in Arcadia and other Essays, 1896. 

2 Epiphan., Haeres., 51, 3, defines this heresy as ἀποβάλλονσαν Ιωάννου τὰς 
βίβλους. “Eel οὖν τὸν λόγον οὐ δέχονται τὸν παρὰ “lwdvvov κεκηρυγµένον, 
"λογοι κληθήσονται. See Harnack, Das N. Test. um ᾱ. ¥ahr 200, pp. 58-70; 


INTRODUCTION 659 


“of the highest significance” for the history of the Canon; but it 
has little or no significance for the criticism of the Gospel, because 
the rejection of the Gospel proceeded wholly on dogmatic grounds. 
Its ascription to Cerinthus, an impossible author, betrays the reck- 
lessness of the judgment pronounced; while the naming of a 
contemporary and fellow-townsman of the Apostle may be accepted 
as an indication of the true date of the Gospel. Some of the 
scholars who are best informed regarding the second century, such 
as Hilgenfeld and Salmon, are inclined to believe that no such sect. 
as the Alogi ever existed, although one or two individuals may have 
held the opinions identified with that nickname. If they existed, their 
rejection of the writings of John demonstrates that previous to their 
time these writings had been accepted as Apostolic and authoritative.! 
Marcion’s neglect of the Johannine books is equally unimportant for 
the criticism of the Gospel. 

In the writings of Irenaeus, who was born, according to Lipsius, 
about Α.Ρ. 130, and whose great work against Gnosticism may be 
dated between 180-185, the Fourth Gospel is referred to the Apostle 
John and is regarded as canonical. In a well-known passage 
(Contra Haer., \11., xi., 8) this representative writer even argues that 
in the nature of things there can be neither more nor fewer than 
four Gospels, as there are four zones of the world in which we live, 
and four principal winds. In accordance with this natural fourfold- 
ness the Word who designs all things has given us the Gospel under 
four aspects but united and unified by one Spirit. Additional 
importance has been given to this statement by the suggestion of 
Dr. Taylor of Cambridge that Irenaeus borrowed this idea from 
Hermas. This writer, who belongs to a much earlier period than 
Irenaeus, in speaking of the Church says: ‘“‘ Whereas thou sawest 
her seated on a couch, the position is a firm one; for the couch has 
four feet and standeth firmly, for the world too is upheld by means 


Watkins’ Β. L., p. 123; Salmon’s Introd., p. 229; Sanday’s B. L., p. 64 ; and cf. 
Irenaeus, Haer., III., xi., 9. 


1 Dr. Plummer, after discussing the rejection of the Gospel by Marcion and the 
Alogi, proceeds: ‘ All this tends to show that if the Fourth Gospel was rejected in 
certain quarters for a time, this tells little or nothing against its genuineness. 
Indeed it may fairly be said to tell the other way; for it shows that the universal 
recognition of the Gospel, which we find existing from a.D. 170 onwards, was no 
mere blind enthusiasm, but a victory of truth over baseless, though not unnatural, 
suspicion. Moreover, the fact that these overwary Christians assigned the Gospel 
to Cerinthus is evidence that the Gospel was in their opinion written by a contem- 
porary of St. John. Toconcede this is to concede the whole question” (Cambridge 
Greek Test. ; Gospel acc. to St. Fohn, nw. 24). 


660 INTRODUCTION 


of four elements”? If we could accept Dr. Taylor’s view and 
believe that the four Gospels are here alluded to, we should have 
the earliest testimony to our four canonical Gospels; but it may so 
reasonably be doubted whether the reference is to four Gospels that 
the passage cannot be appealed to without hesitation. 

But it is the connection of Irenaeus with Polycarp which has 
always been considered the significant element in his testimony. 
Eusebius (H. E., v., 20) has preserved a letter written by Irenaeus to 
Plorinus, in which he reminds him how they had together listened to 
Polycarp in their youth: “I distinctly remember the incidents of 
that time better than events of recent occurrence; for the lessons 
received in childhood, growing with the growth of the soul, become 
identified with it; so that I can describe the very place in which the 
blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his goings out 
and his comings in, and his manner of life and his personal appear- 
ance, and the discourses which he held before the people ; and how 
he would describe his intercourse with John and with the rest who 
had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words. And what 
were the accounts he had heard from them about the Lord, and about 
His miracles, and about His teaching, how Polycarp, as having 
received them from eye-witnesses of the life of the Word [τῆς ζωῆς 
τοῦ Λόγου], used to give an account harmonising on all points with the 
Scriptures.”2 The Scripture in which “the life of the Word” can 
be traced is the Fourth Gospel. Polycarp does not refer his hearers 
to that Gospel, because having himself been a pupil of John, he pre- 
ferred to relate what he had heard from him. But Irenaeus recog- 
nised that Polycarp’s oral tradition was in harmony with the Gospel. 
Besides, John lived to the times of Trajan, whose reign began in Α.Ρ. 
98, while Polycarp was born not later than Α.Ρ. 70, and was put to 
death in 156, so that the first thirty years of his life coincided with 
the last years of John’s, and the last thirty years with the youth of 
Irenaeus. This being so, can it fairly be said to be likely that after 
such intimacy with Polycarp as Irenaeus claims, he should not know 
whether John had written a Gospel or not? Is it conceivable that 
a young man of an intelligent and inquiring turn of mind should 
have been in daily communication with a pupil of the Apostle’s, and 
should never have discovered the origin of the most remarkable 
document of primitive Christianity ? 

But Irenaeus is not the earliest writer who ascribes the Fourth. 


* See Taylor’s Hermas and the Four Gospels. Cambridge, 1892. 
2 This argument is put in an interesting and conclusive form by Dr. Dale in his 
Living Christ and the Four Gospels, pp. 149-151, 281-284. 


INTRODUCTION 66% 


Gospel to the Apostle John. This distinction belongs to Theophilus 
of Antioch. His treatise, Ad Autolycum, was probably of an earlier 
date than Irenaeus’ great work, and in this treatise, speaking of 
inspired men, he says: “ one of whom, John, says, In the beginning 
was the Word”. 

The date of the Muratorian Canon is so much debated that it 
cannot be cited as a witness anterior to Irenaeus. But it records an 
interesting tradition of the origin of the Gospel. ‘ The fourth of 
the Gospels is by the disciple John. He was urged by his fellow 
disciples and bishops and said, ‘ Fast with me this day and for three 
days and whatever shall be revealed to any of us let us relate it’. 
The same night it was revealed to the Apostle Andrew that John 
should write the whole in his own name, and that all the rest should 
revise it.” Whatever may be thought of this tradition, it is at all 
events evidence that for some considerable time prior to the publica- 
tion of the Muratorian Canon the Fourth Gospel had been accepted 
as the work of John. 

The esteem in which the Fourth Gospel was held about the 
middle of the second century is evinced by the place it holds in the 
Diatessaron of Tatian. This harmony of the four Gospels opens 
with a portion of the Fourth Gospel. What may reasonably be 
gathered from the existence of such a work is fairly stated by 
Harnack in his article on Tatian in the Encyc. Brit.; ‘‘ We learn 
from the Diatessaron that about Α.Ρ. 160 our four Gospels had 
already taken a place of prominence in the Church, and that no 
others had done so; that in particular the Fourth Gospel had already 
taken a fixed place alongside of the three synoptics’’. But this is 
too modest an inference. Prof. Sanday has shown that the text 
used in the composition of the Diatessaron does not represent the 
original autograph of the Gospel, nor a first copy of it, but that 
several copyings must have intervened between the original and 
Tatian’s text; that in fact this text was derived “ from a copy that 
is already very corrupt, a copy perhaps farther removed (if every 
aberration is taken into account) from the original text than the text 
which was committed to print in the sixteenth century. This is a fact 
of the very highest significance, and it is one that the negative critics 
in Germany have, to the best of my belief, entirely overlooked.”! The 
date of the Gospel is thus pushed back considerably. 

With the writings of Tatian’s master, Justin, we pass from the 
second into the first half of the second century. Dr. Hort places his 


1 See also Harris’ Preliminary Siudy, etc., p. 56. 


662 INTRODUCTION 


martyrdom in the year Α.Ρ. 149, and his writings may, with Lightfoot, 
be dated in the fifth decade of the century. That he made use of 
the Fourth Gospel, although hotly contested a few years ago, is now, 
since the investigations of Drummond and Abbot, scarcely denied.} 
And indeed several passages in Justin’s writings are indisputable 
echoes of the Gospel. In the Dialogue with Trypho (c. 105) he 
expressly states that his knowledge of Jesus as the only begotten of 
the Father and as the Logos was derived from the Gospels, that is, 
from the Fourth Gospel, for none of the synoptics speak of the Logos. 
In his First Apology (ο. 63) he says of the Jews: ‘They are justly 
upbraided by Christ Himself as knowing neither the Father nor the 
Son”. Inthe same Apology (ο. 61), in explaining baptism, he says: 
“ Ror Christ also said, Except ye be born again ye shall in no wise 
enter into the Kingdom of Heaven”. Other passages have a similar 
bearing. 

In the Apostolic Fathers we find no express references to the 
Fourth Gospel, but there are not wanting echoes which indicate a 
familiarity with its teaching. Thus in the epistles of Ignatius written 
in the year Α.Ρ. 110 while the writer was on his way to martyrdom, 
are found such expressions as “the Spirit . . . knoweth whence it 
cometh and whither it goeth,”’ an obvious reminiscence of our Lord’s 
conversation with Nicodemus. And when we find Ignatius speaking 
of Jesus as “the door of the Father,” “the Shepherd,” “ the Son 
who is His Word,” the probability is that these expressions were 
derived from the Gospel. 

Polycarp’s one epistle dates from the same year Α.Ρ. 110. Itisa 
brief letter, and no reference to the Fourth Gospel occurs in it. But 
he quotes from the First Epistle of John, and as no one doubts that 
the Gospel and the Epistle are from the same hand, it can at any 
rate be concluded that the writer of the Gospel “ flourished before 
Polycarp wrote ”’. 

Papias of Hierapolis, although not usually numbered among the 
Apostolic Fathers, was a contemporary of Polycarp, and his life 
overlapped that of the Apostle John by about twenty-five years. He 
wrote the earliest known commentary, entitled An Exposition of 
our Lord’s Oracles. Most unfortunately this book is lost, and 
among the many rich discoveries which modern research is making 
none could be more valuable than the discovery of this work of 
Papias. The fact remains that he did write it, and therefore had 
some written material to proceed upon. And significant allusion is 

1 See Abbot’s Critical Essays; Purves, Test. of ¥ustin; Norton, Genusneness 
of the Gospels. 


INTRODUCTION 663 


made to this work in an old Latin argument prefixed to the Gospel 
in a MS. of the ninth century, which says: “The Gospel of John 
was revealed and given to the churches by John while he still 
remained in the body, as one named Papias of Hierapolis, a beloved 
disciple of John, related in his five books of expositions ”’. 

The testimony of heretics is equally decisive. From the decade 
A.D. 160-170 we receive a significant witness in the commentary on 
the Gospel of John by Heracleon, a pupil or companion of Valentinus,* 
(γνώριµον is Origen’s word). Mr. Brooke, who edited the extant 
portions of this commentary for Armitage Robinson’s Texts and 
Studies, arrives at the conclusion that it must be dated shortly 
after the death of Valentinus, that is to say, not much later than 
A.D. 160. ‘The rise of commentaries shows an advanced stage in 
the history of the text of the Fourth Gospel” (Lightfoot, Bzbl. 
Essays, p. 111). And the reason for Heracleon’s choosing this 
Gospel as the subject of a commentary is that Valentinus and his 
school borrowed from it much of their phraseology, and hoped by 
putting their own interpretation on it to gain currency for their 
views. We have, then, this remarkable circumstance that shortly 
after the middle of the second century the Fourth Gospel occupied 
such a position of authority in the Church that the Gnostics con- 
sidered it of importance to secure its voice in favour of their views. 
No wonder that even Volkmar should exclaim: “Ah! Great God! 
if between Α.Ρ. 125 and 155 a commentary was composed on John’s 
Gospel such as that of which Origen has preserved considerable 
extracts, what yet remains to be discussed? It is very certain that 
it is all over with the critical thesis of the composition of the Fourth 
Gospel in the middle of the second century.” ? 

But there is evidence that even an earlier Gnostic teacher made 
use of this Gospel. Hippolytus (Philos., vii., 22), in giving an account 
of the opinions of Basileides, who flourished at Alexandria about the 
year A.D. 125, quotes him in the following terms: “ This,” says he 
(t.e., Basileides), “is that which is said in the Gospels, ‘That was the 
true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world’ ”. 
The words are cited precisely as they stand in the Fourth Gospel, 
and as they are not words of Jesus, which might have been handed 
down through some other channel, but words of the evangelist 
himself, they prove that the Gospel existed before the year a.p. 125, 
The attempt to evade this conclusion by the suggestion that 


1 Valentinus himself used “ integro instrumento,” the whole N.T. as Tertullian 
received it. Tert., Praescr., 38. 
2 See Reynolds, Pulpit Com., p. 20. 


664 INTRODUCTION 


Hippolytus is quoting the followers of Basileides rather than himself 
has been finally disposed of by Matthew Arnold (God and the Bible, 
268-9). But even Basileides was not the earliest Gnostic who used 
this Gospel. Hippolytus gives an account of the previously existing 
sects, the Naasseni and Peratae, which proves that they made large 
use of this Gospel. Already in the earliest years of the second 
century the Fourth Gospel was an authoritative document. 

What must necessarily be inferred from this use of the Gospel 
by the Gnostics of the second century? The conclusion drawn by 
Ezra Abbot is as follows: “It was then generally received both by 
Gnostics and their opponents between the years a.p. 120 and 1950. 
What follows? It follows that the Gnostics of that date received it 
because they could not help it. They would not have admitted the 
authority of a book, which could be reconciled with their doctrines 
only by the most forced interpretation, if they could have destroyed 
its authority by denying its genuineness. Its genuineness could then 
be easily ascertained Ephesus was one of the principal cities of the 
Eastern world, the centre of extensive commerce, the metropolis of 
Asia Minor. Hundreds, if not thousands, of people were living who 
had known the Apostle John. The question whether he, the beloved 
disciple, had committed to writing his recollections of his Master’s 
life and teaching, was one of the greatest interest. The fact of the 
reception of the Fourth Gospel as his work at so early a date, by 
parties so violently opposed to each other, proves that the evidence 
of its genuineness was decisive.” 1 

The Clementine Homilies and the Testaments of the Twelve Pa- 
triarchs, which respectively represent the Ebionite and Nazarene 
branches of Judaistic Christianity, betray familiarity, if not with the 
Fourth Gospel, certainly with its teaching and phraseology. 

In the face of this external evidence, it has been found impossible 
to maintain the late date which was ascribed to the Gospel by 
several eminent critics of the last generation. There can be no 
doubt that the Gospel existed in the earliest years of the second 
century, and that it was even then esteemed authoritative. That the 
Apostle John was its author, is nowhere explicitly stated before the 
middle of the century; but that this was from the first believed, may 
legitimately be inferred both from the esteem in which it was held, 
and from the fact that no other name was ever connected with the 
Gospel until the impossible Cerinthian authorship was suggested by 
the insignificant and biassed sect of the Alogi. Schiirer, indeed, says 


1 Critical Essays, p. 01ο 


INTRODUCTION 665 


that “the utmost one can admit in an unprejudiced way, is that the 
external evidence is evenly balanced pro and con, and leads to no 
decision. Perhaps, however, it would be truer to say it is more un- 
favourable than favourable to the authenticity.’”’ Such a conclusion 
can only excite astonishment. 

2. Internal evidence of Fohannine authorship. The internal 
evidence has usually been grouped under four heads, showing 
respectively that the author was (1) a Jew, (2) a Palestinian, (3) an 
eye-witness, (4) the Apostle John. 

(1) That the writer was a Jew is proved by his Hebraistic style, 
by his knowledge of Hebrew and Aramaic, and by his familiarity 
with Jewish traditions, ideas, modes of thought, expectations, 
customs. Although written in Greek which is neither awkward nor 
ungrammatical, the Gospel uses a small number of words and only 
such as are familiar in ordinary conversation. The vocabulary is 
much more limited than that of the well-educated Paul, and the 
style reveals none of the nicety found in the Epistle to the Hebrews. 
One chief distinction between Hebrew and Greek style is that the 
Greek writer by means of multitudinous particles exhibits with 
precision the course of thought by which each clause is connected 
with that which goes before it: the Hebrew writer contents himself 
with laying thought alongside of thought and leaving it to the reader 
to discover the connection. The most casual reader of the Rourth 
Gospel speedily finds that the difficulty of understanding it is the 
difficulty of perceiving the sequence of the clauses. Any one 
accustomed to a Greek style would on reading the Fourth Gospel 
conclude that its author was not familiar with Greek literature. 

It would also naturally be concluded that the writer was a Jew 
from his inserting translations of Aramaic names, as in i. 38, i. 41, 
1, 42, ix. 7, xix. 13, xix. 17, xx. 21; and especially from his familiarity 
with Jewish customs, ideas, and institutions. Thus he knows that it 
is a Jewish custom to sit under the fig tree, i. 49; to have water-pots 
for purposes of purification, ii.6; to embalm the dead, xix. 40; to 
wash the feet before meals, xiii.4. He is familiar with Jewish ideas, 
as that it is wrong for a Rabbi to speak with a woman, iv. 27, that 
disease is the result of sin, ix. 2; that Elias was to come before the 
Messiah, i. 21; that it defiles a Jew to enter a Gentile dwelling, 
xviii. 29. So intimate an acquaintance with the Jewish Messianic 
ideas as is shown in chap. vii. cannot easily be ascribed to any but a 
Jew. Jewish institutions are also well known: Levites and priests 


} See further in Lightioot’s Bibl. Essays, p. 16 ff. Weiss, Introd., ii., 359. 


666 INTRODUCTION 


are distinguished, i. 19; the composition and action of the Sanhedrim 
is well understood; the less frequented feasts (ἐγκαίνια, x. 22) are 
known. He is also aware of the chief point in dispute between Jews 
and Samaritans, iv. 20; the length of time the Temple has been in 
building, ii. 21; that synagogue and temple are the favourite resort 
of teachers, xviii. 20.1 

Two objections, however, have been raised. Ist. It is said 
that the author throughout his Gospels betrays a marked antipathy 


to the Jews. He uses the name as a recognised designation of * 


the enemies of Jesus; “the Jews” sought to kill Him; “no man 
spake openly of Him for fear of ‘the Jews’”. They are spoken of 
as “the children of the devil’. This objection, however, is base- 
less. In the synoptic Gospels Jesus, Himself a Jew, is represented 
as pronouncing invectives against the leaders of the people quite as 
strong as any to be found in the Fourth Gospel. In John all the 
apostles are Jews, and it is in this Gospel the great saying is preserved 
that “salvation is of the Jews”. 2nd. Matthew Arnold and the 
author of Supernatural Religion have maintained that the Jews 
and their usages are spoken of in this Gospel as if they belonged to 
a race different from the writer’s. ‘The water-pots at Cana are set 
‘after the manner of purifying of the ews’; ... ‘now the Fews' 
passover was nigh at hand’.... It seems almost impossible to 
think that a Jew born and bred—a man like the Apostle John— 
could ever have come to speak so... . A Few talking of the Fews: 
passover and of a dispute of some of John’s disciples with a Few 
about purifying. It is like an Englishman writing of the Derby as 
the English people’s Derby, or talking of a dispute between some of 
Mr. Cobden’s disciples and an Englishman about free trade. An 
Englishman would never speak so.”? An Englishman who had for 
many years been resident abroad and who was writing for foreigners 
would use precisely such forms of expression. 

(2) The author was a Palestinian. A Jew of the dispersion, a 
Hellenist, would probably betray himself, not only by writing a freer 
Greek style, but by showing a less intimate knowledge of the 
localities of the Holy Land, and by using the LXX., and not the 
original Hebrew, in quoting from the Old Testament. In regard to 
the evidence afforded by a knowledge of localities, Professor Ramsay 
lays down the following: “It is impossible for any one to invent a 
tale, whose scene lies in a foreign land, without betraying in slight 


1 The best statement of this part of the evidence will be found in Oscar Holtz- 


mann’s Fohan., pp. 188-191. 
2 God and the Bible, p. 251. 


INTRODUCTION 667 


details his ignorance of the scenery and circumstances amid which 
the event is described as taking place. Unless the writer studiously 
avoids details, and confines himself to names and generalities, he is 
certain to commit numerous errors. Even the most laborious and 
minute study of the circumstances of the country, in which he is to 
lay his scene, will not preserve him from such errors. He must live 
long, and observe carefully in the country, if he wishes to invent 
a tale which will not betray his ignorance in numberless details. 
Allusions of French or German authors to English life supply the 
readiest illustration of this principle.” Now the author of the Fourth 
Gospel betrays that intimate acquaintance with the localities of 
Palestine, which could only be possessed by a resident. He de- 
scribes Bethany as “nigh unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs 
off’. Who, but one who had often walked it, would be likely to let 
that exact indication drop from his pen? Itis the unconscious 
gratuitousness of full knowledge. In chap. vi. he has before his 
mind’s eye the movements round the Sea of Galilee, which he de- 
scribes. He is familiar with the Temple, with its porches and 
cloisters, and he knows the side of the building which people chose 
in cold weather. He passes from Jerusalem to the villages around, 
crossing brooks, and visiting gardens without once stumbling in his 
topographical details. This sure sign of a resident he constantly 
betrays, he adds to the name of a town the additional specification 
by which it might be distinguished from others of the same name: 
“ Bethany beyond Jordan,” “ Aenon near to Salim,” “ Bethsaida the 
city of Andrew and Peter,” and so forth. 

In a matter of this kind few are more qualified to judge than 
Bishop Lightfoot, who spent so much of his own life in archzological 
research. Here is his judgment: ‘Let us place ourselves in the 
position of one who wrote at the middle of the second century, after 
the later Roman invasion had swept off the scanty gleanings of the 
past which had been spared from the earlier. Let us ask how a 
romancer so situated is to make himself acquainted with the inci- 
dents, the localities, the buildings, the institutions, the modes of 
thought and feeling which belonged to this past age, and (as we 
may almost say) this bygone people. Let it be granted that here 
and there he must stumble upon a historical fact, that in one or two 
particulars he might reproduce a national characteristic. More than 
this would be beyond his reach. For, it will be borne in mind, he 
would be placed at a great disadvantage, compared with a modern 
writer; he would have to reconstruct history without these various 
appliances, maps and plates, chronological tables, books of travel, 


668 INTRODUCTION 


by which the author of a historical novel is so largely assisted in the 
present day ” (Expositor, Jan., 1890, p. 13). 

A few years ago the writer’s ignorance of the localities he men- 
tioned was insisted upon. But since the Palestinian Survey the 
tables are turned. It is now admitted that competent knowledge 
of the localities is shown. Schiirer, 6.6., says: ‘“ Among serious 
difficulties we need no longer reckon at the present day the 
supposed ignorance of Palestinian and Jewish matters from which 
Bretschneider and Baur inferred that the author was neither a 
Palestinian nor in any sense a Jew. The geographical errors 
and ignorance of things Jewish have more and more shrunk to 
a minimum.” The argument now is, “admitting that the writer 
shows local knowledge, this does not prove that he was a native 
of Palestine. He may have derived his knowledge from books, 
or from occasional residence in the country.” Professor Sanday 
has been at pains to show that any knowledge which could 
have been derived from such geographers as Pomponius Mela, 
Ptolemy, or Strabo, was of the scantiest possible description. Holtz- 
mann, though strongly opposed to the Johannine authorship, admits 
that the topographical knowledge indicates that the author had 
visited the holy places, but not that he was a Palestinian. He had 
then been a resident in Palestine, knew the places he spoke about, 
and so far was not romancing. 

One distinction of the Jew of the dispersion was his use of the 
LXX., instead of the Hebrew Bible. What Old Testament then 
does the writer of the Fourth Gospel use? He is found to depart 
from the LXX., and to use language more closely representing the 
Hebrew. Until a very few years ago, this was accepted as proof 
that he read the Hebrew, and used it. But recently there has been 
a growing conviction that during the Apostolic Age other versions 
of the Old Testament, or of some books and portions of it, were 
extant in Greek. And it is argued that John might have used some 
of these. But when it is found that in some of his quotations his 
language is closer to the original than that of the LXX., or than the 
versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, it is certainly 
reasonable to conclude that he used the Hebrew, and translated for 
himself, and was, therefore, a native Palestinian.? 

(3) There is reason to believe that the author was an eye-witness 
of the events he relates. In the first place, the writer claims to be 
an eye-witness. This is surely of some account. The expression 


4 See this handled with his usual fairness by Professor Sanday, Expositor, 
March, 1802. 


INTRODUCTION 669 


‘‘we beheld His glory” (i. 14) need not be pressed, although con 
sidering the analogous statement of 1 John i. 1, it may very well be 
maintained that the writer had with his bodily eyes seen the mani- 
festation of his Lord’s glory. But in xix. 35 we have an explicit 
claim: ‘‘ He that saw it bare record, and his record is true, and he 
knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe”. The words 
‘“‘he knoweth that he saith true” could hardly have been inserted 
by any other hand than that of the eye-witness himself. In xxi. 24 
we read: ‘‘ This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and 
wrote these things”. Whether this note was added by the writer 
himself, or by another hand, certainly the intention is to identify the 
writer with an eye-witness and participator of the events recorded. 
We are thus confronted with the alternative: either an eye-witness 
wrote this Gospel, or a forger whose genius for truth and for lying 
are alike inexplicable. As Renan says (Vie, xxvii.): ‘‘ L’auteur y 
parle toujours comme témoin oculaire; il veut se faire passer 
pour l’Apotre Jean. Si donc cet ouvrage n’est pas réellement de 
Vapdtre, il faut admettre une supercherie que l’auteur s’avouait 4 
lui-méme.” 

This claim is abundantly confirmed by the character of the Gospel. 
For we find in it such a multitude of detail as gratuitously invites 
the detection of error. Not only are individuals named, and so de- 
scribed that we seem to know them, but frequently there are added 
specifications of time and place which obviously are the involuntary 
superfluity of information which flows almost unconsciously from a 
full memory. Such details are: the hour at which Jesus sat on the 
well, the number and size of the water-pots at the marriage at Cana, 
the weight and value of the ointment, the number of fish at the last 
cast, the hour at which the nobleman’s son began to amend, the 
hour at which Jesus took the two inquirers into His own lodging. 

Circumstantiality can, no doubt, be given to a narrative by a 
Defoe or a Swift. But among the Jews the writing of fiction was 
not cultivated ; and besides, the circumstantial detail of this Gospel 
does not belong to the world of imagination, but attaches to real 
objects and events, and can in many instances be verified. If in 
these instances the detail is found to be accurate, the presumption 
is that accuracy characterises those also which cannot so easily be 
checked ; and that, therefore, the circumstantiality is due to the 
fact that the writer was an eye-witness of what he records. 

(4) This Palestinian Jew who was himself an eye-witness of the 
ministry of Jesus was the Apostle John. In xxi. 24 the writer of the 
Gospel is identified with the disciple whom Jesus loved. This disciple: 


670 INTRODUCTION 


was certainly one of the seven named in xxi. 2, who appear as the 
actors in the scene there recorded. Of these seven there were three 
who frequently appear in the other Gospels as the intimates of 
Jesus. These are Peter, James, and John. But Peter cannot have 
been the disciple in question, for in this chapter Peter and that 
disciple are spoken of separately. Neither can James be the person 
meant, for his early death precludes the idea of his being the author 
of the Gospel. It remains that John was the disciple whom Jesus 
loved,! the author of the Fourth Gospel. And however we interpret 
the intention of John in using this circumlocution to designate 
himself, it must not be overlooked that its employment is evidence of 
the Johannine authorship. In the other Gospels John is frequently 
spoken of by name. In this Gospel John is not once named, 
although from no Gospel do we gather such vivid descriptions of 
the Apostles. Certainly it is a most natural and sufficient explana- 
tion of this fact to suppose that John was the author of the Gospel. 

Objections. But to this conclusion many critics demur. Since 
Bretschneider it has been continually asserted that this does not 
exhaust the internal evidence, and that there is that in the Fourth 
Gospel which makes it impossible to refer it to the Apostle John. 
There are evidences of dependence on the synoptists, inconsistent 
with the hypothesis that it was written by an Apostle who himself 
had been an eye-witness ; of a universalism inconsistent with the 
fact that the Apostle John was a pillar of the Jewish Christian 
Church ; and of a philosophical colouring which does not favour the 
idea that the author was a Galilean fisherman.? 

The two latter objections are not formidable. Schirer shows 
with considerable force that up to the time of the Apostolic conven- 
tion in Jerusalem John was a Jewish Christian and an upholder of 
the law, whereas the author of this Gospel knows the law only as 
the law of the Jews. 15 it likely, he asks, that one who during the 
first twenty years of his ministry maintained the law would in his 
latter years so entirely repudiate it? “If during this long period the 
influence of the preaching of Jesus had not made John a liberal, was 
such a transformation probable at a still later time ?’’ That sucha 
transformation was very probable will be the answer of those who 
consider that between the earlier and the later period the Jewish 


‘“ There is no trace that in Christian antiquity this title ever suggested any 
one but John” (Ezra Abbot, Critical Essays, p. 73). 

? For a brief but conclusive answer to these objections, see Dale’s Living Christ 
and the Four Gospels, 149-152. 


INTRODUCTION 671 


economy had come to an end and that John had become the successor 
of Paul in a thoroughly Greek city. 

The traces of philosophical colouring have been exaggerated and 
misinterpreted. In the Platonic dialogues the circumstances, the 
speakers, and their utterances are all either created by the writer or 
employed to proclaim his own philosophy. To suppose that the 
Gospel was composed in some analogous manner is to misconceive 
it. No doubt in Ephesus John was brought into contact with forms 
of thought and with speculations which were little heard of in 
Palestine. And in so far as the ideas then prevalent were true, an 
intelligent Christian mind would necessarily bring them into relation 
with the manifestation of God: in Christ. This process would bring 
to the surface much of the significance both of the life and teaching 
of Jesus which hitherto had been unnoticed and unused. The process 
is apparent in the epistles of Paul as well as in the Fourth Gospel. 
The idea of the Logos was a Jewish-Alexandrian idea, and that the 
author sought to attach his Gospel-to this idea is unquestionable, but 
it is a very long and insecure step from this to conclude that he was 
himself trained in the Hellenistic philosophy of Alexandria. The 
Logos idea is not essential to the Fourth Gospel; it is rather the 
Sonship idea that is essential. But the term and the idea of the 
Logos are used by the author to introduce his subject to the Greek 
readers. As Harnack says: “The prologue is not the key to the 
understanding of the Gospel, but is rather intended to prepare the 
Hellenistic reader for its perusal”. After the introduction the Logos 
is never again referred to. The philosophy one finds in the Gospel 
is not the metaphysics of the schools, but the insight of the con- 
templative, brooding spirit which finds in Christ the solvent of all 
problems. 

The originality of the author of the Fourth Gospel has recently 
been vigorously assailed.2 It has been shown that, in certain 
passages, he is dependent for his phraseology on the Synoptic 
Gospels; and it has been urged that an Apostle and eye-witness 
would not thus derive from others an account of what he had him- 
self seen. As a general rule it is of course true that an eye-witness 
would depend on his own reminiscences; but, presumably, no one 
denies that John knew and used the Synoptic Gospels; and that 
phrases which occur in them should have remained in his memory is 
not surprising. Even in the passages where these borrowings occur, 


) Zeitschrift f. T. und K., 2nd Jahrg., p. 230. 
* See especially Oscar Holtzmann, Fohannesevang., p. 6 th. 


672 INTRODUCTION 


there are divergences so considerable as to indicate an original 
witness. Por, to interpret these divergences, as Oscar Holtzmann 
does, as misunderstandings of his sources, is rather, if it may without 
offence be said, a misunderstanding of John. It may rather be said 
that, in several instances, we find additions and corrections which 
are requisite for the understanding of the Synoptists. From the 
first three Gospels the reader might gather that our Lord’s ministry 
extended over only one year; the Fourth Gospel definitely mentions 
three Passovers (ii. 13; vi. 4; xiii. 1), with a possible fourth (v. 1). 
The probabilities here are certainly in favour of the representation 
of the Fourth Gospel, and it may be shown that even in the 
Synoptic narratives a longer ministry is implied than that which they 
expressly mention. Again, the ministry in Jerusalem, as recounted 
in the Fourth Gospel, alone enables us to understand the lament 
which finds a place in the Synoptics, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how 
often,” etc. The call of those who afterwards became Apostles, the 
arrival in Galilee of scribes from Jerusalem to watch Jesus, and 
other incidents recorded by the Synoptists, only become fully in- 
telligible when read in the light of the narrative given in the Fourth 
Gospel. Evidently the author of this Gospel had, at least on some 
points, access to more accurate and complete information than that 
which was accessible to the other evangelists. 

The independence of the Fourth Gospel is further shown by its 
omission of such remarkable scenes as the Temptation, the Trans- 
figuration, the Agony in the Garden, and by its introduction of places 
and persons unnamed in the other Gospels; as, Aenon, Salim, 
Sychar, Bethany beyond Jordan, Nicodemus, Nathanael, the Samari- 
tan woman, the man born blind, the dead Lazarus, Annas. The 
most natural way to account for this is to suppose that we have 
here the additional information which an Apostle would necessarily 
possess. The alternatives are that we must refer it to the creative 
imagination of the writer, or to the tradition of our Lord’s life which 
had been handed down irrespective of the Synoptic Gospels, the 
«“ Johanneisches vor Johannes’’. But why deny this tradition to the 
Apostle John? In whom could it find a more suitable repository 2 
Unquestionably there underlies this Gospel a full and significant 
tradition, but there seems no good reason for allotting the tradition 
to one source and the Gospel to another. Much more probable is 
the account of Eusebius, who tells us “that John, having spent all 


1H. E., iii., 24: Ιωάννην Φασὶ τὸν πάντα χρόνον ἀγράφφ κεχρηµένον κηρύγµατι 
Τέλος καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν γραφὴν ἐλθεῖν. 


INTRODUCTION 673 


his life in proclaiming the Gospel orally, at the last committed it to 
writing”. 

Suspicion has been cast on the historicity of the Fourth Gospel 
by the omission from the others of all reference to the raising of 
Lazarus. As related by John, this event was not only remarkable 
in itself, but materially contributed to the catastrophe. It is difficult 
to suppose that so surprising an event should not be known to the 
Synoptists. It is true John omits incidents as remarkable ; but he 
knew that they were already related. It is possible that at the first, 
while the life of Lazarus was still in danger from the authorities, re- 
ference to the miracle may have been judged unadvisable, especially 
as similar raisings from the dead had been recorded. Probably, 
however, Professor Sanday’s solution is right: “ Considering that 
the Synoptists knew nothing of events in Jerusalem before the last 
Passover, we cannot be surprised that they should omit an event 
which is placed at Bethany’’.! 

But that which has driven many open-minded critics to a dis- 
belief in the Apostolic authorship of the Gospel is the character of 
the conversations and addresses which are here attributed to our 
Lord. Some pronounce these discourses to be entirely fictitious, 
ascribed to Jesus for the sake of iilustrating and enforcing opinions 
of the author. Others suppose that a small modicum of historical 
truth is to be found in them; while critics who are branded as 
“ Apologists ’’ almost entirely eliminate from the discourses ascribed, 
to our Lord any subjective element contributed by the Evangelist. 
Is there then any test we can apply to this record, any criterion by 
which these discourses may be judged? The reports in the Synoptic 
Gospels at once suggest themselves as the required criterion. Doubts 
there may be regarding the very words ascribed to our Lord in this 
or that passage of the Synoptists, doubts there must be, whether we: 
are to follow Matthew or Luke, when these two differ; but practi- 
cally there is no doubt at all, even among extreme critics, that we 
may gather from those Gospels a clear idea both of the form and of 
the substance of our Lord’s teaching. 

Now it is not to be denied that the comparison of the Fourth 
Gospel with the first three is a little disconcerting. For it is obvious 
that in the Fourth Gospel the discourses occupy a different position, 
and differ also both in style and in matter from those recorded in 
the Synoptical Gospels. They occupy a different position, bulking 
much more largely in proportion to the narrative. Indeed, the 


1 Authorship of Fourth Gospel, p. 185. 
43 


674 INTRODUCTION 


narrative portion of the Gospel of John may be said to exist for the 
sake of the verbal teaching. The miracles which in the first three 
Gospels appear as the beneficent acts of our Lord without ulterior 
motive, seem in the Fourth Gospel to exist for the sake of the 
teaching they embody, and the discussions they give rise to. 
Similarly, the persons introduced, such as Nicodemus, are viewed 
chiefly as instrumental in eliciting from Jesus certain sayings, and 
are themselves forgotten in the conversation they have suggested. 

In form the teachings recorded in John conspicuously differ from 
those recorded by the other evangelists. They present our Lord as 
using three forms of teaching, brief, pregnant apophthegms, parables, 
and prolonged ethical addresses. In John, it is alleged, the parable 
has disappeared, the pointed sayings suitable to a popular teacher 
have also disappeared, and in their place we have prolonged dis- 
cussions, self-defensive explanations, and stern invectives. As Renan 
says: “ This fashion of preaching and demonstrating without ceasing, 
this everlasting argumentation, this artificial get-up, these long dis- 
cussions following each miracle, these discourses, stiff and awkward, 
whose tone is so often false and unequal, are intolerable to a man of 
taste alongside the delicious sentences of the synoptists ”. 

Even more marked is the difference in the substance of the dis- 
courses. From the synoptists we receive the impression that Jesus 
was a genial ethical teacher who spent His days among the common 
people exhorting them to unworldliness, to a disregard of wealth, to 
the humble and patient service of God in love to their fellow-men, 
exposing the hollowness of much that passed for religion, and seek- 
ing to inspire all men with firmer trust in God as their Father. In 
the Gospel of John His own claims are the prominent subject. He 
is the subject matter taught as well as the teacher. The Kingdom of 
God no longer holds the place it held in the synoptists: it is the 
Messiah rather than the Messianic kingdom that is pressed upon the 
people. 

Again it has been urged that the style ascribed to our Lord in this 
Gospel is so like the style of John himself as to be indistinguishable ; 
so that it is not always possible to say where the words of Jesus end 
and the words of John begin (see chap. xii. 44, iii. 18-21). This 
difficulty may, however, be put aside, and that for more reasons than 
one. The words of Jesus are translated from the vernacular Aramaic 
in which He probably uttered them, and it was impossible they should 
not be coloured by the style of the translator. Besides, there are 
obvious differences between the style of John and that of Jesus. 
For example, the Epistle of Joba is singularly abstract and devoid of 


INTRODUCTION 675 


illustration. James abounds in figure, and so does Paul; but in 
John’s epistles not a single simile or metaphor occurs. Is it credible 
that their writer was the author of the richly figurative teachings in 
the tenth and fifteenth chapters of the Gospel [the sheepfold and the 
vine] 2 

But turning to the real differences which exist between the 
reports of the first three and the Fourth Gospel, several thoughts 
occur which at least take off the edge of the criticism and show us 
that on a point of this kind it is easy to be hasty and extreme. For, 
in the first place, it is to be considered that if John had had nothing 
new to tell, no fresh aspect of Christ or His teaching to present, he 
would not have written at all. No doubt each of the synoptists goes 
over ground already traversed by his fellow-synoptist, but it has yet to 
be proved that they knew one another’s work. John did know of their 
Gospels, and the very fact that he added a fourth prepares us to 
expect that it will be different ; not only in omitting scenes from the 
life of Christ with which already the previous Gospels had made men 
familiar, but by presenting some new aspect of Christ’s person and 
teaching. That there was another aspect essential to the complete- 
ness of the figure was, as the present Bishop of Derry has pointed 
out, also to be surmised. The synoptists enable us to conceive how 
Jesus addressed the peasantry and how He dealt with the scribes of 
Capernaum ; but, after all, was it not also of the utmost importance 
to know how He was received by the authorities of Jerusalem and 
how He met their difficulties about His claims? Had there been no 
record of those defences of His position, must we not still have 
supposed them and supplied them in imagination ? 

That we have here, then, a different aspect of Christ’s teaching 
need not surprise us, but is it not even inconsistent with that already 
given by the synoptists ? The universal Christian consciousness has 
long since answered that question. The faith which has found its 
resting-place in the Christ of the synoptists is not unsettled or per- 
plexed by anything it finds in John. They are not two Christs but 
one which the four Gospels depict: diverse as the profile and front 
face, but‘one another’s complement rather than contradiction. A 
critical examination of the Gospels reaches the same conclusion. 
For while the self-assertiveness of Christ is more apparent in the 
Fourth Gospel, it is implicit in them all. Can any claim be greater 
than that which our Lord urges in the Sermon on the Mount to be 
the supreme lawgiver and judge of men? Or than that which is 
implied in His assertion that He only knows the Father and that 
only through Him can others know Him; or can we conceive any 


676 INTRODUCTION 


clearer confidence in His mission than that which He implies when 
He invites all men to come to Him and trust themselves with Him, 
or when He forgives sin, and proclaims Himself the Messiah, God’s 
representative on earth ? 

Can we then claim that all that is reported in this Gospel as 
uttered by our Lord was actually spoken as it stands? This is not 
claimed. Even the most conservative critics allow that John must 
necessarily have condensed conversations and discourses. The truth 
probably is that we have the actual words of the most striking say- 
ings, because these, once heard, could not be forgotten. And this 
plainly applies especially to the sayings regarding Himself which 
were most likely to astonish or even shock and startle the hearers. 
These at once and for ever fixed themselves in the mind. In the 
longer discussions and addresses we have the substance but cannot 
at each point be sure that the very words are given. No doubt in 
the last resort we must trust John. But whom could we more 
reasonably trust? He was the person of all others who entered 
most fully into sympathy with Christ and understood Him best, the 
person to whom our Lord could most freely open His mind. So that 
although, as Godet says, we have here “ the extracted essence of a 
savoury fruit,’ we may be confident that this essence perfectly 
preserves the flavour and peculiarity of the fruit. 

Neither ought it to be forgotten that there occur in the Gospel 
passages which strikingly illustrate the desire of the author to pre- 
serve the very words of our Lord. In chap. xii. 33, e.g., we find an 
interpretation given of the saying recorded in verse 32. This is 
unintelligible on the hypothesis that the author was himself com- 
posing the discourses which he attributes to Christ. Any author 
who is expressing his own ideas, and writing freely out of his own 
mind, even although he is using another person as his mouthpiece, 
will at once deliver his meaning. To suppose that John first put 
his own words in the mouth of Jesus, and then interpreted them, is 
to suppose an elaborateness of contrivance which would reduce the 
Gospel to a common forgery. Cf. vii. 39. 

While, then, it cannot be affirmed that the internal evidence 
uniformly points to the Johannine authorship, neither can it be said 
that it is decisively against it. There are difficulties on either 
alternative. But when to the internal evidence the weight of 
external attestation is added, by far the most probable conclusion is 
that the Fourth Gospel is the work of the Apostle John, and that it 
is historically trustworthy. 

Between the affirmation and denial of the Johannine authorship 


INTRODUCTION 677 


there has been interposed a third suggestion. The Gospel may have 
been (1) partly or (2) indirectly the work of the Apostle: parts of it may 
be from the hand of John, while the remainder is the work of an 
unknown editor; or, the whole may be from the school of John, but 
not directly from his own hand. The most distinguished advocate of 
the former of these two suggestions is Dr. Wendt, whose theory is 
that the Apostle John made a collection of our Lord’s discourses, 
which was used by some unknown editor as the basis or nucleus 
of a Gospel. This theory ruthlessly sacrifices many of the most 
valuable and characteristic portions of the Gospel, such as the scene 
between the Baptist and the deputation, the examination before 
Annas (or Caiaphas), and many of those historical touches which 
lend life to the narrative. But the fatal objection to this theory is 
the solidarity of the Gospel. Holtzmann does not accept the Fourth 
Gospel as Johannine, but he says: “All attempts to draw a clearly 
distinguishable line of demarcation, whether it be between earlier 
and later strata, or between genuine and not genuine, historical and 
unhistorical elements, must always be wrecked against the solid and 
compact unity which the work presents, both in regard to language 
and in regard to matter. Apart from the interpolations indicated 
by the history of the text (v. 4, vii. 53, viii. 11), and from the last 
chapter added by way of supplement, the work is both in form and 
substance, both in arrangement and in range of ideas, an organic 
whole without omissions or interpolations, the ‘ seamless coat,’ which 
cannot be parted or torn, but only by a happy cast allotted to its 
rightful owner.’’ Certainly, if this Gospel is not from one hand, 
then there is no possibility of proyina nity of authorship by unity of 
design and execution. 

The second alternative, that the Gospel proceeded rather from 
the circle of John’s disciples than from his own hand, has more in 
its favour and has enlisted great names in its support. Thus Renan 
says (Vie de F., xxv.): “Can it indeed be John who has written in 
Greek these abstract metaphysical discourses, which find no analogy 
either in the Synoptists or in the Talmud? This is a heavy tax on 
faith, and for myself I dare not say | am convinced that the Fourth 
Gospel was entirely from the pen of an old Galilean fisherman; but 
that the Gospel as a whole proceeded, towards the close of the first 
century, from the great school of Asia Minor whose centre was 
John.” “One is sometimes tempted to believe that some precious 
notes made by the Apostle were employed by his disciples.” 

The other great literary critic of our own day, Matthew Arnold, 
held the same opinion regarding the origin of the Gospel. In God 


678 INTRODUCTION 


/ 


and the Bible, 256-7, he writes: “In his old age St. John at Ephesus 
has ‘logia,’ sayings of the Lord, and has incidents in the Lord’s story 
which have not been published in any of the written accounts that 
were beginning at that time to be handed about. The elders of 
Ephesus, whom tradition afterwards makes into apostles, fellows of 
St. John, move him to bestow his treasure on the world. He gives 
his materials, and the presbytery of Ephesus provides a redaction 
for them and publishes them. The redaction with its unity of tone, 
its flowingness and connectedness, is by one single hand; the hand 
of a man of literary talent, a Greek Christian, whom the Church of 
Ephesus found proper for such a task. A man of literary talent, a 
man of soul also, a theologian. A theological lecturer perhaps, as in 
the Fourth Gospel he so often shows himself, a theological lecturer, 
an earlier and a nameless Origen, who in this one short composition 
produced a work outweighing all the folios of all the Fathers, but was 
content that his name should be written in the Book of Life.” Schiirer 
and Weizsicker! are both advocates of this theory. 

That this is an inviting theory is not to be denied. But, after all, 
little is gained by it ; and there are grave objections to it. The Jew 
and the eye-witness appear on every page; so that the utmost that 
can be allowed is that some younger man may in quite a subordinate 
function have collaborated with the Apostle. That the Gospel was 
composed after the Apostle’s death, mainly from reminiscences of 
his teaching, is a hypothesis which seems at once needless and 
inadequate. 

Object of the Gospel. The object of the writer reflects some light 
on the nature of his work. In xx. 31 it is said: “these things are 
written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of 
God, and that believing ye might have life in Hisname”. The writer 
has no intention of composing a full biography of Jesus. He means 
to select from His life such material as will most readily convince 
men that He is the Christ, the Son of God. If not a dogmatic 
treatise [a “lehrschrift’’], it is at any rate a history with a dogmatic 
purpose. This is always a dangerous form of literature, tempting the 
author to exaggeration, concealment, misrepresentation. But that 
this temptation invariably overcomes an author is of course not the 
case. Acertain limitation, however, nay, a certain amount of distortion, 
do necessarily attach to a biography which aims at presenting only 
one aspect of its subject—distortion, not in what is actually presented, 
but in the implication that this is the whole. Where only a part of 


1 Apost. Zeit., 531-538. 


INTRODUCTION 679 


the life is given and certain aspects of the character are exclusively 
depicted, there is a want of perspective and so. far a misleading 
element. But this gives us no ground for affirming that the actual 
statements of the book are erroneous or unhistorical. 

The circumstance that John wrote a Gospel with the express 
purpose of proving that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, 
implies that he considered that this truth needed confirmation ; that 
in the Christian circle in which he moved there was some more or 
less pronounced tendency towards a denial of the Messiahship or 
Divinity of Jesus. Whether the teaching of Cerinthus was or was 
not the immediate occasion of the publication of the Gospel, it is a 
happy circumstance that the author did not confine himself to what 
was controversial, or throw his work into a polemic and doctrinal 
form, but built up a positive exhibition of the Person and claims of 
our Lord as stated by Himself. 

The object in view, therefore, reflects light on the historicity of 
the contents of the Gospel. The writer professes to produce certain 
facts which have powerfully influenced the minds of men and have 
produced faith. If these pretended facts were fictions, then the 
writer is dishonest and beneath contempt. He wishes to produce 
the conviction that Jesus is the Messiah, and to accomplish his 
purpose invents incidents and manipulates utterances of Jesus. A 
writer of romance who merely wishes to please, even a preacher 
whose aim is edification, might claim a certain latitude or negligence 
of accuracy, but a writer whose object it is to prove a certain pro- 
position stands on a very different platform, and can only be pro- 
nounced fraudulent if he invents his evidence. 

Method and Plan of the Gospel. The method adopted by the 
writer to convince men that Jesus is the Christ 1s the simplest 
possible. He does not expect that men will believe this on his mere 
word. He sets himself to reproduce those salient features in the 
life of Jesus which chiefly manifested His Messianic dignity and 
function. He believes that what convinced himself will convince 
others. One by one he cites his witnesses, never garbling their 
testimony nor concealing the adverse testimony, but showing with 
as exact truthfulness how unbelief grew and hardened into opposition, 
as he tells how faith grew till it culminated in the supreme con- 
fession of Thomas, “ My Lord and my God”, The plan of the 
Gospel is therefore also the simplest. Apart from the Prologue 
(i. 1-18), and the Epilogue (chap. xxi.), the work falls into two nearly 
equal parts, 1. 19-xii. and xiii.-xx. In the former part the evangelist 
relates with a singular felicity of selection the scenes in which 


680 INTRODUCTION 


Jesus made those self-revelations which it was essential the world 
should see. These culminate in the raising of Lazarus related in 
chap. xi. The twelfth chapter therefore holds a place by itself, and 
in it three incidents are related which are intended to show that the 
previously related manifestations of Jesus had sufficed to make Him 
known (1) to His intimates (xii. 1-11), (2) to the people generally 
(12-19), and (3) even to the Gentile world (20-36). Jesus may there- 
fore now close His self-revelation. And the completeness of the 
work He has done is revealed not only in this widely extended 
impression and well-grounded faith, but also in the maturity of 
unbelief which now hardens into hatred and resolves to compass 
His death. Between the first and second part of the Gospel there 
is interposed a paragraph (xii. 37-50), in which it is pointed out that 
the rejection of Jesus by the Jews, who had been trained to receive 
the Messiah, had been predicted and reflects no suspicion on the 
sufficiency of the preceding manifestations. In the second part of 
the Gospel the glory of Christ is manifested (1) in His revealing 
Himself as the permanent source of life and joy to His disciples 
(xiii.-xvii.), and (2) in His triumph over death (xviii.-xx.). 


The Gospel, therefore, falls into these parts :— 


THE PROLOGUE, i. 1-18. 

I. Part First. 1. Manifestation of Christ’s glory as the Joy, Life, Light, 
Nourishment, Saviour of Men: or as the Son of God 
among men, i. I9-xi. 

2. Summary of results, xii. 1-35. 
Pause in the Gospel for review of Christ’s teaching and its consequences, 
xii. 36-56. 
II. Part SEconp. 1. Jesus declares Himself to be the permanent source of life 
and joy to His disciples, xtii.-xvii, 
2. His victory over death, xviii.-xx. 


Tur EPILOGUE, xxi. 


LITERATURE. 


A vast literature has grown up around the Fourth Gospel. A full list of critical 
treatises on the Authorship, published between 1792 and 1875, is given by Dr. 
Caspar Gregory in an appendix to the translation of Luthardt’s St. Sohn, the Author 
of the Fourth Gospel. To this list may now be added Thoma, Die Genesis d. Fok. , 
Evang., 1882; Jacobsen, Untersuchungen uber ᾱ. Foh. Evang., 1884; Oscar 
Holtzmann, Das ¥oh. evangelium, 1887. The Introductions of H. Holtzmann, 
Weiss, Salmon, and Gloag may also be consulted. The fullest history of the 
criticism of the Gospel is to be found in Watkins’ Bampton Lectures for 1890. 

Full lists of commentaries are given in the second volume of the translation 
ef Meyer on John, and in Luthardt. The most valuable are the following :— 


INTRODUCTION 681 


Hgracrzon. The Fragments of Heracleon have been collected out of Origen’s Com- 
mentary on John, and edited for Armitage Robinson’s Tezts and Studies by 
A. E. Brooke, M.A. 

Crugen. Commentary on St. Fohn’s Gospel ; originally only extending to the 
thirteenth chapter, and even of this original much has been lost. The best 
edition is that of A. E. Brooke, M.A., Cambridge University Press, 1806. 

Portions of this Commentary are translated in the additional volume of 
Clark’s Ante-Nicene Library 

CHRYSOSTOM [347-407 A.D.]. Homilies on the Gospel, etc. The most convenient 
edition is Migne’s. The Commentary on John is translated in the Ozford 
Library, and in the American Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. 

AuGUSTINE [354-430]. Tractatus in ¥oan. Evan. In third volume of Migne’s 
edition ; translated in Oxford series and Clark’s translation. 

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA [ob. 444]. In D. F$oannis Evangelium. Best edition by 
P, E. Pusey, A.M., Clarendon Press. Three vols. 1872. 

THEOPHYLACT and EuTHyMius (see p. 58) both wrote on this Gospel. The com- 
mentary of the latter is especially excellent. 


Among post-reformation works, the Paraphrases of Erasmus, the Commentary 
of Calvin, and the Annotationes Majores .of Beza are to be recommended. The 
Annotationes of Melanchthon are frequently irrelevant. Besides the collections of 
illustrative passages mentioned on pp. 58, 59, and the commentaries of Grotius, 
Bengel, and others which cover the whole New Testament, there may be named 
the following which deal especially with this Gospel: Lampe, Com. Analytico- 
Exegeticus, 3 vols., 4to, Amstel., 1724, an inexhaustible mine. More recent com- 
mentaries are those of Liicke, 1820-24 ; Tholuck, 1827 [translated in Clark’s F. T. 
Lib., 1860]; Meyer, 1834 [translated 1875], edited by Weiss, 1893; Luthardt, 
1852-3 [translated in CJark’s F. T. Lib., 1876], Alford, 1849; 4th edition, 1859; 
Godet, 1864-5 [translated in Clark’s F. T. L., 1876-7], Westcott, 1882; Reith, in 
Clark’s Hand-books for Bible-classes ; Whitelaw, 1888; Reynolds, in Pulpit Com., 
1888 ; Watkins, in Ellicott’s Com., n. d.; Holtzmann, in Hand-commeniar, 1890; 
Plummer, in Cambridge Greek Testament, 1893. In Oscar Holtzmann’s Das 
Fohannesevangelium untersucht und erklart, 1887, there are a hundred pages of 
sommentary. 


ου 
μὴ cells (8 seek tha Chee 


ie 4 Branch 


Pha i Dai Wf didi ἡ ο ΗΝ Cae 


ο... Αι pe ma 


ae σης 
Ee Yate > 





TO KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ATION ΕΥΑΓΤΕΛΙΟΝ.Ι 


I. 1. "Ἐν ἀρχῇ qv 6 λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεὺν, καὶ α Gen. ἱ, τ, 


«Θεὸς ἦν 6 λόγος. 


Ό 1 ]ο. 1. 2. Prov. viii. 30. 


2. οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν. 
c xx. 28; x. 8ο. Phil. ii. 6. 


1 Jo.i.1,2. 
3- ἁΓάντα Ch. xvii. 


ἄν. τ7. Οοἱ, 1.16. ‘Heb. ia. 


1 κατα ωανγην in Ν abeq; κατα Ἰωανην in B; ευαγγελιον κατα ἱωαννην in 


ACEFG;; Τ.Ε. in minusc. 


CHAPTER I.—Vv. 1-18. The prologue. 
The first eighteen verses contain a 
preface, or as it is usually called, the 
prologue to the Gospel. In this prologue 
the writer identifies the person, Jesus 
Christ, whom he is about to introduce 
on the field of history, with the Logos. 
He first describes the Logos in His 
relation to God and to the world, and 
then presents in abstract the history of 
His reception among men, which he is 
about to give in detail. That the Eternal 
Divine Word, in whom was the life of 
all things, became flesh and was 
manifested among men; that some 
ignored while others recognised Him; 
that some received while others rejected 
Him—that is what John means to ex- 
hibit in detail in his Gospel, and this is 
what he summarily states in this pro- 
logue. 

The prologue may be divided thus: 
Vv. 1-5, The Logos described ; wv. 6-13, 
The historic manifestation of the Logos 
and its results in evoking faith and un- 
belief; vv. 14-18, This manifestation 
more precisely defined as incarnation, 
with another aspect of its results. Cf, 
Westcott’s suggestive division; and 
especially Falconer in Expositor, 1897. 

Vv. 1-5. The Logos described. The 
first five verses describe the pre-existence, 
the nature, the creative power of the 
Logos, who in the succeeding verses is 
spoken of as entering the world, becom- 
ing man, and revealing the Father; and 
this derription is given in order that we 
may at Pnce grasp a continuous history 


which runs out of an unmeasured past, 
and the identity of the person who is the 
subject of that history. 

Ver. 1. In the first verse three things 
are stated regarding the Logos, the 
subject 6 λόγος being repeated for im- 
pressiveness. Westcott remarks that 
these three clauses answer to the three 
great moments of the Incarnation de- 
clared in νετ. 14. He who was (ἣν) in 
the beginning, became (ἐγένετο) in time; 
He who was with God, tabernacled 
among men; He who was God, became 
flesh. 

(1) ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος. ἐν ἀρχῇ is 
here used relatively to creation, as in 
Gen. i. 1 and Prov. viii. 23, ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸ 
τοῦ τὴν γῆν ποιῆσαι; cf. 1 John i. 1. 
Consequently even in the time of 
Theophylact it was argued that this 
clause only asserts that the Logos was 
older than Adam. But this is to over- 
look the ἦν. The Logos did not then 
begin to be, but at that point at which 
all else began to be He already was. In 
the beginning, place it where you may, 
the Word already existed. In other 
words, the Logos is before time, eternal. 
Cf. Col. i. 18 (the article is absent 
because ἐν ἀρχῇ is virtually an adverbial 
expression).—6 λόγος. The term Logos 
appears as early as Heraclitus to denote 
the principle which maintains order in 
the world (see passages in Ritter and 
Preller). Among the Stoics the word 
was similarly used, as the equivalent of 
the anima mundi (cf. Virgil, Zn., vi., 
724). Marcus Aurelius (iv. 14-21) uses 


684 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


L. 


εν. οι; xi. δι αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ xwpis αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἓν, ὃ γέγονεν.ὶ 
25. a N a 
f xii. 36. 13 4. ἐν αὐτῷ "ζωὴ Fy,” καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, 5. καὶ τὸ 


times in 
ohn. 
lsewhere : 

only in Mt. x. 27. Lk. xii. 3. 


~ ο , a , 
φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ Φφαίνει, καὶ ἡ ‘oKotia αὐτὸ οὐ κατέλαβεν. 


1 Almost all ante-Nicene Fathers join ο γεγονεν to ver. 4 with AC*DG*L. Chry- 


sostom declares this reading heretical and argues against it. 


CEG?HK vet. Lat. Brixianus. 


2 mv in ABCL, vulg.; εστιν in QD vet. 


the term σπερματικὸς Adyos to express 
the generative principle or creative force 
in nature. The term was familiar to 
Greek philosophy. In Hebrew thought 
there was felt the need for some term to 
express God, not in His absolute being, 
but in His manifestation and active con- 
nection with the world. In the O. T. 
“the Angel of the Lord” and “the 
wisdom of God” are used for this pur- 
pose. In the Apocryphal books and the 
Targums ‘‘the word of Jehovah’’ is 
similarly used. These two streams of 
thought were combined by Philo, who 
has a fairly full and explicit doctrine of 
the Logos as the expression of God or 
God in expression (see Drummond’s 
Philo; Siegfried’s Philo; Reville, 
Doctrine du Logos; Bigg’s Bampton 
Lec. ; Hatch’s Hibbert Lec.). The word 
being thus already in use and aiding 
thoughtful men in their efforts to con- 
ceive God’s connection with the world, 
John takes it and uses it to denote the 
Revealer of the incomprehensible and 
invisible God. Irrespective of all specu- 
lations which had gathered around the 
term, John now proceeds to make known 
the true nature of the Logos. (Cf. The 
Primal Will, or Universal Reason of the 
Babis ; Sell’s Faith of Islam, 146.) 

(2) If the Word was thus in the 
beginning, what relation did He hold to 
God? Was He identical or opposed ? 
ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν. πρός implies 
not merely existence ‘alongside of but 
personal intercourse. It means more 
than µετά or παρά, and is regularly 
employed in expressing the presence of 
one person with another. Thus in 
classical Greek, τὴν πρὸς Σωκράτην 
συνουσίαν, and in N. Τ. Mk. vi. 3, Mt. 
xiii. 56, Mk. ix. το, Gal. i. 18, 2 John 12. 
This preposition implies intercourse and 
therefore separate personality. As 
Chrysostom says: ‘Not in God but 
with God, as person with person, 
eternally’. 

(3) The Word is distinguishable from 
God and yet Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος, the Word 


Τ.Ε. is found in 


Lat., arising out of above punctuation. 


was God, of Divine nature; not ‘‘a 
God,” which to a Jewish ear would have 
been abominable; nor yet identical with 
all that can be called God, for then the 
article would have been inserted (cf. 
1 John iii. 4). ‘‘ The Christian doctrine 
of the Trinity was perhaps before any- 
thing else an effort to express how Jesus 
Christ was God (Θεός) and yet in another 
sense was not God (6 θεός), that is to 
say, was not the whole Godhead.” Con- 
sult Du Bose’s Ecumenical Councils, p. 
70-73. Luther says ‘“‘the Word was 
God” is against Arius: ‘‘ the Word was 
with God ” against Sabellius. 

Ver. 2. οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν 
θεόν. Not a mere repetition of what has 
been said in νετ. 1. There John has 
said that the Word was in the beginning 
and also that He was with God: here he 
indicates that these two characteristics 
existed contemporaneously. ‘He was 
in the beginning with God.” He wishes 
also to emphasise this in view of what he 
is about to tell. dn the beginning He 
was with God, afterwards, in time, He 
came to be with man. His pristine con- 
dition must first be grasped, if the grace 
of what succeeds is to be understood. 

Ver. 3. Πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο. The 
connection is obvious: the Word was 
with God in the beginning, but not as 
an idle, inefficacious existence, who only 
then for the first time put forth energy 
when He came into the world. On the 
contrary, He was the source of all 
activity and life. ‘All things were 
made by Him, and without Him was 
not even one thing made which was 
made.” 

The double sentence, positive and 
negative, is characteristic of John and 
lends emphasis to the statement.— 
πάντα, “grande verbum quo mundus, 
i.€., universitas rerum factarum de- 
notatur ” (Bengel). The more accurate 
expression for * all things” taken as a 
whole and not severally is τὰ πάντα 
(Col. i. 16) or τὸ πᾶν; and, as the 
negative clause of this verse indicates, 


4—7- 


EYATTEAION 


685 


6. ᾿Εγένετο ἄνθρωπος ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ Θεοῦ, ὄνομα αὐτῷ g Cp. Gen. 


Ἰωάννης. 


7. οὗτος ἦλθεν εἰς µαρτυρίαν, ἵνα µαρτυρήσῃ " περὶ τοῦ 


xi. 20. Lk. 
αι 
Ἡ µαρτυρ. 
περὶ freq. in Jo., not elsewhere in N. T. 


1 Ίωανης in Tr.W.H., here and at every recurrence of the name. 


created things are here looked at in their 
variety and multiplicity. Cf. Marcus 
Aurelius, iv. 23, ὦ φύσις, ἐκ cov πάντα, 
ἐν ool πάντα, eis σὲ πάντα.---δι αὐτοῦ. 
The Word was the Agent in creation. 
But it is to be observed that the same 
preposition is used of God in the same 
connection in Rom. xi. 36, ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ 
καὶ δι’ αὐτοῦ καὶ cig αὐτὸν τὰ πάντα; 
and in Col. 1. 16 the same writer uses the 
same prepositions not of the Father but 
of the Son when he says: τὰ πάντα δι 
αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται. In 1 Cor. 
viii. 6 Paul distinguishes between the 
Father as the primal source of all things 
and the Son as the actual Creator. (In 
Greek philosophy the problem was to 
ascertain by whom, of what, and in view 
of what the world was made; ὑφ᾽ οὗ, ἐξ 
οὗ, πρὸς ὅ. And Liicke quotes a signifi- 
cant sentence from Philo (De Cherub., 
35): εὑρήσεις αἴτιον μὲν αὐτοῦ (τοῦ 
κόσμον) τὸν θεὸν, th” οὗ γέγονεν' Όλην 
δὲ τὰ τέσσαρα στοιχεῖα, ἐξ ὧν συν- 
expa9n° ὄργανον δὲ λόγον θεοῦ δι’ οὗ 
κατεσκευάσθη *) 
_ Ver. 4. ἐν αυτῷ ζωὴ ἦν. “In Him was 
life”? ; that power which creates life and 
maintains all else in existence was in the 
Logos. To limit “life” here to any 
particular form of life is rendered im- 
possible by ver. 3. In John ζωή is 
generally eternal or spiritual life, but 
here it is more comprehensive. In the 
Logos was life, and it is of this life all 
things have partaken and by it they 
exist. Cf. Philo’s designation of the 
Logos as πηγὴ ζωῆς.- καὶ 4 ζωὴ ἣν τὸ 
φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, “and the life was 
the light of men”; the life which was 
the fountain of existence to all things 
was especially the light of man ‘Liicke). 
It was not the Logos directly but the 
life which was in the Logos which was 
the light of men. O. Holtzmann thinks 
this only means that as men received 
life from the Logos they might be ex- 
pected in the gift to recognise the Giver. 
Godet says: ‘“‘ The Logos is light; but 
it is through the mediation of life that 
He must become so always; this is 
precisely the relation which the Gospel 
restores. We recover through the new 
creation in Jesus Christ an inner light 
which springs up from the life.”” Stevens 


says: ‘‘The Word represents the self- 
manifesting quality of the Divine life. 
This heavenly light shines in the dark- 
ness of the world’s ignorance and sin.” 
The words seem to mean that the life 
which appears in the variety, harmony, 
and progress of inanimate nature, and 
in the wonderfully manifold yet related 
forms of aniinate existence, appears in 
man as “light,” intellectual and moral 
light, reason and conscience. To the 
Logos men may address the words of 
Ps, xxxvi. 9, wapa σοὶ πηγὴ ζωῆς, ἐν TO _ 
φωτί σου ὀψόμεθα pas.—Ver. 5. καὶ 
τὸ φῶς ἐν TH σκοτίᾳ φαίνει, “' απά the 
light shineth in the darkness”, Three 
interpretations are possible. The words 
may refer to the incarnate, or to the pre- 
incarnate experience of the Logos, or to 
both. Holtzmann and Weiss both con- 
sider the clause refers to the incarnate 
condition (¢f. 1 John ii. 8). De Wette 
refers it to the pre-incarnate operation 
of the Logos in the O. T. prophets. 
Meyer and others interpret Φαίνει as 
meaning “present, 7.¢., uninterruptedly 
from the beginning until now”. The 
use of the aorist κατέλαβεν seems to 
make the first interpretation impossible ; 
while the second is obviously too 
restricted. What ‘shining ”’ is meant ? 
This also must not be limited to O. T. 
prophecy or revelation but to the light of 
conscience and reason (cf. νετ. 4).—év τῇ 
σκοτίᾳ, in the darkness which existed 
wherever the light of the Logos was not 
admitted. Darkness, σκότος or σκοτία, 
was the expression naturally used by 
secular Greek writers to describe the 
world’s condition. Thus Lucian: év 
σκότῳ πλανωμένοις πάντες éoixaper. 
Cf. Lucretius: 

6 Qualibus in tenebris vitae, quantisque 

periclis, 

Degitur hoc aevi quodcunque est ”’. 
Kal 7) σκοτία αὐτὸ ov κατέλαβεν. The 
A. V. renders this ‘‘and the darkness 
comprehended it not”; the R. V. has 
“apprehended” and in the margin 
‘‘overcame’’. The Greek interpreters 
understood the clause to mean that the 
darkness did not conquer the light. 
Thus Theophylact says: ἡ σκοτία . . 
ἐδίωξε τὸ das, GAN’ εὗρεν ἀκαταμάχητον 
καὶ ἀήττητον. Some modern interpreters,,. 


686 


3 lel 

φωτὸς, ἵνα πάντες πιστεύσωσι δι αὐτοῦ. 
a a 

GAN ἵνα µαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ φωτός. 


and especially Westcott, adopt this 
rendering. ‘‘ The whole phrase is indeed 
a startling paradox. The light does not 
banish the darkness: the darkness does 
not overpower the light.” This render- 
ing is supposed to find support in chap. 
xii. 35, where Christ says, ‘‘ Walk while 
ye have the light,” ἵνα μὴ σκοτία ὑμᾶς 
καταλάβῃ: and καταλαμβάνειν is the 
word commonly used to denote day or 
night overtaking any one (see Wetstein). 
But the radical meaning is ‘‘to seize,”’ 
‘“‘to take possession οἱ, ‘‘to lay hold 
of”; so in Rom. ix. 30, 1 Cor. ix. 24, 
Phil. iii. 12. It is also used of mental 
perception, as in the Phaedrus, p. 250, D. 
See also Polybius, iii. 32, 4, and viii. 4, 6, 
δυσχερὲς καταλαβεῖν, difficult to under- 
stand. This sense is more congruous in 
this passage; especially when we com- 
pare ver. 10 (6 κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω) 
and ver. 11 (οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον). 

Vv. 6-13. The historic manifestation 
of the Logos and its results.—Ver. 6. In 
this verse John passes to the historical ; 
and like the other evangelists begins 
with the Baptist. So Theodore Mops: 
μετεληλυθὼς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐπιφάνειαν τοῦ 
viod, τίνα ἄν εὗρεν ἀρχὴν ἑτέραν ἤ τὰ 
κατὰ τὸν Ιωάννην :--ἐγένετο ἄνθρωπος, 
“not there was (chap. iii. 1), but denot- 
ing the appearing, the historical mani- 
festation,”” Meyer. Cf. Lk. i. 5. The 
testimony of John is introduced not only 
as a historical note but in order to bring 
out the aggravated blindness of those 
who rejected Christ. This man was 
ἀπεσταλμένος παρὰ Geov. Holtzmann 
says ‘‘an historical appearance is 
characterised as Godsent’’, It might 
rather be said that an historical appear- 
ance sent to fulfil a definite Divine pur- 
pose is so characterised. There is no 
designation our Lord more frequently 
applies to Himself. In the prayer of 
chap. xvii. some equivalent occurs six 
times. And in the epistle to the Hebrews 
He is called ‘the Apostle of our con- 
fession”. No distinguishing title is 
added to the common name “' John”’. 
Westcott says: ‘If the writer of the 
Gospel were himself the other John of 
the Gospel history, it is perfectly natural 
that he should think of the Baptist, 
apart from himself, as John only”. 
Watkins says: ‘‘The writer stood to 
him in the relation of disciple to teacher. 
To him he was the John.”” Afterwards 
the disciple became the John.—Ver. 7. 


KATA IQANNHN L 


8. οὐκ ἦν ἐκεῖνος τὸ φῶς, 
9. ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινὸν, ὃ 


οὗτος ᾖλθεν εἰς µαρτυρίαν . . . δι 
αὐτοῦ. ‘“ The same (or, this man) came 
for witness,” etc. ‘John’s mission is 
first set forth under its generic aspect: 
he came for witness; and then its 
specific object (ἵνα µαρτ. περὶ τ. φ.) and 
its final object (ἵνα παντ. πιστ.) are de- 
fined co-ordinately,”” Westcott. John 
was not to do a great work of his own 
but to point to another. All his ex- 
perience, zeal, and influence were to be 
spent in testifying to the true Light. 
This he was to do “that all might be- 
lieve through him”. The whole of this 
Gospel is a citing of witnesses, but 
John’s comes first and is of most import- 
ance. At first sight it might seem that 
his mission had failed. All did not 
believe. No; but all who did believe, 
speaking generally, believed through 
him. The first disciples won by Jesus 
were of John’s training; and through 
them belief has become general.—Ver. 
8. otk Fv ἐκεῖνος . .. φωτός, the 
thought of the previous verse is here put 
in a negative form for the sake of 
emphasis; and with the same object 
οὐκ ἦν is made prominent that it may 
contrast with the ἵνα µαρτυρήσῃ. He 
(or, that man) was not the light, but he 
appeared that he might bear witness 
regarding the light. Why say this of 
John? Was there any danger that he 
should be mistaken for the light ? Some 
did think he was the Christ. See vv. το, 
20.—Ver. 9. jv τὸ das... els τὸν 
κόσμον. ἡν stands first in contrast 
to the οὐκ ἦν of νετ. 8. The light was 
not ...: the light was... In this 
verse the light is also further contrasted 
with John. The Baptist was himself a 
light (ver. 35) but not τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν. 
This designation occurs nine times in 
John, never in the Synoptists. It means 
that which corresponds to the ideal; 
true not as opposed to false, but to 
symbolical or imperfect. The light is 
further characterised as 6 φωτίζει πάντα 
ἄνθρωπον. This is the text on which 
the Quakers found for their doctrine that 
every man has a day of visitation and 
that to every man God gives sufficient 
grace. Barclay in his Apology says: 
“This place doth so clearly favour us 
that by some it is called ‘the Quakers’ 
text,’ for it doth evidently demonstrate 
our assertion’. It was also much used 
by the Greek Fathers, who believed that 
the Logos guided the heathen in their 


8—11. 


Φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


687 


10. ἐν τῷ ἵ xvii. 25; 1 
9 Cor. i. 21. 


κόσµωῳ ἦν, καὶ 6 κόσμος δι αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, ‘kai ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὖκ j Acts xxiv. 


> 
εγνω. 


philosophical researches (see Justin’s 
Dial., ii., etc., and Clement, passim).— 
ἐρχόμενον has been variously construed, 
with ἄνθρωπον, with τὸ das, or with ἦν. 
(1) The first construction is favoured by 
Chrysostom, Euthymius, the Vulgate, 
and A. V., “ that was the true light 
which lighteth every man that cometh 
into the world”; or with Meyer, “ the 
true light which lightens every man 
coming into the world was present” (ἦν 
= aderat). To the objection that ἐρχόμ. 
. +. κόσμον is thus redundant, Meyer 
replies that there is such a thing as a 
solemn redundance, and that we have 
here an ‘“‘epic fulness of words”. But the 
“epic fulness” is here out of place, 
emphasising πάντα ἄνθρωπον. Besides, 
in this Gospel, ‘‘ coming into the world” 
is not used of human birth, but of 
appearance in one’s place among men. 
And still further ἐρχόμενον of this verse 
is Obviously in contrast with the ἐν τῷ 
Koop ἦν of the next, and the subject of 
both clauses must be the same. (2) The 
second construction, with τὸ φῶς, was 
advocated by Grotius (‘valde mihi se 
probat expositio quae apud Cyrillum et 
Augustinum exstat, ut hoc ἐρχόμενον 
referatur ad τὸ φῶς,' cf. iii. το, xii. 46, 
xviil. 37), and has been adopted by Godet, 
who renders thus: ‘(That light) was 
the true light which lighteth every man, 
by coming (itself) into the world”. If 
this were John’s meaning, it is difficult 
to see why he did not insert οὗτος as in 
the second verse or τοῦτο. (3) The third 
construction, with ἦν, has much to recom- 
mend it, and has been adopted by West- 
cott, Holtzmann, and others. The R. V. 
margin renders as if ἦν ἐρχόμενον were 
the periphrastic imperfect commonly 
used in N. T., “the true light which en- 
lighteneth every man was coming into 
the world,” 1.ε., at the time when the 
Baptist was witnessing, the true light 
was dawning on the world. Westcott, 
however, thinks it best to take it «ποτε 
literally and yet more generally as 
describing a coming which was Ῥτο- 
gressive, slowly accomplished, combined 
with a permanent being, so that both the 
verb (was) and the participle (coming) 
have their full force and do not form a 
periphrasis for an imperfect”. And 
he translates: ‘‘ There was the light, 
the true light which lighteth every man; 


ε 29. 
11. εἲς τὰ ἴδια HAGE, καὶ Joi ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ * παρέλαβον. k Col. ii. 6. 


that light was, and yet more, that light 
was coming into the world ”’.—Ver. 1Ο. 
ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ . . . οὐκ ἔγνω. Vv. το and 
11 briefly summarise what happened 
when the Logos, the Light, came into 
the world. John has said: ‘The Light 
was coming into the world’’; take now 
a further step, ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ ἦν, and let 
us see what happened. Primarily rejec- 
tion. The simplicity of the statement, 
the thrice repeated κόσμος, and the con- 
necting of the clauses by a mere καί, 
deepens the pathos. The Logos is the 
subject, as is shown by both the second 
and the third clause. 

Westcott thinks that the action of the 
Light which has been comprehensively 
viewed in νετ. 9 is in vv. το, 11 divided 
into two parts. ‘‘ The first part (ver. 10) 
gathers up the facts and issues of the 
manifestation of the Light as immanent. 
The second part (ver. 11) contains an 
account of the special personal manifesta- 
tion of the Light to a chosen race.” 
That is possible; only the obvious ad- 
vance from the ἐρχόμενον of ver. 9 to the 
ἦν of ver. 1ο is thus obscured. Certainly 
Westcott goes too far when he says: 
“It is impossible to refer these words 
simply to the historical presence of the 
Word in Jesus as witnessed to by the 
Baptist ’’. 

Ver. 11. els τὰ ἴδια ἠλθεν, ‘He came 
to His own”. In the world of men was 
an inner circle which John calls τὰ ἴδια, 
His own home. (For the meaning of 
τὰ ἴδια cf. xix. 27, xvi. 32, Acts xxi. 6, 
3 Macc. iv. 27-37, Esther v. 10, Polybius, 
Hist., ii. 57, 5.) Perhaps in this place 
““His own property” might give the 
sense as accurately. Israel is certainly 
signified ; the people and all their in- 
stitutions existed only for Him. (See 
Exod. xix. 5, Deut. vii. 6, ‘‘ The Lord 
thy God hath chosen thee to be a special 
people, a peculium, unto Himself” ; also 
Mt. xxi. 33.)—ot ἴδιοι, those of His own 
home (His intimates, cf. xiii. 1), those who 
belonged to Him, αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον 
έρανε Him no reception”. The word 
is used of welcoming to a home, as in 
xiv. 3, πάλιν ἔρχομαι καὶ παραλήμψομαι 
ὑμᾶς πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. Even those whose 
whole history had been a training to 
know and receive Him rejected Him, 
It is not said of “ His own” that they 
did not ‘“‘know’”’ Him, but that they did 


12. Sco. δὲ ἵ ἔλαβον αὐτὸν, 
18. γενέσθαι, τοῖς "'"πιστεύουσιν 
i. 38. ώς αἱμάτων, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήµατος 
oti. 5,6, ἀλλ᾽ ἐκ Θεοῦ ° ἐγεννήθησαν. 


16. Ch, iii. 
5,6. 1 Jo. passim. 


not receive Him. And in the parable of 
the Wicked Husbandmen our Lord re- 
presents them as killing the heir not in 
ignorance but because they knew him. 
—Ver. 12. But not all rejected Him. 
ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον . . . ὄνομα αὐτοῦ. ὅσοι, 
as many as, as if they were a countable 
number (Holtzmann), or, rather, suggest- 
ing the individuality of exceptional action 
on the part of those who received Him. 
---ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς, to them (resuming 
σοι by a common construction) He 
gave ἐξουσίαν, not equivalent to δύναμις, 
the inward capacity, nor just equivalent 
to saying that He made them sons of 
God, but He gave them title, warrant, or 
authorisation, carrying with it all needed 
powers. Cf. v. 27, x. 18, xix. 10, Lk. 
ix. i., Mk. vi. 7, where ἐξουσία includes 
and implies δύναμις.--- τέκνα θεοῦ 
γενέσθαι, to become children of God. 
Weiss (Bibl. Theol., § 150) says: “Το 
those who accept Him by faith Christ 
has given not sonship itself, but the 
power to become sons of God; the last 
and highest realisation of this ideal, a 
realisation for the present fathomless, 
lies only in the future consummation”. 
Rather, with Stevens, {ο believe and 
to be begotten of God are two insepar- 
able aspects of the same event or 
process” (¥ohan. Theol., p. 251). John 
uses τέκνα rather than the Pauline viots 
+. @., because Paul’s view of sonship 
was governed by the Roman legal 
process of adopting a son who was not 
one’s own child: while John’s view is 
mystical and physical, the begetting of a 
child by the communication of the very 
life of God (1 John, passim). This dis- 
tinction underlies the characteristic use 
of vids by the one writer and τέκνον by the 
other (cf. Westcott, Epistles of St. Ὑοῦμε, 
Ρ. 123). By the reception of Christ as 
the Incarnate Logos we are enabled to 
recognise God as our Father and to 
come into the closest possible relation to 
Him. Those who thus receive Him are 
further identified as τοῖς πιστεύουσιν 
εἲς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, “ those who believe 
(believers, present participle) in His 
name”.—miorevew εἴς τινα is the 
favourite construction with John, and 
emphasises the object on which the 


KATA ITQANNHN 


L 


ἔδωκεν αὗτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα Θεοῦ 
εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ» 14. ot οὐκ ἐξ 
σαρκὸς, οὐδὲ ἐκ ” θελήµατος ἀνδρὸς, 


faith rests. Here that object is τὸ ὄνομα 
avrov, the sum of all characteristic 
qualities which attach to the bearer of 
the name: “quippe qui credant esse 
eum id ipsum, quod nomen declarat ” 
(Holtzmann). It is impossible to identify 
this ‘‘name” with the Logos, because 
Jesus never proclaimed Himself under 
this name. Other definite names, such 
as Son of God or Messiah, can here only 
be proleptic, and it is probably better to 
leave it indefinite, and understand it in a 
general sense of those who believed in 
the self-manifestation of Christ, and 
were characterised by that belief.—Ver. 
13. ot οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων . . . ἐγεννήθησαν. 
This first mention of τέκνα θεοῦ suggests 
the need of further defining how these 
children of God are produced. The ἐκ 
denotes the source of the relationship. 
First he negatives certain ordinary 
causes of birth, not so much because 
they could be supposed in connection 
with children of God (although thoughts 
of hereditary rights might arise in Jewish 
minds) as for the sake of emphasising 
by contrast the true source.—oix ἐξ 
αἱμάτων; that is, not by ordinary 
physical generation. αἵμα was com- 
monly used to denote descent; Acts 
xvii. 26, Odys. iv. 611, αἵματος els 
ἀγάθοιο. This is rather a Greek than a 
Hebrew expression. The plural αἱμάτων 
has given rise to many conjectural ex- 
planations; and the idea currently re- 
ceived is that it suggests the constituent 
parts of which the blood is composed 
(Godet, Meyer). Westcott says: ‘‘ The 
use of the plural appears to emphasise 
the idea of the element out of which in 
various measures the body is formed”’. 
Both explanations are doubtful. The 
plural is used very commonly in the 
Sept., 2 Sam. xvi. 8, ἀνὴρ αἱμάτων ov; 
Ps. xxv. 9, μετὰ ἀνδρῶν ᾽αἱμάτων; 2 
Chron. xxiv. 25, etc.; and especially 
where much slaughter or grievous murder 
is spoken of. Cf. Eurip., Iph. in Taur., 
73. It occurs in connection with descent 
in Eurip., Ion., 693, ἄλλων τραφεὶς ἐξ 
αἵμάτων (Liicke), The reason of John’s 
preference for the plural in this place is 
not obvious; he may perhaps have 
wished to indicate that afi iamily 


32—I4. 


14. Kat ὁ λόγος ’ σὰρξ ἐγένετο, καὶ Séoxyvacer ἐν ἡμῖν, (καὶ pr Tim. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


689 


ii, 
16. Heb. 


: ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν * ὧς μονογενοῦς ' παρὰ πατρός), ii. 14. 


πλήρης χάριτος καὶ " ἀληθείας. 


35; xxi.3,etc. στ ]ο. |. 1. 


histories and pedigrees were here of no 
account, no matter how many illustrious 
ancestors a man could reckon, no matter 
what bloods united to produce him.— 
οὐδὲ . . . ἄνδρος. The combination of 
these clauses by οὐδὲ . . . οὐδὲ and not 
by οὔτε . . . οὔτε excludes all interpre- 
tations which understand these two 
clauses as subdivisions of the foregoing. 
οὐδέ adds negation to negation: οὔτε 
divides a single negation into parts (see 
Winer, p. 612). ‘‘ Nor of the will of the 
flesh,” z.e., not as the result of sexual 
instinct; ‘‘nor of the will of a man,” 
i.é., not the product of human purpose 
{‘‘ Fortschritt von Stoff zum Naturtrieb 
und zum personlichen Thun,” Holtz- 
mann). Cf. Delitzsch, Bibl. Psych., p. 
290, note E, Tr.—a Ad’ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐγεννή- 
θησαν. The source of regeneration 
positively stated. Human will is re- 
pudiated as the source of the new birth, 
but as in physical birth the life of the 
child is at once manifested, so in spiritual 
birth the human will first manifests re- 
generation. In spiritual as in physical 
birth the origination is from without, 
not from ourselves; but just because 
our spiritual birth is spiritual the will 
must take its part in it. Nothing is 
spiritual into which the will does not 
enter. 

Vv. 14-18. The manifestation of the 
Logos defined as Incarnation.—Ver. 14. 
καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο, “ and the Word 
became flesh”. This is not a mere 
repetition. John has told us that the 
Logos came into the world, but now he 
emphasises the actual mode of His 
coming and the character of the revela- 
tion thus made, καί ‘‘ simply carrying 
forward the discourse” (Meyer) and 
now introducing the chief statement 
(Luthardt). . It is this great statement to 
which the whole prologue has been 
directed; and accordingly he names 
again the great Being to whom he at 
first introduced us but whom he has not 
named since the first verse. As forcibly 
as possible does he put the contrast 
between the prior and the subsequent 
conditions, 6 λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο; he 
does not even say ἄνθρωπος but capt. 
He wishes both to emphasise the interval 
crossed, λόγος, σάρξ; and to direct 


q Zech. ii. 


2 Mt. νι, αρ. ti. 4s; x. 18; xv. 26, 


attention to the visibility of the mani- 
festation. Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 16, ἐφανερώθη 
ἐν σαρκί; 1 John iv. 2, ἓν σαρκὶ 
ἐληλυθώς: also Heb. ii. 14. ‘Flesh 
expresses here human nature as a whole 
regarded under the aspect of its present 
corporal embodiment, including of 
necessity the ‘soul’ (xii. 27) and the 
‘ spirit’ (xi. 33, xiii, 21) as belonging to 
the totality of man’? (Westcott). The 
copula is éyévero, and what precisely this 
word covers has been the problem of 
theology ever since the Gospel was 
written. The Logos did not become 
flesh in the sense that He was turned 
into flesh or ceased to be what He was 
before ; as a boy who becomes a man 
ceases to be aboy. By his use of the 
word ἐκένωσεν in connection with the 
incarnation Paul intimates that some- 
thing was left behind when human 
nature was assumed; but in any case 
this was not the Divine essence nor the 
personality. The virtue of the incarna- 
tion clearly consists in this, that the very 
Logos became man. The Logos, retain- 
ing His personal identity, ‘‘became”’ man 
so as to live as man.—kal ἐσκήνωσεν 
ἐν ἡμῖν, ‘and tabernacled among us’’; 
not only appeared in the flesh for a brief 
space, manifesting Himself as a Being 
apart from men and superior to human 
conditions, but dwelt among us (‘‘ non 
tantum momento uno apparuisse, sed 
versatum esse inter homines,” Calvin). 
The “tent,” σκηνή, suggests no doubt 
temporary occupation, but not more 
temporary than human life. Cf. 2 Cor. 
ν. 1, 2 Pet. i. 13. And both in classical 
and N.T. Greek σκηνοῦν had taken the 
meaning “' dwell,” whether for a long or 
a short time. Cf. Rev. vii. 15, xii. 12, 
and Raphel, Annot. in loc. From the use 
of the word in Xenophon to denote living 
together and eating together Brentius 
would interpret ina fullersense: ‘ Filius 
ille Dei carne indutus, inter nos homines 
vixit, nobiscum locutus est, nobiscum 
convivatus est”. But the association in 
John’s mind was of course not military, 
but was rather with the Divine taber- 
nacle in the wilderness, when Jehovah 
pitched His tent among the shifting 
tents of His people, and shared even in 
their thirty-eight years of punishment. 


44 


690 


ν ver. 7. 
w Const . 
Vili. 55, Χχ. ην 


36. Pr) νι, => > 
x Col.i. 19, OTL πρωτος µου ην . 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ {ο 


15. Ἰωάννης μαρτυρεῖ ᾿ περὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ κέκραγε λέγων, “ Οὗτος 
5 év εἶπον,ὶ ' Ὁ ὀπίσω µου ἐρχόμενος, ἔμπροσθέν µου yéyover- 
16. Kat? ἐκ τοῦ ” πληρώματος αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς 


1 Τ.Ε, in ΜΕΡΑ ΒΣΓΙ,, etc. ; οντος ην ο εἴπων, as a parenthesis, in ὃνα 530”. 


ΤΕ. in ACSEF; οτι in ΔΡΒΟΡΙ, 33. 


Whether there is an allusion to the 
προ) has been doubted, but it is 


probable. The Shekinah meant the 
token of God’s presence and glory, 
and among the later Jews at all events 
it was supposed to be present not only 
in the temple but with individuals. See 
Schoettgen in loc. and Weber, Die 
Lehren des Talmud, § 39. What the 
tabernacle had been, the dwelling of God 
in the midst of the people, the humanity 
of the Logos now was.—kat ἐθεασάμεθα 
τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, we, among whom He 
lived, beheld by our own personal ob- 
servation the glory of the incarnate 
Logos. ‘‘Beheld,” neither, on the one 
hand, only by spiritual contemplation 
(Baur), nor, on the other, merely with the 
bodily eye, by which the glory could not be 
seen, This ‘ beholding” John treasured 
as the wealth and joy of his life. The 
“‘ glory ” they saw was not like the cloud 
or dazzling light in which God had 
manifested His glory in the ancient 
tabernacle. It was now a true ethical 
glory, a glory of personality and 
character, manifesting itself in human 
conditions. It is described as something 
unique, δόξαν ὡς μονογενοῦς παρὰ πατρός, 
«κα glory as of an only begotten from a 
father ””.—a@s introduces an illustrative 
comparison, as is indicated by the 
anarthrous μονογενοῦς. Holtzmann ex- 
pands thus: ‘‘ The impression which the 
glory made was of so specific a character 
that it could be taken for nothing less 
than such a glory as an only son has 
from a father, that is, as the only one of 
its kind; for besides the povoyevys a 
father has no other sons’’. But the ex- 
pression is no doubt suggested by the 
immediately preceding statement that as 
many as received Christ were born of 
God. The glory of the Incarnate Logos, 
however, is unique, that of an only 
begotten. In the connection, therefore, 
the application of the relation of Father 
and Son to God and Christ is close at 
hand and obvious, although not explicitly 
made. ‘‘The thought centres in the 
abstract relation of Father and Son, 
though in the actual connection this 


abstract relation passes necessarily into 
the relation of the Son to the Father.” 
Westcott.—mapa πατρός more naturally 
follows δόξαν than povoyevots. The 
glory proceeds from the Father and 
dwells in the only begotten wholly, as if 
there were no other children required to 
reflect some rays of the Divine glory. 
Accordingly He is πλήρης. With what 
is πλήρης to be construed? Erasmus 
thinks with Ἰωάννης following. Codex 
Bezae reads πλήρη and joins it to δόξαν. 
Many interpreters consider it to be one 
of those slight irregularities such as 
occur in Mk. xii. 40 and Phil. iii. το and 
in the Apoc., and would unite it either 
with αὐτοῦ or μονογενοῦς. But (pace 
Weiss) there is no good reason why we 
should not accept it as it stands and con- 
strue it in agreement with the nominative 
to ἐσκήνωσε.- χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας. 
His glory consisted in the moral qualities 
that appeared in Him. What these 
qualities were will appear more readily 
from ver. 17.— Ver. 15. ᾿Ἰωάννης 
μαρτυρεῖ . . . πρῶτός pov ἦν. At first 
sight this verse seems an irrelevant in- 
terpolation thrust in between the πλήρης 
of ver. 14 and the πλήρωμα of νετ. 16. 
Euthymius gives the connection: et καὶ 
μὴ ἐγώ, φησι, δοκῶ τισιν tows ἀξιόπισ- 
τος, ἀλλὰ πρὸ ἐμοῦ 6 Ἰωάννης μαρτυρεῖ 
περὶ τῆς θεότητος αὐτοῦ. Ιωάννη 

ἐκεῖνος οὗ τὸ ὄνομα µέγα καὶ περιβόητον 
παρὰ πᾶσι τοῖς ᾿Ἰουδαίοις.  ‘ John 
witnesses and cries, saying οὗτος ἦν ὃν 
εἶπον. This was He of whom I said 
6 ὀπίσω µου épxdpevos,” etc. This testi- 
mony was given to Andrew and John, 
ver. 30 ; but when the previous “ saying ”’ 
occurred we do not know, unless it be 
referred to the answer to the authorities, 
νετ. 27. The meaning of the testimony 
will be considered in the next section oi 
the Gospel, which is entitled ‘‘ The 
Testimony of John”.—Ver. 16. ὅτι ἐκ 
τοῦ πληρώματος . . . χάριτος, ‘because 
out of His fulness have we all received’”’. 
The ὅτι does not continue the Baptist’s 
testimony, but refers to πλήρης in ver 

14. In Col. ii. ο Paul says that in 
Christ dwelleth all the πλήρωμα of the 
Godhead, meaning to repudiate the 


15—18. EYAITEAION 69 I 


πάντες ἐλάβομεν καὶ χάριν 7 ἀντὶ χάριτος’ 17. ὅτι ὁ vdpos Buby Ga, tn 

Μωσέως ἐδόθη, ἡ " χάρις καὶ ἡ " ἀλήθεια διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐγένετο. 2 Rom. iii 

18. ’ Θεὸν οὐδεὶς ἑώρακε πώποτε" ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς,ὶ ὁ dy εἰς Tova viii, 30; 
b Exod. xzziii, 20. Ecolus. viii χε. 


1 Instead of the reading of the T.R., 9 µονογενης νιος, several modern editors read 
µονογενης θεος, For the T.R. the authorities are AC®X and some other uncials ; 
of versions the old Latin and the Vulgate, Curetonian Syriac, Armenian and Ethiopic; 
almost all the cursives and the great body of the Fathers—all the Latin Fathers after 
the fourth century. For povoyevys θεος the uncials ΜΒ, and cursive 33; the 
Peshito and Harklean Syriac in margin, and the Memphitic; and of the Greek 
Fathers Clement of Alexandria, Valentinus in Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Basil, etc. 
These authorities and the text they witness to have been discussed by the late Dr. 
Hort in his Two Dissertations, and by Ezra Abbot in his Critical Essays, pp. 241-285. 
The MS. authority favours the reading θεος; while the versions and the Fathers 
weigh rather in the opposite scale. Internal evidence is on the whole in favour of 
the T.R. The reading θεος is rejected by Scrivener, Wordsworth, McLellan, 
Tischendorf, Meyer, Godet, Liicke, Holtzmann, and Weizsacker. It should be 
noted, as brought out by Ezra Abbot, that the Arians were quite willing to call the 
Son o povoyevns Geos, because in their view this appellation happily distinguished 
Him from the Father who αἶοπε was God in the highest sense, unbegotten, un. 


caused, and without beginning. 


“Gnostic idea that this pleroma was dis- 
tributed among many subordinate beings 
or zons. But what John has here in 
view is that the fulness of grace in 
Christ was communicable to men. By 
ἡμεῖς πάντες he indicates himself and all 
other Christians. He had himself ex- 
perienced the reality of that grace with 
which Christ was filled and its inex- 
haustible character. For he adds καὶ 
χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος, “ grace upon grace”’. 
Beza suggests the rendering: (‘ut 
quidam vir eruditus explicat,” he says): 
“Gratiam supra gratiam; pro quo 
eleganter dixeris, gratiam gratia cumu- 
latam,”’ but he does not himself adopt it. 
It is, however, adopted by almost all 
modern interpreters: so that ever and 
anon fresh grace appears over and above 
that already received. This rendering, 
as Meyer points out, is linguistically 
justified by Theognis, Sent., 344, ἀντ᾽ 
ἀνιῶν ἀνίας, Sorrows upon sorrows; and 
it receives remarkable illustration from 
the passage quoted by Wetstein from 
Philo, De Poster. Cain., where, speaking 
of grace, he says that God does not 
allow men to be sated with one grace, 
but gives ἑτέρας ἀντ᾽ ἐκείνων (the first) 
Kal τρίτας ἄντι τῶν δευτέρων καὶ del 
νέας ἀντὶ παλαιοτέρων. Harnack (Hist. 
of Dogma, i., 76, E. Tr.) asks: ‘‘ Where 
in the history of mankind can we find 
anything resembling this, that men who 
had eaten and drunk with their Master 
should glorify Him, not only as the 
Revealer of God, but as the Prince of 
Life, as the Redeemer and Judge of the 


world, as the living power of its existence, 
and that a choir of Jews and Gentiles, 
Greeks and barbarians, wise and foolish, 
should along with them immediately 
confess that out of the fulness of this one 
man they have received grace for grace?” 
—Ver. 17. ὅτι ὁ νόμος . : . ἐγένετο. 
What is the connection? His state- 
ment that the Incarnate Logos was the 
inexhaustible supply of grace might seem 
to disparage Moses and the previous 
manifestations of God. He therefore 
explains. And he seems to have in view 
the same distinction between the old and 
the new that is so frequently emerging 
in the Pauline writings. Through Moses, 
here taken as representing the pre- 
Christian dispensation, was given the 
law, which made great demands but 
gave nothing, which was a true revela- 
tion of God’s will, and so far was good, 
but brought men no ability to become 
liker God. But through Jesus Christ 
(here for the first time named in the 
Gospel, because we are now fully on the 
ground of history) came grace and truth. 
In contrast to the inexorable demands 
of a law that brought no spiritual life, 
Jesus Christ brought ‘‘ grace,” the un- 
earned favour of God. The Law said: 
Do this and live; Christ says: God 
gives you life, accept it. ‘‘ Truth” also 
was brought by Christ.—adyj@era here 
means ‘‘reality”’ as opposed to the 
symbolism of the Law (cf. iv. 23). In 
the Law was a shadow of good things 
to come: in Christ we have the good 
things themselves. Several good critics 


692 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ a 


¢ Deut. xiii κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο. 19. Kal αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ. 
µαρτυρία τοῦ Ιωάννου, ὅτε ἀπέστειλαν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐξ Ἱεροσολύμων 


ἱερεῖς καὶ Λευΐτας, ἵνα ἐρωτήσωσιν αὐτὸν, “Ed τίς et;” 


20. Kat 


ὡμολόγησε, καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσατο' Kai ὡμολόγησεν, “' Ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ 


find a contrast between ἐδόθη and 
ἐγένετο; the law being “given” for a 
special purpose, “grace and truth” 
“coming” in the natural course and as 
the issue of all that had gone before.— 
Ver. 18. Qedv ovSels ἑώρακεν . 
ἐξηγήσατο. This statement, ‘God no 
one has ever seen,” is probably suggested 
by the words διὰ ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. The 
reality and the grace of God we have 
seen through Jesus Christ, but why not 
directly? Because God, the Divine 
essence, the Godhead, no one has ever 
seen. No man has had immediate know- 
ledge of God: if we have knowledge of 
God it is through Christ. 

A further description is given of the 
Only Begotten intended to disclose His 
qualification for revealing the Father in 
the words 6 ὢν eis τὸν κόλπον τοῦ 
πατρός. Meyer supposes that John is 
now expressing himself from his own 
present standing point, and is conceiving 
of Christ as in His state of exaltation, as 
having returned to the bosom of the 
Father. But in this case the description 
would not be relevant. John adds this 
designation to ground the revealing 
work which Christ accomplished while 
on earth (ἐξηγήσατο, aorist, referring to 
that work), to prove His qualification for 
it. It must therefore include His con- 
dition previous to incarnation. 6 ὢν is 
therefore a timeless present and els is 
used, asin Mk. xiii. 16, Acts ΥΠ. 40, etc., 
for ἐν. els τὸν κόλπον, whether taken 
from friends reclining at a feast or from 
a father’s embrace, denotes perfect in- 
timacy. Thus qualified, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγή- 
σατο΄« He” emphatic, He thus equipped, 
‘‘has interpreted’? what? See viil. 32; 
or simply, as implied in the preceding 
negative clause, ‘‘God”. The Scholiast 
on Soph., Ajax, 320, says, ἐξήγησις ἐπὶ 
θείων, ἑρμηνεία ἐπὶ τῶν τυχόντων, Wet- 
stein. 

Ver. 19. With this verse begins the 
Gospel proper or historical narrative of 
the manifestation of the glory of the 
Incarnate Logos. 

Vv. 19-42. The witness of Fohn and 
its result.—Vv. 19-28. The witness of 
John to the deputation from Jerusalem, 
entitled αὕτη ἐστὶν . . . Λενείτας. The 
witness or testimony of John is placed 
first, not only because it was that which 


ee 


influenced the evangelist himself, nor 
only because chronologically it came 
first, but because the Baptist was com- 
missioned to be the herald οἱ the 
Messiah. The Baptist’s testimony was 
of supreme value because of (1) his 
appointment to this function of identify- 
ing the Messiah, (2) his knowledge of 
Jesus, (3) his own holiness, (4) his dis- 
interestedness.—atrn, this which follows, 
is the testimony given on a special 
occasion ὅτε ἀπέστειλαν . . . Aeveiras, 
“‘when the Jews sent to him from Jeru- 
salem priests and Levites ’.—lovdaior 


[o-nm], originally designating the 


tribes of Judah and Benjamin which 
formed the separate kingdom of Judah, 
but after the exile denoting all Israelites. 
In this Gospel it is used with a hostile 
implication as the designation of the 
“entire theocratic community as summed 
up in its official heads and as historically 
fixed in an attitude of hostility to 
Christ’ (Whitelaw). Here ‘‘ the Jews” 
probably indicates the Sanhedrim, com- 
posed of priests, presbyters, and scribes. 
—iepeis καὶ Λευείτας, the higher and 
lower order of temple officials (Holtz- 
mann). Why were not scribes sent? 
Possibly because John’s father was him- 
self a priest. The priests were for the 
most part Sadducees, but John tells us 
this deputation was strong in Pharisees 
(ver. 24). Lampe says: ‘‘ Custodibus 
Templi incumbebat, Dominum Templi, 
cujus adventum exspectabant, nosse”’. 
They were sent ἵνα ἐρωτήσωσιν αὐτόν, 
‘that they might interrogate him,” not 
captiously but for the sake of informa- 
tion. Lk. tells us (iii. 15) that the people 
were on the tiptoe of expectation, and 
were discussing whether John were not 
the Christ ; so it was time the Sanhedrim 
should make the inquiry. ‘‘ The judg- 
ment of the case of a false prophet is 
specially named in the Mishna as belong- 
ing to the council of the Seventy One”’ 
(Watkins). ‘ This incident gives a deep 
insight into the extraordinary religious 
life of the Jews—their unusual combina- 
tion of conservatism with progressive 
thought” (Reynolds’ F¥ohn the Baptist, 
Ρ. 365).---Σὺ τίς ef, “Who art thou?” 
Not, what is your name, or birth, but, 
what personage do you claim to be, 


19—23 


ἐγὼ 6 Χριστός.” 
σύ; Kai λέγει, “Οὐκ cit.” 


κ 5) 


ἀπεκρίθη, ‘Ov. 


a ~ ( ς ~ / . 2. 
δῶμεν τοῖς πέµψασιν ἡμᾶς τί λέγεις περὶ σεαυτοῦ ; 


~ 


“8 °Eya «φωνὴ βοῶντος ἐν τῇ 


1 Τ.Ε. in NAC3L; ειπαν in BC*D, 


what place in the community do you 
aspire to?—with an implied reference to 
a possible claim on John’s part to be 
the Christ. This appears from John’s 
answer, ὡμολόγησεν καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσατο 
καὶ ὡμολόγησεν. Schoettgen says the 
form of the sentence is ‘‘ judaico more,” 
citing ‘‘ Jethro confessus, et non mentitus 
est”. Cf,, Rom..ix,.1, and) 1,.Tim.,1i,,.7 
The iteration serves here to bring out 
the earnestness, almost horror, with 
which John disclaimed the ascription to 
him of such an honour. His high con- 
ception of the office emphasises his 
acknowledgment of Jesus.—é6tt, here, as 
commonly, ‘‘recitative,” serving the 


purpose of our inverted commas or’ 


marks of quotation.—éyo οὐκ εἰμὶ 6 
Χριστός, the reading adopted by Tisch. 
and W.H., bringing the emphasis on 
the “I”, ‘J am not the Christ,’’ but 
another is. The Τ.Ε. οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγὼ 6 
Χριστός, by bringing the ἐγὼ and 6 
Χριστός together, accentuates the in- 
congruity and the Baptist’s surprise at 
being mistaken for the Christ. This 
straightforward denial evokes another 
question (ver. 21), τί οὖν; which Weiss 
renders, “' What then art thou ?”’ Better 
‘‘ what then ?”’ ‘‘ what then is the case ?”’ 
quid ergo, quid igitur }--"Ἠλείας εἶ σύ; 
If not the Christ Himself, the next 
possibility was that he was the fore- 
runner of the Messiah, according to Mal. 
iv. 5, ‘‘ Behold, I will send you Elijah 
the prophet before the coming of the 
great and dreadful day of the Lord”. 
{Among the Fathers there seems to have 
been a belief that Elias would appear 
before the second Advent. Thus 
Tertullian (De anima, 50) says: ‘“ Trans- 
latus est Enoch et Elias, nec mors eorum 
reperta est, dilata scilicet. Caeterum 


morituri reservantur, ut Antichristum 
sanguine suo _ exstinguant.” Other 
references in Lampe.] JBut to this 


question also John answers οὐκ eip(, 
because the Jews expected Elias in 
person, so that although our Lord spoke 
of the Baptist as Elias (Mt. xvii. 10-13), 
John could not admit that identity with- 
out misleading them. If people need 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


693 


21. Καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν, “Ti οὖν, “ Ἠλίας ef d Mal. iv. 5. 

6 Ὁ προφήτης εἶ ov;” 
, x 

22. Eirov! οὖν αὐτῷ, “Tis et; ἵνα * ἀπόκρισιν { xix. ο. Job 


Kate Deut. 
viil. 18. 
XKXili. 3. 


23. “Eon, 


ἐρήμῳ, Εὐθύνατε τὴν ὁδὸν Kupiou-” ¢ te, xi. 3. 


-4μν- 


to question a great spiritual personality, 
replies in their own language will often 
mislead them. Another alternative pre- 
sented itself: 6 προφήτης et σύ; ‘art 
thou the prophet?” viz., the prophet 
promised in Deut. xviii. 15, ‘‘ The. Lord 
thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet 
from the midst of thee, like unto me”’. 
Allusion is made to this prophet in four 
places in this Gospel, the present verse 
and ver. 25 of this chapter; also in vi. 
14 and vii. 4ο. That the Jews did not 
see in this prophet the Messiah would 
appear from the present verse, and also 
from vii. 40: “' Some said, Of a truth this 
is the prophet ; others said, This is the 
Christ”. The Jews looked for ‘a faith- 
ful prophet’ (1 Macc. xiv. 41) who was 
to terminate the prophetic period and 
usher in the Messianic reign. But after 
Peter, as recorded in Acts iii. 22, applied 
the prophecy of Deut. to Christ, the 
Christian Church adopted this interpre- 
tation. The use of the prophecy by 
Christ Himself justified this. But the 
different interpretations thus introduced 
gave rise to some confusion, and as Light- 
foot points out, none but a Jew contem- 
porary with Christ could so clearly have 
held the distinction between the two in- 
terpretations. (See Deane’s Pseudepig., p. 
121; Wendt’s Teaching of Fesus, E. Tr., 
i, 67; and on the relation of ‘‘the 
prophet”’ to Jeremiah, see Weber, p. 339.) 
To this question also John answered 
“No”; ‘quia Prophetis omnibus erat 
praestantior”’ (Lampe). This negation 
is explained by the affirmation of ver. 23. 
Thus baffled in all their suggestions the 
deputies ask John to give them some 
positive account of himself, that they 
might not go back to those who sent 
them without having accomplished the 
object of their mission. To this second 
τίς el; τί λέγεις περὶ σεαντοῦ; (νετ. 23) 
he replies in words made familiar by the 
Synoptists, ἐγώ gwvn βοῶντος ἐν τῇ 
ρήμῳ . . . ὁ προφήτης; John applies 
to himself the words of Is. xl. 3, blending 
the two clauses ἑτοιμάσατε τὴν ῥὁδὸν 
Κυρίου and εὐθείας ποιεῖτε τὰς τρίβους 
τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν into one: εὐθύνατε τὴν 


694 


καθὼς εἶπεν Ἡσαΐας ὁ προφήτης.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ f. 


24. Καὶ οἱ ! ἀπεσταλμένοι ἦσαν 


ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων: 25. καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν, καὶ εἶπον αὐτῶ, “Τί 
οὖν βαπτίζεις, εἰ σὺ οὐκ ef ὁ Χριστὸς, οὔτε Ἡλίας, οὔτε ὁ προφήτης ;” 
b Με, fii. 11. 26. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰωάννης λέγων, ““᾿Εγὼ βαπτίζω 3 ἐν ὕδατι - 


Lk. iii. 16. 
i Mt. xiv.24.' µέσος δὲ ὑμῶν ἕστηκεν," 
ὁ Α τατε 
constr., 
usually 
infin. or 
gen. 


ὃν ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε. 


27. αὐτός ἐστιν 6 


ὀπίσω µου ἐρχόμενος, ὃς ἔμπροσθέν µου Ὑέγονεν: οὗ ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ 
ἄξιος J ἵνα λύσω αὐτοῦ τὸν ἵμάντα τοῦ ὑποδήματος.” 


28. Ταῦτα ἐν 


Βηθαβαρᾶ ® ἐγένετο πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου, ὅπου ἦν Ιωάννης βαπτίζων. 


1 T.R. in ΝΕΡΑ20ΟΣ, etc.; without article in ν Α"Β0”. 
2 T.R. in ACX, etc.; στηκει in BL, adopted by W.H.R. 
* βηθανια in N*ABC*EFG, etc., adopted by Tr.T.W.H.R. 


ὁδὸν Κυρίου. By appropriating this pro- 
phetic description John identifies himself 
as the immediate precursor of the 
Messiah; and probably also hints that 
he himself is no personage worthy that 
inquiry should terminate on him, but 
only a voice. [Heracleon neatly graduates 
revelation, saying that the Saviour is 6 
λόγος, John is φωνή, the whole pro- 
phetic order ἦχος, a mere noise; for 
which he is with some justice rebuked 
by Origen.] ‘‘ The desert,” a pathless, 
fruitless waste fitly symbolises the 
spiritual condition of the Messiah’s 
people. For the coming of their King 
preparation must be made, especially by 
such repentance as John preached. “If 
Israel repent but for one day, the Messiah 
will come.” Cf. Weber, p. 334.—Ver. 
24. καὶ ἀπεσταλμένοι ἦσαν ἐκ τῶν 
Φαρισαίων. This gives us the meaning 
‘‘ And they had been sent from,” which 
is not so congruous with the context as 
‘‘And they who were sent were of the 
Pharisees”; because apparently this 
clause was inserted to explain the follow- 
ing question (ver. 25): τί οὖν βαπτίζεις 

ο. 6 προφήτης: Founding on Zech. 
xiii. 1, “In that day there shall be a 
fountain opened for sin and for unclean- 
ness,” and on Ezek. xxxvi. 25, “‘then 
will I sprinkle clean water upon you,” 
they expected a general purification 
before the coming of the Messiah. Hence 
their question. If John was not the 
Messiah, nor the prophet, nor Elias in 
elose connection with the Messiah, why 
did he baptise? Lightfoot (Hor. Heb., 
Ρ. 965) quotes from Kiddushin “ Elias 
venit ad immundos distinguendum et ad 
purificandum’”’. See also Ammonius and 
Beza quoted in Lampe. In reply to 
this objection of the Pharisees (ver. 26) 
John says: ἐγὼ Λβαπτίζω . . . τοῦ 
ὑποδήματος, “I for my part baptise with 
water’; the emphatic ‘‘I”’ leading us 


to expect mention of another with whom 
a contrast is drawn. This contrast is 
further signified by the mention of the 
element of the baptism, ἐν ὕδατι; a 
merely symbolic element, but also the 
element by baptism in which preparation 
for the Messiah was to be made. And 
John’s administration of this precursory 
baptism is justified by the fact he im- 
mediately states, µέσος ὑμῶν στήκει ὃν 
ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε. Had they been aware 
of this presence (tpets emphatic) as John 
was aware of it, they could not have 
challenged the baptism of John, because 
it was the divinely appointed prepara- 
tion for the Messiah’s advent. This. 
scarcely amounts to what Lampe calls 
it, ‘nova exprobratio ignorantiae 
Pharisaeorum” (Is. xlii. 1ο, xxix. 14), 
because as yet they had had no oppor- 
tunity of knowing the Christ.—péoos. 
ὑμῶν. There is no reason why the 
words should not be taken strictly. So 
Euthymius, ἦν yap 6 Χριστὸς ava- 
μεμιγµένος τότε τῷ ag.—étricw pov 
ἐρχόμενος, denoting the immediate 
arrival of the Messiah and John’s close 
connection with Him. He is further 
described relatively to John as incon- 
ceivably exalted above him, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ 

- « ὑποδήματο. The grammatical 
form admitting both the relative and pers. 
pronoun is Hebraistic. ἄξιος ἵνα also 
stands instead of the classical construc- 
tion with the infinitive. - Talmudists 
quote the saying: ‘‘ Every service which 
a servant will perform for his master, a 
disciple will do for his Rabbi, except 
loosing his sandal thong”.—Ver. 28. 
ταῦτα ἐν Βηθανίᾳ ... βαπτίζων. The 
place is mentioned on account of the im- 
portance of the testimony thus borne to 
Jesus, and because the evangelist him- 
self in all probability was present and it 
was natural to him to name it. But 
where was it? There is no doubt that 


24---20. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


695 


29. TH ἐπαύριον βλέπει ὁ Ἰωάννης τὸν “Incody ἐρχόμενον wpe κ Exod. xii. 


ᾳ 


αὐτὸν, καὶ λέγει, ''"Ίδε 6 


the reading Βηθανίᾳ is to be preferred. 
The addition πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου con- 
firms this reading ; as the existence of 
Bethany near Jerusalem rendered the 
distinguishing designation necessary. 


Bethany = TSN [meaning “ boat- 
house,” and Bethabara having the same 
meaning [Tay a ferry boat] is it not 


possible that the same place may have 
been called,by both names indifferently ? 
Henderson (Palestine, p. 154) suggests 
that possibly the explanation of the 
doubtful reading is that the place referred 
to is Bethabara which led over into 
Bethania, that is, Bashan. Similarly 
Conder (Handbook, p. 320) says Bethania 
beyond Jordan is evidently the province 
of Batanea, and the ford Abdrah now 
discovered leads into Batanea. At this 
place ‘‘ John was, baptising,” rather 
than ‘* John was baptising ”’. 

Vv. 29-34. The witness of Σούι based 
on the sign at the baptism of Fesus.— 
Ver. 29. τῇ ἐπαύριον, the first instance 
of John’s accurate definition of time. 
Cf. 35, 43, ii. 1. The deputation had 
withdrawn, but the usual crowd attracted 
by John would be present. ‘‘ The in- 
quiries made from Jerusalem would 
naturally create fresh expectation among 
John’s disciples. At this crisis,” etc. 
(Westcott).—BAére. τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐρχό- 
µενον πρὸς αὐτόν. Jesus had quite 
recently returned from the retirement 
in the wilderness, and naturally sought 
John’s company. Around John He is 
nore likely to find receptive spirits than 
elsewhere. -And it gave His herald an 
opportunity to proclaim Him, ἴδε 6 
ἁμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ 6 αἴρων τὴν αµαρτίαν 
τοῦ κόσμου. The article indicates that a 
person who could thus be designated had 
been expected; or it may merely be 
introductory to the further definition of 
the succeeding clause.—rov θεοῦ, pro- 
vided by God; cf. “bread of God,” vi. 
33; also Rom. viii. 32. It is impossible 
to suppose with the author of Ecce Homo 
that by this title “‘ the lamb of God” the 
Baptist merely meant to designate Jesus 
as aman ‘full of gentleness who could 
patiently bear the ills to which He would 
be subjected” (cf. Aristoph., Pax, 935). 
The second clause forbids this interpre- 
tation. He isa lamb atpwv τὴν ἁμαρτίαν. 


Χ ἁμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, 6 αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν | πα 


. ποστ, 


eb. i. 3. 


1 Jo. ii.a2. x Pet. i. 19. 


and there is only one way in which a 
lamb can take away sin, and that is by 
sacrifice. The expression might suggest 
the picture of the suffering servant of 
the Lord in Is. liii., ‘led as a lamb to 
the slaughter,” but unless the Baptist 
had previously been speaking of this 
part of Scripture, it is doubtful whether 
those who heard him speak would think 
of it. In Isaiah it is as a symbol of 
patient endurance the lamb is introduced; 
here it is as the symbol of sacrifice. It 
is needless to discuss whether the paschal 
lamb or the lamb of daily sacrifice was 
in the Baptist’s thoughts. He used ‘the 
lamb” as the symbol of sacrifice in 
general. Here, he says, is the reality 
of which all animal sacrifice was the 
symbol.—é αἴρων, the present participle, 
indicating the chief characteristic of the 
lamb. aipw has three meanings: (1) to 
raise or lift up, John viii. 59, jpav 
λίθους; (2) to bear or carry, Mt. xvi. 24, 
apdtw τὸν σταυρὸν atrov; (3) to τε- 
move or take away, John xx. 1, of the 
stone ἠρμένον from the sepulchre ; and 
1 John 11. 5, ἵνα τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἄρῃ, that 
He might take away sins. In the LXX 
Φέρειν, not αἴρειν, is regularly used {ο 
express the ‘‘bearing” of sin (sec 
Leviticus, passim). In 1 Sam. xv. 25 
Saul beseeches Samuel in the words 
ἄρον τὸ ἁμάρτημά pov, which obviously 
means “remove” (not ‘“‘bear’’) my 
sin. Soin r Sam. xxv. 28. But a lamb 
can remove sin only by sacrificially 
bearing it, so that here atpew includes 
and implies dépew.—rod κόσμον, cf. 1 
John ii. 2, αὐτὸς ἱλασμός ἐστὶ . . . περὶ 
ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου, and especially Philo’s 
assertion quoted by Wetstein that some 
sacrifices were ὑπὲρ ἅπαντος ἀνθρώπων 
γένους. 

In this verse Holtzmann finds two 
marks of late date. (1) The Baptist was 
markedly a man of his own people, 
whose eye never ranged beyond a Jewish 
horizon; yet here he is represented as 
from the first perceiving that the work ot 
Jesus was valid for all men. And (2) 
the allusion to the sacrificial efficacy ot 
Christ’s death could not have been made 
till after that event. Strauss stated this 
difficulty with his usual lucidity. ‘So 
foreign to the current opinion at least 
was this notion of the Messiah that the 
disciples of Jesus, during the whole 


696 


τοῦ κόσμου. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ L 


30. οὗτός ἐστι περὶ] οὗ ἐγὼ εἶπον, Ὀπίσω µου 


ἔρχεται ἀνὴρ, ὃς ἔµπροσθέν µου Ὑέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός µου ἦν. 


31. κἀγὼ οὐκ ᾖδειν αὐτόν : 
m ΜΕ. i, 10. T00TO ἦλθον ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ ὕδατι βαπτίζων.” 
Ιωάννης λέγων, “'""Ὅτι τεθέαµαι τὸ Πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον ὡσαὶ 


Mt. iii. 16. » 
LK. iii. σα. 


1νπερ in SYBC, Origen. 
in late Greek prose. 


period of their intercourse with Him, 
could not reconcile themselves to it; 
and when His death had actually taken 
place their trust in Him as the Messiah 
was utterly confounded.’’ Yet Strauss 
himself admits that “‘a penetrating mind 
like that of the Baptist might, even 
before the death of Jesus, gather from 
the O.T. phrases and types the notion 
of a suffering Messiah, and that his 
obscure hints on the subject might not 
be comprehended by his disciples and 
contemporaries”. The solution is pro- 
bably to be found in the intercourse of 
John with Jesus, and especially after 
His return from the Temptation. These 
men must have talked long and earnestly 
on the work of the Messiah; and even 
though after his imprisonment John 
seems to have had other thoughts about 
the Messiah, that is not inconsistent 
with his making this statement under 
the direct influence of Jesus. We must 
also consider that John’s own relation 
to the Messianic King must have greatly 
stimulated his thought; and his desire 
to respond to the cravings he stirred in 
the people must have led him to consider 
what the Messiah must be and do. 

Ver. 30. οὗτος . . . πρῶτός µου ἦν. 
Pointing to Jesus he identifies Him with 
the person of whom he had previously 
said ὀπίσω pot, etc. Cf. νετ. 15. ‘ After 
me comes a man who is before me 
because He was before me.” The A.V. 
‘which is before me” is preferable 
though not so literal as the R.V. “‘ which 
is become before me”. The words mean : 
‘Subsequent to me in point of time 
comes a man who has gained a place in 
advance of me, because He was eternally 
prior to me”’.—éaiow pov ἔρχεται refers 
cather to space than to time, “‘ after me,”’ 
but with the notion of immediacy, close 
behind, following upon. As certainly, 
ἔμπροσθέν pov γέγονεν refers to position 
or dignity; He has come to be in front of 
me, or ahead of me. So used sometimes 
in classic writers ; as ἔμπροσθ.τοῦ δικαίον, 
preferred before justice. Dem., 1297, 26. 


Cp. 2 Thess. ii. 1, and 2 Cor. i. 8. 
Cp. Holden’s note in Plutarch, Demosth., p. 181. 


ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα φανερωθῇ τῷ σραὴλ, διὰ 
32. Καὶ ἐμαρτύρησεν 


This use common 


--ὅτι πρῶτός µου ἦν, assigning the 
ground of this advanced position of 
Jesus: He was before me. For πρῶτός 
µου see chap. xv. 18, “If the world 
hateth you, ye know ὅτι ἐμὲ πρῶτον 
ὑμῶν µεμµίσηκεν, and Justin Martyr, 
t Apol., 12. It is difficult to escape the 
impression that something more is meant 
than πρότερος would have conveyed, 
some more absolute priority. As oi 
πρῶτοι στρατοῦ are the chief men or 
leaders, it might be supposed that John 
meant to say that Christ was his 
supreme, in virtue of whom he himself 
lived and worked. But it is more probable 
he meant to affirm the pre-existence of 
the Messiah, a thought which may have 
been derived from the Apocalyptic books 
(see Deane’s Pseud. and Drummond’s 
Fewish Mess.).—Ver. 31. Kayo οὐκ 
ἴδειν αὐτόν, z.e., 1 did not know Him to 
be the Messiah. Mt. iii. 14 shows that 
John knew Jesusas aman. This mean- 
ing is also determined by the clause 
added: GAN ἵνα . . . ἐν ὕδατι βαπτίζων. 
The object of the Baptist’s mission was 
the manifestation of the Christ. It was 
the Baptist’s preaching and the religious 
movement it initiated which summoned 
Jesus into public life. He alone could 
satisfy the cravings quickened by the 
Baptist. And it was at the baptism of 
Jesus, undergone in sympathy with the 
sinful people and as one with them, that 
the Spirit of the Messiah was fully im- 
parted to Him and He was recognised 
as the Messiah. How John himself 
became convinced that Jesus was the 
Messiah he explains to the people, wv. 
32-4.—Ver. 32. τεθέαµαι τὸ πνεῦμα . . . 
ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν. ‘I have seen the Spirit 
coming down like a dove out of heaven, 
and it remained upon Him.” “1 have 
seen, perfect, in reference to the sign 
divinely intimated to him, in the abiding 
fulfilment of which he now stood.” 
Alford, τεθέαµαι is used (as in ver. 14) 
in its sense of seeing with intelligence, 
with mental or spiritual observation and 
inference (cf. Aristoph., Clouds, 363, 


90-34. 


x 3 “ ‘ 4 
περιστερὰν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ἔμεινεν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


697 


34. κἀγὼ οὐκ 


ἐπ αὐτόν. 


ὔδειν αὐτόν: GAN 6 πέµψας µε βαπτίζειν "ἐν ὕδατι, ἐκεῖνός µοι n ver. 26. 
εἶπεν, Ep ὃν ἂν ἴδης τὸ Πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον καὶ µένον ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν, 


οὗτός ἐστιν 6 βαπτίζων ἐν Πνεύματι 


x Αγίω. 


34. Kayo ἑώρακα, 


‘ /΄ 4 Ls ων 4 3 ς εν aA - 3 
και μεμαρτυρηκα οτι OUTOS ἐστιν ὁ ULOS TOU Θεοῦ. 


“‘Have you ever seen it rain without 
clouds?”’). In what sense did the 
Baptist “‘see’’ the Spirit descending ? 
Origen distinctly declared that these 
words οἰκονομὶας τρόπῳ γέγραπται οὐχ 
ἱστορικὴν διήγησιν ἔχοντα ἀλλὰ θεωρίαν 
νοητήν, li. 239. The ὡς περιστερὰν ἐξ 
οὐρανοῦ does not necessarily involve that 
an actual dove was visible. It was not the 
dove which was to be the sign; but, as 
the Baptist affirms in ver. 33, the descent 
and abiding of the Spirit. John was 
scarcely the type of man who would be 
determined in an important course of 
action by the appearance of a bird. 
What he saw was the Spirit descending. 
This he can best have seer in the de- 
meanour of Jesus, in His lowliness and 
sympathy and holiness, all of which 
came to their perfect bloom at and in 
His baptism. It was the possession of 
this spirit by Jesus that convinced John 
that He could baptise with the Holy 
Spirit. That this conviction came to 
him at the baptism of Christ with a clear- 
ness and firmness which authenticated 
it as divine is guaranteed by the words 
of this verse. It was as plain to him 
that Jesus was possessed by the Spirit 
as if he had seen the Spirit in a visible 
shape alighting upon Him. Toa mind 
absorbed in this one idea it may have 
actually seemed as if he saw it with his 
bodily eyes. Ambrose, De Sacram.,i., 5, 
‘‘ Spiritus autem sanctus non in veritate 
columbae, sed in specie columbae 
descendit de οοεῖο”’. The dove was in 
the East a sacred bird, and the brooding 
dove was symbolic of the quickening 
warmth of nature. In Jewish writings 
the Spirit hovering over the primeval 
waters is expressly compared to a dove: 
“Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas, 
sicut columba, quae fertur super pullos 
suos nec tangit illos’. Cf. also Noah’s 
dove as symbol of the new creation. 
(See Suicer, s.v., περιστερά, and Strauss, 
i., 362.) Such a symbol of the Spirit 
would scarcely have been imagined by 
the Baptist, who was all for stern and 
violent methods.—Ver, 33. κἀγὼ οὐκ 
qdew . . . ἐκεϊνός µοι εἶπεν Because 
of the importance of the identification of 
‘the Messiah the Baptist reiterates that 


his proclamation of Jesus was not a 
private idea for which he alone was 
responsible, On the contrary, He whe 
had sent him to baptise had given him 
this sign by which to recognise the 
Christ.—ég’ ὃν ἂν ἴδῃς . . . πνεύµατι 
ἁγίῳ. Lk. (iii. 16) adds καὶ πνρί, which 
occasions the well-known utterance in 
Ecce Homo: ‘“‘ Baptism means cleansing, 
and fire means warmth. How can 
warmth cleanse? The answer is that 
moral warmth does cleanse. No heart is 
pure that is not passionate ; no virtue is 
safe that is not enthusiastic. And such 
an enthusiastic virtue Christ was to in- 
troduce.” In affirming that the Christ 
baptises with the Holy Spirit, and that 
this is what distinguishes the Christ, the 
Baptist steps on to grouud where his 
affirmations can be tested by experience. 
This is the fundamental article of the 
Christian creed. Has Christ power to 
make men holy? History gives the 
answer. The essence of the Holy Spirit 
is communication: Jesus being the 
Christ, the anointed with the Spirit, must 
communicate it.—Ver. 34. κἀγὼ ἑώρακα 
- +. @. vidos τοῦ θεοῦὈ. ‘ And I have 
seen and have testified that this is the 
Son of God.” The Synoptists tell us 
that a voice was heard at the baptism 
declaring ‘‘this is my beloved Son’’; 
and in the Temptation Satan uses the 
title. Nathanael at the very beginning 
of the ministry, and the demoniacs very 
little later, use the same designation. 
This was in a rigidly monotheistic com- 
munity and in a community in which the 
same title had been applied to the king, 
to designate a certain alliance and close 
relation between the human representa- 
tive and the Divine Sovereign. Whether 
the Baptist in his peculiar circumstances 
had begun to suspect that a fuller mean- 
ing attached to the title, we do not know. 
Unquestionably the Baptist must have 
found his ideas of the Messianic office 
expanding under the influence of inter- 
course with Jesus, and must more than 
ever have seen that this was a unique 
title setting Jesus apart from all other 
men. The basis of the application of 
the title to the Messiah is to be found ia 
2 Sam, vii. 14, ‘I will be to him a Father 


698 


KATA IQANNHN 


1.- 


35. TH ἐπαόριον πάλιν} εἰστήκει ὁ Ἰωάννης, καὶ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν΄ 


αὐτοῦ δύο. 
ς “A a” 
6 ἁμνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


n ? An 
ο Ps. xxvii. TOS, καὶ ἠκολούθησαν τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


8. Lk. xi. 


36. καὶ ἐμβλέψας τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ περιπατοῦντι, λέγει, “Ide 
37- Καὶ ἤκουσαν αὐτοῦ οἱ δύο μαθηταὶ λαλοῦν- 


38. στραφεὶς δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ 


9. θεασάµενος αὐτοὺς ἀκολουθοῦντας, λέγει αὐτοῖς, 39. “ Tt Lyreire ; ‘i 


1 For the two forms ειστηκει and torpxes see Veitch. 


and he will be to me a Son”, In the 
second and eighty-ninth Psalms the term 
is seen passing into a Messianic sense, 
and that it should appear in the N.T. as 
a title of the Messiah is inevitable. 

Vv. 35-42. Witness of Fohn to two of 
his disciples and first self-manifestation 
of Fesus as the Christ. Bengel entitles 
the section, vv. 35-52, ‘‘ primae oOrigines 
Ecclesiae Christianae’’; but from the 
evangelist’s point of view it is rather the 
blending of the witness of John with the 
self-manifestation of Jesus. His kingly 
lordship over men He reveals (1) by 
making Himself accessible to inquirers : 
Andrew and John; (2) by giving a new 
name, implying new character: Simon 
becomes Peter ; (3) by summoning men 
to follow Him: Philip; (4) by interpret- 
ing and satisfying men’s deepest desires 
and aspirations: Nathanael.—Ver. 35. 
τῇ ἐπαύριον .. . αὐτοῦ δύο. On the 
morrow John was again standing 
(ἱστήκει, pluperfect with force of im- 
perfect) and two of his disciples. [Holtz- 
mann uses this close riveting of day to 
day as an argument against the historicity 
of this part of the Gospel. He says that 
ne room is left for the temptation 
between the baptism and the marriage 
in Cana. But these repeated “‘ morrows”’ 
take us back, not to the baptism, which 
is nowhere in this Gospel directly 
narrated, but to the Baptist’s conversa- 
tion with the deputation from Jerusalem, 
in which it is implied that already the 
baptism of Jesus was past; how long 
past this Gospel does not state, but, quite 
as easily as not, six weeks may be in- 
serted between the baptism of Jesus and 
the deputation.}—mwdAw looks back to 
ver. 29. Thenno results followed John’s 
testimony: now results follow. Two of 
his disciples stood with him, Andrew 
(ver. 41) and probably John.—Ver. 36. 
The Baptist, ἐμβλέψας τῷ Ἰησοῦ, having 
gazed at, or contemplated (see Mt. vi. 
26, ἐμβλέψατε εἰς τὰ πετεινά, and 
especially Mk. xiv. 67, καὶ ἰδοῦσα τὸν 
Πέτρον . . . ἐμβλέψασα) Jesus as He 
walked, evidently not towards John as 
on the previous day, but away from him. 
---λέγει “ISe 6 ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ without the 
added clause of νετ. 29.—Ver. 37. καὶ 


ἤκουσαν . . . τῷ “Inoov. “And the 
two disciples heard him speaking ”--- 
possibly implying that the day before 
they had not heard him—‘‘and they 
followed Jesus”; the Baptist does not 
bid them follow, but they feel that 
attraction which so often since has been 
felt—Ver. 38. στραφεὶς δὲ .. . τί 
ζητεῖτε; Jesus, hearing their steps 
behind Him, turns. To all who follow 
He gives their opportunity. Having 
turned and perceived that they were 
following Him, He asks τί ζητεῖτε; the 
obvious first inquiry, but perhaps with a 
breath in it of that Fan which the Baptist 
had warned them to expect in the 
Messiah; as if, Are you seeking what 
I can give? They reply Ῥαββεί .. . 
μένεις; Lightfoot (Hov. Heb.) tells us 
that ‘‘ Rabbi” was a new title which had 
not been used long before the Christian 
era, and possibly arose during the 
rivalries of the schools of Hillel and 
Shammai. The word means “‘ my great- 


ness”. Cf. His Majesty, etc., and for 
the absorption of the pronoun ¢f. 
monsieur or madame. See Lampe. As 


it occurs here for the first time John 
translates it, and renders by διδάσκαλε, 
Teacher; so that as yet they were scarcely 
prepared to give Him the greater title 
Lord, or Messiah. Unready with ar 
answer to His question they put another 
which may stand for an answer, ποῦ- 
pévets; where are you staying, where 
are you dwelling? So used in Ν.Τ., 
Lk. xix. 5, and in later Greek, Polybius, 
30, 4, 10, and 34, 9, 9, of dwelling for a 
short time in a place; not so much im- 
plying, as Holtzmann suggests, that 
they wished to go to His lodging that 
they might have more uninterrupted 
talk with Him; for that scarcely fits 
Oriental habits; but rather implying 
that they were shy of prolonging inter- 
course and wished to know where they 
might find Him another time. From 
this unsatisfactory issue they are saved 
by His frank invitation (ver. 40) ἔρχεσθε 
καὶ ὄψεσθε. ‘Come and ye shall see.” 
Use the opportunity you now have. 
Christ’s door is ever on the latch: He is 
always accessible.—f\@av οὖν . . . ὧν. 
δεκάτη. The two men remained in con- 


35-43. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


699 


οἱ δὲ εἶπον αὐτῶ, ““PaBBi,” (ὃ λέγεται ἑρμηνευόμενον, Διδάσκαλε;) 


“rod μένεις; 


ΔΝ 3 Pp A , - ‘ 3 9». α 3 ς 3 , 4 
καὶ εἶδον Prod µένει' καὶ Tap αὐτῷ ἔµειναν τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνην * p Constr. 
"Hy 3 Ανδρέας ὁ 
Πέτρου, εἷς ἐκ τῶν δύο τῶν ἀκουσάντων * παρὰ Ἰωάννου, καὶ Gko- 341. 


ὥρα δὲ ἦν ὡς δεκάτη. 41. 


λουθησάντων αὐτῷ. 


ἴδιον Σίμωνα, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, “'Εὐρήκαμεν τὸν Μεσσίαν, (6 ἐστι 


40. Λέγει αὐτοῖς, '' Ἔρχεσθε καὶ iSere.” Ἠλθον 


vide Bur 
ἀδελφὸς Σίμωνος ton, Μ. 
and Τ., 


q Mk. i. 16. 


42. εὑρίσκει οὗτος mp@tos! τὸν ἀδελφὸν τὸν : vi. 45. 


8 Acts x. 38. 


µεθερμηνευόµενον, "ὁ Χριστός") 43. καὶ ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν πρὸς TOvt Mt. xvi.i8. 


> ~ 
[ησούν. 


1 πρωτον in ΝΑΒΜ. 


versation with Jesus during the remainder 
of the day [but Grotius gives the sense 
as “ibidem pernoctarunt, quia jam 
serum erat”], a day so memorable to 
John that he recalls the very hour when 
they first approached Jesus, four o’clock 
in the afternoon. It seems that at this 
time throughout the Grzco-Roman 
world one system of reckoning the hours 
prevailed. There is indisputable evidence 
that while the Romans calculated their 
civil day, by which leases and contracts 
were dated, as extending from midnight 
to midnight, the hours of each day were 
reckoned from sunrise to sunset. Thus 
on the Roman sun-dials noon is marked 
VI. (see Becker’s Gallus, p. 319). 
Martial’s description of the manner in 
which each hour was spent (Ep., iv., 8) 
leads to the same couclusion; and for 
proof that no different method was 
foliowed in the provinces, see Prof. 
Ramsay’s paper ‘On the Sixth Hour” 
in the Expositor, 1893. Cf. also paper 
by Mr. Cross in Classical Review, June, 
1891.—Ver. 41. ἦν Avdpéas .. . Σίμωνος. 
One of the two who thus first followed 
Christ was Andrew, known not so much 
in his own name as being the brother of 
Simon-—Mlérpov is here proleptic. We 
are left to infer that the other disciple 
was the evangelist.—Ver. 42. εὑρίσκει 
οὗτος πρῶτος. If with T. R. and Tischen- 
dorf we read πρῶτος, the meaning is 
that Andrew, before Fohn, found his 
brother ; if with W.H. we read πρῶτον 
the meaning is that before Andrew did 
anything else, and perhaps especially 
before the other men afterwards named 
were called, he first of all finds his own 
brother. Reading πρῶτον, we cannot 
gather that John went in search also of 
his brother, and as there is no mention 
of him at this time the probability is that 


ἐμβλέψας δὲ αὐτῷ 6 “Inoods εἶπε, ““Σὺ ef Lipwy ὁ υἱὸς 
Ἰωνᾶ 2+ σὺ κληθήσῃ ᾿Κηφᾶς ' ὃ ἑρμηνεύεται Πέτρος. 


Here only 
in John. 

8 times in. 
Paul. 


2T.R. in AB’, etc.; lwavov in ΜΒ, 33. 


he was not at hand. πρῶτον is the note 
of warning that this was but the begin- 
ning of a series of calls. —etpykapev τὸν 
Μεσσίαν. ‘‘ We have found,” perhaps, 
as Weiss suggests, with reference to the 
expectations produced by the Baptist’s 
teaching. The result of their conversa- 
tion with Jesus is summed up in these 
words. They were now convinced that 
He was the Christ. In Jewish lips ‘“‘ we 
have found the Messiah ”’ was the most 
comprehensive of ali Eurekas. That 
John gives the actual words, though he 
has immediately to translate one of them 
for his Greek readers, is not without 
significance in regard to his accuracy in 
reporting.—Ver. 43. καὶ ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν 
πρὸς τὸν ᾿ησοῦν. He was not content 
to allow his report to work in his 
brother’s mind, but induced him there 
and then, though probably on the follow- 
ing day, as now it must have been late, 
to go to Jesus.—épBArewas . . . Πέτρος. 
Jesus may have known Simon previously, 
or may have been told his name by 
Andrew. ‘‘ Thou art Simon, Jonah’s 
son, or better, John’s son. Thou shalt 
be called Kephas.”’ This name, Kephas 
or Peter, stone or mass of rock, Simon 
did receive at Caesarea Philippi on his 
confession of Jesus as the Christ (Mt. xvi. 
17, 18); a confession prompted not by 
‘flesh and blood,” that is, by his brother’s 
experience, but by his own inwrought 
and home-grown conviction. The reason 
of this utterance to Simon is understood 
when it is considered that the name 
he as yet bore, Simon Barjona, was 
identified with a character full of im- 
pulsiveness ; which might well lead him 
to suppose he would only bring mischief 
to the Messiah’s kingdom. But, says 
Christ, thou shalt be called Rock. Those 
who enter Christ’s kingdom believing m 


700 


a Freq. in 
ohn, 


4 ‘ ~ .. 
v Is. Ixv. 1. καὶ ᾿ εὑρίσκει Φίλιππον, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, ''᾽Ακολούθει por. 


Ww Xii. 21. 

X XXi. 2, 

y Gen. xlix. _, 
ro. Deut. Metpou. 
Xviii. 18. 
Is. ix. 6. 
Mic. v. 2. 
Constr. véde Rom. x. 5. 


Him receive a character fitting them to 
be of service. 


Vv. 44-52. Further manifestations 
of $esus as Messiah—Vv. 44. τῇῃ 
ἐπαύριον .. . Γαλιλαίαν. ‘The day 


following He would go forth,” that is, 
from the other side of Jordan, into 
Galilee, probably to His own home.— 
καὶ εὑρίσκει Φίλιππον, “and He finds,” 
‘lights upon,” Philip (cf. vi. 5, xii. 21, 
xiv. 3). To him He utters the summons, 
ἀκολούθει pot, which can hardly have 
the simple sense, ‘‘ accompany me,” but 
must be taken as the ordinary call to 
discipleship (Lk. ix. 59, Mt. xix. 21, etc.). 
—Ver. 45. hy 6 Φίλιππος... 
Πέτρον. This is inserted to explain how 
Jesus happened to meet Philip: he was 
going home also; and to explain how 
Philip’s mind had been prepared by con- 
versation with Andrew and Peter. The 
exact position of Bethsaida is doubtful. 
There was a town or village of this name 
(Fisher-Home) on the east bank of 
Jordan, slightly above its fall into the 
Sea of Galilee. This place was rebuilt 
by Philip and named Julias, in honour of 
the daughter of Augustus. Many good 
authorities think that this was the only 
Bethsaida (see Dr. G. A. Smith’s Hist. 
Geog. of Palestine, p. 457). Others, 
however, are of opinion that the manner 
in which Bethsaida, here and in xii. 21, is 
_ aamed with an added note of distinction, 
“the city of Andrew,” ‘of Galilee,” 
requires us to postulate two Bethsaidas. 
This is further confirmed by the move- 
ments recorded in vi. 16-22. Cf. Mk. 
vi. 4£. Those who accept two Bethsaidas 
locate the one which is here mentioned 
either opposite Bethsaida Julias and as a 
kind of suburb of it or farther south at 
Ain Tabigha (see Rob Roy on the 
Fordan, 342-392).—Ver. 46. εὑρίσκει 
Ναζαρέτ Philip in turn finds 
Nathanael, probably on the road from 
the Bethany ford homewards. Nathanael 
is probably the same person as is spoken 
of in the Synoptical Gospels as Bar- 
tholomew, i.e., Bar Tolmai, son οἱ 
Ptolemy. This is usually inferred from 
the following: (1) Both here and in 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ L 


44. Ti ἐπαύριον "ἠθέλησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐξελθεῖν εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν : 


45. 


"Hy δὲ ὁ Φίλιππος ἀπὸ Βηθσαϊδὰ, ἐκ τῆς πόλεως ᾿Ανδρέου καὶ 
46. Εὑρίσκει Φίλιππος τὸν "Ναθαναὴλ, καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, 
«:Σ Ὃν ἔγραψε Μωσῆς ἐν τῷ νόµῳ καὶ οἱ προφῆται, εὑρήκαμεν, 


chap. xxi. 2 he is classed with apostles ; 
(2) in the lists of apostles given in the 
Synoptical Gospels Bartholomew is 
coupled with Philip ; (3) while Nathanael 
is never, mentioned by the Synoptists, 
Bartholomew is not mentioned by John. 
The two names might quite well belong 
to one man, Bartholomew being a 
patronymic. Nathanael means ‘ God’s 
gift,’ Theodore, or, like Augustine’s son, 
Adeodatus. Philip announces the dis- 
covery in the words ὃν ἔγραψεν . 
Ναζαρέτ. On which Calvin remarks: 
“Quam tenuis fuerit modulus fidei in 
Philippo Ἠϊπο patet, quod de Christo 
quatuor verba profari nequit, quin duos 
crassos errores permisceat. Facit illum 
fillum Joseph, et patriam Nazareth falso 
illi assignat.”” This is too stringent. He 
draws the conclusion that where there is 
a sincere purpose to do good and to pro- 
claim Christ, success will follow even 
where there is error. Nazareth lies due 
west from the south end of the Sea Οἱ ΄ 
Galilee, and about midway between it 
and the Mediterranean.—Ver. 47. 
Philip’s announcement is received with 
incredulity.—é« Ναζαρὲτ δύναταί τι 
ἀγαθὸν εἶναι; ‘Can anything good be 
from Nazareth.” Cf. viii. 52, ‘out-of 
Galilee ariseth no prophet”. Westcott, 
representing several modern interpreters, 
explains: ‘“‘Can any blessing, much 
less such a blessing as the promised 
Messiah, arise out of a poor village like 
Nazareth, of which not even the name 
can be found in the O.T.?” But 
probably Nathanael was influenced by 
the circumstance that he himself was of 
Cana (xxi. 2), only a few miles from 
Nazareth, and with the jealousy which 
usually exists between neighbouring 
villages (inter accolas odium) found it 
hard to believe that Nazareth could pro- 
duce the Messiah (cf. Is. ΠΠ, 2, ‘a root 
out of a dry ground”). From this 
remark of Nathanael’s light is reflected 
on the obscurity and unobtrusiveness 
of the youth of Jesus. Though living 
a few miles off, Nathanael never 
heard of Him. To _ his incredulity 
Philip wisely replies, ἔρχου καὶ tSe; as 


44—50. 


"Inoody τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Ιωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ.” 
Ναθαναὴλ, “Ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ δύναταί τι ἀγαθὸν εἶναι ; 
48. Εἶδεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τὸν Ναθαναὴλ 


Φίλιππος, “"Epxou καὶ ide.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


JO! 


ων 3 2A 

47. Και εἶπεν αὐτῷ 
Λέγει αὐτῷ 
t 


ἐρχόμενον πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ λέγει περὶ αὐτοῦ, “"ISe ” ἀληθῶς 2 Gen. καν 


σραηλίτης, ἐν ᾧ δόλος οὐκ ἔστι.᾿ 


49. Λέγει αὐτῷ Ναθαναὴλ, 


“«Πόθεν µε γινώσκεις; ᾿Απεκρίθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῶ, “ Πρὸ 
με y ρίθη ὁ η , Πρ 


τοῦ σε Φίλιππον φωνῆσαι, ὄντα ὑπὸ τὴν συκΏν, εἶδόν ce.” 


5ο. 


᾿Απεκρίθη Ναθαναὴλ καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, ““PaBBi, σὺ ef 6 vids τοῦ 


Bengel says, ‘‘optimum remedium 
tontra opiniones praeconceptas”’. And 
Nathanael shows himself to be willing 
to have his preconceptions overcome. 
He goes with Philip.—Ver. 48. κεἶδεν 
,.. δόλος οὐκ ἔστιν The honesty 
shown in his coming to Jesus is indicated 
as his characteristic. He had given 
proof that he was guileless. In Gen. 
xxvii. 35 Isaac says to Esau, “ Th 

brother has come and μετὰ δόλου ἔλαβε 
τὴν εὐλογίαν gov”. And it was by 
throwing off this guile and finding in 
God his dependence that Jacob became 
Israel. So that in declaring Nathanael 
to be a guileless Israelite, Jesus declares 
him to be one who does not seek to win 
blessing by earthly means but by prayer 
and trust in God.—Ver. 49. The 
significance of this utterance is further 
shown by what follows. Naturally 
Nathanael is surprised by this explicit 
testimony from one with whom he has 
had no acquaintance and who has not- 
withstanding truly described him, and he 
asks, πόθεν µε γινώσκεις; ‘‘ how do you 
know me?” perhaps imagining that 
some common friend had told Jesus 
about him. But Jesus ascribes it to 
anoth r cause: πρὸ τοῦ σε Φίλιππον 
φωνῆσαι ὄντα ὑπὸ τὴν συκῆν εἶδον σε, 
I saw thee under the fig tree before 
Philip called thee (not, I saw thee some- 
where else before Philip called thee when 
you were under the fig tree). ‘* Under 
the fig tree” is obviously significant. 
Such trees were planted by the wayside 
(Mt. xxi. 19), and the large thick leaf 
afforded shade. It was the favourite 
garden tree of the Jews, so that “ sitting 
under one’s fig tree’? meant being at 
home (Micah iv. 4, Zech. iii. 10). The 
tree formed a natural arbour affording 
shade and privacy. Thus Schoettgen 
quotes that it is related of Rabbi Jose 
and his disciples, '' solebant summo mane 
surgere et sedere et studere sub ficu”. 
And Lightfoot (Hor. Heb., im loc.) says 
that Nathanael was ‘aut orans, aut 


legens, aut meditans, aut aliquid 
religiosum praestans, in secessu sub 
aliqua οι et extra conspectum 


hominum”. But evidently Nathanael 
understood that Jesus had not only seen 
him when he thought he was unobserved, 
but had penetrated his thought in re- 
tirement, and understood and sympa- 
thised with his prayer under the fig tree, 
for the impression made upon him by this 
knowledge of Jesus is profound.—Ver. 
50. “PaBBet, he exclaims, σὺ εἶ ὁ vids 
τοῦ θεοῦ, σὺ βασιλεὺς εἶ τοῦ Ισραήλ. 
Nathanael had been praying for the 
manifestation of the Messiah: now he 
exclaims Thou art He. That Nathanael 
used both expressions, Son of God, and 
King of Israel, we may well believe, for 
he found both in the second Psalm. And 
it is probable that he used both as 
identifying Jesus with the Messiah (see 
chap. xi. 27, xii. 13-15). It is not likely 
that he would pass from a higher designa- 
tion to a lower; more probable that by 
the second title he means more closely 
to define the former. Thou art the Son 
of God, fulfilling the ideal of sonship 
and actually realising all that prophecy 
has uttered regarding the Son of God: 
Thou art the ideal, long-expected King of 
Israel, in whom God’s reign and kingdom 
are realised on earth. “' The words are 
an echo of the testimony of the Baptist. 
Nothing can be more natural than to 
suppose that the language of John had 
created strange questionings in the 
hearts of some whom it had reached, and 
that it was with such thoughts Nathanael 
was busied when the Lord ‘ saw’ him. If 
this were so, the confession of Nathanael 
may be an answer to his own doubts” 
(Westcott). — Ver. 51. Gmexpidy... 
ὄψῃ. In accordance with the habit of 
this evangelist, who calls attention to 
the moving cause of faith in this or that 
individual, the source of Nathanael’s 
faith is indicated with some surprise that 
it should have proved sufficient: and 
with the announcement that his nascent 


702 


α Rarely 


/ , ” » 
µείζω τούτων ὄψει. 
b Gen 


KATA IQANNHN 


Θεοῦ, σὺ ef ὁ βασιλεὺς τοῦ Ισραήλ.” 
εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Orr εἶπόν σοι, Εἶδόν σε ὑποκάτω τῆς συκῆς, πιστεύεις ; 
54. Καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, “Api ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 


I, 51—52. II. 


σι. ᾽Απεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ 


xaviii, τα. ἀπ᾿ ἄρτι ] ὄψεσθε τὸν οὐρανὸν " ἀνεωγότα, καὶ "τοὺς ἀγγέλους τοῦ 


a Josh. xix. 
28. 


b Esth. v. 


τα. 1Cor. LT. {. 
Me τμ. Γαλιλαίας: καὶ ἦν ἡ µήτηρ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἐκεῖ. 


3. 
2 


A , A 
Θεοῦ ἀναβαίνοντας καὶ καταβαίνοντας ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.” 


ΚΑΙ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ γάμος ἐγένετο ἐν "Κανῷ τῆς 


2. ' ἐκλήθη δὲ καὶ 6 


‘ aw αρτι rejected by Tr.T.W.H.R. on authority of NBL vet. Lat. vulg., ete. 


faith will find more to feed upon: µείζω 
τούτων ὄψῃ.--Ψετ. 52. What these 
things are is described in the words 
ὄψεσθε . . . ἀνθρώπον, introduced by 
the emphatic ἀμὴν, ἀμὴν λέγω ἡμῖν, 
used in this double form twenty-five 
times in this Gospel (always single in 
Synop.) and well rendered “verily, 
verily”. Christ as the Faithful and 
True Witness is Himself called the 
Amen in Rev. iii. 14. The words am’ 
ἄρτι are omitted by recent editors. The 
announcement describes the result of the 
incarnation of Christ as a_ bringing 
together of heaven and earth, a true 
mediation between God and man, an 
opening of what is most divine for the 
satisfaction of human need. _It is made 
in terms of Jacob’s dream (Gen. xxviii. 
το ff.). In his dream Jacob saw a ladder 
fixed on earth with its top in heaven, 
ot ἄγγελοι τοῦ θεοῦ ἀνέβαινον καὶ 
κατέβαινον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῃ. What Jacob had 
dreamt was in Christ realised. The Son 
of Man, the Messiah or actual repre- 
sentative of God on earth, brings God to 
man and makes earth a Bethel, and the 
gate of heaven. What Nathanael under 
his fig tree had been longing for and un- 
consciously preparing, an open com- 
munication with heaven, a ladder reach- 
ing from the deepest abyss of an earth 
submerged in sin to the highest heaven 
of purity, Jesus tells him is actually 
accomplished in His person. ‘The Son 
of Man” is the designation by which 
Jesus commonly indicates that He is the 
Messiah, while at the same time He 
suggests that His kingdom is not founded 
by earthly power or force, but by what 
is especially human, sympathy, reason, 
self-sacrifice. 

CHAPTER II.—Vv. 1-11. The marriage 
at Cana. The first manifestation of 
Christ’s glory to His disciples.—Ver. 1. 
As usual John specifies time and place 
and circumstance. The time was τῇ 
ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ. The Greeks reckoned 


σήμερον, αὔριον, τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. So 


Lk. xiii. 32, Ἰάσεις επιτελῶ σήμερον καὶ 
αὔριον, καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ τελειοῦμαι. The 
“third day”? was therefore what we call 
‘the day after to-morrow’. From what 
point is this third day calculated ? From 
i. 41 or i. 44? Probably the latter. 
Naturally one refers this exact specifica- 
tion of time to the circumstance that the 
writer was present. The place was éy 
Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, “of Galilee” to 
distinguish it from another Cana, as in 
all countries the same name is borne by 
more than one place (Newcastle; Tarbet ; 
Cleveland, Ohio, and Cleveland, N.Y.; 
Freiburg). This other Cana, however, 
was not the Cana of Josh. xix. 28 in 
the tribe of Asher (Weiss, Holtzmann) ; 
but more probably Cana in Judaea (cf. 
Henderson’s Palestine, p. 152 ; Josephus, 
Antiq., xiii., 15, 1; and Lightfoot’s Disq. 
Chorog. Fohan. praemissa). Opinion is 
now in favour of identifying ‘“‘ Cana” 
with Kefr Kenna, five miles north-east 
of Nazareth on the road to the Sea of 
Galilee. Robinson (Researches, iii., 108 
and ii., 346) identified it with Khurbet 
Kana, three hours north of Nazareth, 
because ruins there were pointed out to 
him as-bearing the name Kana el Jelil, 
Cana of Galilee. Dr. Zeller, however, 
who resided at Nazareth, declares that 
Khurbet Kana is not known to the 
natives as Kana el Πεμ]. Major Conder 
(Tent Work, i., 153), although not 
decided in favour of Kefr Kenna, shows 
that the alteration in the form of the 
name can be accounted for, and that its 
position is in its favour (Henderson’s 
Palestine, 151-3).—yapos. ἐγένετο, a 
marriage took place. Jewish marriage 
customs are fully described in Trumbull’s 
Studies in Oriental Social Life.—xai ἦν 
ἡ µήτηρ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἐκεῖ,. This is noticed 
to account for the invitation given to 
Jesus and His disciples. Joseph is not 
mentioned, probably because already 
dead. Certainly he was dead before the 
crucifixion.—Ver. 2. ἐκλήθη δὲ καὶ 6 
"Ingots καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν 


a—5. 


. “~ 4 ec 9 > - 3 a 
Ἰησοῦς καὶ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ eis τὸν yduov. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


708 


3. καὶ ὑστερήσαντος 


oe a“ an 39 - 
otvou,! λέγει ἡ µήτηρ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ πρὸς αὐτὸν, -Οἶνον οὐκ ἔχουσι. c Jud. xi. τὸ. 


4. Λέγει αὐτῇ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “*Ti ἐμοὶ καὶ σοὶ, 
5. Adyes ἡ pimp αὐτοῦ τοῖς διακόνοις, “"O τι ἂν ε vii. 6. 


ἡ Opa pov.” 


2 Sam. 
Xvi. 10. 


e 3 ο 
οὕπω KEL 
d xix. 26. 


ἀγύναι ; 


1 Τ.Ε. in NaABL vulg. cop. syr.; but δ΄ and some vet. Lat. read οινον ουκ ειχον 
OTL συνετελεσθη © οινος του Ύαμον, ειτα, ‘they had no wine because the wine of 


” 


the marriage was finished; then... ”. 


γάμον. ‘And both Jesus was invited 
and His disciples to the marriage.” To 
translate ἐκλήθη as a pluperfect “had 
been invited” is grammatically possible, 
but it is impossible that the disciples 
should have been previously invited, 
because their existence as disciples was 
not known. They were invited when 
they appeared. The collective title ot 
μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ is anticipatory: as yet it 
could not be inuse. The singular verb 
(ἐκλήθη) with a plural nominative is too 
common to justify Holtzmann’s inference 
that it indicates, what of course was the 
fact, that the disciples were asked only 
in consequence of Jesus being asked. 
Cf. Lk. il. 33. In this instance Jesus 
‘“came unto His own” and His own 
ceceived Him, at any rate as a friend.— 
Ver. 3. Through this unexpected 
addition to the number of guests the 
wine began to fail, ὑστερήσαντος otvov. 
ὑστερέω, from ὕστερος, signifies ‘to be 
late,’ and hence ‘to come short of,” 
‘to lack,” and also “to be awanting ” 
Cre Mt. xix, 20, τί ἔτι ὑστερῶ; and Mk. 
κ. 21, ἓν σοι vorepet. Here the mean- 
ing is “the wine having failed,” or 
“given out”. Consequently λέγει 7 
µήτηρ τοῦ ‘Ios πρὸς αὐτὸν, Οἶνον οὐκ 
ἔχουσι. Bengel supposes she wished him 
to leave ‘*velim discedas, ut ceteri item 
discedant, antequam penuria patefiat’’. 
Calvin suggests ΄' fieri potest, ut [mater] 
tale remedium [miraculum] non expectans 
eum admonuerit, ut pia aliqua exhorta- 
tione convivis taedium eximeret, ac 
simul levaret pudorem sponsi’’. Lampe 
says: ‘“ Obscurum est”. Licke thinks 
Jesus had given proof of His miracle- 
working previously. The Greek com- 
mentators and Godet suppose that when 
she saw Him recognised as Messiah the 
time for extraordinary manifestation of 
power had arrived. The words show 
that she was on terms of intimacy with 
the family of the bridegroom, that she 
knew of the failure of the wine and 
wished to relieve the embarrassment. She 
maturally turns to her oldest son, who 
had always in past emergencies proved 


helpful in counsel and practical aid. 
But from the words of Jesus in reply, 
6 Mine hour is not yet come,”’ it certainly 
would seem as if she had suggested that 
He should use Messianic powers for the 
relief of the wedding guests. —Ver. 4. His 
complete reply i is, τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, γύναι; 
οὕπω ἥκει ἡ pa pov. γύναι is a term of 
respect, not equivalent to our “‘ woman’”’. 
See chap. xix. 26, xx. 13, Lk. xiii. 12. In 
the Greek tragedians it is constantly 
used in addressing queens and persons 
of distinction. Augustus addresses 
Cleopatra as γύναι (Dio, quoted by 
Wetstein). Calvin goes too far when he 
says that this term of address was used 
to correct the superstitious adoration of 
the Virgin which was to arise. But 
while there is neither harshness nor dis- 
respect, there is distance in the expres- 
sion. Wetstein hits the point when he 
says: ‘‘ Non poterat ο. quid mihi 
tecum est, mater?”—ri ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί 


represents the Hebrew Wz 1 San 


(Judges xi. 12), and means: “What have 
we in common ? Trench gives the sense: 

‘Let me alone; what is there common 
to thee and me; we stand in this matter 
on altogether different grounds”. Or, as 
Holtzmann gives it, Our point of view an 

interests are wholly diverse ; why do you 
mingle them ?—otmw ἥκει ἡ ὥρα pov, 
not as Bengel, ‘‘discedendi hora,” but, 
mine hour for brin ging relief. This 
implies that He too had observed the 
failure of the wine and was waiting a 
fitting opportunity to interfere. Thai 
the same formula is more than once used 
by Jesus of His death (see chap. vii. 30, 
vili. 20) merely indicates that it could be 
used of any critical time. Euthymius 
says it here means “the hour of miracle 
working”. Wetstein quotes from R. 
Sira ‘non quavis hora fit miraculum ”’. 
Especially true is this of the first miracle- 
of the Messiah, which would commit 
Him to a life of publicity ending in an 
ignominious death. That Mary found 
hope in the οὕπω is obvious from ver. 5. 

She did not find His reply wholly refusal. 


794 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IX, 


fiv. 28. 1 λέγῃ ὑμῖν, ποιήσατε. 6. Μσαν δὲ ἐκεῖ * δρίαι * AiOwar ἓξ Ἡ κείµεναι 


Kings . 
XViil. 23. 
g @ Cor. iii. , a 
2 τρεις. 

h Mk. vii. 3. wR, 
i 2 Chron. 


iv. 5. 2 
j Rev. iv. 8. Winer, p. 496. 


She therefore says to the servants (ver. 
5), 6 τι ἂν λέγῃ ὑμῖν ποιήσατε. The 
διακόνοι, Or servants waiting at table, 
might not otherwise have obeyed an un- 
important guest. His orders might 
perhaps be of an unusual kind.—Ver. 6. 
There were there, hard by or in the 
feast-room, there were ὑδρίαι λίθιναι ἐξ 
κείµεναν, “six stone water jars stand- 
ing’. Stone was believed to preserve 
the purity and coolness of the water. 
[According to Plutarch, Tib. Gracchus, 
these jars were sometimes used for 
drawing lots, wooden tablets being put 
in the jars and shaken.) Similar stone 
jars are still used in Cana and elsewhere. 
They were κείµεναι, set; “in purely 
classical Greek κεῖμαι is the recognised 
passive perfect of τίθεµαι’’ (Holden, 
Plutarch’s Themist., p. 121).--κατὰ τὸν 
καθαρισμὸν τῶν Ἰουδαίων. For the wash- 
mg of hands and vessels. Cf. Mk. vii. 
εε Abluendi quidem ritum habebant ex 
Lege Dei, sed ut mundus semper nimius 
est in rebus externis, Judaei praescripta 
a Deo simplicitate non contenti con- 
tinuis aspersionibus ludebant: atque ut 
ambitiosa est superstitio, non dubium 
est quin hoc etiam pompae serviret, 
quemadmodum hodie in Papatu videmus, 
quaecunque ad Dei cultum pertinere 
dicuntur, ad meram ostentationem esse 
composita,” Calvin. The number and 
size are given that the dimensions of the 
miracle may appear. There were six 
χωροῦσαι ava μετρητὰς δύο ἢ τρεῖς, 
“holding two or three firkins each ”’.— 
ava is here distributive, a classical use; 
ef. also Mt. xx. g, 10, Mk. vi. 40. Accord- 
ingly the Vulgate translates ‘“‘ capientes 
singulae metretas binas”. The Attic 
μετρητής held about nine gallons, so 
that averaging the jars at twenty gallons 
the six would together contain 120 
gallons. The English translation has 
jirkin, that is, vierkin, the fourth of a 
barrel, a barrel being thirty imperial 
gallons. It is difficult to assign any 
reason for giving the number and 
capacity of these jars, except that the 
writer wished to convey the idea that 
their entire contents were changed into 
wine. This prodigality would bring the 
miracle into closer resemblance to the 


κατὰ τὸν καθαρισμὸν τῶν Ιουδαίων, ' χωροῦσαι ; ἀνὰ μετρητὰς δύο 
7. λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “΄Γεμίσατε τὰς ὑδρίας datos.” 
Καὶ ἐγέμισαν αὐτὰς Χξως ἄνω. 
k 2 Chron. xxvi. δ. 


8. Καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, -'᾿Αντλήσατα 


gifts of nature. Also it would furnish 
proof, after the marriage was over, that 
the transformation had been actual. 
The wedding guests had not dreamt it. 
There was the wine. It was no mesmerio 
trick. Holtzmann, in a superior manner, 
smiles at the prosaic interpreters who 
strive to reduce the statement to matter 
of fact.—Ver. 7. The first order Jesus 
gives to the διακόνοις is one they may 
unhesitatingly οὐεγ.--Γεμίσατε τὰς 
ὑδρίας ὕδατος, “ Fill the water jars 
with water,’’ the water being specified 
in view of what was to follow.—kai 
ἐγέμισαν αὐτὰς ἕως ἄνω, “and they 
filled them up to the brim”’. The corre- 
sponding expression, ἕως κάτω, is found 
in Mt. xxvii. 51. ἕως ἔσω and ἕως ἔξω 
are also found in N.T. to indicate more 
precisely the terminus ad quem. In this 
usage ἕως is not perceptibly different 
from a preposition. ‘“ Up to the brim” 
is specified not so much to indicate the 
abundant supply as to suggest that no 
room was left for adding anything to the 
water. The servants did all their part 
thoroughly, and left no apparent room 
for Jesus to work. Thus they became 
instrumental to the working of a miracle. 
—Ver. 8. The second order might 
stagger them more, ᾿Αντλήσατε viv, καὶ 
φέρετε τῷ ἀρχιτρικλίνφ. The ἀρχιτρί- 
Κλινος was originally the person whe 
had charge of the triclinium or triple 
couch set round a dining table: “«ρτας- 
fectus cui instruendi ornandique triclinii 
cura incumbit”; a butler or head waiter 
whose duty it was to arrange the table 
and taste the food and wine. Petron. 
Arb. 22, “Jam et Tricliniarches ex- 
perrectus lucernis occidentibus oleum 
infuderat”. But apparently the person 
indicated in this verse is rather the 
συμποσιάρχης or συµποσίαρχος, the 
chairman elected by the company from 
among the guests, sometimes by lot. Cf. 
Horace’s ‘* Arbiter bibendi,” Od., Π., 7. 
The requirements in such an official are 
described in Ecclus. xxxii. 1; Plato, Laws, 
Ρ. 640 ; see also Reid’s edition of Cicero, 
De Senect., p. 131. In general he regu- 
lated the course of the feast and the 
conduct of the guests. [Holtzmann and 
Weiss both retain the proper meaning of 


6— 10, 


viv, καὶ φέρετε τῷ ἀρχιτρικλίνω.” 


\ ” 
Kat Ίνεγκαν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ πος 


9. és δὲ ἐγεύσατο 1Constr.see 
i. 40. 


n Here 


6 ἀρχιτρίκλινος τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον γεγενηµένον, καὶ οὐκ δει | πόθεν mi. ιο. 


ἐστίν' (ot δὲ διάκονοι ῄδεισαν ot ἠντληκότες τὸ ὕδωρ":) 3" φωνεῖ τὸν only, but 


cp. Bel 


νυμφίον 6 ἀρχιτρίκλινος, ΙΟ. καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ, “Nas ἄνθρωπος πρῶτον ard the 


Dragon, 


τὸν καλὸν οἶνον " τίθησι, καὶ ὅταν μεθυσθῶσι, τότε τὸν ᾿ἐλάσσω: σὺ νετ 14. 


ἀρχιτρίκλινος.] Westcott suggests that 
the ἀγτλήσατε viv may refer to drawing 
from the well, and that ‘the change in 
the water was determined by its destina- 
tion for use at the feast”’. ‘“‘ That which 
remained water when kept for a cere- 
monial use became wine when borne in 
faith to minister to the needs, even to 
the superfluous requirements of life,” a 
suggestive interpretation, but it evacuates 
of all significance the clause “ they filled 
them up to the brim’’. The servants 
obeyed, possibly encouraged by seeing 
that what they had poured in as water 
flowed out as wine; although if the 
words in the end of the ninth verse are 
to be taken strictly, it was still water 
when drawn from the water jars. But 
some refer the ot ἠντληκότες to drawing 
from the well. It is, however, more 
natural to refer it to the ἀντλήσατε viv 
of the eighth verse. Besides, drawing 
water from the well would be the 
business rather of the women than of 
the διάκονοι.---Ψετ.ο. The architriklinos, 
then, when he had tasted the water which 
had now become wine, and did not know 
whence it had been procured, and was 
therefore impartially judging it merely 
as wine among wines, φωνεῖ τὸν νυµφίον, 
“‘calls the bridegroom,” or simply “ ad- 
dresses the bridegroom,’’ and says to 
him πᾶς ἄνθρωπος... The usage 
referred to was natural: and is illustrated 
by the ἑωλοκρασία, the mixture of all the 
heeltaps with which the harder heads 
dosed the drunken at the end of a 
debauch.—6rav μεθυσθῶσι, “ when men 
have drunk freely,” R.V. The Vulgate 
more accurately has “cum inebriati 
fuerint”. And if the word does not 
definitely mean ‘“‘when men are in- 
toxicated,’’ it at least must indicate a 
condition in which they are unfit to dis- 
criminate between good wine and bad. 
The company then present was not in 
that condition, because they were able to 
appreciate the good wine ; but the words 
of the architriklinos unquestionably im- 
ply that a good deal had already been 
drunk. The ἕως ἄρτι involves this, 
The significance of the remark consists 
in the certificate thus given to the quality 


o Inferior, 
cp. Wisd. ix. 5. 


of the wine. Bengel felicitously says: 
‘“‘Ignorantia architriclini © comprobat 
bonitatem vini: scientia ministrorum 
veritatem miraculi”. Judging it by his 
natural taste and comparing it with the 
wine supplied by the host, the architri- 
klinos pronounces this fresh supply 
better. What Christ introduces into the 
world will stand comparison with what 
is already in it. Christian grace must 
manifest itself not in sanctimonious and 
unpractical displays, but must stand 
comparison with the rough natural 
virtues, the courage, generosity, and 
force which are called for in the practical 
affairs of life——Ver. 11. No answer of 
the bridegroom is recorded, nor any 
detail of the impression made, but John 
notes the incident as ‘‘the beginning of 
signs”’.—tavthv εποίησεν ἀρχήν, delet- 
ing the article with Tisch. and W.H., 
and rendering '' This as a beginning of 
signs did Jesus,’’ from which it can 
scarcely be gathered that πο insight 
mentioned in the first chapter was con- 
sidered by John to be supernatural. It 
is characteristic of this Gospel that the 
miracles are viewed as signs, or object 
lessons. The feeding of the five thousand 
presents Jesus as the bread of God ; the 
strengthening of the impotent man 
exhibits Him as the giver of spiritual 
life; and so forth. So that when John 
here says that by this miracle Jesus 
ἐφανέρωσε τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, we are 
prompted to ask what particular aspect 
of His glory was manifested here. 
What was there in it to elicit the faith 
and reverence of the disciples? (1) He 
appears as King in physical nature. He 
can use it for the furtherance of His 
purposes and man’s good. He is, as 
declared in the Prologue, that One in 
whom is life. (2) A hint is given of the 
ends for which this creative power is to 
be used. It is, that human joy may be 
full. These disciples of the Baptist 
perceive a new kind of power in their 
new Master, whose goodness irradiates 
the natural joys and domestic incidents 
of human life. (3) When John recorded 
this miracle he saw how fitly it stood as 
the first rehearsing as it did the entire 


45 


7ο6 


τετήρηκας τὸν καλὸν οἶνον ἕως ἄρτι.” 


p John 
passim, 
and freq. 
in Synopt. 


q Mt. xii. 
46. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IL 


11. Ταύτην ἐποίησε τὴν 


ἀρχὴν τῶν 5 σημείων ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἐφανέρωσε 
τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ: καὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 

12. ΜΕΤΑ τοῦτο κατέβη eis Καπερναοὺμ,ὶ αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ µήτηρ 
αὐτοῦ, καὶ οἱ ἃ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ : καὶ ἐκεῖ ἔµειναν 


1 Καφαρναονμ in ΝΒΧ, adopted by T.Tr. W.H. 


work of Christ, who came that human 
happiness might not untimely close in 
shame. Wine had become the symbol 
of that blood which brought reconcile- 
ment and renewal. Seeing this sign and 
the glory manifested in it ἐπίστευσαν 
εἰς αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. ‘‘ Testimony 
(i. 36) directs those who were ready to 
welcome Christ to Him. Personal inter- 
course converts followers into disciples 
(ii. 2). A manifestation of power, as a 
sign of divine grace, converts disciple- 
ship into personal faith’? (Westcott). 
‘“ Crediderunt amplius ’ (Bengel). The 
different grades, kinds, and types of faith 
alluded to in this Gospel are a study. 
Sanday remarks on the unlikelihood of 
a forger making such constant allusion 
to the disciples. That they believed 
would seem a truism. If they had not, 
they would not have been disciples. It 
would have been more to the point to 
tell us the effect on the guests, and a 
forger would hardly have failed to do so. 
But John writes from the disciples’ point 
of view. Not happy are the attempts to 
interpret this seeming miracle as a 
cleverly prepared wedding jest and gift 
‘Paulus); or as a parable (Weisse), or as 
a hastened natural process (Augustine, 
Olshausen). Holtzmann finds here an 
artistic Lehrdichtung, an allegory rich in 
suggestion. Water represents all that 
is mere symbol as contrasted with spirit 
and reality. The period of symbolism is 
represented by the water baptism of 
John: this was to find its realisation in 
Jesus. The jars which had served for 
the outward washings of Judaism were 
by Jesus filled with heart-strengthening 
wine. The O.T. gift of water from the 
rock is superseded by the gift of wine. 
Wine becomes the symbol of the spiritual 
life and joy of the new kingdom. With 
this central idea the details of the in- 
cident agree: the helplessness of the old 
oeconomy, “they have no wine”; the 
mother of the Messiah is the Ο.Τ. com- 
munity; and so forth. The historical 
truth consists simply..in..the joyful 
character ascribed to the beginning of 
Christ’s ministry. (1) Against all these 


attempts it is the obvious intention of 
John to relate a miracle, a surprising 
and extraordinary manifestation of 
power. (2) Where allegory exists he 
directs attention to it; as in this chapter, 
ver. 21; also in chapters x., xv., etc. 
(3) That the incident can be allegorised 
is no proof that it is only allegory and 
not history. ΑΙ incidents and histories 
may be allegorised. The life and death 
of Caesar have been interpreted as a sun 
myth. 

Few, if any, incidents in the life of 
Jesus give us an equal impression of the 
width of His nature and its imperturbable 
serenity. He was at this juncture fresh 
from the most disturbing personal. con- 
flict; His work awasted..Him,...a--work 
full of intense strife, hazard, and pain; 
yet in a mind occupied with these things 
the marriage joy of a country couple 
finds a fit place. 

Ver. 12. From Nazareth to Capernaum 
and thence to Ferusalem, At νετ. 12, as 
Calvin says, ‘“‘transit Evangelista ad 
novam historiam”. This new section 
runs to the end of the fourth chapter, 
and gives an account of the first great 
series of public manifestations on the 
part of Christ (1) in Jerusalem, (2) in 
Judaea, (3) in Samaria, (4) in Galilee 
These are introduced by the note of time 
μετὰ τοῦτο, commonly used by John 
when he wishes merely to denote 
sequence without definitely marking the 
length of the interval. The interval in the 
present case was probably long enough 
at any rate to allow of the Nazareth 
family returning home, although this is 
not in the text. The motive for a fresh 
movement was probably the desire of the 
fishermen to return home. Accordingly 
κατέβη εἰς Καφαρναοὺμ, down from the 
higher lands about Nazareth to the lake 
side, 680 feet below sea level. His 
destination was Καφαρναούμ, the site of 
which is probably to be found at Khan 
Minyeh (Minia), at the north end of the 
plain of Gennesareth, where the great 
road to Damascus leaves the lake side 
and strikes north. [The most valuable 
comparison of the two competing sites, 


ΣΙ---16. 


οὐ πολλὰς ἡμέρας. 
ἀνέβη εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ὁ 


> ~ 
Ιησούς. 


πωλοῦντας βόας καὶ πρόβατα καὶ περιστερὰς, καὶ τοὺς κερματιστὰς 
15. καὶ ποιήσας φραγέλλιον ἐκ σχοινίων, πάντας 


καθηµένους. 


ἐξέβαλεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, τά τε πρόβατα καὶ τοὺς βόας. 


13. Καὶ ἐγγὺς ἦν ” 
14. καὶ εὗρεν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τοὺς 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 707 


a 4 ss 
τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων, Kair Exod. xii. 
14. Chyv 
1; vi. 4; 
xi. 55. 


καὶ τῶν 


κολλυβιστῶν ἐξέχεε τὸ κέρμα, καὶ τὰς τραπέζας ἀνέστρεψε" 


Tell Hum and Khan Minych, will be 
found in the Rob Roy on the Fordan. 
Mr. Macgregor spent several days sound- 
ing along the shore, measuring distances, 
comparing notes, and making careful 
examination, and concluded in favour of 
Khan Minyeh. Tell Hum was thought 
to represent Kefr Nahum (Nahumston) ; 
which, when it ceased to be a town and 
became a heap of ruins, might have been 
called Tell Nahum, and hence Tell 
Hum. Authoritative opinion is, however, 
decidedly in favour of Khan Minyeh.] 
With Jesus there went to Capernaum 
ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ καὶ of ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ 
καὶ . . . αὐτοῦ. From the manner in 
which His brothers are here mentioned 
along with His mother the natural in- 
ference is that they were of the same 
father and probably of the same mother. 
At Capernaum no long stay was made, 
the reason being given in ver. 13, ἐγγὺς 
ἦν τὸ πάσχα τῶν Ἰονδαίων, the Passover 
was approaching, here called ‘‘of the 
Jews,” either for the sake of Gentile 
readers or because the Christian Easter 
was sometimes called πάσχα, and John 
wished to distinguish it.—KatavéBn .. . 
6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, the disciples also went, as 
appears from ver. 17. “επι up” 
because Jerusalem was the capital, and 
because of its height (2500 feet) above 
sea level. On these movements Prof. 
Sanday (Fourth Gospel, p. 53) makes the 
remark: “If it is all an artificial com- 
position with a dogmatic object, why 
should the author carry his readers thus 
to Capernaum—for nothing? The 
apparent aimlessness of this statement 
seems to show that it came directly 
from a fresh and vivid recollection 
and not from any floating tradition.” 
—Ver. 14. On reaching Jerusalem Jesus 
as a devout Jew visited the Temple καὶ 
εὗρεν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, that is, in the outer 
court of the Temple, the court of the 
Gentiles.—rots πωλοῦντας βόας καὶ 
πρόβατα καὶ περιστεράς, cattle and 
sheep and doves, the sacrificial animals. 
It was of course a great convenience to 
the worshippers to be able to procure on 
the spot all requisites for sacrifice. Some 
of them might not know what sacrifice 


was required for their particular offence, 
and though the priest at their own home 
might inform them, still the officiating 
examiner in the Temple might reject the 
animal they brought as unfit; and 
probably would, if it was his interest to 
have the worshippers buying on the spot. 
That enormous overcharges were some- 
times made is shown by Edersheim, who 
relates that on one occasion Simeon, 
the grandson of Hillel, interfered and 
brought down the price of a pair of doves 
from a gold denar, 15s. 3d., to half a 
silver denar, or 4d. This Temple 
tyranny and monopoly and these exorbi- 
tant charges naturally tended to make the 
Temple worship hateful to the people; 
and besides, the old charm of sacrifice, 
the free offering by a penitent of what he 
knew and cherished, the animal that he 
valued because he had watched it from 
its birth, and had tested its value in the 
farm work—all this was abolished by this 
“convenient” abuse. That the abuse 
was habitual is shown by John Lightfoot, 
who quotes: ‘‘ Veniens quadam die Bava 
Ben Buta in atrium, vacuum pecoribus 
illud reperit,’’ as an extraordinary thing. 
It was not the presence of oxen and sheep 
which was offensive, for such animals 
must pass into the Temple with their 
usual accompaniments, But it was an 
aggravation to have these standing all 
day in the Temple, and to have the 
haggling and chaffering of a cattle 
market mingling with the sounds of 
prayer. But especially was it offensive to 
make the Temple service a hardship and 
an offence to the people of God. Not only 
were there those who provided sacrificial 
animals but also τοὺς κερματιστὰς καθη- 
µένους, money changers seated, at their 
tables, for a regular day’s business—not 
a mere accidental or occasional furnish- 
ing with change of some poor man who 
had hitherto not been able to procure it. 
---κέρμα is a small coin, from κείρω, to cut 
short.—ro κέρμα used collectively in the 
next verse would bein Attic τὰ κέρματα. 
--κερματιστής is one who gives small 
change, a money changer (such as may 
be seen sitting on the open street at a 
table in Naples or elsewhere). In tne 


708 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ NH. 


8 With obj, 16. καὶ τοῖς τὰς περιστερὰς πωλοῦσιν εἶπεν, “"Αρατε ταῦτα ἐντεῦθεν : 


in geu., x 
Kom. x. 2. BT) 
Cp. Ps. 


Ixix. 9. 


fifteenth verse they are called κολλν- 
βισταί, from κόλλυβος, a small coin, this 
again from κολοβός, docked, snipped 
short. Maimonides, quoted by Liicke, 
says the κόλλυβος was the small coin 
given to the money changer for exchang- 
ing a shekel into two half-shekels. The 
receiver of the change ‘ dat ipsi aliquid 
superabundans,” gives the changer some- 
thing over and above, and this aliquid 
superabundans vocatur collybus. In 
fact the word was transliterated, and 
in the Hebrew characters was read 
“kolbon”, This kolbon was about 2d., 
which was pretty high for providing the 
sacred half-shekel, which could alone be 
received into the Temple treasury and 
which every Jew had to pay. It was not 
only on the exchange of foreign money 
brought up to Palestine by Jews of the 
dispersion these money changers must 
have made a good percentage; but 
especially by exchanging the ordinary 
currency of Galilee and Judaea into the 
sacred half-shekel, which was the poll- 
tax or Temple tribute exacted from every 
Jew. This tax was either paid a week 
or two before Passover in the provinces 
or at the Passover in the Temple itself. 
To Jesus the usage seemed an intoler- 
able abuse. καὶ ποιήσας φραγέλλιον 
ἐκ σχοινίων. φραγέλλιον is the Latin 
flagellum, Many commentators repre- 
sent the matter as if Jesus made a whip 
of the litter; but John does not say ἐκ 
σχοῖνων, “' of rushes,” but ἐκ σχοινίων, of 
ropes made of rushes. In the account of 
Paul’s shipwreck (Acts xxvii. 32) σχοίνια 
are the ropes which held the boat to the 
ship; so that it is impossible on this 
ground to say with Dr. Whitelaw that 
‘the whip could only have been designed 
as an emblem of authority’’, It is quite 
probable it was not used; as Bengel 
says: ‘‘meque dicitur hominibus ictum 
inflixisse ; terrore rem perfecit ’.—rdvras 
ἐξέβαλεν. Holtzmann and Weiss consider 
that the following clause is epexegetical 
of the πάντας, as, grammatically, it is ; 
and. that πάντας therefore refers to the 
sheep and oxen, not to the men. Inthe 
Synoptical Gospels πάντας ἐξέβαλεν 
certainly refers to the men, and as the 
masculine is here retained it is difficult 
to refer it to the πρόβατα. After driving 
out the oxen and their owners, ἐξέχεε τὸ 
κέρμα καὶ τὰς τραπέζας ἀνέστρεψεν, Or 


ποιεῖτε τὸν οἶκον τοῦ πατρός µου οἶκον ἐμπορίου.᾽ 


17. Ἐμνήσ- 


θησαν δὲ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι γεγραμµένον ἐστὶν, ΄ Ὁ ἵῆλος * τοῦ 


as W.H. read ἀνέτρεψεν.- -τραπέζας 
were specifically ‘bankers’ tables,” 
hence τραπεζίται, bankers, so that we 
might translate ‘‘ counters”. These He 
overturned, and poured the coin on the 
ground. We cannot evacuate of forcible 
meaning these plain terms. It was a 
scene of violence: the traders trying to 
protect their property, cattle rushing 
hither and thither, men shouting and 
cursing, the money changers trying to 
hold their tables as Jesus went from one 
to another upsetting them, It was 
indeed so violent a scene that the 
disciples felt somewhat scandalised until 
they remembered, then and there, not 
afterwards, that it was written: ‘O ἵῆλος 
τοῦ οἴκου σου καταφάγεταί µε, words 
which are found in the sixty-ninth Psalm, 
the aorist of the LXX being changed 
into the future. In ordinary Greek 
ἐσθίω has for its future ἔδομαι, but in 
Hellenistic Greek it has φάγομαι for its 
future. See Gen. ili. 3, Lk. xvii.8. The 
disciples saw in their Master’s act a con. 
suming zeal for God’s house. It was 
this zeal which always governed Christ. 
He could not stand by and wash His 
hands of other men’s sins. _ It was this 
which brought Him to this world and 
to the cross. He had to interfere. It 
might have been expected that the words 
of Malachi would rather have been 
suggested to them, ‘“‘ The Lord whom ye 
seek shall suddenly come to His temple: 
but who may abide the day of His 
coming? for He shall sit as a refiner and 
purifier of silver”. Their interpretation 
of His act was suggested by His words: 
μὴ ποιεῖτε τὸν οἶκον τοῦ πατρός pov 
οἶκον ἐμπορίου. At His first visit to the 
Temple He had called it His Father’s 
house. There is, no doubt, in the pov 
an appropriation from which others are 
excluded. He does not say ‘‘your 
Father’s house” nor ‘‘ our Father’s,” but 
“my Father’s”. In this word and in 
His action His Messiahship was implied, 
but directly the act and even the word 
were no more than a reforming prophet 
might have felt to be suitable. Weiss 
(Life of Fesus, ii:, 6) says: ‘ He felt Him- 
self to be the Son of Him who in a 
unique way had consecrated this place 
for His temple, and He exercised the 
authority of a Son against the turmoil 
which defiled His Father’s house. Those 


«6----το. 


οἴκου σου κατέφαγέ} µε. 


= Pe ir “ct , a , τρ “ ~ a 
εἶπον atta, “*Ti σημεῖον δεικνύεις ἡμῖν, ὅτι ταῦτα ποιεῖς ; 
19. ᾽Απεκρίθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ Λύσατε τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον, 


1 καταφαγεται in all uncials. 


who looked deeper must ultimately have 
seen that the Messiah alone had a right 
to feel Himself in this sense the Chosen 
of Jehovah. As yet, however, there were 
no such observers. The followers by 
whom He was already surrounded did 
not require to deduce His Messiahship 
from this: they knew He was the 
Messiah.” Make not my Father’s house 
οἶκον ἐμπορίου. In Mk. xi. 17 the words 
are given as running, ‘Is it not written, 
My house shall be called of all nations 
the house of prayer? but ye have made 
it a den of thieves”; which seems to be 
a combination of Is, lvi. 7, ‘‘ Mine house 
shall be called a house of prayer for all 
people,” and Jer. vii. 11, ‘‘ Is this house 
which is called by my name become a 
den of robbers in your eyes?” In the 
οἶκος ἐμπορίου there may be a reminis- 
cence of Zech. xiv. 21. 

At ver. 18 the cleft begins to open 
between faith and unbelief. In the act 
in which the disciples had seen the fulfil- 
ment of a Messianic Psalm, the Jews see 
only an unauthorised interference and 
assumption of authority. Characteris- 
tically they ask for a sign.—ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, 
as frequent in John, means ‘‘ the Jewish 
authorities”; and ἀπεκρίθησαν is used as 
elsewhere of a reply to what has been 
suggested or affirmed not by word but 
by ἀεεά.-- τί σημεῖον δεικνύεις ἡμῖν, ὅτι 
ταῦτα ποιεῖς; ὅτι is used similarly in ix. 
17 = εἰς ἐκεῖνο ὅτι. The blindness of 
the Jews is enough to put external 
evidence for ever out of repute. They 
never will see the sign in the thing itself. 
The fact that Jesus by one blow accom- 
plished a much needed reform of an 
abuse over which devout men must often 
have sighed and which perhaps in- 
genuous Leyites had striven to keep 
within limits, the fact that this unknown 
youth had done what none of the consti- 
tuted authorities had been able to do, was 
surely itself the greatest σημεῖον. Might 
they not rather have said: Here is one 
who treats things radically, who does 
not leave grievances to mend themselves 
but effectively puts His hand to the work ? 
But this blindness is characteristic. They 
never see that Jesus Himself is the great 
sign, but are always craving for some 
extraneous testimony. This Gospel 


EYATTEAION 709 
18. ᾿Απεκρίθησαν οὖν ot Ιουδαῖοι καὶ 

>> t vi. 30. Mt. 

xii. 38 and 

xvi. 1. I 

Cor. i. a2. 


throughout is an exhibition of the com- 
parative value of external and internal 
evidence. To their request Jesus could 
not answer, ‘“‘Iam the Messiah”. He 
wished that to be the people’s discovery 
from their knowledge of Him. He 
therefore answers (ver. 19), Λύσατε τὸν 
ναὸν τοῦτον, καὶ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερῷ 
αὐτόν. The saying was meant to be 
enigmatical. Jesus spoke in parables 
when He wished to be understood by 
the spiritual and to baffle the hostile. 
Those who cross-question Him and treat 
Him as a subject to be investigated find 
no satisfaction. John tells us (ver. 21) 
that here He spoke of the ‘‘temple of His 
body”’, Bengel suggests that He may 
have indicated this, ‘‘adhibito nutu ges- 
tuve”’; others suggest that He may have 
given such an zmphasis to τοῦτον as to 
suggest what He intended; but this is ex- 
cluded by ver. 22, which informs us that 
it was only after the resurrection that 
the disciples themselves understood what 
was meant. Those who heard considered 
it an idle challenge which He knew 
could not be put to the proof. He knew 
they would not destroy their unfinished 
Temple. His words then had one mean- 
ing for Himself; another for those who 
heard. For Himself they meant: 
‘‘ Destroy this body of mine in which 
dwells the Father and I will raise it in 
three days”. He said this, knowing 
they would not now understand Him, 
but that this would be the great sign of 
His authority. Paul refers the resurrec- 
tion of Christ to the Father or to the 
Spirit ; John here, as in x. 17, 18, refers it 
directly to Christ Himself. 

Holtzmann suggests, as had previously 
been suggested by others, that ‘to do 
anything in three days’? merely meant 
to do it quickly. Reference is made to 
Hos. vi. 2, Mt. xiii. 40. This may be. 
Holtzmann further maintains that such 
an announcement as Jesus is here re- 
presented as making was impossible at 
so early a period of the ministry, that it 
must have been uttered on some other 
occasion and have been inserted here to 
suit John’s purpose. The origin of the 
expression he finds in the Pauline- 
Alexandrian conception of the body as 
the temple of God. If this was believed 


710 


n Of build- καὶ ἐν τρισὶν ἡμέραις " ἐγερῶ αὐτόν." 


ing ; see 


Kypke, ἐκ Τεσσαράκοντα καὶ εξ ἔτεσιν ᾠκοδομήθη 6 ναὸς 
wea ii. ο. τρισὶν ἡμέραις ἐγερεῖς αὐτόν; ΡΙ. Ἐκεῖνος δὲ 


1 Cor. iii. Prine oat >a 
16. ναοῦ τοῦ σώματος AUTOU. 


KATA IQANNHN 


II. 


20. Εἶπον οὖν ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, 
οὗτος, καὶ σὺ ἐν 
ἔλεγε περὶ ᾿ τοῦ 


22. ὅτε οὖν ἠγέρθη ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἐμνήσθησαν 


οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ὅτι τοῦτο ἔλεγεν adtois!- καὶ ἐπίστευσαν τῇ 


γραφῇ, καὶ τῷ Adyw ᾧ εἶπεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. 


λύμοις ἐν τῷ πάσχα, ἐν τῇ 


wi. τε. 
τα Omit αντοις with ΝΑΕΒΊ, Τε. vulg. 


of ordinary men much more must that 
body be the temple in which dwelt all 
the fulness of the Godhead bodily (Col. 
ii. Q). 

Phat the saying itself was historical 
is put beyond doubt by its quotation at 
the trial of Jesus, Mk. xiv. 58; cf. xv. 29. 
There were those who had heard Him 
say that He would destroy the Temple ; 
which gives this saying with just the 
kind of misunderstanding and perversion 
one would expect. But if the saying 
itself is historical, can Jesus have meant 
anything else by it than John tells us He 
meant? That He considered His body 
the Temple of God goes without saying. 

It is indeed extremely unlikely that 
Jesus should at the very beginning of 
His ministry have spoken of His death 
and resurrection openly. Hence even 
Weiss seems to think that the words 
meant: Destroy this Temple, as you are 
doing by allowing such abuses in it, 
prohibit me from those reforms on the 
Temple which can alone save it, and 
eventually this Temple must be com- 
pletely destroyed, its purpose gone, and 
its services extinct. But I will in its 
place raise a spiritual temple, the living 
Church. But if already Jesus had 
thought out the Messianic career, then 
He already was sure both that He 
would die and that He would rise again. 
Being in perfect fellowship with the 
living God He knew that He must be 
hated of men, and He knew that He 
could never fall from that fellowship but 
must conquer death. At no time then 
after His baptism and temptation could 
it be impossible to Him to speak covertly 
as here of His death and resurrection. 
On this point see Schwartzkopff, Die 
Weissagungen Christi. 

Ver. 20. The Jews naturally saw no 
reference to His own body or to its re- 
surrection, and replied to the letter of His 
words, τεσσεράκοντα. . . . The Temple 
was begun to be rebuilt in the eighteenth 
year of Herod’s reign that is the autumn 


23. ὡς δὲ ἦν ἐν Ἱεροσο- 


ἑορτῇ, πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν " εἰς τὸ ὄνομα 


of 734-735. In Jewish reckoning the 
beginning of a year was reckoned one 
year. Thus forty-six years might bring 
us to the autumn of 779 and the Passover 
of 780, 1.ε., 27 A.D. would be regarded as 
forty-six years from the rebuilding ; and 
this is Edersheim’s calculation. But 
several accurate chronologists think the 
following year is meant. 

The Synoptical Gospels insert a similar 
incident at the close of Christ’s ministry, 
and there alone. Harmonists accordingly 
understand that the Temple was twice 
cleansed by Him. ‘ Bis ergo Christus 
templum ... purgavit”’ (Calvin). It is 
easy to find reasons for such action 
either at the beginning or at the close of 
the ministry. On the whole it seems 
more appropriate at the beginning. The 
Messiah might be expected to manifest 
Himself at the Temple. 

The next paragraph extends from ii. 
23 to ili. 21, and contains (1) a brief 
description of the general result of 
Christ’s manifestation in Jerusalem (ii. 
23-25), and (2) a longer description of an- 
instance of the kind of faith and inquiry 
which were produced by this manifesta- 
tion and of the manner in which Christ 
met it.—Ver. 23. Time, place, and cir- 
cumstance are again given, ὡς δὲ ἦν ἐν 
τοῖς ᾿Ιεροσολύμοις ἐν τῷ πάσχα ἐν 
ἑορτῃ. The last clause is added with a 
reference to ver. 13. Then the feast was 
near, now it had arrived. We are to 
hear what happened while Jesus resided 
in Jerusalem during the feast.—odXot 
ἐπίστευσαν els τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, which 
can scarcely mean less than that 
they believed He was the Messiah. 
Nicodemus, however, seems willing only 
to admit He is ‘‘a teacher come from 
God”. ‘Their belief was founded on the 
miracles they saw.—@ewpotvres αὐτοῦ 
τὰ σημεῖα ἃ ἐποίει, seeing day by day 
the signs He was doing, and of which 
John relates none. This faith, resting 
on miracles, is in this Gospel never com- 
mended as the highest kind of faith, 


20-—25. bf iy en 


αὐτοῦ, θεωροῦντες αὐτοῦ τὰ σημεῖα ἃ énoie. 


EYAr I EAIUN 


70! 


24. αὐτὸς δὲ 6x Lk. xvi. 
ταν εἰς. 


. A a 4 
Ιησοῦς οὐκ * ἐπίστευεν ἑαυτὸν αὐτοῖς, διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν γινώσκειν πάντας * y xvi. 30 ; 


see Bur- 


25. καὶ ὅτι οὗ χρείαν εἶχεν 7 ἵνα τὶς µαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ' ton, 216. 


αὐτὸς γὰρ " ἐγίνωσκε τί ἦν ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ. 


III. τ. Ἡν' δὲ 


αὐτῷ, ἄρχων τῶν Ιουδαίων. 2. οὗτος ἦλθε πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν 
καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “ Ῥαββὶ, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἐλήλυθας διδᾶσ- 
καλος: “οὐδεὶς γὰρ ταῦτα τὰ σηµεῖα δύναται ποιεῖν ἃ σὺ ποιεῖς, 


cp. Thayer. 
αι ΤΠ. in EFGH. 


although it is by no means despised. It 
is what Luther calls ‘‘ milk faith” and 
may grow into something more trust- 
worthy. Accordingly, although Jesus 
had at once committed Himself to the 
men who were attracted without miracle 
by His personality and the testimony of 
the Baptist, to these αὐτὸς ᾿Ιησοῦς οὐκ 
ἐπίστευεν ἑαυτὸν, “ Jesus on His part did 
not commit Himself”. It is necessary 
to consider not only whether we have 
faith in Christ but whether Christ has 
faith in us. Thoroughgoing confidence 
must always be reciprocal. Christ 
will commit Himself to the man who 
thoroughly commits himself to Him. 
The reason of this reserve is given in a 
twofold expression : positive, διὰ τὸ αὐτὸν 
γινώσκειν πάντας, “because He Him- 
self knew all men”’; negative, καὶ ὅτι ov 
χρείαν εἶχεν ἵνα τὶς µαρτυρήσῃ περὶ τοῦ 
ἀνθρώπον, ‘and because He had πο need 
that any one should witness concerning 
man”. Holtzmann, following Winer, 
thinks that the article is inserted because 
reference is made to the individual with 
whom Jesus had on each occasion to 
do. This seems quite unnecessary. 6 
ἄνθρωπος is here, as in A.V., ‘“‘man,” 
the ordinary generic use of the article. 
The reason for this again is given in the 
closing words, αὐτὸς γὰρ . . . ‘‘ For He 
Himself knew what was in man,” knew 
human nature, the motives, governing 
ideas, and ways of man. This know- 
ledge was’ not supernatural. Westcott 
has an important note on this point, in 
which he points out that John describes 
the knowledge of Jesus “ both as relative, 
acquired ᾖ(γινώσκειν) and absolute, 
possessed (eiSévat)”. Each constitutes 
a higher degree of the kind of know- 
ledge found among men. _ Reynolds 
says: ‘‘ There are many other indica- 
tions of this thought mastery, which the 
evangelists appear to regard as proofs of 
divine power; so that I think the real 
significance of the passage is an ascrip- 


"ἄνθρωπος ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων, Νικόδημος " ὄνομα 


b Jobi.1; ερ. Chi 6. 


zi Sam. 


σος. 2 
Sam. xiv 
17. Mt. 


ix. 4. 
1 * yuxtos, α --τις, Μι 


XVii, 14, 
etc.; with 
τις, Mt. 
XVill. 12. 
Jo. v. 5; 


¢ vii. 50; xix. 39. d vii. 31; ix. 31. 


αντον in RABKL, etc, 


tion to Jesus of Divine power. The 
supernatural in mind, the superhuman 
mental processes of Jesus, are part of 
the proof we have that though He was 
man He created the irresistible impres- 
sion that He was more than man.”’ 
CuaPTER III. Vv. 1-21. A specimen 
is given of the kind of belief produced in 
the Fews of Ferusalem and of the 
manner in which Fesus dealt with it.— 
ἦν δὲ ἄνθρωπος, the Syriac adds “ there,” 
i.¢., at Jerusalem. ἄνθρωπος is simply 
equivalent to τις, and does not point 
back to the ἄνθρωπος of the preceding 
verse. He is described as éx tov Φαρισαίων 
that we may the better understand what 
follows. He belonged to that party 
which with all its bigotry contained a 
salt of true patriotism and could rear 
such cultured and high-toned men as 
Gamaliel and Paul. It is a mistake to 
suppose that all who belong to a mis- 
chievous party in a Church are themselves 
mischievous: it is also a mistake to ascribe 
without inquiry the goodness of indi- 
viduals to the influence of their party.— 
Νικόδημος ὄνομα αὐτῷ. Many Jews had 
now Greek names. Lightfoot quotes from 
the Talmud passages which show that a 
certain Bonai surnamed Nicodemus was 
a disciple of Jesus, and that he lived 
through the destruction of Jerusalem, 
but lost in it all his wealth. He is, how- 
ever, very doubtful whether this is the 
Nicodemus of this passage. He is further 
described as ἄρχων τῶν “lovdaiwy, a 
member of the Sanhedrim. See vii. 50, 
where he appears in the Sanhedrim. Lk. 
xiv. I speaks of one τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν 
Φαρισαίων. See also Lk. xviii. 18, viii. 
41; Mt. ix. 18.—Ver. 2. οὗτος ᾖἦλθε 
πρὸς αὐτὸν. The pronoun instead of 
the name Jesus, as Holtzmann remarks, 
shows the close connection with the 
closing verses of the last chapter. 
Nicodemus came to the fountain head, 
dissatisfied with the way in which his 
colleagues were dealing with Jesus, and 


712 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


Ill. 


e Acts vil. ἐὰν μὴ ᾗ ὁ Θεὸς Sper αὐτοῦ. 3. ᾽Απεκρίθη & ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 


9; x. 38 


T Kings αὐτῷ, “"Apyy ἁμὴν λέγω σοι, ‘édv µή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ 


x. 10. 


{ Gal. vi. 15. 1 Pet. i. 23. 


resolved to judge tor himself. Nothing 
could be more hopeful than such a state 
of mind. When a man says, I will see 
for myself what Jesus is, not influenced 
by what other men say ; before I sleep I 
will settle this matter, the result is fairly 
certain to be good. See chap. vii. 50, 
xix. 39. He came νυκτὸς, certainly with 
the purpose of secrecy, and yet for a 
man in his position to come at all was 
much. No timidity is shown in vii. 50. 
In xix. 39 John still identifies him as 
‘‘he that came to Jesus by night,’’ but 
adds ‘‘ at the first’’ in contrast to the 
courage he afterwards showed. Similarly, 
as Grotius tells us, Euclid of Megara 
visited Socrates by night when Athens 
was closed by edict against the 
Megarians. Modestly and as if not pre- 
suming to speak as an individual but as 
representing a party however small (ii. 
32), he says, Ῥαββεί otSapev ὅτι ἀπὸ θεοῦ 
ἐλήλυθας διδάσκαλος, ‘ Rabbi, we know 
that Thou art come from God as a 
teacher”. We need not see in the words 
anything either patronising or flattering, 
but merely the natural first utterance of 
a man wishing to show the state of his 
mind. He was convinced that Jesus was 
a divinely commissioned teacher. He 
came to hear what He had to teach. His 
teaching, in the judgment of Nicodemus, 
was divinely authenticated by the 
miracles; but to Nicodemus at any rate 
the teaching was that for which the 
miracles existed. They were σημεῖα, and 
though not recorded, they must have 
been of a kind to strike a thoughtful 
mind ταῦτα τὰ onpeta & σὺ ποιεῖς, the 
emphatic pronoun, as if other miracles 
might not have been so convincing. At 
the same time the reply of Jesus shows 
that behind this cautious designation of 
“teacher’’ there lay in the mind of 
Nicodemus a suspicion that this might 
be the Messiah. Nicodemus may have 
taken to heart the Baptist’s proclama- 
tion. Grotius supposes the conversation 
is abridged, and that Nicodemus had 
intimated that he wished to learn some- 
thing about the kingdom which formed 
the subject of our Lord’s_ teaching. 
“‘ Responsio tacite innuit, quod adjectum 
a Nicodemo fuerat, nempe, velle 58 5οἵτε, 
quandoquidem Jesus Regni coelestis inter 
docendum mentionem saepe faceret, 
quae ratio esset eo perveniendi.” But 


with the introduction to this incident 
(ii. 23-25) in our mind, it seems gratuitous 
to suppose that part of the conversation 
is here omitted. Jesus speaks to the 


intention and mental attitude of His\/ 


interlocutor rather than to his words. 
He saw that Nicodemus was conceiving 
it as a possible thing that these miracles 
might be the signs of the kingdom; and 
in this visit of Nicodemus He sees what 
may be construed into an overture from 
the Pharisaic party. And so He cuts 
Nicodemus remorselessly short. As 
when the Pharisees (Lk. xvii. 20) demand 
of Him when the Kingdom of God should 
come, He replied: The Kingdom of God 
cometh not with observation, not with 
signs which the natural man can measure, 
it comes within you; so here in strik- 
ingly similar language He says, ἐὰν µή Tes 
γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, ov δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν 
βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. This allusion to 
the kingdom, which is not a favourite 
idea of John’s, is one of the incidental 
marks of his historical trustworthiness, 
---ἄνωθεν is sometimes local = ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, 
from above; sometimes temporal = ἐξ 
ἀρχῆς, de novo. The former meaning 
is advocated here by Baur, Liicke, Meyer, 
and others. But the use of παλιγγενεσία 
and the difficulty stated by Nicodemus 
in ver. 4 rather indicate that the Syriac 
and Vulgate [nisi quis renatus fuerit], 
Augustine, Calvin, and among many 
others Weiss are right in adopting the 
temporal meaning and rendering with 
R.V. ‘‘anew”’. [Wetstein, in proof of 
this meaning, quotes frdm Artemidorus, 
who tells of a father who dreamt that 
there was born to him a child exactly 
like himself; ‘‘ he seemed,”’ he says, “(ο 
be born a second time,’’ ἄνωθεν. And in 
the touching story which gave rise to the 
Domine quo vadis Church at Rome where 
Peter met Christ, the words of the Lord, 
as given in the Acta Pauli, are ἄνωθεν 
µέλλω σταυρωθῆναι.] The answer of 
Nicodemus might seem to indicate that 
he had understood ἄνωθεν as equivalent 
to his own δεύτερον. But it is impossible 
to determine with certainty which is the 
correct meaning. A man must be born 
again, says our Lord, because otherwise 
οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. 
Is ἰδεῖν here to be taken in the sense of 
“seeing”? or of ‘ enjoying,” ‘‘ partak- 
ing’? Meyer and Weiss, resting on 


πα 


1--δ. 


/ 
/ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


7%3 


| 
δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν “ βασιλείαν τοῦ Οεοῦ. 4. Λέγει πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ 6 Only here 


Νικόδημος, “Mas δύναται ἄνθρωπος 


δύναται εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν τῆς μητρὸς αὐτοῦ δεύτερον εἰσελθεῖν καὶ 
> i 2 as 6. 
Inoods, “'᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν h Mii 8. 


γεννηθῆναι; 5. ᾿Απεκρίθη ὁ 


µή τις γεννηθῇ “ef ὕδατος καὶ Πνεύματος, οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς 


such expressions as ἰδεῖν θάνατον (Lk. ii. 
26, Heb. xi. 5), διαφθοράν (Acts ii. 27), 
ἡμέρας ἀγαθάς (1 Pet. iii. 10), under- 
stand that ‘‘ participation ” is meant. So 
Calvin, “' videre regnum Dei idem valet 
ac ingredi in regnum Dei,’’ and Grotius, 
“participem fieri’”. Confirmation of 
this view is at first sight given by the 
εἰσελθεῖν of ver. 5. But it is of “signs” 
Nicodemus has been speaking, of ob- 
serving the kingdom coming; and 
Christ says: To see the kingdom you 
must be spiritual, born anew, for the signs 
are spiritual. In this language there 
should have been nothing to stumble 
Nicodemus. All Jerusalem was ringing 
with the echoes of the Baptist’s preach- 
ing, the essence of which was “‘ ye must 
be born again”. To be children of 
Abraham is nothing. There is nothing 
moral, nothing spiritual, nothing of the 
will, nothing related to the Kingdom of 
God in being children of Abraham. As 
regards your fleshly birth you are as 
passive as stones and as truly outside 
the kingdom. In fact John had excom- 
municated the whole nation, and ex- 
pressly told them that they must submit 
to baptism, like Gentile proselytes, if 
they were to be prepared for the Messiah’s 
reign. The language may not have 
puzzled Nicodemus. Had our Lord said: 
“Every Gentile must be born again,” he 
would have understood. It is the idea 
that staggers him. His bewilderment 
he utters in the words:—Ver. 4. πῶς 
δύναται ἄνθρωπος γεννηθῆναι γέρων av; 
py δύναται, etc. In this reply there is 
no attempt to fence with Jesus, but 
merely an expression of the bewilder- 
ment created by His statement. The 
emphasis is on πῶς, which asks for 
further explanation. The μὴ of the 
second clause shows that Nicodemus 
understood that Jesus could not mean a 
second physical birth (see Lucke). On 
γέρων ὤν Grotius remarks: '' Exemplum 
in se ponit, qui senex jam erat”. That 
our Lord understood Nicodemus’ words 
as a request for further explanation 
appears from His at once proceeding to 
giveit.—Ver. 5. ᾽Αμὴν, ἀἁμὴν λέγω σοι, 
ἐὰν py τις γεννηθῆ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ 
πνεύματος, οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν 


and ver. 5 
in John. y 
ο παω 
in xviii. 


γεννηθῆναι γέρων av; μὴ 


Ezek. 
ΧΧΧΝΙ. 24 


B. To remove as far as possible the 
difficulty of Nicodemus as to the πῶς of 
the second birth our Lord declares that 
the two great factors in it are ‘‘ water” 
and ‘‘ spirit’’.. Calvin thinks this is a ἓν 
διὰ δυοῖν, and that the two names cover 
one reality. ‘*Spiritum et aquam pro 
eodem posuit.’’ ‘‘ Aqua nihil aliud est 
quam interior Spiritus sancti purgatio et 
vegetatio.”” And he defends this by a 
reference to the Baptist’s announcement 
that the Messiah would baptise with the 
spirit and fire. Grotius takes the same 
line, but cautiously adds: ‘Si quis 
tamen malit Ίδια decernere, ut aqua 
significet mali fugam, spiritus vero 
impetum ad optima quaeque agenda, 
inveniet quo hanc sententiam fulciet ”. 
Lk. (vii. 30) tells us that the Pharisees, 
to whom belonged Nicodemus, were not 
baptised of John; their reason being 
that to submit to the same rite as Gentiles 
and acknowledge the insufficiency of 
their Jewish birth wasa humiliation they 
could not suffer. To receive the Spirit 
from the Messiah was no humiliation; 
on the contrary, it was a glorious 
privilege. But to go down into Jordan 
before a wondering crowd and own their 
need of cleansing and new birth was too 
much. Therefore to this Pharisee our 
Lord declares that an honest dying to 
the past is as neediul as new life for the 
future. To be born of the Spirit involves 
a dying to the past, and therefore it is 
only the Spirit that is spoken of in the 
subsequent verses; but it is essential 
that our past be recognised as needing 
cleansing and forgiveness. These two 
factors, water and spirit, are not strictly 
co-ordinate. Water is not an actual 
spiritual agency in the second birth; it 
is only a symbol. But in every true 
second birth there is a negative as well 
as a positive side, a renunciation of the 
past as well as a new life created. The 
same idea is found in Titus iii. 3-5, 
‘* We were [of the flesh] but He saved 
us by the bath of regeneration and the 
renewal of the Holy Ghost”. The same 
combination is found in Ezek. xxxvi. 25- 
27, ‘‘ Then will I sprinkle clean water 
upon you and ye shall be clean: from 
all your filthiness and from all your idols 


714 


ixCor.ii. τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. 6. 


with εἰ 
Mk. xv. 


. 111.13. , » 

k pres.indic. πνευματος. 
Burton, 
313. 

will I cleanse you. A new heart also 
will I give you, and a new spirit will I 
put within you.” The water, then, is 
considered as that which cleanses from 
sin: the Spirit as the principle of the 
new life.—Ver. 6. The necessity of the 
new birth is further exhibited by a com- 
parison of the first and second birth: 
τὸ γεγεννηµένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς, capt 
ἐστι: καὶ τὸ γεγεννγηµένον ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύ- 
patos, πγνεῦμά ἐστι. The neuter is 
used because the speaker ‘‘ wishes to 
make His statement altogether general” 
(Winer, 27, 5), whatever is born. The 
law is laid down in Aristotle (Eth. Maj., 
i., 10), “‘ Every nature generates its own 
substance,” flesh, flesh; spirit, spirit.— 
Ver. 7. Therefore it was no cause for 
wonder that a new birth was required 
for entrance into the spiritual kingdom. 
The argument implies that natural birth 
produces only σάρξ, not spirit. By his 
natural birth man is an animal, with a 
nature fitting him to live in the material 
world in which he finds himself and 
with capacities for spiritual life in a 
spiritual world. These capacities may 
or may not be developed. If they are 
developed, the Spirit of God is the 
Agent, and the change wrought by their 
development may fitly be called a new 
birth, because it gives a man entrance 
into a new world and imparts new life to 
live in it. (Cf. the second birth and 
second life of many insects.)—Ver. 8. 
τὸ πνεῦμα ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ. Two render- 
ings of these words are possible: ‘‘ The 
wind bloweth where it listeth,’? as in 
A.V.; ‘The Spirit breatheth where He 
will,’ as in margin of Κ.Υ. By the one 
rendering a comparison is instituted 
between the unseen but powerful opera- 
tion of the Spirit in regeneration and the 
invisible but mighty power of the wind. 
You hear the voice of the wind but 
cannot see where it comes from nor 
where it goes to. So in the new birth 
the Spirit moves and works unseen. 
Similarly Socrates (Xen., Mem., iv., 3) 
says: The thunder as it comes and goes 
is not seen: the winds also are invisible 
though their effects are manifest; the 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ IL. 


‘td γεγεννηµένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς, σάρξ 


δ. τὸ πνεῦμα 


’ ὅπου θέλει πνεῖ, καὶ Thy Φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις, GAN’ οὐκ οἶδας πόθεν 
44 and : Σἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει: οὕτως ἐστὶ was ὁ γεγεννηµένος ἐκ τοῦ 
τν ϱ. ᾽Απεκρίθη Νικόδημος καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Mads δύναται 


soul of man is itself unseen, therefore 
despise not the unseen but honour God. 
In favour of the other rendering it may 
be urged that there is nothing to warn 
us that we are now to understand that 
by the word πνεῦμα ‘“‘ wind” is meant. 
It occurs about 370 times in the N.T., 
and never means ‘“‘wind” except once 
in a quotation from the O.T. The 
Vulgate renders ‘Spiritus ubi vult 
spirat,” and if we could not only say 
“expire,” “ inspire,” but also “spire,” the 
best translation might be ‘‘the Spirit 
spires”. As this cannot be, we may 
render: ‘“ The Spirit breathes where He 
will,’’ that is to say, there is no limita- / 
tion of His power to certain individuals, 
classes, races. Cf. ν. 21, 6 vids οὓς θέλει 
ζωοποιεῖ. The thought here is similar: 
there need be no despair regarding the 
second birth: the Spirit breathes where 
He will. So Bengel, “ Spiritus, proprie, 
nam huic, non vento voluntas et vox 
est’.—Kal τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκούεις, the 
Spirit makes Himself audible in articu- 
late and intelligible sounds. The breath- 
ing of the Spirit is like man’s breath, not 
mere air, but articulated and significant 
voice. The Spirit works intelligible 
results. He does not roar like the wind 
and toss men in unavailing contortions 
as the wind tosses the trees. It is a 
voice and the result is full of reason, in 
harmony with human nature and vivify- 
ing it to higher life. But for all this, οὐκ 
οἶδας πόθεν ἔρχεται καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγει, you 
cannot observe and regulate the Spirit’s 
approach and departure.—ottws ἐστὶ 
was 6 Ὑεγεννηµένος ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος, 
thus it is in the case of every one who is 
born of the Spirit. You cannot see the 


process of regeneration; the process is _ 


secret and invisible, the results are 
apparent.—Ver. g. This explanation did 
not satisfy Nicodemus. He falls back, 
upon his bewilderment, πῶς δύναται 
ταῦτα Ὑενέσθαι; This question stirs 
Jesus to a fuller explanation, which is 
reported in vv. 10-15.—Ver. ΙΟ. He 
opens with an exclamation of surprise, 
Σὺ εἶ 6 διδάσκαλος τοῦ Ισραήλ καὶ ταῦτα 
οὐ γινώσκεις; perhaps there is more of 


6—13. 


ταῦτα γενέσθαι ;” 


ὁ ' διδάσκαλος τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ, καὶ ταῦτα οὗ γινώσκεις; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


715 


10. ᾽Απεκρίθη ὁ "Ingots καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “ Σὺ ef ! Κοπι. ii.20. 


μὴ mi Posy 
It. ν ο. 2Cor. 
μη v.1. Phil. 


ἁμὴν λέγω σοι, ὅτι ὃ οἴδαμεν λαλοῦμεν, καὶ ὃ ἑωράκαμεν papTupodper’ _ iii. το. 


καὶ τὴν µαρτυρίαν ἡμῶν οὐ λαμβάνετε. 


n 1 Cor. xv. 
12. εἰ τὰ "' ἐπίγεια εἶπον 48. Phil. 
ll. 1Ο, 


nw 8 ~ Ἀ 
ὑμῖν, καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε, πῶς, ἐὰν εἴπω ὑμῖν τὰ " ἐπουράνια, πιστεύ- ο Deut. xxx. 


σετε; 


οὐρανοῦ Ρ καταβὰς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ 1: 


~ 12.Baruch 


13. καὶ °oddels ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν, εἰ μὴ 6 ἐκ τοῦ iii, 29. 


Prov. 
XXX. 4. 
P vi. 33, 38. 


1 o wv εν τω ovpavw is found in ATA vet. Lat. vulg. syr., but is omitted in BL 33 


memph. Cyr.-Alex. 


sadness than either of indignation or 
irony in the words. Is this the state of 
matters I have to confront? If the 
teacher is so obtuse what must the 
taught be? The presence of the article 
1s usually taken as indicating that 
Nicodemus was recognised as a great 
teacher, perhaps held the official position 
of Chakam in the Sanhedrim. But 
Westcott is right: ‘the definite article 
marks the official relation of Nicodemus 
to the people generally”. It is used to 
bring out sharply, not the relation he 
held to other teachers, but the relation 
he held to the people. ‘‘ Art thou the 
teacher of Israel and knowest not 
these things?” Bad enough for an 
Israelite to be blind to such things, but 
how much worse for one who teaches! 
But should a teacher of Israel have 
known these things? Westcott over- 
leaps the difficulty by saying that 
γινώσκεις refers to the knowledge of 
perception, and that Jesus is surprised 
that Nicodemus should not have been 
able during this conversation to appre- 
hend what was said.—Ver. 11. ἁμὴν, 
ἁμὴν . . . οὐ λαμβάνετε. From this point 
dialogue ceases, and we have now an 
unbroken utterance of Jesus. It starts 
with a certification of the truth of what 
Nicodemus had professed himself unable 
to understand.—6 οἴδαμεν λαλοῦμαν. 
Why plural? Were the  discipies 
present and are they included? Or does 
it mean Jesus and the prophets, or Jesus 
and the Baptist, or Jesus and the Father, 
or is it the rhetorical ‘‘we”? Possibly it 
is merely an unconscious transition to 
the plural, as in this same verse the σοι 
of, the first clause becomes a plural in 
λαμβάνετε in the last clause. Or there 
may κ. an indefinite identification of 
Himself with all who had apprehended 
the nature of the new birth—the Baptist 
and the best of his disciples. Jesus does 
not wish to represent Himself as alone 
able to testify of such matters. Weiss’ 


view is peculiar. He thinks that the con- 
tents of the μαρτυροῦμεν consist of what 
John and Jesus saw at the Baptism, 
when the Spirit’s descent indicated Jesus 
as the Baptiser with the Spirit.—Ver. 
13. εἰ τὰ ἐπίγεια .. . πιστεύσετε; 
The reference of τὰ ἐπίγεια is fixed by 
the εἶπον ὑμῖν. They are such things 
as Jesus had been speaking of: things 
verified in human, earthly experience, 
the necessity of a spiritual birth and the 
results of it. Regeneration was a change 
made in this earthly life. The kingdom 
of regenerate men was to be established 
on earth, as apprehensible in certain of 
its aspects as the kingdom Nicodemus 
was proposing to found. The ἐπουράνια 
are matters not open to human observa- 
tion, matters wholly in the unseen, the 
nature and purposes of God. Cf. the 
remarkable parallel in Wisd. ix. 16. 
—Ver. 13. καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν .. . 
καταβάς. The connection is: You have 
not believed earthly things, much less will 
you believe those which are heavenly; 
for not only are they in their own nature 
more difficult to understand, but there is 
none to testify of them save only that 
One who came down out of heaven. 
The sentence may be paraphrased thus: 
No one has gone up to heaven and by 
dwelling there gained a knowledge ot 
the heavenly things: One only has dwelt 
there and is able to communicate that 
knowledge—He, viz., who has come 
down from heaven. ‘ Presence in 
heaven” is considered to be the 
ground and qualification for communi- 
cating trustworthy information regarding 
‘‘ heavenly things”. Direct knowledge 
and personal experience of heavenly 
things alone justify authoritative declara- 
tions about them; as in earthly things 
one may expect to be believed if he can 
say, “νε speak that we do know and 
testify that we have seen”. But this 
‘presence in heaven” Jesus declares to 
be the qualification exclusively of one 


716 


KATA TQANNHN 


ΠΠ. 


/ 
q Num.xxi. 14. καὶ "καθὼς Μωσῆς ὕψωσε τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, " οὕτως 


9 
τν]. 28; 
xii. 32. 


αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται, add’? 


ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου: 15. ἵνα was 6 πιστεύων εἰς 


ἔχη {why αἰώνιον. 16. οὕτω γὰρ 


> , ς A a / Lid ‘ ca -€ A 9 ~ 
ἠγάπησεν 6 Θεὸς τὸν κόσµον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὑτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ 
ἔδωκεν, ἵνα was ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται, GAN’ ἔχη ζωὴν 


1 un αποληται αλλ omitted in NBL 1, 33 vet. Lat. 


person. This person He describes as “‘ He 
that came down out of heaven,” adding 
as a further description ‘“‘the Son of 
Man” (whois in heaven]. This descrip- 
tion identifies this person as Jesus Him- 
self. He claims therefore to have a 
unique qualification for the declaration 
of truth about heavenly things, and this 
qualification consists in this, that He and 
He alone has had direct perception of 
heavenly things. He has been in heaven. 
By ‘“‘ heaven” it is not a locality that is 
indicated, but that condition which is 
described in the prologue as πρὸς τὸν 
θεόν. And when He speaks of coming 
down out of heaven He.can only mean 
manifesting Himself to those who are on 
that lower level from which they had not 
been able to ascend to the knowledge of 
heavenly things. In short, we have here 
the basis in Christ’s own words of the 
statement in the prologue that the Word 
was in the beginning with God, and 
became flesh to be a light to men. Why 
is 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου introduced? It 
identifies the person spoken of, and it 
suggests that He who alone had the 
knowledge of heavenly things now wore 
-human nature, was accessible, and was 
there for the purpose of communicating 
this knowledge. The words added in 
the T.R., 6 dv ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, affirm that 
although He had come out of heaven 
He was still in it, and they show that a 
condition of being, not a locality, was 
meant by ‘‘heaven”.—Ver. 14. If the 
Son of Man alone has this knowledge, 
how is it to be disseminated and become 
a light to all men? ‘This is answered 
in the words, καὶ καθὼς Μωσᾖς . . . τοῦ 
ἀνθρώπου [modern editors read Μωνσῆς: 
so also in LXX]. The emphatic word 
is ὕψωσε. When Moses-made the brazen 
serpent, he did not secrete it in his tent 
and admit a few selected persons to view 
it, but ὕψωσε τὸν ὄφιν, gave it an eleva- 
tion at which all might see it. So must 
the Son of Man, the bearer of heavenly 
light and healing, ὑψωθῆναι, that all may 
sce Him. The “ lifting up” of the Son 
of Man is interpreted in xii. 33 to mean 
His lifting up on the cross. It was this 


which drew human observation and 
human homage. The cross js the throne 
of Christ. In the phrase δεῖ ὑψωθῆναι 
the aorist is used in accordance with 
Greek usage by which an aorist infinitive 
is employed to express the action of the 
verb even though future after verbs 
signifying to hope, to expect, to promise, 
and such like. Thus Iph. in Aul., 462, 
οἶμαι γάρ viv ἱκετεύσαι, where Markland 
needlessly changes the aorist into the 
future. Nicodemus could not see the 
significance with which these words were 
filled by the crucifixion. What would be 
suggested to him by the comparison οἱ 
the Messiah with the brazen serpent 
might be something like this: The Son 
of Man is to be lifted up. Yes, but not 
on a throne in Herod’s palace. He was 
to be conspicuous, but as the brazen 
serpent had been conspicuous, hanging 
on a pole for the healing of the people. 
His elevation was certain, but it was an 
elevation by no mere official appoint- 
ment, or popular recognition, or heredi- 
tary right, but by plumbing the depths 
of human degradation in truest self- 
sacrifice. There is no royal road to 
human excellence, and Jesus reached the 
height He attained by no blare of 
heralds’ trumpets or flaunting of banners 
or popular acclaim, but by being sub- 


jected to the keenest tests by which, / 


character can be searched, by passing 
through the ordeal of human life in this 
world, and by being found the best, the 
one only perfectly faithful servant of God 
and man.—Ver. 15. The words μὴ 
ἀπόληται ἀλλ᾽ of the Τ.Ε. ate omitted 
by Tisch., W.H.,and R.V. Further, the 
same editors replace the words ets αὖτον 
by ἐν αὐτῷ, and the R.V. translates 
‘that whosoever believeth may in Him 
have eternal life,” in accordance with 


< 


Johannine usage, which does not support . 


the rendering ‘‘ believeth in Him”. This 
is the object to be accomplished by the 
“elevation  οἳ the Son of Mah, viz., 
that whoever, Jew or Gentile, believes 
that there is life in Him that is thus 
exalted, may have life eternal.—Ver. 
16. Several conservative theologians, 





(4—I9. 


αἰώνιον. 


κόσμον, ἵνα κρίνη τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ᾽ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι αὐτοῦ. 
c , > > ‘ > 4 ς a 4 , ” 
18. 6 πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται: ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη 


κέκριται, ὅτι 


τοῦ Θεοῦ. 


"μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ 
19. "αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ κρίσις ὅτι τὸ φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ. 717 


17. οὗ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν vidv αὑτοῦ εἷς τὸν 


Ε Excep- 
tional 
constr. ; 
see bur 
ton, 474, 
Winer, 
594, 602. 


κόσμον, καὶ ἠγάπησαν ot ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον τὸ σκότος, ἢ τὸ φῶς' εΊο.ν.τι 


Neander, Tholuck, Westcott, are of 
opinion that the words of Jesus end with 
ver. 15, and that from vv. 16-21 we have 
an addition by the evangelist. There is 
much to be said in favour of this idea. 
The thoughts of these verses are ex- 
-planatory rather than progressive. Vv. 
_ 16 and 17 repeat the object of Christ’s 
mission, which has already been stated. 
Vv. 18 and το declare the historic 
results in faith and unbelief, results 
which at the date of the conversation 
were not conspicuous. Vv. 20 and 21 
exhibit the causes of faith and unbelief. 
The tenses also forbid us to refer the 
passage directly to Jesus. In His lips 
the present would have been more 
natural. To John looking back on the 
finished story aorists and perfects are 
natural. Also, the designation “' only 
begotten son” is not one of the names 
by which Jesus designates Himself, but 
it is used by the evangelist, i. 18 and 
1 John iv. 9.—otrw yap ἠγάπησεν .. . 
ζωὴν αἰώνιον. The love of God for the 
world of.men is the source of Christ’s 
mission with all its blessings. It was 
this which prompted Him to “ give,” 
that is, to give not solely to the death of 
the cross alluded to in ver. 14, but to all 
that the world required for salvation, 
His only begotten Son. ‘‘ The change 
from the aorist (ἀπόληται) to the present 
‘ (xq) is to be noted, the utter ruin being 
spoken of as an act, the possession of 
life eternal as an enduring experience ” 
(Meyer, Weiss, Holtzmann).—Ver. 17. 
οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν . . . δι αὐτοῦ. For 
whatever the result of Christ’s coming 
has been, in revealing a love of sin and 
bringing heavier judgment on men, this 
was not God’s purpose in sending His 
Son. The Jewish idea was that the 
Messiah would come ‘‘ to judge,” {.6., to 
condemn the world.—-xptvw and κατα- 
Kptvw, though originally distinct, are in 
the N.T. sometimes identical in mean- 
ing, the result of judgment so commonly 
being condemnation; cf. crime. But 
although the result is judgment, the 
‘bringing to light a distinction among 
men and the resulting condemnation of 
Many, yet the object was ἵνα σωθῇ 6 


κόσμος. John repeats his favourite word 
κόσμος three times in. this verse that 
there may be no possibility of missing 
his point, that so far as God’s purpose 
was concerned, it was one of unmixed 
love, that all men might be saved. The 
emphasis was probably due to the 
ordinary Messianic expectation which 
limited and misrepresented the love of 
God. Westcott remarks on this verse: 
‘The sad realities of present experience 
cannot change the truth thus made 
known, however little we may be able to 
understand in what way it will be accom- 
plished’’. It might on similar grounds 
be argued that because God wills that 
all men be holy in this life, all men are 
holy.—Ver. 18. 6 πιστεύων . . . τοῦ 
θεοῦ. Expansion of previous verse. God 
sent His Son not to judge but to save; 
and whoso accepts the Son and His 
revelation is not judged. It is no longer 
“every Jew,’ nor ‘‘every one chosen by 
God,”’ but every one that believeth. All 
here is spiritual. Although judgment 
was not the object it is the necessary 
result of Christ’s presence in the world. 
But it is a judgment very different from 
that which the Jews expected. It is 
determined by the attitude towards 
Christ, and this again, as afterwards 
shown, is determined by the moral con- 
dition of the individual.—é6 py πιστεύων 
ἤδη κέκριται, “he that believeth not is 
already judged’; not only is left under 
the curse of his own evil actions ; but, 
as the next clause shows, lies under the 
condemnation of not Ὀε]ενίης.-- ἤδη 
κέκριται, he is already judged: it is not 
some future assize he doubtfully awaits 
and which may or may not convict. He 
is judged, and on a ground which to John 
seems to indicate monstrous depravity, 
ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν . . . ToUGeov. Not 
to perceive the glory of this august 
Being whom Jehn so adored, not to 
receive the revelation made by the Only 
Begotten, is proof not merely of human 
infirmity and passion, but of wickedness 
chosen and preferred in presence of re- 
vealed goodness.—Ver. 1ο. ‘This is 
turther explained in the following, αὕτη _ 
... τὸ φῶς. The ground of the con- 


718 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΠΠ. 


u Prov. κκ, ἣν γὰρ πονηρὰ αὐτῶν τὰ ἔργα. 20. was γὰρ ὁ "φαῦλα πράσσων 


γ. 14. 


μισεῖ τὸ φῶς, καὶ οὐκ έρχεται πρὸς τὸ φῶς, ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ τὰ ἔργα 
ν Tobit xiii. αὐτοῦ. 341. 6 δὲ ᾿ ποιῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ Os 


να 


φανερωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα, ὅτι ἐν Ged ἐστιν εἰργασμένα.” 


demnation lies precisely in this, that 
since the coming of Christ and His 
exhibition of human life in the light of 
the holiness and love of the Father, 
human sin is no longer the result of 
ignorance, but of deliberate choice and 
preference. Nothing can be done fora 
man who says, “' Evil, be thou my good’”’. 
The reason of this preference of darkness 
and rejection of Christ is that the life is 
evil, ἦν γὰρ κ. τ. A.—Ver. 20. The prin- 
ciple is explained in this verse. Under- 
lying the action of men towards Christ 
during His historical manifestation was 
a general law: a law which operates 
wherever men are similarly invited to 
walk in the light. The law which governs 
the acceptance or refusal of light is given 
in the words was yap 6 Φαῦλα . . . ἔργα 


αὐτοῦ. Φαῦλος, originally ‘ poor,” 
“paltry,” “ugly”; of φαῦλοι, “the 
vulgar,” ‘the common sort’. In 


Polybius, φΦαῦλα πλοία, πολιτεία φαῦλα, 
badly constructed; φαῦλος ἠἡγεμών, a 
foolish general, and in xvii. 15, 15 it 
is opposed to deliberate wickedness. 
Dull, senseless viciousness seems to be 
denoted. Here and in ver. 29 πράσσειν 
is used with φαῖῦλα, and ποιεῖν in the 
next verse with ἀλήθειαν, on which 
Bengel remarks: ‘‘ Malitia est irrequieta ; 
est quiddam operosius quam veritas. 
Hinc verbis diversis notantur”’. Where 
a distinction is intended, πράσσειν 
expresses the reiterative putting forth of 
activities to bring something to pass, 
ποιεῖν the actual production of what is 
aimed at. Hence there is a slight hint 
of the busy fruitlessness of vice. Paul, 
as well as John, uses πράσσειν, in certain 
passages, of evil actions. The person 
thus defined μισεῖ τὸ φῶς, “hates the 
light,” instead of delighting in it, καὶ οὐκ 
ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸ dws, and does not bring 
himself within its radiance, does not 
seek to use it for his own enlighten- 
ment; ἵνα μὴ ἐλεγχθῇ τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ, 
‘lest his works be convicted” and so 
put to shame. According to John there 
is moral obliquity at the root of all 
refusal of Christ. Obviously there is, if 
Christ be considered simply as ‘‘light”’. 
To refuse the ideal he presents is to 
prefer darkness.—Ver. 21. 6 δὲ wosev... 
“On the other hand, he who does the 
truth”... This is one of John’s com- 


prehensive phrases which perhaps lose by 
definition. ‘To do the truth” is at any 
rate to live up to what one knows; to 
live an honest, conscientious life. John 
implies that men of this type are to be 
found where the light of Christ has not 
dawned: but when it dawns they hail 
it with joy. He that doeth the truth 
comes to the light that his deeds may be 
manifested, ὅτι ἐν θεῷ ἐστιν eipyaopeva. 
Is ὅτι expressive of a fact or declara- 
tive of a reason? Must we translate 
“manifested, that they are,’’ etc., or 
“‘manifested, because they are,’ etc. ? 
The Κ.Υ. has ‘that’? in the text, and 
“because” in the margin. Godet and 
Westcott prefer the former; Liicke, 
Meyer, Weiss and Weizsacker the latter. 
It is not easy to decide between the two, 
On the whole, the latter interpretation is 
to be preferred. This clause gives the 
reason of the willingness shown by the 
man to have his deeds made manifest : 
and thus it balances the clause ἦν γὰρ 
πονηρὰ αὐτῶν τὰ ἔργα, which gives the 
reason for evil doers shunning the light. 
He who does the truth is not afraid of 
the light, but rather seeks increased light 
because his deeds have been done ἐν 6€@ ; 
that is, he has not been separated from 
God by them, but has done what he has 
done because he conceived that to be the 
will of God. Where such light as exists 
has been conscientiously used, more is 
sought, and welcomed when it comes. 
“ Plato-was like a man shut into a vault, 
running hither and thither, with his poor 
flickering Taper, agonizing to get forthe, 
and holding himself in readinesse to 
make a spring forward the moment a 
door should open. But it never did. 
‘Not manie wise are called.’ He had 
clomb a Hill in the Darke, and stood 
calling to his companions below, ‘ Come 
on, come on, this way lies the East: Iam 
avised we shall see the sun rise anon’. 
But they never did. What a Christian 
he would have made. Ah! he is one 
now. He and Socrates, the veil long 
removed from their eyes, are sitting at 
Jesus’ feet. Sancte Socrates, ora pro 
nobis” (Erasmus to More in Sir Τ, 
More’s Household), Holtzmann quotes 
from Hausrath: ‘* As a magnet attracts 
the metal while the dead stone lies un- 
moved: so are the children of God drawn. 


20---26. 


22. Meta ταῦτα ἦλθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν 


”Ἰουδαίαν γῆν. καὶ ἐκεῖ διέτριβε 


23. ἦν δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης βαπτίζων ἐν Αἰνὼν ἐγγὺς τοῦ Σαλεὶμ, ὅτι 
* ὕδατα πολλὰ ἦν ἐκεῖ ' καὶ παρεγίνοντο καὶ ἐβαπτίζοντο. 
γὰρ ἦν βεβλημένος εἰς τὴν φυλακὴν ὁ Ἰωάννης. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


719 


w Adj. witk 
yn here 
and in 
Mk. i. 5 
only. Cp 
Acts xvi. 
1; xxiv. 
24. 

Ps. xxxii. 


per αὐτῶν καὶ ἐβάπτιζεν. 


24. ᾿ οὕπω 
25. ᾿Εγένετο οὖν 


a A δα ος 
{ζήτησις ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν Ιωάννου μετὰ ᾿Ιουδαίων 1 περὶ καθαρισμοῦ: 6. Nah. 


26. καὶ ἦλθον πρὸς τὸν Ιωάννην, καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “ Ῥαββὶ, ὃς ἦν 
σὺ μµεμαρτύρηκας, ἴδε οὗτος 


- a e 
μετὰ σοῦ πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου, ᾧ 


cy 


i. 12. Rev 
i. 15. 

y Mt. iv. 12 
xiv. 3. 


Ι fovdarov in NcABL, adopted by T.Tr.W.H.R. 


by the Logos and come to the Light”’. 
Cf. chap. xviii. 37. 

Vv. 22-36. The ministry of Fesus in 
Fudaea after He left Ferusalem. This 
falls into three parts: (1) a brief account 
of the movements and success of Jesus 
and the Baptist which provoked a com- 
parison between them, 22-26; (2) the 
Baptist’s acceptance of the contrast and 
final testimony to Jesus, 27-30; (3) the 
expansion by the evangelist of the 
Baptist’s words, 31-36.—Ver. 22. μετὰ 
ταῦτα, subsequent to the ministry in 
Jerusalem Jesus and His disciples came 
εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν γῆν, “into the Judaean 
country,’’ the rural parts in contradis- 
tinction to the metropolis. ‘‘ Nam quum 
ex Judaeae metropoli exiret Jesus, non 
poterat simpliciter dici proficisci in 
Judaeam; . . . maluimus ergo terri- 
torium convertere quam terram,” Beza. 
So in Josh. viii. 1 (Codex Ambrosianus), 
‘«T have given into thy hand the King of 
Gai καὶ τὴν πόλιν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν γῆν 
αὐτοῦ”. Cf. also John xi. 54.---καὶ εἲὲκ 
διέτριβεν, “'απά there He spent some 
time with them’’; whether weeks or 
months depends on the interpretation of 
iv. 35.--καὶ ἐβάπτιζεν, that is, His 
disciples baptised, iv. 2.—Ver. 23. ἦν δὲ 
kal... ἐκε. And John also was 
baptising, although he had said that he 
was sent to baptise in order that the 
Messiah might be identified; which had 
already been done. But John saw that 
men might still be prepared for the 
reception of the Messiah by his preach- 
ing and baptism. Hence, however, the 
questioning which arose, ver. 25. The 
locality is described as Αἰνὼν ἐγγὺς τοῦ 
Σαλείμ. ‘‘ The Salim of this place is no 
doubt the Shalem of Genesis xxxiii. 18, 
and some seven miles north is ’Ainin 
{= Springs], at the head of the Wady 
Far’ah, which is the great highway up 
from the Damieh ford for those coming 
from the east by the way of Peniel and 


Succoth” (Henderson’s Palestine, p. 
154). The reason for choosing this 
locality was ὅτι ὕδατα πολλὰ jv ἐκεῖ, 
6 because many waters were there,’ or 
much water; and therefore even in 
summer baptism by immersion could be 
continued. It is not “the people’s 
refreshment” that is in view. Why 
mention this any more than where they 
got their food ?—«at παρεγίνοντο, the 
indefinite third plural, as frequently in 
N.T. and regularly in English, “ they 
continued coming ”’.—Ver. 24. ove 
γὰρ ... ὁ Ιωάννης, “for not yet had 
John been cast into prison’: a clause 
inserted for the sake of those who might 
have gathered from the synoptic narrative 
that John was cast into prison immedi- 
ately after the temptation of Jesus, Mk. 
i. 14, Mt. iv. 12. John having been 
present with Jesus through all this 
period can give the sequence of the 
events with chronological precision.— 
Ver. 25. ἐγένετο οὖν [yrnois... 
There arose therefore—that is, in con- 
sequence of the proximity of these two 
baptisms—on the part of John’s disciples 
[ἐκ, cf. Herod. ν. 21 and Dionys, Hal. viii. 
Ρ. 556] a questioning, or discussion, with 
a Jew about purifying, that is, generally, 
including the relation of those two 
baptisms to one another, and to the 
Jewish washings, and the significance of 
each. The trend of the discussion may 
be gathered from the complaint to the 
Baptist, ver. 26. As the discussion was 
begun by the disciples of John, it would 
seem as if they had challenged the Jew 
for seeking baptism from Jesus. For 
their complaint is (νετ. 26) ‘PaBBi... 
πρὸς αὐτόν. That Jesus should baptise 
as well as John they could not under- 
stand. Really, the difficulty is that Jesus 
should have allowed John to go on 
baptising, and that John should not him- 
self have professed discipleship of Jesus. 
But so long as John saw that men were 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


ΠΠ. 


27. ᾿Απεκρίθη 


Ἰωάννης καὶ εἶπεν, “Ob δύναται ἄνθρωπος λαμβάνειν οὐδὲν, ἐὰν 


720 
/ 4 / md x 3 ”» 
βαπτίζει, καὶ πάντες ἔρχονται πρὸς αὐτόν. 
μὴ ή δεδοµένον αὐτῷ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. 
ο) 9 κ) > ει ‘ 
τυρεῖτε ὅτι εἶπον, Οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐγὼ 
.. pee 3 / 
rii.9. Is. εἰμὶ έμπροσθεν ἐκείνου. 
liv. 5. 


28. αὐτοὶ ὑμεῖς µοι µαρ- 
ὁ Χριστὸς, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἀπεσταλμένος 


29. ὃ ἔχων τὴν νύμφην, "νυμφίος ἐστίν : 


Eph.v.25.6 δὲ φίλος τοῦ νυµφίου, ὁ ἑστηκὼς καὶ ἀκούων αὐτοῦ, Χαρᾷ χαίρει 


διὰ τὴν Φωνὴν τοῦ νυµφίου. 30. αὕτη οὖν ἡ xapa ἡ ἐμὴ πεπλήρωται. 


led by his preaching to accept the 
Messiah he might well believe that he 
served Christ better thus than by follow- 
ing in His train.—Ver. 27. His answer 
sufficiently shows that it was not rivalry 
that prompted him to continue his 
bapusm.—od δύναται . . . οὐρανοῦ. The 
general sense is obvious (cf. Ps. Ixxv. 6, 7, 
cxxvii. I; Jas. i. 173; 1 Cor. iii. 7), but 
did John mean to apply the principle 
directly to himself or to Jesus ? Wetstein 
prefers the former: “‘non possum mihi 
Άττορατε et rapere, quae Deus non 
dedit”. So Calvin, Beza [* quid cona- 
mini meae conditioni aliquid adjicere ? ’’], 
Bengel [*‘ quomodo audeam ego, inquit, 
homines ad me _ adstringere?’’], and 
Liicke. But, as Weiss points out, it isa 
justification of Jesus which the question 
of the disciples demands, and this is 
given in John’s statement that His 
popularity is God’s gift. But John 
avails himself of the opportunity to 
explain the relation he himself holds to 
Jesus.—Ver. 28. αὐτοὶ ἡμεῖ ... 
ἐκείνον. John’s disciples should have 
been prepared for what they now see 
happening. He had emphatically declared 
that he was not the Christ, but only His 
forerunner (i. 10-27, 30).—Ver. 29. 6 
ἔχων τὴν νύµφην ... The bride is the 
familiar O.T. figure expressive of the 
people in their close relation to God (Is. 
liv. 5, Hos. ii. 18, Ps. xlv.). This figure 
passes into N.T. Cf. Mt. xxii, 2, Eph. 
v. 32, Jas. iv. 4.—6 ἔχων, he that has and 
holds as a wife. Cf. Mk. vi. 18, Is. liv. 
1. xii. 5.—vupdtos ἐστίν, it is the bride- 
groom, and no one else, who marries the 
bride and to whom she belongs. There 
is only one in whom the people of God 
can find their permanent joy and rest; 
one who is the perennial spring of their 
happiness and life—o δὲ φίλος τοῦ 
vupdiov, the friend, par excellence, the 
groomsman, παρανύμφιος, νυμφάγωγος, 
or in Hebrew Shoshben, who was em- 
ployed to ask the hand of the bride and 
to arrange the marriage. For the stand- 
ing and duties of the Shadchan and 
Shoshben see Abraham’s F¥ewish Life in 


the Middle Ages, pp. 170, 180. The 
similar function of the Hindu go-between 
or ghatak is fully described in The City 
of Sunshine. The peculiar and intense 
gratification [χαρά yalpe, intensely 
rejoices, see especially Licke, who 
renders “durch und durch’’; Weizsacker, 
“freut sich hoch”; R.V., ‘rejoiceth 
greatly”) of this functionary was to see 
that his delicate task was crowned with 
success ; and of this he was assured when 
he stood and heard the bridegroom 
directly welcoming his bride [‘‘ voice of 
bridegroom ” as symbol of joy, Jer. vii. 
34, xvi. ΟἸ.---αὕτη οὖν  xapa ἡ ἐμὴ 
πεπλήρωται. This is the joy which 
John claims for himself, the joy of the 
bridegroom’s friend, who arranges the 
marriage, and this joy is attained in 
Christ’s welcoming to Himself the people 
whom John has prepared for Him and 
directed to Him. Cf. 2 Cor. xi. 2, where 
Paul uses similar language. It is not 
John’s regret that men are attracted to 
Jesus: rather it is the fulfilment of his 
work and hope. This was the God- 
appointed order.—Ver. 30. éketvow δεῖ 
αὐξάνειν, ἐμὲ δὲ ἐλαττοῦσθαι. Paley 
translates, ‘‘ it is for Him to go on grow- 
ing and for me to be ever getting less,” 
and adds, ‘‘the language seems to be 
solar”. In the Church Calendar, no 
doubt, John the Baptist’s day is Mid- 
summer Day, while our Lord’s “‘natalitia”’ 
is midwinter, but scarcely founded on 
solar considerations of the day’s increase 
after Christmas and decrease after 24th 
June. Rather John is the morning star 
‘ fidelis Lucifer ’’ whose light is eclipsed 
in that of the rising sun (cf. Bernard’s 
‘**Lucet ergo Johannes, tanto verius 
quanto minus appetit lucere,” and 
Euthymius, ἐλαττοῦσθαι ὡς Ἁἡλίου 
ἀνατείλαντος ἑωσφόρον). If the style 
of the following verses is any clue to 
their authorship we must ascribe them to 
the evangelist. Besides, some of the 
expressions are out of place in the 
Baptist’s lips: ¢.g., τὴν µαρτυρίαν αὐτοῦ 
οὐδεὶς λαμβάνει could scarcely have been 
said at the very time when crowds were 


27---34- 


ἐκεῖνον δεῖ " αὐξάνειν, ἐμὲ δὲ ἐλαττοῦσθαι. 


” 
Σἐπάνω πάντων ἐστίν. 


τῆς γῆς Nadel: ὁ 4 ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἐρχόμενος, ἐπάνω πάντων ἐστὶ,' 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


6 ὢν ἐκ τῆς γῆς, ἐκ τῆς γῆς ἐστι, καὶ ἐκ 


721 


be 3 , : 
1. °6 ἄνωθεν ἐρχόμενος, a intrans. in 
3 ΕΕ ore oi. 28: 
xiii. 32, 
etc.; trans 
in 1 Cor. 
iii, 6, 7. 


A “ A , 
32. καὶ ὃ ἑώρακε καὶ ἤκουσε, τοῦτο μαρτυρεῖ: καὶ τὴν µαρτυρίαν b viii. 23. 


αὐτοῦ "οὐδεὶς λαμβάνει. » 33. ὃ λαβὼν αὐτοῦ τὴν µαρτυρίαν, 47, 
ἐσφράγισεν ὅτι ΄ὁ Θεὸς ἀληθής ἐστιν. 
Θεὸς, τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ Θεοῦ λαλεῖ: οὐ γὰρ ἐκ µέτρου δίδωσιν ὁ Θεὸς 3 


in Gospp. 


d xvi. 28. 


1 Cor. xv 
Phil 
τν c 1. 0. 

34. ὃν γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν Oc Lk. xix. 
17,19; in 
local 
sense freq. 
Rom. iii. 
Ee 


ei, 11. Is. liii. 1. f vii. 18. 


1 επανω παντων εστι Omitted in ND vet. Lat., etc., but found in cABL. The 
words are omitted by W.H.., but are almost necessary as a balance to ex της γης εστι. 


2 o Beos omitted in NBC*L 1, 33, and therefore by Tisch., W.H.and Weiss; Τ.Ε. 


in AC?D vet. Lat. 


flocking to Him. The precise point in 
the Baptist’s language to which the 
evangelist attaches this commentary or 
expansion [‘‘theils erklarende, theils 
erweiternde Reflexion,” Licke] is his 
affirmation of the Messiah’s superiority 
to himself. To this John adds (ver. 31): 
He is superior not only to the Baptist 
but to all, ἐπάνω πάντων éoriv, the 
reason being that He comes from above, 
ἄνωθεν; which is the equivalent of ἐκ 
τοῦ οὐρανοῦ in the latter part of the 
verse. These expressions are contrasted 
with ἐκ τῆς γῆς, the ordinary earthly 
origin of men, and they refer Christ’s 
origin to a higher and unique source: 
unique because the result of this origin 
is that He is supreme over all, ἐπάνω 
"πάντων. His origin is superior to that 
of all, therefore His supremacy is 
universal (cf. ver. 13). The results of 
origin, whether earthly or heavenly, are 
traced out in a twofold direction: in the 
kind of life lived and in the words spoken. 
On the one hand 6 ἐκ τῆς γῆς . . . ἐστι. 
The first ἐκ expresses origin: the second 
moral connection, as in xviii. 37, xv. 19: 
he whose origin is earthly is an earthly 
person, his life rises no higher than its 
source, his interests and associations are 
of earth. Another result is given in 
the words ἐκ τῆς γῆς λαλεῖ, from the 
earth his ideas and his utterance of 
them spring. A man’s talk and teach- 
ing cannot rise above their source. So 
far as experimental knowledge goes 
he is circumscribed by his origin. In 
contrast to persons of earthly origin 
stands 6 ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ épydpevos; ἐρχ. 
is added that not only his origin but his 
transition to his present condition may 
be indicated. His origin in like manner 
determines both his moral relationships 
and his teaching. The one is given in 


ἐπάνω πάντων ἐστί. He lives in a higher 
region than all others and is not limited 
by earthly conditions.—Ver. 32. The 
result is ὁ ἑώρακε.. . μαρτυρεῖ. Seeing 
and hearing are equivalent to having 
direct knowledge. The man who is of 
earth may be trusted when he speaks of 
earth: he who is from heaven testifies 
to that of which he has had experimental 
knowledge (cf. ver. 13), and might there- 
fore expect to be listened to, but τὴν 
µαρτυρίαν αὐτοῦ ovdels λαμβάνει. The 
καὶ which connects the clauses implies 
the meaning ‘“‘and yet’’. This statement 
could not have been made when crowds 
were thronging to Jesus’ baptism. They 
are the reflection of the evangelist, who 
sees how sporadically the testimony of 
Christ has been received. Yet it has not 
been universally rejected: 6 AaBov.. . 
ἀληθής ἐστιν. He who received His 
testimony sealed that God is true. 
σφραγ. means to stamp with approval, 
to endorse, to give confirmation. Wet- 
stein quotes from Aristides, Platonic., i., 
p. 18: Αἰσχίνης μαρτυρεῖ Πλάτωνι .. . 
καὶ τὴν τοῦδε µαρτυρίαν ὥσπερ ἐπισ- 
Φραγίζεται. But he who believes Christ 
not only confirms or approves Christ’s 
truthfulness, but God’s. ὃν γὰρ ἀπέσ- 
τειλεν . . . λαλεῖ. For Christ is God’s 
ambassador and speaks God’s words. 
This is a thought which pervades this 
Gospel, see viii. 26, 28; xv. 5, etc. 
‘* He that sent me,” or ‘‘ the Father that. 
sent me,” is a phrase occurring over 
twenty times in the Gospel and is char- 
acteristic of the aspect of Christ pre- 
sented in it, as revealing the Father.— 
Ver. 34. The reason assigned for the 
truth and trustworthiness of Christ’s 
words is scarcely the reason we expect: 
ov yap . . . Πνεῦμα. John has told us 
that Christ is to be believed because He. 


46 


722 


Εν. 2ο; xiii. τὸ Πνεῦμα. 
3. rs 
h Jud. iii.28. τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ. 
FY Saige bE ο αμ 
19; 
Γπασίκ Ες 5 in) Lieieas i> 
j Rom.i. 18, επ GUTOV. 


testifies of what He hath seen and heard: 
now, because the Spirit is given without 
measure to Him. The meaning of the 
clause is contested. The omission of 
ὁ θεός does not materially affect the 
sense, for 6 θεός would naturally be 
supplied as the nominative to δίδωσι 
from τοῦ θεοῦ of the preceding clause. 
There are four interpretations. (1) 
Augustine, Calvin, Liicke, Alford, sup- 
pose the clause means that God, instead 
of giving occasional and limited supplies 
of the Spirit as had been given to the 
prophets, gives to Christ the fulness of 
the Spirit. (2) Meyer thinks that the 
primary reference is not to Christ but 
that the statement is general, that God 
gives the Spirit freely and abundantly, 
and does thus dispense it to Christ. (3) 
Westcott, following Cyril, makes Christ 
the subject and understands the clause 
as meaning that He proves His Messiah- 
ship by giving the Spirit without measure. 
(4) Godet makes τὸ πνεῦμα the subject, 
not the object, and supposes the meaning 
to be that the Spirit gives to Christ the 
words of God without measure. The 
words of ver. 35 seem to weigh in favour 
of the rendering of A.V.: ‘‘ God giveth 
not the Spirit by measure unto Him”, 
The R.V. is ambiguous. ἐκ µέτρον, out 
of a measure, or, by measure, that is, 
sparingly. So ἐν µέτρῳ in Ezek. iv. 11. 
Wetstein quotes: “R. Achan dixit: 
etiam Spiritus S. non habitavit super 
Prophetas nisi mensura quadam: quidam 
enim librum unum, quidam duos vatici- 
niorum ediderunt”. The Spirit was given 
to Jesus not in the restricted and occa- 
sional manner in which it had been 
given to the O.T. prophets, but wholly, 
fully, constantly. It was by this Spirit 
His human nature was enlightened and 
guided to speak things divine; and this 
Spirit, interposed as it were between the 
Logos and the human nature of Christ, 
was as little cumbrous in its operation 
or perceptible in consciousness as our 
breath which is interposed between the 
thinking mind and the words which utter 
it.—Ver. 35. ὅπατὴρ... αὐτοῦ. These 
absolute expressions, ‘‘the Father,” ‘the 
Son,” are more naturally referred to the 
evangelist than to the Baptist. This 
absolute use of “‘the Son” as a designa- 
tion of Christ certainly suggests, if it 


KATA IQANNHN 


35. *6 πατὴρ ἀγαπᾷ τὸν υἱὸν, καὶ πάντα δέδωκεν 


III. 35—36. 


Bey 


36. 6 πιστεύων εἲς τὸν υἱὸν ἔχει ζωὴν aidmov- 6 
δὲ ἀπειθῶν τῷ vid οὐκ ' ὄψεται ζωὴν, GAN’ ἡ 4 ὀργὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ μένει 


‘ 

does not prove, the proper Divinity of 
Christ. It is the favourite designation 
in this Gospel. The love of the Father 
for the Son is the reason for His giving 
to Him the Spirit: nay, it accounts for 
His committing all things to His hand; 
πάντα δέδωκεν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ, that is, 
to possess andtorule. ‘‘ Facit hic amor, 
quo Filium amplexus nos quoque in eo 
amplectitur, ut per illius manum nobis 
bona sua omnia communicet’””—Calvin. 
But Calvin does not make the mistake of 
supposing that the words signify “ by 
means of His hand”; cf. Beza. God has 
made Christ His plenipotentiary for this 
world and has done so because of His 
love. It was a boon then to Christ to 
come into this world and win it to Him- 
self. There is no history, movement, or 
life of God so glorious as the history of 
God incarnate.—Ver. 36. 6 πιστεύων 
εν ἐπ αὐτόν. Christ has been repre- 
sented as Sovereign, commissioned with 
supreme powers, especially for the pur- 
pose of saving men and restoring them 
to God. Hence ‘‘he that believeth on 
the Son hath eternal life”. He who 
through the Son finds and accepts the 
Father has life in this very vision and 
fellowship of the Supreme; cf. xvii. 3. 
But “he that refuses to be persuaded,” 
lit. “he that disobeyeth”. Beza 
points out that in N.T. there is a twofold 
ἀπείθεια, one of the intellect, dissenting 
from truth presented, as here and in 
Acts xiv. 2; the other of the will and 
life, see Rom. xi. 30. But will enters 
into the former as well as the latter. 4 
ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ, the wrath of God denotes 
‘the fixed and necessary hostility of the 
Divine nature to sin’’; what appears in 
a righteous man as indignation; and 
also the manifestation of that hostility in 
acts of retributive justice. This is the 
only place in the Gospel where it occurs ; 
but in Rev. vi. 16, we have ‘‘the wrath 
of the Lamb’’; also xvi. το, ‘ the wine ot 
the fury of His wrath”; also xiv. το, xi. 
18, xix. 15. In Paul ‘the coming wrath” 
is frequently alluded to; as also ‘the 
day of wrath,” “the children” or 
“vessels”? of wrath. On the refuser of 
Christ the wrath of God, instead of 
removing from him, abides, μένει; not, 
as Theophylact reads, μενεῖ, ‘will 
abide”’. 


IV. I—5. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


723 


IV. 1. ‘QE οὖν ἔγνω "ὁ Κύριος, ὅτι ἤκουσαν of Φαρισαῖοι, ὅτι α vi. 23; xi 


2, etc., 


᾿Ιησοῦς πλείονας ° μαθητὰς ° ποιεῖ καὶ βαπτίζει ἢ Ἰωάννης: 2. (°Kai- freqiiin 
τοιγε “Ingots "αὐτὸς οὐκ ἐβάπτιζεν, GAN ot μαθηταὶ adrou-) 3. bCp. Acts 


“abike τὴν Ἰουδαίαν, καὶ ἀπῆλθε 


4. ἔδει δὲ αὐτὸν διέρχεσθαι διὰ τῆς Σαμαρείας.ὶ 
οὖν εἰς πόλιν τῆς Σαµαρείας λεγομένην Συχὰρ, πλησίον τοῦ 


13. 


1 Σαμαριας Tisch. and W.H. 


CHAPTER IV. Vv. 1-42. Fesus leaves 
Salim and the south for Galilee, and is 
received by the Samaritans on His way. 
—Vv. 1-4 account for His being in 
Samaria; 5-26 relate His conversation 
with a Samaritan woman; 27-38 His 
consequent conversation with His own 
disciples ; 39-42 the impression He made 
upon the Samaritans. The circumstances 
which brought our Lord into Samaria 
seem to be related as much for the sake 
of maintaining the continuity of the 
history and of exhibiting the motives 
which guided His movements as for the 
sake of introducing the incident at 
Sychar.—Ver. 1. The first verse gives 
the cause of His leaving Judaea, to wit, 
a threatened or possible collision with 
the Pharisees, who resented His baptis- 
ἴπσ.-- Ὡς οὖν ἔγνω . . . ἢ Ιωάννης. οὖν 
continues the narrative with logical 
sequence, connecting what follows with 
what goes before ; here it connects what 
is now related with the popularity of 
Jesus’ baptism, iii. 22, 26.—6 κύριος, 
so unusual in this Gospel that some 
editors read “Ingots, for which there is 
scant authority, But where the evangelist 
is not reporting contemporary speech 
but speaking for his own person κύριος 
is natural.—€yvw rightly rendered in the 
modern Greek translation by ἔμαθεν ; the 
knowledge that comes by information is 
ππεαηζ.-- ὅτι ἤκουσαν, that the Pharisees 
had heard, the aorist here, as frequently 
elsewhere, representing the English 
pluperfect. What they had heard is 
given in direct narration under an intro- 
ductory ὅτι, and hence not the pronoun 
but Ἰησοῦς appears as subject: “ Jesus 
is making and baptising more disciples 
than John”.—pa@nras ποιε (cf. 
padyrevoate Bamrifovres, Mt. xxviii. 
το), ‘‘ disciples” being here used in the 
wider sense and not involving permanent 
separation from their employments. The 
Pharisees had resented John’s baptising, 
much more that of Jesus, because 
more popular.—Ver. 2. Here John in- 
‘serts a clause corrective of one impres- 


ii. 36. 


πάλιν eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. Constr. 
40. 


3 cp. i. 

5. ερχεται c Acts xiv. 
17; XVii. 
27 only. 
dx Cor. i. 


e Mk. i, 14. f Num. xxxiii. 37. Josh. xii. 9. 


sion which this statement would make; 
καίτοιγε . .. αὐτοῦ. καίτοιγε is slightly 
stronger than ‘‘ although,” rather 
“although indeed”.  Ἡοορενεεπ (De 
Particulis, p. 322) renders ‘‘ quanquam 
re vera”’ ; see also Paley, Greck Particles, 
pp- 67-8. ot is the old form of τῷ, 
‘hereby, σι Scmicfact ων The 
clause is inserted to remind us, as Benge 
says, that ‘“‘baptizare actio ministralis 
(cf. Paul’s refusal to baptise). Johannes 
minister sua manu baptizavit, discipuli 
ejus, ut videtur, neminem; at Christus 
baptizat spiritu sancto.”’ So too Nonnus, 
who says that the king did not baptise 
with water. ‘‘ By leaving the baptism 
of water to the apostles, He rendered 
the rite independent of His personal 
presence, arid so provided for the main- 
tenance of it in His Church after His 
departure,’ Godet.—Ver. 3. On this 
coming to the ears of Jesus ἀφῆκε τὴν 
᾿Ιουδαίαν, He forsook or abandoned 
Judaea. The verb is used of neglecting 
or dismissing from thought, hence of 
forgiving sin; but there is here no 
ethical sense in the word, and it may be 
translated ‘ left’. — kal ἀπῆλθε πάλιν, 
‘“‘again’’ in reference to the visit to 
Galilee already narrated, i. 44, ii. 1. 
Jesus feared a collision with the Pharisees 
at this early stage, because it could only 
mar His work. He refuses to be hurried, 
and temains master of the situation 
throughout. He therefore retired to 
Galilee, where He thought He would be 
hidden. Cf. νετ. 44.—Ver. 4. ea... 
Σαμαρείας. The ἔδει is explained by the 
position of Samaria interposed between 
Judaea and Galilee. Only the very 
sensitive Jews went round by Peraea, 
The Galileans. were accustomed to go 
through Samaria on their way to the 
feasts at Jerusalem (Josephus, Antiq., xx. 
6, 1). Samaria took its name from the 
city Samaria of Shomron, built by Omri 
as the capital of the kingdom of Israel 
(t Kings xvi. 24). After being destroyed 
by Hyrcanus, the city was rebuilt by 
Herod and called Sebaste in honour 


724 
κε. χωρίου 5ὃ ἔδωκεν ᾿Ιακὼβ Ιωσὴφ τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ. 
XXXiii. 19; A eee ν mrs μὴ 
xlviii. 22. Ty} τοῦ Ιακώβ. ὁ οὖν Ingots 
h Is. xl. 31. ει Li 
i: Mac. vi / éxadéLeto οὕτως ἐπὶ τῇ πηγη. Spa ἦν ὡσεὶ ἕκτη. 
41. 2Cor. κ. a , κ 
χα Yury ἐκ τῆς Σαμαρείας 
Heb. ii. 


1y.  j Exod. ii. 15. 


of Augustus. The territory of Samaria 
in the time of Christ was included in the 
tetrarchy of Archelaus and was under 
the procurator Pontius Pilate. Herod 
Antipas’ domain marched with it north 
and east.—Ver. 5. ἔρχεται οὖν . . . τῷ 
vig αὐτοῦ. ‘So He comes {ο a city of 
Samaria called Sychar.”’ λεγομένην, cf. 
xis τθ,. κὶς δη οκ... 13. είο, , Inthe 
Itinerary of Ferusalem (Α.Ρ. 333) Sychar 
is identified with ‘Askar, west of Salim 
and near Shechem, the modern Nablus. 
The strength of the case for ‘Askar, 
according to Prof. G. A. Smith (Hist. 
Geog., Ῥ. 371), is this: ‘That in the 
fourth century two authorities indepen- 
dently describe a Sychar distinct from 
Shechem; that in the twelfth century at 
least three travellers, and in the thirteenth 
at least one, do the same, the latter also 
quoting a corrupt but still possible 
variation of the name; that in the 
fourteenth the Samaritan Chronicle men- 
tions another form of the name; and 
that modern travellers find α third 
possible variation of it not only applied 
to a village suiting the site described by 
_ the authorities in the fourth century, 

but important enough to cover all the 
plain about the village’”’. The difficulty 
regarding the initial Ayin in the name 
‘Askar is also removed by Prof. Smith. 
See further Conder’s Tent-work, i. 71. 
Sychar is described as πλησίον . . . 
αὐτοῦ, near the “parcel of ground” 
(particella, little part; the Vulgate has 
‘“‘praedium,” estate) which Jacob gave 
to Joseph his son; according to Gen. 
xlviii. 22, where Jacob says, ‘I have 
given thee one portion (Shechem) above 
thy ὑτείπτεῃ 5 ο. Gen. xxxiil., το. 
Shechem in Hebrew means “the shoul- 
der,” and some have fancied that the 
shoulder being the priest’s portion, the 
word came to denote any allotment. 
Gesenius, however, is of opinion that 
the word was transferred to a portion of 
land, on account of the shape resembling 
the back across the shoulders.—Ver. 6. 
ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ πηγὴ τοῦ ᾿Ιακώβ. Both πηγή 
and φρέαρ are used in this context ; the 
former meaning the spring or well of 
water, the latter the dug and built pit or 
well. In ver. ΙΙ φρέαρ is necessarily 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IV. 


6. ἦν δὲ ἐκεῖ 
Σ κεκοπιακὼς ἐκ τῆς ὁδοιπορίας 


7. Ἔρχεται 


ἀντλῆσαι ὕδωρ. λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


k Gen. xxiv. a0. Exod. ii. 16. 


used. Whether in this verse 6 ἐπὶ τῇ 
mnyq is to be rendered ‘‘at,” keeping 
πηγη in its strict sense, or ‘‘on”’ as if 
for φρέατι is doubted; but the former is 
certainly the more natural rendering; 
cf. Aristoph., Frogs, 191, where ἐπί with 
accus. gives rise to misunderstanding of 
sitting ‘‘on”’ an oar instead of ‘“‘at”? it. 
Jacob’s well lies ten minutes south of 
the present village ‘Askar, and a good 
spring exists in ‘Askar. This has given 
rise to the difficulty: Why should a 
woman have come so far, passing good 
sources of water supply? Most probably 
the reason is that this well was Jacob’s, 
and special virtue was supposed to attach 
to it; or because in the heat of summer 
other wells and streams were dry. The 
real difficulty is: Why was there a weil 
there at all, in the neighbourhood of 
streams? Possibly Jacob may have dug 
it that he might have no quarrelling with 
his neighbours about water-rights. As 
a stranger with a precarious tenure he 
might find this necessary. Travellers 
agree in accepting as Jacob’s well here 
mentioned the Ain-Jakub, or Bir-et- 
Jakub, some twenty minutes east of 
Nablis.—é οὖν ΄Ιησοῦς . . . ἕκτη. It 
was “about,” ὡς (Theophylact calls atten- 
tion to this as a mark of accuracy), the 
sixth hour, that is, midday (the Jews 
dined on Sabbath at the sixth hour, see 
Josephus,. Vita) (see on c. i. 40); and 
they had probably been walking for 
several hours, and accordingly Jesus 
was tired, κεκοπιακὼς (κόπος, excessive 
toil), fatigued (Wetstein quotes οὐ γὰρ 
ἐξ ὁδοιπορίας τὰς φλέβας κοπιᾷ ἀλλὰ τὰ 
veupa), and was sitting thus, tired as He 
was (οὕτως, in the condition in which He 
was, that is, tired as He was. Elsner 
thinks it only indicates consequence 
{nihil aliud quam consequentiam signi- 
ficat] and should be omitted in trans- 
lating. So Kypke, who cites instructive 
instances, concludes: ‘‘solemne est 
Graecis, praecedente participio, voculam 
οὕτως pleonastice Ῥοπετε”. But in all 
his instances οὕτως precedes the verb), 
at the well (cf. Josephus, Ant., v. 1: 
στρατοπεδευσαµένους ἐπὶ τινι πηγῇ). 
As to the hour, two circumstances con 

firm the opinion that it was midday 


‘5—I0, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Tas 


* Ads µοι mety.”2 8. οἱ γὰρ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπεληλύθεισαν eis τὴν 1 Gen. xxiv. 
, 9 m yas , \d 5 2 ας 7 43- h 
πόλιν, ἵνα '' τροφὰς ἀγοράσωσι. ο. Λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ  Lapa- m Pi. here 


α ” A A A a » 

ρεῖτις, “™MGs σὺ ᾿Ιουδαῖος ὢν ° wap ἐμοῦ πιεῖν αἰτεῖ, οὔσης 
a“ , Xi, 2 

ov γὰρ συγχρῶνται Ιουδαῖοι Zapapetrats.” n viii. 48. 


γυναικὸς Lapapettidos ; ~ 


10. ᾽Απεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, “Ei ῄδεις τὴν > δωρεὰν τοῦ 


only; cp. 
2 Chron. 
fees 
Ezra iv. 9. 
2 Sings 
XVii. 24. 


A a ον >, 
Θεοῦ, καὶ τίς ἐστιν 6 λέγων σοι, Ads por πιεῖν, σὺ ἂν ῄτησας αὐτὸν, ο Only in 


ix, 2. Jas. i. 5. 


{1 Jo. v. 15. 


Acts iii.2; 


Mt. xx. 2ο.] p Here only in Gospp. 


1 πειν in Tisch., W.H.; πιν in Lachmann. 
3 This clause, a supposed gloss, omitted in $g*D, found in 4eABCL 3 


First, that apparently there was no 
intention of halting here for the night, 
as there would have been had it ‘een 
evening. And, second, while it is truly 
urged that evening is the common time 
for drawing water, it is obvious that only 
one woman had come “i this time, and 
accordingly the prcvability is it was not 
evening. See 2iso Josephus, Ant., ii, 11, 
1, where he describes Moses sitting at the 
weil σὲ midday wearied with his journey, 
aud the women coming to water their 
flocks.—Ver. 7. €pxetar . . . ὕδωρ, 
apparently this clause is prepared for by 
the preceding, ‘“‘ There comes a woman of 
Samaria,” that is, a Samaritan woman, 
not, of course, ‘‘ from the city Samaria,” 
which is two hours distant from the well, 
ἀντλῆσαι ὕδωρ, infinitive and aorist, 
both classical; cf. Rebecca in Gen. 
xxiv. II, etc., having her ὑδρία on her 
shoulder or on her head, ἄγγος ἐπὶ τῇ 
κεφαλῇ ἔχουσα, Herod., v. 12; and Ovid’s 
‘“ Ponitur e summa fictilis urna coma”. 
[Elsner] ἄντλος is the hold of a ship 
where the bilge settles: ἀντλέω, to bale 
a ship; hence, to draw water. To her 
Jesus says, Δός µοι πιεῖν, the usual for- 
mula; cf. δώσω πιεῖν, Pherecrates, Frag., 
67, and Aristoph., Pax, 49.—Ver. 8. οἱ 
yap μαθηταὶ . . . ἀγοράσωσι. This 
gives the reason for the request. Had the 
disciples been present they would have 
made the request: an indication of the 
relations already subsisting between the 
disciples and the Lord. Probably the 
five first called were still with Him. 
That the disciples had gone to buy in 
Sychar, shows either that the law allowed 
trading with Samaritans, or that Jesus 
and His disciples ignored the law. But 
the woman is surprised at the request of 
Jesus.—Ver. 9. πῶς σὺ ᾿Ιουδαῖος av. 
How did she know He was a Jew? 
Probably there were slight differences in 
dress, feature and accent. Edersheim 
says ‘‘the fringes on the Tallith of the 
Samaritans are blue, while those worn 
by the Jews are white”. He also ex- 


poses the mistake of some commentators 
regarding the words uttered by Jesus: 
“Teni li lishtoth’’. The reason of the 
woman’s surprise is given by the Evange- 
list in the words οὐ yap συγχρῶνται 
Ιουδαίοι Σαμαρείταις. ‘‘ For Jews have 
no dealings with Samaritans.” Zuvyxpa- 
σθαι literally signifies ‘‘to use together 
with,’’ so that the sense here might be 
that the woman was surprised that Jesus 
should use the same vessel she used ; rather 
it has the secondary meaning ‘‘to have 
intercourse’’ or ‘‘ dealings with”; simi- 
larly to the Latin utor, see Hor., Ef., i. 
xii. 22, ‘‘utere Pompeio Grospho,’’ and 
xvii. 13, ‘‘regibus uti,” to make a friend 
of, or “be on terms of intimacy with’’. 
The classical phrase is otow οὐκ ἐπισ- 
τροφαί, Eurip., Helena, 440. The later 
tradition said: ‘‘Samaritanis panem 
comedere aut vinum bibere prohibitum 
est’’. . Of course the hostile feeling ran 
back to the days of Nehemiah. And see 
Ecclus. |. 25, 26. | ‘‘ With two nations is 
my soul vexed, and the third is no nation: 
they that sit upon Mount Seir and the 
Philistines, and that foolish people that 
dwelleth in Sichem.” For the origin of 
the Samaritans see 2 Kings xvii., and cf. 
Farrar’s Life of Christ in loc, Tristram, 
Land of Israel, 134.—Ver. 10. ᾿Απεκρίθη 
... ὕδωρ ζῶν. ‘If thou knewest ;” the 
pathos of the situation strikes Jesus. 
The woman stands on the brink of the 
greatest possibilities, but is utterly un- 
conscious of them. Two things she did 
not know: (1) τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ θεοῦ, the 
free gift of God. This is explained in 
the last words of the verse to be ‘‘ living 
water’’; but in its first occurrence it is 
indefinite: ‘‘ If thou knewest the freeness 
of God’s giving, and that to each of His 
children He has a purpose of good”’. 
But in God’s direction the woman 
cherished no hope. (2) She did not 
know τίς ἐστιν 6 λέγων σοι, Ads por 
πιεῖν. So long as she thought Him an 
ordinary Jew she could expect nothing 
from Him. Had she known that Jesus 


726 


a“ 35 
Gen. xxvi. καὶ ἔδωκεν ἄν σοι Ἱ ὕδωρ Lav. 
οὔτε ἄντλημα ἔχεις, καὶ τὸ φρέαρ ἐστὶ βαθύ: πόθεν οὖν ἔχεις τὸ 


19, 
ὕδωρ τὸ Cav; 


r vv. 13, 14. 
Mt. xxvi. 


27. καὶ τὰ θρέµµατα αὐτοῦ; ” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IV.. 


II. Λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ yuvh, “ Κύριε, 


fi a ~ 
12. μὴ σὺ μείζων et τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ᾿Ιακὼβ, ὃς 
ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν τὸ φρέαρ, καὶ αὐτὸς " ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἔπιε, καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ, 
13. ᾽Απεκρίθη 6 ἸΙησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῇ, 


“Mas ὁ πίνων ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος τούτου, διψήσει πάλιν: 14. ὃς δ ἂν 


min ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος οὗ ἐγὼ δώσω αὐτῷ, οὐ μὴ διψήσῃ 1 eis τὸν αἰῶνα : 


ἀλλὰ τὸ ὕδωρ ὃ δώσω αὐτῷ, γενήσεται ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴ ὕδατος ἆλλο- 


8 Ver. 16. ; 4 x ee ορ 
Six times µένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 
in Lk. and 


15. Λέγει πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ γυνὴ, “ Κύριε, 


Acts, and δός µοι τοῦτο τὸ ὕδωρ, ἵνα μὴ διψῶ, μηδὲ ἔρχωμαι 3 * ἐνθάδε ἀντλεῖν.” 


nowhere 
else. 


1 διψησει in NABDL. 
2 Stepxwpar in Tisch., W.H., R.V. 


was the bearer of God’s free gift to 
men, she would have asked of Him. 
σὺ ἂν ἤτησας αὐτόν, od is emphatic. 
You would have anticipated my τε- 
quest by a request on your own behalf, 
And instead of creating difficulties I 
would have given thee living water.— 
ὕδωρ fav, by which the woman under- 
stood that He meant spring water. 
What He did mean appears imme- 
diately. Ver. 11. λέγει αὐτῷ .. . τὸ 
fav; She addresses Him with κύριε, 
perhaps fancying from His saying, “ If 
you had known who it is that says to 
you,” that He was some great person 
in disguise. But her answer breathes 
incredulity: οὔτε ἄντλημα ἔχεις. She 
began her sentence meaning to say, 
“You neither have a bucket, nor is the 
well shallow enough for you to reach 
the water without one,” but she alters 
its construction and puts the second 
statement in a positive form. The depth 


of the well is variously given, Conder 
found it 75 feet.—wd@ev . . . She is 
mystified. μὴ σὺ μείζων ... θρέµµατα 


αὐτοῦ. Jesus had spoken as if inde- 
pendently of the well He could procure 
living water: but even Jacob (claimed 
by the Samaritans as their father, and 
whose bones lay in their midst), great 
as he was, used this well.—@peppara. 
“What is nourished.” Kypke adduces 
several instances in which it is used of 
“domestics”. Plato, Laws, 953 E, uses 
it of ‘‘nurslings of the Nile,” the Egyp- 
tians. But Wetstein adduces many in- 
stances ofits use in the sense of “ cattle’’. 
Theophylact thinks this points to the 
abundant supply of water.—Vv. 13, 14. 
Jesus in reply, though He does not quite 


16. Λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Yaaye, φώνησον τὸν ἄνδρα σου, καὶ 


break through the veil of figure, leads 
her on to think of a more satisfying gift 
than even Jacob had given in this weil. 
--πᾶς 6 πίνων ... ζωὴν αἰώνιον. He 
contrasts the water of the well with the 
water He can give; and the two char- 
acteristic qualities of His living water 
are suggested by this contrast. The 
water of Jacob’s well had two defects: 
it quenched thirst only for a time, and 
it lay outside the town a weary distance, 
and subject to various accidents. Christ 
offers water which will quench thirst 
lastingly, and which will be “in” the 
person drinking, ἐν αὐτῷ πηγὴἡ ὕδατος 
ἀλλομένου εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. For this 
figure put to another though similar 
use, see Marcus Aurelius, vii. 59, and viii. 
51, with Gataker’s notes. The living 
water lastingly quenches human crav- 
ings and .is within the man, inseparable 
from him, and always energetically and 
afresh shooting up.—Ver. 15. The 
woman, with her mind still running on 
actual water, says Κύριε .. . ἀντλεῖν. 
She is attracted by the two qualities of 
the water, and asks it (1) ἵνα μὴ dupe, 
(2) μηδὲ ἔρχωμαι ἐνθάδε ἀντλεῖν.---Ψετ. 
16. Το this request Jesus replies 
Ὕπαγε, Φώνησον . . . ἐνθάε. His 
purpose in this has been much debated, 
Calvin thinks He meant to rebuke her 
scurrility in mockingly asking for the 
water. This does not show Calvin’s 
usual penetration. Westcott says that in 
the woman’s request ‘she confessed by 
implication that even the greatest gift 
was not complete unless it was shared 
by those to whom she was bound. If 
they thirsted, though she might not 
thirst, her toilsome labour must be con- 


11-21. 


ἐλθὲ ἐνθάδε.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


727 


17. ᾽Απεκρίθη ἡ γυνὴ καὶ εἶπεν, “΄Οὐκ ἔχω ἄνδρα.” 


Λέγει αὐτῇ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Kalas εἶπας, Ὅτι ἄνδρα οκ ἔχω; 18. πέντε 


γὰρ ἄνδρας éoxes καὶ νῦν ὃν ἔχεις, οὖκ Eat. σου ἀνήρ: τοῦτο 


ἀληθὲς εἴρηκας. 
προφήτης et σύ. 


ς , ο τα > , ο 3 , 
20. OL πατερες Ίὖμων εν τουτῳ TW OPEL προσεκύ- 


19. Λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ, “Κύριε, 'θεωρῶ ὅτι τ Mt. xii. το; 


XVi. 13, 
etc. 5 1. 49. 


νησαν ' καὶ ὑμεῖς λέγετε, ὅτι ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐστὶν 6 τόπος, ὅπου 


δεῖ προσκυνεῖν.” 


21. Λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “'Γύναι, πίστευσόν 


lg: ” 9 9 5, 3 α 3 , » 2 1 λύ 
μοι, οτι ερχεται ωρα, οτε ουτε εν Tw ορει τουτῳ ουτε εν εροσο υμοις 


1 Τ.Ε. in ACS, but πιστευε por yuvat in $BC*DL. 


tinued still.”” Jesus, reading this thought, 
bids her bring the man for whom she 
draws water. The gift is for him also, 
But this meaning is too obscure. Meyer 
thinks the request was not seriously 
intended: but this detracts from the 
simplicity of Christ. The natural in- 
terpretation is that in response to her 
request Jesus gives her now the first 
draught of the living water by causing 
her to face her guilty life and bring it 
to Him. He cannot give the water 
before thirst for it is awakened. The 
sure method of awaking the thirst is 
to make her acknowledge herself a 
sinful woman (cf. Alford).—Ver. 17. 
The woman shrinks from exposure 
and replies οὐκ ἔχω ἄνδρα, “I have 
no husband’. A literal truth, but 
scarcely honest in intention. Jesus at 
once veils her deceit, καλῶς εἶπας, etc., 
and disposes of her equivocation by 
emphasising the ἄνδρα. Thou hast well 
said, I have no husband.—wévte yap .. . 
εἴρηκας. “'Ἠε whom thou now hast is 
not thy husband: in this [so far] you 
said what is true.” In Malachi’s time 
facility for divorce was producing 
disastrous consequences, and probably 
many women, not only in Samaria but 
among the poorer Jews, had a similar 
history to relate. The stringency with 
which our Lord speaks on this subject 
suggests that matters were fast approach- 
ing the condition in which they now are 
in Mohammedan countries. Lane tells 
us that “there are certainly not many 
persons in Cairo who have not divorced 
one wife if they have been long married,” 
and that there are many who have in the 
course of ten years married twenty or 
thirty or more wives (cf. Lecky’s 
European Morals for the state of matters 
in the Roman world). Jerome, Ep. ad 
Ageruch, 123, mentions a Roman woman 
who had had twenty-two husbands. 
Serious attention need scarcely be given 


to the fancy of “‘the critical school”’ 
that the woman with her five husbands 
is intended as an allegorical representa- 
tion of Samaria with the [seven] gods of 
the five nations who peopled the country. 
See 2 Kings xvii. 24-31. Consistently the 
man with whom the woman now lived 
would represent Jehovah. Holtzmann, 
shrinking from this, suggests Simon 
Magus. Heracleon discovered in the 
husband that was not a husband the 
woman’s guardian angel or Pleroma 
(Bigg’s Neoplatonism, 150).—Ver. το. 
The woman at once recognises this 
knowledge of her life as evidence of a 
supernatural endowment.—Kvpre θεωρῶ 
ὅτι προφήτης εἶ ov. Cf. ver. 20 and ii. 
24. θεωρῶ is used in its post-classical 
sense. It is not unnatural that the 
woman finding herself in the presence of 
a prophet should seek His solution of the 
standing problem of Samaritan religion. 
His answer would shed further light on 
his prophetic endowment, and would 
also determine whether He had any light 
and hope to give to a Samaritan. 
Josephus (Antiq., xiii. 3, 4) narrates that 
a disputation on this point before 
Ptolemy Philometor resulted in the 
death according to contract of the two 
Samaritan advocates, they not being 
able to prove their position.—Ver. 20. 
ot πατέρες . . . Set προσκυνεῖν. Our 
fathers worshipped in this mountain, 
Gerizim, at whose base we are standing, 
etc. On Gerizim were proclaimed the 
blessings recorded Deut. xxviii. Sanballat 
erected on it a rival temple (but see the 
Bible Dict. and Josephus) which was 
rased by John Hyrcanus, B.c. 129. A 
broad flat surface of rock on the top of 
Gerizim is still held sacred by the few 
Samaritans who now represent the old 
race and customs. Especially consult 
G. A. Smith’s Hist. Geog., p. 334, who 
shows that Shechem is the natural 
centre oi Palestine, and adds: ‘‘ It was 


728 


α With acc. " προσκυνήσετε τῷ πατρί. 
νετ. 23, 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


Iv. 


22. “pets προσκυνεῖτε ὃ οὖκ otdarte- 


etc, and ἡμεῖς προσκυνοῦμεν ὃ οἴδαμεν: ὅτι ἡ "σωτηρία ἐκ τῶν “loudaiwy 


in older 
writers ; 
see 


> , 
εστιν. 


v2Kings « 4 
XVii. 27. 
w Hereonly 
in John. 

Lk. i. 69, ~ 
7 προσκυγνειν. 
XiX. 9, 
only in 
Gospp. 
x Here andi. 42 only. 


by this natural capital of the Holy Land, 
from which the outgoings to the world 
are sO many and so open, that the 
religion of Israel rose once for all above 
every geographical limit, and the charter 
of a universal worship was given”. ἐν 
“Ἱεροσολύμοις may either mean that the 
place of worship, the temple, is in 
jerusalem, or that Jerusalem is itself 
the place—more probably the latter.— 
Ver. 21. Γύναι, πίστενσόν por. . τῷ 
πατρί. One of the greatest announce- 
ments ever made by our Lord; and 
made to one sinful woman, cf. xx. 16. 
---ἔρχεται Spa a time is coming; in ver. 
23 καὶ νῦν ἐστίν is added. A great 
religious revolution has arrived. Localism 
in worship is abolished, οὔτε ἐν τῷ ὄρει 
τούτῳ, etc., “neither in this mounte‘n 
nor in Jerusalem,’ exclusively ο” ρτε- 
ferentially, ‘shall ye worship the 
Father”. What determines this ‘hour’? 
The manifestation of God in Christ, and 
the principle announced in ver. 24 and 
implied in τῷ πατρί; for God being abso- 
lutely ‘‘ the Father ”’ all men in all places 
must have access to Him, and being of a 
like nature to man’s He can only receive 
a spiritual worship. Cf. Acts xvii. 29.— 
Ver. 22. ὑμεῖς προσκυνεῖτε ὃ οὐκ οἴδατε. 
The distinction between Jewish and Sa- 
maritan worship lies not in the difference 
of place, but of the object of worship. 
The neuter refers abstractly to the object 
of worship. ‘‘ You do not know the 
object of your worship;” suggested by 
the τῷ πατρί of the preceding clause. 
Cf. Acts xvii. 23. ἡμεῖς προσκυνοῦµεν & 
οἴδαμεν. The Jews worshipped a God 
who had made Himself known to them 
in their history by His gracious and 
saving dealings with them. That it is 
this knowledge which is meant appears 
in the following clause: ὅτι 4 σωτηρία 
ἐκ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἐστίν, that is to say, 
God has manifested Himself as Saviour 
to the Jews, and through them to all. 
ΜΑ powerful repudiation of the theory 


ὁ πατὴρ τοιούτους LnTet τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτόν. 
, ‘4 4 - α. 3 / ‘ 7, ~ 
Θεός: καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτὸν, ἐν mvedpaTe καὶ ἀληθεία, δεῖ 


23. GAN’ έρχεται dpa καὶ viv ἐστιν, ὅτε οἱ ἀληθινοὶ προσ- 
Thayer. κυνηταὶ προσκυνήσουσι τῷ πατρὶ ἐν πνεύµατι καὶ ἀληθείᾳ: καὶ γὰρ 


24. Πνεῦμα ὁ 


25. Λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ, "Οἶδα ὅτι * Μεσσίας 
έρχεται. (6 λεγόμενος Χριστός :) “ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐκεῖνος, ἀναγγελεῖ 


which makes the author of this Gospel a 
Gentile of the second century with a 
Gnostic antipathy to Judaism and Jews,” 
Reynolds.—Ver. 23. There is this great 
distinction between Jew and Samaritan, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἔρχεται ὥρα . . . καὶ ἀληθείᾳ, but 
notwithstanding that it is to the Jews 
God has especially revealed Himself as 
Saviour, the hour has now come when 
the ideal worshippers, whether Jew or 
Samaritan, shall worship the one uni- 
versal Father in sfivit; not in either 
Gerizim or Jerusalem, and in truth, not 
in the symbols of Samaritan or Jewish 
worship, ἐν mwvevpatt καὶ ἀληθείᾳ. Two 
defects of all previous worship are aimed 
at; all that was local and all that was 
symbolic is to be left behind. Worship 
is to be (1) ἐν πνεύµατι [on ἐν here, see 
Winer, 528], in the heart, not in this place 
or that. The essential thing is, not that 
the right place be approached, but that 
the right spirit enter into worship. And 
(2) it is to be ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, in correspond- 
ence with reality, both as regards the 
object and the manner of worship. The 
Samaritans had not known the object of 
their worship: the Jews had employed 
symbolism in worship. Both these de- 
fects were now to be removed. καὶ γὰρ 
6 πατὴρ . αὐτόν. καὶ γάρ is not 
merely equivalent to γάρ, but must 
be rendered, ‘‘ For of a truth”. The 
characteristics of the ideal worshippers 
have been declared; and now, in con- 
firmation, Jesus adds, ‘‘ For of a truth 
the Father seeks such for His worship- 
pers”,—Ver. 24. The reason of all 
this is found in the determining state- 
ment πνεῦμα 6 θεός, God is Spirit. Cf. 
God is Light; God is Love. The pre- 
dication involves much; that God is 
personal, and much else. But primarily 
it here indicates that God is not corporeal, 
and therefore needs no temple. Rarely 
is the fundamental fact of God’s spiritu- 
ality carried to all its conclusions. Cf. 
James i. 27; Rom, xii. 1.—Ver. 25. This 


22---20. 


ΠΕ ο] , 3”. 
ημιν παντα. 
35 


σοι. 


” 32 A 
ὅτι μετὰ γυναικὸς ἐλάλει: οὐδεὶς μέντοι εἶπε, "Τί Lyteis;” ἢ, 


“Ti λαλεῖς pet αὐτῆς; 
28. ᾿Αφῆκεν οὖν τὴν ὑδρίαν αὐτῆς 


πόλιν, καὶ λέγει τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, 20. 


1 εθαυµ.αζον in ΒΑΒΟΡαΚΙ.; Τ.Μ. in 


great statement rather overwhelms and 
bewilders the woman. ᾿Ιλιγγίασε πρὸς 
πὸ τῶν ῥηθέντων tos, Euthymius, after 
Chrysostom. Somewhat helplessly she 
appeals to the final authority, οἶδα ὅτι 
Μεσσίας . . . πάντα. The Samaritan 
expectation of a Messiah was based on 
their knowledge of Deut. xviii., and other 
allusions in the Pentateuch, and on their 
familiarity with Jewish ideas. He was 
‘known as Hashab or Hathab, the Con- 
verter, or as El Muhdy, the Guide. For 
the sources of information, see Westcott’s 
Introd. to Gospels, chap. ii., note 2. ‘It 
appears from Josephus (Ant., xviii. 4, 1) 
that in the later years of the procurator- 
ship of Pilate, there was an actual rising 
of the Samaritans, who assembled on 
Mount Gerizim, under the influence of 
these Messianic expectations. | Who 
can say that they may not have been 
originally set in motion by the event 
recorded in the Fourth Gospel?” San- 
day. It was His prophetic endowment 
which this woman especially believed in, 
‘He will tell us all” ; and for Him she 
was willing to wait.—Ver. 26. The 
woman’s despairing bewilderment is at 
once dissipated by the announcement 
ἐγώ eit, 6 λαλῶν σοι. ‘I that speak to 
thee am He.” This declaration He was 
free to make among a people with whom 
He could not be used for political ends. 
61. think, too, there will be felt to 
be something not only very beautiful, 
but very characteristic of our Lord, 
in His declaring Himself with greater 
plainness of speech than He had Him- 
self hitherto done even to the Twelve, 
to this dark-minded and sin-stained 
woman, whose spiritual nature was just 
awakening to life under His presence 
and His words” (Stanton, ¥ewish and 
Christian Messiah, p. 275).—Ver. 27. 
But just at this critical juncture, ἐπὶ 
τούτῳ, ‘on this,’ came His disciples 
καὶ ἐθαύμασαν. The imperfect better 
buits the sense; ‘they were wonder- 
ing”: the cause of wonder being ὅτι 
μετὰ γυναικὸς ἐλάλει, ‘‘that He was 
speaking with a woman”; this being 
forbidden to Rabbis. ‘* Samuel dicit : non 
Salutant feminam omnino.” ‘ The wise 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


27. Καὶ ” ἐπὶ τούτω ἦλθον ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐθαύμασαν 1} 


729 


26. Λέγει αὐτῇ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, '“᾿Εγώ εἶμι, ὁ λαλῶν 


Cp. ΡΗΠ. 
1.3; i. 17, 


“ Δεῦτε, ἴδετε ἄνθρωπον, ὃς 
ESU. 


have said, Each time that the man pro- 
longs converse with the woman [that is, 
his own wife] he causes evil to himself, 
and desists from words of Thorah and in 
the end:inherits Gehinnom” (Taylor, 
Pirke Aboth, p. 29; see also Schoettgen 
in loc.). But although the disciples 
wondered οὐδεὶς μέντοι εἶπε, “no one, 
however, said’’ τί ζητεῖς, “' what are you 
seeking?”’ nor even the more general 
question τί λαλεῖς pet’ αὐτῆς, '' why are 
you talking with her?” Their silence 
was due to reverence. They had already 
learned that He had reasons for His 
actions which might not lie on the 
surface.—Ver. 28. ἀφῆκεν οὖν . . . ἡ 
γννη. ‘The woman accordingly,” that 
is, because of the interruption, “left her 
pitcher,” forgetting the object of her 
coming, in the greater discovery she had 
made ; and also unconsciously showing 
that she meant to return.—kat ἀπῆλθεν 
. . . 6 Χριστός; and went to the city 
and says to the men, easily accessible 
because lounging in groups at the hottest 
hour of the day, ‘“* Come, see a man who 
told me all I ever did”. The woman’s 
absorption in the thought of the prophet’s 
endowment causes her to forget the 
shame of the declaration which had con- 
vinced her. She does not positively 
affirm that He is the Christ, but says 
µήτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός: This is 
what grammarians call the ‘‘ tentative” 
use of µήτι. The A.V. “13 not this the 
Christ ?” is not so correct as R.V.‘* Can 
this be the Christ?” The Syriac has 
“Is not this perhaps the Christ?” 
The Vulgate has ‘‘ Numquid ipse est 
Christus ?”? In some passages of the 
N.T. (Mt. vii. 16, Acts x. 47) pate is 
used in questions which expect a more 
decided and exclusive negative than the 
simple py, “certainly not,” “not at 
all’. But here and in Mt. xii. 23 mere 
doubt expresses itself, doubt with rather 
a leaning to an affirmative answer (6/. 
Hoogeveen, Doctrina Partic., under 
µήτι; and Pape’s Lexicon, where it is 
rendered “' ob etwa’’). The Greek com- 
mentators unite in lauding the skill with 
which the woman excites the curiosity of 
the men and leads without seeming to 


73° 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IV.. 


, 2 
a xviii. 35. εἶπέ µοι πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησα" "μήτι οὗτός ἐστιν 6 Χρίστός ; 


30. ἘΕξῆλθον οὖν ἐκ τῆς πόλεως, καὶ ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτόν. 


b Only here 
with ev; 
cp. Acts 
Xill. 42. 

e Constr. 
ver. 7. 

d Constr. 
XV. 12. 
Lk. i. 43, 
etc., Bur- 
ton, 213. 

eém... καὶ 


““PaBBl, dye.” 


at, , 3 ye 9 9, 
Gen. vii. τετράμηνόν ἐστι, καὶ ὁ θερισμὸς έρχεται ; 


4. 
f vi. 5. 


lead. [Euthymius says: τὸ δὲ µήτι 
οὗτός ἐστιν 6 Χριστός; ἀντὶ τοῦ, µήποτε 
οὗτός ἐστιν; ὑποκρίνεται yap, οἷον 
ἐπιδιστάζειν, ὥστε Tap αὐτῶν γενέσθαι 
τὴν κρίσιν.]--Ψετ. 30. ἐξῆλθον οὖν . .. 
πρὸς αὐτόν. The men, moved by the 
woman’s question, left the city and were 
coming to Jesus.—Ver. 31. But mean- 
while ἐν τῷ μεταξύ, between the woman’s 
leaving the well and the men’s return to 
it, the disciples, having brought the 
purchased food, and observing that not- 
withstanding His previous fatigue Jesus 
does not share with them, say ‘PaBBi 
gaye. But in His conversation with the 
woman His fatigue and hunger had dis- 
appeared, and He replies (ver. 32) ἐγὼ 
βρῶσιν ... οὐκ οἴδατε. John does not 
distinguish between βρῶσις and βρῶμα, 
eating and the thing eaten, cf. ver. 34; 
Paul uses both words in their proper 
sense, I Cor. viii. 4, vi. 13. Weiss and 
others, strangely enough, maintain that 
βρῶσις has here its proper meaning “ an 
eating”. The pronouns are emphatic: 
I am refreshed by nourishment hidden 
from you. The proof of which they at 
once gave by asking one another Μήτις 
ἤνεγκεν αὐτῷ Φφαγεῖν; “ Surely no one 
can have brought Him anything to 
eat?”? Winer, p. 642, adds “ especially 
here in Samaria”. Perhaps evidence 
that Jesus had such an appearance 
as would not forbid any one offering 
Him food. But we must keep in view 
the easier manners of Oriental life.— 
Ver. 34. Jesus answers their question 
though not put to Him: *Epov βρῶμα 
. . . τὸ ἔργον. Westcott thinks the 
telic. use of ἵνα can be discerned here ; 
‘the exact form of the expression em- 
phasises the end and not the process, 
not the doing and finishing, but that I 
may do and finish”. Licke acknow- 
ledges that it is not always easy to 
distinguish between the construction of 


φαγεῖν, ἣν ὑμεῖς οὖκ oldarte.” 
ἀλλήλους, “Mytis “ἤνεγκεν αὐτῷ Φαγεῖν ; 


µε, καὶ τελειώσω αὐτοῦ τὸ ἔργον. 


31. Ἐν δὲ τῷ μεταξὺ ἠρώτων αὐτὸν of μαθηταὶ, λέγοντες, 
32. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “΄᾿Εγὼ βρῶσιν ἔχω 


33. Ἔλεγον οὖν ot μαθηταὶ πρὸς 
34. Λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ 


᾽ησοῦς, ““'Εμὸν βρῶμά ἐστιν, Siva ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός 


35. οὐχ ὑμεῖς λέγετε, ὅτι "ἔτι 
ἰδοὺ, λέγω ὑμῖν, 


1᾿Ἐπάρατε τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ὑμῶν, καὶ θεάσασθε τὰς χώρας, ὅτι 


αὕτη or τοῦτο with ἵνα and with ὅτι, 
but that here it is possible to discrim- 
inate; and translates ‘‘ Meine Speise 
besteht in dem Bestreben,” etc. It is 
much better to take it as the Greek com- 
mentators and Holtzmann and Weiss 
take it, as equivalent to τὸ ποιῆσαι. 
See especially 3 John 4. [‘* Sometimes, 
beyond doubt, ἵνα is used where the 
final element in the sense is very much 
weakened—sometimes where it is hard 
to deny that it has altogether vanished.” 
Simcox, Grammar, 177.] The idea that 
mental or spiritual excitement acts as 
a physical stimulant is common. Cf. 
Plato’s λόγων ἑστίασις, Tim., 27 B; 
Thucydides, i. 70, represents the Co- 
rinthian ambassadors as saying of the 
Athenians pyre ἑορτὴν ἄλλο τι ἡγεῖσθαι 
ἢ τὸ τὰ δέοντα πρᾶξαι. See also Soph., 
Electra, 363, and the quotations in 
Wetstein; also Browning’s Fra Lippo 
Lippi, “to find its [the world’s] meaning 
is my meat and drink”. Jesus dyes not 
say that His meat is to bring living 
water to parched souls, but “to do the 
will of Him that sent me, and to ac- 
complish His work”. First, because 
throughout it is His aim to make 
Himself a transparency through which 
the Father may be seen; and second, 
because the will of God is the ultimate 
stability by fellowship with which all 
human charity and active compassion 
are continually renewed.—Ver. 35. ovx 
ἡμεῖς λέγετε, etc. These -words may 
either mean “‘ Are you not saying?” or 
“Do you not say?” that is, they may 
either refer to an expression just used by 
the disciples, or to a common proverb. 
If the former, then the disciples had 
probably been speaking of the dearness 
of the provisions they had bought, and 
congratulating themselves that harvest 
would lower them. Or sitting by the 
well and looking round, some of them 


30-39. 


λευκαί εἶσι “ πρὸς θερισμὸν ἤδη. 


λαμβάνει, καὶ συνάγει καρπὸν εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον: ἵνα καὶ 6 σπείρων 


ὁμοῦ χαίρῃ καὶ & θερίζων. 


) ἀληθινὸς, ὅτι ἄλλος ἐστὶν 6 σπείρων, καὶ ἄλλος ὁ θερίζων. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


36. Καὶ Ἀὁ θερίζων μισθὸν 6 Acts iii. 


73% 


Col. 


11. 23. 
a « Ὦ Lk. x. 7. 
37. ἐν γὰρ τούτῳ ὁ λόγος ἐστὶν ὁ x Cor. ix. 
. 182Tim 
38. ἐγὼ ii. 6. 


i Mic. vi. 15. 


ἀπέστειλα ὑμᾶς θερίζειν "ὃ οὐχ ὑμεῖς κεκοπιάκατε" ἄλλοι KEKO-j xix. 35. 2 


, κ ε ~ 3 κ. re > A > / » 
πιάκασι, καὶ ὑμεῖς eis τὸν κόπον αὐτῶν εἰσεληλύθατε. 
A 5 , Nii bates 3 μι a A 
τῆς πόλεως ἐκείνης πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτὸν τῶν Σαμαρειτῶν, 
aA 9 εἰ 
διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς γυναικὸς μαρτυρούσης, -΄ Ὅτι εἶπέ µοι πάντα ὅσα 
yor της Υ 


may have casually remarked that they 
were four months from harvest. In 
this case the time of year would be 
determined. Harvest beginning in April, 
it would now be December. But the 
phrase οὐχ ἡὑμεῖς λέγετε is not the 
natural introduction to a reference to 
some present remark of the disciples ; 
whereas it is the natural introduction to 
the citation of a proverb (Matt. xvi. 2). 
That it is a proverb is also favoured by 
the metrical form ἔτι τετράµηνόν ἐστι 
καὶ 6 θερισμὸς ἔρχεται. No trace of 
such a proverb has been found, but that 
some such saying should be current was 
inevitable, the waiting of the husband- 
man being typical of so mueh of human 
life. (Wetstein quotes from Ovid (Herovd., 
xvii. 263), ‘‘adhuc tua messis in herba 
est,” and many other parallels.) If this 
was a proverbial expression to give en- 
couragement to the sower, we cannot 
infer from its use here that the time 
was December. Our Lord quotes it for 
the sake of the contrast between the 
ordinary relation of harvest to seed-time, 
and that which they can recognise by 
lifting their eyes.—éwapare τοὺς ὀφθαλ- 
pols ὑμῶν. . .. Your harvest is already 
here. What the disciples see when they 
jift their eyes from their food is the crowd 
of Samaritans ripe for the kingdom 
and now approaching them, In Samaria 
a long time might have been expected 
to elapse between sowing and reaping; 
but nol—Aeveat εἶσι . . . the fields 
are already ripe for cutting. ᾖ[λευκαί 
Wetstein illustrates from Ovid, “‘ maturis 
albescit messis aristis”’.}—Ver. 36. καὶ 
6 θερίζων . . . W.H. close ver. 35 with 
θερισµόν and begin 36 ἤδη 6 θερίζων. 
Already, and not after four months 
waiting, the harvester has his reward 
and gathers fruit to life eternal. The 
reaper has not to wait, but even now 
and in one and the same action finds his 
reward (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 17) and gathers 
the great product of this world which 
nourishes not merely through one winter 
till mext year’s crop is gathered but to 


2 Chron. ix. 

30. Ἐκ δὲ 5. 

k ἐπί in 
Josh. 
Xxiv. 13. 


life eternal.—iva 6 σπείρων ὁμοῦ χαίρῃ 
καὶ 6 θερίζων, ‘that sower and reaper 
may rejoice at one and the same time”. 
Here among the Samaritans this extra- 
ordinary spectacle was seen, Jesus the 
Sower and the disciples the reapers 
working almost simultaneously. So 
quickly had the crop sprung that the 
reapers trod on the heels of the Sower.— 
Ver. 37. ἐν yap τούτῳ. For in this, 
i.¢., in the circumstances explained in 
the following verse, namely, that I have 
sent you to reap what others sowed, is 
the saying verified, ‘“‘one soweth and 
another rg@apeth’’.—é λόγος, ‘the say- 
ing ο ος τσ Tim, ας, 8, x5; fete, — 
ἀληθινός without the article is the predi- 
cate and scarcely expresses that the 
saying receives in the present circum- 
stances its ideal fulfilment, rather that 
the saying is shown to be genuine; the 
saying is ἄλλος ἐστὶν ὁ σπείρων καὶ 
ἄλλος 6 θερίζων, various forms of which 
are given by Wetstein; as, ἄλλοι μὲν 
σπείρουσιν, ἄλλοι 8’ ad ἀμήσονται, ‘sic 
vos non yobis”’; cf. Job xxxi. 8; Micah 
vi. 15; Deut. vi. 11. [‘‘It was objected 
to Pompey that he came upon the 
victories of Lucullus and gathered those 
laurels which were due to the fortune and 
valour of another,’ Plutarch.]—Ver. 38. 
The exemplification in our Lord’s mind 
is given in ver. 38, where the pronouns 
ἐγώ and ὑμᾶς are emphatic. ‘I sent 
you to reap.” When? Holtzmann 
thinks the past tenses can only be ex- 
plained as spoken by the glorified Lord 
looking back on His call of the twelve as 
Apostles. That is, the words were not 
spoken as John relates. But may not 
the reference be to the baptising of many 
by the disciples in the preceding months ? 
This would be quite a natural and obvious 
reference. The work in Judaea which 
justifies the preterites was now alluded 
to, because now again the same division 
of labour is apparent. The Samaritans 
come not because of anything the dis- 
ciples had said while making purchases 
in the town, but because of their Master's 


732 


KATA 1ΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IV. 


ILk.v.3. ἐποίησα. 40. Ὡς οὖν ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτὸν of Σαμαρεῖται, ' ἠρώτων 
mi4o. . αὐτὸν " μεῖναι παρ αὐτοῖς: καὶ " ἔμεινεν ἐκεῖ δύο ἡμέρας. 41. καὶ 
ni Mac. xi. κ F eae = nM is a ‘ 
40. πολλῷ πλείους ἐπίστευσαν διὰ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ, 42. TH τε γυναικι 
ἔλεγον, “"Ὅτι οὐκέτι διὰ τὴν σὴν λαλιὰν πιστεύοµεν’ αὐτοὶ γὰρ 
ἀκηκόαμεν, καὶ οἴδαμεν ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ σωτὴρ τοῦ κόσμου, 

ὁ Χριστός.” 1 
ο ΕΜ iE Mera δὲ τὰς δύο ἡμέρας ἐξῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν, καὶ ° ἀπῆλθεν 3 εἰς 

t. Iv. 14. 


τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. 


44. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐμαρτύρησεν, ὅτι προφήτης 


1 ο Χριστος omitted in Φ48ΒΟ vulg. and Memph.; found in AC*DL. 
2 Omit και απηλθεν with BCD, T., Ti., W.H. 


talk with the woman.—Vv. 39-42 briefly 
sum up the results of the Lord’s visit.— 
Ver. 39. Out of Sychar many of the 
Samaritans believed on Him. This 
faith was the result of the woman's 
testimony, διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς γυναικὸς 
μαρτυροῦσης; her testimony being, εἶπέ 
μοι πάντα ὅσα érroinoa.—Ver. 40. Their 
faith showed itself in an invitation to 
Him to remain with them ; in compliance 
with which invitation, impressive as com- 
ing from Samaritans, He remained two 
days.—Ver. 41. The result was that 
πολλῷ πλείους, a far larger number than 
had believed owing to the woman’s 
report now believed διὰ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ, 
on account of what they heard from Jesus 
Himself. This is a faith approved by 
John, because based not on miracles 
but on the word of Christ.—ovKérte . . . 
καὶ οἴδαμεν. No longer do we believe 
on account of your talk [λαλιάν, not 
λόγον], for we ourselves have heard and 
know. ‘This could only be said by those 
who went out first from the city, not by 
those many more who afterwards believed. 
They felt that their faith was now firmer 
and stronger, more worthy to be called 
faith. This mature belief expressed itself 
in the confession οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς 6 
σωτὴρ τοῦ Kdopov 6 Χριστός. The title 
“Saviour of the World’’ was of course 
prompted by the teaching of Jesus Him- 
self during His two days’ residence. To 
suppose, with several interpreters, that 
it is put into the mouth of the Samaritans 
by the evangelist is to suppose that 
during these two days Jesus did not 
disclose to them that He was the Saviour 
of the World. [‘‘ It probably belongs not 
to the Samaritans but to the evangelist. 
At the same time it is possible that such 
an epithet might be employed by them 
merely as synonymous with ‘ Messiah’”’ 
—Sanday.] 

Doubt has been cast on the historicity 


of this narrative by Baur, who thinks the 
woman is a type of susceptible heathen- 
dom ; and by Strauss, who thinks it was 
invented for the purpose of showing that 
Jesus personally taught not only in 
Galilee, Judaea, and Perea, but also in 
Samaria. ‘‘ How natural the tendency 
to perfect the agency of Jesus, by τερτε- 
senting Him to have sown the heavenly 
seed in Samaria, thus extending His 
Ministry through all parts of Palestine ; 
to limit the glory of the apostles and 
other teachers to that of being the mere 
reapers of the harvest in Samaria; and 
to put this distinction, on a suitable 
occasion, into the mouth of Jesus!” 
Holtzmann’s idea of this section of the 
Gospel issimilar. The fictitious character 


of the narrative seems to be mainly 


based on its great significance for the 
life of Christ. As if the actual events of 
His life were not significant. Stress too 
is laid on the circumstance that among 
simple peoples all striking incidents, 
conversations, recognitions, take place 
at wells. In other words, wells are 
common meeting-places, therefore this 
meeting at a well cannot have taken 
place. 

Vv. 43-54. fesus passes into Galilee 
and there heals the son of a nobleman.— 
Ver. 43. Mera δὲ τὰς δύο ἡμέρας. ‘And 
after the two days,” see νετ. 49.---ἐξῆλθεν 
ἐκεῖθεν, “He departed thence,” i.e., 
from Sychar.—eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, “into 
Galilee,” carrying out the intention which 
had brought Him to Sychar, iv. 3.— 
Ver. 44. The reason for His proceeding 
to Galilee is given in ver. 44.-- αὐτὸς 
yap 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐμαρτύρησεν, ‘for Jesus 
Himself testified”. The evangelist 
would not have presumed to apply to 
Jesus the proverbial expression, προφή- 
της ... οὐκ ἔχει, but Jesus Himself 
used it. The saying embodies a common 
observation. Montaigne complained that 


40—46. 


ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ πατρίδι τιμὴν οὐκ έχει. 


Γαλιλαίαν, ἳ ἐδέξαντο αὐτὸν οἱ Γαλιλαῖοι, πάντα ἑωρακότες ἃ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


733 


45. ?"Ore οὖν ἦλθεν εἲς τὴν P LK. iv. 24. 


a 3 / ο 
ἐποί- α i. τι. 


ησεν ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ' καὶ αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν 


ἑορτήν. \ 


46. "HNOev οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς * πάλιν εἰς τὴν Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, 
καὶ ἦν τις " βασιλικὸς, οὗ ὁ υἱὸς ἠσθένει ἐν 45 subst. 


ἐποίησε τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον. 


in his own country he had to purchase 
publishers: while elsewhere publishers 
purchased him. ‘The difficulty lies in 
the present application of the saying. If 
Galilee was His ‘‘ fatherland,” how can 
He use this proverb as a reason for His 
going there? To escape the difficulty 
Cyril, followed by Calvin, Grotius, and 
many more, says Nazareth was His 
πατρίς, and here [ἀναγκαίαν ποιεῖται 
τὴν ἀπολογίαν τῆς παραδρομῆς] he 
assigns the reason for His passing by 
Nazareth. πατρίς can be used of a 
town as in Philo’s Leg. ad Caium, 
Agrippa says tort δέ por Ἱεροσόλυμα 
πατρίς (Kypke). See also Achilles Tat., 
22; Lk. iv. 23. But the objection is 
that Lk. tells us He did go to Nazareth. 
Origen says Judaea was the πατρίς τῶν 
προφητῶν ; and Licke, Westcott, Reith, 
and others believe that Judaea is here 
meant; and that Jesus, by citing the 
proverb, gives the reason for His rejec- 
tion in Jerusalem. But this is out of 
place, as He had long since left Jeru- 
salem. Meyer thinks the meaning is 
that Jesus left Galilee in order to sub- 
stantiate His Messianic claim in Jeru- 
salem, and this having been accom- 
plished, He returns with His credentials 
to His own country. This agrees with 
ver. 45, “ having seen the miracles which 
He had done in Jerusalem”. Weiss 
interprets the words as meaning that 
Jesus leaves Samaria, where honour had 
come unbidden, in order to evoke faith and 
honour where as yet He had none: thus 
continuing the hard work of sowing and 
leaving to the disciples the glad harvest- 
ing. This is ingenious; but the obvious 
interpretation is that which finds in the 
statement (vv. 43, 44) a resumption of the 
narrative of vv. 1-3, which had been 
interrupted by the account of the Lord’s 
experience in Samaria. That narrative 
had assigned as the reason for our 
Lord’s leaving Judaea and making for 
Galilee, His own over-popularity, which 
threatenedia collision with the Pharisees. 
To avoid this He goes to Galilee, where, 
as He Himself said, there was little risk 
of His being too highly honoured.—Ver. 
45. Neither is οὖν of ver. 45 inconsistent 


ὅπου ΣΠ. 1. 
s Here only 


with this interpretation. It merely con- 
tinues the narration; ‘‘when, then, He 
came into Galilee’. The immediate 
result of His coming was not what He 
anticipated, and therefore ἐδέξαντο is 
thrust into the emphatic place, ‘‘a wel- 
come was accorded to Him by the 
Galileans”. And this unexpected result 
is accounted for by the fact stated, πάντα 
ἑωρακότες . . . εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν; they had ΄ 
been at the Passover at Jerusalem, and 
had seen all He haddone there. “ They 
received Him... on account of His 
fame in Jerusalem, the metropolis, which 
set them the fashion in their estimate of 
men and things” (Alford). According to 
John’s usual method of distinguishing 
various kinds of faith, this note is inserted 
to warn the reader that the reception 
was after all not deeply grounded, and to 
prepare for the statement of ver. 48. 
[ᾖλθον, and even ἐποίησεν, may be ren- 
dered by pluperfects.]—Ver. 46. 7A@ev 
οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. May we conclude from 
the circumstance that no mention is made 
of the disciples until vi. 3, “that they 
had remained in Samaria, and had gone 
home”? πάλιν ἐλθεῖν means ‘‘to re- 
turn’’; here with a reference to ii. 1. 
The further definition of Kava, ὅπου 
ἐποίησε τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον, is to identify the 
place, to prepare for ver. 54, and to re- 
mind us He had friends there. Weiss 
and Holtzmann suppose the family of 
Jesus was now resident at Cana, That 
we have no reason to suppose. From 
the period of the nanistry in Galilee now 
beginning, the Synoptists give many 
details: John gives but one. ἡν τις 
βασιλικὸς. Euthymius gives the mean- 
ings of βασιλικός thus: βασιλικὸς ἐλέ- 
γετο, ἢ ὧς ἐκ γένους βασιλικοῦ, ἢ ὡς 
ἀξίωμά τι κεκτηµένος, ἀφ᾽ οὗπερ ἐκαλεῖτο 
βασιλικὸς, ἢ ὡς ὑπηρέτης βασιλικός. 
Kypke gives examples of its use by 
writers of the period to denote soldiers 
or servants of a king, or persons of royal 
blood, or of rank and dignity, and thinks 
it here means ‘‘vir nobilis, clarus, in 
dignitate quadam constitutus”. Lampe 
thinks it may imply that this man was 
both in the royal service and of royal 
blood. Lightfoot suggests that this may 


734 


ΚΑΤΑ Ι1ΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


IV. 


Katrepvaoup. 47. οὗτος ἀκούσας ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς ἥκει ἐκ τῆς Ιουδαίας. 


eis τὴν Γαλιλαίαν, ἀπῆλθε πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἠρώτα αὐτὸν ἵνα καταβῇ 


t 2 Μας. vii. 
18. 

vi. 30. 1 
Cor. i. 22. ς a a 

µη πιστεύσητε. 


κατάβηθι πρὶν ἀποθανεῖν τὸ παιδίον pou.” 
> a “ , PW a 35 
Ιησοῦς, “Mopevou- 6 vids σου Zi. 


“ 4 9 > Hebe ςς 2, A ΔΝ , 
τῷ λόγω @ εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 ‘Ingots, καὶ ἐπορεύετο. 
. c ‘ t 


v With acc. 
here and 
Acts xxiii. 
20 only. 


καὶ ἰάσηται αὐτοῦ τὸν υἱόν: "ἤμελλε γὰρ ἀποθνήσκειν. 


’ c A > [ο] 3 / 
καταβαίνοντος, οἱ δοῦλοι αὐτοῦ ἀπήντησαν 
ϱ a ~ 
λέγοντες, “Ott 6 mats σου CH.” 


48. εἶπεν 


οὖν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς πρὸς αὐτὸν, "Edy μὴ σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα ἴδητε, οὗ 
49. Λέγει πρὸς αὐτὸν & βασιλικὸς, “' Κύριε, 


5ο. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ 
Καὶ ἐπίστευσεν ὁ ἄνθρωπος 
51. ἤδη δὲ αὐτοῦ 
1 αὐτῷ, καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν 
52. ᾿᾿ Επύθετο οὖν map αὐτῶν 


5 ~ ϱ 
τὴν ὥραν ἐν ἡ κοµψότερον ἔσχε: καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, ““Ὅτι χθὲς ὥραν 


'νπηντησαν (always used in John, xi. 20, 30; xii. 18) found in $BCDKL. 


have been Chuza, Herod’s chamberlain. 
Most probably he was an officer of 
Herod’s court, civil or military. His 
prominent characteristic at this time is 
given in the words, οὗ 6 vids ἠσθένει ἐν 
Kagapvaovp. The place is named be- 
cause essential to the understanding of 
what follows.—Ver. 47. Having heard 
ὅτι Ingots Feet, ‘‘that Jesus has come 
into Galilee,” he traces Him to Kana, 
and begs Him not simply to heal his son, 
but pointedly ἵνα καταβῇ, to go to Caper- 
naum for the purpose. He considered 
the presence of Jesus to be necessary 
[‘‘non putat verbo curare posse,” Melan- 
chthon] (contrast the centurion of Matt. 
viii.); and, being a person of standing, 
did not scruple to trouble Jesus. Jesus 
neither refuses nor grants the request at 
once, but utters the reflection: Ver. 48. 
ἐὰν μὴ σημεῖα . . . πιστεύσητε Not 
as a prophet uttering truth, but as a 
miracle worker He is sought in His own 
country: Samaria had received Him 
without miracle, as a Prophet. To seek 
for a sign, says Melanchthon, “est velle 
certificari alio modo quam Ῥες νετ- 
bum”. τέρατα here only in John, 
though frequent in Acts. Faith rooted 
in “marvels” Jesus put in an inferior 
place. But the father in his urgent 
anxiety can only repeat his request (ver. 
49) κατάβηθι πρὶν ἀποθανεῖν τὸ παιδίον 
pov. “ Dupleximbecillitas rogantis, quasi 
Dominus necesse haberet adesse, nec pos- 
set aeque resuscitare mortuum”’ (Bengel). 
But Jesus, unable to prolong his misery, 
says πορεύου: ὁ vids σου ζῃ. He did not 
go with him. His cures are independent 
of material media and even of His pres- 
ence.—Ver. 50. And now the man be- 
lieved τῷ λόγῳ ᾧ [or dv] εἶπεν αὐτῷ 
ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. His first immature faith has 


grown into something better. The 
evident sincerity of Jesus quickens a 
higher faith. On Christ’s word he 
departs home, believing he will find his 
son healed.—Ver. 51. And while already 
on his way down [ἤδη showing that he 
did not remain with Christ until from 
some other source he heard that his son 
was healed], his servants met him and 
gave him the reward of his faith.—s wats 
σου ff, an echo, as Weiss remarks, of 
the words of Jesus, ver. 5ο. The ser- 
vants seeing the improvement in the 
boy and not ascribing it to miracle, set 
out to save their master from bringing 
Jesus to Capernaum.—Ver. 52. ἐπύθετο 
οὖν . . . Koprydrtepov ἔσχε. “' Amoenum 
verbum, de convalescente, puero prae- 
sertim”’—Bengel. Theophylact explains 
by ἐπὶ τὸ βέλτιον καὶ εὐρωστότερον 
μετῆλθεν ὁ mais: Euthymius by τὸ 
ῥᾳότερον, τὸ κουφότερον, as we speak οί 
a sick person being ‘‘ easier,” "ΠρΏίετ”. 
The best illustration is Raphel’s from 
Epictetus (Diss., 3, 10), who bids a 
patient not be too much uplifted if the 
physician says to him κομψῶς ἔχεις, you 
are doing well. The servants name the 
seventh hour, z.¢., I p.m. of the previous 
day, as the time when the fever left him. 
[Accus. of time when, rare; Winer ex- 
plains as if it meant the approximate 
time with a περί or ὡσεί understood ; 
Acts x. 3; Rev. iii. 3.] And this the 
father recognised as the time at which 
Jesus had said "ΤΗΥ son liveth”. The 
distance between Cana and Capernaum 
is about twenty-five miles, so that it 
would appear as if the father had need- 
lessly delayed on the road. But he may 
have had business for Herod or for him- 
self on the road, or the beast he rode 
may have been unequal to the double 


47—54. Ψ. 1, 


ἑβδόμην ἀφῆκεν αὐτὸν ὁ πυρετός. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


54. Ἔγνω οὖν 6 πατὴρ, ὅτι ἐν 


~ a a ~ 9 a 3 
ἐκείνη τῇ ὥρα, ἐν ᾗ εἶπεν αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “OT 6 υἱός σου Li. 


, ~ 
Καὶ ἐπίστευσεν αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ οἰκία αὐτοῦ ὅλη. 


54. " τοῦτο πάλιν w ii. 1-12, 


δεύτερον σημεῖον ἐποίησεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἐλθὼν ἐκ τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας eis 


τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. 


VY. 1. ΜΕΤΑ ταῦτα ἦν ἑορτὴ 1 τῶν Ιουδαίων, καὶ ἀνέβη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


1 η εορτη ΝΟΕ ΕΗΙ, Memph. Theb. Cyr.-Alex. Tisch. 


ABDGK Orig. Chrys. Tr.W.H.R. 


journey. Atany rate it seems illegitimate 
to say with Weiss that ‘yesterday ” 
means before sundown; or to ascribe 
the father’s delay to the confidence he 
had in Jesus’ word. The discovery of 
the coincidence in point of time produces 
a higher degree of faith, ἐπίστευσεν αὐτὸς 
καὶ 4 οἰκία αὐτοῦ ὅλη. The cure brings 
into prominence this distinctive pecu- 
liarity of a miracle that it consists of a 
marvel which is coincident with an ex- 
press announcement of it.—Ver. 54. 
τοῦτο πάλιν ... τὴν Γαλιλαίαν. πάλιν 
δεύτερον a common pleonasm, ‘again a 
second’’; cf. xxi, 16. In Mt. xxvi. 42, 
πάλιν ἐκ δευτέρου; and Acts x. 15. By 
this note John connects this miracle with 
that at the wedding, ii. 1-10, of which he 
said (ii. 11) ταύτην ἐποίησε ἀρχὴν τῶν 
σημείων 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς. It does not mean 
that this was the second miracle after 
this return to Galilee, although the words 
might bear that interpretation. Why 
this note? Bengel thinks that attention 
is called to the fact that John relates 
three miracles wrought in Galilee and 
three in Judaea. Alford supposes that 
John wishes to note that as the former 
miracle had called forth the faith of the 
disciples, so this elicited faith from a 
wider circle. 

Not only Strauss, Baur, and Keim but 
also Weiss and Sanday suppose that this 
is the same healing as is recorded in 
Mt. viii. 5-13. But the differences are 
too great. In the one it is a Gentile 
centurion whose servant is paralysed; 
in the other it is the son of a (probably 
Jewish) court official who is at the point 
of death from fever. In the one the cen- 
turion insists that Jesus shall not come 
under his roof; in the other the supplicant 
beseeches Him to do so. The half-faith 
ox the father is blamed; the extraordinary 
faith of the centurion is lauded. 


Chapters v.-xi. depict the growth of 
‘the unbeliet of the Jews. In this part of 
sthe Gospel three Judaean miracies and 


εορτη without article 


one in Galilee are related in full, and 
the impulse given by each to the hatred 
of the Jews is pointed out. These 
miracles are the healing of the impotent 
man (chap. v.), the miraculous feeding 
(chap. vi.), the cure of the man born 
blind (chap. ix.), and the raising of 
Lazarus (chap. xi.). This section of the 
Gospel may be divided thus :— 

1. Chaps. v. and vi., Christ manifests 
Himself as the Life first in Judaea, then 
in Galilee, but is rejected in both places. 

2. Chaps. vii. to x. 21, He attends the 
Feast of Tabernacles and manifests Him- 
self by word and deed but is threatened 
both by the mob and by the authorities. 

3. Chaps. x. 22 to xi., Jesus withdraws 
from Jerusalem but returns to raise 
Lazarus, in consequence of which the 
authorities finally determine to slay Him. 

CuHaPTER V. Fesus in Ferusalem 
manifests Himself as the Life by com- 
municating strength to an impotent man. 
—Ver. I. μετὰ ταῦτα, “after this”; 
how long after does not concern the 
narrative.—jv ἑορτὴ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. See 
critical note. Even if the article were 
the true reading, this would not, as 
Liicke has shown, determine the feast 
to be the Passover. Rather it would 
be Tabernacles, see W.H. ii. 76. Weare 
thrown upon general considerations :and 
that these yield a very uncertain result 
is shown by the variety of opinion ex- 
pressed by commentators. The feasts 
we have to choose from are: Purim in 
March, Passover in April, Pentecost in 
May, Tabernacles in October, Dedica- 
tion in December. It is chiefly between 
Purim and Passover that opinion is 
divided, because some feast in spring is 
supposed to be indicated by iv. 35. 
Against Passover it is urged that in chap. 
vi. another Passover is mentioned ; but 
this is by no means decisive, as John 
elsewhere passes over equally long 
intervals of time. Lampe, Lightfoot, 
Grotius, Whitelaw, and Wordsworth 
argue tor Passover: Tischendorf, Meyer, 


736 


a Neh.iii.1. εἲς “Ἱεροσόλυμα. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


2. Ἔστι δὲ ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις ἐπὶ τῇ 


eV. 


* 1po- 


βατικῇ κολυµβήθρα, ἡ ἐπιλεγομένη “EBpaioti Βηθεσδὰ,ὶ πέντε 


b Μι. i, 30. στοὰς ἔχουσα. 


Acts ix. 


3. ἐν ταύταις 


Ῥκατέκειτο πλῆθος πολὺ τῶν ἆσθε- 


33. νούντων, τυφλῶν, χωλῶν, ξηρῶν, ἐκδεχομένων τὴν τοῦ ὕδατος κίνησιν.2 


4. ἄγγελος γὰρ κατὰ καιρὸν κατέβαινεν ἐν τῇ κολυµβήθρα, καὶ 


ἐτάρασσε τὸ ὕδωρ" 6 οὖν πρῶτος ἐμβὰς μετὰ τὴν ταραχὴν τοῦ 


δδ « AS Peet? 9 / κά , 8 
voaTos, uytys ΕΥΙΥΕΤΟ; ® δήποτε κατειχετο νοσηµατι. 


ς ili. 1. 
d viii. 57; 
xi. 17. 


1 Βηθεσδα ACI Syr. Cur. Pesh. Orig. Chrys. 
σαιδα B vulg. Memph. Theb. Syr. Harcl. 


5. "Hy δέ 


ο ” > “~ 9 ” dado. 2 ~ ld 
τις ἄνθρωπος ἐκεῖ τριακονταοκτὼ ἔτη “exwv ἐν TH ἀσθενεία. 
6. τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς κατακείµενον, καὶ γνοὺς ὅτι πολὺν ἤδη 


Βηθζαθα (or Βηζαθα) NL 33. Bye» 


Σ εκδεχοµενον την του νδατος κινησιν in ΑΣ0ΣΕΙ vet. Lat. codd. plur. syrr. (Ρε5Η.. 
Harcl. Hier.); omitted from ΝΑ3ΒΟΤ, and by recent editors. 
5 Ver. 4 found in AC7EFGHIKL vet. Lat., etc., but omitted from $¥BC*D vulg, 


Memph. Theb. Arm. and by recent editors. 


But Oscar Holtzmann pronounces it 


necessary for the understanding of the narrative ; and it is quite in keeping with the 
Jewish conception of the ministry of angels. 


Godet, Farrar, Weiss, and others strongly 
favour Purim; while Liicke seems to 
prove that no sure conclusion can be 
reached. [For a full and fair presentation 
of opinions and data see Andrew’s Life 
of our Lord, p. 189 sqq.] The feast, what- 
ever it was, is mentioned here to account 
for Jesus being again in Jerusalem.— 
Ver. 2. ἔστι δὲ ἐν τοῖς “Ἱεροσολύμοις. 
From the use of the present tense Bengel 
concludes that this was written before 
the destruction of Jerusalem [‘* Scripsit 
Johannes ante vastationem urbis’’]. But 
quite probably John considered the pool 
one of the permanent features of the city. 
Its position is more precisely defined in 
the words ἐπὶ τῇ προβατικῇ, rendered in 
A.V. ‘by the sheep market” and in 
R.V. ‘“‘ by the sheep gate”. Others read 
κολυµβήθρᾳ, and render “‘by the sheep- 
pool a pool”; Weiss,’ adopting this 
reading, supplies οἰκία or some such 
word: ‘there is by the sheep-pool a 
building”. But this does some violence 
to the sentence; and as the “sheep 
gate” is mentioned in Neh. iii. 32, xii. 
39, the reading, construction, and render- 
ing of R.V. are to be preferred.—7* ém- 
λεγομένη Ἑβραϊστὶ Βηθεσδά. The pool 
has recently been identified. M. Clermont 
Ganneau pointed out that its site should 
not be far from the church of St. Anne, 
and in 1888 Herr Shick found in that 
locality two sister pools, one fifty-five 
and the other sixty feet long. The former 
was arched in by five arches, while five 
corresponding porches ran alongside the 
pool. By the crusaders a church had 


been bwilt over this pool, with a crypt 
framed in imitation of the five porches 
and with an opening in the floor to get 
down to the water. That they regarded 
this pool as that mentioned here is shown 
by their having represented on the wall 
of the crypt the angel troubling the 
water. [Herr Shick’s papers are con- 
tained in the Palestine Quarterly, 1888, 
ΡΡ. 115-134, and 1890, p. 19. See also 
St. Clair’'s Buried Cities, Henderson’s- 
Palestine, p. 180.) The pool had five 
porches. Bovet describes the bath of 
Ibrahim near Tiberias: ‘The hall :n 
which the spring is found is surrounded 
by several porticoes in which we see 2: 
multitude of people crowded one upon 
another, laid on couches -or rolled in 
blankets, with lamentable expressions of 
misery and suffering”. Here lay πλῆθος 
τῶν ἀσθενούντων, and these were of three 
kinds, τυφλῶν, χωλῶν, Eqpav.—Ver. 3. 
ἐκδεχομένων . . . νοσήµατι. See critical 
note.—Ver. 5. ἦν δέτις ἄνθρωπος... 
ἀσθενείᾳ. ‘ And there was a certain man 
there who had spent thirty-eight years in 
his infirmity: ” ἔτη ἔχων, of. ν. 6 and viii. 
57; and Achil. Tat.,24. How-long he had 
lain by the water is not said. To find in 
the man’s thirty-eight years’ imbecility a. 
symbol of Israel’s thirty-eight years in the 
wilderness is itself an imbecility.—Ver. 6. 
Jesus when He saw the man lying and 
had ascertained (γνοὺς, having learned 
from the man or his friends) that already 
he had passed a long time (in that in- 
firmity) says: θέλεις ὑγιὴς γενέσθαι; 
“Do you wish to become whole 


2—13. 


Xpovov ἔχει, λέγει αὐτῷ, “@€ders Syrjs γενέσθαι ;” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


τη, 


7. ἀπεκρίθη 


9 α , ~ a 
αὐτῷ 6 ἀσθενῶν, '' Κύριε, ἄνθρωπον οὐκ ἔχω, ἵνα ὅταν “ταραχθῇ τὸ ε Ezek. 


ὕδωρ, βάλλη µε εἰς τὴν κολυµβήθραν: 
πρὸ ἐμοῦ καταβαίνει. 
τὸν ’ κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει. 


ὁ ἄνθρωπος, καὶ Ἶρε τὸν κράββατον αὐτοῦ, καὶ περιεπάτει. 
IO. Ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι { Josh. vi. 


δὲ σάββατον /év ἐκείνη TH ἡμέρα. 


Αρ 


8. Λέγει αὐτῷ 


XXXii. 2. 


{ἐν ᾧ δὲ ἔρχομαι ἐγὼ, ἄλλος f Mk. ii. 19, 
e 


ς 


ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “5 


Cc. 
Eyetpat,! dpov g Mk. ii. rx 
ϱ. Kat εὐθέως ἐγένετο ὑγιὴς b Mk. ii. 4, 
is. 9. “ne 
ην] Mk. iii. 1. 


τῷ τεθεραπευµένω, “EaBBatdv ἐστιν" οὐκ ἔξεστί σοι dpar τὸν 


κράββατον.” 


ἐκεῖνός µοι εἶπεν, ᾿Αρον τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει. 


11. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς, ““O "ποιήσας pe 


* ὑγιῆ, k ver. 15; 
Vii. 13. 


, 
12. ᾿Ηρώτησαν οὖν αὐτὸν, “Tis ἐστιν 6 ἄνθρωπος 6 εἰπών σοι, 


"Apov τὸν κράββατόν σου, καὶ περιπάτει; 
δει τίς | ἐστιν: ὁ γὰρ ᾿Ιησοῦς ™ ἐξένευσεν, ὄχλου ὄντος ἐν τῷ τόπω. 


1 1. 4ο. 
14. Ὁ δὲ ἰαθεὶς οὖκ πι νι. 50. 
2 Kings ii 
24. 


1 εγειρε as in S$ABCD;; restored by modern editors in all places of its occurrence. 
Intrans. in Eph. v. 14, etc. ; vide Thayer, cp. ver. 41. 


(healthy) ?” This question was put to 
attract the man’s attention and awaken 
hope. But the man is hopeless: it is 
not a question of will, he says, but of 
opportunity. His very weakness enabled 
others to anticipate him; ἐν ᾧ ἔρχομαι 
ἐγὼ, ‘‘ while Iam coming,” he could, then, 
move a little, but not quickly enough. At 
each bubbling up of the water, apparently 
only one could be healed. The ἄλλος 
πρὸ ἐμοῦ καταβαίνει was a great agera- 
vation of his case.—Ver. 8. The impo- 
tent man having declared his helpless- 
ness, Jesus says to him, Ἔγειρε a 
command to be obeyed on the moment 
by faith in Him who gave it. Cf. vi. 63, 
and Augustine’s ‘‘ Da quod jubes, et jube 
quod vis”. Gpov τὸν κράββατόν σον, 
“take up your pallet”. κράββατος is 
the Latin grabatus, and is late Greek; 
see Rutherford’s New Phryn., 137; and 
McLellan’s Greek Test., p. 106, for re- 
ferences and anecdote. He was com- 
manded to take up his bed that he might 
recognise that the cure was permanent. 
No doubt many of the cures at the pool 
were merely temporary. Ἠπεριπάτει 
“walk,” ability was given not merely to 
rise, but to walk. The cures wrought by 
Christ are perfect, and do not only give 
some relief.—Ver. 9. καὶ εὐθέως . . . Im- 
mediately on Christ’s word he became 
strong, and took up his bed and walked: 
Ἶρε aorist of one act, περιεπάτει im- 
perfect of continued action. Ver. το 
should begin with the words ἦν δὲ 
σάββατον, as this is the starting-point 
for what follows.—Ver. το. ‘It was a 
Sabbath on that day,” the Jews there- 


fore said to him that had been healed, 
Σάββατόν ἐστιν, ‘It is Sabbath”. οὐκ 
ἔξεστί σοι Gpat τὸν κράββατον. The 
law is laid down in Exod. xxiii. 12; Jer. 
xvii. 21. ‘‘ Take heed to yourselves and 
bear no burden on the Sabbath day ;”’ cf. 
Neh. xiii. 15. The rabbinical law ran: 
“Whosoever on the Sabbath bringeth 
anything in, or taketh anything out from 
a public place to a private one, if he hath 
done this inadvertently, he shall sacrifice 
for his sin ; but if wilfully, he shall be cut 
off and shall be stoned” (Lightfoot zn 
loc.).—Ver. 11. The man’s reply reveals 
a higher law than that of the Sabbath, 
the fundamental principle of all Christian 
obedience: ‘O ποιήσας . . . περιπάτει. 
He that gives life is the proper authority 
for its use.—Ver. 12. As the healed man 
transferred the blame to another, ἠρώ- 
τησαν . . . περιπάτει.. ‘Who is the 
man,” rather, ‘the fellow?” ὁ ἄνθρωπος 
used contemptuously. As Grotius says: 
**Quaerunt non quod mirentur, sed quod 
calumnietur”.—Ver. 13. But the man 
could give them no information. He did 
not know the name of his healer. 6 γὰρ 
᾿Ιησοῦς ἐξένευσεν, “for Jesus had with- 
drawn” or ‘‘turned aside”. ἐκνεύω, 
from νεύω, to bend the head, rather than 
ἐκνέω, to swim out. Cf. Judges iv. 18 
(where, however, Dr. Swete reads ἔκ- 
κλινον), xviii. 26. See also Thayer and 
Wetstein. The reason why Jesus took 
Himself away, and the explanation of 
His doing so without observation, are 
both given in ὄχλον ὄντος ἐν τῷ τόπω. 
He did not wish observation and it was 
easy to escape in the crowd.—Ver. 14. 


47 


738 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


V. 


A , a a ~ ~ 
14. Mera ταῦτα εὑρίσκει αὐτὸν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, 


«δε ὑγιὴς Ὑέγονας' µηκέτι ἁμάρτανε, ἵνα μὴ χεῖρόν τί σοι 


yévntar. 15. ᾿Απῆλθεν ὁ 
Li. 40. ὅτι “Ingods | ἐστιν 6 * 
k ver. 15; 
Vii. 13, 
αὐτὸν ἀποκτεῖναι,ὶ 
n ii. IO. 
O Vil. 23; Χ. 5 , 3» 
35. Mt. ἐργάζομαι. 
ν. Ig. 


1 The clause eat... 
posed to have been derived from ver. 18. 
this clause be read. 


Though the healed man had failed to 
keep hold of Jesus, Jesus does not lose 
hold of him, but εὑρίσκει αὐτὸν ἐν τῷ 
ἱερῷ, “finds him,” as if He had been 
looking out for him, cf. i. 44, 46, “in the 
temple,’’ where he may have gone to 
give God thanks. Jesus says to him 
δε ὑγιὴς γέγονας . . . Ὑένηται. µηκέτι 
ἀμάρτανε, present imperative, “‘ continue 
no longer in sin”. yxetpov. There is 
then some worse consequence of sin than 
thirty-eight years’ misery and useless- 
ness. Apparently Jesus feared that health 
of body might only lead the man to 
further sin. His physical weakness was 
seemingly the result of sin, cf. Mark ii. 
5-10. Jesus is not satisfied with giving 
him physical health. Oscar Holtzmann 
observes that we have here the two lead- 
ing Pauline ideas, that the Saviour frees 
from many O.T. precepts, and yet that 
His emancipation is a call to strive 
against sin (¥ohan., p. 60).—Ver. 15. 
ἀπῆλθεν 6 ἄνθρωπος. “ The man went off 
and reported to the Jews that the person 
who healed him was Jesus. He had 
asked His name, and perhaps did not 
consider that in proclaiming it he was 
endangering his benefactor.—Ver. 16. 
The consequence however was that “‘ the 
Jews persecuted Jesus,” ἐδίωκον, not in 
the technical sense ; but, as the imperfect 
also suggests, they began from this 
point to meditate hostile action; cf. 
Mark iii. 6. καὶ ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἀποκ- 
τεῖναι, on the ground that He was a 
Sabbath-breaker, and therefore worthy 
of death; ὅτι ταῦτα ἐποίει ἐν σαββάτῳ. 
The plural and the imperfect show that 
the cure of the impotent man was not 
the only case they had in view. Their 
allies in the provinces had made them 
acquainted with similar cases. It would 
almost seem as if He was in the habit of 


@ a 
ὅτι ταῦτα ἐποίει ἐν σαββάτῳ. 


ἄνθρωπος, καὶ ἀνήγγειλε τοῖς ουδαίοις, 
4 . ἃ 3 ~ 

ποιήσας αὐτὸν ὑγιῆ. 

16. Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἐδίωκον τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ot ᾽Ιουδαῖοι, καὶ ἐζήτουν 


17. ὁ δὲ Ιησοῦς 


, a 
ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτοῖς, ““O πατήρ µου ” ἕως ἄρτι ἐργάζεται, κἀγὼ 
18. Ata τοῦτο οὖν μᾶλλον ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι 
ἀποκτεῖναι, ὅτι οὐ µόνον "ἔλυε τὸ σάββατον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πατέρα 


αποκτειναι is found in A, but not in S$BCDL, and is sup- 


But µαλλον in ver. 18 is pointless unless 


thus signalising the Sabbath.—Ver. 17. 
In some informal way these accusations 
were brought to the ears of Jesus, and 
His defence was: ‘O πατήρ pov... 
ἐργάζομαι. ‘My Father until now 
works, and I work”; as if the work of 
the Father had not come to an end on 
the seventh day, but coritinued until the 
present hour. Nay, as ifthe characteristic 
of the Father were just this, that He 
works. Philo perceived the same truth ; 
παύεται οὐδέποτε ποιῶν ὁ Beds ἀλλ' 
ὥσπερ ἴδιον τὸ καίειν πυρὸς καὶ χίονος 
τὸ ψύχειν, οὕτω καὶ Θεοῦ τὸ ποιεῖν. 
God never stops working, for as it is the 
property of fire to burn and of snow to 
be cold so of God to work (De allegor., 
ii. See Schoettgen in Joc.). Jesus means 
them to apprehend that there is no 
Sabbath, such as they suppose, with 
God, and that this healing of the im- 
potent was God’s work. The Father 
does not rest from doing good on the 
Sabbath day, and I as the Father’s hand 
also do good on the Sabbath. Incharging 
Him with breaking the Sabbath (ver. 18), 
it was God they charged with breaking it. 
But this exasperated them the more “ be- 
cause He not only was annulling (ἔλνε, 
‘laws, as having binding force, are likened 
to bonds, hence λύειν is to annul, subvert, 
deprive of authority,’ Thayer) the Sab- 
bath, but also said that God was His own 
Father, making Himself equal to God”. 
The Jews found in 6 πατήρ pov (ver. 17) 
and the implication in kayo ἐργάζομαι 
a claim to some peculiar and exclusive 
(ἴδιον) sonship on the part of Jesus; that 
He claimed to be Son of God not in the 
sense in which other men are, but in a 
sense which involved equality with God. 
Starting from this, Jesus took occasion to 
untold His relation to the Father so far 
as it concerned men to know it. 


14-24. 


Ρἴδιον ἔλεγε τὸν Θεὸν, ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ Θεῷ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Tao 


, ... 
19. ἀπεκρίνατο p Rom. viii 
32. 1Cor 


οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “'᾽Αμὴν ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ob δύναται vii. 2. 
ὁ υἱὸς ποιεῖν Tad’ ἑαυτοῦ οὐδὲν, ἐὰν py τι βλέπῃ τὸν πατέρα q viii. 28;ix 


ποιοῦντα: ἃ yap ἂν ἐκεῖνος tou, ταῦτα καὶ 6 


J ; x. 18. 


ca ς , α 
ULOS ομοίως ποιει. 


2ο. " ὁ γὰρ πατὴρ Φιλεῖ τὸν υἱὸν, καὶ πάντα δείκνυσιν αὐτῷ ἃ αὐτὸς τν. ο. 


ποιεῖ: καὶ ' μείζονα τούτων δείξει αὐτῷ ἔργα, ἵνα ὑμεῖς θαυµάζητε. s xiv. τ., 


21. ὥσπερ yap ὁ πατὴρ ἐγείρει τοὺς 
22. 


καὶ ὁ υἱὸς οὓς θέλει ζωοποιεῖ. 


The passage 19-30 divides itself thus: 
vv. 109, 20 exhibit the ground of the 
Son’s activity in the Father’s activity 
and love for the Son; vv. 21-23, the 
works given by the Father to the Son 
are, generally, life-giving and judging ; 
vv. 24-27, these works in the spiritual 
sphere; vv. 28-29, in the physical 
sphere; and ver. 30, reaffirmation of 
unity with the Father.—Ver. 19. The 
fundamental proposition is οὐ δύναται 
6 vids ποιεῖν ad’ ἑαυτοῦ οὐδέν. ‘The 
Son can do nothing of Himself.” This 
is not, as sometimes has been supposed, 
a general statement true of all sons, but 
is spoken directly of Jesus. δύναται is 
moral not physical ability—though here 
the one implies the other; but cf. ver. 
26. So perfect is the Son’s sympathy 
with the Father that He can only do 
what He sees the Father doing. He 
does nothing at His own instance. That 
is to say, in healing the impotent man 
He felt sure He was doing what the 
Father wished done and gave Him 
power to do.—a γὰρ » ποιεῖ, as 
Holtzmann observes, the force of the 
repetition lies in ὁμοίως, pariter, ‘in 
like manner ”’.—Ver. 20. And the Son 
is enabled to see what the Father does, 
because He loves the Son and shows 
Him all that He Himself does. The 
Father is not passive in the matter, 
merely allowing Jesus to discover what 
He can of the Father’s will; but the 
Father δείκννσιν, shows Him, inwardly 
and in response to His own readiness to 
perceive, not mechanically but spiritually, 
all that He does; πάντα apparently 
without limitation, for ποιεῖ is habitual 
present as φιλεῖ in previous clause, and 
cannot be restricted to the things God 
was then doing in the case of the im- 
potent man. Besides, a merely human 
sonship scarcely satisfies the absolute 6 
πατήρ and 6 vids of this passage.—kat 
µείζονα . . . Oavpalnre, the Father 
through the Son will do greater works 
than the healing of the impotent man; 
cf. xiv. 12; “that ye may marvel”; 


A Wien pests) 
νεκροὺς καὶ ζωοποιεῖ, * οὕτω | xi, ος. 
5) 5 


“odd€ γὰρ 6 πατὴρ κροαν ο 


this seems an inadequate motive, but 
ver. 23 explains it. In the following 
passage, spiritual quickening is meant 
in vv. 21-27, while in vv. 28, 29, it is 
the bodily resurrection that is in view.— 
Ver. 21. ὥσπερ yap . . . ζωοποιεῖ. 
This is one of the ‘greater works” 
which the Father shows to the Son. 
The Jews believed in the power of God 
to give life and to raise the dead; see 
Deut. xxxii. 39; 1 Sam. ii. 6; Is. xxvi 
1g. In our Lord’s time there was in use 
the following prayer: ‘‘Thou, O Lord, 
art mighty for ever; Thou quickenest 
the dead; Thou art strong to save; Thou 
sustainest the living by Thy mercy; 
Thou quickenest the dead by Thy great 
compassion; Thou makest good Thy 
faithfulness to them that sleep in the 
dust; Thou art faithful to quicken the 
dead. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who 
quickenest the dead.” There is there- 
fore no need to ask, what quickening of 
the dead is here meant? What was 
meant was that the power which they all 
believed to be in God was likewise in the 
Son. He quickens οὓς θέλει, {.6., no 
matter how dead the person is; even 
though he has lain as long useless as the 
impotent man. The question of the 
human will is not touched here, but it 
may be remarked that the will of the 
impotent man was consulted as the prime 
requisite of the cure.—Ver. 22. But not 
only does the Son quicken whom He 
will, but He also judges; οὐδὲ γὰρ... 
vig. ‘For not even does the Father 
judge any one, but has given all judgment 
to the Son.” ‘For since He knows 
Himself to be the sole mediator of true 
life for men, He can also declare that all 
those who will not partake through Him 
of this blissful life, just therein experience 
judgment whereby they sink into death.” 
Wendt, ii. 211; and cf. νετ. 27. οὐδὲ yap 
introduces the fresh statement, that He 
judges, not only as the reason for what 
goes before, but on its own account also, 
as an additional fact to be noticed. It 
would seem an astonishing thing that 


Vv. 


ς 


μὴ τιμῶν τὸν υἱὸν, 
24. ᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω 


25. ᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι 


740 ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 
οὐδένα, ἀλλὰ τὴν κρίσιν πᾶσαν δέδωκε τῷ vid: 23. ἵνα πάντες 
τιμῶσι τὸν υἱὸν, καθὼς τιμῶσι τὸν πατέρα. ὁ 
οὐ τιμᾷ τὸν πατέρα τὸν πέµψαντα αὐτόν. 
ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ τὸν λόγον µου ἀκούων, Kal πιστεύων τῷ πέμψαντί µε, 
vi ]ο. 11. έχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον' καὶ εἰς κρίσιν οὐκ ἔρχεται, ἀλλὰ ” µεταβέβηκεν 
fs ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου eis τὴν ζωήν. 
w iv. 23. 


wr 2 7 A > @ ε 4 > ; 1 an ~ 
ερχεται ωρα και νυν εστιν, οτε οἱ νεκροι ὀκουσονται ΄ Της Φωνῆς 


1 ακουσονται in ΑΓΓ; ακουσουσιν in B, adopted by T.Tr.W.H.R. Soin ver. 28. 


even ‘‘judgment,” the allotting of men 
to their eternal destinies, should be 
handed over to the Son. But so it is: 
and without exception, τὴν κρίσιν πᾶσαν, 
‘all judgment,” of all men and without 
appeal.—Ver. 23. This extreme pre- 
rogative is given to the Son ἵνα πάντες 
τιμῶσι τὸν υἱὸν .. . This is one pur- 
pose, though not the sole purpose, of 
committing judgment to the Son; that 
even those supremely and inalienably 
Divine prerogatives of giving life and 
judging may be seen to be in Him, and 
that thus Deity may be honoured in and 
through Him. The great peril threaten- 
ing the Jews was that they should deny 
honour to the Son, and hereby incur the 
guilt of refusing honour to the Father. 
In denouncing Him for breaking the 
Sabbath they were really dishonouring 
the Father. ὁ μὴ τιμῶν . . « αὐτόν. μὴ 
τιμῶν a supposed case, therefore py: οὐ 
τιµᾷ actual negation. To dishonour the 
Father’s messenger is to dishonour the 
Father. Having explained the relation 
of His work to the Father’s, and having 
declared that life-giving and judging are 
His prerogatives, Jesus now, in vv. 24- 
30, more definitely shows how these 
powers are to be exercised in the spiritual 
regeneration, and in the resurrection and 
final judgment of men. Vv. 24-26. 
The voice of Jesus gives life eternal. 
ἁμὴν, ἀμὴν, however incredible what I 
now say may seem.—Ver. 24. 6 τὸν λόγον 
pov ἀκούων; it was through His word 
Jesus conveyed life to the impotent man, 
because that brought Him into spiritual 
connection with the man. And it is 
thzough His claims, His teaching, His 
ofiers, He brings Himself into connection 
with all. It is a general truth not con- 
fined to the impotent man. But to 
hear is not enough: καὶ πιστεύων τῷ 
wépWavti pe, belief on Him that sent 
Jesus must accompany hearing. Not 
simply belief on Jesus but on God, The 
word of Jesus must be recognised as a 
Divine message, a word with power to 


fulfil it. In this case, by the very hearing 
and believing, ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον. As 
the impotent man had, in his believing, 
physical life, so whoever believes in 
Christ’s word as God’s message receives 
the life of God into his spirit. Faith has 
also a negative result; eis κρίσιν οὐκ 
ἔρχεται [cf. οὐκ ἐθελόντων ὑμῶν ἐλθεῖν 
eis κρίσιν, quoted from Demosthenes by 
Wetstein. Herodotus also uses the ex- 
pression]. Literally this means ‘he 
does not come to trial’’; but has it not 
the fuller meaning ‘‘come under con- 
demnation’’? Meyer says ‘‘ yes”’: Godet 
says πο”. Meyerisright. This clause 
is the direct negative of the former: to 
come to judgment is to come under 
condemnation, ¢f. iii. 19, αὕτη δὲ ἐστιν 
ἡ κρίσις, etc. ἀλλὰ µεταβέβηκεν ἐκ τοῦ 
θανάτου εἰς τὴν ζωήν. The perfect shows 
(x) that the previous ἔχει is an actual 
present, and does not merely mean “has. 
in prospect”’ or “has a right to”; and 
(2) that the result of the transition con- 
tinues. Had the impotent man not 
believed and obeyed, he would have re- 
mained in his living death, in now a self- 
chosen and self-fixed condemnation: but 
accepting the life that was in Christ’s 
command, he passed there and then from 
death to life.—Ver. 25. ᾽Αμὴν . . . in- 
troducing a confirmation of the preced- 
ing statement, in the form of an an- 
nouncement of one characteristic of the 
new dispensation; ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ νῦν 
ἐστιν, cf. ἵν.3. In this already arrived 
‘hour’ or epoch, the message of God 
is uttered by the voice of Jesus, τῆς 
φωνῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ and of vex- 
pot, they who have not made the transi- 
tion spoken of in the preceding verse, 
ἀκούσονται, Shall hear it; καὶ ot ἀκού- 
σαντες ζήσονται [or ζήσουσιν], not “and 
having heard shall live,” ποτ ‘and 
when they hear shall live”; but ‘and 
those who have heard for hear] shall 
live’’, The insertion of the article in- 
dicates that not all, but only a certain 
class of the νεκροί are meant: all the 


ϱ3-- 27. 


A a - a , 
τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ οἱ ἀκούσαντες ζήσονται.ὶ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


741 


26. ὥσπε ap Oxi. το. 
reat Wisd. 


Q 3” 9 3 c ~ o 3, 4 ~ ta ‘ ” 3 as 
πα εχει ἑωην εν εαυτω, ουτως ἔδωκε και τω ULW ζωὴν εχειν ἐν κχνι. 2. 
δν t ‘ 


~ ~ , coy) a c 
ἑαυτῷ: 27. καὶ *éfouciay ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ καὶ ” κρίσιν ποιεῖν, ὅτι υἱὸς 


y Gen. xviii, 
25. 


1 Modern editors read ζησουσι with NBDL 1, 22, 33. 


dead hear but not all give ear (Weiss). 
ἀκουσούσιν in the former clause means 
hearing with the outward ear, ἀκούσαντες 
hearing with faith. The question, how 
can the spiritually dead hear and believe ? 
is the question, how could the impotent 
man rise in response to Christ’s word ? 
Perhaps psychologically inexplicable, it 
is, happily, soluble in practice.—Ver. 26. 
The 26th verse partly explains the 
apparent impossibility. domep γὰρ... 
ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ. ‘ The particles mark 
the fact of the gift and not the degrees of 
it’? (Westcott). As the Father has in 
Himself, and therefore at His own com- 
mand, life which He can impart as He 
will: so by His gift the Son has in Himself 
life which He can communicate directly 
to whom He will.—év ἑαντῷ [similarly 
used Mk. iv. 17, John iv. 14, etc.] excludes 
dependence for life on anything external 
toself. From this it follows that what is 
so possessed is possessed with uninter 
rupted fulness, and can at will be im- 
parted. —éSwxe, ‘‘ the tense carries us back 
beyond time,” says Westcott. This is 
more than doubtful ; although several in- 
terpreters suppose the eternal generation 
of the Son is inview. That is precluded 
both by the word “‘ gave [ which “‘ denotat 
id quod non per naturalem generationem, 
sed per benevolam Patris voluntatem est 
concessum,” Mt. xxviii. 18 Lk. i. 32; 
John iii. 34, vi. 37, Lampe] and by the 
context, especially by the last clause of 
ver. 27. The opinions of the Fathers 
and Reformers are cited in Lampe. See 
further Stevens, fohan. Theol., p. 60.— 
Ver. 27. Not only has the Father given 
to the Son this great prerogative, but 
καὶ ἐξουσίαν . . . ἀνθρώπου ῥἐστί. 
κρίσιν ποιεῖν, like judicium facere, and 
our do judgment, is used by Demosthenes, 
Xenophon, Polybius, etc., in the 
sense ‘‘to judge,” ‘‘to act as judge’’. 
This climax of authority [although καὶ 
is omitted before κρίσιν by recent editors 
on good authority] is based upon the 
fact ὅτι vids ἀνθρώπον ἐστί. [Strangely 
enough, Chrysostom ascribes this 
punctuation to Paul of Samosata, and 
declares it to be an inconsequence. He 
himself begins ver. 28 with this clause, 
and reads ‘‘ marvel not at this, that He 
is the Son of Man’’.] The absence ot 


the article condemns all interpretations 
which render these words ‘‘ the Son of 
Man ”’ and understands that Jesus claims 
the prerogative of judgment as the 
Messiah. Where “the Son of Man” 
means the Messiah the articles regularly 
appear. Besides, direct allusion to the 
Messianic functions would here be out 
of place. The words must be rendered 
‘‘ because He is a son of man,’’ that is, 
a man. How is this a reason for His 
being Judge of men? Various explana- 
tions are given: the Judge must be 
visible since the judgment is to take 
place with human publicity (Luther. 
Maldonatus, Witsius), because as man 
the Son carries out the whole work of 
redemption (Meyer, etc.), because men 
should be judged by the lowliest and 
most loving of men (Stier), because the 
Judge must share the nature of those 
who are brought before Him (Westcott), 
because only as man could Jesus enter 
into the sphere in which the judicial 
office moves or have the compassion 
which a judge of men should possess 
(Baur), because the judgment of 
humanity is to be a homage rendered 
to the holiness of God, a true act of 
adoration, a worship; and therefore the 
act must go forth from the bosom of 
humanity itself (Godet). But un- 
doubtedly Beyschlag is right when he 
says: ‘‘ The eternal love condemns no 
one because he is a sinner; as such it 
does not at all condemn; it leaves it to 
men to judge themselves, through rejec- 
tion of the Saviour who is presented to 
them. The Son of Man is the judge of 
the world, just because He presents the 
eternal life, the kingdom of heaven to 
all, and urges all to the eternal decision, 
and thus urges those who continue un- 
believing to a continuing self-judgment”’ 
(Neutest. Theol.,i. 290). By His appear- 
ing in human form as God’s messenger, 
and by His offer of life eternal, He 
necessarily judges men. As His offer of 
life to the impotent man tested him and 
showed whether he would abide in death 
or pass into life: so are all men judged 
precisely by that appearance among 
them in human torm which stumbles 
them and tempts them to think His 
claims absurd, and which yet as the em- 


742 


z Acc. of 
obj. in Lk. 
Vi. 9; 
XXiv. 12. 


ἀνθρώπου ἐστί. 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


Vv. 


28. μὴ "θαυμάζετε τοῦτο" ὅτι ἔρχεται dpa, ἐν 
ᾗ πάντες οἱ ἐν τοῖς µνηµείοις ἀκούσονται τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ, 29. καὶ 


Jude 16. ἐκπορεύσονται, οἱ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιήσαντες, cis ἀνάστασιν ζωῆς: οἱ δὲ 


Acts vii. 


31. Com- τὰ "φαῦλα πράξαντες, Peis ἀνάστασιν κρίσεως. 


monly 


with ἐπί. ἐγὼ ποιεῖν "ἀπ᾿ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐδέν. 


α 1.2. κε 
b Dan. xii. 1} 


2. 
ς ver. I9. 
d vii. 18; 

Vili. 50. 


30. οὐ δύναμαι 
‘ > , , νά. ’ 
καθὼς ἀκούω, κρίνω: καὶ ἡ κρίσις 


ἐμὴ δικαία ἐστίν: ὅτι οὐ ἆζητῶ τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμὸν, ἀλλὰ τὸ 
θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός µε πατρός.ὶ 


31. ᾿Εὰν ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ 


1 Modern editors omit πατρος in accordance with NABDK. 


bodied love and life of God necessarily 
judges men. Therefore μὴ θαυμάζετε 
tovro.—Ver. 28. And another reason 
for restraining surprise is ὅτι ἔρχεται 
ὥρα, etc. It has been proposed to 
render this as if ὅτι were explanatory of 
τοῦτο, do not wonder at this, that an 
hour is coming. But (1) τοῦτο usually, 
though not invariably, refers to what 
precedes ; and (2) when John says ‘“‘ Do 
not wonder that’’ so and so, he uses μὴ 
θαυμάσῃς ὅτι without τοῦτο; and (3) 
the ordinary rendering suits the passage 
better : Marvel not at this [that my voice 
gives life] because a time is coming when 
there will result from my voice that 
which if not really greater will strike you 
more sensibly. The bodily resurrection 
may be said to be greater than the 
spiritual as its consummation, comple- 
tion, and exhibition in results. Besides, 
the Jews of our Lord’s time looked upon 
the resurrection as the grand demonstra- 
tion of God’s power. But here the ot év 
τοῖς µνηµείοις shows that the surprise is 
to be occasioned by the fact that even 
the physically dead shall hear.—ravres 
- » κρίσεως. That the resurrection is 
alluded to is shown by the change from 
οἱ νεκροί of ver. 25 to οἱ ἐν τοῖς pvnpetots. 
Some rise to life, some to κρίσιν, which 
from its opposition to ζωήν must here be 
equivalent to katakpiow. If it is asked 
with regard to the righteous, With what 
body do they come? much more may 
it be asked of the condemned. The 
entrance into life and into condemnation 
are determined by conduct; how the 
conduct is determined is not here stated. 
For the expressions defining the two 
types of conduct see on chap. iii. 20, 21. 
That the present reception of life is the 
assurance of resurrection is put strikingly 
by Paul in 2 Cor. v. 5. The fact that 
some shall rise to condemnation dis- 
closes that even those who have not the 
Spirit of God in them have some kind Οἱ 
continuous life which maintains thein in 


existence with their personal identity 
intact from the time of death to the time 
of resurrection. Also, that the long 
period spent by some between these two 
points has not been utilised for bringing 
them into fellowship with Christ is 
apparent. In what state they rise or to 
what condition they go, we are not here 
told. Beyond the fact of their condem- 
nation their future is left in darkness, and 
was therefore probably meant to be left 
in darkness.—Ver. 30. This judgment 
claimed by Jesus is, however, engaged 
in, not in any spirit of self-exaltation or 
human arbitrariness, nor can it err, 
because it is merely as the executor of 
the Father’s will He judges.—ot δύναµαι 

. . οὐδέν. The first statement of the 
verse is a return upon ver. 19, ‘‘ The Son 
can do nothing of Himself”; but now it 
is specially applied to the work of judg- 
ment.—Ka@as ἀκούω κρίνω. As He said 
of His giving life, that He was merely 
the Agent of God, doing what He saw 
the Father do: so now He speaks what 
He hears from the Father. His judgment. 
He knows to be just, because He is con- 
scious that He has no personal bias, but 
seeks only to carry out the will of the 
Father. In vv. 31-40 Jesus substantiates 
these great claims which He has made 
in the foregoing verses. He refers to the 
paptupia borne by John the Baptist, by 
the works given Him by the Father, and 
by the Father in Scripture.—Ver. 31. 
Ἐὰν εγὼ μαρτυρῶ . . . ἀληθής. Jesus 
anticipates the objection, that these great 
claims were made solely on His own 
authority [ἔγνω τοὺς Ιουδαίους ἔνθυμον- 
µένους ἀντιθεῖναι, Euthym.]. The Jewish 
law is given by Wetstein, ‘* Testibus de 
se ipsis non credunt,” or ‘‘ Homo non 
est fide dignus de se ipso,” and cf. Deut. 
xix. 15. The same law prevailed among 
the Greeks, μαρτυρεῖν γὰρ οἱ νόμοι οὐκ 
ἐῶσιν αὐτὸν ἑαντῷ (Demosth., De Cor., 
2), and among the Romans, ‘ more 
majorum comparatum est, ut in minimis 


28—35. 


ἐμαυτοῦ, ἡ paptupia µου οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


743 


32. " ἄλλος ἐστὶν ὁ ε viii. 18. 


μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμοῦ, καὶ οἶδα ὅτι ἀληθής ἐστιν ἡ μαρτυρία ἣν 


μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ. 


33- “ Ὑμεῖς ἀπεστάλκατε πρὸς Ἰωάννην, καὶ μεμαρτύρηκε ἕτῇ Εαν. 37. 
ἀληθείᾳ: 34. ἐγὼ δὲ οὗ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου τὴν µαρτυρίαν λαμβάνω, ¢ Perri 
17 Ἰ 


ἀλλὰ ταῦτα λέγω ἵνα ὑμεῖς σωθῆτε. 


καιόµενος καὶ " φαίνων, ὑμεῖς δὲ ἠθελήσατε ἀγαλλιασθῆναι ) πρὸς 


1 αγαλλιαθηναι in NAD; T.R. in BL, 


rebus homines amplissimi testimonium 
de sua re non dicerent” (Cicero, pro 
Roscio, 36, Wetstein). Grotius says: 
‘Romani dicunt neminem idoneum 
testem esse in re sua”. But how can 
Jesus say that if His witness stands 
alone it is not true? Chrysostom says 
He speaks not absolutely but with 
reference to their suspicion [πρὸς τὴν 
ἐκείνων ὑπόνοιαν]. And on occasion He 
can maintain that His testimony of 
Himself is true, chap. viii. 13, where He 
says ‘“‘ Though I witness of myself my 
witness is true,’ and demands that He 
be considered one of the two witnesses 
required. Here the point of view is 
different, and He means: Were I stand- 
ing alone, unauthenticated by the 
Father, my claims would not be worthy 
of credit. But ἄλλος ἐστὶν 6 μαρτυρῶν 
περὶ ἐμοῦ (on the definite predicate with 
indefinite subject vide Winer, p. 136). 
“It is another that beareth witness of 
me,” namely, the Father [σημαίνει τὸν 
ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς ὄντα θεὸν καὶ Πατέρα, 
Cyril, Melanchthon, and the best modern 
interpreters, Holtzmann, Weiss, West- 
cott]. Grotius, following Chrysostom 
and Euthymius, says “ facillimum est ut 
de Johanne sumamus, quia de eo sunt 
quae proxime sequuntur’’. Against this 
is (1) the disclaimer of John’s testimony, 
ver. 34; (2) and especially the accentu- 
ated opposition of ὑμεῖς, νετ. 33, and ἐγώ, 
ver. 34. For other reasons, see Liicke. 
Of this witness Jesus says οἶδα ὅτι ... 
ἐμοῦ. Why this addition? Is it an 
overflow of satisfaction in the unassail- 
able position this testimony gives Him ? 
Rather it is the offset to the supposition 
made in νετ, 31, ‘‘my witness is not 
true’’. [Cyril’s interpretation is in- 
exact, but suggestive: μονονουχὶ τοῦτο 
διδάσκων, ὅτι Θεὸς dv ἀληθινὸς, οἶδα, 
φησὶν, ἐμαυτὸν, κεχαρισµένον δὲ οὐδὲν 
6 Πατὴρ épet περὶ ἐμοῦ.]--Ψετ. 33. 
Before exhibiting the Father’s testimony 
Jesus meets them on their own ground: 
ὑμεῖς, ye yourselves, ἀπεστάλκατε πρὸς 


35. ἐκεῖνος ἦν ἔὁ λύχνος ὁ vi. 20. 
h Phil. ii. 15. 
Mt. ii. 7. 


Ἰωάννην, sent, by the deputation men- 
tioned chap. i., to John; which they would 
not have done had they not thought him 
trustworthy (Euthymius). The perfect 
is used, indicating that the result 
continued; as the perfect μεμαρτύρηκε 
indicates that ‘‘the testimony preserves 
its value notwithstanding the disappear- 
ance of the witness”.—rq ἀληθείᾳ to 
the truth, especially of the Messianic 
dignity of Jesus.—Ver. 34. ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ 
. . . but for my part I do not depend 
upon a man’s testimony. In what sense 
is this to be taken? In iii. 11 λαμβάνειν 
τὴν µαρτυρίαν means ‘‘to credit testi- 
mony,” but this sense does not satisfy 
the present use. Grotius says, ‘ Hic 
λαμβάνω est requiro, ut infra 41, 44, ubi 
in opposito membro ponitur ζητεῖν ut 
idem valens’’. So too Liicke. Godet 
and Westcott prefer to emphasise the 
article, ‘the testimony,” ‘‘ the only real, 
infallible, unexceptionable testimony,” 
I do not accept from man. The sense 
is: You sent to John and he testified to 
the truth; but the testimony which I for 
my part accept and rely upon is not that 
of aman. The testimony which con- 
firms Him in the consciousness that He 
is God’s messenger is not a human but 
a Divine testimony.—éAAa ταῦτα λέγω 
but this I say, that is, this regarding the 
truth of John’s testimony I now mention 
ἵνα ὑμεῖς σωθῆτε, for your sakes, not for 
my own, that even on a man’s testimony 
you may be induced to believe.—Ver. 35. 
ἐκεῖνος ἦν ὁ λύχνος 6 καιόµενος καὶ 
φαίνων, ‘He was (suggesting that now 
the Baptist was dead) the lamp that 
burneth and shineth”’.—6é Ἀύχνος: for 
the difference between λύχνος a lamp 
and λαμπάς a torch, see Trench, 
Synonyms, p. 154, and cf. λαμµπαδη- 
δροµία the Athenian torch-race. The 
article ‘simply marks the familiar piece 
of household furniture” (Westcott). 
‘“The article simply converts the image 
into a definition’’ (Godet). ‘‘ The article 
points him out as the definite light which 


744 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ Vv. 


i Constr. cp. ὥραν ἐν τῷ uti αὐτοῦ. 
Μι.ν. 2ο. 


36. ἐγὼ δὲ ἔχω τὴν µαρτυρίαν µείζω τοῦ 
Ἰωάννου: τὰ γὰρ ἔργα ἃ ἐδωκέ] por ὁ πατὴρ ἵνα τελειώσω αὐτὰ, 


fe. A ” a 2) 8 A a ‘ > - @ c Ul 
auTa Ta εργα α εγω ποιω, µαρτυρει περι εμου οτι ο πατηρ µε 


ἀπέσταλκε: 37. καὶ 6 πέµψας µε πατὴρ, αὐτὸς ” μεμαρτύρηκε περὶ 


j Exod. ἐμοῦ. 
XXVIi. 17. ε 
ἑωράκατε. 


io 5 a > > ~ / ς a > a 
rPs.cxix.2.6Tt ὃν ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος, τούτῳ ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετε. 


οὔτε φωνὴν αὐτοῦ ἀκηκόατε πώποτε, οὔτε  εἶδος αὐτοῦ 
38. καὶ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἔχετε µένοντα ἐν ὑμῖν, 


390. " Ἔρευ- 


I Mt. iii.9. vate® τὰς γραφὰς, ὅτι ὑμεῖς } δοκεῖτε ἐν αὐταῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔχειν, 


1 δεδωκεν in NBL 1, 33. 
3 εραυνατε in QB* ; Tr. Τι. Ν.Π. 


could have shown them the way to salva- 
tion, ver. 34” (Weiss). Others find a 
reference to Ps. cxxxii. 17, ἠτοίμασα 
λύχνον τῷ Χριστῷ σον. Grotius and 
Liicke think the reference is to Ecclus. 
xIviii. 1, καὶ ἀνέστη Ἐλίας προφήτης ὡς 
Tp καὶ 6 λόγος αὐτοῦ ὡς λαμπὰς ἐκαίετο. 
In the medieval Latin Hymns the Baptist 
is ‘“non Lux iste, sedlucerna’’. [Cicero, 
pro Milone, 21, and elsewhere, calls 
certain illustrious citizens ‘ lumina,” 
but with a somewhat different signifi- 
cance.]— 6 καιόµενος, “burning and 
shining are not two different proper- 
ties,’ Meyer; a lamp must burn if it 
is to shine.—vpeis δὲ ἠθελήσατε ἀγαλ- 
λιασθῆναι πρὸς ὥραν ἐν τῷ φωτὶ αὐτοῦ; 
the expression seems intended to 
suggest the thoughtless and brief play 
of insects in the sunshine or round 
alamp. [' Wie die Miicken im Sonnen- 
schein spielen,” Hausrath in Holtzmann.] 
Like children following in a bridal pro- 
cession, dancing in the torchlight: the 
type of sentimental religionists revelling 
in their own emotions.—Ver. 36. ἐγὼ δὲ 
“But I” in contrast to the tpets of ver. 
33, ἔχω τὴν µαρτυρίαν µείζω, “have the 
witness which is greater,” 1.ε., of greater 
weight as evidence than that of John.— 
τὰ γὰρ ἔργα . . . ἀπέσταλκε, ‘the 
works which the Father ἔδωκε [or as 
modern editors read δέδωκεν] to Him” 
comprise all that He was commissioned 
to do, but with a more special reference 
to His miracles. Liicke well says, ‘‘ He 
who looked at the miracles as separate 
and individual displays of supernatural 
power and did not view the entire mani- 
festation of Christ in its solidarity, was 
bound to find the miracles without signifi- 
cance and the latter incomprehensible”. 
The ἔργα are cited as evidence, chaps. x. 
25, 38, and xiv. 11; evidence as here to 
the fact that the Father had sent Him.— 
Ver.37. But over and above the evidence 


Σεκεινος in NBL. The difference here is slight. 


of the works καὶ ὁ πέµψας µε πατήρ, 
αὐτὸς μµεμαρτύρηκε, “And the Father 
who sent me has Himself also testified’’. 
Where and how this testimony of the 
Father’s separate from the works has 
been given, is explained, vv. 38 and 40 
But, first, Jesus states how it has no 
been given: οὔτε φωνὴν αὐτοῦ . . 

ἑωράκατε. It is not by coming into your 
midst in a visible form and speaking as 
I speak that the Father has testified. 
κ His voice you have never heard: His 
form you have never seen.’’ It is not 
by sensible sights and sounds the Father 
has given His testimony. [This inter- 
pretation is however ignored by most: 
by Meyer, who thinks the reference is to 
their insensibility to the revelation of 
God in Scripture; by Westcott, who 
says ‘‘the Jews by their disbelief ot 
Christ failed to hear and see Him”’; 
by Godet, who finds “a declaration ot 
man’s natural impotence to rise to the 
immediate and personal knowledge of 
God”’. Reference to the baptism is put 
out of the question by πώποτε. The 
reference to the two chief forms of 
prophetic revelation (Weiss) is too re- 
mote.J—Ver. 38. καὶ τὸν λόγον... 
you have not heard His voice—as you 
have heard mine (ver. 25)—and His word 
which you have heard, and which has 
been coming to you through all these 
centuries, you do not admit to an abiding 
and influential place within you.—rov 
λόγον αὐτοῦ is God’s revelation, which 
the Jews were conscious they had re- 
ceived; but though the word of God 
had come to them, they did not have it 
‘‘ abiding in” them; cf. 1 John ili, 15; a 
phrase which in John denotes permanent 
possession and abiding influence. God’s 
message does no good until it inwardly 
possesses those to whom it comes. The 
proof that the Jews had not thus received 
itis: ὅτι ὃν ἀπέστειλεν . . . ‘‘whomGod 


36--47. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


745 


4 - Lol ~ - 
καὶ "' ἐκεῖναί εἶσιν at μαρτυροῦσαι περὶ ἐμοῦ: 40. καὶ οὗ θέλετε m1 Pet. i. 


Io, 12. 


3 a“ ο 
ἐλθεῖν πρός µε, ἵνα ζωὴν ἔχητε. 41. "Δόξαν παρὰ ἀνθρώπων οὐ nx Thess. 


λαμβάνω: 42. GAN ἔγνωκα ὑμᾶς, ὅτι "τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐκ 


” 3 ς Ἀ 
εχετε εν EQUTOLS. 


43- ἐγὼ ἐλήλυθα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός µου, 


ii. 6. Ch. 


καὶ οὐ λαμβάνετέ pe ἐὰν ἄλλος ἔλθη ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι τῷ ἰδίῳ, 


ἐκεῖνον λήψεσθε.! 


44. πῶς δύνασθε ὑμεῖς πιστεῦσαι, δόξαν παρὰ 


ἀλλήλων λαμβάνοντες, καὶ τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ 5 µόνου Θεοῦ ρχνή.2. 1 


οὐ ζητεῖτε; 


, ” ε ca lol 3 a € a 3 , 
πατερα ὶ εστιν ο κατηγορων υμων», Μωσῆς, εις ον υμεις ἠλπίκατε. 
3 a > , ~ 2 , 3 , 4 Sy 2 aq 
46 . ει γαρ επιστευετε Mwon, επιστευετε ἂν εμοι 3 περι γαρ εμου 


> ον ” 
ἐκεινος εγραψεν. 
πῶς τοῖς ἐμοῖς ῥήμασι πιστεύσετε; 


Tim. ii. 


45. μὴ δοκεῖτε ὅτι ἐγὼ κατηγορήσω ὑμῶν I πρὸς τὸν 17. Jude 


25. 1Cor. 
Viii. 6. 
πρὸς, 2 
Mac. x. 13. 


47- εἰ δὲ τοῖς ἐκείνου "ypdppacw οὗ πιστεύετε, τ 2 Tim. iii. 


15. Esth. 
νι. 1. 


1 ληµψεσθε in SABDL, adopted in modern editions. 


hath sent, Him ye believe not”. Had 
the revelation or word of God in law 
and prophets possessed them, they would 
inevitably have recognised Jesus as from 
the same source, and as the consumma- 
tion of the message, the fulfilment of the 
promise. Not that the Jews held their 
Scriptures in no esteem, no, (ver. 39), 
ἐρευνᾶτε τὰς γραφάς; the indicative is 
to be preferred, ‘‘ Ye search the Scrip- 
tures’’; the reason being ὅτι ἡὑμεῖς δοκεῖτε 
ἐν αὐταῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἔχειν, “' because 
you suppose that in them you have life 
eternal”—already it is hinted, by the 
. emphatic ὑμεῖς implicitly opposed to a 
contrasted ἐγώ, and by the emphatic ἐν 
αὐταῖς suggesting another source, that 
eternal life was not to be had in the 
Scriptures, but in something else. But 
it is of me these Scriptures themselves 
into which you search testify. καὶ ἐκεῖναι 
... pov. ‘They testify that in me 
is life eternal; and yet you will not come 
to me that you may have life.”—Ver. 4o. 
καὶ οὐ . . . ἔχητε. The true function of 
Scripture is expressed in the words, 
ἐκεῖναί εἰσιν αἱ μαρτυροῦσαι περὶ ἐμοῦ: 
they do not give life, as the Jews thought ; 
they lead to the life-giver. God speaks 
in Scripture with a definite purpose in 
view, to testify to Christ; if Scripture 
does that, it does all. But to set itona 
level with Christ is to do both it, Him, 
and ourselves grave injustice. 

This closes the description of the three- 
fold witness to Christ, and in vv. 41-47, 
He exposes the source of their unbelief. 
This exposure is introduced by a dis- 
claimer on His part of any chagrin 
at the want of homage and acceptance 
He received.—Ver. 41. Δόξαν παρὰ 


ἀνθρώπων οὐ λαμβάνω, not “ glory trom 
men I am not receiving,” not quite 
“glory from men I do not seek,” but 
rather, that which is in my judgment 
glory, I do not receive from men: not 
what men yield me is my _ glory, 
Ambition is not my motive in making 
these claims.—Ver. 42. ἀλλ) ἔγνωκα . . . 
but I know you, etc.; that is, I know 
why you do not receive me; the reason 
is that you have not the love of God 
in yourselves, and therefore cannot ap- 
preciate or understand one who acts in 
concert with God ; if therefore they did 
offer Him homage, it could not be God 
in Him they worshipped (Holtzmann). 
[The motive of Jesus in making His 
claims is a subject inviting inquiry and 
full of significance.]—Ver. 43. ἐγὼ 
ἐλήλνθα . . . It is just because I have 
come in the Father’s name that you do 
not receive me. Not really loving God, 
they could not appreciate and accept 
Jesus who came in God’s name, that is, 
who truly represented God. But ἐὰν 
ἄλλος ἔλθῃ . . . λήψεσθε, “if another 
come in his own name,” and therefore 
seeking only such glory as the Jews 
could give, him ye will receive; cf. Matt. 
xxiv. 5, 23, 24. ‘‘He did not say, ‘If I 
had come in my own name,’ because the 
thing was so inconceivable.’”’ Mason, 
Conditions of our Lord’s Life, etc., p. go. 
Possibly Jesus had here in view Anti- 
christ (see Bousset’s Antichrist, 133); but 
neither Bar Cochba nor any other definite 
Pseudo-Christ. Schudt mentions sixty- 
four.—Ver. 44. The Jewish inability to 
believe arose from their earthly ambition: 
πῶς δύνασθε . . . οὐ ζητεῖτε. The root 
of their unbelief was their earthly idea of 


746 


a Deut. xxx. 
13; cp. 
Pera and 


Γαλιλαίας τῆς Τιβεριάδος - 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


VI. 


VI. 1. ΜΕΤΑ ταῦτα ἀπῆλθεν 6 *Inoods Σπέραν τῆς θαλάσσης τῆς 


2. καὶ ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ ὄχλος πολὺς, 


Saphiodiée’ ὅτι ἑώρων 1 αὐτοῦ” τὰ σημεῖα & ἐποίει ἐπὶ τῶν ἀσθενούντων. 
a τον 3. ἀνῆλθε δὲ εἰς τὸ ὄρος 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἐκεὶ ἐκάθητο μετὰ τῶν 


1 ewpwv in ΝΓΔ Chrys.; εθεωρονν in BDL. 


2 avrov omitted in ΝΑ ΒΕΡ it. vulg. syr. 


glory, what they could win or bestow. This 
incapacitated them from seeing the glory 
of Christ, which was divine and heavenly, 
which men could not give or remove. 
The glory παρὰ ἀλλήλων is contrasted 
with that παρὰ τοῦ µόνου Θεοῦ from the 
only God, the only source, arbiter, and 
dispenser of praise. Seeking credit as 
religious men from one another, they 
necessarily habituated themselves to cur- 
rent ideas, and blotted out Divine glory 
from their mind.—Ver. 45. pm δοκεῖτε 
. . . These words bear in them the mark 
of truth. They spring from Jesus’ own 
consciousness of His intimacy with the 
Father. To suppose that the Jews feared 
He would accuse them, is to suppose 
that they believed Him to have influence 
with God. Chiefly in view is the fact 
that Moses will accuse them. They 
thought they were defending Moses’ law 
in accusing Christ for Sabbath-breaking: 
but, on the contrary, they were them- 
selves open to the accusation of Moses; 
εἰς ὃν ὑμεῖς ἠλπίκατε, in Vulgate ‘ Moy- 
ses in quo vos speratis”’.— Ver. 46. They 
will be accused by Moses because their 
unbelief in Christ convicts them of un- 
belief in Moses, εἶ yap . . . ἐμοί. Had 
they believed the revelation made by 
Moses and understood it, they would 
necessarily have believed in Christ. 
‘* Disbelief in me is disbelief in him, in 
the record of the promises to the patri- 
archs, in the types of the deliverance 
from Egypt, in the symbolic institutions 
of the Law, in the promise of a prophet 
like to himself; for zt was of me (the 
order is emphatic) he wrote,” Westcott. 
—Ver. 47. The converse is true, and 
true with an a fortiori conveyed by the 
contrast between γράµµασιν and ῥήμασι. 
If the writings you have had before you 
for your study all your life, and which 
you have heard read in the Synagogues 
Sabbath after Sabbath, have not produced 
faith in you, and enabled you to see God 
and appreciate His glory, how shall ye 
believe the once heard words of one 
whose coming was prepared for, and His 
identification made easy by all that 
Moses wrote? 


CuaPTeR VI. Fesus miraculously 
furnishes a meal for 5000 men with 
women and children, and thus manifests 
Himself as the Bread from heaven. This 
provokes the crisis in Galilee.—Vv. 1-13. 
The miracle narrated.—Ver. 1. μετὰ 
ταῦτα, John’s indefinite note of time. 
The interval between chap. v. and chap. 
vi. depends on the feast alluded to, v. 1. 
If it was Purim, only a month had 
elapsed ; if it was Passover, a year. In 
any case Jesus had left Jerusalem, the 
reason being that the Jews sought to 
slay Him (vii. 1).--ἀπῆλθεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
“Jesus departed,” but whence? 
Evidently from Capernaum and the 
neighbourhood ; cf. Mt. xiv. 13, Mk. vi. 
30, Lk. ix. 10.—mépav . . . Τιβεριάδος, 
“to the other side of the Sea of Galilee, 
of Tiberias”. In xxi. 1 it is called 
simply τῆς Τιβεριάδο. The second 
title may here be a gloss, either by the 
evangelist himself or by a later hand, to 
distinguish the lake from Merom, or 
possibly because the latter name was 
more familiar to some of John’s readers 
than the former. [Pausanias, v. 7, 3, calls 
it λίμνη Τιβερίς.] Grotius, followed by 
Meyer, says: ‘‘ Proprius denotat lacus 
partem quae ab adsito oppido, ut fieri 
solet, nomen habet proprium”. Con- 
sequently he thinks of Jesus as crossing 
the Jordan below the lake. This is 
groundless. The town Tiberias was 
only built by Herod about the year 20 
A.D. (Smith’s Hist. Geog., 448). The 
exact locality where the following scene 
is laid seems to have been at-the north- 
east corner of the lake, not far from 
Bethsaida Julias.—xat ἠκολούθει .. . 
ἀσθενούντων. ‘A great crowd followed 
Him,” out of Galilee into Gaulanitis, the 
reason being ὅτι ἑώρων [plural although 
ἠκολούθει is singular], ‘‘ because they had 
seen the miracles which He was doing 
{imperfect of continuous action] on the 
sick’’,—émt with genitive denotes the 
object towards which action is directed, 
ἐπ᾽ οἴκου, homewards, etc. Meyer, Weiss 
(and Holtzmann) take it as meaning 
“among .---ἀνῆλθε δὲ elg τὸ ὄρος ὁ 
λησοῦς, “' απἁ Jesus went up,” from the 


τ---δ. 


μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. 


5. ὶἐπάρας οὖν ὁ Ιησοῦς τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς, 
ὄχλος ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτὸν, λέγει πρὸς τὸν Φίλιππον, “'" Πόθεν το. 
ἀγοράσομεν ' ἄρτους, ἵνα φάγωσιν οὗτοι git 
πειράζων adtév: αὐτὸς γὰρ woe τί ἔμελλε ποιεῖν. 7. ἀπεκρίθη | 
αὐτῷ Φίλιππος, “'Διακοσίων δηναρίων ἄρτοι οὐκ ἁρκοῦσιν αὐτοῖς, 
ἵνα ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ΄ «βραχύ τι λάβῃ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


747 


4. ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς «το πάσχα ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν Ἰουδαίων. « Hi. 13. 


καὶ θεασάµενος ὅτι πολὺς ἆ xvii. κ. 
Gen. xiii. 


e Tense cp. 
i. 40. 
Num. xi. 
αι. Mk. 
vi. 37. 


i) ~ €1Sam. 
8. Λέγει αὐτῷ eis ἐκ τῶν © xiv. 29. 


6. Τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγε 


1 «γορασομεν feebly authenticated ; αγορασωμεν in HABDEFG, etc. 


2 SABL 33 omit αντωγ. 


level of the Jordan and the lake, to the 
higher ground on the hill; καὶ ἐκεῖ 
.. « αὐτοῦ, “and there sat down with 
His disciples,” having apparently left 
the crowd behind, for the sitting down 
with the disciples indicated that rest 
and peace were expected.—Ver. 4. But 
another crowd was to be accounted for, 
as ver. 4 intimates, ἦν δὲ ἐγγὺς .. . 
Ιουδαίων, ‘‘now the Passover, the 
Jewish feast, was at Παπά”. [Grotius 
says: ‘‘ Hoc ideo interjicit, ut intelligatur 
tempus fuisse opportunum ad eliciendam 
multitudinem, et quo melius cohaereat 
quod de herba sequitur’. Godet’s 
account of the insertion of this clause, 
that it was meant to show that the near- 
ness of the Fassover suggested to Jesus 
the idea ‘* we will keep a Passover here,” 
is plainly out of the question.]—émapas 
οὖν ... Jesus therefore (or better, 
“accordingly ” ; οὖν connects what He 
saw with the foregoing statement).—Ver. 
5. πολὺς ὄχλος ἔρχεται, not the same 
crowd as was mentioned in νετ, 2, else 
the article would have been inserted, but 
a Passover caravan coming from some 
other direction, and probably guided to 
Jesus’ retirement by some of those who 
had followed in the first crowd. Seeing 
the crowd approaching, He initiates the 
idea of giving them a meal. The synoptic 
account is ἀῑΠετεηί.-- λέγει πρὸς τὸν 
Φίλιππον. Why ιο Philip? The 
question was put to Philip not because 
he happened at the moment to be nearest 
to Jesus (Alford); nor, as Bengel 
suggests, because he had charge of the 
commissariat, ‘‘fortasse Philippus rem 
alimentariam curabat inter discipulos”’ ; 
nor ‘because he knew the country 
best”; nor only, as Euthymius says, ἵνα 
τὴν ἀπορίαν ὁμολογήσας, ἀκριβέστερον 
καταµάθη Tov µέλλοντος γενέσθαι 
θαύματος τὸ μέγεθος; but Cyril is right 
who finds the explanation in the character 
of Philip and in the word πειράζων of 


ver. 6 [yupvalwv εἷς πίστιν τὸν µαθήτηγ]. 
Philip was apparently a matter-of-fact 
person (xiv. 8), a quick reckoner and 
good man of business, and therefore 
perhaps more ready to rely on his own 
shrewd calculations than on unseen 
resources. This weakness Jesus gives 
him an opportunity of conquering, by 
putting the question πόθεν ἀγοράσωμεν 
ἄρτους; ‘Whence are we to buy 
bread? ”’ [lit. loaves]. πόθεν may either 
mean ‘‘ from what village,” or ‘ from 
what pecuniary resources”. Cf. πόθεν 
γὰρ ἔσται βιοτά ; Soph., Philoct., 1159. 
—Ver. Philip swiftly calculating 
declares it impossible to provide bread 
for so vast a multitude, Διακοσίων ... 
λάβῃ. ‘‘ Two hundred denarii worth ot 
loaves are not enough for them that each 
should receive a little.” ‘“ Denarius” 
means containing ten; and originally 
the denarius contained ten asses. The 
as was originally an ingot of copper, 
aes, weighing one lb.; but long before 
imperial times it had been reduced to 
one ounce, and the denarius was reckoned 
as equal to sixteen asses or four sesterces, 
and taking the Roman gold piece like 
our sovereign as the standard, the 
denarius was equivalent to about οφά., 
which at that time was the ordinary 
wage of a working man;_ sufficient 
therefore to support a family for a day. 
If half was spent in food, then, reckoning 
the family at five persons, one denarius 
would feed ten persons, and 200 would 
provide a day’s rations for 2000; but as 
Philip’s calculation is on the basis not of 
food for a whole day, but only for one 
meagre meal, a short ration (βραχύ τι), 
it is approximately accurate. There were 
between five and ten thousand mouths. 
See Expositor, Jan., 1890.—Ver. 8. With 
the same matter-of-factness as Philip 
els . . . Πέτρον, ‘‘ one of His disciples, 
Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter,” a 
description apparently inserted in forget- 


748 


h 2 Kings 
iv. 43. 
Sam. xxi. 
7. Tob. 
Vi. 2. 

i Tob. ii. 1. 
Judith 
Kil. τη, 

j Mt. xv. 36; 
XXVi. 27. 
Rom. xiv. 
6, etc. 


6 Ποιήσατε τοὺς ἀνθρώπους 
τῷ τόπῳ. 


χίλιοι. 


1 ανεπεσαν in all good MSS. 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους;”. 


ἀνέπεσον οὖν ot ἄνδρες τὸν ἀριθμὸν ὡσεὶ 3 


Vi. 


μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, ᾿Ανδρέας ὁ ἀδελφὸς Σίμωνος Πέτρου, 9. ''"Ἔστι 
τ Ἀπαιδάριον ἓν ὧδε, ὃ ἔχει πέντε ἄρτους κριθίνους καὶ δύο ὀψάρια - 


10. Εἶπε δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


) ἀναπεσεῖν. ἦν δὲ χόρτος πολὺς ἐν 


πεντακισ- 


II. ἔλαβε δὲ τοὺς ἄρτους ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ J εὐχαριστήσας 
διέδωκε τοῖς μαθηταῖς, οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ὃ τοῖς ἀνακειμένοις: ὁμοίως 


2 woet in ATA Cyr.; ws in NBDL. 


2 Τ.Ε. in NeD, but τοις µαθηταις, οι δε µαθηται omitted in Q*ABL 1, 33. The 
words apparently were added from the Synoptical Gospels. 


fulness that it has already been given, i. 
41, supplementing Philip’s judgment, ef. 
xii, 22, λέγει αὐτῳ, ‘says to Him ” [the 
dative still holds its place after λέγει, and 
has not quite given way, as in modern 
Greek, to πρός with accusative, cf. 
ver. 5). "Έστι παιδάριο ἓν ade. 
‘“‘ There is here one little boy.” [ὲν is re- 
jected by modern editors. May it not 
have been rejected because unnecessary ? 
At the same time it must be borne in mind 
that although in Mt. (viii. 19 and xxvi. 
69) eis is used as an indefinite article— 
as in German, French, etc.—it is not so 
used in John. The Vulgate has ‘est 
puer unus hic’. Meyer thinks it is 
inserted to bring out the meagreness of 
the resources, ‘‘ but one small boy ”’.J— 
Ver. 9. ὃ ἔχει . . . ddpia. The 
Synoptic account speaks of these pro- 
visions as already belonging to the 
ἀῑδοιρ]ες.-- κριθίνους, the cheapest kind 
of bread; see Ezek. xiii. 19, and the 
extraordinary profusion of illustrations 
in Wetstein, among which occurs one 
from the Talmud: ‘“ Jochanan dixit, hor- 
deum factum est pulchrum. Dixerunt 
ei: runcia equis et asinis’”; and from 
Livy, ‘“‘ Cohortibus, quae signa amiserant, 
hordeum dari jussit”’.—kat δύο ὀψάρια, 
in Mt. xiv. 17, tx@vas, see also John xxi. 
1ο.---ὀψάριον is whatever is eaten with 
bread as seasoning or ‘“‘ kitchen,” hence, 
pre-eminently, fish. So Athenaeus, cited 
by Wetstein. In Numbers xi. 22 we 
have τὸ ὄψος τῆς θαλάσσης.- ἀλλὰ 
ταῦτα τί ἐστιν εἰς τοσούτους: exhibiting 
the helplessness of the disciples and in- 
adequacy of the means, as the background 
on which the greatness of the miracle 
may be seen.—Ver. 10. The moral 
ground for the miracle being thus pre- 
pared Jesus at once says, ποιήσατε τοὺς 
ἀνθρώπους ἀναπεσεῖν. [For the form of 
speech cf. Soph., Philoct., 925, κλύειν 
«+ pe... wovet.] This order was 


given for two reasons: (1) that there 
might be no unseemly crowding round 
Him and crushing out of the weaker ; 
and (2) that they might understand they 
were to have a full meal, not a mere bite 
they could take in their hand in passing. 
Obedience to this request tested the faith 
of the crowd. They trusted Jesus.— 
ἦν δὲ χόρτος πολὺς ἐν TO τόπῳ, “now 
there was much grass in the place,” con- 
trasting with the corn-iands and olive- 
yards of the opposite shore, where the 
large crowd could not easily have found 
a place to lie down. Mark rather brings 
out the contrast between the colours of 
the dresses and the green grass (vi. 39): 
ἐπέταξεν αὐτοῖς ἀνακλῖναι πάντας cup- 
πόσια συμπόσια ἐπὶ τῷ χλωρῷ χόρτῳ. 
καὶ ἀγέπεσαν πρασιαὶ πρασιαί, like beds 
of Πούεις.- -ἀνέπεσον [better ἀνέπεσαν] 
οὖν οἱ ἄνδρες . . . the men reclined, not 
counting women and children (χωρὶς 
γυναικῶν καὶ παιδίων, Mt. xiv. 21), in 
number about five thousand ; the women, 
though not specified, would take their 
places with the men. Some of the chil- 
dren might steal up to Jesus to receive 
from His own hand.—Ver. 11. Facing 
the vast and hungry crowd Jesus took up 
and gave thanks for the slender provision, 
ἔλαβε δὲ [better ἔλαβεν οὖν] τοὺς ἄρτους, 
the loaves already mentioned, καὶ εὖχα- 
ptoryioas [Phrynichus says εὐχαριστεῖν 
οὐδεὶς τῶν δοκίµων εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ χάριν 
εἰδέναι; and Rutherford says Polybius 
is the first writer who uses the word in 
the sense of ‘give thanks’’]. Pagans, 
by libation, or by throwing a handful on 
the household altar, gave thanks before 
a meal; Jews pronounced a blessing, 
ἁγιασμός or εὐλογία. (Luke xxiv. 30, 
Mt. xiv. το, and especially 1 Tim. iv. 4. 
See also Grotius’ note on Mt. xxvi. 27.) 
Having given thanks Jesus διέδωκε . . . 
τοῖς dvaxeipevors. The words added 
trom the Synopt'sts give a tuller account 


ϱ---Ι7. 


A 
καὶ ἐκ τῶν ὀψαρίων ὅσον ἤθελον. 


τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, “΄Συναγάγετε τὰ περισσεύσαντα Ἡ 


ἵνα µή τι ἀπόληται.” 


ΕΥΑΓΕ 


ΕΛΙΟΝ 749 


12. ὡς δὲ μήν λέγει 


κλάσματα, κ Back. xiii. 


13. μη οὖν, καὶ ἐγέμισαν δώδεκα 1: Kingsiv. 


κοφίνους κλασμάτων ἐκ τῶν πέντε ' ἄρτων τῶν κριθίνων, ἃ ™ ἐπέρίο» m ‘Top, iv. 


σευσε τοῖς βεβρωκόσιν. 14. of οὖν 


σημεῖον ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς,] ἔλεγον, "Ort οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ προφήτης ὁ 


ἐρχόμενος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. 


τσι 


” 
ἔρχεσθαι καὶ “ ἁρπάζειν αὐτὸν, ἵνα 


5 ἀνεχώρησε πάλιν εἰς τὸ ὄρος αὐτὸς μόνος. 


16. Ὡς δὲ 4 


θάλασσαν, 17. καὶ ἐμβάντες εἰς τὸ” πλοῖον, ἤρχοντο πέραν τῆς θαλάσ- 


σης εἰς Καπερναούμ. 


1ο Incous omitted in KBD. 


3 A 4. 4 a 
Ιησοῦς οὖν γνοὺς ὅτι 


καὶ σκοτία ἤδη ἐγεγόνει, καὶ οὐκ 5 ἐληλύθει 


ἄνθρωποι ἰδόντες ὃ ἐποίησε 


n i. 40, etc. 
Ἀµέλλουσιν ο id Viii. 


ποιήσωσιν αὐτὸν βασιλέα, p Exod. ii. 
15. Hos. 

xii. 12. 

Mk. vi. 


ὀψία ἐγένετο, ον ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν α Only in 


Gospp. in 
N.T. 
Judith 
xiii. 1. 


2 +o omitted in NBL 33. 


8 ovrw in modern editions as in NBDL 33. 


of what actually happened. But curiosity 
as to the precise stage at which the 
multiplication occurred, or whether it 
could distinctly be seen, is not satisfied. 
They all received ὅσον ἤθελον, not the 
βραχύ τι of Philip; and even this did 
not exhaust the supply; for (ver. 12) ὡς 
δὲ ἐνεπλήσθησαν, when no one could eat 
any more, there were seen to be κλάσματα 
περισσεύσαντα, pieces broken off but not 
used, These Jesus directs the disciples 
to gather ἵνα µή τι ἀπόληται, “ that 
nothing be lost”. The Father’s bounty 
must not be wasted. Infinite resource 
does not justify waste. Euthymius 
ingeniously supposes the order to have 
been given ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ φαντασία τις τὸ 
γενόµενον; but of course those who had 
eaten already knew that the provision 
was substantial and real.—Ver. 13. 
Συνήγαγον ow... βεβρωκόσιν, the 
superabundance, the broken pieces of 
the five loaves which were in excess of 
the requirements, ἃ ἐπερίσσεύσε, filled 
δώδεκα κοφίνους, that is to say, far 
exceeded the original five loaves.— 
κόφινος [French, Coffin, petit panier 
d’osier; cf. our ‘‘ coffin’? and “coffer ”], 
a large wicker basket or hamper used in 
many countries by gardeners for carrying 
fruit, vegetables, manure, soil; and iden- 
tified with the Jew by Juvenal (iii. 14), 
“Judaeis quorum cophinus foenumque 
supellex”. (See further Mayor’s note on 
the line, and Sat., vi. 541.) This gives 
colour to the idea that each of the 
apostles may have carried such a basket, 
which would account ior the twelve. 
But why they should have had the 


baskets with nothing to carry in them 
does not appear. 

Vv. 14-25. The immediate impression 
made by the miracle and the consequent 
movements of Fesus and the crowd.— 
Ver. 14. The conclusion drawn from 
the miracle by those who had witnessed 
it, was that this was “the beginning of 
that reign of earthly abundance, which 
the prophets were thought to have fore- 
told”. See Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., 552. 
This at once found expression in the 
words οὗτός ἐστιν . . . κόσμον. ‘ This 
is indeed,” or ‘‘of a truth,” as if the 
subject had been previously debated by 
them, or as if some had told them He 
was ‘‘ the prophet who should come into 
the world,” 6 ἐρχόμενος, used of the 
Messiah by the Baptist (Matt. xi. 3) 
without further specification; but John 
adds his favourite expression εἰς τὸν 
κόσμον. That the people meant the 
Messiah (cf. Deut. xvili. 14-19) is shown 
by the action they were prepared to take. 
—Ver, 15. For Jesus perceived that they 
were on the point of coming and carrying 
Him off to make Him king. ἁρπάζειν, 
to snatch suddenly and forcibly (derived 
from the swoop of the falcon, the ἅρπη; 
hence, the Harpies). This scene throws 
light on the use of ἁρπάζουσιν in Matt. 
xi. 12. Their purpose was to make Him 
king. Their own numbers and their 
knowledge of the general discontent 
would encourage them. But Jesus ave- 
χώρησε πάλιν εἰς τὸ ὄρος αὐτὸς µόνος, 
“withdrew again (cf. ver. 3) to the 
mountain,” from which He may have 
come down some distance to meet the 


aS 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


vi 


πρὸς αὐτοὺς ὁ "Ingots, 18. 7 τε θάλασσα ἀνέμου peyddou πνέοντος 


r Cp. Jon. 1. Σ διηγείρετο. 
I 


Lk. viii. 


A [ή 
29. Jas. καὶ Ἰ ἐγγὺς τοῦ πλοίου γινόμενον καὶ " ἐφοβήθησαν. 


iii. 4. 


t Mk. vi. 49. λέγει αὐτοῖς, ''᾿Εγώ εἰμι' μὴ φοβεῖσθε.” 


u Job ix. 8. 


19. "€Andaxdtes οὖν ὡς σταδίους εἰκοσιπέντε ἢ 
s Mk. vi. ᾳ8.τριάκοντα ᾿θεωροῦσι τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν περιπατοῦντα 


"ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης, 
20. ὁ δὲ 
21. Ἠθελον οὖν λαβεῖν 


ν With gen. αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ πλοῖον, καὶ εὐθέως τὸ πλοῖον ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς εἰς 


Παν ασ. ες - 
18; ερ.ῖν. ην υπηγογ. 
5. 

w Lk. xxiv. 
37. 


μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ,” 


ὅτι πλοιάριον ἄλλο οὐκ ἦν ἐκεῖ εἰ μὴ Ev ἐκεῖνο eis ὃ 


22. TH ἐπαύριον ὁ ὄχλος ὁ ἑστηκὼς πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης, ἰδὼν 1 


ὃ ἐνέβησαν οἱ 


καὶ ὅτι οὐ συνεισῆλθε τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ ὁ ᾿Ρησοῦς 


1 ειδον read by T.Tr.W.H.R. as in ABL vet. Lat., etc. 


2 The clause εκεινο . . 


crowd. Now He detached Himself even 
trom His disciples. [μὴ παρέχων μηδὲ 
τούτοις ἀφορμὴν, Οτίρεπ.] The Syn- 
optic account is supplementary. The 
disciples remained behind with fragments 
of the crowd, but, when it became late, 
they went down to the sea, and having 
got on board a (not ‘‘the’’) boat, they 
were coming across to Capernaum [Mark 
says Jesus told them to go to Bethsaida, 
but that is quite consistent, as they may 
have meant to land at the one place and 
walk to the other] on the other side, and 
it had already become dark, and Jesus 
had not, or “' not yet,’”’ come to them, and 
the sea was rising owing to a strong 
wind blowing.—Ver. 19. éAnAakdtes 
οὖν ὡς σταδίους εἰκοσιπέντε ἢ τριάκοντα. 
The Vulgate renders ‘‘cum remigassent 
ergo,’ and modern Greek ἐκωπηλάτησαν, 
rightly; see Aristoph., Frogs, 195; and 
other passages in Elsner. The stadium 
was about 194 (Rich gives 202) yards, 
so that nine rather than eight would go 
to a mile. The disciples had rowed 
about three miles. [The best discussion 
of the direction they were taking is in 
the Rob Roy on the $ordan, p. 374.] 
θεωροῦσι τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν περιπατοῦντα ἐπ' 
τῆς θαλάσσης ‘they see Jesus walking 
on the sea’’. It has been suggested that 
this may only mean that Jesus was walk- 
ing ‘“‘ by” the sea, ἐπί being used in this 
sense in xxi. I. But that ἐπί can mean 
“on” the sea is of course not questioned 
(see Lucian’s Vera Historia, where this 
incident is burlesqued; also Job ix. 8, 
where, to signalise the power of God, 
He is spoken of as 6 περιπατῶν ὡς ἐπ᾽ 
ἐδάφους ἐπὶ θαλάσσης). Besides, why 
should the disciples have been afraid had 
they merely seen Jesus walking on the 
shore? They manifested their fear in 


. avrov is deleted by modern editors with NcABL. 


some way, and He says to them, Ἐγώ 
εἰμι, 1am He, or It is 1.—Ver. 20. Hear- 
ing this, ἤθελον οὖν λαβεῖν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ 
πλοῖον, by which Liicke, Holtzmann, 
Weiss, Thayer, and others suppose it is 
meant, that they merely wished to take 
Him into the boat, but did not actually do 
so. The imperfect tense favours this 
sense; and so do the expressions ἤθελον 
πιάσαι αὐτόν, vii. 44; and ἤθελον αὐτὸν 
ἐρωτῷν, xvi. 19; whereas two of the 
passages cited against this meaning by 
Alford are in the aorist, a tense which 
denotes accomplished purpose. On the 
other hand, the imperfect may here be 
used to express a continuous state of 
feeling, and accordingly the A.V., follow- 
ing the Geneva Bible, against Wiclif and 
Tindale, rendered ‘they willingly re- 
ceived Him”. So Grotius “non quod 
non receperint, sed quod cupide ad- 
modum’”’. So, too, Sanday: ‘‘ The stress 
is really on the willingness of the dis- 
ciples, ‘ Before they shrank back through 
fear, but now they were glad to receive 
Him’”. And this seems right. The 
R.V. has ‘they were willing therefore to 
receive Him into the boat”. The καί 
with which the next clause is introduced 
is slightly against the supposition that 
Jesus was not actually taken into the 
boat (but see Weiss im loc.); and the 
Synoptic account represents Jesus as 
getting into the boat with Peter. The 
immediate arrival at the shore was evi- 
dently a surprise to those on board. 
Sanday thinks that the Apostle was so 
occupied with his devout conclusions that 
he did not notice the motion of the boat. 

Vv. 22, 23, and 24 form one 
sentence, in which John describes the 
observations made by the crowd the 
following morning and their consequent 


18---26. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


75t 


eis τὸ πλοιάριον, ἀλλὰ pdvor οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ ἀπῆλθον, 23. ἄλλα 
δὲ1 ἦλθε πλοιάρια ἐκ Τιβεριάδος ἐγγὺς τοῦ τόπου ὅπου ἔφαγον τὸν 
ἄρτον, εὐχαριστήσαντος τοῦ Κυρίου: 24. ὅτε οὖν εἶδεν ὁ ὄχλος ὅτι 
Ἰησοῦς οὐκ " ἔστιν ἐκεῖ οὐδὲ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, ἐνέβησαν καὶ αὐτοὶ xi 40, ote 
eis τὰ πλοῖα, καὶ ἦλθον eis Καπερναοὺμ, ζητοῦντες τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. 
25. καὶ εὑρόντες αὐτὸν πέραν τῆς θαλάσσης, εἶπον αὐτῷ, “ Ῥαββὶ, 


πότε Ode 7 γέγονας ;” 


26. ᾽Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς 6 “Ingots καὶ εἶπεν, y Lk. x. 32. 


“Auhy ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, "ζητεῖτέ µε, οὐχ ὅτι εἴδετε σημεῖα, ἀλλ᾽ ps iv. 48. 


1 δε omitted in BL 33. 


action. The observations they made are 
described under Ἰδών, which never finds 
its verb, but is resumed in ὅτε οὖν εἴδεν 
of ver. 24; and their consequent action 
is described in the main verbs of the 
sentence ἐνέβησαν (ver. 24) καὶ ᾖλθον. 
With the unconscious but accurate ob- 
servation of a fishing population in such 
matters, the crowd had noticed that there 
was only one boat lying on the beach at 
that point, and further that the disciples 
had gone away in it and had not taken 
Jesus with them. But in the morning, 
having presumably passed the night in 
the open air, and having gathered at the 
lake-side below the scene of the miracle, 
they found that neither Jesus nor His 
disciples were there. Apparently they 
expected that the disciples would have 
returned for Jesus, and that they might 


find both Him and them on the shore. 


Disappointed in this expectation, and 
concluding that Jesus had returned by 
land as He had come, or had left in one 
of the Tiberias boats, they themselves 
entered the boats from Tiberias, which 
had been driven ashore by the gale of 
the previous night, and crossed to Caper- 
naum, This account of the movements 
and motives of the crowd seems to give 
each expression its proper force. The 
fact parenthetically introduced, ver. 23, 
that boats from Tiberias had put in 
on the east shore, is an incidental con- 
firmation of the truth that a gale had 
been blowing the night before. What 
portion of the belated crowd went back 
to Capernaum in these Tiberias boats 
we do not know.—eipévres αὐτὸν πέραν 
τῆς θαλάσσης, having found Him on the 
other side of the lake, that is, on the 
Capernaum side, εἶπον ... yéyovas, 
‘they said to Him, Rabbi, when camest 
thou hither?” ‘‘ Quaestio de tempore 
includit quaestionem de modo” (Bengel). 
For this use of γέγονας cf. νετ. 19; and 
Cebes, Tabula, πρὸς τὸν ἰατρὸν γινόµενος, 


and Lucian, Asinus, ἐπεὶ δὲ πλησίον τῆς 
πόλεως ἐγεγόνειμεν (Kypke). They came 
seeking Him, but were surprised to find 
Him. To their question Jesus makes no 
direct reply. He does not tell them of 
His walking on the water. 

In vv. 26-65 we have the conversation 
arising out ofthe miracle. The first break 
in it is at ver. 41. From ver. 26-40 Fesus 
explains that He is the Bread of Life.— 
Ver. 26. ᾽Αμὴν . . . ἐχορτάσθητε. In this 
pursuing crowd Jesus sees no evidence of 
faith or spiritual hunger, but only of carnal- 
ity and misunderstanding. Ye follow me 
οὐχ ὅτι εἴδετε σημεῖα, “' not because you 
saw signs,” not because in the feeding 
of the 5000 and other miracles you saw 
the Kingdom of God and glimpses of a 
spiritual world, ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι ἐφάγετε ἐκ τῶν 
ἄρτων καὶ ἐχορτάσθητε, but because you 
received a physical satisfaction. This 
gave the measure of their Messianic 
expectation. He was the true Messiah 
who could maintain them in life without 
toil. Sense clamours and spirit has no 
hunger.—yoprafew, from χόρτος, means 
“to give fodder to animals,” and was 
used of men only “as a depreciatory 
term”. In later Greek it is used freely 
of satisfying men ; see Kennedy’s Sources 
of N.T. Greek, p. 80; Lightfoot on Phil. 
iv. 12,—Ver. 27. ἐργάζεσθε . . . ὑμῖν 
δώσει. ‘ Work not for the meat which 
perisheth.” épyafopat means “I earn 
by working,” “‘ I acquire,” see passages 
cited by Thayer zm voc, The food which 
He had given them the evening before 
He called βρῶσιν ἀπολλυμένην: they 
were already hungry again, and had 
toiled after Him for miles to get another 
meal. Rather must they seek τὴν 
βρῶσιν . . . αἰώνιον, the food which 
abides els ζωὴν αἰώνιον, that is, which is 
not consumed in the eating but rather 
grows as it is enjoyed. Cf. iv. 14. This 
food 6 vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑμῖν δώσει. 
He does not call Himself ‘‘ the Prophet,” 


75% 


aMt.v.6; ὅτι ἐφάγετε ἐκ τῶν ἄρτων καὶ " ἐχορτάσθητε. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


VI. 


27. " ἐργάζεσθε μὴ 


xiv. 20. 
Jas. ii. 16. thy βρῶσιν τὴν ἀπολλυμένην, ἀλλὰ τὴν βρῶσιν τὴν µένουσαν εἰς 
εν. XIX. 
ο. ζωὴν αἰώνιον, ἣν ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὑμῖν δώσει" τοῦτον γὰρ ὁ 
2 ]ο. 
only; cp. πατὴρ "ἐσφράγισεν ὁ Θεός. 28. Εἶπον οὖν πρὸς αὐτὸν, “ τί 
Wetstein - ι 5 ᾱ 2 2 » - κ.α. 3 , 
on Mt. ποιοῦμεν,ὶ ἵνα 3 ἐργαζώμεθα τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Θεοῦ; 29. ᾽Απεκρίθη 
Xxv. 16. ε: 3 - A = 3 Ley) «6 ~ Ον 3 a ” “ α ef 
ς iii. 33. 6 ‘Ingots καὶ εἶπεν αὗτοις, “ TouTo ἐστι τὸ εργον του Θεού, “ινα 
Exod. a ~ 
Keusi, «ο. πιστεύσητε” εἰς ὃν ἀπέστειλεν ἐκεῖνος. 30. Εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ, "Τί 
d Num. viii. 9 A πι a 9 15 9 , , 43 
ο οὖν ποιεῖς σὺ σημεῖον, ἵνα ἴδωμεν καὶ πιστεύσωμέν σοι; τί ἐργάζῃ ; 
εἰν. 34: Xv. 


μυς: 41. of πατέρες ἡμῶν τὸ ' µάννα ἔφαγον ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ, καθώς ἐστι 


ton, Μ. 
and Τ., 


γεγραμµένον, 5Αρτον ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς Φαγεῖν. 32. 


6 E34. κνὶ  Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὅ ᾿Ιησοῦς, '“᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, OF Μωσῆς 


15. 
ix. 4. 

g Ps. Ixxviii. 
24. 


Heb. δέδωκεν ® ὑμῖν τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ: GAN’ 6 


ς 


πατήρ µου δίδωσιν 


| ποιωµεν in all modern editions as in ABL. 
2 'T.Tr.W.H.R. read πιστενητε following SABL 1, 33. 


3 εδωκεν in BDL; 88. in ΝΑΤ. 


as they had called Him yesterday, 
because this would have excited false 
expectations; but in calling Himself the 
Son of Man He suggests His sympathy 
with all human wants and at the same 
time indicates to the initiated that He 
claims the Messiahship. The guarantee 
is given in the words τοῦτον γὰρ... 
ὁ θεός, ‘‘ For Him hath the Father, God, 
sealed’”’. By giving the Son the miracle 
of the previous day and other signs to do, 
the Father has sealed or authenticated 
Him as the Giver of that which nourishes 
life everlasting. [For the idea, approved 
by Delitzsch, that the seal refers to the 
stamping of loaves with the name of the 
maker, see O. T. Student, Sept., 1883, 
and Expositor, 1885. Elsner with more 
reason cites passages showing that a 
person ordering a banquet gave his seal 
to the slave or steward commissioned to 
provide it: and thus that Christ here 
declares ‘‘se a Patre constitutum esse 
ad suppeditandum Ecclesiae salutarem 
cibum”’. The various meanings of the 
word are given by Suicer.] Some at 
least of the crowd are impressed; and 
conscious that their toil was, as Jesus said, 
commonly misdirected, they ask Him 
(νετ. 28) τί ποιοῦμεν [better, ποιῶμεν] 
ἵνα ἐργαζώμεθα τὰ ἔργα τοῦ θεοῦ ; that 
is, how can we so labour as to satisfy 
God? What precisely is it that God 
waits for us to do, and will be satisfied 
with our doing ? To which Jesus, always 
ready to meet the sincere inquirer, gives 
the explicit answer (ver. 29) τοῦτό ἐστι 


. . . €xetvos. If God has sent a messenger 
it is because there is need of such inter- 
position, and the first duty must be to 
listen believingly to this messenger. To 
this demand that they should accept 
Him as God’s ambassador they reply 
(νετ. 30) τί οὖν ποιεῖς . . . ‘“ Judaeis 
proprium erat signa quaerere,”’ 1 Cor. 1. 
22, Lampe. Grotius and Licke think 
this asking for a sign could not have 
proceeded from those who saw the 
miracle of the previous day. But Lampe 
rightly argues that they were the same 
people, and that they did not consider 
either the miracle of the previous day or 
the ordinary cures wrought by Jesus to 
be sufficient evidence of His present 
claim.—Ver. 31. This is proved by the 
suggestion added in νετ. 31. ot πατέρες 
. . » dayetv; they demanded that He as 
Messiah should make good His claim by 
outdoing Moses. Schoettgen and Light- 
foot quote from Rabbinical literature a 
relevant and significant saying ; ‘‘ Qualis 
fuit redemptor primus (Moses) talis erit 
redemptor ultimus (Messias). Redemptor 
prior descendere fecit pro iis Manna, sic 
et Redemptor posterior descendere faciet 
Manna, sicut scriptum est,” Ps. Ixxiii. 
16, See other instructive passages in 
Lightfoot. According to this expecta- 
tion that the Messiah would feed His 
people supernaturally the crowd now 
insinuate that though Jesus had given 
them bread He had not fulfilled the ex- 
pectation and given them bread from 
heaven. (For the expression ‘bread of 


27-37. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


753 


ὑμῖν τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τὸν " ἀληθινόν. 33. ὁ γὰρ ἄρτος τοῦ hi. 9, etc. 
Θεοῦ ἐστιν 16 καταβαίνων ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ ζωὴν διδοὺς τῷ ! iii. 13. 
κόσμω.”. 34. Εἶπον οὖν πρὸς αὐτὸν, “ Κύριε, πάντοτε δὸς ἡμῖν τὸν 


” a 35 
αρτον τουτογ. 


35. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““᾿Εγώ εἰμι 6 ἄρτος 


τῆς ζωῆς: ὅ ἐρχόμενος πρός µε οὐ μὴ πεινάσῃ΄ καὶ 6 πιστεύων εἰς 


ἐμὲ J οὗ μὴ διψήσῃ | πώποτε. 
µε, καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε. 


37. "πᾶν ὃ δίδωσί por 6 πατὴρ, πρὸς ἐμὲ 


36. GAN εἶπον ὑμῖν ὅτι καὶ ἑωράκατέ j iv. 14. 


« k ver. 39; 
Xvii. 2. 


1 διψησει in T.Tr.W.H.R. following SAB*D. 


heaven’? see Exod. xiv. 4 and Ps. Ixxviii. 
23, 24.) To this challenge to fulfil 
Messianic expectation by showing Him- 
self greater than Moses Jesus replies 
(ver. 32), οὐ Μωσῆς . . - ἀληθινόν. A 
double denial; not Moses, but “my 
Father” s the giver, and although 
the manna was in a sense ‘bread 
from heaven” it was not “the true 
bread from heaven,” τὸν ἄρτον ἐκ τοῦ 
οὐρανοῦ τὸν ἀληθινόν. This my Father 
is now giving to you; 6 γὰρ ἄρτος .. . τῷ 
κόσμῳ.---Ψετ. 33. Moses therefore could 
not give this bread, since it comes 
down out of heaven. It is characterised 
by two attributes: (1) it is 6 καταβαίνων 
ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, that which cometh down 
out of heaven—not, as Godet renders, 
«ες who cometh down from heaven”; 
at least the request of ver. 34 shows that 
those who heard the words did not take 
them in this sense; (2) the other charac- 
teristic of the bread of God is that it 
giveth life to the world; a fuller life- 
giving power than that of the manna is 
implied; and it is of universal application 
and not merely to their fathers. Hearing 
this description of ‘‘ the bread of God”’ 
the crowd exclaim (ver. 34) Κύριε, πάν- 
τοτε δὸς ἡμῖν τὸν ἄρτον τοῦτον, precisely 
as the woman of Samaria had exclaimed 
Κύριε δός pot τοῦτο τὸ ὕδωρ, when Jesus 
had disclosed to her the properties of the 
living water. And as in her case the 
direct request brought the conversation 
to a crisis, so here it elicits the central 
declaration of all His exposition of the 
bearing of the miracle: ᾿Εγὼ εἰμι 6 ἄρτος 
τῆς ζωῆς. [It is not impossible that 
some of them may have had a glimmering 
of what He meant and uttered their re- 
quest with some tincture of spiritual 
desire; for among the Rabbis there was 
a saying, “ In seculo venturo neque edunt 
neque bibunt, sed justi sedent cum coronis 
suis in capitibus et aluntur splendore 
majestatis divinae”.] ‘‘I am the bread 
of life,’ “I am the living bread” (ver. 
51, in a somewhat different sense), “1 


am the bread which came down from 
heaven” (ver. 41), or, “the true bread 
from heaven”—all these designations 
our Lord uses, and that the people may 
quite understand what is meant, He 
adds 6 ἐρχόμενος . . . πώποτε. The 
repetition of the required action 6 ἐρχό- 
µενος, and 6 πιστεύων, and of the result 
οὐ μὴ πεινάσῃ, and οὐ μὴ διψήσῃ, is for 
clearness and emphasis, not for addition 
to the meaning. The “believing”’ εχ- 
plains the ‘‘ coming” ; and the ‘‘ quench- 
ing of thirst” more explicitly conveys 
the meaning of “never hungering,” that 
all innocent and righteous cravings and 
aspirations shall be gratified. The ‘‘com- 
ing” was not that physical approach 
which they had adopted in pursuing Him 

to Capernaum, but such a coming as © 
might equally well be called ‘“‘believing,” | 
a spiritual approach, implying the con- 
viction that He was what He claimed to 
be, the medium through which God 
comes to man, and man to God.—Ver. 
36. But although God and this perfect 
satisfaction were brought so near them, 
they did not believe: ἀλλ” εἶπον . . 


πιστεύετε. Beza, Grotius, Bengel, 
Godet, Weiss, etc., understand that 
εἶπον refers to ver. 26. Euthymius, 


preferably, says εἰκὸς τοῦτο ῥηθῆναι 
μὲν, μὴ γραφῆναι δέ. Lampe gives the 
alternatives without determining. Un- 
doubtedly, although the reference may 
not be directly to ver. 26, the ἑωράκατε 
means seeing Jesus in the exercise of 
His Messianic functions, doing the works 
given Him by the Father to do. But 
seeing is not in this case believing. It 
was found very possible to be in His 
company and to eat the provision He 
miraculously provided, and yet disbelieve. 
If so, what could produce belief? Might 
not His entire manifestation fail to 
accomplish its purpose ?—Ver. 37. No; 
for wav 6 δίδωσι ... Ager. ‘* Everything 
which the Father gives”; the neuter is 
used as being more universal than the 
masculine and including everything 


45 


754 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


Vi, 


ἥξει: καὶ τὸν ἐρχόμενον πρός µε οὗ μὴ ἐκβάλω ἔξω: 38. ὅτι κατα- 


Liv. 34. 
θέληµα τοῦ πέμψαντός pe. 


βέβηκα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ᾿ οὐχ ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέληµα τὸ ἐμὸν, ἀλλὰ τὸ 


30. τοῦτο δέ ἐστι τὸ θέλημα τοῦ 


m Constr. πέμψαντός µε πατρὸς, ἵνα wav ὃ δέδωκέ por, μὴ ἀπολέσω ἐξ 


νετ. 29, 
reff. 

Nn νν. 40, 44, 
54; Vil. 
37, etc. 

0 ver. 29. 


ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ.” 


1 πατρος omitted in ΝΑΒΟΡ, etc. 


αὐτοῦ, ἀλλὰ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸ ἐν "τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρα. 
ἐστι τὸ θέληµα τοῦ πέµψαντός μειὸ "ἵνα was ὁ θεωρῶν τὸν υἱὸν καὶ 
πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν, ἔχη ζωὴν αἰώνιον, καὶ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ἐγὼ "TH 


3 , - A 
41. Εγόγγυζον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι 


40. τοῦτο δέ 2 


Σ All authorities read γαρ. 


3 rov πεµψαντος pe in AEGH ; tov πατρος µου in BCD. 


which the Father determines to save 
from the world’s wreck, viewed as a 
totality. Cf. νετ. 39, ἀναστήσω αὐτό: 
and the collective neuter, as in Thucyd., 
iii. 16, τὸ ἐπιόν for τοὺς ἐπιόντας. 
Lampe thinks the neuter is used, ‘‘ quia 
hae personae spectantur ut reale pecu- 
lium, haereditas, merces, genus, semen, 
sacerdotium, sanctuarium Domini’’. 
What is meant by δίδωσιὸ It is an act 
on God’s part prior to the ‘“‘coming”’ on 
man’s part; the coming is the result of 
the giving. Calvinistic interpreters have 
therefore identified the giving with elec- 
tion. ‘‘ Donandi verbum perinde valet 
ac si dixisset Christus, quos elegit Pater, 
eos regenerat”—Calvin. ‘‘ Patrem dare 
filio est eligere’’—Melanchthon; and 
similarly Beza and Lampe. On the 
other hand, Reynolds represents a number 
of interpreters when he says, ‘‘It is the 
present activity of the Father’s grace that 
is meant, not a foregone conclusion”’. 
This identifies the Father’s “ giving” 
with His “drawing,” ver. 44. It would 
rather seem to be that which determines 
the drawing, the assigning to Jesus of 
certain persons who shall form His king- 
dom. This perhaps involves election 
but is not identical with it. Cf. xvii. 6: 
Euthymius replies, from a Semi-Pelagian 
point of view, to the objections which 
arise from an Augustinian interpretation of 
the words. The purpose of the verse is to 
impart assurance that Christ’s work will 
not fail. καὶ τὸν ἐρχόμενον . . . ἔξω. 
Grotius thinks the ‘casting out” refers 
to the School of Christ; Liicke thinks 
the kingdom is referred to. It is scarcely 
necessary to think of anything more than 
Christ’s presence or fellowship. This 
strong asseveration ot μὴ ἐκβάλω, and 
concentrated Gospel which has brought 
hope to so many, is here grounded on 
the will of the Father.—Vv. 38, 39. ὅτι 
καταβέβηκα . . . ἡμέρ. Everywhere 


Jesus forestalls the idea that He is speak- 
ing for Himself, and is uttering merely 
human judgments, or is in any way 
regulated in His action by what is 
arbitrary: it is the Supreme Will He 
represents. And this will requires Him 
to protect and provide for all that is 
committed to Him. ἵνα πᾶν 6 δέδωκέ 
μοι, On this nominative absolute, see 
Licke or Raphel, who justify it by many 
instances. The positive and negative 
aspects of the Redeemer’s work, and the 
permanence of its results, are indicated. 
On ἀναστήσω . . . ἡμέρᾳ, Bengel says: 
“Hic finis est ultra quem periculum 
nullum,” and Calvin finely: ‘Sit ergo 
hoc animis nostris infixum porrectam 
esse nobis manum a Christo, ut nos min- 
ime in medio cursu deserat, sed quo ejus 
ductu freti secure ad diem ultimum oculos 
attollere audeamus”’. It is a perfect and 
enduring salvation the Father has de- 
signed to give us in Christ.—Ver. 40. 
In ver. 40 Jesus describes the recipients 
of salvation from the human side, πᾶς 6 
θεωρῶν τὸν vidv καὶ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτόν, 
the latter, ‘‘ believing,” being necessary, 
as already shown, to complete the former. 
The neuter wav necessarily gives place to 
the masculine. καὶ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ἐγὼ 
τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. This promise recurs 
like a refrain, vv. 39, 40, 44, 54; each 
time the éy is expressed and emphatic, 
«1, this same person who here stands 
before you, I and no other”. Christ 
gives His hearers the assurance that 
in this respect He is superior to Moses, 
that the life He gives is not confined 
to this present time. In itself it is a 
stupendous declaration. 

Vv. 41-51. In this paragraph we are 
first told how the Jews were staggered 
by our Lord’s affirming that He had 
come down from heaven; second, how 
Jesus explains that in order to under- 
stand and receive Him they must be 


38—45. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


πα 


A a 39 A 
εἶπεν, “Eye εἶμι 6 ἄρτος 6 καταβὰς ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. 42. καὶ 


by > co) ς 2 a Ld 
ἔλεγον, “ Obx οὗτός ἐστιν ᾿Ιησοῦς 6 υἱὸς ᾿Ιωσὴφ, οὗ ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν 
πῶς οὖν λέγει οὗτος, Ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ phys. 


τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα; 
> A , 39 
οὐρανοῦ καταβέβηκα ; 


αὐτοῖς, “Mn γογγύζετε per ἀλλήλων. 


a A 
43. ᾿Απεκρίθη οὖν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν 


xii. 32; in 


sense, 

XVili. 10; 
ty Xxi. 6, ΙΙ 
44. οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐλθεῖν Acts xvi. 


19. 
Uj > ΙΑ 
πρός µε, ἐὰν μὴ 6 πατὴρ 6 πέµψας µε ) ἑλκύσῃ αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐγὼ π wy. 4ο, 44. 


ἆ ή ὑτὸν "TH ἐσχάτη ἡμέ ἔστι γεγραμµένον ἐν τοῖς 37; εἰ 

ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν "TH ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. 45. γεγραμμ. 37, etc. 
A a? A be - 

προφήταις, ‘Kat ἔσονται πάντες "διδακτοὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ. Mas οὖν 6 


taught of God; and third, how He 
reiterates His claim to be the Bread of 
Life, adding now the explanation that it 
is His flesh which He will give for the 
life of the world.—Ver. 41. ᾿Εγόγγυζον 
. .. οὐρανοῦ. ‘ The Jews,” not as we 
might expect, ‘‘ the Galileans,” probably 
because John identifies this unbelieving 
crowd with the characteristically un- 
believing Jews. ἐγόγγυζον in Exod. 
xvi. 7-9, I Cor. x. 1Ο, etc., has a note of 
malevolence, but in John vii. 32 no such 
note. ‘* Murmur’ thus corresponds to 
it, as carrying both meanings. The 
ground of. their murmuring was His 
asserting ᾿Εγώ εἰμι .. . ovpavov. Cf. 
ver. 33, ὁ καταβαίνων, and νετ. 38, κατα- 
βέβηκα. Liicke says: ‘When John 
makes the descent from heaven the 
essential, inherent predicate of the bread, 
he uses the present: when the descent 
from heaven is regarded as a definite 
fact in the manifestation of Christ, the 
aorist’”’. They not merely could not 
understand how this could be true, but 
they considered that they had evidence 
to the contrary (ver. 42), καὶ ἔλεγον, Οὐχ 
... καταβέβηκα; the emphatic ἡμεῖς 
more clearly discloses their thought. 
We ourselves know where He comes 
from. The road from heaven, they 
argued, could not be through human 
birth. This was one of the real difficulties 
of the contemporaries of Jesus. The 
Messiah was to come “in the clouds,’’ 
suddenly to appear; but Jesus had 
quietly grown up among them. From 
this passage an argument against the 
miraculous birth of our Lord has been 
drawn. The murmurets represent the 
current belief that He had a father and 
mother, and in His reply Jesus does not 
repudiate His father. But He could 
not be expected to enter into explana- 
tions before a promiscuous crowd, As 
Euthymius says: He passes by His 
miraculous birth, ‘‘ lest in removing one 
stumbling block He interpose another’, 
To explain is hopeless.—Ver. 43. There- 
fore He merely says Mh γογγύζετε mer’ 


; Vil. 


ε6α1 Cor. ii. 
13. 


ἀλλήλων. That was not the way to light. 
Nor could He expect to convince all of 
them, for ᾿οὖδεὶς .. . ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν, 
πο one can come to me unless the 
Father who hath sent me draw him”. 
ἑλκύειν has the same latitude of mean- 
ing as ‘‘draw”’. It is used of towing a 
ship, dragging a cart, or pulling on a 
rope to set sails. But it is also used, 
xil. 32, of a gentle but powerful moral 
attraction; “1, if I be lifted up, ἑλκύσω, 
will draw, etc.”. Here, however, it is an 
inward disposing of the soul to come to 
Christ, and is the equivalent of the 
Divine teaching of ver. 45. And what 
is affirmed is that without this action of 
God on the individual no one can come 
to Christ. In order to apprehend the 
significance of Christ and to give our- 
selves to Him we must be individually 
and inwardly aided by God. [Augustine 
says: ‘‘Si trahitur, ait aliquis, invitus 
venit. Siinvitus venit, non credit, si non 
credit, πες venit. Non enim ad Christum 
ambulando currimus, sed credendo, nec 
motu corporis, sed voluntate cordis 
accedimus. Noli te cogitare invitum 
trahi: trahitur animus et amore.” And 
Calvin says: ‘‘Quantum ad_ trahendi 
modum spectat, non est ille quidem 
violentus qui hominem cogat externo 
impulsu, sed tamen efficax est motus 
Spiritus Sancti, qui homines ex nolentibus 
et invitis reddit voluntarios ”. All that 
Calvin objects to is that men should be 
said ‘‘ proprio motu ”’ to yield themselves 
to the Divine drawing. Cf.a powerful 
passage from Luther’s De libero Arbitrio 
quoted in Lampe; or as Beza concisely 
puts it: ‘‘ Verum quidem est, neminem 
credere invitum, quum Fides sit assensus. 
Sed volumus quia datum est nobis ut 
velimus.”’]—Ver. 45. In confirmation 
of His assertion in ver. 44, Jesus, as 
is His wont, cites Scripture: ἔστι 
γεγραμµένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις, that is, 
it is written in that part of Scripture 
known as “‘ the Prophets”. The passage 
cited is Is. liv. 13, where, in describing 
Messianic times, the prophet says, ‘‘ Thy 


756 


ri 18. 


KATA TQOANNHN 


VI... 


ἀκούσας παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μαθὼν, ἔρχεται πρός µε" 46. " οὐχ 


svii.2o Ἰχ.ὅτι τὸν πατέρα τις ἑώρακεν' εἶ μὴ "ὁ ὢν παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὗτος 


16. 
ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα. 


tx Οοτ.χ.».ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 


47. ἁμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 6 πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ, 
48. ἐγώ cit 6 ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς. 


40. οἱ 


πατέρες ὑμῶν ἔφαγον τὸ μάννα ἐν τῇ ἐρήμω, καὶ ἀπέθανον" 


ea 4 cel A 
u vv. 26, 51.50. οὗτός ἐστιν 6 ἄρτος 6 ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων, ἵνα τις "ἐξ 


αὐτοῦ pdyy καὶ μὴ ἀποθάνῃ. 


Vv Vili. 16, 17. 


51. ἐγώ εἰμι ὅ ἄρτος 6 Lav, 6 ἐκ τοῦ 


Mt. x. 18, οὐρανοῦ καταβάς: ἐάν τις dyn ἐκ τοῦτο τοῦ ἄρτου, ζήσεται ] εἰς 


Acts iii. . δα 
24. τὸν αἰῶνα. 


ς 


Kat ὁ 


ἄρτος ᾿ δὲ ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω, ἡ σάρξ µου ἐστὶν, ἣν 


1 Here and in v. 58 ζησει is read in SDL 33. 


children shall all be taught of God,” 
ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, and 
what this being taught of God means 
He more fully explains in the words was 
οὖν . . . μαθὼν, ‘every one who has 
heard from the Father and has learned 
comes to me”. Both the hearing and 
the learning refer to an inward spiritual 
process. The outward teaching of Scrip- 
ture and of Christ Himself was enjoyed 
by all the people He was addressing ; 
but they did not come to Him. It is 
therefore an inward and individual illu- 
mination by the special operation of God 
that enables men to come to Christ. 
Whether these verses teach “irresistible 
grace’? may be doubted. That they 
teach the doctrine which Augustine 
asserted against Pelagius, viz., that 
power to use grace must itself be 
given by God, is undeniable. That is 
affirmed in the statement that no one 
can come to Christ unless the Father 
draw him. But whether it is also true 
that every one whom God teaches 
comes is not here stated; the καὶ 
μαθὼν introduces a doubtful element. 
[ Wetstein quotes from Polybius διαφέρει 
τὸ μαθεῖν τοῦ µόνον ἀκοῦσαι.]---Ψετ. 
46. Lest His hearers should suppose 
that in Messianic times direct know- 
ledge of God was to be communicated, 
He adds, οὐχ ὅτι τὸν πατέρα τις ἑώρακεν, 
it is not by direct vision men are to learn 
of God. One alone has direct perception 
of the Father, 6 ὢν παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, He 
whose origin is Divine ; not 6 ἀπεσταλ- 
µένος παρὰ Θεοῦ, a designation which 
belonged to all prophets, but He whose 
Being is directly derived from God. 
Similarly, in vii. 29, we find Jesus saying 
ἐγὼ οἶδα αὐτόν ὅτι wap’ αὐτοῦ εἰμί καὶ 
ἐκεϊῖνός µε ἀπέστειλεν, where the source 
of the mission and the source of the 
being are separately mentioned. To' 
refer this exclusive vision of the Father 


to any earthly experience seems out of 
the question. No one who was not 
more than man could thus separate him- 
self from all men. See i. 18. Having 
thus explained that they could not believe 
in Him without having first been taught 
of God, He returns (ver. 47) to the affir- 
mation of ver. 40, ἀμὴν .. . ζωῆς. Their 
unbelief does not alter the fact, nor 
weaken His assurance of the fact. This 
consciousness of Messiahship was so 
identified with His spiritual experience 
and existence that nothing could shake 
it. But now He adds a significant con- 
firmation of His claim.—Vv. 49, 50. οἱ 
πατέρες . . . μὴ ἀποθάνῃ, ‘ Your fathers 
ate the manna in the desert and died: 
this is the bread which comes down out 
of heaven, that a man may eat of it and 
not die”. In other words: The manna 
which was given to your fathers to main- 
tain them in physical, earthly life, could 
not assert its power against death, and 
maintain them continually in life. Your 
fathers died physically. The bread which 
comes down from heaven does not give 
physical life; it is not sent for that 
purpose, but the life which it is given 
to maintain, it maintains in continuance 
and precludes death. Taken in connec- 
tion with the context, the words inter- 
pret themselves. Godet however says: 
6 Jesus, both here and elsewhere, certainly 
denies even physical death in the case of 
the believer. Cf. viii. στ. That which 
properly constitutes death, in what we 
call by this name, is the total cessation 
of moral and physical existence. Now 
this fact does not take place in the case 
of the believer at the moment when his 
friends see him die.” This seems to 
misrepresent the fact of death for the 
sake of misrepresenting the present pas- 
sage.—Ver. 51. In ver. 51 Jesus adds 
two fresh terms in explanation of the 
living bread, which, however, through 


46—54. 


3. UN / ΡΕ} a “~ , mn 3 
ἐγὼ δώσω ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ Kécpou ζωῆς. 
ἀλλήλους ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι λέγοντες, “Mas δύναται οὗτος ἡμῖν δοῦναι τὴν 


, Lal 133 
σάρκα Φαγειν; 


- lol lal A A 
λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ φάγητε τὴν σάρκα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καὶ 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


737 


1 52. Ἐμάχοντο οὖν " πρὸς w πρὸς τς I 
etc., ἐπὶ 
also used; 


54. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “’Apiy ἁμὴν commonly 


the simple 
dative. 
xiii. 18 


4 > ~ 9 > 3 Ν 3 ς 3. x= , x 
πίητε αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα, οὐκ έχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. 54. *O τρώγων and Mt. 


‘ 
µου τὴν σάρκα, καὶ πίνων µου τὸ αἷμα, ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον, καὶ ἐγὼ 


1 Instead of η σαρξ pov . 


. Xxiv. 38 
only. 


. . ζωης BCDL 33 read η σαρξ µου εστιν υπερ τ. τον 


κοσµου ζωης, adopted by W.H.R. Tisch. adopts the reading of ΔΝ, υπερ της του 


κοσμου ζωης, η σαρξ µου εστιν. 
unbedingt und zu streichen”’. 


their want of apprehension, increased 
their difficulty. The first is ἐγώ εἰμι 
..- ζωῆς. In giving this explanation 
He slightly alters the designation of 
Himself as the Bread: He now claims 
to be not “ the bread of life,” but 6 ἄρτος 
ὁ fav, ‘the living bread”. Godet says: 
““The manna, as not itself living, could 
never impart life. But Jesus, because 
He Himself lives, can give life.” That 
is correct, but is not the full meaning. 
6 ζῶν contrasts the bread with the βρῶσις 
ἀπολλυμένη; and as “living water” is 
water running from a fountain in per- 
petual stream, and not a measured 
quantity in a tank, so “living bread”’ is 
bread which renews itself in proportion 
to all needs like the bread of the miracle. 
The second fresh intimation now made 
is 6 ἄρτος bv ἐγὼ δώσω ἡ σάρξ µου ἐστίν 
... This intimation is linked to the 
foregoing by a double conjunction καὶ 6 
ἄρτος δέ, “and besides” indicating, ac- 
cording to classical usage, a new aspect 
or expansion of what has been said. 
The new intimation is at first sight an 
apparent limitation: instead of “I am 
the bread,” He now says ‘“ My flesh is 
tthe bread”. Accordingly some interpre- 
ters suppose that by “flesh” the whole 
manifestation of Christ in human nature 
is meant. Cf. 6 λόγος σάρξ ἐγένετο. 
Thus Westcott says: ‘‘ The life of the 
world in the highest sense springs from 
the Incarnation and Resurrection of 
Christ. By, His Incarnation and Resur- 
rection the ruin and death which sin 
brought in are overcome. The thought 
here is of support and growth, and not 
of Atonement.” To this there are two 
objections. (1) If σάρξ is equivalent 
to the whole manifestation of Christ in 
the flesh, this is not a new statement, 
but a repetition of what has already 
been said. And (2) the δώσω compels 
us to think of a giving yet wuture, 
Besides, the turn taken by the con- 


% 


Weiss is too positive in saying, ‘“‘ Die Worte sind 
T.R. gives the most intelligible sentence. 


versation, vv. 53-57, seems to point 
rather to the atoning sacrifice of Christ. 
[So Euthymius: τὴν σταύρωσιν αὐτοῦ 
προσηµαίνει. τὸ δὲ, ἣν ἐγὼ δώσω, τὸ 
ἑκούσιον ἐμφαίνει τοῦ τοιούτου πάθους, 
So too Cyril: ᾿Αποθνήσκω, φησὶν, ὑπὲρ 
πάντων, ἵνα πάντας ζωοποιήσω δι’ 
ἐμαντοῦ, καὶ ἀντίλντρον τῆς ἁπάντων 
σαρκὸς τὴν ἐμὴν ἐποιησάμην. Bengel 
says: ‘‘ Tota haec de carne et sanguine 
Jesu Christi oratio passionem spectat’’, 
Beza even finds in δώσω the sense 
“offeram Patri in ara crucis”.] The 
giving of His flesh, a still future giving 
which is spoken of as a definite act, is, 
then, most naturally referred to the 
death on the cross. This was to be 
ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς, “ for the sake 
of the life of the world”. ὑπέρ when 
used in connection with sacrifice tends 
to glide into ἀντί; see the Alcestis of 
Eurip. passim and Lampe’s note on this 
verse. Here, however, the idea of sub- 
stitution is not present. It is only hinted 
that somehow the death of Christ is 
needed for the world’s life. This state- 
ment, however, only bewilders the 
crowd; and the next paragraph, wv. 
52-50, gives expression to and deals with 
this bewilderment.—Ver. 52. ᾿Εμάχοντο 
... The further explanations sprang 
from a fresh question put not directly 
to Jesus, but to one or other of the 
crowd. They differed in their judgment 
of Him. Some impatiently denounced 
Him as insane; others suggesting that 
there was truth in His words. The 
discussion all tended to the question 
πῶς δύναται . . . φαγεῖν. He had only 
spoken of “giving” His flesh for the 
life of the world: but they not unreason- 
ably concluded that if so, it must be 
eaten. Their mistake lay in thinking of 
a physical eating.—Vv. 53, 54. εἶπεν 
οὖν .. . ἡμέρφ. Instead of explaining 
the mode Jesus merely reiterates the 
statement. The reason of this is that 


758 


n vv. 40, 44, ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν "τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. 
ἐστι 7 βρῶσις, καὶ τὸ αἷμά µου ἀληθῶς ἐστι πόσις. 


54. Vii. 


37, etc. 
y Dan. i. 1ο, 
z Freq. in 


KATA IQANNHN 


Vi 


55-7 γὰρ σάρξ µου ἀληθῶς } 
56. 6 τρώγων 


pou τὴν σάρκα, καὶ πίνων µου τὸ αἷμα, "ἐν ἐμοὶ péver, κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. 


a Web. ii 57. καθὼς ἀπέστειλέ pe "ὁ Lav πατὴρ, κἀγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα” 


1 


to. Rom. « 
ix. 26." Ὁ 
pdvva, καὶ ἀπέθανον ' 6 


b) Gen.xxi. as K 2» 
11. Deut. αἴιωνα. 


1.17. Jer. 
Vi. I0. 


me x a a 
‘Thess. i. καὶ 6 τρώγων pe, κἀκεῖνος ζήσεται δι ἐμέ. 
ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς' οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον ot πατέρες ὑμῶν τὸ 


58. οὗτός ἐστιν 6 ἄρτος 


τρώγων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον {ήσεται εἰς τὸν 
5ο. Ταῦτα εἶπεν ἐν συναγωγῇ διδάσκων ἐν Καπερναούμ. 
6ο. Πολλοὶ οὖν ἀκούσαντες ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ εἶπον, “> Σκλη- 


1 For αληθως in both occurrences αληθης is read in ΝΕΒ6. 


their attention was thus more likely to 
be fixed on the necessity of using Him 
as the living bread. The difficulty of 
the statement disappears when it is 
perceived that the figure of speech is 
not to be found in the words “ flesh” 
and ‘* blood,” but in the words “ eating” 
and “ drinking”. The actual flesh and 
blood, the human life of Christ, was 
given for men; and men eat His flesh 
and drink His blood, when they use for 
their own advantage His sacrifice, when 
they assimilate to their own being all the 
virtue that was in Him, and that was 
manifested for their sakes. As Liicke 
points out, the σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα form 
together one conception and are equiva- 
lent to the µε of ver. 57. If αἷμα stood 
alone it might refer especially to the 
death of Christ, but taken along with 
odpé it is more natural to refer the 
double expression to the whole mani- 
festation of Christ; and the “eating 
and drinking” can only mean the com- 
plete acceptance of Him and union with 
Him as thus manifested. [τρώγω, 
originally the munching of herbivorous 
animals, was latterly applied to ordinary 
human eating.]}—Vv. 55, 56. This is 
further shown in νν. 55, 56. ἡ γὰρ σάρξ 
µου ἀληθῶς [better ἀληθής] ἐστι βρῶσις, 
“‘ For my flesh is a genuine food and my 
blood is a genuine drink”; with an 
implied contrast to those things with 
which men ordinarily endeavour to 
satisfy themselves. The satisfying, 
genuine character of Christ as the bread 
consists especially in this, that 6 τρώγων 
εκ. ἐν ἐμοὶ µένει κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. He 
becomes as truly assimilated to the life 
of the individual as the nourishing 
elements in food enter into the substance 
of the body. The believer abides in 
Christ as finding his life in Him (Gal. ii. 
20); and Christ abides in the believer, 
continually imparting to him what con- 


stitutes spiritual life. For in Christ man 
reaches the source of all life in the 
Father (ver. 57), καθὼς ἀπέστειλέ µε 6 
tov πατὴρ . . . δι ἐμέ The living 
Father has sent Christ forth as the 
bearer of life. He lives διὰ τὸν πατέρα, 
not equivalent to διὰ τοῦ πατρός, through 
or by means of the Father, but “ because 
of,” or “‘ by reason of the Father”. The 
Father is the cause of my life; I live 
because the Father lives. [Beza quotes 
from the Plutus of Aristoph., 470, the 
declaration of Penia that µόνην ᾿Αγαθῶν 
ἁπάντων οὖσαν αἰτίαν ἐμὲ Ὑμῖν, δι ἐμέ 
τε ζῶντας ἡμᾶς. The Father is the 
absolute source of life; the Son is the 
bearer of that life to the world; cf. v. 
26, where the sane dependence of the 
Son on the Father for life is expressed. 
The second member of the compacison, 
introduced by καί (see Winer, p. 548; 
and the Nic. Ethics, passim), is not, as 
Chrys. and Euthymius suggest, κἀγὼ ζῶ, 
but καὶ 6 τρώγων µε, κἀκεῖνος ζήσεται 
(better ζῆσει) δι épe. (For the form of 
the sentence cf. x. 14.) Every one that 
eateth Christ will by that connection 
participate in the life of God.—Ver. 
58. οὗτός éorw...aidva. These 
characteristics, now mentioned, identify 
this bread from heaven as something of 
a different and superior nature to the 
manna.—Ver. 59. With his usual exact 
specification of time and place John 
adds ταῦτα . . . ἐν Καφαρναούμ. Lampe 
says: ‘‘Colligi etiam inde potest, quod 
haec acciderint in Sabbato”’; but the 
synagogue was available for teaching on 
other days, and it is not likely that on a 
Sabbath so many persons would have 
followed Him across the lake. 

Vv. 60-71. The crisis in Galilee.— 
Ver. 60. Πολλοὶ οὖν . . . ἀκούειν; many 
of His disciples [i.c., of the larger and 
more loosely attached circle of His fol- 
lowers, as distinct from the Twelve, ver. 

‘ 


55-64. 


pds ἐστιν οὗτος ὅ λόγος: τίς δύναται αὐτοῦ ἀκούειν ; 
‘ 3 ~ ~ A 
δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐν * ἑαυτῷ, ὅτι yoyyLoucr περὶ τούτου of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, 
> > - «ς “A ca 2, 
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς “Toto ὑμᾶς σκανδαλίζει ; 


υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀναβαίνοντα ὅπου ἦν τὸ πρότερον; 


ε 


πνεῦμά ἐστι τὸ ζωοποιοῦν, 


ἃ ἐγὼ λαλῶ 1 ὑμῖν, πνεῦμά ἐστι καὶ ζωή ἐστιν. 


< ~ a > , 33 
ύρμων τινες οι ου πιστευουσιν. 


, Cyl ε x Ul ‘\ , > ς 2 5 +9 
τινες εισιν OL μη πιστευοντες, και τις έστιν ο παραδώσων αυτον. 


1 λελαληκα in ΜΒΟΡ it. νυ]ς., εἰς, 


67] having heard the foregoing utterances, 
said Σκληρός ἐστιν οὗτος 6 λόγος. Σκλη- 
pés is rather “hard to receive” than 
‘hard to understand”. Abraham found 
the command to cast out Hagar σκληρός, 
Gen. xxi. 11. Euripides opposes oxAnp’ 
ἀληθῆ, distasteful, uncompromising truths 
to μαλθακὰ ψευδή, flattering falsehoods 
(Frag., 75, Wetstein). The λόγος τε- 
ferred to was especially, ver. 58, οὗτος 
ἐστιν 6 ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς 
as is proved by vv. 61, 62. But this 
must be taken together with His state- 
ment in ver. 51, that He would give His 
flesh, and the development of this idea 
in vv. 53, 54, τίς δύναται αὐτοῦ ἀκούειν ; 
‘““who can listen {ο Him?”—Ver. 61. 
This apparently was said out of the 
hearing of Jesus, for ver. 61 says εἰδὼς 
δὲ ὁ “Ingots ἐν ἑανυτῷ, “ Jesus knowing 
in Himself,” that is, perceiving that they 
were murmuring, He intuitively under- 
stood what it was they were stumbling 
at, and said τοῦτο ὑμᾶς . . . πρότερον: 
“Does this saying stumble you? If 
then ye see the Son of Man ascending 
where He was before ——’” What are 
we to supply? Either, Will you not be 
much more scandalised? Or, Will you 
not then be convinced? According to 
the former, the sense would be: If now 
you say, how can this Man give us His 
flesh to eat? much more will you then 
say so when His flesh wholly disappears. 
But the second interpretation gives the 
better sense: You will find it easier to 
believe I came down from heaven, when 
you see me returning thither. Cf, iii. 
13; xiii. 3. You will then recognise also 
in what sense I said that you must eat 
my flesh. τὸ wvetpa ἐστι τὸ ζωοποιοῦν, 
ἡ σὰρξ οὐκ ὠφελεῖ οὐδέν. It was there- 
{οτε the spirit animating the flesh in His 
giving of it which profited; not the ex- 
ternal sacrifice of His body, but the 
spirit which prompted it was efficacious. 
The acceptance of God’s judgment of 


EYATTEAION 


159 


61. "Εἰδὼς ο xiii. i. 

k. xi. 17. 
Mk. v. 30. 
5 Gen. xviii. 
62. ἐὰν οὖν θεωρῆτε τὸν 12. 


63. τὸ 


ἡ σὰρξ οὐκ ὠφελεῖ οὐδέν' τὰ ῥήματα 


64. GAN εἰσὶν ἐξ 


"Hider γὰρ 3 ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, dxvi.gonly. 


am ἀρχῆς 
freq. 


sin, the devotedness to man and perfect 
harmony with God, shown in the cross, 
is what brings life to the world; and it 
is this Spirit men are invited to partake 
of. It is therefore not a fleshly but a 
spiritual transaction of which I have been 
speaking to you. ([Bengel excellently: 
‘*Non sola Deitas Christi, nec solus 
Spiritus sanctus significatur, sed universe 
Spiritus, cui contradistinguitur οαγο”..] 
τὰ ῥήματα . . . ἐστιν, His entire dis- 
course at Capernaum, and whatever other 
sayings He had uttered, were spirit and 
life. It was through what He said that 
He made Himself known and offered 
Himself tothem. To those who believed 
His words, spirit and life came in their 
believing. By believing they were brought 
into contact with the life in Him.—Ver. 
64. But τινὲς οὐ πιστεύουσιν, and there- 
fore do not receive the life. This Jesus 
said 78et γὰρ . . . αὐτόν, for Jesus knew 
from the first who they were that believed 
not,and whoit was whoshould betray Him. 
“Hoc ideo addidit Evangelista, ne quis 
putet temere judicasse Christum de suis 
auditoribus,”’ Calvin. Euthymius says 
it illustrates His forbearance. ἐξ ἀρχῆς, 
from the beginning of His connection 
with individuals. Weiss supposes it 
means from the beginning of their not 
believing. He gave utterance to this 
knowledge in ver. 26. He even knew 
who it was who should betray Him. 
This is said in anticipation of vv. 70, 71. 
This declaration raises the question, 
Why then did Jesus call Judas to the 
Apostolate? Holtzmann indeed sup- 
poses that this intimation is purely apolo- 
getic and intended to show that Jesus 
was not deceived in appointing Judas. It 
is unnecessary to increase the difficulty 
by supposing the ἐξ ἀρχῆς to refer to the 
time previous to his call. Jesus saw in 
Judas qualities fitting him to be an 
Apostle; but seeing him among the 
others He recognised that he was an 


760 


KATA IOQANNHN 


νι. 


6ς. Καὶ ἔλεγε, “Ata τοῦτο εἴρηκα ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐλθεῖν 


εΟΡ. iii. 27. πρός µε, ἐὰν μὴ ᾖ δεδοµένον αὐτῷ "ἐκ τοῦ πατρός µου.” 
τούτου πολλοὶ ἀπῆλθον τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ * eis τὰ ὀπίσω, καὶ οὐκέτι 
67. εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς δώδεκα, “ Μὴ 
68. ᾽Απεκρίθη οὖν αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, 


f xix. 12; 

viii. 31. 

Heb. x. 38. > s 
g xviii. 6; PET αὐτοῦ περιεπάτουν. 

XX. 14. Νε n θ AN ε , >» 

Mk. xiii, καὶ ὕμεις JeAeTe ὑπάγειν; 

16. Gen. , 

κα ος Κύρε, πρὸς τίνα ἀπελευσόμεθα ; 
h Acts v. 20. 

υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος. 1 

i xv. 16; 

xiii. 18. 

1ο Χριστος . . 


66. "Ἐκ 


Ῥῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις' 


69. καὶ ἡμεῖς πεπιστεύκαμεν, καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν ὅτι σὺ et ὁ Χριστὸς 6 


70. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Μησοῦς, 


“*OdK ἐγὼ ὑμᾶς τοὺς δώδεκα ἐξελεξάμην, καὶ ἐξ ὑμῶν εἷς διάβολός 


. ζωντος only in inferior authorities; ο αγιος του Θεου (without 


τ. ζωντος) in ΝΡΟΡΙ,. Cp. Mk. i. 24; Acts iii. 14. 


unfaithful man. To suppose that He 
called him in the clear knowledge that 
he would betray Him is to introduce an 
unintelligible or artificial element into 
the action of Christ. [Neither Calvin 
nor Beza makes any remark on the clause. 
Bruce, Training of the Twelve; and 
Reith, in loc., should be consulted.]} 
Jesus already recognised in what manner 
His death would be compassed: by 
treachery. The fact stated in ver. 64, 
that some of His own disciples could yet 
not believe in Him, illustrates the truth 
of what He had said, ver. 44, that no one 
can come to Him except the Father draw 
him.—Ver. 65. He therefore points this 
out, διὰ τοῦτο . .. πατρός pov. All 
that brings men to Christ is the Father’s 
gift.—Ver. 66. ἐκ τούτου, “on this”’; 
neither exclusively ‘from this time” 
ἔκτοτε (Euthymius), ‘from this moment 
onwards’’ (Liicke), nor exclusively ‘‘ on 
this account,”’ but a combination of both. 
Cf. xix. 12. Here the time is in the 
foreground, as is shown by the οὐκ ἔτι 
following. Lampe has: ‘Qui ab illo 
tempore Jesum deserebant, clare indica- 
bant, quod propter hunc sermonem istud 
fecerint”. πολλοὶ ἀπῆλθον εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω 
... περιεπάτουν. Many of those who 
had up to this time been following Him 
and listening to His teaching, returned 
now to their former ways and no longer 
accompanied Jesus. [ὀπίσω δὲ νόει por, 
καὶ τὸν πρότερον βίον αὐτῶν, εἰς ὃν πάλιν 
ὑπέστρεψαν, Euthymius.] εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω 
occurs xviii. 6, xx. 14: also Mk. xiii. 16. 
But the most instructive occurrence is 
in Ps. xliv. 18, οὐκ ἀπέστη eis τὰ ὀπίσω 
ἡ καρδία ἡμῶν, where the literal sense 
passes into the spiritual meaning, 
apostasy, abandonment of God.—Ver. 
67. This giving up of their adherence 
to Christ was probably manifested in an 


immediate and physical withdrawal from 
His presence. For He turned to the 
Twelve with the words: μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς 
θέλετε ὑπάγειν; ‘“Sciebat id non 
facturos,’’ Lampe, who adds six reasons 
for the question, of which the most im- 
portant are: ‘‘ut confessionem illam 
egregiam eliceret, qua se genuinos 
discipulos Jesu esse mox_ probaturi 
erant”?; and “ut edoceret, se nonnisi 
voluntarios discipulos quaerere”’. Pro- 


‘bably also that they might be con- 


firmed in their faith by the expression | 
of it, and that He might be gladdened. 
—Ver. 68. Simon Peter answered in 
name of all, Κύριε . . . ζῶντο. He 
gives a threefold reason why they re- 
mained faithful while others left. (1) 
πρὸς τίνα ἀπελευσόμεθα: “To whom 
shall we go away?” implying that 
they must attach themselves to some one 
as a teacher and mediator in divine 
things. They cannot imagine that any 
one should be to them what already 
Jesus had been. (2) Especially are they 
bound to Him, because He has words of 
eternal life, ῥήματα ζωῆς αἰωνίου ἔχεις. 
They had experienced that His words 
were spirit and life, ver. 63. In them- 
selves a new life had been quickened by 
His words, a life they recognised as the 
true, highest, eternal life. To have re- 
ceived eternal life from Christ makes it 
impossible to abandon Him. (3) καὶ ἡμεῖς 
(ver. 69), ‘‘ we for our part,” whatever 
others think, πεπιστεύκαµεν καὶ ἐγνώ- 
καµεν “have believed and know,” ¢f. 
t John iv. 16, ἡμεῖς ἐγνώκαμεν καὶ 
πεπιστεύκαμεν, Which shows we cannot 
press the order [cf. Augustine’s “‘credimus 
ut intelligamus”] but must accept the 
double expression as a strong assevera- 
tion of conviction: we have believed 
and we know by εχρετιεπεεδτισὺεῖ ... 


65—71. VII. 1—3. 


> » 
ἐστιν: 


VII. 1. ΚΑΙ “περιεπάτει 5 ᾿Ιησοῦς μετὰ 
οὗ γὰρ ἤθελεν ἐν τῇ ᾿Ιουδαίᾳ περιπατεῖν, 


2 a > a 
loudator ἀποκτεῖναι. 
Σσκηνοπηγία. 


βηθι ἐντεῦθεν, καὶ ὕπαγε εἰς τὴν ᾿Ιουδαίαν, ἵνα καὶ ot µαθηταί σου κ. 


‘© ἅγιος τοῦ Θεοῦ occurs in Mk. i. 24, Lk. 
vi. 34: cf. Acts iii. 14, iv. 27, 30; Rev. 
iii. 7, The expression is not Johannine ; 
but the idea of the Messiah as conse- 
crated or set apart is found in x. 36, ὃν 6 
Πατὴρ ἡγίασε. Peter’s confession here is 
equivalent to his confession at Caesarea 
Philippi, recorded in the Synoptic 
Gospels.—Ver. 70. ἀπεκρίθη . . . ἐστιν; 
this reply of Jesus to Peter’s warm- 
hearted confession at first sight seems 
chilling. Peter had claimed for him- 
self and the rest a perfect loyalty; but 
this confidence of Peter’s carried in it a 
danger, and must be abated. Also it 
was well that the conscience of Judas 
should be pricked. Therefore Jesus 
says: Even in this carefully selected 
circle of men, individually chosen by 
myself from the mass, there is not the 
perfect loyalty you boast.—é— ὑμῶν els 
διάβολός ἐστιν. Even of you one is a 
devil. Liucke, referring to Esth. vii. 4 
and viii. 1, where Haman is called ὁ 
διάβολος, as being “the slanderer,” or 
‘‘the enemy,” suggests that a similar 
meaning may be appropriate here. But 
Jesus calls Peter “Satan” and may 
much more call Judas “‘a devil”. Besides 
in the present connection “‘traitor’’ is 
quite as startling a word as “ devil ”.— 
Ver. 71. Using the knowledge brought 
by subsequent events John explains that 
Judas was meant, ἔλεγε δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιούδαν 
Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτην [better Ισκαριώτου, 
which shows that the father of Judas was 
also known as Iscariot], ἔλεγε with the 
accusative, meaning ‘‘ He spoke of,” is 
classical, and see Mk. xiv. 71. The 
word ‘‘ Iscariot” is generally supposed 


to be equivalent to ΓΙ WN, Ish 


Keriyoth, a man of Kerioth in the tribe 
of Judah (Josh. xv. 25). Cf. Ishtob, a 
man of Tob (Joseph., Ant., vii. 6, 1, 
quoted in Smith’s Dict.). The name 
Judas now needs no added surname. 

C@arrers VII.-X. 21. $esus at the 
Feast of Tabernacles, and subsequently 
in Ferusalem. 

CHapTerR ΥΠ. At the Feast.—VWv. 1- 
53. The circumstances of His visit to 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


>. 9 3 8 ς 

2. "Hy δὲ ἐγγὺς ἡ 

. εἶπον οὖν πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ 
ρ 


761 


71. Ἔλεγε δὲ τὸν Ιούδαν Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτην : οὗτος γὰρ 
ἤμελλεν αὐτὸν παραδιδόναι, els Gv ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα. 


a xi. 54. 


mn 3 κ ν Mk. xi. 27. 
ταῦτα ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαία : b ν. 16. 
ΗΝ” αν ε. Exod. ii. 
ὅτι " ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν οἱ 15. Jer. 
κ ο esa ts ; . Ἐκ. 
ἑορτὴ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἡ c Deut. xvi. 

mn 16. Lev. 
ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, “ Μετά- κκ. 34. 


1 Mace. x, 


Ferusalem.—Vv. 14-36. He teaches, and 
discussions regarding Him are evoked.— 
V. 37-end. His manifestation on the last 
day of the Feast, and the consequent action 
of the Sanhedrim.—Ver. 1. Having de- 
scribed the crisis in Galilee the evangelist 
proceeds to describe the various opinions 
and discussions held regarding Jesus in 
Jerusalem. See Sanday, p. 144. In 
chap. vi., a Passover was said to be at 
Παπά; but Jesus did not go to it, but con- 
tinued to go about teaching in Galilee, 
περιεπάτει 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς μετὰ ταῦτα ἐν τῇ 
Γαλιλαία. Although appropriate to a 
single school, περιπάτειν denoted gener- 
ally the going about of a teacher with 
his disciples; hence, ‘‘to dispute,” or 
‘to discourse”’. περίπατος in Aristoph., 
Frogs, 907 and 918, means “a philo- 
sophical discussion or argumentation”’. 
John assigns a reason for Jesus remain- 
ing in Galilee; this, according to Holtz- 
mann and Weiss, proves that he con- 
sidered the Judaean ministry the rule, 
the Galilean the exception. But the 
assigning of a reason may be accounted 
for by the unlikelihood of Jesus remain- 
ing in Galilee after what was recorded 
in chap. vi. His reason for remaining in 
Galilee, even after His rejection there, 
was the active hostility of the Jews, 
ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἀποκτεῖναι. 
See νετ. 18. Things were not yet ripe 
for His exposing Himself to the hostility 
of the authorities.—Ver. 2. But occasion 
arose for His abandoning His purpose 
to remain in Galilee. qv δὲ . . « 


σκηνοπηγία. In Hebrew nian am 


(Lev. xxiii. 34), the Feast of Succoth, or 
Booths, in Greek σκηνοπηγία, the fixing 
of tents; so called because in this Feast 
the Jews commemorated how their fathers 
had dwelt in tents, and been fed and 
cared for as if in a settled condition. It 
was one of the great Feasts, and as it 
fell in October and Jesus had not at- 
tended the previous Passover, it might 
seem desirable that He should go up to 
Jerusalem now.—Ver. 3. The desirable- 
ness of doing so is urged by His brothers, 
εἶπον . . . τῷ Kdopw. The reason they 


762 


KATA TQANNHN 


VIi. 


d Fut. indic. “ Qewpyowor! τὰ ἔργα σου & ποιεῖς: 4. οὐδεὶς yap ° ἐν κρυπτῷ τι 


never in 
classics 


a Π A 
9 ποιεῖ, καὶ ζητεϊὶ αὐτὸς 
after ἵνα; 


. ‘ ~ 35 
freq.inN. Φανέρωσον σεαυτὸν τῷ κόσµω. 


T., Bur- . ὡς λος 
ton, 199. ἐπίστευον εἰς αὐτόν. 


exviil. 20; , 


ἐν παρρησίᾳ εἶναι. 


εἰ ταῦτα ποιεῖς, 
5. Οὐδὲ γὰρ fot ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ 


6. Λέγει οὖν αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “™‘O καιρὸς 6 


commonly ἐμὸς οὕπω πάρεστιν: ὁ δὲ καιρὸς 6 ὑμέτερος πάντοτέ ἐστιν ! ἔτοιμος. 


ἐν τῷ κ. 


fxi.54. Col. 7. } οὗ δύναται 6 κόσμος μισεῖν Spas: ἐμὲ δὲ μισεῖ, ὅτι ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ 


ii. 15. 


‘ ~ - 
α Mk.iii.21. περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ πονηρά ἐστιν. 


hii. 4; viii 


8. ὑμεῖς * ἀνάβητε 


ea 4 , 6 
20. εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν ταύτην : ἐγὼ οὕπω ὃ ἀναβαίνω eis τὴν ἑορτὴν ταύτην, 


ix Pet. i. 5 


o 
j iii, το; xv. OTL 6 καιρὸς 6 ἐμὸς οὕπω  πεπλήρωται.” 


το. a i 
k Zech. xiv. ἔμεινεν ἐν τῇ Γαλιλαία. 
18. Ch. 
xii. 20. 

Mk. x. 32. 
1 Mk. i. 15. 


1 θεωρησουσι in ΜΒ "ΓΙ, 


9. Ταῦτα δὲ εἰπὼν αὐτοῖς, 


c ~ 
10. Ὡς δὲ ἀνέβησαν οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ, τότε καὶ αὐτὸς ἀνέβη εἰς 


Σταντην deleted in modern editions on authority of S$$caBDKL. 


3 ov« is read in RDKM vet. Lat. vulg. Memph. Arm. Tr. Ti. Meyer, Weiss; ουπω 
in BLT syr. Theb. Goth. vulg. codd. aliq. W.H. R.V. 


advanced was “that Thy disciples also 
may see Thy works which Thou doest”’. 
καὶ of µαθηταί σου seems to imply that 
since the Feeding of the Five Thousand 
in April, Jesus had been living in com- 
parative retirement, perhaps at Nazareth. 
At Jerusalem, all who were attached to 
Him would be found at the Feast; and 
the brothers recognise that He would 
then have an opportunity of putting His 
elaims to the proof. “Χο one,” they 
say, ‘who seeks public recognition con- 
fines his activities to a hidden and 
private corner.” ἐν παρρησίᾳ, as in xi. 
54, means ‘“‘ openly” or “‘in public,” and 
is in direct contrast to ἐν κρυπτῷ. Hav- 
ing laid down the general law, they then 
apply it to Him, ‘‘if (or ‘since,’ not ex- 
pressing doubt) Thou doest these things, 
show Thyself to the world”. Licke, 
following Euthymius, thinks doubt is im- 
plied in εἰ; but this implies an ignorance 
on the part of the brothers which is in- 
conceivable.—Ver. 5. It is indeed added 
οὐδὲ γὰρ . . . αὐτόν, “ For not even did 
His brothers believe in Him”; but this 
does not mean that they did not believe 
He wrought miracles, but that they had 
not submitted to His claim to be Messiah. 
They required to see Him publicly ac- 
knowledged before they could believe. 
Therefore this clause is introduced to 
explain why they urged Him to go to 
Jerusalem.—Ver. 6. His answer was 
ὁ καιρὸς 6 ἐμὸς οὕπω πάρεστιν . . . 
ἕτοιμος. The time for my manifestation 
to the authorities as Messiah is not yet 
come; but no time is inappropriate or 


unsafe for you to show yourselves.—Ver. 
7. The reason of the different procedure 
lies in the different relation to the world 
held by Jesus and His brothers. οὐ 
δύναται . . . ἐστιν. There is no danger 
of your incurring the world’s hatred by 
anything you do or say; because your 
wishes and actions are in the world’s 
own spirit. But me the world hates, 
and I cannot at random or on every 
occasion utter to it my claims and pure 
pose, because the very utterance of these 
claims causes it to be conscious that its 
desires are earthly (see chap. vi. passim). 
This hatred of the world compelled Him 
to choose His time for manifesting Him- 
self.—Ver. 8. ἡὑμεῖς . . . πεπλήρωται 
“Go ye up to the feast. I go not up yet 
to this Feast, for my time is not yet 
fulfilled.” His time for manifesting Him- 
self publicly was not yet come, and 
therefore He did not wish to go up to 
the feast with His brothers, who were 
eager for some public display. Had He 
gone in their company He would have 
been proclaimed, and would have ap- 
peared to be the nominee of His own 
family. It was impossible He should go 
on any such terms.—Ver. 9. He there- 
fore remained where He was.—Ver. 1Ο. 
Ὡς δὲ ἀνέβησαν ... κρυπτφ. “ But 
when His brothers had gone up, then He 
also went up to the Feast, not openly, 
but, as it were, in secret.” That,is to 
say, He went up, but not at His brothers’ 
instigation, nor with the publicity they 
had recommended. [Of course if we 
read in ver. 8 ἔγω οὐκ ἀναβαίνω a change 


4—16. 


τὴν ἑορτὴν, οὗ φανερῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ds ἐν κρυπτῷ. 


ΒΥΑΓΓΕΔΙΟΝ 


793 


II. Οἱ οὖν “loudator 


a A A ‘ a 32 
ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ ἑορτῇ, καὶ ἔλεγον, “Mod ἐστὶν ἐκεῖνος ; 


12. Καὶ '' γογγυσμὸς πολὺς περὶ αὐτοῦ ἦν ἐν τοῖς ὄχλοις. 


ς ‘\ . 
οἱ µεν m ix. 16. 


ἔλεγον, “Ore ἀγαθός ἐστιν: ἄλλοι δὲ ἔλεγον, “OU- ἀλλὰ πλανᾷ 


A ” 3» 
τὸν ὄχλον. 
τὸν φόβον τῶν Ιουδαίων. 


13. "Οὖδεὶς μέντοι παρρησίᾳ ἐλάλει περὶ αὐτοῦ, διὰ 2 ix. 22. 


14. Ἠδη δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς ” μεσούσης, ἀνέβη ὅ ᾿Ιησοῦς eis τὸ ἱερὸν, ο Exod. xii. 


καὶ ἐθίδασκε. 


Ργράμματα ode, μὴ µεµαθηκώς; 


of mind must be supposed, although not 
the “‘inconstantia”’ alleged by Porphyry.] 

Vv. 11-13. Disappointment at Fesus’ 
non-appearance.—Ver. 11. Οἱ οὖν 
᾿Ιονδαῖοι . . . ἐκεῖνος; ‘the Jews,” 
possibly, as usual in John, the authorities 
(so Meyer, Weiss, etc.), and thus in 
contrast to the ὄχλοι of ver. 12; but ver. 
15 rather indicates that the term is used 
more generally, They looked for Him, 
expecting that He would appear at least 
at this third feast. They asked mot ἐστὶν 
éxetvos; which Luther, Meyer, etc., 
think contemptuous; but ἐκεῖνος cannot 
thus be pressed. Cf. 1 John passim.— 
Ver. 12. Among the masses (ἐν τοῖς 
ὄχλοις) there was γογγυσμὸς πολύς 
regarding Him; not “ murmuring,” as 
R.V., but rather ‘‘ whispering,” sup- 
pressed discussion in low tones, in 
corners, and among friends ; ‘‘ halblaute 

.Mittheilung entgegengesetzter Ansich- 
ten” (Holtzmann), ‘‘ viel im Volke tiber 
ihn herumgeredet ” (Weizsacker). Speci- 
mens of this talk are given: οἱ μὲν .. . 
ὄχλον. ‘Some said, He is a good 
man,” ἀγαθός, pure in motive and seek- 
ing to do good. ‘But others said, No: 
but He misleads the multitude” (Mt. 
xxvii. 63, Lk, xxiii. 5), that is, seeks 
to ingratiate Himself with the people 
to serve His own επάς.--Οὖδεὶς .. . 
Ιουδαίων. ‘*No one, however, talked 
openly about Him, for fear of the Jews.” 
Until the Jews, the authorities, gave 
their decision, neither party dared to 
utter its opinion openly. 

Vv. 14-36. The teaching of Fesus at 
the Feast of Tabernacles. [Spitta sup- 
poses that the original place of para- 
graph vv. 15-24 was at the end of chap. 
v.] So far as reported this teaching 
is found in three short statements: (1) 
in justification of His authority as a 
teacher ; (2) in assertion of His Divine 
origin ; and (3) of His approaching de- 
parture. This threefold teaching elicited 


15. καὶ ἐθαύμαζον ot Ιουδαῖοι λέγοντες, “ Mas οὗτος 
16. ᾽Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ᾽ 
καὶ εἶπεν, ΄ Ἡ ἐμὴ διδαχὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὴ, ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέµψαντός pe - 


20; XXXiv. 
22. 

Dan. i. 4. 
Is, xxix. 
12. 2Tim. 
11. 15. 


expressions of opinion from three parties: 
(1) from “the Jews” (15-24) ; (2) from 
inhabitants of Jerusalem (25-31); (3) 
from the officers sent to apprehend Him 
(32-36).—Ver. 14. "Ἠδη δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς 
μεσοῦσης. “' But when it was now mid- 
feast,” 7.¢., the fourth day. pecotv is 
commonly used in this sense: ἡμέρα 
μεσοῦσα, midday; θέρος μεσοῦν, mid- 
ΒΙΠΙΠΙΕΓ.---ἀνέβη . . . ἐδίδασκε. '' Jesus 
went up to the temple and taught”’; see 
xviii. 20; He did not go to Jerusalem to 
seclude Himself and worship in private, 
nor did He go to proclaim Himself 
explicitly as Messiah. He went and 
taught. His teaching astonished the 
Jews, and they asked Πῶς οὗτος ypap- 
para olde μὴ µεµαθηκώς; It is not His 
wisdom that astonishes them, for even 
uneducated men are often wise; but 
His learning or knowledge. γράμματα 
(Acts xxvi. 24) ‘included the whole 
circle of rabbinical training, the sacred 
Scriptures, and the comments and tradi- 
tions which were afterwards elaborated 
into the Mishna and Gemara’’ (Plumptre, 
Christ and Christendom). But it cannot 
be supposed that Jesus made Himself 
acquainted with these comments. His 
skill in interpreting Scripture and His 
knowledge of it is what is referred to. 
What the scribes considered their pre- 
rogative, He, without their teaching, 
excelled them in.—Ver. 16. But though 
not received from them, it was a derived 
teaching. He is not self-taught. ‘H ἐμὴ 
διδαχἡ ... pe. The teaching which I 
give has not its source in my know- 
ledge but in Him that sent me. ‘“ Der 
Autodidakt in Wahrheit ein Theodidakt 
ist,’ Holtzmann. The truest self- 
renunciation is the highest claim. That 
this claim was true He proceeds to show 
(1) from the conviction of every one who 
desired to do God’s will, ver. 17; and 
(2) from His own character, ver. 18.— 
Ver. 17. ἐάν tig... λαλῶ. “If any 


764 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


Vil. 


qMt.viiar.17. ἐάν τις θέλῃ τὸ θέλημα αὐτοῦ ποιεῖν, γνώσεται περὶ τῆς 


isd. i. 
25. 

τ Here only 
in Ν.Τ., 
freq. in 
Job. 


> ” 
οὐκ εστιν. 


5 Rom. ii. 
14, etc. 
t vill. 48. 


lal “ , lal - 
ὑμῶν "ποιεῖ τὸν νόµον; τί µε ζητεῖτε ἀποκτεῖναι; ” 


διδαχῆς, ' πότερον ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐστιν, ἢ ἐγὼ ἀπ᾿ ἐμαυτοῦ λαλῶ. 
18. 6 dd’ ἑαυτοῦ λαλῶν, τὴν δόξαν τὴν ἰδίαν ζητεῖ: 6 δὲ {ζητῶν τὴν 
δόξαν τοῦ πέµψαντος αὐτὸν, οὗτος ἀληθής ἐστι, καὶ ἀδικία ἐν αὐτῷ 
19. 08 Μωσῆς δέδωκεν ] ὑμῖν τὸν νόµον, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ 


20. "᾿Απεκρίθη 


” Ν 9 a - 
ὁ ὄχλος καὶ etme, “΄Δαιμόνιον ἔχεις: τίς σε ζητεὶ ἀποκτεῖναι ;~ 


3 , > A ΔΝ a 
21. ᾽Απεκρίθη 6 “Ingots καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Ev ἔργον ἐποίησα, καὶ 


1 «δωκεν in BD; δεδωκεν in SLT. 


man willeth to do His will, he shall 
know concerning the teaching, whether 
it is of God (or from God) or I speak 
from myself.” As Jesus everywhere 
asserts (v. 46, xviii. 37), he who thirsts 
for God will recognise Him as God’s 
messenger; he who hungers for righteous- 
ness is filled in Jesus; he who is of the 
truth hears His voice. The teaching of 
Jesus is recognised as Divine by those 
whose purpose and desire it is to be in 
harmony with God.—Ver. 18. There 
are also two different kinds of teachers: 
the one ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ λαλῶν, speaks his own 
mind, teaches his own ideas, does not 
represent God and reveal His mind; 
because he τὴν δόξαν τὴν ἰδίαν ζητεῖ, 
“seeks his own glory,’’ which of course 
cannot be reached by representing him- 
self to be merely the herald of another’s 
glory. The other style of teacher is 
described in the words 6 δὲ ζητῶν .. . 
ἔστιν. Plainly He who seeks the glory 
of Him whose ambassador He is, has no 
interest in falsifying matters to advance 
His own interests. If His aim is to 
advance the glory of Him who has sent 
Him, He will truthfully deliver His 
message ; ἀληθής ἐστι, καὶ ἀδικία . . . 
and injustice, dishonesty, is not in Him. 
The application of this general principle 
to Jesus was obvious.—Ver. 19. οὐ 
Μωσῆς . . . ἀποκτεῖναι., The connec- 
tion is not obvious, but seems to be 
this: You reject my teaching, but that 
is not surprising, for you reject Moses’ 
also (cf. ν, 39, 45-47). ‘‘ Did not Moses 
give you the law?” or, “Hath not 
Moses given you the law?” [the point of 
interrogation should be after the first 
vémov; none after the second]. “Yet 
none of you keeps it. If you did you 
would not seek to kill me.” Was there 
not a former revelation of God which 
should have prevented you from thus 
violently rejecting my teaching ?—Ver. 
20. This, some of the crowd think 


mere raving. He is a monomaniac 
labouring under α hallucination that 
people wish to kill Him.—Aatpéviov 

. ἀποκτεῖναι; This question, repudi- 
ating the idea that any one seeks 
to slay Him, needs no answer and 
gets none.—Ver. 21. Jesus prefers to 
expose the unjustifiable character of the 
hostility which pursued Him (ver. 16). 
Referring to the miracle wrought at 
Bethesda, and which gave occasion to 
this hostility, He says ἕν épyov... 
σαββάτω. One single work I did and ye 
all marvel [are horrified or scandalised] ; 
for this same object, of imparting health, 
Moses gave you circumcision, an ordi- 
nance that continues through all the 
generations and regularly sets aside the 
Sabbath law. If circumcision is per- 
formed, lest the law of Moses be broken, 
are ye angry at me for making a man 
every whit whole [or rather, for making 
an entire or whole man healthy] on the 
Sabbath day? The argument is obvious ; 
and its force is brought out by the anti- 
thetical form of the sentence: the ἕν 
ἔργον of the healing of the impotent man 
is contrasted with the continuous ordi- 
nance of circumcision, and so the aorist 
is used of the one, the perfect of the 
other. In νετ. 23 περιτομὴν λαμβάνει 
is contrasted with ὅλον ἄνθβωπον ὑγιῆ, 
the partial and symbolic with the complete 
and actual soundness. The argument is 
all the more telling because a “‘ vis medi- 
catrix,”” as well as a ceremonial purity 
(but vide Meyer), was ascribed to circum- 
cision [‘ praeputium est vitium in cor- 
pore’’}. Wetstein quotes from a Rabbi 
a singularly analogous argument: ‘Si 
circumcisio, quae fit in uno membrorum 
248 hominis, pellit Sabbatum, quanto 
magis verum est, conservationem vitae 
Sabbatum pellere?” The parenthesis 
in ver. 22, οὐχ ὅτι . . . πατέρων, is ap- 
parently thrown in for accuracy’s sake, 
lest some captious persons should divert 


17—27. EYATTEAION 765 


πάντες θαυµάζετε. 22. "διὰ τοῦτο Μωσῆς δέδωκεν ὑμῖν τὴν περι- α Lev. xii. 
‘ lel φ 3 ‘ 74's - 4 = Gen. 
τομὴν, οὐχ ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Μωσέως ἐστὶν, GAN’ ἐκ τῶν πατέρων: καὶ ἐν xvii. το. 
σαββάτῳ περιτέµνετε ἄνθρωπον. 23. εἰ περιτομὴν λαμβάνει ἄνθρω- 
mos ἐν σαββάτω, ἵνα μὴ λυθῇ ὁ νόµος Μωσέως, ἐμοὶ ” χολᾶτε ὅτι v3 Macc. iii 
I 


ὅλον ἄνθρωπον ὑγιῆ ἐποίησα ἐν σαββάτῳ; 
ὄψιν, ἀλλὰ τὴν δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνατε.” 


24. μὴ κρίνετε kat w Deut. i. 
16. Zech 


1 35. Ἔλεγον οὖν τινες vii.g. 


~ 5ς - A ~ 
ἐκ τῶν Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν, “Od, οὗτός ἐστιν ὃν ζητοῦσιν ἀποκτεῖναι ; 


26. καὶ ἴδε παρρησίᾳ λαλεῖ, καὶ οὐδὲν αὐτῷ λέγουσι. 
ἀληθῶς ἔγνωσαν ot ἄρχοντες, ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς 2 ὁ Χριστός ; 


ο μήποτε x Gen. xlvii. 
18. Jud. 
iii. 24. 


27. ἀλλὰ τοῦτον οἴδαμεν πόθεν ἐστίν' 6 δὲ Χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται, 


1 «pwere in BDL; κρινατε NXP. 


2 αληθως deleted by modern editors as in SBDKL. 


attention from the argument by objecting 
to the statement that Moses had ‘‘ given” 
them circumcision. The reference of διὰ 
τοῦτο in the same verse is obscure. Some 
editors join these words with θαυμάζετε ; 
but although in Mk. vi. 6 διά follows 
θαυμάζειν, this construction does not 
occur in John. Besides, John frequently 
begins his sentences with διὰ τοῦτο; and 
if νετ. 22 begins with Μωσῆς, such a 
commencement is certainly abrupt. Re- 
taining διὰ τοῦτο as part of ver. 22, the 
words might be understood thus: ‘‘I have 
done one work and ye all marvel: there- 
fore (be it known unto you) Moses has 
given you,” etc., z.¢., ‘I will remove 
your astonishment: you yourselves per- 
form circumcision,’ etc. See Winer, 
p- 68. So Holtzmann, and Weizsacker, 
who renders: ‘‘Darum: Moses hat 
euch,” etc. This gives a good sense, 
but surely the ellipsis is too severe. 
Holtzmann’s reference to vi. 65 tells 
rather against it, for there εἴρηκα is 
added. May διὰ τοῦτο not mean, “on 
this account,” 2.6., for the same reason as 
I had in healing the impotent man, did 
Moses give youcircumcision? I did one 
work of healing and ye marvel. But 
with a similar object Moses gave you 
circumcision. This seems best to suit 
the words and the context. He adds to 
His argument the comprehensive advice 
of νετ. 24. μὴ κρίνετε kat’ dw... 
κρίνατε. ‘‘ Judge not according to ap- 
pearance: ” κατ’ ὄψιν, according to what 
presents itself to the eye; the Pharisaic 
vice. In appearance the healing of the 
impotent man was a breach of the 
Sabbath-law. Ne righteous judgment 
can be come to if appearances decide. 
For κρίσιν κρίνειν, cf. Plato Rep., 360 E ; 


and cf. οἰκίαν olxetv, βαδίζειν ὁδόν, 
πεσεῖν πτώματα, etc. 

Vv. 25-31. Opinion of inhabitants of 
Ferusalem regarding Fesus. Knowing 
the hostility of the authorities, they ex- 
press surprise that Jesus should be al- 
lowed to teach openly; and wonder 
whether the authorities themselves can 
have changed their opinion about Him. 
This they find it difficult to believe, 
because on the point of origin Jesus does 
not satisfy Messianic requirements. — 
Ver. 25. Ἔλεγον οὖν, in consequence of 
the bold denunciation which they had 
heard from the lips of Jesus. ἡτινὲς ἐκ 
τῶν Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν [or Ἱεροσολυμειτῶν, 
or Ἱεροσολυμειτῶν], distinct irom the 
ὄχλος of ver. 20, which was unaware of 
any intention to kill Him; but them- 
selves not so familiar as the Galileans 
with the appearance of Jesus, and there- 
fore they asked: Οὐχ οὗτος . . . λέγονσι. 
Or the words may only be a strong way 
of expressing their astonishment at the 
inactivity of the authorities. µήποτε 
ἀληθῶς . . . ὁ Xprotds; ‘Can it be that 
the rulers indeed know that this man is 
the Christ?”’ But this idea, again, is at 
once dismissed, ἀλλὰ τοῦτον . . . ἐστίν. 
‘“* Howbeit we know this man whence He 
is: but when the Christ comes, no one 
knows whence He is.” There was a 
general belief that the Christ would 
spring from David’s line and be born in 
Bethlehem ; see ver. 42. The words “no 
one knows whence He is” must refer to 
the belief encouraged by the Apocalyptic 
literature that He would appear suddenly 
‘“‘in the clouds” or “‘fromthesun”. Cf. 
4 Ezra vii. 28, xili. 32, Apoc. Baruch 
xili. 32; with Mr. Charles’ note; and 
other passages cited in Drummond’s 


766 


, » 
yxiias. οὐδεὶς γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστίν. 
Exod. 
xxii. 23. 
Ζ V. 10. 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


VII. 


25. "Expatev οὖν ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ διδάσκων 


ὁ Ιησοῦς καὶ λέγων, “ Κἀμὲ οἴδατε, καὶ οἴδατε πόθεν εἰμί: καὶ “am 


a Heb. x. 22. ἐμαυτοῦ οὐκ ἐλήλυθα, ἀλλ᾽ ἔστιν " ἀληθινὸς ὁ πέµψας µε, ὃν ὑμεῖς 


Rev. iii. 
14. 
b vi. 46, etc. sae ne 
c Freg.in µε ἀπέστειλεν. 


John;also » 


Acts iii. >, ἐπέβαλεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν τὴν χεῖρα, ὅτι 
Πολλοὶ δὲ ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου ἐπίστευσαν eis αὐτὸν, καὶ ἔλεγον, 


xii. 4. 2 
Cor. xi.32. 31. 


οὐκ οἴδατε: 20. ἐγὼ δὲ οἶδα αὐτὸν, ὅτι > παρ αὐτοῦ εἰμι, κἀκεῖνός 
30. ᾿Εζήτουν οὖν αὐτὸν πιάσαι' καὶ οὐδεὶς 


ἁοὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ, 


ii. 4; να. “ 
di 4% Vil ες Ὅτι 6 Χριστὸς ὅταν EAOy, pyTe! πλείονα σημεῖα τούτων 3 ποιήσει 


20, etc. 


ef Φ > / 35 
eAttrac.cp. ὢν OUTOS ἐποιησεν; 
Zeph. iil. 
11. 
x > La} ς / 9 4 
f ver. 39. οι ἄρχιερεις υπΏηρετας., ινα 


LA 3 
πιάσωσιν αὐτόν. 


32. ἼἨκουσαν ot Φαρισαῖοι τοῦ ὄχλου 
γογγύζοντος περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα": καὶ ἀπέστειλαν of Φαρισαῖοι καὶ 


33. εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς 


3 esa A κ” ε x ή e ca > 8 46 ΄ ‘ Q 
gls.liv.7. & Ingots, “Ett © μικρὸν xpovoy μεθ ὑμῶν εἰμι, καὶ ὑπάγω προς TOV 


Tum in NBDL, 


Messiah, 279 ff. Different sections of 
the community may have had different 
expectations. The surmises of the Jeru- 
salemites came to the ears of Jesus, and 
stirred Him to further and more emphatic 
statements, Ἔκραξεν οὖν ἐν ἱερῷ. 
From the repetition of the words “in the 
Temple,” Westcott gathers that a break 
occurred between this scene and the last; 
but this idea seems to be precluded by 
the continuity of the conversation. Jesus 
takes up the words of the doubters, Καμὲ 
οἴἵδατε.. . Some interpreters think 
there is a touch of irony in the first 
clauses; thus Weizsacker translates: 
‘‘So? mich kennet ihr und wisset wo 
ich her bin? Und doch bin ich,” etc. 
Similarly Licke and Godet. But this 
is unnecessary. Jesus concedes their 
ability to identify Him as the carpenter 
of Nazareth. This knowledge they had; 
but the knowledge which they had not 
was of far greater importance. To know 
my native place and to be able to recog- 
nise meas Jesus is not enough; for I am 
not come at my own prompting. To 
deduce from your knowledge of my 
origin that I am α self-constituted 
prophet and therefore not the Messiah, 
is to mistake; for I am not come of 
myself. To know me apart from Him 
that sent me is empty knowledge. He 
that sent me has a real existence, and 
is not a fancy of mine. You indeed do 
not know Him; but I know Him because 
from Him I have my being and He has 
sent me. Weiss rightly observes that 
ὅτι (ver. 29) does not include κἀκεῖνος 
µε ἀπέστειλεν under its government. 
Jesus knew the Father because He was 
from Him; but His being sent was the 


2 τοντων omitted in BDL, 


result, not the cause, of His knowledge. 
These statements exasperated the Jews, 
(ver. 30) ᾿Εζήτουν οὖν αὐτὸν πιάσαι. 
They sought to seize or apprehend Him. 
πιάζω, Doric and Hellenistic for πιέζω, 
41 press”; in later Greek ‘‘I catch”? 
(xxi. 3), ‘I arrest,” νετ. 32, etc. But 
οὐδεὶς ἐπέβαλεν “no one laid hands [or, 
‘his hand,’ R.V.] upon Him, for His 
hour was not yet come”’; the immediate 
cause being that they were not all of one 
mind, and feared resistance on the part 
of some of the people.—Ver. 31. For, 
πολλοὶ .. . Here as usual alongside 
of the hostility evoked by the deeds and 
words of Jesus faith also was evoked ; 
faith which suggested covertly that He 
might be the Messiah. 6 Χριστὸς ὅταν 
ἔλθῃ, '' When the Christ comes will He 
do more signs than this man has done?” 

Vv. 32-36. The Sanhedrim takes 
action regarding Fesus.—Ver. 32. 
“Hxovoav ... αὐτόν. The Pharisees, 
perceiving that many of the people were 
coming under the influence of Jesus, 
determined to put a stop to His teach- 
ing, and persuaded the Sanhedrim [ot 
ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι] to send 
officers to apprehend Him.—Ver. 33. 
εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς [αὐτοῖς omitted by 
modern editors] ἔτι μικρὸν χρόνον .. . 
πέμψαντά µε. Seeing the servants of 
the Sanhedrim [οὖν], Jesus said to the 
crowd: “ Yet a little while am I with 
you, and then I go to Him that sent 
me”. The “little while” is prompted 
by the actively hostile step taken by the 
Sanhedrim. The utterance was a word 
of warning. ὑπάγω does not convey any 
sense of secrecy, as has been alleged. 
[It has been supposed that τὸν πέμψαντά 


28—37. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


767 


πέμψαντά pe. 34. " Ἱητήσετέ µε, καὶ οὐχ εὑρήσετε" καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ b Hos. v. 6. 


“ » 


ἐγὼ, ὑμεῖς οὗ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν. 


35. Εἶπον οὖν οἱ ουδαῖοι πρὸς 


ἑαυτοὺς, “Mod οὗτος μέλλει πορεύεσθαι, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οὐχ εὑρήσομεν 


αὐτόν; μὴ εἰς τὴν ᾿ διασπορὰν τῶν ) Ἑλλήνων μέλλει πορεύεσθαι, ish, . ασ 
et. 1. 


καὶ διδάσκειν τοὺς Ἕλληνας ; 


, ‘ > ey ο 4 . > ολ κ. 4 ς ο] 2. 
Ζητήσετέ µε, καὶ οὐχ εὑρήσετε' καὶ, Ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ, ὑμεῖς οὐ 


Φύνασθε ἐλθεῖν ; 


36. τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ λόγος ὃν εἶπε, Deut. 


XXXxil. 26. 
xii. 20. Is 
ix. 12. 


37- Ev δὲ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ “TH µεγάλῃ τῆς ἑορτῆς εἰστήκει 6k xix. 31. 


᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἔκραξε λέγων, “' Εάν τις 


pe is a Johannine addition; chiefly 
because of ver. 35. But this misunder- 
standing proves nothing ; for the people 
never apprehended who was meant by 
‘Him that sent Him’”’.]—Ver. 34. In 
ver. 34 He views with pity (cf. “O 
Jerusalem, Jerusalem,” etc.) their too 
late awakening to a sense of their need: 
ζητήσετέ µε καὶ οὐκ εὑρήσετε. ‘ The 
tragic history of the Jewish people since 
their rejection of Jesus as Christ is con- 
densed into these words,” Reith. Cf. 
Lk. xvii. 22, ‘The days will come when 
ye shall desire to see one of the days of 
the Son of Man, and ye shall not see 
it”; also Lk. xix. 43, 44; and Is. lv. 6. 
εἰκὸς yap πολλοὺς . . . ζητεῖν αὐτὸν 
Βοηθὸν καὶ μᾶλλον ἁλισκομένων Ἱεροσο- 
λύµων, Euthymius, Even though they 
may then know where He has gone, 
they cannot follow Him, ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ 
ὑμεῖς οὐ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν, “where I am” 
{not εἶμι, “I will ρο”], {.ε., in the 
presence of Him that sent me, “ye 
cannot,” as ye now are and by your own 
strength, ‘come’. For the full mean- 
ing see chap. vili. 21-24.—-Ver. 35. This 
was quite unintelligible to the Jews, 
εἶπον οὖν . . . ἐλθεῖν. The only mean- 
ing they could put upon His words was 
that, finding no reception among the 
Jews of Judaea and Galilee, He intended 
to go to the Jews of the Dispersion and 
teach them and the Greeks among whom 
they lived. The διασπορὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων 
does not mean, as Chrysostom and 
Euthymius suppose, the Gentiles διὰ τὸ 
διεσπάρθαι πανταχοῦ, but the Jews dis- 
persed among the Gentiles, see Deut. 
XXVili. 25, Jer. xxxiv. 17, 1 Pet. i. 1, Jas. 
i. 1 (cf. Schiirer, Div. II., vol. ii., and 
Morrison, Fews under Roman Rule). 
But the following clause, καὶ διδάσκειν 
τοὺς Ἕλληνας, indicates that they sup- 
posed He might teach the Greeks them- 
selves ; thus ignorantly anticipating the 
course Christianity took; what seemed 
unlikely and impossible to them became 


Exod. xii. 
16. 


Supa, ἐρχέσθω πρός µε καὶ 
actual,—tis ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ λόγος... 
The saying has impressed itself on their 
memory, though they find it unin- 
telligible. How they could not go where 
He could, they could not fathom. Cf. 
Peter’s ‘‘ Lord, why can I not follow 
Thee now?” and the whole conversa- 
tion, chap. xiii. 33-xiv. 6, “Νο one 
comes to the Father but through me”’. 
Vv. 37-44. Fesus proclaims His ability 
to quench human thirst with living water, 
—Ver. 37. ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ... 
This exact specification of time is given 
that we may understand the significance 
of the words uttered by Jesus. The 
Feast of Tabernacles lasted for seven 
days (Lev. xxiii. 34, Neh. viii. 18), and 
on the eighth day was “an holy convo- 
cation,” on which the people celebrated 
their entrance into the holy land, aban- 
doning their booths, and returning to their 
ordinary dwellings. On each of the 
seven feast days water was drawn in a 
golden pitcher from the pool of Siloam, 
and carried in procession to the Temple, 
in commemoration of the water from the 
rock with which their fathers in the 
desert had been provided. On the 
eighth day, which commemorated their 
entrance into “a land of springs of 
water,” this ceremony was discontinued. 
But the deeper spirits must have 
viewed with some misgiving all this 
ritual, feeling still in themselves a 
thirst which none of these symbolic 
forms quenched, and wondering when 
the vision of Ezekiel would be τε- 
alised, and a river broad and deep 
would issue from the Lord’s house. 
Filled with these misgivings they sud- 
denly hear a voice, clear and assured, 
Ἐάν tis διψᾷ, ἐρχέσθω πρός pe καὶ 
πινέτω: that is, whatever natural wants 
and innocent cravings and spiritual 
aspirations men have, Christ undertakes 
to satisfy them every one. To this 
general invitation are added words so 
enigmatical that John finds it necessary 


768 


KATA TOANNHN 


VII. 


πινέτω: 38. 6 πιστεύων eis ἐμὲ, καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφὴ, ποταμοὶ 


ΓἨζεὶς 1.5.1 ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος.” 


Zech. xiv. 


2 wee 
XVili. 4. 


39. Τοῦτο δὲ 


5. Prov. εἶπε περὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος οὗ ἔμελλον λαμβάνειν ot πιστεύοντες Eis 


m xii, 16; αὐτόν ' οὕπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα "Άγιον.] ὅτι ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς οὐδέπω "' ἐδοξάσθη. 


xiii. 31/ 
XVii. I. 


ἐστιν ἀληθῶς 6 προφήτης.” 


40. πολλοὶ οὖν ἐκ τοῦ ὄχλου ἀκούσαντες τὸν λόγον,” ἔλεγον, “ Οὗτός 


AT. Άλλοι ἔλεγον, “Οὗτός ἐστιν ὅ 


Χριστός.” "Αλλοι δὲ ἔλεγον, “Mh γὰρ ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ὁ Χριστὸς 


n PS. cxxxii. ., 


42. οὐχὶ  ypad? εἶπεν, ὅτι " ἐκ τοῦ oméppatos Δαβὶδ, 


11. ερχεται ; 
ο Heb. Xili. So ‘ Q a , m4 > \ ε x ” 35- 
24. Kat ° ἀπὸ Βηθλεὲμ. τῆς κώμης οπου ἣν AaBid, 6 Χριστὸς έρχεται ; 


1 πνευμα αγιον δεδοµενον in B Syr. (Harcl.-Hier). 


πνευμα without addition in 


SKTM Memph. Arm. Aeth. Cyr.-Alex. adopted by T.Tr.W.H. 
2 twv λογων in all modern editions with S$BDL it. vulg. 


ε 


to explain their reference.—Ver. 38. 6 
πιστεύων . . . ζῶντος. [The nominative 
absolute iscommon.] No Scripture gives 
the words verbatim. Is. lvili. τι has: 
‘‘The Lord shall satisfy thy soul in 
drought: and thou shalt be like a watered 
garden, and like a spring of water whose 
waters fail not’’. Cf. Johniv. 14. The 
words seem to intimate that the believer 
shall not only have his own thirst 
quenched, but shall be a source of new 
streams for the good of others (O. Holtz- 
mann). A remarkably analogous saying 
is quoted by Schoettgen from the Tal- 
mud: ‘Quando homo se convertit ad 
Dominum suum, tanquam fons aquis 
vivis impletur, et fluenta ejus egrediuntur 
ad omnis generis homines et ad omnes 
tribus’’. At the same time it is not easy 
to see the relevancy of the saying if this 
meaning be attached to it, and the saying 
of John iv. 14 is so similar that it seems 
preferable to understand it in the same 
sense, of the inseparableness and inward- 
ness of the living water. Those who 
advocate the other meaning can certainly 
find confirmation for their view in the 
explanation added by John.—Ver. 30. 
τοῦτο . . . ἐδοξάσθη, for these words 
apparently refer to Pentecost, the initial 
outpouring of the Spirit, when it once 
for all became manifest that the Spirit’s 
presence did not turn men’s thoughts in 
upon themselves, and their own spiritual 
anxieties and prospects, but prompted 
them to communicate to all men the 
blessings they had received. From the 
little group in the upper room “‘rivers”’ 
did flow toall. But the appended clause, 
οὕπω γὰρ ἦν Πνεῦμα "Άγιον, is difficult. 
The best attested reading (see critical 
note) gives the meaning: ‘The Spirit 
was not yet, because Jesus was not yet 
[οὔπω, not οὐδέπω] glorified”. ἐδοξάσθη 


with John signifies the entire process of 
glorification, beginning with and includ- 
ing His death (see chap. xii. 23, 32, 33); 
but especially indicating His recognition 
by the Father as exalted Messiah (see 
chap. xvii. I, 5, xiii. 31). Until He 
thus became Lord the Spirit was not 
given: and the gift of the Spirit at Pente- 
cost was recognised as the grand proof 
and sign that He had reached the posi- 
tion of supremacy in the moral universe. 
(See especially Acts ii. 32, 33.) The 
Spirit could not be given before in His 
fulness, because until Christ no man 
could receive Him in His fulness. Christ 
was the lens in whom all the scattered 
Tays were gathered. And it is always 
and only by accepting Christ as perfect 
humanity, and by finding in Him our 
norm and ideal, that we receive the 
Spirit. It is by the work of the Spirit 
on the human nature of Christ that we 
are made aware of the fulness and beauty 
of that work. It is there we see what 
the Spirit of God can make of man, and 
apprehend His grace and power and 
intimate affinity to man.—Ver. 40. The 
immediate results of this declaration were 
twofold. In some faith was elicited: 
many of the crowd said: ‘‘ This is of a 
truth the prophet’’; others, going a step 
further, said: ‘“‘This is the Christ”. On 
the relation of “the prophet” to “the 
Christ,” see on i. 21.—Ver. 41. But 
others, either honestly perplexed, or 
hostile to Christ, and glad to find Scrip- 
ture on their side, objected, μὴ γὰρ ἐκ 
τῆς Γαλιλαίας ὁ Χριστὸς ἔρχεται; “ But 
does the Christ come out of Galilee?” 
[Hoogeveen explains the γάρ by resolving 
the sentence into a double statement: 
“Others said this is not the Christ: for 
Christ will not come out of Galilee”. 
The γάρ assigns the reason for the denial 


38—49. 


43. Σχίσμα οὖν ἐν τῷ ὄχλω ἐγένετο δι αὐτόν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


769 


44. τινὲς δὲ ἤθελον 


ἐξ αὐτῶν Ῥπιάσαι αὐτὸν, GAN’ οὐδεὶς Ἱἐπέβαλεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν τὰς Χεῖρας. p ver. 30. 


45. Ἴλθον οὖν οἱ ὑπηρέται πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ Φαρισαίους - 
καὶ εἶπον αὐτοῖς ἐκεῖνοι, “'Διατί οὐκ "ἠγάγετε αὐτόν; 


q Gen. xxii. 
12. 
6. τ xviii. 28. 
ο Jer.xlvi.7. 


᾿Απεκρίθησαν οἱ ὑπηρέται, “OdddmoTe οὕτως ἐλάλησεν ἄνθρωπος, 


ὡς οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος.” 


47. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν οὖν αὐτοῖς οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, 


“Mi kat ὑμεῖς πεπλάνησθε; 48. µή τις ἐκ τῶν " ἀρχόντων ἐπίστευσεν s ver. 26; iii. 


~ ή 
eis αὐτὸν, ἢ ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων; 


already hinted in the ἄλλοι δὲ intro- 
ducing a contrary opinion to that already 
expressed.] They knew that Jesus was 
a Galilean, and this clashed with their 
idea that the Christ was to be born of 
the seed of David and in Bethlehem; an 
idea founded on Micah v. 2; 18. xi. 1; 
Jer. xxiii. 5. Bethlehem is here called 
the κώμη ὅπον ἦν Δαβίδ [or Δανείδ, 
which gives the same pronunciation], 
because there David spent his youth; 
1 Sam. xvi. I, 4, etc.—Vv. 43, 44. 
Σχίσμα . . « χεῖρς. On this verse 
Calvin has the following pertinent re- 
mark: ‘‘quaecunque dissidia emergunt 
quum praedicatur Evangelium, eorum 
causa et semen prius in hominibus late- 
bant; sed tunc demum quasi ex somno 
expergefacti se movere incipiunt, qualiter 
vapores aliunde quam a sole procreantur, 
quamvis nonnisi exoriente sole emer- 
gant”. To this divided state of opinion 
He owed His immunity on this occasion. 

Vv. 45-52. Anger of the Sanhedrim 
on receiving the report of their officers.— 
Ver. 45. ἦλθον οὖν . . . αὐτόν. It now 
appears that the οὐδεὶς of the preceding 
clause applies even to the officers sent by 
the Sanhedrim. They returned empty- 
handed πρὸς τοὺς ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ Φαρισ- 
aiovs, that is, as the single article shows, 
to the Sanhedrim, or at any rate to these 
parties acting together and officially. 
What follows indicates rather that they 
were met as a court. They [ἐκεῖνοι 
regularly refers to the more remote noun; 
but here, although in the order of the 
sentence the. ὑπηρέται are more remote, 
they are nearer in the writer’s mind, 
and he uses ἐκεῖνοι of the priests and 
Pharisees] at once demand the reason of 
the failure, Διατί οὐκ ἠγάγετε αὐτόν; 
““Why have ye not brought Him?” 
Apparently they were sitting in expecta- 
tion of immediately questioning. Him. 
—Ver. 46. The servants frankly reply: 
οὐδέποτε . . . ἄνθρωπος. The  testi- 
mony is notable, because the officers 
of a court are apt to be entirely 


49. ἀλλ᾽ ὁ ὄχλος οὗτος ὁ μὴ 


mechanical and leave all responsibility 
for their actions with their superiors. 
Also it is remarkable that the same 
result should have found place with 
them all; for in view of the divided 
state of public feeling, probably five or 
six at least would be sent.—Ver. 47. 
But their apology only rouses the in- 
dignation of those who had sent them, 
μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς πεπλάνησθε; Are ye also, 
of whom better things might have 
been expected, deluded ?—py τις... 
Φαρισαίων; What right have sub. 
ordinates to have a mind of their own? 
Wait till some of the constituted autho- 
rities or of the recognised leaders of 
religious opinion give you the cue. Here 
the secret of their hostility is out. Jesus 
appealed to the people and did not 
depend for recognition on the influential 
classes. Power was slipping through 
their βηρεις.- ἀλλ ὁ ὄχλος . . . εἶσι. 
‘But this mob [these masses] that knows 
not the law are cursed.”’ This Pharisaic 
scorn of the mob [or ‘‘am-haarets,” 
which is here represented by ὄχλος] 
appears in Rabbinic literature. Dr, 
Taylor [Sayings of the fewish Fathers, 
p- 44] quotes Hillel as saying: ‘‘ Ne 
boor is a sin-fearer; nor is the vulgar 
pious’’. Το the Am-haarets are opposed 
the disciples of the learned in the law; 
and Schoettgen defines the Am-haarets 
as ‘“‘omnes ΠΠ qui studio sacrarum 
literarum operam non dederunt”. The 
designation, therefore, 6 py γινώσκων 
τὸν νόµον, was usual. That it was 
prompted here by the popular recogni- 
tion as Messiah of one who came out of 
Galilee, in apparent contradiction of the 
law and of the opinion of the Pharisees, 
is also probable. People so ignorant as 
thus to blunder ἐπικατάρατοί εἶσι.--- 
Ver. 50. To this strong expression one 
of their own number (and therefore to 
their great surprise), Nicodemus, the 
same person who had visited Jesus 
under cover of night, takes exception 
and makes a protest. [Tisch. deletes 


49 


ΚΑΤΑ ΤΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


77ο VII. 50—53. 


γινώσκων τὸν νόµον, ἐπικατάρατοί1 eiot.” 5ο. Λέγει Νικόδημος 


πρὸς αὐτοὺς, ὁ ἐλθὼν νυκτὸς 3 πρὸς αὐτὸν, els dv ἐξ αὐτῶν, 51. “MH 
tMt.xv.:1 6 νόµος ἡμῶν κρίνει "τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἐὰν μὴ ἀκούσῃ παρ αὐτοῦ 


4 4 - , a 325 > - 
πρότερον;ὃ καὶ γνῷ τί ποιεῖ;. 52. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, 


υᾳ Kings x.  Μὴ καὶ σὺ ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ef; " ἐρεύνησον καὶ ide, ὅτι προ- 
23. , ~ , 3 πε) » A 3 ΄ 
φήτης ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας οὐκ ἐγήγερται.” 53. Καὶδ ἐπορεύθη 


a 3 4 © “ 
εκαστος εις τὸν οἶκον αὑτοῦ. 


‘ erapatot adopted by T.Tr.W.H.R. as in NB 1, 33, and as the word appears in 
the classics; but T.R. gives the word as used by the Sept. and in Gal. iii. 14. 


2 yuxros omitted by Tr.W.H.R.; W.H. read ο ελθων προς αντον προτερον; Tisch. 
omits the clause altogether ; MS. authority is divided. 


ὅπρωτον in SBDKL 1, 33. 


4 εγειρεται read by T.Tr.W.H.R. after BDK it. vulg. Pesh. syr. Aegypt. Goth. 
Arm. Aeth. 

5 The closing words of the chapter, και επορευθη εκαστος εις τον οικον αντον, 
belong to the next paragraph, which is rejected by recent editors, and ends with 
ver. II of chap. vili. at the words µηκετι αµαρτανε. The entire paragraph is 
awanting in NABCL (A and C are imperfect at this part, but a calculation of space 
required shows they cannot have contained the passage) ; about seventy cursives ; 
a, f, q, Theb. Goth., best Pesh. MSS., Memph., Arm.; Chrys., Cyr.-Alex. The 
paragraph is first found in Codex Bezae, after which it appears in several uncials 
and more than 300 cursives, in b*, c,e; Vulg., Syr.-Hier., Aeth., etc. The Greek 
commentators, Origen, Theodor. Mops., Chrysostom, Cyril, Theophylact, pass it by, 
and Euthymius, although he comments on it, expressly says that in accurate MSS. 
η ουχ ευρηται η ὠβελισται. It rather interrupts the narrative at this point, and 
besides contains several words not elsewhere found in John: ορθρου, ο λαος, οι 
γραμµατεις, αναµαρτητος. At the same time the incident may well be a genuine 
tradition, and, as Calvin says, ‘‘nihil apostolico spiritu indignum continet,” and 
therefore ‘‘non est cur eam in usum nostrum accommodare recusemus”. See 
further in Spitta, Zur Gesch, d. Urchristentums, i. 194; Conybeare’s article 


in Expositor, 5th series, ii. 405. 


the clause 6 ἐλθὼν νυκτὸς πρὸς αὐτόν, 
and no doubt it has quite the appearance 
of a gloss. At the same time it is John’s 
manner thus to identify persons named. 
And at xix. 39 the similar clause is not 
deleted.] This was a bold step. For 
he must have known it was useless; and 
he might have persuaded himself to 
evade all risk by silence. His remon- 
strance is based on their implied claim 
to know the law: μὴ 6 vépos . . . ποιεῖ; 
their own action is suspiciously like a 
violation of the law. ‘‘ Does our law 
pass judgment on the suspected person 
before it first hears him and knows what 
he is guilty of doing?” For the law 
regarding trials see Deut. i. 16 and 
Stapfer’s Palestine, p. 108, on the ad- 
ministration of justice. The construc- 
tion is simple; ‘‘the law” which the 
Sanhedrim administered is the nomina- 
tive throughout.—Ver. 52. This τε- 
monstrance is exasperatingly true, and 
turns the bitterness of the Pharisaic 
party on Nicod mus, μὴ καὶ... 


ἐγήγερται. ‘Art thou also, as well as 
Jesus, from Galilee, and thus dis- 
posed to befriend your countryman?” 
Cf. Mk. xiv. 70. By this they betray 
that their own hostility was a merely 
personal matter, and not founded on 
careful examination. ‘‘ Search and see, 
because [or ‘that ’] out of Galilee there 
arises no prophet.”’ That is, as Westcott 
interprets, ‘‘ Galilee is not the true 
country of the prophets : we cannot look 
for Messiah to come from thence’’. 
They overlooked the circumstance that 
one or two exceptions to this rule ex- 
isted. 

CHAPTER VIII.—Ver. 1.- καὶ ἐπορεύθη 
ἕκαστος . . . The position of these 
words almost necessitates the under- 
standing that the members of the San- 
hedrim are referred to. But in this case 
the contrast conveyed in the next clause, 
Ἴησους δὲ ἐπορεύθη, is pointless.—eis τὸ 


ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν, to the Mount of Olives. 


Cf. Mt. xxiv. 3, xxvi. 
Lodging probably in 


30; Mk. xiii. 3. 
the house of 


VIII, 1—6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


771 


VIII. 1. *IHZOYE δὲ ἐπορεύθη εἰς "τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἸΕλαιῶν: 2.8 Zech. xiv. 
3 ε a ς 4- 
δρθρου δὲ πάλιν "παρεγένετο cis τὸ ἱερὸν, καὶ mas ὁ λαὸς ἤρχετο Ὁ ope ν. 


πρὸς αὐτόν: καὶ 'καθίσας ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς. 


γραμματεῖς καὶ of Φαρισαῖοι πρὸς 


κατειλημμένην, καὶ στήσαντες αὐτὴν ἐν µέσῳ, 4. λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, τ. 
“«Διδάσκαλε, αὕτη ἡ γυνὴ κατελήφθη ! ' ἐπαυτοφώρω µοιχευοµένη. 
5. ἐν δὲ τῷ νόµω Μωσῆς ἡμῖν ἐνετείλατο τὰς τοιαύτας Σλιθοβο- 


λεῖσθαι 2: σὺ οὖν 


αὐτὸν, ἵνα " ἔχωσι κατηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ. 


τί λέγεις; 


f Num. v. 13. 


1 κατειληπται is read by W.H.R., κατειληφθη by early editors. 
both forms occur; see Kypke and Veitch. 


ἆλιθαζειν in Tr.W.H.R. 


Lazarus, He returned to the city before 
dawn (νετ. 2) ὄρθρου δὲ πάλιν παρεγένετο 
εἰς τὸ ἱερόν. Plato, Protag., 310 A, 
teckons ὄρθρος a part of the night.—kat 
πᾶς ὁ λαὸς ἤρχετο, 1.6., those designated 
ὁ ὄχλος in the preceding chapter.—xat 
καθίσας, and He sat down and began to 
teach them. But this quiet and profit- 
able hour was broken in upon.—Ver. 3. 
ἄγουσι δὲ ot γραμματεῖς . . . κατειληµ- 
µένην. The scribes and the Pharisees, 
who in the synoptics regularly appear as 
the enemies of Jesus, bring to Him a 
woman taken in adultery. In itself an 
unlawful thing to do, for they had a 
court in which the woman might have 
been tried. Obviously it was to find 
occasion against Him that they brought 
her; see ver. 6. They knew He was 
prone to forgive sinners.—kal στήσαντες 

. Tt λέγεις; “ And having set her in 
the midst,’’ where she could be well seen 
by all; a needless and shameless pre- 
liminary, ‘“‘they say to Him, Teacher,” 
appealing to Him with an appearance of 
deference, ‘‘ this woman here has been 
apprehended in adultery in the very 
act’’, ἐπ αὐτοφώρῳ is the better read- 
ing. Originally meaning ‘caught in 
the act of theft” (φώρ), it came to mean 
generally “‘ caught in the act,”’ red-hand. 
But also, as the instances cited by Kypke 
show, it frequently meant ‘‘on incon- 
trovertible evidence,” ‘‘ manifestly ”’. 
Thus in Xen., Symp., iii. 13, ἐπ᾽ αὐτο- 
φώρῳ εἴλημμαι πλουσιώτατος ὤν, I am 
evidently convicted of being the richest. 
See also Wetstein and Elsner.—Ver. 5. 
ἐν δὲ τῷ νομῷ . . . λιθοβολεῖσθαι. In 
Lev. xx. ro and Deut. xxii. 22 death is 
fixed as the penalty of adultery; but 
‘“*stoning”’ as the form of death is only 


6. Τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγον πειράζοντες 


Ρ1 Sam. ΧΧΣ.6. Deut. xxii. 24. 


” 9 « eA 
3. ἄγουσι δὲ ot xxiv. 1. 
au rf x . Acts v. 21, 
αύτον YUVOLKG εν µοιχεια ο With εἰς 
in Mt. ii. 
Acts 
ix. 26 (?). 
Acts xiii. 
14; XV. 4; 
commonly 
πρός OF 
ἐπί, 


nd Μι. ν. τ. 


3 a 
6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς κάτω κύψας, τῷ « Exod xxii. 


η 8 
h xvi. 12. 2 ]ο. 12. 


In the classics 


specified when a betrothed virgin is 
violated, Deut. xxii. 23, 24. And the 
Rabbis held that where death simply 
was spoken of, strangling was meant 
[‘‘omnis mors dicta in Lege simpliciter 
non est nisi strangulatio”’]. It is sup- 
posed therefore that by τὰς τοιαύτας 
the accusers refer to the special class to 
which this woman belonged. The words 
themselves do not suggest that; and 
it is better to suppose that these lawyers 
who had brought the woman understood 
“stoning”? when “death”? without 
further specification was mentioned. 
See further in Lightfoot and Holtzmann. 
—ov οὖν τίλέγεις; “' What then sayest 
Thou?” as if it were possible He might 
give a decision differing from that of the 
law.—Ver. 6. τοῦτο 8... αὐτοῦ. 
“And this they said tempting Him,” 
hoping that His habitual pity would 
lead Him to exonerate the woman. [* Si 
Legi subscriberet, videri poterat sibi 
quodammodo dissimilis,” Calvin. προσ- 
εδόκων ὅτι φείσεται αὐτῆς, καὶ λοιπὸν 
ἔξουσι κατηγορίαν kat’ αὐτοῦ ὡς παρανό- 
ια. Φειδοµένου τῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ νόµου 

ιθαζοµένης, Euthymius.] The dilemma 
supposed by Meyer is not to be thought 
of. See Holtzmann. Their plot was 
unsuccessful; Jesus as He sat (ver. 2), 
κάτω κύψας . . . γῆν, “bent down and 
began to write with His finger on the 
ground,” intimating that their question 
would not be answered; perhaps also 
some measure of that embarrassment on 
account of ‘‘ shame of the deed itself and 
the brazen hardness of the prosecutors ”’ 
which is overstated in Ecce Homo, p. 
104. The scraping or drewing figures 
on the ground with a stick or the finger 
has been in many countries a common 


772 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


VIII. 


δακτύλω ἔγραφεν εἰς τὴν γῆν" 7. ὡς δὲ ἐπέμενον ἐρωτῶντες αὐτὸν, 
ΕΤ. xiii. 11; ἀνακύψας εἶπε πρὸς αὐτοὺς, “΄Ὁ ἀναμάρτητος ὑμῶν, / πρῶτος τὸν 


xxi. 28. 4 Ἡ ae 

Ae x. 15. λίθον ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ βαλέτω. 
j Deut. xvii. , 

σι ΠΣΕ 
k Wisd.xvil. , 

πα, 

ii. 15. 


8. καὶ πάλιν κάτω κύψας ἔγραφεν eis τὴν 
9. οἱ δὲ, ἀκούσαντες, καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς "συνειδήσεως | ἐλεγχόμενοι, 
Rom. ἐξήρχοντο “ets καθεῖς, ἀρξάμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ἕως τῶν 
ήρχ ρξάμ 

ἐσχάτων: καὶ κατελείφθη μόνος 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐν µέσῳ 
. 

1Ο. ἀνακύψας δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ µηδένα θεασάµενος πλὴν 
a 9 > αν Ἡ 1 νι οὖν 7 A ε , , 
τῆς γυναικὸς, εἶπεν αὐτῇ, yurh,! ποῦ εἶσιν ἐκεῖνοι οἱ κατήγοροί 


11. Ἡ δὲ εἶπεν, “‘ Οὖδεὶς, κύριε.” 


Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῇ ὁ Ιησοῦς, “OSE ἐγώ σε κατακρίνω" πορεύου καὶ 


1 xvi. 8. 
πι Mk. xiv. ε « 
19, Cp. ἑστώσα. 
Rev. iv. 8. 
2 ὖδ s / 35 
σου”; QUOELS σε κατεκρινεν ; 
a / ε , » 
BY 14. μηκετι αμαρτανε. 


1γυναι Tr.W.H. 


expression of deliberate silence or em- 
barrassment. [Sep εἰώθασι πολλάκις 
ποιεῖν οἱ μὴ θέλοντες ἀποκρίνεσθαι πρὸς 
τοὺς ἐρωτῶντας ἄκαιρα καὶ ἀνάξια, 
Euthymius.] Interesting passages are 
cited by Wetstein and Kypke, in one 
of which Euripides is cited as saying: 
τὴν σιωπὴν τοῖς σοφοῖς ἀπόκρισιν εἶναι. 
—Ver. 7. The scribes, however, did 
not accept the silence of Jesus as an 
answer, but “‘ went on asking Him”’. 
For this use of ἐπιμένω with a participle 
cf. Acts xii. 16, ἐπέμ.ενεν κρούων ; and see 
Buttmann’s N.T. Gram., 257, 14. And 
at length Jesus lifting His head, 
straightening Himself, said to them: ‘O 
ἀναμάρτητος ... βαλέτω, ‘let the 
faultless one among you first cast the 
stone at her”. ἀναμάρτητος only here 
in N.T. In Sept. Deut. xxix. 19, ἵνα μὴ 
συναπολέσῃ ὁ ἁμαρτωλὸς τὸν ἀνα- 
µάρτητον. It can scarcely have been 
used on this occasion generally of all sin, 
but with reference to the sin regarding 
which there was present question ; or at 
any rate to sins of the same kind, sins 
of unchastity. They are summoned to 
judge themselves rather than the woman. 
—Ver. 8. Having shot this arrow Jesus 
again stooped and continued writing on 
the ground, intimating that so far as He 
was concerned the matter was closed. — 
Ver. g. of δὲ . .. ἐσχάτων. ‘And 
they when they heard it went out one 
by one, beginning from the elders until 
the last.” [The words which truly 
describe the motive of this departure, kat 
ὑπὸ τῆς συνειδήσεως ἐλεγχόμενοι, are 
deleted by Tr.W.H.R.] πρεσβυτέρων 
refers not to the elders by office but by 
age. They naturally took the lead, and 
the younger men deferentially allowed 
them to pass and then followed. Thus 


? exeLvot OL κατηγοροι σου Omitted by W.H.R. 


κατελείφθη µόνος . . . ἑστῶσα. Jesus 
was left sitting and the woman standing 
before Him. But only those would retire 
who had been concerned in the accusation: 
the disciples and those who had pre- 
viously been listening to Him would 
remain,—Ver. 1Ο. ἀνακύψας . . . Jesus, 
lifting His head and seeing that the 
woman was left alone, says to her: 
Ἡ γυνή . . . κατέκρινεν; “ Woman,” 
nominative for vocative, as frequently, 
but see critical note, ‘‘ where are they? 
Did no man condemn thee?” That is, 
has no one shown himself ready to 
begin the stoning ?—Ver. 11. And she 
said: '«Νο one, Lord”.—Etwe... 
ἁμάρτανε. ‘Neither do I condemn 
thee,” that is, do not adjudge thee to 
stoning. That He did condemn her sin 
was shown in His words µηκέτι ἁμάρτανε. 
Therefore Augustine says: ‘‘Ergo et 
Dominus damnavit, sed peccatum, non 
hominem ”. 

Vv. 12-20. Fesus proclaims Himself 
the Light of the World.—Ver. 12. Πάλιν 


οὖν. ‘Again therefore Jesus spake to 
them”; ‘‘ again” refers us back to vii. 
37- Liicke and others suppose that the 


conversation now reported took place on 
some day after the feast: but there is no 
reason why it should not have been on 
the same day as that recorded in chap. 
vii. The place, as we read in ver. 
20, was ἐν τῷ γαζοφυλακίῳ, “in the 
Treasury,” which probably was identical 
with the colonnade round the “' Court of 
the Women,” or yuvatkwvis, ‘in which 
the receptacles for charitable contribu- 
tions, the so-called Shopharoth or 
‘trumpets,’ were placed’? (Edersheim, 
Life of Christ, ii. 165). Edersheim sup- 
poses that here the Pharisees would 
alone venture to speak. This seems 


7—16. 


EYATTEAION 773 


12. Πάλιν οὖν 6 "Ingots αὐτοῖς ἐλάλησε λέγων, “Eye εἰμι TO φῶς 
A , Aine’ A > ‘ 3 Sy UZ 1 ~ , 
τοῦ κόσμου 6 ἀκολουθῶν ἐμοὶ, οὗ py περιπατήσει} ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, 


GAN ἕξει τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς.” 


13. Εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, 


“FO περὶ σεαυτοῦ μαρτυρεῖς' ἡ μαρτυρία σου οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθής. 
I A ίθ Ἰ A ἃ 9. > la) «ς δη, a ‘ 
4. ‘AmexptOn ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Kav ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ 
ἐμαυτοῦ, ἀληθής ἐστιν ἡ μαρτυρία µου: ὅτι οἶδα πόθεν ἦλθον, καὶ 
ποῦ ὑπάγω: ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ οἴδατε πόθεν ἔρχομαι, καὶ Tod ὑπάγω" 


15, ὑμεῖς "κατὰ τὴν σάρκα κρίνετε’ ἐγὼ οὐ κρίνω οὐδένα. 


ς 


NIN ή ΑΦ 
καὶ ἐὰν κρίνω δὲ ἐγὼ, ἡ 


16. 0 2 Cor. xi 
8, 


κρίσις ἡ ἐμὴ ἀληθής 2 ἐστιν: ὅτι µόνος οὐκ 


1 περιπατηση in SBFGKL; T.R. in DEHM., 


Σαληθινη in BDL 33; αληθης in N. 


scarcely consistent with the narrative. 
The announcement made by Jesus was, 
᾿Εγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμον. Notwith- 
standing Meyer and Holtzmann it seems 
not unlikely that this utterance was 
prompted by the symbolism of the feast. 
According to the Talmud, on every night 
of the feast the Court of the Women was 
brilliantly illuminated, and the night, 
according to Wetstein and others, was 
spent in dancing and festivity. This 
brilliant lighting was perhaps a memorial 
of the Pillar of Fire which led the 
Israelites while dwelling in tents. This 
idea is favoured by the words which 
follow and which describe how the in- 
dividual is to enjoy the light inherent in 
Jesus: 6 ἀκολονθῶν ἐμοί, “he that 
follows me”. Like the basket of fire 
hung from a pole at the tent of the 
chief, the pillar of fire marked the camp- 
ing ground and every movement of the 
host. And those who believe in Christ 
have not a chart but a guide; not a map 
in which they can pick out their own 
route, but a light going on before, which 
they must implicitly follow. Thus ov 
μὴ περιπατήσει ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ, ‘shall 
not walk in the dark”; cf. Mt. iv. 16. 
The Messiah was expected to scatter 
the darkness of the Gentiles, ‘‘ Lux est 
nomen Messiae” (Lightfoot), ἀλλ᾽ ἕξει 
τὸ φῶς τῆς ζωῆς, but shall have light 
sufficient for the highest form of life. 
The analogous 6 ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς, τὸ 
ὕδωρ τ. ζ. show that the light of life 
means the light which is needful to 
maintain spiritual life.—Ver. 13. Το this 
the Pharisees, seeing only self-assertion, 
reply: Σὺ .. . ἀληθής. A formal objec- 
tion; cf. v. 31. But the attempt to 
apply it here only shows how far the 
Pharisees were from even conceiving the 
conditions of a true revelation They 


were still in the region of pedantic rules 
and external tests.—Ver. 14. Jesus 
replies: Kav... ὑπάγω, ‘‘even if I 
witness of Myself, My witness is true”. 
The difference between καὶ εἰ and εἰ καί 
is clearly stated by Hermann on Viger, 
822; Klotz on Devarius, 519; and is for 
the most part observed in N.T. On the 
law regulating testimony, which was 
meant merely for courts of law, see ver. 
31. The expressed ἐγώ indicates that 
He is an exception to the rule; the 
reason being because He knows whence 
He comes and whither He goes, ὅτι οἶδα 

. ὑπάγω. He knows His origin and 
His destiny. He knows Himself, and 
therefore the rule mentioned has πο 
application to Him.—md0ev ἦλθον cannot 
of course be restricted to His earthly 
origin. He knows He is from God, so 
ὑπάγω refers to His going to God. Cf. 
xili. 3. Moreover, He is compelled to 
witness to Himself, because tpets οὐκ 
οἴδατε . . . ὑπάγω. He alone knew the 
nature of His mission, yet it behoves to 
be known by all men ; therefore He must 
declare Himself. They would no doubt 
have replied, as formerly, vii. 27, Mk. 
vi. 3, that they did know whence He 
was. Therefore He reminds them that 
they judge by appearances only: tpets 
κατὰ τὴν σάρκα κρίνετε. They had con- 
stituted themselves His judges, and they 
decided against Him, because ‘‘ accord- 
ing to the flesh’? He was born in Galilee, 
vii. 52. ‘For my part,” He says, “I 
judge (condemn) no one’”’; ἐγὼ οὐ κρίνω 
ovdéva. As if He said, “I confine 
myself (ver. 16) to witnessing, and do 
not sit in judgment,” cf. iii. 17. ‘ But 
even if I do judge (as my very appear- 
ance among you results in judgment, iti. 
18-19, v. 22), my judgment is true; there 
is no fear of its being merely superticial 


ΚΑΤΑ ΤΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


VIII. 


17. καὶ ἐν τῷ νόµω δὲ τῷ 
t . . 


ὑμετέρῳ γέγραπται, ὅτι δύο ἀνθρώπων ἡ μαρτυρία ἀληθής ἐστιν. 


A ‘ A A A 
18. ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ 6 


774 
εἰμὶ, GAN’ ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πέµψας µε πατήρ. 
πέµψας µε πατήρ.” 

Pp Vii. 28. σου; 7 


μου * 


a Mk. xii. 4r. ῥήματα a tee 
Ne 


ς 


5. ἱερῷ " 
τ Vii. 30. 
sii.4:vii.6, 21. Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν αὐτοῖς 6 

ο κ. a ¢ , Calta & θ a θ 
t xiii. 33. µε, καὶ ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε - 
uiv.29. οὗ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν. 


ἑαυτὸν, ὅτι λέγει, ““Omou ἐγὼ ὑπάγω, ὑμεῖς 


or prejudiced, because I am not alone, 
but I am inseparably united to the 
Father who sent me.” Cf. v. 30, ‘as I 
hear I judge”. In Pivge Aboth, iv. 12, 
R. Ishmael is cited: ‘‘ He used to say, 
judge not alone, for none may judge alone 
save One’’.—Ver. 17. καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμφ 
εκ. πατήρ. He returns from “judging ” 
to “‘ witnessing,” and He maintains that 
His witness (ver. 18) satisfies the Mosaic 
law (Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 15) because what 
He witnesses of Himself is confirmed by 
the Father that sent Him. The nature 
of this witness was given fully at v. 37- 
47.—éy® εἶμι 6 μαρτυρῶν . . . Field 
maintains the A.V. “I am one ‘that 
beareth witness,’ against the R.V. ‘I 
am He that beareth witness”; ἐγώ eipe 
being equivalent to ‘‘ There is I” or “ It 
is I”. Misled perhaps by the Lord’s 
use of ἀνθρώπων (νετ. 17), the Pharisees 
ask (νετ. 19): Mot ἐστὶν 6 πατήρ σου; 
‘¢ Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt ” 
(Augustine), therefore they ask where He 
is that they may ascertain what He has 
to say regarding Jesus; as if they said: 
“It is all very well alleging that you 
have a second witness in your Father ; 
but where is He?” The idea of Cyril 
that it was a coarse allusion to His birth 
is out of the question, and Cyril himself 
does not press it. Jesus replies: Owre 
. ἤδειτε ἄν [or ἂν yderte]. They 
ought to have known who He meant by 
His Father and where He was; and 
their hopeless ignorance Jesus can only 
deplore. They professed to know Jesus, 
but had they known Him they would 
necessarily have known the Father in 
whom He lived and whom He repre- 
sented. Their ignorance of the Father 
proves their ignorance of Jesus.—Tatra 
. « tep@. On yalod., see ver. 12. Euthy- 
mius, as usual, hits the nail on the head: 


εἰ ἐμὲ ῄδειτε, καὶ τὸν πατέρα µου ᾖδειτε ἄν. 
ὁ Ιησοῦς ἐν τῷ 


ς 


” > BAe ACC ay ea 4 Ul 
19. Ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῶ, “Mod ἐστιν ὁ πατήρ 
3 , 3 A 
Απεκρίθη 6 ‘Ingots, ““Ρ Οὔτε ἐμὲ οἴδατε, οὔτε τὸν πατέρα 


20. Ταῦτα τὰ 
πα διδάσκων ἐν τῷ 


καὶ οὐδεὶς * ἐπίασεν ο λλμά ὅτι " οὕπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ο. αὐτοῦ. 


᾿ησοῦς, “Eye ὑπάγω, καὶ ζητήσετέ 
te ee ee ε tal 
ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπάγω, ὑμεῖς 


22. Ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ Ιουδαῖοι, “" Μήτι ἀποκτενεῖ 


οὗ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν ; 


“Tatra ” τα Tappynoiacrid. ἔπεση- 
µήνατο γὰρ τὸν τόπον, δεικνύων τὴν 
παῤῥησίαν τοῦ διδασκάλου. “ But noone 
apprehended Him, because not yet was 
His hour come.” His immunity was all 
the more remarkable on account of the 
proximity to the chamber where the 
Sanhedrim held its sittings, in the south- 
east corner of the Court of the Priests 
See Edersheim’s Life of Christ, ii. 165, 
note. 

Vv. 21-30. Further conversation with 
the Fews, in which Fesus warns them 
that He will not be long with them, 
and that unless they believe they will die 
in their sins. They will know that His 
witness is true after they have crucified 
Him.—Ver. 21. Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν. On 
another occasion, but whether the same 
day (Origen) or not we do not know, 
although, as Licke points out, the 
αὐτοῖς favours Origen’s view, Jesus said: 
Εγὼ ὑπάγω . . . ἐλθεν. This re- 
peats vii..34, with the addition “‘and ye 
shall die in your sin’’; 7.e., undelivered 
by the Messiah, in the bondage of sin 
and reaping its fruit. He adds the 
reason why they should not find Him 
(cf. vii. 34): ὅπου . . . ἐλθεῖν. He goes 
to His Father and thither they cannot 
come, if they do not believe in Him.— 
Ver. 22. As before, so now, the Jews 
fail to understand Him, and ask: Myre 

. ἐλθεῖν; “Will He kill Himself, 
etc.?”? They gathered from the ὑπάγω 
that the departure He spoke of was His 
own action, and thought that perhaps 
He meant to put Himself by death 
beyond their reach. Many interpreters, 
even Westcott and Holtzmann, suppose 
that the hell of suicides is meant by the 
place where they could not come. This 
is refuted by Edersheim (ii. 170, note); 
and, besides, the meaning obviously is, 


17---26. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


775 


23. Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ““Ypets ἐκ τῶν κάτω ἐστὲ, ἐγὼ ἐκ τῶν ἄνω 


«ἰμί: ὑμεῖς ἐκ τοῦ κόσµου τούτου ἐστὲ, ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου 


γούτου. 


a - a / ~ 
24. εἶπον οὖν ὑμῖν ὅτι ἀποθανεῖσθε ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν - 


ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ πιστεύσητε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, ἀποθανεῖσθε ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις 


ς ~ 32 
ὑμῶν. 


᾽νησοῦς, “'"Τὴν ἀρχὴν 6 τι] καὶ λαλῶ ὑμῖν. 


~ > 
25. Ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ, “XO τίς εἶ ;᾽ 


Καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ 
v Gen. xliii. 
26. “moda ἔχω περὶ 20. Dan. 


Viii. 1. 


ὑμῶν λαλεῖν καὶ κρίνειν' GAN 6 πέµψας µε ἀληθής ἐστι, κἀγὼ & w xvii 12. 


1 W.H. read ors as one word and place point of interrogation at the end of the 


clause. 


that as they had no intention of dying, 
His supposed death would put Him 
beyond their reach.—Ver. 23. But dis- 
regarding the interruption, and wishing 
more clearly to show why they could 
not follow Him, and what constituted 
the real separation in destiny between 
Him and them, He says: Ὑμεῖς . 

τούτου, ‘You belong to the things 
below, I to the things above: you are of 
this world, I am not of this world”. 
The two clauses balance and interpret 
one another: ‘things below” being 
equivalent to ‘this world”. It was 
because this gulf naturally separated 
them from Him and His destiny and 
because their destiny was that of the 
world that He had warned them.—Ver. 
24. εἶπον οὖν . . . ὑμῶν. '' Therefore 
said I unto you, ye shall die in your 
sins.” The emphatic word is now 
ἀποθανεῖσθε (cf. ver. 12); the destruc- 
tion is itself put in the foreground 
(Meyer, Holtzmann). ‘For unless ye 
believe that I am He, ye shall, etc.” 
What they were required to believe is not 
explicitly stated (see their question, ver. 
15), it is ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι “ that 1 am,” which 
Westcott supposes has the pregnant 
meaning “that I am, that in me is the 
spring of life and light and strength ” ; 
but this scarcely suits the context. Meyer 
supposes that He means ‘‘ that I am the 
Messiah”’. But surely it must refer 
directly to what He has just declared 
Himself to be, ‘‘I am not of this world 
but of the things above ” [‘‘namlich der 
ἄνωθεν Stammende ; die allentscheidende 
Pers6nlichkeit,” Holtzmann]. This 
belief was necessary because only by 
attaching themselves to His teaching 
and person could they be delivered from 
their identification with this world.— 
Ver. 25. This only adds bewilderment 
to their mind, and they, not “‘ pertly and 
contemptuously ” (Meyer, Weiss, Holtz- 
mann), but with some shade of im- 
patience, ask: Σὺ τίς et; “Πο art 


Thou?” To this Jesus replies: τὴν 
ἀρχὴν & τι καὶ λαλῶ ὑμῖν. These 
words are rendered in A.V. ‘“ Even the 
same that I said unto you from the 
beginning”; and in R.V. ‘ Even that 
which I have also spoken unto you from 
the beginning’. The Greek Fathers 
understood τὴν ἀρχὴν as equivalent to 
ὅλως, a Meaning it frequently bears ; and 
they interpret the clause as an exclama- 
tion, ‘‘ That I should even speak to you 
at all!” [6Aws, ὅτι καὶ λαλῶ ὑμῖν, 
περιττόν ἐστιν. ἀνάξιοι γάρ ἐστε παντὸς 
λόγου, ὡς πειρασταί, Euthymius.] With 
this Field compares Achilles Tatius, vi. 
20, οὐκ Gyamds ὅτι σοι καὶ λαλῶ; Art 
thou not content that I even condescend 
to speak to thee? In support of this 
rendering Holtzmann quotes from Clem., 
Hom. vi. 11, εἶ μὴ παρακολουθεῖς ots 
λέγω, τί καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν διαλέγοµαι; He 
even supposes that this is an echo of 
John, so that we have here an indication 
of the earliest interpretation of the words. 
This meaning does no violence to the 
words, but it is slightly at discord with 
the spirit of the next clause and of Jesus 
generally (although cf. Mk. ix. το). 
Another rendering, advocated at great 
length by Raphel (Annot., i. 637), puts 
a comma after τὴν ἀρχὴν and another 
after ἡμῖν, and connects τὴν ἀρχὴν 
with πολλὰ ἔχω; ‘‘omnino, quia et 
loquor vobis, multa habeo de vobis 
loqui”. Raphel’s note is chiefly valu- 
able for the collection of instances 
of the use of τὴν ἀρχήν. A third 
interpretation is that suggested by the 
A.V., and which finds a remarkable 
analogue in Plautus, Captivi, III. iv. 901, 
“Quis igitur ille est? Quem dudum 
dixi a principio tibi”” (Elsner). But this 
would require λέγω, not λαλῶ. There 
remains a fourth possible interpretation, 
that of Melanchthon, who _ renders 
“plane illud ipsum verbum sum quod 
loquor vobiscum”’. So Luther (see 
Meyer); and Winer translates ‘‘ (I am) 


776 


A A > 
ἤκουσα tap αὐτοῦ, ταῦτα λέγω εἰς τὸν κόσμον.” 


ὅτι τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῖς ἔλεγεν. 


x iii. 14 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


VIIl. 


27. Οὐκ ἔγνωσαν 
28. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


““Orav " ὑψώσητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τότε γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγώ 


εἰμι: καὶ ἀπ᾿ ἐμαυτοῦ ποιῶ οὐδὲν, ἀλλὰ καθὼς ἐδίδαξέ µε ὁ πατήρ 


µου, ταῦτα λαλῶ. 


΄ ς ‘ 9 3 a y 2 ὰ er ~ » 
y Exod. xv. με μµονον ο πατηρ, οτι εγω τ αρεστ αυτῳ ποιω πάντοτε. 


26. Gen. 
xvi. 6. 
Acts Vi. 2. 
στι. πας 
a XV. 9, IO. 
b 2 Mac. i. 
27. Rom. 
vi. 18. 


“co? 


altogether that which in my words I 
represent myself as being”. To this 
Meyer and Moulton (see his note on 
Winer) object that τὴν ἀρχὴν only 
means ‘‘omnino” ‘ prorsus”’ when the 
sentence is negative. Elsner, however, 
admitting that the use is rare, gives 
several examples where it is used “' sine 
addita negativa’”. The words, then, 
may be taken as meaning ‘“‘I am nothing 
else than what I am saying to you: I 
am a Voice; my Person is my teach- 
ing ”’.—Ver. 26. πολλὰ ἔχω . . . “many 
things have I to speak and to judge 
about you,” some of which are uttered 
in the latter part of this chapter.—aAX’ 
ὁ πέµψας .. . But—however hard for 
you to receive—these things are what 
are given me to say by Him that sent 
me, and therefore 1 must speak them; 
and not to you only but to the world eis 
τὸν kéopov.—Ver. 27. His hearers did 
not identify ‘‘ Him that sent me” with 
“the Father’: Οὐκ ἔγνωσαν ... 
ἔλεγεν.---Ψετ. 28. Therefore (οὖν) Jesus 
said to ἴπεπι, Ὅταν . . . eipt, ‘when ye 
have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall 
ye know thatIlam He”. ὑψώσητε has 
the double reference of elevation on the 
cross and elevation to the Messianic 
throne, cf. iii. 14. The people were 
thus to elevate Him and then they would 
recognise Him, Acts ii. 37, etc. ὅτι ἐγώ 
εἰμι “that I am He,” z.2., “‘the Son of 
Man”. What follows is not dependent 
on ὅτι (against Meyer, Holtzmann, 
Westcott); the καὶ am’ ἐμαυτοῦ begins 
a new statement, as the present, ποιῶ, 
shows. The sequence of thought is: ye 
shall know that I am Messiah: and 
indeed I now act as such, for of myself I 
do nothing, but as my Father has taught 
me, so I speak. This is the present 
proof that He was Messiah.—Ver, 29. 
καὶ ὁ πέµψας . . . πάντοτε. His fidelity 
to the purpose of the Father that sent 
Him secured His perpetual presence 


29. καὶ 6 πέµψας µε, pet ἐμοῦ ἐστιν: οὐκ ἀφῆκέ 


30. 


Ταῦτα αὐτοῦ λαλοῦντος πολλοὶ * ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτόν. 

31. Ἔλεγε οὖν 6 ‘Ingots πρὸς τοὺς πεπιστευκότας αὐτῷ Ἰουδαίους, 
Edy ὑμεῖς " µείνητε ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῷ ἐμῷ, ἀληθῶς µαθηταί µου ἐστέ: 
32. καὶ γνώσεσθε τὴν ἀλήθειαν, καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια ” ἐλευθερώσει pas.” 


with Him. By His entire self-abnega- 
tion and freedom from self-will He gave 
room to the Spirit of the Father. Or, as 
Westcott supposes, the ὅτι clause may 
give the evidence or sign of the pre- 
ceding rather than its cause; and the 
meaning may be that the result of the 
Father’s presence is seen in the perfect 
correspondence of the conduct of the Son 
with the will of the Father.—Ver. 30. 
ταῦτα . . . αὐτόν. “As He spake 
these things many believed on Him,” 
not only believed what He said, but 
accepted Him as the Messenger of God. 
The statement closes one paragraph and 
prepares for the next, in which it is 
shown what this faith amounted to 
(Holtzmann). 

Vv. 31-59. Discussion batween Fesus 
and the Fews regarding their paternity. 
—Ver. 31. To those who have just been 
described as believing on Him Jesus 
went on to say, Ἐὰν ὑμεῖς . . . ὑμᾶς. 
“If you ”—wtpets emphasised in distinc- 
tion from those who had not believed— 
‘‘abide in my word ”’—not content with 
making this first step towards faith and 
obedience—“ then ’—but not till then— 
‘are ye really my disciples.”—Ver. 32. 
καὶ γνώσεσθε . . . ὑμᾶς. By abiding in 
Christ’s word, making it the rule of their 
life and accepting Him as their Guide 
and Teacher, they would come to that 
knowledge of the truth which only ex- 
perimental testing of it can bring; and 
the truth regarding their relation to Him 
and to God would turn all- service and 
all life into liberty. Freedom, a con- 
dition of absolute liberty from all out- 
ward constraint, is only attained when 
man attains fellowship with God (who is 
absolutely free) in the truth: when that 
prompts man to action which prompts 
God. ([Cf. the striking parallel in 
Epictetus, iv. 7. εἰς ἐμὲ οὐδεὶς ἐξουσίαν 
ἔχει ' ἠλευθέρωμαι ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἔγνωκα 
αὐτοῦ τὰς ἐντολὰς, οὐκέτι οὐδεὶς SovAa- 


27—39. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


τη 


33. ᾿᾽Απεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ, “'"Σπέρμα ᾽Αβραάμ ἐσμεν, καὶ οὐδενὶ 4 δε- ο vv. 37, 39. 


al. iii. 16. 


δουλεύκαµεν πώποτε’ πῶς σὺ λέγεις, Ὅτι ἐλεύθεροι γενήσεσθε ;” d Gen. xv. 


34. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς 6 


ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν, δοῦλός ἐστι τῆς ἁμαρτίας. 


~ 


τη 


36. ἐὰν οὖν ὁ 


fod µένει ἐν 


2? 3 BY 2A 
οικιᾳ εις τον αιωνα 


vids ὑμᾶς ἐλευθερώση, ὄντως ἐλεύθεροι ἔσεσθε. iv. 22. 


> A 3 A € A oe a 14. 
Ingots, ''᾽Αμὴν ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι οπᾶς ο2 Pet. ii. 


35. 6 δὲ δοῦλος ν. το. 


ς εν 3 by 7A . 
ὁ υἱὸς μένει εἲς τὸν αἰῶνα. fGen. xxi. 
1ο. Gal. 


37. οἶδα ὅτι σπέρμα “ABpadp ἐστε" ἀλλὰ ἔ {ητεῖτέ µε ἀποκτεῖναι, gv. 44. 


ὅτι 6 λόγος ὁ ἐμὸς οὗ χωρεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. 
εαν |S a 2 
ὑμῶν,ὸ ποιεῖτε. 


1 µου omitted in BCL. 


38. εγω ὃ ἑώρακα παρὰ τῷ Ἡ ν. 19; χι. 


x a 1g 4% 
παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ 


39. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “‘O πατὴρ 


7a ηκονσατε with ΝΕΒΟΚΙ, 1, 33. 


Στον πατρος without vpev in T.Tr.W.H.R. 


γωγῆσαί pe δύναται.]- Ὑετ. 33. But 
this announcement, instead of seeming 
to the Jews the culmination of all bliss, 
provokes even in the πεπιστευκότες 
(ver. 31) a blind, carping criticism: 
Σπέρμα . . . Ὑενήσεσθε; we are the 
seed of Abraham, called by God to rule 
all peoples, and to none have we ever 
been slaves. “' The episodes of Egyptian, 
Babylonian, Syrian, and Roman con- 
quests were treated as mere transitory 
accidents, not touching the real life of 
the people, who had never accepted the 
dominion of their conquerors or coalesced 
with them,” Westcott. Sayings such as 
ΜΑΙ] Israel are the children of kings” 
were current among the people. How 
then could emancipation be spoken of as 
yet to be given them ?—Ver. 34. The 
answer is: ἁμὴν ... ἁμαρτίας [τῆς 
ἁμαρτίας is bracketed by W.H.]. The 
liberty meant is inward, radical, and 
individual. ‘Every one who lives a 
life of sin is a slave.” Cf. Rom. vi. 
16, 20; 2 Pet. ii. 19; Xen., Mem., 
iv. 5, 3; Philo’s tract “‘Quod omnis 
probus sit liber,” and the Stoic say- 
ing ‘“solus sapiens est liber”. The 
relations subsisting ἐν τῇ otxlq in the 
house of God, the Theocracy to which 
they boasted to belong, must be deter- 
mined by what is spiritual, by likeness to 
the Head of the house; “this servitude 
would lead to national rejection,” Eders- 
heim. It behoves them therefore to 
remember this result of the generally 
recognised principle that sin masters the 
sinner and makes him a slave (ver. 35), 
viz., “that the slave does not abide in 
the house,” does not permanently inherit 
the promises to Abraham, and the blessed- 
ness of fellowship with God; it is the 
Son who abides for ever. Cf. Heb. in. 


6. The slave has no permanent footing 
in the house: he may be dismissed or 
sold. The transition which Paul himself 
had made from the servile to the filial 
position coloured his view of the Gospel, 
Gal. iv. 1-7 ; but here it is not the servile 
attitude towards God but slavery to sin 
that isin view. From this slavery only 
the Son emancipates, ἐὰν οὖν .. . 
ἔσεσθε. This implies that they were all 
born slaves and needed emancipation, 
and that only One, Himself the Son, 
could give them true liberty.—évrTws 
ἐλεύθεροι in contrast to the liberty they 
boasted of in ver. 33. How the Son 
emancipates is shown in Gal. iv. 1-7. The 
superficial character of the liberty they 
enjoyed by their birth as Jews is further 
emphasised in νετ. 37.—Ver. 37. ol8a... 
ὑμῖν. ‘I know that you are Abraham’s 
seed; it is your moral descent which is 
in question, and your conduct shows 
that my word, which gives true liberty 
(vv. 31, 32), does not find place in you.” 
—ov χωρεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. The Greek Fathers 
all understand these words in the sense 
of A.V., “hath no place in you”. Cyril 
has διὰ τὴν ἐνοικήσασαν ἐν ὑμῖν 
ἁμαρτίαν δηλαδὴ, καὶ τόπον ὥσπερ οὐκ 
ἑῶσαν, etc. So Euthymius and Theo- 
phylact. Beza renders “non _ habet 
locum,” citing a passage from Aristotle, 
which Meyer disallows, because in it the 
verb is used impersonally. But Field 
has found another instance in Alciphron, 
Epist., iii. 7, in which χωρεῖν is used in 
the sense of ‘locum habere” (Otium 
Norvic., p. 67). The common meaning 
of χωρεῖν, “to advance,” is also quite 
relevant and indeed not materially 
different. It is frequently used for 
prosperous, successful progress. See 
Aristoph., Pax, 694, and other passages 


ἡμῶν ᾿Αβραάμ ἐστι.” 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


νι, 


Λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ “Ingots, “Ei τέκνα τοῦ 
᾽Αβραὰμ ἦτε,ι τὰ ἔργα τοῦ ᾽Αβραὰμ ἐποιεῖτε ἄν. 


49. νῦν δὲ 


ζητεῖτέ µε ἀποκτεῖναι, ἄνθρωπον ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα, 


i 1. 40. 


ἣν ἤκουσα ᾿ παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ: τοῦτο ᾽Αβραὰμ οὐκ ἐποίησεν. 
ὑμεῖς ποιεῖτε τὰ ἔργα τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν.” 


41. 
Εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ, ““Hyets 


ἐκ πορνείας ob γεγεννήµεθα”' ἕνα πατέρα ἔχομεν, τὸν Θεόν.” 

42. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Ei ὅ Θεὸς πατὴρ ὑμῶν ἦν, ἠγαπᾶτε 

j Num. xvi, ἂν ἐμέ' ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐξῆλθον καὶ Few: οὐδὲ γὰρ ) ἀπ᾿ 
2 


kiv. 42. Mt. ἐμαυτοῦ ἐλήλυθα, GAN’ ἐκεῖνός µε ἀπέστειλε. 


XXVi. 73. 
τὴν ἐμὴν οὐ γινώσκετε; 


1 Instead of ητε. . 


. εποιειτε αν W.H. read εστε . 


43. Stati τὴν Ελαλιὰν 


ὅτι οὗ δύνασθε ἀκούειν τὸν λόγον τὸν ἐμόν. 


. ποιειτε. εστε is found 


in NBDL; εποιειτε without av in N*BDEFG, with αν in ScCKL. Certainly 
the intrinsically probable reading is that of T.R., especially when the νυν δε of ver. 


40 is considered. 


2 T.R. in CA, but ουκ εγεννηθηµεν in BD, adopted by Tr.W.H.R. 


in Kypke; and cf. 2 Thess. iii. 1, ἵνα 6 
λόγος τρέχῃ. “' ΜΥ word meets with 
obstacles and is not allowed its full 
influence in you.”’—Ver, 38. ‘‘ And yet 
the word of Christ justly claimed accept- 
ance, for it was derived from immediate 
knowledge of God,’ Westcott.—éya 6 
[or ἃ ἐγὼ, as recent editors read]... 
ποιεῖτε. ‘‘ What I have seen with my 
Father I speak ; and what ye have seen 
with your father ye do.” He makes 
the statement almost as if it were a 
necessary principle that sons should 
adopt their fathers’ thoughts. The οὖν 
might be rendered ‘“‘and 5ο: it was 
because Jesus uttered what He had 
learned by direct intercourse with His 
Father that the Jews sought to slay 
Him. See vv. 16-19. The ἑώρακα (cp. 
iii. 31, 32) might seem to indicate the 
knowledge He had in His pre-existent 
state, but the next clause forbids this. — 
ποιεῖτε, if it is to balance λαλω, must be 
indicative.—Ver. 39. To this ambiguous 
but ominous utterance the Jews reply: 
‘O πατὴρ ἡμῶν ᾿Αβραάμ ἐστι, thereby 
meaning to clear themselves of the 
suspicion of having learned anything 
evil from their father. To which Jesus 
retorts: Εἰ τέκνα . . . ἐποιεῖτε ἄν. “If 
ye were Abraham’s children ye would do 
the works of Abraham’’; according to 
the law of ver. 38. If their origin could 
be wholly traced to Abraham, then their 
conduct would resemble his.—viv δὲ 
. .. ἐποίησεν. ‘‘ But now—as the fact 
really is—you seek to kill me; and this 
has not only the guilt of an ordinary 
murder, but your hostility is roused against 
me because I have spoken to you the truth 


I heard from God. It is murder based 
upon hostility to God. This is very 
different from the conduct of Abraham.” 
---ἄνθρωπον seems to be used simply as 
we might use “‘ person ”—a person who: 
certainly, as Lampe says, it is used ‘‘ sine 
praejudicio deitatis”. Bengel thinks it 
anticipates ἀνθρωπόκτονος in ver. 44, 
and Westcott says it ‘stands in contrast 
with of God . . . and at the same time 
suggests the idea of human sympathy, 
which He might claim from them (a 
man), aS opposed to the murderous spirit 
of the power of evil”.—Ver. 41. vpeis 
. .. ὑμῶν. You do not the works of 
Abraham: you do the works of your 
father. And yet (ver. 37) He had 
acknowledged them to be the children of 
Abraham. The only possible conclusion 
was that besides Abraham some other 
father had been concerned in producing 
them. This idea they repudiate with 
indignation: “‘Hpeis . .. Θεόν. “ We 
were not born of fornication: we have 
one father, God’’; not “' Abraham,’’ as 
might have been expected, but ‘‘ God” : 
i.¢., they claim to be the children of the 
promise, within the Theocracy, children 
of God’s house (ver. 35).—Ver. 42. But 
this claim Jesus explodes by the same 
argument: Ei 6 θεὸς . . . ἀπέστειλε. 
Were God your Father you would love 
me, for I am from ἀοἀ.--ἐξῆλθον ἐκ τοῦ 
θεοῦ expresses ‘the proceeding forth 
from that essential pre-human fellowship 
with God, which was His as the Son of 
God, and which took place through the 
incarnation,” Meyer. The meaning of 
the expression is fixed by that with which 
it is contrasted in xiii. 3, xvi. 28. ἥκω is 


4o—45. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


ili) 


44. ὑμεῖς | ἐκ '' πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστὲ, καὶ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας τοῦ 1 iii. 5, 6, 31. 


πατρὸς ὑμῶν θέλετε ποιεῖν. 


καὶ ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ οὐχ ἕστηκεν" ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἀλήθεια ἐν αὐτῷ. 


m Gen. iv. 


ἐκεῖνος " ἀνθρωποκτόνος ἦν am ἀρχῆς; το. 
e j ρχῆ 


nt Jo. iii. 
15. Gen, 
ili. 3. 


ὅταν λαλῇ τὸ ψεῦδος, ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων λαλεῖ : ὅτι "ψεύστης ἐστὶ καὶ 6 ο Prov. xix. 


πατὴρ αὐτοῦ. 


added, as ἐλήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον in xvi. 
28, almost in the sense in which it is 
used in the Dramatists, announcing the 
arrival of one of the ‘‘ personae ’’ on the 
stage, ““Ι am come from such and 
such a place and here I am”, The 
coming itself was the result of God’s 
action rather than of His own: ovdé 

. ἀπέστειλε. This is His constant 
argument, that as He came forth from 
God and was sent by Him, they must 
have welcomed Him had they been 
God’s children. Their misunderstand- 
ing had a moral τοὂῖ.---διατί . . . ἐμόν. 
They did not recognise His speech as 
Divine, because they were unable to 
receive the message He brought. ‘In 
λαλεῖν (= loqui) the fact of uttering 
human language is the prominent notion ; 
in Aéyeww (= dicere) it is the words uttered, 
and that these are correlative to reason- 
able thoughts within the breast of the 
utterer ’ (Trench, Synonyms, 271). ΑΙ 
His individual expressions and the very 
language He used were misunderstood, 
because there was in them a moral in- 
capacity to receive the truth He delivered. 
—Ver. 44. This was the resultand evidence 
of their paternity : ὑμεῖς . . . [τοῦ πατρὸς 
is read by all recent editors]. ‘‘ Ye are of 
the father who is the devil.” The trans- 
lation, ‘‘ of the father of the devil,”’ z.¢., 
the (Gnostic) God of the Jews, is, as 
Meyer says, thoroughly un-Johannine. 
Perhaps a slight pause before the cul- 
minating words τοῦ διαβόλου would 
emphasise them and show that this had 
been in His mind throughout the con- 
versation. Being of this parentage they 
deliberately purpose [θέλετε] and not 
merely unintentionally are betrayed into 
the fulfilment of his desires, Their 
origin is determined by the fact that 
“from the first the devil was a man- 
slayer”. To what does am’ ἀρχῆς refer ? 
Since the beginning of the human race, 
or since men first were killed ; not since 
the devil’s beginning. Cyril and some 
others think it is the first murder, that of 
Abel, that is in view (cf. 1 John iii. 15), 
but far more probably it is the introduc- 
tion of death through the first sin (Wisd. 
ii. 23, 24). So almost all recent com- 
mentators. Some think both references 


45. ἐγὼ δὲ ὅτι τὴν ἀλήθειαν λέγω, οὐ πιστεύετέ por. 


22. 1 Jo. 
ντο στα, 
Gen. iii. 5. 
are admissible (see Liicke).—xKai ἐν τῇ 
ἀληθείᾳ οὐχ ἔἕστηκεν, ‘and stands not in 
the truth”. Κ.Υ. has ‘“‘and stood not’’; 
so the Vulgate “εί in veritate non 
stetit”’. W.H. adopt the same transla- 
tion, reading οὐκ ἔστηκεν, the imperfect 
of στήκω, I stand; but good reasons 
against this reading are given by Thayer 
s.v. ἕστηκεν is the usual perfect of 
ἵστημι with the sense of a present. The 
reference therefore is not to the fall of 
the angels, but to the constant attitude 
of the devil; οὐκ ἐμμένε, Euthymius. 
“The truth is not the domain in which 
he has his footing.”” Meyer, Weiss. He 
does not adhere to the truth and live in it. 
The reason being, ὅτι... αὐτῷ, '' because 
truth is not in him”. There is not in 
him any craving for the truth. He is 
not true to what he knows. His nature 
is so false that ὅταν λαλῇ τὸ ψεῦδος 
ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων λαλεῖ, “ whenever he speaks 
what is false, he speaks of his own”. 
‘* But the article may mean “ the lie that 
is natural to him,’ ‘ his lie’ ” (Plummer).— 
ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων means that he speaks out 
of that which is characteristically and 
peculiarly his (cf. Mt. xii. 34); ‘* because 
he is ”—this is his character and descrip- 
tion— a liar and his father,” 7.e., he is 
himself a liar and the father of all liars. 
This is added to reflect light on the 
first statement of this verse. So 
Holtzmann and most recent inter- 
preters. But Weiss rightly defends the 
reference of αὐτοῦ to ψεῦδος as in 
A.V. Westcott proposes to translate: 
‘Whenever a man speaketh a lie, hé 
speaketh of his own, for his father also 
is a liar”. Paley renders: ‘‘ When (one) 
utters . . . he is speaking from his own, 
because he is a liar, and (so is) his 
father’’. Westcott’s translation makes 
excellent sense and suits the context and 
gives a good meaning to the tdteyv, but, 
as he himself owns, the omission of the 
subject (ὅταν λαλῇ) is certainly harsh; 
it may be said, impossible.—Ver. 45. 
ἐγὼ δὲ. ‘But I”—in contrast to the 
devil—‘‘ because I speak the truth you 
do not believe me.” Had I spoken 
falsehood you would have believed me, 
because it is your nature to live in what 
is false (ef. Euthymius).—Ver. 46. τίς 


780 


p xvi. 8-11. 46. τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν 5 ἐλέγχει µε περὶ ἁμαρτίας ; 
Stati ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετέ jor ; 


ΚΑΤΑ TQANNHN 


ΥΠΠ. 


εἰ δὲ ἀλήθειαν λέγω, 
47. ὁ ὢν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ 


Θεοῦ ἀκούει' διὰ τοῦτο ὑμεῖς οὐκ ἀκούετε, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐκ 


35 


ἐστέ. 


q Vii. 20. 
r Deut. 


48. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Ob 
καλῶς λέγομεν ἡμεῖς, ὅτι Σαµαρείτης ef σὺ, καὶ ἃ δαιµόνιον ἔχεις ; ” 


xxvii. 16. 49. ᾽᾿Απεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς, ''᾿Εγὼ δαιµόνιον οὐκ ἔχω, ἀλλὰ τιμῶ τὸν 


Ῥτον. 


xxviii. 7, πατέρα µου, καὶ ὑμεῖς ” ἀτιμάζετέ µε. 


etc. Rom. 


ii. 23. 
πχ. CLs 


n 


ερ. ver. 5 
and Ps. 
Ixxxix. 48. A τσ 

t 1 Sam. xv, δαιμόνιον ἔχεις. 


Kars » 
σιωνα. 


Lk. δόξαν µου ἔστιν 6 [ητῶν καὶ κρίνων. 


5ο. ἐγὼ δὲ οὐ ζητῶ τὴν 
51. ἁμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν. 


, 
Here only; ἐάν τις τὸν λόγον τὸν ἐμὸν τηρήσῃ, θάνατον οὗ μὴ " θεωρήση eis τὸν 
52. Εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ ot ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, “Nov ἐγνώκαμεν ὅτι 
᾽Αβραὰμ ἀπέθανε καὶ οἱ προφῆται, καὶ σὺ λέγεις, 


u Heb. ii. 9, Edv τις τὸν λόγον µου ᾿τηρήσῃ, οὗ μὴ " γεύσεται] θανάτου eis τὸν 


1 γευσηται in ΒΔΑΟΡΙ.. 


... ἁμαρτίας; Alford, who represents 
a number of interpreters, says: ‘‘ The 
question is an appeal to His sinlessness 
of life, as evident to them all, as a 
pledge for His truthfulness of word”’. 
Calvin is better: ‘‘Haec defensio ad 
circumstantiam loci restringi debet, ac 
si quicquam sibi posse obiici negaret, 
quominus fidus esset Dei minister”’. 
Similarly Bengel.—et δὲ . . . por; “If 
I speak truth, why do you not believe 
me?” It follows from their inability to 
convict Him of sin, that He speaks what 
is true: if so, why do they not believe 
Him ?—Ver. 47. He is believed by those 
who have another moral parentage, 6 dv 
... ἐστέ. ‘‘He that is of God listens 
to the words of God,” implying that the 
words He spoke were God’s words. 
Their not listening proved that they 
were not of God. At this point the Jews 
break in: Οὐ . . . ἔχεις: “Say we not 
well that Thou art a Samaritan and hast 
ademon?’’ “In the language in which 
they spoke, what is rendered into Greek 
by ‘Samaritan’ would have been either 
Cuthi, which, while literally meaning 
a Samaritan, is almost as often used in 
the sense of ‘ heretic,’ or else Shomroni. 
The latter word deserves special atten- 
tion. Literally, it also means ‘ Samar- 
itan’; but the name Shomron is also 
sometimes used as the equivalent of 
Ashmedai, the prince of the demons. 
According to the Kabbalists, Shomron 
was the father of Ashmedai, and hence 
the same as Sammael or Satan. That 
this was a widespread Jewish belief 
appears from the circumstance that in 
the Koran Israel is said to have been 
seduced into idolatry by Shomron, while 


in Jewish tradition this is attributed to 
Sammael. If therefore the term applied 
by the Jews to Jesus was Shomroni— 
and not Cuthi, ‘ heretic’—it would 
literally mean ‘ Child of the Devil,’ ” 
Edersheim. The ordinary interpretation 
of ‘‘ Samaritan ”’ yields, however, quite a 
relevant meaning. To His refusal to 
own their true Abrahamic ancestry 
they retort that He is no pure Jew, a 
Samaritan.—Ver. 49. δαιµόνιον ἔχεις, 
possessed, or crazed. Cf. x. 20. To 
this Jesus replies: ᾿Εγὼ . . . αἰῶνα. 
The ἐγώ is emphatic in contrast to the 
expressed tpets of the last clause; “I 
am not out of my mind, but all I do and 
say springs from my desire to honour 
my Father, while you for your part and 
on this very account dishonour me”’. 
This dishonour does not stir His resent- 
ment, because (ver. 50) ἐγὼ . . . pov, 
“‘T am not seeking my own glory”. Cf. 
v.41. Nevertheless His glory is not to 
be carelessly slighted and turned into 
reproach (Ps, iv. 2) for ἔστιν 6 ζητῶν 
καὶ κρίνων, ‘there is who seeketh it and 
judgeth ” (vv. 22, 23).—Ver. 51. There- 
fore the emphasis in the next verse, 
precisely as in ver. 24 of chap. v., is on 
“my word’’.—édv τις .. . αἰῶνα, “ if 
any one keeps my word, he shall never 
see death”, For τηρεῖν see xiv. 15-23, 
xv. 10-20, xvii. 6, I John and Rev. 
passim; it is exactly equivalent to 
“keep”. θεωρεῖν θάνατον occurs only 
here. It is probably stronger than the 
commoner ἰδεῖν θάνατον (Lk. ii. 26, Heb. 
xi. 5), ‘expressing fixed contemplation 
and full acquaintance” (Plummer) ; 
although in John this fuller meaning is 
sometimes not apparent.—Ver. 52. This 


46—57. 


αἰῶνα. 


ἀπέθανε; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


781 


54. "ph σὺ μείζων ef τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν ᾽Αβραὰμ, ὅστις v iv. 12. 
καὶ οἱ προφῆται ἀπέθανον" τίνα σεαυτὸν σὺ ποιεῖς ;” WEccles.iii. 


1g. 1 Cor. 


3 id 3 Αν «ς2γΓΑ Φιν 1! > A‘ ε / ii. i 
54. ᾿Απεκρίθη “Ingots, “"Edv ἐγὼ δοξάζω] ἐμαυτὸν, ἡ δόξα µου vii. 1ο 


ix. 19. 


"οὐδέν ἐστιν: ἐστιν 6 πατήρ pou 6 δοξάζων µε, "ὃν ὑμεῖς λέγετε, y With gen. 
e€ 


ὅτι Θεὸς ὑμῶν 3 ἐστι, 55. καὶ οὐκ ἐγνώκατε αὐτόν, ἐγὼ δὲ οἶδα αὐτόν " 


here only; 
cp.Herod 
iii. 37. 


καὶ ἐὰν ὃ εἴπω ὅτι οὐκ οἶδα αὐτόν, ἔσομαι 7 ὅμοιος ὑμῶν, ψεύστης : 2 Burton, 


5 a 217. 
GAN’ οἶδα αὐτὸν καὶ τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ τηρῶ. 56. ᾿Αβραὰμ 6 watip a Ps. xxxiv 


ὑμῶν ἠγαλλιάσατο "ἵνα ἵδῃ "τὴν ἡμέραν τὴν ἐμήν' καὶ εἶδε καὶ 
éxdpy.” 57. Εἶπον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι πρὸς αὐτὸν, “ Πεντήκοντα ἔτη 


1 δοξασω in Ν"ΡΒΟ"Γ. 


confirms the Jews in their opinion that 
He is not in His right mind, Niv ἐγνώ- 
Kapev .. . they seem to have now got 
proof of what they had _ suspected ; 
“antea cum dubitatione aliqua locuti 
erant,” Bengel. Their proof is that 
whereas Jesus says that those who keep 
His word shall never die, Abraham died 
and the prophets; therefore Jesus would 
seem to be making Himself greater than 
those most highly revered personages.— 
Ver. 53. What did He expect them to 
take Him for ?—tiva σεαυτὸν σὺ ποιεῖς; 
For the μὴ σὺ petLov cf. iv. 12.—Ver. 
54. To their question Jesus, as usual, 
gives no categorical answer, but replies 
first by repelling the insinuation con- 
tained in their question and then by 
showing that He was greater than 
Abraham (see Plummer).—’Eaw ἐγὼ 
δοξάζω. “If shall have glorified myself, 
my glory is nothing; my Father is He 
who glorifieth πε. He cannot get 
them to understand that it is not self- 
assertion on His part which prompts 
His claims, but fulfilment of His Father’s 
commission. This ‘‘ Father” of whom 
He speaks and who thus glorifies Him is 
the same ὃν ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι . . . “Of 
whom you say that He is your ἀοά ”.. 
His witness therefore you ought to 
receive; and the reason why you do not 
is this, οὐκ ἐγνώκατε αὐτόν, ἐγὼ δὲ οἶδα 
αὐτόν, ““you have not learned to know 
Him, but I know Him”’. The former 
verb denotes knowledge acquired, by 
teaching or by observation ; in contrast 
to the latter, which denotes direct and 
essential knowledge.—kai ἐὰν εἴπω .. . 
τηρῶ. So far from the affirmations of 
Jesus regarding His connection with the 
Father being false, He would be false, a 
liar and like them, were He to deny that 
He enjoyed direct knowledge of God. 
‘But, on the contrary, I know Him and 
all I do, even that which offends you, is the 


2 T.R. in SBD, ηµων in ACL. 


12. Lam. 


Gen. xxii. 
18. 


καν Tr.Ti.W.H. 


fulfilment of His commission, the keeping 
of His word.’’—Ver. 56. And as regards 
the connection they claim with Abraham, 
this refiects discredit on their present 
attitude towards Jesus; for ᾽᾿Αβραὰμ 6 
πατὴρ ὑμῶν, “Abraham in whose 
parentage you glory,”’ ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα 
ἵδῃ τὴν ἡμέραν τὴν ἐμήν, “rejoiced to 
see my ἆαγ”. The day of Christ is 
the time of His earthly manifestation; 
τῆς ἐπιδημίας αὐτοῦ τῆς μετὰ σαρκός, 
Cyril. See Lk. xvii. 22-26; where the 
plural expresses the same as the singular 
here. “Το see” the dayis ‘to be 
present” at it, ‘to experience”’ it; cf. 
Eurip., Hecuba, 56, δούλειον ἦμαρ εἶδες, 
and the Homeric νόστιµον ἦμαρ ἰδέσθαι. 
ἵνα ἵδῃ cannot here have its usual 
Johannine force and be epexegetical 
(Burton, Moods, etc.), nor as Holtzmann 
says = ὅτι ὄψοιτο, because in this case 
the εἶδε καὶ ἐχάρη would be tautological. 
Euthymius gives the right interpretation: 
ἠγαλλ., ἤγουν, ἐπεθύμησεν (similarly 
Theophylact), and the meaning is 
‘Abraham exulted in the prospect of 
seeing,”’ or ‘‘ that he should see”. This 
he was able to do by means of the 
promises given to him.—«al εἶδε, ‘and 
he saw it,” not merely while he was on 
earth (although this seems to have been 
the idea the Jews took up from the words, 
see ver. 57); for this kind of anticipa- 
tion Jesus uses different language, Mt. 
xiii. 17, and at the utmost the Ο.Τ. 
saints could be described as πόρρωθεν 
ἰδόντες, Heb. xi. 13; but he has seen it 
in its actuality. This involves that 
Abraham has not died so as to be un- 
conscious, ver. 52, and cf. Mk. xii. 26.— 
Ver. 57. This, however, the Jews com- 
pletely misunderstand. They think that 
by asserting that Abraham saw His day, 
Jesus means to say that His day and the 
life of Abraham on earth were contem- 
poraneous.—Nevrykovta . . . ἑώρακας; 


782 


by.5 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


οὕπω ” ἔχεις, καὶ ᾽Αβραὰμ. ἑώρακας; 
ἑ᾽αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν ᾽Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμι.” 


VIII. 58—59. IX, 


58. Εἶπεν αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


99- 


εν.ο. Κεν. Ἠραν οὖν λίθους ἵνα βάλωσιν ἐπ αὐτόν: “Ingots δὲ 4 ἐκρύβη, 


XViii. 21. 

d xii. 36. 

a Mk. i. 16; oUTwS.! 
ii.14. Mt. 
ix. 9. 

b Lev. xxv. 
47: 


1Omit διελθων . .. 


“Fifty years” may be used as a round 
number, sufficiently exact for their pur- 
pose and with no intention to determine 
the age of Jesus. But Lightfoot (Hor. 
Heb., 1046) thinks the saying is ruled by 
the age when Levites retired, see Num. 
iv. 3, 39: “Τα non adhuc pervenisti ad 
vulgarem annum _ superannuationis, et 
tune vidisti Abrahamum?” Irenaeus 
(ii. 22, 5) records that the Gospel (pre- 
sumably this passage) and the Presbyters 
of Asia Minor who had known John, 
testified that Jesus taught till He was 
forty or fifty. This idea is upheld by 
E. v. Bunsen (Hidden Wisdom of Christ), 
and even Keim is of opinion that Jesus 
may have lived to His fortieth year.— 
Ver. 58. The misunderstanding of His 
words elicits from Jesus the statement: 
πρὶν Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγώ εἰμι. ‘ Before 
Abraham was born Iam.” ‘‘ Antequam 
Abraham fieret, Ego sum,” Vulgate. 
Plummer aptly compares Ps. xc. 2, πρὸ 
τοῦ Spy γενηθῆναι .. . σὺ el. Before 
Abraham came into existence I am, 
eternally existent. No stronger affirma- 
tion of pre-existence occurs, and 
Beyschlag’s subtle attempt to evade 
the meaning is unsuccessful.—Ver. 59. 
What the Jews thought of the asser- 
tion appeared in their action: ἡραν . 
αὐτόν. Believing that He was speaking 
sheer blasphemy and claiming equality 
with the great ‘“‘I Am,” they sought to 
stone Him. For this purpose there was 
material ready to hand even in the 
Temple court, for, as Lightfoot reminds 
us, the building was still going on. “A 
stoning in the temple is mentioned by 
Josephus, Axt., xvii. 9, 3, Meyer.— 
"Ingots δὲ ἐκρύβη καὶ ἐξῆλθεν. “ But 
Jesus went out unperceived’’; on this 
usage vide Winer, and cf. Thayer. Why 
it should be supposed that there is any- 
thing miraculous or doketic in this 
(Holtzmann and others) does not appear. 
Many in the crowd would favour the 
escape of Jesus. The remaining words of 
the chapter are omitted by recent editors 


καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, διελθὼν διὰ µέσου αὐτῶν: καὶ παρῆγεν 


IX. 1. Καὶ "παράγων εἶδεν ἄνθρωπον τυφλὸν ἐκ γενετῆς. 2. 
καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ λέγοντες  “΄ Ῥαββὶ, τίς 


οντω as in SBD vet. Lat. vulg. T.R. is found in ΝΕΑΟΙ., 


CHapTER ΙΧ. 1—X. 22. The healing 
of a man born blind and the discussions 
arising out of this miracle. 

Vv. 1-7. The cure narrated.—Ver. 
1. Καὶ παράγων. ‘And as He passed 
by,” possibly, as Meyer and Holtz- 
mann suppose, on the occasion just 
mentioned (viii. 59), and as He passed 
the gate of the Temple where beggars 
congregated; but the definite mention 
that it was a Sabbath (ver. 14) rather 
indicates that it was mot the same 
day. See on x. 22.--εἶδεν . . . γενετῆς. 
“He saw a man blind from birth,” an 
aggravation which plays a prominent 
part in what follows. And first of all it 
so impresses the disciples that they ask 
τίς . . . γεννηθῇ; Their question im- 
plies a belief, repudiated by Jesus here 
and in Lk. xiii. 1-5, that each particular 
sickness or sorrow was traceable to 
some particular sin; see Job passim and 
Weber’s Lehren d. Talmud, p. 235. 
Theis question seems also to imply that 
they supposed even a natal defect might 
be the punishment of the individual’s 
own sin. This has received five different 
explanations: (1) that the pre-existence 
of souls had been deduced from Wisd. 
viii. 20, ‘‘ being good, I came into a body 
undefiled”; (2) that metempsychosis 
was held by some Jews (so Calvin, Beza, 
and see Lightfoot, p. 1048); or (3) that 
the unborn babe might sin, see Gen. 
xxv. 26, Lk. i. 41-44; or (4) that the 
punishment was anticipatory of the sin ; 
or (5) that the question was one of sheer 
bewilderment, putting all conceivable 
possibilities, but without attaching any 
very definite meaning to the one branch 
of the alternative. A combination of the 
two last seems to fit the mental attitude 
of the disciples. The alternative that 
the man suffered for his parents’ sin was 
an idea which would naturally suggest 
itself. See Exod. xx. 5, etc.—tva τυφλὸς 
γεννηθῇ; ἵνα expresses result, not pur- 
pose ; and the form of expression is “‘ the 
product of false analogy, arising from 


I—*”,. 


EYATTEAION 


783 


ἥμαρτεν, οὗτος ἢ οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, °iva τυφλὸς γεννηθῇ;”. 3. Απ-ς Burton, 


εκρίθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Οὔτε οὗτος ἤμαρτεν οὔτε οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ: GAN’ 


218. 


ἵνα "φανερωθῇ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Θεοῦ «ἐν αὐτῷ. 4. ἐμὲ} δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι ἆ ος 
8 


τὰ ἔργα τοῦ πέμψαντός µε "ἕως ἡμέρα ἐστίν: ἔρχεται νὺξ, ὅτε e Burton, 


οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐργάζεσθαι. 
κόσμου.” 


5. ὅταν ἐν τῷ κόσµω ὦ, 
t . 


. xlvi δ. 


Αρ 3 A 328. - 
PGs εἰμι τοῦ f Lk. xi. 34. 


6. Ταῦτα εἰπὼν, ἕπτυσε "χαμαὶ, καὶ ἐποίησε πηλὸν ἐκ g xviii. 6. 


τοῦ πτύσµατος, καὶ ἐπέχρισε3 τὸν πηλὸν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ 
τυφλοῦ, 7. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, ''Ὕπαγε νίψαι cis τὴν κολυµβήθραν τοῦ 


Σιλωὰμι” ὃ ἑρμηνεύεται, ἀπεσταλμένος. 


καὶ ἦλθε βλέπων. 


ἀπῆλθεν οὖν καὶ ἐνίψατο, 


1 ημας in SBD, adopted by recent editors. 


Σεπεθηκεν ἵπ BC. W.H.R. add avrov with SABL and delete τον τυφλον, which 
may have been introduced to make the sense clearer. 


imitation of a construction which really 
expresses purpose ’’ (Burton, Moods, 218, 
219).—Ver. 3. Both alternatives are 
rejected by Jesus, Οὔτε . . . αὐτοῦ. And 
another solution is suggested, ἵνα ... 
αυτῷ. Evil furthers the work of God in 
the world. It is in conquering and 
abolishing evil He is manifested. The 
question for us is not where suffering has 
come from, but what we are to do with it. 
Ver. 4. The law which is binding on all 
men Jesus enounces.—épé δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι 
Work, active measures to remove 
suffering, are more incumbent on men 
than resentful speculation as to the 
source of suffering. As to God’s con- 
nection with evil, the practical man 
need only concern himself with this, 
that God seeks to abolish it. The time 
for doing so is limited, it is ἕως qyépa 
ἐστίν, ‘so long as it is day,” that is, as 
the next clause shows, so long as life 
lasts. [On ἕως in N.T. see Burton, 
Moods, 321-330.]—€pxetar νύξ, suggested 
by the threats (vii. 59, etc.) and by the 
presence of the blind man,—vVer. 5. 
ὅταν . . . κόσμου. We should have 
expected ἕως and not ὅταν, and the 
Vulgate renders ‘“‘quamdiu”. But the 
‘‘when”’ seems to be used to suggest a 
time when He should not be in the 
world: ‘“‘when I am in the world, I am 
the Light of the World,” as He immedi- 
ately illustrated by the cure of the blind 
man.—Ver. 6. Tatra εἰπὼν, {.6., “in 
this connection,” ἕπτυσε yapal... 
“He spat on the ground and made clay 
of the spittle,” ‘‘ quia aqua ad manum 
non erat,’’ says Grotius; but that spittle 
was considered efficacious Lightfoot 
proves by an amusing anecdote and 


νο. 6 


Wetstein by several citations. Tacitus 
(Hist., iv. 81) relates that the blind man 
who sought a cure from Vespasian begged 
“ut . . . oculorum orbes dignaretur 
respergere oris excremento”’. Probably 
the idea was that the saliva was of the 
very substance of the person. Tylor 
(Prim. Culture, ii. 400) is of opinion the 
Roman Catholic priest’s touching with 
his spittle the ears and nostrils of the 
infant at baptism is a survival of the 
custom in Pagan Rome in accordance 
with which the nurse touched with spittle 
the lips and forehead of the week-old 
child. Virtue was also attributed to 
clay in diseases of the eye. A physician 
of the time of Caracalla prescribes 
‘“‘turgentes oculos vili circumline coeno ”, 
That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in 
the application of the clay is contradicted 
by the fact that in other cases of blind- 
ness He did not use it. See Mk. x. 46. 
But if He applied the clay to encourage 
the man to believe, as is the likely solu- 
tion, the question of accommodation 
arises (see Liicke). The whole process 
of which the man was the subject was 
apparently intended to deepen his faith, 
—Ver. 7. The application of the clay was 
not enough. Jesus further said: Ὕπαγε 
. +» ἀπεσταλμένος. Elsner shows that 
“wash into,” νίψαι eis, is not an un- 
common construction. But ver. 11, 
which gives the same command in a 
different form, shows that the man 
understood that eis followed ὕπαγε and 
not νίψαι. The pool of Siloam, supplied 
from the Virgin’s fountain (Is. viii. 6), 
lay at the south-east corner of Jerusalem 
in the Kidron Valley. On the opposite 
side of the valley lies a village Silwan 


784 


ee 
b Mt. ix. 30. 


KATA IQANNHN IX. 

8. Οἱ οὖν γείτονες καὶ οἱ θεωροῦντες αὐτὸν τὸ πρότερον ὅτι τυφλὸς 
ἦν, ἔλεγον, “Odx οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ καθήµενος καὶ προσαιτῶν;” 9g. 
"Αλλοι ἔλεγον, “" Ore οὗτός ἐστιν” ἄλλοι δέ, '΄ Ὅτι 1 ὅμοιος αὐτῷ 
ἐστιν.  ᾿Εκεῖνος ἔλεγεν, ΄ Ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι. 10. Ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ, 
Nas * ἀνεῴχθησάν Σ σου ot ὀφθαλμοί;' 
καὶ εἶπεν, '' Ανθρωπος λεγόμενος ᾿Ιησοῦς πηλὸν ἐποίησε, καὶ ἐπέ- 
Χρισέ µου τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς, καὶ εἶπέ pot, Ὕπαγε εἰς τὴν κολυμβήθραν 
τοῦ Σιλωὰμ, καὶ νίψαι. ἀπελθὼν δὲ καὶ νιψάµενος, ἀνέβλεψα.” 
12. Εἶπον οὖν αὐτω, “Mod ἐστιν ἐκεῖνος ;” 


II. ᾽Απεκρίθη ἐκεῖνος 


Λέγει, “ Οὐκ οἶδα.” 

13. "Αγουσιν αὐτὸν πρὸς τοὺς Φαρισαίους, τόν ποτε τυφλόν. 
14. ἦν δὲ σάββατον, ὅτε τὸν πηλὸν ἐποίησεν ὁ Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἀνέωξεν 
αὐτοῦ τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς. 15. πάλιν οὖν ἠρώτων αὐτὸν καὶ οἱ 


Φαρισαῖοι, πῶς ἀνέβλεψεν. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ' Πηλὸν ἐπέθηκεν 


1 Considerable variety of reading occurs in this clause; ΊΛ).Η.Β. adopt αλλοι 


ελεγον Ovxt, αλλα οµοιος αντω εστιν. 


2 ηνεωχθησαν read by Tr. Ti.W.H.R. with $BCDEF. 


representing the old name. The name 
is here interpreted as meaning '' Sent” 


[radu missus ; not mine, missio 
5ο. aquarum, Meyer]. The word 
ἀπεσταλμένος is so frequently used by 
Jesus of Himself that, notwithstanding 
what Meyer says, we naturally apply it 
here also to Himself, as if the noiseless 
Stream which their fathers had despised 
(Is. vii. 6) and which they could trace to 
its source, was a fit type of Him whom 
the Jews rejected because they knew 
His origin and because he had no ex- 
ternal force. His influence consisted in 
this, that He was ἀπεσταλμένος. The 
blind man obeyed and received his sight. 
Cf. Elisha and Naaman. From the 
succeeding γείτονες several interpreters 
conclude that ᾖλθε means “came” 
home. Needlessly. 

Vv. 8-12. The people discuss the man's 
identity.—Ver. 8. Οἱ οὖν γείτονες. . . 
προσαιτῶν; ‘The neighbours, then,” 
who might or might not be at that time 
near the man’s home, ‘‘ and those who 
formerly used to see him, that he was 
blind ” [but προσαίτης is read instead of 
τυφλὸς by recent editors], “said, Is not 
this he that sits and begs? ”’—Ver. 9. 
“Others” but evidently of the same 
description “said, This is he”. Besides 
those who were doubtful and those who 
were certain of his identity there was a 
third opinion uttered: “ He is like him”. 
Naturally the opened eyes would alter 
his appearance. The doubts as to his 


identity were scattered by the man’s 
decisive ἐγώ eiut.—Ver. το. This being 
ascertained the next question was, Πῶς 
ἀνεῴχθησάν σον ot ὀφθαλμοί; In reply 
the cured man relates his experience. 
He had ascertained Jesus’ name from 
some bystander; and it is noticeable 
that he speaks of Him as one not widely 
known: ἄνθρωπος λεγόμενος ᾿Ιησοῦς. 
ἀνέβλεψα, “I recovered sight”. The 
man, who now saw for the first time, 
‘‘uses the ordinary language of men, 
though in strictness it was not applicable 
to his own case,’’ Watkins. 

Vv. 13-34. The man is examined by 
the Pharisees, who eventually excom- 
municate him.—Ver. 13. “Ayovow... 
τυφλόν. ‘ They,” some of the neigh- 
bours and others already mentioned, 
“bring him who had formerly been blind 
to the Pharisees,’’ not to the Sanhedrim, 
but to an informal but apparently 
authoritative (ver. 34) group of Pharisees, 
who were members of the court.—Ver. 
14. The reason of this action was that 
the cure had been wrought on a Sabbath. 
[ή Prohibitum erat sputum oculo illinere 
Sabbato, sub notione aliqua medicinali,” 
Lightfoot.]}—Ver. 15. πάλιν . . . ἀνέ- 
βλεψεν. πάλιν looks back to the same 
question put by the people, ver. 10; the 
καὶ serving the same purpose. Their 
first question admits the man’s original 
blindness. The man’s reply is simple 
απἁ straightforward.—Ver. 16. And 
then the Pharisees introduce their 
charge and its implication, Otros .. + 


8—23. 


ἐπὶ τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς µου, καὶ ἐνιψάμην, καὶ βλέπω.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


785 


16. Ἔλεγον 


οὖν ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων τινὲς, “| Οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος obk ἔστι παρὰ | 7. 16. 


τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι τὸ σάββατον οὗ |! τηρεῖ.᾽ 
δύναται ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρτωλὸς τοιαῦτα σημεῖα ποιεῖν ; 
17. Λέγουσι τῷ τυφλῷ πάλιν, “Ed τί λέγεις περὶ 


4. > Suen oS 
Nv ἐν αὔτοις. 


”λλλοι ἔλεγον, “Masi ΟΡ. Lev. 
8 , ΧΧΥΙ. 2. 
Και σχισµα 


αὐτοῦ, ὅτι Ἠνοιξέ σου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς;' Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν, “΄Ὅτι 


προφήτης ἐστίν. 


18. Οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν οὖν οἱ Ιουδαῖοι περὶ αὐτοῦ, 


ὅτι τυφλὸς ἦν καὶ ἀνέβλεψεν, ἕως ὅτου ἐφώνησαν τοὺς γονεῖς αὐτοῦ 
τοῦ ἀναβλέψαντος, 19. καὶ ἠρώτησαν αὐτοὺς λέγοντες, '' Οὗτός ἐστιν 


ὁ vids ὑμῶν, "ὃν ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη : 


βλέπει ;” 


πῶς οὖν ἄρτι k viii. 54. 


3 , > ο) ς ey > a ‘ 3 
20. ᾿Απεκρίθησαν αὐτοῖς οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ καὶ εἶπον, 


“ OiSapev ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς ἡμῶν, καὶ ὅτι τυφλὸς ἐγεννήθη : 
21. πῶς δὲ νῦν βλέπει, οὐκ οἴδαμεν: ἢ τίς ἤνοιξεν αὐτοῦ τοὺς 
ὀφθαλμοὺς, ἡμεῖς οὐκ οἴδαμεν' αὐτὸς ᾽ἡλικίαν "ἔχει: αὐτὸν ΙΕρΗ.ῖν. 13. 


ἐρωτήσατε, αὐτὸς περὶ αὑτοῦ λαλήσει.᾽ 


A ie = ~ ™ Viii. 57; 
22. TauTa εἶπον οἱ yovets ερ. Job 
xxix. 18. 


αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἐφοβοῦντο τοὺς ᾿Ιουδαίους: ἤδη γὰρ " συνετέθειντο οἱ n Dan. ii.g. 


3 ον o > ον ς a » > 4 
loudator, ἵνα ἐάν τις αὐτὸν ὁμολογήση Χριστὸν, ἀποσυνάγωγος - 


γένηται. 


τηρεῖ. The miracle is not denied, rather 
affirmed, but it cannot be a work of God, 
for it has been done on Sabbath. Cf. 
iii. 2 and v. 16. Some of their party, 
however, inclined to a different conclu- 
sion, Πῶς . . . ποιεῖν; Howcan such 
a work be done at all, whether on 
Sabbath or any other day, by a sinner ? 
This breach of the Sabbath law must 
admit of explanation. It cannot arise 
from opposition to ἀοἀ.- καὶ oxiopa ἦν 
ἐν αὐτοῖς, as before among the people, 
vii. 43, 50Ο now among the authorities a 
pronounced and permanent cleft was 
apparent.—Ver. 17. Differing among 
themselves, they refer the question to 
the man, Σὺ τί λέγεις .. . ‘You, what 
do you say about Him, on account of 
His opening your eyes?” The question 
is not one of fact, but of inference from 
the fact; the ὅτι means “in that,” 
‘“‘inasmuch as,” and the Vulgate simply 
renders ‘.Tu quid dicis de illo, qui 
aperuit oculos tuos?” Promptly the 
man replies, προφήτης éoriv.—Ver. 18. 
It now appears that their previous ad- 
mission of the fact of the miracle was 
disingenuous and that they suspected 
fraudulent collusion between Jesus and 
the man; Οὐκ ἐπίστευσαν, ‘they did 
not believe’’ his account (νετ. 19), ἕως 
ὅτου . . . βλέπει; “until they sum- 
moned his parents’’.—Ver. 20. To 
them they put virtually three questions: 


- A“ A ο , 
23. διὰ τοῦτο οἱ yovets αὐτοῦ εἶπον, “ Ὅτι ἡλικίαν ἔχει, 


Lk. xxii. 
Acts 
XXiii. 20, 
χχῖν. 9. 


Is this your son? Was he born blind ? 
(for though you say this of him, ὑμεῖς 
emphatic, we do not believe it). How 
does he now see? The first two questions 
they unhesitatingly answer: This is our 
son who was born blind. This answer 
explodes the idea of collusion.—Ver. 21. 
The third question they have not the 
means of answering, or as νετ, 22 in- 
dicates, they shammed ignorance to save 
themselves ; and refer the examiners to 
the man Πϊπιδε]{.---ἡλικίαν ἔχει, his 
parents are no longer responsible for 
him, Examples of the Greek phrase are 
given by Kypke and Wetstein from 
Plato, Aristophanes, and Demosthenes. 
αὐτὸς περὶ αὑτοῦ [better ἑαυτοῦ] 
λαλήσει.- -Ψετ. 22. Tatra. . . ἐρωτή- 
gate. The reluctance of the parents to 
answer brings out the circumstance that 
already the members of the Sanhedrim 
had come to an understanding with one 
another that any one who acknowledged 
Jesus as the Messiah should be excom- 
municated, ἀποσυνάγωγος γένηται. Of 
excommunication there were three 
degrees: the first lasted for thirty days; 
then followed ‘fa second admonition,” 
and if impenitent the culprit was punished 
for thirty days more; and if still im- 
penitent he was laid under the Cherem 
or ban, which was of indefinite duration, 
and which entirely cut him off from 
intercourse with others. He was treated 


50 


” 


786 


over.18. αὐτὸν ἐρωτήσατε. 24. 
p Zech, iv. 
I2; Six 
times in 
N.T, ὅτι 6 ἄνθρωπος οὗτος ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν.” 
ἄρτι βλέπω.” 
ἤνοιξέ σου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς ; 
ἤδη, καὶ οὐκ ἠκούσατε"' τί πάλιν θέλετε ἀκούειν; 
θέλετε αὐτοῦ μαθηταὶ γενέσθαι ; 
” 
οἴδαμεν πόθεν ἐστίν. 
q Jas. iv.3; Καὶ ἀνέωξέ µου τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς. 
v. 16. 


AN 
KATA TOANNHN ΧΙ. 
᾿Εφώνησαν οὖν 5 ἐκ δευτέρου τὸν ἄνθρωπον 
ὃς ἦν τυφλὸς, καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Ads δόξαν τῷ Θεῷ: ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν 
25. ᾿Απεκρίθη οὖν ἐκεῖνος 
καὶ εἶπεν, “Et ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν, οὐκ οἶδα " év οἶδα, ὅτι τυφλὸς dv, 
26. Εἶπον δὲ αὐτῷ πάλιν, “Ti ἐποίησέσοι; πῶς 
27. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς, ''Εἶπον ὅμιν 
μὴ καὶ ὑμεῖς 
28. Ἑλοιδόρησαν οὖν αὐτὸν, καὶ 
εἶπον, “Σὺ ef μαθητὴς ἐκείνου: ἡμεῖς δὲ τοῦ Μωσέως ἐσμὲν µαθηταί. 
20. ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν ὅτι Μωσῇ λελάληκεν 6 Θεός: τοῦτον δὲ οὐκ 
30. ᾿Απεκρίθη 6 ἄνθρωπος καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
“Ey γὰρ τούτῳ θαυµαστόν ἐστιν, ὅτι ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε πόθεν ἐστὶ, 
31. Ἱοἴδαμεν δὲ ὅτι ἁμαρτωλῶν 
ὁ Θεὸς οὐκ ἀκούει" ἀλλ᾽ ἐάν τις θεοσεβὴς 4, καὶ τὸ θέληµα αὐτοῦ 


~ , 
r Here only; ποιῃ, τούτου ἀκούει. 
cp. Lk. i. 
70, etc. 


as if he were a leper. This, to persons 
so poor as the parents of this beggar, 
would mean ruin and death (see Eders- 
heim, Life of Christ, ii. 183-4).—Ver. 
24. Baffled by the parents the Pharisees 
turn again, ἐκ Sevtépov, a second time to 
the man and say: Ads δόξαν τῷ Θεῷ . . . 
ἐστιν. They no longer deny the miracle, 
but bid the man ascribe the glory of it to 
the right quarter ; to God: not to Jesus, 
because they can assure him on know- 
ledge of their own, ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν, that 
He is a sinner.—Ver. 25. But they find in 
the man a kind of independence and ob- 
stinacy they are not used to. Et ἁμαρτωλός 
. . . Βλέπω. He does not question their 
knowledge, and he draws no express 
inferences from what has happened, but 
of one thing he is sure, that he was blind 
and that now he sees.— Ver. 26. Thwarted 
by the man’s boldness and perceiving that 
it was hopeless to deny the fact, they re- 
turn to the question of the means used. 
Τί ἐποίησέ σοι; At this the man loses 
patience. Their crafty and silly attempt 
to lead him into some inconsistent state- 
ment seems to him despicable, and he 
breaks out (ver. 27): Εἶπον . . . γενέσθαι. 
No more galling gibe could have been 
hurled at them than this man’s ‘Are 
you also wishing to become His 
disciples ?”—Ver. 28. It serves its 
purpose of exasperating them and bring- 
ing them to the direct expression of 
their feelings. ᾿Ελοιδόρησαν . . . ἐστίν. 
“They reviled him.” On ἐκείνου Bengel 
has: ‘‘Hoc vocabulo removent Jesum 
a sese’’.—Ver, 29. We know that 


τις ὀφθαλμοὺς τυφλοῦ γεγεννηµένου. 


32. ᾿ ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος οὐκ ἠκούσθη, ὅτι ἤνοιξέ 


33. εἰ μὴ ἣν οὗτος παρὰ 


‘Moses was a prophet, commissioned by 


God to speak for Him (for λελάληκεν see 
Heb. i. 1); and if this man is commis- 
sioned He must show proof of His being 
sent from God, and not leave us in 
ignorance of His origin.—Ver. 30. This, 
in the face of the miracle, seems to the 
man a surprising statement: Ἐν yap 
τούτῳ, ‘“‘why, herein is that which is 
marvellous”. τὸ θαυµαστόν is the true 
reading. For the use of yap in rejoinders 
see Winer, p. 559, and Klotz, p. 242. It 
seems to imply an entire repudiation of 
what has just been said: “You utter an 
absurdity, for...” The marvel was 
that they should hesitate about the 
origin of one who had such power 
as was manifest in the cure wrought on 
him.—Ver. 31. This is elaborated in 
νετ. 31: οἵἴδαμεν .. . ἀκούε. They 
themselves had owned it a work of God, 
ver. 24; but God is not persuaded or 
induced to give such power to sinners, 
but only to those who do His will. This 
man therefore, were He a sinner, would 
have been unable to do anything, not to 
speak of such a work as has never before 
been done. Watkins expresses it as a 
syllogism. (1) God heareth not sinners 
but only those who worship Him and do 
His will; (2) That God heareth this man 
is certain, for such a miracle could be 
performed only by divine power; (3) 
This man, therefore, is not a sinner but is 
from God.—Ver. 32. ἐκ Tov αἰῶνος, rather 
“from of old’? than ‘since the world 
began”. Cf. Lk. i. 70, τῶν ἀπ᾿ αἰῶνος 
προφητῶν, and Acts. iii. 21, xv. 18. To 


- - ” 
Θεοῦ, οὐκ ἠδύνατο ποιεῖν οὐδέν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


757 


34. ᾿Απεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον 


αὐτῷ, ''"Ἐν ἁμαρτίαις σὺ ἐγεννήθης "ὅλος, καὶ σὺ διδάσκεις ἡμᾶς ;᾽΄ ο Ps. li. 5. 


Καὶ "ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ew. 


αὐτὸν έξω” καὶ ᾿ εὑρὼν αὐτὸν, εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “EO πιστεύεις cis τὸν 


”” 


υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ1; 
, Γ) , > ray 2? 
κύριε, ἵνα πιστεύσω εἰς αὐτόν ; 


- ο) / ” 

ἑώρακας αὐτὸν, καὶ " ὁ λαλῶν μετὰ σοῦ, ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν. 
> ~ 

ἔφη, “Mucredw, κύριε" ΄ 39. καὶ προσεκύνησεν αὐτῷ. 


36. ᾿Απεκρίθη ἐκεῖνος καὶ 
37. Εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “Kal 


Vii. 23. 


ε an : t 
35. Ἴκουσεν 6 “Ingots ὅτι ἐξέβαλον u 2 Chron. 


xxix. 16. 

Lk. xx. τὸ. 
Ch. vi. 37. 

εἶπε, “Tis ἐστι, vi, 42, ne { 


38. Ὁ δὲ wiv. 26. 
μα ς 
και ειπεν ο 


᾽ησοῦς, “Eis κρίµα ἐγὼ εἰς τὸν κόσμον τοῦτον ἦλθον, ἵνα ot μὴ 


λέποντες βλέπωσι, καὶ ot βλέποντες τυφλοὶ γένωνται. 
> 


40. Kat 


” > A , A : 3 > > A ‘ > 
κουσαν ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίιων ταῦτα οἱ οντες ετ αυτου, και ειπον 
η 


~ αλ. ε 3 , 37 
(αὐτῷ, “Mh καὶ ἡμεῖς τυφλοί ἐσμεν ; 


41. Εἶπεν αὐτοῖς 6 “Ingots, 


“Ei τυφλοὶ ἦτε, οὐκ ἂν 3 εἴχετε ἁμαρτίαν: viv δὲ λέγετε, “Oru καν. 22, 24. 


βλέπομεν: ἡ οὖν ἁμαρτία ὑμῶν μένει. 


1 Θεου in ALXTA Lat. (vet. vulg.) Syrr. (Pesh. Ἡατε]. Hier.) Memph. Goth. Arm. 
Aeth., but ανθρωπου in SAB Theb., adopted by Ti.W.H. 


this there is no reply but abuse and dis- 
missal.—Ver. 34. Ἐν ἁμαρτίαις. . . 
ἔξω. ‘In sins thou wast wholly born, 
and dost thou teach us?” They refer 
his blindness to sin, and reproach him 
with his calamity. Sin, they say, was 
branded on the whole man; he was 
manifestly a reprobate. Yet we, the 
pure and godly, are to be taught by 
such a man |---ἐξέβαλον αὐτὸν ἔξω, ‘‘ they 
cast him out,” not merely from the 
chamber, but from communion. This is 
implied both in ver. 35 and ali that 
Jesus says of the shepherds in the follow- 
ing paragraph. 

Ver. 35-X. 21. The good and the 
hireling shepherds.—Ver. 35. Ἠκουσεν 
... The action of the Pharisees threw 
the man on the compassion of Jesus: 
“He heard that they had cast him out,” 
and He knew the reason; therefore, 
εὑὐρὼν αὐτὸν, “when He found him,” as 
He wished and sought to do, His first 
question was: Σὺ . . . Θεοῦ: Perhapsa 
slight emphasis lies in the Σὺ. “Ώοσι 
thou believe in the Messiah ?’’—Ver. 
36. The man’s answer shows that he 
was willing to believe in the Messiah if 
he could identify Him; and having 
already declared Jesus to be a prophet, 
he believed that He could tell him who 
the Messiah was. It may be taken for 
granted that although he had not seen 
Jesus since recovering his sight, he 
knew somehow that he was speaking to 
the person who had healed him; and 
was perhaps almost prepared for the 


Pe, £12 


great announcement (ver. 37): Kat ἑώρα- 


κας αὐτὸν, '' Thou hast both seen Him,” 
no doubt with a reference to the blessing 
of restored eyesight; Kat... ἐστιν. 
This direct revelation, similar to that 
given to the Samaritan woman (iv. 26), 
was elicited by the pitiable condition of 
the man as an outcast from the Jewish 
cammunity, and by the perception that 
the man was ripe for faith.— Ver. 38. ‘O 
δὲ... αὐτῷ. He promptly uttered his 
belief and ‘‘ worshipped ” Jesus. In this 
Gospel προσκυνεῖν is used of the worship 
of God ; the word is, however, susceptible 
of a somewhat lower degree of adoration 
(Mt. xviii. 26); but it includes the ac- 
knowledgment of supremacy and a com- 
plete submission.—Ver. 39. Summing 
up the spiritual sighificance of the miracle 
Jesus said: Eis κρίμα . . . γένωνται. 
‘For judgment,” for bringing to light 
and exhibiting in its consequences the 
actual inward state of men; ‘‘ that those 
who see not may see,”’ that is, that those 
who are conscious of their blindness and 
grieved on account of it may be relieved; 
while those who are content with the 
light they have lose even that. Witha 
kind of sad humour He points out how 
easily felt blindness is removed, but how 
obstinately blind is presumed knowledge. 
The blind man now saw, because he 
knew he was blind and used the means 
Jesus told him to use: the, Pharisees 
were stone-blind to the world Jesus 
opened to them, because they thought 
that already they knew much more than 
He did.—Ver. 40. Some of the Pharisees 
overheard His words, and unconsciously 


788 


a4 Μας. Ἱ. 7. 
b Obad. 5. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ Χ. 


X. τ. ««᾽ΑΜΗΝ ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 6 μὴ εἰσερχόμενος διὰ τῆς θύρας 


c Gen. iv.2.€ig τὴν αὐλὴν τῶν προβάτων, ἀλλὰ ἀναβαίνων * ἀλλαχόθεν, ἐκεῖνος 


x Pet. ii. 


25 >kdémrys ἐστὶ καὶ ληστής: 


d xvili. 16, ο 


17. ποιµήν ἐστι τῶν προβάτων. 


κο. αν 
Kings viii. 
41, etc. 


οἴδασι τὴν φΦωνὴν αὐτοῦ. 5. 


2. ὁ δὲ εἰσερχόμενος διὰ τῆς θύρας, 
3. τούτω 6 ἆ θυρωρὸς ἀνοίγει, καὶ τὰ 


. πρόβατα τῆς φωνῆς αὐτοῦ ἀκούει, καὶ τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα καλεῖ "κατ 
. ὄνομα, καὶ ΄ ἐξάγει αὖτά. 4. καὶ ὅταν τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα 1 © ἐκβάλῃ, 
. ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν πορεύεται : 


‘ nw a 
καὶ τὰ πρόβατα αὐτῷ ἀκολουθεῖ, ὅτι 
Ἀ ἀλλοτρίω δὲ οὗ μὴ ἀκολουθήσωσιν, 


ἀλλὰ Φεύξονται dw αὐτοῦ: ὅτι οὐκ οἴδασι τῶν ἀλλοτρίων τὴν Φωνήν.᾽ 


1 Τ.Β. in ATA, but παντα in ΜΟ«ΒΕΙ Χ 1, 33. 


proved their truth by saying with in- 
dignant contempt: μὴ καὶ ἡμεῖς τυφλοί 
ἔσμεν; To which Jesus, taking them on 
their own ground, replies: Et τυφλοὶ 
ἦτε, οὐκ Gv εἴχετε ἁμαρτίαν. If ye were 
ignorant, as this blind man was, aware 
of your darkness and anxious to be rid 
of it, your ignorance would excuse you: 
but now by all your words and actions 
you proclaim that you are satisfied with 
the light you have, therefore you cannot 
receive that fuller light which I bring 
and in which is deliverance from sin, and 
must therefore remain under its bondage. 
Cf. viil. 21. 

CHAPTER X.—Vv. 1-21. The Good 
Shepherd and the hirelings. This para- 
eraph is a continuation of the conversa- 
tion which arose out of the healing of 
the blind man. Instead of being intro- 
duced by any fresh note of time, it is 
ushered in by ἁμὴν ἁμὴν, which is never 
found in this Gospel at the commence- 
ment of a discourse. The subject also 
is directly connected with the miracle 
and its consequences. Jesus explains 
to the excommunicated man who it is 
that has power to give entrance to the 
true fold or to exclude from it. As 
usual, the terms and tenor of the teach- 
ing are interpreted by the incident which 
gave rise to it.—Ver. 1. ᾽Αμὴν ... 
ληστής. The αὐλή, or sheepfold, into 
which the sheep were gathered for safety 
every night, is described as being very 
similar to folds in some parts of our own 
country; a walled, unroofed enclosure. 
The θύρα, however, is not as with us a 
hurdle or gate, but a solid door heavily 
barred and capable of resisting attack. 
This door is watched by a θυρωρός 
{door-guard, for root “or” vide Spratt’s 
Thucyd., iii. p. 132], who in the morning 
opened to the shepherd. He who does 
not appeal to the θυρωρός but climbs up 
over the wall by some other way (lit. 


from some other direction: ἀλλαχόθεν, 
which is used in later Greek for the 
Attic ἄλλοθεν) is κλέπτης καὶ λῃστής, a 
‘thief’ who uses fraud and a “robber ” 
who is prepared to use violence. That 
is to say, his method of entrance, being 
illegitimate, declares that he has no right 
to the sheep.—Ver. 2. On the other 
hand, 6 δὲ εἰσερχόμενος . . . προβάτων, 
“but he that entereth by the door is 
shepherd of the sheep ”. Theshepherd is 
known by his using the legitimate mode of 
entrance. What that is, He does not 
here explicitly state. The shepherd is 
further recognised by his treatment of 
the sheep, τὰ ἴδια πρόβατα καλεῖ [better 
dwvet] kat ὄνομα, “his own sheep he 
calls by name”. ἴδια perhaps as dis- 
tinguished from others in the same fold; 
perhaps merely a strong possessive. As 
we have names for horses, dogs, cows, 
so the Eastern shepherds for their sheep. 
{‘‘Many of the sheep have particular 
names,” Van Lennep, Bible Lands, i. 
189. It was also a Greek custom to 
name sheep, and Wetstein quotes from 
Longus, 6 δὲ Advis ἐκάλεσέτινας αὐτῶν 
ὀνομαστί.]--ὅταν . . . αὐτοῦ. When he 
has put ail his own out of the fold, they 
follow him, because they know his voice: 
the shepherd walking in front as is still 
the custom in che East. This method can- 
not be adopted by strangers ‘‘ because the 
sheep know not the voice ο. strangers’. 
“There is a story οί a Scotch traveller 
who changed clothes with a Jerusalem 
shepherd and tried to lead the sheep; 
but the sheep followed the shepherd’s 
voice and not his clothes.” Plummer. 
So that the shepherd’s claim is justified 
not only by his method οἱ entrance but 
by his knowledge οί the names of the 
individual sheep and by their knowledge 
of him and confidence in him, The 
different methods are illustrated in 
Andrewes and Laud, the former saying: 


Ἑτ--- χουν 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


789 


6. Ταύτην τὴν παροιμίαν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς ὁ “Ingots: ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ovKkixvi.25. 2 


ἔγνωσαν τίνα ἦν ἃ ἐλάλει αὐτοῖς. 
ς 


7. Εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν αὐτοῖς 6 
ἐγώ εἰμι ἤ θύρα τῶν προβάτων. 


3 A 
Ιησοῦς, 


Pet. ii. 22 


“66? 


Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, on 


δ. πάντες ὅσοι πρὸ ἐμοῦ ἦλθον, 


, ~ 
κλέπται εἰσὶ καὶ λησταί: GAN’ οὐκ ἤκουσαν αὐτῶν τὰ πρόβατα. j Num. 


XXVii. 17. 


Q. ἐγώ εἶμι ἡ θύρα” δι ἐμοῦ ἐάν τις εἰσέλθῃ, σωθήσεται, ) Kalk Acts x. 13; 


3 , PTE , \ ‘ eee | 
εἰσελεύσεται καὶ ἐξελεύσεται, καὶ νομὴν εὑρήσει. 
οὐκ ἔρχεται εἰ μὴ ἵνα κλέψῃ καὶ " θύσῃη καὶ ἀπολέσῃ: ἐγὼ ἦλθον 


**Our guiding must be mild and gentle, 
else it is not duxisti, but traxisti, draw- 
ing and driving and no leading’’; the 
latter, of whom it was said that he 
‘would never convince an opponent if 
he could suppress him”. See Ottley’s 
Andrewes, 159.—Ver.6. The application 
of the parable was sufficiently obvious ; 
but ταύτην . . . αὐτοῖ. παροιμία 
[παρά, οἶμος, out of the way or wayside] 
seems more properly to denote “a 
proverb”; and the Book of Proverbs 
is named in the Sept. at παροιµίαι or 
παροιµίαι Σαλωμῶντος; and Aristotle, 
Rhetor., 3, 11, defines παροιµίαι as 
μεταφοραὶ am εἴδους em’ εἶδο. But 
mapoiuzta and παραβολή came to be 
convertible terms, both meaning a longer 
or shorter utterance whose meaning did 
not lie on the surface or proverbial 
sayings: the former term is never found 
in the Synoptic Gospels, the latter never 
found in John. [Further see Hatch, 
Essays in Bibl. Greek, p. 64; and 
Abbot’s Essays, p. 82.] This parable 
the Pharisees did not understand. They 
might have understood it, for the terms 
used were familiar Ο.Τ. terms ; see Ezek. 
xxxiv., Ps, Ixxx. But as it had been 
spoken for their instruction as well as 
for the encouragement of the man whom 
they had cast out of the fold, (ver. 7) 
εἶπεν οὖν πάλιν, Jesus therefore began 
afresh and explained it to them.—éyo 
εἰμι ἡ θύρα τῶν πρόβατων I, and no 
other, am the door of the sheep. [Cf. 
the Persian reformer who proclaimed 
himself the ‘‘ Bab,” the gate of life.] 
Through me alone can the sheep find 
access to the fold. Primarily uttered 
for the excommunicated man, these 
words conveyed the assurance that 
instead of being outcast by his attach- 
ment to Jesus he had gained admittance 
to the fellowship of God and all good 
men. Not the Pharisees but Jesus could 
admit to or reject from the fold of God. 
—Ver. 8. In contrast to Jesus, πάντες 
«+. Ἀῃσταί, “all who came before 


xi. 7. Lk 
XV. 23. 1 
Μας, vii. 
19. 


10. 6 κλέπτης 


me,” 2.¢., all who came before me, 
claiming to be what I am and to give to 
the sheep what I give. The prophets 
pointed forward to Him and did not 
arrogate to themselves His functions. 
Only those could be called ‘‘ thieves and 
robbers” who had come before the 
Shepherd came, as if in the night and 
without His authority. It must have 
been evident that the hierarchical party 
was meant. [The inexactness of con- 
trasting the “door” rather than the 
Shepherd with the ‘‘thieves and robbers ”’ 
who came before Jesus, only emphasises 
the fact that the reality was more pro- 
minent than the figure in the mind of 
the speaker.] Those, however, who had 
tried to assume the functions of the 
Shepherd had failed; because οὐκ 
ἤκουσαν αὐτῶν τὰ πρόβατα, the people 
of God had not listened to them. They 
no doubt assumed authority over the 
people of God and compelled obedience, 
but the true children of God did not 
find in their voice that which attracted 
and led them to pasture. — Ver. ο. 
ἐγώ . . . εὑρήσει.. With emphasis He 
reiterates: ‘‘I am the door: through 
me, and none else, if a man enter he 
shall be saved, and shall go in and out 
and find pasture”. Meyer and others 
supply “‘any shepherd” as the nomina- 
tive to εἰσέλθῃ, which may agree better 
with the form of the parabolic saying, 
but not so well with the substance. 
Jesus is the Door of the sheep, not of 
the shepherd; and the blessings pro- 
mised, σωθήσεται, κ. τ. Ἆ., are proper 
to the sheep. These blessings are three: 
deliverance from peril, liberty, and 
sustenance. For the phraseology see 
the remarkable passage Num. xxvii. 15- 
21, which Holtzmann misapplies, neglect- 
ing the twenty-first verse. To “5ο out 
and in’ is the common Ο.Τ. expression 
to denote the free activity of daily life, 
Jer. xxxvii. 4, Ps. cxxi. 8, Deut. xxviii. 
6.—Ver. το. The tenth verse intro- 
duces a new contrast, between the good 


790 ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ κ 


J ‘ ΔΝ ‘ ” 
lvv. 15,17, wa ζωὴν ἔχωσι, καὶ περισσὸν έχωσιν. 


18; xiil. 


11. Εγώ eipe ὁ ποιμὴν 6 


αγ; αν.τ. καλός: ὅ ποιμὴν 6 καλὸς τὴν ᾿ψυχὴν αὑτοῦ τίθησιν ὑπὲρ τῶν 


m Gen. 
xlix, 27. προβάτων. 
Ecclus. 
xiii. 17. 

n jer. x. 21. 


12. 6 μισθωτὸς δὲ, καὶ οὐκ ὢν ποιμὴν, οὗ οὐκ εἰσὶ τὰ 
πρόβατα ἴδια, θεωρεῖ τὸν AdKov ἐρχόμενον, καὶ ἀφίησι τὰ πρόβατα, 


Mac. vi, καὶ φεύγει: καὶ ὁ "λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτὰ, καὶ " σκορπίζει τὰ πρόβατα. 


54. Jer. 
XXili. 1. 
Mt. xii.30; 
and see Thayer. 


ο Exod. xii. 45. Lev. xxii. 10, etc. Mk. i. 20. 


ς So 4 , ris, ‘ > p + a 
13. 6 δὲ °proOwrds φεύγει, ὅτι µισθωτός ἐστι, καὶ οὐ P µέλει αὐτῷ 


p Wisd. xii. 13. Τοῦ.χ. 5. 


2 The verse closes at σκορπιζει, the following six words being deleted in RBDL. 
I, 33, but the clause must at any rate be mentally supplied. 


shepherd and the thieves and hirelings. 
—6 κλέπτης . . « ἀπολέση. The thief 
has but one reason for his coming to 
the fold: he comes to steal and kill and 
destroy; to aggrandise himself at the 
expense of the sheep. θύσῃ has pro- 
bably the simple meaning of “kill,” as 
in Acts x. 13, Mt. xxii. 4; cf. Deut. 
xxii. 1. With quite other intent has 
Christ come: ἐγὼ ᾖλθον . . . ἔχωσιν, 
that instead of being killed and perish- 
ing the sheep ‘‘may have life and may 
have abundance”. This may mean 
abundance of life, but more probably 
abundance of all that sustains life. 
περιττὸν ἔχειν in Xen., Anab., vii. 6, 31, 
means “to have a surplus’. ‘‘ The 
repetition of ἔχωσιν gives the second 
point a more independent position than 
it would have had if καί alone had 
been used. Cf. ver. 18; Xen., Anab., i. 
το, 3, καὶ ταύτην ἔσωσαν καὶ ἄλλα... 
ἔσωσαν,' Meyer. Cf, Ps. «κ. I.— 
Vv. 11-18. In these verses Jesus desig- 
nates Himself *‘the Good Shepherd” 
and emphasises two features by which a 
good shepherd can be known: (1) his 
giving his life for the sheep, and (2) the 
reciprocal knowledge of the sheep and 
the shepherd. These two features are 
both introduced by the statement (ver. 
11) ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν 6 καλός, “πε 
good shepherd”; ‘‘ good” probably in 
the sense in which we speak of a 
‘“sood’? painter or a “good”? architect ; 
one who excels at his business. The 
definite article claims this as a descrip- 
tion applicable to Himself alone. Cf. 
Ps. xxili:, Is. xl. az, Ezek. xxxiv., etc. 
For other descriptions of the ideal 
shepherd, see Plato’s Repub., p. 345, 
and the remarkable passage in the 
Politicus, 271-275, and Columella (in 
Wetstein), ‘Magister autem pecoris 
acer, durus, strenuus, laboris patientissi- 
mus, alacer atque audax esse debet; et 
qui per rupes, per solitudines atque 
vepres facile vadat ’’.—6 ποιμὴν 6 καλὸς, 


the good shepherd, whoever he is, τὴν 

νχὴν ... προβάτων, “lays down his 
life for the sheep”. τιθέναι τὴν ψυχήν 
is not a classical phrase, but in Hip- 
pocrates occurs a similar expression, 
Μαχάων yé τοι ψυχὴν κατέθετο ἐν τῇ 
Τρωάδι, Kypke. Ponere spiritum occurs 
in Latin. Of the meaning there is no 
doubt. Cf. xiii. 37.-- ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων, 
‘for the good of the sheep,’ that is, 
when the welfare of the sheep demands 
the sacrifice of life, that is freely made. 
Here it is evident Jesus describes ‘‘ the 
good shepherd ”’ as revealed in Himself. 
—Ver. 12. 6 μισθωτὸς δὲ [δὲ is omitted 
by recent editors]... πρόβατα. In 
contrast to the good shepherd stands 
now not the robber but a man in some 
respects better, a hireling or hired hand 
(Mark i. 20), not a shepherd whose 
instincts would prompt him to defend 
the sheep, and not the owner to whom 
the sheep belong. So long as there is 
no danger he does his duty by the sheep 
for the sake of his wages, but when he 
sees the wolf coming he abandons the 
sheep and flees. ‘‘ The wolf’ includes 
all that threatens the sheep. In Xen., 
Mem., ii. 7, 14, the dog says to the sheep : 
ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι 6 καὶ ὑμᾶς αὐτὰς σώζων, 
ὥστε µήτε ὑπ ἀνθρώπων κλέπτεσθαι, 
µήτε ὑπὸ λύκων ἁρπάζεσθαι.- καὶ ὁ 
λύκος .. . σκορπίζει, ''απά the wolf 


carries them off and scatters ἴπεπι 


cf. Mt. ix. 36 ; a general description care- 
less of detail. Bengel says ‘‘lacerat quas 
potest, ceteras dispergit ”.—Ver. 13. 6 δὲ 
μισθωτὸς φεύγει, not, as in ver. 12, 6 
µισθ. δὲ, “ because the antithesis of the 
hireling was there first brought forward 
and greater emphasis was secured by that 
position”. Meyer. Klotz, p. 378, says 
that δέ is placed after more words than 
one ‘“ubi quae praeposita particulae 
verba sunt aut aptius inter se conjuncta 
sunt aut ita comparata, ut summum 
pondus in ea sententia obtineant”. He 
flees ὅτι µισθωτός ἐστι, his nature is 


1I—17. 


περὶ τῶν προβάτων. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


791 


14. ἐγώ εἶμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός: καὶ γινώσκω 


κ eS ‘ , ens a ο ρα μη] 8 2 ς 
τα εµα, και γινώσκομµαι υπο των εµων, 15. καθὼς γινώσκει µε ο 


πατὴρ, κἀγὼ γινώσκω τὸν πατέρα” καὶ τὴν ψυχήν µου τίθηµι ὑπὲρ 


τῶν προβάτων. 


16. καὶ ἄλλα πρόβατα ἔχω, ἃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τῆς 


αὐλῆς ταύτης: κἀκεῖνά µε δεῖ Ἡ ἀγαγεῖν, καὶ τῆς φωνῆς µου ἀκούσ- α Is. Ix. ο. 


ovo.’ καὶ γενήσεται µία ποίµνη, “els ποιµήν. 
πατήρ µε ἀγαπᾶ, ὅτι ἐγὼ τίθηµι τὴν ψυχήν µου, ἵνα πάλιν λάβω 


17. διὰ τοῦτο Or Ezek. 
XXXVil. 24. 


1 Τ.Ε. is authenticated by AXTA 33, syr., etc. ; the active γινωσκουσιν pe Ta ena 


is the reading of NBL, it. vulg. ‘‘cognoscunt me meae”’. 


This gives a better 


balanced sentence, though the sense is the same. 


betrayed by his conduct. He does not 
care for the sheep but for himself. He 
took the position of guardian of the 
sheep for his own sake, not for theirs ; 
and the presence of the wolf brings out 
that it is himself, not the sheep, he cares 
for.—Ver. 14. The second mark of the 
good shepherd is introduced by a repeti- 


, 


tion of the announcement: ἐγώ... 


καλός. And this second mark is not 
stated in general terms applicable to all 
good shepherds, but directly of Him- 
self: ἐγώ εἰμι . . . καὶ γινώσκω τὰ ἐμά, 
καὶ γινώσκομαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμῶν. There 
is a mutually reciprocal knowledge 
between Jesus and His sheep. And the 
existence of this knowledge is the proof 
that He isthe Shepherd. The shepherd’s 
claim is authenticated by his knowledge 
of the marks and ways of the sheep, and 
by its knowledge of him as shown in its 
coming to his voice and submission to 
his hand. Augustine says: ‘‘ They some- 
times do not know themselves, but the 
shepherd knows them ’’.—Ver. 15. This 
reciprocal knowledge is so sure and pro- 
found that it can only be compared to 
the mutual knowledge of the Father and 
the Son: καθὼς . . . warépa. He then 
applies to Himself what had been stated 
in general of all good shepherds in ver. 
ΙΙ: and νετ. 16 might suitably have 
begun with the words “And my life I 
lay down for the sheep”. This state- 
ment is, however, prompted by His 
reference -to His knowledge of the 
Father. He knows it is the Father’s 
will that He should lay down His life. 
See vv. 17 and 18.—Ver. 16. But the 
mention of His death suggests to Him 
the wide extent of its consequences. 
ἄλλα πρόβατα exw, “other sheep I 
have”; not that they are already 
believers in Him, but “His” by the 
Father’s design and gift. Cf, xvii. 7 
and Acts xviii. 10. They are only 
negatively described : ἃ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τῆς 


αὐλῆς ταύτης; ‘this fold”’ is evidently 
that which contained the Jews who 
already had received Him as their 
Shepherd; and the other sheep which 
are not “of” (ἐκ, as frequently in John, 
‘belonging to’’; not as Meyer renders) 
this fold are the Gentiles.—kaketva . . . 
ποιµήν ‘those also I must bring and 
they shall listen to my voice, and they 
shall so amalgamate with the Jewish 
disciples that there shall be one flock, 
one shepherd”’. The listening to Christ’s 
voice brings the sheep to Him, and this 
being what constitutes the flock, the 
flock must be one as He is one. But 
nothing is said of unity of organisation. 
There may be various folds, though one 
flock.—pia ποίµνη, els ποιµήν, the 
alliteration cannot be quite reproduced 
in English. For the emphasis gained by 
omitting καί cf. Eurip., Orestes, 1244, 
τρισσοῖς φίλοις yap eis ἀγὼν, δίκη µία. 
The A.V. wrongly translated ‘‘one fold,” 
following the Vulgate, which renders 
both αὐλή and ποίµνη by “ ovile” [‘ qua 
voce non grex ipse sed ovium stabulum 
declaratur; quod unum vix unquam fuit, 
et non modo falso, sed etiam stulte im- 
pudenter Romae collocatur’”. Beza]. 
This is corrected in R.V. The old Latin 
versions had ‘‘unus grex” ; see Words- 
worth’s and White’s Vulg.—Ver. 17. At 
this point the exposition of the functions 
of the good shepherd terminates ; but as 
a note or appendix Jesus adds διὰ τοῦτο, 
‘on this account,” 7.¢., because I lay 
down my life for the sheep (ver. 15 and 
following clause) does my Father love 
me. The expressed ἐγώ serves to bring 
out the spontaneity of the surrender. 
And this free sacrifice or death is justified 
by the object, ἵνα πάλιν λάβω αὐτήν. He 
dies, not to remain in death and so leave 
the sheep defenceless, but to live again, 
to resume life in pursuance of the object 
for which He had given it. The freedom 
of the sacrifice is proved by His taking 


792 

sv.19 | αὐτήν. 
Num. xvi. | - 
29. ἐμαυτοῦ. 

τε πα, Es 
Wisd.xvi. λαβεῖν αὐτήν. 

u ix. 16. 

ν Vii. 20; . 

viii. 48. τούτους. 
Wisd.v.4. w 4 ’ > a , ” 

w Mk. iii. ο μαίνεται" τί αὐτοῦ ἀκούετε; 
21. Acts 
XXVi. 24. 

Wisd. - ” 
xiv. 28.  ὀφθαλμοὺς ἀνοίγειν ; 
x Mt. iv, 24. 
y Acts iii. 
II; ν. 12 
z Lk. xxi. 
20, ACTS . ο 
xiv.z0. PWVTOS. 

a Mt. xvii. cca? S S ε an Ὁ 
17. Rev. Έως πότε τὴν ψυχὴν ἡμῶν 
vi. Io, 
only in N.T. b Ezek. xxiv. 25. 


KATA IQANNHN 


Χ. 


18. οὐδεὶς αἴρει αὐτὴν dm’ ἐμοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ τίθηµι αὐτὴν * ἀπ᾿ 

*éfouciavy exw θεῖναι αὐτὴν, καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω πάλιν 
ταύτην τὴν ἐντολὴν ἔλαβον παρὰ τοῦ πατρός µου. 
19. "Σχίσμα οὖν πάλιν ἐγένετο ἐν τοῖς ᾿Ιουδαίοις διὰ τοὺς λόγους 
20. ἔλεγον δὲ πολλοὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν, “* Δαιμόνιον ἔχει καὶ 


21. Άλλοι ἔλεγον, “Taira τὰ 


ῥήματα οὖκ ἔστι ” δαιμονιζοµένου: μὴ δαιµόνιον δύναται τυφλῶν 


22.᾽ΕΓΕΝΕΤΟ δὲ] τὰ ἐγκαίνια ἐν τοῖς Ἱεροσολύμοις, καὶ χειμὼν 
ἦν: 23. καὶ περιεπάτει 6 ‘Ingots ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ ἐν τῇ ” στοᾷ τοῦ Σολο- 
24. ” ἐκύκλωσαν οὖν αὐτὸν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, καὶ ἔλεγον αὐτῷ, 


aipes; et σὺ et & Χριστὸς, εἰπὲ 


1 τοτε is read instead of δε by W.H. on the authority of BL 33 and some versions. 
This reading would connect this paragraph with the foregoing, and the interval of 
two months between the Feast of Tabernacles and Dedication would be placed 


between chs. vili. and ix. 


It has been suggested that τα εγκαινια may here mean 


the Dedication of Solomon’s Temple, which coincided with the Feast of Tabernacles. 


This is not likely. The reading of Τ.Ε. 
ΝΑΡ and most other uncials, vulg. goth. 


His life again. He was not compelled 
to die.—Ver. 18. otdeis . . . ἐμαυτοῦ. 
He did not succumb to the machinations 
of His foes. To the last He was free to 
choose another exit from life; Mt. xxvi. 
53. He gave His life freely, perceiving 
that this was the Father’s will: ἐξουσίαν 
... pov, Others have only power to 
choose the time or method of their death, 
and not always that: Jesus had power 
absolutely to lay down His life or to 
retain it. Others have no power at all 
to resume their life after they had laid 
it down. He has. This freedom, as 
Weiss remarks, does not clash with the 
instrumentality of the Jews in taking 
His life, nor with the power of God in 
raising Him αραϊπ.---ταύτην τὴν ἐντολὴν. 
“This commandment ” thus to dispose 
of His life and to resume it He has 
received from the Father. In this as in 
all else He is fulfilling the will and pur- 
pose of God. 

——Wv. 19-21. The result of this discourse 
briefly described.—Ver. 19. As usual, 
diverse judgments were elicited, and 
once more a division of opinion appeared, 
Σχίσμα οὖν πάλιν éyevero... Many 
thought Him possessed and mad, as in 
Mk, iii, 21; cf. οὐ µαίνοµαι of Paul, 
Acts xxvi. 24. Others took the more 
sensible view. These words they had 
heard were not the wild exclamations 
and ravings they usually heard from 


is strongly authenticated, being found in 
syt., είς. 


demoniacs; and His acts, such as open- 
ing the blind man’s eyes, were not 
within the compass of a demon. 

Vv. 22-39. Sayings of Fesus at the 
Feast of Dedication.—Ver. 22. ᾿Εγένετο 
δὲ τὰ ἐγκαίνια. The ἐγκαίνια (Ezra vi. 
16) was the annual celebration of the re- 
consecration of the Temple by Judas 
Maccabaeus after its defilement by 
Antiochus Epiphanes (x Mace. i. 20-60, 
iv. 36-57).---ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις. The feast 
might be celebrated elsewhere, and the 
place may be specified because Jesus 
had been absent from Jerusalem and 
now returned.—yetpav ἦν, not “it was 
stormy weather’? (Plummer) but ‘‘it 
was winter”’’; inserted for the sake of 
Gentile readers and to explain why 
Jesus was teaching under cover. The 
feast was held in December, the 25th, 
Chisleu. See Edersheim, Life of ¥esus, ii. 
226.--καὶ περιεπάτει . . . Σολομῶντος 
[better Σολομῶνος].--Ψετ. 23. For the 
sake of shelter Jesus was walking with 
His disciples [περιεπάτει] in Solomon’s 
Porch, a cloister on the east side of 
the Temple area (Joseph., Anézq., xx. 
9, 7) apparently reared on some remain- 
ing portions of Solomon’s building.— 
Ver. 24. Here the Jews ἐκύκλωσαν 
αὐτόν, “ringed Him round,” preventing 
His escape and with hostile purpose ; 
cf. Plutarch’s Them., xii. 3. Their atti- 
tude corresponded to the peremptory 


18—30, 


ea ε Φ ΑΡΑ 
ἡμιν “παρρησίᾳ. 
καὶ οὗ πιστεύετε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ ἕν τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ πατρός 
. 


793 


25. ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““Εἶπον ὑμῖν, c xi. 14; 


XVi. 15. 


µου, ταῦτα μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ: 26. GAN’ ὑμεῖς οὗ πιστεύετε’ οὐ 


Ὑάρ ἐστε ἐκ τῶν προβάτων τῶν ἐμῶν, καθὼς εἶπον ὑμῖν. 


275 τα 


a [ο 9 
πρόβατα τὰ ἐμὰ τῆς φωνῆς µου ἀκούει, Kayo γινώσκω αὐτά: καὶ 


ἀκολουθοῦσί por, 28. Kayo ζωὴν αἰώνιον δίδωµι αὐτοῖς: καὶ οὐ μὴ 


ἀπόλωνται eis τὸν αἰῶνα, καὶ οὐχ 3 ἁρπάσει τις αὐτὰ ἐκ τῆς χειρός d Ps. vii. 2, 


μου. 


οὐδεὶς δύναται ἁρπάζειν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς τοῦ πατρός µου. 


20. 6 πατήρ pou ὃς δέδωκέ por, μείζων Ἰ πάντων ἐστί: καὶ 


2 Sam. 

XXiil. 21. 
νο. Vi. 15. 

30. εγω 


1 Instead of ος and µειζων of Τ.Ε. ο and µειζον are read by Tr.Ti.W.H. follow- 
ing [for αἱ NBL and [for µειζον] AB and versions. This reading seems exegetically 


impossible. See Weiss. 


It gives a sense irrelevant to the passage. 
my Father has given me is greater than all.” 


“That which 
Very possibly µειζον was originally 


read, cp. Mt. xii. 6, and og may have been changed into o through a misunderstand- 


ing of µειζον. 


character of their demand: “Ews πότε 
τὴν ψΨυχὴν ἡμῶν αἴρεις; Beza renders 
αἴρεις by ‘“suspendis, 1... anxiam et 
sSuspensam tenes?”’ For which Elsner 
blames him and prefers ‘why do you 
kill us with delay?” But atpw occurs 
not infrequently in the sense of “ dis- 
τρ”... Soph., Oed. Tyr., 914, atper 
θυμὸν Οἰδίπους, Oedipus excites his soul ; 
Eurip., Hecuba, 69, τί wor’ αἴρομαι 
Evvuxos οὕτω δείµασι; cf. Virgil, Aeneid, 
iv. 9, ‘‘quae me suspensam insomnia 
terrent?’’ ‘Why do you keep us in 
suspense ?” is a legitimate translation. 
“If Thou art the Christ tell us plainly.”’ 
---παρρησίᾳ, in so many words, devoid 
of all ambiguity; ο. xvi. 29. This 
request has a show of reasonableness 
and honesty, as if they only needed to 
hear from Himself that He was the 
Christ. But it is never honest to ask 
for further explanation after enough has 
been given. Nothing more surely evinces 
unwillingness to believe. Besides, there 
was always the difficulty that, if He 
categorically said He was the Christ, 
they would understand Him to mean 
the Christ of their expectation.—Ver. 25. 
Therefore He replies: “1 told you and 
ye believe not. The works which I do 
in my Father’s name, these witness con- 
cerning me.” These works tell you what 
I am. They are works done in my 
Father’s name, that is, wholly as His 
representative. These show what kind 
ot Christ He sends you and that I am 
He.—Ver. 26. ‘But you on your part 
do not believe”? —the reason being 
that you are not of the number οἱ my 
sheep. Had you been oi my sheep you 
must have believed; because my sheep 


have these two characteristics, (ver. 27) 
they hear my voice and they follow me: 
(ver. 28) and these characteristics meet 
a twofold response in me, ‘“‘ I know them” 
and “I give them life eternal”. Kayo 
in each case emphatically exhibits the 
response of Christ to believers. They 
acknowiedge Him by hearing His voice; 
He acknowledges them, ‘‘ knows them”. 
Cf. νετ. 14. They follow Him, and He 
leads them into life eternal. ‘ Sequela 
et vita arcte connectuntur,” Bengel. 
This mention of the gift of life leads 
Him to enlarge on its perpetuity and its 
security.—ov pn ἁπόλωνται eis τὸν 
αἰῶνα, “they shall never perish ” (cf. 
νετ. 10), but shall enjoy the abundant 
life I am come to Ῥερίον.- καὶ οὐχ 
ἁρπάσει τις αὐτὰ ἐκ τῆς χειρός pov, 
“and no one shall carry them off (ver. 
12) out of my hand” or keeping. 
Throughout He uses the phraseology 
of the ‘“‘Shepherd”’ parable.—Ver. 20. 
These strong assertions He bases, as 
always, on the Father’s will and power. 
6 πατήρ pov... éopev. ‘* My Father 
who has given me these sheep is greater 
than all: and therefore no one can snatch 
them out of my Father’s hand. But 
this is equivalent to my saying no one 
can snatch them out of my hand, for I 
and the Father are one.”—éy® καὶ 6 
Πατὴρ ἔν ἐσμεν. Cf. xvii. 21, 22, 23, 
ἵνα πάντες ἓν Gov. Bengel says: 
‘* Unum, non solum voluntatis consensu, 
sed unitate potentiae, adeoque naturae. 
Nam omnipotentia est  attributum 
naturale ; et sermo est de unitate 
Patris et Filii. In his verbis Jesu plus 
viderunt caeci Judaei, quam hodie vident 
Antitrinitarii.” But Calvin is right when 


794 KATA ΙΤΩΑΝΝΗΝ x. 
e xvii. 21. καὶ 6 πατὴρ "ἕν ἐσμεν. 31. :Εβάστασαν οὖν πάλιν λίθους ot 
viii. 59; μα is A ο 
χε Ἰουδαῖοι, ἵνα λιθάσωσιν αὐτόν. 32. ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
g Mt. v. 36. “ Πολλὰ ἔκαλὰ ἔργα ἔδειξα ὑμῖν ἐκ τοῦ πατρός µου" διὰ ποῖον 
Thayer. | αὐτῶν ἔργον λιθάζετέ pe; 33. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι 
i Viii. 53; ν. 4 
ge λέγοντες, “'" Περὶ καλοῦ ἔργου οὐ λιθάζοµέν σε, ἀλλὰ ” περὶ βλασ- 
j Ps. Ixxxii. w 
6. φηµίας, καὶ ὅτι σὺ ἄνθρωπος ὢν | ποιεῖς σεαυτὸν Θεόν. 34. 
k vi. 25. ‘ 5 ίθ ee Paar) a “pn? ” j , 2 a / 
Jonahi.1. Απεκριθη αὗτοις ο Ιησοῦς, “ OuK εστι 'γεγραμμενον ἐν τῷ νόμῳ 
1 Mt. v. 10. ε a 6? π > B09 ? > 3 , 5 A \ 
τι Wisd. ὑμῶν, ‘"Ey® εἶπα, θεοί éote;’ 35. Ei ἐκείνους εἶπε θεοὺς, πρὸς 
xlix. 7. a a n 
Ch. xvii. οὓς 6 λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ " ἐγένετο, καὶ οὗ δύναται | λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή: 
17. Mk. 6. ὃν ὁ AY me / ος ψ λ 3 SY ό ς is λέ 
τι 36. ὃν 6 πατὴρ '' ἡγίασε καὶ ἀπέστειλεν eis τὸν κόσμον, ὑμεῖς λέγετε, 


he denies that the words carry this 
sense: “' Abusi sunt hoc loco veteres ut 
probarent Christum esse Patri ὁμοούσιον. 
Neque enim Christus de unitate sub- 
stantiae disputat, sed de consensu quem 
cum Patre habet: quicquid scilicet 
geritur a Christo Patris virtute confirma- 
tum iri.”” An ambassador whose demands 
were contested might quite naturally say : 
‘“‘Tand my sovereign are one’’; not mean- 
ing thereby to claim royal dignity, but 
only to assert that what he did his 
sovereign did, that his signature carried 
his sovereign’s guarantee, and that his 
pledges would be fulfilled by all the 
resources of his sovereign. So here, as 
God’s representative, Jesus introduces 
the Father’s power as the final guarantee, 
and claims that in this respect He and 
the Father are one. Whether this does 
not involve metaphysical unity is another 
question. Cf, Tertullian, adv. Praxeam, 
22; Hippolytus, ο. Noetum, 7, δύο 
πρόσωπα ἔδειξεν, δύναμιν δὲ piav.—Ver. 
31.  ἘἙβάστασαν οὖν . . . αὐτόν. In 
chap. Vili. 50, ἦραν λίθους, so now once 
more, πάλιν, they lifted stones to stone 
Him.—Ver. 32. Jesus anticipating them 
says: Πολλὰ . . . µε; “ Many excellent 
works [‘ praeclara opera,’ Meyer] have I 
shown you from my Father; for what 
work among these do ye stone me?” 
Which of them deserves stoning ? (Holtz- 
mann). As it could only be a work 
differing in character from the καλὰ 
ἔργα which deserved stoning, ποῖον is 
used, although in later Greek its dis- 
tinctive meaning was vanishing. Wet- 
stein quotes from Dionys. Halicar., viii. 
29, an apposite passage in which Corio- 
lanus says: ot µε ἀντὶ πολλῶν καὶ 
καλῶν ἔργων, ἐφ᾽ ols τιμᾶσθαι προσΏκεν 
.., αἰσχρῶς ἐξήλασαν ἐκ τῆς πατρίδος. 
—Ver. 33. The irony is as much in the 
situation as in the words. The answer 
is honest enough, blind as it is: Περὶ 
κ Θεόν. “For a praiseworthy work 


we do not stone Thee, but for blasphemy, 
and because Thou being a man makest 
Thyself God.” For περί in this sense 
cf. Acts xxvi. 7. The καὶ ὅτι does not 
introduce a second charge, but more 
specifically defines the blasphemy. On 
the question whether it was blasphemy 
to claim to be the Christ see Deut. xviii. 
20, Lev. xxiv. 10-17, and. Treffry’s 
Eternal Sonship. It was blasphemy for 
a man to claim to be God. And it is 
noteworthy that Jesus never manifests 
indignation when charged with making 
Himself God; yet were He a mere man 
no one could view this sin with stronger 
abhorrence.—Ver. 34. On this occasion 
He merely shows that even a man could 
without blasphemy call himself ‘ Son of 
God”; because their own judges had 
been called ‘‘ gods ”'.---Οὐκ ἔστι yeypap- 
µένον ἐν TO νόµῳ itpov, “Is it not 
written in your law, I said ‘ye are 
Gods’?”’ In Ps. Ixxxii. the judges of 
Israel are rebuked for abusing their 
office ; and God is represented as say- 
ing: “I said, Ye are gods, and all of 
you are children of the Most High”. 
“The law” is here used of the whole 
Ο.Τ. as in xii. 34, xv. 25, Rom. ili. 19, 
1 Cor. xiv. 21.—Ei ἐκείνονς . . . “If 
it [that 6 νόμος is the nominative to 
εἶπε is proved by the two following 
clauses, although at first sight it might 
be more natural to suppose the nearer 
and more emphatic ἐγώ supplied the 
nominative] called them gods, to whom 
the word of God came,” that is, who 
were thus addressed by God at their 
consecration to their office and by this 
word lifted up to a new dignity—“ and 
that they were so called is certain 
because Scripture cannot be denied or 
put aside—then do you, shutting your 
eyes to your own Scriptures, declare 
Him whom the Father consecrated and 
sent into the world to be a blasphemer 
because He said, I am God’s Son?” 


31—42. 


J A - a 
Ότι βλασφημεῖς, ὅτι εἶπον, Yids τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰμι ; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


795 


37. εἲ οὐ ποιῶ τὰ 


oe A , x , , 3 BY A a > ‘ 
εργα του πατρὀς µου, µη πιστευετε μοι ) 38. ει δὲ ποιω, καν εμοι 


μὴ πιστεύητε, τοῖς ἔργοις πιστεύσατε"' ἵνα γνῶτε καὶ πιστεύσητε, 


ο a»? 
ὅτι ἐν ἐμοὶ 6 πατὴρ, κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ. 


Ἀπιάσαι: καὶ ’ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν. 


1 


39. ᾿Εζήτουν οὖν πάλιν αὐτὸν 


Ώ Vii. 30. 
o “escaped” 


40. ΚΑΙ ἀπῆλθε πάλιν πέραν τοῦ ᾿Ιορδάνου, eis τὸν τόπον ὅπου vide 


Pav Ἰωάννης Ἱτὸ πρῶτον βαπτίζων - 


Thayer, 
223. 
P iii. 23. 


Voom 39 A 
και εµεινεν εκει. και 


41. 


πολλοὶ ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτὸν, καὶ ἔλεγον, ' Ὅτι Ἰωάννης μὲν σημεῖον q xii. 16; 


ἐποίησεν οὐδέν: πάντα δὲ ὅσα εἶπεν 
> 9? 
ἦν. 


Ἰωάννης περὶ τούτου, ἀληθῆ 


Xix. 39. 


42. Καὶ ἐπίστευσαν πολλοὶ ἐκεῖ εἰς αὐτόν. 


1 Ἐοτ πιστευσητε BLX, cursives and versions read γινωσκητε, ‘‘ that ye may 


attain to knowledge and permanently know’’. 


The a fortiori element in the argument 
lies in this, that the judges were made 
“gods” by the coming to them of God’s 
commission, which found them engaged 
otherwise and itself raised them to their 
new rank, whereas Jesus was set apart 
by the Father and sent into the world 
for the sole object of representing the 
Father. If the former might be legiti- 
mately called ‘‘ gods,’”’ the latter may 
well claim to be God’s Son. The idea 
of the purpose for which Christ was 
sent into the world is indicated in the 
emphatic use of 6 πατήρ; and this is 
still further accentuated in ver. 37.—Vv. 
37,38. εἰ οὐ ποιῶ . . . πιστεύσατε. ‘If 
I do not the works of my Father, do 
not believe me: but if I do them, even 
though you do not believe me, believe 
the works.”? That is, if you do not 
credit my statements, accept the testi- 
mony ofthe deedsI do. And this, not to 
give me the glory but “that ye may know 
and believe [cf. vi. 69] that the Father 
is in me, and I in the Father”’ [for αὐτῷ 
read τῷ πατρί].--Ψετ. 39. ᾿Εζήτουν . 
αὐτῶν. His words so far convinced them 
that they dropped the stones, but they 
sought to arrest Him. The πάλιν refers 
to vii. 30, 44. But He escaped out of 
their hand, and departed again beyond 
Jordan to the place where John at first 
was baptising, {.ε., Bethany. Cf. i. 28, 
also iv. 1. Holtzmann considers that 
the πρῶτον is intended to differentiate 
the earlier from the later ministry of the 
Baptist. It might rather seem to point 
to the beginning of the ministry of 
Jesus, especially as following πάλιν.--- 
Kal ἔμεινεν ἐκεῖ, “‘and He remained 
there”’ until xi. 7, that is, for a little 
more than three months.—Ver. 41. 
There He was still! busy; for πολλοὶ 


The T.R. is read in ΝΔ. 


ἦλθον πρὸς αὐτόν, ‘many came to Him 
and said,” that is, giving this as their 
reason for coming, that ‘“‘although John 
himself had done no miracle, all he had 
said of Jesus was found to be true”. 
The reference to John is_ evidently 
suggested by the locality, and probably 
means that the ‘‘many”’ alluded to as 
coming to Jesus belonged to the district 
and had been impressed by John. The 
correspondence between what they had 
heard from the Baptist and what they 
saw in Jesus, as well as the intrinsic 
evidence of the works He did, engendered 
belief in Him (νετ. 42) Καὶ ἐπίστευσαν 
πολλοὶ ἐκεῖ εἰς αὐτόν. 

CHAPTER XI.—Vv. 1-16. Lazarus’ 
death recalls Fesus to F¥udaea.—Ver. 1. 
"Hv δέ τις ἀσθενῶν. “ Now a certain 
man was ill;”’ δέ connects this narrative 
with the preceding, and introduces the 
cause of our Lord’s leaving His retire- 
ment in Peraea. ‘‘ Lazarus,’ the Greek 
form of Eleazar = God is my Help (cf. 
Lk. xvi. 20), ‘‘of Bethany”. ἀπό is 
commonly used to designate residence 
or birthplace, see i. 45, Heb. xiii. 24, 
etc. ; ἐκ is used similarly, see Acts xxiii. 
34. Bethany lay on the south-east slope 
of Olivet, nearly two miles from Jeru- 
salem, ver. 18; it is now named Ε]- 
*Aziriyeh, after Lazarus; ‘‘from the 
village of Mary and Martha her sister,” 
a description of Bethany added not so 
much to distinguish it from the Bethany 
of i. 28 (cf. x. 40) as to connect it with 
persons already named in the evangelic 
tradition, Lk. x. 38.—Ver. 2. In order 
further to identify Lazarus it is added: 
“« Now it was (that) Mary who anointed 
the Lord with ointment and wiped His 
feet with her hair, whose brother Lazarus 
was ill”, This act of Mary’s has not yet 


796 


a Lk. x. 38. 


b xii. 3. 


KATA IQANNHN 


ΧΙ. 


XI. τ. Ἡν δέ τις ἀσθενῶν " Λάζαρος ἀπὸ Βηθανίας, ἐκ τῆς κώµης 
Μαρίας καὶ Μάρθας τῆς ἀδελφῆς αὐτῆς. 


2. ἦν δὲ Μαρία 1 Ὁ ἡ ἀλεί- 


ε Lk. vii. 38. aoa τὸν Κύριον µύρῳ, καὶ ' ἐκμάξασα τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ ταῖς θριδὶν 


Ch. xiii. 


5. Wisd- αὑτῆς, Ws 6 ἀδελφὸς Λάζαρος ἠσθένει. 


ΧΙ]. 11. 


3. ἀπέστειλαν οὖν αἱ 


ἀδελφαὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγουσαι, “Κύριε, ἴδε ὃν Φιλεῖς ἀσθενεῖ. 


div. 25. ΟΡ.4. ᾿Ακούσας δὲ 6 
2 Kings ος a nA 
κκ... θάνατον, GAN ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
© 1X. 3 A > 3 A ” 
Θεοῦ δι αὐτῆς. 
fi. 40. > XN 2A x 
gver.15,  ἀδελφὴν αὐτῆς καὶ τὸν Λάζαρον. 
Mk. i 


6. , ~ ” ” 3 [ή 
h With Ίω- λέγει τοῖς μαθηταῖς, “ΞΑγωμεν eis τὴν ἸΙουδαίαν πάλιν.” 


perf. here 
only. 


ᾧ ἦν τόπῳ δύο ἡμέρας. 


"Ingods εἶπεν, “Atty ἡ ἀσθένεια οὖκ ἔστι * πρὸς 


ο ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ 


5. ᾿Ἠγάπα δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τὴν Μάρθαν καὶ τὴν 


6. ὡς οὖν ἤκουσεν ὅτι * ἀσθενεῖ, 
” 9 A 
7. Έπειτα μετὰ τουτο 


δ. 


Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ, ““PaBBi, "νῦν ἐζήτουν σε λιθάσαι ot 


1 Recent editors read Maptap instead of Μαρια, but, as Meyer remarks, the 
genitive presupposes the form Μαρια, and while in some versions Μαριαμ is well 
supported, in others it is poorly authenticated. Generally T.R. is supported by 


SAD, Μαριαμ by BC. 


been narrated by John (see xii. 3), but it 
was this which distinguished her at the 
time John was writing ; cf. Mt. xxvi. 13.— 
Ver. 3. The sisters were so intimate with 
Jesus that they naturally turn to Him in 
their anxiety, and send Him a notice of 
the illness, which is only a slightly veiled 
request that He would come to their 
relief: ‘* Lord, behold, he whom Thou 
lovest is ill”. ‘‘ Sufficit ut noveris. Non 
enim amas et deseris.” Augustine.—Ver. 
4. ᾿Ακούσας δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν. “' Απά 
Jesus when He heard said,’ 1.6., to His 
disciples. It was not the reply sent to 
the sisters. ‘This illness is not to 
death,” πρὸς θάνατον, death is not the 
end towards which it is making. But 
that Jesus knew that death had already 
taken place (ver. 6 and ver. 17) or was 
imminent is evident from the following 
clause, but He knew what He would do 
(vi. 6) and that death was not to be the 
final result of this illness. The illness 
and death were ὑπὲρ τῆς δόξης τοῦ Θεοῦ, 
for the sake of glorifying God (cf. ix. 3), 
‘‘oloriae divinae illustrandae causa,” 
Winer, p. 479. This is further explained 
in the clause ‘‘ that the Son of God may 
be glorified by means of it,” 22, by 
means of this illness; cf. xiii. 31. ‘‘In 
two ways; because the miracle (1) would 
lead many to believe that He was the 
Messiah; (2) would bring about His 
death. Δοξάζεσθαι is a frequent expres- 
sion of this Gospel for Christ’s death re- 
garded as the mode of His return to glory 
(vil. 39, xii. 16, xiii. 31), and this glorifica- 
tion of the Son involves the glory of the 


” 


Father (v. 23, x. 30-38).’’ Plummer, 
Bengel.—Ver. 5. ᾿Ηγάπα δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 
. . . It is quite true that φιλεῖν denotes 
the more passionate love, and ἀγαπᾶν 
the more reasoning; but it is doubtful 
whether this distinction is observed in 
this Gospel. Passages proving the dis- 
tinction are given by Wetstein.—Ver. 6. 
Jesus loved the family, ὡς οὖν ἤκουσεν 

. τότε μὲν ἔμεινε. We expect 
another consequence: ‘‘ Jesus loved 
them, therefore He immediately went 
to Bethany”. But the consequence in- 
dicated in οὖν is found in λέγει, ver. 7, 
and the whole sentence should read: 
‘“¢ When, therefore, He had heard that 
he was ill, for the present indeed [τότε 
μὲν = tum quidem], He remained for 
two days where He was; then after this 
He says to His disciples, Let us go into 
Judaea again”. The µέν after τότε sug- 
gests a δέ after ἔπειτα and unites the 
two clauses. For the dropping of δέ 
after ἔπειτα or its absorption see Winer, 
720; and for the pleonastic ἔπειτα μετὰ 
τοῦτο and for ἄγωμεν in the sense “let 
us go’? see Kypke, who gives instances 
of both from post-Macedonian authors. 
Jesus remained two days inactive, not to 
test the faith of the sisters, which Holtz- 
mann justly characterises as ** grausam ” ; 
but, as Godet, Holtzmann, and Weiss 
agree, because He awaited the prompt- 
ing of the Father, cf. ii. 4, vii. 1-10.— 
Ver. 8. The announcement of His in- 
tention is received with astonishment : 
‘PaBpt . éxet. ‘Rabbi, the men of 
Judaea were but now seeking to stone 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


1—16. 


797 


Ἰουδαῖοι, καὶ πάλιν ὑπάγεις exet;’’ 9. ᾿Απεκρίθη 6 Ἰησοῦς, “'Οὐχὶ 


δώδεκά εἶσιν ὧραι τῆς ἡμέρας; * 


ἐάν τις περιπατῇ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρα, οὗ i Burton, 
προσκόπτει, ὅτι TO φῶς τοῦ κόσμου τούτου βλέπει’ TO. ἐὰν δέ τις 


240, 260. 


a 3 a ‘ ό 9 x aA > ” 3 9. 
περιπατη εν τη VUKTL, προσκ. πτει, OTL TO as ουκ εστιν εν αυτο. 


II. Ταῦτα εἶπε, καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο λέγει αὐτοῖς. '' Λάζαρος ὁ φίλος 


ἡμῶν } κεκοίµηται’ ἀλλὰ πορεύομαι ἵνα ἐξυπνίσω αὐτόν. 
8 c sN > ~ ες , > , / 9? 
οὖν ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, “' Κύριε, εἰ κεκοίµηται, σωθήσεται. 


12. Εἶπον 1 1 Kings 


XV. Oe. °F 
το, Thess, iv 


Εἰρήκει δὲ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς περὶ τοῦ θανάτου αὐτοῦ: ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ἔδοξαν ὅτι 


περὶ τῆς " κοιµήσεως τοῦ ὕπνου λέγει. 


14. τότε οὖν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς 6k Wisd. 
xvii. 14. 


Ἰησοῦς Ι παρρησίᾳ, “Λάζαρος ἀπέθανε' 15. καὶ Χαίρω δι’ ὑμᾶς, ἵνα | xvi. 2ο. 


[ή oa > ” 5 - 3 ” 
πιστεύσητε, ὅτι οὐκ μην ἐκεῖ: ἀλλ 
Εἶπεν οὖν Θωμᾶς, ™6 λεγόμενος ἈΛίδυµος, τοῖς συμμαθηταῖς, 
ες ας A 9 5 , 3 3 α 7 

Άγωμεν καὶ ἡμεῖς, ἵνα ἀποθάνωμεν pet αὐτοῦ. 


Thee, and goest Thou thither again?” 
“They think of the danger to Him, 
and are not without thought of the 
danger to themselves (ver. 16).” Watkins. 
The viv shows that they had not been 
long in Peraea. To this remonstrance 
Jesus replies, as in ix. 4, that while His 
day, appointed to Him by the Father, con- 
tinued, He must work, and nothing could 
hinder Him.—Ver. 9. Odyi.. . ημέρας, 
i.e., each man’s day, or term of work, 
is a defined quantity. [τὰ δυώδεκα µέρεα 
τῆς ἡμέρης παρὰ Βαβυλωνίων ἔμαθον 
Ἕλληνες, Herod., ii. 109; and see Raw- 
linson’s Appendix to his Translation.]— 
ἐόν τις .. . βλέπει. So long as this 
day lasts, a man may go confidently 
forward to the duties that call him; οὐ 
προσκόπτει ‘he does not stumble,” he 
can walk erect and straight on amid 
dangers, cf. Mt. iv. 6, ‘‘ because he sees 
the light of the world”; as the sun 
makes all causes of stumbling manifest 
and saves the walker from them, so the 
knowledge of God’s will, which is man’s 
moral light, guides him; and to follow 
it is his only safety.—Ver. το. On the 
other hand, ἐὰν δέτις . . . ἐν αὐτῷ, if a 
man prolongs his day beyond God’s 
appointment, he stumbles about in dark- 
ness, having lost his sole guide, the will 
of God. His prolonged lite is no longer 
a day but mere night.—Ver, 11. Tatra 
εἶπε . . . αὐτόν. ‘These things spake 
He, and after this,’’ how long after we do 
not know; but νετ. 15, ‘‘let us go to 
him,” indicates that the two days here 
intervened. There is, however, difficulty 
introduced by this supposition. He now 
makes the definite announcement : “Ου 
friend Lazarus is fallen asleep, but I go 
to awake him’’.—kekoipyrat cf. Mt. ix. 


m iv. 25; 
xix. 13. 
Mt. xxvii 
17. 

Ώ XX: 24; 
XX1. 2, 


ἄγωμεν πρὸς αὐτόν. 16. 


24, ΧχνΙΙ. 52, Acts. vii. 6ο, 1 Thess. iv. 
13, I Cor. xv. 6. ‘* Mortuos dormientes 
appellat Scripturae veracissima con- 
suetudo, ut cum dormientes audimus, 
evigilaturos minime desperemus.” Augus- 
tine. The heathen idea of the sleep of 
death is very different, cf. Catullus, 
““Nox est perpetua una dormienda”. 
ἐξυπνίσω is later Greek: ἐξυπνισθῆναι 
ov χρὴ λέγειν, ἀλλ ἀφυπνισθῆται, 
Phrynichus (Rutherford, p. 305). The 
disciples misunderstood Him, and said: 
Κύριε . . . σωθήσεται. ‘Lord, if he 
sleep, he will recover,” implying that in 
this case they need not take the dangerous 
step of returning to Judaea [cf. Achilles 
Tatius, iv., ὕπνος γὰρ πάντων νοσημάτων 
φΦάρµακον]. How He knows that Lazarus 
sleeps they do not inquire, accustomed 
as they are to His exercise of gifts they 
do not understand. σωθήσεται, cf. Mk. 
v. 28, 34, vi. 56, etc. Their misunder- 
standing was favoured by His having 
said (ver. 4) that the illness was “‘ not to 
death”’; naturally when Jesus spoke of 
Lazarus sleeping they understood Him 
to speak (ver: 13) περὶ τῆς κοιµήσεως 
τοῦ ὕπνον, “of the κοίµησις of sleep”. 
—Ver. 14. τότε οὖν. ‘‘ At this point, 
accordingly, Jesus told them plainly,” 
παρρησίᾳ “without figure or ambiguity,” 
‘‘ expressly in so many words,” cf. x. 24. 
removing all possibility of misunder- 
standing, ‘‘ Lazarus is dead,’ but instead 
of grieving (ver. 15) καὶ χαίρω δι’ ὑμᾶς, 
“T am glad for your sakes,” although 
grudging the pain to Lazarus and his 
sisters, ὅτι οὐκ ἥμην ἐκεῖ, “that I was 
not there,’”’ implying that had He been 
there Lazarus would not have died. 
This gives us a glimpse into the habitual 
and absolute confidence of Jesus in the 


c 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XL 


17. ᾿Ἐλθὼν οὖν 6 “Ingots εὗρεν αὐτὸν τέσσαρας ἡμέρας ἤδη 


i ἔχοντα έν τῷ µνηµείω. 18. ἦν δὲ ἡ Βηθανία 5 ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύ- 


xxi. 8. pov, ὡς Tams σταδίων δεκαπέντε" 10. καὶ πολλοὶ ἐκ τῶν Ιουδαίων 
Rev. xiv. 

20. ἐληλύθεισαν πρὸς τὰς περὶ Μάρθαν καὶ Maptay,! ἵνα παραµυθήσωνται 
ri. 4Ο. 

s Gen. 20. ἡ οὖν Μάρθα ὡς ἤκουσεν ὅτι 6 
χχχν]]. 
11. 2Sam. 
Vii. I. 


αὐτὰς περὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτῶν. 
*Inoots * ἔρχεται, ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ: Μαρία δὲ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ " ἐκαθέζετο. 
21. εἶπεν οὖν ἡ Μάρθα πρὸς τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, “' Κύριε, et As Ode, ὁ 


1 T.R. is supported by AC°TA; but NBC*LX 33, it. vulg., read προς την Μαρθαν 
κ. t λ. Tisch. retains Τ.Ε. W.H.R. adopt the other and better authenticated 
reading, although it is the easier, while the T.R. might naturally present difficulty. 
Wetstein’s examples show that τας περι κ. τ. λ. would in classical Greek mean 
‘“‘ Martha and Mary and those with them”; in later Greek it might mean “‘ Martha 


and Mary”’. 
to point to the later usage. 


presence with Him of an almighty power, 
ἵνα πιστεύσητε “that ye may believe,” 
go on to firmer faith. ‘‘ Faith can neither 
be stationary nor complete. ‘ He who {5 
a Christian is n8 Christian,’ Luther,”’ 
Westcott.—Ver. 16. Εἶπεν οὖν Θωμᾶς 6 
λεγόμενος Δίδυμος Θωμᾶς is the trans- 
literation and Δίδυμος the translation of 


OND), a twin. 
among the disciples, and now takes the 
gloomy, and, as it proved, the correct 
view of the result of this return to Judaea, 
but his affectionate loyalty forbids the 
thought of their allowing Jesus to go 
alone. ‘To his mind there is nothing 
left for Jesus but to die. But now comes 
the remarkable thing. He is willing to 
take Jesus at the lowest, uncrowned, un- 
seated, disrobed, he loves Him still.” 
Matheson. If Thomas is stiff and 
obstinate in his incredulity, he is also 
stiff and obstinate in his affection and 
allegiance. ‘In him the twins, unbelief 
and faith, were contending with one 
another for mastery, as Esau and 
Jacob in Rebecca’s womb.” Trench. 
συμμαθηταῖς occurs only here.—iva 
ἀποθάνωμεν pet’ αὐτοῦ, {.ε., with Jesus. 
The expression is well illustrated by 
Wetstein. 

Vv. 17-44. The raising of Lazarus. 
—Ver. 17. Ἐλθὼν οὖν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εὗρεν. 
‘““When, then, Jesus came, He found,” 
implying that He did not know before, 
but learned from some in Bethany, 
αὐτὸν τέσσαρας ἡμέρας ἤδη ἔχοντα ἐν 
τῶ µνημείῳ “ that he had been four days 
already in the tomb”. Raphel and 
Wetstein give instances of this construc- 
tion, and see v. 5. According to Jewish 
custom burial took place on the day of 
death, so that, allowing somewhat more 


He is the pessimist 


In Acts xiii. 13 the older usage obtains: here αδελφου αντων seems 


than one day for the journey from the one 
Bethany to the other, it seems probable 
that Lazarus died about the time the 
messenger reached Jesus. At ver. 39 
the time which had elapsed since death 
is mentioned for a different reason. Here 
it seems to be introduced to account for 
νετ. 19; as also is the statement ἣν δὲ 
Βηθανία [ή deleted by Tisch. and W.H.] 
ἐγγὺς τῶν Ἱεροσολύμων, ὡς ἀπὸ σταδίων 
δεκαπέντε, within easy walking distance 
of Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs off. 
The form is a Latinism, used in later 
Greek instead of ὡς σταδίους δεκαπέντε 
ἀπὸ τῶν Ἱέροσολύμων ; cf. xii. 1, xxi. 8, 
Rey. xiv. 20. The nearness of Bethany 
accounts for the fact that πολλοὶ .. . 
αὐτῶν, ‘many of the Jews had come out 
to Martha and Mary”. Of visits of con- 
dolence we have a specimen in Job. 
“Deep mourning was to last for seven 
days, of which the first three were those 
of ‘weeping’. During these seven days 
it was, among other things, forbidden to 
wash, to anoint oneself, to put on shoes, 
to study, or to engage in any business. 
After that followed a lighter mourning of 
thirty days.”’ Edersheim, ¥ewish Social 
Life, an interesting chapter on In Death 
and after Death. Cf. Gen. 1.3; Num. 
xx. 29; I Sam. xxviii. 13. Specimens of 
the manifestations of grief in various 
heathen countries and of the things said 
ὑπὸ τῶν παραμυθουµένων are given by 
Lucian in his tract Concerning Grief.— 
Ver. 20. Ἡ οὖν Μάρθα .. . ἐκαθέζετο. 
Martha as the elder sister and mistress of 
the house (Lk. x. 38-40) goes out to meet 
Jesus, while Mary remained seated in the 
house. “' After the body is carried out of 
the house all chairs and couches are re- 
versed, andthe mourners sit on the ground 
on a lowstool.” Edersheim, Joc. czt. On 


«7—28, 


ἀθελφός µου οὐκ ἂν ἐτεθνήκει.ὶ 

αἰτήσῃ τὸν Θεὸν, δώσει σοι ὁ Θεός. 
3 

ἕεἍ᾽Αναστήσεται 6 ἀδελφός σου. 

a > / 3 ~ ιά 3 

ὅτι ἀναστήσεται, ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει ἐν 


Εἲ > a £ 3 a 
ἴπεν αὐτῇ ὁ Ιησούς, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


24. Λέγει αὐτῷ Μάρθα, ‘ Oida ε Is. κανι. 


“"Eyd εἶμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή. 


το. 


22. ἀλλὰ καὶ νῦν οἶδα ὅτι ὅσα ἂν 


, 2 κ κε 3 a 
23. Λέγει αὐτῇ ὁ Ιησούς, 


το. 5 
25. Mac. vii. 
et) Ou) E4- 
0 u vi. 39 reff. 


“rH ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ.”᾿ 


πιστεύων εἲς ἐμὲ, Kav ἀποθάνῃ, {ήσεται: 26. καὶ was 6 Lav καὶ 


, atin ty en ee | ῃ 3 x 3 
πιστευων ELS εµε;, ου μη ἀποθάνῃ εἰς τον σαιωνα. 


πιστεύεις τοῦτο; 


a A , 
27. Λέγει αὐτῷ, “‘ Nat, κύριε: ἐγὼ πεπίστευκα, ὅτι σὺ εἶ 6 Χριστὸς, 


ς cA n~ A c > x , 
ο υἱος του Θεοῦ, ὁ εἰς τὸν κόσμον 


: ἐρχόμενος. 


28. Καὶ ταῦτα ἓν Μι κχἰ.« 


εἰποῦσα ἀπῆλθε, καὶ ἐφώνησε Μαρίαν τὴν ἀδελφὴν αὗτῆς λάθρα, 


} ουκ αν απεθανεν ο αδελφος µου is the το of NBCDKL 33. 


3 Instead of ταντα {BCL read τοντο. 


sitting asan attitude of grief see Doughty, 
Analecta Sacra, on Ezek. viii. 14.—Ver. 
21. Martha’s first words to Jesus, Κύριε 
. . . ἐτεθνήκει, '' hadst Thou been here 
my brother had not died,” are ‘“‘not a 
reproach but a lament,’”” Meyer. Mary 
uses the same words (ver. 32), suggesting 
hat this had been the burden of their 
alk with one another; and even, as 
Bengel says, before the death “‘utinam 
adesset Dominus Jesus ’’.—Ver. 22. But 
Martha not only believed that Jesus 
could have prevented her brother’s death 
but also that even now He could recall 
him from the grave: καὶ viv ola... 
“Even now I know that what thing 
soever you ask of: God, God will give 
you.” Cf. ix. 31. Jesus referred all 
His works to the Father, and spoke as if 
only faith were required for the working 
of the greatest miracles. See Mt. xiv. 
31, xvii. 20. On the use of αἰτεῖν and 
_ €pwtay see Ezra Abbot’s Critical Essays, 
in which Trench’s misleading account of 
their difference is exposed.—Ver. 23. 
λέγει .. . σον. “Thy brother shall 
rise again.” ‘The whole history of the 
raising of Lazarus is a parable of life 
through death. . . . Here, then, at the 
beginning the key-note is struck.” West- 
cott. Whether the words were meant 
or not to convey only the general truth 
of resurrection, and that death is not the 
final state, Martha did not find in them 
any assurance of the speedy restoration 
of Lazarus.—Ver. 24. ‘‘I know,” she 
says, ‘‘that he will rise again, in the 
resurrection at the ‘last day.” On the 
terms used see v. 28, vi. 39, 40, 54. 
Belief in the resurrection had been pro- 
moted through :Dan. xii. 2, and, as 
Holtzmann remarks, Martha must have 
heard more than enough about it during 


the last four days, and fears perhaps 
that even Jesus is offering the merely 
conventional consolation. To one who 
yearns for immediate re-union the “ last 
day” seems invisible. It was small con- 
solation for Martha to know that her 
brother would lie for ages in the tomb, 
no more to exchange one word or look 
till the last day.—Ver. 25. Nor does 
this faith satisfy Jesus, who at once re- 
places it by another in the words, "Eye 
εἰμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή. Resurrec- 
tion and life are not future only, but 
present in His person; she is to trust 
not in a vague remote event but in His 
living person whom she knew, loved, 
and trusted. Apart from Him there was 
neither resurrection nor life. He carried 
with Him and possessed there and then 
as He spoke with-her all the force that 
went to produce life and resurrection. 
Therefore ὃ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ . 
αἰῶνα (νετ. 26), “' He that believeth on 
me, even though he die, shall live; and 
every one who liveth and believeth on 
me shall never die”. Belief in Him or 
acceptance of Him as the source of true 
spiritual life, brings the man into vital 
union with Him, so that he lives with 
the life of Christ and possesses a life 
over which death has no power.—Ver. 
27. Martha believed this, as implicitly 
included in her belief in Jesus as the 
Messiah, Nal, Κύριε .. . ἐρχόμενος. 
Resurrection and life were both Messianic 
gifts, but it is doubtful whether Martha 
fully understood what our Lord had 
said. Rather she falls back on what she 
did understand and believe. She will 
not claim to believe more than she is 
sure of; but if His statement is only an 
elaboration of His Messianic function, 
then she can truly say: Nat, Κύριε.-- 


δοο 


a 7 

wi.49; ii. εἰποῦσα, “΄ Ὁ διδάσκαλος πάρεστι καὶ 
Io. ” ‘ 34 

ἤκουσεν, ἐγείρεται ταχὺ καὶ ἔρχεται] πρὸς αὐτόν. 


χ νςς τ. 


vver.20. 7 ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἡ Μάρθα. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΧΙ. 


"φωνεῖ σε. 29. Ἐκείνν ὡς 


30. οὕπω δὲ 


ἐληλύθει & ᾿Ιησοῦς εἰς τὴν "κώμην, ἀλλ᾽ ἦν ἐν τῷ τόπῳ ὅπου 


31. οἱ οὖν ἸΙουδαῖοι οἱ ὄντες μετ αὐτῆς 


zMk.xii.34.év τῇ οἰκίᾳ καὶ παραμυθούµενοι αὐτὴν, ἰδόντες τὴν Μαρίαν " ὅτι 
ταχέως ἀνέστη καὶ ἐξῆλθεν, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῇ, λέγοντες,; “΄ "Ore 


ὑπάγει εἰς TS μνημεῖον, ἵνα κλαύσῃ ἐκεῖ.' 


42. Ἡ οὖν Μαρία ὡς 


aHereonly. ἦλθεν ὅπου ἦν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἰδοῦσα αὐτὸν, ἔπεσεν "εἰς ὃ τοὺς πόδας 


Gen. πρός 
or ἐπί. 
b νετ. 38. . 


Μια. 8 ἀδελφός.᾽ 33. ᾿Ιησοῦς 


αὐτοῦ, λέγουσα αὐτῷ, “Κύριε, εἰ ἦς ὧδε, οὐκ ἂν ἀπέθανέ µου 


3 
οὖν ὡς εἶδεν αὐτὴν κλαίουσαν, καὶ 


ΓΑπ.. 1.6. τοὺς συνελθόντας αὐτῇ Ιουδαίους κλαίοντας " ἐνεβριμήσατο τῷ 


1 ΜΦΒΟΙ.Χ 33 read ηγερθη Ταχυ και ηρχετο, “rose quickly and went,” aorist and 


imperfect. 


2 For λεγοντες W.H. read δοξαντες, “ having supposed,” with §BC*DL 1, 33. 


3 προς is read in RBCDLX. 


ἐγὼ πεπίστευκα, I have come to believe, 
I have reached the belief.—Ver. 28. καὶ 
ταῦτα εἰποῦσα ἀπῆλθε, “and when she 
had said this,’ and when some further 
conversation had taken place (cf. dwvet 
σε), “she went and called Mary her 
sister, secretly saying to her: The 
Teacher is here and asks for you”’. 
The secrecy was due not so much to 
the presence of Jesus’ enemies as to 
Martha’s desire that Mary should meet 
Jesus alone, unaccompanied even by 
friends. For the same purpose Jesus 
remained in the place where He had 
met Martha.—Ver. 29. On the delivery 
of His message Mary springs up from 
her attitude of broken-hearted grief and 
comes to meet Him.—Ver. 31. But she 
was not allowed to go alone: ot otv . . . 
éxet. The Jews who were with her in 
the house comforting her interpreted her 
sudden movement as one of those urgent 
demands of grief which already, no 
doubt, they had seen her yield to, and in 
sincere sympathy (ver. 33) followed her. 
—Ver. 32. Consequently when she 
reaches Jesus she has only time to fall 
at His feet and exclaim, in Martha’s 
words, Κύριε . . . ἀδελφός. The sight 
of Jesus, ἰδοῦσα αὐτόν, produced a more 
vehement demonstration of grief than 
in Martha. Cf. Cicero, in Verrem, v. 
39. ‘Mihi obviam venit et... mihi 
ad pedes misera jacuit, quasi ego excitare 
filium ejus ab inferis possem.”’ Wetstein. 
—Ver. 33. Ἰησοῦς οὖν ... αὐτόν. 
“« Jesus, then, when He saw her weeping 
[κλαίειν is stronger than Saxpvew and 
might be rendered ‘wailing’. It is 


joined with ἀλαλάζειν, Mk. v. 38; 
ὀλολύζειν, Jas. v. 1; θορυβεῖν, Mk. ν. 
39; πενθεῖν, Mk. xvi. το. Cf. Webster’s 
Synonyms} and the Jews who accom- 
panied her wailing,” ἐνεβριμήσατο τῷ 
πνεύµατι, “was indignant in spirit’. 
The word ἐμβριμᾶσθαι occurs again in 
ver. 38 and in three other passages of the 
N.T., Mt. ix. 30, Mk. i. 43, and xiv. 5. 
In those passages it is used in its original 
sense of the expression of feeling, and 
might be rendered ‘“ sternly charged”’ ; 
and it is in each case followed by an 
object in the dative. In Mt. ix. 30 Jesus 
sternly charged or with strong feeling 
charged the healed blind man not to 
make Him known. In Mk. i. 43 the 
leper is similarly charged. In Mk. xiv. 
5 the bystanders express strong feeling 
[of indignation, &yavaxrotvres] against 
Mary for her apparent extravagance. In 
all three passages it is used of the ex- 
pression of strong feeling; but no in- 
dignation enters into its meaning in the 
former two passages. Here in John it 
is not feeling expressed, but τῷ πνεύματι, 
inwardly felt; and with only such ex- 
pression as betrayed to observers that He 
was moved (cf. Mk. viii. 12, ἀναστενάξας 
τῷ mvevpart), for τῷ πνεύµατι cannot 
be the object, for this does not give a 
good sense and it is contradicted by 
πάλιν ἐμβριμ. ἐν ἑαντῷ of ver. 38. It 
would seem, then, to mean ‘ strongly 
moved in spirit’. This meaning quite 
agrees with the accompanying clause, 
καὶ ἐταραξεν ἑαυτόν, ‘and disturbed 
Himself’; precisely as we speak of a 
man “ distressing himself,”’ or ‘‘ troubling 


20 --30. 


πνεύματι, καὶ "ἐτάραξεν ἑαυτὸν, 34. 
a ~ , 

35. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “' Kupte, ° 

36. ἔλεγον οὖν οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, ''Ἴδε πῶς epider αὐτόν. 


αὐτόν; 
c > ~~ 
ὁ Ingots. 


EYATTEAION 801 


‘ ΄ a me 
καὶ εἶπε, “Mou ἆ τεθείκατε E ail. a7. 
XX. 15. 


ἔρχου καὶ ἴδε.᾽ ᾿Εδάκρυσεν ei. 40. 


37. Τινὲς δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν εἶπον, “Οὐκ ἠδύνατο] οὗτος £6 ἀνοίξας τοὺς fix. το. 


ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ τυφλοῦ, ποιῆσαι Siva καὶ οὗτος μὴ ἀποθάνῃ ; 


», & Not μὴ 
simply ; 
see Bur- 


a > A 
38. ᾿Ιησοῦς οὖν πάλιν ἐμβριμώμενος ἐν ἑαυτῷ, ἔρχεται eis Τὸ ton, 206. 


μνημεῖον. 


τεθνηκότος” Μάρθα, “Κύριε, ἤδη 
1 εδυνατο in BCDK. 


himself,” or ‘‘ making himself anxious”. 
To say that the active with the reflexive 
pronoun indicates that this was a volun- 
tary act on Christ’s part is to introducea 
jarring note of Doketism. His sympathy 
with the weeping sister and the wailing 
crowd caused this deep emotion. To 
refer His strong feeling to His indigna- 
tion at the “ hypocritical” lamentations 
of the crowd is a groundless and unjust 
fancy contradicted by His own “ weep- 
ing ” (ver. 34) and by the remark of the 
Jews (ver. 35).—Ver. 34. His intense 
feeling prompts Him to end the scene, 
and He asks, Mod τεθείκατε αὐτόν; He 
asks because He did not know. They 
reply, but probably with no expectation 
of what was to happen, ἔρχου καὶ tde. 
As He went ἐδάκρυσεν, ‘‘ He shed tears”. 
To assert that such tears could only be 
theatrical because He knew that shortly 
Lazarus would live, is to show profound 
ignorance of human nature. And it also 
shows ignorance of the true sympathy 
requisite for miracle. ‘‘It is not witha 
heart of stone that the dead are raised.”’ 
—Ver. 36. These tears evoked a very 
natural exclamation, “IS πῶς ἐφίλει 
αὐτόν, “see how He loved him ”.— Ver. 
37. But this again suggested to the more 
thoughtful and wary the question, Οὐκ 
. . . ἀποθάνῃ; The tears of Jesus, which 
manifest His love for Lazarus, puzzle 
them. For if He opened the eyes of a 
blind man, He was able to prevent the 
death of His friend. The question with 
οὐκ expects an affirmative answer. 
Euthymius and the Greek interpreters 
in general think the question was ironical 
and scoffing. Thus Cyril, Nov ἡ ἰσχύς 
σου ὦ θαυµατουργέ;: But there is nothing 
in the words to justify this.—Ver. 38. 
"Inoots οὖν πάλιν ἐμβριμώμενος. “ Jesus, 
then, being again deeply moved.” ‘‘Quia 
non accedit Christus ad sepulcrum 


tanquam otiosus spectator, sed athleta 
51 


ἦν δὲ σπήλαιον, καὶ λίθος 
λέγει ὁ "Incods, ““"Άρατε τὸν λίθον. 
ὄζει: τεταρταῖος γάρ ἐστι.’ ‘Sf 


h ver. 33. 


t ρ 3. 3 9. 
ἐπέκειτο ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ. 39+ i καὶ. 9. 
, SA he aj &xod. 
Λέγει αὐτῷ ἡ ἀδελφὴ TOO” Vii. 34. 
» Ps.xxxviii. 


Στετελεντηκοτος in HABC*DKLN 33. 


qui se ad certamen instruit, non mirum est 
si iterum fremat.” Calvin. To refer the 
renewed emotion to the sayings of the 
Jews just reported is to take for granted 
that Jesus heard them, which is most 
unlikely. The tomb ἣν σπήλαιον ... 
αὐτῷ, “was a cave,”’ either natural, as 
that which Abraham bought, Gen. xxiii. 
9, or artificial, hewn out of the rock, as 
our Lord’s, Mt. xxvii. θο.---λίθος ἐπέκειτο 
ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ, “a stone lay upon it,” i.e., on 
its mouth to prevent wild animals from 
entering. The supposed tomb of Lazarus 
is still shown and is described by several 
travellers.—Ver. 39. The detail, that 
Jesus said, "Apate τὸν λίθον, is mentioned 
because it was an unexpected step and 
quickened inquiry as to what was to 
follow, but also because it gave rise to | 
practical Martha’s quick objection, ἤδη 
ὄζει. [‘‘He employed natural means to 
remove natural obstructions, that His 
Divine power might come face to face 
with the supernatural element. He puts 
forth supernatural power to do just that 
which no iess power could accomplish, 
but all the rest He bids men do in the 
ordinary way.”’ Laidlaw, Miracles, p. 
36ο.]- ἤδη ὄζει shows that Lazarus had 
not been embalmed or even wrapped in 
spiced grave-clothes; which, some sup- 
pose, sheds light on xii. 3. The fact is 
mentioned, however, to show how little 
Martha expected what Jesus was going 
to do: evidently she supposed He wished 
to take a last look at His friend, and she 
[ἡ ἀδελφὴ τοῦ τετελευτηκότος] the sister 
of the deceased, and therefore jealous of 
any exposure, interposes, knowing what 
He would see.—tetapraios γὰρ ἐστι, 
“for he is four days [dead]”. Herodotus, 
ii. 89, tells us that the wives of men of 
rank were not at death given to the 
embalmers at once, ἀλλ) ἐπεὰν τριταῖαι 
ἢ τεταρταῖαι γένωνται. Lightfoot quotes 
a remarkable tradition of Ben Kaphra: 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XI. 


so. Λένει αὐτῇ ὁ Ιησοῦς, “Odx εἶπόν σοι, ὅτι ἐὰν πιστεύσῃς, ὄψει 


τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ ; 


v.35. Ρε. κείµενος. Ὅ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


41. Ἡραν οὖν τὸν λίθον, οὗ ἦν ὁ τεθνηκὼς 


ΧἾρε τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς ἄνω, καὶ εἶπε, 


42. ἐγὼ δὲ ᾖδειν ὅτι 


43. Καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν, φΦωνῇ 
44. Καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ 


λέγει αὐτοῖς ὁ Ιησοῦς, “ Λύσατε 


χχι. I. “ , > A @ » , 
Πάτερ, εὐχαριστῶ σοι ὅτι Ἠκουσάς µου. 
πάντοτέ µου ἀκούεις : ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ὄχλον τὸν περιεστῶτα εἶπον, ἵνα 
πιστεύσωσιν ὅτι σύ µε ἀπέστειλας. 
‘Dan. κ. peyddy ἐκραύγασε, “'Λάζαρε, ᾿ δεῦρο ἔξω.” 
on Acts 6 A , A , ‘ AY ο) m [ή Nee 
vii. 34. τεθνηκὼς, δεδεµένος τοὺς πόδας καὶ τὰς χεῖρας "'κειρίαις, καὶ ἡ 
mn Prov. vil. ῃ » etme . 
16 only, ™ ὄψις αὐτοῦ σουδαρίῳ περιεδέδετο. 
> Jer. ill. 3. ο ν 9 oo» ειν ” 
Song ii. αὐτὸν, καὶ ἄφετε ὑπάγειν. 
14. Rev. 


45. Πολλοὶ οὖν ἐκ τῶν Ιουδαίων οἱ ἐλθόντες πρὸς Thy Μαρίαν, καὶ 
θεασάµενοι ἃ ἐποίησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἐπίστευσαν εἰς αὐτόν. 


46. τινὲς 


δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπῆλθον πρὸς τοὺς Φαρισαίους, καὶ εἶπον αὐτοῖς ἃ 


κ: Theclause ew. . 


“Grief reaches its height on the third 
day. For three days the spirit hovers 
about the tomb, if perchance it may 
return to the body. But when it sees 
the fashion of the countenance changed, 
it retires and abandons the body.”—Ver. 
40. But Martha’s incredulity is mildly 
rebuked, Οὐκ εἶπόν σοι . . . Θεοῦ: ‘ Did 
I not say to you, that if you believed, 
you would see the glory of God?” re- 
calling rather what He had said (ver. 4) 
to the disciples than what He had said 
to Martha (vv. 23-26) ; but the conversa- 
tion is, as already noted, abridged.—Ver. 
41. Accordingly, notwithstanding her 
remonstrance, and because it was now 
perceived that Jesus had some end in 
view that was hidden from them, they 
lifted the stone, ἦραν οὖν τὸν Aibov.—‘O 
δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς . . . ἀπέστειλας. “' But Jesus 
lifted His eyes upwards and said, Father, 
I thank Thee that Thou hast heard me.” 
No pomp of incantation, no wrestling in 
prayer even; but simple words of thanks- 
giving, as if already Lazarus was restored. 
[Origen thinks that the spirit of Lazarus 
had already returned. ’Avti εὐχῆς 
ηὐχαρίστησε, κατανοήσας τὴν Λαζάρου 
ψυχὴν εἰσελθοῦσαν eis τὸ σῶμα.] The 
prayer which He thanks the Father for 
hearing had been offered during the two 
days in Peraea. And the thanksgiving 
was more likely to impress the crowd 
now than in the excitement following 
the resurrection of Lazarus. Therefore 
He thanks the Father because it was 
essential that the miracle should be 
referred to its real source, and that all 
should recognise that it was the Father 
whc had sent this power among men.— 


. κειµενος is obviously a gloss and is not found in $BC*DL 33. 


Ver. 43. Having thus turned the faith 
of the bystanders to the Father, φωνῇ 
µεγάλῃ ἐκραύγασε, “He cried with a 
great voice,” “that all might hear its 
authoritativeness ” (Euthymius). ‘ Talis 
vox opposita est omni magico murmuri, 
quale incantatores in suis praestigiis 
adhibere solent.” Lampe. More pro- 
bably, as Lampe also suggests, it was 
the natural utterance of His confidence, 
and of the authority He felt. κραυγάζω 
is an old word, see Plato, Rep., 607 B, 
but is principally used in late Greek 


(Rutherford’s New Phryn., 425).— 
Λάζαρε Setpo ἔξω. ‘Lazarus, come 
forth,’ or as Weiss renders, “hier 


heraus,” ‘‘huc foras,” ‘‘hither, out ’’; 
but on the whole the E.V. is best. Some- 
times an imperative is added to δεῦρο, as 
χώρει σὺ δεῦρο (Paley’s Com. Frag., p. 
16).—Ver. 44. Kat ἐξῆλθεν & τεθνηκὼς, 
ες And out came the dead man,”’ δεδεµένος 

. περιεδέδετο, ΄΄ bound feet and hands 
with grave-bands,” κειρίαις, apparently 
the linen bandages with which the corpse 
was swathed. Opinions are fully given 
in Lampe. ‘‘And his face was bound 
about with a napkin.” Cf. xx. 7. ‘ The 
trait marks an eye-witness,’’ Westcott. 
--λέγει . . . ὑπάγειν. “Jésus says to 
them, ‘ Loose him and let him go away’.”’ 
He did not require support, and he could 
not relish tne gaze of the throng in his 
present condition. 


Vv. 45-54. The consequences of the 
miracle.—Ver. 45. Πολλοὶ οὖν... 
αὐτόν. ‘‘Many therefore of the Jews, 


viz., those who had come to Mary and 
seen what Jesus did, believed on Him.” 
That is to say, all the Jews who thus 


40—50. 


ἐποίησεν ὁ Ιησοῦς. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


803 


47. συνήγαγον οὖν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of Φαρισαῖοι 


"συνέδριον, καὶ ἔλεγον. “Ti τοιοῦμεν; ὅτι οὗτος 6 ἄνθρωπος πολλὰ ο το 
ες 


σημεῖα ποιεῖ. 


48. ἐὰν 5 ἀφῶμεν αὐτὸν οὕτω, πάντες πιστεύσουσιν Thayer. 


Mt. xv. 14, 


εἷς αὐτόν: Kal ἐλεύσονται ot Ῥωμαῖοι καὶ ἀροῦσιν ἡμῶν καὶ τὸν xxvii. 49. 


τόπον καὶ τὸ ἔθνος. 


ὢν τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, '΄ Ὑμεῖς οὐκ οἴδατε οὐδέν : 
5ο. οὐδὲ διαλογίζεσθε,ὶ ὅτι συμφέρει ἡμῖν, “iva eis ἄνθρωπος 


1 λογιζεσθε in NABDL 1, 22. 
Άγμιν ἵπ BDLM. ηµιν in AEGHM. 


wame and saw believed.—Ver. 46. But 
of this number [it may be “‘ of the Jews” 
generally, and not of those who had been 
at Bethany] some went away to the 
Pharisees and told them, His recognised 
enemies, what He had done. Whether 
they did this in good faith or not does not 
appear.—Ver. 47. The Pharisees at once 
acted on the information, svvyyayov.. . 
συνέδριον. The chief priests, who were 
Sadducees, and the Pharisees, their 
natural foes, but who together composed 
the supreme authority, ‘‘called together 
a meeting of the Sanhedrim”’. The key- 
note of the meeting was struck in the 
words τί ποιοῦμεν; ‘“‘ What are we 
doing 2”) 4.ε., why are we doing nothing ? 
The indicative, not the deliberative sub- 
junctive. The reason for shaking off 
this inertia is ὅτι . . . ποιε. The mir- 
acles are not denied, but their probable 
consequence is indicated.—Ver. 48. ἐὰν 
ἀφῶμεν . . . ἔθνο. “If we let Him 
thus alone,” 1.6., if we do no more to put 
an end to His miracles than we are 
doing, “all will believe on Him; and 
the Romans will come and take away 
both our place and our nation”’. ἡμῶν 
emphatic. The raising of Lazarus and 
the consequent accession of adherents to 
Jesus made it probable that the people 
as a whole would attach themselves to 
Him as Messiah; and the consequence 
of the Jews choosing a king of their own 
would certainly be that the Romans 
‘would come and exterminate them.— 
τὸν τόπον One would naturally render 
‘“‘ our land” as co-ordinate with τὸ ἔθνος 
[ή Land und Leute,’”’ Luther], and pro- 
bably this is the meaning; although in 
2 Macc. v. Ig in a very similar connection 
ὃ τόπος means the Temple: οὐ διὰ τὸν 
τόπον τὸ ἔθνος, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ ἔθνος τὸν 
τόπον ὃ Κύριος ἐξελέξατο. Others, with 
less warrant, think the holy city is meant. 
—Ver.49. Els δέ Tus ἐξ αὐτῶν Καϊάφας. 
‘But a certain one of them, Caiaphas.”’ 


49. Eis δέ τις ἐξ αὐτῶν Καϊάφας, ἀρχιερεὺς q xvi. 7. 


Μι. ν. 20. 
Lk. xvii. 

2. 1 Cor. 
iv. 3. 


T.R. poorly authenticated. 


Winer (p. 146) says that τὶς does not 
destroy the arithmetical force of eis. 
This may be so: but the use of εἷς in 
similar forms is a peculiarity of later 
Greek. Caiaphas (Mt. xxvi. 3) is a sur- 
name = Kephas, added to the original 
name of this High Priest, Joseph. He 
held office from Α.Ρ. 18 to 36, when he 
was deposed by Vitellius.—apytepets dv 
τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνον, ‘ being High Priest 
that year,” not as if the writer supposed 
the high priesthood was an office held 
for a year only, but desiring to emphasise 
that during that marked and fatal year 
of our Lord’s crucifixion Caiaphas held 
the position of highest authority: as if 
he said ‘‘ during the year of which we 
speak Caiaphas was High Priest”’. 
‘‘ Non vocat anni illius pontificem, quod 
annuum duntaxat esset munus, sed quum 
venale esiiet transferretur ad varios 
homines fraeter Legis praescriptum.” 
Calvin. And Josephus (Ant., xx. 10) re- 
minds us that there were twenty-eight 
high priests in 107 years.—Ypets οὐκ 
οἴδατε οὐδέν. ‘“* Ye [contemptuous] know 
nothing at all,’”’ οὐδὲ λογίζεσθε, ‘‘ nor do 
ye take account that it is expedient for 
you that one man die for the people, and 
the whole nation perish not”. The ἵνα 
clause is the subject of the sentence, 
‘‘that one man die for the people is 
expedient’; as frequently, cf. Mt. x. 25, 
XVlii. 6, John xvi. 7, Ι Cor. iv. 3. On 
the use of ἵνα in this Gospel see Burton’s 
Moods and Tenses, 211-219. Caiaphas 
enounced an _ unquestionably sound 
principle (see Wetstein’s examples) ; but 
nothing could surpass the cold-blooded 
craft of his application of it. He saw that 
an opportunity was given them of at 
once getting rid of an awkward factor in 
their community, a person dangerous to 
their influence, and of currying favour 
with Rome, by putting to death one who 
was claiming to be king of the Jews. 
“Why!” he says, “' ἆο you not see that 


804 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ Kt. 


ἀποθάνῃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ aod, καὶ ph ὅλον τὸ ἔθνος ἀπόληται.᾽ 51. 


Τοῦτο δὲ ad’ ἑαυτοῦ οὐκ εἶπεν, ἀλλὰ ἀρχιερεὺς Gv τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ 


r Not μὴ 
μονο Vv. 


See Acts 


xxi.13. 2τέκνα τοῦ Θεοῦ τὰ "διεσκορπισµένα *ouvaydyy “eis ἕν. 


Cor. viii. 


ἐκείνου, προεφήτευσεν 1 ὅτι ἔμελλεν  ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀποθνήσκειν ὑπὲρ 
τοῦ ἔθνους, 52. καὶ " οὐχ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἔθνους µόνον, GAN’ ἵνα καὶ τὰ 


52. ἀπ' 


, lol 
το. Bur- ἐκείνης οὖν τῆς ἡμέρας συνεβουλεύσαντο ὃ iva ἀποκτείνωσιν αὐτόν. 


ton, 481. 
5 Mt. xxvi. 


> lol ! , - 
54. Ιησοῦς οὖν οὐκ ἔτι παρρησίᾳ  περιεπάτει ἐν τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις, 


tie Ivi8. ἀλλὰ ἀπῆλθεν ἐκεῖθεν eis τὴν χώραν " ἐγγὺς τῆς ἐρήμου, els ᾿Εφραϊμ 


U xvii. 23. 
ν vii. I. 
w ver. 18. 


λεγομένην πόλιν, κἀκεῖ διέτριβε΄ μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. 


55. ἦν 


‘A A > , 
x Acts xxi. δὲ ἐγγὺς τὸ πάσχα τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων - καὶ ἀνέβησαν πολλοὶ εἰς Ἱερο- 


24; xxiv. 
18. 


\emrpopytevoev in NBDLX 33. 


σόλυµα ἐκ τῆς χώρας πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα, ἵνα *dyviowow ἑαυτούς. 


The usage is given in Winer, p. 84. 


Σηµελλεν in ABDL 1, 33. See Winer, p. 82. 


5 εβουλενυσαντο in NBD 13, 69. 


this man with His eclat and popular 
following, instead of endangering us and 
bringing suspicion on our loyalty, is 
exactly the person we may use to exhibit 
our fidelity to the empire? Sacrifice 
Jesus, and you will not only rid your- 
selves of a troublesome person, but will 
show a watchful zeal for the supremacy 
of Rome, which will ingratiate you with 
the imperial authorities.”—Ver. 51. 
Τοῦτο δὲ ad’ ἑαυτοῦ οὐκ εἶπεν... 
προεφήτευσεν. ah’ ἑαυτοῦ, ‘at his own 
instigation,” is contrasted with ‘at the 
instigation of God” implied in ἐπρο- 
φήτευσεν [Kypke gives interesting 
examples of the use of ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ in 
classical writers]. ‘‘ None but a Jew 
would be likely to know of the old Jewish 
belief that the high priest by means of 
the Urim and Thummim was the mouth- 
piece of the Divine oracle.” Plummer. 
Calvin calls him “ bilingual,” and com- 
pares his unconscious service to that of 
Balaam. John sees that this unscrupulous 
diplomatist, who supposed that he was 
moving Jesus and the council and the 
Romans as so many pieces in his own 
game, was himself used as God’s mouth- 
piece to predict the event which brought 
to a close his own and all other priest- 
hood. In the irony of events he uncon- 
sciously used his high-priestly office to 
lead forward that one sacrifice which 
was for ever to take away sin and so 
make all further priestly office super- 
fluous. He prophesied ‘“ that Jesus was 
to die for the nation, and not for the 
nation only, but that also the children of 
God who were scattered in various places 
should be gathered into one”. ὅτι is 


4εμεινεν in ΝΒΙ,; cp. iii. 22. 


rendered ‘‘because” by Weiss and 
others. Jesus was to die ὑπὲρ τὸ ἔθνος 
although not in Caiaphas’ sense; and 
His death had the wider object of bring- 
ing into one whole, of truer solidarity 
than the nation, all God’s children wher- 
ever at present scattered. Cf. x. 16, Eph. 
ii. 14. The expression τὰ τέκνα τοῦ Θεοῦ 
is used proleptically of the Gentiles who 
were destined to become God’s children, 
So Euthymius. For the phrase συνάγειν 
els €v Meyer refers to Plato, Phileb., 378, 
C, and Eurip., Ovestes, 1640.—Ver. 53. 
This utterance of Caiaphas brought 
sudden light to the members of the 
Sanhedrim, and so influenced their per- 
plexed mind that ἀπ᾿ ἐκείνης ἡμέρας 
συνεβουλεύσαντο ἵνα ἀποκτείνωσιν 
αὐτόν. This was the crisis: what 
hitherto they had desired (v. 16, 18, vii. 
32, X. 39) they now determined in council. 
—Ver. 54. Jesus accordingly, ᾿Ιησοῦς 
οὖν, not to precipitate matters, οὐκ ἔτι 
... avtov, “no longer went about 
openly among the Jews, but departed 
thence (i.e., from Bethany or Jerusalem 
and its neighbourhood) to the country 
near the desert (χώραν in contrast to the 
city; the particular part being the 
wilderness of Bethaven, a few miles 
north-east of Jerusalem) to a city called 
Ephraim (now Et-Taiyibeh, anciently 
Ophrah, see Smith’s Hist. Geog., 256, 
352; ‘perched on a _ conspicuous 
eminence and with an extensive view, 
thirteen miles north of Jerusalem,’ 
Henderson’s Palestine, p. 161), and there 
He spent some time with His disciples”. 

Vv. 55-57. Approach of the Passover. 
—Ver. 55. fv δὲ ἑαντούς. ‘ Now 


51—57. XII. 1—3. 


EYATTEAION 


805 


29 7% 9 ας 3 ~ κ 2 3 , ae ~ 
56. ἐζήτουν οὖν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἔλεγον pet ἀλλήλων ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ 


ἑστηκότες, “ Ti 
57. Δεδώκεισαν 


δοκεῖ ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐ μὴ ἔλθῃ eis τὴν ἑορτήν; 
δὲ καὶ ot ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ of Φαρισαῖοι ἐντολὴν,ὶ 


an A , 
ἵνα ἐάν τις yv@ ποῦ ἐστι, μηνύσῃ, ὅπως πιάσωσιν αὐτόν. 


XII. 1. Ὁ ΟΥΝ ᾿Ιησοῦς "πρὸ ἐξ ἡμερῶν τοῦ πάσχα ᾖλθεν εἷς α Απιος |. τ. 


bs 2 
Βηθανίαν, ὅπου ἦν Λάζαρος 6 τεθνηκὼς,' ὃν Άγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν. 36. 
2. Ὁ ἐποίησαν οὖν αὐτῷ δεῖπνον ἐκεῖ, καὶ ἡ Μάρθα διηκόνει" 


Λάζαρος ets ἦν τῶν συνανακειµένων § 


Μας. χν. 


ὁ δὲ ὃ Dan. v. 1. 
Mk. vi. 21. 


7A ε ? [ή 
αὐτῷ. 3. H οὐν Μαρία 


λαβοῦσα "λίτραν µύρου νάρδου πιστικῆς πολυτίµου, “ἤλειψε τοὺς c xix. 39. 
A fol > a aA A 1. 2. 
πόδας τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, καὶ " ἐξέμαξε ταῖς θριξὶν αὐτῆς τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ - 


* evroAny in ADL, it. vulg., etc. ; εντολας in ΔΝ Β 1. 


29 τεθνηκως omitted by Ti.W.H.R. with SBLX. T.R.in ADIFA. The words 
have some appearance of a gloss for greater perspicuity, 


3 ανακειµενων συν in SABDILN. 


the Passover of the Jews was at hand, 
and many went up to Jerusalem out of 
the country before the Passover to purify 
themselves.” Cf. xviii. 28, Num. ix. το, 
2 Chron, xxx. 17. Some purifications 
required a week, others consisted only 
of shaving the head and washing the 
clothes. See Lightfoot im loc.—Ver. 56. 
ἐζήτουν . . . €optyv; Jesus was one 
main topic of conversation among those 
who stood about in groups in the Temple 
when their purifications had been got 
through; and the chief point discussed 
was whether He would appear at this 
feast. Cf. vii. 10-13.—Ver. 57. There 
was room for difference of opinion, for 
Δεδώκεισαν . . . αὐτόν, ‘the Sanhedrim 
had issued instructions that if any knew 
where He was he should intimate this, 
that they might arrest Him”. 

CHAPTER XII.—-Vv, 1-11. Fesus em- 
balmed in the love of His intimates.— 
Ver. 1. ‘O οὖν ᾿Ιησοῦς . . . Βηθανίαγ. 
οὖν takes us back to xi. 55; the Passover 
being at hand, Jesus therefore came to 
Bethany.—mpo @& ἡμερῶν τοῦ πάσχα, 
not, as Vulgate, “' ante sex dies Paschae,”’ 
but with Beza “‘sex ante Pascha diebus ”. 
So Amos i. I, πρὸ δύο ἐτῶν τοῦ σεισμοῦ. 
Josephus, Antig., xv. 14, πρὸ μιᾶς 
ἡμέρας τῆς ἑορτῆς. Other examples in 
Kypke ; cf. x. 18, xxi. 8, and see Viereck’s 
Sermo Graecus, p. 81. Six days before 
the Passover probably means the Sabbath 
before His death. According to John 
Jesus died on Friday, and six days before 
that would be a Sabbath. But it is 
difficult to ascertain with exactness what 
day is intended. Bethany is now de- 
scribed as the place ὅπου ἦν Λάζαρος ὅ 


τεθνηκώς. This description is given to 
explain what follows.—Ver. 2. ἐποίησαν 
. ++ αὐτῷ. ἐποίησαν is the indefinite 
plural: ‘‘they made Him” a supper ; 
δεῖπνον, originally any meal, came to be 
used invariably of the evening meal.— 
καὶ ἡ Μάρθα διηκόνει, ''απά Martha 
waited at {ἰαῦία, which was Πες 
peculiar province (Lk. x. 40).—o δὲ 
Λάζαρος . . . αὐτῷ. This is mentioned, 
not to show that Lazarus was still alive 
and well, but because the feast was not 
in his house but in that of Simon the 
leper (Mk. xiv. 3, Mt. xxvi. 6). That 
this was the same feast as that mentioned 
by the Synoptists is apparent; the only 
discrepancy ofany consequence being that 
the Synoptists seem to place the feast only 
two days before the Passover. But they 
introduce the feast parenthetically to 
present the immediate motive of Judas’ 
action, and accordingly disregard strict 
chronology.—Ver. 3. Ἡ οὖν Μαρία... 
The third member of the Bethany family 
appears also in character, \aBotea λίτραν 
µύρου νάρδου πιστικῆς πολυτίμον. 
λίτρα (Lat. libra), the unit of weight 
in the Roman empire, slightly over 
eleven ounces avoirdupois. μύρον (from 
μύρω, to trickle, or from µύρρα, myrrh, 
the juice of the Arabian myrtle) is any 
unguent, more costly and luxurious than 
the ordinary ἔλαιον. Cf. Lk. vii. 46, 
and Trench, Synonyms. νάρδος, “the 
head or spike of a fragrant East Indian 
plant belonging to the genus Valeriana, 
which yields a juice of delicious odour 
which the ancients used in the preparation 
of a most precious ointment”. Thayer. 
πιστικῆς iS sometimes derived from 


δοό 


e With ex ἡ δὲ οἰκία ' ἐπληρώθη ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς τοῦ µύρου. 


here only. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XII 


4. λέγει οὖν εἷς ἐκ 


~ a , 
τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, ᾿Ιούδας Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτης, ὅ µέλλων αὐτὸν 


ΕΜΙ. αἰν.». παραδιδόναι, 5. “'Διατί τοῦτο τὸ μύρον οὐκ ἐπράθη τριακοσίων 


g X. 13. 
h xiii. 29. 
2 Chron. 


δηναρίων, καὶ ἐδόθη πτωχοῖς; 


6. Εἶπε δὲ τοῦτο, οὐχ ὅτι © περὶ 


cxxiv πο. τῶν πτωχῶν © ἔμελεν αὐτῷ, GAN’ ὅτι κλέπτης ἦν, καὶ τὸ " γλωσσόκοµον 


πίστις, and rendered “ genuine,” γνήσιος, 
δόκιµος. Thus Euthymius, ἀκράτου καὶ 
καταπεπιστενυµένης Ets καθαρότητα, UN- 
adulterated and guaranteed pure. But 
πιστός is the common form; κ. 
Θηρικλέους πιστὸν τέκνον, Theopomp. 
in Com. Frag. 
dicates the name of the place where the 
nard was obtained. Thus Augustine: 
“Quod ait ‘pistici,’ locum aliquem 
credere debemus, unde hoc erat un- 
guentum pretiosum”. Similarly some 
modern scholars derive it from Opis (sc. 
Opistike), a Babylonian town. In the 
Classical Review (July, 1890) Mr. Bennett 
suggests that it should be written 
πιστακῆς, and that it refers to the 
Pistacia Terebinthus, which grows in 
Cyprus, Chios, and Palestine, and yields 
a turpentine in such _ inconsiderable 
quantities as to be very costly. The 
word is most fully discussed by Fritzsche 
on Mk. xiv. 3, who argues at great length 
and with much learning for the meaning 
“drinkable”. He quotes Athenaeus in 
proof that some ointments were drunk, 
mixed with wine. πιστός is the word 
commonly used for “potable,” as in 
Aesch., Prom. Vinct., 480, where 
Prometheus says man had no defence 
against disease οὔτε βρώσιμον, οὐ 
χριστὸν, οὔτε πιστόν. And Fritzsche 
holds that while πιστός means “ qui 
bibi potest,” πιστικό means “ qui 
facile bibi potest”. The weight and 
nature of the ointment are specified to 
give force to the added πολυτίµον ; see 
νετ. 5.--ἤλειψε τοὺς πόδας τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, 
Mt. and Mk. say “ the head,” which was 
the more natural but less significant, and 
in the circumstances less convenient, 
mode of disposing of the ointment.— 
κα. ἐξέμαξε . . . αὐτοῦ, ‘‘and wiped 
His feet with her hair”. Holtzmann 
thinks this an infelicitous combination 
of Mk. xiv. 3 and Lk. vii. 38 ; infelicitous 
b cause the anointing of the feet which 
was appropriate in the humbled penitent 
was not so in Mary’s case; and the dry- 
ig with her hair which was suitable 
where tears had fallen was unsuitable 
where anointing had taken place, for 
the unguent should have been allowed 
toremain. This, however, is infelicitous 


Some suppose it in-. 


criticism. In Aristoph., Wasps, 607, the 
daughter anoints her father’s feet: ἡ 
θυγάτηρ ... τὼ πόδ᾽ ἀλείφῃ; and if, 
as Fritzsche supposes, the ointment was 
liquid, there is nothing inappropriate but 
the reverse in the wiping with the hair. 
—7 δὲ οἰκία ἐπληρώθη ἐκ τῆς ὀσμῆς τοῦ 
υροῦ, at once attracting attention and 
etraying the costliness of the offering. 
—Ver. 4. Hence the οὖν in ver. 4, 
λέγει οὖν εἷς . . . πτωχοῖς; “one” of 
His disciples. Matthew (xxvi. 8) leaves 
all the disciples under the reproach, 
which John transfers to Judas alone. On 
the designation of Judas see vi. 71. 
Westcott, however, with a harmonising 
tendency, says “' Judas expressed what 
others felt’’. But this is contradicted 
by the motive which John ascribes to 
Judas, ver. ϐ6.-- Διατί . . . δηναρίων. 
Three hundred denarii would equal a 
day labourer’s wage for one year.—Ver. 
6. Εἶπε δὲ τοῦτο . . . ἐβάσταζεν. ‘ This 
he said, not because he cared for the 
poor, but because he was a thief.” 
Before John could make this accusation, 
he must have kad proof; how or when 
we do not know. But the next clauses, 
being in the imperfect, imply that his 
pilfering was habitual.—ré γλωσσόκομον, 
‘*the bag,” better ‘‘ the purse,”’ or “‘ box,”’ 
“loculos habens,” Vulgate. In the form 
γλωσσοκομεῖον (which Phrynichus de- 
clares to be the proper form, see Ruther- 
ford, p. 181) the word occurs in the 
Bacchae of Lysippus to denote a case for 
holding the tongue pieces of musical 
instruments (γλῶσσαι, κοµέω). Hence 
it came to be used of any box, chest, or 
coffer. In Sept. it occurs in 2 Sam. vi. 
11 (Codd. A, 247, and Aquila) of the Ark 
of the Lord; in 2 Chron. xxiv. 8 of the 
chest for collections in the Temple. This 
chest had a hole in the lid, and the people 
cast in (ἐνέβαλον, cf. τὰ βαλλόμενα here) 
their contributions. (Further see Hatch, 
Essays in Biblical Greek, p. 42, and 
Field’s Otium Norvic., 68.)—7a βαλλό- 
µενα ἐβάσταζεν. The R.V. renders 
‘‘took away what was put therein”, 
Certainly, to say that Judas had the 
money box and carried what was put 
therein is flat and tautological. And that 
ἐβάσταζεν can bear the sense of “ take 


4——I1. 


εἶχε, καὶ] τὰ βαλλόμενα * ἐβάσταζεν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


δο7 


7. εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ! ας. 15. 


{2 Ἂφες αὐτήν: εἰς τὴν ἡμέραν τοῦ ἐνταφιασμοῦ µου τετήρηκεν”/χ.48. Μι 


αὐτό. 
, mm ” 
πάντοτε ἔχετε. 


ϱ. Ἔγνω οὖν ὄχλος ὃ πολὺς ἐκ τῶν 


dXVil. 49. 


8. τοὺς πτωχοὺς γὰρ πάντοτε ἔχετε pel” * ἑαυτῶν, ἐμὲ δὲ οὐ k See Sim- 


cox,Gram. 
Ρ. 63. 


Ιουδαίων ὅτι ἐκεῖ | ἐστι: καὶ ! ἶ. 4ο. 


ἦλθον ™ οὐ διὰ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν µόνον, GAN ἵνα καὶ τὸν Λάζαρον ἴδωσιν, ὃν πι xi. 52. 


ἔγειρεν ἐκ νεκρῶν. 


Λάζαρον ἀποκτείνωσιν * 11. ὅτι πολλοὶ δι αὐτὸν ὑπῆγον τῶν Ιουδαίων, 


‘ ιά 3 . 3 a 
καὶ ἐπιστευον εἰς τὸν Ιησοῦν. 


1 For ειχε, και SBD 33 read εχων. 


10 ἐβουλεύσαντο δὲ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς, "ἵνα καὶ τὸν n Burton, 


405. 


2 Τ.Ε. in AIPA; ινα (inserted after αυτην) . . . Ττηρηση in WBDKL 33, it. vulg. 
Aegypt. Arm. Goth. So Ti.W H.R. T.R. gives the better meaning ; the difficulty 


invited alteration, 


3 SQB*L insert Φ; adopted by Ti.W.H.R. 


away ”’ or “ make away with ” is beyond 
dispute. The passages cited by Kypke 
and Field (Soph., Philoct., 1105; 
Josephus, Antzq., ix. 2; Diog., Laert., 
iv. 59) prove that it was used of “ taking 
away by stealth” or “ purloining”; and 
cf. the use of dépew in Eur., Hec., 792. 
Liddell and Scott aptly compare the 
Scots use of “lift” in “ cattle-lifting ”’ 
and so forth. Mary found a prompt 
champion in Jesus: “Ades αὐτήν, ‘let 
her alone”, Κ.Υ. renders: “' Suffer 
her to keep it against the day of my 
burying”; and in margin: ‘Let her 
alone: it was that she might keep it”. 
This Westcott understands as meaning 
‘‘ suffer her to keep it—this was her pur- 
pose, and let it not be disturbed—for 
my preparation for burial”. But, how- 
ever we understand it, there is a palpable 
absurdity in our Lord’s requesting that 
which had already been poured out to be 
kept for His burial. On the other hand, 
if the reading of A adopted in T.R. 
τετήρηκεν was the original reading, it 
might naturally be altered owing to the 
scribe’s inability to perceive how this 
day of anointing could be called the 
day of His ἐνταφιασμός, and how the 
ointment could be said to have been kept 
till that day (cf. Field, Otium Norvic., p. 
69). τετήρηκεν is opposed to ἐπράθη 
(νετ. 5); she had not sold, but kept it; 
and she kept it, perhaps unconsciously, 
against the day of His entombment or 
preparation for burial. ἐνταφιασμός is 
rather the preparation for burial than the 
actual interment. Vide especially Kypke 
on Mk. xiv. 8. This anointing was His 
true embalming. Mary’s love was re- 
presentative of the love of His intimate 


friends in whose loyal affection He was 
embalmed so that His memory could 
never die. The significance of the in- 
cident lies precisely in this, that Mary’s 
action is the evidence that Jesus may 
now die, having already found an en- 
during place for Himself in the regard of 
His friends. It is possible that Mary 
herself, enlightened by her love, had a 
presentiment that this was the last tribute 
she could ever pay her Lord.—Ver. 8. 
As for Judas’ suggestion, He disposes of 
it, τοὺς πτωχοὺς . . . ἔχετε. “ For the 
poor ye have always with you,” and 
every day, therefore, have opportunities 
of considering and relieving them, ‘but 
me ye have not always,” and therefore 
this apparent extravagance, being occa- 
sional only, finds justification. Occasional 
lavish expenditure on friends is justified 
by continuous expenditure on the real 
necessities of the poor.—Ver. 9. Ἔγνω 
οὖν ὄχλος πολὺς ἐκ τῶν Ιουδαίων. “A 
great crowd of the Jews”; ὄχλος is 
generally used by John in contrast to 
the Jewish authorities, and R.V. renders 
“the common people”. When they 
knew that Jesus was in Bethany they 
went out from Jerusalem to see Him and 
Lazarus: an easily accessible and un- 
doubted sensation. The result was 
that many of the Jews, on identifying 
Lazarus, believed on Jesus. Accordingly 
ἐβουλεύσαντο . . . ἀποκτείνωσιν. The 
high priests, being Sadducees, could not 
bear to have in their neighbourhood a 
living witness to the possibility of living 
through death, and a powerful testimony 
to the power of Jesus. And so, to prevent 
the people believing on Jesus, they made 
the monstrous proposal to put Lazarus, 


808 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XI. 


12. Ti ἐπαύριον ὄχλος πολὺς 6 ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν, ἀκού- 


σαντες ὅτι ἔρχεται 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς eis “ἹἹεροσόλυμα, 13. ἔλαβον τὰ 


ata τῶν Φοινίκων, καὶ ἐξῆλθον eis ὑπάντησιν αὐτῷ, καὶ ἔκραζον,. 
η ντη ο ρ ? 


ο Ps. xviii.  Ὡσαννά" εὐλογημένος 6 ἐρχόμενος ἐν ὀνόματι Κυρίου, 6 βασιλεὺς 


25, 26. a? , ” 
τοῦ Ισραήλ. 


14. Εὐρὼν δὲ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ὀνάριον, ἐκάθισεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸ, 


p Zech. ix. καθώς ἐστι " γεγραμµένον, 15. ‘Mt Φφοβοῦ, θύγατερ Σιών; ἰδοὺ, 6 


9. 


q xX. 40. 
r Vii. 39 reff. 


, ” , > ‘ aA ” 5] 
βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεται, καθήµενος ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου. 


16. ταῦτα δὲ 


οὐκ ἔγνωσαν of μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ Ἱτὸ πρῶτον: GAN’ ὅτε * ἐδοξάσθη ὁ 
᾽ησοῦς, τότε ἐμνήσθησαν ὅτι ταῦτα ἦν ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ νεγραμµένα, καὶ 


~ > ιό earn > , αν. ος 5 con > > ae 
ταυτα εποιησαν αυτῷ. I 7. εµαρτυρει ουνο ὄχλος ο ων μετ αυτου, οτε 


6 ver. I. 
1 expavyalow in BDL, 


an entirely innocent person, to death. 
In Mary John has shown faith and 
devotion at their ripest: in this devilish 
proposal the obduracy of unbelief is 
exhibited in its extreme form. 

Vv. 12-19. The triumphal entry into 
F erusalem.—Ver. 12. Tq ἐπαύριον, {.ε., 
probably on Sunday, called Palm 
Sunday in the Church year [κυριακὴ 
τῶν βαΐων, dominica palmarum, or, in 
ramis palmarum]. Four days before 
the Passover the Jews were required to 
select a lamb for the feast.—6yAos πολὺς 
ὃ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὴν ἑορτὴν, and therefore not 
Jerusalemites, ἀκούσαντες . . . ἔλαβον 
τὰ Bata τῶν Φοινίκων “took the fronds 
of the palms,” ¢ke palms which every 
one knew as growing on the road from 
Jerusalem to Bethany. The Bate (from 
Coptic Bat) were recognised as symbols of 
victory or rejoicing. Cf. 1 Macc. xiii. 51, 
μετὰ αἰνέσεως καὶ Batwv. So Pausanias 
(viii. 48), ἐς δὲ τὴν δεξιάν ἐστι καὶ 
πανταχοῦ τῷ νικῶντι ἐστιθέμενος φοινῖξ. 
Cf. Hor., Odes, I. i. 5, '"ραίπια nobilis”. 
This demonstration was evidently the 
result of recent events, especially, as 
stated in ver. 18, of the raising of 
Lazarus.—Ver. 13. els ὑπάντησιν αὐτῷ. 
‘“‘ Substantives derived from verbs which 
govern a dative are sometimes followed 
by this case, instead of the ordinary 
genitive.’ Winer, 264. They left no 
doubt as to the meaning of the demon- 
stration, ἔκραζον Ὡσαννά . . . Ισραήλ. 
These words are taken from Ps. cxviii. 
25, 26; written as the Dedication Psalm 
of the second Temple. Ὡσαννά is the 


Hebrew S83 Twit, “save now”’. 
Tr v Y 


The words were originally addressed to 
approaching worshippers; here they 
designate the Messiah; but that no 


bY , > , > ο] , Se tyes > a 
τὸν Λάζαρον ἐφώνησεν ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου, καὶ * Ίγειρεν αύτον EK νεκρῶν ' 


mistake might be possible as to the 
present reference, the people add, 6 
βασιλεὺς τοῦ ᾿Ισραήλ.---Ψετ. 14. Jesus 
being thus hailed as king by the people, 
εὑρὼν ὀνάριον . . . dvov, {.έ, He 
accepted the homage and declared Him- 
self king by adopting the prediction ot 
Zech. ix. 9 (ver. 15), ‘‘ Rejoice greatly, 
O daughter of Zion (χαῖρε σφόδρα instead 
of py Φφοβοῦ), proclaim it aloud, O 
daughter of Jerusalem; behold the king 
is coming to thee, just and saving, He is 
meek and riding on a beast of burden 
and a young foal”. The significance of 
the “ass” is shown in what follows: 
‘‘He shall destroy the chariots out of 
Ephraim and the horse out of Jerusalem, 
and the war-bow shall be utterly de- 
“stroyed: and there shall be abundance 
and peace”. By riding into Jerusalem 
as king but on an ass, not on a war horse, - 
He continued to claim to be Messiah 
but ruling by spiritual force for spiritual 
ends.—Ver: 16. The significance of 
His action was not at that time per- 
ceived by the disciples: ταῦτα... 
πρῶτον, but when Jesus had been 
glorified, then they remembered that 
this had been written concerning Him 
and that the people had made this 
demonstration in His favour, καὶ ταῦτα 
ἐποίησαν αὐτῷ.---Ψετ. 17. In verses 17 
and 18 this demonstration is carefully 
traced to the raising of Lazarus: ‘the 
crowd which was with Him when He 
summoned Lazarus from the tomb, and 
raised him from the dead, testified [that 
He had done so], and on this account 
the crowd went out to meet Him, because 
they had heard this testimony”. The 
demonstration is thus rendered intel- 
ligible. In the Synoptists it is not 
accounted for. He is represented as 


12-25. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


δοο 


18. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ὑπήντησεν αὐτῷ 6 ὄχλος, ὅτι ἤκουσε τοῦτο αὐτὸν πε- 


a kd a , . 
ποιηκέναι τὸ σημεῖον. IQ. οἱ οὖν Φαρισαῖοι εἶπον πρὸς ἑαυτούς, ““"Θεω- t iv το. 


ρεῖτε ὅτι οὐκ ὠφελεῖτε οὐδέν; ἴδε 6 κόσμος " ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ ἀπῆλθεν.” u Mk. i. 20, 


20. Ἠσαν δέ τινες Ἕλληνες ἐκ τῶν ” ἀναβαινόντων, ἵνα προσκυνή- ν Zech. xiv. 


σωσιν ἐν τῇ opty: 21. οὗτοι οὖν προσῆλθον Φιλίππῳ τῷ ἀπὸ 


Βηθσαϊδὰ τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ ἠρώτων αὐτὸν λέγοντες, “Κύριε, 


θέλομεν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἰδεῖν. 


᾽Ανδρέᾳ: καὶ πάλιν ᾿Ανδρέας καὶ Φίλιππος λέγουσι τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 


23. 6 δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπεκρίνατο 


"iva " δοξασθῇ 6 υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. 


ἐὰν μὴ ὁ 7 κόκκος τοῦ σίτου πεσὼν εἰς τὴν γῆν ἀποθάνῃ, αὐτὸς µόνος 
µένει' ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ, πολὺν καρπὸν Φέρει. 
ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἀπολέσει 3 αὐτήν" καὶ 6 μισῶν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἐν 


| αποκρινεται in NBLX 33. 


entering the city with the pilgrims, and 
no reason is assigned for the sudden 
outburst of feeling. See Mk. xi. 1, etc. 
—Ver.19. The effect on the Pharisees 
is, as usual, recorded by John; they said 
one to another, Θεωρεῖτε . . . aw7dOev. 
“Do you see how helpless you are? 
The world is gone after Him.’’ For 6 
κόσμος see 4 Macc. xvii. 14 and French 
‘tout le monde”. For ὀπίσω αὐτοῦ see 
2 Sam. xv. 13. 

Vv. 20-36. The Greeks inquire for 
Fesus.—Ver. 20. "Hoav δέ τινες Ἕλλη- 
ves ἐκ τῶν ἀναβαινόντων . . . Among 
the crowds who came up to worship in 
the feast were some Greeks; not Hellen- 
ists, but men of pure Greek extraction; 
proselytes belonging to Decapolis, Gali- 
lee, or some country more remote.—Ver. 
21. οὗτοι οὖν προσῆλθον Φιλίππῳ, 
‘these came therefore to Philip,” pro- 
bably because they had learned that he 
knew their language; or, as indicated in 
the addition, τῷ . . . Γαλιλαίας, because 
they had seen him in Galilee. Their re- 
quest to Philip was, Κύριε . . . ἰδεῖν. 
‘Sir, we would see Jesus’’; not merely 
to see Him, for this they could have 
managed without the aid of a disciple, 
but to interview the person regarding 
whom they found all Jerusalem ringing. 
Philip does not take the sole responsi- 
bility of this introduction on himself, 
because, since they, as Apostles, had been 
forbidden to go to the Gentiles, Philip 
might suppose that Jesus would decline 
to see these Greeks. He therefore tells 
Andrew (cf. i. 44; vi. 7, 8), his fellow- 
townsman, and together they venture to 
make known to Jesus the request.—Ver. 


16. 
23. Ἔρχεται Φίλιππος καὶ λέγει τῷ 
1 αὐτοῖς λέγων, ' Ἐλήλυθε ἡ ὥῶὣα 
A Cia Wale ας. 
24. ἀμὴν ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 25, etc. 
See Bur- 
ton, 216. 
ε .. X Vers τθ 
25. & φιλῶν τὴν y Mt. xiii. 
31. 1 Cor. 
XV. 37. 


* T.R. in ΑΡΧ, it. vulg. ; απολλνει in BL 33. 


23. ὃ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἀπεκρίνατο αὐτοῖς, 
‘““Jesus answers them,” i.¢., the two 
disciples, but probably the Greeks had 
come with them and heard the words: 
᾿Ελήλυθεν 4 ὧρα ἵνα δοξασθῇ ὃ vids τοῦ 
ἀνθρώπου. ἔρχεται dpa is followed by 
ὅτε in iv. 21, ν. 25, and by ἐν ᾗ in v. 28. 
Burton calls it ‘the complementary ” use 
of ἵνα. ‘‘ The hour iscome that the Son of 
Man should be glorified.” Directly the 
glorification of the Son of Man or Messiah 
consisted in His being acknowledged by 
men; and this earnest inquiry of the 
Greeks was the evidence that His claims 
were being considered beyond the circle 
of the Jewish people.— Ver. 24. But second 
to the thought of His enthronement as 
Messiah comes the thought of the way 
toit: ἀμὴν . . . Φέρει, “except the grain 
of wheat fall into the ground and die, 
it abides itself alone; but if it die, it bears 
much fruit”. The seed reaches its full 
and proper development by being sown 
in the ground and dying. It is this pro- 
cess, apparently destructive, and which 
calls for faith in the sower, which disen- 
gages the forces of the seed and allows 
it to multiply itself. To preserve the 
seed from this burial in the ground is tc 
prevent it from attaining its best develop 

ment and use. The law of the seed is 
the law of human life.—Ver. 25. @ 
φιλῶν . . . αὐτήν, he that so prizes his 
life [φιλοψνχεῖν is used in the classics of 
excessive love of life. See Kypke] that 
he cannot let it out of his own hand or 
give it up to good ends checks its growth. 
and it withers and dies: whereas he whe 
treats his life as if he hated it, giving i 
up freely to the needs of other men, shah 


810 


a ΄ > 9 sf 
τῷ κόσµῳ τούτῳ, els ζωὴν αἰώνιον φυλάξει αὐτήν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΧΙΙ. 


26. ἐὰν ἐμοὶ 


A > A , A - 
zMt xxv. "διακονῇ τις, ἐμοὶ ἀκολουθείτω" καὶ ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ, ἐκεῖ καὶ 6 


che 


πατήρ. 
a Gen. xli. 8. 


b Heb. v. 7. pe > ἐκ τῆς ὥρας ταύτης. 
Jas. v. 20. 28 


λελάληκεν. 


keep it to life eternal. φυλάξει, ‘shall 
guard,”’ suggested by the apparent lack 
of guarding and preserving in the μισῶν. 
He has not guarded it from the claims 
made upon it in this world, but thus has 
guarded it to life eternal—Ver. 26. This 
law is applicable not to Jesus only, but 
toall: ἐαν ἐμοὶ . . . ἀκολουθείτω. The 
badge of His servants is that they adopt 
His method and aim and truly follow 
Him. The result of following necessarily 
is that ὅπου . . . ἔσται, “where I am, 
as my eternal state, there shall also my 
servant be”. διάκονος is especially a 
servant in attendance, at table or else- 
where; a δοῦλος may serve at a distance: 
hence the appropriateness of διάκονος 
in this verse. The office of διάκονος 
may seem a humble and painful one, but 
ἐάν τις [omit καὶ] . . . πατήρ, to be 
valued or honoured by the Father crowns 
life—Ver. 27. The distinct and near 
prospect of the cross as the path to 
glory which these Greeks called up in 
His thoughts prompts Him to exclaim: 
Niv ἡ ψυχή µου τετάρακται, “Νου is 
my soul troubled”. ψυχή is, as Weiss 
remarks, synonymous with πνεῦμα, see 
xiii. 21. A conflict of emotions disturbs 
His serenity. “' Concurrebat horror mor- 
tis et ardor obedientiae.” Bengel. καὶ 
τί εἴπω; ‘And what shallI say?” This 
clause certainly suggests that the next 
should also be interrogative, ‘‘ Shall I 
say, Father, save me from this hour? 
But for this cause (or, with this object) 
came I to this hour.” That is, if He 
should now pray to be delivered from 
death this would be to stultify all He had 
up to this time been doing; for without 
His death His life would be fruitless. 
He would still be a seed preserved and 
not sown.—Ver.28. Therefore He prays: 
Πάτερ δόξασόν σου τὸ ὄνομα. “' Father, 
glorify Thy name.” Complete that 


27. “Nov ἡ ψυχή µου "τετάρακται: καὶ τί εἴπω; 


3 ~ 
διάκονος 6 ἐμὸς ἔσται' καὶ ἐάν τις ἐμοὶ διακονῇ, τιμήσει αὐτὸν ὁ 


πάτερ, σῶσόν 


ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο ἦλθον εἰς τὴν ὥραν ταύτην. 
πάτερ, δόξασόν σου τὸ ὄνομα. ΄Ηλθεν οὖν φωνὴ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, 
“Kai ἐδόξασα, καὶ πάλιν δοξάσω.᾽' 


ἀκούσας έλεγε βροντὴν γεγονέναι. 


29. “O οὖν ὄχλος ὁ ἑστὼς καὶ 
ἄλλοι ἔλεγον, '΄ Άγγελος αὐτῷ 


30. ᾽Απεκρίθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν, “Od δι ἐμὲ αὕτη 
ἡ φΦωνὴ Ὑέγονεν, ἀλλὰ δι Spas. 


31. viv κρίσις ἐστὶ τοῦ κόσμου 


manifestation of Thy holiness and love 
which through me Thou art making; 
complete it even at the cost of my 
agony.—H)@ev οὖν φωνὴ . . . δοξάσω. 
‘““There came, therefore, a voice out of 
heaven: I have both glorified it and will 
again glorify it.” However Jesus might 
seem in the coming days to be tossed on 
the sea of human passions, the Father 
was steadily guiding all to the highest 
end. The assurance that His death 
would glorify God was, of course, that 
which nerved Jesus for its endurance. 
He was not throwing His life away.— 
Ver. 29. Ὁ οὖν ὄχλος . . . λελάληκεν. 
The mass of the people which was stand- 
ing by and heard the voice did not 
Tecognise it as a voice, but said it 
thundered. Others caught, if not the 
words, yet enough to perceive it was 
articulate speech, and said that an angel 
had spoken to Him.—Ver. 30. ᾿Απεκρίθη 
ὃ ᾿Ιησοῦς, Jesus, hearing these con- 
jectures, explained to them that not on 
His account but on theirs this voice had 
been uttered. It was of immense im- 
portance that the disciples, and the 
people generally, should understand that 
the sudden transition from the throne 
offered by the triumphal acclamation of 
the previous day to the cross, was not a 
defeat but a fulfilment of the Divine 
purpose. The voice furnished them 
against the coming trial.—Ver. 31. It 
was a trial not so much of Him as of 
the world: viv κρίσις ἐστὶ τοῦ κόσμον 
τούτου. In the events of the next few 
days the world was to be judged by its 
treatment of Jesus. Cf. ili. 18, v. 27. 
Calvin, adopting the fuller meaning given 
to the Hebrew word “judge,” thinks 
that the restoration of the world to its 
legitimate rule and order is signified. 
A fuller explanation folfows in the 
clauses, viv ὃ Gpxov... ἐμαντόν. 


26—40. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Sit 


τούτου viv *S ἄρχων τοῦ κόσμου τούτου ἐκβληθήσεται ἔξω: 32. ¢ xiv. 30; 


κἀγὼ ἐὰν 


4 ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας 


ο σι συ 
"ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. dit. 14; Vili. 


33. Τοῦτο δὲ ἔλεγε, *onpatvwy ποίῳ θανάτῳ ἤμελλεν ἀποθνήσκειν. ον, 


34. ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ ὁ ὄχλος, pias 5 ἠκούσαμω' cK τοῦ νόµου, ὅτι ὁ 


f xvill. 32; 
xxi. 19. 


Χριστὸς Ε µένει εἰς τὸν ai@va’ καὶ πῶς σὺ λέγεις, Ὅτι δεῖ ὑψωθῆναι po 35. 
8 


τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ; 


35. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ 


- 


τν. 1 ἐστι. ο ἕως 5 


Ἀκαταλάβῃ - 


τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ; 
᾿Ιησοῦς, “"Ert μικρὸν χρόνον τὸ φῶς ped” 


”» 


τὸ φῶς ἔχετε, ἵνα μὴ σκοτία ὑμᾶς 
καὶ ὁ περιπατῶν ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ οὐκ olde ποῦ ὑπάγει. h λα 


36. ἕως τὸ φῶς ἔχετε, πιστεύετε Eis τὸ φῶς, ἵνα | υἱοὶ bi a yévnode.” i r Thea 
V. 5. 


Ταῦτα ἐλάλησεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἀπελθὼν ) ἐκρύβη ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν. 


1 ev υμιν in ΝΒΡΚΕΙ.. 


3 For εως ABDKLN 33 read ως, translating ‘“‘ walk as ye have the light ”’. 


in ver. 36. 


Two rulers are represented here as con- 
tending for supremacy, the ruler who is 
spoken of as in possession and Jesus. 
The ruler in possession, Satan, shall be 
ejected from his dominion by the cross, 
but Jesus by the cross shall acquire an 
irresistibly attractive power. ‘Si quis 
roget, quomodo dejectus in morte Christi 
fuerit Satan, qui assidue bellare non 
desinit, respondeo ejectionem hanc non 
restringi ad exiguum aliquod tempus, 
sed describi insignem illum mortis 
Christi effectum qui quotidie apparet.” 
Calvin. The πάντας is a general ex- 
pression looking to the ultimate issue of 
the contention between the rival rulers. 
ἑλκύσω Hellenistic for Attic €hEw.—Ver. 
32. ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς is explained as 
indicating or hinting, σηµαίνων, ‘by 
what death He was to die,” {.ε., that He 
was to be raised on the cross. Cf. iii. 
14. It was the cross which was to 
become His throne and by which He was 
to draw men to Him as His subjects, In 
ὑψωθῶ therefore, although the direct re- 
ference is to His elevation on the cross, 
there is a sub-suggestion of being elevated 
to athrone. ''σηµαίνειν notat aliquid 
futurum vaticinando cum ambiguitate 
quadam atque obscuritate innuere.” 
Kypke. So Plutarch says of the Oracle, 
οὔτε λέγει οὔτε κρύπτει ἀλλὰ σηµαίνει. 
—Ver. 34. The crowd apparently un- 
derstood the allusion to His death, for 
they objected: Ἡμεῖς ἠκούσαμεν ... 
ἀνθρώπου ; ; “νε have heard out of the 
law,” i.e, out of Scripture (cf. x. 
34, xv. 25, and Schechter, Studies in 
Fudaism, p. 15: “under the word Torah 
were comprised not only the Law, but 


j Viii. 59. 


So 


εως is supported by Ν and several versions, and gives the better sense. 


also the contributions of later times 
expressing either the thoughts or the 
emotions of holy and sincere men’’), 
“that the Christ abides for ever”; this 
impression was derived from Ps. cx. 4, 
Is. ix. 7, Ezek. xxxvii. 25, Dan. vii. 14. 
A different belief was also current. Their 
belief regarding the Messiah seemed so 
to contradict His allusion to death that 
it occurred to them that after all ‘‘ the 
Son of Man” might not be identical 
with ‘‘the Messiah” as they had been 
supposing. So they ask, τίς ἐστιν οὗτος 
ὃ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου; This among other 
passages shows that the ‘‘Son of Μαη”) 
was a title suggestive of Messiahship, 
but not quite definite in its meaning ane 
not quite identical with “ Messiah”, 

Ver. 35. Εἶπεν οὖν ὃ ‘Ingots. In re- 
plying Jesus vouchsafes no direct solu- 
tion of their difficulty. It is as if He 
said: Do not entangle yourselves in 
sophistries. Do not seek such logical 
proofs of Messiahship. Allow the light 
of truth and righteousness to enter your 
conscience and your life. ‘‘ Yet a little 
while is the light with you.” ‘ Walk 


.while ye have the light, lest darkness 


overtake you’’ (cf. 1 Thess. v. 4), that 
is, lest Jesus, the light of the world, 
be withdrawn.—xat 6 περιπατῶν ... 
ὑπάγει, cf. xi. 10.—Ver. 36. In ver. 36 
it becomes evident that under τὸ φῶς 
He refers to Himself. He urges them 
to yield to that light in Hime which 
penetrates the conscience. Thus they 
will become υἱοὶ φωτός, see 1 Thess. v. 
5, ‘children of light,” not ‘of the 
Light’. The expression is the ordinary 
form used hy the Hebrews to indicate 


812 


k Cp. xx. 30. 
Mt. v. 16. 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΧΙΠ. 


37. Τοσαῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ σημεῖα πεποιηκότος Β ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, 


' 15. lili. 1. οὐκ ἐπίστευον εἰς αὐτόν: 38. ἵνα ὁ λόγος ] Ἡσαίου τοῦ προφήτου 


πληρωθῇ, ὃν etre, ΄ Κύριε, τίς ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; καὶ ὁ 


Βραχίων Κυρίου tive ἀπεκαλύφθη ;’ 


30. Διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἠδύναντο 


πιστεύειν, ὅτι πάλιν εἶπεν ‘Hoatas, 40. “Τετύφλωκεν αὐτῶν τοὺς 


ὀφθαλμοὺς, καὶ πεπώρωκεν } 


αὐτῶν τὴν καρδίαν, ἵνα μὴ ἴδωσι τοῖς 


- a ~ , - 
ὀφθαλμοῖς, καὶ νοήσωσι τῇ καρδίᾳ καὶ ἐπιστραφῶσι, καὶ ἰάσωμαι 


3 9 
αυτους. 


A ε 
41. Tatra εἶπεν Ἡσαΐας, ὅτε” εἶδε τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, καὶ 


πι Here Β κα a 

only. _ ἐλάλησε περὶ αὐτοῦ: 42. '' ὅμως ™pévror καὶ ἐκ τῶν " ἀρχόντων 
Nn iii. 1; Vii. 

48. πολλοὶ ἐπίστευσαν eis αὐτόν" ἀλλὰ διὰ τοὺς Φαρισαίους οὐχ ὡμολό- 


\ For πεπωρωκεν recent editors read επωρωσεν with ABKL 33; στραφωσιν with 
NBD* 33, although επιστραφωσι is well supported ; and ιασοµαι with SABDN. 


Σοτι in NRABL 33. 
“‘ because he saw the glory”’. 


close connection; see Mt. viii. 12, ix. 
15, Mk. iii, 17, Lk. xvi. 8, etc. To be 
vtot φωτός is to be such as find their 
truest life in the truth, recognising and 
delighting in all that Christ reveals. 
‘* These words Jesus spoke and departed 
and was hidden from them.” His warn- 
ing that the Light would not always be 
available for them was at once followed 
by its removal. Where He was hidden 
is not said. 

Vv. 37-43. In the verses which follow, 
37-43, Fohn accounts for the unbelief of 
the Fews. This fact that the very people 
who had been appointed to accept the 
Messiah had rejected Jesus needed ex- 
planation. This explanation is suitably 
given at the close of that part of the 
Gospel which has described His mani- 
festation.—Ver. 37. Τοσαῦτα . . . αὐτόν, 
The difficulty to be solved is first stated. 
‘Although He had done so many signs 
before them, yet they did not believe on 
Him.” A larger number of miracles is 
implied than is narrated, vii. 31, xi. 47, 
xxl. 25. The quality of the miracles is 
also alluded to once and again, iii. 2, ix. 32. 
They had not been done “in a corner,” 
but ἔμπροσθεν αὐτῶν, cf. ἐνώπιον xx. 30. 
Yet belief had not resulted. The cause 
of this unbelief was that the prediction 
of Is. liii. 1 had to be fulfilled. Certainly 
this mode of statement conveys the im- 
pression that it was not the future event 
which caused the prediction but the pre- 
diction which caused the event. The 
form of expression might in some cases 
be retained although the natural order 
was perceived. The purpose of God 
was always in the foreground of the 
Jewish mind. The prophecy of Isaiah 


The words of Isaiah were uttered not only “ when,” but 


was relevant; the “‘arm of the Lord” 
signifying the power manifested in the 
miracles, and τῇ ἀκοῇ referring to the 
teaching of Jesus. In the time of Jesus 
as in that of Isaiah the significance of 
Divine teaching and Divine action was 
hidden from the multitude.—Ver. 39. 
Διὰ τοῦτο seems to have a double 
reference, first to what precedes, second 
to the ὅτι following, cf. viii. 47.--οὐκ 
ἠδύναντο, ‘they were not able,’ irre- 
spective of will; their inability arose 
from the fulfilment in them of Isaiah’s 
words, vi. 10 (ver. 40), Τετύφλωκεν 
εκ. avtovs. τετύφλωκεν refers to the 
blinding of the organ for perceiving 
spiritual truth, ἐπώρωσεν (from πῶρος, a 
callus) to the hardening of the sensibility 
to religious and moral impressions. This 
process prevented them from seeing the 
significance of the miracles and under- 
standing with the heart the teaching of 
Jesus. By abuse of light, nature pro- 
duces callousness ; and what nature does 
God does.—Ver. 41. John’s view of 
prophecy is given in the words Tatra 

.. αὐτοῦ. “ The Targum renders the 
original words of Isaiah ‘I saw the 
Lord’ by ‘I saw the Lord’s glory’. 
St. John states the truth to which this 
expression points, and identifies the 
Divine Person seen by Isaiah with 
Christ.”’ Westcott. This involves that the 
Theophanies of the O.T. were mediated 
by the pre-existent Logos.—Ver. 42. 
Although unbelief was so commonly the 
result of Christ’s manifestation, ὅμως 
µέντοι, cf. Herodot., i. 189, “' neverthe- 
less, however, even of the rulers many 
believed on Him, but on account of the ~ 
Pharisees they did not confess Him 


97-96, 


your, ἵνα μὴ "ἀποσυνάγωγοι γένωνται. 
δόξαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων μᾶλλον Ρ ἤπερ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ. 
44. ᾿Ιησοῦς δὲ ἔκραξε καὶ εἶπεν, ““O πιστεύων eis ἐμὲ, οὗ πιστεύει 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


813 


43. ἠγάπησαν γὰρ τὴν ο ix. 22. 
Ρ2 Mac. xiv. 
42. 


eis ἐμὲ, GAN’ eis τὸν πέµψαντά pes 45. καὶ 16 θεωρῶν ἐμὲ, θεωρεῖ a xiv. 9 


τὸν πέµψαντά µε. 


, 3 8 ~ , ‘ , 
πιστεύων εἰς ἐμὲ, ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ μὴ petvy. 
ἀκούσῃ τῶν ῥημάτων καὶ μὴ πιστεύσῃ,! 

/ 
γὰρ ἦλθον ἵνα κρίνω τὸν κόσμον, GAN’ ἵνα σώσω τὸν κόσμον. 


46. ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα, ἵνα Tas ὁ 


47. καὶ ἐάν τις µου 
ἐγὼ οὐ κρίνω αὐτόν: * οὐ τς Πῖ, α2. 


48. ὁ 


' ἀθετῶν ἐμὲ καὶ μὴ λαμβάνων τὰ ῥήματά µου, ἔχει τὸν μβκώσι e Thess, 


αὐτόν: 6 ο. ὃν ἐλάλησα, ἐκεῖνος κρινεῖ αὐτὸν 


ἡμέρᾳ. 


t2 iv. Is. 


€v τῇ * ἐσχάτῃ 


49. ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐξ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐκ ahaha: GAN’ 6 πέµψας μεν 5 en 


πατὴρ, αὐτός pou ἐντολὴν ἔδωκε, τί εἴπω καὶ τί λαλήσω: 5ο. καὶ 


οἶδα ὅτι ἡ ἐντολὴ αὐτοῦ ζωὴ αἰώνιός ἐστιν. 


εἴρηκέ pot 6 πατὴρ, οὕτω λαλῶ.”' 


1 φυλαξη in ΒΑΒΡΚΙ.Π 33 and most versions. 


(ὡμολόγουν, imperfect, their fear to con- 
fess Him was continued) lest they should 
be put out of the synagogue’’. The 
inherent truth of the teaching of Jesus 
compelled response even in those least 
likely to be influenced. Westcott says: 
“This complete intellectual faith (so to 
speak) is really the climax of unbelief. 
The conviction found no expression in 
life.” This is true of the bulk of those 
referred to (see ver. 43), but cannot 


apply to all (see vii. 50, xix. 38, 39). For 
ἀποσυνάγωγοι see ix, 22, XVI. 2.-- 
ἠγάπησαν ... Θεοῦ. As in v. 44 an 


excessive craving for the glory which 
men can bestow is noted as the cause of 
unbelief. 

Vv. 44-50. A summary of the teaching 
of Fesus regarding the nature and con- 
sequences of ee and unbelief.—Ver. 44. 
᾿Ιησοῦς δὲ ἔκραξε, “but Jesus cried 
aloud”. δὲ suggests that this summary 
is intended to reflect light on the un- 
belief and the imperfect faith which 
have just been mentioned. ἔκραξε would 
of itself lead us to suppose that Jesus 
made the following statement at some 
particular time, but as ver. 36 has in- 
formed us, He had already withdrawn 
from public teaching. It is therefore 
natural to suppose that we have here 
the evangelist’s reminiscences of what 
Jesus had publicly uttered at a previous 
time.—O πιστεύων .. . This sums 
up the constant teaching of Jesus that 
He appeared solely as the ambassador 
of the Father (see v. 23, 30, 43, vil. 16, 
viii. 42) ; and that therefore to believe on 


ἃ οὖν λαλῶ ἐγὼ, καθὼς 


See Mt. xix. 20, Lk. xi. 28. 


Him was to believe on the Father.— 
Ver. 45. Here He adds καὶ 6 θεωρῶν 
ἐμὲ θεωρεῖ τὸν wépavTa pe: “he who 
beholds me, beholds Him that sent me”’; 
so xiv. 9; cf. vi. 40. Jesus was the 
perfect transparency through whom the 
Father was seen: the image in whom 
all the Father was represented.—Ver. 
46. ἐγὼ φῶς . . . µείνῃ. “I am come 
into the world as light,” and in the con- 
nection, especially as light upon God 
and His relation to men. The purpose 
of His coming was to deliver men from 
their native darkness: tva...év τῇ 
σκοτίᾳ μὴ µείνῃ, “should not abide in 
the darkness’’; cf. i. 9, viii. 123 iii. 18, 
Ig, ix. 41; also 1 John ii. 9, 11.—Ver. 
47. But ‘if any one should hear my 
words and not keep them I do not judge 
him, for I came not to judge,’’ etc. See 
iii. 17.—Ver. 48. Not on that account, 
however, is the unbeliever scatheless: 
ὃ ἀθετῶν . . . ἡμέρᾳ, “ he that rejecteth 


«πε: ἀθετεῖν here only in John but 


used in a similar connection and in the 
same sense in Lk. x. 16; of. 1 Thess. 
iv. 8. For the sense cf. i. 11. The 
rejecter of Christ ‘‘has one to judge 
him; the word which I spake, it will 
judge him in the last day”. Nothing per-. 
sonal enters into the judgment: the man 
will be judged by what he has heard, by 
his opportunities and light.—Ver. 49 
This word will judge him, ‘ because” 
though spoken here on earth it is divine: 
κ] have not spoken at my own instance 
nor out of my own resources”; ἐξ 
ἐμαντοῦ, not as in v. 30, vii. 16-18, ax’ 


814 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XIII 
aii.r3,.23; XIII. 1. ΠΡΟ δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ "πάσχα, εἰδὼς ὁ ἸΙητοῆῦς ὅτι 
Vie 4; χι. ῃ -. ς a A 
35. ἐλήλυθεν 1 αὐτοῦ ἡ dpa, "iva " µεταβῇ ἐκ τοῦ κόσµου τούτου πρὸς 
b xii. 23 5 , 4 σς/ N > a , 95 
ο vii. 3 τὸν πατέρα, ἀγαπήσας τοὺς “idious τοὺς ἐν τῷ κόσµω, "εἰς τέλος 
αλ τά, sae aad Sap) x , 2 «5 , 25 
e Mt. x.22, ἠγάπησεν αὐτούς. 2. καὶ δείπνου γενομένου,” τοῦ *SiaBddou ἤδη 
f Job 1 6. ε 3 a , 3 η , 3 , oe > _ 
Zech. iii. © βεβληκότος εἰς τὴν καρδίαν Ιούδα Σίμωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτου, ἵνα αὐτὸν 
1. Mt.i 


t.1v. 
1. 6 Philo, de Abrahamo, p. 377. 


1 ηλθεν in $ABKLN. 


2 yevopevov in NCADN, vet. Lat. vulg. (coena facta) Pesh. ; Ύινομενον in BLX, 


four times in Origen. 


Ν΄ has γεινομ. 


The present participle is adopted by 


Tr.Ti.W.H., but the reasons assigned by Holtzmann and Weiss are insufficient. 


T.R. gives the better sense. 


épavrov, but indicating somewhat more 
strictly the origin of the utterances. He 
did not create His teaching, ἀλλ 6 
πέµψας .. . λαλήσω, “ but the Father 
who sent me Himself gave me command- 
ment what I should say and what I 
should speak”. The former designates 
the doctrine according to its contents, 
the latter the varying manner of its 
delivery. Meyer and Westcott.—Ver. 50. 
καὶ οἶδα ... ἐστιν. ‘ And I know that 
His commandment is life eternal,” that 
is, the commandment which Jesus had 
received (ver. 49) was to proclaim life 
eternal. This was His commission; 
this was what He was to speak. He 
was to announce to men that the Father 
offered through Him life eternal. ‘‘ There- 
fore whatever I speak, as the Father hath 
said to me, so I speak.” 

CHAPTER XIII. Here commences the 
slosing part of the gospel. It exhibits 
ihe manifestation of Christ’s glory in 
suffering and death. The first division 
embraces xili.-xvii., in which the faith of 
the believing is confirmed and unbelief 
[Judas] cast out. 

Vv. 1-20. Fesus washes the disciples’ 
feet and explains His action.—Ver. 1. 
Πρὸ δὲ τῆς ἑορτῆς τοῦ πάσχα, “before 
the feast of the Passover,” and therefore 
it was not the Paschal supper which is 
now described. According to John, 
though not in agreement with the Syn- 
optists, Jesus suffered as the Paschal 
Lamb on the day of the Passover, which 
in all Jewish households was terminated 
by the Paschal supper. How long before 
the Feast the supper here mentioned oc- 
curred is not explicitly stated, but the 
narrative shows it was the eve of the 
Passover. The note of time has an 
ethical rather than an historical intention. 
It is meant to mark that this was the 
last night of Jesus’ life. Therefore it is 
followed up by a full description of the 


entire situation and motives. The main 
action is expressed in ἐγείρεται of the 
fourth verse; but to set his reader in the 
right point of view for perceiving the 
significance of this action the Evangelist 
points out three particulars regarding 
the mind and feeling of Jesus, and two 
external circumstances. (1) εἰδὼς . . . 
αὐτούς, “]εδις, knowing that the hour 
had come that He should pass [for the 
construction ὥρα ἵνα see xii. 23; µεταβῇ 
emphasises the change in condition im- 
plied] out of this world to the Father, 
having loved His own who were in the 
world [τοὺς ἰδίους, a more restricted and 
more sympathetic class than the οἱ ἴδιοι 
of i. 11. His especial and peculiar 
friends. The designation τοὺς ἐν τῷ 
κόσμῳ is added in contrast to ἐκ τοῦ 
κόσμου which described His future con- 
dition, and it suggests the difficulties they 
are left to cope with and the duties they 
must do. They are to represent Him in 
the world: and this appeals to Him], He 
loved them” eis τέλος, which is trans- 
lated ‘‘in-the highest degree’’ by Chrys., 
Euthymius [σφόδρα], Cyr.-Alex. [τελειο- 
τάτην ἀγάπησιν], Godet, Weiss; but 
Godet is wrong in saying that eis τέλος 
never means “unto the end,” see Mt. x. 
22. Melanchthon renders “ perduravit 
donec pateretur”. He loved them 
through all the sufferings and to all the 
issues to which His love brought Him. 
The statement is the suitable introduc- 
tion to all that now looms in view. His 
love remained steadfast, and was now the 
ruling motive. The statement is further 
illustrated by the disappointing state of 
the disciples. [Wetstein quotes from 
Eurip., Troad., 1051, ovSels ἐράστης ὅσ- 
τις οὐκ ἀεὶ φιλεῖ; and from the Anthol., 
τούτους ἐξ ἀρχῆς µέχρι τέλους ἀγαπῶ, 
and ο. Shakespeare’s Sonnets, cxvi., 
“Love . . . bears it out even to the edge 
of doom”’.] (2) καὶ δείπνου γενοµένον, 


1—6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


δις 


παραδῷ, 3. εἰδὼς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ὅτι πάντα δέδωκεν αὐτῷ ὁ πατὴρ eis τὰς 


Χεῖρας, καὶ ὅτι ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἐξῆλθε καὶ πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ὑπάγει, 4. " ἐγεί- η xi. οο. 


peta ἐκ τοῦ δείπνου, καὶ τίθησι τὰ ἱμάτια, καὶ λαβὼν λέντιον 
Σδιέζωσεν ἑαυτόν" 6. εἶτα βάλλει ὕδωρ εἰς τὸν νιπτῆρα, καὶ ἤρξατο ΟΡ. xxi. 7 


)γίπτειν τοὺς πόδας τῶν μαθητῶν, καὶ 


a fA * wee 
"ἐκμάσσειν τῷ λεντίῷ ᾧ ἦν 1 Gen. xiii, 


διεζωσμένος. 6. ἔρχεται οὖν πρὸς Σίµωνα Πέτρον καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ κ xii. 3, 


“supper having arrived,” ‘‘ supper having 
been served,” cf. γενομένον σαββάτον, 
the Sabbath having come, πρωΐας yevo- 
µένης, Mt. xxvii. I, morning having 
dawned. In x. 22 the phrase ἐγένετο τὰ 
ἐγκαίνια means ‘‘the Dedication had 
arrived”. So here the meaning is “‘ sup- 
per having come,” and not “ supper being 
ended,” or ‘‘ while supper was proceed- 
ing”. If we read γινοµένον the meaning 
is substantially the same, ‘‘ supper arriv- 
ing,” “fat supper time’”’. This also is 
essential to the understanding of the in- 
cident. Feet-washing, pleasant and cus- 
tomary before a meal, would have been 
disagreeable and out of place in the 
course of it. [The custom is abundantly 
illustrated by Wetstein, Doughty and 
others. See especially Becker’s Chari- 
cles.| The feet, either bare, or sandalled, 
or with shoes, were liable to be heated by 
the fine dust of the roads, and it was 
expected that the host would furnish 
means of washing them, see Lk. vii. 44. 
When our Lord and His disciples supped 
together, chis office would be discharged 
by the youngest, or by the disciples in 
turn ; but this evening the disciples had 
been disputing which of them was the 
greatest, Lk. xxii. 24, and consequently 
no one could stoop to do this menial 
office for the rest. (3) τοῦ διαβόλον... 
παραδῷ [or παραδοῖ], “the devil having 
now put into the heart,” etc. For the 
expression βεβληκότος eis τὴν καρδίαν 
see especially. Pindar, Olymp., xiii. 16, 
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἐν καρδίαις ἀνδρῶν ἔβαλον Ὥραι 
κ.τ.λ. Similar expressions are frequent 
in Homer. It is perhaps rather stronger 
than “suggest,” ‘‘the devil having al- 
ready put in the heart”; the idea had 
been entertained, if we cannot say that 
the purpose was already formed. His 
presence was another disturbing element 
in the feast. But had Jesus unmasked 
him before such fiery spirits as John and 
Peter, Judas would never have left that 
room alive. Peter’s sword would have 
made surer work than with Malchus. 
Judas therefore is included in the feet- 
washing. ‘ Jesus at the feet of the traitor, 
what a picture, what lessons for us ”’ (As- 
tié).—Ver. 3. (4) εἰδὼς . . . χεῖρας, this 


consciousness on the part of Jesus is men- 
tioned to bring out the condescension of 
the action to berelated. (5) So too is the 
accompanying consciousness, ὅτι ἀπὸ 
Θεοῦ .. . ὑπάγε.. It was not in for- 
getfulness of His true dignity but because 
conscious that He was supreme and 
God’s ambassador that He did what He 
did. [‘ All things,” says Melanchthon, 
‘‘condere testamentum promissum in 
Scripturis ” : ‘‘ omnia, adeoque peccatur 
et mortem ”.]—Ver. 4. This person, and 
in this mood and in these circumstances, 
on the brink of His own passion, is free 
to attend to the wants of unworthy men, 
and ἐγείρεται . . . διεωσµένο. “He 
rises,” having reclined at the table in 
expectation that one or other of the 
disciples would do the feet-washing.— 
καὶ τίθησι τὰ ἱμάτια, “and lays aside 
His garments,” z.e., His Tallith, appear- 
ing in His χιτών, similar to our “in His 
shirt sleeves”. τίθηµι is similarly used 
in τίθηµι τὴν ψνχήν, x. 11, etc. [See 
also Kypke on Lk. xix. 21.]--καὶ λαβὼν 
λέντιον διέζωσεν ἑαυτόν, “and having 
taken a linteum,’’ a towel or long linen 
cloth, ‘He girt Himself,” tying the 
towel round Him. Cf. ἐγκομβώσασθε, 
1 Pet. ν. 5. The middle διεζώσατο is 
used in xxi. 7; the expression here more 
emphatically indicates that He was the 
sole Agent. The condescension is under- 
stood in the light of what Suetonius tells 
of Caligula (Cal. 26), that he was fond of 
making some of the senators wait at his 
table ‘‘ succinctos linteo,” that is, in the 
guise of waiters——Ver. 5. εἶτα.. 

γιπτῆρα. Each step in the whole 
astounding scene is imprinted on the 
mind of John. ‘Next He pours water 
into the basin,” the basin which the 
landlord had furnished as part of the 
necessary arrangements. [νιπτῆρα is 
only found here; but ποδανιπτήρ is not 
so rare; see Plut., Phocion, 20, where 
ποδονιπτῆρες filled with wine were pro- 
vided for the guests.)—xat Πρξατο 
νίπτειν . . . ‘nihil ministerii omittit ” 
(Grotius). [Plutarch says of Favonius 
that he did for Pompey ὅσα δεσπότας 
δοῦλοι μεχρὶ νίψεως ποδῶν.] He“ began” 
to wash the feet of the disciples; ‘‘ begar.,” 


816 


- , 
ἐκεῖνος, “ Κύριε, σύ µου νίπτεις τοὺς πόδας ;” 


\ ver. 12 


a ” 
ταυτα. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΤΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XIII. 


7. ᾿Απεκρίθη ᾿Ιησοῦς 


καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “°O ἐγὼ ποιῶ, σὺ οὐκ οἶδας ἄρτι, γνώσῃ δὲ ' μετὰ 
δ. Λέγει αὐτῷ Πέτρος, “Od μὴ νίψῃς τοὺς πόδας µου εἰς 


~ ’ / ~ A 
τὸν aidva.” ᾿Απεκρίθη αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “’Edv μὴ νίψω σε, οὐκ 


mam 5 
m Deut. χἰν.'' ἔχεις ™ µέρος per ἐμοῦ. 
27. Rev. 
xx:6; 


n Lev. xvi. 
4. Acts 
iX. 37. 

o Cp. Winer 
p. 638. 

p Ps. li. 7. 


ἀλλ᾽ οὐχὶ πάντες. 


9. Λέγει αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, “' Κύριε, 
μὴ τοὺς πόδας µου µόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τὴν κεφαλήν. 
10. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ““O " λελουμένος οὗ χρείαν ἔχει °F τοὺς 
πόδας 1 νίψασθαι, GAN’ ἔστι } καθαρὸς ὅλος: καὶ ὑμεῖς καθαροί ἐστε, 
II. “Hider γὰρ τὸν παραδιδόντα αὐτόν: διὰ 
τοῦτο εἶπεν, '' Οὐχὶ πάντες καθαροί éote.” 


«Ν omits η τους ποδας, but these words are found in ABCEGKL. 


perhaps because, as Meyer suggests, the 
washing was interrupted, but this is not 
certain.—Ver. 6. ἔρχεται οὖν, apparently 
in the order in which they happened to 
be sitting, and having first washed some 
of the other disciples, He comes to Simon 
Peter, who draws up his feet out of reach 
and exclaims, Κύριε, σύ µου νίπτεις τοὺς 
πόδας; The σύ pov are brought together 
for the sake of the contrast.—Ver. 7. 
This was a right impulse and honourable 
to Peter ; and therefore Jesus treats it 
tenderly. ὃ ἐγὼ ποιῶ . . . μετὰ ταῦτα, 
‘“‘what I am doing thou dost not at 
present comprehend, but thou shalt 
learn as soon as I am finished”. The 
pronouns are emphatic, that Peter may 
understand that Jesus may have much to 
do which the disciple cannot compre- 
hend. The first requisite in a disciple or 
follower is absolute trust in the wisdom 
of his Master. μετὰ ταῦτα refers to the 
immediate future; see ver. 12, where 
the explanation of the action is given. 
[οὐκ εἰς μακρὰν ἐρεῖ, Euthymius. ]—Ver. 
8. Peter, however, cannot accept the 
disciple’s attitude, but persists, Ob py 
γίψῃς µου τοὺς πόδας els τὸν αἰῶνα, 
‘never shalt Thou wash my feet”. The 
εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα was prompted by the 
μετὰ ταῦτα. No future explanation can 
make this possible. Peter’s humility is 
true enough to allow him to see the 
incongruity of Jesus washing his feet: 
not deep enough to make him conscious 
of the incongruity of his thus opposing 
and dictating to his Master. Το this 
characteristic utterance Jesus, waiting 
with the basin, replies, ἐὰν μὴ νίψω σε 
.. . ἐμοὈ. Superficially these words 
might mean that unless Peter allowed 
Jesus to wash him, he could not sit at 
table with Him. But evidently Peter 
found in them a deeper significance, and 


understood them as meaning: Unless I 
wash you, you are outcast from my 
fellowship and cease to share in my 
kingdom and destiny. Here the symbolic 
significance of the eating together and 
of the washing begins dimly to appear. 
That Peter saw that this deeper mean- 
ing was intended appears from the eager- 
ness of his answer.—Ver. 9. Κύριε... 
κεφαλήν. A moment ago he told his 
Master He was doing too much: now 
he tells Him He is doing too little. Self- 
will gives place slowly. Yet this was the 
unmistakable expression of devotion. If 
washing is any requirement for fellow- 
ship with Thee, wash me wholly. [“* Non 
pedes solum, quos soli ministri vident ; 
sed manus et caput, quod convivae 
adspiciunt.” Wetstein.] He is still in 
error.—Ver. 10. ‘O λελουμένος ... 
ὅλος. ‘He that has been in the bath 
has no need to wash save his feet, but is 
all clean.”” His feet may be soiled by 
walking from the public bath to the 
supper chamber, and it is enough that 
they be washed. ‘‘ Ad convivium vocati 
solebant prius in balneo lavari; in domo 
vero convivatoris nonnisi pedes, quibus 
in via pulvis aut sordes adhaeserant, a 
servis abluebantur, ne lecti, super quibus 
accumbebant, macularentur.” Wetstein. 
He supports the statement by many 
references. The added clause discloses 
that a spiritual sense underlies the 
symbol: ὑμεῖς καθαροί éore, GAN’ οὐχὶ 
πάντες, “ ye are clean, but notall”. All 
had been washed : the feet of Judas were 
as clean as those of Peter. But Judas 
was not clean.—Ver. 11. That Judas 
was meant is at once said in ver. II. 
“Hide. . . éore. Jesus thus shows that 
He distinguishes between the offence of 
the rest and the sin of Judas. All that 
they required was to have the soil of 


7—18. 


EYATTEAION 


817 


12. “Ore οὖν ἔνιψε τοὺς πόδας αὐτῶν, καὶ ἅ ἔλαβε τὰ ἵμάτια αὐτοῦ, q x. 17, 18. 


᾿ἀναπεσὼν ' πάλιν, εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “' Γινώσκετε τί πεποίηκα spiv;r Lk. xi. 37. 


13. ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ µε, “O διδάσκαλος, καὶ ὁ 


λέγετε, εἰμὶ γάρ. 


14. εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ ἔνιψα ὑμῶν τοὺς πόδας, ὁ κύριος 


Ἀ . i ob. ii. τ. 
κύριος" καὶ καλῶς siv. 17; viii. 
48. 


ς 


καὶ ὁ διδάσκαλος, καὶ ὑμεῖς ὀφείλετε ἀλλήλων νίπτειν τοὺς πόδας - 


15. "ὑπόδειγμα γὰρ ἔδωκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα καθὼς ἐγὼ " ἐποίησα ὑμῖν, καὶ t Jas. v. το. 


2 Ρεί.11.6. 


ὑμεῖς ποιῆτε. 16. duty ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐκ ἔστι δοῦλος ” μείζων u Exod. xiv. 
a lol a Il. 
τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ ἀπόστολος peiLwv τοῦ πέµψαντος αὐτόν. v xv. 20. 


17. εἰ ταῦτα οἴδατε, µακάριοί ἐστε ἐὰν ποιῆτε αὐτά. 


Μι. χ. 24. 


18. οὗ περὶ Lk. vi. 4o. 


πάντων ὑμῶν λέγω: ἐγὼ οἶδα obs” " ἐξελεξάμην : *GAN ἵνα ἡ ypadh x Constr. i. 
πληρωθῇ, ΄ Ὁ ᾿τρώγων pet ἐμοῦ ὃ τὸν ἄρτον, ἐπῆρεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ τὴν ν Ps, xii, 9. 


1 και ανεπεσεν in ΡΟ”. 


1 Better τινας with BCL 33. 


3 per’ εµον in SAD vet. Lat. vulg. ; pow in BCL adopted by W.H. The clause 


is thus closer to the Hebrew. 


their present evil temper and jealousy 
removed: they were true in heart, they 
had been in the bath and had only con- 
tracted a slight stain. But Judas had 
not been in the bath: he had no genuine 
and habitual loyalty to Christ.—Ver. 
12. “Ore... ὑμῖν: “when, then, He 
had washed their feet and taken His 
garments [cf. τίθησι τὰ ἱμάτια of ver. 4] 
and reclined again He said to them: 
Know ye what I have done to you?” 
Do you perceive the meaning of this 
action? By washing their feet He had 
washed their heart. By stooping to this 
menial service He had made them all 
ashamed of declining it. By this simple 
action He had turned a company of 
wrangling, angry, jealous men into a 
company of humbled and_ united 
disciples.—Ver. 13. ἡὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ pe, 
«γε call me,” in addressing me (φωνεῖν, 
not καλεῖν), 6 διδάσκαλος Kal 6 Κύριος, 
“Teacher”? and ‘‘ Lord”; the nomina- 
tivus tituli, see Winer, 226. Perhaps 
** Rabbi ” would convey better the respect 
involved in διδάσκαλος. καὶ καλῶς 
λέγετε, εἰμὶ yap. Jesus, humble and 
selfsuppressing as He was, clearly 
recognised His own dignity and on 
occasion asserted it. Here the point of 
the lesson lay in His consciousness of 
being their Lord.—Ver. 14. Hence the 
a fortiori argument: εἰ οὖν ἐγὼ ἔνιψα 
... πόδας, “if I then, Lord and Teacher, 
washed your feet, ye also ought (ὀφείλετε 
denoting moral obligation) to wash one 
another’s feet”. ‘‘ It is not the act itself, 
but its moral essence, which after His 
example He enjoins upon them to 
exercise.” Meyer. This has sometimes 


been considered a command enjoining 
the literal washing of the feet of poor 
saints: and was practised in England 
until 1731 by the Lord High Almoner, 
and is still practised by the Pope on 
Maundy Thursday (Dies Mandati), the 
day before Good Friday. See also 
Church’s Anselm, p. 49. The ancient 
practice is discussed in Augustine’s 
Letters, 55, to Januarius, c. 33. It at once 
took its place as symbolic of all kindly 
care of fellow-Christians, see 1 Tim. v. 
10.—Ver. 15. ὑπόδειγμα . . . ποιῆτε. 
ὑπόδειγμα is condemned by Phrynichus, 
who recommends the Attic παράδειγµα. 
See Rutherford’s interesting note, New 
Phryn., p. 62. The purpose, ἵνα, of His 
action was that they might act in the 
same humble, loving spirit, in all their 
conduct to one another,—Ver. 16. And 
as confirmatory of this example and in 
rebuke of their pride, He adds: οὐκ ἔστι. 
δοῦλος . . . αὐτόν. In Mt. x. 24 a 
similar saying occurs; cf. also Lk. vi. 
40, and Lk. xxii. 27. The slave whose 
function it is to serve is not “‘ greater,” 
μείζων, than his lord, who may expect to 
receive service, and therefore the slave 
may well stoop to the offices which the 
lord himself discharges and count on no 
&éxemptions the lord does not claim.— 
Ver. 17. These are obvious first principles 
in Christian discipleship, but the mere 
knowledge of them is not enough: εἰ 
ταῦτα οἴδατε, µακάριοί ἐστε ἐὰν ποιῆτε 
αὐτά. ταῦτα refers to what Jesus had 
just declared to be the significance of 
His action. et οἴδατε, ‘if ye know,” as 
you do know ; ἐὰν ποιῆτε, a supposition. 
“‘The knowing is objectively granted,. 


52 


818 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XIII. 

zxiv.7. mrépvavy αὑτοῦ. 19. "dw ἄρτι λέγω ὑμῖν πρὸ τοῦ γενέσθαι, ἵνα 
ed ὅταν γένηται, πιστεύσητε ὅτι " ἐγώ εἰμι. 20. ἀμὴν ἁμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 
cL 4 Ὁ "λαμβάνων ἐάν τινα πέµψω, ἐμὲ λαμβάνει: 6 δὲ ἐμὲ λαμβάνων, 

ee μα. λαμβάνει τὸν πέµψαντά pe.” 

πώ» 21. Ταῦτα εἰπὼν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ° ἐταράχθη τῷ πνεύµατι, καὶ ἐμαρτύρησε 

ο σι 17. καὶ εἶπεν, “'᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὅτι "εἷς ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει pe.” 


22. Ἔβλεπον οὖν eis ἀλλήλους οἱ μαθηταὶ, ἀπορούμενοι περὶ τίνος ᾿ 


e Lk. xvi.22. λέγει. 


the doing subjectively conditioned.” 
Meyer. On the double protasis see 
Burton, 268. µακάριοι is usually trans- 
lated ‘“‘ blessed,” Mt. v. 3, John xx. 29, 
and should be so here.—Ver. 18. This 
blessedness, He knew, could not attach 
to all of them: οὐ περὶ πάντων ὑμῶν 
λέγω, “I speak not of you all,” I do not 
expect all of you to fulfil the condition 
of blessedness. ἐγὼ οἶδα οὓς ἐξελεξάμην, 
“I for my part (in contrast to the 
disciples who were in ignorance) know 
the men whom I have chosen as 
Apostles,” and am therefore not taken 
by surprise by the treachery cf wi. of 
them. For the choice of Judas see vi. 
7ο, where the same word ἐξελεξάμην is 
used. GAN ἵνα .. . The simplest con- 
struction is: ‘‘ but I chose Judas in order 
that,” etc. This may not, however, in- 
volve that Jesus consciously chose Judas 
for this purpose. That is not said, and 
can scarcely be conceived. The Scripture 
which waited for fulfilment is Ps. xl. 9, 
6 ἐσθίων ἄρτους µου ἐμεγάλυνεν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ 
πτερνισµόν. Eating bread together is 
in all countries a sign, and in some a 
covenant or pledge of friendship. Cf. 
Kypke on ὁμοτράπεζος and Trumbull’s 
Blood Covenant, p. 313, and Oriental 
Life, Ῥ. 361. Here the fact of Judas’ 
eating bread with Jesus is introduced as 
ageravating his crime. ‘To lift the 
heel” is to’kick, whether originally used 
of a horse or not ; and expresses violence 
and contempt.—Ver. 19. This grave 
announcement was made at this point 
and not ‘previously, ἀπ᾿ ἄρτι, “from 
henceforth ” (as if the knowledge result- 
ing from the announcement rather than 
the announcement itself were dictating 
the expression) “I tell you before it 
happens, that when it has happened you 
may know that I am He,” z.e., the 
Messiah in whom these predictions were 
destined to be fulfilled.—Ver. 20. But 
lest this announcement should weaken 
their confidence in one another and in 
their own call to the Apostolate (‘‘ pro- 
babile est voluisse Christum offendiculo 


9 ~ fal fol ~ 
23. ἣν δὲ ἀνακείμενος εἷς τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ "κόλπῳ 


mederi’’. Calvin) He hastens to add: 
ἀμὴν . .. πέµψαντά µε [ᾶν τινα better 
than ἐάν τινα]. He gives the assurance 
that those whom He sends as His 
apostles will be identified with Himself 
and with God. 

Vv. 21-30. Fudas is eliminated from 
the company.—Ver. 21. Ταῦτα εἰπὼν... 
παραδώσει pe. Two elements in the 
company had prevented Jesus from freely 
uttering His last counsels to the Twelve. 
(1) They had manifested dissension which 
would prevent them from acting together 
when He was gone, and a temper which 
would prevent them from receiving His 
words. And (2) there was among them 
a traitor. The first element of discord 
had been removed by the feet-washing. 
He now proceeds to eliminate the second. 
But to have at once named the traitor 
would have been fatal. Peter and the 
rest would have taken steps to defeat, if 
not to put an end to Judas. Therefore 
He merely says, els ἐξ ὑμῶν παραδώσει 
µε. This it was which troubled His 
spirit, that one of the Twelve whom He 
had so cherished should turn traitor, 
using the familiarity and knowledge of 
intimacy to betray Him.—Ver. 22. The 
disciples-had no idea who was meant. 
Ἔβλεπον .. . λέγει, Judas could scarcely 
be ‘‘at a loss to know of whom He 
spoke”’.—Ver. 23. fv... ‘Ingots, the 
disciple whom Jesus loved lay next Him, 
ἐν τῷ κόλπφ. Two arrangements of 
guests at a table were in vogue. They 
either lay at right angles to the table 
and parallel to one another, each resting 
on his left elbow and having his right 
hand free (see Rich’s Dict., s. v. Tri- 
elinium, Lectus, Accubo); or they lay 
obliquely, the second reaching with his 
head to ‘the sinus of the girdle (ké\7os)”” 
of the first, and with the feet of the first 
at his back; while the third occupied the 
same posture relatively to the second (see 
the engraving in Becker’s Charicles, 327, 
and Lightfoot, p. 1095, who says that 
this second arrangement prevailed in 
Palestine in the time of Christ). John 


το--30. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


819 


τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, ‘dv ἠγάπα 6 “Ingots: 24. © veder οὖν τούτῳ Σίμων Πέτρος fxix. 26; xx. 


πυθέσθαι τίς ἂν εἴη περὶ οὗ λέγει. 


A - lol a ? 
στῆθος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ, λέγει αὐτῶ, “' Κύριε, τίς eotw;”’ 


2; Xxi. 7. 


25. ἐπιπεσὼν 1 δὲ ἐκεῖνος ἐπὶ τὸ gActs xxiv 


26. ᾽Αποκρί- 


νεται ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “΄᾿Εκεῖϊνός ἐστιν ᾧ ἐγὼ " βάψας τὸ ψωμίον ἐπιδώσω.” 3 Β Rathii.r 


, 2. , 
Καὶ " ἐμβάψας τὸ ψωμµίον, δίδωσιν “lovda Σίµωνος ᾿Ισκαριώτῃ. 
καὶ μετὰ τὸ ψωµίον, τότε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς ἐκεῖνον 6 Σατανᾶς. 
9 κανει ὰ a “eo ο) i ῃ a? 
αὐτῷ ὁ Inoous, ““ O ποιεις, ποίησον τάχιον. 
- , a 
ἔγνω τῶν ἀνακειμένων πρὸς τί εἶπεν αὐτῷ. 


27. 
λέγει οὖν 

28. Τοῦτο δὲ οὖὐδεὶς 
290. τινὲς γὰρ ἐδόκουν, 


5 5 a A 7 
ἐπεὶ τὸ | γλωσσόκομον εἶχεν 6 ᾿Ιούδας, ὅτι λέγει αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, i xii. 6 


6o? , 2 , 5 3 S ς [αμ ο a ο. ο 
Αγόρασον ων χρείαν εχοµεν εις την εορτην η τοις πτωχοις ινα 


τι δᾷ. 
νὺξ," ὅτε οὖν ἐξῆλθε. 


1 αναπεσων in ΝΕΒΟΚΙ.. 


30. λαβὼν οὖν τὸ ψωμίον ἐκεῖνος, εὐθέως ἐξῆλθεν ὃ: ἦν δὲ 


ουτως added after εκεινος in BCEF 33, ‘‘ as he was”’. 


2 T.R. in SAD, it. vulg. ; Bao και δωσω avtw in BCL copt. arm. aeth. adopted 


‘by Tr.TiLW.HLR. 
3 εξηλθεν ευθυς in NBCD. 


4 $9BCD 1, 33, it. vulg, place full stop after νυξ, and commence next paragraph 


with οτε ουν εξηλθεν λεγει. 

4 
was lying, then, next to Jesus, his posi- 
tion being inside that of Jesus. To him 
Peter veveu, ‘‘ beckons ” (cf. νεύσω µέν τοι 
ἐγὼ κεφαλῇῃ, Od., xvi. 283), taking the 
initiative as usual, but not himself asking, 
perhaps because he had made so many 
mistakes that evening already, perbaps 
because a private matter might better be 
transacted in a whisper from John.—Ver. 
25. That disciple, ἐκεῖνος, when thus 
appealed to, ἀναπεσὼν ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος τοῦ 
᾿μησοῦ, ‘having leant back towards the 
breast of Jesus” so as to speak more di- 
rectly to Himand to beheard only by Him. 
On the difference between ἀνακείμενος 
and ἀναπεσών see Origen in Evang. Fo., 
ii. 191, Brooke.—Ver. 26. But even in 
answer to John’s question, τίς ἐστιν: 
Jesus does not name Judas, but merely 
gives a sign by which John may recog- 
nise the traitor: ᾿Ἐκεῖνος . . . ἐπιδώσω, 
‘the it is for whom I shall dip the sop 
and give it him”. Some argue from the 
insertion of the article τὸ ψωμίον that 
this was the sop made up of a morsel of 
lamb, a small piece of unleavened bread, 
and dipped in the bitter sauce, which was 
given by the head of the house to each 
guest as a regular part of the Passover ; 
and that therefore John as well as the 
Synoptists considered this to be the Pas- 
chal Supper. But not only is the article 
doubtful, see W.H., but it is an ordinary 
Oriental custom for the host to offer such 
a tid-bit to any favoured guest; and we 


So Tisch. and W.H. 


are rather entitled to see in the act the 
last appeal to Judas’ better feeling. The 
very mark Jesus chooses to single him 
out is one which on ordinary occasions 
was a mark of distinctive favour, At 
any rate he is thus all the more effectually 
screened from the others.—Ver. 27. But 
instead of moving Judas to compunction 
μετὰ τὸ ψωμίον, τότε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς ἐκεῖνον 
6 Σατανᾶς. μετὰ “after,” not ‘ with,” 
‘“‘non cum offula,’” Bengel and Cyril, 
who also says, οὐ γὰρ ἔτι σύµβουλον ἔχει 
τὸν σατανᾶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅλης ἤδη τῆς καρδίας 
δεσπότην. On ἐκεῖνον Bengel also has: 
‘‘Jam remote notat Judam’’. Morally 
he is already far removed from that com- 
pany. But what was it that thus finally 
determined Judas? Perhaps the very 
revulsion of feeling caused by taking the 
sop from Jesus: perhaps the accompany- 
ing words, “O ποιεῖς, ποίησον τάχιον, 
‘what thou doest, do quickly”. τάχιον: 
“to Attic writers θάσσων (θάττων) was 
the only comparative, and τάχιστος the 
only superlative’”’. Rutherford, New 
Phryn., p. 150. The idea in the com- 
parative is ‘‘ with augmented speed,” see 
Donaldson’s Greek Gram., p. 390.—Ver. 
28. Τοῦτο . . . αὐτῷ. All heard the 
command given to Judas, but none of 
them knew its object, not even John; 
for although he was now aware that 
Judas was the traitor he did not connect 
the command “ Do it quickly”’ with the 
actual work of betrayal.—Ver. 20. τινὲς 


820 


j Vii. 39; xii. 


Θεὸς ; ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


31. Λέγει ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Nov 
32. εἰ ὁ Θεὸς ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ,ὶ καὶ ὁ 


XIII. 


ἐδοξάσθη ὁ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ὁ 


k Freq. in 1 Θεὸς δοξάσει αὐτὸν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ εὐθὺς δοξάσει αὐτόν. 33. * Texvia, 


John ; » 9 δν 3 
alsoin ἔτι μικρὸν ped ὑμῶν εἰμι. 
Gal.iv.1 

1 vii. 34; 
Viil. 21. . . 

m Xv. 12. I λέγω αρτι. 


Jo. ii. 7, 8. 


/ / ‘ 8 4 αι) 
ζητήσετέ µε, καὶ καθὼς εἶπον τοῖς 


"Ῥ]ουδαίοις, “Ore ὅπου ὑπάγω ἐγὼ, ὑμεῖς οὗ δύνασθε ἐλθεῖν, καὶ ὑμῖν 
/ ο) A 
34. "' ἐντολὴν καινὴν δίδωµ; ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλή- 


Mt. v.43, λους: καθὼς ἠγάπησα Spas, ἵνα καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους. 
nt jodiiro. 35: " ἐν τούτῳ γνώσονται πάντες ὅτι ἐμοὶ µαθηταί ἐστε, ἐὰν ἀγάπην 


1 This clause omitted in Ν"Β6"ΡΙ, (and by W.H.R.); found in SgcAC*F and 


many versions. 


γὰρ ἐδόκουν. Some supposed that Judas 
being treasurer of the company had been 
sent to buy what they needed for the 
feast, or to give something to the poor. 
That it was possible at so late an hour 
to make purchases appears from Mt. xxv. 
g-11 (Holtzmann).—Ver. 30. Judas on 
his part, having accepted the sop, ἐξῆλθεν 
εὐθύς, the εὐθύς answering to τάχιον, ver. 
27; he went out immediately, taking the 
purse with him no doubt. ἦν δὲ νύξ, 
‘and it was night”. The sudden dark- 
ness succeeding sunset in the East sud- 
denly fell on the room, impressing John’s 
sensitive spirit and adding to the per- 
turbation of the company. The note of 
time may however only result from John’s 
desire to keep his narrative exact. 

Ver. 31—XIV. 31 comprise one con- 
tinuous conversation, introduced by 
‘Jesus’ announcement (vv. 31-35) of His 
speedy departure.—Ver. 31. “Ore οὖν 
ἐξῆλθεν. As soon as Judas had gone 
out, the spirit of Jesus rose, and with a 
note of triumph He explains the situa- 
tion to the disciples. Two points He 
emphasises: His work is done, and He 
must leave them. The former He 
announces in the words Ntv ἐδοξάσθη 
... αὐτῷ. “This ‘now’ with which 
the Lord turns to the faithful eleven, 
expresses at once the feeling of deliver- 
ance from the traitor’s presence and His 
free acceptance of the issues of the 
traitor’s work.” Westcott. ἐδοξάσθη the 
aorist is used because the traitor is con- 
sidered to have ‘‘ as it were already com- 
pleted his deed’’. Winer, p. 346. The 
Son of Man is “glorified”? by accom- 
plishing the work of His life by being 
accepted as the manifestation of God, 
and by being acknowledged by the 
Father as having revealed Him; see 
XVii. I, 4, 5, xii. 23, xi. 4. Cf. Milligan’s 
Ascension of our Lord, p. 79.—Ver. 32. 
Necessarily therefore when He is glorified 


6 Θεὸς ἐδοξάσθη ἐν αὐτῷ. καὶ 6 Θεὸς. 
δοξάσει αὐτὸν ἐν ἑαυτῷ. God is more de- 
finitely named as the source of the glori- 
fication of the Son of Man; and as God 
was glorified “in” Jesus, so shall Jesus 
be glorified ‘in’ God. It is not only παρὰ 
σεαυτῷ, as in xvii., 5, but ἐν ἑαυτῷ, 
which does not merely mean that He 
will be taken up into the eternal blessed- 
ness of God, but that His glory will be 
the Divine glory itself.—Ver. 33. This 
result was to be forthwith achieved: 
εὐθὺς δοξάσει αὐτόν, which at once is 
interpreted to the disciples in the explicit 
statement Τεκνία, ἔτι μικρὸν ped” ὑμῶν 
εἰμι. Τεκνία is frequent in 1 John; 
here only in the Gospel. Lightfoot (p. 
1098) says: ‘‘ Discipulus cujusvis vocatur 
ejus βίας: but here there is a tender- 
ness in the expression not so accounted 
for. ἔτι puxpov, “yet a little,” z.¢., it is 
only for a little longer ; cf. vii. 33. This 
announcement, formerly made to the 
Jews (vii. 33, viii. 21, 24), He now, ἄρτι, © 
makes to the disciples; arousing their 
attention to what follows, as His last in- 
junctions. In view of the temper they 
had that evening displayed and the 
necessity for united action and unani- 
mous testimony He first lays upon them 
the commandment to love one another. 
—Ver. 34. ἐντολὴν καινὴν δίδωμι ὑμῖν, 
ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους: “'οπε another,” 
not “αἱ men,” which is a different 
commandment. So, rightly, Grotius: 
‘Novum autem dicit quia non agit de 
dilectione communi omnium . . . sed de 
speciali Christianorum inter se qua tales 
sunt,” and Holtzmann: “Es ist die 
Φιλαδελφία im Unterschied von der 
allgemeinen ἀγάπη᾽'. The necessity of 
love among those who were to carry on 
Christ’s work had that night become 
apparent. It was ‘‘new,” because the 
love of Christ’s friends for Christ’s sake’ 
was a new thing in the world. There-. 


3r1—38. XIV. τ---2.9 


ἔχητε ° ἐν ἀλλήλοις.” 


3 
ὑπάγεις ; , 


pou viv ἀκολουθῆσαι’ ὕστερον δὲ ἀκολουθήσεις por.” 
αὐτῷ 6 Πέτρος, Κύριε, Stati οὐ δύναμαί σοι ἀκολουθῆσαι ἄρτι ; 


τὴν ψυχήν µου ὑπὲρ cod ᾿θήσω.” 
“Thy ψυχήν σου ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ θήσεις; 


2\ 7 q , πι 2 2 , ΄ 
ἀλέκτωρ Ὑφωνήσει ' ἕως οὗ ἀπαρνήσῃ µε τρίς. 
XIV. 1. “Mh "ταρασσέσθω ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία: πιστεύετε εἰς τὸν 


Θεὸν, καὶ εἰς ἐμὲ πιστεύετε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


~ > a σ 
ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “"Ὅπου ὑπάγω, οὗ δύνασαί 


2. ἐν τῇ Ὁ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός µου μοναὶ 


821 


36. Λέγει αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, “ Κύριε, ποῦ ο Kom. i. 12 


, and xv. 5 


37- Λέγει 


ρα. ασ. 


8. ᾽Απεκρίθη αὐτῶ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, α Mk. xiv. 
ρινη re η > 


30. Zeph. 
ii. 14. 

ἃ xitig3, Ps. 
lv. 4. 

b Cp. ii. 16; 
20οτ.ν.1. 

. ¢Cp.1 Mac. 
vii. 38. 

d Gen. xxx. 


ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ 


πολλαί εἶσιν: Tet δὲ μὴ, εἶπον ἂν ὑμῖν. πορεύομαι” ἑτοιμάσαι , 


1 φωνηση in HABG. 


fore the kind rather than the degree of 
love is indicated in the clause καθὼς 
ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς κ. τ. A.—Ver. 35. And 
this Christian love is to be the sole 
sufficing evidence of the individual’s 
Christianity: ἐν ovr (emphatic) 
γνώσονται . . . ἀλλήλοις. Cf. Acts iv. 
32, 1 John iii. 10; also Tertull., Afol., 
39, “vide, inquiunt, ut invicem se 
diligant’?; Clem. Alex., Strom., ii. 9; 
Min. Felix, Octavius, 9.—Ver. 36. On 
this announcement of Jesus that He 
was shortly to leave them follow four 
characteristic utterances of the disciples. 
First as usual, λέγει αὐτῷ Σίμων Πέτρος, 
Κύριε wot ὑπάγεις; ‘Lord, where are 
you going?” referring to ver. 33. The 
Vulgate renders ‘‘ Domine, quo vadis ?”’ 
‘tthe words which the legend ascribes to 
Peter when withdrawing from persecu- 
tion in Rome he met Jesus entering the 
city. Jesus does not needlessly excite 
them by plainly telling them of His 
death, for He has much to say to them 
which He wishes them to listen to un- 
disturbed. He assures Peter that though 
he cannot now accompany his Master, 
he will afterwards follow, and so rejoin 
Him; cf. xxi. 19.—Ver. 37. This does 
not satisfy Peter. He sees it is some 
dangerous enterprise Jesus is undertak- 
ing, and he feels his courage discredited 
by the refusal to be allowed to accom- 
pany Him. Κύριε Stati. . . θήσω. 
“Putasne ulla itineris molestia me 
terreri?’’ Grotius. ‘‘In the zeal of love 
he mistakes the measure of his moral 
strength.” Meyer. Mt. and Mk. τερτε- 
sent all the disciples as making the same 
declaration (Mt. xxvi. 35, Mk. xiv. 31); 
which made it all the more necessary to 
expose its unconscious hollowness, pain- 
ful as it must have been to Jesus to do 
60. Thy ψΨυχήν gov... tpls. “ Wilt 


3 ett is inserted before πορενοµαι in SABC*DKL. 


thou lay down... ? So far from that, 
you will deny me thrice before the morn- 
ing.” οὐ μὴ ἀλέκτωρ φωνήσει. * Cock- 
crow ’’? was used among the Jews as a 
designation of time (Lightfoot on Mt. 
xxvi. 34); cf. Mk. xiii. 35, where the 
night is divided into ὀψέ, μεσονύκτιον, 
ἀλεκτοροφωνία, mpwt. At the equinox 
cock-crow would be between 2 and 4 
A.M. See Greswell’s Dissert., iii. 216. 
This was incomprehensible; how the 
night could bring circumstances so 
appalling as to tempt any of them, and 
compel the hardiest to deny Jesus, they 
could not conceive.—CHAPTER XIV. 
Ver. 1. But as they sat astounded and 
perplexed, He continues, Mj ταρασσέσθω 
ὑμῶν ἡ καρδία. Let not your heart be 
tossed and agitated like water driven by 
winds; cf. Liddell and S. and Thayer. 
He not only commands them to dismiss 
their agitation, but gives them reason: 
πιστεύετε . . . πιστεύετε. ‘ Trust God, 
yea, trust me.” Trust Him who over- 
tules all events, He will bring you 
through this crisis for which you feel 
yourselves incompetent; or if in your 
present circumstances that faith is too 
difficult, trust me whom you see and 
know and whose word you cannot doubt. 
It is legitimate to construe the first 
πιστεύετε aS an indicative, and the 
second as imperative: but this gives 
scarcely so appropriate a sense.—Ver. 2. 
As an encouragement to this trust, He 
adds, ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ . . . ὑμῖν. Heis going 
home to His Father’s house, but had 
there been room in it only for Himself 
He would necessarily have told them 
that this was the case, because the very 
reason of His going was to prepare a 
place for them. ὅτι assigns the reason 
for the necessity of explanation: the 
reason being that His purpose or plan 


822 


τόπον ὑμῖν. 

e Mt. xvii. 'ἔρχομαι καὶ 
11. Acts 
ο πα, 

f Song viii. 
2. Mt. 
XVli I. 


a ς A 4. 
καὶ ὑμεῖς ἦτε. 
οἴδατε.. 1 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


. XIV. 


3. καὶ ἐὰν πορευθῶ καὶ ἑτοιμάσω ὑμῖν τόπον, πάλιν 
Σπαραλήψομαι Suds πρὸς ἐμαυτόν : ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ, 
4. καὶ ὅπου ἐγὼ ὑπάγω οἴδατε, καὶ τὴν ὁδὸν 
5. Λέγει αὐτῷ Θωμᾶς, “' Κύριε, οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ὑπάγεις ' 
καὶ πῶς δυνάµεθα”. τὴν ὁδὸν εἰδέναι ; 


/ alia, 3 A 
6. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


«Εγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή: οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρὸς 


1 Omit και before and οιδατε after την οδον with NBLX. The words occur in ΑΓ, 


probably inserted for clearness. 


2 Instead of δυναµεθα ειδεναι Tr.Ti.W.H.R. read οιδαµεν with BC*D. 


for His future would require to be 
entirely altered had there been no room 
for them in His Father’s house. ‘“ My 
Father’s house”’ is used in ii. 16 of the 
Temple? here of the immediate presence 
of the Father and of that condition in 
which His love and protection are un- 
interruptedly and directly experienced. 
This is most naturally thought of as a 
place, but with the corrective that “‘ it is 
not in heaven one finds God, but in God 
one finds heaven”. Cf. Godet. In this 
house, as in a great palace, cf. Iliad, vi. 
242, μοναὶ πολλαί εἶσιν. µονή (µένειν), 
only here and in ver. 23, means a place to 
abide in, and was used of a station ona 
journey, a resting place, quarters for the 
night, and in later ecclesiastical Greek 
a monastery. See Soph., Lexicon. 
‘‘ Mansions” reproduces the Vuigate 
‘“‘mansiones”. See further Wright’s 
Bible Word-Book. et δὲ μὴ . . . “were 
it not so, I would have told you,” 
‘“‘ademissem vobis spem inanem,” 
Grotius. Had there been no such place 
and no possibility of preparing it, He 
necessarily would have told them, 
because the very purpose of His leaving 
them was to prepare a place for them. 
ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον, a figure derived from 
the custom of sending forward one of 
a party to secure quarters and provide 
all requisites. Cf. the Alcestis, line 363: 
ἀλλ᾽ οὖν ἐκεῖσε προσδόκα μ’, ὅταν θάνω, 
καὶ Sap” ἑτοίμαί, ὡς συνοικήσουσά µοι. 
What was involved in the preparation 
here spoken of is detailed in Hebrews. 
Cf. Selby’s Ministry of the Lord, 275. 
—Ver. 3. Neither will He prepare a place 
and leave them to find their own way to 
it.—Kal ἐὰν πορευθῶ ... ἦτε “If I 
go’; that is, the commencement of this 
work as their forerunner was the pledge 
of itscompletion. And its completion is 
effected by His coming again and receiv- 
ing them to Himself, or ‘‘to His own 
home,” πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. Cf. xx. 10.— 
πάλιν ἔρχομαι καὶ παραλήμψομαι, “I 


come again and will receive”. The 
present is used in ἔρχομαι as if the 
coming were so certain as to be already 
begun, cf. v. 25. For παραλήμψομαι 
see Cant. viii.2. The promise is fulfilled 
in the death of the Christian, and it has 
changed the aspect of death. The 
personal second coming of Christ is not 
a frequent theme in this Gospel. The 
ultimate object of His departure and 
return is ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἦτε. 
Cf.1 Thess. iv. 17, 2 Cor. ν. 8, Phil. i. 
23. The object of Christ’s departure is 
permanent reunion and the blessedness 
of the Christian. 

Vv. 4-7. A second interruption occa- 
sioned by Thomas.—Ver. 4. καὶ ὅπου 
ἐγὼ ὑπάγω οἴδατε τὴν ὁδόν. The ἐγώ is 
emphatic: the disciples knew the direc- 
tion in which He was going.—Ver. 5. But 
this statement bewilders the despondent 
Thomas, who gloomily interjects: Κύριε 
... εἰδέαι; Thomas’ difficulty is that 
not knowing the goal they cannot know 
the way. In the reply of Jesus both the 
goal and the way are disclosed.—Ver. 6. 
ἐγώ εἰμι . . . ἐμοῦ. ‘I am the way and 
the truth and the life: no one comes te 
the Father save through me.” I do not 
merely point out the way and teach the 
truth and bestow life, but I am the way 
and the truth and thelife, so that by attach- 
ment to me one necessarily is in the way 
and possesses the truth and the life. ‘‘ The 
way” here referred to is the way to the 
Father. He is the goal of all human 
aspiration: and there is but one way to 
the Father, “πο one comes,” etc.—kat 
ἡ ἀλήθεια, ‘and the truth,” primarily 
about God and the way to Him, but also 
as furnishing us with all knowledge 
which we now require for life. Thomas 
craved knowledge sufficient to guide 
him in the present crisis. Jesus says: 
You have it in me.—xat ἡ ζωή, “ and the 
life’ ; the death which casts its shadow 
over the eleven and Himself is itself to 
be swallowed up in life. Those who 


™ 


3---12. 


τὸν πατέρα, ei μὴ δι ἐμοῦ. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


823 


7. εἰ ἐγνώκειτέ µε, καὶ τὸν πατέρα µου 


‘ 32 ees 
ἐγνώκειτε ἄν: καὶ ἔ dm ἄρτι γινώσκετε αὐτὸν, καὶ ἑωράκατε αὐτόν. g xiii. το 


δ. Λέγει αὐτῷ Φίλιππος, “ Κύριε, δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα, 


ἡμιν.” 
καὶ οὐκ ἔγνωκάς µε Φίλιππε ; 


ϱ. Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Τοσοῦτον χρόνον μεθ ὑμῶν εἰμι, 


as nih τες, 
Kal" ἀρκεί h Prov. 
Xxx. 16. 


6 ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ, ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρο - 
‘ ~ 9 , -* ς a a s 

καὶ πῶς σὺ λέγεις, Δεῖξον ἡμῖν τὸν πατέρα ; 

ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί ἐστι ; 


10. οὐ πιστεύεις ὅτι 
τὰ ῥήματα ἃ ἐγὼ 


λαλῶ ὑμῖν, ' ἀπ᾿ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐ λαλῶ: 6 δὲ πατὴρ 6? ἐν ἐμοὶ } µένων, iv. το refi. 


αὐτὸς ποιεῖ τὰ ἔργα. 


΄ , 9 > 8 > ρ A A 
11. πιστεύετε μοι οτι εγω εν τῷ πατρι, καιο 
‘ > 3 ms 3 δὲ 5 AY , 3 BG , , 
πατηρ εν εμ.οἳ ει οε μὴ, la τα εργα αυτα πιστευετε μοι. 


«4 Vi. 56, etc. 


12. 


᾽αμὴν dui λέγω ὑμῖν, 6 πιστεύων eis ἐμὲ, τὰ ἔργα ἃ ἐγὼ ποῖω, 


> ο) , ν΄ ς , , , o 31 5 A % 
KOKELVOS ποιησει, και μείζονα τουτων ποιησει * οτι εγω προς τον 


k Mt. xxi. 
21. 


1 Instead of εγνωκειτε αν W.H. read αν ηδειτε with BCL 33. 


are one with Jesus cannot die. They 
are possessed of the source of life. 
Further see Hort’s The Way, etc., 
and Bernard’s Central Teaching. — 
οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται, ‘no one comes. to the 
Father save through me” as the way, 
the truth, the life. It is not ‘‘ through 
believing certain propositions regarding 
me” nor “' through some special kind of 
faith,” but ‘‘ through me ”’.—Ver. 7. He 
is the essential knowledge, et ἐγνώκειτέ 
pe . . . Some press the distinction 
between ἐγνώκειτε and ᾖἤδειτε, “the 
first representing a knowledge acquired 
and progressive; the second a know- 
ledge perceptive andimmediate”’. But 
this discrimination is here inappropriate. 
The clause explains the foregoing. The 
Father is in Jesus, and to know Him 
is to know the Father. They had un- 
consciously been coming to the Father 
and living in Him. Now they were to 
do so consciously: ἀπ᾿ ἄρτι γινώσκέτε 
... αὐτόν. The repeated αὐτόν brings 
out the point, that it was the Father that 
was henceforth to be recognised by them 
when they saw and thought of Jesus: 
**ye know Him and have seen Him”’. 
Vv. 8-14. A third interruption by 
Philip ; to.which Fesus replies, append- 
ing to His answer a promise which 
springs out of what He had said to 
Philip.—Ver.8. Λέγει . . . ἡμῖν. Philip, 
seizing upon the ἑωράκατε αὐτόν of νετ. 
7, utters the universal human craving to 
see God, to have the same indubitable 
direct knowledge of Him as we have of 
one another. Perhaps Philip supposed 
some appearance visible to the eye 
would be granted. Always there persists 
the feeling that more might be done to 


make God known than has been done.— 
Ver. ο. Jesus corrects the error, and 
guides the craving to its true satisfaction. 
Τοσοῦτον χρόνον . . . πατέρα [τοσοῦτον 
χρόνον may be a gloss for the dative 
which is found in ΣΡΙ]. The mani- 
festation which Philip craves had been 
made, and made continuously for some 
considerable time; for so long that it 
was matter of surprise and regret to 
Jesus that Philip needed still to be 
taught that he who saw Jesus saw the 
Father. It is implied that not to see the 
Father in Jesus was not to know Him. 
—Ver. 10. ov πιστεύεις . . . ἐστι: 
This unbelief was involved in Philip’s 
question, but when the question of the 
mutual indwelling of the Father and 
Jesus was thus directly put to him, he 
would keve no doubt as to the answer. 
of. x. 38. The fact of the union is in- 
disputable; the mode is inexplicable; 
some of the results are indicated in the 
words: τὰ ῥήματα . . . τὰ ἔργα. See 
vil. 16-18 and v. 19. The mutual in- 
dwelling is such that everything Jesus 
says or does is the Father’s saying or 
doing. This was so obvious that Jesus 
could appeal to the works He did in case 
His assertion was disbelieved.—Ver. 11. 
πιστεύετέ µοι . . . πιστεύετε. ‘ Believe 
me,” ᾖ.6., my assertion, not my mani- 
festation, ‘‘or if you find that difficult, 
believe on account of the works them- 
selves”. The mention of His works and 
the evidence they afford that He is in 
the Father suggests to Him a ground of 
comfort for His disciples in view of His 
departure. And from this point onwards 
in this chapter it is to the comforting of 
the disciples our Lord addresses Him- 


XIV. 


τι ἂν αἰτήσητε lay τῷ ὀνόματί 


πατὴρ ἐν τῷ vig. 14. ἐάν τι 


824 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 
Γχν.1δ πατέρα µου πορεύοµαι. 13. καὶ ὅ 
µου, τοῦτο ποιήσω: ἵνα δοξασθῇ 6 
αἰτήσητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου, ἐγὼ ποιήσω. 
m Burton, 


15. ““Edv ἀγαπᾶτέ µε, τὰς ἐντολὰς τὰς ἐμὰς ™ τηρήσατε.ὶ 


16. 


250. a 
nver.26; καὶ ἐγὼ ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα, καὶ ἄλλον " παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν, 


xv. 26; 
Jo. i 


XVi. 13. 


xvi.7. 1 ἵνα µένῃ μεθ ὑμῶν eis τὸν αἰῶνα, 17. τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ 6 
1. Te a - 
οχν.2;. Κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν, ὅτι οὗ θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ, οὐδὲ γινώσκει αὐτό” 


1 a A a 
Jo.iv.6. ὑμεῖς δὲ γινώσκετε αὐτὸ, ὅτι wap’ ὑμῖν péver,? καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ~orar.® 


' τηρησετε is read in BL 54, 73, “ye will keep”. This is adopted by Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 
τηρησατε, “keep,” is found in ADQ, it. vulg. and other versions. 


2 The vulg. has “' manebit,” having read pevet. So Arm. and Aeth. versions. 
’ T.R. supported by RAD?LMl 33. εστιν by BD* 1, 22, and is adopted by Tr. and 
W.H. 


self. First, in vv. 12-14: second, in vv. 
15-17; third, in vv. 18-21. The mention 
of the Paraclete in connection with this 
third item of encouragement gives rise to 
a fourth interruption, this time by Judas, 
vv. 22-24; and at ver. 25 Jesus resumes 
His explanation of the Paraclete’s func- 
tion, and closes with several considera- 
tions calculated to remove their fears.— 
Ver. 12. ἁἀμὴν . . . ποιήσει. The first 
encouragement is the assurance that 
through Christ’s absence the disciples 
would be enabled to do greater works 
than Jesus Himself had done. These 
‘‘ greater”? works were the spiritual 
effects accomplished by the disciples, 
especially the great novel fact of conver- 
sion. See this developed in Parker's 
The Paraclete. Such works were to be 
possible ὅτι . . . πορεύοµαι. It was by 
founding a spiritual religion and altering 
men’s views of the spiritual world Christ 
enavled His followers to do these greater 
works. Here this is explained on the 
plane of the disciples’ thoughts and in 
this form: “I go to my Father, the 
source of all power, and whatever you 
ask in my name I will do it ’.—Ver. 13. 
τοῦτο ποιήσω, SO what they do is still 
His doing ; one condition being attached 
to their prayers, that they ask ἐν τῷ 
ὀνόματί pov. The name of a person 
can only be used when we seek to en- 
force his will and further his interests. 
This gives the condition of successful 
prayer: it must be for the furtherance 
of Christ’s kingdom. For the end of all 
is ἵνα δοξασθῃ 6 πατὴρ ἐν τῷ vid, that 
is, that the fulfilment of God’s purpose 
in sending forth His Son may be mani- 
fest in Christ’s people and in their 
beneficent work in the world.—Ver. 14. 
In ver. 14 the promise is repeated, as 


Euthymius says, for confirmation: τὸ 
αὐτὸ λέγει βεβαιῶν μάλιστα τὸν λόγον. 
Perhaps, too, additional significance is 
given to His agency by introducing ἐγώ. 
Cf. Bengel and Meyer. 

Vv. 15-17. The second encouragement : 
the promise of another Paraclete.—Ver. 
15. éav... τηβήσατε. The fulfilment 
of the promise He is about to give 
depends upon their condition of heart 
and life. This therefore He announces 
as the preamble to the promise. On 
their side there would be a constant 
endeavour to carry out His instructions : 
on His side κἀγὼ ἐρωτήσω . . . During 
His ministry Jesus has said little of the 
Spirit. Now on the eve of His departure 
He directs attention to this “' alter ego”’. 
He designates Him ἄλλον παράκλητον, 
implying that Jesus Himself was a 
Paraclete. See 1 John ii. 1. παράκλητος᾽ 
is literally advocatus, called to one’s aid, 
especially in a court of justice. [Cf 
παραστάτης in Arist., Thesm., 360; 
Eccl., 9.) See especially Hatch, Essays 
in Bibl. Greek, p. 82, and Westcott’s 
6 Additional Note’’. ‘‘ Comforter” in 
A.V. is used in its original sense of 
“strengthener”’ (con, fortis); as in 
Wiclifi’s version of Phil. iv. 13, ““I may 
all thingis in him that comfortith me”’ 
(see Wright’s Bible Word-Book). Thin 
Paraclete should remain with them fer 
ever, and He is specifically designated 
(ver. 17) τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, cf. xvi. 
13,14; He would enable them to under- 
stand the new truths which were battling 
with their old conceptions, and to re- 
adjust their beliefs round a new centre. 
He would explain the departure of Christ, 
and the principles of the new economy 
under which they were henceforth ta 
live. This spirit was to be peculiarly 


πΆ---01. 


18. οὐκ ἀφήσω ὑμᾶς Ρ ὀρφανούς: έρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 
υμικρὸν καὶ 6 κόσμος µε οὐκ ἔτι θεωρεῖ, ὑμεῖς δὲ θεωρεῖτέ µε: ὅτι 


:ἐγὸ £0, καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσεσθε. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


δος 


19. ἔτι p Jas. i. 27 
q Ver. 3. 


3 3 , A. 6 / ’ θ ς αν 
20. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ γνώσεσθε ὑμεῖς 
ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί µου, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν ἐμοὶ, κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. 


21.6 


ἔχων τὰς ἐντολάς µου καὶ τηρῶν αὐτὰς, ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν 6 ἀγαπῶν µε" 


ς a > ~ > , ε 9 A / 4 > 
6 δὲ ἀγαπῶν µε, ἀγαπηθήσεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός pou: καὶ ἐγὼ 


theirs, ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν, the 
characteristically worldly cannot receive 
that which can only be apprehended by 
spiritually prepared persons. It has been 
proposed to render λαβεῖν, “ seize”? or 
‘‘apprehend,” as if a contrast to the 
world’s apprehension and dismissal of 
Jesus were intended. But λαμβάνειν τὸ 
πνεῦμα is regularly used in N.T. to 
express ‘‘receiving the Spirit,” Gal. iii. 
2; 1 Cor. ii. 12. The world cannot 
receive the Spirit ὅτι ev θεωρεῖ αὐτὸ, 
. . . Outward sense cannot apprehend 
the invisible Spirit ; and the world has no 
personal experience of His presence and 
power; but ye, ὑμεῖς, have this experi- 
mental knowledge, ‘‘ because He is even 
now abiding with you (has already begun 
His ministry ; or, rather, has this for His 
characteristic that He remains with you, 
making you the object of His work), and 
shall be within you”. With the entire 
statement cf. 1 Cor. ii. 8-14. 

Vv. 18-21. The third encouragement : 
that fesus Himself will come to them and 
make Himself known to them.—Ver. 18. 
Great as was the promise of this other 
helper, this spirit of truth, it did not 
-seem to compensate for the departure of 
Jesus. ‘Another,’ any other, was un- 
able to fill the blank; it was Himself 
they craved. Therefore He goes on, οὐκ 
ἀφήσω ὑμᾶς dphavots: ἔρχομαι πρὸς 
ύμας, “I will not abandon you as 
orphans,” ὀρφανός (orbus) “' bereaved,” 
used of fathers bereft of children (1 
Thess. ii. 17, Dionys. Hal., i.); as well 
as of children bereft of parents. See 
Elsner. πατρικῆς εὐσπλαγχνίας τὸ 
ῥῆμα, Euthymius. Cf. Ps, ix. 14, 
ὀρφανῷ σὺ ἦσθα βοηθό. Wetstein 
quotes Rabbi Akiba as lamenting the 
death of Rabbi Eleazar, ‘‘Vae mihi... 
quia totam hance generationem reliquisti 
orphanam”’. The utter helplessness of 
the disciples without their Master is 
indicated. ἔρχομαι πρὸς pas. From the 
absence of ἐγώ it may be gathered that 
Jesus means to point out not so much 
that it is He who is coming through the 
spirit to them, as that His apparent 
departure is really a nearer approach.— 
Ver. 19. In a short time, ἔτι puxpdv, the 


‘ 


world would no longer see Him, but His 
disciples would be conscious of His 
presence, ὑμεῖς δὲ θεωρεῖτέ µε, present 
for immediate future. His presence 
would be manifested in their new life 
which they would trace to Him, ὅτι ἐγὼ 
ζῶ, καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσεσθε. This is confirmed 
by Paul’s “‘ No longer I, but Christ liveth 
inme”. Gal. Π. 2ο. The grand evidence 
of Christ’s continued life and presence is 
the Christian life of the disciple.—Ver. 
20. ἐν ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ, “in that day,” 
which does not mean Pentecost, but the 
new Christian era which was to be 
characterised by these experiences. Cf. 
Holtzmann. The sense of a new life 
produced by Christ would compel the 
conviction ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί . . 

“that I am in the Father” in vital union 
with the source of all life, ‘‘and that 
you are in me,” vitally connected with 
me so as to receive that life that I live, 
*‘and I in you,” filling you with all the 
fulness that is in myself, living out my 
own life in and through you, and finding 
in you room for the output of all I am.— 
Ver. 21. The conditions on which de- 
pended the manifestation of the departed 
Christ are then exhibited, 6 ἔχων . . . 
ἐμαντόν. The love to which Christ pro- 
mises a manifestation of Himself is not 
an idle sentiment or shallow fancy, but a 
principle prompting obedience, 6 ἔχων 
τὰς ἐντολάς µου, cf. I John ii. 7, iv. 21, 
2 John 5; it means more than “hearing,” 
and is yet not equivalent to τηρῶν; it 
seems to point to the permanent posses- 
sion of the commandments in conscious- 
ness. This finds its appropriate expres- 
sion in τηρῶν attds— keeping them,” 
observing them in the life. This is the 
expression and proof of love, and this 
love finds its response and reward in the 
love of the Father and of the Son, and in 
the manifestation of the Son to the 
individual. The appropriateness of in- 
troducing the Father and His love 
appears in νετ, 24. The love of Christ 
is that which prompts the manifestation. 
ἐμφανίσω, the word is used by Moses in 
Exodus . xxxiii. 13. Reynolds says: 
‘* This remarkable word implies that the 
scene or place of the higher manifestation 


826 ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XIV. 


, a ~ 
ἀγαπήσω αὐτὸν, καὶ ἐμφανίσω αὐτῷ ἐμαυτόν.” 22. Δέγει αὐτῷ 
Ιούδας, οὐχ & ᾿Ισκαριώτης, “Κύριε, τί Ὑέγονεν ὅτι ἡμῖν µέλλεις 
πο. Lf 4 ress ~ , 2 j 

ἐμφανίζειν σεαυτὸν, καὶ οὐχὶ τῷ κόσµῳ; 


r Exod. 23. ᾿Απεκρίθη 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 
Xxxiii. 13. 


Mt. xxvii. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, “Εάν τι ἀγαπᾷ µε, τὸν λόγον µου τηρήσει, Kal 6 


fe πώ πατήρ pou ἀγαπήσει αὐτὸν, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλευσόμεθα, καὶ * μονὴν 
“ver παρ) αὐτῷ ποιήσομεν.ὶ 24. 6 μὴ ἀγαπῶν µε, τοὺς λόγους µου οὐ 
τηρεῖ: καὶ 6 λόγος ὃν ἀκούετε, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸς, ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέµψαντός 

µε πατρός. 
t νετ. 16. 25. “Taira λελάληκα ὑμῖν wap ὑμῖν pevav: 26. 6 δὲ "παρά- 


κλητος, τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ Άγιον, ὃ πέµψει ὅ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου, 
ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδάξει πάντα, καὶ ὑπομνήσει Spas πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν. 


1 ποιησοµεθα has the stronger attestation, being read in 59 ΡΒΙ/Χ 33. 


will be in (év) the consciousness of the 
soul”. The word however is currently 
used for outward manifestation ; although 
here the manifestation alluded to is 
inward. Cf. Judas’ words. The nature 
of the manifestation has already been 
explained, ver. 19. 

Vv. 22-24. A fourth interruption, by 
‘¥udas.—Ver. 22. All that Jesus has said 
has borne more and more clearly in upon 
the mind of the disciples the disappoint- 
ing conviction that the manifestation 
referred to is not to be on the expected 
Messianic lines. Accordingly Judas, not 
Iscariot, but Thaddaeus or Lebbaeus 
(Mt. κ. 3; Lk. vi. 16), says: τί yéyovev 
κ. τε A. ‘What has happened that,” 
etc. ? or, ‘“‘ What has occurred to deter- 
mine you,” etc.? Kypke quotes from 
Arrian apposite instances of the use of 
this expression. Judas expresses, no 
doubt, the thought of the rest. Was 
there to be no such public manifestation 
of Jesus as Messiah, as would convince 
the world?—Ver. 23. To this Jesus 
replies ἐάν τις . . . ποιήσοµεν. The 
answer explains that the manifestation, 
being spiritual, must be individual and to 
those spiritually prepared. ‘It con- 
templates not a public discovery of 
power, but a sort of domestic visitation 
of love.” Bernard. πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐλενσό- 
µεθα, “to him we will come”; Jesus 
without scruple unites Himself with the 
Father. μονὴν . . . ποιησόµεθα, a classi- 
cal expression. see Thuc., i. 131, μονὴν 
. ToLovpevos. ““Wewill make our abode 
with him, will be daily his guests, yea, 
house and table companions.”’ Luther 
in Meyer. povy is here used in a sense 
different from that of ver. 2, .where it 
means a place to abide in.—Ver. 24. 
The necessity of love as a condition of 


this manifested presence is further em- 
phasised by stating the converse, 6 py 
ἀγαπῶν pe... watpds. The κόσμος 
of ver. 22 is here more closely ἀεβπεά by 
6 μὴ ἀγαπῶν px. See Holtzmann. 

Vv. 25-31. The conversation closed by 
bequest of peace. The genuineness of 
this report of the last words of Jesus is 
guaranteed by the frequency with which 
He seems to be on the point of breaking 
off. The constant resumption, the add- 
ing of things that occur on the moment, 
these are the inimitable touch of nature. 
At this point the close seems imminent. 
—Ver. 25. Tatra λελάληκα . . . µένων, 
implying that this abiding and teaching 
were now at an end.—Ver. 26, But His 
teaching would be continued and com- 
pleted by the Paraclete: ὁ δὲ παρά- 
κλητος . . . ὑμῖν. The Paraclete is now 
identified with τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, and 
His connection with Christ is further 
guaranteed by the clause 6 wépwWer ὁ 
πατὴρ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί pov, “which the 
Father will send in my name,” that is, 
as representing me and promoting my 
interests. And this He will accomplish 
by teaching: ἐκεῖνος “He,” and no 
longer the visible Christ, ‘‘ will teach 
you all things,” πάντα in contrast to the 
ταῦτα (νετ. 25) with which Christ had to 
be satisfied; but wavra must itself be 
limited by the needs and capacities of 
the disciples.—xal ὑπομνήσει . . . “and 
will bring to your remembrance all that 
I said to you,” that is, the teaching of 
the Spirit should so connect itself with 
the teaching of Christ as to revive the 
memory of forgotten words of His, and 
give them a new meaning. Cf. especiaily 
XVi. 12-14.—Ver. 27. εἰρήνην ἀφίημι 
ὑμῖν, ‘‘ peace I bequeath to you”. The 
usual farewell was given with the word 


32---31. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


827 


27. εἰρήνην ἀφίημι ὑμῖν, εἰρήνην τὴν ἐμὴν δίδωµι ὑμῖν: οὗ καθὼς 6 


κόσμος δίδωσιν, ἐγὼ δίδωµι ὑμῖν. 
μηδὲ ᾿ δειλιάτω. 
ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 

οµαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ΄ ὅτι ὁ 


εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ µε, ἐχάρητε ἂν ὅτι εἶπον, Πορεύ- 
πατήρ µου μείζων µου ἐστί. 
νῦν εἴρηκα ὑμῖν " πρὶν γενέσθαι: ἵνα ὅταν γένηται, πιστεύσητε. 


“pn ταρασσέσθω ὑμὼν ἡ καρδία, u ver. τ. 
29. ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν, Ὑπάγω καὶ vDeut.i.er 


Is, xiii. 7. 


20. καὶ 


w Is. xlvi. 
1ο. Ecclus. 


30. “OdK ἔτι πολλὰ λαλήσω pel ὑμῶν": ἔρχεται γὰρ *6 τοῦ xiviii. 25. 


κόσμου τούτου ἄρχων, καὶ ἐν ἐμοὶ οὐκ ἔχει οὐδέν' 41. GAN’ ἵνα γνῷ 


X xii. 31 
reff. 


6 κόσμος, ὅτι ἀγαπῶ τὸν πατέρα, καὶ καθὼς ἐνετείλατό por 6 πατὴρ, 


o ~ 
OUTW ποιω. 


““peace’’. And Jesus uses the familiar 
word, but instead of uttering a mere wish 
He turns it into a bequest, intimating 
His power not only to wish but to give 
peace in the further description εἰρήνην 
τὴν ἐμὴν δίδωμµι ὑμῖν, ‘my peace I give 
unto you”; the peace which He had at- 
tained by means of all the disturbance and 
opposition He had encountered. Leaving 
them His work, His view of life, His 
Spirit, He necessarily left them His 
peace.—ov Kaas ὁ κόσμος δίδωσιν, ἐγὼ 
δίδωμι ὑμῖν, “not as the world gives 
give I to you”. This is referred by 
Grotius to the difference between the 
empty form of salutation and Christ’s 
gift of peace. (‘* Mundus, 1.¢., major 
pars hominum, salute alios impertit sono 
vocis, nihil saepe de re cogitans; et si 
cogitet, tamen id alteri nihil prodest.’’) 
So too Holtzmann and Bernard. Meyer 
considers this ‘‘ quite out of relation to 
the profound seriousness of the moment,” 
and understands the allusion to be to the 
treasures, honours, pleasures which the 
world gives. There is no reason why 
the primary reference should not be to 
the salutation, with a secondary reference 
to the wider contrast. This gift of peace, 
if accepted, would secure them against 
perturbation, and so Jesus returns to the 
exhortation of ver, 1, μὴ ταρασσέσθω... 
“ Observing that the opening sentence 
of the discourse is here repeated and 
fortified, we understand that all enclosed 
within these limits is to be taken as a 
whole in itself, and that the intervening 
words compose’ a divine antidote to that 
troubling and desolation of heart which 
the Lord’s departure would suggest.” 
Bernard. He now adds a word, μηδὲ 
δειλιάτω, which carries some reproach 
init. Theophrastus (Char., xxvii.) defines 
δειλία as ὄπειξίς τις ψυχῆς ἔμφοβος, a 
shrinking of the soul through fear. With 
this must be taken Aristotle’s description, 
Nic. Eth,, iii. 6, 7, 6 δὲ τῷ φοβεῖσθαι 


ἐγείρεσθε, ” ἄγωμεν ἐντεῦθεν. 


γχὶ.7 


ὑπερβάλλων δειλός. It may be rendered 
‘neither let your heart timidly shrink ”’. 
—Ver. 28. On the contrary quite other 
feelings should possess them: joy in 
sympathy with Him in His glorification 
a‘ad in expectation of the results of His 
going to the Father: ἠκούσατε.. 

πατέρα. ‘If ye loved me,” an almost 
playful way of reproaching their sadness. 
There was no doubt of their love, but it 
was an unintelligent love. They failed 
to consider the great joy that awaited 
Him in His going tothe Father. This 
going to the Father was cause for rejoic- 
ing, ὅτι 6 πατήρ pov [pov is not well 
authenticated and should be deleted] 
μείζων µου ἐστί, ‘because the Father 
is greater than I” ; and can therefore 
fulfil all the loving purposes of Christ to 
His disciples. ‘‘ The life which He has 
begun with them and for them will be 
raised to a higher level.” They had 
seen the life He had lived and were dis- 
turbed because it was coming to an end: 
but it was coming to an end because 
absorbed in the greater life He would 
have with the Father. The theological 
import of the words is discussed by 
Westcott, who cites patristic opinions 
and refers to Bull and Pearson. In 
all that Jesus did, it was the Father’s 
will He carried out, and with powers 
communicated by the Father: the Father 
is the Originator and End of all His 
work in the world. Throughout the 
ministry of Jesus the Father is repre- 
sented as “' greater’ than the Son. That 
it should require to be explicitly affirmed, 
as here, is the strongest evidence that He 
was Divine.—Ver. 29. καὶ νῶν .. . πισ- 
τεύσητε. ‘I have told you now before it 
came to pass,”’ i.e., He has told them of 
His departure, that they might not be 
terrified or depressed by its occurrence, 
but might recognise it as foretold by 
Him as the consummation of His work 
and so might have their faith increased. 


828 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XV. 
a Ps, bxxx, XV. 1. “EPO cipe ἡ "ἄμπελος ἡ *adnOiwh, καὶ 6 πατήρ µου 6 
αι γεωργός ἐστι. 2. πῶν κλῆμα ἐν ἐμοὶ μὴ φέρον καρπὸν, ’ αἴρει αὐτό - 
b Rom. xi. ος . % ‘ / να , ς 
17. καὶ πᾶν τὸ καρπὸν Φέρον, καθαίρει αὐτὸ, ἵνα πλείονα καρπὸν φέρῃ. 


Cf. xiii. το.-- Μετ. 30. οὐκ ἔτι .. 
ὑμῶν. “I will no longer speak much 
with you’; ‘‘temporis angustiae 
abripiunt verba,’”’ Grotius.—épxerat . - . 
οὐδέν. “The ruler of this world” is 
Satan, see xii, 31. He ‘‘ comes”’ in the 
treachery of Judas (xiii. 27) and all that 
followed. But this coming was without 
avail, because ἐν ἐμοὶ οὐκ ἔχει οὐδέν, 
“in me he hath nothing,” nothing he 
can call his own, nothing he can claim 
as his, and which he can use for his 
purposes. He is ruler of the world, but 
in Christ has.no possessions or rule. A 
notable assertion of sinlessness.—Ver. 
31. Jesus goes to death not crushed by 
the machinations of Satan, ‘‘ but that 
the world may know that I love the 
Father and as the Father has commanded 
me,” οὕτω ποιῶ, “thus I do,” applies 
to His whole life, which was throughout 
tuled by regard to the Father’s com- 
mandment, but in the foreground of His 
thought at present is His departure from 
the disciples, His death.—éyetpeo@e, 
ἄγωμεν ἐντεῶθεν, “arise, let us go hence,” 
similar to the summons in Mt. xxvi. 46, 
but the idea of referring so common an 
expression to a reminiscence of the 
Synoptic passage is absurd. On the 
movement made in consequence of the 
summons, see ΟΠ xv. I. 

In chapters xv. and xvi. Jesus (r) 
explains the relation He holds to those 
who continue His work, xv. 1-17; (2) 
the attitude the world will assume to 
His followers, xv. 18-25; (3) the con- 
quest of the world by the Spirit, 26-xvi.. 
11; and (4) adds some last words, en- 
couragements and warnings, xvi. 12-33. 
In this last conversation, which extends 
from chap. xiii. to chap. xvi. inclusive, 
the closing words of chap. xiv., ἐγείρεσθε 
ἄγωμεν ἐντεῦθεν, form the best marked 
division. At this point Jesus and His 
disciples rose from table. Whether 
the conversation was continued in the 
house or after they left it may be doubt- 
ful; but probabilities are certainly much 
in favour of the former alternative. A 
party of twelve could not conveniently 
talk together on the street. In xviii. 1 
we read that when Jesus had uttered the 
prayer recorded in xvii. ἐξῆλθε σὺν τοῖς 
μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ πέραν τοῦ χειμάρρου 
τῶν Κέδρων. This, however, may refer 
to their leaving the city, not the house. 


Bengel thinks they may have paused in 
the courtyard of the house. 

CHAPTER XV.—Vv. 1-17. The rela- 
tion between Fesus and His disciples 
represented by the relation of the vine 
and its branches.—Ver. 1. ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ἡ 
ἄμπελος ἡ ἀληθινή, ‘1 am the true 
vine.” % ἀληθινή suggests a contrast 
to other vines to which this title could 
not be applied: but not to a vine trailing 
across the window of the room where 
they were, nor to the golden vine on the 
Temple gate, nor to the vines on the 
slopes of Olivet; but to Israel, the 
stock which God had planted to bring 
forth fruit to Him, see Ps. Ixxx., Is. v., 
Jer. ii. 21. ἐγὼ δὲ ἐφύτευσά σε ἄμπελον 
καρποφόρον πᾶσαν ἀληθινήν. The vine 
was a recognised symbol also of the 
Messiah, see Delitzsch in Expositor, 
third series, iii., p. 68, and in his Iris, 
pp. 180-190, E. Tr. On the Maccabean 
coinage Israel was represented by a 
vine. It was the present situation which 
here suggested the figure. As Jesus 
rose to depart the disciples crowd 
round Him with anxiety on every face. 
Their helplessness and trouble appeal 
to Him, and He encourages them by re- 
minding them that, although left to do 
His work in the world, they would still 
be united to Him as truly as the branches 
to the vine. He and His together are 
the true Vine of God. καὶ ὁ πατήρ µου ὁ 
γεωργός ἐστι, “'απά my Father is the 
vine-dresser’’. What is now happening 
is the Father’s doing, and, therefore, 
tends to the well-being and fruitfulness of 
the vine. [‘‘ Pater qui cum diligit me, 
certe servabit totum fruticem.’’ Melanch- 
thon.]—Ver. 2. The function of the vine- 
dresser is at once described: wav κλῆμα 
.. « Φέρῃ. κλῆμα, or more fully as in 
Xen., Oecon., xix. 8, κλῆμα ἀμπέλον, is 
the shoot of the vine which is annually 
put forth. It is from κλάω, “I break,” 
as also is κλάδος, but Wetstein quotes 
Pollux to show that κλάδος was appro- 
priated to the shoots of the olive, 
while κλῆμα signified a vine-shoot. Of 
these shoots there are two kinds, the 
fruitless, which the vine-dresser αἴρει : 
“Tnutilesque falce ramos amputans,” 
Hor. Epod., ii. 13; the fruitful, which 
He καθαίρει [‘‘suavis rhythmus,” Ben- 
gel]. The full meaning of αἴρει is de- 
scribed in ver. 6: καθαίρει here denotes 


I—7. 


3. ἤδη ὑμεῖς 


4. µείνατε ἐν ἐμοὶ, κἀγὼ ἐν ὑμῖν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


829 


καθαροί ἐστε, διὰ τὸν λόγον ὃν λελάληκα ὑμῖν. «χι. το, 11; 


Xvil. 17. 


καθὼς τὸ κλῆμα οὐ δύναται 


ο , ~ Δ 
καρπὸν φέρειν ah ἑαυτοῦ, ἐὰν μὴ pelvy ἐν τῇ ἀμπέλῳ, οὕτως οὐδὲ 


ὑμεῖς, ἐὰν μὴ ἐν ἐμοὶ µείνητε. 
κλήματα. 


πολύν: ὅτι χωρὶς ἐμοῦ οὐ δύνασθε ποιεῖν οὐδέν. 
ἐβλήθη ἔξω ὡς τὸ κλῆμα, καὶ ἐξηράνθη, καὶ ἆ Mt. iii. το 


µείνη 1 ἐν ἐμοὶ, 


, 
«συνάγουσιν αὐτὰ καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλουσι, καὶ καίεται. 7. 
’ > > λ ‘ % ερ 4 > (Pete ή a2 3δν θέλ 
µείνητε ἐν ἐμοὶ, καὶ τὰ ῥήματά µου ἐν ὑμῖν µείνῃ, ὃ ἐὰν θέλητε 


5. ἐγώ εἶμι ἡ ἄμπελος, ὑμεῖς τὰ 


ὅ µένων ἐν ἐμοὶ, κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ, οὗτος Φέρει καρπὸν 


6. ἐὰν py τις 


ain and vii.19. 
EQY e iv. 36. Mt. 
Xiii. 47. 


1 µενη is better authenticated, being found in *ABD. 


especially the pruning requisit e for con- 
centrating the vigour of the tree on the 
one object, ἵνα πλείονα καρπὸν Φφέρῃ, 
that it may continually surpass itself, and 
yield richer and richer results. The 
vine-dresser spares no pains and no ma- 
terial on his plants, but all for the sake 
of fruit. [Cf. Cicero, De Senec., xv. 53.] 
The use of καθαίρει was probably deter- 
mined by the καθαροί of ver. 3.—Ver. 3. 
ἤδη ὑμεῖς καθαροί ἐστε: “ Already ye 
are clean”. καθαροί here means “ina 
condition fit to bear fruit”; in xiii. το, 
II, it is suggested by the feet-washing, 
and means “free from inward stain”. 
It is similarly used even in classical 
writers, διὰ τὸν λόγον ὃν λελάληκα ὑμῖν, 
“‘on account of the word which I have 
spoken unto you”. For διά in this sense 
as indicating the source, see vi. 67. The 
word which Jesus had spoken to them, 
i.e., the whole revelation He had made, 
had brought spiritual life, and, therefore, 
cleansing. But this condition they must 
strive to maintain, µείνατε ἐν ἐμοί, kayo 
ἐν ὑμῖν. pev@ must be understood after 
kayo. Maintain your belief in me, your 
attachment to me, your derivation of 
hope, aim, and motive from me: and I 
will abide in you, filling you with all the 
life you need to represent me on earth. 
All the divine energy you know to be in 
me will now pass through you.—Ver. 4. It 
is in and through you I live henceforth. 
καθὼς τὸ κλῆμα . . . µείνητε [or µένητε]; 
illustrating by the figure the necessity 
of the foregoing injunction. A branch 
that falls to the ground, and no longer 
abides in the vine as a living part of it, 
cannot bear fruit, so neither can ye 
except ye abide in me. That is, ye can- 
not bear the fruit my Father, the vine- 
dresser, looks for, and by which He will 
be glorified, νετ. 8.—Ver. 5. ἐγὼ... 
kAxjpata—‘‘I am the Vine, ye are the 
branches,” together forming one tree and 


possessed by one common life. The 
stock does not bear fruit, but only 


the branches; the branches cannot 
live without the stock. Therefore it 
follows 6 µένων . . . οὐδέ. The one 


thing needful for fruit-bearing is that we 
abide in Christ, and He in us; that the 
branch adhere to the vine, and the life of 
the vine flow into the branch. xwpis 
ἐμοῦ, “in separation from me’’. See 
Eph. ii. 12. Grotius gives the equiva- 
lents ‘‘ seorsim,” ‘‘ separatim,” κατὰ 
µονάς, Kar αὐτό. οὐ δύνασθε ποιεῖν 
οὐδέν, “ye cannot do anything,” abso- 
lutely nothing according to i. 3,43; but 
here the meaning is, ‘“‘ye cannot do 
anything which is glorifying to God, 
anything which can be called fruit- 
bearing,” νετ. 8.—Ver. 6. ἐὰν µή τις 
µείνῃ, “if any one shall not have abided 
in me”. ἐβλήθη .. . ἐξηράνθη, the 
gnomic aorist, cf. 1 Peter i. 24; and see 
Burton, M. and T., 43, and Grotius: ‘* Hi 
aoristi sine designatione temporis signifi- 
cant quid fieri soleat, pro quo et praesens 
saepe usurpatur’’. The whole process 
undergone by the fruitless branch is 
described in these six verbs, αἴρει ver. 2, 
ἐβλήθη, ἐξηράνθη, cvvayovow, βάλλουσι, 
katerat, and each detail is thus given for 
the sake of emphasising the inevitable- 
ness and the completeness of the destruc- 
tion. ἐβλήθη ew ὡς τὸ κλῆμα, ‘is cast 
out,” i.e., from the vineyard, as the next 
words show; here this means hopeless 
rejection. The result is ἐξηράνθη, the 
natural capacity for fruit - bearing is 
destroyed. The figure derived from the 
treatment of the fruitless branch is con- 
tinued in συνάγουσιν . . . καίεται, cf, 
Mt. xiii. 49, 50; and 41, 42. On καίεται, 
Euthymius remarks οὐ μὴν κατακαίονται 
“but are not consumed”. And in Exod. 
iii. 2, the bush καίεται, but ov κατε- 
καίετο “' burns, but was not consumed’”’, 
But this only shows that without the 


αἰτήσεσθε,ὶ καὶ γενήσεται ὑμῖν. 
‘iva καρπὸν πολὺν Φέρητε' καὶ γενήσεσθε” ἐμοὶ µαθηταί. 


; XV. µου, 
12, etc. ir 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XV, 


8. ἐν τούτω ἐδοξάσθη 6 πατήρ 


See Bur- 9. Καθὼς ἠγάπησέ µε ὃ πατὴρ, κἀγὼ ἠγάπησα ὑμᾶς: Σµείνατε ἐν 


ton, 213. 
g Viil. 31. 


τῇ ἀγάπη τῇ ἐμῃ. 


1Ο. ἐὰν τὰς ἐντολάς µου τηρήσητε, μενεῖτε ἐν 


τῇ ἀγάπῃ µου: καθὼς ἐγὼ τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ πατρός µου τετήρηκα, 


καὶ µένω αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ. 
χαρὰ ἡ ἐμὴ ἐν ὑμῖν petvy,® καὶ ἡ χαρὰ ὑμῶν πληρωθῇῃ. 


II. ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἡ 
12. αὕτη 


bh νετ, 8τεβ. ἐστὶν ἡ ἐντολὴ ἡ ἐμὴ, "ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους, καθὼς ἠγάπησα 


1 αιτησεσθε, although supported by Ν and Π, must give place to the im- 


perative αιτησασθε found in ABDL. 


2 T.R. in ΝΑ. Ύγενησθε in BDLM adopted by Tr.W.H., ‘“‘and that ye be my 


disciples ”’. 
2 4 in ABD 33; µεινη in RLXM. 


miraculous interposition it would have 
been consumed.—Ver. 7. From the fate 
of those who do not abide in Him, Jesus 
turns to the results of faithful adherence— 
ἐὰν µείνητε . . . ὑμῖν. The expression is 
altered from that of vv. 3 and 5, instead 
of “and I in you,” we now have “and 
my words abide in you”; it is by means 
of His teaching and His commandments 
that Christ abides in His people, ana by 
His word they are fitted for fruit-bearing, 
ver. 3. Not that His words are a substi- 
tute for His personal presence, but its 
medium. But His presence is not to ener- 
gise in them as if they were machines; 
they are to consider the exigencies that 
arise, and, giving play to judgment and 
conscience, are to ask for appropriate 
manifestations of grace: 6 ἐὰν θέλητε 
αἰτήσασθε, ‘ask what ye will”. Petitions 
thus prompted by the indwelling word of 
Christ will necessarily be answered: 
καὶ γενήσεται vpiv.—Ver. 8. Further 
assurance of an answer is given in the 
fact that the γεωργός is glorified in the 
fruit-bearing branches: ἐν τούτῳ, ‘in 
this pre-eminently,”’ z.e., in your bearing 
much fruit, cf. vi. 29, 30, 40. So, rightly, 
Weiss and Holtzmann. For construction 
with ἵνα see Burton on Subject, Pre- 
dicate and Appositive clauses introduced 
by ἵνα.---ἐδοξάσθη 6 πατήρ pov, ἵνα, etc. 
ἐδοξάσθη, proleptic; cf. xiii. 31. The 
Father is glorified in everything which 
demonstrates that through Christ His 
grace reaches and governs men.—«at 
γενήσεσθε ἐμοὶ µαθηταί, “and ye shall 
become my disciples”. The ἐμοὶ 
µαθηταί seems to mean: This is the 
relation you will hold to me, viz., that 
of discipleship. ‘‘ A Christian never ‘is,’ 
but always ‘is becoming’ a Christian. 


And it is bv his fruitfulness that he in- 
dicates his claim to the name.” Westcott. 

Vv. 9-17. The disciples are urged to 
fulfil Christ’s purposes in the world, and 
are assured that if they abide in the love of 
Christ they will receive all they need for 
Sruit-bearing.—Ver. 9. Kalas ἠγάπησε 
.. « ἐμῃ. Love is the true bond which 
gives unity to the moral world, and in- 
spires discipleship. All that Christ 
experiences is the result of the Father’s 
love: all that the disciples are called to 
be and to do is the outcome of Christ’s 
love. This love of Christ was to be 
retained as their possession by their con- 
forming themselves to it: µείνατε ἐν τῇ 
ἀγάπῃ τῇ ἐμῇ, ‘abide in my love,” no 
longer ‘‘abide in me,” but specifically 
‘‘in my love”. Abide in it, for there is 
a possibility of your falling away from 
its enjoyment and possession.—Ver. Io. 
That possibility is defeated, ἐὰν τὰς 
ἐντολάς pov τηρήσητε. To encourage 
them in keeping His commandments He 
reminds them that He also has been 
subject to the same conditions, and by 
keeping the Father’s commandments 
has remained in His love.—Ver. 11. 
The great joy of iis life had been found 
in the consciousness of the Father’s love 
andin the keeping of Hiscommandments: 
this joy He desires that they may inherit, 
ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ἡ ἐμὴ ἐν 
ἡμῖν µείνῃ, ‘my joy,” {.ε., the joy I have 
enjoyed, the joy which I habitually feel in 
accomplishing the Father’s will. This 
joy is not an incommunicable monopoly. 
—kal ἡ χαρὰ ὑμῶν πληρωθῇ, ‘ and your 
joy be fuil,’’ which it could not be until 
they, like Him, had the spring of full joy 
in the consciousness of His love, and 
perfect obedience to Him; standing in 


8—17. 


ὑμᾶς. 
αὐτοῦ 'θῇ ὑπὲρ τῶν Φίλων αὐτοῦ. 
ποιῆτε ὅσα eyo ἐντέλλομαι ὑμῖν. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


831 


13. petLova ταύτης ἀγάπην οὐδεὶς ἔχει, ἵνα τις τὴν ψυχὴν 
14. ὑμεῖς ) φίλοι µου ἐστὲ, ἐὰν i x. tt reff 


Mt. xii. 5ο, 


15. οὐκέτι ὑμᾶς λέγω δούλους, 


ὅτι ὁ δοῦλος οὐκ olde τί ποιεῖὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ κύριος: ὑμᾶς δὲ εἴρηκα 
Φίλους, ὅτι πάντα ἃ ἤκουσα * παρὰ τοῦ πατρός µου, ἐγνώρισα ὑμῖν. k viii. 26, 


etc. 


16. οὐχ ὑμεῖς µε ἐξελέξασθε, ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ ἐξελεξάμην ὑμᾶς, καὶ ' έθηκα | Acts xx. 


28. 1 Cor. 


ε ~ o ε a“ ς . A 4 [4 A c a“ ee 
ὑμᾶς, ἵνα ὑμεῖς ὑπάγητε καὶ Ικαρπὸν Φέρητε, καὶ ὁ καρπὸς ὑμῶν xii. 23. 1 


Tim. i. 12. 


s ov a a ee a , τι 3 ροκ 2 , ο 5 
peevy ° ινα ο τι αν αιτήησητε τον πατερα "εν τῷ OVOLLATL µου, θῷ m xiv. 14. 


Pie 
υμιν. 


the same relation to Him as He to the 
Father.—Ver. 12. And that they might 
know definitely what His commandment 
(ver. το) is, He says, αὕτη . . . ὑμᾶς. 
“This is my commandment, that ye 
love one another as I have loved you.” 
Perhaps they expected minute, detailed 
instructions such as they had received 
when first sent out (Matt. x.). Instead 
of this, love was to be their sufficient 
guide. καθὼς ἠγάπησα tyas.—His love 
was at once the source and the measure 
of theirs. In His love for them fey 
were to find the spring of love to one 
another, and were to become trans- 
parencies through which His love would 
shine.—Ver. 13. And that they might 
not underrate the measure of this 
exemplary love, He says, peiLova ταύτης 
ἀγάπην .. . αὐτο. Tairns is ex- 
plained by ἵνα . . . αὐτοῦ as in ver. 8; 
and does not directly mean ‘than this 
which I have shown and still show,” 
as understood by Westcott and White- 
law. ' It is a general statement, the 
application of which is suggested in ver. 
14. Self-sacrifice is the high water mark 
of love. Friends can demand nothing 
more: there is no more that love can do 
to exhibit devotedness to friends, cf. 
Rom. v. 6, 8,-10.—Ver, 14. Then comes 
the application: ἡμεῖς . . . ὑμῖν. “Ye 
are my friends, if ye do what 1 command 
you.” You may expect of me this 
greatest demonstration of love, and 
therefore every minor demonstration of 
it which your circumstances may re- 
quire, “if ye do,” etc. This condition 
was added not to chill and daunt, but to 
encourage: when you find how much 
suffering the completion of my work 
entails upon you, assure yourselves of 
my love. It is copartnery in work that 
will give you assurance that you are my 
friends.—Ver. 15. ‘‘ Friends’? who may 
expect all the good offices of their 
Friend, not “slaves,” is the character in 
which alone you can carry on my work: 


17. ταῦτα ἐντέλλομαι ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους. 


οὐκέτι ἡμᾶς λέγω δούλους . . . ὑμῖν. 
The designation “slave” is no longer 
(οὐκέτι) appropriate, cf. xiii. 16 and Jas. 
i. I, Phil. i. 1, etc. Itis not appropriate, 
because 6 δοῦλος οὐκ olde τί ποιεῖ αὐτοῦ 
ὁ κύριος ‘“ the slave knows not what his 
lord is doing,” he receives his allotted 
task but is not made acquainted with the 
ends his master wishes to serve by his 
toil (‘‘servus tractatur ut Spyavov”’. 
Bengel), He is animated by no sym- 
pathy with his master’s purpose nor by 
any personal interest in what he is doing. 
Therefore ‘‘ friends” is the appropriate 
designation, ὑμᾶς δὲ εἴρηκα φίλους, ‘ but 
I have called you friends”. Schoettgen 
quotes from Jalkut Rubeni, 164, ‘“‘ Deus 
Israelitas prae nimio amore primo vocat 
servos, deinde filios, Deut. xiv. 1”’. 
Other remarkable passages on God’s call- 
ing the Israelites “' friends” are also cited 
by him in loc. For the peculiar use of 
εἴρηκα, cf. x. 35 and τ Cor. xii. 3; and for 
parallels in the classics, see Rose’s Park- 
hurst’s Lexicon. ὅτι πάντα ἃ ἤκουσα 
παρὰ τοῦ πατρός µου, ἐγνώρισα ὑμῖν. 
Jesus had opened to them the mind of 
the Father in sending Him to the world, 
and as this purpose of the Father had 
commended itself to Jesus, and fired Him 
with the desire to fulfil it, so does He 
expect that the disciples will intelli- 
gently enter into His purposes, make 
them their own, and spend themselves 
on their fulfilment.—Ver. 16. οὐχ ὑμεῖς 
. .. ὑμῖν. This is added to encourage 
them in taking up and prosecuting the 
work of Jesus. Euthymius says it is ἄλλο 
τεκµ.ήριον τοῦ ἔχειν αὐτοὺς φίλους ἑαυτοῦ; 
but it is more. They are invited to de- 
pend on His will, not on their own. They 
had not discovered Him, and attached 
themselves to Him, as likely to suit their 
purposes. ‘It is not ye who chose me.” 
But “1 chose you,” as a king selects his 
officers, to fulfil my purposes. καὶ ἔθηκα 
ὑμᾶς, “and I set (or, appointed) you,” cf. 
I Cor. xii. 28, Acts xx. 28, etc., see Con- 


832 


pi. 15. 
o1 Jo. iv. 5. ; 
Jas. iv. 4. μ.εμισηκεν. 
Ρ ὑπὲρ Acts 
κ τοις, 
16: XXi. 
13, etc. ; 
ἕνεκεν Mt. 
xix. 29. 
Lk. xxi. 
τα, etc. 
q ix. 41; xix. 
11. 1 Jo. 
i. 8. 


ὑμέτερον τηρήσουσιν. 


bist 1.18.7 ὄνομά µου, ὅτι οὐκ οἴδασι τὸν πέµψαντά µε. 


Mt. xxiii. 
13. 


cordance. The purpose of the appoint- 
ment is ἵνα tpets ὑπάγητε, ‘that you 
may go away” from me on your various 
missions, and thus (resuming the original 
figure of the vine and branches) καρπὸν 
Φέρητε, may bear fruit in my stead, and 
supplied by my life. Or to express this 
purpose in a manner which reveals the 
source of their power to bear fruit, ἵνα ὅ 
τι ἂν αἰτήσητε . . . δῷ ὑμῖν, see ver. 7, 
and xiv. 13.—Ver. 17. ταῦτα ἐντέλλομαι 
ὑμῖν. ‘These things” which I have 
now spoken “I enjoin upon you,” tva 
ἀγαπᾶτε ἀλλήλους, “in order that ye 
may love one another ”. site 
Vv. 18-25. The relation of the disciples 
to the world.—Ver. 18. Ei 6 κόσμος... 
µεμίσηκεν, ‘Ifthe world hates you,” as it 
does (indicative) ;“‘ the world’ iscontrasted 
with ‘“‘one another” of ver. 17, with the 
disciples who were to love. Ὑινώσκετε, 
“ye know,” or, if it be taken as an impera- 
tive, ‘‘ know ye,” that it has hated me, 
πρῶτον ὑμῶν, “before you,” and, as in 
i. 15 where also the superlative is found, 
not only “before” in point of time, but 
as the norm or prototype.—Ver. το. et ἐκ 
... ἐφίλει, ‘If ye were of the world, 
the world would love [that which is] 


its own”; not always the case, but 
generally. ὅτι δὲ. . . 6 κόσμος, ‘but 


because ye are not of the world,” do not 
belong to it, and are not morally identi- 
fied with it, ‘“‘ but I have chosen you out 
of the world, therefore the world hates 
you”. So that the hatred of the world, 
instead of being depressing, should be 
exhilarating, as being an evidence and 
guarantee that they have been chosen 
by Christ.—Ver. 20. μνημονεύετε τοῦ 
λόγου . . . αὐτοῦ. µμνημονεύετε (from 
µνήµων, mindful), “ be mindful of,” some- 
times used pregnantly, as in 1 Thess. i. 
3; Gal. ii, το; ‘the words which I said 
to you,” viz., in xiii. 16, and Mt. x. 24, 
25. The outcome of the principle is seen 
in, 2 .Tim,, Ἡ, αι, and) 1, Peter, iv... 73. 
That He should speak of them as 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


οὗ ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν, Οὐκ ἔστι δοῦλος μείζων τοῦ κυρίου αὗτοῦ. 


XV. 


18. “Ei ὅ κόσμος ὑμᾶς μισεῖ, γινώσκετε ὅτι ἐμὲ " πρῶτον ὑμῶν 
το. "εἰ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου FTE, ὅ κόσμος ἂν τὸ ἴδιον ἐφίλει - 
ὅτι δὲ ἐκ τοῦ κόσµου οὖκ ἐστὲ, GAN ἐγὼ ἐξελεξάμην ὑμᾶς ἐκ τοῦ 
κόσμου, διὰ τοῦτο μισεῖ ὑμᾶς 6 κόσμος. 


20. μνηµονεύετε τοῦ λόγου 


αι Γρ 
ει ee 


ἐδίωξαν, καὶ ὑμᾶς διώξουσιν: εἰ τὸν λόγον µου ἐτήρησαν, καὶ τὸν 


21. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα πάντα ποιήσουσιν ὑμῖν } διὰ 


23. εἰ μὴ ἦλθον 


nw , a 
καὶ ἐλάλησα αὐτοῖς, tdpaptiav οὐκ 3 εἶχον ὁ: νῦν δὲ " πρόφασιν οὐκ 


‘“‘ servants ᾿ so shortly after calling them 
“friends,” shows how natural and ap- 
propriate both designations are, how 
truly service characterises His friends, 
and how He must at all times be looked 
upon as Supreme Lord. εἰ ἐμὲ ἐδίωξαν 
+.» τηρήσουσιν. ‘If they persecuted 
me, you also will they persecute ; if they 
kept my word, yours too will they keep.” 
In so far as they are identified with Him,. 
their experience will be identical with 
His. The attitude of the world does not 
alter. Benge! takes ἐτήρησαν in a hostile 
sense, ‘‘ infensis modis observare,”’ refer- 
ring to Mt. xxvii. 36, but in John τὸν 
λόγον τηρεῖν is regularly used of “' ob- 
serving” in the sense of “keeping,” 
practising, see vili. 51, ix. 16, xiv. 23; 
I John ii. 3, 4, 5, etc.; Apoc. 1. 3, iii. 8, 
etc.—Ver. 21. ἀλλά. ‘* But” be not dis- 
mayed at persecution, for ‘all these 
things they will do to you for my name’s 
sake”. ταῦτα πάντα seems to involve 
that details had been given (cf. Mt. x. 
16 ff.) which were omitted by the reporter ; 
or that xvi. 2 had been already uttered ; 
or that John, writing when the persecu- 
tions of the Christians were well known, 
uses ‘“‘all these things’’ from his own 
point of view. διὰ τὸ ὄνομά pov. The 
efficacy of this consolation appears 
everywhere in the Apostolic age; Acts v. 
41; Phil. i. 29, and cf. Ramsay’s Church 
in the Roman Empire. The “name” οί 
Christ was hateful to the world, ὅτι οὐκ 
οἴδασι τὸν πέμψαντά pe. They did not 
believe He was sent, because they did 
not know the sender. Had they known 
God, they would have recognised Christ 
as sent by Him. Cf. vii. 28, v. 38, et 
μὴ ἦλθον . . . αὐτῶν.- Ψετ. 22. “If I 
had not come and spoken to them,” as the 
revealer of the Father, ‘‘ they would not 
have sin,” they would still be ignorant of 
the Father, but would not have incurred 
the guilt which attaches to ignorance 
maintained in the presence of light.. 
ἔχειν ἁμαρτίαν is Johannine, see ver. 24’ 


1δ---27. 


3 4 fol , 3.” 
EXOUGL περι τῆς ἁμαρτιίας αὐτῶν. 
µου μισεῖ. 
, , > > at 
πεποίηκεν, ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ εἶχον '" 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


$33 


~~ 


23. 6 ἐμὲ μισῶν, καὶ τὸν πατέρα 
24. εἰ τὰ ἔργα μὴ ἐποίησα ἐν αὐτοῖς, ά οὐδεὶς ἄλλος 
viv δὲ καὶ " ἑωράκασι, καὶ µεμµισή- ςχἰν. ϱ. 


κασι καὶ ἐμὲ καὶ τὸν πατέρα µου" 25. GAN’ ἵνα πληρωθῇ ὁ λόγος 6 


γεγραµµένος ἐν τῷ νόµῳ αὐτῶν, ΄"Ὅτι ἐμίσησάν µε δωρεάν. 


26. t Ps. xxxv. 
19; Ixix. 4. 


Ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ 6 "παράκλητος, ὃν ἐγὼ πέµψω ὑμῖν παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς, u xiv. 16. 
τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ ” παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ᾿ ἐκπορεύεται, ἐκεῖνος ν More freq. 


µαρτυρήσει περὶ ἐμοῦ ' 27. καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ μαρτυρεῖτε, ὅτι ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς 


μετ’ ἐμοῦ ἐστε. 
1 ειχοσαν in NB; «ιχον in AD?, 


xix, IT; 1 John i. δ. νῦν δὲ πρόφασιν 
οὐκ ἔχουσι περὶ τῆς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν. 
“But now,”’ as I have come, “ they have 
no excuse for,” etc., πρόφασιν, cf. Ps. cxl. 
4: “Incline not my heart προφασίζεσθαι 
προφάσεις ἐν apaptiats”’.—Ver. 23. In 
hating me, they hate my Father whom I 
represent, 6 ἐμὲ μισῶν . . . pioet. In 
hating and persecuting me, it is God 
they hate—-Ver. 24. ef τὰ épya... 
οὐκ εἶχον. This repeats in a slightly 
varied form the statement of ver. 
22. He had not only come and 
spoken, but had done works which 
none other had done, cf. iii. 2; 
ix. 32; vii. 31. The miracles wrought 
by Christ were themselves of a kind 
fitted to produce faith. In them men 
were meant to see God, v. 17, 19, 20. 
So that He could say, vov δὲ καὶ ἑωράκασι 
κκ. pov. This is their guilt, that they 
have both seen and hated both me and 
my Father. This does not imply that 
they had been conscious of seeing the 
Father in Christ, but only that in point 
of fact they had done so. Cf. xiv. 9; i. 
18.—Ver. 25. This almost incredible 
blindness and obduracy is accounted for, 
as in xii. 37, by the purpose of God dis- 
closed in Ο.Τ, Scripture. ‘‘ Their law” 
is here, as in x. 34, εἴς., used of Ο.Τ. 
Scripture as a whole. αὐτῶν is inserted, 
as ὑμετέρῳ in vili. 17, to suggest that the 
very Scripture in which they had prided 
themselves would condemn them; see 
also v. 45, v.39. The words ἐμίσησάν pe 
δωρεάν do not occur inO.T.; but similar 
expressions are found in Ps. xxxiv. 10, 
οἱ pirotwrés µε δωρεάν, and cviii. 3, 
ἐπολέμησάν µε δωρεάν. Entirely gratui- 
tous was their hatred and rejection of 
Christ, so that they were inexcusable. 
Ver. 26—xvi. 11. The conquest of 
the world by the Spirit.—Ver. 26. But 
the work of the Apostles was not to be 
wholly fruitless, nor was their experience 


with ἐκ; 
cp. xvi. 28. 


to be wholly comprised in fruitless perse- 
cution, "Όταν δὲ ἔλθῃ . . . περὶ ἐμοῦ. 
The Spirit of Truth will witness concern- 
ing me. The Spirit is here designated, 
as in xiv. 16, ‘‘the Paraclete,’’ and the 
Spirit of Truth. There, and in xiv. 26, 
it is the Father who is to give and send 
Him in Christ’s name: here it is ὃν ἐγὼ 
πέµψω παρὰ τοῦ πατρός, as if the Spirit 
were not only dwelling with the Father, 
but could only be sent out from the 
Father as the source of the sending. 
This is still further emphasised in the 
added clause, 6 παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύ- 
erat. To define the mode of being of 
the Spirit, or His essential relation to the 
Father, would have been quite out of 
place in the circumstances. These words 
must be understood of the mission of the 
Spirit. What the disciples needed to 
know was that He came out from the 
Father, and of this they are here assured. 
ἐκεῖνος µαρτυρήσει περὶ ἐμοῦ, ‘ He,” 
that person thus elaborately described, 
who is truth and who comes out from 
Him who sent me, ‘will witness con- 
cerning me”.—Ver. 27. καὶ ὑμεῖς δὲ 
μαρτυρεῖτε, ''απά do ye also witness,” 
or, if indicative, ‘‘and ye also witness”’. 
Most prefer the indicative. ‘The dis- 
ciples were already the witnesses which 
they were to be in the future.” Meyer. 
This agrees with the ἐστε following. 
They were able to act as witnesses ὅτι 
ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς μετ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἐστε, “' because from 
the beginning,” of the Messianic activity, 
“ye are with me”. The present, ἐστε, is 
natural as Jesus is looking at their entire 
fellowship with Him, and that was 
still continuing. Cf. Mk. iii. 14, ἐποίησε 
δώδεκα, ἵνα dou per αὐτοῦ ; also Acts i. 
21, iv. 13.—CHAPTER XVI. ver. 1. 
Tatra λελάληκα ὑμῖν, I have warned 
you of persecution, and have told you of 
the encouragements you will have, 
ἵνα μὴ σκανδαλισθῆτε, ‘that ye be not 


ολο) 


834 


a Mt. xi. 6. 


KATA IQANNHN 


ΧΝΙ 


XVI. 1. “Tatra λελάληκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα μὴ " σκανδαλισθῆτε. 2. 


b ix.22; xii.” ἀποσυναγώγους ποιήσουσιν buds: ἀλλ᾽ ἔρχεται ὥρα, "ἵνα mwas ὁ 


42 


c xii. 23 ερ. ἀποκτείνας ὑμᾶς, δόξῃ λατρείαν προσφέρειν τῷ Oca. 


v.25 


3. καὶ ταῦτα 


ποιήσουσιν ὑμῖν, ὅτι οὐκ ἔγνωσαν τὸν πατέρα οὐδὲ ἐμέ. 4. ἀλλὰ 


ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἡ ὥρα, μνημονεύητε αὐτῶν, ὅτι 


ἀν].6ι οπΙγ; ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν: ταῦτα δὲ ὑμῖν : ἐξ ἀρχῆς οὐκ εἶπον, ὅτι μεθ ὑμῶν 


cp. XV. 27. y 


ἥμην- 


e xiii. 36. ἐρωτῷ µε, ᾿Ποῦ ὑπάγεις; 
λύπη πεπλήρωκεν ὑμῶν τὴν καρδίαν. 
fxi.so; λέγω ὑμῖν, συμφέρει ὑμῖν ἵνα ἐγὼ ἀπέλθω. 


xviii. 14. . 


staggered,” or stumbled, ἐ.ε., that the 
troubles that fall upon you may not in- 
duce you to apostatise. See Thayer 
and Parkhurst, and Wetstein on Mt. v. 
29. Cf. also Mt. xi. 6.—Ver. 2. ἄποσνν- 
αγώγους ποιήσουσιν ὑμᾶς. For the word 
ἀποσυν. see ix. 22, xii. 42; “they will 
put you out of their synagogues,” they 
will make you outcasts from their syna- 
gogues. ἀλλ’, “yea,” or “ yea more” ; 
used in this sense Rom. vii. 7, 2 Cor. vii. 
11, where it occurs six times. Cf. Acts 
xix. 2.—€pyerat ... Θεῷ. ἔρχεται ὥρα 
ἵνα, cf. xii. 23, ἐλήλνθεν ἡ Spa iva... 
and Burton, Moods and Tenses, 216, on 
the complementary limitation by tva of 
nouns signifying set time, etc. And for 
was 6 ἀποκτείνας, the aorist indicating 
those “ who once do the act the single 
doing of which is the mark of the class,” 
see Burton, 124, cf. 148.--δόξῃ λατρείαν 
προσφέρειν, ‘may think that he offers 
sacrificial service’. λατρεία is used in 
Exod. xii. 25, etc., of the Passover ; 
apparently used in a more general sense 
in 1 Mace. ii. 19, 22; and defined by 
Suicer ‘‘quicquid fit in honorem et 
cultum Dei,’ and by Theophylact as 
θεάρεστον ἔργον, a work well pleasing 
to God. Cf. Rom. xii. 1. Meyer and 
others quote the maxim of Jewish 
fanaticism, “' Omnis effundens sanguinem 
improborum aequalis est illi qui sacri- 
ficium facit”.—Ver. 3. This fanatical 
blindness is traced to its source, as in 
xv. 21, to their ignorance of God and of 
Christ: καὶ ταῦτα . .. ἐμέ And He 
forewarns them that they might not be 
taken unawares.—Ver. 4. ἀλλὰ ταῦτα 

. ὑμῖν. This repeats νετ. 1, but He 
now adds an explanation of His silence 
up to this time regarding their future: 
ταῦτα δὲ ὑμῖν . . . ἥμην. ἐξ ἀρχῆς- ἀπ᾿ 
ἀρχῆς of xv. 27, Holtzmann. If there is 
a difference, ἐξ ἀρχῆς indicates rather 


5. νῦν δὲ ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πέµψαντά µε, καὶ οὖὐδεὶς ἐδ ὑμῶν 


6. ἀλλ) ὅτι ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν, ἡ 


7. GAN ἐγὼ τὴν ἀλήθειαν 
ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ ἀπέλθω, 


ὁ παράκλητος οὐκ ἐλεύσεται πρὸς Spas: ἐὰν δὲ πορευθῶ, πέµψω 


the point of time (6/. its only other 
occurrence, vi. 64) while am ἀρχῆς in- 
dicates continuity. The fact of the 
silence has been disputed: but no 
definite and full intimations have hitherto 
been given of the future experience of 
the Apostles, as representing an absent 
Lord. The reason of His silence was 
ὅτι μεθ) ὑμῶν ἥμην, '' because I was with 
you”. While He was with them they 
leant upon Him and could not apprehend 
a time of weakness and of persecution. 
See Mt. ix. 15.—Ver. 5. vwuv δὲ, ‘but 
now,” in contrast to ἐξ ἀρχῆς, ὑπάγω, 
1 go away,” in contrast to μεθ) ὑμῶν 
ἤμην, πρὸς ... µε, “Sto Him that sent 
me,” as one who has discharged the duty 
committed to Him. καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ ὑμῶν 
. .  ὑπάγεις, “' απἁ no one of you asks 
me, Where are you going?” They 
were so absorbed in the thought of His 
departureand its consequences of bereave- 
ment to themselves that they had failed 
to ascertain clearly where He was going. 
GAN ὅτι .. . καρδίαν. The consequence 
of their absorption in one aspect of the 
crisis which He had been explaining t 
them was that grief had filled their heart 
to the exclusion of every other feeli g. 
Cf. xiv. 28.—Ver. 7. GAN ἐὼ... 
ἀπέλθω. ‘* But,’’ or ‘‘ nevertheless I tell 
you the truth,” I who see the whole event 
tell you “it is to your advantage” and 
not to your loss “that I goaway”’. This 
statement, incredible as it seemed to the 
disciples, He justifies: ἐὰν yap μὴ ἀπέλθω 
. . ἡμᾶς. The withdrawal of the bodily 
presence of Christ was the essential con- 
dition of His universal spiritual presence. 
—Ver. 8. καὶ ἐλθὼν ἐκεῖνος . . . “ and 
when He” (with some emphasis, “ that 
person”) “has come, He will reprove,’ 
or as in R.V., “convict the world” 
“‘ Reprove,” reprobare, to rebut or refute, 
as in Henry VI., iii., 1. 40, '' Reprove no 


I—I3. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


835 


αὐτὸν πρὸς ὑμᾶς: 8. καὶ ἐλθὼν ἐκεῖνος 5 ἐλέγξει τὸν κόσμον περὶ viii. 46. 1 


ἁμαρτίας καὶ περὶ δικαιοσύνης καὶ περὶ κρίσεως. 


nike yt Cor. xiv. 
Q. περὶ ἁμαρτίας 24. 


μὲν, ὅτι οὐ πιστεύουσιν Eis ἐμέ: 1Ο. περὶ δικαιοσύνης δὲ, ὅτι πρὸς 


τὸν πατέρα µου ὑπάγω, καὶ οὐκ ἔτι θεωρεῖτέ µε. 
, A 
κρίσεως, ὅτι Ἡ ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ κόσµου τούτου κέκριται. 


oo” 


12. 


Ere πολλὰ ἔχω λέγειν ὑμῖν, GAN οὐ δύνασθε ' βαστάζειν 2. 


II. περὶ δὲ α xii. 51. 
i Rev. ii. 2. 
Mt. xx. 12 
1 Cor. iii 


j xiv. 26. 


ἄρτι: 13. ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ ἐκεῖνος, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, 1 68myHoer’ “Acts viii. 


ὑμᾶς eis πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν]: οὗ γὰρ λαλήσει ab ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ 
µ η Π γ P η ͵ 


31. Mt. 
xv. 14. 


1 ev τη αληθεια παση in NDL, possibly originating in the common occurrence of 
9δηγειν with dative in Sept., see Ps. xxv. 5. 


allegation if you can,” is no longer used 
mthissense. The verb ἐλέγξει expresses 
the idea of pressing home a conviction. 
The object of this work of the Spirit is 
“the world” as opposed to Christ; and 
the subjects regarding which (περὶ) the 
convictions are to be wrought are “ sin, 
righteousness and judgment”. Regard- 
ing these three great spiritual facts, new 
ideas are to be borne in upon the human 
mind by the spirit.—Ver. 9. In detail, 
new convictions περὶ ἁμαρτίας are to be 
wrought, ὅτι οὐ πιστεύονσιν eis ἐμέ. 
Each of the three clauses introduced by 
ὅτι is in apposition with the foregoing 
substantive, and is explanatory of the 
ground of the conviction, '' Concerning 
sin, because they do not believe on me”’. 
Unbelief will be apprehended to be sin. 
The world sins ‘‘ because” it does not 
believe in Christ, z.e., the world sins 
inasmuch as it is unbelieving, cf. iii. 18, 
19, 36; xv. 22. περὶ δικαιοσύνης δὲ... 
‘“* And concerning righteousness, because 
I go to my Father and ye see me no 
longer.” The world will see in the 
exaltation of Christ proof of His right- 
eousness [δικαίου γὰρ γνώρισμα τὸ 
πορεύεσθαι πρὸς τὸν θεὸν καὶ συνεῖ- 
ναι αὐτῷ, Euthymius] and will accord- 
ingly cherish new convictions regard- 
ing righteousness. The clause καὶ οὐκ 
ἔτι θεωρεῖτέ pe is added to exhibit 
more clearly that it was a spiritual 
and heavenly life He entered upon in 
going to the Father; and possibly to re- 
mind them that the invisibility which 
they lamented was the evidence of 
His victory.—Ver. 11. περὶ δὲ κρίσεως, 
“and concerning judgment (between sin 
and righteousness, and between Christ 
and the prince of this world, xii. 31, 
xiv. 30), because the ruler of this world 
has been judged,” or “is judged”, The 
distinction between sin and righteous- 
ness was, under the Spirit’s teaching, to 


become absolute. In the crucifixion of 
Christ the influences which move worldly 
men—6 ἄρχων τοῦ kéopov—were finally 
condemned. The fact that worldliness, 
blindness to the spiritually excellent, led 
to that treatment of Christ, is its con- 
demnation. The world, the prince of it, 
is “ judged’’. To adhere to it rather than 
to Christ is to cling to a doomed cause, 
a sinking ship. 

Vv. 12-15. The Spirit will complete 
the teaching of Fesus.—Ver. 12. Ἔτι 
πολλὰ exw λέγειν ὑμῖν, “I have yet 
many things to say to you’’; after all I 
have said much remains unsaid. There 
is, then, much truth which it is desirable 
that Christians know and which yet was 
not uttered by Christ Himself. His 
words are not the sole embodiment of 
truth, though they may be its sole cri- 
terion. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ δύνασθε βαστάζειν ἄρτι, 
‘‘but you cannot bear them now,”’ there- 
fore they are deferred; truth can be 
received only by those who have al- 
ready been prepared for its reception. 
“?Tis the taught already that profit by 
teaching”? (Ecclus. iii. 7; 1 Cor. iii, 1; 
Heb. v. 11-14). The Resurrection and 
Pentecost gave them new strength and 
new perceptions. βαστάζειν, similarly 
used in 2 Kings xvii. 14, 6 ἐὰν ἐπιθῇς 
ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ, βαστάσω. To those who wish to 
become philosophers Epictetus gives the 
advice, “AvOpwre, σκέψαι τί δύνασαι 
βαστάσαι (Diss. iii. 15, Kypke),—Ver. 13. 
What was now withheld would after- 
wards be disclosed, ὅταν . . . ἀλήθειαν. 
The Spirit would complete the teach- 
ing of Christ and lead them ‘ into ail 
the truth”.  ὁδηγήσει ὑμᾶς “ shall lead 
you,” ‘‘as a guide leads in the way, by 
steady advance, rather than by sudden 
revelation”. Bernard. This function 
of the Spirit He still exercises. It is the 
Church at large He finally leads into all 
truth through centuries of error. οὐ yap 


\ 


836 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ XVI. 

ὅσα ἂν ἀκούσῃ λαλήσει, καὶ τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. 14. 

k i. 16. ἐκεῖνος ἐμὲ δοξάσει, ὅτι " ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήψεται, καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. 

15. πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ, ἐμά ἐστι’ διὰ τοῦτο εἶπον, ὅτι Σ ἐκ τοῦ 

lvii.33; ἐμοῦ λήψεται,ὶ καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. 16. Ἰ Μικρὸν καὶ οὐ 2 θεωρεῖτέ 
xiii. 33. 


µε, καὶ πάλιν μικρὸν καὶ ὄψεσθέ µε, ὅτι ἐγὼ ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα.” 5 


17. Εἶπον οὖν ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, “ Th ἐστι τοῦτο 
ὃ λέγει ἡμῖν, Μικρὸν καὶ οὗ θεωρεῖτέ µε, καὶ πάλιν μικρὸν καὶ 


1 λαµβανει in BDEG adopted by Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 


* overt in SBD 33. 


3 This clause οτι . 
Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 
this may be a reminiscence of ver. Io. 


λαλήσει . . . ὑμῖν, “for He shall not 
speak from Himself, but whatever He 
shall have heard He will speak, and the 
things that are coming He will announce 
to you’’. This is the guarantee of the 
truth of the Spirit’s teaching, as of 
Christ’s, vii. 17, xiv. 10, What the Father 
tells Him, He will utter. Particularly, 
τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν, “the things 
that are coming He will declare to you”’. 
τὰ ἐρχόμενα means “ the things that are 
now coming,” not ‘the things which at 
any future stage of the Church’s history 
maycome’”’, It might include the events 
of the succeeding day, but in this case 
ἀναγγελεῖ could not be used; for al- 
though these events might require to 
be explained, they did not need to be 
‘‘announced’’. The promise must there- 
fore refer to the main features of the 
new Christian dispensation. The Spirit 
would guide them in that new economy 
in which they would no longer have the 
visible example and help and counsel of 
their Master. It is not a promise that 
they should be able to predict the future. 
[‘‘ Maxime huc_ spectat apocalypsis, 
scripta per Johannem.’’ Bengel.] In 
enabling them to adapt themselves to 
the new economy the centre and norm 
would be Christ.—Ver. 14. ἐκεῖνος ἐμὲ 
δόξασει, “He will glorify me”. The 
fulfilment of this promise is found in 
every action and word of the Apostles. 
Under the Spirit’s guidance they lived 
wholly for Christ: the dispensation of 
the Spirit was the Christian dispensation. 
This is further explained in ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ 
ἐμοῦ λήψεται . . . “because He shall 
take of that which is mine, and declare 
it unto you”, The Spirit draws from no 
other source of information or inspira- 
tion. It is always “out of that which 
is Christ’s’”? He furnishes the Church. 


.. πατερα is not found in S§BDL, and is deleted by 
It seems to have been inserted because of ver. 17, last clause ; but 


So only could He glorify Christ. Not 
by taking the Church beyond Christ, 
but by more fully exhibiting the fulness 
of Christ, does He fulfil His mission.— 
Ver. 15. There is no need that the Spirit 
go beyond Christ and no possibility He 
should do so, because πάντα ὅσα ἔχει 6 
Πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστι, “all things whatsoever 
the Father has are mine,” cf. xvii. 10 
and xiii. 3; 1 Cor. xv. 24-28; Heb. ii. 8. 
The Messianic reign involved that Christ 
should be truly supreme and have all 
things at His disposal. So that when 
He said that the Spirit would take of 
what was His, that was equivalent to 
saying that the Spirit had the unlimited 
fulness of the Godhead to draw upon. 
Vv. 16-22. The sorrow occasioned by 
Christ’s departure turned into joy at His 
return.—Ver. 16. Μικρὸν καὶ οὐ θεωρεῖτέ 
µε καὶ πάλιν μικρὸν καὶ ὄψεσθέμε. The . 
first ‘‘little while” is the time till the 
following day ; the second “little while,” 
the time till the resurrection, when they 
would see Him again. The similar 
expression of xiv. Ig has induced 
several interpreters to understand our 
Lord as meaning, ‘‘ Ye shall see me 
spiritually ” ; thus Bernard says: ‘‘ The 
discrimination in the verbs employed 
affords sufficient guidance, and leads us 
to interpret as follows. A little while (it 
was but a few hours), and then ‘ ye be- 
hold me no longer ’ (οὐκέτι θεωρεῖτέ µε); 
I shall have passed from the visible 
scene, and from the observation of spec- 
tators (that is the kind of seeing which 
the verb intends). ‘ Again, a little while’ 
(of but little longer duration), and ‘ ye 
shall see me’ (ὄψεσθέ µε), with another 
kind of seeing, one in which the natural 
sight becomes spiritual vision.” This 
distinction, however, is not maintained in 
xiv. I9.—Ver. 17. Εἶπον οὖν ἐκ τῶν 


14-23. 


ὄψεσθέ µε; 


- , 
οὖν, “Todto τί ἐστιν ὃ λέγει, τὸ μικρὸν; 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


° 
καὶ, Ὅτι ἐγὼ ὑπάγω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα; 


837 
18. Ἔλεγον 


οὐκ οἴδαμεν τί Nadel.” 


19. Ἔγνω οὖν ὁ "Ingots ὅτι ἤθελον αὐτὸν ἐρωτᾷν, καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, 
«Περὶ τούτου {ητεῖτε μετ ἀλλήλων, ὅτι εἶπον, Μικρὸν καὶ οὗ 


θεωρεῖτέ µε, καὶ πάλιν pees καὶ ὄψεσθέ µε; 


Ἑ το J 
ὑμιν, OTe 


20. ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω 


Ἀκλαύσετε καὶ θρηνήσετε ὑμεῖς, ὁ δὲ κόσμος χαρήσεται αι ee 
ὑμεῖς δὲ αν ολ, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ λύπη ὑμῶν 
21. ἡ yur ὅταν τίκτῃ, λύπην ἔχει, ὅτι "ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα αὐτῆς: ὅταν τι. 
δὲ γεννήσῃη τὸ παιδίον, οὐκ ἔτι μνημονεύει τῆς θλίψεως, διὰ τὴν 
Χαρὰν, ὅτι ἐγεννήθη ἄνθρωπος εἰς τὸν κόσμον. 


Peis χαρὰν δν λαίδη, 36. 
Rev. vili. 


ο ii. 4. 


‘ A 
22. καὶ ὑμεῖς οὖν 


λύπην μὲν νῦν ἔχετε' πάλιν δὲ ὄψομαι Suds, καὶ Χαρήσεται ὑμῶν ἡ 


δί κ x 4 ex ον ῤὸ ‘ ” 1 
καροια, και Την χαραν υμων QUOELS αιρει 


1 apes, future, in BD*P, vulg. ‘ tollet”’. 


μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. A pause is implied; 
during which some of the disciples 
(τινές understood, as in vii. 40; see 
Simcox, Gram. of N.T., p. 84) expressed 
to one another their bewilderment. They 
were alarmed, but could not attach their 
alarm to any definite object of dread.— 
Ver. 19. Jesus, perceiving their embar- 
rassment, and that they wished to inter- 
rogate Him—6r1 ἤθελον αὐτὸν ἐρωτῶν--- 
said to them: Περὶ τούτου . . . “'Ατε 
you inquiring among yourselves? aber 
ἀλλήλων, not as in ver. 17, πρὸς 
ἀλλήλους, “about this that I said,’ εἰς. ? 
—Ver. 20. ἀμὴν . . . ὅτι κλαύσετε καὶ 
θρηνήσετε ἡὑμεῖς, “ye shall weep and 
lament”; θρηνέω is commonly used of 
lamentation for the dead, as in Jer. xxi. 
10, μὴ κλαίετε τὸν τεθνηκότα, μηδὲ 
θρηνεῖτε αὐτόν; 2 Sam. i. 17; Mt. xi. 

17; Lk. vii.32. Here it is weeping and 
lamentation for the dead that is meant. 
6 δὲ κόσμος χαρήσεται, but while you 
mourn, the world shall rejoice, as achiev- 
ing a triumph over a threatening enemy. 
ἡμεῖς δὲ λυπηθήσεσθε, “and ye shall be 
sorrow-stricken, but your sorrow shall 
become joy”. Cf. ἀπὸ πένθους eis χαράν, 
Esth. ix, 22, and especially XX. 20, ἐχάρη- 
σαν οἱ μαθηταὶ ἰδόντες τὸν Κύριον.--νετ. 
21. He adds an illustration of the manner 
in which anxiety and dread pass into joy : 

ἡ γννή “ the woman,” the article is 
generic, cf. ὃ δοῦλος, xv. 15, Μεγετ, ὅ ὅταν 
τίκτῃ, '' when she brings forth,” λύπην 
... αὐτῆς, “hath sorrow because her 
hour ”—the critical or appointed time of 
her delivery—‘is come”. The woman 
in travail is the common figure for 
terror-stricken anguish in O.T.: Ps. 
xlviii. 6; Jer. iv. 31; vi. 24, etc. ὅταν 


dp ὑμῶν. 23. καὶ ἐν 


αιρει in SACD?LN. 


δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παιδίον . . . ‘ but when 
the child is born, she no longer remem- 
bers the distress, for the joy that a man 
is born into the world”. The comparison, 
so far as explicitly used by our Lord in ver. 
22, extends only to the sudden replace- 
ment of sorrow with joyin both cases. But 
a comparison of Is. lxvi. 7-9, Hos. xiii. 13, 
and other O.T. passages, in which the 
resurrection of a new Israel is likened 
to a difficult and painful birth, warrants 
the extension of the metaphor to the 
actual birth of the N.T. church in the 
resurrection of Christ. Cf. Holtzmann. 
—Ver. 22. καὶ tpets ... ὑμῶν, ‘and 
you accordingly,” in keeping with this 
natural arrangement conspicuous in the 
woman’s case, ‘‘ have at present sorrow”’ 
This is the time when the results are 
hidden and only the pain felt: ‘‘ but I will 
see you again and your heart shall 
rejoice and your joy no one takes from 
you”. This joy was felt in the renewed 
vision of their Lord at the Resurrection. 
“All turns on the Resurrection; and 
without the experiences of that time there 
would have been no beholding Christ in 
the Spirit.” Bernard. 

Vv. 23-28. Future accessibility of the 
Father.—Ver. 23. καὶ ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ, 
‘‘and in that day” of the Resurrection 
and the dispensation it introduces, see 
xiv. 20, in contrast to this present time 
when you wish to ask me questions, ver. 
το, ‘‘ ye shall not put any questions to 
me”. Cf. xxi. 12, He was no longer 
the familiar friend and visible teacher to 
whom at any moment they might turn. 
But though this accustomed intercourse 
terminated, it was only that they might 
learn a more direct communion with the 


838 


ἐκείνῃ TH ἡμέρᾳ ἐμὲ οὐκ ἐρωτήσετε οὐδέν. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVI. 


᾽Αμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, 


σ o + ee J a - - 
ὅτι ὅσα ἂν αἰτήσητε τὸν πατέρα ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου, δώσει ὑμῖν.ὶ 


es o ” ή, sok ο - 
Ρ ii, το. Μι. 24. P ἕως ἄρτι οὐκ ἠτήσατε οὐδὲν ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου: Ἱ αἰτεῖτε, καὶ 


xi. 12. 


q Mt. vii. 7.λήψεσθε, ἵνα ἡ χαρὰ ὑμῶν ᾖ 
µίαις λελάληκα ὑμῖν ' GAN’ ἔρχεται dpa 
λαλήσω ὑμῖν, ἀλλὰ "παρρησίᾳ περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀναγγελῶ” ὑμῖν. 


r ii. 7-10. 

5 ver. 29. 
Prov. i. 1. 
Ecclus. 
xlvii. 17. 


* weTANpwwern. 


25. ταῦτα ἐν "παροι- 


te > ” ’ 
ὅτε οὐκ ETL ἐν παροιµίαις 


, ~ ο ΄ 
Cp. Hatch, 26. ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί µου αἰτήσεσθε: καὶ οὐ λέγω 


Essays, Ρ. 
64. 


γ. 25. 
5 χ. 24. 


ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐρωτήσω τὸν πατέρα περὶ ὑμῶν: 27. αὐτὸς γὰρ 6 
x λ Cate Ser. a ς Lay > IN λή ‘ , g 
πατὴρ Φιλει ὑμᾶς, OTL Upets Ewe πεφιλήκατε, καὶ πεπιστεύκατε OTL 


1 δωσει υμιν before ev τω ονοµατι pov in ΝΔΒΟΥΧ. T.R. in AC*D, it. vulg. Cp. 


2 For the αναγγελω of EGH απαγγελω is read in ABC*D, while δ reads 


rv. 13, 14. 
επαγγελλω. 
Father: ἁμὴν . . . δώσει ὑμῖν. The 
connection is somewhat obscure. The 


words may either be taken in connection 
with those immediately preceding, in 
which case they intimate that the in- 
formation they can no longer get from a 
present Christ they will receive from the 
Father: or they may begin a distinct 
paragraph and introduce a fresh subject, 
the certainty of prayer being heard.— 
Ver. 24. ἕως ἄρτι οὐκ ἠτήσατε οὐδὲν ἐν τ. 
. « . “ Until now ye have asked nothing 
in my name.” They had not yet realised 
that it was through Christ and on the 
lines of His work all God’s activity 
towards man and all man’s prayer to 
God were to proceed.—airette... 
πεπληρωμµένη, ‘ ask and ye shall receive, 
that your joy may be full,” or ‘* fulfilled,” 
or ‘‘completed”. The joy they were 
to experience on seeing their Lord 
again, ver. 22, was to be completed 
by their continued experience of the 
efficacy of His name in prayer. Prayer 
must have been rather hindered by 
the visible presence of a_ sufficient 
helper, but henceforth it was to be the 
medium of communication between the 
disciples and the source of spiritual 
power.—Ver. 25. Another great change 
would characterise the economy into 
which they were passing. Instead of 
dark figurative utterances which only 
dimly revealed things spiritual, direct 
and intelligible disclosures regarding the 
Father would be made to the disciples: 
ταῦτα ἐν παροιµίαις . . . ὑμῖν. παρ- 
οιµία. See x. 6; “dark sayings” or 
‘riddles’ expresses what is here meant. 
It is opposed to παρρησίᾳ, open, plain, 
easily intelligible, meant to be under- 
stood. He does not refer to particular 
utterances, such as xv. I, xvi. 21, etc. 


but to the reserved character of the 
whole evening’s conversation, and of all 
His previous teaching. ‘* The promise 
is that the reserve imposed by a yet un- 
finished history, by a manifestation in 
the flesh, by the incapacity of the hearers, 
and by their gradual education, will then 
be succeeded by clear, full, unrestricted 
information, fitted to create in those who 
receive it that ‘full assurance of under- 
standing’ which contributes so largely to 
the ‘full assurance of faith’.’’ Bernard. 
περὶ τοῦ πατρός, the Father is the 
central theme of Christ’s teaching, both 
while on earth and above.—Ver. 26. ἐν 
ἐκείνῃ TH Ἠμέρᾳ. “Ιπ that day,” in 
which I shall tell you plainly of the 
Father (ver. 25, ἔρχεται ὥρα), “ye shall 
ask in my name”’; this is the natural 
consequence of their increased knowledge 
ofthe Father. καὶ οὐ λέγω . . . ἐξῆλθον © 
« Απά I do not say to you that I will ask 
the Father. concerning you”’—rrept, al- 
most equivalent to ὑπέρ, here and in 
Matt. xxvi. 28; 1 John iv. το, “in rela- 
tion to,” almost ‘“‘in behalf of ”—(ver. 27) 
‘for the Father Himself loves you, be- 
cause ye have loved me, and have 
believed that I came forth from God”’. 
The intention of the statement is to 
convey fuller assurance that their prayers 
will be answered. The Father’s love 
needs no prompting. Yet the interces- 
sion of Christ, so emphatically presented 
in the Epistle to the Hebrews and in 
Rom. viii. 34, is not ignored. Jesus says: 
«1 do not base the expectation of answer 
solely on my intercession, but on the Fa- 
ther’s love, a love which itself is quick- 
ened and evoked by your love for me”. 
“T do not say that I will ask’? means 
“T do not press this,” “I do not bring 
this forward as the sole reason why you 


24-33. 


ἐγὼ ᾿ παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ} ἐξῆλθον. 
καὶ ἐλήλυθα eis τὸν κόσμον: 
πορεύοµαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


839 


28. ἐξῆλθον Ἰ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς,” v See crit. 


noie. 


πάλιν  ἀφίημι τὸν κόσμον, καὶ wiv. 3. 


29. Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, “Ide νῦν παρρησίᾳ λαλεῖς, 


καὶ Σπαροιµίαν οὐδεμίαν λέγεις. 


30. 


, a 
καὶ οὗ χρείαν ἔχεις "iva τίς σε ἐρωτᾷ. 


ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἐξῆλθες.” 
τεύετε ; 


θῆτε ἕκαστος εἰς τὰ "ἴδια, καὶ ἐμὲ µόνον ἀφῆτε: καὶ οὐκ εἰ 


μόνος, ὅτι ὁ πατὴρ μετ ἐμοῦ ἐστι. 


ἐν ἐμοὶ εἰρήνην ἔχητε. ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ θλίψιν ἕξετεδ' ἀλλὰ θαρσεῖτε, © 


ae ρ ‘ , 2} 
ἐγὼ 3νενίκηκα τὸν κόσμον. 


31. Απεκρίθη αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, '""Αρτι πισ- 
32. ἰδοὺ, ἔρχεται dpa καὶ νῦν ΄ ἐλήλυθεν, " ἵνα » σκορπισ- 


viv οἴδαμεν ὅτι οἶδας πάντα, αγετ. 25. 
στ 25, I 

Jo. ii. 27. 
Cp. Heb. 
γ. 12. 

Ζ1 Jo.iii.19; 
iv. 2. 

, aver. 2. 

tbx. 12. 
ο xix. 27. 


.. , , ° 
εν TOUTW πιστευοµεν οτι 


33. ταῦτα λελάληκα ὑμῖν, ἵνα ἆ viii. 16, 2ο. 


1 ]ο. ν. 4, 


ii pes 


1 πατρος is read by W.H.R. following NcaBC*D. θεον is found in ${*AC%, it. vulg. 
2T.R. in SAC, εκ in BC*L 33. εκ follows εξηλθον in viii. 42; απο in ver. 30, 


xiii. 3, XVi. 30; παρα in ver. 27 and in xvii. 8. 


εκ conveys the idea of origin, παρα 


of starting point, απο of the agency of the sender. 
Σεν with NBCD nowhere else in John with λαλειν, but in Ep. pera is used in 


Acts. 


4 vuv deleted by Tr. Ti.W.H.R. following RABC*D*L 33. 


5 εχετε in NABCL, etc. 


may expect to be heard’’. The mediation 
of Christ has here its incidence at an earlier 
stage than in the Apostolic statements. 
The love of God is represented as intensi- 
fied towards those who have accepted 
Christ as the revealer of the Father.—Ver. 
28. ἐξῆλθον ... πατέρα. “I came forth 
from the Father and am come into the 
world; again (reversing the process) I leave 
the world and go to the Father.” There is 
a sense in which any man can use these 
words, but it is a loose not an exact 
sense. The latter member of the sentence 
—‘*I leave the world and go to the 
Father ’—gives us the interpretation of 
the former—‘' I came forth,” etc. For to 
say ‘‘I leave-the world” is not the same 
as to say “I go to the Father’’; this 
second expression describes a state of 
existence which is entered upon when 
existence in this world is done. And to 
say “‘I came forth from the Father” is 
not the same as to say “'Ι am come into 
the world’: it describes a state of 
existence antecedent to that which began 
by coming into the world. 

Vv. 29-33. Last words.— Ver. 29. 
The Lord’s last utterance, vv. 25-28, the 
disciples find much more explicit than His 
previous words: “IS viv παρρησίᾳ 
λαλεῖς, ‘ Behold, now (at length) Thou 
speakest plainly,” explicitly, καὶ παροι- 
piav οὐδεμίαν λέγεις, “and utterest no ob- 


scure saying,” ver. 25. Almost univers- 
ally viv, in vv. 29, 30, is understood to 
denote the present time in contrast to the 
future promised in ver. 25. As if the 
disciples meant: ‘Already Thou speakest 
plainly ; we do not need to wait for that 
future time”. It seems simpler to take 
it as signifying a contrast to the past 
time in which He had spoken in dark 
sayings. — Ver. 30. viv οἵἴδαμεν ... 
épwrg. The reference is to ver. 190, 
where they manifested dissatisfaction 
with the obscurity of His utterances. 
Here in ver. 30 two things are stated, 
that Jesus has perfect knowledge, οἶδὰς 
πάντα, and that He knows how to com- 
municate it, οὐ χρείαν ἔχεις ἵνα τίς σε 
épwrg. Convinced that He possessed 
these qualifications, they felt constrained 
to accept Him as a teacher come from 
God, ἐν τούτῳ (‘‘herein,” or “by this,” 
ἐκ τούτου in modern Greek version) 
πιστεύοµεν ὅτι ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἐξῆλθες, cf. iii. 
2.—Ver. 31. To this enthusiastic con- 
fession Jesus makes the sobering and 
pathetic reply: "Αρτι πιστεύετε; Do 
ye now believe that I am God’s Re- 
presentative ? Is this your present at- 
titude? Sot, ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ viv 
ἐλήλυθεν, “ Behold, the hour is coming 
and is come,’ so imminent is it that 
the perfect may be used.—tva σκορπισ. 
θῆτε . . . ἀφῆτε. Cf. 1 Macc. vi. 54 


84.0 


AXi, {πο α 
Chren. 
xxi. 16. 
Is. xiv. 14. 

b Witk 
gen.of , 


KATA IQANNHN 


/ , A εν 4 4 
δόξασόν σου τὸν υἱὸν, ἵνα καὶ 


XVII. 


XVII. 1. ΤΑΥΤΑ ἐλάλησεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ " ἐπῆρε] τοὺς ὀφθαλ- 
μοὺς αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν, καὶ εἶπε, “΄ Πάτερ, ἐλήλυθεν ἡ dpa: 


2 6 υἱός σου δοξάσῃ σε: 2. καθὼς 


A , a A 
obj. here ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ' ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκὸς, ἵνα °mav ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, 


and Mt. 


x. 1, Mk. vi. 7; usually with infin. or ἐπί with gen. or acc. 


1 T.R. in AC* and most versions, except vulg. 


in SBC*DL 33. 
2 Omit και with SABC*D. 


ἐσκορπίσθησαν ἕκαστος cis τὸν τόπον 
αὐτοῦ. In x. 12 the wolf σκορπίζει τὰ 
πρόβατα. Cf. especially Mk. xt. 27. 
εἰς τὰ ἴδια frequently of one’s own house, 
cf. xix. 27; Acts xxi. 6; Esth. ν. το, vi. 12. 
Here perhaps it is somewhat less definite, 
‘to his own ” is better than ‘‘ to his own 
house”. It includes ‘‘to his own 
interests,” or “pursuits,” or ‘‘ familiar 
surroundings,” or ‘“‘ private affairs,” or 
all these together. Those whom He had 
gathered round Him and who believed 
in Him were yet destined to fail Him in 
the critical hour, and were to scatter 
each to his own, for the time abandoning 
the cause and Person who had held them 
together, leaving their loved Master 
(ver. 27) alone.—kai οὐκ εἰμὶ μόνος... 
ἐστι, ΄΄ and (yet) I am not alone, because 
the Father is with me’’. This presence 
supplies the lack of all other company. 
He was destined to lose for a time the 
consciousness even of this presence, Mt. 
xxvii. 46.—Ver. 33. ταῦτα . . . κόσμον. 
ταῦτα embraces the whole of the con- 
solatory utterances from xiv. I onwards. 
His aim.in uttering them was ‘‘ that in 
me” (cf. Paul’s use of ‘in Christ”) “γε 
may have peace”. ἐν ἐμοί and ἐν τῷ 
xéop are the two spheres in which at 
one and the same time the disciples 
live, xvii. 15, Col. ΠΠ. rand5. Solongas 
they ‘“‘ abode in Christ” and His words 
abode in them, xv. 7, they would have 
peace, xiv. 27. So long as they were in 
the world they would have tribulation, 
θλίψιν ἔχετε, “in the world ye have 
tribulation .---ἀλλὰ θαρσεῖτε, “ but be 
of good courage”. Cf. θάρσει τέκνον, 
Mt. ix. 2, xiv. 27.--ἐγὼ vevikeynka τὸν 
κόσμον. viKay occurs only here in the 
Gospel, but twenty-two times in the 
Johannine Epistles and Apocalypse ; 
only four times in the other N.T. writ- 
ings; cf. especially 1 John v. 4,5. “I 
(emphatic) have overcome the world,” 
have proved that its most dangerous 
assaults can be successfully resisted ; and 
in me you are sharers in my victory; in 
me you also overcome. 


ς Vi. 39. 


επαρας, without και before ειπε, 


Liicke says this is ‘‘ offenbar eine stylistische correctur”’, 


CHAPTER XVII.—Vv. 1-26. The clos- 
ing prayer of Fesus [' precatio summi 
sacerdotis,” Chytraeus]. Vv. 1-5, with re- 
ference to Himself ; vv. 6-19, for His 
disciples ; vv. 20-26, for all who should 
afterwards believe on Him.—Ver. 1. 
Tatra ἐλάλησεν .. . καὶ ἐπῆρε. The 
connection of ἐλάλησεν with ἐπῆρε by 
καί shows that the prayer followed im- 
mediately upon the discourse, and was, 
therefore, uttered in the hearing of the 
disciples. ἐπῆρε . . . οὐρανόν, so 1 
Chron. xxi. 16. ρα τ. ὀφθ., Ps. cxxi. 1, 
and cxxiii 1, From οὐρανόν it cannot be 
argued that they were in the open air. 
“Fiir das Auge des Geistes is der freie 
Himmel iiberall.” Liicke. ‘The eye of 
one who prays is on all occasions raised 
toward heaven.” Meyer. Πάτερ, ἐλήλυ- 
θεν ἡ Spa, “' Father,” the simplest and 
most intimate form of address, cf. xi. 41, 
xii. 27. ‘The hour is come,” i.¢., the 
hour appointed for the glorification of the 
Son ; ¢f. ii. 4, xii. 23. That this hour is 
meant is shown by the petition which 
follows : δόξασόν σου τὸν vidv, “' glorify 
Thy Son”. gov, in position of emphasis. 
This glorification embraced His death,- 
resurrection, and session at God’s right 
hand, as accredited Mediator, cf. vii. 30, 
xii. 16, 23. But this glorification itself 
had an object, ἵνα 6 vids δοξάσῃ σε, “ that 
the Son may glorify Thee”. The 
Father is glorified by being known in 
His love and holiness.—Ver. 2. This is 
the object of Christ’s manifestation and 
reign. This glorification of the Son, 
which is now imminent, is in accordance 
with the purpose of the Father in giving 
the Son power over men: καθὼς ἔδωκας 
αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν . . . αἰώνιον. - Only by 
His being glorified could the Son give 
this eternal life, and so fulfil the com- 
mission with which He was entrusted, 
ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκας is explained in ver. 27. 
and the verses preceding: Mt. xi. 27: 
Heb. i. 2. πάσης σαρκὸς represents 


αλ, Gen. vi. 12, Is. xl. 6, etc., 
and denotes the human race as possessed 


I—5. 


δώση | adtots ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


841 


3. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωὴ, 3 ἵνα ἆ vi. 29 reff. 


e1 Thess. i. 


, 
γινώσκωσί σε τὸν µόνον " ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας ᾿Ιησοῦν 9. Heb. 


Χριστόν. 


A A δόξ me 3 1 Ν a x , = 
σεαυτω» τη ο η η ειχον προ του τον KOO}LOV ειναι παρὰ σοι. Εν. 36. 


4. ἐγώ σε ἐδόξασα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς᾽ τὸ ἔργον ΄ ἐτελείωσα 3 ὃ 
δέδωκάς por Siva ποιήσω: 5. καὶ νῦν " δόξασόν µε σὺ, πάτερ, ' παρὰ _ iii 


i Prov. il. 1; iii. 13. 


1x. 14 (A) 
cp.1 Jo.v. 


. 
» ΕΝεΠ. vi.16. 


: ν Xiil. 33. 
j Prov. viii. 24. Ps, Ixxi. § 


* For δωση and γινωσκωσι some read δωσει and γινωσκονσι, but vide Simcox, 
Gram., p. 1009, and W.H., Appendix, p. 171. 


2 τελειωσας in SABCLN 33 adopted by Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 


of a frail, terrestrial existence, lacking 
ζωὴν αἰώνιον. ἵνα wav ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, 
the neuter, as in vi. 39, resolved into 
the individuals in αὐτοῖς; and on the 
nominative absolute, see Buttmann’s 
N.T. Gram., 379; and Kypke in loc.— 
Ver. 3. αὕτη δέἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή ἵνα 
... On ἵνα in this construction, see 
Burton, 213, and cf. xv. 8; ὅτι in 
iii. I9 is not quite equivalent. In 
Is. xxxvii. 20 God is designated 6 
Θεὸς povos, and in Exod. xxxiv. 6 
ἀληθινός; cf. 2 Thess. i. ro. He is the 
only true God in contrast to many that 
are ‘‘called gods,” 1 Cor. viii. 5,6. But 
cf. especially 1 John v. 20. It was by mak- 
ing known to them this God, and thus 
glorifying the Father, that Christ ‘‘ gave 
men eternal life”. The life He gave 
consisted in and was maintained by this 
knowledge. But to the knowledge of 
the Father, the knowledge of ‘‘ Him 
whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ,” 
was necessary, i. 18, xiv.6. Asini, 17, 
so here, ᾿Ιησοῦν Χριστόν is the double 
name which became common in Apos- 
tolic times, and not (as Meyer and 
others) ‘‘an appellative predicate,’’ ‘‘Jesus 
as the Messiah”. Whether Jesus’ nam- 
ing of Himself as a third person can be 
accounted for by the solemnity of the 
occasion (‘der feierliche Gebetstyl,” 
Licke), or is to be ascribed to John, is 
much debated. Westcott seems justified 
in saying that ‘‘the use of the name 
‘Jesus Christ’ by the Lord Himself at 
this time is in the highest degree un- 
likely. . . . It is no derogation from the 
truthfulness of the record that St. John 
has thus given parenthetically, and in 
conventional language (so to speak), the 
substance of what the Lord said at greater 
length.”—Ver. 4. ἐγώσε. . . ποιήσω. 
This is a fresh ground for the petition of 
ver. I renewed in νετ. 5: “' glorify Thou 
me’’. The ground is ‘I have glorified 
Thee on the earth; having finished 
“perfectly accomplished, cf. τετέλεσται 


of the cross] the work which Thou 
gavest me todo”. But it is not the idea 
of reward that is prominent here, although 
that idea is found in Phil. ii. 6-11 ; Heb. 
ii. Q-II ; v. 4-10; the immediate thought 
here is of the necessary progress which 
the hour demanded. There remained no 
longer any reason for His continuance 
on earth. He did not desire, and did not 
need, any prolongation of life below. 
Beyschlag’s objection (N.T. Theol., i. 
254) is therefore baseless, as also is 
Grotius’ ‘‘ostendit, non iniquum se pe- 
tere”.—Ver. 5. καὶ viv δόξασον ... 
got. The precise character of the glori- 
fication He looks for is here presented. 
It is παρὰ σεαυτῷ, and it is a restoration 
to the glory He had enjoyed πρὸ τοῦ τὸν 
κόσμον εἶναι. By παρὰ σεαυτῷ it 15 
rendered impossible to understand παρὰ 
σοί of an “ideal ”’ pre-existence ; because 
these two expressions are here equiva- 
lents, and Christ cannot be supposed 
to have prayed for an ‘“‘ideal” glory 
when He asked that God would glorify 
Him παρὰ σεαυτῷ. ‘There is, con- 
sequently, here, as in vi. 62, viii. 58, a 
continuity of the consciousness of the 
historical Christ with the Logos.” Tho- 
luck. On this verse Beyschlag remarks 
(i. 254): ‘The possibility of such a 
position was first won by Jesus through 
His lite and death on earth, so that, in 
point of fact, it forms the divine reward 
of that life and death; how then could 
He have possessed it realiter before the 
world was?” But the representation 
given by Paul in Phil. ii. is open to the 
same objection. Christ is represented 
as leaving a glory He originally enjoyed 
and returning to it when His work on 
earth was done and as the result of that 
work. The humanity was nowto share 
in and to be in some way the organ of 
that divine glory; and this it could not 
be until it had been perfected by the 
experience of a human life. Wendt 
(Teaching of Fesus, ii. 169) says: “' Ac- 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


XVII. 


6. ᾿Εφανέρωσά σου τὸ ὄνομα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οὓς δέδωκάς } por ἐκ 


842 
aA , 
TOU κοσμου x 
k viii. 51. "επημήμμαε, 
ον ee 


cou ἐστιν 2 
1 Ace Vii. af 


abalone ὅτι σύ pe ἀπέστειλας. 


gol ἦσαν, καὶ ἐμοὶ αὐτοὺς δέδωκας' καὶ τὸν λόγον σου 

7. νῦν ἔγνωκαν ὅτι πάντα ὅσα δέδωκάς μου, παρὰ 
:δ. ὅτι τὰ "ῥήματα ἃ δέδωκάς por, δέδωκα αὐτοῖς: καὶ 
ὑτοὶ ἔλαβον, καὶ ἔγνωσαν ἀληθῶς, ὅτι παρὰ god ἐξῆλθον, καὶ 


9. ἐγὼ περὶ αὐτῶν ἐρωτῶ": οὗ 


περὶ τοῦ κόσµου ἐρωτῶ, ἀλλὰ περὶ ὧν δέδωκάς por, ὅτι coi εἶσι. 


πι 1 Chron 
ΧΧΙΧ. 14. 


1 For δεδωκας in both occurrences in ver. 
7 δεδωκας is found in $CDL, εδωκας in AB. 


ABCD. 
}εισιν in NBCL 33. 


cording to the mode of speech and con- 
ception prevalent in the N.T., a heavenly 
good, and so also a heavenly glory, can 
be conceived and spoken of as existing 
with God, and belonging to a person, not 
because this person already exists, and is 
invested with glory, but because the glory 
of God is in some way deposited and pre- 
served for this person in heaven’’. The 
passages, however, on which he depends 
for this principle do not sustain it. Such 
expressions as i. 14, ii. 11, which indicate 
that already while on earth a divine 
glory was manifest in Christ, in no de- 
gree contradict but rather confirm such 
statements as the present. 

Vv. 6-19. Prayer for the dis- 
ciples.—Ver. 6. sili al σου. . « 
κόσμου. Ver. 4 is resumed and 
explained. ‘‘I have glorified Thee 
and finished my work by manifest- 
ig,” etc. To manifest the name 
here means to make God known 
as the holy and loving Father. This 
had been accomplished by Christ not in 
the case of all, but of those whom the 
Father had given Him; ο. vi. 37-44. 
Out of the world some were separated by 
the Father and allotted to Christ as His 
disciples. oot ἦσαν, ‘‘ Thine they were,” 
before they attached themselves to Jesus 
they already belonged to God in a 
special sense; as, ¢.g., Nath. i. 48.— 
Holtzmann. καὶ τὸν λόγον σου τετ- 
ηρήκασι, ‘and they have kept Thy 
word,” the revelation of God which has 
come to them through various channels ; 
in contrast to those mentioned in v. 38. 
—Ver. 7. As the result of this keep- 
ing of God’s truth, viv ἔγνωκαν . . . 
ἐστιν, ‘they have now’”’—in presence 
of this final revelation—‘ known that 
all things whatsoever Thou hast given 


Ver. 10. 


"10. καὶ τὰ ἐμὰ ™ πάντα od ἐστι, καὶ τὰ od End> καὶ δεδόξασµαι ἐν 


6 εδωκας is read in SABDK. In ver. 
In ver. 8 δεδωκας in WL, eSwxas in 


me are from Thee’. The object of 
the manifestation in Christ has been 
attained: the Father has been seen in 
and through Him. All the wisdom and 
power of Christ have been recognised as 
from God.—Ver. 8. ὅτι τὰ pypata... 
ἀπέστειλας. The result achieved, νετ. 7, 
was due to the fidelity of the messenger, 
τὰ ῥήματα . . . δέδωκα αὐτοῖς, and to 
the receptiveness of those prepared by 
God, αὐτοὶ ἔλαβον, etc. cf. xvi. 30. ἐγὼ 
περὶ αὐτῶν ἐρωτῶ. He desires solemnly 
to commit to the Father’s keeping those 
who have believed. He prays for them 
in distinction from the world, and for the 
present sets the world aside, οὐ περὶ τοῦ 
κόσμου. The petitions now presented 
are only applicable to disciples, not to 
the world. Melanchthon says: ‘ Vide 
horrendum judicium Christi de mundo, 
cum negat se orare pro mundo, damnat- 
que quicquid est mundi, quantumvis 
speciosum”. But Luther more justly 
says: “' To pray for the world, and not 
to pray for the world, must both be right 
and good. For soon after He says Him- 
self: ‘ Neither pray I for those alone, but 
for them also who shall believe on me’.”’ 
He prayed too for His crucifiers, Lk. 
xxiii. 34. His reason for praying for 
those who have received Him is ὅτι σοί 
εἶσι, ‘ because they are Thine’’, God’s 
interest in them and work upon them 
have already been manifested, and are 
the promise | of His further operation. — 
καὶ τὰ ἐμὰ πάντα σά ἐστι, καὶ 
τὰ oa ἐμά, the community of property 
and therefore of interest is unlimited, 
absolute; extending not only to the 
persons of the disciples, but to all that 
Christ has spoken and done on earth. 
καὶ δεδόξασµαι ἐν αὐτοῖς, “and 1 have 
been glorified in them,” 1.ε., in the dis- 


6—15. 


αὐτοῖς. 
εἰσὶ, καὶ ἐγὼ πρός σε ἔρχομαι. 


τῷ ὀνόματί σου, οὓς] δέδωκάς por, 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


1. καὶ οὖκ ἔτι εἰμὶ ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ, καὶ οὗτοι ἐν τῷ κόσµῳ 


843 


* nJosh.xxiv. 


πάτερ "Gyre, "τήρησον αὐτοὺς ἐν 19 


ΟΙ Thess.v. 
23. 


ἵνα dow Pév, καθὼς ἡμεῖς. ae 


12. ὅτε ἤμην pet αὐτῶν ἐν τῷ Kéopw,? ἐγὼ Ἡ ἐτήρουν αὐτοὺς ἐν τῷ 4 Prov. xix. 


ὀνόματί σου: ols® δέδωκάς por "ἐφύλαξα, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ αὐτῶν 


ἀπώλετο, εἰ μὴ ὁ "υϊὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, ἵνα ἡ γραφὶ  πληρωθῇῃ. 


16. Wisd. 
ἄν οι Xix. 
1 Pet. 
i, 5. 
r 2 Kings 


I Gv δὲ ό é καὶ ταῦτα λαλῶ ἐν TH κόσµω. ἵνα xii.5. Is 
3. νῦν δὲ πρός σε έρχομαι, καὶ ταῦτ ῶ A µω, sh de 


ἔχωσι "τὴν χαρὰν τὴν ἐμὴν πεπληρωμένην ἐν αὐτοῖς. 


τα 
14. ἐγὼ Thess. ii. 


a 3 
δέδωκα αὐτοῖς τὸν λόγον σου, καὶ 6 κόσμος ἐμίσησεν αὐτοὺς, ὅτι οὐκ s xv, ατ. 


εἰσὶν ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, καθὼς ἐγὼ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου. 
ἐρωτῶ ἵνα ἄρῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, GAN’ ἵνα τηρήσῃς αὐτοὺς ' ἐκ 


t Rev. iii. 
10; ἀπό 
common. 


15. οὐκ 


lovs D? and a few cursives; ο in D*XU and a few cursives; w in ΝΑΒΟΙ,, 


etc., Syrr. Theb. Arm, Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 
2 Omit εν τω κοσµω with NBC*DL. 


δω read here also by BC*L, and και inserted before epvAaga, 


ciples. In them it had been manifested 
that Christ was the messenger of God 
and had the words of eternal life.—Ver. 
11. καὶ οὐκέτι εἰμὶ ἐν τῷ Kéopo. The 
circumstances necessitating the prayer 
are now stated. Jesus is no longer in 
the world, already He has bid farewell to 
it, but the disciples remain in it, exposed 
without His accustomed counsel and 
defence. πάτερ dye, “Holy Father”; 
this unique designation is suggested 
by the Divine attribute which would 
naturally assert itself in defending from 
the world’s corruptions those who were 
exposed to them. τήρησον αὐτοὺς ἐν 
τῷ ὀνόματί σου ὢ δέδωκάς por, ‘ pre- 
serve them in [the knowledge of] Thy 


name, which Thou gavest me”. @ is 
attracted into dative by ὀνόματι. This 


was the fundamental petition. The 
retention of the knowledge which Christ 
had imparted to them of the Father 
would effect ἵνα dow ἕν καθὼς ἡμεῖς. 
Without harmony among themselves, 
so that they should exist as a manifest 
unity differentiated from the world, their 
witness would fail; xv. 8, 12. καθὼς 
ἡμεῖς is explained by xv. 9, 10.—Ver. 12. 
The protection now asked had been 
afforded by Christ so long as He was 
with the disciples. ὅτε ἥμην per αὐτῶν, 
ἐγὼ ἐτήρουν ... “when I was with 
them, I kept them in Thy name which 
Thou hast given me: and I guarded 
them, and not one of them perished, but 
the son of perdition, that the Scripture 
might be fulfilled”. On the detail of 
educative care spent on the disciples, 
and covered by ἐτήρουν, see Bernard, 


Central Teaching, p. 370. 6 vids τῆς 
ἀπωλείας, cf. 2 Thess. ii. 3, in accord- 
ance with the usual Hebrew usage, the 
person identified with perdition, closely 
associated withit. Cf. Is. lvii. 4; xxxiii. 2; 
Mt. xxiii.15. Raphel quotes from Herod- 
otus, viii., ὕβριος vidv, with the remark, 
“nec Graecis plane ignotus est hic lo- 
quendi modus’. The Scripture referred 
to is Ps. xli. το, as in xiii. 18.—Ver. 13. 
As He Himself goes to the Father, He 
utters this petition aloud, and while yet 
with the disciples—ratra λαλῶ ἐν τῷ 
«éop@—that they might recognise that 
the power of God was engaged for their 
protection, and might thus have repeated 
and perfected in themselves the same joy 
with which Christ had overcome all the 
trials and fears of life. Cf. xv. 11, xvi. 
24.—Ver. 14. ἐγὼ δέδωκα . . . κόσμον. 
Additional reason for soliciting in behalf 
of the disciples the protection of the 
Father consists in this, that the world 
hates them because they have received 
the revelation of God in Christ, and are 
thereby separated from the world as their 
Teacher was not of the world. Cf. ver. 
6.—Ver. 15. The simplest escape from 
the anger of the world was removal from 
it, but for this He would not ask: οὐκ 
ἐρωτῶ ἵνα ἄρῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ κόσμον. 
They had a work to do which involved 
that they should bein the world. Italso 
involved the fulfilment of the petition, ἵνα 
τηρήσῃς αὐτοὺς ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ. Luther, 
Calvin, etc., take πονηροῦ as neuter; 
recent interpreters in general consider it 
to be masculine, ‘‘ from the evil one,” as 
in 1 John ii. 13, iv. 4, v. 18; cf. Με, vi. 


844 
τοῦ πονηροῦ. 
αχ. 36; 
Exod. xiii. 
2. wv ὁ ods ἀλήθειά ἐστι. 
Ecclus. 
xlv. 4. 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVII. 


16. ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου οὐκ εἰσὶ, καθὼς ἐγὼ ἐκ τοῦ 
κόσμου οὐκ εἰμί. 17. " ἁγίασον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ σου] ὁ λόγος 
18. καθὼς ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλας εἰς τὸν κόσμον, 
> A > , > a > A , 4 ε 7 ᾿ A 3 4 
κἀγὼ ἀπέστειλα αὐτοὺς eis τὸν κόσμον: 19. καὶ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἐγὼ 


vi Esdri, ” ἁγιάζω ἐμαυτὸν, ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ dow ἡγιασμένοι ἐν ἀληθεία. 29. 


3. 


1 gov omitted in ΝΑΕΒς3Β, it. vulg. 


13. ‘The evil one” as the prince of 
this world and ‘‘a murderer from the 
beginning’? (viii. 44) was the instigator 
of persecution.—Ver. 16, For τηρεῖν ἐκ 
see Rev. iii. το. The reason of the world’s 
hatred and persecution is given here, as 
in xv. 19, ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου . . . “ They do 
not belong to the world, as I am out of 
the world.’’—Ver. 17. But besides this 
negative qualification for representing 
Christ, they must possess also a positive 
equipment, ἁγίασον αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ 
σου. ‘‘Consecrate them by thy truth.” 
ἁγιάζω is to render sacred, to set apart 
from profane uses; as in Exod. xiii 1, 
ἁγίασόν µοι πᾶν πρωτότοκον; Exod. xx. 
8, ay. ἡμέραν; Exod. xxviii. 37, ἁγιάσεις 
αὐτοῦς ἵνα ἱερατεύωσί por; Mt. xxiii. 17 ; 
Heb. ix. 13. Inx. 36 it is used of the 
Father’s setting apart of Christ to His 
mission. Here it is similarly used of the 
setting apart or consecration of the dis- 
ciples as Christ’s representatives. Meyer 
includes their “‘ equipment with Divine 
illumination, power, courage, joyfulness, 
love, inspiration, είο., for their official 
activity”. Wetstein’s definition is good ; 
“ Sanctificare est aliquem eligere ad 
certum munus obeundum, eumque prae- 
parare atque idoneum reddere”’. ‘‘ The 
truth,” as the element in which they now 
lived, was to be the efficient instrument 
of their consecration, cf. xiv. 16, xvi. 
7-13; the truth specifically which be- 
came theirs through the revelation of 
the Father, 6 λόγος 6 σὸς ἀλήθειά ἐστι, 
“«the word which is Thine,’’ ver. 14, but 
here emphatically distinguished as being 
the Word of the Father and no other. 
The article is absent before ἀλήθεια, as in 
iv. 24, because ἀλήθ. is abstract. ‘“ Thy 
word 15 not only ‘‘ true” but “ truth ”’.— 
Ver. 18. καθὼς ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλας .. . 
“As Thou didst send me into the world, 
I also sent them into the world.” 
καθὼς seems to imply ‘in _ pro- 
secution of the same purpose and 
therefore with similar equipment”’. eis 
τὸν κόσμον is not otiose, but suggests 
that as Christ’s presence in the world 


, ~ A 
Οὐ περὶ τούτων δὲ ἐρωτῶ µόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τῶν πιστευσόντων 3 


Σπιστενοντων in SABCD, 


was necessary for the fulfilment of God’s 
purpose, so the sphere of the disciples’ 
work is also “‘the world,” cf. v. 15. 
ἀπέστειλα, aorist, because already they 
had served as apostles, see iv. 38 and 
Mark iii. 14.—Ver. 19. The crowning 
plea is that it was for this end, their con- 
secration, Jesus consecrated Himself: 
καὶ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν, “and in their behalf, 
that they may be consecrated in truth, 
do I consecrate myself”. “'"Αγιάζω in 
the present with ὑπέρ can only be under- 
stood of Christ’s self-consecration to His 
sacrificial death.” Tholuck. ἐγὼ ἑκουσίως 
θυσιάζω ἐμαντόν, Euthymius; so Meyer, 
Reynolds and others. This however is 
needlessly to limit the reference and to 
introduce an idea somewhat alien to this 
context and to x. 36. Calvin is right: 
“Porro sanctificatio haec quamvis ad 
totam Christi vitam pertineat, in sacri- 
ficio tamen mortis ejus maxime illustris 
fuit”. ἵνα e.. The object of Christ’s 
consecration to His work was the sever- 
ance of His disciples from the world and 
their inspiration with the same spirit of 
self-sacrifice and devotedness to sacred 
uses, ἐν ἀλήθειᾳ, understood by the 
Greek commentators as ‘real’’ in con- 
trast to what is symbolic, cf. iv. 23. Thus 
Euthymius, ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ ὦσι τεθυµένοι 
ἐν ἀληθινῇ θυσίᾳ, ἡ γὰρ νομικὴ θυσία 
τύπος ἦν, οὐκ ἀλήθεια.  Discernit a 
sanctificationibus legis.” Melanchthon. 
Similarly Godet. Meyer renders “truly” 
and remarks: ‘‘ As contrasted with every 
other ἁγιότης in human relations, that 
wrought through the Paraclete is the 
true consecration”. But is it possible to 
neglect the reference to ἀληθείᾳ, ver. 17 ? 
As Liicke points out, John-(3 John 3, 4) 
does not always distinguish between 
ἀλήθεια and ἡ ἀλήθεια. The object of 
Christ’s consecration was to bring the 
truth by and in which the disciples might 
be consecrated. 

Vv. 20-26. Prayer for future believers. 
—Ver. 20. Οὐ περὶ τούτων δὲ ἐρωτῶ 
µόνον .. . The consecration of the dis- 
ciples and His sending them forth natu- 


16---26. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ [ 


84.5 


διὰ τοῦ λόγου αὐτῶν εἰς ἐμέ: 21. ἵνα πάντες ev ὦσι' καθὼς σὺ, 


πι 3 > 4 ‘ > \ ϱ/ ‘ > VS St κα. | 
πάτερ. εν EOL, Kayo εν σοι, ινα και αυτοι εν ημιν εν 


a ϱ 
@ol* ινα 


ὁ κόσμος πιστεύσῃ ὅτι σύ µε ἀπέστειλας. 22. καὶ ἐγὼ "τὴν δόξαν wi. 14. 
um. 


ἣν, δέδωκάς pot, δέδωκα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα dow ἓν, καθὼς ἡμεῖς * ἕν ἐσμεν' xxii. 20. 
η > Γι >] 


X X. 30. 


rn > A ‘ 5 
23. ἐγὼ ἐν αὐτοῖς, καὶ σὺ ἐν ἐμοὶ, ἵνα ὦσι τετελειωμένοι εἲς Ev, καὶ Zech. xiv. 


ἵνα γινώσκη ὁ κόσμος ὅτι σύ µε ἀπέστειλας, καὶ ἠγάπησας αὐτοὺς, 
24. Mdrep,® οὓς  δέδωκάς po, θέλω ἵνα 
ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγὼ, κἀκεῖνοι Gor pet ἐμοῦ: ἵνα θεωρῶσι τὴν δόξαν τὴν 
ἐμὴν, ἣν ἔδωκάς por, ὅτι ἠγάπησάς pe πρὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου. 


καθὼς ἐμὲ ἠγάπησας. 


Υ πρὸ ΟΠΙΥ 
here and 
Eph. i. 4. 
1 Pet. i. 
20; ἀπὸ 
seven 
times. 


> 
25. Πάτερ " δίκαιε, καὶ 6 Kdopos σε οὖκ ἔγνω, ἐγὼ δέ σε ἔγνων, καὶ z Here only 


οὗτοι ἔγνωσαν ὅτι σύ µε ἀπέστειλας' 26. καὶ ἐγνώρισα αὐτοῖς τὸ 
” , ‘ / 9 c a > > 9 a 
ὄνομά σου, καὶ yywpiow: ἵνα ἡ ἀγάπη, ἣν ἠγάπησάς µε, ἐν αὐτοῖς 


- >? 
ᾖ, κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτοῖς. 


1 πατερ in NACL; πατηρ in BD. 


rally suggests the enlargement of the 
Church and of His care.—Ver. 21. For 
those who through their preaching be- 
lieve on Him He prays that they may be 
one. Naturally the extension of the 
Church imperils its unity, the ἑνότης τοῦ 
πνεύματος, Eph. iv. 3. ‘This unity is in- 
finitely more than mere unanimity, since 
it rests upon unity of spirit and life.” 
Tholuck. This unity of all believers finds 
its ideal in the unity of the Father and the 
Son: καθὼς σὺ, πάτερ κ. τ. λ., and not 
only its ideal but its unifying principle 
and element, ἐν ἡμῖν. This unity of all 
believers is to result in the universal 
belief in Christ’s mission, ἵνα 6 κόσμος 
.. . G@wéorethas.—Ver. 22. That the 
unity of believers in the Father and the 
Son might be perfect, it was needful that 
even the glory which Christ possessed by 
the Father’s gift (ver. 5) should be given 
to His people. The perfect tense is 
used, because the gift had already been 
determined. The nature of the glory 
spoken of is interpreted both by ver. 5 
and by ver. 24. It could not be com- 
pletely and actually bestowed until the 
point indicated in ver. 24 was reached.— 
Ver. 23. ἵνα dow ἕν of ver. 22 becomes 
in νετ. 23 ἵνα Gov τετελειωμένοι εἰς Ev, 
‘that they may be perfected into one’’. 
They are perfected by being wrought to 
a Divine unity. The work of Christ is 
accomplished when men are one by 
Christ dwelling in them. God is in Him, 
He is in each believer, and thus a true 
and final unity is formed. One result is 
the conviction wrought in the world, ὅτι 
σύ µε ἀπέστειλας . . . ἠγάπησας. The 


with 
πάτερ, but 
cp. 1 Jo. 
i. 9; il. 29. 
Rev. xvi. 


5. 


Σεν omitted in BC*D, read in SSACfL. 
Σπατηρ in AB, πατερ NCDL. So in ver. 25. 


“ovs in ACL, it.; o in NBD. 


mission of Christ and its results prove 
not only the Father’s love of the Son 
but His love for men.—Ver. 24. Πάτερ, 
ὃ δέδωκάς por, “that which Thou hast 
given me,” te, the community of 
believers; θέλω, ‘I will,” no longer, 
ἐρωτῶ, ‘that where I am, there they 
may be also”; 6 resolved into individuals, 
To share in the destiny of Christ has 
already been promised to His followers, 
x. 26; cf. xiv. 3. This is the consumma- 
tion of Christian blessedness. They are 
not only in the same condition as their 
Lord, but enjoy it in fellowship with 
Him, pert’ ἐμοῦ.-- ἵνα θεωρῶσι τὴν δόξαν 
τὴν ἐμήν. To see Christ honoured and 
supreme must ever be the Christian’s 
joy. But this glory of Christ resulting 
from the eternal love of the Father is not 
only seen but shared in by the disciples 
in the measure of their capacity, v. 22, 
2 Tim. ii, 12, Rev. iii. 21.—Ver. 25. 
Πάτερ δίκαιε, ‘ Righteous Father”. 
The appeal is now to God’s justice; 
“ut tua bonitas me -miserat servandsn 
si qua Πετί potuisset, omnibus; ita tui, 
justitia non patietur ob quorundam ia- 
credulitatem frustrari vota credentium”’. 
Erasmus. The Father’s justice is 
appealed to, that the believing may not 
share the fate of the unbelieving world 
καὶ 6 κόσμος Elsner translates '' quam- 
vis,” and Lampe says all difficulty thus 
disappears. But Elsner’s examples are 
irrelevant. Meyer renders “' Righteous 
Father—(yea, such Thou art!) and 
(and yet) the world knew Thee not”. 
Simcox suggests that the first καί is 
correlative not to the immediately follow- 


846 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVIII. 


XVIII. 1. ΤΑΥΤΑ εἰπὼν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐξῆλθε σὺν τοῖς μαθηταῖς 


a vi. 1. 
b 2 Kings a x 
xxiii. 6. εἰσῆλθεν αὐτὸς καὶ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ. 
cMt. . παραδιδοὺς αὐτὸν, τὸν τόπον : 
XXViii. 12. ο τή η όλ, 
μετὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ. 3. 
d vii. 32. 


αὐτοῦ "πέραν τοῦ ᾿ χειμάρρου τῶν Κέδρων,ὶ ὅπου ἦν κῆπος, eis ὃν 


2. det δὲ καὶ ᾿Ιούδας, 6 
ὅτι πολλάκις ° συνήχθη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐκεῖ 
ε > > , π a a ‘ 
ὁ οὖν Ιούδας λαβὼν τὴν σπεῖραν, καὶ 


> ~ a 
ἐκ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ Φαρισαίων “bmypéras, ἔρχεται ἐκεῖ μετὰ 


1 twv Κεδρων in ΝΕΒΟΙΙΧΓ, Orig. Chrys. Cyr.-Alex. Tr.W.H.R. [ερ. 2 Sam. xv. 


2313 


τον KeSpov in ΝΤ, Ti.; του Κεδρων in A(S)A, vet. lat. vulg. Meyer, Weiss, 


Holtzmann, who understand it as = pv? black, a name frequently given to 


streams. “If the original reading was του Κεδρων it is easy to understand how 
each of the two corruptions came to be substituted for it by copyists knowing only 


Greek.” Sanday. 
ing δέ, but to the secon. καί, the 
effect being something like: ‘* While 
the world knew Thee not, though I knew 
Thee, these on their part knew”... . 
Similarly Westcott; ‘it serves to co- 
ordinate the two main clauses.... 
The force of it is as if we were to say: 
Two facts are equally true; it is true 
that the world knew Thee not; it is 
true that these knew that Thou didst 
send me.’’ May the καί not be intended 
to connect this clause with the preceding 
ὅτι . . . κόσμον, and to mark the con- 
trast between the love that was in God 
before the foundation of the world and 
the world’s ignorance of Him, and 
especially of His love? But “I knew 
Thee and these knew,” etc. They did 
not know God directly as Christ did, 
but they knew they could accept Him as 
the Revealer of God. And to them who 
were willing to receive my message, 
because they knew I was sent by Thee, 
I made known Thy name and will make 
it known by my death (Weiss) and by 
sending the Spirit of truth (Westcott). 
The end in view in this manifestation by 
Christ was that the love with which the 
Father had loved the Son might rest on 
the disciples. ἵνα ἡ ἀγάπη ἣν ἠγάπησάς 
pe. The construction is found in Eph. 
i. 4, and is frequent in the classics ; 
ἡ κρίσις ἣν ἐκρίθη, Lysias; τῇ νίκῃ ἣν 
ἐνίκησε, Arrian.—See Kypke. kayo ἐν 
αὐτοῖς. This is the end and crown of 
all. That He should desire this intimate 
communion with men, and should seek 
above all else to live in and through His 
disciples, is surprising proof of His love. 
CHAPTER XVIII. — Friedrich Spitta 
(Zur Geschichte und Litteratur des Ur- 
christentums, i. 157 ff.) believes that the 
second section of this chapter has been ac- 
cidentally dislocated, and that its original 
order was as follows: (1) 12, 13, Jesus 


is brought to Annas; (2) 19-23, He is 
examined before the high priest; (3) 
24, 14, He is passed on to Caiaphas; 
(4) 15-18, 25-27, the triple denial of 
Peter; (5) 28, Jesus is sent to the 
Praetorium. 

But this arrangement also has its 
difficulties. It requires us to suppose 
that Caiaphas had come to the house of 
Annas and conducted the examination 
recorded in 10-23, and that when it is 
said that Annas sent the prisoner to 
Caiaphas, after this examination, it is 
only meant that he sent Him to the 
house or palace of Caiaphas where the 
Sanhedrim sat. 

Vv. 1-12. The arrest of Fesus.—Ver. 
1. Having finished His prayer and His 
discourse, Jesus ἐξῆλθε, “‘ went out”’ from 
the city, as is suggested by πέραν τοῦ 
χειμάρρου, “to the other side of the 
torrent,” cf. vi. I. χείμαρρος sc. χειµάρ- 
poos ποταμός, a stream that flows in 
winter, a torrent ; of Jabbok, Gen. xxxii. 
35; of Kidron, 2 Sam. xv. 23. τῶν 
Κέδρων, “the Kidron,” described in 
Henderson’s Palestine, 90. ὅπου Hv 
κῆπος ‘‘where was a garden,” in Mark 
xiv. 32, described as χωρίον (a country 
place, or estate), and called Γεθσημανῆ. 
The owner was probably a friend οί 
Jesus. Into this garden He went with 
His disciples—Ver. 2. 78a δὲ καὶ 
*lovdas. ‘And Judas also knew the 
place, because Jesus and His disciples 
had frequently assembled there” on 
previous visits to Jerusalem, Lk. xx1. 
37. This is inserted to account for what 
follows, and to remind the reader of the 
voluntariness of the surrender. There 
was no attempt to escape or hide.— 
Ver. 3. ὁ οὖν Ιούδας λαβὼν τὴν σπεῖραν 
καὶ . . . ὑπηρέας. σπεῖρα (Spira, 
anything rolled up or folded together), 
a Roman cohort (Polyb., xi. 23, 1) or tenth 


I—I0. 


φανῶν καὶ λαμπάδων καὶ ὅπλων. 4. 
ἐρχόμενα ew αὐτὸν, ἐξελθὼν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “Τίνα ζητεῖτε; 
᾽Απεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ, “"Incodv τὸν Ναζωραῖον. 
Εἱστήκει δὲ καὶ ἐν, ὁ ο. αὐτὸν 


*Ingods, ““"᾿ Εγώ εἰμι. 
pet αὐτῶν. 
b , 

Xapat. 


® cig τὰ ὀπίσω, καὶ ἔπεσον | 
Lal ? 
τησε, “Tiva {nrette ;” 


8. ᾽Απεκρίθη 6 “Ingots, “Εἶπον ὑμῖν, ὅτι ἐγώ εἶἰμι. 
Ο. ἵνα πληρωθῇ 6 


ζητεῖτε, ‘adhere τούτους ὑπάγειν '” 


9 3 
εἶπεν, “Ὅτι οὓς δέδωκάς por, οὐκ ἀπώλεσα ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐδένα. 
10. Σίμων οὖν Πέτρος ἔχων µάχαιραν, εἵλκυσεν αὐτὴν, καὶ ἔπαισε 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


a Ὃ 
6. Ὡς οὖν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “ 
iP pea οὖν αὐτοὺς ἐπηρώ- g vi. "66; Xx. 
οἱ δὲ εἶπον, “"Incodv τὸν lees Ge 


847 


"Ingots οὖν εἰδὼς πάντα τὰ 


ε ae 13. 
Gap. ie 
oy, Je 


Λέγει stots 6 


Yo) εἰμι, δελ 26; viii. 


14. 2 Pet. 
11. 2%. 2 
Kings xx, 
εἰ οὖν wk 11, 


λόγος ὃν 
>i Xi. 44; χι. 
7. Acts 

v. 38, etc, 


A 


τὸν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως δοῦλον, καὶ ἀπέκοψεν αὐτοῦ τὸ dtiov? τὸ δεδιόν, 


1 απηλθαν, επεσαν in NBD. 


part of a legion, and therefore containing 
about 600 men. The cohort denotes the 
garrison of the castle Antonia, which, 
during the Passover, was available to 
assist the Sanhedrim in maintaining 
order. Part of it was. now used in case 
“the servants of the Sanhedrim,’”’ ἐκ 
τῶν .. . ὑπηρέτας, should not prove 
sufficient. A considerable body of troops 
would obviate the risk of a popular rising, 
Vii. 32-49, xii. 42; especially Mk. xiv. 2. 
They were furnished with φανῶν καὶ 
λαμπάδων καὶ ὅπλων. Φανός was a link 
or torch, consisting of strips of resinous 
wood tied together, and in late Greek 
was used for λυχνοῦχος, a lantern ; 
λαμπάς was the opentorch. See Ruther- 
ford’s New Phryn., p. 131, and Wetstein. 
Both open lights and lanterns were in 
use in the Roman army, and would be at 
hand. ‘ The soldiers rushed out of their 
tents with lanterns and torches.” Dion, 
Hal., xi. 5. It was new moon, but it 
might be cloudy, and it would certainly 
be shady in the garden.—Ver. 4. Jesus, 
then, not with the boldness of ignorance, 
but knowing πάντα τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, 
‘all that was coming upon Him,” ef. 
Lk. xiv. 31, ἐρχομένῳ ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, “went 
out”’ from the garden, or more probably, 
ver. 26, from the group of disciples, ‘‘ and 
says, Whom seek ye?” to concentrate 
attention on Himself and prevent a 
general attack.—Ver. 5. “Imgotv τὸν 
Ναζωραῖον “Jesus the Nazarene,” cf. 
Acts xxiv. 5, Ναζαρηνός occurs Mk. 
xiv. 67, etc. ἐγώ εἰμι, “Iam He”. He 
had already been identified by Judas’ 
kiss, Mt. xxvi. 47, but Jesus wished to 
declare Himseif as one who did not fear 
identification. That the kiss was super- 


2 wraptov in SBC*L, vulg. “ auriculam ”. 


fluous is, however, no proof that it was 
not given. Εἰστήκει δὲ καὶ Ιούδας . . . 
This remark is inserted not to bring o έ 
that Judas fell to the ground with the 
rest (Holtzmann), but to point out that 
Judas had not only given directions, but 
had actually come, and now confronted 
his Lord and companions.—Ver.6. The 
immediate effect of His calm declaration 
was: ᾿ἀπῆλθον els τὰ ὀπίσω καὶ ἔπεσον 
χαμαί, << they went backwards and fell to 
the ground”’. Job i. 20, πεσὼν χαμαί; 
similarly used by Homer, etc., as = 
χαμᾶζε This might have been con- 
a ae a fulfilment of Ps. xxvii. 2, ot 
θλίβοντές pe... ἔπεσαν. The recoil, 
which necessarily causes stumbling and 
falling in a crowd, was natural, especially 
if the servants here employed were the 
same as those who had been sent to take 
Him on a former occasion, vii. 46. No 
one wished to be the first to lay hands 
on Him. Similar effects were produced 
by Mohammed (when Durthur stood over 
him with drawn sword), Mark Antony, 
Marius, Coligny. But the object in 
narrating the circumstance may have 
been to illustrate the voluntariness ot 
Christ’s surrender.—Ver. 7. Declaring 
His identity a second time, Jesus ex- 
plicitly reminds the officials that by their 
own acknowledgment they are instructed 
to arrest none but Himself. εἰ οὖν ἐμὲ 
ζητεῖτε . . . οὐδένα. In thus protecting 
His companions, Jesus, according to 
John, fulfils xvii. 12; although here the 
fulfilment is more superficial than that 
which was intended. (Cf. 2 Sam. xxiv. 
17.)—Ver. το. Peter did not wish to be 
thus dissociated from the fate of his 
Master, xiii. 38, and thinks a rescue 


848 


ἦν δὲ ὄνομα τῷ δούλωῳ Μάλχος. 
«Βάλε τὴν µάχαιράν σου] εἰς τὴν θήκην. τὸ ) ποτήριον ὃ δέδωκέ 
ὁ πατὴρ, οὗ μὴ πίω αὖτό ; 


12. Ἡ οὖν σπεῖρα καὶ ὅ χιλίαρχος καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέται τῶν ουδαίων 


j Ezek. 
Xxill. 31. 
Ps. xvi. 5. μοι 
Mt. xx. 
23, etc. 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVIII. 


II. εἶπεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τῷ Πέτρῳ. 


A 
k Acts i. 16." συνέλαβον τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἔδησαν αὐτὸν, 13. καὶ ἀπήγαγον 3 αὐτὸν 


2 Kings - a 

x.14. pos “Avvay πρῶτον: ἣν yap | 
1 Gen. Ac Ayan 

Xxxviii. 13. TOU ενιαυτου εκεινου. 
m Xi. 49. 
n Ps. ; 

Ixxxviii.8. 


14. Hv δὲ Καϊάφας 6 
Ἰουδαίοις, ὅτι συμφέρει ἕνα ἄνθρωπον ἀπολέσθαι ὃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ λαοῦ. 
15. ᾿Ηκολούθει δὲ τῷ ᾿Ιἠσοῦ Σίμων Πέτρος, καὶ 64 ἄλλος μαθητής. 


πενθερὸς τοῦ Καϊάφα, ὃς ἦν ἀρχιερεὺς 
™ συμβουλεύσας τοῖς 


Acts i. 19.0 δὲ μαθητὴς ἐκεῖνος ἦν ™ γνωστὸς τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ, καὶ συνεισῆλθε τῷ 


1 gov omitted in ΝΑΒΟΡΙ.Π. 


2 wyayov without αυτον in 3*BD. So in Tr.Ti.W.H.R. 


3 αποθανειν in ΡΟ Ρ 33. 


4ο omitted in \*ABD, inserted in ΔΝΕΡΟΙ/Π. The article is out of place here, 


though appropriate in xx. 3, 4. 


possible, as only the Sanhedrim officials 
would enter the garden, leaving the 
soldiers outside. ἔχων µάχαιραν, “ having 
a sword,” ‘‘ pro more peregrinantium in 
iis locis,” Grotius, and cf. Thucyd., i. 6; 
Luke xxii. 36. He struck τὸν τοῦ 
ἀρχιερέως δοῦλον, “the high priest’s 
servant’. The δοῦλοι are distinguished 
from the ὑπηρέται, ver. 18. John, being 
acquainted with the high priest’s house- 
hold, both identified the man and knew 
his name, which was a common one, see 
Wetstein, and of. Neh. x. 4; also, Por- 
phyry, Life of Plotinus, 17. “In my 
native dialect I (Porphyry) was called 
Malchus, which is interpreted, king.” 
ἀπέκοψεν αὐτοῦ τὸ ὠτίον τὸ δεξιόν. In 
Mark xiv. 47 ἀφεῖλεν τὸ ὠτάριον. τὸ 
δεξιόν indicates eye-witness ος subse- 
quent intimate knowledge. Peter meant, 
no doubt, to cleave the head.—Ver. 
11.  Peter’s action, however, was not 
commended, βάλε . . . θήκην. “Res 
evangelica non agitur ejusmodi praesi- 
diis.” Erasmus. θήκη, a receptacie; 
sometimes ξιφοθήκη; usually κολεός. 
τὸ ποτήριον . . « αὐτό. For the figure 
of the cup, see Ezek. xxili. 31-34; Mt. 
xx. 22, and xxvi. 39. Shall I refuse the 
lot appointed me by the Father ?—Ver. 
12. Ἡ οὖν σπεῖρα . . . αὐτόν. The 
Roman soldiers, ἡ σπεῖρα, under the 
orders of their Chiliarch (Tribune, 
Colonel), abetted the officers of the San- 
hedrim, ὑπηρέται τῶν Ἰουδαίων, in the 
apprehension of Jesus. As a matter of 
course and following the universal prac- 
tice ἔδησαν αὐτόν, “they bound Him,” 
with His hands shackled behind His back. 


Vv. 13-24. Examination before Annas. 
—Ver. 13. καὶ απήγαγον αὐτὸν, “and 
they led Him to Annas first”. πρῶτον 
refers to the subsequent examinations, 
vv. 24, 28. The reason for taking Him 
to Annas first was that he was father- 
in-law of the actual high priest, Caiaphas, 
and was a man of commanding influence. 
He had himself been high priest from 
A.D. 7-14, while five of his sons occupied 
the office in succession. Caiaphas held 
office till 37 A.D. On ἀρχιερεὺς τοῦ 
ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου see xi. 49.—Ver. I4. 
The attitude Caiaphas was likely to 
assume towards the prisoner is indicated 
by his identification with the person who 
uttered the principle, xi. 50, ὅτι συμφέρει ᾽ 
. . . GtrodkéoGar.—Ver. 15. "Ἠκολούθει 
- + µαθητής. ‘“ There followed Jesus 
Simon Peter ’’—with whom the narra- 
tive is now concerned—“ and another 
disciple,” in all probability John. He is 
mentioned to explain how Peter found 
access to the high priest’s residence. 
“That disciple was known to the high 
priest,” #.¢., probably to Caiaphas, and 
accerdingly went in with Jesus eis τὴν 
αὐλὴν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, “into the palace 
(or court) of the high priest”. αὐλή, 
originally the court or quadrangle round 
which the house was built, was used of 
the residence itself. Apparently, and 
very naturally, Annas had apartments 
in this official residence now occupied 
by Caiaphas.—Ver, 16. Peter, not being 
known to the household, was excluded 
and stood outside at the door, πρὸς τῇ 
θύρᾳ ἔξω, cf. xx. 11. John, missing him, 
spoke to the doorkeeper and introduced 


11---23. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


Ιησοῦ eis τὴν αὐλὴν τοῦ ἀρχιερέως: 16. 6 δὲ Πέτρος εἴστήκει πρὸς 


τῇ θύρᾳ ἔξω. 


Zz “ A se ~ 6 lal Δ 3 , a né 
ἄρχιερει, και εἶπε τη υρωρῳ., και εισηγαγε τον τρον. 


ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ μαθητὴς ὁ ἄλλος ὃς ἦν γνωστὸς τῷ 


17. λέγει 


οὖν ἡ “παιδίσκη ἡ θυρωρὸς τῷ Πέτρω, “΄Μὴ καὶ σὺ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν oGal. iv. 22. 


A 2 
et τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου ; 


Λέγει ἐκεῖνος, “'Οὐκ εἰμί. 
κεισαν δὲ ot δοῦλοι καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέται 5 ἀνθρακιὰν πεποιηκότες, 


Gen. xx. 


18. Εἱστή- τ7. 


ὅτι p xxi. ο. , 
Ecclus.xi. 


ψύχος ἦν, καὶ ἐθερμαίνοντο: ἦν δὲ pet αὐτῶν 6 Πέτρος ἑστὼς Kal 32. 4 


θερµαινόµενος. 


lal > aA ‘ A lal fal > an 
μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ, καὶ περὶ τῆς διδαχῆς αὐτοῦ. 


Macc. ix. 


19. ‘O οὖν ἀρχιερεὺς ἠρώτησε τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν περὶ τῶν το. 


20. ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ 6 


"Ingots, ''᾿Εγὼ Ἀπαρρησίᾳ ἐλάλησα1ὶ τῷ κόσµῳ' ἐγὼ πάντοτε α vii. 4 reff. 
2513 ξ 2 a 2 ~ Wee at na 8 , ee | 5 “ 
ἐδίδαξα ἐν τῇ” συναγωγῇ καὶ ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ, ὅπου πάντοτε ὃ οἱ Ιουδαῖοι 


συνέρχονται, καὶ " ἐν κρυπτῷ ἐλάλησα οὐδέν. 


21. Τί µε ἐπερωτᾶς ; r vii. 4. 


5 ay 5 
ἐπερώτησον τοὺς ἀκηκοότας, τί ἐλάλησα αὐτοῖς: ἴδε οὗτοι οἴδασιν 


” 
& εἶπον ἐγώ. 


22. Ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος, εἷς τῶν ὑπηρετῶν 


a“ ~ or , x 
παρεστηκὼς " έδωκε "ῥάπισμα τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, εἰπὼν, '' Οὕτως ἀποκρίνῃ s xix. 3. Is. 


aA > a 1 
τῷ ἀρχιερει ; 


1 λελαληκα in ΝΑΒΟΊ.. 


23. Απεκρίθη αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Ei κακῶς ἐλάλησα, 


1. 6. 


2 Omit τη with ΝΑΒΟΡ. 


3 παντες in SABC*L and most versions. 


him. tq θυρωρῷ, female doorkeepers 
appear 2 Sam. iv. 6, Acts. xil. 13, and 
see Wetstein.—Ver. 17. Naturally he 
concluded from John’s introducing him 
that Peter was also a disciple, and asa 
mere innocent and purposeless remark 
says: Μὴ καὶ ob... τούτου; ‘Are 
you also one of this man’s disciples?” 
He says, οὐκ eipt, ‘ I am not ”’.—Ver. 18. 
Εἱστήκεισαν . . . θερµαινόµενο. The 
household servants and the Sanhedrim 
servitors had made a fire in the open 
court of the house and were standing 
round it warming themselves. Peter, 
unabashed by his lie, joined himself to 
this group and stood in the light of the 
fire. Cf. Lk. xxii. 56, πρὸς τὸ ods. 
Jerusalem, lying 2500 feet above sea- 
level, is cold at night in spring.—Ver. 
19. Ὁ οὖν ἀρχιερεὺς ἠρώτησε . . . “The 
high priest then interrogated Jesus about 
His disciples and about His teaching,”’ 
apparently wishing to bring out on what 
terms He made disciples, whether as 
a simple Rabbi or as Messiah. But 
Jesus answered: ᾿Ἐγὼ παρρησίᾳ ἐλάλησα 
. . . οὐδέν. The high priest’s question 
was useless. Jesus had nothing to tell 
which He had not publicly and fre- 
quently proclaimed. Similarly Socrates 
replied to his judges (Plato, Afol., 33), 
“If any one says that he has ever 
learned or heard anything from me in 
private which the wo-ld has not heard, 


be assured he says what is not true”. 
mappynota ‘ without reserve,” riuckhalts- 
los, Holtzmann. τῷ κόσµῳ, “to every- 
body,” to all who cared to hear; cf. 
Socrates’ δηµοσίᾳ. ‘I always taught in 
synagogue and in the temple”; the 
article dropped as we drop it in the 
phrase ‘‘in church”; ‘ where,” ζ.6., in 
both synagogue and temple, πάντες ‘‘all 
the Jews assemble”.—Ver. 21. ‘‘ Why 
do you interrogate me? Ask those who 
have heard, what I said to them.” 
Similarly Socrates appeals to his dis- 
ciples. The οὗτοι might be construed as 
if Jesus looked towards some who were 
present.—Ver, 22. Tatra ... ἄρχιερεῖ; 
ῥάπισμα. The older meaning of ῥαπίζειν 
was “to strike with arod”’ sc. ῥαβθίζειν ; 
but in later Greek it meant “to give a 
blow on the cheek with the open hand”’. 
This is put beyond doubt by Field, Otium 
Norv., p. 71; cf. Rutherford’s New 
Phryn., Ῥ. 257. R.V. marg. ‘with a 
rod”? is not an improvement on R.V. 
text.—Ver. 23. The calmness and rea- 
sonableness of Jesus’ retort to this blow 
impressed it on the memory of John, 
whose own blood would boil when he 
saw his Master struck by a servant.— 
Ver. 24. As nothing was to be gained 
by continuing the examination, Jesus is 
handed on to Caiaphas, ᾽Απέστειλεν . . , 
ἀρχιερέα. 

Ver. 25 resumes the narrative inter- 


5+ 


850 


tHeb. v.14. µαρτύρησον περὶ τοῦ "κακοῦ” εἰ δὲ ' καλῶς, τί µε δέρεις; 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVIII 


24 


᾿Ἠρνήσατο ἐκεῖνος, 


26. Λέγει εἷς ἐκ τῶν δούλων τοῦ ἀρχιερέως, 


27. Πάλιν οὖν ἠρνήσατο ὁ Πέτρος, καὶ εὐθέως 


20. ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Πιλάτος ὃ 


30. ᾿Απεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον αὐτῷ, “Et μὴ ἦν οὗτος - 


Exod, 7 *aréotechev! αὐτὸν 6 “Avvas δεδεµένον πρὸς Καϊάφαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα. 
ase 25. Ἡν δὲ Σίµων Πέτρος ἑστὼς καὶ θερµαινόµενος: εἶπον οὖν 
αὐτῷ, “Mi καὶ σὺ ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ et ;” 
καὶ εἶπεν, “ Οὐκ eipt.” 
u Lk. 1.36. συγγενὴς ὢν οὗ ἀπέκοψε Πέτρος τὸ ὠτίον, '' Οὐκ ἐγώ σε εἶδον ἐν τῷ 
7 ete . κήπω μετ αὐτοῦ ; 0 
vy xiii. 38. ἀλέκτωρ ᾿ ἐφώνησεν. 
wxix.g. 28. "“ATOYEIN οὖν τὸν Ιησοῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ Καϊάφα eis τὸ " πραιτώριον. 
ιν ἦν δὲ mpwia?- καὶ αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσῆλθον eis τὸ πραιτώριον, ἵνα μὴ 
- Lev. vs 8 * μιανθῶσι», GAN ἵνα φάγωσι τὸ πάσχα. 
eee πρὸς αὐτοὺς, Kal εἶπε, “‘Tiva κατηγορίαν ” φέρετε κατὰ τοῦ ἀνθρώ- 
Judes, που τούτου; ΄ 
y = et κακοποιὸς,” οὐκ ἄν σοι παρεδώκαµεν αὐτόν. 


ii. 11. 


”” 
αὐτόν. 


31. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς 


~ A Γεν 
ὁ Πιλάτος, “Λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς, καὶ κατὰ τὸν νόµον ὑμῶν κρίνατε 
- ς Ls A - 
Εἶπον οὖν αὐτῷ οἱ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι, '΄ Ἡμῖν οὐκ ἔξεστιν ἀποκτεῖναι 


1 ουν inserted in BC*L 33, which compels the translation '' Annas therefore sent 
Him,” and forbids the meaning '' Annas had sent Him”’. 


2 Better πρωι as in ABCD. 
3 Πειλατος in ABC, Πιλατος in ND. 


with a javelin”. 
has ‘“‘ malefactor”’. 


rupted at vv. 18-19, and resumes by τε- 
peating the statement that Simon Peter 
was standing and warming himself. 
While he did so the servants and officers, 
νετ. 18, who were round the fire said, My 
καὶ ov... “Are you also of His dis- 
ciples?””—Ver. 26. Λέγει els ἐκ τῶν 
δούλων . . . ὠτίον, “one of the servants 
of the high priest, who was a kinsman of 
him,” εἴο., ‘a detail which marks an 
exact knowledge of the household (ver. 
15),” Westcott.—Ver. 27. Πάλιν οὖν... 
ἐφώνησεν . . . A cock crew, the dawn 
approaching, and the warning of xiii. 38 
was fulfilled. See on xiii. 38. 

Vv. 28—xix. 16. Fesus before Pilate.— 
Ver. 28. "Αγουσιν, ‘“ They lead,’ {.ε., 
the Sanhedrists who had assembled lead : 
in Luke xxiii. 1, ἀναστὰν ἅπαν τὸ πλῆθος 
αὐτῶν. ἀπὸ τοῦ Καϊάφα. Field prefers 
translating “from the house of Caia- 
phas,” cf. Mark v. 35; Acts xvi. 40. 
πραιτώριον, practorium, lit. “the gene- 
ral’s tent’’; here probably the governor’s 
quarters in Antonia, but possibly the 
magnificent palace of Herod used by the 
Roman governor while in Jerusalem ; see 
especially Keim, F¥esus of Nazareth, vi. 


It represents the Latin filatus, ‘‘ armed 


εξω is added in $WBC*L 33. 
4 κακον ποιων read by Tr.Ti.W.H. on the authority of ΝΕΒΙ, 33. 


The Vuigate 


79 E. Tr. ἣν δὲ πρωΐα καὶ αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσηλ- 
θον . . . “Τε was early morning (the 
fourth watch, from 3 to 6 Α.Μ., see Mark 
xiii. 35; see on xiii. 38) and they them- 
selves entered not into the palace that 
they might not be defiled but might eat - 
the passover.”” The dawning of the day 
seems to have reminded them of its 
sacred character. To enter a house 
from which all leaven had not been re- 
moved was pollution. Probably too the 
mere entrance into the house of a Gen- 
tile was the gnat these men strained at. 
The plain inference from the word is 
that the Paschal Supper was yet to be 
eaten. But see Edersheim’s Life of 
Fesus, ii. 566.—Ver. 29. ἐξῆλθεν οὖν 6 
Πιλάτος ... The examination began 
therefore in the open air in front of the 
building; cf. xix. 13. Pilate opened the 
case with the formal inquiry, Tiva 
κατηγορίαν κ.τ.λ.; Το this reason- 
able demand the Sanhedrists evasively 
and insolently reply (ver. 30): ‘* Had 
He not been a κακοποιός we should not 
have delivered Him to you”. It appears 
therefore that having already cendemned 
Him to death (see Mt. xxvi. δι Ίνοχος 


24—36, 


ΕΥΑΙΕΕΛΙΟΝ 


851 


x 


obSéva-” 32. ἵνα 6 λόγος τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ πληρωθῇ, ὃν εἶπε * σηµαίνων z xii. 33. 


tow θανάτῳ ἤμελλεν ἀποθνήσκειν. 


33. Εἰσῆλθεν οὖν εἰς τὸ 


Ὠ A 3 cel 4 9 . AKL | 
πραιτώριον πάλιν 6 Πιλάτος, καὶ " ἐφώνησε τὸν ‘Ingo, καὶ εἶπεν ai. 49; ii. το 


~ ~ > ΄ > 
αὐτῷ, “Ed ef 6 βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων ; 
. 


34. ᾽Απεκρίθη αὐτῷ ὁ 


Δ 
᾿ησοῦς, “Ὁ ΑΦ ἑαυτοῦ σὺ τοῦτο λέγεις, 7 ἄλλοι σοι εἶπον περὶ ὃ ν. 19. 


ἐμοῦ ; 


45. ᾿᾽Απεκρίθη ὁ Πιλάτος, “° Mate ἐγὼ ᾿Ιουδαῖός εἰμι ; 


τὸ ς iv. 29. 


ε] x x ‘ cis a i ’ 3 , d_’ > , 2) 
ἔθνος τὸ Gov καὶ ol ἀρχιερεῖς παρέδωκάν σε ἐμοί: “Ti ἐποίησας;  ἆἅ τβαπι.ΧΧ, 


A , A 32. 
36. ᾽Απεκρίθη 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, '΄ Ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τοῦ e iii. 31. 


/ , > > ~ ό 2. hs! < λ , ο a ay c 
κοσμου τουτου ' ει εκ του κ σμου τούτου ην η βασι εια η ep), Ob 


ὑπηρέται ἂν ot ἐμοὶ ἀγωνίζοντο, ἵνα μὴ παραδοθῶ τοῖς Ιουδαίους - 


θανάτου ἐστί. Mk. xiv. 64) they handed 
Him ονετ-- παρεδώκαµεν--ίο Pilate, not 
to have their judgment revised, but to 
have their decision confirmed and the 
punishment executed. κακοποιός is 
‘found in Arist., Eth., iv. 9, Polybius, and 
frequently in 1 Peter.—Ver. 31. This 
does not suit Roman ideas of justice ; and 
therefore Pilate, ascribing their reluct- 
ance to lay a definite charge against the 
prisoner and to have the case reopened 
to the difficulty of explaining toa Roman 
the actual law and transgression, bids 
them finish the case for themselves, 
λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς . . . cf. Acts xviii. 
14.—Ver. 32. This, however, they de- 
cline to do, because it is the death 
penalty they desire, and this they have 
no right to inflict: ἡμῖν οὐκ ἔξεστιν 
ἀποκτεῖναι οὐδένα. In the Roman pro- 
vinces the power of life and death, the 
jus gladii, was reserved to the governor. 
See Arnold’s Roman Prov. Administra- 
tion, ῬΡρ. 55, 57; and Josephus, Bell. 
Fud., Π. 8, 1, who states that when the 
territory of Archelaus passed to the pro- 
vincial governor, Coponius, the power of 
inflicting capital punishment was given to 
him, µέχρι Tod κτείνειν λαβὼν παρὰ τοῦ 
Καίσαρος ἐξουσίαν. See also Stapfer’s 
Palestine, p.100. By being thus handed 
over to the Roman magistrate it came 
about that Jesus was crucified, a form of 
capital punishment which the Jews never 
inflicted even when they had power; and 
thus the word of Jesus was fulfilled 
which He spake intimating that He 
would die by crucifixion, xii. 32, 33. 

Vv. 33-37. Fesus examined by Pilate 
in private.—Ver. 33. Pilate, being thus 
compelled to undertake the case, with- 
draws within the Praetorium to con- 
duct it apart from their prejudices and 
clamours. He calls Jesus and says to 
Him, Σὺ εἶ 6 βασιλεὺς τῶν Ιουδαίων; 
How did Pilate know that this was the 
κατηγορία against Jesus? John omits the 


information given in Lk. xxiii. 2 that the 
Sanhedrists definitely laid this accusation. 
And the answer of Jesus implies that He 
had not heard this accusation made in 
Pilate’s presence. The probability there- 
fore is that Pilate had privately obtained 
information regarding the prisoner. 
There is some contempt as well as sur- 
prise in Pilate’s Σύ. ‘‘ Art Thou,” whose 
appearance so belies it, “(πε king of the 
Jews ?””—Ver. 34. Jesus answers by ask- 
ing: ΑΦ’ ἑαυτοῦ σὺ τοῦτο λέγεις . . .; 
Pilate’s reply, “Απ I a Jew ?”’ precludes 
all interpretations, however inviting (see 
especially Alford and Oscar Holtzmann), 
but the simple one: ‘‘Do you make 
this inquiry from any serious personal 
interest and with any keen apprehension 
of the biessings attached to the Kingdom 
of God, or are you merely echoing a 
formal charge brought against me by 
others ?”’—-Ver. 35. To this Pilate with 
some heat and contempt replies: Μήτι 
ἐγὼ Ἰουδαῖός εἰμι; ““AmlajJew?” How 
can you suppose that I have any personal 
interest in such a matter ?—76 ἔθγος τὸ 
σὸν . . . ἐμοί. “Your own nation and 
the chief priests handed you over to me.” 
It is their charge [ repeat. τί ἐποίησας; 
““what hast Thou done?” He scouts 
the idea that he should take any interest 
in the Jewish Messiah, and returns to 
the practical point, “what have you 
done ?”’—Ver. 36. But Jesus accepts 
the allegation of the Jews and proceeds - 
to explain in what sense He is king: “Ἡ 
βασιλεία ἡ ἐμῆ κ.τ.λ. My kingdom is 
not of a worldly nature, nor is it estab- 
lished by worldly means. Had it been 
sO, my servants would have striven to 
prevent my being surrendered to the 
Jews. But as things are, viv, since it is 
indisputable that no armed resistance or 
rescue has been attempted, it is put 
beyond question that my kingdom is 
not from hence. ‘‘ The substitution of 
‘hence’ for ‘of this world’ in the last 


΄ 


852 


νῦν δὲ ἡ βασιλεία ἡ ἐμὴ οὐκ ἔστιν ἐντεῦθεν.'' 
ὁ Πιλάτος, “«Οὐκοῦν βασιλεὺς εἶ σύ; 
λέγεις ὅτι βασιλεύς εἰμι ἐγώ. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


XVIII. 17---4ο. 


37. Εἶπεν οὖν αὐτῷ 
t 

᾽Απεκρίθη 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Σὺ 
4 3 a / ‘ > 
ἐγὼ eis τοῦτο γεγέννηµαι, καὶ εἰς 


τοῦτο ἐλήλυθα eis τὸν κόσμον, ἵνα µαρτυρήσω τῇ ἀληθεία. mas 6 


ὢν ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας *dkover µου τῆς ovis.” 


38. Λέγει αὐτῶ 6 
Καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν, πάλιν ἐξῆλθε 


πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “Ey οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν 


{x. 6 
’ 
Πιλάτος, “Ti ἐστιν ἀλήθεια ;’ 
εΌαπ.ἱκ. εὑρίσκω 5 ἐν αὐτῷ. 
26. 
h Cp. xii 
PENG ap BCH ” 
Burton, τῶν Ιουδαίων ; 
216. 


clause appears to define the idea of the 
world by an immediate reference to the 
representatives of it close at hand.” 
Westcott. Perhaps this rather limits the 
reference. Jesus uses ἐντεῦθεν as one 
who has other worlds than this in view. 
—Ver. 37. Pilate understands only so 


far as to interrupt with Οὐκοῦν . . . ov; 
“So then you are a king?” On 
οὐκοῦν see Klotz’s Devarius, p. 173- 


To which Jesus replies with the ex- 
plicit statement: Σὺ λέγεις . . . ἐγώ. 
‘Thou sayest.” This, says Schoettgen 
(Mt. xxvi. 25), is “‘solennis adfirman- 
tium apud Judaeos formula’’; so that 
ὅτι must be rendered with R.V. 
marg. ‘because’? I am a king. Eras- 
mus, Westcott, Plummer, and others 
render, ‘“‘ Thou sayest that I am aking,” 
neither definitely accepting nor rejecting 
the title. But this interpretation seems 
impossible in the face of the simple σὺ 
λέγεις of the synoptists, Mt. xxvii. 11, 
Mark xv. 2, Luke xxiii. 3. We must 
then render, '' Thou art right, for a king 
Iam”. In what sense a king, He ex- 
plains: ἐγὼ εἰς τοῦτο γεγέννηµαι κ. T. Ae 
‘‘ For this end have I been born, and for 
this end am I come into the world;”’ the 
latter expression, by being added to the 
former, certainly seems to suggest a prior 
state. Cf. i. ο. The end is expressed 
in ἵνα paptupyow τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, “that 1 
might witness to the truth,” especially 
regarding God and His relation to men. 
The consequence is that every one who 
belongs to the truth (moral affinity ex- 
pressed by ἐκ) obeys Him, ἀκούει in a 
pregnant sense, cf. x. 8-16. They 
become His subjects, and form His 
kingdom, a kingdom of truth, For 
which Pilate has only impatient scorn: 
τί ἐστιν ἀλήθεια:---'' Tush, what is 
Aletheia?” It was a kingdom which 
could not injure the empire. What have 


39. ἔστι δὲ συνήθεια ὑμῖν, 


τσ 5! ς a 
ινα ενα υμιν 


ἀπολύσω ἐν τῷ πάσχα: βούλεσθε οὖν ὑμῖν ἀπολύσω τὸν βασιλέα 
40. ᾿Εκραύγασαν οὖν πάλιν πάντες, λέγοντες, 
“Mi τοῦτον, ἀλλὰ τὸν Βαραββᾶν - η ἦν δὲ 6 Βαραββᾶς λῃστής. 


I to do with provinces that can yield πο 
tribute, and threaten no armed rebellion ? 

Vv. 38-40. Pilate declares the result 
of his examination.—Ver. 38. Pilate 
waited for no reply to his question, but 
τοῦτο εἰπὼν, πάλιν ἐξῆηλθε. The noting 
of each movement of Pilate suggests the 
eye-witness, and brings out his vacilla- 
tion. ᾿Εγὼ οὐδεμίαν αἰτίαν . . . “I for 
my part find no fault, or ground of accusa- 
tionin Him.” Naturally, therefore, Pilate 
will acquit and dismiss Him; but no. He 
attempts a compromise : ἔστι δὲ συνήθεια 
ἡμῖν “You have a custom,” of which we 
have no information elsewhere ; although 
Josephus (Antiq., xx. 9, 3) relates that at 
a passover Albinus released some robbers. 
Analogies in other countries have been 
produced. This custom Pilate fancies 
they will allow him to follow in favour 
of Jesus: βούλεσθε . . . Ιουδαίων; ἀπο- 
λύσω, aorist subjunctive ; cf. Mt. xiii. 28, 
θέλεις συλλέξωμεν; Lk. ix. 54, θέλεις . 
εἴπωμεν; βούλεσθε καλῶμεν; βούλεσθε 
εἴπω, εἴο., commonly occur in Aristo- 
phanes and other classical writers. 
Ἐκραύγασαν . . . Μὴ τοῦτον, ἀλλὰ τὸν 
Βαραββᾶν, “'ΤΠεΥ shouted,” showing 
their excitement: πάλιν, previous shout- 
ings have not been mentioned by John, 
but this word reflects light on the manner 
in which the accusations had been made. 
ἦν δὲ 6 Βαραββᾶς λῃστής. Bar-Abbas, 
son of a father, or of a Rabbi, διδασ- 
κάλου vids. In Mt. xxvii. 16, Origen 
read *Incotv τὸν Bap., but added ‘in 
multis exemplaribus non continetur”’. 
He found a mystery in the circumstance 
that both prisoners were called “‘ Jesus, 
the Son of the Father”. Barabbas is 
designated λῃστής, or, as Luke (xxiii. 19) 
more definitely says, he had been im- 
prisoned for sedition in the city and for 
murder. John does not bring out the 
irony of the Jews’ choice, which freed 


XIX. τ---6. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


853 


XIX. 1. Τότε οὖν "ἔλαβεν 6 Πιλάτος τὸν “Incodv, καὶ "ἐμαστί-α Μι. xiii. 


γωσε. 2. καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται 


απλέξαντες στέφανον ἐξ ἀκανθῶν, b is, L 6, 


1° Is. xxviii. 


ἐπέθηκαν αὐτοῦ τῇ κεφαλῇ καὶ ἱμάτιον πορφυροῦν “mepreBahov αὐτὸν, 5. 


Oo 


> λος , α 
αὐτῷ "ῥαπίσματα. 


a a > [ο 
καὶ ἔλεγον, “ Xatpe, ὅ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων : 


d Mt. xv. 5% 


, 
καὶ ° ἐδίδουν e xviii. 22. 


4. Ἐξῆλθεν οὖν πάλιν ἔξω 6 Πιλάτος, καὶ λέγει 


ο = ο o aA oe 
αὐτοῖς, δε ἄγω ὑμῖν αὐτὸν ἔξω, ἵνα γνῶτε ὅτι ‘ev αὐτῷ οὐδεμίαν Ε xviii. 38. 


5 ear, ” 
αιτιαν ευρισκω. 


θινον στέφανον, καὶ τὸ που ἱμάτιον. 


ὁ ἄνθρωπος.” 


4 ” 
ἐκραύγασαν λέγοντες, “ Σταύρωσον, σταύρωσον. 


5. Εξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς ἔξω, Σ φορῶν τὸν ἀκάν- g Ecclus. xl. 


4: 
καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, "Ide? 


6. Ὅτε οὖν εἶδον αὐτὸν οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ ὑπηρέται, 


Λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 


Πιλάτος, “Λάβετε αὐτὸν ὑμεῖς καὶ σταυρώσατε' ἐγὼ γὰρ ’ οὐχ 


1 Insert και ηρχοντο προς αυτον with δν ΕΙ 33, omitted in AD by homoioteleuton. 


2 ]δου in NBL 33. 


the real and crucified the pretended 
mover of sedition. 

CHAPTER XIX.—Vv. 1-6. Pilate, after 
scourging Fesus, again pronounces Him 
guiltless. “—Ver. 1. Tére otv... épac- 
πίψωσε: Keim (vi. 99) thinks that Pilate 
at this point pronounced his ‘‘condemno”’ 
and ‘ibis in crucem,” and that the 
scourging was preparatory to the cruci- 
fixion. This might seem to be warranted 
by Mark’s very condensed account, xv. 
15. Φραγελλώσας ἵνα σταυρωθῇ (ac- 
cording to the Roman law by which, 
according to Jerome, it was decreed “ut 
qui crucifigeretur, prius flagellis verberare- 
tur”; so Josephus, B. F., v. 11, and 
Philo, ii. 528). But according to John 
the scourging was meant as a compromise 
by Pilate; as in Lk. xxiii. 22: “what 
evil hath He done? I found in Him 
nothing worthy of death ; I will therefore 
scourge Him and let Him go.”’ Neither, 
then, as part of the capital punishment, 
nor in order to elicit the truth (quaestio 
per tormenta) ; but in the ill-judged hope 
that this minor punishment might satisfy 
the Jews, Pilate ordered the scourging. 
The victim of this severe punishment was 
bound in a stooping attitude to a low 
column (column of the Fiagellation, now 
shown in Church of Holy Sepulchre) and 
beaten with rods or scourged with whips, 
the thongs of which were weighted with 
lead, and studded with sharp-pointed 
pieces of bone, so that frightful laceration 
followed each stroke. Death frequently 
resulted. καὶ οἱ στρατιῶται . . . ῥαπί- 
σµατα, ‘and the soldiers plaited a crown 
of thorns” in mockery of the claim to 
royalty (for a similar instance, see Keim, 
vi, 121). Of the suggestions regarding 


the particular species of thorn, it may be 
said with Bynaeus (De Morte Christi, iil. 
145) ‘‘nemo attulit aliquid certi”’. ἵμάτιον 
πορφυροῦν, ‘a purple robe,” probably 
a small scarlet military cloak, or some 
cast-off sagum, or paludamentum, worn 
by officers and subject kings.—Ver. 3 
καὶ ἤρχοντο πρὸς αὐτόν, “ and they eat 
on, coming to Him,” imperfect of con- 
tinued action; “and hailing Him king, 
χαῖρε κ. τ. λ., as they were accustomed 
to shout “Ave, Caesar”, At the same 
moment they struck Him on the face 
with their hands.—Ver. 4. Pilate, judg- 
ing that this will content the Jews, brings 
Jesus out that they may see Him and ἵνα 
γνῶτε . . . εὑρίσκω, that Pilate may have 
another opportunity of pronouncing Him 
guiltless.—Ver. 5. Still wearing (φορῶν) 
the mocking symbols of royalty, an ob- 
ject of derision and pity, Jesus is led out, 
and the judge pointing to Him says, 
δε 6 é ἄνθρωπος, Ecce Homo, “Lo! the 
man,” as if inviting inspection of the 
pitiable figure, and convincing them how 
ridiculous it was to try to fix a charge 
of treason on so contemptible a person. 
6 ἄνθρωπος is used contemptuously, as in 
Plutarch, Them., xvi. 2, “‘ the fellow,” 
“the creature”. Other instances in 
Holden’s note in Plut., Them. The 
result is unexpected.—Ver. 6. Instead 
of allowing him to release the prisoner, 
“the chief priests and their officers,’ 
not “the people,’? who were perhaps 
moved with pity (Licke), ‘‘roared’’ 
bese ν “ Crucify, crucify’’; ‘To 
the cross’ To this demand Pilate, 
“in angry " sarcasm” (Reynolds), but 
perhaps rather merely wishing strongly 
to assert, for the third time, that he 


XIX. 


3 , 3 A € αν ην 
7. ᾿Απεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, 


““Huets νόµον ἔχομεν, καὶ κατὰ τὸν νόµον ἡμῶν © ὀφείλει ἀποθανεῖν, 


8. “Ore οὖν ἤκουσεν ὁ Πιλάτος τοῦτον τὸν λόγον, μᾶλλον ἐφοβήθη, 


ιά 
ἐξουσίαν ἔχω σταυρῶσαί σε, καὶ ἐξουσίαν ἔχω '' ἀπολῦσαί ce;’ 


‘ ιο 3 αν η ὅ [4 AS / ~ νὰ 
0. καὶ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ ᾽ πραιτώριον πάλιν, καὶ λέγει τῷ [ησοῦ, 
3 A ~ 
Ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιησοῦς | ἀπόκρισιν οὐκ ἔδωκεν αὐτῷ. 


οὐκ οἶδας ὅτι 


TI. ᾽Απεκρίθη ὅ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “' Οὐκ εἶχες ἐξουσίαν οὐδεμίαν κατ ἐμοῦ, 


854 ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 
| ος > 2A etd ” 
ευρισκω εν αυτῷ αιτιαγ. 
h xiii. 14. 
3 @ ite x εν A A» , 2” 
iv. 33. OTL ᾿ έαυτον υιον τοῦ Θεοῦ εποίιησεν. 
1 xviii. 28. 
νο; ΣΠόθεν ef σύ; 

ΙΧ. 29. ε e 
li, 22. Io. λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ ὁ Πιλάτος, “΄'Ἐμοὶ οὐ λαλεῖς ; 
M xviii. 39. 

Ώ ili. 27. 


1 παραδους in KBE, it. vulg. 


for his part would not condemn Jesus to 
death, ‘‘ If He is to be crucified, it is you 
who must do it,” retorts, Λάβετε... 
αἰτίαν, ‘‘ Take ye Him and crucify Him, 
for I find no fault in Him”. 

Vv. 7-12a. Second private examina- 
tion by Pilate—Ver. 7. The Jews are 
as determined that Pilate shall condemn 
Jésus as he is resolved not to condemn 
Him, and to his declaration of the pris- 
oner’s innocence they reply, Ἡμεῖς vépov 
ἔχομεν . . . ἐποίησεν. He may have 
committed no wrong of which your 
Roman law takes cognisance, but ‘‘ we 
have a law (Lev. xxiv. 16), and according 
to our law He ought to die, because He 
made Himself God’s Son”’. For the 
construction see v. 18. The occasion 
they refer to is His profession to the 
Sanhedrim recorded in Mk. xiv. 62. 
vidv Θεοῦ here means more than “ Mes- 
siah,” for the claim to be Messiah was 
not apparently punishable with death 
(see Treffry’s Eternal Sonship), and, 
moreover, such a claim would not have 
produced in Pilate the state of mind 
suggested by (ver. 8) μᾶλλον ἐφοβήθη, 
words which imply that already mingling 
with the governor’s hesitation to con- 
demn an innocent man there was an 
element of awe inspired by the prisoner’s 
bearing and words. The words also 
imply that this awe was now deepened, 
and found utterance in the blunt inter- 
rogation (ver. 9), Πόθεν et σύ; ‘ Whence 
art Thou?”? What is meant by your 
claim to be of Divine origin? ‘To this 
question Jesus ἀπόκρισιν οὐκ ἔδωκεν 
αὐτῷ, ‘did not give him an answer”. 
Pilate had no right to prolong the case; 
because already he had three times over 
pronounced Jesus innocent. He needed 
πο new material, but only to act on 
what he had. Jesus recognises this and 


Pel μὴ ἦν σοι δεδοµένον ἄνωθεν. διὰ τοῦτο 6 mapadidous! µέ σοι 


declines to be a party to his vacillation. 
Besides, the charge on which He was 
being tried was, that He had claimed to 
be King of the Jews. This charge had 
been answered. Legal procedure was de- 
generating into an unregulated wrangle. 
Jesus therefore declines to answer. 
Ver. to. At this silence Pilate is 
indignant; "Epot οὐ λαλεῖς:; ''Το me 
do you not speak?” It is intelligible 
that you should not count it worth your 
while to answer the charges of that 
yelling mob; but do you not know that 
I have power to crucify you and have 
power to release you?—Ver. 11. Jesus 
answered, Οὐκ εἶχες . . . ἔχει. ἄνωθεν, 
“from above,” 7z.e., from God. Pilate 
must be reminded that the power he 
vaunts is not inherently his, but is given 
to him for God’s purposes. From this 
it follows, διὰ τοῦτο, that 6 παραθιδούς © 
µέ σοι, ‘‘ he that delivered me unto thee,” 
to wit, Caiaphas (although the designa- 
tion being that which is constantly used 
of Judas it has not unnaturally been 
referred to him), μείζονα ἁμαρτίαν ἔχει, 
“‘hath greater sin,” not than you, Pilate 
(as understood by most interpreters), but 
greater than in other circumstances it 
would have been. Had Pilate been a 
mere irresponsible executioner their sin 
would have been sufficiently heinous; 
but in using the official representative of 
God’s truth and justice to fulfil their own 
wicked and unjust designs, they involve 
themselves in a darker criminality. So 
Wetstein : ‘‘ Comparatur ergo, nisi fallor, 
peccatum Judaeorum cum suis circum- 
stantiis, cum eodem peccato sine istis 
circumstantiis: hoc Judaeos aggravat, 
eosque atrocioris delicti reos agit, quod 
non per tumultum sed per Praesidem, 
idque specie juris, me quaerunt de medio 
tollere”.—Ver. 12. In consequence of 





7—14. 


id , ο” 1”. 
μείζονα ἁμαρτίαν "ἔχει. 
“ ἀπολῦσαι αὐτόν. 


ἀπολύσῃς, οὐκ εἶ φίλος τοῦ Καίσαρος. 


- - ΄ 
ποιῶν, " ἀντιλέγει τῷ Καίΐσαρι.” 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


13. Ὁ οὖν Πιλάτος ἀκούσας τοῦτον iv. 4. 


855 


12. P’Ek τούτου 3 ἐζήτει ὁ Πιλάτος ο ix. 41. 


Ρ Vi. 66 reff: 


οἱ δὲ ᾿Ιουδαῖοι ἔκραζον + λέγοντες, “Edy τοῦτον q v. τὸ. 


op ee EVEL: 7.) 
QuTOY 515. xxii. 22; 
Hos. 
Lk. 


was 6 βασιλέα 


A , 38 ” 9 3 A Ce SP > 3 - , 1. 34. 
τὸν λόγον, ἤγαγεν ἔξω τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος, tv. 2; vw. 


εἰς τόπον λεγόμενον Λιθόστρωτον, ' Ἑβραϊστὶ δὲ Γαββαθᾶ: 14. ἦν 
δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα, dpa δὲ ὡσεὶ ἕκτη." 


17, 20. 
Rev. ix. 
II; Xvi. 


καὶ λέγει τοῖς 16. 


1 εκραυγαζον is adopted by Tisch. after AIL; εκραυγασαν by W.H. after BD 33. 


3 Ti.W.H. read ωρα ην ws with SAB. 


cursives. 


this and from this point, ἐκ τούτον, as 
in vi. 66, ‘‘upon this,” with a causal as 
well as a temporal reference, ἐζήτει 6 
Πιλάτος ἀπολῦσαι αὐτόν, Pilate sought 
(ineffectually, fmperfect) to set Him free. 

Vv. 126-16, Fresh assault upon Pilate 
and his final surrender.—Ver. 12. ot δὲ 
ουδαῖοι, “' but the Jews,’ a new turn 
was at this point given to the case by the 
cunning of the Sanhedrists, who cried 
out, ἔκραζον λέγοντες Ἐὰν . . . Καίσαρι. 
φίλος τοῦ Καΐσαρος. Wetstein says: 
‘‘ Legati, praesides, praefecti, consiliarii, 
amici Caesaris dicebantur,’’ but it is not 
in this titular sense the expression is here 
used. The meaning is: Thou dost not 
show thyself friendly to Caesar. The 
reason being that every one who makes 
himself a king, ἀντιλέγει τῷ Καίσαρι, 
““speaks against Caesar”. Euthymius, 
Field, Thayer, etc., prefer ‘‘setteth him- 
self against Caesar,” ‘‘ resisteth his 
authority’. And as Jesus made Himself 
a king, Pilate would aid and abet Him 
by pronouncing Him innocent. This was 
a threat Pilate could not despise. Tiberius 
was suspicious and jealous. [* Judicia 
majestatis . . « atrocissime exercuit.” 
Suetonius, Tib., 58. Treason was the 
makeweight in all accusations. Tacitus, 
Annals, iii. 38.]—Ver. 13. Pilate therefore, 
when he heard this, brought Jesus out, 
καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος. In the 
Gospel according to Peter, ἐκάθισεν is 
understood transitively: καὶ ἐκάθισαν 
αὐτὸν ἐπὶ καθέδραν κρίσεως λέγοντες 
Δικαίως κρῖνε, βασιλεῦ τοῦ Ισραήλ. 
Similarly in Justin, I. Apol., i. 35. 
This rendering presents a_ strikingly 
dramatic scene, and admirably suits 
the “‘behold your king” of ver. 14. 
(See Expositor for 1893, p. 296 ff., 
and Robinson and James’ Gospel accord- 
ing to Peter, p. 18.) But it is extremely 
unlikely that Pilate should thus have 
degraded his seat of justice, and much 
more natural to suppose that ἐκάθισεν 


τριτη is found SycDsuppLX and some 


is used intransitively, as in xii. 14, etc. 
(Joseph., Bell. Fud., ii. 9, 3, 6 Πιλάτος 
καθίσας ἐπὶ βήματος), and that Pilate’s 
taking his seat is mentioned to indicate 
that his mind was now made up and 
that he was now to pronounce his fina] 
judgment. The βῆμα was the suggestum 
or tribunal, the raised platform (Livy, 
maa. 2915!) Ταςι ists; ἵν. 25)! or seat 
(Suet., Aug., 44) on which the magistrate 
sat to administer justice. See 2 Macc. xiii. 
26.—eis τόπον λεγόμενον Λιθόστρωτον. 
“at a place called Lithostroton,”’ 1.6., 
lit. Stone pavement, or Tesselated 
pavement (of which see reproductions 
in Rich’s Antiq.). Cf. 2 Chron. vii. 3, 
Joseph., Bell. Fud., vi. 1,1. Pliny (xxxvi. 
15) defines Lithostrota as mosaics, 
‘‘parvulis certe crustis,’’ and says they 
were a luxury introduced in the time of 
Sulla and found in the provinces rather 
than in Rome (see Krebs iz loc.). The 
space in front of the praetorium where 
the βῆμα stood was thus paved and 
therefore currently known as “ Litho- 
stroton”: Ἑβραϊστὶ δὲ Γαββαθᾶ, “' but 
in Hebrew,” z.e., in the popular Aramaic, 
‘* Gabbatha,”’ which is not a translation 
of Lithostroton, but a name given to the 
same place from its being raised, from 


23, The tribunal 


was raised as a symbol of authority and 
in order that the judge might see and be 
seen (see Liicke).—Ver. 14. ἡἦν δὲ παρα- 
σκευη τοῦ πάσχα, ‘now it was the pre- 
paration of the Passover”’. παρασκευή 
was the usual appellation of Friday, the 
day of preparation for the weekly Sabbath. 
Here the addition τοῦ πάσχα shows that 
it is used of the day preceding the 
Passover. This day was, as it happened, 
a Friday, but it is the relation to the 
feast, not to the ordinary Sabbath, that 
is here indicated. Cf. ver. 42. ὥρα δὲ 
aoe ἕκτη. ‘It was about the sixth 
hour,” z.¢., about 12 o’clock. But Mark 


a ridge or elevation. 


Oe 


856 


KATA TQANNHN 


ἸΙουδαίοις, “*"ISe ὁ βασιλεὺς ὑμῶν.” 


XIX, 


15. Οἱ δὲ ἐκραύγασαν, 


” A 
“*Apov, ἄρον, σταύρωσον αὐτόν.” Λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 Πιλάτος, “ Tév 


u i, 29, etc. 
A s 4 ” 
βασιλέα ὑμῶν σταυρώσω; 
” η 3 ‘ s ” 
: t Katoapa. 
¥aKings XOPeY βασιλέα εἰ py ρ 
λα αὐτοῖς, ἵνα σταυρωθῇ. 
ui. Mk. αρέλαβον δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν καὶ ἀπήγαγον 1: 
Xiv. 13. Π ρ β η πηγαγ 
Acts xv. 


το. 

w Dan. xii. 
5. Rev. 
xxii. 2, 


λέγεται “EBpaioti Γολγοθᾶ - 


᾽Απεκρίθησαν ot ἀρχιερεῖς, “΄Οὐκ 
16. Τότε οὖν παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν 


17. καὶ Ἰ βαστάζων 


τὸν σταυρὸν αὑτοῦ 2 ἐξῆλθεν εἰς τὸν λεγόμενον Κρανίου τόπον, ὃς 


J 9 % > , ‘ > 
18. οπου αυτον εσταυρωσαν, και μετ 


αὐτοῦ ἄλλους δύο ἳἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἐντεῦθεν, µέσον δὲ τὸν Ιησοῦν. 


1 Έτ, Ti.W.H.R. omit και απηγαγον following BLX 33. 


2 Instead of the genitive NL read εαντω, BX 33 αυτω. 


(xv. 25) says: “It was the third hour 
and they crucified Him”. The various 
methods of reconciling the statements 
are given in Andrew’s Life of Our Lord, 
p. 545 ff. Meyer leaves it unsolved 
‘‘and the preference must be given to 
the disciple who stood under the cross ”. 
But if the crucifixion took place midway 
between nine and twelve o’clock, it was 
quite natural that one observer should 
refer it to the former, while another 
referred it to the latter hour. The height 
of the sun in the sky was the index of 
the time of day; and while it was easy 
to know whether it was before or after 
midday, or whether the sun was more or 
less than half-way between the zenith 
and the horizon, finer distinctions of time 
were not recognisable without consulting 
the sun-dials, which were not everywhere 
at hand. Cf. the interesting passages 
from rabbinical literature in Wetstein, 
and Professor Ramsay’s article in the 
Expositor, 1893, vol. vii., p. 216. The 
latter writer found the same conditions 
in Turkish villages, and ‘‘cannot feel 
anything serious” in the discrepancy 
between John and Mark. ‘‘ The Apostles 
had no means of avoiding the difficulty 
as to whether it was the third or the 
sixth hour when the sun was near mid- 
heaven, and they cared very little about 
the point.” καὶ Aéyer.. . ὑμῶν, “and 
he says to the Jews: Behold your 
king!’’ words uttered apparently in sar- 
casm and rage. If he still wished to free 
Jesus, his bitterness was impolitic.— 
Ver. 15. They at once shouted, ᾿Αρον, 
ἄρον, σταύρωσον αὐτόν. To this Pilate 
could offer only the feeble opposition of 
more sarcasm, Tov βασιλέα ὑμῶν σταν- 
pwow; where, of course, the emphasis is 
on the first words, John with his artistic 
perception exhibits their final rejection of 


Christ in the form in which it appeared 
as a reckless renunciation of all their 
national liberties and hopes: Οὐκ ἔχομεν 
βασιλέα εἰ μὴ Καίσαρα. Even yet Pilate 
will take no active part, but hands Jesus 
over to the Sanhedrists with the requisite 
authorisation ; παρέδωκεν, used in a semi- 
technical sense, cf. Plut., Dem., xiv. 4, 
and the passages cited in Holden’s note. 

Vv. 17-30. The crucifixion.—-Ver. 17. 
The Jewish authorities on their part 
“received” Jesus, καὶ ἀπήγαγον. καὶ 
βαστάζων . . . Γολγοθᾶ. “' Απά carrying 
the cross for Himself, He went out to the 
place called Kraniou (of a skull), which 
in Hebrew is called Golgotha.” The 
condemned man carried at least part ot 
the cross, and sometimes the whole. 6 
µέλλων σταυρῷ προσηλοῦσθαι πρότερον 
αὐτὸν βαστάζει, Artemid., Οπεῖγ., ii. 56. 
Other passages in Keim, vi. 124. Since | 
Tertullian (adv. Fud., το) a type of this 
has been found in Isaac’s carrying the 
wood for the sacrifice. ἐξῆλθεν, it was 
usual both in Jewish and Roman com- 
munities to execute criminals outside the 
city. In Athens the gate through which 
they passed to the place of punishment 
was called χαρώνεια θύρα. Cf. Bynaeus, 
De Morte Christi, 220; Pearson, On the 
Creed (Art. iv.); Heb. xiii. 12; Lev. xxiv. 
14. The place of execution at Jerusalem 
was a small knoll just beyond the 
northern wall, which, from its bare top 
and two hollow caves in its face, bears a 
rough resemblance to a skull, and was 
therefore called xpaviov, Calvaria, Skuil. 
“Golgotha” is the Aramaic form of 
Gulgoleth, which is found in 2 Kings 
ix. 35. It is described in Conder’s Hand- 
book, p. 355; Henderson’s Palestine, pp. 
163, 164.—Ver. 18. ὅπου . . . Ιησοῦν. 
All information regarding the cross has 
been collected by Lipsius in his treatise 


I5—25. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


857 


10. Ἔγραψε δὲ καὶ τίτλον 6 Πιλάτος, καὶ ἔθηκεν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ ° 


A al A 7 , ” 
ἦν δὲ yeypappévoy, ''᾿Ιησοῦς 6 Nafwpatos 6 βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων. 


lol - 3 / ‘J 
20. Τοῦτον οὖν τὸν τίτλον πολλοὶ ἀνέγνωσαν τῶν Ιουδαίων, ὅτι 


*éyyts ἦν τῆς πόλεως 6 τόπος, ὅπου ἐσταυρώθη 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς: καὶ x vi. τὸ reff 


ἦν yeypappevoy Ἑβραϊστὶ, Ἑλληνιστὶ, Ῥωμαῖϊστί. 


- c 
τῷ Πιλάτω ot 
A > , 

τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων : 


ς 


22. ᾽Απεκρίθη 6 


al a 3 , Q 3 a Ελ S75 , > A 
στρατιῶται, ὅτε ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν, ἔλαβον τὰ ἱμάτια αὐτοῦ, 


καὶ ἐποίησαν τἐσσαρα µέρη, ἑκάστω στρατιώτῃ µέρος, καὶ τὸν 


Χιτῶνα. 


Πιλάτος, “7 Ὅ γέγραφα, γέγραφα. 


ἦν δὲ ὁ χιτὼν ἄρραφος, ἐκ τῶν " ἄνωθεν " ὑφαντὸς δι ὅλου. 


21. ἔλεγον οὖν 


ἀρχιερεῖς τῶν Ιουδαίων, '' Μὴ γράφε, Ὁ βασιλεὺς 


an ~~ 3 , ? 
GAN’ ὅτι ἐκεῖνος εἶπε, Βασιλεύς εἰμι τῶν Ιουδαίων.) 


25. Οἱ οὖν ν Gen. xliii 
14. 


z Mk. xv. 38. 
a Exod. 
XXviii. 28. 


24. εἶπον οὖν πρὸς ἀλλήλους, “ Μὴ  σχίσωµεν αὐτὸν, ἀλλὰ "λάχωμεν b xxi. 11. 


περὶ αὐτοῦ, τίνος ἔσται: ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ ἡ λέγουσα, τ, 
> η 36 
«Διεμερίσαντο τὰ ἱμάτιά µου ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν ἱματισμόν µου xv. 38. 


ἔβαλον κλῆρον.᾽ 


Οἱ μὲν οὖν στρατιῶται ταῦτα ἐποίησαν ' 25. εἰστήκεισαν δὲ παρὰ 
~ lat a 35 α ες , > A \ ss 3 S ~ x 
τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ ἡ µήτηρ αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἡ ἀδελφὴ τῆς μητρὸς 


De Cruce, Antwerp, 1595; Amstel., 1670; 
and in vol. ii. of his collected works, 
published at Lugduni, 1613. With Jesus 
were crucified “' other two,” in Mt. xxvii. 
38, called “robbers,” probably of the 
same class as Barabbas. Jesus was 
crucified between them; possibly, to 
identify Him with the worst criminals. 
“The whole of humanity was repre- 
sented there: the sinless Saviour, the 
saved penitent, the condemned impeni- 
tent.” Plummer.—Ver. 19. Έγραψε δὲ 
καὶ τίτλον 6 Πιλάτος.  “'Απά Pilate 
wrote a ‘title,’ also, and set it on the 
cross.” The “‘title,” αἰτία, was a board 
whitened with gypsum (σανίς, λεύκωμα) 
such as were commonly used for public 
notices. Pilate himself, meaning to 
insult the Jews, ordered the precise 
terms of the inscription. καὶ τίτλον, 
‘a title also,’’ in addition to all the 
other insults he had heaped on them 
during the trial—Ver. 20. This title 
was read by “many of the Jews,” 
because the place of crucifixion was 
close to the city, and lay in the road of 
any coming in from the north; also it 
was written in three languages so thate 
every one could read it, whether Jew or 
Gentile.——Ver. 21. Naturally the chief 
priests remonstrated and begged Pilate 
so to alter the inscription as to remove 
the impression that the claim of Jesus 
was admitted.— Ver. 22. But Pilate, “by 
nature obstinate and stubborn”’ (Philo, 
di. 589), peremptorily refused to make 


Is, xxXXVil. 
Lkevws 
Mk. 


c Here only 
in this 
sense, see 
Thayer. 

d Ps. xxii. 
18. 


any alteration. 6 γέγραφα yéypada.— 
Ver. 23. ‘*The soldiers, then, when 
they had crucified Jesus, took His gar- 
ments’’—the executioner’s perquisite 
(Apuleius has the comparison ‘“ naked 
as a new-born babe or as the cruci- 
fied ”)—and as there were four soldiers, 
τετράδιον, Acts xii. 4, they divided the 
clothes into four parts. This was the 
more easily done because the usual dress 
of a Jew consisted of five parts, the head- 
dress, the shoes, the ο ο, the outer 
garment, and the girdle. The χιτών 
remained after the four other articles 
were distributed. They could not divide 
it into four without spoiling it, and so 
they cast lots for it. It was seamless, 
ἄρραφος, unsewed, and woven in one 
piece from top to bottom.—Ver. 24. 
‘Lhe soldiers therefore said, My σχίσωµεν 
αὐτόν ἀλλὰ λάχωμεν, “let us not rend it 
but cast lots”. λαγχάνειν is, properly, 
not ‘‘to cast lots,’ but ‘to obtain by 
lot”. See Field, Otiuwm Norv., 72. In 
this John sees a fulfilment of Ps. xxii. 
18, the LXX. version of which is here 
quoted verbatim.—Ver. 25. This nart 
of the scene is closed (that another 
may be introduced) with the commcn 
formula, οἱ μὲν οὖν στρατιῶται ταῦτα 
ἐποίησαν. (‘‘Graeci . . . saepissime 
hujusmodi_ conclusiunculis utuntur.”’ 
Raphel in loc.) οἱ μὲν . . . eioryKeroay 
δὲ... The soldiers for their part acted 
as has been related, but there were others 
beside the cross who were very differently 


858 


αὐτοῦ, Μαρία ἡ τοῦ Κλωπᾶ, καὶ Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνή. 


ΚΑΤΑ IQANNHN 


XIX. 


26. ᾿Ιησοῦς 


οὖν ἰδὼν τὴν pytépa, καὶ τὸν µαθητὴν παρεστῶτα ὃν ἠγάπα, λέγει 


τῇ. μητρὶ αὐτοῦ, “' Γύναι, ἰδοὺ ὁ υἱός σου. 


exi. 53. µαθητῇ, “180d ἡ µήτηρ σου.” 
Acts xxi. αὐτὴν 6 μαθητῆς eis τὰ ! ἴδια. 
g ii. 6; xx. 
5; XXi. 9. 
h Ps. lxix. 


21. 


πάντα ἤδη τετέλεσται, ἵνα τελειωθῇ ἡ Ὑραφὴ, λέγει, “Διψῶ. 


27. Εἶτα λέγει τῷ 
Καὶ «ἀπ᾿ ἐκείνης τῆς ὥρας ἔλαβεν 
28. Meta τοῦτο εἰδὼς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ὅτι 


a 22 


29. Σκεῦος οὖν 5 ἔκειτο " ὄξους µεστόν: οἱ δὲ, πλήσαντες σπόγγον 


i Prov. vii.3." ὄξους, καὶ ὑσσώπω | περιθέντες, προσήνεγκαν αὐτοῦ τῷ στόµατι. 


affected. ἡ µήτηρ .. . Μαγδαληνή. It 
is doubtful whether it is meant that three 
or that four women were standing by the 
cross; for Μαρία ἡ τοῦ Κλωπᾶ may either 
be a further designation of ἡ ἀδελφὴ τῆς 
μητρὸς αὐτοῦ, or it may name the first 
member of a second pair of women. 
That four women are intended may be 
argued from the extreme improbability 
that in one family two sisters should bear 
the same name, Mary. The Synoptists 
do not name the mother of Jesus among 
those who were present, but Matthew 
(xxvii. 56) and Mark (xv. 40) name Mary 
Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, 
and Salome the mother of John. Two 
of these three are mentioned by John 
here, and it is natural to infer that the 
unnamed woman (ἡ ἀδελφὴ κ. τ. A.) is 
the third, Salome; unnamed possibly 
because of this writer’s shyness in naming 
himself or those connected with him. 
But the fact that Luke (xxiv. 10) names 
Joanna as the third woman reflects some 
uncertainty on this argument. If Salome 
was Mary’s sis@er, then Jesus and John 
were cousins, and the commendation of 
Mary to John’s care is in part explained. 
ἡ τοῦ Κλωπᾶ may mean the mother, 
daughter, sister, or wife of Klopas; pro- 
bably the last. According to Mt. xxvii. 
56, Mk. xv. 40, Lk. xxiv. 10, the Mary 
here mentioned was the mother of James 
and Joses. But in Mt. x. 3 we learn 
that James was the son of Alphaeus. 
Hence it is inferred that Klopas and 
Alphaeus are two slightly varying forms 


of the same name %$)9f}.—Ver. 26. 


John’s interest in naming the women is 
not obvious except in the case of the frst. 
Ἰησοῦς . . . ἣ µήτηρ σον. Jesus when 
He saw His mother, and the disciple 
whom He loved standing beside her (the 
relevancy of the designation, τὸν µαθητὴν 
ὃν ἠγάπα, is here obvious, and the most 
convincing proof of its truth and signifi- 
cance is now given), says to His mother, 
** Woman, behold thy son’’; 1.6., turn- 
ing His eyes towards John, There is 


your son. Me you are losing, so far as- 
the filial relation goes, but John will in 
this respect take my place.—Ver. 27. 
And this trust He commits to John in 
the simple words, ᾿Ιδου ἡ µήτηρ σου, 
although his natural mother, Salome, 
was also standing there. [Cf. the bequest 
of Eudamidas: “I leave to Aretaeus the 
care of nourishing and providing for my 
mother in her old age’. Lucian’s 
Toxarvis.} John at once accepted the 
charge, ‘‘ from that hour (which cannot 
be taken so stringently as to imply that 
they did not wait at the cross to see the 
end) the disciple took her to his own 
home’’; eis τὰ ἴδια, see i. II, Xvi. 
32. The circumstances of the Nazareth 
home which made this a possible and 
desirable arrangement are not known. 
That Mary should find a home with her 
sister and her son is in itself intelli- 
gible, and this close intimacy of the two 
persons whose hearts had been most 
truly the home of Jesus must have helped 
to cherish and vivify all reminiscences of 
His character and words.—Ver. 28. 
Μετὰ τοῦτο... Διψῶ. ‘‘ After this, Jesus 
knowing that all things are now finished, 
that the scripture might be completely 
fulfilled, saith, I thirst.’’ Jesus did not 
feel thirsty and proclaim it with the 
intention of fulfilling scripture—which 
would be a spurious fulfilment—but in 
His complaint and the response to it, 
John sees a fulfilment of Ps. Ixix. 22, eis 
τὴν δίψαν pov ἐπότισάν µε ὄξος. Only 
when all else had been attended to 
(εἰδὼς κ. τ. A.) was He Πεε to attend to 
His own physical sensations.—Ver. 29. 
Eketos . . . µεστόν---'' There was set a 
vessel full of vinegar”; the mention of 
the vessel betrays the eye-witness. ‘‘ The 
Synoptists do not mention the oxevos, 
but John had stood beside it.””. Plummer, 
ὄξος, the vinegar used by soldiers. 
[Ulpian says: “‘vinum atque acetum 
milites nostri solent percipere, uno die 
vinum, alio die acetum”’. Keim, vi. 162.] 
Here it seems to have been provided for 
the crucified, for as Weiss and Plummer: 


26---34. 


30. ὅτε οὖν ἔλαβε τὸ Sos ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, εἶπε, “ Τετέλεσται : 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


859 


” καὶ 


κλίνας τὴν κεφαλὴν, παρέδωκε τὸ πνεῦμα. 


31. Οἱ οὖν Ἰουδαῖοι, ἵνα μὴ μείνῃ ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ τὰ σώματα ἐν 
τῷ σαββάτῳ, ἐπεὶ παρασκευὴ ἦν: ἦν yap) µεγάλη ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνου j = 37. Is 


τοῦ σαββάτου : 
σκέλη. καὶ ἀρθῶσιν. 


ἠρώτησαν τὸν Πιλάτον, ἵνα 
32. ἦλθον οὖν of στρατιῶται, καὶ τοῦ μὲν 


- 13. 
κ κατεαγῶσιν αὐτῶν τὰ Bex Xxxi, 


25. 


πρώτου κατέαξαν τὰ σκέλη καὶ τοῦ ἄλλου τοῦ συσταυρωθέντος αὐτῷ ' 


. ἐπὶ δὲ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἐλθόντες, ὡς εἶδον αὐτὸν ἤδη τεθνηκότα, οὐ 
η > 


κατέαξαν αὐτοῦ τὰ σκέλη ° 


observe, there were a sponge and a 
hyssop-reed also at hand. ot δὲ, 7.e., the 
soldiers, but cf. Mk. xv. 36; πλήσαντες 
. They filled a sponge, because a cup 
was impracticable, and put it round a 
stalk of hyssop, and thus applied the 
restorative to His mouth. The plant 
called ‘‘ hyssop”’ has not been identified. 
All that was requisite was a reed (cf. 
περιθεὶς καλάμῳ, Mt. xxvii. 48, Mk. xv, 36) 
of two or three feet long, as the crucified 
was only slightly elevated. — Ver. 30. 
ὅτε οὖν . . . πνεῦμα. The cry, τετέ- 
λεσται, “it is finished,” was not the 
gasp of a worn-out life, but the deliberate 
utterance of a clear consciousness that 
His work was finished, and ali God’s 
purpose accomplished (xvii. 4), that all 
had now been done that could be done 
to make God known to men, and to 
identify Him with men. παρέδωκε τὸ 
πνεῦμα, ‘* gave up His spirit,’’ according 
to Luke xxiii. 46, with an audible com- 
mendation of His spirit to the Father. 
ὀφῆκε πνεῦμα in Eurip., Hecuba, 569; 
ἀφῆκε τὴν ψυχήν Plut., Dem., χι 5: 
Vv. 31-37. The piercing of Fesus’ side, 
—Ver. 31. ‘‘ The Jews, therefore, since 
it was the preparation,” 1.6., Friday, the 
day before the Sabbath, “and as the day 
of that Sabbath was great,” being not only 
an ordinary Sabbath but the Passover, 
‘that the bodies might not hang on the 
cross on the Sabbath”’ and so defile it, 
‘they asked Pilate that their legs might 
be broken, and that they might be re- 
moved”. The law of Deut. xxi. 23 was 
that the body of a criminal should “ not 
remain all night upon the tree’”’. This 
law seems not to have been in view; but 
rather the fear of polluting their great feast. 
The Roman custom was to leave the body 
to birds and beasts of prey. To secure 
speedy death the crurifragium, breaking 
of the legs with a heavy mallet or bar, 
was sometimes resorted to: as without 
such means the crucified might in some 
cases linger for thirty-six hours. Neander 


34. ἀλλ εἷς τῶν στρατιωτῶν λόγχη 


(Life of Christ, p. 473) has an interesting 
note on fie ee and ¢f. the 
Gospel according to Peter on σκελοκοπία, 
with the note by the Author of Supernat. 
Religion.—Ver. 32. The two robbers 
were thus despatched. ἐπὶ δὲ τὸν ἸησοῦνΏὸ 
ἐλθόντες, but when the soldiers who 
were carrying out Pilate’s orders came 
to Jesus and saw that He was already 
dead, they refrained from breaking His 
legs. “Ver. 34. But one of the soldiers 
λόγχῃ αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ο. “« pierced 
His side with a spear’. But Field 
prefers ‘‘ pricked His side” to keep up 
the distinction between évuge (the milder 
word) and ἐξεκέντησε (ver. 37). He 
favours the idea οἱ Loesner that the 
soldier’s intention was to ascertain 
whether Jesus was really dead, and he 
cites a very apt parallel from Plutarch’s 
Cleomencs, 37. But €yxet νύξε occurs in 
Homer (11.,ν. 579), where death followed, 
and as the wound inflicted by this spear 
thrust seems to have been a Παπά- 
breadth wide (xx. 25) it may be presumed 
the soldier meant to make sure that 
Jesus was dead by giving Him a thrust 
which itself would have been fatal. The 
weapon with which the blow was in- 
flicted was a λόγχη, the ordinary Roman 
hasta, which had an iron head, egg- 
shaped, and about a hand-breadth at the 
broadest part. Following upon the blow 
εὐθὺς ἐξῆλθεν αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ. Dr. Stroud 
(Physical Cause of the Death of Christ) 
advocates the view that our Lord died 
from rupture of the heart, and thus 
accounts both for the speedy cessation 
of life and for the effusion of blood and 
water. Previous literature on the sub- 
ject will be found in the Critici Sacri 
and select passages in Burton’s Bampton 
Lec., 468-9. Without physiological 
knowledge John records simply what he 
saw, and if he had an eye to the Docetae, 
as Waterland (v. 190) supposes, yet his 
main purpose was to certify the real 
death of Jesus. The symbolic signifi- 


n Exod. xii. 
46. Ps. 


ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ἔνυξε, καὶ εὐθὺς Ἰ ἐξῆλθεν αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ. 
“kal 6 ἑωρακὼς µεμαρτύρηκε, καὶ ™ 
κἀκεῖνος οἶδεν ὅτι ἀληθῆ λέγει, ἵνα ὑμεῖς πιστεύσητε. 


XIX. 


35: 
ἀληθινὴ αὐτοῦ ἐστὶν ἡ paptupia, 
36. ἐγένετο 


γὰρ ταῦτα, ἵνα ἡ Ὑραφὴ πληρωθῇῃ, '"᾿Οστοῦν οὐ συντριβήσεται 
37. Καὶ πάλιν ἑτέρα γραφὴ λέγει, ΄"Ὄψονται εἰς ὃν 


38. ΜΕΤΑ δὲ ταῦτα ἠρώτησε τὸν Πιλάτον 6 Ιωσὴφ 6 ἀπὸ ᾿Αριμα- 
θαίας, Gv μαθητὴς τοῦ ᾿[ησοῦ, ! κεκρυµµένος δὲ διὰ τὸν Φόβον τῶν 


ή ϱ lo a A 
16 Ιουδαίων, ἵνα Ἱ ἄρῃ τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ: καὶ ἐπέτρεψεν 6 Πιλάτος. 


EXXIV, 3ο στ ἂν 

ο Zech. xii. GUTOU. 
1ο, fi . > 

ἐξεκέντησαν. 

p Hereonly. 

qi Kings 
xiii. 29. 

τχ ο σα. 

8 Here only EN 5 λα ne RS μυς od 
inN.T. ᾖλθεν οὖν καὶ “ype τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 
Ecclus. ε 2 
XXXViii, 8, © 


cance of the blood and water so 
abundantly insisted on by the Fathers 
“see Burton, B. L., 167-72, and West- 
cott’s additional note) is not within 
John’s horizon.—Ver. 35. When he goes 
on to testify, 6 ἑωρακὼς . . . it is not the 
phenomenon of the blood and water he 
so emphatically certifies, but the veritable 
death of Christ. To one who was 
about to relate a resurrection it was a 
necessary preliminary to establish the 
bona-fide death. That John here speaks 
of himself in the third person is quite in 
his manner. Here, as in chap. xx., he 
shows that he understood the value of an 
eye-witness’s testimony. It is that which 
constitutes his paptvupia as ἀληθινή, it is 
adequate. Besides being adequate, its 
contents are true, ἀληθῆ. ‘Testimony 
may be sufficient (e.g., of a competent 
eye-witness) but false; or it may be in- 
sufficient (e.g., of half-witted child) but 
true. St. John declares that his testimony 
is both sufficient and true.’’ Plummer. 
The reason of his utterance, or record of 
these facts, is ἵνα tpeis πιστεύσητε, 
‘that ye might believe,” first, this record, 
and through it in Jesus and His revela- 
tion.—Ver. 36. ἐγένετο γὰρ ταῦτα. He 
records these things, contained in this 
short paragraph, because they further 
identify Jesus as the promised Messiah. 
Ὀστοῦν οὐ συντριβήσεται αὐτοῦ. The 
law regarding the Paschal lamb ran 
thus (Exod. xii. 46): ὁστοῦν οὐ ouv- 
τρίψετε ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ, cf. Ps. xxxiv. 20. 
Evidently John identified Jesus as the 
Paschal Lamb, cf. 1 Cor. v. 7. καὶ 
πάλιν ... ἐξεκέτησαν. Another Scrip- 
ture also here found its fulfilment, Zech. 
xii. 10. The original is: ‘‘ They shall 
look upon me whom they pierced”. The 
Sept. renders: ἐπιβλέψονται πρὸς μὲ avd? 
ὧν κατωρχήσαντο: “They shall look 
towards me because they insulted me”. 


39. ἦλθε δὲ καὶ Νικόδημος 


λθὼν πρὸς τὸν Ιησοῦν νυκτὸς "Td πρῶτον, φέρων " μίγμα σµύρνης 


John gives a more accurate translation: 
Ὄψονται εἷς Ov ἐξεκέντησαν: ‘“‘ They 
shall look on Him whom (ἐκεῖνον ὃν) 
they pierced”. The same rendering is 
adopted in the Greek versions of Aquila, 
Theodotion and Symmachus, and is also 
found in Ignatius, Ep. Trall., 10; Justin, 
I, Apol., i. 77; and cf. Rev. i. 7, and 
Barnabas, Ep., 7. In the lance thrust 
John sees a suggestive €onnection with 
the martyr-hero of Zechariah’s prophecy. 

Vv. 38-42. The entombment.—Ver. 38. 
Mera. δὲ ταῦτα, “ But after these things ’’. 
In ver. 31 the Jews asked that the bodies 
might be removed. Had this request 
been fulfilled by the soldiers, they would 
have cast the three bodies together into 
some pit of refuse, cf. Josh. vili. 29; 
but before this was done Joseph of 
Arimathaea—a place not yet certainly 
identified—who was a rich man (¢/. Is. 
liii. g) and a member of the Sanhedrim 
(Mt. xxvii. 57; Mk. xv. 43 ; Lk. xxiii. 50), © 
but also ‘a disciple of Jesus,” though 
“a hidden: one, kexpuppévos, through 
fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that 
he might remove the body of Jesus”. 
This required some courage on Joseph’s 
part, and Mark therefore uses the word 
τολµήσας. Reynolds says that ἠρώ- 
τησεν “implies something of claim and 
confidence on his part. The Synoptists 
all three use ᾖτήσατο, which rather 
denotes the position of a supplicant for 
a favour.” The reason, however, why 
ἠτήσατο is used in the Synoptists is that 
it is followed by an accusative of the 
object asked for; while ἠρώτησε is used 
in John because it introduces a request 
that something may be done. With 
Joseph’s request Pilate complied. ἠλθεν 
...?Inood. For Ἶρε τὸ σῶμα, cf. 1 
Kings xiii. 29. Another member of 
Sanhedrim countenanced and aided 
Joseph.—Ver. 39. ἦλθε δὲ καὶ Νικό- 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


35—42. XX. 1—3. S6r 


40. ἔλαβον οὖν τὸ σῶμα τοῦ t Here only: 


/ / 
καὶ ' ἀλόης ὡσεὶ "λίτρας ἑκατόν. 
U Xil. 3. 


᾽μησοῦ, καὶ ἔδησαν αὐτὸ  ὀθονίοις μετὰ τῶν " ἀρωμάτων, * καθὼς ν xx. 5, 6.7. 
be atlas Pe , y2 α δὲ τῶ . . w Mk. xvi. 
ἔθος ἐστὶ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις 7 ἐνταφιάζειν. 41. ἦν δὲ TH τόπῳ, ὅπου 1, οἷς, 
a ΧΙ ac. X. 
ἐσταυρώθη, κῆπος, καὶ ἐν τῷ *KHTH μνημεῖον καινὸν, ἐν ᾧ οὐδέπω 5. 3 
8 a 3 ron. 
οὐδεὶς ἐτέθη. 42. ἐκεῖ οὖν διὰ τὴν " παρασκευὴν τῶν ‘loudaiwy, ὅτι xvi. 14. _ 
> . 4 x a > ee A y Mat. xxvi. 
ἐγγὺς ἦν τὸ μνημεῖον, ἔθηκαν τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν. τα 
αν , z 2 Kings 
XX. 1. THe δὲ "μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἔρχεται ΄ xxi. 26. 


a ver. 14. 


lal ‘ , 
Ῥπρωϊ, σκοτίας ἔτι οὔσης, eis τὸ μνημεῖον" καὶ βλέπει τὸν λίθον 2 Acts xx. 7. 


ἠρμένον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου. 


Mk. xvi. 2. 


3. Ν ” 9 , 
2. τρέχει οὖν καὶ έρχεται πρὸς Σίµωνα y Gen. i. s. 


c 


Πέτρον καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἄλλον μαθητὴν ὃν epider 6 “Ingods, καὶ λέγεις ο ώς 


- lol , Δ A 
αὐτοῖς, 3 Ἠραν τὸν κύριον ἐκ τοῦ μνημείου, καὶ οὐκ οἴδαμεν ποῦ ῃ 


ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. 


δηµος. ‘Thus Jesus by being lifted up 
is already drawing men unto Him. 
These Jewish aristocrats first confess 
Him in the hour of His deepest de- 
gradation.” Plummer. Nicodemus is 
identified as 6 ἐλθὼν . . . τὸ πρῶτον, 
‘*he who came to Jesus by night at the 
first ’’; iii. 1, in contrast to the boldness 
of his coming now. Φέρων piypa... 
ἑκατόν. piypa, a “confection” or 
“* compound,” ο, Ecclus. xxxviii. 8. 
σµύρνης καὶ ἀλόης, “of myrrh and 


aloes”. Myrrh was similarly used by 
the Egyptians, see Herod., ii. 83. Cf. 
Ps. xlv. 9. ὡσεὶ λίτρας ἑκατόν. The 


λίτρα (libra) was rather over eleven 
ounces avoirdupois. The enormous 
quantity has been accounted for as a 
rich man’s expression of devotion, or as 
required if the entire body and all the 
wrappings were to be smeared with it, 
and if the grave itself was to be filled 
with unguents as in 2 Chron. xvi. 14. 
—Ver. 40. ἔλαβον . . . ἐνταφιάζειν. 
They wrapped the body in strips of linen 
along with the aromatic preparations (2 
Chron. xvi. 14, ἀρωμάτων), as is the 
custom (ὡς ἔθος ἐστί, 1 Macc. x. 80) 
with the Jews (other peoples having 
other customs) to prepare for burial.— 
Ver. 41. ἐνταφιάζειν, see Gen. 1. 1-3. 
Hv ἐν τῷ τόπῳ, ‘There was in the 
place,” 1.ει, in that neighbourhood, 
κῆπος, a garden, which, according to 
Mt. xxvii. 60, must have belonged to 
Joseph. μνημεῖον καινόν, a tomb, rock- 
hewn according to Synoptists, which 
had hitherto been unused, and which 
was therefore fresh and clean.—Ver. 42. 
“There, accordingly, on account of the 
preparation of the Jews, because the 
tomb was at hand, they laid Jesus.” 
The Friday was so nearly at an end 
that they had not time to go to any 


3. Ἐξῆλθεν οὖν ὁ Πέτρος καὶ 6 ἄλλος μαθητὴς, 


xiv. 46. 
δι τη 
xix. 38. 


distance, and therefore availed them- 
selves of the neighbouring tomb as a 
provisional, if not permanent, resting- 
place. 

CHAPTER XX.—The resurrection and 
subsequent manifestations.—Vv._ 1-10. 
The empty tomb.—Ver. 1. THe δὲ pug 
τῶν σαββάτων: ‘And on the first day 
of the week”. Mk. (xvi. 2) and Lk. 
(xxiv. 1) have the same expression, Mt. 
(xxviii. 1) has ὀψὲ δὲ σαββάτων, τῇ 
ἐπιφωσκούσῃ εἰς µίαν σαββάτων. [In 
the suspected ninth verse of Mk. xvi. 
πρώτῃ appears instead of µιᾷ.]--Μαρία 
ἡ Μαγδαληνἡ ἔρχεται, Mary of Magdala, 
now Mejdel, a fishing village north of 
Tiberias ; she is further described in Mk. 
xvi. Qg as wap 7s ἐκβεβλήκει ἑπτὰ 
δαιμόνια (cf. Lk. viii. 2), which lends 
significance both to her being at the 
tomb and to her being the first to see the 
Lord. She alone of the three women 
present is here named, because she alone 
is required in John’s account. The time 
is more exactly described as pot, σκοτίας. 
ἔτι οὔσης. Mk. (xvi. 2) has λίαν mpot, 
but adds ἀνατείλαντος τοῦ ἡλίου, ap- 
parently having chiefly in view, not the 
first arrival of the women, but the 
appearance of Jesus to Mary. Luke’s 
ὄρθρου βαθέος agrees with John’s ex- 
pression. Phrynichus defines ὄρθρος as 
the time before the day began while a 
lamp was still needed. [Cf. Plato’s 
Crito at the beginning, and Roger’s note 
on Aristoph., Wasps, 215.] The dark- 
ness is noticed by John to account for 
her seeing nothing of what Peter and 
John afterwards saw. She could not, 
however, fail to see τὸν λίθον ἠρμένον ἐκ 
τοῦ μνημείου; the slab closing the 
sepulchre had been removed. Seeing 
this she naturally concluded that the 
tomb had been violated, possibly that 


δ62 


ΚΑΤΑ ΤΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΧΧ. 


. ῃ ,™ > bs Lo) 3 A ε , ec A RS 
civ. 36; xxi. καὶ ἤρχοντο εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον. 4. ἔτρεχον δὲ οἱ δύο ' ὁμοῦ" καὶ ὁ 
2. 


ἄλλος μαθητὴς προέδραµε τάχιον τοῦ Πέτρου, καὶ ἦλθε πρῶτος Eis 


f ver. 11. 
Jas. i. 25. 
g xix. 28. 


εἰσῆλθεν. 


τὸ μνημεῖον, 5. καὶ * παρακύψας βλέπει © κείµενα τὰ ὀθόνια, οὗ μέντοι 
” το / a a 
6. έρχεται οὖν Σίμων Πέτρος ἀκολουθῶν αὐτῷ, καὶ 


εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, καὶ θεωρεῖ τὰ ὀθόνια ἕ κείµενα, 7. καὶ τὸ 


5 , af pes, al MA 3 ~ > a ~ 3 [ή , 
GTOUVOGPLOV ο ην επι της κεφα QS αυτου, ου μετα των ὀθονίων κειµενον, 


h Αν. here ἀλλὰ " χωρὶς ἐντετυλιγμένον eis ἕνα τόπον. 


only. 


8. τότε οὖν εἰσῆλθε 


καὶ 6 ἄλλος μαθητὴς ὁ ἐλθὼν πρῶτος εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, Kal Eide, καὶ 


iLk. xxiv.7. ἐπίστευσεν  Ο. οὐδέπω γὰρ ἤδεισαν τὴν γραφὴν, ὅτι ‘Set αὐτὸν ἐκ 


the authorities for purposes of their own 
had removed the body.—Ver. 2. τρέχει 
οὖν .. . αὐτόν. She therefore runs, dis- 
regarding unseemliness, and comes to 
those who would be most interested, and 
without preface, breathless and anxious, 
exclaims: ἡραν .. . ‘they have re- 
moved the Lord from the tomb, and we 
know not where they have laid Him”, 
Evidently she had no idea that a resur- 
rection had taken place. The plural 
οἴδαμεν may naturally be accepted as 
confirming Mark’s account that she 
was not alone.—Ver. 3. At once the 
two men ἐξῆλθεν .. . καὶ ἤρχοντο, 
singular and plural as frequently, aorist 
and imperfect, the one referring to the 
passing beyond the city wall, the other 
to the whole course from the house to 
the tomb.—Ver. 4. ἔτρεχον δὲ οἱ δύο 
ὁμοῦ, “and the two ran together’: 
equally eager; but 6 ἄλλος μαθητὴς 
προέδραµε ταχίον τοῦ Πέτρον, ‘the 
other disciple ran on before more 
quickly than Peter”; probably John 
was the younger man. [Lampe sug- 
gests two other reasons: either Peter’s 
steps were slower “ob conscientiam 
culpae,” or “forte via Joanni magis 
nota erat’’.] Consequently John ἦλθε 
πρῶτος . . » “came first to the tomb”. 
—Ver. 5. καὶ παρακύψας... The Κ.Υ. 
renders παρακύψας by ‘stooping and 
looking in,” A.V. has merely “' stooping 
down”; the Vulgate “cum se inclinasset,”’ 
Weizsacker “' beugte sich vor”. Field 
(Otium Norvic. on Luke xxiv. 12) prefers 
‘‘ looking in,” although, he says, ‘‘ peep 
in’? would more accurately define the 
word παρακύπτειν. He quotes Casau- 
bon’s opinion that the word implies “‘ pro- 
tensionem colli cum modica corporis 
incurvatione . See also Kypke on 
Luke xxiv. 12, and Lid. and Scott Lex. 
ὀθόνια are the strips of linen used for 
swathing the dead; the cerecloths. ὀθόνη 
is frequent in Homer (I1., 3, 141 ; 18, 595) 
to denote the fine material of women’s 


dress; in Lucian and Herodian of sails ; 
in Acts x. 11 ofasheet. σινδών is the word 
used by Luke (xxiii. 53); so Herodotus, 
li. 86. οὐ µέντοι εἰσῆλθεν, “he did not 
however enter,” withheld by dread of 
pollution, according to Wetstein; by 
terror, according to Meyer. Itisenough 
to suppose that it did not occur to John 
to enter the tomb, or that he was with- 
held by a feeling of reverence or delicacy. 
—Ver. 6. Peter is notso withheld. He 
enters καὶ θεωρεῖ τὰ ὀθόνια . . . τόπον, 
θεωρεῖ is probably used here in its stricter 
sense of seeing so as to draw conclusions. 
—Ver. 7. What he saw was significant ; 
the linen wrappings lying, and the nap- 
kin which had been on His head not 
lying with the linen cloths, but separately 
folded up in a place by itself. The first 
circumstance was evidence that the body 
had not been hastily snatched away for 
burial elsewhere. Had the authorities or 
any one else taken the body, they would 
have taken it as it was. The second 
circumstance gave them even stronger 
proof that there had been no hurry. The . 
napkin was neatly folded and laid “into 
one place,” the linens being in another. 
They felt in the tomb as if they were in 
a chamber where one had divested him- 
self of one set of garments to assume 
another. [Euthymius is here interesting 
and realistic.] σονδάριον, sudarium, 
from sudo, I sweat.—Ver. 8. On Peter 
reporting what he saw τότε οὖν. .. 
ἐπίστευσεν. “then entered accordingly 
the other disciple also, who had first 
arrived at the tomb, and he saw and 
believed”. Standing and gazing at the 
folded napkin, John saw the truth. 
Jesus has Himself risen, and disencum- 
bered Himself of these wrappings. Cf. 
xi. 44. It was enough for John; ἐπίσ- 
τευσεν. He visited no other tomb; he 
questioned no one. — Ver. g. The 
emptied and orderly grave convinced 
him, οὐδέπω γὰρ ῄδεισαν .. . ἀναστῆναι; 
it was not an expectation founded on 


4—16. 


νεκρῶν ἀναστῆναι. 10. ἀπῆλθον οὖν πάλιν ) πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς οἱ pabyrtal. J 
Il. Μαρία δὲ εἰστήκει πρὸς τὸ μνημεῖον κλαίουσα ἔξω. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


363 


1 Sam. 
XXVi. 11. 
Num. xxiv. 


> 
ὡς ουν 25. Lk. 


ἔκλαιε, * παρέκυψεν εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον, 12. καὶ θεωρεῖ δύο ἀγγέλους ἐν ‘ af τα. 
Σλευκοῖς καθεζοµένους, ἕνα πρὸς τῇ κεφαλῆ, καὶ ἕνα πρὸς τοῖς ποσὶν, ! Pl. Exod. 


A an? ~ 

ὅπου ἔκειτο τὸ σῶμα τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ. 
, ” 

“Tuva, τί κλαίεις; ΄ Λέγει αὐτοῖς, 


~ ”” 
καὶ οὐκ οἶδα Tod ” ἔθηκαν αὐτόν. 


ο 3 a 3 , 4 A A 3 a ε fal A > mr =] ς τς ρω 
εἲς τὰ ὀπίσω, καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν ᾿Ιησοῦν ἑστῶτα: καὶ οὐκ ᾖδει ὅτι ὁ α Gen. 


᾿Ρησοῦς 2 ἐστι. 


Στίνα ζητεῖς ; 


κ ‘ Sigh εἰ XXXill. 4. 
13. καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῇ ἐκεῖνοι, m xix. 38; 
and Ver, 2. 
ϱ . 
΄Ὅτι “pay τὸν κύριόν µου, mani at, 
η a ο xviii. 
14. Καὶ ταῦτα εἰποῦσα ἐστράφη ref. 
Pp i. 40 
a = τς XXXVii. 15, 
15. λέγει αὐτῇ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “'Γύναι, τί κλαίεις; cp. xviii.7. 


8 ’ fo ~ 
Εκείνη δοκοῦσα ὅτι 6 " κηπουρός ἐστι, λέγει αὐτῷ, τ Here only. 


> A 
«Κύριε, εἰ σὺ *€Bdotacas αὐτὸν, εἶπέ µοι ποῦ αὐτὸν ” ἔθηκας : 6 ΟΡ. xii. 6. 


a 2) 
Kaya αὐτὸν " dpa. 


16. Λέγει αὐτῇ 6 “Ingots, “΄ Μαρία. 
φεῖσα ἐκείνη λέγει αὐτῷ, “"“PaBBouvi-’’ ὃ λέγεται, διδάσκαλε. 
a 


2Tpa- t ver. 13. 
u Mk. x. 51 


only. 


1 Insert Εβραιστι with §§BDLOX 33 Syrr. Aegypt. Arm. Aeth., omitted in AEGK 


vulg. Cyr.-Alex. 


scripture which prompted belief in the 
resurrection; but only those matter-of- 
fact observations, the empty grave and 
the folded napkin.—Ver. το. Satisfied 
in their own minds ἀπῆλθον οὖν... 
ot µαθηταί. πρὸς éavTovs Or αὐτούς or 
αὐτούς = home; ‘chez eux,’’ Segond’s 
French version; εἰς τὰ ἴδια, modern 
Greek. Kypke gives examples of a phrase 
which he says is “‘ trita profanis ”. 

Vv. 11-18.—$esus reveals Himself to 
Mary.—Ver.11. Μαρία δὲ εἰστήκει .. . 
Έξω. Hitherto John has told us simply 
what he himself saw: now he reports 
what Mary told him, see ver. 18. She 
had come to the tomb after the men, but 
could not share in their belief. She re- 
mained outside the tomb helplessly and 
hopelessly weeping. She herself had 
told the disciples that the tomb was 
empty, and she had seen them come out 
of it; but again παρέκνψεν εἰς τὸ 
μνημεῖον “she peered into the tomb”; 
an inimitably natural touch.. She could 
not believe her Lord was gone. καὶ 
θεωρεῖ . . . ᾿Ιησοῦ. This, says Holtz- 
mann, is a mere reminiscence of Luke 
xxiv. 4. But even the description of the 
angels differs. They were “seated one 
at the head and one at the feet where 
the body of Jesus lay”; sitting, says 
Bengel, ‘‘ quasi opera quapiam perfunc- 
tos, et exspectantes aliquem, quem doce- 
rent”. Lampe has little help to give 
here ; and Liicke is justified in saying 
that neither the believing nor the critical 
inquirer can lift the veil that hangs over 
this appearance of angels. In Mary’s 
case it was wholly without result; for no 


sooner does she answer the angels’ ques- 
tion than she turns away, probably hear- 
ing a footstep behind her.—Ver. 14. 
ἐστράφη cis τὰ ὀπίσω .. . ‘And she 
sees Jesus standing and did not know 
that it was Jesus”’; not merely because 
her eyes were dim with tears, but 
because He was altered in appearance ; 
as Mark (xvi. 12) says, ἐν érépa µορφῇῃ. 
So little was her ultimate recognition of 
Jesus the result of her expectation or her 
own fancy embodied.—Ver. 15. λέγει... 
ζητεῖς: That she was searching for some 
one she had lost was obvious from her 
tears and demeanour. But not even the 
voice of Jesus sounds familiar. ᾿Εκείνη 

. . ἀρῶ. She supposed Him to be the 
gardener (or garden-keeper) not because 
He had on the gardener’s clothes—for 
probably He wore merely the short 
drawers in which He had been crucified 
(see Hug and Lucke)—nor because He 
held the spade as represented in some 
pictures, but because no one else was 
likely to be there at that early hour and 
to question her as to her reason for being 
there. Her answer shows that she 
thought it possible that it had been found 
inconvenient to have the body of Jesus in 
that tomb and that it had been removed to 
some other place ofsepulture. In this case 
she will gladly relieve them of the encum- 
brance. It is none to her.—Ver. 16, 
λέγει . . . Διδάσκαλε. His uttering her 
name, Mapidu, revealed that He was a 
friend who knew her; and there was 
also that in the tone which made her 
instantly turn fully round to search Him 
with her gaze. Surprise, recognition, 


864 


KATA TOANNHN 


XX, 


v iii. 13; vii 17. λέγει αὐτῇ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, “My pou ἅπτου, οὕπω γὰρ ᾿ ἀναβέβηκα 


πρὸς τὸν πατέρα µου" πορεύου δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφούς pou, καὶ εἰπὲ 


- ΄ A 
αὐτοῖς, * AvaBatvw πρὸς τὸν πατέρα µου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν, καὶ Θεόν 


ου καὶ Θεὸν ὑμῶν. 
µ 


19. Ἔρχεται Μαρία ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ ἀπαγγέλ- 


λουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς, ὅτι ἑώρακε τὸν κύριον, καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ. 


w νετ. I. 

X XViii. 2. 
Esth. ix. 
15. 

y ver. 26. 

z Jud. vi. 23. 
Dan. x.19. 

a ΧΙΧ. 34. 

b Esth. ix. 
15. 


καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “* Εἰρήνη 
αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας καὶ τὴν 


relief, joy, utter themselves in her ex- 
clamation, ‘PaBBovvi, which Buxtorf 
renders ‘Domine mi”; but probably 
the pronominal suffix had ceased to have 
significance, as in ‘ Monsieur,” etc. 
Lampe quotes the saying; ‘‘ Majus est 
Rabbi quam Rabh, et majus est Rabban 
quam Rabbi,” cf. Mk. x. 51. With the 
exclamation Mary made a forward move- 
ment as if to embrace Him. But this is 
forbidden.—Ver. 17. My µου ἅπτου, 
“‘noli me tangere,”’ not because it was 
indecorous (Lk. vii. 38); nor because 
she wished to assure herself by touch 
that the appearance was real, a test 
which He did not prevent His disciples 
from applying; nor because her embrace 
would disturb the process of glorification 
through which His body was passing ; 
nor, following Kypke’s note, can we 
suppose that Jesus forbids Mary to 
worship Him [although K. proves that 
ἅπτεσθαι is used of that clinging to the 
knees or feet which was adopted by 
suppliants], because He accepts Thomas’ 
worship even before His ascension ; but, 
as He Himself says, οὕπω γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα 
πρὸς τὸν πατέρα pov, “for I have not 
yet ascended to my Father,” implying 
that this was not His permanent return 
to visible fellowship with His disciples. 
Mary, by her eagerness to seize and hold 
Him, showed that she considered that 
the μικρόν, the ‘little time,” of xvi. 16, 
was past, and that now He had returned 
to be for ever with them. Jesus checks 
her with the assurance that much had 
yet to happen before that. His disciples 
must at once be disabused of that mis- 
apprehension. Therefore, πορεύου . . . 
ὑμῶν, “Go to my brothers [ἀδελφούς 
pov, here for the first time; in anticipa- 
tion of the latter part of the sentence, 
cf. Mk. iii. 35] and tell them, I ascend to 
my Father and your Father, and my 
God and your God”. He thus forms a 
relationship which bound Him to them 


98 = / a / [ο a a 
19. Οὔσης οὖν ὀψίας, τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ τῇ " μιᾷ τῶν σαββάτων, 
καὶ τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων, ὅπου ἦσαν ot μαθηταὶ * συνηγµένοι, διὰ 


τὸν φΦόβον τῶν Ιουδαίων, ἦλθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ ἔστη 7 εἲς τὸ µέσον, 


2ο. Καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν ἔδειξεν 
ν 


ὑμῖν. 
"πλευρὰν αὐτοῦ. ἐκάρησαν οὖν ot 
more closely than His bodily presence. 
His place by right is with God. But 
His love binds Him as certainly to His 
people on earth as His rights carry Him 
to God. The form of the expression is 
dictated by His desire to give them 
assurance. They had no doubt God 
was His God and Father. He teaches 
them that, if so, He is their God and 
Father. épxerar . . αὐτῃ, Mary 
carries forthwith the Lord’s message 
to the disciples, cf. Mk. xvi. 10; Mt. 
xxviii. 10; Lk. xxiv. Io. 

Vv. 19-29. Manifestations of the risen 
Lord to the disciples, first without Thomas, 
then with Thomas.—Ver. 19. The time 
of the manifestation is defined, it was 79 
ἡμέρᾳ . . . σαββάτων “on that day, the 
first of the week,” and during the evening, 
ovens οὖν ὀψίας, which agrees with 
Luke’s account, from which we learn 
that when Jesus and the two disciples 
reached Emmaus, two hours from Jeru- 
salem, the day was declining. The 
evening was chosen, probably because: 
then the disciples could be found to- 
gether. The circumstance that the doors 
were shut seemed to John significant 
regarding the properties of the risen body 
of Jesus. τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων, “ the 
doors having been shut,” 1.6., securely 
fastened so that no one could enter, 
because the precaution was taken διὰ 
τὸν φόβον τῶν Ιουδαίων. So soon had 
the disciples begun to experience the 
risks they ran by being associated with 
Jesus. Calvin supposes Jesus opened 
the doors miraculously; but that is not 
suggested in the words. Rather it is 
indicated that His glorified body was not 
subject to the conditions of the natural, 
earthly body, but passed where it would. 
Suddenly έστη εἰς τὸ µέσον (c/. Lk. xxiv. 
36). ‘Phrasis notat se in publico 
omnium conspectu sistere.”” Kypke. Not 
only as the ordinary salutation, but to 
calm their perturbation at this sudden 


17—26. 


μαθηταὶ ἰδόντεφ τὸν κύριον. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


δός 


21. εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς πάλιν, 


“Ειρήνη ὑμῖν: καθὼς ἀπέσταλκέ µε ὁ πατὴρ, Kayo πέµπω Spas.” ο τα 


A a Lal A 
22. Kat τοῦτο εἰπὼν ° ἐνεφύσησε καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς, “*AdBere Πνεῦμας 


Ἅγιον. 
τινων κρατῆτε, κεκράτηνται.᾽᾽ 


λεγόμενος "Δίδυμος, οὐκ ἦν μετ αὐτῶν ὅτε ἦλθεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς. 
ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ of ἄλλοι μαθηταὶ, “΄ Ἑωράκαμεν τὸν κύριον.’ 


23. ἄν τινων ἀφῆτε τὰς ἁμαρτίας, ἀφίενται] αὐτοῖς: ἄν Gen. 
24. Θωμᾶς δὲ, εἷς ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα 


an. x. 19 
Here only 
in N.T. 
yen. ii. 7. 
. d vii. 39. 

ο 


25. ο xi. 16. 
Ὁ δὲ 


εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ''᾿Εὰν μὴ ἴδω ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν αὐτοῦ τὸν τύπον 2 τῶν 


ἥλων, καὶ βάλω τὸν δώμτωλόν µου eis τὸν τύπον 3 τῶν ἤλων, καὶ 


βάλω τὴν χεῖρά pou ety τὴν πλευρὰν αὐτοῦ, οὗ μὴ πιστεύσω.” 


26. Καὶ µεθ᾽ ἡμέρας ὀκτὼ πάλιν ἦσαν 


Θωμᾶς pet αὐτῶν. ἔρχεται ὁ ᾿Ιἠσοῦς, 


1 αφεωνται with ΝΕΑΡΙ,, 


ft» € ‘ > a a 

ἔσω ot μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ, καὶ fEzek. ix. 6, 
a = . . Αςί8ν,.23, 
τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων, καὶ 


"τυπον in its first occurrence in this verse is rendered in the Vulgate by 


” 


“‘fixuram,” which may mean “(πε spot 


‘* fissuram,”’ 


and “locum” are also read. 


where the nail was fixed’; “ figuram,” 
See Wordsworth and White in loc. 


τοπον is read by Tisch. instead of τυπον inits second occurrence on the authority 
of A only, some old Lat. and Syr. versions. 


apparition (cf. Lk. xxiv. 37), He greets 
them with Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν, and to assure 
them of His identity ἔδειξεν . . . αὐτοῦ. 
—Ver. 20. His body, therefore, however 
changed in its substance, retained its 
characteristic marks. The fear of the 
disciples was replaced by joy, ἐχάρησαν 
. . . Κύριον. In this joy the promise of 
xvi. 22 is fulfilled (Weiss).—Ver. 21. 
When they recognised Him and com- 
posed themselves, He naturally repeated 
His greeting, εἰρήνη ὑμῖν, but now adds, 
καθὼς . . . ἡμᾶς. ‘As the Father hath 
sent me, 50 5επά I you.’’ In these words 
(cf. xvii. 18) He gives them their com- 
mission as His representatives. And in 
confirmation of it, (ver. 22) τοῦτο 
εἰπὼν . . . "Άγιον. ‘He breathed on 
them,” ἐνεφύσησε; the same word is 
used in Gen. -ii. 7 to describe the dis- 
tinction between Adam’s “living soul,” 
breathed into him by God, and the life 
principle of the other animals. The 
breathing upon them was meant to con- 
vey the impression that His own very 
Spirit was imparted to them.—Ver. 23. 
The authorisation of the Apostles is 
completed in the words: ἄν τινων... 
κεκράτηνται. ‘* Whosesoever sins ye for- 
give, they are forgiven to them: whose- 
soever ye retain, they are retained.” 
The meaning of κεκράτηνται is deter- 
mined by the opposed ἀφέωνται [the 
better reading]. The announcement is 
unexpected. Yet if they were to repre- 
sent Him, they must be empowered to 
continue a function which He constantly 


5 


exercised and set in the forefront of His 
ministry. They must be able in His 
name to pronounce forgiveness, and to 
threaten doom. This indeed formed the 
main substance of their ministry, and it 
was by receiving His Spirit they were 
fitted for it. The burden was laid upon 
them of determining who should be for- 
given, and who held by their sin. Cf, 
Acts iii. 26, ν. 4.—Ver. 24. Θωμᾶς δὲ... 


"Ingots. Θωμᾶς [OiNA or OND 
a twin, from ONS) to be double; of 


which Δίδυμος from δύο is the Greek 
equivalent]. ets ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα “ one of 
the twelve,” the familiar designation still 
used of the eleven, οὐκ ἦν . . . “was 
not with them when Jesus came,’ why, 
we do not know.—Ver. 25. The rest 
accordingly, when first they met him, 
possibly the same evening, said, ἑωράκαμεν 
τὸν Κύριον; which he heard with in- 
credulity, not because he could mistrust 
them, but because he concluded they 
had been the victims of some hallucina- 
tion. Nothing would satisfy him but 
the testimony of his own senses: ᾿Εὰν 
. πιστεύσω. The test pro- 
posed by Thomas shows that he had 
witnessed the crucifixion and that the 
death and its circumstances had deeply 
impressed him. To him resurrection 
seemed a dream. But he still associated 
with those who believed in it.—Ver. 26. 
Καὶ μεθ’ ἡμέρας .. . αὐτῶν. ped’ ἡμέρας 
ὀκτὼ πάλιν. Probably he had been with 


ea 


866 ΚΑΤΑ ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


g ver. 10. 
h ver. 21. 


® ory εἲς TO µέσον, καὶ εἶπεν, ''" Εἰρήνη unt: 


XX. 27—31. 


ας λέγει τῷ 


Θωμᾶ, “'Φέρε τὸν δάκτυλόν σου ὧδε, καὶ ide τὰς χεῖράς µου καὶ 


φέρε τὴν χεῖρά σου, καὶ ΡΕ eis τὴν πλευράν µου: καὶ μὴ γίνου 


i Gal. 11.9. ἄπιστος, ἀλλὰ | πιστός. 
Acts xvi. 


1,etc.;see αὐτῷ, -' Ὅ κύριός µου καὶ ὁ Θεός µου.” 


28. Καὶ ἀπεηρίθη ὁ Θωμᾶς, καὶ εἶπεν 


20. Λέγει αὐτῷ 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, 


Thayer. κκ“ , ε ου. 
Ότι ἑώρακάς µε, Θωμᾶ, πεπίστευκας µακάριοι οἱ μὴ ἰδόντες, 
καὶ πιστεύσαντες. 
j xii. 32: 30. )ModAAG μὲν οὖν καὶ ἄλλα onpeta ἐποίησεν 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς 4 ἐνώπιον 
xo ors) ~ 6 a > al a > ” , > Αα λί ’ 
τῶν μαθητῶν attod,! ἃ οὐκ ἔστι yeypappéeva ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτω. 
ki, 343 a 31. ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται, ἵνα πιστεύσητε” ὅτι 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς ἐστιν 


23. 


1 Acts iii. = sMateTOs 6 υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ ἵνα πιστεύοντες ζωὴν ἔχητε ev τ 


1ν.το τσ 
Cor. virr, ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ. 


1 αντον deleted in NB. 


them every day during the interval, but 
as Bengel remarks, ‘‘interjectis diebus 
nulla fuerat apparitio”’. On the first day 
of the second week the disciples were 
‘‘again,” as on the previous Sunday, 
“within,” in the same convenient place 
of meeting, and now Thomas is with 
them. As on the previous occasion (ver. 
10), the doors were shut and Jesus sud- 
denly appeared among them and greeted 
them with the customary salutation.— 
Ver.27. Εἰταλέγει... πιστός. Hedoes 
not need to be informed of Thomas’ in- 
credulity; although it is quite possible 
that, as Liicke supposes, the others had 
mentioned it to Him. Still, this is not 
in the text. Cf. Weiss, who also quotes 
Bengel’s characteristic note: ‘* Si Phari- 
saeus ita dixisset, Nisi videro, etc., nil 
impetrasset; sed discipulo pridem pro- 
bato nil non datur’’. Weiss supposes 
the hands were seen (ie), the side 
only touched under the clothes. Some 
suppose that as the feet are not men- 
tioned in this passage, they had not 
been nailed but only bound to the cross. 
See Liicke’s interesting note. καὶ μὴ 
γίνου ἄπιστος ἀλλὰ πιστός, “ Incre- 
dulitas aliquid habet de νο]απίατίο 

Ver. 28. Grotius, following Tertullian, 
Ambrose, Cyril and others, is of opinion 
that Thomas availed himself of the 
offered test: surely it is psychologically 
more probable that the test he had 
insisted on as alone sufficient is now 
repudiated, and that he at once exclaims, 
Ὅ Κύριός µου καὶ 6 θεός pov. His 
faith returns with a rebound and utters 
itself in a confession in which the gospel 
culminates. The words are not a mere 
exclamation of surprise. That is for- 


” 


ς 
6 
a 


Ίπιστενητε in Ν Β. 


bidden by ἐἶπεν αὐτῷ; they mean “ Thou 
art my Lord and my God”. The re- 
peated pronoun lends emphasis. In 
Pliny’s letter to Trajan (112 A.D.) he 
describes the Christians as singing hymns 
to Christ as God. Our Lord does not 
reject Thomas’ confession; but (ver. 29) 
reminds him that there is a higher faith 
than that w hich springs from visual evi- 
dence : “Ort ἑώρακάς pe... καὶ πισ- 
τεύσαντες. Jesus would have been better 
pleased with a faith which did not τε- 
quire the evidence of sense: a faith 
founded on the perception that God was 
in Christ, and therefore He could not die; 
a faith in His Messiahship which argued 
that He must live to carry on the work 


of His Kingdom. The saying is cited _ 


as another instance of the care with 
which the various origins and kinds of 
faith are distinguished in this gospel. 
Vv. 30-31. First conclusion of the 
gospel—Ver. 30. πολλὰ μὲν οὖν... 
τούτῳ. That this was the original or 
intended conclusion of the gospel is 
shown by the use of the words ‘‘in this 
book,’’ which indicate that the writer 
was now looking back on it as a whole 
(Holtzmann). Perhaps τούτῳ is em- 
phatic, contrasted with the Synoptic 
gospels in which so many other signs 
were recorded, The expression πολλὰ 
μὲν οὖν καὶ ἄλλα is necessarily of fre- 
quent occurrence and is illustrated by 
Kypke. Beza says these particles in the 
usage of John ‘“ proprie conclusionibus. 
adhibentur’’. ‘‘ Many other signs there- 
fore” (R.V.) is not an improvement on 
A.V. ‘And many other signs truly. i 
‘Many other signs indeed did Jesus ”’ is 
sufficient. Why ἐνώπιον τῶν μαθητῶν ? 


XXI. 15. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


867 


XXI. 1. ΜΕΤΑ ταῦτα *épavépwoev ἑαυτὸν πάλιν ὁ Ιησοῦς τοῖς ai. 3’ ii. 11. 
μαθηταῖς ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης τῆς "Τιβεριάδος : " ἐφανέρωσε δὲ οὕτως. b vi. τ. 
2 ἦσαν "ὁμοῦ Σίμων Πέτρος, καὶ Θωμᾶς 6 λεγόμενος 9 Δίδυμος, καὶ c xx. 4 reff. 


d xx. 24. 


Ναθαναἡλ 6 "ἀπὸ Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, καὶ οἱ τοῦ Ζεβεδαίου, καὶ ei. 46. 


ἄλλοι ἐκ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ δύο. 
ν Ὑπάγω * ἁλιεύειν. 

#99 
gol. 


νυκτὶ § ἐπίασαν οὐδέν. 


Λέγουσιν αὐτῷ, “'Ερχόμεθα καὶ ἡμεῖς σὺν 
Ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἀνέβησαν εἰς τὸ πλοῖον εὐθὺς,' καὶ ἐν ἐκείνη τῇ 16. 

κ δὲ τον , 2h» ς 5 A 
4. πρωΐας δὲ ἤδη γενομένης 7 " ἔστη ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς 


3. λέγει αὐτοῖς Σίμων Πέτρος, 


, £ Once only 
in LXX., 
Jer. xvi. 


g ver. Io. 
Rev. xix. 


h 5 9 3 / 9 bd ς λ ο 3 AS fits , 20. 
eis τὸν aiyrahdv: ob µέντοι ὔδεισαν ot μαθηταὶ ὅτι ᾿Ιησοῦς | ἐστί. b xx. το, 26. 
a a » 11. 40. 
5. λέγει οὖν αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, '' Παιδία, µή te! προσφάγιον ἔχετε ;”” | Here only. 


1 ευθυς omitted in ΝΒΟ "ΓΙ, 1, 33. 


Ἅγινοµενης is read by Tr.Ti.W H.R. following ABC*EL ; yevop. in ΝςΓΧΔ, it. 


vulg, ‘‘ mane autem facta ”’. 


Probably because they are viewed as the 
cause of faith. ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται, 
“but these have been written,” these, 
viz., which have been included in this 
book, ἵνα . . . αὐτοῦ, with an object, 
and this object has determined their 
selection: ‘‘that ye may believe that 
Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”. 
The use of the 2nd pers. suggests that 
the writer had in view some special class. 
But his object was of universal signifi- 
cance. See the Introduction. 

CHAPTER XXI.—Sufpplementary chap- 
ter in which Fesus again manifests Him- 
self after the resurrection. 

[There is no reason why this chapter 
should be ascribed to a different hand. 
The style is the same as that of the 
gospel, and although the gospel closed 
at the end ofchap. xx., this supplementary 
chapter must have become an integral 
part of the gospel at a very early period. 
No trace exists of a gospel without it. 
It is by no means so certain that ver. 25 
is Johannine. It seems an inflated ver- 
sion of xx. 30. The twenty-fourth verse 
is also rejected by several critics on the 
ground of οἴδαμεν. This may be valid 
as an objection; but it is in the manner 
of the Apostle to testify to his own truth- 
fulness, xix. 35 ; and the use of the plural 
instead of the singular is not decisive. ] 

Ver. 1. Metra ταῦτα, John’s usual 
indefinite note of time, ἐφανέρωσεν 
ἑαυτὸν, cf. vii. 4, xiii. 4; Mark xvi. 12; 
πάλιν, over and above the manifestations 
in Jerusalem, at the Sea of Tiberias; see 
vi, 1.—Ver. 2. ἦσαν ὁμοῦ, seven of the 
disciples had kept together, Simon Peter, 
Thomas, Nathanael, further designated 
as 6 ἀπὸ Kava τῆς Γαλιλαίας, not to 
remind us of the miracles wrought there 


(Reynolds), nor “without any special 
design” (Meyer), but to emphasise the 
ὁμοῦ by showing that even though not 
belonging to the lake-side Nathanael 
remained with the rest. John indicates 
his own presence with his usual reserve, 
ot τοῦ ZePeSaiov.—Ver. 3. As the 
disciples stand together and see boat 
after boat put off, Simon Peter can stand 
it no longer but suddenly exclaims, 
Ὑπάγω ἁλιεύειν, “I am off to fish”. 
This is a relief to all and finds a ready 
response, Ἐρχόμεθα καὶ ἡμεῖς σὺν coi, 
At once they embark, and as we watch 
that boat’s crew putting off with their 
whole soul in their fishing, we see in how 
precarious a position the future of Chris- 
tianity hung. They were only sure of 
one thing—that they must live. But év 
ἐκείνῃ τῇ VUKTL ἐπίασαν οὐδέν, “ durin 

that night they took nothing”. Αλί- 
σκονται δὲ µάλιστα οἱ ἰχθύες πρὸ ἡλίου 
ἀνατολῆς καὶ μετὰ τὴν SVotw—Aristotle, 
Hist. Animal., viii. 19, quoted by Lampe. 
[On ἐπίασαν, see vii. 30 and Rev. xix. 20.7 
—Ver. 4. πρωΐας δὲ ἤδη γενομένης, 
‘but early morning having now arrived,”’ 
i.e., when all hope of catching fish was 
past, ἔστη 6 “Ingots eis [or ἐπὶ] τὸν 
αἰγιαλόν, “' Jesus stood upon the beach”’; 
for ἔστη, cf..xx. I9, 26. It seems to in- 
dicate the suddenness of the appearance. 
οὐ µέντοι . . . ἐστί, ‘the disciples, how- 
ever, were not aware that it was Jesus”’. 
—Ver. 5. λέγει οὖν . . . ἔχετε; The 
οὖν is not merely continuative, but 
indicates that what Jesus said was in 
some respect prompted by their ignorance 
of His identity. This is neglected by 
Liicke when he says that παιδία is not 
Johannine, and that τεκνία is the regular 
term used by Jesus in addressing the 


868 


κ Mk. i. 16. ᾽Απεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ, “' OU.” 
Is. xix. 8. 5 


1 Hab. i. 15. οὖν, καὶ οὐκ ἔτι αὐτὸ | ἑλκῦσαι 


πι Mk. v. 
etc. 

N Xiii. 23; 
XX. 2. 


* Ἰχθύων. 7. λέγει οὖν 


Πέτρω, ““O κύριός ἐστι. 
o 1 Sam. 

XVili. 4. κ J 2 
p Cp. xiil. 4. ἑαυτὸν €ig τὴν θάλασσαν. 
q xi 18. 


1 1νσχνον in NBCDL. 


disciples. Yes, when He openly ad- 
dresses them ; but here He uses the word 
any stranger might use, and the render- 
ing ‘‘ children ” retained even in R.V. is 
wrong. It should be “lads”; παιδίον 
being the common term of address 
to men at work, see Aristophanes, 
Clouds, 137, Frogs, 33; Euthymius, ἔθος 
γὰρ τοὺς ἐργατικοὺς οὕτως ὀνομάζειν. 
Jesus appeared as an intending purchaser 
and cries, µήτι προσφάγιον ἔχετε; ‘Have 
you taken any fish?” (R.V.: ‘have ye 
anything to eat?’’ misapprehends both 
the words and the situation). προσφά- 
ylov, as its composition shows, means 
anything eaten as seasoning or ‘“‘kitchen”’ 
to bread; being the Hellenistic word 
used instead of the Attic ὄψον or 
προσόψηµα. Athenaeus and Plutarch 
both tell us that fish was so commonly 
used in this way that προσφάγιον came 
to mean “fish”. €yere has its quasi- 
technical sense, ‘‘have ye caught?” 
For this sense, see Aristophanes, Clouds, 
705 (723, 731), where Socrates asks Strep- 
siades under the blanket, ἔχεις τι; on 
which the Scholiast remarks, χαριέντως 
τὸ ἔχεις τι, TH τῶν ἀγρεντῶν λέξει 
XPSpevos* τοῖς γὰρ ἁλιεῦσιν ἢ ὀρνιθα- 
γρευταῖς οὕτω φασὶν, ἔχεις τι. So that 
the words of Jesus are: ‘‘ Lads, have ye 
caught no fish?” ἀπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ, 
“OU”. ‘They answered Him, ‘ No,’”’ 
without any Κύριε or AtSaoxade.—Ver. 
6. Ὁ δὲ εἶπεν . καὶ εὑρήσετε. 
‘‘Cast your net on the right side of the 
boat, and you will find.” They sup- 
posed the stranger had been making 
observations from the shore, had seen a 
shoal or some sign of fish, and unwilling 
to come in empty, ἔβαλον οὖν . . . ἰχθύων. 
‘““ They cast therefore, and were no 
longer (as they had been before) able to 
draw it [ἑλκύσαι, not ἑλκῦσαι, see 
Veitch’s Irreg. Verbs, seems here to be 
used as we use ‘draw’ in connection 
with a net, meaning to draw over the 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


n ’ 
τὰ δεξιὰ µέρη τοῦ πλοίου τὸ δίκτυον, καὶ εὑρήσετε. 


ο µα 


5 ΧΧΙ. 


c ~ 
6. “O δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, “* βάλετε eis 
Κ”"Εβαλον 
“toxucav! ἀπὸ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν 


θητὴς ἐκεῖνος " ὃν ἠγάπα ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς τῷ 
Σίμων οὖν Πέτρος ἀκούσας ὅτι ὁ κύριός 
ἐστι, τὸν "ἐπενδύτην } διεζώσατο: Fv γὰρ γυμνός: καὶ ἔβαλεν 
8. οἱ δὲ ἄλλοι μαθηταὶ τῷ πλοιαρίῳ 
ἦλθον: οὗ γὰρ ἦσαν μακρὰν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς 1 ἀπὸ πηχῶν 


side of the boat so as to secure the fish. 
Contrast σύροντες in νετ. 8] for the 
multitude of fishes”; ἀπό often means 
“on account of’ in Dionysius Hal., 
Plutarch, and even in Thucydides and 
Sophocles as shown by Kypke.—Ver. 7. 
This sudden change of fortune John 
at once traced to its only possible 
source, Ὅ Κύριός ἐστι. “Vita quieta 
citius observat res divinas quam activa.” 
Bengel. Σίμων οὖν . . . θάλασσαν. 
The different temperaments of the two 
Apostles as here exhibited have constantly 
been remarked upon; as by Euthymius, 
“John had the keener insight; Peter 
the greater ardour”. Peter τὸν ἐπενδύτην 
διεζώσατο. Some writers identify the 
ἐπενδύτης with the inner garment or 
χίτων, others suppose it was the outer 
garment or ἱμάτιον. And the reason 
assigned, ἦν γὰρ γυμνός, they say, is that 
he had only the χίτων. That one who 
was thus half-dressed might be called 
γυμνός is well known (see Aristoph., 
Clouds, 480); but it was not the outer 
garment round which the belt was girt, 
but the inner. And besides, Peter must 
often have appeared before Jesus in their 
boat expeditions without his upper gar- 
ment, And to put on his Tallith when 
about to plunge into the sea was out of 
the question. He was rowing, then, 
with as little on as possible, probably only 
a subligaculum or loin-cloth, and now 
picks up his ἐπενδύτης, a garment worn 
by fishers (Theophylact), and girds it on, 
and casts himself into the sea.—Ver. 8. 
The rest came in the little boat, οὐ γὰρ 
ἦσαν . . . ἰχθύων. Bengel correctl¥ 
explains the γάρ, ‘‘Celeriter hi quoque 
venire poterant”. They were not far 
from the land, ἀλλ ὡς ἀπὸ πηχῶν 
διακοσίων, ‘about one hundred yards”. 
πηχῶν, says Phrynichus, is δεινῶς ἀνάτ- 
τικον; we must use the form πηχέων. 
Observe the unconscious exactness of the 
eye-witness. For the Hellenistic con- 


6—14. 


διακοσίων, " σύροντες τὸ δίκτυον τῶν ἰχθύων. 
εἰς τὴν γῆν, βλέπουσιν * ἀνθρακιὰν * κειµένην καὶ ὀψάριον ἐπικείμενον, 


A 34 
καὶ ἄρτον. 
, a 2) 
ὀψαρίων ὧν " ἐπιάσατε νῦν. 


x ’ > Af lol iol 1 ὸ 3 6 , {λ 3 4 
τὸ δίκτυον ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, μεστὸν ἰχθύων μεγάλων ἐκατὸν πεντηκοντα- 
τριῶν: καὶ τοσούτων ὄντων, οὐκ ” ἐσχίσθη τὸ δίκτυον. 
, > a ς 32 ~ ~ Ul 
12. Λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 ‘Ingots, Δεῦτε ἀριστήσατε. 
~ a , 2” 
τῶν μαθητῶν ἐξετάσαι αὐτὸν, “Xd τίς ef; 


Σ ἐστιν. 


δίδωσιν αὐτοῖς, καὶ τὸ ὀψάριον ὁμοίως. 
ἐφανερώθη 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς τοῖς μαθηταῖς αὐτοῦ, ἐγερθεὶς ἐκ νεκρῶν. 


Vets την γην in NABCL. 


struction with ἀπό. cf. xi. 18. The 
others came σύροντε . . . ἰχθύων, 
‘*hauling the net of the fishes,” or ‘‘ net- 
ful of the fishes”; genitive of contents, 
like δέπας οἴνου, a cup of wine. It is 
needless, with Liicke, to complete the 
construction with µεστόν, cf. νετ. 11.— 
Ver.9. ‘Qs οὖν ... ἄρτον. ‘When, 
then, they got out upon the land, they 
see a fire (or heap) of coals laid and fish 
laid thereon, and bread”’; or, possibly, 
‘a fish” and ‘‘a loaf,’ but see ver. 13. 
For ἀνθρακιά, see xviii. 18. The dis- 
ciples were evidently surprised at this 
preparation.—Ver. 10. But miracle is 
not gratuitously wrought; indeed, Weiss 
maintains there is neither miracle nor the 
appearance of one in this preparation. 
Accordingly Jesus says, Ἐνέγκατε. .. 
viv. And in compliance avéBy.. . 
δίκτυον. ‘Simon Peter went on board 
and drew the net on shore full of large 
fishes, 153, and though there were so 
many the net was not torn.’”’ Mysteries 
have been found in this number. In 
Hebrew characters Simon Iona is equiva- 
lent to 118 + 35, z.¢., 153. Some of the 
Fathers understood that 100 meant the 
Gentiles, 50 the Jews, 3 the Trinity. 
Jerome cites the authority of naturalists 
to prove that there were exactly 153 
species of fish, and he concludes that the 
universality of the Gospel take was thus 
indicated. Calvin, with his usual robust 
sense, says: ‘“‘quantum ad piscium nu- 
merum spectat, non est sublime aliquid 
in εο quaerendum mysterium”. Peter 
never landed a haul of fish without 
counting them, and John, fisherman as 
he was, could never forget the number of 
his largest takes. The number is given, 
because it was large, and because they 
were all surprised that the net stood the 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


869 


ϱ. Ὡς οὖν ἀπέβησαν r 2 Sam. 
XVii. 13. 
Acts viii 


a a Pek Seies 
1Ο. λέγει αὐτοῖς 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ''᾿Ενέγκατε ἀπὸ Tavs xviii. 18. 


t xix. 28. 


11. ᾿᾽Ανέβη Lipwv Πέτρος, καὶ ” εἵλκυσε u ver. 3. 


ν νετ. 6. 
Ww XIX. 24. 
οὐδεὶς δὲ ἐτόλμα 
εἰδότες ὅτι ὁ κύριός 


13. ἔρχεται οὖν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, καὶ λαμβάνει τὸν ἄρτον καὶ xi. ο. 


14. τοῦτο ἤδη "τρίτον y 2 Cor. xii. 
14; Xiii. . 


strain. The only significance our Lord 
recognises in the fish is that they were 
food for hungry men.—Ver. 12. λέγει 
... ἀρστήσατε, Jesus takes the place 
of host and says, ‘Come, breakfast,’ 
make your morning meal. οὐδεὶς ... 
Κύριός ἐστιν, not one of the disciples 
ventured to interrogate Him; ἐξετάσαι 
is ‘‘to examine by questioning”. Each 
man felt convinced it was the Lord, and 
a new reverence prevented them from 
questioning Him.—Ver. 13. When they 
had gathered round the fire, ἔρχεται 
. . + ὁμοίως. “Jesus approaches and 
takes the bread and gives to them, and 
the fish’? (used here collectively) ‘in 
like manner.” Evidently there was 
something solemn and significant in His 
manner, indicating that they were to con- 
sider Him as the Person who supplied all 
their wants. If they were to be free from 
care as His Apostles, they must trust 
Him to make provision for them, as He 
had this morning done.—Ver. 14. A 
note is added, perhaps indicating no 
more than John’s orderliness of mind, 
explaining that this was the third mani- 
festation given by Jesus to His disciples 
after rising from the dead. For the form 
of expression, τοῦτο ἤδη τρίτον, see 2 
σου μα, 

Vv. 15-18. Fesus evokes from Peter a 
confession of love, and commissiuns him 
as shepherd of His sheep.—Ver. 15. 
“Ore οὖν ἠρίστησαν, ‘ when, then, they 
had broken their fast,’’ a note of time 
essential to the conversation following. 
Peter had manifested the most ardent 
affection, by abandoning on the instant 
the net of fish for which he had been 
toiling all night, and by springing into 
the sea to greet his Lord. But was not 
that a mere impulsive demonstration, 


ΧΧΙ. 


A A 
*  Adyer αὐτῷ, “Nat 


Λέγει αὐτῷ, “Booke τὰ dpvia 


870 KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 
15. “Ore οὖν ἠρίστησαν, λέγει τῷ ἘΣίμωνι Πέτρω & ᾿Ιησοῦς, 
ri. 4a. “* Finwv ᾿Ιωνᾶ,ὶ ἀγαπᾶς µε πλεῖον τούτων ;’ 
αχ.1. Κύριε" σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ ce.” 
Κεν. ν. 6 


”. 


μου. 


Λέγει αὐτῷ, “Nat κύριε" σὺ οἶδας ὅτι φιλῶ σε. 


bls αχ] τα, tcc 
Song i. 8. 


”? 
ὃ Ποίµαινε τὰ πρόβατά ” µου. 


/ 7A , , ες , 3 [ο ~ 2 
16. Λέγει αὐτῷ πάλιν δεύτερον, “ Σίμων ᾽Ιωνᾶ, ἀγαπᾷς µε; 


LZ > 
Λέγει αὐτῷ, 
17. Λέγει αὐτῷ τό τρίτον, “ Σίμων 


1 Better lwavov with NBC*DL. So in 16, 17. 


* rpoBatia in BC; προβατα in NAD. 
αρνια, προβατια, προβατα. 
oviculas meas.” 


‘*the wholesome madness of an hour ”’? 
Therefore He lets Peter settle down, He 
lets him breakfast and then takes him at 
the coolest hour of the day, and, at last 
breaking silence, says, Σίμων lwva [better, 
Ἰωάνου | ὁ ἀγαπᾷς µε πλεῖον (better, πλέον] 
τούτων; “Simon, son of John, lovest 
thou me more than these?” So far as 
grammar goes, this may either mean 
‘* Lovest thou me more than the other 
disciples love me?” or ‘ Lovest thou 
me more than this boat and net and 
your old life?” It may either refer 
to Peter’s saying, ‘‘ Though all should 
forsake Thee, yet will not I,” or to 
his sudden abandonment of the boat 
and fishing gear. If the former were 
intended, the second personal pronoun 
would almost necessarily be expressed ; 

but, as the words stand, the contrast is not 
between ‘you’? and ‘these,” but be- 
tween ‘‘me’’ and ‘these’. Besides, 
would the characteristic tact and delicacy 
of Jesus have allowed Him to put a 
question involving a comparison of Peter 
with his fellow-disciples? The latter 
interpretation, although branded by 
Liicke as ‘eine geistlose lacherliche 
Frage,” commends itself. Difference of 
opinion also exists about the use of 
ἀγαπᾶς and Φφιλῶ, most interpreters 
believing that by the former a love based 
on esteem or judgment is indicated, by 
the latter the affection of the heart. 
The Vulgate distinguishes by using 
“diligis” and “amo”. Trench (Syno- 
nyms, 38) uses this distinction for the 
interpretation of this passage, and main- 
tains that Peter in his reply intentionally 
changes the colder ἀγαπᾶς into the 
warmer @gtAo. It is very doubtful 
whether this is justifiable. The two 
words are used interchangeably to ex- 
press the love of Jesus for John, see xiii. 
23, and xx. 2; also for His love for 
Lazarus, xi. 3, 5, 36. And that the 
distinction cannot be maintained at any 


Some have thought there was a climax, 


‘“Pasce agniculos meos, pasce agnos meos, pasce 


rate in this conversation is obvious from 
ver. 17; for if the words differed in 
meaning, it could not be said that 
“ Peter was grieved because Jesus a 
third time said, φιλεῖς pe”; because 
Jesus had not used these words three 
times. The words seem interchanged for 
euphony, as in Aelian, Var. Hist., ix. 1, 
where Hiero is said to have lived with 
his three brothers, wavy σφόδρα 
ἀγαπήσας αὐτοὺς καὶ im’ αὐτῶν φιληθεὶς 
ἐν τῷ µέρει. In Peter’s answer there is 
no sense of any discrepancy between the 
kind of love demanded and the love felt. 
It comes with a ναί, Κύριε. Why need 
He ask? σὺ οἶδας. . . . In this appeal te 
Christ’s own knowledge there is probably, 
as Weiss suggests, a consciousness of 
his own liability to be deceived, as shown 
in his recent experience.—Ver. το: Το 
this confession, the Lord responds, 
Βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία µου, “' Feed my lambs,”’ 

showing that Jesus could again trust 
him and could leave in his hands those 
whom He loved. ‘Lambs” is used 
instead of ‘‘sheep”’ to bring out more 
strongly thé appeal to care, and the 
consequent complete confidence shown 
in Peter. Aéyer... pov. The second 
inquiry is intended to drive Peter back 
from mere customary or lip-profession to 
the deep-lying affections of his spirit. 
But now no comparison is introduced 
into the question, which might be para- 
phrased: ''Άτε you sure that love and 
nothing but love is the bond between 
you and me?” This test Peter 
stands. He replies as before; and 
again is entrusted with the work in 
which his Lord is chiefly interested, 
Ποίµαινε τὰ πρόβατά pov. No different 
function is intended by ποίµαινε: it re- 
peats in another form the commission 
already given.—Ver. 17. But to him 
who had uttered a threefold denial, op- 
portunity is given of a threefold confes- 
sion, although Peter at first resented the 


15—22 
lava, φιλεῖς µε; ᾿Ελυπήθη 6 
εφιλεῖς pes” 


~ 9 
γινώσκεις ὅτι φιλῶ σε. 


μου. 


καὶ περιεπάτεις ὅπου ἤθελες: ὅταν δὲ γηράσῃς, 
σου, καὶ ἄλλος σε ζώσει, καὶ οἴσει ὅπου οὐ θέλεις. 
εἶπε, σηµαίνων ποίῳ θανάτῳ δοξάσει τὸν Θεόν. 
20. 


” 


λέγει αὐτῷ, “'᾿Ακολούθει por. 


ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΟΝ 


871 


~ , 
Πέτρος, ὅτι εἶπεν αὐτῷ "τὸ τρίτον, c ver 14. 
t 
καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, '' Κύριε, σὺ πάντα oidas: σὺ 
/ οἱ ει [ο] ές / a , , 
Λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, “ Βόσκε τὰ πρόβατά 
18. ἀμὴν duty λέγω σοι, ὅτε ἧς νεώτερος, 4 ἐζώννυες σεαυτὸν, d ver. 7. 


© ἐκτενεῖς τὰς χεῖράς e Ecclus. 
- xv. 16. 

19. Τοῦτο δὲ 

καὶ τοῦτο εἰπὼν 


Ἐπιστραφεὶς δὲ ὁ Πέτρος 


βλέπει τὸν µαθητὴν, ὃν ἠγάπα 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἀκολουθοῦντα, ὃς καὶ 


-- , 4 - A nw AQ 
Σ ἀνέπεσεν ἐν τῷ δείπνω ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος αὐτοῦ καὶ etme, “ Κύριε, Τις f xiii. ιτεῖ: 


ἐστιν 6 παραδιδούς σε; 
a [ή ” 
““Kupie, οὗτος δὲ τί; 
2 


θέλω µένειν ἕως " ἔρχομαι, " 


oh , 
τι προς σε; 


21. Τοῦτον ἰδὼν ὁ Πέτρος λέγει τῷ ᾿Ιησοῦ, gx Tim. iv. 


13. Bur- 


lol 3 a > 
22. Λέγει αὐτῷ 6 ‘Ingots, “Edy αὐτὸν τοπ, 326. 


b Mt, xxvil. 
σὺ ἀκολούθει po.” 4. 7 


1 Se omitted in ABC 33; inserted in NDX. 


reiterated inquiry: Ἐλυπήθη ... He 
was grieved because doubt was implied, 
and he knew he had given cause for 
doubt. His reply is therefore more 
earnest than before, Κύριε . . . φιλῶ σε. 
He is so conscious of deep and abiding 
love that he can appeal to the Lord’s 
omniscience. The σὺ πάντα οἶδας [or 
πάντα σὺ οἶδας with recent editors] τε- 
flects a strong light on the belief which 
had sprung up in the disciples from their 
observation of our Lord. And again he 
is commissioned, or commanded to mani- 
fest his love in the feeding of Christ’s 
sheep. The one qualification for this is 
love to Christ. It is not for want of time πο 
other questions are asked, There was time 
to put this one question three times over ; 
and it was put because love is the one 
essential for the ministry to which Peter 
and the rest are called.—Ver. 18. To 
this command our Lord unexpectedly 
adds a reflection and warning emphasised 
by the usual ἁμὴν ἁμὴῆν λέγω σοι. It 
had been with a touch of pity Jesus had 
seen the impulsive, self-willed Peter gird 
his coat round him and plunge into the 
sea. It suggested to Him the severe 
trials by which this love must be tested, 
and what it would bring him to: ὅτε ἧς 
νεώτερος, “when thou wert younger” 
(the comparative used not in relation to 
the present, but to the γηράσης follow- 
ing) ‘thou girdedst thyself and walkedst 
whither thou wouldest,” 7.e., your own 
will was your law, and you felt power to 
carry it out. The “girding,” though 
suggested by the scene, ver. 7, symbolises 
all vigorous preparation for arduous work. 
ὅταν δὲ γηράσης ... θέλεις. The in- 


terpretation of these words must be 
governed by the succeeding clause, which 
informs us that by them Jesus hinted at 
the nature of Peter’s death. But this 
does not prevent us from finding in them, 
primarily, an intimation of the helpless- 
ness of age, and its passiveness in the 
hands of others, in contrast to the self- 
regulating activity and confidence of 
youth. The language is dictated by the 
contrasted clause, and to find in each 
particular a detail of crucifixion, is to 
force a meaning into the words. ἐκτενεῖς 
τὰς χεῖρας σον is not the stretching out 
of the hands on the cross, but the help- 
less lifting up of the old man’s hands to 
let another gird him. δοξάσει τὸν θεόν. 
‘“‘Magnificus martyrii titulus.” Grotius. 
‘Die conventionelle Sprache der Mar- 
tyrerkirche klingt an in δοξ. τὸν θεόν: 
weil der Zeugentod zu Ehren Gottes 
erlitten wird.” Holtzmann. The expres- 
sion has its root in xii. 23, 28. καὶ τοῦτο 
... pot. It is very tempting to refer 
this to xiii. 36, ἀκολουθήσεις δὲ ὕστερον, 
and probably there is a latent reference 
to this, but in the first instance it is a 
summons to Peter to accompany Jesus 
as He retires from the rest. This is clear 
from what follows.—Ver. 20. Ἔπιστρα- 
gels . . . oe. Peter had already followed 
Jesus some distance, but hearing steps 
behind him he turns and sees ]οῖς 
following. The elaborate description ot 
John in this verse is, perhaps afmose 
unconsciously, introduced to justify his 
following without invitation. On the 
word ἀνέπεσεν, see Origen, in Foan., ii. 
191 (Brooke’s edition).—Ver. 21. Peter, 
however. seeks an explanation, Κύρι: 


872 


KATA ΙΩΑΝΝΗΝ 


ΧΧΙ. 23—25. 


i Dan. i. 13. 23. /Εξηλθεν οὖν ὁ λόγος οὗτος εἰς τοὺς ; ἀδελφοὺς, "OTL 6 μαθητὴς 
t. ΙΧ. 


> 
26. 


ἐκεῖνος οὐκ ἀποθνήσκει '᾿ 
1 Here only 


‘ > 5 Be A yen 3 a 9 > 
και ουκ είπεν αυτω ο Ingous, οτι οὐκ 


in Gospp., ἀποθνήσκει' ἀλλ’, ''᾿Εὰν αὐτὸν θέλω µένειν ἕως ἔρχομαι, τί πρός 


freq. in ae 


k xx, 30. 
1 x Cor. xiv. 


31. Acts TAUTA* καὶ οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀληθής ἐστιν ἡ µαρτυρία αὐτοῦ. 


XXi. 19. 


24. ΟΥΤΟΣ ἐστιν 6 μαθητὴς 6 μαρτυρῶν περὶ τούτων, καὶ γράψας 


25. ἔστι 


Eph. v.33. δὲ καὶ " ἄλλα πολλὰ ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς, ἅτινα ἐὰν γράφηται 


Gen. xiii. 
G52 , 
Chron. iv. βιβλία. 
5 


᾽Αμήν.! 


1 Tisch. omits this verse with 9”. 


χωρησαι of AC?7D χωρησειν is found in BC*. 


.. . τες ‘Lord, and this man, what of 
him ?”’—Ver. 22. To which Jesus replies 
with a shade of rebuke, Ἐὰν . . . µοι. 
Peter, in seeking even to know the future 
of another disciple, was stepping beyond 
his province, τί πρός σε; σὺ ἀκολούθει 
pot. Your business is to follow me, 
not to intermeddle with others. Cf. A 
Kempis’ description of the man who 
‘neglects his duty, musing on all that 
other men are bound to do”. De Imit. 
Christi, ii. 3. Over-anxiety about any 
part of Christ’s Church is to forget that 
there is a chief Shepherd who arranges 
for all. This part of the conversation 


might not have been recorded, but for a’ 


misunderstanding which arose out of it, 
—Ver. 23. ᾿Ἐξῆλθεν . . . πρός σε; 
“There went forth this saying among 
the brethren, that that disciple should 
not die”. John himself, however, has 
no such belief, because he remembers 
with exactness the hypothetical form of 
the Lord’s words, Ἐὰν αὐτὸν θέλω µένειν 
. . . Another instance of the precision 
with which John recalled some, at least, 
of the words of Jesus. 

In ver. 24, the writer of the gospel is 
identified with the disciple whom Jesus 


PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN 


For οσα of AC?D a is read in NBC*X. 


‘kab’ ἓν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸν οἶμαι τὸν κόσμον ™ χωρῆσαι τὰ γραφόμενα 


For 
Άμην is omitted in ABCD 1, 33 


loved, and a certificate of his truth is 
added. The whole verse has a strong 
resemblance to xix. 35, and it seems im- 
possible to say with certainty whether 
they were or were not written by the 
evangelist himself. The οἴδαμεν might 
seem to imply that several united in this 
certificate. But who in John’s old age 
were there, who could so certify the 
truth ofthe gospel? They could have no 
personal, direct knowledge of the facts; 
and could merely affirm the habitual 
truthfulness of John. Cf. too the οἶμαι 
of ver. 25 where a return to the singular 
is made; but this may be because in the 
former clause the writer speaks in the 
name of several others, while in the 
latter he speaks in his own name. Who 
these others were, disciples, Ephesian 
presbyters, friends, Apostles, it is vain to 
conjecture. τούτων and ταῦτα refer to 
the whole gospel, including chap. xxi. Be- 
sides the things narrated ἔστι δὲ... 
᾽Αμήν. The verse re-affirms the state- 
ment of xx. 30, adding a hyperbolical 
estimate of the space required to re- 
count all that Jesus did, if each detail 
αν. separately told, ἐὰν γράφηται καθ’ 
Ve 


BY 


THE ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY PRESS 


πι δι | μην 





ών ν δι ΑΙ δή ης > 





ο rey 


~ 4 


» κ _ e 
Να 
4a? - j 


Cn thd 
a 
rp et 





Princeton Theological Seminary Speer Library 


TN 


DATE DUE 





ο roe 


a 
Due αν : Pana 








| 





μον) ον 
ΜΑΜΑ ΛΜ 
ney ον ν 


ARE Hr ener 
σαι 


1% Labbe 
> ¢* A 4 #) 
2, μη, y η | ὶ 
ΑΡΣΗ ος ΜΑΚΡΗ, ζ . η αἱ | ή 
ολλ ΗΡΙ ΓΗ Ped κὺ Syl * 
Py rere 4” ο ναό Ἡ ή Let ree oh ~~ oe 4 
4219 yoy resi ο ο ο 
; a ee μὴ (ptt 
ην, 
ος earns 1 
Μο ον | 
ος Hf fc oct 
ος. . : Bis 4 ra 
erat ve peas gts ; 
BS ea i 4 
“4 rane ή 
αμ 
αμ αν ΑΡΗ 
κών: Pee paper 
Αν treet μην 


μι 23 ay ze sti 


se 


ves Bag pe 
ΑΗ Kr riot 
‘ hy ee κ.) 


ΜΗ i or 54 
innate 


SAW Ον, 


rarer cite οκ dager ον. ας, 
seer τα με tates eta 


Aes 
jay ate age! he 


i ; αι ae cies er ae 
nee : ΡΜ) aig ο νε 
Ἆ : , Sgt cee ; ' ο κο [ 

end pore ‘ 7 Gi ¥, he ‘ set be ιο κ. 


ec ed μή 
aus soiree: 
ἵ πω. 


ΑΙ 
as οί isi 
η 


η 


νά 
ee 
ο... 


΄ 
jeans ois 
oh | ace! 

a 


ος 
ο οτι 
ty ; peep eet ; 
feet ηἩ 


"Gane Whe yee 

5 ry tt Prey terectrh | 
rte 1ο), Vath tate 

- 


ψ 
vf rare ιν ΦΡ 
epee δώ eT SE 
μμ νἩ 
ate 


(Sethe 


η΄ 
πω 

woe kt 
spon 
. 


te Fide nee 
eu cay ith spt LDR 
δν. port be oto} 
wee 


κο ν nara λος. (ict 
pat ae ς 


: ae re μμ at 
ΜΜ με: 


oe i 
SK 


«ρε ty 
ove naa shew 
od lt 
’ 
ct " TT Gare ets 


aheies any ‘ee ή ή A AY ή 


τή 3 3, it 
Beta ecay a 
Ai Athol πι 


vias niet: 
van ο, 
ας 


, 
ηδη 
πι ΠΧ 


ον 


νο, HAS Μετ