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