THE GOSPEL TO S. LUKE — — — — THE TITLE OF THE GOSPEL The title cannot be any part of the original autograph. It is found in different forms in ancient authorities, the earliest being the simplest: κατὰΛουκᾶν (א B F), εὐαγγέλιονκατὰΛουκᾶν , τὸκατὰΛουκᾶνεὐαγγέλιον or τὸκατὰΛουκᾶνἅγιονεὐαγγέλιον (cursives). The κατά neither affirms nor denies authorship: it implies conformity to a type. But, inasmuch as all four Gospels have the κατά , these uniform titles must be interpreted according to the belief of those who gave the titles, viz. the Christians of the first four centuries; and it was their belief that each Evangelist composed the Gospel which bears his name. Had the κατά meant no more than “ drawn up according to the teaching of,” then this Gospel would have been called κατὰΠαῦλον and the second Gospel would have been called κατὰΠέτρον ; for it was the general tradition that Mark wrote according to the teaching of Peter, and Luke (in a different sense) according to the teaching of Paul. The κατά , however is not a mere substitute for the genitive of authorship, but indicates that the same subject has been treated by others. Thus, ἡπαλαιὰδιαθήκηκατὰτοὺςὲβδομήκοντα points to the existence of other translations, just as ὍμηροςκατὰἈρίσταρκον or κατὰἈριστοφάνην points to the existence of other editions. That the κατά does not exclude authorship is shown by such expressions as ἡκατὰΜωϋσέαπεντάτευχος (Epiphanius) and ἡκαθ ʼ Ἠρόδοτονἱστορια (Diodorus): comp. ἐντοῖςὑπομνηματισμοῖςτοῖςκατὰτὸνΝεεμίαν (2 Mal 2:13). Strictly speaking, there is only one Gospel, εὐαγγέλιονΘεοῦ , the Gospel of God concerning His Son (Romans 1:1); but it has been given to us in four shapes, εὐαγγέλιοντετράμορφον (Iren. Hæ r. iii. 11. 8), and the κατά indicates the shape in which the writer named composed it. 1:1-4. THE OR PREFACE The classical style of this opening, and its similarity to the. prefaces of Herodotus, Thucydides, and Polybius, hardly amount to proof that Lk. was well read in classical literature, and consciously imitated Greek historians; but there is nothing improbable in this supposition. Among the words which are classical rather than biblical should be noticed ἐπειδήπερ , ἐπιχειρεῖν , ἀνατάσσεσθαι , διήγησις , καθεξῆς . The construction also is classical, and in no way Hebraistic. We have clauses idiomatically interlaced, not simply co-ordinated. The modest position claimed by the writer is evidence of his honesty. A forger would have claimed to be an eye-witness, and would have made no apology for writing. Ewald remarks that “ in its utter simplicity, modesty, and brevity, it is the model of a preface to an historical work.” Its grammatical construction should be compared with that of the preface to the synodical epistle in Acts 15:24, Acts 15:25: Ἐπειδὴἠκούσαμεν … ἔδοξενἡμῖν . This prologue contains all that we really know respecting the composition of early narratives of the life of Christ, and it is the test by which theories as to the origin of our Gospels must be judged. No hypothesis is likely to be right which does not harmonize with what is told us here. Moreover, it shows that an inspired writer felt that he was bound to use research and care in order to secure accuracy. 1. Ἐπειδήπερ . A stately compound, suitable for a solemn opening: freq. in class. Grk., but not found in LXX, or elsewhere in N.T. Quoniam quidem, “ For as much as,” Weil denn einmal. πολλοί . The context seems to imply that these, like Lk., were not eye-witnesses. That at once would exclude Mt., whose Gospel Lk. does not appear to have known. It is doubtful whether Mk. is included in the πλλοί . The writers of extant apocryphal gospels cannot be meant, for these are all of later origin. Probably all the documents here alluded to were driven out of existence by the manifest superiority of the four Canonical Gospels. The ἐπεχείρησαν cannot imply censure, as some of the Fathers thought, for Lk. brackets himself with these writers ; what they attempted he may attempt. The word occurs 2 Mac. 2:29, Malachi 2:7:19; Acts 9:29, Acts 9:19:13; and is freq. in class. Grk. in the sense of “ put the hand to, take in hand, attempt.” The notion of unlawful or unsuccessful attempting is sometimes implied by the context: it is not contained in the word. Luther renders unter wunden haben, “ have ventured.” Lk. must have regarded these attempts as insufficient, or he would not have added another. Meyer quotes Ulpian, p. 159 (in Valckenaer), ἐπειδήπερπερὶτούτονπολλοὶἐπεχείρησανἀπολογήσασθαι . It is doubtful whether ἐπιχειρ . necessarily implies a great undertaking. ἀνατάξασθαιδιήγησιν . “ To draw up again in order a narrative” ; i.e. to arrange afresh so as to show the sequence of events. The verb is a rare one, and occurs elsewhere only Plut. Moral p. 969 C, De sollert. animal. xii. (Reiske, x. p. 36), in the sense of “ practise, go over again in order,” Iren. iii. 21 2, and as v.l. Ecclesiastes 2:20. The subst. implies something more than mere notes or anecdotes; “ a leading through to the end” (durchfü hren),“ a narrative” (Ecclus. 6:35, 9:15 ; 2 Mac. 2:32, Malachi 2:6:17 ; Plat. Rep. 392 D; Arist. Rhet. iii. 16, 1). Versions vary greatly: ordinare narrationem (Latt.), componere narrationem (Beza), stellen die Rede (Luth.), “ ordeyne the telling” (Wic.), “ compyle a treates” (Tyn.), “ set forth the words” (Cov.), “ set forth the declaration” (Cran.), “ write the historie” (Gen.), “ compile a narration” (Rhem.), “ set forth in order a declaration” (AV.), “ draw up a narrative” (RV.), composer une narration suivie (Godet), coordonner en corps de ré cit (Lasserre), “ restore from memory a narrative” (Blass). τῶνπεπληροφορημένων . “ Of the things which have been carried through to the end, of the matters which have been accomplished, fully established.” Here again English Versions differ much; but “ surely known” (Tyn.), “ surely to be believed” (Cran.), “ surely believed” (AV.), cannot be justified. The verb when used of persons may mean “ persuade fully, convince,” and in pass. “ be fully persuaded” (Romans 4:21, Romans 14:5) ; but of things it means “ fulfil” (2 Timothy 4:5, 2 Timothy 4:17). Here we may render “ accomplished.” Others less well render “ fully proved.” See Lightfoot on Colossians 4:12. The ἐνἡμῖν probably means “ among us Christians.” Christendom is the sphere in which these facts have had their full accomplishment. The ἡμῖν in ver. 2 shows that contemporaries are not meant. If these things were handed down to Lk., then he was not contemporary with them. The verse is evidence that the accomplished facts were already fully established and widely known, for they had already been narrated by many. See Westcott, Intr. to Gosp. p. 190, 7th ed. 2. καθὼςπαρέδοσανἡμῖν . “ Even as they delivered them to us.” The difference between ὡς , “ as,” and καθώς , “ just as,” should be marked in translation : the correspondence was exact. Lk. implies that he himself was among those who received the tradition. Like the πολλοί , he can only arrange afresh what has been handed down, working at second hand, not as an eye-witness. He gives no hint as to whether the facts were handed down orally or in writing. The difference between the πολλοί and these αὐτόπται is not that the πολλοί wrote their narratives while the αὐτόπται did not, but that the αὐτόπται were primary authorities, which the πολλοί were not. ὑηρέταιγενόμενοιτοῦλόγου . They not only had personal knowledge of the facts they also had practical experience of the effects. They had preached and taught, and had thus learned what elements in the Gospel were of most efficacy for the winning and saving of souls. That τοῦλόγου belongs to ὑπηρέται only, not to αὐτόπται and means “ the doctrine,” i.e. the Gospel (Acts 6:4, Acts 8:4, Acts 14:25, Acts 16:6, Acts 17:11), is manifest from the context. Origen and Athanasius are wrong in making τοῦλόγου mean the personal Word, the Son of God, a use which is peculiar to Jn. The ἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆς refers to the beginning of Christ’ s ministry. (John 15:27, John 16:4). For ὑπηρέτης see on 4:20 and comp. Acts 13:5. 3. ἔδοξεκἀμοί . This is the main sentence, the apodosis of ἐπειδήπερπολλοὶἐπεχείρησαν . It neither implies nor excludes inspiration: the ἔδοξε may or may not have been inspired. The wish to include inspiration caused the addition in some Latin MSS. of et spiritui sancto (Acts 15:28), which makes what follows to be incongruous. With ἔδοξε comp. the Muratorian Fragment: Lucas iste medicus … nomine suo ex opinione conscripsit— Dominum tamen nec ipse vidit in carne— et idem, prout assequi potuit, ita et a nativitate Joannis incepit dicere. The κἀμοί shows that Lk. does not blame the πολλοί : he desires to imitate and supplement them. It is their attempts that encourage him to write. What they have done he may do, and perhaps he may be able to improve upon their work. This is his first reason for writing a narrative. See Blass, NT. Gram. p. 274. παρηκολουθηκότι . This is his second reason for writing, making the argument á fortiori. He has had special advantages and qualifications; and therefore what was allowed to others may be still more allowed to him. These qualifications are fourfold, and are told off with precision. In the literal sense of “ following a person closely so as to be always beside him,” παρακολουθεῖν does not occur in N.T. Here it does not mean that Lk. was contemporaneous with the events, but that he had brought himself abreast of them by careful investigation. Comp. the famous passage in Dem. De Cor. cap. liii. p. 285 (344), παρηκολουθηκότατοῖςπράγμασινἐξἀρχῆς : also De Fal. Leg. p. 423. ἄνωθεν . This is the first of the four qualifications: he has gone back to the very beginning, viz. the promise of the birth of the Forerunner. “ From the first” is the meaning of ἄνωθεν here, not “ thoroughly,” radicitus, as in Acts 26:5, which would make ἄνωθεν almost the same as πᾶσιν . Vulg. has a principio, and d has desusum (comp. the French dessus). It is the πᾶσιν which implies thoroughness; and this is the second point. He has begun at the beginning, and he has investigated everything. The Syriac makes πᾶσιν masc., but there is little doubt that it is neut., and refers to πραγμάτων in ver. 1. ἀκριβῶς . This is the third point. He has done all this “ accurately.” There is no idle boast in any one of the three points. No other Gospel gives us this early history about the Baptist and the Christ. No other is throughout so full, for of 170 sections contained in the synoptic narrative 48 are peculiar to Lk. And, in spite of the severest scrutiny, his accuracy can very rarely be impugned. We cannot be sure whether he means to imply that ἀκριβῶς was not true of the πολλοί , but we may be sure that none of them could claim all three of these points. In any case we have an inspired historian telling us in his inspired writings that he is giving us the results of careful investigation. From this it seems to follow that an inspired historian may fail in accuracy if his investigation is defective. καθεξῆς . This is the fourth point, resulting from the other three. He does not propose to give a mere collection of anecdotes and detached sayings, but an orderly narrative systematically arranged. Chronological order is not necessarily implied in καθεξῆς , but merely arrangement of some kind. Nevertheless, he probably has chronological order chiefly in view. In N.T. the word is peculiar to Lk. (8:1; Acts 3:24, Acts 11:4, Acts 18:23), as is also the more classical ἑξῆς (7:11, 9:37, etc.); but ἐφεξῆς does not occur. κράτιστεΘεόφιλε . The epithet κράτιστος , often given to persons of rank (Acts 23:26, Acts 24:3, Acts 26:25), is strongly in favour of the view that Theophilus was a real person. The name Theophilus was common both among Jews (= Jedidiah) and among Gentiles. But it was a name likely to be used to represent any pious reader. See Lft. on “ Acts,” D. B.2 pp. 25, 26. The word κράτιστος occurs in N.T. only here and in the Acts, where it is evidently a purely official epithet, for the persons to whom it is applied are of bad character. See Deissmann, Bibelstudien, p. 19 for the name. 4. ἴναἐπιγνῷςπερὶὧνκατηχήθηςλόγωντὴνἀσφάλειαν . “ In order that thou mightest fully know the certainty concerning the words wherein thou wast instructed.” The λόγοι are not the πράγματα or historic facts, but the details of the λόγος or Gospel (ver. 2), which “ ministers of the word” had communicated to Theophilus. The compound ἐπιγνῷς indicates additional and more thorough knowledge. It is very freq. in Lk. and Paul: see esp. Romans 1:28, Romans 1:32 ; 1 Corinthians 13:12 ; Lft. on Colossians 1:9; Trench, Syn. lxxv. In N.T. κατηχεῖν , “ to sound down into the ears, teach orally,” is found only in Lk. and Paul. The position of τὴνἀσφάλειαν gives it solemn emphasis. Theophilus shall know that the faith which he has embraced has an impregnable historical foundation. Hastings, D.C.G. ii. p. 726. The idiomatic attraction, περὶὧνκατηχήθηςλόγων , is best resolved into περὶτῶνλόγωνοὓςκατηχήθης , not περὶτῶνλόγωνπερὶὧνκατηχήθης . Only of persons does περίτινος stand after κατηχεῖν (Acts 21:21, Acts 21:24): of things we have the acc. (Acts 18:25 ; Galatians 6:6). These attractions are very freq. in Lk. See Blass, Gr. p. 170. On the superficial resemblance between this preface and Jos. Con. Apion. i. 9, 10, see Godet, i. pp. 92, 93, 3è me ed. 1888. The resemblance hardly amounts to remarkable coincidence, and such similarities are common in literature. It is more interesting to compare this preface with that of the medical writer Dioscorides. The opening words of Dioscorides’ treatise, περὶὄληςἰατρικῆς , run thus: Πολλῶνοὐμόνονἀρχαίων , ἀλλὰκαὶνέωνσυνταξαμένωνπερὶτῆςτῶνφαρμάκωνσκευασίαςτεκαὶδυνάμεωςκαὶδοκιμασίας , φίλτατεἈρεῖε , πειράσομαίσοιπαραστῆσαιμὴκενὴνμηδὲἄλογονὁρμὴνἐσχηκέναιπρὸςτήνδετὴνπραγματείαν . The date of Dioscorides Pedacius is uncertain; but, as Pliny does not mention him, he is commonly assigned to the first or second century a.d. He is said to have been a native of Anazarbus in Cilicia, about fifty miles from Tarsus; and in that case he would almost certainly obtain his medical knowledge in the great school at Tarsus. That he and S. Luke may have been there at the same time with S. Paul, seems to be a not impossible conjecture. The treatise περὶἀρχαίηςἰητρικῆς , commonly attributed to Hippocrates (c. 460-350 b.c.), begins; Ὁκόσοιἐπεχείρησανπερὶἰητρικῆςλέγεινἢγράφειν , κ .τ .λ . 1:5-2:52. THE GOSPEL OF THE INFANCY These chapters have often been attacked as unhistorical. That Marcion omitted them from his mutilated edition of this Gospel is of no moment. He did not do so upon critical grounds, but because their contents did not harmonize with his doctrine. It is more to the point to urge that these early narratives lack apostolic authority; that they cover ground which popular imagination, in the absence of history, would be sure to fill; that they abound in angelic appearances and other marvels; that their form is often highly poetical; and that it is sometimes difficult to reconcile them with the narrative of Mt. or with known facts of history. To this it may be replied that reserve would keep Christ’ s Mother from making known these details at first. Even Apostles may have been ignorant of them, or unwilling to make them known until the comparatively late period at which Lk. wrote. The dignity, beauty, and spirituality of these narratives is strong evidence of their authenticity, especially when contrasted with the silly, grotesque, and even immoral details in the apocryphal gospels. They abound in historic features, and are eminently true to life. Their independence of Mt. is evident, and both accounts bear the stamp of truthfulness, which is not destroyed by possible discrepancies in a few minor points. That Lk. is ever at variance with other historians, has still to be proved; and the merit of greater accuracy may still be with him, even if such variance exists. This Gospel of the Infancy is made up of seven narratives, in two parallel groups of three, followed by a supplement, which connects these two groups with the main body of the Gospel. I. 1. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner (5-25); 2. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour (26-38); 3. The Visit of the Mother of the Saviour to the Mother of the Forerunner (39-56). II. 4. The Birth of the Forerunner (57-80) ; 5. The Birth of the Saviour (2:1-20); 6. The Circumcision and Presentation of the Saviour (2:21-40). III. 7. The Boyhood of the Saviour (2:41-52). On the two accounts of our Lord’ s infancy see Resch, Das Kindheitsevangelium, pp. 10 ff 1897; Gore, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation, pp. 12 ff.: Murray, 1895. 1:5-25. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Forerunner. “ When John the Baptist appeared, not the oldest man in Palestine could remember to have spoken even in his earliest childhood with any man who had seen a prophet. … In these circumstances it was an occurrence of the first magnitude, more important far than war or revolution, when a new prophet actually appeared” (Ecce Homo, ch. 1.). The miracles recorded are in keeping with this. God was making a new departure in dealing with His people. We need not, therefore, be startled if a highly exceptional situation is accompanied by highly exceptional facts. After more than three centuries of silence, Jehovah again speaks by prophecies and signs to Israel. But there is no violent rupture with the past in making this new departure. The announcement of the rise of a new Prophet is made in the temple at Jerusalem, to a priest of the old covenant, who is to be the Prophet’ s father. It is strong evidence of the historic truth of the narrative that no miracles are prophesied of the new Prophet, and that after his appearance his disciples attribute none to him. 5. Ἐγένετοἐνταῖςἡμέραις . The elegant idiomatic Greek of the preface comes abruptly to an end. Although the marks of Lk.’ s style are as abundant here as in any part of the Gospel, yet the form of the narrative is strongly Hebraistic; so much so that one may be confident that he is translating from an Aramaic document These first two chapters seem to consist of a series of such documents, each with a distinct conclusion (1:80, 2:40, 2:52). If they are historical, the Virgin Mary must have been the source of much that is contained in these first two chapters; and she may have been the writer of documents used by Lk. In any case, we have here the earliest documentary evidence respecting the origins of Christianity which has come down to us,— evidence which may justly be called contemporary. Both ἐγένετο and ἐνταῖςἡμέραις are Hebraistic (see on ver. 39); but there is no need to understand ἦν or any other verb after ἐγένετο , “ It came to pass that there was.” Rather, “ There arose, came into notice,” or simply “ There was.” See on 4:36, and comp. Mark 1:4; John 1:6. ἩρῴδουβασιλέωςτῆςἸουδαίας . Herod “ the Great,” a title not given to him by his contemporaries, who during his last years suffered greatly from his cruelty. It is in these last years that the narrative of Lk. begins. The Herods were Idumæ ans by birth,1 though Jews by religion, and were dependent upon the Romans for their sovereignty. As Tacitus says: Regnum ab Antonio Herodi datum victor Augustus auxit (Hist. v. 9. 3). The name Ἡρῴδης is contracted from Ἡρωίδης , and should have iota subscript, which is well supported by early inscriptions. Later inscriptions and coins omit the iota. In the Codex Ambrosianus of Josephus the name is written with iota adscript, Ηρωιδης (Ant. xi-xx.). See the numerous instances from inscriptions cited by Schü rer in the Theol. Litztg. 1892, No. 21, col. 516. The τοῦ inserted before βασιλέως in A and other texts is in accordance with classical usage. But in LXX the art. is commonly omitted in such cases, because in Hebrew, as in English, “ Saul, king of Israel,” “ George, king of England,” is the common idiom (Genesis 14:1, Genesis 14:2, Genesis 14:18, Genesis 14:20:2, 26:1, etc. etc.). See Simcox, Lang. of N. T. p. 47. βασιλέωςτῆςἸουδαίας . This was the title conferred on him by the Senate at the request of Antony, Messala, and Atratinus (Jos. Ant. xiv. 14. 4). Judæ a here may mean “ the land of the Jews, Palestine” (7:17, 23:5 ; Acts 2:9, Acts 2:10:37, Acts 2:11:1, Acts 2:29) Besides Judæ a in the narrower sense, Herod’ s dominions included Samaria, Galilee, a great deal of Peræ a, and Cœ le-Syria. For the abundant literature on the Herods see D. B.2 i. p. 1341; Herzog, Pro_2 vi. p. 47 ; Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. i. I, p. 400. ἱερεύςτιςὀνόματιΖαχαρίας . In the Protevangelium of James (viii.), Zacharias is called high priest; and this has been adopted by later writers, who have supposed that the incident narrated by Lk. took place on the Day of Atonement in the Holy of Holies. But the high priest would not have been called ἱερεύςτις , and it could not have been by lot that he offered incense on the Day of Atonement. Priestly descent was much esteemed. The name means “ Remembered by Jehovah.” For ὀνόματία see on 5:27. ἐξἐφημερίαςἈβιά . The word ἐφημερία has two meanings: 1. “ service for a term of days” (Nehemiah 13:30; 1 Chronicles 25:8; 2 Chronicles 13:10); 2. “ a course of priests who were on duty for a term of days,” viz. for a week (1 Chronicles 23:6, 1 Chronicles 23:28:13; 1Ch_1 Esdr. 1:2, 15). These courses were also called διαιρέσεις , and by Josephus πατριαί and ἐφημερίδες (Ant. vii. 14. 7; Vita, i.). Abijah was descended from Eleazar, and gave his name to the eighth of the twenty-four courses into which David divided the priests (1 Chronicles 24:10; 2 Chronicles 8:14). Of these twenty-four only the courses of Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, and Harim returned from captivity (Ezra 2:36-39); but these four were divided again into twenty four with the old names. So that Zacharias did not belong to the original course of Abijah, for that did not return from exile. Each course was on duty twice during the year; but we know far too little about the details of the arrangement to derive any sure chronology from the statements made by Lk. See on 2:7. Wieseler places the vision of Zacharias early in October A.U.C. 748 or b.c. 6 (Chron. Syn. ii. 2, Eng. tr. p. 123). With this result Edersheim agrees (L. &T. 1. p. 135), as also does Andrews (L. of our Lord, p. 52, ed. 1892). Lewin prefers May 16th, b.c. 7 (Fasti Sacri, 836). Caspari is for July 18th, b.c. 3, but remarks “ how little reliance is to be placed upon conclusions of this kind” (Chron. Einl. § 42, Eng. tr. p. 57). For the courses of priests, see Herzog, Pro_2 art. Priestertum im A.T. ; Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. ii. 1, pp. 216-220. γυνὴαὐτῷἐκτῶνθυγατέρωνἈαρών . “ He had a wife,” not “ his wife was” (AV.). Lk. follows LXX in omitting the art. with the gen. after θυγάτηρ : comp. 13:16 and the quotations Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15, and contrast Matthew 14:6. To be a priest and married to a priest’ s daughter was a double distinction. It was a common summary of an excellent woman, “ She deserves to marry a priest.” In the fullest sense John was of priestly birth. See Wetst.: Sacrosancta præ cursoris nobilitas non solum a parentibus, sed etiam a progenitoribus gloriosa descendit (Bede). Aaron’ s wife was Elisabeth = Elisheba = “ God is my oath.” 6. δίκαιοι . Once a term of high praise, and meaning righteousness in the fullest sense (Ezekiel 18:5, Ezekiel 18:9, Ezekiel 18:11, Ezekiel 18:19, Ezekiel 18:20, Ezekiel 18:22, Ezekiel 18:24, Ezekiel 18:26); but it had come to mean little more than careful observance of legal duties. The addition of the Hebraistic ἐναντίοντοῦΘεοῦ (Acts 8:21; Genesis 6:8, Genesis 6:11, Genesis 6:13, Genesis 6:7:1, Genesis 6:10:9) gives δίκαιοι its full meaning: Zacharias and Elisabeth were saints of the O.T. type. Symeon is called δίκαιος (2:25), and Joseph (Matthew 1:19). Comp. δίκαιονεἶναίμ ʼ ὁνόμοςἡφύσιςθ ʼ ἅμαπαρεῖχετῷΘεῷ (Eur. Ion. 643). The Gospel was to restore to δίκαιος its original spiritual meaning. See detached note on the word δίκαιος and its cognates, Romans 1:17. For ἀμφότεροι see on 5:7. πορευόμενοιἐνπάσαιςταῖςἐντολαῖςκαὶδικαιώμασιντ . κ . Another Hebraism (Deuteronomy 28:9; 1 Samuel 8:3, 1 Samuel 8:5; 1 Kings 3:14, etc.). The distinction often drawn, that ἐντολαί are moral, while δικαιώματα are ceremonial, is baseless; the difference is, that the latter is the vaguer term. Here, although they differ in gender, they have only one article and adjective, because they are so similar in meaning. Comp. Colossians 2:22 ; Revelation 5:12; and see Win. xix. 3 c, p. 157. The two words are found combined Genesis 26:5 and Deuteronomy 4:40. For δικαιώματα , “ things declared right, ordinances,” comp. Romans 2:26 and Hebrews 9:1, and see note in Sp. Comm. on 1 Corinthians 5:6 as to the force of the termination -μα . The genitive here, as in Romans 2:26 and 8:4, expresses the authority from which the ordinance springs. The ἄμεμπτοι anticipates what follows, and, of course, does not mean that they were sinless. No one is sinless; but the conduct of some is free from reproach. Comp. Philippians 3:6. See the quotation Eus. H.E. v. I.9. 7. καὶοὐκἦναὐτοῖςτέκνον . This calamity is grievous to all Orientals, and specially grievous to Jews, each of whom is ambitious of being among the progenitors of the Messiah. It was commonly believed to be a punishment for sin (Leviticus 20:20, Leviticus 20:21; Jeremiah 22:30). The story of Glaucus, who tempted the oracle at Delphi, and “ at the present time has not a single descendant” (Hdt. vi.86, 16), indicates a similar belief among the Greeks. Zacharias and Elisabeth had the sorrow of being childless, as Anna of being husbandless, and all three had their consolation. Comp. the births of Samson and Samuel, both of whom were Nazirites, and of Isaac. καθότι . Peculiar to Lk. “ Because that” (19:9; Acts 2:24, Acts 17:31), or “ according as” (Acts 2:45, Acts 4:35). In class. Grk. editors commonly write καθ ʼ ὅτι . The clause καὶἀμφότεροι … ἦσαν does not depend upon καθότι , which would be illogical, but is a separate statement. Their age would not explain why they had had no children, but why they were not likely to have any. “ They had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren; and they were both advanced in years,” so that they had no hope of children. προβεβηκότεςἐνταῖςἡμέραιςαὐτῶν . Hebraistic: in class. Grk we should rather have had τῇἡλικίᾳ . In LXX we have προβεβ . ἡμέραις , or ἡμερῶν , or τῶνἡμερῶν (1 Kings 1:1; Genesis 24:1; Joshua 13:1). Levites were superannuated at about sixty, but a priest served as long as he was able. 8. Ἐγένετο … ἔλαχε . On the various constructions with ἐγένετο in Lk. see detached note at the end of this chapter; and on ἐντῷἱερατεύειναὐτόν , “ while he was officiating as priest,” which is another very favourite construction with Lk., see on 3:21. The verb ἱερατεύειν is freq. in LXX, but occurs nowhere else in N.T. It is not found earlier than LXX, but is not rare in later Greek. See Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 119. The phrase κατὰτὸἔθος is peculiar to Lk. in N. T. (2:42, 22:39), but occurs in Theod. Bel 15; and ἔθος occurs ten times in his writings, and only twice elsewhere (John 19:40 ; Hebrews 10:25). Comp. κατὰτὸεἰθισμένον (2:27) and κατὰτὸεἰωθός (4:16; Acts 27:2). It is for the sake of those who were unfamiliar with the usages of the temple that he says that it was “ according to the custom of the priest service” that it was decided by lot which priest should offer incense. To take κατὰτὸἔθοςτῆςἱερατίας with what precedes robs it of all point; it is tautology to say that he was officiating as priest according to the custom of the priest’ s service. But the number of cases in which Lk. has a clause or word which is grammatically amphibolous is very large; vv. 25, 27, 2:22, where see note. The word ἱερατεία occurs in N.T. only here and Hebrews 7:5. “ In relation to ἱερωσύνη (Hebrews 7:11, Hebrews 7:12, Hebrews 7:24) it expresses the actual service of the priests, and not the office of priesthood” (Wsctt. on Hebrews 7:5). ἔλαχετοῦθυμιᾶσαι . The casting of lots took place twice a day, at the morning and the evening offering of incense. In the morning the drawing lots for offering the incense was the third and chief of a series of drawings, four in all; in the evening it was the only one. We do not know whether this was morning or evening. No priest might have this honour twice; and the number of priests was so great that many never offered the incense. The fortunate lot was a ψῆφοςλευκή , to which there is a possible reference Revelation 2:17. The priest who obtained it chose two others to help him; but, when they had done their part, they retired, leaving him alone in the Holy Place. For the very elaborate details see Edersh. The Temple, its Ministry and Services, pp. 129-142. The gen. τοῦθυμιᾶσαι is probably governed by ἔλαχε , which in class. Grk. commonly has a gen. when it means “ became possessed of,” and an acc. when it means “ obtained by lot” (Acts 1:17 ; comp. 2 Peter 1:1). In 1 Samuel 14:47 we have Σαοὺλἔλαχε [al. l. κατακληροῦται ] τοῦβασιλεύεινἐπὶἸσραήλ . The εἰσελθὼνεἰςτὸνναόν must be taken with θυμιᾶσαι , not with ἔλαχε : “ he obtained by lot to go in and burn incense,” not “ after entering into the ναός he obtained by lot to burn incense.” The lots were cast before he entered the Holy Place, which was the front part of the ναός . 10. πᾶντὸπλῆθοςἦντοῦλαοῦπροσευχόμενον . Cod. Am. has the same order, omnis multitudo erat populi orans. The position of τοῦλαοῦ is against taking ἦν with προσευχόμενον as the analytical tense instead of the imperf., a constr. of which Lk. is very fond (vv. 20, 21, 22, 2:33, 4:17, 31. 38, 44, etc.); ἦν may mean “ was there,” or “ there was,” and τοῦλαοῦ be epexegetic of τὸπλῆθος . But certainty is unattainable and unimportant. We need not infer from πᾶντὸπλῆθος that there was a great multitude. As compared with the solitary priest in the ναός , all the worshippers outside were a πλῆθος . The word is a favourite one with Lk., who uses it twenty-five times against seven in the rest of N.T. It is remarkable that prayer is not expressly mentioned in the Law as part of public worship, except in connexion with the offering of the first-fruits (Deuteronomy 26:15). But comp. 1 Kings 8:33-48, 2 Chronicles 6:14-42; Isaiah 56:7. The people were inside the ἱερόν , although outside the ναός , and the other priests would be between them and the ναός . Syr-Sin. omits ἔξω . 11. ὤφθηδὲαὐτῷἄγγελοςΚυρίου . It was the most solemn moment of his life, when he stood alone in that sacred spot to offer the pure and ideal symbol of the imperfect prayer which he and those outside were offering. The unique circumstances contributed to make him conscious of that unseen world which is around all of us (2 Kings 6:17; comp. Luke 15:7, Luke 15:10). For ὤφθη see on 22:43 ; and for an analysis of the psychological facts see Lange, L. of Christ, bk. ii. pt. ii. § 2 ; Eng. tr. 1:264. But must we not choose between admitting an objective appearance and rejecting the whole as a myth? To explain it as a “ false perception” or optical delusion, i.e. a purely subjective result of psychological causes, seems to be not admissible. In that case Zacharias, like Lord Herbert of Cherbury,1 would have accepted the sign which he supposed that he had received. To believe in the reality of a subjective appearance and not believe its testimony is a contradiction. Moreover, the psychological explanation leaves the dumbness to be explained. Again, we have similar appearances ver. 26, 2:9, 13, 22:43, 24:4. Can we accept here an explanation which is very difficult (2:9, 13) or inadmissible (24:4) elsewhere? Are all these cases of false perception? See Paley, Evidences of Christianity, prop. 2Ch_1.; Mill, Pantheistic Principles, 2:1, 4, p. 123, 2nd ed. 1861; Edersh. L. &T. 1. p. 142, 2. p. 751. ἐκδεξιῶντοῦθυσιαστηρίου . The place of honour. It was “ the right side of the altar,” not of Zacharias, who was facing it. Comp. Acts 7:55, Acts 7:56. The right side was the south side, and the Angel would be between the altar and the golden candlestick. On the left, or north side, of the altar was the table with the shewbread. 12. φόβοςἐπέπεσενἐπ ʼ αὐτόν . Fear is natural when man becomes suddenly conscious of contact with the unseen: Humanæ fragilitalis est spiritualis creaturæ visione turbari (Bede). Comp. 2:9, 9:34; Judges 6:22, Judges 6:13:22; Job 4:15, etc. For the phrase comp. Acts 19:17; Exodus 15:16; Judith 15:2. In class. Grk. the dat. is more usual: Thuc. iii. 87, 1; Xen. Anab. ii:2:19; Eur. Andr. 1042. 13. εἶπενδὲπρὸςαὐτόν . Both εἶπενδέ and εἶπενπρός are very freq. in Lk., who prefers εἶπενδέ to καὶεἶπεν even at the beginning of narratives, and uses πρὸςαὐτόν , αὐτούς , κ .τ .λ . in preference to αὐτῷ , αὐτοῖς , κ .τ .λ ., after verbs of speaking, answering, etc., to an extent which is quite remarkable (vv. 18, 19, 34, 55, 61, 73, 2:15, 18, 20, 34, 48, 49, etc. etc.). This πρός is so strong a mark of his style that it should be distinguished in translation: εἶπενπρὸςαὐτόν , “ He said unto him,” and εἶπεναὐτῷ , “ He said to him.” But not even RV. does this. See pp. 62, 63. Μὴφοβοῦ . This gracious charge is specially common in Lk. (ver. 30, 2:10, 8:50, 12:4, 7, 32; Acts 28:9, Acts 27:24). Bengel says of it, Primum alloquium coeleste in aurora N.T. per Lucam amæ nissime descripta. Comp. Genesis 15:1; Joshua 8:1; Isaiah 43:1, Isaiah 43:5, 44:2 ; Jeremiah 46:27, Jeremiah 46:28; Daniel 10:12. διότι . “ Because,” as generally in N.T. Comp. 2:7, 21:28. It never means “ therefore” ; not Romans 1:19 nor 1 Thessalonians 2:18. εἰσηκούσθηἡδέησίςσου . “ Thy supplication was heard,” at the time when it was offered. The pass. is used both of the petition (Acts 10:31; Ecclus. 51:11) and of the petitioner (Matthew 6:7 ; Hebrews 5:7). The word δέησις implies personal need; it is a “ special petition for the supply of want” (Lft. on Philippians 4:6 ; Trench, Syn. li.). Unlike προσευχή , it may be used of petitions to men. The word favours, but by no means proves, the view that the prayer of Zacharias was for a son. And the context at first seems to confirm this. But would Zacharias have made his private wishes the main subject of his prayer at so unique an opportunity? Would he have prayed for what he regarded as impossible? As Bede remarks, Nemo orat quod se accepturum desperat. Having prayed for it as possible, would he have refused to believe an Angel who told him that the petition was granted? It is much more probable that he and the people were praying for the redemption of Israel,— for the coming of the Messiah’ s kingdom; and it is this supplication which was heard. To make δέησις refer to habitual supplication, and not to the prayer offered with the incense, seems unnatural. What Didon points out (p. 298) in quite a different connexion seems to have point here. It was an axiom with the Rabbins that a prayer in which there was no mention of the kingdom of God was no prayer at all (Babyl., Beracoth, fol. 40, 2) ; and in the ritual of the temple the response of the people to the prayers of the priests was, “ Blessed be the name of the glory of the Kingdom of God for ever” (Babyl., Taanith, fol. 16, 2): Jé sus Christ, ed. 1891. See also Edersh. The Temple, p. 127. καὶἡγυνήσουἘλεισάβετγεννήσειυἱόνσοι . Not ἡγυνὴγάρ . “ For thy wife shall bear thee a son” would have made it clear that the son was the answer to the δέησις . But “ and thy wife shall bear thee a son” may mean that this is an additional boon, which (as ver. 17 shows) is to prepare the way for the blessing prayed for and granted. Thus, like Solomon, Zacharias receives the higher blessing for which he prayed, and also the lower blessing for which he did not pray. Γεννάω is generally used of the father (Matthew 1:1-16 ; Acts 7:8, Acts 7:29; Genesis 5:3-30, Genesis 11:10-28, etc.) ; but sometimes of the mother (ver. 57, 23:29; John 16:21). The best authorities give Ἰωάνης , with only one ν (WH. 2. App. p. 159). In LXX we have Ἰωάνης (2 Chronicles 28:12); Ἰωάναν 2 Chronicles 17:15; Nehemiah 12:13) ; Ἰωνάν (Nehemiah 6:18) ; Ἰωνά (2 Kings 25:23 ; comp. John 21:15-17). All these forms are abbreviations of Jehohanan, “ Jehovah’ s gift,” or “ God is gracious.” Gotthold is a German name of similar meaning. It was a Rabbinical saying that the names of six were given before they were born— Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and Messiah. 14. πολλοὶἐπὶτῇγενέσειαὐτοῦχαρήσονται . With the πολλοί here contrast παντὶτῷλαῷ in 2:10. The joy at the appearance of a Prophet after centuries of need was immense, although not universal. The Pharisees did not dare to say that John was not a Prophet (Matthew 21:26); and Herod, until driven to it, did not dare to put him to death (Matthew 14:5). The word ἀγαλλίασις means “ extreme joy, exultation.” It is not class., but is freq. in LXX. Elsewhere in N.T. only ver. 44; Acts 2:46; Jude 1:24; Hebrews 1:9 (from Psalms 44:8). In class. Grk. χαίρειν more often has the simple dat., but ἐπί is usual in N.T. (13:17; Acts 15:31; Matthew 18:13, etc.). It marks the basis of the joy. The reading γεννήσει (G C G) for γενέσει (א A B C D) probably comes from γεννήσει in ver. 13. 15. ἔσταιγὰρμέγαςἐνώπιον [τοῦ ] Κυρίου . For he shall be great in the truest sense of the term. Whatsoever a character man has before God, of that character he really is. The adj. ἐνώπιος is found in Theocr. (22:152) and in LXX, but ἐνώπιον as a prep. seems to be confined to LXX and N.T. It is not in Mt. or Mk., but is specially freq. in Lk. (vv. 17, 19, 75, 4:7, 5:18, 25, etc.), as also in Rev. The phrase ἐνώπιοντοῦκυρίου or Θεοῦ is a Hebraism (12:6, 16:15; Acts 4:19, Acts 4:7:46, Acts 4:10:31, Acts 4:33; Judges 11:11; 1 Samuel 10:19 ; 2 Samuel 5:3, 2 Samuel 6:5). The preposition retains this meaning in modem Greek. οἶνονκαὶσίκεραοὐμὴπίῃ . He is to drink neither wine nor any intoxicating liquor other than wine. The same Hebrew word is rendered sometimes σίκερα , sometimes μέθυσμα , and sometimes σίκεραμέθυσμα (Leviticus 10:9; Numbers 6:3 ; Judges 13:4, Judges 13:7, Judges 13:14). Wiclif here has “ ne wine ne syder.” See D. B.2 art. “ Drink, Strong.” John is to be a Nazirite, not only for a time, as was usual, but for all his life, as Samson and Samuel. This is not disproved by the omission of the command not to cut his hair (Edersh. The Temple, p. 322). Eusebius (Præ p. Evang. vi:10:8) has gen. σίκερος , and σικέρατος is also quoted; but σικερα is usually undeclined. πνεύματοςἁγίουπλησθήσεται . This is in obvious contrast to οἶνονκαὶσίκερα . In place of the physical excitement of strong drink he is to have the supernatural inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The whole phrase is peculiar to Lk. (vv. 41, 67; Acts 2:4, Acts 2:4:8, Acts 2:31, Acts 2:9:17, Acts 2:13:9); and the two elements of it are specially characteristic of him. Excepting Matthew 22:10, Matthew 27:48, the verb πίμπλημι occurs only in Lk., who uses it twenty-two times. Mt. has the expression “ Holy Spirit” five times, Mk. and Jn. each four times. Lk. has it fifty-three times, of which twelve are in the Gospel. He uses three forms: πνεῦμαἅγιον (1:15, 35, 41, 67, [2:25,] 3:16, 4:1, 11:13); τὸἅγιονπνεῦμα (12:10, 12); and τὸπνεῦματὸἅγιον (2:26, 3:22). According to Schoettgen (i. p 255), “ to be filled with the Holy Spirit is” locutio Judæ is familiaris. He gives one example. Comp. the contrast in Ephesians 5:18. ἔτιἐκκοιλίαςμητρὸςαὐτοῦ . A Hebraism (Psalms 22:11, 71:6; Isaiah 49:1, Isaiah 49:5: comp. Judges 13:5, Judges 13:7, Judges 13:16:17; Job 31:18, etc.); instead of the more classical ἐκγενετῆς , with or without εὐθύς (Hom. Il. 24:535, Obadiah 1:18:6 ; Arist. Eth. Nic. 6:13. 1, 7:14, 4, 8:12, 6). For the ἔτι comp. ἔτιἐκβρέφεος , ἔτιἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆςἔτικαὶἐκπαρόντων , where ἔτι seems to mean “ even.” The expression does not imply that John was filled with the Spirit before he was born (ver. 41). In LXX κοιλία is often used of the womb (see esp. Jeremiah 1:5); but this is very rare in class. Grk. 16, 17. The two personal characteristics just stated— subjection of the flesh and sovereignty of the spirit— will manifest themselves in two external effects,— a great religious revival and the preparation for the Messianic kingdom. The first of these was the recognized work of every Prophet. Israel, through sin, was constantly being alienated from God; and it was one of the chief functions of a Prophet to convert the people to God again (Jeremiah 3:7, Jeremiah 3:10, Jeremiah 3:14, Jeremiah 3:18:8; Ezekiel 3:19; Daniel 9:13). καὶαὐτός The personal pronouns are much more used in N.T. than in class. Grk., esp. in the oblique cases. But even in the nom. the pronoun is sometimes inserted, although there is little or no emphasis. Lk. is very fond of beginning sentences with καὶαὐτός , even where αὐτός can hardly mean “ he on his part,” as distinct from others (3:23, 5:14, 17, 6:20, etc.). In προελεύσεται we have another mark of Lk.’ s style. Excepting Mark 6:33 and 2 Corinthians 9:5, the verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (22:47; Acts 12:10, Acts 20:5 ?, 13). ἐνώπιοναὐτοῦ . “ Before God,” who comes to His people in the person of the Messiah (Isaiah 40:1-11; Malachi 3:1-5). It is unlikely that αὐτοῦ means the Messiah, who has not yet been mentioned. There is no analogy with αὐτὸςἔφα , ipse dixit, where the pronoun refers to some one so well known that there is no need to mention him by name. For ἐνώπιον see on ver. 15; and for δύναμις , on 4:14, 36. Elijah is mentioned, not as a worker of miracles, for “ John did no sign” (John 10:41), but as a preacher of repentance: it was in this that the Baptist had his spirit and power. For Rabbinic traditions respecting Elijah as the Forerunner see Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 706. Comp. Justin, Try. xlix. The omission of the articles before πνεύματι and δυνάμει is probably due to the influence of an Aramaic original, in which the gen. which follows would justify the omission. Proper names in -ας pure commonly have gen. in -ου (Matthew 1:6, Matthew 3:3) ; but here Ἠλεία is the true reading. ἐπιστρέψαικαρδίαςπατέρωνἐπὶτέκνα . The literal interpretation here makes good sense, and perhaps, on the whole, it is the best. In the moral degradation of the people even parental affection had languished: comp. Ecclus. 48:10. Genuine reform strengthens family ties; whatever weakens them is no true reform. Or the meaning may be that the patriarchs will no longer be ashamed of their offspring: comp. Isaiah 43:16. In any case, ἀπειθεῖς is not to be referred to τέκνα . It is not the disobedience of children to parents that is meant, but that of the Jews to God. The Vulg. renders ἀπειθεῖς by incredibiles, for which some MSS. have incredulos: comp. dissociabilis, penetrabilis for adjectives in -bilis with this force. Lat. Vet. varies: ineruditos (f), non consentientes (d), contumaces (e). ἐνφρονήσειδικαίων . The prep. of rest after a verb of motion expresses the result of the motion (7:17 ; Matthew 14:3): “ Turn them so as to be in the wisdom of the just.” For φρόνησις see Lft. on Colossians 1:9 : the word occurs only here and Ephesians 1:8 in N.T. De Wette, Bleek, and others maintain that φρόνησις here means simply “ disposition,” Gesinnung. In what follows it is better to make ἑτοιμάσαι dependent upon ἐπιστρέψαι , not co-ordinate with it. The preparation is the consequence of the conversion, and the final object of the προελεύσεται : ne Dominus populum imparatum majestate sua obterat (Beng.). 18. κατὰτίγνώσομαιτοῦτο ; The very question asked by Abraham (Genesis 15:8): “ In accordance with what shall I obtain knowledge of this?” i.e. What shall be in harmony with it, so as to be a sign of it? Comp. the cases of Gideon (Judges 6:36-39) and of Hezekiah (2 Kings 20:8), who asked for signs; also of Moses (Exodus 4:2-6) and of Ahaz (Isaiah 7:11), to whom signs were given unasked. The spirit in which such requests are made may vary much, although the form of request may be the same; and the fact that Zacharias had all these instances to instruct him made his unbelief the less excusable. By his ἐγὼγάρεἰμι , κ .τ .λ ., he almost implies that the Angel must have forgotten the fact. 19. ἀποκριθεὶςὁἄγγελοςεἶπεν In Attic ἀποκρίνομαι , in Homeric and Ionic ὑποκρίνομαι , is used in the sense of “ answering.” In N.T. ὑποκρίνομαι . occurs only once (20:20), and there of “ acting a part,” not “ answering” : comp. 2 Mac. 5:25. But ἀποκριθείς for the class. ἀποκρινάμενος (which is rare in N.T.) marks the decay of the middle voice. In bibl. Grk. the middle voice is dying; in mod. Grk. it is dead. Machon, a comic poet about B.C. 250, is perhaps the earliest writer who uses ἀπεκρίθην like ἀπεκρινάμην in the sense of “ replied, answered.” In LXX, as in N.T., ἀπεκρινάμην is rare (Judges 5:29 [A] ; 1 Kings 2:1 ; 1 Chronicles 10:13). See Veitch, Greek Verbs, p. 78. 19. ἘγώεἰμιΓαβριήλ . Gabriel answers his ἐγώεἰμι with another. “ Thou art old, and not likely to have children, but I am one whose word is to be believed” : ἀγγέλῳἀπιστεῖς , καὶτῷἀποστείλαντι (Eus.). The names of two heavenly beings are given us in Scripture, Gabriel (Daniel 8:16, Daniel 9:21) and Michael (Daniel 10:13, Daniel 10:21, Daniel 10:12:1 ; Jude 1:9 ; Revelation 12:7) ; other names were given in the later Jewish tradition. It is one thing to admit that such names are of foreign origin, quite another to assert that the belief which they represent is an importation. Gabriel, the “ Man of God,” seems to be the representative of angelic ministry to man; Michael, “ Who is like God,” the representative of angelic opposition to Satan. In Scripture Gabriel is the angel of mercy, Michael the angel of judgment. In Jewish legend the reverse is the case proving that the Bible does not borrow Jewish fables. In the Targums Gabriel destroys Sennacherib’ s army; in the O.T. he instructs and comforts Daniel. The Rabbis said that Michael flies in one flight, Gabriel in two, Elijah in four, and Death in eight; i.e. mercy is swifter than judgment, and judgment is swifter than destruction. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 97; D.C.G. i. p. 55. ὁπαρεστηκὼςἐνώπιοντοῦΘεοῦ . See on ver. 15. Gabriel is “ the angel of His presence” (Isaiah 43:9; comp. Matthew 18:10). “ Standing before” implies ministering. In LXX the regular phrase is παραστῆναιἐνώπιον (Job 1:6, which is a close parallel to this; 1 Kings 17:1, 1 Kings 17:18:15 ; 2 Kings 3:14, 2 Kings 5:16). It is also used of service to a king (1 Kings 10:8). But when Gehazi “ stood before his master,” we have παρειστήκειπρὸςτὸνκύριοναὐτοῦ (2 Kings 5:25). Only here and 9:27 does Lk. use the unsyncopated form of the perf. part of ἴστημι and its compounds. Elsewhere he prefers ὲστώς to ὲστηκώς (1:11, 5:1, 2, 18:13; Acts 4:14, Acts 7:55, etc.). In Matthew 27:47 and Mark 9:1 and 11:5, ὲστηκότων is the right reading. In Jn. the unsyncopated form is common. ἀπεστάληνλαλῆσαιπρὸςσὲκαὶεὐαγγελίσασθαίσοιταῦτα . This reminds Zacharias of the extraordinary favour shown to him, and so coldly welcomed by him. It is the first use in the Gospel narrative of the word which was henceforward to be so current, and to mean so much. In LXX it is used of any good tidings (2 Samuel 1:20; 1 Chronicles 10:9), but especially of communications respecting the Messiah (Isaiah 40:9, Isaiah 52:7, Isaiah 60:6, Isaiah 61:1). See on 2:10 and 3:18. 20. καὶἰδοὺἔσῃσιωπῶνκαὶμὴδυνάμενοςλαλῆσαι . The ἰδού is Hebraistic, but is not rare in class. Grk. It introduces something new with emphasis. Signum poscenti datur congruum, quamvis non optatum (Beng.). The analytical form of the fut. marks the duration of the silence (comp. 5:10, 6:40 ?, 17:35 ?, 21:17); and μὴδυνάμενος , κ .τ .λ ., is added to show that the silence is not a voluntary act, but the sign which was asked for (comp. Daniel 10:15). Thus his wrong request is granted in a way which is at once a judgment and a blessing; for the unbelief is cured by the punishment. For σιωπάω of dumbness comp. 4 Mac. 10:18. We have here one of many parallels in expression between Gospel and Acts. Comp. this with Acts 13:11 ; 1:39 with Acts 1:15; 1:66 with Acts 11:21 ; Acts 2:9 with Acts 12:7 ; Acts 15:20 with Acts 20:37 ; Acts 21:18 with Acts 27:34; Acts 24:19 with Acts 7:22. In N.T. μή with the participle is the common constr., and in mod. Grk. it is the invariable use. In Lk. there is only one instance of οὐ with a participle (6:42). See Win. 4:5. β , pp. 607-610; Lft. Epp. of St. Paul, p. 39, 1895. The combination of the negative with the positive statement of the same thing, although found in class. Grk., is more common in Heb. literature. In Acts 13:11 we have ἔσῃτυφλὸςμὴβλέπων ; comp. John 1:3, John 1:20, John 1:3:16, John 1:10:5, John 1:18, John 1:18:20, John 1:20:27; Revelation 2:13, Revelation 2:3:9; Psalms 89:30, Psalms 89:31, Psalms 89:48; 2 Samuel 14:5; Isaiah 38:1, etc. ἄχριἦςἡμέρας Galatians 3:19 is the only certain exception to the rule that ἄχρι , not ἄχρις , usually precedes vowels in N.T. Comp. 17:27, 21:24, and see on 16:16. For the attraction, comp. Acts 1:2 ; Matthew 24:38. Attractions are specially freq. in Lk. See on 3:10; also Blass, Gr. pp. 169, 214. ἀνθ ʼ ὧν . Only in this phrase does ἀντί suffer elision in N.T. It is equivalent to ἀντίτούτωνὅτι , “ for that, because” (19:44; Acts 12:23 ; 2 Thessalonians 2:10; Leviticus 26:43; 2 Kings 22:17; Ezekiel 5:11). It is found in class. Grk. (Soph. Ant. 1068 ; Aristoph. Plut. 434). οἵτινες . Stronger than the simple relative: “ which are of such a character that.” Comp. 2:10, 7:37, 39, 8:3, 15. Almost always in nom. εἰςτὸνκαιρὸναὐτῶν . That which takes place in a time may be regarded as entering into that time: the words go on to their fulfilment. Comp. εἰςτὸμέλλον (13:9) and εἰςτὸμεταξὺσάββατον (Acts 13:42). 21. ἦνὁλαὸςπροσδοκῶν . As in ver. 20, the analytical tense marks the duration of the action. Zacharias was longer than was customary; and the Talmud states that the priests were accustomed to return soon to prevent anxiety. It was feared that in so sacred a place they might incur God’ s displeasure, and be slain (Lev. 16:113). Hence ἐθαύμαζονἐντῷξρονίζειν , “ They were wondering while he tarried.” Comp. ver. 8, and see on 3:21. The common rendering, “ at his tarrying,” or “ because he tarried,” quod tardaret, is improbable even if possible. This would have been otherwise expressed: ἐθαύμαζονἐπί (2:33, 4:22, 9:43, etc.), which D reads here; or διά (Mark 6:6; John 7:21 ?); or ὅτι (11:38; John 3:7, John 4:27); or περί (2:18). 22. οὐκἐδύνατολαλῆσαιαὐτοῖς . He ought to pronounce the benediction (Numbers 6:24-26) from the steps, either alone or with other priests. His look and his inability to speak told them at once that something extraordinary had taken place; and the sacred circumstances would suggest a supernatural appearance, even if his signs did not make this clear to them. The compound ἐπέγνωσαν implies clear recognition and full knowledge (5:22, 24:16, 31); and the late form ὀπτασίαν is commonly used of supernatural sights (24:23; Acts 26:19; 2 Corinthians 12:1 ; Daniel 9:23, Daniel 9:10:1, Daniel 9:7, Daniel 9:8, Daniel 9:16). For καὶαὐτός “ he on his part,” as distinct from the congregation, see on ver. 17, and Win. 22:4. b, p. 187. The periphrastic tense ἦνδιανεύων again calls attention to the continued action. The verb is found here only in N.T., but occurs twice in LXX (Psalms 34:19; Ecclus. 27:22). In διέμεινεκωφός both the compound and the tense emphasize the fact that it was no mere temporary seizure (22:28; Galatians 2:5; 2 Peter 3:4). 23. ὡςἐπλήσθησαναἱἡμέραιτῆςλειτουργίαςαὐτοῦ . When the week for which the course of Abijah was on duty for public service was at an end. See on vv. 15 and 57. In class. Grk. λειτουργία is freq. of public service undertaken by a citizen at his own expense. In bibl. Grk. it is used of priestly service in the worship of God (Hebrews 8:6, Hebrews 8:9:21; Numbers 8:22, Numbers 8:16:9, Numbers 8:18:4; 2 Chronicles 31:2), and also of service to the needy (2 Corinthians 9:12: Philippians 2:30). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 140. ἀπῆλθενεἰςτὸνοἶκοναὐτοῦ . This was not in Jerusalem, in the Ophel quarter, where many of the priests resided, but in an unnamed town in the hill-country south of Jerusalem (ver. 39). It is probable that most of the priests who did not live in the city itself resided in the towns and villages in the neighbourhood. Convenience would suggest that they should live inside Judæ a. In Nehemiah 11:10-19 we have 1192 priests in Jerusalem; in 1 Chronicles 9:13 we have 1760. Later authorities speak of 24,000; but such figures are very untrustworthy. The whole question of the residences of the priests is an obscure one, and Jos_21. must not be quoted as evidence for more than a projected arrangement. That it was carried into effect and maintained, or that it was revived after the Exile, is a great deal more than we know. Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. ii. I, p. 229. 24. συνέλαβεν . The word occurs eleven times in Lk. against five times elsewhere. He alone uses it in the sense of conceiving offspring, and only in these first two chapters (vv. 31, 36, 2:21). This sense is common in medical writers and in Aristotle. Hobart remarks that the number of words referring to pregnancy and barrenness used by Lk. is almost as great as that used by Hippocrates: ἐνγαστρὶἔχειν (21:23), ἔγκυος (2:5) στεῖρα (1:7) ἄτεκνος (20:28). And, excepting ἐνγαστρὶἔχειν , all of these are peculiar to himself in N.T. (Med. Lang. of Lk. p. 91). περιέκρυβενἑαυτὴνμῆναςπέντε . The reflexive pronoun brings out more forcibly than the middle voice would have done that the act was entirely her own (Acts 23:14; 1 Corinthians 11:31; 1 John 1:8); and the compound verb implies all round, complete concealment. Her motive can only be conjectured; but the enigmatical conduct and remark are evidence of historic truth, for they would not be likely to be invented. The five months are the first five months; and at the end of them it would be evident that she had ceased to be ἡστεῖρα (ver. 36). During these five months she did not wish to risk hearing a reproach, which had ceased to be true, but which she would not care to dispute. She withdrew, therefore, until all must know that the reproach had been removed. The form ἔκρυβον is late: in class. Grk. ἔκρυψα is used. But a present κρύβω is found, of which this might be the imperfect. It can hardly be accidental that μήν is scarcely ever used in N.T. in a literal sense by any writer except Lk., who has it five times in his Gospel and five times in the Acts. The chronological details involved in this frequent use are the results of the careful investigation of which he writes in the preface. The other passages are Galatians 4:10; James 5:17, and six times in Revelation. So also ἔτος occurs fifteen times in Lk. and six in Mt. Mk. and Jn. 25. ἐπεῖδενἀφελεῖνὄνειδόςμουἐνἀνθρώποις . The object of ἐπεῖδεν is neither ἐμέ understood (as all English Versions except Wic. and Rhem.) nor τὸὄνειδόςμου (Hofmann), but ἀφελεῖν : “ watched to take away, taken care to remove.” The constr. seems to be unique; but comp. Acts 25:14. Alford and Holtzmann translate “ hath deigned, condescended to remove” ; but can ἐπεῖδεν mean that? Elsewhere in N.T. it occurs only Acts 4:29; but in class. Grk. it is specially used of the gods regarding human affairs (Aesch. Suppl. 1:1031; Sept. 485). Hdt. 1:124. 2 is not rightly quoted as parallel. Omitting ἐπεῖδεν , Rachel makes the same remark: ἈφεῖλενὁΘεόςμουτὸὄνειδος (Genesis 30:23; comp. Psalms 113:9 ; Isaiah 4:1); but the different position of the μου is worth noting. In ἐνἀνθρώποις we have another amphibolous expression (see on ver. 8). It may be taken with ἀφελεῖν , but more probably it belongs to τὸὄνειδόςμου (ver. 36). 26-38. The Annunciation of the Birth of the Saviour.1 The birth of the Baptist is parallel to the birth of Isaac; that of the Messiah to the creation of Adam. Jesus is the second Adam. But once more there is no violent breach with the past. Even in its revolutions Providence is conservative. Just as the Prophet who is to renovate Israel is taken from the old priesthood, so the Christ who is to redeem the human race is not created out of nothing, but “ born of a woman.” 26. εἰςπόλιντῆςΓαλιλαίαςᾗὄνομαΝαζαρέτ . The description perhaps implies that Lk. is writing for those who are not familiar with the geography of Palestine. There is no reason for believing that he himself was unfamiliar with it. Comp. ver. 39, 4:31, 7:11, 8:26, 9:10, 17:11, 19:29, 37, 41. Galilee is one of many geographical names which have gradually extended their range. It was originally a little “ circuit” of territory round Kadesh Naphtali containing the towns given by Solomon to Hiram (1 Kings 9:11). This was called the “ circuit of the Gentiles,” because the inhabitants were strangers . But it grew, until in the time of Christ it included the territory. of Naphtali, Asher, Zebulon, and Issachar (D. B.2 1. p. 1117). For a description of this region see Jos. B. J. 3:3. 1-3. Nazareth is mentioned neither in O.T. nor in Josephus, but it was probably not a new town in our Lord’ s time. The site is an attractive one, in a basin among the south ridges of Lebanon. The sheltered valley is very fruitful, and abounds in flowers. From the hill behind the town the view over Lebanon, Hermon, Carmel, the Mediterranean, Gilead, Tabor, Gilboa, the plain of Esdraelon, and the mountains of Samaria, is very celebrated (Renan, Vie de J. p. 27). It would seem as if Mt. (2:23) was not aware that Nazareth was the original home of Joseph and Mary. The form of the name of the town varies much, between Nazareth, Nazaret, Nazara, and Nazarath. Keim has twice contended strongly for Nazara (J. of Naz., Eng. tr. 2. p. 16, 4. p. 108) ; but he has not persuaded many of the correctness of his conclusions. WH. consider that “ the evidence when tabulated presents little ambiguity” (2. App. p. 160). Ναζαράθ is found frequently (eight out of eleven times) in Codex Δ , but hardly anywhere else. Ναζαρά is used once by Mt. (4:13), and perhaps once by Lk. (4:16). Ναζαρέθ occurs once in Mt. (21:11) and once in Acts (10:38). Everywhere else (Matthew 2:23; Mark 1:9; Luke 1:26, Luke 1:2:4, Luke 1:39, Luke 1:51; John 1:46, John 1:47) we have certainly or probably Ναζαρέτ . Thus Mt. uses the three possible, forms equally; Lk. all three with a decided preference for Nazaret ; while Mk. and Jn. use Nazaret only. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 2:1-20. The Birth of the Saviour, its Proclamation by the Angels, and its Verification by the Shepherds. The second of the narratives in the second group (1:57-2:40) in the Gospel of the Infancy (1:5-2:52). It corresponds to the Annunciation (1:26-38) in the first group. Like the sections which precede and which follow, it has a clearly marked conclusion. And these conclusions have in some cases a very marked resemblance. Comp. 2:20 with 1:56, and 2:40 and 52 with 1:80. This similarity of form points to the use of material from one and the same source, and carefully arranged according to the subject-matter. This source would be some member of the Holy Family (see on 1:5). The marks of Lk.’ s style, accompanied by Hebraistic forms of expression, still continue; and we infer, as before, that he is translating from an Aramaic document. The section has three marked divisions: the Birth (1-7), the Angelic Proclamation (8-14), and the Verification (15-20). The connexion with what precedes is obvious. We have just been told how the promise to Zacharias was fulfilled; and we are now to be told how the promise to Mary was fulfilled. 1-7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem at the Time of the Enrolment. The extreme simplicity of the narrative is in very marked contrast with the momentous character of the event thus narrated. We have a similar contrast between matter and form in the opening verses of S. John’ s Gospel. The difference between the evangelical account and modern Lives of Christ is here very remarkable. The tasteless and unedifying elaborations of the apocryphal gospels should also be compared.1 1-3. How Bethlehem came to be the Birthplace of Jesus Christ, although Nazareth was the Home of His Parents. This explanation has exposed Lk. to an immense amount of criticism, which has been expressed and sifted in a manner that has produced a voluminous literature. In addition to the commentaries, some of the following may be consulted, and from Schü rer and Herzog further information about the literature may be obtained. S. J. Andrews, Life of our Lord, pp. 71-81, T. &T. Clark, 1892; T. Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 955, Longmans, 1865; J. B. McClellan, The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour, i. pp. 392-399, Macmillan, 1875; C. F. Nö sgen, Geschichte Jesu Christi, pp. 172-174, Beck, 1891; *E. Schü rer, Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, i. 2, pp. 105-143, T. &T. Clark, 1890; B. Weiss, Leben Jesu, i. 2, 4, Berlin, 1882; Eng. tr. pp. 250-252; K. Wieseler, Chronological Synopsis of the Four Gospels, pp. 66-106, 129-135, Deighton, 1864; O. Zö ckler, Handbuch der Theologischen Wissenchaften, i. 2, pp. 188-190, Beck, 1889; A. W. Zumpt, Das Geburtsjahr Christi (reviewed by Woolsey in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1870), Leipzig, 1869; D. B.2 art. “ Cyrenius” ; Herzog, Proverbs 2:13. art. “ Schatzung” ; P. Schaff, History of the Church, i. pp. 121-125, T. &T. Clark, 1883; Ramsay, Was Christ Born at Bethlehem? 1899; Hastings, D.B. art. Chronology of N.T. 1. ἘγένετοδὲἐνταῖςἡμέραιςἐκείναιςἐξῆλθενδόγμαπαρὰκαίσαροςΑὐγούστουἀπογράφεσθαιπᾶσαντὴνοἰκουμένην . For the constr. see detached note at the end of ch. 1.; and for ἐνταῖςἡμέραιςἐκείναις see on 1:5 and 39. The time of the birth of John is roughly indicated. Even in class. Grk. the first meaning of δόγμα , as “ opinion, philosophic tenet,” is not very common (Plat. Rep. 538 C); it is more often a “ public decree, ordinance.” This is always the meaning in N.T., whether an ordinance of the Roman Emperor (Acts 17:7), or of the Apostles (Acts 16:4; comp. Ign. Mag. 13; Didaché , 11:3), or of the Mosaic Law (Colossians 2:14; Ephesians 2:15; comp. 3 Mal 1:3; Jos. Ant. xv. 5, 3). For ἐξῆλθενδόγμα comp. Daniel 2:13 (Theod.). In Daniel δόγμα is freq. of a royal decree (3:10, 4:3, 6:9, 10). See Lft. on Colossians 2:14. ἀπογράφεσθαι . Probably passive, ut describeretur (Vulg.), not middle, as in ver. 3. The present is here used of the continuous enrolment of the multitudes; the aorist in ver. 5 of the act of one person. The verb refers to the writing off, copying, or entering the names, professions, fortunes, and families of subjects in the public register, generally with a view to taxation . It is a more general word than ἀποτιμάω , which implies assessment as well as enrolment. But it is manifest that the ἀπογραφή here and in Acts 5:37 included assessment. The Jews were exempt from military service; and enrolment for that purpose cannot be intended. In the provinces the census was mainly for purposes of taxation. πᾶσαντὴνοἰκουμένην . “ The whole inhabited world,” i.e. the Roman Empire, orbis terrarum. Perhaps in a loose way the expression might be used of the provinces only. But both the πᾶσαν and the context exclude the limitation to Palestine, a meaning which the expression never has, not even in Jos. Ant. viii. 3. See on 4:5 and 21:26. In inscriptions Roman Emperors are called κύριοιτῆςοἰκουμένης . The verse implies a decree for a general census throughout the empire. It must be confessed that no direct evidence of any such decree exists beyond this statement by Lk., and the repetitions of it by Christian writers. But a variety of items have been collected, which tend to show that a Roman census in Judæ a at this time, in accordance with some general instructions given by Augustus, is not improbable. 1. The rationarium or rationes imperii, which was a sort of balance-sheet published periodically. by the emperor (Suet. Aug. xxvii.; Cal. xvi.). 2. The libellus or breviarium totius imperii, which Augustus deposited with his will (Tac. Ann. i. 11. 5, 6 ; Suet. Aug. ci.). 3. The index rerum gestarum to be inscribed on his tomb, which was the original of the Marmor Ancyranum. But these only indicate the orderly administration of the empire. A general census would have been useful in producing such things; but that does not prove that it took place. Two passages in Dion Cassius are cited; but one of these (liv:35) refers to a registration of the emperor’ s private property, and the other (lv:13) to a census of Roman citizens. If Augustus made a general survey of the empire, of which there is evidence from the commentarii of Agrippa mentioned by Pliny (Nat. Hist. iii. 2, 17), this also would have been conveniently combined with a general census, although it does not show that such a census was ordered. Of some of the provinces we know that no census was held in them during the reign of Augustus. But it is probable that in the majority of them a census took place; and the statement of so accurate a writer as Lk., although unsupported by direct evidence, may be accepted as substantially true: viz. that in the process of reducing the empire to order, Augustus had required that a census should be held throughout most of it. So that Lk. groups the various instances under one expression,just as in Acts 11:28 he speaks of the famines, which took place in different parts of the empire in the time of Claudius, as a famine ἐφ ʼ ὅληνοἰκουμένην . Of the Christian witnesses none is of much account. Riess seems to be almost alone in contending that Orosius (Hist. Rom. vi. 22. 6) had any authority other than Lk. Cassiodorus (Variarum Epp. iii. 52) does not mention a census of persons at all clearly; but if orbis Romanus agris divisus censuque descriptus est means such a census, he may be referring to Luke 2:1. The obscure statement of Isidore of Spain (Etymologiarum, v. 26. 4; Opera, iii. 229, ed. Arevallo) may either be derived from Lk. or refer to another period. What Suidas states (Lex. s.v. ἀπογραφή partly comes from Lk. and partly is improbable. At the best, all this testimony is from 400 to 1000 years after the event, and cannot be rated highly. The passages are given in full by Schü rer (Jewish People in the T. of J. C. i. 2, pp. 116, 117). But it is urged that a Roman census, even if held elsewhere, could not have been made in Palestine during the time of Herod the Great, because Palestine was not yet a Roman province. In a.d. 6, 7, when Quirinius certainly did undertake a Roman census in Judæ a, such a proceeding was quite in order. Josephus shows that in taxation Herod acted independently (Ant. xv.10. 4, xvi. 2. 5, xvii.2. I, II. 2; comp. 17:8, 17:4). That Herod paid tribute to Rome is not certain; but, if so, he would pay it out of taxes raised by himself. The Romans would not assess his subjects for the tribute which he had to pay. Josephus, whose treatment of the last years of Herod is very full, does not mention any Roman census at that time. On the contrary, he implies that, even after the death of Herod, so long as Palestine was ruled by its own princes, there was no Roman taxation; and he states that the census undertaken by Quirinius a.d. 7 excited intense opposition, presumably as being an innovation (Ant. 18:1. 1, 2:1). In meeting this objection, let us admit with Schü rer and Zumpt that the case of the Clitæ (?) is not parallel. Tacitus (Ann. vi. 41. 1) does not say that the Romans held a census in the dominions of Archelaus, but that Archelaus wished to have a census after the Roman fashion. Nevertheless, the objection that Augustus would not interfere with Herod’ s subjects in the matter of taxation is untenable. When Palestine was divided among Herod’ s three sons, Augustus ordered that the taxes of the Samaritans should be reduced by one-fourth, because they had not taken part in the revolt against Varus (Ant. xvii. 11, 4; B. J. ii. 6. 3); and this was before Palestine became a Roman province. If he could do that, he could require information as to taxation throughout Palestine; and the obsequious Herod would not attempt to resist.1. The Value of such information would be great. It would show whether the tribute paid (if tribute was paid) was adequate; and it would enable Augustus to decide how to deal with Palestine in the future. If he knew that Herod’ s health was failing, he would be anxious to get the information before Herod’ s death; and thus the census would take place just at the time indicated by Lk., viz. in the last months of the reign of Herod. For “ Clitæ ” we should read Kietai; Ramsay, Expositor, April, 1897. 2. αὕτηἀπογραφὴπρώτηἐγένετο . This may be accepted as certainly the true reading; 2 and the meaning of it is not really doubtful.“ This took place as a first enrolment, when Q. was governor of Syria.” The object of the remark is to distinguish the census which took Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem from the one undertaken by Q. in a.d. 6, 7, at which time Q. was governor of Syria. But was he governor b.c. 4, when Herod died? It is very difficult to establish this. From b.c. 9 to 6 Sentius Saturninus was governor; from b.c. 6 to 4 Quinctilius Varus. Then all is uncertain until a.d. 6, when P. Sulpicius Quirinius becomes governor and holds the census mentioned Acts 5:37 and also by Josephus (Ant. xviii. 1, 1, 2. 1). It is quite possible, as Zumpt and others have shown, that Quirinius was governor of Syria during part of the interval between b.c. 4 and a.d. 6, and that his first term of office was b.c. 3, 2. But it seems to be impossible to find room for him between b.c. 9 and the death of Herod; and, unless we can do that, Lk. is not saved from an error in chronology. Tertullian states that the census was held by Sentius Saturninus (Adv. Marc. iv. 19); and if that is correct we may suppose that it was begun by him and continued by his successor. On the other hand, Justin Martyr three times states that Jesus Christ was born ἐπὶΚυρηνίου , and in one place states that this can be officially ascertained ἐκτῶνἀπογραφῶντῶνγενομένων (Apol. i. 34, 46; Dial. lxxviii.). We must be content to leave the difficulty unsolved. But it is monstrous to argue that because Lk. has (possibly) made a mistake as to Quirinius being governor at this time, therefore the whole story about the census and Joseph’ s journey to Bethlehem is a fiction. Even if there was no census at this time, business connected with enrolment might take Joseph to Bethlehem, and Lk. would be correct as to his main facts. That Lk. has confused this census with the one in a.d. 6, 7, which he himself mentions Acts v. 37, is not credible. We are warranted in maintaining (1) that a Roman census in Judæ a at this time, in accordance with instructions given by Augustus, is not improbable; and (2) that some official connexion of Quirinius with Syria and the holding of this census is not impossible. The accuracy of Lk. is such that we ought to require very strong evidence before rejecting any statement of his as an unquestionable blunder. But it is far better to admit the possibility of error than to attempt to evade this by either altering the text or giving forced interpretations of it. The following methods of tampering with the text have been suggested: to regard πρώτη as a corruption of πρώτῳἔτει through the intermediate πρωτει (Linwood); to insert πρὸτῆς after ἐγένετο (Michaelis); to substitute for Κυρηνίου either Κυιντιλίου (Huetius), or Κρονίου =Saturnini (Heumann), or Σατουρνίνου (Valesius); to omit the whole verse as a gloss (Beta, Pfaff, Valckenaer). All these are monstrous. The only points which can be allowed to be doubtful in the text are the accentuation of αὕτη and the spelling of Κυρηνίου , to which may perhaps be added the insertion of the article. Among the various interpretations may be mentioned— (1) Giving πρῶτος a comparative force, as in John 1:15, John 1:30: “ This taxing took place before Quirinius was governor of Syria” (Huschke, Ewald, Caspari); or, as ἐσχάτητῶνυἱῶνἡμήτηρἐτελεύτησε (2 Mac. 7:41) means “ The mother died last of all, and later than her sons,” this may mean, “ This took place as the first enrolment, and before Q. was governor of S.” (Wieseler). But none of these passages are parallel: the addition of ἡγεμονεύοντος is fatal. When πρῶτος is comparative it is followed by a simple noun or pronoun. It is incredible that Lk., if he had meant this, should have expressed it so clumsily. (2) Emphasizing ἐγένετο , as in Acts 11:28: “ This taxing took effect, was carried out, when Q. was governor of S.” (Gumpach, etc.); i.e. the decree was issued in Herod’ s time, and executed ten or twelve years later by Q. This makes nonsense of the narrative. Why did Joseph go to Bethlehem to be enrolled, if no enrolment took place then? There would be some point in saying that the census was finished, brought to a close, under Q., after having been begun by Herod; but ἐγένετο cannot possibly mean that. (3) Reading and accentuating αὐτὴἡἀπογραφή : “ The raising of the tax itself (as distinct from the enrolment and assessment) first took place when Q.,” etc. “ Augustus ordered a census and it took place, but no money was raised until the time of Q.” (Ebrard). This involves giving to ἀπογραφή in ver. 2 a totally different meaning from ἀπογράφεσθαι in ver. 1 and ἀπογράψασθαι in ver. 5; which is impossible. (4) With αὐτὴἡἀπογραφή , as before: “ The census itself called the first took place when Q.,” etc. The better known census under Q. was commonly regarded as the first Roman census in Judæ a: Lk. reminds his readers that there had really been an earlier one (Godet). This is very forced, requires the insertion of the article, which is almost certainly an interpolation, and assumes that the census of a.d. 6, 7 was generally known as “ the first census.” From Acts 5:37 it appears that it was known as “ the census” : no previous or subsequent enrolment was taken into account. In his earlier edition Godet omitted the ἡ : in the third (1888) he says that this interpretation requires the article (i. p. 170). McClellan quotes in illustration of the construction: αἰτίαδὲαὕτηπρώτηἐγένετοτοῦπολέμου (Thuc. i. 55, 3); αὔτητῶνπερὶΘήβαςἐγένετοἀρχήκαὶκατάστασιςπρώτη (Dem. 291. 10); πρώτημὲνμήνυσιςἐγένετοαὕτηκατὰτούτωντῶνἀνδρῶν (Andoc. iii. 5); αὕτηπρώτηδημοτελὴςκρίσιςἐγένετοἀρετῆςπρὸςπλοῦτον (Aristid. i. 124); and adds the curious remark that “ the Holy Spirit would have us note that the Saviour of the World was registered in the first census of the World !” ἡγεμονεύοντοςτῆςΣυρίαςΚυρηνίου . Like ἡγεμών (20:20, 21:12, etc.) and ἡγεμονία (3:1), the verb is generic, and may express the office of any ruler, whether emperor, propræ tor, procurator, etc. It does not tell us that Quirinius was legatus in b.c. 4 as he was in a.d. 6. And it should be noted that Justin (see above) states that Quirinius was procurator at the time of this census (Apol. i. 34); and that in the only other place in which Lk. uses this verb he uses it of a procurator (3:1). This gives weight to the suggestion that, although Varus was legatus of Syria at the time of the enrolment, yet Quirinius may have held some office in virtue of which he undertook this census. Lk. is probably not giving a mere date. He implies that Quirinius was in some way connected with the enrolment. For what is known about P. Sulpicius Quirinius see Tac. Ann. ii. 30. 4, iii. 22. 1, 2, 23. 1, and esp. 48; Suet. Tib. xlix. Dion Cassius (54:48) calls him simply ΠόπλιοςΣουλπίκιος . But he was not really a member of the old patrician gens Sulpicia. The familiar word Quirinus induced copyists and editors to substitute Quirinus for Quirinius. B has Κυρείνου , but there is no doubt that the name is Quirinius and not Quirinus. This is shown, as Furneaux points out in a note on Tac. Ann. ii. 30, 4, by the MS. readings in Tacitus; by the Greek forms Κυρίνιος (Strabo, 12, 6, 5, 569) and Κυρήνιος (here and Jos. Ant. xviii. 1, 1), and by Latin inscriptions (Orell. 3693, etc.). Quirinius is one of the earliest instances of a person bearing two gentile names. 3. καὶἐπορεύοντοπάντεςἀπογράφεσθαι , ἕκαστοςεἰςτὴνἑαυτοῦπόλιν . The καί looks back to ver. 1, ver. 2 being a parenthesis. The πάντες means all those in Palestine who did not reside at the seat of their family. A purely Roman census would have required nothing of the kind. If Herod conducted the census for the Romans, Jewish customs would be followed. So long as Augustus obtained the necessary information, the manner of obtaining it was immaterial. Where does Lk. place the death of Herod? 4. ἈνέβηδὲκαὶἸωσὴφἀπὸτῆςΓαλιλαίαςἐκπόλεωςΝαζαρέτ For ἀνέβη comp. ver. 42, 18:31, 28; Acts 11:2; and for δὲκαί see on 3:9. Note the change of prep. from ἀπό to ἐκ . But ἀπό is used of towns (10:30; Acts 8:26, Acts 13:14, Acts 20:17, etc.), and ἐκ of districts (23:55; Acts 7:4, etc.); so that there is no special point in the change, although it should be preserved in translation. Comp. John 1:45 and 11:1; also the ἐκ of Luke 21:18 with the ἀπό of Acts 27:34. εἰςπόλινΔαυείδ . That Bethlehem was David’ s birthplace and original home is in accordance with 1 Samuel 17:12 ff. and 17:58; but both passages are wanting in LXX. In O.T. “ the city of David” always means the fortress of Zion, formerly the stronghold of the Jebusites (2 Samuel 5:7, 2 Samuel 5:9; 1 Chronicles 11:5, 1 Chronicles 11:7), and in LXX πόλις in this phrase commonly has the article. Bethlehem is about six miles from Jerusalem. Note that Lk. does not connect Christ’ s birth at Bethlehem with prophecy. ἥτιςκαλεῖταιβηθλεέμ . In late Greek ὅστις is sometimes scarcely distinguishable from ὅς : comp. Acts 17:10. But in 9:30 (as in Acts 23:14, Acts 27:18, and Ephesians 1:23, which are sometimes cited as instances of ὅστις = ὅς ) there may be special point in ὅστις . Even here it may “ denote an attribute which is the essential property of the antecedent,” and may possibly refer to the meaning of Bethlehem. Comp. πόλινκτίσαςταύτην , ἥτιςνῦνΜέμφιςκαλεῖται (Hdt. ii. 99. 7). βηθλεέμ . “ House of Bread” ; one of the most ancient towns in Palestine. It is remarkable that David did nothing for Bethlehem, although he retained affection for it (2 Samuel 23:15); and that Jesus seems never to have visited it again. In John 7:42 it is called a κώμη , and no special interest seems to have attached to the place for many years after the birth of Christ. Hadrian planted a grove of Adonis there, which continued to exist from a.d. 135 to 315. About 330 Constantine built the present church. D. B.2 art. “ Bethlehem.” The modern name is Beit Lahm; and, as at Nazareth, the population is almost entirely Christian. οἴκουκ . πατριᾶς . Both words are rather indefinite, and either may include the other. Here οἶκος seems to be the more comprehensive; otherwise καὶπατριᾶς would be superfluous. Usually πατριά is the wider term. That a village carpenter should be able to prove his descent from David is not improbable. The two grandsons of S. Jude, who were taken before Domitian as descendants of David, were labourers (Eus. H. E. iii. 20. 1-8). 5. ἀπογράψασθαι . “ To get himself enrolled.” The aorist of his single act, the present (ver. 3) of a series of such acts. Both are middle, while ἀπογράφεσθαι in ver. 1 is probably passive. We must not take σὺνΜαριάμ with ἀπογράψασθαι : it belongs to ἀνέβη . It is essential to the narrative that she should go up with him; it is not so that she should be enrolled with him. In a Roman census women paid the poll-tax, but were not obliged to come in person. That Mary had property in Bethlehem is a conjecture which is almost disproved by her resourcelessness in the place. And if it was necessary for her to come, because she also was of David’ s line, would not Lk. have written διὰτὸεἶναιαὐτοὺςἐξοἴκουκ . π . Δ . ? This reading is found in Syr-Sin.: “ because they were both of the house of D.” It is futile to argue that a woman in her condition would not have gone unless she was compelled: therefore Lk. represents her as being compelled: therefore he has made a mistake. She would be anxious at all risks not to be separated from Joseph. Lk. does not even imply that her presence was obligatory; and, if he had said that it was, we do not know enough about the matter to say whether he would have been wrong. Had there been a law which required her to remain at home, then Lk. might be suspected of an error. For σύν see on 1:56. τῇἐμνηστευμένῃαὐτῷ , οὔσῃἐγκύῳ . The γυναικί of A, Vulg. Syr. and Aeth. is a gloss, but a correct one. Had she been only his betrothed (1:27; Matthew 1:18), their travelling together would have been impossible. But by omitting γυναικί Lk. intimates what Mt. states 1:25. Syr-Sin. and some Latin texts have “ wife” without “ espoused.” The οὔσῃ introduces, not a mere fact, but the reason for what has just been stated; he took her with him, “ because she was with child.” After what is related Matthew 1:19 he would not leave her at this crisis. See on 1:24. 6, 7. The Birth of the Saviour at Bethlehem. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew (13.) represents the birth as taking place before Bethlehem is reached. So also apparently the Protevangelium of James (xvii.), which limits the decree of Augustus to those who lived at Bethlehem ! For ἐπλήσθησαν see on 1:15 and 57. 7. τὸνυἱὸναὐτῆςτὸνπρωτότοκον . The expression might certainly be used without implying that there had been subsequent children. But it implies the possibility of subsequent children, and when Luke wrote this possibility had been decided. Would he have used such an expression if it was then known that Mary had never had another child ? He might have avoided all ambiguity by writing μονογενῆ , as he does 7:12, 8:42, 9:38. In considering this question the imperf. ἐγίνωσκεν (Matthew 1:25) has not received sufficient attention. See Mayor, Ep. of St. James, pp. xix-xxii. ἐσπαργάνωσεναὐτόν . It has been inferred from her being able to do this that the birth was miraculously painless (τὴνἀνώδινονκύησιν , Euthym.), of which there is no hint. For the verb comp. ὁμίχλῃαὐτὴνἐσπαργάνωσα , “ I made thick darkness a swaddling band for it” (Job 33:9). ἐνφάτνῃ . The traditional rendering “ in a manger” is right; not “ a stall” either here or in 13:15. The animals were out at pasture, and the manger was not being used. Justin (Try. 78.) and some of the apocryphal gospels say that it was in a cave, which is not improbable. In Origen’ s time the cave was shown, and the manger also (Con. Cels. 1:51). One suspects that the cave may be a supposed prophecy turned into history, like the vine in 19:31.Isaiah 33:16 was supposed to point to birth in a cave, and then the cave may have been imagined in order to fit it, just as the colt is represented as “ tied to a vine, ” in order to make Genesis 49:11 a prediction of Luk 19:30-33 (Justin, Apol. 1:32). οὐκἦναὐτοῖςτόποςἐντῷκαταλύματι . Most of the Jews then residing in Palestine were of Judah or Benjamin, and all towns and villages of Judah would be very full. No inhospitality is implied. It is a little doubtful whether the familiar translation “ in the inn” is correct. In 10:34 “ inn” It is πανδοχεῖὸν , and in 22:11 κατάλυμα is not “ inn.” It is possible that Joseph had relied upon the hospitality of some friend in Bethlehem, whose “ guest-chamber,” however, was already full when he and Mary arrived. See on 22:11. But κατάλυμα in LXX represents five different Heb. words, so that it must have been elastic in meaning. All that it implies is a place where burdens are loosed and let down for a rest. In Polybius it occurs twice in the plural: of the general’ s quarters (2:36, 1), and of reception rooms for envoys (32:19, 2). It has been suggested that the “ inn” was the Geruth Chimham or “ lodging-place of Chimham” (Jeremiah 41:17), the [son] of Barzillai (2 Samuel 19:37, 2 Samuel 19:38), “ which was by Bethlehem,” and convenient for those who would “ go to enter into Egypt.” See Stanley, Sin. &Pal. pp. 163, 529. Justin says that the cave was σύνεγγυςτῆςκώμης , which agrees with “ by Bethlehem.” The Mandra of Josephus (Ant. 10:9, 5) was perhaps the same place as Geruth Chimham. Syr-Sin. omits “ in the inn.” 8-14. The Angelic Proclamation to the Shepherds: πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται (7:22). It was in these pastures that David spent his youth and fought the lion and the bear (1 Samuel 17:34, 1 Samuel 17:35). “ A passage in the Mishnah (Shek. 7:4; comp. Baba K. 7:7, 80a) leads to the conclusion that the flocks which pastured there were destined for Temple-sacrifices, and accordingly, that the shepherds who watched over them were not ordinary shepherds. The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism on account of their necessary isolation from religious ordinances and their manner of life, which rendered strict religious observance unlikely, if not absolutely impossible. The same Mischnic passage also leads us to infer that these flocks lay out all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields thirty days before the Passover— that is, in the month of February, when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest” (Edersh. L. &T. i. pp. 186, 187). For details of the life of a shepherd see D.B. art. “ Shepherds,” and Herzog, Pro_2 art. “ Viehzucht und Hirtenleben.” 8. ἀγραυλοῦντες . Making the ἀγρός their αὐλή , and so “ spending their life in the open air” : a late and rare word, whereas ἄγραυλος is class. This statement is by no means conclusive against December as the time of the year. The season may have been a mild one; it is not certain that all sheep were brought under cover at night during the winter months. It is of the flocks in the wilderness, far from towns or villages, that the often quoted saying was true, that they were taken out in March and brought home m November. These shepherds may have returned from the wilderness, and if so, the time would be between November and March. But the data for determining the time of year are so very insufficient, that after minute calculation of them all we are left in our original uncertainty. Among those who have made a special study of the question we have advocates for almost every month in the year. The earliest attempts to fix the day of which we have knowledge are those mentioned (and apparently condemned as profane curiosity) by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 1:21 sub fin.). In his time some took April 21, others April 22, and others May 20, to be the day. What was unknown in his time is not likely to have been discovered afterwards respecting such a detail. December 25th cannot be traced higher than the fourth century, and it seems to have been adopted first in the West. We must be content to remain in ignorance as to the date of the birth of Christ. See on ἐφημερίας 1:5; D. of Chr. Ant. art. “ Christmas” ; Andrews, L. of our Lord, pp. 12-21, ed. 1892. φυλάσσοντεςφυλακάς . The plural refers to their watching in turns rather than in different places. The phrase occurs Numbers 8:26; Xen. Anab. 2:6, 10; but in LXX τὰςφυλακὰςφυλ . is more common; Numbers 3:7, Numbers 3:8, Numbers 3:28, Numbers 3:32, Numbers 3:38, etc. Comp. Plat. Phæ dr. 240 E; Laws, 758 D. The fondness of Lk. for such combinations of cognate words is seen again ver. 9, 7:29, 17:24, 22:15, and several times in the Acts. See on 11:46 and 23:46. We may take τῆςνυκτός after φυλακάς , “ night-watches,” or as gen. of time, “ by night.” See Blass, Gr. p. 199. 9. ἄγγελοςΚυρίουἐπέστηαὐτοῖς . The notion of coming suddenly is not inherent in the verb, but is often derived from the context: see on ver. 38.1 In N.T. the verb is almost peculiar to Lk., and almost always in 2nd aor. In class. Grk. also it is used of the appearance of heavenly beings, dreams, visions, etc. Hom. Il. 10:496, 23:106; Hdt. 1:34, 2, 7:14, 1. Comp. Luke 24:4; Acts 12:7, Acts 23:11. δόξαΚυρίου . The heavenly brightness which is a sign of the presence of God or of heavenly beings, 2 Corinthians 3:18: comp. Luke 9:31, Luke 9:32. In O.T. of the Shechinah, Exodus 16:7, Exodus 16:10, Exodus 16:24:17, 40:34; Leviticus 9:6, Leviticus 9:23; Numbers 12:8, etc. This glory, according to the Jews, was wanting in the second temple. 10. ὁἄγγελος . The art. is used of that which has been mentioned before without the art. Comp. τὸβρέφος and τῇφάτνῃ in ver. 16. Μὴφοβεῖσθε . Comp. 1:13, 30, 5:10; Matthew 14:27, Matthew 14:28:5, Matthew 14:10.Matthew 14:1 For ἰδοὺγάρ see on 1:44. εὐαγγελίζομαιὑμῖνχαρὰνμεγάλην . The verb is very freq. in Lk. and Paul, but is elsewhere rare; not in the other Gospels excepting Matthew 11:5, which is a quotation. See on 1:19. The act. occurs Revelation 10:7, 14:6; the pass. Luke 7:22, Luke 7:14:16; Galatians 1:11; Hebrews 4:2, Hebrews 4:6; 1 Peter 1:25, 1 Peter 1:4:6; the mid. is freq. with various constructions. As here, dat. of pers. and acc. of thing, 1:19, 4:43; Acts 8:35; acc. of thing only, 8:1 ; Acts 5:42, Acts 5:8:4, Acts 5:12?; acc. of person, 3:18; Acts 8:25, Acts 8:40; acc. of person and of thing, Acts 13:32. ἥτιςἔσταιπαντὶτῷλαῷ . “ Which shall have the special character of being for all the people.” The ἥτις has manifest point here (see on ver. 4); and the art. before λαῷ should be preserved. A joy so extensive may well banish fear. Comp. τῷλαῷ , 1:68, 77, and τὸνλαόν , 7:16. In both these verses (9, 10) we have instances of Lk. recording intensity of emotion: comp. 1:42, 8:37, 24:52; Acts 5:5, Acts 5:11, Acts 5:15:3. Dat. after εἰμί is freq. in Lk. 11. ἐτέχθηὑμῖνσήμερονσωτήρ . To the shepherds, as a part, and perhaps a specially despised part, of the people of Israel. Here first in N.T. is σωτήρ used of Christ, and here only in Lk. Not in Mt. or Mk., and only once in Jn. (4:42): twice in Acts (5:31, 13:23), and freq. in Tit. and 2 Pet. The 1st aor. of τίκτω , both act. and pass., is rare: see Veitch. χριστὸςκύριος . The combination occurs nowhere else in N.T., and the precise meaning is uncertain. Either “ Messiah, Lord,” or “ Anointed Lord,” or “ the Messiah, the Lord,” or “ an anointed one, a Lord.” It occurs once in LXX as a manifest mistranslation. Lamentations 4:20, “ The breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the Lord,” is rendered πνεῦμαπροσώπουἡμῶνΧριστὸςκύρος . If this is not a corrupt reading, we may perhaps infer that the expression Χριστὸςκύριος was familiar to the trapslator. It occurs in the Ps. Sol., where it is said of the Messiah καὶοὐκἔστινἀδικίαἐνταῖςἡμέραιςαὐτοῦἐνμέσῳαὐτῶν , ὅτιπάντεςἅγιοι , καὶβασιλεὺςαὐτῶνΧριστὸςκύριος (17:36: comp. the title of 18.). But this may easily be another mistranslation, perhaps based on that in Lamentations 4:20. Comp. εἶπενὁκύριοςτῷκυρίῳμου (Psalms 110:1), and ἐπεκαλεσάμηνΚύριονπατέρακυρίουμου (Ecclus. 51:10). See Ryle and James, Ps. of Sol. pp. 141-143. The addition of ἐνπόλειΔαυείδ here indicates that this σωτήρ is the King of Israel promised in the Prophets: see on ver. 4. 12. καὶτοῦτοὑμῖντὸσημεῖον . ΒΞ omit the τό . Sign for what? By which to prove that what is announced is true, rather than by which to find the Child. It was all-important that they should be convinced as to the first point; about the other there would be no great difficulty.— εὑρήσετεβρέφος . “ Ye shall find a babe,” “ not the babe,” as most English Versions and Luther; Wiclif has “ a yunge child.” This is the first mention of it; in ver. 16 the art. is right. In N.T., as in class. Grk., βρέφος is more often a newlyborn child (18:15; Acts 7:19; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 Peter 2:2) than an unborn child (Luke 1:41, Luke 1:44); in LXX it is always the former (1 Mac. 1:61; Mal_2 Mac. 6:10; 3 Mac. 5:49; 4 Mac. 4:25), unless Ecclus. 19:11 be an exception. Aquila follows the same usage (Psalms 8:3, 16:14; Isaiah 65:20).— ἐσπαργανωμένονκαὶκείμενονἐνφάτνῃ . Both points are part of the sign. The first participle is no more an adjective than the second. No art. with φάτνῃ : the shepherds have not heard of it before. 13. ἐξέφνης .1 The fact that this is expressly stated here confirms the view that suddenness is not necessarily included in ἐπέστη (ver. 9). For σὺντῷἀγγέλῳ see on 1:56.— στρατιᾶς . Magna appellatio. Hic exercitus tamen pacem laudat (Beng.). The genitive is partitive: “ a multitude (no art.) forming part of the host.” Comp. 1 Kings 22:19; 2 Chronicles 18:18; Psalms 103:21; Joshua 5:15).— αἰνοῦντων . Constr. ad sensum. The whole host of heaven was praising God, not merely that portion of it which was visible to the shepherds. The verb is a favourite with Lk. (ver. 20, 19:37, 24:53?; Acts 2:47, Acts 2:3:8, Acts 2:9). Elsewhere only Romans 15:11 (from Psalms 117:1) and Revelation 19:5; very freq. in LXX. 14. Δόξα … εὐδοκίας . The hymn consists of two members connected by a conjunction; and the three parts of the one member exactly correspond with the three parts of the other member. Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men of His good will. Δόξα balances εἰρήνη , ἐνὑψίστοις balances ἐπὶγῆς , Θεῷ balances ἐνἀνθρώποιςεὐδοκίας . This exact correlation between the parts is lost in the common triple arrangement; which has the further awkwardness of having the second member introduced by a conjunction, 1 while the third is not, and of making the second and third members tautological. “ On earth peace” is very much the same as “ Good will amongst men.” Yet Scrivener thinks that “ in the first and second lines heaven and earth are contrasted; the third refers to both those preceding, and alleges the efficient cause which has brought God glory and earth peace” (Int. to Crit. of N.T. ii. p. 344); which seems to be very forced. The construction ἐνἀνθρώποιϚεὐδοκίαϚ is difficult; but one of the best of modem Greek scholars has said that it “ may be translated ‘ among men of His counsel for good’ or ‘ of His gracious purpose.’ This rendering seems to be in harmony with the preceding context and with the teaching of Scripture in general” (T. S. Evans, Contemp. Rev., Dec. 1881, p. 1003). WH. take a similar view. They prefer, among possible meanings, “ in (among and within) accepted mankind,” and point out that “ the Divine ‘ favour’ (Psalms 30:5, Psalms 30:7, 85:1, 89:17, 106:4) or ‘ good pleasure,’ declared for the Head of the race at the Baptism (3:22), was already contemplated by the Angels as resting on the race itself in virtue of His birth” (ii. App. p. 56, where the whole discussion should be studied). H. suggests that the first of the two clauses should end with ἐπὶγῆς rather than Θεῷ , and that we should arrange thus: “ Glory to God in the highest and on earth; Peace among men of His good pleasure.” With the construction of this first clause he compares 7:17 and Acts 26:23: “ Glory to God not only in heaven, but now also on earth.” “ In this arrangement ‘ glory’ and ‘ peace’ stand severally at the head of the two clauses as twin fruits of the Incarnation, that which redounds to ‘ God’ and that which enters into ‘ men.’ ” This division of the clauses, previously commended by Olshausen, makes the stichometry as even as in the familiar triplet, but it has not found many supporters. It destroys the exact correspondence between the parts of the two clauses, the first clause having three or four parts, and the second only two. W. here leaves H. to plead alone. εὐδοκίας . The word has three meanings: (1) “ design, desire,” as Ecclus. 11:17 ; Romans 10:1; (a) “ satisfaction, contentment,” as Ecclus. 35:14; 2 Thessalonians 1:11; (3) “ benevolence, goodwill,” as Psalms 106:4; Luke 2:14. Both it and εὐδοκεῖν are specially used of the favour with which God regards His elect, as Ps. 146:12; Luke 3:22. The meaning here is “ favour, goodwill, good pleasure” ; and ἄνθρωποιεὐδοκίας are “ men whom the Divine favour has blessed.” See Lft. on Philippians 1:15. Field (Otium Norv. 3. p. 37) urges that, according to Græ co-biblical usage, this would be, not ἄνθρωποιεὐδοκίας , but ἄνδρεςεὐδοκίας , and he appeals to nine examples in LXX. But two-thirds of them are not in point, being singulars, and having reference to a definite adult male and not to human beings in general. These are 2 Samuel 16:7, 2 Samuel 16:18:20; Psalms 80:18; Jeremiah 15:10; ibid. Aq.; Daniel 10:11. There remain ἄνδρεςβουλῆςμου , Psalms 119:24, Aq.; of οἱἄνδρεςτῆςδιαθίκηςσου , Obadiah 1:7; ἄνδρεςεἰρηνικοίσου , Obadiah 1:7. This last is again not parallel, as being accompanied by an adj. and not a gen. Substitute ἄνδρεςαἱμάτων , Ps. 138:19. Of these instances, all necessarily refer to adult males, excepting Aq. in Psalms 119:24, and this more naturally does so, for “ counsellors” are generally thought of as male. But, allowing that the usual expression would have been ἀνδράσινεὐδοκίας , this might well have been avoided here in order to emphasize the fact that all, male and female, young and old, are included. Even in the case of an individual S. Paul writes ὁἄνθρωποςτῆςἀνομίας (2 Thessalonians 2:3), so that the combination is at any rate possible. See on Romans 10:1. The reading is a well-known problem, but the best textual critics are unanimous for εὐδοκίας . The internal evidence is very evenly balanced, as regards both transcriptional and intrinsic probabilities, which are well stated and estimated in WH. (2. App. pp. 55, 56). The external evidence is very decidedly in favour of the apparently more difficult reading εὐδοκίας . Roughly speaking, we have all the best MSS. (excepting C, which is here defective), with all Latin authorities, against the inferior MSS., with nearly all versions, except the Latin, and nearly all the Greek writers who quote the text. Syr-Sin.. has “ and goodwill to men.” For εὐδοκίας , א * A B D, Latt. (Vet. Vulg.) Goth. Iren-Lat. Orig-Lat. and the Lat. Gloria in excelsis. For εὐδοκία , L P ΓΔΛΞ , etc., Syrr. (Pesh. Sin. Harcl.) Boh. Arm. Aeth. Orig. Eus. Bas. Greg-Naz. Cyr-Hier. Did. Epiph. Cyr-Alex. “ The agreement, not only of א with B, but of D and all the Latins with both, and of A with them all, supported by Origen in at least one work, and that in a certified text, affords a peculiarly strong presumption in favour of εὐδοκίας . If this reading is wrong, it must be Western; and no other reading in the New Testament open to suspicion as Western is so comprehensively attested by the earliest and best uncials” (WH. p. 54). The vehemence with which Scrivener argues against εὐδοκίας is quite out of place. 15-20. The Verification, by the Shepherds. 15. ἐλάλουνπρὸςἀλλήλουςΔιέλθωμενδή . “ They repeatedly said unto one another, Come then let us go over,” or “ Let us at once go across.” The compound verb refers to the intervening country (Acts 9:38, Acts 11:19, Acts 18:27), and the δή makes the exhortation urgent. Lk. is fond of διέρχεσθαι , which occurs thirty times in his writings and less than ten elsewhere in N.T. In LXX it is very freq. Note ὡς = “ when.” τὸῥῆματοῦτο . This need not be limited to the saying of the Angel. It is rather the thing of which he spoke: see on 1:65. In class. Grk. λόγος is used in a similar manner; e.g. Hdt. 1:21, 2. Videamus hoc verbum quod factum est (Vulg.). 16. ἦλθανσπεύσαντεςκαὶἀνεῦραν . For these mixed forms of the aor. see on 1:59. Lk. alone in N.T. uses σπεύδειν in its class. intrans. sense (19:5, 6; Acts 20:16, Acts 22:18). In 2 Peter 3:12 it is trans. as in Isaiah 16:5 Lk. alone uses ἀνευρίσκειν (Acts 21:4), but the mid. occurs 4 Malachi 3:14: 2nd aor. in all three cases. The compound implies a search in order to find. In his Gospel Lk. never uses τε without Καί (12:45, 15:2, 21:11, etc.). Here both βρέφος and φάτνῃ , having been mentioned before, have the article. 17. ἐγνώρισαν . “ They made known,” not merely to Mary and Joseph, but to the inhabitants of Bethlehem generally. Both in N.T. and LXX γνωρίζω is commonly trans.; but in Philippians 1:22 and Job 34:25, as usually in class. Grk., it is intrans. Vulg. makes it intrans. here: cognoverunt de verbo quod dictum erat illis de puero hoc. But ver. 18 makes this very improbable. 18. πάντεςοἱἀκούσαντες . See on 1:66. This probably includes subsequent hearers, just as ver. 19 includes a time subsequent to the departure of the shepherds. The constr. ἐθαύμασανπερί is unusual. But in English “ about,” which is common after “ perplexed,” might easily be transferred to such a word as “ astonished.” 19. ἡδὲΜαρίαπάντασυνετήρειτὰῥήματαταῦτα . “ But Mary” could have no such astonishment; neither did she publish her impressions. The revelations to Joseph and herself precluded both. Note the change from momentary wonder (aor.) to sustained reticence (imperf.): also that πάντα is put before the verb with emphasis. Comp. Daniel 7:28; Ecclus. 39:2.— συνβάλλουσαἐντῇκαρδίᾳαὐτῆς . Conferens in corde suo. From whom could Lk. learn this? The verb is peculiar to him (14:31; Acts 4:15; Acts 17:18, Acts 17:18:27, Acts 17:20:14). See small print note on 1:66. 20. δοξάζοντεςκαὶαἰνοῦντες . The latter is the more definite word. The former is one of the many words which have acquired a deeper meaning in bibl. Grk. Just as δόξα in bibl. Grk. never (except 4Ma. 5:18) has the class. meaning of “ opinion,” but rather “ praise” or “ glory,” so δοξάζω in bibl. Grk. never means “ form an opinion about,” but “ praise” or “ glorify.” It is used of the honour done by man to man (1 Samuel 15:30), by man to God (Exodus 15:2), and by God to man (Psalms 91:15). It is also used of God glorifying Christ (Acts 3:13), a use specially common in Jn. (8:54, 11:4, etc.), and of Christ gloryfying God (17:4). See on Romans 1:21. For the combination comp. αἰνετὸνκαὶδεδοξασμένον (Daniel 3:26, 55). For αἰνεῖν see on ver. 13. πᾶσινοἷς . For the attraction see on 3:19. If ἤκουσαν refers to the angelic announcement, then καθώς refers to εἶδον only. But ἤκουσανκαὶεἶδον may sum up their experiences at Bethlehem, which were a full confirmation of what the Angel had said. Syr-Sin. Omits καὶαἰνοῦντες and πᾶσιν . Schleiermacher points out that, if this narrative had been a mere poetical composition, we should have had the hymn of the shepherds recorded and more extensive hymns assigned to the Angels (S. Luke, Eng. tr. p. 31). He regards the shepherds as the probable source of the narrative; “ for that which to them was most material and obvious the nocturnal vision in the fields, is the only circumstance treated in detail” (p. 33). But any narrator would give the vision, and could hardly give it more briefly without material loss. The brevity of it, especially when contrasted with the apocryphal gospels, is strong guarantee for its truth. How tempting to describe the search for the Babe and the conversation between the parents and the shepherds! Of the myth-hypothesis Weiss rightly says that “ it labours in vain to explain the part played here by the shepherds by means of the pastoral tales of the ancients, and is driven to drag in, awkwardly enough, the legends of Cyrus and Romulus” (Leben Jesu, i. 2, 4, note, Eng. tr. p. 255). As for the old rationalism, which explained the angelic vision by ignis fatuus or other phosphoric phenomena, which travellers have said to be common in those parts; “ the more frequent such phenomena, the more familiar must shepherds above all men, accustomed to pass their nights the whole summer long in the open air, have been with them, and the less likely to consider them as a sign from heaven pointing at a particular event” (Schleierm. p. 36) 21-40. The Circumcision and the Presentation in the Temple This forms the third and last section in the second group of narratives (1:57-2:40) in the Gospel of the Infancy (1:5-2:52). It corresponds to the Visitation (1:39-56) in the first group. Its very marked conclusion has close resemblance to 1:80 and 2:52 See introductory note to vv. 1-20 (p. 46). The absence of parallel passages in the other Gospels shows that at first this portion of the Gospel narrative was less well known. An oral tradition respecting the childhood of the Christ (when hardly anyone suspected that He was the Christ) would be much less likely to arise or become prevalent than an oral tradition respecting the ministry and crucifixion. We can once more trace a threefold division, viz. a longer narrative between two very short ones: the Circumcision (21), the Presentation in the Temple (22-38), and the Return to Home Life at Nazareth (39, 40). 21. The Circumcision. The verse contains an unusual number of marks of Lk.’ s style. 1. Καὶὅτε (vv. 22, 42, 6:13, 12:14, 23:23); 2. πλήθειν (twenty-two times in Lk. and Acts, and thrice elsewhere in N.T.); see on 1:57; 3. τοῦ ; c. infin. to express aim or purpose (1:74, 77, 79, 2:24, 4:10, 5:7, 8:5, etc.); see on 1:74; 4. καί introducing the apodosis (5:1, 12, 17, 7:12, 9:51, etc.); 5. συλλαμβάνειν (eleven times in Lk. and Acts, and five times elsewhere). See on 5:1. 21. τοῦπεριτεμεῖναὐτόν . There being no art. with ἡμέραι (contrast ver. 22), we cannot, as in ver. 6 and 1:57, make the gen. depend on all αἱἡμέραι or ὁχρόνος . The ὀκτώ does not take the place of the art. As Jesus was sent “ in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Romans 8:3), and “ it behoved Him in all things to be made like unto His brethren” (Hebrews 2:17), He underwent circumcision. He was “ born under the law” (Galatians 4:4), and fulfilled the law as a loyal son of Abraham. Had He not done so, οὐκἂνὅλωςπαρεδέχθηδιδάσκων , ἀλλ ʼ ἀπεπέμφθηἂνὡςἀλλόφυλος (Euthym.) His circumcision was a first step in His obedience to the will of God, and a first shedding of the redeeming blood. It was one of those things which became Him, in order “ to fulfil all righteousness” (Matthew 3:15). The contrast with the circumcision of the Baptist is marked. Here there is no family gathering of rejoicing neighbours and kinsfolk. Joseph and Mary are strangers in a village far from home. Hastings, D.C.G. i. p. 331. The reading τὸπαιδίον (D A G H) for αὐτόν (א A B R Ξ and versions) probably arose from this being the beginning of a lection, “ Him” being changed to “ the child” (AV.) for greater clearness. The same kind of thing has been done at the beginning of many of the Gospels in the Book of Common Prayer, “ Jesus” being substituted for “ He” or “ Him” : e.g. the Gospels for the 6th, 9th, 11th, 12th, 16th, 18th, 19th, and 22nd Sundays after Trinity. καὶἐκλήθη . The καί is almost our “ then” and the German da: but it may be left untranslated. It introduces the apodosis, as often in Grk., and esp. in Lk. This is simpler than to explain it as a mixture of two constructions, “ When eight days were fulfilled … He was called” and “ Eight days were fulfilled … and He was called” (Win. liii. 3. f, p. 546, lxv. 3. c, p. 756). Comp. Acts 1:10. “ He was also called” is not likely to be right. The Vulgate and Luther are right. Et postquam consummati sunt dies octo ut circumcideratur vocatum est nomen ejus Jesus. Und da acht Tage um waren, dass das Kind beschnitten wü rde, da ward seen Name genannt Jesus. This passage, with that about John the Baptist (1:59), is the chief biblical evidence that naming was connected with circumcision: comp. Genesis 17:5, Genesis 17:10. Among the Romans the naming of girls took place on the eighth day: of boys on the ninth. The purification accompanied it; and hence the name dies lustricus. Tertullian uses nominalia of the naming festival (Idol. xvi. 1). Among the Greeks the naming festival was on the tenth day; δεκάτηνἑστιᾷν or θύειν . συλλημφθῆναι This and corresponding forms, such as λήμψομαι , προσωπολημψία , and the like, are abundantly attested in good MSS. both of LXX and of N.T See on 1:31, κοιλία = “ womb” is specially freq. in Lk. 22-38. The Purification and the Presentation in the Temple. Here also we have a triplet. The Ceremony (22-24); Symeon and the Nunc Dimittis (25-35); and Anna the Prophetess (36-38). Symeon and Anna, like Zacharias and Elisabeth, with those spoken of in ver. 38, are evidence that Judaism was still a living religion to those who made the most of their opportunities. 22. αἱἡμέραιτοῦκ . Leviticus 12:6. Lk. is fond of these periphrases, which are mostly Hebraistic. Comp. ἡἡμέρατῶνσαββάτων (6:16), or τοῦσαββάτου (13:14, 16, 14:5), ἡἡμέρατῶνἀζύμων (22:7), and the like. τοῦκαθαρισμοῦαὐτῶν . “ Of their purification.” The Jewish law (Lev_12.) did not include the child in the purification. This fact, and the feeling that least of all could Jesus need purifying, produced the corrput reading αὐτῆς , followed in AV. No uncial and perhaps only one cursive (76) supports the reading αὐτῆς , which spread from the Complutensian Polyglott Bible (1514) to a number of editions. It is a remarkable instance of a reading which had almost no authority becoming widely adopted. It now has the support of Syr-Sin. The Complutensian insertion of διηρθρώθη after ἡγλῶσσααὐτοῦ in 1:64 was less successful, although that has the support of two cursives (140, 251). D here has the strange reading αὐτοῦ , which looks like a slip rather than a correction. No one would alter αὐτῶν to αὐτοῦ . The Vulgate also has purgationis ejus, but some Lat. MSS. have eorum. The αὐτῆς might come from LXX of Lev 12:6, ὅτανἀναπληρωθῶσιναἱἡμέραικαθάρσεωςαὐτῆς . Note that Lk. uses καθαρισμός and not κάθαρσις , which is a medical term for menstruation, and which Gentile readers might misunderstand. The meaning of αὐτῶν is not clear. Edersheim and Van Hengel interpret it of the Jews; Godet, Meyer, and Weiss of Mary and Joseph. The latter is justified by the context: “ When the days of their purification were fulfilled … they brought Him.” Contact with an unclean person involved uncleanness. Purification after childbirth seems to have been closely connected with purification after menstruation; the rites were similar. Herzog, Pro_2 art. Reinigungen. After the birth of a son the mother was unclean for seven days, then remained at home for thirty-three days, and on the fortieth day after the birth made her offerings. κατὰτὸννόμονΜωυσέως . These words must be taken with what precedes, for the law did not require them to bring Him to Jerusalem (Leviticus 12:1-8). We have already had several places in ch. 1. (vv. 8, 25, 27) in which there are amphibolous words or phrases: comp. 8:39, 9:17, 18, 57, 10:18, 11:39, 12:1, 17:22, 18:31, 19:37, 21:36, etc. The trisyllabic form Μωϋσῆς is to be preferred to Μωσῆς . The name is said to be derived from two Egyptian words, mo = “ water,” and ugai = “ to be preserved.” Hence the Lxx, a version made in Egypt, and the best MSS. of the N.T., which in the main represent the text of the N.T. that was current in Egypt, keep nearest to the Egyptian form of the name by preserving the v. Josephus also has Μωυσῆς . But Μωσῆς is closer to the Hebrew form of the name, and is the form most commonly used by Greek and Latin writers Win. v. 8, p. 47. ἀνήγαγον . One of Lk.’ s favourite words (5:5, 8:22, and often in Acts). It is here used of bringing Him up to the capital, like ἀναβαινόντων in ver. 43. In the literal sense they went down; for Bethlehem stands higher than Jerusalem. This journey is the first visit of the Christ to His own city. Ἰεροσόλυμα . In both his writings Lk. much more often uses the Jewish form Ἰεροσαλἡμ (vv. 25, 38, 41, 43, 45, etc.), which Mt. uses only once (23:37), and Mk. perhaps not at all (? 11:1). Jn. uses the Greek form in his Gospel, and the Jewish form in the Apocalypse. The Jewish form is used wherever the name is not a geographical term, but has a specially religious signification (Galatians 4:25; Hebrews 12:22). The Greek form is neut. plur. In Matthew 2:3 it may be fem.; but perhaps πᾶσαἡπόλις was in the writer’ s mind. Neither form should have the aspirate, which a “ false association with ἱερός ” has produced (WH. ii. 313; App. p. 160). This visit to Jerusalem probably preceded the arrival of the Magi, after which Joseph and Mary would hardly have ventured to bring Him to the city. If this is correct, we must abandon the traditional view that the Epiphany took place on the thirteenth day after the Nativity. There is no improbability in Joseph’ s going back to Bethlehem for a while before returning to Nazareth. See Andrews, Life of our Lord, p. 92, ed. 1892; Swete, The Apostles’ Creed, p. 50, ed. 1894. In any case the independence of Mt. and Lk. is manifest, for we do not know how to harmonize the accounts. Lk. seems to imply that “ the law of Moses” was kept in all particulars; and if so, the imply that did not take place before the fortieth day. Mt. implies that the flight into Egypt took place immediately after the visit of the Magi (2:14). As Bethlehem is so close to Jerusalem, Herod would not wait long for the return of the Magi before taking action. We adopt, therefore, as a tentative order the Presentstion on the fortieth day, Return to Bethlehem, Visit of the Magi, Flight into Egypt, without any return to Nazareth. παραστῆσαιτῷκυρίῳ . The Heb. verb in Exodus 13:12 means “ cause to pass over.” It is elsewhere used of parents causing their children to pass through the fire in offering them to Moloch, but is not then translated by παρίστημι (Deuteronomy 18:10; 2 Kings 16:3, 2 Kings 17:17, 2 Kings 23:10, etc.). For παραστῆσαι of offering to God comp. Romans 12:1. This παραστῆσαιτῷκυρίῳ is quite distinct from the purification, which concerned the mother, whereas the presentation concerned the son. It is evident that the presentation is the main fact here. Not, “ she came to offer a sacrifice,” but “ they brought Him up to present Him to the Lord,” is the principal statement. The latter rite points back to the primitive priesthood of all firstborn sons. Their functions had been transferred to the tribe of Levi (Numbers 3:12); but every male firstborn had to be redeemed from service in the sanctuary by a payment of five shekels (Numbers 18:15, Numbers 18:16), as an acknowledgment that the rights of Jehovah had not lapsed. This sum would be about twelve shillings according to the present worth of that amount of silver, but in purchasing power would be nearly double that. 23. The quotation which is not a parenthesis) is a combination of Exo 13:2 with Exodus 13:12 and is not exact with either: κληθήσεταιἁγ . perhaps comes from Exodus 12:16, comp. Luke 1:35. For πᾶνἄρσεν see Genesis 7:23; Exodus 1:22. The διανοῖγονμήτραν seems to be fatal to patristic speculations respecting Mary’ s having given birth to the Christ clauso utero. and therefore painlessly: see on ver. 7. Excepting Mark 7:34, διάοίγω is peculiar to Lk. (24:31, 45; Acts 7:56, Acts 16:14, Acts 17:3); freq. in LXX (Genesis 3:5, Genesis 3:7; Exodus 13:15; Numbers 3:12, etc.). 24. τοῦδοῦναιθυσίαν . See on 1:74, and to the reff. there given add 5:7, 8:5, 9:51, 12:42, 21:22, 22:6, 31, 24:16, 25, 29, 45. This is Mary’ s offering for her own purification: it has nothing to do with the ransom of the firstborn. The record of the offerings is considerable guarantee for the truth of the history. A legend would very probably have emphasized the miraculous birth by saying that the Virgin mother was divinely instructed not to bring the customary offerings, which in her case would not be required. ζεῦγοςτρυγόνων . The offering of the poor. It has been argued that this is evidence that the Magi had not yet come. But their gifts, even if they had already offered them, would not have raised Mary’ s condition from poverty to riches. Only well-to-do people offered a lamb and a pigeon. Neither here nor elsewhere in N.T. have we any evidence that our Lord or His parents were among the abjectly poor. “ The pigeon and turtle-dove were the only birds enjoined to be offered in sacrifice by the law of Moses. In almost every case they were permitted as a substitute for those who were too poor to provide a kid or a lamb … But while the turtle-dove is a migrant, and can only be obtained from spring to autumn, the wild pigeons remain throughout the year; and not only so— they have young at all times. Consequently, at any time of the year when the turtledove was unattainable, young pigeons might be procured. There is also a force in the adjective ‘ young’ ; for while the old turtle-dove could be trapped, it was hopeless to secure the old pigeon” (Tristram, Nat. Hist. of the B. pp. 211, 213). 25-35. The Benediction of Symeon. He and Anna are representatives of the holiness which, in a time of great spiritual deadness, still survived among the men and women of Israel. They are instances of that “ spontaneous priesthood” which sometimes springs up, and often among the lower orders, when the regular clergy have become corrupt and secularized. To identify Symeon with any other Symeon is precarious, the name being exceedingly common. He is introduced rather as an unknown person . It is sometimes said that Symeon, son of Hillel and father of Gamaliel, would hardly have been old enough; he was president of the Sanhedrin a.d. 13. But ver. 29 does not necessarily imply that Symeon is very old. What we know of the Sanhedrin at this period, however, does not lead us to expect to find saints among its presidents. In the Gospel of Nicodemus he is called sacerdos magnus, and it is his two sons who are raised from the dead by Christ, and reveal what they have seen in Hades (Pars altera, A. i.). 25. ἐνἸερουσαλήμ . It is remarkable that with one exception (Romans 15:26) this expression is used in N.T. by no one but Lk., who has it very often (ver. 43, 9:31; Acts 1:8, Acts 1:2:5, Acts 1:6:7, Acts 1:9:13, Acts 1:21, Acts 1:10:39, Acts 1:13:27, Acts 1:16:4, Acts 1:21:11). In LXX it is common. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 316, εὐλαβής . The word is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 2:5, Acts 8:2, Acts 22:12): lit. “ taking hold well,” and so “ cautious.” Lat. timoratus (Vulg.), timens (e), metuens (d), timens deum (r). Plutarch uses εὐλάβεια in the sense of “ carefulness about religious duties, piety” ; but εὐλαβής is not thus used in class. Grk. We find the combination of these same two adjectives, δίκαιος and εὐλαβής , twice in Plato’ s sketch of the ideal statesman. He ought to have both moderation and courage; and of moderation the two chief elements are justice and circumspection. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 3:1-9:50. THE 3:1-22. The External Preparation for the Ministry of the Christ: the Ministry of John the Baptist, Matthew 3:1-12; Mark 1:1-8; John 1:15-28 Hic quasi scena N. T. panditur is Bengel’ s illuminative remark. “ It was the glory of John the Baptist to have revived the function of the prophet” (Ecce Homo, p. 2); and it is difficult for us to realize what that meant. A nation, which from Samuel to Malachi had scarcely ever been without a living oracle of God, had for three or four centuries never heard the voice of a Prophet. It seemed as if Jehovah had withdrawn from His people. The breaking of this oppressive silence by the voice of the Baptist caused a thrill through the whole Jewish population throughout the world. Lk. shows his appreciation of the magnitude of the crisis by the sixfold attempt to give it an exact date. Of the four Evangelists he is the only one to whom the title of historian in the full sense of the term can be given; and of Christian writers he is the first who tries to fit the Gospel history into the history of the world. It is with a similar wish to do justice to a crisis that Thucydides gives a sixfold date of the entry of the Thebans into Platæ a, by which the thirty years’ truce was manifestly broken and the Peloponnesian War begun (ii. 2; comp. v. 20). The section is carefully arranged. First the Date (1, 2); then a Description of the new Prophet (3-6); then an account of his Preaching and its Effects (7-17); and an Explanation as to how it came to an End (18-20). He baptizes the Christ (21, 22). 1, 2. The Date. The event that is thus elaborately dated is the appearance of the new Prophet, not the beginning of Christ’ s ministry. See below on the conclusion of ver. 2. Ellicott considers it the date of the captivity of the Baptist. This had been advocated by Wieseler in his Synopsis (ii. ch. ii. Eng. tr. p. 178), but he abandoned it in his Beiträ ge. Others would make it refer to Christ’ s baptism, which may have followed closely upon John’ s first appearance as a preacher (Caspari, Chron. Einl. § 33, Eng, tr. p. 41). But the interval between the beginning of John’ s ministry and his baptizing Jesus cannot be determined Some estimate it at one month, others at six months, because John was six months older than Jesus (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1171). Weiss (Leben Jesu, I. ii. 8, Eng. tr. 1. p. 316) shows that the interval was not more than six months. The appearance of one who seemed to be a Prophet soon attracted immense attention; and when large numbers accepted his doctrine and baptism, it became imperative that the hierarchy should make inquiry as to his authority and claims. But it appears from John 1:19-28 that the first investigation made by the Sanhedrin was about the time when the Baptist met Jesus. In neither case can year or time of year be determined. If Jesus was born towards the end, John about the middle, of 749 (b.c. 5), then John might begin to preach about the middle of 779, and Jesus be baptized early in 780 (a.d. 27). It is little or no confirmation of this result that both the Greek and the Roman Churches celebrate the Baptism of Christ on Jan. 6th. Originally, the Nativity, the Visit of the Magi, and the Baptism were all celebrated on Jan. 6th. When Dec. 25th was adopted as the date of the Nativity, the Roman Church continued to celebrate the Baptism with the Epiphany to the Gentiles on Jan. 6th, while the Greek Church transferred the latter along with the Nativity to Dec. 25th, commemorating the Baptism alone on Jan. 6th. The fact that both the Eastern and the Western Church have concurred in celebrating the Baptism on Jan. 6th seems at first sight to be imposing testimony. But there is little doubt that all trustworthy evidence had perished before any of these dates were selected.1 Instead of the elaborate dates given in these first two verses, Mt. (3:1) has simply Ἐνδὲταῖςἡμέραιςἐκείναις , while Mk. (1:4) has nothing. Comp. the somewhat similar dating of the erection of Solomon’ s temple (1 Kings 6:1). Beng. says of this date, Epocha eccltsiæ omnium maxima. Hic quasi scena N.T. panditur. Ne nativitatis quidem, aut mortis, resurrectionis, ascensionis christi tempus tam præ cise definitur. 1. ἘνἔτειδὲπεντεκαιδεκάτῳτῆςἡγεμονίαςΤιβερίουΚαίσαρος . He naturally begins with the Roman Empire, and then takes the local governors, civil and ecclesiastical. “ Now in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Cæ sar,” or “ of Tiberius as Cæ sar.” Is the 15th year to be counted from the death of Augustus, Aug. 19th, a.u.c. 767, a.d. 14? or from the time when he was associated with Augustus as joint ruler at the end of 764 or beginning of 765, a.d. 11 or 12? It is impossible to determine this with certainty. Good authorities (Zumpt, Wieseler, Weiss) plead for the latter reckoning, which makes the Gospel chronology as a whole run more smoothly; but it is intrinsically less probable, and seems to be inconsistent with the statements of Tacitus and Suetonius. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 405. The main points are these. 1. Tiberius was not joint Emperor with Augustus; he was associated with him only in respect of the provinces and armies: ut provincias cum Augusto communiter administraret, simulque censum ageret (Suet. Tib. 21.); ut æ quum ei jus in omnibus provinciis exercitibusque esset (Vell. Paterc. 2:121); filius, collega imperii, consors tribuniciæ protestatis adsumitur, omnisque per exercitus ostentatur (Tac. Ann. 1:3, 3; comp. i. 11. 2 and iii. 56, 2). 2. It is clear from Tacitus (Ann. 1:5-7) that, when Augustus died, Tiberius was not regarded by himself or by others as already Emperor. Suetonius confirms this by saying that Tiberius, while manifestly getting the imperial power into his hands, for a time refused the offer of it (Tib. 24.). 3. No Instance is known of reckoning the reign of Tiberius from his association with Augustus. The coins of Antioch, Lk.’ s own city, which helped to convert Wieseler from the one view to the other by seeming to date the reign of Tiberius from the association, are not admitted by Eckhel to be genuine. On the other hand, there are coins of Antioch which date the reign of Tiberius from the death of Augustus. It remains, therefore, that, although to reckon from the association was a possible method, especially in the provinces, for there Tiberius had been really a consort of Augustus, yet it is more probable that Lk. reckons in the usual way from the death of the predecessor (see Wieseler, Chron. Synop. 2Ch_2.; Keim, Jesus of Naz. ii. pp 381, 382; Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1044; Sanday, Fourth Gospel, p. 65). Fifteen years from the death of Augustus would be a.d. 29, at which time our Lord would probably be 32 years of age, which sufficiently agrees with Lk.’ s “ about 30” (ver. 23).If the earlier date is admissible, the agreement becomes exact. ἡγεμονίας . Quite a vague term, and applicable to the rule of emperor, king, legatus, or procurator, as is shown by Jos. Ant. 18:4, 2, and by the use of ἡγεμών in N.T.: 20:20, 21:12; Acts 23:24, Acts 23:26, Acts 23:33, etc. Wieseler is alone in seeing in this word . and in καῖσαρ , evidence that the co-regency of Tiberius is meant (Beiträ ge z. richtigen Wü rdigung d. Evan. 1869, pp. 191-194). From the Emperor Lk. passes to the local governor under him. ἡγεμονεύοντος . The more exact ἐπιτροπεύοντος of D and other authorities is an obvious correction to mark his office with precision: ἐπίτρπος =procurator. Pilate succeeded Valerius Gratus a.d. 25, and was recalled a.d. 36 or 37 by Tiberius, who died, March a.d. 37, before Pilate reached Rome. Having mentioned the Roman officials, Lk. next gives the local national rulers. τετραρχοῦντος . The word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is used by Josephus of Philip, tetrarch of Trachonitis (B. J. iii. 10, 7). The title tetrarch was at first used literally of the governor of a fourth; e.g. of one of the four provinces of Thessaly (Eur. Alc. 1154), or one of the fourths into which each of the three divisions of Galatia were divided (Strabo, 430, 540, 560, 567). But after-wards it came to mean the governor of any division, as a third or a half, or of any small country; any ruler not a βασιλεύς (How Sat. 1:3, 12). Such seems to be the meaning here; but it may be used in its literal sense, Pilate’ s province representing the fourth tetrarchy, viz. the dominions of Archelaus. In d we have the singular rendering: in anno quintodecimo ducatus Tibert Cæ saris procurants Pontio Pilato Judæ æ , quaterducatus Galilæ æ Herode. Ἡρῴδου . Antipas, son of Herod the Great and Malthace the Samaritan. See small print on 1:5 for the iota subscript. Two inscriptions have been found, one at Cos and one at Delos, which almost certainly refer to him as tetrarch, and son of Herod the king (Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. I. vol. 2. p. 17). His coins have the title tetrarch, and, like those of his father, bear no image. Herod Philip was the first to have any portrait on the coins of a Jewish prince. He had the images of Augustus and Tiberius put upon his coins. As his dominions were wholly heathen, this would cause little scandal. He even went so far as to put the temple of Augustus at Panias on his coins. Herod Antipas was made tetrarch of Peræ a and Galilee, b.c. 4 (Jos. Ant. 17:11, 4; B. J. 2:6, 3). As he ruled this district until a.d. 39 or 40, the whole of Christ’ s life falls within his reign, and nearly the whole of Christ’ s ministry took place within his dominions. For his character see on 13:32. He was by courtesy allowed the title of βασιλεύς (Mark 6:14); and as Agrippa had obtained this by right, Antipas and Herodias went to Rome, a.d. 39, to try and get the courtesy title made a real one by Caligula. The attempt led to his banishment, the details of which are uncertain, for Josephus makes inconsistent statements. Either he was banished at Baiæ , a.d. 39, to Lugdunum (Ant. 18:7, 2), or he had a second audience with Caligula at Lugdunum, a.d. 40, and was banished to Spain (B. J. 2:9, 6). The latter is probably correct (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1561). But see Farrar, Herods, p. 178. Θιλίππου . Herod Philip, son of Herod the Great and Cleopatra. He reigned for nearly 37 years, b.c. 4 to a.d. 33, when he died at Julias, which he had built and named in honour of the infamous Julia, d. of Augustus and wife of Tiberius. He was the builder of Cæ sarea Philippi (B. J. 2:9, 1), and was the best of the Herods (Ant. 18:4, 6). He married his niece Salome soon after she had danced for the head of the Baptist, c. a.d. 31 (Ant. 18:5, 4). Trachonitis τραχών = τραχὺςκαὶπετρώδηςτόπος derived its name from the rugged character of the country. It lay N.E. of Galilee in the direction of Damascus, and its inhabitants were skilled archers and very often banditti (Ant. xv. 10. 1). The expression τῆςἸτ . καὶΤρ . χώρας , “ the region of Ituræ a and Trachonitis,” seems to indicate that more than these two is included; probably Auranitis and Batanæ a. Ἰτυραία , both here and perhaps everywhere, is an adjective. Farrar, p. 164. ΛυσανίουτῆςἈβιληνῆςτετρ . Not merely Strauss, Gfrö rer, B. Bauer, and Hilgenfeld, but even Keim and Holtzmann, attribute to Lk. the gross chronological blunder of supposing that Lysanias, son of Ptolemy, who ruled this region previous to b.c. 36, when he was killed by M. Antony, is still reigning 60 years after his death. Such a mistake is very improbable; and the only difficulty about Lk.’ s statement is that we have no indisputable evidence of this tetrarch Lysanias. D.C.G. art. “ Lysanias.” But 1. Lysanias, son of Ptolemy, was styled king and not tetrarch, and the seat of his kingdom was Chalcis in Cœ le-Syria, not Abila in Abilene. 2. It is pure assumption that no one of his name ever ruled in these parts afterwards. 3. Josephus (Ant. xix. 5, 1) speaks of “ Abila of Lysanias,” and (xx. 7, 1) of a tetrarchy of Lysanias (comp. B. J. ii. 11, 5, 12. 8); and as the son of Ptolemy was not called tetrarch, nor was connected with Abila, and, moreover, reigned for only 5 or 6 years, it is improbable that “ Abila of Lysanias” was called after him. Therefore these passages in Josephus confirm rather than oppose Luk_4. A medal found by Pococke designates Lysanias “ tetrarch and high priest.” If this refers to either, it is more likely to refer to Lk.’ s Lysanias. 5. Two inscriptions exist, one of which proves that Lysanias, the son of Ptolemy, left children; the other, that at the time when Tiberius was associated with Augustus there was a “ tetrarch Lysanias” (Boeckh, Corp. inscr. Gr. 4523, 4521). See Davidson, Intr. to N. T. 1. pp. 214-221, 1st ed.; Rawlinson, Bampton Lectures for 1859, P. 203; Wieseler in Herzog,2 1. PP. 87-89; and the reff. in Thayer’ s Grimm under Λυσανίας . 2. ἐπὶἀρχιερέωσἍννακαὶΚαιάφα . Lk. now passes to the ecclesiastical rulers. The singular is probably not accidental, and certainly not ironical. “ Under the high priest Annas-Caiaphas,” which means that between them they discharged the duties; or that each of them in different senses was regarded high priest, Annas de jure (Acts 4:6) and Caiaphas de facto (John 11:49). Annas had held office a.d. 7-14, when he had been deposed by Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pilate, who set up in succession Ismael, Eleazar (son of Annas), Simon, and Joseph surnamed Caiaphas, who held office a.d. 18-36, when he was deposed by Vitellius. Four more sons of Annas succeeded Caiaphas, the last of whom (another Annas) put to death James the “ brother of the Lord” and the first bishop of Jerusalem. It is manifest that Annas retained very great influence, and sometimes acted as high priest. “ Annas the high priest was there, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest” (Acts 4:6). Perhaps, so far as it was safe to do so, he was encouraged to ignore the Roman appointments and to continue in office during the high priesthoods of his successors. This would be especially easy when his own son-in-law or son happened to be the Roman nominee.1 There were no less than twenty-eight high priests from the time of Herod the Great to the capture of Jerusalem by Titus (Jos. Ant. 20:10). ἐγένετοῥῆμαΘεοῦἐπὶἸωάνην . It is clear from this that what Lk. is anxious to date with precision is not any event in the life of the Messiah, but the appearance of the new Prophet, who was to be the Messiah’ s herald, and who was by some mistaken for the Messiah. John’ s preaching and baptizing is an epoch with Lk. (Acts 1:22, Acts 10:37, Acts 13:24). As distinct from ὁλόγοςτοῦΘεοῦ , which means the Gospel message as a whole (see on 8:11), ῥῆμαΘεοῦ means some particular utterance (Matthew 4:4; Comp. Luke 22:61). The phrase γίνεσθαιῥῆμαΚυρίου is freq. in LXX (Genesis 15:1; 1 Samuel 15:10; 2 Samuel 7:4; 1 Kings 17:2, 1 Kings 17:8, 1 Kings 17:18:1, 1 Kings 17:20:28, etc.); also γίνεσθαιλόγονΚυρίου (2 Samuel 24:11; 1 Kings 6:11, 1 Kings 12:22, 1 Kings 13:20, 1 Kings 14:1, etc.). It is the O.T. formula. to express Divine inspiration. In such cases the phrase is almost always followed by πρός : but in 1 Chronicles 22:8 (?) and Jeremiah 1:1 we have ἐπί . Jeremiah 1:1 is a close parallel to this : τὸῥῆματοῦΘεοῦὃἐγένετοἐπὶἸερεμίαν . The phrase occurs nowhere else in N.T. ἸωάνηντὸνΖαχαρίουυἱόν . Lk. alone describes the Baptist thus. No other N.T. writer mentions Zacharias.— ἐντῇἐρήμῳ . The one mentioned as his abode (1:80). Both AV. and RV. rather obscure this by using “ deserts” in 1:80 and “ wilderness” here. Mt. calls it “ the wilderness of Judæ a” (3:1). It is the Jeshimon of 1 Samuel 23:19. See D. B.2 art. “ Arabah,” and Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 310. 3-6. Description of the New Prophet. Lk. omits the statements about his dress and food (Matthew 3:4; Mark 1:6), and also the going out of the people of Jerusalem and Judæ a to him (Matthew 3:5; Mark 1:5). The famous account of the Baptist in Jos. Ant. 18:5, 2 should be compared. It may have been altered by Christian scribes, but its divergence from the Gospel narrative as to the motive for imprisoning and killing John, is in favour of its originality.1 See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 240. 3. πᾶσανπερίχωροντοῦἸορδάνου . The same as “ the plain of Jordan,” which is thus rendered in LXX Genesis 13:10, Genesis 13:11; by τῷπεριχώρῳτοῦἸ ., 2 Chronicles 4:17; and by τῷπεριοίκῳτοῦἸ ., 1 Kings 7:46. The expression covers a considerable portion of the Jordan valley at least as far north as Succoth (2 Chronicles 4:17). The Baptist, therefore, moved north from the limestone desert on the W. shore of the Dead Sea, and perhaps went almost the whole length of the valley to the confines of the Sea of Galilee. For “ Bethany beyond Jordan” must have been near Galilee (John 1:28), and is supposed by Conder to be the same as Bashan (Handbook of the Bible, pp. 315, 320). See, however, D. B.2 art. “ Bethabara.” John was sometimes on one bank and sometimes on the other, for we read of his working in Peræ a (John 10:40). His selection of the valley of the Jordan as his sphere of work was partly determined by the need of water for immersion. Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 312. κηρύσσων … ἁμαρτιῶν . Verbatim as Mark 1:4. Nowhere in N.T. has κηρύσσειν its primary meaning of “ act as a herald” ; but either “ proclaim openly” (8:39, 12:3; Mark 1:45, etc.) or “ preach the Gospel” (Matthew 11:1; Mark 3:14; Romans 10:14, Romans 10:15, etc.). To “ preach baptism” is to preach the necessity or value of baptism; and “ repentance baptism” is baptism connected with repentance as being an external symbol of the inward change (Acts 13:24, Acts 19:4). The repentance precedes the baptism, which seals it and reminds the baptized of his new obligations. To submit to this baptism was to confess that one was a sinner, and to pledge oneself to a new life. The “ change of mind” 1 has reference both to past deeds and to future purposes, and is the result of a realization of their true moral significance (Wsctt. on Hebrews 6:1, Hebrews 6:6, Hebrews 6:12:17). This inward change is specially insisted upon in the account of John’ s preaching in Jos. Ant. 18:5, 2. The word is rare in Mt. (3:8, 11) and Mk. (1:4), and does not occur in Jn. It is freq. in Lk. (ver. 8, 5:32, 15:7, 24:47; Acts 5:31, Acts 11:18, etc.). We find it in Jos. Ant. 13:11, 3 of Aristobulus after the murder of his brother; to Plut. Pericles, X., of the Athenians after the banishment of Cimon; and in Thuc. iii. 36, 3 of the Athenians after the sentence on Mitylene. See American Ch. Rev. No. 134, pp. 143 ff. John’ s “ repentance baptism” was εἰςἄφεσινἀμαρτιῶν . This was its purpose, assuring the penitent of forgiveness, and of deliverance from the burden, penalty, and bondage of sin (Trench, Syn. xxxiii.; Crem. Lex. p. 297: comp. Luke 1:77; Acts 2:38; Hebrews 10:18). 4. ἐνβίβλῳλόγων . With the exception of Php 4:3, ἐνβίβλῳ is peculiar to Lk. (20:42; Acts 1:20, Acts 7:42). The form βίβλος is usual where the meaning is a writing or document, βύβλος where the plant or papyrus as writing material is intended (Hdt. 2:96, 3, 5:58. 3). For λόγοι in the sense of the “ utterances of a teacher or prophet” comp. Acts 20:35; Amos 1:1. φωνὴβοῶντος … τὰςτρίβουςαὐτοῦ . From Matthew 3:3 and Mark 1:3 we see that, in the tradition of which all three make use, these words were quoted as applying to the Baptist. This is therefore a primitive interpretation; and we learn from John 1:23 that it originated with the Baptist himself. John was a φωνή making known the Λόγος . “ The whole man was a sermon.” The message was more than the messenger, and hence the messenger is regarded as mainly a voice. Jn. has εὐθύνατε for εὐθείαςποιεῖτε (1:23), and this looks as if he were translating direct from the Hebrew, which has one word and not two. The quotation in the other three is identical, and (with the substitution of αὐτοῦ for τοῦΘεοῦ [ἡμῶν ] verbatim as LXX. Lk. quotes Isaiah 40:4, Isaiah 40:5 as well as 40:3, and here slightly varies from LXX, having εὐθείας for εὐθεῖαν , and αἱτραχεῖαιεἰςὁδοὺςλείας , for ἡτραχεῖαεἰςπεδία .1 ἐντῇἐρήμῳ . It is possible to take these words with ἑτοιμάσατε rather than with φωνὴβοῶντος : but here, as in Mt. and Mk., the latter arrangement is more natural— vox clamantis in deserto. Barnabas (9:3) connects them with βοῶντος . It is evident from the scenery which is mentioned that it is in a desert that the road for the coming King has to be made. The details symbolize the moral obstacles which have to be removed by the repentance baptism of John, in order to prepare the people for the reception of the Messiah, or (as some prefer) of Jehovah (Isaiah 35:8-10). That Lk. means the Messiah is shown by the substitution of αὐτοῦ for τοῦΘεοῦ : and that this interpretation is in accordance with the primitive tradition is shown by the fact that all three Gospels have this substitution. Just as Oriental monarchs, when making a royal progress, send a courier before them to exhort the population to prepare roads, so the Messiah sends His herald to exhort His own people (John 1:11) to prepare their hearts for His coming. 5. φάραγξ . “ A valley shut in by precipices, a ravine” ; here only in N.T., but found in LXX (Judith 2:8) and in class. Grk. (Thuc. 2:67, 4). It is perhaps from the same root as φαράω =“ plough” and foro=“ bore.” βουνός . Herodotus seems to imply that this is a Cyrenaic word (4:199, 2): but it is freq. in later writers and in LXX. Comp. 23:30, and for the sense Zechariah 4:7; Isaiah 40:4. ἔσταιτὰσκολιὰεἰς , κ .τ .λ . “ The crooked places shall become straight ways, and the rough ways smooth ways” : i.e. roads shall be made where there were none before, and bad roads shall be made good roads. Comp. the account of Vespasian’ s march into Galilee, especially the work of the pioneers (Jos. B. J. iii. 6, 2). 6. πᾶσασάρξ . Everywhere in N.T. this expression seems to refer to the human race only; so even Matthew 24:22; Mark 13:20; 1 Peter 1:24; comp. Acts 2:17; Romans 3:20. Fallen man, man in his frailty and need of help, is meant. In LXX it often includes the brutes: Genesis 6:19, Genesis 6:7:15, Genesis 6:16, Genesis 6:21, Genesis 6:8:17, Genesis 6:9:11, Genesis 6:15, Genesis 6:16, Genesis 6:17; Psalms 136:25; Jeremiah 32:27, Jeremiah 45:5. The phrase is one of many which occur frequently in Is. 40-45., but not at all in the earlier chapters (Driver, Isaiah, p. 197). τὸσωτήριον . It was obviously for the sake of this declaration that Lk. continued the quotation thus far. That “ the salvation of God” is to be made known to the whole human race is the main theme of his Gospel. 7-17. John’ s Preaching and its Effects. This section gives us the burden of his preaching (Ἑλεγεν , imperf.) in accordance with the character which has just been indicated. The herald who has to see that hearts are prepared for the Messiah must be stern with hypocrites and with hardened sinners, because the impenitent cannot escape punishment (7-9); must supply different treatment for different classes (10-14; comp. ver. 5); and must declare the certainty of his Master’ s coming and of its consequences (15-17). 7. Ἔλεγενοὖν . “ He used to say, therefore” : being the predicted Forerunner, his utterances were of this character. We need not regard this as a report of what was said on any one occasion, but as a summary of what he was in the habit of saying during his ministry to the multitudes who came out of the towns and villages into the wilderness to hear the Prophet and gain something from him. Mt. (3:7) represents this severe rebuke as addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees; which confirms the view that Lk. is here giving us the substance of the preaching rather than what John said on some particular day. What he said to some was also said to all; and as the salvation offered was universal, so also was the sin. This is thoroughly characteristic of Lk. βαπτισθῆναι . As a substitute for repentance, or as some magical rite, which would confer a benefit on them independently of their moral condition. Their desire for his baptism showed their belief in him as a Prophet; otherwise the baptism would have been valueless (John 1:25; comp. Zechariah 13:1 ; Ezekiel 36:25). Hence the indignation of John’ s disciples when they heard of Jesus baptizing, a rite which they regarded as their master’ s prerogative (John 3:26). The title ὁβαπτιστής or ὁβαπτίζων shows that his baptism was regarded as something exceptional and not an ordinary purification (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, 2). Its exceptional character consisted in (1) its application to the whole nation, which had become polluted; (2) its being a preparation for the more perfect baptism of the Messiah. It is only when baptism is administered by immersion that its full significance is seen. βαπτίζω is intensive from βάπτω , like βαλλίζω from βάλλω : βάπτω , “ I dip” ; βαπτίζω , “ I immerse.” Γεννήματα is “ offspring” of animals or men (Ecclus. 10:18); “ fruits” of the earth or of plants (Deuteronomy 28:4, Deuteronomy 28:11, Deuteronomy 28:18, Deuteronomy 28:42, Matthew 26:29; Mark 14:25; Luke 22:18); “ rewards” of righteousness (Hosea 10:12; 2 Corinthians 9:10). Γεννήματαἐχιδνῶν . Genimina (Vulg.) or generatio (b ff2 l q r) or progenies (a c d e f) viperarum. In Mt. this is addressed to the Pharisees, first by John and afterwards by Jesus (3:7, 12:34, 23:33). It indicates another parentage than that of Abraham (John 8:44), and is perhaps purposely used in opposition to their trust in their descent: comp. Aesch. Cho. 249; Soph. Ant. 531. John’ s metaphors, like those of the prophecy (ver. 5), are from the wilderness;— vipers, stones, and barren trees. It is from this stern, but fresh and undesecrated region, and not from the “ Holy,” but polluted City, that the regenerating movement proceeds (Isaiah 41:18). These serpent-like characters are the σκολιά that must be made straight. Comp. Psalms 58:4, Psalms 140:3. ὑπέδειξεν . “ Suggested” by showing to eye or ear: 6:47, 12:5; Acts 9:16, Acts 9:20:35; elsewhere in N.T. only Matthew 3:7. τῆςμελλούσηςὀργῆς . It is possible that this refers primarily to the national judgments involved in the destruction of Jerusalem and the banishment of the Jews (21:23; 1 Mac. 1:64); but the penalties to be inflicted at the last day are probably included (Romans 1:18, Romans 1:2:5, Romans 1:8, Romans 1:3:5, Romans 1:5:9). The Jews believed that the judgments of God, especially in connexion with the coming of the Messiah, as threatened by the Prophets (Joe 2:31; Malachi 3:2, Malachi 3:4:1; Isaiah 13:9), were to be executed on the heathen. The Baptist proclaims that there is no such distinction. Salvation is for all who prepare their hearts to receive the Messiah; judgment, for all who harden their hearts and reject Him. Birth is of no avail. 8. ποιήσατεοὖνκαρποὺςἀξίουςτ . μ . “ If you desire to escape this wrath and to welcome the Messiah , repent, and act at once (aor. imperat.) as those who repent.” Comp. 20:24; Acts 3:4, Acts 3:7:33, Acts 3:9:11, Acts 3:16:9, Acts 3:21:39, Acts 3:22:13; and see Win. xliii. 3. a, p. 393. Mt. has καρπόν (3:8), which treats the series of acts as a collective result. Comp. S. Paul’ s summary of his own preaching, esp. ἄξιατῆςμετανοίαςἔργαπράσσοντας (Acts 26:20). It was a Rabbinical saying, “ If Israel would repent only one day, the Son of David would come forthwith” ; and again, “ If Israel would observe only one sabbath according to the ordinance, forthwith would the Son of David come” ; and, “ All the stages are passed, and all depends solely on repentance and good works.” The phrase ποιεῖνκαρπόν is not necessarily a Hebraism (Genesis 1:11, Genesis 1:12): it occurs [Arist.] De Plant. i. 4, p. 819, ii. 10, p. 829. Comp. James 3:12: Mark 4:32. μὴἄρξησθε . “ Do not even begin to have this thought in your minds.” Omnem excusationis etiam conatum præ cidit (Beng.). If there are any passages in which ἄρχομαι with an infin. is a mere periphrasis for the simple verb (20:9), this is not one of them. See Win. lxv. 7. d, p. 767; Grim-Thay. p. 79; Fritzsche on Matthew 16:21, p. 539.— λέγεινἐνἑαυτοῖς . “ To say within yourselves” rather than “ among yourselves.” Comp. 7:49 and λέγετεἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςὑμῶν (Psalms 4:5). For the perennial boast about their descent from Abraham comp. John 8:33, John 8:53; James 2:21; Jam_2 Esdr. 6:56-58; Jos. Ant. iii. 5, 3; B. J. v. 9, 4; Wetst. on Matthew 3:9. ἐκτῶνλίθωντούτων . There is a play upon words between “ children” (banim) and “ stones” (abanim). It was God who made Abraham to be the rock whence the Jews were hewn (Isaiah 51:1, Isaiah 51:2); and out of the most unpromising material He can make genuine children of Abraham (Romans 4:9:6, Romans 4:7, 11:Romans 4:13-24; Galatians 4:21-31). The verb ἐγεῖραι is applicable to both stones and children. 9. ἤδη “ Although you do not at all expect it.” The image of the axe is in harmony with that of the fruits (ver. 8). In the East trees are valued mainly for their fruit; and trees which produce none are usually cut down. “ And even now also the axe is laid unto the root.” The πρός after κεῖται may be explained either, “ is brought to the root and lies there” ; or, “ lies directed towards the root.” In either case the meaning is that judgment is not only inevitable, but will come speedily: hence the presents, ἐκκόπτεται and βάλλεται . The δὲκαί is Lk.’ s favourite method of giving emphasis; ver. 12, 2:4, 4:41, 5:10, 36, 9:61, 10:32, 11:18, 12:54, 57, 14:12, 16:1, 22, 18:9, 19:19, 20:12. For μή with a participle, expressing a reason or condition, comp. 2:45, 7:30, 11:24, 12:47, 24:23; Acts 9:26, Acts 9:17:6, Acts 9:21:34, Acts 9:27:7; and see Win. Lev_5 , p. 607. For ἐκκόπτειν , “ to cut off,” of felling trees, comp. 13:7, 9; Hdt. ix. 97, 1. See notes on 6:43. 10-14. John’ s Different Treatment of Different Classes. Peculiar to Lk., but probably from the same source as the preceding verses. It shows that, in levelling the mountains and raising the valleys, etc. (ver. 5), he did not insist upon any extraordinary penances or “ counsels of perfection.” Each class is to forsake its besetting sin, and all are to do their duty to their neighbour. The stern warnings of the Baptist made the rulers leave in disgust without seeking baptism at his hands (7:30; Matthew 21:25); but they made the multitude anxious to comply with the conditions for avoiding the threatened judgment. 10. ἐπηρώτων . “ Continually put this question.” The notion of repetition comes from the imperf. and not, as in ἐπαιτεῖν (16:3, 18:35), from the ἐπί , which in ἐπερωτᾷν indicates the direction of the inquiry; Plato, Soph. 249 E, 250. Comp. ἐπεδόθη in 4:17. Τίοὖνποιήσωμεν ; “ What then, if the severe things which thou sayest are true, must we do?” For the conjunctivus deliberativus Comp. 23:31; Matthew 26:54, Mark 12:14; John 12:27; and see Win. xli. 4. b, p. 356; Matth. 515. 2; Arnold’ s Madvig, p. 99; Green, p. 150. 11. δύοχιτῶνας . The χιτών was the under and less necessary garment, distinguished from the upper and almost indispensable ἱμάτιον ; 6:29; Acts 9:39; Matthew 5:40; John 19:23. When two of these χιτῶνες were worn at once, the under one or shirt would be the Hebrew cetoneth, the upper would be the Hebrew meil, which was longer than the cetoneth. It was common for travellers to wear two (Jos. Ant. xvii. 5, 7); but Christ forbade the disciples to do so (9:3; Matthew 10:10). It is not implied here that the two are being worn simultaneously. See Trench, Syn. l.; Conder, Handb. of B. p. 195; D. B.2 art. “ Dress” ; Schaff’ s Herzog, art. “ Clothing and Ornaments of the Hebrews.” If the owner of two shirts is to “ give a share” , he will give one shirt. Comp. Romans 1:11, Romans 1:12:8; and contrast Peter’ s reply to the same question Acts 2:37, Acts 2:38. With regard to βρώματα , nothing is said or implied about having superfluity or abundance. He who has any food is to share it with the starving. Comp. 1 Thessalonians 2:18. This verse is one of those cited to support the view that Lk. is Ebionite in his sympathies, a view maintained uncompromisingly by Renan (Les É vangiles, ch. xiii.; V. de J. chs. x., xi.), and by Campbell (Critical Studies in St. Luke, p. 193). For the answer see Bishop Alexander (Leading Ideas of the Gospel, p. 170). Here it is to be noticed that it is Mt. and Mk. who record, while Lk. omits, the poor clothing and poor food of the Baptist himself; and that it is Mt. who represents his sternest words as being addressed to the wealthy Pharisees and Sadducees, while Lk. directs them against the multitudes generally. 12. τελῶναι . From τέλη (Matthew 17:25; Romans 13:7) and ὠνέομαι ; so that etymologically τελῶναι = publicani, “ those who bought or farmed the taxes” under the Roman government. But in usage τελῶναι = portitores, “ those who collected the taxes” for the publicani. This usage is common elsewhere, and invariable in N.T. Sometimes, and perhaps often, there was an intermediate agent between the τελῶναι and the publicani, e.g. ἀρχιτελώνης or magister (19:2). These “ tax-collectors” were detested everywhere, because of their oppressiveness and fraud, and were classed with the vilest of mankind: μοιχοὶκαὶπορνοβοσκοὶκαὶτελῶναικαὶκόλακεςκαὶσυκοφάνται , καὶτοιοῦτοςὅμιλοςτῶνπάντακυκώντωνἐντῷβίῳ (Lucian. Necyomant. xi.; comp. Aristoph. Equit. 248; Theophr. Charac. vi.; Grotius, in loco; Wetst. on Mt. v. 46). The Jews especially abhorred them as bloodsuckers for a heathen conqueror. For a Jew to enter such a service was the most utter degradation. He was excommunicated, and his whole was regarded as disgraced. But the Romans allowed the Herods to retain some powers of taxation; and therefore not all tax-collectors in Palestine were in the service of Rome. Yet the characteristic faults of the profession prevailed, whether the money was collected in the name of Cæ sar or of Herod; and what these were is indicated by the Baptist’ s answer. See Lightfoot, Opera, i. pp. 324, 325; Herzog, Pro_2 art. Zoll; Edersh. L. &T. 1. p. 515. 13. Διδάσκαλε . Publicani majore ceteris reverentia utuntur (Beng.). Syr-Sin. omits the word. πλέονπαρά . For παρά after comparatives comp. Hebrews 1:4, Hebrews 1:3:3, Hebrews 1:9:23, Hebrews 1:11:4, Hebrews 1:12:24; Hdt. 7:103. 6; Thuc. i . 23, 4, iv. 6, 1. The effect is to intensify the notion of excess: so also ὑπέρ , 16:8; Hebrews 4:12. τὸδιατεταγμένον . “ That which stands prescribed” (perf.), a favourite word with Lk.: 8:55; 17:9, 10; Acts 7:44, Acts 18:2, Acts 20:13, Acts 23:31, Acts 24:23. Comp. disponere, verordnen. It is from the general meaning of “ transacting business” that πράσσειν acquires the special sense of “ exacting tribute, extorting money” : comp. 19:23. This use is found from Herodotus onwards: Hdt. iii. 58. 4; Æ sch. Cho. 311; Pers. 476; Eum. 624; Xen. Anab. vii. 6. 17: comp. πράκτωρ , εἰσπράσσειν , ἐκπράσσειν , and many illustrations in Wetst. Agere is similarly used: publicum quadragesimæ in Asia egit (Suet. Vesp. i.); but what follows is of interest as showing how rare an honourable publicanus was: manebantque imagines in civitatibus ei positæ sub hoc titulo ΚΑΛΩΣΤΕΛΩΝΗΣΑΝΤΙ . This is said of Sabinus, father of Vespasian. After farming the quadragesima tax in Asia he was a money-lender among the Helvetii. It is to be noticed that the Baptist does not condemn the calling of a tax-collector as unlawful for a Jew. He assumes that these τελῶναι will continue to act as such. 14. στρατευόμενοι . “ Men on service, on military duty” ; militantes rather than milites (Vulg.). In 2 Timothy 2:4, οὐδεὶςστρατευόμενος is rightly rendered nemo militans. Who these “ men on service” were cannot be determined; but they were Jewish soldiers and not Roman, and not on service in the war between Antipas and his father-in-law Aretas about the former’ s repudiation of the latter’ s daughter in order to make room for Herodias. That war took place after the Baptist’ s death (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, 2), two or three years later than this, and probably a.d. 32 (Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1171, 1412). These στρατευόμενοι were possibly gendarmerie, soldiers acting as police, perhaps in support of the tax-collectors. Such persons, as some modern nations know to their cost, have great opportunities for bullying and delation. By their καὶἡμεῖς they seem to connect themselves with the τελῶναι , either as knowing that they also were unpopular, or as expecting a similar answer from John. Μηδέναδιασείσητε . Like concutio, διασείω is used of intimidation, especially of intimidating to extort money (3 Mac. 7:21). Eusebius uses it of the extortions of Paul of Samosata (H. E. vii. 30. 7); where, however, the true reading may be ἐκσείει . In this sense σείω also is used (Aristoph. Equit. 840; Pax, 639); and it is interesting to see that Antipho couples σείω with συκοφαντῶ . Φιλοκράτηςοὑτοσὶἑτέρουςτῶνὑπευθεύνωνἔσειεκαὶἐσυκοφάντει (Orat. vi. p. 146, l. 22).1 This last passage, combined with the verse before us, renders it probable that συκοφάντης , a “ fig-shower,” is not one who gives information to the police about the exportation of figs, but one who shows figs by shaking the tree; i.e. who makes the rich yield money by intimidating them. Nowhere is συκοφάντης found in the sense of “ informer,” nor yet of “ sycophant.” It always denotes a “ false accuser,” especially with a view to obtaining money; Arist. Ach. 559, 825, 828. Hatch quotes from Brunet de Presle, Notices et textes du Musé e du Louvre, a letter of b.c. 145 from Dioscorides, a chief officer of finance, to his subordinate Dorion: περὶδὲδιασεισμῶνκαὶπαραλειῶνἐνίωνδὲκαὶσυκοφαντεῖσθαιπροσφερομένωνβουλόμεθαὑμᾶςμὴδιαλανθάνειν , κ .τ .λ ., “ in the matter of fictitious legal proceedings and plunderings, some persons being, moreover, alleged to be even made the victims of false accusations,” etc. (Bibl. Grk. p. 91). Comp. Leviticus 19:11; Job 35:9. Hesychius explains συκοφάντης as ψευδοκατήγορος . ὀψωνίοις . From ὄψον , “ cooked food” to be eaten with bread, and ὠμέομαι , “ I buy” : hence “ rations, allowance, pay” of a soldier; 1 Corinthians 9:7; 1Co_1 Mac. 3:28, Malachi 3:14:32; Mal_1 Esdr. 4:56; and freq. in Polybius. John does not tell these men on service that theirs is an unlawful calling. Nor did the early Christians condemn the life of a soldier: see quotations in Grotius and J. B Mozley, University Sermons, Serm. v. 15-17. The certainty of the Messiah’ s Coming and the Consequences of the Coming. Matthew 3:11, Matthew 3:12. The explanatory opening (ver. 15) is peculiar to Lk. The substance of ver. 16 is common to all three; but here Lk. inserts the characteristic πᾶςιν . In ver. 17 he and Mt. are together, while Mk. is silent. Lk. shows more clearly than the other two how intense was the excitement which the Baptist’ s preaching caused. 15. Προσδοκῶντος . What were they expecting? The result of all this strange preaching, and especially the Messianic judgment. Would it be put in execution by John himself? For this absolute use of προσδοκάω comp. Acts 27:33. Excepting Matthew 11:3, Matthew 11:24:50, 2 Peter 3:12-14, the verb is peculiar to Lk. (1:21, 7:19, 20, 8:40, 12:46; Acts 3:5, etc.). Syr-Sin. omits. The Vulg. here has the strange rendering existimante; although in 1:21, 7:19, 20, 8:40 προσδοκάω is rendered expecto, and in 12:46 spero.. Cod. Brix. has sperante here. See on 19:43 and 21:23, 25 for other slips in Jerome’ s work. Here d has an attempt to reproduce the gen. abs. in Latin: et cogitantium omnium. Comp. 9:43, 19:11, 21:5, 24:36, 41. μήποτεαὐτός . “ If haply he himself were the Christ.” Their thinking this possible, although “ John did no sign,” and had none of the insignia of royalty, not even descent from David, is remarkable. Non ita crassam adhuc ideam de Christo habebant, nam Johannes nil splendoris externi habebat et tamen talia de eo cogitabant (Beng.). That this question had been raised is shown by John 1:20. The Baptist would not have declared “ I am not the Christ,” unless he had been asked whether he was the Messiah, or had heard the people discussing the point. For the constr. comp. μήποτεδῴηαὐτοῖςὁΘεὸςμετάνοιαν (2 Timothy 2:25). The opt. in indirect questions is freq. in Lk. both without ἄν (1:29, 8:9, Acts 17:11, Acts 21:33) and also with ἄν (1:62, 6:11, 15:26; Acts 5:24, Acts 10:17). 16. πᾶσιν . Showing how universal the excitement on this point was. Neither Mt. (3:11) nor Mk. (1:7) has the πᾶσιν of which Luke is so fond: comp. 6:30, 7:35, 9:43, 11:4, 12:10. The aor. mid. ἀπεκρίνατο is rare in N.T. (23:9; Acts 3:12; Matthew 27:12; Mark 14:61; John 5:17, John 5:19); also in LXX (Judges 5:29; 1 Kings 2:1; 1 Chronicles 10:13; Ezekiel 9:11). In bibl. Grk. the pass. forms prevail: see small print on 1:19. Ἐγὼμὲνὕδατι . Both with emphasis: “ I with water.” ὁἰσχυρότερος . Valebat Johannes, sed Christus multo plus (Beng.). The art. marks him as one who ought to be well known. λῦσαιτὸνἱμάντατῶνὑποδημάτων . More graphic than Mt.’ s τὰὑποδ . βαστάσαι , but less so than Mk.’ s κύψαςλῦσαιτὸνἱμ . τῶνὑποδ . αὐτοῦ Both AV. and RV. mark the difference between ὑπόδημα , “ that which is bound under” the foot, and σανδάλιον , dim. of σάνδαλον , by rendering the former “ shoe” (10:4, 15:22, 22:35; Acts 7:33, Acts 13:25) and the other “ sandal” (Mark 6:9; Acts 12:8). The Vulg. has calceamenta for ὑποδήματα , and sandalia or caligæ for σανδάλια . In LXX the two words seem to be used indiscriminately (Joshua 9:5, Joshua 9:13); but ὑποδ . is much the more common, and it is doubtful whether the Jews before the Captivity wore shoes or manalim (Deuteronomy 33:25) as distinct from sandals. Comp. οἱἱμάντεςτῶνὑποδημάτωναὐτῶν (Isaiah 5:27). To unfasten shoes or sandals, when a man returned home, or to bring them to him when he went out, was the office of a slave (See Wetst. on Matthew 3:11). John is not worthy to be the bond-servant of the Christ. The αὐτοῦ is not so entirely redundant as in some other passages: “ whose latchet of his shoes.” 1 αὐτός . In emphatic contrast to the speaker. ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳ . See on 1:15. That the ἐν with πνεύματιἁγίῳ and its absence from ὕδατι marks a distinction of any great moment, either here or Acts 1:5, must be doubted; for in Matthew 3:11 both expressions have the ἐν , and in Mark 1:8 neither. The simple dat. marks the instrument or matter with which the baptism is effected; the ἐν marks the element in which it takes place (John 1:31). See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 244. καὶπυρί . This remarkable addition is wanting in Mk. Various explanations of it are suggested. (1) That the fiery tongues at Pentecost are meant, is improbable. Were any of those who received the Spirit at Pentecost among the Baptist’ s hearers on this occasion? Moreover, in Acts 1:5 καὶπυρί is not added. (2) That it distinguishes two baptisms, the penitent with the Spirit, and the impenitent with penal fire, is very improbable. The same persons are to be baptized with the Spirit and with fire. In ver. 17 the good and the bad are separated, but not here. This sentence must not be made parallel to what follows, for the winnowing-shovel is not baptism. (3) More probably the πυρί refers to the illuminating, kindling, and purifying power of the grace given by the Messiah’ s baptism. Spiritus sanctus, quo Christus baptizat, igneam vim habet: atque ea vis ignea etiam conspicua fuit oculis hominum (Beng.): comp. Malachi 3:2. (4) Or, the fiery trials which await the disciple who accepts Christ’ s baptism may be meant: comp. 12:50; Mark 10:38, Mark 10:39. The passage is one of many, the exact meaning of which must remain doubtful; but the purifying of the believer rather than the punishment of the unbeliever seems to be intended. 17. πτύον . The “ winnowing-shovel” (pala lignea; Vulg. ventilabrum), with which the threshed corn was thrown up into the wind .1 This is a further description of the Messiah,— He whose πτύον is ready for use. Note the impressive repetition of αὐτοῦ after τῇχειρί , τὴνἅλωνα , and τὴνἀποθήκην .2 τὴνἅλωνα . The threshing-floor itself, and not its contents. It is by removing the contents— corn to the barn, and refuse to the fire— that the floor is thoroughly cleansed. Christ’ s threshing-floor is the world; or, in a more restricted sense, the Holy Land. See Mever on Matthew 3:12. ἀσβέστῳ . Comp. Mark 9:43; Leviticus 6:12, Leviticus 6:13; Isaiah 34:8-10, 66:24; Jeremiah 7:20; Ezekiel 20:47, Ezekiel 20:48. In Homer it is a freq. epithet of γέλως , κλέος , βοή , μένος , and once of φλόξ (Il. xvi. 123). As an epithet of πῦρ it is opposed to μαλθακόν and μακρόν . See Heinichen on Eus. H. E. vi. 41, 15 and viii. 12, 1. It is therefore a fierce fire which cannot be extinguished, rather than an endless fire that will never go out, that seems to be indicated: and this is just such a fire as τὸἄχυρον (the refuse left after threshing and winnowing) would make. But ἄσβεστος is sometimes used of a fire that never goes out, as that of Apollo at Delphi or of Vesta at Rome (Dion. Hal. cxciv. 8). For κατακαίειν comp. Matthew 13:30, Matthew 13:40; also Exodus 3:2, where it is distinguished from καίειν : it implies utter consumption. 18-20. § Explanation of the Abrupt Termination of the Baptist’ s Ministry. This is given here by anticipation in order to complete the narrative. Comp. the conclusions to previous narratives: 1:66, 80, 2:40, 52. 18. Λολλὰμὲνοὖνκαὶἕτερα . The comprehensive πολλὰκαὶἕτερα confirms the view taken above (ver. 7) that this narrative (7-18) gives a summary of John’ s teaching rather than a report of what was said on any one occasion. The ἕτερα means “ of a different kind” (Galatians 1:6, Galatians 1:7), and intimates that the preaching of the Baptist was not always of the character just indicated. The cases in which μὲνοὗν occurs must be distinguished. 1. Where, as here, μέν is followed by a corresponding δέ , and we have nothing more than the distributive μὲν … δὲ … combined with οὖν (Acts 8:4, Acts 8:25, Acts 8:11:19, Acts 8:12:5, Acts 8:14:3, Acts 8:15:3, Acts 8:30, etc.). 2. Where no δέ follows, and μέν confirms what is said, while οὖν marks an inference or transition, quidem igitur (Acts 1:6, Acts 1:2:41, Acts 1:5:41, Acts 1:13:4, Acts 1:17:30; Hebrews 7:11, Hebrews 8:4, etc.). Win. liii. 8. a, p. 556. παρακαλῶνεὐηγγελίζετο … ἐλεγχόμενος . These words give the three chief functions of the Baptist: to exhort all, to preach good tidings to the penitent, to reprove the impenitent. It is quite unnecessary to take τὸνλαόν with παρακαλῶν , and the order of the words is against such a combination. In late Greek the acc. of the person to whom the announcement is made is freq. after εὐαγγελίζεσθαι (Acts 14:15, Acts 14:16:10; Galatians 1:9; 1 Peter 1:12; comp. Acts 8:25, Acts 8:40, Acts 8:14:21): and hence in the pass. we have πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται . The acc. of the message announced is also common (8:1; Acts 5:42, Acts 5:8:4, Acts 5:12?, 10:36, 11:20). Where both person and message are combined, the person addressed is in the dat. (1:19, 2:10, 4:43; Acts 8:35; comp. Luke 4:18; Acts 17:18; Romans 1:15, etc.): but in Acts 13:32 we have double acc. Here the Lat. texts vary between evangelizabat populum (Cod. Am.) and evang. populo (Cod. Brix.). 19. Ἡρῴδης . Antipas, as in ver. 1. The insertion of the name Φιλίππου after γυναικός comes from Mk. and Mt. (A C K X and some versions). This Philip must be carefully distinguished from the tetrarch Philip, with whom Jerome confuses him. He was the son of Mariamne, on account of whose treachery he had been disinherited by Herod the Great; and he lived as a private individual at Jerusalem (Jos. B. J. i. 30, 7). Josephus calls both Antipas and also this Philip simply “ Herod” (Ant. xviii. 5, 4). Herodias became the evil genius of the man who seduced her from his brother. It was her ambition which brought about the downfall of Antipas. Lk. alone tells us that John rebuked Antipas for his wicked life as well as for his incestuous marriage. Obviously ἐλεγχόμενος means “ rebuked, reproved” (1 Timothy 5:20; 2 Timothy 4:2), and not “ convicted” or “ convinced” (John 8:46, John 16:8). In the former sense ἐλέγχειν is stronger than ἐπιτιμᾷν : see Trench, Syn. iv. Once more (see on ver. 1) we have a remarkable rendering in d: Herodes autem quaterducatus cum argueretur ad eo, etc. Note the characteristic and idiomatic attraction , and comp. 2:20, 5:9, 9:43, 12:46, 15:16, 19:37, 24:25; Acts 3:21, Acts 10:39, Acts 13:39, Acts 22:10, Acts 26:2. 20. προσέθηκενκαὶτοῦτοἐπὶπᾶσιν , κατέκλεισεν , κ .τ .λ . “ He added this also on the top of all— he shut up John in prison” ; i.e. he added this to all the other πονηρά of which he had been guilty. Farrar, Herods, p. 171. Josephus, in the famous passage which confirms and supplements the Gospel narrative respecting the Baptist (Ant. xviii. 5, 2), says that Antipas put him in prison because of his immense influence with the people. They seemed to be ready to do whatever he told them; and he might tell them to revolt. This may easily have been an additional reason for imprisoning him: it is no contradiction of the Evangelists. What Josephus states is what Antipas publicly alleged as his reason for arresting John: of course he would not give his private reasons. The prison in which the Baptist was confined was in the fortress of Machæ rus at the N.E. corner of the Dead Sea. Seetzen discovered the site in 1807 above the valley of the Zerka, and dungeons can still be traced among the ruins. Tristram visited it in 1872 (Discoveries on the East Side of the Dead Sea, ch. xiv.). It was hither that the daughter of Aretas fled on her way back to her father, when she discovered that Antipas meant to discard her for Herodias. Machæ rus was then in her father’ s dominions; but Antipas probably seized it immediately afterwards (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, 1, 2). The expression προσέθηκεντοῦτο , κατέκλεισεν must not be confounded with the Hebraisms προσέθετοπέμψαι (10:11, 12), προσέθετοσυλλαβεῖν (Acts 12:3). It is true that in LXX the act. as well as the mid. is used in this manner: προσέθηκετεκεῖν (Genesis 4:2); προσέθηκελαλῆσαι (Genesis 18:29): see also Exodus 10:28; Deuteronomy 3:26; and for the mid. Exodus 14:13. But in this Hebraistic use of προστίθημι for “ go on and do” the second verb is always in the infin. (Win. liv. 5, p. 588). Here there is no Hebraism, and therefore no sign that Lk. is using an Aramaic source. Κατακλείειν is classical, but occurs in N.T. only here and Acts 26:10; in both cases of imprisoning. It is freq. in medical writers, and Galen uses it of imprisonment (Hobert, Med. Lang. of Lk. pp 66, 67). Matthew 14:3 we have ἀπέθετο , and Mark 6:17, ἔδησεν , of Herod’ s putting John into prison. 21, 22. Jesus is baptized by John.— It is remarkable, that although the careers of the Forerunner and of the Messiah are so closely connected, and so similar as regards prediction of birth, retirement, ministry, and early end, yet, so far as we know, they come into actual contact only at one brief period, when the Forerunner baptized the Christ. Once some of John’ s disciples raised the question of fasting, and Jesus answered it (5:33; Matthew 9:14), and once John sent some of his disciples to Jesus to question Him as to His Messiahship (7:19-23; Matthew 11:2-19); but there is no meeting between Christ and the Baptist. Lk., having completed his brief account of the Forerunner and his work, begins his main subject, viz. the Messiah and His work. This involves a return to the point at which the Forerunner met the Messiah, and performed on Him the rite which prepared Him for His work, by publicly uniting Him with the people whom He came to save, and proclaiming Him before them. 21. ἐντῷβαπτισθῆναιἅπαντατὸνλαόν . “ After all the people had been baptized” ; cum bapitizatus esset omnis populus (Cod. Brix.): not, “ while they were being baptized” ; cum baptizaretur (Cod. Am.). The latter would be ἐντῷ with the pres. infin. Both constructions are very freq. in Lk. Contrast the aorists in 2:27, 9:36, 11:37, 14:1, 19:15, 24:30, Acts 11:15 with the presents in 5:1, 12, 8:5, 42, 9:18, 29, 33, 51, 10:35, 38, 11:1, 27, 17:11, 14, 24:4, 15, 51; Acts 8:6, Acts 19:1. Lk. is also fond of the stronger form ἄπας which is rare in N.T. outside his writings. Readings are often confused, but ἄπας is well attested 5:26, 8:37, 9:15, 19:37, 48, 23:1; Acts 2:44, Acts 2:4:31, Acts 2:5:16, Acts 2:10:8, Acts 2:11:10, Acts 2:16:3, Acts 2:28, Acts 2:25:24; and may be right in other places. That there were great multitudes present when John baptized the Christ is not stated; nor is it probable. Had Lk. written ἐντῷβαπτίζεσθαι , this would have implied the presence of many other candidates for baptism; but it was not until “ after every one of the people had been baptized” that the baptism of Jesus took place. Possibly Jesus waited until He could be alone with John. In any case, those who had long been waiting for their turn would go home soon after they had accomplished their purpose. It was some time after this that John said to the people, “ He that cometh after me … is standing in the midst of you, and ye know Him not” (John 1:26). They could hardly have been so ignorant of Him, if large multitudes had been present when John baptized Him. καὶἼησοῦβαπτισθέντος . It is remarkable that this, which seems to us to be the main fact, should be expressed thus incidentally by a participle. It is as if the baptism of all the people were regarded as carrying with it the baptism of Jesus almost as a necessary complement “ After they had been baptized, and when He had been baptized and was praying.” But perhaps the purpose of Lk. is to narrate the baptism, not so much for its own sake as an instance of Christ’ s conformity to what was required of the people, as for the sake of the Divine recognition and authentication which Jesus then received. Jerome has preserved this fragment of the Gospel acc. to the Hebrews: “ Lo, the mother of the Lord and His brethren said to Him, John the Baptist baptizeth for remission of sins: let us go and be baptized by him. But He said to them, Wherein have I sinned that I should go and be baptized by him? except perchance this very thing which I have said is ignorance” (Adv. Pelag. 3:1). The Tractatus de Rebaptismate says that the Pauli Præ dicatio represented “ Christ, the only man who was altogether without fault, both making confession respecting His own sin, and driven almost against His will by His mother Mary to accept the baptism of John: also that when He was baptized fire was seen on the water, which is no written in any Gospel” (17. ; Hartel’ s Cyprian, 2. p. 90). The fire in the water is mentioned in Justin (Try. 88.), but not as recorded by the Apostles; and also in the Gospel acc. to the Hebrews. καίπροσευχομένου . Lk. alone mentions this. On his Gospel as emphasizing the duty of prayer see Introd. § 6. Mt. and Mk. say that Jesus saw the Spirit descending; Jn. says that the Baptist saw it; Lk. that it took place along with the opening of the heaven and the coming of the voice. Mk. says simply τὸπνεῦμα ; Mt has πνεῦμαΘεοῦ ; Lk. τὸπνεῦματὸἅγιον . See On 1:15. The constr. of ἐγένετο with acc. and infin. is on the analogy of the class. constr. of συνέβη : it is freq. in Lk. See note, p. 45. The form ἀνεῳχθῆναι is anomalous, as if assimilated to ἀνεῷχθαι : comp. John 9:10, John 9:14; Revelation 4:1, Revelation 6:1. 22. σωματικῷεἴδειὡςπεριστεράν . “ In a bodily form” is peculiar to Lk. Nothing is gained by admitting something visible and rejecting the dove. Comp. the symbolical visions of Jehovah granted to Moses and other Prophets. We dare not assert that the Spirit cannot reveal Himself to human sight, or that in so doing He cannot employ the form of a dove or of tongues of fire. The tongues were appropriate when the Spirit was given “ by measure” to many. The dove was appropriate when the Spirit was given in His fulness to one. It is not true that the dove was an ancient Jewish symbol for the Spirit. In Jewish symbolism the dove is Israel. The descent of the Spirit was not, as some Gnostics taught, the moment of the Incarnation: it made no change in the nature of Christ. But it may have illuminated Him so as to complete His growing consciousness of His relations to God and to man (2:52). It served two purposes: (1) to make Him known to the Baptist, who thenceforward had Divine authority for making Him known to the world (John 1:32, John 1:33); and (2) to mark the official beginning of the ministry, like the anointing of a king. As at the Transfiguration, Christ is miraculously glorified before setting out to suffer, a voice from heaven bears witness to Him, and “ the goodly fellowship of the Prophets” waits on His glory. The phrase φωνὴνγενέσθαι is freq. in Lk. (1:44, 9:35, 36; Acts 2:6, Acts 7:31, Acts 10:13, Acts 19:34). Elsewhere only Mark 1:2, Mark 1:9:7; John 12:30; Revelation 8:5, Comp. ἔρχεταιφωνή , John 12:28; ἐξέρχεταιφωνή , Revelation 16:17, Revelation 19:5. Σύ . Responsio ad preces, ver. 21 (Beng.). The Σύ shows that the voice conveyed a message to the Christ as well as to the Baptist. Mk. also has Σὺεἶ : Matthew 3:17 we have Οὗτόςἐστιν . Diversitas locutionum adhuc etiam utilis est, me uno modo dictum minus intelligatur (Aug.). In the narrative of the Transfiguration all three have Οὗτόςἐστιν . The reference seems to be to Psalms 2:7; and here D and other important witnesses have Τἰόςμουεἶσύ , ἐγὼσήμερονγεγέννηκάσε . Augustine says that this was the reading of some MSS., “ although it is stated not to be found in the more ancient MSS.” (De Cons. Evang. 2:14: comp. Enchir. ad Laurent. 49.). Justin has it in his accounts of the Baptism (Try. 88., 103.). In Mt. it is possible to take ὁἀγαπητός with what follows: “ The beloved in whom I am well pleased” ; but this is impossible here and in Mark 1:11, and therefore improbable in Mt. The repetition of the article presents the epithet as a separate fact: “ Thou art My Son, My beloved one.” Comp. μοῦνοςἐὼνἀγπητός (Hom. Obadiah 1:2:365). It is remarkable that St. John never uses ἀγαπητύς of Christ: neither in the Fourth Gospel nor in the Apocalypse does the word occur in any connexion. εὐδόκησα “ I am well pleased” : the timeless aorist. Comp. John 13:3. The verb is an exception to the rule that, except where a verb is compounded with a prep., the verbal termination is not retained, but one from a noun of the same root is substituted: e.g. ἀδυνατεῖν , εὐεργετεῖν , not ἀδύνασθαι , εὐεργάζεσθαι . Comp. καραδοκεῖν and δυσθνήσκειν , which are similar exceptions, Win. 16:5, p. 125. The voice does not proclaim Jesus as the Messiah, as a legend would probably have represented. No such proclamation was needed either by Jesus or by the Baptist. The descent of the Spirit had told John that Jesus was the christ (John 1:33). This voice from heaven, as afterwards at the Transfiguration (9:35), and again shortly before the Passion (John 12:28), followed closely upon Christ’ s prayer, and may be regarded as the answer to it. His humanity was capable of needing the strength which the heavenly assurance gave. To call this voice from heaven the Bath-Kol, of the Rabbis, or to treat it as analogous to it, is misleading. The Rabbinic Bath-Kol, or “ Daughter-voice,” is regarded as an echo of the voice of God: and the Jews liked to believe that it had been granted to them after the gift of prophecy had ceased. The utterances attributed to it are in some vases so frivolous or profane, that the more intelligent Raobis denounced it as a superstition. It has been pointed out that Lk. appears to treat the baptism of Jesus by John as a matter of course. Mt. tells us that the Baptist at first protested against it; and many writers have felt that it requires explanation. Setting aside the profane suggestions that Jesus was not sinless, and therefore needed “ repentance baptism for remission of sins,” or that He was in collusion with John, we may note four leading hypotheses. 1. He wished to do honour to Joh_2. He desired to elicit from John a declaration of His Messiahship. 3. He thereby gave a solemn sign that He had done with home life, and was beginning His public ministry. 4. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 4:1-13. The Internal Preparation for the Ministry of the Christ: the Temptation in the Wilderness, Matthew 4:1-11; Mark 1:12, Mark 1:13. R. C. Trench, Studies in the Gospels, pp. 1-65, Macmillan, 1867; B. Weiss, Leben Jesu, I. 2:10, Berlin, 1882; Eng. tr. 1. pp. 319-354; H. Lathamn, Pastor Pastorum, pp. 112-146, Bell, 1890; P. Schaff, Person of Christ, pp. 32, 153, Nisbet, 1880; A. M. Fairbairn, Expositor, first series, vol. iii. pp. 321-342, Hodder, 1876; P. Didon, Jé sus Christ, ch. iii. pp. 208-226, Plon, 1891. Many futile and irreverent questions have been raised respecting this mysterious subject; futile, because it is impossible to answer them, excepting by empty conjectures; and irreverent, because they are prompted by curiosity rather than by a desire for illumination. Had the answers to them been necessary for our spiritual welfare, the answers would have been placed within our reach. Among such questions are such as these: Did Satan assume a human form, and change his form with each change of temptation, or did he remain invisible? Did he know who Jews was, or was he trying to discover this? Did he know, until he was named, that Jesus knew who he was? Where was the spot from which he showed all the kingdoms of the world? Three points are insisted upon in the Epistle to the Hebrews (2:18, 4:15), and beyond them we need not go. 1. The temptations were real. 2. Jesus remained absolutely unstained by them. 3. One purpose of the temptations was to assure us of His sympathy when we are tempted. The second point limits the first and intensifies the third. The sinlessness of Jesus excluded all those temptations which spring from previous sin; for there was no taint in Him to become the source of temptation. But the fact that the solicitations came wholly from without, and were not born from within, does not prevent that which was offered to Him being regarded as desirable. The force of a temptation depends, not upon the sin involved in what is proposed, but upon the advantage connected with it. And a righteous man, whose will never falters for a moment, may feel the attractiveness of the advantage more keenly than the weak man who succumbs; for the latter probably gave way before he recognized the whole of the attractiveness; or his nature may be less capable of such recognition. In this way the sinlessness of Jesus augments His capacity for sympathy: for in every case He felt the full force of temptation.1 It is obvious that the substance of the narrative could have had only one source. No one has succeeded in suggesting any probable alternative. There is no Old Testament parallel, of which this could be an adaptation. Nor is there any prophecy that the Messiah would have to endure temptation, of which this might be a fictitious fulfilment. And we may be sure that, if the whole had been baseless invention, the temptations would have been of a more commonplace, and probably of a grosser kind. No Jewish or Christian legend is at all like this. It is from Christ Himself that the narrative comes; and He probably gave it to the disciples in much the same form as that in which we have it here. 1. πλήρηςπνεύματοςἁγίου . These words connect the Temptation closely with the Baptism.1 It was under the influence of the Spirit, which had just descended upon Him, that He went, in obedience to God’ s will, into the wilderness. All three accounts mark this connexion.; and it explains the meaning of the narrative. Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering His own interests without regard to the Father’ s will. And here ἀνήχθη … πειρασθῆναι . (Matthew 4:1) must not be understood as meaning that Christ went into the wilderness to court temptation. That would be too like yielding to the temptation which He resisted (vv. 9-12). He went into the desert in obedience to the Spirit’ s promptings. That He should be tempted there was the Divine purpose respecting Him, to prepare Him for His work. D.C.G. ii. P. 714. Neither Mt.nor Mk. has ἄγιον as an epithet of πνεῦμα here (see on 1:15); and neither of them has Lk.’ s favourite ὑπέστρεψεν . ἤγετοἐντῷπνεύματιτῇἐρήμῳ . “ He was led in (not into) the wilderness,” i.e. in His wanderings there, as in His progress thither, He was under Divine influence and guidance. The imperf. indicates continued action. Tradition, which is not likely to be of any value, places this wilderness close to Jericho. Some region farther north is more probable. The ἡμέραςτεσσεράκοντα may be taken either with ἤγετο (RV.) or with πειραζόμενος (AV.). As the temptation by Satan was simultaneous (pres. part.) with the leading by the Spirit, the sense will be the same, whichever arrangement be adopted. In Mk. also the words are amphibolous, and may be taken either with ἦνἐντῇἐρήμῳ or with πειραζόμενος . If we had only the account in Mt. we might have supposed that the temptations did not begin until the close of the forty days. The three recorded may have come at the end of the time, as seems to be implied with regard to the first of them. Or they may be given as representative of the struggles which continued throughout the whole period. 2. πειραζόμενος . The word is here used in its commonest sense of “ try or test,” with a sinister motive. In N.T. it has three uses: 1. “ try or attempt” to do (Acts 9:26, Acts 14:7, Acts 24:6); 2. “ try or test, ” with a good motive (John 6:6; 2 Corinthians 13:5; Revelation 2:2), especially of God’ s sending trials (1 Corinthians 10:13; Hebrews 11:17; Revelation 3:10); 3. “ try or test, ” with a bad motive, in order to produce perplexity or failure (11:16; Matthew 19:3; [Jn.] 8:6), especially of tempting to sin (1 Corinthians 7:5; 1 Thessalonians 3:5; James 1:13). It is thus of much wider meaning than δοκιμάζειν (12:56, 14:19), which has only the second of these meanings. Trench, Syn. lxxiv.; Cremer, Lex. p. 494. ὑπὸτοῦδιαβόλου . All three use ὑπό of the agency of Satan. He is not a mere instrument. Comp. 2 Corinthians 2:11; Acts 10:38. In N.T. διάβολος with the art. always means Satan, “ the calumniator,” κατ ʼ ἐξοχήν . In Mt., Jn., Acts, Eph., 1 and 2 Tim., Heb., James, Jude, 1 Pet., and Rev. this use is invariable. It is possible that ὁδιάβολος was originally a translation of Satan = “ the adversary.” In LXX ἐνδιαβάλλειν sometimes means “ meet, oppose” (Numbers 22:22, Numbers 22:32), and διάβολος means “ adversary” (1 Mac. 1:36). In Job (1:6-12, 2:1-7) and Zech. (3:1-3) ὁδιάβολος is used as in N.T. for Satan, as the accuser or slanderer of God to man and of man to God. In this scene he endeavours to misrepresent God, and to induce Jesus to adopt a false view of His relation to God. The existence of such a being is sometimes denied, but on purely à priori grounds. To science the question is an open one, and does not admit of demonstration either way. But the teaching of Christ and His Apostles is clear and explicit; and only three explanations are possible. Either (1) they accommodated their language to a gross superstition, knowing it to be such; or (2) they shared this superstition, not knowing it to be such; or (3) the doctrine is not a superstition, but they taught the actual truth. As keim rightly says, one cannot possibly regard all the sayings of Jesus on this subject as later interpolations, and “ Jesus plainly designated His contention with the empire of Satan as a personal one” (Jes. of Naz., Eng. tr. ii. pp. 318, 325). See Gore, Dissertations on Subjects connected with the Incarnation, pp. 23-27. οὐκἔφαγενοὐδέν . This does not agree well with the supposition that Jesus partook of the scanty food which might be found in the wilderness. The νηστεύσας of Mt. seems to imply the deliberate fasting which was customary in times of solemn retirement for purposes of devotion. But this does not exclude the possility that the mental and spiritual strain was so great that for a time there was no craving for food. In any case the want of food would at last bring prostration of body and mind; and then the violence of temptation would be specially felt. Both Mt. and Lk. appear to mean that it was not until near the end of the forty days that the pangs of hunger were endured. For συντελεῖσθαι of days being completed comp. Acts 21:27; Job 1:5; Tobit 10:7.1 3. εἶπεν . Mt. adds προσελθών , which is a very favourite expression of his.It does not necessarily imply corporal presence, although Mt. himself may have understood it in that sense. Jesus says of the approaching struggle in Gethsemane, “ The prince of the world cometh” (John 14:30). Nowhere in Scripture is Satan said to have appeared in a visible form: Zechariah 3:1 is a vision. And nothing in this narrative requires us to believe that Satan was visible on this occasion. ΕἰυἱὸςεἶτοῦΘεοῦ . Both Mt. and Lk. have υἱόςτ . Θ . without the article, the reference being to the relationship to God, rather than to the office of the Messiah. The emphatic word is υἱός . The allusion to the voice from heaven (3:22) is manifest, but is not likely to have occurred to a writer of fiction, who would more probably have written, “ If Thou art the Christ.” The “ if” does not necessarily imply any doubt in Satan, although Augustine takes it so;1 but it is perhaps meant to inspire doubt in Jesus: “ Hath God said, Thou art My beloved Son, and yet forbidden Thee to give Thyself bread?” Comp. “ Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of any tree of the garden?” (Genesis 3:1). The suggestion seems to be that He is to work a miracle in order to prove the truth of God’ s express declaration, and that He may doubt His relation to God, if God does not allow the miracle. This seems better than to regard the first temptation as a temptation of the flesh. If the food had been there, would it have been sinful for Jesus to partake of it? Again, it is sometimes said that it was a temptation to use His supernatural power to supply His own necessities. Among “ the Laws of the Working of Signs” we are told was one to the effect that “ Our Lord will not use His special powers to provide for His personal wants or those of His immediate followers.” 2 This law perhaps does not hold, except so far as it coincides with the principle that no miracle is wrought where the given end can be obtained without miracle. Some of Christ’ s escapes from His enemies seem to have been miraculous. Was not that “ providing for a personal want” ? His rejoining His disciples by walking on the sea might be classed under the same head. The boat coming suddenly to land might be called “ providing for the wants of His immediate followers.” Had He habitually supplied His personal wants by miracle, then He would have ceased to share the lot of mankind. But it would be rash to say that it would have been sinful for Him to supply Himself with food miraculously, when food was necessary for His work and could not be obtained by ordinary means. It is safer to regard this as a temptation to satisfy Himself of the truth of God’ s word by a test of His own. The singular τῷλιθῳτούτῳ is more graphic than the of οἰλίθοιοὖτοι of Mt. A single loaf is all that He need produce. The similarity between lumps of stone and loaves of bread perhaps explains why this material, so common in the wilderness, was selected for change into food. For the use of ἵνα after εἰπέ (10:40, 14:15, etc.) see Win. lxiv. 8, pp. 420-424; B. Weiss on Matthew 4:3; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 177; Green, Gr. of N. T. p. 170. It is a weakening of the talk force of ba rather than a mere substitute for the infinitive. See Blass, Gr. pp. 217 ff. 4. Christ does not reply to the “ if” by affirming that He is the Son of God; nor does He explain why the Son of God does not accept the devil’ s challenge. He gives an answer which holds good for any child of God in similar temptation.1 The reply is a pointed refutation, however, of the special suggestion to Himself, ὁἄνθρωπος having direct reference to υἱὸςτ . Θεοῦ . Satan suggests that Gods Son would surely be allowed to provide food for Himself. Jesus replies that God can sustain, not only His Son, but any human being, with or without food, and can make other things besides bread to be food. Comp. “ My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me” (John 4:34). The reply is verbatim as LXX of Deu 8:3. As all His replies come from this book, we may conjecture that Jesus had recently been reading it or meditating on it. The repeated use of a book which is so full of the trials of Israel in the wilderness may suggest a parallel between the forty days and the forty years. The direct reference is to the manna. The addition of the remainder of the quotation in A D and other authorities comes from Mt. It differs in wording in the texts which insert it. If it were genuine here, its absence from the best authorities would be most extra ordinary. The insertion of ὁδιάβολος and of εἰςὄροςὑψηλόν in ver. 5, and the substitution of τοῦκόσμου for τῆςοἰκουμένης , are corruptions of the same kind. 5. Lk. places second the temptation which Mt. places last The reasons given for preferring one order to the other are subjective and unconvincing. Perhaps neither Evangelist professes to give any chronological order. Temptations may be intermingled. It is very doubtful whether the τότε with which Mt. introduces the temptation which he places second, and the πάλιν with which he introduces his third, are intended to specify sequence in time. Many Lat. MSS. (Gbcflqr) here place vv. 5-8 after vv. 9-11. Lk.omits the command to Satan to depart;2 and we have no means of knowing which temptation it immediately followed. Mt. naturally connects it with the one which he places last. ἀναγαγών . See on 2:22. The word does not require us to believe that Satan had control of Christ’ s person and transferred Him bodily from the desert to a mountain-top. From no mountain could “ ll the kingdoms of the world” be visible, least of all “ in a moment of time.” If Satan on the mountain could present to Christ’ s mind kingdoms which were not visible to the eye, he could do so in the desert. We may suppose that he transferred Jesus in thought to a mountain-top, whence He could in thought see all. For “ all the kingdoms of the world” comp. Ezra 1:2, where we have τῆςγῆς for “ of the world” in Mt. τοῦκόσμου , which D substitutes here. τῆςοἰκουμένης . A favourite expression with Lk. (2:1, 21:26; Acts 11:28, Acts 11:17:6, 31, Acts 11:14:27, Acts 11:24:5): elsewhere only six times, of which one is a quotation (Romans 10:18 from Psalms 14:5). It describes the world as a place of settled government, “ the civilized world.” To a Greek it might mean the Greek world as distinct from barbarian regions (Hdt. 4:110, 4; comp. Dem. De Cor. p. 242). Later it meant “ the Roman Empire,” orbis terrarum, as in 2:1 (Philo, Leg. ad Cai. 25). In inscriptions the Roman Emperor is ὁκύριοςτῆςοἰκουμέης Finally, it meant “ the whole inhabited earth,” as here and 21:26 (Revelation 16:14; Hebrews 1:6; Jos. Ant. viii. 13, 4: B. J. vii. 3, 3). In Hebrews 2:5 it is used of the world to come as an ordered system: see Wsctt. Lk. omits καὶτὴνδόξαναὐτῶν here, but adds it in Satan’ s offer. ἐνστιγμῇχρόνου . Puncto temporis: comp. ἐνῥιπῇὀφθαλμοῦ (1 Corinthians 15:52). Not in Mt. Comp. Isaiah 24:5; Isa_2 Mac. 9:11. It intimates that the kingdoms were represented, not in a series of giants, but simultaneously: acuta fentatio (Beng.). To take ἐνστιγμῇχρ . with ἀναγαγών is not a probable arrangement. With στιγμή comp. stimulus, “ stick,” and “ Sting.” 6. Σοὶδώσω … ὅτιἐμοιπαραδέδοται . Both pronouns are emphatic: “ To Thee I will give … because to me it hath been delivered.” The αὐτῶν after τὴνδόξαν is a constructio ad sensum, referring to the kingdoms understood in τὴνἐξουσίανταύτην “ this authority and jurisdiction.” In παραδέδοται we have the common use of the perf, to express permanent and present result of past action; “ it has been given over” and remains in my possession: comp. γέγραπται (4, 8. 10) and εἴρηται (12). Satan does not say by whom it has been given over; and two answers an possible: 1. by God’ s permission; 2. by man’ s sin. But the latter does not exclude the former; and in any case confitetur tentator, se non ease conditor (Beng.). That it refers to a Divine gift previous to his revolt against God, is agiatuitous conjecture. Christ Himself speaks of Satan as “ the ruler of this world” (John 12:31, John 14:30, John 16:11). In the Rabbinical writings “ Lord of this world” A a common name for Satan, as ruler of the heathen, in opposition to God, the Head of the Jewish theocrazy. The devil is the ruler of the un believing and sinful; but he mixes truth with falsehood when he claims to have dominion over all the material glory of the world. Comp. Ephesians 2:2; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Revelation 13:2. In ᾦἅνθέλω the mixture of falsehood seems to be still greater. Even of those who are under the dominion of Satan it is only in a limited sense true that he can dispose of them as he pleases. But the subtlety of the temptation lies partly in the fact that it appeals to what is in a very real sense true. Satan intimates that the enormous influence which he possesses aver human affairs may be obtained for the promotion of the Messiah’ s Kingdom. Thus all the pain and suffering, which otherwise lay before the Saviour of the world, might be evaded.1 7. ἐὰνπροσκυνήσῃς . Mt. adds πεσών which, like προσελθών indicates that be may have believed that Satan was visible, although this is not certain. Even actual prostration is possible to an invisible being, and “ fall down and worship” is a natural figure for entire submission or intense admiration. In the East, prostration is an acknowledgment of authority, not necessarily of personal merit. The temptation, therefore, seems to be that of admitting Satan’ s authority and accepting promotion from him. ἐώπιονἐμοῦ . Lk.’ s favourite expression (1:15, 17, 19, 75, etc.), The usual constr. after προσκύεῖν is the acc. (ver. 8; Matthew 4:10; Revelation 9:20, Revelation 9:13:12, Revelation 9:14:9, Revelation 9:2) or the dal. (Acts 7:43; John 4:21, John 4:23; Revelation 4:10, Revelation 7:11) 4: but Revelation 15:4 as here. ἔσταισοῦπᾶσα . “ The ἐξουσία which has been delivered to me I am willing to delegate or transfer” : magna superbia (Beng.). The acceptance of it would be equivalent to προσκύνησις . Just as in the first case the lawful desire, for food was made an occasion of temptation, so here the lawful desire of power, a desire specially lawful in the Messiah. Everything depends upon why and how the food and the power are obtained. Christ was born to be a king; but His Kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36, John 18:37), and the prince of this world has nothing in Him (John 14:30). He rejects the Jewish idea of the Messiah as an earthly potentate, and thus condemns Himself to rejection by His own people. He rejects Satan as an ally, and thereby has him as an implacable enemy. The end does not sanctify the means. 8. προσκυνήσεις . Mt. also has this word in harmony with Satan’ s προσκυνήσῃς ; but in LXX of Deu 6:13 we have φοβηθήσῃ : see on 7:27.— λατρεύσεις . Lit. “ serve for hire” . In class. Grk. it is used of the service of slaves and of freemen, whether rendered to men or to God: in N. T. always of religious service, but sometimes of the worship of idols (Acts 7:42; Ram. 1:25). Trench, Syn. xxxv. Propositum out Domino humilitate diabolum vincere, non potehtia (Jerome). 9. τὸπτερύγιοντοῦἱεροῦ . It is impossible to determine what this means. The article points to its being something well known by this name. The three points conjectured are: 1. the top of the Royal Porch, whence one looked into an abyss (Jos. Ant. 15:11, 5); 2. the top of Solomon’ s Porch; 3. the roof of the ναός . It was from τὸπτερύγιοντοῦἱεροῦ that James the just was thrown, according to Hegesippus (Eus. H. E, 2:23, 11, 16). Had any part of the ναός been intended, we should perhaps have had τ . ναοῦ rather than Τ . ἱεροῦ . ΕἰυἱὸςεἶτοῦΘεοῦ . The repetition of this preamble is evidence that this temptation is in part the same as the first (ver. 3). In both cases Jesus is to “ tempt” (ver. 12) God, to challenge Him to prove His Fatherhood by a test of His Son’ s own choosing. But, whereas in the first case Christ was to be rescued from an existing danger by a miracle, here He is to court needless danger in order to be rescued by a miracle. It may be that this is also a partial repetition of the second temptation. If the suggestion is that He should throw Himself down into the courts of the temple, so that the priests and the people might see His miraculous descent, and be convinced of His Messiahship, then this is once more a temptation to take a short cut to success, and, by doing violence to men’ s wills, avoid all the pain and suffering involved in the work of redemption.1 If this is correct, then this temptation is a combination of the other two. It is difficult to see what point there is in mentioning the temple, if presumptuously seeking peril was the only element in the temptation. The precipices of the wilderness would have served for that. The βάλεσεαυτόν expresses more definitely than the mid. would have done that the act is to be entirely His own.Not “ Fall,” nor “ Spring,” but “ Cast Thyself” ; dejice teip̱ sum. Comp. ἑαυτοὺςπλανῶμεν (1 John 1:8). 10. The fact that after Τ . διαφυλάξαισε Satan omits ἐνπάσαιςταῖςὁδοῖςσου is in favour of the view that presumptuous rushing into danger is part of the temptation. To fling oneself down from a height is not going “ in one’ s ways,” but out of them. The disobedient Prophet was slain by the lion, the obedient Daniel was preserved in the lions’ den. But we are not sure that the omission of the words has this significance. 11. ἐπὶχειρῶν . “ On their hands,” implying great carefulness. The πρὸςλίθον has no special reference either to the temple or the rocks below: stones abound in most places, and lie in the way of those who stumble. 12. Εἴρηται . In Mt. Πάλινγέγραπται . Jesus had appealed to Scripture; Satan does the same; and then Jesus shows that isolated texts may be misleading. They may be understood in a sense plainly at variance with some other passage. Satan had suggested that it was impossible to put too much trust in God. Christ points out that testing God is not trusting Him. The verb ἐκπειροιζειν is wholly biblical (10:25; Matthew 4:7; Psalms 77:18). In the Heb. it is “ Ye shall not tempt” : but in LXX we have the sing. as here. 13. πάνταπειρασμόν . “ Every kind of temptation” : a further indication that He was tempted throughout the forty days, and that what is recorded is merely an illustration of what took place. The enemy tried all his weapons, and was at all points defeated. Comp. πᾶσαἁμαρτίακαὶβλασφημία , “ all manner of sin and blasphemy” (Matthew 12:31); πᾶνδένδρον , “ every kind of tree (Matthew 3:10); ὁμὲνπάσηςἡδονῆςἀπολαύωνκαὶμηδεμιᾶςἀπεχόμενοςἀκόλαστος , “ he who enjoys every kind of pleasure,” etc. (Arist. Eth. Nic. ii. 2. 7) ἄχρικαιροῦ . “ Until a convenient season.” This rendering gives the proper meaning both of ἄχρι and of καιρός : comp. Acts 13:11, Acts 13:24:25; Luke 21:24. It is Satan’ s expectation that on some future occasion he will have an opportunity of better success; and an opportunity came when Judas was allowed to deliver the Christ into the hands of His enemies. That this was such an occasion seems to be indicated by Christ’ s own declarations “ The prince of this world cometh; and he bath nothing in Me” (John 14:30); and “ This is your hour and the power of darkness” (Luke 22:53). Satan was not visible in a bodily shape then, and probably not on this earlier occasion.It is Peter who on one occasion became a visible tempter (Matthew 16:23; Mark 8:33). Not that we are to suppose, however, that Satan entirely desisted from attacks between the beginning and end of Christ’ s ministry: “ Ye are they which have continued with Me in My temptations,” rather implies the contrary (22:28); but the evil one seems to have accumulated attacks at the beginning and the end. In the wilderness he employed the attractiveness of painless glory and success; in the garden he tried the dread of suffering and failure. All human temptation takes place through the instrumentality of pleasure or pain. Comp. 22:3. Luke says nothing about the ministration of Angels which followed the temptation, as recorded by both Mt. and Mk., not because he doubts such facts, for he repeatedly records them (1:11, 26, 2:9, 22:43; Acts 5:19, Acts 8:26, Acts 7:7, Acts 23:23), but probably because his source said nothing about them. Mk. seems to mean that Angels were ministering to Jesus during the whole of the forty days: his three imperfects are co-ordinate. The Temptation is not a dream, nor a vision, nor a myth, nor a parable, translated into history by those who heard and misunderstood it but an historical fact. It was part of the Messiah’ s preparation for His work. In His baptism He received strength. In His temptation He ractised the use of it. Moreover, He thus as man acquired experience (Heb. v. 8) of the possibilities of evil, and of the violent and subtle ways in which His work could be ruined. Only from Himself could the disciples have learned the history of this struggle.Among other things it taught them the value of the Jewish Scriptures. With these for their guide they could overcome the evil one, as He had done: no special illumination was necessary (16:29, 31). 4:14-9:50. The Ministry in Galilee Lk., like Mt. and Mk., omit the early ministry in Judæ a; but we shall find that his narrative, like theirs, implies it. All three of them connect the beginning of the Galilean ministry with the Baptism and the Temptation; while Mt. and Mk. make the imprisonment of the Baptist to be the occasion of Christ’ s departure from Judæ a into Galilee (Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14). But they neither assert nor imply that John was imprisoned soon after the Temptation; nor do they explain why the arrest of John by Herod Antipas should make Christ take refuge in this same Herod’ s dominions. It is from the Fourth Gospel that we learn that there was a considerable interval between the Temptation and John’ s imprisonment, and that during it Jesus went into Galilee and returned to Judaea again (2:13). From it also we learn that the occasion of the second departure into Galilee was the jealousy of the Pharisees, who had been told that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples even than the Baptist. Much as they disliked and feared the revolutionary influence of John, they feared that of Jesus still more. John declared that he was not the Christ, he “ did no sign,” and he upheld the Law. Whereas Jesus had been pointed out as the Messiah; lie worked miracles, and He disregarded, not only traditions which were held to be equal to the Law (John 4:9), but even the Law itself in the matter of the Sabbath (John 5:9, John 5:10). Thus we see that it was not to escape the persecution of Herod, but to escape that of the Pharisees, who had delivered the Baptist into the hands of Herod, that Jesus retired a second time from Judaea into Galilee. It was “ after that John was delivered up” (Mark 1:14),and “ when He heard that John was delivered up” (Matthew 4:12), that Christ retired into Galilee. In neither case was it Herod’ s action, but the action of those who delivered John into the hands of Herod, that led to Christ’ s change of sphere. And in this way what is recorded in the Fourth Gospel explains the obscurities the other three. There is a slight apparent difference between the first two Gospels and the third. The three Evangelists agree in noticing only one return from Judæ a to Galilee, and possibly each knows of only one. But whereas Mt. and Mk. seem to point to the second return, for they connect it with the delivering up a the Baptist, Lk. seems rather to point to the first return, for he connects it with “ the power of the Spirit,” an expression which Suggests a reference to that power which Jesus had received at the Baptism and exercised in the Temptation. It is quite possible, however, that the expression refers to the power with which He had worked miracles and taught in Galilee and Judaæ in which case all three Gospels treat of the second return to Galilee. Not very much plan is discernible in this portion of the Gospel; and it may be doubted whether the divisions made by commentators correspond with any arrangement which the writer had in his mind. But even artificial schemes help to a clearer apprehension of the whole; and the arrangement suggested by Godet is, at any rate, useful for this purpose. He takes the Development in the Position of Christ’ s Disciples as the principle of his divisions. 1. 4:14-44. To the Call of the first Disciples. 2. 5:1-6:11. To the Nomination of the Twelve. 3. 6:12-8:56. To the first Mission of the Twelve. 4. 9:1-50. To the Departure for Jerusalem. These divisions are clearly marked out in the text of WH., a space being left at the end of each. 4:14-44. The Ministry in Galilee to the Call of the First Disciples. The Visits to Nazareth and Capernaum. 14, 15. Comp. Matthew 4:12; Mark 1:14. These two verses are introductory, and point out three characteristics of this period of Christ’ s activity. 1. He worked in the power of the Spirit. 2. His fame spread far and wide. 3. The synagogues were the scenes of His preaching (comp. ver. 44). 14. ἐντῇδυνάμειτοῦπνεύματος . This is perhaps to remind us that since His first departure from Galilee He has been endowed with the Holy Spirit and has received new powers (3:22, 4:1, 18). Bengel’ s post victoriam corroboratus connects it too exclusively with the Temptation. Unless, with De Wette, we take καὶφήμηἐξῆλθεν as anticipating what follows, the statement implies much preaching and perhaps some miracles, of which Lk. has said nothing; for Jesus is famous directly He returns. The power of the Spirit had already been exhibited in Him. Jn. says that “ the Galileans received Him, having seen all the things that He did in Jerusalem at the feast” (4:45). But it is not likely that they had heard of the wonders which attended the Birth, or of those which attended the Baptism. There are various marks of Lk.’ s style. 1. ὑπέστρεψεν , for which Mt. has ἀνεχώρησεν and Mk, ἦλθεν Comp. ver. 1, where Lk. has ὑπέστρεψεν while Mt. has ἀνήχθη . 2. δύναμις of Divine power. Comp. 1:35, and see on 4:36. 3. καθ ʼ ὅλς in this sense. Comp. 23:5; Acts 9:31, Acts 9:42, Acts 9:10:37 it is peculiar to Lk. see Simcox, Lang. of N.T.p.148. 4. ἡπερίχωρος sc. γῆ , is an expression of which Lk. is fond (3:3, 4:37, 7:17, 8:37; Acts 14:6);not in Jn., and only twice in Mt.(3:5, 14:35) and once in Mk. (1:28; not 6:55). 15. καὶαὐτὸςἐδίδασκεν . Lk. is so fond of this mode of transition that αὐτός has no special significance; if it has, it is “ He Himself,” as distinct from the rumour respecting Him. The imperf. points to His habitual practice at this time, and seems to deprive what follows of all chronological connexion. All the Gospels mention His teaching in synagogues, and give instances of His doing so during the early part of His ministry (Matthew 4:23, Matthew 4:9:35, Matthew 4:12:9, Matthew 4:13:54; Mark 1:21, Mark 1:39, Mark 1:3:1, Mark 1:6:2, Luke 4:44, Luke 6:6, John 6:59). Toward the close of it, when the hostility of the teachers became more pronounced, there is less mention of this practice: perhaps He then taught elsewhere, in order to avoid needless collision. It should be noticed that here, as elsewhere, it is the teaching rather than the worship in the synagogues that is prominent. Synagogues were primarily places of instruction (13:10; John 18:20; Acts 13:27, Acts 15:21, etc.), and it was as such that Augustus encourged them. Morality of a high kind was taught there, and morality is on the side of order. ἐνΤαῖςσυναγωγαῖςαὐΤῶν . This means in the synagogues of the Galileans. Galilee at this time was very populous. Josephus no doubt exaggerates when the say that the smallest villages had fifteen thousand inhabitants (B. J. iii. 3, 2), and that there were over two hundred towns and villages. But in any case there were many Galileans. Among them there was more freshness and less formalism than among the inhabitants of Judæ . Here the Pharisees and the hierarchy had less influence and therefore Galilee was a more hopeful field in which to seek the first elements of a Church. On the other hand, it was necessary to break down the prejudices of those Who had known Him in His Youth, and had seen in Him no signs of His Being the Messiah that they were expecting: andthe fame of the miracles which He had wrought in Judaæ was likely to contribute towards this. Thus the Judæ an ministry prepared the way for the more promising ministry in Galilee. We have no means of estimating the number of Galilean synagogues; but the fact that such a place as Capernaum had either none,or only a poor one, until a Roman centurion was moved to provide one (“ himself built us our synagogue,” 7:5), is some evidence that by no means every village or even every small town possessed one. The remains of ancient synagogues exist at several places in Galilee; Tell-Hum, Irbid (the Arbela of 1 Mac. 9:2), Jisch (Giscala), Meiron (Mero), Kasyoun, Nabartein, and Kefr-Bereim. But it is doubtful whether any of theses are older than the second or third century. The origin of synagogues is to be sought in the Babylonish captivity; and they greatly increased in number after the destruction of the temple. The fact that Jewish legend derives the institution of synagogues from Moses, shows how essential the Jews considered it to be. The statement that there were at one time 480 synagogues in Jerusalem is also legendary; but 480 may be a symbolical number. One has only to remember the size of Jerusalem to see the absurdity of 480, places of public instruction in it. But large towns sometimes had several synagogues, either forerent natonates (Acts 6:9; see Lumby and Blass) or different handicrafts.1 δοξαζόμενοςὑπὸπάντων . Because of the power of His preaching, especially when contrasted with the lifeless repetitions and senseless trivialities of ordinary teachers. 16-30. The Visit to Nazareth. Comp. Matthew 13:53-58; Mark 6:1-6. It remains doubtful whether Lk. here refers to the same visit as that recorded by Mt. and Mk. If it is the same, he perps has purposely transposed it to the opening of the ministry, as being typical of the issue of Christ’ s ministry. He was rejected by His own people. Similarly the non-Galilean ministry opens with a rejection (9:51-56). In any case, the form of the narrative is peculiar to Lk., showing that he here has some special source. We we not to understand that the Galilean ministry began at Nazareth. More probably Christ waited until the reports of what He had said and done in other parts of Galilee prepared the way for His return to Nazareth as a teacher. 16. οὗἦν [ἀνα ]τεθραμμένος . This tells us rather more than 2:51: it implies, moreover, that for some time past Nazareth had camed to be His home. But the addition of “ where He had been brought up” explains what follows. It had been “ His custom” during His early life at Nazareth to attend the synagogue every sabbath. It is best to confine κατὰτὸεἰωθός to the clause in which it is embedded, and not carry it on to ἀνέστηἀναγνῶναι : it was possibly the first time that He had stood up to read at Nazareth. But the phrase may refer to what had been His custom elsewhere since He began His ministry; or it may be written from the Evangelist’ s point of view of what was afterwards His custom. We may therefore choose between these explanations. 1. He had previously been in the habit of attending the synagogue at Nazareth, and on this occasion stood up to read. 2. He had previously been in the habit of readiing at Nazareth 3. He had lately been in the habit of reading elsewhere, and now does so at Nazareth. 4. This was an early example of what became His custom. In no case must the sermon be included in the custom. That fais was His first sermon at Nazareth is implied by the whole context. In D both τεθραμμένος and αὐτῷ after εἰωθός are omitted, and the text runs, ἑλθὼνδὲεἶςΝαζαρὲδὄπουἦνκατὰτὸεἰωθὸςἐντῇᾑμέρα̣τῶνσαββάτωνεἰςτὴνσυναγωγήν ; but in the Latin the former word is restored, veniens autem in Nazared ubi erat nutricates introibit secundum consuetudinem in sabbato in synagogam. The omissions are perhaps due to Marcionite influence. According to Marcion, Christ came direct from heaven into the synagogue, de calo in synagogam (see p. 131); and therefore all trace of His previous life in Nazareth must be obliterated. He was not reared there, and was not accustomed to visit the synagogue there. Only a custom of attending the synagogue existed. See Rendel Harris, Study of Codex Bexes, p. 232, in Texts and Studies, 2:1. Comp. the insertions 9:54, 55, which may be due to the same influence. The phrase κατὰτὸεἰωθός occurs in LXX Numbers 24:1; Sus. 13. It is characteristic of Lk. See on κατὰτὸἔθος , 1:8. With the dat. κατὰτὸεἰωθός occurs only here and Acts 17:2; and τῇήμέρᾳτῶνσαββάτων occurs only here, Acts 13:14, and 16:13: but comp. Luke 12:14, Luke 12:16 and 14:5. It is a periphrasis for ἐντοιςσαβ ., or ἐντῷσαβ or τοῖςσαβ or τῷσαβ . ἀνέστηἀναγνῶναι . Standing to read was the usual practice, excepting when the Book of Esther was read at the Feast of Purim: then the reader might sit. Christ’ s standing up indicated that He had been asked to read, or was ready to do so. This is the only occasion on which we are told that Jesus read. The lectern was close to the front seats, where those who were most likely to be called upon read commonly sat. A lesson from the Thorah or Law was read first, and then one from the Prophets. After the lesson had been mad in Hebrew it was interpreted into Aramaic (Nehemiah 8:8), or into Greek in places where Greek was commonly spoken. This was done verse by verse in the Law; but in the Prophets three verses might be taken at once, and in this case Jesus seems to have taken two verses. Then followed the exposition or sermon. The reader, interpreter, and preacher might be one, two, or three persons. Here Christ was both reader and preacher; and Possibly He interpreted as well.1 Although there were officers with fixed duties attached to each synagogue, yet there was no one specially appointed either to read, or interpret,or preach, or pray. Any member of the congregation might discharge these duties; and probably those who were competent discharged them in turn at the invitation of the ἀρξισυνάγωγος (Acts 13:15. Comp. Philo in Eus. Præ p Evang. viii. 7, p. 360 A, and Quod omnis probus liber 12.). Hence it was always easy for Jesus to address the congregation. When He became famous as a teacher He would often be invited to do so2 And during His early years He may have read without interpreting or expounding; for even those under age were sometimes allowed to read in the synagogues. We cannot infer from His being able to read that He Himself possessed the Scriptures. In N.T. ἀναγινώσκω is used in no other sense than that of reading; lit recognizing again the written characters; of reading aloud, Acts 13:27, Acts 13:15:21; 2 Corinthians 3:15; Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27. 17. ἐπεδόθη . “ Was handed” to Him, “ was given over by handing” : comp. ἐπεζήτουν (ver. 42). It does not mean “ was handed to Him in addition, ” implying that something else had been handed to Him previously. This meaning is not common, and is not found elsewhere in N.T. The reading of the Parascha, or section from the Law, had probably preceded, and had been read possibly by someone else. This was the Haphthara, or prophetic section (Acts 13:15). That Isaiah 61:1, Isaiah 61:2 was the lesson appointed for the day is quite uncertain. We do not even know whether there was at that time any cycle of prophetical lessons, nor whether it would be strictly adhered to, if there was such. Apparently Isaiah was handed to Him without His asking for it; but that also is uncertain. The cycle of lessons now in use is of much later origin; and therefore to employ the Jewish lectionary in order to determine the day on which this took place is futile. On the other hand, there is no evidence that “ Jesus takes the section which He lights upon as soon as it is unrolled” ; for εὖρε quite as easily may mean the opposite;— that He intentionally found a passage which had been previously selected. The more definite ἀναπτύξας (א D) is probably a correction of ἀνοίξαι (A B L and most versions). The former occurs nowhere in N.T., while the latter is very common: see esp. Revelation 5:2, Revelation 5:3, Revelation 5:4, Revelation 5:5, Revelation 5:10:2, Revelation 5:8, 20:12. Fond as Lk. is of analytical tenses, ἦνγεγραμμεινον occurs nowhere else in his writings: ἕστιγεγραμ . is common in Jn. (2:17, 6:31, 45, 10:34, 12:14, 16). 18. The quotation is given by the Evangelist somewhat freely from LXX, probably from memory and under the influence of other passages of Scripture. To argue that the Evangelist cannot be S. Luke, because S. Luke was a Gentile, and therefore would not know the LXX, is absurd. S. Luke was not only a constant companion of S. Paul, but a fellow-worker with him in dealing with both Jews and Gentiles. He could not have done this without becoming familiar with the LXX. Down to ἀπέσταλκένμε inclusive the quotation agrees with LXX. After that the text of LXX runs thus: ἰάσασθαιτοὺςσυντετριμένουςτὴνκαρδίαν , κηρύξαιαἰχαλώτοιςἄφεσινκαὶτυφλοῖςἀνάβλεψιν , καλέσαιἐνιαυτὸνΚυρίουδεκτόν . In many authorities the clause ἰάσασθαιτοὺςσυντετριμμένουςτὴνκαρδίαν has been, inserted into the test of Lk. in order to make the quotation morefull and more in harmony with O.T. We have similar insertion Matthew 15:8; Acts 7:37; Romans 8:9; Hebrews 12:20, and perhaps 2:71. In the original the Prophet puts into the mouth of Jehovah’ s ideal Servant a gracious message to those in captivity, promising them release and a return to the restored Jerusalem, the joy of which is compared to the joy of the year of jubilee. It is obvious that both figures, the return from exile and the release at the jubilee, admirably express Christ’ s work of redemption. ΠνεῦμαΚυρίουἐπ ʼ ἐμέ . In applying these words to Himself the Christ looks back to His baptism. He is more than a Prophet; He is “ the Son, the Beloved One,” of Jehovah (3:21, 22). With ἐπ ʼ ἐμέ comp ἦνἐπ ʼ αὐτόν (2:25).— οὖεἴνεκεν . Not “ wherefore,” as in Acts 19:32, which here would spoil the sense, but “ because,” a meaning which οὔνεκεν often has in class. Grk. Vulg. has propter quod.Comp. Genesis 18:5, Genesis 18:14:8, Genesis 18:22:16, 38:26; Numbers 10:31, Numbers 14:43, etc. The Ionic form εἴνεκεν is found 18:29; Acts 28:20; 2 Corinthians 3:10: but ἔνεκεν is the commonest form (2 Corinthians 7:12), and ἔνεκα also occurs before consonants (6:22; Acts 26:21). ἔχρισένμε . The Christ was anointed with the Spirit, as Prophets and priests were anointed with oil (1 Kings 19:16; Exodus 28:41, Exodus 30:30). Unlike πέης (2 Corinthians 9:9), πτωχός “ always had a bad meaning until it was ennobled by the Gospels” (6:20, 7:22; 2 Corinthians 6:10; James 2:5). It suggests abject poverty . See Hatch, Bibl. Grk. pp. 76, 77. ἀπέσταλκένμε . Change from aor. to perf. “ He anointed Me (once for all); He hath sent Me (and I am here)” : comp 1 Corinthians 15:4. We have had ἀποστέλλω of the mission of Gabriel (1:19, 26); here and ver. 43 we have it of the mission of the Christ; 7:27 of the Forerunner; 9:2 of the Twelve. Whereas πέμπω is quite general and implies no special relation between sender and sent, ἀποστέλλω adds the idea of a delegated authority making the person sent to be the envoy or representative of the sender. But πέμπω also is used of the mission of the Christ (20:13), of Prophets (Ver. 26, 20:11, 12), and of the Apostles (John 13:20, John 20:21). Strictly speaking, αἰχμαλώτοις means “ prisoners of war” freq. in class. Grk. but here only in N.T The cognate αἰχμαλωτίζω occurs 21:24; 2 Corinthians 10:5; 2 Timothy 3:6; αἰχμαλωσία , Ephesians 4:8. Neither this metaphor nor that of τυφλοῖςἀνάβλεψιν harmonizes very well with the year of jubilee, to which Godet would restrict the whole passage. Both might apply to captives in exile, some of whom had been blinded by their captors, or by long confinement in a dungeon. ἀποστεῖλαιτεθραυσμένουςἐνἀφέσει . These words come from another part of Isaiah (58:6), and are perhaps inserted through a slip of memory. Jesus was reading, not quoting without book; and therefore we cannot suppose that He inserted the clause Lightfoot says that it was lawful to skip from one passage to an.other in reading the Prophets, but not in reading the Law (Hor. Heb. on Luke 4:17). That might explain the omission of a few verses, but not the going back three chapters. The insertion comes from the Evangelist, who is probably quoting from memory, and perhaps regards the unconsciously combined passages as a sort of “ programme of the ministry.” The strong expression τεθραυσμένους is here applied to those who are shattered in fortune and broken in spirit. For the pregnant construction, “ send so as to be in,” comp. 1:17. The asyndeton throughout, first between ἔχρισεν and ἀπέσταλκεν and then between the three infinitives which depend upon ἀπέσταλκεν is impressive. 19. ἐνιαυτὸνΚυρίουδεκτόν . The age of the Messiah, which is Jehovah’ s time for bestowing great blessings on His people. Comp. καιρὸςδεκτός (2 Corinthians 6:2; Isaiah 49:8): δεκτός is not found in class. Grk. It is strange that Clement of Alexandria and Origen, who are commonly so ready to turn fact into figure, here turn an expression which is manifestly figurative into a literal statement of fact, and limit Christ’ s ministry to a period of twelve months (comp. Clem. Hom. 17:19). Keim and other modern writers have made the same limit; but the three Passovers distinguished by S. John (2:13, 6:4, 11:55) are quite fatal to it.1 It is, however, an equally faulty exegesis to find the three years (i.e. two years and a fraction) of Christ’ s ministry in the three years of Lk. 6-9 or the three days of 13:31-33. The first of these is obviously a parabolic saying not to be understood literally; and the other probably is such. The suggestion that the three servants sent to the wicked husbandmen mean the three years of the ministry is almost grotesque. See Nö sgen, Gesch. Jesu Christi, Kap. 8., Mü nchen, 1890. 20. The vivid description of what followed the reading of the lesson Points to an eye-witness as the source of the narrative. But the “ closed” of AV., and RV. gives a wrong impression of the first incident: it leads one to think of a modern book with leaves. The Rhemish has “ folded” ; but “ rolled up” would be a better rendering of πτύξας . The long strip of parchment, or less probably papyrus (2 John 1:12), would be wound upon a roller, or possibly upon two rollers, one at each end of the strip. Hence the name megillah (volumen),from gâ lal, “ to roll.” Such a book was in Greek sometimes called κεφαλὶς (Ezra 6:2; Ezekiel 3:1-3) or κεφαλὶςβιβλίου (Hebrews 10:7; Psalms 39:8; Ezekiel 2:9): and it I said that κεφαλίς originally meant the knob (cornu or umbilicus) at the end of the roller; but no instance of this use of κεφαλίς appears to be known (Wsctt. on Hebrews 10:7). ἀποδοὺςτῷὑπηρέτῃ . The ἀπο - implies that it was the minister or chazzan who had handed Him the book who received it back again. The τῷ may have the same meaning, just as τὸβιβλίον means the book which had been given to Him. But τῷὑπηρέτῃ more probably means the minister usually found in a synagogue. It was among the duties of the chazzan to take the Scriptures from the ark and put them away again (Surenhusius, Mishna, ii. 246, iii. 266). He taught the children to read, and inflicted the scourgings (Matthew 10:17). A Roman epitaph to a Jew who held is office is quoted by Schü rer, II. ii. p. 66— φλαβιοςΙουλιανοςυπηρετης φλαβιαΙουλιανηθυγατηρπατρι Ενειρηνηηκοιμησιςσου . The chazzan of the synagogue became the deacon or sub-deacon the Christian Church. A ὑπηρέτης is lit. “ an under-rower” . The word may be used of almost any kind of attendant or servant (Acts 5:22, Acts 5:26, Acts 5:13:5; Matthew 26:58; Mark 14:54, Mark 14:65; John 7:32, John 7:45; 1 Corinthians 4:1). For the two participles, πτύξας … ἀποδούς , without καί , comp. Acts 12:4, Acts 12:25. ἐκάθισεν . This was the usual attitude for expounding or preaching, and in the synagogues there was commonly a raised seat for the purpose. On other occasions we find Christ sitting to teach (5:3; Matthew 5:1; Mark 4:1; [John 8:2]); and the disciples do the same (Acts 16:13). ἦσανἀτενίζοντες . “ Were fixed intently.” Their intense interest was caused by His reputation as a teacher and as a worker of miracles, as well as by His having been brought up amongst them; perhaps also by His look and manner of reading. That lie had selected an unexpected passage, or had omitted the usual lesson from the Law, and that this surprised them, is pure conjecture. Comp. Acts 6:15, where the same verb is used of the whole Sanhedrin riveting their eyes upon Stephen. It is a favourite word with Lk., who uses it a dozen times: elsewhere in N.T. only 2 Corinthians 3:7, 2 Corinthians 3:13. It occurs in LXX (1 Es. 6:28; Est_3 Mac. 2:26), in Aq. (Job 7:8), and in Jos. (B. J., v. 12, 3). The analytical tense marks the continuance of the action. 21. ἤρξατοδὲλέγειν . The ἤρξατο is not pleonastic: it points to the solemnity of the moment when His words broke the silence of universal expectation: comp. 7:24, 11:29, 12:1, 14:18. What follows may be regarded as a summary of what was said. It gives us the main subject of His discourse. We are led to suppose that lie said much more; perhaps interpreting to them in detail the things concerning Himself (24:27). The conversation with Nicodemus is similarly condensed by S. John (3:1-21). Even without this narrative we should know from 7:22 and Matthew 11:5 that Christ interpreted Isaiah 61:1 ff. of Himself. The whole of the O.T. was to Him a prophecy respecting His life and work And this applies not only to prophetic utterances, but also to rites and institutions, as well as to historical events, which were so ordered as to be a forecast of the salvation and judgment which He was to bring.1 This verse sums up His sermon. ἡγραφὴαὔτη . “ This passage of Scripture” (Mark 12:10; John 7:42, etc.) : for Scripture as a whole the plural is used (24:27, 32, 45; Matthew 21:42, Matthew 21:22:29, Matthew 21:26:54, 56; Mark 12:24, etc.). His interpretation of the prophecy was at the same time a fulfilment of it; for the voice of Him of whom the Prophet wrote was sounding in their ears.Hence it is that he affirms πεπλήρωταιἐντοῖςὠσὶνὑμῶν . As Renan says, Il ne prê chait passes opinions, il se prê chait luimê me. 22. ἐμαρτύρουναὐτῷ . “ They bore witness to Him,” not that what He said about Himself, but that what rumour had said respecting His power as a teacher, was true. They praised Him in an empty-hearted way. What they remembered of Him led them to think that the reports about Him were exaggerations; but they were willing to admit that this was not the case. Comp. 11:48. This “ bearing witness” almost of necessity implies that Jesus had said a great deal more than is recorded here. What follows shows that they did not believe the teaching which so startled and impressed them, any more than those whose attention was riveted on Stephen, before he began to address them, were disposed to accept his teaching. The cases are very similar. Hence ἐθαύμαζον expresses amazement rather than admiration. For θαυμαιζεινἐπί see small print on 2:33. τοῖςλόγοιςτῆςχάριτος . Characterizing genitive or genitive of quality; freq. in writings influenced by Hebrew, “ which employs this construction, not merely through poverty in adjectives, but also through the vividness of phraseology which belongs to Oriental languages” (Win. 34:3. b, p. 297).Comp. οἰκονὸμοςτῆςἀδικίας (16:8); κριτὴςτῆςἀδικίας (18:6); ἀκροατὴςἐπιλησμονῆς (James 1:25); κριταὶδιαλογισμῶνπονηρῶν (James 2:4); and perhaps the difficult τροπῆςἀποσκίασμα (James 1:17). The meaning here is “ winning words.” The very first meaning of χαίρω (χαίρω is “ comeliness, winsomeness” (Hom. Obadiah 1:8:175; Ecclesiastes 10:12; Psalms 64:3; Ecclus. 21:16, 37:21; Colossians 4:6): and in all these passages it is the winsomeness of language that is specially signified. From this objective attractiveness it easily passes to subjective “ favour, Kindness,goodwill,” esp. from a superior to an interior (Acts 2:47; Genesis 18:3, Genesis 32:5, Genesis 33:8, etc.); and hence, in particular, of finding “ favour” with God (1:30; Acts 7:46; Exodus 33:12, Exodus 33:13, Exodus 33:16, etc).From the sense of God’ s favour generally(2:30, 52; John 1:14, John 1:16) we come to the grace” (Acts 14:3, Acts 14:20:24, 32; and the pauline Epp. passim). Lastly, it sometimes means the “ gratitude” which this favour produces in the recipient (6:32-34, 17:9; 1 Corinthians 10:30). The word does not occur in Mt. or Mk. See Sanday on Romans 1:5, and Blass on Acts 2:47 and 4:33. Origen evidently has this passage in his mind when he wrote: “ For a proof that grace was poured on His lips is this, that although the period of His teaching was short,— for He taught somewhere about a year and a few months,— the world has been filled with His eaching” (De Prin. 4:1, 5). But the words so calculated to win did not win the congregation. They were “ fulfilled in their ears,” but not in their hearts.1 A doubt at once acrose in their minds as to the congruity of such words with one whom they had known all His life as the “ son of Joseph” the carpenter. Here οὖτος has a contemptuous turn, as often (5:21, 7:39, 49, 15:2, 22:56, 59, etc): yet the vulg. in none of these places has iste, but hic. “ Is not this person Joseph’ s son? What does he mean by using such language?” Just as a single sentence is given as a summary of His discourse, so a single question is given as a summary of their scepticism. While the οὖτος and υἱός is in all three, the question as a whole differs. Mk. has Οὐχοὖτόςἐστινὁτέκτων , ὁυἱὸςτῆςΜαρίας ; (6:3). Mt. has Οὐχοὖτόςἐστινὁτοῦτέκτονοςυἱός ; (13:55). Lk. ΟὐχὶυἱόσἐστινἸωσὴφοὖτος ; And while the others mention Christ’ s brothers and sisters in close connexion with His mother, Lk. mentions none of them. Lk. and Jn. seem to prefer the expression “ son of Joseph” (Luke 3:23, Luke 3:4:22; John 1:45, John 6:42). Renan thinks that Marc ne connaî t pas Joseph (V. de J. p.71). But it may be that, as he does not record the virgin birth of Christ, he avoids the expression “ son of Joseph” or “ the carpenter’ s son,” which those who have recorded thre virgin birth could use without risk of being misunderstood. 23. Πάντωςἐρεῖτέμοιτὴνπαραβολὴνταύτην . “ At all events, assuredly, ye will say,” etc: πάτως is used in strong affirmations (Acts 21:22, Acts 21:28:4, 1 Corinthians 9:10). Excepting Hebrews 9:9 and 11:19, παραβολή occurs only in the Synoptic Gospels: in John 10:6 and 16:25, 29 as in 2 Peter 2:22, the word used in παροιμία . It nedd not be doubted that the notion of placing beside for the sake of comparison, rather than that of merely putting forth, lied at the root of παραβολή . From the notion of (1) “ throwing beside” come the further notions of (2) “ exposing” and (3) “ comparing,” all three of which are common meanings of παραβάλλειν . While the adj. παράβολος represents the derived notion on the one side, the subst. παραβολή represents that on the other side. A παραβολή therefore is “ an utterance which invloves a comparison.” Hence varoius meanings: 1. a complete parable or allegory (8:4, 13:6, etc.); 2. a single figurative saying, proverb, or illustration (here; 5:36, 6:39); 3 a saying of deeper meaning, which becomes intelligible through comparison, in which sense it is sometimes joined with σκοτεινὸςλόγος (Proverbs 1:6), πρόβλημα (Psalms 59:5, Psalms 78:2), and the like. In the teaching of Christ παραβολή is commonly in the first sense, and is a means of making known the mysteries of the kingdom in a mixed audience; for it conceals from the unworthy what it reveals to the worthy (8:9, 10). See Crem. Lex. pp. 124, 657; Hatch, Bibl. Grk., p. 70; Hase, Gesch. Jesu, § 63, p. 535, ed. 1891; Didon, Jé sus Christ, ch. vi. p. 391, ed. 1891; Latham, Pastor Pastorum, ch. x. Ἰατρέ , θεράπευσονσεαυτόν . “ Heal thine own lameness” is the Hebrew form of the proverb. Similar sayings exist in other literatures: eg. a fragment of Euripides, ἄλλωνἰατρός , αὐτὸςἕλκεσιβρύων ; Ser. Sulpicius to Cicero, Neque imitare males medicos, qui in alienis morhis pro, fitentur tenere se medicines sdendam, ipsi se curare non passunt (Cic, Epp. ad diversos, 4:5). Hobart quotes from Galen, ἐχρῆνοὖναὐτὸνἐαυτοῦἐαυτοῦπρῶτονἰᾶσθαιτὸσύμπτωμακαὶοὕτωςἐπιχειρεῖνἑτέρουςθεραπεύειν . Comp. Aesch. P. V. 469; Ov.Metam 7:561; and the other examples, Lightfoot and Wetst. It is remarkable that this saying of Christ is preserved only by the beloved physician. Its meaning is disputed. Some take the words which follow to be the explanation of it: “ Heal the ills of thine own town.” Thus Cornà Lap., “ Cure Thine own people and Thins own country, which should be as dear to Thee as Thyself.” Similarly Beng. Alf. Sadler and others. It is thus made to mean much the same as “ Charity begins at home.” But ἰατρέ and σεαυτόν ought to be interpreted of the same person or group; not one of a person and the other of his neighbours. “ Prophet, heal Thins own countrymen” is not parallel to “ Physician, heal Thyself” The saying plainly refers to the passage just read from Isaiah; and although Lk. omits the words “ to heal the brokenearted,” yet Christ must have read them, and He had probably explained them. He professed to be the fulfilment of them, and to be healing the miseries of mankind. The people are supposed to tell Him to better His own condition before bettering that of others. He must make His own position more secure, and give evidence of His high mission before asserting it. He must make His own position more secure and give evidence of His high mission before asserting it. He must work convincing miracles, such as He is said ot have worked elsewhere. Comp. σῶσονσεαυτὸνκαὶἡμᾶς (23:39). Comp. also Logion 6:3 ὅσαἠκούσαμεν . They do not say ὅσαἐποίησας wishing to leave it open whether the report may not be untrue. We learn from John 2:12 that after the miracle at Cana, Jesus was at Capernaum for a short time; and we know also that there were many unrecorded miracles. It is probably to reports of some of these that reference is here made. For the constr. comp. Acts 7:12 and 24:10 εἰςτὴνκαφαρναούμ . See on ver. 31.The readings vary between εἰςτὴνΚαφ . (א B), εἰςΚαφ . (D L), ἐντῇΚαφ .(X), and ἐνκαφ (AK), The substitution of ἐν for εἰς , and the omission of the article between a preposition and a proper name, are obvious corrections by a later hand. The εἰς is not “ put for ἐν ” It maybe doubted whether these two prepositions are ever interchanged. Rather εἰς is used because of the idea of motion contained in “ come to pass.” It is scarcely possible that εἰς contains the notion of “ to the advantage of,” and indicates the petty jealousy of the people of Nazareth. We have the same constr. 1:44; Acts 28:6 (comp. Luke 11:7); and in no case is there any idea of advantage. That the jealousy was a fact, and that the people of Nazareth were inclined to discount or discredit all that seemed to tell in favour of prosperous Capernaum, is probable; but there is no hint of this in the εἰς . What is said to have happened to Capernaum ought to happen here. Comp. the Cornish use of “ to” for “ at.” In N.T. ὦδε is never “ thus,” but either “ hither” (9:41, 14:21, 14:27) or “ here” (9:33, 22:38). The ἐντῇπατρίδισου is epexegetic of ὦδε , and means “ Thy native town,” not the whole of Israel: comp. Mark 6:5; Matthew 13:58. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 5:1-6:11. From the Call of the First Disciples to the Nomination of the Twelve This section presents a symmetrical arrangement, which possibly is intentional. The call of a leading disciple (1-11) is followed by two healings which provoke controversy (12-16, 17-26); and then the call of another leading disciple (27-39) is followed by two incidents on the Sabbath, which again provoke controversy (6:1-5, 6-11). 5:1-11. The call of Simon. In Matthew 4:18-22 and Mark 1:16-20 the narrative is the call of Simon and Andrew, and of James and John. Here Andrew is not mentioned. And although all obey the call (ver. 11), yet Simon alone is addressed (vv. 4, 10). But the identity of this incident with that narrated by Mt. and Mk. can neither be affirmed nor denied with certainty. In Mt. and Mk. the disciples are fishing; here they are washing their nets before putting them away. The important point is that in all narratives those called are at work. Similarly, Levi is called from his busi ness. It would seem as if none of the Twelve were called when idle. 1. Ἐγένετοδέ . See detached note at the end of ch. 1. For τὸνὄχλον see on 11:29; for ἐντῷτὸνὄχλονἐπικεῖσθαι see on 3:21; for τὸνλόγοντοῦΘεοῦ see on 8:11; for καί introducing the apodosis see on 2:21; and for καὶαὐτός see on ver. 14. All these points, with the analytical ἦνἑστώς (1:7, 10, 20, 21, etc.), are characteristic of Lk. Not often do we find so many marks of his style in so small a compass. Comp. 8:22, 37, 40, 41. For the popular desire to behold Christ see on 4:42. With ἐπικεῖσθαι comp. 23:23; Acts 27:20; 1 Corinthians 9:16; Hebrews 9:10; Jos. Ant. xx. 5, 3. It is used in a literal sense John 11:38, John 21:9. Here it is mainly figurative, but it includes the notion of physical pressure. The αὐτός distinguishes Jesus from the ὄχλος comp. 4:15, 30. παρὰτὴνλίμνηνΓεννησαρέτ . With characteristic accuracy Lk. never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake. Except in Rev. of the “ lake of fire,” λίμνη in N.T. is peculiar to Lk, When he uses θάλασσα he means sea in the ordinary sense (17:2, 6, 21:25; Acts 4:24, etc). In AV. of 1611 both here and Mark 6:53 the name appears as “ Genesareth,” following the spelling of the Vulgate; but in Matthew 14:34. as “ Genesaret.” The printers have corrected this to “ Gennesaret.” in all three places. Γεννησαρέτ is the orthography of the best MSS. in all three places. Josephus writes both λίμνηΓεννησαρῖτις (Ant. xviii. 2, 1) and λίμνηΓεννησάρ (B. J. iii. 10, 7). 1 Mac. 11:67 we have τὸὔδωρτοῦΓεννησάρ . But in O.T the lake is called ΘάλασσαΧενέρεθ (Numbers 34:11?; Joshua 12:3) from a town of that name near to it (Joshua 19:35). Josephus contrasts its fertility with the barrenness of the lower take in the Jordan valley (B. J. iv. 8, 2); the one is the “ Sea of Life,” the other the “ Sea of Death.” See Stanley’ s fine description of “ the most sacred sheet of water that this earth contains” (Sin. &Pal. pp. 368-378) Farrar, Life of Christ, 1. pp. 175-182; Conder, D. B.2 “ Gennesaret.” For παρά c. acc. after a verb of rest comp. 18:35; Acts 10:6, Acts 10:32; Hebrews 11:12: Xen. Anab. iii. 5, 1, vii. 2, 11. With ἦνἐστώς , καὶεἶδεν is to be joined: “ It came to pass that He was standing, and He saw.” It is very clumsy to make καὶαὐτὸςἦνἐστώς parenthetical, and take καὶεἶδεν as the apodosis of ἐγένετε . 2. οἱδὲἁλεεῖς “ But the sea-folk” or “ fishermen.” It is one of many Homeric words which seem to have gone out of use and then to have reappeared in late Greek. Fishing in the take has now almost ceased. The Arabs dislike the water. The washing of the nets was preparatory to hanging them up to dry. As distinct from νίπτω , which is used of washing part of the human body, and λούω , which is used of washing the whole of it, πλύνω is used of washing inanimate objects (Revelation 7:14, 22:14; Genesis 49:11; Exodus 19:10). In Leviticus 15:11 all three words are used with exactly this difference of meaning. Trench, Syn. xlv. τὰδίκτυα . The most general term for nets of all kinds, of which ἀμφίβληστρον (Matthew 4:18) and σαγήνη (Matthew 13:47) are special varieties. Trench, Syn. lxiv.; D.B. art. “ Net.” 3. ἐπαναγαγεῖν . The correct word for “ putting off to sea” (2 Mac. 12:4?; Xen. Hellen. vi. 2, 28): elsewhere in N.T. only Matthew 21:18 in the sense of “ return.” For the double preposition comp. ἐπανέρχομαι (10:35, 19:15) and ἐπαναπαύω (10:6). Christ uses Peter’ s boat as a pulpit, whence to throw the net of the Gospel over His hearers. We have a similar scene Mark 4:1, and in both cases He sits to teach, as in the synagogue at Nazareth. Peter was probably steering, and therefore both before and after the sermon he is addressed as to the placing of the boat. But the letting down of the nets required more than one person, and hence the change to the plural . Non statim promittit Dominus capturam: explorat prius obsequia Simonis (Beng.). 5. Ἐπιστάτα Lk. alone uses ἐπιστάτης (8:24, 45, 9:33, 49, 17:13), and always in addresses to Christ. He never uses Παββεί , which is common in the other Gospels, esp. in Jn., but would no be so intelligible to Gentiles. The two words are not synonymous, ἐπιστάτης implying authority of any kind, and not merely that of a teacher. Here it is used of one who has a right to give orders. δι ʼ ὅληςνυκτὸςκοπιάσαντες . Through the whole of the best time for fishing they had toiled fruitlessly. Only in bibl. Grk. has κοπιάω the meaning of “ work with much effort, toil wearisomely” (12:27; Acts 20:35; Matthew 6:28; Joshua 24:13, etc.). The original meaning is “ become exhausted, grow weary” (John 4:6). Clem. Alex. quotes a letter of Epicures, Μήτενέοςτιςὤνμελλέτωφιλοσοφεῖν , μήτεγέρωνὑπάρχωνκοπιάτωφιλοσοφῶν (Strom. iv. 8, p. 594, ed. Potter). ἐπὶδὲτῷπ̔ήματίσουχαλάσωτὰδίκτυα . “ But relying upon Thy word I will have the nets let down.” The “ nevertheless” of AV. Cran. and Gen. is too strong: for that we should have πλήν (6:24, 35, etc.). For this use of ἐπί “ on the strength of,” comp. 2:20; Acts 4:21. Win. xlviii. d, p. 491 The χαλάσατε and ποιήσαντες show that the χαλάσω includes the employment of others. Excepting Mark 2:4 and 2 Corinthians 11:33, χαλάω is peculiar to Lk. (vv. 4, 5; Acts 9:25, Acts 9:27:17, Acts 9:30). With the faith involved in χαλάσωτὰδίκτνα we may compare κέλευσόνμεἐλθεῖνπρὸςσὲἐπὶτὰὕδατα (Matthew 14:28). 6. συνεκλεισανπλῆθοςἱχθύωνπολύ . Not a miracle of creation, but at least of knowledge, even if Christ’ s will did not bring the fish to the spot. In no miracle before the Resurrection does Jesus create; and we have no sufficient reason for believing that the food provided at the second miraculous draught of fishes was created (John 21:9-13). There is no exaggeration, as De Wette thinks, in, διερήσετο or in βυθίζεσθαι (ver. 7). The nets “ were breaking,” i.e. beginning to break, when the help from the other boat prevented further mischief, and then both boats were overloaded. On the masses of fish to be seen in the lake see Tristram, Nat. Hist. of the Bible, P. 285, and D.B.2 p. 1074: “ The density of the shoals of fish in the Lake of Galilee can scarcely be conceived by those who have not witnessed them. They sometimes cover an acre or more on the surface in one dense mass.” The form π̔ήσσω occurs in poetry (Hom. Il. xviii.571, xxiv.454) and late rose (Strab. xi. 14. 8). It is a collat. form of π̔ήγνυμι (Veitch, s.v., and curtius, Etym. 511, 661): but see on 9:42. 7. κατένευσαντοῖςμετόχοις . Possibly because they were too far off for a call to be heard. The other boat was still close to the shore (ver. 2), for Simon alone had been told to put out into deep water. The verb is freq. in Hom., and occurs in Hdt. and Plato, generally in the sense of “ nod assent, grant.” Here only in N.T. Euthymius. suggests that they were too agitated to call. Here and Hebrews 1:9 (from Psalms 44:8) we have μέτοχος as a subst. Comp. Hebrews 3:1, Hebrews 3:14, Hebrews 3:6:4, Hebrews 3:12:8: and see T. S. Evens on 1 Corinthians 10:16-18 in Speaker’ s com. “ As distinguished from κοινωνός (ver. 10; Hebrews 10:33), which suggests the 4 idea of personal fellowship, μέτοχος describes participation in some common blessing or privilege, or the like. The bond of union lies in that which is shared and not in the persons themselves” (Wsctt. on Hebrews 3:1). For συλλαβέσθαι in the sense of “ assist” comp. Philippians 4:3. In Class. Grk. the act. is more common in this sense. For ἦλθαν see on 1:59. ἔπλησανἀμφότερατὰπλοῖαὥστεβυθίζεσθαιαὐτά . For ἔπλησαν see on 1:15; ἀμφότεροι is another favourite word (1:6, 7, 6:39, 7:42; Acts 8:38, Acts 19:16, Acts 23:8); not in Mk. or Jn.“ They filled both the boats, so that they began to sink” : comp. διερήσετο . The act is used 2 Mac. 12:4 of the sinking of persons; by Polybius (2:10, 5) of the sinking of ships; and 1 Timothy 6:9 of sending down to perdition. Nowhere else in N.T. 8. ΣίμωνΠέτροςπροσέπεσεντοῖςγόνασινἸησοῦ . This is the only place in his Gospel in which Lk. gives Peter both names, and it is the first mention of the surname: see on 6:14. Syr-Sin. omits Πέτρος . The constr. προσπίπτειντοῖςγον . is quite classical (Eur. Or. 1332; comp. Mark 7:25; Soph. O. C. 1606); often with dat. of pers. (8:28, 47; Acts 16:29; Mark 3:11, Mark 5:33). Ἔξελθεἀπ ʼ ἐμοῦ . Not “ Leave my boat,” which is too definite, but, “ Go out of my vicinity, Depart from me.” , See on 4:35. It is quite erroneous to introduce here the notion that sailors believe it to be unlucky to have a criminal on board (Cic. De Nat Deor. iii. 37. 89; Hor. Carm. iii. 2. 26). In that case Peter, like Jonah, would have asked to be thrown into the sea. That the Twelve, before their call, were exceptionally wicked, ὑπὲρπᾶσανἁμαρτίανἀνομωτέρους (Barn. v. 9), is unscriptural and incredible. But Origen seems to accept it (Con. Cels. i. 63; comp. Jerome, Adv. Pelag. iii. 2). See Schanz, ad loc. p. 198. Peter does not regard himself as a criminal, but as a sinful man; and this miracle has brought home to him a new sense, both of his own sinfulness and of Christ’ s holiness. It is not that he fears that Christ’ s holiness is dangerous to a sinner (B. Weiss), but that the contrast between the two is felt to be so intense as to be intolerable. The presence of the sinless One is a reproach and a condemnation, rather than a peril; and therefore such cases as those of Gideon and Manoah (Judges 6:22, Judges 13:22), cited by Grotius and De Wette, are not quite parallel. Job (42:5, 6) is a better illustration; and Beng. compares the centurion (Matthew 8:8). The objection that Peter had witnessed the healing of his wife’ s mother and other miracles, and therefore could not be so awestruck by this miracle, is baseless. It frequently happens that one experience touches the heart, after many that were similar to it have failed to do so. Perhaps, without being felt, they prepare the way. Moreover, this was a miracle in Peter’ s own craft, and therefore was likely to make a special impression on him; just as the healing of a disease, known to the profession as incurable, would specially impress a physician. κύριε . The change from ἐπιστάτα (see on ver 5) is remarkable, and quite in harmony with the change of circumstances. It is the “ Master” whose orders must be obeyed, the “ Lord” whose holiness causes moral agony to the sinner (Daniel 10:16). Grotius, followed by Trench, points out that the dominion over all nature, including “ the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas” (Psalms 8:8), lost by Adam, is restored in Christ, the ideal man and the second Adam. But that Peter recognized this is more than we know. In what follows notice the characteristic πάντας and σύν . 9. ἐπὶτῇἄγρᾳτῶνἰχθύων . This was the basis of their amazement: see small print on 2:33, and comp. Acts 14:3 and Romans 5:14 There is no need to make ἄγρα act. in ver. 4, “ a catching,” and pass. here, “ the thing caught.” “ For a catch” in ver. 4; “ at the catch of fish” here. If ὦνσυνέλαβον (B D X, Goth.) is the true reading, both may be act. But if ᾖσυνέλαβον is right, then in both places ἄγρα is pass. In either case we have the idiomatic attraction of the relative which is so freq. in Lk. See small print on 3:19. The word is common in poetry both act and pass. Not in LXX, nor elsewhere in N.T. Note the change of meaning from συλλαβέσθαι in ver. 7 to συνέλαβον . The verb is freq. in Lk., but elsewhere rare in N.T. 10. ἸάκωβονκαὶἸωάνην . The first mention of them by Lk. In Mt. and Mk. they were in their boat, mending their nets, when Jesus called them; and Mt adds that Zebedee was with them, which Mk. implies (1:20). For κοινωνοί see on ver. 7. Are they the same as the μέτοχοι It is possible that Peter had his κοινωνοί in his boat, while the μέτοχοι were in the other boat. In any case the difference of word should be preserved in translation. This Tyn. Cran. and Gen. effect, with “ fellows” for μέτοχοι and “ partners” for κοινωνοί But Vulg. and Beza have socii for both; and RV. follows AV. with “ partners” for both. εἶπενπρὸςτὸνΣίμωναἸησοῦς . It is still Peter who is singled out for notice. Yet some critics affirm that it is the tendency of this Evangelist to depreciate Peter. For μὴφοβοῦ see on 1:13: excepting Mark 5:36 and Revelation 1:17, Lk. alone uses the expression without an accusative. Peter’ s sense of unworthiness was in itself a reason for courage. Quo magis sibi displirebat hoc magis Domino placet (Grotius). ἀπὸτοῦνῦν . The present moment is a crisis in his life, of which he was reminded at the second miraculous draught of fishes, when the commission given to him now was restored to him after his fall. Excepting 2 Corinthians 5:16 and [John 8:11], ἀπὸτοῦνῦν is peculiar to Lk. (1:48, 12:52, 22:18, 69; Acts 18:6) Comp. ἕωςτοῦνῦν (Matthew 24:21; Mark 13:19) and ἄχριτοῦνῦν (Romans 8:22; Philippians 1:5). Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 253. ἀνθρώπουςἔσῃζωγρῶν . Both substantive and verb have special point (men instead of fish; for life instead of for death); while the analytical tense marks the permanence of the new pursuit: comp. 1:20. This last is preserved in Rhem. “ shaft be taking,” following Vulg. eris capiens. Beza seems to be alone in giving the full force of ζωγρῶν : vivos capies homines. But to add “ alive” in English deprives “ men” of the necessary emphasis.1 The verb is used of sparing the lives of those taken in battle: ζώγρειἈτρέοςυἱέ , σὺδ ʼ ἄξαιἄποινα (Hom. Il 6:46). Elsewhere in N.T. only 2 Timothy 2:26, of the evil one. Comp. the exhortation of Socrates to Critobulus: Ἀλλὰθαρρῶνπειρῶἀγαθὸςγιγνεσθαικαὶτοιοῦτοςγιγνόμενοςθηρᾶνἐπιχείρειτοὺςκαλούςτεκἀγαθούς (Xen. Mem. ii. 6, 28). 11. καταγαγόντεςτὰπλοῖα . Like ἐπαναγαγεῖν in ver. 3, this is a nautical expression; freq. in Acts (9:30, 22:30, 23:15, 20, etc.). Comp. ἀνάγειν , 8:22. ἀφέντεςπάνταἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ . Even the large draught of fishes does not detain them. They are sure that He who has given them such marvellous returns from their usual business will be ready to provide for them when, at His summons, they abandon their business. The call was addressed to Peter (ver. 10), but the sons of Zebedee recognize that it concerns them also; and they We and follow. In this late Greek ἀφίημι is preferred to λείπω and its compounds, and ἀκολουθέω to ἔπομαι (which does not occur in N.T.) and its compounds. The fact that other disciples besides Peter obeyed the call and followed Jesus, is the main reason for identifying this narrative with Mark 1:16-20 and Matthew 4:18-22. All three have the important word ἀφέντες and Mt. and Lk.have ἡκολούθησαναὐτῷ for which Mk. has ἀπῆλθονὀπίσωαὐτοῦ . But note that Lk. alone has his favourite πάντα after ἀφέντες (comp. 6:30, 7:35, 9:43, 11:4, 12:10). Against these similarities, however, we have to set the differences, chief among which is the miraculous draught of fishes, which Mt. and Mk. omit. Could Peter have failed to include this in his narrative? And would Mk. have omitted it, if the Petrine tradition had contained it? It is easier to believe that some of the disciples were called more than once, and that their abandonment of their original mode of life was gradual. so that Mk. and Mt may relate one occasion and Lk. another. Even after the Resurrection Peter speaks quite naturally of “ going a fishing” (John 21:3), as if it was still atleast an occasional pursuit. But we must be content to remain in doubt as to the relation of this narrative to that of Mk. and Mt. See Weiss, Leben Jesu, I .iii. 4 Eng. tr. 2. PP. 54-59. This uncertainty, however, need not be extended to the relation of this miracle to that recorded in John 21:1-14. It cannot be accepted as probable that, in the source from which Lk. drew, “ the narrative of the call of Peter has been confused with that of his reinstatement in the office which had been entrusted to him, and so the history of the miraculous draught of fishes which is connected with the one has been united with the other.” The contrast between all the main features of the two miracles is too great to be explained by confused recollection. 1. There Jesus is not recognized at first; here He is known directly He approaches. 2. There He is on the shore; here He is in Peter’ s boat. 3. There Peter and John are together; here they seem to be in different boats. 4. There Peter leaves the capture of the fish to others; here he is chief actor in it. 5. There the net is not broken; here it Isa_6. There the fish are caught close to the shore and brought to the shore; here they are caught in deep water and are taken into the boats. 7. There Peter rushes through the water to the Lord whom he had lately denied; here, though he had committed no such sin, he says, “ Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” There is nothing improbable in two miracles of a similar kind, one granted to emphasize and illustrate the call, the other the re-call, of the chief Apostle. The way in which the Fathers allegorize the two miracles is well known, the first of the Church Militant, the second of the Church Triumphant. R. A. Lipsius would have it that the first is an allegory of quite another kind, the main point of which is the μέτοχοι in the other boat. He assumes that James an John are in Peter’ s boat, and explains thus. That Christ first teaches and then suddenly speaks of fishing, tells us that the fishing is symbolical. The fishing in deep water is the mission to the heathen, which Peter at first is unwilling (?) to undertake (comp. Acts 10:14). The marvellous draught after the night of fruitless toil is the conversion of many heathen after the failure of the mission to the Jews. This work is so great that Peter with the two other Apostles of the Jews axe unequal to it, and have to call Paul, Barnabas, and help them. Peter then recognizes his former unwillingness (?) as a sia, and both he and the sons of Zebedee are amazed at the success of the mission to the heathen (Galatians 2:9). Thus the rejection of Jesus by the people of Nazareth (4:29, 30), and His preaching “ to the other cities also” (4:43) teach the same lesson as the miraculous draught; viz. the failure of the mission to the Jews and the success of the mission to the heathen (Jahrb. fü r prot.Theol. 1875, 1. p. 189). The whole is exceedingly forced, and an examination of the details shows that the do not fit. If the common view is correct, that James and John were the μέτοχοι in the other boat, the whole structure falls to the ground. Had Lk. intended to convey the meaning read into the narrative by Lipsius, he would not have left the point on which the whole is based so open to misconction. Keim on the whole agrees with Lipsius, and dogmatically asserts that “ the artificial narrative of Lk. must unhesitatingly abandoned … It is full of subtle and ingenious invention … Its historical character collapses under the weight of so much that is artificial” (Jes. of Naz. 3. pp. 264, 265). Holtzmann also pronounces it to be “ legendary and consciously allegorical” (in loco). Does Peter’ s apprantly inconsistent conduct, beseeching Jesus to depart and yet abiding at His feet, look like invention? 12-16. The Healing of a Leper. Here we certainly have an incident which is recorded by all three Evangelists. The amount: of verbal agreement is very great, and we may confidently affirm that all three make use of common material. Mt. (8:1-4) is the most brief, Mk. (1:40-45) the most full; but Mt. is the only one who gives any note of time. He places the miracle just after Jesus had come down from delivering the Sermon on the Mount. On the subject of Leprosy see H. V. Carter, Leprosy and Elephantiasis, 1874; Tilbury Fox, Skin Diseases, 1877; Kaposi, Hautkrankheiten, Wien, 1880; and the literature given at the end of art. Aussatz in Herzog; also in Hirsch, Handb. d. Pathologie, 1860. 12. καὶἰδού . Hebraistic; in Matthew 8:2, but not in Mark 1:40: the καί is the apodosis to ἐγένετο as in ver. 1. No verb follows the ἰδού as if the presence of the leper were a surprise. Had the man disregarded the law in approaching the crowd? Or had the people come upon him suddenly, before he could avoid them? What follows shows a third possibility. Syr-Sin. Omits καὶἰδού . πλήρηςλέρας . This particular is given only by the beloved physician. His face and hands would be covered with ulcers and sores, so that everyone could see that the hideous disease was at a very advanced stage. This perhaps accounts for the man’ s venturing into the multitude, and for their not fleeing at his approach; for by a strange provision of the law, “ if the leprosy break out abroad in the skin, and the leprosy cover all the skin of him that path the plague, from his head even to his feet … then the priest … shall pronounce him clean that hath the plague” (Leviticus 13:12, Leviticus 13:13). ἐδεήθηαὐτοῦ . Excepting Matthew 9:38, the verb is peculiar in N.T. to Lk. and Paul. It is especially freq. in Lk. (8:28, 38, 9:38, 40, 10:2, etc). In LXX it represents a variety of Hebrew words, and is very common. Here Mk. has παρακαλῶν . ἐὰνθέλῃς , δυνασαίμεκαθαρίσαι . All three accounts have these words, and the reply to them, Θέλω , καθαρίσθητι , without variation. The δύνασαι is evidence of strong faith in the Divine power of Jesus; for leprosy was believed to be incurable by human means. It was “ the stroke” of God, and could not be removed by the hand of man. But it is characteristic of the man’ s imperfect apprehension of Christ’ s character, that he has more trust in His power than in His goodness. He doubts the will to heal. He says καθαρίσαι rather than θεραπεῦσαι or ἰάσασθαι because of the pollution which leprosy involved (Leviticus 13:45, Leviticus 13:46). In O.T. “ unclean” and “ clean,” not “ sick” and “ healed,” are the terms used about the leper. The old rationalistic explanation, that καθαρίσαι means “ to pronounce clean,” and that the man was already cured, but wanted the great Rabbi of Nazareth to absolve him from the expensive and troublesome journey to Jerusalem, contradicts the plain statements of the Gospels. He was “ full of leprosy” (Lk.); “ immediately the leprosy departed from him” (Mk. Lk.). If καθαρίσαι means “ to pronounce clean,” then καθαρίσθητι means “ be thou pronounced clean.” Yet Jesus sends him to the priest (Lk. Mk. Mt.). Contrast the commands of Christ with the Prayers of Moses, Elijah, and Elisha, when they healed. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 216. 13. ἐκτείναςτὴνχεῖρα . All three have this Hebraistic amplification. In LXX the phrase commonly occurs in connexion with an act of punishment: Exodus 7:5, Exodus 7:19, Exodus 7:8:1, Exodus 7:2, Exodus 7:9:22, Exodus 7:23, Exodus 7:10:12, Exodus 7:21, Exodus 7:22, Exodus 7:14:16, Exodus 7:21, 26, 27; Ezekiel 6:14, Ezekiel 6:14:9, 16:27, 25:7, Ezekiel 6:13, 16, 35:3; Zephaniah 1:4, Zephaniah 1:2:13; Jeremiah 6:12, Jeremiah 15:6. In N.T. it rarely has this meaning. Jesus touched the leper on the same principle as that on which He healed on the sabbath: the ceremonial law gives place to the law of charity when the two come into collision. His touch aided the leper’ s faith. ἡλέπραἀπῆλθενἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦ . Here again (see on 4:40) Mk. has the whole expression, of which Lk. and Mt. each use a part. Mk. has ἀπῆλθενἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦἡλέπρα , καὶἐκαθαρίσθη , and Mt. has ἐκαθαρίσθηαὐτοῦἡλέπρα . All three have εὐθέως or εὐθύς , Showing that Jesus not merely prepared the way for a cure which nature accomplished, but healed the leper at once by His touch. 14. καὶαὐτός . Lk.’ s favourite form of connexion in narrative: vv. 1, 17, 37, 1:17, 22, 2:28, 3:23, 4:15, 6:20, etc. παρήγγειλεν . The word is specially used of commanders, whose orders are passed along the line , and is freq. in Lk. (8:29, 56, 9:21; Acts 1:4, Acts 1:4:18, Acts 1:5:28, 40, Acts 1:10:42, etc.); rare in Mt. (10:5, 15:35) and Mk. (6:8, 8:6); not in Jn. All the others use ἐντέλλεσθαι and Mt. κελεύειν , both of which are rare in Lk. Here Mt. and Mk. have λέγει . μηδενὶεἰπεῖν . The charge was given with emphasis and sternness , as Mk. tells us. The meaning of it is variously explained. To prevent (1) the man from having intercourse with others before being pronounced clean by proper authority; (2) the man from becoming proud through frequent telling of the amazing benefit bestowed upon him; (3) the priests from hearing of the miracle before the man arrived, and then deciding, out of hostility to Jesus, to deny the cure; (4) the people from becoming unhealthily excited about so great a miracle. Chrysostom and Euthymius suggest (5) that Christ was setting an example of humility, διδάσκωντὸἀκομπαστονκαὶἀφιλότιμον in forbidding the leper to proclaim His good deeds. Least probable of all is the supposition (6) that “ our Lord desired to avoid the Levitical rites for uncleanness which the unspiritual ceremonialism of the Pharisees might have tried to force upon Him” for having touched the leper. The first of these was probably the chief reason; but one or more of the others may be true also.The man would be likely to think that one who had been so miraculously cured was not bound by ordinary rules; and if he mixed freely with others before he was declared by competent authority to be clean, he would give a handle to Christ’ s enemies, who accused Him of breaking the law. In the Sermon on the Mount He had said, “ Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets” (Matthew 5:17); which implies that this had been said of Him. The command μηδενὶμηδὲνεἴπῃς is further evidence that Jesus did not regard miracles as His chief credentials. And there are many such commands (8:56; Matthew 9:30, Matthew 9:12:16; Mark 1:34, Mark 3:12, Mark 5:43, Mark 7:36, Mark 8:26). ἀλλὰἀπελθὼνδεῖξονσεαυτὸντῷἰερεῖ . Sudden changes to the oratio directa are common after παραγγέλλω and similar verbs (Acts 1:4, Acts 1:23:22; Mark 6:8, Mark 6:9?; comp. Acts 17:3; Tobit 8:21; Xen. Anab. i. 3, 16, 20). Win. lxiii. 2, p. 725. τῷἱερεῖ . As in the original (Leviticus 13:49), the sing. refers to the priest who was on duty at the time. Note the καθώς “ exactly as” : the reference is to Leviticus 14:4-10, which enjoins rather expensive offerings. Comp. Matthew 1:24. For the form Μωυσῆς see on 2:22. This charge is in all three narratives almost in the same words. On its import see Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 30 καθαρισμοῦ . Emundatio (Vulg.), mundatio (f q) purgatio (a), purificatio (d). εἰςμαρτύριοναὐτοῖς . This addition is in all three, and various explanations have been suggested. That (1) the priests may be onvinced of My Divine over; (2) the priests may see that I do of disregard the Law; (3) the people may be convinced that the cure is complete, and that the leper may be readmitted to society; (4) the people may see that I do not disregard the Law. It is the sacrifice which is the μαρτύριον , and top, and therefore the second or fourth explanation is to be preferred. Both may be right.1 15. διήρχετοδὲμᾶλλονὁλόγοςπερὶαὐτοῦ . Lk. does not state, as Mk. does, that this was owing to the man’ s disobedience. Mt. omits both points. This use of διέρχομαι of the spreading of a report is quite classical (Thuc. vi. 46, 5; Xen. Anab. i. 4, 7). The word is a favourite one with Lk.; see on 2:15. The μᾶλλον means “ more than before, more than ever” (John 5:18, John 19:8), or “ all the more,” because of the command not to tell (18:39; Acts 5:14, Acts 9:22, Acts 22:2). συνήρχοντοὄχλοιπολλοὶἀκούεινκαὶθεραπεύεσθαιἀπὸτῶνἀσθενειῶν . For miracles mentioned as being numerous, but without details, comp. 4:40, 6:18, 7:21. The constr. θεραπεύεσθαιἀπό is peculiar to Lk. (7:21, 8:2). The usual constr. with θερ . is the acc. (4:23, 40, 9:1, etc.). For ἀσθενειῶν comp. 8:2, 13:11, 12; Acts 28:9; Hebrews 11:34, where we have a similar constr., ἐδυναώθησανἀπὸἀσθενείας 16. αὐτὸςδὲἦνὑποχωρῶνἐνταῖςἐρήμοιςκαὶπροσευχόμενος . The verse forms one of those resting-places with which Lk. frequently ends a narrative (1:80, 2:20, 40, 52, 3:18-20, 4:13, 15, 30, 44). “ But He” on His part, in contrast to the multitudes who came to see Him, “ was in retirement in the deserts, and in prayer.” See on 3:21. The analytical tense expresses what Jesus was engaged in while the multitudes were seeking Him. That they were unable to find Him is not implied here, and Mk. states the opposite. For the αυτός comp, 4:30, 6:8, :37, 54, 11:17, 28, 23:9; and for ὑποχωρεῖν , 9:10. The verb occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is freq. in class. Grk. Lk. alone uses the plur, of ἔρημος (1:80, 8:29). See Bede, ad loc. For ἐν after a verb of motion, to express the rest which is the result of the motion, comp. Matthew 14:3; John 3:35; 2 Corinthians 8:16. Such condensed constructions are not common, if found at all, in earlier writers. The converse use of εἰς after verbs of rest is more common (11:7, 21:37; Acts 2:39, Acts 2:7:4, Acts 2:8:20, Acts 2:23, Acts 2:40, etc.). Win. l. 4. a, p. 514. 17-26. The Healing of a Paralytic. Matthew 9:1-8; Mark 2:1-12. We again have a narrative which is narrated by all three Synoptists in a way which shows that they are using common material. Mt. is again the most brief. Mk. and Lk. agree in the details, but differ considerably in the wording. Different translations of the same Aramaic original, or of two very similar Aramaic originals, would account for these similarities and differences. The cast of the opening verse is very Hebraistic, as is shown by ἐγένετο by ἐνμιᾷτῶνἡμερῶν , by καὶαὐτός and by δύναμιςΚύριουἦνεἰς . See on 4:36 and on 8:22. The ἐνμιᾷτῶνἡμερῶν is an absolutely indefinite expression, which we have no right to limit. Mt. and Mk. give no date. The phrase ἐνμιᾶτῶν is peculiar to Lk. 17. φαρισαῖοι . The first mention of them by Lk., who assumes that his readers know who the Pharisees were. This introduction of them stamps them as hostile to Christ; and we have here the first collision in Galilee between Jesus and the authorities at Jerusalem. On the Pharisees see Jos. Ant. xiii. 5, 9, 10.6, xvii. 2. 4, xviii. 1, 2, 3; B. J. ii. 8. 14; Schü rer, Jewish People, II. 2. § 26, p. 10; Hausrath, N.T. Times, 1. p. 135; Keim, Jes. of Naz. 1. p. 321; Edersh. L.& T. 1. pp. 96, 97, 310-324. νομοδιδάσκαλοι . The word is formed on the analogy of ἱεποδιδάσκαλος and χοροδιδάσκαλος , but is not classical. Elsewhere only Acts 5:34 and 1 Timothy 1:7. In all three cases teachers of the Jewish Law are meant, and the term is almost a synonym for οἱγραμματεῖς in the N.T. sense. That they had come ἐκπάσηςκώμηςτῆςΛαλιλαίαςκαὶἸουδαίας is, of course, a popular hyperbolical expression, and illustrates Lk.’ s fondness far πᾶς comp, 6:17. δύναμιςκυρίουἦνεἰςτὸἰᾶσθαιαὐτὸν . “ The power of Jehovah was present for Him to heal with” ; i.e. for Jesus to employ in working miracles, of healing. See on 4:36 and comp. 1:35, 24:49; Acts 6:8. Hence miracles are often called δυνάμεις or out comes of the power of God. Trench, Syn. xci. The failure to see that αὐτόν is the subject, not the object, of ἰᾶσθαι produced the corrupt reading αὐτούς (A C D and versions). This corrupt reading produced the erroneous interpretation of Κυρίου as meaning Christ. Lk. often calls Christ “ the Lord” ; but in such cases Κύριος always has the article (7:13, 10:1, 11:39, 12:42, 13:15, 17:5, 6, 18:6, 9:8, 22:61). Κύριος without the article means Jehovah (1:11, 2:9, 4:18; Acts 5:19, Acts 5:8:26, Acts 5:39, Acts 5:12:7). This verse shows us Jesus armed with Divine power and con fronted by a large body of hostile spies and critics. What follows (VV. 19, 26) proves that there was also a multitude of curious spectators, who had not declared for either side, like the multitude round Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Carmel (1 Kings 18:21). Except in quotations from LXX (Matthew 13:15; John 12:40) and one other passage (John 4:47), ἰᾶσθαι with act. signif. is peculiar to Lk. (6:19, 9:2, 11, 42, 14:4, 22:51; Acts 9:34, Acts 10:38, etc.). 18. ὅςἦνπαραλελυμένος . “ Here and wherever St. Luke mentions this disease, he employs the verb παραλύεσθαι , and never παραλυτικός . The other N.T. writers use the popular form παραλυτικός , and never use the verb, the apparent exception to this, Hebrews 12:12, being a quotation from the LXX, Isaiah 35:3. St. Luke’ s use is in strict agreement with that of the medical writers” (Hobart, Med. Lang. of St. Lk. p. 6). ἐζήτουναὐτὸνεἰσενεγκεῖν . Into the house, although it has not yet been stated that Jesus was in a house. Mk. tells us that there were four bearers, and that the place was thronged even about the door. For ἐνώπιον see small print on 1:15. 19.For μή with a participle expressing a reason see small print on 3:9. With ποίας understand ὀδοῦ and comp. ἐκεὶνης (19:4). Here we should have expected διά , which some inferior MSS. insert in both places. “ By what kind of a way” emphasizes their perplexity. For the omission of ὀδός comp. 3:5. Win. xxx. 11, lxiv. 5, pp. 258, 738. The classical τὴνἄλλως illustrates this common ellipse. Blass, Gr. pp. 106, 137. διὰτὸνὄχλον . “ Because of the multitude” ; not “ through the multitude,” a meaning of διά c.acc. which is found only in poet and freq. in Hom. It was probably by means of outside step that they “ went up on to the top of, the house.” Oriental houses sometimes have such steps; and in any case, ladders could be used. That the δῶμα was a dwelling-house is not stated. In bibl. Grk. it means a roof rather than a house (Deuteronomy 22:8; Joshua 2:6, Joshua 2:8), and in N.T. seems to imply a flat roof (12:3, 17:31; Acts 10:9; Mark 13:15; Matthew 10:27, Matthew 24:17). It may have been over a large hall on the ground floor. Even if Jesus was teaching in the upper room of a dwelling-house (and the Rabbis often taught there), the difficulty of getting on to the roof and removing a small portion of it would not be very great. Edersh. Hist. of J. N. P. 253. διὰτῶνκεράμωνκαθῆκαν . The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 9:25, Acts 10:11, Acts 11:5); freq. in class. Grk. Mk. has ἀπεστέγασαντὴνστέγηνὅπουἦν , καὶἐξορύξαντεςχαλῶσιν . Perhaps Lk. thinks of Græ co-roman houses, Mk. of Palestinian. We need not infer from ἐξορύξαντες that under the tiles was clay or mortar to be “ dug out.” But, if there was anything of the kind to be cut through and removed, this could easily be done without serious consequences to those who were in the crowded room below. Men who had so much at stake, and who had got thus far, would not desist through fear of sprinkling a few persons with rubbish. To make these difficulties, which are very unsubstantial, a reason for rejecting the whole narrative as a legend, is rather childish criticism. The constructor of a legend would not have made his details conspicuously incredible. The suggestion that Jesus was in a gallery outside the house, teaching the multitude in the open court below, is not helpful. In that case, why unroof the gallery? The sick man might have been let down to the front of it.1 σὺντῷκλινιδίῳ . Lk. alone has his favourite κλίνη The substantive occurs here only. It is the dim. of κλίνη (8:16, 17:34), and perhaps means here a portion of the κλίνη mentioned in ver. 18. Not all of what had been used to bring him through the streets would be let down through the roof. Comp. κλινάριον (Acts 5:15). Double forms of diminutives are not uncommon e.g. γυναίκιον and γυναικάριον (2 Timothy 3:6); παιδίον (1:59, 66 and παιδάριον (John 6:9); πινάκιον and πινακίδιον (1:63). Mk. has the inelegant κράβαττος , grabatus (Acts 5:15, Acts 9:33), for which e Greeks preferred σκίμπους or σκιμπόδιον . 20. ἰδὼντὴνπίστιναὐτῶν . The faith of the man and of those who brought him. All three accounts have the words; but Mt. omits the persevering energy which proved how strong their faith was. We reed not assume the the paralytic himself did not share his friends! confidence. For a fall discussion of the Meaning of “ Faith” in the New Testament and in some Jewish Writings see detached note on Romans 1:17. Here it will suffice to point out its four main uses for (1) belief in God; (2) belief in His promises; (3) belief in Christ; (4) belief in some particular utterance or claim of God or of Christ. Of these four the last is the commonest use in the Synoptic Gospels, where it generally means belief in the power of Christ, or of God in Christ, to work miracles. The efficacy of Christ’ s power is commonly dependent upon the faith of those who are to be benefited by its exercise, as here. Comp. 7:50, 8:48, 17:19, 18:42. By an easy transition this faith in the power of God or of Christ to work miracles becomes used of the conviction that the believer himself has received power to work miracles. Comp. 17:6. In 18:8 the faith to be found on earth means faith in the Son of Man. Ἄνθρωπε , ἀφέωνταίσοιαἱἁμαρτίαισου . Mk. has τέκνον , and Mt has θάρσειτέκνον . It is not likely that Lk., the writer of the Gospel of grace for all, has deliberately changed the more tender address, because it seemed to be unsuitable to one who must, as he thinks, have been a grievous sinner. Comp. 12:14 and 22:58. And we affirm more than we know, if we say that this absolution was necessary for the man’ s cure, because otherwise he would not have believed that Jesus could heal him, and his faith was essential to the cure. He probably believed, and perhaps knew, that his malady was the direct consequence of his own sin (13:2; John 5:14, John 5:9:2; 1 Corinthians 11:30). But it does not follow from this that faith on his part was thus far absent. Suidas seems to be right in regarding ἀφέωνται as a Doric form of the perf. indic. for ἀφεῖνται . But it was admitted rather freely, even by Attic writers. Comp. ἀνέωται (Hdt. ii. 165, I; but the reading is not certain) and εἴωθα from ἔθω (4:16). Win. 14:3. a, p. 96; Veitch, s.v. In Mt. and Mk. the true reading here is ἀφίενται : but ἀφέωνται occurs again 7:47, 48; 1 John 2:12, and propably John 20:23. Some have regarded it as a subjunctive: remissa sunto. Fritzsche (on Matthew 9:2) pertinently asks, Quo usu aut more subjunctivum in talibus locis absolute positum defendas? 21. ἤρξαντοδιαλογίζεσθαι . Not a mere periphrasis for διαλογεσαντο : see on 4:21. Hitherto they had found nothing in His words to excite criticism. Here they seemed to see the opportunity for which they had been watching, and their discussions forthwith began.1 The γραμματεῖς are evidently the same as the νομοδιδάσκαλοι in ver. 17. Neither Mt. nor Mk. mention the Pharisees here; and both of them imply that the criticisms were not uttered aloud: ἐνἑαυτοῖς (Mt.), ἐνταῖςκαρδίαις (Mk.). Even here utterance is not stated, for λέγοντες may be used of thoughts (12:17; Matthew 21:25). Τίςἐστινοὖτοςὅςλαλεῖβλασφημίας ; An accidental iambic line. We have another ver. 39, if εὐθέως be admitted as genuine. The οὖτος is contemptuous, as often (4:22, 7:39, 49, 9:9, 14:30, 15:2, etc.). In N.T., as in class. Grk., βλασφημία has the two meanings of “ evil speaking” (Colossians 3:8; Ephesians 4:31; 1 Timothy 4:4; Jude 1:9 : comp. Romans 3:8, Romans 14:16) and “ blasphemy” (Matthew 12:31, Matthew 12:26:65; Revelation 13:6). These cavillers assume that Jesus claimed to have pardoned the man on His own authority, not merely to have said that He knew that his sins have been forgiven by Got And Jesus does not say that they are mistaken in this. He acts on His own authority in accordance with the will of the Father, doing on earth what the Father does in heaven (John 5:19, John 5:21). For ἀφιέναι of sins comp. Matthew 12:31; Mark 3:28; Romans 4:7, etc. 22. ἐπιγνοὺςδὲὁἸησοῦςτοὺςδιαλογισμοὺςαὐτῶν . The compound verb implies thorough and accurate knowledge (1 Corinthians 13:12; Romans 1:32; Justin, Try. 3. p. 221 A). The subst. ἐπίγυωσις is used of “ the knowledge of God and of Christ as being the perfection of knowledge: e.g. Proverbs 2:5; Hosea 4:1, Hosea 4:6:6; Ephesians 1:17, Ephesians 1:4:13; 2 Peter 1:2, 2 Peter 1:3, 2 Peter 1:8, 2 Peter 1:2:20; Clem. Alex Pæ d. ii. i. p. 173” (Lft. on Colossians 1:9). Comp. the climax in Apost. Const. 7:39, 1, γνῶσις , ἐπίγνωσιςπληροφορία . On both ἐπίγνωσις and διαλογισμούς see Hatch, Bibl. Grk. p. 8. The latter seems here to mean “ thoughts” (ἐνθυμήσεις , Matthew 9:4) rather than “ discussions” (9:46). In LXX it is used of the counsels of God (Psalms 39:6, Psalms 91:6). It is, however, more often used in a bad sense (Psalms 55:5, 93:11, Psalms 145:4, etc.), and is specially freq. in Lk. (2:35, 6:8, 9:47, 24:38). Not in Jn., and only once each in Mt. and Mk. ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςὑμῶν . This seems to imply that there had been o utterance. Christ read their thoughts. See on Romans 1:21. 23. τίἐστινεὐκοπώτερον , εἰπεῖν … ἤεἰπεῖν . It is in this verse and the next that the three accounts are most similar— almost verbatim the same. The challenge is a very practical one, and the point of it is in the εἰπεῖν . It is easier to say, “ Thy sins are forgiven,” because no one can prove that they are not forgiven. But the claim to heal with a word can be easily and quickly tested. εὐκοπώτερον . Lit. “ more capable of being done with easy labour” . In N.T. always in the comparative (16:17, 18:25; Mark 10:25; Matthew 19:24); but εὐκοπον occurs 1 Mal 3:18; Ecclus, 22:15. It is found in Polyb., but not in class. Grk.— For τίς in the sense of “ whether of two” like πότερος as quis = uter, comp. 22:27; Matthew 21:31, Matthew 21:24:17, Matthew 21:27:17, Matthew 21:21; Xen. Cyr. iii. 1, 17. 24. ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου . This remarkable phrase in all four Gospels is invariably used by Christ of Himself; upwards of eighty times in all. The Evangelists never use it of Him, and no one ever addresses Him by this title. Yet none of the four ever directs our attention to this strict limitation in the use of the phrase, so that their agreement must be regarded as undesigned, and as evidence of their accuracy. D.C.G. art. “ Son of Man.” In O.T. we have “ son of man” used in three different connexions, and it must be noted that in each case the rendering in LXX is υἰὸςἀνθρώπου and not ὁυἰὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου . In the Psalms it is used of the ideal man: 8:4, 80:16, 144:3, 146:3. In Ezekiel it is the title by which the Prophet is addressed, 2:1, 3, 6, 8, 3:1, 3, 4, etc. etc.; upwards of eighty times in all. In Daniel’ s night visions (7:13, 14), “ One like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days,” and received a dominion which was universal and eternal. With this should be compared various passages in the Book of Enoch, of which this is specially noteworthy. “ There I saw one who had a head of days, and His head was white like wool; and with Him was a Second, whose countenance was like the appearance of a man, and His countenance was full of grace, like one of the holy angels. And I asked one of the angels who were with me, and who showed me all the secrets, concerning this Son of Man, who He was, and whence He was, and why He goes with the Head of days. And he answered and said to me: This is the Son of Man who has justice, and justice dwells with Him; and all the treasures of secrecy He reveals, because the Lord of the spirits has chosen Him, and His portion overcomes all things before the Lord of the spirits in rectitude to eternity. And this Son of Man, whom thou hast seen, will arouse the kings and mighty from their couches, and the strong from their thrones, and will loosen the bands of the strong, and will break the teeth of the sinners” (46.), This Son of Man is the Messiah. He is called “ the Anointed,” (48:11, 51:4), “ the Righteous One” (38:2, 53:6), “ the Elect One” (passim), and the Lord speaks of Him as “ my Son” (105:2). That these Messianic passages in the Book of Enoch are of Christian origin is the opinion of a few critics, but it is difficult to maintain it. Everything distinctly Christian is absent. This Son of Man or Messiah is not the Word, is not God. That He has lived on the earth is nowhere intimated. Of the historical Jesus, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, or the Ascension, there is not a hint; nor yet of baptism, or of the eucharist, or of the doctrine of the Trinity. Why should a Christian write just what any Jew might accept about the Messiah and no more? But if the whole of the Book of Enoch was written before the birth of Christ, then we have sufficient evidence to show that when Christ was teaching on earth “ Son of Man” was already accepted by the Jews as one title, although not a common one, for the Messiah.1 The idea of a weak and suffering Messiah was unwelcome to the Jews, and therefore a name which emphasized human weakness was not a favourite one. “ But the very reason which induced them to avoid the title induced our Lord to take it. It expressed His Messiahship definitely enough for His purpose; but it expressed it In that veiled and suggestive way which characterise the whole of His teaching on His own person. At the same time, it conveyed to those who had ears to bear the whole secret of the Incarnation. That which the Jews shrank from and ignored He rather placed in the forefront of His mission” . ἐπὶτῆςγῆς . In all three accounts there is room for doubt as the words which this expression qualifies. Here either ἐξουσίανἔχει or ἀφιεναιἀμαρτίας . In Mk. and Mt. it may qualify ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου . It is best taken with ἐξουσίανἔχει . But the difference in meaning is not great. εἶπεντῷπαραλελυμένῳ . This is not the apodosis to iva ἵναεἰδῆτε but a parenthesis:1 the apodosis to ἵναεἰδῆτε is Σοὶλέγω Note the emphasis on σοί : “ to thee I say the crucial words.” Clement of Alexandria gives this address to the paralytic in singularly different language: ἀνάστα , φησὶτῷπαρειμένῳτὸνσκίμποδαἐφ ʼ ὃνκατάκεισαιλαβὼνἄπιθιοἴκαδε (pæ d. i. 2, p. 101, ed. Potter) Probably a paraphrase. For the pres. imperat. see Blass, Gr. p. 191. 25. παραχρῆμαἀναστὰςἐνώπιον . Every one of these words is characteristic of Lk. For παραχρῆμα MK. has his equally characteristic εὐθύς , a feature which recurs Luke 8:44, Luke 8:55, Luke 8:18:43, Luke 8:22:60. Lk. has παραχρῆμα ten times in the Gospel and six times in the Acts: elsewhere only Matthew 21:19, Matthew 21:20. For ἀναστάς Mt. has ἐγερθείς and Mk. ἠγέρθηκαί : see on 1:39. For ἐνώπιοναὐτῶν Mk. has ἔμπροσθενπάντων . ἄραςἐφ ʼ ὃκατέκειτο . Il doit porter maintenant ce grabat qui l’ a si longtemps porté (Godet). The wording is peculiar to Lk., and is perhaps intended to suggest this inversion of relations. Lk. alone records that he glorified God. The phrase δοξάζειντὸνΘεόν is specially. common with him (ver. 26, 7:16, 13:13, 17:15, 18:43, 23:47; Acts 4:21, Acts 11:18, Acts 21:20): once in Mk., twice in Mt., once in Jn. The reading ἐφ ʼ ᾦ (R U Λ is an obvious correction to a more usual construction. For the acc. after a verb of rest comp. 21:35; Matthew 13:2; Mark 4:38; John 21:4; also Plato, sym. 212 D, ἐπιστῆναιἐπὶτὰςθύρας . 26. ἔκστασιςἔλαβενἅπαντας Mk. has πάντας Mt. nothing. Lk. is fond of the stronger form. He alone records all three emotions— amazement, fear, and gratitude to God. The last is in all three. For ἔκστασις comp. Mark 5:42, Mark 5:16:8; Acts 3:10; Genesis 27:33; 1 Samuel 14:15; 2 Chronicles 14:14. Mt., whose narrative is much the most brief, adds after ἐδόξασαντὸνΘεόν , τὸνδόνταἐξουσίαντοιαύτηντοῖςἀνθρώποις which seems to refer to the preceding ἐξουσίανἔχει . He who is the Son of Man, the ideal representative of the race, had vindicated His claim to possess authority to forgive sins. Εἴδαμενπαράδοξασήμερον . The adj. occurs here only in N.T. In LXX it is not rare (Judith 13:13; Wisd. 5:2; Ecclus. 43:25; 2 Mac. 9:24; 4 Malachi 2:13).It is used of the miracles of Jesus in the famous passage, of very doubtful origin, in Josephus: σοφὸςἀνὴρ , εἴγεἄνδρααὐτὸνλέγεινχρή . ἦνγὰρπαραδόξωνἔργωνποιητής (Ant. xviii 3. 3).Whereas ἔνδοξα (13:17) has reference to the δόξα or glory of the agent, παράδοξα refers to the δόξα or opinion of the spectators; but δόξα in the sense of “ opinion” or “ belief” is not found in N.T. For the mixed form of aor. εἴδαμεν see small print on 1:59, and comp. 1 Samuel 10:14 and 2 Samuel 10:14. 27-39. The Calling of Levi and the Discussion about Fasting. Matthew 9:9-17; Mark 2:13-22. In all three narratives this section is connected closely with the healing of the paralytic; but Mt. places both incidents much later, viz. after the return from the country of the Gadarenes. The common identification of Levi with Matthew is probably correct; but his father must not be identified with the father of James the Less. Matthew is probably a contraction of Mattathias = “ Gift of God,” and this name may have been given to Levi after His conversion, like that of Peter to Simon. Comp. Joseph Barsabbas, surnamed Justus (Acts 1:23). In Galilee it was common to have two names; and therefore both names may have been original. But if Levi was the earlier name, and was less well known among Christians, that would account for Mk. and Lk. using it, while Mt. equally naturally would let it be evident that a τελώνης had become, by Christ’ s mercy, the well-known Apostle. There can be no reasonable doubt that the three narratives refer to same incident. And, as Levi is mentioned in no list of the Twelve, and Matthew is mentioned in all such lists, the identity of Levi the τελώνης with Mt. the τελώνης and Apostle need not be doubted. Such doubts, however, are ancient. They existed in the Gnostic commentator Heracleon (Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 9, p. 595, ed Potter) and were shared by origen. They have been reproduced by Grotius (on Matthew 9:9) and Michaelis; and more recently by Sieffert, Neander, Ewald, Keim, and Reuss. But a satisfactory solution, which is not contradicted by any evidence, is not to be rejected because it does not amount to demonstration. 27. ἐξῆλθεν . So also Mk., while Mt. has παράγωνἐκεῖθεν Departure from the town, rather than from the house, is probably meant; and we therefore obtain no evidence as to the site of Capernaum. We may place Capernaurn away from the lake, and yet suppose the τελώνιον to have been close to the shore. The customs collected there went to Herod Antipas, not to the imperia, fiscus (Jos. Ant. xvii. 11, 4, 5; B. J. ii. 6, 3): see on 20:25. ἐθεάσατοτελώνην . “ Looked attentively at, contemplated, a collector,” as if reading his character. The verb often implies enjoyment in beholding (7:24; John 1:14, John 1:32, John 1:38; Joh_1 Joh 1:1). For the τελῶναι see on 3:12. The Talmud distinguishes two classes of τελῶναι : the Gabbai or tax-gatherer (e.g. of income-tax or polltax), and the Mokhes or custom-house officer. The latter was specially hated, as having greater opportunities for vexatious exactions, especially from the poor. Levi was one of the latter. The great commercial route from Acre to Damascus, which continued until the crusades as the via maris, passed the lake at or near Capernaum, and gave employment to excisemen (Isaiah 9:1). ὀνόματιΛευείν . Mk. as ΛευεὶντὸντοῦἈλφαίου , and Mt. has Μαθθαῖον . The fondness of Lk. for ὀνόματι in introducing a name is here conspicuous. Mt. has λεγόμενον , and Mk. has neither. Comp. 1:5, 10:38, 16:20, 23:50, and over twenty times in the Acts. Mt. and Mk. have ὀνόματι once each. Jn. says ὄνομααὐτῶς (1:6, 3:1, 18:10). καθήμενονἐπὶτὸτελώνιον . Excepting in the parallel passages, τελώνιον does not occur in N.T. Nor is it common elsewhere. In Strabo, xvi. I. 27, it seems to mean “ customs, taxes,” and some would render ἐπὶτὸτελώνιον , “ to receive the customs.” But it is more probable that it means the place where dues were collected, “ the tol bothe” (Wic.) or “ the custom-house” (Rhem.). Comp. similarly formed δεκατώνιον “ the office of a collector of tenths.” Very likely Levi was sitting outside the portitorium. He must have been visible from the outside: the ἐπί is “ at,” not “ in.” 28. καταλιπὼνπάντα . Lk alone mentions this.1 Note the characteristic πάντα , and comp. ver. 11. The fact illustrates the doctrine, to which Lk. often bears witness, that riches are a peril and an impediment, and that the kingdom of God is specially preached to the poor. The statement is against the supposition (D. B.1 ii. p. 969) that Mt. returned to his business afterwards; and it is quite gratuitous to suppose that the statement is a mere reminiscence of ver. 11. In them case why has ἀφιέναι been changed to καταλείπειν Syr-Sin. omits ἀναστάς . There is a slight awkwardness in καταλιπών preceding ἀναστάσς : the rising was the first act in the leaving all and in the following Christ. Both Mt. (?) and Lk. represent the following as habitual, ἠκολούθει . Mk. regards the single act on this occasion, ἠκολούθησεν . With the call, Ἀκολούθειμοι , comp. John 1:44, and with the result comp. ver. 11 and Matthew 4:19, Matthew 4:22. The two combined lead one to the view that this is a call to become an Apostle. 29. ἐποίησενδοχὴνμεγάλην . “ Made a great reception” or banquet. The word is peculiar to Lk., who has δοχὴνποιεῖν again 14:13. The phrase occurs in LXX ( Genesis 21:8, Genesis 21:26:30; Esther 1:3, Esther 1:5:4, Esther 1:8). Of course ἐντῆςοἰκίαςαὐτοῦ means in Levi’ s house, which is not included in καταλιπὼνπάντα . He was not at his house when he left all. The πάντα refers to his whole mode of life, his business as a τελώνης . It is strange that any one should understand the words either here or Mark 2:15 as meaning “ in the house of Jesus.” Had Jesus a house? If so, how improbable that Levi should hold a reception in it! If the narrator had meant this, must he not have given the name instead of αὐτοῦ , which would inevitably be misunderstood? Mt. has simply ἐντῆςοἰκίας , which possibly means “ indoors” as apposed to the outdoor scene ἐπὶτὸτελώνιον . There is no evidence that Christ had a house at Capernaum. After the call of Simon and Andrew He is entertained in the house of Simon and Andrew (Mark 1:16, Mark 1:29); and after the call of Levi He is entertained in the house of Levi. The new disciple wishes his old friends to make the acquaintance of his new Master. C’ est son premier acte missionaire (Godet). ἦνὄχλοςπολὺςτελωνῶνκαὶἄλλωνοἵἦσανμετ ʼ αὐτῶνκατακείμενοι . This proves that the house was a large one, which the house of Jesus would not have been: and it also shows the character of the company, for only social outcasts would sit down at the same table with τελῶναι . 30. ἐγόγγυζονοἱφαρισαῖοικαὶοἱγραμματεῖςαὐτῶν . The αὐτῶν means “ the scribes of the Pharisees,” i.e. who belonged to that party. Some scribes were Sadducees. That this is the meaning is clear from Mark 2:16. It is pointless, and scarcely grammatical, to make αὐτῶν refer to the inhabitants of the place, who have not been mentioned. These scribes were probably not invited guests, but had entered during the meal, like the woman that was a sinner in the house of Simon. The Sinaiticus and other authorities omit αὐτῶν , doubtless because it was not clear what it meant. For γογγύζω , which is not in Mk. or Mt., see Lft, on Philippians 2:14, and Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 39. The Atticists preferred τονθορύζω . Both are probably onomatop.— Note that here, as in vv. 31, 33 and 4:43, Lk. has πρός c. acc. after a verb of speaking, where Mk. (2:16-19) has the dat. See on 1:13. Διὰτίμετὰτῶντελωνῶνκαὶἁμαρτωλῶνἐθίετε ; The single article (so in all three) brackets them as one class. In Mt. and Mk. the disciples are not included in the charge ; but they both mention that the disciples were sitting at table with Jesus and the τελῶναι , and therefore were open to the charge, Lk., on the other hand, does not mention that the disciples were sitting at table, but his ἐσθίετε implies it. With διὰτί comp. Exodus 5:14. 31. In all three accounts Jesus ignores the insinuation against His disciples, and answers for Himself. He is responsible for the intercourse with taxcollectors and sinners. For οἱὑγιαίνοντες Mt. and Mk. have οἱἰσχύοντες . This looks like a deliberate change made by Lk. for the sake of a word which would more definitely express health as opposed to sickness. Like παραλελιμένος for παραλυτικός (vv. 18, 24) and ἰᾶσθαι for διασώζειν (6:19), these changes may be the result of Lk.’ s medical training (Hobart, p. 67; Salmon, Int. to N.T. p. 129, 5th ed.). But would Lk. have made changes in a report of Christ’ s words? There would be no need to have scruples, for οἱἰσχύοντες is only a translation of the Aramaic, and Lk. might think that οἱὑγιαίνοντες was a better translation. Christ’ s reply is an argumentum ad hominem, partly ironical. On their own showing the Pharisees had no need of a teacher, while these outcasts were in the greatest need of one. 32. εἰςμετάνοιαν . These words are peculiar to Lk., but in some texts have been transferred to Mk. and Mt. Both μετάνοια and μετανοεῖν are freq. in Lk. See on 15:7. Obviously those who are really δίκαιοι do not need to be called to repentance; but who are δίκαιοι That is the question which Christ’ s reply suggests. If we had only Mk.’ s account, we might suppose that what follows took place on some other occasion; but both Lk. and Mt. connect it with the banquet in Matthew’ s house. 33. οἱδὲεἶπαν . The same who asked the previous question, viz. the Pharisees and their scribes (ver. 30). Mt. says that it was the disciples of John who came up and put this question. Mk. states that both the disciples of John and the Pharisees were keeping a fast at that very time, and joined in asking why Christ’ s disciples did not do so also. We know from John 3:26 how jealous the Baptist’ s disciples were of Christ, and therefore ready to criticize. Perhaps they were also jealous of the freedom from legal restraints which His disciples seemed to enjoy. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 6:1-5. The first Incident on the Sabbath (see Maurice, Lectures an St. Luke, pp. 82, 83 ed. 1879). The Call of Peter was followed by two healings which provoked opposition to Christ: and now the Call of Levi is followed by two incidents on the sabbath, which lead to similar opposition. Mk. agrees with Lk. in placing these two immediately after the call of Levi; Mt. has them much later (12:1-14). On the connexion here see Schanz, ad loc. 1. ἐνσαββάτωςδευτεροπρώτως . This passage is a well-known crux in textual criticism and exegesis. Is δευτεροπρώτως part of the true text? If so, what does it mean? The two questions to some extent overlap, but it is possible to treat them separately. 1. The external evidence is very much divided, but the balance is against the words being original.1 The reading is Western and Syrian, and “ has no other clean pre-Syrian authority than that of D a ff.” The internal evidence is also divided. On the one hand, “ The very obscurity of the expression, which does not occur in the parallel Gospels or elsewhere, attests strongly to its genuine. ness” (Scriv.), for “ there is no reason which can explain the insertion of this word, while the reason for omitting it is obvious” (Tisch.) On the other hand, “ all known cases of probable omission on account of difficulty are limited to single documents or groups of restricted ancestry, bearing no resemblance to the attestation of text in either variety or excellence” (WH.). Moreover, if any sabbath had really borne this strange name, which is introduced without explanation as familiar to the readers, it would almost certainly have been found elsewhere, either in LXX, Philo, Josephus, or the Talmud. In the life of Eutychius (512-582) by his chaplain Eustathius δευτεροπρώτηκυριακή is used of the first Sunday after Easter, but the expression is obviously borrowed from this passage, and throws no light. In the whole of Greek literature, classical, Jewish, or Christian, no such word is found independently of this text. The often quoted δευτεροδεκάτη , “ second tenth” (Hieron. ad Ez. xlv. 13), gives no help. The analogy of δευτερογάμος , δευτεροτόκος , κ .τ .λ ., suggests the meaning of “ a sabbath which for a second time is first” ; that of δευτερέσχατος , which Heliodorus (apud Soran. Med. vet.) uses for “ last but one,” suggests the meaning “ first but one” i.e. “ second of two firsts.” But what sense, suitable to the passage, can be obtained from either of these? The more probable conclusion is that the word is spurious. How then did it get into the text and become so widely diffused? The conjecture of Meyer is reasonable. An early copyist inserted πρώτως to explain ἐνέτέρωςσαββάτως in ver. 6; this was corrected to δευτέρως because of 4:31; and the next copyist, not understanding the correction, combined the two words. A few MSS. have the reading δευτέρωςπρώτως , among them R (Cod. Nitriensis). a paü mpsest of the sixth cent. in the British Museum. See Knight’ s Field. 2. If the word is genuine, what can be its meaning? Jerome put this question to Gregory Nazianzen, and the latter eleganter lusit, saying, Docebo te superhac re in ecclesia (Hieron. Ep. 52.). Of the numerous conjectures the following may be mentioned as not altogether incredible. (1) The first sabbath of the second year in a sabbatical cycle of seven years. This theory of Wieseler has won many adherents. (2) The first sabbath in Nisan. The Jewish civil year began in Tisri, while the ecclesiastical year began in Nisan; so that each year there were two first sabbaths, one according to civil, the other according to ecclesiastical reckoning: just as Advent Sunday and the first Sunday in January are each, from different points of view, the first Sunday in the year. It would be possible to call the second of the two “ a second first Sunday.” But would anyone use such languale and expect to be understood? (3) The first sabbath of the second month. It is asserted that the story of David obtaining the shewbread would often be in the lesson for that sabbath. But the lectionary of the synagogues in the time of Christ is unknown. See on 4:17. For other guesses see Godet, McClellan, and Meyer. Most editors omit or bracket it. Tisch. changed his decision several times, but finally replaced it in his eighth edition. διαπορεύεσθαιαὐτὸνδιὰσπορίμων . Excepting Romans 15:24, the verb is peculiar to Lk. (13:22, 18:36; Acts 16:4). In N.T. σπόριμος occurs only here and parallels. In Theophr. (H. P. vi. 5. 4) we have ἡσπορίμη , sc. γῆ . In Genesis 1:29 it is applied to the seed, πάνταχόρτονσπόριμονσπεῖρονσπέρμα ; so that like σπείρεσθαι , it can be used either of the field or of the seed. ἔτιλλονοἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦκαὶἤσθιοντοὺςστάχυας . For this Mk. has ἥρξαντοὁδὸνποιεῖντίλλοντεςτοὺςστάχυας , which has been interpreted to mean “ began to make a way by plucking the ears.” But (1) all three imply that Jesus was walking in front of the disciples. What need was there for them to make a way? (2) How would plucking the ears make a path? (3) In LXX ὁδὸνποιεῖν is used for iter facere (Judges 17:8). All three mean that the disciples went along plucking the ears. This was allowed (Deuteronomy 23:25). ψώχοντεςταῖςχερσίν . This and the τίλλοντες constituted the offence: it was unnecessary labour on the sabbath. According to Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, thrashing, winnowing, and preparing food all at once. Lk. alone mentions the rubbing, and the word ψώχειν seems to occur elsewhere only in the medical writer Nicander (Theriaca, 629). It is from the obsolete ψώω , a collat. form of ψάω . Comp. Hdt. iv. 75, 2. For the action described see Robinson, Res. in Pal. i. pp. 493, 499. 2. τινὲςδὲτῶνφαρισαίων . As in 5:30, they are represented as addressing their question to the disciples. In Mark 2:24 and Matthew 12:2 the charge against the disciples is addressed to Christ, while in Mark 2:16 and Matthew 9:11 the charge against Christ is addressed to the disciples. The τοῖςσάββασιν may mean either “ on the sabbath days” (AV. and most English Versions) or “ on the sabbath day” (RV.). Although Vulg. has in sabbatis, Wic. has “ in the saboth” ; Cov. also “ upon the sabbath.” See on 4:31, 3. οὐδὲτοῦτοἀνέγνωτεὃἐποίησενΔαυείδ . “ Have ye not read even this that David did?” Does your knowledge not extend even thus far? RV. follows AV. in translating ὃἐποίησεν as if it were the same as the τίἐποίησεν of Mt. and Mk., “ what David did.” καὶοἱμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ . “ The young men,” whom David was to meet afterwards. He came to Nab alone (1 Samuel 21:1). 4. εἰσῆλθενεἰςτὸνοἶκοντοῦΘεοῦ . This is not stated in O.T., but may be inferred from his being seen by Doeg the Edomite, who was “ detained before the Lord” : i.e. he was in the tabernacle as a proselyte, perhaps to be purified, or to perform a vow. τοὺςἄρτουςτῆςπροθέσεως . Lit. “ the loaves of the setting forth.” These were the twelve loaves of wheaten bread placed before the Lord in the Holy Place every sabbath. The word “ shewbread” first appears in Coverdale, probably from Luther’ s Schaubrote. Wic. follows the panes propositionis of Vulg. with “ looves of proposisiounn,” which is retained in Rhem. Tyn. has “ loves of halowed breed.” In O.T. we have also ἄρτοιτοῦπροσώπου , i.e. of the presence of God (1 Samuel 21:6; Nehemiah 10:33), or ἄρτοιἐνώπιοι (Exodus 25:30), or ἄρτοιτῆςπροσφορᾶς (1 Kings 7:48), or again οἱἄρτοιοἱδιαπαντός , i.e. “ the perpetual loaves” (Numbers 4:7). But the expression used here, Matthew 12:4 and Mark 2:26, occurs Exodus 39:36?, 40:23; 1 Chronicles 9:32, 1 Chronicles 23:29: comp. 2 Chronicles 4:19. For the origin of ἡπρόθεσιςτῶνἄρτων (Hebrews 9:2) comp. 2 Chronicles 13:11, 2 Chronicles 29:18. See Edersh. The Temple, pp. 152-157; Herzog, Pro_2 art. Schaubrote. καὶἔδωκεντοῖςμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ . This also is not stated in 1 Sam. 21., but it is implied in David’ s asking for five loaves, and in Abimelech’ s asking whether the wallets of the young men were Levitically clean. For ἔξεστιν c. acc. et inf. see on 20:22. 5. κύριόςἐστιντοῦσαββάτουὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου . In all three accounts Κύριος comes first with emphasis. The Son of Man controls the Sabbath, not is controlled by it. This does not mean that He abrogates it (Matthew 5:17-20), but that He has power to cancel the literal observance of it in order to perform or permit what is in accordance with its spirit. Mk. gives the additional reason that “ the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath,” i.e. that it was given to be a blessing, not a burden. Even the Rabbis sometimes saw this; “ The sabbath is handed over to you; not, ye are handed over to the sabbath” (Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 58). Ritual must give way to charity. The Divine character of the Law is best vindicated by making it lovable; and the Pharisees had made it an iron taskmaster. And, if the sabbath gives way to man, much more to the Son of Man. In John 5:17 Christ takes still higher ground. The Father knows no sabbath in working for man’ s good, and the Son has the same right and liberty. For ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου see on 5:24. The point here is that Christ as the representative of man defends man’ s liberty. Cod. D transfers ver. 5 to after ver. 10, and instead of it has the remarkable insertion: τῆςαὐτῆςἡμέραθεασάμενόςτιναἐργαζόμενοντῶςσαββάτωςεἶπεναὐτῶςἄνθθρωπε , εἰμὲνοἰδαςτίποιεῖς , μακάριοςεἰ · δὲμὴοἰδας , ἐπικατάρατοςκαὶπαραβάτηςεἶτοῦνόμου . For ἄνθρωπε comp. 12:14; ἐπικατάρατος Galatians 3:10; παραβάτηςνόμου , Romans 2:25, Romans 2:27; James 2:11. It is possible that the tradition here preserved in Cod. D is the source from which both S. Paul and S. James derive the phrase παραβάτηςνόμου . In Rom. 2., where it occurs twice, we have the address ἄνθρωπε twice (vv. 1, 3). There is nothing incredible in Christ’ s having seen a man working (not necessarily in public) on the sabbath. The words attributed to Christ are so unlike the undignified, silly, and even immoral inventions in the apocryphal gospels that we may believe that this traditional story is true, although it is no part of the Canonical Gospels. D has other considerable insertions Matthew 20:28 and John 6:56. See A. Resch, Agrapha Aussercanonische Evangelienfragmente (Leipzig, 1889) pp. 36, 189. 6-11. The Second Incident on the Sabbath. Matthew 12:9 would lead us to suppose that it was the same sabbath . Lk. definitely states that it was ἐνἑτέρωςσαββάτως , but not that it was “ on the very next sabbath following.” He alone mentions that Jesus taught in the synagogue on this occasion, and that the withered hand that was healed was the right one. 6. Ἐγένετοδὲ … εἰσελθεῖναὐτὸν … καὶἦν … καὶἦν . The same Hebraistic constr. as in ver. 1, somewhat modified in accordance with classical usage: see note at the end of ch. 1. We have ξηροί at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:3); but outside N.T. the word seems to mean, when applied to the human body, either “ not wet” or “ lean.” 7. παρετηροῦντοδὲαὐτὸνοἱγραμματεῖςκαὶοἱφαρισαῖοι . Lk. alone tells us who the spies were. Mt. puts their inquisitiveness into words, “ Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day?” The verb signifies “ watch narrowly,” esp. with sinister intent, perhaps from looking sideways out of the corner of one’ s eyes, ex obliquo et occulto. As in Galatians 4:10, the mid. gives the idea of interested observance. Mk. has παρετήρουν : comp. 20:20; Sus. 12, 15, 16; Polyb. xvii. 3. 2; Aris. Rhet. ii. 6, 20; Top. vii. 11, 1. εἰἐντῷσαββάτῳθεραπεύει . The present has reference to His habitual practice, of which His conduct on this occasion would be evidence. But א B with other authorities read θεραπεύσει , which is probably genuine in Mark 3:2, and may be genuine here. The future would limit the question to the case before them. ἵναεὕρωσινκατηγορεῖναὐτοῦ . According to what is probably the invariable rule in N.T. we have the subj. in spite of the past tense on which the final clause is dependent. The opt. for this purpose is obsolete; for γνοῖ (Mark 9:30) and similar forms are probably meant to be subj. Simcox, Lang,. of N.T. p. 107. 8. αὐτὸςδὲᾔδειτοὺςδιαλογισμοὺςαὐτῶν . “ But He,” in contrast to these spies (5:16, 8:37, 54) “ knew their thoughts.” For διαλογισμός comp. 2:35, 5:22, 9:46, 24:38. It commonly means intellectual and inward questioning rather than actual dis puting: but see on 5:22 and comp. 1 Timothy 2:8. τῷἀνδρὶτῷξηρὰνἔχοντιτὴνχεῖρα . “ To the man who had his hand withered,” not “ who had the withered hand.” For ἀνδρί comp. 5:12: Mt. and Mk. have ἀνθρώπῳ . Ἔγειρεκαὶστῆθιεἰςτὸμέσον . Lk. alone has καὶστῆθι . Christ’ s method is as open as that of His adversaries is secret. “ Arise and stand into the midst” i.e. “ Come into the midst and stand there” : comp. 9:7; Acts 8:40. Win. l. 4, b, p. 516. In what follows note Lk.’ s favourite ἀναστάς (1:39), which neither Mt. nor Mk. has here. None of them records any words of the man; but Jerome in commenting on Matthew 12:13 states, in evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni et Ebionitæ … homoiste qui aridam habet manum cæ mentarius scribitur, istiusmodi vocibus auxilium precans, Cæ mentarius eram, manibus victum quæ ritans. precor te, Jesu, ut mihi restituas sanitatem, ne turpiter mendicem cibos. See on 18:25. 9. Ἐπερωτῶὑμᾶς . He answers the questioning in their hearts by a direct question which puts the matter in the true light. To refuse to do good is to do evil; and it could not be right to do evil on the sabbath. The reading of TR., ἐπερωτήσωὑμᾶςτι , is wrong in both variations; and has the disadvantage of being ambiguous, for τι may be indefinite or interrogative. “ I will ask you something, Is it lawful?” etc. Or, “ I will ask you what is lawful,” etc. ψυχὴνσῶσαιἤἀπολέσαι . It was a principle of the Rabbinists that periculum vitæ pellit sabbatum; but the life must be that of a Jew. This canon was liberally interpreted; so that a large number of diseases might be attended to on the Sabbath, as being dangerous. These modifications of the rigid rule were based on the principle that it was lawful to do good and avert evil on the sabbath; and to this Jesus appeals. If the Pharisees said, “ This man’ s life is not in danger,” the answer would have been easy, “ You do not know that, any more than in the cases always allowed.” The addition of ἢἀπολέσαι has special point, for this was what these objectors were doing. They did not consider that they were breaking the sabbath in plotting to destroy Jesus on this day (ver. 7). Were they to be allowed to destroy, while He was forbidden to save? 10. περιβλεψάμενοςπάνταςαὐτούς . Mk. adds, still more graphically, μετ ʼ ὀργῆς , συλλυπούμενοςἐπὶτῇπωρώσειτῆςκαρδίαςαὐτῶν : but πάντας is peculiar to Lk. See on 7:35 and 9:43. Mt. omits the whole of this, but inserts the case of the sheep fallen into a pit. Lk. has a similar question about a son or ox fallen into a well, which was asked on another occasion (14:5). Ἔκτεινοντὴνχεῖράσου . As His challenge to His enemies remained unanswered, He now makes trial of the man. The attempt to obey this command was evidence of his faith. With the double augment in ἀπεκατεστάθη comp. ἐπροέταξα , ἐροεφήτευον , ἐκατεσκεύασαν , ἐσυνεμαρτύρουν , ἠφώρισται , which occur in vinous writers. Exodus 4:7, ἀπεκατέστη ; Jeremiah 23:8, ἀπεκατέστησεν Ign. Smyr. xi., ἀπεκατεστάθη . Win. 12:7. a, p. 84. D Cod. here inserts ver. 5. 11. ἀνοίας . The phrensy or loss of reason which is used by extreme excitement; dementia rather than insipientia (Vulg.) or amentia (Beza). Plato distinguishes two kinds of ἄνοια , τὸμὲνμανίαν , τὸδ ʼ ἀμαθίαν (Tim. 86 B). It is the former which is intended here. Elsewhere 2 Timothy 3:9; Proverbs 22:15; Ecclesiastes 11:10; Wisd. 15:18, 19:3; 2 Mal 4:6, etc. τίἂνποιυήσαιεν . “ What they should do,” if they did anything. In Lk. the opt. is still freq. in indirect questions: see on 3:15. Mk. says that the Pharisees forthwith took counsel with the Herodians how they might destroy Him . They would be glad of the assistance of the court party to accomplish this end. With their help Antipas might be induced to treat Jesus as he had treated the Baptist. Lk. nowhere mentions the Herodians. The Aeolic form ποιήσειαν is not found is the best MSS, here. In Acts 17:27 ψηλαφήσειαν is probably genuine. 6:12-8:56. From the Nomination of the Twelve to Their First Mission In proportion as the work of Christ progresses the opposition between Him and the supporters of moribund Judaism is intensified. 12-16. The Nomination of the Twelve. Common to all three: comp. Mark 3:13-19; Matthew 10:2-4. L’ é lection des Douze est le premier acte organisateur accompli par Jé sus-Christ. Sauf les sacraments, c’ est le seul. Car c’ é ait ce collè ge, une fois constitué , qui devait un jour faire le reste (Godet). 12. ἐνταῖςἡμέραιςτ .. See on 1:39. This expression, and ἐγένετο and ἦν with the participle, are characteristic of Lk., and are not found in the parallels in Mt. and Mk. For the constr. comp. vv. 1 and 6; for προσεύξασθαι see Introd. § 6. The momentous crisis of choosing the Twelve is at hand, and this vigil is the preration for it. διανυκτερεύων . Here only in N.T., but not rare elsewhere; Job 2:9 (where LXX has much which is not in the extant Heb.); Jos. Ant. vi. 13. 9; B. J. i. 29, 2; Xen. Hellen. v. 4, 3. The analytical tense emphasizes the long continuance of the prayer. τῇπροσευχῇτοῦΘεοῦ . The phrase occurs nowhere else. It means prayer which has God for its object: comp. ζῆλοςΘεοῦ (Romans 10:2); ὁζῆλοςτοῦοἴκουσου (John 2:17); πίστιςἸησοῦ (Galatians 3:22). Win. xxx. 1. a, p. 231.1 That προσευχή here means an oratory or place of prayer is incredible: see on Acts 16:13, Lightfoot says that some Rabbis taught that God prays: “ Let it be My will that My mercy overcome My wrath.” But such trifling has no place here. Mark 11:22 and James 2:1 are perhaps parallel. 13. ἐγένετοἡμέρα . The phrase is freq. in Lk. (4:42, 22:66; Acts 12:18, Acts 12:16:35, Acts 12:23:12, 27:29, 33, 39).— προσεφώνησεν . “ Called to Him, summoned.” This is the more correct use of the word. Elsewhere in N.T. it means “ address, call to” ; and, excepting Matthew 11:16, it is used only by Lk. (7:32, 13:12, 23:20; Acts 21:40, Acts 22:2).— τοὺςμαθητάς . These are the larger circle of disciples, out of whom He selected the Twelve. Comp. John 6:70; Matthew 19:28; Revelation 21:14. That either the larger circle or the Twelve had spent the night with Him is neither stated nor implied. ἐκλεξάμενος . This implies the telling over in preference to others for one’ s own advantage (mid.). The word is fatal to Lange’ s theory that Judas was forced upon our Lord by the importunity of the other Apostles (L. of C. ii. p. 179). οὓςκαὶἀποστόλουςὠνόμασεν . Not at the time possibly, but afterwards. The καί marks the naming as a separate act from the election. The word ἀπόστολος is used only once each by Mt. (10:2), Mk. (6:30), and Jn. (8:16); by Lk. six times in the Gospel (9:10, 9:49, 17:5, 22:14, 24:10) and often in the Acts. In the Gospels the Twelve are generally called the Twelve. The word occurs once in, LXX, ἐγώεἰμιἀπόστολοςπρόςπρόςσεσκληρός (1 Kings 14:6); and once in N.T. it is used of Christ (Hebrews 3:1), See Lft. Galatians, pp. 92-101, 6th ed.; D. B.2 art. “ Apostle” Harnack in Texte u. Untersuch. ii. 111 ff.; Sanday on Romans 1:1. The theory that Lk. writes in order to depreciate the Twelve, does not harmonize with the solemn importance which he assigns to their election. And criticism is out of harmony with itself, when it adopts this theory, and then suggests that Lk. has invented this early election See on 22:45.Mark 3:14 is doubtful. 14-16. In construction the twelve names are in apposition to ἀποστόλους , and the narrative is not resumed until ver. 17. The four lists of the Apostles preserved in the Synoptic Gospels and the Acts agree in two main features. 1. The names are arranged in three groups of four. 2. The same Apostles, War, Philip, and James of Alphæ us, stand first in each group. Only in respect of one name is there material difference between the lists. In the third group Lk. both here and Acts 1:13 has Judas of James; for whom Mt. (10:3) and Mk. (3:18) have Thaddæ us or Lebbæ us. In both places Thaddæ us is probably correct, Lebbæ us being due to an attempt to include Levi among the Apostles. Levi = Lebi or Lebbi, the Greek form of which might be Λεββαῖος , as θαδδαῖος of Thaddi. Some Mss. read Λεβαῖος , which is still closer to Levi. See WH. ii. App. pp. 12, 24. The identification. of Thaddæ us with Judas of James solves the difficulty, and there is nothing against it excepting lack of direct evidence. No pairing oft he Apostles is manifest in this list as in that of Mt. If the καί after Θωμᾶν be omitted, there is a break between the second and third group; but otherwise the list is a simple string of names. In the first six names Lk. agrees with the first three pairs of Mt. In the other six he places Matthew before Thomas (while Mt. places himself last in his group) and Simon, Zelotes before Judas of James. 14. ΣίμωναὃνκαὶὠνόμασενΠέτρον . The similarity to the preceding clause is marked. This certainly does not mean that Simon received the name of Peter on this occasion, and there is nothing to show that the Twelve received the name of Apostles on this occasion. But it should be noticed that henceforth Lk. always speaks of him as Peter (8:45, 51, 9:20, 28, 32, 33, 12:41, etc.) and not as Simon. In 22:31 and 24:34 Lk. is quoting the words of others. Hitherto he has called him Simon (4:38, 5:3, 4, 5, 10) and once Simon Peter (5:8), but, never Peter. In the Acts he is never called Simon without the addition of the surname. The usage with regard to the names Saul and Paul is very similar. See papers by Dean Chadwick on “ The Group of the Apostles” and on “ Peter” in Expositor, 3rd series, vol. 9. pp. 100-114, 187-199, 1889; also Schanz, ad loc. p. 216. Ἀνδρέαν . Only in his lists of the Apostles does Lk. mention Andrew. Mt. mentions him on one other occasion, and Mk. on three others (Matthew 4:18; Mark 1:16, Mark 1:29, Mark 1:13:3). Nearly all that we know about him comes from Jn. (1:41, 44, 6:8, 12:22). Although one of the earliest disciples, he does not become one of the chosen three, although Mark 13:3 seems to indicate special intimacy. For legends respecting him see Lipsius, Apokryphen Apostelgeschichten u. Apostellegenden, i. pp. 543-622; Tregelles, Canon Muratorianus, pp. 17, 34. ἸάκωβονκαὶἸωάνην . This is their order according to age, and it is observed in all three Gospels; in Acts 1:13 John precedes James. The fact that James was the first of the Twelve to be put to death is evidence that he was regarded as specially influential. James and John were probably first cousins of the Lord; for, according to the best interpretation of Joh 19:25, their mother Salome was the sister of the Virgin Mary. That the title of Boanerges was given to them “ at the time of the appointment of the Twelve” (D. B.2 i. p. 1509) is a baseless hypothesis. See Trench, Studies in the Gospels, pp. 138-146; Suicer, Thesaurus, s.v. βροντή . For legends see D. B.2 i. p. 1511; Lipsius, iii. pp. 201-228, i. pp. 348-542. φίλιππον . All that we know of him comes from Jn. (1:44-49, 6:5-7, 12:21, 22, 14:8, 9). There seems to have been some connexion between him and Andrew (John 1:44, John 12:22); and both in Mark 3:18 and Acts 1:13 their names are placed together in the lists; but the nature of the connexion is unknown. Lipsius, iii. pp. 1-53. βαρθολομαῖον . The ancient and common identification with Nathanael is probable, but by no means certain. 1. As Bar-tholomew is only a patronymic, “ son of Talmai,” the bearer of it would be likely to have another name. 2. The Synoptists do not mention Nathanael; Jn. does not mention Bartholomew. 3. The Synoptists place Bartholomew next to Philip, and Philip brought Nathanael to Christ. 4. The companions of Nathanael who are named John 21:2 are all of them Apostles. Lipsius, iii. pp. 54-108. 15. ΜαθθαῖονκαὶΘωμᾶν . In all three these names are combined; but Mt. reverses the order, and after his own name adds ὁτελώνης , which is found in none of the other lists. All that we know of Thomas is told us by Jn. (11:16, 14:5, 20:24-29, 21:2). Lipsius, iii. pp. 109-141, i. pp. 225-347. ἸάκωβονἈλφαίου . His father is probably not the father of Levi (Mark 2:14), and James himself is certainly not the brother of the Lord (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Galatians 1:19) who was the first over seer of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 12:17, Acts 12:15:13; Galatians 2:9, Galatians 2:12) The brethren of the Lord did not believe on Him at this time (John 7:5), and none of them can have been among the Twelve. But the Apostle James the son of Alphæ us is probably identical with James the Little (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; John 19:25), for Alphæ us and Clopas may be two different Greek forms of the Aramaic Chalpai; but this is uncertain. See Mayor, Ep. of S. James, pp. 1-46; also Expositor’ s Bible, S. James and S. Jude, pp. 25-30 (Hodder, 1891). In all the catalogues James of Alphæ us heads the third group of Apostles. Lipsius, iii. 229-238. τὸνκαλούμενονζηλωτήν .1 Lk. has this in both his lists, while Mt. and Mk. have ὁΚαναναῖος , which in some authorities has been corrupted into Κανανίτης . Neither of these forms can mean “ Canaanite,” for which the Greek is Χαναναῖος (Matthew 15:22 and LXX), nor yet “ of Cana,” for which the Greek would be ΚαναῖοςΚαναναῖος . is the Aramaic Kanan in a Greek form (on the analogy of φαρισαῖος from Pharish and Ἀσσιδαῖος from Chasid) and = ζηλωτής . Lipsius, iii. pp. 142-200. See on 1:36. Rhem. leaves the word untranslated, Cananæ us, and Wic. makes it unintelligible, “ Canane.” All the other English Versions make it a local adj., “ of Cana” or “ of Cane,” or “ of Canaan,” or “ of Canaanite.” or “ the canaanite.” The last error seems to begin with Cranmer in 1539. RV. is the first to make clear that “ Kananæ an” means “ Zealot.” Lft. On Revision, pp. 138, 139 (154, 155, 2nd ed.); Fritzsche on Matthew 10:4. The Zealots date from the time of the Maccabees as a class who attempted to force upon others their own rigorous interpretations of the Law. S. Paul speaks of himself as περισσοτέρωςζηλωτὴςὑπάρχωντῶνπατρικῶνμουπαραδόσεων (Galatians 1:14), i.e. he belonged to the extreme party of the, Pharisees (Acts 22:3, Acts 22:23:6, Acts 22:26:5; Philippians 3:5, Philippians 3:6). Large numbers of this party were among the first converts at Jerusalem (Acts 21:20). From these extremists had sprung the revolt under Judas of Galilee (Acts 5:37; Jos. Ant. xviii. 1, 1, 6), and the Sicarii, who were the proximate cause of the destruction of Jerusalem (Jos. B. J. iv. 3, 9, 5, 1, 7, 2, vii. 8, 1, 10. 1, 11, 1). Milman, Hist. of the Jews, ii. pp. 191, 291, 299, 323, 4th ed. 1866; Ewald, Hist. of Israel, vii. 559 ff., Eng. tr.; Herzog, Pro_2 art. “ Zeloten.” Whether the Apostle Simon was called ζηλωτής because he had once belonged to this party, or because of his personal character either before or after his call, must remain uncertain. 16. ἸούδανἸακώβου . That there were two Apostles of the name of Judas is clear from John 14:22, although Mt. and Mk. mention only one; and the identification of their Thaddæ us with the Judas not Iscariot of Jn. and with this Judas of James makes all run smoothly. ἸούδαςἸακώβου must be rendered “ Judas the son of James,” not “ the brother of James,” for which there is no justification. When Lk. means “ brother” he inserts ἀδελφός (3:1, 6:14; Acts 12:2). Nonnus in his Paraphrase of Joh 14:22 has ἸούδαςυἱὸςἸακώβοιο . ἸούδαςἀδελφὸςἸακώβου (Jude 1:1) is quite a different person, viz. the brother of James the )Lord’ s brother. Tyn. Cov. and Cran. rightly supply “ sonne” here, and Luth. also has sohn The error begins with Beza’ s fratrem. Of this James, the father of Judas Thaddæ us, nothing is known. Lk. adds the name of the father, because his arrangement places this Judas next to the traitor. Ἰσκαριώθ . This epithet probably means “ man of Kerioth,” which was a place in Judah (Joshua 15:25), or possibly in Moab (Jeremiah 48:24). John 6:71 confirms this; for there and John 13:26 the true reading gives “ Judas son of Simon Iscariot” ; and if the name is a local epithet, both father and son would be likely to have it. In this case Judas was the only Apostle who was not a Galilean, and this may have helped to isolate him. Other derivations of “ Iscariot,” which connect the word with “ lying,” or “ strangling,” or “ apron,” i.e. bag, or “ date-trees” , are much less probable. We know nothing about Simon Iscariot. Farrar identifies him with Simon Zelotes, which is most improbable. Simon was one of the commonest of names. The MSS. vary between Ἰσκαριώθ , which is right here, and Ἰσκαριώτης , which is right 22:3. Here only is προδότης used of Judas: it occurs in the plur. Acts 7:52; 2 Timothy 3:4; and in the sing. 2 Mac. 5:15, 10:13. All English Versions go wrong about ἐγένετοπροδότης . Nowhere in Scripture is Judas styled “ the traitor,” and ἐγένετο should be distinguished from ἦν : therefore, not “ was the traitor,” but “ became a traitor,” as the American Revisers proposed. Judas “ turned traitor.” The difficulty about the call of Judas is parallel to the powers bestowed upon a Napoleon. The treason of Judas shows that no position in the Church, however exalted, gives security against the most complete fall. The verb used of the treachery of Judas is never προδιδόναι , but παραδιδόναι (22:4, 6, 21, 22, 48; Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:19; John 6:64, John 6:71). In class. Grk. προδιδόναι commonly has this meaning; παραδιδόναι rarely. Here the Lat. texts vary between proditor (Vulg.) and traditor (c f ff2 r) and qui tradidit eum or illum (d e). 17-19. The Descent from the Mountain, and many Miracles of Healing. The parallel passages in Mark 3:7-12 and Matthew 4:24, Matthew 4:25 are very different from Lk. and from one another in wording. 17. ἐπὶτόπουπεδινοῦ . This may mean a level spot below the summit; but in connexion with καταβάς , and without qualification, it more naturally means level ground near the foot of the mountain. Hither it would be more likely that multitudes would come and bring their sick, than to a plateau high up the mountain. The Latin texts vary: in loco campestri (Vulg.), in loco campense (a), in l. lano (f) in l. pedeplano (1.). καὶὄχλοςπολὺςμαθητῶναὐτοῦ . Not a nom. pendens, but included in the preceding ἔστη : comp. the constr. 8:1-3. He stood, and they stood. But the ἔστη is no evidence as to Christ’ s attitude during the discourse, because the healings intervene: 4:20 shows that Lk. is aware of Christ’ s sitting to preach. καὶπλῆθοςπολὺτοῦλαοῦ , κ .τ .λ . This is a third group. Christ and the Twelve form one group. The multitude of disciples in the wider sense form a second. And besides these there is a mixed throng from Judæ a and the sea-coast: see on 11:29. ἰαθῆναιἀπό . The prep, is not classical; but we say “ to to be cured from” (Mark 5:29). In the perf., 1 aor. and 1 fut. pass. the dep. ἰάομαι is pass. in meaning (7:7, 8:47, 17:15; not Acts 3:11). Except in Lk, the verb is rare in N.T. writers.— There should be at least a colon at τῶννόσωναὐτῶν : here the long sentence which began at ver. 13 ends. 18, 19. For similarly condensed accounts of groups of miracles comp. 4:40, 5:15, 7:21. We once more have an amphibolous expression: see on 2:22. Here ἀπὸπνευμάτωνἀκαθάρτων may be taken either with ἐνοχλούμενοι or with ἐθεραπεύοντο . From ver. 17 and 7:21 we infer that the latter constr. is right: “ They that were troubled with them were healed of unclean spirits.” But in the other cases the gen. with ἀπό follows the verb; so that ἐνοχλούμενοιἀπό may be right. The “ and” before “ were healed” in AV. is from a corrupt reading: not only Wic. and Rhem. with Vulg., but also Cov., omit the “ and.” For πνευμάτωνἀκαθάρτων see on 4:33. Note πᾶς and πάντας here and πάσης in ver. 17. They are not found in Mark 3:7, Mark 3:10: see on ver. 30. With παρ ʼ αὐτοῦἐξήρχετο comp. John 16:27. Lk. commonly writes ἐξέρχομαιἀπό : see small print on 4:35, and comp. 8:46, which illustrates ἅπτεσθαι , δύαμις and ἐξήρχετο . For δύναμις and ἰᾶτο see on 4:36. 20-49. The Sermon ἐπὶτόπουπεδινοῦ . D.B. v. art. “ Sermon.” To call it “ the Sermon on the Plain,” following the AV. in ver. 17, is convenient, but scarcely justifiable. “ The plain” has not been mentioned, and τὸπεδίον does not occur in N.T. Moreover, it is by no means certain that this τόποςπεδινός was at the foot of the mount. And to talk of “ the Sermon on the Plain” assumes, what cannot be proved, that the discourse here recorded is entirely distinct from “ the Sermon on the Mount” (Matthew 5:1-7, Matthew 5:29). The relations between the two discourses will never cease to be discussed, because the materials are insufficient for a final decision. The following are the chief hypotheses which have been suggested in order to explain the marked similarities and differences. 1. They are reports, at first or second hand, of two similar but different discourses, distinct in time, place, and circumstance (Auger, Greswell, Osiander, Patritius, Plumptre, Sadler; so also in the main Barradius, Basil, Doddridge, Toletus, Tostatus). 2. They are reports of two different discourses delivered on the same day, Mt. giving the esoteric address to the disciples on the mountain, Lk. the exoteric address to the mixed multitude below (Augustine, Lange), 3. The are recensions, with interpolations and omissions, of two independent reports of one and the same sermon (Schleiermacher). 4. They are recessions of the same report, to which Mt. adds material from other sources, and from which Lk. perhaps omits portions (B. Weiss). 5. Mt. gives a conflate arrangement of sayings which were uttered on various occasions, and some of these occasions are given by Lk. (Bleek, Calvin, Godet, Holtzmann, Keim, Kuinoel, Neander, Pott, Semler, Weizsä cker, Wieseler). 6. Both sermons are a conglomeration of detached sayings collected into an anthology of aphorisms (Strauss, and to some extent Baur). Besides the writers mentioned above under the last four heads, a multitude of commentators adopt the view that the main portions of the reports given by Mt. and Lk. represent one and the same discourse (Bengal, Bucer, Calovius, Caspari, Chemnitz, Chrysostom, De Wette, Ebrard, Edersheim, Ellicott, Ewald, Farrar, Fritzsche, Grotius, Hilgenfeld, Keim, Lewin, Luther, McClellan, Meyer, Milman, Olshausen, Oosterzee, Origen, Robinson, Schanz, Schneckenburger, Sieffert, Stroud, Tholuck, Tischendorf, Wordsworth). Bad or inadequate arguments are used on both sides. It is a great deal too much to say with Schleiermacher that the fact that the portions common to both appear in the same order, with the same beginning and end, “ Proves incontrovertibly the identity of the discourse.” Any preacher repeating a carefully prepared sermon would begin and end in the same way, and would put his points in the same order. And it is mere dogmatism without argument when Sadler asserts that “ the Lord must have pronounced each [beatitude] which St. Matthew records, and yet it is equally plain that He could hardly have pronounced them according to St. Luke’ s form. He would not have said, Blessed are ye meek ones, Blessed are ye merciful ones, Blessed are ye peacemakers. The four given by St. Luke are the only ones which could well have been pronounced personally on the disciples; so that the beatitudes as given by St. Matthew and St. Luke respectively, could not have been altered forms of the same discourse.” Much more reasonable is the position of Grotius, who beleives that both record the same sermon: sicut facti narrationes circumstantiis congruents non temere ad res diversas referendæ sunt, ita sermones nihil vetat sæ pius habitos eosdem aut similes, præ sertim continents vitæ totius præ cepta, quæ non potuerunt nimium sæ repeti (on Luke 6:17). We know beyond all question that some of our Lord’ s words were uttered several times, and there is nothing antecedently improbable in the hypothesis that the words of this discourse, quæ non potuerunt nimium sæ pe repeti, were delivered one or other of these forms more than once. Nor does it follow that those portions which Lk. gives as having been uttered on other occasions were not also uttered as parts of a continuous discourse. A preacher naturally repeats fragments of his own sermons in giving catechetical instruction, and also gathers up detached items of instruction when composing a sermon. The fact that Lk. meant to record these other occasions may have been part of his reason for omitting the similar words in this discourse. Another consideration which may have determined his selection is the thought of what would best suit Gentile readers. But in any case the dictum of Grotius must be remembered, that the hypothesis of a repetition of verbally similar sayings may be used with much more freedom than hypothesis of a repetition of circumstantially similar acts. The conclusion arrived at by Sanday and P. Ewald is of this kind. The beatitudes originally stood in the Logia in a form similar to that in Matthew 5:3-12. Lk. used the Logia, but had also a rocument entirely independent of the Logia; and this contained a discourse, spoken originally on some other occasion, but yet so like the Sermon on the Mount as to be identified with it by Lk. The sermon in Luke is, therefore, a compound of the reports of two similar but different discourses; and in this compound the elements derived from the Logia are dominated by those derived from the independent document (Expositor for April 1891, p. 315). It seems, however, simpler to suppose that Lk. took the whole of his report from the document which contained this very similar, but different sermon. See Paul Feine, Ueber das gegenseit. Verhä ltniss d. Texte der Bergpredigt bei Matthä und Lukas in the jahrb. fü r Protest. Theologie, ix. 1. The following tables will show the parallels between the two Evangelists:— Between the Two Sermons. Luke 6:20, Luke 6:21.Matthew 5:3, Matthew 5:4, Matthew 5:6. Luke 6:37, Luke 6:38. Matthew 7:1, Matthew 7:2. 22, 23. 11, 12. 41, 42. 3-5. 27-30. 39-42. 43-46. 16-21. 31. 7:12. 47-49. 24-27. 32-36. 5:42-48. Between detached Sayings in Lk. and the Sermon in Mt. Luke 14:34, Luke 14:35.Matthew 5:13.Luke 11:34-36. Matthew 6:22-23. 8:16 and 11:33. 15. 16:13. 24. 16:17. 18. 12:22-31. 25-34. 12:58, 59. 25, 26. 11:9-13. 7:7-11. 16:18. 32. 13:24. 13. 11:2-4. 6:9-13. 25-27. 22, 23. 12:33, 34. 19, 21. Between the Sermon in Lk. and detached Sayings in Mt. Luke 6:39. Matthew 15:14.Luke 6:40. Matthew 10:24. This last saying was frequently uttered. It is recorded twice by Jn. (8:16, 15:20), and the four records seem to refer to four different occasions; besides which we have a similar utterance Luke 22:27. These tables leave three verses of the sermon in Lk. without a parallel in Mt. (or any other Gospel), viz. the four woes corresponding to the beatitudes, vv. 24-26. The portions of the sermon in Mt. which have no parallel in Lk. amount to forty-one verses, viz. Matthew 5:5, Matthew 5:7-10, Matthew 5:14, Matthew 5:16, Matthew 5:17, Matthew 5:19-24, Matthew 5:27-31, Matthew 5:33-38, Matthew 5:43, 6:Matthew 5:1-8, Matthew 5:14-18, Matthew 5:7:6, Matthew 5:14, Matthew 5:15. The plan of both discourses is the same. 1. The qualifications of those who can enter the kingdom (Lk. 20-26; Matthew 5:1-12); 2. The duties of those who have entered the kingdom (Lk. 27-45; Matthew 5:13-12); 3. The judgments which await the members of the kingdom (Lk. 46-49; Matthew 7:13-27). Encouragement, requirement, warning; or invitation, principles, sanction;— these are three gradations which may be traced in these discourses; and, as Stier remarks, the course of all preaching is herein reflected. There is considerable unanimity as to the spot where the sermon was delivered (Stanley, Sin &Pal. pp. 368, 369, Caspari, Chron. and Geograph. Int. to the L. of C. § 108, p. 171; Robinson, Pal. ii. 370, iii. pp. 241, 485; Farrar, L. of C. i. p. 250, and on Luke 6:12; Keim, Jes. of Nas. ii. p. 289). On the other hand, Edersheim asserts that “ the locality is for many reasons unsunable” ; but he gives no reasons (L. &T. 1. p. 524; see also Thomson, Land and Book, ii. p. 118). 20-26. The Qualifications necessary for Admission to the Kingdom: the Happiness of those who possess them (20-23), and the Misery of those who possess them not (24-26). This contrast of Blessings and Woes at the beginning of the sermon corresponds with the contrast in the parable with which it ends. The Beatitudes common to Mt. and Lk. with the corresponding Woes in Lk. ΜακάριοιΜακάριοιΟὐαί 1. οἱπτωχοὶτῷπνεύματι , ὄτιαὐτῶνἐστὶνἡβασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν . 1. οἱπτωχοί , ὄτιὑμετέραἐστὶνἡβασιλείατοῦΘεοῦ . 1. ὑμῖντοῖςπλουσίας , ὄτιἀπέχετετὴνπαράκλησινὑμῶν . 2. οἱπενθοῦτες , ὄτιαὐτοὶπαρακληθήσονται . 3. οἱκλαίοντεςνῦν , ὄτιγελάσετε . 3. οἱγελῶντεςνῦν , ὅτιπενθήσετεκαὶκλαύσετε . 4. οἱπεινῶντεςκαὶδιψῶτεσςτὴνδικαιοσύνην , ὄτιαὐτοὶχορτασθήσονται . 2. οἱπεινῶντεςνῦν , ὅτιχορτασθήσεσθε . 2. ὐμῖνοἱἐμπεπλησμένοινῦν , ὄτιπεινάσετε . 8. ἐστεὄτανὀνειδίσωσινὑμᾶςκαὶδιώξωσινκαὶεἴπωσινπᾶνπονηρὸνκαθ ʼ ὑμῶνψευδόμενοιἔνεκενἐμοῦ . Χαίρετεκαὶἀγαλλιᾶσθε , ὄτιὀμισθὸςὑμῶνπολὺςὲντοῖςοὐρανοῖςγὰρἐδίωξαντοὺςπροφήταςτοὺςπρὸὑμῶν . 4. ἐστεὄτανμισήσωσινὑμᾶςοἱἄνθρωποι , καὶὄτανἀφορίσωσινὐμᾶςκαὶὀνειδίσωσινκαὶἐκβάλωσιντὸὄνομαὑμῶνὡςπονηρὸνἔνεκατοῦυἱοῦτοῦἀνθρώπου · χάρητεἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳκαὶσκιρτήσατε , ἰδοὺγὰρὁμισθὸςὑμῶνπολὺςἐντῷοὐρανῷ · κατὰτὰαὐτὰγὰρἐποίοιντοῖςπροφήταιςοἱπατέρεςαὐτῶν . 4. ὅτανκαλῶςὐμᾶςεἴπωσινπάντεςοἱἄνθρωποι , κατὰτὰαὐτὰγὰρἐποίουντοῖςψευδοποφήταιςοἱπατέρεςαὐτῶν . 6:20-23. Four Beatitudes; which correspond to the first, second, fourth, and eighth in Matthew 5:3-12; those relating to the meek, the merciful, the pure in heart, and the peacemakers being omitted. In the four that Lk. gives the more spiritual words which occur in Mt. are omitted, and the blessings are assigned to more external conditions. Actual poverty, sorrow, and hunger are declared to be blessed (as being opportunities for the exercise of internal virtues); and this doctrine is emphasized by the corresponding Woes pronounced upon wealth, jollity, and fulness of bread (as being sources of temptation). It is in the last Beatitude that there is least difference between the two. Even in Lk. unpopularity is not declared to be blessed, unless it is “ for the son of Man’ s sake” ; and there is no Woe pronounced upon popularity for the Son of Man’ s sake. See Hastings, D. B. 1. p. 261. 20. Καὶαὐτὸςἐπάραςτοὺςὀφθαλμοὺςαὐτοῦεἰςτοὺςμαθητάς . Lk.’ s favourite mode of connexion in narrative: see on 5:14 and comp. 8:1, 22, 9:51, etc. With ἐπάραςτ . ὀφθ . comp. 18:13 and John 17:1. We must not take εἰς with ἔλεγεν ; Lk. would have Written πρός , and after ἔλεγεν : contrast 22:65 and Mark 3:29. Mt. has προσῆλθαναὐτῷοἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ . καὶ … ἐδίδασκεναὐτούς . The discourse in both cases is addressed to the disciples; there is nothing to indicate that the discourse in Lk. is address mixed multitudes, including unbelieving Jews and heathen. These Beatitudes would not be true, if addressed to them. It is to the faithful Christian that poverty, hunger, sorrow, and unpopularity are real blessings; to others they may be mere sterile suffering. Whereas, even for the heathen, to be poor in spirit and to hunger and thirst after righteousness are blessed things. In Mt. the Beatitudes are in the third person and have a wider sweep. μακάριοιοἱ , This is the common constr, both in LXX and N.T., the reason for the blessedness being expressed by a noun or participle which is the subject of the sentence (Psalms 2:12, 40:5, 41:2, 84:5, Psalms 2:6, 13, 89:16, etc.); but the reason is sometimes expressed by the relative with a finite verb (Psalms 1:1, 32:1, Psalms 1:2; Luke 14:15; James 1:12), or by ὅτι (14:14; 1 Peter 4:14), or by ἐάν (John 13:17; 1 Corinthians 7:40). οἱπτωχοί . See on 4:18. We have no right to supply τῷπνεύματι from Mt. It is actual poverty that is here meant. Nor is it the meaning that actual poverty makes men “ poor in spirit.” Still less does it mean that in itself poverty is to all men a blessing. There is no Ebionite doctrine here. But “ to you, My disciples, poverty is a blessing, because it preserves you in your dependence on God, and helps you to be truly His subjects” : τὸγὰρὑμετέραδεικτικῶςπρὸςπάρονταςἐλέγετο (Eus.) Some of these disciples had made themselves poor by surrendering all in order to follow Christ. Comp. Psalms 72:12, Psalms 72:13. ὑμετέραἐστὶνἡβασιλεία . “ Yours is the kingdom,” not “ Will be.” It is not a promise, as in the next Beatitudes, but the statement of a fact. But the Kingdom is not yet theirs in its fulness; and those elements which are not yet possessed are promised in the Beatitudes which follow. 21. οἱπεινῶντεςνῦν . “ Those of you who are suffering from actual want in this life. Ye shall have compensation.” χορτασθήσεσθε . Originally the verb was confined to supplying animals with fodder , and if used of men implied a brutish kind of feeding (Plato, Rep. 9. p. 586). But in N.T. it is never used of cattle, and when it is used of men it has no degrading associations (9:17; John 6:26; Philippians 4:12; James 2:16); not even 15:16, if the word is genuine there, nor 16:21. Comp. τοὺςπτωχοὺςαὐτῆςχορτάσωἄρτων (Psalms 132:15). In LXX χορτάζω and πίμπλημι are used to translate the same Hebrew word, sometimes in the same verse: ὅτιἐχόρτασενψυχὴνκενήν , καὶψυχὴνπεινῶσανἐνέπλησενἀγαθῶν (Psalms 107:9). Here the filling refers to the spiritual abundance in the Kingdom of God. In all four cases, although the suffering endured is external and literal, yet the compensating blessing is spiritual. οἱκλαίοντεςνῦν . Mt. has πενθοῦντεσς , which empresses the mourning, while κλαίοντες implies outward manifestation of grief in loud weeping, just as γελάσετε implied outward expression of mirth in laughter. Though common in LXX, γελάω occurs in N.T. only here and ver. 25. 22. ἀφορίσωσινὑμᾶς . “ Mark you off from by a boundary .” It is used both in a good sense (Acts 13:2; Romans 1:1; Galatians 1:15) and also in a bad, as here. Comp. καίμ ʼ ἀπὸγᾶςὥρισε (Eur. Hec. 940). Excommunication from the congregation as well as from social intercourse is here meant. The usual sentence was for thirty days, during which the excommunicated might not come within four cubits of any one. Comp. John 9:22, John 12:42, John 16:2. Whether there was at this time a more severe form of excommunication is uncertain. Herzog, Pro_2 art. Bann bei den Hebrä ern; Grotius on Luke 6:22; Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. on John 9:22. ὀνειδίσωσιν . The object to be supplied may be either the preceding ὑμᾶς (so most English Versions) or the following τὸὄνομαὑμῶν (Bede, Weiss). Vulg. supplies nothing; and Tyn. and Gen. have simply “ and rayle” without an object Neither AV., nor RV. has “ you” in italics. ἐκβάλωσιντὸὄνομαὑμῶνὡςπονηρόν . “ Throw your name contemptuously away, reject it with ignominy, as an evil thing.” There is no idea of striking a name off the list as a mark of disgrace, ex albo expungere, a meaning which ἐκβάλλειν never has. It is used of hissing an actor off the stage and otherwise dismissing with contempt (Aristoph. Eq. 525; Nub. 1477; Soph. O. C. 631, 636; O. T. 849; Plato, Crito, 46 B). “ Your name” means “ the name by which you are known as My disciples,” as Christians. “ Christian” or “ Nazarene” was a name of bad repute, which it was disgraceful, and even unlawful, to bear, for Christianity was not a religio lictia. For πονηρόν as an epithet of ὄνομα comp. Deuteronomy 22:19. ἕνεκατοῦυἱοῦτοῦἀνθρώπου . A vital qualification. The hatred and contempt must be undeserved, and be endured for Christ’ s sake; not merited by one’ s own misconduct. 23. σκιρτήσατε . Peculiar to Lk. See on 1:41 and comp. Malachi 4:2. κατὰτὰαὐτὰγὰρἐποίουντοῖςπροφήταις . This implies that they are to receive “ a prophet’ s reward” (Matthew 10:41), as in this world, so in the next. For the dat. comp. τοῖςμισοῦσινὐμᾶς (ver. 27). In class. Gk. we should have had τὰαὐτὰἐποίουντοὺςπροφ . Thus, ἐγὼδὲταῦτατοῦτονἐποίησασὺνδίκῃ (Hdt. i. 115. 3, iv. 166., 3: comp. Aristoph. Nub. 259; Vesp. 697). In later Gk. the dat. of relation becomes much more common. οἱπατέρεςαὐτῶν . The gen. refers to οἱἄνθρωποι in ver. 22; “ the fathers of them” who hate and abuse you. 24-26. Four Woes corresponding to the four Beatitudes. There is no evidence that these were not part of the original discourse. Assuming that Mt. and Lk. report the same discourse, Mt. may has omitted them. But they may have been spoken on some other occasion. Schleiermacher and Weiss would have it that they are mere glosses added by Lk. to emphasize and explain the preceding blessings. Cheyne thinks that some of them were suggested to Lk. by Isaiah 65:13-16. We have no right to assume that no persons were present to whom these words would be applicable. Even if there were none present, yet these Woes might have been uttered as warnings both to those who heard them and to others who would learn them from those who heard. Just as the Beatitudes express the qualifications of those who are to enter the Kingdom, so these show the qualities which exclude men from it. It is possible that some of the spies and adversaries from Judæ a were among the audience, and thus Jesus warns them of their condition. When the discourse as placed by Mt. was spoken there was less opposition to Christ, and hence no Woes (Pastor Pastorum, p. 256). 24. πλήν . Curtius makes πλήν an adverbial form of πλέον , so that its radical meaning would be “ more than, beyond” (Gr. Etym. 282); but Lft. (Philippians 3:16) connects it with πέλας , in the meaning “ besides, apart from this, only.” For the accusatival form comp. δίκην , ἐπίκλην , clam, coram. It sometimes restricts, sometimes expands, what precedes. It is a favourite word with Lk., in the Gospel as an adv. (ver. 35, 10:11, 14, 20, 11:41, 12:31, 13:33, 17:1, 18:8, 19:27, 22:21, 22, 42, 23:28), in the Acts as a prep. (8:1, 15:28, 27:22). “ But” is the only possible rendering here. οὐαὶὑμῖντοῖςπλουσίοις . As a matter of fact the opponents of Christ came mostly from the wealthy classes, like the oppressors of the first Christians (James 5:1-6). see Renan, L’ Antechrist, p. 12; Ewald, Hist. of Israel, 7. p. 451. But the cases of Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea show that the rich as such were not excluded from the kingdom.— ἀπέξετε . “ Ye have to the full” ; so that there is nothing more left to have. The poor consolation derived from the riches in which they trusted is all that they get: they have no treasure in heaven. Comp. Matthew 6:2, Matthew 6:5, Matthew 6:16; Philemon 1:15; and see Lft. on Philippians 4:18. This meaning is classical: comp. ἀπολαμβάνω , ἀπεγάζομαι . Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 229, For παράκλησιν see on 2:25, and comp. 16:25 of Lazarus. 25. οἱἐμπεπλησμένοινῦν . “ Sated with the good things of this life,” like Dives (Ezekiel 16:49). Grotius compares. the epitaph, τόσσ ʼ ἔχωὅσσ ʼ ἔπιονκαὶἐδήτυα . It may be doubted whether the change of word from χορτάζεσθαι (ver. 21) indicates that horum plenitudo non meretur nomen satietatis (Beng.): comp. 1:53. In Lat. Vet. and Vulg. we have saturor both here and ver. 21. πεινάσετε . This received a partial and literal fulfilment when Jerusalem was reduced to starvation in the siege: but the reference is rather to the loss of the spiritual food of the Kingdom. Comp. Isaiah 65:13. Hillel said, “ The more flesh one hath the more worms, the more treasures the more care, the more maids the more unchastity, the more men-servants the more theft The more law the more life, the more schools the more wisdom, the more counsel the more insight, the more righteousness the more peace.” οἱγελῶτεςνῦν . “ Who laugh for joy over your present prosperity,” the loss of which will surely come and cause grief. But the worst loss will be that of spiritual joy hereafter (Isaiah 65:14). 26. ὅτανκαλῶςεἴπωσινὑμᾶς . It is the wealthy who are commonly admired and praised by all who hope to win their favour. The praise of worldly men is no guarantee of merit: rather it shows that those who have won it do not rise above the world’ s standard (John 15:19; James 4:4). Plutarch says that Phocion, when his speech was received with universal applause, asked his friends whether he had inadvertently said anything wrong. τοῖςψευδοπροφήταις . Just as the persecuted disciples are the representatives of the true Prophets, so the wealthy hierarchy whom all men flatter are the representatives of the false (Jeremiah 5:31; comp: 23:17; Isaiah 30:10; Micah 2:11). Having stated who can and who cannot enter the Kingdom, Jesus goes on to make known the principles which regulate the Kingdom. See Hastings, D.B. 1. p. 783. 27-45. Requirement: the Duties to be performed by those who are admitted to the Kingdom of God. This forms the main body of the discourse. Lk. omits the greater portion of what is reported in Mt. respecting Christ’ s relation to the Mosaic Law (5:17-19), and His condemnation of existing methods of interpreting it (5:20-48) and of fulfilling it (6:1-18). This discussion of Judaic principles and practices would not have much meaning for Lk.’ s Gentile readers. The portion of it which he gives is stated without reference to Judaism. The main point in Mt. is the contrast between legal righteousness and true righteousness. In Lk. the main point is that true righteousness is love; but the opposition between formalism and the spirit of love is not urged. The opposition which is here marked is the more universal opposition between the spirit of selfishness and the spirit of love. There is a break in this main portion, which Lk. marks by making a fresh start, Εἶπενδὲκαὶπαραβολὴναὐτοῖς , but the second half (39-45) continues the subject of the working of the principle of love. 27. Ἀλλά . What is the contrast which this ἀλλά marks? The emphatic position of the ὑμῖν seems to show that the contrast is between those on whom the Woes have been pronounced and the faithful hearers now addressed. Others interpret, “ But, although I have denounced them, I do not allow you to to them: you must love them.” There is, however, no indication that the enemies who are to be loved are the wealthy who have just been denounced, and such a limitation of the meaning of enemies cannot be justified: comp. Matthew 5:44. τοῖςἀκούουσιν . “ Who give ear and obey,” τοῖςπειθομένοις (Euthym.). It is unnatural to take it literally as meaning “ My audience,” in contrast to the rich who have just been addressed in their absence. Representatives of the rich may have been present among the audience. Schanz interprets “ who listen with attention.” There is on the whole a double climax in what follows,— the worse the treatment received, the better the return made; but it is not quite exact. One would expect that ἀγαπᾶτε would be coupled with τοῦςμυσοῦντας . This is the first time that Lk. uses the word ἀγαπᾷν , which sums up the whole spirit of the Gospel: it is most frequent in the writings of Jn. “ It should never be forgotten that ἀγάπη is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion: it occurs in the Septuagint; but there is no example of its use in any heathen writer whatever” (Trench, Syn. xii.). This is not true of ἀγαπᾷν and ἀγαπάζειν , which are common in class. Grk. But Christianity has ennobled the meaning of both ἀγαπᾷν and φιλεῖν , with their cognates: ἐρᾷν , which is scarcely Capable of such advancement, does not occur in N.T. See on 11:42, the only place where ἀγάπη occurs in Lk. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 198. τοὺςἐχθρούς . For the combination with τοῖςμισοῦσιν comp. 1:71; Psalms 18:18, 106:10; and for the fourfold description of enmity comp. ver. 22. In Matthew 5:44 we have only enemies and persecutors according to the best texts; and as καλῶςποιεῖτετοὺςμις . ὑμᾶς (note the acc.) is not genuine there, this is the only passage in which καλῶςποιεῖςποιεῖν = “ benefit, do good to” : comp. καλῶςεἰπεῖν (ver. 26), and contrast Matthew 12:12; Mark 7:37; Acts 10:33; 1 Corinthians 7:37, 1 Corinthians 7:38; Philippians 4:14; James 2:8, James 2:19; 2 Peter 1:19; 3 John 1:6.— τοῖςμισοῦσιν . For the dat. comp. τοῖςπροφήταις (ver. 23) and τοῖςψευδοπροφήταις (ver. 26). See the expansion of this principle Romans 12:17-21; 1 Thessalonians 5:15; 1 Peter 3:9. Comp. Exodus 23:4; Job 21:29; Proverbs 17:5, Proverbs 24:17, Proverbs 25:21. See detached note on the relation of Rom. 12-14 to the Gospels at the end of Rom_13. 28. εὐλογεῖτετούςκαταρωμένουςὑμᾶς . In class. Grk. εὐλογεῖν means “ praise, honour,” whether gods or men: comp. 1:64, 2:28; James 3:9. The meaning “ invoke blessings upon” is confined to LXX and N.T. (Genesis 14:19, Genesis 14:22:17, 48:9; Romans 12:14; Acts 3:26). In class. Grk. καταρᾶσθαι is followed by a dat. (Hom. Hdt. Xen. Dem.), as in Ep. Jer. 65: but in N.T. by an acc. (Mark 11:21; James 3:9); and the interpolation Matthew 5:44.— For προσεύχεσθεπερί we might have expected πρ . ὑπέρ , and the MSS. here and elsewhere are divided between ὑπέρ and περί (Galatians 1:4; Colossians 1:3; Romans 1:8). But comp. Acts 8:15; Hebrews 13:18; Colossians 4:3. Win. xlvii. 1, 2, P. 478. τῶνἐπηρεαζόντωνὑμᾶς . Aristotle defines ἐπηρεασμός as ἐμποδισμὸςταῖςβουλήσεσιν , οὐχἵνατιαὑτῷ , ἀλλ ʼ ἵναμὴἐκείνῳ (Rhet. 2:2, 3.). It is “ spiteful treatment.” 29, 30. Whereas vv. 27, 28 refer to the active ἀγάπη which returns good for evil, these refer rather to the passive μακποθυμία , which never retaliates. The four precepts here given are startling. It is impossible for either governments or individuals to keep them. A State which endeavoured to shape its policy in exact accordance with them would soon cease to exist; and if individuals acted in strict obedience to them society would be reduced to anarchy. Violence, robbery, and shameless exaction would be supreme. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 7:1. The division of the chapters is misleading. This verse forms the conclusion of the preceding narrative quite in Lk’ s manner. Comp. 4:30, 37, 44, 5:11, 26, 6:11, etc. It is not the introduction to what follows, for Jesus must have been in Capernaum some time before the centurion heard about Him. Lk. says nothint. about the impression which the discourse made upon the people (Matthew 7:28), or about their following Him (Matthew 8:1). Ἐπειδὴἐπλήρωσενπάντατὰπ̔ήματααὐτοῦ . This is the only place in N.T. in which ἐπειδή is used in the temporal sense of “ after that, when now.” Hence Ἐπεἰδέ is found in many texts. K has Ἐπειδὴδέ , while D has Καἰἐγένετοὅτε . In the causal sense of “ since, seeing that,” ἐπειδή occurs only in Lk. and Paul (11:6; Acts 13:46, Acts 13:14:12, Acts 13:15:24; 1 Corinthians 1:21, 1 Corinthians 1:22, 1 Corinthians 1:14:16, 1 Corinthians 1:15:21). See Ellicott on Philippians 2:26. For ἐπλήρωσε , “ completed,” so that no more remained to be said, comp. Acts 12:25, Acts 13:25, Acts 14:26, Acts 19:21. εἰςτὰςἀκοὰςτοῦλαοῦ The εἰς marks the direction of what was said: comp. 1:44, 4:44; Acts 11:22, Acts 17:20. Both in bibl. Grk. and in class. Grk. ἀκοή has three senses. 1. “ The The thing heard, report” (1 Samuel 2:24; 1 Kings 2:28; John 12:38; Romans 10:16). 2. “ The sense of hearing” (2 Samuel 22:45; Job 42:5; 1 Corinthians 12:17; 2 Peter 2:8). 3. “ The ear” (Mark 7:35; Hebrews 5:11; Heb_2 Mac. 15:39). 2-10. The healing of the Centurion’ s Servant at Capernaum. Matthew 8:5-13. Mt. places the healing of the leper (Luke 5:12-14) between the Sermon on the Mount and the healing of the centurion’ s slave. This centurion was a heathen by birth (ver. 9), and was probably in the service of Antipas. He had become in some degree attracted to Judaism (ver. 5), and was an illustration of the great truth which Lk. delights to exhibit, that Gentile and Jew alike share in the blessings of the kingdom. The anima naturaliter Christiana of the man is seen in his affection for his slave. 2. ἤμελλενπελευτᾷν “ Was on the point of dying,” and would have done so but for this intervention (Acts 12:6, Acts 16:27, etc.). Burton., § 73. For ἔντιμος “ held in honour, held dear,” comp. 14:8; Philippians 2:29; 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:6; Isaiah 28:16. The fact explains why this deputation of elders came. 3. ἀπέστειλενπρὸςαὐτὸνπρεσβυτέρους These elders ( no article) would be leading citizens; but they need not be identifi with the ἀρχισυνάγωγοι (8:49, 13:14; Acts 13:15, Acts 13:18:8, Acts 13:17), as Godet formerly advocated. The compound διασώζειν , “ to bring safe through,” is almost peculiar to Lk. in N. T. (Acts 23:24, Acts 23:27:43, 44, Acts 23:28:1, Acts 23:4; Matthew 14:36; 1 Peter 3:20). 4. οἱδὲπαραγενόμενοι A favourite verb (ver. 20, 8:19, 11:6, 12:51, 14:21; 19:16, 22:52; and about twenty times in Acts): elsewhere in N.T. eight or nine times, but very freq. in LXX. ἄξιόςἐστινᾧπαρέξῃτοῦτο “ He is worthy that Thou shouldest de this for him” ; 2 sing. fut. mid. The reading παρέξει Isa_3 sing. fut. act. and must not be taken as analogous to the exceptional forms ὄει , ὄψει , and βούλει . But beyond doubt παρέξῃ (א A B C D R Ξ etc.) is the correct reading. 5. ἀγαπᾷγὰρτὸἔθνοςἡμῶν This would hardly be said of one who was actually a proselyte. He had learned to admire and respect the pure worship of the Jews and to feel affection for the people who practised it. This would be all the more likely if he were in the service of the Herods rather than that of heathen Rome. See Hastings, D.B. 1. p. 366. τὴνσυναγωγὴναὐτὸςᾠκοδόμησενἡμιν “ At his own expense he built us our synagogue,” the one which we have; not “ a synagogue” (AV.). Had Capernaurn only one synagogue? If Tell Hû m represents Capernamn, and if the ruins of the synagogue there are from a building of this date, they show with what liberality this centurion had carried out his pious work. But it is doubtful whether the excellent work exhibited in these ruins is quite so early as the first century. The centurions appear in a favourable light in N.T. (23:47; Acts 10:22, Acts 10:22:26, Acts 10:23:17, Acts 10:23, Acts 10:24, Acts 10:24:23, Acts 10:27:43). Roman organization produced, and was maintained by, excellent individuals, who were a blessing to others and themselves. As Philo says after praising Petronius the governor of Syria, τοῖςδὲἀγαθοῖςἀγαθὰςὑπηχεῖνἔοικεγνώμαςὁΘεὸςδι ʼ ὧνὠφελοῦντες (Leg. ad Caium, p. 1027, ed. Gelen.). Augustus had recognized the value of synagogues in maintaining order and morality. Hastings, D.C.G. art. “ Capernaum.” . 6. οὐμακράν Comp. Acts 17:27. The expression is peculiar to Lk., who is fond of οὐ with an adj. or adv. to express his meaning. Comp. οὐπολλαί (15:13; Acts 1:5), οὐπολύ (Acts 27:14), οὐκὀλίγος (Acts 12:18, Acts 12:14:28, Acts 12:15:2, Acts 12:17:4, Acts 12:12, Acts 12:19:23, Acts 12:24, 27, Acts 12:20), οὐκὁτυχών (Acts 19:11, Acts 28:2), οὐκἄσημος (Acts 21:39), οὐμετρίως (Acts 20:12). ἔπεμψενφίλους Comp. 15:6, Acts 10:24. Mt. says nothings about either of these deputations, but puts the message of both into the mouth of the centurion himself, who comes in person. In Lk. the man’ s humility and faith prevail over his anxiety as soon as he sees that the first deputation has succeeded, and that the great Rabbi and Prophet is really coming to him. Therefore he sends the second deputation to say that he is not worthy of a visit, and that e visit is not necessary. κύριε , μὴσκύλλου “ Lord, cease to trouble Thyself.” The verb is a marked instance of the tendency of words to become weaker in meaning: σκύλλω (σκῦλον 11:22) Isa_1. “ flay” ; 2. “ mangle” ; 3. “ vex, annoy” (8:49; Mark 5:35; Matthew 9:36). See Expositor, 1st series, 1876, 4. pp. 30, 31. What follows seems to show that the centurion was not a proselyte. The house of a Gentile was polluting to a Jew; and therefore οὐγὰρἱκανόςεἰμι , κ .τ .λ ., is quite in point if he was still a heathen. But it is rather strong language if he had ceased to be a heathen. For ἵνα after ἱκανός see Burton., § 216. 7. εἰπὲλόγῳ , καὶἰαθήτωὁπαῖςμου . Lit. “ Say with a word, and let my servant be healed.” The word is to be the instrument with which the healing is to take place, instead of Jesus’ coming in person: comp. Acts 2:40 and Galatians 6:11. There is no doubt that ὁπαῖςμου means “ my servant.” This use is found in N.T. (12:45, 15:26; Matthew 8:6, Matthew 8:8, Matthew 8:13), and is very freq. in LXX and in class. Grk. It has been contended that in Matthew 8:6, Matthew 8:8, Matthew 8:13 παῖς must mean “ son,” because be centurion calls his servant δοῦλος in ver. 9: as if it were improbable the a person in be same conversation should speak sometimes of his “ servant” and sometimes of his “ boy.” In both narratives παῖς and δοῦλος are used as synonyms; and it is gratuitous to suppose that in using δοῦλος Lk. has misinterpreted the παῖς in the source which he employed. Comp. 15:22, 26. Here ὁπαῖςμου is more affectionate than ὁδοῦλόςμου would have been. 8. ἐγὼἀνθρωπόςεἰμιὑπὸἐξουσίαντασσόμενος . The εἰμι must not be united with τασσόμενος and made the equivalent of τάσσομαι : τασσόμενος is adjectival. Thus, “ For I am a man who is habitually (pres. part.) placed under authority” But, “ For I an an ordinary person and a person in a dependent position” is rather an exaggeration of the Greek. Comp. ὐπὸτὴντοῦβασιλέωςἐξουσίανπεσεῖν (2 Mal 3:6). The καὶγάρ shows the intimate connexion with what precedes, εἰπὲλόγῳκαὶἱαθήτω : see on 6:32, “ I know from personal experience What a word from one in authority can do. A word from my superiors secures my obedience, and a word from me secures the obedience of my subordinates. Thou, who art under no man, and hast authority over unseen powers, hast only to say a word and the sickness is healed.” Perhaps ἄνθρωπος hints that Jesus is superhuman. Evidently ὑπὸἐξουσιχαντασσόμενος means that, if an inferior can give effective orders, much more can a superior do so. It is the awminty of the result without personal presence that is the point. 9. ὁἸησοῦςἐθαύμασεναὐτόν This is stated in both narratives, Comp. Mark 6:6. Those who are unwilling to admit any limitations in Christ’ s knowledge have to explain how wonder is compatible with omniscience. One limitation is clearly told us by Himself (Mark 13:32); so that the only question is how far such limitations extend. See on 2:46, 52, and 17:14. Note the solemn Λέγωὑμῖν , and comp. ver. 28, 10:12, 24, 11:8, 9, 51, etc. οὐδὲἐντῷἸσραὴλτοσαύτηνπίστινεὗρον . This again points to the centurion being still a heathen. Nowhere among the Jews had He found any one willing to believe that He could heal without being present. It is natural that Lk. should express this preference for a Antile more strongly than Mt., who has παρ ʼ οὐδενὶτοσαύτηνπίστινἐντῷἸσραὴλεὗρον Lk. here omits the remarkable passage Matthew 8:11, Matthew 8:12; but he gives it in quite a different connexion 13:28, 29. Such teaching, so necessary and so unwelcome to the Jews, may easily have been repeated. 10. ὑποστρέψαντες . See on 1:56 and 4:14. Lk.’ s ὑγιαίνοντα is stronger than the ἰάθη of Mt. The servant was not only cured, but “ in good health.” Non modo sanum, sed sanitate utentem (Beng.) Hobart remarks that Lk. “ is the only N.T. writer who uses ὑγιαίνειν in this its primary sense, ‘ to be in sound health,’ with the exception of S. John, 3 Eph_2. For this meaning it is the regular word in the medical writers” (p. 10). See on 5:31 and comp. 15:27. Here and 5:31 Vulg. has sanus; in 15:27, salvus. The identification of this miracle with that of the healing of the son of the royal official in Joh_4. is not probable: it involves an amount of misinformation or carelessness on one side or the other which would be very startling. Irenæ us seems to be in favour of it; but “ centurion” with him may be a slip of memory or a misinterpretation of βασιλικός . Origen and Chrysostom contend against the identification. Is there any difficulty in supposing that on more than one occasion Jesus healed without being present? The difficulty is to explain one such instance, without admitting the possession of supernatural powers: this Strauss has shown, and the efforts of Keim and Schenkel to explain it by a combination of moral and psychical causes are not satisfying. There is no parallel to it in O.T., for (as Keim points out) the healing of Naaman is not really analogous. 11-17. § The Raising of the Widow’ s Son at Nain. Because Lk. alone records it, its historical character has been questioned. But there were multitudes of miracles wrought by Christ which have never been recorded in detail at all (4:23, 40, 41, 6:18, 19; John 2:23, John 4:45, John 7:31, John 12:37, John 20:30, John 21:25), and among these, as ver. 22 shows, were cases of raising the dead. We must not attribute to the Evangelists the modern way of regarding the raising of the dead as a miracle so amazing, because so difficult to perform, that every real instance would necessarily become widely known, and would certainly be recorded by every writer who had knowledge of it. To a Jew it would be hardly more marvellous than the healing of a leper; and to one who believes in miracles at all, distinctions as to difficulty are unmeaning. It is not unreasonable to suppose, either that this event never came to the knowledge of the other Evangelists, or that, although they knew of it, they did not see the necessity for recording it. It is worth noting that nearly all recorded instances of raising the dead were performed for women (1 Kings 17:23; 2 Kings 4:36; John 11:22, John 11:32; Acts 9:41; Hebrews 11:35). 11. ἐντῷἑξῆς It is not easy to decide between the reading ἑντῷἑξῆς , sc. χρόνῳ (A B R), and ἑντῇἑξῆς , sc. ἡμέρᾳ (א C D). On the one hand, Lk. elsewhere, when he writes ἐντῷ , has καθεξῆς (8:1); on the other, when he writes τῇἑξῆς he does not prefix ἐν (9:37; Acts 21:1, Acts 25:17, Acts 27:18). The less definite would be more likely to be changed to the more definite than vice versâ . Thus the balance both of external and internal evidence is in favour of ἐντῷἑξῆς , and we must not limit the interval between the miracles to a single day. In N.T. ἑξῆς is peculiar to Lk. (9:37; Acts 21:1, Acts 24:17, Acts 27:18). So also is ὡςἤγγισεν (v. 12, 15:25, 19:20, 41). Ναΐν . The place is not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture; and the village of that name in Josephus (B. J. iv. 9. 4) is on the other side of the Jordan, and cannot be the same. D. C. G. art. “ Nain.” A hamlet called Nein was found by Robinson about two miles west of Endor, on the north slope of Little Hermon, which is where Eusebius and Jerome place it; and it would be about a day’ s journey from Capernaum. “ One entrance alone it could have had, that which opens on the rough hillside in its downward slope to the plain” (Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 357); so that the very path on which the two companies met can be identified. About ten minutes’ walk on the road to Endor is a burying-place which is still used, and there are many tombs cut in the rock. Robinson, Psa_3. p. 469; Bibl. Res. 2:361; Thomson, Land &Book, p. 445; Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 127. The expression, πόλινκαλουμένηνΝαΐν , looks as if Lk. were writing for those who were not familiar with the country; comp. 1:26, 39, 4:31. See on 6:15. οἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ . Including more than the Twelve; 6:13. See on 11:29. 12. καὶἰδοὺἐξεκομίζετοτεθνηκώς . “ Behold there was being carried out a dead man.” Or, “ there was being carried out dead the only son,” etc. The καί introduces the apodosis of ὡςδὲἤγγισε , and must be omitted in translation: ‘ then” would be too strong. See on 5:12. The compound verb occurs here only in N. T. and nowhere in LXX. It is equivalent to ἐκφέρειν (Acts 5:6, Acts 5:9, Acts 5:10) and efferre, and is used of carrying out to burial, Polyb. 35:6, 2; Plut. Agis, 21.; Cic. 42. In later Gk. ἐκκομιδή is used for ἐκφορά of burial. With τεθνηκώς comp. John 11:44. μονογενὴςυἱὸςτῇμητρὶαὐτοῦ . Comp. 8:42, 9:38; Hebrews 11:17; Judges 11:34; Tobit 3:15, 8:17. Only in Jn. is μονογενής used of the Divine Sonship (1:14, 18, 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). καὶαὐτὴἧνχήρα . The ἦν may safely be pronounced to be certainly genuine (א B C L S V Ξ , and most Versions). For αὐτή some editnors write αὕτη , and a few authorities have καὶαὐτῇχήρᾳ . The mourning of a widow for an only eon b typical for the extremity of grief: orba cum Flet unicum mater (Catull. 39:5). Comp. Jeremiah 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zechariah 12:10; Proverbs 4:3. ὄχλοςτῆςπόλεωςἱκανός . Some of this multitude would be hired mourners, and musicians with flutes and cymbals. The mother would walk in front of the bier, and Jesus would naturally address her before touching it. This use of ἱκανός for “ enough and to spare, much,” is specially freq. in Lk. (8:27, 32, 20:9, 22:38, 23:8, 9; Acts 8:2, Acts 8:9:23, 43, Acts 8:11:24, Acts 8:26, etc.). It is possibly colloquial: it occurs in Aristoph. Pax 354. See Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. P. 79. D here has πολύς . 13. καὶἰδὼναὐτὴνὁκύριοςἐσπλαγχνίσθηἐπ ʼ αὐτῇ . The introduction of ὁΚύριος has special point here: it is the Lord of Life meeting sorrow and death. The expression is characteristic of Lk. Comp. 24:34, and see on 5:17. Compassion is elsewhere mentioned as a moving cause in Christ’ s miracles (Matthew 14:14, Matthew 14:15:32, Matthew 14:20:34; Mark 1:41, Mark 8:2). The verb is peculiar to the Synoptists; and, excepting in parables (Luke 10:33, Luke 10:15:20; Matthew 18:27), is used of no one but Christ. It is followed, as here, by ἐπί c. dat. Matthew 14:14; and by περί c. gen. Matthew 9:36; but generally by ἐπί c. acc. (Matthew 15:32; Mark 6:34, Mark 8:2, Mark 9:22). Μὴκλαῖε . “ Do not go on weeping, cease to weep” : comp. ver. 6. He is absolutely sure of the result; otherwise the command would have been unnatural. Quis matrem, nisi mentis inops, in funere nati Flere vetat? 14. ἥψατοτῆςσοροῦ , οἱδὲβαστάζοντεςἔστησαν . Lk. Clearly intimates that the purpose of the touching was to make the bearers stand still. At such solemn times words are avoided, and this Wet sign sufficed. Perhaps it also meant that Jesus claimed as His own what Death had seized as his prey. Lk. equally clearly intimates that the resurrection was caused by Christ’ s command. This is the case in all three instances of raising the dead (8:54; John 11:43). The σορός may be either the bier on which the body as carried, or the open coffin (probably wicker) in which it was laid (Genesis 50:26; Hdt. 1:68, 3, 2:78, 1). It is worth noting that βαστάζειν , which occurs twenty-seven times in N.T. (10:4. 11:27, 14:27, 22:10, etc.), is found only thrice in LXX. σοὶλέγω . “ To thee I say, Arise.” To the mother He had said, “ Weep not.” The σοί is emphatic. For this use of λέγω , almost in the sense of “ I command,” comp. 11:9, 12:4, 16:9. 15. ἀνεκάθισενὁνεκρός . The verb occurs only hers and Acts 9:40 in N. T.; in both cases of persons restored to life and sitting up. Not in LXX. In this intrans. sense it is rare, excepting in medical writers, who often use it of sick persons sitting up in bed (Hobart, p. 11). The speaking proved complete restoration. To suggest that the young man was in a trance does not get rid of the miracle. How did Jesus know that he was in a trance, and know exactly how to rouse him? And can we suppose that this happened on three different occasions, even if we could reconcile Christ’ s action with a character for truthfulness? Here and in the case of Jairus’ daughter it is the Evangelist who tells us that the person was dead; but Jesus Himself declared that Lazarus was dead (John 11:14). We are told that the symmetry of the three instances is suspicious, raised from the death-bed, raised from the bier, raised from the tomb. But no Evangelist gives us the triplet. Lk. is the only writer who records more than one and the two which he records he places in unsymmetrical order, the raising from the bier coming before the raising from the death-bed. Strauss has shown how unsatisfactory the trance theory is (Leben Jesu, ed. 1864, p. 469). ἔδωκεναὐτὸντῇμητρί . The sudden change of nominative causes no obscurity. Comp. 14:5, 15:15, 17:2, 19:4; Acts 6:6, Acts 10:4. Jesus might have claimed the life which He has restored, nam juvenis jam desierat esse matris suœ ; but compassion for the mother again influences Him. Comp. 8:55; Acts 9:41; Act_1 Mac. 10:9; 1 Kings 17:23; 2 Kings 4:36. 16. Ἔλαβενδὲφόβοςπάντας . It is natural that this should be the first feeling on seeing a corpse reanimated. But a writer of fiction would rather have given us the frantic joy of the mother and of those who sympathized with her. Comp. 1:65, 5:8, 26, 8:37; Acts 2:43, Acts 19:17. See on 1:12, and also Schanz, ad loc. λέγοντεςὅτι … καὶὅτι . It is very forced to make ὅτι in both cases argumentative: “ Saying, (We praise God) because … and because.” It is possible to take the second ὅτι in this way; but the common method of making both to be recitative is preferable. Both, therefore, are to be omitted in translation, the words quoted being in the oratio recta (Tyn. Cran. Cov. RV.). Cases in which ὅτι may be taken either way are freq. in N.T. (1:45, 2:11, 4:36, 7:39, 9:22, 10:21, 11:38, 22:70; 1 John 2:12-14, etc.). Ἐπεσκέψατοὁθεὸςτὸνλαὸναὐτοῦ . Comp. 1:68, 78; Acts 15:14; Hebrews 2:6. The verb was specially used of the “ visits” of a physician. Comp. Matthew 25:36, Matthew 25:43; James 1:27; Acts 6:3, Acts 7:23, Acts 15:36, the only other passages in N.T. in which the word occurs. In the sense of visiting with judgment or punishment it is never used in N.T. and but seldom in LXX (Ps. 88:33; Jeremiah 9:9, Jeremiah 9:25, Jeremiah 9:11:22, 51:29). After the weary centuries during which no Prophet had appeared, it was indeed a proof of Jehovah’ s visiting His people that one who excelled the greatest Prophets was among them. No one in O. T. raised the dead with a word. 17. ἐξῆλθενὁλόγοςοὗτοςἐνὅλῃτῇἸουδαίᾳπερὶαὐτοῦ . The λόγος is the one just mentioned,— that God had visited His people in sending a mighty Prophet. The statement does not imply that Lk. supposed Nain to be in Judæ a. Ἰουδαία here probably means Palestine: see on 4:44 and 23:5. But even if we take it in the narrower sense of Judæ a as distinct from Galilee, Samaria, and Peræ a, there is no need to attribute to Lk. any geographical inaccuracy. “ This saying went forth (from Nain and circulated) in Judæ a” ; i.e. it reached the headquarters of Christ’ s opponents. For περὶαὐτοῦ comp. 5:15. Syr-Sin. omits ὁλόγος This pregnant use of a prep. of rest after a verb of motion is perhaps found only in late Grk., for in Thuc. 4:42, 3 and Xen. Hellen. vii. 5, 10 the readings vary between ἀπῄεσαν and ἀπῆσαν . Comp. 8:7, and see Win. i. 4. a, p. 514; Blass, Gr. p. 127. καὶπάσῃτῇπεριχώρῳ . Note the position of this clause, which is added after περὶαὐτοῦ with augmented force: “ and (what is more) in all the region round about” ; i.e. round about Ἰουδαία , not Nain. Comp. Acts 14:6. The verse prepares the way for the next incident by showing how the Baptist’ s disciples came to hear about “ all these things.” The evidence that Jesus raised the dead is that of all four Gospels and of primitive tradition. The fact seems to have been universally believed in the early Church (Justin, Apol. i. ii, 48; Try. 69; Orig. c. Cels. ii. 48). Quadratus, one of the earliest apologists, who addressed a defence of Christianity to Hadrian a.d. 125, says in the only fragment of it which is extant, “ But the works of our Saviour were always present, for they were true; those that were healed and those that were raised from the dead, who were seen not only when they were healed and when they were raised, but were also always present; and not merely while the Saviour was on earth, but also after His departure, they were there for a considerable time, so that some of them lived even to our own times” (Eus. H. E. iv. 3, 2). This does not mean that Quadratus had seen any of them, but that there was abundance of opportunity, long after the event, to inquire into the reality of these miracles. S. Paul uses the same kind of argument respecting the resurrectis on of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Weiss points out how unsatisfactory are all the attempts to explain the evidence on any other hypothesis than the historical fact that Jesus raised the dead (Leben Jesu, 1. pp. 557-565, Eng. tr. 2:178-186). He concludes thus: “ In no other miracle did the grace of God, which appeared in His Messiah, manifest itself so gloriously, by overcoming the consequences of sin and thereby giving a pledge for the highest consummation of salvation.” See Aug. In Joh. Trac. 69:2. 18-35. The message from the Baptist to the Christ. Peculiar to Lk. and Mt., who place it in different connexions, but assign to it the same occasion, viz. that John had “ heard in his prison the works of the Christ” (Matthew 11:2). Lk.’ s narrative, as usual, is the more full. He does not mention that John is in prison, having already stated the fact by anticipation (3:20). The περὶπάντωντούτων shows that the works reported to the Baptist include the healing of the centurion’ s servant and the raising of the widow’ s son πρὸςτὸνκύριον . This is probably the true reading (B L R X, a ft2 Vulg.) rather than πρὸςτὸνἸησοῦν (א A X Γ , b c f). See on ver. 13. 19. Σὺεἶὁἐρχόμενος ; “ Art Thou He that cometh,” i.e. whose coming is a matter of quite notorious certainty (3:16, 13:35, 19:38; Hebrews 10:37). ἤἕτερονπροσδοκῶμεν ; “ Or must we look for another, different in kind?” whereas ἄλλον might be another of the same kind (Lft. on Galatians 1:6, Galatians 1:7). The reading ἕτερον is right, and is of taken from Mt. It is ἄλλον (A D) that is the corruption. For the delib. subj. comp. 3:10, 12, 14. See on 3:15. The meaning of the question thus sent to Christ has been much discussed. 1. Chrysostom and other Fathers have suggested that the question was asked for the sake of John’ s disciples, who needed strengthening or correcting in their beliefs. See Oxford Library of the Fathers, 10. p. 267, note e. Luther, Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Bengel, and others adopt this view. But the whole context is against it. Christ’ s reply is addressed to John, not to the disciples; and it is not clear that the disciples even understood the message which they carried. 2. Weiss and other critics follow Tertullian (Marcion. iv. 18) in contending that John’ s own faith was failing, because the career of Jesus did not seem to correspond with what he and the people had expected, and with what he had foretold (3:17). There is nothing incredible in this view; but the Baptist had had such a long and stern preparation for his work, and had received such convincing evidence that Jesus was the Messiah, that a failure in his faith is surprising. 3. Hase and others suggest that he was not failing in faith, but in patience. John was disappointed that Jesus did not make more progress, and he wished to urge Him on to take a more prominent and indisputable position. “ If Thou do these things, manifest Thyself unto the world.” Perhaps John was also perplexed by the fact that one who could work such miracles did not set His forerunner free, nor “ cleanse His threshing-floor” of such refuse as Antipas and Herodias. This view suits the context better than the second. John’ s sending to Jesus is strong evidence that he was not seriously in doubt as to His Messiahship. For a false Christ would not have confessed that he was false; and what proof could the true Christ give more convincing than the voice from heaven and the visible descent of the Spirit? 4. The view of Strauss, that John had just begun to conjecture that Jesus is the Messiah, and that therefore this narrative is fatal to the story of his having baptiz Jesus and proclaimed Him as the Messiah, is answered by Hase (Gesch. Jesu, § 39, p. 388, ed. 1891). See also Hahn, 1. p. 475. 21. θεραπεύεινἀπό . See on 5:15: it is peculiar to Lk. μαστίγων . “ Distressing bodily diseases” ; Mark 3:10, Mark 3:5:29, Mark 3:34. In LXX it is used of any grievous trouble, but not specially of disease: Psalms 35:15, 88:32 ; Ecclus. 40:9?; 2 Mac. 7:37: comp. Hom. Il. xii. 37, xiii. 812.; Aesch. Sept. 607; Ag. 642 The notion that troubles are Divine chastisements is implied in the word. It is used literally Acts 22:24 and Hebrews 11:36. ἐχαρίσατο . “ He graciously bestowed, made a free present of” ; magnificum verbum (Beng.) ; Comp. 2 Mac. 3:31. 22. ἀπαγγείλατεἸωάνει . See on 8:20. The answer is expressly sent to John: there is no intimation that it is for the instruction of his disciples, who are sent back, “ like the messenger from Gabii to Sextus Tarquinius,” to relate a symbolical narrative, which their master is to interpret. That they can understand it is it her stated nor implied. τυφλοὶἀναβλέπουσιν , κ .τ .λ . There is probably a direct reference to Isaiah 35:5, Isaiah 35:6, 61:1. It is clear, not only that Lk. and Mt. understand Jesus to refer to bodily and not spiritual healings, but that they are right in doing so. John’ s messengers had not “ seen and heard” Christ healing the spiritually blind and the morally leprous. Moreover, what need to add πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται , if all that precedes refers to the preaching of the good tidings? It is unnatural to express the same fact, first by a series of metaphors, and then literally. All the clauses should be taken literally. They seem to be arranged in two groups, which are connected by καί , and in each group there is a climax, the strongest item of evidence being placed last. πτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται . This was the clearest sign of His being the Cbrist (Isaiah 61:1), as He Himself had declared at Nazareth (4:18-21). His miracles need not mean more than that He was “ a great Prophet” ; moreover, the Baptist had already heard of them. But it was a new thing that the poor, whom the Greek despised and the Roman trampled on, and whom the priest and the Levite left on one side, should be invited into the Kingdom of God (6:20).For the passive sense of εὐαγγελίζεσθαι comp. Hebrews 4:2, Hebrews 4:6, and see Win. xxxix. 1. a, p. 326, and Fritzsche on Matthew 6:4. For εὐαγγέλλιον see on Romans 1:1. 23. μακάριος . Not μακάριοι , as it would have been if the direct reference were to the disciples of John. It implies that Baptist had in some way found an occasion of stumbling in Jesus (i.e. he had been wanting in faith, or in trust, or in patience); and it also encourages him to overcome this temptation. σκανδαλισθῇ . Only here and 17:2 in Lk., but frequent in Mt. and Mk. The verb combines the notions of “ trip up” and “ entrap,” and in N. T. is always used in the figurative sense of “ causing to sin.” See on 17:1. This record of a rebuke to the Baptist is one of many instances of the candour of the Evangelists. For ὃςἐάν see Greg. Proleg. p. 96, and Win. lxi. 6, p. 390; this use of ἐάν for ἄν is common in LXX and N.T. (17:33?; Matthew 5:19, Matthew 5:32, Matthew 5:12:32, Matthew 5:18:5; James 4:4). 24. περὶἸωάνου . This is further evidence that the question and ewer just recorded concerned John himself. The people had heard Jesus send a rebuke to the Baptist. But He forthwith guards them from supposing that John has ceased to be worthy of reverence. He waits till his disciples are gone; because if they had heard and reported Christ’ s praise of John to their master, it might have cancelled the effect of the rebuke. This panegyric is almost the funeral oration of the Baptist; for soon after this he was put to death. For ἤρξατο see on 4:21. Τίἐξήλθατε . In each of the three questions it is possible to put the note of interrogation before the infinitive, and render, “ Why went ye out? to behold?” etc. But the order of the words favours me usual punctuation. Perhaps θεάσασθαι implies “ behold” with wonder and admiration. κὰλαμον … σαλευόμενον . The literal meaning makes excellent sense: “ Did you go out into the wilderness to admire what you would certainly find there, but which would have no interest or attraction? Or did you go out to see what would no doubt have been interesting and attractive, but which you were not likely to find there?” But it also makes good sense to interpret, “ Had John been a weak and fickle person, you would not have made a pilgrimage to see him.” 25. ἄνθρωπονἐνμαλακοῖς . Such a person would not be found in the wilderness; although he might have attracted them. This seems to show that the κάλαμον is not metaphorical, for this is obviously literal. Hastings, D.C.G. art. “ Reed.” οἱἐἱματισμῷἐδόξῳκαὶτρυφῇὑπάρχοντες “ Those who live in gorgeous apparel and luxury.” The word ἱματισμός is of late origin, and is seldom used excepting of costly vesture (9:29; Acts 20:33; John 19:24; 1 Timothy 2:9; 24:53; Exodus 3:22, Exodus 3:12:35; 1 Kings 10:5). See Trench, Syn. l. For ἐνδόξῳ comp. 13:17, and for ὑπάρχοντες see on 8:41. In N.T. τρυφή occurs only here and 2 Peter 2:13; in LXX only as v.l. Lamentations 4:5. But it is freq. in class. Grk. It means an enervating mode of life . 26 περισσότερονπρογήτηυ This completes the Climax : κάλαμον , ἄνθρωπον , προφήτην , περισσότερονπροφήτου . In περισσότερον we have a late equivalent of πλέον . It may be masc. or neut., but is probably neut., like πλεῖον in 11:32. Comp. 12:4, 20:47. They went out to see something more than a Prophet, and they did see it. 27. This quotation from Malachi (3:1) is given by Mk. at the opening of his Gospel coupled with φωνὴβοῶντος , κ .τ .λ ., and attributed as a whole to Isaiah. Neither Heb. nor LXX has πρὸπροσώπουσου , which Mt. Mk. and Lk. all insert in the first dause. See on 9:52. Moreover, they all three have ἀποστέλλω and κατασκευάσει instead of the ἐξαπστέλλω and ἐπιβλέψεται of LXX. See on 4:18. The passage was one of the common-places of Messianic prophecy, and had been stereotyped in an independent Greek form before the Evangelists made use of it. 28. ἐνγεννητοῖςγυναικῶν . A solemn periphrasis for the whole human race; that it implies weakness and frailty is not evident: in Job 14:1 these qualities are expressed. It is human generation as distinct from heavenly regeneration that is meant. John’ s superiority lay, not in his personal character, but in his office and mission: the glory of being the immediate forerunner of the Messiah was unique. He was a Prophet, like Moses and Elijah; yet he not only prophesied, but saw and pointed out to others Him of whom he prophesied. Lk. omits the Hebrew ἀμήν . The word προφήτης is an interpolation. The external evidence against it is immense (א B K L M X Ξ and most Versions), and it is improbable that the possibility of Prophets outside Israel would be indicated. ὁδὲμικρότερος . There is no need to make this a superlative, as AV. alone among English Versions: better, “ he that is inferior,” i.e. less than other members of the Kingdom, less than any among the more insignificant. It is most unnatural to explain ὁμικρότερος of Christ. Chrysostom says, περὶἑαυτοῦλέγωνεἰκότωςκρύπτειτὸπρόσωπονδιὰτὴνἔτικρατοῦσανὑπόνοιανκαὶδιὰτὸμὴδόξαιπερὶἑαυτοῦμέγατιλέγειν (Hom. xxxvii. p. 417), and above he explains μικρότερος as κατὰτὴνἡλικίανκαὶκατὰτὴντῶνπολλῶνδόξαν (p. 416). Much the same view is taken by Hilary, Theophylact, Erasmus, Luther, Fritzsche, and others. In that case ἐντῇβασιλείᾳτοῦΘεοῦ must be taken after μείζων , which is awkward; and we can hardly suppose that Jesus would have so perplexed the people as to affirm that He was inferior to the Baptist, who in all his teaching had enthusiastically maintained the contrary (3:16; Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:7 ; John 1:15, John 1:20, John 1:27, John 1:30, 3:John 1:28-30). By his office John belonged to the old dispensation; he was its last and highest product (major prophetâ , quia finis prophetarum), but he belonged to the era of preparation. In spiritual privileges, in grace, and in knowledge any even of the humbler members of the Kingdom are superior to him. He is a servant, they are sons; he is the friend of the Bridegroom, they are His spouse. It is possible to understand Ἰωάνου after μικρότερος , but it is unnecessary: more probably the comparative refers to others in the Kingdom. The paradox, “ He that is less than John is greater than John,” is capable of interpretation; but the principle that the lower members of a higher class are above the highest member of a lower class is simpler. The superlative of μικρός does not occur in N.T. 29, 30 Many have supposed that these two verses are a parenthetical remark of the Evangelist. But a comment inserted in the middle of Christ’ s words, and with no indication that it is a comment, is without a parallel and improbable. John 3:16-21 and 31-36 are not parallel. There the question is whether comment is added. In both passages it is probable that there is no comment. But, assuming that the Evangelist is in both cases commenting, he appends his comment: he does not insert it into the utterances of others. Here vv. 29 and 30 are part of Christ’ s address, who contrasts the effect which John’ s preaching had upon the people and upon the hierarchy (see Schanz). The connexion between ver. 30 and ver. 31 is close, as is shown by the οὖν . 29. πᾶςὁλαὸςἀκούσας . “ All the people, when they heard” the preaching of the Baptist. Note the πᾶς , and see small print on 1:66. ἐδικαίωσαντὸνΘεὸν , βαπτισθέντες . “ Admitted the righteousness of God (in making these claims upon them and granting them these opportunities) by being baptized.” Their accepting baptism was an acknowledgment of His justice. See on ver. 35 and the detached note on the word δίκαιος and its cognates, Romans 1:17. 30. οἱνομικοί . Lk. often uses this expression instead of οἱγραμματεῖς , which might be misleading to Gentile readers (10:25, 11:45, 46, 52, 14:3). Elsewhere in N.T. the word occurs only Matthew 22:35; Titus 3:9, Titus 3:13. Comp. 4 Mac. 5:4; Corp. Inscr. 2787, 8. Hastings, D.C.G. art. “ Lawyer.” τὴνβουλὴντοῦΘεοῦἠθέτησανεἰςἑαυτούς . “ They frustrated the counsel of God concerning themselves” : comp. εἰςὑμᾶς in 1 Thessalonians 5:18. The rendering, “ for themselves, so far as they were concerned, they rendered the counsel of God effectless,” would require τὸεἰςἐαυτούς . The verb is a strong one: “ render ἄθετον , placeless, inefficacious” (Galatians 2:21, Galatians 2:3:15; John 12:48; Luke 10:16). Free will enables each man to annul God’ s purpose for his salvation. The phrase τὴνβουλὴντοῦΘεοῦ is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 13:36, Acts 13:20:27; Comp. 2:23, 4:28). It occurs Wisd. 6:4; comp. Psalms 32:11, 106:11; Proverbs 19:21. With μὴβαπτισθέντες comp. the case of Nicodemus (John 3:4, John 3:5). 31. The spurious reading εἶπεδὲὁΚύρις was interpolated at the beginning of this verse to mark vv. 29, 30 as a parenthetical remark of the Evangelist. Owing to the influence of the Vulgate the interpolation was followed by all English Versions prior to RV. Almost all MSS. and ancient versions omit the words. But their Spuriousness must not be quoted as evidence against the view which they support. Many false readings are correct glosses upon the true text, although that it probably not the case here. Τίνιοὖνὁμοιώσω . The οὖν would not be very intelligible if vv. 29, 30 were omitted; but after ver. 30 it is quite in place. “ Seeing that the rulers and teachers have rejected the Divine invitation given by John, and that Ye (λέγετε , ver. 34) follow them in refusing to follow Me, to what, then, shall I liken the people of this generation?” so comprehensive a phrase as τοὺςἀνθρώπουςτῆςγενεᾶςταύτης may include the Baptist and the Christ: and to assume that it does include them frees the true interpretation of the parable from seeming to be somewhat at variance with the opening words. With the double question comp. 13:18; Mark 4:30. 32. There are two parties of children. This is more clearly marked by τοῖςἑτέποις in Mt. than by ἀλλήλοις here. Which of the two groups is blamed? It has been taken both ways. (1) The children who invite the second group to play, first at dances and then at dirges, represent Jesus and the Baptist with their respective followers. The children who waywardly refuse to join in any kind of game are the Jews as represented by the hierarchy and the majority of the people. These rejected both the asceticism of John and the joyous freedom of the Gospel. Godet infers from ἀλλήλοις that the two groups of children change sides and take turns in proposing the form of play. But it is not necessary to give so much meaning to ἀλλήλοις . Yet such a change would not be difficult to interpret. The Jews may have proposed to the Baptist to become less stern. They certainly tried to force fasting on Jesus. And hence (2) the possibility of the other interpretation, which is preferred by Euthymius, Stier, and Afford, and is ably defended by Trench (Studies in the Gospels, pp. 150-153) The children sitting in the market-place and finding fault with their fellows are the Jews. John comes to them in his severity, and they want him to play at festivals. When he retains his strict mode of life, they complain and say, “ We piped to you, and you did not dance.” Then Christ comes to them as the bringer of joy, and they want Him to play at funerals. When He retains His own methods, they say, “ We wailed, and you did not weep.” This interpretation has two advantages. It makes the men of this generation, viz. the Jews, to be like the children who cry, “ We piped,” etc. And it gives the two complaints a chronological order. “ We piped,” etc., is a complaint against the Baptist, who came first; “ We wailed,” etc., is a complaint against the Christ, who came afterwards. With καθημένοις comp. 5:27; with ἀγορᾷ , Mark 6:56; with προσφωνοῦσινἀλλήοις Acts 22:2; with ηὐλήσαμεν 1 Corinthians 14:7; with ὠρχήσασθε 2 Samuel 6:21; with ἐθρηνήσαμεν John 16:20. Of these προσφωνεῖν is a favourite word: see on 6:13. Both θρηνεῖν and κλαίειν refer to the outward manifestation of grief as distinct from the feeling; and here the outward expression only is needed. 33. μὴἔσθωνἄρτονμήτεπίνωνοἶνον . “ Without eating bread or drinking wine” ; spoken from the point of view of those who objected to John. He did not take the ordinary food of mankind; and so Mt. says, “ neither eating nor drinking,” For the poetic form ἔσθω see on 10:7. Syr-Sin. omits ἄρτον and οἶνον Δαιμόνιονἔχει . They afterwards said the same of Jesus (John 7:20, John 8:48, John 10:20); and δαιμόνιονἔχεις shows that δαιμόνιον is acc. and not nom. Renan compares the Arabic Medjnoun enté as showing that Orientals consider all madness to be possession by a demon (V. de J. p. 263). See on 4:33. One regrets that the American Revisers did not carry their point in getting “ demon” substituted for “ devil” as the rendering of δαιμόνιον . Tyn. Cov. and Cran. make great confusion by translating “ hath the devil.” Wic. is better with “ hath a fende.” The λέγετε in vv. 33 and 34 shows that some of those censured are present. Comp. 11:15, where Jesus is accused of casting out demons with the help of Beelzebub. 34. φάγος Like ὀνοπότης , this is a subst. and therefore paroxytone: φαγός which L. and S. give, would be an adj. See Chandler, Greek Accentuation, § 215. Latin Versions vary between devorator (Vulg.), vorator (q), vorax (c e), manducator (d). English Versions vary between “ devourer” (Wic.) “ glutton” (Tyn. Cov.), “ gurmander” (Rhem.), and “ gluttonous man” (Cran. AV. RV.). The ref. is to 5:33 and similar occasions. For φίλοςτελωνῶν see 5:27, 29, 30. 35. καὶἐδικαιώθηἡσοφία . “ And yet wisdom was justified.” In N. T. καί often introduces a contrast, which is placed side by side with that with which it is contrasted: “ and (instead of what might be expected), and yet.” This is specially common in Jn. (1:5, 10, 3:11, 32, 5:39, 40, 6:36, 43, 70, 7:28, etc.). Atque sometimes has the same tam; Cic. De Off. iii. II. 48. Although the Jews as a nation rejected the methods both of John and of Christ, yet there were some who could believe that in both these methods the Divine wisdom was doing what was right. ἐδικαιώθη . This looks back to ἐδικαίωσαν in ver. 29, and ἡσοφία looks back to τὴνβουλὴντοῦΘεοῦ in ver. 30. Here, as in Romans 3:4 (Psalms 51:6), δικαόω means “ Show or pronounce to be righteous, declare or admit to be just.” The analogy of verbs in -όω is often wrongly urged. An important distinction is sometimes overlooked. In the case of external qualities, such verbs do mean to “ make or render, ” whatever the noun from which they are derived signifies (ἐρημόω , τυφλόω , χρυσόω , κ .τ .λ .).But in the case of moral qualities this is scarcely possible, and it may be doubted whether there is a passage in which δικαιόω clearly means “ I make righteous.” Similarly, ἀξιόω never means “ I make worthy,” but “ I consider worthy, treat as worthy.” In the case of words which might apply to either external or moral qualities both meanings are possible acc. to the context: thus ὁμοιόω may mean either “ make like,” e.g. make an image like a man (Eur. Hel. 33, comp. Acts 14:11; Romans 9:29), or “ consider like, compare” (ver. 31, 13:18, 20). In ἐδικαιώθη we perhaps have an example of what is sometimes the ornic aorist. Comp. John 15:6; James 1:2, James 1:24; 1 Peter 1:24. Burton., § 43. But see Win. 11. b. 1, p. 346, where the existence of this aorist in N.T. is denied. ἀπὸπάντωντῶντέκνωναὐτῶς . “ At the hands of all her children” : the justification comes from them. It is certainly incorrect to interpret ἀπό as implying rescuing or protecting “ from the attacks of all her children,” viz. from the Jews. The children of the Divine Wisdom are the faithful minority who have welcomed the Baptist and the Christ, not the unbelieving majority who rejected them. In Matthew 11:19 there is no πάντων , and D L M X omit A here. But it is certainly genuine: see on 6:30. In A P Ξπάντων is placed last with emphasis: there are no exceptions. But the order of א B is to be preferred. Mt. has ἔργων for τέκνων , and א has ἔργων here. For the personification of the Wisdom of God comp. Proverbs 8:9.; Ecclus. 24.; Wisd. 6:22-9:18. 36-50. § The Anointing by the Woman that was a Sinner. Without note of time or express connexion. The connexion apparently is that she is an illustration of ver. 35. The proposal to identify this anointing with that by Mary of Bethany just before the Passion (Matthew 26:6; Mark 14:3; John 12:3) is ancient, for Origen on Matthew 26:6 contends against it; and it still has supporters Thus Holtzmann is of opinion that the act of a “ clean” person in the house of “ an unclean” (Simon the leper) has been changed by Lk. into the act of an “ unclean” person in the house of a “ clean” (Simon the Pharisee), in order to exhibit the way in which Christ welcomed outcasts, a subject which Lk. often makes prominent. But the confusion of Mary of Bethany with a notorious ἁμαρτωλός by Lk., who knows the character of Mary (10:39, 42), is scarcely credible. And there is nothing improbable in two such incidents. Indeed the first might easily suggest the second. Simon is one of the commonest of names (there are ten or eleven Simons in N. T. and about twenty in Josephus), and therefore the identity of name proves nothing. Moreover, there are differences of detail, which, if not conclusive, are against the identification. The chief objection is the irreconcilable difference between Mary of Bethany and the ἁμαρτωλός . Strauss and Baur suggest a confusion with the woman taken in adultery. But the narrative betrays no confusion: everything is clear and harmonious. The conduct both of Jesus and of the woman is unlike either fiction or clumsily distorted fact. His gentle severity towards Simon and tender reception of the sinner, are as much beyond the reach of invention as the eloquence of her speechless affection. On the traditional, but baseless, identification of the woman with Mary of Magdala see on 8:2. The identification of this woman with both Mary of Magdala and Mary of Bethany is advocated by Hengstenberg. His elaborate argument is considered a tour de force, but it has not carried conviction with it. The potest non eadem esse of Ambrose is altogether an understatement. It is probably from considerations of delicacy that Luke does not name her: or his source may have omitted to do so. The leading thought in the narrative is the contrast between Pharisees and sinners in their behaviour to Christ. 36. Ἠρώταδέτιςαὐτὸντῶνφαρισαίωνἵναφάγῃμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ . There is nothing to show that the Pharisee had any sinister motive in asking Him, although he was evidently not very friendly. As the Pharisees were generally hostile to Christ, it may have been a courageous thing. He is inclined to believe that Jesus may be a Prophet (ver. 39); and Jesus rebukes him as one who loved little, not as asecret enemy. But; like Herod Antipas, he may simply have been curious. Lk. records two other instances of Christ being the guest of a Pharisee (11:37, 14:1). For ἵνα see on 4:3, and comp. 6:31, 7:6; and for κατεκλίθη see on 4:14. 37. καὶἰδοὺγυνἠἥτιςἥν . The opening words imply that her presence created surprise. The ἥτις is stronger than ἥ and has point here: “ who was of such a character as to be” : comp. 8:3. This is the right order, and ἐντῇπόλει follows, not precedes, ητισἧν (א B L Ξ and most Versions). The exact meaning is not quite clear: either, “ which was a sinner in the city,” i.e. was known as such in the place itself; or possibly, “ which was in the city, a sinner.” The city is probably Capernaum. ἁμαρτωλός . A person of notoriously bad character, and probably a prostitute: comp. Matthew 21:32. For instances of this use of ἁμαρτωλός see Wetst. To the Jews all Gentiles were in a special sense ἁμαρτωλό ;but something more than this is evidently meant here. The ἦν need not be pressed to mean, “ She was even up to this time” (Alf.); nor does accessit ad Dominum immunda, ut rediret munda (Aug.) imply this. The ἦν expresses her public character: ἦνἐντῇπόλει . She had repented (perhaps quite recently, and in consequence of Christ’ s teaching); but the general opinion of her remained unchanged. Her venturing to enter a Pharisee’ s house in spite of this shows great courage. In the East at the present day the intrusion of uninvited persons is not uncommon (Trench, Parables, p. 302 n.; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands, p. 36). Mary of Bethany was not an intruder. Note the idiomatic pres. κατακεῖται : just equivalent to our “ He is dining with me to-day,” meaning that he will do so. ἀλάβαστρου . Unguent-boxes or phials were called ἀλάβαστρα even when not made of alabaster. But unguenta optime servantur in alabastris (Plin. N. H. xiii. 3, xxxvi. 12; comp. Hdt. iii. 20, 1). See Wetst. on Matthew 26:6. The word is of all three genders in different writers; but in class Grk the sing. is ἀλάβαστρος , either masc. or fem. The origin of μύρον is unknown, μύρω , μύρρασμύρνα , μύρτος being conjectures. In N.T. certainly, and probably in LXX also, μύρον , “ ointment,” is distinguished from ἔλαιον , “ oil.” Trench, Syn. xxxviii. 38. στᾶσαὀπίσωπαρὰτοὺςπόδαςαὐτοῦ . The sandals were removed at meals, and people reclined with their feet behind them ; she could therefore easily approach the feet. While Lk. writes παρὰτοὺςπόδας (8:35, 41, 10:39?, 17:16, Acts 4:35, Acts 4:37, Acts 4:5:2, Acts 4:7:58, Acts 4:22:3), Mk. has πρὸςτοὺςπόδας (5:22, 7:25), and Jn. πρὸςτοὺςπόδας (11:32). Mt. has παρὰτοὺςπόδας (15:30). τοῖςδάκρυσινἥρξατοβρέχειντοὺςπόδαςαὐτοῦκαὶταῖςθριξίν , κ .τ .λ . This was no part of her original plan. She came to anoint His feet, and was overcome by her feelings; hence the ἤρξατο . The βρέχειν led to the ἐξέμασσεν , which was also unpremeditated. Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice. For βρέχειν comp. Psalms 6:7: it is probably a vernacular word (Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 39). καὶκατεφίλει . Note the compound verb and the change of tense: “ She continued to kiss affectionately.” The word is used of the kiss of the traitor (Matthew 26:49; Mark 14:45), which was demonstrative, of the prodigal’ s father (Luke 15:20), and of the Ephesian elders in their last farewell (Acts 20:37), and nowhere else in N.T. Comp. Xen. Mem. ii. 6, 33. Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading Rabbis (Xen. Cyr. vii. 5. 32; Polyb. xv. I. 7; Aristoph. Vesp. 608). 39. προφήτης . Referring to the popular estimate of Jesus (vv. 16, 17). The οὖτος is contemptuous. No true Prophet would knowingly allow himself to be rendered unclean by contact with such a person. The reading ὁπροφήτης would mean “ the great Prophet” of Deuteronomy 18:15 (comp. John 1:25, John 7:40), or possibly “ the Prophet that He professes to be.” The art. is accepted by Weiss, bracketed by WH., put in the margin by Treg., and rejected by Tisch. τίςκαὶποταπὴἡγυνὴἥτιςἅπτεταιαὐτοῦ . “ Who and of what character is the woman who is clinging to Him.” She was notorious both in person and in life. See on 1:29. The ἅπτεται implies more than mere touching, and is the pres. of continued action. Trench, Syn. xvii.; Lft. on Colossians 2:21. Imo si tu, Simon, scires, qualis hæ c jam esset femina, aliter judicares (Beng.). The ὅτι comes after ἐγίωσκεν : “ that she is,” not “ because she is.” See on ver. 16, and comp. Isaiah 65:5. 40. ἀποκριθεὶςὁἸησοῦς . Audivit Pharisaeum cogitantem (Aug. Serm. xcix.). Jesus not only answered but confuted his doubts. Simon questioned the mission of Jesus because He seemed to be unable to read the woman’ s character. Jesus shows Simon that He can read his inmost thoughts: He knows τίςκαὶποταπόςἐστι . For ἔχωσοίτιεἰπεῖν see on 12:4. Christ asks permission of His host to speak. As Godet remarks, there is a tone of Socratic irony in the address. The historic present is very rare in Luke 41. Δύοχρεοφιλέταιἦσανδανιστῇτινί . For the orthography of the two substantives see WH. ii. App. p. 154; Greg. Proleg. p. 89. In N.T. χρεοφιλέτης occurs only here and 16:5; in LXX Job 31:37; Proverbs 29:13. The word is of late origin. All English Versions, except Rhein. and AV., rightly have “ lender” and not “ creditor” for δανιστής : Vulg. fœ nerator, Luth. Wucherer. In weight of silver the denarius was considerably less than a shilling ; in purchasing power it was above two shillings, the wage of a daylabourer (Matthew 20:2) and of a Roman soldier (Tac. Ann. i. 17, 8, where see Furneaux). The two debts were about £ 50 and £ 5. 42. μὴἐχόντωναὐτῶνἀποδοῦναι . Because they had not where with to pay” non habentibus illis unde redderent (Vulg.). Comp. 12:4, 14:14; Acts 4:14. Others render ἔχειν in these passages “ to be able,” like habeo quod with the subjunctive. In ἐχαρίσατο , “ he made them a present” of what they owed, we trace the Pauline doctrine of free grace and salvation for all. Comp. ver. 21. τίςοὖναὐτῶνπλεῖονἀγαπήσει ; This is the point of the parable, and perhaps the only point. The love and gratitude of those who have had debts remitted to them depends upon their estimate of the amount which has been remitted to them rather than upon the actual amount. 43. Ὑπολαμβάνω . “ I suppose,” “ I presume,” with an air of supercilious indifference. Comp. Acts 2:15; Job 25:3; Tobit 6:18 ; Wisd. 17:2. It is very improbable that ὑπολαμβάνω here means “ I reply,” as in 10:30; Job 2:4, Job 4:1, Job 9:1, Job 25:1. In N.T. it is almost peculiar to Lk. The Ὀρθῶςἔκρινας may be compared with the πάνυὀρθῶς of Socrates, when he has led the disputant into an admission which is fatal. In N.T. ὀρθῶς occurs only here, 10:28, 20:21; Mark 7:35. Freq. in LXX. Comp. οὐκἐκρίνατεὀρθῶς (Wisd. 6:4). 44. στραφεὶςπρὸςτὴνγυναῖκὰ . She was behind Him. His turning to her while He spoke to Simon was in itself half a rebuke.Up to this He seems to have treated her as He treated the Syrophenician woman, as if paying no attention. The series of contrasts produces a parallelism akin to Hebrew poetry, and in translating a rhythm comes almost spontaneously. Βλέπειςταύτηντὴνγυναῖκα ; This is probably a question: Simon had ignored her presence. The σου being placed before εἰςτὴνοἰκίαν gives point to the rebuke, but it hardly makes the σου emphatic. An enclitic cannot be emphatic, and σου here is enclitic. The meaning is not “ I entered into thine house,” in preference to others; but rather, “ I came to thee in thy house,” and not merely in the public street; “ I was thy invited guest.” ὕδωρμοιἐπὶπόδας . Comp. Genesis 18:4; Judges 19:21; 1 Samuel 25:41; John 13:5 ; 1 Timothy 5:10. The reading is somewhat uncertain, and there are many variations between ftot and μοι , and μου , πόδας and τοὺςπόδας and also of order: μουἐπὶτοὺςπόδας may be right. 45. φίλημα . Comp. 33:4; Exodus 18:7; 2 Samuel 15:5, 2 Samuel 19:39, 2 Samuel 20:9. The traitor’ s choosing it as a sign seems to mark it as usual. ἀφ ʼ ἦςεἰσῆλθον . The reading εἰσῆλθεν (L1 Vulg.) is an attempt to avoid the apparent exaggeration in “ since the time I came in.” But there need be no exaggeration, or difference of meaning, between the two readings. The woman very likely entered with Christ and His disciples in order to escape expulsion. Fear of it would make her begin to execute her errand directly the guests were placed. The compound καταφιλοῦσα makes the contrast with φίλημα more marked, and τοὺςπόδας makes it still more so. The φίλμα would have been on the cheek, or possibly (if Simon had wished to be very respectful) on the hand. 46. ἐλαίῳ . Very cheap in Palestine, where olives abound, and very commonly used (Psalms 23:5, 141:5; Matthew 6:17). The μύρον would be more valuable, and possibly very costly (John 12:3, John 12:5). This woman, whom Simon so despised in his heart, had really done the honours of the house to his guest. This fact would be all the more prominent if she entered close after Jesus, and thus at once supplied Simon’ s lack of courtesy. See Hastings, D. B.1 1. p. 101. 47. This is a verse which has been the subject of much controversy. What is the meaning of the first half of it? We have to choose between two possible interpretations. 1. “ For which reason, I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven, because she loved much” ; i.e. οὖχάριν anticipates ὅτι , and λέγωσοι is parenthetical. Her sins have been forgiven for the reason that her love was great; or her love won forgiveness. This is the interpretation of Roman Catholic commentators (see Schanz), and the doctrine of contritio caritate formata is built upon it. But it is quite at variance (a) with the parable which precedes; (b) with the second half of the verse, which ought in that case to run, “ but he who loveth little, wins little forgiveness” ; (c) with ver. 50, which states that it was faith, not love, which had been the means of salvation; a doctrine which runs through the whole of the N.T. This cannot be correct. 2. “ For which reason I say to thee, her many sins have been forgiven (and I say this to thee), because she loved much” ; i.e. λέγωσοι is not parenthetical, but is the main sentence. This statement, that her many sins have been forgiven, is rightly made to Simon, because he knew of her great sinfulness, he had witnessed her loving reverence, and he had admitted the principle that the forgiveness of much produces much love. This interpretation is quite in harmony with the parable, with the second half of the verse, and with 50. There were two things evident,— the past sin and the present love,— both of them great. A third might be known, because (according to the principle just admitted) it explained how great love could follow great sin,— the forgiveness of the sin. Remissio peccatorum, Simoni non cogitata, probata a fructu, qui est evidens, quum illa sit occulta (Beng). αἱἀμαρτίαιαὐτῆςαἱπολλαί . The second art. refers to 5:39: “ The many sins of which than thinkest.” “ Her sins, yes (according to thy estimate), her many sins.” ᾦδὲὀλίγονἀφίεται . “ But he to whom little is forgiven,” i.e. who thinks that he has committed little which could need forgiveness.It is said with evident reference to Simon. O Pharisæ e, parum diligis, quia parum tibi dimitti suspicaris; non quia parum dimittitur, sed quia parum putas quod dimittitur (Aug. Serm. xcix.). For this use of the dat. comp. Soph. Ant. 904. 48. εἶπενδὲαὐτῇ . What He had to say to Simon (ver. 40) is finished: it is His true entertainer (44-46) who now occupies His attention. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 8:1-3. § The ministering Women. This section is evidence of the excellence of Lk.’ s sources. The information contained in it is exact and minute. The names and other details are utterly unlike fiction. An inventor would avoid such things as likely to be refuted: moreover, no motive for invention can be discerned. The passage tells us— what no other Evangelist makes known— how Jesus and His disciples lived when they were not being entertained by hospitable persons. The common purse (John 13:29; comp. 12:6) was kept supplied by the generosity of pious women. This form of piety was not rare. Women sometimes contributed largely towards the, support of Rabbis, whose rapacity in accepting what could ill be spared was rebuked by Christ 20:47 ; [Matthew 23:14; ] Mark 12:40) with great severity. 1. καὶἐγένετοἐντῷκαθεξῆςκαὶαὐτὸςδιώδευεν . See detached note p. 45, and comp. 5:1, 5:12, 14: for ἐντῷκαθεξῆς see small print on 7:11. The αὐτός anticipates καὶοἱδώδεκα , “ He Himself and me Twelve.” But me καί before αὐτός comes after ἐγένετο and must not be coupled with the καί before οἱδώδεκα In N.T. διοδεύω occurs only here and Acts 17:1, but it is freq. in LXX (Genesis 12:6, Genesis 13:17, etc.); also in Polyb. Plut. etc. Comp. 9:6, 13:22. κατὰπόλινκαὶκώμηνκηρ . Ne quis Judæ us præ teritum se queri posset (Grotius), Jesus preached city by city (Acts 15:21) and village by village. The clause is amphibolous. It probably is meant to go with διώδενε , but may be taken with κηρύσσωνκαὶεὐαγγ . The incidental way in which the severity of Christ’ s labours is mentioned is remarkable. Comp. 9:58, 13:22; Matthew 9:35; Mark 4:31. For εὐαγγελιζόμενος see on 2:10. We are not to understand that the Twelve preached in His presence, if at all. Note the σύν , and see on vv., 38, 51, and 1:56. 2. πνευμάτωνπονηρῶν . See on 4:33. We cannot tell how many of these women had been freed from demons: perhaps only Mary Magdalen, the others having been cured ἀπὸἀσθενειῶν . For the ἀπό comp. 5:15, 7:21. ἡκαλουμένηΜαγδαληνή . See on 6:15. The adj. probably means “ of Magdala,” a town which is not named in N.T.; for the true reading in Matthew 15:39 is “ Magadan” “ Magdata is only the Greek form of Migdol, or watch-tower, one of the many places of the name in Palestine” (Tristram, Bible Places, p. 260); and it is probably represented by the squalid group of hovels which now bear the name of Mejdel, near the centre of the western shore of the lake. Magdala was probably near to Magedan, and being much better known through ἡΜαγδαληνή , at last it drove the latter name out of the common text. See Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 382. Mary being a common name, the addition of something distinctive was convenient; and poissibly a distinction from Mary of Bethany was specially designed by the Evangelists. Mary Magdalen is commonly placed first when she is mentioned with other women (Matthew 27:56, Matthew 27:61, Matthew 27:28:1 ; Mark 15:40, Mark 15:47, Mark 15:16:1; Luke 24:10). John 19:25 is an exception. See on 1:36. ἀφ ʼ ἦςδαιμόνιαἐπτὰἐπτὰἐξεληλύθει . This fact is mentioned in the disputed verses at the end of Mk. (16:9). It indicates a posession of extraordinary malignity ( Mark 5:9). We need not give any mystical interpretation to the number seven: comp. 11:26; Matthew 12:45. There is nothing to show that demoniacs generally, or Mary in particular, had lived specially vicious lives: and the hut that no name is given to the ἀμαρτωλός in the preceding section, while Mary Magdalen is introduced here as an entirely new person, is against the traditional identification of the two. Moreover, such an affliction as virulent demoniacal possession would be almost incompatible with the miserable trade of prostitution. If Lk. had wished to intimate that the ἁμαρτωλός is Mary Magdalen, he could have done it much more clearly. Had he wished to conceal the fact, he would not have placed these two sections in juxtaposition. Had he wished to withhold the name of the ἁμαρτωλός , who may possibly be included among the ἕτεραιπολλαί , he would have done as he has done. The ἁμαρτωλός and Mary Magdalen and Mary of Bethany are three distinct persons. 3. Ἰωάνα . She is mentioned with Mary Magdalen again 24:10: all that we know about her is contained in these two passages. Godet conjectures that Chuza is the βασιλικός , who “ believed and his whole house” (John 4:46-53). In that case her husband would be likely to let her go and minister to Christ The Herod meant is probably Antipas, and his ἐπίτροπος would be the manager of his household and estates: comp. Matthew 20:8. Blunt finds here a coincidence with Matthew 14:2 ; Herod “ said to his servants, This is John the Baptist.” If Herod’ s steward’ s wife was Christ’ s disciple, He would often bespoken of among the servants at the court; and Herod addresses them, because they were familiar with the subject. Comp. the case of Manaen (Acts 13:1), Herod’ s σύτροφος (Undesigned Coincidences, Pt. IV. xi. p. 263, 8th ed.). Of Susanna nothing else is known, nor of the other women, unless Mary, the mother of James and Joses, and Salome (Mark 15:40) may be assumed to be among them. αἵτινεςδιηκόνουναὐτοῖς . “ Who Were of such a character as to minister to them” ; i.e. they were persons of substance. For ἥτις see on 7:37, and for διακονεῖν comp. Romans 15:25. The αὐτοῖς means Jesus and the Twelve, the reading αὐτῷ (A L M X) being probably a correction from Matthew 26:55 ; Mark 15:41. But αὐτοῖς has special point. It was precisely because Jesus now had twelve disciples who always accompanied Him, that there was need of much support from other disciples. ἐκτῶνὑπαρχότωναὐταῖς . It is this which distinguishes this passage from Matthew 27:55 and Mark 15:41. There the διακονεῖν might refer to mere attendance on Him. We learn from this that neither Jesus nor the Twelve wrought miracles for their own support. Here, as in 12:15 and Acts 4:32, τὰὐπάρχοντα has the dat. Everywhere else in Lk. (11:21, 12:33, 44, 14:33, 16:1, 19:8) and elsewhere in N.T. (five times) it has the gen. So also in LXX the gen. is the rule, the dat. the exception, if it is the true reading anywhere. Both τὰὑπάρχοντα and ὑπάρχειν are favourite expressions with Lk. See on ver. 41. 4-18. The Parable of the Sower. Matthew 13:1-23; Mark 4:1-20. We have already had several instances of teaching by means of parables (5:36-39, 6:39, 41-44, 47-49, 7:41, 42); but they we brief and incidental. Parables seem now to become more common in Christ’ s teaching, and also more elaborate. This is intelligible, when we remember the characteristics of parables. They have the double property of revealing and concealing. They open the truth, and impress it upon the minds of those who are ready to receive it: but they do not instruct, though they may impress, the careless (ver. 10). As Bacon says of a parable, “ it tends to vail, and it tends to illustrate a truth.” As the hostility to His teaching increased, Jesus would be likely to make more use of parables, which would benefit disciples without giving opportunity to His enemies. The parable of the Sower is in some ind icate ts chief among the parables, as Christ Himself seems to (Mark 4:13). It is one of the three which all three record, the others being the Mustard Seed and the Wicked Husbandmen: and it A one of which we have Christ’ s own interpretation. 4. Συνιόντοςδὲὄχλουπολλοῦκαὶτῶνκατὰπόλινἐπιπορευομένωνπ . αὐτ . The constr. is uncertain, and we have choice of two ways, according as the καί is regarded as simply co-ordinating, or as epexegetic. 1. “ And when a great multitude was coming together, and they of every city were resorting to Him.” 2. “ And when a great multitude was coming together, namely, of those who city by city were resorting to Him.” According to 2, the multitude consisted wholly of those who were following from different towns (ver. 1). As no town is named, there was perhaps no crowd from the place itself. In any case the imperf. part. should be preserved in translation. It was the growing multitude which used Him to enter into a boat (Matthew 13:2; Mark 4:1). See on 11:29. Except Titus 1:5, κατὰπόλιν is peculiar to Lk. The Latin Versions vary greatly: conveniente autem turba magna et corum qui ex civitatibus adveniebant dixit parabolam (a); conveniente autem turba multa et qui de singulis civitalibus exibant dixit p. (c); congregate autem populo multo et ad civitatem iter faciebant ad eum dixit parabolam talem ad eos (d); cum autem turba plurima conveniret et de civitatibus properarent ad cum dixit per similitudinem (Vulg.); cum autem turba plurima convenisset (συνελθόντος , D) et de civitatibus advenirent multi dixit per similitudinem (Cod. Brix.). εἶπενδιὰπαραβολῆς . The expression occurs nowhere else. Mt. and Mk. write ἐνπαραβολαῖςλέγειν or λαλεῖν , while Lk. has παραβολὴνεἰπεῖν or λέγειν . See on 4:23, 5:36, and 6:39; and on the parable itself see Gould on Mark 4:1ff. 5. ἐξῆλθενὁσπείρων . So in all three accounts: “ The sower went forth.” The force of the article is “ he whose business it is to sow” : he is the representative of a class who habitually have these experiences. Rhem. has “ the sower” in all three places, Cran. in Mt. and Mk., Cov. in Mt. For the pres. part. with the article used as a substantive comp. 3:11, 5:31, 6:29, 30, 32, 9:11, 10:16, etc. There is solemnity in the repetition, ὁσπείρωντοῦσπεῖραιτὸνσπόρον . The comparison of teaching with sowing is frequent in all literature; but it is possible that Jesus here applies what was going on before their eyes. See me vivid description of a startling coincidence with the parable in Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 425. ἐντῷσπείρειναὐτόν . “ During his sowing, while he sowed” : αὐτόν is subj., not obj., and refers to ὁσπείρων , not τὸνσπόρον . See on 3:21. Note the graphic change of prepositions: παρὰτὴνὁδόν (ver. 5), ἐπὶτὴνπέτραν (ver. 6), ἐνμέσῳ ver. 7), εἰςτὴνγῆν (ver. 8). In this verse Lk: has three features which are wanting in Mt. and Mk.: τὸνσπόρον , καὶκατεπατήθη , and τοῦοὐρανοῦ . παρὰτὴνὁδόν . Not “ along the way,” but “ by the side of the way.” It fell on the field, but so close to the road that it was trampled on. Both Lk. and Mk. here have μέν followed by καί : … καὶἔτερον Comp. Mark 9:12. The absence of δέ after μέν is freq. in Acts, Pauline Epp., and Heb. See Bless, Gr. p. 261. 6. ἐπὶτὴνπέραν . The rock had a slight covering of soil; and hence is called τὸπετρῶδες (Mk.) and τὰπετρώδη (Mt.), which does not mean “ stony ground,” i.e. full of stones, but “ rocky ground,” i.e. with rock appearing at intervals and with “ no depth of earth.” The thinness of the soil would cause rapid germination and rapid withering; but Lk omits the rapid growth. With φυέν comp. Proverbs 26:9; Exodus 10:5; and (for the constr.) Luke 2:4. For ἰκμάδα , “ moisture,” Mt. and Mk. have ῥίζαν . The word occurs Jeremiah 17:8; Job 26:14; Jos. Ant. iii. 1, 3; but nowhere else in N.T. 7. ἐνμέσῳτῶνἀκανθῶν . The result of the falling was that it was in the midst of the thorns: prep. of rest after a verb of motion: comp, 7:17. Lk is fond of ἐνμέσῳ (2:46, 10:3, 21, 22:27, 55, 24:36; Acts 1:15, etc.). Elsewhere it is rare, except in Rev. Neither Mt. nor Mk. have it here. συνθυεῖσαι . Here only in N.T. In LXX only Wisd. 13:13. In Plato and Aristotle it is transitive: “ cause to grow together.” We are to understand that the good seed fell into ground where young thorns were growing; otherwise the growing together would hardly be possible. Indeed the ἀνέβησαναἱἄκανθαι of Mt. and Mk. almost implies that the thorns were not yet visible, when the good seed was sown in the midst of them. The ἀπέπνιξαν means “ choked it off, ” so as to exterminate it: comp. the ἀπό in ἀποκτείνω . Wic. has “ strangliden it” but that, though sufficient for suffocaverunt (Vulg.), does not express the ἀπό . The verb occurs only here and ver. 33 in N.T., and in LXX only in Nahum 2:12 and Tobit 3:8. Matthew 13:7 is doubtful. 8. εἰςτὴνγῆντὴνἀγαθήν . Not merely upon, but into the soft. The double article in all three accounts presents the soil and its goodness as two separate ideas: “ the ground (that was intended for it), the good (ground).” Mt. and Mk. have καλήν . This repetition of the article is specially frequent in Jn. Lk. omits the sixty- and thirtyfold. Isaac is said to have reaped a hundredfold (Genesis 26:12). Hdt. (i. 193. 4) states that in the plain of Babylon returns of two hundred- and even three hundredfold, were obtained. Strabo (xiv. p. 1054) says much the same, but is perhaps only following Hdt. See Wetst. on Matthew 13:8 for abundant evidence of very large returns. ὁἔχωνὦταἀκούεινἀκουέτω . This formula occurs in all three. Comp. 14:35; Matthew 11:15, Matthew 13:43. In Rev. we have the sing., ὁἔχωνοὖςἀκουσάτω (2:7, 11, 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22). The introductory ἐφώνει , “ He cried aloud,” indicates a raising of the voice, and gives a solemnity to this concluding charge. The imperf.perhaps means that the charge was repeated. Comp. Ezekiel 3:27; Hom. Il. xv. 129. 9. τίςαὔτηεἴηἡπαραβολή “ What this parable might be in meaning.” See small print on 1:29. Mt. says that the disciples asked why He spoke to the multitude in parables. Christ answers both questions. For ἐπηρώτων see on 3:10. 10. τοῖςδὲλοιποῖς . “ Those who are outside the circle of Christ’ s disciples” ; ἐκείνοιςτοῖςἔξω as Mk. has it. This implies hat it is disciples generally, and not the Twelve only, who are being addressed. Mt. is here the fullest of the three, giving the passage from Isaiah 6:9, Isaiah 6:10 in full. Lk. is very brief. ἵναβλέποντεςμὴβλέπωσιν . At first sight it might seem as if the ἵνα of Lk. and Mk. was very different from the ὅτι of Mt. But the principle that he who path shall receive more, while he who bath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have, explains both me ἵνα and the ὅτι . Jesus speaks in parables, because the multitude see without seeing and hear without hearing. But lie also speaks in parables in order that they may we without Seeing and hear without hearing. They “ have not” a mind to welcome instruction, and therefore they are taught in a way which deprives them of instruction, although it is full of meaning to those who desire to understand and do understand. But what the unsympathetic “ hear without understanding” they remember, be cause of its impressive form; and whenever their minds become fitted for it, its meaning will become manifest to them. WH. write συνίωσιν , from the unused συνίω , while other editors prefer συνιῶσιν , from συνίημι or the unused συνιέω . Similarly WH. have συνίουσιν (Matthew 13:13), where omen give συνιοῦσιν . ii. App. p. 167. Here some authorities have συνῶσιν , as in LXX. 11. Having answered the question διατίἐνπαραβολαῖςλέγεις ; Jesus now answers τίςἐστιναὔτηἡπαραβολή ; To the disciples “ who have” the one thing needful “ more is given.” The similarity between the seed and the word lies specially in the vital power which it secretly contains. Comp. “ Behold I sow My law in you, and it shall bring fruit in you, and ye shall be glorified in it for ever. But our fathers, which received the law, kept it not, and observed not the statutes: and the fruit of the law did not perish, neither could it, for it was Thine; yet they that received it perished, because they kept not the thing that was sown in them (2 Esdr. 9:31-33). ὁλόγοςτοῦΘεοῦ . Mt. never (? 15:6) has this phrase; it occurs only once in Mk. (7:13) and once in Jn. (10:35). Lk. has it four times in the Gospel (5:1, 8:11, 21, 11:28) and twelve times in the Acts. Here Mk. has τὸνλόγον (4:15) and Mt. has nothing (13:18). So in ver. 21, where Lk. has τὸνλ . τοῦΘ ., Mk. has τὸθέληματοῦΘ . (3:35) and Mt. τὸθέληματοῦπατρός (12:50). Does it mean “ the word which comes from God” or “ the word which tell of God” ? Probably the former. Comp. the O. T. formula “ The word of the Lord came to.” The gen. is subjective. Lft. Epp. of S. Paul, p. 15. 12. οἱδὲπαρὰτὴνὁδόν . There is no need to understand σπαρέντες , as is clear from Mark 4:15. “ Those by the wayside” is just as intelligible as “ Those who received seed by the wayside.” εἶταἔρχεταιὁδιάβολος . Much more vivid than “ And the birds are the devil.” This is Christ’ s own interpretation of the birds, and it is strong evidence for the existence of a personal devil. Why did not Jesus explain the birds as meaning impersonal temptations? He seems pointedly to insist upon a personal adversary. See on 10:18. Mt. has ὁπονηρός Mk. ὁσατανᾶς The concluding words are peculiar to Lk.: “ in order that they may no by believing be saved.” Perhaps a sign of Pauline influence. 13. The constr. is ambiguous. In vv. 12, 14, 15 εἰσίν is expressed: and it is usually understood here: “ And those on the rock are they which, when they have heard, receive the word with joy; and these have no root.” But it is not necessary to insert the εἰσίν . We may continue the protasis to τονλόγον and make καί mean also: “ And those on the rock, which, when they have heard, receive the word with joy,— these also (as well as those by the wayside) have no root” Thus οὖτοιἔχουσιν exactly corresponds to οὖτοίεἰσιν in vv. 14, 15. But the usual arrangement is better. The οἵπρὸςκαιρὸνπιστεύουσιν is a further explanation of οὖτοι . Neither Mt. nor Mk. has δέχονται , of which Lk. is fond (2:28, 9:5, 48, 53, 10:8, 10, 16:4, 6, 7, 9, etc.). It implies the internal acceptance; whereas λαμβάνειν implies no more than the external reception. ἐνκαιρῷπειρασμοῦἀφίστανται . Mt. and Mk. have θλίψεωςἤδιωγμοῦ , which shows that the temptation of persecution and external suffering is specially meant: comp. James 1:2. In all times of moral and spiritual revival persons who are won easily at first, but apostatize under pressure, are likely to form a large portion : comp. Hebrews 3:12. The verb does not occur in Mt. Mk. or Jn. The repetition of καιρός is impressive. As opportunity commonly lasts only for a short time, καιρός may mean “ a short time.” 14. τὸδὲεἰςτὰςἀκάθαςπεσόν . It is not probable that this is an acc. abs.: “ Now as regards that which fell among me thorns.” The attraction of οὖτοι to οἰἀκούσαντες is quite intelligible. ὑπὸμεριμνῶνκαὶπλούτουκαὶἡδονῶβίου . It is usual to take this after συμπνίγονται ; and this is probably correct: yet Weiss would follow Luther and others and join it with πορευόμενοι , “ going on their way under the influence of cares,” etc. But ver. 7 is against this : the cares, etc., are the thorns, and it is the thorns choke. This does not reduce πορευόμενοι to a gehaltloser Zusatz. The choking is not a sudden process, like the trampling and devouring; nor a rapid process, like the withering: it takes time. It is as they go on their way through life, and before they have reached the goal, that the choking of the good growth takes place. Therefore they never do reach the goal. The transfer of what is true of the growing seed to those in whose heart it is sown is not difficult; and συμπνιγονται is clearly passive, not middle and transitive. The thorns choke the seed (ver. 7); these hearers are choked by the cares, etc. (ver. 14). Here only in N.T. does τελεσφορεῖν occur. It is used of animals as well as of plants (4 Mac. 13:20; Psalms 64:10, Sym.). 15. τὸδὲἐντῇκαλῇγῇκ .τ .λ . It fell into the good ground (ver. 8), and it is in the right ground. Perhaps οἵτινες has its full meaning: “ who are of such a character as to,” etc. The two epithets used of the ground, ἀγαθή in ver. 8 and καλή in ver. 15, are combined for καρδίᾳ : “ in a right and good heart.” We must take ἐνκαρδίᾳ with κατέχουσι rather than with ἀκούσαντες . Even if ἀκούειν be interpreted to mean “ hearing gladly, welcoming,” it is not the same as κατέχειν , which means “ hold fast” (1 Corinthians 11:2). It is reasonable to suppose that ἀκούειν means the same in all four cases (12, 13, 14, 15). But κατέχουσιν (Lk.), παραδέχονται (Mark 4:20), and συνιών (Matthew 13:23) may all be equivalents of the same Aramaic verb, meaning “ to take in” : see footnote on 5:21. Comp. 1 Corinthians 15:2 ; 1 Thessalonians 5:21. ἐνὑπομονῇ . “ With endurance, perseverance,” rather than “ patience,” which would be μακροθυμία : in patientia (Vulg.), in tolerantia (c), in sufferentia (d), per patientiam (b f ff2). See Lft. on Colossians 1:11 ; Trench, Syn. liii. This ὑπομονή is the opposite of ἀφίστανται (ver. 13), and is not in Mt. or Mk. Thus Lk. gives the opposite of all three of the bad classes: κατέχουσιν , non ut in via ;καρποφοροῦσιν , non Ut in spinis; ἐνὑπομονῇ non in petroso (Beng.). Neither here nor in ver. 8 does Lk. give the degrees of fruitfulness. Mt. and Mk. do so both in the parable and in the interpretation. The suggestion that Lk. has mistaken three numerals for a word which he translates ἐνὑπομονῇ seems to be a little too ingenious (Expositor, Nov. 1891, p. 381). That Jesus knew that all four of the classes noticed in the parable were to be found in the audience before Him, is probable enough; but we have no means of knowing it. We may safely identify the Eleven and the ministering women with the fourth class. Judas is an instance of the third. But all are warned that the mere receiving of the word is not decisive. Everything depends upon how it is received and how it is retained. Grotius quotes from the Magna Moralia: ᾦτὰἀγαθὰπάνταὄνταἀγαθάἐστιν , καὶὑπὸτούτωνμὴδιαφθείρεται , οἶονὑπὸπλούτουκαὶἀρχῆς , ὁτοιοῦτοςκαλὸςκαὶἅγαθός . 16-18. Practical Inference. The connexion with what precedes need not be doubted. By answering the question of the, disciples (ver. 9) and explaining the parable to them, Jesus had kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see that it spreads to others. Here we have the opposite of what was noticed in the Sermon on the Mount. Here Lk. has, gathered into one, sayings which Mt. has, scattered in three different places (5:15, 10:26, 13:12: comp. 13:12, 25:29). Mk. and Lk. are here very similar and consecutive. Comp. 11:33-36. 16. λύχνονἄψαςκαλύπτειαὐτὸνσκεύει . “ Having lighted a lamp,” rather than “ a candle.” Trench, Syn. xlvi.; Becker, Charicles, iii. 86, Eng. tr. p. 130; Gallus, ii. 398, Eng. tr. p.308. For ἄψας see on 15:8: it occurs again 11:33, but not in the parallels Matthew 5:15; Mark 4:21. Instead of σκεύει Mt. and Mk. have the more definite ὑπὸτὸνμόδιον , which Lk. has 11:33. As λύχνος is a “ lamp,” λυχνία is a “ lamp-stand,” on which several λύχνοι might be placed or hung: for, whereas the λαμπτήρ was fixed, the λύχνος was portable. Other forms of λυχνία are λυχνίον and λυχνεῖον (Kennedy, Sources of .N.T. Grk. p. 40) Comp. the very similar passage 11:33. In both passages of οἱεἰσπορευόμενοι , the Gentiles, are mentioned instead of οἱἐντῇοἰκίᾳ , the Jews (Matthew 5:15). 17. The poetic rhythm and parallelism should be noticed. Somewhat similar sayings are found in profane writers: ἄγειδὲπρὸςφῶςτὴνἀλήθειανχρόνος (Menander); comp. Soph. Ajax, 646, and Wetst. on Matthew 10:26. For φανερὸνγενήσεται see on 4:36; Mt has ἀποκαλυφθήσεται , Mk. φανερωθῇ . For ἀπόκρυφον , “ hidden away” from the public eye, see Lft. on Colossians 2:3. It was a favourite word with the Gnostics to indicate their esoteric books, which might not be published. Comp. the very similar passage 12:2; and see S. Cox in the Expositor, 2nd series, i. pp. 186, 372, and Schanz, ad loc. 18. βλέπετεοὖνπῶςἀκούετε . Because the doctrine received must be handed on and made known to all, therefore it is all-important that it should be rightly heard, viz. with intelligence and “ good heart” (ver. 15). Whoever gives welcome to the word and appropriates it, becomes worthy and capable of receiving more. But by not appropriating truth when we recognize it, we lose our hold of it, and have less power of recognizing it in the future. There is little doubt that ὅδοκεῖἔγειν means “ that which he thinketh he hath.” Wic. has “ weneth” ; Tyn. and Cran. “ supposeth” ; Cov. and Rhem. “ thinketh.” “ Seemeth” comes from Beza’ s videtur. It is self-deception that is meant. Those who received the seed by the wayside were i this condition; they failed to appropriate it, and lost it. Comp. 19:26. Mk. here inserts (4:24) the ᾦμέτρῳμετρεῖτε , κ .τ .λ ., which Lk. has already given in the sermon (6:38): and both Mt. and Mk. here add other parables, two of which Lk. gives later (13:18-21). 19-21. The Visit of His Mother and His Brethren. Christ’ s true Relations. Mt. (12:46-50) and Mk. (3:31-35) place this incident before the parable of the Sower; but none of the three state which preceded in order of time. Comp. 11:27, 28, and see on 11:29. On the “ Brethren of the Lord” see Lange, Leben Jesu, ii. 2, § 13, Eng. tr. i. p. 329; Lft. Galatians, pp. 253-291, in his Dissertations on the Apostolic Age, pp. 3-45, Macmillan, 1892; J.B. Mayor, Epistle of S. James, pp. v-xxxvi, Macmillan, 1892.1 D. B.2 artt. “ Brother” ; “ James” ; “ Judas, the Lord’ s Brother.” 19. Παρεγένετοδὲπρὸςαὐτὸνἡμήτηρκαὶοἱἀδελφοὶαὐτοῦ . For the verb, which is a favourite with Lk., see on 7:4. Here Mk. has ἔρχονται and Mt. ἰδού . In writing the sing. Lk. is thinking only of ἡμήτηρ . Such constructions are common, and do not imply that the first in the series of nominatives was emphatic or specially prominent, except in the writer’ s thoughts. Comp. John 18:15, John 18:20:3; Acts 26:30; Philemon 1:23. The precise relationship to be understood from the expression οἱἀδελφοὶαὐτοῦ will probably never he determined or cease to be discussed. There is nothing in Scripture to warn us from what is the antecedently natural view that they are the children of Joseph and Mary, unless “ I know not a man” (1:34) is interpreted as implying a vow of perpetual virginity. The “ firstborn” in 2:7 and the imperfect followed by “ till” in Matthew 1:25, seem to imply that Joseph and Mary had children; which is confirmed by contemporary belief (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:55) and by the constant attendance of the ἀδελφοί on the Mother of the Lord (Matthew 12:46; Mark 3:32; John 2:12). The Epiphanian theory, which gives Joseph children older than Jesus by a former wife, deprives Him of His rights as the heir of Joseph and of the house of David. It seems to be of apocryphal origin (Gospel according to Peter, or Book of James); and, like Jerome’ s theory of cousinship, to have been invented in the interests of asceticism and of à priori convictions, respecting the perpetual virginity of Mary. Tertullian, in dealing with this passage, seems to assume as a matter of course that the ἀδελφοί are the children of Mary, and that she and they were, here censured by Christ (Marcion. iv. 19; De Carne Christi, vii.). He knows nothing of the doctrine of a sinless Virgin. Renan conjectures that James, Joses, Simon, and Judas were the cousins of Jesus, but that the brethren who refused to believe in Him were His real brethren (V. de J. p. 23). This solution remains entirely his own, for it creates more difficulties than it solves. See Expositor’ s Bible, James and Jude, ch. iii., Hodder, 1891. συντυχεῖν . Elsewhere in bibl. Grk. 2 Mac. 8:14 only. 20. ἀπηγγέλη . A favourite word (vv. 34, 36, 47, 7:18, 22, 9:36, 13:1, etc.). Here [Mt.] has εἶπενδέτις and Mk. has λέγουσιν . The λεγόντων is certainly spurious; om. א B D L D X Latt. Goth. etc. 21. μήτηρμουκαὶἀδελφοίμου . Note the absence of the article in all three accounts. This is the predicate, and οὖτοι , κ .τ .λ ., is the subject. And the meaning is not are “ My actual mother or brethren,” which would be ἡμήτηρμουκαὶοἱἀδελφοίμου , but “ Mother to Me and brethren to Me,” i.e. equal to such, equally dear, Mt. and Mk. have the singular here: οὖτος or αὐτόςμουἀδελφὸςκαὶἀδελφὴκαὶμήτηρἐστίν . We cannot infer from καὶἀδελφή that His sisters were present: they had settled at Nazareth (Matthew 13:56; Mark 6:3). The texts of Mar 3:32, which represent the multitude as telling Jesus that His sisters are with His Mother and brethren, are probably the result of this inference. A D and some Latin authorities insert “ and Thy sisters” ; א B C G K L and most Versions omit the words. Christ’ s reply is not a denial of the claims of family ties, nor does it necessarily imply any censure on His Mother and brethren. It asserts that there are far stronger and higher claims. Family ties at the best are temporal; spiritual ties are eternal. Moreover, the closest blood-relationship to the Messiah constitutes no claim to admission into the Kingdom of God. No one becomes a child of God in virtue of human parentage (John 1:13). Jesus does not say πατήρμου , not merely because Joseph was not present, but because in the spiritual sense that relationship to Christ is filled by God alone. See on ver. 11. 22-25. The Stilling of the Tempest on the Lake of Gennesaret. This is the first of a pair of miracles which appear in the same order in all three Gospels (Matthew 8:23 ff.: ; Mark 4:35 ff.), the second being the healing of the demoniacs in the country of the Gadarenes. To these two Mk. and Lk. add the healing of the woman with the issue and the raising of the daughter of Jairus, which Mt. places somewhat later. The full series gives us a group of representative miracles exhibiting Christ’ s power over the forces of nature and the powers of hell, over disease and over death. 22. Ἐγένετοδὲἐνμιᾷτῶνἡμερῶνκαὶαὐτός . All these expressions are characteristic, and exhibit Aramaic influence. See note at the end of ch. i., and comp. 5:1, 12, 17, 6:12. There is nothing like them in Mark 4:35 or Matthew 8:23, and ἐνμιᾷτῶνἡμερῶν is peculiar to Lk. (5:17, 20:1). Comp. ἐνμιᾷτῶνπόλεων (5:12) and ἐνμιᾷτῶνσυναγωγῶν (13:10). Mt. tells us that it was the sight of the multitudes around Him that moved Jesus to order a departure to the other side of the lake; and Mk. says that the disciples “ leaving the multitude, take Him with them, even as He was in the boat.” This seems to imply that He was utterly tired, overcome by the demands which the multitude made upon Him. For διέλθωμεν see on 2:15. The nautical expression ἀνάγεσθαι is freq. in Lk. and peculiar to him (Acts 13:13, Acts 13:16:11, Acts 13:18:21, Acts 13:20:3, Acts 13:13, Acts 13:21:2, Acts 13:27:2, Acts 13:4, Acts 13:12, Acts 13:21, Acts 13:28:10, Acts 13:11). Syr-Sin. omits καὶἀνήθησαν . 23. πλεόντωνδὲαὐτῶνἀφύπνωσεν . Excepting Revelation 18:17, πλεῖν is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 21:3, Acts 21:27:2, Acts 21:6, Acts 21:24). In Anth. Pal. 9. 517, ἀφυπνόω means “ awaken from sleep.” Here it means “ fall off to sleep,” a use which seems to be somewhat late (Heliod. ix. 12). In class. Grk. we should rather have καθυπνόω (Lob. Phryn. p. 224). This is the only passage in which we read of Jesus sleeping. κατέβηλαῖλαψἀνέμου . “ There came down a violent squall of wind,” from the heights which surround the lake. These are furrowed with ravines like funnels, down which winds rush with great velocity. See Thomson, Land &Book, p. 375; Keim, iv. p. 179, who quotes Rusegger, Reisen, iii. p. 136. For λαῖλαψ comp. Job 21:18, 38:1; Wisd. 5:14, 23; Ecclus. 48:9; Hom. Il. xii. 375, xvii. 57. Mt. gives the effect of it as σεισμὸςμέγαςἐντῇθαλάσσῃ . For the accent comp. καλαῦροψ , κλῖμαξ , κ .τ .λ ., and see Chandler, § 668. συνεπληροῦντο . The verb occurs only here, 9:51, and Acts 2:1. Note the imperf. in contrast to κατέβη . The squall came down with a single rush; the filling of the boat continued and was not completed. What was true of the boat is stated of the own In class. Grk. the act. is used of manning ships thoroughly (Thuc. vi. 50, 2). 24. Ἐπιστάτα , ἑπιστάτα . See on 5:5. The doubling of the name is here peculiar to Lk. Comp. 10:41, 22:31; Acts 9:4, Acts 22:7, Acts 24:14. Mt. has Κύριε , Mk. Διδάσκαλε . Auguskins has some good remarks as to the differences between the exclamations attributed to the disciples in the three narratives. “ There is no need to inquire which of these exclamations was really uttered. For whether they uttered some one of these three, or other words which no one of the Evangelists has recorded, yet conveying the same sense, what does it matter?” (De Cons. Evang. ii. 24, 25). ἐπετίμησεντῷἀνέμῳκαὶτῷκλύδωνι . This does not prove that Lk. regarded the storm as a personal agent: both the wind and its effect are “ rebuked,” a word which represents the disciples’ view of the action. See on 4:39. A κλύδων is larger than a κῦμα (James 1:6 ; Jonah 1:4, Jonah 1:12 ; Wisd. 14:5; 1 Mac. 6:11; 4 Mac. 7:5, 15:31). γαλήνη . Mt. and Mk. add μεγάλη : the word is common elsewhere, but in N.T. occurs only in this narrative. The sudden calm in the sea showed the reality of the miracle. Wind may cease suddenly, but the water which it has agitated continues to work for a long time afterwards. In Mk., as here, the stilling of the tempest precedes the rebuke: Mt. transposes the order of the two incidents. In both the rebuke is sharper than in Lk., who “ ever spares the Twelve” (Schanz). See on 6:13 and 22:45. 25. Ποῦἡπίστιςὑμῶν ; They might have been sure that the Messiah would not perish, and that their prayer for help would be answered. It is not their praying for succour that is blamed, but their want of faith in the result of their prayer: they feared that their prayer would be vain. Comp. His parents’ anguish, and see on 2:48. τίςἄραοὖτόςἐστιν ; Mt. has ποταπός . There is nothing incredible in the question. Their ideas of the Christ and His powers were very imperfect; and this was probably the first time that they had seen Him controlling the forces of nature. Their experience as fishermen told them how impossible it was in the natural course that such a storm should be followed immediately by a great calm. The fear which accompanies this question or exclamation is not that which the storm produced, but that which was caused by a sudden recognition of the presence of supernatural power of a kind that was new to them. Comp. 5:26, 7:16. For the ἄρα comp. 22:23; Acts 12:18. One conjectures that the framer of a legend would have made the disciples accept the miracle as a matter of course: comp. 5:8, 9. Keim opposes Strauss for rejecting me whole as a myth, although he himself by no means accepts the whole as historical. “ Unquestionably there rests upon this brief and pregnant narrative a rare ma sets, such as does not reappear in the other nature-miracles. With a few mastey strokes there is here sketched a most sublime picture from the life of Jesus, and a picture full of truth. … Even His rising up against weather and sea is told by Mt. and Lk. quite simply, without any ostentation; and the tentative query of the disciples, after their deliverance was accomplished, Who is this? is the slightest possible, the only too modest and yet the true utterance of the impression which they must at that time have received” (Jes. of Naz. iv. p. 180). See Gould on Mark 4:41. 26-39. The Healing of the Demoniac in the Country of the Gerasenes. Gerasenes seems to be the true reading both here and Mark 5:1, while Gadarenes is best attested Matthew 8:28; but in all three places the authorities vary between Gerasenes, Gadarenes, and Gergesenes. The evidence here is thus summmarized— Γαδαρηνῶν , A R G D L R etc., Syrr. (Cur-Pesh-Sin-Harcl txt) Goth. Γερασηνῶν , B C* (ver. 37, hiat ver. 26) D, Latt. Syr-Harcl. mg. Γεργεσηνῶν , א L C X, minusc. sex, Syr-Hier. Boh. Arm. Aeth. See WH. ii. App. p. 2. If Luke 8:26 stood alone, one might adopt Γεργεσηνῶν as possibly correct there; but the evidence in ver. 37 is conclusive against it. These Gerasenes are probably not the people of the Gerasa which lay on the extreme eastern frontier of Peræ a, over thirty miles from the lake: even in a loose description to foreigners Lk. would no be likely to speak of the shore of the lake as in the country of these Gerasenes. Rather we may understand the town which Thomson rediscovered (Land &Book, ii. 34-38) under the name of Gersa or Kersa on the steep eastern bank. Gergesa is merely a conjecture of Origen, adopted upon topographical grounds and not upon textual evidence. It may be rejected in all three narratives. There is no real difficulty of topography, whichever reading be adopted. The expression τὴνχώραντῶνΓ . gives considerable latitude, and may include a great deal more than the immediate vicinity of the town. Nor is there any difficulty in the fact that Mt. knows of two demoniacs, whereas Lk. and Mk. mention only one. The real difficulties in the miracle, for those who believe in the fact of demoniacal possession, are connected with the swine. 1. Can beings which are purely spiritual enter and influence beings which are purely animal? 2. How can we justify the destruction of the swine, which time innocent creatures, and which belonged to persons who do not seem to have merited such a heavy loss? On the first of these two questions our ignorance is so great that we do not even know whether there is a difficulty. Who can explain how mind acts upon matter, or matter upon mind? Yet the fact is as certain, as that mind acts upon mind or that matter acts upon matter. There is nothing in experience to forbid us from believing that evil spirits could act upon brute beasts; and science admits that it has “ no à priori objection to offer” to such an hypothesis. And if there is no scientific objection to demoniacal possession of brutes, à fortiori there is none to that of men, seeing that men have both bodies and spirits to be influenced. The influence may have been analogous to that of mesmerism or hypnotism. The real difficulty is the moral one. As Huxley puts it, “ the wanton destruction of other people’ s property is a misdemeanour of evil example.” The answers are very various. 1. The whole story is a myth. 2. The healing of the demoniacs and the repulse of the Healer by the inhabitants are historical, but the incident of the swine is a later figment. 3. The demoniacs frightened the swine, and the transfer of demons from them to the swine was imagined. 4. The drowning of the swine was an accident, possibly simultaneous with the healing, and report mixed up the two incidents. 5. The demoniacs were mere maniacs, whom Jesus cured by humouring their fancies; and His giving leave to imaginary demons to enter into the swine, produced the story of the disaster to the herd.— All these explanations assume that the Gospel narratives are wholly or in part unhistorical. But there are other explanations.— 6. Like earthquakes, shipwrecks, pestilences, and the like, the destruction of the swine is part of the mystery of evil, and insoluble. 7. As the Creator of the universe, the incarnate Word had the right to do what He pleased with His own. 8. A visible effect of the departure of the demons was necessary to convince the demoniacs and their neighbours of the completeness of the cure. Brutes and private property may be sacrificed, where the sanity and lives of persons are concerned. 9. The keepers of the swine were Jews, who were breaking the Jewish law, which was binding on them, and perhaps on the whole district. “ In the enforcement of a law which bound the conscience, our Lord had an authority such as does not belong to the private individual” (W. E. Gladstone, Nineteenth Century, Feb. 1891, p. 357). Against this it is contended that the swineherds were probably pagans, and that the district was not under Jewish law (N. C. Dec. 1890, p. 967; March 1891 p. 455). Certainty is not attainable, but it is probable that one of the last two reasons is the true explanation. See Expositor, 3rd series, 1889, 9:303. Godet’ s conclusion seems to be sound, that it is one of those cases in which the power to execute the sentence guarantees the right of the Jdg_1 Contrast the healing of a demoniac woman as recorded in the Gospel of the Infancy, 14. 26. κατέπλευσανεἰςτὴνχώραντῶνΓεπασηνῶνἥτιςἐστὶνἀντίπερα . “ They landed at the country of the Gerasenes, which is in such a position as to be opposite Galilee.” The verb is quite class. of coming to land from the high seas, but is found here only in N. T. of in LXX. See Smith, Voyage and Shipwreck of S. Paul, p. 28, and reff. in Wetst. The statement tells us nothing as to the position of the country of the Gerasenes, for “ opposite” would A to the whole of the east shore. Lk. alone mentions its being “ opposite Galilee” ; perhaps to justify its inclusion in the Galitean ministry. D.C.G. artt. “ Gadara,” “ Greasiness.” Some texts have πέραν from Mt. or Mk., while others have ἀντιπέραν , of which ἀντιπέρα is a later form. Another form is ἀντιπέρας . For the accent see Chandler, § 867. 27. ὑπήντησενἀνήρτιςἐκτῆςπόλεως . The man belong to the city, but he came out of the tombs to meet Jesus: ἐκτῆςπόλεως belongs to ἀνήρτις not to ὑπήντησεν . For this force of ὑπό in composition comp. ὑποκρίνομαι , “ answer back” ; ὑπολογίζομαι “ reckon per contra” ; ὑποστρέφω “ turn back.” For ἱκανῷ see on 7:12; and for ἐνεδύσατο see Burton., § 48. Lk. alone mentions that the demoniac wore no clothes; but Mk. implies it by stating that he was clothed after he was cured. All three mention the tombs; and near the ruins of Khersa there are many tombs hewn in the rocks. Excepting Mark 5:3, Mark 5:5 and Revelation 11:9, μνῆμα is peculiar to Lk. (23:53, 24:1; Acts 2:29, Acts 7:16); but he more often uses μνημεῖον . With ἔμενεν comp. 19:5, 24:29. 28. Τίἐμοὶκαὶσοί ; See on 4:34. ἸησοῦυἱὲτοῦΘεοῦτοῦὑψίστου . This expression rather indicates that the man is not a Jew, and therefore is some evidence that the owners of the swine were not Jews. “ The Most High” (Elyon) is a name for Jehovah which seems to be usual among heathen nations It is employed by Melchisedek, the Canaanite priest and king (Genesis 14:20, Genesis 14:22). Balaam uses it (Numbers 24:16). Micah puts it into the mouth of Balaam (6:6); Isaiah, into the mouth of the king of Babylon (14:14). It is used repeatedly in the Babylonian proclamations in Daniel (3:26, 4:24, 32, 5:18, 21, 7:18, 22, 25, 27). The girl with a spirit of divination at Philippi employs it (Acts 16:17). It is found in Phoenician inscriptions also. See Chadwick, St. Mark, p. 144, and Wsctt. on Hebrews 7:1. For φωνῇμεγάλῃ see on 1:42, and for δέομαι see on 5:12: with ἀνακράξας of demoniac cries comp. 4:41; Acts 8:7. μήμεβασάίσῃς . Neither the verb nor its cognate substantive is ever used in N.T. of testing metals, or of obtaining evidence by torture, but simply of pain or torment. The demoniac identifies himself with the demon which controls him, and the torment which is feared is manifest from ver. 31. 29. παρήγγελλενγὰρτῷπνεύματι . Authorities are very evenly divided between the imperf. and the aor. If παρήγγειλεν be right, it almost means “ He had ordered.” Burton., § 29, 48. We should have expected τοῖςπνεύμασιν , for both in ver. 27 and ver. 30 we have δαιμόνια . But the interchange of personality between the man and the demons is so rapid, that it becomes natural to speak of the demons in the sing. Note that while Lk. has his characteristic ἐξελθῖνἀπό (vv. 33, 38, 4:35, 41, 5:8, etc.), Mk. has the more usual ἐξελθεῖνἐκ . πολλοῖςγὰρχρόνοιςσυνηρπάκειαὐτόν . “ Many times,” i.e. on many occasions, multis temporibus (Vulg.), “ it had seized him,” or “ carried him away” : comb. Acts 27:15. Mk. has πόλλακις . Others explain “ within a long time.” See Win. 31:9, p. 273. The verb is quite class., but in N.T. peculiar to Lk. (Acts 6:12, Acts 19:29, Acts 26:15). Hobart counts it as medical (p. 244). In LXX, Proverbs 6:25; Pro_2 Mac. 3:27, 4:41, ἀύσεσινκαὶπέδαις . Both Lk. and Mk. use these two words to distinguish the “ handcuffs and fetters,” manicæ et pedicæ , with which he was bound. See Lft. Phil. p. 8. The former is used of the chain by which the hand of a prisoner was fastened to the soldier who had charge of him. Like “ chains,” ἁλύσεις are of metal, whereas πέδαι might be ropes or withes. Both ἀλύσεις and πέδαι are included in τὰδεσμά . The imperfects tell of what usually took place. During the calmer intervals precautions were taken to prevent the demons “ carrying him away with” them; but these precautions always proved futile. εἰςτὰςἐρήμους . In order to take the man away from humane influences. But the wilderness is regarded as the home of evil spirits. See on 11:24; and for the plural see on 1:80. 30. Τίσοιὄνομάἐστιν ; In order to recall the man to a sense of his own independent personality, Jesus asks him his name. It was a primary condition of his cure that he should realize that he is not identical with the evil powers which control his actions. Perhaps also Christ wished the disciples to know the magnitude of the evil, that the cure might increase their faith (ver. 25): and this purpose may have influenced Him in allowing the destruction of the swine. The peculiar word Λεγιών 1, which is preserved in Mark 5:9 also, is a mark of authenticity. As Sanday points out, it is more probable that this strange introduction of a Latin word should represent something which really took place, than that it should be pure invention (Contemp. Rev. Sept. 1892, p. 349). The words ὄτιεἰσῆλθενδαιμόνιαπολλὰεἰςαὐτόν are the remark of the Evangelist: comp. 2:50, 3:15, 23:12. 31. παρεκάλουναὐτόναὐτόν . “ They kept beseeching Him.” The plurality of those who ask is emphatically marked: with δαιμόνια we might have expected παρεκάλει , as in Mk. The plur. would have been less noticeable in Mk., because the masc. plur., πολλοίἐσμεν , precedes. That παρεκάλουν (א B C D F L S, Latt. Goth.) and not παρεκάλει is right here, need not be doubted. εἰςτὴνἄβυσσον . In class. Grk. ἄβυσσος is always an adj, “ bottomless, boundless,” and is mostly poetical. In LXX ἡἄβυσσος is used of the sea (Genesis 1:2, Genesis 1:7:11; Job 41:22, Job 41:23); without the art. (Job 28:14, 36:16; Ecclus. 13, 16:18); of the depths of the earth (Psalms 71:20; Deuteronomy 8:7); but perhaps nowhere of Hades. In N.T. it means Hades (Romans 10:7), and esp. the penal part of it which is the abode of demons (Revelation 9:1-11, Revelation 9:11:7, Revelation 9:17:8, Revelation 9:20:1, Revelation 9:3). The latter is the meaning here. The demons dread being sent to their place of punishment. See Crem. Lex. sub v. In Mk. the petition is “ that He will not send them out of the country” ; but the verb is sing. and the man is the petitioner. He still confuses himself with the demons, and desires to stay where he feels at home. This is their wish and his also. The persistent confusion of personality renders it necessary that the man should have some decisive evidence of the departure of the evil spirits from him. In this way his cure will be effected with least suffering, Prof. Marshall thinks that εἰςτὴνἄβυσσον and ἔξωτῆςχώρας may represent Aramaic expressions so nearly alike as readily to be confounded by copyist or translator (Expositor, Nov. 1891 p. 377). See footnote on 5:31 32. ἀγέληχοίρωνἱκανῶν . This illustrates the fondness of Lk. for ἱκανός in this sense: Mt. has ἀγ · χοίρωνπολλῶν and Mk. ἀγχοίρωνμεγάλη . With characteristic love of detail Mk. gives the number as ὡςδισχίλιοι , which may be an exaggeration of the swineherds or of the owners, who wished to make the most of their loss. Had the number been an invention of the narrator, we should have had 4000 or 5000 to correspond with the legion. It is futile to ask whether each animal was possessed. If some of them were set in motion, the rest would follow mechanically. For the ἐπέτρεψεναὐτοῖς of Lk. and Mk. we have the direct ὑπάγετε in Mt., which need mean no more than “ depart, be gone.” But the distinction between commanding and allowing what He might have forbidden is not very helpful. Whatever the motive of the demons may have been, Jesus uses it for a good end, and secures the easy and effectual cure of their victim. 33. ὥρμησενἡἀγέληκατὰτοῦκρημνοῦ . These words also are in all three. The word κρημνός need not mean an abrupt precipice: a steep and rocky slope suffices. MacGregor, Stanley, Tristram, Wilson, and others believe that the spot which suits the description can be identified. The art. implies that it was well known. Comp. 2 Chronicles 25:12. The use of ἀπεπνίγη for suffocation by drowning is classical (Dem. p. 883). 34. τὸγεγονός . Chiefly the destruction of the swine. In ver. 36 οἱἰδόντες means the disciples and others near to Jesus, not the swineherds. 35-39. Note how the characteristics of Lk.’ s diction stand out in these verses. For τὸνἀνθρωπονἀφ ʼ οὗτ .δ . ἐξῆλθεν (see on ver. 29) Mk. has τὸνδαιμονιζόμενον , and παρὰτοὺς (see on 7:38) has no equivalent in Mk. For ἀπἡγγειλαν (see on ver. 20) Mk. has διηγήσαντο while ἄπον (see on 3:21), τὸπλῆθος (see on 1:10), φόβῳ (see on 1:42, 7:16), οὗἐξεληλύθει (see on 4:38), and ὑπέστρεψεν (see on 1:56) have no equivalents. For ἐδεῖτο (see on 5:12) Mk. has παρεκάλει ; for ὁἀνὴρἀφ ʼ οὖἐξεληλύθει (see on ver. 29) Mk. has the less accurate ὁδαιμονισθείς for σύν (see on 1:56) Mk. has μετά ; and for ὑποστρεφε (see on 1:56) Mk. has ὕπαγε . 35. ἱματισμένον . Some of the bystanders may have given him clothing; but there would have been time to fetch it. The verb is found neither in LXX nor in profane writers, but only here and Mark 5:15. The παρὰτοὺςπόδας implies an attitude of thankfulness rather than that he has become a disciple. It is the last of the four changes that have taken place in the man. He is καθήμενον instead of restless, ἱματισμένον instead of naked, σωφρονοῦντα instead of raging, and παρὰτοὺςπόδαςτοῦἸ . instead of shunning human society. Baur would have it that he is meant to represent the conversion of the Gentiles. We are not sure that he was a Gentile; and this would have been made clear if he was intended as a representative. For παρά with the acc. after a verb of not comp. Acts 10:6; Matthew 13:1, Matthew 13:20:30; Mark 5:21, Mark 10:46. 36. ἀπήγγειλανδὲαὐτοῖς . This is not a repetition of ver. 34, but a statement of additional information which was given to the townspeople after they arrived on the scene. 37. ἅπαντὸπλῆθος . The desire that He should depart was universal, and all three narratives mention it. The people feared that His miraculous power might lead to further losses: and this feeling was not confined to the inhabitants of the πόλις close at hand (ver. 34); it was shared by the whole district. Comp. 4:29, 9:53, and contrast 4:42; John 4:40. Although Keirn rejects the incident of the swine, yet he rightly contends that this request that Jesus should leave the place gives the impression of a sober historical fact. There is nothing like it elsewhere in the history of Jesus; and neither it nor the locality is likely to have been invented. Why should a myth take Jesus across to Gerasa? Some historical connexion with the locality is much more probable. Here, as in vv. 30, 36, Syr-Sin. abbreviates. 38. ἐδεῖτοδὲαὐτοῦὁἀνήρ . The δέ marks the contrast between Him and the rest. Mk. says that the request was made as Jesus was stepping into the boat. Mt. omits the whole incident. The man fears the unfriendly populace, and clings to his preserver. 39. διηγοῦὅσασοιἐποίησενὁΘεός . In Galilee and Judæ a, where Jesus and His disciples preached, He commonly told those who were healed to be silent about their cures. In this half-heathen Peræ a there were no other missionaries, and the man was not fitted for permanent work with Christ elsewhere. Moreover, here there was no danger of the miracle being used for political purposes. Lastly, it might be beneficial to a healed demoniac to have free converse with all after his gloomy isolation. The ὁΘεός is last with emphasis. Jesus shows the man that he must attribute his deliverance to God. Both Lk. and Mk. preserve the highly natural touch that, in spite of this command, the man proclaimed what Jesus had done for him. Note also that καθ ʼ ὅληντὴνπόλιν is much in excess of ειςτὸνοἶκόνσου and κηρύσσων of διηγοῦ . See on 9:10. καθ ʼ ὅληντὴνπόλιν . With κηρύσσων , not with ἀπῆλθεν : Win. 69. d.a, p. 499. Mk. has ἐντῇΔεκαπόλει . Nowhere else in N.T. does καθὀλην occur: Lk. commonly writes καθ ʼ ὅλης (4:14, 23:5 ; Acts 9:31, Acts 9:42, Acts 9:10:37). He nowhere mentions Decapolis. 40-56. The Healing of the Woman with the Issue and the Raising of the Daughter of Jairus. Matthew 9:18-26; Mark 5:21-43. The name of Bernice (Veronica) for this woman first appears in the Acts of Pilate, Gospel of Nicodemus, Pt. 1Ch_7. Respecting the statues, which Eusebius saw at Cæ sarea, and which he believed to represent Christ and this woman, see H. E. vii. 18, 1-3. Sozomen says that Julian removed the statue of Christ and substituted one of himself, which was broken by a thunderbolt (5:21). Philostorgius says the same (7:3). Malalas gives the petition in which the woman asked Herod Antipas to be allowed to erect the memorial (Chrongr. x. 306-8). That the statues existed, and that Christians thus misinterpreted their meaning, need not doubted Pseudo-Ambrosius would have it that the woman was Martha the sister of Lazarus. 40-48, In these verses also the marks of Lk.’ s style are very conspicuous (see, above on vv. 35-39). In ver. 40). we have ἐνδὲτῷ c.infin. (see on 3:21) ὑποστρέθειν (see on 1:56) ἀπεδέξατο (see on ver. 40), ἦσαν . c. particip. (see on 1:10), πάντες (see on 9:43), and προσδοκῶντες (see on 3:15). In ver. 41, καὶἰδού (see on 1:20), καὶοὐτος (1:36) ὑτῆρχεν (see on ver. 41), παρὰτοὺςπὸδας (see on 7:38). In ver. 42, καὶαὐτή (see on 1:17) and ἐνδὲτῳ c. infin. In ver. 44, παραχρῆμα (see on 5:25). In ver. 45, πάντων (6:30, 7:35) and ἐπιστάτα (5). In ver. 46, ἐξελθεῖνἀπό (see on 4:35). In ver. 47, ἀπήγγειλεν (see on ver. 20), ἐνώπιον (see on 1:15), παντός , τοῦλαοῦ , ἰάθη and παραχρῆμα . Not one of these expressions is found in the parallel passages in Mt. and Mk. See on 9:28-36. 40. ἀπεδέξατο . Peculiar to Lk. (9:11; Acts 2:41, Acts 2:18:27, Acts 2:17, Acts 2:24:3, Acts 2:28:30, and possibly 15:4). The meaning is they “ received Him with pleasure, welcomed Him” (Euthym. Theophyl. Schanz). See on 4:42 and on 11:29. In class. Grk. the verb means “ accept as a teacher, as an authority,” or “ admit arguments as valid” : so in Xen. Plat. Arist. etc. 41. Ἰάειρος . The same name as Jair (Numbers 32:41; Judges 10:3). It is strange that the name should be used as an argument against the historical character of the narrative. It is not very appropriate to the circumstances. ὑπῆρχεν . Very freq. in Lk., esp. in Acts: not in Mt. Mk. or Jn. The use of this verb as almost equivalent to εἶναι is the beginning of the modern usage. But the classical meaning of a present state connected with a previous state still continues in N. T. (9:48, 11:13, 16:14, 23, 23:50). See Sp. Comm. on 1 Corinthians 7:26. Here also Christ does not refuse the homage (4:8), as Peter (Acts 10:26) and the Anget (Revelation 19:10) do. 42. μονογενής . As in the cases of the widow’ s son and the lunatic boy (7:12, 9:38), this fact may have influenced Christ. On all three occasions Lk. alone mentions the fact. ἐτῶνδώδεκα . A critical time in a girl’ s life. Not only Lk., who frequently notes such things (2:36, 37, 42, 3:23, 13:11), but Mk. also gives the age. All three mention that the woman with the issue had been suffering for twelve years. For ἀπέθνησκεν Mk. has ἐσχάτωςἔχει and Mt. ἄρτιἐτελεύτησεν . The reason for the difference between Mt. and the others is plain. Lk. and Mk. give the arrivals, both of the father, who says, “ She is dying,” and of the messenger, who says, “ She is dead.” Mt. condenses the two into one. συνέπνιγον . Mk. has συνέθλιβον , which is less strong: see on ver. 14. In both cases the συν · expresses the pressing together all round Him. The crowd which had been waiting for Him (ver. 40) now clings to Him in the hope of witnessing a miracle. 43. οὖσαἐνῥύσει . “ Being in a condition of hemorrhage.” The constr. is quite simple and intelligible; comp. ἐνφθορᾷἐνἐκστάσει , ἐνδόξηἐνἐκτενείᾳ , ἐνἕχθρᾳ . The form ῥύσις is from the unused π̔ύω , from which come the late forms ἐρρυσα and ἐρρυκα , and π̔εῦσις is often a v l. Win. 29:3. b, p. 230. λατροῖςπροσαναλώσασαὅλοντὸνβίον . “ Having, in addition to all her sufferings, spent all her resources on physicians,” or “ for for pbysiclans,” or “ in physicians.” This use of βίος for “ means of living” is freq. in N.T. (15:12, 30, 21:4; Mark 12:44; 1 John 3:17) and in class. Grk. In class. Grk. βίος is a higher word than ζωή , the former being that which is fecaber to man, the latter that which he shares with brutes and vegetables. In N.T. βίος retains its meaning, being either the “ period of human life,” as 1 Timothy 2:2; 2 Timothy 2:4, or “ means of life,” as here. But ζωή is raised above βίος , and means that vital principle which through Christ man shares with God. Hence βίος is comparatively rare in N.T., which is not much concerned with the duration of temporal life or the means of prolonging it; whereas ζωή occurs more than a hundred times. See Trench, Syn. xxvii.; Crem. Lex. p. 272 ; Lft. on Ign. ad Rom. vii. 3. WH. follow B D, Arm. in omitting ἰατροῖς … βίον . Treg. at RV., indicate doubt in marg. Syr-Sin. omits. οὐκἴσχυσεν . This use of ἰσχύω for “ be able” is freq. in Lk. See on 6:48. It is natural that “ the physician” does not add, as Mk. does, that she had suffered much at the hands of the physicians, and was worse rather than better for their treatment. The remedies which they tried in such cases were sometimes very severe, and sometimes loathsome and absurd. See Lightfoot, p. 614; Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands, pp. 22, 23. 44. προσελθοῦσαὄπισθενἥψατο . She came from behind that He might not see her. Her malady made her levitically unclean, and she did not wish to own this publicly. Her faith is tinged with superstition. She believes that Christ’ s garments heal magically, independently of His will. In other cases those who touched Him in faith seem to have done so openly. Comp. 6:19; Matthew 14:36; Mark 3:10, Mark 6:56. For ὅπισθεν a has de retro: comp, Baruch 6:5, visa itaque turba de retro (Vulg.). Hence the French derriere. τοῦκρασπέδουτοῦἱματίου . “ The tassel” rather than “ the fringe” or “ hem of His garment.” The square overgarment or Tallith had tassels of three white threads with one of hyacinth at each of the four corners. Edersh. L. &T. 1. p. 624 . Of the four corners two hung in front, and two behind. It was easy to touch the latter without the wearer feeling the touch. D.C.G. art. “ Border.” This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 9:1-50. To the Departure for Jerusalem This is the last of the four sections into which the Ministry in Galilee (4:14-9:50) was divided. It contains the Mission of the Twelve (1-9), the Feeding of the Five Thousand (10-17), the ransfiguration (28-36), the Healing of the Demoniac Boy (37-43), and two Predictions of the Passion (18-27, 43-50). 1-9. The Mission of the Twelve and the Fears of Herod. Matthew 10:1-15; Mark 6:7-11. Mt. is the most full. Lk. gives no note of time or of connexion, and we may suppose that his sources gave him no information. See Weiss, L. J. ii. p. 119, Eng. tr. 2. p. 306. For mention of “ the Twelve” see 6:13, 8:1, 9:12, 18:31, 22:3, 47. All three mention this summons or invitation on the part of Jesus. Mt. and Mk. describe it by their usual προσκαλεῖσθαι , for which Lk. has συνκαλεῖσθαι , which he more commonly uses in his Gospel (9:1, 15:6, 9, 23:13), while in the Acts he generally uses προσκαλεῖσθαι (2:39, 5:40, 6:2, 13:2, etc.). 1. δύναμινκαὶἐξουσίαν . Mt. and Mk. have ἐξουσίαν only (see on 4:36): δύναμις is the power, ἐξουσία the authority to use it. The Jewish exorcists had neither δύναμις nor ἐξουσία , and made elaborate and painful efforts, which commonly failed. Elsewhere, when the two are combined, ἐξουσία precedes δύναμις (4:36; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Ephesians 1:21; 1 Peter 3:22). The πάντα with δαιμόνια is peculiar to Lk. It covers all that would come under the head of possession. The constr. is not really doubtful: νόσουςθεραπεύειν depends on δύναμινκαὶἐξουσίαν , and is co-ordinate with ἐπὶπάνταδαιμόνια . Others make ν . θερ . depend on ἔδωκεν and be co-ordinate with δύν . κ . ἐξ . The least satisfactory way is to couple νόσους with δαιμόνια , and make θεραπεύειν refer to both” : “ authority over all diseases and demons, to heal them.” For this meaning Lk. would almost certainly have written τοῦθεραπεύειν . He as usual mentions the curing of demoniacs separately from other healings (4:40, 41, 6:17, 18, 7:21, 8:2, 13:32). 2. After ἰᾶσθαι . C etc. ins. τοὺςἀσθενοῦντας from Mt.; A D L Z ins. τοὺςἀσθενεῖς : om. B, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. 2. κηρύσσειντὴνβασιλείαντοῦΘεοῦκαὶἰᾶσθαι . These two verbs sum up the ministration to men’ s souls and bodies. See on 5:17. Mt. adds that they were to raise the dead (10:8). Mk. tells us that they were sent out δύο , δύο . For ἀποστέλλω see on 4:18, p. 121. 3. μήτεῥάβδον . Mk. has εἰμὴῥάβδονμόνον (6:8); and the attempts to explain away this discrepancy in a small matter of detail are not very happy. As between Mt. and Mk. it is possible to explain that both mean “ Do not procure a staff for the journey, but take the one which you have.” But both Mk. and Lk. use αἴρειν , and the one has “ Take nothing except a staff,” while the other has “ Take nothing, neither a staff,” etc. Yet in all three the meaning is substantially the same: “ Make no special preparations; go as you are.” From 22:35 we learn that the directions were obeyed, and with good results. Lk. says nothing about sandals, respecting which there is another discrepancy between Mt. and Mk., unless we are to suppose that ὑποδήματα are different from σανδάλια . D. C. G. art. “ Staff.” μήτεἀργύριον . Mk. has χαλκόν and Mt. has both, μηδὲἄργυρονμηδὲχαλκόν . Thus Lk. is Greek, and Mk. is Roman, in choice of words. In LXX ἀργύριον is very common, ἄργυρος comparatively rare, while χαλκός is common as a metal, but not in the sense of money. μήτεδύοχιτῶναςἔχειν . As no πήρα was allowed, the second tunic, if taken, would have to be worn. Hence the form in Mk., “ Put not on two tunics.” Comp. Jos. Ant. xvii. 5. 7. In ἔχειν we have an anacoluthon; change from direct to oblique oration. For it is scarcely admissible to take ἔχειν as infin. for imperat. The actmal imperat. both precedes and follows . Win. 43:5. d, p. 397. Mk. here is strangely abrupt in his mixture of constructions. 4. ἐκεῖμένετεκαὶἐκεῖθενἐξέρχεσθε . Vulg. has et inde ne exeatis. But only, one cursive has μή (38). Cod. Brix. has donec exeatis fr. Mt. The meaning is “ Go not from house to house,” as He charges the Seventy in 10:7, a passage which should be compared with this. The mission both of the Twelve and of the Seventy was to be simple and quiet, working from fixed centres in each place. This is the germ of what we find in the apostolic age,— “ the church that is in their house” (Romans 16:5; 1 Corinthians 16:19; Colossians 4:15; Philemon 1:2). 5. For δέχωνται see on 8:13, and for ἐξερχόμενοιἀπό see on 4:35. In Acts 13:51 we find Paul and Barnabas performing this symbolical action of shaking off the dust. It signified that henceforth they had not the smallest thing in common with the place. It is said that Pharisees performed this action when re-entering Judæ a from heathen lands. There and in Acts 18:6 Lk. uses ἐκτινάσς ., which Mt. and Mk. have here. For ἀποτινασς . comp. Acts 28:5. The ἐπ ʼ αὐτούς means lit. “ upon them,” and so against them.” Comp. 2 Corinthians 1:23 and Acts 13:51, and contrast 2 Thessalonians 1:10. Mk. here has αὐτοῖς . 6. εὐαγγελιζόμενοικαὶθεραπεύοντες . Comp, ver. 2. Union of care for men’ s bodies with care for their souls is characteristic of Christ and of Christian missions. The miraculous cures of the apostolic age have given place to the propagation of medical and sanitary knowledge, which is pursued most earnestly under Christian influences. For διήρχοντο see on 2:15, and for εὐαγγελιζόμενοι see on 2:10. Excepting Mark 1:28, Mark 1:16:20, 1 Corinthians 4:17 πανταχοῦ occurs only here and three or four times in Acts: here it goes with both participles. 7-9. The Fears of Herod. Mt. places this section much later (14:1-13); but Mk. (6:14-16) agrees with Lk. in connecting it with the mission of the Twelve. It was their going in all directions up and down the villages that caused the fame of Christ’ s work to reach Herod φανερὸνγὰρἐγένετετὸὄνομααὐτοῦ (Mark 6:14), or, at anyrate, excite his fears. 7. Ἡρῴδηςὁτετράρχης . So also Mt. But Mk. gives him his courtesy title of βασιλεύς . See on 3:1, p. 83. The τὰγινόμεναπάντα means “ all that was being done” by Jesus and His disciples. There is no πάντα in Mt. or Mk., either here or in the parallels to ver. 1. See on 8:45. The thoroughly classical word διηπόρει does not occur in LXX, nor in N.T. excepting in Lk. (Acts 2:12, Acts 5:24, Acts 10:17). Antipas was “ utterly at a loss” as to what he was to think of Jesus. Note the change of tense: he heard once for all; he remained utterly at a loss. He had no doubt heard of Christ before. It was the startling theories about Him which perplexed Herod. D. C. G. i. p. 721; ii. p. 717. Ἰωάνηςἠγέρθηἐκνεκρῶν . This is strong evidence of the effect of John’ s teaching. During his life he “ did no sign,” and yet they think it possible that so great a Prophet has risen from the dead and is working miracles. Comp. Matthew 16:14; Mark 8:28. For ἐκνεκρῶν comp. 20:35. For ἠγέρθη (א B C L Ξ 169) most MSS. have ἐγήγερται , which is not to be accepted because ἠγέρθη is found in Mt. 8. Ἠλείαςἐφάνη . The verb is changed from ἡγέρθη , because Elijah had not died. Mt. represents Antipas as saying that Jesus is the risen Baptist, and omits the suggestions about Elijah and other Prophets. The account of Lk, is intrinsically more exact. He would obtain good information at Cæ sarea from Herod’ s steward (8:3), and at Antioch from Herod’ s foster-brother (Acts 13:1). προφήτηςτιςτῶνἀρχαίων . We know from John 7:40, John 7:41 that some Jews distinguished the great Prophet of Deu 18:15 from the Messiah. Comp. John 1:21. And Matthew 16:14 seems to show that there was an expectation that Jeremiah or other Prophets would return at some future crisis. The τῶνἀρχαίων is peculiar to Lk. (comp. ver. 19). It may be opposed either to it new Prophet (7:16), or to the later Prophets as compared with Moses and Samuel. The former is more probable. 9. Ἰωάνηνἐγὼἀπεκεφάλισα . “ As for John, I beheaded him.” Mt. and Mark represent Herod as saying of Christ, “ This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead” : and some interpret this remark as meaning much the same: “ Seeing that I put him to death, he may have risen again.” But this is very unnatural. Rather, “ I thought that I had got rid of this kind of trouble when I beheaded John; and here I am having it all over again.” Perhaps, as Bede suggests, Antipas afterwards came to the conclusion that the Baptist had risen from the dead, a view which to his guilty conscience was specially unwelcome. Lk. mentions the imprisonment of the Baptist by anticipation (3:20); but, excepting in this remark of Antipas, he does not record his death. τοιαῦτα . This may refer either to the works of Christ or to the speculations of the multitude respecting Him. Although John had wrought no miracles during his ministry (John 10:41), yet, if he had risen from the dead, such things might be expected of him (Matthew 14:2). The ἐγώ of TR. before ἀκούω is of very doubtful authority (A D C Γ etc.): Treg. brackets, Tisch. WH. RV. omit. It would have no point. ἐζήτειἰδεῖναὐτόν . Not merely “ he desired” (AV.), but “ he continued seeking to see Him.” He made various attempts to apply a test which would have settled the question. Herod knew the Baptist; and he could soon determine whether this was John or not, if only he could see Him. Comp. 23:8, where the gratification of this desire is recorded. No doubt it was not merely the wish to settle the question of identity which led Antipas to try to see Jesus. That he was a Sadducee is a guess of Scholten. 10-17. The Feeding of the Five Thousand. This is the one miracle which is recorded by all four Evangelists (Matthew 14:13; Mark 6:30; John 6:1). In all four it is the climax of the ministry. Henceforward attention is directed more and more to the death which will bring Christ’ s work to a close. From S. John we learn that it took place shortly before the Passover. All four accounts should be compared. Each contributes some special features, and each appears to be to a large extent independent. The marks of Lk.’ s style are abundant in his narrative. 10. ὑποστρέφαντες . See small print on 1:56. Lk. connects the miracle with the return of the Twelve; but he gives no hint as to the time of their absence. We may perhaps allow a few weeks. He does not often call the Twelve οἱἀπόστολοι (6:13, 17:5, 22:14, 24:10). διηγήσαντοαὐτῷὅσαἐποίησαν . What this was has already been recorded in brief (ver. 6). It is strange that anyone should infer from Lk.’ s not expressly mentioning, as Mk. does (6:12, 13), the casting out of demons, “ that Lk. wishes us to believe that they had failed in this respect,” and “ had evidently been able to out only a part of their commission.” Lk. records the success of the Seventy in exorcizing demons (10:17): why should he wish to insinuate that the Twelve had failed? Excepting Mark 5:16, Mark 5:9:9; Hebrews 11:32, διηγεῖσθαι occurs only in Lk. (8:39; Acts 8:33, Acts 9:27, Acts 12:17). Comp. ver. 49. Lk. perhaps wishes us to understand that it was the report which the Apostles brought of their doings that led to Christ’ s taking them apart, as Mk. says, for rest. Mt states that it was the news of the Baptist’ s death which led to the withdrawal. Jn. has only a vague μετὰταῦτα . All may be correct; but there can have been no borrowing. παραλαβὼναὐτούς . Comp. ver. 28, 18:31. ὑπεχώρησενκατ ʼ ἰδίαν . The verb occurs only here and 5:16 In NT. Comp. Ecclus. 13:9 (12). Lk. does not seem to be aware that Christ and His disciples went by boat across the lake (Mt. Mk. Jn.), while the multitude went round by land. Hence it is possible that he supposed that the miracle took place near Bethsaida on the west shore, and not at Bethsaida Julias on the near the north-east end of the lake. See D. B.2 art “ Bethsaida.” Mt. Mk. and Lk. all have κατ ʼ ἰδίαν . The common reading, εἰςτόπονἔρημονπόλεωςκαλουμένηςΒηθσαιδά (A D A G H K M S U V etc., Aeth. Arm. Goth.), seems to be an ingenious conflation of the original text, εἰςπόλινκαλουμένηνΒηθσαιδά (B L X Ξ 33, Boh. Sah.),— which is supported by D [only κώμην for πόλιν ],— with a correction of it, εἰςτόπονἔρημον (א *), or εἰςτόπονἔρημονΒηθσαιδά (b c ff2 l g Vulg. Syr.), or εἰςτόπονἔρημονκαλούμενονΒηθσαιδα (a e f). These corrections would be suggested by ver. 12 and Mt. and Mk. and the difficulty of associating the miracle with a πόλις . See WH. ii. Intr. p. 102, and also Wordsw. Vulg. in loco. For ther apparent instances of conflation see 11:54, 12:18, 24:53. Note Lk.’ s favourite καλουμένην . 11. οἱδὲὄχλοιγνότεςἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ . The Baptist was dead and the Twelve had returned to Jesus, so that there was no longer any counter-attraction. No Evangelist tells us how long Jesus and the disciples enjoyed their privacy before the multitudes arrived. ἀποδεξάμενοςαὐτούς . “ He gave them a welcome,” as they had Him (see on 8:40), although their arrival destroyed the retirement which He had sought. As Jn. states, it was His miracles of healing which attracted them rather than His teaching. For ἀποδεξάμενος (א B D L X Ξ 1 33 69) A C etc. have δεξάμενος : the compound is peculiar to Lk. It corresponds to ἐσπλαγχνίσθη in Mt. and Mk. ἐλάλειαὐτοῖςπερὶτῆςβας . τ . Θ ., κ .τ .λ .. “ He continued speaking to them about the kingdom of God; and those who had need of cure He healed.” See on 5:17 and 9:6. Neither Mt. nor Jn. say anything about His teaching the multitudes, or about His healing any of them. 12. ἡδὲἡμέραἤρξατοκλίειν . Comp. Jeremiah 6:4 ; Judges 19:11, Judges 19:9:3; 1 Samuel 4:2. In N.T. Lk. alone uses κλίνειν intransitively (24:29). Comp. ἐκκλίνετεἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν (Romans 16:17). In Att. Grk. κλίνειν is generally trans., ἀποκλίνειν intrans. Win. 38:1, p. 315. προσελθόντεςδὲοἱδώδεκα . In the three it is the Twelve who take the initiative; in Jn. it is the Lord who does so. εἰςτὰςκύκλῳκώμαςκαὶἀγρούς . Being similar in meaning, the nouns have only one article, although they differ in gender: comp. 1:6 and 14:23, and contrast 10:21 and 14:26. See on 1:6. ἐπισιτισμόν . Here only in N. T., but quite class. It is specially used of provisions for a journey: Genesis 42:25, 45:21; Joshua 9:5, Joshua 9:11; Judith 2:18, 4:5; Xen. Anab. i. 5, 9, vii. 1, 9. 13. Both εἶπενδέ and πρός are in Lk.’ s style, and neither occurs in the parallels. The same is true of πάντα , and in ver. 14 of πρός and the second ὡσεί . Note the emphatic ὑμεῖς . “ Ye are to find food for them, not they.” There is no need to supply anything after εἰμήτιἡμεῖςἀγοράσωμεν . “ We have no more five loaves,” leads quite naturally to “ unless we are to go and buy,” etc.; and then the sentence is complete. The statement expresses perplexity (Weiss), not sarcasm (Schanz). Οὐκεἰσὶνἡμῖνπλεῖονἢπέντε . The πλεῖονἢπέντε is virtually plur. and has plur. verb. For the subjunct, after εἰμή comp. 1 Corinthians 14:5, and see Win. xli. 2. b, p. 368, and Burton., § 252, 253. The subjunct. after εἰ is not rare in late Grk. But this is rather a delib. subjunct. Jn. tells us that it was Andrew who pointed out the lad with the loaves, and that they were of barley-bread. On the whole, narrative is the most precise. The ἡμεῖς , like the preceding ὑμεῖς , is emphatic. 14. ὡσεὶἄνδρεςπεντακισχίλιοι . They were roughly counted as about a hundred companies with about fifty men in each. Note the ἄνδρες : not ἄνθρωποι . The women and children, as Mt. tells us, were not included in the reckoning. They would be much less numerous than the men. Lk. says nothing about the grass, which all the others mention, and which made the companies in their Oriental costumes look like flower-beds , as Mk. indicates. Κατακλίνατεαὐτοὺςκλισίας . The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (7:36, 14:8, 24:30); in LXX Numbers 24:9; Exodus 21:18; Judges 5:27; Judith 12:15. The κλισίας is cogn. acc. It occurs 3 Mac. 6:31 and here only in bibl. Grk. Comp. Jos. Ant. xii. 2, 11; Plut. Sertor. xxvi. ὡσεὶἀνὰπεντήκοντα . In the spaces between the groups the Apostles would be able to move freely and distribute the food. That the arrangement (50, 5000) has any relation to the five loaves is not likely. The ἀνά is distributive: comp. 10:1 ; Matthew 20:9; John 2:6; Revelation 4:8. 16. Here Mt. Mk. and Lk. are almost verbatim the same. All three mention the taking the loaves and fishes, the looking up to heaven, the blessing, and the breaking, and the giving to the disciples. For εὐλόγησεν Jn. has εὐχαριστήσας . This blessing or thanksgiving is the usual grace before meat said by the host or the head of the house. The Talmud says that “ he who enjoys aught without thanksgiving is as though he robbed God.” We are probably to understand that this blessing is the means of the miracle. Comp. John 6:23; and of feeding the four thousand (Matthew 15:36; Mark 8:6); and of the eucharist (Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:17, Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24). The manner of the miracle cannot be discerned: it is a literal fulfilment of Mat 6:33. Lk. alone mentions that Jesus blessed the loaves, εὐλόγησεναὐτούς . The preceding articles, τοὺςπέντεἄρτουςκαὶτοὺςδύοἰχθύας , mean those which had been mentioned before in ver. 13, where the words have no article. ἐδίδουτοῖςμαθηταῖς . “ Continued giving them to the disciples.” The imperf. in the midst of aorists is graphic. Comp. 24:30; Mark 8:6, and contrast 22:19; Mark 14:22. 17. The verbal resemblance between the three accounts continues. For ἐχορτάσθησαν see on 6:21, and take κλασμάτων after τὸπερισσεῦσαν (De W. Hahn). All four mention the twelve κόφινοι , as also does Mt. in referring to this miracle (16:9); whereas at the feeding of the four thousand (Matthew 15:37; Mark 8:8), and in referring to it (Matthew 16:10), the word used for basket is σπυρίς . It is the more remarkable that Lk. and Jn. both have κόφινοι because they do not mention the other miracle. The σπυρίς was large, capable of holding a man (Acts 9:25). The κόφινος was the wallet carried by every travelling Jew, to avoid buying food from Gentiles: Judæ is quorum cophinus fæ numque supellex (Juv. Sat. iii. 14). Comp. nupsisti, Gellia, cistifero, “ thou hast married a Jew” (Mart. Epig. v. 17, 4). These exact details would scarcely have been maintained so consistently in a deliberate fiction or in a myth. Still less would either fiction or myth have represented one who could multiply food at will as giving directions that the fragments should not be wasted (John 6:12). The possessor of an inexhaustible purse is never represented as being watchful against extravagance. Note the climax in ver. 17. They not only ate, but were satisfied,— all of them; and not only so, but there was something over,— far more than the original supply. Weiss well remarks that “ the criticism which is afraid of miracles finds itself in no small difficulty in the presence of this narrative. It is guaranteed by all our sources which rest upon eye-witness; and these show the independence of their tradition by their deviations, which do not affect the kernel of the matter, and cannot be explained by any tendencies whatever. In the presence of this fact the possibility of myth or invention is utterly inadmissible. … Only this remains absolutely incontrovertible, that it is the intention of all our reports to narrate a miracle; and by this we must abide, if the origin of the tradition is not to abide an entirely inexplicable riddle” (L. J. 2. pp. 196-200, Eng. tr. 2. pp. 381-385). The explanation that Christ’ s generosity in giving away the food of His party induced others who had food to give it away, and that thus there was enough for all, is plainly not what the Evangelists mean, and it does not explain their statements. Would such generosity suggest that He was the Messiah, or induce them to try to make Him king? Still more inadequate is the suggestion of Renan: Grace à une extrê me frugalité , la troupe sainte y vé cut; on crut naturellement voir en cela un miracle (V. de. J. p. 198, ed. 1863). 18-22. The Confession of Peter and First Announcement of the Passion. Matthew 16:13-21; Mark 8:27-31. No connexion with the miracle just related is either stated or implied. Lk. omits the sequel of the miracle, the peremptory dismissal of the disciples and gradual dismissal of the people, the storm, the walking on the sea, the discourse on the Bread of Life, the Syrophenician woman, the Ephphatha miracle, the feeding of the four thousand, the forgetting to take bread, and the healing of a blind man at Bethsaida Julias (Matthew 14:22-12; Mark 6:45-26; John 6:14-71). Can he then have seen either Mt. or Mk.? So also here: both the others mention that the incident took place near Cæ sarea Philippi, on the confines of heathenism. Lk. mentions no place. It is a desperate expedient to suppose with Reuss, that the copy of Mk. which Lk. knew chanced to omit these sections. From ver. 18 to ver. 50 Lk. is once more parallel in the main to be other two. 18. καὶἐγένετοἐντῷεἶναιαὐτὸνπροσευχόμενον . See note at end of ch. 1. and on 3:21. For the periphrastic infinitive comp. 11:1, and Burton., § 97. Jesus Patrem rogarat, ut discipulis se revelaret. Nam argumentum precum Jesu colligi potest ex seramous actionibusque insecutis; 6:12, 13 (Beng.). κατὰμόνας . Perhaps χώρας was originally understood. But the expression is used as a simple adv. and is sometimes written as one word, καταμόνας . In N.T. only here and Mark 4:10. In LXX Ps. 4:9, 32:15; Jeremiah 15:17; Lamentations 3:28. συνῆσαναὐτῷοἱμαθηταί . This almost amounts to a contradiction of what precedes. “ When He was alone praying, His disciples were with Him.” “ Alone” no doubt means “ in private,” or “ in a solitary spot,” and may be taken with σύῆσαν : so that the contradiction is only on the surface. Moreover we are perhaps to understand that His prayer was solitary: His disciples did not join in it. In either case κατὰμόνας is quite intelligible, although the disciples may have been close to Him. But it is possible that the true reading is συνήντησσν , meaning, “ His disciples met Him, fell in with Him,” as He was engaged in prayer. This is the reading of B*, which a later scribe has corrected to συνῆσαν . And B* is here supported by the Old Latin f (occurrerunt) and one excellent cursive (157), besides two less important authorities. Nevertheless, it is on the whole more probable that συνήντησαν is an early attempt to get rid of the apparent contradiction involved in κατὰμόναςσυνησσαν . See Expositor, 3rd series, iv. p. 159. Elsewhere in N.T. συνεῖναι occurs only Acts 22:11. 20. Ψ̔μεῖςδέ . With great emphasis: “ But ye— who do ye say that I am?” The impulsiveness of Peter, and his position as spokesman for the Twelve, are here conspicuous. He is στόματοῦχοροῦ : 8:45, 12:41, 18:28. Licet cæ teri apostoli sciant, Petrus tamen respondit præ cæ teris (Bede). τὸνχριστὸντοῦΘεοῦ . “ Whom God bath anointed” and sent: sent on 2:26. Here Mk. has simply ὁΧριστός , and Mt. ὁΧριστὸςὁυἱὸςτοῦΘεοῦτοῦζῶντος . See Kelm on this confession, as “ a solemn event of the very highest character” (Jes. of Nas. iv. p. 263). Lk. and Mk. omit the praise bestowed on Peter for this confession, and the much discussed promise made to him (Matthew 16:17-19). 21. μηδενὶλέγειντοῦτο . Because of the grossly erroneous views about the Messiah which prevailed among the people. Shortly before this they had wished to take Him by force and make Him king (John 6:15). Hence Jesus never proclaimed Himself openly to the multitude as the Messiah; and here, when He does to the Twelve, He explains the nature of His Kingdom, and strictly forbids them to make His Messiahship known. The nearest approach to exceptions to this practice are the Samaritan woman (John 4:26), and the outcast from the synagogue (John 9:37). Others explain the command to keep silence as prompted by the fear lest the guilt of those who were about to put Jesus to death should be increased by the disciples proclaiming Him as the Messiah. Others again suggest the fear lest the people, if they knew that He was the Messiah, should attempt to rescue Him from the death which it was necessary that He should undergo. Neither of these appears to be satisfactory. In any case the δέ is adversative. What Peter said was quite true: “ but He charged them, and commanded.” 22. Lk. does not tell us, as Mk. does, and still more plainly Mt., that this was the beginning of Christ’ s predictions respecting His Passion: ἤρξατοδιδάσκειναὐτοὺςὅτιΔεῖ , κ .τ .λ . (Mark 8:31); ἀπὸτότεἤρξατοδεικνύειν , κ .τ .λ . (Matthew 16:21). The first announcement of such things must have seemed overwhelming. Peter’ s protest perhaps expressed the feeling of most of them. εἰπὼνὅτιΔεῖ . The ὅτι is recitative, not argumentative. The Δεῖ is here in all three; but elsewhere Lk. uses it much more often than any other Evangelist. It expresses logical necessity rather than moral obligation (ὤφειλεν , Hebrews 2:17) or natural fitness (ἔπρεπενχ , Hebrews 2:10). It is a Divine decree, a law of the Divine nature, that the Son of Man must suffer. Prophecy had repeatedly intimated this decree. Comp. 13:33, 17:25, 22:37, 24:7, 26, 44; John 3:14, etc. For τὸνὐ̔ὸντοῦἀνθρώπου , the title which suggested, while it veiled, His Messiahship, see on 5:24. ἀποδοκιμασθῆναιἀπὸτῶν , κ .τ .λ . “ Be rejected after investigation at the hands of the,” etc. The δοκιμασία was the scrutiny which an elected magistrate had to undergo at Athens, to see whether he was legally qualified to hold office. The hierarchy held such a scrutiny respecting the claims of Jesus to be the Christ, and rejected Him: 17:25, 20:17; 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:7. For the ἀπό , “ at the hands of,” comp. Ecclus. 20:20; Luke 7:35; Acts 2:22; James 1:13; Revelation 12:6. τῶνπρεσβυτέρωνκαὶἀρχιερέωνκαὶγραμματέων . The three nouns, as forming one body, have one article. So also in 16:21. In Mark 14:43, Mark 14:53, where the Sanhedrin is spoken of with similar fulness, all three nouns have the article. The ἀρχιερεῖς are rarely placed second: comp. 20:19; Matthew 16:21; Mark 8:31. The common formulæ are ἀρχ ., γραμ ., πρεσβ . or ἀρχ ., πρεσβ ., γραμ . and ἀρχ . πρεσβ . or ἀρχ ., γραμ . ἀποκτανθῆναι . The pass. of ἀποκτείνω is late Grk. Classical writers use θνήσκω or ἀποθνήσκω . For τῇτρίῃἡμέρᾳ Mk. has the less accurate μετὰτρεῖςἡμέρας . He also has ἀναστῆναι , while Mt. has ἐγερθῆναι , which is probably right here; but ἀναστῆναι (A C D, Just. Orig.) is well supported. Lk. omits Peter’ s protest against the declaration that Christ must suffer, and the severe rebuke which he received. His omission of “ Get thee behind Me, Satan,” is sufficient answer to those who assert that it is out of ill-will to Peter that Lk. omits “ Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah.” See on 5:10 and 22:54-62. 23-27. The Self-Renouncement required in Christ’ s Followers. Matthew 16:24-28; Mark 8:34-1. Although the manner of introducing the words is different in all three, the similarity between the reports of the words is very close throughout, especially in the words quoted vv. 23, 24. Throughout the Gospels it is in the records of Christ’ s sayings that the closest resemblances are found. Comp. 18:16, 17, 25, 27. 23. πρὸςπάντας . Both words are characteristic: see on ver. 43 and 1:13. The πάντας represents Mk.’ s τὸνὄχλονσὺντοῖςμαθηταῖς . The necessity of self-denial and self-sacrifice was made known to all, although for the present the supreme example of the necessity was a mystery revealed gradually to a very few. ἀράτωτὸνσταυρὸναὐτοῦκαθ ʼ ἡμέραν . This is the first mention of the cross in Lk. and Mk. Its associations were such that this declaration must have been startling. The Jews, especially in Galilee, knew well what the cross meant. Hundreds of the followers of Judas and Simon had been crucified (Jos. Ant. xvii. 10. 10). It represents, therefore, not so much a burden as an instrument of death, and it was mentioned because of its familiar associations. Comp. 14:27; Matthew 10:38. The καθ ʼ ἡμέραν here is peculiar to Lk.: comp. 1 Corinthians 15:31. We must distinguish between ἀκολουθείτωμοι , “ follow Me loyally,” and ὀπίσωμουἔρχεσθαι , “ become My disciple.” There are three conditions of discipleship: self-denial, bearing one’ s cross, and obedience. 24. ὃςγὰρἂνθέλῃ . Here, as in ver. 23, “ will” (AV.) is too weak as a translation of θέλειν , being too like the simple future. “ desireth” or “ willeth” is better: si quis vult, qui enim voluerit. Such inadequate renderings of θενλειν are common in AV., (19:14; John 6:67, John 7:17, John 8:44), See small print on 10:22. Comp. 17:33. 25. τίγὰρὠφελεῖταιἄνθρωπος . The same verb is used by all three; but AV. obliterates this by rendering “ profit” in Mt. and Mk., and “ advantage” in Lk. Again, ζημιωθῆναι is common to all three: yet AV. has “ lose” in Mt. and Mk., and “ cast away” in Lk. The opposition between κέρδος and ζημία is common in Grk. See Lft. on Philippians 3:7. In N.T. the act. ζημιόω does not occur, but only the pass. with either acc. of the thing confiscated (Philippians 3:8), or dat. with ἐν (2 Corinthians 7:9), or absol. (1 Corinthians 3:15). The ἑαυτόν is equivalent to τὴνψυχήν in ver. 24 and in Mt. and Mk. To be excluded from eternal life is death. Lk. omits “ What should a man give in exchange for his life?” We must keep “ life” for ψυχή throughout the passage: the context shows when it means life as men desire it on earth, and when life as the blessed enjoy it in the Kingdom. The Gospel has raised the meaning of ψυχή , as of ζωή , to a higher power. Comp. Revelation 12:11. Frumentum; si servas perdis, si seminas renovas (Bede) For the combination of aor. part. with fut. indic. comp. 3 John 1:6, and Burton., § 141. 26. ἐπαισχύθῇμεκαὶτοὺςἐμοὺςλόγους . Mt. omits. The ἐπί in comp. means “ on account of” : this is the ground of his shame: comp. 13:26, 27. For the constr. comp. Romans 1:16; 2 Timothy 1:8, 2 Timothy 1:16; Hebrews 11:16. The ἐντῇδόξῃαὐτοῦ refers to the ταρουσία , not to the Resurrection (12:36, 17:24, 18:8, 19:15, 21:27), and is the first mention by Lk. of Christ’ s promising to return in glory. Lk. omits “ in this adulterous generation” (Mk.). 27. ἀληθῶς . With λέγεω , not with what follows. Mt. and Mk. have ἀμήν , which Lk. uses much less frequently than the others. In 12:44 and 21:3 Lk. has ἀληθῶς , others have ἀμήν . For αὐτοῦ , “ here,” comp. Acts 18:19; Matthew 25:36. Mt. and Mk. have ὧδε . γεύσωνταιθανάτου . The expression is found in the Talmud, but not in O.T. Comp. Matthew 16:28; John 8:52; Hebrews 2:9. It implies experience of the bitterness of death. Comp. ἰδεῖνθάνατον (2:26) and θάνατονθεωρεῖν (John 8:51). For γεύεσθαι in the sense of “ experience” comp. Hebrews 6:4, Hebrews 6:5; Psalms 34:9. τὴνβασιλείαντοῦΘεοῦ . Mk. adds ἐληλυθυιῖανἐνδυνάμει , and Mt. substitutes τ . υἱὸντοῦἀνθρ . ἐρχόμενονἐντῇβασιλείᾳαὐτοῦ . The meaning is much disputed. The principal interpretations are:— 1. The Transfiguration, which all three amounts closely connect with this prediction (most of the Fathers, Euthym. Theophyl. Maldon); 2. The Resurrection and Ascension (Cajetan, Calvin, Beza); 3. Pentecost and the great signs which followed it (Godet, Hahn); 4. The spread of Christianity (Nö sgen); 5. The internal development of the Gospel (Erasmus, Klostermann); 6. The destruction of Jerusalem (Wetstein, Alford, Morison, Plumptre, Mansel); 7. The Second Advent (Meyer, Weiss, Holtzmann). No interpretation can be correct that does not explain εἰσίντινες , which implies the exceptional privilege of some, as distinct from the common experience of all. This test seems to exclude all but the first and the sixth of these interpretations; and, if we must choose between these two, the sixth must be right. “ Shall not taste of death until” cannot refer exclusively to an event to take place the next week.But both may be right. The Transfiguration, witnessed by only three of those present, was a foretaste of Christ’ s glory both on earth and in heaven. The destruction of Jerusalem, witnessed by S. John and perhaps a few others of those present, swept away the remains of the Old Dispensation and left the Gospel in possession of the field. Only so far as the destruction of Jerusalem was a type of the end of the world is there reference to the παρουσία (see on 21:32). A direct reference to the παρουσσία is excluded by the fact that none of those present lived to witness it, except in the sense that all men will witness it. Jesus has told us that during His life on earth He was ignorant of the date of the day of judgment (Mark 13:32): and we cannot suppose that in spite of that ignorance He predicted that it was near; still less that He uttered a prediction which has not been fulfilled. Moreover, the οὐμὴγεύσωνταιθανάτουἕως implies that the τωες will experience death after seeing the βας .τ .Θεοῦ , which would not be true of those who live to see the παρουσία (1 Corinthians 15:51). 28-36. The Transfiguration. Matthew 17:1-13; Mark 9:2-13. Both Lk (vv. 31, 32) and Mt. (17:6, 7) give details which Mk. omits; but Mk. has very little (part of 9:3) which is not in either of the others. Here again (see on 8:35-39, 40-48) the marks of Lk.’ s diction are numerous: ἐγένετο , ὡσεί (ver. 28); ἐγένετο , ἐντῷ with infin. (29); ἅνδρες (30); σύν , ἄνδρας (32); ἐγένετο , ἐντῷ , εἶπενπρός , ἐπιστάτα (33); ἐντῷ (34); φωνὴἐγένετο (35); ἐντῷ , καὶαὐτοί , ἀπήγγειλαν , ἐνἐκείναιςταῖςἡμέραις , οὐδὲνὦν (36). For comment see Tert. Adv. Marcion. iv. 2; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, pp. 184-214; Herzog, Pro_1 art. Verk1ä rung, omitted in 2nd ed.; Schaff’ s Herzog, art. “ Transfiguration.” 28. ὡσεὶἡμέραιὀκτώ . A nom. without construction of any kind. Comp. Acts 5:7; Matthew 15:32; Mark 8:2, and πλεῖον in ver. 13. Win. lviii. 4, p. 648. The other two have “ after six days which agrees with “ about eight days.” We can hardly Lay that Lk. is “ improving their chronology.” It looks as if he had not seen their expression. For παραλαβών comp. ver. 10; and for the order of the names see on 8:51. Note that Lk. changes the order of the names. He places John before James (8:51), which may be because he wrote after John had become the better known εἰςτὸὄρος . The others have εἰςὄροςὑφηλόν . Both expressions would fit Hermon, which is about 9200 feet high, and would easily be reached in a week from Cæ sarea Philippi. It is still called Jebel esh Sheikh, “ the chief mountain.” It is higher than Lebanon (8500) or Anti-Lebanon (8700), and its isolated white summit is visible from many eminences throughout Palestine (Conder, Handbook of the Bible, p. 205; D.B.2 1. p. 1339; Tristram, Bible Places, p. 280). A tradition, which is first mentioned by Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. xii. 16), places the scene of the Transfiguration on Tabor,1 which at this time seems to have had a village or town on the top, which Josephus fortified against Vespasian (B. J. iv. 1, 8). In that case the solitude which is required for the Transfiguration would be impossible. The προσεύξασθαι is peculiar to this account: see on 3:21, a similar occasion. 29. ἐγένετο … ἓτερον .The Gentile Lk. writing for Gentiles avoids the word μετεμορφώθη (Matthew 17:2; Mark 9:2), which might be understood of the metamorphosis of heathen deities. Comp ἐνἑτέρᾳμορφῇ ([Mk.] 16:12). The λευκός need not be made adverbial. The asyndeton is not violent, if it be made co-ordinate with ἐξαστράπτων , a word which occurs Ezekiel 1:4, Ezekiel 1:7; Nahum 3:3. 30. Both ἄνδρες and οἵτινες are peculiar to Lk. here: see 2:4. The three Apostles saw the forms of two men who were such as to be recognized as Moses and Elijah,— the representatives of the Law and the Prophets. The power to recognize them was granted with the power to see them; otherwise the sight would have been meaningless. In the same way S. Paul recognized Ananias in a vision, although he had not previously known him (Acts 9:12). We might render the οἵτινες “ who were no others than.” That Moses was to reappear as well as Elijah at the beginning of the Messianic Kingdom, was a later dream of the Rabbis. See Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. ad loc. See small print on 2:22 for the form Μωυσῆς . 31, 32. Peculiar to Lk. See on 22:43. τὴνἔξοδοναὐτοῦ . His departure from this world by means of the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension. Comp. the use of εἴσοδος in Acts 13:24. For ἔξοδος in the sense of death see 2 Peter 1:15; Wisd. 3:2, 7:6. That the Apostles heard this subject being discussed explains part of the meaning of the Transfiguration. It was to calm their minds, which had recently been disturbed by the prediction of Christ’ s sufferings and deaths.2 The ἤμελλεν corresponds to δεῖ in ver. 22. It is all ordained by God, and is sure to take place; and when it takes place it may be regarded as a fulfilment , and also as a filling, full. There were types and prophecies shadowing forth the Divne purpose, every detail of which must be gone through. It is perhaps to be regretted that RV., retains “ accomplish,” which is its freq. rendering of τελειόω (John 4:34, John 4:5:36; Acts 20:24; John 17:4, etc.), instead of substituting “ fulfil,” which is its freq. rendering of πληρόω (21:24, 22:16, 24:44; Acts 1:16, etc.). And why not “ exodus” here, and Hebrews 11:22, and 2 Peter 1:15, for ἔξοδος βεβαρημένοιὕπνῳ . In N.T. only the pass. of this verb is found, and the best writers do not use the pres. of either voice. In Matthew 26:43 it is used of the eyes of these same three being heavy with sleep. comp. Luke 21:34; 2 Corinthians 1:8, 2 Corinthians 1:5:4; 1 Timothy 5:16. διαγρηγορήσαντεςδέ . “ But having remained awake” in spite of this sleepiness would be the common meaning of the word;1 but perhaps here it means “ having become thoroughly awake.” Syr-Sin. has “ when they awoke.” It is a late word, and occurs nowhere else in N.T. or LXX. Lk. is fond of compounds with διά :— διαγινώσκειν , διαδέχεσθαι , διαλείπειν , διαλύειν , διανέμειν , διανυκτερεύειν , διαπονεῖσθαι , διαπορεῖν , διαπραγματεύεσθαι , etc. As the invention of a later hand these two verses (31, 32) do not explain themselves. What is the motive for the invention? As a narrative of facts they throw much light on the whole situation. 33. ἐντῷδιαχωρίζεσθαιαὐτοὺςἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦ . “ As they were pasting from Him.” This again is in Lk. only, and it explains Peter’ s remark. His first impulse is to prevent Moses and Elijah from going away. He wishes to make present glory and rapture permanent. εἷπενὁΠέτρος . Mt. and Mk. add ἀποκριθείς . It is his response to what he saw. For Ἐπιοτάτα see on 5:5. He says that “ it is good for us to be here,” not “ it is better.” There is no comparison with any other condition. The ἡμᾶς probably means the Apostles, not all six persons. The Apostles are ready to help in erecting the σκηναί . If they were to remain there, they must have shelter. μὴεἰδὼςὃλέγει . We need not follow Tertullian in interpreting this of a state of ecstasy (amentia), as of one rapt into another world. Mk. tells us plainly why Peter “ wist not what to answer,” ἔκφοβοιγὰρἐγένοντο : and this he would have from Peter himself. In any case, neither Peter’ s strange proposal nor the comment upon it looks like invention. 34. ἐγένετονεφέληκαὶἐπεσκίαζεναὐτούς . Mt. calls it φωτεινή , a “ luminous cloud.” Here there is perhaps an association of ideas, suggested by similarity of sound, between ἐπεσκίαζεν and the Shechinah or δόξη mentioned in ver. 31. Comp. ἐπεσκίαζενἐπὶτὴνσκηνὴνἡνεφέλη (Exodus 40:29). Strictly speaking a luminous cloud cannot overshadow; but it may veil. Light may be as blinding as darkness. We cannot be sure whether the αὐτούς includes the three Apostles or not. It does not include them in ver. 33, and probably does not include them here. The reading ἐκείνουςεἰσελθεἰν (A D P R) is meant to exclude the Apostles; but εἰσελθεῖναὐτούς (א B C L) is right. See D. B.2 art. “ Cloud.” 35. For φωνὴἐγένετο see on 3:22, and comp. Exodus 33:9. The reading ἀγαπητός (A C D P R) for ἐκλελεγμένος (א B L X) comes from Mt. and Mk. The Versions are divided, and in many copies of the Aeth, the two readings are combined. Syr-Sin. has “ the chosen.” 36. ἐντῷγενέσθαιτὴνφωνήν . “ After the voice had come” , i.e. when it had ceased: see on 3:21. Syr-Sin. has “ when there was the voice.” Peter had wished to make three tabernacles, as if Moses and Elijah were to be as abiding as Christ; but now the Law and the Prophets pass away, ita dimissis, quasi jam et officio et honore dispunctis (Tertul. Adv. Marcion. iv. 22), and εὑρέθηἸησοῦςμόνος . καὶαὐτοὶἐσίγησανκαὶοὐδενὶἀπήγγειλανἐνἐκείναιςτ̣αῖςἡμέραις . See on 5:14, on 8:20, and on 1:39. Lk. tells us that they kept silent; Mt. tells us that Jesus charged them to tell no one until the Son of Man was risen from the dead. Mk. relates both the command and their observance of it. The prohibition to speak of what they had seen is a strong confirmation of the incident as an historical fact. If the vision is an invention, how can we explain the invention of such a prohibition? The statement of all three, that the Transfiguration took place a week after the preceding incident, the characteristic impulsiveness of Peter, and the healing of the demoniac boy immediately afterwards, are marks of historical reality. D. C. G. art. “ Transfiguration.” But as in the case of other miracles, while we admit the fact, we must remain in ignorance as to the manner. Were Moses and Elijah, who were mysteriously removed from the earth, here present in the body? Or were their disembodied spirits made visible? Or was it a mere vision, in which they only seemed to be present? We cannot say; the third alternative is not excluded by the fact that all three saw it, whereas a mere vision is perceived by only one. As Weiss well remarks, “ We are not here concerned with a vision produced by natural causes, but with one sent directly by God” ; and he adds, “ Our narrative presents no stumbling-block for those who believe in divine revelation” (L.J. ii. pp. 319, 320, Eng. tr. 3. p. 103). The silence of S. John respecting he whole incident is thoroughly intelligible. (1) It had already been recorded three times; (2) the glorification of Jesus as the Son of God, which is here set forth in a special incident, is set forth by him throughout his whole Gospel. ἑώρακαν . With this form of the 3rd pers. plur. perf. comp. τετηρηκαν and ἔγνωκαν (John 6:7), εἴρηκαν (Revelation 19:3), γέγοναν (Revelation 21:6), εἰσελήλυθαν (James 5:4); also Romans 16:7; Colossians 2:1; Revelation 18:3. Such forms are common in inscriptions and in the Byzantine writers. Win. xiii. 2. c, p. 90; Gregory, Prolegom. p. 124. In meaning the perfect seems here to be passing into the aorist; Burton., § 88, but see § 78. 37-43. The Healing of the Demoniac Boy. Matthew 17:14-18; Mark 9:14-29. In all three this incident is closely connected with the Transfiguration. The moral contrast between the peace and glory on the mount and the struggle and failure down below is intense, and is magnificently brought out by Raffaelle in the great picture of the Transfiguration, which was his last work. The combination of the two scenes is fatal to the unity of the subject, which is really two pictures in one frame; but it heightens the moral and dramatic effect. It is perhaps even more instructive to regard it as three pictures. Christ and the saints in glory; the chosen three blinded by the light; the remaining nine baffled by the powers of darkness. The marks of Lk.’ s style continue with considerable frequency: ἐγένετο , ὲξῆς (ver. 37); καὶἰδού , ἐβόησεν , δέομαι , μονογενής (38); καὶἰδού (39); ἐδεήθην (40); ἰάσατο (42); πάντες (43). None of these are in the parallel passages. See small print on 8:35-39, 40-48. 37. τῇἑξῇἡμέρᾳ . See on 7:11. The Transfiguration probably took place at night. Lk. alone tells us that the descent from the mountain did not take place until next day. Thus the three Apostles had time to think over what they had seen and heard, before receiving fresh experiences. Lk. omits the conversation about Elijah. Mk., who is here much more full than either Lk. or Mt., tells us that this ὄχλοςπολύς was gathered round the other disciples, with whom scribes were disputing. The opportune arrival of Christ caused great amazement. 38. For ἐβόησεν comp. 3:4, 18:7, 38, and for δέομαι see on 5:12. ἐπιβλέψαι . 1 aor. inf. Act.; not ἐπίβλεψαι , 1 aor. imper. mid., a tense which perhaps does not occur. It means “ to regard with pity” ; 1:48; 1 Samuel 1:11, 1 Samuel 1:9:16; Ps. 24:16; Tobit 3:3, 15; Judith 13:4.— For the third time Lk. is alone in mentioning that a child is μονογενής : 7:12, 8:42. Comp. Hebrews 11:17; Tobit 3:15, 8:17; Judges 11:34. 39. The three accounts differ in describing the symptoms. Mt. has σεληνιάζεταικαὶκακῶςἔχει . Mk. has ἀφρίζεικαὶτρίζειτοὺςὀδόνψταςκαὶξηραίνεται . In Lk.’ s description Hobart (pp. 17-20) claims ἐξέφνης , μετὰἀφροῦ , and μόγιςἀποχωρεῖ as medical expressions, together with the preceding ἐπιβλέφαι .1 The μόγις occurs here only in N.T. Comp. 3 Mac. 7:6. But μόλις , which is found Acts 14:18, Acts 14:27:7, Acts 14:8, Acts 14:16; Romans 5:7; 1 Peter 4:18, may be the right reading here also (B R etc.). Both μόγος and μόλος mean “ toil.” The ἀποχωρεῖν means cessation of convulsions. 40. ἐδεήθην … ἵνα See on 4:3 and on 10:2. The disciples who failed here need not be the Apostles, who were charged to cast out demons (ver. 1). If they were, this one failure was exceptional (Mark 6:12, Mark 6:13). 41. ὦγενεὰἄπιστος . This probably is neither addressed to the disciples, who had failed to cure the lad, nor includes them. It is addressed to the father, and includes the multitude. Per unum hominem Judæ os arguit infidefilitatis (Bede). As in the case of the peralytic (5:20), the faith of those who had charge of the afflicted person is taken into account. This is more clearly brought out in Mk. It was a wish to see what the disciples could do, rather than faith in Divine power and goodness, which prompted the bringing of the boy to them. Possibly it was a wish to see what the disciples could not do that inspired some of them. The hierarchy sometimes attacked Jesus through His disciples (Mark 2:16, Mark 2:18, Mark 2:24, Mark 2:7:5; comp. Luke 13:14). In 12:46 ἄπιστος means “ unfaithful,” and in Acts 26:8 “ incredible.” καὶδιεστραμμένη . Not in Mk. It is a strong expression: “ distorted, wrong-headed” (Acts 20:30; Philippians 2:15; Deuteronomy 32:5). Comp. ὀθυμὸςἄρχονταςδιαστρέφεικαὶτοὺςἀρίστουςἄνδρας (Arist. Pol. iii. 16, 5); εἰσὶδ ʼ αὐτῶναἱψυχαὶδιεστραμμέναι [a.l. παρεστραμ ] τῆςκατὰφύσινἕξεως (8:7, 7). ἕωςπότεἔσουμαιπρὸςὑμᾶς ; The notion is that of being turned towards a person for the sake of intercourse; and the question implies that Jesus is not of that generation, or that it is alienated from Him. Comp. Isaiah 55:2. For ἕωςποτε comp. John 10:24; and for πρὸςὑμᾶς , apud vos, comp. Matthew 13:56; Mark 6:3, Mark 6:14:49; John 1:1, etc. Mt. has μεθ ʼ ὑμῶν . Vita Jesu perpetua tolerantia (Beng.). In N.T. and LXX ἀνέχεσθαι has the gen. But in class. Grk., as sometimes in LXX, we have the acc. after ἀνέχεσθαι (Amos 4:7; Amo_4 Mac. 13:27). 42. προσερχομένουαὐτοῦ . This is to be understood of the lad’ s approach to Jesus, not of His approach to the lad. Jesus had just said, “ Bring thy son hither.” ἔρρηξεναὐτὸντὸδαιμόνιον . “ The demon dashed him down.” The word is used of boxers knocking down, and of wrestlers throwing, an opponent: and some distinguish ῥήσσω in this sense from ῥήγνυμι . Comp. Wisd. 4:19; Herm. Mand. xi .3; Apost. Const. vi. 1. There is also ῥάσσω , like ἀράσσω , in the sense of dashing to the ground (Isaiah 9:10). The expulsion of the demon left the boy in a condition which still required healing. Lk. gives each act separately. Comp. Mark 9:27. For ἰάσατο see small print on 5:17; and with ἀπέδωκεναὐτὸντῷπατρὶαὐτοῦ , which Lk. alone mentions, comp. 7:15 and 8:55. 43. This also is peculiar to Lk., who omits the rebuke to the disciples, thus again sparing them. The division of the verses is unfortunate, half of ver. 43 belonging to one section and half to another. For μεγαλειότητι comp. Acts 19:27; 2 Peter 1:16: Latin texts have magnitudo (Vulg.), magnificentia (e), magnalia (d). The πάντες in the first half of the verse, and the πάντωνἐπὶπᾶσιν in the second half, strongly illustrate Lk.’ s fondness for πᾶς : see on 7:35 and 11:4; and comp. Acts 4:10, Acts 17:30, Acts 21:28, Acts 24:3. 43-45. The Second Announcement of the Passion. Matthew 17:23; Mark 9:31, Mark 9:32. Besides the πάντων and πᾶσιν , we have as marks of Lk.’ s style, θαυμαζόντωνἐπί , the attraction in πᾶσινοἷς , πρός after εῖπεν (ver. 43), and the analytical ἦνπαρακεκελυμμένον (ver. 45). See on 2:33 and 3:19. 43. θαυμαζόντωνἐπὶπᾶσινοἷςἐποίει . See small print on 2:33 and 3:19. The imperfects include more than the preceding incident. It was because, the people were so constantly in an attitude of empty admiration and wonder at His miracles, that Jesus tells the disciples of the real nature of His Messiahship. He is not going to reign as an earthly king, but to suffer as a criminal. Here d has one of several attempts to reproduce the gen. abs. in Latin: omnium autem mirantium. Comp.et cogitantium omnium (3:15); audientium autem eorum (19:11); quorundam dicentium (21:5); accipientium autem eorum (24:31); hæ c autem eorum loquentium (24:36). 44. Θεσθεὑμεῖςεἰςτὰὦταὑμῶν . “ Do ye lay up in your ears,” in contrast to the gaping crowd. It perhaps means “ Store My words in your memories, even if you do not understand them.” Or again, “ Do not let men’ s admiration of My miracles make you forget or doubt My declarations. It is into men’ s hands that I must be delivered.” Comp. δὸςεἰςτὰἸησοῖ (Exodus 17:14). Cod. Am. and other MSS. of Vulg. here have in cordibus vestris. All Grk. MSS. have ειςτὰὦταὑμῶν . This is one of several places in which Jerome seems to have had a Grk. text which is no longer extant. Comp. erat Petrus (22:55), hic nos esse (Mark 9:5), Moses in quo vos speratis (John 5:45); also John 6:12, John 7:25, John 9:38, John 10:16. The last is crucial. ὁγὰρυἱὸςἀνθρώπουμέλλει . The γάρ is almost “ namely” : “ For what you may believe without doubting is this, that the Son of Man,” etc. The παραδίδοσθαι perhaps does not refer to the act of Judas, but to the Divine will. When His hour was come, the plots against Him were allowed to succeed. 45. ἦνπαρακεκαλυμμένονἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν . A Hebraism, occurring here only in N.T. Comp. Ezekiel 22:26, and the subst. Wisd. 17:3. More often we have ἀποκρύπτεινἀπὸ : 10:21; Jeremiah 32:17; or κρύπτεινἀπό : Matthew 11:25; Psalms 37:10. Lk. alone states that this ignorance of the disciples was specially ordered for them. The ἵνα here has its full telic force. They were not allowed to understand the saying then, in order that they might remember it afterwards, and see that Jesus had met His sufferings with full knowledge and free will. Comp. 18:34, 24:16. It is strange that this mention of their want of understanding should be attributed to a wish to abase the Twelve in the interests of S. Paul: for (1) it is plainly stated that they were prevented by God from understanding; and (2) Mk. mentions their ignorance no less than Lk. We saw above that Lk. omits the rebuke for want of faith addressed to the disciples who failed to heal the demoniac boy. See on ver. 43 and 8:24. 46-50. The Close of the Galilean Ministry. Two Lessons in Humility. Matthew 18:1-7; Mark 9:33-39. We learn from the other two that this took place after the return from the neighbourhood of Cæ sarea Philippi to Capernaum (Matthew 17:24; Mark 9:33). The dispute took place during the journey, the comment on it at Capernaum. See notes on 22:24-30. 46. Εἰσῆλθενδὲδιαλογισμὸςἐναὐτοῖς . See small print on 1:17 and 7:17. It is not necessary to confine the διαλογισμός to their thoughts (see on 5:22), and thus make a difference between Mk. and Lk. But the desire of each to be pronounced the superior was probably not expressed in the discussion; and this thought Jesus read and rebuked. Bede explains the occasion of the dispute to be quia viderant Petrum, Jacobum, et Joannem seorsum ductos in montem, secretumque eis ibi aliquod esse creditum. The ἐναὐτοῖς , “ among them,” rather implies that the reasoning did not remain unexpressed. τὸτίςἂνεἴη . “ The question, who perchance might be,” wer wohl wä re: see on 3:15 and 6:11; also Burton., § 179. For this use of τό see on 1:62, and comp. 19:48, 22:2, 4, 23. μείζωναὐτῶν . Although αὐτῶν does not here immediately follow τίς as it does 22:24 (see notes), yet doubtless αὐτῶν is the gen. after τίς and not after μείζων . Whether anyone outside their company was greater than they were, was not a question which interested them. The point in dispute was, who among themselves was greater than the rest of them; who stood nearest to the Christ, and had the highest place in the Kingdom (Mt.). The question illustrates the want of perception just mentioned (ver. 45). 47. τῆςκαρδίαςαὐτῶν . The discussion in words was, Who is the greatest? The thought in their hearts was, Am not I the eatest? Will the Master decide? Comp. 5:22, 6:8. ἐπιλαβόμενοςπαιδίον . The action indicates that the child belongs to Him, is one of His: it represents the humblest among His followers. For other instances of Christ’ s attitude towards children comp. 10:21, 17:2, 18:16; Mark 10:15, etc. In N.T. and LXX the mid. only of ἐπιλαμβάω is used, sometimes with the acc. (Acts 9:27, Acts 16:19, Acts 18:17), sometimes with the gen. (Acts 17:19, Acts 17:21:30, Acts 17:33; with gen. always in LXX). Here and 23:26 the acc. is probably right (B C D, Orig.), but the reading is uncertain. παρ ʼ ἑαυτῷ . The place of honour. As Jesus was sitting with is disciples round Him (Mark 9:35), παρ ʼ ἑαυτῷ would be the same as ἐνμενμέσῳαὐτῶν (Mt. and Mk.). Syr-Sin. has “ beside them” The late tradition, that Igantius was the child who was thus taken up by our Lord, probably arose from a misunderstanding of the name Θεοφόρος , which means “ bearing God” in himself, and not “ borne by God” . Even if Θεόφορος be the right accentuation, we must interpret “ borne along and inspired by God” rather than “ carried in the Divine arms.” The identification was unknown to Eusebius, who does not mention it, and to Chrysostom, who states that Ignatius had not even seen Christ (Hom. in Ign. Mart. iv.). It cannot be found earlier than the ninth century (Anastasius Bibliothecarius, Migne, cxxix. 42; Nicephorus Callistus, H. E. ii. 35, Migne, clxiii. 848). See Lft. Ignatius, i. p. 27, ii. p. 22. 48. In this saying of Christ there is again (comp. vv. 23, 24) almost exact verbal agreement in the three reports. τοῦτοτὸπαιδίον . Or any similar little one, ἕνπ . τοιοῦτο (Mt.), ἓντῶντοιούτωνπ . (Mk.). The child is not the type of the honoured disciple; but the honoured disciple is he who welcomes little children, not because he is fond of children, but because they belong to Christ. ἐπὶτῷὀνόματίμου . “ On the basis of My Name.” He knows that he is dealing with something which concerns Christ and belongs to Him, and he welcomes it for Christ’ s sake. The phrase is specially common in Lk. (ver. 49, 21:8, 24:47; Acts 4:17, Acts 4:18, Acts 4:5:28, 40, Acts 4:15:14; comp. Luke 1:59); not in Jn. or Paul. ἐμὲδέχεται … ἐμὲδέξηται . The pronoun is emphatic. ὁγὰρμικρότερος , κ .τ .λ . Not in Mk. or Mt. It explains how it is that to welcome a child for Christ’ s sake is to welcome the Father, for promotion in the Kingdom depends upon self-abasement. Both ὁμικρότερος and μέγας are objective; really in a lowly position, really exalted. He who does the humble work of serving the insignificant is promoted by God. It is the chief proof of the Messiah’ s presence that the poor have the Gospel preached to them (7:22). ἐνπᾶσινὑμῖν . “ Among you all.” The circle of the disciples is the sphere in which this holds good. For ὑπάρχων see on 8:41 and 23:50. ἐστινμέγας . Already ipso facto “ is great” ; not merely ἔσται (A D). Jesus does not say “ is the greatest” ; and He thus gives no encouragement to the desire to be above others. It is possible for all in the Kingdom to have this greatness, and there is no need for anyone to measure himself against others. The standard is Christ Syr-Sin. reads, “ He that is small and is a child to you, that one is great.” 49, 50. A Second Lesson in Humility, the Humility of Toleration. Mark 9:38-40. The ἀποκριθείς in ver. 49 shows, that there is connexion with what precedes, but the precise link is not certain. The common explanation, that Christ’ s ἐπὶτῷὀνόματίμου suggests to John’ s mind the case of the stranger who cast out demons ἐντῷὀνόματι , is possible. But it is perhaps more likely that Christ’ s declaration about the blessedness of giving a welcome to the humblest of His followers has aroused misgivings in John’ s mind. His words are those of one who defends his conduct, or at least excuses it, and might be paraphrased, “ But the principle just laid down must have limits, and would not apply to the case which I mention” ; or, “ But one who remains outside our body is not really a follower of Thee, and therefore ought not to receive a welcome.” John does not mean that the man was not an Apostle, but that he was not a professed disciple. Jealousy for the credit of their Master, not jealousy for their own prerogatives, prompted the Apostles1 to forbid this man from making use of the Name. The reading ἐντῷὀνόματίσου (א B L X D Ξ 1 33 69) is to be preferred to ἐπὶτ . ὀν . (A C D), and is not to be discarded because it is also found in Mark 9:38. On the expression see Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 147. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 10:1-16. § The Mission of the Seventy. The number was significant in more ways than one, and we have no means of determining which of its various associations had most to do with its use on this occasion, (1) The Seventy Elders, whom God commanded Moses to appoint, and who were endowed with the spirit of prophecy, to help Moses to bear the burden of the people in judging and instructing them: Numbers 11:16, Numbers 11:17, Numbers 11:24, Numbers 11:25. (2) The number of the Nations of the Earth, traditionally supposed to be seventy: Gen_10. (3) The Sanhedrin, which probably consisted of seventy members and a president, in imitation of Moses and the seventy Elders.1 D.C.G. art. “ Seventy.” That Jesus should have followed the number given to Moses, in order to suggest a comparison between the two cases, is probable enough. That He should have used the tradition about the number of Gentile nations, in order to point out the special character of this mission, viz. to others besides the Jews, is also not improbable.2 So far as we can tell, the Seventy were sent out about the time of the Feast of Tabernacles. The number of bullocks offered during the Feast was seventy in all, decreasing from thirteen on the first day to seven on the Last: and, according to the Talmud, “ There were seventy bullocks to correspond to the number of the seventy nations of the world” (Edersh. The Temple, p. 240; Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. on John 7:37). It was about this time that Jesus had declared, “ Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must lead, and they shall hear My voice” (John 10:16). The connexion of the mission of the Seventy with this thought cannot be regarded as unlikely. It is much less probable that the number was meant “ to suggest the thought that the seventy disciples were placed by Him in a position of direct contrast” with the Sanhedrin. The account of the appointment of the Seventy to minister to all without distinction, like the account of the appointment of the Seven to minister to the Hellenists (Acts 6:1-7), is given by Lk. alone. This fact has led to the conjecture that he himself was one of the Seventy; a conjecture agarently sanctioned by those who selected this passage as the Gospel for S. Luke’ s Day, but implicitly contradicted by himself in his preface (1:1-4), which indicates that he was not an eye-witness. His mention of the Seventy and the silence of Mt. and Mk. are very intelligible. The mission belongs to a period about which he had special information, and about which they tell us little. They omit many other matters connected with his part of there ministry. Had they given us the other details and omitted just his one, there would have been some difficulty. Moreover, this incident would have special interest for the writer of the Universal Gospel, who sympathetically records both the sending of the Twelve to the tribes of Israel (9:1-6), and the sending of the Seventy to the nations of the earth. No mention of the Gentiles is made in the charge to the Seventy; but there is the significant omission of any such command as “ Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not into any city of the Samaritans: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 10:5, Matthew 10:6). And in Peræ a, which was to be the scene of their labours, the proprotion of Gentiles would be larger than in the districts to the west of the Jordan. The silence of Jn. respecting the mission of the Seventy is no more surprising than his silence respecting the mission of the Twelve. He omits these, as he omits many things, because they have been sufficiently recorded, and because they are not required for the plan of his Gospel. The proposals to treat the charge to the Seventy as a mere doublet of the charge to the Twelve, or as an invention of the Evangelist in the interest of Pauline ideas, will not bear criticism. In either case, why does Lk. also give us the charge to the Twelve (9:1-6), and in such close proximity? In the latter case, why does he not insert a special direction to go to the Gentiles? The difference and the similarity between the two charges are quite intelligible. The mission of the Seventy was not permanent, like that of the Twelve. Yet the object of it was not, like that of 9:52, to prepare shelter and food, but, like that of the Twelve, to prepare for Christ’ s teaching.1 The increased numbers were necessary because the time, was short, and in many cases His first visit would also be His last. And when we examine the two charges in detail, we find that there is not only the prohibition noted above, which is given to the Twelve and not to the Seventy, but also several directions which are given to the Seventy and not to the Twelve. Neither in Matthew 10:5-15, nor in Mark 6:7-11, nor in Luke 9:1-5 is there any equivalent to Luke 10:2, Luke 10:8; while a good deal of what is similar in the two charges is differently worded or differently arranged. See Rushbrooke’ s Synopticon, pp. 35, 36. One may readily it the possibility of some confusion between the traditional forms of the two charges; but no such hypothesis is required. The work of the Seventy was sufficiently similar to the work of the Twelve to make the directions given in each case similar. An address to candidates for ordination now would be largely the same, whether addressed to deacons or to priests. The uncritical character of the hypothesis that this section is an invention to promote Pauline doctrine is further shown by the fact that its authenticity is clearly recognize in a work of notoriously anti-Pauline tendency, viz. the Clementine Recognitions.2 And whatever may be the worth of the traditions that this or that person was one of the Seventy, how could the traditions (some of which are as old as the second century) have arisen, if no such body as the Seventy ever existed? As Eusebius remarks (H. E. i. 12, 1), “ there exists no catalogue of the Seventy.” 1 But he goes on to mention traditions as to a few of them, some of which come from the Hypolyposes of Clement of Alexandria. Barnabas (Acts 4:36, etc), Sosthenes (1 Corinthians 1:1), Cephas (Galatians 2:11), Matthias (Acts 1:26), Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus (Acts 1:23), and Thaddæ us are mentioned as among the Seventy. Clement states definitely of barnabas the Apostle that he was one of the Seventy (strom. ii. 20, p. 489, ed. Potter), and in Clem. Recog. i. 7 he is called one of Christ’ s disciples. So far as we know, Clement was the first to separate the Cephas of Gal 2:11 from the Apostle. This second Cephas is an obvious invention to avoid a collision between two Apostles, and to free S. Peter from the condemnation of S. Paul. From Acts 1:21 we know that both Matthias and Barsabbas had been with Jesus during the whole of His ministry; and therefore the tradition that they were among the Seventy may be true. Thaddæ s was one of the Twelve, and cannot have been one of the Seventy also. Eusebius gives the tradition as rumour . To these may be added an improbable tradition preserved by Origen, that Mark the Evangelist was one of the Seventy. The early disappearance of the Seventy is sufficiently accounted for by (1) the temporary character of their mission; (2) the rise of the order of presbyters, which superseded them; (3) the fact that no eminent person was found among them. It is not improbable that the N.T. prophets were in some cases disciples who had belonged to this body. The Fathers make the twelve springs of water at Elim represent the Apostles, and the threescore and ten palm trees represent the Seventy disciples (Exodus 15:27; Numbers 33:9). Thus Tertul. Adv. Marcion. iv. 24; Orig. Him. vii. in Exod. and Hom. xxvii. in Num.; Hieron. Ep. lxix. 6. 1. Μετὰδὲταῦτα . After the incidents just narrated (9:46-62). The historical connexion is clearly marked. ἀνέδειξενὁΚύριος . The verb is found in N. T. only here and Acts 1:24; freq. in LXX Comp. ἀνάδειξις (1:80). It means “ show forth, display,” and hence “ make public, proclaim,” especially a person’ s appointment to an office: ἀναδέδειχατὸνυἱόνμουἈντίοχονβασιλέα (2 Mac. 9:25; comp. 10:11, 14:12, 26; 1 Esdr. 1:34, 8:23). This meaning of the word seems to be (Polyb. Plut. etc.). But the use of an official word of this kind points to a more important preparation for Christ’ s coming than is indicated 9:52. Therefore ἑτέρους points back to 9:1-6, the mission of the Twelve. For ὁΚύριο͂ see on 5:17, and comp. 7:13: describitur ho loco actus vere dominicus (Beng.). The ἑτέρους is in apposition, “ others, viz. seventy.” The καὶ before ὲτέρους (א A C D) is of very doubtful authority, and is as likely to have been inserted in explanation as omitted because superfluous. Comp. 23:32, where καὶ is certainly genuine; and see Win. lix. 7. d, p. 665. ἑβδομήκοντα [δύο ]. Both external and internal evidence are rather evenly balanced as to the addition or omission of δύο . The word might have been either inserted or omitted to make the number agree with the Seventy Elders, for with Eldad and Medad they were seventy-two. The nations of the earth also are sometimes reckoned as seventy, sometimes as seventy-two. The δύο might also be omitted to make a favourite number (Genesis 46:27; Exodus 1:5, Exodus 1:15:27; Judges 1:7, Judges 1:9:2; 2 Kings 10:1; Ezra 8:7, Ezra 8:14; Isaiah 23:15; Jeremiah 25:11, etc.). See Ryle, Canon of O.T. p. 158. ἐβδομήκοντα . א A C L X ΔΔΞΠ etc., bfq Syrr. Goth. Aeth., Iren-Lat. Tert. Eus. ἐβδομήκονταδύο B D M R. ace Vulg. Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Arm., Clem-Recogn. Epiph. Scrivener considers the evidence against δύο to be “ overwhelining both in number and weight.” So also Keim. WH, bracket, Treg. and Tisch. omit. ἀνὰδύο . For companionship, as in the case of the Twelve (Mark 6:7), of the Baptist’ s disciples (Luke 7:19), of Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13:2), of Judas and Silas (15:27), of Barnabas and Mark (15:39), of Paul and Silas (15:40), of Timothy and Silas (17:14), of Timothy and Erastus (19:22). The testimony of two would be more weighty than that of one; and they had to bear witness to Christ’ s words and works. Comp. Ecclesiastes 4:9-12; Genesis 1:18. The reading ἀνὰδύοδύο (B K) seems to be a combination of ἀνὰδύο and δύοδύο (Mark 6:7; Genesis 6:19, Genesis 6:20). ἤμελλεναὐτὸςἔρχεσθαι . “ He Himself (as distinct from these forerunners) was about to come.” 2. Ὁμὲνθερισμὸςπολύς , … εἰςτὸνθερισμὸναὐτοῦ . This saying is verbatim the same as that which Matthew 9:37, Matthew 9:38 records as addressed to the disciples just before the mission of the Twelve. The Twelve and the Seventy were answers to the prayer thus prescribed; and both had the warning of the fewness of the labourers and the greatness of the work. The ὀλίγοι has no reference to the Seventy as being too few: the supply is always inadequate. We cannot conclude anything as to the time of year when the words were spoken from the mention of harvest. So common a metaphor might be used at any season. Corn. John 4:35. Why does RV. retain the “ truly” of AV. in Matthew 9:37 while abolishing it here? It has no authority in either place, and apparently comes from the quidem of Vulg., which represents μέν . δεήθητε . The verb does not occur in Mk. or Jn., nor in Mt. excepting in this saying (9:38). It is a favourite with Lk. (5:12, 8:28, 38, 9:38, 40, 21:36, 22:32; Acts 4:31, Acts 8:22, etc.). Elsewhere rare in N.T., but very freq. in LXX. For the constr. see Burton., § 200. ὅπωςἐργάταςἐκβάλῃ . “ Send forth with haste and urgency.” The verb expresses either pressing need, or the directness with which they are sent to their destination. Comp. Mark 1:12; Matthew 12:20; James 2:25. There is always human unwillingness to be overcome: comp. Exodus 4:10, Exodus 4:13; Judges 4:8; Jonah 1:3. For ἐργάτας of agricultural labourers comp. Matthew 20:1, Matthew 20:8; James 5:4; Ecclus. 19:1; and of labourers in the cause of religion, 2 Corinthians 11:13; Philippians 3:2; 2 Timothy 2:15. 3. ἰδοὺἀποστέλλωὑμᾶς , κ .τ .λ .. The same is said to the Twelve, with πρόβατα for ἄρνας (Matthew 10:16).1 For ἀποστέλλω see on 4:18. In the ancient homily wrongly attributed to Clement of Rome (Lft., Clement, ii. p. 219) we have the following: λέγειγὰρὁΚύριοςἜσεσθεὡςἀρνίαἐνμέσῳλύκων · ἀποκριθεὶςδὲὁΠέτροςαὐτῷλέγει · Ἐὰνοὖνδιασπαράξωσινοἱλύκοιτὰἀρνία ; εἶπενὁἸησοῦςτῷΠέτρῳ · Μὴφοβείσθωσαντὰἀρνίατοὺςλύκουςμετὰτὸἀποθανεῖναὐτά . Then follows a loose quotation of Mat 10:28 or Luke 12:4, Luke 12:5. See A. Resch, Agrapha, Texte u. Untersuch. v. 4, p. 377, 1889. 4. μὴβαστάζετεβαλλάντιον , μὴπήραν , μὴὑποδήματα . The Talmud enjoins that no one is to go on the Temple Mount with staff, shoes, scrip, or money tied to him in his purse. Christ’ s messengers are to go out in the same spirit as they would go to the services of the temple, avoiding all distractions. Edersh. The Temple, p. 42. From βαστάζετε we infer that ὑποδήματα were not to be carried in addition to what were worn on the feet. Sandals were allowed in the temple. Comp. 9:3, 22:35. The whole charge means, “ Take with you none of the things which travellers commonly regard as indispensable. Your wants will be supplied.” In N.T. βαλλάντιον occurs only in Lk. (12:33, 22:35, 36): in LXX Job 14:17. The word is quite classical: Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 42. See on 9:3 and 7:14. μηδένακατὰτὴνὁδὸνἀσπάσησθε . They are to go straight to their destination, and not give their message of good tidings until they have reached it. It is not greetings, but greetings κατὰτὴνὁδόν that are forbidden.2 Omnia præ termittatis, dum quod injunctum est peragatis (Aug.). Comp. 2 Kings 4:29. Like the sayings in 9:10, 62, this prohibition implies that entire devotion to the work in hand is necessary. 5. But directly they have reached a goal, and have obtained admission to a household, a greeting is to be given. Comp. 2:4, εἰρήνηἐνἀνθρώποις ; John 20:19, John 20:21, John 20:26, εἰρήνηὑμῖν . 6. υἱὸςεἰρήνης . Another Hebraism: “ one inclined to peace” : dignus qui illo voto potiatur. Comp. υἱὸςγεέννης (Matthew 23:15); τῆςἀπωλείας (John 17:12); τῆςἀπειθείας (Ephesians 5:6); θανάτου (2 Samuel 12:5). Comp. τώκναὀργῆς (Ephesians 2:3). It was a saying of Hillel, “ Be thou of Aaron’ s disciples, loving peace and seeking for peace.” ἐπαναπαήσεται . This is the reading of א B for ἐπαναπαύσεται , like ἀναπαήσονται (Revelation 14:13). A 2 aor. pass. ἐπάην is given by Choeroboscus. Veitch, sub παύω , p. 156. Comp. ἐπανεπαύσατοτὸπνεῦμαἐπ ʼ αὐτούς (Numbers 11:25; 2 Kings 2:15). Here ἐπ ʼ αὐτόν probably refers to the son of peace, not to the home. For εἰδὲμήγε (which is freq. in Lk.) see small print on 5:36, and Burton., § 275. ἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶςἀνακάμψει . “ As if it had been unspoken” ; or, “ as if it had been spoken to you, instead of by you.” 1 Comp. Matthew 2:12; Acts 18:21; Hebrews 11:15; Exodus 32:27; 2 Samuel 1:22, 2 Samuel 8:13, etc. But they have no discretion as to giving this salutation, however unworthy the recipient may seem to be. 7. ἐναὐτῇδὲτῇοἰκίᾳμένετε . Not “ in the same house” (as all English Versions, Vulg. and Luther), which would be ἐντῇαὐτῇοἰκίᾳ , but “ in that very house,” viz. the one which has given a welcome. Comp. 2:38, 12:12, 13:1, 31, 20:19, 23:12, 24:13, 33; in all which places RV. has rightly “ that very.” But here it has “ that same,” and ver. 21 it changes “ that” (AV.) to “ that same.” Lk. prefers ἐναὐτῇτῇὤρᾳ , ἡμέρᾳ , κ .τ .λ . The other Evangelists prefer ἐνἐκείνῃτῇὤρᾳ , κ .τ .λ . ἔσθοντες . The poetic form ἔσθω is very rare in prose: comp. 7:33, 22:30; Mark 1:6; Leviticus 17:10; Isaiah 9:20; Ecclus. 20:18. τὰπαρ ʼ αὐτῶν . What their entertainers provide: they are to consider themselves as members of the family, not as intruders; for their food and shelter are salary and not alms. Comp. τὰπαρ ʼ ὑμῶν , “ the bounty which you provide” (Philippians 4:18), and see Lft. on Galatians 1:12. The injunction is parallel to 1 Corinthians 9:7, not to 1 Corinthians 10:27. Christ is freeing them from sensitiveness about accepting entertainment, not from scruples about eating food provided by heathen. ἄξιοςγὰρἐργάτηςτοῦμισθοῦαὐτοῦ . Matthew 10:10 has τῆςτροφῆςαὐτοῦ . Epiphanius combines the two with Luke 3:14: ἄξιοςγὰρὁἐργ . τ . μισθ . αὐτοῦκαὶἀρκετὸνἀρκετὸντῷἐργαζομένῳἡτροφὴαὐτοῦ (Hæ r. lxxx 5, p. 1072 A). Much more interesting is the quotation in 1 Timothy 5:18, which has been made an objection to the genuineness of the Epistle. But it is probable (1) that λέγειγὰρἡγραφή applies only to Βοῦνἀλοῶνταοὐφιμώσεις , and (2) that Ἄξιοςὁἐργάτηςτοῦμισθοῦαὐτοῦ is given as a well-known proverb or saying of Christ. See Introduction, § 6, i. a. μὴμεταβαίνετεἐξοἰκίαςεἰςοἰκίαν . “ Do not go on changing,” i.e. μένετε . They were not to fear being burdensome to their first entertainers, nor to go back to those who had rejected them, still less to seek more pleasant quarters. Perhaps also this is a warning against accepting numerous invitations which would waste precious time. To this day in the East travellers who arrive at an Arab village are overwhelmed with a round of invitations (Lasserre, É vangiles, p. 324). Note the exact and original antithesis between ἐξ and εἰς , “ Out of” and “ into the interior of.” 8. καὶεἰςἣνἄνπόλιν . Apparently vv. 5-7 apply to single dwellings, vv. 8-12 to towns. For δέχωνται see small print on 8:13. We might expect ἐὰνδέχωνται for καὶδέχωνται . τὰπαρατιθέμεναὑμῖν . Just “ what is offered,” without demanding more or anything different. They must be neither greedy nor fastidious. Comp. 9:16; Genesis 24:33, Genesis 24:43:31; 1 Samuel 28:22; 2 Samuel 12:20; 2 Kings 6:22; 2Ki_4 Mac. 6:15. 9. καὶλέγετεαὐτοῖς . “ And continue saying to them” ; i.e. to the inhabitants generally, not merely to the sick. Ἤγγικενἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶςἡβασιλείατοῦΘεοῦ . So that the last preaching resembled the first: Matthew 3:2, Matthew 3:4:17; Mark 1:15. The Kingdom of Heaven is naturally thought of as coming “ upon” men, down from above. For ἐγγίζεινἐπίτινα see Psalms 26:2; Psa_1 Mac. 5:40, 42. Comp. Matthew 12:28. Note Lk.s favourite ἐγγίζειν . 10. One house might receive them, but the town as a whole reject them. In that case they are to leave the house and deliver a public warning before leaving the town. εἰςτὰςπλατείας . “ Into the open streets” : It is the fem. of πλατύς with ὁδός understood: 13:26, 14:21; Acts 5:15; Proverbs 7:6; Isaiah 15:3; Ezekiel 7:9. Not in Mk. or Jn. 11. Καὶτὸνκονιορτὸντὸνκολληθέταἡμῖν . “ Even the dust that cleaveth to us.” “ Not even the smallest thing of yours will we have.” Hobart claims κολλάω as a medical word (pp. 128, 129). In N.T. it is used only in the passive with reflexive force. It occurs seven times in Lk. (15:15; Acts 5:13, Acts 8:29, Acts 9:26, Acts 10:28, Acts 17:34) and five times elsewhere (Matthew 19:5; Romans 12:9; 1 Corinthians 6:16, 1 Corinthians 6:17; Revelation 18:5), two of which are quotations from LXX, where it is frequent; once in the active (Jeremiah 13:11). Neither in LXX nor in N.T. does ἀπομάσσειν occur again: comp. ἐκμάσσειν (7:38, 44). πλὴντοῦτογινώσκετεὅτι . “ But, although you reject us, the fact remains that you must perceive, that,” etc. See on 6:24, 35. Note that there is no ἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶς after ἤγγικεν . The message of mercy has become a sentence of judgment. “ The Kingdom has come nigh, but not on you, because you have put it from you.” Lk alone of the Evangelists uses τοῦτο … (12:39; Acts 24:14). Jn. has ὄτι after διὰτοῦτο , but after τοῦτο has ἵνα . 12. ἐντῇἡμέρᾳἐκείνῃ . The day of judgment following on the completion of the Kingdom, as is clear from ver. 14. Comp. 21:34; Matthew 7:22; 2 Thessalonians 1:10; 2 Timothy 1:12, 2 Timothy 1:18, 2 Timothy 1:4:8. Luke 6:23 is different. As in ver. 24, Lk. omits the introductory ἀμήν : he also omits καὶΓομόρροις . The people in the cities of the plain had had no such opportunities as those to whom Christ’ s own disciples preached. Comp. Matthew 11:23. ἀνεκτότερον . Remissius (Vulg.); tolerabilius (Lat. Vet.). Only the comparative of ἀνεκτός occurs in N.T., and always in this phrase: Matthew 10:15, Matthew 10:11:22, Matthew 10:24. Not in LXX. 13-15. The Solemn Farewell to the Cities in which He had preached and manifested Himself in vain. The mention of the judgment which awaits the towns that shall reject His forerunners naturally leads to the mention of those places which have already rejected Him. It is plain from ver. 16 that this lamentation over the three cities is part of the address to the Seventy. The wording is almost the same as Matthew 11:21-24, but there the comparison with Sodom is joined to the denunciation of Capernaum. 13. χοραζείν . Excepting here and the similar Woe in Matthew 11:21, Chorazin is not mentioned in N.T. This shows us how much of Christ’ s work is left unrecorded (John 21:25). The name does not occur in O.T. nor in Josephus. It may be identified with the ruins now called Kerâ zeh, about two miles N.E. of Tell Hû m, which is supposed to be Capernaum; and Jerome tells us that Chorazin was two miles from Capernaum: est autem nunc desertum in secundo lapide a Capharnaum. Some identify Tell Hû m with Chorazin; but Conder, who does not believe that Tell Hû m is Capernaum, nevertheless regards Kerâ zeh as certainly Chorazin (Handbook to the Bible, pp. 324-326); and this is now the prevailing view. D. B.2 s.v.; D.C.G.s.v. ἐνσάκκῳ … καθήμενοι . Constructio ad sensum: comp. ver. 8. Χοραζείν and Βηθσαϊδά are feminine, and hence the reading καθήμεναι (D). ἐνσάκκῳ . Our “ sackcloth” gives a wrong idea of σάκκος , which was made of the hair of goats and other animals, and was used for clothing. But sacks were made of it (Genesis 42:25; Joshua 9:4) as well as garments. Comp. Jonah 3:6. The πάλαι points to a ministry of considerable duration in these cities. μετενόησαν . Like μετάνοια (see on 3:3), μετανοεῖν is much more frequent in Lk. (11:32, 13:3, 5, 15:7, etc.) than in Mt. and Mk. Neither is found in Jn. See on 5:32. 14. πλὴνΤύρῳκαὶΣιδῶνι . “ But, guilty as Tyre and Sidon are yet,” etc. They were both of them heathen commercial towns, and are frequently denounced by the Prophets for their wickedness: Isa_23.; Jeremiah 25:22, 47:4; Ezekiel 26:3-7, Ezekiel 28:12-22. Of Chorazin and Bethsaida the paradox was true, that the Kingdom of God had come nigh to them, and yet they were far from the Kingdom of God. 15. μὴἕωςοὐρανοῦὑψωθήσῃ ; “ Shalt thou be exalted as far as heaven? Thou shalt be thrust down as far as Hades.” Both here and Matthew 11:23 the reading ἡ … ὑψωθεῖσα is found in many authorities; but the evidence against it is conclusive. Godet supports it as being parfaitsment Claire et simple; which is the explanation of the corruption. There is less certainty as to whether καταβήσῃ , which is probably right in Mt., is right here (B D): καταβιβασθήσῃ is well supported. In Ezekiel 31:16, Ezekiel 31:17 we have both κατεβίβαζονεἰςᾅδου and κατέβησανεἰςᾅδου . Heaven and Hades (not Gehenna) here stand for height of glory and depth of shame (Isaiah 14:13-15). The desolation of the whole neighbourhood, and the difficulty of identifying even the sites of these flourishing towns, is part of the fulfilment of this prophecy. See Jos. B. J. iii. 10, 9; Farrar, Life of Christ, ii. 101; Tristram, Bible Places, 267; Renan, L’ Antechrist, p. 277. 16. Ὁἀκούωνὑμῶνἐμοῦἀκούει . Note the chiasmus. This verse connects the work of Christ with the work of His disciples (Acts 9:4), and forms a solemn conclusion to the address to the Seventy. Those who reject their message will share the lot of those who rejected Christ:1 all alike have rejected God. Comp. Matthew 10:40; John 13:20; 1 Thessalonians 4:8; 1 Samuel 8:7. The Seventy must do their utmost to avert so miserable a result of their labours. For ἀθετεῖ see on 7:30. Syr-Sin. paraphrases. 17-24. The Return of the Seventy. They would not all retrun at once, and probably did not all return to the same place, but met Jesus at different points as He followed them. Contrast the very brief account of the return of the Twelve (9:10). Trench, Studies in the Gospels, p. 225. 17. Ὑπέστρεψανδὲοἱἑδομήκοντα . Most of the authorities which add δύο in ver. 1 add it here also. By “ returned” is meant that they came back to Jesus. He meanwhile had been moving. See on 4:14 and 1:56. καὶτὰδαιμόνιαὑποτάσσεται . “ Even the demons are being subjected.” This was more than they expected, for they had only been told to heal the sick (ver. 9); whereas the Twelve were expressly endowed with power to cast out demons (9:1). There is nothing to show that Lk. considers exorcizing evil spirits to be the highest of gifts; but the Seventy were specially elated at possessing this power. They think more of it than of their success in proclaiming the Kingdom; yet they recognize that it is derived from their Master. It is in His name that they can exorcize. His reply is partly (ver. 20) like the reply to the woman who propounced His Mother to be blessed (9:27, 28). They may admire this; but there is something much more admirable. 18. ἘθεώρουντὸνΣατάᾶν . At the very time when His ministers were casting out Satan’ s ministers,— nay, even as He was sending them forth to their work, Jesus knew that Satan was being overcome, In the defeat of the demons He saw the downfall of their chief. This passage is again conclusive evidence as to Christ’ s teaching respecting the existence of a personal power of evil. See on 8:12, and comp. 13:16, 22:31. In all these cases it would have been quite natural to speak of impersonal evil. See D. B.1 art. “ Satan” ; Edersh. L. &T. 2.Rev_13. § 2. In N.T. the form is Σατανᾶς (not excepting 2 Corinthians 12:7), which is declined, and almost invariably has the art.; but 22:3 and Mark 3:23 are exceptions. In LXX the word is rare. We have σατάν , indecl. and without art., 1 Kings 11:14, [23, 25], in the sense of “ adversary,” a human enemy; and τὸνΣατανᾶν , or τὸνΣατανά , Ecclus. 21:27. For the imperf. comp. Acts 18:5, and see Win. xl. 3. d, p. 336. ὡςἀστραπήν . It was as visible and unmistakable: comp. 17:24; Matthew 24:27. The words are amphibolous, but are better taken with ἐθεώρουν than with ἐκτοῦοὐρανοῦ , which is to be joined with πεσόντα : comp. 9:17, 27, 57, 13:1, etc. In B 254 ἐκτοῦοὐρανοῦ precedes ὡςἀστραπήν . As in ver. 15, heaven is here put for the height of prosperity and power: Comp. Isaiah 14:12 and τὰἐπουράνια (Ephesians 6:12).1 πεσόντα . Last with emphasis. The “ fallen” of RV. is no improvement on the “ fall” of AV. “ I beheld Satan fallen” means “ saw him prostrate after his fall.” The aor. indicates the coincidence between the success of the Seventy and Christ’ s vision of Satan’ s overthrow ; and neither “ fallen” nor “ falling” (cadentem, Vulg.) express this so well as “ fall” in English. See Burton., § 146, and T.S. Evens, Expositor, 2nd series, iii. p. 164. Some refer the fall to the original fall of the Angels (Jude 1:6), in which case ἐθεώρουν refers to the Son pre-existing with the Father. Others to the Incarnation, or the Temptation. Rather, it refers to the success of the disciples regarded as a symbol and earnest of the complete overthrow of Satan.2 Jesus had been contemplating evil as a power overthrown. In any case there is no analogy between this passage and Revelation 12:12: the point is not that the devil has come down to work mischief on the earth, but that his power to work mischief is broken. This verse is sometimes quite otherwise explained. “ You are elated at your victory over the demons, and are proud of our spiritual powers. Beware of spiritual pride. There was a time when I beheld Satan himself fall even from heaven owing to this sin.” 1 Others make it a rebuke to complacency and elation, but in another way. “ You are overjoyed at finding that demons are subject to you. That is no very great thing. I once beheld their sovereign cast out of leaven Itself; and their subjection was involved in his overthrow.” Both these interpretations depend upon a misunderstanding of τοῦοὐρανοῦ , which does not mean the abode of the Angels, but the summit of power (Lamentations 2:1). This is well expressed in the Clementine Liturgy, in the Collect at the dismissal of the energumens, ὁῥήξαςαὐτὸνὡςἀστραπὴνἐξοὐρανοῦεἰςγῆν , οὐτοπικῷῥήγματι , ἀλλὰἀπὸτιμῆςεἰςἀτιμίαν , δι ʼ ἐκούσιονκακόνοιαν Hammond, Liturgies Eastern and Western, Oxford, 1878, p. 5. 19. δέδωκαὑμῖντὴνἐξουσίαν . The powers which they have received are larger than they had supposed. They possessed during their mission, and still retain, the ἐξουσία to vanquish the powers of evil. Note the article, which is almost peculiar to this passage. Contrast 5:24, 9:1, 12:5, 19:17; Acts 9:14. The passage is possibly moulded on Psalms 91:13: ἐπ ʼ ἀσπίδακαὶβασιλίσκονἐπιβήσῃ , καὶκαταπατήσειςλέοντακαὶδράκοντα ; but comp. Deuteronomy 8:15: τοῦἀγαγόντοςσεδιὰτῆςἐρήμουτῆςμεγάληςκαὶτῆςφοβερᾶςἐκείνης , οὗὂφιςδάκνωνκαὶσκορπίος . The meaning is that no fraud or treachery shall prevail against them. καὶἐπὶπ . τὴνδύναμιντοῦἐχθροῦ . Contrast the δύναμις of the enemy with the ἐξουσια given by Christ. Nor shall any hostile strength or ability succeed. The promise in both cases refers to victory over spiritual foes rather than to immunity from bodily injuries. “ The enemy” means Satan: Matthew 13:25; Romans 14:20; 1 Peter 5:8. But protection from physical harm may be included (Acts 28:3-5). The appendix to Mk. more clearly includes this (14:18). Comp. the story of S. John being preserved from being harmed by boiling oil (Tertul. Praeligscr. Haeligr. xxxvi.), or by drinking hemlock (Lips. Apokr. Apostelgesch. 1. PP. 426, 428, 432, 480, etc.). This latter story is unknown to the Fathers of the first six centuries. ἐπὶνπᾶσαντὴνδυν . This does not depend upon πατεῖν , as is shown by the change of prep. and case, but upon ἐξουσίαν . They have ἐξουσία over every δύναμις . Syr-Sin. omits πᾶσαν . πατεῖνἐπάνω . Not of trampling under foot as vanquished, but of walking upon without being hurt. οὐδὲνὑμᾶςοὐμὴἀδικήσει . Strong negation: οὐδέν is probably the subject of ἀδικήσει . We might translate, “ and the power of the enemy shall not in anywise hurt you.” For ἀδικεῖν with double acc. comp. Acts 25:10; Galatians 4:12; Philemon 1:18: and for ἀδικεῖν in the sense of “ injure” comp. Revelation 7:3, Revelation 9:4. The reading ἀδικήσῃ (BC) looks like a grammatical correction. This last clause sums up the other two. They have power over fraud and force; nothing shall harm them. Comp. John 10:28, John 10:29; Isaiah 11:8, Isaiah 11:9.Isaiah 11:1 20. πλὴνἐντούτῳμὴχαίρετε . “ But (although you may well rejoice, yet) cease to rejoice in this, but continue to rejoice in something better.” Pres. imperat in both cases. Ista læ titia periculo superbiæ subjacet: illa demissum gratumque animum Deo subjicit (Grodus). The casting out of demons gives no security for the possession of eternal life. It is not one of τὰχαρίσματατὰμείζονα still less is it the καθ ʼ ὑπερβολὴνὁδόν (1 Corinthians 12:31). A Judas might cast out demons. Comp. “ I will have mercy, and not sacrifice” (Hosea 6:6), which does not mean that sacrifice is forbidden, but that mercy is greatly superior. See on 23:28 and comp. 14:12, 13. For πλήν comp. vv. 11, 14. τὰὀνόματαὑμῶνἐνγέγραπταιἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς . “ Your names have been written, and remain written, in heaven,” as citizens possessing the full privileges of the heavenly commonwealth: in cœ lis untie Satanas decidit: etsi reclamavit Satanas: etiamsi in terra non sitis celebres (Beng.). But there is probably no reference to ἐντῷὀνόματί (ver. 7). “ Do not rejoice because you exorcize demons in My name, but rejoice because your names are written in heaven,” is a false antithesis.2 There is no emphasis on ὑμῶν . Comp. Hebrews 12:23; Revelation 3:5, Revelation 3:17:8, Revelation 3:20:12, Revelation 3:15, Revelation 3:21:27, Revelation 3:22:19; Philippians 3:20. The figure is one of many taken from O.T. and endued with a higher meaning: Isaiah 4:3; Ezekiel 13:9; Daniel 12:1. Comp. Hermas, Vis. i. 3, 2; Sim. ii. 9. Contrast Jeremiah 17:13. For Rabbinical illustrations see Wetst. on Philippians 4:3. Allusion to the Oriental custom of recording in the archives the names of benefactors (Esther 10:2; Hdt. viii. 90, 6) is not probable. And it is clear from Revelation 3:5, Revelation 3:22:19; Exodus 32:32; Psalms 69:28 that absolute predestination is not included in the metaphor. For the Hebr. plur. τοῖςοὐρανοῖς comp. 12:33, 21:26; Acts 7:56. 21-24. The Exultation of Jesus over the Divine Preference shown to the Disciples. Matthew 11:25-27. Nowhere else is anything of the kind recorded of Christ. Mt. connects it with the Woes on the three cities, and connects these with the message from the Baptist. 21. Ἐναὐτῇτῇὥρᾳ “ In that very hour” (see small print on ver. 7), making the connexion with the return of the Seventy close and express. Both this and αὐτῇτῇὥρᾳ are peculiar to Lk. (7:21?, 12:12, 20:19: and 2:38; Acts 14:18, Acts 22:13). In the parallel passage we have ἐνἐκείνῳτῷκαιρωε͂ͅ (Matthew 11:25). ἠγαλλιάσατοτῷπνεύματιτῷἁγίῳ . “ Exulted in the Holy Spirit,” i.e. this holy joy is a Divine inspiration. The fact is analogous to His being “ led by the Spirit in the wilderness” (4:1). Nowhere else is anything of the kind recorded of Christ. The verb is a strong one: Comp. 1:47; Acts 2:26, Acts 2:16:34; 2 Samuel 1:20; 1 Chronicles 16:31; Habakkuk 3:18; Isaiah 12:6, 25:9; Psalms passim. Mt. has merely ἀποκριθείς . The strangeness of the expression “ exulted in the Holy Spirit” has led to the omission of τῷἁγίῳ in A Syr-Sin. and some inferior authorities. There is no parallel in Scripture. Romans 1:4; Hebrews 9:14; 1 Peter 3:18, are not analogous. Ἐξομολογοῦμαίσοι , πάτερκύριετοῦοὐρανοῦκαὶτῆςγῆς . “ I acknowledge openly to Thine honour, I give Thee praise” ; Genesis 29:35; Psalms 30:4, 106:47, 122:4; Romans 14:11, Romans 15:9: Clem. Romans 61:3. Satan is cast down from heaven, and vanquished on earth. God is Father and Lord of both; Father in respect of the love, and Lord in respect of the power, which this fact exhibits. For other public recognitions of God as His Father comp. Matthew 15:13, Matthew 15:18:35; John 5:17, John 5:11:41, John 5:12:27; Luke 23:34, Luke 23:46. The genitives belong to κύριε only, not to πάτερ : comp. Clem Hom xvii. 5. ἀπέκρυψαςταῦταἀπὸσοφῶνκαὶσυνετῶν , κ .τ .λ . The ταῦτα refers to the facts about the Kingdom made known by the Seventy. In sound as in sense there is a contrast between ἀπέκρυψας and ἀπεκάλυψας . The aristocracy of intellect, who prided themselves upon their superiority, are here the lowest of all. The statement is general, but has special reference to the scribes and Pharisees, who both in their own and in popular estimation were the wise and enlightened (John 7:49, John 9:40). The νήπιοι are the unlearned, and therefore free from the prejudices of those who had been trained in the Rabbinical schools. It is very arbitrary to confine the thanksgiving to ἀπεκάλυψας : it belongs to ἀπέκρυψας also. That God has proved His independence of human intellect is a matter for thankfulness. Intellectual gifts, so far from being necessary, are often a hindrance. S. Paul is fond of pointing out this law of the “ Lord of heaven and earth” : Romans 1:22; 1 Corinthians 1:19-31, 2 Corinthians 4:3, 2 Corinthians 4:4. Note the omission of the article before σοφῶν , συνετῶν , and νηπίοις . To be σοφός and συνετός is not fatal: such are not ipso facto excluded, although they often exclude themselves. Nor are the νήπιοι ipso facto accepted. In Clem Hom viii. 6 the passage is quoted thus: ἐξομολογοῦμαἰσοι , πάτερτοῦοὐρανοῦκαὶτῆςγῆς , ὅτιἀπέκρυψαςταῦταἀπὸσοφῶνκαὶπρεσβυτέρων , καὶἀπεκάλυψαςαὐτὰνηπίοιςθηλάζουσιν ; and again, 18:15: ὅτιἅτερἧνκρυπτὰσοφοῖς , ἀπεκάλυψαςαὐτὰνηπίοιςθηλάζουσιν . The latter form avoids the difficulty about thanking God for hiding the wise. In application the νήπιοι are made to be the Gentiles. The Marcosians had the future,— ἐξομολογήσομαι (Iren. i. 20, 3). The word νήπιος represents the Latin infans. Lat. Vet. and Vulg. have parvulis here and Matthew 11:25 ; but infantium, Matthew 21:16. It is opposed to ἀνήρ , 1 Corinthians 13:11; Ephesians 4:14; and to τέλειος , Hebrews 5:13. ναί . This resumes the expression of thanks; and hence the second ὅτι , like the first, depends upon ἐξομολογοῦμαίσοι : “ I thank Thee that thus it was well-pleasing.” Comp. Philippians 4:3; Philemon 1:20; Revelation 16:7; Revelation 22:20. ὁπατήρ . The nom. with the art. often takes the place of the voc. in N.T., and generally without any difference in meaning. This is specially the case with imperatives (8:54, 12:32; Matthew 27:29?; Mark 5:41, Mark 5:9:25; Colossians 3:18; Ephesians 6:1, etc.), and may often be due to Hebrew influence (2 Kings 9:31; Jeremiah 47:6). Here there is perhaps a slight difference between πάτερ and ὁπατήρ , the latter meaning, “ Thou who art the Father of all.” The use of ὁπατήρ for πάτερ may be due to liturgical influence. Comp. Mark 14:36; Romans 8:15; and see Lft. on Galatians 4:6 and Colossians 3:18; also Win. xxix. 2, p. 227; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 76. εὐδοκίαἐγένετοἔμπροσθένσου . A Hebraism, with εὐδοκία first for emphasis. See on 2:14. 22. The importance of this verse, which is also in Mt. (11:27), has long been recognized. It is impossible upon any principles of criticism to question its genuineness, or its right to be regarded as among the earliest materials made use of by the Evangelists. And it contains the whole of the Christology of the Fourth Gospel. It is like “ an aerolite from the Johannean heaven” (Hose, Gesch. Jesu, p. 527), and for that very reason causes perplexity to those who deny the solidarity between the Johannean heaven and the Synoptic earth. It should be compared with the following passages: John 3:35, John 3:6:46, John 3:8:19, John 3:10:15, John 3:30, John 3:14:9, John 3:16:15, John 3:17:6, John 3:10.John 3:1 The introductory insertion, καὶστραφεὶςπρὸςτοὺςμαθητὰςεἶπεν (A C) is one of the few points in which the TR. (which with א B D L M Ξ omits the words) differs from the third edition of Steph. 22. Πάνταμοιπαρεδόθη . The πάντα seems primarily to refer to the revealing and concealing. Christ has full power in, executing the Divine decrees. But it is arbitrary to confine the πάντα to the potestas revelandi. γινώσκειτίςἐστινὁυἱός . “ Comes to know what His nature is, His counsel, His will.” Mt. has ἐπιγινέσκειτὸνυἱόν , where the compound verb covers what is here expressed by the τίς . Both might be translations of the same Aramaic. On purely subjective grounds Keim contends for the Marcionite reading ἔγνω , which is certainly as old as Justin (Apol. i. 63), although he has γινώσκει , Try. c. Even Meyer thinks that ἔγνω may be original. But the evidence against it is overwhelming. Syr-Sin. makes the two clauses interrogative: “ Who knoweth the Son, except the Father? and who knoweth the Father, except the Son?” βούληται … ἀποκαλύψαι . “ Willing to reveal” (RV.); “ will reveal” (AV.), is the simple future. There is a similar weakening of βούλεσθαι in AV. Acts 18:15, and of θέλειν , 14:14. See small print on 9:24. 23, 24. In Matthew 13:16, Matthew 13:17 this saying, with some slight differences, occurs in quite another connexion, viz. after the explanation of the reason to Christ’ s speaking in parables. If the words were uttered only once, Lk. appears to give the actual position. The κατ ʼ ἰδίαν seems to imply some interval between vv. 22 and 23. Christ’ s thanksgiving seems to have been uttered publicly, in the place where the returning Seventy met Him. 23. ἃβλέπετε . The absence of ὑμεῖς is remarkable. Contrast ὑμῶνδὲμακάριοιοἰὀφθαλμοί (Matthew 13:16). Lk. has no equivalent to καὶτὰὦτα [ὑμῶν ] ὅτιἀκούουσιν . Comp. μακάριοιοἰγινόμενοιἐνταῖςἡμέραιςἐκείναιςἰδεῖντὰἀγαθά (Ps. Sol. 17:50, 18:7). 24. πολλοὶπροφῆταικαὶβασιλεῖς . Balaam, Moses, Isaiah, and Micah; David, Solomon, and Hezekiah. For βασιλεῖς Mt. has δίκαιοι , and for ἠθέλησαν has ἐπεθύμησαν . Vulg. has voluerunt here and cupierunt in Mt. Neither AV. nor RV. distinguishes. Note that Lk. again omits the introductory ἀμήν , as in ver. 12. See on 12:44. As to the Prophets comp. 1 Peter 1:10, 1 Peter 1:11. ἃὑμεῖςβλέπετε . Here Mt., who has given the emphatic contrast between “ you” and the ancients at the outset, omits the ὑμεῖς . One suspects that his arrangement of the pronouns is the original one. Lk. has no ὑμεῖς with ἀκούετε . In 2 Corinthians 11:29 we have an emphatic pronoun with the second verb and not with the first. 25-29. The Lawyer’ s Questions. This incident forms the introduction to the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Comp. 12:13-15, 14:15, 15:1-3. The identification of this lawyer with the one who asked, “ Which is the great commandment in the law?” (Mark 12:28-32; Matthew 22:35-40) is precarious, but perhaps ought not to be set aside as impossible. There the question is theological and speculative; here it is practical. Place, introduction, and issue are quite different; and the quotation from the Law which is common to the narratives is here uttered by the lawyer, there by Christ. An identification with the man who had great possessions, and who asked the very same question as the lawyer asks here, although in a very different spirit (Mark 10:17-22; Matthew 19:16-22), is impossible, because Lk. himself records that in full (18:18-23). The opening words of this narrative point to an Aramaic source. 25. νομικόςτιςἀνέστηἐκπειράζωναὐτον . See on 7:30. Excepting Matthew 22:35, which is possibly parallel to this, νομικός is used by no other Evangelist. The ἀνέστη implies a situation in which the company were seated. Neither this question nor the one respecting the great commandment was calculated to place Jesus in a difficulty, but rather to test His ability as a teacher: the ἐκπειράζων (see small print on 4:12) does not imply a sinister attempt to entrap Him. This use of τις (vv. 30, 31, 33, 38) is freq. in Lk. τίποιήσας . The tense implies that by the performance of some one thing eternal life can be secured. What heroic act must be performed, or what great sacrifice made? The form of question involves an erroneous view of eternal life and its relation to this life. Contrast the Philippian gaoler (Acts 16:30). ζωὴναἰώνιονκληρονομήσω . The verb is freq. in LXX of the occupation of Canaan by the Israelites (Deuteronomy 4:22, Deuteronomy 4:26, Deuteronomy 4:6:1, etc.), and thence is transferred to the perfect possession to be enjoyed in the Kingdom of the Messiah (Ps. 24:13, 36:9, 11, 22, 29; Isaiah 60:21); both uses being based upon the original promise to Abraham. See Wsctt. Hebrews, pp. 167-169. Lk. like Jn., never uses αἰώνιος of anything but eternal beatitude (16:9, 18:18, 30). The notion of endlessness, although not necessarily expressed, is probably implied in the word. See Wsctt. Epp. of St. John, pp. 204-208; App. E, Gosp. of S. John in Camb. Grk. Test.; and the literature quoted in Zoeckler, Handb. d. Theol. Wissft. 33. pp. 199-201. With the whole expression comp. οἱδὲὅσιοικυρίουκληρονομήσουσιζωὴνἐνεὐφροσύνῃ (Ps. Sol. 14:7), and ὅσιοικυρίουκληρονομήσαιενἐπαγγελίαςκυρίου (12:8). 26. Εντῷνοιμῳ . First with emphasis. A νομικός ought to know that ἐννόμῳ the answer to the question is plainly given: ἐπὶτὸννόμοναὐτὸνπαραπέμπει (Euthym.). πῶςἀναγινώσκεις ; Equivalent to the Rabbinical formula, when scriptural evidence was wanted, “ What readest thou?” But perhaps the πῶς implies a little more, viz. “ to what effect” ? The form of question does not necessarily imply a rebuke. For ἀναγινώσκειν see 4:16. That Jesus pointed to the man’ s phylactery and meant, “ What have you got written there?” is conjecture. That he had “ Thou shaft love thy neighbour as thyself” on his phylactery, is improbable. The first of the two laws was written on phylacteries, and the Jews recited it morning and evening, from Deuteronomy 6:5, Deuteronomy 6:11:13; hence it was the natural answer to Christ’ s question. That he adds the second law, from Leviticus 19:18, is remarkable, and it may be that he was desirous of leading up to the question, “ And who is my neighbour?” See D.B.2 art. “ Frontlets” ; Schaffs Herzog, art. “ Phylactery.” 27. Here, as in Mark 12:30, we have four powers with which God is to be loved. Matthew 22:37 follows Heb. and LXX in giving three. They cover man’ s physical, intellectual, and moral activity. Mk. and LXX have ἐξ throughout; Mt. has ἐν throughout; Lk. changes from ἐξ to ἐν . For the last words comp. Romans 13:9. 28. Ὀρθῶςἀπεκρίθης . Comp. ὀρθῶςἔκρινας (7:43). In Mark 12:32 it is the scribe who commends Jesus for His answer. τοῦτοποίει . Pres. imperat. “ Continually do this,” not merely do it once for all; with special reference to the form of the lawyer’ s question (ver. 25). See Romans 2:13, Romans 2:10:5; Leviticus 18:5. 29. θέλωνδικαιῶσαιἑαυτόν . Not merely “ willing,” but “ wishing to justify himself,” For what? Some say, for having omitted to perform this duty in the past. Others, for having asked such a question, the answer to which had been shown to be so simple. The latter is perhaps nearer the fact; but it almost involves the other. “ Wishing to put himself in the right,” he points out that the answer given is not adequate, because there is doubt as to the meaning of “ one’ s neighbour.” Qui multa interrogant non multa facere gestiunt (Beng.). For δικαιῶσαι see on 7:35 and Romans 1:17. καὶτίςἐστίνμουπλησίον ; The question was a very real one to a Jew of that age. Lightfoot, ad loc., quotes from Maimonides, “ he excepts all Gentiles when he saith, His neighbour. An Israelite killing a stranger inhabitant, he doth not die for it by the Sanhedrim; because he said, If any one lift up himself against his neighbour.” καὶτίςμουπλησίον ; The καί accepts what is said, and leads on to another question: comp. 18:26; John 9:36; 2 Corinthians 2:2. Win. liii. 3. a, p. 545. For the omission of the art. before πλησίον (μου perhaps taking its place) see Win. 19:5. b, p. 163: but πλησίον may be an adverb. 30-37. § The Parable of the Good Samaritan. Entirely in harmony with the general character of this Gospel as teaching that righteousness and salvation are not the exclusive privilege of the Jew. The parable is not an answer to the original question (ver. 25), and therefore in no way implies that works of benevolence secure eternal life. It is an answer to the new question (ver. 29), and teaches that no one who is striving to love his neighbour as himself can be in doubt as to who is his neighbour. We may believe that the narrative is not fiction, but history. Jesus would not be likely to invent such behaviour, and attribute it to priest, Levita, and Samaritan, if it had not actually occurred. Nowhere else does He speak against priests or Levites. Moreover, the parable would have far more point if taken from real life.1 30. ὑπολαβών . “ Took him up” to reply to him. Here only in N.T. has ὑπολαμβάνω this meaning, which is quite classical and freq. in Job (2:4, 4:1, 6:1, 9:1, 11:1, 12:1, 15:1, 16:1, etc.). Contrast 7:43; Acts 2:15; Job 25:3, where it means “ I suppose.” Here Vulg. has suscipiens, with suscipiens as v.l. in many MSS. Besides these two, Lat. Vet. has subiciens (e) and respondens (f); but not excipiens, which would be an equivalent. Syr-Sin. omits. Ἄνθρωπόςτιςκατέβαινεν . The road is downhill; but besides this we commonly talk of “ going down” from the capital. The narrative implies that the man is a Jew. Jericho is about twenty miles from Jerusalem; and the road still, as in Jerome’ s day, has a bad name for brigandage from “ the Arabian in the wilderness” (Jeremiah 3:2), i.e. the Bedawin robbers who infest the unfrequented roads. Sir F. Henniker was murdered here in 1820.2 It is possible that Jesus was on this road at the time when He delivered the parable; for Bethany is on it, and the next event takes place there (vv. 38-42). λῃσταῖςπεριέπεσεν . Change from imperf, to aor. “ Fell among robbers,” so that they were all round him. Quite classical; comp. James 1:2. Wetst. gives instances of this very phrase in profane authors, and it is in correct to classify περιπίπτειν as a medical word. For λῃστής , “ robber” (19:46, 22:52; John 18:40), as distinct from κλέπτης , “ thief” (12:33, 39; John 12:6), see Trench, Syn. xliv. οἳκαὶἐκδύσαντες . “ Who, in addition to other violence, stripped him.” Robbers naturally plunder their victims, but do not always strip them. Comp. Matthew 27:28; with double accusative, Matthew 27:31; Mark 15:20. It was because he tried to keep his clothes, and also to disable him, that they added blows to robbery. For the phrase πληγὰςἐπιθέντες comp. Acts 16:23; Revelation 22:18: in class. Grk. πλ . ἐμβάλλειν . Cicero has plagam alicui imponere (Pro Sest. xix. 44); also vulnera alicui imponere (De Fin. iv. 24, 66). For ἠμιθανῆ comp. 4 Mac. 4:11. 31. κατὰσυγκυρίαν . Not exactly “ by chance,” but “ by way of coincidence, by concurrence.” Vulg. has accidit ut; Lat. Vet. fortuito (a ff2 q r), forte (d), derepente (e), while several omit (b c i 1). The word occurs here only in N.T. and is rare elsewhere. In Hippocrates we have δι ʼ ἄλληντινασυγκυρίαν and τὰἀπὸσυγκυρίας Neither συντυχία nor τύχη occurs in N.T.; and τύχη only once or twice, συντυχία hot once, in LXX. Multæ bone occasiones latent sub his quæ fortuita videantur. Scriptura nil describit temere ut fortuitum (Beng.). ἱερεύςτιςκατέβαινεν . This implies that he also was on his way from Jerusalem. That he was going home after discharging his turn of service, and that Jericho was a priestly city, like Hebron, is conjecture. ἀντιπαρῆλθεν . “ Went by opposite to him.” A rare word; here only in N.T. In Wisd. 16:10 it has the contrary meaning, “ came by opposite to them” to help them; τὸἔλεοςγάρσουἀντιπαρῆλθενκαὶἰάσατοαὐτούς . Comp. Malachi 2:7-9. 32. The insertion of γέόμενος before κατὰτὸντόπον (A) makes ἐλθών belong to ἰδών , “ came and saw” : and thus the Levite is made to be more heartless than the priest, whom he seems to have been following. The priest saw and passed on; but the Levite came up to him quite close, saw, and passed on. But B L X Ξ omit γέόμενος , while D and other authorities omit ἐλθών ; and it is not likely that both are genuine. Syr-Sin. omits one. Most editors now omit γέόμενος , but Field pleads for its retention, and would omit ἐλθών (Otium Norvic. 3. p. 43). 33. Σαμαρείτηςδέτιςὁδεύων . A despised schismatic, in marked contrast to the orthodox clergy who had shown no kindness.1 Comp. 9:52; John 4:39-42. He is not said to be καταβαίνων : he would not be coming from Jerusalem. See on 17:18. ἧλθενκατ ʼ αὐτόν . “ Came down upon him,” or “ where he was,” or “ towards him” (Acts 8:26, Acts 8:16:7; Philippians 3:14). The fear of being himself overtaken by brigands, or of being suspected of the robbery, does not influence him. “ Directly he saw him, forthwith (aor.) he was moved with compassion.” See on 7:13. 34. προσελθών . This neither of the others seems to have done: they avoided coming near him. He was half-unconscious, and they wished to get past without being asked to help. κατέδησεντὰτραύματααὐτοῦἐπιχέωνἔλαιονκαὶοἶνον . These medical details would be specially interesting to Lk. “ Bound up, pouring on, as he bound, oil and wine.” Neither compound occurs elsewhere in N.T. Comp, τραῦμαἔστινκαταδῆσαι (Ecclus. 27:21); and, for ἐπιχέω , Genesis 28:18; Leviticus 5:11. Oil and wine were recognized household remedies. The two were sometimes mixed and used as a salve for wounds. See evidence in Wetst. Both τραῦμα and τρανματίζω are pec. to Lk. ἐπιβιβάσαςδὲαὐτὸνἐπὶτὸἴδιονκτῆνος . The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (19:35; Acts 23:24), but classical and freq. in LXX. Comp. ἐπιβιβάσατετὸνυἱόνμουΣαλωμὼνἐπὶτὴνἡμίονοντὴνἐμήν (1 Kings 1:33). Κτῆνος is lit. “ property,” and so “ cattle,” and especially a “ beast of burden” (Acts 23:24; 1 Corinthians 15:39; Revelation 18:13). The πανδοχεῖον was probably a more substantial place of entertainment than a κατάλυμα : see on 2:7. The word occurs here only in bibl. Grk., and here only is stabulum used in the sense of “ inn” : comp. stabularius in ver. 35. It is perhaps a colloquial word (Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 74). Attic πανδοκεῖον . 35. ἐπὶτὴναὒριον . “ Towards the morrow,” as Acts 4:5 and ἐπὶτὴςὥραντῆςπροσευχῆς (Acts 3:1). Syr-Sin. has “ at the dawn of the day.” In Mark 15:1 some texts read ἐπὶτὸπρωί . This use of ὲπί is rare. Comp. ὲπίτὴνἔω (Thuc. ii. 84, 2). The ἐξελθών after αὔριον (A C is not likely to be genuine; but it would mean that he went outside before giving the money, to avoid beine seen by the wounded man. א B D L X Ξ and most Versions omit. ἐκβαλὼνδύοδηνάρια . The verb does not necessarily imply any violence: “ having put out, drawn out,” from his girdle; not “ flung out” ; comp. 6:42; Matthew 12:35, Matthew 13:5. The two denarii would be more than four shillings, although in weight of silver much less than two shillings. See on 7:41. προσδαπανήσῃς “ Spend in addition” to the two denarii. Luc. Ep. Saturn. 39. From the Vulg. supererogaveris comes the technical expression opera supererogationis. ἐγὼἐντῷἐπανέρχεσθαίμε . The ἐγώ is very emphatic: “ I, and not the wounded man, am responsible for payment.” Note the pres. infin. “ While I am returning, in the course of my return journey” : see on 3:21. The verb occurs elsewhere in N.T. only 19:15, but is classical and not rare in LXX. 36, 37. The Moral of the Parable. Christ not only forces the lawyer to answer his own question, but shows that it has been asked from the wrong point of view. For the question, “ Who is my neighbour?” is substituted, “ To whom am I neighbour? Whose claims on my neighbourly help do I recognize?” All the three were by proximity neighbours to the wounded man, and his claim was greater on the priest and Levite; but only the alien recognized any claim. The γεγονέναι is very significant, and implies this recognition: “ became neighbour, proved neighbour” : comp. 19:17; Hebrews 11:6 “ The neighbouring Jews became strangers, the stranger Samaritan became neighbour, to the wounded traveller. It is not place, but love, which makes neighbourhood” (Wordsworth). RV. is the only English Version which takes account of γεγονέναι : Vulg. Luth. and Beza all treat it as εἶναι . 37. Ὁποιήσαςτὸἔλεοςμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ . The lawyer goes back to his own question, τίποιήσας ; He thereby avoids using the hateful name Samaritan: “ He that showed the act of mercy upon him,” the ἔλεος related of him. Comp. ποιῆσαιἔλεοςμετὰτῶνπατέρωνἡμῶν (1:72), and ἐμεγάλυνεντὸἔλεοςαὐτοῦμετ ʼ αὐτῆς (1:58). The phrase is Hebraistic, and in N.T. peculiar to Lk. (Acts 14:27, Acts 15:4): freq. in LXX (Genesis 24:12; Judges 1:24, Judges 8:35, etc.). Πορεύουκαὶσὺποίειὁμοίως . Either, “ Go; thou also do likewise” ; or, “ Go thou also; do likewise.” Chrysostom seems to take it in the latter way: πορεύουοὖν , φησί , καὶσύ , καὶποίειὁμοίως (xi. p. 109, B). There is a rather awkward asyndeton in either case; but καὶσύ must be taken together. Comp. Matthew 26:69; 2 Samuel 15:19; Obadiah 1:11. “ Go, and do thou likewise” would be πορεύουκαὶποίεισὺὁμοίως . Field, Otium Norvic. iii. p. 44. Note the pres. imperat. “ Thou also habitually do likewise.” It is no single act, but lifelong conduct that is required. Also that καὶζήσῃ does not follow ποίει , as in ver. 28; perhaps because the parable says nothing about loving God, which does not come within its scope. It is an answer to the question, “ Who is it that I ought to love as myself?” and we have no means of knowing that anything more than this is intended. Comp. 6:31. The Fathers delight in mystical interpretations of the parable. For references and examples see Wordsw. Comm. in loco; Trench, Par. xvii. notes. Such things are permissible so long as they are not put forward as the meaning which the Propounder of the Parable designed to teach. That Christ Himself was a unique realiation of the Good Samaritan is unquestionable. That He intended the Good Samaritan to represent himself, in His dealings with fallen humanity, is more than we know.1 38-42. § The Two Sisters of Bethany. That this incident took place at Bethany can hardly be doubted. If the sisters had of yet settled at Bethany, the place could hardly have been called ἡκώμηΜαρίαςκαὶΜάρθας (John 11:1). Jesus is on His way to or from a short visit to Jerusalem which Lk. does not mention. He perhaps inserts it here as a further answer to the question, “ What must one do to inherit eternal life?” Mere benevolence, such as that of the Samaritan, is not enough. It must be united with, and be founded upon, habitual communion with the Divine. “ The enthusiasm of humanity,” if divorced from the love of God is likely to degenerate into mere serving of tables. But the narrative may be here in its true chronological position. It is one of the most exquisite among the treasures which Lk. alone has preserved; and the coincidence between it and Joh_11. with regard to the characters of the two sisters, the incidents being totally different, is strong evidence of the historical truth of both.1 Comp. for both thought and language 1 Corinthians 7:34, 1 Corinthians 7:35. 38. Ἐνδὲτῷπορεύεσθαιαὐτούς . “ Now during their journeyings” : see on 3:21. As Lk. does not name the village, we may conjecture that he did not know where this occurred. One does not see how the mention of Bethany would have put the sisters in danger of persecution from the Jerusalem Jews. If that danger existed, the names of the sisters ought to have been suppressed. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 11:1-13. § On Prayer. Lk. shows no knowledge of time or place, and it is possible that the paragraph ought to be placed earlier in the ministry. Mt. places the giving of the Lord’ s Prayer much earlier, in the Sermon on the Mount (6:5-15). Both arrangements may be right. Christ may have delivered the Prayer once spontaneously to a large number of disciples, and again at the request of a disciple to a smaller group, who were not present on the first occasion. But if the Prayer was delivered only once, then it is Lk. rather than Mt. who gives the historic occasion (Neander, De Wette, Holtzmann, Weiss, Godet, etc. See Page, Expositor, 3rd series, vii. p. 433), Mt. might insert it to exemplify Christ’ s teaching on prayer. Lk. would not invent this special incident. The section has three divisions, of which the second and third belong to the same occasion: the Lord’ s Prayer (1-4); the Friend at Midnight (5-8); Exhortation to Perseverance in Prayer (9-13). 1-4. The Lord’ s Prayer. For abundant literature see Herzog, Pro_2 iv. p. 772; Keim, Jes. of Naz. iii. p. 337. For the liturgical use of the Prayer see D. Chr. Ant. 2 p. 1056; Kraus, Real-Enc. d. Chr. Alt. i. p. 562. Note the mark of Luke’ s style: ἐγέετο , ἐντῷεἶναι , εἶναιπροσευχόμενον , εἶπενπρόςεἶπενδέ , τὸκαθ ʼ ὴμέραν , αὐτοί , παντί . The last three, which are in the Prayer itself, point to the conclusion that at least some of the differences in wording between this form and that in Mt. are due to Lk., and that the form in Mt. better represents the original, which would be in Aramaic. The differences cannot be accounted for by independent translation The Greek of the two forms is too similar for that, especially in the use of the perplexing word ἐπιούσιος . Both Evangelists must have had the Prayer in Greek. F. H. Chase supposes that the disciples adapted the Prayer for use on special occasions, either by alterations or additions, and that both forms exhibit the Prayer as changed for liturgical purposes, ἐπιούσιος being one of these later features (Texts &Studies, vol. i. No. 3, Camb. 1891). 1. προσευχόμενον . See Introd. § 6 i. b. That this was at dawn, or at one of the usual hours of prayer, is conjecture. Nothing is known of a form of prayer taught by the Baptist; but Rabbis sometimes drew up such forms for their disciples. 2. εἶπενδὲαὐτοῖς . The disciple had said διδαξονἡμᾶς , and Jesus includes all in His reply. After προσεύχησθε D inserts much from Matthew 6:7, and in the Lat. has the form multiloquentia for multiloquium : putant enim quidam quia in multiloquentia sua exandientur. Πάτερ . There is little doubt that the texts of Lk. which give the more full form of the Prayer have been assimilated to Mt. by inserting the three clauses which Lk. omits.1. The temptation to supply supposed deficiencies would be very strong; for the copyists would be familiar with the liturgical use of the longer form, and would regard the abbreviation of such a prayer as intolerable. The widespread omission is inexplicable, if the three clauses are genuine; the widespread insertion is quite intelligible, if they are not. The express testimony of Origen, that in the texts of Lk. known to him the clauses were wanting, would in itself be almost conclusive; and about the second and third omitted clauses we have the express testimony of Augustine also (Enchir. cxvi.: see Wordsworth’ s Vulg. in loco). Syr-Sin. has “ Father, hallowed be Thy name. And Thy Kingdom come. And give us the continual bread of every day. And forgive us our sins; and we also, we forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation.” A few authorities, which omit the rest, add ἡμῶν to Πάτερ , and four have sancle for noster (a c ff2 1). D.C.G. artt. “ Prayer” and “ Lord’ s Prayer.” In O.T. God is seldom spoken of as a Father, and then in reference to the nation (Deuteronomy 32:6; Isaiah 63:16; Jeremiah 3:4, Jeremiah 3:19, 31:9; Malachi 1:6, Malachi 2:10), not to the individual. In this, as in many things, the Apocrypha links O.T. with N.T. Individuals begin to speak of God as their Father (Wisd. 2:16, 14:3; Ecclus. 23:1, 4, 51:10; Tobit 13:4; 3 Mac. 6:3), but without showing what right they have to consider themselves sons rather than servants. Christ gave His disciples ἐξουσίαντέκναΘεοῦγενέσθαι (John 1:12; comp. 3:3; Romans 8:23; Galatians 4:5). But we must notice how entirely free from Jewish elements the Prayer is. It is not addressed to the “ Lord God of Israel,” nor does it ask for blessings upon Israel. See Latham, Pastor Pastorum, p. 416. ἁγιασθήτω . “ Let it be acknowledged to be holy, treated as holy, venerated.” Comp. 1 Peter 3:15; Isaiah 29:23; Ezekiel 20:41, Ezekiel 20:38:23; Ecclus. 33. (36.) 4. τὸὂνομάσου . A common expression in both O.T. and N.T. It is not a mere periphrasis for God. It suggests His revealed attributes and His relation to us. Comp. οἱἀγαπῶντεςτὸὄνομάσου (Psalms 5:12); οἱγιγνώσκοντεςτὸὄνομάσου (Psalms 9:11); οὐβεβηλώσειςτὸὄνοματὸἅγιον (Leviticus 18:21). It is freq. in Ps. Sol. (5:1, 7:5, 8:31, 9:18, 15:4, etc.). Codex D adds to this petition the words ἐφ ʼ ἡμᾶς , super nos, which may be an independent addition, or a survival of the petition for the coming of the Spirit of which there are traces elsewhere.1 ἐλθάτωἡβασιλείασου . It is asserted that in bibl. Grk. βασιλεία is the abstract noun, not of βασιλεύς but of κύριος and should therefore be rendered “ dominion” rather than “ kingdom.” Had “ kingdom” been meant, βασίλειον would have been more distinct, a word current then, and still the only designation in modern Greek. The petition therefore means, “ Thy sway be extended from heaven to this world (now ruled by the adversary), so as to extirpate wickedness.” See A. N. Jannaris in Contemp. Rev. Oct. 1894, p 585. For Rabbinical parallels to these first two petitions see Wetst. on Matthew 6:9, Matthew 6:10. For such mixed forms as ἐλθάτω , which is specially common, see on 1:59. 3. From prayers for the glory of God and the highest good of all we pass on to personal needs. τὸνἐπιούσιον . We are still in ignorance as to the origin and exact meaning of this remarkable word. It appears here first in Greek literature, and is the only epithet in the whole Prayer. And it is possible that in the original Aramaic form there was nothing equivalent to it. The presence of the ι (ἐπιούσιος not ἐπούσιος makes the derivation from ἐπεῖναι , ἐπών , or ἐπί and οὐσία very doubtful. With Grotius, Scaliger, Wetstein, Fritzsche, Winer, Meyer, Bishop Lightfoot, and others, we may suppose that ἐπιούσιος comes from ἐπιών , perhaps with special reference to ἡἐπιοῦσα , “ the coming day.” The testimony of the most ancient Versions is strongly in favour of do derivation from ἐπιέναι and of a meaning having reference to time, whether “ of to-morrow,” or “ that cometh,” or “ for the coming day,” or “ daily,” “ continual,” or “ for an day.” Jerome found quotidianum as the translation both in Mt. and Lk. He substiuted supersubstantialem in Mt. and left quotidianum in Lk., thus producing a widespread impression that the Evangelists use different words. Cod. Gall. supersubstantialem in Lk. See Lft. On a Fresh Revision of the N.T. Rev_1. pp. 218-260, 3rd ed. For the other views see McClellan, The N.T. pp. 632-647. Chase confirms Lft, and contends that (1) This petition refers to bodily needs; (2) The epithet is temporal, not qualitative; (3) The epithet is not part of the original form of the petition, and is due to liturgical use; (4) All the phenomena may be reasonably explained if we assume that the clause originally was “ Give us our (or the) bread of the day” (Texts &Studies, i. 3, pp. 42-53). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 214. Jannaris contends that the word has nothing to do with time at all. He points to the use in LXX of περιούσιος in the sense of “ constituting a property” Exodus 9:5; Deuteronomy 7:6, Deuteronomy 14:2, Deuteronomy 26:18), as obviously coined from περιουσία , “ wealth, abundance,” for the translation of the Hebrew segulla. And he interprets, “ Ask not for bread περιύσιον , to be treasured up as wealth , but for bread ἐπιούσιον , mere bread.” Accordingly the term ἐπιούσιος is a new formation coined for the purpose, on the analogy of, and as a direct allusion and contrast to, περιούσιος that is, intended to imply the opposite meaning. He considers that the formation περιούσιος was apparently facilitated by the existence of such words as πλούσιος , ἐκούσιοςἐθελούσιος , and that it was the existence of περιούσιος which produced the form ἐπιούδιος instead of ἐπούσιος . So also in the main Tholuck. δίδουἡμῖν . “ Continually give to us.” instead of δός in Mt. The change of tense brings with it a corresponding change of adverb: δίδουἡμῖντὸκαθ ʼ ἡμέραν for δὸςἡμῖνσήμερον : “ Continually give day by day” for “ Give once for all to-day.” In N.T. τὸκαθ ʼ ἡμέραν is, peculiar to Lk. (19:47; Acts 17:11). This fact and the insertion of his favourite πάντί with ὀφείλοντι , and the substitation of his favourite καὶαὐτοί for καὶἡμεῖς with ἀφίομεν , incline us to believe that some of the differences between this form of the Prayer that in Mt. are due to Lk. himself. The petition in Lk. embraces more than the petition in Mt. In Mt. we pray, “ Give us to-day our bread for the coming day,” which in the morning would mean the bread for that day, and in the evening the bread for the next day. In Lk. we pray, “ Continually give us day by day our bread for the coming day.” One stage in advance is asked for, but no more: “ one step enough for me” D here has σήμερον , and most Latin texts have hodie. But Codd. Amiat. Gat. Turon. Germ. 2 support τὸκαθ ʼ ἠμέραν with cotidie or quatidie. 4. τὰςἁμαρτίαςἡμῶν . Mt. has τὰὀφειλήματαἡμῶν , and there is reason for believing that Mt. is here closer to the Aramaic original. The ὀφειλοντι of Lk. points to this, and so does τὴνὀφειλὴνἡμῶν in the Didaché (8:2). Anyone accustomed to LXX would be likely to prefer the familiar ἄφεςτὰςἁμαρτίας (Ps. 24:18; comp. Numbers 14:19; Exo_32; Genesis 50:17), even if less literal. Moreover, ὀφειλήματα would be more likely to be misunderstood by Gentile readers. καὶγὰραὐτοὶἀφίομεν . For this Mt. has ὡςκαὶἡμεῖςἀφήκαμεν . The Old Syriac has the future in both Mt. and Lk., and in Lk. it has what may be the original form of the petition: “ Remit to us, and we also will remit” Tertullian seems to have had the future in his mind when he wrote Debitotibus denique dimissuros nos in oratione prefitemur (De Pudic. ii.). If this is correct, ἀφίομεν , is closer to the original than ἀφήκαμεν is. But the connexion is the same, whether we ask for forgiveness because we have forgiven, or because we do forgive, or because we will forgive. It was a Jewish saying Dies expiationis non expiationis donec cum proximis in gratiam redieris. The form ἀφίω is found Mark 1:34, Mark 1:11:16; Revelation 11:9. Comp. συνίω , Matthew 13:13; WH. ii. App. p. 167. παντὶὀφείλοντιἡμῖν . Here the τοῖςὀφειλέταιςἡμῶν Mt. looks more like the original form, as being simpler. The introduction of παντί in harmony with Lk.’ s usage: see on 6:30, 7:35, 9:43. εἰσενέγκῃς . “ Bring into.” The verb occurs five times In Lk. (5:18, 19, 12:11; Acts 17:20) and thrice elsewhere (Matthew 6:13, 1 Timothy 6:7; Hebrews 13:11); and everywhere, except in the Lord’ s Prayer, it is rendered in AV. by “ bring,” not “ lead.” In Lk. εἰσάγειν is also very common (2:27, 14:21, 22:54; Acts 7:45, Acts 9:8, etc.). The latter word implies guidance more strongly than εἰσφέρειν does. For examples of the petition comp. 22:40, 46, Mark 14:38; Matthew 26:41. The inconsistency between this petition and James 1:2 is only apparent, not real. This petition refers especially to the internal solicitations of the devil, as is shown by the second half of it, as given in Mt, “ but deliver us from the evil one.” 1 S. James refers chiefly to external trials, such as poverty of intellect (1:5), or of substance (1:9), or persecution (2:6, 7). Moreover, there is no inconsistency in rejoicing in temptations when God in His wisdom allows them to molest us, and yet praying to be preserved from such trials, because of our natural weakness. Aug. Ep. cxxi. 14, cxlv. 7, 8; Hooker, Eccles. pol. v. 48, 13. There is a very early Latin gloss on ne nos induces which found its way rote the text of the Prayer itself. Quis non sinet deduci in temptationem ? asks Tertullian (Adv. Marcian. iv. 26). Ne patiaris nos induci, or ne passus fueris induci nos, is Cypriads form (De Dom. Orat. xxv.). Augustine says, Multi precando ita dicunt, Ne nos patiaris induci in temptationem (De Serm. Dom. ix. 30, Migne, xxxiv. 1282; De Dono Persev. Migne, xlv. 1000). And several MSS. of the Old Latin have these or similar readings (Old Latin Biblical Texts, No. ii. Oxford, 1886, p. 32). Dionysius of Alexandria explains the petition as meaning this: καὶδὴκαὶμὴεἰσενγκῃςἡμᾶςεἰςπειρασμόν , τοῦτ ʼ ἐστιμὴὲάσῃςἡμᾶςἐμπεσεῖνεἰςπειρασμός (Migne, x. 1601). Evidently the idea of God’ s leading us into temptation was from early times felt to be a difficulty; and this gloss may have been used first in private prayer, then in the liturgies, and thence have found its way into Latin texts of the Gospels. Jannaris contends that this is not a gloss, but a correct translation of the Greek. He holds that in the time of Grist the active of this verb was fast acquiring the force of the middle, and that εἰσενεγκεῖν = εἰσενέγκασθαι , “ to have one brought into.” The petition then means, “ Have us not brought into temptation.” And he suggests that the true reading may be the middle, εἰσενέγηκ , to which ς has been added by a mistake. The evidence, however is too uniform for that to be probable. There is yet anosler gloss, which probably has the same origin, viz. the wish to avoid the difficulty of the thought that God leads us into temptation: ne induces nos in temptationem quarn ferre non possumus(Jerome in Ezech. xlviii. 16; comp. Hilary in Ps. cxviii.). Pseudo-Augustme combines the two: ne patiaris nos induci in temptationem guam ferre non possumus (Serm. lxxxiv.). “ The fact that these glosses occur in writers who are separated from each other in time and circumstance, and that they are found in Liturgies belonging to different families, shows very clearly that they must be due to very early liturgical usage” (Chase, pp. 63-69). That Lk. omitted άλλὰπ̔ῦσαιἡμᾶςἀπὸτοῦπονηροῦ because he saw that deliverance from the tempter is included in preservation from temptation, is less probable than that this clause was wanting (very possibly for this reason) in the liturgical form which he gives. All authorities here, and the beat authorities in Mt., omit the doxology, which is no doubt a liturgical addition to the Prayer. See Treg. on 6:13 ; Hastings, D.C.G. art. “ Doxology.” 5-8. § The Parable of the Friend at Midnight. This parable is parallel to that of the Unjust judge (18:1-8). Both of them are peculiar to Lk., whose Gospel is in a special sense the Gospel of Prayer; and they both teach that prayer must be importunate and persevering. So far as they differ, the one shows that prayer is never out of season, the Ober that it is surre to bring a blessing and not a curse. 5, 6. τίςἐξὑμῶν . The sentence is irregularly constructed: (1) the interrogative is lost in the prolongation of the sentence., (2) the future drifts into the deliberative subjunctive , which in some texts has been corrected to the future . Excepting Matthew 6:27, τίςἐξὑμῶν is peculiar to Lk. (7:25, 14:28, 15:4, 17:7). Win. xli. 4, b p. 357. Excepting Mark 13:35, μεσονύκτιον is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 16:25, Acts 20:7). In the East it is common to travel by night to avoid the heat. φίλε , χρῆσόνμοιτρεῖςἄρτους . As distinct from δονειζω (“ I tend on interest” as a matter of business), κίχρημι , which occurs here only in N.T., is “ I allow the use of” as a friendly act. There is no need to seek any meaning in the number three. For παρατίθημι of food comp. 9:16; Mark 6:41, Mark 6:6. 7. Μήμοικόπουςπάρεχε . It is the trouble that he minds, not the parting with the bread. When he has once got up (ἀναστάς , ver. 8), he gives him as much as he wants. For κόπουςπαρέχειν comp. Matthew 26:10; Mark 14:6; Galatians 6:17; and for κόπος see Lft. Epp. p. 26. μετ ʼ ἐμοῦεἰςκοίτηνεἰσίν . Prep. of motion after verb of rest; comp. Mk. [2:1], 10:10; Acts 8:40; and plur. verb after neut. plur., the persons being animate; comp. Matthew 10:21; Mark 3:11, Mark 5:13. Win. 50:4, b, pp. 516, 518, 58:3m β , p. 646. 8. εἰκαὶ . As distinct from καὶεἰεἰκαί implies that the supposition is a fact, “ although” ; 18:4; 2 Corinthians 12:11, 2 Corinthians 12:7:8; 1 Peter 3:14. For εἰκαὶ … γε comp. 18:4, 5; Win. 53:7, b, p. 554. οὐδώσει . “ Will refuse to rise and give.” The negative is part of the verb and is not effected by the εἰ . Otherwise we should have had μή : 16:31, 18:4; Romans 8:9; Matthew 26:42; 1 Corinthians 7:9. The use is classical. Soph Aj. Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 184; Win. 55:2, C, p. 599. διάγε . In N.T. ψε is rare, except as strengthening other particles: 18:5; 1 Corinthians 4:8: “ At least because of.” ἀναίδιαν . “ Absence of αἰδώς shamelessness” ; Ecclus. 25:22; here only in N.T. 9-13. Exhortation to Perseverance in Prayer, based on the preceding parable and confirmed (11-13) by personal experience. Mt. has the same almost verbatim as part of the Sermon on the Mount (7:7-11). 9. κα ʼ γὼὑμῖνλέγω . “ I also say to you” : the ἐγώ is emphatic by being expressed, the ὑμῖν by position; contrast ver. 8, and see on 16:9. The parable teaches them; Jesus also teaches them. The parable shows how the urgent supplicant fared; the disciples may know how they will fare. The three commands are obviously taken from the parable, and they form a climax of increasing earnestness. They are all impreat. “ Continue asking, seeking, knocking.” Comp. John 16:24; Matthew 21:22; Mark 11:24. 10. λαμβάνει … εὑπίσκει . The parallel with ver. 9 would be more exact if these two verbs, as well as ἀνοιγήσεται , were futures. But here, as in Matthew 7:8, ἀνοίγεται (B D) is possibly the true reading 11. τὸνπατέρα . “ As being his father.” Mt. has ἄνθρωπος , “ as a human being,” or (more simply) “ person.” The construction is broken, and can scarcely be rendered literally. “ Of which of you as being his father will the son ask for a fish? Will he for a fish hand him a serpent?” The question ought to have continued, “ and for a fish receive a serpent” ; but the abrupt change to the father’ s side of the transaction is very emphatic, For μή interrog. when a negative reply is expected comp. 5:34, 10:15, 17:9, 22:35. Syr-Sin. omits “ father” and inserts “ perhaps.” μὴἐπιδώσει . “ Will he give over, hand to him” : 24:30, 42; Acts 15:30. The text is confused, and it is doubtful whether we ought to have two pairs as in Mt., or three. If two, they are not the same two as in Mt. There we have the loaf and the stone with the fish and the serpent. Here we have the fish and the serpent with the egg and the scorpion. But perhaps before these we ought to have the loaf and the stone, although B and some other authorities omit. The insertion from Mt., however, is more intelligible than the omission. 12. σκορπίον . 10:19; Revelation 9:3, Revelation 9:9, Revelation 9:10; Deuteronomy 8:15; Ezekiel 2:6. When its limbs are closed round it, it is egg-shaped. Bread, dried fish, and hardboiled eggs are ordinary food in the East. It is probable that some of these pairs, especially “ a stone for a loaf,” were proverbial expressions. “ A scorpion for a fish,” ἀντὶπέρκηςσκορπίον , seems to have been a Greek proverb. The meaning here is, that in answer to prayer God gives neither what is useless (a stone) nor what is harmful (a serpent or scorpion). 13. πονηροὶὑπάρχοντες . “ Being evil from the first, evil already” : much stronger than ὄντες (Mt.). Illustre testimonium de peccato originali (Beng.). See on 8:41 and 23:50. δόματα Matthew 7:11; Ephesians 4:8; Philippians 4:17. The word is very freq. in LXX, where it represents ten different Hebrew words. ὁἐξοὐρανοῦ . Pregnant construction for ὁἐνοὐράνῳἐξοὐρανοῦδώσει : comp. 9:61; Colossians 4:16. Win. 66:6, P. 784. With the assurance here given comp. αἰτείτωπαρὰτοῦδιδόντοςΘεοῦπᾶσινἁπλῶςκαὶμὴὀνειδίζοντος (James 1:5). The change from ἐπιδώσει to δώσει in both Lk. and Mt. is noteworthy: the idea of “ handing over” would here be out of place. πνεῦμαἅγιον . See on 1:15. Mt has ἀγαθά : One of the latest maintainers of the theory that Lk. is strongly influenced by Ebionism, remarks on this difference between Mt. and Lk., “ From this important deviation in Luke’ s version of this passage we learn that the course of thought is from the material to the spiritual: temporal mercies, even daily bread, are transcended altogether. … This is one of the most important passages in Luke that can be cited in support of an Ebionite source, for much of his Gospel.” This may well be correct: in which case the total amount of support is not strong. D and some other authorities have ἀγαθὸνδόμα here. Hence various conflations: πνεῦμαἀγαθόν (L8), bonum donum spiritus sancti (Aeth.). From bonum datum (b c d ff2 i l r), bona data (a2.) spiritum bonum (Vulg.), spiritum bonum datum (E), etc. Assimilation to the first half of the verse is the source of corruption. Syr-Sin. has “ good things.” 14-26. The Dumb Demoniac and the Blasphemy of the Pharisees. Matthew 12:22-30; Mark 3:19-27 may be parallels. 14. δαιμόνιονκωφόν . The demon is called dumb because it made the man dumb: Mt. has τυφλὸνκαὶκωφόν . When the demon is cast out, it is the man who speaks, ἐλαλησενὁκωφός . For ἐγένετο see P. 45. ἐθαύμασαν . stupebant (a2 i l), obstupebant (b), stupuerunt (ff2.). Mt. has ἐξίσταντο . The combination of dumbness and blindness with possession made them suppose that no exorcist could succeed in such it case. Probably the man was deaf also, so that there seemed to be no avenue through which the exorcist could communicate with a victim who could neither see him, nor hear him, nor reply to his manipulations. 15. τινὲςδὲἐξαὐτῶνεἶπαν . This is very vague. Mt. says οἱφαρισαῖοι , and Mk. still more definitely of οἱγραμματεῖςἀπὸἸεροσολύμωνκαταβάντες . They had probably come on purpose to watch Him and oppose Him. It was at Jerusalem about this time that they had said, “ Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil,” and, “ He hath a devil, and is mad” (John 8:48, John 10:20). Ἐνβεεζεβούλ . “ In the power of B.” The orthography, etymology, and application of the name are uncertain. Here, vv. 18, 19; Matthew 10:25, Matthew 10:12:24, Matthew 10:27, A.aleph; B have Βεεζεβούλ , and B has this Mark 3:22. The word occurs nowhere else in N.T. and nowhere all in O.T. With the form Βεελζεβούλ Comp. βάαλμυῖαν (2 Kings 1:2, 2 Kings 1:3, 2 Kings 1:6) and Μυῖαν (Jos Ant. ix. 2, 1) for Beelzebub= “ Lord of flies.” But Βεελζεβούλ , is found in no Greek MS. of N.T., and the form Beelzebub owes its prevalence to the Vulgate; but even there some MSS. have beelzebul. With the termination βουβ the connexion with the Ekronite god of flies must be abandoned. Βεελζεβούλ may mean either, “ Lord of the dwelling,” i.e. of the heavenly habitation, or, “ Lord of idols,” i.e. of idolatrous abomination. “ Lord of idols,” “ Prince of false gods,” comes close to “ Prince of the demons.” D. B.2 art. “ Beelzebub.” It is uncertain whether the Jews identified Beelzebub with Satan, or believed him to be a subordinate evil power. Unless 13:32 refers to later instances, Lk. mentions no more instances of the casting out of demons after this charge of casting them out by diabolical assistance. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 331. 16. πειράζοντες . The demand for a mere wonder to compel conviction was a renewal of the third temptation (4:9-12). Comp. John 2:18, John 6:30. See Martensen, Chr. Dogm. § 105. 17. τὰδιανοήματα . “ Thoughts,” not “ machinations,” a meaning which the word nowhere has. Here only in N.T., but freq in LXX and classical: Proverbs 14:14, Proverbs 14:15:24; Isaiah 55:9; Ezekiel 14:3, Ezekiel 14:4; Plat. Prot. 348 D; Sym. 210 D. οἷκοςἐπὶοἶκον . Matthew 12:25 and Mark 3:25 do not prove that διαμερισθείς is here to be understood. In that case we should expect ἑαυτόν or καθ ʼ ἑαυτοῦ rather than ἐπὶοἶκον . Comp. πίπτεινἐπίτι , 8:6, 13:4, 20:18. 30. 23:30. It is better, with Vulg. (domus supra domum cadet) and Luth. (ein Haus fa¬ llet u¬ bet das andere), to keep closely to the Greek without reference to Matthew 12:25 or Mark 3:25. We must therefore regard the clause as an enlargement of ἐρημοῦται : “ house falleth on house” ; or possibly “ house after house falleth.” Comp. ναῦςτενηὶπροσέπιπτε (Thus. 2:84, 3). Wetst, quotes πύργοιδὲπύργοιςἐνέπιπτον (Aristid. Rhodiac. p. 544). In this way Lk. gives one example, a divided kingdom; Mk. two, kingdom and house; Mt. three, kingdom, city, and house. In class. Grk. ἐπί after verbs of falling, adding, and the like is commonly followed by the dat. In bibl. Greek the acc. is more common: λύπηνἐπὶλύπην (Philippians 2:27); λίθοςἐπὶλίθον (Matthew 24:2); ἀνονίανἐπὶτὴνἀνομίαν (Psalms 68:28); ἀγγελίαἐπὶἀγγελίαν (Ezekiel 7:26). In Isaiah 28:10 we have both acc. and dat., θλίψινἐπὶθλίψιν , ἐλπίδαἐπ ʼ ἐλπίδι . 18. εἰδὲκαὶὁΣατανᾶς . Satan also is under the dominion of the same law, that division leads to destruction. The fondness of Lk. for δὲκαί is again manifest: see on 3:9. Contrast εἰκαί in ver. 8. Here καί belongs to ὁΣατ . and means “ also.” Burton., § 282. Mt. and Mk. here have simply καὶεἰ . ὅτιλέγετε . Elliptical: “ I use this language, because ye say,” etc. Comp. Mark 3:30, and see on 7:47. 19. An argumentum ad hominem. οἱυἱοὶὑμῶν . First with emphasis. See Acts 19:13 and Jos Ant. viii. 2, 5 for instances of Jewish exorcisms; and comp. Ant. vi. 8, 2; B. J. vii. 6, 3; Tobit 8:1-3; Justin M. Try. 85.; Apol ii. 6; 1 Samuel 16:14, 1 Samuel 16:23. 20. εἰδὲἐνδακτύλῳΘεοῦ .1 As distinct from the charms and incantations used by Jewish exorcists, who did not rely simply upon the power of God. Mt. has ἐνπνεύματιΘεοῦ . Lk. seems to be fond of Hebraistic anthropomorphisms: 1:51, 66, 73. But it is not likely that “ the finger of God” indicates the ease with which it is done. Comp. Exodus 8:19, Exodus 8:31:18; Deuteronomy 9:10; Psalms 8:4.See foot-note P. 473. ἔφθασενἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶς . In late Greek, φθάνω followed by a preposition commonly loses all notion of priority or surprise, and siniply means “ arrive at, attain to” : Romans 9:31; Philippians 3:16; 2 Corinthians 10:14, 1 Thessalonians 2:16; Daniel 4:19. In 1 Thessalonians 4:15 it is not followed by a preposition, and that is perhaps the only passage in N.T. in which the notion of anticipating survives. Here Vulg. and many Lat. texts have præ venit, while a2, has anticipanit; but many others have pernenit, and d has adpropinquanit. 21. ὅτανὁἰσχυρὸςκαθωπλισμένος . Here Lk. is very different from Matthew 12:29 and Mark 3:27, while they resemble one another. “ The strong one” is Satan, and the parable is very like Isaiah 49:24-26, which may be the source of it. Luther is certainly wrong in translating, Wenn ein starker Gewapneter: καθωπλισμένος is an epithet of ὁἰσχυρός . Coverdale is similar: “ a stronge harnessed man.” RV. restores the much ignored article: “ the strong man fully armed.” τὴνἑαυτοῦαὐλήν . “ His own homestead.” Mt. and Mk. have οἰκίαν . Comp. Matthew 26:3, Matthew 26:58; Mark 14:54, Mark 14:15:16; John 18:15. Meyer contends that in all these places αὐλή retains its meaning of “ court; courtyard,” as in Matthew 26:69; Mark 14:66; Luke 22:55. But there is no hint here that “ our Lord encountered Satan in the αὐλή of the High Priest.” For τὰὑπάρχοντα see on 8:3: substantia ejus (d), facultates ejus (a2 c), ea quæ possidet (Vulg.). Mt. and Mk. have τὰσκεύη . 22. ἐπὰνδέ Note the change from ὅταν with pres. subj. to ἐπάν with aor. sub., and comp. χρὴδὲὅτανμὲντιθῆσθετοὺςνόμους … σκόπειν , ἐπειδὰνδὲθῆσθε , φυλάττειν , (Dem. p. 525, 11); “ whenever you are enacting. … but after a stronger has come.” you have enacted” so here: “ All the while that the strong man is on guard … but after a stronger has come.” In ver. 34 both ἐπάν and ἐπάν have pres. subj.; in Matthew 2:8 ἐπάν has aor. subj.; and ἐπάν occurs nowhere else in N.T. ἰσχυρότεροςαὐτοῦἐπελθών . This is Christ: ἀπεκδυσάμενοςτὰςἀρχὰςκαὶτὰςἐξουσίαςἐδειγμάτισενἐνπαρρησίᾳθριαμβεύσαςαὐτούς (Colossians 2:15). For ἐπέρχομαι in a hostile sense comp. 1 Samuel 30:23; Hom. Il. xii. 136, xx. 91. See on 1:35. Here Mt. and Mk. have εἰσελθών . τὴνπανοπλίαναὐτοῦαἴρειἐφ ʼ ᾗἐπεποίθει . Because it had been so efficacious. Comp. Ephesians 6:11. τὰσκῦλααὐτοῦ . Bengel explains, quæ Satanas generi humane eripuerat, identifying τὰσκῦλααὐτοῦ . with τὰὑπάρχοντα (ver. 21 : comp. Esther 3:13). But τὰσκῦλα may be identified with τὴνπανοπλίαν . In either case Christ makes the powers of hell work together for the good of the faithful. Some who identify τὰσκῦλα with τὰὑπάρχοντα interpret both of the souls which Satan has taken captive, and especially of demonises. Comp. τῶνἰσχυρῶνμεριεῖσκῦλα (Isaiah 53:12). 23. ὁμὴὤνμετ ʼ ἐμοῦκατ ʼ ἐμοῦἐστίν . Verbatim as Matthew 12:30. The connexion with what precedes seems to be that the contest between Christ and Satan is such that no one can be neutral. But that the warning is specially addressed to those who accused Him of having Beelzebub as an ally (ver. 15), or who demanded a sign (ver. 16), is less evident. See on 9:50. συνάγων . Comp. 3:17, 12:17, 18. But the metaphor is perhaps not from gathering seed and fruit, but from, collecting a flock of sheep, or a band of followers. Comp. συνάγειτοὺςἐσκορπισμένους (Artem. Oneir. i. 56. 1). Hillel had said, “ Whoso revileth the Name, his name perisheth; and whoso doth not increase it, diminisheth.” σκορπίζει . Ionic and Hellenistic for the more classical σκεδάννυμι ; comp. John 10:12, John 10:16:32; Joh_1 Mac. 6:54; 2 Samuel 22:15. 24-26. Almost verbatim as Matthew 12:43-45, where see Alford. It is not likely that there is any reference to the success of the Jewish exorcists, as being only temporary, and leading to an aggravation of the evil. The disastrous conclusion is the result, not of the imperfect methods of the exorcist, but of the misconduct of the exorcised. The case of a demoniac who is cured and then allows himself to become repossessed is made a parable to illustrate the case of a sinner who repents of his sins, but makes no effort to acquire holiness. Such an one proves the impossibility of being neutral. He flees from Satan without seeking Christ, and thus falls more hopelessly into the power of Satan again. 24. τοῦἀνθρώπου . “ The man” who had been afflicted by it. δι ʼ ἀνύδρωντόπων . “ Through waterless places” (Tyn. RV.). The wilderness is the reputed house of evil spirits; Tobit 8:3, where Vulg. has Angelus apprehendit dæ monium, et religavit illud in deserto superioris Aegypti. Comp. Bar. 4:35; Leviticus 16:10; Isaiah 13:21; Revelation 18:2.Revelation 18:1 Martensen, Chr. Dogm. § 103. ἀνάπαυσιν . “ Cessation” from wandering (Genesis 8:9): the demon seeks a soul to rest in. In LXX ἀνάπαυσις is common of the Sabbath-rest: Exodus 16:23, Exodus 16:23:12; Leviticus 23:3, etc. The punctuation is here uncertain. We may put no comma after ἀνάπαυσιν and make μὴεὑρίσκον co-ordinate with ζητοῦν : “ seeking rest and finding none.” This necessitates a full stop at εὑρίσκον and the admission of τότε before λέγει as genuine. But τότε is probably an insertion from Matthew 12:44 (om. A C D R, Vulg. Aeth. Arm.); and, if it be omitted, we must place a comma after ἀνάπαυσιν and take μὴεὑρίσκον with λέγει . This is to be preferred. μὴεὑρίσκον [τότε ] λέγει “ Because he doth not find it (then) he saith.” εἰςτὸνοἶκόνμουὅθενἐξῆλθον . He still calls it “ my house.” No one else has taken it, and he was not driven out of it; he “ went out.” No mention is made of exorcism or expulsion. 25. [σχολάζοντα ]. This also may be an insertion fr. Mt., but the evidence is stronger than for τότε (א c B L R Λ G Ξ , Aeth. f l r). Tisch. omits; W H. bracket the word. If it is genuine, it is placed first as the main evil. It is “ standing idle,” not occupied by any new tenant. The Holy Spirit has not been made a guest in place of the evil spirit. σεσαρωμένονκαὶκεκοσμημένον . Ready to attract any passer-by, however undesirable. The three participles form a climax, and perhaps refer to the physical and mental improvement in the man. There is much for the demon to ruin once more, but there is no protection against his return. He brings companions to share the enjoyment of this new work of destruction, and to make it complete and final. The verb σαρόω is a later form of σαίρω and occurs again 15:8. For κεκοσμημένον comp. Revelation 21:2. 26. παραλαμβάνει . Comp. 9:10, 28, 18:31; Acts 15:39. Here again we have a climax. He brings additional spirits, more evil than himself, seven in number. Comp. the seven that went out from Mary of Magdala (8:2). Here in the best texts ἐπτά comes last, in Mt. first. In either case the word is emphatic. See Paschasius Radbertus on Matthew 12:43, Migne, 120:478. εἰσελθόντακατοικεῖ . There is nothing to oppose them; “ they enter in and settle there,” taking up a permanent abode: 13:4; Acts 1:19, Acts 1:20, Acts 1:2:9, Acts 1:14, Acts 1:4:16, etc. The verb is freq. in bibl. Grk., esp. in Acts and Apocalypse. In the Catholic and Pauline Epp. it is used of the Divine indwelling (James 4:5; 2 Peter 3:13; Ephesians 3:17 ; Colossians 1:19, Colossians 2:9). Contrast παροικεῖν of a temporary sojourn (24:18; Hebrews 11:9; Genesis 21:23). In Genesis 37:1 both verbs occur. χείρονατῶνπρώτων . The expression is proverbial; Matthew 27:64. Comp. 2 Peter 2:20; Hebrews 10:29; John 5:14. Lk. omits the words which show the primary application of the parable: Οὕτωςἔσταικαὶτῇγενεᾷταύτῃπονηρᾷ . The worship of idols had been exorcized, but that demon had returned as the worship of the letter, and with it the demons of covetousness, hypocrisy, spiritual pride, uncharitableness, faithlessness, formalism, and fanaticism. 27, 28. These two verses are peculiar to Lk., and illustrate his Gospel in its special character as the Gospel of Women. Christ’ s Mother is once more declared by a woman to be blessed (1:42), and Mary’ s prophecy about herself begins to be fulfilled (1:48). The originality of Christ’ s reply guarantees its historical character. Such a comment is beyond the reach of an inventor. 27. ταῦτα . Apparently this refers to the parable about the demons. Perhaps the woman, who doubtless was a mother, had had experience of a lapsed penitent in her own family. Bene sentit, sed muliebriter loquitur (Beng.). For a collection of similar sayings see Wetst. ἐπάρασαφωνήν . The expression is classical (Dem. De Cor. § 369, p. 323: comp. vocem tollit, Hor. A.p. 93); in N.T., peculiar to Lk. (Acts 20:2:14, Acts 14:11, Acts 22:22). But it is not rare in LXX (Judges 2:4, Judges 2:9:7; Rth 1:9, Rth 1:14; 2 Samuel 13:36). Μακαρίαἡκοιλία . Matthew 12:46 tells us that it was at this moment that His Mother and His brethren were announced. The sight of them may have suggested this woman’ s exclamation. Lk. records their arrival earlier (8:19-21), but he gives no connecting link. Edersheim, quotes a Rabbinical passage, in which Israel is represented as breaking forth into these words on beholding the Messiah: “ Blessed the hour in which the Messiah was created; blessed the womb whence He issued; blessed the generation that sees Him; blessed the eye that is worthy to behold Him” (L. &T. 2. p. 201). For κοιλία = “ womb” comp. 1:15, 41, 42, 44, 2:21, 23:29; Acts 3:2, Acts 14:8. 28. Μενοῦν . This compound particle same times confirms what is stated, “ yea, verily” ; sometimes adds to what is said, with or without confirming it, but virtually correcting it: “ yea rather,” or “ that may be true, but” Here Jesus does not deny the woman’ s statement, but He points out how inadequate it is. She has missed the main point To be the Mother of Jesus implies no more than a share in His humanity. To hear and keep the word of God implies communion with what is Divine. The saying is similar to 8:21. The relationship with Christ which brings blessedness is the spiritual one. For τὸνλόγοντοῦΘεοῦ see on 8:11. Here and Philippians 3:8 some authorities have μενοῦνγε (Romans 9:20, Romans 10:18); but in N.T. μὲνοὖν is more common (Acts 1:18, Acts 5:41, Acts 13:4, Acts 17:30, Acts 23:22, Acts 26:9). In class Grk. neither form ever comes first in a sentence. Of the Lat. text Wordsworth says, Codices hie tantum variant quantum vix alibi in evangeMs in una saltem vocabulo (Vulg. P. 388). Among the renderings are quippe enim, quippini, quinimmo, immo, manifestissime, etiam. Many omit the word. See Blass, Gr. p. 264. καὶφυλάσσοντες . Comp. James 1:22-25. S. James may have been present and heard this reply. He also says μακάριος is the man who hears and does τὸνλόγον . 29-36. The Rebuke to those who Demanded a Sign (ver. 16). A longer account of the first half of the rebuke is given Matthew 12:39-42. 29. τῶνδὲὄχλωνἐπαθροιζομένων . Lk. once more notes how the multitude was attracted by Christ’ s words and works: comp. ver. 27, 4:42, 5:1, 6:17, 7:11, 8:4, 19, 40, 9:11, 37, 12:1, 54, 14:25, 15:1, 18:36, 19:37, 48. The verb is a rare compound; here only in bibl. Grk. For ἤρξατολέγειν see on 4:21 and 3:8. Τοπονηρά Mt. adds καὶμοιχαλίς . εἰμὴτὸσημεῖονἸωνᾶ . At first sight Lk. appears to make the parallel between Jonah and Christ to consist solely in their preaching repentance. He omits the explanation that Jonah was a type of the burial and resurrection of Christ. But δοθήσεται and ἔσται show that this explanation is implied. Christ had for long been preaching; yet He says, not that the sign has been given or is being given, but that it Shall be given. The infallible sign is still in the future, viz. His resurrection. Nevertheless, even that ought not to be necessary; for His teaching ought to have sufficed. Note the emphatic repetition of σημεῖον thrice in one verse.1 Some have interpreted σημεῖονοὐδοθήσεται as meaning, either that Jesus wrought no miracles, or that He refused to use them as credentials of His Divine mission. It is sufficient to point to ver. 20, where Jesus appeals to His healing of a dumb and blind demoniac as proof that He is bringing the kingdom of God to them. The demand for a sign and the refusal to give it are no evidence as to Christ’ s working miracles and employing them as credentials. What was demanded was something quite different from wonders such as Prophets and (as the Jews believed) magicians had wrought. These scribes and Pharisees wanted direct testimony from God Himself respecting Jesus and His mission, such as a voice from heaven or a pillar of fire. His miracles left them still able to doubt, and they ask to be miraculously convinced. This He refuses. See Neander, L. J. C. § 92, Eng. tr. p. 144. 31. βασίλισσανότου . Lk. inserts this illustration between the two sayings about Jonah. Mt. keeps the two sayings about Jonah together. Lk. places the Ninevites after the Queen of Sheba either for chronology, or for effect, or both: their case was the stronger of the two. There is a threefold contrast in this illustration: (1) between a heathen queen and the Jews; (2) between the ends of the earth and here; (3) between Solomon and the Son of Man. There may possibly be a fourth contrast between that enterprising woman and the men of this generation implied in ἀνδρῶν , which is not in Mt. νότου … ἐκτῶνπεράτωντῆςγῆς . Sheba was in the southern part of Arabia, the modern Yemen, near the southern limits of the world as then known. Comp. Psalms 2:8. πλεῖονΣολομῶνος . There is no need to understand σημεῖον : “ a greater thing, something greater, than Solomon.” 32. ἄνδρεςΝινευεῖται . No article: “ Men of Nineveh.” RV. retains “ The men of Nineveh.” εἰςτὸκήρυγμα . “ In accordance with the preaching” they repented; i.e. they turned towards it and conformed to it; comp. ἐζωγρημένοιὑπ ʼ αὐτοῦεἰςτὸἐκείνουθέλημα (2 Timothy 2:26); or else, “ out of regard to it” they repented; comp. αἵτινεςἐλάβετετὸννόμοιεἰςδαιαταγὰςἀγγέλων (Acts 7:53); ὁδεχόμενοςδίκαιονεἰςὄνομαδικαίου (Matthew 10:41). See on 10:13; and for κήρυγμα , as meaning the subject rather than the manner of preaching, see Lft. Notes on Epp. p. 161. 33-36. The Light of the inner Eye. There is no break in the discourse, and this should hardly be printed as a separate section: the connexion with what goes before is close. Christ is still continuing His reply to those who had demanded a sign. Those whose spiritual sight has not been darkened by indifference and impenitence have no need of a sign from heaven. Their whole soul is full of the light which is all around them, ready to be recognized and absorbed. This saying appears to have been part of Christ’ s habitual teaching. Lk. gives it in a rather different form after the parable of the Sower (8:16-18). Mt. has it as part of the Sermon on the Mount (5:15, 6:22, 23), but does not repeat it here. Mk. has a portion of it after the parable of the Sower (4:21). See S. Cox in the Expositor, 2nd series, 1. p. 252. 33. λύχνονἄψας . See on 8:16.— εἰςκρύπτην . “ Into a vault, crypt, cellar.” But no ancient Version seems to give this rendering, although Euthym. has τὴνἀπόκρυφονοἰκίαν . Win. 34:3. b, P. 298. For the word comp. Jos. B. J. v. 7, 4; Athen. 5. (4.) 205 A; and the lat. crypta; Suet. Cal. 58.; Juv. v. 106. ὑπὸτὸνμόδιον . “ Under the bushel,” i.e. the one in the room, or in the house; as we say “ the sofa, the shovel.” In capacity a modius is about a peck = 16 sextarii or 1/6 μέδιμνος (comp. Nep. Att. ii.): elsewhere only Matthew 5:15; Mark 4:21. Syr-Sin. omits. 34. ὁλύχνοςτοῦσώματος . “ The lamp of the body.” To translate λύχνος “ candle” in ver. 33 and “ light” in ver. 34 (Tyn. Cov. Cran. Gen. AV.) is disastrous. Vulg. has lucerna in both; Wic. has “ lanterne” in both, and Rhem. “ candel” in both; RV. still better, “ lamp” in both.D. C. G. art. “ Light.” ὅταν … ἐπάν . See on ver. 22. Here both are follow by the subj., and there is no appreciable difference. ἁλοῦς . “ Free from distortion, normal, sound.” — πονηρός . “ Diseased” : πονηρίαὀφθαλμῶν occurs Plat. Hip. min. 374 D. Comp. πονηρὰἕξιςσώματος (Plat. Tim. 86 D) and the common phrase πονηρῶςἔχει . Faith, when diseased, becomes the darkness of superstition; just as the eye, when diseased, distorts and obscures. Comp. Matthew 6:22, Matthew 6:23. 35. σκόπειοὖν . Here, and not in the middle of ver. 34, the meaning passes from the eye of the body to the eye of the soul.1 μὴτὸφῶςτὸἐνσοὶσκότοςἐστίν . This happens when the eye of the soul is so diseased that it cannot receive any ray of Divine truth. The μή is interrogative, and the indicative after it suggets that the case contemplated is an actual fact: “ look whether it be not darkness” ; considera num, schaue ob wahl nicht. The vide ne of Vulg. is not exact. Comp. Galatians 4:11; Thuc. 3, 53:2. Win. lii. 2, a, p. 631; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 109. 36. The tautology is only apparent In the protasis the emphasis is on ὅλον , which is further explained by μὴἔχονμέροςτισκοτινόν : in the apodosis the emphasis is on φωτινόν , which is further explained by ὡςὅτανὁλύχνοςκ .τ .λ . “ If thy whole body … it shall be wholly full of light.” Complete illumination is illumination indeed, and those who possess it have no need of a sign from heaven in order to recognize the truth. Syr-Sin. condenses. 37-54. § The Invitation from a Pharisee. Christ’ s Denunciation of Pharisaic Formalism and Hypocrisy. A similar condemnation of the Pharisees is placed by Mt. somewhat later, and is given with great fulness (23.). If these sayings were uttered only once, we have not much material for determining which arrangement is more in accordance with fact. See on ver. 54. 37. Ἐνδὲτωσͅλαλησσαι . “ Now after He had spoken” (aor.), rather than “ As He spake” (AV. RV.). See on 3:21. There is nothing to show that the invitation was the result of what Christ had just been saying. Indeed, there may have been a considerable interval between vv. 36 and 37. Syr-Sin. omits. ὅπωςἀριστήσῃ . Here, as in John 21:12, John 21:15, the early meal of breakfast or lunch is meant rather than dinner or supper: comp. 14:12; Matthew 22:4. At this time the first meal of all was called ἀκράτισμα . Becker, Charicles, vi. excurs. 1., Eng. tr. p. 240. 38. ἐθαύμασεν . We are not told that he expressed his surprise. Jesus read his thoughts and answered them. Jesus had just come from contact with the multitude, and, moreover, He had been ting out a demon; and the Pharisee took for granted that He would purify Himself from any possible pollution before coming to table. This was not enjoined by the Law but by tradition, which the Pharisees tried to make binding upon all (Mark 7:3). This man’ s wonder is evidence that his invitation was not a plot to obtain evidence against Jesus: he was not expecting any trangression. ἐβαπτίσθη . This need not be taken literally of bathing. Probably no more than washing the hands is meant; and this often took place at table, the servants bringing water to each person. Edersh. L. &T. 2. pp. 204-207. We may understand Christ’ s omission to wash before coming to table, or refusal of the water offered to Him at table, as a protest against the attempt to “ bind burdens” upon men, and to substitute trivialities for the weightier matters of the Law. Comp. Derenbourg, Hist. de. la Pal. p. 134. 39. εἶπενδὲὁκύριος . The use of ὁΚύριος here (see on 5:17 and 7:13) perhaps has special point. The Pharisee might rega Him as an ordinary guest; but He has a message to deliver to him. Νυσν . The meaning is not certain; but it probably refers to time, and is not merely concessive. “ It was not so formerly, but is is the fact now,” comp. 2 Corinthians 7:9 and Colossians 1:24, where see Lft. Or, “ Here we have a case in point.” comp. 2 Kings 7:6. Or, “ This is what you as a matter of fact do,” in contrast to what you ought to do— πλὴντὰἐνόνταδότε . With the whole saying comp. Matthew 23:25. For πίνακος Mt. has παροψίδος : comp. Mark 6:25; Matthew 14:8. τὸδὲἔσωθενὑμωσν . Here the outside of the cup and platter is contrasted with the hearts of the Pharisees. In Mt the point is the outside of the vessels is kept clean, while the meat and drink in them are the proceeds of rapacity and the means of excess . Comp. ἐνποικιλίᾳἁμαρτιωσνκαὶἀκρασίαις (Ps. Son 4:3): amantes convivia devoratores gulæ (Assump. Mos vii. 4). Here some make τὸἔσωθεν mean the inside of the vessels, and take ὑμωσν with ἁρπαγησςκ . πονηρίας . But the position of ὑμωσν is conclusive against this. Others make τὸἔσωθενὑμωσν mean “ your inward parts” in the literal sense. “ You can keep the vessels from polluting the food; but that will not prevent the food, which is already polluted by the way in which it was obtained, from filling you with uncleanness.” But this is not probable. For Jewish trifling about clean and unclean vessels seeSchoettg. and Wetst. on Matthew 23:25, Matthew 23:26; and for the moral sterility of such teaching, Pressensé , Le Siè le Apstolique, p. 90. 40. ἄφρονες . A strong word: quite classical, but in the N. T. almost confined to Lk (12:20) and Paul (Romans 2:20; 1 Corinthians 15:36; 2 Corinthians 11:16, 2 Corinthians 11:19, 2 Corinthians 11:12:6, 2 Corinthians 11:11; Ephesians 5:17. See on 24:25). οὐχὁποιήσαςτὸἔξωθεν . This is almost certainly a question. “ Not he who has done the outside has thereby done the inside,” makes sense, but it is harsh and hardly adequate. It is better with most Versions to make οὐκ = nonne. “ Did not God, who made the material universe, make men’ s souls also?” 1 It is folly to be scrupulous about keeping material objects clean, while the soul is polluted with wickedness. 2 41. πλὴντὰἐνόνταδότεἐλεημοσύνην . The πλήν is here expansive and progressive, “ only.” See on 6:24. The meaning of τὰἐνόντα is much disputed, and the renderings vary greatly: quæ sunt (b d g); ex his quæ habetis (f); quod superest (Vulg.) ; ea quæ , panes Vos sunt (Beza); quantum potestis (Grot.); von dem, das da ist (Luth.). Quod superest is impossible; and the others are not very probable. Nor is it satisfactory to follow Erasmus, Schleiermacher, and others, and make the saying ironical: “ Give something to the or out of your luxuries, and then (as you fancy) all your ἁρππαγή and πονηρία will be condoned.” According to this τὰἔνόντα means either what is in the cups and platters, or what is in your purses. And this is perhaps right, but without irony. “ The contents of your cup and platter give ye in alms, and, lo, all things are clean to you,” i.e. benevolence is a better way of keeping meals free from defilement than scrupulous cleansing of vessels. We are told that this is “ a peculiarly Ebionitic touch.” But it is very good Christianity. Others make τὰἐνόντα = τὸἔσωθεν : “ As for that which is within you, as for the care of your souls, give alms.” See Expositor, 2nd series, v. P. 318. Or, “ Give your souls as alms,” i.e. give not merely food or money, but your heart. Comp. δῷςπεινῶντιτὸνἄρτονἐκψυχῆςσου (Isaiah 58:10). In any case, πάντα refers specially to the vessels used at meals. They will not defile where benevolence prevails. With the passage as a whole com Mark 7:18, Mark 7:19 and the Baptist’ s commands (Luke 3:11). 42. ἀλλὰοὐαὶὑμῖν . “ But, far from acting thus and obtaining this blessing, a curse is upon you.” Rue is mentioned in the Talmud as a herb for which no tithe need be paid. παρέρχεσθε . “ Ye pass by, neglect” : comp. 15:29; Deuteronomy 17:2; Jeremiah 34:18; Judith 9:10; 1 Mac. 2:22. Elsewhere in N. T. it means “ pass by” literally (18:37; Acts 16:8), or “ pass away, perish” (16:17, 21:32, 33, etc.). Here Mt. has ἀφήκατε . τὴνκρίσιν . “ The distinction between right and wrong, rectitude, justice.” This use of κρίσις is Hebraistic; comp. Genesis 18:19, Genesis 18:25; Isaiah 5:7, 56:1, 59:8; Jeremiah 17:11; Jer_1 Mac. 7:18. τὴνἀγάπηντοῦΘεοῦ . Here only does Lk. use the word ἀγάπη , which occurs once in Mt. (24:12), and not at all in Mk. It is fairly common in LXX, esp. in Cant. (2:4, 5, 7, etc.). κἀκεῖναμὴπαρεῖναι . Their carefulness about trifles is not condemned, but sanctioned. It is the neglect of essentials which is denounced as fatal. It is not correct to say that Christ abolished the ceremonial part of the Law while retaining the moral par. see Hort, Judaistic Christianity, pp. 30, 31. 43. ἀγαπᾶτετὴνπρωτοκαθεδρίαν . “ Ye highly value (John 12:43) the first seat” This was a semicircular bench round the ark, and facing the congregation, Edersh. L. &T. 1. p. 436. comp 20:46; Matthew 23:6; Mark 12:39. Some Latin texts agree with C D in adding to this verse et Primos discubitos in conviviis (b l q r), or et primos adcubitos in cenis (d). 44. ἐστὲὡςτὰμνημεῖατὰἄδηλα . “ Whosoever in the open field toucheth a grave shall be unclean seven days” (Numbers 19:16). Hence the Jews were accustomed to whitewash such graves to make them conspicuous. People mixed freely with Pharisees, believing them to be good men. and unconsciously became infect with their vices, just as they sometimes walked over a hidden grave and were polluted without knowing it. In Matthew 23:27 the Pharisees are compared to the whitewashed graves, which look clean and are inwardly foul. 45. τῶννομικῶν . See on 7:30. Not all the Pharisees were professional students , or teachers of the Law . καὶἡμᾶςὑβρίζεις . “ Thou insultest even us,” the better instructed among the Pharisees. The verb implies outrageous treatment (18:32; Acts 14:5; Matthew 22:6; 1 Thessalonians 2:2), and “ reproachest” is hardly strong enough. Comp. ἐνυβρίζειν (Hebrews 10:29). In class. Gk. ὑβρίζειν is commonly followed by εἰς , esp. in prose. “ Reproach” would be ὀνειδίζειν (Matthew 11:20). 46. There is a triplet of Woes against the lawyers (vv. 46, 47. 52), as against the Pharisees (42, 43, 44). With this first Woe comp. Matthew 23:4. In both passages φορτίον occurs; and, as distinct from βάρος and ὄγκος , it means that which a man is expected to bear (Matthew 11:30). But Lk. shows his fondness for cognate words by writing φορτίζετεφορτία , while Mt. has δεσμεύουσινφορτία . See on 23:46, and comp. Galatians 6:2. δυσβάστακτα . Proverbs 28:3. The word probably occurs here only in N.T., and has been inserted Matthew 23:4 from here. The reference is to the intolerably burdensome interpretations by which the scribes augmented the written Law. They made it far more severe than it was intended to be. explaining every doubtful point in favour of rigorous ritualism. οὐπροσψαύετε . Touching with a view to removing seems to be meant ; but it may indicate that. while they were rigorous to others. they were evasive themselves. They were scrupulous about their own traditions, but they did not keep the Law. It is not admissible, however. to interpret τοῖςφορτίοις in a different way from φορτίαδυσβάστακτα , making the latter refer to traditions. and τοῖςφορτίοις to the Law. Both mean the same, the force of the article being “ the φορτία just mentioned.,” Seeing that νομικοί were not neglectful of traditions, τοῖςφορτιοις must mean the Law; and therefore φορτίαδυσβάστακτα must have this meaning. 47. Comp. Matthew 23:30; Acts 7:52. οἰκοδομεῖτετὰμνημεῖατῶνπροφητῶνοἱδὲπατέρεςὑμῶν . “ Ye build the tombs of the prophets, while your fathers.” The “ Tombs, of the Prophets,” near the top of the Mount of Olives, are still “ an enigma to travellers and antiquarians.” All that can safely be asserted is that they are not the “ tombs of the prophets” mentioned here. Robinson, Res. in Pal. iii. P. 254. 48. μάρτυρέςἐστεκαὶσυνευδοκεῖτε . “ Ye are witness and consent to” or, “ Ye bear witness that ye approve.” 1 Mt. has μαρτυρεῖτε only (23:31), which some texts introduce here (A C D). Comp. Saul, who was συνευδοκῶν to the murder of Stephen (Acts 8:1). The ἄρα as first word is not classical: comp. Acts 9:18. τῶνπατέρωνὑμῶν . “ Your fathers, morally as well as actually; for you carry on and complete their evil deeds.” Externally the Pharisees seemed to honour the Prophets. Really they were dis-honouring them as much as those did who slew them; for they neglected the duties which the Prophets enjoined, and ignored their testimony to Christ. 49. διὰτοῦτοκαί . “ Because of your complicity with your fathers’ murderous deeds, there is this confirmation of the Woe just pronounced.” comp. Matthew 23:34. ἡσοφίατοῦΘεοῦεἶπενἈποστελῶ . The words are here ascribed to the “ Wisdom of God” are in Matthew 23:34 Christ’ s own words, spoken on a later occasion. It is improbable that Christ is here quoting what He said on some previous occasion. Nowhere does He style Himself “ the Wisdom of God” ; nor does any Evangelist give Him this title; nor does Θεοῦσοφίαν or σοφρίαἀπὸΘεοῦ (1 Corinthians 1:24, 1 Corinthians 1:30) warrant us in asserting that this was a common designation of Christ among the first Christians, so that tradition might have substituted this name for the ἐγώ used by Jesus. That He is quoting from a lost book called “ The Wisdom of God” is still less probable.2 Written words would be introduced with λέγει rather than εἶπεν , and the context seems to imply some Divine utterance. In the O.T. no such words are found; for Proverbs 1:20-31; 2 Chronicles 24:20-22, 2 Chronicles 36:14-21 are quite inadequate. And we obtain nothing tangible when we make the passage “ a general paraphrase of the tenor of several O.T. passages.” Rather it is of the Divine Providence (Proverbs 8:22-31), sending Prophets to the Jewish Church and Apostles to the Christian Church, that Jesus here speaks : “ God in His wisdom said.” Comp. 7:35. Jesus here speaks with confident knowledge of the Divine counsels: comp. 10:22, 15:7, 10. ἀποστόλους . Mt. has σοφοὺςκαὶγραμματεῖς , and mentions Crucifixion and scourging along with death and persecution. By coupling the persecuted Apostles with the persecuted Prophets, Jesus once more indicates the solidarity of the Pharisees with their wicked forefathers: comp. Matthew 5:12. For ἐξαὐτῶν comp. John 16:17 ; 2 John 1:4; Revelation 2:10. For διώξουσιν (א ; B C L X) in the sense of “ persecute” comp. 21:12; Acts 7:52, Acts 7:9:4, Acts 7:22:4, Acts 7:7, etc. 50. ἴναἐκζητηθῇτὸαἶμα . This is the Divinely ordered sequence. The verb is almost unknown in profane writings; and nowherse else in N.T. is it used of “ demanding back, requiring as a debt.” Comp. 2 Samuel 4:11; Ezekiel 3:18, Ezekiel 3:20, 33:6, Ezekiel 3:8, Genesis 9:5, Genesis 42:22. τὸἐκκεχυμένονἀπὸκαταβολῆςκόσμου . comp. Matthew 25:34; Hebrews 4:3, Hebrews 4:9:26; Revelation 13:8, Revelation 17:8. The expression καταβολὴκόσμου does not occur in LXX Comp. ἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆς (Psalms 78:2). ἐκκεχυμένον . This is the reading of B and a few cursives; but almost all other authorities have ἐκχυννόμενον , which may easily have come from Mt. The grammarians condemn ἐκχύνω , or ἐκχύννω (Aeolic) as a collateral form of ἐκχέω . It is used of bloodshed Acts 22:20, and the pres. part., if genuine here, is very expressive: “ the blood which is perpetually being shed.” ἀπὸτῆςγενεᾶςταύτης . To be taken after ἐκζητηθῇ . The reference is specially to the destruction of Jerusalem (21:32). 51. The murders of Abel and Zacharias are the first and last murders in the O.T., which in the Jewish Canon ends with Chronicles. In both cases the ἐκζήτησις is indicated: “ The voice of the brother’ s blood crieth unto me from the ground” (Genesis 4:10); “ The Lord look upon it, and require it” (2 Chronicles 24:22). Chronologically the murder of Uriah by Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 26:23) is later than that of Zachariah the son of Jehoiada. Zachariah the son of Barachiah was the Prophet, and there is no mention of his having been murdered: in Matthew 23:35 “ the son of Barachiah” is probably a mechanical slip. For τοῦοἴκου Mt. has τοῦναοῦ , and the ναός is evidently the οἶκος meant here. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 12. The greater part of the utterances of Christ which Lk. records in this chapter are also recorded in different parts of Mt., for the most part either in the Sermon on the Mount (5-7.), or in the Charge to the Twelve (10:5-42), or in the Prophecy of the Last Days (24:4-51). Here they are given in the main as a continuous discourse, but with marked breaks at vv. 13, 22, 54. Lk. evidently regards vv. 1-21 as spoken immediately after the commotion at the Pharisee’ s house; and there is little doubt that vv. 22-53 are assigned by him to the same occasion. How much break there is between vv. 53 and 54 is left undetermined. The fact that many of Christ’ s sayings were uttered more than once, and were differently arranged on different occasions, will partly explain the resemblances and differences between Lk. and Mt. here and elsewhere. But it is also probable that there has been some confusion in the traditions, and that words which one tradition placed in one connexion were by another tradition placed in another. Luke 12:2-9 = Matthew 10:26-33.Luke 12:51-53 = Matthew 10:34-36. 22-32 = 6:25-34. 54-56 = [16:2, 3]. 33, 34 = 6:19-21. 57-59 = 5:25, 26. 39-46 = 24:43-51. 1-12. Exhortation to Courageous Sincerity. This is closely connected with what precedes. The commotion inside and outside the Pharisee’ s house had attracted an immense crowd, which was divided in its sympathy, some siding with the Pharisees, others disposed to support Christ. His addressing His words to His disciples rather than to the multitude indicates that the latter were in the main not friendly. But the appeal made to Him by one of them (ver. 13) respecting a purely private matter shows that is authority is recognized by many. The man would not have asked Him to give a decision in the face of a wholly hostile assembly. But this warning to His followers of the necessity far courageous testimony to the truth in the face of bitter opposition implies present hostility. The connexion with the preceding scene is proved by the opening words, Ἐνοἶς , “ In the midst of which, in the meantime.” 1. τωσνμυριάδωντουςὄχλου . Hyperbolical, as in Acts 21:20. The article points to what is usual; “ the people in their myriads.” Comp. οὐφοβηθήσομαιἀπὸμυριάδωνλαουςτωσνκύκλῳἐπιτιθεμένωνμοι (Psalms 3:7). ἤρξατολέγειν . The ἤρξατο gives a solemn emphasis to what follows: see on 4:21, and comp. 14:18 and Acts 2:4. It may possibly refer to πρωστον ; He began to address the disciples, and then turned to the people. The πρωστον means that His wor were addressed primarily to the disciples, although the people were meant to hear them. After the interruption He addresses the people directly (ver. 15). It makes poor sense to take πρωστον with προσέχετε , “ First of all beware” (Tyn. Cr an. Gen.), for to beware of Pharisaic hypocrisy cannot be considered the first of all duties. For other amphibolous constructions see on 2:22. Προσέχετεἑαυτοισςἀπό . “ Take heed to yourselves and avoid; beware of.” The warning phrase προσέχετεἑαυτοῖς is peculiar to Lk. (17:3, 21:34; Acts 5:35, Acts 20:28); but in LXX πρόσεχεσεαυτωσͅ is common (Genesis 24:6; Exodus 10:28, 34:12; Deuteronomy 4:9, etc.). For the reflexive see on 21:30. ἀπὸτησςζύμης . This constr. is common after verbs of avoiding, ceasing from, guarding against, and the like; παύω , κωλύω , φυλάσσομαι , κ .τ .λ . Comp. πρόσεχεσεαυτωσͅἀπὸπάσηςπορνείας (Tobit 4:12). The pronoun is often omitted 20:46; Matthew 7:15, Matthew 7:10:17, Matthew 7:16:6, Matthew 7:11; Deuteronomy 4:23 ?. This warning seems to have been given more than once (Mark 8:15). Leaven in Scripture is generally a type of evil which corrupts and spreads, disturbing, puffing up and souring that which it influences. The parable of the Leaven (13:20, 21; Matthew 13:33) is almost the only exception. Ignatius (Magnes. 10.) uses it in both a good and a bad sense. In profane literature its associations are commonly bad. The Flamen Dialis was not allowed to touch leaven or leaven bread (Aulus Genius, 10:15): comp. Juv. 3:188. The proverb μικρὰζύμηἅλοντὸφύραμαζυμοις , is used of pernicious influence (1 Corinthians 5:6; Galatians 5:9). Fermentation is corruption. If τωσνφαρισαίων is rightly placed last (B L), it b epexegetic. “ Beware of the leaven which is hypocrisy,— I mean the Pharisees’ leaven.” In Matthew 16:12 “ the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees” is interpreted as meaning their doctrine. 2. Οὐδὲνδὲσυγκεκαλυμμένονἐστιν . “ But there is nothing covered up, which shall not,” etc. Hypocrisy is useless, for one day there will be a merciless exposure. It is not only wicked, but senseless. 3. ἀνθ ʼ ὦν . This is commonly rendered “ wherefore,” like ἀντὶτούτου , “ for this cause” (Ephesians 5:31). But in 1:20, 19:44, Acts 12:23 it = ἀντὶτούτων , ὅτι ; and it may have the same meaning here. “ There is nothing hid, that shall not be known: because whatever ye have said in the darkness shall be heard in the light,” — quoniam quæ in tenebris dixistis in lumine dicentur (Vulg.). Christ is continuing to insist that hypocrisy is folly, for it is always unmasked at last. There was a saying of Hillel, “ Think of nothing that it will not be easily heard, for in the end it must be heard” See small print on 1:20. It is in wording that this is parallel to Matthew 10:26, Matthew 10:27: the application is very different. ἐντοῖςταμείοις … ἐπὶτῶνδωμάτων . “ Store chambers” are commonly “ inner chambers, secret rooms,” especially in the East, where outer walls are so easily dug through: comp. Matthew 6:6, Matthew 6:24:26; Genesis 43:30; Judges 16:9; 1 Kings 22:25. To this day proclamations are often made from the housetops: comp. ἐπὶτωσνδωμάτων (Isaiah 15:3; Jeremiah 19:13, Jeremiah 48:38). See D. B.2 i. p. 1407; Renan, Les Evangelis, p. 262 n. The Latin Versions give a variety of renderings: in cellariis (i l r), in promptalibus (d), in promptuariis (e), in cubilibus (Vulg. (f); om, b q). Comp. ver. 24. 4. Λέγωδὲὑμῖντοῖςφίλοῖμου . “ My friends are not likely to be hypocrites, although persecution will tempt them to become such” : comp. John 15:15. μὴφοβηθῆτεἀπὸτῶνἀποκτεινόντων . The use of ἀπό here is analogous to that in ver. 1, of that which one turns away from. It is Hebraistic (Leviticus 19:30, Leviticus 19:26:2; Deuteronomy 1:29, Deuteronomy 1:3:22, Deuteronomy 1:20:1; Joshua 11:6; 1 Samuel 7:7; Jeremiah 1:8, Jeremiah 1:17; Jer_1 Mac. 2:62, 8:12, etc.). It is not used of fearing God. μετὰταῦτα . The plural may refer to the details of a cruel death, or to different kinds of death. Not in Matthew 10:28. μὴἐχόντων . Lk. is fond of this classical use of ἔχειν : ver. 50, 7:40, 42, 14:14; Acts 14:14, Acts 14:23:17, Acts 14:18, Acts 14:19, Acts 14:25:26, Acts 14:28:19. Here (Matthew 10:28) has μὴδυναμένων . 5. φοβήθητετὸνμετὰτὸἀποκτεῖναιἔχονταἐξουσίαν , κ .τ .λ . There is little doubt that this refers to God and not to the devil. The change of construction points to this. It is no longer φοβήθητεἀπὸτούτου , but τοῦτονφοβήθητε , “ fear without trying to shun,” which is the usual construction of fearing God. Moreover, we are not in Scripture told to fear Satan, but to resist him courageously (James 4:7; 1 Peter 5:9); τὸνθεὸνφοβήθητε , τῷδιαβόλῳἀντίστητε is scriptural doctrine. Moreover, although the evil one tries to bring us to Gehenna, it is not he, who has authority to send us thither. This passage (with Matthew 10:28), the king with twenty ousand (see on 14:33), and the Unjust Steward (see on 16:1), are perhaps the only passages in which the same words have been interpreted by some of Satan and by others of God. ἐμβαλεῖνεἰςτὴνγέενναν . Excepting here and James 3:6, γέεννα occurs only in Mt and Mk. in N.T. Not in LXX. The confusion caused in all English Versions prior to RV. by translating both γέεννα and ᾅδης “ hell” has been often pointed out. Lft. On Revision, Pp. 87, 88; Trench, On the AV. p. 21. Γέεννα is a transliteration of Ge-Hinnom, “ Valley of Hinnom,” where children were thrown into the red-hot arms of Molech. When these abbominations were abolished by Josiah (2 Kings 23:10), refuse of all kinds, including carcases of criminals, was thrown into this valley, and (according to late authorities) consumed by fire, which was ceaselessly burning. Hence it became a symbolical name for the place of punishment in the other world. D. B.2 “ Geharma,” “ Hinnom,” and “ Hell.” 6. πέντεστρουθία … ἀσσαρίωνδύο . Mt has δύοστρουθίαἀσσαρίου . Both have ἕνἐξαὐτῶνοὐ , which is more expressive than οὐδὲνἐξαὐτῶν , throwing the emphasis on ἕν : “ not even one of them,” although five cost so little. Both στρουθός and στρουθίον commonly mean “ sparrow,” although sometimes used vaguely for “ bird” or “ fowl” : e.g. Psalms 11:1, Psalms 84:4. The Heb. tzippor, which it often represents, is still more commonly generic, and was applied to any variety of small passerine birds, which are specially numerous in Palestine, and were all allowed as food. Tristram, Nat. Hist, of B. P. 201. It is unfortunate that ἀσσάριον and its fourth part κοδράντης (Matthew 5:26; Mark 12:42) should both be translated “ farthing,” while δηνάριον , which was ten to sixteen times as much as an ἀσσάριον , is translated “ penny.” “ Shilling” for δηνάριον , “ penny” for ἀσσάριον , and “ farthing” for κοδράντης would give the ratios fairly correctly, although a shilling now will buy only a little of what a denarius would buy then. ἐνώπιοντοῦΘεοῦ . A Hebraism, very freq. in Lk. (1:19, 16:15; Acts 4:19, Acts 7:46: comp. Luke 1:6, Luke 1:15, Luke 1:75; Acts 8:21, Acts 10:4). It implies that each bird is individually present to the mind of God. Belief in the minuteness of the Divine care was strong among the Jews: Non est vel minima herbula in terra cui non præ fectus sit aliquis in cæ lo. 7. ἀλλὰκαὶαἱτρἰχεςκεφαλῆς . “ But (little as you might expect it) even the hairs of your head.” Comp. 21:18; Acts 27:34; 1 Samuel 14:45; 2 Samuel 14:11; 1 Kings 1:52; Daniel 3:27. μὴφοβεῖσθε … διαφέρετε . “ Cease to fear (pres. imper.) … ye are different from, i.e. are superior to” : Matthew 6:26, Matthew 6:12:12; 1 Corinthians 15:41; Galatians 4:1. This use of διαφέρω is classical. 8. Λέγωδὲὐμῖν . The “ also” of AV. is impossible. The fear of men, which lies at the root of hypocrisy, as opposed to the fear of a loving God, appears to the connecting thought. πᾶς . Nom pend. placed first with much emphasis. For similar constructions comp. 21:6; John 6:39, John 7:38, John 17:2. ὁμολογήσειἐνἐμοί . The expression comes from the Syriac rather than the Hebrew, and occurs only here and Matthew 10:32. The phrase ὄμνυμιἐν (Matthew 5:4-36) is not quite parallel. Here perhaps the second ὁμολογήσει requires ἐν , and this leads to its being used with the first. That Christ will confess His disciples is not true in the same sense that they will confess Him: but they will make a confession in His case, and He will make a confession in theirs; their confession being that He is the Messiah, and His that they are His loyal disciples. As early as the Gnostic teacher Heracleon (C. a.d. 170-180), the first commentator on the N.T. of whom we have knowledge, this ἐν after ὁμολογήσει attracted notice.1 9. ἀπαρνηθήσεταιἐνώπιοντῶνἀγγέλων . This expressive compound verb is used of Peter’ s denial of Christ (22:34, 61; Matthew 26:34, Matthew 26:75, Mark 14:30, Mark 14:72). In Mt. we have ἀρνήσομαικἀγὼαὐτὸνἔμπροσθεντοῦπατρόςμου . Note that Lk. has his favourite ἐνώπιον for ἔμπροσθεν (see on 1:15), and that he has “ the Angels of God” where Mt. has “ My Father” : comp. 15:10. 10. Comp. Matthew 12:31, Matthew 12:32 and Mark 3:28, Mark 3:29, in both which places this difficult saying is closely connected with the charge brought against our Lord of casting out demons through Beelzebub; a charge recorded by Lk. without this saying (11:15-20). We cannot doubt that Mt. and Mk. give the actual historical connexion, if these words were uttered only once. πᾶς . Here again Lk. has a favourite word (see on 7, 35): Mt has ὃςἐάν , and Mk. has ὃςἄν . Also for εἰςτὸνυἱόν Mt. has κατὰτοῦυἱοῦ . For this use of εἰς After βλασφημεῖν and the like comp. 22:65; Acts 6:11; Hebrews 12:3. After ἁμαρτάνειν it is the regular construction, 15:18, 21, 17:4; Acts 25:8, etc. The Jewish law was, “ He that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, he shall surely be put to death: all the congregation shall certainly stone him” (Leviticus 24:16). τὸἄγιονπνεῦμα . See on 1:15. οὐκακφεθήσεται . Constant and consummate opposition to the influence of the Holy Spirit, because of a deliberate preference of darkness to light, renders repentance, and therefore forgiveness, morally impossible. Grace, like bodily food, may be rejected until the power to receive it perishes. See on 1 John 5:16 in Camb. Grk. Test., and comp. Hebrews 6:4-8, Hebrews 10:26-31. The identity of the “ blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” with the “ sin unto death” is sometimes denied (D. B.2 i. P. 442); but a sin which will never be forgiven must be a sin unto death. Schaff’ s Herzog, i. p. 302. In each case there is no question of the efficacy of the Divine grace. The state of him who is guilty of this sin is such as to exclude its application (Wsctt. on Hebrews 6:1-8, p. 165). Blasphemy, like lying, may be acted as well as uttered: and it cannot safely be argued that blasphemy against the Spirit must be a sin of speech (Kurzg. Kom. N.T. i. P. 75). See Aug. on Matthew 12:31, Matthew 12:32; also Paschasius Radbertus, Migne, 120:470-472. 11, 12. Comp. 21:14, 15, which is parallel to both Matthew 10:19, Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11, but not so close to them in wording as these verses are. The connexion here is evident. There is no need to be afraid of committing this unpardonable blasphemy by illadvised language before a persecuting tribunal; for the Holy Spirit Himself will direct their words. 11. εἰσφέρωσινὑμᾶςἐπὶτὰςσυναγωγάς . In all four passages their being brought before synagogues is mentioned. The elders of the synagogue were responsible for discipline. They held courts, and could sentence to excommunication (6:22; John 9:22, John 12:42, John 16:2), or scourging (Matthew 10:17), which was inflicted by the ὑπηρέτης (see on 4:20). Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. ii. pp. 59-67 ; Derenbourg, Hist. de la Pal. pp. 86 ff. The ἀρχαί and ἐξουσίαι would include the Sanhedrin and Gentile tribunals. μὴμεριμνήσητεπῶςἤτίἀπολογήσησθε . Neither the form nor the matter of the defence is to cause great anxiety beforehand. Sec on ver. 22 and 10:41 Excepting Romans 2:15 and 2 Corinthians 12:19, ἀπολογεῖσθαι is peculiar to Lk. (21:14 and six times in Acts). Here Mt. and Mk. have λαλήσητε . D 157, a b c d e ff2i l q Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Aeth, omit ἤτί , which may possibly come from Matthew 10:19. If so, this is a Western non-interpolation. See note at the end of ch, 24. WH. bracket. 12. ἐναὐτῇτῇὥρᾳ . “ In that very hour” : see small print 10:7 and comp. Exodus 4:12 and 2 Timothy 4:17. Renan points out the correspondence between this passage and John 14:26, John 15:26 (V. de J. P. 297, ed. 1863). Comp. Exodus 4:22. 13-15. § The Avaricious Brother rebuked. This incident forms historical introduction to the Parable of the Rich Fool (16-21), just as the lawyer’ s questions (10:25-30) form the historical introduction to the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Comp. 14:15, 15:1-3. We are not told whether the man was making an unjust claim on his brother or not; probably not: but he was certainly making an unjust claim on Jesus, whose work did not include settling disputes about property. The man grasped at any means of obtaining what he desired, invading Christ’ s time, and trying to impose upon his brother an extraneous authority. Facile ii; qui doctorem spiritualem admirantur, eo delabuntar, ut velint eo abuti ad domestica componenda (Beng.). Compare Christ’ s treatment of the questions respecting the payment of the didrachma, the woman taken in adultery, and payment of tribute to Cæ sar. 13. εἰπὲτῷἀδελφῷμου . He does not ask Jesus to arbitrate between him and his brother, but to give a decision against his brother. There is no evidence that the brother consented to arbitration. 14. Ἄνθρωπε . A severe form of address, rather implying disapprobation or a desire to stand aloof, 22:58, 60; Romans 2:1, Romans 9:20. Comp. Soph. Aj. 791, 1154. As in the case of the lepers whom He healed (5:14, 17:14), Jesus abstains from invading the office of constituted authorities. No one appointed Him to any such office. Comp. Τίςσεκατέστησενἄρχοντακαὶδικαστὴνἐφ ʼ ἡμῶν ; (Exodus 2:14), words which may have been fliar to this intruder. Comp. John 18:36. μεριστήν . Here only in N.T. Not in LXX. There is no need to interpret it of the person who actually executes the, sentence of partition pronounced by the κριτής The κριτής who decides for partition is a μεριστής . Syr-Sin. omits. 15. φυλάσσεσθεἀπό . The expression is classical (Xen. Hell. vii. 2, 10; Cyr. ii. 3, 9), but the only similar passage in N.T. is φυλάξατεἑαυτὰἀπὸτῶνεἰδώλων (1 John 5:21): it is stronger than προσέχετεἀπό . πάσηςπλεονεξίας . “ Every form of covetousness” : comp. πάνταπειρασμόν , “ every kind of temptation” (4:13); πᾶσαἁμαρτίακαὶβλασφημία (Matthew 12:31). On πλεονεξία “ the greedy desire to have more,” as a more comprehensive vice than φιλαργυρία , see Lft. Epp. p. 56 and on Colossians 3:5. He quotes φυλάξασθεοὖνἀπὸτῆςπορνείαςκαὶτῆςφιλαργυρίας (Test. 12. Patr. Jude 1:18.), and somewhat differs from Trench, Syn. xxiv. Jesus, knowing what is at the root of the brother’ s unreasonable request, takes the opportunity of warning the whole multitude against this prevalent and subtle sin. οὐκἐντῷπερισσεύειντινι . “ Not in the fact that a man has abundance is it the case that his life is the outcome of his possessions” ; i.e. it does not follow, because a man has abundance, that his life consists in wealth. Some render, “ For not because one has abundance, is his life part of his possessions,” i.e. so that he can secure it. But the other is simpler. Life depends for its value upon the use which we make of τὰὑπάρχοντα , and for its prolongation upon the will of God. It is unlikely that ἡζωή here means or includes eternal life; but it includes the higher life as distinct from βίος . Comp. οὐγὰρἐντῇὑπερβολῇτὸαὔταρκεςοὐδ ʼ ἡπρᾶξις , δυνατὸνδὲκαὶμὴἄρχονταγῆςκαὶθαλάττηςπράττειντὰκαλά · καὶγὰρἀπὸμετρίωνδύναιτ ʼ ἄντιςπράττεινκατὰτὴνἀρετἡν (Arist. Eth. Nic. x. 8, 9). For the dat. after περισσεύειν comp. 21:4 and Tobit 4:16, and for that after τὰὑπάρχοντα see on 8:3. 16-21. § The Parable of the Rich Fool, which illustrates both points;— that the life that is worth living does not depend upon wealth, which may be a trouble and anxiety; and that even mere existence cannot be secured by wealth. 16. Εἶπενδὲπαραβολὴνπρός . Each separate combination is characteristic: εἶπενδέ , εἶπενπαραβολήν , and εἶπενπρός . See on 6:39, and comp. 15:3. εὐφόρησεν . Here only in bibl. Grk. Josephus uses it of Galilee as productive of oil (B. J. ii. 21, 2); but elsewhere it occurs in this sense in medical writers only (Hobart, p. 144): comp. τελεσφορεῖν (8:14). ἡχώρα . Comp. 21:21; John 4:35; James 5:4. There is no hint that the man’ s wealth was unjustly acquired; and this is some slight confirmation of the view that the brother’ s claim was not unjust (ver. 13). There is perhaps a reference to Ecclus. 11:18, 19 or to Psalms 49:16-20. 17. Τίποιήσω ; Comp. Ecclesiastes 5:10. οὐκἔχωποῦσυνάξω . Quasi musquam essent quibus pascendis possent impendi (Grot.). Inopum sinus, viduarum domus, ora. infantum … istæ sunt apothecæ quæ Maneant in æ ternum (Ambr.), Note the repetition of μον : “ my fruits, my barns, my goods, my soul.” it is just here that there is some resemblance to the story of Nabal: “ Shall I take my bread, and my water, and my flesh that I have killed for my shearers and give it unto men of whom I know not whence they be ?” (1 Samuel 25:11): but it is too much to say that there is an evident reference to Nabal. 18. καθελῶ First with emphasis: he is eager to set to work. But pauperum nulla mentio (Beng.). Comp. ἀφελεῖ , which is the true reading, Revelation 22:19; and see Veitch, p. 25. Note the chiasumus between καθελῶ and οἰκοδομήσω . The text of the words which follow καὶσυνάξωἐκεῖ is much confused, but πάντατὸνσῖτονκαὶτὰἀγαθάμου (א a א c B L T X, Syr-Harcl. Boh. Sah. Aeth. Arm.) is probably correct, the μου after σῖτον (א a א c X, Syr-Harcl.: Boh. sah. Aeth.). being rejected as an insertion. WH. give the evidence in full (ii. p. 103), and regard it as a marked instance of conflation. Comp. 9:10, 11:51, 24:51 The main facts are these. The expression τὰγενήματα is very common in LXX for the fruits of the earth, arid the phrase συνάγειντὰγενήματα Occurs Exodus 23:10; Leviticus 25:20; Jeremiah 8:13. The familiar τὰγενήματάμου was substituted in some documents for the unusual combination τὸνσῖτονκαὶτὰἀγαθά (א * D), in others for τὸνσῖτον (A Q A F G H etc.), in one for τὰἀγαθάμου (346); yet another variation is caused by the substitution of τοὺςκαρπούςμου (from ver. 17) for the whole of the unusual combination (39), omnes fructus meos (a c d e). Thus we have— τὸνσῖτον [μου ] καὶτὰἀγαθάμου . 1. τὰγενήματαμου . 2. τοὺςκαρπούςμου . 1. τὰγενήματάμουκαὶτὰἀγαθάμου . 2. τὸνσῖτόνμουκαὶτὰγενήματάμου The common reading (δ . 1) is a conflation of β , 1 and α , 19. ἐρῶτῇψυχῇμοῦ . There is probably no irony in making him address, not his body, but his soul: the ψυχή is here used as the seat of all joyous emotions. comp μὴμεριμνᾶτετῇψυχῇτίφάγητε (ver. 22). Field quotes καρτέρησον , ψυχή , προθεσμίανσύντομον , ἵνατὸνπλείωχρόνονἀπολαύσηςἀσφαλοῦςἡδονῆς (Charit. Aphrod. iii. 2); and Wetst. quotes θαρρυνῶἐμαυτὸνκαὶπρὸςτὴνἐμαυτοῦψυχὴνεἰπών · Ἀθηναῖοςεἶμι (Libanius, D 6. P. 463). See Stallbaum on Plat. Repub. ii. 8, p. 365 A. κείμεναεἰςἔτηπολλά · ἀναπαύον , φάγε , πίε . These words are amitted, in D and some Latin authorities (a b c d e ff2). With εἰςἔτηπολλά comp. James 4:13-17; Proverbs 27:1; Ecclus. 29:12:, and with φάγε , πίε comp. Tobit 7:10 and the remarkable parallel Ecclus. 11:19. The asyndeton marks the man’ s confidence and eagerness. 20. εἶπενδὲαὐτῷὁΘεός . This is a parable, not history. It is futile to ask how God spoke to him. For Ἄφρων see on 9:40 and 24:5. The ταύτῇτῇνυκτί is placed first in emphatic contrast to the ἔτηπολλά . See Schanz, pp, 347, 348. τὴνψυχήνσουαἰτοῦσινἀπὸσοῦ . “ They are demanding thy soul of thee” : the present tense is very impressive. They do not demand it for themselves, and so we have act. and not mid. Comp. 2 Corinthians 11:20; and see the parallel lesson Wisd. 15:8. For the impersonal plural comp. vv. 11, 48, 6:38, 16:9, 23:31. There is no need to think of ἄγγελοιθανατηφόροι (Job 33:23), or of λῃσται (10:30). ἂδὲἡτοίμασας , τίνιἔσται ; Vulg. Rhem. and RV. preserve the telling order: quæ autem parasti cujus erunt? “ And the things which thou hast prepared, whose shall they be?” Comp. Psalms 39:6, 49:6; Ecclesiastes 2:18-23; Job 27:17-22. When not even his ψυχή is his own to dispose of, what will become of his ἀγαθά 21. θησαυρίζωναὑτῷ . Comp. Matthew 6:19; 2 Corinthians 12:14; and for the εἰς before Θεόν comp. 16:8. It is to be regretted that the εἰς is rendered differently in the two passages in both AV. and RV. . “ Being rich toward God” means being rich in those things which are pleasing to Him. Amassing wealth without reference to the God who bestows it is πλεονεξία , and πλεονεξία is ἀφροσύνη . The change from αὐτῷ to εἰςΘεόν , instead of Θεῷ , is intentional, and Juvenal’ s dives tibi, pauper amicis (v. 113) is not quite parallel, nor at Hecato in Cic. De Off. iii. 15. 63: Neque enim solum nobis divites esse volumus, sed liberis, propinquis, amicis, maximeque rei publicæ . The whole verse is omitted in D and a b d. 22-53. God’ s Providential Care and the Duty of Trust in Him (22-34) and of Watchfulness for the Kingdom (35-48) which Christ came to found (49-53). The address to the people (vv. 15-21) being ended, Jesus once more turns specially to the disciples; and it should be noticed that in doing so He no longer speaks in parables. That what follows was spoken on the same occasion as what precedes seen, to be intended by Lk., but is not stated. The διὰτοῦτο is included in the traditional report (see Matthew 6:25), and proves nothing as to the original historical connexion. It is more to the point to notice that covetousness and hoarding are the result of want of trust in God (Hebrews 13:5), and that an exhortation to trust in God’ s fatherly care follows naturally on a warning against covetousness. There is logical, but not necessarily chronological connexion. More convincing is the coincidence between details. The mention of sowing, reaping, store-chamber, and barn (ver. 24) may havedirect reference to the abundant harvests and insufficient barns in the parable (vv. 17, 18). But it does not follow, because this lesson was given immediately after the parable of the Rich Fool, that therefore it was not part of the Sermon on the Mount; any more than that, because it was delivered there, it cannot have been repeated here. 22. Εἶπενδὲπρὸςτοὺςμαθητάς . Note both the δέ and the πρός and comp. ver. 16, 7:50, 9:13, 14, 59, 62, etc. Assuming a connexion with what precedes, Διὰτοῦτο will mean, “ Because life does not depend on riches.” μὴμεριμνᾶτε . “ Be not anxious” : comp. ver. 11 and 10:41. See Lft. On Revision, 2nd ed. p. 190; Trench, On the A.V. p. 39; T. L. O. Davies, Bible English, p. 100, for evidence that “ thought” in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries meant distressing anxiety. Comp. 1 Samuel 9:5 with 10:2. S. Paul reiterates Christ’ s teaching (1 Corinthians 7:32 ; Philippians 4:6). τῇψυχῇ . Not, “ in your soul,” but, “ for your soul.” Here again the reference to the parable seems to be direct. If so, the necessity for translating ψυχή in the same way in both passages is all the stronger. The ψυχή is the source of physical life and physical enjoyment. 23. πλεῖόνἐστιντῆςτροφῆς . “ Is something greater than the food” (comp. 11:31, 32). Therefore He who gave the greater will not fail to provide the less. 24. κατανοήσατε . A favourite verb: see on ver. 27, Mt. has ἐμβλέψατε ; and for τοὺςκόρακας he has τὰπετεινὰτοῦοὐρανοῦ . Ravens are mentioned nowhere else in N. T., but often in O. T. See especially τίςδὲἡτοίμασενκόρακιβοράν (Job 38:41), and καὶδιδόντιτοῖςκτήνεσιτροφὴναὐτῶνκαὶτοῖςνοσσοῖςτῶνκοράκωντοῖςἐπικαλουμένοιςαὐτόν (Psalms 147:9). The name (Heb. ˒ oreb) covers the whole of the crow tribe (including rooks and jackdaws) which is strongly represented in Palestine. Like the vulture, the raven acts as a scavenger: but it is a fable that it turns its young out of the nest, leaving them to feed themselves, and that this is the point of our Lord’ s mention of them. The raven is very careful of its young; and God feeds both old and young. Tristram, Nat. Hist. of B. pp. 198-201. Here Vulg. b f l have cellarium for ταμεῖον , while d has promptuarium See on ver. 3. διαφέρετετῶνπετεινῶν . See on ver. 7. “ The birds are God’ s creatures; but ye are God’ s children” : ὁπατὴρὑῶν (Mt), not αὐτῶν . 25. Τίςδὲἐξὑῶν . See on 11:5. μεριμνῶνδύναταιἐπὶτὴνἡλικίανπροσθεῖναιπῆχυν . “ By being anxious can add a span to his age.” That ἡλικία here means “ age” (Hebrews 11:11; John 9:21, John 9:23), and not “ stature” (19:3), is clear from the context. It was prolongation of life that the; anxiety of the rich fool failed to secure. Not many people give anxious, thought to the problem of adding to their stature; and the addition of a πῆχυς (the length of the forearm) would be monstrous, and would not be spoken of as ἐλάχιστον . Many persons do give anxious thought to the prolongation of their allotted age, and that by any amount, great or small. Wetst. quotes Mimnermus, πηχύϊονἐπὶχρόνονἄνθεσινἥβηςτερπόμεθα . See on 2:52, where ἡλικία probably means stature. For πῆχυς see D. B.1 iii. pp. 1736 ff.; and for the literature on Hebrew Weights and Measures, Schaff’ s Herzog, iv. P. 2486; Hastings, D.C.G.M ii. p. 818. 26. εἰοὖνοὐδὲἐλάχιστονδύνασθε . These words have no equivalent Mt. and are omitted in D, which for the whole verse has simply καὶπερὶτῶνλοιπῶντίμεριμνᾶτε . So also a b c d ff2 i l r: et de cæ teris quid solliciti estis. By τῶνλοιπῶν are meant clothing (Mt.), food, and other bodily necessities. For οὐδέ we might have expected μηδέ . But εἰ =ἐπεί and the sentence conditional in form only. “ If (as is certain) ye cannot” = “ Since ye cannot.” Comp. John 3:12, John 3:5:47; 1 Corinthians 11:6; Hebrews 12:25. Win. lv. 2. a, pp 600 Or we may consider οὐδέ as belonging to δύνασθε , and not to the whole sentence “ If ye are unable.” Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 183. But the former is better. 27. τὰκρίνα . Mt. adds τοῦἀγροῦ . The word occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is be, in LXX, esp. in Cant. (2:16, 4:5, 5:13, 6:2, 3, etc.) : Heb. shushan or shoshannah. Some flower with a brilliant colour is evidently meant, and the colour is one to which human lips can be compared (Son 5:13). Either the scarlet Martagon (Lilium Chalcedonicum) or the scarlet anemone (anemone coronaria) may be the flower that is thus named. Like στρουθία , however (ver. 7), κρίνα may be generic; and to this day the Arabs call various kinds of flowers “ lilies.” See D.B. art. “ Lily” ; and comp. Stanley, Sin. &Pal. pp. 139, 430. Note that, while Mt. has καταμανθάνειν , Lk. has his favourite κατανοεῖν (ver. 24, 6:41, 20:23; Acts 7:31, Acts 7:32, Acts 7:11:6, Acts 7:27:39). For κοπιᾷ see on 5:5 : it covers the works of men νήθει that of women. After τὰκρίναπῶς D has οὔτενήθειοὔτεὑφαίνει , while d has quomodo neque neunt neque texunt, and a has quomodo non texunt neque neunt. Several other Lat. texts have texunt. Thus, quomodo crescunt non laborant neque neunt neque texunt (b l r) ; quomodo crescunt non next neque texunt (c); quomodo crescunt non laborant non neunt texunt (ff2); and, by a curious slip, quomodo non crescunt non laborant neque neunt neque texunt (i). 28. εἰδὲἐνἀγρῷ . First with emphasis. “ If in the field,” where such care might seem to be superfluous. AV. wrongly takes ἐνἀγρῷ with ὄντασήμερον , following Vulg. quod hodie in agro est. Both here and in Mt. the right connexion is, “ which to-day is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven.” For κλίβανος , a portable oven, as distinct from ἰπνός , see D.B. The κλίβανος is often mentioned in LXX, generally as a simile for great heat (Psalms 20:9; Hosea 7:1, etc.); ἰπνός neither in LXX nor in N.T. Wood being scarce in Palestine, grass is commonly used as fuel. For ἀμφιάζει , which is a late word (Job 29:14, Job 31:19), see Veitch. 29. καὶὑμεῖςμὴζητεῖτε . “ And do you cease to seek” : comp Ver. 11, 6:30, 37, 7:13, 8:49, 50, 52, etc. Mt. has the aor. μεριμνήσητε . μὴμετεωρίζεσθε . In class. Grk. and in LXX (Psalms 130:1; Psa_2 Mac, 5:17, 2 Mac, 7:34) this would probably mean, “ Be not lifted up, do not exalt yourselves, seek not high things.” So the Vulg. nolite in sublime tolli. Old Latin texts differ: nolite solliciti esse; nec solliciti sitis (c); non abalienetis vos (d): and many omit the passage. Luth. fahret nicht hoch her. Tyn. Cov. and Cran. “ neither clyme ye up an high.” But most commentators interpret it as a metaphor from ships tossing at sea: “ Waver not anxiously, not tossed about with cares.” Comp. μετέωρονἐνφόβῳ of a criminal expecting punishment (Jos. B. J. iv. 2, 5); and see S. Cox, who turns the word into a parable, Expositor, 1st series, 1. P. 249, 1875. Edersheim contends for the LXX meaning, “ be not uplifted” (L. &T. 2. p. 217). The verb is one of the rarer which are common to N.T., Philo, and Plutarch. 30. ταῦταγὰρπάντα . This is the right combination; not πάντατὰἔθνη : hæ c enim omnia gentes mundi quæ runt. The heathen seek anxiously after all these things, because they know nothing of God’ s providential care. The phrase τὰἔθνητοῦκόσμου occurs nowhere else in N.T. or LXX, but represents an Aramaic expression common in Rabbinical writings. The plural verb shows that the different nations are considered distributively; and the compound expresses the anxiety with which they seek. Each nation seeks laboriously after the sum-total of these things. On the difference between ταῦταπάντα here and πάνταταῦτα , Matthew 6:32, see Win. lxi. 2, b, p. 686. In both places ἐπιζητοῦσιν is the true reading, and ἐπιζητεῖ a grammatical correction. ὑμῶνδὲὁπατήρ . But you, who know that you have such a Father, have no need to be disturbed about these wants. 31. Lk. alone has his favourite πλήν . See on 6:24. “ But (dismissing all this useless anxiety) continue to seek,” etc. Mt. adds πρῶτον to ζητεῖτε . Origen quotes εἶπεγὰρὁἸησοῦςτοῖςμαθηταῖςαὐτοῦΑἰτεῖτετὰμεγάλακαὶτὰμικρὰὑμῖνπροστεθήσεται , καὶαἰτεῖτε , καὶαἰτεῖτετὰἐπουράνιακαὶτὰἐπίγειαπροστεθήσεταιὑμῖν (De Orat. § 2). Comp. Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 24, P. 416, ed. Potter, and iv. 6, p. 579. 32. This verse has no parallel in Mt., and it is the only verse in this section which is entirely without equivalent in the Sermon on the Mount. The passage reads so well both with and without it, that it is difficult to see why it should have been either inserted or omitted without authority. In it the Good Shepherd assures His flock that, while the anxious seeking of the ὀλιγόπισται after god and raiment is vain, their seeking after the Kingdom of God will not be vain. He gives the Kingdom to those who seek it, and with it gives the necessaries of life. Whereas those who neglect the Kingdom that they may secure the necessaries, may lose both. Κύριοςποιμαίνειμε , καὶοὐδένμεὑστερήσει (Psalms 23:1). The μικρὸνποίμνιον are the disciples as contrasted with the μυριάδεςτοῦὄχλου (ver. 1). ποίμνιον = ποιμένιον , which is not a diminutive, and therefore μιπρόν is neither superfluous nor an epithet of affection, hut an expression of fact. On the nom. with the art. for the voc. see on 10:21; and for εὐδόκησεν see Lft. on Colossians 1:19, and comp. Romans 15:26. 33. The first half of this verse has no parallel in Mt. As in 6:29, 30, we have a rule given, not that it may be kept literally, but that it may illustrate a principle. So far as attachment to our possessions is concerned, we must be ready to part with them (1 Corinthians 7:30). Our fondness for them is not our justification for keeping them. But there is no Ebionism here, no condemnation of possessions as sinful.1 As Bede points out, Christians are not commanded to retain nothing for their own use (for Christ Himself had a purse out of which He gave alms), but to take care that fear of poverty does not interfere with benevolence. Almsgiving is not to be a mere giving of what we can spare. Nor is it merely for the sake of the receiver. It is also for the good of the giver, that his heart may be freed from covetousness. The attempt to keep the letter of the rule here given (Acts 2:44, Acts 2:45) had disastrous effects on the Church of Jerusalem, which speedily became a Church of paupers, constantly in need of alms (Romans 15:25, Romans 15:26; 1 Corinthians 16:3; 2 Corinthians 8:4, 2 Corinthians 9:1). For τὰὑπάρχοντα see on 8:3; and for βαλλάντια see on 10:4. ἀνέκλειπτον . Not elsewhere in N.T. or LXX. Comp. 16:9, 22:32; and, for the command, Mark 10:41. Heaven is not to be bought with money; but, by almsgiving, what would be a hindrance is made a help.2 In σής the reference perhaps is to costly garments, which are a favourite form of wealth in the East. The word occurs Isaiah 50:9, 51:8; Job 4:19, 27:18; Proverbs 14:30; but in N.T. only here and Matthew 6:19. 34. Almost verbatim as Matthew 6:21. S. Paul states a similar principle 1 Corinthians 7:32-34. Wealth stored up in this world has any enemies; that which is stored in heaven is safe from them all. The γάρ is specially to be noted. The reason why treasure must be stored in heaven is that the hearts of those who bestow it may be drawn heavenwards. 35-48. The Duty of Loyal Vigilance. From ver, 35 to ver. 38 this section has no parallel in Mt. The interpellation of Peter (ver. 41) is also peculiar to Lk. But vv. 39, 40 and 42-46 are parallel to Matthew 24:43-51. The discourse once more takes a parabolic turn, watchfulness being inculcated by the parables of the Master’ s Return (35-38, 42-48) and of the Thief’ s Attack (39, 40). 35. Ἔστωσανὑμῶναἱὀσφύεςπεριεζωσμέαι . The long garments of the East are a fatal hindrance to activity. Comp. 17:8; Acts 12:8; 1 Kings 18:46; 2 Kings 4:29, 2 Kings 4:9:1; Job 38:3, Job 38:40:7; Jeremiah 1:17 Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands, p. 158. Note the emphatic position of ὑμῶν and ὑμεῖς . “ Whatever others may do, this is to be your condition.” οἱλύχνοικαιόμενοι , κ .τ .λ . This is the parable of the Ten Virgins condensed (Matthew 25:1). 36. προσδεχομένοις . Expectantibus (Vulg.) cum desiderio et gaudio (Bang.): comp. 2:25, 38, 23:51. πότεἄαλύσῃἐκτῶνγάμων . If the rendering “ when he shall return from,” etc., is correct, this is the only place in N.T. in which the verb has this meaning: Comp. 2 Mac. 8:25, 13:7, 15:28; 3 Mac. 5:21; Wisd. 2:1. The more usual sense is “ break up (a feast, camp, etc.), depart” : comp. Philippians 1:23; Judith 13:1; 2 Mac. 9:1: and this may be the meaning here. See instances in Wetst. So Luther, wenn er aufbrechen wird. The wedding is not his own, but that of a friend which he has been attending. In Esther (2:18, 9:22) γάμοι is used of any banquet or festival: but the literal meaning is better here.1 For the plural of a single marriage feast comp. 14:8; Matthew 22:2, Matthew 25:10, and suee Win. 27:3, p. 219. For the constr. ἴναέλθότος … ἀνοίξωσιναὑτῷ see Win. 30:11, p. 259, and comp. 15:20. 37. περιζώσεταικαὶἀνακλινεῖαὐτούς . Comp. Revelation 3:20, Revelation 3:21. Christ acted in this way when He washed the disciples’ feet: not, however, in gratitude for their faithful vigilance, but to teach them humility. Nevertheless, that was a type of what is promised here: comp. Revelation 19:9. References to the Saturnalia, when Roman masters and slaves changed places in sport, are here quite out of place. The parable 17:7-10 sets forth the usual course between master and man. 38. δευτέρᾳ . The first watch is not mentioned, because then the wedding-feast was going on. These are probably the two last of the three Jewish watches (Judges 7:19), not the two middle watches of the Roman four (Mark 13:35; Acts 12:4). See on 22:34 and D. B. art. “ Watches of Night.” In D, Marcion, Irenæ us, and some other authorities, the first watch is inserted: WH. 2. App. p. 61. 39. γινώσκετε . Probably indic. But Vulg. Luth. Beza, and all English Versions make it imperat. There is nothing strange in the sudden change of metaphor, especially in Oriental language. The “ thief in the night” is a proverb for unexpected events (1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10; Revelation 3:3, Revelation 16:15). Comp. the changes of metaphor in the parallel passage Matthew 24:40-44. ἀφῆκεν . “ Left his house” (RV.). AV., makes no distinction between ἀφῆκεν here and εἴασεν in Matthew 24:43, rendering both “ suffered.” But the RV. elsewhere renders ἀφίημι by “ suffer” (8:51, 18:16); and ἀφῆκεν here cannot mean that he went out of the house, for “ he would have kept awake” implies that he remained in it. If the distinction between εἵασεν and ἀφῆκεν is to be marked, the latter might be translated “ allowed,” a word which the Revisers nowhere use, except in the margin of Mar 4:29. διορυχθῆναι . “ To be dug through,” the walls being made of mud. Wic. has “ to be myned” here and “ to be undermynyde” in Mt. for perfodiri of Vulg. Comp. διώρυξενἐνσκότειοἰκίας (Job 24:16); ἐὰνδὲἐντῷδιορύγματιεὑρεθῇὁκλέτης (Exodus 22:2); οὐκἐνδιορύγμασινεὗροναὐτούς (Jeremiah 2:34). 41. ΕἶπενδὲὁΠέτρος . This interruption should be compared with that in 9:33. Each of them connects the discourse in which it appears with a definite incident. It illustrates Peter’ s impulsiveness and his taking the lead among the Twelve. Perhaps it was the magnificence of the promise in ver. 37 which specially moved him. He wants to know whether this high privilege is reserved for the Apostles. For παραβολὴνλέγεις see on 36, and for πρός = “ in reference to” comp. 18:1; Romans 10:21; Hebrews 1:7, Hebrews 1:8, Hebrews 1:11:18, and possibly Luke 19:9 and 20:19. Here πρόςἡμᾶς comes first with emphasis. ἢκαὶπρὸςπάντας . Peter is sure that it has reference to the Twelve: the question is whether others are included. The employment of parables would make him suppose that the multitude was being addressed, as in ver. 16; for Jesus did not commonly employ this kind of teaching with His permanent disciples. The spirit of the question resembles John 21:21, and the answer resembles John 21:22. In Mark 13:37 we have what looks like a direct answer to the question here askcd by S. Peter, “ What I say to you I say to all, Watch.” 42. Τίςἄραἐστίν . Christ answers one question by another which does not tell the questioner exactly what he wishes to know, but what it concerns him to know. It is enough that each who hears recognizes that he is an οἰκανόμος with responsibilities. This was true in the highest sense of the Apostles. The οἰκονόμος here is a dispensator (Vulg.) or villicus (d), a superior slave left in charge of the household and estate (see on 16:1). Other names are ordinarius, actor, procurator, the meanings of which seem to have varied at different periods and on different estates. Becker, Gallus, Excursus 3. p. 204, Eng. tr. Hatch seems to assume that dispenstor and villicus were terms of fixed and invariable meaning (Bibl. Grk. p. 62). With πιστός comp. Numbers 12:7; 1 Samuel 22:14; and with φρόνιμος comp. 16:8; Genesis 41:39. With θεραπείας (abstr. for concr.) comp. ἐχάρηδὲΦαραὼκαὶἡθεραπείααὐτοῦ (Genesis 45:16). Contrast Luke 9:11. σιτομέτριον . “ A measured portion of food, ration.” These rations on Roman estates were served out daily, weekly, or monthly. The word occurs nowhere else, but σιτομτρεῖν is found (Genesis 47:12, Genesis 47:14). Comp. Hor. Ep. i. 14. 40. See instances in Wetst, and in Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 158. 44. ἀληθῶςλέγωὑμῖν . Here, as in 9:27 and 21:3 Lk. has ἀληθῶς , others have ἀμή́ . See on 10:12. Comp. νομικοί (11:52) where Mt. has γραμματεῖς (23:14), and his never using Ῥαββεί . ἐπὶπᾶσιντοῖςὑπάρχουσιναὐτοῦ . See on 8:3. This passage and Matthew 24:47 seem to be the only instances in N.T. of this use of ἐπί . Elsewhere we have the gen. (ver. 42) or acc. (ver. 14), the former being more common (Matthew 24:45, Matthew 24:25:21, Matthew 24:23). 45. Χρονίζειὁκύριόςμου . Comp. 2 Peter 3:3, 2 Peter 3:4; Ecclesiastes 8:11. The “ But and if” of AV. is simply “ But if” (RV.); “ and if” being “ an if,” a double conditional, which was common in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. ἄρξηται . He begins to do this, but the arrival of his lord puts a stop to it: comp. 21, 13:25; Acts 11:15. This οἰκονόμος has a large familia of slaves under him. Perhaps he makes merry on what he ought to have given them. For παιδίσκκη as a vernacular word for a female slave see Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 40. Μεθύσκεσθαι is “ to get drunk,” as distiract. μεθύειν “ to be drunk” (Acts 2:15). 46. For the attraction in ἐνὥρᾳᾗοὐγινώσκεν see on 3:19. διχοτομήσει . To be understood literally; for his having his portion with the unfaithful servants does not imply that he still lives: their portion is a violent death. For the word comp. Exodus 29:17; and for the punishment 2 Samuel 12:31; 1 Chronicles 20:3; Susannah 59; Amos 1:3 (LXX); Hebrews 11:37. There is no example of the word being used of scourging or other severe treat ment. There is a gradation of punishments: for vile misconduct and tyranny, death; for deliberate neglect, many stripes; for unintentional neglect, few stripes. Herodotus uses διατέμνειν : ii. 139, 2, 7:39, 5. Comp. Suet. Caligula, 27: multos honesti ordinis … medios serra dissecuit. τὸμέροςαὐτοῦμετὰτῶνἀπίστωνθήσει . “ Will appoint his portion with the unfaithful servants,” i.e. those guilty of a gross abuse of trust. “ Unbelievers” here has no point. Mt. has τῶνὑποκριτῶν , which means much the same as τῶνἀπίστων . This unfaithful steward expected to be able to play the part of a trusty agent at the time of his lord’ s arrival. For τὸμέρος we have ἡμερίς in LXX, Isaiah 17:14; Jeremiah 13:25. Here the parallel with Matthew 24:43-51 ends. What follows is preserved by Lk. alone. 47. ἐκεῖνοςδὲὁδοῦλος . “ But that servant,” Ille autem servus. Both AV. and RV. have “ and.” The δέ marks the contrast between this transgressor and the οἰκονόμος , for μὴἑτοιμάσαςἢποιήσαςπρὸςτὸθέλημααὐτοῦ is a less serious offence than the outrages which are described in vv. 45, 46, and one which all servants may commit. δαρήσεταιπολλάς . Understand πληγάς and comp. παίεινὁλίγας (Xen. Anab. v. 8. 12). In N.T. δέρω is never “ I flay,” but always “ I beat.” Comp. the vulgar “ hide, giving a hiding to.” In LXX δέρω does not occur, except as v.l. in Leviticus 1:6; 2 Chronicles 29:34, 2 Chronicles 29:35:11; but in all three places the meaning is “ flay,” and the true reading possibly ἐκδέρω . Comp. Micah 2:8, Micah 3:3. The doctrine of degrees of punishment hereafter is taught here still more plainly than in 10:12, 14. See Aug. De Civ. Dei, xxi. 16. There are two classes not mentioned here: ὁγνοὺςκαὶποιήσας and (so far as that is possible) ὁμὴγνοὺςκαὶποιήσας : see on Romans 2:14. 48. ὁμὴγνούς . Seeing that he is a servant, he might have known his master’ s will, had he been anxious to find it out. Nevertheless it is true that even he, who, in ignorance for which he is not responsible, commits ἄξιαπληγῶν , has to suffer. The natural consequences of excess or transgression must follow. In the second half of the verse it is doubtful whether the two parallel statements mean exactly the same thing or not. Either, “ He who receives much is expected to exhibit much gratitude, and also readiness to make return; and is expected to do more than those who have received less” : or, “ He who receives a gift , must make a proportionate return: and be who receives a deposit , must restore more than he has received.” In the latter case the second half states the principle of the parables of the Talents and the Pounds Note the impersonal plurals, and comp. ver. 20. 49-58. The discourse seems to return to its starting-point (vv. 1-2). Christ’ s teaching inevitably provokes opposition and a vision between those who accept it and those who reject it. There is no parallel in Mt. or Mk. to vv. 49, 50. 49. Πῦρ . First for emphasis. “ It is fire that I came to cast upon the earth.” The context seems to show that the fire of division and strife is meant: or, comparing 3:16, we may understand the fire of holiness, which excites hostility and controversy. Ignis ille non est nativus terræ (Beng.). Εἰςκρίμαἐγὼεἰςτὸνκόσμοντοῦτονἦλθον (John 9:39: comp. 3:19). καὶτίωέλωεἰἤδηἀνήφθη ; A passage of well-known difficulty, the translation of which remains doubtful. With this punctuation we may follow AV. and RV., “ What will I, if it be (is) already kindled?” the meaning of which is not clear: comp. LXX of Jos 7:7. Or, with De Wette, Weiss, and many others, “ How I wish that it were already kindled!” which does rather serious violence to the Greek. Or, with Origen, Meyer, etc., we may punctuate, καὶτίθέλω ; εἰἤδηἀνήφθη . “ And what will I? Would that it were already kindled!” (Win. 53:8. c, p. 562); which is rather abrupt and harsh: but comp. 19:42 and John 12:27. Perhaps the first is best, meaning, “ What more have I to desire, if it be already kindled.” The next verse does not imply that it is not kindled; and the history of Christ’ s ministry shows that it was not kindled, although not to the full extent. Comp. Psalms 78:21. Christ came to set the world on fire, and the conflagration had already begun. Malachi 3:2. Comp. the constr. in Ecclus. 23:14. 50. βάπτισμαδὲἔχωβαπτισθῆναι . Having used the metaphor of fire, Christ now uses the metaphor of water. The one sets forth the result of His owning as it affects the world, the other as it affects Himself. The world is lit up with flames, and Christ is bathed in blood: Mark 10:38. His passion is a flood in which He must be plunged. The metaphor is a common one in O.T. Psalms 69:2, Psalms 69:3, Psalms 69:14, Psalms 69:15, 42:7, 124:4, Psalms 69:5, 144:7; Isaiah 43:2. Jordan in flood and mountain torrents in spate would suggest such figures. See on 9:22. πῶςσυνέχομαιἔωςὅτουτελεσθῇ . “ How am I oppressed, afflictect until it be finished” : comp. 8:37; Job 3:24. The prospect of His sufferings was a perpetual Gethsemane: comp. John 12:27. While He longed to accomplish His Father’ s will, possibly His human will craved a shortening of the waiting. Comp. συνέχομαιδὲἐκτῶνδύο (Philippians 1:23). With τελεσθῇ comp. τελέλεσται , John 19:28, John 19:30 51. With vv. 51. and 53 comp. Matthew 10:34, Matthew 10:35. It was the belief of the Jews that the Messiah would at once introduce a reign of peace and prosperity. Jesus does not wish His followers to live in a fool’ s paradise. He is no enthusiast making wild and delusive promises. In this world they must expect tribulation. ἀλλ ʼ ἤ . “ Except I but.” Although the ἀλλ ʼ has no accent, it seems to represent ἄλλο rather than ἀλλά : “ I came not to send any other thing than division.” Or there may be a mixture of οὐδὲνἄλλοἤ and οὐδὲνἄλλο , ἀλλά : comp. 2 Corinthians 1:13; Job 6:5; Ecclus. 37:12, 44:10. The expression is common in class. Grk.; and in Hdt. i. 49. I, ix. 8, 3 the origin of it seems to be shown. See Stallbaum on Phæ do, 81 B; Win. liii:7. n. 5, p. 552. διαμρισμός . Comp. Micah 7:12; Ezekiel 48:29; here only in N. T. Again Christ prepares them for disappointment. 52. This verse has no parallel in Mat_10 Comp. Micah 7:6, on which what follows seems to be based. Godet says that there are five persons here and six in ver. 53 There are five in both cases, the mother and mother-in-law being the same person. Excepting 2 Corinthians 5:16, ἀπὸτοῦνῦν is peculiar to Lk. (1:48, 5:10, 22:18, 69; Acts 18:6). It is not rare in LXX (Genesis 46:30; Psalms 112:2, 113:26, 120:8, Psalms 124:2, Psalms 130:3, Isaiah 9:7, etc.). 53. πατὴρἐπὶυἱῷ … μήτηρἐπὶθυγατέρα … πενθερὰἐπὶτὴννύμφην . The change from the dat. to the ace. possibly indicates that the hostility is more intense in the case of the women. But LXX of Mic 7:6 more probably was the cause of the change. There we home ἐπὶτήν of the women, but υἱὸςἀτιμάζειπατέρα of the men. In Matthew 10:35 we have κατά c. gen. in all three cases. Lk. omits “ A man’ s foes shall be those of his own household.” Comp. Malachi 4:6. For νύμφη = “ daughter-in-law” comp. Matthew 10:35; Genesis 11:31, 38:11; Leviticus 18:15, etc.; Jos. Ant. v. 9, 1 In John 3:29; Revelation 18:23, etc., it has the classical meaning of “ bride.” 54-59. § Ignorance of the Signs of the Times. Christ once more addresses the multitude (ver. 15), apparently on the same occasion; but it is by no means certain that Lk. means this. If so, this is a last solemn word by way of conclusion. The parallel passage Matthew 16:2, Matthew 16:3 is of very doubtful authority. It can hardly be derived from Lk., from which it differs almost entirely in wording, but perhaps comes from some independent tradition. 54. Ἔλεγενδὲκαὶ . The formula is suitable for introducing a final utterance of special point. Comp. 5:36, 9:23, 16:1, 18:1. For τοῖςὄχλοις see on 11:29. ἐπὶδυσμῶν . In the West, and therefore from the Mediterranean Sea, which was a sign of rain (1 Kings 18:44). Robinson, Res. in Psa_1. p. 429; D.B. art. “ Rain.” εὐθέωςλέγετεὄτιὌμβροςἔρχεται . Both the εὐθέως and the pres. ἔρχεται point to the confidence with which the announcement is made: “ at once ye say, Rain is coming.” Comp. ἔρχεταιὥρα . Ὄμβρος is “ heavy rain, a thunder-shower” : Deuteronomy 32:2; Wisd. 16:16; Ecclus. 49:9; Jos. Ant. ii. 16, 3. 55. ὅταννότονονέοντα . Understand ἴδητε . One sees, that it is a south wind by the objects which it moves. Lk. alone uses νότος of the south wind (Acts 27:13, Acts 28:13). Elsewhere it means the South, as frequently in LXX (11:31, 13:29; Matthew 12:42; Revelation 21:13; 1 Samuel 27:10, 30:1, 14, 27; 2 Samuel 24:7; 1 Kings 7:25, 1 Kings 7:39 [13, 25], etc.). καύσων . “ Scorching heat” : Matthew 20:12; James 1:11; Isaiah 49:10; Ecclus. 18:16, 43:22. Perhaps nowhere in N.T. does καύσων mean the burning east wind (Job 27:21; Hosea 12:1); but James 1:11 is doubtful. 56. ὑποκριταί . Comp. Matthew 23:14 ff. They professed to be unable to interpret signs, such as the birth, preaching, and death of the Baptist, the preaching and miracles of Jesus. But their weather-wisdom proved that they could be intelligent enough where their worldly interests were concerned. δοκιμάζειν . “ To test.” In τὸπρόσωποντοῦοὐρανοῦ and καιρόν we have almost the only words that are common to this passage and Matthew 16:2, Matthew 16:3. With τὸνκαιπόν comp. 19:44. 57. τίδὲκαὶαιφ ʼ ἑαυτῶν . “ But why even of yourselves, out of your own hearts and consciences,” without information from externals: comp. 21:30. Or possibly, “ Of yourselves also, ” as readily as in the case of the weather. In either case ἀφ ʼ ἑαυτῶν comes first for emphasis. For δὲκαὶ see small print on 3:9. 58. ὡςγὰρὑπάεις . γὰρ sæ pe ponitur, ubi propositionem excipit tractatio. Here ειντῇὁδῷ stands first with emphasis; no time is to be lost. And the Latinism δὸςειργασίαν , da operam, occurs here only. Wetst. quotes Heremogenes, De Inventione, iii. 5, 7. Excepting Ephesians 4:19, ἐργασία in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 16:16, Acts 16:19, Acts 16:19:24, Acts 16:25). Hobart regards it as medical (p. 243), but it is very freq. in LXX. Note ὡς = “ when.” ἀπηλλάχθαι . “ To he quit of him” by coming to terms with him. Christ is perhaps taking the the case of the two brothers (vv. 13, 14) as an illustration. The ὰπό before the αὐτοῦ is omitted in B, but is certainly right Acts 19:12. In class. Grk. both constructions are found, but the simple gen. is more common. Plat. Leg. 868 D; Xen. Mem. ii. 9, 6. κατασύρῃ . Here only in N.T. and only once in LXX of ruining or demolishing: ὅτιἐγὼκατέσυρατὸνἨσαῦ (Jeremiah 49:10). In Lat. detraho is used of dragging into court. For examples see Wetst. Mt. has παραδῷτῷκπιτῇ . παραδώσειτῷπράκτορικαὶὁπράκτωρσεβαλεῖεἰςφυλακήν . Tradat te exactori et exactor mittat to in carcerem (Vulg.). For exactor Cod. Palat (e) has the strange word pignerarius. No where else in bibl. Grk. does πράκτωρ occur. At Athens the magistrate who imposed a fine gave notice to the πράκτορες , who entered it as due from the person fined; but they did not enforce payment, if the fine was not paid. They merely kept the record. See D. of Ant.2 art. Practores. For πράκτορι Mt. has ὑπηρέτῃ . 59. λέγωσοι . He addresses each individual. Mt. has ἀμὴνλέγωσοί (comp. ver. 44), and for λεπτόν has κοδράντην . The λεπτόν was half a quadrans and the eighth of an as: see on ver. 6, and comp. 21:2; Mark 12:42. Can the payment be made ἐνφυλακῇ The parable gives no answer to this question. But it teaches that the proper time for payment is before judgment is given, and that release is impossible until full payment is made. The Talmud says: “ The offences between man and God the Day of Atonement Both atone for. The offences between man and his neighbour the Day of Atonement atoneth for, only when he hath agreed with his neighbour.” There is no need to interpret the details in the parable, and make the ἀντίδικος mean the law of God, and the ἄρχων God Himself, and the κριτής the Son of God. Tyn. Tyndale. Gen. Geneva. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. Vulg. Vulgate. D. B. Smith’ s Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition. RV. Revised Version. AV. Authorized Version. 1 The fragment of Heracleon, preserved by Clem. Alex. Strom. iv. 9, is translated by Westcott, Canon of N.T. P, 275, 3rd ed. syr-Sin. omits v. 9. Wsctt. Westcott. Aug. Augustine. D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. Syr Syriac. Cur. Curetonian. Sin. Sinaitic. WH. Westcott and Hort. V. de J. Vie de Jé sus. § Found in Luke alone. Beng. Bengel. Grot. Grotius. Ambr. Ambrose. א Ԡ א a contemporary, or nearly so, and representing a second MS. of high value; א Ԡ א c attributed to the beginning of sæ c. 7. Two hands of about this date are sometimes distinguished as א ca and א cb T T. Cod. Borgianus, sæ c. v. In the Library of the Propaganda at Rome. Greek and Egyptian. Contains 22:20-23:20. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. Harcl. Harclean. Boh. Bohairic. Sah. Sahidic. Aeth. Ethiopic. Arm. Armenian. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 13:1-9. § Three Exhortations to Repentance, of which two (1-3; 4, 5) are based upon recent occurrences, while the third (6-9) is a parable. All three seem to have been omitted by Marcion in his mutilated Gospel; but it is not easy to see what he disliked in them. They are peculiar to Lk., and both external and internal evidence guarantee their authenticity. Time and place are indefinite; but the connexion with what precedes is expressly stated, and the scene must have been away from Jerusalem. 1-3. The Moral of the Massacre of the Galilæ an Pilgrims. There is no record of this massacre in any other source. But the turbulent character of the Galilæ ans, and the severity of Pilate and other Roman governors, make the incident more than credible. Horrible massacres are recorded by Josephus (Ant. xvii.9. 3, xviii.3.1, xx. 5. 3; B. J. ii. 3. 3, 9. 4, v. 1. 5). The fact that such things were common accounts for the absence of other records; and possibly not very many were slain. But such an outrage on Galilæ ans may have been one of the causes of the enmity between Herod and Pilate (23:12); and Keim conjectures that it was on this occasion that Barabbas was imprisoned. So also Lewin, Fasti Sacri, 1407. Others have conjectured the occasion to have been the insurrection under Judas of Galilee, the Gaulonite of Gamala (Ant. xviii. 1. 1; B. J. ii. 8. 1); but that was many years earlier (c. a.d. 6), and these new-comers evidently report some recent event. On the other hand, the insurrection of the Samaritans (Ant. xviii. 4. 1) took place later than this, being the immediate cause of the recall of Pilate (a.d. 36). And what had Samaritan rebellion to do with the massacre of Galilæ ans? Comp. Philo’ s summary of the enormities of Pilate: τὰςδωροδοκίας , τὰςὔβρεις , τὰςἁρπαγὰς , τὰςαἰκίας , τὰςἐπηηρείας , τοὺςἀκκρίτουςκαὶἐπαλλήλουςφόνους , τὰςἀνήνυτονκαὶἀπγαλεωτὰτηνὠμότητα (Leg. ad Gaium, 38. p. 1034 c, ed. Galen.). Again he says of him: ἤνγὰρτὴνφύσινἀκαμπὴςκαὶμετὰτοῦαὐμείλικτοςἀμείλικτος ; and, οἶαοὖνἐγκότωςἔχωνκαὶβαρύμηνιςἄνθρωπος . See Lewin, 1493; Derenbourg, p. 198. 1. Πρῆσαν . Not, “ there were present,” as all English Versions render, but, “ there came,” venerunt (Cod. Brix.). These informants were not in the crowd which Jesus had been addressing, but brought the news afterwards. For this use of παρεῖναι comp. Acts 10:21; Matthew 26:50; John 11:28: sometimes followed by πρός (Acts 12:20; Galatians 4:18, Galatians 4:20), or by εἰς (Colossians 1:6): comp. Luke 11:7. In Matthew 26:50; Acts 10:21, Acts 12:20, Vulg. has venio; in Colossians 1:6, pervenio. Wetst. quotes a close parallel: παρῆσάντινεςἀπαγγέλοντεςπολλοὺςτῶνἙλλήνωννεωτερίζειν (Diod. Sic. xvii. 8). ἐναὐτῷτῷκαιρῷ . “ At that very opportunity,” viz. just as He was speaking about the signs of the times. Possibly they had heard His last words, and thought that their story would be regarded as a sign: τῷκαιρῷ may look back to τὸνκαιρόν (12:56: comp. 1:20, 4:13). ὦντὸαἶμαΠειλᾶτοςἔμιξενμετὰτῶνθυσιῶναὐτῶν . These pilgrims from Galilee had come up to Jerusalem for one of the Feasts, probably Tabernacles, and had come into collision with the Romans, no doubt through some fanatical act of rebellion. The merciless procurator, himself in Jerusalem to keep order during the Feast, sent troops to attack them as they were sacrificing in the temple courts, and their blood was mingled with that of the slaughtered beasts. The expression, “ mingling blood with blood,” occurs elsewhere. Schoettgen quotes (of Israelites who were circumcised in Egypt at the Passover). et circummcisi sunt, et commixtus est sanguis paschatis cum sanguine circumcisionis (Hor. Hebr. p. 286). And again: David swore to Abishai, if he laid hands on Saul, “ I will mingle thy blood with his blood” (ibid. p. 287; Lightfoot Hor. Hebr. ad loc.). 2. We gather the object of these informants from Christ’ s answer. They did not want Him as a Galilæ n to protest against Pilate’ s cruelty, perhaps by heading another Galilman revolt. Rather, like Job’ s friends, they wanted to establish the view that this calamity was a judgment upon the sufferers for exceptional wickedness (Job 4:7, Job 4:8:4, Job 4:20, 22:5; comp. John 9:1, John 9:2). Perhaps they had heard about the threatened “ cutting asunder” (12:46), and thought that this was a case in point. There is no hint that they wished to entrap Him into strong language respecting Pilate. παρὰπάνταςτ . Γ . ἐγένοντο . “ Showed themselves to be (comp. 10:36) sinners beyond all the Galilæ ans.” Comp. the use παρά after comparatives, 3:13. 3. πάντεςὁμοίωςἀπολεῖσθε . The suffering of a whole nation is more likely to be produced by the sin of the nation than the suffering of an individual by the sin of the individual. Exempla sunt omnium tormenta paucorum. Jesus condemns neither the Galilæ ans nor Pilate, but warns all present of what must befall them unless they free themselves from their guilt. It is this approach of judgment upon His whole people which seems to fill Chrises thought, and to oppress Him far more than the approach of His own sufferings. Grotius points out how exact the ὁμοίως is. Vide quam omnia congruerint. Paschatis enim die occisi sunt, magna pare in ipso templo pecudum ritu, ob eandam causam seditionis. But it is unlikely that this massacre took place at the Passover. The rest is right. πολλοὶ … πρὸτῶνθυμάτωνἔπεσοναἰτοὶκαὶτὸνἝλλησιπᾶσικαὶβαρβάροιςσεβάσμιονβωμὸνκατέσπεισανἰδίῳφόνῳ (B. J. v. 1, 3). See Martensen, Chr. Dogm. § 110. 4, 5. The Moral of the Catastrophe at Silosm. This incident also is recorded here only. Jesus mentions it spontaneously as something fresh in their memories. “ The tower” means the wellknown tower. 4. ἐντῷΣιλωάμ . The ἐν perhaps indicates that it was surroundde by buildings. The Greek form of the name varies. Σιλωάμ in LXX and Josephus; Σιλωάς in Josephus; Σιλωά in Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. Note the article, which agrees with Jewish usage. In John 9:7 and in LXX the article occurs: comp. τὸνΣαρῶνα (Acts 9:35). Few sites have been identified with more certainty than Siloam: Conder, Handbk. of B. p. 335; Stanley, Sin. &Pal. pp. 180, 428; Tristram, Bible Places, p. 162. ὀφειλέται . 7:41, 11:4; Matthew 6:12, Matthew 18:24-34. The change of word from ἁμαρτωλοί (ver. 2) ought to be marked in translation, as by Wic. Rhem. and RV.; and also the change from ὁμοίως (ver. 3) to ὡσαύτως (ver. 5), as by RV., although there is little change of meaning. If Ewald’ s guess is correct, that these eighteen were working at the aqueducts made by Pilate, to pay for which he had used τὸνἱερὸνθησαυρόν , then ὀφειλέται may be used in allusion to this, implying that it was held that these workmen ought to pay back their wages into the treasury (Jos. B. J. ii. 9. 4). Jesus reminds the people that they are all sinners, and that all sinners are debtors to Divine justice (12:58). 5. μετανοήσητε . The change of tense, if this be the right reading (א A D L M T U X), points to the need of immediate repentance, as distinct from a state or continued attitude of repentance, μετανοῆτε (ver. 3). Vulg. expresses the difference by nisi poœ nitentiam habueritis (ver. 3) and si pœ nitentiam non egeritis (ver. 5). See on 3:3 and 5:32. πάντεςὡσαύτωςἀπολεῖσθε . The ὡσαύτως is stronger than ὁμοίως , as “ in the same manner” than “ in like manner.” In both verses the MSS. are divided, but with a balance in ver. 3 for ὁμοίως and for ὡσαύτως here. See Jos. B. J. vi. 5, 4, 7. 2, 8. 3, etc., for the similarity between the fate of these eighteen and that of the Jews at the fall of Jerusalem. 6-9. § The Parable of the Barren Fig tree. It sets forth the longsuffering and the severity of God. His visitation of sin, however long delayed in order to give opportunity of repentance, is sure. The fig tree, as in Mark 11:13, is the Jewish nation, but also any individual soul. Comp. Hosea 9:10; Joe 1:7. It is arbitrary to assert that the withering of the barren fig tree in Mat_21. and Mar_11. is a transformation of this parable into a fact, or that the supposed fact has here been wisely turned into a parable. 6. Ἔλεγενδὲταύτηντὴνπαραβολήν . See on 5:36. The parable is a continuation of the warning, “ Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.” D. C. G. art. “ Fig-tree.” Συκῆν … ἐντῷἀμπελῶνιαὐτοῦ . The main subject of the parable is placed first. Deuteronomy 22:9 forbids the sowing of corn in vineyards, but to plant other fruit trees there was not a violation of this. At the present day fruit trees of various kinds are common in vineyards and in cornfields in Palestine (Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 421). “ The fig tree ripeneth her green figs, and the vines are in blossom” (Son 2:13), perhaps implies this combination. 7. τρίαἔτηἀφ ʼ οὖἔρχομαι . Lit. “ It is three years from the time when I continue coming” : comp. Thuc. i. 18. 1. A fig tree is said to attain maturity in three years, and a tree that remained fruitless for so long would not be likely to bear afterwards. See quotations in Wetst. The three years of Christ’ s ministry cannot well be meant. The tree had been fruitless long before He began to preach, and it was not cut down until forty years after He ceased to do so. Cyril suggests Moses and Aaron, Joshua and the Judges, and the Prophets (Migne, vol. 72:753). Ambrose proposes the armunciations to Abraham, Moses, and Mary (Migne, vol. 15:1743). Other triplets equally good might be easily devised; but none are required. See Schanz, ad loc. p. 369. ἵνατίκαὶτὴνγῆνκαταργεῖ ; “ Why, in addition to doing no good, does it sterilize the ground?” Ut quid etiam terram occupat (Vulg.). Excepting here and Hebrews 2:14, the verb is used in N.T. only by S. Paul. He has it often, and in all four groups of his Epistles. In LXX only in Ezra (4:21, 23, 5:5, 6:8). Latin Versions vary between occupat, evacuat, detinet, and intricat; English Versions between “ occupy,” “ keep barren,” “ cumber,” and “ hinder.” All the latter, excepting Rhem, and RV., miss the καὶ : it not only gives no fruit, it also renders good soil useless .1 8. κόθρια . Here only in N.T. In Jeremiah 25:33 (32:19) and Ecclus. 22:2 this plur. occurs as here without the art. The curious reading κόφινονκοπρίων is found in D, and is supported by cofinum stercoris or cophinam stercoris of various Latin texts, d having qualum stercoris. 9. εἰςτὸμέλλον . In the true text (א B L 33, Boh. Aeth.) this expression precedes εἰδὲμήγε , and we have an aposiopesis as in Acts 23:9; Romans 9:22-24. Comp. Exodus 32:32, where LXX supplies the apodosis. The ellipse of καλῶςἔχει occurs in class. Gk. It is perhaps possible to make εἰςτὸμέλλον the apodosis: “ if it bear fruit, we may postpone the question; but if not,” etc. That εἰςτὸμέλλον may mean “ against next year” is clear from Plutarch’ s use of it for magistrates designate: e.g. τὸνΠείσωνακατέστησενὕπατονεἰςτὸμέλλον (Cæ s. 14.); and perhaps it may mean “ next year (Syr-Sin.),” the prep. being redundant, as in εἰςτὴντρίτην : comp. Jos. Ant. i. 11, 2. But that ἔτος need not be understood, and that the prep. need not be redundant, is clear from 1 Timothy 6:19, where εἰςτὴντρίτὴν means “ against the time to come.” Only if the prep. be made redundant is the transfer of εἰςτὸμέλλον to ἐκκόψεις (A D) possible; for “ against next year thou shalt cut it down” would here make no sense; but the external evidence is conclusive against the transfer. Comp. Acts 13:42; Hom. Od. xiv. 384. For the change from ἐάν to εἰ comp. Acts 5:38, Acts 5:39. It occurs in class. Grk.; and in most cases of this kind either conjunction might just as well have been used twice. Here it is possible that the first alternative is given as more problematical than the second. ἐκκόψειςαὐτήν . “ Thou shalt (have) it cut down,” shalt give the order for it. The vine-dresser will not even then cut it down without express command. He does not say ἐκκόψω . Comp, the Baptist’ s warning, in which this same verb is used (3:9). Trench gives a striking parallel in an Arabian recipe for curing a barren palm tree (Par. p. 359, 10th ed.). 10-17. § Healing of a Woman on the Sabbath from a Spirit of Infirmity. The details are manifest tokens of historical truth. The pharisaic pomposity of the ruler of the Synagogue, with his hard and fast rules about propriety; Christ’ s triumphant refutation of his objections; and the delight of the people, who sympathize with the dictates of human nature against senseless restrictions;— all this is plainly drawn from life. See Keim, Jes. of Naz. 4. pp. 15, 162. Here, as in 6:1-11, Christ claims no authority to abolish the sabbath. He restores it to its true meaning by rescuing it from traditions which violated it. See Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 32. 10. This is the last mention of His teaching in a synagogue, and the only instance of His doing so in the latter part of His ministry. In many places where He was known the elders would not have allowed Him to preach, seeing that the hierarchy had become so hostile to Him. It is evident that τοῖςσάββασιν is sing. in meaning, as always in the Gospels. See on 4:31, where, as here, we have the periphrastic imperfect. 11. πνεῦμαἔχουσαἀσθενείας . “ Who had a spirit that caused infirmity.” See Sanday on Romans 8:15. Similarly a demon that caused dumbness is called a “ dumb spirit” (11:14; Mark 9:17, Mark 9:25). Weiss would have it that this expression is the Evangelist’ s own inference, and a wrong inference, from ἥνἔδησενὁΣατανᾶς (ver. 16), which probably means that Jesus knev, her malady to be the consequence of her sinful life. Therefore Satan, who caused the sin, caused the malady. Weiss asserts that the laying on of hands never occurs in the case of demoniacs. And he appeals to θεραπεύεσθε (ver. 14), observing that exorcisms are not healings (L. J. 2. p. 53, Eng. tr. 2. p. 239). But we know too little to affirm that Jesus never laid His hands on demoniaces; and both θεραπεύειν (8:2; Matthew 17:16) and ἰᾶσθαι (9:42) are used of healing them. Jesus generally cured ordinary diseases with a touch or laying on of hands (4:40, 5:13, 8:44, 54, 14:4, 22:51); but He sometimes healed such with a word (4:39, 5:24, 6:10, 7:10). Although He commonly healed demonises with a word (4:35, 41, 8:29, 9:42), He may sometimes have touched them. And it should be noted that ἀπολέλυσαι , which implies that she has already been freed from the πνεῦμαἀσθενείας (comp. 5:20), precedes the laying on of hands. Therefore this act, like the laying hold of the demoniac boy (Mark 9:27), may have been added in order to complete the physical cure. There is nothing to show that the woman had come expecting to be healed by Jesus. For συνκύπτουσα see Ecclus. 12:11, 19:26. ἔτηδέκαὀκτώ . To suggest that this is a reminiscence of the eighteen on whom the tower fell, and that the twelve in 8:43 is a reminiscence of the twelve in 8:42, is hardly sober criticism. Do numbers never come a second time in real life? And he must be a poor inventor or incapable of varying numbers. Syr-Sin. has “ had a spirit eighteen years.” μὴδυναμένη . As usual in N. T., we have μή with the participle, although it refers to a matter of fact. Comp. 1:20; Acts 9:9; and see Simcox, Lang. of N. T. p. 188. ἀνακύψαιεἰςτὸπαντελές . “ Wholly to lift up herself, to straighten herself properly.” Nearly all English Versions follow the Vulgate in taking εἰςτὸπαντελές with νὴδυναμένη ; nee omnino poterat, “ could not in any wise, could not at all.” But it may go with ἀνακύψαι , after which it is placed: “ coulde not well loke up” (Cov.); konnte nicht wohl aufsehen (Luth.). Comp. σώζεινεἰςτὸπαντελὲςδύναται (Hebrews 7:25), the only other passage in N. T. in which it occurs. Not in LXX. Josephus always has it next to the word to which it belongs (Ant. i. 18. 5, iii. 11. 3, 12. 1, vi. 2. 3, vii. 13. 3). 12. ἀπολέλυσαι . “ Thou hash been and remainest loosed” ; an unasked for cure. Comp. ἀφέωνται (5:20, 7:48). 13. παραχρρῆμαἀνωρθώθη . See on 5:25. The verb occurs in N. T. only here, Acts 15:16, and Hebrews 12:12; but is freq. in LXX. Hobart shows that it is used by medical writers of straightening abnormal or dislocated parts of the body (p. 22). 14. ἀποκριθεὶςδὲὁἀρχισυνάγωγος . Comp. 8:41. No one had spoken to him, but he replies to what had been done. He indirectly censures the act of Jesus by addressing the people as represented by the woman. 15. Ὑποκριται . All who sympathize with this faultfinder are addressed, especially of οἱἀντικείμενοιαὐτῷ (ver. 17). There was hypocrisy in pretending to rebuke the people, when he was really censuring Jesus; and in professing to have a zeal for the Law, when his motive was animus against the Healer. There was no evidence that people had come in order to be healed. And, if they had done so, would they have broken the Law? Cyril has a very animated attack on this man, whom he addresses as βασκαίαςἀνοδράποδον , rebuking him for not seeing that Jesus had not broken even the letter of the Law in keeping its spirit (Migne, vol. lxxii.770; Payne Smith, p. 454). See also Iren. iv. 8, 2. For ὁΚύριος see on 5:17 and 7:13. The sing. ὑποκριτά (D U X and some Versions) is an obvious correction. All English Versions prior to RV., even Wic. and Rhem., have the sing., in spite of hypocritæ in Vulg. λύειτὸνβοῦναὐτοῦ . Christ appeals from his perverted interpretation of the law to a traditional and reasonable interpretation. But here the Talmud makes the characteristic reservation that, although water may be drawn for the animal, it must not be carried to the animal in a vessel (Edersh. L. &T. 2.Rev_17). For other arguments used by Christ respecting the Sabbath, see 6:3, 5, 9; Mark 2:27, Mark 2:28; John 5:17. We may place them in an ascending scale. Jewish tradition; charity and common sense; the Sabbath is a blessing, not a burden; the Son of Man is Lord of it; Sabbaths have never hindered the Father’ s work, and must not hinder the Son’ s. Such appeals would be varied to suit the occasion and the audience. 16. An argument à fortiori. If an animal, how much more a daughter of Abraham; if one whom yourselves have bound for a few hours, how much more one whom Satan has bound for eighteen years. Comp. Job_2.; Acts 10:38; 1 Corinthians 5:5; 2 Corinthians 12:7; 1 Timothy 1:20: and with ἰδοὺδέκακαὶὀκτὼἔτη comp. ἰδοὺτεσσερράκονταἔτη (Deuteronomy 8:4); also Acts 2:7, Acts 13:11. ἔδειλυθῆναι . Not only she may be loosed, but she ought to be. The obligation was for the healing on the Sabbath. It was a marked fulfilment of the programme of the ministry as announced in the synagogue at Nazareth (4:18). There is no prescription against doing good; and a religion which would honour God by forbidding virtue is self-condemned. 17. λέγοντοςαὐτοῦ . “ As He said” (RV.), not “ When He had mid” (AV.). κατῃσχύνοντο . “ Were put to shame” : comp. 2 Corinthians 7:14, 2 Corinthians 7:9:4; 1 Peter 3:16; in all which passages RV. is more accurate than AV. See also LXX of Isa 45:16. ἐπὶπᾶσιντοῖςἐνδόξοιςτοῖςγινομένοιςὑπ ʼ αὐτοῦ . “ Over all the glorious things that were being done by Him.” For τοῖςἐνδόξοις comp. Exodus 34:10; Deuteronomy 10:21; Job 5:9, Job 5:9:10, 34:24; and for the pres. part. Mark 6:2. It refers to much more than the healing of this woman: quæ gloriose flebant ab eo (Vulg.). Some would put a full stop at αὐτῷ , and make Καὶπᾶςὁὄχλοςἔχαιρες the introduction to what follows. But this robs do statement of all point. As a revolt of the popular conscience against the censoriousness of the hierarchy it is full of meaning. 18-21. The Parables of the Mustard Seed and of the Leaven. The former is given by all three (Matthew 13:31, Matthew 13:32; Mark 4:30-32), the latter by two (Matthew 13:33). Thus Mt. as well as Lk. places them together. Both parables set forth the small beginning, gradual spread, and immense development of the Kingdom of God, the one from without, the other from within. Externally the Kingdom will at last embrace all nations; internally, it will transform the whole of human life. Often before this Jesus has mentioned the Kingdom of God (6:20, 7:28, 8:10, 9:2, 27, 60, 62, 10:9, 11, 11:20): here He explains some of its characteristics. Mk. places the Mustard Seed immediately after the parables of the Sower and of the Seed growing secretly; Mt. after those of the Sower and of the Tares. But neither gives any note of connexion. Whereas the οὖν of Lk. clearly connects this teaching with the preceding incident.1 18, 19. The Parable of the Mustard Seed. 18. Ἔλεγενοὖν . It is a needlessly violent hypothesis to regard this as a fragment torn from its context, so that the οὖν refers to something not recorded. On the other hand, it is a little forced to connect the οὖν with the enthusiasm of the multitude for His teaching and miracles. This success is but an earnest of far greater triumphs. It is safer to refer it back to ver. 11. After the interruption caused by the hypocritical remonstrance He continued His teaching. With the double question which introduces the parable comp. τίνιὡμοιώσατεκύριον , καὶτίνιὁμοιώματιὡμοιώσατεαὐτόν ; (Isaiah 40:18). The parable itself is more condensed in Lk. than in Mk. and Mt. 19. κόκκῳσινάπεως . It is the smallness of the seed in comparison with the largeness of the growth that is the point. Whether other properties of mustard need be taken into account, is doubtful. It is not quite certain what plant is meant. Stanley is inclined to follow Royle and others in identifying it with the Salvadora Persica, called in the East Khardel, the very word used in the Syriac Version to translate σίναπι . It is said to grow round the lake of Gennesareth, and to attain the height of twenty-five in favourable circumstances. Its seeds are small and pungent, and are used as mustard (Sin. &Pal. p. 427). Edersheim follows Tristram and others in contending for the Sinapis nigra. “ Small as a mustard-seed” was a Jewish proverb to indicate the least drop of blood, the least defilement, etc. Even in Europe the Sinapis sometimes reaches twelve feet (L. &T. 1. p. 593; Nat. Hist. of B. p. 472). ἄνθρωπος . Comp. 20:9. Lk. commonly writes ἄνθρωπόςτις : 10:30, 12:16, 14:16, 15:11, 16:1, 19, 19:12; comp. 18:2. εἰςκῆπονἑαυτοῦ . See Introd. § 6. 1. f. Not merely “ the earth” (Mk) or “ his field” (Mt.), but “ his own garden,” viz. Israel. ἐγένετοεἰςδένδρον . All three use γίνομαι , Lk. alone adding εἰς , but μέγα before δένρον is not genuine either here or in Mt. For γίνομαιεἰς comp. 20:17; Acts 4:11, and 5:36 etc. The expression is freq. in LXX, and is also classical. τὰπετεινὰτοῦοὐρανοῦκατεσκήνωσεν , κ .τ .λ .. All three have this expression. See on 9:58, and comp, ὑποκάτωαὐτοῦκατεσκήνουντὰθηρίατὰἄγρια , καὶἐντοῖςκλάδοιςαὐτοῦκατῴκουντὰὄρνεατοῦοὐρανοῦ (Daniel 4:9, Daniel 4:18) and ἐνταῖςπαραφυάσιναὐτοῦἐνόσσεσανπάντατὰπεατεινὰτοῦοὐρανοῦ (Ezekiel 31:6: Comp. 17:23), passages which show that this was a recognized metaphor for a great empire giving protection to the nations.1 20, 21. The Parable of the Leaven. Matthew 13:33; comp. Luke 12:1. ἔκρυψενεἰςἀλεύρουσάτατρία . The beginnings of the Kingdom were unseen, and Pagan ignorance of the nature of the Gospel was immense. But the leaven always conquers the dough. However deep it may be buried it will work through the whole mass and change its nature into its own nature. Josephus says that a σάτον was one and a half of a Roman modius (Ant. ix. 4. 5). It was a seah, or one third of an ephah; which was an ordinary baking (Genesis 18:6). There is no more reason for finding a meaning for the three measures than for the three years (ver. 7). But Lange is inclined to follow Olshausen in interpreting the three measures as the three powers in human nature, body, soul, and spirit; and he further suggests the material earth, the State, and the Church. In class. Gk. we generally have the plur. ἄλευρα . It meams “ wheaten meal” (Hdt. vii. 119. 2; Plat. Rep. ii. 372 B). ἕωςοὗ . Comp. Acts 21:26. In Luke 24:49 it is followed by the subj., as often. 22-30. The Danger of being excluded from the Kingdom of God. The warning grows out of the question as to the number of the saved, but no note is given of time or place. The introductory διεπορεύετο seems to point back to 9:51, “ He was continuing His journey” (see on 6:1). In any case it is part of the last journeyings which ended in the Passion. For the substance of the discourse comp. Matthew 7:13, Matthew 7:14, Matthew 7:22, Matthew 7:23, Matthew 7:19:30; Mark 10:31. 22. κατὰπόλειςκαὶκώμας . Once more we have an amphibolous phrase: see on ver. 11, 10:18, 11:39, 12:1, etc. Either, “ He went on His way, teaching through cities and villages” ; or, “ He went on His way through cities and villages, teaching.” 23. Εἶπενδέτιςαὐτῷ . We have no means of knowing whether he was a disciple or not, or what his motive was. The question has always been an attractive one to certain minds (2 Esdras 8.). εἰὀλίγοιοἱσωζόμενοι . The questioner perhaps supposes that, at any rate, none but Jews will be saved. Comp. Acts 2:47; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 2:15. In all these passages the pres. part. should be marked; “ these who are being saved, who are in the way of salvation.” For εἰ introducing a direct interrogative comp. 22:49, Acts 1:6, Acts 1:19:2; Matthew 12:10, etc. The constr. is not classical, and may be explained as arising from the omission of θαυμάζω , γινώσκεινθέλω , or the like. In German we might have, Ob. Wenige selig werden? εἶπενπρὸςαὐτούς . Note the plur. As in 12:15, 42, Jesus gives no answer to the question asked, but replies in a way that may benefit others as well as the interrogator far more than a direct answer would have done. 24. Ἀγωνίζεσθεεἰσελθεῖν . “ Keep on striving to enter,” or, “ Strain every nerve.” Questio theoretica initio vertitur ad praxin (Beng.). Comp. 1 Timothy 6:12; 2 Timothy 4:7; Ecclus. 4:28; Daniel 6:14 (Theod.). In Matthew 7:13 we have εἰσέλθατεδιὰτῆςστενῆςπύλης . But the context is quite different; and there it is an outside gate, while here the door leads directly into the house, and is so narrow that only those who are thoroughly in earnest can pass through it. Vulg. has per angustam portam in both places; but some Lat. texts have januam or ostium here. ζητήσουσινεἰσελθεῖνκαὶοὐκἰσχυίσουσιν . The futures are most important, whether we place a comma or a full stop after the second. Jesus does not say that there are many who strive in vain to enter, but that there will be many who will seek in vain to enter, after the time of salvation is past. Those who continue to strive now, succeed. The change from “ strive” to “ seek” must also be noted. Mere ζητεῖν is very different from ἀγωνίζεσθαι (1 Timothy 6:12). Comp. John 7:34. οὐκἰσχύσουσιν . “ Will not have strength to” (6:48, 16:3): appropriate to the attempt to force a closed door. 25. ἀφ ʼ οὖἅνἐγερθῇ . Connect this closely with what precedes: “ Shall not be able, when once the master of the house shall have risen up,” etc. With this arrangement a full stop is placed at πόθενἐστέ , and τότε begins a new sentence. Those who place a full stop at ὶοχύσουσιν differ much as to the apodosis of ἀφ ʼ οὖ . Some make it begin at καὶἄρξησθε , more at καὶἀποκριθείς , and others at τότε . Of these three the first is the worst, making ἄρξησθε = ἄρξεσθε , and the last is the best (AV. RV.). 26, 27. Comp. Matthew 7:22, Matthew 7:23. When the attempt to force the door has failed, ye will begin to use this plea; but it will be cut short by the reply, Οὐκοἶδαὑμᾶς . The plea is almost grotesque in its insufficiency. To have known Christ after the flesh gives no claim to admission into the kingdom. ἀπόστητεἀπ ʼ ἐμοῦπάντεςἐργάταιἀδικίας . A quotation from Psalms 6:9, where we have πάντεςοἱἐργαζόμενοιτὴνἀνομίαν . Aristotle says that as δικαιοσύνη sums up the whole of virtue, so ἀδικία sums up the whole of vice (Eth. Nic. v. 1, 19). Contrast the quotation of the same text in Matthew 7:23. Vulg. preserves one difference by having qui operaminis there and operarii here; preserves ignores another in using iniquitas for ἀνομία there and also for ἀδικία here. Similarly AV., and RV., have “ iniquity” in both. With ἐργάταιἀδικίας comp. οἱἐργάταιτῆςἀνομίας (1 Mal 3:6); τῶνκαλῶνκαὶσεμνῶνἐργάτην (Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 27); τῶνπολεμικῶν (Cyr. iv. 1. 4). 28. Ἐκεῖἔσταιὁκλαυθμός . There is no need to interpret ἐκεῖ of time, a use which is rare in class. Grk. and perhaps does not occur in N.T. Here the meaning is, “ There in your exclusion, in your place of banishment.” Note the articles with κλαυθμός and βρυγμός , “ the weeping and the gnashing,” which are indeed such. Elsewhere in N. T. βρυγμός occurs only in Mt. (8:12, 13:42, 50, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30). In LXX Proverbs 19:12; Ecclus. 51:3; also Aq. Psalms 37:9. These two verses (28, 29) occur in Mt. (8:11, 12) in a different connexion and with some difference of wording. ἈβραὰμκαὶἸσαὰκκαὶἸακὼβκαὶπάνταςτ . προφήτας . For all, this Marcion seems to have substituted πάνταςτοὺςδικαίους . in order to avoid a direct reference to O.T. (Tert. Adv. Marcion, iv. 30). The evidence is wholly against the conjecture that Marcion’ s reading was original one, which was altered in order to oppose him and agree with Matthew 8:11. In Mt. πάνταςτοὺςπροφήτας is wanting. Some Lat. texts add dei to prophetas, and many add introire, or intrare or introeuntes before in regno or in regnum. ὑμᾶςδὲἐκβαλλομένουςἔξω . “ But yourselves being cast forth without,” in the attempt to enter. They never do enter; but, they would have entered, but for their misconduct, their exclusion is spoken of as “ casting out.” Syr-Sin. omits the words. 29. ἥξουσινἀπὸἀνατολῶν , κ .τ .λ . A combination of Isa 45:6 and 49:12: comp. 59:19; Jeremiah 3:18; Malachi 1:11. In Matthew 8:11, Matthew 8:12 the exclusion of the Jaws and admission of the Gemiles is still more clearly expressed. This was the exact opposite of Jewish expectations. In mundo futuro mensam ingentem vobis sternam, quod gentes videbunt et pudefient (Schoettgen, Hor. Heb. p. 86); i.e. the Gentiles were to be put to shame at the sight of the Jews in bliss. Here it is the Jews who gnash their teeth, while the Gentiles are in bliss. There is no πολλοί with ἥξουσιν , so that the man’ s curiosity remains unanswered; but the context implies many rather than few. In Mt. πολλοί is expressed; and this also seems to have been against Jewish expectations. Vidi filios cœ naculi qui numero admodum pauci sunt (Schoettgen, p. 80). The Jews commonly spoke of the Messianic Kingdom as a banquet (14:15; Revelation 19:9). For the four quarters of the globe comp. Psalms 107:3; 1 Chronicles 9:24. Of the order in which they are given here Bengel remarks, Hoc fere ordine ad fidem conversi sunt populi. Mt. has only East and West. Comp. 2 Esdr. 8:1. Even if ὄψεσθε (B1 D X) were the right reading for ὄψησθε in ver. 28, there would be no, need to make ἥξουσιν depend upon ὅταν . There should in any case be a full stop at ἔξω . 30. εἰσὶνἔσχατοι … εἰσὶνπρῶτοι . There are some of each class who will be transferred to the other. Matthew 20:16 we have ἔσονταιοἱἔσχατοιπρῶτοικαὶοἱπρῶτοιἔσχατοι . From that passage coupled with Matthew 19:30 = Mark 10:31 we infer that this was a saying which Jesus uttered more than once. But here only is it introduced with καὶἰδού , of which Lk. is so fond (1:20, 31, 36, 5:12, 7:12, 37, etc.), and for which Mt. and Mk. have πολλοὶδέ . The practical answer to the question in ver. 23 remains, “ Whatever be the number of those who are in the way of salvation, that which concerns you is, that you should without delay secure a place among them.” 31-35. § The Message to Herod Antipas and the Lament over Jerusalem. From ἐναὐτῇτῇὦρᾳ it is clear that the scene does not shift. It probably lies in Peræ a, but we cannot be certain. Both Peræ a and Galilee were under the jurisdiction of Antipas. The Pharisees wanted to frighten Jesus into Judæ a, where He would be more in the power of the Sanhedrin; but that they did not invent this alarm about Antipas is clear from Christ’ s reply. He would have denounced the Pharisees for cunning and deceit, if they had brought Him a lying report; and it is very unnatural to make τῇἀλώπεκιταύτῃ refer to the inventor of the report or to be Pharisees as a body, or indeed to anyone but Herod. For the same reason we need not suppose that the Pharisees werein a plot with Herod. They reported his words withow consulting him. Although the tetrarch wished to see Christ work a miracle, yet he probably regarded Him as a dangerous leader like tha Baptist; and that he should openly threaten to put Him to death, in order to induce Him to leave his province, is probable enough. The wish to disturb Jesus in His work, and to create a panic among His followers, would make the Pharisees report this threat, even it they had no hope of driving Him into the power of the hierarchy. The incident is remarkably parallel to the attempt of Amaziah, priest of the golden calf at Bethel, who first denounced the Prophet Amos to Jeroboam 2., and then tried to frighten Amos out of Israel into Judah, equally in vain (Amos 7:10-17). See Trench, Studies in the Gospels, p. 238. 31. θέλεισεἀποκτεῖναι . “ Would fain kill Thee” (RV.). The “ will” of all other English Versions is too like the simple future: comp. 9:23. They do not say, “ has determined to kill.” Possibly Jesus was in the very district in which John had been captured by Antipas; and this may have suggested the threat or the report of it, or both. 32. εἴπατετῇἀλώπεκιταύτῃ . As ἀλώπηξ is usually fem. (9:58; Matthew 8:20; Judges 1:35; 1 Kings 21:10; and also in class. Grk.), we cannot infer that the fem. is here used in a contemptuous sense: but the masc. occurs Son 2:15. Here, as usual, the fox is used as a symbol of craftiness, not of rapacity, as some maintain. Herod’ s craftiness lay in his trying to get rid of an influential leader and a disquieting preacher of righteousness by a threat which he had not the courage to execute. He did not wish to bring upon himself a second time the odium of having slain a Prophet.1 In the Talmud the fox is called “ the sliest of beasts.” See examples in Keim, Jes. of Naz. 4. P. 344, and Wetst. Foxes of more than one species are very common in Palestine. D. B.2 art. “ Fox.” ἐκβάλλωδαιμόνιακαὶἰάσειςἀποτελῶ . As in the reply to the Baptist (7:22), Jesus gives the casting out of demons and the healing of the sick as signs of the Messiah’ s works. In N.T. ἴασις is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 4:22, Acts 4:30); in LXX Proverbs 3:8, Proverbs 4:22. See Hastings, D. B. i. P. 593. The reading ἐπιτελῶ (A R) is a correction to a more familiar verb, for ἀποτελῶ occurs elsewhere in bibl. Grk. only James 1:15; Jam_1 Esdr. 5:73 (same v.l. as here); 2 Mac. 15:39. It means, “ I bring quite to an end.” σήμερονκαὶαὔριονκαὶτῇτρίτῃ . The three days have been interpreted to mean (1) three actual days, (2) the three years of the ministry, (3) a long time, (4) a short time, (5) a definite time. The last is probably right. The course of the Messiah is determined, and will not be abbreviated or changed because of the threats of a Herod.1 For the same expression of three actual days comp. Exodus 19:10, Exodus 19:11. See also Hosea 6:2. τελειοῦμαι . “ I am perfected,” consummor (Vulg.). Comp. Hebrews 2:10. In both cases the idea is that of “ bringing Christ to the full moral perfection of His humanity, which carries with it the completeness of power and dignity” (Wsctt.). This is the only passage in N.T. outside the Epistle to the Hebrews in which this verb is used of Christ. In that Epistle it is thus used thrice (2:10, 5:9, 7:28), and the idea which it represents is one of the main characteristics of the Epistle. It is doubtful whether there is here any reference to the special phrase τελειοῦντὰςχεῖρας which is used in LXX of the installation of priests in their office (Exodus 29:9, Exodus 29:29, Exodus 29:33, Exodus 29:35; Leviticus 8:33, Leviticus 8:16:32; Numbers 3:3: comp, Leviticus 21:10; Exodus 28:37 (41); Jude 1:17:5); although such a reference would be very appropriate on the approach of Christ’ s sacrifice of Himself. See Wsctt. on The idea of τελείσις and on The τελείωσις of Christ (Hebrews, pp. 63-67). τελειοῦμας is probably pass. and not mid.; pres. and and not Attic fut. Ellicott, Hulsean Lectures, 1859, p. 264, 4th ed.; Keim, 4. p. 344. 33. πλὴνδεῖμεσήμερονκ . αὔριονκ . τῇἐχομένῃπορεύεσθαι . “ Howbeit” (see on 6:24, 35) “ it is ordained by Divine decree (see on 4:43, 9:22) that I go My way hence, as Herod desires; not, however, because you suggest it, but because My work at this time requires it.” The same verb is used in places: πορεύουἐντεῦθεν and δεῖμεπορεύεσθαι . But, as ἐξελθεῖν is not repeated, the repetition of πορεύεσθαι may be accidental.2 The expression τῇἐχομένῃ for “ the next day” occurs elsewhere in bibl. Grk. only Acts 20:15; 1 Chronicles 10:8; 1Ch_2 Mac. 12:39: comp. Acts 13:44?, 21:26; 1 Mac. 4:28?. To understand χώρᾳ instead of ἡμέρᾳ and translate “ I must go on My way to-day and to-morrow in the adjoining region also,” is against the context: τῇἐχομένῃ plainly= τῇτρίτῃ . οὐκἐνδέχεταιπροφήτηνἀπολέσθαιἔξωἸερουσἀήμ . “ It cannot be allowed,” non convenit, non fieri potest: 2 Mac 11:18; Plat. Rep. vi. 501, C. The saying is severely ironical, and that in two ways. (1) According to overwhelming precedent, Jerusalem is the place in which a Prophet ought to be put to death. Quæ urbijus illud occidendi Prophetas quasi usu ceperat (Grotius). Jewish usage has determined that Jerusalem is the right place for such crimes. (2) When the conditions of place and time have been fulfilled, it is not Herod that will be the murderer. “ You profess to be anxious for My safety, if I remain in Herod’ s dominions. Do not be alarmed. I am in no danger here, nor from him. But I must go to your capital: and it is there, and at your hands, that I shall die.” Jesus is not referring to the Sanhedrin as having the exclusive right to try a Prophet; nor does He mean that no Prophet had ever been slain outside Jerusalem. The Baptist had been murdered at Machæ rus.1 But such cases were exceptional. By long prescription it had been established that Jerusalem was the proper scene for these tragedies. προφήτην . Any Prophet. To make it equivalent to τὸνπροφήτην , and interpret it of Christ in particular, does violence to the Greek. 34, 35. The Lament over Jerusalem. This lament is called forth by the thought of the previous verse. What sorrow that the Messiah should have to speak thus of the metropolis of His own people! The connexion is natural; all the more so if the Pharisees (ver. 31) came from Jerusalem. But the connexion in Matthew 23:37 is not less natural; and there Christ is at Jerusalem. To decide between the two arrangements is not easy: and to suppose that such words were spoken on two different occasions is rather a violent hypothesis; which, however, is adopted by Alford, Andrews, Ellicott, and Stier. The wording is almost identical in both places, especially in the remarkable turn from the third sing. to the second sing. , and thence to the second plur. . On the whole it seems to be more probable that the lament was uttered when Jerusalem was before His eyes, than when it and its inhabitants were far away. For the repetition of the name see on 10:41. 34. ἡἀποκτείνουσατοὺςπροφήτας . “ The slayer of Prophets” pres. part. This is her abiding character; she is a murderess, laniena prophetarum, προφητοκτόνος . Comp. Acts 7:52. λιθοβολοῦσατοὺςἀπεσταλμένουςπρὸςαὐτήν . As the wicked husbandmen did (Matthew 21:35): comp. Hebrews 12:20. This is a repetition in a more definite form of the preceding clause. It is arbitrary to make τοὺςἀποταλμένους refer to the Apostles and other messengers of the Gospel: they are the same class as τοὺςπροφήτας . See Paschasius Radbertus on Matthew 23:37, Migne, 120:789. ποσάκιςἠθέλησαἐπισυνάξαιτὰτέκνασου . These words, which are found in both Mt. and Lk., are evidence from the Synoptists themselves respecting much work of Christ in Jerusalem which they do not record. As S. John tells us, He ministered there at other times than just before His Passion. The context forbids us from taking τὰτέκναοσου in any other sense than the inhabitants of Jerusalem. (Comp. 19:44, and see Neander, L. J. C. § 110, Eng. tr. p. 165.) This is fully admitted by Strauss, if the words were really spoken by Christ.1 He suggests therefore that they come from an apocryphal source, and probably the same from which he supposes 11:49-51 to have been taken. In this he has been followed by Loman and Pfleiderer (see Hahn, 2. p. 255). But, like 10:22, this verse— so strongly confirming the Johannean tradition— is far too well attested to be got rid of by any suppositions. The prepositions in ἐπισυνάξαι mean “ together to one place— to Myself.” Comp. Ps. 101:23?, 105:47. ὅντρόπονὄρνιςτὴνἑαυτῆςνοσσιάν . “ Even as a hen her own brood.” For ὅντρόπον comp. Exodus 2:14. Like “ fowl” in English, ὄρνις is used specially of domesticated hens (Xen. Anab. iv. 5, 25; Aesch. Eum. 866). Mt. has τὰνοσσίααὐτῆς , “ her chickens.” This similitude is not found in O.T., but is frequent in Rabbinical literature. Schoettgen, pp. 207-210. Comp. τὰκείνουτέκν ʼ ἔχωνὑπὸπτεροῖςσώζωτάδε (Eur. Heracl. 10). Jerome quotes Deuteronomy 32:11 in illustration: “ As an eagle that stirreth up her nest, that fluttereth over her young, He spread abroad His wings, He took them, He bare them on His pinions.” With ὑπὸτὰςπτέρυγας comp. Rth 2:12; Isaiah 31:5; Malachi 4:2; Psalms 17:8, Psalms 36:8, Psalms 57:2, Psalms 61:5, Psalms 63:8. καὶοὐκἠθελήσατε . In tragic contrast with ποσάκιςἠθέλησα : comp. John 1:5, John 1:10, John 1:11. 35. ἀφίεταιὑμῖνὁὑμῶν . Neither here (D A G D M U X, Δ Latt. Boh. Syr.) nor in Matthew 23:38, where it is better attested, is ἔρημος more than a gloss. Comp. ἵτιεἰςἐρήμωσινἔσταιὁοἶκοςοὖτος (Jeremiah 22:5), and ἐγκαταλέλοιπατὸνοἶκόνμου , ἀφῆκατὴνκληρονομίανμου (Jeremiah 12:7). “ Is being left to you” means “ You have it entirely to yourselves to possess and protect; for God no longer dwells in it and protects it.” Comp. ἀφεθήσεται (17:34, 35). By “ your house” is meant the home of ψὰτέκνασου , the city of Jerusalem. Note the repetition ὑμῖν … ὑμῶν . Syr-Sin., here has, “ Your house is forsaken” ; in Mt. it is defective. λέγωδὲὑμῖνοὐμὴἴδητέμε . With great solemnity and with strong assurance. Comp. John 7:34, John 8:21. ἕωςεἴπητε . Their seeing Him is dependent upon their repentance; and this is left uncertain; for the ἥξειὅτεἂνἥξηανχὲͅὅτε after ἕως (A D, Vulg.) is not genuine.1 There are three interpretations of the point of time indicated by this declaration. (1) The cries of the multitude on Palm Sunday (19:38; Matthew 21:9; Mark 11:9). But this is quite inadequate. Christ would not have declared with this impressive solemnity the fact that He would not enter Jerusalem for some weeks, or possibly months. (2) The Second Advent. But where are we told that the unbelieving Jews will welcome the returning Christ with hymns of praise? (3) The conversion of the Jews throughout all time. This last no doubt is right. The quotation Εὐλογημέος , κ .τ .λ ., is verbatim from LXX of Psa 118:26, and ἐνὀνόματιΚυρίου means as the representative of Jehovah. Converted Israel will thus welcome the spiritual presence of the Messiah. § Found in Luke alone. Vulg. Vulgate. Wetst. Wetstein. Wic. Wiclif. Rhem. Rheims (or Douay). RV. Revised Version. Jos. Josephus. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. M M. Cod. Campianus, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. T T. Cod. Borgianus, sæ c. v. In the Library of the Propaganda at Rome. Greek and Egyptian. Contains 22:20-23:20. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. 1 Both ἀργός and ἀργία are used of land that yields no return: Xen. Cyr. iii. 2, 19; Theophr. H. Phys. v. 9, 8. Comp. Romans 6:6 “ that the body as an instrument of sin may be rendered unproductive, inactive” ; also 1 Corinthians 15:26; 2 Corinthians 3:14; 2 Timothy 1:10. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). Boh. Bohairic. Aeth. Ethiopic. Syr Syriac. Sin. Sinaitic. L. J. Leben Jesu Cov. Coverdale. Luth. Luther. Iren. Irenæ us. U U. Cod. Nanianus, sæ c. x. In the Library of St. Mark’ s, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel. Edersh. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. AV. Authorized Version. 1 With this pair of Parables comp. the Garments and the Wine-skins (5:36-39), the Rash Builder and the Rash King (14:28-32), the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin (15:3-10). Other pairs are not in immediate juxtaposition; e.g. the Friend at Midnight (11:5-8) and the Unjust Judge (18:1-8). 1 West. quotes from the Talmud, “ There was a stalk of mustard in Sichin from which sprang out three branches, of which one was broken off, and out of it they made a covering for a potter’ s hut, and there were formed on it three cabs of mustard. Rabbi Simeon, son of Calaphta, said, A stalk of mustard was in my field into which I was wont to climb, as men are wont to climb into a fig tree.” Beng. Bengel. Tert. Tertullian. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. 1 Cyril argues that, because we have ταύτῃ and not ἐκείνῃ with τῇἀλώπεκι , the fox must be some one nearer the spot than Herod, viz. the Pharisees (Migne, vol. 72. p. 582). Theophylact uses the same argument. But it is the common use of οὖτος for that which is condemned or despised, vulpi isti; or still more simply, “ that fox of yours,” i.e. whom you put forward and make use of. Comp. οὗτος , 5:21, 7:39, 49; John 6:42, John 6:7:15, John 6:36, John 6:49, John 6:9:16, John 6:12:34. D. B. Smith’ s Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition. 1 “ The number three seems here, as in the three years (ver. 7), to denote a period of time as complete in itself, with a beginning, middle, and end” (Andrews, L. of our Lord, p. 396). Universi tamporis requisiti ad opus suum perfectio significatur (Cajetan). Wsctt. Westcott. 2 Maldonatus, whom Trench approves, makes the πλήν signify, “ Although I must die on the third day, yet threats will not interfere with My continuing My work until then” Rather, “ Although I must go to Jerusalem, yet a is not threats which send Me thither.” 1 But perhaps even in the case of the Baptist the hierarchy at Jerusalem had a hand. was “ delivered up” by some party. Comp. παραδοθῆναι (Mark 1:14), παρεδόθη (Matthew 4:12). 1 Hier sind alle Ausflü chte vergebens, und man muss bekennen: sind diess wirkliche Worte Jesu, so muss or ö fter and lä nger, als es den synoptischen Berichten nack scheint, in Jerusalem thä tig gewesen sein (L. J. 1864, p. 249). G G. Cod. Harleianus, sæ c. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions. Δ̠Δ . Cod. Sangallensis, sæ c. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. Latt. Latin. 1 Not only do א B K L M P X, Syr. Boh. Arm. and omit ἤξειὅτε , but no authorities insert the words Matthew 23:39, which adds to the weight of the evidence against ban here. 14:1-17:10. The Second Period of the Journey This forms a new division of the section which has been styled “ the Journeyings towards Jerusalem” : see on 9:51. The first portion of it (14:1-24) may be thus subdivided. A Sabbath-meal in the House of a Pharisee, including the Healing of a Dropsical Man on the Sabbath (1-6), a Discourse about taking the lowest seats (7-11) and inviting Lowly Guests (12-14), and the Parable of the Great Supper (15-24). The whole is peculiar to Lk., and probably comes from some source unknown to Mt. and Mk. 1-24. § A Sabbath-meal in the House of a Pharisee. Time and place are quite undetermined. The chief men among the Pharisees no doubt lived mostly at Jerusalem. Beyond that we have no clue. 1-6. The Cure of a Dropsical Man at the Sabbath-meal. The cure of the man with the withered hand (6:6-11; Matthew 12:9-14; Mark 3:1-6) should be compared but not identified. Although Lk. records both cures, with very important differences of detail, Strauss and Keim maintain that this is a mere doublet of the other, and reject both. The style of the opening words indicates an Aramaic source. Of the seven miracles of mercy on the Sabbath, Lk. records five: the Demoniac at Capernaum (4:31), the Withered Hand (6:6), the Woman bowed down eighteen years (13:14), Simon’ s wife’ s mother (4:38), and this. The others are: the Paralytic at Bethesda (John 5:10), the Man born blind (John 9:14). 1. Καὶἐγένετοἐντῷἐλθεῖναὐτό́ν . “ And it came to pass after He had entered” (aor.), not “ as He entered” (AV.) nor “ when He entered” (RV.): cum intrasset or introisset (some MSS, of Vulg.) rather than cum intraret (Vulg.). See on 3:21 and the note at the end of ch. i. p. 45. τινοςτῶνἀρχόντωντῶνφαρισαίων . “ Of one of the chief men of the Pharisees.” We have no knowledge of official rulers of the Pharisees; but of course they had their leading men. That the invitation of a leading Pharisee was accepted (ver. 12) after what is recorded 11:37-54 might seem surprising, especially as Jesus knew the minds of those whom He was to meet (ver. 3). But there was still the possibility of influencing some of them for good. We know of no case in which Jesus refused an invitation. σαββάτῳφαγεῖνἄρτον . Sabbath banqueting was common, and became proverbial for luxury. Observa diem sabbati, non Judaicis deliciis; and Hodiernus dies sabbati est, hunc in præ senti tempore otio quodam corporaliter languido et fluxo et luxurioso celebrant Judæ i (Aug.). See Wetst. ad loc., and Polano, The Talmud; Selections translated from the original, p. 259. καὶαὐτοὶἦσανπαρατηρούμενοιαὐτόν . Lk.’ s favourite construction. See on 5:14 and 6; 20. The καὶ introduces the apodosis of ἐγένετο : “ it came to pass … that the Pharisees themselves were persistently watching Him.” For παρατηρεῖσθαι of interested and sinister espionage see on 6:7. Excepting Mark 3:2 and Galatians 4:10, verb occurs only in Lk. (20:20; Acts 9:24). The translation “ were there, watching” is erroneous: ἦσανπαρατηρούμενοι is the periphrastic imperf. It is also an error to carry on the construction of ἐγένετο beyond ver. 1: vv. 1 and 2 are quite independent statements. 2. καὶἰδοὺἄνθρωπόςτι̣ς . We are left in doubt whether the man was placed there as a trap, which the absence of γάρ does not disprove, or was there by accident, or had come in the hope of being healed. The last is probable: but the ἰδού seems to imply that his presence was unexpected by the company, and perhaps by the host. He was probably not an invited guest, as ἀπέλυσεν (ver. 4) appears to show. But in an Eastern house he would have no difficulty in obtaining admission (Tristram, Eastern Customs, pp. 36, 81): and, if he hoped to be healed, he would take care to appear ἔμποσθεναὐτοῦ . Note the τις vv. 2, 19, 20. ὑδρωπικός . Not elsewhere in bibl. Grk., but freq. in medical writers. The disease seems to be indicated as a curse Numbers 5:21, Numbers 5:22; comp. Psalms 109:18. Comp. Hor. Carm. ii. 2, 13. 3. ἀποκριθεὶς … πρὸςτοὺςνομικοὺςκαὶφαρισαίους . He answered their thoughts implied in ἦσανπαρατηρούμενους . This watching had now a definite object owing to the presence of the dropsical man. Comp. 5:22, 7:40. The νομικοί (see on 7:30) and Φαρισαῖοι are put as one class, and area more definite description of the αὐτοί in ver. 1. Note the Hebraistic εἶπενλέγων . θεραπεῦσαιἢοὔ .; Comp. ἀγαποιῆσαιἢκακοποιῆσαι (6:9); ἐξοὐρανοῦἢἐξἀνθρώπων (20:4). The dilemma, if they had planned one against Him, is turned against themselves. These lawyers were bound to be able to answer such a question: and if rigorist Pharisees made no objection when consulted beforehand, they could not protest afterwards. They take refuge in silence; not in order to provoke Him to heal, but because they did not know what to say. They did not wish to say that healing on the sabbath was allowable, and they did not dare to say that it was not. For ἡσυχάζω in this sense comp. Acts 11:18, Acts 11:21:14; Job 32:6; Nehemiah 5:8. The εἰ before ἔξεστι (A, Syrr. Arm.) probably comes from Matthew 12:10 (om. א B D L 59, Latt. divided). If it is genuine, comp. 13:23. Most of the authorities which insert εἰ have θεραπεύειν for θεραπεῦσαι (also from Matthew 12:10) and omit ἤοὐ 4. ἐπιλαβόμενοςἰά́σατο . That the laying hold of him is to be regarded as the means of the cure is not certain. The touching in order to heal is more often expressed by ἅπτεσθαι (5:13, 22:51; Mark 1:41, Mark 1:7:33, Mark 1:8:22; Matthew 8:3, Matthew 8:15, Matthew 8:17:7, Matthew 8:20:34) or by ἐπιτιθέναιτὰςχεῖρας (4:40, 13:13; Mark 6:5, Mark 6:8:23, Mark 6:25, etc.). Both ἰᾶσαθαι (see small print on 5:17) and ἐπιλαβέσθαι (9:47, 20:20, 26, 23:26, etc.) are freq. in Lk. Christ read the man’ s faith, as He read the hostility of the Pharisees, and responded to it. ἀπέλυσεν . This probably means something more than the letting go after the ἐπιλαβόμενος , viz. “ dismissed him” from the company, to prevent interference with him. 5. Τίνοςὑμῶνυἱὸςἢβοῦς . The emphatic word is ὑμῶν . “ How do you act, when your interests are concerned? When your son, or even your ox, falls into a well?” 1 Palestine abounds in unprotected cisterns, wells and pits. Wetst. quotes from the Mishna, Si in puteum bos aut asinus … filius aut filia. The argument is that what the Pharisees allowed themselves for their own benefit must be allowed to Christ for the benefit of others. Their Sabbath help had an element of selfishness; His had none. The reading ὄνοςἢβοῦς probably comes from 13:15. The correction was doubly tempting: 1. because υἱός seemed rather to spoil the à fortiori argument; 2. because ὄνος is more naturally coupled with βοῦς . Comp. Deuteronomy 22:4. The reading πρόβατον (D) for υἱός has a similar origin, while ὄϊς is a conjecture as the supposed original of both υἱός and ὄνος . The evidence is thus divided: υἱός A B A G D M S U V G D L etc., e f g Syrr., Cyr-Alex.— ὄνος א K L X Π , a b c i Syr-Sin. Vulg. Arm. Aeth. See WH. 2. App, p. 62; Sanday, App. to Grk. T. p. 120. The ἀποκριθείς before πρὸςαὐτοὺςεἶπεν (א A, Vulg.) is probably an insertion. Note the Hebraistic construction instead of τίςὑμῶνοὗυἱὸς , κ .τ .λ ., οὐθεὐθέωςἀνασπάσειαὐτόν ; 6. οὐκἴσχυσανἀνταποκριθῆναι . stronger than ἡσύχασαν (ver. 3): “ The had no power to reply.” Lk. is fond of noting that people are silenced or keep silence (20:26; Acts 11:18, Acts 12:17, Acts 15:12, Acts 22:2). For the compound verb comp. Romans 9:20; Judges 5:29; Job 6:8, Job 32:12. 7-11. Discourse on choosing the Lowest Seats at Entertainents. We may suppose that the healing of the dropsical man preceded the meal. This now begins; and, as they settle round he tables, there is a manœ uvring on the part of some of the guests to secure the best places. To suggest a comparison between healing the dropsy and dealing with duplicem animi hydropem, superbiæ tumorem et pecuniæ sitim is almost as fancifulas supposing that “ falling into a well” is meant to refer to the dropsy. The latter supposition (Aug. Bade) still finds favour. 7. Ἔλεγενδὲ … παραβολήν . Comp. 5:36, 13:6, 18:2. The “ parable” is not in the form of a narrative, but in that of advice, which is thus called because it is to be understood metaphorically. Christ is not giving counsels of worldly wisdom or of good manners, but teaching a lesson of humility. Every one before God ought to feel that the lowest place is the proper place for him. There is no need to suppose that this was originally a parable in the more usual sense, and that Lk. has turned it into an exhortation; still less that ver. 7 is a fictitious introduction to a saying of which the historical connexion had been lost. ἐπέχων . Sc. τὸννοῦν : comp. Acts 3:5; 1 Timothy 4:16; Ecclus. 31:2. He directed His attention to this: not the same as its attracting or catching His attention. Syr-Sin. omits. τὰςπρωτοκλισίας . In the mixture of Jewish, Roman, Greek, and Persian customs which prevailed in Palestine at this time, we cannot be sure which were the most honourable places at table. Josephus (Ant. xv. 2, 4) throws no light. But the Talmud says that, on a couch holding three, the middle place is for the worthiest, the left for the second, and the right for the third (Edersh. L. &T. 2. pp. 207, 494). Among the Greeks it was usual for each couch to have only two persons (Plat. Sym. 175 A, C), but both Greeks and Romans sometimes had as many as four an one couch. D. of Grk. and Rom. Ant. artt. Cena, Symposium, Triclinium; Beaker, Charicles, Sc. 6. Exc. 1.; Gallus, Sc. 9. Exc 1:2. Comp. Luke 20:46; Matthew 23:6; Mark 12:39. ἐξελέγοντο . “ They were choosing out for themselves; eligebant (b c d e ff2) rather than eligerent (Vulg.).” The same thing seems to have taken place at the Last Supper (22:24), and the washing of the disciples’ feet may have been intended as a rebuke for this. 8. εἰςγάμους . Probably sing. in meaning; “ to a wedding-feast” : see on 12:36. The meal at which his was said was an ordinary one, as is shown by φαγεῖνἄρτον (ver. 1), the common Hebrew phrase for a meal (ver. 15; Matthew 15:2; Mark 3:20; Genesis 37:25, 43:16; Exodus 2:20, etc.). Jesus singles out a marriage, not perhaps because such a feast is a better type of the Kingdom of God, but because on such occasions there is more formality, and notice must be taken of the rank of the guests. κατακλιθῇς . Peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (7:36, 9:14, 24:30): see on 9:14. 9. ὁσὲκαὶαὐτὸνκαλέσας . It is misplaced ingenuity to render, “ thee thyself also,” dich auch selbst. “ Thee and him,” te et illum (Vulg.), is right. His inviting both gave him the right to arrange both guests as he pleased. Contrast 2:35. ἐρεῖ . For the change from subjunct. to fut. indic. comp. 12:58. See also ἐρεῖ after ἵνα , ver. 10. Δὸςτούτῳτόπον … τὸνἔσχατοντόπον . Here AV. is inferior to all previous versions. Vulg. has locum in both places. Luth. omits in both. Tyn. Cov. Cran. Gen. have “ rowme” in both: Wic. and Rhem. “ place” in both. “ The lowest room” means “ the lowest Place” ; but in that case “ give this man room” should precede. Otherwise “ lowest room” will seem to mean the bottom chamber. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 267. “ Thou hast set my feet in a large room” (Psalms 31:8), i.e. in abundant space (Psalms 18:19). Bishop Hall calls Pope Pius 11. “ as learned as hath sat in that zooms this thousand yeeres” (Letters, Dec, 2.Eph_3). Davies, Bible English, p. 152. Comp. Ter. Heaut. iii. 3, 25. Sy. Jube hunc abire hinc aliquo. Cl. Quo ego hinc abeam? Sy. Quo? quo libet: da illis locom. Abi deambulatum. Cl. Deambulatum? Quo? Sy. Vah, quasi desit locu. ἄρξῃ … κατέχειν . The ἄρξῃ marks the contrast between the brief self-assumed promotion and the permanent merited humiliation. Comp. Proverbs 25:6, Proverbs 25:7, which Christ seemed to have had in His mind. The displaced guest goes from top to bottom, becausethe intermediate places have meanwhile been filled. 10. ἵνα … ἐρεῖσοι . Perhaps ἵνα is here used ἐβατικῶς , of the result rather than of the purpose: “ so that he will say to thee.” But if the idea of purpose be retained, it is Christ’ s purpose in giving the advice, not the purpose with which the hearer is to adopt the advice. There 1s no recommendation of “ the pride that apes humility,” going to a low place in order to be promoted. See small print on 20:10. The fut. indic. after ἵνα is common in late Greek: 20:10; Mark 15:20; John 7:3, John 7:17:2; Acts 21:24; Galatians 2:4, etc. Win. 41. b. 1, p. 360; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 109; Burton., § 199. προσανάβηθιἀνώτερον . Perhaps “ Come up higher,” i.e. to where the host is sitting: accede (a C f ff2 i q r) rather than asccende (Vulg.). Comp. αινάβαινεπρόςμε (Proverbs 25:7). The verb is classical and frequent in LXX, esp. in Joshua of geographical description (11:17, 15:3, 6, 7, 18:12, 19:11, 12; Exodus 19:23, etc.). The adv. occurs elsewhere in bibl. Grk. only Hebrews 10:8; comp. ἀνώτερος (Nehemiah 3:25), ἀνώτατος (Tobit 8:3), ἐσώτερος (Acts 16:24; Hebrews 6:19), κατώτερος (Ephesians 4:9). ἐνώπιονπάντων . Both words are characteristic: see on 1:15 and 6:30. The πάντων is unquestionably to be retained (א A B L X 1, 33 69, Syrr. Boh. Aeth.). 11. πᾶςὁὑψῶνἑαυτόν . One of our Lord’ s repeated utterances: 18:14; Matthew 23:12. In all three places AV. spoils the antithesis by varying the translation of ταπεινόω , “ abase,” “ humble.” The saying here guards against the supposition that Christ is giving mere prudential rules of conduct or of good taste. Humility is the passport to promotion in the Kingdom of God. Comp. for the first half 10:15; and for the second half James 4:10; 1 Peter 5:6. Note that while Lk. in both places has πᾶς with the participle (see on 1:66), Mt. has ὅστις . 12-14. The Duty of inviting Lowly Guests. The previous discourse was addressed to the guests (ver. 7): this is addressed to the host. It is a return for his hospitality. We cannot be sure that all the other guests were of the upper classes, and that this moved Jesus to utter a warning. Some of His disciples may have been with Him, and they were not wealthy. Still less may we assert that, if all the other guests were of the upper classes, this was wrong. All depends upon whether the motive for hospitality was selfish. But it is wrong to omit benevolence to the poor, in whose case the selfish motive is excluded. As before, we have a parable in a hortatory form; for Jesus is not merely giving rules for the exercise of social hospitality. 12. Ἔλεγενδὲκαὶτῷκεκληκότιαὐτόν . “ But He was saying to him also that had bidden Him” ; qui invitaverat eum (d f), invitanti eum , invitatori (a b c ff2 i l q r) : convivatori suo benigne rependens, πνευματικὰἀντὶσαρκικῶν (Grotius). For ἄριδτον see on 11:37. μὴφώνει . Pres. imperat. “ Do not habitually call.” It is the exclusive inivation of rich neighbours, etc., that is forbidden. As distinct from καλεῖνφωνεῖν , would specially apply to invitation by word of mouth: and the use of φωνεῖν for invitations is very rare. Neither Vulg. nor any English Version before RV. distinguishes between φώνει here and κάλει , ver. 13, although in vv. 7, 8, 12 καλεῖν is rendered invitare and ver. 12 φωνεῖν , vocare. πλουσίους . With γείτονας only. It is pleasant to entertain ones friends, seemly to entertain one’ s relations, advantageous to entertain rich neighbours. But these are not high motives for hospitality; and we must not let our hospitality end there. μήποτεκαὶαὐτοὶἀντικαλέσωσίνσε . Godet remarks that this warning is playful. Prends-y garde: la pareille à recevoir, c’ est un malheur à é viter! Car, une fois la retribution reç ue, c’ en est fait de la remuneration future. Comp. οὔτεμὲνὡςἀντικληθησόμενοςκαλεῖμετις (Xen. Symp. i. 15). 13. δοχὴνποιῇς . See on 5:29. κάλειπτωχούς , ἀναπείρους . The former would not have the money, the latter would not have the strength, to give an entertainment. That ἀναπείρους is here generic, and that χωλούς and τυφλούς are species under it, is improbable: comp. ver. 21. The πτωχοί are one class,— those wanting in means; and all the rest belong to another class,— those wanting in physical strength. Beyond this we need not specify; but in Plato we have ἀνάπηροι 1 containing the other two classes, οἱχωλοίτεκαὶτυφλοὶκαὶοἱἄλλοιἀνάπηροι (Crito, p. 53 A). The ἀνά is intensive: “ very maimed.” For the command comp. ver. 21 and Nehemiah 8:10. 14. μακάριοςἔσῃ , ὅτιοὐκἔχουσινἀνταποδοῦναίσοι . The ὅτι is strictly logical. Good deeds are sure to be rewarded either in this world or in the world to come. Those persons are blessed whose good deeds cannot be requited here, for they are sure of a reward hereafter. For οὐκἔχουσιν see on 12:4. For ἀναποδοῦναι in a good sense comp. Romans 11:35; 1 Thessalonians 3:9; in a bad sense, Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30. The ἀντί expresses retaliation, exact repayment. Comp. Arist. Eth. Nic. ix. 2. 5, where we have δόσις , ἀποδοτέον , and ἀνταπόδοσις . ἐντῇἀναστάσειτῶνδικαίων . It is possible that there is here a reference to the doctrine of a double resurrection, first of the righteous, and then of all. Comp. 1 Corinthians 15:23; 1 Thessalonians 4:16; Revelation 20:5, Revelation 20:6. If so, this is the ἀνάστασιςἐκνεκρῶν (20:35; Acts 4:2; Philippians 3:11; 1 Peter 1:3: comp. Mark 9:9, Mark 9:12:25; Matthew 17:9; Galatians 1:1), which implies that some are for the present left upraised, as distinct from the ἀνάστασιςνεκρῶν (Acts 17:32; 1 Corinthians 15:12, 1 Corinthians 15:21; Hebrews 6:2), which is the general resurrection. See Lft. on Philippians 3:11. But τῶνδικαίων may be added merely to indicate the character of those who practise disinterested benevolence. 15-24. The Parable of the Great Supper. The identity of this with the Parable of the Marriage of the King’ s Son, often called the Parable of the Wedding Garment (Matthew 22:1-14), will continue to be discussed, for the points of similarity and of difference are both of them so numerous that a good case may be made for either view. But the context, as well as the points of difference, justifies a distinction. The parable in Mt. is a comment on an attempt to arrest Christ (21:46), and tells of rebels put to death for insulting and killing their sovereign’ s messengers; this is a comment on a pious remark, perhaps ignorantly or hypocritically made, and tells of discourteous persons who, through indifference, lose the good things to which they were invited. It is much less severe in tone than the other; and even in those parts which are common to the two has very little similarity of wording. 15. τιςτῶνσυνανακειμένων . “ The resurrection of the just” suggests the thought of the Kingdom, and this guest complacently assumes that he will be among those who will enjoy it. With this introductory incident comp. 10:25-30, 12:13-15, 15:1-3. φάγεταιἄρτον . A Hebraism: comp. ver. 1; 2 Samuel 9:7, 2 Samuel 9:10; 2 Kings 4:8, etc., and see on ver. 8. It points to the Jewish idea that the Messianic age will be inaugurated by a banquet and will be a prolonged festival (Isaiah 25:6). The reading ἄριστον is a mere corruption of ἄρτον . 16. ὁδὲεἶπεναὐτῷ . “ But He said to him” (Rhem.). “ And” (Wic.) and “ Then” (Tyn. Gen. AV.) obscure the fact that Christ is opposing the comfortable self-complacency of the speaker. What he says is correct, but the spirit in which he says it is quite wrong. Only those who are detached from earthly things, and treat them as of small account in comparison with the Kingdom of God, will enter therein. ἐποίειδεῖπνονμέγα . “ Was about to make a great supper,” similar to that at which Jesus was now sitting. One might expect the mid., but comp. ver. 12; Acts 8:2; Xen. Anab. iv. 2. 23. The πολλούς are the Jews who observe the Law. In Mt. it is ἄνθρωποςβασιλεύς who made a marriage-feast for his son. 17. τὸνδοῦλον . The vocator, who was sent to remind them, according to custom, and not because they were suspected of unwillingness.1 Comp. Esther 5:8, Esther 6:14. This custom still prevails. To omit the second summons would be “ a grievous breach of etiquette, equivalent to cancelling the previous more general notification. To refuse the second summons would be an insult, which is equivalent among the Arab tribes to a declaration of war” (Tristram, Eastern Customs, p. 82). The δοῦλος represents God’ s messengers to His people, and specially the Baptist and Jesus Christ. Comp. Matthew 11:28-30. Ἔπχεσεθ , ὅτιἤδηἕτοιμάἐστιν . The true reading may be ἔρχεσθαι (א A D K L P R D) to follow εἰπεῖν (Syr-Sin.), dicere invitatis ut venirent (Vulg.). See small print note on 19:13. But the πάντα after ἐστιν (A P, Syr-Sin. Vulg, f) or before ἔτοιμα (D, a e) comes from Matthew 22:4. א * B L R, b c ff2 il q omit. 18. ἤρξαντοἀπὸμιᾶςπάντεςπαραιτεῖσθαι . Every word is full of point. The very beginning of such conduct was unexpected and unreasonable, and it lasted some time. There was no variation; it was like a prearranged conspiracy: they all pleaded that they were at present too much occupied to come. And there was not a single exception. The παραιτεῖσθαι comes as a surprise at the end, there being no ἀλλά or δέ at the outset to prepare for a contrast. This absolute unanimity prepares us for a joyous acceptance of the courteously repeated invitation. On the contrary, they begin “ to beg off,” deprecari (Acts 25:11; Act_2 Mac. 2:31). In Jos. Ant. vii. 8. 2. the verb is used, exactly as here, of excusing oneself from an invitation. They ought to have excused themselves when the first invitation came, if at all. Their begging off now was breaking their promise; and the excuses were transparently worthless. In Mt. there is no begging off. Those invited simply ἀμελήσαντεςἀπῆλθον ; and some of them insulted, and even killed the vocatores. For ἄρχεσθαι of proceedings which last some time comp. 7:38, 12:45, 19:37, 45, 22:23, 23:3. Here the further idea of interruption is not present. ἀπὸμιᾶς The expression is unique in Greek literature. Comp. ἀπ ʼ εὐθείας , απὸτῆςἴσης , ἐξὀρθῆς , διὰπάσης . We are probably to supply γνώμης : ἀπὸμιᾶςκαὶτῆςαὐτῆςγνώμης (Philo, De Spec. Legg. 2. p. 311). Both ἐκμιᾶςγνώμης and ἐκμιᾶςφωνῆς are also found. We might also supply ψυχῆς . Less probable suggestions are ὤρας , συνθήκης (Vulg. simul), αἰτίας , ὁδοῦ . ἔχωἀνάγκην . A manifest exaggeration. He had already bought it, probably after seeing it; and now inspection could wait. For the phrase, which is classical, comp. 1 Corinthians 7:37; Hebrews 7:27; Jude 1:3; and the insertion Luke 23:17. Not in LXX. ἔχεμεπαρῃτημένον . It is doubtful whether this is a Latinism, habe me excusatum, i.e. “ Consider me as one who has obtained indulgence.” 1 But certainly με , which is enclitic, cannot be emphatic: “ Whatever you do about others, I must be regarded as excused.” This would require ἐμέ , and before rather than after ἔχε . Comp. οὐθαρροῦντάμεἕξεις (Xen. Cyr. iii. I. 35). 19. πορεύομαι . “ I am on my way.” He pleads no ἀνάγκη , and is too indifferent to care about the manifest weakness of his excuse. That he had bought the oxen “ on approval” is not hinted. Both these two seem to imply that they may possibly come later, if the host likes to wait, or the feast lasts long enough. Hence the hoses declaration ver. 24. 20. οὐδύναμαι . He is confident that this is unanswerable. See On ver. 26 “ When a man taketh a new wife, he shall not go out in the host, neither shall he be charged with any business: he shall be free at home one year” (Deuteronomy 24:5). Comp. Hdt. 21. The πάντες (ver. 18) probably means more than three. But three suffice as examples. Some said that they would not come now; others declared that they could not come at all. Comp. the parable of the Pounds, where three servants are samples of the whole ten, and represent two classes (19:16-21). Ἔξελθεταχέως . Not because his anger makes him impatient; but because he has no intention of putting off anything to please the discourteous persons who have insulted him. He goes on with his arrangements at once. εἰςτὰςπλατείαςκαὶπ̔ύμας . We have the same combination Isaiah 15:3. This use of π̔ύμη is late: Acts 9:11, Acts 9:12:10; Ecclus. 9:7; Tobit 13:18. A lane resembles a stream; and the original sense of π̔ύμη is the rush or flow of what is in motion. See Kennedy, Sources of N. T. Greek, p. 16. The two words combined stand for the public places of the town, in which those who have no comfort able homes are likely to be found. Comp. 1 Corinthians 1:26-28. τοὺςπτωχοὺςκαὶἀναπείρους , κ .Τ .λ . The Jews who do not observe the Law; the publicans and sinners. These were not asked simply because the others refused, and in order to fill the vacant places. They would have been asked in any case; but the others were asked first. They both live in the city: i.e. both are Jews. But those who respected the Law had a prior claim to those who rebelled against it. The similarity of wording shows the connexion with the preceding discourse (ver. 13); and therefore Bengel’ s attractive distinction is probably not intended. He points out that the poor would get no other invitation; the maimed would not be likely to many; the blind could not go to see farms; and the lame would not go to prove oxen. Contrast Matthew 22:9, Matthew 22:10. εἰσάγαγεὧδε . See on 2:27. It is assumed that they can be “ brought in” at once, without formal invitation. They are not likely to refuse. The mixture of guests of all classes is still seen at Oriental entertainments. 22. κύριε , γέγονενὂἐπέταξας . He executes the order, and then makes this report. There is no ἤδη , and we are not to suppose that he had anticipated his master’ s order; which would have been audacious officiousness, and could hardly have been done without his master’ s knowledge. ἔτιτόποςἐστίν . Comp. ver. 9. No such expression is found in Matthew 22:10. It is added because the servant knows that his master is determined to fill all the places, and that the banquet cannot begin till this is done. 23. φραγμούς . “ Hedges” : Matthew 21:33 ; Mark 12:1. Just as πλατεῖαικαὶπ̔ῦμαι represent the public roads inside the city, so ὁδοὶκαὶφραγμοί the public roads outside the city; and this command is invitation to the heathen. ἀνάγκασονεἰσελθεῖν . By persuasion. A single servant could not use force, and those who refused were not dragged in. Comp. Mark 6:45 |7verbar; and παρεβιάσαντο (24:29; Acts 16:15). The text gives no sanction to religious persecution. By showing that physical force was not used it rather condemns it. ἵναγεμισθῇμουὁοἶκος . Nec natura nec gratia patitur vacuum (Beng.). We are not told the result of this third invitation; but we may conclude that the Gentiles fill the void which the unbelief of the Jews has left (Romans 11:25). In Mt. the result of the second invitation is ἐπλήσθηὀνυμφών , and there is no third. Augustine interprets this third summons as a call to heretics, which cannot be correct. 24. λέγωγὰρὑμῖν . Solemn introduction of the main point of the parable. The transition from sing. to plur. is variously explained. (1) That some of the πτωχοί (ver. 21) are present and are included in the address. (2) That there is a transition from the parable to its application, and Christ speaks half as the host to his servant and others, and half in His own person to the Pharisee and his guests. (3) That the host addresses, not only the servant, but all who may hear of what he has done. In favour of (2) we must not quote 11:8, 15:7, 10, 16:9, 18:14; Matthew 21:43. In all these places it is Jesus who is addressing the audience; not a person in the parable who sums up the result. Here the ἐκείνων and the μου show that the latter is the case. In Mt. the conclusion to the parable is πολλοὶγάρεἰσινκλητοί , ὀλίγοιδὲἐκλεκτοί (22:14), and these are the words of Christ, not of the βασιλεύς . 25-35. § Warnings against Precipitancy and Half-heartedness in Following Christ. The Parables of the Rash Builder, the Rash King, and the Savourless Salt. The section has been called “ The Conditions of Discipleship.” These are four. 1. The Cross to be borne (25-27; Matthew 10:37, Matthew 10:38). 2. The Cost to be counted (28-32). 3. All Possessions to be renounced (33). 4. The Spirit of Sacrifice to be maintained (34, 35; Matthew 5:13; Mark 9:49). The journeying continues, but we are not told the direction; and a large multitude is following. They are disposed to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, and that the crisis of the Kingdom is at hand. They therefore keep close to Him, in order not to miss any of the expected glories and blessings. This fact is the occasion of the address. They must understand that following Him involves great deal. Like the guest in the Pharisee’ s house (ver. 15), they have no realized what the invitation to enter the Kingdom implies. 25. Σενεπορεύοντοδὲαὐτῷ “ Now there were going with Him,” of what continued for some time. Comp, 7:11, 24:15. Elsewhere only Mark 10:1 of people assembling, but often in LXX (Genesis 13:5, Genesis 14:24, Genesis 18:16, etc.). 26. οὐμισεῖτὸνπατέραἑαυτοῦ , κ .Τ .λ .. Does not hate them so far as they are opposed to Christ. The context and the parallel passages (Matthew 6:24, Matthew 10:37) show that the case supposed is one in which choice must be made between natural affection and loyalty to Christ. In most cases these two are not incompatible; and to hate one’ s parents as such would be monstrous (Matthew 15:4). But Christ’ s followers must be ready, if necessary, to act towards what is dearest to them as if it were an object of hatred. Comp. John 12:25. Jesus, as often, states a principle in a startling way, and leaves His hearers to find out the qualifications. Comp. 6:29, 30; Matthew 19:12. The καὶτὴνγυναῖκα here is a comment, whether designed or not, on γυναῖκαἔγημα in ver. 20. Comp. 18:29. τὴνψυχὴνἑαυτοῦ . Not merely his carnal desires, but his life (9:24, 12:23); all his worldly interests and affections, including life itself. Nec tamen sufficit nostra relinquere, nisi relinquamus et nos (Greg. Mag. Hom. 32.). So that μισεῖντὴνψυχὴνἑαυτοῦ is ἀπαρνήσαθαιἑαυτόν (9:23) carried to the uttermost. εἶναίμουμαθητής . The emphasis is on μαθητής , not on μου , which is enclitic. “ He may be following Me in some sense, but he is no disciple of Mine.” Would any merely human teacher venture to make such claims? Syr-Sin. omits v. 27. 27. οὐβαστάζειτὸνσταυρὸνἑαυτοῦ . Comp. 9:23; Matthew 10:38, Matthew 10:16:24; Mark 8:34. Only here and John 19:17 is βαστάζειν used of the cross; here figuratively, there literally. “ Carrying his own cross” would be a familiar picture to many of Christ’ s hearers. Hundreds had been crucified in Galilee for rebellion under Judas the Gaulonite (a.d. 6). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 102. In Late Gk. βαστάζειν seems to be more common than φέρειν , when the carrying is figurative. LXX of 2 Kings 18:14; Job 21:3. It is specially common in the later versions of Aq. Sym. and Theod. All three have it Isaiah 40:11, 66:12; Jeremiah 10:5: and both Sym. and Theod. have it Proverbs 9:12, Isaiah 63:9. But in none of these places does it occur in LXX. 28-33. Two Parables upon Counting the Cost: the Rash Builder and the Rash King. Comp. Matthew 20:22; Mark 10:38. It is possible that in both parables Jesus was alluding to recent instances of such folly. It was an age of ostentatious buildng and breckless warfare. The connexion with what precedes seems to be that becoming a disciple of Christ is at least as serious a matter as any costly or dangerous undertaking. 28. τίςγὰρἐξὑμῶνθέλων . “ For which of you (see on 11:5), if he wishes.” καθίσας . In both parables (ver. 31) this represents long and serious consideration. The matter cannot be settled off-hand Comp. Virg. Aen. x. 159. ψηφίζει . “ Calculates” (ψῆφος = calculus). In class. Gk. commonly in mid. of voting. Comp. Revelation 13:18: not in LXX. Neither ἀπαρτισμός not δαπάνη occur again in N.T., but δαπάνη is fairly common in LXX, and ἀπαρτισμός is very rare in Greek literature.1 In LXX ἀπαρτίζειν occurs (1 Kings 9:25); also in Aq. and Sym. See Suicer, ἀπαρτίζω . 29. μὴἰσχύοντοςἐκτελέσαι . “ Not having the means to finish.” For ἐκτελεῖν comp. Deuteronomy 32:45; 1 Kings 14:15 ; 2 Chronicles 4:5; 2Ch_2 Mac. 15:9; Dan. 3:40 (Theod.). Not elsewhere in N.T. 30. οὗτος . Contemptuous: 5:21, 7:39, 13:32, where see reff. The lesson conveyed is not so much, “ It is better not to begin, than to begin and fail,” as, “ It is folly to begin without much consideration.” 31. συνβαλεῖνεἰςπόλεμον . To be taken together: “ to engage with another king for the purpose of war.” The verb. is intrans., as 1 Mac. 4:34; Mal_2 Mac. 8:23, 14:17; and often in Polyb. The more common expression is συμβάλλεινεἰςμάχην (Jos. Ant. vi. 5. 3: so also in Polyb.). Comp. confligere. ἐνδέκαχιλιάσιν . “ Equipped with ten thousand,” a meaning which readily flows from “ clad in, invested with.” Comp. 1:17; Romans 15:29 ; 1 Corinthians 4:21 ; Hebrews 9:25; Jude 1:14. The very phrase occurs 1 Mac. 4:29. 32 εἰδὲμήγε . See small print on 5:36. ἐρωτᾷ [τὰ ] πρὸςεἰρήνην . “ Asks for negociations with a view to peace.” The τά is omitted in א B (? homœ otel.), and the meaning will then be, “ negociates for peace.” B K P have εἰς for πρός (perhaps from ver. 28). Comp. 19:42 and examples in Wetst. There is a remarkable parallel to this second parable Xen. Mem. ii. 6. 8. 33. This verse shows the futility of asking what the tower means, and who the king with the twenty thousand Isa_2 These details are part of the framework of the parables, and by themselves mean nothing. The parables as a whole teach that to become Christ’ s disciple involves something which ought to be well weighed beforehand. This something was explained before, and is shown in another form here, viz. complete self-renunciation. ἀποτάσσεταιπᾶσιντοῖςἑαυτοῦὑπάρχουσιν . “ Renounceth all his own belongings,” the chief of which were specified ver. 26. See on 9:61 and 8:3. All disciples must be ready to renounce their possessions. Many of the first disciples were called upon actually to do so. Comp. the sarcasm of Julian : “ In order that they may enter more easily into the Kingdom of Heaven in the way which their wonderful law bids them, I have ordered all the money of the Church of Edessa to be seized” (Ep. 43.). Note the characteristic πᾶς and πᾶσιν . Comp. 5:11, 28. It is very forced to put a full stop a πᾶςἐξὑμῶν , and make two independent sentences. “ Such is the case therefore with all of you. Whoever renounceth not,” etc. MSS. vary much as to the order of the three words εἶναίμουμαθητής . 34, 35. The Spirit of Sacrifice. The similitude respecting salt was probably uttered more than once, and in more than one form. Comp. Matthew 5:13; Mark 9:50. The salt is the self-sacrifice spoken of vv. 26, 27, 33. The figure of salt is not found in O.T., but comp. Job 6:6. 34. καλὸνοὖντὸἅλας . The οὖν (א B L Ξ 69, Boh.) perhaps refers to previous utterances: “ Salt, therefore (as I have said before), is good.” Nihil utilius sale et sole (Plin. H. N. xxxi. 9, 45, 102). ἐὰνδὲκαὶτὸἅλας . The Καί (א B L Ξ , Vulg. codd. Syr., Bede) must be preserved. “ But if even the salt.” In Matthew 5:13 there is no καί . Note the characteristic δὲκαί , and see small print on 3:9. In LXX and N.T. ἄλας is the common form, with ἄλα as v.l. in good MSS. In class. Gk. ἄλς prevails. In class. Gk. μωραίνω is “ I am foolish” (Eur. Med. 614); in bibl. Grk. μωραίνομαι has this meaning (Romans 1:22; Matthew 5:13), μωραίνω being “ I make foolish” (1 Corinthians 1:20). Mk. has ἄναλονγίνεσθαι . Vulg. has evanuerit; a d e infatuatum fuerit. ἐντίνιἀρτυθήσεται ; Quite impossibly Tyn. and Cran. have “ What shall be seasoned ther with?” From meaning simply “ prepare,” ἀρτύω came to be used of preparing and flavouring food (Colossians 4:6). 35. It is futile to discuss what meaning is to be given to “ the land” and “ the dunghill.” They do not symbolize anything. Many things which have deteriorated or become corrupt are useful as manure, or to mix with manure. Savourless salt is not even of this much use: and disciples without the spirit of self-devotion are alike it. That is the whole meaning.1 If this saying was uttered only once, me may prefer the connexion here to that in the Sermon on the Mount. Mk. so far agrees with Lk. in placing it after the Transfiguration. But all three arrangements may be right. κοπρίαν . The word is one of many which seem to be of a colloquial character, and are common to N.T. and the comic poets. See Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. PP. 72-76. In N.T. only here. Comp. 13:8. Ὃἔξωνὦταἀκούεινἀκουέτω . A solemn indication that attention to what has been said is needed, and will be rewarded. It is another of Christ’ s repeated sayings. See on 8:8. § Found in Luke alone. AV. Authorized Version. RV. Revised Version. Vulg. Vulgate. Aug. Augustine. Wetst. Wetstein. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. Syrr. Syriac. Arm. Armenian. om. omit. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. Latt. Latin. 1 There is possibly a reference to the wording of the fourth commandment, In which son stands first among the rational creatures possessed, and ox first among the irrational (Deuteronomy 5:14). But comp. Exodus 21:33. G G. Cod. Harleianus, sæ c. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions. M M. Cod. Campianus, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. S S. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. x. In the Vatican. The earliest dated MS. of the Greek Testament. Contains the whole Gospel. U U. Cod. Nanianus, sæ c. x. In the Library of St. Mark’ s, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel. K K. Cod. Cyprius, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. Sin. Sinaitic. Aeth. Ethiopic. WH. Westcott and Hort. Edersh. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Luth. Luther. Tyn. Tyndale. Cov. Coverdale. Gen. Geneva. Wic. Wiclif. Rhem. Rheims (or Douay). Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moulton’ s edition). Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses. C C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sæ c. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53. These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T. Boh. Bohairic. 1 The form ἀνάπειρος seems to be a mere misspelling of ἀνάπηρος (Tobit 14:2α ; 2 Mac. 8:24 A V); but it is well attested. WH. ii. App. p. 151. 1 Vocatores Suos ostendenti, ut diceret a quibus invitatus esset (Plin. N. H. xxxv. 10. 36. 89). Comp. Suet Calig. 39.; Sen. De Ira, iii. 37. 3. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. Jos. Josephus. 1 Invitas tunc me, cum scis, Nasica, vocasse. Excusatum habeas me rogo: cæ no domi.— (Mart. ii. 79. Beng. Bengel. 1 Dion. Hal. De Comp. Verb. 24., and Apoll. Dysc. De Adv. p. 532, 7, seem to be almost the only quotations. The Latin renderings here are ad perficiendum (f Vulg.), ad consummandum (a r), ad consummationem (e), ad perfectum (d). 2 Those who insist on explaining the king with the twenty thousand commonly make him mean Satan. But would Christ suggest that we should come to terms with Satan? To avoid this difficulty others regard the as representing God. But would Christ place the difference between the power of God and the power of man as the difference between twenty thousand and ten thousand? Contrast the ten thousand talents and the hundred pence ( Matthew 18:24, Matthew 18:28). See on 12:5 and 16:1. Ξ̠Ξ . Cod. Zacynthius Rescriptus, sæ c. viii. In the Library of the Brit. and For. Bible Soc. in London. Contains 1:1-9, 19-23, 27, 28, 30-32, 36-66, 1:77-2:19, 21, 22, 33-39, 3:5-8, 11-20, 4:1, 2, 6-20, 32-43, 5:17-36, 6:21-7:6, 11-37, 39-47, 8:4-21, 25-35, 43-50, 9:1-28, 32, 33, 35, 9:41-10:18, 21-40, 11:1, 2, 3, 4, 24-30, 31, 32, 33. 1 For this savourless salt in Palestine see Maundrell, Journey from Aleppo te Jerusalem, pp. 161 ff. (quoted by Morison on Mark 9:50); also Thomson, “ I saw large quantities of it literally thrown into the street, to be trodden under foot of men and beasts” (Land &Book, p. 381). 15:1-32. Three Parables for the Encouragement of Penitent Sinners. The Love and Free Forgiveness of God. The Lost Sheep (3-7) and the Lost Coin (8-10) form a pair. Like the Mustard Seed and the Leavin (13:18-21), and the Rash Builder and the Rash King (14:28-32), they teach the same lesson, which the Prodigal Son (11-32) enforces and augments. In the first two Jesus justifies His own conduct against the criticisms of the Pharisees. In the third He rebukes their criticisms, but at the same time continues the lesson to a point far beyond that touched by the objectors. When we regard them as a triplet, each parable teaching a separate lesson, Bengal’ s classification will stand: 1. Peccator stupidus; 2. sui plane nesciens; 3. sciens et voluntarius. But the insertion of εἶπενδέ (ver. 11) clearly marks off the third parable from the first two, whereas these are closely connected ἤ , which almost implies that the second is little more than an alternative way of saying the same thing as the first. 1-3. The Murmuring of the Pharisees against Christ’ s Intercourse with Publicans and Sinners. We have had several other cases in which Jesus has made a question, or an appeal, or a criticism, the occasion of a parable: ver. 15, 10:25-29, 12:13-15, 14:15. There is once more no indication of time or place; but connexion with what precedes is perhaps intended. There a thoughtless multitude followed Him, intending to become His disciples, and He warns them to count the cost. Here a number of publicans and sinners congregate about Him, and He rebukes the suggestion that He ought to send them away. It was well to check heedless enthusiasts, that they might be saved from breaking down afterwards. It would have been a very different thing to have sent away penitents, that He might be saved from legal pollution. 1. ῏Ησανδὲαὐτῷἐγγίζοντεςπάντεςοἱτελῶναικαὶοἱἁμαρτωλοί . The meaning of πάντες determines the meaning of the tense. We may regard it as hyperbolical for “ very many,” — a common use of “ all.” Or it may mean all the tax-collectors and other outcasts of the place in which He then was. In either of these cases ἦσανἐγγίζοντες (see on 1:10) will mean “ were drawing near” on some particular occasion. Or we may take πάντες literally of the whole class of publicans and sinners; and then the verb will mean “ use to draw near,” wherever He might be. This was constantly happening, and the Pharisees commonly cavilled (imperf.), and on one occasion He uttered these parables (aor.). It was likely that He would attract these outcasts more and more. Comp. 7:29, 37, and see on 11:29. For the characteristic πάντες see on 1:66, 6:30, 12:10, etc Note the repeated article: the τελῶναι and the ἁμαρτωλοί are grouped together as one class by the Pharisees themselves (5:30 ; Matthew 9:11); not so here by the Evangelist. 2. διεγόγγυζον . “ Murmured among themselves, throughout their whole company.” In N.T. only here and 19:7, which is very similar. Comp. Exodus 16:2, Exodus 16:7, Exodus 16:8; Numbers 14:2; Joshua 9:18. “ The scribes” are usually placed before “ the Pharisees” (5:21, 6:7, 11:53; Matthew 12:38, etc.). Here perhaps the Pharisees took the lead: comp. 30 (true text); Mark 7:1, Mark 7:5. προσδέχεται . “ Allows them access, gives them a welcome” : Romans 16:2; Philippians 2:29. συνεσθίει . A much more marked breach of Pharisaic decorum than προσδέχεται . He accepted invitations from Levi and other tax-collectors, and in His outdoor teaching He took His meals with them. 3. εἶπενδέ . “ But (in answer to this cavilling) He said.” Cov. and Cran. have “ But” ; Tyn. and Gen. “ Then.” Something stronger than “ And” (AV. RV.) is needed. Note εἶπενδέ , εἶπενπρός , and εἶπεντὴνπαραβολήν as marks of Lk.’ s style. None of them is found in Matthew 18:12. 4-7. The Parable of the Lost Sheep. Comp. Matthew 18:12-14, where this parable is given in a totally different connexion, and with some differences of detail. Comp. also John 10:1-18. We have no means of knowing how often Jesus used the simile of the Good Shepherd in His teaching. No simile has taken more hold upon the mind of Christendom. See Tert. De Pud. vii. and x. Comp. Eze_34.; Isaiah 60:11 ; 1 Kings 22:17. 4. τίςἄνθρωποςἐξὑμῶν . Once more He appeals to their personal experience. See on 11:5, and comp. 12:25, 14:5, 28. The ἄνθρωπος inserted here marks one difference between this parable and the next. ἔχωνἑκατὸνπρόβατα . The point is, not that he possesses so much, but that the loss in comparison to what remains is so small. ἀπολέσαςἐξαὐτῶνἅν . This is the point of the first two parables,— the particular love of God for each individual soul. In Mt we have πλανηθῇ (Exodus 23:4; Isaiah 53:6; Jeremiah 27:17) for ἀπολέσας . καταλείπειτὰἐνενήκονταἐννέα . He is the owner, not the shepherd. His leaving them does not expose them to danger. The wilderness is not a specially perilous or desolate place, but their usual pasture, in which they are properly tended. He does not neglect them, but for the moment he is absorbed in the recovery of the lost. Cyril Alex. and Ambrose make the ninety and nine to be the Angels, and the one the human race. Ambrose adds, Dives igitur pastor cujus omnes nos centesima portio sumus Migne, xiv. xv. 1756; lxxii. 798; Payne Smith, p. 497. πορεύσταιἐπὶτὸἀπολωλός . For ἐπί of the goal comp. Acts 8:26, Acts 9:11, Matthew 22:9; in each case after πορεύεσθαι . Mt has here πορευθεὶςζητεῖτὸπλανώμενον . ἕωςεὕρῃαὐτό . Peculiar to Lk. There is no cessation of the seeking until the lost is found. See Lange, L. of C. i. p. 497. 5. ἐπιτίθησινἐπὶτοὺςὤμουςαὐτοῦ . This also is peculiar to Lk. The owner does not drive it back, nor lead it back, nor have it carried: he carries it himself. Comp. Isaiah 40:1l, 49:22, 60:4, 66:12. In LXX ὦμος is common; in N.T. only here and Matthew 23:4. χαίρων . There is no upbraiding of the wandering sheep, nor murmuring at the trouble. Comp. the use of χαίρων , 19:6; Acts 8:39. 6. συνκαλεῖτοὺςφίλους . See on 9:1. In Mt. there is nothing about his calling others to rejoice with him. Only his own joy is mentioned. It is a mark of great joy that it seeks sympathy. τὸἀπολωλός . Not ὃἀπώλεσα (ver. 9). The sheep went astray through its own ignorance and folly (Psalms 119:176): the coin was lost through the woman’ s want of care. This is another mark of difference between the first parable and the second. 7. λέγωὑμῖν . Mt. has the characteristic ἀμὴνλέγωὑμῖν . ἢἐπί . For ἤ without a previous comparative see small print on 17:2, and comp. Matthew 18:8; Mark 9:43, Mark 9:45, Mark 9:47; Mar_1 Cor, 14:19. Win. xxv. 2. c, p. 302; Simcox p. 92. Perhaps ἤ may be said to imply μᾶλλον by a usage which was originally colloquial. It is freq. in LXX; Genesis 49:12; Numbers 22:6, etc. In Matthew 18:13 the μᾶλλον is expressed. δικαίοιςοἵτινεςοὐχρείανἔχουσινμετανοίας . “ Righteous who are of such a character as to have no need of repentance.” The οἵτινες does not prove that δικαίοις means those who are really righteous. It will fit any explanation of δικαίοις and οὐχρείανἔχουσιν . If both expressions be taken literally, the ninety-nine represent a hypothetical class, an ideal which since the Fall has not been reached. But as Jesus is answering Pharisaic objections to intercourse with flagrant sinners, both expressions may be ironical and refer to the external propriety of those whose care about legal observances prevents them from feeling any need of repentance. Comp. 5:31. Mt. here has τοῖςμὴπεπλανημένοις . In any case the χαίρων , ver. 5, and the χαρά here are anthropomorphic, and must not be pressed. Insperata aut prope desperata magis nos afficiunt (Grotius); but such unlooked for results are impossible to Omniscience. We must hold to the main lesson of the parable, and not insist on interpreting all the details.1 Note the confidence with which Jesus speaks of what takes place in heaven, and compare it with the claims made upon His followers, 14:26, 33. μετανοοῦντι … μετανοίας . Both verb and substantive are much more common in Lk. than in Mt. or Mk. Neither occurs in Matthew 18:14 or anywhere in Jn. See on 5:32 and 3:3. 8-10. § The Parable of the Lost Coin. The main points of difference between this and the preceding parable are the changes from a man to a woman, and from a sheep, which could stray of its own accord, and feel the evil consequences, to a coin, which could do neither. From this it follows that, while the man might be moved by pity rather than by self-interest to bring back the sheep, the woman must be moved by self-interest alone to recover the coin; also that the woman can blame herself for the loss of the coin , which the man does not do with regard to the sheep . Hence we may infer that the woman represents the Church rather than the Divine Wisdom, if she represents anything at all. The general result of the two parables is that each sinner is so precious that God and His Ministers regard no efforts too great to reclaim such. 8. τίςγυνή ; No ἐξὑμῶν is added, perhaps because no women were present. Yet there may be something in the remark of Wetst, Cum varios haberet auditores Christus, mares, feminas, juniores, iis parabolas accommodat: de pastore, de muliere frugi, de filio prodigo. Women also may work for the recovery of sinners. δραχμάς . The word occurs here only in N.T., but often in LXX (Genesis 24:22; Exodus 39:2; Joshua 7:21, etc.). The Greek drachma was a silver coin of nearly the same value as a Roman denarius1 (7:41, 10:35, 20:24), which is not mentioned in LXX. It was the equivalent of a quarter of a Jewish shekel (Matthew 17:24). Ten drachmas in weight of silver would be about eight shillings, but in purchasing power above a pound. Wic. has “ besant,” Tyn. and others have “ groat,” Luth. has Groschen. That the ten coins formed an ornament for the head, and that the loss of one marred the whole, is a thought imported into the parable. ἅπτει . The act. is peculiar to Lk. in N.T., and always in the sense of kindling (8:16, 11:33; Acts 28:2, and perhaps Luke 22:55: comp. Exodus 30:8; Tob. 8:13; Jude 1:13:13). Oriental houses often have no windows, and a lamp would be necessary for a search even in the day. σαροῖ .1 Non sine pulvere (Beng.). It may be doubted whether there is any lesson intended in the coins being lost in the house, whereas the heep strays from the fold; as showing that souls may be lost in be Church as well as by going out of it. In any case, the details are graphic, and express great and persevering activity. “ The charge against the Gospel is still the same, that it turns the world upside down” (Trench, Par. p. 386) 9. τὰςφίλαςκαὶγείτονας . “ Her women friends and neighbours.” No meaning is to be sought in the change of gender, which merely preserves the harmony of the picture. It is women who congratulate Naomi and Ruth (Rth 4:14, Rth 4:17). 10. γίνεταιχαρὰἐνώπιον . “ There comes to be joy,” etc. The γίνεται = ἔσται in ver. 7. Joy will arise in any case that may occur. “ In the presence of” means “ in the judgment of.” The angelic estimate of the facts is very different from that of the Pharisees: comp. 12:8, 16:22; Ephesians 1:4-14. ἐπὶἑνὶἁμαρτωλῷ . This is the moral throughout,— the value of a single sinner. The Pharisees condemned Jesus for trying to reclaim multitudes of sinners. They had a saying, “ There is joy before God when those who provoke Him perish from the world.” 11-32. § The Parable of the Prodigal Son. It completes the trilogy of these parables of grace, but we cannot be sure that it was uttered on the same occasion as the two other parables. The Evangelist separates it from them by making afresh start: Εἶπενδέ (comp. 24:44). But this may mean no more than that Jesus, having justified Himself against the murmuring of the Pharisees, paused; and then began again with a parable which is a great deal more than a reply to objections. Even if it was delivered on some other occasion unknown to Lk., he could not have given it a more happy position than this. The first two parables give the Divine side of grace; the seeking love of God. The third gives the human side; the rise and growth of repentance in the heart of the sinner. It has been called Evangelium in Evangelio, because of the number of gracious truths which it illustrates.2 It has two parts, both of which appear to have special reference to the circumstances in which Lk. places the parable. The younger son, who was lost and is found (11-24), resembles the publicans and sinners; and the elder son, who murmurs at the welcome given to the lost (25-32), resembles the Pharisees. In the wider application of the parable the younger son may represent the Gentiles, and the elder the Jews. Like the Lost Coin, it is peculiar to Lk., who would take special delight in recording a discourse, which teaches so plainly that God’ s all-embracing love is independent of privileges of birth and legal observances. Its literary beauty would be a further attraction to the Evangelist, who would appreciate the delicacy. picturesqueness, and truth of this description of human circumstances and emotions. See Jerome, Ep. xxi., for a commentary. 11. Ἄνθρωπόςτιςεἶχεν . The appeal to the personal experience of each is no longer made; but the idea of possession still continues . In each case it is the owner who exhibits the self-sacrificing care. 12. τὸἐπιβάλλονμέρος . According to Jewish law this would be half what the eldest received, i.e. one-third (Deuteronomy 21:17): but had he any claim to it in his father’ s lifetime? Very possibly he had. We have here perhaps a survival of that condition of society in which testaments “ took effect immediately on execution, were not secret, and were not revocable” (Maine, Ancient Law, ch. vi. p. 174, ed. 1861), and in which it was customary for a father, when his powers were failing, to abdicate and surrender his property to his sons. In such cases the sons were bound to give the father maintenance; but the act of resignation was otherwise complete and irrevocable. Both in Semitic and in Aryan society this seems to have been the primitive method of succession, and the Mosaic Law makes no provision for the privileges of testatorship (ibid. p. 197). The son of Sirach warns his readers against being in a hurry to abdicate (Ecclus. 33:19-23), but he seems to assume that it will be done before death. We may say, then, that the younger son was not making an unheard-of claim. His father would abdicate some day in any case: he asks him to abdicate now. See Expositor, 3rd series, 10. pp. 122-136, 1889; Edersh. Hist. of J. N. p. 367. This intrans. use of ἐπιβάλλω occurs Tobit 3:17, 6:11; 1 Mac. 10:30. Comp, κτημάτωντὸἐπιβάλλον (Hdt. iv. 115, 1). Other examples in Suicer. For οὐσία comp. Tobit 14:13; 3 Mac. 3:28. διε͂λεναὐτοῖςτὸνβίον . The verb occurs elsewhere in bibl. Grk. 1 Corinthians 12:1; Numbers 31:27; Num_1 Mal 1:6, etc For τὸνβίον see on 8:43. Here it means the same as ἡοὐσία : comp. ver. 31. 13. μετ ʼ οὐπολλὰςἡμέρας . He allows no delay between the granting of his request and the realization of his freedom. On the fondness of Lk. for such expressions as οὐπολλοί , οὐμακράν , and the like, see on 7:6. συναγαγώνπάντα . He leaves nothing behind that can minister to his desires; nothing to guarantee his return. The stronger form ἅπαντα is well attested (א A etc.). εἰςχώρανμακράν . There is no reason for making μακράν an adv. (ver. 20) rather than an adj. either here or 19:12: μακρός in the sense of “ distant, remote” is quite classical. ἐκεῖ . Away from his father’ s care and restraint, and from the observation of those who knew him. διεσκόρπισεντὴνοὐσίαν . The opposite of συναγάγωνπάντα . It had cost him nothing to collect it together, and he squanders it as easily as he acquired it. ζῶνἀσώτως . The expression occurs Jos. Ant. xii. 4, 8; but ἀσώτως is not found again either in N.T. or LXX. The ἄσωτος is “ one who does not save, a spendthrift, a prodigal” : Proverbs 7:11; comp. Arist. Eth. Nic. ii. 8, 2, iv. 1, 5. For ἀσωτία see Ephesians 5:18; Titus 1:6; 1 Peter 4:4; Proverbs 28:7; Pro_2 Mac. 6:4. Sometimes ἄσωτος is taken in a passive sense, “ one who cannot be saved, abandoned” ; perditus rather than prodigus, as if for ἄσωστος (Clem. Alex. Pæ d. ii. 1, p. 168, ii. p. 184, ed. Potter). But the active signification is appropriate here. Trench, Syn. xvi.; Suicer and Suidas ς . ἄσωτος . Syr-Sin. adds “ with harlots.” 14. The working of Providence is manifested in coincidences. Just when he had spent everything, a famine, and a severe one, arose in precisely that land to which he had gone to enjoy himself, and throughout the land. And he himself , as well as the country, began more and more to be in want. λιμὸςἰσχυρά . See small print on 4:25. For καὶαὐτός see on 1:17, 5:14, 6:20. For ὑστερεῖσθαι , “ to feel want” (mid.), comp. 2 Corinthians 11:9; Philippians 4:12; Ecclus. 11:11. Syr-Sin. omits the clause. 15. πορευθεὶςἐκολλήθηἑνὶτῶνπολιτῶν . He has to leave his first luxurious abode and attach himself, in absolute dependence, to one of another nation, presumably a heathen. Evidently his prodigality has not gained him a friend in need. Godet sees in this young Jew, grovelling in the service of a stranger, an allusion to the τελῶναι in the service of Rome. Excepting the quotation from LXX in Hebrews 8:11, πολίτης in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. (19:14; Acts 21:39): in LXX Proverbs 11:9, Proverbs 11:12, Proverbs 11:24:34, etc. For ἐκολλήθη see on 10:11. For the sudden change of subject in ἔπεμψεν comp. 7:15, 14:5, 17:2, 19:4; Acts 6:6. βόσκεινχοίρους . A degrading employment for anyone, and an abomination to a Jew. Comp. Hdt. ii. 47, 1. But the lowest degradation has still to be mentioned. 16. ἐπεθύμειχορτασθῆναι . Exactly as in 16:21, of the pangs of hunger. See on 6:21. There is no doubt that χορτασθῆναι (א B D L R) is not a euphemism for γεμίσαιτὴνκοιλίαναὐτοῦ , but the true reading: cupiebat aturari (d f), con cupiscebat saturari (e). Syr-Sin. supports A. ἐκτῶνκερατίωνὧνἤσθιονοἱχοῖροι . The pods of the “ carob tree,” or “ locust tree,” or “ John the Baptist’ s tree,” or “ S. John’ s Bread” ; so called from the erroneous notion that its pods were the locusts which were the Baptist’ s food. The carob tree, ceratonia siliqua, is still common in Palestine and round the Mediterranean. It is sometimes called Siliqua Grœ ca. But it is rash to assume that the siliquæ of Hor. Ep. ii. 1-123; Pers. iii. 55; Juv. xi. 58, are carob pods (D. B.2 i. p. 1412).1 For the attraction in ὧν see on 3:19. οὐδεὶςἐδίδουαὐτῷ . “ No one used to give him” even this miserable food, so that the quantity which he got was small. The neighbours cared nothing about this half-starved foreigner, who even in this vile employment could not earn enough to eat. 17. εἰςἑαυτὸνδὲἐλθών . Implies that hitherto he has been “ beside himself” : comp. ἐνἑαυτῷγενόμενος (Acts 12:11). The expression is classical both in Greek (Diod. Sic. xiii. 95; Epictet. iii. 1, 15) and Latin, redire ad se (Hor. Ep. ii. 2, 138; Lucret. iv. 1020; Ter. Adelph. v. 3, 8). This “ coming to himself” is manifested in the thought of home and the longing for it. Want rekindles what his revelry had extinguished. See Blass on Acts 12:11. Πόσοιμίσθιοι … περισσεύονταιἄρτων . There is no emphasis on ἄρτων in contrast to κερατίων : the contrast lies in their having plenty to eat. Godet sees the proselytes in these μίσθιοι . The word occurs in N.T. only here and ver. 10: in LXX Leviticus 25:50; Job 7:1; Tobit 5:11; Ecclus. 7:20, 34:27, 37:11. Only in late Greek is περισσεύω trans. In N.T. both act. (12:15, 21:4) and pass. (Matthew 13:12, Matthew 25:29) are used in much the same sense. ἐγὼδὲλιμῷὧδεἀπόλλυμαι . Comp. τῷαἰσχίστῳὀλεθρῷ , λιμῷτελευτῆσαι (Thuc. iii. 59, 4). The ὧδε is after λιμῷ in א B L before λιμῷ in D R U, ego autem hic fame pereo (Vulg.), while A A F etc. omit. The transfer to before λιμῷ caused it to be lost in ἐγὼδέ . 18. ἀναστὰςπορεύσομαι . Not mere Oriental fulness of description (1:39; Acts 10:20, Acts 22:10). The ἀναστάς expresses his rousing himself from his lethargy and despair (Acts 5:17, Acts 5:9:6, Acts 5:18). εἰςτὸνοὐρανόν . “ Against heaven.” This is not a rare use of εἰς : comp. 17:4; Matthew 18:21; 1 Corinthians 6:18, 1 Corinthians 8:12. It is common in LXX and is found also in class. Grk. Comp. Pharaoh’ s confession, ἩμάρτηκαἐναντίονΚυρίουτοῦΘεοῦὑμῶνκαὶεἰςὑμᾶς (Exodus 10:16); also Plat. Rep. iv. 396 A; Phæ dr. 242 C; Hdt. i. 138, 2; Soph. O. C. 968. Filial misconduct is a sin utterly displeasing to God. But the εἰς does not mean “ crying to heaven for punishment,” himmelschreiend, which is otherwise expressed (Genesis 4:10, Genesis 18:21). For ἁμαρτάνωἐνώπιόντινος comp. 1 Samuel 7:6, 20:1; Tobit 3:3; Judith 5:17; Sus. 23. The sin is regarded as something to be judged by the person who regards it. κληθῆναιυἱόςσου . By the father himself. What other people may call him is not in question. 19. ὡςἕνατῶνμισθίωνσου . This will be promotion from his present position. He asks it as a favour. 20. ἀναστὰςἦλθεν . The repentance is as real and decided as the fall. He prepares full confession, but no excuse; and, having made a good resolution, he acts upon it without delay. Here the narrative respecting the younger son practically ends. What follows (20-24) is mainly his father’ s treatment of him; and it is here that this parable comes into closest contact with the two others. Every word in what follows is full of gracious meaning. Note especially ἑαυτοῦ , “ his own father,” αὐτοῦμακρὰνἀπέχοντος , ἐσπλαγχνίσθη , and δραμών . In spite of his changed and beggarly appearance, his father recognizes him even from a distance. ἐπέπεσενἐπὶτὸντράχηλοναὐτοῦκαὶκατεφίλησεναὐτόν . The exact parallel in Acts 20:37 should be compared. Excepting Mark 3:10 and the quotations Romans 15:3 and Revelation 11:11, ἐπιπίπτειν is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (1:12; Acts 8:16, Acts 10:44, etc.), and he alone uses it in this sense: comp. Genesis 33:4, Genesis 45:14, Genesis 46:29. Latin texts vary much in rendering ἐπέπεσεν : cecidit (Vulg.), incubuit (a d Hier. ad Dam.) procidit (r), superjecit se (e). None of them marks the κατα - in κατεφίλησεν , “ kissed him tenderly,” deosculatus est. See on 7:38, and comp. Tobit 7:6; 3 Mac. 5:4. As yet the son has said nothing, and the father does not know in what spirit he has returned; but it is enough that he has returned. The father has long been watching for this. With the constr. αὐτοῦἀπέχοντοςεἰδεναὐτόν , for αὐτὸνἀπέχονταεἶδεν , comp. 12:36. 21. He makes his confession exactly as he had planned it: but it is doubtful whether he makes his humiliating request. The words ποίησονμεὡςκ .τ .λ ., are here attested by א B D U X; but almost all other MSS. and most Versions omit them. They may be taken from ver. 19, and internal evidence is against them. Augustine says, Non addit quod in illa meditatione dixerat, Fac me sicut unum de mercenariis tuffs (Quæ st. Evang. ii. 33). He had not counted on his father’ s love and forgiveness when he decided to make this request; and now emotion prevents him from meeting his father’ s generosity with such a proposal. But the servants are not present. They would not run out with the father. Not till the two had reached the house could the order to them be given. 22. Ταχὺἐξενέγκαρε . “ Bring forth quickly” ; cito proferte The father says nothing to his son; he continues to let his conduct speak for him. The ταχύ must be retained with א B L X, Syr-Sin. Vulg. Boh. Aeth. Arm. Goth. D and other MSS. have ταχέως . στολὴντὴνπρώτην . Not, “ his best robe,” still less “ his former robe,” which without αὐτοῦ is scarcely possible; but, “ the best that we have, the finest in the house.” Comp. Ezekiel 27:22. The στολή was any long and stately robe, such as the scribes loved to promenade in (20:46), the talar: Mark 12:38, Mark 12:16:5; Revelation 6:11, Revelation 6:7:9, Revelation 6:13; Esther 6:8, Esther 6:11; Est_1 Mac. 10:21, 14:9. It is the common word for the liturgical vestments of Aaron; Exodus 28:2, Exodus 29:21. Trench, Syn. l.; D. B.2 i. p. 808. The τήν before στολήν (D2 R) has been inserted because of the τήν before πρώτην , for an epithet joined to an anarthrous noun is commonly itself anarthrous. But comp. Romans 2:14, Romans 2:9:30; Galatians 3:21. δακτύλιον . Here only in N.T., but freq. in LXX and in classical writers. Comp. ἀνὴρχρυσοδακτύλιος (James 2:2). We are probably to understand a signet-ring, which would indicate that he was a person of standing and perhaps authority in the house (Esther 3:10, Esther 3:8:2; Genesis 41:42). The ὑποδήματα were marks of a freeman, for slaves went barefoot. None of the three things ordered are necessaries. The father is not merely supplying the wants of his son, who has returned in miserable and scanty clothing. He is doing him honour. The attempts to make the robe and the ring and the sandals mean distinct spiritual gifts are misapplied labour. 23. τὸνμόσχοντὸνσιτευτόν . Not “ sacrifice” (Acts 14:13, Acts 14:18; 1 Corinthians 10:20), for the context shows that there is no thought of a thank-offering but “ slay” for a meal (Acts 10:13, Acts 10:11:7; John 10:10): it implies rather more ceremony than the simple “ kill.” τὸνμόσχοντὸνσιτευτόν . There is only one, reserved for some special occasion. But there can be no occasion better than this. Comp. 1 Samuel 28:24; Judges 6:25, Judges 6:28 (A); Jeremiah 46:21. With σιτευτός comp. ἀπαίδευτος , γνωστός , θεόπνευστος , χωνευτός . εὐφρανθῶμεν . Excepting 2 Corinthians 2:2, this verb is always pass. in N.T., but with neut. meaning, “ be glad, be merry” (12:19, 16:19; Acts 7:41, etc.). 24. Note the rhythmical cadence of this refrain (24, 32), and comp. Exodus 15:1, Exodus 15:21; Num. 23., Numbers 23:24.; 2 Samuel 1:19-27. Carmine usi veteres in magno effectu (Bang.): There is probably no difference in meaning between the two halves of the refrain; but νεκρός means “ dead to me,” and ἀπολωλώς “ lost to me.” Would the father speak to the servants of his son’ s being morally dead? Whereas he might well speak of one who had gone away, apparently for ever, as practically dead. And if we give a moral sense to νεκρός , why not to ἀπολωλώς (19:10; [Matthew 18:11])? Here the first part of the parable ends. The welcome which Jesus gave to outcasts and sinners is justified. The words καὶἤρξαντοεὐφρίνεσθαι should be given to ver. 25 rather than to ver. 24. An interval elapses during which the father’ s command is executed; and then the banquet, which is the setting of the second part of the parable, begins. 25-32. In the episode of the elder son the murmuring of the Pharisees is rebuked, and that in the gentlest manner. They are reminded that they are sons, and that to them of right belongs the first place. God and His gifts have always been accessible to them (ver. 31), and if they reject them, it is their own fault. But self-righteousness and exclusiveness are sinful, and may be as fatal as extravagance and licentiousness. 25. ἐνἀγρῷ . Doing his duty, but in no loving spirit. This explains why he was not present when his brother returned. συμφωνίΑςκαὶχορῶν . Performed by attendants, not by those at the banquet Comp. Discumbens de die inter choros et symphonias (Suet. Calig. xxxvii.). Neither word occurs again in N.T. In LXX χορός is freq. (Exodus 15:20, 32:19; Judges 11:34, etc.); συμφωνία (Daniel 3:5, Daniel 3:10) is a musical instrument. D. B.2 art. “ Dulcimer” ; Pusey, Daniel, p. 29. There were some who understood symphonia in this passage to mean a musical instrument, for Jerome (Ep. xxi.) protests against the idea. It almost certainly means a band of players or singers, and probably fluteplayers (Polyb. xxvi. 10, 5, xxxi. 4, 8). D. of Ant.2 art Symphonia. 26. τῶνπαίδων . Perhaps not the same as the δοῦλοι (ver. 22), who are occupied with the banquet. Vulg. has servi for both; Cod. Vercell. has pueri for both; Cod. Palat. has pueri for παῖδες and servi for δοῦλοι . No English Version distinguishes the two words, and RV. by a marginal note implies that the same Greek word is used. D. C. G. art. “ Boy.” τίἂνεἴηταῦτα . “ What all this might mean.” Comp. Acts 10:17, and contrast Luke 18:36, where there is no ἄν . Here א A D omit ἄν . His not going in at once and taking for granted that what his father did was right, is perhaps an indication of a wrong temper. Yet to inquire was reasonable, and there is as yet no complaint or criticism. See second small print on 1:29. 27. ὅτι . Recitative, and to be omitted in translation: see on 1:45 and 7:16. Not, “ Because thy brother is come.” There is no hint that the servant is ridiculing the father’ s conduct. ὑγιαίνοντα . Not to be taken in a moral sense, about which the servant would give no opinion, but of bodily health. The house hold knew that the father had been anxious about his son’ s safety. See on 7:10, and comp. Tob. 5:21. For ἀπέλαβεν of “ receiving back” comp. 6:34. 28. ὠπγίσθηδὲκαὶοὐκἤθελεν . Note the characteristic δὲκαί here and ver. 32 (see on 3:9), and the change of tense: the unwillingness to go in was a state which continued. Hence the father’ s entreaties continue also . He treats both sons with equal tenderness: the ἐξελθών here is parallel to δραμών in ver. 20. The reading ἠθέλησεν (A L P Q R X) arose from a wish to harmonize the tenses. The reading οὖν instead of δέ (א A B D L R X) is followed in Vulg. (pater ergo illius) and AV. : but it is a correction to the sake of smoothness. Lat. Vet either vero or autem. 29. τοσαῦταἔτηδουλεύωσοι . His view of his relation to his father is a servile one. With τοσαῦτα comp. John 12:37, John 21:11. οὐδέποτεἐντολήνσουπαρῆλθον . The blind self-complacency of the Pharisee, trusting in his scrupulous observance of the letter of the Law, is here clearly expressed. This sentence alone is strong evidence that the elder brother represents the Pharisees rather than the Jewish nation as a whole, which could hardly be supposed to make so demonstrably false a claim. For παρῆλθον in the sense of “ neglect, transgress,” see on 11:42. ἐμοὶοὐδέποτεἔδωκαςἔριφον . The pronoun first with emphasis: “ Thou never gavest me a kid,” — much less a fatted calf. He is jealous, and regards his father as utterly weak in his treatment of the prodigal; but what specially moves him is the injustice of it all. His own unflagging service and propriety have never been recognized in any way, while the spendthrift has only to show himself in order to receive a handsome recognition. Both here and Matthew 25:32, B has ἐρίφιον for ἔριφος . Here the diminutive has point. In LXX ἔριφος prevails. ἵναμετὰτῶνφίλωνμουεὐφρανθῶ . He does not see that he is exhibiting much the same spirit as his brother. He wants to have his father’ s property in order that he may enjoy himself apart from him. 30. ὁυἱόςσουοὗτος . Contemptuous: “ This precious son of yours.” He will not say “ my brother.” μετὰπορνῶν . This is mere conjecture, thrown out partly in contrast to μετὰτῶνφίλωνμου (who of course would be respectable), partly to make the worst of his brother’ s conduct: That it shows how he would have found enjoyment, had he broken loose, is not so clear. But although there is contrast between πορνῶν and τῶνφίλωνμου , and between τὸνσιτευτὸνμόσχον and ἔριφον , there is none between ἔθυσας and ἔδωκας , as if the one implied more exertion and trouble than the other, and therefore more esteem. ἦλθεν . There is no bitterness in this, as if to imply that a stranger had come rather than a member of the family returned. Throughout the parable the prodigal is said to “ come,” not to “ return” (VV. 20, 27; comp. 18). But there may be bitterness in σοῦτὸνβίον . As the father had freely given the younger son his share, it would more fairly have been called τὸνβίοναὐτοῦ . 31. Τέκνον . More affectionate than υἱέ , although the son had not said, “ Father.” Comp. 2:48, 16:25; Matthew 21:28; Mark 10:24; 2 Timothy 2:1. σύπάντοτε . In emphatic contrast to the one who has been so long absent, and perhaps in answer to his own emphatic ἐμοί (ver. 29). “ What he is enjoying for this one day, thou hast always been able to command.” But, like the Pharisees, this elder son had not understood or appreciated his own privileges. Moreover, like the first labourers in the vineyard, he supposed that he was being wronged because others were treated with generosity. πάντατὰἐμὰσάἐστιν . If he wanted entertainments he could always have them; the property had been apportioned: διεῖλεναὐτοῖͅτὸνβίον (ver. 12). Thus the first reproach is gently rebutted. So far from the elder son’ s service never having met with recognition, the recognition has been constant; so constant that he had failed to take note of it. The father now passes to the second reproach,— the unfair recompense given to the prodigal. It is not a question of recompense at all; it is a question of joy. Can a family do otherwise than rejoice, when a lost member is restored to it? 32. εὐφρανθῆναιδὲκαὶχαρῆναιἔδει . Note the emphatic order. “ To be merry and be glad was our bounden duty.” The εὐφρανθῆναι of the external celebration, the χαρῆναι of the inward feeling. The imperf. perhaps contains a gentle reproof: it was a duty which the elder son had failed to recognize. ὁἀδελφόͅσουοὗτοͅ . The substitution of ὁἀδελφόͅσου for ὁυἱόͅμου , and the repetition of οὗτοͅ , clearly involve a rebuke: “ this thy brother, of whom thou thinkest so severely. If I have gained a son, thou hast gained a brother.” Not the least skilful touch in this exquisite parable is that it ends here. We are not told whether the elder brother at last went in and rejoiced with the rest. And we are not told how the younger one behaved afterwards. Both those events were still in the future, and both agents were left free. One purpose of the parable was to induce the Pharisees to come in and claim their share of the Father’ s affection and of the heavenly joy. Another was to prove to the outcasts and sinners with what generous love they had been welcomed. Marcion omitted this parable. Cov. Coverdale. Tyn. Tyndale. Gen. Geneva. AV. Authorized Version. RV. Revised Version. Tert. Tertullian. Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moulton’ s edition). 1 In the Midrash there is a story that Moses, while tending Jethro’ s flocks, went after a lamb which had gone astray. As he thought that it must be weary, he carried it back on his shoulders, Then God said, that, because he had shown pity to the sheep of a man, He would give him His own sheep, Israel, to feed (Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 257; Wetst. on Luke 15:5). § Found in Luke alone. 1 Nearly all Latin texts have dragmas, dracmas, or drachmas here; but Cod. Palat. and Ad Novatianum xv. (Hartel’ s Cypr. App. p. 65) have denarios. Wic. Wiclif. Luth. Luther. 1 MSS. of the Vulg. nearly all read evertit, which Wordsworth conjectures to be a slip for everrit. Lat. Vet. has scopis mundavit (b f ff2 l), scopis mundabit (iq), scopis commundat (a) scopis mundat (c r), mundat (d), emundat (e). Beng. Bengel. Trench, Trench, Parables. 2 Inter omnes Christi parabolas hæ c sane eximia est, plena affectuum of pulcherrimis picta coloribus (Grotius on ver. 20). Hist. of J. N. History of the Jewish Nation. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. Jos. Josephus. Clem. Alex. Clement of Alexandria. Trench, Trench, New Testament Synonyms. Syr Syriac. Sin. Sinaitic. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. Δ̠Δ . Cod. Sangallensis, sæ c. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. D. Smith’ s Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition. 1 “ These ‘ husks’ are to be seen on the stalls in all Oriental towns, where they are sold for food, but are chiefly used for the feeding of cattle and horses, and especially for pigs” (Tristram, Nat. Hist. of B. p. 361). U U. Cod. Nanianus, sæ c. x. In the Library of St. Mark’ s, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel. Vulg. Vulgate. F F. Cod. Boreeli, sæ c. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht. Contains considerable portions of the Gospel. Hier. Palestinian (Jerusalem). Boh. Bohairic. Aeth. Ethiopic. Arm. Armenian. Goth. Gothic. 16:1-31. On the Use of Wealth. This is taught in two parables, the Unrighteous Steward (1-8) and the Rich Man and Lazarus (19-31). The intermediate portion is partly supplementary to the first parable (9-13), partly introductory to the second (14-18). The first is addressed to the disciples (ver. 1), but is felt by the Pharisees who heard it to apply to them (ver. 14). The second appears to be addressed directly to the Pharisees. Both of them teach that riches involve, not sin, but responsibility and peril. They are a trust rather than a possession; and the use made of wealth in this world has great influence upon one’ s condition in the great Hereafter. The steward seems to illustrate the case of one who by a wise use of present opportunities secures a good condition in the future; while the rich man exhibits that of one who by misuse of his advantages here ruins his happiness hereafter. Attempts have been made to connect these two parables with the three which precede, and also with the three which follow. A connexion in fact with what precedes cannot be established. There is no clear intimation of a break, but there is intimation of a fresh start, which may or may not be upon the same occasion. But in thought a connexion may be admitted. These two parables, like the previous three, are directed against special faults of the Pharisees. The former three combated their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others. These two combat their self-indulgence. It is still harder to establish a connexion in fact between these two and the three which follow; but Edersheim thinks that the thought which binds all five together is righteousness. The five run thus: the Unrighteous Steward, the Unrighteous Owner (Dives), and the Unrighteous Judge; the Self-righteous Pharisee and the Self-righteous Servant (L. &T. 2. p. 264). Milligan gives a somewhat similar grouping (Expositor, August, 1892, p. 114). 1-8. § The Parable of the Unrighteous Steward. The difficulty of this parable is well known, and the variety of interpretations is very great. A catalogue of even the chief suggestions would serve no useful purpose: it is sufficient to state that the steward has been supposed to mean the Jewish hierarchy, the tax-collectors, Pilate, Judas, Satan, penitents, S. Paul, Christ. Here again, therefore, we have absolutely contradictory interpretations (see on 14:33). But the difficulty and consequent diversity of interpretation are for the most part the result of mistaken attempts to make the details of the parable mean something definite. Our Lord Himself gives the key to the meaning (ver. 9), and we need, not go beyond the point to which His words plainly carry us. The steward, however wanting in fidelity and care, showed great prudence in the use which he made of present opportunities as a means of providing for the future. The believer ought to exhibit similar prudence in using material advantages in this life as a means of providing for the life to come. If Christians were as sagacious and persevering in using wealth to promote their welfare in the next world, as worldly men are in using it to promote their interests here, the Kingdom of God would be more flourishing than it is. We may put aside all the details of the parable as mere setting. Every parable contains details which are not intended to convey any lesson, although necessary to complete the picture, or to impress it upon the memory. In this parable the proportion of such details is larger than in others. It should, however, be noticed that the steward provides for his future by means of goods which are not his own, but are merely entrusted to his care. The wealth out of which the Christian lays up treasure in heaven is in like manner not his own, but is held in trust. The method of the parable is very similar to that in the parable of the Unrighteous Judge (18:2). In both we have an argument à fortiori. In that case the argument is, If an unrighteous judge will yield to the importunity of a stranger, how much more will a righteous and loving Father listen to the earnest prayers of His own children? Here the argument is, If an unrighteous steward was commended by his earthly master for his prudence in providing for his future by a fraudulent use of what had been committed to him, how much more will a righteous servant be commended by his heavenly Master for providing for eternity by a good use of what has been committed to him? But see the explanation given by Latham in Pastor Pastorum, pp. 386-398. The literature on the subject is voluminous and unrepaying. For all that is earlier than 1800 see Schreiber, Historico-critica explanationum parabolæ de improbo œ con. descriptio, Lips, 1803. For 1800-1879 see Meyer-Weiss, p. 515, or Meyer, Eng. tr. p. 209. 1. Ἔλεγενδὲκαὶπρὸͅτοὺͅμαθητᾴ . For ἔλεγενδέ of a new start in the narrative see 18:1. The meaning of the καί is that at this time He also said what follows, and it was addressed to the disciples. The latter would include many more than the Twelve. Note both δὲκαί (15:28, 32) and πρόͅ . Ἄνθρωπόͅτιͅἦνπλούσιοͅ . The rich owner is almost as variously interpreted as the steward. The commonest explanation is God; but the Romans, Mammon, and Satan have also been suggested. Grave objections may be urged against all of these interpretations. It is more likely that the owner has no special meaning. We are probably to understand that he lived in the town while the steward managed the estate. Note the τιͅ . οἰκονόμον . Here he is a superior person to the one mentioned 11:42. There the steward is a slave or freedman, left in charge of other slaves, corresponding on the whole to the Roman dispensator or villicus. Here be is a freeman, having the entire management of the estate, a procurator. Comp. Si mandandum aliquid procuratori de agriculturâ aut imperandum villico est (Cic. De Orat. i. 58, 249). But the Procurator was often a slave, and perhaps in some cases was not superior to the dispensator or the villicus. See D. of Ant.3 pp. 496, 957. Vulg. has villicus here and dispensator 12:42 (where see note) and arcarius Romans 16:23. διεβλήθηαὐτῷ . This use of διαβάλλειν of hostile information presumably true is not common in class. Grk. It probably implies accusing behind a person’ s back (Daniel 3:8, Daniel 6:24 (Theod.); 2 Mal 3:11; Mal_4 Malachi 4:1; Hdt. 8:110.; Thuc. iii. 4. 4); but ἐνδιαβάλλειν is used Numbers 22:22 of mere hostility. Eusebius (perhaps quoting Papias) says of the woman, who may be identical with the woman taken in adultery, διαβληθείσῃἐπὶτοῦκυρίου (H. E. iii 39, 16). Vulg. here has diffamatus est; Beza, delatus est; Luther, der ward berü chtiget. The ᾡ by no means implies that the charge was false (James 2:9), but is in accordance with the best authors, who use it after κατηγορεῖν as well as after διαβάλλειν . The steward does not deny the charge. ᾡδιασκορπίζων . Not quasi dissipasset (Vulg.), “ that he had wasted” (AV.); but “ as wasting” or “ as a waster of” For τὰὑπάρχοντααὐτοῦ see on 8:3. The epithet τὸνοἰκονόμοντῇἀδικίᾳ (ver. 8) does not refer to this culpable neglect and extravagance, but to the fraudulent arrangement with the creditors. Nevertheless there is no hint that his fraud was a new departure. 2. φωνήσᾳαὐτὸν . For φωνεῖν of summoning by a message comp. 19:15; John 9:18, John 9:24, John 9:11:28. τίτοῦτοἀκούωπερὶσοῦ ; No emphasis on σοῦ , as if it meant “ of thee among all people.” The question is taken in three ways. What? do I hear this of thee?” 2. “ What is this that I hear of thee?” (RV.) 3. “ Why do I hear this of thee?” Acts 14:15, where τίταῦταποιεῖτε ; means, “ Why do ye these things?” is in favour of the last. See Blass on Acts 14:15. ἀπόδοͅτὸνλόγον . “ Render the (necessary) account.” This is commonly understood of the final account, to prepare for the surrender of the stewardship. But it might mean the account to see whether the charge was true; and the use elsewhere in N.T. rather points to this (Matthew 12:36; Acts 19:40; Romans 14:12; Hebrews 13:17; 1 Peter 4:5). In that case the thought to be supplied is, “ a steward who cannot disprove charges of this kind is an impossibility.” The steward, knowing that he cannot disprove the charges, regards this demand for a reckoning as equivalent to dismissal. With the originally Ionic form δύνῃ (א B D P) contrast φάγεσει and πίεσαι (17:8). 3. εἶπενἐνἑαυτῷ . Not then and there, but when he thought the matter over afterwards. Comp: 7:39, 18:4; Matthew 9:3 Note the pres. ἀφαιρεῖται , “ is taking away,” i.e. what he is doing amounts to that. He does not say, “ has taken away.” σκάπτεινοὐκἰσχύω . “ I have not strength to dig.” Comp. σκάπτεινγὰροὐκἐπίσταμαι (Aristoph. Aves, 1432). Only here and 18:35 does ἐπαιτεῖν occur in N.T. Comp. Psalms 108:10; Ecclus. 40:28. It means “ to ask again and again, ask importunately,” and so “ to beg for alms.” Soph. O.C. 1364. Comp. προσαιτεῖν , John 9:8. 4. ἔγνων . The asyndeton and the aor. express the suddenness of the idea: subito consilium cepit (Beng.). This aor. is sometimes called aoristus tragicus. Burton., § 45. The subject of δειξωνται is the debtors mentioned afterwards. See Blass on Acts 13:22. 5. χρεοφιλετῶν . Comp. 7:41; Proverbs 29:13; Job 31:37. They paid in kind, and the steward had sometimes received more from them than he had put down in the accounts. This time he makes the amount paid agree with the amount entered by reducing the amount paid. He thus curries favour with the debtors, and to some extent lessens the number of his manifest defalcations. The covenants were kept by the steward; and he now hands to each debtor his written agreement,— Δέξαισουτὰγράμματα ,— in order that the debtor may reduce the amount which he covenanted to pay. The debtor gained on this last payment. The steward gained on the previous payments. 6. βάτουͅ . Here only in N.T. Comp. Aq. Sym. Theod. Is. v. 10 , and Jos. Ant. Viii. 2, 9. The bath was for liquids what the ephah was for solids. It equalled about 83/4 gallons, being the μετρητῄ of John 2:6; and 100 bath of oil would probably be worth about £ 10. See Edersh. Hist. of J. N. p. 283, ed. 1896. For καθίσᾳ see on 14:28. 7. κόρουͅ . Here only in N. T. Comp. Leviticus 27:16; Numbers 11:32; Ezekiel 45:13: Jos. Ant. XV. 9, 2. The cor or homer = 10 ephahs = 30 seahs or σάτα (13:21; Matthew 13:33). It equalled about 10 bushels, and 100 cor of wheat would be worth £ 100 to £ 120. But there is very great uncertainty about the Hebrew measures, for data are vague and not always consistent. We are to understand that there were other debtors with whom the steward dealt in a similar manner; but these suffice as examples. The steward suits his terms to the individual in each case, and thus his arbitrary and unscrupulous dealing with his master’ s property is exhibited. See Schanz, ad loc. Syr-Sin. omits “ Take thy bill.” Both βάτοͅ and κόροͅ are instances of Hebrew words which have, assumed regular Greek terminations. See Kennedy, Sources of N.T. Grk. p. 44. 8. τὸνοἰκονόμοντῇἀδικίᾳ . These words are to be taken together, as τοῦμαμωνᾶτῇἀδικίᾳ shows. In both cases we have a characterizing genitive. Comp. κριτῂτῇἀδικίᾳ (18:6). Win. 30:9. b, p. 254, 34:3. b, p. 297; Green, p. 90. It is grammatically possible to take τῇἀδικίᾳ after ἐπῄνεσεν (4 Malachi 1:10, Malachi 4:4); but in that case ὄτιφρονίμῳἐποίησεν would be very in congruous. φρονίμῳ . “ Prudently, intelligently,” with a shrewd adjustment of means to ends. It is the man’ s prompt savoir faire that is praised. Wic. has “ prudently” from prudenter (Vulg.); but all other English Versions have “ wisely.” Some have erroneously concluded from this that the scrutiny of the accounts ended favourably for the steward; others that, although he did not escape detection, yet he was allowed to remain steward for his shrewdness. The original charge was not disproved, and the steward was dismissed. His master saw that in spite of this he had found friends and a home, and for this commended him. Comp. Syr. Eho, quæ so, laudas qui heros fallunt? Chr. In locoego vero laudo. Recte sane. Ter. Heaut. iii. 2, 26. The adv. occurs here, only in N.T., but φρόνιμοͅ is common (12:42; Matthew 7:24, Matthew 10:16, Matthew 24:45, etc.). ὅτιοἱυἱοὶτοῦαἰῶνοͅτούτου . “ He was justified in praising his shrewdness, because” ; or, “ I cite this example of shrewdness, because.” This is the moral of the whole parable. Men of the world in their dealings with men like themselves are more prudent than the children of light are in their intercourse with one another. Worldly people are very farsighted and ready in their transactions with one another for temporal objects. The spiritually minded ought to be equally ready in making one another promote heavenly objects. “ The sons of this world” occurs only here and 20:34; but comp. Acts 4:36; Mark 2:19. φρονιμώτεροιὑπέρ . For this use of ὑπέρ comp. Hebrews 4:12; Judges 11:25; 1 Kings 19:4; Ecclus. 30:17; also παρά , 3:13. τοὺͅυἱοὺͅτοῦφωτόͅ . We have υἱοὶφωτόͅ , John 12:36; 1 Thessalonians 5:5; and τέκναφωτόͅ , Ephesians 5:8; comp. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Is the expression found earlier than N.T.? Comp. 1:78, 2:32; and see Lft. Epp. p. 74. Comp. also Enoch cviii. 11; Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 163. εἰͅτὴνγενεὰντὴνἑαυτῶν . Not, “ in their generation,” but, “ towards their own generation” ; erga idem sentientes; im Verkehr mit thres Gleichen. The clause belongs to both of οἱυἱοὶτ . αἰῶνοͅτούτου and τοὺͅυἱοὺͅΤ .φωτόͅ , not to the former only. The steward knew the men with whom he had to deal: they would see that it was to their own interest to serve him. The sons of light ought to be equally on the alert to make use of opportunities. Vulg. has in generatione sua; but Cod. Palat. reads in sæ culum istut, which respects the εἰͅ , while it misrepresents ἑαυτῶν . 9-14. Comments respecting the Parable and its Application, which are still addressed to the disciples. To prevent possible misunderstanding owing to the commendation of a dishonest servant, Christ here insists upon the necessity of fidelity in dealing with worldly possessions. He shows clearly that it is not the dishonesty of the steward which is commended as an example, but his prudence in using present opportunities as a means of providing for the future. 9. καὶἐγὼὑμῖνλέγω . “ And I say to you,” or “ I also say to you” ; balancing what the master said to the steward. The disciples ought to earn similar commendation in spiritual matters. Here, as in 2:48 and Acts 10:26, the correct reading seems to be καὶεγώ ; but almost everywhere else κἀγώ is right (11:9, 19:23, 20:3, 22:29, etc.). So also κἀμοί and κἀμέ rather than καὶἐμοί and καὶἐμέ . Greg. Proleg. p. 96. ἑαυτοῖͅποιήσατεφίλουͅ . The pronoun stands first with emphasis. “ In your own interest make friends.” The friends are those in need, who are succoured by the benevolent use of wealth, and show their gratitude by blessing their benefactors and praying for them. The poor are the representatives of Christ (Matthew 25:40), and it is well worth while having them as friends. Comp. 1 Timothy 6:10. Mammon is not personified here as it is in ver. 13, Comp. μὴἔπεχεἐπὶχρήμασινἀδίκοιͅ (Ecclus. 5:8). The word appears to mean “ that which is trusted in.” Lucrum Punice mammon dicitur (Aug. De Serm. Dom. in Monte, ii. 14. 47). But although found in Punic it is of Syrian origin and was in use in the Targums. The expression occurs in the Book of Enoch: “ Our souls are satisfied with the mammon of unrighteousness, but this does not prevent us from descending into the flame of the pain of Sheol” (lxiii. 10). There are rabbinical sayings which are akin to what Jesus here says: e.g. that “ alms are the salt of riches,” and that “ the rich help the poor in this world, but the poor help the rich in the world to come.” See Schœ ttg. 1. p. 299; Herzog, Pro_2 art. Mammon. The spelling μαμμωνᾷ , with double μ , is not correct. ἵναὅτανἐκλίτῃδέξωνταιἡμᾷ . Here, as in 14:10, the ἵνα , if it expresses purpose and not result, refers to Christ’ s purpose in giving this advice rather than to that of the disciples in following it. “ When it shall fail” means when the wealth shall have come to an end. The subject of ἐκλίπῃ is ὁμαμωνᾷ . The reading ἐκλίπητε or ἐκλείπητε would mean “ when ye die” (Genesis 15:8, 49:33; Psalms 104:29; Jer_42.(49.) 17, 22; Tobit 14:11; Wisd. 5:13). In either case the verb is intrans. No acc. is to be understood. Comp. Ps. Sol. 3:16, 17:5. The evidence although somewhat confused, is quite decisive for the sing, ἐκλίπῃ or ἐκλείπῃ (א A B * D L R ΞΠ etc., Syr. Boh. Arm. Aeth.) as against the plur. ἐκλίπητε or ἐκλείπητε (F R U G ΔΛ ; etc. etc., Vulg. Goth.) Wordsw. is almost alone in defending ἐκλίπητε . Sadler represents the choice on between “ Ye fail” and “ they fail.” δέξωνται . This may be impersonal, like αἰτοῦσιν in 12:20. But possibly the φίλοι are to be understood as procuring the reception qui eos introducant in tabernacula æ terna, qui necessitatibus suis terrena bona communicaverint (Aug. Quæ st. Evang. ii. 34); or again, as giving them a welcome when they enter. Comp. the use of δέχεσθαι 9:5, 48; John 4:45. εἰͅτᾲαἰωνίουͅσκηνᾴ . The emphasis is on αἰωνίουͅ , “ into the eternal tabernacles,” in contrast to the uncertain and transitory houses of the debtors (ver. 4). The steward secured a home for a time; but a wise use of opportunities may secure a home for eternity. In 5 Ezra 2:11 God is represented as promising to Israel, dabo eis tabernacula æ terna, quæ præ paraveram illis (Fritzsche, p. 643). Some such idea Peter seems to have had in his mind at the Transfiguration (9:33). The combination of “ eternal” with “ tabernacles” is remarkable, because σκηναί is commonly used of dwellings which are very temporary. 10. We have here a general principle which is capable of application in a variety of spheres. The reference to the parable is less direct than in ver. 9. ἐνἐλαχίστῳ . “ In very little” rather than “ in that which is least.” Comp. 19:17. We find in Irenæ us, Si in modico fideles non fuistis, quod magnum est quis dabit vobis (2:34, 3), which is probably a loose quotation of Lk. made from memory. In the so-called 2 Ep. Clem Rom we have a similarly fused citation: εἰτὸμικρὸνοὐκἐτηρήσατε , τὸμέγατίͅὑμῖνδώσει ; λέγωγὰρὑμῖνὄτιὁπιστὸͅἐνἐλαχίστῳκαὶἐνπολλῷπιστόͅἐστιν (8.), which some suppose to have come from an apocryphal gospel, and others to be the source used by Irenæ us. Comp. Hippol. Hæ r. 10:29, ἵναἐπὶτῷμικρῷπιστὸͅεὑρεθεὶͅκαὶτὸμέγαπιστευθῆναιδυνηθῇͅ . All three are probably reminiscences of Lk. Comp. Matthew 25:21, Matthew 25:23. 11. τῷἀδίκῳμαμωνᾷ . Obviously this means the same as the μαμωνᾶτῇἀδικίᾳ , i.e. the wealth which is commonly a snare and tends to promote unrighteousness. Some, however, make τῷἀδίκῳ balance τὸἀληθινόν , and force ἄδικοͅ to mean “ deceitful.” and so “ false” wealth, which is impossible. τὸἀληθινόν . That which is a real possession, genuine wealth. We are not to supply μαμωνᾶ , which is masc. Heavenly riches would not be called “ mammon.” It is clear that this is parallel to πολλῷ in ver. 10, as ἀδίκῳμαμωνᾷ to ἐλαχίστῳ , and that this genuine wealth means much the same as the “ ten cities” (19:17). The connexion between πιστοί and πιστεύσει , “ trusty” and is “ entrust,” is perhaps not accidental. Neither Latin nor English Versions preserve it. Cran. has the impossible rendering, “ who wyll beleve you in that whych is true.” 12. ἐντῷἀλλοτρίῳ . Earthly wealth is not only trivial and unreal; it does not belong to us. It is ours only as a loan and a trust, which may be withdrawn at any moment, Heavenly possessions are immense, real, and eternally secure. With οὐκἐγένεσθε , “ ye did not prove to be,” comp. γεγονέναι (10:36). τὸὑμέτεροντίͅδώσειὑμῖν ; “ Who will give you (in the world to come) that which is entirely your own,” your inheritance, “ the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 15:34). The case sketched in these three verses (10-12) is that of a wealthy owner who educates his son for managing the estate to which he is heir, and proves his fitness for it by allowing him to have control of something that is of little value except as an instrument for forming and discerning character. If the son proves faithless in this insignificant charge, he is disinherited. Il y a là une admirable conception du but la vie terrestre et mé me de l’ existence de la matiè e (Godet). It seems to be impossible to make satisfactory sense of the notable reading τὸἠμέτερον , attested by B L and Origen, and to some extent by Tertullian, who has meum (Adv. Marc. iv 33): e i l also have meum, and 157 has ἐμόν . Almost all other witnesses (א A D P R ΞΓΔΛΠ etc., Versions, Cypr. Cyr-Alex. etc.) have τὸὑμέτερον , which, however, would be an inevitable correction, if τὸἡμέτερον were genuine. 13. This verse forms a natural conclusion to the comments on the parable; and, if it was uttered only once, we may believe that this is its original position, rather than in the Sermon on the Mount where it is placed by Mt. (6:24). So Schanz, Weiss. οὐδεὶͅοἰκέτῃδύναταιδυσὶκυρίοιͅδουλεύειν . “ No domestic can be a slave to two masters” : comp. James 4:4. To be a servant to two masters is possible, and is often done. But to be at the absolute disposal of two masters is not possible. The force of δουλεύειν must be preserved, and the special meaning of οἰκέτῃ is also worth noting. ἤἑνὸͅἀνθέξεται . The omission of the article makes very little, difference: “ one or other of the two.” As the second clause is less strong than the first, the ἤ may be understood in the sense of “ or at least he will hold on to” — so as to stand by and support. οὐδύνασθε . It is morally impossible, for each claims undivided service. Mammon is here personified as a deity, devotion to whom is shown in “ covetousness which is idolatry” (Colossians 3:5). No vice is more exacting than avarice. D.C.G. art. “ Covetousness.” 14-18. Introduction to the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. 14. Ἤκουονδὲταῦταπάντα . This shows that the occasion is the same; but the scoffs of the Pharisees diverted Christ’ s words from the disciples (ver. 1) to themselves. Note the πάντα . φιλάργυροιὑπάρχοντεͅ Avarice was their constant characteristic: for the verb see on 8:41 and 23:50. The adj. occurs 2 Timothy 3:2 and nowhere else in bibl. Grk., but is quite classical., 2 Mac 10:20 we have φιλαργυρεῖν . The covetousness of the Pharisees is independently attested, and they regarded their wealth as a special blessing for their carefulness in observing the Law. Hence their contempt for teaching which declared that there is danger in wealth, and that as a rule it promotes unrighteousness. They considered themselves an abiding proof of the connexion between riches and righteousness: moreover, they had their own explanation of the reason why a Rabbi who was poor declaimed against riches. Comp. 20:47. ἐξμυκτήριζον . “ Turned up the nose at” : 23:35; Psalms 2:4, Psalms 34:16. Here deridebant (f), inridebant (a), subsannabant (d). In class. Grk. μυκτηρίζειν is more usual: Galatians 6:7; 2 Kings 19:21; Proverbs 1:30; Isaiah 37:22; Jeremiah 20:7. In medical writers it means “ bleed at the nose.” 15. ἐνώπιοντῶνἀνθρώπων . This is the emphatic part of the statement. The Pharisees succeeded in exhibiting themselves as righteous persons in the judgment of men; but God’ s judgment was very different. Comp. Matthew 6:2, Matthew 6:5, Matthew 6:16, Matthew 6:23:5, Matthew 6:6, Matthew 6:7, Matthew 6:25. ὁδὲθεὸͅγινώσκειτᾲκαρδίᾳ . The use of γινώσκειν , which commonly implies the acquisition of knowledge, rather than εἰδέναι , is remarkable. We find the same word used of Christ,even where the knowledge must have been supernatural (John 2:24, John 2:25, John 2:10:14, 27, John 2:17:25). The exact antithesis would have been, “ but before God ye cannot justify yourselves.” This, however, would have implied that there were no Pharisees who were not hypocrites: that God reads their hearts is true in all cases. Comp. ὁδὲΘεὸͅὄυεταιεἰͅκαρδίαν (1 Samuel 16:7), and again, πάσᾳκαρδίᾳἐτάζεικύριοͅκαὶπᾶνἐνθύμημαγινώσκει (1 Chronicles 28:9). ὅτιτὸἐνἀνθρώποιͅὑψηλόν . We must understand something before ὅτι : “ But God knoweth your hearts [and He seeth not as man seeth], because that which is exalted in the eyes of men,” etc. For this use of ἐν comp. 1 Corinthians 14:11, and perhaps Jude 1:1: it is clear that ἐνἀνθρώποιͅ = ἐνώπιοντῶνἀνθρώπων above. Comp. Job 10:4; 1 Samuel 16:7. βδέλυγμα . Here only in N.T. in the general sense of an abomination: comp. Genesis 43:31, Genesis 44:34. Elsewhere (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14; Revelation 17:4, Revelation 17:5, 21:27) of the special abominations of idolatry: comp. 1 Kings 11:5, 1 Kings 11:33, 1 Kings 11:20:26; 2 Kings 16:3, 2 Kings 21:2. The word belongs to Hellenistic Greek, and is very freq. in LXX. It meant originally that which greatly offends the nostrils, and it is very much in excess of the usual antithesis to ὑψηλόν , viz. ταπεινόν . See Suicer, s.v.; D.C. G. “ Abomination.” 16-18.The discourse has been so greatly condensed that the connecting links have been lost. It is possible that the connexion is something of this kind. “ To be justified before God is all the more necessary now when the Kingdom of God among men is being founded. The Law has been superseded. Its types have been fulfilled, and its exclusiveness is abolished: everyone now can force his way to salvation. But the moral principles of the Law are imperishable: you cannot abolish them. And thus your frequent divorces violate the spirit of the Law.” Others regard ver. 18 as symbolical. “ You and those whom you instruct are wedded to the Divine revelation, and if you desert it for anything else you are guilty of spiritual adultery.” But in that case what meaning can the second clause have? How can anyone commit spiritual adultery by accepting the revelation which the Jews rejected? See on ver. 18 for another attempt at a parabolic interpretation. 16. Ὁνόμοςκαὶοἱπροφῆται . A common expression for the O. T. Dispensation. It may point to a time when the Hebrew Canon consisted only of the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17, Matthew 5:7:12, Matthew 5:12:40; Acts 13:15, Acts 28:23). See Ryle, Canon of O.T. p. 118. μέχριἸωάνου . We supply ἦσαν : “ they existed and had authority until John.” This is the only passage in which μέχρι is found preceding a vowel; else where μέχρις , is used (Mark 13:30; Hebrews 12:4). See on ἄχρι , 1:20. πᾶςεἰςαὐτὴνβιάζεται . “ Every one forces his way into it,” — perhaps not always in the right spirit. See Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 26. The πᾶς is to be noticed: the Jew has no longer any exclusive rights. Here βιάζεται is mid. according to class. usage: in Matthew 11:12 it is pass.— “ the Kingdom of God is forced, taken by storm.” Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 258. 17. Εὐκοπώτερον . See on 5:23. The δέ which follows it is “ But” (RV.), not “ And” (AV.). Many English Versions omit the conjunction. Facilius est autem (Vulg.). κερέαν . Minimæ literæ minius apex, i.e. one of the little horns or minute projections which distinguish Hebrew letters, otherwise similar, from one another. There are several Jewish sayings which declare that anyone who is guilty of interchanging any of these similar letters in certain passages in O.T. will destroy the whole world. Wetst. on Matthew 5:18; Schoettg. 1. p. 29; Edersh. L. &T. 1. pp. 537, 538. For the form κερέα = κεραία comp. 2:13, and see WH. ii. App. p. 151. Marcion read τῶνλόγωνμου , or τῶνλόγωντοῦΚυρίου , instead of τοῦνόμου . The reading has no support; and μίανκερέαν is more applicable to the written law than to the as yet unwritten words of Christ. See Tert. Adv. Marcion. iv. 33, and contrast Luke 21:33. πεσεῖν . “ To fall to the ground” as devoid of authority: comp. Romans 9:6?; 1 Corinthians 13:8. The moral elements in the Law are indestructible, and the Gospel confirms them by giving them a new sanction. 18. Perhaps this introduces an example of the durability of the moral law in spite of human evasions. Adultery remains adultery even when it has been legalized, and legalized by men who jealously guarded every fraction of the letter, while they flagrantly violated the spirit of the Law. “ Because he hath found some unseemly thing in her” (Deuteronomy 24:1), was interpreted with such frivolity, that Hillel is said to have taught that a man might divorce his wife for spoiling the dinner. Comp. Mark 10:11, Mark 10:12 and Matthew 5:32 for other statements of Christ’ s doctrine. Matthew 5:32 states the one exception. It is very forced to take the whole utterance as a parable. “ It is spiritual adultery to cast off all the obligations of the Law; and it is also spiritual adultery to maintain all those obligations which have been rescinded by the Gospel.” But this does not fit the wording; and, if it did, would it have been intelligible to those who heard it? According to this explanation the wife unlawfully put away = those elements in the Law which are eternal; and the divorced wife unlawfully married to another man = those elements of the Law which are obsolete. But in the parable (if it be a parable) we have not two women but one. It is better to take the words literally, and leave me connexion with what precedes undetermined. 19-31. § The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus; in two scenes, one on earth (19-22) and the other in Hades (23-31). It continues the lesson respecting the right employment of earthly possessions. The unjust steward showed what good results may follow from a wise use of present advantages. The rich man shows how disastrous are the consequences of omitting to make a wise use of such things. This second parable illustrates in a marked way some of the utterances which precede it. “ That which is exalted among men” describes the rich man in his luxury on earth. “ An abomination in the sight of God” describes him in his misery in Hades. “ It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the law to fail,” shows that Moses and the Prophets still avail as the teachers of conduct that will lead a man to Abraham’ s bosom rather than to the place of torment. There is no taint of “ Ebionitic heresy” in the narrative. It emphasizes the dangers of wealth; but it nowhere implies the unlawfulness of wealth. (See Milligan, A Group of Parables, in the Expositor for September 1892, p. 186.) It is not suggested that the rich man ought to have renounced his riches, but that he ought not to have found in riches his highest good. He ought to have made his earthly possessions a means of obtaining something much higher and more abiding. Out of this mammon, which in his case was unrighteous mammon, he might have made Lazarus and others his “ friends,” and have secured through them eternal tabernacles. His riches were “ his good things,” the only good things that he knew; and when he lost them he lost everything. “ What doth it profit a man, to gain the whole world, and forfeit his life?” There is no reason for supposing that the second half of the parable is a later addition, or that it is the only part which has a meaning. It is when both are combined that we get the main lesson,— that to possess great wealth and use it solely for oneself, without laying up treasure in heaven, is fatal. The parable is sometimes understood quite otherwise. Lazarus is the Jewish people, ill-treated by earthly powers, such the Romans and their underlings; and Dives and his five brothers are the Herods: (1) Herod the Great, (2) Archelaus, (3) Philip, (4) Antipas, (5) Agrippa 1., (6) Agrippa 2. Father, sons, and grandsons are thus all put together as brothers for simplification. It is a natural consequence of such an interpretation as this that the parable is assumed to be the invention of a later age, and to have been wrongly attributed to Christ. It is difficult to believe that He could have wished to suggest any such meaning.1 Moreover, this interpretation destroys the connexion with the context. 19. Ἄνθρωποςδέτιςἦνπλούσιος . “ Now a certain man was rich” is less probable than “ Now, there was a certain rich man” : comp. ver. 1, 13:11. Note the τις . πορφύρανκαὶβύσσον . The former for the upper garment, the latter for the under. Both were very costly. The former means first the murex, secondly the dye made from it (1 Mac. 4:23), and then the fabric dyed with it (Mark 15:17, Mark 15:20). Similarly, βύσσος is first Egyptian flax, and then the fine linen made from it (Exodus 26:1, Exodus 26:31, Exodus 26:36; Ezekiel 16:10, Ezekiel 27:7). The two words are combined Proverbs 31:22: comp. Revelation 18:12, Revelation 18:16. For εὐφραινόμενος comp. 12:19, 15:23, 29: λαμπρῶς occurs nowhere else in bibl. Grk. 20. ὀνόματιΛάζαρος . For ὀνόματι see on 5:27: the expression is freq. in Lk. Nowhere else does Christ give a name to any character in a parable. That this signifies that the name was “ written in heaven,” while that of the rich man was not, is farfetched. Tertullian urges the name as proof that the narrative is not a parable but history, and that the scene in Hades involves his doctrine that the soul is corporeal (De Animâ , 7.).2 It is possible that the name is a later addition to the parable, to connect it with Lazarus of Bethany. He was one who “ went to them from the dead,” and still they did not repent. As he was raised from the dead just about this time, so far as we can determine the chronology, there may be a reference to him. But it is more probable that the name suggests the helplessness of the beggar; and some name was needed (ver. 24). Tradition has given the name Nineuis to the rich man. The theory that the story of the raising of Lazarus has grown out of this parable is altogether arbitrary. ἐβέβλητοπρὸςτὸνπυλῶνααὐτοῦ . Not “ had been flung at his gate,” as if contemptuous roughness were implied. In late Greek βάλλειν often loses the notion of violence, and means simply ‘ lay, place” : 5:37; John 5:7, John 5:7:6, John 5:18:11, John 5:20:25, John 5:27, John 5:21:6; James 3:3; Numbers 22:38. By πυλῶνα is meant a large gateway or portico, whether part of the house or not (Acts 10:17, Acts 10:12:14; Matthew 26:71; 2 Chronicles 3:7; Zephaniah 2:14). It indicates the grandeur of the house. εἱλκωμένος . The verb occurs here only in bibl. Grk., but is common in medical writers, especially in the pass., “ be ulcerated.” The irregular augment, instead of the usual ἡλκωμένος , is well attested here, and perhaps arose from analogy with ἔλκω . Comp. κατειργάσατο (Romans 15:18). WH. ii. App. p. 161; Greg. Proleg. p. 121. Syr-Sin. omits. 21. ἐπιθυμῶνχορτασθῆναι . This does not imply (Iren. ii. 34, 1) that his desire was not gratified. His being allowed to remain there daily, and his caring to remain there daily, rather indicates that he did get the broken meat. He shared with the dogs (Mark 7:28). But perhaps it does imply that what was given to him did not satisfy his hunger. Some authorities insert from 15:16 καὶοὐδεὶςἐδίδουαὐτῷ et nemo illi dabat, which even as a gloss seems to be false. The silence of Lazarus throughout the parable is very im pressive. He never murmurs against God’ s distribution of wealth, nor against the rich man’ s abuse of it, in this world. And in Hades he neither exults over the change of relations between himself and Dives, nor protests against being asked to wait upon him in the place of torment, or to go errands for him to the visible world. ἀλλὰκαὶοἱκύνες . “ Nay, even the dogs.” This shows his want and his helplessness. Not only was his hunger unsatisfied, but even the dogs came and increased his misery. He was scantily clad, and his sores were not bound up; and he was unable to drive away the unclean dogs when they came to lick them. The suggestion that the dogs were kinder to him than the rich man was, is probably not intended; although the main point of vv. 20, 21 is to continue the description of Dives rather than to make a contrast to him. Here was a constant opportunity of making a good use of his wealth, and he did not avail himself of it. ἐπέλειχον . “ Licked the surface of.” Here only in bibl. Greek. The reading ἀπέλειχον has very little authority. For ἀλλὰκαί comp. 12:7, 24:22. 22. This verse serves to connect the two scenes of the parable. The reversal of the positions of the two men is perhaps intimated in the fact that Lazarus dies first. The opportunity of doing good to him was lost before the rich man died, but the loss was not noticed. ἀπενεχθῆναιαὐτόν . . “ His soul was carried,” a loco alieno in patriam. Clearly we are not to understand that what never happened to anyone before happened to him, and that body and soul were both translated to Hades. In saying that he died the severance of soul and body is implied. And the fact that his burial is not mentioned is no proof that it is not to be understood Jesus would scarcely have shocked Jewish feeling by the revolting idea that close to human habitations a corpse was left unburied, In each case the feature which specially characterized the death is mentioned. See Aug. De Civ. Dei, xxi. 10, 2. ὑπὸτῶνἀγγέλων . The transition was painless and happy. A Targum on Cantic. iv. 12 says that the souls of the righteous are carried to paradise by Angels. Comp. the λειτουργικὰπνεύματα of Hebrews 1:14 and the ἄγγελοιλειτουργοί of Philo. But it is no purpose of the parable to give information about the unseen world. The general principle is maintained that bliss and misery after death are determined by conduct previous to death; but the details of the picture are taken from Jewish beliefs as to the condition of souls in Sheol, and must not be understood as confirming those beliefs. The properties of bodies are attributed to souls in order to enable us to realize the picture. εἰςτὸνκόλπονἈβραάμ . This is not the objective genitive, “ the bosom which contained Abraham,” but the subjective, “ that in which Abraham received Lazarus.” Comp. Matthew 8:11. Lazarus in Sheol reposes with his head on Abraham’ s breast, as a child in his father’ s lap, and shares his happiness. Comp. John 1:18. The expression is not common in Jewish writings; but Abraham is sometimes represented as welcoming the penitent into paradise. Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 280. Comp. οὕτωγὰρπαθόντας ἡμᾶςἈβραὰμκαὶἸσαὰκἀκὼβὑποδέξονται (4 Mac 13:17). Such expressions as “ go to one’ s fathers” (Genesis 15:15), “ lie with one’ s fathers” (Genesis 47:30), “ be gathered to one’ s fathers” (Judges 2:10), and “ sleep with one’ s fathers” (1 Kings 1:21), apply to death only, and contain no clue as to the bliss or misery of the departed. “ Abraham’ s bosom” does contain this. It is not a synonym for paradise; but to repose on Abraham’ s bosom is to be in paradise, for Abraham is there (John 8:56: Diptychs of the Dead in the Liturgy of S. James). καὶἐτάφη . It is not the contrast between the magnificence of his funeral (of which nothing is stated) and the lack of funeral for Lazarus (of which nothing is stated) that is to be marked, but the contrast between mere burial in the one case and the ministration of Angels in the other. Some authorities seem to have omitted the καί before ἐντῷᾄδῃ and to have joined these words with ἐτάφη . Vulg. has et sepultus est in inferno: elevans autem oculos suos. Aug. has both arrangements. Comp. John 13:30, John 13:31 for a similar improbable shifting of a full stop in some texts. Other examples Greg. Proleg. p. 181. 23. καὶἐντῷᾅδῃ . “ In Hades,” the receptacle of all the departed until the time of final judgment, and including both paradise and Gehenna. That Hades does not mean “ hell” as a place of punishment is manifest from Acts 2:27, Acts 2:31; Genesis 37:35, 42:38, 44:29; Job 14:13, Job 17:13, etc. That Hades includes a place of punishment is equally clear from this passage. In the Psalms of Solomon Hades is mentioned only in connexion with the idea of punishment (14:6, 15:11, 16:2). See Suicer, s.v. The distinction between Hades and Gehenna is one of the many great advantages of RV. Dives “ lifts up his eyes,” not to look for help, but to learn the nature of his changed condition. ὑπάρχωνἐνβασάνοις . Torment is now his habitual condition: not ὤν , but ὑπάρχων . That he is punished for his heartless neglect of great opportunities of benevolence, and not simply for being rich, is clear from the position of Abraham, who was rich. Comp. μέγαςγὰρψυχῆςἀγὼνκαὶκίνδυνοςἐναἰωνίῳβασάνῳκείμενοςτοῖςπαραβᾶσιτὴνἐντολὴντοῦΘεοῦ (4 Mac. 13:15); and contrast δικαίωνδὲψυχαὶἐνχειρὶΘεοῦ , καὶοὐμὴἅψηταιαὐτῶνβάσανος (Wisd. 3:1). Luxurioso carere deliciis poena est (Ambr). ὁρᾷἈβραάμ . The Jews believed that Gehenna and paradise are close to one another: Edersh. Hist. of Jewish Nation, p. 432 ed. 1896. We need not suppose that the parable teaches us to believe this. The details of the picture cannot be insisted upon. ἀπὸμακρόθεν . The ἀπό is pleonastic, and marks a, late use, when the force of the adverbial termination has become weakened: Matthew 27:51; Mark 5:6, Mark 14:54, Mark 15:40, etc. In LXX we have ἀπὸὄπισθεν (freq. in 1 and 2 Sam.), ἀπὸἐπάνωθεν , ἀπὸπρωΐθεν : and in Aq. ἀπὸἀρχῆθεν and ἀπὸκυκλόθεν . With κόλποις comp. ἱμάτια of a single garment (Acts 18:6; John 13:4, John 19:23) and γάμοι of a single wedding (12:36). We have similar plurals in late class. Grk. 24. ΠάτερἈβραάμ . He appeals to their relationship, and to his fatherly compassion. Will not Abraham take pity on one of his own sons? Comp. John 8:53. Note the characteristic καὶαὐτός (see on 1:17, 5:14). The φωνήσας implies raising his voice, in harmony with ἀπὸμακρόθεν . πέμψονΛάζαπον . Not that he assumes that Lazarus is at his beck and call, although Lange thinks that this is “ the finest masterstroke of the parable” that Dives unconsciously retains his arrogant attitude towards Lazarus. See also his strange explanation of the finger-drop of water (L of C. i. p. 507). On earth Dives was not arrogant; he did not drive Lazarue from his gate; but neglectful. In Hades he is so humbled by his pain that he is willing to receive alleviation from anyone, even Lazarus. ἵναβάψῃτὸἄκροντοῦδακτύλουαὐτοῦὕδατος . The smallest alleviation will be welcome. On earth no enjoyment was too extravagant: now the most trifling is worth imploring. With the part. gen. ὕδατος comp. βάψειτὸνδάκτυλοντὸνδεξιὸνἀπὸτοῦἐλαίου (Leviticus 14:16). To understand τι and make ὔδατόςτι nom. to βάψη is an improbable constr. See win. xxx. 8. c, p. 252. ὀδυνῶμαιἐντῇφλογὶταύτῃ . “ I am in anguish in this flame” of insatiable desires and of remorse: a prelude to the γέεννατοῦπυρός (Matthew 5:22). For ὀδυνῶμαι see on 2:48. 25. Τέκνον . He does not resent the appeal to relationship: the refusal is as gentle as it is decided. The rich man cannot fail to see the reasonableness of what he experiences. ἀπέλαβες . “ Thou didst receive in full.” This seems to be the meaning of the ἀπο -. Nothing was stored up for the future: Comp. ἀπέχειν , 6:24; Matthew 6:2, Matthew 6:5, Matthew 6:16. Note the μνήσθητι . It is only in the mythological Hades that there is a river of Lethe, drowning the memory of the past. See second small print, p. 425. τὰἀγαθάσου . Herein also was fatal error. He had no idea of any other good things, and he kept these to himself. καὶΛάζαροςὁμοίωςτὰκακά . There is no αὐτοῦ . His evil things were not his own, but he accepted them as from God, while the rich man took his good things as possessions for which he had no account to render. Comp. vv. 11, 12. νῦνδὲὧδε . Contrast of time and place: “ But now here.” The ὁδὲ of TR. has scarcely any authority. The same corruption is found 1 Corinthians 4:2. Comp. οὐκἔστινἐνᾅδουζητῆσαιτρυφήν (Ecclus. 14:16). There is, however, no hint that during their lives Dives had been sufficiently rewarded for any good that he had done, and Lazarus sufficiently punished for any evil that he had done. And there is also no justification of the doctrine that to each man is allotted so much pleasure and so much pain; and that those who have their full allowance of pleasure in this world cannot have any in the world to come. Abraham’ s reply must be considered in close relation to the rich man’ s request. Dives had not asked to be freed from his punishment. He accepted that as just. He had asked for a slight alleviation, and in a way which involved an interruption of the bliss of Lazarus. Abraham replies that to interfere with the lot of either is both unreasonable and impossible. Dives had unbroken luxury, and Lazarus unbroken suffering, in the other world. There can be no break in the pangs of Dives, or in the bliss of Lazarus, now. Apoc. Baruch, lxxv. 9. ὀδυνᾶσαι . An intermediate form between ὀδυνάεσαι and ὀδυνᾷ . Such things belong to the popular Greek of the time. Comp. καυχᾶσαι (Romans 2:17; 1 Corinthians 4:7), κατακαυχᾶσαι (Romans 11:18), and see on φάγεσαι and πίεσαι (Luke 17:8). See Expos. Times, viii. p. 239. 26. ἐνπᾶσιτούτοις . In his omnibus (Vulg.). The ἐπί (A, etc.) for ἐν (א B L) is a manifest correction. While ver. 25 shows that on equitable grounds no alleviation of the lot of Dives is admissible, ver. 26 shows that the particular kind of alleviation asked for is impossible. Can it mean, “ In all these regions, from end to end” ? χάσμαμέγαἐστήρικται . “ Has been and remains fixed.” Evidence is lacking to show that the Jews pictured the two parts of Hades as divided by a chasm. Here only in bibl. Grk. is χάσμα found: not Numbers 16:30. Chaos magnum firmatum est (Vulg. f), chaus magnum confirmatus est (d), chaos magnus firmatus est (1). For this use of chaos comp. Posita est mihi regia cæ lo: Possidet alter aquas, alter inane chaos (Ovid, Fast. iv. 599). Bentley conjectured chasma, the ma having been lost in magnum and chas expanded into chaos. This conjecture finds support in two MSS. of Vulg., M having chasma and Y chasmagnum. Jerome would be likely to correct chaos into chasma. ὅπως … μὴδύωνται . Not, “ so that they cannot” (AV.); but, “ in order that they may not be able.” μηδέ . “ Nor yet” : this would be still less permissible. The οἱ before ἐκεῖθεν is probably not genuine, but we may understand a new subject. Groups from each side are supposed to contemplate crossing; not one group to cross and recross. 27. But perhaps there is no χάσμα between paradise and the other world; and Dives makes another request, which, if less selfish than the first, is also less humble. It implies that he has scarcely had a fair chance. If God had warned him sufficiently, he would have escaped this place of torment. 28. διαμαρτύρηταιαὐτοῖς . “ May bear witness successfully,” right through to a good issue. But the δια - need not mean more than “ thoroughly, earnestly” (Acts 2:40, Acts 2:8:25, Acts 2:10:42, Acts 2:18:5, Acts 2:20:21, Acts 2:23, Acts 2:24, Acts 2:23:11, Acts 2:28:23). Elsewhere in N. T. only five times, but freq. in LXX. That any five persons then living, whether Herods, or sons of Annas, or among the audience, are here alluded to, is most improbable. That the request is meant to illustrate the Pharisees’ craving for signs is more possible: and the lesson that the desire to warn others from vicious courses may come too late is perhaps also included. But the simplest explanation of the request is that it prepares the way for the moral of the parable,— the duty of making use of existing opportunities. 29. ἀκουσάτωσαναὐτῶν . Nemo cogitur. Auditu fideli salvamur, non apparitionibus. Herodes, audire non cupiens, miraculum non cernit (Beng.). Wonders may impress a worldly mind for the moment; but only a will freely submitting itself to moral control can avail to change the heart. 30. Οὐχί , πάτερἈβραάμ . Not, “ No, they will not repent for Moses and the Prophets,” which Abraham has not asserted; but, “ No, that is not enough.” He speaks from his own experience. It is better to take ἀπὸνεκρῶν with πορευθῇ than with τις . Vulg. is as amphibolous as the Greek: si quis ex mortuis ierit ad eos. See on 1:8. μετανοήσουσιν . “ They will repent.” Not, “ they will give all to the poor,” or “ they will leave all and become as Lazarus.” There is no hint that being rich is sinful, or that the poor are sure of salvation. In ver. 28 he did not say that wealth had ruined himself. 31. Εἰ … οὐκἀκούουσιν . “ If, as matters now stand, they are refusing to hear.” We go beyond the tenour of the reply when we make it mean that “ a far mightier miracle than you demand would be ineffectual for producing a far slighter effect.” Does ἐκνεκρῶνἀναστῆ imply “ a far mightier miracle” than ἀπὸνεκρῶνπορευθῇ And does πεισθήσονται imply “ a far slighter effect” than μετανοήσουσιν “ Persuaded” obviously means “ persuaded to repent” ; and one who “ goes from the dead” to warn the living must “ rise from the dead.” By this conclusion Christ once more rebukes the demand for a sign. Those who ask for it have all that they need for the ascertainment of the truth; and the sign if granted would not produce conviction. Saul was not led to repentance when he saw Samuel at Endor, nor were the Pharisees when they saw Lazarus come forth from the tomb. The Pharisees tried to put Lazarus to death and to explain away the resurrection of Jesus. For allegorical interpretations of the parable see Trench, Parables, p. 470, 10th Exo_1 In οὐκἀκούουσιν the negative belongs to the verb so as almost to form one word, and is not influenced by the εἰ : “ If they disregard.” Comp. 11:8, 12:26, 18:4. The pres. indic. represents the supposition as contemporaneous. Note the change from εἰ with pres. indic. to ἐάν with aor. subjunc. The latter is pure hypothesis. The Idea of Hades or Sheol in the Old Testament It is surprising how very little advance there is in O.T., respecting conceptions of the unseen world, upon Greek mythology. It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that, until about b.c. 200, the Jewish Sheol is essentially the same in conception as the Hades of Greek poetry. There are no moral or spiritual distinctions in it. Good and bad alike are there, and are apparently much in the same condition. Moreover, there is no thought of either of them rising again. In some places, possibly, Sheol or Hades is merely a synonym for the grave or death, which receives good and bad alike, and retains them: e.g. Genesis 37:35, 42:38; 1 Samuel 2:6. But in passages in which the unseen world of spirits is plainly meant, the absence of the religious element is remarkable. Nay, in one way the bad are better off than the good; for while the Just have lost the joys which were the reward of their righteousness, the wicked have ceased to be troubled by the consequences of their iniquity. See Davidson on Job 3:16-19. Sheol is a place of rest; but also of silence, gloom, and ignorance. In the only passage in which the word occurs in Ecclesiastes we are told that there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest” (9:10). Those who have gone thither return no more, and none escape it (Job 7:9, Job 7:10, Job 7:10:21, 22, Job 7:20:9). It is a land of forgetfulness, in which there is no more remembrance of God or possibility of serving Him (Psalms 6:5, 30:9, 88:12; comp. Isaiah 38:11, Isaiah 38:18). And it is insatiable (Proverbs 1:12, Proverbs 1:27:20, Proverbs 1:30:16; comp. Isaiah 5:14). In some Psalms there is some trace of hope for eternal life in God in the other world (49:15), but not of hope for resurrection. In 17:15 “ when I awake” probably does not mean awake from death, but from sleep. It is the daily renewal of communion with God that is desired. In Isaiah 25:8, and still more in Isaiah 26:19, hope in a resurrection from Sheol is expressed; and in Daniel 12:2 we reach idea of resurrection with rewards and punishments. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 740; D.C.G. ii. p. 514. Side by side with the hope of a resurrection (2 Mac. 12:43-45, 14:46) comes the belief did Sheol is only an intermediate state, at any rate for the rightous (2 Mac. 7:9, 11, 14, 36, 37; Enoch li.): and along with the idea of a resurrection to rewards and punishments comes the idea that there is retribution in Sheol itself, and consequently a separation of the righteous from the wicked (Enoch xxii.). But the idea of rising again to be punished does not seem to have prevailed. The view rather was that only the righteous were raised, while the wicked remained for ever in Sheol (Enoch lxiii. 8-10, xcix. 11). In this way Hades becomes practically the same as Gehenna (Ps. Sol. 14:6, 15:11, 16:2). In the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus there is nothing to show whether Hades is intermediate or final: but the doctrine of its being a place of retribution, with a complete separation of the righteous from the wicked, could hardly be more clearly marked. In the Talmud, Sheol is identical with Gehenna, just as in popular English “ hell” is always a place of punishment, and generally of final punishment. See DB.2 art. “ Hell” ; Herzog, Pro_2 art. Hades; Charles, Book of Enoch, p. 168. L. &T. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. § Found in Luke alone. Vulg. Vulgate. AV. Authorized Version. RV. Revised Version. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. Beng. Bengel. Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses. Jos. Josephus. Hist. of J. N. History of the Jewish Nation. Syr Syriac. Sin. Sinaitic. Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moulton’ s edition). Wic. Wiclif. Lft. J. B. Lightfoot, * Notes on Epistles of S. Paul. Aug. Augustine. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. Boh. Bohairic. Arm. Armenian. Aeth. Ethiopic. F F. Cod. Boreeli, sæ c. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht. Contains considerable portions of the Gospel. U U. Cod. Nanianus, sæ c. x. In the Library of St. Mark’ s, Venice. Contains the whole Gospel. G G. Cod. Harleianus, sæ c. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions. Δ̠Δ . Cod. Sangallensis, sæ c. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. Goth. Gothic. Wordsw. Wordsworth (Chr.) Hippol. Hippolytus. Ξ̠Ξ . Cod. Zacynthius Rescriptus, sæ c. viii. In the Library of the Brit. and For. Bible Soc. in London. Contains 1:1-9, 19-23, 27, 28, 30-32, 36-66, 1:77-2:19, 21, 22, 33-39, 3:5-8, 11-20, 4:1, 2, 6-20, 32-43, 5:17-36, 6:21-7:6, 11-37, 39-47, 8:4-21, 25-35, 43-50, 9:1-28, 32, 33, 35, 9:41-10:18, 21-40, 11:1, 2, 3, 4, 24-30, 31, 32, 33. Cypr. Cyprian. Wetst. Wetstein. WH. Westcott and Hort. Tert. Tertullian. 1 Jé sus se serait-il abaissé à de pareilles personalité s? asks Godet, with some reason. 2 Ambrose also takes it as history: Narratio magis quam parabola videtur, quando etiam nomen exprimitur (Migne, xv. 1768). Greg. Gregory, Prolegomena ad Tischendorfii ed. N. T. Iren. Irenæ us. TR. Textus Receptus. 1 Near the end of the Koran are two passages worth comparing. (Sale’ s Koran, chs. 102, 104). 17:1-10. Four sayings of Christ. These are, The Sin of Causing Others to Sin (1, 2); The Duty of Forgiveness (3, 4); The Power of Faith (5, 6); and, The Insufficiency of Works (7-10). They have no connexion with the much longer utterances which precede them. Some of them are given by Mt. and Mk. in other positions. And the four sayings appear to be without connexion one with another. It is possible to make them into two pairs, as RV. does by its paragraphs. But the connexions between the first and second, and between the third and fourth, are too uncertain to be insisted upon. 1, 2. The Sin of Causing Others to Sin. These two verses are found in reverse order; and somewhat differently worded, Matthew 18:6, Matthew 18:7, and ver. 2 is found Mark 9:42. 1. Ἀνένδεκτον . Here only in bibl. Grk., and rare elsewhere, excepting in writers who knew this passage. In 13:33 we have ἐνδέχεται , from which this comes; and the intermediate ἔνδεκτόνἐστι is found in Apollonius. The meaning is “ it is unallowable, it cannot be,” οὐκἐνδέχεται . The gen. in τοῦ … μὴἐλθεῖν may be variously explained, but best as an expression of design, implied in what is not allowed, a construction of which Lk. is very fond: see on 2:21. Win. xliv. 4. b, p. 408. Others refer it to the notion of hindering implied in ἀνένδεκτον (Burton., § 405); while Meyer makes ἀνέν . a substantive on which the gen. depends, “ There is an impossibility of offences” not coming. Here only does σκάνδαλον occur in Lk. It is a late form of σκανδάληθρον (Aristoph. Ach. 687), the “ bait-stick” in a trap, and combined the ideas of ensnaring and tripping up. It is bibl. and eccles. word, freq. in LXX. πλὴνοὐαὶδι ʼ οὗἔρχεται . See on 6:24, and comp. 22:22. 2. λυσιτελεῖαὐτῷ . “ It is well for him, is worth his while” : lit. “ it pays the taxes , repays the outlay.” Here only in N. T., but found Tobit 3:6; Ecclus. 20:10, 14, 29:14, and quite classical. In Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. iv. 35) we have an insertion from Matthew 26:24: expedisse ei, si natus non fuisset, aut si moline saxo ad collum deligato, etc. A similar mixture of texts is found in Clem. Hom. (Cor. 46.), who has ἕνατω̈́͂νἐκλεκτῶν for τῶνμικρῶντούτωνἕνα . λίθοςμυλικός “ A stone fit for a mill” . Matthew 18:6 and Mark 9:42 we have μύλοςὀνικός for λίθιςμυλικός . Neither occurs in LXX. καὶἔρριπται . Mk. has βέβληται . The change from pres. to perf. is graphic: “ It is good for him if a millstone is hanged about his neck and he has been hurled.” As to the double ρρ see Greg. Proleg. p. 121. ἤ . “ Rather than” : see small print on 15:7, and comp. λυσιτελεῖμοιἀποθανεῖνἢζῆν (Tobit 3:6). Such constructions are common in LXX (Genesis 49:12; Jonah 4:3, Jonah 4:8; Tobit 12:8; Ecclus. 20:25, 22:15, etc.), but are found also in class. Grk. καλὸντὸμὴζῆνἢζῆνἀθλίως (Menander). Nothing is to be understood with ἵνα , such as “ rather than (to remain alive) in order to.” It is the late use of ἵνα with the telic force lost. Win. 46:8. c, p. 424; § 124. Comp. Matthew 5:29, Matthew 5:30; 1 Corinthians 4:3. τῶνμικρῶντούτωνἕνα . As the saying is addressed to the disciples (ver. 1), it is unlikely that the whole body of the disciples is included in “ these little ones.” It is more natural to understand it of the more insignificant among them (comp. 7:28), or those who were young in the faith, or possibly children. The ἕνα comes last with emphasis. To lead even one astray is an awful responsibility. προσέξετεἑαυτοῖς . These words come better as a conclusion to the previous warning than as an introduction to the exhortation which follows. They are analogous to “ He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” For the constr. see on 12:1. For instances in which there is discrepancy as to the division of verses see Greg. Proleg. p. 175. 3, 4. § The Duty of Forgiveness. Those who connect this saying with the one which precedes it, make an unforgiving spirit to be set forth as a common way of causing others to stumble. Others regard it as an à fortiori argument. If we must avoid doing evil to others, much more must we forgive the evil which they do to us. A better link is found in the severity of vv. 1 and 2, “ when thou sinnest against another,” and the tenderness of vv 3 and 4, “ when others sin against thee.” The δέ , which A etc. insert after ἐάν , is perhaps an attempt to mark a contrast between the two sayings and thus link them. Or it may come from Matthew 18:15.: om. א A B L; X, Latt.Boh. Aeth. Arm. Goth. Neither here nor Matthew 18:15 is the εἰςσέ , which D and some Latin authorities insert after ἁμάρτῃ , genuine: om. א A B L C D, Cod. Am. Cod. Brig. Syr. Goth. Nevertheless, what follows shows that offences εἰςσέ are specially meant. ἐπιτίμησον . The tenderness is not to be weakness. The fault is not to be passed over without notice (Leviticus 19:17). 4. ἑπτάκιςτῆςἡμέρας . In Peter’ s question (Matthew 18:21, Matthew 18:22) there is no τῆἡμέρας , which is genuine here after the first ἕπτακις only: and there is no μετανοῶ . See on 15:7. The “ seven times” is of course not to be taken literally. Comp. “ Seven times a day do I praise thee” (Psalms 119:164). Unlimited forgiveness is prescribed. But too much meaning is put into λέγων , when it is explained to mean that the mere expression of repentance is to suffice. Professed repentance may be ostentatiously unreal. 5, 6. The Power of Faith. There is no sign of connexion with what precedes. The fact that we have τοὺςμαθητάς in ver. 1 and οἱἀπόστολοι here points to different occasions. Mt. connects this saying of Christ with the Apostles’ question, “ Why could not we cast it out?” (17:19, 20). Mk. has a similar saying after the withering of the barren fig tree (11:23). Marcion omitted vv. 5-10. 5. τῷκυρίῳ . See on 17 and 7:13. The expression has point here. The Apostles ask the Lord who had given them their office to supply them with what was necessary for the discharge of that office. Πρόσθεςἡμῖνπίστιν “ Give us faith in addition: add it to the gifts already bestowed.” The “ faith” here meant is faith in Christ’ s promises. It is very forced to make it refer to what precedes; the faith that enables one to forgive a brother seven times in a day. Power to fulfil that duty would have been otherwise expressed. See Sanday on Romans 1:5 and additional note pp. 31-34. 6. Εἰἔχετε … ἐλέγετεἄν . Irregular sequence, which has produced the reading εἰεἴχετε (D E G H) as a correction. In the protasis the supposition is left open: in the apodosis it is implicitly denied. See Moulton’ s note 5. Win. p. 383. We have a further change of tense in ὑπήκουσενἄν , implying that the obedience would at once have followed the command. Comp. Xen. Anab. v. 8, 13. ὡςκόκκονσινάπεως It is not a question of additional faith. Is there genuine faith to any extent? See on 13:19. τῇσυκαμίνῳ . At the present time both the white and the black mulberry are ommon in Palestine; and in Greece the latter is still called συκαμινέα . It is not certain that the συκάμινος here is a different tree from the συκομορέα (19:4).1 But in any case both are different from the English sycomore, which is a maple. The Συκάμινος is mentioned 1 Chronicles 27:28; 2 Chronicles 1:15, 2 Chronicles 1:9:27; Psalms 78:47; Isaiah 9:10. In Matthew 17:20 we have τῶςὄρειτούτῳ for τῇσυκαμίνῳταύτῃ , the saying being uttered just after the descent from the Mount of Transfiguration. Comp. Matthew 21:21||. Here Christ’ s reply seems to indicate that it is faith in His promise that they should work miracles that is desired by the Apostles. To treat the saying as a parable, and make the tree mean the Kingdom of God and the sea the heathen world, is fanciful. 7-10. § The Insufficiency of Works, or, the Parable of the Unprofitable Servant. The attempts to find a connexion between this and the preceding saying are forced and unsatisfactory. Obviously these four verses are not concerned with miracles, which cannot be meant by τὰδιαταχθένταὑμῖν (ver. 10). It is the ordinary duties of the Christian life that are meant. See the illustration in Hermas (Sim. v. 2. 1-11), and comp. Seneca, De Benef. 3:18. 7. Τίςδὲἐξὑμῶν . There is no need to seek for explanations as to why Jesus speaks to “ the poor Apostles” as if they had slaves who ploughed for them, or to point out that Zebedee had had hired servants (Mark 1:20). There is no evidence that these words were addressed to the Twelve; and the words almost necessarily imply that they were addressed to a mixed audience of well-to-do persons. For τίςἐξὑμῶν see on 11:5, 6. Εὐθέως : belongs to παρελθών rather than to ἐρεῖ , as is shown by the μετὰταῦτα afterwards, which balances εὐθέως : “ Come straightway and sit down to eat” Wic. Tyn. Cov. Cran. Rhem. RV. with Vulg. and Luth. adopt this arrangement. AV. follows Gen. with “ say unto him by and by,” where “ by and by” has its original meaning of “ immediately” : AV. of 21:9; Matthew 13:21; Mark 6:25 Comp. “ presently,” Matthew 26:53; 1 Samuel 2:16 (T. L. O. Davies, Bible English, p. 109; Lft. On Revision, p. 196, 2nd ed.; Trench, On the A. V. of N. T. p. 48). παρελθὼνἀνάπεσε . “ Come forward and sit down to meat.” This use of παρέρχομαι is classical, but in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. (12:37). Comp. the insertion Acts 24:7 and 2 Chronicles 25:7 A. 8. Ἑτοίμασοντίδειπνήσω … διακόνει . Change from aor. to pres. “ Prepare once for all … continue to serve.” With τίδειπνήσω comp. Matthew 10:19: in class. Grk. we should have ὄτι , as in Acts 9:6. The forms φάγεσαι and πίεσαι are analogous to ὀδυνᾶσαι (16:25) and δύνασαι (Matthew 5:36). They belong to the popular Greek of the time, but are not quite constant; Mark 9:22 we have δύνῃ . See Veitch, s.v.; Win. 15 pp. 109, 110; WH. 2. p. 304. Both πάγεσαι and πίεσαι are found Rth 2:9, Rth 2:14; Ezekiel 12:18 With ἔχειξάριν comp. 1 Timothy 1:12; 2 Timothy 1:3; Hebrews 12:28: the expression is classical. The οὐδοκῶ of A D, Vulg. etc. is an insertion. 10. οὕτωςκαὶὑμεις , ὅτανποιήσητεπάντα . A purely hypothetical case. Nothing is gained by placing a full stop at ὑμεῖς . With τὰδιαταχθένταὑμῖν comp. τὸδιατεταγμένονὑμῖν . (3:13; Acts 23:31). ἀχρεῖοι . Not “ vile” as in 2 Samuel 6:22, nor “ good for nothing” as in Ep. Jer_15, the only places in which the word occurs in LXX; but “ unprofitable,” because nothing has been gained by them for their master. He has got no more than his due. Comp. Matthew 25:30, the only other passage in N.T. in which the word is found. That God does not need man’ s service is not the point. Nor are the rewards which He gives in return for man’ s service here brought into question. The point is that man can make no just claim for having done more than was due. Miser est quem Dominus servum inutilem appellat (Matthew 25:30); beatus qui se ipse (Beng.). Syr-Sin. omits ἀχρεῖοι . 17:11-19:28. The Third Period of the Journey 11-19. Here begins the last portion of the long section (9:51-19:28), for the most part peculiar to Lk., which we have called “ the Journeyings towards Jerusalem” : see on 9:51. For the third time (9:51, 52, 13:22) Lk. tells us that Jerusalem is the goal, but we have no means of knowing whether this represents the beginning of a third journey distinct from two previous journeys. Marked breaks may be made at the end of 13:35 and 17:10. But we have no data for determining what the chronology of the different divisions is; and the geography is almost as indistinct as the chronology. This last portion, however, brings us once more (10:38) to Bethany, and to the time which preceded the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. 11-19. § The Healing of the Ten Lepers. The gratitude of the Samaritan leper illustrates the special theme of this Gospel. The opening of the narrative indicates an Aramaic source: but that it is placed here “ to contrast man’ s thanklessness to God with the sort of claim to thanks from God, which is asserted by spiritual pride,” is not probable. 11. ἐντῷπορεύεσθαι . “ As He was on His way.” See on 3:21 and comp. 9:51, the beginning of this main portion, where the construction is similar. The αὐτόν is probably a gloss (om. א B L), but a correct gloss. As no one else is mentioned it is arbitrary to translate “ as they were on their way.” Latin texts all take it as singular: dum iret, cum iret, dum vadit, dum iter faceret. So also Syr-Sin., which omits ἐγένετο . καὶαὐτὸςδιήρχετο . The apodosis of ἐγένετο : see on 5:12, 14, 6:20; also on 2:15. There is no emphasis on αὐτός . διὰμέσον . This is the reading of א B D L, accepted by Tisch. Treg. WH. and RV. It means “ through what lies between,” i.e. along the frontier, or simply, “ between.” This is the only passage in N.T. in which διά c. acc. has its original local signification. Even if διὰμέσου were the right reading, we ought to translate it “ between” and not “ through the midst of.” This use is found in Xenophon: διὰμέσουδὲῥεῖτούτωνποταμός (Anab. 1:4, 4), of a river flowing between two walls; and in Plato: ἢτὸτούτωνδὴδιὰμέσουφῶμεν (Leg. 7. p. 805 D), of an intermediate course. “ Through midst of Samaria and Galilee” wouldimply that Jesus was moving from Jerusalem, whereas we are expressly told that He was journeying towards it. Samaria, as being on the right would naturally be mentioned first if He was going eastward along the frontier between Samaria and Galilee possibly by the route which ends at Bethshean, near the Jordan. In order to avoid Samaritan territory (9:52-55), He seems to have been making for Peræ a, as Jews often did in going from Galilee to Jerusalem. On the frontier He would be likely to meet with a mixed company of lepers, their dreadful malady having broken down the barrier between Jew and Samaritan. See Conder, Handbk. of B. p. 311; Tristram, Bible Places, p. 222; Eastern Customs, pp. 19, 21. In the leper-houses at Jerusalem Jews and Mahometans will live together at the present time. There is no doubt that ver. 11 forms a complete sentence. To make from καὶαὐτός to Γαλιλαίας a parenthesis, and take ἀπήντησαν as the apodosis of ἐγένετο , is quite gratuitous clumsiness. 12. δέκαλεπροὶἄνδρες . Elsewhere we read of four (2 Kings 7:3), but so large a company as ten was perhaps at that time unusual. Now it would be common, especially in this central region. These ten may have collected on hearing that Jesus was approaching. No meaning is to be sought in the number. ἔστησανπόρρωθεν . In accordance with the law, which the leper of 5:12 possibly did not break: see notes there. The precise distance to be kept was not fixed by law, but by tradition, and the statements about it vary. See Leviticus 13:45, Leviticus 13:46; Numbers 5:2, and the evidence collected in Wetst. The adv. occurs Hebrews 11:13 and often in LXX, esp. in Isaiah (10:3, 13:5, 33:13, 17, 39:3, etc.). On the authority of B F, WH. adopt ἀνέστησαν in the text, with ἔστησαν in the margin. Lk. is very fond of this compound. 13. καὶαὐτοὶἦρανφωνήν . They took the initiative. Here ἦρανφωνήν agrees with πόρρωθεν , just as in 16:24 φωνήσας agrees with ἀπὸμακρόθεν . Comp. ἐπαίρεινφωνήν (11:27) and ὑψοῦνφωνήν (Genesis 39:15, Genesis 39:18). This phrase occurs Acts 4:24; Judges 21:2; 1 Samuel 11:4. For ἐπιστάτα see on 5:5. 14. καὶἰδών . “ And directly He saw” : which seems to imply that, until they cried out, He had not perceived who they were. This previous supernatural knowledge was not necessary. But He knows, without seeing or hearing, that they all were cleansed (ver. 17). This knowledge was necessary. ἐπιδείξατεἑαυτοὺςτοῖςἱερεῦσιν . “ Show yourselves to the priests” appointed for this purpose. Each of the ten would go to the priest near his own home. In 5:14 we have τῷἱερεῖ , there being then only one leper. The Samaritan would go to a priest of the temple on Mount Gerizim. ἐντῷὑπάγειν . Their faith was shown in their obedience to Christ’ s command, and on their way the cure took place. As they were no longer companions in misery, the Jews would rejoice that the Samaritan turned back and left them. 15. ὑπέστρεψεν . See on 4:14 and 7:10. Even Hahn follows Schleiermacher in referring this to the Samaritan’ s return from the priest. In that case he would have inevitably returned without the others. It was because he saw that he was healed (not after he had been declared to be clean) that he came back to give thanks. The μετὰφωνῆςμεγάλης may mean that he still “ stood afar off” (see on 1:42), as having not yet recovered the right to mix with others: for παρὰτοὺςπόδας (see on 7:38) need not imply close proximity. But if the loud voice be only an expression of great joy, a man in the jubilation of such a cure would not be punctilious about keeping the exact distance, especially when he knew that he was no longer a leper. It is most improbable that he did not see that he was cleansed till the priest told him that he was. 16. καὶαὐτὸςἦνΣαμαρείτης . Here the αὐτός has point: “ and he was a S.” The only one who exhibited gratitude was a despised schismatic. That all the others were Jews is not implied. 17. ἀποκριθεὶςδὲὁἸησοῦς . See small print on 1:19, p. 16. Here first we learn that Jesus was not alone; for His “ answer” is addressed to the bystanders, and is a comment on the whole incident rather than a reply to the Samaritan. Οὐχοἱδέκα . “ Were not the ten,” etc.— all the ten who had asked Him to have mercy on them. The ποῦ with emphasis at the end, like σύ in ver. 8. These questions imply surprise, and surprise implies limitation of knowledge (7:9; Matthew 8:10; Mark 6:6). 18. This sentence also may be interrogative: so WH. and RV. text. The εὑρέθησαν is not a mere substitute for ἦσαν : it marks or implies the discovery or notice of the quality in question (1 Peter 2:22; Revelation 14:5). ἀλλογενής . The classical word would be ἀλλόφυλος (Alas 10:28) or ἀλλοεθνής , But ἀλλογενής is very freq. in LXX, especially of the heathen (Exodus 12:43, Exodus 12:29:33, Exodus 12:30:33; Leviticus 22:10, etc). The Samaritans were a mixed people, both as regards race and religion. They were Israelites who had been almost overwhelmed by the heathen colonists planted among them by the Assyrians. Those from Cuthah (2 Kings 17:24, 2 Kings 17:30) were probably the most numerous, for the Jews called the Samaritans Cuthites or Cutheans (Jos. Ant. ix. 14. 3, 11:4, 4, 7, 2, 13:9, 1). These heathen immigrants brought their idolatry with them, but gradually mixed with it the worship of Jehovah. Both as regards race and religion it was the Jewish element which grew stronger, while the heathen element declined. Refugees from Judea settled among them from time to time; but we do not hear of fresh immigrants from Assyria. The religion at last became pure monotheism, with the Pentateuch as the law of worship and of life. But in race the foreign element no doubt predominated, although Christ’ s use of ἀλλογενής does not prove this. He may be speaking with a touch of irony: “ this man, who is commonly regarded as little better than a heathen.” See Schü rer, Jewish People in T. of J. C. 2:1, pp. 6-8; Edersh. Hist. of Jewish Nation, pp. 249, 486, 499, ed. 1896; Derenbourg, Hist. de la Psa_1. p. 43; Jos. Ant. 11:8, 6, 12:5, 5. 19. ἡπίστιςσουσέσωκένσε . He did well to be thankful and publicly express his thankfulness; but he had contributed something himself, without which he would not have been cured. Comp. 8:48, 18:42. Others refer the saying to some benefit which the Samaritan received and which the nine lost, and explain it of moral and spiritual salvation. Comp. 7:50, 8:48, 50. 20-37. The Coming of the Kingdom of God and of the Son of Man. The introductory verses (20-22) are peculiar to Lk. For the rest comp. Matthew 24:23 ff.; Mark 13:21 ff. 20. Ἐπερωτηθείς . There is no evidence that the question of the Pharisees was asked in contempt. Jesus had taught that the Kingdom was at hand, and they ask when it may be expected. Perhaps they wanted to test Him. If He fixed an early date, and at that time there were no signs of the Kingdom, they would know what to think. His reply corrects such an idea. There will be no such signs as would enable a watcher to date the arrival. A spiritual Kingdom is slow in producing conspicuous material effects; and it begins in ways that cannot be dated. With this rather loose use of πότε for ὅποτε in an indirect question comp. 12:36; Mark 13:4, Mark 13:33, Mark 13:35; Matthew 24:3. Nowhere in N.T. is ὄποτε found. παρατηρήσεως . Here only in bibl. Grk. and not classical, although παρατηρεῖν is not rare either in N.T. or LXX, and occurs in medical writers of watching the symptoms of a disease (Hobart, p. 153). It implies close rather than sinister watching, although the latter sense occurs. See on 14:1. The interpretation cum multa pompa, cum regio splendore, fits neither the word nor the context. The meaning is that no close observation will be able to note the moment of its arrival, which will not be marked by external sounds. 21. οὐδὲἐροῦσιν . “ Neither will they say” (with any reason): non erit quod dicatur (Grot.). In ver. 23 they do say this; but it is a groundless statement. The ἰδοὐ before ἐκεῖ (A D, Vulg.) is an insertion from ver. 23. ἰδοὺγάρ . See on 1:44. This ἰδού introduces the true statement in contrast to the previous ἰδού , which introduced a false one. The γάρ marks the reason why “ Lo here” or “ There” cannot be accepted. Note the solemn repetition of ἡβασιλείατοῦΘεοῦ . ἐντὸςὑμῶνἐστίν . Usage sanctions either translation: “ within you, in your hearts” (Psalms 38:4, 108:22, 103:1; Isaiah 16:11; Daniel 10:16 (Theod.); Ecclus. 19:23[26]: comp. Matthew 23:26); or, “ among you, in your midst” (Xen. Anab. 1:10, 3; Hellen. 2:3, 19; Plat. Leg. 7:789 A). The latter seems to suit the context better; for the Kingdom of God was not in the hearts of the Pharisees, who are the persons addressed. The meaning will then be, “ so far from coming with external signs which will attract attention, the Kingdom is already in the midst of you (in the person of Christ and of His disciples), and you do not perceive it.” Note the contrast between ἐροῦσιν , the supposition that the Kingdom is still in the future, and ἐστίν , the fact that it is really present. But this rendering of ἐντός lacks confirmation in Scripture, and the context is not decisive against the other. If “ within you” be adopted, the meaning will be, “ Instead of being something externally visible, the Kingdom is essentially spiritual: it is in your hearts, if you possess it at all.” All Latin texts have intra vos est. But the interpretation of “ within you” varies considerably. Gregory Nyssen explains it of the image of God bestowed upon all men at their birth (De Virg. 12.; comp. De Beat. 1.), Which cannot be right. Cyril of Alexandria makes it mean, “ lies in your power to appropriate it,” ἐνἐξουσίᾳκεῖταιτὸλαβεῖναὐτήν (Migne 72:841). Similarly Maldonatus, quia poterant, si vellent Christum recipere. But this is translating ἐντὸςὑμῶν “ within you,” and interpreting “ within you” as much the same as “ among you.” If they had not received Christ or the Kingdom, it was not yet within them. Against “ in your hearts” Maldonatus points that not only does Lk. tell us that the words were addressed to the Pharisees, in whose hearts, the Kingdom was not; but that he emphasizes this by stating that the next saying was addressed to the disciples. Among moderns, Godet arguesably for “ within you” (see also McClellan): Weiss and Hahn for “ among you.” Syr-Sin. has “ among.” Comp. 10:9, 11:20. 22. Εἶπενδὲπρὸςτοὺςμαθητάς . Apparently this is the same occasion (comp. 12:22); and perhaps the Pharisees have retired. But we cannot be certain of either point. Christ takes up the subject which the Pharisees had introduced, and shows that it is the Second Advent that will be accompanied by visible signs. But with regard to these, discrimination must be used. Comp. Matthew 24:23, Matthew 24:26 and Mark 13:21, to which this is partly parallel. Ἐλεύσονταιἡμέραι . No article: “ Days will come” : as in 5:35, 21:6; Matthew 9:15; Mark 2:20. Even RV. has “ The days will come.” Comp. the Johannean phrase, ἔρχεταιὥρα , “ There cometh an hour” (John 4:21, John 4:23, John 4:5:25, John 4:28, John 4:16:2, John 4:25, John 4:32). But it is erroneous to make this passage mean the same as 5:35; Matthew 9:15; Mark 2:20:— “ Days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them; then will they fast in those days.” This means, not that hereafter there will be a time when the disciples will long in vain for one day of such intercourse with Christ as they are constantly enjoying now; but that there will be days in which they will yearn for a foretaste of the coming glory, a glory which must be waited for and cannot be anticipated. “ Oh for one day of heaven in this time of trouble!” is a futile wish, but it will be framed by some. It is clear from ver. 26 what “ the days of the Son of Man” must mean. But what does μίαντῶνἡμερῶν , κ .τ .λ ., mean? The common rendering, “ one of the days,” etc., makes good sense. But the possibility of taking the expression as a Hebraism, “ one” being used for “ first,” as in μιᾷτῶνσαββάτων (Mark 16:2), is worth noting. Comp. 24:1; Matthew 28:1; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2; John 20:1. In this case he desire would be for “ the first of the days of the Son of Man,” the day of His return. καὶοὐκὄψεσθε . Not because it will never come; but because it will not come in those days of longing. 23. There is no contradiction between this and ver. 21. That refers to true signs of the First Advent; this to false signs of the Second. It covers all premature announcements of the approach of the Last Day. All predictions of exact dates, and all statements as to local appearances, are to be mistrusted. μὴἀπέλθητεμηδὲδιώξητε . “ Do not leave your ordinary occupation, still less go after those who offer to lead you to the place of the Son of Man’ s appearing.” 24. ὥσπεργὰρἡἀστραπή . As sudden, and as universally visible. None will foresee it, and all will see it at once; so that no report respecting it can have any value. Non ejus ergo venturi tempus aut locus potest a mortalibus observari, qui fulguris instar omnibus coruscus videlicet et repentinus adveniet (Bede). See on 2:8, 11:46, 23:46 for Lk’ s fondness for cognate words. The wording here is almost identical with Matthew 24:27. The art. before ἀστράπτουσα is probably an insertion; om. א B L C G. Without it translate, “ when it lightens.” For fulgur e has choruscatio and d has scoruscus. In what follows we again have an amphibolous expression (9:17, 18, 27, 57, 10:18, etc.); but ἐκτῆς … ὑπ ʼ οὐρανόν should be taken with λάμπει rather than with ἀστράπτουσα . For the ellipse of χώρα after ἡὑπ ʼ οὐρανόν or ἡὑπὸτὸνοὐρανόν comp. Deuteronomy 25:9; Job 1:7, Job 2:2, Job 18:4, Job 34:13, Job 38:18, Job 42:15. The words ἐντῇἡμέρᾳαὐτοῦ after ἀνθρώπου are of doubtful authority: om. B D, a b c d e i Aeth., while I has in adventu suo (comp. Matthew 24:27): om. filius hominis in die sua ff2. Syr-Sin. has ‘ so shall be the day of the Son of Man.” 25. πρῶτονδὲδεῖαὐτὸν … ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι . “ But there is no need to be expecting this now” : the events immediately impending are very different. For δεῖ see on 4:43, and for ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι see on 9:22, and comp. 18:31. Just as the hought of impending suffering needs to be cheered by that of future glory, so the thought of future glory needs to be chastened by that of impending suffering. Comp. 9:44. 26. Having told the disciples that the Son of Man will not come as soon as they wish (22), in what way He will not come (23), in what way He will come (24), and what will happen first (25), Christ now states in what condition the human race will be when He comes. καὶκαθὼςἐγέετο . Not ὥσπερ , as in ver. 24. There something analogous was introduced; here something exactly similar is cited. “ Just as, even as.” Comp. 11:30; John 3:14; 2 Corinthians 1:5, 2 Corinthians 10:7, etc. In Attic Greek we should rather have καθό (Romans 8:26), καθά (Matthew 27:10), or καθάπερ (Romans 12:4). 27. ἤσθιον , ἔπινον , ἐγάμουν , ἐγαμίζοντο . The imperfects and the asyndeton are very vivid: “ They were eating, they were drinking,” etc. The point is not merely that they were living their ordinary lives, but that they were wholly given up to external things. It is of no moment whether καὶἧλθενὁκατακλυσμός is made to depend upon ἄχριἤςἡμέρας or not: probably it is independent. But certainly ὁμοίως belongs to καθὼςἐγένετο (similiter sicut factum est, Vulg.), and not to ἀπώλεσενπάντας (perdidit omnes pariter), which is pointless. The ὁμοίως anticipates κατὰτὰαὐτά in ver. 30. 28, 29. There is no parallel to this in Mat_24. It is a second instance of careless enjoyment suddenly overwhelmed. Comp. 2 Peter 2:5, 2 Peter 2:6. 29. ἔβρεξενπῦρκαὶθεῖον . The subject of ἔβρεξεν is Κύριος , Which is, expressed in Genesis 19:24 (comp. Matthew 5:45) and must be supplied here, because of ἀπώλεσεν . The verb is not impers., as in James 5:17. Grotius makes πῦρκαὶθεῖον the nom. and compares ἵναμὴβρέχῃὑετός (Revelation 11:6). Genesis 19:24 and the sing. verb are against this. Comp. Hom. Od. 22:493. 30. ἀποκαλύπτεται . A technical expression in this connexion (1 Corinthians 1:7; 2 Thessalonians 1:7; 1 Peter 1:7, 1 Peter 1:13, 1 Peter 1:4:13). The present indicates the certainty of the veil being withdrawn. Up to that day He is hidden from man’ s sight: then at once He is revealed. 31. In Matthew 24:17, Matthew 24:18 and 13:15, 16 these words are spoken of flight before the destruction of Jerusalem. Here flight is neither expressed nor understood. The point is absolute indifference to all worldly interests as the attitude of readiness for the Son of Man. We need not discuss whether the words were spoken in a literal sense, as in MK. and Mt., and Lk has applied them spiritually; or in a spiritual sense, and Mt. and MK. have taken them literally. Christ may have used them in both senses. The warning about flight from Judæ a is recorded by Lk. elsewhere (21:21). On the oratio variata of the constr. see Win. lxiii. 2. 1, p. 722, 723. 32. μνημονεύετετῆςγυναικὸςΛώτ . Lot’ s wife looked back with a wish to recover worldly possessions and enjoyments. She proved herself to be unworthy of the salvation that was offered her. In like manner the Christian, whose first thought at the Advent of the Son of Man was about the safety of his goods, would be unfit for the Kingdom of God. Note that Christ says, “ Remember,” not “ Behold.” Nothing that is in existence is appealed to, but only what has been told. Attempts have been made to identify the Pillar of Salt. Josephus believed that he had seen it (Ant. i. 11, 4). Comp. Wisd. 10:7; Clem. Hom. Cor. 11.; Iren. iv. 31, 3; CyrHier. Catech. xix. 8. 33. περιποιήσασθαι . “ To preserve for himself” : elsewhere “ to gain for oneself” (Acts 20:28; 1 Timothy 3:13). The reading σῶσαι (A R) comes from 9:24. ζωογονήσει . “ Shall preserve alive” : Acts 7:19; 1 Timothy 6:13; Exodus 1:17; Judges 8:19; 1 Samuel 2:6, 1 Samuel 2:27:9, 1 Samuel 2:11; 1Sa_1 Kings 21:31. The rendering “ shall bring to a new birth” has been rightly abandoned by Godet. In bibl. Grk. it is not used of “ bringing forth alive,” “ viviparous.” From 9:24; Matthew 10:39, Matthew 10:16:25; Mark 8:35; John 12:25 it appears that this solemn warning was often uttered: for most of these passages refer to different occasions. It is the one important saying which is in all four. 34, 35. The closest intimacy in this life is no guarantee of community of condition when the Son of Man comes. The strangest separations will take place between comrades, according as one is fit to enter the Kingdom and another not. 34. ταύτῃτῇνυκτί . This must not be pressed to mean anything, whether a time of great horror or actual night. Christ is not intimating that His return will take place in the night-time. “ Night” is part of the picture, for it is then that people are in bed. δύοἐπὶκλίνηςμιᾶς . “ Two on one bed.” Not necessarily two men, although that is probably the meaning. AV. was the first English Version to insert “ men,” and RV. retains it. The “ being taken” probably means “ taken from destruction” (John 14:3), ὡςἀλλότριοςτῆςοἰργῆς (Eus.), as Lot from Sodom; while “ left” means “ left to his fate” (13:35). Or, “ taken into the Kingdom” and “ left outside” may be the meaning. 35. This image presupposes day rather than night, and refers to a fact which is still of everyday occurrence in the East. Whether people be sleeping or working when the Lord comes, those who still cling to things earthly will be left without share in the Messianic joy. And in this matter “ no man may deliver his brother” : ἔσταιπλείστηκαὶἀκριβὴςτῶντρόπωνἡδοκιμασία (Cyr.). 36. An ancient (D, Latt. Syrr.) insertion from Matthew 24:40: om. א A B Q R, Aeth. Copt. Goth. 37. Ποῦ , κύριε ; The question is one of curiosity which Christ does not gratify. Moreover, it assumes, what He has just been denying, that the Second Advent will be local— limited to one quarter of the earth. Ὅπουτὸσῶμα , ἐκεῖκαὶοἱἀετοί . This was perhaps a current proverb. The application is here quite general. “ Where the conditions are fulfilled, there and there only will the revelation of the Son of Man take place.” Or possibly, “ Where the dead body of human nature, clinging to earthly things, is, there the judgments of God will come” : ubi peccatores, ibi Dei judicia. Jesus thus sets aside all questions as to the time (ver. 20) or the place (ver. 37) of His return. One thing is certain; that all who are not ready will suffer (VV. 27, 29). Upon all who are dead to the claims of the Kingdom ruin will fall (37). The πτῶμα of Matthew 24:28 expresses more definitely than σῶμα that the body is a dead one: comp. Matthew 14:12; Mark 6:29, Mark 6:15:45; Revelation 11:8, Revelation 11:9. But σῶμα for a dead body is quite classical, and is always so used in Homer, a living body being δέμας : comp. Acts 9:40. οἱἀετοί . “ The vultures.” Here, as in Micah 1:16, the griffon vulture (vultur fulvus) is probably meant: comp. Job 39:27-30; Habakkuk 1:8; Hosea 8:1, and see Tristram, Nat. Hist, of B. p. 172; D. B.2 art. “ Eagle.” Eagles neither fly in flocks nor feed on carrion. During the Crimean War, griffon vultures, which had previously been scarce round Sebastopol, collected in great numbers, “ from the ends of the earth,” as the Turks said. In the less general interpretation of this saying of Christ the ἀετοί are the ministers of judgment which overtake the ungodly. A reference to the eagles of the Roman standards is not in point here, although it is possible Matthew 24:28. The patristic interpretation of the saints gathering round the glorified body of Christ is equally unsuitable to the context.1 See Didon, JC ch. 9. p. 613, ed. 1891; also Hastings, DB. i. p. 632. RV. Revised Version. Sin. Sinaitic. Win. Winer, Grammar of N.T. Greek (the page refers to Moulton’ s edition). Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses. Clem. Hom. Clementine Homilies. Greg. Gregory, Prolegomena ad Tischendorfii ed. N. T. § Found in Luke alone. om. omit. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. Latt. Latin. Boh. Bohairic. Aeth. Ethiopic. Arm. Armenian. Goth. Gothic. D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. C C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sæ c. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53. These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T. Cod. Am. Codex Amiatimus. Syr Syriac. 1 “ Two points may be urged in favour of those who identify the two trees: (1) In LXX every instance in which the Hebrew has Shikmin the Greek has συκάμινος , although the fig, and not the mulberry, is certainly intended. (2) As to the mulberry it has yet to be shown that it was then known in Palestine: and further the mulberry is more easily plucked by the roots than any other tree of the size in the country, and the things is oftener done” (Groser, Trees and Plants in the Bible, pp. 121, 123). Wic. Wiclif. Tyn. Tyndale. Cov. Coverdale. Rhem. Rheims (or Douay). Vulg. Vulgate. Luth. Luther. AV. Authorized Version. Gen. Geneva. WH. Westcott and Hort. Beng. Bengel. Tisch. Tischendorf. Treg. Tregelles. Wetst. Wetstein. F F. Cod. Boreeli, sæ c. ix. In the Public Library at Utrecht. Contains considerable portions of the Gospel. Jos. Josephus. Grot. Grotius. G G. Cod. Harleianus, sæ c. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions. Iren. Irenæ us. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. Eus. Eusebius of Cæ sarea D. B. Smith’ s Dictionary of the Bible, 2nd edition. 1 Ὄτανὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπονπαραγένηται , τότεδὴπάντεςοἱἀετοί , τουτέστνοἱτὰὑψηλὰπετόμενοι , καὶτῶνἐπιγείωνκαὶκοσμικῶνἀνενηγμένοιπραγυάτων , ἐπ ʼ αἰτὸνσυνδραμοῦνται (Cyr. Alex., Migne, 52:848). Justorum animæ aquilis comparantur, quod alta petant, humilia derelinquant, longæ vam ducere ferantur atatem (Ambr., Migne, 15:1781). Comp. Paschasius Radbertus on Matthew 24:28. Didon, Pè re Didon, Jé sus Christ 18:1-8. § The Parable of the Unrighteous Judge. Comp. 15:8-10, 11-32, 16:1-9, 19-31, 17:7-10. The connexion with what precedes is close, and is implied in the opening clause; for αὐτοῖς naturally refers to the same audience as before. Had there been no connexion, αὐτοῖς would have been omitted: comp. 13:6. Godet appeals also to the formula ἔλεγενδὲκαί ; but here the καί is not genuine. The connexion is, that, although the time of Christ’ s return to deliver His people is hidden from them, yet they must not cease to pray for deliverance. Both here and 21:36 we ve the command to be unremitting in prayer immediately after a declaration that the hour of Christ’ s coming is unknown; and the same connexion is found Mark 13:33. See Resch, Agrapha, p. 297. 1. Ἔλεγενδὲπαραβολήν . See on 5:36. πρὸςτὸδεῖν . Not merely the duty, but the necessity of perseverance in prayer is expressed; and prayer in general is meant, not merely prayer in reference to the Second Advent and the troubles which precede it. Only here and ver. 9 is the meaning of a parable put as the preface to it; and in each case it is given as the Evangelist’ s preface, not as Christ’ s. πάντοτεπροσεύχεσθαι . Comp. πάντοτεχαίρετε . ἀδιαλείπτωςπροσεύχεσθε (1 Thessalonians 5:17). Grotius quotes Proclus ad Timæ um χρὴἀδιαλείπτωςεὔχεσθαιτῆςπερὶτὸθεῖονθρησκείας . See Origen, περὶεὐχῆς , 12.; Tert. De Orat. 29.; Lft. Epp. p. 81. On the other hand, we have the Jewish doctrine that God must not be wearied with incessant prayer. Tanchuma, fol. 15:3. A man ought not to pray more than three times a day. Hourly prayers are forbidden. Si quis singulis horis ad te salutandum accedit, hunc dicis te contemtui habere: idem ergo quoque Valet de Deo, quem nemo hominum singulis horis defatigare debet (Schœ ttgen, 1:305). The form ἐνκακεῖν is right here, and perhaps Galatians 6:9; Ephesians 3:13; 2 Thessalonians 3:13; ἐγκακεῖν 2 Corinthians 4:1, 2 Corinthians 4:16; but in six places some texts have ἐκκακεῖν . See Gregory, Proleg. p. 78. Ellicott makes ἐγκακεῖν mean “ to lose heart in a course of action,” and ἐκκακεῖν “ to retire through fear out of it” ; but authority for any such word as ἐκκακεῖν seems to be wanting. Perhaps ἐγκακεῖν is not found earlier than Polybius. See Suicer. 2. Κριτήςτιςἦνἔντινιπόλει . We are probably to understand a Gentile official. He had no respect for either the vox Dei or the vox populi, consciously (ver. 4) defying Divine commands and public opinion. See numerous parallels in Wetst., and contrast 2 Corinthians 8:21. The Talmud speaks of frequent oppression and venality on the part of Gentile magistrates; and for a striking illustration of the parable witnessed by himself see Tristram, Eastern Customs in Bible Lands, p. 228. Note the τις . The idea of ἐντρέπομαι seems to be that of “ turning. towards” a person, and so “ paying respect” (20:13; Matthew 21:37; Mark 12:6; 2 Thessalonians 3:14; Hebrews 12:9). But as ἐντρέπω means “ I put to shame” (1 Corinthians 4:14), ἐντρέπομαι may possibly have the notion of “ being abashed, having a felling of awe,” before a person. In class. Grk. it is commonly followed by a gen. 3. χήραδὲἦν . Typical of defencelessness: she had neither a protector to coerce, nor money to bribe the unrighteous magistrate. The O.T. abounds in denunciations of those who oppress widows: Exodus 22:22; Deuteronomy 10:18, 24:17, 27:19; Job 22:9, Job 22:24:3; Jeremiah 22:3; Ezekiel 22:7, etc. Comp. Non, ita me dii ament, auderet facere hæ c viduæ mulieri, quæ in me facit (Ter. Heaut. v. 1:80). ἤρχετο . “ Continued coming, came often,” ventitabat. The imperf. indicates her persistence. Ἐκδίκησόνμεἀπό . “ Give me a sentence of protection from; vindicate my right (and so protect me) from.” Assere me jure dicundo ab injuriâ adversarii mei (Schleusn.). For the ἀπό comp. 12:15, 58, 13:16, 20:46: it does not express the penalty exacted from the adversary, but the protection afforded from him, as in π̔ῦσαιἡμᾶςἀπὸτοῦπονηροῦ . The meaning is “ preserve me against his attacks” rather than “ deliver me out of his power,” which wo require ἐκ . For ἀντίδικος comp. 12:58; Matthew 5:25. As often, the ἀπό follows up the idea suggested by the ἐκ in the compound verb: see on ἐξέρχομαιἀπό (4:35), and comp. also ἐκλέομαιἀπό (6:13), ἐκζητεῖνἀπό (11:50, 51), ἐκδιώκωἀπό (Joe 2:20; Daniel 4:22, Daniel 4:29, Daniel 4:30, Theod.), etc. Here d has devindica me ab. 4. οὐκἤθελεν . The imperf. (A.aleph; A B D L Q R Ξ L) has more point than the aor. (A etc.): he continued refusing, just as she continued coming. With ἐπὶχρόνον comp. ἐπὶπλείοναχρ . (Acts 18:20); ἐφ ʼ ὅσονχρ . (Romans 7:1; 1 Corinthians 7:39; Galatians 4:1). ΕἰκαὶτὸνΘεὸνοὐφοβοῦμαι . “ Although I fear not God,” implying that this is the actual fact (2 Corinthians 12:11), whereas καὶεἰ would have put it as an hypothesis (1 Corinthians 8:5; , 1 Peter 3:1). Win. 53:7. b, p. 554. Perhaps its being given as a fact explains the use of οὐ rather than μή : or the οὐ coalesces with the verb, and thus escapes the influence of the εἰ : comp. 11:8, 14:26, 16:11, 12, 31; 2 Corinthians 12:11. Burton., § § 284, 469. But see Simcox, Lang. of N. T. p. 184. οὐδέ . “ Nor yet, nor even” : a climax. 5. διάγετὸπαρέχεινμοικόπον . “ Yet because she trouble me.” Comp. διάγετὴνἀναιδίαναὐτοῦ (11:8), where, as here., εἰκαί is followed by οὐ and γε . Both κόπον and ὑπωπιάζῃ are strong words, and express the man’ s impatience. On the reading τὴνχήραταύτην see Gregory, prolegom. p. 58. εἰςτέλοςἐρχομένηὑπωπιάζῃμε . “ Unto the end, to the utter most” easily passed in meaning to either “ continually” or “ at last” ; and either of these makes sense here, according as we join εἰςτέλος with the participle or the verb or both. Either, “ by continually coming wear me out” ; or, “ at last by her coming wear me out” ; or, “ be forever coming and plaguing me.” The first is best: it was her perpetual coming that was so trying. Both τέλος and ἐςτέλος are frequent in class. Grk. In LXX εἰςτελος is frequent. ὑπωπιάζῃ . From ὑπώπιον , which means (1) the part of the face below the eyes; (2) a blow there, a black eye; (3) any blow. Hence ὑπωπιάζω means (1) hit under the eye, give a black eye; (2) beat black and blue; (3) mortify, annoy greatly (1 Corinthians 9:27). Comp. αἱπόλειςὑπωπιασμέναι (Aristoph. Pax, 541). There is no doubt that “ annoy greatly” is the meaning here. Comp. Qui me sequatur quoquo eam, rogitando obtundat, enecet (Ter. Eun. iii. 5, 6). Meyer, Godet, Weiss and others advocate the literal meaning, and regard it as a mauvaise plaisanterie or an exaggeration on the part of the judge. But, as Field points out (Otium Norvic. 3. p. 52), the tenses are fatal to it. “ Lest at last she come and black my eyes for me” would require ἐλθοῦσαὑπωπιάσῃ . The judge was afraid of being annoyed continually, not of being assaulted once. The Latin Versions vary much in their rendering both of εἰςτέλος and of υΚπωπιάζῃ : in novissimo (Vulg.), in novissimo die (q), in tempus (d), usque ad finem (e), usque quaque (1), in finem (r): suggillet (Vulg.), contringat (b ff2 q), molestior sit mihi (e), invidiam mihi faciat (1). Strauss has pointed out similarities of feature between the parables of the Rich Fool, to the Friend at Midnight at Midnight, and the Unrightous Judge, especially with regard to the soliloquies in each case: διελογίζετοἐναὑτῶλέγωνΤίποιήσω , ὄτικ .τ .λ ., τοῦτοποιήσω (16:3, 4); εἶπενἐνἑαυτῷ (18:4), One may admit that these are “ signs of a common origin,” but that they are also “ signs of a Jewish-Christian, or indeed of an Ebionite source,” is not so evident. He says that this “ mimic” repetition, “ What shall I do? … This will I do,” is thoroughly Jewish. But as Christ was a Jew, speaking to Jews, there is nothing surprising in that. He says also that the Ebionites laid great stress on prayer, and inculcated a contempt for riches; and that two of the three parables do the one, while the third does the other. But assuredly the Ebionites were not peculiar in advocating prayer, not in despising riches, although in the latter point they went to fanatical excess. See Strauss, L. J. § 41, p. 257, ed. 1864. 6 Εἶπενδὲὁκύριος . The insertion indicates a pause, during which the audience consider the parable, after which Jesus makes a comment and draws the moral of the narrative. For ὁκύριος of Christ see on 5:17 and 7:13; and for ὁκριτὴςτὴςἀδικίας see on 16:8. 7. οὐμὴποιήσῃ . This intensive form of the simple negative may be used in questions as well as in statements, and expresses the confidence with which an affirmative answer is expected: comp. John 18:11.Revelation 15:4 is not quite parallel. The argument here is à forliori, or (as Augustine, Quæ st. Evang. ii. 45) ex dissimilitudine, and has many points. If an unjust judge would yield to the importunity of an unknown widow, who came and spoke to him at intervals, how much more will a just God be ready to reward the perseverance of His own elect, who cry to Him day and night ? comp. the very similar passage Eccles. 35:13-18 [32:18-22], and the similar argument Luke 11:13. The treatment of the Syrophenician woman (Matthew 15:22-28 ||) is an illustration of the text. With τῶνβοώντωναὐῷ comp. the souls of the saints under the altar . In both cases it is deliverance from oppression that is prayed for. καὶμακροθυμεῖἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς . “ And He is long-suffering over them” (RV.). This, and not μαλροθυμῶν (E), is the reading of almost all uncials and of other important authorities: et patiens est in illis (d e), et patientiam habebit in illis (Vulg.). The exact meaning of the different parts of the clause cannot be determined with certainty; but the general sense is clear enough, viz. that, however long the answer to prayer may seem to be delayed, constant faithful prayer always is answered. The chief points of doubt are (1) the construction of καὶμακροθυμεῖ , (2) the meaning of μακροθυμεῖ , (3) the meaning of ἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς . (1) We need not join καὶμακροθυμεῖ to οὐμὴποιήσῃ , but may take it with τῶνβοώντων , which is equivalent to of οἳβοῶσιν : the elect cry and He μακροθυμεῖἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς . (2) We need not give μακροθυμεῖ its very common meaning of “ is slow to anger” : it sometimes means “ to be slow, be backward, tarry,” and is almost synonymous with βραδύνω . Comp. Hebrews 6:15; James 5:7; Job 7:16; Jeremiah 15:15; and the remarkably parallel passage Eccles. 35 [32. 22, καὶὁΚύριοςοὐμὴβραδύνῃοὐδὲμὴμακροθυμήσειἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς . So also μακροθυμία may mean “ slow persistency” as well as “ slowness to anger.” Comp. 1 Mac. 8:4, and see Trench, Syn. liii. (3) This being so, there is no need to make ἐπ ʼ αὐτοῖς refer to the enemies of the elect, although such loose wording is not impossible, especially if Lk. had the passage in Ecclus. in his mind. The words naturally, and in strict grammar necessarily, refer to the elect, and indicate the persons in respect of whom the slowness of action takes place. Comp. μακροθυμῶνἐπ ʼ αὐτῷ (James 5:7). The meaning, then, seems to be, “ And shall not Clod deliver His elect who cry day and n ht to Him, while He is slow to act for them?” That is, to them in their need the μακροθυμία of God seems to be βραδύτης (Revelation 6:10), just as it does to the ungodly, when they see no judgment overtaking them (2 Peter 3:1-10). But it is possible that μακροθυμεῖ means “ is not impatient.” The unjust judge heard the widow’ s frequent request with impatience and dislike. God listens to the ceaseless crying of His is saints with willingness and pleasure. In this sense μακροθυμεῖν is the opposite of ὀξυθυμεῖν , “ to be quick-tempered.” 8. ἐντάχει . “ Quickly, without delay” ; celeriter (a), confestim (d), cito (Vulg.). Although He bears long, and t suffering seems to delay, yet He really acts speedily. This interpretation is confirmed by Acts 12:7, Acts 12:22:18, Acts 12:25:4; Romans 16:20; 1 Timothy 3:14; Revelation 1:1, Revelation 22:6. Other, prefer repente, inopinato. Thus Godet says, that although God delays to act, yet. when the moment comes, He acts swiftly, as at the Deluge and the destruction of Sodom. So Didon, l’ heure sonné e, la Vengeance sera Foudroyante (J. C. Ch. 9. p. 614). In any case, the ἐντάξει is placed last with emphasis. πλήν . “ Howbeit (certain as the Messiah’ s deliverance of His people is, a sorrowful question arises) the Son of Man, when He come, will He find faith on the earth?” The πλήν is not im Uebrigen (Weiss), nor seulement (Godet), but doch (Luther), cependant (Lasserre). Latin Versions have verum (d), tamen (b i l q), or verumtamen (Vulg.). Note the emphatic order, both ὁυἱὸςτ . ἀνθρ . and ἐλθών being placed before the interrogative practicle. Yet Syr-Sin. has, “ Shall the Son of man come and find.” Only here and Galatians 2:17 is ἆρα found in N.T. In LXX it a always followed by γε (Genesis 18:13, Genesis 18:26:9, 37:10; Jeremiah 4:10), but without γε it is freq. in Sym. Latin Versions have numquid (b c i l q) or putas (Vulg.). See B lass on Acts 8:30. τὴνπίστν . “ The necessary faith, the faith in question, faith in Jesus as the Messiah and Saviour.” Others prefer “ the faith which perseveres in prayer,” or again “ loyalty to Himself,” which is much the same as faith in Christ. The answer to this desponding question, which seems, but only seems, “ to call in question the success of our Lord’ s whole mediatorial work,” has been given by anticipation 27:26: the majority, not only of mankind but of Christians, will be absorbed in worldly pursuits, and only a few will ‘ endure to the end” (Matthew 24:12, Matthew 24:13). No doubt is expressed or implied as to the coming of the Son of Man, but only as to what will find. There is therefore no reason for conjecturing that the parable received its present from at a time when belief in the Second Advent was waning. Still is there for interpreting it of the Christian Church seeking, help from pagan magistrates against Jewish persecutors, and then concluding that it must have been composed after the time of S. Luke (De Wette). On the other hand, Hilgenfeld sees in the thirst for vengeance, which (he thinks) inspires the parable, evidence of its being one of the oldest portions of the Third Gospel. 9-14. Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. This s no connexion either with the parable which precedes it or with the narrative which follows it. The two parables were evidently spoken on different occasions and addressed to different audiences, the first to the disciples on a specified occasion, the second to the persons described in ver. 9 on some occasion not specified. They are placed in juxtaposition, probably because tradition assigned them to the same portion of Christ’ s ministry (Hahn); or possibly because they both (but in very different ways) treat of prayer (Keil). That Lk. brackets the two parables for some reason is shown by the καί . But note the δέ also, and see on 3:9. The καί is genuine (A.aleph; B D L M Q R X L, Vulg.) although A etc. with several Versions omit. 9. As in ver. 1, this preface to the parable is the Evangelist’ s: εἶπενδέ , δὲκαί , εἶπενπρός , and εἶπενπαραβολήν are all marks of his style. It is possible to take πρός here as meaning “ with a view to,” as in ver. 1, or “ against,” as in 20:19. But it is much more likely that it means “ unto” after εἶπεν because (1) this construction is specially common in Lk. and (2) we here have persons and not the substantial infinitive after πρός : dixit autem et ad quosdam qui (vulg.). Syr-Sin. has “ against.” τοὺςπεποιθόταςἐφ ʼ ἑαυτοῖςὅτι . They themselves were the foundation on which their confidence was built: 11:22; 2 Corinthians 1:9; Hebrews 2:13; Deuteronomy 28:52; 2 Samuel 22:3; Isaiah 8:17, Isaiah 12:2, etc. The Constructions ἔντινι , ἐπίτινα , and εἴςτινα are less common. Grotius and others render ὅτι “ because,” making the righteousness a fact and the ground of their self-confidence; which is incredible. Comp. Proverbs 30:12; Isaiah 65:5. The Talmud inveighs against the Pharisaism of those “ who implore you to mention some more duties which they might perform.” ἐξουθενοῦντας . A strong word, common to Lk. and Paul: “ utterly despised, treated as of no account,” 23:11; Acts 4:11; Romans 14:3, Romans 14:10. Comp. Ps. Son 2:5. τοὺςλοιπούς . “ The rest, all others” (RV.): comp. οἱλοιποί (ver. 11). The “ other” of AV. and most English Versions has been silently altered into “ others” by the printers: “ other” means “ other folk,” but τοὺςλοιπούς means “ all other folk.” 10. ἀνέβησαν . “ They went up” from the lower city to Mount Moriah, the “ Hill of the House,” on which the temple stood. We are probably to understand one of the usual hours of prayer (1:10; Acts 2:15, Acts 3:1, Acts 10:9). 11. σταθείς . This perhaps indicates the conscious adopting of an attitude or of a conspicuous place: debout et la tê te haute (Lasserre); aprè s s’ ê tre placé en é vidence (Reuss); in loco conspicuo instar statutæ stans erectus (Valek.). Contrast ver. 13 and comp. vet. 40, 19:8; Acts 2:14, Acts 17:22, Acts 27:21. The expression is peculiar to Lk. Standing was the common posture at prayer among the Jews (1 Samuel 1:26; 1 Kings 8:14, 1 Kings 8:22; Matthew 6:5; Mark 11:25). See Lightfoot on Matthew 6:5. πρὸςἑαυτόν . These words probably follow ταῦτα (B L, Vulg. Boh. Arm. Orig.); but, even if they precede, they must be taken with προσηύχετο (comp. 2 Mac. 11:13): infra so precabalur (e), apud se orabat (Vulg.). This use of πρὸςἑαντόν is classical. “ Standing by himself” would be καθ ʼ ἑαυτόν , seorsum, which D here reads: comp. Acts 28:16; James 2:17. The character of his prayer shows why he would not utter it so that others could hear. εὐχαριστῶσοι . There is no prayer, even in form; he asks God for nothing, being thoroughly satisfied with his present condition. And only in form is this utterance a thanksgiving; it is self-congratulation. He glances at God, but contemplates himself. Indeed he almost pities God, who but for himself would be destitute of faithful servants. οἱλοιποὶτῶνἀνθρώπων . “ The rest of men” (RV.), “ all other men,” ceteri hominum (Vulg.). He is in a class by himself; every one else in a very inferior class. For other vainglorious thanksgivings used by Jews see Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 291. Contrast S. Paul’ s declaration 1 Corinthians 15:9, 1 Corinthians 15:10, and see Schœ ttgen, 1., p. 306. Noli in precibus bona tua enumerare. ἅρπαγες , ἄδικοι , μοιξοί . Gratias agit, non quia bonus, sed quia Bolus; non tam de bonis quæ habet, quam de malis quæ in aliis videt (Bernard, De Grad. Humil. 5:17). But there is no hint that he was lying in acquitting himself of gross and flagrant crimes. Such falsehood in a silent address to God is scarcely intelligible. His error lay in supposing that all other men were guilty of these things, and that he himself was not guilty of sins that were as bad or worse. Hillel had taught, “ Endeavour not to be better than the community, and trust not in thyself until the day of thy death.” The οὗτοςιςχοντεμπτυους , as often. The τελώνης is pointed out to the Almighty as a specimen of a οἱλοιποὶτ . ἀνθρώπων . 12. He cites these good works as instances of the ways in which he is still further superior to other men. He is superior not only in what he avoids, but in what he performs. Characteristically he names just those things on which Pharisees prided themselves (Matthew 9:14, Matthew 23:23). δὶςτοῦσαββάτου . Mondays and Thursdays. Moses was supposed to have ascended the mount on the fifth day, and to have come down on the second. For the sing. of σάββατον in the sense of “ a week” comp. Mark 16:9; 1 Corinthians 16:2. It is amazing that any should have taken this as meaning “ I fast twice on the sabbath,” which would be unintelligible. The jejuno bis in sabbato of the Vulg. might mislead those who knew no Greek. The frequent statement that the Pharisees observed the second and fifth days as fasts all through the year (D. B.2 1:2. p. 1054), and held that this was enjoined by the oral Law, is without foundation: and those who make it are inconsistent in saying that this Pharisee boasts of works of supererogation. In that case he merely States that he keeps the Law in its entirety. The Mosaic Law enjoins only one fast in the year, the Day of Atonement. Other annuaj fasts were gradually established in memory of national calainities (Zechariah 8:19). Occasional fasts were from time to time ordered in seasons of drought and other public calamities, and these additional fasts were always held on Mondays and Thursdays. Thus, a five days’ fast would not last from Monday to Friday inclusive, but would be held on all Mondays and Thursdays until the five days were made up (see the Didache, 8:1; Apost. const. vii. 23, 1). But many individuals imposed extra fasts on themselves, and there were some who fasted on Mondays and Thursdays all the year round. Such cases would be commonest among the Pharisees, and the Pharisee in the parable is one of them: but there is no evidence that all Pharisees adopted this practice or tried to make it a general obligation (Schü lrer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. II. 2. p. 118; Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 291; Wetstein and Lightfoot, ad loc.). The man, therefore, is boasting of a work of supererogation. What is told us about Jewish fasting in the N.T. (5:33; Matthew 6:16, Matthew 6:9:14; Mark 2:18; Acts 27:9) is confirmed by the Mishna. Note that the Pharisee has dropped even the form of thanksgiving. With δὶςτοῦσαββάτου comp. ἑπτάκιςτῆςἡέρας (17:4). The genitives in 24:1; Matthew 2:14, 25:6, 28:13; Galatians 6:17 are not parallel. ἀποδεκατεύωπάντα . Here again, in paying tithe of everything, he seems to boast of doing more than the Law required. Tithe was due (Numbers 18:21; Deuteronomy 24:22), but not of small garden herbs (Matthew 23:23). There is something for which God owes thanks to him. The rare form ἀποδεκατεύω is found in B א * here in place of the not very common ἀποδεκατόω or ἀποδεκατῶ . WH. 2. App. p. 171. The simple δεκατεύω is more usual. ὅσακτῶμαι . “ All that I get” (RV.): quæ cunque adquiro (i q), quæ adquiro (d). It was on what he acquired, not on what he possessed, that he paid tithe; on his income, not on his capital. All English Versions prior to RV. go wrong here with Vulg. (quæ possideo), Luth. (das ich habe), and Beta. “ Possess” would be κέκτημαι . There is a similar error 21:19. Excepting Matthew 10:9 and 1 Thessalonians 4:4, the verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 1:18, Acts 8:20, Acts 22:28): it is freq. in LXX. 13. μακρόθενἑστώς . Far from the Pharisee: nothing else is indicated. In his self-depreciation he thinks himself unworthy to come now in worship to one who must be a favoured servant of God. But we need not suppose that he remained in the Court of the Gentiles (Grot.), in which case the Pharisee in the Court of Israel would hardly have seen him. Comp. 23:49. The change from σταθείς (ver 11) to ἑστώς perhaps implies less of a set, prominent position in this case. Vulg. has stans in both places; but Cyprian has cum stetisset for σταθείς and stabat et for ἑστώς (De Dom. Orat. 6.). Comp. Tac. Hist. iv. 72, 4. οὑκἤθελενοὐδὲτοὺςὀφθαλμοὺςἐπᾶραι . The common explana “ would not lift up even his eyes, ” much less his hands and his face (1 Timothy 2:8; 1 Kings 8:22; Psalms 28:2, Psalms 63:4, Psalms 134:2), does not seem to be satisfactory. The οὐδέ strengthens the previous οὐκ and need not be taken exclusively with, τοὺςὀφθαλμούς ; “ would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, ” much less adopt any confident or familiar attitude towards God. See Maldonatus, ad loc. Some Rabbis taught that it was necessary to keep the eyes down or to close them in praying (Schœ ttgen, 1: p. 307). ἔτυπτε . “ He continued to smite” ; tundebat (d), percutiebat (Vulg Comp. 8:52, 23:48. Om. εἰς after ἔτυπτε א B L. ἱλάσθητίμοιτῷἁμαρτωλῷ . “ Be merciful (Daniel 9:19) to me the sinner.” He also places himself in a class by himself; but he makes no comparisons. Consciousness of his own sin is supreme; de nemine alio homine cogitat (Beng.). For similar self-accusation comp. Psalms 25:11, 40:12, 51:3; Ezra 9:6; Daniel 9:8; 1 Timothy 1:15. The verb occurs elsewhere in N.T. only Hebrews 2:17, with acc. of the sin. In LXX it is not common. Psalms 64:3, with acc. of the sin. Ps. 24:11, 77:38, Psalms 78:9, with dat. of the sin. 2 Kings 5:18, with dat, of the person, as here. The compound ἐξιλάσκομαι is the more usual word. The classical construction with acc. of the person propitiated is not found in bibl. Grk., because the idea of “ propitiating God” is not to be encouraged. “ The ‘ propitiation’ acts on that which alienates God and not on God, whose love is unchanged throughout” (Wsctt. on Hebrews 2:17, and Additional Note on 1 John 2:2, Epp. of S. John, p. 83). The Latin Versions have propitiare (c ff2 1), repropitiare (b), miserere (d), propitius esto (Vulg.). See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 224. 14. λέγωὑμῖν . As often, this formula introduces an important declaration uttered with authority (7:26, 28, 9:27, 10:12, 24, 11:9, 51, 12:4, 5, 8, 27, 37, 44, 51, 13:3, etc.). Here Christ once more claims to know the secrets both of man’ s heart and of God’ s judgments. κατέβηοὖτοςδεδικαιωμένος . The pronoun perhaps looks back to the contemptuous οὖτος in vet. 11. “ This despised man went down justified in the sight of God,” i.e. “ accounted as righteous, accepted.” Comp. 7:35, 10:29, 16:15; Isaiah 50:8, 53:11; Job 33:32. The Talmud says, “ So long as the temple stood, no Israelite was in distress; for as often as he came to it full of sin and offered sacrifice, then his sin was forgiven and he departed a just man” (Schœ ttgen, 1. p. 308). παρ ʼ ἐκεῖνον . The expression is one of comparison, and of itself does not exclude the possibility of the Pharisee being justified in some smaller degree. Comp. 13:2, 4. But the context perhaps excludes it. Thus Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. iv. 36), ideoque alterum reprobatum, alterum justificatum. Also Euthym. (ad loc.), ὁδικαιώσαςμόνονἑαυτὸκατεδικάσθηπαρὰΘεοῦ , ὁδὲκαταδικάσαςμόνονἑαυτὸνἐδικαιώθηπαρὰΘεοῦ . Aug., however, points out that the Scripture does not say that the Pharisee was condemned (Ep. xxxvi. 4, 7). The readings are various, but παρ ʼ ἐκεῖνον (א B L, Boh. Sah., Orig. Naz.) may be safely adopted: ab illo (Vulg.) is a misrepresentation of this, and μαλλονπαρ ʼ αικεινοντονφαρισειον (D) an amplification of it. The ἢἐκεῖνος (min.pauc.) of Elz. is a gloss; which, however, may have helped to produce the common reading ἢὰρἐκεῖνος (A A G H K M P Q etc.), ΠΑΠ being changed to ΓΑΠ . If ἤγὰρἐκεῖνος (Tisch., Treg. marg.) be adopted, it must be interrogative: “ I say to you, this man went down to his house justified— or did the other do so?” Other Latin variations are præ illum pharisæ um (a), magis guam ille pharisæ us (b c e), to which some add qui so exaltabat (f ff2 i l q r). ἦπαρ ʼ ἐκεῖνον (Hofm. Kell) and ἤπερἐκεῖνος (Hahn) are conjectures. See Blass, Gr. pp. 106, 139. ὅτιπᾶςὁἑψῶν , κ .τ .λ . Verbatim as 14:2 (where see note), which Weiss pronounces to be its original position, while its appearance here is due to Lk. Why is it assumed that Jesus did not repeat His sayings? The suggestion (Aug. Bede) that the Pharisee represents the Jews and the publican the Gentiles cannot be accepted. Nor need we suppose (Godet) that Lk. is here showing that the Pauline doctrine of justification was based on the teaching of Christ. There is nothing specially Pauline here. We are not told that the publican was justified by faith in Christ, but by confession of sin and prayer. The meaning is simple. Christ takes a crucial case. One generally recognized as a saint fails in prayer, while one generally recognized as a sinner succeeds. Why? Because the letter’ s prayer is real, and the former’ s not. The one comes in the spirit of prayer,— self-humiliation; the other in the spirit of pride,— self-satisfaction. 15-17. Little Children brought to Christ. Matthew 19:13-15; Mark 10:13-16. The narrative of Lk., which has been proceeding tindependently since 9:51, here rejoins Mt. and Mk. The three narratives are almost verbatim alike. Where Lk. differs either he has an expression peculiar to himself, as τὰβρέφη (ver. 15) or προσεκαλέσατο (ver. 16); or he and Mk. agree against Mt., as in αὐτῶνἅπτηται (ver. 15), ἔρχεσθαι and τοῦΘεοῦ (ver. 16), ὃςἂνμὴδέξηται , κ .τ .λ . (ver. 17), where Mt. varies considerably in wording. Only in the καί before μὴκωλύετε (ver. 16) does Lk agree with Mt. against Mk. 15. Προσέφερονδὲαὐτῷκαὶτὰβρέφη . The δὲ and καὶτὰβρέφη are peculiar to Lk. For δέ Mk. has καί and Mt. τότε : for καὶτὰβρέφη both have simply παιδὶα . “ Now people were bringing to Him even their babes,” or “ their babes also,” as well as sick folk. In any case βρέφος must be rendered here as in 2:12, 16: comp. 1:41, 44; Acts 7:19; 1 Peter 2:2. AV. has “ babe,” “ infant,” and “ young child.” Vulg. has infans throughout. ἅπτηται Mt. says more distinctly, τὰςχείραςἐπιθῇκαὶπροσεύξηται . Blessing them is meant: comp. Genesis 48:14, Genesis 48:15. The pres. subj. after imperf. indic. is a constr. that is freq. in LXX. It shows how the opt, is going out of use. But here it might be explained as expressing the thought of those who brought the babes, a thought put in a direct form for the sake of vividness: “ that He may touch” for “ that He might touch.” Win. 41. b. 1. a, p. 360. ἐπετίμωναὐτοῖς Not because, as Chrysostom and Theophylact suggest they thought that little children were unworthy to approach Him; but because they thought it a waste of His time and an abuse of His kindness; or, as Jerome, followed closely by Bede, puts it, eum in similitudineum hominum offerentium importunitate lassari. On the first anniversary of their birth Jewish children were sometimes brought to the Rabbi to be blest. Lk. has the imperf. in both places, προσὲφερον … ἐπετίμων : Mt. προσηνέχθησοαν … ἐπετίμησαν : Mk. προσέφερον … ἐπετίμησαν . 16. προσεκαλέσατο . Even if with B we omit αὐτά , this would mean that He called the children (with their parents), and then addressed the disciples. Mk. has ἰδὼν … ἠγανάκτησεν Mt. simply εἶπεν . μὴκωλύετε . “ Cease to forbid.” The wording is almost identical in all three narratives. Jerome and Euthym. (on Matthew 19:14) point out that Christ does not say τούτων but τοιούτων , ut ostenderet non æ tatem regnare sed mores. It is not these children, nor all children, but those who are childlike in character, especially in humility and trustfulness, who are best fitted for the Kingdom. 17. Verbatim as in Mark 10:15. Mt. gives a similar saying on a different occasion (18:3, 4). The δέξηται explains the τοιούτων : a child receives what is offered to it, in full trust that it is good for it, μηδὲνδιακρινόμενοςμηδὲἀμφιβάλλωνπερὶαὐτοῦ (Euthym.). 18-30. The Rich Young Ruler who preferred his Riches to the Service of Christ. Matthew 19:16-30; Mark 10:17-31. In all three narratives this section follows immediately upon the one about bringing children to Christ. This young ruler is humiliated by being told that there is still a great deal to be done before he is qualified for ζωὴαἰώνιος . Thus the lessons supplement one another. The children, like the publican, are nearer the Kingdom than they could suppose themselves to be; the rich young man, like the Pharisee, is farther from it than he supposed himself to be. Those who can be benefited by being abased (9, 22), are abased; while those who cannot be harmed by being exalted (16), are exalted. Here again Lk. often agrees with Mk. in small details of wording against Mt., and only once (ἀκούσας in ver. 23) with Mt. against Mk. 18. ἄρχων . Lk. alone tells us this, and we are in doubt what he means by it. His being a νεανίσκος as Mt. tells us (19:20, 22), is rather against his being a member of the Sanhedrin or a ruler of a synagogue. Weiss, Neander, and others conjecture that νεανίσκος is an error, perhaps an inference drawn by Mt. from Christ’ s charge, especially τίματὸνπατέρασου , κ .τ .λ . Certainly ἐκνεότητος (which is wanting in the best texts of Mt.) does not seem appropriate to a νεανίσκος . Yet Holtzmann supposes that νεανίσκος has been added through a misconception of ἐκνεότητος But the rich ruler’ s self-confidence might easily make him pose as an older man than he really was. Keim seems to be nearer the truth when he says that “ the whole impression is that of an eager and immature young man” (Jes. of Naz. v. p. 36). The statement of Mk., that he ran to Jesus and kneeled to Him (10:17), indicates youthful eagerness. τίποιήσας , κ .τ .λ .. See on 10:25, where the same question is asked. In Mt the “ good is transferred from “ Master” to “ what,” Αιδάσκαλε , τίἀγαθὸνποιήσω ; and hence Christ’ s reply is different, Τίμεἐπωτᾶςπερὶτοῦἀγαθοῦ ; The ruler thought that by some one act, perhaps of benevolence, he could secure eternal life: he was prepared for great expenditure. Similar questions were discussed among the Rabbis: see Wetst. on Matthew 19:16. 19. Τίμελέγειςἀγαθόν ; So also in Mk. In none of the three is there any emphasis on “ Me,” which is an enclitic. There is no instance in the whole Talmud of a Rabbi being addressed as “ Good Master” : the title was absolutely unknown among the Jews. This, therefore, was an extraordinary address, and perhaps a fulsome compliment The Talmud says, “ There is nothing else that is good but the Law.” The explanation of some ancient and modern commentators, that Jesus is here speaking merely from the young man’ s standpoint, is not satisfactory. “ You suppose Me to be a mere man, and you ought not to call any human being good. That title I cannot accept, unless I am recognized as God.” 1 The young ruler could not understand this; and the reply must have had some meaning for him. His defect was that he trusted too much in himself, too little in God. Jesus reminds him that there is only one source of goodness whether in action (Mt.) or in character (Mk. Lk.), viz. God. He Himself is no exception. His goodness is the goodness of God working in Him. “ The Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He seeth the Father doing. … For as the Father hath life in Himself, even so gave He to the Son also to have life in Himself … I can of Myself do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and My judgment is righteous, because I seek not My own will, but the will of Him that sent Me” (John 5:19-30). Non se magistrum non esse, sed magistrum absque Deo nullum bonum esse testatur (Bede). There is no need to add to this the thought that the goodness of Jesus was the goodness of perfect development (see on 2:52), whereas the goodness of God is that of absolute perfection (Weiss on Mark 10:18). οὐδεὶςἀγαθὸςεἰμὴεἶςὁΘεός . So also Mk. Here the article is wanting in א B. The saying appears in a variety of forms in quotations. Justin has two: οὐδεὶςἀγαθὸςεἰμὴμόνοςὁΘεὸςὁποιήσαςτὰπάντα (Apol. i. 16), and εἶςἐστὶνἀγαθός , ὁπατήρμουὁἐντοῖςοὒπανοῖς (Try. ci.). Marcion scams to have read εἶςἐστὶνἀγαθός , ὁΘεὸςὁπατήρ . In Hippol. Philosoph. v. 1 εἶςἑστὶνἀγαθός , ὁπατὴρἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς and a similar reading appears four times in Clem. Hom. See Zeller, Apostelg.; pp. 32 ff., Eng. tr. pp. 105-119, and WH. 2. App. pp. 14, 15. 20. τὰςἐντολὰςοἶδας . Jesus securos ad Legem remittit; contrifos Evangelice consolatur (Beng.). This is, however, not the main point. Nothing extraordinary or not generally known is required for salvation: the observance of well-known commands will suffice. Here Lk. exactly agrees with Mk., except that he places the seventh before the sixth commandment, and omits, as Mt. does, μὴἀποστερήσῃς , which perhaps represents the tenth. In Romans 13:9, James 2:11, and in Cod. B of Deu 5:17 adultery is mentioned before murder. Philo says that in the second πεντάς of the decalogue adultery is placed first as μέγιστονἀδικημάτων (De decem orac. xxiv., xxxii.,). In all three of the Gospels the fifth commandment is placed last and none of the first four is quoted. In Mt. they are in the same form as in Exo_20. and Deut, 5, Οὐφονεύσειςκ .τ .λ . So also Romans 13:9. In Mk. and James 2:11, Μὴφονεύσῃς . 21. ταῦταπάνταἐφύλαξαἐκνεότητος . Not so much a boast, as an expression of dissatisfaction. “ I wanted to be told of something special and sublime; and I am reminded of duties which I have been performing all my life.” The reply exhibits great ignorance of self and of duty, but is perfectly sincere. That it was possible to keep the whole Law is an idea which is frequent in the Talmud. Abraham, Moses, and Aaron were held to have done so. R. Chanina says to the Angel of Death, “ Bring me the book of the Law, and see whether there is anything written in it which I have not kept” (Schoettg. 1. pp. 160, 161. See also Edersh. L. &T. 1. p. 536). Here, as in Matthew 19:20; Genesis 26:5; Exodus 12:17, Exodus 20:6, we have the act. of φυλάττω : Mark 10:20; Leviticus 18:4, Leviticus 18:20:8, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 18:26:3, the mid. without difference of sense. 22. ἀκούσαςδὲὁἸησοῦς . Mk. has the striking ἐμβλέψαςαὐτῷαὐτόν , which is strong evidence that behind Mk. is one who was intimate with Christ. From ἠγάπησεν , πάνταπώλησον , and ἀκολούθειμοι (5:27, 9:59) we may conjecture that this was a call to become an Apostle. Ἔτιἕνσοιλείπει . Mk. has ἕνσεὑστερεῖ . Mt. transfers the words to the young man, τίἔτιὑστερῶ ; Christ neither affirms nor denies the ruler’ s statement of his condition. Assuming it to be correct, there is still something lacking, viz. detachment from his wealth. In what follows we have two charges, one to sell and distribute; the other to follow Christ; and the first is preparatory to the second. But we may not separate them and make the first the one thing lacking and the second the answer to τίποιήσας in ver. 18. In ἕξειςθησαυρὸνἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς we have a clear reference to ζωὴναἰώνιον , and this promise is attached to the first charge. The πάντα (comp. 6:30, 7:35, 9:43, 11:4) and the compound διάδος (11:22; Acts 4:35; elsewhere only John 6:11) are here peculiar to Lk. Mt., having transferred the words about “ lacking something yet” to the rich young man, gives Christ’ s reply Εἰθέλειςτέλειοςεἶναι in place of Ἔτιἕνσοιλείπει . These words cannot mean a perfection superior to the fulfilment of the Law, for no such perfection is possible (17:10). A misconception is point led to the distinction between the performance of duty and moral perfection, which has produced much error in moral theology. Clam. Alex. rightly says, ὄτανεἴπῃΕἰθέλειςτέλειοςγενέσθαι (sic), πωλήσαςτὰὑπάρχονταδὸςπτωχοῖς , ἐλέγχειτὸνκαυχώμενονἐπὶτῷπάσαςτὰςἐντολὰςἐκνεότητοςτετηρηκέναι · οὐγὰρπεπληρώκειτό , Ἀγαπήσειςτὸνπλησίονσουὡςἑαυτόν · τότεδέ , ὑπὸτοῦΚυριουσυντελειούμενος , ἐδιδάσκετοδι ʼ ἀγάπηνμεταδιδόναι (Strom. iii. 6, p. 537, ed. Potter). Neander, L. J. C. § 226, Eng. tr. p. 367. In class. Grk. this use of λείπειν for ἐλλείπειν is mostly poetical. For διάδος (B A F etc.) א A D L M P R D have δός from Mt. and Mk.) And for ἐντοῖςοὐρανοις (B D) א A L R have ἐνοὐράνοις from Mt., and P, Vulg. Goth. have ἐνοὐρανῷ from Mk. The plur. is supported by in cæ lis (a d e), but the article is doubtful. 23. περίλυπος . Stronger than λυπούμενος (Mt. Mk.), to which Mk. adds the graphic στυγνάσας (Ezekiel 32:10; [Matthew 16:3]). For περίλυπος comp. Mark 6:26, Mark 6:14:34; Matthew 26:38. He wanted to follow Christ’ s injunctions, but at present the cost seemed to him to be too great. πλούσιοςσφόδρα . The statement explains, and perhaps in some measure excuses, his distress. He possessed a great deal more than a boat and nets; and Peter, James, and John were not told to sell their boats and nets and give the proceeds to the poor; because their hearts were not wedded to them. 24. Πῶςδυσκόλως . All three have this adv., which occurs nowhere else in bibl. Grk. Clam. Alex. seems to allude to the saying when he writes ὁλόγοςτουὺςτελώμαςλέγειδυσκόλωςσωθήσεται (Strom. v. 5. p. 662, ed. Potter). Lk. omits the departure of the ruler, which took place before these words were uttered. Mk. alone records (10:24) the consternation which they excited in the disciples, and Christ’ s repetition of them. It was perhaps largely for the sake of Judas that these stern words about the perils of wealth were uttered to them. 25. In the Talmud an elephant passing through the eye of a needle is twice used of what is impossible; also a camel dancing in a very small corn measure. See Lightfoot, Schœ ttgen, and Wetstein, ad loc. For εὐκοπώτερον see small print on 5:23. The reading κάμιλον = “ cable” here and Matthew 19:24 is an attempt to tone down a strong statement. It is found only in a few late MSS. The word κάμιλος occurs only in Suidas and a scholiast on Aristoph. Vesp. 1030. Some would give the meaning of “ cable” to κάμηλος (so Cyril on Matthew 19:24), but no doubt the animal is meant. Others would make the “ needle’ s eye” into a narrow gateway for foot-passengers; but this also is erroneous. See Expositor, Ist series, 3. p. 369, 1876; WH. 2. App. p. 151. For βελόνης , which occurs nowhere else in bibl. Grk., Mt. and Mk. have ῥαφίνη , and for τρήματος Mk. has τρυμαλιᾶς . Hobart claims both βελόη and τρῆμα as medical, the former with good reason (p. 60). Celsus said that this saying of Christ was borrowed along with others from Plato. But the passage which he quoted from the Laws (v. p. 742) merely says that a man cannot be at once very good and very rich. There is nothing about a camel or a needle. Orig. Con. Cels. 6:16, 1. The saying in the Koran (7:38), “ Neither shall they enter into paradise, until a camel through the eye of a needle,” is probably taken from the Gospels (Sale, p. 108). It is specially to be noted that this hard saying about the difficulty of those who have riches entering into the Kingdom of God is in all three Gospels and not merely in the one which is supposed to be Ebionite in tone. Comp. Matthew 6:19-21; Mark 12:41, Mark 12:42. Lk.omits the great amazement, ἐξεπλήσσντοσφόδρα (Mt.), περισσῶςἐξεπλήσσοντο (Mk.), which this second utterance on the impediments caused by wealth excited in the disciples. The Latin translator of Origen’ s comm, on Mat_19. has the following extract from “ a certain Gospel which is called According to the Hebrews.” But neither this preface not the extract are in the Greek text of Origen. Dixit ad eum alter divitum, Magisterter, quid bonum faciens vivam ? Dixit ei, Homo, legem et prophetas fac. Respondit ad eum, Feci. Dixit ei, Vade, vende omnia quæ possides et divide pauperibus et veni, sequere me. Coepit autem dives scalpere caput suum (sic), et non placuit ei: Et dixit ad eum Dominus, Quomodo dicis Legem feci et prosphetas ? quoniam scriptum est in lege Diliges proximum tuum sicut te ipsum, et ecce multi fratres tui, filii Abrahæ amicti sunt stercore, morientes præ fame, et demur tua plena est multis bonis, et non egreditur omnino aliquid ex ea ad eos. Et conversus dixit Simoni discipulo suo, sedenti apud se, Simon, fili Johannæ , facilius est camelum intrare per foramen acus quam divitem in regnum cæ orum. See also the fragment quoted from the narrative of the man with the withered hand (Luke 6:8). These specimens explain why the Gospel according to the Hebrews was allowed to pass into oblivion. and it is difficult to believe that this Nazarene Gospel was the original Hebrew of our Mt. If it was, “ our Greek Evangelist must have been a most unfaithful translator” (Salmon, Int. to N.T. p. 166, 5th ed.). We may add that he must have been a person of very superior taste and ability. 26. Καὶτίςδύναταισωθῆναι ; Not “ what rich man” (Weiss), but “ what person of any description” : Numbers 24:23. The whole world either possesses or aims at possessing wealth. If, then, what every one desires is fatal to salvation, who can be saved? The καί adds emphasis to the question, which arises out of what has just been said: Comp. 10:29; John 9:36; 2 Corinthians 2:2. 27. Τὰἀδύναταπαρὰἀνθρώποις . This shows that ver. 25 means an impossibility, not merely something difficult or highly improbable. It is a miracle of grace when those who have wealth do not put their trust in it. Lk. omits the steadfast look with which Mt. and Mk. say that this declaration was accompanied. He sympathizes with their perplexity and hastens to remove it. Not only before proper names which begin with a vowel (Mt :28:15; John 1:40), but also in other cases, παρά sometimes is found unelided; παρὰἁμαρτωλῷ (19:7). This is commonly the case before ἄνθρωπος : comp. Matthew 19:26; Mark 10:27; John 5:34, John 5:41; Galatians 1:12. δυνατὰπαρὰτῷΘεῷ . Zacchæ us proved this (19:1-10). Comp. Zechariah 8:6; Job 42:2. For parallels from profane writers see Grotius and Wetstein on Matthew 19:26. But παρὰἀνθρώποις and παρὰτῷΘεῷ certainly do not mean hominum judicio and Dei judicio (Fri. Ew.). they refer to what each can do. Man cannot, but God can, break the spell which wealth exercises over the wealthy. Comp. 1:37; Genesis 18:14; Jeremiah 32:17, Jeremiah 32:27; Zechariah 8:6. 28. εἶπενδὲὁΠέτρος . His being the one to speak is characteristic; but he does not speak in a spirit of boastfulness. Rather it is the reaction from their consternation which moves him to speak: spe ex verbis Salvatoris concepts (Bang.). He wants to be assured that God’ s omnipotence has been exerted on their behalf, and that they may hope to enter the Kingdom. Mt adds τίἄραἔσταιἡμῖν ; Note the εἶπενδέ , which neither Mt. nor Mk. has. 29. Ἀμὴνλέγωὑμῖν . In all three: it is a declaration of great moment. Not only has God done this for the Twelve, but for many others: and every one who has had grace to surrender is sure of his reward. Lk. alone has γυναῖκα , and alone omits ἀγρούς , among the things surrendered. The omission is noteworthy in connexion with his supposed Ebidnitism. 30. πολλαπλασίονα . Job’ s family was exactly restored; his goods were exactly doubled. The dramatic compensations of the O.T. are far exceeded by the moral and spiritual compensations of the Gospel: and it is evident from this passage that material rewards are included also. What is lost in the family is replaced many times over in Christ and in the Church. This would apply in a special way to converts from heathen families, who found loving fathers and brethren to replace the cruel relations who cast them out. Lk. and Mt. omit (but for no imaginable dogmatic reasons) the important qualification μετὰδιωγμῶν . “ He only is truly rich,” said the Rabbi Meir, “ who enjoys his riches.” The Christian sacrifices what is not enjoyed for what brings real happiness. Mk. has ἐκατονταπλασίονα . D supported by many Latin authorities (a b c d e ff2 i l q r, Cypr. Ambr. Aug. Bede) here has ἑπταπλασίονα . Cyprian quotes the passage thrice, and each time has septies tantum in isto tempore. Wh. conjectures “ some extraneous source, written or oral.” Vulg. and f have multo plura in hoc tempore. Between λάβῃ (B D M, Arm.), which may come from Mk., and ἀπολάβῃ (א A P R etc.) it is not easy to decide. With ἀπολάβῃ comp. 23:41; Romans 1:27; Colossians 3:24; 2 John 1:8. It is often used with τ . μισθόν (Xen. Anab. vii. 7, 14; Her. 8:137, 6). Vulg. has et non recipiat. ἐντῷκαιρῷτούτῳ . Note the contrast with τῷαἰῶνι : not merely in this world, but in this season. So also in Mk. Comp. ἐντῷνῦνκαιρῷ (Romans 3:26, Romans 8:18), and τὸνκαιρὸντὸνἐνεστηκότα (Hebrews 9:9), which means the same: see Wsctt. ἐντῶαἰῶνιτῷἐρχομένῳ . “ In the age which is in process of being realized.” See on 7:19, and comp. Ephesians 1:21, Ephesians 1:2:7; Hebrews 6:5. Bengal remarks that Scripture in general is more explicit about temporal punishments than temporal rewards, but about eternal rewards than eternal punishments. Millermarians made use of this promise as an argument for their views. It would be in the millennium that the faithful would receive literally a hundredfold of what they had given up for the Kingdom’ s sake: non intelligentes quod si in cæ teris digna sit refiromissio, in uxoribus appareat turpitudo; ut qui unam pro Domino dimiserit, et centum recipiat in futuro (Jerome on Matthew 19:29). Lk. omits the saying about last being first and first last, having already recorded it in a different connexion (13:30). 31-34. The Third Announcement of the Passion. Matthew 20:17-19; Mark 10:32-34. For previous announcements (just before and just after the Transfiguration) see 9:22, 44. The raising of Lazarus should probably be placed here. The decree of the Sanhedrin for the arrest of Jesus had very likely already been passed when our Lord made this new announcement of His death. Apostolis sæ pius dixit et indies expressius, ut in posterum testes essent præ scientiæ iprsius (Grotius). The εἷπεν (ver. 31) is the one item which Lk. and Mt. have in common against Mk. In several expressions in vv. 32, 33 Lk. agrees with Mk. against Mt. The εἶπενπρός the πάντα (see on 7:35, 9:43, 11:4), τὰγεγραμμένα (see on 22:37), and all of ver. 34 are peculiar to Lk.’ s account. 31. παραλαβών . “ Took to Himself” (9:28, 11:26; Acts 15:39). The notion of taking aside, away from the multitude, is involved, but is not prominent. In class, Grk. it is freq. of taking a wife, a companion, an ally, or adopting a son. This announcement specially concerned the Twelve who were to accompany Him to Jerusalem. See the graphic account of their behaviour Mark 10:32. διὰτῶνπροφητῶν . This is the regular expression for the utterances of prophecy: they are spoken by means of the Prophets.” The Prophet is not an originating agent, but an instrument. But this is the only place in which the phrase occurs in Lk., who says little to his Gentile readers about the fulfilment of prophecy. Comp. Matthew 1:22, Matthew 1:2:5, Matthew 1:15, Matthew 1:23, Matthew 1:4:14, Matthew 1:8:17, Matthew 1:12:7, Matthew 1:13:35, etc. In Matthew 2:17 and 3:3 ὑπό is a false reading. Comp. Haggai 2:2.— See Gould on Mark 10:33, Mark 10:34. τῷυἱῷτοῦἀνθρώπου . Once more an amphibolous expression. It can be taken with either τελεσθήσεται or τὰγεγραμμένα . If with the former it may mean either “ by the Son of Man” (which is not probable, for it is not what He does, but what others do to Him that is predicted), or “ unto the Son of Man” (RV. Hahn, Nö sgen). Comp. ἀναπληροῦταιαὐτοῖςἡπροφητεία (Matthew 13:14). But for this Lk. elsewhere has ἐντῷυἱῶςτ . ἀνθρ . (22:37). It seems better to take the dat. with τὰγεγραμμένα : “ for the Son of Man,” i.e. prescribed for Him as His course (Weiss, Godet), or “ of the Son of Man” (Vulg. Wic. Tyn. Cov. Cran. Rhem. AV. Alf.). Hence the ancient gloss in the text of D, περὶτοῦυἱοῦτ .ἀ . Win. 31:4, p. 265. Green, p. 100. 32. παραδοθήσεταιγὰρτοῖςἔθνεσιν . This is a new element of definiteness in the prophecy, and it almost carries with it, what Matthew 20:19 distinctly expresses, that the mode of death will be crucifixion. It is said that this prediction has been made more definite by the Evangelist, who has worded it in accordance with accomplished facts. But, in that case, why were not 9:22 and 44 made equally definite? That Christ should gradually reveal more details is in harmony with probability. Lk., however, omits the high priests and scribes, and their condemning Christ to death before handing Him over to the heathen, although both Mt. (10:18) and Mk. (10:33) say that Jesus predicted these details on this occasion. Here Lk. alone has ὑβρισθήσεται (11:45; Acts 14:5; elsewhere twice). 33. τῇἡμέρᾳτῇτρίτῃ . Mk. has the less accurate μετὰτρεῖςἡμέρας , which can hardly have been invented to fit the facts. While the prediction of His death might shake the disciples’ faith in His Messiahship, the prediction of His rising again was calculated to establish it. 34. καὶαὐτοὶοὐδὲντούτωνσυνῆκαν . Comp. 2:50. Note the characteristic καὶαὐτοί and ἦνκεκρυμμένον . Lk. alone mentions the appeal to prophecy (ver. 31), and he alone states— with three-fold emphasis— that the Twelve did not at all understand. But Mt. and Mk. illustrate this dulness a apprehension by the request of the sons of Zebedee for the right and left hand places in the Kingdom, which Lk. omits. Their minds were too full of an earthly kingdom to be able to grasp the idea of a Messiah who was to suffer and to die: and without that they could not understand His rising again, and did not at first believe when they were told that He had risen. Their dulness was providential, and it became a security to the Church for the truth of the Resurrection. The theory that they believed, because they expected that He would rise again, is against all the evidence. Comp. 9:45. κεκρυμμένονἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν . This was changed when He διήνοιξεναὐτῶντὸννοῦντοῦσυνιέναιτὰςγραφάς (24:45). For ἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν comp. 9:45, 10:21, 19:42; 2 Kings 4:27; Psalms 118:19?; Isaiah 40:27; Jeremiah 39:17. This statement is not identical with either of the other two. It explains the fact that they not only did not understand any of this at the time, but “ did not get to know the things that were said.” 35-43. The Healing of Blind Bartimæ us at Jericho. Matthew 20:29-34; Mark 10:46-52. This miracle probably took place in the week preceding that of the Passion. The three narratives have exercised the ingenuity of harmonizers. Lk. and Mk. have only one blind man; Mt. again mentions two (comp. Matthew 9:27). Lk. represents the miracle as taking place when Jesus was approaching Jericho; Mt and Mk. as taking place when He was leaving it. Lk. says that Jesus healed with a command, ἀνάβλεψον ; Mk. with a word of comfort, ὔπαγε , ἡπίστιςσουσέσωκένσε ; Mt. with a touch, ἤψατοτῶνὀμμάτῶναὐτῶν . Only those who have a narrow view respecting inspiration and its effects will be concerned to reconcile these differences and make each of the three verbally exact. These make many suggestions. 1. There were three different healings (Euthym, on Matthew 20:34). 2. As Christ entered Jericho, Bartimæ us cried for help, and was not healed; he then joined a second blind man, and with him made an appeal as Jesus left Jericho, and then both were healed (Calvin and Maldon. Followed by Wordsw.). 3. One blind man was healed as He entered, Bartimæ us, and another as He left (Aug. Quæ st. Evang. 2:48). 4. One was healed as He entered and one as He left; and Mt. combines the first with the second (even Neander inclines to this, L. J. C. § 236, note). 5. There were two Jerichos, Old and New, and Lk. means that Jesus was approaching New Jericho, Mt. and Mk. that He was leaving Old Jericho (Macknight), although there is no evidence that Old Jericho was still inhabited, or that “ Jericho” without epithet could at this time mean anything but the city which was given by Antony to Cleopatra, and afterwards redeemed by Herod the Great (Jos. Ant. 15:4, 2, 4). See Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 310; also some good remarks by Sadler on Mark 10:46, to the effect that “ the inspiration of the Evangelists did not extend to minutiæ of this sort” , and by Harvey Goodwin against forced explanations (Gosp. of S. Luke, p. 311, Bell, 1865). 6. See below on ver. 35. The narrative of Mk., who gives the name Bartimæ us and other details, is probably the most exact of the three. See Wsctt. Intr. to the Gospels, ch. 7. p. 367, 7th ed. The attempts of Hitzig and Keim to use the name, which in Syriac may perhaps mean “ son of the blind,” to discredit the whole narrative, are rightly condemned by comes Weiss (L. J. 2. p. 439, Eng. tr. 3. p. 222). Strauss suggests that the name comes from ἐπετίμων (ver. 39; Mark 10:48)and ἐπετίμησε (Matthew 20:31) (L. J. § 71, p. 429, 1864). For other possible meanings see Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. ad loc.. 35. ἐντῷἐγγίζειναὐτὸνεἰςἸερειχώ . The translation, “ When He was not far from Jericho,” i.e. as He had just left it (Grotius, Nö sgen), is perhaps the worst device for harmonizing Lk. with Mt. and Mk. The meaning of ἐγγίζειν is decisive; and there is the εἰς in addition. Both Herod the Great and Archelaus had beautified and enlarged Jericho, which at this time must have presented a glorious appearance . It was here that Herod had died his horrible death (Jos. B. J. 1:33, 6, 7). Note the characteristic ἐγένετο and ἐντῷ c. infin. See on 3:21, and comp. 2 Samuel 15:5. In class. Grk. ἐγγίζειν is not common, and usually has the dat. In bbl. Grk. it is very frequent; sometimes with dat., esp. in the phrase ἐγγίζειντῷθεῷ (James 4:8; Exodus 19:22; Leviticus 10:3; Isaiah 29:13, etc.); sometimes with πρός (Genesis 45:4, 48:10; Exodus 19:21, etc.); and also with εἰς (19:29, 24:28; Matthew 21:1; Mark 11:1; Tob. 6:10 א , 11:1). In N.T. ἐγγίζειν is always intrans. For ἐπαιτῶν (א B D L, Orig.) A P Q R etc. have προσαιτῶν . Comp. 16:3. 36. ὄχλουδιαπορευομένου . The caravan of pilgrims going up to the Passover. See on 6:1 and on 11:29; also Edersh. Hist. of J. N. p. 255, ed. 1896. Leaving His place of retirement (John 11:54, John 11:55), Jesus had joined this caravan; and it is probable that He came to Jericho in order to do so. The crowd was there, according to all three narratives, before the miracle took place. This shows how untenable is the view of Keim, Holtzmann, and Weiss, that Lk. has purposely transferred the healing from the departure to the entry in order to account for the crowd at the meeting with Zacchæ us (19:3): the miracle produced the crush of people. But according to Lk. himself the crowd was there before the miracle. ἐπύθάνετοτίἔητοῦτο . In N.T. πυνθάνομαι is almost peculiar to Lk. (15:26, where see note; Acts 4:7, Acts 4:10:18, Acts 4:29, etc.). Omitting ἄν with א A B P etc. against D K L M Q R X, “ He enquired what this was,” not “ what this possibly might be.” Matthew 2:4; John 4:52. 37. For ἀπήγγειλαν see on 8:20; for Ναζωωραῖος see on 4:34 (Mk. here has Ναζαρηνός , and Mt. omits the epithet); and for παρέρχεται see on 11:42. 38. ἐβόησεν . Comp. 9:38, 17:13. υἱὲΔαυείς . This shows that he recognizes Jesus as the Messiah (Matthew 9:27, Matthew 9:12:23, Matthew 9:15:22, Matthew 9:21:9, Matthew 9:15). It is not this which the multitude resent, but the interruption: comp. 5:15. They regard him as an ordinary beggar, asking for money. And Jesus was perhaps teaching as He went. Mk. tells us how the attitude of the people changed towards him, when they saw that Jesus had decided to listen to him. See Gould on Mark 10:47. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 19:1-10. § The Visit to Zacchæ us, the Tax-collector of Jericho. The on other grounds improbable conjecture, that we have here a distorted variation of the Call of Matthew, the Tax collector of Capernaum, is excluded by the fact that Lk. has recorded that event (5:27-32). Even if the two narratives were far more similar than they are, there would be no good reason for doubting that two such incidents had taken place. The case of Zacchæ us illustrates the special doctrine of this Gospel, that no one is excluded from the invitation to the Kingdom of God. The source from which Lk. obtained the narrative seems to have been Aramaic. In time it is closely connected with the preceding section. 1. διήρχετοτὴνἸερειχώ . “ He was passing through Jericho,” and the meeting took place inside the city. For the verb see on 2:15, and for the constr. comp. 2:35; Acts 12:10, Acts 13:6, Acts 14:24, etc. Apparently the meeting with Zacchæ us was what detained Him in Jericho: otherwise He would have gone through without staying: comp. 24:28. 2. ὀνόματικαλούμενοςΖακχαῖος . For the dat. comp. 1:61. The name, which means “ pure,” shows him to have been a Jew: Ezra 2:9; Nehemiah 7:14. Tertullian says, Zacchæ us, etsi allophylus, fortasse tamen aliqua notitia scripturarum ex commercio Judaico afflatus (Adv. Marcion. 4:37, 1). But the Jews murmured because Jesus lodged with a man that was a sinner. They would have said a heathen, if it had been true. See below on ver. 9. The Clementines make Zacchæ us a companion of Peter, who appoints him, much against his wish, to be bishop of Cæ sarea (Hom. 3:63; Recog. 3:66); and be Apost. Const. say that he was succeeded by Cornelius (7:46). Clem. Alex. says he was identified with Matthias (Strom. 4:6. p. 579). The Talmud mentions a Zacchæ us who lived at Jericho and was father of the celebrated Rabbi Jochanan. He might be of the same family as this Zacchæ us. The use of ἀνήρ here (comp. 1:27, 8:41, 23:50) rather than ἄνθρωπος (comp. 2:25, 6:6) perhaps is no mark of dignity: see ver. 7. καὶαὐτὸςἧνἀρχιτελώνηςκαὶαὐτὸςπλούσιος . Note the double καὶαὐτός , and see on 5:14 and 6:20. The second καὶαὐτός (B K U Π , Vulg.) is doubtful: om. D, d e; καὶοὗτοςἧν (A Q R); καὶἦν (א L, Boh. Goth.). The last may be right. ἀρχιτελώνης . This is evidently an official title, and means more than that Zacchæ us was a very rich tax-collector (Didon). Had that been the meaning, we should have ὅτι or γάρ instead of καί . Perhaps we may render, “ Commissioner of Taxes.” The word occurs nowhere else, and the precise nature of the office not be ascertained. Probably he was intermediate between the portitores and the publicani, and by the Romans would have been called magister. Jericho, as a large frontier city, through which much of the carrying trade passed, and which had a large local trade in costly balsams, would be a likely place for a commissioner of taxes. This is the sixth notice of the tax-collectors, all favourable, in this Gospel (3:12, 5:27, 7:29, 15:1, 18:10). 3. ἐζήτειἰδεῖν . Not like Herod (23:8), but like the Greeks (John 12:21). He had heard of Him, and perhaps as mixing freely with publicans and sinners. Fama notum vultu noscere cupiebat (Grotius). For the indic. after τίς dependent comp. Acts 21:33. οὐκἠδύνατοἀπὸτοῦὄχλου . The multitude was the source of the hindrance. comp. 21:26, 24:41; Acts 12:14, Acts 12:22:11; John 21:6; Hebrews 5:7. His being unable to free himself from the throng is not the meaning of the ἀπό . In class. Grk. we should have διά with acc. For ἡλικίᾳ see on 2:52. 4. εἰςτὸἔμπροσθεν .. Strengthens the προδραμών . He ran on to that part of the city which was in front of Christ’ s route. There is nothing to show that he wished to hide, and that Christ’ s call to him was like His making the woman with the issue disclose her act (Trench). On the other hand, there is no evidence that he braved the derision of the crowd. We may say, however, that no thought of personal dignity or propriety deterred him from his purpose. TR. omits εἰςτό , which is sufficiently attested by א B L, processit in priore et (e), antecedens ab ante (d), D having προλαβών for προδραμών . συκομορέαν . “ A fig-mulberry,” quite a different tree from the fig and the mulberry and the common sycamore: Its fruit is like the fig, and its leaf like the mulberry, and hence the name. The συκάμινος of 17:6 is commonly held to be the mulberry, but may be another name for the fig-mulberry, as Groser thinks. The fig-mulberry “ recalls the English oak, and its shade is most pleasing. It is consequently a favourite wayside tree. … It is very easy to climb, with its short trunk, and its wide lateral branches forking out in all directions” (Tristram, Nat. Hist. of B. P. 398). The MSS. vary much, but all early uncials except A have -μορέα and not -μοραία ; and -μορέα is much better attested than -μωρέα or -μωραία . The common form is συκόμορος . With ἐκείης sc. ὁδοῦ comp. ποίας 5:19. For the sudden change of subject, ἀνέβη … ἤμελλεν , comp. 14:5, 15:15, 17:2; and for the subjunctive after a past tense, ἀνέβη … ἴναἴδῃ , comp. 6:7, 18:15, 39; John 4:8, John 7:32. 5. ζακχαῖε . There is no need to assume that Jesus had supernatural knowledge of the name: John 4:17, John 4:18 is not parallel Jesus might hear the people calling to Zacchæ us, or might enquire. And He seems not to use His miraculous power of knowledge when He could obtain information in the usual way (Mark 8:5; John 11:34). The explanation that He thereby showed Zacchæ us that He knew all about him, is not adequate. Would Zacchæ us have inferred this from being addressed by name? σπεύσαςκατάβηθι . He had made to to see Christ: he must make haste to to receive Him. Accepit plus quam sperabat, qui, quod potuit, fecit (Maldon.). As in the case of Nathanael (John 1:47), Jesus knew the goodness of the man’ s heart. Here supernatural knowledge, necessary for Christ’ s work, is quite in place. For σπεύδειν see on 2:16. σήμερονγὰρἐντῷοἴκῳσου . First, with emphasis. “ This very day; in thy house.” For δεῖ of the Divine counsels see on 4:43. Taken in conjunction with καταλῦσαι (ver. 7), μεῖναι possibly means “ to pass the night.” But neither word necessarily means staying for more than a long rest. 7. πάντεςδιεγόγγυζον . Note the characteristic πάντες , and comp. 5:30, 15:2. It was not jealousy, but a sense of outraged propriety, which made them all murmur. Παρὰἁμαρτωλῷ . First, with emphasis. They allude, not to the personal charact of Zacchæ us, but to his calling. For παρά unelided before a vowel see small pint on 18:27, and Gregory, Prolegom. p. 95. καταλῦσαι . Only here and 9:12 in N.T. has καταλύω the classical meaning of “ loosing one’ s garments and resting from a journey” : comp. Genesis 19:2, Genesis 19:24:23, Genesis 19:25; Ecclus. 14:25, 27, 36:31. Elsewhere in N.T. it means “ throw down, destroy” (21:6; Acts 5:38, Acts 6:14, etc.). 8. σταθείς . Perhaps indicates a set attitude: see on 18:11. It is a solemn act done with formality. The narrative represents this declaration as the immediate result of personal contact with the goodness of Christ. He is overwhelmed by Christ’ s condescension in coming to him, and is eager to make a worthy acknowledgment. That he was stung by the reproach παρὰἁμαρτωλῷἀνδρί , and wished to prove that he was not so great a sinner, is less probable. The δέ does not show that Zacchæ us is answering his accusers, but that Lk. contrasts with theirs. The solemn declaration is addressed τρὸςτὸνκύριον , not to them; and the Ἰδού with which it begins indicates a sudden resolution rather than one which had been slowly reached. τὰἡμίσια . “ MSS. clearly certify to τὰἡμίσια , apparently from a form ἡμίσιος , against τὰἤμισυ and still more against τὰἡμίση : this peculiar form occurs in an inscription from Selinus in Cilicia (C.I.G. 4428).” WH. 2. App. p.158. But editors are much divided. Lach. ἡμίσεα , Treg. Tisch. an Weiss ἡμίσεια , TR. and RV. ἡμίση , WH. ἡμίσια . May not ἡμίσεια and ἡμίσια be mere mistakes for ἡμίσεα , and ἡμίση be a supposed improvement? The neut. plur. depends upon the neut. plur. of τῶνὑπαρχόντων . Comp. τῶννήσωντὰςἡμίσεας (Hdt. 2:10, 4); οἱἡμίσειςτῶνἄρτων (Xen. Cyr. 4:5, 4). For τὰὑπάρχοντα see on 8:3. τοῖςπτωχοῖςδίδωμι . “ I hereby give to the poor” : it is an act done there and then. The present tense might mean “ I am in the habit of giving” (Godet); but this is not likely. For (1) this makes Zacchæ us a boaster; (2) τῶνὑπαρχόντων has to be interpreted “ income,” whereas its natural meaning is “ that which one has possessed all along, capital” ; (3) ἀποδίδωμι must follow δίδωμι , and it is improbable that Zacchæ us was in the habit of making fourfold restitution for inadvertent acts of injustice; and a man so scrupulous as to restore fourfold would not often commit acts of deliberate injustice. Standing in Christ’ s presence, he solemnly makes over half his great wealth to the poor, and with the other if engages to make reparation to those whom he has defrauded. So Iren. Tertul. Ambr. Chrys. Euthym. Theoph. Maldon. etc. Aug. and Euthym. suggest that he kept one half, not to possess it, but to have the means of restitution. That he left all and became a follower of Christ (Ambr.) is not implied, but may eventually have taken place. εἴτινόςτιἐσυκοφάντησα . The indic. shows that he is not in doubt about past malpractices: “ if, as I know is the case, I have,” etc. Comp. Romans 5:17; Colossians 2:20, Colossians 3:1. For συκοφαντεῖν see on 3:14, the only other place in N.T. in which the verb occurs: in LXX it is not rare. The constr. τινόςτι is on the analogy of ἀποστερεῖν and similar verbs. ἀποδίδωμιτετραπλοῦν . This was almost the extreme penalty imposed by the Law, when a man was compelled to make reparation for a deliberate act of destructive robbery (Exodus 22:1; 2 Samuel 12:6). But sevenfold was sometimes exacted (Proverbs 6:31). If the stolen property had not been consumed, double was to be paid (Exodus 22:4, Exodus 22:7). When the defrauder confessed and made voluntary restitution, the whole amount stolen, with a fifth added was sufficient (Leviticus 6:5; Numbers 5:7). Samuel promises only simple restitution if anything is proved against him (1 Samuel 12:3). Zacchæ us is willing to treat his exactions as if they had been destructive robberies. In thus stripping himself of the chief part even of his honestly gained riches he illustrates 18:27. Ecce enim camelus, deposita gibbi sarcina, per foramen acus transit, hot est dives et publicanus, relicto onere divitiarum, contempto sensu fraudium, angustam, portam arctamque viam quæ ad vitam ducit ascendit (Bede). 9. πρὸςαὐτόν . Although Christ uses the third person, this probably means “ unto him” (May. Hahn) rather than “ in reference to him” (Grot. Nö sg. Godet): see on 18:9. Ewald reads πρὸςαὑτόν , like πρὸςἑαυτόν , 18:11, as if Jesus were thinking aloud. It is doubtful whether αὑτόν for ἑαυτόν occurs in N.T. To avoid the difficulty some texts have the plur. πρὸςαὐτούς (R), ad illos (a b c ff2 i l s), and some omit (d e, Cypr.). Some MSS of Vulg. have ad eos or ad illos for ad eum. ὅτιΣήμερον . The ὅτι is merely recitative and is not to translated. The σήμερον confirms the view that δίδωμι and ἀποδίδωμι refer to a present resolve and not to a past practice. σωτηρία … ἐγένετο . A favourite constr. with Lk. See on it 6:36 “ Only on this occasion did Jesus offer Himself as a guest, although He sometimes accepted invitations. Just as it was to a despised schismatic (John 4:26), and to a despised outcast from the synagogue (John 9:37), that He made a spontaneous revelation of His Messiahship, so it is a despised tax-collector that He selects for this spontaneous visit. In each case He knew that the recipient had a heart to welcome His gift: and it is in this welcome, and not in the mere visit, that the σωτηρία consisted.1 That τῷοἴκῳτούτῳ is said rather than τῷἀνδρὶτούτῳ probably means that the blessing extends to the whole household; rather than that Jesus is alluding to the hospitality which He has received under this roof. In any case it is to be noted that it is the house which has suddenly lost half its wealth, and not the poor who have the promise of abundant alms, that Jesus declares to have received a blessing. To this occasion we may apply, and possibly to this occasion belongs, the one saying of Christ which is not recorded in the Gospels, and which we yet know to have been His, “ It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). καθότικαὶαὐτὸςυἱὸςἈβραάμ . This is conclusive as to Z being a Jew. The words cannot be understood exclusively in a spiritual sense, as Cyprian seems to take them (EP. 63:4, ed. Hartel). Chrysostom points out the moral sonship: Abraham offer his heir to the Lord, Zacchæ us his inheritance. Comp. 13:16, and see Weiss, L. J. 2. p. 438, Eng. tr. 3. p. 221. For καθότι , which is peculiar to Lk., see small print on 1:7. The meaning is that he also, as much as any one else, is an Israelite. “ His detested calling has not cancelled his birthright. My visit to him, and his receiving salvation, are entirely in harmony with the Divine Will” (ver. 5). 10. ἦλθεν . First with emphasis: “ He came for this very purpose.” The γάρ explains σωτηρίαἐγένετο : salvation to such as Z. is the object of His Epiphany. For the neut. of a collective whole, τὸἀπολωλός , comp. John 6:37, John 6:17:2, John 6:24; and for the thought, Luke 15:6, Luke 15:9, Luke 15:32; Ezekiel 34:16. The expression is no evidence that Zacchæ us was a heathen. Comp. τὰἀπολωλόταοἴκουἸσραήλ (Matthew 10:6, Matthew 15:24). 11-28. § The Parable of the Pounds. It is probable that this is distinct from the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30; comp. Mark 13:34-36). It is more likely that Jesus should utter somewhat similar parables on different occasions than that Mt. or Lk. should have made very serious confusion as to the details of the parable as well as regards the time and place of its delivery. Here Jesus is a approaching Jerusalem, but has not yet entered it in triumph: apparently He is still in Jericho. In Mt. He is on the Mount of Olives a day or two after the triumphal entry. Here He addresses a mixed company publicly. In Mt. He is speaking privately to His disciples (24:3). Besides the difference in detail where the two narratives are parallel, them is a great deal in Lk. which is not represented in Mt. at all. The principal items are: (1) the introduction, ver. 11; (2) the high birth of the chief agent and his going into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, ver. 12; (3) his citizens hating him and sending an ambassage after him to repudiate him, ver. 14; (4) the signal vengeance taken upon these enemies, ver. 27; (5) the conclusion, Ver. 28. Strauss supposes that Lk has mixed up two parables, the Parable of the Pounds, which is only another version of the Parable of the Talents in Mt., and another which might be called the Parable of the Rebellious Citizens, consisting of vv. 12, 14, 15, 27. Without denying the possibility of this hypothesis, one may assert that it is unnecessary. As regards the Talents and the Pounds, Chrysostom pronounces them to be distinct, while Augustine implies that they are so, for he makes no attempt to harmonize them in his De Consensu Evangelistarum. Even in the parts that are common to the two parables the differences are very considerable. (1) In the Talents we have a householder leaving home for a time, in the Pounds a nobleman going in quest of a crown; (2) the Talents are unequally distributed, the Pounds equally; (3) the sums entrusted differ enormously in amount; (4) in the Talents the rewards are the same, in the Pounds they differ and are proportionate to what has been gained; (5) in the Talents the unprofitable servant is severely punished, in the Pounds he is merely deprived of his pound. Out of about 302 words in Mt. and 286 in Lk., only about 66 words or parts of words are common to the two. An estimate of the probabilities on each side seems to be favourable to the view that we have accurate reports of two different parables, and not two reports of the same parable, one of which, if not both, must be very inaccurate. And, while both parables teach that we must make good use of the gifts entrusted to us, that in Mt. refers to those gifts which are unequally distributed, that in Lk. to those in which all share alike. See Wright, Synopsis, § 138, p. 127. The lesson of the parable before us, is twofold. To the disciples of all classes it teaches the necessity of patiently waiting and actively working for Christ until He comes again. To the Jews it gives a solemn warning respecting the deadly opposition which they are now exhibiting, and which will be continued even after His departure. There will be heavy retribution for those who persistently reject their lawfully appointed King. This portion of the parable is of special interest, because there is little doubt that it was suggested by contemporary history. Herod the Great, appointed procurator of Galilee by Julius Cæ sar b.c. 47 and tetrarch by Antony b.c. 41, went to Rome b.c. 40 to oppose the claims of Antigonus, and was made king of Judæ a by the senate (Jos. Ant. 14:7, 3, 9:2, 13:1, 14:4; B. J. 1:14, 4). His son Archelaus in like manner went to Rome to obtain the kingdom which his father, by a change in his will, had left to him instead of to Antipas. The Jews revolted and sent an ambassage of fifty to oppose him at Rome. Augustus, after hearing them and the Jews on the spot, confirmed Herod’ s will, but did not allow Archelaus the title of king until he had proved his worthiness. This he never did; but he got his “ kingdom” with the title of ethnarch (Ant. 17:8, 1, 9:3, 11:4; B. J. 2:6, 1, 3). All this had taken place b.c. 4, in which year Antipas also went to Rome to urge his own claims against those of Archelaus. His more famous attempt to obtain the title of king did not take place until after this, and cannot be alluded to here. The remarkable feature of the opposing embassy makes the reference to Archelaus highly probable; and Jericho, which he had enriched with buildings, would suggest his case as an illustration. But the reference is by some held to be fictitious, by others is made a reason for suspecting that the author of this detail is not Christ but the Evangelist (Weiss). 11. Ἀκουόντωνδὲαὐτῶνταῦτα . These words connect the parable closely with what precedes. The scene is still Jericho, in or near the house of Zacchæ us; and, as ταῦτα seems to refer to the saying about σωτηρία (vv. 9, 10), αὐτῶν probably refers to the disciples and those with Zacchæ us. The belief that the Kingdom was close at hand, and that Jesus was now going in triumph to Jerusalem, was probably general among those who accompanied Him, and the words just uttered night seem to confirm it. “ But because the heard these things” (Mey.) is, however, not quite the meaning: rather, “ And as they head” (AV. RV.); hæ c illis audientibus (Vulg.). Here Cod. Bezae has one of its attempts to reproduce the gen. abs. in Latin: audientium autem eorum; comp. 3:15, 9:43, 21:5, 26, etc. προσθεὶςεἶπενπαραβολήν . Not, “ He spoke, and added a parable” to what He spoke; but, “ He added and spoke a parable” in connexion with what had preceded. Moris est Domino, præ missum sermonem parabolis adfirmare subjectis (Bede). It is a Hebraistic construction: comp. Genesis 38:5; Job 29:1; Genesis 25:1. In Luke 20:11, Luke 20:12; Acts 12:3; Genesis 4:2, Genesis 8:12 we have another form of the same idiom, προσέθετοπέμψαι , etc. See also on 6:39 for εἶπενπαραβολήν . The Latin equivalents are interesting: addidit dicens (a), adjecit et dixit (e), addidit dicere (s), adjiciens dixit (Vulg.). See also 20:11. διὰτὸἐγγὺςεἶναιἸ . About six hours’ march; 150 stades (Jos. B. J. iv. 8. 3), or about 18 miles. The goal was almost in sight the arrival could not be much longer delayed. παραχπῆμαμέλλει … ἀναφαίνεσθαι . It is against this that the parable is specially directed. The Messiah was there, Jerusalem was only a few hours distant; the inauguration of the Kingdom must be imminent: παραχρῆμα is placed first with emphasis. The μέλλει , “ is sure to,” and ἀναφαίεσθαι , “ come to view,” are both appropriate: they believed that they were certain of a glorious pageant. Comp. Acts 1:6. 12. εὐγενής . In a literal sense here and 1 Corinthians 1:26; comp Job 1:3: in a figurative sense Acts 17:11; comp. 4 Mac. 6:5, 9:23, 27. The μακράν , which is probably an adj. as in 15:3 has obvious reference to παραχρῆμα : the distance would exclude an immediate return. Note the τις . λαβεῖνἑαυτῷβασιλείαν . If we had not the illustrations from contemporary history, this would be a surprising feature in the parable. He is a vassal of high rank going to a distant suzeraim to obtain royal authority over his fellow-vassals. For ὑποστρέψαι see small print on 1:56; it tells us that the desired βασιλεία is at the starting point, not at a distance. 13. He plans that, during his absence, servants of his private household shall be tested, with a view to their promotion when he is, appointed to be king. δέκαδούλουςἑαυτοῦ . “ Ten bond-servants of his own.” It does not follow, because we have not δέκατῶνδ . αὐτοῦ , that he had only ten slaves. This would require τοὺςδ . δ ., and would be very improbable; for an Oriental noble would have scores of slaves. The point of ἑαυτοῦ is, that among them, if anywhere, he would be likely to find fidelity to his interests. As he merely wishes to test them, the sum committed to each is small,— about £ 4. In the Talents the householder divides the whole of his property and hence the sums entrusted to each slave are very large. πραγματεύσασθε . “ Carry on business,” especially as a banker or a trader: here only in N.T., and in LXX on Daniel 8:27 and some texts of 1 Kings 9:19. Vulg. has negotiamini (not occupate), which Wic. renders “ chaffare.” The “ occupy” of Rhem. and AV. comes from Cov. and Cran., while Tyn. has “ buy and sell.” We have a similar use of “ occupy” Ezekiel 27:9, Ezekiel 27:16, Ezekiel 27:19, Ezekiel 27:21, Ezekiel 27:22, where Vulg. has negotiatio and negotiator: comp. “ occupy their business in great waters” (Psalms 107:23). Latimer exhibits the same use of “ occupy” ; and in a letter of Thomas Cromwell to Michael Throgmorton, a.d. 1537, he calls Pole “ a merchant and occupier of all deceits” (Froude, His. of Eng. ch. xiv.). “ Occupy till I come” is now misunderstood to mean “ keep possession till I come.” WH. are alone in reading πραγματεύσασθαι here. All other editors make the verb 2nd. pers. plur. imper. not infin. WH. regard the decision difficult both here and 14:17, but prefer the infin. here as “ justified by St. Luke’ s manner of passing from oratio obliqua to oratio recta” (2. p. 309). ἐνᾧἔρχομαι . “ During the time in which I am coming,” i.e. the time until the return. For ἔρχομαι in the sense of “ come back” comp. John 4:16 and esp. 21:22, 23. The meaning “ to be on the journey” (Oosterz. Godet) is impossible for ἔρχεσθαι . The reading ἕως (TR. with E etc.) is an obvious correction of ἐνᾧ (א A B D K L R etc.). 14. While the δοῦλοι represent the disciples, the πολῖται represent the Jew. The Jews hated Jesus without cause, ἐμίσησάνμεδωρεάν (John 15:25; Psalms 68:5): but they had reason enough for hating Archelaus, who had massacred about 3000 of them at the first Passover after his accession (Ant. xvii. 9. 3; B. J. ii. 1. 3). οὐθέλομεντοῦτον . They state no reasons: stat pro ratione voluntas. The τοῦτον is contemptuous (istum), or at least expresses alienation: “ he is no man of ours.” So the Jews, of Christ 15. For καὶἀγένετο … καὶεἶπεν . see note p. 45, and for ἐντῶςἐπανελθεῖν see on 3:21. The double compound occurs only here and 10:35 in N.T. comp. ἐπανάγειν (5:3, 4). Both verbs occur in LXX. τοὺςδούλουςτούτουςοἷς . This implies that he had other slaves to whom nothing had been entrusted. ἵναγνοῖ . For this form comp. Mark 5:43 and 9:30. TR. with A etc. has γνῷ in all three places. The τίς after γνοῖ (A R, syrr. Arm. Goth. Vulg.) is not genuine: om. א B D L Boh. Aeth. d e. τίδιεπραγματεύσαντο . “ What business they had done” : here only in bibl. Grk. In Dion. Hal. iii. 72, it means “ attempt to execute.” He wants to know the result of their trafficking. But the word does not assume that they have “ gained by trading” (AV. RV.); and hence negotiatus esset (Vulg.) is better than lucratus esset (f). 16. ἡμνᾶσουπροσηργάσατο . “ Thy pound worked out in addition, won” : modeste lucrum acceptum fert herili pecuniæ , non industriæ suæ (Grot). Comp. οὐκἐγὼδὲἀλλὰἡχάριςτοῦΘεοῦ [ἡ ] σὺνἐμοί (1 Corinthians 15:10): see also 1 Corinthians 4:7. The verb occurs here only in bibl. Grk. Comp. Matthew 25:16 17. εὖγε . In replies approving what has been said this is classical; but the reading is doubtful: εὖγε (B D, Latt., Orig. Ambr.), εὖ , possibly from Matthew 15:21 (א A R etc., Syrr.). ἐνἐλαχίστῶπιστὸςἐγένου . “ Thou didst prove faithful in a very little” : comp. 16:10. The management of £ 4 was a small matter. ἴσθιἐξουσίανἔχων . The periphrastic pres. imper. is not common in N.T. Comp. Genesis 1:6; Burton., § 97. Lk. is probably translating: Mt. is much more classical: ἐπὶπολλῶνσεκαταστήσω (25:21). For ἐξουσίανἔχειν comp. Matthew 7:29. 18. With ἐποίησενπέντεμνᾶς comp. εἰμὴεἴτιςαὐτῶνἀργύριονποιεἰ (plat Rep. ix. 581 C): pecuniam facere is fairly common. 19. ἐπάνωγίνου . “ Come to be over, be promoted over.” In both cases the efficient servants “ receive as their reward,— not anything they can sit down to and enjoy,— but a wider sphere of activity” (Latham, Pastor pastorum, p. 320). Urbs pro minâ ; minâ ne tugurium quidem emeretur. Magna rerum amplitudo ac varietas in regno Dei, quamvis nondum cognita nobis (Beng.). 20. καὶὁἕτερος . The omission of the article in A and inferior MSS. is a manifest correction to avoid a difficulty. As there were ten servants, the third cannot rightly be spoken of as ὁἕτερος . Weiss takes this as evidence that in the original parable there were only three servants, as in me Talents; and therefore as evidence that the two narratives represent the same original. But it would have been tedious to have gone through all the ten, which is a round number, as in the Ten Virgins. The three mentioned are samples of the whole ten. Some gained immensely, some considerably, mad some not at all. The two first classes having been described, the representative of the remaining class may be spoken of as ὁἕτερος , especially as he is of quite a different kind. They both belong to the profitable division, he to the unprofitable. ἣνεἶχονἀποκειμένην . “ Which I was keeping stored up.” He is not owning a fault, but professing a virtue: “ I have not lost or spent any of it.” In Colossians 1:5; 2 Timothy 4:8; Hebrews 9:27 the verb is used of what is “ stored up” and awaits us in the future: here only in a literal sense. σοιδαρίῳ . A Latinism: sudarium (Acts 19:12; John 11:44, John 20:7). Comp. ἀσσάριον (12:6), λεγιών (8:30), δηνάριον (10:35), κεντυρίων (Mark 15:39), κοδράντης (Matthew 5:26), etc. 21. αὐστηρός . Here only in N.T. comp. 2 Mac. 14:30, and see Trench, Syn. xiv. The word originally means “ rough to the taste, stringent.” It is in this servant’ s plea and in the reply to it that the resemblance between the two parables of the Pounds and of the Talents is closest. αἴρειςὅοὐκἔθηκας . Perhaps a current proverbial expression for a grasping person. We need not decide whether he means, “ If I had gained anything, you would have taken it,” or, “ If I had lost it, you would have held me responsible.” The general sense is “ You are a strict man; and I have taken care that you should get back the exact deposit, neither more nor less.” 22. κρίνωσε . “ Do I judge thee” ; te judico (f Vulg.), condemno (e). Most editors prefer κρινῶ , “ will I judge” (AV. RV.); judicabo (a d). But Tyn. has “ judge I thee” and Luth. richte ich dich. Hist. pres. (λέγει , 13:8, 16:7, 29) is very rare in Lk. The Latin Versions vary greatly in rendering πονηρέ ; inique (d), infidelis (e ff2 i r), crudelis (b), nequa et piger (f), infidelis et piger (q), infidelis et male (a)nequam (Vulg.). Comp. Matthew 18:32. The piger comes from Matthew 25:26, πονηρὲδοῦλακαὶὀκνηρέ . 23. ἐπὶτράπεζαν . “ On a banker’ s table.” Here the interrogation ends, and κἀγώ begins a declaratory sentence. It would have been very little trouble to put it in a bank. There the money would have been as safe as in the napkin, and would have borne interest. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 580. The often quoted saying, “ Show yourselves tried bankers,” Γίνεσθετραπεζῖταιδόκιμοι , may easily be a genuine utterance of Christ. But if it is a mere adaptation, it comes from Matthew 25:27 rather than from Lk. See Resch, Agrapha, pp. 118, 234; Wsctt. Int. to Gosp. App. C. τόκῳ . In N.T. the word occurs only in these parables; but is freq. in LXX; Deuteronomy 23:19; Leviticus 25:36, Leviticus 25:37; Exodus 22:25, etc. The notion that money, being a dead thing, ought not to breed , augmented the prejudice of the ancients against interest Aristotle condemns it as παρὰφύσιν (Pol. i. 10. 4; comp. Eth. Nic. iv. 1. 40). Cicero represents Cato as putting it on a level with murder (De Off. ii. 25. 89). “ The breed of barren metal” (Shaks.). ἂναὐτὸἔπραξα . The protasis is readily understood from the previous question: comp. Hebrews 10:2. For this use of πράσσειν see on 3:13. 24. τοῖςπαρεστῶσιν . His attendants, or body-guard, or courtiers: comp. 1 Kings 10:8; Esther 4:5. The man who had proved most efficient in service is rewarded with an additional sum with which to traffick for his sovereign. 25. The subject of εἶπαν and the meaning of αὐτῷ are uncertain. The common interpretation is that the attendants who have this order here express their surprise to the master who gave it; i.e. the remonstrance is part of the parable. But it is possible that Lk. is here recording an interruption on the part of the audience, and thus lets us see with what keen interest they have listened to the narrative. It is the audience who remonstrate with Christ for giving the story such a turn. They think that He is spoiling the parable in assigning the unused pound to the servant who has most and therefore seems to need it least (see on 20:15). But in any case the remonstrance serves to give to the declaration which follows. Comp. Peter’ s interruption and Christ’ s apparent ignoring of it 12:41, 42; and again 18:28, 29. In all the cases there is an indirect answer. A general principle is stated which covers the point in question. Bleek rejects ver. 25 as an interpolation: om. D 69, b d e ff2q2, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. The difficulty might cause the omission. The insertion of γάρ after λέγω in ver. 26 (A D R, Syrr. Goth.) is due to a similar cause. Both omission and insertion may he influenced by Matthew 25:28, Matthew 25:29. 26. λέγωὑμῖν . Whose words are these? The answer will partly depend upon the view taken of ver. 25. If the interruption is made by the king’ s attendants, then ver. 26, like ver. 24 and ver. 27, gives the words of the king. But if the interruption comes from Christ’ s audience, then ver. 26 may be His reply to the audience; after which He finishes the parable with the king’ s words in ver. 27. The λέγωὑμῖν does not prove that Christ is giving these words as His own: comp. 14:24. But in any case, either in His own person or in that of the king in the parable, Jesus is stating a principle which answers the objection in ver. 25. In Matthew 25:29 this principle is uttered by the householder in the parable without λέγωὑμῖν . ἀπὸδὲτοῦμὴἔχοντος . With this apparent paradox comp. 8:18, when an unused gift is spoken of, not as ὃἔχει , but as ὃδοκεῖἔχειν . He alone possesses, who uses and enjoys his possessions. 27. πλὴντοὺςἐχθρούςμουτούτους . The τούτους represents the enemies as present to the thoughts of the audience: comp. τούτους in ver. 15. It is possible to take the pronoun with what follows, as in Syr-Sin. “ Bring hither mine enemies, those who would not,” etc. And this makes one more witness for the reading ἐκείνους (A D R etc., Latt. Syrr. Goth.), which almost all editors reject as a correction of τούτους (א B K L M R, Aegyptt.). For πλήν comp. 18:8. κατασφάξατεαὐτοὺςἔμπροσθένμου . Comp. ἔσφαξενΣαμουὴλτὸνἈγὰγἐνώπιονΚυρίου (1 Samuel 15:33). The punishment of rebellious subjects and active opponents is far more severe than that of neglectful servants. The compound κατασφάζω occurs nowhere else in N.T., but is not rare in LXX. It means “ hew them down, slay them utterly.” The destruction of Jerusalem and the doom of all who deliberately rebel against Christ are here Foreshadowed. Augustine more than once points to this sentence in answer to the objection that the severe God of the O.T. cannot be identical with the God of Love in the N.T. In the Gospels, as in the Law, the severity of God’ s judgments against wilful disobedience is plainly taught. Comp. Con. Faust. xii. 14. 19. The nobleman, who goes on a long journey and returns a king, is christ. He leaves behind Him servants of various degrees of merit, and enemies. When the King returns, each of these is rewarded or punished according to his deserts; and the rewards are larger opportunities of service. There is no special meaning in ten, which is a round number; nor in three, which gives a sufficiently representative classification. And it may be doubted whether there is any special meaning in the transfer of the and from the unprofitable to the most profitable servant. The point is that to neglect opportunites is to lose them; and that to make the most of opportunities is to gain others. The main lesson of the parable is the long period of christ’ s absence, during which there will be abundant time for both service and rebellion. There is not to be, as the disciples fancied, immediate triumph and joy for all; but, first a long time of probation, and then triumph and joy for those only who have earned them, and in exact proportion to their merits. 28. Historical conclusion, corresponding to the historical introduction in ver. 11. ἐπορεύετοἔμποσθεν . “ He went on before.” Although the αὐτῶν is not expressed, this probably means “ in front of the disciples” : comp. Mark 10:32. But ἔμπροσθεν may = εἰςτὸἔμπροσθεν (ver. 4), as ὀπίσω = εἰςτὰὀπίσω (Matthew 24:18): in which case the meaning would be, “ He went forwards” from Jericho towards Jerusalem. With ἀναβαίνων Comp. κατέβαινεν (10:30) of the opposite route. D omits ἔμροσθεν and a d have simply ibat; c ff2 i l q r s abiit, while Vulg. has præ cedebat. D inserts δέ after ἀναβαίνων . Syr-Sin. reads, “ And when He had said these things, they went out from there. And as He was going up to Jerusalem, and had reached Bethphage,” etc. 19:29-21:38. THE LAST DAYS OF PUBLIC 29-40. The Triumphal Procession to Jerusalem. Matthew 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-11. Comp. John 12:1-19. “ The Journeyings towards Jerusalem” are over, and Lk. now permanently rejoins the other Gospels in describing the concluding scenes. As compared with them, he has both additions and omissions. He omits the supper at Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, which Mt. and Mk. place without date after the triumphal entry, but which Jn. states to have taken place before the entry. Lk. has already given a similar incident, a meal at which Jesus is a guest and a woman anoints Him (7:36-50), and perhaps for that reason omits the supper at Bethany. The chronology may be tentatively arranged thus. Jn. tells us that Jesus arrived at Bethany six days before the Passover, viz. Nisan 8, a day on which pilgrims often arrived at Jerusalem, as Josephus states. Assuming that the year is a.d. 30, Nisan 8 would be Friday, March 31. Jesus and His disciples reached Bethany that afternoon, either before the Sabbath began, or after having done no more than “ a sabbath day’ s journey” after it began. But the chronology of these last days, as of the whole of our Lord’ s life, is uncertain. At Bethany He would part from the large caravan of pilgrims in whose company He had been travelling. Most of these would press on to Jerusalem. See Wieseler, Chron. Syn. v. 2, Eng. tr. p. 358, and comp. Caspari, Chron. Einl. § 165, Eng. tr. p. 217. 29. βηθφαγή . Accent, derivation, and site are all doubtful. But Βηθφαγή ; is preferable to Βηθφαγῆ ; the meaning is probably “ House of unripe figs,” and the situation must have been near Bethany. See Robinson, Res. in pal. i. 433; Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 422; D. B.2 s.v. Caspari, following Lightfoot, contends that Bethphage was not a village, but a whole district, including Bethany and all that lay between it and Jerusalem. The meaning in this case would be, that Jesus drew near to the district Bethphage and to the particular spot in it called Bethany (Chron. Einl. § 144, 145, Eng. tr. pp. 189-191). The passage is worthy of study. In N.T. Bethphage is mentioned in these three narratives only; in O.T. not at all. The Talmud says that it was east of the walls of Jerusalem. Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome knew it, but do not describe its position. Its being placed first points to its being more important than Bethany. The derivation of Bethany is still more uncertain, but its site is well ascertained. The conjecture “ House of dates” is confirmed by the adjacent “ House of figs” and “ Mount of olives.” The names point to the ancient fertility of the neighbourhood. τὸκαλούμενονἘλαιῶν . Here also there is doubt about the accent, which in this case, as in κρίνω (ver. 22), affects the meaning. In Mt. and Mk. the article, τῶνἘλαιῶν , shows that the word is gen. plur.; but here, with Lach. Tisch. Treg. and others, we may write Ἐλαιών , as nom. sing. In that awe the name is treated as a sound and not declined. In 21:37 the same doubt arises. Acts 1:12 We have Ἐλαιῶνος . as in Ant. vii. 9. 2, from Ἐλαιών , Olivetum, “ an olive-grove, Olivet.” But ver. 37 and the parallels in Mt. and Mk. render Ἐλαιῶν the more probable here (WH. 2. App. p. 158: so also Hahn, wittichen, and Wetzel). The fact that Ἐλαιῶν commonly has the article is not decisive (Field, otium Norvic. 3. p. 53), Jos. B. J. ii. 13. 5, v. 2. 3, vi. 2. 8 are all doubtful; but both Bekker and Dindorf edit Ἐλαιῶν in all three places. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 208. In ver. 29 note the characteristic ἐγένετο and καλούμενον : In the latter we have an indication that Lk. is writing for those not familiar with Palestine: comp. 21:37, 22:1. Neither occurs in the parallels in Mt.and Mk. Note also ὡς = “ when” and ἤγγισεν . 30. Ὑπάγετε . So also Mk., while Mt. has his favourite πορεύεσθε . The details which Mk. alone records render the conjecture that Peter was one of the two who were sent reasonable. τὴνκατέναντικώμην . Whether Bethany, or Bethphage, or an unnamed village, is quite uncertain. This compound preposition is not found in profane writers, but is common in bibl. Grk. (Matthew 21:2; Mark 11:2; Romans 4:17; 2 Corinthians 12:19; Exodus 19:2, Exodus 32:5, etc). L &S Lex. quote C. I. 2905 D. 13. ἐφ ʼ ὂνοὐδεὶςπώποτεἀνθρώπωνἐκάθισεν . This intimates to the disciples that it is no ordinary journey which He contemplates, but a royal progress: comp. Deuteronomy 21:3; Numbers 19:2; 1 Samuel 6:7. The birth of a virgin and the burial in a new tomb are facts of he same kind. 31. οὕτωςἐρεῖτεὅτι . Vulg. and AV. make ὅτι the answer to Διὰτί ; So also Mey. and Hahn. But in Matthew 21:3 we have ὅτι and no διὰτί ; In both places the ὅτι is recitative. Comp. 7:16, 22:70. Ὁκύριος . This rather implies that the owner has some knowledge of Jesus. Lk. omits the assurance that the owner will send the colt. That the whole had been previously arranged by Jesus is Possible, for He gives no intimation that it was not so. But the impression produced by the narratives is that the knowledge is supernatural, which on so momentous an occasion would be in harmony with His purpose. Comp. John 14:29, John 16:32, John 21:8, and see on Luke 22:10, Luke 22:13, Luke 22:34. As Godet points out, this prophetic knowledge must not be confounded with omniscience. 32. καθὼςεἶπεν . “ Exactly as He said.” This καθώς , in slightly different connexions, is in all three narratives. Mt. has “ they did even as He appointed” ; Mk., “ they said to them even He said” ; Lk., “ they found even as He said.” They could not have done and said just what He had commanded, unless the facts had been such as He had foretold. Lk. and Mk., as writing for Gentiles, take no notice of the prophecy in Zechariah 9:9, which both Mt. and Jn. quote. Justin, in order to make the incident a fulfilment of Gen 49:11, “ Binding his foal unto the vine,” etc., says that the πῶλος was πρὸςἄμπελονδεδεμένος (Apol. i. 32). Syr-Sin. omits most of v. 33. 33. οἱκύριοιαὐτοῦ . The owner of the colt and those with him: τινεςτῶνἐκεῖἑστηκότων (Mk.). In all three narratives Jesus uses the singular. A fiction would have made exact correspondence by representing the remonstrance as coming from one person only. Mt. omits the fulfilment of the predicted remonstrance. 35. αὐτῶντὰἱμάτια . The pronoun stands first with emphasis: they did not spare their own chief garments. Comp. ἑαυτῶν in ver. 36. In both verses readings vary: here TR. with A R etc. has ἐαυτῶν , while א B D L, Orig. have αὐτῶν : there TR. with א D has αὐτῶν , while A B K have ἑαυτῶν . The best editors are unanimous for αὐτῶν here. ἐπεβίβασαν . Lk. alone tells us of their placing Him on the colt. The other three merely state that He sat on it.1 Nowhere in O.T. do we find kings thus mounted. While there is much in this triumphal precession that tells of royally, there is also something which adds, “ My Kingdom is not of this world” (Godet). Against carnal chiliastic notions of the Kingdom this entry on “ a colt the foal of an ass” is an ironia realis ordained by the Lord Himself (Nö sgen, Gesh. J. Chr. p. 506). For ἐπιβιβάζω comp. 10:34; Acts 23:24: it is not rare in LXX. 36. ὑπεστρώννυοντὰἱμάτια . Change of subject: it is the multitude that does this. Robinson tells how the people of Bethlehem spread their garments before the horses of the English consul and his suite (Res. in Pal. i. p. 473): other instances in Wetst. on Matthew 21:8. Lk. omits the branches strewn in the way. All three omit the multitude with palm branches coming from Jerusalem to meet the procession (John 12:13, John 12:18). 37. Here every word differs from the wording of the others, although the substance is the same. As marks of style note ἅπαν , πλῆθος , φωνῇμεγάλῃ , πασῶνὧν . The ἤδη is amphibolous, and may be taken either with ἐγγίζοντος (AV.) or with πρὸςτῇκαταβάσει (RV.): see on 17:22 and 18:31. In either case πρὸςτῇκαταβάσει is epoexegetic of ἐγγίζοντος , “ When He was drawing nigh, viz. at the descent,” etc. It is at the top of this descent that that the S.E. corner of the “ City of David” (but not the temple) comes in sight; and the view thus opening may have prompted this “ earliest hymn of Christian devotion” (Stanley). Many of the pilgrims were from Galilee, where Jesus still had enthusiastic friends. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 232. The reading πρὸςτὴνκατάβασιν (D) is an obvious correction. D M L with a d e Syrr. Aeth. omit ἤδη . In both readings D is supported by Syr-Sin., “ When they came near to the descent,” etc. With this plur. comp. Syr-Sin. in ver. 28. The Latin Versions are interesting in what follows. Nearly all Mss. of Vulg. have omnes turbæ descendentium, which is a mere slip for discentium , a reading preserved in G M of Vulg. as in Codd. Am. and Brix. Discentes was substituted for discipuli possibly to show that a larger body than the Twelve was meant. Cod. Bezae has discentes John 6:66, John 21:2, while almost all have it John 21:12, and c has it Luke 22:45. comp. Tert. præ scr. 3. δυνάμεων . The healing of Bartimæ us and the raising of Lazarus would be specially mentioned. For δυνάμεων D has γεινομένων , quæ fiebant (d), factis (1); om. Syr-Cur.. Syr-Sin. 38. Εὐλογημένος … ἐνὀνόματικυρίου . In these words all four agree. Lk. and Jn. add ὁβασιλεύς which in Mk. is represented by ἡἐρχομένηβασιλεία and in Mt. ὩσαννὰτῷυἱῷΔαυείδ Lk. substitutes δόξα (more intelligible to Gentiles) for the Hosanna of the other three. See on 2:14. “ He that cometh in the name of the Lord” means God’ s representative, envoy, or agent. The words ἐνοὐρανῷεἰρήνη are in Lk. alone, and are perhaps part of his paraphrase of Hosanna. Heaven is the abode of God, and there is peace there because man is reconciled to God, or perhaps because peace is now prepared for man in the heavenly Kingdom. These cries (comp. 4:34) clearly recognize Jesus as the Messiah. The Psalms from which they come were sung at the Passover and at the F. of Tabernacles, and hence were familiar to the people. Psa_118. is said by some to have been written for the F. of Tabernacles after the Return, by others for the dedication of the second temple. The supposition that the Evangelists have confounded the Passover with the F. of Tabernacles, and have transferred to the former what was customary at the latter, is gratuitous. These responses from the Hallel were sung, not only at the Passover, but at other Feasts; and the waving of palm branches was not confined to the F. of Tabernacles (1 Mac. 13:5). see Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 371. Hase calls attention to the audacity of the whole transaction. Jesus and His disciples were under the ban of the hierarchy. The Sanhedrin had issued a decree that, if any one knew where He was, he should give information, that they might arrest Him (John 11:57). And yet here are His disciples bringing Him in triumph into Jerusalem, and the populace enthusiastically joining with them. Moreover, all this had been arranged by Jesus Himself, when He sent for the colt. What He had hitherto concealed, or obscurely indicated, or revealed only to a chosen few, He now, seeing that the fulness of time is come, makes known to the whole world. He publicly claims to be the Messiah. This triumphal procession is the Holy One of God making solemn entry into the Holy City. Hase is justly severe on Strauss for the way in which he changed his view from edition to edition: the truth being that the triumphal entry is an historical fact, too well attested to be discredited (Gesch. Jesu, § 94). 39, 40. Here Lk. is alone, not only in wording, but in substance. The remonstrance of these Pharisees is intrinsically probable. Having no power to check the multitude (John 12:19), and perhaps not daring to attempt it, they call on Jesus to do so. Possibly they wished to fasten the responsibility upon Him, and they may have been sent by the Sanhedrin to spy and report. This Messianic homage was offensive to them, and they feared a tumult which might cause trouble with Pilate. 39. ἀπὸτοῦὄχλου . It matters very little whether we take these words with rives twv τινεςτῶνφ . (AV. RV.) or with εἶπαν (Weiss, Hahn). Perhaps Διδάσκαλε implies that He is no more than a teacher: it is the way in which His critics and enemies commonly address Him (7:40, 20:21, 28; Matthew 12:38, etc.). But comp. 21:7; Mark 4:38. Syr-Sin. has, “ Some of the people from amongst the crowd said unto Him Good Teacher, rebuke Thy disciples, that they shout not.” 40. Christ’ s reply is of great sternness. It implies that their failure to appreciate the significance of the occasion is amazing in its fatuity. It is not likely that there is any reference to the crashing of the stones at the downfall of Jerusalem (Lange, Oosterzee). Perhaps ow οἱλίθοικράξουσιν was already a proverbial expression. Comp. λίθοςἐκτοίχουβοήσεται (Habakkuk 2:11): Parietes, medius fidius, ut mihi videntur, tibi gratias agere gestiunt (Cic. Marcel. iii.); and see other illustrations in Wetst. Nothing is gained by making οἱλίθοι figurative “ men of stony hearts” such an event “ might rouse even the dullest to rejoice” (Neander). comp. 3:8. ἐὰν … σιωπήσουσιν . This is the abundantly attested reading . With the exceptional constr. comp, ἐὰνμήτιςὁδηγήσει (Acts 8:31); ειὰνὑμεῖςστήκετε (1 Thessalonians 3:8); ἐὰνοἴδαμεν (1 John 5:15); ἐὰνπροσφέρεν (Leviticus 1:14). In John 8:36 and Romans 14:8 the indic. is probably a false reading. Win. xli. 2 (b), p. 369; Lft. Epp. p. 46; Simcox, Lang. of N.T. p. 110; Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien, p. 29. There is no authority for inserting mox (Beza), “ shortely” (Genev.), or “ immediately” (AV.) with “ cry out.” The reading κεκράξονται (AR.) is a substitution of the form which is most common in LXX (Ps. 64:14; Job 35:9; Jeremiah 11:11, Jeremiah 11:12, 47:2, etc.). See Veitch, s.v. “ The simple fut. perf. does not occur in N.T.” Burton., § 93. 41-44. § The Predictive Lamentation of Jesus over Jerusalem. The spot where these words must have been uttered can be ascertained with certainty, although tradition, as in other cases (see on 4:29), has fixed on an impossible site. See the famous description by Stanley, Sin. &Pal. pp. 190-193, together with that of Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 174), part of which is quoted in the Eng. tr. of Caspari’ s Chron. Einl. p. 188. See also Tristram, Bible Places, p. 125. This lamentation must not be confounded with the one recorded 13:34, 35; Matthew 23:37. 41. ἔκλαυσεν . Stronger than ἐδάκρυσεν (John 11:35): it implies wailing and sobbing. It is used of the widow at Nain (7:13), the penitent in the Pharisee’ s house (7:38), and the mourners in the house of Jairus (8:52). It was the sight of the city and the thought of what might have been, which called forth the mentation. The attitude of the Pharisees had just shown Him what the real condition of the city was. Christianity is sometimes accused of being opposed to the spirit of patriotism: but there is deep patriotism in this lamentation. With ειπ ʼ αὐτήν comp. 23:28; Revelation 1:7, Revelation 18:9. In class. Grk. we have ἐπ ʼ αὐτῇ , but more often αὐτήν without a prep. Here TR. with A etc. has ἐπ ʼ αὐτῇ . 42. Εἰἔγνωσἐντῇἡμέρᾳκαὶτὰσὺπρὸςεἰρήνην — This is probably correct; but the text is somewhat uncertain. The aposiopesis is impressive. In the expression of strong emotion sentences are often broken. 22:42; John 6:62, John 6:12:27; Exodus 32:32. Win. lxiv. 2, p. 749. The words imply that there have been various opportunities, of which this is the last. Thus once more (ποσάκις , 13:34) the synoptic narrative is found to imply the Judæ an ministry recorded by Jn. The καὶσύ perhaps implies no comparison: “ even thou” (AV. RV.). But if “ thou also” (Rhem.) be preferred, it probably means, “ as well as My disciples.” For the wish comp. Deuteronomy 32:29. The protasis, “ If thou hadst known,” does not imply any such definite apodosis as, “ Thou wouldest weep as I do, for thy past blindness” ; or, “ Thou wouldest not perish” ; or, “ Thou wouldest hear Me and believe” ; or, “ I would rejoice like My disciples” ; all of which have been suggested (Corn. à Lap. ad loc.). The expression is virtually a wish, “ O that thou hadst known.” Comp. εἰεἶχονμάχαιρανἐντῇχειρίμου (Numbers 22:29); εἰκατεμείναμενκαὶκατῳκίσθμηενπαρὰτὸνἸορδάνην (Joshua 7:7); εἰἤκουσαςτῶνἐντολῶνμου (Isaiah 48:18). In all these places Vulg. has utinam, and RV. either “ would that” or “ O that.” For τὰπρὸςεἰρήνην see on 14:32. There is possibly an allusion to the name Jerusalem, which perhaps means “ inheritance of peace.” The καὶγε before ἐντῇἡμέρᾳ (TR. with A R) can hardly be genuine; om. א B D L, Boh. Aeth, Goth. Iren-lat. Orig. The σου after ἡμέρᾳ is still more certainly an insertion; om. א A B D L, Boh. Aeth. Arm. Iren-lat. Orig. Eus. Bas. The σου after εἰρήνην has the support of Versions, but is just the kind of addition which is common in Versions; om. א B L, Iren-lat. Orig. Epiph. Godet naively remarks, Les deux mots καίγε et σου ont une grande valeur; which explains the insertion. Elsewhere in N.T. καίγε occurs only Acts 2:18 in a quotation. νῦνδέ . “ But now, as things are.” The actual fact is the reverse of the possibility just intimated. Comp. John 8:40, John 8:9:41; 1 Corinthians 7:14, 1 Corinthians 12:20. ἐκρύβη . “ Hidden once for A by Divine decree” : comp. John 12:38-40. The nom. to ἐκρύβη is not “ the fact that days will come,” etc. (Theoph.), but τὰπρὸςεἰρήνην . For the form ἐκρύβη see Veitch, s.v. 43. ὅτιἥξουσινἡμέραι . “ Because days will come” ; not “ the days” (AV. RV.): see on 5:35 and 17:22. Dies multi, quia unum diem non observas (Beng.). The ὅτι probably depends upon εἰεπγνως “ Would that thou hadst known in time; because the consequences (now inevitable) of not knowing are terrible.” Or ὅτι may introduce the explanation of νῦνδὲἐκρύβη : “ They are bid from thine eyes, because the very reverse of peace will certainly come upon thee.” But in any case ὅτι is “ because, for,” not “ that.” For the constr. see Bless, Gr. p. 256. It is not easy to decide between παρεμβαλοῦσιν (א C* L), which Tisch. and WH. prefer, and περιβαλοῦσιν (TR. with A B etc.). D has καὶβαλοῦσινἐπὶσέ . In LXX παρεμβάλλειν is freq. for “ to encamp” : Numbers 1:50, Numbers 1:2:17, Numbers 1:27, Numbers 1:3:38, Numbers 1:33:10, Numbers 1:11, Numbers 1:12, Numbers 1:13, etc. Here it would mean “ cast up in front” or “ plant in beside,” rather than “ surround.” In Vulg., through carelessness on Jerome’ s part, circumdabunt is used to translate both περιβαλοῦσιν and περικυκλώσουσιν , although earlier Lat. texts distinguish. Similarly we have pressura for both ἀναγκη (21:23) and συνοχή (21:25). For a converse inaccuracy see on 24:14. Χάρακα . From meaning a single stake (vallus), χάραξ comes mean, not only a “ palisade” (vallum) but a “ rampart” or “ palisaded mound” (vallum and agger combined). This is its meaning here: comp. Isaiah 37:33; Ezekiel 4:2, 26:8; Jos. Vita, xliii. In Ezekiel 4:2 we have περιβαλεῖςἐπ ʼ αὐτὴνχάρακα “ Pale” (Wic.), “ rampars” (Gen.), and “ bank” (Tyn. Cov. RV.) are all preferable to “ trench” (Rhem. AV.). It is said that these details show that the prophecy has been re-worded to fit the event more precisely and that therefore this Gospel was written after a.d. 70. The argument is precarious, although the conclusion is probable. At any rate it is worthy of note that neither here nor elsewhere does Lk. call attention to the fulfilment of the prophecy, as he does in the case of Agabus (Acts 11:28). To those who assume that Jesus was unable to foresee the siege of Jerusalem, the amount of detail in the prediction is not of much moment. But it is not logical to maintain that Jesus could foresee the siege, but could not have foreseen these details; or to maintain that He would make known the coming siege, but would not make known the details. What is there in these details which is not common to all sieges? Given the siege, any one might add them. Il n’ est pas né cessaire pour cela d’ etre prophè te (Godet). Moreover it is possible that Jesus is freely reproducing Isaiah 29:3: καὶκυκλώσωἐπὶσέ , καὶβαλῶἐπὶσὲχάρακα , καὶθήσωπερὶσὲπύργους . In both cases note the solemn effect of the simple coordination of sentences with καί : here we have καί five times. Note also the impressive repetition of the pronoun: we have σου , σοι , or σε ten times in two verses. For the fulfilment of this prophecy see Jos. B. J. v. 6. 2, 12. 2. The Jews burnt the palisade, and then Titus replaced it with a wall. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 30. συνέξουσίνσεπάντοθεν . One of Lk.’ s favourite verbs: 4:38, 8:37, 45, 12:50, 22:63; Acts 7:57, Acts 18:5, Acts 28:8. It is possibly medical (Hobart, p. 3). The adv. occurs elsewhere in N.T. in Mark 1:45 and Hebrews 9:4 only: it is rare in LXX. This “ keeping in on every side” was so severe that thousands died of famine (Jos. B. J. v. 12. 3, vi. 1. 1). 44. ἐδαφιοῦσίνσεκαὶτὰτέκνασουἐνσοί . Not a case of zeugma, for ἐδαφίζειν may mean “ dash to the ground” (RV.) quite as well as “ lay even with the ground” (A.V.), and the former will apply to both buildings and human beings. Comp. ἐδαφιεῖτὰνήπιάσουπρὸςτὴνπέτραν (Psalms 137:9); καὶτὰὑποτίτθιααὐτῶνἐδαφισθήσουνται (Hosea 14:1). In Amos 9:14 ἠδαγισμένας is a false reading for ἠφανισμένας , and therefore the passage gives no support to the rendering, “ raze, level to the ground.” Field, Otium Norvic. iii. p. 53. Add in confirmation, τὰνήπιααὐτῆςἐδαφιοῦσιν (Nahum 3:10). The AV. translation, “ lay thee even with the ground,” makes this tautological with “ not leave in thee one stone upon another.” The τέκνα are all the inhabitants, not the young only. The Latin Versions are interesting: ad treram prosternent (f Vulg.); ad terram consternent (some MSS. of Vulg.); ad terram sternent (E); ad solum deponent (e); ad nihilum deducent (d); pavimentabunt (a). In class. Lat. pavimentare means “ to cover with a pavement” (Cic. Q. Fr. iii. 1. 1). Comp. the double meaning of “ to floor” . οὐκἀφήσουσινλίθονἐπὶλίθον . Comp. ὅπωςμὴκαταλειφθῆςἐκεῖμηδὲλίθος (2 Samuel 17:13); κατασπάσωεἰςχάοςτοὺςλίθουςαὐτῆς (Micah 1:6). For ἀνθ ʼ ὦν see on 1:20 and 12:3. οὐκἔγνωςτὸνκαιρὸντῆςἐπισκοπῆςσου . “ Thou didst not recognize the time in which God visited thee” — ἐπεσκέψατόσε . The whole of this period of opportunity, which culminated ἐντῇἡμέρᾳταύτῃ , was unnoted and unused. Like ἐπισκέπτομαι (see on 1:68), ἐπισκοπή is a neutral term, and may imply either blessing or punishment. Here and 1 Peter 2:12 (not 5:6) in the former sense, as in Genesis 50:24; Job 29:4; Ecclus. 18:20; and perhaps Wisd. 3:7. In the sense of visiting with punishment it does not occur in N.T., but in LXX of Jer 10:15; Isaiah 10:3, Isaiah 10:29:6; Wisd. 14:11, 19:15. It is not found in class. Grk. For τὸνκαιρόν Syr-Sin. has “ the day.” Here Lk. rather abruptly ends his account of the triumphal procession. The actual entry into the city is not recorded by him. The proposal of schleiermacher and others to distinguish two triumphal entries, one unexpected and unannounced, recorded by the three, and one expected and arranged, recorded by S. John, is no real help. Does the hypothesis make either record more intelligible? What good purpose would a second triumphal procession serve? Would the Romans have allowed this popular Teacher to enter the city a second time with a tumultuous crowd hailing Him as King? This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 20:1-8. The Question of the Sanhedrin respecting the authority of Jesus. Matthew 21:23-27; Mark 11:27-33. Having given a general description of the activity of Jesus and of His enemies during these last days, Lk. now gives some illustrations of both. it was fear of the people which kept His opponents from proceeding against Him: and therefore their first object was to discredit Him with His protectors. Then they could adopt more summary measures. None of the Evangelists enables us to answer with certainty the question whether the hierarchy had at first any idea of employing the sicarii to assassinate Jesus. Matthew 26:4 might mean this. But more probably this and other notices of plots against the life of Jesus refer to the intention of getting Him out of the way by some legal process, either as a blasphemer or as a rebel against the Roman government. Of course, if a mob could be goaded into a fury and provoked to put Him to death (4:29; John 8:59, John 10:31), this would suit their purpose equally well. The intrinsic probability of the controversies reported by the Evangelist as taking place after the triumphal entry is admitted even by Strauss. If the tentative chronology suggested above be accepted, this conversation about authority took place probably two days after the entry, and on Tuesday, April 4, Nisan 12. This day is sometimes called the “ Day of Questions.” We have (1) the Sanhedrin asking about Authority, and (2) Christ’ s counter-question about the Baptist; (3) the Pharisees and Herodians asking about the Tribute; (4) the Sadducees asking about the Woman with Seven Husbands; (5) the Scribe asking which is the First Commandment; (6) Christ’ s question about Psa_110. It is possible this day the question was asked about the Woman taken in Adultery; but that is too precarious to be worth more than a passing mention, although Renan places it here without doubt, and makes it the proximate cause of the arrest and death of Jesus (V. de J. p. 346). If it were included, we might group the questions pressed upon Christ thus: (i.) a personal question; (ii.) a political question; (iii.) a doctrinal question; (iv.) an ethical question; (v.) a question of discipline. Of hardly any day in our Lord’ s life have we so full a report. With Luk_20. and 21. comp. Matthew 21:18-5; Mark 11:20-2; John 12:20-43. It includes at least four parables: the Two Sons (Matthew 21:28-32), the Wicked Husbandmen (Matthew 21:33-44; Mark 12:1-11; Luke 20:9-18), the Ten Virgins (Matthew 25:1-13), and eht Talentg (Matthew 25:14-30). The day may be considered the last working-day of Christ’ s ministry, the last of His public teaching, the last of activity in the temple, the last of instruction to the e and of warning to their leaders. “ It is a picture with genuine Oriental local colouring. … We see Jesus sitting surrounded by a multitude awed into silence. They are all devoutly meditating on the great Messianic question. From time to time an emissary from His opponents steps up to Him, with Eastern solemnity and ceremoniousness, to propose some well-considered question. Anxiously do the multitude listen for Jesus’ answer. Then again follows a meditative silence as before, until at last Jesus Himself delivers a connected discourse” (Hausrath, N. T. Times, ii. p. 250). 1. ἐνμιᾷτῶνἡμερῶν . Lk. alone uses this expression (5:17, 8:22; comp. 5:12, 13:10). He is still indefinite in his chronology. Mt. is a little more clear. It is Mk. who enables us to distinguish three days; presumably Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday. “ The days” perhaps refers to the “ daily teaching in the temple” (19:47); and this deputation from the Sanhedrin is the result of their “ seeking to destroy Him.” We have a similar deputation to the Baptist John 1:19. See fourth note on Luke 9:22. For εὐγγελιζομένου , which defines the character of His teaching more clearly than διδάσκοντος , see on 2:10. ἐπέστησαν . One of Lk.’ s favourite words (see on 2:38): “ there came upon Him.” So also σὺντοῖςπρ . and πρὸςαὐτόν illustrate his fondness for these prepositions. Mt. and Mk. here have καὶ for σύν (see on 1:56), and neither of them has πρός after λέγειν . The introduction of the oratio recta by λέγοντες or λέγων after εἰπεῖν is rare (Mark 12:26): but either is common after λαλεῖν (Acts 8:26, Acts 26:31, Acts 28:25, etc.). 2. ἐνποίᾳ … ποιεῖς ; So in all three. The two questions are not identical; nor is the second a mere explanation of the first. It anticipates the reply, “ By the Messiah’ s authority,” with another question, “ Who made Thee Messiah?” They ask by what kind of authority, human or Divine, ecclesiastical or civil, assumed or conferred, He acts. They refer not merely to His teaching, but also to His cleansing the temple, as ποιεῖς shows. On the first occasion they had asked for a σημεῖον as a guarantee for the lawfulness of His ποιεῖν (John 2:18). They do not venture to do more than question Him, for they know that the feeling and conscience of the people are with Him for putting down their extortionate and profane traffic, for His teaching, and for His works of healing. This was the one point where He seemed to be vulnerable. “ For there was no principle more firmly established by universal consent than that authoritative teaching required previous authorization,” because all such teaching was traditional (Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 381). For ἐνἐξουσσίᾳ see on 4:32. 3. εἶπενπρὸςαὐτούς . Both Mt. and Mk. have αὐτοῖς . Ἐρωτήσωὑμᾶςκἀγὼλόγον . The λόγον refers to their answer rather than His question, as is shown by ὅνἐὰνεἴπητέμοι (Matthew 21:24). “ You ask Me to state My authority. I also will ask you for a statement” ; not, “ ask you a question” (RV.), nor, “ ask you one thing” (AV.). As teachers they must speak first. The ἕνα (A C D) is an insertion from Mt. and Mk, om. א B L R, Syr-Sin. Latin texts are divided. 4. Verbatim as Mt. and Mk., except that Mt. inserts πόθεν , and Mk. adds ἀποκρίθητέμοι . “ Baptism of repentance” was the special characteristic of John’ s teaching (3:3). The question as to is origin is not a mere escape from their attack by placing them in a difficulty: the answer to it would lead to the answer to their question. John had testified to the Divine authority of Jesus, and his baptism was a preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. What had been their view of John’ s position? That was a question to which the official guides of the nation were bound, and had long been bound, to furnish an answer. For the alternative ειξοὐρανοῦ or ἐξἀνθρώπων comp. Acts 5:38, Acts 5:39 5. συνελογίσαντο . Here only in N.T., but classical. א C D have συνελογζοντο . Comp. ver. 14. 6. καταλιθάσει . Here only: but λιθάζειν is found John 10:31-33, John 10:11:8; Acts 5:26, Acts 14:19. In LXX λιθάζειν occurs twice (2 Samuel 16:6, 2 Samuel 16:13), but λιθοβλεῖν is the common verb. comp, 13:34; Acts 7:58. The κατα . expresses “ stoning down, overwhelming with stones” : Comp. καταλιθοβολεῖν Exodus 17:4, and καταλιθοῦν in Josephus. Here Mt. and Mk. have the less definite expression, “ fear the multitude.” προφήτηνεἶναι . Their intense joy at the reappearance of a Prophet after three centuries of silence (p. 80) would be the measure of their fury against a hierarchy which should declare that John had not been a Prophet at all. Comp. 7:29, 30. With ὁλαὸςἅπας comp. 19:48. Nowhere else does πεπεισμένοςἐστιν occur. 7. μἠεἰδέναιπόθεν . This shameful and dishonest avowal is excelled a few days later by their answer to Pilate, “ We have no king but Cæ sar” (John 19:15). Timentes lapidationem, sed magis timentes veritatis confessionem (Bede), these professed “ Teachers of Israel” (John 3:10), who so scorned the ignorant multitude (John 7:49), confessed that they had not yet decided whether one, who for years had been recognized by the nation as a Prophet, had any Divine commission. If they were not competent to judge of the Baptist, still less were they competent to judge of the Christ. Nö sgen, Gesch. J. C. i. p. 514. 8. οὐδὲἐγώ . Verbatim as in Mt. and Mk. Their refusal to answer His question cancels their claim to an answer from Him. This they admit by ceasing to press it. See Gould on Mark 11:33. 9-19. The Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen. Matthew 21:33-46; Mark 12:1-12. Mt. here gives a trilogy of parables, placing this one between the Two Sons and the Marriage of the King’ s Son. Godet thinks that the Two Sons cannot have been uttered where Mt. places it. But it fits the preceding discussion about the Baptist very well; and Mk., who records one parable only, says ἤρξατααὐτοῖςἐνπαραβολαῖςλαλεῖν , which agrees well with the fact that more than one parable was spoken. The idea of “ work in the vineyard” is common to both parables. In this parable Christ lets His enemies know that He is aware of their murderous plans against Himself; an in it He warns both them and the people generally of the fatal results co themselves, if their pans are carried out.1 It is the special characteristic of this parable that it does not teach general and perinanent truths for the guidance of Christians, but refers to post, present, and future events. From the conduct of His traditional enemies, especially at that very time, He predicts His own end and theirs. The parable is capable of spiritual application as to God’ s dealings with churches and individuals, but its primary reference is to the treatment which He is receiving from the Jewish hierarchy. The parable contains the answer to the question which they had raised. He is acting in the authority of His Father who sent Him to them. The imagery is taken from the O. T. and would be readily understood by the audience. The inairl source is the similar parable Isaiah 5:1-7; but comp. Jeremiah 2:21; Ezekiel 15:1-6, 19:10-14; Hosea 10:1; Deuteronomy 32:32, Deuteronomy 32:33, and the many other passages in which Israel is spoken of as a vineyard or a vine; Psalms 80:8 ff.; Joe 1:7, etc. It has been said that be main difference between this parable and Is. v. or other O.T. figures is, that there the husbandmen or leaders and teachers of the people are not mentioned: it is the nation as a whole that fails in its duty to Jehovah. Here it is those who have charge of the nation that are condemned: the vineyard itself is not destroyed for its unfruitfulness, but is treansferred to more faithful stewards. And, in support of this view, it has been pointed out that in the first times of the Kingdom the nation went voluntarily into idolatry; it was not led into it by the priests and other teachers: but now it was mainly the official teachers who prevented the people from acceptin Jesus as the Messiah. This, however, does not fit vv. 15, 16, which show that the tenants are the Jewish nation, and not merely the leaders, and that the vineyard is not the nation, but its spiritual privileges. The nation was not to be transferred to other rulers, but its privileges were to be transferred to other nations. 9. Ἤρξατοδὲπρὸςτὸνλαὸνλέγειν . There is a pause after the discomfiture of the deputation from the Sanhedrin; and then Jesus “ begins” to address a different company. But while He speaks to the people He also speaks at the hierarchy, who are still present, though silenced. Mt. and Mk. regard the parable as addressed to the latter. Syr-Sin. has “ to speak to them.” D, a d e omit πρὸςτὸνλαόν . Comp. 5:36. Ἄνθρωπος . Lk. commonly adds τις : see small print note on 13:19. TR. follows A in adding τις here. ἐφύτευσενἀμπελῶνα . The phrase is freq. in O.T. (Genesis 9:20; Deuteronomy 20:6, 28:30, 39; Psalms 106:37, etc.). Lk. omits the fence, the winepress, and the tower. ἐξέδετο . In all three narratives in this place, but nowhere else in N. T. In LXX it is used of giving a daughter in marriage; Exodus 2:21; Ecclus. 7:25; 1 Mac. 10:58: but the sense of letting out for hire is classical; Plat. Leg. vii:806 D, γεωργίαιδὲἐκδεδομέναιδούλοιςἀπαρχὴντῶνἐκτῆςανποτελοῦσινἱκανήν . Among the Jews rent was sometimes paid in money, but generally in kind. If in kind, it was either a fixed amount of produce, whether the harvest was good or bad; or a certain proportion, e.g. a third or fourth, of each harvest. This latter system led to much disputing and dishonesty, and does so still wherever it is adopted. The tenants in the parable have a long lease and pay in kind; but it is not clear whether they pay a fixed or a proportionate amount. The same form (ετο , not -οτο is found in the best MSS. in all three. Comp. διεδίδετο (Acts 4:35) and παρεδίδετο (1 Corinthians 11:23). Gregory, Proleg. p. 124. Χρόνουςἱκανούς . This addition is peculiar to Lk. See on 7:12. We may understand several years. 10. καιρῷ . No doubt ὁκαιρὸςτῶνκαρπῶν (Mt.) is meant. Syr-Sin. has “ at one of the seasons.” ἀπέστειλεν … δοῦλον . So also Mk., while Mt. has τουςδούλουςαὐτοῦ . In Lk. it is always a single slave who is sent, and the treatment becomes worse each time, culminating in the slaying of the heir, before whom no one is killed. In Mt. and Mk. there is no such dramatic climax, and several are killed before the son is sent: all which is more in accordance with facts in Jewish history. See 1 Kings 18:13, 22:1 Kings 18:24-27; 2 Kings 6:31, 2 Kings 6:21:16; 2 Chronicles 24:19-22, 36:15, 2 Chronicles 24:16; Nehemiah 9:26; Jeremiah 37:15, 44:4; Acts 7:52. ἵναἀπὸτοῦκαρποῦ . Keim says that this means the O. T. tenth; but it does not necessarily imply a proportionate amount at all. A fixed amount, independent of the yield, would be paid ἀπὸτοῦκαρποῦ . ἵνα … δώσουσιν . The fut. iudic. is found in class. Grk. after ὅπως , but not after ἵνα . In bibl. Grk, it is found most often in the last of a series: of verbs following ἵνα : but cases in which the verb depends immediately upon ἵνα occur: 1 Corinthians 9:18; 1 Peter 3:1, Revelation 6:4, Revelation 8:3, Revelation 9:20, Revelation 12:12, on 14:13, and other passages in which the reading is somewhat doubtful. See on 14:10. Burton., § 198, 199. ἐξαπέστειλαν … κενόν . They probably told him, and perhas tried to persuade themselves that his master’ s demand was unjust. Excepting Galatians 4:4, Galatians 4:6. the verb is peculiar in N.T. to Lk. (Acts 7:12, Acts 9:30, Acts 11:22, Acts 12:11, Acts 13:26, Acts 17:14, Acts 22:21); but it is freq. in LXX. For the phrase “ send empty away” comp 1:53; Genesis 31:42; Deuteronomy 15:13; 1 Samuel 6:3; Job 22:9. For δείρατες see on 12:47. 11. προσέθετοπέμψαι . A Hebraism: see on 19:11. Whether this is a second messenger sent that same vintage, or the messenger sent at another vintage, is not stated. The important point is that chastisement does not follow upon the first outrage. The husbandmen have several opportunities; and these are brought by different persons. If one messenger’ s manner of delivering his message was unpleasing, another’ s would be the opposite. But this time they add insult to violence. Comp. the use of ἀτιμάζειν in John 8:49; Acts 5:41; Romans 1:24, Romans 1:2:23; James 2:6. The verb is freq. in LXX. 12. τραυματίσαντες . Worse than δείραντέςκ . ἀτιμάσαντες , as ἐξέβαλον is worse than ἀξαπέστειλαν . Comp. Hebrews 11:36-38; Acts 7:52. 13. Τίποιήσω ; Peculiar to this account; as also is the qualifying ἴσως , which occurs nowhere else in N.T., and only once in LXX (1 Samuel 25:21), where English Versions have “ surely.” Godet contends for such a meaning here: pourtant, en tout cas, certainement. But comp. ΚΛ . Ἴσως . ΑΘ . Οὐκἴσως , ἀλλ ʼ ὄντωςὦδαομόνιε (Plat. Laws, xii:965). We must remember that it is the ἄνθρωπος of ver. 9 who deliberates as to what he shall do, says ἴσως , and expects that his son will be well received. All this is the setting of the parable, and must not be pressed as referring to God. This man represents God, not by his perplexity, but by his long-suffering and mercy. ἐντραπήσονται . In all three: for the meaning see on 18:2. This form of the fut. is late. In Polyb. and Plut. the verb sometimes has an acc., but in class. Grk. a gen., when it means “ reverence” Comp. Exodus 10:3, Wisd. 2:10. The ἰδότες of TR. with A R, Vulg. Goth. comes from ver. 14; om. א B C D C Q, a c d e ff2 i l q r, Bob. Arm. The Syriac Versions are divided. Syr-Sin. is defective here. 14. διελογίζοντοπρὸςἀλλήλους . This touch also is peculiar to Lk. It perhaps looks back to 19:47, 48. Nothing is gained by taking πρὸςἀλλήλους : with λέγοντες : comp. πρὸςἑαυτούς , which is equally amphibolous, ver. 5. A K and Latt. have διελογίσαντο , cogitaverunt and A C Q, Vulg. have πρὸςἑαυτούς from Mark 12:7 for πρὸςἀλλήλους (א B D L P, Bob. Arm.). For ὁκληρονόμος see Wsctt. on Hebrews 1:2 and his detached note on Hebrews 6:12, p. 167. 15. ἐκβαλόντεςἀπέκτειναν . This perhaps was intended to represent their turning him out of his inheritance. It may be doubted whether it refers to Jesus “ suffering without the gate.” Outside the vineyard would be outside Israel rather than outside Jerusalem. Moreover in Mk. the heir is killed before he is cast out of his inheritance. It is possible that they regard the vineyard as already made over to the heir, as was often the case in ancient law: see on 15:12. Comp. the case of Naboth: ἐξήγαγοναὐτὸνἄξωτῆςκαὶἐλιθοβόλησαναὐτὸνλίθοις , καὶἀπέθανεν (1 Kings 20:13). No doubt ἔξωτ . ἀμπελῶνος goes with ἐκβαλόντες (4:29; Acts 7:58, which is closely parallel), not with ἀπέκτειναν . τίοὖνποιήσειαὐτοῖς ; Not, τίοὖνἐποίησεν ; Our Lord indicates that the parable is not a mere fiction: it is a key to a future which depends upon present action. Assuming that the heir is killed, what will happen? In Mt. some of the bystanders answer the question. They are so interested, and enter so fully into the spirit of the narrative, that, without seeing the application to themselves, they reply κακοὺςκακῶς . See on 19:25, and comp. David’ s reply to Nathan’ s parable (2 Samuel 12:5, 2 Samuel 12:6). 16. ἐλεύσεταιλκαὶἀπολέσει … καὶδώσει . Three points: He will no longer send but come; will punish the wrong-doers; will transfer their privileges to others. The Jews were familiar with the idea of the Gentiles being gathered into the Messianic Kingdom (Isaiah 2:2; Isa_60. passim; Jeremiah 3:17). Yet this was restricted to those Gentiles who had taken no part in oppressing Israel, but had submitted to Israel; and later Judaism as a rule denied even this to the heathen (Charles, Enoch, 90:30). Here the Jews are to lose what the Gentiles gain. In vv. 16-19 Syr-Sin. is confused. ἀκούσαντεςδὲεἶπανΜὴγένοιτο . We need not confine this to the people and conclude that “ the Pharisees had too much wariness and self command to have allowed such an exclamation to escape from their lips.” The exclamation may not mean more than “ That is incredible,” or “ Away with the thought.” See Lft. on Galatians 2:17 and Sanday on Romans 3:4. This is the only instance of μὴγένοιτο in N.T. outside the Pauline Epp., where it generally is used to scout a false inference which might be drawn. Burton., § 176, 177. Here it probably refers to the punishment rather than to the sin which brings it,— to ἀπολέσεικαὶδώσει rather than to ἀπέκτειναν . The expression is rare in the Pauline Epp. except in Rom., where it occurs ten times: twice in Gal. and once in 1 Cor. In LXX it is rare, and never stands as an independent sentence: Genesis 44:7, Genesis 44:17; Joshua 22:29, Joshua 22:24:16; 1Ki_20 [21] 3. 17. ἐμβλψαςαὐτοῖς . Lk. alone has this touch. Comp, 22:61 and Elisha’ s fixed look on Hazael (2 Kings 8:11). Τίοὖνἐστίν . “ If the destruction which I have just foretold is not to come , how then do you explain this text?” The passage is once more (see on ver. 9) from the Hallel Psalms (118:22, 23), where see Perowne. The Rabbis recognized it as Messianic: see Schoettg. 1. p. 173. In all three Gospels the quotation is verbatim as in LXX. For τὸγεγραμμένον see on 22:37, and for ἀπεδοκίμασαν see on 9:22. Perhaps λίθον is “ a stone” rather than “ the stone” : the builders may have rejected many stones, one of which became κεφαλὴγωνίας . But, if the Jews used Λίος as a name for the Messiah, as seems to be probable, “ the stone” is better. In Justin Martyr we have Λίθος as a name for Christ (Try. xxiv:xxxvi.): see on Romans 9:33. For the attraction of λίθον to ὄν see on 3:19, and for ἐγενήθηεἰς see on 13:19. κεφαλὴγωνίας . Not the key-stone of the arch, but a cornerstone uniting two walls; but whether a foundation-stone at the base of the corner, or a completing stone at the top of it, is uncertain. Comp. Acts 4:11 and 1 Peter 2:7; also ἀκρογωνιαῖος in Ephesians 2:20 and Isaiah 28:16. Mt. and Mk. quote ver. 23 of Psa_118. as well as ver. 22, and Mt. adds the explanation that the Kingdom shall be transferred to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Would Lk. have omitted this reference to the believing and loyal Gentiles if he had known it? We conclude that he was not familiar with Mt.’ s account. See on 19:46. 18. πᾶςὁπεσὼν … αὐτόν . These words are not in Mk. and are of somewhat doubtful authority in Matthew 21:44, where they are omitted by D 33, or b d e ff12 Syr-Sin., Orig. But the characteristic πᾶς is in any case peculiar to Lk. The first half of the saying seems to be an adaptation of Isa 8:14, and the second half an adaptation of Dan 2:34, Daniel 2:35, Daniel 2:44. Christ is a stumblingblock to some (2:34), and they suffer heavily for their shortsightedness. They not only lose the blessing which is offered, but what they reject works their overthrow. συνθλασθήσεται . “ Shall be shattered” ; confringetur (Lat Vet, Beza), conquassabitur (Vlug.), wird zerschellen (Luth.). But in Matthew 21:44 Vulg. has confringetur. The verb occurs nowhere else in N.T., but the act, is found in LXX (Psalms 57:7; Micah 3:3), and several times as v.l. ἐφ ʼ ὅνδ ʼ ἃνπέσῃ . Note the impressive change of construction. In the first case the man is the chief agent; in the second the stone. And the main thought now is simply λίθος : the metaphor of κεφαλήγωνίας is dropped. A chief corner-stone would not be likely either to trip up a person or to fall on him. λικμήσειαὐτόν . The rendering “ grind to powder,” which all English. Versions from Tyn. to AV. give , follows the comminuet of Vulg. (in Mt. conteret), but is without authority. Not only in classical authors (Hom. Xen. Plut. Lucian.), but also in LXX, it means “ to winnow chaff from gain,” from λικμός , “ a winnowing fan.” In Rth 3:2, λικμᾷτὸνἅλωνατῶνκριθῶν , and Ecclus. 5:9, μὴλίκμαἐνπαντὶἀνέμῳ , the meaning is indisputable. Hence “ to blow away like chaff, sweep out of sight or out of existence” : ἀναλήμψεταιδὲαὐτὸνκαύσωνκαὶἀπελεύσεται , καὶλικνήσειαὐτὸνἐκτοῦτόπουαὐτοῦ (Job 27:21); καὶπόρῥωαὐτὸνδιώξεταιὦςχνοῦνἀχύρουλικμώντωνἀπέναντιἀνέμου (Isaiah 17:13); ὁλικυμήσαντὸνἸσραὴλσυννάξειαὐτόν (Jeremiah 31:10); καὶλικμήσωἐνπᾶσιντοῦςἔθνεσιντὸνοἶκοντοῦἸσραήλ , ὃντρόπονλικμᾶταιἐντῷλικμῷ (Amos 9:9). Daniel 2:44 is important, as being the probable source of the saying: there, while in LXX we read πατάξεικαὶἀφανίσει , Theodotion has λεπτυνεῖκαὶλικμήσει , showing that λικμήσει = ἀφανίσει . Comp. Theod. ἐγένετοὡσεὶκονιορτὸςἀπο ʼ ἅλωνοςθερινῆς , καὶἐξῆρεντὸπλῆθοςτοῦπνεεύματος , καὶτόποςοὐχεὑρέθηαὐτοῖς (Daniel 2:35). “ Scatter him as chaff,” therefore, is the meaning. When a heavy mass falls, what is pulverized by the blow is scattered by the rush of air. The Commovet illum of Cod. Palat. (e) looks like an attempt to preserve the right idea. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 225. 19. ἐναὐτῇτῇὥρᾳ . “ In that very hour” Lk.’ s usual expression: see on 10:7, 21. There is no equivalent to it here in Mt. or Mk. ἔγνωσανγὰρὅτιπρὸςαὐτούς . So also in Mark 12:12, while Mt. has πρόςαὐτῶν . Vulg. has ad ipos here and ad eos in Mk. But πρός may be either “ with a view to, in reference to” (see on 12:41, 18:1, 9, 19:9), or “ against” (AV. RV.): comp. Acts 23:30. Here, as in Hebrews 1:7, Hebrews 1:8, Wsctt. prefers the meaning “ in reference to” : comp. Romans 10:21; Hebrews 11:18. The nom. to ἔγνωσαν is οἱγραμματεῖς , not ὁλάς , which would require ἔγνω , to be unambiguous. In Mt. the nom. to ἔγνωσαν must be the hierarchy. And γάρ gives the reason, not for ἐζνωσαν , but for ἐφοβήθησαν , as the order of the sentences shows: and this is still more clear in Mk. by the change of tense from ἐζήτουν (see Gould). The hierarchy recognize that the parable was directed against themselves; and this made them fear the people, who had heard e parable also. Syr-Sin. transfers this to v. 16. In class. Grk. πρόςτινα often means “ in reply to,” and hence “ against,” being less strong than κατάτινος , as adversus than in. Here Beza has adversus ipsos and Luther auf sie. 20-26. The Question about the Tribute. Matthew 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17. There is no evidence that a night intervened between the previous question and this one. The connexion between vv. 19 and 20 is close; and ver. 19 took place ἐναὐτῇτῆὥρᾳ with what precedes. The previous question about authority had emanated from the Sanhedrin as a whole. The different parties represented in it now act separately and devise independent attacks. This one comes from the Pharisees (Matthew 22:15), who send a group composed of Pharisees and Herodians (Matthew 21:16; Mark 12:13). Neither Lk. nor Jn. mentions the Herodians. Their alliance with Pharisees is remarkable, for the Pharisees detested the Herodian dynasty; and this is not the first instance of such an alliance (Mark 3:6). But opponents often combine to attack those who are obnoxious to both. 20. παρατηρήσαντες . See on 14:1. Both AV. and RV. follow Tyn. Cran. Cov, and Gen. in translating “ watched him” ; but neither indicates by italics that “ him” is not in the Greek. Wic, and Rhem. have no pronoun, in accordance with Vulg. observantes miserunt. It is doubtful whether the pronoun ought to be supplied, for παρατηρεῖν without case may mean “ to watch an opportunity.” See Field and Alford, ad loc. Mt. has his favourite πορευθέντες . D and some Versions here have ἀποχωρήσαντες : so Goth. Aeth. cum recessissent (f i l), cum discessissent (a), recedentes (d), secesserunt et (e). ἐνκαθέτους . “ Suborned to lie in wait” ; lit. “ sent down into.” In N.T. here only, and in LXX Job 19:12, Job 31:9: but classical. Comp. Jos. B. J. vi:5, 2. The ὑποκρινομέους shows for what purpose they were suborned: they posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience. In different ways all three accounts call attention to their hypocrisy. Meyer quotes, Qui tum, cum maxime fallunt, id agunt ut viri boni videantur (Cic. De Off. i:13, 41). ἐπιλαβωνταιαὐτοῦλόγου . “ Take Him in His speech” ; αὐτοῦ depending upon ἐπιλαβ . and λόγου being epexegetic (De W. Mey. Go.): rather than “ take hold of His speech,” αὐτοῦ depending upon λόγου (Holtz. Hahn). Vulg. has eum in sermone. So also Tyn. Cov. Cran. Gen. Rhem. Luth. Comp. ἐπελάβετόμουτῆςστολῆς (Job 30:18) and ἐπιλαμβάνεταιαὐτοῦτῆςἴτους (Xen. Anab. iv:7, 12). Mt. has ὅπωςαὐτὸνοαγιδεύσωσινἐνλόγῳ , Mk. ἵνααὐτὸνἀγρεύσωσινλόγῳ Jesus had baffled them with a dilemma (ver. 4), and they now prepare a dilemma for Him. Comp. the constr in 19:4. ὥστεπαραδοῦναι … τοῦἡγεμόνος . Peculiar to Lk. Quod per se non poterant, præ sidis manibus efficere tentabant, ut veluti ipsi a morte ejus viderentur immunes (Beds). For ὥστε comp 4:29; Matthew 24:4. τῇἀρχῇκαὶτῆἐξουσίᾳτ . ἡγεμ . It is an improbable refinement to press the double article and separate τῇἀρχῇ from τοῦἡγεμόνος : “ so as to deliver Him to the Government, and (in particular) to the authority of the governor” (Mey. Weiss); or, “ so as to deliver Him to the rule (of the Sanhedrin) and to authority of the governor” (Nö sg. Hahn). For the combination of ἀρχή with ἐξουσία comp. 12:11; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Ephesians 3:10, Colossians 1:16, Colossians 1:2:15; Titus 3:1. See Lft. on Colossians 1:16. The generic term ἡγεμών may be used of the emperor (comp. ἠγεμονία 3:1) or any of his subordinates. In N.T. it is often used of the ἐπίροπος or procurator (Matthew 27:2, Matthew 27:11, Matthew 27:14, etc.; Acts 23:24, Acts 23:26, Acts 23:33, Acts 23:24:1, Acts 23:10, etc.) and less definitely of any governor (21:12; 1 Peter 2:14). Comp. Jos, Ant. xviii:3, 1; and ἡγεμονεύω 2:2, 3:1. 21. ὄρθωςλέγειςκαὶδιδάσκεις . The falseness of these fulsome compliments in their mouths stamps this as one of the most dastardly of the attacks on Christ. They go on to emphasize their flattery by denying the opposite. οὐλαμβάνειςπρόσωπον . Affreux barbarisme pour des lecteurs grecs (Godet). The expression is a Hebraism, which originally meant “ raise the face,” i.e. make the countenance rise by favourable address, rather than “ accept the face.” Hence it came to mean “ regard with favour,” but not necessarily with undue favour: Comp. Psalms 81:2; Malachi 1:8, Malachi 1:9. But the bad sense gradually prevailed; and both here and in Galatians 2:6 (see Lft.) partiality is implied, as in Leviticus 19:15 and Malachi 2:9. In LXX the common phrase is θαυμάζεινπρόσωπον : comp. Jude 1:16. The compounds προσωπολήμπτης , προσωπολημψία , etc., always imply favouritism. Both Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin. for “ way of God” read “ word of God.” 22. The φόρος (classical and in LXX) or capitation-tax must be distinguished from τέλη , which are indirect taxes. Mt. and Mk. here have κῆνσον , but in Mk. ἐπικεφάλαιον is a notable v. l. For ἡμᾶς (א A B L) TR. has ἡμῖν . Only here and 6:4 does ἔξεστιν c. acc. et infin. occur in N.T. Καίσαρι stands first with emphasis. Usually both dat, and acc. follow δοῦναι : 1:74, 77, 12:32, 17:18; Acts 5:31, Acts 5:7:5; Matthew 14:7, Matthew 20:4, etc. 23. κατανοήσας … πανουργίαν . Mt. has γνοὺς … πονηρίαν , Mk. εἰδὼς … ὑπόκρισιν . See on 12:27 for Lk.’ s fondness for κατανοέω . In N.T., as in class. Grk., πανουργία always has a bad meaning (1 Corinthians 3:19; 2 Corinthians 4:2, 2 Corinthians 4:11:3; Ephesians 4:14). In LXX it may mean “ versatility, skill” (Proverbs 1:4, Proverbs 8:5). 24. Δείξατέμοιδηνάριον . Mk. has φέρετε , which implies that they had to fetch it. They would not have heathen money on their persons. Mt. has προσήνεγκαναὐτῶ , which implies the same thing; and he calls it τὸνόμισματοῦκήνσου , because this poll-tax had to be paid in denarii. Τίμεπειράζετε (A C D P) is an insertion here from Mt. and Mk. א B L omit. See Wright, Synopsis, § 80, p. 73. Καίσαρος . Probably that of Tiberius. There was no royal offigy on Jewish coins: and Roman copper coins, if for circulation in Palestine, had no image on them. It was a base piece of flattery on the part of Herod Philip that he placed on his coins the head of the emperor, and the denarius used on this occasion may have been one of his. It is possible but not probable that it was a foreign coin, such as circulated outside Palestine.1 “ Judas of Galilee” (Acts 5:37; Jos. Ant, xviii:1. 6, 20:5, 2) or the Gaulonite (Ant. xviii:1, 1) had denounced the payment of tribute to Cæ sar as treason against Jehovah, the only Lord that Israel could acknowledge (a.d. 6): and probably the Galileans who were listening to Jesus on this occasion were thoroughly in sympathy. But His adversaries had conceded the whole point when they admitted that the coinage was Cæ sar’ s: for even Judaism admitted that coinage implies the right of taxation, and is evidence of the government to which submission is due. Ubiunque numisma alicujus regis obtinet, illic incolæ regem istum pro domino agnoscunt (Maimon.). See Edersh. L. &T. 2. p. 385; Hist. of. J. N. p. 257. Grodus quotes Τίναἔχειχαρκτῆρατοῦτοτετρασσάριον ; Τραιανοῦ (Arrian. Epict. iv:5, 17). 25. Τοίνυνἀπόδοτε . This is the right order (א B L, Boh. Goth. Arm.), contrary to the best usage; and hence the correction ἀπόδοτετοίνυν (א C R D A P). D, Syr-Sin. and Lat. Vet. omit τοίνυν . For τοίνυν first in the sentence come Hebrews 13:13; Isaiah 3:10, Isaiah 5:13, and contrast 1 Corinthians 9:26; Wisd. 1:11, 8:9. The τοίνυν marks the sayings as a conclusion drawn from the previous admission: “ Then render to, Cæ sar,” etc. τὰΚαίσαροςΚαίσαρι . This is the answer to the Pharisaic portion of His questioners, as τὰτοῦΘεοῦτῷΘεοῷ to the Herodian. The error lay in supposing that Cæ sar and God were mutually exclusive alternatives. Duty to Cæ sar was part of their duty to God, because for purposes of order and government Cæ sar was God’ s vicegerent. In Romans 12:1, Romans 12:2 S. Paul insists on the second of these principles, in 13:1-7 on the first. See detached note at the end of Rom_13. As Judæ a was an imperial province, its taxes would go to the fiscus of the emperor, not to the æ rarium of the senate. τὰτοῦΘεοῦ . No one duty is to be understood to the exclusion of others, whether offerings in the temple, or penitence, etc. All duties owed by man to God are included.2 For ἀποδίδωμι of paying what is due comp. vii:42, x:35, xii:59; and see Wsctt. on Hebrews 12:11. They had said φόρονδοῦναι , as if the tribute was a gift. By substituting ἀπόδοτε He indicates that it is a due. 26. οὐκἴσχυσαν … ἐναντίοντοῦλαοῦ . Peculiar to Lk., who drawe special attention to this further victory of Jesus. All three record the wonder of His adversaries. For the constr. of αὐτοῦ see on ver. 20. This use of ἐναντίον is common in LXX, but in N.T. is found only here, 24:19; Acts 7:10, Acts 8:32: comp. ἔναντι 1:8, Acts 8:21. For θαυμάζεινἐπί see on 2:33, and for σιγᾷν see on 18:39. 27-38. The Question of the Sadducees respecting a Woman with Seven Husbands. Matthew 22:23-33; Mark 12:18-27. Mt. tells us expressly that this took place ἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳ . Lk. mentions the Sadducees several times in the Acts (4:1, 5:17, 23:6-8) but here only in his Gospel. Mk. also here only. This question was less dangerous than the previous one. It concerned a matter of exegesis and speculation, not of politics, and was doctrinal rather than practical. Like the first two questions, it aimed at destroying Christ’ s influence with the multitude. While the first aimed at inspiring them with distrust, and the second at rousing their indignation against Him, this one is calculated to excite their ridicule. If Jesus failed to answer it, He and His supporters would be placed in a grotesque position. The Sadducees were not popular, for the doctrine of the resurrection is precious to the majority of mankind, and they would be glad of this opportunity of publicly exhibiting the popular doctrine as productive of ludicrous results. Josephus says that when Sadducees became magistrates, they conformed to the views of the Pharisees, for otherwise the people would not tolerate them (Ant. xviii:1, 4). D.C.G. art. “ Sadducees.” But the doctrine of the resurrection and of invisible powers (Acts 23:8, Jos. B. J. ii:8 14) was not the main point in dispute between Sadducees and Pharisees, but a deduction from the main point. The crucial question was whether the oral tradition was binding (Ant. xii:10, 6). The Pharisees contended that it was equal in authority to the written law, while the Sadducees maintained that everything not written was an open question and might be rejected. Apparently the Pharisees were willing to concede that the doctrine of the resurrection is not to be found in the written Law; and indeed outside the Book of Daniel it is not clearly taught in O.T. What is said in favour of it (Job 19:26; Psalms 16:9, Psalms 16:11; Isaiah 26:19) seems to be balanced by statements equally strong on the other side (Psalms 6:5, 88:10, 11, 115:17; Ecclesiastes 9:4-10; Isaiah 38:18, Isaiah 38:19). Hence it followed, on Sadducean principles, that the doctrine was without authority, and was simply a pious opinion. That the Sadducees rejected the O.T., with the exception of the Pentateuch, is a mistake of Tertullian, Origen, Hippolytus, Jerome, and others; and perhaps arises from confusion with the Samaritans. But no Jew regarded the other books as equal in authority to the Books of Moses; and hence Jesus, in answering the Sadducees, takes His argument from Exodus (Bleak, Int. to O. T. § 305, Eng. tr. 2. p. 310). The name Σαδδουκαῖος probably comes from Zadok, the best attested form of which in many passages of LXX is Σαδδούκ (2 Samuel 8:17; Nehemiah 3:29, Nehemiah 3:10:21, Nehemiah 3:11:11, Nehemiah 3:13:13; Ezekiel 40:46, Ezekiel 43:19, Ezekiel 44:15, Ezekiel 48:11): but which Zadok gave the name to the sect, remains doubtful (Schü rer, Jewish People in the T. of J. C. II, 2. pp. 29-43; Hausrath, N. T. Times, 1. pp. 136-150; Pressensé , Le Siê cle Apostolique, pp. 87, 88, ed. 1888. For minor points of difference between Sadducees and Pharisees, see Kuenen, Religion of Israel, 3. pp. 234-238; Derenbourg, pp. 132-144): 27. τινεςτῶνΣαδδουκαίωνοἱλέγοντες . The οἱλεγ . may agree with τινες , or be an irregular description of τῶνΣαδδ . In the latter case comp. Mark 12:40; but the former is better. All Sadducees held that the resurrection was not an article of faith, but some may have believed that it was true. One might render οἱλέγοντες “ who were saying” at that moment. λέγοντες is the reading of א B C D L" 133 etc., d e Syr-Sin. Syr-Cur. Aegypt. Goth. Aeth., which is not discredited because it is also in Mt. But Tisch. follows B R ΓΔΛΠ etc. in reading ἀντιλγοντες . Ἐάντινοςἀδελφός . The quotation gives the substance rather than the wording of Deu 25:5; comp. Genesis 38:8. The levirate law is said still to prevail among the Kalmucks and other nations in the East. See Morison on Mark 12:19. 29. ἑπτὰυὀ͂νἀδελφοί . The οὖν appears to indicate that what is about to be narrated was a consequence of this levirate law. But the υὀ͂ν may be a mere particle of transition. Mt. inserts παρ ʼ ἡμῖν , as if they professed to describe what had actually taken place. It is said to have been a well-known problem, the recognized answer to which was, that at the resurrection the woman would be the wife of the first brother. This answer Christ might have given; but, while it would have avoided the ridicule to which the Sadducees wished to expose Him, it would not have refuted their doctrine. D, Syr-Sin. c d ff2 l q ins. παρ ʼ ἡμῖν here. ἄτεκνος . “ Childless” as in ver. 28: comp. ver. 31. All three imply that there was neither son nor daughter. And this is laid down in the Talmud,— that the deceased brother must have no child at all, although Deuteronomy 25:5 says simply “ have no son” (RV.). Some maintained that the levirate law, which to a large extent had gone out of use, did not apply to a wedded wife, but only to a betrothed woman. The Mishna recommends that the levirate law be not observed. 30. καὶὁδεύτερος . This is the reading of א B D L 157, e. omitting ἔλαβεν after καὶ and τὴνγυναῖκακαὶοὖτολςἀπέθανενἄτεκνος after ὁδεύτερος . These insertions are found in A R ΓΔΛΠ , Syr-Sin. Syr-Cur. Vulg. 31. οὐκατέλιποντέκνακαὶἀπέθανον . The main point is placed first, although their death logically precedes. 33. τίνοςαὐτῶνγίνεταιγυνή ; The question is a plausible appeal to the rough common sense of the multitude, and is based upon the coarse materialistic views of the resurrection which then prevailed. 34. Jesus begins by removing this erroneous basis and shows that the question is futile. The words of οἱυἱοὶτοῦαἰῶνος … τυχεῖν are peculiar to Lk., who omits “ Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” Comp. Ephesians 1:21. 35. οἱδὲκαταξιωθέντεςτοῦαἰῶνοςἐκείνου . One might have expected simply of οἱυἱοὶΤ . αἰῶνοςἐκ . But the substitution of καταξιωθέντες corrects the assumption that all the sons of this world will enter the Kingdom which begins with the resurrection. Comp. Acts 5:41; 2 Thessalonians 1:5 Nowhere else does ὁαἰὼνἐκεῖνος occur in N.T. It means the age beyond the grave regarded as an age of bliss and glory. See on Romans 12:2. In itself it implies resurrection; but, inasmuch as this is the doctrine in dispute, the resurrection is specially mentioned. The word ἀνάστασις occurs Zephaniah 3:8; Lamentations 3:63; Daniel 11:20; title of Psa_65. But not until 2 Mac. 7:14, 12:43 is it used of resurrection after death. τῆςἐκνεκρῶν . This must be distinguished from [ἡ ] ἀνάστασις [τῶν ] νεκρῶν . The latter is the more comprehensive term and implies that all the dead are raised (Matthew 22:31; Acts 17:32, Acts 17:23:6, Acts 17:24:21, Acts 17:26:23; Romans 1:4; 1 Corinthians 15:12, 1 Corinthians 15:13, 1 Corinthians 15:42; Hebrews 6:2). Whereas ἀνάστασιςἐκνεκρῶν rather implies that some from among the dead are raised, while others as yet are not. Hence it is used of the resurrection of Christ and of the righteous, and is equivalent to the ἀνάστασιςζωῆς (Acts 4:2; 1 Peter 1:3: comp. Colossians 1:18). The ἀνάστασιςνεκρῶν includes the ἀνάστασιςκρίσεως as well as the ἀνζωῆς (John 5:29).Comp. 14:14; 1 Thessalonians 4:16; Revelation 20:5, Revelation 20:6; and see Lft. on Philippians 3:11 and Mey. on Romans 1:4. With the construction comp. τούτουτυχεῖνοὐκἠειώθηναὐτός (Aesch. P.V. 239). γαμίζονται . Identical in meaning with γαμίσκονται (ver. 34). In both verses the simple verb is the right reading. In both places TR. inferior authorities in reading ἐκγαμ . 36. οὐδὲγὰρἀποθανεῖν . The γάρ means that the abolition of death involves the abolition of marriage, the purpose of which is to preserve the human race from extinction. For οὐδέ (A B D L P 106 157) Tisch. has οὔτε (א Q R G D D P). It looks like a correction. ἰσάγγελοιγάρεἰσιν . The adj. occurs here only in bibl. Grk. and was probably coined by Lk. on the analogy of ἰσάστερος (4 Mac. 17:5), ἰσάδελφος , ἰσόθεος , κ .τ .λ . Mt. and Mk have ὡςἄγγελοι . Grotius quotes from Hierocles τοὺςἰσοδαίμοναςκαὶἰσαγγέλουςκαὶτοῖςἥρωσινὁμοίους . “ They do not marry, because they cannot die; and they cannot die, because they are like angels; and they are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.” In correcting the error of the Sadducees about the resurrection Jesus incidentally corrects their scepticism respecting Angels (Acts 23:8). See Latham, A Service of Angels, pp. 52-60; Charles, Apoc. of Baruch, pp. 77:84. The connexion of καὶυἱοίΘεοῦ is uncertain. The repetition of εἰσιν is rather against the clause being taken with ἰσάγγελοιγάρεἰσιν . More probably it is co-ordinate with οὐδὲἀποθανεῖνδύνανται . It is worth noting both in Job 1:6, Job 2:1, and Genesis 6:2 LXX has not υἱοί but ἄγγελοιτοῦΘεοῦ . Comp. 1 Corinthians 15:52; Revelation 21:4 But in any case it is the immortality, of the Angels, not their sexlessness or immateriality, that is the point of the argument. For τῆςἀν . υἱοὶὄντες see on 16:8. 37. Having shown that their question ought not to have been asked, being based upon a gross misconception of the conditions of the future state, Jesus proceeds to answer the objection which their question implied, viz. that the doctrine of the resurrection is inconsistent with the Mosais Law. On the contrary, Moses implies the doctrine. The levirate law is no argument against a resurrection; and the passage here quoted is a strong argument in favour of it. See Martensen, Chr. Dogm. § 290, 274. καὶΜωυσῆς . “ Even Moses,” who was supposed to be against the doctrine (Mey. Weiss, Holtzm.). Less well, etiam Moses, non modo proPhetæ (Beng.). Jesus quotes Moses because they done so (ver. 28), not because the Sadducees accepted only the Pentateuch (Tert. Orig. Hieron.), which was not the case. ἐμήνυσεν . Not, “ hinted,” but “ disclosed, intimated, revealed.” Both in class. and bibl. Grk. μήύω is specially used of making known what was secret (Acts 23:30; 1 Corinthians 10:28; John 11:57; soph. O.R. 102). ἐπὶτῆςβάτου . “ In the Bush,” i.e. in the portion of Scripture known as “ the Bush.” In Mk. we have ἐντῇβίβλῳΜωυσέωςἐπὶτοῦβάτου , where AV. violently transposes ἐπὶτ . β .,— “ how in the bush God spake unto him.” Comp. 2 Samuel 1:18 and Romans 11:2 The O.T. was divided into sections, which were named after something prominent in the contents. Examples are quoted from the Talmud. The rhapsodists divided Homer into sections and named them on a similar principle. In the Koran the chapters are named in this way. But the possibility of the simple local meaning here must not be excluded. The gender of βάτος varies. Here and Acts 7:35 it is fem. In Mk. and in LXX it is masc. (Exodus 3:2, Exodus 3:3, Exodus 3:4; Deuteronomy 33:16). So also in Polyb. and Theophr. Several Old Latin texts here read sicut dixit vidi in rubo (cf ff2 il q), which seems to imply a Greek text ὡςλέγειεἶδονἐντῇβ . 38. The Sadducees based their denial of the resurrection on the alleged silence of Scripture and on the incredibility of existence after the death of the body (Jos. B. J. ii. 8. 14). Christ demolishes their premises by showing that Scripture is not silent, but teaches the reality of existence after death.1 His argument has less force against those who admit existence after death, but hold that this existence of the soul apart from the body will continue for ever. This, however, was not the error which He was combating, and perhaps was not a common view. Yet even against this error the argument has force, as Bengel points out. Deus non est non entis deus: ipse est deus vivens; ergo ii qui deum habent, vivere debent, et qua parte vivere intermiserant, reviviscere in perpetuum. But perhaps this is more than is intended. What is obvious is this:— Dead things may have a Creator, a Possessor, a Ruler: only living beings can have a God. If Abraham or any of the patriarchs had ceased to exist when he died, God would have ceased to be his God. “ I am the God of Abraham” implies that Abraham still lives. Comp. οἱδιὰτὸνΘεὸνἀποθανόντεςζῶσιντῷΘεῷ , ὤσπερἈβραὰμκ . Ἰσαὰκκ . Ἰακώβ (4 Mac. 16:25).2 It is to reference to us that they seem to die: in reference to Him πάντεςζῶσιν . The πάντες need not be restricted to the three patriarchs: it includes all who are mentioned in vv. 35, 36. Mk. adds πολὺπλανᾶσαθε , but the condemnation of this doctrinal error is less severe than of the Pharisaic hypocrisy. 39, 40. The Testimony of the Scribes. Some of the Pharisees could not refrain from expressing their admiration of the manner in which lesus had vanquished their opponents. That proof of the doctrine of the resurrection, which Sadducees had defied a Pharisees to find in the Pentateuch, Jesus had produced, and in the most convincing manner. The scribes were now persuaded that it was useless to ply Jesus with hard questions. Such attempts merely gave Him the opportunity of winning victories. But we learn from Mt. and Mk. that one of them came forward to try Him once more with a question that was much debated, as to which commandment was chief. There is nothing to show, however, that there was any snare in the question: the scribe may have wished to try His sagacity on a point which was very interesting. That a similar inquiry has been narrated elsewhere (10:25), may be Lk.’ s reason for omitting the incident here. 40. γάρ . The fact that this was not understood caused it to be altered in many texts into δέ . Godet maintains that it “ has absolutely no sense,” and erroneously states that WH. have abandoned it. It is attested by א B L, 33, Aegyptt., and gives excellent sense. Some of His opponents praised Him, for they saw that He was always victorious, and that they must risk no more defeats. 41-44. Jesus in turn asks a Question about David and the Messiah. Matthew 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37, where see Gould. It is yet another opportunity of instructing them, not of vanquishing and humiliating them, that is sought. The approbation recorded in ver. 39 (comp. Mark 12:32) gave signs that some of His opponents were open to conviction, and might even now recognize the Christ. 41. πρὸςαὐτούς . The scribes who had expressed admiration are perhaps chiefly meant. In any case, “ unto them” and not “ in reference to them” is the meaning. Πῶςλέγουσιν . Mk. gives οἱγραμματεῖς as the subject of λέγουσιν , which does not imply that the scribes had gone away. “ With what right do teachers say?” This is the usual doctrine; but do people consider what it involves in reference to other statements? 42. αὐτὸςγάρ . is the reading of א B L R I 33, l, Aegyptt., and may be safely preferred to καὶαὐτός (A D P, Syrr. Vulg. Goth.). Q has καὶαὐτὸςγάρ . ἐνβίβλῳψαλμῶν . See on 3:4. Mt. has πνεύματι and Mk. τῷπν . τῷἁγίῳ for βίβλῳψαλμ͂ν . The quotation is verbatim the same in all three, excepting that Mt. and Mk. have ὑποκάτω for the ὑποπόδιον of LXX. and Lk. All three omit the ὁ before Κύριος . In the Hebrew we have different words for Lord: “ Jehovah saith to Adonai.” Psa_110. was always believed to be Messianic, and to have been written by David. That it is Messianic is a matter of spiritual interpretation; and, as Jesus here gives this doctrine the sanction of His authority, no loyal Christian will consider that he is free to question it. The authorship of the Psalm is a question of Criticism; and nothing in the method of Christ’ s teaching, or in the contents of Scripture generally, warrants us in believing that He here frees us from the duty of investigating a problem which is capable of being solved by our own industry and acuteness. We have no right to expect that Scripture will save us from the discipline of patient research by supplying us with infallible answers to questions of history, chronology, geology, and the like. The last word has not yet been spoken as to the authorship of Psa_110.; but it is a mistake to maintain that Jesus has decided the question. There is nothing antecedently incredible in the hypothesis that in such matters, as in other details of human information, He condescended not to know more than His contemporaries, and that He therefore believed what He had been taught the school and in the synagogue (see footnote, p. 124). Nor ought we summarily to dismiss the suggestion that, although He knew that the Psalm was not written by David, He yet abstained from challenging beliefs respecting matters of fact, because the premature and violent correction of such beliefs would have been more harmful to His work than their undisturbed continuance would be. In this, as in many things, the correction of erroneous opinion might well be left to time. But this suggestion is less satisfactory than the other hypothesis. It should be noticed that, while Jesus affirms both the inspiration (Mt. Mk.) and the Messianic character (Mt. Mk. Lk.) of Ps. 110., yet the argumentative question with which He concludes need not be understood as asserting that David is the author of it, although it seems to imply this. It may mean no more than that the scribes have not fairly faced whale their own principles involve. Here is a problem, with which they ought to be quite familiar, and of which they ought to be able to give a solution. It is their position, and not His, that is open to criticism. The question, “ Why callest thou Me good?” appears to serve a similar purpose. It seems to imply that Christ is not to be called good in the sense that God is called good (Mark 10:18). But it need mean no more than that the young man who addressed Jesus as “ Good Master” ought to reflect as to the significance of such language before making use of it. 1 44. καὶπῶςαὐτοῦυἱόςἐστιν ; De Wette and Strauss both point out that this question must imply either (1) that the Messiah is not the Son of David, or (2) that the inspired Psalmist teaches that the Messiah is no mere political deliverer. Strauss, with Schenkel and Volkmar, prefers the former altenative.2 But it is incredible that, even if Jesus were a mere human teacher, He would thus gratuitously have contradicted the express utterances of Scripture (2 Samuel 7:8-29; Isaiah 9:5-7, 11:Isaiah 9:1-10; Jeremiah 23:5-8; Micah 5:2) and the popular belief which was built upon them; especially as this belief was a valuable help to His own work (18:38; Matthew 15:22, Matthew 12:23, Matthew 21:9). Whereas, those who believe in His Divinity need have no difficulty in admitting, that, on a point which was no part of His teaching, Jesus might go all His human life without even raising the question as to the truth of what was authoritatively taught about the authorship of this or that portion of Scripture. 45-47. The Condemnation of the Scribes. Like Mark 12:38-40, this seems to be a summary of the terrible indictment of the hierarchy given at length in Mat_23. Lk. perhaps did not know the longer report preserved by Mt. As he had already given an account of a similar discourse (11:39-52), there was the less need to give a full report here. 45. Ἀκούοντοςδὲπαντὸςτοῦλαοῦ . It is in the hearing of the multitude who had just been witnesses of the contest, in which the scribes had been so signally defeated, that Jesus utters His final condemnation of them. Comp. the similar condemnation 12:1, where as here we have προσέχετεἀπό , and see notes there. Comp. also the somewhat parallel passage in Ezekiel 22:25: ἁρπάζοντεςἁπράγματα , ψυχὰςκατεσθίοντεςἐνδυναστείᾳ , καὶτιμὰςλαμβάνοντεςκαὶαἱχῆραίσουἐπληθύνθησανἐνμεσῳσου . 46. περιπατεῖνἐνστολαῖς . Mk. also has this Hellenized expression for πλατύνουσιντὰφυλακτήριααὐτῶν (Matthew 23:5). The saying from ἀσπασμοὺςἐνταῖςἀγοραῖς to τοῖςδείπνοις is in all three accounts. Comp. 16:7, and see Wetst. on Matthew 23:6, Matthew 23:7. Salmon quotes AV. of this and of Mar 12:38 in illustration of the variety which independent translation is sure to produce. There, “ love to go in long clothing, and love salutations in the market places and the chief seats in the synagogues, and the uppermost rooms at feasts, which for a pretence make long prayers.” Here, “ desire, walk, robes, greetings, markets, highest, chief, show” for the words in italics, the Greek in all cases being the same. τῶνθελόντωνπερινπατεῖν . This constr. of θέλω = “ like, love” c. infin. occurs only here and Mark 12:38. It is perhaps an extension of the Hebraistic θέλωτινα or τι = “ take delight in,” and in Mark 12:7 an acc. is coupled with the infin. Comp. Matthew 27:43, Matthew 27:9:13, Matthew 27:12:7; Hebrews 10:5, Hebrews 10:8. But Lk. seperates the acc. from θελόντων by inserting the more usual φιλούντων , Win. liv. 4 p. 587. What follows is common to all three accounts. See on 11:43 and 14:7. 47. οἳκατεσθίουσιντὰςοἰκίαςτῶνχηρῶν . Comp. Mark 12:40; but this item in the condemnation is not found in the true text of Mat_23. Probably wealthy widows are chiefly meant. They devoured widows’ houses by accepting hospitality and rich presents from pious and weak women. Sexus muliebris ut ad superstitionem pronior ita magis patet ad eas fraudes (Grot.). They would find widows a specially easy prey, and their taking advantage of the defenceless aggravated their guilt C’ é taient les Tartuffes de l’ é poque (Godet). Josephus says of the Pharisees οἷςὑπῆκτοἡγυναικωνῖτις (Ant. xvii. 2. 4). Comp. the cases of Fulvia (18:3, 5) and of Helene (20:2, 5) as instances of devout and benevolent women. The wife of Pheroras, brother of Herod the Great, paid the fines of thousands of Pharisees who had been fined for refusing to swear loyalty to Cæ sar (17:2, 4). The Talmud gives evidence of the plundering of widows. Inter plagas quæ a Pharisæ is proveniunt hæ c etiam est. Est qui consulant cum orphanis, ut alimenta viduæ eripiat (Sota Hieros. f. 20. I, , Schoettg. 1:199). Of a plundered widow R. Eleazar says, Plaga Pharisæ orum tetigit illam. λήμψονταιπερισσότερονκρίμα . The “ more abundant” may be understood in two ways: (1) in proportion to the high estimation in which they were held in this world; or (2) in proportion to the hypocrisy which makes a trade of religion (Gould). Qui male agit, judicatur. Qui bono abutitur ad malum ornandum, magis judicatur (Beng.). For λήμψομαικρίμα comp. Romans 13:2; James 3:1; and for περισσότερον see on 7:26. V. de J. Vie de Jé sus. Edersh. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. RV. Revised Version. AV. Authorized Version. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. C C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sæ c. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53. These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T. D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. om. omit. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. Syr Syriac. Sin. Sinaitic. 1 Keim speaks with sverity of the “ destructive criticism” which “ again miserably fails to see anything hut an invention of the dogmatic artist” in “ this grand self-revelation of Jesus,” which is attested by all three Gospels (v. p.142). TR. Textus Receptus. Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses. Vulg. Vulgate. Goth. Gothic. Arm. Armenian. K K. Cod. Cyprius, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. Latt. Latin. Wsctt. Westcott. Orig. Origen. Luth. Luther. Tyn. Tyndale. Rhem. Rheims (or Douay). Gen. Geneva. Aeth. Ethiopic. Jos. Josephus. De W. De Wette. Mey. Meyer. Cov. Coverdale. Nö sg. Nö sgen. Cur. Curetonian. Δ̠Δ . Cod. Sangallensis, sæ c. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. 1 Some “ heretic” sent R. Juda an imperial denapius, and he was deciding not to accept it, when another Rabbi advised him to accept it and throw it into a well before the donor’ s feet (Avoda Sara f. 6 quoted by Wetst. on Matthew 22:21). But see Schü rer, J.P. in T. of. J.C. p. 77. Boh. Bohairic. Lat. Vet. Vetus Latina. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 21:1-4. The Widow’ s Mites. Mark 12:41-44. The incident is not recorded by Mt. The saying respecting “ widows’ houses” might lead to the preservation of this narrative. Mk. and Lk. give both neither. 1. Ἀναβλέψας . Mk. has καθίσας . The long discussions had wearied Him, and He had been sitting with downcast or closed eyes. εἶδεντοὺςβάλλοντας … πλουσίους . Either, “ He saw the rich who were casting,” etc. Or, “ He saw those who were casting … rich people.” The former is better. In either case the imperf. part. expresses what was continually going on: vidit eos qui mittebant munera sua in gazophylacium divites (Vulg.). τὸγαζοφυλάκιον . We are not sure that there was a separate building the Treasury. But the thirteen trumpet-mouthed boxes which stood in the spacious Court of the Women appear to have been known as the Treasury. These Shoparoth or “ trumpets” were each of them inscribed with the purpose to which the money put into them was to be devoted. See Edersh. The Temple, p. 26. Besides these there was the strong-room whither their contents were taken from time to time. This, however, of be meant here. Comp. John 8:20. Both in LXX and in Josephus we find sometimes τὰγαζοφυλάκια (Nehemiah 10:38., Nehemiah 10:13:9; B. J. v. 5. 2, vi. 5, 2), sometimes τὸγαζοφυλάκιον (2 Kings 23:11; 2Ki_1 Mac. 14:49; Ant. xix. 6, 1): and we cannot say that there is any difference of meaning. 2. πενιχράν . Exodus 22:25; Proverbs 28:15, 29:7; but nowhere else in N.T. Vulg. and l have pauperculam: see also Vulg. of Isaiah 66:2. Note the τινα . λεπτάδύο . See on 12:59. The exact amount would not be visible from a distance. Jesus knew this, as He knew that it was all that she had, supernaturally. It was not lawful to offer less than two perutahs or mites. This was therefore the smallest offering ever made by anyone; so that Bengel’ s remark on the two mites is out of place: quorum unum vidua retinere potuit. She could have kept both. 3. Ἀληθῶςλέγωὑμῖν . Introduces something contrary to the usual view. Here, as in 9:27 and 12:44, Lk. has ἀληθῶς , where Mk. or Mt. has ἀμήν . πλεῖονπάντων . Non modo proportione geometrica, sed animo, quem spectabat Dominus (Beng.). For πλεῖον , which is supported by πλεον , Tisch. prefers πλείω (D Q X), which is supported by πλείονα (L). Orig. has πλεῖον several times. 4. πάντεςγὰροὗτοι . Pointing to those of them who were still in sight. εἰςτὰδῶρα . “ Unto the gifts,” which were already in the boxes. ἐκτοῦὑστερήματος . Comp. 2 Corinthians 8:14, 2 Corinthians 8:11:9; Judges 19:20; Psalms 33:10. Whereas they had more than they needed for their wants, she had less: they had a surplus, and she a deficit. Yet out of this deficient store she gave,— gave all she had. The Latin Versions vary much in rendering both expressions: de exuperantia (s), de eo quod superfuit illis (e), de quo super illis fuit (a), fre> (f), ex abundanti (Vulg.): de exiguitate sua (a), de inopia suo (e r), de minimo suo (d), ex eo quad deest illi (f Vulg.). πάντατὸνβίον . All that she had to support her at that time: comp. 8:43, 15:12, 30; Son 8:7; Soph. Phil. 933, 1283. 5-36. The destruction of the Temple and of Jerusalem foretold. Matthew 24:1-36; Mark 13:1-32. The section falls into three divisions: the Occasion of the Prophecy (5-7), the Prophecy (8-28), the Exhortation to Vigilance based on the Parable of the Fig Tree (29-36). Edersheim has shown in detail how different contemporary Jewish opinion respecting the end of the world was from what is contained in this prediction, and therefore how untenable is the hypothesis that we have here only a reflexion of ordinary Jewish tradition (L. &T. 2. pp. 434-445). 5-7. Lk. gives no indication of time or place. Mk. and Mt. tell us that it was as Jesus was leaving the precincts that the remark of the disciples was made. The discourse as to the comparative merits of the offerings made in the Temple would easily lead on to thoughts respecting the magnificence of the temple itself and of the votive gifts which it received. 5. τινωνλεγόντων . Mt. and Mk. tell us that these were disciples. Here again Cod. Bezae has a reproduction of the gen. abs in Latin. quorundam dicentium: comp. Ver. 26. λίθοιςκαλοῖς . Some of the stones of the substructure were enormous. The columns of the cloister or portico were monoliths of marble over forty feet high. See Josephus, whose account should be read in full (B. J. v. 5), Tacitus (Hist. v. 12), Milman (Hist. of the Jews, 2. bk. 16, p. 332), Edersheim (Temple, p. 21.), Renan (V. de J. p. 210). “ It is almost impossible to realise the effect which would be produced by a building longer and higher than York Cathedral, standing on a solid mass of masonry almost equal in height to the tallest of our church spires” (Wilson, Recovery of Jerusalem, p. 9). ἀναθήμασιν . Mt. and Mk. say nothing about the rich offerings, which were many and various, from princes and private individuals (2 Mal 3:2-7): e.g. the golden vine of Herod, with bunches as tall as a man (Jos. B. J. v. 5, 4; Ant. xv. 11, 3: comp. 17:6, 3; 18:3, 5, 19:6, 1). Illic immensæ opulentiæ templum (Tac. Hist. v. 8, 1). For ἀνάθημα comp. 2 Mac. 9:16; 3 Mal 3:17; Hdt. i. 183, 6. Here only in N.T. On the relation between ἀνάθημα and ἀνάθεμα see Ellicott and Lft. on Galatians 1:8; Trench, Syn. v.; Crerner, Lex. p. 547. In MSS. the two words are often confounded. Here א A D X have ἀναθέμασιν , which Tisch. adopts. 6. ταῦταἅθεωρεῖτε . Nom. pendens: comp. Matthew 10:14, Matthew 10:12:36; John 6:39, John 6:7:38, John 6:15:2, John 6:17:2; Acts 7:40. ἐλεύσονταιἡμέραι . “ Days will come” : no article. Comp. 5:35, 17:22, 19:43, 23:29. οὐκἀφεθήσεταιλίθοςἐπὶλίθῳ . A strange prediction to those who had been expecting that the Messianic Kingdom would immediately begin, and that Jerusalem would be the centre of it. Respecting the completeness of the fulfilment of this prediction see Stanley, Sin. &Pal. p. 183; Robinson, Res. in Psa_1. p. 295. 7. Just as Lk. omits the fact that the remark about the glorious buildings was made as Jesus was leaving the temple (ver. 5), so he omits the fact that this question was asked while Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives. Mt. knows that it was “ the disciples” who asked; but the interpreter of Peter knows that Peter, James, John, and Andrew were the enquirers. Both state that the question was asked κατ ʼ ἰδίαν . πότεοὖνταῦταἔσται ; They accept the prediction without question, and ask as to the date, respecting which Christ gives them no answer: comp. 13:23, 24, 17:20. Perhaps they considered that this temple was to be destroyed to make room for one more worthy of the Kingdom. Their second question, τίτὸσημεῖον , shows that they expect to live to see the preparatory catastrophe. 8-28. The Prophecy. The Troubles which will follow the Departure of Christ— False Christs, Wars, Persecutions (8-19), The Destruction of Jerusalem (20-24). The Signs of the Return of the Son of Man (25-28). The record of the prediction in Mt. and Mk. is similarly arranged. But in all three records the outlines of the two main events, with their signs, cannot always, be disentangled. Some of the utterances clearly point to the Destruction of Jerusalem; others equally clearly to the Return of the Christ. But there are some which might apply to either or both; and we, who stand between the two, cannot be sure which one, if only one, is intended. In its application to the lives of the hearers each event taught a similar truth, and conveyed a similar warning; and therefore a clearly cut distinction between them was as little needed as an exact statement of date. Some of the early commentators held that the whole of the prophecy refers to the end of the world without including the fall of Jerusalem. 8. πλανηθῆτε . “ Be led astray?” The verb is used nowhere else in Lk. It implies no mere mistake, but fundamental departure from the truth: John 7:47; 1 John 1:8, 1 John 1:2:26, 1 John 1:3:7; Revelation 2:20, Revelation 12:9, Revelation 20:3-10, etc. “ Deceive” (AV.) would rather be ἀπατᾷν (James 1:26: comp. 1 Corinthians 3:18; Galatians 6:3). ἐπὶτῷὀνόματίμου . Christ’ s name will be the basis of their claim. We know of no false Messiahs between the Ascension and the fall of Jerusalem. Theudas (Acts 5:36), Simon Magus (Acts 8:9), the Egyptian (Acts 21:38) do not seem to have come forward as Messiahs. Dositheus, Simon Magus, and Menander might be counted among the “ many antichrists” of 1 John 2:18, but not as false Christs. We seem, therefore, at the outset to have a sign which refers rather to Christ’ s return than to the destruction of Jerusalem. 9. ἀκαταστασίας Comp. 1 Corinthians 14:33; 2 Corinthians 6:5, 2 Corinthians 6:12:20; James 3:16; Proverbs 26:28; Tob, 4:13. In Josephus we have abundant evidence of such things. Tacitus says of this period— opimum casibus, atrox præ liis, discors seditionibus, ipsâ etiam pace sæ vum. Quatuor Principes ferro interempti. Trina bella civilia, plura externa ac plerumque permixta (Hist. i. 2, I).— πτοηθῆτε . only here and 24:37: Mt. and Mk. have θροεῖσθε . δεῖ . It is so ordered by God: Comp. 13:33, 17:25, 19:5, 24:7, 26, 44. οὐκεὐθέως . First, with emphasis: “ Not immediately is the end.” For “ by-and-by” as a translation of εὐθέως see on 17:7. By τὸτέλος is not meant τὸτέλοςὠδίνων (comp. Matthew 24:8), but πάντωντὸτέλος (1 Peter 4:7), the end of the world and the coming of the Son of Man. 10. Τότεἔλεγεναὐτοῖς A new introduction to mark a solemn utterance, The τότε with ἔλεγεν is unusual; but that does not make the combination of τότε with ἐγερθήσεται (Beza, Casaubon, Hahn) probable, D, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. a d e ff2 i l r omit the words. ἐγερθήσεταιἔθνοςἐπ ʼ ἔθνας . Only here and in the parallel use of ἐγείρεσθαιἐπίτινα found in N.T. Comp, ἐπεγερθήσονταιΑἰγύπτιοιἐπ ʼ Αἰγυπτίους … [ἐπεγερθήσεται ] πόλιςἐπὶπόλινκαὶνομὸςἐπὶνομόν (Isaiah 19:2). 11. After describing the general political disturbances which shall precede the end, Jesus mentions four disturbances of nature which shall also form a prelude: earthquakes, famines, pestilences, and terrible phenomena in the heaven. Lk. alone mentions the λοιμοί (elsewhere in a metaphorical sense: Acts 24:5; Proverbs 21:24; Psalms 1:1; Psa_1 Mac. 15:21). Lk. alone also mentions the φόβηθράτεκαὶσημεῖα . On the prodigies which preceded the capture of Jerusalem see Jos. B. J. 6:5, 3; Tac. Hist. v. 13. According to the better text (א B L, Aegyptt. Arm. Aeth.) κατὰτόπους belongs to λοιμοὶκαὶλιμοί , not (as in Mk.) to σεισμοὶμεγάλοι (A D, Latt.).Syr-Sin. has “ in divers places” with both. Many authorities (א A D L, de Boh.) have λιμοὶκ . λοιμοί . For the paronomasia comp. ζωὴνκαὶπνοήν (Acts 17:25); γινώσκειςἃἀναγινώσκεις (Acts 8:30); ἔμαθενἀφ ʼ ὦνἔπαθεν (Hebrews 5:8); ὀναίμην in Ὀνήσιμος (Philemon 1:20); τινὲςτῶνκλάδωνἐξεκλάσθησαν (Romans 11:17). Some Latin, Syriac, and Aethiopic authorities here insert et hiemes (tempestates), “ probably from an extraneous source written or oral” (WH. 2. App. p. 63). Comp. the addition of καὶταραχαί in Mark 13:8. And as regards the terrors generally comp. 4 Esdr. v. 4-10. 12-19. Calamities specially affecting the Disciples; Persecution and Treachery. While Lk. and Mk. emphasize the persecution that will come from the Jews, Mt. seems almost to confine it to the Gentiles (but see Matthew 10:17-19). Jn. also records that Christ foretold persecution (15:18-21), and in particular from the Jews (16:2, 3). The Acts may supply abundant illustrations. Note that Lk. has nothing about “ the Gospel being preached to all, the nations” (Mark 13:10; Matthew 24:14). Would he have omitted this, if either of those documents was before him ? 12. πρὸδὲτούτων . The prep. is certainly used of time, and of superiority in magnitude. Persecutions are among the first things to be expected. The tendency of Mt. to slur the misdeeds of the Jews is conspicuous here. While Lk. mentions τὰςσυναγωγάς and Mk. adds συνέδρια , Mt. has the vague term θλίψιν . 13. ἀποβήσεταιὑμῖνεἰςμαρτύριον . “ The result to you will be that your sufferings will be for a testimony.” A testimony to what? Not to the innocence of the persecuted, which is not the point: and they were commonly condemned as guilty. Possibly to their loyalty: comp. Philippians 1:19. More probably to the truth of the Gospel. For the verb comp. Job 13:16; Job_2 Mac. 9:24. 14. προμελετᾷν . The regular word for conning over a speech: here only in N.T. Mk. has the less classical προμεριμνᾷν . Comp. Matthew 10:20, and see on 12:11. Hahn would make the word mean anxiety about the result of the defence. 15. ἐγὼγάρ . With emphasis: “ all of that will be My care.” In the parallel assurances in Matthew 10:20 and Mark 13:11 it is the help of the Holy Spirit that is promised. In form this verse is peculiar to Lk. By στόμα is meant the power of speech; by σοφία the choice of matter and form. Comp. ἐγὼἀνοίξωτὸστόμασου (Exodus 4:12), and δέδωκατοὺςλόγουςμουεἰςτὸστόμασου (Jeremiah 1:9). ἀντιστῆναι . This refers to σοφία (Acts 6:10) as ἀντειπεῖν to στόμα . Their opponents will find no words in which to answer, and will be unable to refute what the disciples have advanced. Vos ad certamen acceditis, sed ego præ lior. Vos verba editis, sed ego sum qui loquor (Bede). Quid sapientius et incontradicbilius confessione simplici et exserta in martyris nomine cum Deo invalescentis (Tert. Adv. Marc. 4:39, 20). Holtzmann would have it that these verses (12-15) are the composition of the Evangelist with definite reference to the sufferings of S. Paul and S. Stephen. 16. καὶὑπὸγονέων . “ Even by parents” (RV.) rather than “ both by ants” (AV.). Cov. also has “ even.” Comp. 12:52, 53; Matthew 10:35 for similar predictions of discord in families to be produced by the Gospel. θανατώσουσιν . This verb is in all three accounts. It cannot be watered down to mean “ put in danger of death” (Volkmar): ver. 18 does not require this evasion. Comp. ἐξαὐτῶνἀποκτενεῖτεκαὶσταυρώσετε (Matthew 23:34) and ἐξαὐτῶνἀποκτενοῦσιν (Luke 9:49). Here ἐξὑμῶν naturally means “ some of you Apostles.” Three of the four who heard these words— James, Peter, and Andrew— suffered a martyr’ s death. 17. καὶἔσεσθεμισούμενοι . This verse is found in the same form in all three, excepting that Mt. inserts τῶνἐθνῶν after πάντων , which is in harmony with his omitting synagogues as centres of persecution (24:9). For the paraphrastic future see on 1:20. 18. καὶθρὶξ … οὐμὴἀπόληται . Peculiar to Lk. This proverbial expression of great security must here be understood spiritually; for it has just been declared (ver. 16) that some will be put to death. “ Your souls will be absolutely safe; your eternal welfare shall in nowise suffer” (Mey. Weiss, Nö sg.). John 10:28 is in substance closely parallel. This is more satisfactory than to take it literally and supply sine præ mio, ante tempus (Beng.); or supply from Matthew 10:29 ἄνευτοῦπατρὸςὑμῶν (Hahn). The proverb is used of physical preservation, Acts 27:34; 1 Samuel 14:45; 2 Samuel 14:11; 1 Kings 1:52. 19. ἐντῇὑπομονῇὑμῶν . “ In your endurance” of suffering without giving way; whereas μακροθυμία is patience of injuries without paying back. See Trench, Syn. liii.; Lft. on Colossians 1:11, Colossians 1:3:12; Wsctt on Hebrews 6:12. The Latin Versions often confuse the two words. Here we have patientia (e f ff2 i q r s Vulg.), tolerantia (a), sufferentia (d). These three translations are found also 8:15. In no other Gospel does ὑπομονή occur; and in no Gospel does μακροθυμία occur. κτήσεσθετὰςψυχὰςὑμῶν . “ Ye shall win your souls,” or “ your lives.” This confirms the interpretation given above of ver. 18. There the loss of eternal salvation is spoken of as death. Here the gaining of it is called winning one’ s life. See on 9:25 and 17:33 In Mt. (24:13, 10:22) and Mk. (13:13) this saying is represented by “ He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.” Neither Lk. nor Jn. use ὑπομένειν in this sense. The reading is uncertain as regards the verb. A B some cursives, Latt. Syr. Arm. Aeth. and best MSS. of Bob., Tert. Orig. support κτήσεσθε , which is adopted by Treg. WH. RV. and Weiss; while א D L R X G D etc., some MSS. of Bob., Const-Apost Bas. support κτήσασθε , which is adopted by Tisch. Neither reading justifies “ possess your souls,” a meaning confined to the perf. Cov. has “ holde fast” but nearly all others have “ possess,” following in verb, though not in tense, the possidebitis of Vulg. Other Lat. texts have adquiretis (c ff2 l) or adquirite (d i). See last now on 18:12. 20-24. The Destruction of Jerusalem. 20. κυκλουμένην . “ Being compassed” : when the process was completed it would be too late; comp. Hebrews 11:30. No English Version preserves this distinction: but Vulg. has videritis circumdari, not circumdatam. (a e). Instead of this Mt. and Mk. have “ the abomination of desolation,” etc. ἡἐρήμωσις . The word is freq. in LXX, but in N.T. occurs only here and the parallels. The disciples had been expecting an immediate glorification of Jerusalem as the seat of the Messianic Kingdom. It is the desolation of Jerusalem that is really near at hand. 21. τότε … τὰὄρη . Verbatim the same in all three. What follows, to the end of ver. 22, is peculiar to Lk. By “ the mountains” is meant the mountainous parts of Judæ a: but ἐνμέσῳαὐτῆς (see on 8:7) refers, like εἰςαὐτήν , not to Judæ a, but to Jerusalem. χώραις “ Land-estates” (12:16), “ country” as opposed to the town. See Blass on Acts 8:2. The Jews who fled from the country into Jerusalem for safety greatly increased the miseries of the siege. It is probably to this prophecy that Eusebius refers when he speaks of “ the people of the Church in Jerusalem being commanded to leave and dwell in a city of Peræ a called Pella, in accordance with a certain oracle which was uttered before the war to the approved men there by way of revelation” (H. E. 3:5, 3). The flight to Pella illustrates the prophecy; but we need not confine so general a warning to a single incident. It is important to note that the wording of the warning as recorded here has not been altered to suit this incident. Marcion omitted vv. 18, 21, 22. Vulg. and Lat. Vet. are misleading in translating it ἐνταῖςχώραις in regionibus The Frag. Ambrosiana (s) give more rightly in agris. See old. Latin Biblical texts, 2. p, 88. 22. ἡμέραιἐκδικήσεως . Comp. LXX of Deu 32:35; Hosea 9:7; Ecclus. 5:9. In what follows note the characteristic construction, and verb, and adjective. There is an abundance of such utterances throughout the O.T. Leviticus 26:31-33; Deuteronomy 28:49-57; 1 Kings 9:6-9; Micah 3:12; Zechariah 11:6; Daniel 9:26, Daniel 9:27. The famous passage in Eus. H. E. 2:23, 20should be compared, in which (like Origen before him) he quotes as from Josephus words which are in no MS. of Josephus which is extant: “ These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a very just man.” 23. οὐαὶ … ἡμέραις . Verbatim the same in all three. For ἀνάγκη Mt. and Mk. have θλίψις In Job 15:24 we have ἀνάγκηκαὶθλίψις : comp. Job 7:11, Job 18:14, Job 20:22. In class. Grk. ἀνάγκη rarely means “ distress,” a meaning common in bibl. Grk. (1 Corinthians 7:26; 1 Thessalonians 3:7; 2 Corinthians 6:4, 2 Corinthians 6:12:10; Psalms 106:6, Psalms 106:13, Psalms 106:19, Psalms 106:28; Ps. Son 5:8). See small print on ver. 25. The meaning of ἐπὶτῆςγῆς is determined by τῷλαῷτούτῳ . The latter means the Jews, and therefore the former means Palestine (AV. RV.) and not the earth (Weiss). For the Divine ὀργή comp. 1 Mac. 1:64, Malachi 1:2:49; Mal_2 Mac. 5:20; PS. Sol. 2:26, 17:14. The ὀργή is provoked by the people qui tantam gratiam cæ lestem spreverit (Beng.). 24. καὶπεσοῦνταιμαχαίρης . This verse and the last words of Ver. 23 are peculiar to Lk. Note the characteristic πάντα , periphrastic future, and ἄχρι . The often repeated assertion of Josephus, that 1,100,000 perished in the siege and 97,000 were carried into captivity (B. J. 6:9, 3) is quite incredible: they could not have found standing-ground within the walls. The sexcenta millia of Tacitus (Hist. v. 13, 4), if taken literally, is far too many for the number of those besieged: but sexcenti need not mean more than “ very many.” Perhaps 70,000 is an ample estimate. The phrase ἐνστόματιμαχαίρας occurs Genesis 24:26; Genesis 10:28; ἐνστόματιρομφαίας , 6:21, 8:24; ἐνστόματιξἰφους , Joshua 10:30, Joshua 10:32, Joshua 10:35, Joshua 10:37, Joshua 10:39. The plur. στόματαμαχαίρης is found Hebrews 11:34 In the best MSS. substantives in ρα form gen. and dat. in ρης and ρῃ (WH, 2. App. p. 156). ἔσταιπατουμένη . See on 1:20, and see also Burton., § 71.Plus sonat quam πατηθήσται (Beng.): it expresses the permanent condition, la domination é crasante (Godet). Comp. the LXX of Zec 12:3, θήσομαιτὴνἸερουσαλὴμλίθονκαταπατούμενονπᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν .1 Jerusalem has more often been under the feet of Gentiles than in the hands of Christians. Romans, Saracens, Persians, and Turks have all trampled upon her in turn. The Latin Versions vary much: erit calcata erit incalcata (e), erit in concalcation (a), concalcabitur (r), calcabitur (Vulg.). ἄχριοὖ . See on 2:20: ἄχριςοὗ is possibly correct Romans 11:25; Hebrews 3:13. καιροιἐθνῶν . As stated already, the whole of this verse is peculiar to Lk., and some have supposed that the last part of it is in addition made by him. It is not necessary to charge him with any such licence; although it is possible that oral tradition has here, as elsewhere, paraphrased and condensed what was said. The “ seasons of the Gentiles” or “ opportunities of the Gentiles” cannot be interpreted with certainty. Either (1) Seasons for executing the Divine judgments; or (2) for lording it over Israel; or (3) for existing as Gentiles; or (4) for themselves becoming subject to Divine judgments; or (5) opportunities of turning to God; or (6) of possessing the privileges which the Jews had forfeited. The first and last are best, and they are not mutually exclusive. Comp. ἄχριοὗτὸπλήρωματῶνἐθνῶνεἰσέλθῃ (Romans 11:25), where the whole section is a comment on the promise that the punishment of Israel has a limit. The plur. καιροί corresponds with the plur. ἔθνη : each nation has its καιρός but comp. ἔωςπληρωθῶσινκαιροὶτοῦαἰῶνος (Tob. 14:5), where the whole passage should be compared with this. 25-28. The Signs of the Second Advent. Lk. here omits what is said about shortening the days and the appearance of impostors (Matthew 24:22&-26; Mark 13:20-23). On the latter subject he has already recorded a warning (17:23, 24). 25. ἐνἡλίῳκ . σελήνῃκ . ἄστροις . “ In sun and moon and stars.” In Mt. and Mk. the three words have the article. All English Versions prior to RV. wrongly insert the article here, Cov. with “ sun,” the rest with all three words. Similar language is common in the Prophets: Isaiah 13:10; Ezekiel 32:7; Joe 2:10, Joe 3:15: comp. Isaiah 34:4; Haggai 2:6, Haggai 2:21, etc. Such expressions indicate the perplexity and distress caused by violent changes: the very sources of light are cut off. To what extent they are to be understood literally cannot be determined: but it is quite out of place to introduce here the thought of Christ as the sun and the Church as the moon, as do Ambr. and Wordsw. ad loc. (Migne, 15:1813). The remainder of this verse and most of the next are peculiar to Lk. συνοχή occurs only here and 2 Corinthians 2:4 in N.T.; but comp. 8:45, 19:43, 12:50. In LXX it is found Judges 2:3; Job 30:3; Jeremiah 52:5; Micah 5:1. In Vulg. Jerome carelessly uses pressura both for συνοχή here and for ἀνάγκη in ver. 23; although Lat. Vet. distinguishes, with conpressic (a), conflictio (d), conclusio (e), or occursus (f) for συνοχή , and necessitas (a d e r) or pressura (f) for ἀνάγκη . See small print on 19:43. ἐνἀπορίαἡχοῦς . All English Versions prior to RV. go astray here, but Wic. and Rhem. less than the rest, owing to the Vulgate: in terris Pressura gentium prae confusione sonitus maris et fluctuum. Tertullian is better: in terra angustias nationum obstupescentium velut a sonitu matis fluctuantis (Adv. Marc. 4:39). It is the nations who are “ in perplexity at the resounding of sea and surge.” Figurative language of this kind is common in the Prophets: Isaiah 28:2, Isaiah 28:29:6, 30:30; Ezekiel 38:22; Psalms 42:7, Psalms 55:7, Psalms 88:7. See Stanley, Jewish Church, 1. p. 130. It is uncertain whether ἠχους is to be accented ἠχοῦς as from ἠχώ or ἤχους as from ἦχος (4:37; Hebrews 12:19; Acts 2:2). See WH. 2. App. p. 158. The reading ἠχούσης (D ΓΔΛΠ etc.) is a manifest correction: the evidence against it (א A B C L M R X and Versions) is overwhelming. For the gen. after ἀπορίᾳ , “ perplexity because of, ” Comp, καταλέγωντῶνΣκυθέωντὴνἀπορίην (Hdt. 4:83. 1.). The conjecture ἐνἀπειρίᾳ is baseless, an gives an inferior meaning. 26. ἀποψυχόντων . “ Fainting, swooning,” as Hom. Od. 24:348, rather than “ expiring,” as Thuc. 1:134, 3; Soph. A.j. 1031. The arescentibus of Lat. Vet. and Vulg. is remarkable; but a has a refrigescentibus and d has deficientium.1 Of these three words refrigescere best represents ἀποψύχειν . But in LXX ψύχειν is used of drying in the sun or air: Numbers 11:32; 2 Samuel 17:19. Comp, τοὶδ ʼ ἰδρῶἀπεψύχοντοχιτώνων , στάντεποτὶπνοιήν (Hom. Il. 11:621): “ They dried the sweat off their tunics.” Rhem. renders arescentibus “ withering away.” Hobart claims both ἀποψύχειν and προσδοκία as medical (pp. 161, 166). But medical writers use ἀποψύχειν of being chilled, not of swooning or expiring. He gives many instances from Galen of προσδοκία (which occurs here and Acts 12:11 It only in N.T.) as denoting the expectation of an unfavourable result. For this use of ἀπό see on 24:41. τῇοἰκουμένῃ . See on 4:5. αἱδυνάμειςτῶνοὐρανῶνσαλευθήσονται . Comp. τακήσονταιπᾶσαιαἱδυνάμειςτῶνοὐρανῶν (Isaiah 34:4). The verb which Lk. substitutes is one of which he is fond (6:38, 48, 7:24; Acts 2:25, Acts 4:31, Acts 16:26, Acts 17:13). By αἱδυνάμειςτ . οὐρ . is meant, not the Angels (Euthym.), nor the cosmic powers which uphold the heavens (Mey. Oosterz), but the heavenly bodies, the stars (De W. Holtz. Weiss, Hahn): Comp. Isaiah 40:26; Psalms 33:6. Evidently physical existences are meant. 27. καὶτότεὄψονται . “ Not till then shall they see.” Not ὄψεσθε : there is perhaps a hint that those present will not live to see this. This verse is in all three: comp. 1 Thessalonians 4:16; 2 Thessalonians 1:7, 2 Thessalonians 1:2:8; Revelation 1:8, Revelation 19:11-16. 28. This word of comfort is given by Lk. alone. Only here in N.T. is ἀνακύπτειν used of being elated after sorrow. Comp. Job 10:15, and contrast Luke 13:2; [Jn.] 8:7, 10. The disciples present are regarded as representatives of believers generally, Only those who witness the signs can actually fulfil this injunction. ἀπολύρωσις . At the Second Advent. Here the word means little more than “ release” or “ deliverance,” without any idea of “ ransom” . See Sanday on Romans 3:24, Abbott on Ephesians 1:7, and Wsctt. Heb. pp. 295-297. Comp. Enoch, 51:2. 29-33. The Parable of the Fig Tree. Matthew 24:32-35; Mark 13:28-32. 29. καὶεἶπεν . This marks the resumption of the discourse after a pause: comp. 9:5. More often Lk. uses εἶπενδέ or ἔλεγεν : 14:12, 20:41, etc. For εἶπενπαραβολήν see on 6:39. Lk. alone makes the addition καὶπάντατὰδέδρα : see on 6:30 and 7:35. Writing for Gentiles, Lk. preserves words which cover those to whom fig trees are unknown. 30. προβάλωσιν . Here only without acc. We must understand τὰφύλλα . In Jos Ant. 4:8, 19 καρπόν is added: comp. Acts 19:33. ἀφ ʼ ἑαυτῶνγινώσκετε . “ Of your own selves ye recognize:” i.e. with out being told. For ἐαυτοῦ , -ῶν , of the 2nd pers. comp. 12:1, 33, 16:9, 15, 17:3, 14, 22:17, 23:28. It occurs in class. Grk. where no ambiguity is involved. There is no justification for rendering θέρος “ harvest,” which would be θερισμός (10:2). In N.T. θέρος occurs only in this parable. 32. ἡγενεὰαὕτη . This cannot well mean anything but the generation living when these words were spoken: 7:31, 11:29-32, 50, 51, 17:25; Matthew 11:16, etc. The reference, therefore, is to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world. To make ἡγενεὰαὕτη mean the Jewish race, or the generation contemporaneous with the beginning of the signs, is not satisfactory. See on 9:27, where, as here, the coming of the Kingdom of God seems to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem. 33. ὁοὐρανὸςκαὶἡγῆ . Comp. 2 Peter 3:10; Hebrews 1:11, Hebrews 1:12; Revelation 20:11, 21:1; Psalms 102:26; Isaiah 51:6. A time will come when everything material will cease to exist; but Christ’ s words will ever hold good. The prophecy just uttered is specially meant; but all His sayings are included. Comp. οὐδὲγὰρπαρῆλθενὐπ ʼ αὐτῶνλόγος (Addit. Esth. 10:5). οὐμὴπαρελεύσονται . So also in Mark 13:31, but in Matthew 24:35 παρέλθωσιν , which A R X etc. read here and A C D X etc. read in Mk. As the subj. is the usual constr, in N.T. after οὐμή , copyists often corrected the fut. indic. to aor. subj. Comp. Mark 14:31; Matthew 15:5; Galatians 4:30; Hebrews 10:17, etc. The Old Latin MSS. used by Jerome seem here to have read transient … transient. Our best MSS. of the Vulgate read transibunt … transient. Jerome may have forgotten to correct the second transient into transibunt: or he may have wished to mark the difference between παρελεύσονται and παρέλθωσιν . Cod. Brix. with the Book of Dimma and some other authorities has transibunt … præ teribunt. See Hermathena, No 19. p. 386. 34-36. Concluding Warning as to the Necessity of Ceaseless Vigilance. Comp. Matthew 25:13-15; Mark 13:33-37. The form of this warning differs considerably in the three Gospels. Not many words are common to any two of them; and very few are common to all three. It should be noted that here as elsewhere (10:7 = Tim. 5:18, 24:34 = 1Co_5), Lk. in differing from Mt. and Mk. agrees with S. Paul. Comp. with this 1 Thessalonians 5:3 See Lft. Epp. p. 72. 34. For προέχετεδὲἑαυτοῖς see on ver. 30 and 12:1; and for βαρηθῶσιν see on 9:32. κρεπάλῃ . Not “ surfeiting,” but the nausea which follows a debauch: crapula. Here only in bibl. Grk. For this and μέθη (Romans 13:13; Gal. v. 21) see Trench, Syn. lxi.; and for the orthography see WH. 2. App. p. 151. μερίμναιςβιωτικαῖς . The adj. occurs 1 Corinthians 6:3, 1 Corinthians 6:4: but is not found in LXX, nor earlier than Aristotle. Comp. πρὸςτὰςβιωτικὰςχρείαςὑπηρετεῖν (Philo, Vit. Mo. 3:18). The remarkable rendering soniis for μερίμηαις in Cod. Bezae has long attracted attention, and has been regarded by some as a manifest Gallicism. It is confidently connected with the French soins. But the connexion is not certain. The word may be a form of somniis, and the transition from “ turbing dreams” to “ perplexities” and “ own” would not be difficult, The word occurs once in the St. Gall MS. of the Sortes, and soniari occurs four times. It was therefore a word which was established in use early in the sixth century. Whether it is original in the text of D, or is a later substitution, is much debated. Here other renderings are sollicitudinibus (a e), cogitationibus (b f), curis (Tert. Vulg.). The prevalent Old Latin rendering was sollicitudines (a b d f) both in 8:14 and Matthew 13:22 (comp. Mark 4:19); and the translator of Irenæ us has sollicitudinibus here. see Scrivener, Codex Bezae, pp. 44, 45 Rendel Harris, p. 26; and an excellent review in the Guardian, May 18, 1892, p. 743. ἐφνίδιος . Here, but not 1 Thessalonians 5:3 or Wisd. 17:14, this form is best attested. WH. Intr. 309, App. 151. The Latin renderings are repentaneus (a), subitaneus (d e), repentina (f Vulg.). ἡἡμέραἐκείνη . This is the one expression which in section is common to all three accounts. Comp. 10:12, 17:31. The day of the Messiah’ s return is meant. ὡςπαγίς . According to the best authorities (א B D L, a b c e ff2 1 Boh., Tert.) these words belong to what precedes, and the γάρ follows ἐπεισελεύσεται , not παγίς . The whole recalls φόβοςκαὶβόθυνοςκαὶπαγὶςἐφ ʼ ἡμᾶςτοὺςἐνοικοῦνταςἐπὶτῆςγῆς (Isaiah 24:17). The resemblance between the passages, and the fact that ἐπεισελεύσεται suits the notion of a παγίς , accounts for the transposition of the γάρ . Originally απαγίς is that which holds fast: Psalms 91:3; Proverbs 7:23; Ecclesiastes 9:12. Here most Latin texts have laqueus, but Cod. Palat. has muscipula. 35-36. Note the characteristic repetition of πᾶς . 35. πάσηςτῆςγῆς . Not the land of the Jews only. Possibly καθημένους indicates that, as at the flood. and at Belshazzar’ s feast, people are sitting at ease, eating and drinking, etc. (17:27): but it need not mean more than inhabiting. Comp. μάχαιρανἐγὼκαλῶἐπὶπάνταςτοὺςκαθημένουςἐπὶτῆςγῆς (Jeremiah 25:29). For ἐπὶπρος . π . τ . γῆς Comp. 2 Samuel 18:8. The phrase is Hebraistic. 36. ἀγρυπνεῖτεδέ . Comp. Ephesians 6:18; Hebrews 13:17; 2 Samuel 12:21; Psalms 126:1; Proverbs 8:34. The οῦν (A C R, b c ff2. Syrr. Aeth. Arm.) for δέ (א B D, a d e) probably comes from Matthew 25:13 and Mark 13:35, ἐνπαντὶκαιρῷ 18:1 and 1 Thessalonians 5:17 are in favour of taking these words with δεόμενοι (Wic. Gen. Rhem. AV.) rather than with ἀγρυπνεῖτε (Tyn. Cov. Cran. RV.). For similar questions comp. 9:17, 18, 57, 10:18, 9:39, etc. κατισχύσητε . This is the reading of א B L X 33, Aegyptt. Aeth. and is adopted by the best editors. It properly means “ prevail against” . (Matthew 16:18; Jeremiah 15:18; 2 Chronicles 8:3; comp. Luke 23:23; Isaiah 22:4; Wisd. 17:5). The καταξιωθῆτε of A C D R, Latt. Syrr. Arm., Tert. perhaps comes from 20:35. σταθῆναι . “ To hold your place.” comp. Τότεστήσεταιἐνπαρρησίαπολλῇὁδίκαιος (Wisd. 5:1). It is clear from 11:18. 18:11, 40, 19:8; Acts 2:14, Acts 5:20, Acts 11:13, Acts 17:22, Acts 25:18, Acts 27:21, etc., that σταθῆναι is not to be taken passively of being placed by the Angels (Matthew 24:31). Comp. τίςδύναταισταθῆναι ; (Revelation 6:17). For the opposite of σταθῆναι see 23:30; Revelation 6:16: comp. 1 John 2:28. The Apocalypse of Jesus Hase (Gesch. Jesu, § 97). Colani (J. C. et les croyances messianiques de son temps). and others think that Jesus had penetration enough to foresee and predict the destruction of Jerusalem, but they cannot believe that He was such a fanatic as to foretell that He would return in glory and judge the world. Hence they, conclude that these predictions about the Parusia were never uttered by Him Keim sees that Mark 13:32 cannot be an invention (Jes. of Naz. 5. p. 241): in some shape or other Jesus must have foretold His glorious Return. therefore this eschatological discourse is based upon some genuine utterances of Jesus; but has been expanded into an apocalyptic poem with the help of other material. Both Keim and some of those who deny the authenticity of any prediction of Christ’ s Return assume the existence of an apocalypse by some Jewish Christian; as the source from which large portions of this discourse are taken. Weizsä cker holds that the apocalypse was Jewish, and was taken from a lost section of the Book of Enoch. Weiffenbach. followed by Wendt and Vischer, upholds the theory of a Jewish-Christian original. But did this spurious apocalypse, the existence of which is pure conjecture. supply Lk. with what he has recorded 11:49-51. 13:23-27, 35, 17:23, 37. 18:8, 19:15, 43, 20:16? Did it supply Mt. with what he has recorded 7:22, 10:23, 19:28, 21:44. 13:7. 25:31, 26:64? Mk. also with the parallels to them passages? That all three derived these utterances from Apostolic tradition is credible. Is it credible that a writing otherwise unknown and by an unknown author should have had such enormous influence? And its influence does not end with the three Evangelists. It has contributed largely to the Epistles of S. Paul. especially to the very earliest of them. Comp. 1 Thessalonians 2:16, 1 Thessalonians 2:4:6, 1 Thessalonians 2:17, 5:1 Thessalonians 2:1-3;, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12. And it would seem to have influenced much of the imagery in Revelation. which foretells wars. famine, pestilence. and persecution (6:4, 5, 8, 9), and the Return of the Saviour accompanied by the armies of heaven (19:11-16). This supposed fictitious apocalypse is assigned to A.D. 68, or thereabouts; and therefore long after the Pauline Epistles were written. Apostolic tradition, which is known to have existed, is a far safer hypothesis. See Godet. ad loc. (2. PP. 430 ff.), whose remarks have been, freely used in this note. See also Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, T. &T. Clark. 1894, ch. 4. where this “ Apocalypse of Jesus” is critically discussed, with special reference to the theory of Weiffenbach and others that the assumed Jewish-Christian apocalypse consisted of these three portions:— (a) the ἀρχὴὠδίνων , Mark 13:7, Mark 13:8=Matthew 24:6-8=Luke 21:9-11; the θλίψις , Mark 13:14-20=Matthew 24:15-22; the παρουσία , Mark 13:24-27=Matthew 24:29-31=Luke 21:25-27.Luke 21:1 Briggs points out the insignificance of the fact that ideas such as these are found in Jewish pseudepigrapha. These ideas were by them derived from the O.T.. which was the common source of both canonical and uncanonical apocalypses, whether Jewish or Christian. Jesus uses this source on other occasions, and there is nothing unreasonable in the belief that He uses it here. The cosmical disturbances foretold (vv. 25-27) “ belong not only to the theophanies and the Christophanies of prophecy, but also to the theophanies and Christophanies of history In both the Old Testament and the New. They represent the response of the creature to the presence of the Creator” (p. 155). Both Briggs and Nö sgen (Gesch. J. C. Kap. 9.), give abundant references to the literature of the subject in Beyschlag (L.J.), Hilgenfeld (Einl. 1. N.T.), Holsten (die syn. Ev..), Immer (Ntl. Theol.), Mangold in Bleek (Einl. 1. N.T.), Pfleiderer (Urchristen.), Pressensé (J.C.) Spitta (die Offbg. des Joh.) and Wendt (Lehre Jesu). See also especially D. E. Haupt (Eschatolog Aussagen Jesu in d. syn. Evang., Berlin, 1895). 37, 38. General Description of the last Days of Christ’ s Public Ministry. 37. τὰςἡμέρας . “ During the days.” From the other narratives we infer that this covers the day of the triumphal entry and the next two days. It is, therefore, retrospective, and is a repetition, with additional detail, of 19:47. The contrast with τὰςδὲνύκτας , “ but during the nights,” is obvious. It is not clear whether ἦν belongs to ἐντῷἱερῷ or to διδάσκων , which probably ought to follow and not precede (B K) ἐντῷἱερῷ . ἐξερχονμενοςἡμλίζετοεἰς . “ Leaving (the temple) He used to go and bivouac on” (4:23, 7:1, 9:61, 11:7). Comp. μηκέτιαὐλισθῆτεεἰςΝινευή (Tobit 14:10), ὑπὸτοὺςκλάδουςαὐτῆςαὐλισθήσεται (Ecclus. 14:26). On the M. of Olives He would be undisturbed (22:39). For καλούμενον see on 6:15, and for Ἐλαιων see on 19:29. It is not probable that εἰςτὸὄρος is to taken with ἐξερχονμενος , but the participle of motion has influenced the choice of preposition. 38. ὤρθριζεπρὸςαὐτόν . Another condensed expression: “ rose early and came to Him.” The verb occurs here only in N.T., but is freq. in LXX. Twice we have the two verbs combined. αὐλίσθητιὧδε … καὶὀρθριεῖτεαὔριονεἰςὁδὸνὑμῶν (Judges 19:9); αὐλισθῶμενἐνκώμαις · ὀρθρίσωμενεἰςἀμπελῶνας (Son 7:11, Son 7:12). The literal meaning is the right one here, although ὀρθρίζω may mean “ seek eagerly” (Ps. 77:34; Ecclus. 4:12, 6:36; Wisd. 6:14). Contrast Psalms 127:2; Psa_1 Mac. 4:52, Malachi 4:6:33, 11:67; Gospel of Nicodemus xv. The classical form ὀρθρεύω is always used in the literal sense. Most MSS. of Vulg. here have the strange rendering manicabat ad eum, which is also the rendering in Cod. Brix. (f), the best representative of the Old Latin text on which Jerome worked. But G has mane ibat, which may possibly be Jerome’ s correction of manicabat, a word of which Augustine says mihi non occurrit. See Rö nsch, It. und Vulg. p. 174. Other renderings are— vigilabat ad eum (d), de luce vigilabant ad eum (a), ante lucem veneibat ad eum (e r), diluculo conveniendum erat (Tert.). See on 16:26. Five cursives (13, 69, 124, 346, 556), which are closely related, here insert the pericope of the Woman taken in Adultery, an arrangement which was perhaps suggested by ὤρθριζε here and ὄρθρου John 8:2. The common origin of 13, 69, 124, 346 is regarded as certain. See Scrivener. Int. to Crit. of N.T. i. pp. 192, 202, 231; T.K. Abbott, Collation of Four Important MSS. of the Gospels, Dublin, 1877. “ The Section was probably known to the scribe exclusively as a church lesson, recently come into use; and placed by him here on account of the close resemblance between vv. 37, 38 and [Jo] 7:53, 8:1, 2. Had he known it as part of a continuous text of St. Johns Gospel. he was not likely to transpose it” (WH. ii. App. p. 63). Vulg. Vulgate. Beng. Bengel. A A. Cod. Alexandrinus, sæ c. v. Once in the Patriarchal Library at Alexandria; sent by Cyril Lucar as a present to Charles 1. in 1628, and now in the British Museum. Complete. B B. Cod. Vaticanus, sæ c. 4. In the Vatican Library certainly since 15331 (Batiffol, La Vaticane de Paul 3, etc., p. 86). G G. Cod. Harleianus, sæ c. ix. In the British Museum. Contains considerable portions. Δ̠Δ . Cod. Sangallensis, sæ c. ix. In the monastery of St. Gall in Switzerland. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. א Ԡ א Cod. Sinaiticus, sæ c. iv. Brought by Tischendorf from the Convent of St. Catherine on Mt. Sinai; now at St. Petersburg. Contains the whole Gospel complete. Tisch. Tischendorf. D D. Cod. Bezae, sæ c. vi. Given by Beza to the University Library at Cambridge 1581. Greek and Latin. Contains the whole Gospel. X X. Cod. Monacensis, sæ c. ix. In the University Library at Munich. Contains 1:1-37, 2:19-3:38, 4:21-10:37, 11:1-18:43, 20:46-24:53. L L. Cod. Regius Parisiensis, sæ c. viii. National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. Orig. Origen. L. &T. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. V. de J. Vie de Jé sus. Jos. Josephus. Trench, Trench, New Testament Synonyms. Sin. Sinaitic. AV. Authorized Version. Syr Syriac. Cur. Curetonian. Aegyptt. Egyptian. Arm. Armenian. Aeth. Ethiopic. Boh. Bohairic. WH. Westcott and Hort. Tert. Tertullian. RV. Revised Version. Cov. Coverdale. Mey. Meyer. Nö sg. Nö sgen. Latt. Latin. Treg. Tregelles. R R. Cod. Nitriensis Rescriptus, sæ c. 8. Brought from a convent in the Nitrian desert about 1847, and now in the British Museum. Contains 1:1-13, 1:69-2:4, 16-27, 4:38-5:5, 5:25-6:8, 18-36, 39, 6:49-7:22, 44, 46, 47, 8:5-15, 8:25-9:1, 12-43, 10:3-16, 11:5-27, 12:4-15, 40-52, 13:26-14:1, 14:12-15:1, 15:13-16:16, 17:21-18:10, 18:22-20:20, 20:33-47, 21:12-22:15, 42-56, 22:71-23:11, 38-51. By a second hand 15:19-21. Bas. Basil. Lat. Vet. Vetus Latina. Eus. Eusebius of Cæ sarea Burton. Burton, N.T. Moods and Tenses. 1 This use of πατέω , “ I tread,” as = καταπατέω , “ I trample on,” is classical: Plat. Phæ dr. 248 A; Soph. Aj. 1146; Ant. 745; Aristoph. Vesp. 377: The meaning is certainly not “ shall be inhabited by” (Hahn), as in Isaiah 42:5. Comp. Revelation 9:2; PS. Son 7:2, Son 2:2. Ambr. Ambrose. Wordsw. Wordsworth (Chr.) Wic. Wiclif. Rhem. Rheims (or Douay). C C. Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus, sæ c. 5. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the following portions of the Gospel: 1:2-2:5, 2:42-3:21, 4:25-6:4, 6:37-7:16, or 17, 8:28-12:3, 19:42-20:27, 21:21-22:19, 23:25-24:7, 24:46-53. These four MSS. are parts of what were once complete Bibles, and are designated by the same letter throughout the LXX and N.T. M M. Cod. Campianus, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. 1 Deficientium hominum a timore: another reproduction of gem abs. in Latin. Comp. 3:15, 9:43, 19:11, 21:5, 24:36, 41. Euthym. Euthymius Zigabenus. De W. De Wette. Wsctt. Westcott. Lft. J. B. Lightfoot, * Notes on Epistles of S. Paul. Gen. Geneva. Tyn. Tyndale. 1 Holtzmann (Handcomm. on Matthew 24:4-34, Eng. tr. p. 112) Makes the divisions thus: (a) Matthew 24:4-14; 15-28; 29-34. K K. Cod. Cyprius, sæ c. ix. In the National Library at Paris. Contains the whole Gospel. 22-24. THE PASSION AND THE We now enter upon the last main division of the Gospel (22-24.), containing the narratives of the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension. The first of these three subjects falls into three parts:— The Preparation (22:1-38); the Passion (22:39-23:49); and the Burial (23:50-56). In the first of these parts we may distinguish the following sections:— The Approach of the Passover and the Malice of the Hierarchy (22:1, 2); the Treachery of Judas (3-6); the Preparation for the Paschal Supper (7-13); the Institution of the Eucharist (14-23); the Strife about Priority (24-34); the New Conditions (35-38). In this part of the narrative the particulars which are wholly or mainly peculiar to Lk. are those contained in vv. 8, 15, 24, 28-30, 35-38. 22:1-38. The Preparation for the Passion. Comp. Matthew 26:1-29; Mark 14:1-25. For date see Hastings. D.B. i. p. 410. 1. Ἤγγιζεν . “ Was drawing nigh.” Mt. and Mk. say more definitely μετὰδύοἡμέρας . Keim calls attention to the fidelity of this introductory section. vv. 1-13 (v. p. 305. n.). ἡἑορτὴτῶνἀζύμων . The phrase is freq. in LXX (23:15, 34:18; Deuteronomy 16:16; 2 Chronicles 8:13, etc.), but occurs nowhere else in N.T. Comp. 2:41 Lk. is fond of these Hebraistic circumlocutions: ἡἡμέρατ . ἀζ . (ver. 7), ἡἡμέρατῶνσαββάτων (4:16; Acts 13:14, Acts 16:13), ἡμεραιτ . ἀζ . (Acts 12:3, Acts 20:6); Βίβλοςψαλμῶν (20:42; Acts 1:20), Βίβλοςτῶνπροφητῶν (Acts 7:42), etc. See small print on 4:16. ἡλεγομένηΠάσχα . Strictly speaking the Passover on Nisan 14th was distinct from the F. of Unleavened Bread, which last from the 15th to the 21st (Leviticus 23:5, Leviticus 23:6; Numbers 28:16, Numbers 28:17; 2 Chronicles 30:15, 2 Chronicles 30:21; Ezra 6:19, Ezra 6:22; Ezr_1 Esdr. 1:10-19; comp Mark 14:1). But they were so closely connected, that it was common to treat them as one festival. Not only Lk. as “ writing mainly for Gentiles” does so, but Mt. (26:17); and Josephus goes beyond either in saying ἑορτὴνἄγομενἐφ ʼ ἡμέραςὀκτὼ , τὴντῶνἈζύμωνλεγομένην (Ant. ii. 15, 1). Comp. κατὰτὸνκαιρὸντῆςτῶνἈζύμωνἑορτῆςἣνφάσκαλέγομεν (xiv. 2, 1). Elsewhere he distinguishes them (Ant. iii. 10, 5, ix. 13, 3). 2. ἐζήτουν … τὸπῶς . “ They continued seeking as to the method” : comp. 19:47, 48, and for the τό see on 1:62. tells us that they held a meeting in the house of Caiaphas. ἀνέλωσιν . Another of Lk.’ s favourite words. Here, 23:32, and eighteen times in the Acts it has the special meaning of “ remove, slay” : so also 2 Thessalonians 2:8, where the reading is doubtful. This meaning is common in LXX (Genesis 4:15; Exodus 2:14, Exodus 2:15, Exodus 2:21:29, etc.) and in class. Grk. Except Matthew 2:16; 2 Thessalonians 2:8, and Hebrews 10:9 (where see Wsctt.), it occurs only in Lk. With ἐφοβοῦντο comp. 20:19, 19:48, 21:38. 3. ΕἰσῆλθενδὲΣατανᾶς . Comp. John 13:2, where this stage is represented as the devil making suggestions to Judas, while his entering and taking possession of the traitor is reserved for the moment before he left the upper room to carry out his treachery (13:27). See on 10:18 and comp. 4:13, to which this perhaps, looks back. Satan is renewing the attack. Neither Mt. nor Mk. mentions Satan here. But there is no hint that Judas is now like a demoniac, unable to control his own actions (Hahn). Judas opened the door to Satan. He did not resist him, and Satan did not flee from him. Jesus must suffer, but Judas need not become the traitor. τὸνκαλούμενονἰσκαριώτην . All three give this distinctive sure (see on 6:16), and also the tragic fact that he was τῶνδώδεκα . Comp. 1:36, 6:15, 7:11, 8:2, 9:10, 10:39, 19:2, 29. For καλούμενον (א B D L X) TR. has ἐπικαλούμενον , a from commonly used in Acts (1:23, 4:36, 10:5, 32, 12:25). In Acts 1:23 we have both verbs. 4. στρατηγοῖς . Lk. alone mentions these officials. They are the leaders of the corps of Levitas, which kept guard in and about the temple. The full title is στρατηγοὶτοῦἱεροῦ (ver. 52). See Edersh. The Temple, 119; Jos. B. J. vi. 5, 3. These officers would be consulted, because they had to take part in carrying out the arrest. The chief of them was called ὀστρατηγὸςτοῦἱεροῦ (Acts 4:1, Acts 4:5:24, Acts 4:26). or “ the man of the temple mount” or “ the man of the mount of the house.” Comp. 2 Mal 3:4. Here and ver. 52 the plur. has no art. D, a b c d e ff2i l q Syr-Cur. Aeth. omit καὶστρατηγοῖς , but all these, excepting D d, substitute καὶτοῖςγραμματεῦσιν . C P retain both, adding τοῦἱεροῦ to στρατηγοῖς . παραδῷ . In 6:16 Judas is called προδότης but elsewhere παραδιδόναι , not προδιδόναι , is the word used to describe his crime. 5. ἐχάρησαν . It was wholly unexpected, and it simplified at matters enormously. συνέθεντο . Acts 23:20; John 9:22; and quite classical. Mk. has ἐπηγγείλαντο . The ἔστησαν of Mt. refers to the actual paying of the money. He alone states the amount,— thirty shekels. 6. ἄτερὄχλου . Either “ without a crowd” or “ without tumult.” Comp. Matthew 26:5. Contrast ματὰὄχλου , Acts 24:18. In bibl. Grk. the poetical word ἄτερ occurs only here, ver. 35, and 2 Mac. 12:15. Very possibly the priests had intended to wait the feast was over before arresting Jesus. The offer of Judas induced them to make the attempt before the feast began. Keim rightly rejects with decision the theory that the betrayal by Judas is not history, but a Christian fiction personifying in Judas the Jewish people. That Christians should invent so appalling a crime for an Apostle is quite beyond belief. The crime of Judas is in all four Gospels and in the Acts, is emphasized by Christ’ s foreknowledge of it. Speculations as to other causes of it besides the craving for money are not very helpful: but the motives may easily have been complex. The well-known difficulty as to the time of the Last Supper and of our Lord’ s death cannot be conclusively solved with our present knowledge. But the difficulty is confined to the day of the month. All four accounts agree with the generally accepted belief that Jesus was crucified on a Friday. In the Synoptists this Friday seems to be the 15th Nisan. Jn. (13:1, 29, 18:28, 19:14, 31) clearly intimates that it was the 14th. and we shall probably do rightly in abiding by his statements and seeing whether the others can be brought into harmony with it. This is perhaps most easily done by ding. in accordance with Jewish reckoning, the evening of the 13th as the beginning of the 14th. All, therefore, that is said to have taken place “ on first day of unleavened bread” may have taken place after sunset on what we should call 13th. It seems improbable that the priests and their officials would go to a Jesus at the very time when the whole nation was celebrating the Paschal meal. It is more easy to believe that Jesus celebrated Paschal meal before the usual time, viz. on the Jewish 14th, but before midnight and some twenty hours before the usual time for slaughtering the lambs, at which time He was dying or dead upon the cross. Professor D. Chwolson of Petersburg has made a new attempt at a solution in a recently published essay, Das letzte Passamahl Christi und der Tag seines Todes; Mé moire de l’ Acadé mie Impé riale des Sciences, 7c Serie, tome 41. No. 1. A criticism in the Guardian, June 28, 1893, tends to show that it leaves the crucial question just where it was. A later contribution is that of G. M. Sermeria. Le Jour de la Mort de Jé sus; Rev. bibl. I, 1896. 7. ῏Ηλθενδὲἡἡμτ . ἀζ . The day itself arrived, as distinct from “ was approaching” (ver. 1). This arriving would take place at sunset on the 13th. See Schanz, ad loc. Mt. and Mk. have τῇπρώτῃπρώτῃτῶνἀζύμων . ἔδειθύεσθαι . This in no way proves that the 14th, according to our reckoning, is intended. The day on which the lambs had to be killed began at sunset on the 13th, and ended at sunset on the 14th; and the lambs were killed about 2:30-5:30 P.M. on the 14th in the Court of the Priests. Each head of the company sharing the lamb slew the animal, whose blood was caught in a bowl by a priest and poured at the foot of the altar of burnt-offering (Edersh. The Temple. p. 190). It was on the evening of the 13th that the houses were carefully searched for leaven, in silence, and with a light: comp. 1 Corinthians 5:7; Zephaniah 1:12. The ἔδει refers to legal necessity: it was so prescribed. 8. ἀπέστειλεν . Both Mt. and Mk. omit this preliminary order and begin with the disciples’ question: and Lk. alone gives the names of the two who were sent. As this does not harmonize with the theory that Lk. shows animus against Peter, we are told that Peter and John are named by Lk. as the representatives of the old Judaism. The treason of Judas might lead Jesus to select two of His most trusted Apostles. 10. The care with which Jesus avoids an open statement to all the disciples as to the place ordained for the supper may be explained in the same way. Until His hour is come Judas must be prevented from executing his project: and no miracle is wrought, where ordinary precautions suffice. In what follows Lk. and Mk. are almost identical: Mt. is more brief. Evidently the ἄνθρωπος is not the head of the household, but a servant or slave: the carrying of water was specially the work of slaves or of women (Deuteronomy 29:11; Joshua 9:21-27; Genesis 24:11; John 4:7). The head of the house is in the house (vv. 10, 11). The suggestion, therefore, that this is the master of the house drawing the water for making the bread, according to Custom, on the 13th of Nisan, falls to the ground. This incident gives no help in deciding between the 13th and the 14th., The water was more probably for washing the hands before the evening With κεράμιονὕδατος comp. ἀλάβαστρονμύρου (7:37). As in the case of the colt (19:30), we are uncertain whether this is a case of supernatural knowledge, or of previous arrangement,, but in both cases prophetic prescience seems to be implied. For amphoram aquæ portans (Vulg.) bajulans bascellum (vascellam) aquæ (d). 11. ἐρειτε . Fut. for imperat. This is more common in prohibitions than in commands (4:12; Acts 23:5; Matthew 6:5). In the Decalogue. only the positive τίματὸνπατέρα has the imperative: the negative commandments have οὐ with the fut. indic. Win. xliii. 5. c, p. 396. τῷοἰκοδεσπότῃτῆςοἰκίας . A pleonasm marking a late stage in the language, in which the meaning of οἰκοδεσπότης has become indefinite: comp. ὐποόδιοντῶνποδῶν (20:43), συῶνσυβόσια , στρατηγὸντῆς , the Daily Journal, etc. The cogn. accus. is different. ὁδιδάσκαλος . like ὁκύριος (19:31), this implies that man knows Jesus. and is perhaps in some degree a disciple. τὸκατάλυμα . Not necessarily the same as the ἀνάγαιον (ver. 12). It is possible that Jesus only asked for the large general room on the ground floor (comp. 2:7), but that the man gave Him the best room, reserved for more private uses. above the κατάλυμα . It was a common thing for the inhabitants of Jerusalem to lend a room to pilgrims for the passover, the usual payment being the skin of the paschal lamb and the vessels used at the meal. Mt. alone gives the words ὁκαιρόςμουἐγγύςἐστιν , which perhaps explains why Jesus is having the paschal meal before the time. Neither here. nor at the supper, is any mention of a lamb: and perhaps there was none. The time for slaughtering had not yet come; and, as Jesus was excommunicated, it is not likely that the priests would have helped His disciples to observe the ritual respecting it. Moreover, there would hardly be time for all this and for the roasting of the lamb. The Last Supper was the inauguration of a new order rather than the completion of an old one; and its significance is enhanced if the central symbol of the old dispensation was absent, when He whom it symbolized was instituting the commemoration of that which the old symbol prefigured. It was on the last great day of the F. of Tabernacles, when the water from Siloam was probably not poured out beside the altar, that Jesus cried, “ If any man thirst, let him come unto Me, and drink” (John 7:37); and it was when the great lamps were not lit in the Court of the Women, that He said. “ I am the Light of the World” (John 8:12). From vv. 15-19 it appears that τὸπάσχα and φάγω refer to the eucharistic bread and wine. 12. ἀναγαιον . “ Anything raised above the ground upper floor (Xen. Anab. v. 4, 29), upper room.” Only here and Mark 14:15. The MSS. vary between ἀνάγαιον , ἀνόγαιον , ἀνώγεων , ἀνώγεως , ἀνωγαιον , and ἀνώγεον . Most, including the best, have ἀνάγαιον . That this room is identical with the ὑπερῷον . Acts 1:13 is pure conjecture: the change of word is against it. In both Passages Vulg. has cæ naculum, for which Old Latin texts have here medianum (a), pede plano locum (b), superiorum locum (q), in superioribus locum (c e), and superiorem domum (d). ἐστρωμένον . “ Spread, furnished” — with what, depends upon the context, which here suggests couches or cushions: comp. Acts 9:34. Luther erroneously has gepflastert. Mk. adds ἔτοιμον , which some insert here. 13. καθώς “ Even as” the correspondence was exact; comp. 19:32. The Evangelists seem to intimate that Christ’ s knowledge was supernatural rather than the result of previous arrangement. But in any case the remaining ten, including Judas, were left in ignorance as to where the meal was to take place. 14-23. The Last Supper, with the Institution of the Eucharist as a new Passover: comp. Matthew 26:20-29; Mark 14:17-25. The declaration that one of them is a traitor is placed by Mt. and MK. at the beginning of the section, by Lk. at the end (ver. 21): comp. John 13:21 where the wording of the declaration agrees with Mt. and Mk. Lk. seems to have used an independent source: comp. 1 Corinthians 11:24, 1 Corinthians 11:25. 14. Lk.’ s independence appears at once: nearly every word in the verse differs from Mt. and Mk. ἀνέπεσεν . Mt. has ἀνέκειτο : the practice of standing (Exodus 17:11) had long been abandoned; first for sitting, and then for reclining. Mos servorum est, ut edant stantes; at nunc comendunt recumbentes, ut dignoscatur, exisse eos e servitute in libertatem, was the explanation given by the Rabbins. The choosing of the lamb ten days in advance had also been given up. Here, as elsewhere, ἀναπίπτω implies a change of position (11:37, 14:10, 17:7; John 13:12, John 13:25, etc.). Lft. On a Fresh Revision of N.T. p. 80. οἱἀπόστολοι . This is the true reading. In some texts δώδεκα has been Inserted (A C P R) or substituted (LX) from Mt. and Mk. Ten to thirty was the number for a passover. Note that Lk. once more has σύν , where others have μετά or καὶ comp. 8:38, 51, 20:1, 22:56. 15. The whole of this verse and most of the next are peculiar to Lk. The combination of ἐπιθυμίᾳἐπεθύμησα with τοῦμεπαθεῖν is remarkable. The knowledge of the intensity of the suffering does not cancel the intensity of the desire. Ἐπιθυμίᾳἐπεθύμησα . A Hebraism common in LXX. Comp. Acts 5:28, Acts 5:23:14; John 3:29; Matthew 13:14, Matthew 13:15:4; James 5:17; Genesis 31:30; Exodus 21:20; Deuteronomy 7:26, etc. 16. οὐμὴφάγωαὐτό . After this present occasion. The αὐτο must refer to τοῦτοτὸπάσχα (ver. 15), and shows that this need not imply a lamb. The Passover of which Christ will partake, after having fulfilled the type, is the Christian Eucharist, in which He joins with the faithful in the Kingdom of God on earth. Others suppose the reference to be to the spiritual banquet in the world to come. But if αὐτό means the paschal lamb, in what sense could Jesus partake of that in the future? The Mishna itself contemplates the possibility of a passover without a lamb, and rules that unleavened bread is the only essential thing. With an influx of many thousands of pilgrims, to provide a lamb might be in some cases impossible. 17. δεξάμενος . It was handed to Him: contrast λαβών , ver. 19 (schanz). It is usual to consider this as the first or second of the four cups that were handed round during the paschal meal; the eucharistic cup being identified with the third or fourth. But we are in doubt (1) as to what the paschal ritual was at this time; (2) as to the extent to which Jesus followed the paschal ritual in this highly exceptional celebration; (3) as to the text of this passage, especially as to whether Lk. records two cups or only one: so that identifications of this kind are very precarious. In any case, Lk. mentions a cup before the breaking of the bread, whether this be the eucharistic cup or not: and S. Paul twice mentions the cup first (1 Corinthians 10:16, 1 Corinthians 10:21), although in his account of the institution he follows the usual order (1 Corinthians 11:23). In the Διδαχή the cup is placed first (9:2: see Schaff’ s 3rd ed. PP. 58-61, 191). εὐχαριστήσας . This seems to imply the eucharistic cup. All three have εὐχαριστήσας of the cup. Lk. repeats it of the bread. where Mt. and Mk. have εὐλογήσας . In the Jewish ritual the person who presided began by asking a blessing on the feast; then blessed, drank, and passed the first cup. Then Psa_113. and 114. were sung and the bitter herbs eaten, followed by the second cup. After which the president explained the meaning of the feast: and some think that for this explanation of the old rite Jesus substituted the institution of the new one. After eating of the lamb and unleavened cakes came the thanksgiving for the meal and the blessing and drinking of the third cup. Lastly, the singing of Ps. 115.-118. followed by the fourth cup: and there as sometimes a fifth. διαμερίσατε . Comp. Acts 2:45; Judges 5:30 Followed by εἰςἑαυτούς , it expresses more strongly than the mid. (23:34; Matthew 27:35) the fact of mutual distribution. In some texts (AD etc.) εἰςἑαυτούς has been altered into the more usual dat. (John 19:24; Acts 2:45). The distribution would be made by each drinking in turn, rather than by each pouring some into a cup of his own. The εἰςἑαυτούς perhaps corresponds to the πάντες of Mt. and Mk. Πίετε ἐξαὐτοῦπάντες . 18. ἀπὸτοῦνῦν . This at first sight appears to mean that Jesus did not partake of the cup. “ I say, Divide it among yourselves, because henceforth I shall not drink,” etc. But this would be strange; for (1) according to Jewish practice it would be monstrous for the presiding person to abstain from partaking; (2) Jesus had just said that He earnestly desired to partake of this paschal meal; and (3) vv. 17, 18 seem to be parallel to 15, 16: He eats the paschal food, and then says that it is for the last time under these conditions; and He drinks of the paschal cup, and then says that it is for the last time under these conditions. There is nothing in any of the accounts to prevent us from supposing that Jesus drank before handing the cup to the others. The γάρ explains why they are to consume it among themselves, and not expect Him to take more than was ceremonially necessary; and the ἀπὸτοῦνῦν will then be quite exact. “ I have just drunk; but from this moment onwards I will drink no more” : Comp. οὐκέτιοὐμὴπίω . It was possibly because ἀπὸτοῦνῦν seemed to mean that Jesus refused to drink that some texts (A C etc.) omitted the words. τοῦγενήματοςτῆςἀμπέλου . Some regard this as a reference to the Jewish benediction at the first cup: “ Blessed be Thou, O Lord our God, the King of the world, who hast created the fruit of the vine.” It is quite uncertain that this form was in use at the time. For γένημα see Deissmann, Bible Studies, pp. 109, 184. Latin variations in rendering are of interest: generatione vitis (Vulg.), fructu vineæ (a), creatura vineæ (d). gonimine vitis . Comp. 3:7. Syr-Sin. omits “ of the vine.” See Parch. Radb. on Matthew 26:29, Migne cxx. 895. 19, 20. In connexion with what follows we have these points to consider. (1) Are the words from τὸὑπὲρὑμῶνδιδόμενον to τὸὑπὲρὑμῶνἐκχυννόμενον Part of the original text? (2) If they are, is τὸποτήριον in ver. 20 the same as ποτήριον in ver. 17? Assuming provisionally that the overwhelming external evidence of almost all MSS. and Versions in favour of the words in question is to be accepted, we may discuss the second point. As in the other case. neither view is free from Serious difficulty. If the cup of ver. 20 is not the same as that of ver. 17, then Lk. not only states that Jesus did not drink of the eucharistic cup (for οὐμὴπίωἀπὸτοῦνῦν excludes the partaking of any subsequent cup), but he also records that Jesus charged the Apostles to partake of the earlier cup, while he is silent as to any charge to partake of the eucharistic cup. So far as this report of the Institution goes, therefore, we are expressly told that the Celebrant refused the cup Himself, and we are not told that He handed it to the disciples. If, on the other hand, we identify the two cups, and regard vv. 17, 18 as the premature mention of what should have been given in one piece a ver. 20, mean its severance into two portions, and the insertion of the distribution of the bread between the two portions. are inexplicable. Of the two difficulties, this seems to be the greater, and it is better not to identify the two cups. It is some confirmation of this that in ver. 17 ποτήριον is without the article, “ a cup,” while in ver. 20 it is “ the cup.” But τὸποτήριον need not mean more than “ the cup just mentioned.” In Mt. and Mk. ποτήριον has no article: and in all three ἄρτον has no article: so that is absence in ver. 17 and presence in ver. 20 is not of much weight in deciding between the two difficulties. The only way to avoid both these difficulties is to surrender the passage as an interpolation. D a d ff2, i l omit from τὸὑπὲρὑμῶν to ἐκχυννόμενον , and Syr-Cur. omits ver. 20, while b e Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin.place ver. 19 before ver. 17, an arrangement which has been elaborately advocated by Dean Blakesley (Præ lectio in Scholis. Feb. 14, 1850). The possibility of the whole being an importation from 1 Corinthians 11:24, 1 Corinthians 11:25 may be admitted on the evidence; but the probability of ver. 19 either to τὸσῶμάμου (b e Syr-Cur.), or to the end (Syr-Sin.), having stood originally before ver. 17 is almost infinitesimal. In what way can we account for so simple an arrangement (harmonizing with Mt. and Mk.) becoming almost universally disturbed? “ These difficulties, added to the suspicious coincidence with 1 Corinthians 11:24f., and the Transcriptional evidence given above, leave no moral doubt (see Introd. § 240) that the words in question were absent from the original text of Lc, notwithstanding the purely Western ancestry of the documents which omit them” (WH, ii. App. p. 64). For the other view see Scrivener; also R. A. Hoffmann, Abendmahlsgedanken Jesu Christi, 1896, Pp. 5-25. 19. λαβὼνἄρτονεὐξαριστήσαςἔκλασεν . The taking bread (or a loaf), breaking, giving thanks. and the declaration. “ This is My Body,” are in all four accounts. But for εὐχαριστήσας here and 1 Corinthians 11:24 Mt. and Mk. have εὐλογήσας and both here and 1 Cor. Λάβετε is omitted. Mt. alone has φάγετε with ΛάΒετε of the bread, and Lk. alone has Λάβετε of the cup (ver. 17); but perhaps this is not the eucharistic cup (see above). τοῦτοἐστιντὸσῶμάμου . Not much is gained by pointing out that the ἐστιν would not be expressed in Aramaic. It must be understood; and the meaning of τοῦτο , and its relation to τὸσῶμάμου must be discussed. The τοῦτο cannot mean the act of breaking and eating, nor anything else excepting “ this bread.” For the meaning of ἐστι see ver. 20. where the ποτήριον is identified with ἡκαινὴδιαθήκη , and comp. εἰμι in John 8:12, John 8:9:5, John 8:14:6, John 8:15:1, John 8:5. In taking this bread they in some real sense take His Body. See Thirlwall’ s Charges, vol. i. Charges v. and vi.; vol. ii. Charge x and esp. p. 25, e d. Perowne, 1877; also Gould on Mark 14:22. τὸὑπὲρὑμῶνδιδόμενον . Peculiar to this account: “ which is being given for your advantage.” The κλώμενον which many texts add to τὸὑπὲρὑμῶν in 1 Corinthians 11:24, is not genuine. τοῦτοποιρῖτε . The proposal to give these words a sacrificial meaning, and translate them “ Offer this, Sacrifice this, Offer this sacrifice,” cannot be maintained. It has against it (1) the ordinary meaning of ποιεῖν in N.T., in LXX, and in Greek literature generally; (2) the authority of all the Greek Fathers, 1 who knew their own language. knew the N.T. and the LXX, and understood the words as having the ordinary meaning, “ Perform this action” ; (3) the authority of the Early Liturgies. which do not use ποιεῖν or facere when the bread and wine are offered. but προσφέρειν or offerre, although the words of institution precede the oblation, and thus suggest ποιεῖν or facere; (4) the authority of a large majority of commentators, ancient and modern, of the most various schools. who either make no comment, as if the ordinary meaning were too obvious to need stating: or give the ordinary meaning without mentioning any other as worthy of consideration; or expressly reject the sacrificial meaning; (5) the testimony of the Septuagint, in which the various and frequent Hebrew words which mean “ offer” or “ Sacrifice” are translated, not by ποιεῖν , but by προσφέρειν or ἀναφέρειν or the like; (6) the fact that here and in 1 Corinthians 11:24 the writer might easily have made the sacrificial meaning clear by using προσφέρειν or ἀναφέρειν . He has not even suggested such a meaning, as he might have done by writing ποιεῖτετοῦτον , i.e. τοῦτοντὸνἄρτον . He has given as a translation of Christ’ s words neither “ Offer this bread,” nor “ Offer this,” nor “ Do this bread” , but “ Do this thing.” See Expositor, 3rd series, vii. 441; T. K. Abbott, Essays on the Original Texts of O. &N.T., Longmans, 1893, p. 110; A Reply to Mr. Supple’ s and other Criticisms, Longmans, 1893; Mason, Faith of the Gospel, Rivingtons, 1888, p. 309. εἰςτῆνἐμὴνἀνάμνησιν . “ With a view to a calling to mind, a recollection, of Me.” The word means more than a mere record or memorial, and is in harmony with the pres. imperat. ποιεῖτε : “ Continually do this in order to bring Me to mind,” i.e. “ to remind yourselves and others of the redemption which I have won by My death.” The eucharist is to be a continual calling to mind of Him who redeemed men from the bondage of sin, as the Passover was an annual calling to mind of redemption from the bondage of Egypt (Exodus 12:24-27, Exodus 12:13:8, Exodus 12:14). In N.T. ἀνάμνησιν occurs only here, 1 Corinthians 11:24, 1 Corinthians 11:25, and Hebrews 10:3, where see Wsctt. Comp. 1 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Timothy 1:6. In LXX it occurs Leviticus 24:7; Numbers 10:10; Wisd. 16:6; the titles of Psa_37. and 69. T. K. Abbott has shown that a sacrificial meaning cannot be obtained from ἀνάμνησιν any more than from ποιεῖτε (Essays, etc. P 122; A Reply, etc. p. 34). The εἰς corresponds to ἵνα , rather than to ὡς , and indicates the purport of the new institution. For the possessive pronoun used objectively comp. Romans 11:31; 1 Corinthians 15:31, 1 Corinthians 16:17. The omission of this charge, τοῦτοποιεῖτε , κ .τ .λ ., in Mt and Mk. has attracted attention. DR. C. A. Briggs says, “ Jü licher (Zur Gesch. der Abendmahlsfeier in der ä llesten Kirche, in the Theolog. Abhandlungen Weizsä cker gewidment, 1892, s. 238 seq.) and Spitta (Urchristenthum, i. S. 238 seq.) are doubtless correct in their opinion that the earliest Christian tradition. represented by Mark and Matthew. knew nothing of an institution of the Lord’ s Supper by Jesus on the night of His betrayal, as a sacrament to be observed continuously in the future. But they admit that Paul and Luke are sustained by the earliest Christian usage in representing it as a permanent institution. It is easier to suppose that the risen Lord in connection with these manifestations commanded the perpetual observance of the holy supper. Just as He gave the Apostles their commission to preach and baptize, and explained the mystery of His life and death (Luke 24:25-49). Paul and Luke would then combine the words of Jesus on two different occasions” (The Messiah of the Gospels, T. &T. Clark, 1894, p. 123). See Schaefer, Das Herrenmahlnach Ursprung und Bedeutung, Gü tersloh, 1897. 20. τὸποτήριον . The τό may mean the cup which all Christians know as part of the eucharist, or (if this passage be genuine) the cup mentioned before (ver. 17). Paul also has the article, Mt. and Mk. not. The other portions of this verse which are in 1 Cor., but not in Mt. and Mk., are ὡσαύτωςμετὰτὸδειπνῆσαι … τὸποτήριον … καινὴ … ἐντῷ . On the other hand, Paul and Lk. omit Πίετεἐξαὐτοῦπάντες (Mt.) or ἔπιονἐξαὐτοῦπάντες (Mk.). The ὡσαύτως means that He took it, gave thanks, and gave it to them. For καινή , which is opposed to παλαιά (2 Corinthians 3:6; comp. Romans 11:27), see on 5:38. διαθήκηἐντῷαἵματίμου . Mt. and Mk. have τὸαἷμαμουτῆςδιαθήκης , which is closer to LXX of Exo 24:8, τὸαἷματῆςδιαθήκης . Comp. ἐναἵματιδιαθήκης (Zechariah 9:11). The testamentum sanguine suo obsignatum of Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. IV. 40) gives the sense fairly well. The ratification of a covenant was commonly associated with the shedding of blood; and what was written in blood was believed to be indelible. For διαθήκη see Wsctt. on Hebrews 9:15, Hebrews 9:16, with the additional note. p. 298. τὸὑπὲρὑμῶνἐκχυννόμενον . The ὑμῶν is peculiar to this passage. Mk. has ὑπὲρπολλῶν , Mt. περὶπολλῶν , and Paul omits. The ὑμῶν both here and in ver. 19 means the Apostles as representatives of all. The part. is the Æ olic form of the pres. part. pass. of ἐκχύνω = ἐκχέω (Comp. Acts 22:20); “ being poured out,” like διδόμενον (ver. 19). In sense τὸἐκχ . agrees with αἵματι , but in grammar with ποτήριον : in Mt. and Mk., both in sense and grammar. with αἷμα . But see Win. lxvii. 3. p. 791. 21-23. The Declaration about the Traitor. Comp. Matthew 26:21-25; Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21-30. If Lk. places this incident in its proper place, Judas did partake of the eucharist. But the question cannot be decided. See Schanz, ad loc. pp. 509, 510. 21. πλὴνἰδοὺἡχεὶρ … ἐπὶτῆςτραπέζης . The expression is peculiar to Lk. The πλήν here indicates a transition; an expansion or change of subject. From the meaning of His death He passes to the manner of it. Others take it as a restriction of ὑπὲρὑμῶν ; others again as marking a contrast between Christ’ s conduct and that of the traitor. See on 6:24, 35, 10:11, 14. The verse may be understood literally, but probably means no more than that the traitor was sharing the same meal with Him: comp. Matthew 26:23. 22. It is here that Lk. is almost verbatim the same as Mt. and Mk. Such solemn words would be likely to be remembered in one and the same form. Keim draws attention to their conspicuous originality. They are not adaptations of anything in O.T., although Obadiah 1:7 and Micah 7:6 might appropriately have been used (v. p. 309). He regards Lk. as most exact. In any case πορεύεται , for which Mt. and Mk. have ὑπάγει , is to be noticed. It is probably used in the LXX sense of “ depart, die” : comp. Psalms 78:39. ὅτιὁυἱὸςμέν . The “ because” explains how such an amazing thing has come to pass. Failure to see the meaning of ὅτι (א B D L T, Sah. Boh.) has caused the substitution in many texts of καί (A X ΓΔΛΠ b c e f ff2. Vulg. Syr-Sin. Arm. Aeth.), while others omit (a d, Orig.). κατὰτὸὡρισμένον . It is part of the Divine decree that the death of the Christ should be accompanied by betrayal: Mt. and Mk. have καθὼςγέγραπταιπερὶαὐτοῦ : comp. Acts 2:23. Excepting Romans 1:4; Hebrews 4:7, ὁρίζειν is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 2:23, Acts 2:10:42, Acts 2:11:29, Acts 2:17:26, Acts 2:31). πλήνοὐαί . Mt and Mk. have οὐαὶδέ ; but Lk. is fond of πλήν (ver. 21). Although God knows from all eternity that Judas is the betrayer of the Christ. yet this does not destroy the freedom or responsibility of Judas. The ἐκείνῳ marks him off as an alien: comp. John 13:26, John 13:27, John 13:30. Mt. and Mk. add καλὸναὐτῷεἰοὐκἐγεννήθηὁἄνθρωποςἐκεῖνος . 23. Here ἢρξαντο is the one word which is common to all three. Mt. and Mk. say that they each asked Jesus (and Mt. adds that Judas in particular asked) “ Is it I ?” No one seems to have suspected Judas; and perhaps Christ’ s Σὺεἶπας was heard by Judas alone. Jesus may have had Judas next to Him on one side, S. John being on the other. For πράσσειν of doing evil comp. John 3:20, John 3:21; Romans 7:19; Thuc. iv. 89. 2. 24-30. The Strife as to Precedence. Disputes of this kind had taken place before, and the frequent records of them are among the abundant proofs of the candour of the Evangelists. But a comparison of the records seems to indicate that the tradition respecting them had become somewhat confused; and it is possible that what was said on one occasion has in part been transferred to another. Comp. Matthew 18:1-5; Mark 9:33-37; Luke 9:46-48; John 13:14: also Matthew 20:24-28; Mark 10:41-45; Luke 22:24-27. Of these last three passages, Mt. and Mk. clearly refer to the same incident, which took place considerably before the Last Supper. If Lk. merely knew what Jesus said on that occasion, but did not know the occasion, he would hardly have selected the Last Supper as a suitable place for the incident. He probably had good reason for believing that a dispute of this kind took place at the supper. Jesus may have repeated some of what He had said on a similar present occasion. But there is no note of time or sequence in ver. 24, where δὲκαί simply indicates that something of a different character from what precedes also took place: and it is scarcely credible that this strife occured after Jesus had washed their feet and instituted the eucharist. More probably the dispute arose respecting the places at the paschal meal— who was to be nearest to the Master; and the feet-washing was a symbolical rebuke to this contention. Here ver. 27 appears to have direct reference to His having washed their feet. 24. Ἐγένετοδὲκαί . “ But there arose also” : see small print on 3:9. The δέ perhaps contrasts this discussion with that as to which of them was the traitor. But we are not sure that the one discussion came closely after the other. φιλονεικία . “ Contentiousness.” Here only in N.T., but quite classical. It is sometimes coupled with βασκανία (4 Mac. 1:26; M. Antonin. iii. 4), and easily comes to mean “ contention” (2 Mal 4:4; Jos. Ant. vii. 8. 4). δοκεῖεἶναι . “ Is accounted, allowed to be” — omnium suffragiis; implying who ought to be so accounted. See Lft. on Galatians 2:6. μείζων . Not quite equivalent to the superlative, which would have indicated several gradations from lowest to highest. The comparative implies only two,— a superior and all the rest as equals: 9:46; Mark 9:34. Win. 35:4, p. 305. 25. Almost verbatim as the account of the earlier strife provoked by James and John (Matthew 20:25; Mark 10:42). For κυριεύουσιν comp. Romans 14:9; 2 Corinthians 1:24; 1 Timothy 6:15. Mt. and Mk. use the compounds, κατακυρ . and κατεξουσιαζ . εὐεργέταικαλοῦνται Peculiar to Lk. The phrase εὐεργέτηςβασιλέοςἀνεγράφη (Hdt. viii. 85, 4: comp. Thuc. i. 129. 2; Esther 2:23, Esther 6:1) is not parallel. There persons who have done special service to the sovereign are formally credited with it. Here it is the sovereign who receives the title of Benefactor (i.e. of his country, or of mankind) as a perpetual epithet; e.g. some of the Greek kings of Egypt. Comp. Σωτήρ , Pater patriæ , Servus servorum. For less formal instances of the title see McClellan and Wetstein. It is better to take καλοῦνται as middle: “ claim the title,” hunc titulum sibi vindicant (Beng.). This is what the disciples were doing. 26. ὁμείζων . He who is really above the rest. True greatness involves service to others: noblesse oblige. For γινέσθω , “ let him prove himself to be,” comp. 10:36, 12:40, 16:11, 19:17. We have an echo of this 1 Peter 5:3. For νεώτερος as διακονῶν comp. Acts 5:6, Acts 5:10: νεώτερονδὲλέγειτὸνἔσχατον (Euthym.), the lowest in rank. The Latin Versions have junior (e f Vulg.), minor (a c ff2 i), minus (d, μεικρότερος D), juvenis (r), adulescentior (b q). For ὁἡγούμενος we have qui præ est (a b f q), qui princeps est (r). qui primes est (l) qui præ sens est (e), qui ducatum agit (d), qui præ cessor est (Vulg.). In N.T. ἡγέομαι means “ lead” only in pres. part., and most often in Lk. It is used of any leader. ecclesiasticat of civil (Acts 7:10, Acts 7:14:12. Acts 7:15:22; Matthew 2:6; Hebrews 13:7, Hebrews 13:17, Hebrews 13:24). In LXX it is freq. 27. ἐγώδὲἐνμέσῳὑμῶν . This need not be confined to the feet-washing (Euthym. De W. Godet, Hahn), nor to the fact that the person who presided at the paschal meal served the others (Hofm.): and the reference to either is uncertain. The whole of Christ’ s ministry was one of service to His disciples (Nö sg. Weiss). For ἐνμέσῳ , see on 8:7. Strauss, Keim, and others regard the feet-washing recorded in Jn. as a mere fictitious illustration of Luk 12:37 and 22:27 (L. J. § 86, p. 542, ed. 1864; Jes. of Naz. v. p. 341 n). 28-30. Nearly the whole of this is peculiar to Lk. But comp. Matthew 19:28. Having rebuked them for raising the question of precedence among themselves, Jesus shows them wherein the privileges which they all enjoy consist, viz. in their standing by Him in His service to others. He gives preference to none. 28. οἱδιαμεμενηκότεςμετ ʼ ἐμοῦ . The idea of persistent loyalty is enforced by the compound verb, by the perfect tense, and by the preposition (Lft. on Galatians 2:5): “ who have perseveringly remained with Me and continue to do so” (1:22; Hebrews 1:11; 2 Peter 3:4). ἐντοῖςπειρασμοῖςμου . The trials to which He had been subjected during His ministry, and especially the latter portion of it. These, even to Him, were temptations to abandon His work. Comp. ἄχρικαιροῦ (4:13). κἀγὼδιατίθεμαιὑμῖν . “ And I on My part, in return for your loyalty, hereby appoint to you dominion, even as My Father appointed to Me dominion.” As in 1:33, βασιλεία is here “ dominion” rather than “ a kingdom” : comp. 23:42; Revelation 17:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:12. See on 11:2. Comp. τὴνβασιλείανεἰςτὴνἈλεξάνδρανδιέθετο (Jos. Ant. xiii. 16. 1). A connexion with διαθήκη (ver. 20) is doubtful. The καινὴδιαθήκη is with all the faithful; this διατίθεμαι seems to be confined to the Apostles. The verb does not necessarily mean “ covenant to give” or “ assign assign by bequest,” which would not fit διέθετο here, but may be used of any formal arrangement or disposition (Hdt. i. 194, 6; Xen. Anab. vii. 3, 10; Mem. i. 6, 13; Cyr. v. 2. 7, 9). 30. ἵναἔσθητεκαὶπίνητε . This is the purpose of,conferring regal power upon them. Some make from καθώς to βασιλείαν a parenthesis and render, “ I also (even as My Father appointed to Me dominion) appoint to you that ye may eat and drink,” etc. So Theophyl. Nö sg. Hahn. But βασιλείαν belongs to both διατίθεμαι and διέθετο . So Buthym. De W. Mey. Weiss, Schanz, Godet. ἐπὶτῆςτραπέζηςμου . The Jews commonly regarded the Messianic Kingdom as a banquet: Comp. 13:29, 14:15. Cibus potusque, ille de quo alias dicitur. Beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt justitiam (Bede). καθῆσθεἐπὶθρόνων . The meaning of the promise is parallel to what precedes. As they have shared the trials, so they shall share the joy; and as they have proclaimed the Kingdom to Israel, so they shall exercise royal power over Israel, judging them according as they have accepted or rejected what was proclaimed. Comp. 1 Corinthians 6:2, 1 Corinthians 6:3; Revelation 20:4. As to the verb, the readings are very various: καθίζεσθε , καθίσησε (H), καθέζησθε (D). But the choice lies between καθῆσθε (B* T D), which must depend upon ἵνα , and καθήσεσθε (א A B3 G L Q), which rather gives this as an independent promise. In Matthew 19:28 καθήσεσθε is right, and may have been transferred to this passage, as δώδεκα has been in some authorities (א D Xm a b c d f1 q) with ωρόνων . 31-34. The Prediction of Peter’ s Denial. Both the prediction and the fulfilment are given in all four Gospels. A comparison of them shows that Lk. and Jn. are quite independent of one an other and of the other two. We have three separate narratives. Lk. agrees with Jn. (13:36-38) in placing the prediction in the supper-room. Mt. (26:30-35) and Mk. (14:26-30) place it on the way from the room to Gethsemane. It is not likely that it was repeated; and the arrangement of Lk and Jn. is to be preferred. But some make three predictions; two in the room (Lk. being different from Jn.), and one during the walk to Gethsemane. Godet regards a repetition of such a prophecy impossible de supposer (2. p. 476). 31. Lk. makes no break in Christ’ s words, but it is possible that a remark of Peter’ s, such as Jn. records, is omitted. The apparent want of connexion between vv. 30 and 31 has led to the insertion εἶπεδὲὁκύριος (א A D X, Latt.), as if to mark the beginning of a new subject. B L T, Sah. Boh. Syr-Sin. omit. Bede suggests by way of connexion, Ne gloriarentur undecim apostoli, suisve viribus tribuerent, quod soli pæ ne inter tot millia Judæ orum dicerentur in tentationibus permansisse cum Domino, ostendit et eos si non juvantis se Domini assent opitulatione protecti, eadem procella cum cæ teris potuisse conteri. ΣίμωνΣίμων . The repetition of the name is impressive: see on 10:41. Contrast Πέτρε ver. 34. The whole of this address (31, 32) is peculiar to Lk. It tends to mitigate Peter’ s guilt, by showing how sorely he was tried. Lk. “ ever spares the Twelve.” See pp. 146,, 172, 511,. ὁΣατανᾶςἐξῃτήσατοὑμᾶς “ Satan obtained you by asking” (RV. marg.); “ procured your being surrendered to him,” as in the case of Job (1:12, 2:6): exoravit vos. Neither postulavit (Tert. Cypr.), nor quæ sivit (c), nor expetivit (f Vulg.) is adequate. The aorist of the compound verb necessarily implies success in the petition. In class. Grk. the mid. would generally have a good sense: “ obtained your release by entreaty.” See instances in Wetst. and Field. As in 10:18 Jesus is here communicating a portion of His divine knowledge. See notes there and on 8:12. Note the plur. ὑμᾶς , which covers both σύ and τοὺςἀδελφούςσου . Satan was allowed to try them all (Matthew 26:31, Matthew 26:56; Mark 14:27, Mark 14:50); Judâ non contentus (Beng.). Comp. Apost. Const, vi. 5, 4: Test. XII. Patr. Benj. iii. τοῦσινιάσαι . See on 1:74: “ in order to sift.” Neither verb nor substantive is classical. They are probably colloquial for κόσκινον and κοσκινεύειν which survives in modern Greek. In Amos 9:9 we have λικμᾷν . See Suicer, s.v. Ut ventilet (e f ff2 i l q r, Ambr.), ut vexaret (Cypr. Aug.). ut cerneret (d, Tert. Hil.), ad cernendum (c), ut cribraret (Vulg.). 32. ἐγὼδὲἐδεήθην . See on 5:12. The ἐγὼδέ and the aor. are in marked contrast to Satan and his request. We may regard ἐξῃτήσατο and ἐδεήθή as contemporaneous. περὶσοῦ As being the leader on whom so much depended, and as being in special need of help, as his fall proved. Jesus prayed for all (John 17:2, John 17:9, John 17:15, John 17:17). The interpolator of Ignatius understands this as a prayer for all: ὁδεηθεὶςμὴἐκλείπειντὴνπίστιντῶνἀποστόλων (Smyrn. 7.) For ἵνα after δέομας comp. 9:40, 21:36. μὴἐκλίπῃ . “ Fail not utterly, once for all.” Defectt in Petro ἡἐνέργειατῆςπίστεως ad tempus: at ἕξιν labefactavit, non extinxit (Grotius). καὶσύ . Answering to ἐγὼδέ . Christ has helped him: he must do what he can for others. ποτεἐπιστρέψαςστήρισον . “ When once thou hast turned again, stablish” (RV.). It is unnatural to take ποτε with στήρισον (Mey. Weiss); and it is a mistake to make ἐπιστρέψας a sort of Hebraism , meaning “ in turn” (Grot. Maldon. Beng.), a use which perhaps does not occur in N.T. See Schanz. On the other hand, “ when thou art converted” is too strong. It means turning again after a temporary aberration. Yet it is not turning to the brethren, but turning from the fault that is meant. It is not likely that the transitive sense is meant: “ convert thy brethren and strengthen them” . comp. 1:16, 17; James 5:19, and contrast Acts 3:19, 28:27; Matthew 13:15; Mark 4:12. See Expos. Times, Oct 1899, p. 6. This metaphorical sense of στηρίζειν is not classical: comp. Acts 18:23; Romans 1:11, Romans 1:16:25; James 5:8, etc. The form στήρισον for στήριξον is late. Some Latin texts add. without any Greek authority, et rogate nen iniretis in temptationem (a b c e ff2 i q). 33. μετὰσοῦ . First. with enthusiastic emphasis: “ With Thee I am ready.” The impulsive reply is thoroughly characteristic. As at the feet-washing (John 13:6, John 13:8) he has more confidence in his own feelings than in Christ’ s word; but this version of the utterance is less boastful than that in Matthew 26:33 and Mark 14:29. 34. Λέγωσοι , Πέτρε . For the first and last time in the Gospels Jesus addresses him by the significant name which He had given him. Rock-like strength is not to be found in self-confidence, but in humble trust in Him. Mt. and Mk. have Ἀμὴνλέγωσοι : Jn. Ἀμὴνἀμὴνλ . σοι . The solemn earnestness with which this definite prediction was uttered made a deep impression upon all. σήμερον . Mt. his ταύτῃτῇνυκτί . Mk. has both. The new day began after sunset. See 4:40, 13, and 23:38 for similar cases in which Mt. and Lk. have different parts of an expression, of which Mk. has the whole. οὐφωνήσει … ἀλέκτωρ . The third of the four Roman watches was called ἀλεκτοροφωνία , gallicinium (Mark 13:35; Apost. Const. viii. 34, 1; Strabo, vii. 35; Geopon. 1153). The expression here is equivalent to “ Before this night is past.” Mk. alone mentions the double cock-crowing, and the fact that Peter, so far from being silenced, kept on protesting with increased vehemence. ἕωςτρίςμεἀπαρνήσῃεἰδέναι . This is the true reading (א B L M Q X T), The τρίς is in all four Gospels: the εἰδέναι in Lk. alone. 35-38. § The New Conditions; the Saying about the Sword. The opening words mark the beginning of a new subject; and there is no indication of any connexion with what precedes. It is one more proof of His care for them. Precautions and equipments, which would have hindered them in more peaceful times, have become necessary now. What He formerly forbade, He now enjoins. Dominus non eâ dem vivendi regulâ persecutionis quam pacis tempore discipulas informat (Bede). 35. Ὅτεἀπέστειλαὑμᾶςἄτερβ . The wording suggests a direct reference to 10:4. which is addressed to the Seventy. In 9:3, where similar directions are given to the Twelve, the wording is different. In the source which Lk. is here using the words given in 10:4 would seem to have been addressed to the Apostles. There may have been some confusion in the tradition respecting two similar incidents, or in the use which Lk. makes of it. This use of ὑστερεῖν occurs here only in N.T. Comp. Jos. Ant. ii.2, 1. The pass. is thus used 15:14; Romans 3:23; Hebrews 11:37. 36. ὁμὴἔχων . This is ambiguous. It may look back to ὁἔχωνβαλλάντιον : “ He that hath no purse, let him sell his garment and buy a sword” (Cov. Gen. Rhem. RV.). Or it may anticipate μάχαιραν : “ He that path no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one” (Tyn. Cran. AV.). The former is far the more probable. Only he who has no money or wallet, would sell the most necessary of garments (ἱμάτιον , 6:29), to buy anything. But even the ἱμάτιον is less indispensable than a sword; so dangerous are their surroundings. “ For henceforth the question with all those who continue in the land will not be whether they possess anything or not, but whether they can exist and preserve their lives” (Cyril Adex. Syr. Com. ad loc., Payne Smith. p. 680) Christ implies that His Apostles will have to rely upon their own resources and to confront deadly hostility. Comp. John 15:18-21. Christ does no mmean that they are to repel force by force; still less that they are to use force in spreading the Gospel. But in a figure likely to be remembered He warns them of the changed circumstances for which they must now be prepared. 37. λέγωγὰρὑμῖν . The γάρ introduces the explanation of the change from ὅτεἀπέστειλα to νῦν . τὸγεγραμμένον . Comp. 20:17; 2 Corinthians 4:13, More often we have τάγεγραμμένα : 18:31, 21:22; Acts 13:29; Revelation 20:12, Revelation 22:19. The ἔτι before τοῦτο (G ΔΛΠ , Vulg. Arm.) is spurious. It is the kind of insertion which versions are apt to make for the sake of completeness: “ must yet be fulfilled.” For δεῖ see on 4:43 and 9:22. ἐνἐμοί . Therefore the disciples must expect no better treatment than the Master receives (Matthew 10:24; John 15:20, John 13:16: see on 6:40). Καὶμετὰἀνόμων . The καί is part of the quotation: καὶἐντοῖςἀνόμοιςἐλογίσθη (Isaiah 53:12): “ even with the transgressors” is incorrect. In AV. ἄνομος is translated in five different ways: “ transgressor” (Mark 15:28); “ wicked” (Acts 2:23; 2 Thessalonians 2:8), “ without law” (1 Corinthians 9:21), “ lawless” (1 Timothy 1:9), “ unlawful” (2 Peter 2:8). καὶγάρ . An extension of the argument: “ and what is more.” This fulfilment is not only necessary,— it is reaching its conclusion, “ is having an end” (Mark 3:26). The phrase τέλοςἕχειν is used of oracles and predictions being accomplished. See Field, Ot. Norvic. iii., and comp. τετέλεσται (John 19:30). Om. γάρ D, a d e ff2 i l Syr-Sin. Failure to see the point of the γάρ would cause the omission. τὸπερὶἐμοῦ This form of expression is found in no other Gospel; but the plur. τὰπερὶἐμουῦ , occurs 24:19, 27 and is freq. in Acts (1:3, 18:25, 23:11, 15, 24:10, 22, 28:15, 31: in 8:12, 19:8, 28:23 the τά is probably spurious). Some text (A X ΓΔ etc.) have τά here for τό : ea quæ sunt de me (Vulg.); ea quæ de me scribta sunt (Cod. Brix.). But τό (א B D L Q) has been altered to the more usual expression. perhaps to avoid the possible combination of τὸπερὶἐμοῦτέλος . There is no need to understand γεγραμμένον . Much which concerned the Christ had never been written. 38. μάαιραι . Chrysostom has supposed that these were two knives, prepared for the slaughtering (ver. 8) or carving of the paschal lamb. In itself this is not improbable: but nowhere else in N.T. does μάχαιρα mean a knife. Assuming that swords are meant, these weapons may have been provided against robbers on the journey to Jerusalem, or against attack in the city. Peter had one of them, and may have been the speaker here. It is one more instance of the Apostles’ want of insight, and of the Evangelistbs candour: comp. Mark 8:17. Schleiermacher points out that the obscurity of the passage is evidence of its genuineiess and originality (p. 299, Eng. tr.). Ἱκανόνἐστιν . Satis est (c ff2 q Vulg.), sat est (a i), sufficit (b d f l r), which law perhaps represents ἀρκεῖ (D). The reply is probably the equivalent for a Hebrew formula for dismissing the subject (Deuteronomy 3:26), not with impatience, but with satiety or sorrow. Comp. ἕωςτοῦνῦν [ἱκανόν ] (1 Mac. 2:33). But even if it means that two swords are a sufficient quantity (“ They are enough for you,” SyrSin.), it intimates that the subject is dismissed. Bede is hardly right in his view: duo gladii sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi salvatoris, i.e. to prove that he could have resisted. had He pleased. If the words apply to the swords, they are spoken with a sad irony (μονουχὶδιαγελᾷ , Cyril Alex.). as meaning, not that the two weapons will be sufficient for the protection of the company, but that none at all are required: they have grievously misunderstood Him.1 Es gilt nith: mehr mit dem leiblichen Schwerdt fechten, sondern as gilt hinfort leiden um des Evangelii willen und Kreuz tragen: denn man kann wider den Teufel nicht mit Eisten fechten; darum ist Noth Alles dran zu setzen, und nur das geistliche Schwerdt, das Wort Gottes, zu fassen (Luth.). 22:39-23:49. The Passion. In this part of the narrative of the Passion proper, i.e. from the Agony to the Death, the particulars which are wholly or mainly peculiar to Lk. are 22:51, 23:6-12, 27-32 [34]. 40-43, 46: and these particulars are among the most precious details in the history of the Passion. 39-46. The Agony in the Garden. With regard to the omission of nearly the whole of the last discourses (Jn. 14-17.) Godet remarks that the oral tradition was not a suitable vehicle for transmitting such things: c’ é taient den tré sors qu’ un cæ ur d’ é lite Pouvait seul garder et reproduire. On the other hand Jn. omits the whole of this scene, although there is a clear reference to it 18:11. Lk.’ s narrative once more differs considerably from that of Mt. (26:30-41) and of Mk. (14:26-38), which are almost verbatim the same; and it is very much shorter. It is in vv. 39, 42, 46 that Lk. comes most closely to the other two. 39. ἐξελθών . From the house. κατὰτὸἔθος Peculiar to Lk. (1:9, 2:42): Comp. πολλάκιςσυνήχθηἸησοῦςἐκεῖ (John 18:2). It was no longer necessary to keep Judas ignorant of His movements; so He follows His usual practice. Lk. omits the ὑμνήσαντες which records the chanting of the second part of the Hallel. Jn. alone mentions the passing of the gloomy ravine of the Kidron (18:1). 40. τοῦτόπου . Lk. and Jn. call it “ the place,” Mt. and Mk. χωρίον and add the name Γεθσημανεί = “ oil-press.” The traditional Gethsemane is a questionable site. Both Robinson and Thomson would place the garden higher up the Mount of Olives. The tradition is continuous from the age of Constantine, but cannot be traced to any earlier source. Stanley inclines to accept it as correct (Sin &Pal. p. 455). See D. B.2 art. “ Gethsemane.” Προσεύχεσθε . This first command to pray (comp. ver. 46) is recorded by Lk. alone. It is given to the eleven; the second is to the chosen three. whom Lk. does not notice particularly. 41. ἀπεσπάσθη . Avulsus est (Vulg.). “ He was drawn away” by the violence of His emotion. which was too strong to tolerate the sympathy of even the closest friends: comp. Acts 21:1. It seems to be too strong a word to use of mere separation: but comp. 2 Mac. 12:10, 17; 4 Mac. 13:18; Isaiah 28:9. ὡσεὶλίθουβολήν . Mt. and Mk. have μικρόν Comp. ὡσεὶτόξουβολήν (Genesis 21:16): λείπετοδουρὸςἐρωήν (Hom. Il. xxiii. 529). The acc. in John 6:19 is not quite parallel. θεὶςτὰγόνατα . Lk. alone mentions this. Standing was the more common attitude (18:11; Matthew 6:5; Mark 11:25; 1 Samuel 1:26): but on occasions of special earnestness or humiliation kneeling was more natural (1 Kings 8:54; Ezra 9:5; Daniel 6:10). In N. T. kneeling is the only attitude mentioned; perhaps in imitation of Christ’ s example here: Acts 7:60, Acts 7:9:40, Acts 7:20:36, Acts 7:21:5; Ephesians 3:14. The phrase τιθέναιτὰγόνατα is not classical, but comp. genua ponere. See on 3:21: the imperf. προσηύχετο implies continued prayer. 42. Πάτερ , εἰβούλει , παρένεγκε . We might have expected εἰθέλεις (comp. ἐὰνθέλῃς , 5:12), because of τὸθέλημα in the next sentence. But this is one of the passages which tend to show that in N.T. θέλω indicates mere choice, while βούλομαι implies deliberate selection (Matthew 1:19). The latter is far less common in N.T. In LXX there is not much difference. This is the only passage in which the Attic βούλει for βούλῃ is well supported. Such forms are found in some texts Matthew 27:4; John 11:40; Acts 16:31, Acts 24:8. In D a c d e ff2 μὴτὸθέλημα … γενέσθω precedes εἰβούλει … ἐμοῦ , πλήν being omitted. Several of the same authorities have a similar inversion 9:62. The reading παρενεγκεῖν turns the prayer into an unfinished pleading: “ Father, if Thou be willing to remove this cup from Me.” — Comp. Exodus 32:32. B D T Versions, and Orig. support παρένεγκε . Vulg. transfer calicem istum; Tert. transfer poculum istud; but he may be quoting Mark 14:36 (De Orat. 4.). Boh. Sah. Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. have “ let this cup pass.” παρέενεγκετοῦτοτὸποτήριονἀπ ʼ ἐμοῦ . “ This cup” and the address “ Father” are in all three accounts. In O.T. the metaphor of “ cup” for a person’ s fortune, whether good or bad, is very common (Psalms 11:6, Psalms 16:5, Psalms 23:5, Psalms 75:8, etc.). In N.T. specially of the sufferings of Christ (Mark 14:36; John 18:11; Matthew 20:22, Matthew 20:23; Mark 10:38, Mark 10:39): comp. Revelation 14:10, Revelation 16:19, Revelation 18:6. In class. Grk. παραφέρεινποτήριον would mean to place a cup at the side of a person. put it on the table near him (Hdt. 1:119, 5, 133, 3; Plat. Rep. 1. p. 354). But in Plutarch παραφέρειν is used in the sense of “ lay aside, remove” (Camill. 41.). Elsewhere in N.T. it is used of leading astray (Hebrews 13:9; Jude 1:12). τὸθέλημάμου . Either βούλημα or βουλή might have been used of the Father’ s will. but less suitably of Christ’ s (Ephesians 1:11). The γινέσθω is peculiar to Lk. It recalls γέηθήτωτὸθέλημάσου (Matthew 6:10), which Lk. omits (11:2). For πλήν comp. 10:11, 14, 20. 43, 44. As in the case of vv. 19, 20, we have to consider whether this passage is part of the original text. For be evidence see be additional note at the end of ch. 23. One thing is certain. “ It would be impossible to regard these verses as a product of the inventiveness of the scribes. They can only be a fragment from the traditions, written or oral, which were, for a time at least, locally current beside the canonical Gospels, and which doubtless included matter of every degree of authenticity and intrinsic value. These verses and the first sentence of 22:34 may be safely called the most precious among the remains of this evangelic tradition which were rescued from oblivion by the scribes of the second century” (WH. 2. App. p. 67). It matters little whether Lk. included them in his narrative, so long as their authenticity as evangelic tradition is acknowledged. In this respect the passage is like that respecting the Woman taken in Adultery. 43. ὤφθη . “ Was visible” to the bodily eye is obviously meant. It is against the context and the use of the expression in other places to suppose that internal perception of an invisible spiritual presence is intended. Lk. is fond of the expression (1:11, 9:31, 24:34; Acts 2:3, Acts 2:7:2, Acts 2:26, Acts 2:30, Acts 2:35, Acts 2:9:17, Acts 2:13:31, Acts 2:16:9, Acts 2:26:16; comp. 1 Corinthians 15:5-8), which Mt. and Mk. use once each (17:3. 9:4), and Jn. thrice (Revelation 11:19, Revelation 11:12:1, Revelation 11:3), but not in his Gospel. The ἀπ ʼ οὐρανοῦ would not have been added if the presence of the Angel was invisible. ἐνισχύων . Elsewhere in N.T. only Acts 9:19, of bodily strengthening: comp. 2 Samuel 22:40; Ecclus. 50:4; and this may well be the meaning here, but without excluding the strengthening of soul and spirit. Either would tend to produce the other; and the sight of His Father’ s messenger would strengthen both body and spirit. Commentators have speculated as to what the Angel said (see Corn. à Lap. ad l.). There is nothing to indicate that he spoke. Hobart remarks of ἐνισχύειν that, outside the LXX “ its use in the transitive sense, ‘ to strengthen,’ is confined to Hippocrates and St. Luke” (p. 80). In Acts 9:19 the true reading is probably ἐνισχύθη .1 This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 23:1-7. The Civil Trial before Pilate. Comp. Matthew 27:2, Matthew 27:11, Matthew 27:12; Mark 15:1-3; John 18:28-37. Lk. assumes that his reader know that Jesus was condemned to death by the Sanhedrin. But it was necessary to have Him condemned by Roman procurator also, in order that the sentence might be executed, and without delay, by him who possessed μέξριτοῦκτείνεινἐξουσίαν (Jos. B. J. ii. 8, 1).1 It is almost certain that at this time the Jews were deprived of the right of inflicting capital punishment. They sometimes did inflict it and risked the consequences, as in the case of S. Stephen: and the Romans sometimes found it expedient to ignore these transgressions (John 5:18, John 5:7:1, John 5:25, John 5:8 [5, ] 59; Acts 5:33, Acts 21:31, Acts 26:10). A good deal would depend upon the character of the execution and the humour of me procurator. But besides John 18:31 we have the express statement, quadraginta annis ante vastatum templum ablata sunt judicia capitalia ab Israë le (Bab. Sanh. f. 24, 2). See Blass on Acts 7:57. But it is quite possible that in some of the cases in which the Jews are represented as trying to put persons to death, the meaning is that they wished to no them over to the Romans for execution. See notes on John 18:31 in Camb. Grk. Test. In the accounts of this Roman trial we have the attempts of the Jews to induce Pilate to condemn Jesus contrasted with Pilate’ s attempts to save Him from execution. The Sanhedrin hoped that Pilate would confirm their sentence of death; but Pilate insists on trying the case himself. This be does in his πραιτώριον or palace (Matthew 27:27; Mark 15:16; John 18:28, John 18:33, John 18:19:9). But we do not know where this was. A little later than this (Philo, Leg. ad Gaium, § 38, ed. Mangey. ii. 589) the Roman governor resided in “ Herod’ s Præ torium,” a large palace on the western hill of the city. But Pilate may have used part of the fortress Antonia, the site of which is supposed to be known; and some conjecture that a chamber with a column in it is the scene of the scourging. For the rather considerable literature concerning Pilate see Leyrer in Herzog, art. Pilatus, sub fin., and Schü rer, Jewish People, etc. I. 2. p. 82, who refers especially to G. A. Mü ller, Pontius Pilatus, Stuttgart, 1888. 1. ἀναστὰνἅπαντὸπλῆθος . All three words are characteristic: see on 1:39, on 3:21, and on 1:10. The whole body of the Sanhedrin is meant, not including the populace, who at this point are not mentioned in any of the accounts. ἐπὶτὸνΠειλᾶτον . Neither in order to shift the responsibility on to him, nor to avoid disturbing the feast with a Jewish execution, nor to ensure death by crucifixion, but simply in order to get their own sentence of death confirmed. 2. Lk. is alone in giving clearly the three political charges, which could not fail to have weight with Pilate: (1) seditious agitation, (2) forbidding tribute to Tiberius, (3) assuming the title of king. The point of ἤρξαντο seems to be that they began to do all this, but Pilate interposed: comp. 5:21, 12:45, 13:25, 19:37. The τοῦτον is probably contemptuous: “ this fellow” (Tyn. Cov. Cran. Gen. AV.). Whether εὓραμεν refers to “ catching in the act” or to “ discovering by investigation” is not certain. The form εὔραμεν is well attested here (B* L T X) as ἀνεῦραν in 2:16. In 2 Samuel 17:20 we have ἐ͂ραν with ἦλθαν and παρῆλθαν . See small print on 1:59. διαστρέφοντατὸἔθνοςἡμῶν . They imply that the perversion of the nation was seditious. The excitement caused by Christ’ s ministry was notorious, and it would not be easy to prove that it had no political significance. For the verb comp. 9:41; Acts 13:10, Acts 13:20:30; Exodus 5:4; 1 Kings 18:17, 1 Kings 18:18. κωλύονταφόρουςΚαίσαριδιδόναι . Jesus had done the very opposite a day or two before (20:25). But this second charge seemed to be of one piece with the third. If He claimed to be a king, He of course would forbid tribute to a foreign power. Vulg. wrongly changes the dare of Lat. Vet. to dari. χριστὸνβασιλέα . “ Messias. a king” (comp. 2:11) is more probable than either “ King Messias,” or. “ an anointed king” (Schegg). They add βασιλέα that Pilate may know the political significance of Χριστός (Schanz). It is here that the charge made before Pilate approximates to the charge on which they condemned Jesus (22:69-71). But with them it was the theological significance of His claim that was so momentous: and this Pilate could not regard. Epiphanius (Marc. 316, 317, 346) tells us that after διαστρέφοντατὸἔθνος Marcion inserted καὶκαταλύοντατὸννόμονκαὶτοὺςπροφήτας ; and that after κωλύοντα … διδόναι he added καὶἀποστρέφοντατὰςγυναῖκαςκαὶτὰτέκνα . The former of these interpolations is found in various MSS. of the Old Latin, et solventem legem [nostram] et prophetas (b c e ff2 i l q), and in some MSS. of Vulg., (A Q R), while the latter is added to ver. 5 in some Old Latin texts: see below. Prof. Rendel Harris attributes these insertions to Marcion himself, who was himself accused of these things. Texts &Studies. ii. 1. p. 230. See small print note on 16:17. 3. ΣὺεἶὁβασιλεὺςτῶνἹουδαίων ; All four record this question, and in exactly these words. The pronoun is emphatic, implying that His appearance was very much against such a claim. Σὺλέγεις . Like the reply in 22:70, this is probably not interrogative. It condenses a conversation given at greater length by Jn., without whose narrative that of the three is scarcely intelligible. It would be extraordinary that Pilate should simply hear that Jesus admitted that He claimed to be King of the Jews, and at once declare, “ I find no fault in this man.” But a conversation with Jesus had convinced Pilate that He was a harmless enthusiast. He did not claim to be a king in the ordinary sense. 4. καὶτοὺςὄχλους . The first mention of them. The procession of the Sanhedrin would attract a crowd; and perhaps some had come to ask for the customary release of a prisoner (Mark 15:8). αἵτιον . = αἰτία is peculiar to Lk., and is always combined with a negative: vv. 14, 22; Acts 19:40. 5. ἐπίσχυον . Intransitive, as in 1 Mac. 6:6, so that nothing is to be understood: “ they were the more urgent,” invalescebant (Vulg.). They became more definite in their accusations, because Pilate took the matter too easily. καθ ʼ ὅληςτῆςἸουδαίας . Comp. 4:44. Whether this means the whole of Palestine (1:5, 7:17; Acts 2:9, Acts 2:10:37, Acts 2:11:1, Acts 2:29) or Judæ a proper (2:4; Acts 1:8, Acts 8:1), is uncertain. In either case we have allusion to an activity of Jesus in southern Palestine of which Lk. records very little. ἀπὸτῆςΓαλιλαίας . Nutrix seeditiosorum hominum (Grot). The ἕωςὧδε may have special reference to the triumphal entry into Jerusalem; but it may also refer to previous visits of Jesus to the city. With the constr. ἀρεάμενοςἀπὸ … ἕως comp. Acts 1:22; Matthew 20:8; [John 8:9]. The very words καθ ʼ ὅληςτῆςἸουδαίας , ἀρξάμενοςἀπὸτῆςΓαλιλάας occur Acts 10:37. At the end of ver. 5 Cod. Colb. adds et filios nostros et uxores avertit a nobis, non enim baptizatur sicut nos; and Cod. Palat. has the same down to nobis, and continues non enim baptizantur sicut et nos nec se mundant. The retention of “ Jewry” in AV. here, John 7:1, and Daniel 5:13 was probably an oversight. 7. ἐπιγνούς . Freq. in Lk. in the sense of “ thoroughly ascertain” 7:37; Acts 19:34, Acts 22:29, Acts 24:11, Acts 28:1, etc. ἀνέπεμψεναὐτόν . The verb may be used in the legal sense of “ sending up” to a higher authority or “ referring” to another jurisdiction, like remitto, which Vulg. has here and vv. 11, 15: comp. Acts 25:21; Jos. B. J. ii. 20, 5; Philo, De Creat. Prin. 8. But in vv. 11, 15 the meaning “ send back” is more suitable, and may be retained here: comp. Philemon 1:12. If Jesus originally belonged to Herod’ s jurisdiction, sending Him to Herod was, sending Him back; just as the man born blind is said to recover his sight , because sight is natural to man (John 9:15, John 9:18). It was perhaps chiefly in order to get rid of a difficult case, or to obtain official evidence from the tetrarch, that Pilate sent Jesus, rather than merely to conciliate Antipas. Justin says that Pilate χαριζόμενοςδεδεμένοντὸνἸησοῦνἔπεμψε 45̀ (Try. 103.); and comp. Vespasian allowing Agrippa to have the prisoners who came from the latter’ s kingdom (Jos. B. J. iii. 10. 10). Herod had come up to keep the feast, and probably occupied the palace of the Asamonæ ans (B. J. ii. 16, 3; Ant. xx. 8, 11). 8-12. § The Trial before, Herod. It has been noticed by Schleiermacher that its omission by Jn. is no serious objection to its authenticity. “ The transaction is too circumstantially detailed to admit a doubt, and our reporter seems to have had an acquaintance in the house of Herod who supplied him with this fact, as John seems to have had in the house of Annas” (S. Luke, p. 304, Eng. tr.). Joana, the wife of Chuza, Herod’ s steward (8:3), would be a likely source of information: see on 8:3 and 24:10. 8. ἦνθέλων , τὸἀκούειν , ἤλπιζεν . These expressions indicate the continuance of the wishing, hearing, and hoping: comp. 9:9. Such curiosity is not gratified any more than the demand for signs from heaven (11:29). With ἐξἱκανῶνχρόνων comp. χρόνῳἱκανῷ (8:27; Acts 8:11), χρόνουςιὙκανούς (20:9). TR. follows A R Γ D L in reading ἐξἱκανοῦ , to which H M C Π add χρόνου . But א B D L T, Sah. Arm. give the plural. 9. αὐτὸςδὲοὐδὲνἀπεκρίνατοαὐτῷ . “ But He on His part answered him nothing.” The language and tone of Antipas showed that he was in no condition to profit by anything that Jesus might say: see on 3:1. “ He regarded Jesus as a sight.” For ἀπεκρίνατο comp. 3:16. Cod. Colb. adds quasi non audiens: and Syr-Cur. has the more remarkable quasi non ibi erat. This may have suggested the possibly Docetic touch in the Gospel of Peter, “ He held is peace as in no wise feeling pain.” Both Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. for ἐνλόγοιςἱκανοῖς have “ in cunning words.” Syr-Sin. omits vv. 10, 11, 12. 10. ἱστήκεισαν . This, and not εἱστήκειν , is the pluperf. of ἵσταμαι . The evidence varies in the fourteen places; but ἱστήκειν is never a more itacism, and is freq. in LXX. Even B, which often prefers ει to ι , supports ἱστήκει five times (WH. ii. App. p. 162). εὐτόνως . “ At full stretch, vehemently,” in N. T. only here and Acts 18:28: comp. Joshua 6:8; Jos_2 Mac. 12:23. In Latin texts we have instanter (c), fortiter (d), vehementer (a r), constanter (f Vulg.). Apparently they had kept silence while Herod was questioning Jesus; but his silence had exasperated them. Syr-Sin. omits vv. 10-12. 11. ἐξουθενήσας … ἐμπαίξας . These participles are put first in their clauses with emphasis. Herod’ s baffled curiosity takes this despicable revenge: comp. 18:9; Galatians 4:14. We need not suppose that Antipas formally pronounced Him innocent, but that he did not condemn Him to death. He evaded the responsibility, as Pilate tried to do. In the Gospel of Peter Herod sentences the Lord; and when “ Joseph, the friend of Pilate and of the Lord,” asks Pilate before the crucifixion for the Lord’ s body, Pilate sends to ask Herod for it. The chief guilt throughout is transferred from Pilate to Herod and the Jews. σὺντοῖςστρατεύμασιν . Probably a guard of honour: cum militibus suis (f). It was one of these perhaps that he had sent to behead John in the prison (Mark 6:27; Matthew 14:10). It was fitting that the prince who had murdered the Baptist should mock the Christ. ἐμπαίξας . He treats Him as a crazy enthusiast, and gives a mock assent to His claim to be a king, which the scribes no doubt reported. Latin texts have irrisit (c), inludens (d), deludens (r), delusum (a), inlusit (Vulg.). ἐσθῆταλαμπράν . “ A bright robe,” splendidum (c), rather than “ a white robe,” candida (a), alba (f Vulg.). That it was a toga candida to mark Him as a candidate for royalty, is not likely: it was to mark Him as already king. The epithet does not indicate its colour, but its “ gorgeous” character: comp. James 2:2, James 2:3. In Acts 10:30 it is used of angelic apparel. Elsewhere in N.T. ἐσθής occurs only 24:4; Acts 1:10, Acts 12:21: comp. 2 Mac. 8:35, 11:8. 12. ἐγένοντοδὲφίλοι . Although Pilate failed in the attempt to transfer the responsibility to Herod, yet something was gained by the transaction. In the Gospel of Peter Herod addresses him as ἈδελφὲΠειλᾶτε . The cause of enmity may easily have been some dispute about jurisdiction. Ephrem conjectured that the enmity arose through Pilate sending soldiers to punish the chief men of Galilee who had been the guests of Herod when he put the Baptist to death, and that this was the occasion when the blood of Galileans was mingled with their sacrifices. For the importance of this strange idea as a link in the evidence respecting the Diatessaron see Rendel Harris in Contemp. Review, Aug. 1895, p. 279. D transposes the clauses, and has ἀηδίᾳ for ἔχθρᾳ :ὄντεςδὲἐνἀηδίᾳὁΠ . κ . ὁἩ . ἐγένοντοφίλοιἐναὐτῇτ . ἡμ . So also Cod. Colb. cum essent autem in dissensionem pil. et her. facti sumt amici in illa die. 13-25. The vain Attempts of Pilate to avoid Sentencing Jesus to Death. Comp. Matthew 27:15-26; Mark 15:6-15. Pilate’ s first two expedients had failed: (1) telling the Jews to deal with case themselves; (2) sending it to Herod. He now tries two others: (3) to release Him in honour of the feast; (4) to scourge Him and let Him go. Roman dislike of a gross injustice to an innocent person possibly influenced him; but perhaps the chief motive was the superstitious fear, produced by his wife’ s dream and confirmed by Christ’ s bearing and words. Jn. states that he again and again declared Jesus to be innocent (18:38, 19:4, 6). In wording Lk. is not very similar to either Matthew 27:15-26 or Mark 15:6-15; but the substance of all three is the same. Jn. is more full and quite independent; he distinguishes the conversation inside the præ torium with Jesus and outside with the Jews. 13. συνκαλεσάμενος . See on 9:1. Pilate in taking the matter in hand again summons not only the hierarchy, whose bitterness against Jesus he knew, but the populace, whom he hoped to find more kindly disposed, and able to influence their rulers. 14. ἀποστρέφοντατὸνλαόν . “ Seducing the people from their allegiance.” He condenses the three charges in ver. 2 into one. Note the emphatic ἐγώ and the ἐνώπιονὑμῶν : the one anticipates Ἡρῴδης , and the other implies that they know with what thoroughness the case has been investigated. ἀνακρίνας . In its forensic sense of a judicial investigation word is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (Acts 4:9, Acts 12:19, Acts 24:8, Acts 28:18). But the classical use for a preliminary examination must not here be pressed. See Dict. of Grk. and. Rom. Ant., art. Anakrisis; Gardner and Jevons, pp. 574ff. Pilate’ s οὐθὲνεὗρον is in direct contradiction to their εὕραμεν (ver. 2). For αἴτιον see on ver. 4. 15. ἀλλ ʼ οὐδὲἩρῴδης . Therefore the friendship between Herod and Pilate is hardly “ a type of Judaism and Heathenism leagued together to crush Christianity.” Both were willing to set Jesus free. What we see here is, however, an anticipation of what not unfrequently happened during the first three centuries, viz. that Jewish mobs incited the heathen against the Christians. ἀνέπεμφενγὰραὐτὸνπρὸςἡμᾶς . This reading agrees better with “ No, nor yet Herod” than does “ For I sent you to him,” and the external evidence for it is decisive. For the text, א B K L M T Π and some cursives; for ἀνέπεμψαγὰρὑμᾶςπρὸςαὐτόν , A D C ΓΔ L. Versions are divided, Latt. against Æ gyptt., while Syrr. including Syr-Sin. have the conflate. “ For I sent Him to him.” Wic. had a Lat. text such as Cod. Brix. nam remisit eum ad nos, for he renders “ For he path sent Him again to us,” although Vulg. has nam remisi vos ad illum. Some Latin authorities combine both readings. ἐστὶνπεπραγμένοναὐτῷ . “ Is done by Him.” or “ hath been done by Him” (RV.). The former is perhaps better, as giving the result of the trial before Herod. The dat. indicates that what is done stands to the person’ s credit; Win. iii. 10, p. 274: xxiv. 25 is not parallel. “ Nothing worthy of death is done unto Him” (AV.) is scarcely sense. Cov. has “ There is brought upon Him nothing that is worthy of death.” For the periphrastic perfect see Burton., § 84. 16. παιδεύσας . He uses a light word to express the terrible flagellatio, in order to excuse the injustice to his own conscience, and to hide his inconsistency from them. It is no punishment, but a chastisement to warn Him to be more circumspect in future. But the priests would see that a judge who was willing to inflict this on an innocent person could be induced by further pressure to inflict death. Scourging was sometimes fatal: Hor. Sat. i. 2, 41; comp. i. 3, 119. Comp. Deuteronomy 22:18. 17. This verse is wanting in A B K L T Π , Sah. a, while D, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Æ th. insert it after ver. 19. It is a gloss based on Matthew 27:15, and Mark 15:6. Alf. urges that ἀνάγκηνεἶχεν is an idiom Lk.’ s manner. But Lk. uses it only once (14:18), as do also S. Paul (1 Corinthians 7:37) and S. Jude (3). Homœ oteleuton might explain the omission in one family of witnesses; but against this is the widespread omission, and the fact that the gloss is inserted in two different places. The passage reads more naturally without the gloss than with it. 18. ἀνέκραγον . We have the 1 aorist 4:33, 8:28; Mark 1:23, Mark 6:49: and in LXX both aorists are common. Here A X Γ have ἀνέκραξαν , א B L T ἀνέκραγον . Here only in bibl. Grk. does πανπληθεί occur. Αἶρετοῦτον . E medio tolle istum: Acts 21:36, Acts 21:22:22; Matthew 24:39; John 19:15: comp. Acts 8:33. They are perhaps recalling such passages as Deuteronomy 17:7, Deuteronomy 19:19. ἀπόλυσονδὲἡμῖν . Nothing is known of this custom of releasing a prisoner at the Passover apart from the Gospels. Pilate says “ Ye have a custom” (John 18:39), which is against the hypothesis that he originated it: The Herods may have done so in imitation of Roman customs. At the first recorded lecstisternium prisoners were released (Livy, v. 13, 7). βαραββᾶν . “ Son of Abba” (father). Other instances of the name are given by Lightfoot: Samuel Bar-Abba, Nathan Bar-Abba (Hor. Heb. Matthew 27:16). But evidence is wanting that Abba was a proper name. On the remarkable reading “ Jesus Barabbas” Matthew 27:16, Matthew 27:17 see WH. ii. App. 19. 19. διὰστάσιντινὰγενομένην . Of Barabbas they might with some truth have said τοῦτονεὕραμενδιαστρέφοντατὸἔθνος (ver. 2). Not that he had originated the στάσις but that he had taken a conspicuous part in it. The στάσις was probably no popular movement, but some plundering disturbance. Jn. calls him simply “ a robber,” and he may have been connected with the other two robbers who were crucified with Jesus. The rather awkward order of the words in the verse is perhaps to intimate that while the στάσις took place in the city the murder did not. On the rare form of periphrastic tense (ἦν with aor. part.), see Burton., § 20. βληθείς is the reading of B L T, for which א * a A D X Γ etc. have the more usual βεβλημένος : and while א B L T X, f qhave ἐντῇφυλακ͂ͅ , A D ΓΔ etc. have the obvious correction εἰςτὴνφυλακήν . Excepting Mark 15:7 and Hebrews 9:8, στάσις in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. (ver. 25; Acts 15:2. Acts 15:19:40, Acts 15:23:7, Acts 15:10, Acts 15:24:5). In LXX it represents several Hebrew words of different meaning. Syr-Sin. here has “ wicked deeds.” 20. That we should read δέ (א A B D T, Latt. Bob. Sah.) and not οὖν (C ΓΔ L etc.) after πάλιν is certain. That αὐτοῖς is to be added after προσεφώνησεν (א B L T, Latt. Boh. Sah. Syx-Cur. Æ th.) is also certain. But Lk. uses the verb absolutely, 13:12; Acts 21:40. Contrast 7:32; Acts 22:2. 21. ἐπεεφώνουν . “ Kept shouting at him” : clamabant (f), proclamahant (a), succlamabant (Vulg.). In N.T. the verb is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 12:22, Acts 21:34, Acts 22:24); but it is classical. According to all four Gospels the demand for crucifixion was not made until Pilate had proposed to release Jesus on account of the feast. Lk. and Jn. give the double cry, “ Crucify, crucify.” Mt. has σταυρωθήτω , Mk. and Jn. σταύρωσον , Lk. σταύρου . We must read σταύρου , 2 pers. imper. act., and not σταυροῦ , mid. א B D Fa have σταύρου (bis), A L R C Γ etc. have σταύρωσον (bis); but U 157, a b e f ff2 1 Arm. Aeth. omit the second “ Crucify.” 22. τίγὰρκακὸνἐποίησεν ; So in all three. The γάρ means “ Impossible; for what evil hath this man done?” This is well represented by the idiomatic “ Why,” which we owe to the Vulg. Quid enim, through Rhem. Cov. has “ What evil then, ” etc. The τρίτον refers to vv. 4 and 14. οὐδὲναἴτιονθανάτου . The θανάτου is a qualification added after failure of the mission to Herod (ver. 15). Previously it was οὐδὲναἴτιον without limitation (vv. 4, 14). In his weakness Pilate s to admit, “ Well, perhaps He may be guilty of something: but He is not guilty of a capital offence.” He began by saying that Herod had not found Him worthy of death. Now he says the same himself. In each case the proposal is the same,— παιδεύσαςἀπολύσω (vv. 16, 22). 23. εἐπέκειντοφ . μ . αἰτούμενοι . Comp. μᾶλλονἐπέκειτοἀξιὼν . μᾶλλονἐπέκειντοβλασφημοῦντες (Jos. Ant. xviii. 6, 6, xx. 5. 3). With φωναῖςμεγάλαις comp. 1:42, 4:33, 8:28, 17:15, etc. κατίσχυον . Comp. 21:36: “ they prevailed,” but not until Pilate had tried whether the παιδεύειν would satisfy them (John 19:1). Mt. and Mk. connect the scourging with the crucifixion, because it usually preceded this punishment in Roman law.1 It is extremely unlikely that Pilate allowed the scourging to be repeated. He merely separated it from the crucifixion in the hope that the latter would not be required. Note the impressive repetition of φωναί . 24. ἐπέκρινεν . “ He gave sentence” ; 2 Mac. 4:47?; 3 Mal 4:2. Here only N.T., but classical. For τὸαἴτημα comp. Philippians 4:6. 25. ἀπέλυσεν … παρέδωκεν . This tragic contrast is in all three; and all four use παρέδωκεν of the final surrender. Comp. Acts 3:14, and note the contrast between these aorists and the imperfect ᾐτοῦντο , “ kept demanding.” Both the repetition of τὸνδιὰατάσιν , κ .τ .λ . and the addition of τῷθελήματιαὐτῶν are peculiar to Lk. The writer thus emphasizes the enormity of the transaction. In the Gospel of Peter Herod is present at this point and gives the sentence. He does not wash his hands, and the blame is transferred to him and the Jews. So also in the Acta Pilati (B. x.) it is the Jews who hastily execute the sentence, as soon as Pilate has pronounced it. Comp. Justin (Try. 108.) ὃνσταυρωσάντωνἡμῶν . See Hastings, D.B. 1. p. 245. 26-32. § The Road to Calvary. Simon the Cyrenian, and the Daughters of Jerusalem. With the exception of ver. 26, the whole of this peculiar to Lk. In ver. 26 his wording is closer to Mark 15:21 than to Matthew 27:32. 26. Κυρηναῖον . Josephus tells of the origin of the Jewish colony in Cyrene (Apion. 2:4), and quotes Strabo respecting it (Ant. xiv. 7, 2): this gives us important information respecting branch of the Dispersion. Comp. Ant. xvi. 6. 1, 5; 1 Mac. 15:23; 2 Mac. 2:23. That Cyrene was the chief city of the district, which is the modern Tripoli, is shown by the name Cyrenaica and by Acts 2:10. For the literature of the subject see D. B.2 i. p. 688. This Simon may have been a member of the Cyrenian synagogue at Jerusalem (Acts 6:9). It has been proposed to identify in with “ Symeon that was called Niger,” who is mentioned in company with “ Lucius of Cyrene” (Acts 13:1). But Simon or Symeon was one of the commonest of names; and Lk. would probably have given the same designation in both books, if he had meant the same person. If the Rufus of Rom 16:13 is the Rufus of Mar 15:21, then the wife of Simon of Cyrene was well known to S. Paul. ἐρχόμενονἀπ ʼ ἀγροῦ . Mk. has the same. He might be taking “ a Sabbath day’ s journey” ; so that this is no proof as to the date. But he would not be likely to be coming in from the country on such a sabbatical day as Nisan 15. The gen. of TR. following A R Γ D etc. is probably a grammatical correction. ἐπέθηκαναὐτῷτὸνσταυρόν . His being a provincial may have made them more ready to make free with him. Perhaps it was only the cross-beam (patibulum) which he carried; and if he carried both pieces, they would not be fastened together as finally erected. On the shape of the cross see Justin, Try. xci.; 1, Apol. lv.; Iren. ii. 24, 4; Tert. Adv. Jud. x.; Ad. Nat. xii.; and Schaff’ s Herzog, art. “ Cross” ; Kraus, Real-Enc. d. Chr. Alt. ii. p. 225. At first Jesus carried it Himself (John 19:17), according to the usual custom. ἕκαστοςτῶνκακούργωνἐκφέρειτὸνἑσυτοῦσταυρόν (Plutarch, De Sera Num. Vind. 9. p. 554 B), as indicated by the word furcifer: but He was physically unable to continue to do so. Indeed it has been inferred from φέρουσιναὐτόν (Mark 15:22) that at length He was unable even to walk, and was therefore carried to Golgotha: but comp. Mark 1:32, Mark 7:32, Mark 8:22, Mark 9:19. On the other hand Lange interprets φέρεινὄπισθεν as meaning that Simon carried the lower end, while the top was still carried by Jesus. But this is not in harmony with ἵναἄρῃτὸνσταυρὸναὐτοῦ (Mt. Mk). Syr-Sin. here has, “ that he might bear the cross and follow Jesus.” See Hastings, D.B. 1. p. 529. The Basilidian Gnostics taught that Simon was crucified in the place of Jesus, being transformed by Jesus to look like Him, while Jesus in the form of Simon stood by and laughed at His enemies: and it was for this reason that they disparaged martyrdom, as being an honour paid, not to Christ, but to Simon the Cyrenian. See Photius, Bibl. cxiv. 292. Irenæ us (i. 24. 2) wrongly attributes that doctrine to Basilides himself, who was not docetic, but made the sufferings of Jesus an essential part of his system. Contrast Hippol. Refut. vii. 15 the Mahometans teach a similar doctrine; that God deceived the Jews and caused them to crucify a spy, or an emissary of Judas, or Judas himself, in mistake for Jesus. See Sale’ s Koran, pp. 38, 70, Chandos ed. 27. γυναικῶναἳἐκόπτοντο . This incident is in place in the “ Gospel of Womanhood” (1:39-56, 2:36-38, 7:11-15, 37-50, 8:1-3, 10:38-42, 11:27, 13:11-16). These are probably not the women who had ministered to Him previously (8:1-3), but sympathizers from the city. Comp. Zechariah 12:10-14. In the Gospels there is no instance of a woman being hostile to Christ. For ἐκόπτοντο comp. 8:52 and Matthew 11:17. The καί after αἳ — “ which also bewailed” (AV.)— must be omitted upon decisive evidence: A B C * D L L X. Boh. Sah. Vulg. etc. 28. στραφεὶςπρὸςαὐτάς . As they were following Him, this would hardly have been possible, if He was still carrying the cross: comp. 7:9, 44, 9:55, 10:23. For “ daughter of” = “ inhabitant of” comp. Isaiah 37:22; Zephaniah 3:14; Jeremiah 46:19; Ezekiel 16:46. μὴκλαίετεἐπ ʼ ἐμέ · πλὴνἐφ ʼ ἑαυτὰςκλαίετε . Comp. Judges 11:37, Judges 11:38. Note the chiasmus, making the contrast between ἐμέ א and ἑαυτάς very emphatic. His sufferings will be short, and are the road to glory: theirs will be prolonged, and will end in shame and destruction. Christ is not rebuking mere sentimentality or sympathetic emotion, as if the meaning were that they ought to lament their own sins rather than His sufferings. The form of command is similar to that in 10:20. They are not wrong in weeping for Him: nevertheless there is something else for which they may weep with far greater reason. That for which He wept (19:41-44) may rightly move them to tears,— the thought that a judgment which might have been averted must now take its course. For the legend of Veronica see D. of Chr. Biog. iv. p. 1107. Comp. an eloquent passage in a lecture on the relation of Art to Religion by Ruskin, in which he contrasts the barren emotion produced by realistic representations of the past agonies of Christ with sympathetic realization of the present miseries of mankind (Lecturers on Art, Oxford, 1870, § 57, p. 54). 29. ἔρχονταιἡμέραι . “ Days are coming” : comp. Hebrews 8:8; Jeremiah 7:32, Jeremiah 7:9:25, Jeremiah 7:16:14, Jeremiah 7:19:6, Jeremiah 7:23:5, Jeremiah 7:7, etc. In all these cases ἰδού precedes ἔρχονται . In Lk. the fut. is more common: 5:35, 17:22, 19:43, 21:6. Here the nom. to ἐροῦσιν is not τὰτέκναὑμῶν , but “ people, the world in general” : man wird sagen. Μακάριαιαἱστεῖραι . As a rule childless women are commiserated or despised (1:25, 36), but in these dreadful times they will be congratulated. Comp. Eur. Androm. 395; Alc. 882; Tac. Ann. ii. 75, 1. See on 1:24. 30. τότεἄρξονται . The nom. is the same as to ἐροῦσιν , — the population generally, not the women only; and the τότε means simply ἐνἐκείναιςταῖςἡμέραις . The wish is that the mountains may fall on them and kill them, not hide and protect them. Death is preferable to such terror and misery. So also in the original passage Hosea 10:8; comp. Revelation 6:6, and contrast Isaiah 2:19. 31. ὅτιεἰἐντῷὑγρῷξύλῳ . This is not a continuation of the cry of despair, but gives the reason for predicting such things. “ These horrors will certainly come, because, ” etc. In Syr-Sin. the ὅτι is omitted: “ Who do these things in the moist tree, what shall they do in the dry?” Proverbs of similar import are found in various languages, and are capable of many applications: comp. Proverbs 11:31; 1 Peter 4:17, 1 Peter 4:18. This saying is an argument à fortiori, and it may be easily applied in more than one sense here. (1) If the Romans treat Me, whom they admit to be innocent, in this manner, how will they treat those who are rebellious and guilty? (2) If the Jews deal thus with One who has come to save them, what treatment shall they receive themselves for destroying Him? (3) If they behave thus before their cup of wickedness is full, what will they commit when it overflows? The use of εύλον , lignum, for a tree as well as for timber is late Greek (Genesis 1:29, Genesis 1:2:9, Genesis 1:3:1; Isaiah 14:8; Psalms 1:3). In Ezekiel 21:3 [20:47] we have ξύλονχλωρόν and ξύλονξηρόν combined; but otherwise there is no parallel. For the delib. subjunct. γένηται comp. Matthew 26:54, and Ὤμοιἐγώ , τἱπάθω ; τίνύμοιμήκισταγένηται ; (Hom. Od. v. 465). See Burton., § 169. 32. ἕτεροικακοῦργοιδύο . This is the order of א B and Aegyptt., which has been corrected to ἕτεροιδύοκακοῦργοι , to avoid the implication that Jesus was a κακοῦργος . With a similar object Syr-Sin. with Codd. Colb. and Palat. omits ἕτεροι , and perhaps the omission of καί before ἕτεροι (Syr-Cur. b) is due to the same cause. Yet the implication is not necessary. We may retain the order of א B and translate, “ others. viz. two malefactors” ; or, “ two very different malefactors.” In the latter case κακοῦργος is used of Jesus with irony against those who treated Him as such: ἐντοῖςἀνόμοιςἐλογίσθη (Isaiah 53:12). But it is perhaps best to regard it as what Field calls “ a negligent construction” not likely to be misunderstood. In that case the AV. is courageously accurate with “ two other malefactors” : for the comma after “ other” is a later insertion of the printers; it is not found in the edition of 1611. These two κακοῦργοι were bandits (Matthew 27:38, Matthew 27:44; Mark 15:27). The hierarchy perhaps contrived that they should be crucified with Jesus in order to suggest similarity of crime. In the persecutions, Christians were sometimes treated in this way. Comp. πολλάκιςἅμακακούργοιςἐμπομπεύσαςτῷσταδίῳ (Eus. Mart. Pal. vi. 3). Note the characteristic σύν , and for ἀναιρεθῆναι see on 22:2. The Latin Versions render κακοῦργοι latrones (a b e f ff2 l), maligni (d), rei (c), nequam (Vulg.), to which are added the names of the robbers, Ioathas et Maggatras (1). Similarly in Mark 15:27 we have names added, Zoathan et Chammatha (c), and in Matthew 27:38, Zoathan et Camma. See on ver. 39. 33-38. The Crucifixion. The narrative is substantially the same as Matthew 27:33-44 and Mark 15:22-32; but it has independent features. 33. τόπον . This word is used by all three. The precise place is still a matter of controversy, and must remain so until excavation has determined the position of the old walls, outside which it certainly was. See MacColl. Contemp. Rev., Feb. 1893, pp. 167-188; D. B.2 i. pp. 1205, 1652-1657. τὸνκαλούμενονΚρανίον . See on 6:15. It was so called on account of its shape, not because skulls were lying there unburied, which would have outraged Jewish feeling. Lk. omits the Hebrew name Golgotha (Matthew 27:33; Mark 15:22; John 19:17), which would have conveyed in meaning to Greek readers, as he has already omitted (without Greek equivalent) Gethsemane and Gabbatha. It is from the Latin that the word “ Calvary” has come into all English Versions prior to RV., which has, “ the place which is called The Skull.” The ancient explanation that the place was thus called because of the skull of Adam, who was buried there by Noah after the Flood, is rejected by Jerome (on Mat_27, Migne, xxv. 209), as interpretatio mulcens aurem populi, nee tamen vera. But he wrongly adopts the view that it was a plac in which truncantur capita damnata, a view which even Fritzsche (on Matthew 27:33) has defended. No such place has ever existed in the East, least of all at Jerusalem: and such a place would be styled κρανίωντόπος not κρανίου . A rocky protrusion, resembling a skull in form, is no doubt the meaning. Thus Cyril of Jerusalem speaks of it as “ rising on high and showing itself to this day, and displaying even yet how because of Christ the rocks were then riven” (Catech. Lect. xiii. 39). For the attractive Adam legend compare Ambrose, ad loc.: Congruebat quippe ut ibi vitæ nostra primitia locarentur, ubi fuerant mortis exordia (Migne, xv. 1852). Chrys. and Euthym. do not o beyond tradition , which they do not expressly accept. See Tisch. app. crit. ad John 19:17. ἐσταύρωσαναὐτόν . It will always remain disputable whether our Lord’ s feet were nailed as well as His hands. John 20:25-27 proves that His hands were nailed: but it is not certain that Luke 24:39 has way reference to the nails. In the Gospel of Peter, before the burial, nails are taken from the hands only. Ewald refers to the Zeitschrift fü r die Kunde des Morgenlandes, i. 20, for evidence that in Palestine the mediæ val tradition limited the nailing to the hands; but this is less probable. ὃνμὲν … ὃνδέ … For this late use of the relative comp. Matthew 21:35, Matthew 21:22:15; 1 Corinthians 11:21; 2 Timothy 2:20; Romans 9:21. 34, a. As in we cases of 22:19b, 20 and of 43, 44, we have to consider whether this passage is part of the original text. For the evidence see the additional note at the end of the chapter. “ Few verses of the Gospels bear in themselves a surer witness to the truth of what they record than this first of the Words from the Cross: but it need not therefore have belonged originally to the book in which it is now included. We cannot doubt that it comes from an extraneous source. Nevertheless, like 22:43f.; Matthew 16:2 f., it has exceptional claims to be permanently retained, with the necessary safeguards, in its accustomed place” (WH. ii. App. p. 68). ὁδὲἸησοῦςἔλεγεν . The δέ and the imperf. refer back to ἐσταύρωσαναὐτόν : while they crucified Him, He in contrast to them was saying. ἄφεςαὐτοῖς . This cannot refer to the Roman soldiers, who were doing no more than their duty in executing a sentence which had been pronounced by competent authority. It was the Jews, and especially the Jewish hierarchy, who were responsible for what was being done: and but for the pressure which they had put upon him, even Pilate would have remained guiltless in this matter. What follows shows that the petition refers to the act of crucifixion, not to their sins generally. In this way He “ made intercession for the transgressors” (Isaiah 53:12); where, however, LXX has διὰτὰςἀνομίαςαὐτῶνπαρεδόθη . οὐγὰροἴδασιντίποιοῦσιν . This was true even of the rulers (Acts 3:17), still more of the people, and most of all of Pilate. Their ignorance of what they were doing in crucifying the Christ mitigates their guilt. Comp. 12:48, and ποιοῦσιν in ver. 31: also the use of the words attributed to James the Just at his martyrdom (Hegesip. ap. Eus. H.E. ii. 23, 16). 34, b. Διαμεριζόμενοι … κλῆρον . The wording is very similar in all three, and is influenced by Psalms 22:19, which Jn. (19:24, quotes verbatim from LXX. Some texts wrongly insert the quotation Matthew 27:35; but the Synoptists use the wording of the Psalm without directly quoting it. Jn. tells us that it was a quaternion of soldiers (comp. Acts 12:4) who were carrying out the procurator’ s sentence, and thus came to share the clothes as their perquisite. And Jn. distinguishes, as does the Heb. of Psalms 22:19, although LXX and the Synoptists do not, between the upper and under garments. This dividing of the clothes is one more detail in the treatment of Christ as a criminal, and a criminal whose career was closed. The sing. κλῆρον (א B C D L, b c d Aeth.) has been altered in some texts to κλήρους (A X, a e f ff2 Vulg. codd. plur. Syr-Sin.) to harmonize with usage, e.g. 1 Chronicles 25:8, 1 Chronicles 25:26:13, 1 Chronicles 25:14; Nehemiah 10:34, Nehemiah 11:1, etc. 35. θεωρῶν . ἐξεμυκτήριζον . Both words are from Psalms 22:8: πάντεςοἱθεωροῦντέςμεἐξεμυκτήρισάνμε . Mt. and Mk. use other words; but they add, what Lk. omits, the fulfilment of ἐκίησανκεεφαλήν . Lk. marks clearly four kinds of ill-treatment which Jesus received. The people ἱστήκειθεωρῶν , the rulers ἐξεμυκτήριζον , the soldiers ἐνέπαιξαν , and the robber ἐβλασφήμει . They form a sort of climax. The θεωρῶν implies vulgar curiosity, staring as at a spectacle (comp. ver. 48): for ἐκμυκτηρίζω comp. 16:14, where, as here, Cod. Bezae has subsannabant. For the form ἱστήκει see on ver. 10. Ἄλλουςἔσωσεν . This sarcasm is preserved in all three narratives, but Lk. alone gives the contemptuous οὗτος and ὁἐκλεκτός . Comp. 9:35. Jesus was elected from all eternity to fulfil all there things. Comp. Enoch, xl. 5. WH. and RV. put a comma after τοῦΘεοῦ , which belongs to ὁΧριστός , not to ὁἐκλεκτός . TR., following A C3 Q X Γ etc., places ὁ before τοῦΘεοῦ , while C*, ff2 have ὁἐκλεκτός before Θεοῦ . Syr-Sin. supports this combination. D has εἰυἱὸςεἶτοῦΘεοῦεἰΧριστὸςεἷὁἐκλεκτός , si filius es dei si christus es electus; and the insertion of υἱός is found in other texts. The σὺναὐτοῖς after ἄρχοντες (A ΓΔΠ , f Vulg. Syr-Sin.) is an insertion to harmonize with Mt. and Mk. 36, 37. This mockery by the soldiers is peculiar to Lk. Apparently it was the hierarchy who took the initiative. They told the King of Israel to come down from the cross; the soldiers told the King of the Jews to save Himself. Note the change of tense (ἐξεμυκτήριζον , εἐέπαιξαν , which implies that the soldiers were less persistent in their derision than the rulers. The reading ἐνέπαιζον (A C D Q etc.) has all the look of a correction. 36. ὄξοςπροσφέροντες . Offering some of their sour wine or posca, which the Evangelists call ὄξος , perhaps in connexion with ἐπότισάνμεὄξος (Psalms 68:22). Probably they could not have reached His lips with a vessel held in the hand; otherwise the sponge would no have been placed on a stalk, however short (John 19:29): but there is no reason for supposing that Christ’ s feet were on a level with the heads of the spectators, as pictures sometimes represent. Syr-Sin. omits the words. Comp. the words which legend has put into the mouth of His Mother at the cross: κλῖνονσταυρέ , ἵναπεριλαβοῦσατὸνυἱόνμουκαταφιλήσωτὸνἐμὸνυἰόν (Acta Pilati, B. x.). ἧνδὲκαὶἐπιγραφὴἐπ ʼ αὐτῷ . For ἐπιγραφή Mt. has τ . αἰτίαναὐτοῦ , Mk. ἡἐπιγραφὴτῆςαἰτίαςαὐτους , Jn. τίτλον . Thus Mk. again has the whole expression of which Mt. and Lk. have each a part: comp. 4:40, 5:13, 22:34. The name and crime of the person executed was sometimes hung round his neck as he went to the place of crucifixion and then fastened to the cross. The καί suggests that this inscription was an additional mockery. The wording differs in all four Gospels, and perhaps it varied in the three languages. It was directed against the hierarchy rather than against Jesus. All four variations contain the offensive words “ The King of the Jews” (John 19:21). But Lk. regards it as an insult to Jesus. In the Gospel of Peter the wording is “ This is the King of Israel, ” just as at the mock homage the address is “ Judge righteausly, O King of Israel.” The words γράμμασινἙλληνικοῖςκαὶῬωμαικοῖςκαὶἙβραικοῖς are almost certainly a gloss from Joh_19. They are omitted in א c a B C* L, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Boh. Sah., and by the best editors. The authorities which insert the words differ as to the order of the languages and as to the introductory words γεγραμμένη or ἐπιγεγραμμένη , ἐπ ʼ αὐτῷ or ἐπ ʼ αὐτῷγεγραμμένη . The omission of the statement, if it were genuine, would be unintelligible. Comp. Jos. Ant. xiv. 10, 2; B. J. vi. 2, 4, v. 5, 2. In the inscription itself the order of א B L, ὁβας . τῶνἸ . οὗτος , is to be preferred. D has the same, adding ἐστιν after οὗτος , rex Judæ orum hic est. Contrast Eus. H. E. v. 1, 44. 39-43. § The Two Robbers. Mt. (27:44) and Mk. (15:32) merely state that those who were crucified with Him reproached Him. Harmonists suggest that during the first hour both robbers reviled Jesus, and that one of them (who may have heard Jesus preach in Galilee) afterwards changed his attitude and rebuked his comrade. So Origen, Chrysostom, Jerome, Theophylact, Euthymius, on Mat_27. But Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, and Augustine confine the reviling to one robber, who in Mt. and Mk. is spoken of in the plur. by synecdoche. See Maldonatus on Matthew 27:44: wt Suarez he adopts the latter view. Or they insist upon the difference between ὠνείδιζον , which Mt. and Mk. use of the two robbers, and ἐβλασφήμει , which Lk. uses of one of them. Both bandits reproached Jesus (perhaps for not having them in their revolt against existing conditions of society); but only one of them railed upon Him. It is much simpler to suppose that Mt. and Mk. regard the two λῃσταί as a class, to which the conduct of either of them may be hear attributed. Christ’ s conversation with the penitent robber would not be heard by many. The constant reviling (imperf.) of the other would be much more widely known. That ὀνειδίζω may mean much the same as βλασφημέω is seen from 6:22; Romans 15:3; 1 Peter 4:14. The two verbs are combined 2 Kings 19:22, and seem to be synonymous. Mt. and Mk. would hardly have omitted the incident of the penitent robber, if they had known it; but here Lk. once more other sources of information. The incident would have special interest for him as illustrating the doctrine that salvation is open to all. In the Arabic Gospel of the Infancy (xxiii.) the names of the two robbers are given as Titus bribes Dumachus. Titus bribes Dumachus to release the Holy Family, whom they had captured. In the Greek form of the Gospel of Nicodemus (Acta Pilati x.) the penitent malefactor is Dysmas, and the other is nameless. In the Latin form (Gesta Pilati x.) the two are Dismas and Gestas. See small print note on ver. 32. 39. εἶςδὲτῶνκρεμασθέντων . When used of hanging on a cross or gibbet ἐπὶξύλου is commonly added (Acts 5:30, Acts 5:10:39; Galatians 3:13; Genesis 40:19, Genesis 40:22; Deuteronomy 21:22, Deuteronomy 21:23, etc.): but here the context is sufficient. Οὐχὶσὺεἶ . This is the true reading (א B C* L and most Versions, including Syr-Sin.) rather than Εἰσὺεἶ (A Q R X etc. c f q vulg.). “ Art thou not” is a more bitter taunt than “ If thou art.” D d e omit the utterance, and 1 substitutes qui destruebas templum et in tribus diebus reæ dificabas illum, salvumm te fac nunc et descende de cruce. 40. ΟὐδὲφοβῇσὺτὸνΘεόν . The οὐδέ cannot be taken with either σύ (De W. Nö sg.) or τὸνΘεόν (Pesh.), but only with φοβῇ . “ Dost thou not even fear,” to say nothing of penitent submission (Schanz). “ Dost not even thou fear” would be οὐδὲσὺφοβῇ ; Vulg. Neque tu times, Beza Ne tu quidem times, and Godet Et toi non plus, tu ne crains donc point, are all inaccurate. The meaning is, “ You and He will soon have to appear before God. Does not even fear restrain you from adding to your sins; whereas He has nothing to answer for.” 41. οὐδὲνἄτοπον . A meiosis: “ nothing unbecoming;” still less anything criminal; Acts 25:5; Job 27:6, 34:12, 35:13; Prov. 24:55; Pro_2 Mac. 14:23. D has οὐδὲνπονηρὸνἔπραξεν and then adds a characteristic amplification: καὶστραφεὶςπρὸςτὸνκύριονεἶπεναὐτῷΜνήσθητίμουἐντῇἡμέρᾳτῆςἐλεύσεώςσου . ἀποκριθεὶςδὲὁἸησοῦςεἶπεναὐτῷτῷεπλησοντι (?) Θάρσει , σήμερονμετ ʼ ἐμοῦἔσῃἐντῷπαραδείσῳ . Respondens autemm Jesus dixit qui objurgabat animæ uior esto, hodie mecum eris in paradiso. See on ver. 53 and 6:5. 42. Ἰησοῦ , μνήσθητὶμου . “ Jesus, remember me,” The insertion of κύριε (A R X ΓΔ etc. and most Versions) was made because Ἰησοῦ was mistaken for the dat. after ἔλεγεν : dicebat ad Jesum, Domine, memento mei (Vulg.). So also Syr-Sin. Comp. ἀλλὰμνήσθητίμουδιὰσεαυτοῦὅτανεὖσοιγένηται (Genesis 40:14). The robber knew that he had only a few hours to live, and therefore this prayer implies a belief in a future state in which Jesus is to receive him in His Kingdom. Possibly he believed that Christ would raise him from the dead. In any case his faith in one who is crucified with him is very remarkable. Some saw Jesus raise the dead, and did not believe. The robber sees Him being put to death, and yet believes. Contempserunt Judæ i mortuos suscitantem: non contempsit latro secum cruce pendentem (Aug. Serm. xxiii. 3). D again amplifies with στραφεὶςπρὸςτ . κύριον . ἐντῇβασιλείᾳσου . This is perhaps the best supported reading: comp. Matthew 16:28, Matthew 25:31. It means “ when Thou comest in the glory and power of Thy Kingdom” : whereas εἰςτὴνβασιλείανσου (B L, Vulg., Hil Ambr.) would mean “ comest into Thy Kingdom.” The former refers to Christ’ s return in glory, the latter to his return to the Father through death. The alteration of ἐν into εἰς as more appropriate to ἔλθῃς seems more probable than the converse. That the robber had heard what is recorded John 18:36, John 18:37 is possible, but not probable. He believes that Jesus is the Messiah, and he knows that the Messiah is to have a kingdom. It is all but certain that the robber was a Jew. This is antecedently probable; and to a heathen the word “ paradise” would hardly have been intelligible. There is no reason for supposing that the robber felt the need of obtaining forgiveness from the Messiah. To the Jew death is an expiation for sin. In the “ Confession on a Death Bed” in the Authorised Daily Prayer Book of the United Hebrew Congregations we have, “ O may my death be an atonement for all my sins, iniquities, and transgressions, of which I have been guilty against Thee” (p. 317). 43. Ἀμήνσοιλέγω . As usual, this introduces something of special importance, or beyond expectation: 4:24, 12:37, 18:17, 29, 21:32. B C* L have this order; others the common Ἀμὴνλέγωσοι . σήμερον . To take this with λέγω robs it of almost all its force. When taken with what follows it is full of meaning. Jesus knows that both He and the robber will die that day, and He grants him more than he had asked or expected. Uberior est gratia quam precatio. Ille enim rogabat ut memor esset sui Dominus cum venisset in regnum suum: Dominus autem ait illi: Amen, amen dico tibi: Hodie mecum eris in paradiso. Ubi Christus, ibi vita, ibi regnum (Ambr. ad loc.). μετ ʼ ἐμοῦἔσῃ . Not merely in My company , but sharing with Me. The promise implies the continuance of consciousness after death. If the dead are unconscious, the assurance to the robber that he will be with Christ after death would be empty of consolation. ἐντῷπαραδείσῳ . The word, said to be of Persian origin, is used in various senses in Scripture: 1. “ a park or pleasure-ground” (Nehemiah 2:8; Son 4:13; Ecclesiastes 2:5); 2. “ the garden of Eden” (Genesis 2:8-10, Genesis 2:15, Genesis 2:16, 3:Genesis 2:1-3, Genesis 2:8-10, etc.); 3. “ Abraham’ s Bosom,” i.e. the resting-place of the souls of the just until the resurrection (the meaning here); 4. “ a region in heaven,” perhaps identical with “ the third heaven” (2 Corinthians 12:4). It is doubtful whether ὁπαράδεισοςτοῦΘεοῦ (Revelation 2:7) is the same as 3 or 4, or is yet a fifth use. By His use of the word, Jesus neither confirms nor corrects Jewish beliefs on the subject. He assures the penitent that He will do far more than remember him at some unknown time in the future: this very day He will have him in His company in a place of security and bliss. See Wetst. Epiphanius (317, 347) states that Marcion omitted this promise of Christ to the robber. Origen sometimes adds τοῦΘεοῦ to παραδείσῳ : e l r add patris. Syr-Cur. substitutes in horto Eden. See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 148. 44-49. The Death. In substance, and sometimes in wording Lk. is the same as Matthew 27:45-56 and Mark 15:33-41. But the words recorded in ver. 46 are peculiar to this Gospel, and once more (comp. vv. 27-32) are among the most precious details in the history of the Passion. 44. ἤδηὡσείὥραἔκτη . This is Lk.’ s first note as to the time of day (22:66), and he qualifies it with his favourite ὡσεί (3:23, 9:14, 28, 22:41, 59, 24:11). In days in which there were no clocks, and on a day on which the darkness and the earthquake caused so much disturbance of the ordinary signs of the hour, very large margin for inaccuracy may be covered by ὡσεί . All three Synoptists give the sixth hour, i.e. about noon, as the time when the darkness began; while Mk. (15:25) gives the third hour as the time of the Crucifixion. On the apparent discrepancy between these statements and John 19:14 see Ramsay in the Expositor for March 1893 and June 1896. The ἤδη is in B C* L Boh. ἐφ ʼ ὅληντὴνγῆν . “ Over the whole land” (Orig. Luth: Calv. Bez. Mald. Nö sg. Schanz, Hahn, Tyn. Con Gen. RV.), rather than “ over all the earth” (Euthym. Beng. De W. Mey. Godet, AV.). For “ land” comp. 4:25, 21:23: for “ earth” 21:35; Acts 1:8. The Gospel of Peter has ἦνδὲμεσημβρίακαὶακότοςκατέσχεπᾶσαντὴνἸουδαίαν , where, as here, the time of day and the darkness are co-ordinate : Win. liii. 3, p. 543. These exceptional phenomena, as Godet points out, may be attributed either to a supernatural cause or to a providential coincidence. On ne peut mé connitre une relation profonde, d’ un cô té , entre l’ homme et la nature, de l’ autre, entre l’ humanité et Christ. The sympathy of nature with the sufferings of the Son of God is what seems to be indicated in all three accounts, which are here almost verbally the same; and possibly the Evangelists believed the darkness to have enveloped the whole earth. 45. τοῦἡλίουἐλέποντος . The reading is doubtful; but this is probably correct, although ἐλιπόντος may possibly be correct. “ The sun failing,” or “ the sun having failed.” is the meaning: and we must leave it doubtful whether Lk. supposes that there was an eclipse (which is impossible at full moon), or uses ἐκλείπειν in its originally vague sense of “ fail.” The latter is probable. Neither in LXX nor elsewhere in N.T. is ἐκλείπω used of the sun. The fact that it might mean an eclipse, and that an eclipse was known to be impossible, would tempt copyists to substitute a phrase that would be free from objection; whereas no one would want to change ἐσκοτίσθηὁἣλιος . The Gospel of Peter states that “ many went about with lamps, supposing it is night.” and that the darkness lasted until Jesus was taken from the cross, when the earthquake took place: “ then the sun shone out, and it was found to be the ninth hour.” See Charles. Assump. of Moses, 41, 87. The evidence stands thus:— τοῦἡλίουἐκλείπόντος (or ἐκλιπόντος א L al., Tisch.) א B C* (?) L codd. ap. Orig. Aegyptt. Orig. “ Cels.” WH. RV. Weiss. καὶἐσκοτίσθηὁἥλιος A C3 D Q R X Γ etc., codd. ap. Orig-lat. Latt. Syr. Marcion ap. Epiph. Lach. Treg. D has ἐσκ . δέ . The Latin renderings are intenebricatus est sol (a),tenebricavit sol (c), obscuratus est sol (d e f Vulg.). See WH. ii. App. pp. 69-71 for a full discussion of the evidence. Julius Africanus (c. a.d. 220) in his Chronica opposes the heathen historian Thallus for explaining this darkness as an eclipse, which at the Passover would be impossible (Routh, Rel Sacr. ii. pp. 297, 476). In the Acta Pilati, A. xi. the Jews are represented as explaining away the darkness in a similar manner: ἔκλειψιςἡλίουγέγονενκατὰτὸεἰωθός ! Origen (Con. Cels, ii. 33, 59; comp. 14) tells us that Phlegon (a freedman of Hadrian) recorded the earthquake and the darkness in his Chronicles. Eusebius in his Chronicle quotes the words of Phlegon, stating that in the 202nd Olympiad (4th year of the 203rd, Arm. Vers.) there was a very great eclipse; also that there was a great earthquake in Bithynia, which destroyed a great part of Nicæ a (Eus. Chron. p. 148, ed. Schœ ne). It is impossible to determine whether the events recorded by Phlegon have any connexion with the phenomenoa which accompanied the death of Christ. ἐσχίσθηδὲτὸκαταπέτασμα . Between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies (Exodus 26:31; Leviticus 21:23, Leviticus 21:24:3; Hebrews 6:19; comp. Hebrews 10:20) there was a curtain called τὸδεύτερονκαταπέτασμα (Hebrews 9:3), to distinguish it from the curtain which separated the outer court from the Holy Place. The latter was more accurately, but not invariably, called τὸκάλυμμα (Exodus 27:16; Numbers 3:25). But Jewish traditions state that there were two curtains, one cubit apart, between the Holy Place and the Holy of Holies, the space between them being called τάραξις because of the perplexity which led to this arrangement (J. Light. foot on Matthew 27:51). It is not clear how many curtains are included in τὰκαταπετάσματα in 1 Mac. 4:51. It is futile to speculate how the curtain was rent; but the fact would be well known to the priests, “ a great company” of whom soon afterwards became “ obedient to do faith” (Acts 6:7). The μέσον of Lk. is more classical than the εἰςδύο of Mt. Mk. and the Gospel of Peter. 1 46. φωνήσαςφωνῇμεγάλῃ . All three mention this loud voice, which seems to indicate that Jesus did not die of exhaustion. Comp. Stephen’ s cry (Acts 7:60). But here the fondness of Lk. for cognate words is conspicuous. While he has φωνήσαςφωνῇ , Mt. has κράξαςφωνῇ , and Mk. ἀφεὶςφωνήν : comp. 2:8 and 9, 7:29, 12:50, 17:24, 22:15: and see on 11:46. The aorist does not prove that φωνήσας is not to be taken with εἶπεν , and we may suppose that what was uttered with a loud voice was the saying, “ Father, into Thy hands,” etc. Comp. the freq. ἀποκριθεὶςεἶπεν . But it is admissible to make the φωνήσας refer to “ It is finished,” or to some separate inarticulate cry. It is quite unnecessary to suppose that Lk. has here taken the words of Psa 31:6 and attributed them to Jesus, in order to express His submissive trust in God at the moment of death. Are we to suppose that Jesus did not know Psa_31? or that, if He did not, such a thought as this could not occur to Him? εἰςχεῖράςσουπαρατίθεμαιτ . πν . μ . The psalmist, thinking of a future death, has παραθήσομαι , which L and inferior MSS. read here. The voluntary character of Christ’ s death is very clearly expressed in this last utterance, as in ἀφῆκεντὸπνεῦμα (Mt.) and παρέδωκεντὸπνεῦμα (Jn.). None of the four says ἀπέθανεν , or ἐκοιμήθη , or ἐτελεύτησεν . Quis ita dormit quando voluerit, sicut Jesus mortuus est quando voluit? Quis ita vestem ponit quando voluerit, sicut se carne exuit quando voluit? Quis ita cum voluerit abit quomodo cum voluit obiit? (Aug. Tr. in Job. xix. 30). To urge that this utterance is not consistent with ver. 43 is futile, unless we believe that God is excluded from paradise(Psalms 16:10, 139:8; Acts 11:27). Strauss, Renan, and others are unwilling to decide whether all the Seven Words from the Cross are to be rejected as unhistorical. Keim will commit himself to no more than “ the two probable facts, that shortly before His death Jesus uttered a cry of lamentation, and when on the point of dying a death-cry” (vi. p. 162). One asks once more, Who was capable of inventing such words? Compare the inventions in the apocryphal gospels. 47. ὁἐκατοντάρχης . The one who was there to superintend the execution, supplicio præ positus: all three speak of him as “ the centurion.” Legend has invested him with the name Longinus (Acta Pilati, B. xi.), which perhaps originally meant the soldier with the λόγχη (John 19:34), and later writers make both him and the soldier with the spear die a martyr’ s death. See D. of Chr. Ant. p. 1041. τὸγενόμενον . Not merely the manner of Christ’ s death, but its extraordinary circumstances. Mt. has τὸνσεισμὸνκαὶτὰγινόμενα , Mk. ὅτιοὕτωςἐξέπνευσεν . Mt. says that those with him joined in the exclamation, and that they “ feared greatly.” ἐδόξαζεντὸνΘεόν . He glorified God unconsciously by this public confession, by saying that Jesus was no criminal, but had died in accordance with God’ s will. The statement is the Evangelist’ s appreciation of this heathen’ s attitude towards the death of Christ. Some, however, suppose that the centurion was a proselyte, and that He first consciously praised God, and then added the remark which is recorded: comp. the use of the phrase 2:20, 5:25, 26, 7:16, 13:13, 13:15, 18:43; Acts 4:21, Acts 11:18, Acts 21:20. The good character of the centurions in N.T. confirms the statement of Polybius, that as a rule the best men in the army were promoted to this rank (vi.24. 9). See small print on 7:5. A C P Q X etc. have ἐδόξασε . Ὄντως … δίκαιοςἧν . Mt. and Mk. have ἀληθῶςΘεοῦυἱὸςἧν . Harmonists suggest that the centurion said δίκαιος before the earthquake, and Θεοῦυἱός after it. More probably the two expressions represent one and the same thought: “ He was a good man, and quite right in calling God His Father” (vv. 34, 46). The centurion would not mean much by υἱὸςΘεοῦ . See Aug. De Cons. Ev. iii. 20. 48. συνπαραγενόμενοι … θεωρίαν . Neither word occurs elseWhere in N.T. For θεωρία comp. Daniel 5:7; Dan_2 Mac. 5:26, 15:12; 3 Mac. 5:24. Note the πάντες here and ver. 49. Neither Mt, nor Mk. has it: comp. 20:18, 45, 21, 29, 23:1. The multitude would be very great, owing to the Passover, and thousands would see Jesus hanging dead upon the cross. They had looked on the whole tragedy as a sight, spectaculum (ver. 35). This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/ 24. The Resurrection and the Ascension. It is well known that the difficulty of harmonizing the different accounts of the Resurrection given by the Evangelists and by S. Paul is great; and this difficulty is perhaps at a maximum when the narrative of Lk, is compared with the others. Here, as so often in the Gospels, we have not sufficient knowledge to piece together the different fragments which have come down to us, and consequently the evidence for important facts is not what we might antecedently have expected or desired. But our expectations and wishes are not adequate criteria, and it is no paradox to say that the difficulty of harmonizing the various narratives is in itself a security for their general truthfulness. Dishonest witnesses would have made the evidence more harmonious. As it is, each witness fearlessly tells his own story according to the knowledge which he possesses, and is not careful as to whether it agrees with what may have been told elsewhere. Nevertheless there is agreement in the following important particular:— 1. Resurrection itself is not described. Like all beginnings, whether in nature or in history, it is hidden from view. (Contrast the attempt at description in the Gospel of Peter.) 2. The manifestations, while confined to disciples, were made to disciples who were wholly unexpectant of a Resurrection. The theory that they were visions or illusions, arising from intense and unreasoning expectation, is contrary to all the evidence that has come down to us. On the contrary, 3. They were received with doubt and hesitation at first, and mere reports on the subject were rejected. 4. The evidence begins with the visit of women to the tomb very early on the first day of the week, and the first sign was the removal of the stone from the door of the tomb. 5. Angels were seen before the Lord was seen. 6. He was seen on various occasions by various kinds of witnesses, male and female, both individuals and companies, both sceptical and trusting. 7. The result was a conviction, which nothing ever shook, that “ the Lord own indeed” and present with them (see Wsctt. on John 20:1: he gives a tentative arrangement of the events of the first Easter Day, which at least shows that there is no serious discrepancy between the four narratives) Sadler asserts, and Godet endeavours to show, that each narrative is determined by the purpose which each Evangelist had in view in writing; but in most cases the distinctions are not very convincing. Nearly the whole of Lk.’ s narrative is peculiar to him, the partial exceptions being vv. 1-6 and 9, 10. The nucleus of the whole is the account of the walk to Emmaus (vv. 13-43); and the first part of the chapter is an introduction to this graphic account, with special reference to vv. 22, 23.See Loofs, Die Aufstehungsberichte. An excellent opportunity of comparing six forms of the Old Latin (a b c d e f) with one another and with the Vulgate is given in Scrivener’ s edition of Codex Bezae in connexion with a large portion of this chapter. He prints the first twenty-four verses of this chapter as given in these authorities in seven parallel columns (pp. 36, 37). This passage is “ rich in peculiar and idiomatic expressions, and little liable to be corrupted from the Synoptic Gospels.” The result, he thinks, is to show that the Latin of Codex Bezae was made “ immediately from its Greek text,” which it generally servilely follows; but that occasionally the translator was led away by his recollection of the Old Latin, “ sometimes for whole verses together,” even when the Old Latin differed from e Greek text which be was translating. Adhuc sub judice lis est. 1-11. The Visit of the Women to the Tomb and the Vision of Angels. Comp, Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; John 20:1-10. Lk. and Jn. mention two Angels; Mt. and Mk. mention only one: but we know too little about the manner of Angel appearances to be sure that Lk. and Jn. mention the same two Angels, or that Mt. and Mk. mention the same one. In the other two cases of similar difference (the Gerasene demoniacs and the blind men at Jericho) it is Mt. who mentions two, while Lk. gives only one. In all three cases Mk. mentions only one. Where, out of two or more, only one is spokesman, he is necessarily remembered. The other or others may easily be ignored or forgotten. It is an exaggeration to call such differences absolute discrepancies. Lk. records only those appearances of the risen Lord which took place in Judæ a. 1. τῇδὲμιᾷτῶνσαββάτων . “ But on the first day of the week.” The δέ corresponds to the previous μέν : they rested on the sabbath, but the next day they did not. Jn. has the same expression (20:1), which literally means “ but on day one of the week,” una antem sabbati (Vulg.). Cov. here translates “ upon one of the Sabbathes,” and in Jn. “ upon one daye of the Sabbath.” But here with Cran. he rightly has “ But” (RV.) and not “ And” (Rhem.) or “ Now” (AV.). Comp. Acts 20:7; Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2; John 20:19; Revelation 9:12. This use of the cardinal for the ordinal is Hebraistic: Genesis 1:5; Esther 3:6; Psa_23. tit. In class. Grk. it occurs only in combination with an ordinal: τῷἐνὶκαὶτριηκοστῷ (Hdt. v. 89, 2). ὅρθρουβαθέως . It is doubtful whether βαθέως is the Attic form of the gen. of βαθύς (De W. Nö sg. Alf.) or an adv. (Mey. Weiss). The former is probable; for ὅρθροςβαθύς occurs (Aristoph Vesp.216; Plat. Crit. 43 A; see esp. Prot. 310 A; Philo, De Vita Mosis, i. 32), and 2 Corinthians 11:23 does not favour the latter. For ὅρθρου comp. [Jn.] 8:2, Jeremiah 25:4, Jeremiah 26:5. τὸμνῆμα . With the exception of Mar 5:3, Mark 5:5, Mark 5:15:46; Revelation 11:9, the word is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (8:27, 23:53; Acts 2:29, Acts 7:16). The common word is μνημεῖον (11:44, 47, 23:55, 24:2, 9, 12, 22, 24, etc.); but Mt sometimes has τάφος (23:27, 29, 27:61, 64. 66, 28:1; comp. Romans 3:13). RV. “ tomb” for μνῆμα and μνημεῖον and “ sepulchre” for τάφος . A C2 D X Λ etc. d f q Syrr. (Cur. Sin. Pesh. Harcl. Hier.) Sah. Arm. Aeth. (most MSS.) add καίτινεςσὺναὐταῖς , and D c d Sah. add from Mark 16:3 ἐλογίζοντοδὲἐνἐανταῖςτίςἅραἀποκυλίσειτὸνλίθον ; א B C* L 33, 124 a b c e ff21 Vulg. Bob. Aeth. (some MSS.) omit. The insertion is a gloss from ver. 10 and Mark 16:1, Mark 16:3. 2. εὖρονδὲτὸνλίθον . Lk. has not yet mentioned it, but he speaks of it as well known or as usual. All three use ἀποκυλίω of stone, while Jn. has ἠρμένονἐκ ; the verb occurs nowhere else N.T.Comp. Genesis 29:3, Genesis 29:8, Genesis 29:10; Judith 13:9. 3. τοῦκυρίουἸησοῦ . The combination occurs nowhere else in the Gospels, although possibly right [Mk.] 16:19; but it is frequent in Acts (1:21, 4:33, 8:16, etc.) and Epistles. Here the words are possibly a very early insertion. See note on Western Noninterpolations at the end of this chapter. 4. καὶἐγένετοἐντῶἀπορεῖσθαιαὐτὰςπερὶτούτου ,καὶἰδού . Note the strongly Hebraistic construction, so common in Lk., and see additional note, p. 45. The Latin Versions differ greatly. dum aporiarentur (d), hæ sitarent (f), stuperent (a c) ments contristarentur (ff2). mente consternatæ essent (Vulg,). The last is wrong both in verb and tense.Aporiari occurs in vulg. 2 Corinthians 4:8; Isaiah 59:16; Ecclus. 18:6, and in Irenæ us, ii. 7. 1. 2. ἄνδρεςδύο . The plur. agrees with ἀγγέλων in ver. 23. For ἀνήρ of an Angel in human form comp. Acts 1:10, Acts 1:10:30; for ἐπέστησαν see on 2:9; and for ἐσθής see on 23:11. Only here and 17:24 in N. T. does ἀστράπτω occur. Instead of ἐσθῆτιἀστραπτούσῃ (א B D;. Latt. Orig. Eus.) TR. has ἐσθήσεσινἀστραπτούσαις with A C D L D etc., Sah. Bob. Arm. L has ἐσθήσεσινλευκαῖς Syr-Sin. “ their garments were dazzling,” ἔσθησις occurs Acts 1:10 only. See Deissmann, Bible Studies. p. 263. The contrast between the Gospel of Peter and the Canonical Gospels is still more marked in the account of the Resurrection than in that of the Passion. There the watchers see δύοἄνδρας come down from heaven; and ἀμφότεροιοἱνεανίσκοι enter the tomb. But the watchers see τπεῖςἄνδρας come out of the tomb. Then ἄνθρωπόςτις comes down from heaven and enters the tomb; and the women find τινανεανίσκον sitting in the tomb, and be ad them. 5. ἐφόβωνδὲγενομένων . In N. T. the use of ἔμφοβος (always with γίνεσθαι is almost confined to Lk. (ver. 37; Acts 10:4, Acts 10:24:25; Revelation 11:13): in LXX Ecclus. 19:24. The detail κλινουσῶντὰπρόσωπαεἰςτ . γῆν is peculiar to Lk Note πρὸςαὐτάς : Mt. and Mk. have the dat. Τίζητεῖτετὸνζῶνταμετὰτῶννεκρῶν ; A rebuke: comp. 2:49 There is possibly a reference to Isaiah 8:19, τίἐκζητοῦσινπερὶτῶνζώντωντοὺςνεκρούς ; They ought to have remembered His assurance that on the third day He would rise again. 6. οὐκἔστινὧδε , ἀλλὰἠγέρθη . Like the doubtful words in ver. 3, this sentences is wanting in D and important Latin authorities. A reason for the omission is hard to find. A very early insertion from Mark 16:6 = Matthew 28:6 may be suspected: see now at the end of this chapter. μνήσθητε . Angels “ may be employed in endless ways of which we can form no idea, but we have Scripture warrant for supposing that they call things to remembrance, and it is not going much her to suppose that they put thoughts into people’ s minds” (Latham, A Service of Angels; p, 162). ὡςἐλάλησενὑμῖν . The ὡς is not exactly ὅτι , but suggests the wording of the statement: in both 9:22 and 18:32, 33 the important “ on the third day” is predicted. The whole of this to end of ver. 8 is peculiar to Lk. On the other hand Lk, who records no appearances in Galilee, omits προάγειὑμᾶςεἰςτήνΓαλιλαίαν , which refers back to Mark 14:28; Matthew 26:32. 7. δεῖ . See on 4:43 and 9:22. 9. ὑποστρέψασαι . Lk.’ s favourite word: Mt. has ἀπελθοῦσαι and Mk. ἐξελθοῦσαι . Lk. omits the speed with which they returned in mingled fear and joy. ἀπήγγειλαν . Mt. says the same (28:8), but Mk. says οὐδενὶοὐδὲνεἶπαν , ἐφοβοῦντογάρ . If we had the conclusion of Mk.’ s Gospel we should know how this apparent contradiction is to be explained. Obviously they did not remain silent about it for the rest of their lives, but only so long as fear kept them silent. When the fear passed away, they told their tale to the disciples (not merely to the Apostles) in accordance with the angelic charge (Matthew 28:7). But it is perhaps simpler to suppose that Mt. and Lk. here give, as Mt. and Mk. do in the case of the crucified robbers, the tradition which was generally current, and which attributed to all the women what was true of only one, viz. Mary Magdalen. She on her return told the Apostles, while the others kept silence through fear. A little later no doubt all told to all. Note the characteristic πάντα and πᾶσιν . Mt. has neither, and he sums up “ the Eleven and all the rest” in τοῖςμαθηταῖςαὐτοῦ . 10. The other Evangelists give the names of the women at the beginning of the narrative. All four place Mary Magdalen first, and Jn. mentions no one else; but οὐκοἴδαμεν (20:2) implies that others were with her. “ Mary the [mother] of James” or “ the other Mary” is mentioned by all three; Joana by Lk. alone, and Salome by Mk. alone. For Joana see on 8:3: it is from her that Lk. may have got both these details, and also what he relates 23:8-12. Here only does the order ἡΜαγδ . Μαρία occur: elsewhere ΜαρίαἡΜαγδ . (so D here). All English Versions previous to RV. follow a false reading, and make one sentence of this verse. There are two sentences. “ Now they were Mary Magdalen, and Joana, and Mary the mother of James” : these were the women specially referred to in ver. 9. “ Also the other women with them told these things unto the Apostles.” The evidence against the second αί is overwhelming (א * A B C A L G H etc. b d e ff2 q Sah. Aeth.), and the reason for its insertion is obvious. Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin. interpret ἡἸακώβου “ the daughter of James.” There is little doubt that “ mother” is meant, and that James is not the Lord’ s brother, the first president of the Church of Jerusalem. She is called “ the mother of James and Joses” (Mark 15:40), and “ the mother of Joses” (Mark 15:47); and she is probably the same as “ Mary the [wife] of Clopas” (John 19:25). See J.B. Mayor, Ep. of St. James, Macmillan, 1892, p. 15, perhaps the best discussion of the vexed question about the brethren of the Lord. 11. ἐνώπιοναὐτῶν . “ In their sight,” in the judgment of the Apostles and others; apud illos (c), in conspeetu eorum (d), coram illis (f) apostolis (1). For ἐνώπιον see small print on 1:15, and for ὠσεί on 1:56. λῆρος . “ Nonsense” ; the word “ is applied in medical language to the wild talk of the sick in delirium” (Hobart): comp. 4 Mac. 5:11: here only in N.T. derisus (d), delira (a), deliramentum (f Vulg.). The incredulity with which mere reports were received is noted [Mk.] 16:11. Even S. John did not infer from the disappearance of the body that He had risen until he had examined the tomb himself (John 20:8). Apparently no one had understood Christ’ s predictions of His rising again. They were interpreted of His return in glory, either with a new body or as an incorporeal being. No Apostle had grasped the fact that He would be killed, buried, and raised again to life. They had seen Him dead, and women’ s talk about Angels who said that He was alive did not cancel that. τὰρ̀ήματαταῦτα . (א B D L, a b c d e l q Vulg. Sah. Boh. Syr-Cur. Aeth.) is certainly to be preferred to τὰῥήματααὐτῶν (A I X ΓΔ etc. f Arm.). Syr-Sin. has “ They appeared in their eyes as if they had spoken these words from their wonder.” For neut. plur.with plur. verb comp. John 19:31. 12. § The Visit of Peter to the Tomb. The whole of this verse is of unknown and doubtful authority. It is absent from important Western documents, and has the look of an insertion. Its source is probably John 20:3-10, part of what is there said of “ the other disciple” (ver. 5) being here transferred to S. Peter. The only words which are not found in John 20:3-10 are ἀναστάς , μόνα , θαυμάζωντόγεγονός but of these ἀναστάς (not in Jn. and rare in Mt.) and τὸγεγονονός (not in Mt. or Jn. and once in Mk.) are specially frequent in Lk. And although Lk. more often writes θαυμάζεινἐπὶτῷ , yet he sometimes has θαυμάζειντι (7:9; Acts 7:31). Perhaps the hypothesis of an insertion made in a second edition is here admissible. See note on Western Noninterpolations at the end of this chapter. The verse has probably no connexion with what precedes. Certainly it does not give the reason why the Apostles disbelieved, viz. because Peter had already been to the tomb and seen no Angels but only grave-cloths. That would require γάρ for δέ and the pluperf. The δέ would rather mark a contrast; although they disbelieved, yet Peter went to the grave to satisfy himself. Didon supposes two visits of Peter to the tomb, one with John when Mary Magdalen reported the tomb empty, and a second when she reported that she had seen Angels and the Lord Himself (J.C. ch. 12. p. 797). More probably this verse (whatever its source) is an imperfect account of the visit of Peter with John. τὰὀθόνιαμόνα . “ The grave-cloths without the body.” This is the reading of א c b B, Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Bob. Sah., omitting κείμενα , while א * A K Π omit μόνα . L, cf Arm. have μόνακείμενα , I X ΓΔ etc. κείμεναμόνα . Cod. Am. has posita only, but many MSS. of Vulg. have sola posita. πρὸςαὑτόν . So B L, the rest reading πρὸςἐαυτόν . The words are amphibolous (comp. 23:35, 43, 50), and may be taken either with ἀπῆλθεν , “ he went away to his home,” i.e. his loding in the city (Syr-Sin. Rev_1 Hahn), or with θαυμάζων , “ wondering with himself” (Vulg. Luth. AV. Rev_2). But does αὑτόν for ἑαυτόν occur in N.T.? 13-32. The Manifestation to the Two Disciples at Emmaus. This narrative forms a counterpart to that of the manifestation to Mary Magdalen in Jn. There is a condensed allusion to the incident in the appendix to Mk. (16:12, 13); but the narrative is peculiar to Lk. and is among the most beautiful of the treasures which he alone has preserved for us. He almost certainly obtained his information from one of the two disciples, and probably in writing. The account has all the effect of personal experience. If this is accepted, then Cleopas may be regarded as the narrator; for Lk. would know and be likely to name the person from whom he received the account. The fact that Lk. was almost certainly a Gentile (Colossians 4:10-14), and that in the preface to his Gospel he indicates that he was not an eye-witness, renders the conjecture of Theophylact. that Lk. was the unnamed disciple who went with Cleopas to Emmaus, very improbable. This disciple was evidently a Jew (vv. 20, 27, 32) or a proselyte. Lk. may have been a proselyte before he was a Christian, and his preface may mean no more than that he was not one of those “ which from the beginning were eye-witnesses” : but nothing is gained by such conjectures. In the Acts he uses the first person plural, when he himself was present. Why does he not do the same here, if he was one of the two? It would have added greatly to “ the certainty” which he wished to impart to Theophilus, if he had assured him that he himself had talked and eaten with Jesus on the very day of His Resurrection. But the hypothesis still finds sup porters, e.g. Lange, Godet, Bp. Alexander. Origen twice gives Simon as the name of the unnamed disciple (Cels. 2:62, 68). This may be an erroneous interpretation of ὥφθηΣίμωνι (ver. 34). Epiphanius conjectures Nathanaei, which could hardly be right, if Nathanael is Bartholomew (ver. 33). But all such conjectures are worthless. Probably Lk. himself did not know who the other was. 13. Καὶἰδού . As often, introduces something new and unexpected: 1:20, 31, 36, 2:25, 5:12, 18, 7:12, etc. δύοἐξαὐτῶν . Not of the Apostles (ver. 10), as is shown by ver. 33, but of the disciples generally. A direct reference to πᾶσιντοῖςλοιποῖς (ver. 9) is not manifest. For ἐναὐτῇτῇἡμέρᾳ see sma1l print on 10:7, and contrast AV. and RV. ἐξήκοντα . The reading ἕκατονἐξήκοντα (א I K1N1Π and some other Gk. Lat. and Syr. authorities) is “ an Alexandrian geographical correction, though not of the type of Γεργεσηνῶν or Βηθαβαρά ; evidently arising from identification of this Emmaus with the better known Emmaus which was later called Nicopolis. The identification is distinctly laid down by Eus. Hier. Soz., though they do not refer to the distance” (WH. 2: App. p. 72). Syr-Sin. has “ threescore.” Ἐμμαούς . The fortified town afterwards called Nicopolis cannot be meant, although all Christian writers from Eusebius to the twelfth century assume that it is meant. It Isaiah 176 stadia, or 20 English miles, from Jerusalem; and it is absurd to suppose that these two walked about 20 miles out, took their evening meal, walked 20 miles back, and arrived in time to find the disciples still gathered together and conversing (ver. 33). Yet Robinson contends for it (Res in Psa_3. pp. 147-151). El Kubeibeh, Which Isa_63 stadia from Jerusalem, on the road to Lydda, is probably the place. It is about 7 miles N.W. of Jerusalem, in the beautiful Wady Beit Chanina, and the tradition in its favour dates from the crusades. Of other conjectures, Kulonieh and Beit Mizzeh are too near (36 to 40 stades), and Khamasa is not near enough (72 stades). But Caspari is very confident that Kulonieh is right (p. 242). See D.B.2 and Schaff’ s Herzog, art. “ Emmaus” ; also Didon, J.C. App. U. 14. καὶαὐτοὶὡμίλουν . If αὐτοί has any special force, it is “ and they communed” — as well as those mentioned in ver. 10. Among the disciples this was the topic of conversation. The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N.T. (ver. 15; Acts 20:11, Acts 24:26). The meaning of “ converse, talk with” is classical, and survives in mod. Gk. Vulg. leads the way in translating ὁμιλεῖν differently in ver. 14 (loque bantur, “ talked” AV.) and ver. 15 (fabularentur, “ communed” AV.). See footnote on 2:9. 15. καὶαὐτὸςἸησοῦς . B omits καί , which makes no difference to the sense, but is the common constr. after ἐγένετο : see note at the end of ch.1 “ It came to pass. that Jesus Himself” about whom they were talking. ἐγγίσας . He overtook them, for they assume that He comes from Jerusalem (ver. 18), from which they are walking. 16. ἐκρατοῦντο . There is no need to assume a special act of will on the part of Christ, “ who would no be seen by them till the time when He saw fit.” They were preoccupied and had no expectation of meeting Him, and there is good reason for believing that the risen Saviour had a glorified body which was not at once recognized. Comp. ἐνἑτέρᾳμορφῇ in the appendix to Mk. (16:12), the terror of the disciples (ver. 37), the mistake of Mary Magdalen (John 20:14, John 20:15), and the ignorance of the Apostles on the lake (John 21:4). But it is quite possible that the Evangelist understands the non-recognition of Jesus here and the recognition of Him afterwards (ver. 31) to be the results of Divine volition. For κρατεῖσθαι comp. Acts 2:24. See on 18:34. τοῦμή . This may mean either “ in order that they might not” or “ so that they did not.” If the latter is adopted, the negative may be regarded as pleonastic. “ Were holden from knowing” easily passes into “ were holden so that they did not know,” or “ were holden that they might not know.” Comp. κατέπαυσαντοῦμὴθύειν (Acts 14:18) ; κωλῦσαιτοῦμὴβαπτισθῆναι (Acts 10:47); οὐχὑτεστειλάμηντοῦμὴἀναγγεῖλαι (Acts 20:27): see also Genesis 16:2; Psalms 34:14, etc. ; Win. 64:4. b, p. 409. For ἐπιγνῶναι comp. Acts 12:14, Acts 27:39. 17. ἀντιβάλλετε . Here only in N.T. and once only in LXX (2 Mac. 11:3). It looks back to συνζητεῖν (ver. 15). καὶἐστάθησανσκυθρωποί . This is the reading of א B, e Boh: Sah. It is supported by the ἔστησαν of L, and probably by the erasure in A. It is adopted by Tisch. Treg. WH. Weiss, RV., but contended against by Field, ot. Noiv.3. p. 6o. With this reading the question ends at περιπατοῦντες For σκυθρωποί comp. Matthew 6:16; Genesis 11:7; Ecclus. 25:23. 18. ὀνόματικλεόπας . See on 5:27. The name is not to be identified with Κλωπᾶς (John 19:25), which is Aramaic, whereas Κλεόπας ( = Κλεόπατρος is Greek. The incorrect spelling Cleophas (AV.) comes from some Latin MSS. The mention of the name is a mark of reality. ΣὺμόνοςπαροικεῖςἸερουσαλήμ . The pronoun is emphatic. The μόνος cannot mean “ only a stranger” (AV.), but either “ the only stranger” or “ a lonely stranger,” i.e. either “ Dost thou alone sojourn at J.,” or “ Dost thou sojourn alone at J.” The former is more probable: see Wetst. and Field for examples. The verb occurs only here and Hebrews 11:9 in N.T., but is common in LXX of being a stranger or sojourner (Genesis 21:23, Genesis 21:34; Genesis 24:3, etc.). Comp. πάροικος (Acts 7:6, Acts 7:29) and παροικία (Acts 13:17). The usual construction would be ἐνἸερουσαλήμ : but we have γῆνἥνπαροικεῖς (Genesis 17:8; Exodus 4:4). 19. Ποῖα ; “ What kind of things?” The question leads them on to open their hearts, and He is able to instruct them. ὅςἐγένετοἀνὴρπροφήτης . “ Who proved to be, showed Himself to be, a Prophet.” The ἀνήρ is perhaps a mark of respect, as in addresses (Acts 1:16, Acts 1:2:29, 37, Acts 1:7:2, etc.); or mere amplification, προφήτης being a kind of adjective. δυνατὸςἐνἔργῳ . Comp. Acts 7:22, Acts 7:18:24; Ecclus. 21:8; Judith 11:8. In class. Grk. without ἐν . In Ps. Sol. 17:38, 42 we have both constructions, but in a sense different from this, With the order comp. 2 Thessalonians 2:17: usually λόγοςκαὶἔργονἐναντίον . He proved Himself to be all this before God and man; but no more than this. In thinking Him to be more they had made a mistake. 20. It is not out of any favour to the Romans (Renan) that Lk. does not mention their share in the crime. Lk. alone tells us that Roman soldiers mocked Jesus on the cross (22:36). And here their share (which was notorious and irrelevant) is implied in παρέδωκαν and ἐσταύρωσαν . 21. ἡμεῖςδὲἠλπίζομεν . “ But we were hoping,” until His death put an end to our expectation, “ that precisely He,” and no other, “ was the one who should redeem Israel.” Comp. the use of ὁμέλλων in 22:23; Matthew 11:14; John 12:4. λυτροῦσθαι . “ To cause to be released to oneself, set free for oneself the slave of another, redeem, ransom.” Comp. Titus 2:4; Deuteronomy 13:5; 2 Samuel 7:23; Hosea 13:14. The οἱδὲεἶπαν justifies us in concluding that vv. 19-24 were spoken partly by Cleopas and partly by his companion. But the attempt to assign definite portions to each (19, 20 to Cl., 21a to the other, 21b to Cl., and so on) is wasted ingenuity. ἀλλάγε . The combination occurs elsewhere in N.T. 1 Corinthians 9:2. In class. Grk. another particle must immediately follow, and with this the γε coalesces, as ἀλλάγεδή or ἀλλάγετοι . Otherwise a word or more must” separate ἀλλά from γε . The force of the two is concessive. See Stallbaum on Plat. Rep. 1:331 B. The καί after ἀλλάγε is certainly genuine (B C L D 33, Arm.) σὺνπᾶσιντούτοις . Super hæ c omnia (Vulg.): rather a lax use of σύν , Comp. Neh. v. 18; 3 Mac. 1:22. Syr-Sin. omits. τρίτηνταύτηνἡμέρανἄγει . The verb is probably impersonal. “ one is keeping the third day, we are at the third day” (Grot. Beng. De W. Nö sg. Wordsw. Hahn). Perhaps we may understand ὁἸησοῦς (Mey. Godet, Weiss, Alf): the speaker has an impression that there was a prediction about the third day. But it is not probable that either ὁἥλιος , or ὁοὐρανός or χρόνος or Ἰσραήλ is to be supplied. Comp. περιέχειἐνγραφῇ (1 Peter 2:6). The σήμερον after ἄγει (A P X ΓΔ etc. Syr-Pesh. Sah. Aeth. Vulg.) may be omitted (א B G, Boh. Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Arm.) with Tisch. WH. RV. 22. ἀλλὰκαί “ But, in spite of this disappointment, there is also this favourable item.” ἐξἡμῶν : and therefore not wanton deceivers. With ἐξέστησαν comp. ἐξιστάνων Acts 8:9: the trans. use is found nowhere else in N.T. There should perhaps be a colon at ἡμᾶς . To put a colon (AV.) or semicolon (RV.,) at μνηνεῖον implies that the being early at the tomb was the astonishing thing. Better “ amazed us: having been early at the tomb and having failed to find His body, they came, saying,” etc. ὀρθρινός is a later form of ὄρθριος 23. ἦλθανλέγουσαι … οἵλέγουσιν . It is all hearsay evidence and unsatisfactory; but it is sufficiently disturbing. For the constr. see Burton., § 343. 24. ἀπῆλθάντινες . If this refers to the visit of Peter and John, it confirms the view that ver.12 was not part of the original narrative. The pleonastic καί before αἱγυναῖκες ought probably to be omitted with B D and most Versions. αὐτὸνδὲοὐκεἶδον . This was true of Peter and John: and perhaps Cleopas and his comrade had left Jerusalem without having heard that Mary Magdalen had said that she had seen Him. If they had heard it, like the rest, they had disbelieved it, and therefore do not think it worth mentioning. 25. ἀνόητοι . Four quite different Greek words are translated “ fool” in AV.; ἀνόητος (elsewhere “ foolish,” Galatians 3:1, Galatians 3:3; 1 Timothy 6:9; Titus 3:3), ἄσοφος (Ephesians 5:15), ἄφρων (11:40, 12:20; 1 Corinthians 15:36, etc.), μωρός Matthew 5:22, Matthew 5:23:17, (19); 1 Corinthians 3:18, 1 Corinthians 4:10). The latter two are much stronger in meaning than the former two. Here the Latin translations vary between insensati (a c d e) and stulti (f Vulg.), as in 11:40 between insipientes (c) and stulti (f Vulg.): 12:20 and Matthew 23:17 all have stultus, ML v. 22 all fatuus. βραδεῖς … τοῦπιστεύεινἐπὶπᾶσινοἵς . The gen. is one of limitation depending upon βραδεῖς which occurs here and James 1:19 only. Comp. ἐτοιμοιτοῦἀνελεῖν (Acts 23:15): ἐτοιμοιτοῦἐλθεῖν (1 Mac. 5:39). Elsewhere Lk. has the acc. after πιστεύεινἐπί (Acts 9:42, Acts 11:17, Acts 16:31, Acts 22:19), in all which cases the object of the belief is a person. The difference is between faith resting upon, and faith directed towards, an object. Note the characteristic attraction: see small print on 3:19. ἐπὶπᾶσινοἶςἐλάλησανοἱπροφῆται . There is special point in the πᾶσιν . Like most Jews. they remembered only the promises of the glories of the Messiah. and ignored the predictions of His sufferings. We cannot well separate ἐπὶπᾶσιν from πιστεύειν and take ἐπί = “ on the top of, after, in spite of” : “ slow of heart to believe. in spite of all that the Prophets have spoken” (Hahn). Still more unnatural is Hofmann’ s proposal to transfer these words to the next verse: “ On the basis of all that the Prophets have spoken ought not Christ,” etc. 26. οὐχὶταῦταἔδει . “ Behoved it not the Christ to suffer these very things and thus enter into His glory?” According to the Divine decree respecting the Messiah as expressed in prophecy, precisely the things which these two had allowed to destroy their hopes were a confirmation of them, The ταῦτα stands first with emphasis: for ἔδει comp. 9:22, 13:33, 17:25, etc. There is no need to understand δεῖ with εἰδελθεῖν in order to make it clear that He had not yet entered. Grammatically ἔδει belongs to both verbs, but it chiefly influences παθεῖν : the suffering comes first, and is the road to the glory. Comp. ver. 46. The same is said of Christ’ s followers Acts 14:22. 27. ἀπὸΜωυσέως .. For the form see on 2:22. Such prophecies as Genesis 3:15, Genesis 3:22:18; Numbers 24:17; Deuteronomy 18:15, and such types as the scape-goat, the manna, the brazen serpent, and the sacrifices, are specially meant. Comp. Acts 8:35. καὶἀπὸπάντωντῶνπροφητῶν . This may be regarded as a lax construction not likely to be misunderstood : comp. ἕτεροικακοῦργοιδύο (23:32). But this is not necessary, for with each Messianic passage there was a fresh start in the interpretation. It does not help much to say that Moses and the Prophets are here considered as one class in distinction from the rest of O.T., and that the meaning is that He began with these and thence passed to the Psalms (ver. 44) and other books (Hofm. Hahn). The repetition of the ἀπό shows that the Prophets are regarded as separate from the Pentateuch. The literal meaning 0f the characteristic πάντων and πάσαις may stand, but need not be pressed. There is nothing incredible in the supposition that He quoted from each one of the Prophets. διερμήνευσεν (א c B L U) supported by διηρμήνευσεν (M) is probably right, rather than διερμήνευεν or διηρμήνευεν (A H K S V Π etc.). But instead of ἀρξάμενος … διερμήνευσεν we have in D ἦνἀρξάμενοςἀπὸΜωυσέωςκαὶπ .τ .πρ . ἐρμηνεύειν erat incipiens a mosen.et omnium propheetarum interpraetari.(d) ; a1so erat incipiens… interpretans (b ff2r), fuit incipiens … interpretants (ce). erat inchoans… interpretans (a). but f Vulg. have et incipiens… interpretabatur. The καὶδιερμηνεύειν of א * points to some form of this Western reading. διερμήνευσεν … τὰπερὶἐαυτοῦ . Comp. 1 Corinthians 12:30, 1 Corinthians 12:14. 1 Corinthians 12:5, 1 Corinthians 12:13, 1 Corinthians 12:27. In Acts 9:36 and 2 Mac. 1:36 the verb is used of interpreting a foreign language. Neither γεγραμμεινα (De W. Mey Weiss) nor anything else is to be understood with τὰπερὶἐαυτοῦ : see small print on 22:37. 28. προσεποιήσατο . No unreal acting a part is implied. He began to take leave of them, and would have departed, had they not prayed Him to remain. Comp. His treatment of the disciples on the lake (Mark 6:48), and of the Syrophenician woman (Mark 7:27). Prayers are part of the chain of causation. The Latin Versions suggest pretending what was not meant: finxit se (b c f ff2), dixit se (1) fecit se (d). simulavit se (e), adfectabat se (a). But all of these. excepting the last, support προσεποιηοιήσατο (א A B D L) against προσεποιεῖτο . The προσποιεῖθαι did not continue, The verb does not occur elsewhere in N.T. Comp. Job 19:14. In this verse οὖ for οἶ or εἰςἥν is a genuine; not in 22:1O. 29. παρεβιάσαντο . Moral pressure, especially by entreaty, is meant : Acts 16:15; Genesis 19:9; Gen_1 Sam, 28:23; 2 Kings 2:17, 2 Kings 5:16. In the last case the urgent entreaty is unsuccessful, and therefore the word does not imply compulsion. Comp. ἀνάγκασονεἰσεθεῖν (14:23). Μεῖνονμεθ ʼ ἡμῶν . Combined with what follows, this implies a dwelling. which may have been the home of one of the two. Their allowing Him to preside does not prove that it was an inn. In their enthusiasm they naturally left the chief place to Him. On the other hand, μεθ ʼ ἡμῶν is simply “ in our company,” not necessarily “ at our house” : comp.σὺναὐτοῖς below. πρὸςἐσπέραν Comp. Genesis 8:11; Exodus 12:6; Numbers 9:11; Zechariah 14:7. The classical ἐσπέρα is very freq. in LXX, but in N.T. is peculiar to Lk. (Acts 4:3, Acts 28:23). So also κλίνω of the declining day (9:12): Comp. Jeremiah 6:4. The ἥδη after κέκλικεν (א B L: 1 33, a b e f ff2, Vulg. Boh.) is doubtless genuine. Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin. paraphrase the sentence: “ And they began to entreat Him that He would be (abide) with them, because it was nearly dark” . 30. ἐντῷκατακλιθῆναι . “ After He had sat down” ; not “ as sat, He sat” etc. (AV.), nor dum recumberet (Vulg.): see on 3:21. In N.T. in the verb is peculiar to Lk. (7:36, 9:14, 15, 14:8): see on 9:14. λαβὼντὸνἄρτον . “ He took the bread” that was usual, or “ the loaf” that was there. That this was a celebration of the eucharist (Theophylact), and a eucharist sub unâ specie, is an improbable hypothesis, To support it Maldouatus makes ἐντῷκατακλ mean `“ after He had supped, ” as a parallel to μετὰτὸδειπῆσαι (22:20). But the imperf. ἐπεδίδου is against the theory of a eucharist. In the Last Supper there is no change from aor. to imperf such as we have here and in the Miracles of the Five Thousand (κατέκλασενκαὶἐδίδου , 9:16) and of the Four Thousand (ἔκλασενκαὶἐδιδου Mark 8:6). In none of the Gospels is the imperf used of the eucharist (22:19; Mark 14:22;Matthew 26:26) nor in 1 Cor in 11:23. Wordsworth, although he regards this as a eucharist, points out that “ bread” was to the Jews a general name for food, including drink as well as meat; and that to “ eat bread” and “ break bread” are general terms for taking refreshment. That the bread was blessed in order that it might open the eyes of the disciples is also improbable: the εὐλόγησεν is the usual grace before meat. It was the breaking of the bread on the part of Jesus, rather than their own partaking of the bread, which d them to see who He was: see ver. 35. 31. διηνοίχθησανοἱὀφθαλμοί . This must be explained in harmony with ver. 16. If the one implies Divine interposition, so also does the other. These two had not been present at the Last Supper, but they had probably often seen Jesus preside at meals; and something in His manner of taking and breaking the bread, and of uttering the benediction, may have been the means employed to restore their power of recognizing Him. Wright’ s conjecture that the eucharist was instituted long before the Last Supper is unnecessary. Comp. Genesis 21:19; 2 Kings 6:20 ; Genesis 3:5, Genesis 3:7. For the augment see WH. 2. App. p.161, All three forms, ἠνοίχθηνἐνεῴχθην and ἠνεῴχθην , are found well attested in N.T. Gregory, prolegom, p.121. Syr-Cur. and Syr-Sin. add “ immediately” to “ were opened.” ἀφαντοςἐγένετο .“ He vanished, became invisible” : comp. ver 37, 6:36, 12:40, 16:11, 12, 19:17. It is very unnatural to take ἐγέετο with ἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν and make ἄφαντος adverbial: “ He departed from them without being seen.” Something more than a sudden departure, or a departure which they did not notice until He was gone, is intended. We are to understand disappearance without physical locomotion: but we know too little about the properties of Christ’ s risen body to say whether this was super natural or not. Nowhere else in bibl. Grk. does ἄφαντος occur: in class. Grk. it is poetical. In 2 Mac. 3:34 ἀφανεῖςἐγένοντο is used of Angels ceasing to be visible. The ἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν implies no more than withdrawal from their sight: to what extent His presence was withdrawn we have no means of knowing. But His object was accomplished; viz. to convince them that He was the Messiah and still alive, and that their hopes had not been in vain. To abide with them in the old manner was not His object. The Latin versions vary much, but none of them suggest a mere quiet withdrawal : nusquam comparit ab eis non comparuit ab eis (dr),invisus factus est eis (bf),non apparens factus est ab eis (δ evanuit ex oculis eorum (Vulg.). Syr-Sin. has “ He was lifted away from them” : so also Syr-Cur. Respecting Jos. Ant. 20:8, 6 see p. 30. 32. καιομένηἦν . The periphrastic tense emphasizes the continuance of the emotion. Common and natural as the metaphor is, it seems to have been misunderstood; and hence the reading κεκαλυμμένη (D). perhaps from 2 Corinthians 3:14-16; while exaæ catum (c). and optusum (1) seem to imply πεπηρωμένη as another correction. Other variations are exterminatum (e) and gravatum (Syr-Cur. Syr-Sin. Sah. Arm.). They regard the glow in their hearts as further proof that it was indeed Jesus who was with them as they walked. ὡςἐλάλει … ὡςδιήνοιγεν “ While He was speaking… while He was opening.” Note the asyndeton and the use of the same verb for be opening of their eyes and the opening of the Scriptures. 33-43. § The Manifestation to the Eleven and the other Disciples at Jerusalem. We cannot determine whether this is the same appearance as John 20:19. If it is. then τοὺςἕνδεκα is not exact, for on that occasion Thomas was absent; and in any case it is improbable that he was present. If he was, why was the incident which convinced him delayed for a week? Can we suppose that he withdrew between vv. 35, 36? It is much simpler to suppose that“ the Eleven” is used inaccurately. 33. αὐτῇτῇὥρᾳ . “ That very hour” : comp. 10:7. The lateness of the hour, which they had urged upon their guest (ver. 29), does not deter them. Note the characteristic ἀναστάντες (1:39, 4:29, etc.) and ὑπέστρεψαν (1:56, 2:20, 43, 45, 4:1, etc.). It was in order that others might share their great joy that they returned at once to Jerusalem. Yet D c d e Sah. insert λυπούμενοι (tristes contristati) after ἀναστάτες ἠθροισμένους . This is the reading of א B L 33, adopted by all the best editors. The verb is not rare in LXX. but occurs here only in N.T. TR. has συνηθρ . with A L P X etc., a verb which is found in N,T. only in Acts 12:19:25. τοὺςσὺναὐτοῖς . Much the same as πάντεςοἱλοιποί (ver. 9). Comp Acts 1:14. 34. λέγοντας . This was the statement with which the assembled disciples greeted the two from Emmaus. The appendix to Mk. cannot be reconciled with this. There we are told that, so far from the two being met by news that the Lord was risen, their own story was not believed (16:13). ὤφθηΣίμωνι . There is no other mention of this manifestation in the Gospels; but S. Paul quotes it in the first rank as evidence of the Resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:5): and this coincidence between the Evangelist and the Apostle cannot well be accidental. It conlirms the belief that this Gospel is the work of one who was intimate with S. Paul. For ὤφθη see on 22:43, This manifestation apparently took place after the two had started for Emmaus and before the disciples assembled at Jerusalem. The Apostle “ most in need of comfort was the first to receive it.” But Lange is fanciful when he adds, “ We here learn that after his fall Peter named himself, and was named in the Church, Simon, not Peter” (L. of C. iii. p. 387). See on 6:14. 35. καὶαὐτοὶἐξηγοῦντο . “ And they on their side rehearsed.” Excepting John 1:18, the verb occurs only here and Acts 10:8, Acts 10:15:12, Acts 10:14, Acts 10:21:19. Note that the Lord’ s breaking of the bread, and not their partaking of it, is spoken of as the occasion of their recognizing Him. Syr-Sin. has “ as He brake bread.” 36. ἔστηἐνμέσῳ . A sudden appearance, analogous to the sudden appearance, analogous to the sudden disappearance (ver. 31), is intended. See on 8:7. On the words καὶλέγειαὐτοῖςΕἰρήνηὑμιν , which look like a very early insertion from John 20:19, see note at the end of the chapter. They express what is true in fact, but is probably not part of the original text of Lk. 37. πτοηθέντεςδέ . There is some confusion of text here. This is the reading of A L R C ΓΔ etc. supported by conturbatique (b ff2), turbati autem (c e), et conturbati (1), conturbati vero (f Vulg.). But D has αὐτοὶδὲπτοηθεχντες , ipsi autem paverunt (d), א φοβηθέντεςδέ , exterriti autem (a), and B θροηθέντες . The last may possibly right. Syr-Sin. has “ shaken” both here and for τεταραγμένοι in ver. 38. πνεῦμα . “ The disembodied spirit of a dead person, a ghost.” Comp. φάντασμα (Matthew 14:26), which D has here. Thomas would explain away their evidence by maintaining that this first impression respecting what they saw was the right one. For ἔμφοβοιγενὀμενοι see on ver. 5; and for this use of πνεῦμα comp. 1 Peter 3:19. To introduce the notion of an evil spirit is altogether out of place. 38. τί … καὶδιάτί . So in א A C ΓΔΛ * Π , quid … et quare, a b c e f ff2l Syr-Cur. “ Why … and wherefore” RV. But D L have τί … ἵνατί , and B L2 τί , … τί , Syr-Sin. has Why … why, Tert. quid … quid. Vulg. inaccurately omits the second quid. άαβαίνουσινἐντῇλαραδιάᾳὑμῶν . So A * (?) B D, in corde vestro (a b c e ff2 l. Sah. Aeth.); for which ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςὑμῶν (א A1 L C X ΓΔ etc.), in cordibus vestris (f Syr-Sin.), is an obvious correction. Vulg. is again the least accurate with in corda vertra. Nowhere else does, ἀναβ , ἐντῇκαρδιάᾳ occur: elsewhere ἐπὶτὴνκ . (Acts 7:23) or ἑπὶκαρδίαν (1 Corinthians 2:9; Jeremiah 3:16). 39. ἴδετετὰςχεῖράςμουκαὶτοὺςπόδας . This seems to imply that His feet as well as His hands had been nailed. Jesus first convinces them of His identity,— that He is the Master whom they supposed that they had lost; and secondly of the reality of His body,— that it is not merely the spirit of a dead Master that they see. Tyn. Cov. Cran. Gen. AV. all have “ Behold … see” for ἴδετε … ἴδετε . Wic. Rhem. RV. follow videte … videte of Vulg. with “ See … see.” The first refers to the test of identity, the sight of the wound-prints, the second to the test of reality, the sense of touch. ψηλαφήσατέμε . 1 John 1:1 seems to be a direct reference to this passage: the same verb is used. The remarkable quotation in Igneous (Smyr. iii. 1) should be compared: ὅτεπρὸςτοὺςπερὶΠέτρουἦλθεν , ἐφηαὐτοῖς · Λάβετε , ψηλαφήσατέμε , καὶἴδετε , ὅτιοὐκεἰμὶδαιμόνιονἀσώματον . Eusebius (H.E. iii. 6, 11) does not know whence Ignatius got these words. Jerome more than once gives the Gospel according to the Hebrews as the source of the saying about the incorporale dæ monium. Origen says that it comes from the Teaching of Peter. As all three writers knew the Gospel according to Hebrews well, the testimony is perplexing. We may conjecture that Origen is right, that Eusebius had never seen the passage, and that Jerome’ s memory has failed him. That it is quite possible to forget much of a book that one has translated, every translator will admit. See Lft. on Ign. Smyr. iii. ὅτιπνεῦμα . Once more an ambiguous ὅτι : Comp. 19:31, 43, 22:70, etc. But “ because” or “ for” (AV. RV. Nö sg. Godet, Weiss) is much more probable than “ that” (Mey. Hahn). Comp οὐγὰρἕτισάρκαςτεκαὶὀστέαἶνεςἔχυσιν (Hom. Od. xi. 219). 40. The evidence against this verse is exactly the same as against the doubtful words in ver. 36 with the addition of Syr-Cur. It may be regarded as an adaptation of Joh 20:20, καὶτὴ́πλευράν being changed into καὶτοὺςπόδας to suit ver. 39. Apelles in Hipp. Ref. vii. 26 combines the two, δείξαντατοὺςτύπουςτῶνἦλωνκαὶτῆςπλευρᾶς . Tertullian uses ver. 40 to answer Marcion’ s perversion of ver. 39 (4:43). See note p. 568. 41. ἀπιστούντωναὐτῶνἀπὸτῆςχαρᾶς . A remark, “ which, with many similar expressions, we owe to the most profound psychologist among the Evangelists.” Vix sibimet ipsi præ necopinato gaudio credentes (Livy, xxxix. 49). For this use of ἀπό comp. 21:26, 22:45; Acts 12:14; Matthew 13:44, Matthew 14:26, etc. ῎εχετέτιβρώσιμονἐνθάδε ; The objection that, if Jesus took food in order to convince them that He was no mere spirit, when food was not necessary for the resurrection-body, He was acting deceitfully, does not hold. The alternatives— “ either a ghost, or an ordinary body needing food” — is false. There is a third possibility: a glorified body, capable of receiving food. Is there any deceit in taking food, which one does not want, in order to place others, who are needing it, at their ease? With the double sign granted here, the handling and the seeing Him eat, comp. the double sign with Moses’ rod and hand (Exodus 4:1-8). and with Gideon’ s fleece (Judges 6:36-40). For βρώσιμον comp. Leviticus 19:23; Ezekiel 47:12; Nehemiah 9:25: not elsewhere in N.T ἐνθάδε : rare in LXX,and in N.T., excepting John 4:15, John 4:16 peculiar to Lk. (Acts 10:18, Acts 10:16:28, Acts 10:17:6, Acts 10:25:17, Acts 10:24). 42. καὶἀπὸμελισσίουκηρίου . The evidence against these words is far stronger than against any of the other doubtful passages in this chapter(vv. 3, 6, 9, 12, 36, 40, 51, 52). Here א A B D L, d e Boh. Syr-Sin. omit the whole, while a b omit mellis. Clem-Alex. Orig. Eus. Cyr-Alex. speak of the broiled fish in a way which makes it very improbable that they would have omitted the honey-comb, had it been contained in their copies of the Gospel. N X are the beat uncials which contain the words, and of these X with E* has κηρίον for κηρίου . Even Godet admits that not only here, but in vv. 36 and 40, the disputed words are probably interpolations. 43. ἐώπιοναὐῶνἔφαγεν . Comp. οἵτινεςσυνεφάγομενκαὶσυνεπίομεναὐτῷμετὰτὸἀναστῆναιαὐτὸνἐκνεκρῶν (Acts 10:41). Nothing is said here or in the meal at Emmaus about drinking, but are we to infer that nothing was drunk? K Π and some cursives with many Versions (Syr-Cur. Syr-Hier. Boh. Aeth. Arm. c Vulg.) after ἔφαγεν add καὶ [λαβών ] τὰἐπίλοιπαἔδωκεναύτοῖς , sumens reliquias dedit eis. 44-49. Christ’ s Farewell Instructions. This section seems to be a condensation of what was said by Christ to the Apostles between the Resurrection and the Ascension, partly on Easter Day and partly on other occasions. But we have no sure data by which to determine what was said that same evening, and what was spoken later. Thus Lange assigns only ver. 44 to Easter Day, Godet at least vv. 44, 45, Euthymius vv. 44-49, while Meyer and others assign all the remaining verses also (44-53) to this same evening. On the other hand Didon would give the whole of this section to a later occasion, after the manifestations in Galilee. It is evident that the command to remain ἐντῇπόλει (ver. 49) cannot have been given until after those manifestations, and was almost certainly given in Jerusalem. 44. εἶπενδὲπρὸςαὐτούς . This new introduction points to a break of some kind between vv. 43 and 44; but whether of moments or of days we cannot be certain. It is probable that Lk. himself, when he wrote his Gospel, did not know what the interval was. This was one of several points about which he had obtained more exact information when he wrote the first chapter of the Acts. οὗτοιοἱλόγοι . “ These are My words, which I spake unto you formerly (and repeat now), viz. that all things,” etc. ἔτιὢνσὺνὑμῖν : refers to His intercourse with them before His death, a mode of intercourse which is entirely at an end: comp. Acts 9:39. Not that the new intercourse will be less close or continuous, but it will be of a different kind. His being visible is now the exception and not the rule, and He is ceasing to share in the externals of their lives. That the words refer to what He said during the walk to Emmaus (ver. 26) is most improbable. Christ is addressing all the disciples present, not merely those was walked with Him to Emmaus. Such passages as 18:31-33 and 9:22 are meant. ἐντῷνόμῳΜωυσέωςκαὶ [τοῖς ] προφήταιςκαὶψαλμοῖς . This is the only place in N.T. in which the tripartite division of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture is clearly made. But it does not prove that the Canon was at this time fixed and closed; nor need we suppose that “ Psalms” here means the whole of the Kethubim or Hagiographa. Of that division of the Jewish Scriptures the Psalter was the best known and most influential book; and, moreover, it contained, very much about the Messiah. Hence it is naturally singled out as representative of the group. In the prologue to Ecclesiasticus we have the tripartite division in three slightly different forms (1) “ the Law and the Prophets and others that have followed their-steps” (2) “ the Law and the Prophets and other our fathers” (3) “ the Law and the Prophets and the rest of the books.” Elsewhere we have “ the Law and the Prophets” (16:16; Matthew 7:12); “ Moses and the Prophets” (16:29, 31, 24:27); and “ the Law of Moses and the Prophets” (Acts 28:23); where the third division is not to be regarded as excluded because not specially mentioned. Ryle, Canon of the O.T. pp. 150, 191, 291. Note that the prep. is not repeated with either προφήταις or ψαλμοῖς , and that the art. is not repeated with ψαλμοῖς and not quite certainly with προφήταις : the three divisions are regarded as one storehouse of Messianic prophecy. The evidence stands thus: καὶπροφήταις (A Δ N X Γ D ΔΠ , et prophetis Latt.), καὶτοῖςπροφήταις (B, Boh.), ἐντοῖς prof. , καὶἐντοῖςπροφ . (L). 45. This opening of their understanding is analogous to that in ver. 31. Comp. Acts 14:14, Acts 14:26:18; Act_2 Mal 1:4. Godet regards this as parallel to “ He breathed on them, and with unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost” (John 20:22). It was by the gift of the Spirit that their minds were open to understand. Contrast 18:34. D has διήνυξεν (sic) αὐτῶντὸννοῦν , but d has adaperti sunt eorum sensus. 46. Godet would put a full stop at γραφάζ and make καὶεἶπεναὐτοῖς introduce a fresh summary of what was said, possibly on another occasion. It is very unnatural to make ὅτι mean “ because” or “ for,” and take it as the beginning of Christ’ s words. “ He opened their minds and (in explanation of this act) said to them, Because thus it is written,” etc. (Mey.). It is more doubtful whether ὅτι introduces the oratio recta (Weiss, Hahn), in which case it is left untranslated (AV. RV.), or the oratio obliqua (Rhem.). οὕτωςγέγραπταιπαθεῖντὸνχριστόν . Thus א B C* L, Aeth. Syr. Harcl. So also D, a b c d e ff2 l r Boh,, but with τὸνΧριστόν before παθεῖν Syr-Sin. and Arm. substitute for γεγραπται the ἔδει of the similar ver. 26, while A C2 N X Γ D ΔΠ , fq Vulg. insert καὶοὕτωςἔδει after γέγραπται , and c e Cypr. omit οὕτως . All are attempts to get rid of abruptness, and perhaps the reading of A C2 etc. is a conflation of א B etc. with Syr-Sin. and Arm. D omits ἐκνεκρῶν . For the aor. infin. referring to what is future in reference to the main verb see Burton., § 114. 47. ἐπὶτῷὀνόματιαὐτοῦ . “ On the basis of all that His name implies” : it is His Messiahship which makes repentance effectual, Comp. the use of ἐπὶτῷὀν . 9:48, 21:8; Acts 4:17, Acts 4:18, Acts 4:5:28, 40, etc. μετάνοιανεἰςἀφεσινἁμαρτιῶν . The εἰς (א B, Boh. Syr.) was corrected to καί (A C D N X etc.) on account of the second εἰς . The εἰς is confirmed by 3:3; Matthew 26:28; Mark 1:4: comp. τὴνμετάνοιανεἰςζωήν (Acts 11:18). Comp. also Matthew 23:19. ἀρξάμενοι . It I difficult to decide between taking this as a rather violent inacoluthon, as if “ that ye should preach” had preceded, and making it the beginning of a new sentence, “ Beginning from Jerusalem ye are witnesses of these things.” The former is perhaps better. The correction ἀρξάμενον (A C3 etc.) is meant to agree with τὸνΧριστόν , or perhaps to be an impers. acc. abs. like ἐξόν , παρόν . Comp. ἀπὸδὲΠοσειδηΐουπόλιος , ἀρξάμενονἀπὸταύτηςμέχριΑἰγύπτου (Hdt. iii. 91, 1). The priority of the Jewish nation in its right to the Gospel is still acknowledged, in spite of their rejection of the Messiah. D has ἀρξαμένων , d incipientium. 48. ὑμεῖςμάρτυρεςτούτων . The omission of ἐστέ is a against taking ἀρξάμενοιἀπὸἸεπ . with this clause. That ἐστέ is rightly omitted (B D, Aeth. Aug.) is shown by its being inserted sometimes before (א A C3 L etc.) sometimes after (C) μάρτυρες . A C2 X Γ etc. have ὑμεῖςδέ , D καὶὑμεῖςδέ . א B C L, Boh. Syr-Harcl. have ὑμεῖς alone. The omission of both conjunction and verb makes the sentence more forcible and ὑμεῖς more emphatic. That bearing testimony respecting the Passion and Resurrection was one of the main functions of an Apostle is manifest from Acts 1:8, Acts 1:22, Acts 1:2:32, Acts 1:3:15, Acts 1:5:32, Acts 1:10:39, 41, etc. 49. καὶἰδοὺἐγώ . The ἐγώ balances the preceding ὑμεῖς . “ I have told you your part: this is mine.” The ἰδού is wanting in א D L, Latt. Boh. Syr-Sin. The combination ἰδοὺἐγώ (23:14; Acts 10:21, Acts 20:22) is extraordinarily frequent in LXX. ἐξαποστέλλωτὴνἐπαγγελίαν . Present of what will come in the immediate and certain future. Here first in the Gospels have we ἐπαγγελία in the technical sense of the “ promise of God to His people” : see on Romans 1:2. The gift of the Spirit is specially meant: comp. Isaiah 43:3; Ezekiel 36:27; Joe 2:28; Zechariah 12:10. “ The promise” therefore means the thing promised. For ἰδοὺἐγὼἐξαποστέλλω comp. Jeremiah 8:17; ἰδοὺἐγὼἀποστέλλω , 7:27; Matthew 10:16; Malachi 4:4 [3:23]: א * A C D N ΓΛΠ have ἀποστέλλω here. In John 15:26 and 16:7, where, as here, Christ speaks of the Spirit as His gift, πέμψω is used: in John 14:16 the Father δώσει at the petition of Christ. ὑμεῖςδὲκαθίσατεἐντῇπόλει . Once more an emphatic contrast between ἐγώ and ὑμεῖς . For καθίζειν of spending some time in a place comp. Acts 18:11; Exodus 16:29; Judges 11:17, Judges 19:4, Rth 3:1 [2:23]; 1 Samuel 1:23, etc. With the command here given comp. Acts 1:4. To suppose that it was spoken on Easter Day involves a contradiction with Matthew 28:7, Matthew 28:10, Matthew 28:16; Mark 16:7; John 21:1. It implies patient waiting. ἐνδύσησθε … δύναμιν . The metaphor is common both in N.T. and LXX: Romans 13:14; 1 Corinthians 15:53; Galatians 3:27; Colossians 3:10; Ephesians 4:24; Job 8:22, 29:14, 39:19; Ps. 34:26, Psalms 92:1, etc. There is no need to discuss whether the Spirit is the δύναμις or confers it. According to the best texts (א B C* L 33, Eus. Syr-Hier.) ἐξὔψους precedes δύναμιν and immediately follows ἐνδύσησθε , to which it belongs. Comp. Isaiah 32:15. 50-53. The Ascension and the Conclusion of the Gospel. It is not improbable that, at the time when he wrote his Gospel, Lk. did not know the exact amount of interval between the Resurrection and the Ascension. That was a piece of information which he may easily have gained between the publication of the Gospel and of the Acts. And while he does not state either here or ver. 44 that there was any interval at all, still less does he say that there was none: there is no ἐναὐτῇτῇἡμέρᾳ (ver. 13). Being without knowledge, or not considering the matter of importance, he says nothing about the interval. But it is incredible that he can mean that, late at night (vv. 24:29, 33), Jesus led them out to Bethany, and ascended in the dark. So remarkable a feature would hardly have escaped mention. Probably δέ both here and in ver. 44 introduces a new occasion. 50. ἕωςπρὸςΒηθανίαν . It is doubtful whether this can mean “ until they were over against Bethany.” Field regards πρός after ἕως as a mere expletive and compares καὶἀφίκετοἕωςπρὸςἄνθρωπόντιναὈδολλαμίτην (Genesis 38:1). In LXX ἕωςεἰς is common, and many texts substitute ἕωςεἰς here for ἕωςπρός (א B C L). D has πρός without ἕως . The ἔξω after αὐτούς (A C3 D X etc.) is omitted by א B C L 33, a c Boh. Syr. Arm. The well-known passage in the Epistle of Barnabas (15:9) is probably only a clumsily expressed explanation for keeping Sunday as a day of joy; viz. because Jesus on that day rose from the dead, and (not to die again, as Lazarus and others,— on the contrary) manifested Himself and ascended into heaven. Διὸκαὶἄγομεντὴνἡμέραντὴνὀγδόηνεἰςεὐφροσύνην , ἐνᾗκαὶὁἸησοῦςἀνέστηἐκνεκρῶν , καὶφανερωθεὶςἀνέβηρἰςοὐρανούς . Grammatically ἐνᾗ belongs to ἀνέβη as well as to ἀνέστη , and with Hefele we must admit the possibility that Barnabas believed that the Ascension took place on Sunday. But Funk is tight in saying that ἐνᾗ is perhaps not intended to go beyond ἀνέστηἐκνεκρῶν . Dressel’ s expedient however, of putting a full stop at ἐκνεκρῶν , is rather violent. Harmer does not place even a comma between the clauses. 51. διέστηἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν . “ Parted, withdrew from them.” The verb is peculiar to Lk. in N. T. (22:59; Acts 27:28). This refers to the Ascension, whatever view we take of the disputed words which follow. Weiss holds that, if the doubtful words are rejected, we must interpret διέστη of mere withdrawal, as after previous a appearances; and that Lk. purposely reserves the narrative of the Ascension for the Acts. But at least a final departure is meant. It is evident that ver. 50 is preparatory to a final withdrawal, and that vv. 52, 53 are subsequent to such an event. And was there ever a time when Lk. could have known of Christ’ s final withdrawal without knowing of the Ascension? In the Acts (1:1, 2) he expressly states that ὁπρῶτοςλόγος contained an account of the work of Jesus ἄχριἧςἡμέρας … ἀνελήμφθη . He himself, therefore, considered that he had recorded the Ascension in his Gospel. See Hastings, D.B. i. p. 161; D.C.G. i. p. 124. καὶἀνεφέρετοεἰςτὸνοὐρανόν . The important witnesses which omit the disputed words in vv. 3, 6, 9, 36, 40 are here joined by א * and Aug. No motive for their omission, if they were in the original document, can be suggested. They look like a gloss on διέστη : but it is conceivable that Lk. himself (or Theophilus) may added them in a second edition of the Gospel, in order to make it quite clear what διέστηἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν meant. See p. 569. Note the change from aor. to imperf. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/iccnt/