THE GOSPEL TO S. MATTHEW — — — — A.— 1. 2. BIRTH AND INFANCY OF THE MESSIAH 1:1-17. His Genealogy (E) 1:1. Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.] βίβλοςγενέσεως is clearly borrowed from Genesis 2:4a LXX. So far as the Hebrew of that passage is concerned, “ These are the generations,” etc., would seem to close the preceding section. But it is probable that the LXX. translator connected it rather with 2:4b-4:26. This section contains J’ s narratives of the creation of man, of the garden, of the Fall, of the birth of Cain and Abel, and of the descendants of Cain down to Lamech; ending with the births of Seth and of his son. γένεσις here, therefor covers the genealogy of mankind from Adam to Seth, and includes a good deal of narrrative-matter relating to this period. In Genesis 5:1 βίβλοςγενέσεως occur again, and here covers the genealogy of Adam as far as Japheth (5:32), with an appended history containing an account of the wickedness of men in the days of Noah (6:1-8). In 6:9 occurs the shorter superscription αὗταιδὲαἱγενέσειςΝῶε , introducing the account of the Flood, 6:9-9:29. In 10:1 αὗταιδὲαἱγενέσειςτῶνυἱῶνΝῶε introduces a list of the descendants of Noah, with an appended narrative of the tower of Babel (11:1-9). In 11:10 αὗταιαἱγενέσειςΣήμ introduces a list of the descendants of that Patriarch to Terah; and in 11:27 a similar formula ushers in the descendants of Terah. It is therefore clear that to a Jewish Christian writer acquainted with the LXX., ἡβίβλοςγενέσεως , or αὗταιαἱγενέσεις , was a biblical phrase which might be used to describe a narrative containing, as in the case of Noah, a list of descendants, and some account of the life of the person named. In strict analogy we should expect βίβλοςγενέσεωςἈβραάμ . But, since for the editor the main interest centred in the person of Christ rather than of Abraham, it was not unnatural for him to depart from literary usage in this respect. It seems probable that the title should be taken as covering not the whole Gospel, but only that portion of it which gives Christ’ s ancestry and the circumstances of His birth and childhood. ἸησοῦΧριστοῦ .] This collocation is rare in the Synoptic Gospels. It occurs here, 1:18? 16:21? Mark 1:1 only. Also in John 1:17, John 17:3 Χριστός has become a proper name, and lost its adjectival force. For the history of Χριστός as a Messianic title, see Dalm. Words, 289 ff.— υἱοῦΔαυείδ ] For “ Son of David” as a title of the Messiah, see Dalm. Words, 319 ff.— υἱοῦἈβραάμ ] Cf. Hebrews 2:16 σπέρματοςἈβραὰμἐπιλαμβάνεται . The descent of the Messiah from Abraham is emphasised in Test. Lev_8. Cf. Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 216. The genealogy which follows was probably compiled by the editor for the purpose of his Gospel. (a) In accordance with this purpose he carries back the genealogy to Abraham, the first founder of the Jewish race. (b) He inserts details which are out of place in a strict genealogy, but which are in harmony with the theme of his Gospel, e.g. ἐκτῆςΘάμαρ , v. 3; ἐκτῆςῬαχάβ , v. 4; ἐκτῆςῬούθ , v. 5; ἐκτῆςτοῦΟὐρίου , v. 6. These names are probably introduced as those of women, in whose case circumstances were overruled by the divine providence which, as it might have seemed, should have excluded them from a place in the ancestral line of the Messiah. They were in a sense forerunners of the Virgin Mary. (c) The division into three groups of fourteen names also has its purpose. In David the family rose to royal power (Δαυεὶδτὸνβασιλέα , v. 6). At the Captivity it lost it again. In the Christ it regained it. For the names in the genealogy the compiler naturally had recourse to the Old Testament so far as that availed him. He appears to have used the LXX. text. V. 2 comes from 1 Chronicles 1:34, 1 Chronicles 2:1, v. 3 from 1 Chronicles 2:4, 1 Chronicles 2:5, 1 Chronicles 2:9, vv. 4-6a from 1 Chronicles 2:10-13, vv. 6b-11 from 1 Chronicles 3:5, 1 Chronicles 3:10-15 vv. 12, 13 to Ζοροβάβελ from 1 Chronicles 3:17-19. The names in vv. 13-16 come from an unknown source, probably from information received from Christ’ s relations. (E) 2. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judah and his brethren.] ἈβραὰμἐγέννησετὸνἸσαάκ , from 1 Chronicles 1:34 καὶἐγέννησενἈβραὰμτὸνἸσαάκ . In the next clause Ἰακώβ comes from 1 Chronicles 1:34, where the Heb. has “ Israel.” This is at the outset a hint that the compiler is using the LXX. rather than the Hebrew.— Ἰούδανκαὶτοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ ] The compiler borrows Ἰουδά from 1 Chronicles 2:1, and then summarises the brethren whose names are there given as τοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ . The fact that he mentions the brethren at all suggests that he has this verse in Chronicles before him. (E) 3. And Judah begat Phares and Zara from Tamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram.] Clause a is from 1 Chronicles 2:4 καὶΘαμάρἡνύμφηαὐτοῦἔτεκεναὐτῷτὸνΦάρεςκαὶτὸνΖαρὰ . The fact that the compiler adds καὶτὸνΖαρὰἐκτῆςΘάμαρ , which is quite superfluous in a genealogy proper, shows that he had 1 Chronicles 2:4 before him. Ζαρά is the Septuagintal form of ז ֶ ר ַ ח . On the editor’ s special reason for mentioning Tamar, see above.— Ἑσρώμ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:9 B has Ἑσερών , A Luc. Ἑσρώμ . In 1 Chronicles 2:5 B has Ἁρσών , B a? b? Ἑσερών , A Luc. Ἑσρώμ . Elsewhere Ἑσρώμ is peculiar to A Luc., never appearing in B. Its use in Mt. shows that the compiler was using Septuagintal forms, and not trans literating the Hebrew.— Ἀράμ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:9 Ἀράμ appears as a son of Ἑσρώμ . (E) 4. And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon.]— Ἀράμ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:10 B has Ἀρράν , but A Luc. Ἀράμ .— Ἀμιναδάβ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:10 B has Ἀμειναδάβ , but A Luc. Ἀμιναδάβ . Ναασσών and Σαλμών come from 1 Chronicles 2:10, 1 Chronicles 2:11. They are the Septuagintal forms of נ ַ ח ְ ש ׁ ו ֹ ן and ש ׂ ַ ל ְ מ ָ א . (E) 5. And Naasson begat Boes from Rahab; and Boes begat Iobed from Ruth; and Iobed begat Jessai.]— Βόοζ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:11, 1 Chronicles 2:12 B has Βόος , but A Luc. βόοζ .— ἐκτῆςῬαχάβ ] For the insertion, see on v. 1. Ῥαχάβ is not a Septuagintal form. This version uniformly has Ῥαάβ However, Josephus has ἡῬαχάβη or Ῥαάβη , Ant. v. 8, 11, 15. The editor adopts here a form which represents the Hebrew more nearly than Ῥαάβ . Ἰωβήδ and Ἰεσσαί are the Septuagintal forms of ע ו ֹ ב ד and י ִ ש ׁ ַ י or א ִ י ש ׁ י . They come from 1 Chronicles 2:12, where B has Ὠβήδ and A Ἰωβήδ . (E) 6. And Jessai begat David the king.] The insertion of “ the king,” which was perhaps suggested by ἐβασίλευσεν , 1 Chronicles 3:4 or by Rth 4:22 LXX. A, marks the close of the first division of the genealogy. At this point the family obtained royal power. Δαυείδ is the Septuagintal form. For τὸνβασιλέα , cf. also Jos. Ant. v. ix. 4:— “ From Obed came Jessai, and from him David the king , and left the sovereignty to his sons for twenty-one generations. I thought it necessary to recount the history of Ruth, because I wished to show the power of God, that He can advance even the ignoble to splendid dignity; such as that to which He brought David, though born of such parents.” 6, 7. And David begat Solomon from the wife of Uriah; and Solomon begat Roboam.] 1 Chronicles 3:5, 1 Chronicles 3:10.— Σολομῶνα ] The LXX. A B has Σαλωμών , Luc. Σαλομών , Josephus Σολομών . Ῥοβοόμ is the Septuagintal form.— ἐκτῆςτοῦΟὐρείου ] Perhaps suggested to the editor by 1 Chronicles 3:5. For the insertion of a woman’ s name, see on v. 1. Οὐρείου is the Septuagintal form. (E) 7, 8. And Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asaph; and Asaph begat Joshaphat; and Joshaphat begai Joram.] Cf. 1 Chronicles 3:10, 1 Chronicles 3:11.— Ἀβιά ] LXX. A B has Ἀβειά , Luc. Ἀβιά . Josephus Ἀβίας .— Ἀσάφ ] In 1 Ch. LXX. A B Luc. has Ἀσά , Josephus Ἄσανος . But Ἀσάφ is a Septuagintal form. See Burkitt, Evangelion Da-Mepharreshe, 203. Ἰωσαφάτ and Ἰωράμ are Septuagintal forms. Josephus has Ἰωσάφατος and Ἰώραμος . (E) 8, 9. And Joram begat Ozias; and Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Ahaz; and Ahaz begat Hezekias.] Cf. 1 Chronicles 3:11, 1 Chronicles 3:12. Joram begat Ozias. Commentators usually note that Mt. has here omitted three kings, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah. But this is not the case. 1 Chronicles 3:11 records that Ὀζειά was the son of Joram. That is to say, Mt. follows the LXX. of the Chronicles. Mt. continues: ὈζείαςδὲἐγέννησετὸνἸωάθαμ . The Chronicler LXX. has Ἰωὰςυἱὸςαὐτοῦ , Ἀμασίαςυἱὸςαὐτοῦ , Ἀζαριὰυἱὸςαὐτοῦ , Ἰωαθὰνυἱὸςαὐτοῦ . That is to say, Mt. has omitted not Ahaziah = Ὀζείας , Joash, and Amaziah, but Joash, Amaziah, and Azariah = Uzziah. The reason must be sought in 1 Chronicles 3:11 LXX. The son of Joram is there called Ὀζειά . Now for Ahaziah the LXX. generally has Ὀχοζείας , whilst Ὀζειά is generally the equivalent of Uzziah, e.g. 2 Chronicles 26:3ff. Ὀζειά in 1 Chronicles 3:11 is possibly a mistake. Mt. as he copied it seems naturally enough to have connected it with Uzziah, and so to have passed on to this king’ s son, Jotham, thus omitting unconsciously the three intervening kings. Or the copy of the LXX. which he followed may have made the omission for the same reason.— Ὀζείας ] The Septuagintal forms are Ὀζειά , B; Ὀζίας , A Luc.— Ἰωαθάμ ] The LXX. A B has Ἰωαθάν , but Luc. Ἰωθάς .— Ἄχαζ ] The LXX. A B has Ἄχας , but Luc. Ἄχαζ . Ἐζεκίας is the LXX. form. (E) 10. And Hezekiah begat Manasseh; and Manasseh begat Amos; and Amos begat Josiah.]— Μανασσῆς ] So LXX. Josephus.— Ἰωσείας ] LXX. A B has Ἰωσειά , but Luc. Ἰωσίας ; so Josephus.— Ἀμώς ] LXX. B has Ἀμνών , A1? Ba b Ἀμώς , Josephus, Ἄμωσος or Ἀμμών . (E) 11. And Josiah begat Jechoniah and his brethren, at the time of the captivity into Babylon.] καὶτοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ is inserted because in 1 Chronicles 3:15, the names of the brethren of Jehoiakim are recorded just as the same words occur in v. 2, because the brethren of Judah are registered in 1 Chronicles 2:1. The verse as it stands gives rise to great difficulties, because Jehoiakim has been omitted. But the text must be corrupt. As it stands there are only thirteen names in the third division, beginning with Salathiel. And this is impossible in view of v. 17. If we suppose that Ἰεχονίαν in v. 11 is a corruption for Ἰωακείμ , everything is plain.1 The καὶτούςἀδελφούς is then due to 1 Chronicles 3:15 where the names of Jehoiakim’ s brethren are given.— ἐπὶτῆςμετοικεσίας ] μετοικεσία , a rare word. It occurs ten times in the LXX., besides only Anth. P. 7. 731. The mention of the Captivity closes the second division of the genealogy. In the generation of Jechoniah the family lost the royal power to which it had risen in the person of David. (E) 12. And after the captivity into Babylon, Jechoniah begat Sala thiel.] From 1 Chronicles 3:17. (E) 12, 13. And Salathiel begat Zorobabel; and Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim.] In 1 Chronicles 3:19 the Hebrew represents Zerubbabel as the son of Pedaiah. But the LXX. B A gives καὶυἱοὶΣαλαθιὴλΖοροβάβελ , κ .τ .λ . The editor is therefore clearly using the LXX. It seems clear that up to this point the editor has been using the LXX. of 1 Ch 1-3. For (1) the names are given in the forms of the LXX. The only apparent exceptions are Ἀσάφ and ʼ Ραχάβ . The latter does not occur in 1 Ch 1-3, and the editor substitutes a traditional form for the ʼ Ραάβ of the LXX. (2) Several of the details in Mt. are explained by his use of the LXX. of 1 Ch., e.g. (a) Ἰακώβ , v. 2. So LXX. 1 Chronicles 1:34, Heb. י ֵ ש ׂ ְ ר ָ א ֵ ל . (b) ἸωρὰμδὲἐγέννησετὸνὈζίαν (v. 9). So LXX. 1 Chronicles 3:11. (c) ΣαλαθιὴλδὲἐγέννησετὸνΖοροβάβελ (v. 13). So LXX. 1 Chronicles 3:19. Other details in the genealogy point to a use of 1 Ch. but not necessarily of the LXX. version, e.g. (a) καὶτοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ (v. 2), is explained by 1 Chronicles 2:1, 1 Chronicles 2:2; (b) καὶτὸνΖαρὰἐκτῆςΘάμαρ (v. 3), by references to 1 Chronicles 2:4; (c) καὶτοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ (v. 11), by reference to 1 Chronicles 3:15. For the names which follow, the editor is dependent on other information. (E) 13, 14. And Eliakim begat Azor; and Azor begat Sadok; and Sadok begat Acheim; and Acheim begat Eliud.] (E) 15. And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob.] (E) 16. And Jacob begat Joseph. Joseph, to whom was espoused Mary a virgin, begat Jesus, who is called Christ.] Thus ends the third division of the genealogy. The family now regained in the Christ, the anointed King, the sovereignty which it had won in David and lost at the Captivity. There is no sufficient ground for supposing that the genealogy ever existed apart from the Gospel. The references to Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba, can only be explained as due to the editor of the Gospel, who saw in the life histories of these women a divine overruling of history from which a right understanding of Mary’ s virginity might be drawn. Of course these references might have been inserted by the editor of the Gospel in a genealogy which he found ready made to his hand. But the artificial arrangement into three groups of fourteen names reminds us of the not infrequent predilection for arrangements in three which runs through the entire work. Cf. the following: three incidents of Christ’ s childhood, ch. 2; three incidents prior to His ministry, 3-4:11; three temptations, 4:1-11; threefold interpretation of “ do not commit murder,” v. 22; three illustrations of “ righteousness,” 6:1-18; three prohibitions, 6:19-7:6; three injunctions, 7:7-27; three miracles of healing, 8:1-15; three miracles of power, 8:23-9:8; three complaints of His adversaries, 9:1-17; threefold answer to question about fasting, 9:14-17; three incidents illustrating the hostility of the Pharisees, 12; three parables of sowing, 13:1-32; three sayings about “ little ones,” ch. 18; three parables of prophecy, 21:28-22:14; three parables of warning, 24:32-25:30. There is, further, no ground for the widespread belief that the genealogy is in itself a proof of a belief that Christ was the natural son of Joseph and Mary. This particular genealogy contains the condemnation of such a belief. The man who could compile it and place immediately after it 1:18-25, clearly did not believe that Christ was the son of Joseph. He inserted in the genealogy the references to the women and the relative clause “ to whom was betrothed Mary a virgin,” in order to anticipate vv. 18-25. In other words, ἐγέννησε throughout the genealogy denotes legal, not physical descent. He had before him two traditional facts— (a) that Christ was born of a Virgin in a supernatural manner, (b) that He was the Messiah, i.e. the Son of David. How could a Jewish Christian, indeed how could anyone, reconcile these facts otherwise than by supposing that Mary’ s husband was the legal father of Christ? So non-natural a sense of fatherhood may seem strange to us, but the fact of the supernatural birth which gave rise to it is stranger. Whatever we may think of it, this was the belief of the editor of the Gospel; so that there is no ground for the widespread opinion that the existence of a genealogy of Christ is proof of an underlying belief that He was the natural son of Joseph and Mary. If the editor simply tried to give expression to the two facts which had come down to him by tradition— the fact of Christ’ s supernatural birth, and the fact that He was the Davidic Messiah, and did not attempt a logical synthesis of them, who shall blame him? (E) 17. Therefore all the generations from Abraam to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the Captivity into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the Captivity into Babylon to the Christ are fourteen generations.] The artificial character of the genealogy is obvious from this verse. The arrangement into three will be found to be characteristic of this Gospel. The grouping into three fourteens may be due to the fact that in the Hebrew name David = ד ו ד , there are three letters, and that the numerical value of these letters Isa_4+6+4=14. “ By this means the genealogy was invested with the character of a sort of numerical acrostic on the name David” (G. H. Box, Interpreter, Jan. 1906, p. 199). The genealogy thus constructed is no mere antiquarian attempt to discover genealogical facts. The writer is interested in the question whether Jesus was legally descended from David, and believes that this was the case. But his interest in this point arises from some other than a purely antiquarian motive. The clue to this motive is furnished by the insertion of the women. Why did the compiler think it necessary to safeguard in this manner the fact of the supernatural birth and of Mary’ s innocence. The reason can hardly be any other than that these things were already the ground of anti-Christian polemic on the part of the Jews. Celsus, c. a.d. 170-180, is already acquainted with the Jewish slander that Jesus was born out of wedlock; cf. Orig. Contra Celsum, i. 28, 32, 33, 39. And we may be sure that the Christian tradition of the supernatural birth which lies behind the first and third Gospels evoked Jewish slander as soon as it became known to the Jews. For the later Jewish forms of this slander cf. Laible, Jesus Christus im Talmud; Herford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash; Krauss, Das Leben Jesu nach Jü dischen Quellen. 1:1. Δαυείδ ] So א A B C D al. The LXX. has Δαυείδ or Δαυίδ ; Josephus Δαυίδης or Δαβίδης .— Ἀβραάμ ] So LXX. Josephus has Ἄβραμος , Αβραάμης (once), Ἀβραάμ rarely. 2. Ἰσαάκ ] So LXX. Josephus Ἴσακος .— Ἰακώβ ] So LXX. Josephus Ιάκωβος .— Ἰσαὰκδέ ] Om. δέ here and throughout S12. 3. Ἰούδας ] LXX. has Ἰουδάς or Ἰουδά . In 1 Chronicles 2:1 Ἰουδά , B; Ἰούδας , Luc.; Ἰούδας , Josephus.— Ζαρά ] B Ox Ζαρέ , LXX. Ζαρά , Josephus Ζάρασος or Ἐζελοός .— Φαρές ] So LXX.; Josephus Φάρεσος .— Ἑσοώμ ] LXX. has Ἑσρώμ (not B), Ἑσερών , Ἑσρών , Ἑζρών , Ἁρσών . In 1 Chronicles 2:5 Ἁρσών , B; Ἑσρών , Ba? b? mg; Ἑσρώμ , A Luc. In 1 Chronicles 2:9 Ἑσερών , B; Ἑσρών , Ba b; Ἑσρώμ , A Luc.— Ἀράμ ] In 1 Chronicles 2:9 LXX. B has Ἀράμ ; in v. 10 Ἀρράν , but A Luc.Ἀράμ . 4. Ἀμιναδάβ , א C al; Ἀμειναδάβ , B Δ . In 1 Chronicles 2:10 LXX. B has Ἀμειναδάβ , A Luc. Ἀμιναδάβ , Josephus Ἀμινάδαβος .— Ναασσών ] So LXX.— Σαλμών ] In 1 Chronicles 2:11 Heb. has ש ל מ א , LXX. B Luc. Σαλμών , A Σαλμάν . 5. Βοές ] א B Ox k; Βοός , C 33; Βοόζ , E K al; LXX. has Βοός , Βοόζ . In 1 Chronicles 2:11, 1 Chronicles 2:12 B Βοός , A Luc. Βοόζ , Josephus Βόαζος , Βοώζης .— Ῥαχάβ ] LXX. Ῥαάβ . Josephus Ῥαάβη , Ῥαχάβη .— Ἰωβήδ ] א B Ox Ὠβήὃ E K al; LXX. has Ὠβήδ , Ἰωβήδ (A). In 1 Chronicles 2:12, 1 Chronicles 2:13 B Luc. Ὠβήδ , A Ἰωβήδ , Josephus Ὠβήδης .— Ῥούθ ] So LXX. Josephus Ῥούθη .— Ἰεσσαί ] So LXX. Josephus Ἰεσσαῖος . 6. Σολομῶνα ] LXX. has Σαλωμών , Σαλομών , Σαλωμώ , Σολομών (A). In 1 Chronicles 3:5 Σαλωμών , Luc. Σαλομών , Josephus Σολομών .— Οὐρείου ] B Ox. 7. Ῥοβοάμ ] So LXX. Josephus Ῥοβόαμος .— Ἀβιά ] LXX. Ἀβειά , Ἀβιά ; Josephus Ἀβίας .— Ἀσάφ ] א B C D luc Ox i. 209, 543, 700, k al. LXX. has Ἀσά , Josephus Ἄσανος . 8. Ἰωσαφάτ ] LXX. Ἰωσαφάτ , Ἰωσαφάθ . In 1 Chronicles 3:10 Ἰωσαφάτ , Josephus Ἰωσάφατος .— Ἰωράμ ] So LXX. Josephus Ἰώραμος .— Ὀζείαν ] S2 has “ Ahazia; Ahazia begat Joash; Joash begat Amozia.” So Aphr. 9. Ὀζείας ] א B.;; LXX. has Ὀζειά , Ὀζιά , Ὀζείας , Οζίας . In 1 Chronicles 3:11 Ὀζεία , B. Ὀζιάς , A Luc.; Josephus Ὀζίας .— Ἰωαθάμ ] So LXX.; josephus Ἰωάθαμος , Ἰωθάμης , Ἰωνάθης .— Ἄχαζ ] LXX., has Ἄχαζ ,Ἄχας . In 1 Chronicles 3:13 Ἄχας , A B Ἄχαζ , Luc. Josephus Ἄχαζος .— Ἐζεκίας ] So LXX., Josephus. 10. Ἀμώς , א B C D luc Ox; LXX. Ἀμνών , Ἀμμών , Ἀμώς . In 1 Chronicles 3:14 B. has Ἀμνών , Ba b. Al? val forte a Ἀμώς , Luc. Ἀμών , Josephus Ἀμμών , Ἄμωσος . 11. Ἰωσείας ] א B Dluc; LXX. has Ἰωσείας , Ἰωσίας ; Josephus Ἰωσίας .— τὸνἸεχονίαν ] We must read here τὸνἸωακεὶμκαὶτοὺςἀδελφοὐςαὐτοῦ ]. ἸωακεὶμδὲὲγέννησετὸνἸεχονίανἐπὶτῆςμετοικεσίαςΒαβνλῶνος . So substantially: M U al S4 S5 with asterisk. 12. Σαλαθιήλ ] So LXX.; Josephus Σαλαθίηλος .— Ζοροβάβελ ] So LXX.; Josephus Ζοροβάβηλος . 16. On the text, see the admirable note of Mr. Burkitt, Evangelion da Mepharreshe, ii. 258 ff. The reading of א B. al is: ἸακὼβδὲέγέννησετὸνἸωσὴφτὸνἄνδραΜαρίαςὲξἧςἐγεννήθηἹησοῦςὁλεγόμενοςΧριστός . Besides this there is a second reading: ἸακὼβδέἐγέννησετὸνἸωσὴφᾧμνηστευθεισαπαρθένοςΜαριὰμἐλέννησεἸησοῦντὸνλεγόμενονΧριστόν . This is the reading of the Ferrar group 346, 556, 826, 828. So S2 Jacob begat Joseph, him to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin, she who bare Jesus the Messiah. So, too, the old latt a b c d g k q. So, too, the text which underlies the Armenian; cf. Robinson, Euthaliana, p. 82. Besides these two readings, S1 has a third. “ Jacob begat Joseph. Joseph, to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin, begat Jesus, called the Messiah.” Burkitt believes this to be a paraphrase of the reading of the Ferrar group, and thinks that S2 is derived from it. In this last point he is no doubt right. S2 is, as a whole, dependent on S1, and it is therefore probable that S1 has the earlier reading here. But it is questionable whether S1 does not represent a Greek text found nowhere else (not in the Dialogue of Timothy and Aquila; see Burkitt, p. 265), namely, ἸακὼβδὲἐγέννησετὸνἸωσήφ . ἸωσήφδὲᾧμνηστευθεῖσαἥνΜαριάμπαρθένοςἐγέννησεἸησοῦντὸνλεγόμενονΧριστόν .. Burkitt objects that “ the practice of the writer is to interpose no words between the name and the verb ἐγέννησε , so that the clause ᾧμνηστευθεῖσαπαρθ . M. ought to follow the first mention of Joseph, not the second.” But the relative clause is clearly required in close connection with ἐγέννησε in order to qualify it, meaning “ begat,” but “ from a virgin,” i.e. not “ literally,” but “ legally.” It seems probable, therefore, that the text underlying S1 is the nearest approach now extant to the original Greek, and it must remain possible that even here the relative clause is an insertion. This earliest Greek form was gradually altered from a desire to avoid words which, though in the intention of the writer they expressed legal parentage, not paternity, in fact, might be misunderstood by thoughtless readers. The first step was perhaps the insertion of the relative clause. The second, the insertion as in S2 of a second relative, “ she who,” as a subject to ἐγέννησε . The third, the substitution of τόνἄνδραΜαρίας for ᾧμνηστευθεῖσα M. by assimilation to v. 19 ὁἀνὴραὐτῆς , ἀνήρ being used as there in the sense of “ betrothed husband,” and the substitution of the passive for the active in the following clause. 1:18-25. His Supernatural Birth (P) 1:18-25. And the birth of the Christ was in this manner: His mother Mary being betrothed to Joseph, before that they came together,. she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.] γένεσις here means birth, begetting, as in Genesis 31:13, Rth 2:11, Luke 1:14; cf. also Hdt. 1204 669. Since γένεσις has been used in 1:1 in a different sense, and since γέννηις is the common term for birth, we should expect the latter here.— μνηστευσθείσης ] Betrothal according to Jewish marriage law constituted a legal relationship which could only be dissolved by legal means. See Merx, Die vier Evangelien, ii. 1, 9 ff. The narrative in this respect rests on an accurate knowledge of Jewish civil law.— πνεύματοςἁγίου ] For the omission of the article, cf. Blass, p. 149.— πρὶνἤ ] cf. Blass, p. 229. (P) 19. And, Joseph her husband, being a righteous man, and (yet) not wishing to disgrace her, was minded to put her away secretly.]— ὁἀνὴραὐτῆς ] According to Jewish law, a betrothed woman was already the wife of her betrothed husband; cf. Merx, op. cit. p. 10.— δίκαιος ] i.e. God-fearing, and a keeper of the law. Mary’ s condition seemed to make the fulfilment of their contract of marriage impossible for a religious man.— μὴθέλωνδειγματίσαι ] On the other hand, he did not wish to expose her to shame. δειγματίσαι occurs besides only Colossians 2:15, Asc. Is. in Am. Pap. i. I. viii. 21.δειγματισμός occurs on the Rosetta Stone.— λάθραἂπολῦσαι ] Appeal to the courts for a divorce would expose Mary to public ignominy, and make her liable to severe penalties. Refusal to carry out the contract of marriage would leave her and her child in disgrace in the house of her parents. The latter seemed the more merciful course, and Joseph determined, therefore, to repudiate her by private arrangement. (P) 20. And whilst he purposed this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, Joseph, son of David, fear not to lake Mary thy wife: for that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit.]— ἰδού ] Exclusive of quotations, ἰδού occurs 30 times in Mt., 29 in Lk., 7 in Mk.; καὶἰδόυ , 28 in Mt., 26 in Lk., 0 in Mk.— κατ ʼ ὄναρ ] 6 times in Mt., not elsewhere in NT; cf. Ditt. Syll. 780. 5, 781. 4, 782. 4.— παραλαβεῖν ] According to Jewish law, marriage begun in the betrothal, was completed in the “ taking” of the bride to the house of her husband; cf. Merx, op. cit. p. 11. (P) 21. And she shalt bear a son, and thou shall call His name Jesus: for He shall save His people from their sins.] Ἰησοῦς is the Greek form of י ְ ה ו ֹ ש ׁ ו ּ ע ַ or י ְ ש ׁ ו ּ ע ַ , “ Jehovah is salvation” ; cf. Philo, De Mut. Nom. i. 597:Ἰησοῦςδὲσωτηρίακυρίου , ἕξεωςὄνοματῆςἀρίστης .— αὐτὸςγὰρσῶσειτὸνλαὸναὐτοῦἀπὸτῶνἁμαρτιῶναὐτῶν ] cf. Psalms 129:8 καὶαὐτὸςλυτρώσεταιτὸνἸσραὴλἐκπασῶντῶνἀνομιῶναὐτοῦ . For τέξεταιδὲυἱὸνκαὶκαλέσειςτὸὄνομααὐτοῦ . cf. Genesis 17:9 τέξεταίσοιυἱὸνκαὶκαλέσειςτὸὄνομααὐτοῦ . (O) 22. And all this has come to pass, in order that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying.] The formula ἵναπληρωθῇτὸῥηθέν recurs 2:15, 23, 4:14, 8:17, 13:17, 13:35, 21:4, cf. 26:56. τότεἐπληρώθητὸῥηθέν occurs 2:17, 27:9. The quotations thus introduced are for the most part free renderings of the Hebrew. They are sometimes composite in character. The formula occurs in Jewish writings. Cf. Bacher, Exeget. Terminol. der Jü d. Traditionsliteratur, i. 171. γέγονε here and 21:4, 26:56 is used from the writer’ s standpoint. Contrast John 19:36. (O) 23. Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and they shall call His name Immanuel, which is being interpreted, With us is God.] The quotation comes from Isaiah 7:14, and is given according to the rendering of the LXX., with the exception that καλέσεις of the LXX. (σει א ,— σετε Q*), which would not suit this context, is altered into καλέσουσιν . For ἕξει (LXX. א A Q), λήμψεται is read by LXX. B. There are signs that the view that Isaiah was using current mythological terms, and intended his ה ע ל מ ה to carry with it the sense of supernatural birth, is rightly regaining ground. Cf. Jeremias, Babylonisches im Neuen Testament, p. 47; and Gressmann, Der Ursprung der Israelitisch-jü dischen Eschatologie, p. 270 ff. In any case, the LXX. translators already interpreted the passage in this sense, and the fact that the later Greek translators substituted νεᾶνις for παρθένος , and that there are no traces of the supernatural birth of the Messiah in the later Jewish literature, is due to anti-Christian polemic. Cf. Just. Mart. Trypho, xliii., lxvii. It is probable that the editor is here, as elsewhere, adapting words of the O.T. to a tradition which he had before him.1 (P) 24, 25. And Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife: and knew her not until she bore a son: and he called His name Jesus.] For the redundant and Semitic use of ἐγερθείς see Dalman. Words of Jesus, 23, 36. The imperfect ἐγίνωσκεν is against the tradition of perpetual virginity. 18. Χριστοῦ ] So a b c d S1 S2; Irenæ us, III. xi. 8, xvi. 2; Tert. de Carne Christi, xxii. This Western reading is probably right. Nowhere in the N.T. is the article used before Ἰης . Χρ . B. has ʼ ΧριτοῦἸησοῦ , an assimilation to the later usage of S. Paul. א C al Ox have τοῦδὲἸησοῦΧρ . The variation in the position of Ἰησοῦ is against its originality. γένεσις ] So א B. C al Ox γένεσις here means begetting (see above), whilst in 1:1 it has another meaning. The early translators differ in their treatment of the word. The latins render by generatio in both verses. The Syriac S1 S2 render in v. 1 by “ generation,” in this verse rightly by “ birth.” But γέννησις was more common to the latter sense, and is therefore substituted here by E K L al.— μνηστευθείσης ] Add γάρ E K L al Omit, א B. C* Z Ox, latt S1 S2. 19. ὀἀνὴραὐτῆς ] Om. S2— δειγματίσαι ] So א a B. Z Ox; Eus. Quæ st. i. 3. The word is very rare. It occurs in Colossians 2:15 and in Asc. Is. in Am. Pap. 1. i. viii. 21. Here it presumably means to expose to open and notorious disgrace. δειγματισμός on the Rosetta Stone means “ inspection.” Cf Herwerden, Lex. Græ c. Suppl. p. 190. א * C E K L al substitute the more common παραδειγματίσαι , which occurs in the LXX. 5 times, Numbers 25:4, Esther 4:17, Jeremiah 13:22, Ezekiel 28:17, Daniel 2:5; Ps.-Son 2:14, in Polyb. and Plut. 20. τἠνγυναῖκἀσον ] S2 has “ thy betrothed.” Cf. the omission of ὁἁνἠραὐτῆς , v. 19. 21. λαὸναὐτοῦ ] S2 has “ the world” .— καλέσεις ] S2 “ shall be called.” 22. ὃλον ] Om. S1 S2. 24. τὴνγυναῖκααὐτοῦ ] S2 substitutes “ Mary.” 25. οὐκἐγίνωσκεναὐτήν S2 has “ purely was dwelling with her.” S1 k omit οὐκἐγίνωσκεναὐτὴνἔωςοὖ .— υἱόν ] So א B. Z S1 S2 k. τὸνυἱὸναὐτῆςτὸνπρωτότοκον is substituted by C D al by assimilation to Luke 2:7.— ἐκάλεσεν ] S2 has “ she called.” On the Syriac VSS in these verses, see Burkitt, op. cit. p. 261 ff. E editorial passages. LXX. The Septuagint Version. Dalm. Dalman. Luc. Lucian. B. Babylonian Talmud. Jos. Josephus. 1 In 1 Esd 1:32 reference is made to τὸνἸεχονίανυἱὸνΙωσείου . Here Jehoahaz is meant. We might suppose that Mt. also meant Jehoahaz by τὸνἸεχονίαν , and that his καὶτοὺςἀδελφοὺςαὐτοῦ was a summary way of describing Jehoiakim; Jehoiachin and Zedekiah, of whom the first and third were brothers of Jehoahaz, whilst the second was his nephew, if it were not for the fact that in v. 12 Ἰεχονίας is clearly Jehoiachin. For confusion between Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin cf. 1 Esd 1:41, where the latter is called Ἰωακείμ . Anth. P. Anthologia Palatina. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. Ox A papyrus fragment, containing Matthew 1:1-9. Matthew 1:12. Matthew 1:14-20, published in Oxyrhynchus Papyri, i. S Syriac version: Curetonian. M the Second Gospel. S Syriac version: Harclean. S Syriac version: Jerusalem Lectionary. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. P Palestinian traditions. Hdt. Herodotus. Asc. Is. Ascension of Isaiah. Am. Pap. Amherst Papyri. Ditt. Dittenberger Sylloge. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Just. Mart. Justin Martyr. 1 See Briggs, “ Criticism and the Dogma of the Virgin-Birth,” in North Amer. Rev., June 1906. Tert. Tertullian. L the Matthæ an Logia. Eus. Eusebius. Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. Polyb. Polybius. Plut. Plutarch. 2. Incidents of His Childhood 1. Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judæ a in the days of Herod the king, behold, Magi from the east came to Jerusalem, saying.]— τῆςἸουδαίας ] Ἰουδαία in this Gospel always signifies the southern division of Palestine. It is here specified to emphasise the fact that Jesus as the Messiah was born in the territory of the tribe of Judah; cf. Test. Judah 24; Hebrews 7:14; Revelation 5:5.— ἐνἡμέραις ] For the omission of the article, cf. Blass, p. 151.— ἰδού ] See on 1:20. For the construction ΤοῦδὲἸησοῦγεννηθέντος … ἰδού , cf. 1:20, 2:13, 19, 9:18, 32, 12:46, 17:5, 26:47, 28:11.— μάγοι ] For the presence of Magi in the west, cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist. xxx. 16: “ Magus ad eum (i.e. Nero) Tiridates advenerat … magos secum adduxerat.” The same account is told by Dio Cassius, lxiii. 1-7; Suetonius, Vit. Nero, xiii. That Messianic hopes were widespread at this period seems clear; cf. Virgil, Eclogue iv. Messianic language is used of Augustus in the inscriptions from Priene and Halicarnassus. He is σωτῆρατοῦκοινοῦτῶνἀνθρώπωνγένους . Since his birth εἰρηνεύουσιμὲνγάργῆκαὶθάλαττα . If the hope of finding the world’ s Saviour drew Tiridates and his Magi to Naples, it is quite probable that other Magi may have come to the metropolis of Palestine on a like errand. They came probably from Babylon. Astrologers there had at a very early period busied themselves with astrological observations which portended good or evil for the “ Westland,” i.e. Canaan. Cf. Jeremias, op. cit. 50 f.; von Oefele, Die Angaben der Berliner Planatentafel, P. 8279, p. 9; Campbell Thompson, Magicians and Astrologers of Nineveh and Babylon, vol. ii. No. 234: “ When a star stands at its (Virgo) left horn, there will be an eclipse of the ring of Aḫ arrû ” ( = Phœ nicia and Palestine). 222: “ When Leo is dark, the traffic of Aḫ arrû will be hindered.” 211: “ When Venus appears in Virgo, the crops of Aḫ arrû will prosper.” 192: “ When Jupiter enters the midst of the moon, there will be want in Aḫ arrû .” 167: “ When Saturn the star of Aḫ arrû grows dim, it is evil for Aḫ arrû ; there will be a hostile attack on Aḫ arrû .” Now that the whole world was expecting the Saviour King (cf. Bousset, Rel. Jud. p. 212), the attention of these heaven-searchers directed itself towards portents of the coming peacemaker. παραγίνεσθαι occurs only here and in 3:1, 13 in Mt.; in Mk. once, 14:43. Ἰεροσόλυμα occurs 10 times in Mt. as a neuter plural; once, 2:3, as a feminine singular. It is used by Mar_10 times, by Luk_4, by Joh_12, frequently in the Acts, and by S. Paul 3 times in Galatians. Mt. once (23:37) has Ἰερουσαλήμ . This form is common in Lk., Acts, S. Paul, and occurs in Hebrews 12:22, Revelation 3:12, Revelation 3:21:2, Revelation 3:10. It is the form used in the , except in 2, 3, 4 Mac. and Tobit. (P) 2. Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? for we saw His star at (its) rising, and are come to worship Him.] The widespread expectation of the birth of a great monarch in the west led the Magi to connect some particular star, or conjunction of heavenly bodies, with His birth. Just so on the birth-night of Alexander, Magi prophesied from a brilliant constellation that the destroyer of Asia was born. Cf. Cicero, De Divinatione, i. 47.— αὐτοῦτὸνἀστέρα ] On the position of the pronoun, cf. Blass, p. 168. ἀστέρα , i.e. the star with which their astronomical calculations had led them to connect the birth of the expected monarch. ἐντῇἀνατολῇ might mean “ in the east,” cf. Numbers 3:38 , Joshua 18:7 B., Jeremiah 31:40, Revelation 21:13; but it is unlikely that the Magi should say “ in the east” instead of “ in our native country” ; and it is improbable that the editor should use plural and singular in two successive verses in the same sense. It is difficult not to suppose that ἀνατολή here is a technical astronomical expression denoting the beginning of the particular phenomenon expressed here by ἀστήρ . We should certainly expect αὐτοῦ ; and it is probable that the editor has omitted “ his” from his source, or that αὐτοῦ dropped out at an early stage in the transmission of the text of the Gospel, because ἀνατολή was misunderstood and interpreted as = “ east.” — προσκυνῆσαι ] The word is a favourite one in this Gospel. Mat_13 times, Mar_2, Luk_3. Mt. alone uses the dative with reference to Christ. The one exception is Mark 15:19 of mock homage. See Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary,1644. (P) 3. And Herod the king having heard it, was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.]— πᾶσαἸεροσόλυμα ] see on v. 1. For the feminine, cf. To 14:4. (P) 4. And gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he tried to learn from them where the Messiah is being born.] πυνθάνεσθαι only here in this Gospel. (P) 5, 6. And they said, In Bethlehem of Judæ a: for so it is written through the prophet, And thou Bethlehem, land of Judah, art in no wise least amongst the rulers of Judah: for from thee shall come forth a ruler, who shall shepherd My people Israel.] τῆςἸουδίας ] cf. on v. 1. For the official expectation of the Messiah from Bethlehem, cf. John 7:41 ff., and the on Micah 5:1. Also Jer. Berach. v. a, quoted by Lightfoot on Matthew 2:1. The quotation comes from Micah 5:1, Micah 5:3, with an assimilation of the last clause to 2 S 5:2. The LXX. text is not followed here, though it seems to have been in the mind of the editor; for ὄστιςποιμανεῖτὸνλαόνμουτὸνἸσραήλ , which reminds us of 2 S 5:2 σὺποιμανεῖςτὸνλαόνμουτὸνἸσραήλ , seems to have been suggested by Ἰσραήλ and ποιμανεῖ of Micah 5:1, Micah 5:3 LXX. The rest of the quotation appears to be an independent rendering of the Hebrew text. καὶσὺΒηθλεέμ corresponds to ו א ת ח ב י ת ־ ל ח ם . γῆἸούδα is substituted for א פ ר ת ה by assimilation to vv. 1, 5. οὐδαμῶςἐλαχίστηειͅ seems to represent a Hebrew original ל א ה ּ י י ת צ ע י ר . ἐντοῖςἡγεμόσινἸούδα corresponds to ב א ל פ י י ה ו ד ה , א ַ ל ְ פ ֵ י being read as א ל ו פ י ; cf. Genesis 36:15, Exodus 15:15. ἐκσοῦ = מ מ ך . γάρ is inserted as a necessary connecting link. ἐξελεύσεται = י צ א . So LXX. ל י is omitted. ὅστιςποιμανεῖτὸνλαόνμοντὸνἸσραήλ represents ב י ש ר א ל מ ו ש ל , the Greek words being assimilated to 2 S 5:2. γέγραπται means “ it stands written,” the inspired text runs. It corresponds to כ ת ו ב or כ ת י ב of the Jewish literature. Cf. Basher, ii. 90. (P) 7. Then Herod having secretly called the Magi, made accurate inquiry of them as to the time of the appearing star.] τότε is a favourite word in this Gospel. Mt. 90 times, Mar_6, Luk_15. τὸνχρόνοντοῦφαινομένουἀστέρος , i.e. the period since the star first appeared to them at (its) rising. (P) 8. And having sent them to Bethlehem, said, Go, accurately inquire concerning the child. And when you find, report to me, that I may come and worship Him.] (P) 9. And they, having heard the king, went; and, lo, the star, which they saw at (its) rising, went before them, until it came and stood still above (the place) where the child was.]— καὶἰδού ] see on 1:20. (P) 10. And when they saw the star, they rejoiced exceedingly with great joy.]— σφόδρα ] Mat_7 times, Mar_1, Luk_1. (P) 11. And when they had come into the house, they saw the child with Mary His mother, and having fallen down, they worshipped Him: and having opened their treasures, they brought to Him gifts; gold, and frankincense, and myrrh.] For gold and frankincense as costly offerings, cf. Isaiah 60:6 ἥξουσινφέροντεςχρυσίονκαὶλὶβανονοἴσουσιν , Psalms 72:10, Psalms 72:11, Psalms 72:15. For frankincense and myrrh, cf. Son 3:6. (P) 12. And having been divinely warned in a dream not to return to Herod, they departed to their own country by another way.]— χρηματισθέντες ] The verb in the passive means to be instructed, admonished; cf. Luke 2:26, Hebrews 8:5; Fayû m Towns (Grenfell and Hunt), 137. 2; Syll. 738. 8, 807. 1, 7, 11, 15.— κατ ʼ ὄναρ ] cf. on 1:20.— δἰἄλληςὁδοῦ ] The same feature occurs in the story of Tiridates’ visit to Nero, Dio Cassius, lxiii. 7. ἀναχωρεῖν occurs in Mat_10 times, Mar_1, Lk. 0. The main outline of the story of the Magi is in many respects noteworthy for its historical probability. The expectation of a world’ s Redeemer, or in Palestine of a Jewish Messiah; the interest of Eastern Magi in these questions; their presence in the west to do homage to the supposed Saviour; the inference from Micah 5:1 that Bethlehem was to be His birthplace: all this violates no canon of historical probability. The only detail that has a legendary atmosphere about it is the statement that the star moved before the Magi as they went to Bethlehem, until it stayed over the house where the child lay. This may be due to the Jewish narrator poetically accounting for the fact that the Magi were successful in their search for the child. It is extremely unlikely that he intended it to be taken as a bald statement of fact, literally describing how the star in some strange manner enabled the searchers without other aid to identify the particular house in Bethlehem in which the holy family were dwelling. In view of the editor’ s interest in the fulfilment of prophecy, it is very strange that he does not cite Numbers 24:17 for the star, or Isaiah 60:6, Psalms 72:10, Psalms 72:11, Psalms 72:15, for the bringing of gifts. But it is difficult to think that the two last passages were not in his mind, and that they may account for the specification of two of the gifts as gold and frankincense. On the other hand, such gifts would be natural enough as the offerings of Magi who came to search for a world’ s Redeemer. The modern theory, that the story is a literary fiction, based only upon legendary motives and folklore analogies, violates every probability. In view of the matter of fact character of the editor of this Gospel, it is almost certain that he believed that he was transmitting matters of actual fact. And it is in every respect probable that he was not altogether mistaken. If we suppose that astrologers in Babylon were acquainted with current expectation of the birth of a universal King, that they inferred from some unique astral phenomenon that He had been born in the west, i.e. in Palestine; that some of them came to Jerusalem in search of Him; that their errand came to the ears of Herod, and that the Jewish authorities suggested Bethlehem as the right place in which to expect the birth of the Messiah; that the Magi went there and found the newborn babe, whether by popular rumour that Mary, wife of Joseph ben David, had given birth to a child under strange circumstances, or by inference from the position of the heavenly bodies; that they did homage to the child, and, thinking it best not to trust Herod, left secretly on their journey homewards: we need not press every detail of the narrative. Descriptive detail may in some small measure have crept into it from the Old Testament or from analogous literary or folklore stories, just as they have certainly been used to embellish the story in its later history in the Church (cf. Zahn, in loc.). But these, if they exist at all in Mt.’ s account, are mere literary embellishments of a story which in outline is intrinsically probable in view of the atmosphere of thought of the period described. 1. Ἰουδαίας ] ff1 g2 2 have Judah. 1 is ambiguous. The translator renders Ἰούδας and Ἰουδαία alike by ܝ ܗ ܘ ܕ ܐ in the early part of Mt. In 19:1 he began to render Ἰουδαία by ܝ ܗ ܘ ܕ and continues this throughout the Gospels, retaining ܝ ܗ ܘ ܕ ܐ for Ἰούδας . So Luke 3:25. S2 has ܝ ܗ ܘ ܕ for Ἰουδαία , and ܝ ܗ ܘ ܕ ܐ for Ἰούδας . 5. Ἰουδαίας ] ff1 g1 K* S2 have Judah. 6. γῆ ] Om. S1 S2.— Ἰούδα ] D a c f g1 q have τῆςἸουδαίας . (P) 13. And when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph, saying, Arise, take the child and His mother, and flee into Egypt, and be there until I tell thee. For Herod is about to seek the child to destroy Him.] ἀναχωρησάντωνδὲαὐτῶν — ἰδού ] For the construction, see on v. 1. On ἰδού and κατ ʼ ὄναρ see note on 1:20. For the redundant ἐγερθείς , see on 1:24.— μέλλει — ζητεῖν ] For the pres. inf., see Blass, p. 197.— τοῦἀπολέσαι ] For the construction, cf. Blass, p. 235. It occurs 6 times in Mt., never in Mk. The aorist signifies a single definite action. So in 3:13. Contrast 13:3. (P) 14. And he arose, and took the child and His mother by night, and departed into Egypt.] 15. And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt I called My Son.] Herod died shortly before Passover b.c. 4. See Schü rer, i. 464 ff.— ἵναπληρωθῇ ] On the formula, see on 1:22. The quotation is from Hosea 11:1. The LXX. rendering here is ἐξΑἰγύπτουμετεκάλεσατὰτέκνααὐτοῦ , which is not suitable for the editor’ s purpose. He therefore makes an independent translation of the Hebrew, or more probably cites from a current Greek translation. Cf. Introduction, p. lxii. (P) 16. Then Herod, seeing that he was mocked by the Magi, was very wroth, and sent, and slew all the male children in Bethlehem, and in all its borders, from two years old and under, according to the period which he inquired from the Magi.]— ἀπὸδιετοῦς ] If the star or constellation when first seen “ at (its) rising” signified the conception of the child, it would have been sufficient to kill children in their first year. But Herod may have thought it best to reckon on the possibility that the phenomenon denoted the actual birth, in which case the child would now be in His second year. See Von Oefele, p. 14. (PO) 17, 18. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, A voice was heard in Rama, weeping, and much lamentation, Rachel weeping, for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.] τότεἐπληρώθη ] For the formula, see on 1:22. The quotation comes from Jer_31 (LXX. 38) 15. It appears to be a citation from memory of the LXX. text: φωνὴἐνῬαμὰἠκούσθη = LXX. κλαυθμὸςκαὶὀδυρμὸςπολύς represents the LXX. θρήνουκαὶκλαυθμοῦκαὶὀδυρμοῦ . Ῥαχὴλκλαίουσα paraphrases the LXX. Ῥαχὴλἀποκλαιομένη (-ης , א A Q). τὰτέκνααὐτῆς inserts from the Heb. a clause which the LXX. omitted, but A Q have ἐπὶτῶνυἱῶναὐτῆς — καὶοὐκἤθελενπαρακληθῆναι ] So LXX. καὶ (א A Q) οὐκἤθελενπαρακληθῆναι . Here “ for her children” of M.T. and LXX. B. is omitted, with LXX. A Q.— ὅτιοὐκεἰσίν ] So LXX. (P) 19. And when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egeypt, saying.] For the construction see on 2:1.— κατ ʼ ὄναρ ] see on 1:20. (P) 20. Arise, take the child and His mother, and Go into the land of Israel: for “ they are dead who seek the life” of the child.] For the redundant ἐγερθείς , see on 1:24. τεθνήκασινγὰροἱζητοῦντεςτὴνψυχήν is a reminiscence of Exo 4:19. Throughout this section. the editor seems to have had the story of Moses in mind, and to have borrowed phrases from it. Cf. v. 13 μέλλει — ζητεῖν — τοῦἀπολέσαι , and 15 ἀνεῖλε , with Exodus 2:15 ἐζήτειἀνελεῖν ; v. 14 ἀνεχώρησεν , with Exodus 2:15 ἀνεχώρησεν . (P) 21. And he arose, and took the child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel.] (P) 22. And having heard that Archelaus is reigning over Judæ a in the place of Heod his father, he feared to go there. But being divinely instructed in a dream, he departed into the regions of Galilce.] For χρηματισθείς , see on v. 12; for κατ ʼ ὄναρ , on 1:20. (PO) 23. And came and settled in a city called Nasara: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets, that He shall be called a Nazarene.] This verse contains a still unexplained difficulty. It is clear that Jesus was popularly known as ὁΝαζωραῖος , Matthew 2:23, Matthew 26:71, Luke 18:37, John 18:5, John 18:7, John 18:19:9, Act_7 times; or ὁΝαζαρηνός , Mar_4 times, Lk twice; and it seems obvious to suppose that these adjectives are equivalent to ὁἀπὸΝαζαρέθ , Matthew 21:11, John 1:45, John 1:46, Acts 10:38. The town is written Ναζαρά , Ναζαρέθ , or Ναζαρέτ , representing נ ָ צ ְ ד ָ ח , נ ָ צ ְ ר ַ ת (cf. Gram. p. 152). Ναζωραῖος presupposes a form נ צ ו ר י from נ צ ו ר ת = נ צ ר ת , (Dalm. Gram. p. 178). Others, however, would connect the two adjectives with Nesar in Gennesareth; cf. Wellhausen on Matthew 26:69; and it must remain doubtful whether Ναζωραῖος at least had any original connection with Ναζαρά . But in any case the editor clearly wished to find such a connection. Jesus was ὁΝαζωραῖος because He had dwelt at Nazara. And this name of Nazorean had been foreshadowed by the prophets. The use of the plural τῶνπροφητῶν suggests that the editor had no single passage in mind. But it is not easy to find any references in the Old Testament which could furnish a basis for the application of ὁΝαζωραῖος to the Messiah. The attempt to connect the word with the Heb. נ ז י ר = a Nazirite, has little in its favour. More plausible is the supposition that the writer is playing on the Hebrew words נ צ ר and צ מ ח . In Isaiah 11:1 the נ צ ד = branch, from the roots of Jesse, is interpreted as the Messiah in the Targum. In Jeremiah 23:5, Jeremiah 33:15 a branch = צ מ ח , is to be raised up to David. The editor may have seen in the prophecies of a נ צ ר and צ מ ח a sort of foreshadowing of the fact that Jesus was popularly known as the Nazorean or man of Nazara. The ὅτι introduces the clause which summarises the content of the prophecies. Cf. 4:6, where ὅτι introduces a direct quotation, and 26:54 where it introduces another summary of the contents of Scripture. Ναζωραῖοςκληθήσεται summarises the prophecies referred to. Isaiah 11:1 had called the Messiah (so Targ.) נ צ ר = branch; Jeremiah 23:5, Jeremiah 33:15 had called Him צ מ ח = branch, and Isaiah 4:2 had spoken of Him also as צ מ ח (Targ. has Messiah). His parents settled at Nazara; and He was popularly known as the Nazorean, that these prophecies might be fulfilled. Zahn, who thinks this explanation too artificial, points out three peculiarities of the introductory formula— (a) ὅπως instead of ἵνα ; (b) τῶνπροφητῶν instead of the singular; (c) the absence of λεγόντων . He thinks that the Evangelist saw in the settlement at Nazara, and in the fact that Christ’ s early years were spent in this obscure village of ill fame, a fulfilment of the general tenor of Old Testament prophecy, that the Messiah should be rejected by His own people. ὅτι is therefore equivalent not to “ that,” and does not introduce the contents of the prophecies referred to, but = “ because,” and introduces an epexegetical remark of the Evangelist. Christ lived at Nazara, and so fulfilled the prophecies that He should be despised and rejected of men, because He was to be known as the Nazorean. But it is very questionable whether ὅτι — κληθήσεται can be so translated. Zahn himself remarks that we should expect ἔμελλε — κληθῆναι If the play on the words נ צ ר = branch, and נ צ ד ה = Nazara, be thought too artificial for the Evangelist, his statement that the prophets had foretold that Christ should be called a Nazorean must remain unexplained. We might, of course, conjecture that ὅτι — κληθήσεται is a copyist’ s gloss. In that case the clause will end with προφητῶν ; cf. 26:56, and the reference in ὅπωςπληρωθῇ may be to the settlement in Galilee as contrasted with Judæ a. In this case the editor probably had in mind the passage of Isaiah which he reserves for insertion at 4:14-16. Or the reference in the mind of the compiler may be to the whole of vv. 19-22. Jesus came up from Egypt when Herod was dead, and settled in Galilee in order that He might begin there His Messianic work. The return from a strange country when a persecutor was dead had been foreshadowed in the history of Moses (Exodus 4:19); the settlement in Galilee had been foretold by Isaiah. 13. ἀναχωρησάντωνδὲαὐτῶν ] S1 S2 have “ and after them.” B. adds είςτὴνχώραναὐτῶν from v. 12.— φαίνεται ] א C D . B has ἐφάνη as in 1:20. 15. προφητοῦ ] S1 prefixes “ Isaiah.” 18. κλαυθμός ] C D al S1 S2 prefix θρῆνοςκαί to assimilate to O.T. Just as in ch. 1 there is an undercurrent of apology against Jewish polemic, so too in this chapter. The fact which underlies it is the sojourn of Jesus in Egypt. Celsus is already acquainted with Jewish tradition that Christ worked as a labourer in Egypt, learned magical arts there, and made use of them when He returned to Palestine in order to support His claim to divinity (Contra Celsum, i. 28, 38). For the later forms of this tradition, see Krauss, p. 256, who emphasises the fact that the Talmudic tradition is not dependent on the first Gospel; Laible, pp. 44-48; Zahn, p. 104, Anm. 4. To rebut such misrepresentations of the influence of His sojourn in Egypt on the character of Jesus, the editor states the simple facts. Jesus had, indeed, gone down into Egypt, but as an infant, to escape from the wrath of a king. In all the circumstances of the visit to Egypt there had been unmistakable evidence of divine guidance. Just as of old the Israelite nation, Jehovah’ s firstborn (Exodus 4:22), had been called out of Egypt to be the chosen people; so Jesus the Son of God by supernatural conception was called out of Egypt to save His people. Just as Moses fled from Egypt to escape the wrath of Pharaoh, and returned there when his persecutor was dead (Exodus 4:19), to be the deliverer of his people; so Jesus was taken into Egypt to escape the wrath of Herod, and returned to Palestine when Herod was dead, to deliver His people from their sins. See the admirable commentary of Zahn; and cf. G. H. Box, Interpreter, January 1906, p. 201. The Origin and Date of the Narratives in Chs. 1, 2. 1. The opinion of Usener (Encycl. Bib. iii. 3350), that in the narrative of the supernatural birth “ we unquestionably enter the circle of pagan ideas,” and that “ the idea is quite foreign to Judaism,” is to be decisively rejected if it be intended to carry with it the inference that this idea had not already been used in the interests of Jewish Messianic speculation before the Christian era. It is probably to be found in Isaiah 7:14 and Micah 5:3, and certainly in the Alexandrian Jewish interpretation of Isa 7:14 as represented in the LXX. Cf. also Enoch 62:5 “ Son of the Woman,” all MSS. except G; 69:29 “ Son of the Woman,” G, and Revelation 12:1, Revelation 12:5 See Gunkel, pp. 68-69; Jeremias, pp. 47-49; and for Isa_7, Gressmann, pp. 270 ff. 2. The accumulation of heathen parallels is therefore only valuable as proving that the conception of the supernatural origin of the world’ s Saviour was very widespread. It is found in Assyria and in Egypt, in Parseism and in Buddhism, and had been used with reference to the birth of heroes in the Greek and Roman mythologies. 3. The stories of the supernatural birth might therefore very well have originated in Palestine in the first half of the first century a.d.; the idea of the authors being to explain the divine nature of the Messiah in terms of physical Sonship without any conscious borrowing from non-Jewish sources of speculation. The universal belief in the supernatural birth of gods and heroes, as represented in Judaism by, e.g., Isaiah 7:14 LXX., would have been quite sufficient to supply the central idea, without any recourse to non-Jewish forms of this speculation. 4. But, on the other hand, the fact that the conception of supernatural birth was widespread in the ancient world, and had already been used in pre-Christian speculation on the person of the Messiah, is not in itself an argument against the historical accuracy of the tradition that the Messiah was born in a supernatural manner. If that were so, we should be reduced to the unphilosophic position that the Jewish anticipation of a Messiah could never be fulfilled in any of its developments, because the supposed realisation of these anticipations would always be regarded with suspicion on the ground that anticipation and fulfilment were too closely in agreement. On these lines the only possible Messiah would be one who contradicted in every respect the ideas which previous generations had formed of Him. The truth, no doubt, is that the idea of supernatural birth was one of the many grooves in the mould in which the conception of the Messianic King had been shaped, and that the fulfilment did not prove the anticipation to have been altogether false. 5. Assuming, then, that the tradition of the supernatural birth might have arisen on Palestinian soil in the first century a.d., is it possible to define more closely the period of their publication? 6. In favour of as early a date as possible, is the fact that the agreement of Mat_1 and Luk_1 as to the central fact of supernatural birth presupposes the existence of the tradition for some years prior to the publication of these Gospels. It is here assumed that Luke 1:34, Luke 1:35 form an integral part of Lk.’ s narrative. See Gunkel, p. 67; Interpreter, February 1905, pp. 116 ff. 7. The silence of S. Paul seems adverse to an early date. Whether this Apostle was or was not acquainted with the tradition, it is clear that he did not make any extended use of it as a basis of Christological doctrine in his extant letters. But, on the other hand, it is in every way probable that even if the Apostle had received this tradition, he would not have employed it as an argument for Christianity in his preaching to the Gentiles. To him the resurrection of Christ was the conclusive proof of His divinity (cf. Romans 1:2). The supernatural birth neither enhanced nor diminished that proof. And, on the other hand, there was every reason for keeping in the background a tradition which in the early stages of Church development would probably have proved a great stumbling-block to the progress of Christianity, and a continual source of wounded feeling for the reverence of Christians for the Person of their Master. On the one hand, the proclamation of the supernatural birth amongst the pagan peoples of Asia Minor and Greece and Italy would no doubt have seemed to lower Christianity in this respect to the level of the heathen mythologies. Nothing could be more disastrous, and S. Paul was no doubt far-sighted enough to see it, than quite unnecessarily to give pagan hearers facts which would encourage many of them to think of Christ as they thought of the deities and heroes of their mythologies. When the risen Christ had been revealed in them as in S. Paul, the tradition of His supernatural birth would come to them safeguarded by their belief in Him as the only-begotten Son of God. The silence of S. Paul is analogous to the silence of the author of the Fourth Gospel. This writer almost undeniably wrote at a period when the tradition of the supernatural birth was current. Yet he does not put it forward as a main argument for Christianity. On the other hand, he certainly does not wish to deny its historical character nor to depreciate its value. But he seems to assume it as a part of the Christian faith just as he does the tradition of the Ascension, and to use it as an analogy of the spiritual birth of the Christian believer, 1:14. See Interpreter, Oct. 1905, pp. 51 ff. And again, if the proclamation of the supernatural birth would have lowered Christian doctrine in the eyes of the pagan world, so it would have led to debate which would have been distasteful and painful to Christian reverence. At a very early period Jewish caricatures of the story of the supernatural birth were current. They may already underlie Mark 6:3, and more probably are reflected in Matthew 1:18-25. And wherever Christianity spread, Jewish misrepresentation followed it. If the proclamation of the supernatural birth would have encouraged on the one hand semi-pagan conception of the Messiah, so on the other it would have provoked Jewish slander of a most offensive kind. The silence of S. Paul may well be due partly to his common sense, which enabled him to see that there are wise ways and unwise ways of presenting the facts of Christianity to the world (pearls were not to be cast before swine), and partly to that highly developed Christian reverence and modesty which also marks the narratives of the Gospels. The alleged silence of S. Paul seems, therefore, to be no sufficient argument against the existence of the tradition of the supernatural birth in Palestine during his lifetime. 8. In favour of the early date of the narrative as it now stands in the Gospel, is the prosaic matter of fact style, and the absence of ornamental detail. There is nothing in the narrative itself which forbids our supposing that it formed one of a series of traditions preserved in the Christian Church in Palestine in the middle of the first century a.d., and there is nothing in the narrative, except a supposed impossibility of the central fact recorded, which prevents our supposing that this particular tradition originated with the family concerned in it. 9. As regards the incidents of ch. 2, the Palestinian atmosphere of literary style and religious belief is very strongly marked. See Box. The narratives certainly received their present form at the hands of Jewish Christians. If we allow for a certain element of poetic looseness, and do not examine every phrase by a rigid standard of photographic accuracy which is quite foreign to Oriental standards of historical narrative, there is nothing to prevent our supposing that these traditions were current in the Palestinian Church in the middle of the century, and that they represent in the main events of history. That Babylonian astrologers should have sought for the expected king in Jerusalem; that the Jewish authorities should have referred them to Bethlehem; that Herod should have killed the infants of that village; that Joseph and Mary should have sought refuge in Egypt, and have eventually settled in Galilee,— all this is entirely within the limits of probability, due account being taken of the circumstances of the age and the political condition of Palestine. 10. Something should be said in conclusion as to a recent attempt to show that the story of the Magi was added to the Gospel as late as 119 a.d. The alleged evidence is a Syrian documents which states that Balaam prophesied the destruction of the Assyrians by the Greeks, and the rise of the star in Israel. This was recorded in a letter written by Balak to the Assyrian monarch. It was laid up in the Assyrian archives, and handed down from king to king. At last, in the reign of Pir Shabour, the star appeared, and the Magi were sent. The colophon at the end states that “ in the year 430 (= 118-119 a.d.), in the reign of Hadrianus Cæ sar, in the consulship of Severus and Fulgus, and the episcopacy of Xystus, Bishop of Rome … this concern arose in the minds of men who were acquainted with the Holy Books, and through the pains of the great men in various places this history was sought for, and found, and written in the tongue of those who took this care.” Mr. Conybeare argues that the “ Holy Books” are the books of the Old Testament, and seems to imply that “ this history” was Matthew 2:1-15. He further argues that the story of the Magi thus elaborated was “ an echo of the story as told by Dio and Pliny of the visit of the Magi to Nero, and of their worshipping him in Rome.” But there seems to be no reason why we should not rather agree with Zahn (Einl. ii. 266 f.), who sees in the “ Holy Books” the New Testament, including Mat_2, which was already, therefore, an integral part of the Gospel in 119 a.d.; and in the question with which men at that time busied themselves, the question as to the year in which the Magi came to Bethlehem, or the problem of the harmonisation of the infancy narratives of Mt. and Lk. The history which they wrote will therefore be not Mat_2, but the legend about the preservation of Balak’ s letter, and the coming of the Magi to Bethlehem in the reign of Pir Shabour. Palestinian traditions. The Septuagint Version. Babylonian Talmud. Targum. Dittenberger Sylloge. Syriac version: Curetonian. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Dalman. As compared with the formula in 1:23, 2:15. Elsewhere ὅπως occurs 8:17, 13:25. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Cf. Harnack, “ die Legende von der Jungfrauen-geburt, die Matthä us zuerst fü r uns bezeugt, auf judenchristlichem, nä her jerusalemischem Boden entstanden ist,” Lukas der Arzt, 118, Anm. 1. Cf., however, Galatians 4:4, 1 Timothy 2:15. Interpreter, January 1906, pp. 195 ff. Conybeare, Guardian, April 29, 1903. Cf. also Nestle, Zeitsch. f. Wissensch. Litt. xxxvi. 435-438; Hilgenfeld, ib. xxxviii. 447-451. Published by W. Wright in the Journal of Sacred Literature, New Series, vols. ix. x., April and October 1866. B.— 3.-4:11. FOR HIS (1) 3:1-12. He was heralded by the Baptist 1-12. The editor now begins to copy Mk. But he considerably paraphrases and expands Mark 1:1-8. 1. And in those days cometh John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judæ a.] Mk. has, v. 4 “ John the Baptizer was in the wilderness preaching.” ἐνδὲταῖςἡμέραιςἐκείναις ] is a loose connecting link (cf. Exodus 2:11) anticipated from Mk v. 9. Between chs. 2 and 3 is a gap of some thirty years.— παραγίνεται ] occurs once in Mk. (14:43), where Mt. substitutes as usual an aorist. The present here is unexpected.— ὁβαπτιστής ] Mk. has ὁβαπτίζων . For the same change, cf. Mark 6:14 = Matthew 14:2.— ἐντῇἐρήμῳ ] the editor adds the explanatory τῆςἸουδαίας . (M) 2. Saying, Repent: for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand.] Mk has: “ preaching a baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.” The editor omits the last clause in view of the fact that Christ came to be baptized.— μετανοεῖτε ] On repentance as necessary for the coming of the Messianic period, see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 112 f.; and for μετάνοια in Alexandrine Jewish Philosophy, see Philo, De Pæ nit. ii. 405; De Præ m. et Pæ n. ii. 410. For sayings about repentance in the Talmud, see Joma 86b. It brings healing to the world, reaches to the throne of glory, cancels a prohibition in the Torah, brings salvation, and lengthens the life of men. βασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν ] See Introduction, p. lxvii. The conception here involved is obviously one of warning and judgement: “ Repent: for the kingdom is near” ; that is to say, the coming of the kingdom will involve judgement upon the unrepentant. (M) 3. For this is he that was spoken of through Isaiah the prophet, saying, A voice of a crier in the wilderness, Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight His paths.] Mk vv. 1, 2 has: “ As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way. A voice of a crier in the wilderness,” etc. Mt. omits the citation from Malachi as irrelevant after the express reference to Isaiah, but he has inserted it later at 11:10.— οὖτοςγάρἐστιν ] The sanction of the Baptist’ s message lay in his personality. He was the “ voice” spoken of by Isaiah. The quotation is from Isaiah 40:3. It was clearly taken by Mk. from the , in which ἐντῇἐρήμῳ is connected with βοῶντος , whereas the Hebrew connects it with the following imperative. Mk.’ s context demanded the LXX. order.— διὰἨσαίου ] Mk. has ἐντῷἨσαίᾳ . Mat_13 times uses διά in this sense; cf. 1:22. (M) 4. Now he, John, had his raiment (made) of camel’ s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins. And his food was locusts and wild honey.] Mk. has: “ And John was clothed with camel’ s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins, and (was) eating locusts and wild honey.” — αὐτὸςδέ ] For αὐτός before the proper name, cf. Mark 6:17. “ Nach aramä scher Weise,” Wellhausen. But cf. Moulton, p. 91.— εἷχεν ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s harsh construction ἦνἐνδεδυμένοςτρίχαςκαμήλουκαὶζώνην .— ἡδὲτροφὴἦναὐτοῦ ] Mt. thus avoids Mk.’ s loosely connected participle καὶἔσθων .— ἀκρίδες ] Vegetarian tendencies in the early Church led to the alteration of locusts into “ milk” (so Tatian; see Harris, Fragments of the Commentary of Ephrem, p. 17) or “ cakes” (so the Ebionites, according to Epiph. Hœ r. 30, 13). (M) 5. Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judæ a, and all the district of the Jordan.] Mk. has: “ And there went out to him all the country of Judæ a, and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem.” The περίχωροςτοῦἸορδάνου , cf. Genesis 13:10, Genesis 13:11, is found also in Luke 3:3. For τότε , see on 2:7. (M) 6. And were being baptized in the river Jordan by him, confessing their sins.] Mk. has: “ And were being baptized by him in the river Jordan,” etc. Mk. has the description of the Baptist and the thronging to him of the people in the reverse order. Mt.’ s change is due to a sense of literary fitness. The description of the Baptist comes more appropriately after the statement of his appearance as a preacher, than it does after the account of the effect of his preaching upon the people. There is no reason to suppose that Mt. had any other source than Mk. for these six verses, unless παραγίνεται is a hint of such a source (cf. Introduction, p. lx). In Mk. they stand at the beginning of the Gospel, and are written in Mk.’ s abrupt style. The construction of Mk vv. 1-4 is not altogether clear (see Swete, in loc.), and v. 7 is awkward. Mt. rewrites the passage in a smoother and more connected style. 3. διἀ ] So א C D 1 13 33 124 157 209 ; ὑπό , K .— φωνὴβοῶντοςἐντῇἐρήμῳ ] Om. 1.— εὐθείαςποιεῖτετὰςτρίβουςαὐτοῦ ] Om. S1 k. αύτοῦ is substituted by Mk. and Mt. for the LXX. τοῦθεοῦἠμῶν ; b 2 assimilate to the LXX. 4. καὶζώνην — ὀσφὺναὐτοῦ is omitted in Mk. by D a b fl2. μέλιἄγριον ] S1 has “ honey of the hills,” S2 “ honey of the waste.” 7. The next two verses in Mk. contain a summary of the Baptist’ s preaching. Mk. had selected from Peter’ s account of the Baptist’ s preaching a few words which suited his introductory section (1:1-11), because they represented the Baptist as looking forward to the coming of Christ. John contrasts the work of the coming Messiah with his own as being not merely symbolical “ with water,” nor merely preparatory “ of repentance,” but spiritual and final “ with the Holy Spirit.” Mt. takes these words, and, combining with them other sayings traditionally attributed to the Baptist, frames a discourse of which the keynote is “ judgement.” He represents it as addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees, and indeed it is very unlikely that the Baptist should have spoken words like these to the common people who crowded to his baptism. If the first two chapters have been apologetic, rebutting Jewish calumnies, this speech of the Baptist’ s is marked by the tendency to anti-Jewish polemic which runs through the whole Gospel. The authorities and representatives of the Jewish nation had been forewarned, even so far back as the days of John’ s preaching, of the fatal results of their short-sighted policy towards the Messiah and His teaching. 7. And seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, O offspring of vipers, who bade you to flee from the coming wrath?] Lk. has: “ He said, therefore, to the multitudes who went out to be baptized by him,” etc. Both τίς and ὑμῖν are emphatic, and the tone is one of ironical surprise. “ Can it actually be the case that you have been persuaded to believe that the divine judgement is near, and stirred to endeavour to escape from it?” For the divine wrath, cf. Enoch 90:18 “ the staff of His wrath” ; 91:7 “ the holy Lord will come forth with wrath” ; Wis 5:20 “ He shall sharpen stern wrath for a sword” ; 24:30 “ the day of wrath” ; Secrets of Enoch 50:5A “ lest the wrath of God come upon you” ; Romans 1:18 “ the wrath of God is revealed” ; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 “ the coming wrath” ; Romans 2:5 “ the day of wrath” ; Revelation 6:16 etc. (X) 8. Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance.] So Lk. with “ fruits” for “ fruit.” If you are really alive to the necessity of escape from the divine wrath, take the only possible way: repent, and act as only men who have repented can act. For the connection between repentance and good works, cf. Rabbi Eleazer ben Jacob (Ab 4:13), “ Repentance and good works are a shield against punishment.” (X) 9. And think not to say in yourselves, We have Abraham as (our) father: for I say to you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.] Lk. has: “ And do not begin to say,” etc. Do not suppose that you can substitute for repentance and good works the plea of descent from Abraham. The divine wrath is about to break in judgement. The Jew will not escape by virtue of his nationality. For a commentary on the idea that membership of the Jewish polity could save from judgement, cf. Romans 2:17-29. (X) 10. And already the axe is laid at the root of the trees. Every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is cut down, and cast into the fire.] So Lk. Moreover, delay will be fatal. Already the judgement is beginning. (M) 11. I indeed baptize you with water to repentance. But He who comes after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and with fire.] Mk. has these four clauses in the order 2, 3, 1, 4. Lk. agrees with Mt.— ἐγὼμὲνὑμᾶςβαπτίζω ] Mk. has the aor. ἐβάπτισα , which is due to Semitic influence.— ἐνὔδατι ] For the instrumental ἐν , cf. Blass, 116 f. Mk. has the simple dative.— εἰςμετάνοιαν ] with a view to repentance, i.e. the baptism denoted that those who submitted to it repented of their sins and wished to be cleansed from them. It symbolised both a present and future state of repentance. Mt. adds these words by way of compensation for the βάπτισμαμετανοίας which he has omitted from Mk v. 4. For the prepositional use of ὀπίσω , cf. Blass, p. 129.— τὰὑποδήματαβαστάσαι ] Mk. has κύψαςλῦσαιτὸνἱμάντατῶνὑποδημάτωναὐτοῦ . To carry the sandals after his master is the duty of a slave.— αὐτός ] Cf. Blass, p. 164: ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳ . Baptism with water and baptism with the Holy Spirit need not be regarded as antithetical and exclusive. The former symbolised repentance. But repentance anticipates the gift of righteousness. Baptism with the Holy Spirit conveys this righteousness. The former is preparatory, the latter final. The Messiah was Himself to be endowed with the Spirit; cf. Isaiah 11:2, Enoch 49:3, 62:2, 17:42 ὁθεὸςκατειργάσατοαὐτὸνδυνατὸνἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳ , and so able to transmit it to other people. Cf. Test. Lev_18Lev_18, Juda 24. But if His work should in one direction be a work of transmission of righteousness, in another it would be one of judgement. He should baptize with fire καὶπυρί . Not in Mk. The words are interpreted in the next verse. The fire is that of judgment upon sinners. (X) 12. Whose fan is in His hand, and He will purge His threshing floor, and will gather His wheat into the granaryi; but the chaff He will burn with fire unquenchable.] So Lk. with infinitives for the future tenses. These words furnish a commentary on καὶπυρί of the last verse. The Messiah will separate between the repentant and the unrepentant. The former He will baptize with the Holy Spirit, and gather them like wheat into a granary (i.e. into His kingdom). The latter He will exclude from His kingdom, and commit them to fire to be burned like chaff. For the work of the Messiah in destroying sinners, cf. Enoch 69:27 “ He caused the sinners and those who have led the world astray to pass away and be destroyed from off the face of the earth” ; 62:2 “ And the word of His mouth slew all the sinners, and all the unrighteous were destroyed before His face.” The unrighteous descend, 63:10 “ into the flame of the pain of Sheol.” 7. βάπτισμααὐτοῦ ] Om. αὐτοῦ , א * B. 8. U al a g2 S1 S2 have “ fruits,” assimilating to Lk. 11. πνεύματιἀγίῳκαὶπυρί ] S1 has “ with fire and with the Holy Spirit.” Om. καὶπυρί , E S V al. But the words are essential to the context. 7-12. In place of Mk vv. 7, 8, both Mt. and Lk. have a longer discourse, Matthew 7-12, Luke 3:7-17, which embodies Mk.’ s two verses. In the parallels to Mark 3:7, Mark 3:8, Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following respects. Both arrange the four clauses in the order 3, 1, 2, 4 as against Mk.’ s 1, 2, 3, 4. Both have μέν after ἐγώ , and βαπτίζω for ἐβάπτισα . Both have ἐν before πνεύματι , and καὶπυρί at the end. In the remaining verses there is very great verbal agreement. The only divergences in the words of the Baptist are Mat_9 μὴδόξητε = Luk_8 μὴἄρξησθε , Mat_12 the ind., Luk_17 the inf. It seems possible, therefore, that the two Evangelists had before them a second source, containing words ascribed to the Baptist. It is not, however, likely that in this source the sayings were set in any historical connection; for whilst Mt. makes of them a discourse of warning to the Pharisees and Sadducees, Lk. divides them into short addresses to the multitude, viz. 7-9, 16, 17 separated by other sayings to the multitudes, to toll-gatherers, and to soldiers. The source, therefore, seems to have contained sayings only without historical incident. Again, it is possible that the two Evangelists drew these verses from oral tradition or from different Greek sources. Such short summaries of sayings may well have been preserved orally, and would tend to become stereotyped in language during the process of transmission and use in the services of the Christian Churches and in the discourses of preachers. Or, lastly, Lk. may have read the first Gospel and been influenced by its phraseology. Against the theory of one common source may be urged (a) the different descriptions of the audience; (b) the absence of Lk vv. 10-14 from Mt.; (c) the variations in language. Matthew 3:9 δόξητε = Luke 3:8 ἄρξησθε ; Matthew 3:11a εἰςμετάνοιαν ; Lk. omits; Matthew 3:11b τὰὑποδήματαβαστάσαι = Luke 3:16b λῦσαιτὸνἱμάντατῶνὑποδημάτωναὐτοῦ ; Matthew 3:12 καὶδιακαθαριεῖ , καὶσυνάξει = Luke 3:17 διακαθᾶραι , καὶσυναγαγεῖν . On the other hand, the otherwise close and minute agreement in language may be urged in its favour. But we are possibly dealing with fragments of four (three) and two verses in length. There seems to be no reason why such scraps should not have been stereotyped in language and widely known. It is a matter of indifference whether the Evangelists borrowed them from oral tradition or from independent written sources. But admitting that close verbal identity does not necessarily presuppose direct and immediate community of source, the variations in Mat_9 = Luk_8, Mat_12 = Luk_17, combined with the differences of setting, are clearly adverse to a common written source. It must remain probable that Mt. drew the words from an unknown source, whilst Lk. also had them in an independent source. (2) 13-17. At His Baptism He received the Holy Spirit, and was supernaturally proclaimed to be the Son of God, the Beloved whom God has chosen = Mark 1:9-11. (M) 13. Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to be baptized by him.] Mk. has: “ And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized in the Jordan by John.” Mt. substitutes τότε (see on 2:7) for καὶἐγένετο . The latter connecting formula is common in Lk. Mk. has it rarely— 1:9, 2:15 2:23, 4:4, 9:7? Mt. retains it only in 9:10 = Mark 2:15. Elsewhere he has it five times in the formula καὶἐγένετοὄτεἐτέλεσενὁἸησοῦς , 7:28, 11:1, 13:53, 19:1, 26:1. ἐνἐκείναιςταῖςἡμέραις he omits here, having anticipated it in 3:1. For Mk.’ s ἧλθεν he has παραγίνεται to assimilate to 3:1. ἀπὸΝαζαρέτ he omits as needless after 2:23. For the substitution of “ to be baptized” for “ and was baptized,” cf. the similar change in 4:1 “ to be tempted” for Mark 1:13 “ and He was— tempted.” The editor has in mind the fulfilment of the divine purpose in the life of the Messiah. For τοῦ with the inf. (7 times in Mt.) expressing purpose, cf. Blass, p. 235 and 2:13. The aorist implies a definite and completed action. (E) 14, 15. And John tried to forbid Him, saying, I have need to be baptized by Thee, and dost Thou come to me? And Jesus answering said to him, Suffer it now: for so it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffers Him.] These verses are not found in Mk., and appear to be an attempt to explain why the Messiah submitted to John’ s baptism. πληρῶσαιπᾶσανδικαιοσύνην apparently means “ to leave nothing undone that had been revealed as the righteous will of God.” John’ s baptism had the divine sanction, and the Messiah therefore must submit to it. In Mk.’ s Gospel the baptism of Christ would seem to be recorded as the period when He received His Messianic authority. Then the Spirit came down into Him, and the divine voice declared Him to be the beloved Son. But when Mt. prefixed the narrative of the supernatural birth, the question was at once raised, How could one who was conceived of the Holy Spirit need to be baptized in order to receive Him? Mt. leaves the question unsolved, but attempts a partial solution by suggesting that the baptism was not necessary to the Messiahship of Christ. The Spirit, indeed, then came down upon Him, but He was not then constituted the Son of God. This He had been from His birth. The divine voice only ratified and publicly proclaimed an already existing Sonship. With this insertion and its attempt to explain why Christ was baptized, cf. the omission of Mk.’ s statement that John’ s baptism was εἰςἄφεσινἁμαρτιῶν . A somewhat parallel account is quoted by Jerome, Contra Pelag. iii. 2 from the Gospel according to the Hebrews: “ Ecce mater domini et fratres ejus dicebant ei: ‘ Joannes baptista baptizat in remissionem peccatorum; eamus et baptizemur ab eo.’ Dixit autem eis ‘ Quid peccavi ut vadam et baptizer ab eo? nisi forte hoc ipsum quod dixi ignorantia est.’ ” Here the point seized for explanation is the sinlessness of Christ. How could one who was sinless submit to a baptism “ of repentance unto remission of sins,” Mark 1:4? The editor of the first Gospel has also felt the difficulty, and partially removed it, by omitting εἰςἄφεσινἁμαρτιῶν . See on v. 2. But since he has prefixed to the account of the baptism the narrative of the supernatural birth and the words of the Baptist, “ He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire,” the question was raised in a new form, How could one who was begotten of the Holy Spirit (1:20) receive the Holy Spirit at baptism? And how could one who was Himself to baptize with the Holy Spirit come to John for baptism? I have marked the insertion vv. 14-15 as editorial, but of course the editor may be borrowing from a source known to him.— τότε ] see on 2:7.— ἀφίησιν ] For the historic present, cf. Introduction, p. lx. (M) 16. And Jesus, having been baptized, went up straightway from the water: and, behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God coming down as a dove, and coming upon Him.] Mk. has: “ And straightway going up out of the water, He saw the heavens being rent, and the Spirit as a dove coming down into Him” . Mt. by substituting ἀπό for ἐκ and avoiding εἰς in the previous verse, suggests that the “ baptism” did not necessarily involve complete immersion. After the insertion of vv. 14, 15 he adds βαπτισθεὶςδὲὁἸησοῦς as a connecting link = Mk.’ s καί . He then retains Mk.’ s εὐσύς , which he elsewhere generally omits. καὶεὐθύς is characteristic of Mk., and seems to be used by him without any emphasis on the idea of immediacy, but rather as a mere connecting link. Mt. prefers τότε ; Lk. καὶἐγένετο — καίἰδού ] See on 1:20.— ἀνεῴχθησαν ] a commonplace word for Mk.’ s graphic σχιζομένους , which is not used elsewhere in this sense. Cf. Isaiah 64:1 “ O that thou wouldest rend the heavens,” where the LXX. has ἐὰνἀνοίξῃςτὸνοὐρανόν . Ezekiel 1:1 καὶἠνοίχθησανοἱοὐρανοί , καὶεἶδον .— καὶεἶδεντὸπνεῦμαθεοῦκαταβαῖνονὡσεὶπεριστερὰνἐρχόμενονἐπ ʼ αὐτόν ] Mk. has: “ the Spirit as a dove coming down into Him.” The ὡσεὶπεριστερὰν must mean like a dove in appearance. Lk. so interpreted it and explained it. Philo describes Wisdom as a dove, Quis Rer. Div. Her. i. 491. Mk.’ s “ coming down as a dove into Him” is rather harsh. Mt. expands to smooth the construction: “ coming down as a dove and coming upon Him.” The editor may have felt that “ coming down into” seemed to suggest too forcibly that up to this time Jesus had been without the Spirit. The τὸ — θεοῦ — ἐπ ʼ may be due also to Isaiah 42:1 τὸπνευμὰμουἐπ ʼ αὐτὸν . (M) 17. And behold a voice from the heavens, saying, This is My Son, the Beloved, in whom I was well pleased.] Mk. has: “ And there came a voice from the heavens, Thou art My Son, the Beloved, in whom I was well pleased.” — καὶἰδοὺφωνή ] Mk. has καὶφωνὴἐγένετο . For καὶἰδού , see on 1:20. In Mk. it would seem that the voice was heard by Jesus alone. Mt. alters σὺεἶ into οὗτόςἐστιν to make it clear that the proclamation was a public one. The passage is modelled on Isaiah 42:1 as quoted in Matthew 12:18-21 Ἰδού , ὁπαῖςμου , ὀ͂νᾑρέτισα · ὁἀγαπηπόςμου , ὅνεὐδόκησενἡψυχήμου · θήσωτὸπνε͂μάμουἐπ ʼ αὐτόν . The Messiah is in a higher sense than Israel the Son and the Beloved of God. The aor. εὐδόκησα is modelled on the aorists of the LXX. in this passage, which were probably interpreted as implying the divine election of Israel, and so here the divine election of the Messiah. Cf. the aorist ἐδόθη , 28:18; παρεδόθη , 11:26. ὁἀγαπητός is not an attribute of ὁυἱόςμου , but an independent title = “ the Beloved” = the Messiah. Cf. Armitage Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 229 ff.; Dict. Bib. art. “ Isaiah, Ascension of.” 15, 16. τότεἀφίησιναὐτόν · βαπτισθεὶςὄὲδἸησοῦς ] S1 has: “ Then he suffered Him to be baptized. And when He was baptized.” S2 “ Then He suffered Him to be baptized. And Jesus had been baptized; and when He was baptized.” a g1 have; “ et cum baptizaretur (Jesus) lumen ingens (magnum) circumfulsit (fulgebat) de aqua ita at timerent omnes qui advenerunt (congregati erant).” For the light, cf. the Ebionite Gospel as quoted by Epiphanius, xxx. 13: καίεὐθῦς (after the voice) περιέλαμψετὸντόπονφῶςμέγα ; and Just. Dial. lxxxviii. κατελθόντοςτοῦἸησοῦἐπὶτὸὔδωρκαὶπῦρἀνήφθηὲντῷἸορδάνῃ . Wellhausen and Blass both note that the text presents difficulties, and both come to the conclusion that καὶβαπτισθεὶς — ὔδατος is an interpolation from Mk. But the difficulties are due to the work of the editor in dove-tailing his insertion vv. 14, 15 into the text of Mk. After the insertion he comes to Mk.’ s words: καὶεὐθὐςάναβαίνωνἐκτοῦὔδατοςεἶδεν . As he has previously changed Mk.’ s καὶἐβαπτίσθηεἰςτὸνἸορδάνηνὑπὸἸωάνου into ἐπὶτὸνἸορδάνηνπρὸςτὸνἸωάνηντοῦβαπτισθῆναιύπ ʼ αύτοῦ , he feels it necessary to take up the thread of the narrative, and to state the fact of the baptism by inserting βαπτισθεὶςδὲὁἸησοῦς . This carries with it the change of Mk.’ s εὐθὺςἀναβαίνων into εύθὺάνέβη . The subject of εἶδεν is as MK. Ἰησοῦς . Contrast John 1:32. We might have expected Mt. to make the publicity of the whole scene more emphatic by introducing John or others as the subject of εῖδεν . But he has followed Mk. in this particular, contenting himself with suggesting the publicity of the divine proclamation by changing Σὺεί into οὑτόςέστιν . S1 S2 add “ to be baptized” in order to relieve the ambiguity of ὰφίησιν and its Syriac equivalent. Both might mean “ leaves Him.” S2 adds also: “ And Jesus had been baptized,” from an over-scrupulous desire to have the fact of baptism explicitly stated. 17. οὑτόςὲστιν ] D a S1 S2 have σὺεἶ as in Mar_1:ll. The fact that Mt. in 17:5 assimilates to 3:17 by adding ἰδού , λέγουσα , and ἐνῷεὐδόκησα , makes it probable that οὖτόςὲστιν of 17:5 occurred also in 3:17. If σὺεἶ had stood there, we should probably also have found it in 17:5. ὁυἰόςμουὸἀγαπητός ] S1 S2 have “ My Son and My beloved.” 13-17. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ἠνεῴχθησαν , Mat_16 = ἀνεῳχθῆναι , Luk_21 for σχιζομένους , Mar_10; ὲπ ʼ αὐτόν , Mat_16, Luk_22 for εἰςαὐτόν , Mar_10. the Second Gospel. The Septuagint Version. ζώνην — αὐτοῦ . Cf. 2 K 1:8. Babylonian Talmud. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. jubilees. A disciple of Akiba. See Baeher, Die Agada der Tannaiten, ii. 283. The Psalms of Solomon. the Matthæ an Logia. Irenæ us. (3) 4:1-11. He was prepared for His ministry by temptation. An expansion of Mar 1:12 Mark 1:12, Mark 1:13 1. Then was Jesus led into the wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted by the devil.] Mk. has: “ And straightway the spirit driveth Him into the wilderness. And He was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan.” — τότε ] For Mk.’ s καὶεὐθύς , see on 3:16.— ὁἸησοῦςἀνήχθη — ὑπὸτοῦπνεύματος ] For Mk.’ s harsh τὸπνεῦμααὐτὸνἐκβάλλει , thus avoiding ἐκβάλλειν , a harsh word in this context, Lk. also has ἤγετο . Mt. substitutes a passive for Mk.’ s active voice in 9:25, 14:11, 16:26, 18:8, 19:13, 24:22 (2), 26:57, 27:38, 28:6.— πειρασθῆναι ] for Mt.’ s emphasis on the divine purpose, see on 3:13. For the final infinitive, see Blass, p. 223. Mt. avoids Mk.’ s repetition of “ the wilderness.” — ὑπὸτοῦδιαβόλου ] So Lk. (M) 2. And having fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterwards hungry.] Mk. has only the “ forty days,” omitting the fasting and the hunger (which Lk. also has). But he has the obscure, “ And he was with the wild beasts,” which Mt. omits. The verse reminds us of the fasting of Moses, Exodus 34:28. For the form ἐπείνασα , see Blass, pp. 40, 47. Lk. has: “ And He ate nothing in those days; and when they were accomplished He was hungry.” Vv. 3-10 are not in Mk. Lk. has a parallel narrative, but the temptations are in a different order, and the descriptive verses differ in phraseology. There is also less verbal agreement here in the dialogue than there is in 3:7-12 = Luke 3:7-17. As in that case the two Evangelists may have drawn from independent written or oral sources. 3. And the tempter came and said to Him, If thou art God’ s Son, say that these stones become loaves.] Lk. has: “ And the devil said to Him, If thou art God’ s Son, say to this stone that it become a loaf.” — καὶπροσελθὼν — εἶπεν ] Lk. has εἶπενδέ . προσέρχεσθαι a favourite word in Mt. It occurs 52 times: in Mar_6, in Luk_10.— ὁπειράζων ] a reminiscence of Mk.’ s παραζόμενος — υἱὸςθεοῦ ] Cf. Words, 274 ff.— οἱλίθοι ] Lk. has the singular. For Mt.’ s predilection for plurals, see on 8:26. (X) 4. And He answered and said, It is written, Not upon bread alone shall man live, but upon every utterance that proceedeth through the mouth of God.] Lk. has: “ And Jesus answered him, It is written that, Not upon bread alone shall man live.” The quotation is from Deuteronomy 8:3 in the language of the B has τῷ before ἐκπορευομένῳ , but A F Luc omit. In Deuteronomy the writer describes how the Israelites in their wanderings learned that natural products do not always suffice to support life. They were thus led to live in dependence on the creative word of God. Christ restates this principle as valid for Himself. He will rely upon God’ s will for the necessities of life. The tempter implied that Sonship involved power to perform miracles. Christ neither affirms nor denies this, but replies that God, if it be His will, can provide food for His needs. Cf. John 4:34. For an earlier application of Deu 8:3, cf. Wisd. 16:26. (X) 5. Then the devil taketh Him into the holy city, and placed Him upon the wing of the temple.] Lk. has: “ And he led Him to Jerusalem, and planed Him upon the wing of the temple.” — τὴνἁγίανπόλιν ] Cf. 27:53, Revelation 11:2, 21:2, Revelation 11:10, 22:19, Daniel 9:24, To 13:9.— πτερύγιον ] For the diminutive form, see Blass, p. 63.— παραλαμβάνει ] The historic presents here and in the succeeding verses are striking; see Introduction, p. lx. (X) 6. And he saith to Him, If Thou art God’ s Son, cast Thyself down: for it is written, that His angels He charges concerning Thee: and upon (their) hands they shall bear Thee, lest Thou strike against a stone Thy foot.] Lk. has: “ And he said to Him, If Thou art God’ s Son, cast Thyself hence down. For it is written, that His angels He charges concerning Thee, to guard Thee; and that upon (their) hands they shall bear Thee, lest Thou dash against a stone Thy foot.” The quotation is from Psalms 90:11, Psalms 90:12. Mt omits τοῦδιαφυλάξαισεὲνταῖςὁδοῖςσου , and Lk. omits ἐνταῖςὁδοῖςσου , which would not have been suitable to this context. (X) 7. Jesus said to him, Again it is written, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.] Lk. has: “ And Jesus answered and said to him that, It has been said,” etc. The quotation is from Deuteronomy 6:16 in the words of the LXX. (X) 8. Again the devil taketh Him unto an exceeding high mountain, and showeth Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.] Lk. has: “ And taking Him up, he showed Him all the kingdoms of the inhabited world in a moment of time.” Lk.’ s ἀναγαγών is ambiguous, “ into the air” ? For Mt.’ s mountain, cf. the mountain of the Sermon, 5:1; the mountain of Transfiguration, 17:1; and the mountain of Ascension, 28:16. (X) 9. And said to Him, All these things will I give Thee, if Thou wilt fall down and worship me.] Lk. has: “ And the devil said to Him, To Thee I will give all this authority and their glory: because to me it has been delivered; and to whomsoever I will, I give it. Thou, therefore, if Thou wilt worship before me, all shall be Thine.” (X) 10. Then saith Jesus to him, Away, Satan: for it is written, The Lord thy God shah thou worship, and Him alone shah thou serve.] Lk. has: “ And Jesus answered and said to him, It is written,” etc. The quotation comes from Deuteronomy 6:13. B has there φοβηθήσῃ , and omits μόνῳ . But A has προσκυνήσεις and μόνῳ a favourite word with Mt., generally takes a dative; cf. 2:2, 8, 11, 4:9, 8:2, 9:18, 14:33, 15:25, 18:26, 28:9. (X) 11. Then the devil leaveth Him.] Lk. has: “ And having accomplished every temptation, the devil departed from Him for a time.” Mt. now returns to Mark 1:12. (M) And, behold, angels came and were ministering to Him.] Mk.has: “ And the angels were ministering to Him.” For τότε , see on 2:7; for καὶἰδού , 1:20; and for προσῆλθον , v. 3. 6. περὶσοῦ ] 1 adds: “ that they should keep thee,” assimilating to Lk. 8. τοῦκόσμου ] S1 “ of this world.” καὶτὴνδόξαναὐτῶν ] Omit S1. 9. S1 has: “ And said to Him, These kingdoms and their glory Thou hast seen. To Thee will I give them, if,” etc. 10. ὂπαγε ] So א B C * 1 f k. Add όπίσωμου C2 D al 2. S1has “ behind.” 11. διάβολος ] S1 S2 add “ for a time,” assimilating to Lk. The three temptations are clearly symbolical. That is suggested at the outset by “ was led by the Spirit,” an external representation of an inward experience. The first temptation was to put to the test His own consciousness of divine “ Sonship.” The “ Son of God” could change stones into loaves when necessity arose. In answer, Christ refuses thus to test His own convictions. He would act only as God willed. The second was a temptation to put God to the test. If the “ Son of God” were in danger, God would protect Him. In answer, Christ appeals to Scripture for proof that such testing was forbidden. The third was a temptation to grasp at once and by one act the Messianic sovereignty of the world, which His consciousness of Messiahship led Him to expect in the future. For answer, Christ finally dismisses the tempter. The service of God to which He was pledged forbade the premature hastening of events by methods which involved rebellion against God’ s will. Lk. has the last two temptations in the reverse order, and consequently no ὕπαγεΣατανᾶ . His arrangement avoids the double change of scene which is found in Mt.— desert to Jerusalem, Jerusalem to a high mountain. On the other hand, Mt.’ s arrangement is probably due to his belief that the offer of universal monarchy formed the fitting climax to the series. By inserting the mountain, the editor may have intended to draw a contrast between the mountain upon which Christ refused Messianic power with that other mountain (28:16) upon which at a later period He told His disciples that all power was given to Him in heaven and upon earth. It seems probable that the three temptations are artificially connected with Mk.’ s brief statement (1:12, 13), where the whole scene takes place in the wilderness. “ He was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted.” There He was with the beasts, and there presumably angels ministered to Him. But in Mt., after the first temptation, we leave the wilderness, and the ministration of angels presumably took place on the high mountain. C.— 4:12-15:20. IN GALILEE = Mark 1:14-23 (1) 12-17. Appearance in Galilee. From Mark 1:14 Mark 1:14, Mark 1:15 (M) 12, 13. And when He heard that John was delivered up, He departed into Galilee. And having left Nazara, He came and settled at Capḥ arnaum, which is on the lake, in the districts of Zabulon and Naphtali.] Mk. has: “ And after that John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee.” For ἀκούσας , cf. 14:13, a second occasion on which Christ’ s movements were conditioned by tidings of the Baptist.— ἀνεχώρησεν ] See on 2:12.— ἐλθὼνκατῴκησενεἰςΚαφαρναούμ ] The editor anticipates the arrival at Capharnaum from Mark 1:23, because he wishes to make it the subject of a fulfilment of prophecy.— τὴνπαραθαλασσίαν ] Capharnaum, whether identified with Tell Ḥ û m or Khâ n Minyeh (see Sanday, Sacred Sites, 36 ff.), being on the shore of the lake.— ἐνὁρίοιςΖαβουλὼνκαὶΝεφθαλείμ ]. This geographical note is necessary to explain the bearing of the following quotation: 14. In order that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying.] For the formula, see on 1:22. The quotation comes from Isaiah 9:1, Isaiah 9:2. (O) 15. Land of Zebulon, land of Naphtali, way of the sea, over Jordan, Galilee of the nations.] (O) 16. The people which (was) sitting in darkness saw a great light. And for those sitting in a region and shadow of death, light rose for them.] The editor seems to be quoting a Greek version, otherwise he would hardly have rendered ד ר ך by the accusative ὁδόν . In the original it is the object of a verb; but Mt., who wrests the words from the context and omits the verbs, would, if translating from the Hebrew, have rendered ὁδός just as he has given us γῆ , not γῆν . ὁδόν can only be due to careless copying from a version before him. This version was not the LXX., which differs a good deal from Mt.’ s rendering. B of the LXX. has not ὁδὸνθαλάσσης but these words stand in LXX. א o a A Q, and were found in Aquila and Theodotion. Mt. presumably had before him a Greek version which was either different from the LXX., or was an early form of the LXX., containing ὁδὸνθαλάσσης In the latter case he has adapted the verbs to suit his context. We need not inquire as to the exact signification of the geographical terms in the original. The editor tears the words from their context, because he saw in them a prophecy of the fact that Christ went to Galilee to begin His ministry, and settled for that purpose at Capharnaum, which became from henceforth His headquarters. Isaiah had spoken of Galilee . He had also spoken of ὁδὸνθαλάσσης , and Capharnaum was παραθαλασσία . Isaiah had spoken also of Zebulon and Naphtali, and Capharnaum was in the territory of these tribes. The prophet had said of these places that their inhabitants should see a great light. When Christ began His work amongst them this was fulfilled. Whatever, therefore, may have been the original signification of ד ר ך ה י ם , or of its Greek equivalent ὁδὸνθαλάσσης , it is hardly possible to doubt that Mt. had in mind when he copied the words the lake of Galilee, and described Capharnaum as τὴνπαραθαλασσίαν to make his meaning clear. ΓῆΖαβουλὼνκαὶγῆΝεφθαλείμ ] LXX. has χώραΖαβουλὼνἡγῆΝεφθαλείμ .— ὁδὸνθαλάσσης ] See above.— πέραντοῦἸορδάνου ] So LXX., the usual equivalent of ע ב ר ה י ר ד ן .— Γαλιλαίατῶνἐθνῶν ] So LXX.— ὁλαὸςὁκαθήμενοςἐνσκότει ] LXX. B has πορευόμενος after the Heb., but A καθήμενος — εἰδεφῶςμέγα ] LXX. ἴδετε B, εἴδετε א Γ , εἶδε א c.— καὶτοῖςκαθημένοις ] LXX. οἱκατοικοῦντες .— ἐνχώρᾳκαὶσκιᾷθανάτου ] So LXX. (om. καί B א ).— φῶςἀνέτειλεναὐτο͂ις ] LXX.: φῶςλάμψειἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶς (M) 17. From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Regent: for the kingdom of the heavens is at hand.] Mk. has κηρύσσωντὸεὐαγγέλιοντοῦθεοῦ , καὶλέγωνὅτιΠεπλήρωταιὁκαιρὸςκαὶἤγγικενἡβασιλείατοῦθεοῦΜετανοεῖτεκαὶπιστεύετεἐντῷεὐαγγελίῳ — ἀπὸτότε ] The editor contrasts this early period of the preaching of the kingdom with a later preaching of His death and resurrection; cf. 16:21, and abbreviates the statement of the contents of Christ’ s preaching. For his habit of retaining only one of Mk.’ s many double expressions of an idea or fact, see Introduction, p. xxiv. He has already assimilated the statement of the contents of the Baptist’ s preaching to this verse, cf. 3:2. 13. Καφαρναούμ ] So א B D Z 33 latt.— Ναζαρά ] א b B X Z 33 k Orig. Ναζαρέθ , א D al 16. ἐνχώρᾳκαὶσκιᾷ ] S1 has: “ in sorrow and in the shadow of death” ; S2 “ in the shadows of death.” 17.μετανοεῖτε ] Om. S1 S2 k Blass. (2) 18-22. The calling of four disciples. From Mark 1:16-20 Mark 1:16-20 (M) 18. And walking by the sea of Galilee, He saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea: for they were fishermen.] Mk. has: “ And passing by the sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and Andrew the brother of Simon casting in the sea: for they were fishermen.” περιπατῶνδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶπαράγων , Mt. prefers the construction with δέ , and avoids Mk.’ s iteration of the same pronoun παράγωνπαρά , cf. 17:18, 24:1. He inserts δύοἀδελφούς and τὸνλεγόμενονΠέτρον , and substitutes αὐτοῦ for the tautologous Σίμωνος . Σίμων is a Greek name substituted for the Hebrew Symeon. It occurs in Ecclus 50:1, Josephus, and the N.T., and is a common Greek name; see Pape, Wö rterb. der griech. Eigennamen; and Bib. Stud. p. 315. Ἀνδρέας ] is a not uncommon Greek name. It occurs of a Jew in an Olympian inscription of b.c. 169, Syll. 301. 5. Mt. substitutes βάλλονταςἀμφίβληστρον for Mk.’ s vaguer ἀμφίβαλλοντας , which is used absolutely here only. The subst. άμφιβολεύς = a fisherman, occurs in Isaiah 19:8.— ἦσανγὰρἁλιεῖς ] For the occurrence of this clause in Mt. and Mk. as a proof of dependence of one Gospel on the other, see p. 43. ἁλιεύς occurs from Homer downwards. For the first cent. a.d., cf. II. 294, 6. (M) 19. And He saith to them, Come after Me, and I will make you fishers of men.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to them, Come after Me, and I will make you to become fishers of men.” Mt. omits γενέσθαι as superfluous. For ὀπίσω as a preposition, see Blass, p. 129.— δεῦτεὀπίσω ] is Semitic. (M) 20. And they immediately left the nets and followed Him.] Mk. has; “ And immediately they left the nets and followed Him.” Mt. substitutes οἱδέ for Mk.’ s καί . See on v. 18, and Introduction, p. xx. (M) 21. And going forward thence, He saw two other brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. And He called them.] Mk. has: “ And going forward a little, He saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, these also in the boat mending the nets.” Mt. inserts ἐκεῖθεν , which occurs 12 times in this Gospel, 5 in Mk., 3 in Lk., 2 in Jn. He inserts also ἄλλουςδύοἀδελφούς , as in v. 18, and omits Mk.’ s Semitic καὶαὐτούς . He adds “ with Zebedee their father” by anticipation from the next verse of Mk., and “ their” after “ nets.” (M) 22. And they immediately left the boat and their father, and followed Him.] Mk. has: “ And they left their father Zebedee in the boat with the hired servants, and went after Him.” Mt. substitutes οἱδέ for καί as in v. 20, and ἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ for ἀπῆλθονὀπίσωαὐτοῦ . (3) Illustrations of His teaching and work, 4:23-9:34 (a) Anticipatory sketch, 4:23-25 23-25. The editor now comes to Mark 1:21-22. He has already (4:13) spoken of the entry into Capharnaum, and therefore omits it here. Mark 1:21, b speaks of teaching in the synagogue. But here the editor wishes to develop his scheme of giving illustrations of Christ’ s teaching and work in successive sections. He therefore inserts at this point an introductory sketch of Christ’ s activity in these two respects, 4:23-25. The teaching in the synagogue at Capharnaum becomes a synagogal teaching throughout the country, and a summary of Christ’ s work of healing is added. And Jesus passed through the whole of Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people. And the rumour about Him went into all Syria: and they brought to Him all who were in evil plight, holden with manifold sicknesses and torments, demoniacs, and lunatics, and paralytics; and He healed them. And there followed Him many multitudes from Galilee, and Decapolis, and Jerusalem, and beyond, Jordan.] The phraseology of this editorial summary is largely borrowed from Mk. For καὶπεριῆγεν — διδάσκων , cf. Mark 6:6 καὶπεριῆγε — διδάσκων ; for ἐνὅλῃτῇΓαλιλαίᾳ , Mark 1:39 εἰςὅληντὴνΓαλιλαίαν ; for κηρύσσωντὸεὐαγγέλιον , Mark 1:14; for ἀπῆλθενἡἀκοὴαὐτοῦεἰςὅληντὴνΣυρίαν , Mark 1:28 ἐξῆλθεδὲἡἀκοὴαὐτοῦεὐθὺςπανταχοῦεἰςὅληντὴνπερίχωρον ; for προσήνεγκαναὐτῷπάνταςτοὺςκακῶςἔχοντας , Mark 1:32 ἔφερονπρὸςαὐτὸνπάνταςτοὺςκακῶςἔχοντας ; for ποικίλαιςνόσοις — καὶἐθεράπευσεναὐτούς , Mark 1:34 καὶἐθεράπευσεν — ποικίλαιςνόσοις ; for δαιμονιζομένους , Mark 1:32; for ἠκολούθησαναὐτῷὄχλοιπολλοί , Mark 5:24 ἠκολούθειαὐτῷὄχλοςπολύς , cf. Mark 3:7; for Δεκάπολις , Mark 5:20, Mark 5:7:31; for ἸεροσολύμωνκαὶἸουδαίαςκαὶπέραντοῦἸορδάνου , Mark 3:8. (E) 23. τὸεὐαγγέλιοντῆςβασιλείας ] i.e. the good news that the kingdom was near, cf. v. 17. εὐαγγέλιον in Cl. Gk. is the reward given to a bearer of good news. So in 2 Samuel 4:10. In later writers it means, as here, the good news itself. So in Lucian, Plutarch.— μαλακία ] only in Mt. amongst New Testament writers, cf. 9:35, 10:1.— συναγωγαῖς ] For the history of the synagogues, see Schü rer, 11. ii, 52 ff. (E) 24. Συρία ] never occurs in Mk.— συνέχομαι ] in this sense only here and in Lk. and Acts amongst the New Testament writers.— βάσανος of disease only here.— βασάνοιςσυνεχομέος ] occurs in a different sense in 4 Mac 15:32.— δαιμουίζεσθαι ] in this sense only in late writers.— παραλυτικός ] a New Testament word, Mt. and Mk. Lk. (5:18, 24) and twice in Acts has παραλελυμένος — σεληνιαζομένος ] i.e. epileptic, again in 17:15; a late and rare word.— καὶἐθεράπενσεναὐτούς D a b c g1 h have καὶπάνταςἐθεράπευσεν Cf. 8:16, 12:15, 14:36. (E) 25. ὄχλοιπολλοί ] the plural is characteristic of Mt. He has the plural ὄχλοι about 30 times, the singular 16 times. Mk. has the singular about 37 times, the plural once.. In Lk. the numbers are more equally balanced. Δεκαπόλεως ] occurs twice in Mk. For its history, see Schü rer, II. i, 94; , art. “ Decapolis.” Ἰεροσολύμων ] is here treated as a neuter plural. In 2:3 it is fem. sing. The aspirated form is apparently due to association with ἱερός . Cf. West. and Hort, Introduction, p. 313; Blass, p. 31. Mk. and Mt. (except in 23:37) always have this form. Cf. Blass, p. 31.— πέραντοῦἸορδάνου ] is the ע ֵ ב ֶ ר ח ַ י ַ ר ְ ד ּ ֵ ן the Mishna, and the Peræ a of Josephus. For its extent, see Schü rer, 11. i. 3, 4; DB., art. “ Peræ a.” The reason why the editor now gives his illustration of Christ’ s teaching before that of His work is probably to be found in the next verse of Mk., viz. 1:22, which describes the effect of Christ’ s preaching. He therefore here inserts the Sermon on the mountain, 5-7:27, and closes it with this verse from Mark 1:22 = Matthew 7:27, Matthew 7:28. the Second Gospel. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Dalman. The Septuagint Version. The editor (or his source) either had προσκυνήσεις in his copy of the LXX., or has substituted it for φοβηθήση to emphasize the antithesis with προσκυνήσης of v. 5. Cf. Introduction, p. xxxi. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Curetonian. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Deissmann. Dittenberger Sylloge. Horœ Synopticœ (Hawkins). Oxyrhynchus Papyri. editorial passages. 10:l, but D S1 latt have the singular also here Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). On the Sermon on the Mount, see especially the article of Votaw in DB., Extra Volume, pp. 1ff. (b) 5-7. Illustration of the Messiah’ s teaching From the Logia.2 Analysis— A. Nine Beatitudes, 5:3-12. B. Two metaphors of discipleship, 5:13-16. C. Relation of the Christian character to the Law, 5:17-48 The Christian character is not released from the obligations of the Law. It is under still heavier responsibilities. Christian “ righteousness” is to be not less than that of the scribes, but greater, 17-20. Five illustrations of the permanence of the Law and of this greater righteousness. (1). Threefold interpretation of “ do not kill,” 21-22. Twofold application, 23-26. (2). Interpretation of “ do not commit adultery,” 27-28. Twofold application, 29, 30. Application of this to divorce, 31-32. (3). Interpretation of “ do not swear falsely,” 33-34a Fourfold application, 34b-37. (4). Interpretation of the lex talionis, 38-39a. Fourfold application, 39b-42. (5). Interpretation of “ love thy neighbour,” 43-45. Twofold illustration, 46-48. D. Three illustrations of the way in which the Christian “ righteousness” is to exceed that of the Pharisees, 6:1-18. (1). Alms, 2-4. (2). Prayer, 5-15. (3). Fasting, 16-18. E. Three Prohibitions, 6:19-7:6. (1). μὴθησαυρίζετε , 19-34. (2). μὴκρίνετε , 7:1-5. (3). μὴδῶτε , 6. F. Three Commands, 7-23. (1). αἰτεῖτε , 7-12. (2). εἰσέλθατε , 13-14. (3). προσέχετε , 15-23. G. Concluding Parable, 24-27. (E) 1. And seeing the multitudes, He went up into the mountain: and having sat down, His disciples came to Him.] Luke 6:17 has: “ And He came down with them, and stood upon a level place.” τὸὄρος ] Cf. 14:23, 15:29. The article is less natural here than in these two places, where it may not unnaturally designate the hill country adjoining the lake. It suggests that the Sermon had long been traditionally connected with a mountain, and seems to mean the mountain upon which the Sermon was delivered. καθίσαντοςαὐτοῦπροσῆλθοναὐτῷ ] For the unclassical construction, see Blass, p. 251. προσῆλθον is a favourite word with Mt. It occurs 52 times, 6 in Mk., 10 in Lk., 1 in Ju. οἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ ] Since nothing has been told us apart from 4:18-22 of any disciples, their sudden appearance here is a hint that the Sermon is anticipated here from a later period. 2. And He opened His mouth and taught them, saying.] Lk. has: “ And He lifted up His eyes upon His disciples, and said.” ἀνοίξαςτὸστόμααὐτοῦ Again of Philip, Acts 8:35; Peter, Acts 10:34; Paul, Acts 18:14; cf. Luke 1:64. It is a somewhat formal introductory clause; cf. Job 3:1. (L) 3. Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.] Lk. has: “ Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of God.” μακάριος in the LXX. is equivalent to א ַ ש ׁ ְ ר ֵ י . It describes a state not of inner feeling on the part of those to whom it is applied, but of blessedness from an ideal point of view in the judgement of others. οἱπτωχοὶτῷπνεύματι ] Cf. καθαροὶτῇκαρδίᾳ v. 8; ταπεινοὺςτῷπνεύματι , Psalms 33:19; ζέωντῷπνεύματι , Acts 18:25; ἁγίατῷπνεύματι , 1 Corinthians 7:34. By analogy with these parallels the clause must mean “ those whose spirit is poor.” The idea of poverty intended can best be reached through the corresponding Hebrew word ע ָ נ ִ י , for which πτωχός stands in the LXX. 38 times. The ע נ י is the man who is poor in the sense of being needy. But the word frequently denotes the poor man who is oppressed by the rich and powerful. The word then attracts to itself the sense of poor, pious, religious people who are oppressed by the ungodly. They are therefore the objects of God’ s favour. He does not forget them, Psalms 9:13, but delivers them, Psalms 34:10, and has compassion on them, Isaiah 49:13. On these lines πτωχοί here will mean those who, because they endeavour to lead pious lives of obedience to God, are “ poor,” i.e. are oppressed and downtrodden by ungodly people. They are “ poor” as needing God’ s help. The τῷπνεύματι serves to spiritualise the sense, and to lay the emphasis rather on the religious and moral than on the social condition of those referred to. Their spirit is “ poor,” because they feel their need of God’ s help, and are aware that it can come from Him alone. In their inner spiritual life they realise their need of God, and this conscious spiritual poverty constitutes their claim to the blessings promised in the next clause. The τῷπνεύματι here suggests that πτωχοί in Luke 6:20 should be interpreted in the same sense and not of literal poverty. The editor of the First Gospel probably felt quite rightly that the simple πτωχοί would be misinterpreted by Greek readers unacquainted with Semitic idiom. It compressed a complicated Hebrew train of thought in a Greek word which would be misunderstood if literally interpreted. See Zahn’ s admirable note on the passage. For theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.] On the meaning of this phrase, see Introduction, p. lxvii. It is clear that the meaning must be determined from a general survey of the sense which the phrase has throughout the Gospel. The ἐστιν probably was not represented in the Semitic original, and cannot be pressed. If the “ kingdom” be a state or condition which is necessarily future, the ἐστιν must naturally be equivalent to ἔσται . “ The kingdom is theirs, i.e. will belong to them when it comes or is realised.” Or, “ they will enter into it when it comes” ; or, “ the kingdom will consist of such as these.” The future tenses in the following verses suggest that the whole emphasis of the blessings lies upon a future condition which shall compensate for the unsatisfying present. 4, 5. The order of these two verses is uncertain. The arrangement πενθοῦντες — πρᾳεῖς is found in א B. C and most unc., in most curss. in S1 S3 S4 S5 b f q, Tert. Orig.1 On the other hand, the order πρᾳεῖς — πενθοῦντες occurs in D 33 a c ff1 g1 h k S2 Tat.2 That is to say, both arrangements were known in the second century. Zahn is probably right in saying that if vv. 3, 5 had originally stood together with their rhetorical antithesis of heaven and earth, it is unlikely that any copyist would have thrust v. 4 in between them. On the other hand, the Western scribes, who represent the order 5, 4, may have preferred this arrangement because it heightened the antithesis, or to draw together the closely allied πτωχοί and πρᾳεῖς . Wellhausen, observing that the clause about the πρᾳεῖς is directly quoted from Psalms 36:11, and that its position in this chapter varies in the manuscripts, condemns it as an interpolation. If πτωχοὶτῷπνεύματι in v. 3, and not rather πτωχοί simply , were original, there would be something to be said for this on the ground that πτωχοὶτῷπνεύματι and πρᾳεῖς are practically synonymous terms. πτωχοί , as we have seen, corresponds in the LXX. to ע נ י י ם , and implies not poverty alone or in the literal sense, but misery suffered at the hands of others because of godliness. πρᾳεῖς , on the other hand, corresponds to ע נ ו י ם (8 times). This word emphasises not the social condition implied in ע נ י י ם but humbleness of mind. (See Driver, art. “ Poor,” DB.) But by adding τῷπνεύματι the editor has obliterated the distinctive meaning of πτωχοί as = ע נ י י ם , and made it practically equivalent to πρᾳεῖς = ע נ ו י ם . But this identity belongs to the Greek forms of the sayings, not to their Semitic original. There the distinction would have been clear. The Lord singled out for His approval both the godly oppressed and the godly humble-minded. Of the former, He declared that when the kingdom came, they and, by implication, not their ungodly oppressors, should enter into it. Of the latter, He affirms that because they humbly submit themselves to God’ s will, and look for His help, they shall, as the Psalmist said, “ inherit the earth,” which, purged of the ungodly, will be coextensive with the kingdom. It seems best, therefore, to retain the usual order of verses, on the grounds (a) that it is best supported; (b) that it was more likely to be reversed than the rival order, which would at once suggest itself to scribes who would like to bring πτωχοί and πρᾳεῖς into close connection, and to emphasise by close contact the antithesis between “ heaven” and “ earth.” (L) 4. Blessed are those who mourn: because they shall be comforted.] Cf. Isaiah 61:2 παρακαλέσαιπάνταςτοῦςπενθοῦντας . The thought is of those who mourn for the sin in Israel, which checks and thwarts God’ s purposes for His people, and delays the coming of the kingdom. (L) 5. Blessed are “ the humble-minded” : because “ they shall inherit the earth” .] Quoted from Psalms 36:11. See above. (L) 6. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness: because they shall be filled.] Lk has: “ Blessed are ye who mourn now: for ye shall be filled.” Cf. Jeremiah 38:25 (LXX.) ὅτιἐμέθυσαπᾶσανψυχὴνδιψῶσανκαὶπᾶσανψυχὴνπεινῶσανἐνέπλησα ; Isaiah 55:1, Psalms 106:9 (LXX.) ὅτιἐχόρτασενψυχὴνκενὴνκαὶψυχὴνπεινῶσανἐνέπλησενἀγαθῶν . The thought is of those who spend their lives in endeavours to fulfil the requirements of the law, and to obtain the “ righteousness” which God demands. Such whole-hearted search will not fail. χορτασθήσονται ] A coarse word softened down in Comedy and in colloquial use. Common in the LXX. and N.T. in the sense to feed. See Kennedy, Sources, 82. (L) 7. Blessed are the merciful: because they shall obtain mercy.] i.e. in the day of judgement. (L) 8. Blessed are the pure in heart: because they shall see God.] καθαροὶτῇκαρδίᾳ ] Cf. Psalms 23:4.— ὄψονται ] Cf. Psalms 10:7. For the vision of God as the aim of the religious life, cf. Philo, De Vit. Contempl. ii. 473: The Therapeutæ aim at vision τοῦὌντος . They persevere μέχριςἂντὸποθούμενονἴδωσιν . Leg. Alleg. i. 115: the wise man is θεωρίᾳτῶνθείωντρεφόμενος . De Vit. Mos. ii. 106: Moses by his ascetic life entered into the darkness where God was, τὰἀθέαταφύσειθνητῇκατανοῶν . Cf. Friedlä nder, Die Relig. Beweg. pp. 258 ff., from whom these references are taken. Cf. also Revelation 22:4, 1 John 3:2 ὀφόμεθααὐτὸνκαθώςἐστιν , and Philo, de Abr. ii. 10: ὅτῳδὲἐξεγένετομὴμόνοντὰἄλλαὅσαἐντῇφύσειδι ʼ ἐπιστήμηςκαταλαμβάνειν , ἀλλὰκαὶτὸνπατέρακαὶποιητὴντῶνσυμπάντωνὁρᾶν , ἐπ ʼ ἄκρονεὐδαιμονίαςἴστωπροεληλυθώς . (L) 9. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called sons of God.] Cf. Secrets of Enoch 52:11 “ Blessed is he who establishes peace and love” ; Aboth 1:12 “ Hillel said, Be ye of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace” ; Ps.-Sol. 17:30 γνώσεταιγὰραὐτοὺςὅτιπάντεςυἱοὶθεοῦαὐτῶνεἰσι ; Aboth 3:18 “ The Israelites are beloved, for they are called children of God.” Cf. Deuteronomy 14:1. (L) 10. Blessed are they who have suffered persecution for righteousness’ sake: because theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.] The preceding eight blessings seem to form a complete paragraph begun and ended with the same promise, “ because theirs is the kingdom of the heavens.” It is clear that this phrase contains in itself all the blessings promised in the six intermediate clauses. It seems clear also that the kingdom is regarded as a condition of things still in the future. When it comes, those whose spirit is poor, i.e. those who humbly rely upon God, or, as originally spoken without τῷπνεύματι , those who are poor, i.e. the oppressed godly people, will be its citizens. Then those who mourn for the sin which now delays its coming, will receive consolation when they see righteousness triumphant. Then, too, the humble minded, i.e. those who feel their need of God, will inherit the earth. It seems best to suppose that this clause should be understood literally in spite of the fact that it is a quotation from the Psalter. The earth purified from sin and purged of the ungodly, who now oppress the “ poor” and meek godly people, will then be coextensive with the kingdom. Then, too, those who hunger and thirst after the divine righteousness, will be satisfied when they find it to be the ruling principle in their own lives and in those of other people. The merciful, i.e. those who show mercy and compassion to be the ruling principle of their lives, will obtain mercy at the great day of judgement, which divides the present age from the establishment of the kingdom. The pure in heart will then see God. The peacemakers will be openly proclaimed as God’ s sons. Those who have been persecuted for their devotion to religion will become its citizens. (L) 11, 12. In the ninth blessing Christ addresses Himself directly to the disciples. S. Luke has the second person throughout. Blessed are ye when they shall reproach you and persecute you, and speak all manner of evil against you for My sake. Rejoice and exult, Because your reward is great in the heavens. For so did they per secute the prophets who were before you.] Lk. has: “ Blessed are ye when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you, and reproach you, and cast out your name as evil for the sake of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven. For likewise did their fathers treat the prophets.” μισθός ] The later Jewish theology is much coloured by ideas of reward and punishment. In Wis 2:22 we read of the “ reward of holiness” μισθός — ὁσιότητος . Cf. Wis 5:15, 2 Es 7:35, 83, 98, Esther 7:8:33, 39, 13:56. Occasionally, however, we find a protest against the idea of reward for goodness. “ Be not,” saith Antigonus of Socho, “ as slaves who minister to the Lord in order to receive recompense,” Aboth 1:3. Here the thought is not that of reward for piety, but of future recompense for a present condition of persecution and reproach. The number of the Beatitudes is much disputed. They can be reckoned as seven by disconnecting 11-12 from the preceding verses and uniting 8 and 10 as one (so Meyer), or by regarding v. 5 as a marginal gloss (so Bacon, Wellhausen); or they may be reckoned as eight by treating 10-12 as one beatitude (so Votaw), or by disconnecting 11-12 from the preceding (so Zahn). But it seems better to treat them as nine in number in spite of the fact that 11-12 only repeat and apply v. 10 to the disciples. In the Secrets of Enoch, two groups of Blessings occur, one (42:6-14) of nine, the other (52) of seven Beatitudes. 11. καθ ʼ ὐμῶν ] Add ψευδόμενοι , א B. al. Om. D k S1. The word seems to have been added to limit a wide generalisation; cf. v. 22. 13-16. Not in Lk.’ s sermon. (EL) 13. Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have become insipid, wherewith shall it be salted? it is no longer of any use, except to be cast out, and trodden under foot of men.] Cf. Luke 14:34, Luke 14:35. The idea underlying “ salt” here is probably its use as a preservative. The disciples are the element in the world which keeps it wholesome, and delays the day of decay and of consequent judgment. But since salt may become useless for household purposes, and be thrown out of doors, so the disciples should beware lest they lose their essentially Christian character. The saying is probably proverbial, and it is needless to object that, properly speaking, salt cannot change its nature. It may become so soiled or mixed with dirt and other extraneous substances as to become practically useless. (EL) 14. Ye are the light of the world. A city set upon a hill cannot be hid.] If salt designates the disciples as an element in the world, so light describes their attitude to it as one of aloofness and separation. But though separated from it they cannot but exercise an influence upon it, just as a city built on a hill is too conspicuous to remain unnoticed. For the light, cf. Test. Leviticus 14:3 “ Ye are the lights of Israel” ; 2 Es 12:42 “ Thou only art left … as a lamp in a dark place” ; Philippians 2:15. For κειμένη of a city, cf. 2 Mac 4:33. For the city, cf. Logia Jesu 7: πόλιςᾠκοδομηένηἐπ ʼ ἄκρονὄρουςὑψηλοῦκαὶἐστηριγμένηοὔτεπεσεῖνδύναταιοὔτεκρυβῆναι . For the combination of “ light” and “ city,” cf. Cicero, Catilin. iv. 6: “ Videor enim mihi hanc urbem videre, lucem orbis terrarum atque arcem omnium gentium.” (L) 15. Neither do they light a lamp, and place it under the bushel, but on the lampstand; and it lightens all who are in the house.] Cf. Luke 8:16, Luke 11:33, Mark 4:21. (L) 16. So let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in the heavens.] λυχνία ] a word of the later Greek writers for the Attic λυχνίον . It is used in the LXX., Joseph., Luc., Philo, Galen, but was an old vernacular word. Cf. Kennedy, Sources, 40. 16. τὸνπατέραὑμῶντὸνἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς ] The phrase is characteristic of Mt. See Introduction, p. lvi. It occurs besides only in Mark 11:25, cf. Luke 11:13. As early as the books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus we find Israelites addressing God as “ Father” ; cf. Wis 2:16, 14:3, Ecclus 23:1. 4 “ O Lord, Father and Master of my life” ; and the idea of God as Father of the nation had been familiar from very primitive times. For examples from the later literature, cf. To 13:4 “ our Father,” Jub 1:24 “ their Father,” 3 Mac 5:7 “ their merciful God and Father.” The term “ Father in heaven” is not infrequent in the Rabbinical literature; cf. Mechilta (Ugol.) 397: “ my Father who is in heaven” ; 331: “ their Father who is in heaven” ; Siphri (Ugol.) 871: “ his Father who is in heaven” ; Aboth 5:22 “ Jehuda ben Tema said, Be … strong as a lion to do the will of thy Father who is in heaven” ; Sotah, ix. 15 (49b): “ Upon whom shall we lean? Upon our Father who is in heaven” ; Rosh ha-Shana, iii. 8 (29a): “ As often as the Israelites directed their heart towards their Father who is in heaven they were strong” ; Shabbath 116a, Joma, viii. 9 (85b), Pesikta (Wü nsche), pp. 228, 238; Vayyikra R. (Wü nsche), p. 222; Siphri (Ugol.) 593. These examples carry us back to the beginning of the second cent. a.d., for the speaker in the last case is Simeon ben Jochai, who lived c. 130 a.d.1 Cf. Bacher, Ag. d. Tann. ii. 70 ff. For the phrase in Jewish literature, see Dalm. Words, pp. 184 ff. Bousset, Rel. Jud. p. 357, sees in the phrase a possible influence of Christianity upon Judaism; cf. Bischoff, Jesu und die Rabbinen, p. 74. But it is not improbable that the phrase was already current in Palestine at the time of Christ. 13-16. Two of the verses in this section find parallels in Lk. V. 13 occurs in Luke 14:34, Luke 14:35 in a somewhat different form, akin partly to Mt., partly to Mark 9:50, where Lk. in his parallel passage omits it. Mt. also omits it in the parallel to Mk. V. 15 finds a parallel in Luke 8:16 = Mark 4:21, where Mt. omits it, and again in Luke 11:33. It is therefore probable that Lk. had not this section in his Sermon, and that the editor of Mt. has inserted it here; because it is more likely that Mt. should have inserted, in accordance with his general tendency to enlarge discourses, than that Lk should have omitted The setting of these sayings in Luke 14:34 and 11:33 is not internally probable, and it seems very unlikely that he would have omitted them from the Sermon in order to place them afterwards in such artificial connections. The clauses ὑμεῖςἐστετὸἅλαςτῆςγῆς , ὑμεῖςἐστετὸφῶςτοῦκόσμου are very probably editorial additions to link together detached sayings. (L) 17-20. Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say to you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one yō d or one tittle shall not pass from the law, till all things come to pass. Whosoever therefore shall weaken one of these commandments (even) the least, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of the heavens: but whosoever shall do and teach (them), he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens. For I say to you, That except your righteousness shall exceed (that) of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens.] The meaning of the words is clear. Christ did not come to overthrow the authority of the Mosaic law, which was to be eternally binding upon the hearts and consciences of men. So long as the world lasted its authority was to be permanent. If any of His disciples taught men to disobey any of its commandments, he would be placed in an inferior position in the coming Kingdom. If he was a faithful servant of the law, and upheld its authority before men, he would receive high rank in the Kingdom. Commentators have exhausted their ingenuity in attempts to explain away this passage, but its meaning is too clear to be misunderstood. Christ is here represented as speaking in the spirit of Alexandrine and Rabbinical Judaism. Cf. Philo, Vita Mos. ii. 136: “ (The Laws of Moses) will, it may be hoped, remain to all eternity immortal so long as sun and moon and the whole heaven and world last.” Ass. Mos 1:12 “ He has created the world for the sake of His law” (reading legem for plebem. See Bousset, Rel. Jud. p. 90). 2 Es 9:37 “ The law perisheth not, but abideth in its honour.” Joseph. Contra Apion. ii. 277: “ Our law remains immortal.” Bereshith R. x. 1 (Wü nsche, 39): “ Everything has its end, the heaven and the earth have their end, only one thing is excepted which has no end, and that is the law.” Shemoth R. 6 (Wü nsche, 67): “ Not a letter shall be abolished from the law for ever” ; Midrash Koh 714 “ The law shall remain in perpetuity for ever” ;1 Aboth 1:2 “ Upon three things is the world supported: on the Thorah,” etc. Shemoth R. 33 (Wü nsche, 261): “ (The law) is an everlasting inheritance for Israel. Vayyikra R. 19 (Wü nsche, 123): “ If all the peoples of the world came together to rend a single word from the law, they could not do it.” The attitude to the law here described is inconsistent with the general tenor of the Sermon Vv. 21-48 are clearly intended to expain and illustrate the way in which Christ fulfilled the law. But they describe a fulfilment which consists in a penetrating insight into the true moral principles underlying the enactments of the Mosaic Code, and vv. 34, 39 directly traverse two propositions of the law. Fulfilment in this sense is something very different from the fulfilment which rests upon the idea of the permanent authority of the least commandment of the law (cf. v. 19). It seems probable, therefore, that vv. 18, 19 did not originally belong to the Sermon, but have been placed here by the editor, who has thus given to πληρῶσαι (= to bring into clear light the ture scope and meaning) a sense (viz. to reaffirm and carry out in detail) which is foreign to the general tenor of the Sermon. V. 18 finds a parallel in an artificial context in Luke 16:17. It is therefore a well-authenticated traditional utterance of Christ. Both it and v. 19 may well have been spoken by Him on different occasions, and under circumstances which made His meaning clear, as hyperbolical expressions of respect for the authority of the general tenor and purport of the law. 17. For καταλύειν of overthrowing or destroying the authority of the law, cf. 2 Mac 2:22, Malachi 2:4:11, Malachi 2:4 Mac 5:33, 17:9.— τὸννόμονἢτοὺςπροφήτας ] The reference to the prophets seems out of place. It is the law alone which is taken into consideration in the rest of the chapter. The editor has probably added ἢτοὺςπροφήτας in view of the fact that, according to Christ’ s teaching elsewhere, Prophets and Law alike (i.e. the whole O.T.) found their fulfilment in Him. πληρῶσαι ] See above. The sentence finds a distorted reminiscence in the Bab. Tal. Shabb. 116b “ I gospel came not to diminish the law of Moses, but to add to the law of Moses did I come.” The verse as originally followed by v. 20 meant: “ I did not come, as you might think, to overthrow the authority of the law of Moses. In its general scope and purport its authority as an expression of the divine will is permanent. I came to fulfil it by emphasising its true meaning, and as being the Messiah whom it dimly foreshadowed. So far from depreciating it, I tell you that your ‘ righteousness’ must be more fundamental than the ‘ righteousness’ of the scribes and Pharisees, based not upon external adherence to the letter of the law, but upon insight into the principles which underlie it.” If Christ was from this point of view the fulfiller of the law, He was from another its “ end” ; cf. Romans 10:4. As here expounded by the editor, the passage means: “ I came to reaffirm the authority of the law of Moses, not to overthrow it. No particle of it shall lose its validity so long as the world lasts. Anyone who weakens the hold which the smallest commandment has over the minds of men will receive an inferior position in the coming Kingdom. He who obeys its precepts and teaches others to do so, will be ranked high in the Kingdom. For your ‘ righteousness’ is to be not less, but more exacting than that of the scribes and Pharisees.” ἦλθον ] (cf. 9:13, 10:40: 11:10, 15:24) has behind it the thought of the divine sending. (L) 18. Cf. Luke 16:17.— ἀμήν ] For this word as characteristic of Christ’ s diction, cf. Dalman, Words, 226 ff.— ἕωςἂνπαρέλθῃὁοὐρανὸςκαὶἡγῆ ] a hyperbolical expression signifying “ never” ; cf. the passages from Philo and Bereshith R. quoted on v. 17; cf. also 24:35.— ἰῶτα ] Yod = y, is the smallest letter to the Hebrew Square Alphabet. Bab. Sanh. 107a “ If the yod which I took from Sarai (in changing it to Sarah) stood and complained many years until Joshua came and I added it to him,” etc. κεραία ] The κεραῖαι are presumably the small strokes that distinguish from one another otherwise similar letters of the Hebrew Alphabet. For examples of similar letters which may be confused and pervert the sense of a passage, see Vayyikra R. 19 (Wü nsche, 124).— οὐμὴπαρέλθῃ ] For the construction, see Moulton, pp. 190-92. It is rare in the N.T. (except in words of Christ) and in the Papyri. ἕωςἂνπάνταγένηται ] (1) Until all things (in the law) happen, i.e. receive their fulfilment” ; (2) parallel to and synonymous with ἕωςἂνπαρέλθῃ , κ .τ .λ ., “ until the end of the world.” The similarity to Philo, Vit. Mos. ii. 136: ἕωςἂνἥλιοςκαὶσελήνηκαὶὁσύμπαςοὐρανόςτεκαὶκόσμοςᾖ , rather favours this meaning. 21-26. First illustration of the fulfilment of the law. (L) 21. Ye heard that it was said to the ancients, Thou shalt not commit murder; and whosoever commits murder is liable to the judgement.] ἠκούσατεὅτιἐρῥέθητοῖςἀρχαίοις ] We might have expected, “ It is written in the law,” or “ Ye have read in the law” ; cf. 12:5, 21:16, 42, 22:31; but here the audience presupposed is one of unlearned people (cf. 7:28). For the “ hearing,” compare the saying of the multitude in John 12:34 ἠκούσαμενἐκτοῦνόμου . Moreover, each word in the sentence is chosen in order to form a direct antithesis to ἐγὼδὲλέγωὑμῖν . This partly accounts for ἠκούσατε rather than ἀνέγνωτε , and for ἐρῥέθη rather than γέγραπται . Further, “ it was said,” is the most frequent form of biblical citation in the Rabbinical writings; cf. Bacher, i. 6. For antithesis in this Gospel, cf. 15:2, 3 and 4, 5. τοῖςἀρχαίοις is difficult to parallel; but desire for antithesis to “ I say,” having produced “ Ye heard that it was said,” it is not easy to see what other phrase could have been found as a contrast to ὑμῖν . For the use of ἀρχαῖοι as the men of a past age, cf. Aristoph. Eq. 507; Arist. Metaphys. xi. 1. 2, p. 240; and the phrases κατὰτοὺςἀρχαίους or κατ ʼ ἀρχαίους quoted by Steph. Thes. 1. ii. 2098.— οὐφονεύσεις ] is quoted from Exodus 20:15, Deuteronomy 5:18 (LXX.). The following words are not a direct quotation, but a summary of the teaching of the law; cf. Exodus 21:12. For τῇκρίσει = the verdict of the judges, cf. Deuteronomy 17:8 ἐνκρίσειἀνὰμέσοναἶμααἵματοςκαὶἀνὰμέσονκρίσιςκρίσεως .— ἔνοχος ] is here apparently equivalent to the Rabbinic ת ַ י ָ ב = condemned, guilty. ἕνοχοςτῇκρίσει means guilty, and so condemned by the properly constituted authority. The phrase is therefore equivalent to “ shall be put to death” ; cf. 26:66 ἔνοχοςθανάτου = He is guilty (and worthy) of death. (L E?) 22. But I say to you, That every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to the judgement. And whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the Sanhedrin. And whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be liable to the Gehenna of fire.] Not only will the external act receive due punishment at human tribunals, but the inner feeling that prompts it is liable to the verdict of condemnation which will be pronounced by God. In other words, both prohibition and penalty must be interpreted spiritually as well as literally. The addition of the last two clauses is unexpected and difficult. Nothing further seems wanted. The law said that murder should be punished by the proper authority. Christ says that the feeling of anger which prompts the crime will meet with the divine condemnation. In this way He fulfilled the law by drawing out the moral principles which underlay the enactment. But the next two clauses seem to create an artificial distinction between different grades of enmity and between the penalties to be assigned to them. τῷσυνεδρίῳ , the Sanhedrin, i.e. the Supreme Court in Jerusalem, seems to presuppose the interpretation of τῇκρίσει as equivalent to “ the local district court.” Thus we have a climax: the local court, the Sanhedrin, the final judgement of God. The corresponding sins are anger, contempt, and abuse. But, of course, only the last two of these would, in fact, lead to trial either before a local court or the Sanhedrin. Nor is there any distinction between them to justify the increasing severity of punishment. Zahn thinks that Christ is here satirising by imitation the Scribal methods of exegesis; showing their futility by a reductio ad absurdum which at the same time serves to emphasise his main point, that sins of the inner life are as culpable as those of the external act. Others would reconstruct the passage. Prof. Richards suggests that 22b and c should follow v. 21. The three clauses would then form a Rabbinical comment and explanation of the text “ Thou shalt not commit murder,” followed by Christ’ s simple antithesis, “ Whosoever is angry” is liable to the judgement. But in this case τῇκρίσει = the local court, must be understood in a sense different from that of τῇκρίσει in Christ’ s answer where it = the judgement of God. For another rearrangement of the verses, see DB., art. “ Sermon on the Mount,” 26. The fact that as the passage stands κρίσει of v. 21 and κρίσει of v. 22 must be taken in two different senses, suggests that 22b and c do not originally belong here. They may be duplicate versions of a saying which originally stood in some context similar to this, where a distinction was being drawn by Christ between moral disorder and external action. Or they may be current Scribal precepts added here by the editor in a manner which has led to their being understood as part of Christ’ s words: “ And (it was also said by the Scribes) whosoever,” etc. For parallels, cf: Kiddushin 28a “ He that calleth his neighbour a slave, let him be excommunicated; he that calleth him a bastard, let him be punished with forty stripes” ; Bab. Mes. 58b. Vv. 21 and 22 will then mean: “ It was said in the law that the murderer should be subjected to the judgement of death. I say that anger is equally deserving of judgement.” Ῥακά ] seems to be equivalent to the Aramaic ר ֵ י ָ ק א = empty. It was a term of contemptuous address; cf. James 2:20. It is not infrequently used in Jewish writings; cf. Bab. Berakh 32b, where it is applied by a ruler to one who had not returned his salute, Mechilta (Ugol.), 389, Sanhedrin 100a. μωρέ ] is the Greek word. It has quite unnecessarily been identified with the Hebrew מ ו ֹ ר ֶ ח Numbers 20:10 Since the Jews borrowed many foreign words, it is quite possible that μωρός was in use amongst the Aramaic-speaking population in Christ’ s time. Or μωρέ may be a translation of Ῥακά . For examples of μωρός in the Midrashim, cf. Levy, Neuheb. Wö rterb., and Pesikta, Rab. Kahana 14 (Wü nsche, p. 158), where it is used to explain Numbers 20:10. γέενναντοῦπυρός ] נ י ה נ ם was the name of a valley on the South-west of Jerusalem. In Jewish literature it became a name for the place of punishment of the godless. It occurs in Apoc. Bar 59:10 “ the mouth of Gehenna” ; 2 Es 7:36 “ the furnace of Gehenna shall be revealed” ; and Targ. Isaiah 3314 “ the wicked shall be given over to Gehenna, (to) burning of everlasting fire.” It occurs frequently in the later Rabbinical literature. It has three doors and seven names, Bab. Erubh 19a. Fire has 1/60th part of the heat of the fire of Gehenna, Bab. Berakh. 57b. “ Those who are destined for Gehenna are called sons of Gehenna,” Rosh ha Sh 17a. It was one of seven things created before the world, Bab. Pes 54a Cf. Weber, Jü d. Theol 341 ff.; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 288 ff. τῷἀδελφῷαὐτοῦ ] D al S1 S2 add είκῆ . The word has strong second century attestation, but may perhaps more probably have been added as a limitation of a wide generalisation, than omitted as unnecessary; cf. on v. 11. 23, 24. First application of the preceding. (L) If therefore thou art offering thy gift upon the altar, and there shouldest remember that thy brother hath aught against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.] ἔχειτικατὰσοῦ ] Cf. Bab. Joma 87a ה ו ה ל י ח מ י ל ת א ל = he had something against. This section deals with the necessity of reconciliation with one’ s neighbour before the day of Atonement. “ Rabbi Isaac said, If a man vexes his neighbour, even if it be only by what he has said, he must be reconciled to him.” 25, 26. Second application. Cf. Luke 12:57-59. (L) Be agreed with thine adversary quickly, whilst thou art with him on the way (to judgement); lest the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say to thee, Thou shalt not come out thence, until thou payest the last farthing.] εὐνοεῖν only here in N.T. “ Its regular meaning is ‘ be well disposed to,’ ‘ have goodwill to.’ ” Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1714. The ἀντίδικος in this passage should be parallel to ἀδελφός in the preceding verse. The brother who has been wronged must be appeased; and the adversary must be agreed with, in accordance with the principle that murder includes anger and all such turbulent passions of the soul.1 ἀντίδικος in this connection should therefore mean “ prosecutor” ; cf. Luke 18:3. But with this meaning vv. 25b and 26 have no real point, and 23-24 and 25-26 are not in any true sense parallel. Vv. 23-24 apply the principle of v. 22. “ Because anger is implied in the command ‘ do not murder,’ therefore remove all cause for anger before coming before God with a gift.” That is an exhortation with an implicit warning. “ God will not accept the gift of an offerer whose heart is stained with evil passion.” Vv. 25-26 suggest in the first few words that we have a second application: “ For the same reason be reconciled with one who has legal claims against you” “ but the following words carry us into a new atmosphere of thought: “ Be reconciled” not “ because God condemns anger,” but “ lest you meet the due reward of your wrongdoing and languish in prison.” Of course it is possible to obtain some sort of connection between the verses by spiritualising the details of vv. 25-26. “ On the road throught life be careful to settle your accounts with spiritual enemies,lest you come at last before God,the Judge of all, and by Him be cast into hell.“ But in this case the idea involved in ἀντίδικος falls into the background, and must remain in ambiguity as an unessential element in the saying, whereas its position shows that it is obviously as important as is ἀδελφός in v. 23. There can be little doubt that the connection here is literary and artifical. The editor has appended to the saying about “ the brother who has aught against thee” another about “ thy adversary” i.e. “ thy prosecutor,” in spite of the fact that as a whole the general purport of the sayings is quite different. Vv. 25-26 are clerly a warning against the risk of appearing before God at the judgement day unreconciled to Him. He is a like Prosecutor and Judge and executor of judgement. Lk (12:57-59) has the saying in a context to which this meaning is more applicable. For a somewhat similar legal smile of the relation of men to God, cf. Ab 320. “ The office is open; and the broker gives credit; and the ledger is open; and the writes; and whosoever will, comes and borrows; and the bailiffs go round continually every day and exact from a man wherather he wills or not; and they have whereon to rest (i.e. the arm of the law), and the judgement is a judgement of truth.” For God as Judge and Prosecutor, cf. Ab 429 “ He is Judge, and He is witness, and He is Plaintiff” . 27-28. Second illustration. (L) Ye heard that it was said, Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say to you, That every one who looks upon a woman to dersire her hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.] οὐμοιχεύσεις ] Exodus 20:13, Deuteronomy 5:17. The prohibition includes also lustful thoughts.— ὁβλέπωνγυναῖκα ] Cf. Jer. Challah 583; Bab. Berakh 24a, quoted by Lightfoot; and Shabbath 64b. ἐπιθυμῆσαιαὐτήν ] Unclassical; but cf. Exodus 20:17, Deuteronomy 5:21 οὐκἐπιθυμήσειςτὴνγυναῖκατοῦπλησίονσου ; cf. Blass, p. 102. 29. First applicatiion for this. (L) And if thy right eye is causing thee to stumble(by inducing lustful thoughts), pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for its is better for thee that one of thy members perish, than that thy whole body be cast into Gehenna.] δεξιός as applied to a hand seems to emphasise it as being the more valued of the two. It is here transferred to a eye by a natural assimilatiion of the two phrases. σκανδαλίζει occurs outside the New Testament in LXX. Daniel 11:41; in Aquila, Psalms 63:9, Isaiah 40:30, Isaiah 63:13, Proverbs 4:12, Daniel 11:41; in Ecclus 9:5, 23:8, 32:15; in Sym. Isaiah 8:21; in Ps.-Sol. 16:7, and in eccles. writers. 30. Second application. (L) And if thy right hand is causing thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for is better for thee that one of thy members perish, than that thy whole body go away into Gehenna.] For the hand as an instrument of lust, see Bab. Niddah 13, quoted by Lightfoot. For the greater value of the right hand cf. bab. Berakh 62a. Vv. 29, 30 occur again in substance in 18:8, 9; and it has been questioned whether their position here is not artifical v. 30 is omitted by D and S1. But they may well have been spoken in this connection. The lustful look, v. 28, suggests the thought that the offending member, the eye, should be plucked out; and this leads quite naturally to the thought of another member, the hand, which is a ready instrument wherewith to satisfy desire. Sight and contract which stimulate passion are alike to be avoided. For sight in this connection, cf. Job 31:1 30. Is omitted by S1. This and the previous verse have the same ending in S2, and the verse may have been passsed over for that reason by the ending scribe of S1. 31. Special applications to divorce. (L) And it was said that, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give to her a bill of divercement.] Cf. Deuteronomy 24:1, Deuteronomy 24:3 γράψειαὐτῆβιβλίονἀποστασίου . ἀποστάσιον occurs also in Isaiah 50:1, Jeremiah 3:8 ἔδωκααὐτῆβιβλίονἀποστασίοιυ . (L) 32. But I say to you, That every one who puts away his wife, except on account of fornication, causes her to commit adultery: and whosoever marries her that has been put away commits adultery.] Cf. Luke 16:18.— παρεκτὸςλόγουπορνείας ] λόγουπορνείας is probably equivalent to the Heb. ד ב ר ע ר ו ה = “ something unchaste,” which the school of Shammai decreed to be the only ground of divorce; cf. Gittin 90 a1 “ No one shall divorce his wife unless there be found in her something unchaste.” πορνεία defines the unchastity as illicit sexual intercourse. It is, however, open to question whether this exception is not an addition of the editor, representing no doubt two influences, viz. Jewish custom and tradition, and the exigencies of ethical necessity in the early Christian Church. A similar exception is made in 19:9, and it will there be seen that the clause is clearly an interpolation. There is, therefore, a presumption that it has also been interpolated here. Moreover, the teaching of Christ as recorded by S. Mark (10:11) seems to preclude any such exception. And S. Luke represents His teaching as a simple prohibition of divorce without reservation (16:18). The same may be said of S. Paul’ s account of Christ’ s teaching, 1 Corinthians 7:10, 1 Corinthians 7:11.— ποιεῖσὐτὴνμοιχευθῆναι ]. The clause implies the circumstance that after divorce the woman will be likely to marry again. In that case the divorce will have been the means of leading her to marry again; and so from Christ’ s standpoint, though not legally, committing adultery, because according to His teaching the divorce was ideally wrong, and the first marriage was ideally still valid.— ὃςἐάν ] cf. Moulton, 42 ff.— μοιχᾶται ] because she is ideally still the wife of the first husband. Christ’ s teaching here therefore seems to admit of no exceptions. If a man divorces his wife, he causes her to commit adultery (it being presupposed that she will remarry), because ideally her first marriage still holds good. If a man marries such a divorced woman, he not only causes her to commit adultery, but himself does so, since he marries one who ideally is still the wife of her first husband. The interpolated clause confuses the issues. If a man divorced his wife for πορνεία , he would not then cause her to commit adultery, because she would already be guilty of this crime. 32. πᾶςὁἁπολύων ] So א B al ὃςἄνἀπολύσῃ has strong second century attestation, D S1 S2 k. The first reading might be due to assimilation to vv. 22, 28, the second to assimilation to v. 31. But in a writer fond of sharp, antithesis, the second reading is more probable here, to contrast with v. 31 cf. Introduction, p. xxxi.— καὶὂςἐὰν — μοιχᾶται ] Omit D a b k. 33-37. Third illustration. (E L) Again, ye heard that it was said to the ancients, Thow shalt hot swear falsely, but shalt pay thy oaths to the Lord. But I say to you. Swear not at all; neither by the heaven, because it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, because it is the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King. And swear not by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your speech be, Yea, yea, Nay, nay: and whatever gœ s beyond these (comes) of what is evil.] For the whole passage, cf. Secrets of Enoch 49:1: “ For I swear to you, my children; but I will not swear by a single oath, neither by heaven, nor by earth, nor by any other creature which God made. God said, There is no swearing in Me, nor injustice, but truth. If there be no truth in men, let them swear by a word, yea, yea, or nay, nay,” and the passages from Philo cited in Charles’ note. οὐκἐπιορκήσεις ] Cf. Leviticus 19:12.— ἀποδώσεις — τοὺςὅρκουςσου ] Cf. Deuteronomy 23:21, Psalms 50:14, Numbers 30:3.— θρόνος ] Cf. Isaiah 66:1.— ὑποπόδιον ] A late word found in Lucian, Athenæ us, LXX., Egyptian Papyri; cf. Deissm. Bib. Stud. 223. Cf. Isaiah 66:1, Lamentations 2:1.— Ἱεροσόλυμα ] Cf. on 2:1.— πόλιςἐστὶτοῦμεγάλουβασιλέως ] Cf. Psalms 47:3. ὀμνύεινἐν is common in the LXX. For the interchange of εἰς and ἐν , cf. Blass, p. 123, and for swearing, cf. 23:16-22, James 5:12. In its present connection the sequence of thought is confused. “ Thou shalt not swear falsely, but shalt pay to the Lord thy oaths,” must, as a reference to Numbers 30:3 shows, mean, “ If you bind yourself by an oath, you must carry out your promise.” The emphasis is here clearly not on the way in which the promise is made, whether by an oath or otherwise, but on the necessity of fulfilling promises made to God. That is to say, the “ swearing” is merely incidental. “ Promise” or “ pledge yourself” would be equally in point. But “ swear not at all” lays all the emphasis on ἐπιορκήσεις , and neglects altogether the second half of the clause. Again, it seems improbable that Christ should have found in the incidental references to swearing in connection with religious vows in the Old Testament, a text upon which to hang His “ swear not at all” ; because it is clear that His utterance has in view not the solemn use of oaths in religion, but the casuistical distinctions made by the Jews between different formulas in swearing. In other words, His teaching here is opposed to Jewish tradition, instead of being, as we should here expect, interpretative of Scripture. It seems probable that the editor has adapted words traditionally ascribed to Christ, vv. 34-37, to this context by providing for them an artifical antithesis from the Old Testament, v. 33. Leaving v. 33 out of consideration, the meaning will be that Christ’ s disciples should avoid as far as possible the use of unnecessarily strong expressions of affirmation. The Jews avoided swearing by the divine name, and used equivalents for it. The Christian disciple should aviod these. For him Yes and No should be sufficient. His ungarnished statements should carry with them the authority of truthfulness. The necessity for supporting simple statements of fact by artifical formulas of swearing, arises from the evil in life which obscures truth. The Talmud Sanhed 36a discusses the question whether Yes and No are oaths, and decides that they are oaths if repeated twice. Here we should expect a simple ναί and οὐ . They seem to be repeated to add emphasis. James 5:12 has the saying in a slightly different form: “ Let your Yes be Yes.” that is, let your statements carry with them the assurance of their accuracy. And the saying is not infrequently quoted in this form in early writers Cf. Resch. Paralleltexte, ii. 96 ff. Zahn thinks that James represents Christ’ s words more closely than the Gospel. But it may be questioned whether the construction in the Epistle is not due to a grecising of the original. 38-39a. Fourth illustration. (L) Ye heard that it was said, Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. But I say unto you. Resist not the malicious.] Cf. Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21. We are here carried into the atmosphere of the law court. One element in Jewish law was the rough adaptation of punishment to crime. From the individual point of view. recourse to law for protection against injury meant an attempt to retaliate upon the offender through the arm of the law. The question is here contemplated from the point of view of the individual wronged, not from that of social justice. So far from seeking to injure his oppressor by calling in the aid of the law to inflict penalties upon him, the Christian disciple should quietly submit to wrong. We need not ask as to the gender of τῷπονηρῷ . Just as in v. 37 it meant the evil and sinful element to life regarded from the abstract point of view, so here it is the same element contemplated as in action through an individual. For the lex talionis in Jewish and Babylonian law. cf. Johns. The Oldest Code, and Cook, The Laws of Moses and the Code of Ḫ ammurabi, 249 ff. 39b-42. Fivefold application. Cf. Luke 6:29-30. (L) But whosoever smiteth thee upon thy right cheek, turn to him also the other. And if a man wishes to go to law with thee, and to take thy coat, suffer him (to take) also thy cloke. And whosoever shall impress thee for one mile, go with him two. To him that asketh give, and turn not away from him that wishes to borrow of thee.] χιτών ] The coat worn with a girdle over the shirt.— ἱμάτιον ] The cloak worn over the χιτών . See DB., art. “ Dress.” . ἀγγαρεύειν is Persian in origin. ἄγγαροι were the mounted couriers who conveyed the royal messages. cf. Hdt. 898. The verb is found in Jos. Ant. xiii. 52, with reference to the compulsory transportation of military baggage, but occurs as early as the third century b.c. in Egypt in reference to a boat used for postal service. See Deissm. Bib. Stud. 86 f. The substantive ἀγγαρεῖα seems to have been borrowed by the Jews. Cf. Dalman, wö rterbuch, i. 23. μίλιον ] A word of Latin origin used in later writers. Polyb., Plut., Strabo. Like ἀγγαρεῖα , it occurs in the later Jewish literature, Targ., Bab. Talmud (Joma 67a, Sanh 96a), Midrashim. Only here in the N.T. For τῷθέλοντι in v. 40 D has ὁθέλων , the nominative being a casus pendens. Cf. 17:9 καὶκαταβαίνοντες , D; 17:14 καὶἐλθών , D. See Moulton, 69, 225, and Wellhausen, Einl. p. 13. 43-48. Fifth illustration. Cf. Luke 6:27-36. (L) Ye heard that it was said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and shalt hate thy enemy. But I say to you, Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you; that you may be sons of your Father who is in the heavens: because He causes His sun to rise upon evil and good, and sends rain upon just and unjust. For if ye love those who love you, what reward have ye ? do not even the toll-gatherers do the same ? And if ye have saluted your brethren only, what more do ye (than they) ? do not even the Gentiles do the same ? Ye shall therefore be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.] The first clause is found in Leviticus 19:18, the second is an inference from the distinction drawn in the Old Testament between conduct towards Israelites and conduct towards Gentiles. Christ here sweeps away all casuistical distinctions between neighbours and enemies, Jews and Gentiles. The neighbour of the Old Testament is to include the enemy. Love is to seek the good of all men alike, regardless of moral or racial distinctions. In this respect the Christian disciple is to be a son of the heavenly Father, i.e. like Him in moral character. For He bestows His blessing on all alike. Cf. Secrets of Enoch 50:4 “ When you might have vengeance do not repay, either your neighbour or your enemy.” Buddhist and Christian Gospels, Edmunds, p. 82. “ Let one conquer wrath by absence of wrath, Let one conquer wrong by goodness, Let one conquer the mean man by a gift, And a liar by the truth.” For πατρὸςὑμῶντοῦἐνοὐρανοῖς , see on v. 16.— βρέχει ] In this sense poetical and vernacular. See Kennedy, Sources, 39. It is common in LXX. and N.T. τελώνης here as in the Rabbinical literature, used as descriptive of a despised class of men; cf. Schü rer, I. ii. 71. ἀσπάσησθε defines the practical method of the prayer of v. 44. The divine blessing is to be invoked on all, regardless of distinctions of race and religion, not only on brethren, i.e. Jews. ἐθνικοί is apparently equivalent to Gentiles, cf. 6:7, 18:17, and 3 John 1:7. In Oxyrhynchus Papyri, i. 126, 13, a.d. 573, it seems to signify a collector of taxes. 48. τέλειος ] Lk. has οἰκτίρμων , but it is probable that he substitutes this word to emphasise the particular aspect of “ perfection.” which the whole context in his Sermon makes prominent. “ Perfection” in the Old Testament means “ without moral blemish,” and can be used of upright men such as Noah (Genesis 6:9), Job (1:1). It is enjoined in Deuteronomy 18:13 τέλειοςἒσῃἐναντίονκυρίουτοῦθεοῦσου . Here the context defines it as perfection in love, which seeks the good of all men. God is perfect, because He bestows His favour on all alike. The whole section is aimed at definitions of the word “ neighbour,” which would limit its application to a particular class who must be treated in accordance with the command “ to love,” whilst others not included in it might be treated in a different way. “ Perfection” contemplates all men alike from the standpoint of love, and this is in accord with God’ s dealings with men. Compassion or mercy is a rather one-sided application of this idea. 44. τοὺςἐχθροὺςὑμῶν ] Add εὐλογεῖτετοὺςκαταρωμένουςὑμᾶςκαλῶςποιεῖτετοὺςμισοῦνταςὑμᾶς , D al from Luke 6:28. ὑπὲρτῶν ] Add ἐπηρεαζόντωνὑμᾶςκαί , D al from Luke 6:26; cf. note on 1:25. 47. The verse is omitted by S1 k either by homœ oteleuton or intentionally. The “ salute” is widened into “ love” by Aphraates. 2 On the Sermon on the Mount, see especially the article of Votaw in DB., Extra Volume, pp. 1ff. E editorial passages. L the Matthæ an Logia. LXX. The Septuagint Version. B. Babylonian Talmud. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. S Syriac version: Peshitta. S Syriac version: Harclean. S Syriac version: Jerusalem Lectionary. Tert. Tertullian. 1 iii. 780 on Matthew 17:3, but in iii. 740 on 16:16 the other order is given. S Syriac version: Curetonian. Tat. Tatian. 2 See Zahn, Forschungen, i. 131. DB. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. Luc. Lucian. 1 He was a disciple of Akiba. Dalm. Dalman. 1 Cited by Schoettgen, in loc. Bab. Babylonian Talmud. Aristoph. Aristophanes. Arist. Aristotle. 1 Cf. The Instruction of Ptah-Hotep, p. 53: “ Set out therefore after a quarrel; be at peace with him that is hostile to (thee) his opponent. It is such souls that makes love grow.” Sym. Symmachus. 1 = Mishnah Gittin 9:10. Deissm. Deissmann. Hdt. Herodotus. Jos. Josephus. Polyb. Polybius. Plut. Plutarch. Targ. Targum. 6:1-18. Three illustrations of the statement that “ righteousness” is not to be like that of “ the hypocrites.” 1. Take heed that ye do not your righteousness before men, to be seen of them: if ye do, ye have no reward from your Father who is in the heavens.] δικαιοσύνην refers back to 5:20. “ Righteousness” is to exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees in the sense illustrated in 5:21-48. It is also to differ in kind from that of the scribes and Pharisees in avoiding ostentation.— θεαθῆναιαὐτοῖς ] For the construction, cf. 23:5, and see Blass, p. 113. 2-4. First illustration. (L) 2. But when thou art doing alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be glorified by men. Verily I say to you, They have their reward already.] σαλπίσῃς ] Not to be taken literally, but as a metaphor for methods of attracting notice.— οἱὑποκριταί ] i.e. the scribes and Pharisees; cf. 15:7, 22:18, 23:13, 14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29. ῥμαις ] See Kennedy, Sources, p. 15. ὅπωςδοξασθῶσιν ] Contrast Bab. Bathra 10b “ They (idolators) only do alms to be exalted.” ἀπέχουσι ] For ἀπέχω and its use in receipts, see Bible Studies, p. 229. It means here, “ They have their reward now, and can expect none in future.” (L) 3. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth.]— σοῦδὲποιοῦντος ] For the construction of the participle, see Blass, p. 252; Moulton, p. 74. (L) 4. That thy alms may be (done) in secret: and thy Father who sees what is secret shall recompense thee openly.] Cf. Bab. Bathra 9b “ He who does alms in secret is greater than Moses our teacher.” ὁβαλέπωνἐντῷκρυπτῷ ] Cf. Sotah 9a “ She does it in secret; but the who sits in the secret place, the Most High, looks upon her.” 1. δικαιοσύνην ] So א * et b B D 1; ἑλεημοσύνην , K ; δόσιν א a; gift, 2. δικαιοσύνη is probably original, because v. 1 is a general introduction to the following section. The “ righteousness” which is not to be ostentatiously paraded is illustrated under the three subdivisions of “ alms” 2-4, “ prayer” 5-6, “ fasting” 16-18. δικαιοσύνην has, therefore, much the same sense as in 5:20, and means the religious life as expressed in the carring out of religious duties. The variant reading is due to the fact that the Hebrew and Aramaic צ ד ק ה , צ ק ד א had acquired the sense of “ alms,” and that ποιεῖνδικαιοσύνην might, therefore, have the meaning to do alms in any context where this meaning was required.— ἐλεημοσύνη ] is the substitution of a more direct synonym for δικαιοσύνη understood (wrongly here) in the sense of “ alms.” 4. ἁποδώσεισοι ] Add ἐντῷφανερῷ , E K al S1 a b c f g1 h q. The agreement of the Old Syriac and the Old Latin proves the reading to be an ancient one. And such antithesis is in the style of Mt. Cf. Intro. p. xxxi. If it is genuine here, its occurrence, in some authorities, in vv. 6 and 18 is accounted for as an assimilation to this passage. 5-8. Second illustration. (L) 5. And when ye pray, ye shall not be as the hypocrites: because they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the open places, that they may be seen of men. verily I say to you, That they have their reward already.] The whole verse is omitted by S1. οὐκἔσεθε ] For the fut. ind., cf. Blass, p. 209. (L) 6. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy chamber, and having shut thy door, pray to thy Father who is in secret; and thy Father who sees what is secret shall recompense thee.] ταμεῖον ] The word thus spelt occurs in the Papyri. See Deissm. Bible Studies, p. 182; Blass, p. 23; Syll. 418, 10, 87; 892, 6.— ἀποδώσει ] The verb seems less relevant here and in v. 18 than in v. 4, where it forms a contrast to “ give alms.” Here the emphasis is not on the answering of prayer, but on the reward of avoidance of ostentation. Mt. adds other sayings which bear upon the same subject, vv. 7-15. (L) 7. And when ye pray, do not speak idly, as do the heathen: for they think they shall be heard for their quantity of words.] ἐθνικοί ] See on 5:47.— βαττολογήσητε ] The Sinaitic Syriac renders “ do not be saying baṭ ṭ â lâ thâ ,” i.e. idle things. The meaning of βαττολογεῖν is unknown. It may be an attempt to render א מ ר ב ט ל ת א . This and the following verse probably comes from the Logia, but did not stand there in the Sermon. It is directed against heathen, not against hypocrites = Pharisees. (L) 8. Be not therefore like to them: for your Father knoweth what things ye need, before you ask Him.] οἶδεγὰρὁπατὴρὑμῶν ] Cf. v. 32 = Luke 12:30.— αἰτῆσαι ] D h have ἀνοῖξαιτὸστόμα . For “ before you ask Him,” cf. Isaiah 65:24. 9. The editor here adds, vv. 9-12, the Lord’ s Prayer. This is found in Luke 11:1-4 in a different context and in a shorter form. Mt. probably drew it from the Logia. In the source from which Lk. drew it its Jewish and eschatological colouring had been partially obscured. The Jewish phrase “ which art in heaven” had been omitted. The further omission of “ Thy will be done as in heaven, so upon earth,” partially obscures the eschatological significance of the first three petitions as they stand in the first Gospel. The substitution of sins for ὀφειλήματα avoids the Jewish metaphor implied in the latter word. Lastly, the omission of “ but deliver us from evil” avoids an ambiguous phrase. See below. (L) Thus therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in the heavens, Hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven so upon earth. Our daily bread give us to-day. And forgive us our debts, as we forgave our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil.]— οὕτως ] i.e. “ after this manner,” not “ in these words.” — ὑμεῖς ] in contrast to αὑτοῖς , v. 8.— πάτερ — ὁἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς ] See on 5:16. The first three petitions are eschatological in scope, and pray for the inauguration of the kingdom; cf. Introduction, p. lxix. For the aorist imperatives as appropriate in prayer, cf. Moulton, p. 173. When the kingdom has come, God’ s name will be sanctified and His will will be realised.— ἁγιασθήτωτὸὄνομασου ] Cf. Isaiah 29:23 “ They shall sanctify My name,” Ezekiel 36:23 “ I will sanctify My great name.” The “ name” of God is equivalent to His nature as revealed. In one respect His name is profaned when His people are ill-treated. The sin of the nation which brought about the captivity had caused a profanation of the Name, Isaiah 43:25, Isaiah 48:11, Ezekiel 36:20-23. By their restoration His name was to be sanctified. But this sanctification was only a foreshadowing of a still future consummation. Only when the “ kingdom” came would God’ s name be wholly sanctified in the final redemption of His people from reproach. Thus the petition, “ Hallowed be Thy name,” carries with it the anticipation of the next clause. “ Hallowed be Thy name.” Yes, but when can that be? Only when the kingdom is inaugurated. So “ Thy kingdom come.” Cf. the collocation of the two clauses, “ May His great name be sanctified,” and “ May His sovereignty reign,” in the Jewish prayer cited below. Further, when His name has been sanctified in the redemption of His people and in the establishment of the kingdom, then, and then only, will it be true that God’ s will is done. Hence the third petition forms the climax of the first two. D* a b c k omit ὡς before ἐνοὐρανῷ . With or without ὡς the sense is the same: “ May Thy will be done” throughout the universe. The addition of ὡςἐνοὐρανῷκαὶἐπὶγῆς does not exclude the reference to the coming “ kingdom,” since there is nothing in the Gospel which leads us to believe that the editor thought of that kingdom as purely heavenly or spiritual. True, the Son of Man is to come on the clouds of heaven, and the elect are to be gathered from the ends of the earth. But, on the other hand, the wicked are to be gathered out of the kingdom, and the just to shine forth in it (13:41-43). The phrase “ heaven and earth shall pass away,” 24:35, need not be anything more than a rhetorical statement by contrast of the eternal validity of Christ’ s words; cf. 5:18. Even if they are understood as a direct statement of a future passing away of the heaven and earth (cf. Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:22), they must be interpreted in the light of the conception of the παλιγγενεσία of 19:28, in which the apostles are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel. The contrast heaven-earth is frequent in the later Jewish literature; cf. Berakh 29b “ Do Thy will in heaven above, and give rest of spirit to them that fear Thee beneath” ; 17a “ May it be Thy will, Lord our God, to establish peace in the upper family and in the lower family” ; Joma 39a “ If a man sanctifies himself below, they sanctify him above” ; cf. Psalms 135:6. The prayer passes from aspiration for the sanctification of God’ s name by the inauguration of the “ kingdom,” in which His will will be universally recognised and carried into effect, to three petitions which concern the daily life of those who are awaiting the “ kingdom.” The first is for the satisfaction of bodily necessities. 11. Give us to-day our daily bread.]— σήμερον ] Lk. has τὸκαθ ʼ ἡμέραν and δίδου for δός .— ἐπιούσιος ] The word is obscure. The Syriac versions S1 S2 have “ continual bread,” but 3 “ bread of our necessity.” Jerome says that the Gospel according to the Hebrews had “ of the morrow,” and this would agree with the usual derivation of ἐπιούσιος from the participle ἐπιοῦσα Cf. the phrase ἡἐπιοῦσα = “ the morrow.” But this meaning does not harmonise readily with σήμερον in this verse, nor with 6:34 “ Take no thought for the morrow,” and Greek phrases for “ for the morrow” were ready to hand without coining a new adjective for the purpose. Jerome substituted supersubstantialem in Mt. For this and other renderings, see Chase, Texts and Studies, i. 3, pp. 42-53. It is difficult not to think that τὸνἐπιουσίον rests upon misunderstanding (false transliteration?) of an original Aramaic phrase, or upon a Greek corruption. If Lk. did not borrow it from Mt., their agreement proves that the word must have become stereotyped in Greek versions of the prayer at a very early period. We should expect a phrase corresponding to the “ my needful bread” of Proverbs 30:8; cf. Job 23:12. The second is for the divine forgiveness of sin: “ And remit to us our debts, as we also remitted to our debtors.” The conception of man’ s indebtedness to God, and of his inability to pay the debt as constituting a state of sin which can only be removed by the divine remission of the debt and forgiveness of the sin, is illustrated in 18:21-35, where also the divine forgiveness is represented as conditional upon the forgiveness by men of their fellows. Cf. the saying of Rabbi Akiba in Aboth 30:20 “ Everything is given on pledge, and the net is cast over all the living. The office is open; and the broker gives credit; and the ledger is open; and the hand writes; and whosoever will borrow comes and borrows; and the bailiffs go round continually day by day, and exact from a man whether he wills or not; and they have whereon to lean; and the judgement is a judgement of truth.” For the Aramaic ח ו ב א =debt or sin, cf. Targ. Isaiah 53:5 Isaiah 53:5 = Heb. פ ש ע . The third petition is for deliverance from the evil that is in the world. The thought is that God allows men to be led into circumstances of moral danger and temptation. They are to pray that He will so overrule the circumstances of life that they may not come into positions of trial and difficulty, and that in any case He will deliver them from the snares of evil. The terms are left purposely ambiguous. ὁπονηρός in 13:19, 28 means the Devil, who is the personification of evil. But here as in 5:37 it is better to assume a nominative τὸπονηρόν , and to think of “ the evil” as a wide generalisation of the evil element in life. 12. ἀφήκαμεν ] א * B Z. ἀφίομεν , D al; ἀφίεμεν , א c G al; ἀφίωμεν , L “ So that we also may,” S2. The right reading in Luke 11:4 is άφίομεν . The renderings of the Syriac versions are striking. In Mt. S1 is wanting. S2 has: “ so that we also may.” In Lk. S1 has: “ and we also ourselves forgive” ; S2 “ and we also will forgive.” The Acts of Thomas has: “ that also we may forgive.” S3 has: “ have forgiven” in both Gospels. In other words, the early Synac tradition understood the clause as a final one. But vv. 14 and 15 demand comparative sense. ἀφήκαμεν has the best attestation. The variants seem to be assimilations to Lk. 13. The doxology is omitted by א B D Z. Its insertion seems to be due to the liturgical use of the Lord’ s Prayer, and the early forms of it vary. k has: “ quoniam est tibi virtus in sæ cula sæ culorum” ; S2 “ Because Thine is the kingdom and the glory for ever and ever, Amen.” The Acts of Thomas omits it. The Didaché has: “ For thine is the power and the glory for ever.” With vv. 9-12 compare the ancient synagogal prayer known as the Kaddisch. I translate from Dalman’ s Messianische Texte, appended to his Die Worte Jesu, Leipzig, 1898: “ May His great name be magnified and sanctified in the world which He has created according to His will. May His sovereignty reign” (or kingdom rule); or, “ And may He cause His sovereignty to reign [and His redemption to shoot forth, and may He bring near His Messiah, and redeem His people] in your life and in your days, and in the life of all the house of Israel, speedily, and at a near time. And say ye Amen.” (L) 14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.] Similar words occur in Mark 11:25 “ And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have anything against any one: that your Father who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.” Mt. has omitted them in the parallel to that passage, if indeed they stood in his copy of Mk. He inserts them here with the next verse from the Logia; cf. also 18:35. (L) 15. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. 16-18. Third illustration. (L) “ And when ye fast, be not, as the hy pocrites, of a sad countenance; for they disfigure their faces that they may be seen to fast by men. Verily I say to you, That they have their reward already.] σκυθρωποί ] in the N.T. only again Luke 24:17. In the LXX it occurs Genesis 40:7, Nehemiah 2:1, Ecclus 25:23, and Daniel 1:10.— ἀφανίζουσι ]. Cf. Joe 2:20 καὶἀφανιῶτὸπρόσωποναὐτοῦ , where, however, the sense is different. ἀφανίζειν seems not to be used elsewhere in this sense of the face. Cf. the epithet ה צ ב ו ע י ן = “ dyed,” applied to the Pharisees by King Jannai in Sotah 22b (Wü nsche, 299). ἀφανίζειν may have been chosen here to rhyme with φανῶσι . (L) 17-18. But thou, when thou art fasting, anoint thy head, and wash thy face; that thou be seen not by men to fast, but by thy Father who is in secret. And thy Father, who sees what is secret, shall recompense thee.] ἀποδώσει ] See on v. 6. 6:19-7:6. Three prohibitions. (a) 6:19-34. Relation to wealth. This section finds parallels in Luke 12:22-34, Luke 11:34-35, Luke 16:18. Mt. drew most of it from the Logia, but may have massed together sayings or groups of sayings which were there disconnected. V. 19 may have been attached to 16-18 because of the occurrence in both of the verb ἀφανίζειν . (L) 19. Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon the earth, where moth and rust mar, and where thieves break through and steal.] Luke 12:33 has: “ Sell your goods and give alms. Make for yourselves purses that do not become old.” (L) 20. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth mar, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.] Luke 12:33 has: “ a treasure unfailing in the heavens, where thief approaches not, nor moth corrupts.” Cf. Test. Leviticus 13:5 Leviticus 13:5 “ Do righteousness, my sons, upon earth, that you may have treasure in heaven” ; Buddhist and Christian Gospels, Edmunds, p. 83, “ Let the wise man do righteousness; a treasure that others can share not, which no thief can steal; a treasure which passeth not away.” (L) 21. For where thy treasure is, there will be thy heart also.] Luke 12:34 has: “ For where your treasure is, there also your heart will be.” 22. To obtain this heavenly treasure you must keep your inner eye healthy by almsgiving. (L) The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore thy eye be sound (=liberal), thy whole body will be light.] Luke 11:34 has: “ The lamp of the body is thine eye. Whenever thy eye is sound, then thy whole body is light.” The idea here is the naï ve one that the eye is the organ through which light has access to the whole body, and that there is a spiritual eye through which spiritual light enters and illuminates the whole personality. This spiritual eye must be kept sound, or else light cannot enter, and the inner man dwells in darkness. But how can it be kept sound? The contrast ἁπλοῦς — πονηρός suggests the answer, by liberality and almsgiving. Treasure is not to be hoarded, but to be given away. In Jewish idiom, “ a good eye” is a metaphor for liberality, “ an evil eye” for niggardliness. Cf. Deuteronomy 15:9 “ Beware that … thine eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou give him nought,” 28:54-56; Proverbs 23:6 “ Eat not the bread of him that hath an evil eye,” because he is niggardly, and grudges what you eat, 28:22 “ He that hath an evil eye hasteth after riches” by hoarding up wealth, 22:9 “ He that hath a good eye … giveth of his bread to the poor” ; To 4:7 “ Give alms of thy substance … and let not thine eye be evil” ; Ecclus 14:10 “ An evil eye is grudging of bread, and he is miserly at his table” ; Aboth 5:15 “ He who is willing to give, but not that others should give, his eye is evil towards the things of others,” i.e. he wishes to have a monopoly of liberality for himself; Shemoth R. 31 (Wü nsche, 235). We should therefore expect here, as a contrast to πονηρός , ἀγαθός rather than ἁπλοῦς . But (1) the phrase “ a sound eye” may have had in the original saying a wider meaning than that of liberality, which is here imparted to it by the context. There is no such limitation in the passage as it stands in Lk. (2) ἁπλοῦς may have been chosen because it interprets ἀγαθός as = liberal; cf. Proverbs 11:25 ψυχὴεὐλογουμένηπᾶσαἁπλῆ , where ἀπλῆ after the preceding verse seems to mean liberal; James 1:5, where ἁπλῶς seems to mean “ liberally,” and the use of ἁπλότης =liberality in 2 Corinthians 8:2, 2 Corinthians 9:11, Romans 12:8. Cf. Test. Issach 3:4 “ I slandered none, and I walked in singleness of eye.” (L) 6:23. But if thine eye be evil (niggardly), thy whole body is dark. If therefore the light which is in thee be darkness, how great is the darkness t] Luke 11:34-35 has: “ But if it be evil, then thy body is dark. Take heed, therefore ! Perhaps the light which is in thee is darkness.” The meaning is, “ If thine eye be evil, i.e. if you are miserly and grudging, keeping your wealth for yourself, then spiritual light cannot penetrate unto you; and such light as you have becomes ever darker, till it ceases to be light, and becomes darkness.” 24. Moreover, you cannot have both the treasure upon earth and the treasure in heaven. (L) No one can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will cleave to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon.] So Luke 16:13 with οἰκείης after οὐδείς . Lk. has the saying in quite a different context. Mt. probably drew it from the Logia, where it need not have stood in this connection. δυσί ] See Blass, p. 35. For ὁεἶς — ὁἕτερος , cf. Blass, p. 144.— μαμμωνᾶς ] is derived by Gram.2 p. 170, Anm. 1, from מ ַ א ְ מ ו ֹ ן = “ deposited.” מ מ ו ן and מ מ ו נ א occur in the Talmuds, see Levy, and in the Targums. 25-33 occur in Luke 12:22-31. Mt. probably drew them from the Logia. (L) 25. Therefore I say to you, Be not careful for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor for your body, what ye shall put on.] So Lk. omitting the first ὑμῶν and ἢτίπίητε . Is not the life more than food, and the body than raiment ?] Lk. has: “ For the life,” etc. The connection seems to be: “ Because you cannot lay up treasure on earth and in heaven, therefore give up all thought of earthly treasure, and even of the necessities of life, which God will provide for you.” The διὰτοῦτο occurs also in Lk. in quite a different context. Here the connection seems loose. After v. 24 we should expect: “ Therefore serve God and renounce wealth,” or words to that effect. The διὰτοῦτο seems to refer back to some assurance of the providential care of God for those who trust in Him. Mt may have transferred it to this place from some context in the Logia where the διὰτοῦτο would be more applicable. The thought of the last clause seems to be that God, who has given the life and the body, will also provide the lesser gifts of food and raiment. (L) 26. Look at the birds of heaven, that they sow not, nor harvest, nor gather into granaries. And your heavenly Father feeds them. Are ye not of more value than they ?] Lk. has: “ Consider the ravens, that they sow not nor harvest, who have neither chamber nor granary, and God feeds them; of how much more value are ye than the birds!” Cf. Job 12:7-9, and New Sayings of Jesus, Il. 9-14. “ Jesus saith, (ye ask who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom if) the kingdom is in heaven? The fowls of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth, or upon the earth, and the fishes of the sea.” Son 5:11 Son 5:11 Son 5:11 τὰπετεινὰκαὶτοὺςἰχθύαςσὺτρέφεις (L) 27. And which of you by being careful can add to his stature one cubit?] So Lk. omitting ἕνα . Lk. adds: “ If therefore ye are able (to do) not even the least, why are ye careful about the rest?” The saying is a difficult one. πῆχυς is a measure of space, not of time. ἡλικία can mean either age, duration of life, or stature. In Mt the latter seems more appropriate. V. 25 lays down the double precept, Take anxious thought neither for the nourishment of the life, nor for the clothing of the body. V. 26 illustrates the former precept, Take no anxious thought for the nourishment of the life. God nourishes the birds of heaven. Much more will He care for you. Vv. 27-30 seem to illustrate the second precept about the body. You cannot increase your bodily stature, and are not so foolish as to spend thought on trying to do so. Why then be anxious about the clothing of the body? God who clothes the flowers will clothe you. The structure of the passage may be illustrated as follows: General proposition. Take no thought either (a) for the nourishment of your life; nor (b) for the clothing of your body (v. 25). For (a) God will provide nourishment (v. 26). (b) (1) You cannot increase the height of your body. Why then trouble about its clothing? (v. 27). (2) God will clothe you (vv. 28-30). It will be seen that there is nothing in (a) corresponding to b 1, and the argument from the impossibility of adding to the height of the body to avoidance of care about its clothing seems so forced that many commentators prefer to render ἡλικία by length of life. For πῆχυς in reference to time, cf. Psalms 39:5 “ Behold thou hast made mine age as handbreadths” ; and see Zahn, in loc. V. 27 must then be connected with v. 26 thus: General proposition. Take no thought for life or body (v. 25). For (a) God will nourish your life. And you cannot add to its length (vv. 26-27). (b) God will clothe you (vv. 28-30). The difficulty of the verse is increased by Lk.’ s addition, for ἐλάχιστον seems to refer to the “ adding to one’ s age or stature,” and τῶνλοιπῶν to nourishment and clothing; and it is not easy to see how the former, whether ἡλικία be translated age or stature, can be said to be “ least” as compared with the two latter. (L) 28. And for raiment, why are ye careful? Study the flowers of the field, how they grow; they toil not, they spin not.) Lk. has: “ If therefore ye cannot even (do) the least, why are ye careful about the rest? Consider the flowers, how they grow. They toil not, nor spin.” — καταμάθετε ] see Moulton, p. 117, who suggests “ understand, take in this fact about.” (L) 29. And I say to you, That not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed as one of these.] So Lk., omitting ὃτι . (L) 30. And if the grass of the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, God so dresses, will He not much more (clothe) you, O ye of little faith ?] Lk. has: “ And if in the field the grass which is to-day, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, God so dresses, how much more (will He clothe) you, O ye of little faith!” — ὀλιγόπιστοι ] The object of the πίστις here is God, and faith is confidence, assurance, trust in His power and willingness to care for the bodily needs of those who trust in Him. See on 8:26, 14:31, 16:8. The word does not occur in Mk., once in Luke 12:28. (L) 31. Be not therefore careful, saying, What shall we eat ? or what shall we drink? or wherewith shall we be clothed?] Lk. has: “ And ye do not seek what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink, and be not of doubtful mind(?).” (L) 32. For all these things the Gentiles seek after. For your heavenly Father knoweth that you need all these things.] Lk. has: “ For all these things the Gentiles of the world seek after. But your Father knoweth that ye need these things.” (L) 33. But seek first His kingdom and righteousness; and all these things shall be added to you.] Lk. has: “ But seek His kingdom, and these things shall be added to you. (L) 34. Be not therefore careful against the morrow; for the morrow will be careful of its own (affairs). Sufficient for the day is its evil.] Cf. Sanhedrin 100b “ Trouble thyself not about the trouble of the morrow, for thou knowest not what a day brings forth. Perhaps on the morrow thou wilt not exist, and so wilt have troubled about that which does not exist for thee.” ἀρκετός ] a late and rare word; cf. Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 257: “ Outside the N.T. only authenticated hitherto in Chrysippus (in Athen. iii. 79, p. 113b); is also found in the Fayû m Papyri, 531, ii. 24 (second cent. a.d.) and 33. 5 (second to third cent. a.d.).” Add Wars, iii. 130: ἀρκετὴνδύναμιν . 33. τἠνβασιλείαν ] Add τοῦθεοῦ , E al S2 k has τοῦθεοθ for αὐτοῦ after δικαιοσύνην . B transposes βασιλείαν and δικαιοσύνην . The explanatory τοῦθεοῦ is quite needless after ὁπατὴρὑμῶν of the previous verse. The transposition of B, which is hardly likely to be genuine, is perhaps due to observance of the fact that δικαιοσύνη is said to be a requisite for admission into the kingdom, 5:20, and should therefore come first. 34. μεριμνήσειἑαντῆς ] the harsh construction is due to translation from Aramaic. See Wellhausen, in loc. E K al have τὰἑαυτῆς to ease the Greek. the Matthæ an Logia. Deissmann. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Dittenberger Sylloge. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Syriac version: Peshitta. Babylonian Talmud. See Charles, Hibbert Journal, April 1905, p. 563. Mr. W. T. Lendrum (Class. Rev. July 1906, 307) quotes the following parallel from Pindar, Frag. 22: Διὸςπαῖὸχρυσός . κεῖνονοὑσῆςοὐδὲλὶςδάπτει . Dalman. The Psalms of Solomon. Aegyptische Urkunden aus den Koenig lichen Museum zu Berlin, 1892 ff. Josephus. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. (b) 7:1-5. Judgement of others. Cf. Luke 6:37-42. 1, 2. Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged. And with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you.] Lk. has: “ And judge not, and ye shall not be judged. For with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured back to you.” Lk., who has nothing in his Sermon corresponding to 6:1-34, connects this saying about judgement with his saying: “ Be ye merciful,” which is parallel to Matthew 5:48. There is a good connection between the ideas of compassion and fair treatment of others. In Mt. there is no connection between 7:1 and 6:34. The verse probably stood in the Logia after 6:20. Mt. has drawn together 6:21-34 from other parts of the Logia. The compiler of the Sermon as it lay before Lk. omitted 6:1-18, just as he had omitted 5:17-39a, 43 because of its controversial tone. The sayings in this verse are of the nature of proverbs, and were probably current maxims of life. For μὴκρίνετε , cf. Rosh ha Sh 16b “ Who accuses his neighbour, will himself be punished first.” ἐνᾧμέτρῳ , κ .τ .λ ., occurs in Mark 4:24b, where Mt. omits it. It is common in the Jewish literature, e.g. Mechilta (Ugol.) 136, 140, Siphri (Ugol.) 884, 904, cf. 512, Sotah 8b, Sanhedrin 100a. The meaning here seems to be that hasty or unjustifiable condemnation of others will provoke the just judgement of God. (L) 3. And why dost thou behold the mote that is in the eye of thy brother, and considerest not the beam which is in thine own eye ?] Lk. has the same, with a slight variation in order. Cf. Arachin 16b where R. Tarphon (end first cent. a.d.) says: “ If one says, Take the mote from thy eye; he answers, Take the beam from thine eye.” The thought is, that so far from judging others, a man should consider that in himself which will expose him to judgement. (L) 4. Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, the beam is in thine own eye ?] Lk. has: “ How canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me cast out the mote which is in thine eye, when thyself seest not the beam in thine own eye?” — ἄφεςἐκβάλω ] See Blass, p. 208; Moulton, p. 175, who quotes 413: ἄφεςἐγὼαὐτὴνθρηνήσω . (L) 5. Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’ s eye.] Lk. has: “ Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine eye; and then shalt thou see clearly the mote which is in thy brother’ s eye to cast out” ; cf. Grenfell and Hunt, Sayings of Our Lord, 11. 1-4. (c) 6. Perverted zeal. (L) 6. Give not that which is holy to dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them with their feet, and turn and rend you.] This saying occurs only in Mt., and has no particular connection with the preceding. But it may have stood here in the Logia. 6:19-20, 7:1-5 and this verse form a group of three prohibitions. The “ swine” and the “ dogs” symbolise alien and heathen men. For “ dogs,” cf. Philippians 3:2, Revelation 22:15. The “ pearls” symbolise religious truth; cf. 13:46. The verse is, of course, capable of infinite adaptation. As it stood in the Logia (and here in the mind of the editor?) it may express the Jewish-Christian point of view with regard to the preaching of Christianity to pagans; cf. Introduction, p. lxxvii, and the application of κυνάρια to Gentiles in 15:26. It was applied to the Eucharist in the second century. Cf. Didaché ix.; de Prœ scr. xli. 7-23. Three Commands. (a) 7-12. Prayer. 7-11 occur in a different context in Luke 11:9-13. Mt. probably drew them from the Logia, where they probably did not stand in the Sermon. (L) 7. Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened to you.] So Lk. with: “ And I say to you,” at the beginning. κρούετε ] Cf. R. Benaiah (c. 200 a.d.) in Pesikta 176a with reference to the study of the Mishna: “ If he knocks, it will be opened to him.” (L) 8. For every one who asks receives; and he who seeks finds; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.] So Lk. (L) 9, 10. Or what man is there of you, who, if his son ask for bread,— will he give him a stone ? Or also (if) he shall ask for a fish, will he give him a serpent ?] Lk. has: “ But which of you being a father, shall his son ask a fish, will he give him instead of a fish a serpent? or also shall he ask an egg, will he give him a scorpion?” (L) 11. If ye therefore, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those who ask Him.] Lk. has: “ If ye, therefore, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children; how much more will the Father who is from heaven give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?” (L) 12. All things therefore whatsoever ye wish that men should do to you, so also do ye to them: for this is the law and the prophets.] Luke 6:31 has: “ And as ye wish that men should do to you, do ye to them likewise.” Lk. has this saying after the parallel to Matthew 5:42. Mt. no doubt found it in the Logia in the Sermon, possibly after 7:1, 2. But it seems more in place in Lk.’ s connection, i.e. to say somewhere within Matthew 5:38-48 which concern the treatment of others. In its present connection in Mt. the verse seems out of place, but 7:1, 2 deal with behaviour to other people, and so does 7:6. If vv. 3-5 and 7-11 are interpolations from other parts of the Logia, 7:12 may have stood in connection with 7:1, 2, 6. A negative form of this saying was attributed to Hillel: “ What is hateful to thee, do not do to thy neighbour,” Shabbath 31a; and is found in To 4:16 ἂμισεῖςμηδενὶποιήσης . Cf. Philo apud Prœ p. Ev. viii. 7. 6: ἄτιςπαθεῖνἐχθαίρειμὴποιεῖναὐτόν (b) 13-14. The narrow gate. Cf. Luke 13:24. (L) 13. Enter in through the narrow gate: because broad and wide is the way which leadeth to destruction, and many are they that go in through it.] Lk. has: “ Strive to enter through the narrow door: because many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able.” (L) 14. How narrow is the gate, and contracted is the way, which leads to life, and (how) few are they who find it !] 14. The narrow gate or narrow door (Lk.) is the gate or door into the kingdom of heaven. Lk. has the phrase in an eschatological context. Here the meaning is less definitely eschatological, but it is not improbable that we should interpret the words in the light of vv. 22ff. with reference to the future kingdom. “ Enter through the narrow gate” will then mean, “ remember that the gate by which you must enter into the kingdom is a narrow one” ; cf. 19:24 “ It is easier to go through the eye of a needle than— into the kingdom” ; and 2 Ezr 7:3-14. The metaphor of the narrow gate suggests the parallel and more common metaphor of the two ways. And the speaker states the first member of that simile: “ Because broad and wide is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many are they that go in through it.” For δἰαὐτῆς = διὰτῆςὁδοῦ , cf. 2:12. Then instead of simply stating the second member of the simile, the speaker breaks into an exclamation which combines both metaphors: “ Ah ! how narrow is the gate and contracted is the way which leads to life, and few there are who find it.” For the two ways, cf. Jeremiah 21:8; Siphri on Deuteronomy 11:26 (Ugol.) 604, where “ blessing and cursing” are interpreted as “ two ways; the one at first level and at last full of thorns, the other at first full of thorns and at last level.” — ὀλίγοιεἰσίν , κ .τ .λ .] cf. 2 Est 8:3 “ There be many created, but few shall be saved.” — εἰςτὴνζωήν ] cf. 18:8, 9, 19:17. In 19:16, 29, 25:46 we have “ eternal life.” For “ life” as equivalent to “ eternal life,” see Words, 156 ff.; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. pp. 306, 326, 368. 13. ἡπύλη ] is omitted by א * a b c h k m for and by many Fathers. 1 is unfortunately wanting. The words have probably been inserted by the copyists to complete the parallelism with v. 14. 14. τί ] So א b vid et c B2 2 ὄτι , א B, is perhaps due to assimilation to the previous verse. (c) 15-23. False prophets. Cf. Luke 6:43-49, Luke 13:26-27. (L) 15. Beware of false prophets, such as come to you in sheep’ s clothing, but are inwardly ravening wolves.] (L) 16. From their fruits ye shall recognise them. Do men gather from thorns grapes, or from thistles figs !] Luke 6:44 has: “ For not from thorns do they gather figs, nor from a bramble-bush do they pluck grapes.” (L) 17. So every good tree makes sound fruit; but the rotten tree makes evil fruit.] Luke 6:48 has: “ For there is not a sound tree making rotten fruit; nor again a rotten tree making sound fruit.” (L) 18. A good tree cannot make evil fruit, nor a rotten tree make good fruit.] (L) 19. Every tree which does not make good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.] (L) 20. Therefore from their fruits ye shall recognise them.] Mt. has an application of this saying about trees and their fruit containing sayings parallel to Luke 6:44a and 45 in 12:33-15. He probably found in the Logia after the saying about false prophets, v. 15, the words: ἀπὸτῶνκαρπῶναὐτῶνἐπιγνώσεσθεαὐτούς , 16a. This suggested to him the insertion from elsewhere in the Logia of the saying about trees and fruit which he closes by repeating the words, v. 20, which had suggested the insertion. Compare his insertion of a parable 20:1-15 to explain 19:30. Here, too, he closes his interpolated section with the text from which he started, 20:16 Compare also his insertion of parables 24:43-25:12 to explain 24:42. Here, too, he repeats at the end 25:18, the verse from which he started. (L) 21. Not every one who saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of the heavens; but he who doeth the will of My Father who is in the heavens.] Cf. Luke 6:46. ὁποιῶντὸθέλημα , κ .τ .λ .] Cf. Aboth 5:22 (R. Jehudah ben Thema): “ Be bold as a leopard, and swift as an eagle, and fleet as a hart, and strong as a lion to do the will of thy Father which is in heaven” ; 2:4 (R. Gamaliel iii., c. 210 a.d.): “ Do His will as if it were thy will” ; Siphri (Ugol.), 872: “ If any one keeps the law and does the will of his Father who is in heaven.” The phrase to do the will is common in Jewish writings; cf. Mechilta (Ugol.) 220, 222, 230, 240, 242; Siphri (Ugol.) 956; Berakhoth 16b “ It is our will to do Thy will.” (L) 22. Many shall say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Thy name? and in Thy name cast out demons ? and in Thy name do many miracles?] Cf. Luke 12:26. ἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳ . For “ that day” as a technical eschatological term, see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 188. (L) 23. And then will I confess to them that I never knew you: depart from Me, ye workers of lawlessness.] Cf. Luke 13:27. 24-27. Closing parable. Cf. Luke 6:47-49. (L) 24. Every one, therefore, who hears these My words, and doeth them, shall be likened to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock.] Lk. has: “ Every one who cometh to Me and heareth My words, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like. He is like a man building a house, who digged and went deep, and laid the foundation upon the rock.” (L) 25. And the rain came down, and the streams came, and the winds blew, and fell upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded on the rock.] Lk. has: “ And when there was a flood, the river beat against that house, and could not shake it, because it was well founded.” βροχή ] is a late and rare word. The lexicons quote Orac. ap. 50. In Ox. Pap. iii. 593, a.d. 172, ii. 280. 5, a.d. 88-89, βροχαί are artificial inundations of land. (L) 26. And every one who heareth these My sayings, and doeth them not, shall be likened to a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand.] Lk. has: “ But he who heard and did not, is like to a man who built a house upon the soil without a foundation.” (L) 27. And the rain came down, and the streams came, and the winds blew, and fell upon that house; and it fell: and its fall was great.] Lk. has: “ Upon which the stream beat, and straightway it fell: and the destruction of that house was great.” 28. And it came to pass when Jesus finished these words, the multitudes were astonished at His teaching.] Cf. Luke 7:1 “ When He had fulfilled all His words in the hearing of the people.” καὶἐγένετο , κ .τ .λ .] For the formula, see Introduction, p. lxiv.— ἐξεπλήσσοντοοἱὄχλοιἐπὶτῇδιδαχῇαὐτοῦ ] With these words Mt. returns to Mark 1:22 after his long insertion, 5-7:27. (M) 29. For He was teaching them as one having authority, and not as their scribes.] Mk. has the same without αὐτῶν . The relation of the Sermon to S. Luke 6:20-49. The Introduction, 5:1, 2. Lk. introduces His Sermon at a later period in the narrative. After borrowing Mark 3:1-6 = Luke 6:6-11, he passes on to the appointment of the Twelve, Mark 3:13-19=Luke 6:12-16. This took place, according to Mk., on a mountain. He then records the descent into the plain again, καὶκαταβὰςμετ ʼ αὐτῶνἒστηἐπὶτόπουπεδινοῦ , 6:17, and then turns back in order to summarise Mark 3:7-12 = Luke 6:7-19, thus obtaining an audience for the Sermon which he introduces in 6:20 with the words: “ And He, lifting up His eyes upon His disciples, said.” It is clear that the two Evangelists independently create a suitable time and place and audience for the Sermon. Mt. places it early in his Gospel to illustrate Mark 1:21, Mark 1:22 “ He was teaching— at His teaching— He was teaching.” Lk. places it after the formal appointment of the Twelve, and provides an audience by transposing Mark 3:13-19 and 7-12. Mt.’ s τὸὄρος and Lk.’ s τόπουπεδινοῦ may both represent a tradition that the Sermon was spoken on a hillside. But Mt.’ s τὸὄρος may equally well be due to the Evangelist. It was fitting that the exposition of the Christian law of the kingdom should have been given on a mountain as the Old Law to Moses on Mount Sinai. Cf. in this Gospel the mountain of temptation (4:8), the mountain of transfiguration (17:1), and the mountain upon which the Lord gave His final commands to the disciples (28:16). Lk.’ s καταβὰς — ἐπὶτόπουπεδινοῦ is probably an editorial connecting link. It was more natural to represent the Lord as descending from the mountain upon which He had appointed the Twelve to find an audience for His Sermon in the plain than to bring the multitudes from Judæ a and Tyre and Sidon up into the mountain. Lastly, Mt. has provided an audience for His Sermon by collecting phrases from Mk. (see on 4:23-25), whilst Lk. provides an audience by transposing Mark 3:7-12 and 13-19. There is therefore no necessary connection between the introduction to the Sermon in Mt. and Lk. other than a common use of Mk.’ s Gospel. A. The Beatitudes, 5:3-13. Lk. has a corresponding section, consisting of four blessings and four woes, 6:20-26. The four blessings are addressed in the second person (Mt. in the third) to οἱπτωχοί , οἱπεινῶντες , οἱκλαίοντες (no parallel in Mt.), and to those who are hated and persecuted; cf. Mt vv. 11, 12. It is clear that the Evangelists in this section are independent of one another, and that they did not use a common written source. The Sermon traditionally began with Beatitudes, but the number and form of these varied in different recensions. B. The two metaphors of discipleship, Matthew 5:13-16, do not occur in Lk.’ s Sermon. They have probably been inserted here from other parts of the Logia. Lk. has parallels to 5:13, 15 in 14:34, 35, 8:16, 11:33. See notes on vv. 13-16. He drew the sayings from some source, or sources, other than the Logia. C. Relation to the Old Law, 5:17-48. Lk. has no parallel in his Sermon to 5:17-39a. But in 6:27-36 he has parallels to Matthew 5:39-48. The ἀλλ ʼ ὑμῖνλέγωτοῖςἀκούουσιν suggests that Lk. himself, or the source which he follows, has omitted from the Sermon matter parallel to Matthew 5:17-39a on account of its polemical character. On the other hand, Mt. has probably added to this section of the Sermon as it stood in the Logia sayings from other parts of the Logia. Such additions are probably vv. 18-19, 22b.c. 25-26. 33-37. See the notes on these passages. D. Three illustrations of righteousness, Matthew 6:1-18. No parallels to this occur in Lk.’ s Sermon. The Sermon in the Logia may have contained it; but if so, Mt. has probably added 7-15 from other sections of the Logia. Lk. has parallels to 8 in 12:30, and to 9-12 in 11:2-4. He was drawing from independent sources. E. Three prohibitions, Matthew 6:19-6. Lk. has no parallels in his Sermon to 6:19-34, but has sayings corresponding to 6:19-21 in 12:33-34, to 6:22-23 in 11:34-35, to 6:24 in 16:13, and to 6:25-34 in 12:22-31. The Sermon in the Logia may have contained Matthew 6:19-20, which Mt. has enlarged by adding 21-34 from other parts of the Logia. Lk. drew from independent sources. Lk. has parallels in his Sermon to 7:1-5 in 6:37-42. Mt. probably drew from the Logia, Lk. from his independent source. F. Three commands, Matthew 7:7-23. Lk. has parallels in his Sermon to 7:12a. 16-18 and 21 = Luke 6:43-44, Luke 6:46. The section probably stood in the Logia, but may have been enlarged by Mt., e.g. vv. 16b-20, from other parts of the Logia. G. Concluding parable, Matthew 7:24-27, is found at the end of Lk’ s Sermon, 6:47-49. These facts seem most easily explained on some such lines as these: Mt. found in the Logia a sermon containing— A. Beatitudes, 5:2-12. B. Relation to Old Law, 5:17, 20, 21-24, 27-30, 31-32, 33-42, 43-48. C. Three illustrations of righteousness, 6:1-4, 5-6, 16-18. D. Three prohibitions, 6:19-21, 7:1-5, 6, 12. E. Two commands, 7:13-14, 15-16a. F. A warning and concluding parable, 7:21-23, 24-27. This sermon he has enlarged by adding to it sayings which also were probably contained in the Logia, viz. 5:13-16, 18-19, 25-26, 33-37, 6:7-15, 22-34, 7:7-11, 16b-20. Lk. also had in one of his sources (not the Logia) a Sermon which was parallel in outline to that of the Logia. It contained, A, a section of blessings and woes (6:20-26), and then passed, B, to a series of exhortations to Christian love (6:27-38), followed by, C, various precepts (6:39-45), and ended by D, a parable (6:46-49). Either Lk. himself or, more probably, an editor at an earlier stage, in the transmission of the Sermon, omitted before B a section dealing with Christ’ s relation to the Old Law. Of course, the Hebrew or Aramaic Logia may be the ulimate source of both Mt. and Lk.’ s Sermon. But if so, it is probable that the sermon was excerpted from the Logia, and passed through several stages before it reached S. Luke. Mt., on the other hand, seems to have used a Greek translation of the Logia itself. That Mt. and Lk. were not using the same Greek source for the Sermon is suggested by their frequent divergence in language, and is decisively proved by the remarkable differences in the section containing blessing, with which the Sermon opens. Lk. also has, not in the Sermon, but elsewhere in his Gospel, sayings corresponding to sayings which Mt. has in the Sermon. Whilst Mt. drew these probably from the Logia, where some of them need not have stood in the Sermon, Lk. borrowed them from oral tradition or from other sources. That the two Evangelists did not draw them from the same Greek source is proved by the variations in setting and in language, and by other differences. The Lord’ s Prayer alone, with its striking variation in the two Gospels, proves that the Evangelists took it from quite independent sources or streams of tradition. For it is very improbable that Lk. should have shortened Matthew 6:9-13, or that Mt. should have expanded Luke 11:2-4. On the other hand, it is very probable that the Prayer should have received different forms in the period of transmission prior to our two Gospels. The Logia may be the ultimate source of tradition. But if Mt. drew directly from a Greek translation of the Logia, LK. borrowed from some source in which the Prayer had been borrowed from the Logia after passing through several stages of transmission. The fact that in both Gospels the Sermon is followed by an entry into Capharnaum (Matthew 8:5=Luke 7:1), and by the miracle of the centurion’ s servant, has led to the supposition that both Evangelists used a source in which this connection was already made. But this is very doubtful. In Matthew 8:5 ΕἰσελθόντοςδὲαὐτοῦεἰςΚαφαρναούμ may be purely editorial. The editor places immediately after the Sermon Mk.’ s narrative of the leper, 8:1-4. He now wishes to continue with the story of the centurion’ s servant. Capharnaum was the obvious place in which to locate this, cf. Matthew 4:13, especially as the editor intends to continue with Mark 1:29-31, which did take place in Capharnaum. He was therefore obliged to insert a statement of the return to that city somewhere, and 8:5 was an obvious opportunity for doing so. In Lk. also, if we allow that Capharnaum was the natural place for the miracle, there was an obvious reason for inserting 7:1 between the Sermon and the miracle. Of course, there are other possibilities. The statement in Matthew 8:5 may be editorial, whilst in the source which Lk. was following the Sermon may have been immediately followed by the return to Capharnaum and the miracle. In that case the agreement of Mt. and Lk. in linking the Sermon to the miracle by the entry into Capharnaum may be accidental. Or this may be just one of those points in which the first Gospel has influenced Lk. He remembered the closing formula of Mat 7:28 “ And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these words,” and reproduced them in 7:1 in the form, “ When He had fulfilled all His sayings in the ears of the people.” Then, passing over Matthew 7:28-29 and 8:1-4 because he has them in other contexts in Mk., he came to Matthew 8:5, and recorded the entry into Capharnaum and the miracle, not slavishly following Mt., but giving the miracle in the form known to him from another source. The view that Mt. and Lk. were both following a source in which Sermon and miracle were already linked by the statement of the entry into Capharnaum, would have everything in its favour if it did not make it impossible to understand the variations in the Sermon in the two Gospels. the Matthæ an Logia. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Tertullian. Eusebius. Cf. also Isocrates, Nicocl. 39 C: ἂπάσχοντεςὑφ ʼ ἑτέρωνόργίζεσθε , ταῦτατοῖςἄλλοιςμὴποιεῖτε . Dalman. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Clement of Alexandria. the Second Gospel. (c) Illustrations of his work, 8:1-9:34 (1) Three miracles of healing, 8:1-17 8:1-4=Mark 1:40-45. The next section in Mk. Isaiah 1:23-28, the account of the demoniac in the synagogue at Capharnaum. We should expect the editor to begin his account of Christ’ s miracles with this incident. But he omits it, and, postponing several verses which follow, continues with the account of the leper, which in Mark 1:40-45 is found without notice of time and place, unless we may infer from Mark 1:39 that it took place during the journey throughout Galilee there mentioned. This change in Mk.’ s order is difficult to explain. We have to account for (1) the omission of the incident of the demoniac, (2) the insertion of the account of the leper immediately after the Sermon, and before the entry into Capharnaum and the incidents there. (1) The omission of the account of the demoniac is probably intentional. (a) Both Mt. and Lk. seem to have disliked the story as found in Mk. We read there that the demon obeyed the Lord’ s command to come out, but not until He had “ rent” the patient and “ cried with a loud voice.” Lk. materially modifies this when he omits the “ crying,” and adds, “ having in no way injured him.” A somewhat similar modification is found in the parallels to Mark 9:14-29, where Mt. altogether omits the details that the demon after the Christ’ s command “ cried out and tore him much,” and that the patient “ became as one dead, insomuch that the more part said, He is dead” ; Whilst Lk. retains indeed the “ rending,” but places it before Christ’ s command, and, like Mt., omits the “ becoming as one dead.” (b) Mt. takes over two of Mk.’ s narratives of expulsion of demons, 5:1-20 and 9:14-29, omitting, however, from the later all traces of demoniac possession except in v. 18. Elsewhere he sometimes omits references to this subject from Mk.; cf. his omission of Mar 1:34, Mark 1:39, Mark 1:3:11. (2) In view of his habit of arranging incidents and sayings in numerical groups, it is probable that he wished to begin his illustrations of Christ’ s miracles with three incidents of healing of typical diseases— leprosy, paralysis, fever. The incident of the leper, which in Mk. seems to have no expressed details of time or place, is therefore substituted for that of the demoniac, and becomes the first miracle (8:1-4). The fact that this incident illustrates Christ’ s attitude towards legal ceremonies may have co-operated in influencing the editor to place it immediately after the Sermon on the Mount. A healing of a paralytic, which Lk. also has in close connection with the Sermon, is inserted as the second (8:5-13); whilst the healing of Peter’ s wife’ s mother, which follows the omitted incident in Mk., supplies the third. 1. And when He came down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him.] In this way Mt. forms a connection with the following incident. 2. And behold a leper came and was worshipping Him, saying, Lord, if Thou wilt, Thou canst cleanse me.] Mk. has: “ And there cometh to Him a leper, beseeching Him, and kneeling down, saying to Him, that if Thou wilt Thou canst cleanse me.” For καὶἰδού as a connecting link, see on 1:20. Mt. avoids Mk.’ s historic present ἔρχεται , and substitutes his favourite word προσέρχεσθαι . See on 4:3. For Mk.’ s vivid “ beseeching Him, and kneeling down,” he substitutes another word which is characteristic of the first Gospel. See on 2:2. Mt. omits Mk.’ s ὄτι (see Introduction, p. xix). κύριε as a form of address to Christ is common in Mt. and Lk. In Mk. it occurs only 7:28, 10:51. καθαρίζειν is late, and rare outside the and N.T. It occurs in Ant. xi. 153, and two or three times in inscriptions in a ceremonial sense; cf. Bib. Stud. p. 216, and Syll. 633. 3, 653. 37. 3. And stretching out the hand, He touched him, saying, I will; be cleansed. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed.] Mk. has: “ And having compassion , He stretched out His hand and touched (him), and saith to him, I will; be cleansed.” Since Mt. elsewhere omits words descriptive of human emotion in the case of Christ (see Introduction, p. xxxi), with the exception of σπλαγχνίζεσθαι which he has four times, it is probable that his copy of Mk. had ὀργισθείς , and that he intentionally omitted it.— ἥψατοαὐτοῦλέγων ] Mk. has ἥψατοκαὶλέγει ; Mt. prefers subordinate to co-ordinate clauses; cf. 8:25 = Mark 4:38, Mark 9:14 = 2:18, 14:27 = 6:50, 20:30 = 10:47, 21:1, 2 = 11:1, 2, 26:67, 68 = 14:65, 21:23 = 11:27, 28.— ἐκαθαρίσθηαὐτοῦἡλέπρα ] Mt. combines two clauses in Mk. He elsewhere omits one of two synonymous clauses; see Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 4. And Jesus saith to him, See that thou tell no man; but go show thyself to the priest, and offer the gift which Moses commanded, for a testimony to them.] Mk. has: “ And he urgently charged him, and immediately sent him out ; and saith to him, See that thou tell no man: but go show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing the things which Moses commanded, for a testimony to them.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s first clause as unnecessarily strongly worded. For the omission of ἐμβριμησάμενος , cf. Introduction, p. xxxi. Mt. inserts ὁἸησοῦς , and omits one of Mk.’ s negatives; cf. Introduction, p. xxv. He also substitutes τὸδῶρον for περὶτοῦκαθαρισμοῦσοῦ . For the offerings made by a leper, cf. Lev_14.— εἰςμαρτύριοναὐτοῖς ] i.e. to the priests, but not to assure them that he was healed. The priests would exercise their own judgment as to this before the customary offerings were made at Jerusalem. The clause can only refer to the supposed hostility of Jesus to the law already implied in 5:17-20. The fact that Christ bade His patient present himself to the priests and offer the usual sacrifices, should convince them that He did not seek to undermine the Mosaic ritual. The illustration here given of Christ’ s attitude towards legal ceremonies may be one reason why the editor places this incident immediately after the Sermon on the Mount. Mk. adds here: “ But he went out and began to publish (it) much, and to spread abroad the matter, so that He could no longer openly enter into a city, but was without in desert places: and they came to Him from every quarter.” The words are ambiguous. The first “ he” is probably the healed leper, the second “ he” Jesus. But the subject in both cases may be Jesus. “ He went forth from the place where He healed the leper, and began to preach much, and to spread abroad the word of the good news of the kingdom, so that in consequence of the thronging multitudes He was obliged to avoid the towns with their narrow streets, and to receive the people in the open country.” For τὸνλόγον = the Gospel message, cf. Mark 2:2, Mark 4:14ff, Mark 8:32. Mt. omits the verse partly because it does not suit the connection in which he has placed the incident. In his narrative, Christ, so far from being unable to enter into a city, is immediately to enter into Capharnaum, partly perhaps on account of the ambiguity in the words, partly also from a feeling of dislike to recording an act of direct disobedience to Christ’ s expressed command, and of hesitation at the μὴδύνασθαι as applied to Christ. He elsewhere omits clauses attributing failure or inability to Christ; cf. Mark 6:5 οὐκἐδύνατο — ποιῆσαι =Matthew 13:58 οὐκἐποίησεν ; Mark 6:48 καὶἤθελενπαρελθεῖναὐτούς , Mt. omits; Mark 9:30 καὶοὐκἤθελενἴνατιςγνοῖ , Mt. omits. Cf. also Mark 8:3 and 11:13 with Mt.’ s parallels, and see Introduction, p. xxxi. In one or two small points Mt. and Lk. agree in their account of this incident against Mk. Both have καὶἰδού and κύριε at the beginning, and ἤψατο — λέγων for ἥψατοκαὶλέγει . Both omit σπλαγχνισθείς and Mark 43a. Lk. paraphrases Mark 45 in such a way as to avoid the disobedience of the man, and the “ could not” of Christ. Mt. omits the verse. This partial agreement in treatment and the omissions may be due to the same tendency operating independently in two writers. The other agreements may be due to the influence of one Gospel upon the other in respect of the original writers, or of later copyists assimilating one passage to another; to oral tradition independently influencing the original writers; or to some unknown cause. They are not sufficient to make it probable that Mt. and Lk. had any other written account of this incident before them in addition to Mk. 5-13. The Paralytic; cf. Luke 7:1-10. 5, 6. And when He entered into Capharnaum, there came to Him a centurion, beseeching Him, and saying, Lord, my boy lies in the house sick of the palsy, terribly tormented.]— αὐτοῦ — αὐτῷ ] For the construction, cf. Blass, p. 251. For προσερχεσθαι as a characteristic word of Mt., cf. on 4:3.— ἑκατόταρχος ] In Hellenistic writers ἑκατοντάρχης also occurs; cf. Blass, p. 28.— παρακαλῶναὐτὸνκαὶλέγων ] It is curious that the editor should omit παρακαλῶν in Mk v. 40 and insert it here. Perhaps he thought it more suitable in view of the long appeal which here follows, than in reference to the short sentence of v. 2. For κύριε , see on v. 2— ὁπαῖςμου ] παῖς may be either “ child” or “ servant.” — παραλυτικός ] See on 4:24.— βέβληται ] Lies prostrate. The strong word represents a Semitic original. (X) 7. And he saith to him, Shall I come and heal him?] The centurion was probably a Gentile. He had not ventured to bring his servant to a Jewish healer. Only in the case of Jairus’ daughter does Christ go to the patient. Elsewhere the sick are brought to Him. It matters little whether we translate the last clause as a question or as a simple statement, “ I will come,” etc. In either case the main point is that Christ should be willing to enter the house of a foreigner. (X) 8. And the centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldest enter under my roof: but only speak, and my servant shall be healed.] For κύριε , see on v. 2.— ἱκανὸςἵνα ] Blass, 227 f. For the position of μου , cf. 7:24, 26; Blass, 168; and see on 9:5. (X) 9. For I, too, am a man under authority, having soldiers under me: and I say to one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes; and to my servant, Do this, and he does it.] The officer, impressed with the spiritual power of Christ, believes that He must have spiritual agencies at His command, who could carry out His command that the patient should be healed. (X) 10. And Jesus hearing, marvelled, and said to those who followed, Verily I say to you, With no one did I find such faith in Israel.]— πίστιν ] “ Faith” here is “ confidence,” “ trust,” “ assurance,” that Christ could, if He would, heal with a word. 11. And I say to you, That many from east and west shall come and sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of the heavens.] For this and the next verse, cf. Luke 13:28-30. The gap between this and the last verse must be bridged by the thought that such faith as that exhibited by the Gentilic centurion would admit him into the kingdom. And he was only typical of a class. Many in all parts of the world would be found to have this faith. When the kingdom came, they would come from the remote corners of the world, and, entering into it, would sit down to feast with the righteous patriarchs. The metaphor of a meal is frequently used in the N.T. to symbolise the joys of the kingdom. Cf. 26:29, Luke 14:15-24, Luke 22:30, Revelation 3:20, Revelation 19:9. It is common in Jewish literature. Cf. Aboth 3:20 “ Everything is prepared for the banquet,” Secrets of Enoch 42:5 “ At the last coming they will lead forth Adam with our forefathers, and conduct them there, that they may rejoice, as a man calls those whom he loves to feast with him” ; and Pesikta 188b. Behemoth and Leviathan are reserved for the meal of the righteous. Cf. Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 331; Enoch 62:14, Apoc. Bar 29:4. (L) 12. But the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness: there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.] “ Sons of the kingdom” is in Semitic idiom equivalent to those who should inherit it, its rightful heirs. Here it, no doubt, signifies the Jewish nation or people. Such of them as are lacking in the faith which the centurion possessed will be cast out of the kingdom, whilst Gentiles sit down with the righteous patriarchs at the banquet. For “ sons of the kingdom,” cf. Shabb. 153a; “ Who is a son of the world to come?” Pesaḥ im 8a, and cf. 13:38. τὸσκότοςτὸἐξώτερον occurs only in Matthew 22:13; Matthew 25:30. Cf. Enoch 103:8 “ into darkness— will your spirits enter” ; 108:14 “ those who were born in darkness will be cast into darkness” ; 14:6 “ their inheritance is— darkness,” 15:11 “ the inheritance of the sinners is— darkness” ; 4:43 He will send back the ungodly into darkness. For the Rabbinical literature, cf. Vayyikra R. 27 (Wü nsche, 183): “ God names gehinnom ‘ darkness.’ ” Shemoth R. 14 (Wü nsche, 100): “ the sinners in gehinnom will be covered with darkness.” Cf. Bousset, Rel. Jud. 266; Weber, Jü d. Theol. 393; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 284 f.: ἐκεῖἔσταιὁκλαυθμὸςκαὶὁβρυγμὸςτῶνὀδόντων . This refrain is characteristic of Mt. It occurs again in 13:42, 50, 22:13, 24:51, 25:30, and once in Luke 13:28. Cf. Enoch 108:3, the transgressors “ will cry and make lamentation” ; 5 “ the voice of crying, and weeping, and lamentation, and strong pain” ; Secrets of Enoch 40:12 “ the mighty hell— full of lamentation.” For the whole verse, cf. Philo, de Exsecr. vi. The proselyte — receive(s) for reward a sure and firm foundation in heaven, such as cannot be described. But the rightful heir “ will be dragged downwards, and brought into Tartarus and deep darkness.” (X) 13. And Jesus said to the centurion, Go; as thou hast believed, be it to thee. And the boy was healed at that hour.] For the healing at the moment of Christ’ s utterance, cf. 9:22, 15:28, 17:18.— ἐνἐκείνῃτῇὤρᾳ ] is a formula of frequent occurrence in Rabbinical literature; cf. Schlatter, Die Sprache und Heimat des vierten Evangelisten, p. 64.— ὡςἐπίστευσας ] see on v. 10. 5. For “ And when He entered into Capharnaum.” 1 k have: “ After these things.” This abrupt introduction is quite unlike Mt.’ s style, and may be original. 2 has: “ After these things, when He entered into Capharnaum” ; adding the last clause from a Greek MS. which had assimilated to Luke 7:1. The Gk MSS. vary between εἰσελθόντοςδὲαὐτοῦ , א B C Z, εἰσελθὁντιδὲαὐτῷ , and εἰσελθόντιδὲτῷἸησοῦ . ὲκατόνταρχος ] So the Greek MSS. S1 has “ chiliarch,” which may be original, ἑκατόνταρχος being in that case due to assimilation to Lk. ὑπὸἐξουσίαν ] א B add τασσόμενος , assimilating to Lk. S1 has: “ I also am a man that hath authoriy.” S2 “ I also am a man under authority, and I have authority also.” S1 has misinterpreted the rather ambiguous ὑπὸἐξουσίαν , and S2 has prefixed a more exact rendering. 10. παρ ʼ οὐδενὶτοσαύτηνπίστινἐντῷἸσραήλ ] So B a k q S2 (“ not even in any one of the house of Israel have I found aught like this faith,” Burk). The variant οὐδὲἐντῷἸσραἡλτοσαύτηνπίστιν , א C S1 (“ not even aught like this faith have I found in the house of Israel,” Burk), may be due to assimilation to Lk. 5-13. The Paralytic. Luke 7:1-10 records a similar incident in a similar connection immediately on the entry into Capharnaum, which followed the Sermon. The narrative setting of the two Evangelists is very different. In Mt. the officer himself comes to Christ. In Lk. he sends, first, elders, and then friends, to intercede for him. On the other hand, the dialogue Matthew 8-12 = Luke 6b-9 is almost verbally identical; but Mt. has two verse, 11-12, which are not found in Lk. The similar position of the story might be accounted for by supposing that Mt. and Lk. drew from a common documentary source. Against this is the divergent narrative setting. Or on the supposition that the incident was connected with the Sermon in oral tradition. The agreement in dialogue is not too great to be accounted for on this view. Or, lastly, the agreement in position may be due to reminiscence of Mt. by Lk. The reverse is on many grounds hardly probable. It seems probable that the two Evangelists record different versions of the same story. For a third, cf. John 4:46-54. The text of Mt. seems to have undergone considerable assimilation to Lk. See the critical notes. 14-16. From Mark 1:29-34. The editor now returns to the incident in Mk. which follows the omitted section of the demoniac. (M) 14. And Jesus came into the house of Peter, and saw his wife’ s mother abed, and fever-sick.] Mk. has: “ And straightway they went out of the synagogue, and came into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. And the wife’ s mother of Simon lay fever-sick, and straightway they tell Him of her.” Mt. must omit ἐκτῆςσυναγωγῆςἐξελθόντες because he has omitted the previous scene in Mk. which took place in a synagogue. He abbreviates Mk.’ s account by omitting as unnecessary καὶἈνδρέουμετὰἸακώβουκαὶἸωάνου and καὶεὐθὺςλέγουσιναὐτῷπερὶαὐτῆς . βεβλημένην for Mk.’ s κατέκειτο is an assimilation to v. 6; see note there. Cf. a similar change in 9:2, and cf. Mark 7:30. 15. And He touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered to Him.] Mk. has: “ And He came and raised her, having taken hold of (her) hand; and the fever left her, and she ministered to them.” The editor slightly paraphrases Mk. ἥψατο for Mk.’ s κρατήσας is an assimilation to v. 3. Mk. has the plural throughout, “ they came— ministered to them,” because since 1:16-20 he has represented Christ as accompanied by the four disciples; cf. v. 21 “ they come.” But Mt. has left the incident of the call so far behind that he has ceased to be influenced by it, and substitutes the singular. (M) 16. And when it was evening, they brought to Him many demoniacs; and He cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all that were in evil plight.] Mk has: “ And when it was evening, when the sun set, they were bringing to Him all who were in evil plight, and the demoniacs. And the whole city was gathered at the door. And He healed many who were in evil plight, and cast out many demons; and did not suffer the demons to speak, because they knew Him to be the Christ.” This passage is very characteristic of Mk.’ s style. Notice the tautologous “ When it was evening, when the sun set,” the repetition of τοὺςκακῶςἔχοντας and of τὰδαιμόνια , and the emphasis upon the multitude who thronged the door. Mt. omits “ when the sun set” ; cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. He substitutes the aorist προσήνεγκαν for Mk.’ s imperfect ἔφερον . See Introduction, p. xx. προσφέρειν occurs fifteen times in Mt., three in Mk. The substitution of the composite for the simple verb carries with it the substitution of αὐτῷ for πρὸςαὐτόν ; cf. the same change in 9:2 = Mark 2:3, the dat. for πρόςμε in 17:17 = Mark 9:19, the dot. for πρὸςαὐτόν in 22:23 = Mark 12:18, and the dat. for πρὸςτὸνΙΙειλᾶτον in 27:57 = Mark 15:43. He abbreviates the rest in such a way as to omit one occurrence of τοὺςκακῶςἔχοντας and of τὰδαιμόνια , and by a slight transposition has “ many brought, all healed” for Mk.’ s “ all brought, many healed.” Cf. Introduction, p. xxxii. λόγῳ is an assimilation to v. 8 It enhances the miraculous character of the healing. Cf. Introduction, p. xxxii. 17. The editor closes his first series of miracles with a quotation from Isaiah 53:4, which seems to be an independent translation of the Hebrew. The LXX is quite different , and would hardly have been applicable here. We need not ask as to the exact signification of the verbs. The translator’ s thought was centred on the nouns “ weaknesses and diseases.” Christ healed these, as the three illustrations of leprosy, paralysis, and fever just given show. In so doing, He “ bore and carried” them in any sense in which these verbs can be predicated of a physician. The translator therefore chooses two colourless Greek verbs— λαμβάνειν , βαστάζειν — to represent the Hebrew originals, giving us no clue whether the thought in his mind was that Christ “ took away” and “ carried away” disease from the sufferer, or rather that He took upon Himself and carried in His own person these ailments in the weariness which such work caused Him. Cf. Deissm. Bib. Stud. 102 f. (2) Three miracles of power, 8:18-9:17 18. The next section in Mk Isaiah 1:35-39. This the editor omits as being irrelevant to his purpose, since it contains no miracle. Mark 1:40-45 he has already inserted. He comes therefore to 2:1-22. But this occurred at a second visit to Capharnaum (Mark 2:1), and Mt., who has already inserted Mark 1:40-45, which separates the two visits, cannot by continuing with 2:1-22 confuse them. He therefore postpones 2:1-22. 2:23-3:6 contains controversial matter, which Mt. reserves for a special controversial section (12). 3:7-35 furnishes no miracle of healing. 4:1-34 is reserved for a special parable section (13). He therefore comes to 4:35, where Christ is described as surrounded by a multitude at evening time, and about to cross the lake, possibly being wearied with His ministry. Mt. adapts this situation to what he has just recorded, inserts 8:19-22, and then takes over Mark 4:35-20 = Matthew 8:23-34 with considerable omissions. These verses contain two incidents which form the first two of a second series of miracles illustrating Christ’ s power over natural and supernatural forces. (M) 18. And Jesus, seeing great multitudes about Him, gave command to depart to the other side.] Mk has: “ And He saith to them on that day when it was evening, Let us cross to the other side.” Mt. omits “ on that day when it was evening,” because he has already recorded the latter fact in v. 16. (X) 19-22.Luke 9:57-62 has the story of these two claimants to discipleship, with the addition of a third, at a later stage in the ministry. The substantial agreement in language is no reason for supposing that both drew from the same documentary source. Lk.’ s addition and the difference of context is against this. But it is not easy to see why Mt. should have placed the section here in his series of miracles. Possibly the thought of the sickness bearer suggested to him the companion picture of the homeless Son of Man. (X) 19. And there came a scribe, and said to Him, Teacher, I will follow Thee whithersoever Thou goest away.] προσελθών ] Cf. on 4:3.— εἷςγραμματεύς ] For the Semitic use of εἷς = τις , cf. Blass, p. 144; p. 243. But contrast Moulton, p. 96; and for one= “ a” in Aramaic, Gram. 121. In Aramaic it is placed before the substantive, in Hebrew after it. Its use in Hebrew in this sense seems to be occasional and limited. Hatzidakis, Einl. 207, says that this use occurs in Greek writers since Polybius. Zahn refers to take εἷςγραμματεύς in apposition, “ one, a scribe,” cf. 18:24 εἷςὀφειλέτης , on the ground that when Mt. uses alt as εἷς as=τις , he places it after the substantive; cf. 9:18, 12:11, 18:5, 21:18. Lk. has simply τις . διδάσκαλε ] = ῥαββεί . See Dalman, Words, 336. What induced this scribe to wish to accompany Christ in His wanderings we cannot say. The next verse suggests that the Lord doubted his sincerity of purpose. (X) 20. And Jesus saith to him, The foxes have earths and the birds of the heaven nests, but the Son of Man hath not where to lay His head.] “ Son of Man” is here quite clearly a self-designation of Himself by Christ. For its meaning, see the Introduction, p. lxxi. (X) 21. And another of the disciples said to Him, Lord, suffer me first to go away and bury my father.] ἕτερος ] is used loosely for ἅλλος , as in 10:23, 12:45, 15:30.— τῶνμαθητῶν ] loosely qualifies ἕτερος without implying that the γραμματεύς was a disciple. (X) 22. And Jesus saith to him, Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead.] It is generally suggested that τοὺςνεκρούς means the spiritually dead, i.e. those who had not felt the call to follow Christ, and were dead so far as He was concerned. They could perform the duties of burial. The questioner had received the call, and that was the more urgent duty. In this case, the burial of the dead parent would come under the rule that sometimes the call to follow Christ might necessitate the abandonment of human relations; cf. 19:29. But it is possible that “ let the dead bury their dead” was a proverbial saying, meaning, “ Cut yourself adrift from the past when matters of present interest call for your whole attention.” (M) 23. And when He embarked into a boat, His disiples followed Him.] Mk. has: “ And they left the multitude, and take Him as He was in the boat. And other boats were with Him.” The editor adapts Mk. to his context. In Mk. Christ was already in a boat, and had been speaking from it (Mark 4:1). Mt. is obliged to insert a statement of the embarkation, and omits the reference to the other boats as superfluous. 24. And, behold, there arose a great storm in the sea, so that the boat was being covered by the waves: but He was sleeping.] Mk. has: “ And there arises a great hurricane of wind, and the waves were beating into the boat, so that the boat was already being filled. And He was in the stern upon the cushion sleeping.” καὶἰδού ] see on 1:20.— σεισμός ] Mk. has the stronger phrase λαῖλαψ — ἀνέμου .— ἐγένετο ] for Mk.’ s historic present, cf. Introduction, p. xx.— καλύπτεσθαι ] for Mk.’ s stronger γεμίζεσθαι . Mt. avoids the repeated τὸπλοῖον ; see on v. 16.— αὐτὸςδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶαὐτός , cf. Introduction, p. xx. Mt. omits ἐντῇπρύμνῃἐπὶτὸπροσκεφάλαιον ; cf. Introduction, p. xvii. (M) 25. And they came and aroused Him, saying, Lord, save; we are perishing.] Mk. has: “ And they arouse Him, and say to Him, Teacher, dost Thou not care that we are perishing?” The editor inserts his characteristic προσελθόντες .— προσελθόντεςἤγειραναὐτὸνλέγοντες ] for Mk.’ s ἐγείρουσιναὐτὸνκαὶλέγουσιν , see note on 8:3. Mt. as usual avoids the historic present. Cf. Introduction, p. xx. — σῶσονἀπολλύμεθα ] for Mk.’ s οὐμέλεισοιὅτιἀπολλύμεθα ; σῶσον is a conventional substitute for the half reproachful οὐμέλεισοι ; cf Introduction, p. xxxiii. (M) 26. And He saith to them, Why are ye cowardly, O ye of little faith ? Then He arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there, was a great calm.] Mk. has: “ And He rose up, and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, Be silent, be muzzled. And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. And He said to them, Why are ye cowardly? have ye not yet faith?” The editor transposes Mark 39, 40 in order to bring the answer of Christ in close juxtaposition to the appeal of the disciples. He modifies the severity of the rebuke by substituting ὀλιγόπιστοι for οὔπωἔχετεπίστιν . For other instances, cf. Introduction, p. xxxiii. ὀλιγόπιστος addressed to the disciples does not occur in Mk., but in Mt. here and 6:30, 14:31, 16:8, in Lk. only 12:28. Here the object of πίστις seems to be the power of Christ, for He was with them, and that should have kept them from fear of danger: or perhaps more generally the providence of God.— τότε ] see Intro. lxxxv.— τοῖςἀνέμοις ] Mk. has the singular. It is characteristic of Mt. to prefer plurals. Cf. his frequent ὄχλοι for Mk.’ s ὄχλος ; ἄλλα and πετρώδη , 13:5, for Mk.’ s ἄλλο and πετρῶδες ; μυστήρια , 13:11, for Mk.’ s μυστήριον ; and ἀργύρια , 26:15, for Mk.’ s ἀργύριον .— καὶτῇθαλάσσῃ ] Mk. has: καὶεἶπεντῇθαλάσσῃΣιώπαπεφίμωσο . The editor perhaps wished to avoid Mk.’ s strong imperatives, and he elsewhere avoids the oratio recta; cf. v. 18 ἐκέλευσενἀπελθεῖν = Mk v. 35 λέγει — διέλθωμεν . (M) 27. And men marvelled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him ?] Mk. has: “ And they feared greatly, and were saying to one another, Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?” The subject of the sentence in Mk. must be inferred to be the disciples from Mk vv. 34 and 36. In the whole of the succeeding section Mk. speaks ambiguously of “ they” and “ them.” Mt. has introduced “ the disciples” in v. 23. οἱἄνθρωποι might mean “ men.” It generally has this meaning in the first Gospel; cf. 5:13, 16:13 and 24 times. If so, the verse would mean that “ men (hearing of the miracle) marvelled,” cf. 9:8. This is more probable than that the editor should refer to the disciples as “ οἱἄνθρωποι .” Feeling that Mk.’ s “ and they feared greatly” refers to the disciples, he substitutes “ marvelled” to soften the expression, and then to remove all reference to the disciples inserts οἱἄνθρωποι as subject to the sentence. Cf. 9:8, where he inserts οἱὄχλοι to remove all possible reference to the disciples. 23-27. There are some small points of agreement between Mt. and Lk. as against Mk. Both report the embarkation. Mt. ἐμβάντιαὐτῷεἰςπλοῖονἠκολούθησαναὐτῷοἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ ; Lk. αὐτὸςἐνέβηεἰςπλοῖονκαὶοἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ . But since both editors have broken Mk.’ s connection, it is necessary for them to say that Christ entered into, rather than that He was in, a boat. έμβαίνειν is the common synoptic word for embarkation, and in other respects the two clauses could hardly agree less. Both agree almost verbatim in the words προσελθόντεςἤγειραναὐτὸνλέγοντες . The main point here is the agreement in the insertion of προσελθόντες . Both agree in ἐθαύμασαν (Matthew 27., Luke 25) and in the plural ἄνεμοι . Lastly, both agree in omitting Mark 36c, in paraphrasing 37b, in omitting all or part of 38a, in omitting or paraphrasing οὐμέλεισοι in 38b, in omitting the direct command in 39, in modifying the rebuke in 40. It does not, however, seem necessary to suppose that they had another written source besides Mk. These agreements are probably in part independent changes, and in part may be due to reminiscence of Mt. by Lk. and to assimilation in process of transmission. (M) 28. And when He had come to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes, there met Him two demoniacs coming forth from the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no one could pass by that way.] In these words Mt. paraphrases and abbreviates Mark 5:1-5. The two most striking changes introduced are the “ two” and Gadara for Gerasa. In view of the brevity of Mt. as compared with Mk. in this section and the following, and to a less extent in the preceding one, it seems not improbable that when the editor came to Mark 1:45 and was proposing to pass on to Mark 4:35-20, he did not unroll Mk.’ s Gospel to these verses, but summarised them from memory, perhaps purposely shortening them. If that was the course adopted, δύο may be a slip of the memory; but it should be borne in mind that, having omitted a previous history of a demoniac, he may purposely have duplicated here by way of compensation. Cf. 20:30, where he has two blind men and Mk. has one, with the fact that he had previously omitted a history of a blind man, Mark 8:22-26. The change of Gadara for Gerasa is probably intentional. The best known Gerasa lay 30 miles to the south-east of the lake. Mk.’ s Gerasa is therefore a geographical crux, and has been corrected into Gadara by A C ΙΙΣΦ S2, and into Gergesa by א c a L U Δ S1, in that Gospel. Mt. seems to have felt the difficulty, and to have substituted Gadara. This city lay 6 miles south-east of the lake, and the miracle might be supposed to have taken place within its district . He does not say, as does Mk., that the demoniacs met Christ immediately on His landing, but seems to imply that Christ had come into the district of Gadara when the meeting took place. The herd of swine by the lake was “ far from them,” v. 30, when the demons entered into them. That is to say, Christ had left the lake “ far” behind Him. δαιμονιζόμενοι ] Mk. has ἄνθρωποςἐνπνεύματιἀκαθάρτῳ ; cf. the change in 9:20 of αἱμορροοῦσα for οὖσαἐνῥύσειαἵματος . (M) 29. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with Thee, Thou Son of God? art Thou come here before the time to torment us?] Mk. has: “ And seeing Jesus from afar, he ran and worshipped Him. And cried with a loud voice, and saith, What have I to do with Thee, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure Thee by God, do not torment me.” For καὶἰδού , see Introduction, p. lxxxv. υἱὲτοῦθεοῦ ] We may suppose that the fame of Christ’ s miracles had preceded Him, cf. 4:24. The demoniacs, seeing Him approaching, guessed Him to be the great healer. They address Him as “ Son of God,” meaning no more than one who was endowed with divine power, or possibly using it as equivalent to Messiah. Cf. Dalm. Words, 274 ff.— βασανίσαι ] The word carries us into the atmosphere of the then current belief about demons, their activity and their destiny. See the art. “ Demon” in It was believed that evil demons could enter into human beings and dominate their personality. They could also be expelled by magic. Josephus speaks of one Eleazer whom he had seen curing demoniacs by holding a magical ring to the nose of the patient. He then drew the demon out through his nostrils (Ant. viii. 46, 47). The demons have power to afflict mankind until the day of judgment, when they will be punished, Enoch 15-16. Cf. Weber, Jü d. Theol. 254 ff.; Bousset, Rel. Jü d. 331 ff. The demons who have taken possession of the two men here spoken of see coming one whose fame as an exorcist had preceded His arrival. They beg Him not to anticipate for them the destined torments of hell by casting them out homeless into the wilderness. Mt. here omits Mk vv. 8-10, which are not necessary to the story, and contain a question: “ What is thy name?” ascribed to Christ. Cf. the omission of such questions from the parallels to Mark 5:30, Mark 5:6:38, 8:Mark 5:19-20, Mark 5:23, Mark 5:9:12, Mark 5:16, Mark 5:21, Mark 5:38, Mark 5:10:3, Mark 5:14:14; and see introduction, p. xxxii. (M) 30. And there was far from them a herd of many swine feeding.] Mk. has: “ And there was there at the mountain a great herd of swine feeding.” For μακρὰνἀπ ʼ αὐτῶν , see note on v. 28, and cf. Mk v. 6. (M) 31. And the demons were beseeching Him, saying, If Thou cast us out, send us into the herd of swine.] Mk. has: “ And they were beseeching Him (παρεκάλουν , A D al latt Syrr), saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.” — οἱδέ ] For Mk.’ s καί , cf. Introduction, p. xx. The editor omits Mk.’ s tautologous ἵναεἰςαὐτοὺςεἰσέλθωμεν ; cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 32. And He said to them, Go. And they went out, and went away into the swine: and, behold, all the herd ran down the declivity into the sea, and perished in the waters.] Mk. has: “ And He suffered them. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine. And the herd ran down the declivity into the sea, and were choked in the sea.” — οἱδὲὲξελθόντες ] For Mk.’ s καὶἐξελθόντα , cf. Introduction, p. xx.— καὶἰδού ] see on 2:1. For the omission of Mk.’ s ὡςδισχίλιοι , cf. Introduction, p. xviii.— ἐντοῖςὕδασιν ] Mt. avoids the repeated θάλασσα of Mk. See note on 8:16. (M) 33. And the herdsmen fled, and went away into the city, and reported all things, and the (affairs) of the demoniacs.] Mk. has: “ And the herdsmen fled, and reported into the city and into the country.” — οἱδέ ] For Mk.’ s καί as usual, see Introduction, p. xx.— εἰςτὴνπόλιν ] Mk. adds καὶεἰςτοὺςάγρούς . Mk. uses ἀγρός here and in 6:36, 56 in the sense of “ farm” or “ hamlet.” Mt. avoids it in this sense. (M) 34. And, behold, all the city went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw Him, they besought (Him) that He would depart from their frontiers.] With these words Mt. abbreviates Mk vv. 14c-17.— παρεκάλεσαν ] For Mk.’ s ἤρξαντοπαρακαλεῖν , cf. Introduction, p. xxi. εἰςὑπάντησιντῷἸησοῦ ] For the construction, see Moulton, p. 14, n. 3. Mk. has here three verses which Mt. omits. 28. Γαδαρηνῶν ] So B al S1 Γερασηνῶν latt; Γεργεσηνῶν , א c al; Γαζαρηνῶν , א *. 28-34. Mt. and Lk. have a few points of agreement against Mk. in the following: δαιμονιζόμενοι , Mat_28 = δαιμόνια , Luke 27. δαίμονες , Matthew 30; cf. δαιμόνια , Luke 33. δέ , Matthew 32, Luke 33, for καί , Mar_13. δέ , Matthew 33, Luke 34, for καί , Mar_14. ἐξῆλθεν , Matthew 34 = ἐξῆλθον , Luke 35, for ἦλθον , Mar_14. editorial passages. the Second Gospel. The Septuagint Version. Josephus. Deissmann. Dittenberger Sylloge. Ephrem Syrus. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. the Matthæ an Logia. Babylonian Talmud. The Psalms of Solomon. Sibylline Oracles. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. i.e. with other uncial MSS. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. πολλοὐςὄχλους , cf. 8:1. So א C al latt; ὄχλους , א ; ὄχλον , B, assimilating to Mark 4:36 “ the great multitude,” S1 S2; turbam multam, cg1; ὅχλοςπολύς , a b ff1 h k q. In a half editorial note of this kind the plural is more probable; cf. Introduction, p. lxxvi. Winer-Schmiedel. Dalman. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). 9:1-8. The healing of a paralytic, from Mark 2:1-12. (M) 1. And He embarked into a boat, and crossed over, and came to His own city.] Mark 5:21a has: “ And when Jesus had crossed over in the boat again to the other side.” The editor now wishes to return to Mark 2:1, which begins: “ And He entered again into Capharnaum after some days, and it was reported that He is at home. And there were gathered together many, so that there was no longer room for them; no, not even about the door (R.V.): and He was speaking to them the Word.” The editor omits, as usual, the thronging of the multitude, cf. Introduction, p. xviii, and substitutes for εἰςΚαφαρναούμ the words εἰςτὴνἰδίανπόλιν . He has already (4:13) made it clear that Christ’ s headquarters were at Capharnaum. For the omission of Mk.’ s ἐνοἴκῳ , see on 15:15. He now inserts Mark 2:3-12, and thus completes his second series of miracles over forces natural (8:23-27), supernatural (8:28-34), and spiritual (forgiveness of sin, 9:1-8). He then adds Mark 2:13-22 simply because it is closely connected in Mk. with the preceding section, and in spite of the fact that it interrupts his series of illustrations of Christ’ s healings. (M) 2. And, behold, they were bringing to Him a paratytic lying on a bed. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the paralytic, Be of good courage; Son, thy sins are forgiven thee.] Mk. has: “ And they come, bringing to him a paratytic borne of four. And not being able to bring him to Him on account of the crowd, they unroofed the house where He was. And digging a hole, they let down the pallet upon which the paralytic lay. And Jesus, seeing their faith, saith to the paralytic, Son, thy sins are forgiven thee.” — καὶἰδου ] See on 2:1.— προσέφερον ] See on 8:16; and for the past tense for Mk.’ s historic present, cf. Introduction, p. xx.— ἐπὶκλίνηςβεβλημένον ] In these words the editor summarises Mark 3b-4, thus avoiding the emphasis on the multitude; cf. Introduction, p. xviii. For βεβλημένον , cf. 8:6. Here, as in 8:15, it takes the place of Mk.’ s κατέκειτο . For κλίνη , Mk. has the vernacular and dialectic κράββατος .— θάρσει ] inserted by the editor, as in 9:22.— πίστιν ] as in 8:10, the quality of assurance, trust, confidence in the power of Christ to heal the patient.— σουαἱἁμαρτίαι ] See on v. 5. (M) 3. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemes.] Mk. has: “ And there were certain of the scribes there sitting, and reasoning in their hearts. Why doth this man so speak? He blasphemes.” — καὶἰδού ] See on 1:20.— ἐνἐαυτοῖς ] for Mk.’ s ἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςαὐτῶν refers to inward reasoning, not to outward expression. Mk. adds: “ Who can forgive sins save one, God?” (M) 4. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, Why do you think evil things in your hearts?] Mk. has: “ And straightway Jesus, perceiving in His Spirit that they so reason within themselves, saith to them, Why do you reason these things in your hearts?” Mt. omits Mk.’ s τῷπνεύματιαὐτοῦ . Cf. the similar omission from Mark 8:12; and see Introduction, p. xxxi. 5. For which is easier,1 to say, Thy sins are forgiven; or to say, Arise, and walk?] Mk. has: “ Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, Thy sins are forgiven, or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed and walk?” Mt. omits τῷπαραλυτικῷ after the first εἰπεῖν , and καὶἇροντὸνκράβαττόνσου after ἐγείρου . εὔκοπος is a late and uncommon word. It occurs in Ecclus 22:15, 1 Mal 3:18; εὐκοπία , 2 Mac 2:25.— σουαἰἀμαρτίαι ] This order occurs in Mark 2:5, Mark 2:9, Mark 2:14:47, and parallels in Mt., also in Mark 6:52, Mark 7:19, Mark 10:37, Mark 14:3, Mark 15:19, Matthew 2:2, Matthew 2:5:16, Matthew 2:6:4, Matthew 2:7:24, 26, Matthew 2:9:2, Matthew 2:9:6, Matthew 2:12:13, 50, Matthew 2:17:15 etc. (M) 6. But that you may know that the Son of Man upon earth hath authority to forgive sins, then He saith to the paralytic, Arise, take up thy bed, and go to thy house.] Mk. has: “ But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath authority upon earth to forgive sins, He saith to the paralytic, Take up thy pallet, and go to thy house.” For the parenthetical clause breaking the construction as suggesting dependence of one Gospel upon another, cf. Hor. Syn. p. 42, and Mark 1:16 = Matthew 4:18, Mark 5:28 = Matthew 9:21, Mark 14:2 = Matthew 26:5, Mark 15:10 = Matthew 27:18. The construction of ἐπὶτῆςγῆς is ambiguous. In Mk. it occurs as here before, ἀφιέναιἁμαρτίας (so א C D al latt S3, but B Φ place it afterward). The ambiguity is therefore due to Mk. The somewhat emphatic position of ἐπὶτῆςγῆς seems intended to give implicit expression to the underlying contrast in heaven. In heaven, God alone can forgive sins, but on earth the Son of Man has authority (delegated to Him by God) to do so. For “ Son of Man,” see Introduction, p. lxxi. It is, of course, possible that in the Aramaic phrase originally used here by Christ, “ Son of Man” meant (in this passage, not necessarily elsewhere) “ man” — “ That you may know that men share with God His divine prerogative of forgiving sins.” But if Mk. had thus mistranslated the original Aramaic1 by ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀυθρώπου instead of οἱἄνθρωποι , it is hardly possible that Mt. would not have corrected him. He therefore probably understood the phrase in Mk v. 10 as referring to Christ. The Son of Man has received from God the power of exercising a function otherwise restricted to God alone. Cf. Dalm. Words, 261. κλίνη for Mk.’ s κράβαττος , as in v. 2. For τότε in Mt., see on 2:7.— σουτὴνκλίνην ] See on v. 5. (M) 7. And he arose, and went away to his house.] Mk. has: “ And he arose, and straightway took up the pallet, and went out before all.” Mt. omits the taking of the bed, as in v. 5. Mk. has it three times. (M) 8. And the multitudes, seeing (it), feared and glorified God, who had given such power to men.] Mk. has: “ So that all were amazed, and glorified God, saying that we never saw anything like it.” Mt. makes it clear that the πάντας of Mk. means the multitude.— ἐφοβήθησαν ] Mk. has the strong word ἐξίστασθαι . Mt. once (12:23) uses this in reference to the effect produced by the healing of a blind and dumb demoniac, where its use is probably due to Mark 3:21. He twice omits verses of Mk. which have it (Mark 5:42, Mark 6:51). Here he substitutes “ fear” as being more appropriate to the forgiveness of sin than “ astonishment.” But Mk., no doubt, has chiefly in mind the effect produced by the miracle of healing, rather than by the exercise of forgiveness. τοῖςἀνθρώποις ] Christ, the “ Son of Man,” was also man. If He had the power to forgive sins, then this power can be said to have been given to mankind as represented by Him. It is, therefore, pedantic to see in τοῖςἀνθώποις a proof that the editor regarded ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου as equivalent to “ mankind.” 1-8. There are several small points of agreement between Mt. and Lk. against Mk. Both have a different introductory verse to that given by Mk. Matthew 9:1 is due to his alteration of Mk.’ s order, and his omission of Mar 2:2 is in harmony with his omissions elsewhere, e.g. of Mark 1:33, Mark 1:45, Mark 1:2:13, Mark 1:3:9, Mark 1:20, Mark 1:32. He does not, like Mk., emphasise the pressure of the multitudes. But there seems no reason why Lk. should omit Mk.’ s reference to Capharnaum and introduce the incident in such ambiguous terms. Both have καὶἰδού and κλίνη or κλινίδιον , Luke 5:19, Luke 5:24 for κράβαττος . Both omit τῷπαραλυτικῷ and καὶἆροντὸνκράβαττόνσου from Mar_9. Both insert ἀπῆλθενεἰςτὸνοἶκοναὐτοῦ in Mar_12. Both have an expression of “ fear” in the parallels to Mar_12. Lk. also has several details peculiar to himself. Many commentators, therefore, think it necessary to suppose that Mt. and Lk. had before them a second documentary source which would account for these agreements, and in particular for Luke 17a. But it is questionable whether the facts are sufficient to warrant the conclusion. κλίνη , e.g., and the omissions from Mar_9 may well be independent alterations. ἀπῆλθενεἰςτὸνοἶκοναὐτοῦ may be due to independent inference from Mar_11 ὔπαγεεἰςτὸνοἶκόνσου , whilst the insertion of “ fear” at the end, and all these agreements, may be due to reminiscence of Mt. by Lk. It seems better to leave them unexplained than to build upon them the theory of a second source, which, whilst it affords an explanation of these details, introduces other difficulties. 9. The calling of Matthew from Mark 2:13, Mark 2:14. (M) 9. And Jesus passing thence, saw a man sitting at the place of toll, called Matthew, and saith to him, Follow Me. And he arose, and followed Him.] Mk. has here: “ And He went out again by the sea. And all the multitude was coming to Him, and He taught them.” Capharnaum lay on the lake side, and the customs house was probably on the outskirts of the town. But Mt. in this section is not concerned with the teaching of the multitude, and omits. Mk. continues: “ And passing by He saw Levi, the son of Alphaeus, sitting at the place of toll; and He saith to him, Follow Me; and he arose, and followed Him.” Mt. inserts ἐκεῖθεν . See on 4:21. In substituting “ Matthew” for “ Levi, son of Alphaeus,” he presumably follows tradition, which identified the Apostle Matthew 10:3, with Levi the toll-gatherer. Μαθθαῖος represents the Hebrew מ ת י shortened from מ ת נ י ה or מ ת ת י ה . A similar name מ ת א occurs in a Palmyrene Inscription. Cf. Dalm. Gram. p. 178; Encycl. Bib. art. “ Matthew.” The customs at Capharnaum were levied for Herod Antipas; cf. Schü rer, I. ii. 67 f. For ἀνάστας as an Aramaic or Hebrew idiom, cf. Dalm. Words, 23 f.,36. (M) 10. And it came to pass, as He was sitting in the house, that, behold, many toll-gatherers and outcasts came and sat with Jesus and His disciples.] Mk. has: “ And it cometh to pass that he sat in his house, and many toll-gatherers and outcasts sat,” etc. Mt. avoids as usual the historic present γίνεται . In Mk. the αὐτόν is ambiguous. It might refer to Jesus, but more probably signifies Levi. However, the connection, “ he arose, and followed Him. And it cometh to pass that he sat in his house,” is a harsh one. Mt. seems to have understood the house to be that of Jesus, and attempts to make this clear by altering the construction into the Septuagintal Hebraic: “ And it came to pass as He ( = Jesus) was sitting in the house (= at home) and (= that),” etc. For καὶἐγένετο — καί , cf. Blass, p. 262. It seems improbable that Mt., who in 4:13 has spoken of Christ as settling at Capharnaum, and in 9:1 has referred to it as “ His own city,” can mean by the simple ἐντῇοἰκίᾳ any other than Christ’ s own house. By ἁμαρτωλοί are no doubt meant people who were regarded with suspicion by the orthodox Jews because their lives were immoral, or because, like the toll-gatherers, they practised a trade which was looked upon with disfavour. At the end Mk. has “ for they were many, and they followed Him.” Mt. omits this as tautologous. (M) 11. And the Pharisees seeing it, said to His disciples, Why does your Teacher eat with toll-gatherers and sinners?] Mk. has: “ And the scribes of the Pharisees seeing that He eats with toll-gatherers and sinners, said to His disciples, (Why is it) that He eats with toll-gatherers and sinners?” Mt. avoids the iteration of the phrase ἐσθίειμετὰτῶνἁμαρτωλῶνκαὶτελωνῶν ; cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. διὰτί seems to be a grammatical correction of Mk.’ s ὄτι = “ why.” Cf. Mark 9:11, Mt. τί ; 9:28, Mt. διὰτί . We need not suppose that the Pharisees (Mk. the scribes of the Pharisees) were guests at the meal. They were acquainted with the fact that Christ had sat at table with outcasts, and took an early opportunity of remonstrating with the disciples. (M) 12. And He hearing, said, The strong have no need of a physician, but they who are in evil plight.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus hearing, saith to them that,” etc.— ὄτι ] recitative, is characteristic of Mk. Mt. generally omits; cf. Introduction, p. xix f. (L) 13. But go and learn what is (i.e. what the meaning is of the words), Mercy I desire, and not sacrifice.” These words are not found in Mk. The quotation with a different introduction is also inserted by Mt. (12:7) after Mark 2:26. It is, therefore, probable that the words represent a traditional detached utterance of Christ inserted twice by the editor in what seemed to be suitable connections. Here they emphasise the different attitude of Christ and of the Pharisees to religion. They laid stress on obedience to the law and to its sacrifices. He emphasises the moral aspect of the Old Testament revelation. The quotation comes from Hosea 6:6, and is in the words of the Hebrew and LXX. (A Q); for καὶοὐ B has ἤ . (M) 13. For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.] Mk. has: “ I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” — ἦλθον ] cf. on 5:17, has behind it the conception of the divine mission.— οὐγὰρἦλθονκαλέσαιδικαίουςἀλλ ʼ ἁμαρτωλούς ] Had Christ, then, no message for the δικαίους Not as such. The word implies righteousness obtained by obedience to the law. Only when the δίκαιοι , as in the case of S. Paul, realised their essential unrighteousness, and ceased to strive after righteousness as a condition to be produced along the lines of orthodox Jewish teaching, could they need or appreciate Christ’ s call to repentance; cf. Galatians 2:17 . 10-13. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: οἱΦαρισαῖοι , Mat_11, Luke 30. διὰτί , Mar_11, Luke 30; ὄτι , Mar_16. εἶπεν , Mat_12, Luke 31; λέγει , Mark 17. 13. ἀμαρτωλούς ] Add, εἰςμετάνοιαν , C E al S1 c g1 2. Omit, א B D al. The words have probably been added by Luke 5:32 to Mk. in order to explain why the δίκαιοι were not called. From Lk. they have crept into the authorities for Mt. and Mk., partly in order to assimilate the Gospels to each other, partly because the same motive that influenced Lk. probably still affected the later translators and copyists. (M) 14. Then come to Him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast often, but Thy disciples do not fast?] Mk. has: “ And the disciples of John, and the Pharisees were fasting (i.e. were performing one of the stated fasts), and they come and say to Him, Why do the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees fast, but Thy disciples do not fast?” The iteration of words and phrases here is characteristic of Mk. Mt. avoids by omitting clause a, inserting οἱμαθηταὶἸωάνου as the subject of προσέρχονται , and substituting ἡμεῖς for these words in the next clause, with οἱΦαρισαῖοι for οἱμαθηταὶτῶνΦαρ . He substitutes for Mk.’ s ἔρχονται his favourite compound (see on 4:3), but, against his custom, retains the historic present. For fasting among the Jews, see Schü rer, II. ii. 118 ff.; Bousset, Rel. Jud. 157 f. (M) 15. And Jesus said to them, Can the sons of the bride-chamber mourn so long as the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast].— υἱοὶτοῦνυμφῶνος ] Hebrew ב נ י ח פ ה , Aramaic ב נ י ג נ נ א . The guests at a wedding, in particular, the friends of the bridegroom.— πενθεῖν ] Mk. has νηστεύειν . πενθεῖν is probably due to a desire to avoid iteration of the same word.— ἐφ ʼ ἕσον ] for Mk.’ s ἐνᾦ , to compensate for the omission of ὄσονχρόνον in the next clause of Mt. The ὅσον is necessary to suggest that amongst the Jews the wedding festivities might last for some days.— μετ ʼ αὐτῶνἐστὶνὁνυμφίος ] We should expect some such phrase as “ whilst the festivities last.” Christ singles out the bridegroom as essential to His application of the analogy; His disciples cannot fast in His company any more than the guests and friends of a bridegroom during the wedding festivities. Mt. omits here Mk.’ s tautologous “ so long as they have the bridegroom with them they cannot fast.” Cf. Introduction, p. xxiv.— ἐλεύσονταιδὲἡμέραι , κ . τ . λ .] After His departure from them they will fast. The words need not be understood as a prophecy, nor as a command, but may be a way of saying “ they cannot fast now, but there will be time and cause for such expressions of mourning then.” — νηστεύσουσιν ] Mk. adds the tautologous ἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳ . For Mt.’ s omission, cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. 14. πολλά ] Om. א B. א b vel a πυκνά , S1 “ eagerly,” as in Lk. The omission in א B may be due to desire for absolute antithesis between fasting and not fasting, and to assimilation to Mk. Mt. either found the word, which is very characteristic of Mk., in his copy of that Gospel, or added it to weaken the impression that Christ condemned fasting absolutely. (M) 16. But no one places a patch from an undressed piece of cloth upon an old coat, for such a patch drags away from the coat, and a worse rent is made.] Mt. inserts δέ , thus connecting what follows with the foregoing incident, and substitutes ἐπιβάλλει for Mk.’ s otherwise unknown ἐπιράπτει .— ῥάκος ] = rags. Artemidorus, 27, uses it of strips of cloth wrapped round a mummy. In. Ox. Pap. I. cxvii. 14, ῥάκηδύο = two strips of cloth.— ἀγνάφου ] A word ἄγναπτος = undressed, uncarded (so new ?), occurs in Plut. 169 C, 691 D. In the second clause Mk. has εἰδὲμὴαἴρειτὸπλήρωμαἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦτὸκαινὸντοῦπαλαιοῦ . The sentence is obscurely worded, and has caused difficulty to the copyists (see Swete’ s notes). πλήρωμα is apparently synonymous with ἐπίβλημα , and both words mean the patch sewn on an old garment to mend it. Wellhausen regards πλήρωμα as an Aramaism. He cites examples of the Syriac ܡ ܠ ܐ = to mend, and ܡ ܠ ܝ ܐ = a cobbler. ἐπίβλημα will de note the patch as that which is let in or on to the coat; πλήρωμα emphasises its function as that which fills up and completes it. We need not ask whether πλήρωμα has a passive or active sense. It is used as a rough equivalent of an Aramaic noun or participle derived from a verb of which the primary meaning is “ to fill” (see Armitage Robinson, Ephesians, p. 256). Mk.’ s clause apparently means: “ If he does (sew a patch of undressed cloth on an old coat), the patch drags away from it (by its weight, and because it shrinks), (I mean) the new (patch drags away) from the old (coat).” Mt., like the copyists in Mk., attempts to relieve the awkwardness of the words, “ For (in such a case) its (his?) patch drags away from the coat,” and omits the rather obscurely expressed explanation, τὸκαινὸντοῦπαλαιοῦ . The connection of this verse with the preceding is obscure. Mk. has no connecting particle. He may be compiling detached sayings round a convenient incident. The strife about fasting suggests the contrast between new and old, between the old systems of the Pharisees and of John and the new system of Christ. But Mt., who connects by δέ , understood v. 16 as the continuation of the foregoing. Christ had justified the abstention of His disciples from fasting in v. 15. He now explains why He did not graft His teaching on to the old and outworn Pharisaic system of religion; why, in other words, He did not reinforce the whole system of religious observances as taught by the orthodox Jews. He does not emphasise the effect which would be produced on His own teaching. That is suggested by the next verse. Here He lays stress on the disastrous effects which His teaching would produce on Judaism. As the new patch makes a worse rent in an outworn coat, so His teaching would weaken rather than heal weak points in the religious system of Judaism. A system to which fasting and the like was essential, was outworn. That is why He introduced a conception of religion in which fasting was perhaps an expedient, but not a vitally essential element. (M) 17. Nor do they put new wine into old skins. Otherwise the skins are burst, and the wine is poured out, and the skins are destroyed. But they put new wine into fresh skins, and both are preserved.]— οὐδὲβάλλουσιν ] for Mk.’ s καὶοὐδεὶςβάλλει .— ῥήγνυνταιοἱἀσκοί ] Mk. has ῥήξειὁοἶνοςτοὺςἀσκούς .— καὶὁοἶνοςἐκχεῖταικαὶοἱἀσκοὶἀπολλύνται ] Mk. has καὶὁοἶνοςἀπόλλυταικαὶοἱἀσκοί . We should expect Mt. to omit the second and redundant ὁοἶνος . But he retains it, and furnishes it with an appropriate verb.— βάλλουσιν ] Mk., in his abrupt manner, has no verb. Mt. inserts to make the Greek smooth, and adds καὶἀμφότεροισυντηροῦνται to describe the effect of this better course of action. The verse carries on the thought of the preceding, but from a new point of view. To graft Christianity on to Judaism would not only increase the rents in the latter, and ultimately destroy its forms and ordinances; it would also be disastrous for Christianity itself, which, confined in the forms of Judaism, would burst them asunder and be dissipated like wine poured on the ground. Forms such as fasting could not hold the wine of the new Christian spirit. The last clause, “ and both are preserved,” can only give expression to the thought that if Christianity be allowed to develop independently of Jewish modes, both Christianity and Judaism are preserved. But the thought of the preservation and continuance of Jewish modes of religion is foreign to the context. The clause is doubtless due to the editor, who is thinking rather of completing the literary parallelism than of the meaning underlying the words which he records. 16-17. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ἐπιβάλλει , Mat_16, Luke 36; ἑπιράπτει , Mark 21. εἰδὲμήγε , Mat_17, Luke 37; εἰδὲμή , Mark 22. ἐκχεῖται , Mat_17; ἐκχυθήσεται , Luke 37. Mk. has no corresponding verb. βάλλουσιν , Mat_17; βλητέον , Luke 38. (3) Three miracles of restoration, 9:18-34 18. The editor now, as before (see on 8:18), postpones Mark 2:23-34. He has already inserted 4:35-5:20. This brings him therefore to Mark 5:21-43, which contains two miracles, one set within the other. The editor probably counted this as one incident rather than as two miracles. He then adds two miracles from other sources, and thus completes a third series of three miracles illustrating Christ’ s power to restore life, sight, and speech. Sir John Hawkins’ Horœ Synopticœ , p. 134, reckons ten miracles in 8:1-9:34, and quotes Pirke Aboth 5:5 and 8 “ Ten miracles were wrought for our fathers in Egypt and ten by the sea.… Ten miracles were wrought in the sanctuary.” But ten is not by any means a number exclusively used of miracles or wonders in Jewish literature; cf. Ab 5:5 ten utterances at creation; 5:2 ten generations from Adam to Noah; 5:3 ten generations from Noah to Abraham; 5:4 ten temptations of Abraham; 5:6 ten temptations of God; 5:8 ten things created on the eve of the Sabbath; ten days of repentance, B. Rosh ha Sh 18a; ten things through which the world was created, B. Chagiga 12a; ten praise Psalms of David, B. Rosh ha Sh 32a; ten words at creation, ib.; ten things incompatible with study, B. Horayoth 13b; ten times Israel is called a bride, Midrash Shir, p. 123 (Wü nsche); ten journeys of Shechinah, Midr. Echah. p. 32 (Wü nsche); ten famines, Midr. Ruth, p. 12 (Wü nsche); ten expressions of joy, Midr. Shir, p. 28 (Wü nsche); ten terms for prophecy, ib. p. 84. Moreover, other numbers are used of wonders or miracles; cf. six wonders done by Phinehas, B. Sanh. 82a, and six miracles at the fiery furnace, ib. 92b. In both these cases the same word נ ס י ם is used as in Ab 5:5, 8. It is true that as a matter of fact there are ten miracles in 8:1-9:34, but 9:18-26 contains a miracle within another, and may be counted as one. And the fact that there are two previous series of three miracles, suggests that the editor reckoned this last series as three, not four. For the frequent use of three in this Gospel, see Introduction, p. lxiv. (M) 18. Whilst He was saying these things, behold, a ruler came and was worshipping Him, saying that my daughter is just dead; but come, lay Thy hand upon her, and she shall live.] Mk. has, “ And there cometh one of the rulers of the synagogue, by name Jairus; and seeing Him, he falls down at His feet and beseeches Him much, saying that my daughter is very ill, (I pray Thee) that Thou wilt come and lay hands on her, that she may be saved and clay live.” — ταῦτααὐτοῦλαλοῦντοςαὐτοῖς ] inserted by the editor to form a connecting link; cf. Mark 5:35. This section is much loner in Mk. than in Mt. In part, this is due to the difference of situation in the two Gospels. In Mk. Jairus comes to Christ when He is by the lake side, and surrounded by a multitude (5:21). But when Mt. transfers the incident to 9:18, Christ is in a house discoursing to the disciples of John. Consequently he has to omit Mk vv. 30-33, which could not have taken place in a house. The shortening may also be due to the method adopted by the compiler, who, instead of unrolling his copy of Mk. from 2:22-5:20, may have summarised 5:20-43 from memory, purposely shortening (see on 8:28). It is certainly noticeable that the sections in which Mt. is considerably shorter than Mk., viz. Mark 4:35-41, 5:Mark 4:1-20, 21-43, are just those to obtain which the editor must be supposed to have unrolled his copy of Mk. if he wished to see them before him.— ἰδού ] See on 1:20.— ἄρχωνεἶς ] Mk. has εἶςτῶνἀρχισυναγώγων . For these titles, see Schü rer, II. ii. 63 ff. For εἶς = τις , see on 8:19. Mt. as usual substitutes his favourite compound for Mk.’ s simple ἔρχεται , and avoids the historic present. Mt. omits Mk.’ s ὀνόματιἸάειρος .— προσεκύνειαὐτῷλέγωνὅτι ] these words summarise Mk.’ s καὶἰδὼναὐτὸνπίπτειπρὸςτοὺςπόδαςαὐτοῦκαὶπαρακαλεῖαὐτὸνπολλὰλέγωνὅτι . Mt. substitutes his favourite word, προσκυνεῖν (see on 2:2), avoids as usual Mk.’ s present tenses, and omits the clause of entreaty as in 8:2 = Mark 1:40.— ἡθυγάτηρ ] Mk. has τὸθυγάτριον . Mk. is fond of diminutives; Mt. avoids them.— ἄρτιἐτελεύτησεν ] Mk. has ὲσχάτωςἔχει , and records later on that a message came that the girl was dead. Mt. summarises.— ἀλλά ] Mk. has the pregnant ἴνα = “ I pray thee that.” — καὶζήσεται ] Mk. has ἵνασωθῇκαὶζήσῃ . For Mt.’ s omission of one of two synonymous clauses, see Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 19. And Jesus arose, and was following him, and His disciples.] Mk. has “ And He went with him; and a great multitude was following Him, and they were thronging Him.” Mt. elsewhere omits the references to the pressure of the multitude. Cf. Introduction, p.xviii. (M) 20. And, behold, a woman, with an issue of blood for twelve years, came behind, and touched the tassel of His cloak.] Mk. has: “ And a woman, being with an issue of blood for twelve years, and having suffered much from many physicians, and having spent all her substance, and being not at all benefited, but rather having become worse, having heard about Jesus, came in the crowd behind and touched His cloak.” καὶἰδού ] See on 2:1.— αἱμορῥοοῦσα ] for Mk.’ s awkward αὖσαἐνῥύσειαἵματος , cf. on 8:28. Mk. has a long and awkward string of participles, which Mt. omits.— προσελθοῦσα ] the editor substitutes his favourite word for Mk.’ s ἐλθοῦσα . See on 4:3.— ὄπισθεν ] Mt. omits ἐντῷὄχλῳ , see above, on v. 19.— τοῦκρασπέδου ] the editor adds to assimilate to 14:36, where Mk. has it.— κράσπεδα ] are the tassels attached to the corner of a garment, in accordance with Numbers 15:38, Deuteronomy 22:12. See DB., art. “ Fringes.” (M) 21. For she said to herself, If only I shall touch His cloak, I shall be saved.] Mk. has: “ For she said that, If I shall touch but His garments, I shall be saved.” For Mt.’ s omission of ὅτι , cf. Introduction, p. xix.— μόνον ] Mk. has κἄν ; for a similar change, cf. Mark 6:56 = Matthew 14:36. (M) 22. And Jesus turned and saw her, and said, Be of good courage, daughter, thy faith hath saved thee.] In these words the editor summarises Mk vv. 30-34.— θάρσει ]is inserted by Mt. as in 9:2. For his insertion of καὶἐσώθηἡγυνὴἀπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης , cf. 8:13, 15:28, 17:18 and Introduction, p. xxxii.— ἡπίστιςσου ] πίστις here, as in 8:10, 9:2 = assurance, trust in the power of Christ to heal. (M) 23. And Jesus came into the house of the ruler, and saw the flute players and the multitude making a noise, and said.] Mk. has: “ And they come into the house of the ruler of the synagogue, and He seeth the noise, and those who wept and bewailed much. And He entered in, and saith to them.” — ἐλθών ] the editor avoids, as usual, Mk.’ s historic present; cf. Introduction, p. xx.— τοὺςαὐλητάς ] a touch of Jewish knowledge for Mk.’ s vaguer κλαίονταςκαὶἀλαλάζοντας . Cf. B. Chethuboth 46b, “ Even the poorest in Israel will provide two flutes and a wailer.” — τὸνὄχλον ] Mt. here retains Mk.’ s sing.; see Introduction, p. lxxxvi. (M) 24. Depart, for the girl is not dead, but is sleeping; and they laughed Him to scorn.] Mk. has: “ Why do you make a noise, and weep? The child is not dead, but is sleeping.” (M) 25. And when the multitude was put out, He entered in, and took her hand, and the girl arose.] The editor here summarises Mark 40-43.— ἐξεβλήθη , ἠγέρθη ] Mk. has ἐκβαλών , ἀνέστη . For Mt.’ s preference for passives, see Introduction, p. xxiii. (E) 26. And the fame of this went out into all that land.] This clause is inserted by the editor. His next section ends with similar words. 18-26. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ἰδού , Mat_18, Luke 41. ἄρχων , Mat_18 = ἄρχωντῆςσυναγωγῆς , Luke 41, for Mk.’ s εἶςτῶνἀρχισυναγώγων . θυγάτηρ , Mat_18, Luke 42, for Mk.’ s θυγάτριον . τοῦκρασπέδου , Mat_20, Luke 44. προσελθοῦσα , Mat_20, Luke 44, for Mk.’ s ἐλθοῦσα . ἐλθὼν — εἰςτὴνοἰκίαν , Mat_23, Luke 51, for Mk.’ s ἔρχονταιεἰςτὸνοἶκον . γάρ , Mat_24, Luke 52. αὐτῆς , Mat_25, Luke 54, for Mk.’ s τοῦπαιδίου . 27. Mt. here inserts two miracles which illustrate Christ’ s power to quicken defective physical senses. The first of these, that of the two blind men, is noticeable for two reasons— (a) Mk records two healings of a blind man, 8:22-26, 10:46-52. Mt. omits the first of these, but both here and in the parallel to 10:46-52 has two blind men. The case is similar to that of the demoniacs. Mk. records two healings of a man ἐνπνεύματιἀκαθάρτῳ , 1:23-28, 5:1-20. Mt. omits the first, but in the parallel to the second has δύοδαιμονιζόμενοι . (b) It is striking that Mt., who in 8:4 omits ἐμβριμησάμενος and the disobedience to Christ’ s express and urgent command from Mark 1:43-45, should here (vv. 30-31) have ἐνεβριμήσατο followed by just such an act of disobedience. It looks as though the editor, both in his insertion of v. 26, cf. v. 31, and in his record of the fact that the blind men spread Christ’ s fame, was preparing for the extension of Christ’ s work in the mission of the Twelve, which forms the subject of the next chapter. (E) 27. And as Jesus passed thence, two blind men followed Him, crying and saying, Have mercy on us, Thou Son of David.]— ἐκεῖθεν ] (see on 4:21) i.e. from the ruler’ s house.— παράγοντι ] cf. 20:30.— κράζοντεςκαὶλέγοντες ] cf. Mark 10:47.— ἘλέησονἡμᾶςυἱὲΔαβίδ ] cf. Mark 10:47 υἱὲΔαβὶδἸησοῦἐλέησόνμε . For “ Son of David” as a current Messianic title, see Dalm. Words, pp. 319 f. (E) 28. And when He came into the house, the blind men came to Him. And Jesus saith to them, Believe ye that I am able to do this? They say to Him, Yes, Lord.]— εἰςτὴνοἰκίον ] presumably the house to which Christ lived at Capharnaum.— προσῆλθον ] Mt.’ s favourite word. See on 4:3.— πιστεύετε ] See on 8:10.— κύριε ] See on 8:2.— ἐλθόντιδέ ] D a b c g1 h k have καὶἔρχεται . (E) 29. Then He touched their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it to you.]— ἥψατο ] cf. 8:15 of the hand, 20:34 of the eyes, Mark 7:33 the tongue.— κατὰτὴνπίστινὑμῶν ] cf. Mark 10:52 ἡπίστιςσουσέσωκενσε .— πίστις ] as in 8:10, 9:2, 22. (E) 30. And their eyes were opened; and Jesus urgently charged them, saying, See, let no one know it.]— ἐνεβριμήσατο ] The verb is used of horses snorting (Æ sch. Theb. 461), of men fretting or being downcast (Luc. Nec. 20), or being angry (Daniel 11:30 LXX.). It occurs twice in Mark 1:43; Mark 14:5, where Mt. both times omits it. In Mt. it occurs only here. It is found twice in a different sense in John 11:33, John 11:38, followed by τῷπνεύματι or ἐνἑαυτῷ . Here, as in Mark 1:43, it presumably means “ to command with emphasis.” 1 (E) 31. But they went out and spread abroad His fame in all that land.]— διαφημίζειν occurs in Mark 1:45 and again in Matthew 28:15. (E) 32-34. And when they were going out, behold, they brought to Him a dumb man possessed with a demon. And when the demon had been cast out, the dumb man spake: and the multitudes marvelled, saying, Never was it so seen in Israel. But the Pharisees said, By the prince of the demons He casts out demons.] A similar story is substituted by Matthew 12:22-24 for Mark 3:19-21. But no mention is there made of the casting out of the demon, as in ἐκβληθέντοςτοῦδαιμονίου , Matthew 9:33. It is curious that Mt. should not have reversed the order. 9:32-34 would suit the discourse (Matthew 12:25-30) better than does 12:22-24. Another curious fact is that Luke 11:14-15 also substitutes for Mark 3:19-21 an incident which has greater similarity to Matthew 9:32-34 than to Matthew 12:22-24. If, however, Matthew 9:34 be omitted, see below, this agreement is much lessened. It would seem that Mt., wishing to find a miracle to conclude his series, has fashioned a short account of the healing of a dumb demoniac from phrases which for the most part occur again in the Gospel. αὐτῶνδὲἐξερχομένων is a mere connecting link. ἰδού and προσήνεγκαναὐτῷ are Mt.’ s favourite words. See on 1:20 and 4:3. For κωφὸνδαιμονιζόμενον , cf. Mark 7:32 and 9:25, both of which Mt. omits. ἐκβάλλειν is the word used frequently of the expulsion of demons. When he comes to Mark 3:19-21 the editor wishes to substitute a more suitable introduction to the following discourse. He therefore inserts 12:22-24. Lk. omits Mark 3:19-21, and at a later point in the narrative substitutes for the discourse which follows in Mk, another similar one from a different source which Mt. has also seen. As an introduction to it, Lk. inserts 11:14-15, very possibly by reminiscence of Mat 9:32-33. 34. Om. S1 D a k. It may be due to assimilation to 12:24 = Mark 3:23. C. (4) Extension of His work in the mission of the Twelve, 9:35-11:1. 9:35-38 an expansion of Mar 6:6b. 35. Having finished his illustrations of Christ’ s teaching (5-7) and healing (8-9:34), the editor now proposes to show how this ministry found extension in the mission work of the Twelve. The fame of Jesus had gone forth into all the land of Israel (9:26-31), and men were everywhere desirous to see Him. He therefore sent forth the Twelve to carry on His work. In order to introduce his account of this sending, the editor postpones Mark 6:1-6a, and expands Mark 6:6b into an introduction to this mission, modelled on the similar introduction to his illustrations of Christ’ s preaching and healing (4:23-25). (E) 35. And Jesus passed about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the good news of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease.] Mk. has: “ And He passed about the villages in a circuit teaching.” For τὰςπόλειςπάσαςκαὶτὰςκώμας , cf. Mark 6:56 εἰςκώμαςἢεἰςπόλεις ; for ἐνταῖςσυναγωγαῖςαὐτῶν , 4:23; for καὶκηρύσσωντὸεὐαλλέλιοντῆςβασιλείας , 4:23; for καὶθεραπεύωνπᾶσαννόσονκαὶπᾶσανμαλακίαν , 4:23. (E) 36. And when He saw the multitudes, He was moved with compassion for them, because they were harassed and cast down as sheep that have not a shepherd.]— ἐσπλαγχνίσθη ] σπλαγχνίζεσθαι occurs 5 times in Mt., 4 in Mk., 3 in Lk., in Testaments of XII. Patriarchs, in LXX. A, Proverbs 17:5, Proverbs 17:2 Mac 6:8, in Symm., 1 S 23:21, and Ezekiel 24:21.— ἐσκυλμένοι ] σκύλλειν in Æ sch. and the Anthol. = to “ flay” or “ mangle.” In the N.T. to “ annoy,” “ importune,” Mark 5:35, Luke 7:6, Luke 8:49. In Berlin Papyri, 757. 14 (12 a.d.), to “ plunder” ; in a 4th cent. papyrus (Fayû m Towns, 134. 2), σκῦλονσεαυτού = to “ hasten” ; cf. ποίησοναὐτὸνσκυλῆναι = “ make him concern himself,” Ox. Pap. i. 123. 10. The substantive σκυλμός means “ vexations,” Artemid. 11. xxxi.; “ fatigue” of a journey, Fayû m Towns, iii. 5; “ insolence,” Tebtunis Pap. 41. 7, b.c. 119; “ violence,” ib. 48. 22, b.c. 113. Used here of the common people, it describes their religious condition. They were harassed, importuned, bewildered by those who should have taught them; hindered from entering into the kingdom of heaven (23:13), laden with the burdens which the Pharisees laid upon them (23:4). ἐριμμένοι denotes men cast down and prostrate on the ground, whether from drunkenness, Polyb. v. 48. 2, or from mortal wounds. Here “ mentally dejected.” — ὡσεὶπρόβαταμὴἔχονταποιμένα ] An Old Testament simile. Cf. Numbers 27:17, Numbers 27:1 K 22:17, Ezekiel 34:5. The words are anticipated here from Mark 6:34. (L) 37, 38. Then He saith to His disciples, The harvest indeed is abundant, but the labourers few; pray, therefore, the Lord of the harvest that He will send forth labourers into His harvest.]— τότε ] See on 2:7.— ἐκβάλῃ ] For the weakened sense, “ bring out,” “ send out,” cf. 12:20, 12:35, Mark 1:43. These two verses occur in Luke 10:2 at the beginning of the charge to the Seventy in identical words, except that Lk. has in the introductory clause “ and He said to them.” 36. ἐσκυλμένοι ] א B C D al; ἐκλελυμένοι , L M the Second Gospel. 1 Which is easier. The reply expected is that it is easier to say Thy sins are forgiven, because such a claim could be neither proved nor disproved. On the other hand, to say Arise and walk would be to court ridicule when failure followed. Hence in v. 6 Christ supports His right to make the apparently easier statement, by demonstrating His power to make the seemingly harder. Hor. Syn. Horœ Synopticœ (Hawkins). al i.e. with other uncial MSS. S Syriac version: Peshitta. 1 For Mk as resting on an Aramaic basis, see Expository Tmes, xiii. 328 ff., and, more recently, Wellhausen’ s Commentary. Dalm. Dalman. L the Matthæ an Logia. LXX. The Septuagint Version. E editorial passages. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. B. Babylonian Talmud. Ox. Pap. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Plut. Plutarch. DB. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). Luc. Lucian. 1 See Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1811, “ Gk. usage seems to demand some such rendering as ‘ roar.’ ” Polyb. Polybius. 10:1. The editor continues with Mark 6:7. (M) And having called His twelve disciples, He gave to them authority over unclean spirits, so that they should cast them out, and heal every sickness and every disease.] Mk. has: “ And He calleth the Twelve, and began to send them forth two by two, and was givin them authority over the unclean spirits.” — καὶπροσκαλεσάμενος ] The editor avoids as often Mk.’ s historic present. See Introduction, p. xx.— τοὺςδώδεκαμαθητὰ͂αὐτοῦ ] Mk. has simply τοὺςδώδεκα . In Mt., who has previously omitted Mark 3:13-19a, and has not hitherto recorded the choice of the Twelve, the mention of the twelve disciples is abrupt and unprepared for. ἔδωκεν for Mk.’ s ἐδίδου . See Introduction, p. xx. The editor omits Mk.’ s “ and began to send them forth two by two” ; but shows a reminiscence of it by arranging the Apostles in pairs. For the last clause, cf. 4:23 and 9:35. 2. The editor thought that this would be a suitable place for the insertion of the names of the Apostles, Mark 3:16-19, which he had previously omitted. (EM) Now of the twelve apostles the names are these: First, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; and James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother.] Mk. has: “ And He appointed the Twelve. And he added to Simon a name Peter, and James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and He added to them names,1 Boanerges, that is, sons of thunder; and Andrew.” τῶνδὲδώδεκαἀποστόλωντὰὀνόματάἐστινταῦτα ] This is an editorial introduction. ἀπόστολος , which occurs only here in Mt., is a reminiscence of Mar 3:14.Mark 3:2— πρῶτος ] The word is unexpected in a mere catalogue like the following. It can only mean that Peter was the most prominent amongst the members of the Apostolic band; cf. 16:17-19.— ΣίμωνὁλεγόμενοςΠέτρος ] The editor simplifies Mk.’ s harsh construction. On Σίμων , see note on 4:18. Mk. places the three chief Apostles first, and thus brings together the Greek names Andrew and Philip. Mt. places the brothers in pairs.— Ἀνδρέαςὁἀδελφὸςαὐτοῦ ] Lk. also has Ἀνδρέαντὸνἀδελφὸναὐτοῦ .— Ἰωάνηςὁἀδελφὸςαὐτοῦ ] avoiding Mk.’ s iteration of the name James. See on 4:18. For Mk.’ s ἐπέθηκεναὐτοῖςὀνόματα 1, cf. Daniel 1:7 LXX. Th. (M) 3. Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the toll-gatherer; James (the son) of Alphæ us, and Thaddæ us.] Mk. has: “ And Philip, and Bartholomew; and Matthew and Thomas; and James (the son) of Alphæ us, and Thaddæ us.” Βαρθολομαῖος ] an Aramaic name; cf. Dalm. Gram. 176.— Θωμᾶς ] another Aramaic name =“ twin” ; cf. Dalm. Gram. 145.— Μαθθαῖος ] also Aramaic. Cf. Dalm. Gram. 178; Words, 51. The editor transposes Thomas and Matthew, and adds to the latter ὁτελώνης in order to identify the Apostle with the Matthew of 9:9.— Ἀλφαῖος ] Aramaic; cf. Dalm. Gram. 179.— Θαδδαῖος ] according to Dalm. Gram. 179, Words, 50, is of Greek extraction = Θευδᾶς . 3. Θαδδαῖος ] א B. c ff1 g2; Δεββαῖος , D k; ΔεββαῖοςὁἐπικληθεὶςΘαδδαῖος , C2 E al. S1 has “ Judas the son of James,” assimilating to Luke 6:16. In Mk. Θαδδαῖος is read by most authorities, including S1; Δεββαῖος by D a b ff2 i q. It is best to suppose that in both Gospels Θαδδαῖος is original, and that Αεββαῖος was substituted in Western texts for reasons that can only be conjectured. It is possible that someone who supposed Thaddæ us to be connected with the Aramaic word for “ breast” substituted Lebbæ us, which he had formed from the Hebrew word for “ heart,” as a more fitting name for an Apostle. The Thaddæ us of Mk. and Mt. may be a corruption of Judas, which Lk. has rightly replaced. Cf. Encycl. Bib. “ Thaddæ us.” (M) 4. Simon the Cananœ an, and Judas Iscariot, who also delivered Him up.] Mk. has: “ And Simon the Cananæ an, and Judas Iscariot, who also delivered Him up.” Καναναῖος ] according to Lk. means “ Zealot,” i.e. a member of the fanatical sect known to us from Josephus, Wars, iv. 160, v. 310, vii. 268; cf. Schü rer, 1. ii. 80 ff. Dalman (Gram. p. 174) thinks that the Greek form should be Κανναῖος , and this has been changed into Καναναῖος by assimilation to the geographical term Canaanite. Ἰσκαριώτης ] Mk. has Ἰσκαριώθ , which Mt. has found unintelligible, and has græ cised. Ἰσκαριώθ has been explained in many ways, but none of them are satisfactory. Dalman, who thinks that it is equivalent to the Hebrew א י ש ק ר י ו ת , admits that it is surprising that this phrase should have been left untranslated. Cf. Words, 51 f. (M) 5. These twelve Jesus sent forth, having charged them, saying.] Mark 6:8 has: “ And He charged them.” The relation to Mk. of the discourse which follows may be shown as follows: Matthew 10:5-8. 9-10a = Mark 6:8-9. 10b. 11-14. Expand 6:10-11. 15-16. 17-22. 23-11:1. omit. 6:12-13. It is clear that Mk describes a sending out of the Twelve on a definite occasion. They go forth in pairs, Mark 6:7. Their activity brings the name of Jesus to the notice of Herod, 6:14. They return and report the result of their work, 6:30. To the editor of the first Gospel this mission of the Twelve during Christ’ s lifetime seems to have had little interest. He omits the statement that they went forth, and the notice that they returned. Further, he draws together here sayings that clearly refer to the work of the Apostles in the interval between Christ’ s death and His return, e.g. 17-23, 38-39. His discourse seems to have in view the circumstances of the band of disciples after His death whilst they were still in Palestine expecting their Master’ s return. The startling feature in it is that Christ is represented as bidding His disciples to limit their preaching to the Jews (v. 6), and as assuring them that they will not have exhausted the cities of Israel before His return (v. 23). We may compare with this the parallel conception that Christ’ s return would immediately follow the fall of Jerusalem. It might be possible to harmonise these sayings with the rest of the Gospel by interpreting “ cities of Israel,” not geographically, but ethnographically = “ cities where Israelites lived,” thus including the Jews of the dispersion. Along these lines v. 6 would mean “ do not go out of your way to preach to non-Israelites, rather go to the dispersion of the Jews.” But it seems more probable that the two sources Mk. and the Logia, which the editor of the Gospel is combining, represented different standpoints on this question. The compiler of the Jewish Christian Logia preferred to emphasise those sayings of Christ’ s teaching which seemed to limit the preaching of the kingdom to the Jewish people. The Twelve were to preach in Palestine, 10:6, 23; but the Jews in the dispersion, and proselytes from the heathen, would also furnish disciples of the kingdom, 8:11. In Mk., on the other hand, emphasis is laid on a preaching to all nations; cf. 13:10 “ The good news must first be preached to all nations,” and Matthew 28:19 “ all nations,” which probably comes from Mk.’ s lost ending. Mt. borrows these passages, but defines the object of the preaching of Mar 13:10 as εἰςμαρτύριονπᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν . He seems to have found it possible to combine the ideas of a coming of Christ to usher in the end of the world immediately after the fall of Jerusalem, and of a previous preaching of the good news of the Kingdom to all nations. We may suppose that to him the phrase “ all nations” was only a wide generalisation, and that he saw no difficulty in the idea that the good news could be preached “ in all the world” within a single generation. The difficulty of completely harmonising 10:23 with other parts of the Gospel, arises from the fact that the editor is borrowing from sources representing different points of view, which he has not found it possible to blend so thoroughly that no trace of the original divergence remains. (L) 5, 6. Go not away to the Gentiles, and enter not into a Samaritan city; but be going rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.]— εἰςὁδὸν ] means apparently “ to,” “ towards,” “ in the road that leads to.” The reference is to the large Gentile population in Palestine. For the Hellenistic towns there, see Schü rer, 11. i. 57 ff. For the Pharisaic view of the Samaritans as “ in many respects on a level with the Gentiles, see Schü rer, 11. i. 8.— τὰπρόβατατὰἀπολωλότα ] cf. 15:24, Jeremiah 50:6 = LXX. 27:6. (L) 7. And as you go, preach, saying that The kingdom of the heavens is at hand.] Cf. 3:2, 4:17. (L) 8. Heal sick people, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. Freely ye received, freely give.] For καθαρίζειν , see on 8:2.— ἀσθενοῦντας ] cf. ἰατρὸντὸνθεραπεύσοντατοὺςἀσθενοῦντας , Ditt. Syll. 503. 16. (M) 9, 10. Acquire neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your girdles; nor a wallet1 for travelling, nor two coats, nor sandals, nor a staff; for the labourer is worthy of his rations.] Mk. has: “ That they should take nothing for travelling except a staff only; neither bread, nor a wallet, nor brass in the girdle; but being shod with sandals, and not to put on two coats.” In Mk. these regulations seem intended to teach the disciples that they need make no preparations for their journeys. Their wants will be supplied. A staff is all that they will require. No bread need be carried, and consequently no travelling sack will be needed. Nor need they take money to purchase food. The recommendation of sandals seems to strike a discordant note. How could it be of any importance whether the missioners went barefoot or not? The prohibition of wearing two coats seems to refer to the under and overcoats . It is, however, difficult to think that the text of Mk. is in order. The Greek is harsh (see Swete), and the command to wear sandals seems quite pointless. The command not to wear them, though difficult, would at least be easier, as having the same sort of meaning as the prohibition of two coats. In B. Berakhoth 54a it is said that men were forbidden to use the Temple courts as a thoroughfare. Consequently they went there without a staff in the hand, without shoes on the feet, and without money, whether in the girdle or in a purse. It is possible that Christ wished His missioners to avoid anything that would make them look like ordinary travellers journeying for purposes of trade or pleasure. In that case, the prohibition of staff and sandals would be more natural than the command to take them. Mt. has μηδὲὑποδήματαμηδὲῥάβδον . Lk. in the parallel section has μήτεῥάβδον , and omits the reference to the sandals; but in the next chapter, in the charge to the Seventy, he has μὴὑποδήματα . Both Mt. and Lk. seem to be rewriting Mk. in the light of a more familiar tradition of Christ’ s words, according to which staff and shoes were forbidden. (L) ἄξιοςγὰρὁἐργάτηςτῆςτροφῆςαὐτοῦἐστιν .] Lk., in the charge to the Seventy (10:7), has the same words with μισθοῦ for τροφῆς , and without ἐστιν ; and Lk.’ s form occurs in 1 Timothy 5:18, where the words seem to be quoted as Scripture. (M) 11. And into whatsoever city or village you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and there abide until you go out.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, Wheresoever you enter into a house, there abide until you go out thence.” Lk. in the parallel section has: “ And into whatsoever house you enter, there abide and thence go out.” But in the charge to the Seventy He has separate sections dealing with the entry into a house and into a city. It would seem, therefore, that Mt.’ s πόλινἢκώμην is due to reminiscence of a traditional form of this saying which contained these words.— ἐξετάσατε , κ .τ .λ .] comes probably from this tradition. For ἐξετάζειν , cf. 2:3. (L) 12, 13. And when you enter into the house, salute it. And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.] Mk. has no parallel words; but Lk., in the charge to the Seventy (10:5, 6) has: “ And into whatsoever house you enter, first say, Peace to this house. And if a son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon him. But if not, it shall return to you.” The words differ from those in Mt. The two Evangelists are drawing from different sources. (M) 14. And whosoever will not receive you, nor hear your words; as you go outside that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.] Mk. has: “ And whatsoever place will not receive you, and they will not hear you; as you proceed thence shake off the dust which is under your feet for a testimony against them.” Lk. has: “ And whosoever will not receive you, as you go out from that city, shake away the dust from your feet for a testimony against them.” Both Mt. and Lk. substitute κονιορτός for Mk.’ s χοῦς , and introduce the reference to the city. Lk. has the same features in the charge to the Seventy (10:10). They are due to the use of independent non-Marcan sources. (L) 15. Verily, I say to you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrhah in the day of judgement than for that city.] Lk. has similar words in the charge to the Seventy: “ I say to you, that for Sodom in that day it shall be more tolerable than for that city.” Sodom is used in the N.T. as a typical instance of the execution of divine judgement; cf. 11:23, 24, Luke 10:12, Luke 17:29, Romans 9:29, Romans 9:2 P 2:6, Jude 1:7. So in Jub. 36:10 “ On the day of turbulence, and execration, and indignation, and anger, with flaming devouring fire, as He burnt Sodom, so likewise will He burn His land and His city.” — ἡμέρακρίσεως .] For the omission of the article in a technical phrase, see Blass, p. 151. For the end of the world as a day of judgement, see the references in Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 188; Charles, Enoch, p. 126; and cf. Ps.-Sol. 15:12 “ The sinners shall perish in the Lord’ s day of judgement for ever” ; Jub. 4:19 “ until the day of judgement” ; Secrets of Enoch 39:1, 2 Es 7:102, 113, 12:34. (L) 16. Behold, I send you forth as sheep to the midst of wolves: be therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.] The first clause, with ἄρνας for πρόβατα , occurs in Luke 10:3 in the charge to the Seventy, and is probably to be reconstructed in the fragment called Fragment of a Lost Gospel, published by Grenfell and Hunt. It there stands immediately after fragments of a saying parallel to Luke 11:52 = Matthew 23:13.— φρόνιμοιὠςοἱὄφεις .] Cf. Genesis 3:1 ὁδὲὄφιςἦνφρονιμώτατος . It will have been noticed that in the preceding verses Mt. seems to have borrowed Mark 6:6-11. Lk. in the parallel section seems also to have borrowed Mark 6:7-12. Mt. and Lk., in several striking respects, agree against Mk., e.g. προσκαλεσάμενος — ἔδωκεν , Matthew 10:1 = συνκαλεσάμενος — ἔδωκεν , Luke 9:1. καὶθεραπεύεινπᾶσαννόσον Mat_1 = καὶνόσουςθεραπεύειν , Luke 9:1. Both have μήτεῥάβδον . Both add “ nor silver.” Both add a reference to a city, ἐξερχόμενοιἔξω — τῆςπόλεωςἐκείνης , Mat_14 = ἐξερχόμενοιἀπὸτῆςπόλεωςἐκείνης , Luke 9:5. Both have κονιορτόν for Mk.’ s χοῦν . The case is complicated by the fact that Lk., in the charge to the Seventy (ch. 10), has verses parallel to Matthew 9:37, Matthew 9:38, Matthew 9:10:7, Matthew 9:10b, Matthew 9:12-13, Matthew 9:15, Matthew 9:16a, and also has parallels to Mt.’ s expansions or alterations of Mk. in Matthew 10:9 μὴὑποδήματα , 11 πόλιν . These facts seem to be best accounted for by supposing that Mt.’ s modifications of Mk. are due to the fact that he not infrequently substitutes for Mk.’ s phrases others which were more familiar to him. He may, of course, have had before him in writing another account of the charge to the Twelve, or of words spoken to disciples with reference to their mission work, and it is probable that the Logia contained such an account. Lk., in copying Mk., has also been influenced by his memory of other forms of Christ’ s charge. Sometimes the phraseology which he remembers, or the second source which he uses, agrees with Mt.’ s source. In compiling or copying the charge to the Seventy, the language of his source, oral or written, is often in agreement with the language of verses which Mt. has inserted in the charge to the Twelve. In other words, the situation is best explained as follows. Mt. has before him Mk.’ s short account. He also has quite probably a section of the Logia containing a charge to the Twelve. These he combines, with quite possibly insertions or turns of phrase from his reminiscence of forms of the charge current in Church circles. Lk. has before him Mk., and quite possibly one or more other accounts of the charge. Amongst these may have been the first Gospel. He sometimes substitutes for Mk.’ s phrases others drawn either from Mt., or from another source which was closely allied to Mt. in phraseology. The common theory that Mt. and Lk. both used (a) Mk., (b) the Logia, and that Lk. had also a third source, is too artificial to be carried through the Gospels, and does not leave enough to the independence of the Evangelists. 17. The editor is reminded by the ἐνμέσῳλύκων which he has just written of a passage which occurs later in Mk.’ s Gospel (13:9b-13). He therefore inserts it here, though it is clear that it does not, like the preceding sayings, refer to the Apostolic mission during Christ’ s lifetime, but to their preaching after His death. (M) But beware of men: for they shall deliver you up to Sanhedrins, and in their synagogues shall they scourge you.] Mk. has: “ But take ye heed to yourselves. They shall deliver you up to Sanhedrins, and in synagogues shall ye be beaten.” — προσέχετεἀπό ] cf. 7:15, and Blass, p. 126. Mk. has βλέπετεδὲὑμεῖςἑαυτούς ; cf. Mark 8:15 βλέπετεἀπό , where Mt. again has προσέχετεἀπό . Mt. omits βλέπετε from Mark 13:23, Mark 13:33.— παραδώσουσι ] Mt. as often inserts a connecting particle, here γάρ .— συνέδρια ] the local courts of justice; see Schü rer, 11. i. 151.— καὶἐνταῖςσυναγωγαῖςμαστιγώσουσινὑμᾶς ] Mk. has the harsh καὶεἰςσυναγωγὰςδαρήσεσθε . For the substitution of ἐν for εἰς , cf. 24:18 = Mark 13:16, and Introduction, p. xxvii. (M) 18. And before rulers and kings shall ye be led for My sake, for a testimony to them and to the Gentiles.] Mk. has: “ And before rulers and kings shall ye stand (fast) for My sake, for a testimony to them.” — ἀχθήσεσθε ] for Mk.’ s σταθήσεσθε is suggested by ἄγωσιν of Mk v. 11.— καὶτοῖςἔθνεσιν ] for Mk.’ s harsh καὶεἰςπάντατὰἔθνη , which in Mk. belongs to the following verse. The editor could not take over the next few words, πρῶτονδεῖκηρυχθῆναιτὸεὐαγγέλιον , since they are obviously unsuited to this charge to the Twelve. He should therefore have stopped at μαρτύριοναὐτοῖς . See on 24:14. (M) 19. And when they shall deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for there shall be given to you in that hour what ye shall speak.] Mk. has: And when they shall lead you, delivering you up, do not be taking thought beforehand what ye shall speak. But whatsoever shall be given to you in that hour, this speak.” ὅτανδέ ] Mk. has καὶὅταν ; see Introduction, p. xx— παραδῶσιν ] Mk. has ἄγωσιν — παραδιδόντες . The editor has carried the ἄγωσιν into the previous verse . The editor adds πῶςἤ , which are found also in Luke 12:11. (M) 20. For not ye are the speakers, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.] Mk. has: “ For not ye are the speakers, but the Holy Spirit.” (M) 21. And brother shall deliver up brother to death, and father, child: and children shall rise up against parents, and shall kill them.] So Mk. with καί for δέ at the beginning. See Introduction, p. xx. Social strife is a common feature of the Apocalyptic description of the last days; cf. 2 Est 5:9 “ all friends shall destroy one another” ; 6:24 “ At that time shall friends make war one against another like enemies” ; Jub. 23:19 “ And they will strive one with another, the young with the old, and the old with the young, the poor with the rich, and the lowly with the great, and the beggar with the prince” ; Apoc. Bar 70:3 “ And they will hate one another, and provoke one another to fight; and the mean will rule over the honourable, and those of low degree will be extolled above the famous” ; Enoch 56:7, 99:5, 100:1. See note on v. 34. (M) 22. And ye shall be hated by all for My name’ s sake. But he that endured to the end, he shall be saved.] So Mk. In Mk. the τέλος is the coming of the Son of Man in the period after the great tribulation; cf. 2 Es 6:25 “ Whosoever remaineth— he shall be saved, and shall see My salvation, and the end of the world” ; 9:7, 8 “ And every one that shall be saved— shall be preserved.” — ὑπομείνας ] cf. Daniel 12:12 (Th.) μακάριοςὁὑπομένων . (L) 23. But when they persecute you in this city, flee to the other: for verily I say to you, Ye shall not exhaust the cities of Israel, until the Son of Man come.] The εἰςτέλος of the last verse has carried away the mind of the editor, in spite of his context, to the thought of the Second Coming. The apostles had been forbidden to go to the Gentiles or Samaritans. They were to preach to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, vv. 5, 6. In this work they would suffer persecution, vv. 17-22. But persecution would not become so universal that a city of Israel could not be found as a refuge before the Son of Man came. It seems to be impossible to interpret this verse of a coming of Christ to His missionaries during His lifetime. In this Gospel the coming of the Son of Man is always a final coming after His death to inaugurate the kingdom. 19. πῶςἥ ] om. S1 a b k. 23. After τὴνὲτέραν ] D L S1 a b k g1 q h add: “ and if they persecute you in the other, flee ye to another.” The words, as Merx points out, seem necessary to explain the following exhortation. 24. The editor here collects together other sayings bearing upon persecution. (L) A disciple is not above the teacher, nor a slave above his master.] Lk. in his Sermon (6:40) has clause a, adding: “ but every one who is perfected shall be as his teacher.” (L) 25. Sufficient for the disciple that he be as his teacher, and the slave (shall be) as his master. If they called the master of the house Beelzeboul, how much more the members of his house?] In Lk. the saying about the disciple and his teacher illustrates the saying about the blind leading the blind. Because a blind man cannot be directed by a blind man, so a scholar dependent on his teacher cannot receive more wisdom than his teacher has. At the best, he will he as wise as his teacher. Here the words have a different application, and are intended as a warning to the disciples to expect persecution. If their Master has been ill-treated and slandered, they must expect similar treatment. It is clear that Mt. and Lk. were acquainted with the saying in a detached form or in different contexts.— ἵναγένηται ] Here as in 8:8 practically equivalent to the infinitive. See Moulton, p. 206 ff.— Βεελζεβούλ ] Here clearly a term of reproach.1 In 12:24 it is wrongly made equivalent to arch-devil. It has been traced to the ב ע ל ז ב ו ב = god of flies, of 2 K 1:6. This has been changed into ב ע ל ז ָ ב ו ל in order to introduce assimilation to the sound of ז ב ל = dung. In B. Ab. Zar 186 the sacrifice of the heathen is ironically called ז ב ל “ dung.” Cf. Dalm. Gram. p. 137. The objection to this explanation is that there is no evidence that Baalzebul was adopted into the popular demonology as a powerful devil, or that flies were particularly identified with evil spirits. Others connect zebul with the Hebrew ז ב ו ל meaning “ lofty dwelling,” cf. 1 K 8:13, Isaiah 63:15; but ז ב ו ל in this sense is used as the dwelling of God, whereas we should expect here some term equivalent to Hades, the abode of evil spirits. In the Rabbinical literature, Zebul is the name of the fourth heaven, in which are the heavenly Jerusalem, the Temple, the Altar, and Michael.2 In the apocalyptic literature the lord of evil spirits and the Antichrist is called Beliar; cf. Charles on Ascension of Isa 1:8. 25. ἀρκετόν ] See on 6:34.— ὁδοῦλος ] sc. “ let him be” or “ shall be.” We should expect τῷδούλῳ . The nom. is probably due to careless translation. 26-33. The editor here inserts a section which finds a parallel in Luke 12:2-9, where it is ascribed to an occasion at a later period in Christ’ s life. There is a good deal of agreement in language, with some striking differences. These differences do not favour the theory that the two Evangelists borrowed from the same written source; and the difference in historical setting is still more unfavourable to such a view, unfavourable to such a view, unless the supposed source contained sayings without any historical settings. It is probable that the two writers drew these words from different written sources, Mt.’ s being the Logia. (L) 26. Fear them not, therefore; for nothing is covered which shall not be revealed, and hidden which shall not be known.] Three times in the following verses we get this “ fear not.” See Introduction, p. 65. The saying about that which is hidden being revealed seems to have been a traditional utterance of Christ which could be adapted to any context. Mk. has it after the parable of the Sower, 4:22, in the difficult form, οὐγὰρἔστινκρυπτὸνἐὰνμὴἵναφανερωθῇοὐδὲἐγένετοἀπόκρυφονἀλλ ʼ ἵναεἰςφανερὸνἔλθῃ . It there seems to be applied to the teaching in parables. The truth was hidden in the parabolic teaching, but only that it might gain the greater publicity. Mt., having inserted a similar saying here, omits Mark 4:22 in his parallel section. Lk. in the parallel to Mk. has οὐγὰρἔστινκρυπτὸνὃοὐφανερὸνγεηέσεταιοὐδὲἀπόκρυφονὃοὐμὴγνωσθῇκαὶεἰςφανερὸνἔλθῃ . Lk. here in γνωσθῇ shows remembrance of the form of the saying which occurs in Mt., γνωσθήσεται . Lk. has the saying again in 12:2, where he has a section, 12:2-9, parallel to Matthew 10:26-33, but assigned to a different occasion. The saying in 12:2 runs thus: οὐδὲνδὲσυγκεκαλυμμένονἐστίν , ὃοὐκἀποκαλυφθήσεταικαὶκρυπτὸνὃοὐγνωσθήσεται . This is almost identical with Mt., where the words seem to be used as a proverbial saying, affording an analogy for the following exhortation: “ Just as all hidden things are destined to be brought to light, so you must publish to the world what I tell you now in obscurity.” In Lk. the application seems different: “ Beware of hypocrisy, because the truth will come to light.” (L) 27. What I say to you in the darkness, speak ye in the light; and what you hear at the ear (in whispers), proclaim upon the housetops.] Lk. has: “ Wherefore , whatever things you say in the darkness shall be heard in the light, and what you speak to the ear (i.e. privately) in the chambers shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.” In Mt. the meaning seems to be: “ I give you My teaching in privacy and obscurity. But I wish you to be the agents in making it everywhere public.” In Lk. the idea rather is: “ Hypocrisy is essentially futile, inasmuch as all things hidden ultimately come to light, and your secret words and whispers will one day be known.” (L) 28. And fear not those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul. But fear rather Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.] The second “ fear not,” cf. v. 26. The warning there is against fear of slander; here, against fear of persecution to the death: “ In your work of making My teaching public you will meet with persecution. Fear not physical death. But fear the wrath of God against unfaithfulness to Him, for He can destroy soul and body together in Gehenna.” The Talmud (B. Rosh ha Sh 16b 17a) says that the school of Shammai taught that at the judgement-day there would be three classes of men. Of these, one would remain in Gehinnom for twelve months, after which their bodies would be destroyed and their souls burned. But, as a rule, both in Apocalyptic and Talmudic literature, the punishment of the wicked is regarded as eternal; cf. Volz, Jü d. Eschat. pp. 286 f. Lk. has: “ But I say unto you, my friends, Fear not those who kill the body, and after these things have nothing more that they can do. But I will show you whom you should fear. Fear Him who has power after killing to cast into Gehenna. Yea, I say unto you, fear Him.” For φοβηθῆτεἀπό , a Hebraistic idiom, cf. Blass, p. 88. For γέεννα , cf. on 5:22. (L) 29. Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing ? and not one of them falls to the ground without your Father.] Lk. has: “ Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings? and not one of them is forgotten before God.” ἀσσάριον ] The Latin as, known to the Talmudic writers as א ס ד . It was equivalent to 1/16th of a denarius, i.e. to something less than a halfpenny. Cf. Pesikta des Rab. Kahana, 10 (Wü nsche), p. 113: “ If the bird is not captured without the will of heaven, how much less we!” (L) 30. But even the hairs of your head are all numbered.] So Lk. with ἀλλὰκαὶ — ὑμῶν for ὑμῶνδὲκαί . The emphasis here is rather upon αἱτρίχες than upon ὑμῶν . (L) 31. Fear not, therefore, you are more valuable than many sparrows.] So Lk. without οὖν or ὑμεῖς . This is the third “ Fear not” ; cf. vv. 26, 28. (L) 32. Every one, therefore, who shall acknowledge Me before men, I also will acknowledge him before My Father which is in the heavens.] Lk. has: “ And I say to you, Every one who shall acknowledge Me before men, also the Son of Man will acknowledge him before the angels of God.” ὁμολογεῖνἐν occurs only here and in Luke 12:6. It is an Aramaic and Syriac idiom. Cf. even Moulton, p. 104: “ It seems best not to look for any justification of this usage in Greek.” — τοῦπατρόςμουτοῦἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς ] See on 5:16. (L) 33. But whosoever shall deny Me before men, I also will deny him before My Father which is in the heavens.] Lk. has: “ But he who denied Me before men, shall be denied before the angels of God.” Vv. 32, 33 find a differently worded parallel in Mark 8:38, which the editor of Mt. omits when he comes to that section of Mk. (L) 34. The thought of persecution, especially of persecution at the hands of near relatives, reminds the editor of other sayings bearing upon the divisions caused by Christ’ s teaching in families. Think not that I came to cast peace upon the earth. I came not to cast peace, but a sword.] This and the following verse find a parallel in Luke 12:51-53 in a different context. Lk. has: “ Think ye that I came to give peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but division.” Phraseology and context alike differ. The two Evangelists draw from different sources. Μὴνομίσητεὅτιἦλθον — οὐκἦλθον ] The same formula occurs in 5:17. The editor probably assimilates. 35. For I came to divide a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a bride against her mother-in-law.] Luke 12:52, Luke 12:53 has a similar thought in different words. Cf. B. Sanhed. 97a “ In the period when the Son of David shall come, a daughter will rise up against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” For similar formulas in Babylonian Inscriptions, cf. Jeremias, Babylonisches im NT, p. 97. Cf. also Sotah 49a b “ The son despises the father, the daughter rebels against the mother, the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law, and a man’ s enemies are they of his own household.” (L) 36. And a man’ s enemies (shall be) those of his household.] This and the previous verse seem to be a reminiscence of Mic 7:6. (L) 37. He who loveth father or mother more than Me, is not worthy of Me; and he who loveth son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy of Me.] This and the following verse find a parallel in Luke 14:26-27. But context and phraseology are alike different. The Evangelists draw from different sources. Lk. has: “ If any man come to Me, and hate not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, yea, and also his own life, he cannot be My disciple.” (L) 38. And he who taketh not his cross, and followeth after Me, is not worthy of Me.] Lk. has: “ Whosoever beareth not his cross, and cometh after Me, cannot be My disciple.” It is clear that in the Synoptic Gospels we have three recensions of this saying, viz. (a) Mark 8:34 = Matthew 16:24 = Luke 9:23, a positive form, εἴτιςθέλειὀπίσωμονἐλθεῖνἀρνησάσθωἑαυτὸνκαὶἀράτωτὸνσταυρὸναὐτοῦκαὶἀκολουθείτωμοι . (b) Matthew 10:38, a negative form, ὃςοὐλαμβάνειτὸνσταυρὸναὐτοῦκαὶἀκολουθεῖὀποίσωμου . (c) Luke 14:27, another negative form in a different context, ὅστιςοὐβαστάζειτὸνσταυρὸνἐαυτοῦκαὶἔρχεταιὀπίσωμου . The two latter look like independent translations of a Semitic original. It is commonly assumed that this saying betrays reflection upon the manner of Christ’ s death. So far as Lk. is concerned, the thought of discipleship as involving probable death in persecution, seems less obvious than that of faithful discipleship simply. It would not have been surprising had we found “ yoke” for “ cross” there. The Rabbis spoke of a man as receiving the yoke of the law, cf: Ab 36; or the yoke of the kingdom of the heavens, cf. B. Berakhoth 13a. So Christ, elsewhere, Matthew 11:29, spoke of His yoke. But it is historically probable that Christ in speaking of His death should anticipate it as one of crucifixion. This had become, as it would seem, typical of violent death. It is so used in the parables of the Mechilta. Cf. Fiebig, Altjü d. Gleichnisse, p. 44: “ (Like) a robber who entered in and outraged the king’ s palace, (saying), If I find the king’ s son I will seize him and kill and crucify him.” Cf. Plato, Rep. ii. 361: “ The just man— will be impaled.” The condemned man carried his cross to the place of execution. Cf. Artemidorus, ii. 56: ὁμέλλωναὐτῷπροσηλοῦσθαιπρότεροναὐτὸνβαστάζει ;1 Bereshith Rabba, Par. 56 (Wü nsche, p. 266): “ Abraham took the wood of the offering as one who bears his cross upon his shoulder” ; Plut. de Sera Num. Vind. c. 9: καὶτῷσώματιτῶνκολαζομέωνἕκαστοςκακούργωνἐκφέρειτὸναὐτοῦσταυρόν . The thought in Matthew 10:38 is no doubt of death in persecution. The disciples would be dragged before courts of justice, v. 17; they would be killed by their relatives, v. 21. But they were not to fear physical death, v. 28. If they shrank back and recanted their faith in Christ, He would deny them before God, v. 33. They must be prepared to go to a shameful death, following His example, v. 38. 39. He that found his life shall lose it; and he that lost his life for My sake shall find it). This saying occurs in four forms: (1) Mark 8:35 = Matthew 16:25 = Luke 9:24 ὃςγὰρἐὰνθέλῃτὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦσῶσαιἀπολέσειαὐτήν , ὃςδ ʼ ἂνἀπολέσῃτὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦἕνεκενἐμοῦοὗτος (Om. Mt. Mk.) σῶσειαὐτήν (Mt. εὑρήσει , assimilating to 10:39). (2) Matthew 10:38 ὁεὑρὼντὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦἀπολέσειαὐτήν , καὶὁἀπολέσαςτὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦἕνεκενἐμοῦεὐρήσειαὑτήν . (3) Luke 17:33, in a different context, ὃςἐὰνζητήσῃτὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦπεριποιήσασθαιἀπολέσειαὐτήν , ὃςδ ʼ ἂνἀπολέσῃζωογονήσειαὐτήν . This and No. 1 look like independent translations of a Semitic original. They are not based on a common Greek source. (4) John 12:25 ὁφιλῶντὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦἀπολλύειαὐτήν · καὶὁμισῶντὴνψυχὴναὐτοῦἐντῷκόσμῳτούτῳεἰςζωὴναἰώνιονφυλάξειαὐτήν . In Mar_8 = Mat_16 =Luk_9, and in Mat_10, this saying is connected with the saying about bearing the cross. Here in Mt. it clearly has reference to death in persecution. “ He who shrinks from death, and wishes to preserve his life of the body, will indeed do so, but will lose the higher life of the soul into which he would have passed through martyrdom. He who is content to suffer death because of his faithfulness to My teaching, will forfeit the life of the body, but will make discovery on the other side of death of the higher life of the soul.” (L) 40. He who receiveth you receiveth Me, and he who receiveth Me receiveth Him that sent Me.] Cf. Mark 9:37. (L) 41. He who receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive the reward of a prophet; and he who receives a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive the reward of a righteous man.] V. 40 finds a parallel in Mark 9:37b ὃςἂνἓντῶντοιούτωνπαιδίωνδέξηταιἐπὶτῷὀνόματίμουἐμὲδέχεται · καὶὃςἂνἐμὲδέχηταιοὐκἐμὲδέχεταιἀλλὰτὸνἀποστείλαντάμε . Mt. adapts to his context here by substituting ὑμᾶς for “ one of such children,” and omits from Mk when he comes to that passage. The thought passes from the fate of the disciples to that of those who receive the teaching of Christ, which they are to proclaim to the world. Those who receive them, i.e. welcome their teaching, receive Christ, because it is His teaching which the disciples transmit, and receive God who sent Him. This idea of Christ’ s mission from God has already underlain the ἦλθον of 5:17, 10:34. In v. 40 the Christian missionaries are called προφῆται and δίκαιοι . For the first, cf. 23:34. They were δίκαιοι as practising the δικαιοσύνη which he taught them, 6:1-18; cf. 5:20. εἰςὄνομα is a translation of the Jewish ל ש ם = “ in the capacity of,” “ as,” “ on the ground of his prophetic qualifications.” Cf. Heitmü ller, Im Namen Jesu, pp. 112 ff. Those who receive the Christian missionaries in respect of their Christian message, i.e. accept their teaching and become Christians, will receive the same reward as the preachers themselves. For the idea of eternal life as a reward, see on 19:29; and for the conception that early and late comers into the kingdom receive the same reward of eternal life, see on 20:1-16. (M) 42. And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say to you, he shall not lose his reward.] This saying is clearly out of place here, because there is nothing to the context to explain the meaning of τῶνμικρῶντούτων . It occurs again in Mark 9:41 with ὑμᾶς for “ these little ones.” ὃςγὰρἂνποτίσῃὑμᾶςποτήριονὕδατοςἐνὀνόματιὅτιΧριστοῦἐστέ , ἀμὴνλέγωὑμῖνὅτιοὐμὴἀπολέσῃτὸνμισθὸναὐτοῦ . Mt. in the parallel section to Mk. omits this verse. Mk., however, has τῶνμικρῶντούτων in the next verse, 9:42. Mt. seems to be quoting from memory, and to have brought in the “ these little ones” inadvertently. Mk.’ s ὑμᾶς would have suited the purpose much better. If Mt. had known the saying independently with τῶνμικρῶντούτων , he would almost certainly have inserted it in this form in the parallel to Mark 9:41. On the other hand, τῶνμικρῶντούτων in Matthew 10:42 can only be explained as a reminiscence of Mar 9:41, Mark 9:42. M the Second Gospel. E editorial passages. 1 ὀνὸματα is read by א A C L al, ὄνομα by B D. 2 οὒςκαὶἀποστόλουςὠνόμασεν , א B C*vid Δ . But this clause may be an interpolation in Mk from Luke 6:15. If so, the title ἀπόστολος in Mt. is due to reminiscence of Mar 6:20. LXX. The Septuagint Version. Th. Theodotion. Dalm. Dalman. B. Babylonian Talmud. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. L the Matthæ an Logia. Ditt. Dittenberger Sylloge. 1 Deissmann, Exp. Times, Nov. 1906, p. 62, suggests that πήρα means “ a beggar’ s collecting bag,” and quotes in support a Greek inscription of the Roman period found in Syria. DB. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). Jub. jubilees. Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. 1 C E al have Βεελζεβούλ ; א B., Βεεζεβούλ ; S1 c g2 Beelzebub. See on 12:24. 2 Cf. Chagiga 12b. 1 Quoted by Dr. Bigg, The Church’ s Task under the Roman Empire, p. 79. Plut. Plutarch. (E) 11:1. And it came to pass, when Jesus finished charging His twelve disciples, He departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.] For this formula at the end of five long discourses, cf. Introduction, p. lxiv. For ἐκεῖθεν , cf. on 4:21.— τοῦδιδάσκειν ] Mt. has τοῦ with inf. 7 times. The present tense emphasises the continuance of the action; cf. 13:3, and contrast 2:13, 3:13. See Blass, pp. 196 ff.; Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2496. C. (5) Survey of His ministry, 11:2-30. 2. The editor gives a survey of Christ’ s work. It falls into three sections. Christ’ s work is considered (a) in relation to that of the Baptist, 2-19; (b) in view of its apparent failure, 20-24; (c) in view of its real success, 25-30. No part of this is found. in Mk. Vv. 2-19 find a parallel in Luke 7:18-35. But Matthew 2-3 bear little resemblance to Luke 18-21. Matthew 4-11 agree verbally for the most part with 22-28. At this point Lk. breaks the thread of the discourse by inserting an editorial comment, vv. 29-30. Mt. seems to carry on the speech, but vv. 12-15 are probably inserted here by him from another context. Vv. 12, 13 find a parallel in Luke 16:16, where the clauses are in the reverse order. Matthew 16-19 agree very closely with Luke 31-35. 20 is an editorial comment. 21-23a agree closely with Luke 10:13-15 from the charge to the Seventy. 23b has no parallel in Lk. 24 agrees closely with Luke 10:12. 25-27 agree closely with Luke 10:21, Luke 10:22 after the return of the Seventy. 28-30 have no parallel in Lk. So far as vv. 20-30 are concerned, it seems probable that the editor is bringing together detached sayings, some of which Lk. has placed in or after the charge to the Seventy. The two Evangelists cannot have had a common source for these sayings, unless the source consisted of sayings only, without historical connections. These sayings are probably become stereotyped in tradition, and were drawn by the two writers from different sources. But the relation of Mt 4-11, Matthew 4:16-19 to Luke 22-28, Luke 22:31-35 is very puzzling. Why do both writers connect these groups of sayings; puzzling. Why do both writers connect these groups of sayings; and why do both insert between them a paragraph which is quite different in the two Gospels? It is probable that the two groups existed independently before the two Evangelists. Why both writers connected them is not easy to explain. But since both groups deal with John the Baptist, it is not altogether unnatural that two or more Gospels should have connected them together. That they did this independently is shown by the different character of the connecting links, Matthew 11:12-16, Luke 29-30. If it be thought that the close verbal agreement of Mt 4-11 = Luke 22-28 and of Mt 16-19 = Luke 7:31-35 compels us to think of a direct connection between the Gospels, it would be better to fall back upon the view that Lk. had seen Mt., than to suppose that both are borrowing from a common source. In the latter case it is impossible to explain the fact that both editors independently insert extraneous words at the same point in a common source. If Lk. had seen Mt., he may well have taken objection to vv. 12-15 as obscure, and substituted for them a comment which prepared an anticipatory explanation of Mt 19b. In that case he has not cared to pass over Matthew 12-13 altogether, but has placed them in another context, transposed them, substituted ἀπὸτότε for ἀπὸδὲτῶνἡμερῶνἸωάνου which he felt to be anachronistic, substituted εὐαγγελίζεται for the ambiguous βιάζεται , and paraphrased βιασταὶἁρπάζουσιναὐτήν by πᾶςεἰςαὐτὴνβιάζεται , thus making the sentence clearly express the idea that the Baptist’ s ministry was the inauguration of the kingdom of heaven. Cf. Acts 1:22, Acts 10:37. (L) 2, 3. And John having heard in the prison the works of the Messiah, sent through his disciples, and said to Him, Art Thou the Coming One, or are we to wait for another?] Lk. agrees only in the last clause. ἐντῷδεσμωτηρίῳ ] The imprisonment of the Baptist has been referred to in 4:12.— τὰἔργα ] of which illustrations have been given in 8:1-9:34.— ὁἐρχόμενος ] i.e. the Messiah; cf. 3:11, Psalms 118:26, Daniel 7:13. (L) 4-6. And Jesus answered and said to them, Go report to John what ye hear and see: blind men see, and lame men walk. Lepers are cleansed, and deaf men hear. And dead men are raised, and poor men are told good news. And blessed is he who shall not be made to stumble in Me.]— καθαρίζονται ] See on 8:2.— εὐαγγελίζονται ] The verb occurs only here in this Gospel. For the construction, cf: Hebrews 4:2, Hebrews 4:6.— σκανδαλισθῇ ] See on 5:29. Lk. agrees almost word for word. He omits ὁἸησοῦς , has εἴδετεκαὶἠκούσατε for ἀκούετεκαὶβλέπετε , omits καί before χωλοί , νεκροί , and πτωχοί , and has ἐάν for ἄν in the last clause. (L) 7. And as they were going, Jesus began to speak to the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to behold? A reed shaken by the wind? or: Why went ye out into the wilderness ? To behold a reed shaken by the wind?] Lk. has: ἀπελθόντωνδὲτῶνἀγγέλωνἸωάνου , for τούτωνδὲπορευομένων . The reed shaken by the, wind seems to be a metaphor for a commonplace event. But there is probably a side reference to the thoughts of the multitudes concerning John. He had predicted the coming of One mightier than he (3:11). He had recognised in Christ one who honoured him by coming to his baptism. Now his message seemed to show that he was vacillating, doubtful whether after all Christ was the coming mightier One. θεάσασθαι ] does not occur in Mk. The seeing implied is the beholding, gazing at, e.g. a spectacle or pageant. It occurs in 6:1 “ to be gazed at by them,” 22:11 “ to look at the guests,” 23:5 “ to be gazed at by men.” (L) 8. But what went ye out to see ? A man clothed in soft (raiment)? I Behold, they who wear soft (raiment) are in kings’ houses.] Lk. has ἐνμαλακοῖςἱματίοις in the first clause, and for the second: ἱδοὺοἱἑνἱματισμῷἐνδόξῳκαὶτρυφῇὑπάρχοντεςἐντοῖςβασιλείοιςεἰσίν . The meaning is: “ You did not go all that way into the wilderness to see a worldly sensualist.” (L) 9. But what went ye out to see ? A prophet ? yes, I say to you, and more than a prophet.] So Lk. “ You went to see a spiritual leader of men. And the fulfilment exceeded your expectation. You saw a prophet, and that no ordinary prophet.” (L) 10. This is he, of whom it stands written, Behold, I send My messenger before Thy face, who shall prepare Thy way before Thee.] “ For John is he whom the Scripture predicted as the messenger who should prepare the way for the Messiah.” The quotation comes from Malachi 3:1, where the LXX. has ἰδοὺἐξαποστέλλωτὸνἄγγελόνμου , καὶἐπιβλέψεταιὁδόνπρὸπροσώπουμου . Mt., Mark 1:2, and Luke 7:27 agree against the LXX.— (a) in ἀποστέλλω for ἐξαποστέλλω ; (b) in πρὸπροσώπουσου after “ My messenger” ; (c) in ὅς for καί ; (d) to κατασκεύασει for ἐπιβλέψεται , and Mt. and Lk. agree; (e) in ἔμπροσθένσου for πρὸπροσώπουσου after “ way.” Both Mt. and Lk. omit in their parallels to Mark 1:2 It seems clear that the quotation was current in Christian circles in a form slightly different from the LXX. πρὸπροσώπουμου after “ My messenger,” may be due to assimilation to Exodus 23:20. (L) 11. Verily I say to you, There hath not arisen among women-born a greater than John the Baptist. But the least in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he.] Lk. has: μείζωνἐνγεννητοῖςγυναικῶνἸωάνουοὑδεὶςἔστιν , “ of God” for “ of the heavens.” “ Thus as fulfilling the prophecy of Malachi and heralding the Messiah, John is pre-eminent. But the least who shall stand within the kingdom shall be more privileged than he.” The thought is that it is better to enter the kingdom than to herald its coming. John was unique amongst men, but citizenship of the kingdom will be better than his unique position. On ἀμήν cf. on 5:18.— ἐνγεννητοῖςγυναικῶν ] is equivalent to “ amongst mortal men” ; cf. Job 14:1, Job 15:14, Job 25:4.— μικρότερος ] For grades within the kingdom, cf. 5:19. The comparative form is probably used in a superlative sense. Cf. Blass, p. 33; Moulton, pp. 77 ff: In 13:32, Luke 9:48, μικρότερος has the same superlative sense. For βασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν , see Introduction, p. lxvii. Here as hitherto in this Gospel it is thought of as the kingdom to be inaugurated when the Son of Man comes.1 The least in that kingdom will be more privileged than if he had been its herald. (E L) 12-15. And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens suffers violence, and violent men ravage it. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. And if ye will receive it, this is Elias which was about to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.] These obscure verses serve as a connecting link between vv. 4-11 and 16-19. Lk. has instead two verses of editorial comment describing how the people and the toll-gatherers were baptized by John, whilst the Pharisees and the lawyers refused to submit to his baptism. Of Mt.’ s four verses, Lk. in Luke 16:16, in quite a different context, has a parallel to 12 and 13 in the reverse order: ὁνόμοςκαὶοἱπροφῆταιμέχριἸωάνου · ἀπὸτότεἡβασιλείατοῦεὐαγγελίζεταικαὶπᾶςεἰςαὐτὴνβιάζεται . Mt v. 14 is not found elsewhere. V. 15 is a refrain which occurs again in 13:9, 43. In Luke 16:16 βιάζεται is clearly middle. “ Every one presses into it with vehemence.” That is to say, the good news of the kingdom is preached, and men welcome the good news. For the middle sense, see Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 258, and add to his reference to Ditt. Syll. 379 the following, εἴτις — βιασάμενοςἀνοιξῃτὴνκαμάραν , Ditt. Syll. 893. 5. Cf. also βιάζεσθαι = “ to take forcible possession of,” in a decree of b.c. 140-139, Tebtunis Papyri, 6. 31. In Mt. the subject of βιάζεται is ἡβασιλεία . The verb, therefore, can hardly be middle, for in what sense could it be said that the kingdom forces its way with violence. We must translate, “ The kingdom of the heavens is violently treated,” that is, in the persons of its messengers and heralds. The editor has in mind the death of the Baptist and the similar ill-treatment meted out to subsequent Christian preachers, cf. 23:34-35. Cf. Dalm. Words, pp. 139 ff. So far the words might be taken as a simple editorial comment parallel to the editorial comment at this place in Lk. But just as Luke 7:29-30 are so worded that they might appear to be a continuation of Christ’ s words, so Matthew 11:12 suggests the question, Is this a simple comment of the editor reflecting on the fact that John was the first of a long line of men who suffered on behalf of the kingdom, or did he intend the verse to be taken as a continuation of Christ’ s words? The parallel in Luke 16:16 seems to prove that Mt. was acquainted with a traditional saying of Christ which brought into close connection the kingdom and the verb βιάζεσθαι . That is to say, in his comment in v. 12 he is paraphrasing words traditionally ascribed to Christ, and he probably intended the verse to be taken as spoken by Christ in continuation of v. 11 in spite of the fact that the phrase ἀπὸδὲτῶνἡμερῶνἸωάνουτοῦβαπτιστοῦ clearly betrays either Christ speaking on another occasion than that described in vv. 2-6, or the Evangelist himself. It seems probable that he knew of a saying ascribed the kingdom, since John preached as in some sense the object of men’ s violence. He therefore inserted it here, together with vv. 14 and 15, as affording a connecting link between vv. 7-11 and 16-19, and with the intention of preparing for the latter paragraph in which John’ s career is viewed as finally closed. V. 13 seems to be brought in here only on the ground that it contains the name John. It seems impossible to find any good connection with v. 12 What is the meaning of “ all the prophets and the law prophesied until John” ? And why the “ prophets and the law,” and not “ the law and the prophets” ? Does the verse mean that in foretelling the Christ, John had been preceded by the prophets and the law, and that these had borne witness until he came to supplant them, and to give the finishing touch to their witness? If, however, we prefer to disregard the obvious clue to compilation in the words ἀπὸδὲτῶνἡμερῶνἸωάνουτοῦβαπτιστοῦἕωςἄρτι , and to interpret βιάζεται in a middle sense, as in Lk., it will be possible to connect the verses in the following manner: V. 9. John was more than a prophet. He was a fulfilment of prophecy. A prophet foretells the future. John helped to inaugurate what he preached. He proclaimed the Messiah, and at the same time prepared the way for Him. V. 10. He was thus the messenger foretold by Malachi. V. 11. Hence he was the greatest of men. But though in a sense he inaugurated the kingdom, yet he stood outside it. The least who has become a disciple of it is more privileged than he. V. 12. For since his preaching men can, in a sense, stand within the kingdom. The good news of its near advent has entered into life with all the force and energy of a spiritual movement, and men and women fired with enthusiasm welcome it. Vv. 13, 14. Before John’ s coming the prophets had foretold the kingdom; and when there were no prophets, the law, i.e. the whole divine Scriptures, bore the same witness. But when He came, prophecy was at an end, and fulfilment began. For He was Elias whom the Scripture foretold. 13. ἐπροφήτευσαν ] For the augment, see Blass, p. 39. 14. Already in Ecclus 48:10 the coming of Elijah to accomplish a work of restoration is presupposed on the basis of Mal 4:5, Malachi 4:6. This idea is common in the later Jewish literature; cf. Weber, Jü d. Theol. 352 f.; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 192. There is a remarkable discussion as to the work of the prophet in B. Edujoth 87. It is there said that Johanan ben Zakkai had received from his teacher a tradition that Elijah would not come to pronounce clean or unclean, to separate or receive (i.e. to decide upon the legitimacy of Israelites whose descent was doubtful), but to separate those who had been received by force , and to receive those who had been separated by force, i.e. to remove those who had fraudulently claimed Israelitish descent, and to receive back those whose legitimacy had been wrongly denied. Here we have the idea of membership of the Israelite community suffering violence, and violent men wrongly laying claim to it. It is possible that this throws some light on the sayings underlying Matthew 11:12, Luke 16:16. The Baptist strongly denounced the claim to Abrahamic descent as in itself conferring merit (3:9). In other words, he threw open the kingdom, or the stage of preparation for it, to all men without regard to the question of legitimacy. Consequently, since his day men forced their way into it whose claims would have been denied from an orthodox Jewish standpoint. The common people and men of suspected orthodoxy like the τελῶναι welcomed his teaching, Luke 7:29, and forced their way into the kingdom. In thus opening the kingdom to invasion on the part of those whom orthodox Jewish theologians would have excluded, John fulfilled one of the functions expected of the coming Elijah; cf. Ecclus 48:10 “ to restore the tribes of Israel,” but in a sense opposed to Jewish theological expectation, not merely by restoring to their rights those whose true membership was wrongly denied, but by clearing away the superstition that purity of descent in itself was essential to participation in the Messianic blessings. In this respect John was Elijah who was to come. 2. διά ] א B C * D al 33 124 q. δύο of C2 E F al seems to bean assimilation to Lk. For διά , cf. 1:22, 2:5, 15, 17, 23, 3:3, 4:14, 8:17, 12:17, 13:35, 21:4, 24:15, 27:9 δι ʼ οὗ , 18:7, 26:24, and ὁμόσαιδἰἀγγέλων , Ditt. Syll. 122, 25. 5. καὶπτωχοὶεὐαγγελίζονται ] Omit S1 k. εὐαγγελίζεσθαι occurs only here in Mt. It is common in Lk. For other Lucan words occurring once in texts of Mt., cf. συνέχεσθαι , 4:24; νομικός , 22:35. 15. The words occur again in 13:9, 43. Here they seem to call attention to a fulfilment of prophecy, and they may have a similar purpose in 13:43. See note there. 16. But to what shall I liken this generation? It is like to children sitting in market-places, who call to the others, and say.] Lk. has: “ To what therefore shall I liken the men of this generation and to what are they like? They are like to children who sit in the market-place, and call to one another. Who say.” τίνιδὲὁμοιώσω — ὁμοίαἐστί ] In the Jewish Midrashic literature the most common formula for introducing a parable is ה ד ב ר ד ו מ ה ל . . . מ ש ל ל מ ה = “ a parable. To what is the matter like? to,” etc.; cf. Bacher, Exeget. Termin. den Jü d. Traditionsliteratur, i. p. 121, ii. p. 121.— ἀγοραῖς ] on Mt.’ s preference for the plural, see on 8:26. (L) 17. We piped to you, and ye did not dance; we wailed, and you did not lament.] Lk. has ἐκλαύσατε for ἐκόψασθε . The idea is that the children could get no response from their playmates, whom they could attract to no games, whether cheerful or mournful. (L) 18. For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, He hath a devil.] Lk. has: “ For John the Baptist has come neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you say, He hath a devil.” The austere life of the Baptist (cf. ch. 3), and his call to repentance, failed to influence his contemporaries. “ He has a demon,” they said, “ who drives him to an excess of asceticism.” (L) 19. The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners.] Lk. has again ἐλήλυθεν for ἦλθεν and λέγετε for λέγουσιν . On the other hand, the sociability of Christ, His intercourse with the common people, equally failed to attract His contemporaries. He associates, they said, with men of lax life. It is clear that this paragraph is aimed at the orthodox Jews, the Pharisees, who judged the Baptist and the Lord by the standard of their Pharisaic righteousness. It seems out of place as addressed to the multitudes, and probably originally belonged to a context in which Christ was addressing the Pharisees. Lk. has endeavoured to prepare for it by inserting 7:29, 30. (L) And Wisdom was justified by (against) her children.] Lk. has: “ all her children.” This obscure verse is full of difficulty. σοφία is presumably the divine Wisdom of God to whom the Baptist and the Lord alike owed their inspiration. Both had been sent by Wisdom, and the responsibility for the different character of their teaching and methods rested with her. Cf. Luke 11:49 διὰτοῦτοκαὶἡσοφίατοῦθεοῦεἶπενἀποστελῶ , κ .τ .λ . and see on Matthew 23:34.— ἐδικαιώθη ] If we suppose that the editor wishes this clause to be taken as a continuation of Christ’ s words, the aorist must be compared with the similar aorists in 4:17 , 11:27 , 28:18 , as implying a pre-temporal foreordaining of future events by the divine Wisdom, which was eternally “ justified” as it developed itself in history. If it were not that the clause occurs also in Lk., it would be natural to interpret it (cf. on v. 12), as a comment of the Evangelist reflecting on the fact that the divine Wisdom which had seemed to fail in its methods, so far as Christ’ s contemporaries were concerned, had nevertheless justified her plan of action in the history of the Christian Church. If the Jews had failed to respond to her summons, others had obeyed her call; cf. 8:12 the sons of the kingdom rejected, whilst many from east and west take their place. ἀπό here is apparently equivalent to ὑπό ; cf. Blass, p. 125. The divine Wisdom, which had planned and carried out its purposes of sending the Baptist and the Son of Man to call the Jews to repentance and to the kingdom, was declared to be right, approved, justified by her children, i.e. by those who did not pass condemnatory judgements on the Baptist and on the Son of Man, but did respond to their teaching, and become their disciples. These showed themselves to be the sons of the Wisdom who called to them through John and through the Son of Man. The clause therefore seems to qualify the “ this generation” of v. 16. As a whole, or in large part, they were indeed as irresponsive children unaffected by the message of Baptist or Son of Man. But there were exceptions, Wisdom’ s sons. These caught the sound of her voice in the preaching of the Baptist and of Christ, and responded to it. In so doing they justified the methods and agents used by the divine Wisdom. For the “ sons” of Wisdom, cf. Proverbs 8:32, Ecclus 48:11; and in this Gospel the parallel υἱοὶτῆςβασιλείας , 13:38. Lk. seems to have anticipated the meaning of ἐδικαιώθη in his insertion in 7:29 “ All the people and the tax-gatherers justified God, i.e. declared, proved Him to be right by submitting to John’ s baptism.” Thus Wisdom was justified of her children. Wellhausen gives a different turn to the passage by taking ἀπό as = מ ן ק ד ם or מ פ נ י = against. The divine Wisdom represented by John and Jesus was justified against her children, i.e. the Jews, in so far as their complaints against her (vv. 18, 19) were seen to be contentious contradictions. For “ sons of Wisdom” as = the Jews, cf. the υἱοὶτῆςβασιλείας of 8:12, which also is equivalent to the Jews. 16. ἂπροσφωνοῦντα — λέγουσιν ] so א B D Z.— καὶπροσφωνοῦσι — καὶλέγουσιν ] so E F al. S1 S2 have “ send” for προσφωνεῖν , and so S1 in Luke 7:32.— τοῖςἐτέροις ] so א B D Z; τοῖςἑταίροιςαὐτῶν G S U V al S1 S2. C E F al S1 S2 add αὐτῶν to τοῖςἑτέροις . ἑταῖρος occurs in this Gospel three times in the vocative, 20:13, 22:12, 26:50, but τοῖςἑτέροις is both best attested and most likely to have given rise to the variants. Lk. has ἀλλήλοις . 19. τέκνων ] B2 D al S1 S2 a c k; ἔργων , א , B* S3 S4 codd. ap. Hier. In Lk. ἔργων is read by א only. It might be urged that τέκνων in Mt. is due to assimilation to Lk.; but, on the other hand, ἔργων may be a late conjectural emendation. There seems to be no trace of it before the fourth century. 20. The editor adds a connecting link in order to introduce the following paragraph, which in Lk. occurs in the charge to the Seventy. (E) Then He began to reproach the cities in which His many miracles happened, because they repented not. τότε ] See on 2:7.— αἱπλεῖσταιδυνάμεις ] For ὁπλεῖστος = ὁπολύς , cf. Blass, p. 143; Moulton, p. 79, “ those very numerous mighty works.” δύναμις = “ a miracle,” “ a mighty deed,” is common to the Synoptic tradition, but is avoided by Jn. Cf. Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1686 e. (L) 21. Woe to thee, Chorazin! woe to thee, Bethsaida! Because if in Tyre and Sidon had happened the miracles which happened in you, long ago they would have repented in sackcloth and ashes.] Lk. has ἐγενήθησαν for ἐγένοντο , and adds καθήμενοι after σποδῷ . Chorazin lay about an hour’ s distance north from Tell Ḥ û m (= Capharnaum?); see Sanday, Sacred Sites, p. 24. Bethsaida was situated on the left side of the Jordan, a little north of the lake; see Sanday, p. 41. It is remarkable that the Gospel tradition should have preserved the name Chorazin without at the same time transmitting some account of the “ many” miracles done there. For sackcloth and ashes as symbols of grief, cf. Jonah 3:6, Daniel 9:3, Isaiah 58:5. (L) 22. But I say to you, For Tyre and Sidon it shall be more tolerable in the day of judgement than for you.] Lk. omits λέγωὑμῖν , and has ἐντῇκρίσει for ἐνἡμέρᾳκρίσεως . See for this phrase on 10:15. (L) 23. And thou, Capharnaum, shalt thou be exalted up to heaven? Unto Hades shalt thou come down. Because if in Sodom had happened the miracles which happened in thee, they would have remained unto this day.] Lk. has only the first clause. Clause a seems to contain a reminiscence of Isa 14:13, Isaiah 14:15 εἰςτὸνοὐρανὸνἀναβήσομαι — εἰςᾅδην (ᾅδου , א A) καταβήσῃ . The words are purely metaphorical. The men of Capharnaum dwelt in a flourishing city, of which they were proud. But they had failed to appreciate the true significance of Christ’ s works, and need expect no better fate than the judgement which overwhelmed the inhabitants of Sodom. On Sodom, see note on 10:15. 24. But I say unto you, That for the land of Sodom it shall be more tolerable on the day of judgement than for thee.] The verse does not occur in Lk. Similar words have already occurred in 10:15; see note there. 23. μὴ — ὑψωθήσῃ ] א B C D Φ a b c ff1 g2; ἡ — ὑψωθεῖσα , N Σ al; ἡ — ὑψώθης E F al. S1 has “ that hath been uplifted,” S2 “ not unto heaven shalt thou be uplifted,” k “ ne quomodo in cœ lum elata es.” The variation between the two Greek readings is explicable as due either to a repetition of the μ of Καφαρναούμ or the omission of the μ of μή . The rendering of S2 is due to misunderstanding of μή . Either reading gives a good sense. For the exclamatory question, c f. 7:14 τίστενὴ , κ .τ .λ . καταβήσῃ ] B D; καταβιβασθήσῃ , א C al. The former is probably original here, and is due to assimilation to Isaiah 14:15 on the part of the editor. The latter is due to assimilation to Lk. by the copyists. 25. The editor here inserts a paragraph which, in Luke 10:21-22, occurs after the return of the Seventy. (L) 25. At that time Jesus answered and said, I praise Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because Thou didst hide these things from wise and prudent men, and didst reveal them to babes.] Lk. has: “ In that same hour Jesus rejoiced in the Holy Spirit, and said,” etc. ἀποκριθεὶςὁἸησο͂ςεἶπεν ] For the Hebraistic ἀποκριθείς , see Dalm. Words, pp. 24 f.— ἐξομολογῦμαι ] used as in the LXX. = ה ו ד ה ל , “ to give praise to” ; Cf. 2 S 22:56, and see Kennedy, Sources, p. 118. In view of the dependence of vv. 28, 29 upon Ecclus 51:23-27 cf. also Ecclus 51:1, 17. ταῦτα in this connection means the δυνάμεις which the men of Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capharnaum failed to recognise in their true bearing, and the methods of the divine Wisdom which the Jews misunderstood.— σοφῶνκαὶσυνετῶν ] i.e. the Jews, with their arrogant condemnation of Wisdom’ s methods.— νηπίοις ] i.e. the children of Wisdom who justified her methods. There is an underlying contrast here between the stereotyped orthodox Jew, who misunderstood Christ’ s teaching, and the unlearned, childlike simplicity of His disciples, the “ children of Wisdom,” who accepted it. (L) 26. Yea, O Father, because so it was well-pleasing before Thee.] So Lk.— ὁπατήρ ] For the nominative used as the vocative, cf. Blass, p. 87, and 2729 ὁβασιλεύς .— ἐγένετοεὐδοκίαἔμπροσθένσου ] is equivalent to the late Hebrew and Aramaic ר צ ו ן מ ל פ נ י , ר ע ו א ק ד ם Cf. י ה י ר צ ו ן מ ל פ נ י ן , B. Berakhoth 17a 29b, B. Taanith 24b, and א י ל ו ר ע ו א ק ד ם י י ״ , Targ. Jud. 1323. (L) 27. All things were delivered to Me by My Father. And no one understandeth the Son except the Father. Neither understandeth any one the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son wills to reveal (Him).] Lk. has γινώσκειτίςἐστιν for ἐπιγινώσκει , and καὶτίςἐστινὁπατήρ for οὐδὲτὸνπατέρατιςἐπιγινώσκει . ἐπιγινώσκειν is used in 7:16, 20, 14:35, 17:12 in the sense “ to recognise,” and so four times in Mk. Jn. uses γινώσκειν of the relationship between Father and Son. See Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1626. For the aorist παρεδόθη , cf. εὐδόκησα , 3:17; ἐδόθη , 28:18. The idea involved is of a pre-temporal act, and carries with it the conception of the pre-existence of the Messiah. The same thought probably underlies the ἦλθον of 5:17, 10:34, and the ἀποστείλαντα of 10:40. For the belief in the pre-existence of the Messiah, cf: Enoch 48:3 “ Before the sun and the signs were created, before the stars of heaven were made, His name was named before the Lord of Spirits,” 48:6 “ He has been chosen and hidden before Him before the creation of the world, and for evermore” ; and see Charles on Enoch 48:3; Schü rer, II. ii. 160; Bousset, Rel. Jü d. pp. 250 ff.; Volz, Jü d. Esch. pp. 217 ff.; Weber, Jü d. Theol. p. 355; Dalm. Words, pp. 129 ff., 299 ff. Dalman endeavours to show that “ Judaism has never known anything of a pre-existence peculiar to the Messiah antecedent to His birth as a human being” ; but however true this may be of Rabbinical Judaism, traces of a conception of a premundane existence of the Messiah or Son of Man in the Apocalyptic literature cannot be altogether explained away. For traces of this idea in the LXX., see Bousset.— τὸνυἱόν ] The remarkable antithesis, the Son— the Father, is found only here in this Gospel. But see note on 24:36 and Intro. p. lxvi, note 1. It is a reminiscence of a side of Christ’ s teaching which is prominent in the Fourth Gospel. The occurrence of this verse in both Mt. and Lk., even if the two Evangelists borrow from a single source, proves that this saying reaches back to an early stage of the Gospel tradition. If, as is probable, the two writers drew from different sources, this tradition was widespread. If we add the fact that a similar use of the Son— the Father occurs in Mark 13:32, this usage as a traditional saying of Christ is as strongly supported as any saying in the Gospels. It implies consciousness of a unique relationship to God, and that relationship, as the context suggests, consisted in part of fulness of revelation, “ all things were delivered,” and in part of pre-existence with God. Whether the words as originally uttered involved consciousness of pre-existence is, no doubt, open to question. But it is difficult not to suppose that the editor of this Gospel interpreted them in this sense. The Messiah was supernaturally born of a virgin, 1:18-25. His return from Egypt fulfilled the words, “ Out of Egypt I called My Son,” 2:15. The devil challenged Him upon this point: “ If Thou be God’ s Son,” 4:3, 6. At His baptism the divine voice proclaimed Him to be “ My Son, the Messiah, elected by divine choice from all eternity,” 3:17. In His teaching He spoke of having come, “ I came” (5:17, 10:34), and of having been “ sent” (10:40). In accordance with this line of thought, 11:25-27 are most easily explained if the tenses be treated as aorists referring to pre-temporal acts of God wrought in the prehistoric “ beginning” or eternity: “ Thou didst conceal— didst reveal— all things were delivered.” Since the Son was pre-existent with God, it follows that no one knows the Son (i.e. knows fully) except the Father; and the reverse is equally true. ᾧἐάν ] ἐάν is found after relatives for ἄν in the LXX., in MSS of the N.T., and in the papyri; cf. Blass, pp. 60 f.; Deissm. Bibl. Stud. 202 ff.; and Moulton, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 32, Gram. PP. 42 f., who speaks of it as “ a fashion of the first and second centuries.” “ It seems fair to conclude that, ἄν in cents. 1 and 2 was written by those who were particular about correctness, and that N.T. writers, therefore, used predominantly the popular ἐάν .” 28-30. These verses are peculiar to this Gospel. (L) Come unto Me, all who labour and are burdened, and I will refresh you. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me. Because I am meek and humble-hearted: and you shall find refreshment for your souls. For My yoke, is easy, and My burden is light.] There seems to be an undoubted dependence of these words upon Ecclus 50, 51. Cf. the following: Matthew 11:25 ἐξομολογοῦμαίσοιπάτερΚύριετοῦοὐρανοῦκαὶτῆςγῆς . Ecclus 51:1 ἐξομολογήσομαίσοιΚύριεβασιλεῦ̣̣̣ἐξομολογοῦμαι . 51:10 ἐπεκαλεσάμηνΚύριονπατέραΚυρίουμου . Matthew 11:28 δεῦτεπρόςμε . Ecclus 51:23 ἐγγίσατεπρὸςμέ . 11:28 πάντεςοἱκοπιῶντες . 51:27 ἐκοπίασα . 11:29 ἄρατετὸνζυγόνμουἐφ ʼ ὑμᾶς . 51:26 τὸντράχηλονὑμῶνὑπόθετεὑπὸζυγόν . 11:29 καὶμάθετεἀπ ʼ ἐμοῦ . 51:26 καὶἐπιδεξάσθωἡφυχὴὑμῶνπαιδείαν . 11:29 καὶεὑρήσετεἀνάπαυσινταῖςψυχαῖςὑμῶν . 51:27 καὶεὗρονἐμαυτῷπολλὴνἀνάπαυσιν . For this last phrase, cf. also Ecclus 6:28 and Jeremiah 6:16, Heb. The LXX. has καὶεὑρήσετεἁγνισμὸνταῖςψυχαῖςὑμῶν . 29. τὸνζυγόνμου ] See on 10:38, and cf. Ab 36 “ Whoso receives upon him the yoke of the law” ; B. Berakhoth 13a “ Yoke of the kingdom of the heavens” ; “ Yoke of the commandments,” Schemoth R. Par. 30 (Wü nsche, p. 217); “ the yoke of God,” Ps.-Son 7:8; ἡμεῖςὑπὸζυγόνσου , 17:32. There is throughout this passage an underlying contrast between the Pharisaic conception of religion and the teaching of Christ. The Pharisees maintained the authority of the law as traditionally interpreted: Christ had a higher authority committed to Him by the Father. “ All things were delivered.” The Pharisaic treatment of the law made it a heavy burden; cf. 23:4. Christ’ s teaching was a light burden and an easy yoke. The Pharisaic conception of religion made them despise the unlearned and common people. Christ summoned to Him these simple folk groaning beneath the burden of religion as expounded by the Pharisees. The paragraph may be paraphrased as follows: “ I praise Thee because Thou hast concealed the working of Wisdom’ s methods from the orthodox Pharisaic formalist, and hast revealed them rather to simple-hearted peasants innocent of religious technicalities. So Thy divine pleasure foreordained it. The Pharisees claim authority and inspiration. I have complete and final authority from the highest source. The Pharisees fail to recognise the Son of God, and indeed no one knows Him but the Father. They misrepresent God, and indeed no one knows Him but the Son, and those to whom the Son wills to reveal Him. The Pharisees despise the unlearned and simple, and burden them with the heavy burdens of their expositions of the law. But I bid those who are weary of carrying Pharisaic loads to come to Me that they may be relieved. Let them take in exchange the yoke of allegiance to Me; let them be disciples of one who is a sympathetic teacher, not harsh nor arrogant. They shall find My yoke which I lay on them to be mild, and My burden which I impose to be light.” 27. We should expect: “ And no one understandeth the Father save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him.” The insertion of the words relating to the knowledge of the Son by the Father do not seem in place in the context, and the order “ the Son,” “ the Father” is unexpected. Iren. i. 13, 2 has the reverse order, but in iv. 11. 1 he ascribes this order to “ those who wish to be more skilful than the Apostles.” The same order is, given by Just. Dial. 100 and Apol. i. 63, and by Tertullian, Adv. Marc. iv. 25. But the difficulty is not removed by reversal of the order of the clauses. Even if placed second, the clause relating to knowledge of the Son by the Father seems irrelevant to the context. But it occurs also in Lk., and is no doubt genuine in Mt. The connection seems to be as follows: “ All things were delivered to Me by My Father,” i.e. “ I was appointed as the agent of His revelation of Himself.” “ And no one understands the Son save the Father,” i.e. “ My true nature and functions are known to God alone.” “ Nor does any one understand the Father save the Son, and he to whom the Son wishes to reveal Him,” i.e. “ As the appointed representative of the Father, I alone have full knowledge of Him, which I can impart to whom I will.” But there does not seem to be any clear connection of thought with vv. 25-26.,where the Father is the revealer of things hidden from the wise. The link of “ revelation” (ἀπεκάλυψας , v. 25; ἀποκαλύψαι , v. 27) may have brought together detached sayings in a source lying behind our two Evangelists. E editorial passages. L the Matthæ an Logia. LXX. The Septuagint Version. 1 ἐστίν need not compel us to suppose that the kingdom is here thought of as a present condition of things in any other sense than that the good news of its near advent and of its nature was after a fashion a present foretaste of its future blessedness. The verb would not be represented to the original Aramaic. See note on 5:3. Deissm. Deissmann. Ditt. Dittenberger Sylloge. Dalm. Dalman. B. Babylonian Talmud. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. S Syriac version: Curetonian. S Syriac version: Peshitta. S Syriac version: Harclean. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Class. Rev. Classical Review. Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. Iren. Irenæ us. C. (6) Hostility of the Pharisees, 12:1-45 12. The editor now wishes to illustrate the grounds of the hostility of the Pharisees to the Messiah and His work. For material for this he goes back to the earlier point at which he left Mk.’ s narrative, i.e. 2:23. He borrows Mark 2:23-28 = Matthew 12:1-8, and also the next section, Mark 3:1-6 = Matthew 12:9-14. In vv. 15-21 he summarises Mark 3:7-12, and adds a reference to the Old Testament. As he has already inserted Mark 3:13-19a, this brings him to 3:19b-21. For this he substitutes Matthew 12:22-23, thus completing a series of three incidents illustrative of Pharisaic hostility. For arrangement in threes, see Introduction, p. lxv. (M) 1. At that time, Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the cornfields. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck ears of corn, and to eat.] Mk. has: “ And it came to pass that He was going on the Sabbath day through the cornfields; and His disciples began as they went to pluck the ears of corn.” — ἐνἐκείνῳτῷκαιρῷἐπορεύθηὁἸησοῦς ] Mk. has καὶἐγένετοαὐτὸν — διαπορεύεσθαι . The editor avoids καὶἐγένετο as a connecting link except in a special formula; see on 3:13. ἐνἐκείνῳτῷκαιρῷ occurs three times, here, 11:25, and 14:1, in this Gospel; never in Mk. or Lk. We have just had it in 11:5. Formulas have a way of appearing in close connection in this Gospel; cf. εἰςὅληντήνγῆνἐκείνην , 9:26; ἐνὅλῃτῇγῇἐκείνῃ , 9:31; the construction ἀναχωρησάντωνδὲαὐτῶν — ἰδού , 2:1, 13, 19. παραγίνεαιἸωάνης , 3:1; παραγίνεταιὁἸησοῦς , 3:13; the construction ἀκούσαςδὲ — ἀνεχώρησεν , 4:12, 18, 5:1; the construction καὶἐμβάντιαὐτῷ — ἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ , 8:23, 28; καὶμεταβὰςἐκεῖθεν , 15:29; καὶἐξελθὼνἐκεῖθεν , 15:21; the construction καὶἐμβὰς — διεπέρασε , 9:1, 9. Cf. Intro. lxxxvi. The editor avoids Mk.’ s pleonastic διαπορεύεσθαιδιά by substituting the simple verb. Cf. περιπατῶνπαρά , 4:18, for Mk.’ s παράγωνπαρά ; and cf. Intro. xxv.— τοῖςσάββασι ] from σάββατα , which seems to correspond to the Aramaic ש ׁ ב ּ ָ ת ָ א , but is declined as though it were a neuter plural.— τὰσπόριμα ] = sown land or crops, seems to occur only here.— οἱδὲμαθηταί ] for Mk.’ s καὶοἱμαθηταί , see Introduction, p. xx. ἐπείνασνκαὶ is omitted by Mk. For ἐπείνασαν , see on 4:2.— ἤρξαντοτίλλειν ] Mk. has ἤρξαντοὁδὸνποιεῖντίλλοντες . Mt. omits the ambiguous ὁδὸνποιεῖν and substitutes after σταχύας , καὶἐσθίειν . Mk. specifies two actions, “ making a way” and “ plucking.” ; Mt. has two, “ plucking” and “ eating” ; Lk. has three, “ plucking,” “ rubbing with the hands,” and “ eating.” The “ eating” already involved in Mk.’ s “ plucking” is probably an explanatory addition of the later Evangelists. The “ plucking” was, probably, from a Pharisaic standpoint, regarded as work on the Sabbath. “ Reaping” is one of the thirty-nine kinds of work forbidden on the Sabbath in the Talmud, B. Shab. 73b; and Lightfoot, Hor. Heb., quotes Maimonides as saying: “ To pluck ears is a kind of reaping.” (M) 2. And the Pharisees saw it, and said to Him, Behold, Thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.] Mk has: “ And the Pharisees were saying to Him, See ! Why do they on the Sabbath that which is not lawful?” ]— οἱδὲ ] as often for Mk.’ s καὶοἱ .— ἰδόντεςεἶπαν ] for Mk.’ s ἔλεγον . For the form εἶπα , see Blass, p. 45; Moulton, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 36.— ἰδοὺοἱμαθηταὶσου ] Mk. has simply ἰδέ — ποιοῦσινὃοὑκἔξεστινποιεῖνἐνσαββάτῳ ] Mk. has: ποιοῦσιντοῖςσάββασινὃοὐκἔξεστιν . σάββατον is the Greek form of the Hebrew ש ׁ ַ ב ּ ָ ת . (M) 3. And He said to them, Did you not read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him.] Mk. has “ And He saith to them, Did ye never read what David did when he had need and was hungry; he and those who were with him?” ὁδὲεἶπεν ] as often for Mk.’ s καὶλεγει .— οὐκ ] for Mk.’ s οὐδέποτε .— ὅτεἐπείνασεν ] Mk. has two clauses: ὅτεχρείανἔσχενκαὶἐπείασεν . For Mt.’ s omission of one of two synonymous clauses, see Introduction, p. xxv.— καὶοἱμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ ] Mk. prefixes αὐτός . (M) 4. How he entered into the house of God, and ate the bread of the setting forth, which was not lawful for him to eat, nor those who were with him, but for the priests alone?] Mk. has: “ How He entered into the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the setting forth, which it is not lawful to eat save for priests, and gave also to those who were with him.” In clause a Mk. has ἐπὶἈβιάθαρἀρχιερέως . Mt. omits as an erroneous reference (as do D latt. S1 in Mk.), Ahimelech (LXX. Abimelech) being high priest at the time; cf. 1 S 21:1.— τοὺςἄρτουςτῆςπροθέσεως ] is one of the renderings of the LXX. for the Hebrew ל ח ם ה פ נ י ם ; cf. 2 Chronicles 4:19. Other renderings are ἄρτοιἐνώπιοι , Exodus 25:29; οἱἄρτοιοἱπροκείμενοι , of Exodus 39:18; ἄρτοιτοῦπροσώπου , 1 K 21:6 For its meaning, see Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 157.— ὃοὐκἐξὸνἦναὐτῷφαγεῖνοὐδὲτοῖςμετ ʼ αὐτοῦεἰμὴτοῖςἱερεῦσινμόνοις ] Mk. has: οὓςοὐκἐξεστινφαγεῖνεἰμὴτοὺςἱερεῖςκαὶἔδωκεντοῖςσὺναὐτῷοὖσιν . Mt. assimilates τοῖςσὺναὐτῷοὖσιν to οἱμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ of v. 3, and substitutes the easier dative for τοὺςἱερεῖς . Christ meets the complaint that His disciples work on the Sabbath by pleading necessity, and by quoting an analogous instance sanctioned by Scripture. The charge was based on the Rabbinical exposition of the law of the Sabbath. “ Plucking the ears” was not in itself an offence, cf. Deuteronomy 23:25, but it came under the category of work forbidden on the Sabbath by scribal tradition. Against this tradition Christ appealed to Scripture. David ate the shewbread. That was an illegal act. But he was impelled by necessity. In the same way the action of His disciples was sanctioned by their need. (L) 5. The second point in Christ’ s answer in Mk. is the statement that “ the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath,” with the inference that “ the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” It is clear that this last statement in the form given by Mk. does not very well suit the context. It is the disciples who were blamed, not Christ Himself. Very possibly ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου is a mistranslation for “ man.” This would give the required justification of the disciples. The Sabbath was made to subserve man’ s need, therefore man is lord of the Sabbath, and may use it as need requires, working upon it if necessary. But Mk.’ s καὶἔλεγεναὐτοῖς may be a hint that he has added here words spoken on the occasion of some other Sabbath dispute, when Christ Himself was attacked, and the ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου would be in place. Mt. omits the words καὶἔλεγεν — διὰτὸσάββατον , and substitutes a second appeal to the Old Testament. Just as it furnished a precedent for the breaking of religious regulations in case of necessity, so it also sanctioned the overruling of general laws (in this case the prohibition of work on the Sabbath) in particular cases. The editor then adds an appeal to the general tenor of the Old Testament witness, as illustrated in Hosea 6:6, and ends with Mark 2:28. The argument in these verses is not easy to follow. The action of the disciples is in no sense parallel to that of the priests in the temple; nor could the fact that the priests obeyed the injunctions of the law, by working on the Sabbath, justify the disciples for disobeying the scribal expositions of the law which prohibited work on the Sabbath. The appeal to Hosea 6:6 is more suitable in such a context as 9:13, where the editor has again inserted it, than it is here. It seems probable, therefore, that the editor here, as elsewhere, adds to a particular incident sayings spoken on other similar occasions. He is also, probably, influenced here by the difficulty of the present text of Mk vv. 27-28. “ The Sabbath was made for man— so that the son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath,” seems to have no bearing upon the disciples and their plucking the ears of corn. If ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου is a mistranslation for “ man,” the saying becomes pertinent, “ Man is lord of the Sabbath.” That justifies the action of the disciples. But “ the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath” seems to be no true inference from the preceding clause, nor to have any bearing upon the action complained of. The editor, therefore, omits “ the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath,” and, losing sight of the incident of the disciples and the ears, adds a saying in which Christ on some other occasion justified His own action in working on the Sabbath. The priests in the temple work on the Sabbath. That is to say, the sanctity of the temple overrides Sabbath regulations. But the Messiah is greater than the temple. Much more, therefore, can He dispense Sabbath rules. For the Son of Man ( = the Messiah) is, in virtue of His personality, Lord of the Sabbath. (L) 5. Or did you not read in the law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are without guilt?]ἐντῷνόμῳ ] Cf. Numbers 28:9, Numbers 28:10.— βεβηλοῦσιν ] i.e. by performing the actions necessary to the offering of the sacrifices. (L) 6. But I say to you, That more than the temple is here.] The “ more than the temple” is the Son of Man = the Messiah. If the temple was not subservient to Sabbath rules, how much less the Messiah! (L) 7. But if you had known what is “ Mercy I wish, and not sacrifice,” ye would not have condemned the guiltless.] See on 9:13. The words are of the nature of a parenthesis. The γάρ of the next verse continues the thought of v. 6. (M) 8. For the Lord of the Sabbath is the Son of Man.] Mk. has: ὥστεκύριόςἐστινὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπουκαὶτοῦσαββάτου . Mt.’ s γάρ is necessary to his argument. The Messiah is greater than the temple, for He is Lord of the Sabbath, i.e. = to God who ordained it. 1-8. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in one or two striking details. Both omit ὁδὸνποιεῖν from Mark 23, and specify the “ eating.” Both have εἶπαν for ἔλεγον in Mark 24, and εἶπεν for λέγει in Mark 25. Both insert μόνους in Mark 26, and both omit χρείανἔσχεν from Mark 25; ἐπὶἈβιάθαρἀρχιερέως from Mark 26, and τὸσάββατον — τὸσάββατον from Mark 27. It does not, however, seemnecessary to suppose that they had a second source other than Mk. See on 8:4. (M) 9. And having departed thence, He went into their synagogue.] Mk. has: “ And He entered again into a synagogue.” — καὶμεταβὰςἐκεῖθεν for Mk.’ s καὶ — πάλιν . πάλιν as a connecting link in descriptive narrative is characteristic of Mk., occurring 26 times. Mt. generally avoids it. For ἐκεῖθεν , see on 4:21. καὶμεταβὰςἐκεῖθεν occurs again in 15:29. μεταβαίνειν 5 times in Mt., never in Mk.— ἦλθενεἰς ] avoids the redundancy of Mk.’ s εἰσῆλθεν — εἰς . See on 12:1.— εἰςτὴνσυναγωγὴναὐτῶν ] Mk. has simply εἰςσυναγωγήν . Lk. also has the article. (M) 10. And, behold, a man having a withered hand. And they questioned Him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath? that they might accuse Him.] “ Mk. has: “ And there was there a man having the hand withered. And they were observing Him, if He would heal him on the Sabbath, that they might accuse Him.” — καὶἰδού ] See on 1:20. Mk. has καὶἦνἐκεῖ .— χεῖραἔχωνξηράν ] Mk. has ἐξηραμμένηνἔχωντὴνχεῖρα . Lk. also has ξηρά .— καὶἐπηρώτησαναὐτὸνλέγοντες ] Mk. has καὶπαρετήρουναὐτόν .— εἰἔξεστιν — θεραπεύειν ] Mk. has εἰ — θεραπεύσειαὐτόν . For εἰ before a direct question, cf. Blass, p. 260. Mk. has here: “ And He saith to the man having the withered hand, Rise into the midst. And He saith to them, Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill? And they were silent. And looking round at them with anger, being grieved at the hardness of their hearts.” Mt. omits all this. He elsewhere omits clauses which describe Christ’ s human emotions. See Introduction, p. xxxi. Here he substitutes instead an example of the doing good of which Mk. speaks in v. 4. That he may introduce vv. 11, 12 the editor changes Mk.’ s “ they were observing Him, if,” into a direct challenge, “ they asked Him if.” (L) 11. And He said to them, What man of you shall there be, who shall have one sheep, and if this fall on the Sabbath into a pit, will he not take hold of it and lift it out?] (L) 12. How much therefore is a man better than a sheep? So that it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath.] Lk. has similar sayings differently worded in another miracle, 14:1-6. There is no sufficient reason for thinking that the two Evangelists drew from a common source. 11. πρόβατονἕν ] See on 8:19, and Blass, p. 144. S1 S2 ff1 k omit ἕν . 12. πόσῳοὖνδιαφέρει ] Cf. 10:31 πολλῶνστρουθίωνδιαφέρετε , 6:26 οὐχὑμεῖςμᾶλλονδιαφέρετεαὐτῶν . (M) 13. Then He saith to the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, as the other.] Mk. has: “ He saith to the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he stretched it forth, and his hand was restored.” For τότε , see on 2:7.— ἀπεκατεστάθη ] For the double augment, see Blass, p. 39. Omit ὑγιής , S1 S2 latt. (M) 14. And the Pharisees went out, and took counsel against Him, how they might destroy Him.] Mk. has: “ And the Pharisees straightway, with the Herodians, went out and gave counsel against Him, how they might destroy Him.” — ἐξελθόντεςδέ ] as often for Mk.’ s καὶἐξελθόντες . After Φαρισαῖοι , Mk. has εὐθὺςμετὰτῶνἩρῳδιανῶν . For the omission of εὐθύς , see on 3:16. The editor omits the Herodians here, but retains them in 22:16 = Mark 12:13.— συμβούλιονἔλαβον ] Mk. has ἐδίδουν or ἐποίουν . συμβούλιονλαμβάνειν occurs 5 times in Mt., here and in 22:15, 27:1, 7, 28:12. συμβούλιον occurs in Plutarch, Rom_14, Lucull. 26; and in Dittenberger, Syll. 316. 11 (second cent. b.c.), 328. 7. 8, 334. 7., 29, 39, 55, 57 (73 b.c.); and twice in Egyptian Papyri of the second century. See Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 238. (M) 15, 16. And Jesus perceived it, and departed thence: and there followed Him many, and He healed them all; and He charged them that they should not make Him known.] The editor summarises Mark 3:7-12, which he might have omitted as not congruous to this chapter of controversy. But Mark 3:7-12 suggested to him a contrast between the Lord’ s quiet work of healing and His avoidance of publicity, and the hostile clamour of the Pharisees. He adds the quotation from Isaiah to emphasise the contrast.— ὁδὲἸησοῦς ] as often for Mk.’ s καὶὁἸησοῦς . γνούς is not in Mk. ἐκεῖθεν added by Mt.; see on 4:21.— ἠκολούθησαναὐτῷπολλοί ] Mk. has πολὺπλῆθος — ἠκολούθησεν .— πάντας ] Mk. has πολλούς . For a similar change, see on 8:16. Lk. also has πάντας .— ἐπετίμησεν ] Mk. has πολλὰἐπετίμα . Mk.’ s adverbial πολλά (13 times) is generally omitted by Mt. He retains it twice, 13:3, 16:21; and has it once besides, 27:19. For the substitution of the aorist for the imperfect, see Introduction, p. xx. The editor here adds a fulfilment of prophecy. (O) 17-21. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying, Behold My Son,whom I adopted; My Beloved, in whom My soul was well pleased: I will put My spirit upon Him,and He shall announce judgement to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry out; nor shall any one hear His voice in the streets. A bruised reed He shall not break, and smoking flax He shall not quench, until He bring forth judgement to victory. And in His name shall Gentiles hope.] ὅπωςπληρωθῇ , κ .τ .λ .] For the formula, see on 1:22. The quotation is from Isaiah 42:1-4. The only trace of the LXX. seems to be in the last clause, where the Hebrew has “ His law” for “ His name.” The editor may be translating from the Hebrew, but more probably is using an existing Greek version which is already presupposed in Mark 1:11. The passage had probably been adapted in Christian circles in order to bring out the conception that the Messiah, the Son of God, accomplished the career that had been foretold of the idealised nation. We should expect to find υἱός here or παῖς in Mark 1:11 = Matthew 3:17. But υἱός as more applicable to the Messiah may have been substituted for παῖς either by the author of the Greek second Gospel, or at some stage between his time and the first appearance of the quotation in this Greek form. παῖς in Mt. is either a return to the original form of the quotation in Greek, or a reminiscence of the LXX.— ὂνᾑρέτισα ] αἱρετίζειν is a late word common in the LXX. It is used as = equivalent to “ adopt” in 1 Chronicles 28:6 ὅτιᾑρέτικαἐναὐτῷεἶναίμουυἱόν ; Malachi 3:17 ὃντρόποναἱρετίζειἄνθρωποςτὸνυἱόν ; Kaibel, Epigrammata, 252: αἱρετίσαςδὲπατὴρστοργαῖφύσινἐπροτέρησεν . The aorist here and in εὐδόκησεν may simply be due to imitation of the Hebrew tenses, but in the mind of the Christian translator probably imply the eternal pre-temporal act of God in the election of the Messiah. ὁἀγαπητόςμου = the Messiah, see on 3:17.— εἰςὃνεὐδόκησενἡψυχήμου ] in 3:17 ἐνᾧεὐδόκησα . For the good pleasure of God in the Messiah as shown in election and adoption to Messiahship and Sonship, cf. Ephesians 1:4-6, and see Bacon, Am. Journ. Theol. ix. 458 ff.:— ἀπαγγελεῖ ] Heb. is י ו צ י א , LXX. ἐξοίσει . ἀπαγγέλλειν , a very common LXX. word, seems to be a translation according to the sense.— ἐρίσει ] The Heb. is י צ ע ק , LXX. κεκράξεται .— κραυγάσει ] Heb. י ש א , LXX. ἀνήσει (cf. נ ש א = ἀνίημι , Genesis 18:24, Joshua 24:19, Isaiah 1:14, Isaiah 2:9, Isaiah 46:4).— κραυγάζειν ] only here in Mt., is used once in Acts 22:23, and 4 times in Jn. of a multitude of people, and once John 11:43 of Christ at the tomb of Lazarus. By earlier writers it is used of discordant forms of utterance— of a dog, Plat. Rep. x. 607; of a drunken man, Demosth. Con. 1258; of a raven, Epict. Diss. iii. I. 37; of shouting in a theatre, ib. iii. 4. 4.— κατεάξει ] For the augmented fut., cf. Blass, p. 52; Moulton, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 36.— εἰςνῖκος ] Heb. ל א מ ת , LXX. εἰςἀλήθειαν , but cf. Habakkuk 1:4 ל א י צ א ל נ צ ח מ ש פ ט . After κρίσιν , Isaiah 42:4a is omitted, the translator’ s eye passing from מ ש פ ט to the second occurrence of the same word. 22. The editor here omits Mark 3:19-21. He elsewhere omits Mk.’ s references to a house, see on 15:15; and also elesewhere omits the descriptions of the thronging of the multitude; cf. the omissions of Mar 1:33 from Matthew 8:16, Mark 1:45 of at Matthew 8:4, Mark 2:2 from Matthew 9:1, Mark 3:9 from Matthew 12:15. And he has probably felt objection to Mark 3:21, especially ἔλεγονγὰρὅτιἐξέστη . The copyists of Mk. have felt the same difficulty. D has ἐξέσταταιαὐτούς ; a b d ff i q exsentiat eos. But a reminiscence of this verse betrays itself in the ἐξίσταντο of Matthew 12:23. There follows in Mk. the statement that “ the scribes … said that he hath Beezeboul,” and this is followed by a short rebutting discourse of Christ. Mt. has here a short introductory miracle followed by a much longer discourse, in which are verses parallel to the discourse of Mk. Thus: Matthew 12:22-23. Introductory miracle. 24-26 = Mark 3:22-26. 27-28. 29 = 3:27. 30. 31, 32b = 3:28-30. 33-37. Here follows the statement that some of the scribes asked for a sign, v. 38, and a discourse in answer, vv. 39-45. The question of relationship is complicated by the parallels in Lk. Lk. omits Mark 3:22-30 in its order. It should come at Luke 6:19 or 8:4. But later in his Gospel he has a discourse which is very similar to that in Mt. Thus: Matthew 12:22-23 = Luke 11:14. 24-26 = Mark 3:22-26 = 15, 17-18. Lk. has here combined the request for a sign which in Mt. comes later with the charge of demoniac agency. Matthew 12:38 = Luke 11:16. 27-28 = 19-20. 29 = Mark 3:27 = 21-22. 30 = 23. 43-45 = 24-26. Lk vv.27-28 have no parallel in Mt. Mt vv.31-37 have no parallel in this discourse in Lk. Matthew 12:39-42 = Luke 11:29-32. It will be seen that both Mt. and Lk. prefix an introductory miracle. Both have parallels to Mark 23-26, but in this section Mt. and Lk. have verbal agreements against Mk. E.g.: εἰδὼςδὲτὰςἐνθυμήσειςαὐτῶνεἶπεναὐτοῖς , Mat_25 = αὐτὸςδὲεἰδὼςαὐτῶντὰδιανοήματαεἶπεναὐτοῖς , Luk_17. πᾶσαβασιλείαμερισθεῖσα , Mat_25 = πᾶσαβασιλεία — διαμερισθεῖσα , Luk_17. Mk. has καὶἐὰνβασιλεία — μερισθῇ . ἐρημοῦται , Mat_25, Luk_17. Mk. has δύναταισταθῆναιἡβασιλείαἐκείνη . πῶς — σταθήσεταιἡβασιλείααὐτοῦ , Mat_26, Luk_18. Mk. has οὐδύναταιστῆναιἀλλὰτέλοςἔχει . Both have parallels to Mark 27, but here Mt. agrees closely with Mk., whilst Lk. considerably diverges. Mt. embodies Mark 28-30. Lk. omits. Further, in Mt. the whole discourse falls into two portions, one an answer to the charge of demoniac agency, the second an answer to a request for a sign. In Lk. the charge and the request are combined, but the discourse is divided by vv. 27-28, which have no parallel in Mt. And, lastly, Mt. has a section, 31-37, which has no parallel in the discourse in Lk. It is not easy to explain adequately this complex relationship. The fact that Lk. omits Mk.’ s paragraph at the place where it would naturally occur in his Gospel, and gives instead a longer discourse later in his Gospel, would naturally suggest the explanation that he had before him a second source containing this longer discourse at a later period in Christ’ s life, and that he abandoned Mk. to follow this source. Cf. his omission of Mar 1:16-20 at Luke 4:15, because he proposes to insert a little later, 5:1-11, a similar narrative from another source. Cf. his omission at 8:56 of Mark 6:1-6, because he has inserted a similar account in 4:16-30. It seems, therefore, necessary to suppose that Lk. had a second narrative before him containing matter parailel to Mark 3:22-30. That being so, it is natural to suppose that Mt. also had a discourse longer than Mark 3:22-30, and containing many features parallel to Lk.Their divergence in many points makes it unlikely that they were copying from the same document. More probably they had before them different sources containing discourses in many respects parallel to one another. To some extent their agreement may be due to Lk.’ s reminiscence of Mt. Mt.’ s source is probably the Logia. (E) 22. Then there was brought to Him a demoniac, blind, and dumb: and He healed him, so that the dumb spake and saw.] Lk. has: “ And He was casting out a dumb devil. And it came to pass when the devil was gone forth the dumb spake.” Mt. has already inserted in 9:32-33 a similarly worded miracle: “ Behold, they brought to Him a dumb demoniac. And when the devil was cast forth, the dumb spake.” It is striking that Luke 11:14 is not, as we should expect, so nearly agreed with Matthew 12:22 as with Matthew 9:32-33. It must remain doubtful whether this miracle was in the sources used by Mt. and Lk. It is quite possible that in 9:32-34 Mt., wishing to add another miracle, described as shortly as possible the healing of a deaf demoniac (see on 9:32), the fact of such a healing being current in Christian tradition. At 12:21 he wants a suitable introduction to the following discourse, and rewrites shortly a similar account. But it is curious that he should not have specially mentioned, as in 9:33, the “ casting out” of the devil in order to prepare for the ἐκβάλλει of 12:24. Lk., when inserting in 11:14ff. the discourse which follows, has felt the same need of an introductory miracle. His choice of a deaf demoniac may be due to reminiscence of the two passages in Mt., or may be accidental, and due simply to the fact that both Evangelists inserted in this same connection the story of a deaf demoniac, known to them as an incident current in Christian tradition, of which no details had been preserved. Given the fact of the healing of a dumb demoniac, the agreement in language between Matthew 9:32-33 and Luke 11:14 is not very remarkable. It would be difficult to describe the bare fact of such a healing without some verbal agreement. τότεπροσηνέχθηαὐτῷ ] For τότε , see on 2:7. For προσφέρειν as characteristic of Mt., see Introduction, p. lxxxvi. προσηνέχθη is the reading of א C D al latt. B S1 S2 have προσήνεγκαν , as in 9:32. For the passive, cf. 18:24, 19:13. (E) 23. And all the multitudes were astonished, and said, Is this indeed the Son of David?] ἐξίσταντο only here in this Gospel. It is a reminiscence of Mar 3:21. For “ Son of David” as a title of the Messiah, see Dalm. Words, 319 ff. (M) 24. But the Pharisees heard it, and said, This man doth not cast out devils, except by Beelzeboul, chief of the devils.] Mk. has: “ And the scribes who had come down from. Jerusalem were saying that He hath Beelzeboul, and that by the chief of the devils He casts out devils.” Mt. and Lk. independently, or Lk. by reminiscence of Mt., fuse together the two clauses of Mk 22, and wrongly make Beelzeboul equivalent to the chief of the devils and Satan. In 10:25 βεελζεβούλ is a name of reproach. Here in Mk. it seems to be the name of a demon by whom Christ was regarded as possessed. But it is not equivalent to Satan, the ἄρχωντῶνδαιμονίων from whom Mk. distinguishes Beelzeboul. For Beelzeboul,1 see on 10:25. (M) 25. And knowing their thoughts, He said to them, Every kingdom divided against itself is made desolate; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.] Mk. has: “ And having called them, He was saying to them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house be divided against itself, that house shall not be able to stand.” Lk. agrees closely with Mt. in omitting the summoning of the disciples, in substituting the knowledge of the thoughts of the Pharisees, and in combining Mk.’ s two analogies into one clause. “ But He , knowing their thoughts , said to them, Every kingdom divided against itself is made desolate, and house falls on house,” or “ a house (divided) against a house falls.” — οἶκος ] Mt. and Mk. have οἰκία . Wellhausen argues that “ house” in Aramaic, and so here, means “ a political territory,” as in “ house of Lysanias.” This would give an appropriate meaning in Mt. No kingdom torn by internal dissension can escape devastation. And no city or State so divided can long maintain its independent existence. Lk.’ s source seems to have differed here from Mt.’ s. (M) 26. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how therefore shall his kingdom stand?] Mk. has: “ And if Satan rise up against himself and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.” Lk. agrees closely with Mt.: “ And if Satan be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand?” Lk. adds here: “ because you say that by Beelzeboul I cast out devils” ; cf. Mk v. 30. (L) 27-28. And if I by Beelzeboul cast out devils, your sons by whom do they cast (them) out? therefore they shall be your judges. But if I by the Spirit of God cast out devils, then the kingdom of God came upon you.] These verses are not in Mk. Lk. has them in verbal agreement with Mt., except that he has δακτύλῳ for πνεύματι . Christ, after urging the absurdity of the charge brought against Him (25-26), now throws back the accusation upon the Jews. They, too, practised exorcism. Were they also the agents of Beelzeboul?— οἱυἱοὶὑμῶν ] means “ people of your own race and religion,” i.e. Jews. It is here an Oriental circumlocution for “ you.” For an example of Jewish exorcism, cf. Jos. Ant. viii. 46, 47 (quoted on 8:29), and Acts 19:13.— διὰτοῦτο ] occurs 11 times in Mt., 3 in Mk., 4 in Lk.— κριταὶὑμῶν ] “ shall convict you of hypocrisy in accusing Me of employing diabolical arts whilst you yourselves practice exorcism.” — πνεύματιθεοῦ ] Lk. has the striking δακτύλῳθεοῦ ; cf. Exodus 8:19 (15) where it is applied to a miraculous event, and Deuteronomy 9:10.— ἔφθασεν ] φθάνειν occurs here in the Synoptic Gospels. with prepositions it means to “ arrive at,” “ reach to,” “ come upon” ; cf. Judges 20:34 οὐκἔγνωσανὅτιφθάνειἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςἡκακία . The aorist is difficult, and we should expect the perfect. The same unexpected aor. occurs in 1 Thessalonians 2:16 ἔφθασεδὲἐπ ʼ αὐτοὺςἡὀργή . “ If I by the Spirit of God cast out devils, then when I began my work, or when I came, the kingdom of God came to and amongst you, though you were not aware of it.” βας . τοῦθεοῦ occurs 4 times in Mt, here and in 19:24, 21:31, 43. The kingdom is here regarded as something present. But only by anticipation. Where the Messiah was, there must be the kingdom in some sense. But in a fuller sense it was still future, to be inaugurated when He came on the clouds of heaven. ἡβασιλείατοῦθεοῦ here is certainly due to the source used by the editor, in this case probably the Logia, which therefore contained sayings about “ the kingdom of God” and “ the kingdom of the heavens.” The reason why the editor did not here substitute the latter for the former no doubt is that he always uses ἡβασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν in an eschatological sense, which would here be out of place; cf. Introduction, p. lxvii f. (M) 29. Or how can any one enter into the house of “ the strong man,” and spoil his goods? unless first he bind “ the strong man,” and then he will spoil his house.] Mk. has: “ But no one can, having entered into,” etc. Lk. has a different version of the saying.— ἢπῶς ] In Mk. the saying is loosely appended to the preceding with ἀλλά . The saying about the strong man and his goods had probably become proverbial; cf. Ps.-Son 5:4 οὐγὰρλήψεταισκῦλαἄνθρωποςπαρὰἀνδρὸςδυνατοῦ ; Isaiah 49:24 μὴλήμψεταίτιςπαρὰγίγαντοςσκῦλα . So far from acting as a subordinate of Beelzeboul, Christ had invaded his territory, and by ejecting devils from the possessed, was spoiling his goods. This implied a previous victory over him. (L) 30. He that is not with Me is against Me: and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.] So Lk v. 23. In this war against Satan’ s strongholds there are only two sides: for Christ or against Him, gathering with Him or scattering with Satan. (M) 31. Therefore I say to you, Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men: but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven.] Mk. has: “ Verily I say to you that all things shall be forgiven to the sons of men,1 the sins and the blasphemies where with soever they shall blaspheme. But whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath not forgiveness for ever, but is guilty of an eternal sin. Because they were saying that He hath an unclean spirit.” Lk. has no parallel in this discourse, but in 12:10 has “ He who blasphemed against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven.” In Mt. the meaning seems to be: “ You have taken sides against Me in the war against Satan. In so doing you have committed an unpardonable sin, because in charging Me with being an agent of Satan you have hardened yourselves against a revelation of God’ s Spirit working in Me.” (M) 32. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age nor in the coming.] This verse seems to repeat the thought of the last, the difference being that as a contrast to speaking against or blasphemy against the Spirit, we have here speaking against the Son of Man in particular, instead of all sin and blasphemy in general. The two verses seem to be different recensions of the same saying. Mt. has probably conflated Mk. and his other source, or Mk. = the other source and another form of the saying known to him. Lk. in 12:10 has: καὶπᾶςὃςἐρεῖλόγονεἰςτὸνυἱὸντοῦἀνθρώπουἀφεθήσεταιαὐτῷτῷδὲεἰςτὸ̔́Αγιονπνεῦμαβγασφημήσαντιοὐκἀφεθήσεται . Lk. appears to borrow the first clause from Matthew 32, the second from Matthew 31 = Mark 29. He may have done so from memory, or may have had the saying before him in this form. If Matthew 32 and Matthew 31 = Mark 28-29 be different recensions of one saying, it is probable that Ms.’ s striking τοῖςυἱοῖςτῶνἀνθρώπων and Mt.’ s κατὰτοῦυἱοῦτοῦἀνθρώπου go back to the same orginal Aramaic phrase. Of the two, Mk.’ s phrase is probably the more accurate translation. “ Anything shall be forgiven to men save blasphemy against the Holy Spirit,” gives a clear and intelligible meaning. On the other hand, “ Opposition to the Son of Man is pardonable, opposition to the Holy Spirit is unpardonable,” is difficult to explain. How could the Pharisees be supposed to be able to distinguish between the Son of Man ( = Christ?) acting as such, and the Son of Man driving out devils by the power of the Spirit. We have here a fairly clear instance where an original Aramaic phrase meaning “ sons of men” = “ men” has been mistakenly represented by ὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπου . Mark 2:28 is probably another instance. The general drift of vv. 31, 32 seems to be: “ You accuse Me of Satanic methods in casting out devils. In reality I cast them out by the power of God’ s Spirit. In substituting Satan for the Holy Spirit you are guilty of blasphemy. And this is an unpardonable sin. It is the lie in the soul.” — οὔτεἐντούτῳτῷαἰῶνιοὔτεἐντῷμέλλοντι ] Mark 10:30 has: ἐντῷαἰῶνιτῷἐρχομένω . So Lk.; but Mt. omits. Lk. also has: τοῦαἰῶνοςτούτου , 16:8, 20:34, and τοῦαἰῶνοςἐκείνου , 20:35. These phrases are connected with the distinction which is common in apocalyptic literature of the first cent. a.d. between the present and the future age. See Dalm. Words, pp. 147-156; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 57; and cf. 2 Es 7:50 “ the Most High hath not made one world, but two” ; 7:47 “ the world to come” ; Apoc. Bar 15:7., 8, 44:15 “ the world to come.” The distinction is also found in Rabbinical literature; cf. Aboth 2:8. Hillel said: “ He who acquires for himself the words of the law, acquires for himself the life of the age which is coming.” Dalman says of this, “ if genuine.” Ber. R. 44 (Wü nsche, p. 209): According to Jochanan ben Zaccai, c. 80 a.d., God revealed to Abraham “ this age, but not that age.” According to Akiba, “ He revealed to him both ages.” “ The currency of these expressions ‘ this age,’ the future age,” says Dalman, “ is at all events established by the end of the first Christian century.” Mt. has also 5 times the expression συντέλειατοῦαἰῶνος . See on V. 39.— οὐκἀφεθήσεται ] B has οὐμὴἀφεθῇ . For this construction, see on 5:18. 33-35. The editor here inserts a paragraph which is similar to one which he has already recorded in the Sermon on the Mount, 7:17-20. Lk. in his Sermon, 6:43-45, also has a similar sections, which, however, is more closely in agreement with Mat_12 than with Mat_7; that is to say, Luke 6:43 and 44b = Matthew 7:18, Matthew 7:16, whilst Luke 6:44a, Luke 6:45 = Matthew 12:33c, 34b, 35. Lk. is here perhaps conflating the words of his source for the Sermon with reminiscences of Mat_12. (L) 33. Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree rotten, and its fruit rotten: for by the fruit the tree is known.] Cf. 7:17, 18, Luke 6:43. The meaning here is “ Be consistent. Either allow My acts of casting out devils to be good in result, and attribute the power to do such good acts to the Holy Spirit; or condemn them as evil in result, and attribute them to Satanic agency.” (L) 34. Ye offspring of vipers, how can you speak good things, being evil?] This has no parallel in Lk. The meaning is: “ The reason why you utter judgements which directly gainsay plain facts is to be found in your evil nature.” (L) 34. For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.] (L) 35. The good man from the good treasure brings forth good things: and the evil man from the evil treasure brings forth evil things.] Cf. Luke 6:45 “ The good man from the good treasure of (his) heart brings forth the good. And the evil man from the evil brings forth the evil. For out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.” The meaning is: “ Your malicious judgements come from the treasure-house of your malicious nature.” 36-37. These verses have no parallel in Lk. (L) But I say to you, that every idle utterance that men shall speak, they shall give account concerning it in the day of judgement. For from thy words shalt thou be acquitted, and from thy words shalt thou be condemned.] 36. πᾶνῥῆμαἀργόν ] The Pharisees might urge that their saying of v. 24 was after all only a pleasantry, and did not express their real beliefs. Christ warns them that such idle utterances, because they come from the heart (v. 34), give expression to the inward nature, and will be called into judgement no less than the reasoned statement or the outward action. The last verse, with its change to the singular and its substitution of λόγος for ῥῆμα , sounds like a quotation or a proverbial saying. Clause (a) is perhaps a reminiscence of Psa 50:6 ὅπωςἂνδικαιωθῇςἐντοῖςλόγοιςσου . For ὃἐάν , see on 11:27. (L) 38. Then answered Him certain of the scribes and Pharisees, saying, Teacher, we wish to see a sign from Thee.] In Luke 11:16 this request is combined with the accusation at the head of the discourse. “ But others tempting (Him), were seeking a sign from heaven from Him.” τότε ] see on 2:7. (L) 39. And He answered and said to them, An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; and a sign shall not be given to it, save the sign of Jonah the prophet.] Lk. has: “ And when the multitudes were crowding together, He began to say, This generation is an evil generation: it seeks a sign, and a sign shall not be given to it, save the sign of Jonah.” — μοιχαλίς ] means apostate, disobedient, and unfaithful to God. (E?L) 40. For as Jonah was in the belly of the monster three days and three nights; so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.] Lk. has: “ For as Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, so shall be also the Son of Man to this generation.” It is probable that Mt. (or the writer of his source) has paraphrased the saying as recorded by Lk., in order to explain the parallelism between Jonah as a sign and the Son of Man as a sign. “ As Jonah was a sign.” But how was he a sign? Certainly not simply because he preached. His message of warning could in no true sense be called a sign. He was a sign because of his remarkable experience recorded in Jonah 1-2. “ So shall the Son of Man be a sign,” in virtue of His remarkable life’ s history from beginning to end. The writer of the saying as recorded in Mt. has wished to make this parallelism clear. He has done so by illustrating it from one particular event in the life history of Jonah and of the Son of Man, in connection with which there was, as it seemed to him, a striking coincidence. The Son of Man ( = Christ) foretold, as tradition recorded, that He would rise again after three days; cf. Mark 8:31, Mark 9:31, Mark 10:34, Matthew 27:63. (This was traditionally interpreted as equivalent to “ on the third day,” cf. Matthew 16:21, Matthew 17:23, Matthew 20:19, Luke 9:22, Luke 9:18:33, Luke 9:24:7, Luke 9:46, Acts 10:40). It might, therefore, be said that He lay in the grave for three days. Mt. turned to the Book of Jonah, and found in 2:1 the words: καὶἦνἸωνᾶςἐντῇκοιλίᾳτοῦκήτουςτρεῖςἡμέραςκαὶτρεῖςνύκτας . Here was material for a comparison. Jonah’ s wonderful story of guidance and preservation culminated in his sojourn in the belly of the sea monster followed by his miraculous deliverance. This, as illustrating his whole unique experience, made him a sign to the Ninevites. He preached to them as one miraculously accredited. The life history of the Son of Man culminated in His sojourn in the grave, followed by His miraculous resurrection. This, as illustrating His whole life of wonder and marvel, constituted Him a sign to the men of that generation. Mt. has, of course, rather forced his analogy.1 Putting aside the fact that according to Christian tradition Christ lay in the grave only one whole day and parts of two others, he has tried to increase the parallelism by adding τρεῖςνύκτας , when at the most there were only two. The words ἦνἸωνᾶς — νύκτας are borrowed from Jonah 2:1.— τῇκαρδίᾳτῆςγῆς ] cf. Deuteronomy 4:11 Heb. “ the heart of heaven,” and cor maris, 4 Es ( = 2 Es R. V.) 13:25, 51. (L) 41. The men of Nineveh shall rise up at the judgement with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the message of Jonah; and, behold, more than Jonah is here.] Lk. transposes this and the next verse, probably simply in order to secure a chronological sequence. He has this verse in verbal agreement with Mt. ἀναστήσονταιἐντῇκρίσει ] shall stand or rise up at the judgement. Except in this and the next verse, Mt. uses ἡμέρακρίσεως in this sense; cf. 10:15, 11:22, 24, 12:36. For ἡκρίσις = the last judgement, cf. Luke 10:14. The idea is that at the final judgement the men of Nineveh will indict the men of this generation for not having repented at the preaching of Christ, who had been a greater sign to them than Jonah had been to the Ninevites. Wellhausen urges that in Aramaic “ stand or rise up in judgement with” means “ to accuse.” That is true; but even so the implied period of accusation must have been the final judgement day. The Greek translator, who rendered the Aramaic original by ἀναστήσονταιἐντῇκρίσειμετά , only made his words express what he supposed to be implied in the original.— πλεῖονἸωνᾶ ] cf. 12:6 τοῦἱεροῦμεῖζον . (L) 42. The queen of the South shall rise up at the judgement with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, more than Solomon is here.] So Lk. with τῶνἀνδρῶν after μετά . ἐγερθήσεται is synonymous with ἀναστήσεται of v. 41. Both represent the same Aramaic word.— νότου ] In 1 K 10:1 ש ׁ ְ ב ָ א = LXX. Σαβά . Jos. Ant. viii. 165 calls her queen of Egypt and Ethiopia. But Sheba was in southern Arabia. Wellhausen remarks that this is the earliest instance of the name Jemen for South-West Arabia. (L) 43-45 are placed by Lk. (11:24-26) earlier in the discourse. There they seem to illustrate the futility of the methods of the Jewish exorcists (v. 19). These seem to do the same work as Christ, but really they act against Him (v. 20); for the evil spirit whom they drive out returns, making the sufferer worse than before. In Mt. the verses seem rather to describe the condition of the Jewish nation in Christ’ s time. They had formerly repented at the summons of God, and their evil spirit had been driven out. But it had returned with seven others. And now the condition of the nation was such that even the preaching of Christ had no effect. Or the passage may have been added here by the editor, with immediate reference to the preceding verses, as bearing upon the subject of exorcism with which the discourse started. It is possible that Lk. may have tried to improve the connection by placing the verses within the body of the discourse. (L) 43. But when the unclean spirit is gone forth from the man, he passes through waterless places, seeking rest, and finds none.] So Lk. with μὴεὑρίσκον for οὐχεὑρίσκει .— ἀνύδρωντόπων ] Demons were thought to dwell in deserted places. Cf. Isaiah 13:21, Isaiah 34:14, Bar 4:35, Revelation 18:2, Mark 5:10. For the waterless place, cf. the incantation given in Thompson, Devils and Evil Spirits of Babylonia, i. pp. 61, 167: “ Neither with sea water, nor with sweet water, Nor with bad water, nor with Tigris water, Nor with Euphrates water, nor with pond water, Nor with river water, shalt thou be covered.” And for desert places as the abode of demons, cf. the same work: p. 123: “ O evil spirit— to the desert. O evil demon— to the desert. O evil ghost— to the desert. O evil devil— to the desert. p. 139: O evil spirit, get thee forth to distant places. O evil demon, hie thee unto the ruins. . . . . . . . . A ruined desolate house is thy home.” (L) 44. Then he saith, I will return to my house whence I came out; and having come, he finds it vacant, swept, and adorned.] So Lk. with ὑποστρέψωεἰςτὸνοἶκόνμου for εἰςτὸνοἶκόνμουἐπιστρέψω ; but א * A D al S1 S2 omit σχολάζοντα in Lk.— σχολάζοντα ] Rare in this sense; cf. Plut. Cai Grœ c. 12; and of uncultivated land, Plut. Timol. ch. 22 end.— σαρόω ] A late form of σαίρω , Artem. ii. 33. (L) 45. Then he goeth, and taketh with himself seven other spirits worse than himself, and entering in they dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first.] So Lk. without μεθ ʼ ἑαυτοῦ , and with ἑπτά after ἑαυτοῦ .— ἑπτά ] For the seven evil spirits of Babylonian demonology, cf. Thompson, pp. xlii ff. So shall it be to this evil generation.] These words are not found in Lk. C. (7) His relations seek Him. 46. The editor now goes back to Mark 3:31-35. In Mk. Christ is in a house (3:19b), where the preceding discourse was presumably uttered. But in Mt. the last place mentioned is the synagogue of 12:9. In 12:15 He leaves the synagogue, and in 12:22 a blind and deaf demoniac is brought to Him; but no detail of place is given. (M) While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brethren had taken their stand without, seeking to speak to Him.] Mk. has: “ And His mother and His brethren come, and, having taken their stand outside, sent to Him, calling Him.” The outside here means outside the house in which He was (3:19). In Mt. the outside must be interpreted as on the outskirts of the crowd. The editor is obliged to rewrite Mk.’ s opening words, ἔτιαὐτοῦλαλοῦντος ] Cf. the insertion of a similar formula, ταῦτααὐτοῦλαλοῦντος , as a connecting link, in 9:18.— τοῖςὄσλοις ] cf. v. 23.— ἰδού ] See on 1:20.— ζητοῦντεςαὐτῷλαλῆσαι ] Mk.’ s ἀπέστειλανπρὸςαὐτὸνκαλοῦντεςαὐτόν is unsuitable here, where Christ is separated from His relatives only by the circle of people round Him. Mt. anticipates the ζητοῦσίνσε of Mk v. 32 which he omits. (M) 48. And He answered and said to him who told Him, Who is My mother? and who are My brethren?] The editor summarises Mk vv. 32, 33 “ And the crowd sat about Him; and they say to Him, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren without seek Thee. And He answered them, and saith, Who is My mother and brethren?” (M) 49. And He stretched out His hands towards His disciples, and said, Behold My mother and My brethren!] Mk.has: “ And He looked round at those sitting in a circle about Him, and saith, Behold My mother and My brethren!” It is in Mt.’ s manner to make the reference apply specially to the disciples.— ἰδού ] for Mk.’ s ἴδε . See on 1:20. (M) 50. For whosoever shall do the will of My Father who is in the heavens, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother.] Mk. has: “ Whosoever shall do the will of God, he is My brother, and sister, and mother.” For τοῦπατρόςμουτοῦἐνοὐρανοῖς , see on 5:16. Cf. Aboth 5:22 “ Be bold as a leopard, and swift as an eagle, and fleet as a hart, and strong as a lion, to do the will of thy Father which is in heaven.” 2:4 “ Do His will as if it were thy will, that He may do thy will as if it were His will. Annul thy will before His will, that He may annul the will of others before thy will.” B. Berakhoth 16b “ Our will is to do Thy will.” See also on 6:12. 47. א a C D E al latt. insert here: “ And one said to Him, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren are standing without, seeking to speak to Thee.” Mk. has: “ And there sat about Him a multitude; and they say to Him, Behold, Thy mother and Thy brethren outside are seeking Thee.” The verse in Mt. is rightly omitted by א * B L Γ S1 S2 ff1 k. Mt. has purposely omitted the corresponding clause in Mk., and has only taken from it the ζητοῦσίνσε = ζητοῦντεςαὐτῷλαλῆσαι , Matthew 46. The interpolator has written the words to assimilate to Mk. and Lk., and to prepare the way for v. 48. If the verse were genuine, Mt. and Lk. would agree against Mk. in ἑστήκασιν , as they do in the next verse in εἶπεν for λέγει . M the Second Gospel. B. Babylonian Talmud. Hor. Heb. Hora Hebraiœ (Lightfoot). Class. Rev. Classical Review. latt. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. LXX. The Septuagint Version. Deissm. Deissmann. L the Matthæ an Logia. S Syriac version: Curetonian. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Demosth. Demosthenes. Epict. Epictetus. E editorial passages. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. Dalm. Dalman. 1 C D al have Βεελζεβούλ , and so Eph. Syr., the Armenian and the Arabic Diatessaron. א B have Βεεζεβούλ , as in 10:25. S1 S2 have Beelzebub, as in 10:25. Jos. Josephus. 1 This Aramaic “ sons of men” = “ men” occurs only here in the Synoptic Gospels. Mt. avoids it. 1 For an early attempt to account for the “ three days” and “ three nights,” see the Syriac Didascalia (ed. Lagarde), p. 88, where the “ three days” are reckoned as Friday 6 a.m. to noon, Friday 3 p.m. to 6 p.m., and Saturday; the “ three nights” as Friday 12Ti_3 p.m. (darkness = night), Friday night, and Saturday night. Plut. Plutarch. C. (8) Illustrations of His parabolic teaching, 13:1-52. 13. The editor now comes to Mar_4. (M) 1. On that day Jesus went (out of the house?), and sat by the sea.] Mk has: “ And again He began to teach by the sea.” ἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳ ] inserted to make the connection closer, as in 22:23 and as a substitute for Mk.’ s πάλιν which Mt. often omits. ἐκτῆςοἰκίας if genuine is a reminiscence of Mar 3:19b καὶἔρχεταιεἰςοἶκον , which Mt. had omitted, but which still underlies 12:46; but D S1 a b e ff 12 g1 k omit ἐκτῆςοἰκίας . B omits ἐκ . C E al have ἀπό . The words are probably a gloss to explain ἐξελθών .— ἐκάθητο ] Mk. has ἤρξατοδιδάσκειν . Mt. often avoids ἤρξατο . For ἐκάθητο , cf. 15:29. It is suggested here by the καθῆσθαι of the next clause in Mk. (M) 2. And there were gathered to Him many multitudes, so that He embarked into a boat, and sat.) Mk. has: “ And there is gathered to Him a very great multitude, so that He embarked into a boat, and sat in the sea.” — συνήχθησαν ] for Mk.’ s hist. pres., as often.— ὄχλοι for Mk.’ s singular, as often. Mt. omits Mk.’ s superfluous ἐντῇθαλάσσῃ . (M) And all the multitude had taken its stand on the shore.] Mk. has: “ And all the multitude were at the sea upon the land.” — ἐπὶτὸναἰγιαλόν ] For αἰγιαλός cf. v. 48. Mt. avoids Mk.’ s redundant “ at the sea upon the land.” Cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 3. And He spake to them many things in parables, saying, Behold, the sower went out to sow.] Mk. has: “ And He was teaching them many things in parables, and He said to them in His teaching, Hear; Behold, the sower went out to sow.” πολλά ] Mt. generally omits Mk.’ s adverbial πολλά .— ἐλάλησεν ] abbreviates Mk.’ s ἐδίδασκεν — καὶἔλεγεναὐτοῖςἐντῇδιδαχῇαὐτοῦ . See Introduction, p. xxiv.— τοῦσπείρειν ] for Mk.’ s σπεῖραι . Mt. has τοῦ with inf. 7 times. The present tense emphasises the continuance of the action. See Blass, p. 196 f., and note on 11:1. (M) 4. And during his sowing, some fell by the wayside, and the birds came and devoured them.] Mk. has: “ And it came to pass during the sowing, some fell by the wayside, and the birds came and devoured it.” — ἅ ] Mk. has the singular. For Mt.’ s preference for plurals, see on 8:26.— ἐλθόντα — κατέφαγεν ] for Mk.’ s ἦλθενκαὶκατέφαγεν . (M) 5. And others fell upon the stony places, where they had not much earth; and immediately they sprang up, because they had not depth of earth.] Mk. has: “ And other fell upon the stony place, and where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up because it had not depth of earth.” — ἄλλα ] plural again, and so in πετρώδη for Mk.’ s ἄλλο and πετρῶδες ; see on 8:26. But Mk. has ἄλλα in v. 8 and πετρώδη in v. 16.— ἄλλαδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶἄλλο , as often. (M) 6. And the sun having risen, they were scorched; and because they had not root they withered.] Mk. has: “ And when the sun rose,” etc. (M) 7. And others fell upon the thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them.] Mk. has: “ And other (sing.) fell into the thorns; and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it gave no fruit.” — ἄλλαδέ for Mk.’ s καὶἄλλο , as Often.— ἀπέπνιξαν ] Mk. has συνέπνιξαν . In Mt. א D have the simple verb, which occurs also in 18:28, Mark 5:13. ἀπέπνιξαν may be an assimilation to Lk. (M) 8. And others fell upon the good ground, and was giving fruit.] Mk. has: “ And others fell into the good ground, and was giving fruit, growing and increasing.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s rather obscure last three words, see Swete.— ἄλλαδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶἄλλα , as often. ἐπί is easier than Mk.’ s εἰς . “ Some an hundred, and some sixty, and some thirty fold.” Mk. has: “ And was bearing one thirty, and one sixty, and one an hundred fold.” Mk.’ s εἷς — ἒν — ἕν is due to mistranslation of the Aramaic ע ל ח ד א or Hebrew ח ד ; cf. ע ל ח ד מ א ה , Genesis 26:12 (Targ.) = an hundred fold, ח ד ש ב ע ה Daniel 3:19 = sevenfold. Cf. Exp. Times, xiii. p. 330, and so now Wellhausen on Mt. Mt. has avoided the Aramaism by substituting ὅ — ὅ — ὅ . (M) 9. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.] Mk. has: “ And He said, Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” The words occur again in Matthew 11:15 and 13:43. 1-9. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ὄχλοιπολλοί , Mat_2 = ὄχλουπολλοῦ , Luk_4. Mk. has ὄχλοςπλεῖστος . τοῦσπείρειν , Mat_3 = τοῦσπεῖραι , Luk_5. Mk. has σπεῖραι alone. ἐντῷσπείρειναὐτόν , Mat_4, Luk_5. Mk. has καὶἐγένετοἐντῷσπείρειν . ὁἔχων , Mat_9, Luk_8. Mk. has ὃςἔχει . (M) 10. And the disciples came and said to Him, Why dost Thou speak to them in parables?] Mk. has: “ And when He was in private, those who were around Him with the Twelve were asking Him the parables.” This is ambiguous. Lk. interprets it to mean, “ asked Him the meaning of the parable.” In Mk. we must understand that vv. 10-33 refer to teaching on some occasion other than that implied in vv. 1-9, 35-36. This explains Mk.’ s plural παραβολάς . On some other occasion the Twelve and others asked for an explanation of the parable of the Sower and of other parables. But Mt. prefers to treat Mark 10-33 as a part of the same scene as Mk. 1-9, Mark 1:35-36. He therefore omits “ And when He was in private,” and changes “ Asked Him about the Parables” into “ Said to Him, Why dost Thou speak to them in parables?” For προσελθόντες , see on 4:3.— οἱμαθηταί ] “ disciples” in a wide sense. Mt. thus avoids representing the Twelve as ignorant of the reason of Christ’ s use of parables. See Introduction, p. xxxiii. (M) 11. And He answered and said that, To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of the heavens, but to them it has not been given.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, To you the secret of the kingdom of God has been given, but to those outside all things happen in parables.” — μυστήρια ] for the plural, see on 8:26. The singular might suggest that the very conception of the kingdom was something unknown. But the idea of the kingdom was current and familiar. Christ’ s teaching about it contained, however, many things unfamiliar. Hence the plural. Mt. adds the explanatory γνῶναι .— δέδοται ] Christ’ s teaching about the kingdom had familiarised His disciples with many conceptions of its nature and near approach which remained unknown to the masses of the people.— μυστήρια ] The word is used in the LXX. to denote a “ secret” ; cf. Wis 2:22 “ the secrets of God,” To 12:7 “ the secret of a king,” Jth 2:2 the same, 2 Mac 13:21. The representation of eschatological ideas, immortality of the soul, resurrection of the body, future judgement, Messianic kingdom as “ secrets” revealed to the elect, is especially characteristic of the Apocalyptic and Sibylline literature, and the word in this sense has been adopted by the New Testament writers. See Armitage Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 234 ff. S1 a b e ff k omit τῶνοὐρανῶν . ἐκείνοιςδὲοὐδεδόται ] Mk. has the obscure ἐκείνοιςδὲτοῖςἕξωἐνπαραβολαῖςπάνταγίνεται , which may perhaps mean, “ all spiritual teaching is like an unexplained parable to the uninitiated,” or “ to the multitude outside (the place where we are).” (M) 12. For whosoever hath, there shall be given to him, and increased. But whosoever hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken from him.] Mk. has a similar clause in 4:25 “ For he who bath, there shall be given to him; and he who hath not, there shall be taken from him even that which he hath.” Similar words occur in 25:29 in the parable of the Talents, and Mt. here adds καὶπερισσευθήσεται to assimilate to that passage or in anticipation of καὶπροστεθήσεταιὑμῖν , Mark 4:24. Here the words seem to refer to spiritual opportunities. The disciples “ had,” e.g., faith to receive the revelation of the secrets of the kingdom. Hence these secrets were entrusted to them. The masses of the people “ had not” such capacity for divine truth. Hence these secrets were withheld from them, because the parabolic form in which Christ taught them only yielded its “ secret” to those who already had some understanding of the nature of the secrets concerned. But the verse does not seem entirely applicable here, because it is difficult to give any adequate meaning to the last clause. The teaching in parables did not bring about the “ taking away even what he hath.” Mt. has probably added them here in order to afford at least a partial explanation of Mk.’ s obscure “ all things happen in parables.” (M) 13. Therefore I speak to them in parables: because seeing they do not see; and hearing they do not hear, nor understand.] Mk. has: “ (Happen in parables) in order that seeing they may see, and not see; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest they should turn, and be forgiven.” The verse in Mk. is an adaptation of Isa 6:9, Isaiah 6:10 ἀκοῇἀκούσετεκαὶοὐνὴσυνῆτεκαὶβλέτεςκαὶοὐμὴἴδητε — μήποτε — ἐπιστρέψωσικαὶἰάσομαιαὐτούς . In the last clause Mk.’ s καὶἀφεθῇαὐτοῖς is nearer to the Heb. ו ר פ א ל ו than to the LXX. As the words stand in Mk. they describe the purpose of the “ all things happen in parables.” This may mean, “ To the unspiritual masses of the people, who have no capacity for divine truth, the whole of life, and, in particular, all revelation of divine secrets, is like an unexplained parable, into the real meaning of which they never penetrate. And this condition of things fulfils the words of God to the prophet Isaiah, which described the spiritual condition of that generation.” A modern speaker would use terms of analogy rather than of purpose to connect the state of things before him with the Old Testament parallel. But in the New Testament any condition of things parallel to or analogous to a similar condition in the Old Testament is said to fulfil the terms which describe the latter. And the use of future tenses in the LXX. of Isaiah easily leads to the use of the passage as a prediction of future events rather than as the description of a present condition. Mt., however, has explained the question of Mar 4:10 as asking after the reason of Christ’ s use of parables, διὰτίἐνπαραβολαῖςλαλεῖςαὐτοῖς ; and introduces this use of Isaiah’ s language with the direct answer, “ Therefore I speak to them in parables.” He cannot, therefore, continue with Mk.’ s ἵνα , the effect of which would be to represent Christ’ s speaking in parables as purposely adopted in order to prevent the people from understanding the teaching underlying them. The editor feels that this would be intolerable. He therefore changes ἵνα , into ὅτι , and substitutes indicatives for Mk.’ s subjunctives. “ I speak in parables, because the people are not able to receive nor to understand the ‘ secrets’ when revealed in plain language.” “ They see, and yet do not see; and they hear, and yet do not hear, nor understand.” Nothing is here said (as apparently in Mk.) of the object gained by the use of parables, but an explanation is given of the causes which made it necessary. But there is implied the inference that the object was to present the “ secrets” of the kingdom in a form which would enable all such as had (v. 12) capacity to understand, to penetrate their meaning, whilst it would shroud these divine secrets from those who had no qualifications for appreciating them. In this way Christ fulfilled His own saying, “ Give not that which is holy to dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine” (7:6). D S1 S2 a b c d e ff k add μήποτεἐπιστρέψωσιν from Mk. 14, 15. Mt. here introduces the direct quotation, which is indirectly employed in Mark 5:12. (E) And there is being fulfilled for them the prophecy of Isaiah, which says, With hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive. For the heart of this people was made fat, and with their ears they heard heavily, and their eyes they smeared; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should turn, and I should heal them.] καὶἀναπληροῦταιαὐτοῖς ] We might expect the editor to use the formula ὅπωςπληρωθῇτὸῥηθέν , on which see Introduction, p. lxi. But that formula seems to have been characteristic of a special group of quotations which the editor had before him in a Greek form. In this case he himself has recourse to the LXX., in order to quote a passage which has been suggested to him by Mark 4:12. He therefore uses an introductory phrase of his own, which was suggested, no doubt, by the πληρωθῇ of the recurring formula. The quotation which follows seems to be verbally identical with the LXX. of Isaiah 6:9-10, even to the unexpected fut. ind. ἰάσομαι of the last clause. 16-17. Cf. Luke 10:23-24, Mark 4:13. (L) But blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say to you, That many prophets and righteous men desired to see the things which ye see, and did not see; and to hear the things which ye hear, and did not hear.] Mk. has: “ And He saith to them, Do ye not know this parable, and how shall you understand all the parables ?” Mt. omits this reproach (see Introduction, p. xxxiii), and substitutes for it a passage from the Logia containing a statement of the privileges of the disciples. This saying also occurs in Luke 10:23-24 in a different context (the return of the Seventy), and differently worded: “ And turning to the disciples, privately He said, Blessed are the eyes which see the things which ye see; for I say to you, that many prophets and kings wished to see the things which ye see, and did not see; and to hear the things which ye hear, and did not hear.” ὑμῶνδέ .] The ὑμῶν is emphatic, and contains a direct contrast to those referred to in αὐτοῖς , vv. 10-13, ἐκείνοις , v. 11, and in vv. 13-15. “ They” cannot understand the parablies, and that is why I use the parabolic method, because they are not capable of appreciating the “ secrets” when plainly taught in literal language; “ for they have blinded their eyes to the light of divine truth. But blessed are your eyes, for they see this divine light.” (E) 18. Ye therefore hear the parable of the sower.] The words are inserted by the editor.— ὐμεῖς ] “ Because your eyes see, you are able to understand and to receive the ‘ secrets’ which the parable enfolds.” (M) 19. In the case of every one who hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand, them comes the evil one, and wrests away that which was sown in his heart. This is he who was sown by the wayside.] Mk. has: “ The sower sows the word. These are they who (are) by the wayside, where the word is sown. And when they hear, straightway cometh Satan, and taketh away the word which was sown into them.” Mk’ s explanation of the parable suffers from condensation. “ These are they who are by the wayside” interprets ὃμὲνἔπεσενπαρὰτήνὁδόν , v. 4, i.e. the seed which fell by the wayside describes the case of the people who hear the doctrine and allow it quickly to be lost from their memory and understanding. Properly speaking, “ that which fell by the wayside” is the doctrine, and the wayside represents superficial hearers; but Mk.’ s loosely connected words seem to confuse the seed sown, i.e. the doctrine, with the people amongst whom it is sown, i.e. those who hear it. Mt. might have simplified by saying in his last clause, “ This is, i.e. this is represented by, that which was sown by the wayside” ; but he follows Mk.’ s confusion between the seed sown and the people amongst whom it is sown. He adds καὶμὴσυνιέντος to explain why the evil one succeeds in wresting the seed from them, and substitutes ἐντῇκαρδίᾳαὐτοῦ for Mk.’ s harsher εἰςαὐτούς — ὁπονηρός , as in v. 38. (M) 20, 21. And he that was sown upon the stony places, this is he who hears the word, and straightway with joy receives it; but hath not root in himself, but is ephemeral; and when tribulation or persecution for the word cometh, straightway is made to stumble.] Mk. has: “ And these are they likewise who are being sown on the stony places, who, when they hear the word, straightway with joy receive it; and have not root in themselves, but are ephemeral. Then when tribulation or persecution for the word cometh, straightway they are made to stumble.” There is here again the same confusion in Mk., followed by Mt., between the seed and the people amongst whom it is sown.— σπαρείς ] and so in v. 22 for Mk.’ s less suitable σπειρόμενοι . Mk. has σπαρέντες in v. 20. ὁδέ for καὶοὗτοι ; and οὐκἔχειδέ for καὶοὐκἔχουσιν , as often; τὸνλόγον throughout this chapter means the good news of the kingdom; cf. v. 19. (M) 22. And he that was sown into the thorns, this is he who hears the word; and the care of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.] Mk. has: “ And others there are who are being sown into the thorns. These are they who heard the word; and the cares of the world, and the desires concerning the rest, enter in and choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.” Again the same verbal confusion. Lk. here simplifies by substituting the neuter: “ And that which was sown,” etc. Mt. omits καὶαἱπερὶτὰλοιπὰἐπιθυμίαι as being involved in ἡμέριμνατοῦαἰῶνος . τοῦαἰῶνος probably implies the distinction between this and the coming age; see on 12:32. (M) 23. And he that was sown upon the good ground, this is he who hears the word and understands, who brings forth and produces fruit, some an hundred fold, and some sixty, and some thirty.] Mk. has: “ And these are they who were sown upon the good ground, who hear the word and receive it, and bring forth fruit, one thirty fold, and one sixty, and one an hundred. Lk., again, has the neuter— “ that which,” etc. συνιείς , cf. v. 19, explains Mk.’ s παραδέχονται .— ὃ — ὃ — ὅ ] for Mk.’ s ἕν — ἕν — ἕν . See on v. 8.— ὂδέ ] for Mk.’ s καί , as often. The parable as it stands here seems to describe the reception of the word, or good news, or teaching (v. 19) about the secrets of the kingdom (v. 11) as taught by Christ. Some do not understand it (v. 19). Some cannot endure the persecution with which its disciples are assailed (vv. 20-21). Some are too much preoccupied by worldly pursuits to allow it to influence them (v. 22). But others welcome it, and become true disciples of the kingdom (v. 28); cf. v. 52. 10-23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: οἱμαθηταί , Mat_10; οἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ , Luk_9. Mk. has οἱπερὶαὐτὸνσὺντοῖςδώδεκα . ὁδὲ — εἷπεν — γνῶναιτὰμυστήρια , Mat_11, Luk_10. Mk. has καὶἔλεγεν — τὸμυστήριον . ἐντῇκαρδίᾳαὐτοῦ , Mat_19 = ἀπὸτῆςκαρδίας , Luk_12. Mk. has εἰςαὐτούς . δέ , Mat_20, Luk_13; Mat_22, Luk_14; Mat_23, Luk_15. Mk. has καί . 24-30. The tares. (L) 24. Another parable He put forth to them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man who sowed good seed in his field.] ὡμοιώθη ] The usual introduction of a parable in the later Jewish literature is: “ A parable. To what is the matter like? To,” etc. See Bacher, Exeg. Term. i. 121, ii. 121. The use of parables is very common in this literature. Examples from the Mechilta may be seen in Fiebig, A1tjü d. Gleichnisse. All the parables in Mt. which are not borrowed from Mk. are introduced with the formula ὡμοιώθη or ὁμοίαἐστί , except 25:14-30, which is introduced with a simple ὥσπερ , a method also used in the Jewish parables. Cf. Fiebig, p. 78. (L) 25. And whilst men were sleeping, the enemy came and sowed tares in the midst of the wheat, and went away.] (L) 26. But when the blade sprouted and made fruit, then appeared also the tares.] (L) 27. And the servants of the householder came, and said to him, Lord, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? Whence, therefore, hath it tares?] (L) 28. And he said to them, An enemy hath done this. And the servants say to him, Dost thou wish, therefore, that we go and gather them?] (L) 29. And he saith, No, lest as you gather the tares ye root up also with them the wheat.] (L) 30. Let both grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather first the tares, and bind them into bundles to burn them; but the wheat gather into my granary.] αὐτὰεἰςδέσμας L X Δ S1 S2 a b c g1 2 ff2 q omit εἰς . D e f h k omit αὐτά . Epiph. quoted by Tisch. gives δέσμαςδέσμας ; cf. συμπόσιασυμπόσια , Mark 6:39; and see Moulton, p. 97. 31. Mt. here omits Mk.’ s added sayings, 4:21-25. He has already inserted a parallel to 4:21 in 5:15, and to 4:22 in 10:26. A parallel to 4:23 has already been given twice in 13:9= Mark 4:9, and in 11:15. A parallel to Mark 4:24 has been given in 7:2b, and to 4:25 in v. 12. This, therefore, brings the editor to 4:26-29.But it is probable that in the Logia he had before him a group of parables containing the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the explanation of the Tares, the Hid Treasure, the Goodly Pearl, the Drag-net, and a conclusion. He turns now to this source, and borrows from it, thus omitting Mark 4:26-29, and substituting for 4:30-32 the similar parable of the Logia. After the third Logian parable, the Leaven, he turns back to Mk. and borrows Mk.’ s conclusion, 4:33-34, before continuing with the explanation of the Tares from the Logia. Thus: Mat_13.Mar_4. Seed growing secretly, omitted 26-29. Tares, 24-30 — Mustard Seed, 31-32 substituted for 30-32. Leaven, 33 — Conclusion, 34-35 33-34. It may seem strange that, having once abandoned Mk at 13:24, he should take the trouble to borrow from him 4:33-34, and that he should place this not after the Mustard Seed as in Mk., but after the Logian parable of the Leaven. By so doing he seems to introduce into his chapter two conclusions, 13:34-35 from Mk., and 51-52 from the Logia. But let us suppose that the Logia contained two groups of three parables, separated by the explanation of the Tares, and ended with the conclusion, vv. 51-52. Thus: 13:24-30 Tares First group. 31-32 Mustard Seed First group. 33 Leaven First group. 36-43 Explanation of Tares. 44 Hid Treasure Second group. 45-46 Goodly Pearl Second group. 47-50 Draw Net Second group. Of course, the difficulty here is in the position of the explanation of the Tares. Why does it not stand immediately after the parable? Moreover, the reference to the house, v. 36, is improbable as a feature of the Logia. In any case this is probably due to the editor. It does not help us to attribute the whole of vv. 36-43 to the editor, because the position of the section remains a difficulty, and because the section is characterised throughout by phrases which are probably due to the Logia. It is easiest, therefore, to suppose that the Logian parables were arranged as above in two groups of three, separated by the explanation of the Tares. The editor having once deserted Mk., inserts the first group of three, and then adds Mk.’ s conclusion. He did not place it immediately after the mustard seed, where Mk. has it, because he did not care to break up the grouping into three. For his liking for this arrangement, see Introduction, p. lxv. 31, 32. Cf. Mark 4:30-32, Luke 13:18, Luke 13:19. (LM) 31. Another parable He put forth to them, saying, The kingdom of the heavens is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field.] Mk. has: “ And He said, How shall we liken the kingdom of God, or in what parable shall we set it forth? As a grain of mustard seed?” ὁμοίαἐστίν ] see on v. 24. Mt. avoids Mk.’ s redundancy; cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. For Mk.’ s ὡς , cf. 25:14, and see on v. 24. (LM) 32. Which indeed is less than all seeds. But when it has grown it is greater than the herbs, and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the heaven come and lodge in its branches.] Mk. has: “ Which when it is sown upon the earth, though it is less than all seeds which are upon the earth, and when it is sown, grows up and becomes greater than all herbs, and makes great branches, so that the birds of the heaven are able to lodge under its shadow.” ὃμικρότερονμένἐστιν ] Mt. simplifies Mk.’ s harsh construction, ὃς — μικρότερονὄν . He also avoids the repetition of ὅτανσπαρῇ and ἐπὶτῆςγῆς .— κατασκηνοῖν ] cf. Psalms 104:12.— ἐντοῖςκλάδοιςαὐτοῦ ] Mk. has ὑπὸτὴνσκιὰναὐτοῦ . Both expressions are used of birds in connection with trees. For ὑπὸτὴνσκιὰναὐτοῦ , cf. Ezekiel 17:23; and for ἐντοῖςκλάδοιςαὐτοῦ , Daniel 4:18 Th. The latter phrase expresses more suitably here the size of the tree. Mt. and Lk. have several agreements in this parable as against Mk.; cf. ὁμοίαἐστίν . Mt. Lk. ὃνλαβὼνἄνθρωποςἔσπειρενἐντῷἀγρῷαὐτοῦ , Mt. = ὃνλαβὼνἄνθρωποςἔβαλενεἰςκῆπονἐαυτοῦ , Lk. αὐξηθῇ , Mt.=ηὔξησεν , Lk.; δένδρον , Mt. Lk.— ἐντοῖςκλάδοιςαὐτοῦ ] So far as Mt. goes, these variations from Mk. might be easily explained as editorial revisions of Mk.’ s text. But his omission of Mar 4:26-29, combined with these variations and with the fact that the interpretation of the Tares does not immediately follow that parable, but comes later, after other parables in vv. 36-43, suggests that he borrowed the whole section 24-52 (excepting v. 34) from the Logia. In that case, when he came to Mark 4:26 he turned to his other source for all that follows down to v. 52. His variations from Mark 4:30-32 are then due chiefly to the fact that this parable stood in the Logia in a form which differed from that of Mk. Lk. at 8:18 omits Mark 4:26-34, but has the parable of the Mustard Seed combined with that of the Leaven later in his Gospel at 13:18-21. He probably, therefore, borrowed them from a non-Marcan source, which may have been the first Gospel, or a source which contained these two parables in the same order and largely in the same language as the Logia. The parable seems to describe the future propagation of the word or doctrine of the kingdom. Starting from small beginnings in the teaching of Christ, it will spread rapidly and win many adherents. 31, 32. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ὁμοίαἐστίν — ὃνλαβὼνἄνθρωπος — αὐτοῦ , Matthew 31, Luke 18:19. αὐξηθῇ , Matthew 32 = ηὔξησεν , Luk_19. Mk. has σπαρῇ . δένδρον , Matthew 32 = εἰςδένδρον , Luk_19. Mk. has μεῖζονπάντωντῶνλαχάνων . ἐντοῖςκλάδοιςαὐτοῦ , Matthew 32, Luk_19. Mk. has ὑπὸτὴνσκιὰναὐτοῦ . 33. Cf. Luke 13:20, Luke 13:21. (L) Another parable He spake to them; The kingdom of the heavens is like to leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened.] Lk. has: “ And again He said, To what shall I liken the kingdom of God? It is like to leaven,” etc.— ὁμοίαἐστίν ] for this and for Lk.’ s τίνιὁμοιώσω — ὁμοίαἐστίν , see on v. 24. The parable, like that of the Mustard Seed, describes the propagation of the doctrine of “ the kingdom.” Like leaven, this will spread rapidly until it has accomplished the purpose for which it was taught. 34. The editor now inserts Mk.’ s conclusion, 4:33-34. (M) 34. All these things spake Jesus in parables to the multitudes; and without a parable He was speaking nothing to them.] Mark 4:33, Mark 4:34 has: “ And with many such parables He was’ speaking to them, as they were able to hear. And without a parable He was not speaking to them. But privately He was interpreting all things to His disciples.” Mt. has omitted Mark 33b and 34b on account of the ambiguity of 33b “ as they were able to hear.” 35. He now adds one of the series of quotations from which he has elsewhere borrowed. (O) 35. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet, saying, I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things hidden from the foundation of the world.]— ὅπωςπληρωθῇ ] see Introduction, p. lxi, and on 1:22. The quotation is from Psalms 77:2. The LXX. there has: ἀνοίξωἐνπαραβολαῖςτὸστόμαμου , φθέγξομαιπροβλήματαἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆς . The first clause of the Gospel quotation betrays reminiscence of the LXX., the second clause appears to be an independent translation from the Hebrew. For ἐρεύγεσθαι , cf. Psalms 18:3; and for κεκρυμμένα , cf. 2 Mac 12:41. καταβολὴκόσμου does not occur in the LXX., but here, 25:34, Luke 11:50, John 17:24, Ephesians 1:4, three times in Heb., 1 P. 1:20, and Revelation 13:8 and 17:8. Cf. also Ass. Mos 1:14 “ ab initio orbis terrarum” =πρὸκαταβολῆςκόσμου , with Charles’ note, p. 58. But see critical note on p. 154. (EL) 36. Then having left the multitudes, He went into the house; and there came to Him His disciples, saying, Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.] — τότε ] see on 2:7.— ἀφείς ] as in 26:44, 22:22.— εἰςτὴνοἰκίαν ] cf. 13:1. Mt.’ s references to place in this chapter are very vague; vv. 2-9 were spoken in the boat. προσελθόντες , v. 10, may or may not suggest a change of scene, but in the former case nothing is said of the disembarkation nor of the scene of the following section, 10-35. The reference here to τοὺςὄχλους suggests that the whole of 2-35 was spoken in the boat. If so, christ now disembarks and returns to the house. Since the reference to the boat and the house are borrowed from Mk., it seems probable that τότεἀφεὶς — οἰκίαν is an editorial insertion to introduce the explanation of the Tares.— προσῆλθον ] see on 4:3.— διασάφησον ].The verb occurs again in 18:31, a probable Logian passage. It is found in Deuteronomy 1:5, Daniel 2:6 LXX., 1 Mac 12:8, and several times in 2 Mac. (L) 37. And He answered and said, He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.] (L) 38. And the field is the world; and the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one.]— οἱυἱοὶτῆςβασιλείας ] i.e. those who are qualified to enter into it; cf. “ Son of the coming world,” Taanith 22a, and other phrases quoted by Dalm. Words, p. 115. The phrase is used with rather a different application in 8:12. There it means “ those who were chosen to enter the kingdom, but have failed to justify the choice.” (L) 39. And the enemy who sowed them is the devil; and the harvest is the consummation of the age; and the reapers are angels.]— συντέλειααἰῶνος ] The phrase occurs in vv. 40, 49, 24:3 and 28:20. In the two latter it seems to have been inserted by the editor into his source. If this section is Logian, the phrase in 24:3 and 28:20 will be due to the influence of Logian language on the editor. If this section is wholly editorial the phrase points to the Jewish origin of the editor, for it is characteristic of Jewish, especially of apocalyptic, literature. It occurs in Hebrews 9:26. Cf. συντέλειατῶναἰώνων , Test. Lev_10; “ consummation of the age,” Apoc. Bar 83:7; “ consummation of the world,” 54:21; Daniel 12:13 συντέλειανἡμερῶν ; “ consummation of the times,” Apoc. Bar 13:3, 27:15; “ of time,” 29:8; “ the day when the great consummation of the great world will be consummated,” Enoch 16:1; “ the end of this time,” 2 Es 7:113; “ the consummation of the end of the days,” Ass. Mos 1:18. Cf. Dalm. Words, p. 155; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 166.— ἄγγελοι ] cf. 24:31. (L) 40. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned with fire; so shall it be at the consummation of the age.] (L) 41. The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather together out of His kingdom all stumbling-blocks, and they who do lawlessness.]— ἀποστελεῖ ] cf. 24:31.— ἐκτῆςβασιλείαςαὐτοῦ ] This must not be interpreted in such a way as to suggest that the kingdom is conceived of as a present condition of things within which tares and wheat grow together. When the Son of Man has come, then the kingdom also will have come. Hence at that future date the tares can be said to be gathered out of His kingdom. (L) 42. And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.]— κάμινοντοῦπυρός ] only again in v. 50 a Logian passage; cf. “ furnace of Gehenna,” 2 Es 7:36, and see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 285.— ἐκεῖἔσται , κ .τ .λ .] See on 8:12. (L) 43. Then the righteous shall shine as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.] τότε ] see on 2:7.— οἱδίκαιοιἐκλάμψουσιν ] Cf. Daniel 12:3 Th. καὶοἱσυνιέντεςλάμψουσιν — καὶἀπὸτῶνδικαίων .— ὡςὁἥλιος ] cf. references on 17:2, and add Ecclus 50:7 ὡςἥλιοςἐκλάμπων ; Ep. Jeremiah 66.— ὁἔχων , κ .τ .λ .] A similar refrain occurs in 11:15, 13:9. The parable deals with the period prior to the future establishment of the kingdom, during which Christ and His disciples preach its “ secrets” and announce its coming. See Introduction, p. lxx. 35. Add Ἠσαίου , א * curss. and MSS. known to Eus. and Jer. Omit א b B C D S1 S2. The word is certainly not genuine.— καταβολῆςκόσμου ] א b B 1 22 k omit κόσμου . S1 S2 have “ from of old” ܕ ܡ ܢ ܩ ܕ ܝ ܡ , assimilating to the Syriac and to the Hebrew of the Psalm, which has מ נ י ק ד ם . It seems probable that Mt. wrote καταβολῆς , that S1 and S2 assimilated to the Hebrew, and that the mass of authorities have added κόσμου to assimilate to the general usage of the N.T. 36. διασάφησον ] א * B; φράσον א o C D al S1 S2 ܦ ܫ ܩ probably implies διασάφησον . 44-50. Three Parables from the Logia. (L) 44. The kingdom of the heavens is like treasure hidden in the field; which a man found and hid, and from joy goes and sells all that he hath, and buys that field.] This and the following parable deal rather with the nature of the doctrine of “ the kingdom” than with the method of its propagation, as in the previous parables. The good news of the kingdom is of such value that men will give up everything else to accept it. (L) 45, 46. Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a merchant, seeking goodly pearls. And having found one precious pearl, he went and sold all that he hath, and bought it.] ὁμοίαἐστί ] see on v. 24.— ἀνθρώπῳἐμπόρῳ ] cf. ἀνθρώπῳβασιλεῖ , 18:23, 22:2; cf. ἀνθρώπῳοἰκοδεσπότῃ , 13:52, 21:33. (L) 47. Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a net, cast into the sea, and gathering of every kind.] (L) 48. Which, when it was filled, they drew to the shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but the bad they cast away.]— ἄγγη ] so א B C M*. ἀγγεῖα , D E F al ἀγγεῖον occurs again in 25:4. S1 S2 have “ the good as good” for τὰκαλὰεἰςἄγγη ; see Burkitt. (L) 49, 50. So shall it be at the consummation of the age: the angels shall go forth, and shall separate the evil from the midst of the righteous, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.] συντελείᾳ ] see on v. 39.— κάμινον ] see on v. 42.— ἐκεῖἔσται , κ .τ .λ .] see on 8:12. (L) 51, 52. Have ye understood all these things? They say to Him, Yea. And He said to them, Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple of the kingdom of the heavens is like a householder, who brings out of his treasure new things and old things.]— πᾶςγραμματεύς ] Christ’ s disciples were to be disciples and teachers of His doctrine, just as were the Jewish scribes of the Law and of the traditions; cf. 23:34 where He describes His disciples as “ prophets and wise men and scribes.” — μαθητευθείς ] only here passive, no doubt corresponds to ת ל מ י ד , a scholar or disciple.— ἀνθρώπῳοἰκοδεσπότῃ ] see on v. 45. The thought seems to be of a house steward, who brings from his household stores, new and old things, food, raiment, etc., as and when they are needed for household use. Just so Christ’ s disciples who had learned from Him the secrets of the kingdom, i.e. the truths about its near approach, the qualities which befitted those who should enter into it, and the separation between bad and good which would be made at its coming, were to be teachers of others. In this respect they would be as stewards, bringing out of the stores of their newly acquired knowledge, truths new and old, as was necessary to the requirements of those who wished to learn from them. (9) Various incidents, 13:53-15:20, borrowed from Mk. (E) 53. And it came to pass, when Jesus finished these parables.] For this formula, see Introduction, p. lxiv. 54. The editor left Mk at 4:34. Having already inserted 4:35, 5:48, he comes to 6:1-6a which he now borrows. (E) He departed thence, and came into His native town, and was teaching in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these miracles?] Mk. has: “ And He went forth thence, and cometh into His native town; and His disciples follow Him. And when the Sabbath came, He began to teach in the synagogue. And the multitude hearing were astonished, saying, Whence hath this man these things? And what is this wisdom which is given to Him, and the miracles such as happen through His hands? μετῆρενἐκεῖθεν ] μετῆρεν occurs again in 19:1 for Mk.’ s ἔρχεται , here for Mk.’ s ἐξῆλθεν . ἐκεῖθεν in Mk. refers to the house of Jairus; here, to the house of Mat 13:36.— εἰςτὴνπατρίδααὐτοῦ ] in Mk. apparently means Nazara, cf. Mark 1:9, and so, no doubt, in Matthew 2:23.— ἐλθών ] Mt. as usual avoids Mk.’ s hist. pres. ἔρχεται , and omits καὶἀκολουθοῦσινοἱμαθηταὶαὐτοῦ as unnecessary, since the disciples are not mentioned in the incident that follows, and καὶγενομένουσαββάτου as unnecessary, since no further reference is made to the sabbath.— ἐδίδασκεν ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s ἤρξατο , as often.— πόθεντούτῳἡσοφίααὕτη ] Mt., as often, dovetails together two clauses of Mk., see Introduction, p. xxiv; but in this case compensates by repeating the phrase in the next verse but one in a slightly different form, πόθενοὖντούτῳταῦταπάντα .— καὶαἱδυνάμεις ] Mt. omits Mk.’ s τοιαῦταιδιὰτῶνχειρῶναὐτοῦγενόμεναι as otiose. (M) 55. Is not this the Son of the carpenter? Is not His mother called Mary? and His brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and, Judas?] Mk. has: “ Is not this the Carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, and Joses, and Judas, and Simon?” Mt. has substituted “ the Son of the carpenter” for “ the Carpenter,” from a feeling that the latter was hardly a phrase of due reverence. Mk.’ s striking phrase “ the Carpenter” is occasionally echoed in later writers; cf. Celsus ap. Origen, vi. 34: ἦντέκτωντὴντέχνην . Origen, vi. 36, denies that Jesus was called τέκτων anywhere in the Gospels; Just Tryph. 88: τὰτεκτονικὰἔργαἠργάζετοἐνἀνθρώποιςὤν , ἄροτρακαὶζυγά ; Acts of Judas Thomas, ed. Wright, p. 159: “ I know how to make ploughs and yokes.” This substitution explains why he has felt it necessary to change Mk.’ s ὁυἱὸςτῆςΜαρίας . He might, of course, have simply substituted ΚαὶΜαρίας ; but it is questionable whether, whilst feeling no objection to “ Son of Joseph” or “ Son of the carpenter,” he would not have shrunk from “ Son of Joseph (or the carpenter) and of Mary.” To the editor, Jesus was legally the Son of Joseph and physically the Son of Mary. He would probably avoid a phrase which seemed to describe Him as Son of Joseph in the same sense that He was Son of Mary. He therefore substitutes for ὁυἱὸςτῆςΜαριάς a paraphrase, οὐχἡμήτηραὐτοῦλέγεταιΜαριάμ ; and this carries with it the change of καὶἀδελφὸςἸακώβου , κ .τ .λ ., into καὶοἱἀδελφοὶαὐτοῦἸάκωβος , κ .τ .λ . Since parentage in Palestine was always reckoned (and expressed) from the father, it may be argued with much probability that Mk.’ s ὁυἱὸςτῆςΜαρίας implies either the death of Joseph, or, more naturally, an allusion to the supernatural circumstances of the birth of Jesus. The verse is entirely misquoted when it is used as an argument that S. Mark himself believed Jesus to be the natural Son of Joseph and Mary. He may have so believed, but no proof of such belief can be found in this passage. Ἰωσήφ ] Mt. substitutes the old Hebrew name for Mk.’ s Ἰωσῆς . The latter represents the Galilean י ו ס י ; cf. Dalm. Gram.2 175. (M) 56. And His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence, there fore, hath this man all these things?] Mk. has: “ And are not His sisters here with us?” — πόθενοὖντούτῳταῦταπάντα ] the words are an expansion of the clause omitted from Mar_2. See note on v. 54.— πρὸςἡμᾶς ] for Mk.’ s ὧδεπρὸςἡμᾶς , see Introduction, p. xxiv. For εἶναιπρός , see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2363a. 2364.— πρός ] implies the familiarity of daily intercourse. (M) 57. And they were made to stumble in Him. But Jesus said to them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his native town, and in his house.] Mk. has: “ And they were made to stumble in Him. And Jesus said to them that a prophet is not without honour, save in his native town, and amongst his kindred, and in his house.” For σκανδαλίζεσθαι , see on 5:29.— ὁδέ ] as often for Mk.’ s Καί , see Introduction, p. xx.— εἶπεν ] as often for Mk.’ s ἔλεγεν . Mt. often omits Mk.’ s ὅτι ; cf. Introduction, p. xx.— οὐκἔστινπροφήτης , κ .τ .λ .] cf. the similar sayings, Luke 4:24, John 4:44; and Sayings of Jesus, No. 6: οὐκἔστινδεκτὸςπροφήτηςἐντῇπατρίδιαὐτοῦ . Mt. omits καὶἐντοῖςσυγγενεῦσιναὐτοῦ , as implied in the next clause; see Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 58. And He did not do there many miracles because of their unbelief.] Mk. has: “ And He could not do there any miracle, save that He laid His hands on a few sick folk, and healed them. And He marvelled because of their unbelief.” For the omission of ἐδύνατο and of ἐθαύμασεν , see Introduction, p. xxxi. 55. τέκτονος ] S2 a b ff2 g1 h add “ of Joseph” ; S1 has “ of Joseph” only. The true reading in Mk. seems to be ὁτέκτωνὁυἱὸςτῆςΜαρίας ; so א B D Δ . Mt. has changed from the motives above explained. The variants in Mk. are due to assimilation to Mt. Mt. has no objection to the phrase “ Son of Joseph,” but might not unnaturally wish to avoid “ the carpenter.” The editor now comes to Mark 6:6-13. This he has already inserted (9:35ff.). So he passes to Mark 6:14-29. From this point in his Gospel the grouping of material taken from Mk. and elsewhere under subject-heads ceases to be observable. Henceforth he follows Mk.’ s order, expanding it and adding to it other material. M the Second Gospel. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. E editorial passages. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. Targ. Targum. LXX. The Septuagint Version. S Syriac version: Curetonian. L the Matthæ an Logia. X passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Th. Theodotion. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Dalm. Dalman. Eus. Eusebius. 14:1 At that time Herod the tetrarch heard the report concerning Jesus.] Mk. has: “ And the king, Herod, heard; for His name became notorious.” In Mk. the reference in φανερὸνγὰρἐγένετοτὸὄνομααὐτοῦ seems to be to the mission of the Twelve which Mk. has just recorded: “ They went out and preached, and cast out many demons,” etc. “ And Herod heard; for His name became notorious.” Mt., by altering the order, has separated this incident of Herod from the charge to the Twelve, and, moreover, had omitted altogether the express statement that they went forth on their mission. He therefore introduces the section with a loose formula, ἐνἐκείνῳτῷκαιρῷ ; cf. 11:25, 12:1. For βασιλεύς he substitutes the more precisely accurate τετραάρχης , which Lk. also has, and omits the surmises of the people. For ἀκοή , cf. 4:24. (M) 2. And he said to his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore the powers are active in him.] Mk. has: “ And he said (ἔλεγεν , א A C 1) that John the Baptizer has risen from the dead, and therefore the powers are active in him. But others were saying that it is Elijah. And others were saying that he is a prophet as one of the prophets. But Herod heard, and said, John whom I beheaded, he is risen.” Mt. seems to have had ἔλεγεν in 14.— βαπτιστής ] for βαπτίζων , cf. the same change in 3:1. Mt. abbreviates Mk.’ s double statement of Herod’ s opinion and the surmises of other people.— αἱδυνάμεις ] elsewhere in this Gospel means “ miraculous actions.” Here, as in Mar_14, it seems to denote the supernatural powers who operated through the risen Baptist. (M) 3. For Herod seized John, and bound him, and threw him into prison on account of Herodias, the wife of Philip his brother.] Mk. has: “ For he, Herod, had sent and seized John, and bound him in prison on account of Herodias, the wife of Philip his brother. Because he had married her.” — ἔδησεν ] The aorists throughout the section are borrowed from Mk. They are practically equivalent to the English pluperfect.— ἐνφυλακῇ ] i.e. Machæ rus, Josephus, Ant. xviii. 119.— Φιλίππου ] not the tetrarch, but a son of Herod the Great and Mariamne. Josephus, Ant. xviii. 136, calls him “ Herod.” (M) 4. For John said to him, It is not lawful for thee to have her.]— αὐτῷ ] Mk. has: τῷἩρῴδῃ . Mt. as often omits Mk.’ s ὅτι .— αὐτήν ] Mk. has: τὴνγυναῖκατοῦἀδελφοῦσου . For Mt.’ s avoidance of Mk.’ s iteration of a phrase, see on 4:18, and Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 5. And wishing to kill him, he feared the multitude, because they held him as a prophet.] Mk. has a different account: “ And Herodias set herself against him, and wished to kill him, and could not. For Herod was fearing John, knowing him to be a man just and holy. And he was keeping him in prison; and having heard him, he was much perplexed, and was hearing him gladly.” Mt., in summarising Mk., seems to be influenced by another form of the story. (M) 6. And on the birthday of Herod, the daughter of Herodias danced in the midst, and pleased Herod.] Mt. summarises Mk vv. 21 and 22.— γενεσίοιςδὲγενομένοις ] For the dative, cf. Blass, p. 120, n. 3. The dative seems to be due to a fusion of Mk.’ s τοῖςγενεσίοις with his preceding γενομένηςἡμέρας . γενέσια is used in the later Greek as equivalent to γενέθλια , a birthday; cf. Fayû m Towns, 11420, 1158, 11930. (M) 7. Whence with an oath he promised to give to her whatever she should ask.] Mt. summarises Mark 23-24. For ὃἐάν , see on 11:29.— αἰτήσηται ] Mk. has αἰτήσῃς and αἴτησον , but ᾐτήσατο in v. 25. For the middle as the stronger word, see Moulton, p. 160. For the juxtaposition of both voices, see Mark 10:35, Mark 10:38. (M) 8. And she, being put forward by her mother, Give me, she says, here upon a dish the head of John the Baptist.] Mt. summarises Mark 24-25. In abbreviating, he shortens the narrative so far as to make it almost unintelligible. The reader must suppose that Herodias and Herod were living together, which Mk. has stated in v. 17 ὅτιαὐτὴνἐγάμησεν , from the fact that the daughter of Herodias danced before Herod. He has also to infer that this took place at a public festivity from τοὺςσυνανακειμένους of the next verse. (M) 9. And being grieved, the king, because of his oaths, and because of those who sat with him, commanded (it) to be given.] Mk.’ s βασιλεύς creeps in here, in spite of τετραάρχης in v. 1. The συνανακειμένους is a hint that Mt. has omitted much that precedes in Mk. The editor summarises Mk vv. 26, 27. (M) 10. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.] (M) 11. And his head was brought upon a dish, and given to the girl, and she brought it to her mother.] For the passives, see on 4:1, and Introduction, p. xxiii. (M) 12. And his disciples came, and took up the corpse, and buried him.] Mk. has: “ And His disciples heard it, and came and took up his corpse and placed it in a sepulchre.” For προσέρχεσθαι as characteristic of Mt., see on 4:3. (M) And came and brought word to Jesus.] Mk. has: “ And the Apostles gather together to Jesus, and brought Him word, all things that they had done, and that they had taught. And He saith to them, Come ye yourselves privately into a desert place, and rest a little: for those who were coming and going were many, and they had no opportunity to eat.” In Mk. the execution of John is introduced parenthetically. The disciples go forth on their mission, 6:12. (As a result) Herod hears of the fame of Christ. He expresses his belief that John has risen. This gives occasion to the Evangelist to introduce the story of John’ s execution. In Mt. the sequence of events is distorted. He has omitted the statement of the Apostolic Mission, and is obliged to introduce Herod’ s belief that Jesus was the risen John, with a vague reference of time: “ At that time.” But since he must have been aware that the story of John’ s execution is introduced parenthetically to explain the superstition of Herod, it is very surprising to find him treating it as though it were recorded here in its proper chronological sequence: “ His disciples came— and buried him, and came and told Jesus. And Jesus having heard, departed.” That is to say, the Evangelist treats John’ s execution as though it happened historically before the events of Mar 6:30-44, and actually alters Mk vv. 30-31 to suit this artificial sequence. The reason for this goes back to ch. 10. The editor has there constructed a charge to the disciples which is quite unsuitable for the temporary Galilean missionary expedition described by Mk. He therefore omits the short description of this mission given by Mk. (6:12, 13). When, therefore, he comes to the statement of Mk. that the Apostles returned to Christ and brought news of their doings on this mission, the editor is compelled to omit this also. He therefore summarises Mark 30-31 into the sentence: “ And coming, they reported to Jesus” ; but has done so in words which it is impossible to avoid connecting with the preceding: “ And his disciples came — and buried him.” That he intended this is shown by his insertion of: “ And Jesus having heard,” and by his change of Mk.’ s ἀπῆλθον into ἀνεχώρησεν . In Mk. the subject of ἀπῆλθον is Christ and the returned Apostles. But in Mt. the comers are John’ s disciples. Since they would improbably have accompanied Christ, the editor is obliged to alter the verb into the singular. This treatment of Mk.’ s narrative is not more artificial than the editor’ s rearrangement of Mk. in 8:1-9:34, but is less justifiable, because even though Mk vv. 30-31 had to be omitted in pursuance of previous changes, it was not necessary to supply another motive for Christ’ s retirement into the desert. (M) 13. And Jesus heard it, and withdrew thence in a boat to a desert place privately; and the multitudes heard it, and followed Him on foot from the cities.— ἀνεχώρησενἐκεῖθεν ] both favourite words of Mt.; see on 2:12 and 4:21. The last place mentioned was Nazareth, 13:54.— καὶἀκούσαντες , κ .τ .λ .] Mk. has: “ And many saw them going, and recognised (them), and ran together there on foot from all the cities, and went before them.” Mt. summarises. (M) 14. And going forth, He saw a great multitude, and had compassion on them, and healed their sick.] Mk. has: “ And going forth, He saw a great multitude, and had compassion on them, because they were as sheep not having a shepherd: and He began to teach them much.” — ἐξελθών ] in Mk. almost certainly means “ having disembarked.” That is to say, the multitude reached the landing-place before the boat. This is probably the meaning also in Mt. For σπλαγχνίζεσθαι , see on 9:36. Mt. has already inserted the analogy of the sheep in 9:36.— ἐθεράπευσεν ] Mt. substitutes healing for teaching in 19:2 and 21:14 = Mark 10:1, Mark 10:11:17, Mark 10:18. (M) 15. And when it was evening, the disciples came to Him, saying, The place is desolate, and the hour is already a late one; send away the multitudes, that they may go away into the villages, and buy food for themselves.] Mk. has: “ And already, it being a late hour , His disciples came to Him, and were saying that, The place is desolate, and already it is a late hour . Send them away, that they may go away into the neighbouring hamlets and villages, and buy something for themselves to eat.” — ὀψίαςδὲγενομένης ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s iterated ὥραπολλή .— προσῆλθαν ] on the aor. in a, see Blass, p. 45.— λέγοντες ] Mt. as usual omits Mk.’ s ὅτι .— παρῆλθεν ] For παρέρχεσθαι of time, cf. 1 P 4:3. The meaning here seems to be, “ the hour (for the customary meal) is already passed.” — τοὺςὄχλους ] The editor, who in v. 14 copied Mk.’ s ὄχλον , slips back here into his customary plural. For the omission of Mk.’ s ἀγρούς , see on 8:33. (M) 16. And Jesus said to them, They need not go away; give ye to them to eat.] (M) 17. And they say to Him, We have not here save five loaves, and two fishes.] (M) 18. And He said, Bring them hither to Me.] Mk. has: “ And He answered and said to them, Give ye to them to eat. And they say to Him, Are we to go away and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat? And He saith to them, How many loaves have ye? go, see. And having ascertained, they say, Five, and two fishes.” Mt. summarises.— οὐκἔχομεν ] The editor avoids the half-sarcastic question of the disciples.— οἱδέ ] for Mk.’ s καί , as often. Mt. also avoids the question in the mouth of the Lord; see on 8:29, 16:9-10, 17:11, 14, 17, 18:1, 19:7, 26:18 and Introduction, p. xxxii. (M) 19. And He commanded the multitudes to sit down upon the grass.] Mt. summarises Mark 39. And took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looked up into heaven, and blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples the loaves, and the disciples to the multitudes.] The editor slightly alters Mk.— ἔδωκεν ] For Mk.’ s ἐδίδου , see Introduction, p. xx.— ἐπὶτοῦχόρτου ] see Introduction, p. xxviii. (M) 20. And they all ate, and were filled; and they took up the remain der of the fragments twelve baskets full.] For χορτάζειν , see on 5:6. τὸπερισσεῦοντῶνκλασμάτωνδώδεκακοφίνουςπλήρεις ] for Mk.’ s harsher κλάσματαδώδεκακοφίνωνπληρώματα . Mk. adds καὶἀπὸτῶνἰχθύων . (M) 21. And they who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.]— οἱδέ ] as often for Mk.’ s καί . The editor adds χωρὶςγυναικῶνκαὶπαιδίων ; cf. the similar insertion in 15:38. 12-21. There are a few verbal agreements between Mt. and Lk. as against Mk.; e.g.: Mat_13 ἀνεχώρησεν = Luk_10 ὑπεχώρησεν ; Mat_13 οἱὄχλοιἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ = Luk_11 οἱδὲὄχλοι — ἠκολούθησαναὐτῷ ; Mat_14 ἐθεράπευσεν = Luk_11 θεραπείαςἰᾶτο ; Mat_15 τοὺςὄχλους = Luk_12 τὸνὄχλον ; Mat_17, Luk_18 οἱδέ for Mk.’ s καί ; Mat_17 οὐκἔχομεν = Luk_13 οὐκεἰσὶνἡμῖν ; Mat_15 βρώματα = Luk_13 βρώματα ; Mat_21 τὸπερισσεῦον = Luk_17 τὸπερισσεῦσαν . Both omit Mk v. 31. And both avoid the questions in Mark 37, 38. It is not, however, probable that they had a second source besides Mk. See Introduction, p. xxxix. (M) 22. And straightway He compelled the disciples to embark into a boat, and to go before Him to the other side, until He had sent away the multitudes.] Mk. has τὸπλοῖον , and after πέραν adds πρὸςΒηθσαιδάν , and then has ἕωςαὐτὸςἀπολύειτὸνὄχλον . The occurrence of Bethsaida gives rise to difficulties, because if the miracle took place on the north-eastern shore of the lake, Bethsaida (see on 11:21) lay close at hand, and would hardly be called on the other side. Moreover, as a matter of fact, nothing is said of an arrival at Bethsaida, but of a disembarkation at Gennesareth, Mark 53. Of course, Mk. may have meant that they proposed to cross obliquely the north-east corner of the lake towards Bethsaida. They may have arrived at this place and embarked again, or may have been driven away from Bethsaida to the western side of the lake. In either case the mention of Bethsaida in Mark 45 seemed to Mt. unnecessary, as finding no further mention in the narrative.— τοὺςὄχλους ] as usual for Mk.’ s τὸνὄχλον . (M) 23. And having sent away the multitudes, He went up into the mountain privately to pray.]— ἀπολύσαςτοὺςὄχλους ] Mk. has the ambiguous ἀποταξάμενοςαὐτοῖς , ἀπῆλθεν for ἀνέβη , and omits κατ ʼ ἰδίαν . (M) 23, 24. And when it was evening He was there alone, and the boat was already in the midst of the lake.] Mk. has: “ And when it was evening the boat was in the midst of the lake, and He Himself was alone upon the land.” Tossed by the waves, for the wind was contrary.] Mk. has: “ And seeing them tossed in their rowing; for the wind was contrary to them.” — ὀψίαςδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶὀψίας , see Introduction, p. xx.— βασανίζειν ] has occurred in 8:6 of a patient suffering from paralysis, in 8:29 = Mark 5:7 of the demons. Here Mk. uses it of the rowers exhausted by their efforts. Mt. transfers it to the boat buffeted by the waves.— μέσοντῆςθαλάσσηςἦν ] So א C F latt. D has ἦνεἰςμέσοντῆςθαλάσσης . B 13 124 238 346 S1 2 have σταδίουςπολλοὺςἀπὸτῆςγῆςἀπεῖχε . (M) 25. And at the fourth watch of the night He came to them, walking over the sea.] Mk. has: “ About the fourth watch of the night He cometh to them, walking on the sea , and wished to pass by them.” ἦλθεν for Mk.’ s historic present ἔρχεται , as often. For the omission of Mk.’ s last clause, see Introduction, p. xxxi. Mt. has ἐπὶτὴνθάλασσαν for Mk.’ s ἐπὶτῆςθαλάσσης . Cf. 13:2 ἐπὶτὸ́αἰγιαλόν for Mk.’ s ἐπὶτῆςγῆς ; 15:35 ἀναπεσεῖνἐπὶτὴνγῆν for Mk.’ s ἐπὶτῆςγῆς ; and Introduction, p. xxix. (M) 26. And the disciples seeing Him walking on the sea, were troubled, saying that it is a phantasm; and they cried out from fear.] Mk. has: “ And seeing Him walking on the sea, they thought that it is a phantasm; and they cried out . For all saw Him and were troubled.” Mt. slips here into Mk.’ s genitive, ἐπὶτῆςθαλάσσης . See Gould on Mark 6:48. (M) 27. And straightway Jesus spake to them, saying, Be of good cheer; it is I; be not afraid.] Mk. has: ἐλάλησενμετ ʼ αὐτῶνκαὶλέγειαὐτοῖς . Mt. alters, as often, into ἐλάλησεν — λέγων . Cf. on 8:3. 28-31. The editor here inserts four verses from tradition: And Peter answered Him and said, Lord, if it be Thou, bid me come to Thee over the waters. And He said, Come. And Peter descended from the boat, and walked over the waters to come to Jesus. And seeing the wind to be strong, he feared; and, beginning to be immersed, he cried, saying, Lord, save me. And immediately Jesus stretched out His hand, and took hold of him, and saith to him, O thou of little faith, Why didst thou doubt?]— τὸνἄνεμον ] B2 C D al S1 S2 latt add ἰσχυρόν ; omit א — καταποντίζεσθαι ] occurs again in 18:6.— διστάζειν ] occurs again in 28:17.— ὀλιγόπιστε ] See on 6:30. Here the object of πίστις seems to be not so much the providence of God as the power of Christ and His good will. (M) 32. And when they had gone up into the boat, the wind ceased.] Mk. has: “ And He went up to them into the boat. And the wind ceased.” (M) 33. And they in the boat worshipped Him, saying, Truly, Thou art God’ s Son.] Mk. has: “ And they marvelled exceedingly in themselves. For they understood not about the loaves; but their heart was hardened.” For the omission of this statement, see Introduction, p. xxxiii. For προσκυνεῖν as characteristic of Mt., see on 2:2. (M) 34. And having crossed over, they came to the land into Gennesaret.] Mk. has: “ And having crossed over to the land, they came into Gennesaret; and came to moorings.” — Γεννησαρέτ ] called in 1 Mac 11:67, in Josephus, and in the Talmud Gennesar. For a description of the plain, see G. Adam Smith’ s Hist. Geog. 443, n. 1. (M) 35. And the men of that place recognised Him, and sent into all the surrounding district, and brought to Him all who were in evil plight.] Mk. has: “ And when they had gone forth from the boat, straightway recognising Him, they ran about all that country and began to bring on beds those who were in evil plight, where they were hearing that He is. And wheresoever He entered into villages, or into cities, or into hamlets, they placed the infirm in the market-places.” Mt. summarises, and gives the impression that he understood Gennesaret to be not, as in Mk., a district, but a town. For Mk.’ s ἀγρούς , see on 8:33. For Mt.’ s πάντας , cf. 4:24, 8:16, 12:15. (M) 36. And were beseeching Him that they might only touch the tassel of His garment; and as many as touched were completely cured.]— ἵναμόνον ] Mk. has ἴνακἄν . For a similar change, see 9:21. For κρασπέδου , see on 9:20.— διεσώθησαν ] Mk. has ἐσώζοντο . Mt.’ s is a stronger word, “ were thoroughly, completely cured.” the Second Gospel. the Matthæ an Logia. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. ἕωςοὗ for Mk.’ s ἕως . See on 26:36. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Palestinian traditions. Babylonian Talmud. 15:1. Then there come to Jesus from Jerusalem Pharisees and scribes, saying.] Mk. has: “ And there gather together to Him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, who had come from Jerusalem.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— προσέρχονται ] see on 4:3. 2. The editor here omits Mk.’ s long archæ ological note, vv. 2-4. (M) Why do Thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they wash not their hands when they are eating bread.] Mk. has: “ Why do Thy disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with common hands.” — παραβαίνουσι ] for Mk.’ s more technical οὐπεριπατοῦσινκατά .— οὐγὰρνίπτονται , κ .τ .λ .] Mk. has: ἀλλὰκοιναῖςχερσὶνἐσθίουσιντὸνἄρτον . Mt. avoids Mk.’ s technical κοιναῖςχερσίν . (M) 3. And He answered and said to them.] Mk. has simply: “ And He said to them.” In what follows Mt. has altered the sequence of the verses in Mk. in such a way that he makes a double antithesis: “ Why do Thy disciples transgress?” v. 2; “ Why do ye transgress?” v. 3; “ God said,” v. 4; “ But you say,” v. 5; and makes the speech work up towards the rhetorical climax: “ Ye hypocrites,” etc. Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?] Mk. has: “ Well do you annul the commandment of God that you may keep your tradition.” Mt. turns the ironical statement into a question to form an antithesis with v. 2, assimilating ἀθετεῖτε to παραβαίνετε to make the antithesis more pointed. (M) 4. For God said, Honour the father and the mother; and, He who curseth father or mother, let him surely die.] Mk. has: “ For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, he who curseth father or mother, let him surely die.” — θεός ] substituted for Μωυσῆς to heighten the antithesis.— τίματὸνπατέρακαὶτὴνμητέρα ] Mk. has σου twice. So in Deuteronomy 5:16. In Exodus 20:12, only after πατέρα .— ὁκακολογῶν , κ .τ .λ .] from Exodus 21:17 LXX. has αὐτοῦ twice and τελευτήσειθανάτῳ , but A F Luc θανάτῳτελευτάτω . For ἤ the Heb. has “ and.” (M) 5. But you say, Whosoever shall say to the father or the mother, A gift (is) anything wherewith thou mightest be profited by me, shall not honour his father.] Mk. has: “ But you say, If a man say to father or mother, Korban (that is, A Gift) is anything wherewith thou mightest be profited by me— you no longer allow him to do ought for father or mother.” Mt. avoids Mk.’ s technical term Κορβάν , and endeavours to emend Mk.’ s harsh construction. The custom which the Lord was reproving was this, that the scribes allowed a man by a formula to dedicate all his property to the Temple, and so escape the duty of supporting his parents. A legal formula thus became more sacred than the divine command expressed in Scripture. In Mt. this is described thus: “ Moses said, Honour thy father, etc. But you say, A man need not honour.” In Mk., however, the construction is very harsh. To complete the sentence we must supply after ὠφεληθῇς some such words as “ he is absolved from honouring his parents.” But we should expect “ and” before οὐκέτι . The fact is that the sentence consists of two unassimilated constructions: (1) You say, If a man says, etc. (he need not honour). (2) You no longer allow a man to do ought for his father or mother if he says, etc. Mt. has endeavoured to correct this harshness by converting οὐκέτιἀφίετεαὐτὸν , κ .τ .λ . into the required clause giving the contents of λέγετε . “ You say, If a man say, etc., he shall not honour.” Clearly, however, this is not original. “ He shall not honour” is the result attributed by Christ to the scribal teaching, not the literal expression of that teaching. It is only explicable as a literary attempt to ease Mk.’ s harsh Greek. On οὐμή , see Moulton, p. 190. (M) 6. And you made void the word of God because of your tradition.] Mk. has: “ Making void the word of God by your tradition which you delivered; and many such similar things you do.” For Mt.’ s omission of the redundant ᾗπαρεδώκατε , see on 8:16. For ἀκυροῦν , which occurs here and in Galatians 3:17, the lexx. cite 2. 72. Add Syll. 329. 30. (M) 7. Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy concerning you, saying.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, Well did Isaiah prophesy concerning you hypocrites, as it stands written that.” (M) 8. This people honours Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.] (M) 9. And in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines ordinances of men.] The quotation is given in the words of Mk. = LXX. , which differ only slightly from the LXX. of Isaiah 29:13. The LXX. has: ἐντοῖςχείλεσιναὐτῶντιμῶσίνμε , and ἐντάλματαἀνθρώπωνκαὶδιδασκαλίας . 2. τὴνπαράδοσιν ] 1 2 have “ the commandments,” assimilating to v. 3 τὴνἐντολὴντοῦθεοῦ . 5. πατέρααὐτοῦ ] add ἢτὴνμητέρααὐτοῦ , C . om. א B D S1 S2. 6. τὸνλόγον ] א c a B D a b ff1 2 S1 S2; τὸννόμον , א * et c b C; τὴνἐντολήν , E F al. 8. The quotation is completed by the addition of the words ἐγγίζειμοι at the beginning, and of τῷστόματιαὐτοῦκαί after οὗτος by C E al. (M) 10. And having called the multitude, He said to them, Hear and understand.]— προσκαλεσάμενος ] Mk. adds πάλιν . For Mt.’ s omission, see Introduction, p. xx.— εἶπεν ] for Mk.’ s ἔλεγεν , as often.— ἀκούετε ] Mk. has ἀκούσατεμουπάντες .— τὸνὄχλον ] Mt. retains Mk.’ s sing. here and in vv. 31, 32, 33, 35. See Introduction, p. lxxxvi. (M) 11. Not that which goes into the mouth defiles the man; but that which comes out from the mouth, this defiles the man.] Mk. has: “ There is nothing outside a man entering into him which can defile him. But the things which proceed from the man are those which defile the man.” The ambiguity of Mk. is clearly original. It is this ambiguity which called for explanation. Mt., by substituting the explanatory ἐκτοῦστόματος for ἐκτοῦἀνθρώπου , makes all that follows tautologous and redundant. 13, 14. The editor here inserts three verses from the Logia: (E) Then came the disciples, and said to Him, Dost Thou know that the Pharisees, when they heard the saying, were made to stumble? And He answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father did not plant, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if a blind man be leading a blind man, both will fall into a pit.] τότε ] see on 2:7.— προσελθόντες ] see on 4:3.— ἐσκανδαλίσθησαν ] see on 5:29. It is no wonder if the Pharisees were dismayed. For Christ’ s saying, that what went into a man did not defile him, directly contravened the Mosaic distinction between clean and unclean meats. πᾶσαφυτεία , cf. 3:10, 12. The Pharisees and scribes were barren trees about to be cut down, chaff about to be burned, plants about to be uprooted. It is said of the heretic Acher that he uprooted plants by his false teaching, Chag. 15a.— ὁδηγοίεἰσιντυφλοί ] Lk. has a parallel in the Sermon, 6:39 μήτιδύναταιτυφλὸςτυφλὸνὁδηγεῖν ; οὐχὶἀμφότεροιεἰςβόθυνονἐμπεσοῦνται ; (M) 15. And Peter answered and said to Him, Declare to us the parable.] Mk. has: “ And when He entered into a house from the crowd His disciples were asking Him the parable.” For Mt.’ s omission of Mk.’ s vague and indeterminate reference to a house, cf. Mark 2:1, Mark 3:20, Mark 9:28, Mark 10:10 with the parallels in Matthew 9:1, Matthew 12:22, Matthew 15:21, Matthew 17:19, Matthew 19:8. For the prominence given to S. Peter in this Gospel, cf. 10:2, 14:28ff., 16:16ff.— τὴνπαραβολήν ] That is the saying of v. 11, which Mt. has already interpreted by inserting ἐκτοῦστόματος . (M) 16. And He said, Are you even yet without understanding? Mk. has: “ And, He saith to them, Are you also so without understanding?” — ὁδέ ] for Mk.’ s καί , as often.— εἶπεν ] for Mk.’ s λέγει , as often.— ἀκμήν ] only here in N.T. Mk. has οὕτως . (M) 17. Do you not understand that everything that goeth into the mouth passeth into the belly, and is cast out into the closet.] Mk. has: “ Do you not understand that everything that goeth into the man from outside cannot defile him, because it goeth not into the heart, but into the belly, and goeth forth into the closet, cleansing all meats.” The editor omits the last clause in Mk., which is difficult to construe, and of doubtful meaning.— ἀφεδρών ] is a rare word of doubtful meaning. It is generally understood as equivalent to ἀπόπατος . But Wellhausen argues that it means the “ intestine,” on the ground that this suits the context in Mk. “ The intestine (not the closet) cleanses meats by separating from them the unwholesome elements.” But Mt., who substitutes ἐκβάλλεται for ἐκπορεύεται and omits καθαρίζωνπάντατὰβρώματα , probably understood the word to mean “ closet.” (M) 18. But the things which go out from the mouth go forth from the heart, and they defile the man. ] Mk. has: “ And He was saying that that which goes forth from the man, that defiles the man.” Mt. again anticipates the explanation. Mk v. 20 simply repeats the ambiguous saying of v. 15b, and the explanation follows in v. 21. But Mt., by substituting ἐκτοῦστόματος for ἐκτοῦἀνθρώπου , and by inserting ἐκτῆςκαρδίαςἐξέρχεται , anticipates the explanation of the next verse. (M) 19. For out of the heart go forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witnesses, railings.] Mk. has: “ For from within from the heart of men evil thoughts go out, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, covetousnesses, maliciousnesses, craft, wantonness, an evil eye, railing, pride, folly.” Mt. in abbreviating Mk.’ s list of evils confines it to external actions. (M) 20. These are the things that defile the man. But to eat with unwashen hands does not defile the man.] Mk. has: “ All these evil things go out from within and defile the man.” Cf. Buddhist and Christian Gospels, p. 93: “ Destroying life, killing, cutting, binding, stealing, speaking lies, fraud and deceptions, worthless reading, intercourse with another’ s wife — this is defilement, but not the eating of flesh.” D.— 15:21-18:35 = Mark 7:24-50 Further ministry in and on the outskirts of Galilee. A period marked by Christ’ s teaching about His death and resurrection. The phrase ἐκεῖθενδὲἀναστάς in Mark 7:24 marks the beginning of a new period in that Gospel. Cf. ἐκεῖθενἀναστάς at the beginning of the next development, Mark 10:1. Christ had hitherto worked in or near Capharnaum amongst the multitudes who thronged to Him. He now enters upon a period of travel on the outskirts of Galilee. It is true that we read of Him at Capharnaum, but He no longer publicly taught there, Mark 9:30, Mark 9:33; and instead of preaching to the common people, He now devoted Himself to instructing His disciples on the subject of His death and resurrection, Mark 8:31, 9:Mark 8:10-12, Mark 8:31-32. In Mt. the long and purposeless journeys are curtailed, cf. 15:29 with Mark 7:31, and it might seem as though the editor intended to enter upon a new section of his Gospel at 16:21 ἀπὸτότε , κ .τ .λ ., cf. 4:17. But even in 4:17 this phrase does not stand at the very beginning of the section which it opens, 4:12-15:20, and it is convenient to retain in Mt. as in Mk. the grouping: Matthew 4:12-20 = Mark 1:14-23, work in or near Capernaum; Matthew 15:20-35=Mark 7:24-50, work outside Galilee marked by a new phase in Christ’ s teaching; Matthew 19:1-31=Mar_10, journey to Jerusalem; Matthew 21-28=Mark 11-16:8, last days of the Messiah’ s life. (M) 21. And Jesus went out thence and withdrew into the regions of Tyre and Sidon.] Mk. has: “ And having arisen thence, He departed into the boundaries of Tyre and Sidon.— ἐξελθών ] for Mk.’ s Semitic ἀναστάς .— ἀνεχώρησεν ] for Mk.’ s ἀπῆλθεν . See on 2:12. ἐκεῖθεν in Mk. refers to the house of v. 17. In Mt. it has no antecedent. Mk. adds here: “ And entering into a house, He wished no one to know it, and could not be hid.” For Mt.’ s omission of the house, see on 15:15. For the omission of the statement that Christ “ wished, but could not,” see Introduction, p. xxxi. (M) 22. And behold a Canaanite woman came out from those boundaries, and cried, saying, Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is grievously afflicted with a demon.] Mk. has: “ But straightway a woman having heard about Him, whose daughter had an unclean spirit, came and fell at His feet. And the woman was a Greek, a Syrophœ nician by race. And she was asking Him that He would cast the demon out of her daughter.” It can hardly be unintentional that Mt. omits the statement that Jesus entered into a house in this heathen territory, and represents the woman as coming out of those boundaries to Jesus; cf. 10:5. 23-25 are not in Mk. (E) And He answered not a word. And His disciples came and asked Him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. And He answered and said, I was not sent save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And she came and worshipped Him, saying, Lord, help me.]— ἠρώτων ] ἐρωτάω in the LXX and N.T. has the sense to “ beg,” “ beseech.” So in the Papyri, e.g. Fayû m Towns, cxxxii. 1; cf. Ditt. Syll.. 328. 5, 930. 56.— εἰςτὰπρόβατα , κ .τ .λ .] see on 10:6.— προσελθόντες ] see on 4:3.— προσεκύνει ] see on 2:2. (M) 26. And He answered and said, It is not good to take the children’ s bread, and to cast it to the dogs.] Mk. has: “ And He was saying to her, Let first the children be fed: for,” etc.— κυνάρια ] house-dogs. Mk. is fond of diminutives, which Mt. sometimes retains; but cf. v. 25 θυγάτριον , for which Mt. θυγάτηρ . (M) 27. And she said, Yea, Lord: for even the dogs eat from the crumbs which fall from the table of their masters.] Mk. has: “ And she answered and saith to Him, Yea, Lord; even the dogs underneath the table eat from the crumbs of the children.” — Ναί ] “ Yes, that is true.” — καὶγάρ ] “ It is neither good to give the children’ s food to the dogs, nor is it necessary; for they eat of the crumbs.” ψιχίων ] The word seems to occur here only.— κύριε ] occurs here only in Mk., in Mat_19 times, inLk. 16, in Jn. 38. (M) 28. Then Jesus answered and said to her, woman, great is thy faith: be it to thee as thou wilt. And her daughter was healed from that hour.]— τότε ] see on 2:7.— ἀπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης ] cf. Matthew 9:22, Matthew 8:13, Matthew 17:18. Mk. has: “ And He said to her, For this saying go, the demon has gone out of thy daughter. And she went away to her house, and found the child lying upon the bed, and the demon gone out.” For πίστις = assurance, confidence, trust in the healing power of Christ, see 8:10, 9:2, 22, 29. See Gould in loc. 21-28. The relation of this section to Mark 7:24-30 is not easy to determine. It is possible that the editor here is substituting for Mk.’ s narrative a second and longer account traditionally known to him. On the other hand, a good many of the features of Mt.’ s account remind us of characteristics of the editor of this Gospel. It is, e.g., quite natural that he should omit Mk v. 24b; see above. Further, the phraseology of the whole narrative is strongly marked by the editor’ s characteristic phrases; e.g. ἀναχωρεῖν , see on 2:12; καὶἰδού , see on 1:20; ἘλέησόνμεΚύριευἱὲΔαυείδ , cf. 9:27 ἐλέησονἡμᾶςυἱὲΔαυείδ , 17:15 Κύριεἐλέησόνμουτὸνυἰόν , 20:30 ΚύριεἐλέησονἡμᾶςυἱὲΔαυείδ ; προσέρχεσθαι , see on 4:3; προσκυνεῖν , see on 2:2; τότε , see on 2:7; μεγάλησουἡπίστιςγενηθήτωσοιὡςθέλεις , cf. 8:13 ὡςἐπίστευσαςγενηθλήτωσοι , 9:22 ἡπίστιςσουσέσωκένσε , 9:29 κατὰτὴνπίστινὑμῶνγενηθήτωὑμῖν ; καὶἰάθηἡθυγάτηραὐτῆςἀπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης , cf. 9:22 καὶἐσώθη — ἄπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης 8:13 καὶἰάθη — ἐντῇὥρᾳἐκείνῃ , 17:18 καὶἐθεραπεύθη — ἀπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης . It would seem, therefore, that the editor has rewritten Mk.’ s narrative with a view to explaining how it was that Christ, in spite of such sayings as 10:5, 6, should have extended His compassion to a heathen woman. He did not enter into a house on heathen soil. Rather the woman came out to Him. At first He paid no attention to, her entreaty, conscious that His mission concerned only the lost sheep of the house of Israel. When she still importuned Him, He told her that the children’ s bread, i.e. privileges intended for the Jews, should not be cast to dogs, i.e. to heathen women like herself. She, inspired by her misery, was quick to turn the analogy in her own favour. It was quite true, yet dogs fed from the crumbs of their master’ s table. Therefore mercy shown to her might be justified by the metaphor. Thus, as in the previous case of condescension to a heathen (8:5-13), faith forced the barrier of Christ’ s rule of working only amongst His own people. The chief obstacle to this view is the insertion of vv. 23-25. Why does the editor lengthen the dialogue. Partly perhaps to heighten the effect. Not at once, and only because of the woman’ s earnest importunity, did Christ condescend to her. And partly, to explain the ambiguity of Mk 27 “ Let first the children be fed.” There is no specific explanation given in Mk. of this “ children.” The reader is left, as the woman was, to apply it to the Jews as contrasted with the heathen (dogs). But Mt. by prefixing, “ I was not sent save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” gives a clue to the interpretation. The “ children” are the “ lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Cf. Mt.’ s interpretation, 15:11, of Mark 7:15. (M) 29. And Jesus removed thence, and came by the sea of Galilee; and He went up into the hill country, and sat down there.] Mk. has: “ And again He went out from the boundaries of Tyre, and passed through Sidon to the sea of Galilee, amidst the boundaries of Decapolis.” The geography of Mk. is difficult. He here describes a journey of considerable length from Tyre, through Sidon, to the east side of the lake of Galilee, without giving any further details about it, so that it seems quite purposeless. Wellhausen is probably right in supposing that the text of Mk. is corrupt, and that διὰΣιδῶνος covers some original statement about Bethsaida. This would considerably shorten the journey. The editor of Mt. has felt the needlessness of recording a long journey to the north without giving any details. He therefore brings Christ back at once to the lake. For μεταβὰςἐκεῖθεν as a connecting formula, cf. 11:1 μετέβηἐκεῖθεν , 12:9 μεταβὰςἐκεῖθεν . Mk. now describes the healing of a deaf man at an unknown place. A little later, 8:22-26, he records the healing of a blind man at Bethsaida. Mt. omits both miracles, probably intentionally, for it can hardly be accidental that they are both characterised by features which Mt. elsewhere avoids. In both the healing is performed in private, 7:33 ἀπολαβόμενοςαὐτὸνἀπὸτοῦὄχλουκατ ʼ ἰδίαν , 8:23 ἐπιλαβόμενος — ἐξήνεγκεναὐτὸνἔξωτῆςκώμης . In both physical contact and material means are employed, 7:33 ἔβαλεντοὺςδακτύλουςαὐτοῦεἰςτὰὦτααὐτοῦκαὶπτύσοςἥψατοτῆςγλώσσηςαὐτοῦ , 8:23 καὶπτύσαςεἰςτὰὄμματααὐτοῦἐπιθεὶςτὰςχεῖραςαὐτῷ . In the former we read that Christ sighed , and that the people disobeyed Christ’ s express command to keep silence. In the latter the recovery of sight is gradual, and Christ asks a question, εἴτιβλέπεις , as though He were not sure how far recovery was taking place. In the first Gospel we have “ touching” as an incident in healing, 8:3, 15, 9:29, 20:34, but never the use of spittle, and there is an opposite tendency to describe miracles as taking place at the simple word or command of Christ, 8:8 μόνονεἶπελόγῳ , 9:5, 8:16 ἐξέβαλετὰπνεύματαλὸγῳ . Mt. elsewhere omits such phrases as ἐστέναξεν , which seem to attribute emotion or effort to Christ; cf. the omission of σπλαγχνισθείς , Mark 1:43; ἐμβριμησάμενος , 1:45; περιβλεψάμενοςαὐτοῦςμετ ʼ ὀργῆςσυνλυπούμενος , 3:5; ἐξέστη , 3:21; ἐθαύμασεν , 6:6; ἀναστενάξαςτῷπνεύματι , 8:12; ἠγανάκτησεν , 10:14, and lays emphasis on the immediacy of Christ’ s miraculous healings; cf. 8:13, 9:22, 17:18. He elsewhere omits statements that people disobeyed Christ’ s commands; cf. the omission of Mar 1:45, on which see on 8:4, and also statements to the effect that Christ asked questions as though He had not absolute knowledge. See notes on Matthew 8:29, Matthew 8:14:18, 16:Matthew 8:9-10, Matthew 8:17:11, Matthew 8:14, Matthew 8:17, Matthew 8:18:1, Matthew 8:19:7, Matthew 8:26:18 and Introduction, p. xxxi. It seems probable, therefore, that the editor intentionally passes over Mark 7:32-37. In lieu, he has substituted a general description of Christ’ s miracles of healing, vv. 30-31. (E) 30-31. And there came to Him many multitudes, having with them lame, blind, dumb, maimed, and many others, and they cast them by His feet, and He healed them: so that the multitudes marvelled, as they saw the dumb speaking, the maimed whole, the lame walking, and the blind seeing: and they glorified the God of Israel.]— προσῆλθον ] see on 4:3.— παρὰτοὺςπόδαςαὐτοῦ ] D S1 have ὑπό . τοὺςὄχλουςθαυμάσαι ] so B E al S1 S2. א C D U Δ curss have τὸνὄχλον . It is very improbable that Mt. in this non-Marcan passage would have the singular. See Introduction, p. lxxxvi. (M) 32. And Jesus called His disciples, and said, I have compassion on the multitude, because already three days they are present with Me, and have nothing to eat: and to send them away fasting I am not willing, lest they faint on the road.]— ὁδὲἸησοῦς ] Mk. has a longer introduction: “ In those days again there being a great multitude, and they not having anything to eat, having called the disciples, He saith to them,” etc.— εἶπεν ] as usual for λέγει .— σπλαγχίζεσθαι ] See on 9:36.— ὅτιἤδηἡμέραιτρεῖςπροσμένουσίμοι ] The same phrase occurs in Mk. For the nominative standing in a parenthesis interrupting the construction, see Blass, p. 85; Moulton, p. 70; and cf. Esther 4:11 οὐκέκλημαι — εἰσίναὗταιἡμέραιτριάκοντα . But the accusative would be so much more natural, that the nominative in Mt. and Mk. must be regarded as a proof of dependence of one Evangelist upon the other.— καὶἀπολῦσαι ] Mk. has: “ And if I send them away fasting to their homes, they will faint on the road: and some of them are from a distance.” The change of ἐὰνἀπολύσω into ἀπολῦσαι — οὐθέλω , like other alterations of Mk. by Mt., heightens the note of mastery and dignity of Christ’ s words. The idea of His sending away the people to faint on the way home was to be avoided. (M) 33. And the disciples say to Him, Whence have we in a wilderness loaves sufficient to feed so great a multitude?] Mk. has: “ And His disciples answered to Him that, Whence shall one be able to feed these with loaves here on a wilderness?” For the omission of Mk.’ s ὅτι , see Introduction, p. xx. ἐρημία and νῆστις occur only here in the Gospels. Both are rare words in Biblical Greek. For χορτάζειν , see on 5:6. ἐνἐρημίᾳ is easier than Mk.’ s ἐπ ʼ ἐρημίας . 34. And Jesus saith to them, How marry loaves have ye? And they said, Seven, and a few little fish.] Mk. has: “ And He asked them, How many loaves have ye? And they said, Seven. … And they had a few little fish.” The editor here retains the question in the mouth of the Lord. In 14:17 he avoided it. (M) 35. And He commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground.] Mk. has παραγγέλλει and ἐπὶτῆςγῆς . For Mt.’ s change of ἐπὶτῆςγῆς into ἐπὶτὴνγῆν , cf. 13:2; ἐπὶτὸναἰγιαλόν for Mk.’ s ἐπὶτῆςγῆς ; 14:25 περιπατῶνἐπὶθάλασσαν for Mk.’ s ἐπὶτῆςθαλάσσης ; cf. Introduction, p. xxviii. (M) 36. And took the seven loaves and the fishes, and having given thanks, He brake and was giving to the disciples, and the disciples to the multitudes.] Mk. has: “ And having taken the seven loaves, having given thanks, He brake, and was giving to His disciples that they might distribute; and they distributed to the multitude. And they had a few little fishes: and having blessed them, He commanded also to distribute these.” (M) 37. And all ate, and were filled: and of the remainder of the fragments they took up seven baskets full.] Mk. has: “ And they ate, and were filled: and they took up remainders of fragments seven baskets.” Mt. adds πάντες and πλήρεις , to assimilate to 14:20.— σφυρίδας ] For this spelling, see Bib. Stud. 158, 185. D has σφορίδας here and in Mark 8:20. In Mark 8:8 it is read by א A* D; in Matthew 16:10 by B D. (M) 38. And they that did eat were four thousand men, besides women and children.] Mk. has: “ And there were about four thousand.” Mt. adds χωρὶςγυναικῶνκαὶπαιδίων , to assimilate to 14:21. (M) 39. And He sent away the multitudes, and embarked into the boat, and came to the boundaries of Magadan.] Mk. has: “ And He sent them away; and straightway having embarked into the boat with His disciples, He came to the regions of Dalmanutha.” Mk.’ s Dalmanutha is certainly corrupt. The editor of Mt. has tried to emend by substituting Magadan. If Cheyne (EncycBib 1635) is right in suggesting that the real name of the place was Migdal-nunia, a suburb of Tiberias, Mt. has got from oral tradition or from some earlier copy of Mk. a form which is not very far from the original. 32-39. In these vv. Mt. has here and there assimilated the language to that of the feeding of the five thousand. Cf. 14:19 καὶτοὺς — ἰχθύας with 15:36. 19 οἱδὲμαθηταὶτοῖςὄχλοις with 15:36. 20 καὶἔφαγονπάντες with 15:37. 20 καὶἦραντὸπερισσεῦοντῶνκλασμάτωνδώδεκακοφίνουςπλήρεις with 15:37 καίτὸπερισσεῦοντῶνκλασμάτωνἦρανἑπτὰσφυρίδαςπλήρεις . 21 οἱδὲἐσθίοντεςἦσανἄνδρεςὡσεὶπεντακισχίλιοιχωρὶςγυναικῶνκαὶπαιδίων with 15:38 οἱδὲἐσθίοντεςἦσαντετρακισχίλιοιἄνδρεςχωρὶςγυναικῶνκαὶπαιδίων . 39. Μαγαδάν ] א B D; Magedon, S2; Magedan, S1; Magedan, latt; Μαγδαλά ; E F al. the Second Gospel. The Septuagint Version. Cf. Josephus, Against Apion, 1: τὸνκαλούμενονὅρκονκορβὰν — — δηλοἵδὲ — δῶρονθεοῦ . Dionysius Halicarnassus. Dittenberger Sylloge. Ox. Pap. iii. 491. 3 (a.d. 126), 494. 4 (a.d. 156), 495. 3 (a.d. 181-189). In these three cases it means “ to revoke” of a will. It occurs also in 1 Es 6:32, Esther 6:6 times in 4 Mac, and 6 times in Aquila. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Babylonian Talmud. The addition of the last clause in Mt. is significant. In Mk. the section vv. 14-23 might seem to be directed against the Mosaic regulations with regard to clean and unclean meats. Mt., by omitting Mark 19 end and by inserting the last clause, seems to have wished to make it clear that the whole paragraph was directed not against the Mosaic law, but against the ceremonial rules of the Pharisees. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Deissmann. 16:1. And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, tempting Him, and asked Him to show them a sign out of heaven.] Mk. has: “ And the Pharisees went out, and began to dispute with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, tempting Him.” For the request for a sign, see 12:38. ἐπερωτᾶν = to beseech, cf. on 15:23. The editor substitutes his favourite καὶπροσελθόντες for Mk.’ s ἐξῆλθον , of which the precise reference is obscure. Whence did they go out? 2. And He answered and said to them.] Mk. has: “ And having groaned in His spirit, He saith.” For the omission of ἀναστενάξαςτῷπνεύματιαὐτοῦ , see on 15:29. The editor here inserts two verses (but see critical note) which are not in Mk. ( ?) When it is evening, you say, (It will be) fair weather: for the heaven is red.] (E) 3. And in the morning (you say), To-day (will be) stormy: for the heaven is red and angry. The face of the heaven you know how to discern; but the sign of the times ye are unable.] For similar ideas differently worded, cf. Luke 12:54-56. (M) 4. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; and a sign shall not be given to it, save the sign of Jonah.] Mk. has: “ Why does this generation seek a sign? Verily I say to you, A sign shall not be given to this generation.” Mt. assimilates to 12:39. 4. And leaving them, He went away.] Mk. has: “ And leaving them, again having embarked, He went away to the other side.” Mt. transfers εἰςτὸπέραν to the next verse. 1-4. Mt. and Luke 11:16, Luke 11:29 agree against Mk. in the following:— σημεῖονἐκτοῦοὐρανοῦ , Mat_1 = σημεῖονἐξοὐρανοῦ , Luk_16. πονηρά , Mat_4, Luke 29. καὶσημεῖονοὐδοθήσεταιαὐτῇεἰμὴτὸσημεῖονἸωνᾶ , Mat_4, Luke 29. 2. Ὀψίαςγενομένης — οὐδύνασθε ] C D . Om. א B V 1 2. The clause can hardly be genuine here. It seems to be a gloss modelled on Luke 12:54-56.— στυγνάζων ] στυγνότης is used of the dulness of the sky in iv. 21. 1. στυγνάζειν occurs in the LXX = ש ׁ ָ מ ַ ם Ezekiel 27:35, Ezekiel 28:19 A, 32:10. πυρράζειν seems to occur only in Byzantine writers. πυρρίζειν occurs in the LXX, Leviticus 13:19, Leviticus 13:42, Leviticus 13:43, Leviticus 13:49, Leviticus 13:14:37, B2 R. (M) 5. And the disciples came to the other side, and forgot to take bread.] Mk. has: “ And they forgot to take bread, and had not with them in the boat save one loaf.” In Mk. the dialogue which follows presumably took place in the boat during the crossing of the lake. Mt. by inserting καὶἐλθόντεςοἱμαθηταί before εἰςτὸπέραν in Mk v. 13 seems to wish to make it clear that the subject of ἐπελάθοντο did not include Christ. The disciples forgot, not the Lord. His insertion has the further effect that the whole of what follows took place, not during the crossing, but when they had reached the other side. It is necessary, therefore, to omit Mark 14b. (M) 6. And Jesus said to them, Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.] Mk. has: “ And He was charging them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.” — προσέχετεἀπό ] see on 10:17. Luke 12:1 also has προσέχετε in this connection.— καὶΣαδδουκαίων ] Mk. has καὶτῆςζύμηςἨρῴδου . It is doubtful what Mk. intended his readers to understand by the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. Possibly the plots of the Pharisees and the Herodians to kill Christ, cf. Mark 3:6. Mt. has understood ζύμη to mean false teaching, and therefore substitutes Σαδδουκαίων for Ἡρῴδου . (M) 7. And they were reasoning in (or amongst) themselves, saying, (He says it) because we took no bread.] Mk. has: “ And they were reasoning with one another because they have no bread.” The disciples suppose that the Lord’ s warning against the leaven of the Pharisees had some reference to the fact that they were without sufficient provision, as though He were advising them to be on their guard against purchasing poisoned loaves.— οἱδέ ] for Mk.’ s καί , as often.— διελογίζοντοἐνἑαυτοῖς ] occurs again in 21:25. (M) 8. And Jesus, perceiving it, said, Why do you reason in (or amongst) yourselves, ye of little faith, because you have no bread?] Mk. has: “ And perceiving it, He saith to them, Why do you reason because you have no bread?” — γνοὺςδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶγνούς , as often.— εἶπεν ] for Mk.’ s λέγει , as often. Mk. omits ὁἸησοῦς and ἐνἑαυτοῖςὀλιγόπιστοι . ὀλιγόπιστοι is also inserted by Mt. in 8:26, where, as in the next verse, He is softening a rebuke administered to the disciples. It occurs also in 6:30, 14:31. Here πίστις seems to be trust, confidence, assurance in the power of Christ to provide food as He had done before. (M) 9, 10. Do you not understand nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?] The editor rewrites Mk vv. 17-20 in such a way as to avoid the questions in Christ’ s mouth (see notes on 8:28, 14:17, 15:29, 16:9-10, 17:11, 14, 17, 18:1, 19:7, 26:7, 8), and to soften the rebuke of the disciples; cf. 8:26, note. Mk. has: “ Do you not yet understand nor perceive? Have ye your heart hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? And having ears, hear ye not? And do ye not remember? When I brake the five loaves to the five thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? They say to Him, Twelve. When the seven to the four thousand, of how many baskets took ye up (their) fulness of fragments? And they say to Him, Seven.” Mt. three times omits references to the hardness of the hearts of the disciples; Mark 3:5, Mark 6:52, Mark 8:17. (M) 11. How do ye not understand?] Mk. has: “ And He was saying to them, Do ye not yet understand?” (E) The editor here adds the explanatory that not about bread I spake to you, but beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. (M) 12. Then understand they that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees]. This explanation, which is connected with the substitution of Σαδδουκαίων in v. 6 for Ἡρῴδου , has little to commend it. Whatever may originally have been meant by “ the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod,” it can hardly have been teaching. The connection of the Pharisees with Herod suggests rather that the leaven symbolised the hostility and enmity of the Pharisees and of Herod; cf. Mark 3:6. For a similar note in favour of the disciples, see 17:13. 12. τῆςζύμηςτῶνἄρτων ] Om. τῶνἄρτων , D S1 S2 a b ff2. This is probably right. S2 assimilates to the preceding verse by adding “ of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” א c B add τῶνἄρτων ; C E al τοῦἄρτου . 13. The editor here omits Mark 8:22-26. For this omission, see on 15:29. See also Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p. 93. (M) And Jesus having come into the districts of Cæ sarea Philippi, asked His disciples, saying, Whom say men that (I) Son of Man am?] Mk. has: “ And Jesus and His disciples went out into the villages of Cæ sarea Philippi, and on the road He asked His disciples, saying to them, Whom do men say that I am?” — ἐλθὼνδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶἐξῆλθεν , as often. Mt. substitutes τὸνυἱὸντοῦἀνθρώπου for Mk.’ s με to form an antithesis to v. 16 ὁυἱὸςτοῦθεοῦ . (M) 14. And they said, Some (say) John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.] Mk. has: “ And they spake to Him, saying that John the Baptist, and others Elijah, but others that one of the prophets.” Mt., as usual, omits Mk.’ s ὅτι , and corrects εἷς into ἕνα to harmonise with the other accusatives. The insertion of Jeremiah shows acquaintance with Jewish belief in the possibility of the appearance of the illustrious dead; cf. 2 Mac 15:13ff. where Onias and Jeremiah appear to Judas Maccabee; 2 Est 2:18: “ For thy help I will send My servants, Isaiah and Jeremiah.” For the expectation of Elijah, see on 11:14. Mt.’ s οἱμέν is intended to ease the Greek. For ἔτεροι in the third clause, see Blass, p. 179; p. 244. (M) 15. He saith to them, But you, whom say ye that I am?] Mk. has: “ And He asked them, But you, whom say ye that I am?” (M) 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.] Mk. has: “ Peter answered and saith to Him, Thou art the Christ.” Mt.’ s ὁυἱὸςτοῦθεοῦτοῦζώντος is explanatory. It has caused the substitution of τὸνυἱὸντοῦἀνθρώπου for με in v. 13 to form an antithesis. 13-16. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ἅλλοιδέ , Mat_14, Luk_19. Mk. has καὶἄλλοι . δέ — εἶπεν , Mat_16, Luk_20. Mk. has λέγει . ὁυἱὸςτοῦθεοῦζῶντος , Mat_16 = τοῦθεοῦ , Luk_20. 17-19. The editor here inserts three verses which are not in Mk. For the prominence given to S. Peter, cf. 10:2, 14:28-31, 15:15. (L) 17. And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal (it) to thee, but My Father who is in the heavens.]— Σίμων ] for the form, see on 4:18. βάρ is the Aramaic “ son,” and Ἰωνᾶ (cf. John 1:43) = י ו נ ה = Jouah י ו נ א as a shortened form of י ו ח נ ן = John, is not found elsewhere. See Gram. p. 179, Anm. 5.— σὰρξκαὶαἷμα ] ב ש ר ו ד ם is very common in the Talmud and Midrashim as an expression for humanity as contrasted with God; cf. Berakhoth 28b “ a king of flesh and blood,” contrasted with “ the King of kings, “ the fear of flesh and blood” contrasted with the “ fear of heaven.” — ὁπατήρμουὁἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς ] see on 5:16. (L) 18. And I also say to thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.] The πέτρα is equivalent to the object of ἀπεκάλυψε in v. 17 “ Flesh and blood did not reveal it,” i.e. the Messiahship and divine Sonship of Christ. “ Upon this rock of revealed truth I will build my Church.” The play upon Πέτρος and πέτρα means, “ You have given expression to a revealed truth, and your name Πέτρος suggests a metaphorical name for it. It shall be the πέτρα or rock upon which the Church shall stand. In other words, it shall be the central doctrine of the Church’ s teaching.” The idea that the divine Christ is the keystone of the new edifice of the Christian Church, finds expression elsewhere in the parallel metaphor of the corner-stone in 1 P 2:4-8, Ephesians 2:20.— ἐκκλησία ] As the Evangelist wrote the word, he, no doubt, had in mind the Christian society for which ἐκκλησία had long been a current title (Acts, S. Paul, Hebrews, S. James, S. John’ s Epp., and Rev.). There is no difficulty at all in supposing that Christ used some Aramaic phrase or word which would signify the community or society of His disciples, knit together by their belief in His divine Sonship, and pledged to the work of propagating His teaching. πύλαιᾅδου ] Against the Church the powers of evil shall not prevail. But just as the Church has been compared to a building, so, too, the powers of evil. These have their metropolis in the fortress of Hades. For Hades symbolised as a strong fort with barred gates, cf: Isaiah 38:10 “ the gates of Sheol” , Job 17:16 “ the bars of Sheol,” Job 38:17 “ the gates of death,” Psalms 9:18, Psalms 107:18, Wis 16:13, 3 Mac 5:51, 16:2. “ The gates of Hades shall not prevail against the Church” is a pictorial way of saying, “ The organised powers of evil shall not prevail against the organised society which represents My teaching.” (L) 19. I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound in the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in the heavens.] κλεῖς ] The figure of the gates of Hades suggests the metaphor of the keys. There were keys of Hades, Revelation 1:18; cf. 9:1, 20:1. The apocalyptic writer describes the risen Christ as having the keys of Hades, i.e. having power over it, power to enter it, and power to release from it, or to imprison in it. In the same way, “ the kingdom of the heavens” can be likened to a citadel with barred gates. He who held the keys would have power within it, power to admit, power to exclude. In Revelation 3:7 this power is held by Christ Himself: “ He that hath the key of David, that openeth and none shall shut, and that shutteth and none shall open.” The words are modelled on Isaiah 22:22, and express supreme authority. To hold the keys is to have absolute right, which can be contested by none. Just so in B. Sanh. 113a it is said that the keys of birth, of rain, and of the resurrection of the dead are in the hand of God, and are delegated to no one. It would, therefore, be not unexpected if we found the Messiah or Son of Man described as having the keys of the kingdom of the heavens. This would imply that He was supreme within it. But it is surprising to find this power delegated to S. Peter. We must, however, be careful not to identify the ἐκκλησία with the kingdom. There is nothing here to suggest such identification. The Church was to be built on the rock of the revealed truth that Jesus was the Messiah, the Divine Son. To S. Peter were to be given the keys of the kingdom. The kingdom is here, as elsewhere in this Gospel, the kingdom to be inaugurated when the Son of Man came upon the clouds of heaven. If S. Peter was to hold supreme authority within it, the other apostles were also to have places of rank: “ Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel,” 18:28: The ἐκκλησία , on the other hand, was the society of Christ’ s disciples, who were to announce the coming of the kingdom, who were to wait for it, and who would enter into it when it came. The Church was built upon the truth of the divine Sonship. It was to proclaim the coming kingdom. In that kingdom Peter should hold the keys which conferred authority. In the next clause this authority is described under a different metaphor. To “ bind” and to “ loose,” in Jewish legal terminology, are equivalent to “ forbid” and to “ allow,” to “ declare forbidden” and to “ declare allowed” ; see Lightfoot, Her. Heb. in loc. The terms, therefore, describe an authority of a legal nature. If he who has the keys has authority of an administrative nature, he who binds and looses exercises authority of a legislative character. In the coming kingdom Peter was to exercise this two-sided authority.— ὃἐὰνδήσῃςἐπὶτῆςγῆςἔσταιδεδεμένονἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς ] The idiom “ on earth,” “ in heaven,” is simply an emphatic way of stating that the action referred to would be permanent in its results: “ Whatsoever thou bindest shall remain bound, shall never be loosed.” Cf. B. Joma 39a: “ If a man sanctifies himself a little, he will be sanctified much; if (he sanctifies himself) below, he will be sanctified above; if (he sanctifies himself) in this world, he will be sanctified in the world to come.” The contrast, therefore, between earth and heaven is merely literary. The words throw no light upon the earthly or heavenly position of the future kingdom. But nothing in this Gospel suggests any other locality for it than the renewed (cf. 19:28) earth. 17-19. The whole passage, therefore, might be paraphrased thus: “ Happy are you, Simon, son of Jonah, because the truth to which you have given utterance was revealed to you by God Himself. Your name is Petros, and this truth is a rock upon which I will build My Church. It will be the foundation truth of the belief of My disciples, i.e. of those who await the kingdom of heaven. In that kingdom you shall hold an exalted position, having the keys of administrative power, and the right to legislate for the needs of its citizens.” As an alternative, we might interpret τὰςκλεῖς with special reference to the function of a key in opening shut doors. Cf. Matthew 23:13 “ You shut the kingdom of the heavens before men: for you enter not, nor suffer those who are entering to go in” ; Luke 11:52 “ You took away the key of knowledge,” i.e. refused to open the doors of the kingdom of “ knowledge” to others. δώσωσοὶτὰςκλεῖς woe will then mean: “ I will give to you the right of admitting others to the kingdom.” The Evangelist may very possibly have had in mind the part taken by S. Peter in the early days of the Church in admitting Gentiles to its privileges, just as in the “ binding” and “ loosing” he may have had in mind the prominent part taken by S. Peter in regulating the affairs of the infant Church. It is possible that originally the “ keys” described the effect of S. Peter’ s insight into divine truth. His perception that Jesus was the Divine Son, was a key which admitted him into the kingdom. By bringing others to the same faith, he would open for them, too, the kingdom, in contrast to the scribes and Pharisees, who locked it in the face of those who wished to enter, 23:13. But, if so, the Evangelist by inserting v. 18 before v. 19, and by combining the saying about “ the keys” with the saying about “ binding” and “ loosing,” has obscured the original meaning. In his connection the “ keys” are not equivalent to S. Peter’ s faith, but represent a privilege promised to the Apostle as a reward for it. Further, the position of v. 18, with its description of the Church as a fortress impregnable against the attacks of evil (the gates of Hades), suggests irresistibly that “ the keys of the kingdom” mean more than power to open merely, and imply rather authority within the kingdom. And this is confirmed by the “ binding” and “ loosing” which immediately follow. The latter saying occurs again with the verbs in the plural in 18:18. This may be its more original form. If so, the Evangelist is here, as elsewhere, compiling detached sayings, fitting them into contexts which seemed to him to be suited to them. If we remove, therefore, 19b as alien to the context, we are justified in asking whether the remaining three verses originally formed part of this incident. V. 17 is in every respect suitable to the context. V. 18 might seem to betray the hand of the Evangelist in the phrase οἰκοδομήσωμουτὴνἐκκλησίαν , which certainly seems to reflect ideas which presuppose the history and growth of Christianity in the early Apostolic age. But if Christ, wishing to commend S. Peter’ s faith, drew from his name a metaphor, “ the rock,” to symbolise the value and importance of the revealed truth to which S. Peter had given utterance, this metaphor of the rock would suggest the phrase “ to build” rather than any such expression as “ My disciples shall stand.” ἐκκλησία may well be the equivalent of some Aramaic expression for community, society, school, band of disciples. Further, the idea thus gained of the Christian body as a building firmly founded, would suggest the use of the common phrase “ gates of Hades” to describe the forces of evil which would attack it. And it is possible that this latter phrase would suggest the keys of the kingdom of the heavens as a term expressing some privilege to be given to S. Peter. The real difficulty in supposing that vv. 17-19a were spoken on this occasion, lies in the vagueness of the idea thus expressed. What were the keys thus given? Even if we identify the kingdom with the Church, it is not entirely satisfactory to suppose that the Lord simply foretold that S. Peter was to take a prominent part in the work of opening the door of faith to the Gentiles. His share in that work, though a great, was not an exclusive one. S. Paul bore the burden of it. Of course we might, without identifying Church and Kingdom, give the words some such meaning as this. The truth of the divine Sonship shall be the keynote of the doctrine of My disciples in their work of preaching the coming kingdom. All to whom this truth is revealed will have in it a key to the kingdom, and will be able to admit others to it, i.e. make them members of the society which waits for the kingdom. In this case S. Peter would be mentioned on the ground that it was he who had given utterance to the divinely revealed truth, with the implication that all to whom it should be revealed would have the same privileges. But in view of the fact that v. 19b is almost certainly added to this context and modified by the Evangelist so as to apply specially to S. Peter, it is difficult not to be drawn to the conclusion that the whole of the passage, vv. 17-19, inserted in S. Mark, is the work of the Evangelist. The motive must have been to emphasise the prominence of S. Peter in the Christian body as foretold and sanctioned by Christ Himself. Throughout the Gospel the twelve Apostles are everywhere represented in a more favourable light than in Mk. Rebukes addressed to them by Christ are softened, see on 8:26, 16:9. Statements that they did not understand, or did not know what to say, or disputed, are passed over, cf. Mark 6:52, Mark 6:9:5, Mark 6:10, Mark 6:32, Mark 6:33, Mark 6:34, Mark 6:14:40. On the other hand, it is expressly said that they did understand, Matthew 16:12, Matthew 17:13. They had left all to follow Christ; but when He sat on the throne of His glory they would sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, 19:28. And amongst them Peter was pre-eminent. He was πρῶτος , 10:2. He had shown remarkable ventures of faith, 14:29-31. To him Christ had given the keys, and the power of “ binding” and “ loosing.” It is, therefore, possible that 16:17-19 are in their present order and connection the work of the Evangelist compiling detached sayings in honour of the great Apostle. The Jewish colouring in these sayings is very remarkable; σὰρξκαὶαἶμα , ὁπατήρμουὁἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς , πύλαιᾅδου , τὰςκλεῖς , ἡβασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν , the “ binding” and “ loosing,” the literary contrast of “ earth” and “ heaven,” were probably all commonplaces of Jewish theological thought. The single word ἐκκλησία alone lies open to the suspicion of betraying Christian influence, and it may easily be explained as representing a more specifically Jewish or less Christian word. (M) 20. Then He charged the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ.] Mk. has: “ And He charge d them that they should speak to no man about Him.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— διεστείλατο ] Mk. here has ἐπετίμησεν , but διεστείλατο in 5:48, 7:36, 9:9. The verb occurs only here in Mt. B.* D S1 S2 have ἐπετίμησεν .— τοῖςμαθηταῖς ] Mk. has αὐτοῖς , but the insertion of vv. 17-19 makes the explicit reference to the disciples necessary.— ὃτιαὐτόςἐστινὁχριστός ] for Mk.’ s περὶαὐτοῦ . For similar explanatory glosses, see v. 22, 26:67, 73. (M) 21. From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and sufer much from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again on the third day.]— ἀπὸτότε ] Mk. has καί . Cf. 4:17. The Galilean mission to the common people is over. Henceforth the Lord devotes Himself mainly to instructing His disciples. The τοῖςμαθηταῖς for Mk.’ s αὐτοῖς assists the emphasis.— αὐτόν ] Mk. has τὸνυἱὸντοῦἀνθρώπου , which Mt. has anticipated in v. 13. The editor inserts εἰςἸεροσόλυμαἀπελθεῖνκαί , or rather substitutes it for Mk.’ s ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι , which is involved in πολλὰπαθεῖν . This carries with it the alteration of ὑπό into ἀπό . D has ὑπό .— τῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳἐγερθῆναι ] for Mk.’ s μετὰτρεῖςἡμέραςἀναστῆναι . The resurrection took place, according to tradition, on the Sunday after the Friday of the Crucifixion. The “ after three days” of the Lord’ s prediction was, therefore, interpreted as equivalent to “ on the third day,” counting the day of Crucifixion as the first. So S. Paul (1 Corinthians 15:4), the writer of the Acts (10:40), and the first and third Evangelists. Mark 8:31, Mark 9:31, Mark 10:34 and Matthew 12:40, Matthew 27:63 retain the “ three days.” The order πρεσβυτέρωνκαὶἀρχιέωνκαὶγραμματέων is striking, because it is an unusual order. The editor has borrowed it from Mk. (so Lk.) Mk. adds here καὶπαρρησίᾳτὸνλόγονἐλάλει , which Mt. omits as being of doubtful meaning. (ME) 22. And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him, saying, (God) be gracious to Thee, Lord: that shall not happen to Thee.] Mk. has: “ And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him.” The words from λέγων are an explanatory gloss of the editor to explain Mk.’ s ἐπιτιμᾷν ; see on v. 20.— Ἰλεώςσοι ] Cf. Ἰλεώςμοι = ח ָ ל ִ י ל ָ ח ל ּ ִ י 1 Chronicles 11:19, 1 Chronicles 11:2 S 20:20; Letronne, Recueitl des Inscripts grecques et latines de l’ Egypte, ii. p. 286, ἵλεώςσοι , Ἀλύπι : “ (Sarapis) help thee, Alypius” ; or with the subject inserted, ib. 221, ἵλεωςἡμῖνΠλάτωνκαὶἐνταῦθα , quoted by Moulton, 1901, p. 436.— οὐμὴἔσται ] For the fut. ind. after οὐμή , see Blass, p. 209; Moulton, p. 190.— προσλαμβάνειν ] occurs only here in Mt. and Mk. Its presence in Mt. is due to Mk. (M) 23. And He turned, and said to Peter, Go behind Me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block to Me: because thou thinkest not the things of God, but the things of men.] So Mk., without σκάδαλονεἴἐμοῦ , which is inserted by the editor to explain the use of the harsh Σατανᾶ with reference to the Apostle. Mk. also has ἐπιστραφείς for στραφείς (for στρέφω , which Mk. never uses, cf. 9:22), and adds καὶἰδὼντοὺςμαθητὰςαὐτοῦ , which seems to emphasise the publicity of the rebuke. The editor omitted it for this reason, or because he missed the point of it here. ὀπίσω , see on 3:11.— οὐφρονεῖςτὰτοῦθεοῦ , κ .τ .λ .] seems to mean: “ Your ideas of the Messiah and His destiny are superficial. You can imagine a career of splendour for Him, but fail to understand that suffering and death are a part of the career planned out for Him by God.” σκάδαλονεἶἐμοῦ ] So א * B. 13; εἶμοῦ , א c C; εἶἐμοί , D latt; μοῦεἶ , E F al Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2566 c, suggests that the original may have been εἰμίσοι = “ I am a stumbling-block [it seems], to Thee!” But Σατανᾶ suggests that the following σκάνδαλον is used of S. Peter, not of the Lord. In trying to set aside thoughts of the coming Passion, Peter was at once Christ’ s adversary and His stumbling-block. And this interpretation alone explains the following ὅτι . 21-23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: ἀπὸ — τῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳἐγερθῆναι , Mat_21, Luk_22. 21. ὁἸησοῦς ] So א c b C al S2; ἸησοῦςΧριστός , א B.. The latter can hardly be original. It is the work of a scribe who wished to emphasise the fact that this was a turning-point in Christ’ s ministry and teaching. (M) 24. Then Jesus said to His disciples, If any one wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.] Mk. has: “ And having called the multitude, with His disciples, He said to them,” etc. For the saying about the cross, see note on 10:38, where another form of the saying has been inserted. Here the meaning clearly is that the disciples must be ready to face death in allegiance to their Master, and after His example. The cross need mean no more than violent death; see on 10:38. (M) 25. For whosoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, and whosoever shall lose his life for My sake shall find it.] See on 10:39.— ὅς — ἐάν ] See on 11:27.— ἕνεκενἐμοῦ ] Mk. adds καὶτοῦεὐαγγελίου . For Mt.’ s omission of one of two synonymous clauses, see on 8:16; and cf. 19:29 ἕνεκεντοῦἐμοῦὀνόματος for Mk.’ s ἕνεκενἐμοῦκαὶἕνεκεντοῦεὐαγγελίυ .— εὑρήσει ] Mk. σώσει . Mt. assimilates to 10:39 in order to form an antithesis to ἀπολέσει . For antithesis in Mt., see on 15:2, 3, 4, 5, 19:8, 9. (M) 26. For what shall a man be profited if he gain the whole world, but be deprived of his life? or what will a man give as exchange for his life?] Mk. has: “ For what will it profit a man to gain the whole world and to be deprived of his life? For what would a man give as exchange for his life?” The meaning seems to be: “ Suppose a man to shrink from martyrdom, he will, indeed, ‘ save’ his physical life. But he will ‘ lose’ the higher life of the soul. To gain the whole world, and to lose this higher life, is a profitless proceeding; because this higher life cannot be purchased. No money can buy it.” — ὠφεληθήσεται ] For Mt.’ s preference for passives, see on 4:1.— ζημιωθῇ ] ζημιοῦν is to “ fine” or “ confiscate” ; so in the passive, “ to suffer confiscation or loss of” ; cf. Philippians 3:8 τὰπανταἐζημιώθην .— ἀντάλλαγμα ] is the price paid for anything; cf. Ecclus 6:15 φίλουπιστοῦοὐκἔστινἀντάλλαγμα , 26:14 οὐκἔστινἀντάλλαγμαπεπαιδευμένηςψυχῆς , “ there is nothing worth so much as, nothing which can be paid in exchange for, a well-instructed soul.” δοῖ in Mk. is the aor. conj.; cf. Blass, p. 49; Moulton, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 37; Gram. p. 55. Mt. substitutes the easier fut. ind. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in this verse in the following ὠφεληθήσεταιἄνθρωπος — δέ , Mt. = ὠφελεῖταιἄνθρωπος — δέ , Lk. Mk. has ὠφελεῖἄνθρωπον — καί . (M) 27. For the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of His Father with His angels. And then He shall give to each man according to his work.] Mk. has: “ For whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man shall be ashamed of him when He shall come in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.” Mt. has already inserted words parallel to the first clause of Mk. in 10:33. He therefore omits them here, and makes of ὅτανἔλθῃ a main clause, μέλλειγὰρ — ἔρχεσθαι . μέλλειν , which here emphasises the nearness of the coming, is characteristic of Mat 17:12; Matthew 17:22 μέλλει — παραδίδοσθαι for Mk.’ s παραδίδοται , 20:17, 22, 24:6. He then adds, by way of compensation for the omitted clause of Mk., καὶτότεἀποδώσειἑκάστῳκατὰτὴνπρᾶξιναὐτοῦ .— ἐντῇδόξῃτοῦπατρόςαὐτοῦ ] For the glory of the Messiah; cf. Enoch 61:8 “ The Lord of Spirits placed the Elect One on the throne of glory,” 62:2 “ The Lord of Spirits seated Him on the throne of His glory” ; and Test. Lev_18Lev_18. καὶτότεἀποδώσει , κ .τ .λ .] For the conception of the Messiah in glory judging men after their works, cf. Enoch 45:3 “ On that day Mine Elect One will sit on the throne of glory, and make choice amongst their deeds,” 69:27 “ And He sat on the throne of His glory, and the sum of judgement was committed to Him, the Son of Man.” The terms seem to be borrowed from Psalms 61:13 σὺἀποδώσειςἑκάστῳκατὰτὰἔργααὐτοῦ ; cf. Proverbs 24:12, Ecclus 32:24. (M) 28. Verily I say to you, That there are some of those who stand here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.] Mk. has: “ And He was saying to them, Verily I say to you, that there are some here of the bystanders who shall not taste of death until they see the kingdom of God come with power.” The ἔλεγεναὐτοῖς of Mk. may be a hint that this saying was not spoken on the same occasion as the preceding. However that may be, Mt. Omits καὶἔλεγεναὐτοῖς , and connects the words closely with the foregoing. By substituting τὸνυἱὸντοῦἀνθρώπουἐρχόμενονἐντῇβασιλείᾳαὐτοῦ for τήνβασιλέαντοῦθεοῦἐληλυθυῖανἐνδυνάμει , he makes it clear that what the “ some of those who stand here” will see is the coming of the Son of Man “ in the glory of His Father,” or “ in His kingdom.” That is to say, he believed that that coming would take place in the lifetime of some of Christ’ s contemporaries. The same belief finds expression in 10:23 and 24:34, and has an important bearing on the date of the Gospel.— ἀμήν ] see on 5:18.— γεύεσθαιθανάτου ] was a Jewish phrase; cf. Schlatter, Die Sprache and Heimat des Vierten Evangelisten, p. 35. It occurs in John 8:52, Hebrews 2:9. the Second Gospel. editorial passages. i.e. with other uncial MSS. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Polybius. ἔχουσιν . So B. D has εἷχαν , and a b i q haberent. S1 has “ there is no bread.” א A C al assimilate to Mt. by substituting ἔχομεν and inserting λέγοντες . But Mk.’ s ἔχουσιν is ambiguous. The clause might be rendered, “ They were disputing (cf. 9:34) because they have no bread,” without any apparent reference to the leaven of the preceding verse, which does not appear again in Mk.’ s narrative. Mt. by inserting λέγοντες and changing ἔχουσιν into έλάβομεν , connects the “ reasoning” with the preceding saying, and so prepares for his insertion of vv. 11, 12. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. the Matthæ an Logia. Winer-Schmiedel. Dalman. Babylonian Talmud. The Psalms of Solomon. Tatian. Classical Review. 17:1. And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, and James, and John his brother, and leadeth them up into a high mountain privately.] So Mk., without τὸνἀδελφὸναὐτοῦ and with μόνους after κατ ʼ ἰδίαν . For Mt.’ s omission of one of two synonymous expressions, see on 8:16. (M) 2. And was transfigured before them; and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment became white as the light.] Mk.: “ And was transfigured before them; and His raiment became glistening, very white, as a fuller on earth cannot so whiten.” — μετεμορφώθη ] Both the later Evangelists seem to have found difficulty in the use of this word in reference to Christ. It was ambiguous, and it might easily be misinterpreted. Lk. omits it, and substitutes ἐγένετο — τὸεἶδοςτοῦπροσώπουαὐτοῦἕτερον . For this, cf. Daniel 5:6 ἡὅρασιςαὐτοῦἠλλοιώθη , Theod. ἡμορφὴἠλλοιώθη , Secrets of Enoch 1:7 “ the appearance of my countenance was changed.” Mt. retains the word, but explains it by adding καὶἔλαμψεντὸπρόσωποναὐτοῦὡςὁἥλιος . For this, cf. Secrets of Enoch 1:5 “ their faces shone like the sun,” 19:1 “ their faces shining more than the rays of the sun,” 2 ES 7:97 “ their face shall shine as the sun,” Revelation 1:16 “ His countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.” In Enoch 14:20 the simile is used of raiment, “ His raiment did shine more brightly than the sun.” — τὰδὲἱμάτιααὐτοῦἐγένετολευκὰὡςτὸφῶς ] τὰδέ for καὶτά , as often. Mt. omits Mk.’ s στίλβοντα . This word is used elsewhere of metals, e.g. brass, Ezekiel 40:3, Daniel 10:6; or of hills reflecting the sun’ s rays, 1 Mac 6:39. Lk. substitutes ἐξαστράπτων , which is the LXX. equivalent of Theodotion’ s στίλβοντος in Daniel 10:6. For Mk.’ s simile of the fuller, which Lk. omits, Mt. substitutes ὡςτὸφῶς . (M) 3. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with Him.] Mk. has: “ And there appeared to them Elias with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.” — καὶἰδού ] see on 1:20. The order Moses and Elias, substituted by Mt. and Lk. for Elias with Moses, is probably simply due to a natural desire for the chronological order; cf. Lk.’ s order in 11:31, 32, as compared with Matthew 12:41, Matthew 12:42. On Elijah as the expected forerunner of the Messiah, see note on v. 10. There seem to be traces in Jewish literature of a belief that Moses would accompany Elijah when he came; see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 191-193, and cf. Jochanan ben Zaccai in Midr. Debarim R. Par. 111 (Wü nsche), p. 55: “ When I bring the prophet Elijah, you shall both (Moses and Elijah) come together.” Moses may be referred to as one of the two witnesses of Rev 11:3; see Bousset and Swete, in loc., and Anim. 50. (M) 4. And Peter answered and said to Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if Thou wilt, I will make here three booths; for Thee one, and for Moses one, and for Elias one.] Mk.: “ And Peter answered and saith to Jesus, Rabbi, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three booths,” etc. For the Semitic use of ἀποκριθείς , see Words, p. 24. δέ for καί , as often. ἑ͂πεν for λέγει , as often.— Κύριε ] see on 8:2. Ῥαββεί occurs again in Mark 10:51, Mark 11:21, Mark 14:45, Mt. retains it only in the last instance.— τρεῖςσκηνάς ] The idea apparently is that of prolonging the scene. Mk. adds at the end; “ For He did not know what to answer; for they were very afraid.” For Mt.’ s omission, see Introduction, pp. xxxiii f.; and cf. the omission of Mar 14:40c The “ fear” is postponed by Mt. to a more suitable place in v. 6. (M) 5. While He was still speaking, behold, a cloud of light over-shadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is My Son, the Beloved its whom I took pleasure; hear Him.]— ἔτιαὐτοῦλαλοῦντος ] is inserted by the editor; cf. similar insertions, Matthew 12:46 = Mark 3:31, and Matthew 9:18 = Mark 5:21. In both these passages, however, the clause is placed at the beginning of a section as a connecting link. Here there seems no reason for the insertion. Lk. has a similar clause; see below. Mk. has καὶἐγένετο here twice, and in 1:9, 11, 2:23, 4:4, 39. Mt avoids it in 1:9, 2:23, 4:4. He has it 5 times in a formula, 7:28, 11:1, 13:53, 19:1, 25:1. In 3:17 = Mark 1:9 he has καὶἰδού , and in clause b here he assimilates to that passage. In clause a he has simply ἰδού .— νεφέλη ] Mt. adds φωτινή ; cf. Revelation 14:14 νεφέληλευκή . The cloud is the symbol of the divine presence. It was to reappear in the Messianic period; cf. 2 Mal 2:8 ὀφθήσεταιἡδόξατοῦΚυρίονκαὶἡνεφέλη .— ἐπεσκίασεν ] cf. Exodus 40:29 ἐπεσκίαζενἐπ ʼ αὐτὴνἡνεφέλη .— καὶἰδού ] for Mk.’ s καὶἐγένετο , assimilated to 3:17.— οὗτόςἐστιν , κ .τ .λ .] See on 3:17. Mt. assimilates to that passage by adding ἐνᾧεὐδόκησα .— ἀκούετεαὐτοῦ ] cf. Deuteronomy 18:15, αὐτοῦἀκούσεσθε . Christ was the prophet foretold by Moses. 6. And the disciples, when they heard it, fell upon their face, and feared exceedingly.] (E) 7. And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Rise up, and fear not.] Mk. has nothing corresponding to these two verses. Mt., who has omitted ἔκφοβοιγὰρἐγένοντο from 6, where “ He knew not what to answer; for they were very afraid” seems to express a degree of bewilderment on the part of the Apostles which is unexpected, expands it here into the statement that the disciples were exceedingly afraid when they heard the divine voice from the cloud of light. Lk. places the “ fear” at the entry into the cloud.— σφόδρα ] occurs 7 times in Mt., 1 in Mk., 1 in Lk.— προσῆλθεν ] see on 4:3. (M) 8. And lifting up their eyes, they saw no one, save Jesus only.] Mk. has: “ And suddenly, looking round, they saw no one with them, save Jesus only.” Mt. has modified to suit the previous verse. “ Suddenly looking round” would harmonise badly with “ Jesus came and touched them.” — οὐδένα ] Mt. omits Mk.’ s οὐκέτι ; see Introduction, p. xxxi. 1-8. Mt. and Lk. both modify Mk. in some striking respects. In some of these modifications they agree, but not in others, .e.g. both feel the necessity of explaining μετεμορφώθη , but do so in different ways; see above. Both omit στίλβοντα , but Lk. substitutes ἐξαστράπτων . Both omit the simile of the fuller, but Mt substitutes ὡςτὸφῶς . Both transfer the fear of the disciples to another part of the narrative, but they do not agree in the position which they assign to it; see on v. 7. These changes look like independent editing. Further, both agree in καὶἰδού and in ΜωυσῆςκαὶἨλείας , Mat_3, Luke 30; in εἶπεν , Mat_4, Luke 33; in ἔτιαὐτοῦλαλοῦντος , Mat_5 = ταῦταδὲαὐτοῦλέγοντος , Luke 34; and in λέγουσα , Mat_5, Luke 35. Of these all except the insertion of “ while He was still speaking” = “ while He was saying these things,” may be accidental coincidences. The additions of Mt. in vv. 5, 6, 7 are probably due to the editor. On the other hand, Luke 31-32 and ἐκλελεγμένος in 35 for ἀγαπητός rather suggest that Lk. had a second source for the narrative. But they might be explained equally well by supposing that Lk. is inserting reminiscences of other versions of the incident, or as simply editorial insertions. The insertion of “ while He was still speaking” = “ while He was saying these things,” can hardly be purely accidental, but is insufficient even in combination with the other small details, καὶἰδού , ΜωυσῆςκαὶἨλείας , εἶπεν , λέγουσα , to serve as a basis for the theory that Mt. and Lk. had in common a second narrative which they both used in addition to Mk. If so, their divergences, e.g. in Mat_2 = Luke 29, in Luke 31, 32, in Matthew 6-7, and in Luke 33, cause fresh difficulties. Rather Lk. may be supposed to have read Mt., and to have occasionally written reminiscences of Mt.’ s phraseology. (M) 9. And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell no man the vision, until the Son of Man be risen from the dead.] Mk. has: “ And as they came down from the mountain, He charged them that they should recount to no man what they saw, except when the Son of Man should rise from the dead.” ἐγερθῇ for ἀναστῇ ; cf. on 16:21. Mk. has here the words: “ And they kept the saying to themselves, disputing what the ‘ rising from the dead’ was.” Mt. omits other statements of misunderstanding on the part of the disciples; cf. the omission of Mar 6:52, Mark 8:17, and see Introduction, pp. xxxiii f. (M) 10. And the disciples asked Him, saying, Why therefore do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?] Mk. has: “ And they were asking Him, saying, Why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?” Two facts in the preceding narrative may have suggested this question. The disciples had seen Elijah on the mountain. In what relation did this appearance stand to the coming which was attributed to him by the official theologians? Further, it was part of this official theory, that Elijah would prepare the way for the Messiah by restoring all things. (On this see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 192.) But if all things were restored, and Israel was made ready for the Messiah, what did Christ mean by foretelling His death and resurrection? Why death in view of the restorative work of the forerunner?— ἐπηρώτησαν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imperf, as often. τί for Mk.’ s ambiguous ὅτι ; cf. similar changes in 17:19 = Mark 9:28, Matthew 9:11 = Mark 2:16. (M) 11. And He answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, Elijah indeed having come first, restores all things.“ — ἀποκατατήσει ] for Mk.’ s ἀποκατιστάνει is an assimilation to the LXX. of Malachi 4:5. Christ answers that the scribes are right in expecting a return of Elijah to accomplish a restoration, because so much was foretold in the prophet Malachi. The words which follow in Mk. are very obscurely expressed: “ And how has it been written concerning the Son of Man, that He should suffer much, and be set at nought?” Does this mean: “ It has not been so prophesied. Elijah’ s coming was foretold, but not the Messiah’ s suffering” ? Or, “ Seeing that Elijah was predicted as coming to restore, in what sense are the prophecies of Messiah’ s suffering to be understood” ? Or, “ Elijah indeed comes, and (yet) how has it been written of the Son of Man? (It stands written) that He should suffer” ? “ But I say to you that Elijah has come,” that is, “ It was not only foretold that he should come, but he has come in the person of John the Baptist.” “ And they did to him whatever they wished.” That is, “ And he did not restore all things, because Herod thwarted prophecy by putting John to death. Thus no restoration has taken place, and there is room for the fulfilment of the prophecies of Messiah’ s death.” “ As it has been written concerning Him.” To what does this refer? The answer is generally found in 1 K 19:2, 10 “ The fate intended for Elijah had overtaken John: he had found his Jezebel in Herodias” (Swete). But how can this prophecy by type and contrast explain the matter of fact words καθὼςγέγραπταιἐπ ʼ αὐτόν How can the escape of Elijah from death at the hands of Jezebel be a prophecy of the execution of John the Baptist at the instigation of Herodias? Mt. has re-edited the passage in order to simplify it. He omits the obscure question Mark 12b, and the equally obscure καθὼςγέγραπταιἐπ ʼ αὐτόν . The reference to Herodias can hardly have been present to his mind, for he has omitted Mk.’ s statements that she persecuted the Baptist. Further, he adds: οὐκἐπέγνωσαναὐτὸνἀλλά , to explain the failure of the prophecy that Elijah should restore all things, and to compensate for the omission of Mk 12b adds the definite statement: οὕτωςκαὶὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπουμέλλειπάσχεινὑπ ʼ αὐτῶν . (M) 12. And I say to you, That Elijah has already come, and they did not recognise him, but did in his case whatever they wished. So also the Son of Man is about to sufer from them.]— οὐκἐπέγνωσαναὐτόν ] i.e. did not recognise Elijah in the person of the Baptist.— ἠθέλησαν ] aor. for imperf., as often.— ἐποίησαν — ὅσαἠθέλησαν ] Cf. Daniel 11:16 ποιήσει — κατὰτὸθέλημααὐτοῦ .— μέλλει ] see on 16:27. (E) 13. Then understood the disciples that He spake to them concerning John the Baptist.] An editorial comment in favour of the disciples; cf. 16:12. (M) 14. And when they came to the multitude.] Mk. has: “ And having come to the disciples, they saw a great multitude, and scribes disputing with them. And straightway all the multitude seeing Him, were astonished; and running up, were saluting Him. And He asked them, Why dispute ye with them?” Mt. shortens the narrative throughout. Here he omits as elsewhere the question in the mouth of Christ. See Introduction, p. xxxii. The rest he probably passes over because it is ambiguously expressed. Who were the parties to the dispute— the scribes and the disciples, or the scribes and the multitude? Why should the people be astonished (ἐκθαμβεῖν is a strong word) when they saw Christ? There came to Him a man, kneeling down, and saying.] Mk. has: “ And there answered Him one out of the multitude.” — προσῆλθεν ] see on 4:3. (M) 15. Lord, have pity on my son: because he is moonstruck, and in evil plight: for often he falls into the fire, and often into the water.] Mk. has: “ Teacher, I brought my son to Thee, having a dumb devil; and wheresoever it takes him, it throws him down: and he foams, and gnashes his teeth, and wastes away.” And in v. 22 “ And often it cast him into the fire, and into waters, to destroy him.” The symptoms seem to be those of some form of epileptic seizure, described in Mk. under terms of demoniac possession. Mt. omits the references to demoniac possession, except in vv. 18, 20.— κύριε ] for Mk.’ s διδάσκαλε . A similar change in 8:25.— σελμνιάζεται ] only again in 4:24. (M) 16. And I brought him to Thy disciples, and they could not heal him.] Mk. has: “ And I spoke to Thy disciples that they should cast him out, and they could not .— προσήνεγκα ] See on 4:3.— θεραπεῦσαι ] because Mt. omits the references to demoniac possession. (M) 17. And Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverted generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him to Me here.] Mk. omits ὁἸησοῦς .— εἶπεν ] for Mk.’ s λέγει , as often.— καὶδιεστραμμένη ] is not in Mk.; cf. Deuteronomy 32:5.— μεθ ʼ ὑμῶν ] “ in your company.” Mk. has πρὸςὑμᾶς ; cf. Mark 6:3.— ὧδε ] is not in Mk.; cf. Matthew 14:18. Mk. adds here eight verses describing how the boy was brought, how the spirit rent him so that he fell on the earth and wallowed foaming, how Christ asked how long he had been so afflicted. Then follows a short dialogue with the father, after which Christ commands the spirit to come forth; upon which the spirit having “ cried and rent him much, came forth: and he became as dead; so that many said that he had died.” Jesus then took him by the hand, and he rose up. For all this Mt. simply has: (M) 18. And Jesus rebuked him; and the demon came forth from him: and the boy was healed from that hour.] It is probable that Mt. has intentionally omitted Mk.’ s account of this healing. He elsewhere omits questions in the mouth of Christ; see Introduction, p. xxxii. He elsewhere has omitted a narrative of the expulsion of a demon, Mark 1:23-28, in which it was said that after the command of Christ the demon rent the sufferer and cried out. And, lastly, he has elsewhere omitted a miracle in which the healing was described as a gradual process, Mark 8:22-26. He therefore substitutes the simple statement that Christ rebuked the demon, and the boy was healed; but curiously enough retains the clause that the demon came out, although he has elsewhere in the narrative, except in the next two verses, suppressed the references to features of demoniac possession. For ἀπὸτῆςὥραςἐκείνης , cf. 8:13, 9:22, 15:28. (M) 19. Then came the disciples to Jesus privately, and said, Why could not we cast him out?] Mk. has: “ And when He entered into a house, His disciples privately were asking Him, Why could not we cast him out?” For Mt.’ s omission of the house, see on 15:15. διὰτί for Mk.’ s ὅτι ; cf. τί , 17:10, for ὅτι , and 9:11 διὰτί , for ὅτι . (M) 20. And He with to them, Because of your little faith: for verily I say to you, If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say to this mountain, Remove hence yonder; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible to you.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, This kind cannot go out by anything except by prayer.” This apparently means, “ devils (or this particular species of devil) can only be expelled by the power of prayer which you lacked.” But the words are vague and ambiguous. Mt. omits them, and substitutes a direct reproof, “ because of your little faith.” Cf. the editor’ s use of ὀλιγόπιστος in 6:30, 8:26, 14:31, 16:8. To emphasise the effect of faith, he adds a saying, influenced, perhaps, by ὄρος , 17:1, 9, which recurs in a different form in 21:21, where it is taken from Mk. Luke 17:6 has a similar but quite independent saying.— ὀλιγοπιστίαν ] πίστις here is different from the trust implied in 8:10, 9:2, 22, 29, 15:8, 6:30, 8:26, 14:31, 16:8. In all these passages it is assurance, trust in the power and love of God or of Christ. Here it is the same trust, but combined with the confidence that the man who has it can himself apply the divine power to work miracles. Cf. 21:21 and 1 Corinthians 13:2. The Talmudic writers use “ uprooter of mountains” as a term of praise for a skilful expositor of the law who removed difficulties of interpretation. See Lightfoot on Matthew 21:21. 14-20. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. (a) in two or three small points, e.g. λέγων , Mat_15, Luke 38; ὅτι , ib.; ἠδυνήθησαν , Mat_16, Luke 40; εἶπεν , Mat_17, Luke 41; καὶδιεστραμμένη , ib.; ὧδε , Mat_17, Luke 41; (b) in omitting the greater part of Mk 20-26, of which, however, Mt. shows a trace in v. 15 πολλάκιςγάρ , κ .τ .λ . = Mark 22, and Lk. shows traces in v. 38 ἐξέφνηςκράζεικαὶσπαράσσειαὐτὸνμετ ʼ ἀφροῦκαὶμόλιςἀποχωρεῖἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦσυντρῖβοναὐτόν . Cf. Mark 20, 26. Lk. has transposed the convulsions of the sufferer after the command of Christ to a general description of his condition before that command. Lk. treats Mark 1:26 in a similar way. It is there said that after Christ’ s command “ the unclean spirit rent him, and cried with a loud voice.” Luke 4:35 omits the loud cry, and adds a clause to the effect that the demon did him no harm. It is therefore probable that the two Evangelists independently modify Mk. in this passage. The other verbal agreements are insufficient as a basis for a theory of a second source used by Mt. and Lk. It may more probably be supposed that Lk. had read Mt., and inserted reminiscences of his phraseology into his own account. 20. όλιγοπιστίαν ] א 1 13 22 33 124 346 2. ἀπιστίαν , C D 1 latt όλιγοπιστια occurs only here, but όλιγόπιστος occurs 4 times in Mt. Internal evidence is in favour of όλιγοπιστία — (1) in view of the facts collected in Introduction, pp. xxxiii f., it is unlikely that the editor would have written ἀπιστία here, whilst his use of όλιγόπιστος 4 times of the Apostles would suggest όλιγοπιστία as a suitable word here; (2) the substitution in the MSS. of the common άπιστία for the rare όλιγοπιστία is easier than the reverse process. 21. τοῦτοδὲτὸγένοςοὐκἐκπορύταιεἰμὴἐνπροσευχῇκαὶνηστείᾳ ] So א b C D al latt Omit א * B. 33 e ff1 S1 S2. The words are interpolated here from Mark 9:29, which had already been corrupted by the addition of καὶνηστείᾳ . (M) 22. And whilst they were gathering together in Galilee, Jesus said to them, The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men.] Mk. has: “ And they went out thence, and were going through Galilee. And He wished that no one should know it; for He was teaching His disciples, and saying to them that the Son of Man is being delivered into the hands of men.” It is in accordance with the editor’ s practice to omit Mk.’ s καὶοὐκἤθελενἵνατιςγνοῖ . Cf. his omission of οὐδέναἤθελενγνῶναι fromMk 7:24, ἤθελενπαρελθεῖναὐτούς from Mark 6:48. But it is difficult to see why he substitutes συστρεφομένωνδὲαὐτῶνἐντῇΓαλιλαίᾳ for Mk.’ s ἐπορεύοντοδιὰτῆςΓαλιλαίας . συστρέφεσθαι occurs only once again in the N.T., in Acts 28:3, of S. Paul gathering sticks. It is used of the movement of soldiers or of men conspiring together. Here apparently it means simply to “ gather together.” — μέλλει ] See on 16:27. (M) 23. And they shall kill Him, and on the third day He shall be raised again.] Mk. has: “ And they shall kill Him; and being killed, He shall rise after three days.” See on 16:21. (M) And they were exceedingly grieved.] Mk. has: “ And they were ignorant about the saying, and were fearing to ask Him.” For Mt.’ s omission of the ignorance of the disciples, see Introduction, p. xxxiii.— λυπεῖσθαι ] occurs six times in Mt., twice in Mk.— σφόδρα ] seven times to Mt., once in Mk. Lk. also found a difficulty in the ignorance of the disciples in view of Christ’ s plain statement. He adds a clause to the effect that “ it was hidden from them that they should not perceive it,” probably meaning that their ignorance was due to the divine providence. See note on Luke 9:45. 22, 23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following:— δέ , Mat_22, Luke 43; εἶλεπεν , Mat_22, Luke 44. Mk. has παραδίδοται . 22. συστρεφομένων ] So א B 1. ἀναστρεφομένων , C D al. (M) 24. And when they came to Capharnaum.] Mk. has: “ And they came to Capharnaum.” Mt. here inserts (24-27) the incident of the stater in the fish’ s mouth. Mk. has here: “ And being in a house, He was asking them, What were you disputing about on the way? And they were silent, for they had disputed with one another on the way (as to) who was the greater.” It is quite in accordance with Mt.’ s practice to omit this. For his omission of questions in the mouth of Christ, see Introduction, p. xxxii. For his omission of disputes among the disciples, see on 16:19. He substitutes for it the simple statement that “ the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Who is the greater in the kingdom?” 18:1. But this by itself, and as compared with Mk., would be rather abrupt. Mk.’ s account of the dispute formed a suitable introduction to the dis course which follows. Mt. therefore, having omitted Mk.’ s introduction, substitutes another, viz. the incident of the stater in the fish. In this story Peter was singled out by the tax-collectors as though he were in some way the representative of Christ’ s followers. This affords, therefore, an occasion for the question, “ Who then is the greater?” i.e. “ Why is Peter assumed to be the chief among us?” They who receive the half-shekel came to Peter, and said, Does not your Master pay the half-shekel? He saith, Yes.] According to Exodus 30:13 every Jew from the age of twenty was to pay half a shekel to the Temple treasury once a year. The LXX. renders shekel by δίδραχμον , so that the sum to be paid according to the LXX. of Exodus 30:13 was τὸἥμισυτοῦδιδράχμου . But Josephus, Ant. iii. 194, says that the shekel was equivalent to four Attic drachmæ , and calls the sum paid to the Temple τὸδίδραχμου . Ant. xviii. 312, so that this was a current term for the Temple tax. After the destruction of Jerusalem, the Romans confiscated this yearly tax, and applied it to the support of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus; Josephus, Wars, vi. 218. As v. 25 shows, it is the tax paid to the Jewish Temple that is here intended. The narrative, therefore, reflects the condition of things in Palestine before the year 70 a.d. It looks like a tradition which had grown up in Palestine to regulate the position of Jewish Christians towards the Jewish authorities. Christ Himself had paid the Temple tax. His disciples should do the same. Earthly monarchs take tribute from subject peoples, not from their own race and kin. Christians, as disciples of the Son of God, were children of the heavenly King. By analogy, they should be exempted from paying tribute to His Temple. This might rightly be imposed upon the Jews who, as compared with Christians, were strangers and foreigners. But no good purpose could be gained by giving needless offence. For the tax, see Schü rer, 11. i. 249 ff. We should expect here τὸδίδραχμον . For the prominence assigned to S. Peter, see on 16:19, p. 180. (P) 25. And when he entered into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth receive taxes or tribute; from their own people, or from aliens?]— εἰςτὴνοἰκίαν ] may be a reminiscence of Mk. v. 33.— τίσοιδοκεῖ ] the phrase is common in the latter part of the Gospel; cf. 18:12, 21:28, 22:17, 42, 26:66.— οἱβασιλεῖςτῆςγῆς ] are obviously contrasted with God, the heavenly King; cf. 5:35.— τῶνυἱῶναὐτῶναὐτῶν ] in Oriental idiom, means not relatives, but members of one’ s own race. “ Earthly monarchs (in the East) take no tribute from their own people, but from aliens.” The implied analogy is that God, the heavenly King, takes no tribute from His own people. But by His sons or people the Jews can hardly be intended. Otherwise, the meaning would be that the Temple tax, as paid by the Jews, was an unjustifiable one, not binding on the consciences of religious Jews. It might be paid voluntarily as a freewill offering, but not of necessity. It is, however, questionable whether the Lord would thus have criticised the imposition of the Temple tribute sanctioned by Old Testament precedent, Exodus 30:13. Compare, however, His criticism of the Pentateuchal distinction between clean and unclean meats. Rather the υἱοί seem to signify a class of people contrasted with the Jews. The latter are the aliens who are rightly called upon to pay tribute to the heavenly King. In this case the υἱοί must be Christ and His disciples. They were in a true sense “ Sons of God,” cf. 5:9, and might claim exemption from tribute. τέλη ] taxes on goods.— κῆνσος ] the capitation tax. (P) 26. And when he said, From aliens; Jesus said to him, Then are their own people free.] (P) 27. But that we may not cause them to stumble, go to the sea and cast a hook, and take the first fish that comes up. And having opened its mouth, thou shalt find a stater. That take, and give for Me and thee.]— σκανδαλίσωμεν See on 5:29.— στατῆρα ] The stater was equivalent to four drachmæ , and thus exactly equivalent to the Temple tax for two persons. The Evangelist probably recorded this tradition as illustrative of Christ’ s foreknowledge and power, which emphasised His independence from obligation to pay taxes. Divine foreknowledge may also be intended in v. 25 προέφθασεν . the Second Gospel. The Septuagint Version. Theodotion. Tertullian. Dalman. editorial passages. Babylonian Talmud. Syriac version: Curetonian. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Palestinian traditions. 18:1. In that hour came the disciples to Jesus, saying, Who then is greater in the kingdom of the heavens?] The editor here returns to Mark 33, but omits the dispute and Christ’ s question (see above), for which he substitutes the statement that the disciples came with a question. The ἄρα is probably intended as a link with the preceding incident. “ Why is Peter regarded as chief among us? Who is to be chief in the coming kingdom?” In order to form a connecting link, the editor inserts ἐνἐκείνῃτῇὥρᾳ ; cf. the insertion of ἐνἐκείνῳτῷκαιρῷ , 12:1. For προσῆλθον , see on 4:3, (M) 2. And He called a child, and placed him in the midst of them, and said.] Mk. has: “ And sitting down, He called the Twelve, and saith to them, If any one wishes to be first, he shall be last of all, and servant of all. And He took a child, and placed him in the midst of them; and having taken him into His arms, He said to them.” For the omission of ἐναρκαλισάμενος , cf. 19:15. In Mk. there now follows a series of sayings, 9:37-50, broken by a short paragraph of incident, 38-40. The connection of these sayings is sometimes very obscure, and frequently artificial. The transition, e.g., from 42 to 43 is difficult, and unless πυρί in v. 49 has the same reference as in 48, the connection of thought seems to be broken there also. It is probable that Mk. has strung together detached sayings or paragraphs. ἐπὶτῷὀνόματίμου of v. 37 would remind the Evangelist of 38-40 and 41, both of which have a similar phrase vv. 39, 41. τῶντοιούτωνπαιδίων (= children) of v. 37 would bring to his remembrance v. 42 with its μικρῶντούτωντῶνπιστευόντων (= recent converts). And the σκανδαλίσῃ of 42 would suggest the section 43-48, although this paragraph has no immediate bearing on the subject with which the discourse started. Lastly, πυρί of v. 48 would suggest the (probably) quite different πῦρ of v. 49 (see Swete), and ἁλισθήσεται of this verse recalls to the Evangelist’ s mind the saying about salt, v. 50. The editor of Mt., however, has treated the whole series of sayings as though it formed a unity, only omitting some of the least harmonious verses. But just as he has made Mark 6:8-12 and 4 the basis round which to group a number of other sayings so as to form a discourse of some length, so he has done here. The relation of Mt. to Mk. may be shown as follows. Passages in brackets are added by Mt.: Matthew 19:1a is a closing formula like that which closes the three previous great discourses in Matthew 7:28, Matthew 11:1, Matthew 13:53. Of the verses omitted, 37b has already found a place in 10:40; 38-40 are omitted because they break the tenor of the speech; 41 has already been recorded in 10:42; 48-50 are probably omitted on account of their difficulty. A saying parallel to v. 50 has already been recorded in 5:13. Of the verses inserted, 12-14 find a parallel in a different context in Luke 15:3-7; Luk_6 finds a parallel in a different context in Luke 17:2; Luk_7 in Luke 17:1; Luk_15 in Luke 17:3; and 21 in Luke 17:4. 3. Verily I say to you, Except ye turn and become as children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of the heavens.] That is to say, “ in asking who shall be the greater, you have entered upon a path which will not lead you to this end. The very question shows that you do not understand what greatness is. You must turn back and recover the childlike temper which is untempted to self-advancement. You must become again as children, i.e. unassuming. Otherwise, so far from being great in the kingdom, you will never even enter it.” This verse anticipates Mark 10:15. (L) 4. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this child, he shall be the great one in the kingdom of the heavens.] That is to say, “ greatness involves humility. To be great one must be unassuming.” (M) 5. And whosoever shall receive ore such child in My name receives Me.] Mk. has: “ Whosoever shall receive one of such children in My name receives Me.” By “ receive in My name” here is apparently meant to recognise in the humble, unassuming disposition of children a feature of the Christlike character; cf. 11:29.They who recognise and welcome this characteristic of childhood receive Christ, i.e. are in communion with Him. The editor here omits Mark 37b-41. But it is noticeable that in 10:40, 42 he has parallels to the first and last of these sayings. (M) 6. And whosoever shall cause to stumble one of these little ones who believe in Me, it is expedient for him that an ass’ s millstone be hanged about his neck, and (that) he be sunk into the deep sea.] Mk. has “ And whosoever shall cause to stumble one of these little ones who believe in Me, it is good for him rather if an ass’ s millstone is placed about his neck, and he is cast into the sea.” — ὃςδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶὅς , as often.— τῶνπιστευόντων ] In Mk. the thought of the discourse has been turned by the insertion of vv. 38-40 from the consideration and treatment of children to that of children in faith and belief. In Mt., who has omitted 38-40, the thought is still of children. The editor retains Mk.’ s τῶνπιστευόντωνεἰςἐμέ in spite of its incongruity. Mk. has καλόν — μᾶλλον for συμφέρει . Mt. assimilates to 5:29, 30. Lk. in 17:1 has λυσιτελεῖ̀ .— ἵνακρεμασθῇ ] Mk. has εἰπερίκειται . So Lk. The ἵνα is an assimilation to 5:29-30.— καταποντισθῇ ] Mk. has βέβληται , Lk. ἔρριπται — πέλαγοςτῆςθαλάσσης ] Mk. has τὴςθάλασσαν , simply. πιστεύεινεἰς occurs only here in Mt. In Mk. It is wrongly omitted by א D Δ a b ff i k. The πιστευόντωνεἰςἐμέ there, immediately after vv. 38-41, can only refer to such as had confidence in the power of Christ, like the man who cast out demons in His name even though he was not an immediate follower of Christ. The construction does not occur again in Mk. nor in Lk. It is common in Jn. The τῶνπιστευόντωνεἰςἐμέ in Mt. is incongruous, and is only explicable as borrowed, i.e. not omitted, from Mk. (L) 7. Woe to the world because of stumbling-blocks! for there is necessity that stumbling-blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling-block comes!] Luke 17:1 has: ἀνέδεκτόνἐστιντοῦτὰσκάνδαλαμὴἐλθεῖν , πλὴνοὐαὶδι ʼ οὗἔρχεται . The editor inserts the saying here because of the verbal connection between σκάνδαλα and σκανδαλίσῃ of the previous verse; cf. the juxtaposition of 6:16 and 6:19 ἀφανίζει . For κόσμος , cf. 5:14, 13:38. (M) 8. And if thy hand or thy foot is causing thee to stumble, cut it off, and cast (it) from thee. It is good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt, than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the eternal fire.] Mk. has two separate sayings for the hand and the foot: “ And if thy hand should cause thee to stumble, cut it off. It is good for thee maimed to enter into life, than having the two hands to go away into Gehenna, into the unquenchable fire. And if thy foot should be causing thee to stumble, cut it off. It is good for thee to enter into life halt, than having the two feet to be cast into Gehenna.” Mt. has the saying about the hand in 5:30. He combines here, selecting βληθῆναι (Mark 45) rather than ἀπελθεῖν (43). In 5:29-30 he has both verbs. He assimilates to 5:29 by substituting εἰσκανδαλίζει for ἐὰνσκανδαλίσῃ , and ἔκκοψον for ἀπόκοψον , and by adding καὶβάλεἀπὸσοῦ ; cf. Introduction, p. xxx. For “ life,” see on 7:14.— εἰςτὸπῦρτὸαἰώνιον ] Mk. has: εἰςτὴνγέενναν , εἰςτὸπῦρτὸἄσβεστον . τὸπῦρτὸαἰώνιον , is an assimilation to 25:41. αἰώνιος occurs again in 25:46 of κόλασις , and in 19:16, 29, 25:46 of ζωή . On the idea of everlasting punishment, see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 287. Cf. 2:35 ἀπώλειααἰώνιος ; Enoch. 91:9 “ eternal judgement” ; 27:3 “ judgement— continually, for ever” ;22:11 “ punishment and torture for ever” ; 67:13 “ fire which burns for ever” ; Josephus, Wars, ii. 164, “ everlasting punishment” ; Ant. xviii. 14, “ an everlasting prison” ; Secrets of Enoch 10:6 hell is “ an everlasting inheritance” ; Jubilees 24:32 “ eternal malediction” ; Berakhoth 28b (Jochanan ben Zaccai) “ All the more should I weep now that they are about to lead me before the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, who lives and abides for ever, and for ever and ever; whose wrath, if He be wrathful, is an eternal wrath; and if He bind me, His binding is an eternal binding; and if He kill me, His killing is an eternal killing; whom I cannot placate with words, nor bribe with wealth” ; Baruch 85:12 “ there will be no opportunity of returning, nor a limit to the times.” In view of this general drift of contemporaneous thought upon this subject, there is no justification for the attempt to weaken the meaning of αἰώνιος in this Gospel. For the questions raised as to the duration of punishment in the Rabbinical schools, see Volz. (M) 9. And if thy eye is causing thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast (it) from thee. It is good for thee with one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into the Gehenna of fire.] Mk. has: “ And if thy eye should be causing thee to stumble, cast it out. It is good for thee with one eye to enter into the kingdom of God, than having two eyes to be cast into Gehenna, where ‘ their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched.’ ” Mt. assimilates to 5:29 by substituting εἰ — σκανδαλύζει for ἐὰν — σκανδαλίζῃ , σοί for σέ , ἔξελε for ἔκβαλε , and by adding καὶβάλεἀπὸσοῦ̀ . The addition of τοῦπυρός after γέενναν is an assimilation to 5:22 and a substitute for Mk v. 48. (L) 10. Take heed, do not despise one of these little ones; for I say to you, That their angels in heaven always see the face of My Father who is in heaven.] The editor adds a saying which clearly has reference to children, not to adult Christians of childlike faith, and is an additional proof that in v. 6 he still had literal children in mind. The τῶνμικρῶντούτων of v. 6 and of this verse probably suggested the insertion of this saying here. See note on v. 7.— βλεπουσιτὸπρόσωπον ] Cf. 1 K 10:8, 2 K 25:19, To 12:15. The “ seeing the face” means that they stand in the immediate presence of God. The verse gives an additional reason for reverencing the Christlike qualities of children; cf. v. 6. (L) 12. What think ye? if any man have a hundred sheep, and one of them stray, doth he not leave the ninety-nine, and go to the mountains and seek that which has strayed?] (M) 13. And if it happen that he find it, verily I say to you, that he rejoices more over it, than over the ninety-nine which did not stray.] Luke 15:3-7 has a similar saying. The parable there illustrates the divine love which seeks to reclaim sinners. In Mt. after v. 10 and before v. 14 it apparently illustrates from another point of view the value of children in God’ s sight. Their angels stand in His presence, and He cares for them as a shepherd does for his lost sheep. But this can hardly be an original connection. (L) 14. So it is not the will of (before) your Father who is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.] Vv. 12-14 have probably been added here by the editor as a third saying about τῶνμικρῶντούτων ; cf. vv. 6, 10. Even if vv. 10-14 be interpreted of children in faith, i.e. recent converts, vv. 12-14 can hardly be in an original connection. They presuppose a context such as that in Lk. where they would illustrate the divine love, not for children or for childlike believers, but for sinners who had strayed away from His love. For θἐλημαἔμπροσθεν cf. 11:26 εὐδοκίαἔμπροσθεν . 10. τῶνμικρῶντούτων ] D b c ff 1 2 g1 2 2, add τῶνπιστευόντωνεἰςἐμέ , to assimilate to v. 6. The words are very unsuitable here. 11. ῃλθεγὰρὁυἰὸςτοῦἀνθρώπουσῶ̀σαιτὸἀπολωλός So D S2 Omit א L * 1 13 33 e ff1 1. The verse is interpolated from Luke 19:10, apparently in order to make some sort of connection between v. 10 and 12-14. 15. The thought with which the discourse started was the necessity of an unassuming and unpretentious disposition in those who hope to enter the kingdom. Children and behaviour towards them were the test of this quality, vv. 1-5. A change was then made to the consideration of conduct towards children, and the sin of putting stumbling-blocks in their path, v. 6. Another abrupt change due to Mk. introduced the subject of a man who puts stumbling-blocks in his own spiritual life, vv. 7-9. Lastly, in some verses added by Mt. to Mk.’ s discourse the thought returned to the consideration of right conduct towards children (or childlike believers?), vv. 10-14. In these last three verses the thought of God’ s forgiveness of sinners is not prominent. Rather the thought emphasised here is that of His love for children (or childlike believers?). But the love of God is most strikingly expressed in His forgiveness of sin, and the Evangelist is aware that the parable could more appropriately be employed to illustrate His forgiving love. This suggests to him the sayings which follow about forgiveness as a necessary qualification of the Christian character. It seems clear that the juxtaposition of the ideas of giving no offence to little ones, v. 6, and of forgiving sin, v. 15, is purely artificial and literary, and that it is due to the editor of the Gospel. Now it is noticeable that vv. 6, 7, 15, 21 are paralleled in Luke 17:2, Luke 17:1, Luke 17:3, Luke 17:4. That is to say, that both Evangelists connect the ideas of giving offence to little ones and of forgiving sin. Since a motive for this connection can be discovered in Mt., whilst in Lk. it seems purely arbitrary, it seems probable that Luke 17:1-4 is due to reminiscence of Mat_18. (L) 15. And if thy brother sin against thee, go convince him between thee and him alone. if he hear thee, then hast gained thy brother.] Lk (17:3, 4) has: “ If thy brother sin, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if seven times a day he sin against thee, and seven times turn to thee, saying, I repent, thou shalt forgive him.” Cf. Test. Gad 6:3-7 “ If he admit his offence and repent, forgive him.” — ἔλεγξον ] cf. Leviticus 19:17 ἐλεγμῷἐλέγξειςτὸνπλησίονσου — μεταξὺσοῦκαὶαὐτοῦ ] is an Aramaism. The thought is of personal offences. The Christian disciple is to be reconciled to his offended fellow-Christian before he can bring offerings to God, 5:23, 24. He must also do everything in his power to bring one who has wronged him to penitence and to forgiveness. (L) 16. But if he will not hear (thee), take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may stand.]— ἐὰνδὲμὴἀκούσῃ ] i.e. if he will not admit his wrong-doing and be reconciled to you.— παράλαβεμετὰσοῦἔτιἕναἢδύο ] i.e. take with you one or two that they may admonish him, and be witnesses to the fact that you have made efforts to re-establish amity.— ἕναἢδύο ] in order that the Mosaic “ two or three” may be satisfied. The two or three are the offended Christian and the one or two whom he takes with him. The matter is not treated from a strictly legal point of view, because the offended person would not be regarded as a witness in a law court. Moreover, the one or two are to witness not to the offence, but to the unwillingness of the offender to be reconciled, and to the efforts made by the offended party to bring about reconciliation. It is probable that the quotation is an addition to the original saying made by the Evangelist, or by the compiler of his Jewish Christian source. The words quoted are from Deuteronomy 19:15 ἐπὶστόματοςδύομαρτύρωνκαὶἐπὶστόματοςτριῶνμαρτύρωνστήσεταιπᾶνῥῆμα . Luc has δύομαρτύρωνἢτριῶν . (L) 17. But if he refuse to hear them, tell it to the Church: and if he refuse to hear the Church also, let him be to thee as the Gentile and the toll-gatherer.] παρακούειν in the later Greek is to refuse to hear, cf. Esther 3:3, Esther 3:8, To 3:4, xxvi. 2. 1, xxx. 18. 2, and Mark 5:36 with Swete’ s note.— ἐκκλησία ] see on 16:18. The Church is the society of disciples of Christ who dwell in any place. For ἐθνικός and τελώνης , see on 5:46, 47. The Christian disciple who refuses to be reconciled to his fellow-Christian is to be regarded as no true member of the Society. (L) 18. Verily I say to you, Whatsoever things you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever things you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.] The saying with the verbs in the singular has already been recorded in 16:19. Here it means that the decisions of the community regarding what is or is not justifiable in its members must be regarded as final. (L) 19. Again I say to you, That if two of you agree upon earth concerning anything which they shall ask, it shall be done for them from My Father who is in the heavens.] This gives the reason for the assurance made in v. 18. The decisions of the community will be final, because God will hear the petitions of even two Christians who agree together. But the verse cannot be in an original connection. In v. 18 the agreement presupposed is agreement in coming to decisions upon questions which concern the Church’ s welfare. V. 19 is clearly an encouragement to prayer on the ground that the agreement of the smallest number in their petitions will insure an answer. The “ on earth” and “ in heaven” in both verses suggested the insertion of 19 here. Cf. note on v. 7. (L) 20. For where two ar three are gathered in My name, there am I in the midst of them.] That is to say, the prayer of two who are agreed will receive an answer, because Christ is with His disciples in their prayer; cf. Sayings of Our Lord, Log. v.: “ Wherever there are (two) they are not without God, and wherever there is one alone I say I am with him” ; Malachi 3:16 “ They that feared the Lord spake often the one to the other, and the Lord hearkened and heard” ; Aboth 3:8 “ Two that sit together and are occupied in the words of the Law have the Shechinah (i.e. the Divine Presence) among them.” Cf. 3:9 and B. Berakhoth 6a quoted by Taylor, The Oxyrhynchus Logia, p. 34 f. 15. εἰςσέ ] So D al latt. S1 S2. The words are wrongly omitted by א B 1 22 234*, and if not expressed would have to be understood. They are not found in Luke 17:3, but occur in the next verse. ὔπαγε is omitted by S1 S2. 20. D S1 have this verse in a negative form: “ For there are not two or three gathered together in My name that I am not in the midst of them.” (L) 21. Then came Peter, and said to Him, Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I shall forgive him? unto seven times?] Luke 17:4 has: “ And if seven times in the day he sin against thee, and seven times turn to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.” For the introduction of Peter, cf. 14:28, 15:15; and see note on 16:19, p. 180. (L) 22. Jesus saith to him, Not, I say to thee, until seven times; but, until seventy times seven.] The latter number is meant as an indefinitely great one. There is the same literary contrast between seven and seventy times seven in Genesis 4:24 Cf. Moulton, p. 98: “ A definite allusion to the Genesis story is highly probable. Jesus pointedly sets against the natural man’ s craving for seventy-sevenfold revenge, the spiritual man’ s ambition to exercise the privilege of seventy-sevenfold forgiveness.” Dr. Moulton had previously said that the meaning “ seventy seven times” is unmistakable in Genesis. It is very probable that Mt.’ s ἑβδομηκοντάκιςἑπτά is modelled on the similar phrase in Genesis, but it seems doubtful whether in both passages we should not translate seventy times seven, rather than seventy-seven times. In Mt., D has ἑβδομηκοντάκιςἑπτάκις , an obvious emendation. Blass renders seventy times seven, p. 145. So Wellhausen and Zahn, in loc. Contrast the teaching in the Babylonian Talmud, Joma 86b “ Rabbi Jose ben Jehuda said, If a man commits an offence once they forgive him, a second time they forgive him, a third time they forgive him, the fourth time they do not forgive him: for it is said (here follow Job 33:29 and Amos 2:6)” ; 87a “ Rabbi Isaac said, Every one who vexes his neighbour, if only in words, must appease him.” “ Rabbi Jose ben Hanina said, He who begs forgiveness from his neighbour must not do so more than three times, for it is said” (here follows Genesis 2:17, in which are here three particles of entreaty). 23. The editor now inserts a parable to illustrate the necessity of forgiveness. (L) 23. Therefore the kingdom of the heavens is like to a man, a king, who wished to take reckoning with his servants.]— ὡμοιώθη ] See on 11:16.— ἀνθρώπῳβασιλεῖ ] cf. 20:1, 22:2, 13:52. Here and in 22:2 ἄνθρωποςβασιλεύς probably means “ an earthly king,” a grecised form of the Jewish “ king of flesh and blood” which is common in the parables of the Talmud and Midrashim.— συνᾶραιλόγον ] occurs in BU 775, 2nd cent. a.d.; the middle voice in Fayû m Towns, p. 261, συνῆρμαιλόγοντῷπατρί , 1st cent. a.d.; and in i. 113, 2nd cent. a.d. (L) 24. And when he began to take account, there was brought to him a debtor to the amount of ten thousand talents.]— εἶςὀφειλέτης ] Cf. Blass, p. 144. And see on 9:18.— μυρίωνταλάντων ] The talent was equivalent to 6000 denarii, or £ 240. 10,000 talents is, therefore, an enormous sum. We must either suppose that the sum is heightened in order to form a literary contrast to the 100 denarii, or suppose that the servants here referred to are the higher officers of the king, through whose hands would pass the imperial taxes. (L) 25. And when he was unable to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made.] 26. Therefore the servant fell down, and did homage to him, saying, Lord, have forbearance with me, and I will pay thee all.] (L) 27. And the lord of that servant had compassion on him, and absolved him from the debt.] (L) 28. And that servant went out, and found one of his fellow-servants, who owed him one hundred denarii.] The denarius was worth about eightpence halfpenny. And he seized him, and held him by the throat, saying, Pay anything thou owest.] (L) 29. Therefore his fellow-servant fell down, and besought him, saying, Have forbearance with me, and I will pay thee.] (L) 30. And he would not; but went and cast him into prison, until he should pay what was owed.] (L) 31. Therefore his fellow-servants, seeing what had happened, were grieved exceedingly, and came and recounted to their lord all that had happened.]— ἐλυπήθησανσφόδρα ] see on 17:23. (L) 32. Then his lord called him, and saith to him, Thou evil servant, I forgave thee all that debt, since thou besoughtest me.]— τότε ] See on 2:7.— ὀφειλή ] occurs in 1 Corinthians 7:3, Romans 13:7.Romans 13:1 (L) 33. Oughtest not thou to have had pity on thy fellow-servant, as I had pity on thee?] (L) 34. And his lord was angry, and delivered him to the tormentors, until he should pay all that was owed.] (L) 35. So also my heavenly Father will do to you, if ye forgive not each his brother from your hearts.] The details of the parable do not seem altogether consistent. After v. 23 we seem to have a story of a wealthy merchant and his slaves, rather than one of a king and his ministers. The story has quite probably been adapted by the editor to suit the context. But the main point, that an unmerciful disposition will meet with the divine wrath, is quite clear. The parable begins with the formula “ the kingdom of heaven is like.” This means nothing more than that a lesson may be drawn from what follows, which all who hope to enter the kingdom should lay to heart. the Second Gospel. the Matthæ an Logia. Men like the Exorcist, vv. 38-40, or like him who merely gave a cup of cold water, v. 41, were “ little ones who believe in Me.” No stumbling-blocks were to be placed in their way. The Psalms of Solomon. Syriac version: Curetonian. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Babylonian Talmud. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Polybius. The Septuagint Version. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. For examples from the Papyri, see Deissmann, Bib. Stud. p. 221. And add Ox. Pap. ii. 286. 18 (a.d. 82), 272. 16 (a.d. 66), iv. 719. 24 (a.d. 193) 736. 75 (a.d. 1); Fayû m Towns, 247. The word is not found in literature outside the New Testament. E.— 19:1-20:34. JOURNEY TO 19:1-12. From Mark 10:1-16 (E) 1. And it came to pass, when Jesus finished these words.] For the formula, cf. 7:28, 11:1, 13:53, 26:1. (M) He departed from Galilee, and came into the boundaries of Judæ a beyond Jordan.] Mark 10:1 has: “ And He arose thence, and cometh into the boundaries of Judæ a, and beyond Jordan.” — ἦλθεν ] for Mk.’ s hist. present, as often. The addition of ἀπὸτῆςΓαλιλαίς marks the editor’ s perception of a new stage in Mk.’ s Gospel. (M) 2. And there followed Him many multitudes; and He healed them there.] Mk. has: “ And there journey with Him (?) again multitudes; and as He was wont, He was teaching them.” — ἠκολούθησαν ] Mt., as often, avoids the hist. pres. συνπορεύονται . He omits Mk’ s Semitic ἀναστάς as in 15:21 = Mark 7:24 and 26:60 = Mark 14:57, and omits also, as often, Mk.’ s πάλιν .— ἐθεράπευσεν ] The editor substitutes healing for teaching in 14:14 = Mark 6:34, and in 21:14 = Mark 11:18.— ὄχλοιπολλοί .] For the addition of πολλοί , cf. 4:25, 8:1, 18, 13:2, 15:30. In Mk. most MSS. have συνπορεύονταιπάλινὄχλοι . This is the only occurrence in Mk. of the plural ὄχλοι . But D S1 a b c ff 1 i k q have the singular. συνπορεύεσθαι occurs only here in Mk. D has συνέρχεται , cf. Mark 3:20. συνπορεύεσθαιπρός is awkward, and the reading of D al may be original. (M) 3. And there came to Him Pharisees, tempting Him, and saying, Is it lawful to put away a wife for every cause?] Mk. has: “ And Pharisees came and were questioning Him, if it is lawful for a man to put away a wife, tempting Him.” At first sight Mt. seems more likely to be original than Mk. The Jews did not question the legality of divorce. That was legalised by Deuteronomy 24:1, Deuteronomy 24:2. But they debated about the scope and limits of reasons for divorce. Cf. Gittin 90a, where the views of the schools of Hillel and of Shammai are given. The former allowed divorce for trivial offences, the latter only for some unchaste act. But it is clear that Mt. is editing Mk., and that in κατὰπᾶσαναἰτίαν and μὴἐπὶπορνείᾳ , v. 9, he has inserted into Mk.’ s narrative matter which is really inconsistent with it. In Mk. the Pharisees first put their leading question, Is it lawful to divorce a wife? They themselves would have no doubt of the legality of this, but they test Christ (πειράζοντες , Mar_2), knowing probably from previous utterances of His that He would reply in words which would seem directly to challenge the Mosaic law. Cf. His criticism of the distinction between clean and unclean meats, Mark 7:14-23. Christ answers with the expected reference to the law, What did Moses command? They state the Old Testament law. Moses sanctioned divorce. Christ at once makes His position clear. The law upon this poin was an accommodation to a rude state of society. But a prior and higher law is to be found in the Creation narrative, “ Male and female He created them,” Genesis 1:27 LXX., i.e. God created the two sexes that they might be united in the marriage bond, which is, therefore, ideally indissoluble. In answer to a further question of His disciples, the Lord enforces the lesson. A man who puts away his wife and marries another commits adultery. A woman who puts away her husband and marries another commits adultery. Upon this point Christ’ s teaching passes beyond the ordinary conditions of Jewish society. No woman could divorce her husband by Jewish law. But that is no reason why the Lord should not have expressed himself as Mk. records. There were exceptional cases of divorce by women in Palestine. Cf. Salome, Jos. Ant. xv. 259: “ She sent him (Costobar) a bill of divorce, though this was against the Jewish law (and dissolved her marriage with him).” And there is no reason why He may not have been acquainted with the possibility of divorce by women in the West, or why, even if He had not this in view, He may not have emphasised His point by stating the wrongfulness of divorce on either side of the marriage tie. All this is logical and consistent. Compare with it Mt.’ s account. The Pharisees are represented as inquiring, Is it lawful to put away a wife on any pretext? Christ answers as in Mk., that marriage from an ideal standpoint is indissoluble. The Pharisees appeal to the law against this judgement. In reply we should expect the Lord, as in Mk., to state the accommodating and secondary character of the legal sanction of divorce, and to reaffirm the sanctity of marriage. But instead, He is represented as affirming that πορνεία constitutes an exception. Thus He tacitly takes sides with the severer school of Jewish interpretation of Deu_24, and acknowledges the permanent validity of that law thus interpreted in a strict sense, which immediately before He had criticised as an accommodation to a rude state of social life. This inconsistency shows that Mk. is here original, and that κατὰπᾶσαναἰτίαν and μὴἐπὶπορνείᾳ are insertions by the editor of Mt. into Mk.’ s narrative. The motive of these insertions can only be conjectured. But in view of other features of the Gospel, it is probable that the editor was a Jewish Christian who has here judaised, or rather rabbinised Christ’ s sayings.1 Just as he has so arranged 15:16-20 as to represent Christ’ s attitude to the law to be that of the Rabbinical Jews, who regarded every letter of the law as permanently valid, so here he has so shaped Christ’ s teaching about divorce as to make it consonant with the permanent validity of the Pentateuchal law, and harmonious with the stricter school of Jewish theologians. It is probably to the same strain in the editor’ s character, the same Jewish Christian jealousy for the honour of the law and for the privileges of the Jewish people, that the prominence given to Peter (see on 16:19, p. 180), and the preservation of such sayings as 10:5-6, 23 is due. And to the same source may probably be attributed the judaising of Christ’ s language, in such expressions as “ the kingdom of the heavens,” “ The Father who is in the heavens.” 3. εἰἔξεστιν ] See note on 12:10.— κατὰπᾶσαναἰτίαν ] cf. Jos. Ant. iv. 253: γυναικὸςδὲτῆςσυνοικούσηςβουλόμενοςδιαζευχθῆναικαθ ʼ ἁσδηποτοῦναἰτίας . (M) 4. And He answered and said, Have ye not read, that the Creator from the beginning made them male and female?] Mk. has: “ But from the beginning of the creation male and female He made them.” ὁκτίσαςἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆς is an adaptation to suit the altered order of Mk.’ s ἀπ ʼ ἀρχῆςκτίσεως , for which cf. Pesikta R. K. 21 (Wü nsche, p. 205): מ ת ח ל ת ב ר י י ת ו ש ל ע ו ל ם .2 ἄρσενκαὶθῆλυἐποίησεναὐτούς is a quotation from the LXX. of Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:2. (M) 5. And said, For this cause shall a man leave the father and the mother, and shall be joined to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh.] Mk. has no “ and said,” and omits the second clause of the quotation. The editor has inserted καὶεἶπεν to separate the two quotations, and inserts the clause omitted by Mk. The passage comes from the LXX. of Genesis 2:24, which has αὐτοῦ after πατέρα and after μητέρα . Luc omits the second αὐτοῦ . So Mk. Mt. omits both. The idea involved in the verses seems to be that God created a single pair, who were therefore destined for one another. It was also written that a man should forsake his parents and cleave to his wife, and that he and his wife should be one flesh. In other words, married couples were in respect of unity, as the first pair created by God, destined for one another. Divorce, therefore, should be out of the question. This conclusion is expressed in the next verse. (M) 6. So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God joined together, let not man separate.] So Mk. Divorce, therefore, is from an ideal standpoint not to be thought of. (M) 7. They say to Him, Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and put away (a wife)?] In Mk. this clause occurs earlier in the narrative in the form, “ And he answered and said, What did Moses command you? And they said, Moses allowed us to write a bill of divorce, and to put away (a wife).” Mt., as usual, avoids the question in the mouth of the Lord. No Jew would regard Deuteronomy 24:1ff. as anything else than a Mosaic command to adopt certain forms in cases of divorce. And yet, as grammatically construed, the passage does not command the giving of a bill of divorce, but assumes that as a matter of practice it will under certain circumstances be given. See Driver, in loc. 8. He saith to them, that Moses for the hardness of your heart allowed you to put away your wives, but from the beginning it hath not been1 so.] That is to say, the toleration of divorce by the law is a departure from the high standard of morality presupposed in the creation of a single pair. Divorce is a bad custom which has grown up amongst a degenerate people, and the Mosaic law tolerated it as an accommodation to a low level of moral custom. Mk. has: “ And Jesus said, For the hardness of your heart he wrote for you this commandment.” 9. Mk. has here: “ And in the house again, the disciples were asking Him about this.” Mt., as elsewhere, omits Mk.’ s vague references to a house. See on 9:1, 15:15, 21, 17:19. (M) 9. But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, save for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery.] Mk. has: “ And He saith to them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and shall marry another, commits adultery against her. And if she who has put away her husband shall marry another, she commits adultery.” — λέγωδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶλέγει , to make an antithesis with v. 8, cf. Introduction, p. xxxi. The editor omits the last clause as inconsistent with Jewish custom. See on v. 3. Some of the copyists of Mk. have also found it inconvenient, and modified it so as to get rid of the conception of divorce by a woman. See critical note in Swete. A parallel to this saying has already been recorded in 5:32. See note there. And he who marries her that is put away, commits adultery.] This clause is not in Mk. If genuine (see below), it may be meant to compensate for the omission of Mar_12. (E) 10. The disciples say to him, If the reason (of divorce) between a man and his wife be so, it is not convenient to marry.] The editor adds three verses which are not in Mk. Vv. 10, 11 are probably an editorial link to connect 12 with the preceding. αἰτία refers back to αἰτία of v. 3. If the cause or reason of divorce between man and wife be so, i.e. if it is to be limited to unchaste acts, it is better not to marry, because marriage with a woman of bad temper or malicious tongue, e.g., is in that case an intolerable burden which cannot be thrown off. (E) 11. And He said to them, All do not receive this saying, but those to whom it has been given.] That is, “ what you say about the expediency of abstaining from marriage has some truth in it. But it is not practicable for all men, but only for some for whom providence has so destined it, e.g. physical eunuchs, and those who abstain from marriage in order to obey a religious call. If a man feels himself called to do so, let him.” It is clear that if the passage be so interpreted, the disciples instead of receiving an explanation and solution of their difficulty that marriage without facility for divorce would be a burden, receive what amounts to a commendation of abstention from marriage for the kingdom’ s sake. In other words, whilst vv. 1-9 are calculated to heighten the conception of marriage, vv. 10-12 are clearly intended to increase respect for those who renounce marriage. This can hardly be an original connection. V. 12 is probably added here by the editor simply because it is concerned in a negative way with the subject of marriage, which has been the subject of vv. 1-9. If v. 11 be a historical saying of Christ, it looks very much as though it were originally connected with the exposition of Christ’ s about divorce as given in Mk., and not with this teaching as modified by Mt. For the saying of the disciples, that if Christ’ s exposition of the question of divorce were to hold good, marriage would be a burden better left alone, seems to arise naturally enough from the strict teaching that divorce is not permissible, whilst it is very unexpected in the mouths of Christ’ s disciples as a protest against the doctrine that divorce should be limited to cases of adultery. Could not Christ’ s disciples endure what the disciples of Shammai submitted to? It might be possible to interpret the passage in a different direction by referring τὸνλόγοντοῦτον not to the question of the disciples, but to the statement by the Lord of the indissoluble character of the marriage bond, vv. 1-9. “ Not all can receive this estimation in their understanding and carry it into practice in their life, but those to whom it has been given by the divine grace. But these can receive it; for just as there are physical eunuchs, so there are spiritual eunuchs, who, knowing marriage to be a sacred and indissoluble bond, abstain from it for the purpose of dedicating their lives to the kingdom.” But the logical consequence of “ not all receive this saying (vv. 1-9) but those to whom it has been given,” is not for there are some who abstain from marriage, but for there are some who recognise the sacred nature of the bond, and live married lives without recourse to divorce. The whole section in Mt. suffers from inconsistency of thought due to literary revision and compilation. μὴἐπὶπορνείᾳ is inconsistent with v. 6, and whilst this verse, and the whole paragraph, 1-9, exalts marriage as an institution of the Creator; v. 12, without depreciating it, emphasises the duty of renouncing it under certain circumstances.— χωρεῖν ] “ to contain,” then of the mind “ to contain,” “ receive,” “ hold” : the saying is too sweeping to be universally received and practised.— τὸνλόγοντοῦτον ] (see above) either the dictum that it is better not to marry, or less probably the exposition of Christ that marriage is a permanent bond, and should be unbroken by divorce, vv. 4-8.— οἶςδέδοται ] See on 13:11. ὑμῖνδέδοται are those who have received spiritual insight, which enables them to receive and practise the high standard involved in “ this saying.” (L) 12. For there are eunuchs who were born so from their mother’ s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of the heavens. He who can receive it, let him receive it.] The verse explains what is meant by οἶςδέδοται . Some there are to whom the spiritual capacity to recognise the truth of “ this saying” and to practise it has been given. For just as there are physical eunuchs, i.e. men for whom natural infirmity or the cruelty of men has made marriage impossible, so that for them the saying “ better not to marry” is a necessary truism; so there are some who have made themselves spiritual eunuchs, i.e. have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom, i.e. because the calls of religious duty have made marriage inexpedient. To such as these spiritual insight has been given which enables them to realise that it is better not to marry. For renunciation of earthly blessings for the sake of the kingdom, cf. vv. 28, 29. The Lord may have had in mind such instances of the renunciation of marriage as the Essenes, or John the Baptist, or some among His disciples. 3. προσελθόντεςΦαρισαῖοι ] The words are omitted from Mk. by D S1 a b k. If they are not genuine there, Mt. has inserted them. For his partiality for προσέρχεσθαι , see on 4:3; and for the insertion of the Pharisees, cf. 22:34, 41, and Introduction, p. lxxviii. 4. ὁκτίσας ] So B 1 22 33 124. κτίσας is probably a reminiscence of Mar 10:6, and is probably genuine.— ὁποιήσας ] of א C D Z al S1 S2 latt., though strongly attested, is probably an assimilation to the following ἐποίησεν , and to the LXX. of Genesis 1:27. S1 S2 have: “ Have ye not read that He that made the male from the beginning, the female also made?” This is not the original text (Merx), but a clumsy translation which necessitates the omission of αὐτούς at the end of the clause.— ἄρσενκαὶθῆλυέποίησεναὐτούς ] is taken by the editor from Mk. If he had wished to suggest the complete equality of the sexes by omitting αὐτούς , he would also have changed the order of the words to make this clear. καὶεἷπεν is added by Mt. to separate the two quotations. It is omitted by S1, but after the change of Mk.’ s κτίσεως into ὀκτίσας it suitably introduces the following quotation as a direct command of the Creator expressed in the words of Scripture. S1 ff omit ἐξἀρχῆς . 7. δοῦναι ] S1 S2 introduce a subject “ that he that would dismiss his wife should give,” etc. 9. The passage in Mk. runs: ὅςἅνἀπολύσῃτὴνγυναῖκααὐτοῦκαὶγαμήσῃἄλληνμοιχᾶταιἐπ ʼ αὐτήν · καὶἐὰναὐτὴἀπολύσασατὸνἄνδρααὐτῆςγαμήσηἄλλονμοιχᾶται . This has given trouble to the Syriac and Latin translators, who substitute desertion for divorce in the second clause. So S1, who also transposes the clauses: “ That woman which leaveth her husband and becometh the wife of another doth indeed commit adultery, and that man which leaveth his wife and taketh another doth indeed commit adultery” (Burkitt). D has καὶἐὰνγυνὴἐξέλθῃἀπὸτοῦἀνδρός , and so in substance d a b c ff2 Wellh. Mt. inserts μὴἐπὶπορνείᾳ after γυναῖκααὐτοῦ , and omits the harsh ἐπ ʼ αὐτήν . He also omits the whole of the second clause. B D S2 133 latt. assimilate to 5:32 by substituting παρεκτὸςλὸγουπορνείας for μὴἐπὶπορνείᾳ . B C* N further assimilate to 5:32 by substituting ποιεῖαὐτήνμοιχευθῆναι for μοιχᾶται .1 B N also omit καὶγαμήσῃἅλλην for the same reason. S2 adds “ against against her,” to assimilate to Mk. καὶὁἀπολελυμένηνγαμήσαςμοιχᾶται ] is omitted by א C3 D L S S1 S2 a b e ff1 g1 h. It seems to be a further assimilation to 5:32. 13-22. From Mark 10:13-22. (M) 13. Then were there brought children to Him, in order that He night place His hands upon them, and pray; and the disciples rebuked them.] Mk. has: “ And they were bringing children to Him, in order that He might touch them; and the disciples were rebuking them.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— προσηνέχθησαν ] Mk. has προσέφερον . Mt. substitutes aor. for imperf., as often. For Mt.’ s preference for passive verbs, see on 4:1; and cf. ἠνέχθη , 14:11, for ἥνεγκεν Mark 6:28.— τὰςχεῖραςἐπιθῇαὐτοῖςκαὶπροσεύξηται ] Mk. has simply αὐτῶνἅψηται . Mt.’ s words are an editorial explanation.— ἐπετίμησαν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imperf. (A D al latt. (so also Lk. א B al), but א B ἐπετίμησαν ), as often. (M) 14. And Jesus said, Allow the children, and forbid them not, to come to Me: for of such is the kingdom of the heavens.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus saw and was vexed, and said to them, Allow the children to come to Me; do not forbid them: for of such is the kingdom of God.” It is usual with Mt. to omit verbs like ἠγανάκτησεν as applied to Christ; see on 8:3 and 15:29, and Introduction, p. xxxi.— καὶμὴκωλύετε ] Mk. rather frequently in the latter part of his Gospel has no connecting link between sayings. Mt. generally supplies a particle. Lk. also has καί here.— τῶντοιούτωνἐστὶνἡβασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν ] i.e. many qualities characteristic of childhood are necessary to admit people into the kingdom. See on 18:3-5. (M) 15. Mt. here omits Mk v. 15. He has anticipated it in 18:3-4: And having laid His hands upon them, He departed thence.] Mk. has: “ And having taken them in His arms, He was blessing them, having laid His hands upon them. And as He was going forth to travel” . Mt. omits Mk.’ s ἐναγκαλισάμενος , as in 18:2. 16. The connection of sections in Mar_10 is probably purely topical. The relation of Christianity to the marriage question (1-12) suggested the incident of the children (13-16) and the relation of Christianity to wealth (17-27) followed naturally enough. Mt. simply follows Mk.’ s guidance. (M) And, behold, one came to Him, and said, Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?] Mk. has: “ And as He was going forth into the way, there ran one, and, kneeling down before Him, was asking Him, Good Teacher, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?” — ἐπορεύθηἐκεῖθενκαὶἰδού ] for Mk.’ s καὶἐκπορευομένουεἰςὁδόν . For καὶἰδού , see on 1:20.— εἶςπροσελθὼναὐτῷεἷπεν ] abbreviates Mk.’ s προσδραμὼνεἶ̀ςκαὶγονυπετήσαςαὐτὸνἐπηρώτααὐτόν . For προσελθών , see on 4:3.— διδάσκαλε ] Mt., in view of his modification of the next verse of Mk., transposes “ good” from “ Teacher” to “ what.” .— σχῶζωὴναἰώνιον ] For “ eternal life,” see Dalm. Words, p. 156; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 368. Mk. has κληρονομήσω . “ Inheritance” is a common Jewish metaphor, to express participation in the blessings of the future; cf. Dalm. Words, 125 ff.; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 306. (M) 17. And He said to him, Why askest thou Me about the good? One is the good. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to him, Why callest thou Me good? No one is good save one, God. Thou knowest the commandments.” Mt.’ s changes are probably intentional, to avoid the rejection by Christ of the title “ good,” and the apparent distinction made between Himself and God. In Mk. the meaning seems to be, “ Why go out of your way to call one whom you regard as a human Teacher ‘ good’ ? Goodness is a quality of character, and belongs in any full sense to God alone. But God’ s goodness is revealed in His commandments, and inheritance of eternal life depends upon keeping them.” Thus the words begin as a rebuke for the thoughtless use of the epithet “ good,” and end as an answer to the question, “ What shall I do,” etc. Mt., by placing “ good” in the main question, is obliged to treat all that follows as a direct answer to the question. The sequence of thought seems to be, “ Why askest thou Me about the good? One is good,” i.e. “ the good” is not an independent and limited quantity in life which can be ascertained and “ done.” It is an attribute of character, and that the divine character. But the goodness of the divine nature is revealed in His commandments. In order to make clear this last thought, which is already implied in Mk., the editor substitutes “ But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments,” for Mk.’ s “ thou knowest the commandments.” For τηρεῖν , cf. 23:3 “ keep,” i.e. a continual process, not a single act which can be begun and ended , as a necessary preliminary to entry into life. (M) 18. He saith to Him, Of what sort? And Jesus said, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour father and mother; and, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself.] Mk. has: “ Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud.” Mt. takes a severer view of the character of the questioner than Mk. By representing him as asking, “ What good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” he makes the question more unintelligent than it is in Mk. Here, by inserting λέγει — τό , he emphasises the man’ s obtuseness. In v. 20, by putting into his mouth, “ What lack I yet?” he attributes to him selfsufficiency. And he omits altogether Mk v. 21a. Compare the treatment in Matthew 22:34-40 of the questioner described in Mark 12:28-34. ποίας may mean, “ What sort of commandment?” cf. 22:36. Or ποῖος may be hardly distinguishable from τίς . “ Which commandments?” cf. Blass, p. 176; Win.-Schm. p. 241. See on 24:42.— οὐφονεύσεις , κ .τ .λ .] Mk. has μὴφονεύσῃς , κ .τ .λ . After μὴψευδομαρτυρήσῃς , Mk. has μὴἀποστερήσῃς (so א A B2 C D latt.). This may be a reminiscence of Exo 21:10, or Deuteronomy 24:14 (LXX. A F), or Ecclus 4:1. Mt. omits it (if it was in his text of Mk., but B S1 omit there), and substitutes after “ honour father and mother,” “ thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” This comes from Leviticus 19:18, and occurs again in 22:39 = Mark 12:31 = Luke 10:27, whence it is here taken. The first four clauses come from Exodus 20:13-16 or Deuteronomy 5:17-20. In Mk. the order μὴμοιχ . μὴφον . is attested by A N X al latt., but μὴφον . μὴμοιχ . in א a B C al S1. Mt. has this latter order, which is that of the Massoretic Text of Ex. and Dt., and of the LXX. A F. In. Ex. B has οὐμοιχ . οὐκλεψ . οὐφον ., and in Dt. οὐμοιχ . οὐφον . οὐκλεψ . Thus Mk. (א a B C al S1) and Mt. agree in order with the Heb. (M.T.) and the LXX. (A F Luc.). The other order, οὐμοιχ . οὐφον . οὐκλεψ ., represented by Mk. (A N X al latt.), Luke 18:20, LXX. (B in Dt.), Philo, is now supported by the Hebrew Papyrus published in the Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæ logy, xxv. Pt. 1. pp. 34-56. Mk. has the conjunctive for the indicative of the LXX. Mt. assimilates to the LXX. (M) 19. τίματὸνπατέρακαὶτὴνμητέρα ] Mk. has σου after πατέρα , and in Ex. LXX. B omits the second σου . Mt. (א B C* D al) omits the pronoun altogether as in 15:4. It is twice inserted by S1 S2 and some old latt., but can hardly be genuine. This is surprising, since the tendency in Mt. is to assimilate Mk.’ s quotations to LXX. not to deviate from it. (M) 20. The young man saith to Him, All these things I observed: what lack I yet?] Mk. has: “ And he said, Teacher, all these things I observed from my youth.” — ὁνεανίσκος ] Mt. has formed a nominative for the verb out of Mk.’ s ἐκνεότητόςμου , which he omits. He also omits Mk.’ s διδάσκαλε , and has ἐφύλαξα for ἐφυλαξάμην .1 The former is the New Testament form elsewhere; cf. Luke 11:28, Luke 18:21, John 12:47, Acts 7:53, Acts 16:4, Acts 21:24, Romans 2:26, Galatians 6:13, 1 Timothy 5:21, 1 Timothy 5:6:20, 2 Timothy 1:12, 2 Timothy 1:14.— τίἔτιὑστερῶ ] is formed out of Mk.’ s ἕνσεὑστερεῖ in the next verse. See on v. 16. (M) 21. Jesus said to him, If thou wishest to be perfect, go sell thy possessions, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow Me.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus looking on him loved him, and said to him, One thing is lacking to thee: go sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow Me.” Mt. omits the first clause, in accordance with his tendency to drop out clauses which attribute emotion to the Lord; cf. on 8:3, and Introduction, p. xxxi. Moreover, the questioner, as described by Mt., with his obtuse self-complacency, was not lovable. Mt. substitutes: “ But if thou wilt be perfect.” What could be said to a man of this sort, one who conceived of eternal life as something to be acquired by merit, as a day labourer earns a wage; one who regarded “ goodness” as a definite and ascertainable quantity which could be worked off; one who so misunderstood the commandments, and so deceived himself as to suppose that he had kept them; one who could ask the question, What do I yet lack? “ If thou wilt be perfect,” says the Lord. The words are, of course, a descent to the level of the questioner. He thought of perfection as attainable by works, and the Lord took him at his own estimation, and proposed to him a task which would not lead him to perfection, but which would do one of two things. If he obeyed, he might learn in the service of Christ something of the spirit of the gospel, which sets before men the ideal of the divine perfection, 5:48, and which can never conceive of perfection as a goal reached; cf. Luke 17:10. If he found the task too hard for him, he would have learned to be less confident of his own capacity to do the one thing needful for inheritance of eternal life. For τέλειος cf. 5:48.— σουτὰὑπάρχοντα ] for Mk.’ s ὅσαἔχεις . τὰὑπάρχοντα occurs in 24:47, 25:14, never 1n Mk., but often in Lk. (M) 22. And the young man when he heard this saying went away grieved: for he had great possessions.] Mk. has: “ But his countenance fell at the saying, and he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s strong word στυγνάσας , with its implication of unwillingness to obey Christ’ s command, just as he omits Mark 1:45 with its direct disobedience of Christ’ s word. 16-22. The section with its striking deviations from Mk. is most easily explained as being derived from the second Gospel. The alteration in v. 17 seems clearly secondary as compared with Mk. On the other hand, the insertions in vv. 17, 19, 21, and the double historic present vv. 18, 20, might seem to point to another source, but are insufficient as a proof of such a source. Lk. has some points of agreement with Mt. against Mk Both have ἐφύλαξα (Lk. א A B L) for ἐφυλαξάμην , both have οὐρανοῖς for οὐρανῷ , both omit στυγνάσας and substitute ἀκούσας , both omit μὴἀποστερήσῃς , and both omit ἐμβλέψαςαὐτῷἠγάπησεναὐτόν . These agreements are not sufficient to make a second source necessary. 16. διδάσκαλε ] C E al S1 S2 latt. add ἁγαθέ , assimilating to Mark 10:17.— τίἀγαθόν ] ἀγαθόν is omitted by S1 S2 ff2 238 248 for the same reason. 17. τίμεἐρωτᾷςπερὶτοῦἀγαθοῦ ] So א B D L S1 S2 latt. C E al assimilate to Mk. εἷςἐστὶνὁἀγαθός ] א B D L 1 22 S1 a; and with ὁθέος b c ff1 2 S2. C E al assimilate to Mk. In these verses Mt.’ s omission of άγαθέ after διδάσκαλε , his insertion of ὰγαθόν after τί , his change of Mk.’ s τίμελέγειςἁγαθόν into τίμεἐρωτᾷςπερὶτοῦάγαθοῦ , and his change of οὐδεὶςἀγαθὸςείμὴεἶςὁθεός into εἶςέστὶνὁἀγαθὁς , seem clearly due to a desire to warn readers of Mk. that the Lord did not refuse, as applied to Himself, a title which He admitted as applicable to God, and did not draw a sharp distinction between Himself and God. That these changes are due to Mt. himself rather than to the copyists of his Gospel, is suggested by the changes made by Mt. in the text of Mk., which are collected on pp. xxxi, xxxii of the Introduction. The later copyists of the Gospel have assimilated the passage to the text of Mk. 20. ἐφύλαξα ] א c b C D al S1 S2 a b c e ff2 h q add ἐκνεότητόςμου from Mk.— τίἔτιὑστερῶ ] Om. S1. 21. ἐνοὐρανοῖς ] B C D. But א E F have ἐνοὐρανῷ as in 6:20. S2 adds, “ and take thy Cross.” The words are added in Mk. by A N X al a q S1. 23-30. = Mark 10:23-31. (M) 23. And Jesus said to His disciples, Verily I say to you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of the heavens. And again I say to you.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus looking round saith to His disciples, How hardly shall they who have riches enter into the kingdom of God. And the disciples were amazed at His words. And Jesus again answering saith to them, Children, how hard it is to enter into the kingdom of God.” Mt. by abbreviating avoids the redundancy of Mk., cf. Introduction, p. xxiv; and also the amazement of the disciples, cf. Introduction, p. xxxiv. πάλιν is a reminiscence of the clauses omitted from Mk. δυσκόλως ] is an uncommon word. συσκολία occurs in Job 34:30; δύσκολος , Jeremiah 49:8, Ezekiel 2:6 (Th.); Ditt. Syll. 213. 33, δυσκόλωνκαιρῶν , and in Galen, Arist., Plato, Xenophon, and other writers. (M) 24. It is easier for a camel to enter through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man into the kingdom of the heavens.] Mk. has: “ It is easier for a camel to pass through the hole of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” — εὐκοπώτερος ] see on 9:5.— τρήματος ] for Mk.’ s late and rare τρυμαλιᾶς .— εἰσελθεῖν ] Mt. avoids the duplication of the verb διελθεῖν , εἰσελθεῖν ] in Mk.— ῥαφίς ] add to the examples in Lexicons, Ox. Pap. iv. 736, 75, (a.d. 1). (M) 25. And the disciples when they heard it, were very astonished, saying, Who then can be saved?] Mk. has: “ And they were exceedingly astonished, saying to Him, And who can be saved?” Mt. inserts ἀκούσαντες and μαθηταί , substitutes his favourite σφόδρα for Mk.’ s stronger περισσῶς , omits πρὸςαὐτόν , and substitutes τίςἄρα for καὶτίς . For τίςἄρα , cf. 18:1, 19:25, 24:45, Mark 4:41. For Mk.’ s πρὸςαὐτόν see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2366e. (M) 26. And Jesus looking upon (them) said to them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.] Mk. has: “ Jesus looked upon them and saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God.” Mt. inserts a conjunction, and substitutes a past tense for λέγει , as often. He omits the redundant ἀλλ ʼ οὐπαρὰθεῷ : cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 27. Then Peter answered and said to Him, Behold, we have left all things, and followed Thee; what then shall we have?] Mk. has “ Peter began to say to Him, Behold, we have left all things, and followed Thee.” — τότε ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s abruptness and his ἤρξατο . His insertion of τίἄραἔσταιἡμῖν seems intended to relieve the ambiguity of S. Peter’ s statement as recorded in Mk., where “ Behold we,” etc., is a half-interrogative statement evidently intended to provoke comment. “ We have done what the young man could not bring himself to do (v. 22). What reward in heaven shall we have?” (M) 28. And Jesus said to them, Verily I say to you, That.] Mk. has: “ Jesus said, Verily I say to you.” Mt. avoids Mk.’ s abruptness. Mt. here inserts the following: (L) Ye who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.] Lk. has somewhat similar words in 22:28-30.— παλινγενεσία ] After the advent of the Messiah the Jews expected the creation of a new heaven and new earth. Cf. Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:22, Deuteronomy 32:12 (Onq.), Apoc. Bar 32:6 “ the mighty One will renew His creation” ; 44:12 “ the new world,” cf. Charles’ note on 32:6. παλινγενεσία is used by Philo, Vita Mos. ii. 12, of the renewal of the world after the Flood, and de Mund. xv. of the restoration of the world after being burned. There seems to be no exact Aramaic equivalent. According to Dalman, Words, p. 177, “ new world” would be the nearest.— ὅτανκαθίση , κ .τ .λ .] cf. Enoch 62:5 “ Pain will seize them when they see that Son of Man sit on the throne of His glory” ; and see on 16:27.— φυλὰςτοῦἸσραήλ ] i.e. those to whom they had preached the gospel; cf. 10:6, 23. (M) 29. And every one who hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for My name’ s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall inherit eternal life.] Mk. has “ There is no one who hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or children, or lands, for My sake, and for the gospel’ s sake, but he shall receive an hundredfold now in this present time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the coming age eternal life.” Mt. avoids Mk.’ s harsh construction, οὐδεὶςἔστινὃςἀφῆκεν — ἐὰνμὴλάβῃ . In Mk v. 30 the thought is of the many advantages of incorporation into the Christian society. In it the convert should find fresh ties and new interests more satisfying than those from which he had cut himself adrift; cf. 1 Corinthians 3:21. But in Mt.’ s connection, after the insertion of v. 28, the whole emphasis is on the future reward in the παλινγενεσία . This is why Mt. omits Mk.’ s νῦνἐντῷκαιρῷτούτῳ — διωγμῶν , for which his κληρονομήσει is a sort of substitute. The Apostles should sit on thrones; but even the humblest disciple should receive a manifold compensation, and inherit an estate greater than any which he had abandoned, namely, life everlasting. (M) 30. But many first shall be last; and last first.] The connection of this clause with the preceding is obscure both in Mt. and in Mk. It would seem that the πολλοί must refer to Christian disciples. All will inherit life everlasting, but many who are now first shall then be last. It seems best (with Swete) to understand the words as a rebuke to the self-complacent spirit implied in S. Peter’ s words: “ It may be difficult for the rich to enter into the Kingdom, but we who have left all are in no danger of exclusion.” Christ’ s words are a warrant for this confidence, and at the same time a rebuke and a warning. The ambiguity lies in the “ first” and “ last.” Does He mean “ Many who first became My disciples will find greater difficulty of entry than many who followed Me at a later period” ? Or is the πρῶτοι used of rank rather than of time: “ Many who now seem to hold a position of privilege will then find themselves in the lowest place” ? Lk. (13:30) has similar words in a different connection, and the saying occurs in the New Sayings of Jesus from Oxyrhynchus, ll. 25-27 in a doubtful context. 23-30. Mt. and Lk. in this section have a number of small points of agreement against Mk. E.g.: Mat_23 = Luke 18:24 δὲ — εἶπεν . Both omit Mk v. 24; but Mt. has a trace of it in πάλινδὲλέγωὑμῖν . Mat_24 = Luke 25 τρήματος . Mat_25 = Luke 26 ἀκούσαντες . Mat_26 = Luke 27 εἶπεν , and the omission of ἀλλ ʼ οὐπαρὰθεῷ . Mat_27 = Luke 28 εἶπεν , ἠκολουθήσαμεν . Mat_28= Luke 29 ὁδὲ — εἷπεν . Matthew 29, Luke 30 πολλαπλασίονα (Mt. B L). 24. βασιλείαντοῦθεοῦ ] Z curss a b c e S1 S2 have βασιλείαντῶνοὐρανῶν . We should certainly expect the latter, but, in editing Mk., Mt. does not seem to have carried out his modifications with absolute uniformity, and he may have left τοῦθεοῦ here. If so, it was inevitable that it should be altered into τῶνοὐρανῶν . But in view of the facts given in Introduction, p. lxvii, it must remain probable that τῶνοὐρανῶν is original here, and that it has been changed into τοῦθεοῦ to assimilate to Mk. τρἡματος ] א * B, but א c D L X al, τρυπήματος . 29. μητέπα ] א C K al S2 add ἢγυναῖκα , which occurs in Luke 18:29. It is omitted here by B D 1 S1 a b e ff 12. It is unnatural here after the express prohibition of divorce in vv. 1-9. ἐκατονταπλασίονα ] So א C D X S1 S2. πολλαπλασίονα as in Lk. is read by B L. E editorial passages. M the Second Gospel. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. LXX. The Septuagint Version. 1 See also p. 167, note 1 Jos. Josephus. 2 Cf. also Ass. Mos. 1:17, 12:4 ab initio creaturœ orbis terrarum. 1 γέγονεν . For the perfect cf. 21:21, Daniel 12:1 Th. It seems to mean “ Moses indeed tolerated divorce; but from the creation onwards it was not and never has been the Divine intention. Behind the Mosaic toleration lay always the ideal implied in Genesis 1:27, Genesis 5:2. L the Matthæ an Logia. S Syriac version: Curetonian. latt. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Wellh. Wellhausen. 1 It would be natural to suppose that παρεκτὸςλὸγουπορνείας is original here, if it were not that we should then have to explain why μὴἐπίπορνείᾳ has been substituted here only, and not in 5:32. The two phrases maÿ be alternative renderings by the editor of the ד ב ד ע ר ו ה of the school of Shammai. See on 5:32. Dalm. Dalman. Win.-Schm. Winer-Schmiedel. X passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Luc. Lucian. 1 Weiss renders this in Mk. “ From all these I guarded myself.” See Meyer’ s Comm. 6th ed. in loc., and cf. Acts 21:25, 2 Timothy 4:15. Th. Theodotion. Ditt. Dittenberger Sylloge. Arist. Aristotle. Ox. Pap. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. Onq. The Targum of Onkelos. 20:1-16. “ For the kingdom of the heavens is like to a man, a householder,” i.e. in the preparation for the kingdom, God deals with His servants as a householder does with his hired labourers, who pays them each and all the stipulated wage. Just so God when the kingdom comes will give to all who enter His service the eternal life which He has promised to them. The parable, as originally spoken, can hardly have had any other object than that of warning Christ’ s first disciples, that others who should become His disciples at a later date would also be partakers of privileges equal to theirs who had first joined Him (cf, Galatians 2:6) The statement that the payment of wages began with the last hired, is a literary device to account for and to emphasise the dissatisfaction of the first hired labourers. The editor has been led by this feature to insert the parable here as an explanation of Mk.’ s difficult v. 31. The first called will be as the last called, because all alike will receive an equal reward. A somewhat similar question is solved on parallel lines in 2 Es 5:41, 42. God has made promises of love to His people: “ And I said, Lord, Thou hast made the promise unto them that be in the end: and what shall they do that have been before us, or we, or they that shall come after us? And He said unto me, I will liken My judgement unto a ring: like as there is no slackness of them that be last, even so there shall be no swiftness of them that be first.” Cf. also Apoc. Bar 30:2 “ the first will rejoice, and the last will not be grieved.” This does not, however, exclude the thought of differences of position in the kingdom; cf. 19:28. 1. For the kingdom of the heavens is like— for the formula, cf. on 11:16, 13:24— to a householder, — cf. 13:52, — who went out early— “ the time of working,” says the Babyl. Talmud ( Mez 832), “ is from sunrise” — to hire labourers into his vineyard.] For the earthly estate owner as contrasted with God, see the parable from the Mechilta, cited by Fiebig, Altjü dische Gleichnisse Jesu, 69. For a somewhat similar parable, with, however; a very different application, see Jer. Talm. Berakhoth 5:3 quoted by Lightfoot.— μισθώσασθαιἐργάτας ] misses the ring of the original ל א נ ו ר י א נ י ר י ; cf. Bab. Mez 76b. (L) 2. And having agreed with the labourers at the rate of a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard.] For the denartus, cf. on 18:28. It was equivalent in value to the Greek drachma which Tobit received as his daily wage (5:14), and the word, like many other Latin terms, passed into Jewish use. (L) 3. And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing in the market place unemployed.]— ἀγορά ] had passed into Jewish usage. See Dalman’ s Wö rterbuch. The third hour Isaiah 9 a.m. (L) 4. And he said to them, Go also ye into the vineyard, and whatsoever is fair I will give to you. And they went.] (L) 5. Again he went out about the sixth (= 12) and the ninth (= 3 p.m.) hour, and did likewise.] (L) 6. And about the eleventh hour (= 5 p.m.) he went out, and found others standing; and he saith to them, Why have you stood all the day unemployed?] (L) 7. They say to him, Because no one hired us. He saith to them, Go ye also into the vineyard.] (L) 8. And when it was evening, the master of the vineyard saith to his bailiff, Summon the labourers, and pay to them the wage, beginning from the last unto the first.]— ὲπίτροπος ] has passed into Jewish usage; see Dalman, Wö rterbuch. (L) 9. And they came (who had been hired) about the eleventh hour, and received each a denarius.] (L) 10. And the first came, and thought that they would receive more; and they also received each a denarius.] (L) 11, 12. And having received it, they murmured against the householder, saying that these last laboured one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us, who bore the weight of the day and the heat.]— γογγύζειν ] only here in Mt. It is equivalent to א ת ר ע ם , Jer Talm. Berakhoth 53. It is a vernacular word found in the N.T., and later writers; cf. Kennedy, Sources, 39. It occurs in i. 33, iii. 14, 2nd cent. a.d.— καύσων ] a colloquial word found in the LXX. N.T., and late writers; cf. Kennedy, 154. καύσων occurs 15 times in the LXX. generally of a hot blasting wind = Heb. ק ָ ד ִ י ם , It is used as here of heat in Athenæ us, iii. p. 73a μελιλώτινοιστέφανοιπάνυεὐώδειςκαὶκαύσωνοςὥρᾳψυκτικώτατοι . (L) 13. And he answered and said to one of them, Friend, I do not wrong you: didst not thou agree with me at a denarius?]— Ἑταῖρος ] cf. 11:16. It occurs again in the vocative, 22:12, 26:50. (L) 14. Take what is thine, and go: it is my will to give to this latest (comer) even as to thee.] (L) 15. May I not do what I will with my own (or in my house)? or is thine eye grudging because I am liberal?] i.e. “ do you grudge my generosity?” For πονηρός and ὀφθαλμός cf. on 6:22. 16. So the “ last” shall be “ first,” and the “ first” “ last.” ] That is, “ in a similar way the saying about first and last will be fulfilled. All alike will receive the reward of eternal life, whether they become disciples of the kingdom at an earlier or at a later period.” At this point C D 1 2 add πολλοὶγάρεἰσινκλητοὶὀλίγοιδὲἐκλεκτοί . But it is almost impossible to give the words any meaning in this connection. They are genuine in 22:14. 17-19. From Mark 10:32-34. 17. And as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples privately, and on the way He said to them.] Mk. has: And they were on the way going up to Jerusalem: and Jesus was going before them; and they were amazed; and they who followed were afraid. And taking again the Twelve, He began to tell them the things which were about to happen to Him.” Mt. abbreviates Mk., omitting as often the unexplained amazement or fear of the disciples; cf. 19:24 = Mark 10:24, 18:6 = Mark 9:6, Matthew 8:27 = Mark 4:41, Matthew 17:23 = Mark 9:32; or of the multitude, cf. Mark 5:15. Mark 5:33, and Mk.’ s πάλιν and ὅτι . (M) 18. Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of Man shall be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death.] So Mk. The agreement in “ chief priests and scribes” without “ elders” is proof of dependence. Cf. on 16:21. (M) 19. And shall deliver Him to the Gentiles for mocking, and scourging, and crucifying: and on the third day He shall be raised again.]— εἰςτὸἐμπαῖξαι ] Mk. has καὶἐμπαίξουσιν , and adds καὶἐμπτύσουσιναὐτῷ — καὶσταυρῶσαι ] Mk. has καὶἀποκτενοῦσιν . Mt.’ s change is probably due to remembrance that crucifixion was the actual form of death. But there would be no difficulty in supposing that Christ, if He foretold His death, would speak of it as crucifixion. See on 10:38.— καὶτῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳἐγερθήσεται ] For Mk.’ s μετὰτπεῖςἡμέραςἀναστήσεται , see on 16:21. 17-19. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in omitting Mark 32b, and in the omission of ὅτι , Mark 33; and of πάλιν Mark 32; in εἶπεν Mat_17, Luke 31; and in τῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳ Mat_19, Luke 32. See Introduction, p. xlviii. 17. καὶἀναβαίνων ] א D al S1 S2. μέλλωνδὲἁναβαίνειν , B 1. The μέλλων is in Mt.’ s style, cf. 16:27, 17:12, 22, 20:22, 24:6, but is weakly attested here. 20-28. From Mark 10:35-45. (M) 20. Then there came to Him the mother of the sons of Zebedee with her sons, worshipping Him, and asking something from Him.] Mk. has: “ And there come to Him James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, saying to Him, Teacher, we wish that Thou wilt do for us whatsoever we ask.” The substitution of the mother instead of the two sons as the chief petitioner (cf. αὐτῇ , v. 21) is probably due to a desire to minimise the ambition of the Apostles. See Introduction, p. xxxiii.— τότε ] See on 2:7.— προσκυνεῖν ] See on 2:2.— προσῆλθεν ] for Mk.’ s historic present, as often. For the verb, see on 4:3— αἰτοῦσα ] For the active voice, see on 14:7. (M) 21. And He said to her, What do you wish? She saith to Him, Say that these my two sons shall sit, one at Thy right hand, and one at Thy left hand, in Thy kingdom.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, What do you wish that I should do for you? And they said, Grant to us that we may sit, one at Thy right hand, and one at Thy left hand, in Thy glory.” — εἷς — καὶεἷς ] see Blass, P. 144. (M) 22. And Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Can you drink the cup which I am about to drink? They say to Him, We can.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to them, Ye know not what ye ask. Can you drink the cup which I drink, or be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized? And they said to Him, We can.” — μέλλω ] see on 16:27. Mk.’ s “ cup” and “ baptism” both signify suffering. For “ cup” as a metaphor of sorrow, cf. Lamentations 4:21, Isaiah 51:17. For “ baptism,” cf. Luke 12:50. Mt. omits the latter clause as synonymous with the first, cf. 8:3, or simply on the ground of its obscurity. (M) 23. He saith to them, Of My cup indeed ye shall drink; but to sit at My right hand and at the left is not Mine to give, but (it shall be given to those) for whom it has been prepared by My Father.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to them, The cup which I drink, ye shall drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, shall ye be baptized. But to sit at My right hand or at the left is not Mine to give, but (it shall be given to those) for whom it has been prepared.” For Mt.’ s addition, ὑπὸτοῦπατρόςμου , cf. 25:41, ὁἡτοίμασενὁπατήρμου , D 1 22 a b c ff1 2 g1 h. (M) 24. And the ten having heard, were vexed about the two brethren.] Mk. has: “ And the ten, having heard, began to be vexed about James and John.” — ἠγανάκτησαν ] The aor. as often for Mk.’ s ἤρξαντο and inf.— τῶνδύοἀδελφῶν ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s express mention of the names of the two Apostles. (M) 25. And Jesus having called them, said, Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones have authority over them.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus having called them, saith to them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones have authority over them.” δέ for καί , as often. εἶπεν for λέγει , as often.— οἱἄρχοντες ] Mk. has οἱδοκοῦντεςἄρχειν , an unusual paraphrase. See Swete.— οἱμεγάλοι ] Mk. adds αὐτῶν .— κατεξουσιάζειν ] is a very rare word. Its occurrence in Mt. and Mk. is proof of dependence. See on Luke 22:25. (M) 26. Not so is it amongst you. But whosoever wishes amongst you to be great shall be your minister.] So Mk. with δέ after οὕτως , and ἐνὑμῖν after γενέσθαι instead of before μέγας . (M) 27. And whosoever wishes among you to be first shall be your servant.] So Mk. with πάντων for ὐμῶν . (M) 28. Even as the Son of Man did not come to be ministered to but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.] So Mk. with καὶγάρ for ὥσπερ . This is the first passage in the Gospel where the death which has been foretold is described as intended to have a definite result or effect. For the idea of expiatory self-sacrifice, cf. 2 Mac 7:37, 38, 4 Mac 17:22. “ Give his life” : cf. Mechilta (Ugol.) 207. “ Moses gave his life for three things, and they were called by his name,” 274. 22. πίνειν ] C E al add from Mk. καὶτὸβάπτισμαὃἑγὼβαπτίζομαιβαπτισθῆναι . 23. πίεσθε ] C al add from Mk. καὶτὸβαπτισμαὃέγὼβαπτίζομαιβαπτισθἡσεσθε . (M) 28. ἀντὶπολλῶν ] S2 adds here: “ But seek ye, that from littleness ye may increase, and not from greatness become little. What time ye are bidden to a supper party be not sitting down to meat in an honourable place, that there may not come one more honourable than thou, and the lord of the supper say to thee, ‘ Bring thyself down’ ; and thou be confounded in the eyes of the guests. But if thou sit down to meat in a lesser place, and there come one less than thou, and the lord of the supper say to thee, ‘ Bring thyself, and come up and sit down to meat’ ; then thou shalt have more glory in the eyes of the guests” . S1 is wanting here, but did not contain the passage. D a b e ff1 2 g1 h m n and 6 Vulgate MSS have the same insertion, but without the negative in the second clause. The passage is ancient, and finds parallels in the Canonical Gospels. For the first sentence, with the negative to the second clause, cf. Matthew 23:12, Luke 14:11, Luke 18:14. For the rest, compare Luke 14:8-11. The negative of S2 looks like an afterthought to bring the originally independent first sentence into harmony with the following passage. 29-34. From Mark 10:46-52. (M) 29. And as they go forth from Jericho, there followed Him a great multitude.] Mk. has: “ And they come into Jericho. And as He goes forth from Jericho, and His disciples and a great multitude.” Mt. abbreviates, omitting the quite needless statement of the entry into Jericho, including the Lord and His disciples (who have been mentioned in the last paragraph) in αὐτῶν for αὐτοῦ , inserting a verb for the ὄχλος , and substituting the more usual πολύς for ἱκανός (M) 30. And behold two blind men sitting by the roadside heard that Jesus is passing by, and cried, saying, Lord, have pity on us, Thou Son of David.] Mk. has: “ The son of Timæ us, Bartimæ us, a blind beggar, sat by the roadside. And having heard that it is Jesus, the Nazarene, he began to cry, and to say, Thou Son of David, Jesus, have pity on me.” — καὶἰδού ] see on 1:20.— δύο ] Mt. substitutes two men for Mk.’ s one, and as a consequence omits Mk.’ s name of one man. But cf. his omission of the name Jairus in 9:18. For the “ two,” see on 8:28.— Ἰησοῦς ] Mt. omits Mk.’ s ὁΝαζαρηνός . Cf. the same omission in 28:5 = Mark 16:6. In 26:69 = Mark 14:67 he substitutes ὁΓαλιλαῖος .— ἔκραξαν ] the aor., as often, for Mk.’ s ἤρξατο and inf.— ἔκραξανλέγοντες for Mk.’ s κράζεινκαὶλέγειν : cf. on 8:3.— Κύριε ] for Mk.’ s Ἰησοῦ , see on 8:2.— υἱός ] nom. for vocative; cf. Blass, 86 f. See on Luke 18:38. (M) 31. And the multitude rebuked them, that they should be silent. But they cried the more, saying, Lord, have pity on us, Thou Son of David.] Mk. has: “ And many were rebuking him, that he should be silent; but he was crying much the more, Thou Son of David, have pity on me.” — ἐπετίμησεν and ἔκραξαν ] aors. for Mk.’ s impfs., as often. (M) 32. And Jesus stood and called them, and said, What will ye that I should do for you?] Mt. abbreviates three verses of Mk. (M) 33. They say to Him, Lord, that our eyes may be opened.] Mk. has: “ And the blind man said to Him, Rabboni, that I may see.” (M) 34. And Jesus, having compassion, touched their eyes; and straightway they saw, and followed Him.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to him, Go, thy faith hath saved thee. And straightway he saw, and was following Him on the way” ; ἥψατοτῶνὀμμάτωναὐτῶν ] ὄμματα occurs only here and in the omitted section, Mark 8:22-26. The clause here is probably a reminiscence of that passage.— ἠκολούθησαν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imperf., as often. 29-34. Matthew 33 and Luke 41 agree against Mk. in Κύριε for Mk.’ s Ῥαββουνεί . Cf. also παράγει , Matthew 30 = παρέρχεται , Luke 37. Mk. has ἐστι . quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. the Matthæ an Logia. Babylonian Talmud. The Septuagint Version. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. editorial passages. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. i.e. with other uncial MSS. the Second Gospel. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Burkitt. F.— 21-28.THE LAST DAYS OF THE MESSIAH’ S LIFE 21:1-11. From Mark 11:1-11 (M) 21:1. And when they came near to Jerusalem, and came to Bethphage, to the Mount of Olives, then Jesus sent two disciples.] Mk. has: “ And when they come near to Jerusalem, to Bethphage and Bethany, at the Mount of Olives, He sendeth two of His disciples.” — ἤγγισαν , ἀπέστειλεν ] aors. for Mk.’ s hist. presents, as often. Mt. inserts a second verb, ἦλθον , to ease clause α , and omits Bethany. This probably is simply due to his tendency to omit redundant details. He feels that one village is sufficient to identify the scene. Βηθφαγή = ב י ת פ א נ י = “ house of unripe figs” ; cf. Dalm. Gram. p. 191.— τότε ] see on 2:7. (M) 2. Saying to them, Go into the village which is over against you, and straightway you shall find an ass tied up, and a colt with her; loose, and lead to Me.] Mk. has: “ And saith, Go into the village which is over against you, and straightway entering into it, you shall find a colt tied up upon which no one of men ever sat; loose it, and bring.” — λέγων ] for καὶλέγει , as often.— πορεύεσθε ] for ὑπάγετε . Cf. a similar change in 28:7 = Mark 16:7. πορεύεσθαι occurs once in Mark 9:30 as a variant for παραπορεύεσθαι ; in Mt. it occurs twenty-eight times. Mt. omits εἰσπορευόμενοιεἰςαὐτήν as redundant.— ὄνον — καὶπῶλονμετ ʼ αὐτῆς ] Mt. adds ὄνον in view of the passage which he is about to quote (v. 4). ἀγάγετε is a more usual word in this connection than Mk.’ s φέρετε . (M) 3. And if any one say anything to you, you shall say that the Lord hath need of them; and straightway he will send them.] Mk. has: “ And if any one say to you, Why do ye this? Say, The Lord hath need of it and straightway sends it again here” (= will return it). Mt., as often, omits πάλιν .— εὐθὺςδέ ] for καὶεὐθύς , as often. In Mk. the subject of ἀποστέλλει seems to be ὁκύριος . “ The Lord needs it, and will soon return it.” Mt. seems to make the sentence mean, “ and (at your words) he (the man who spoke to you) will send it.” (O) 4, 5. And this has come to pass, in order that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet, saying, Tell ye the daughter of Zion, Behold, thy King cometh, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of a yoke-bearer.] τοῦτοδὲγέγονενἵναπληρωθῇ ] For the formula, see Introduction, p. lxiv. The quotation for which the editor has prepared, by inserting ὄνον — μετ ʼ αὐτῆς in v. 2, comes in the main from Zechariah 9:9.— εἴπατετῇθυγατρὶΣιών ] seems to be a reminiscence of Isa 62:11 LXX. The rest of the quotation agrees with the LXX. of Zec. except in the last seven words, for which the LXX. has: ἐπὶὑποζύγιονκαὶπῶλοννέον . Mt.’ s ἐπὶὄνονκαὶἐπὶπῶλονυἱὸνὑποζυγίου looks like a translation of the Heb., with adaptation of the words of the LXX. For ὑποζύγιον = ass, see Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 160 f. (M) 6. And the disciples went, and did as Jesus commanded them.] Mt. abbreviates Mk vv. 4-6.— πορευθέντεςδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶἀπῆλθον . The δέ for καί , as often. Cf. πορεύεσθαι for ἀπέρχεσθαι , Matthew 26:14 = Mark 14:10. (M) 7. And brought the ass and the colt, and placed upon them their clothes, and He sat upon them.] Mk. has: “ And bring the colt to Jesus, and place upon it their clothes; and He sat upon it.” — ἤγαγον ] aor. for Mk.’ s hist. pres., as often.— τὴνὄνονκαί ] for the insertion, see on v. 3.— ἐπέθηκεν ] aor. for Mk.’ s hist. pres., as often.— ἑπ ʼ αὐτῶν ] Mt., in modifying the passage, is not quite careful to make the details harmonious, The Lord could not ride on both animals, and there was no need, therefore, to place clothes on both.— τὰἱμάτια ] Mk., who adds αὐτῶν , almost certainly means that the disciples managed to find some raiment, which they threw over the colt’ s back. Mt. writes τὰἱμάτια simply as though he understood it to refer to the saddle cloths of the animals.— ἐπάνωαὐτῶν ] If the editor had not just said that they placed clothing upon them, we might take ἐπάνωαὐτῶν here to refer to the ἱμάτια . But he may have meant it to refer to the animals, regardless of the impossibility of riding more than one at a time. (M) 8. And the very great multitude spread their garments in the way; and others were cutting branches from the trees, and were spreading (them) in the way.] Mk. has: “ And many spread their garments on to the way. And others having cut litter from the fields.” — ὁδὲπλεῖστοςὄχλος ] δέ for καί , as often. For πλεῖστοςὄχλος see on 11:20; and cf. Blass, p. 143.— ἔκοπτονκλάδους ] is the substitution of a more ordinary feature for Mk.’ s unusual στιβάδαςκόψαντες . The editor adds καὶἐστρώννυονἐντῇὁδῷ to make it clear what was done with the branches. In Mk. this is implied in his abrupt participle κόψαντες . (M) 9. And the multitudes who were going before, and who were following, were crying, saying, Hosanna to the son of David: Blessed is He who cometh in the name of the Lord; Hosanna in the highest places.] Mk. has: “ And they who were going before, and they who were following, were crying, Hosanna: Blessed be He that cometh in the name of the Lord: Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David; Hosanna in the highest places.” — δέ ] for καί , as often.— Ὡσαννά ] See Dalm. Words, 220 f. The word is derived from Psalms 118:25, Psalms 118:26 ה ו ש י ע ה נ א . . . ב ר ו ך ה ב א ב ש ם י ה ו ה = “ give salvation now— Blessed be He that cometh in the name of the Lord.” ה ו ש י ע ה נ א is addressed to God, and is a prayer for help and deliverance. In the source from which Mk. drew, ה ו ש י ע ה had been shortened into the common form ה ו ש ע . Cf. Dalm. Gram. p. 249. Mk., as often, retains a Hebrew or Aramaic phrase; and it is probable that he, without necessarily “ being ignorant of its origin and meaning,” believed that it had become a cry of greeting and homage, like our “ hail” or “ welcome.” Only on this ground can we explain his ὡσαννὰἐντοῖςὑψίστοις , which can only mean, “ let those in the heights of heaven say, Hosanna.” Mt., who adds to the first Ὡσαννά the words τῷυἱῷΔαυεΐδ , must also have supposed ὡσαννά to be a cry of acclamation. He need not have been ignorant of its philological meaning. The multitudes cried “ Hosanna,” i.e. “ glory, or hail, or welcome to David’ s son.” εὐλογημένοςὁἐρχόμενοςἐνὀνόματιΚυρίου is the LXX. of Psalms 118:26. Mk. adds a clause: εὐλογημένηἡἐρχομένηβασιλείατοῦπατρὸςἡμῶνΔαυεΐδ , which Mt. omits as tautologous.— ὡσαννὰἐντοῖςὑψίστοις ] Lk. also understood ὡσαννά to be a cry of acclamation; he renders it by δόξα . See note on Luke 19:38. (M) 10. And when He entered into Jerusalem.] Mk. has: “ And He entered into Jerusalem.” Mt. now inserts, All the city was moved, saying, Who is this? And the multitudes said, This is the prophet Jesus, who is from Nazara of Galilee. 8. ἔστρωσαν , second time] א D c e ff2 q. ἐστρώννυον , א B C al b f ff1 g1 2 h S2. In Mk. ἔστρωσαν is read by most MSS., but ἐστρώννυον by D S1 curss. The imperf. is probably genuine in Mk. and in the second clause of Mt. Mt. having altered the imperfect into ἔστρωσαν in clause a, continued with imperfs. ἔκοπτον , ἐστρώννυον in clause b, and in v. 9 ἔκραζον . א * D in Mt. have assimilated ἐστρώννυον to the ἔστρωσαν of clause a, and of Mk., and in Mk. most MSS. have assimilated ἐστρώννυον to Mt.’ s clause a. Lk.’ s ὑπεστρώννυον shows that he too had the imperf. in his copy of Mk. 1-10. Mt. and Lk. agree in the following: ἤγγισαν , Mat_1 = ἤγγισεν , Luke 29; ἐγγίζουσιν , Mar_1. ἀπέστειλεν , Mat_1, Luke 29; ἀποστέλλει , Mar_1. λέγων , Mat_2, Luke 30; καὶλέγει , Mar_2. ἀγάγετε , Mat_2, Luke 30; φέρετε , Mar_2. ἐρεῖτε , Mat_3, Luke 31; εἴπατε , Mar_3. ἤγαγον , Mat_7, Luke 35; φέρουσιν , Mar_7. ἑαυτῶν — ἐντῇὁδῷ , Mat_8, Luke 36; αὐτῶν — εἰςτὴνὁδόν , Mar_8. λέγοντες , Mat_9, Luke 38. 12-17. From Mark 11:15-19. (M) 12. And Jesus entered into the temple of God,1 and cast out all who sell and buy in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of those who sell the doves.] Mk. has here: “ And He entered into Jerusalem, into the temple: and having looked about at all things, it being already a late hour, He went out to Bethany with the twelve.” The editor of Mt. omits this. For omission of verses of a similar character, cf. the omission of Mar 1:45, Mark 6:12-13. The next three verses in Mk. are 12-14, which contain the first part of the narrative of the fig-tree, the sequel being vv. 20-25. Mt., with the obvious intention of representing the withering of the fig-tree as having taken place immediately upon the word of Christ, postpones vv. 12-14 that he may connect them with 20-25. This brings him, therefore, to Mark 15-19, which he now inserts. The result of these changes may be shown thus: First day— Mt. Entry. … Cleansing of temple. Return to Bethany. First day— Mk. Entry. Return to Bethany. Second day— Mt. Cursing and withering of fig-tree. Teaching, 21:13-25. Second day— Mk. Cursing of fig-tree. Cleansing of temple. Third day— Mt. Third day— Mk. The withered fig-tree. Teaching, 11:27-13. Mt. has, therefore, shortened Mk.’ s sequence of events by one day. Lk. does the same, but does not even suggest that the two days which he mentions were consecutive. He places the entry and the cleansing of the temple on one day, omits the incident of the fig-tree, and introduces teaching parallel to Matthew 21:13-25 and Mark 11:27 with “ and it came to pass on one of the days.” It is clear that neither Mt. nor Lk. regarded Mk.’ s sequence of events as chronologically important in detail. It is not probable that Mt.’ s change in Mk.’ s order is accidental rather than intentional. But, if so, at Mk v. 12 he came to the words καὶεἰσῆλθενεἰςἸεροσόλυμαεἰςτὸἱερόν . From these words he passed on by accident to Mk v. 15 καὶἔρχονταιεἰςἸεροσόλυμακαὶεἰσελθὼνεἰςτὸἱερόν , and he therefore continued with the account of the cleansing of the temple, Mk vv. 15-19. Then finding that he had omitted the cursing of the fig-tree, Mk vv. 12-14, he combined it with the withering of the fig-tree, Mk vv. 20-25. 12. Mk. has: “ And they come to Jerusalem: and He entered into the temple, and began to cast out those who sell and who buy in the temple, and He overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of those who sell the doves.” — ἐξέβαλεν ] the indic., as often, for Mk.’ s ἤρξατο , and the inf. Mk. adds, “ And did not allow any one to carry a vessel through the temple.” (M) 13. And saith to them, It stands written, My house shall be called a house of prayer; but ye made1 it a lair of robbers.] Mk. has: “ And was teaching, and saying, Does it not stand written that My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations? but ye have made it a lair of robbers.” — ὁοἶκόςμου , κ .τ .λ .] the quotation is from the LXX. of Isaiah 56:7. Mk. seems to have carried the quotation too far. The temple was not, in fact, a house of prayer πᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν . Mt. omits the words.— σπήλαιονλῃστῶν ] seems to be a reminiscence of Jer 7:11. (E) 14. And there came to Him blind and lame in the temple; and He healed them.] Mk. has here: “ And the chief priests and scribes heard, and were seeking how they might kill Him: for they feared Him, for all the multitude was amazed at His teaching.” Mt. substitutes for this an account of miracles done in the temple which the chief priests saw, and how they heard the children crying, Hosanna, and were vexed. He elsewhere substitutes a statement of healing for Mk.’ s statement of teaching. See on 14:14, 19:2. He has already omitted Mk.’ s reference to teaching, Mk v. 17. The editor seems to regard the first day as a day of action (vv. 14-15), the second as a day of teaching. Hence Mk.’ s ἐδίδασκεν , 11:17 is, transferred to Matthew 21:23, and Mark 11:18 πᾶςγὰρὁὄχλοςἐξεπλήσσετοἐπὶτῇδιδαχῇαὐτοῦ to Matthew 22:33. (E) 15. And the chief priests and scribes seeing the marvellous things that He did, and the children who were crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the Son of David, were vexed.] (L) 16. And said to Him, Dost Thou hear what these say? And Jesus saith to them, Yes; did you never read that “ From the mouth of babes and infants Thou didst bring praise to perfection” ?] The quotation is from the LXX. of Psalms 8:3. The Heb. has “ strength” for “ praise,” and is, therefore, less adapted to this context. Lk. places sayings parallel to these during the entry into Jerusalem, 19:39-40 “ Certain of the Pharisees from the multitude said to Him, Teacher, rebuke Thy disciples. And He answered and said, I say to you, that if these shall be silent, the stones will cry out.” It seems clear that Mt. and Lk. have independent traditions behind them. (M) 17. And having left them, He went outside the city to Bethany, and passed the night there.] Mk v. 19 has: “ And when it became late they were going outside the city.” — ἐξῆλθεν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imp. ἐξεπορεύοντο , as often. But Mk. has ἐξῆλθεν in v. 11.— ηὐλίσθη ] Lk. has the same verb in a similar connection, 21:37. It occurs from Homer downwards, and is common in the LXX. It is used of men, Apoll. R. 2. 1284; Diod. 13. 6; Hdt. 8. 9, 9. 37, Xen. Cyrop. 4. 18-22. From Mark 11:2-14, Mark 11:20-25. (M) 18. And early in the morning, as He made for the city, He was hungry.] Mk. has: “ And as they were passing by early in the morning,” v. 20; and: “ And on the morrow as they went out from Bethany, He was hungry,” v. 12. (M) 19. And seeing a fig-tree by the way side, He came to it, and found nothing on it, save leaves alone, and saith to it, There shall no longer be fruit from thee for ever.] Mk. has: “ And seeing a fig-tree from afar having leaves, He came, if haply He might find anything on it: and having come to it, He found nothing except leaves; for it was not the season of figs. And He answered and said to it, May no one any longer eat fruit of thee for ever. And the disciples were hearing it.” The editor omits εἰἄρατιεὑρήσειἐναὐτῇκαὶἐλθών , and ὁγὰρκαιρὸςοὐκἦνσύκων , which might suggest that Christ hoped against probability to find “ fruit” and was disappointed. He also modifies the imprecation or wish, Mark 14b, into a solemn prophecy of fact. (E) 19. And the fig-tree withered away immediately.] Mk., who puts the continuation of the story on the following morning, has no parallel to this. (M) 20. And the disciples saw it, and marvelled, saying, How immediately did the fig-tree wither away!) Mk. has: “ And Peter remembered, and saith to Him, Rabbi, see, the fig-tree which Thou didst curse is withered away.” (M) 21. And Jesus answered and said to them, Verily I say unto you, If ye have faith, and doubt not, not only shall ye do this of the fig-tree, but if ye shall say to this mountain, Be taken up and cast into the sea, it shall happen.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus answered and saith to them, Have faith in God. Verily I say to you, That whosoever shall say to this mountain, Be taken up, and cast into the sea, and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he speaks happens, it shall be to him.” — ἀποκριθεὶςδέ ] for καὶἀποκριθείς , as often.— εἶπεν ] for λέγει , as often. Mt. omits Mk.’ s ὅτι , as often.— ἐὰνἔχητεπίστιν ] for Mk.’ s ἔχετεπίστιν is an assimilation to 17:20.— πίστις ] here, as in 17:20, means trust in the divine power combined with confidence that he who trusts can make use of the divine power to work miracles. See on 17:20. In Mk. א D curss S1 have εἰἔχετε , and Mt. may have had this before him. If so, he has changed to ἐὰνἔχητε to assimilate to 17:20. (M) 22. And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.] Mk. has: “ Therefore I say to you, All things whatsoever ye pray and ask, believe that ye received, and it shall be to you.” — αἰτήσητε ] Mt. omits one of Mk.’ s two synonymous verbs; see on 8:3.— πιστεύοντες ] i.e. with trust in the power and love of God to grant the request. Mk. adds here: “ And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any one; that your Father who is in the heavens may forgive you your trespasses.” The verse seems out of place in Mk., and appears to have been added as an afterthought. It is very possibly an early gloss. The phrase “ Father who is in the heavens” occurs nowhere else in Mar_1 If the verse was in the copy of Mk. used by Mt., the latter has omitted it, because he has recorded similar sayings in 6:14, 5:23. A further addition is made in Mk. by the majority of MSS., namely, εἰδὲὑμεῖςοὐκἀφίετεοὐδὲὁπατὴρὑμῶνὁἐνοὐρανοῖςἀφήσειτὰπαραπτώματαὑμῶν . The clause is omitted by א B L S Δ S1 k. 23-27. From Mark 11:27-33. (M) 23. And when He came into the temple, there came to Him, as He was teaching, the chief priests and elders of the people, saying, By what authority doest Thou these things, and who gave Thee this authority?] Mk. has: “ And they come to Jerusalem: and as He was walking in the temple, there come to Him the chief priests, and scribes, and elders, and were saying to Him, By what authority doest Thou these things? or who gave Thee this authority that Thou shouldest do these things?” Mk.’ s καὶἔρχονταιεἰςἸεροσόλυμα is unnecessary after v. 18.— προσῆλθαν ] aor., as often, for Mk.’ s hist. present. For προσέρχεσθαι , see on 4:3. For the aor. in a, see Blass, p. 45.— διδάσκοντι ] This is to be a day of teaching, as yesterday was of action; see on v. 14.— — προσῆλθαν — λέγοντες ] for Mk.’ s ἔρχονται .— καὶἔλεγον , as often. Mt. omits Mk.’ s redundant ἵναταῦταποιῇς at the end. (M) 24. And Jesus answered and said to them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell Me, I, too, will tell you by what authority I do these things.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to them, I will ask you one thing, and answer Me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.” Mt.’ s ὃνἐὰνεἴπητέμοικἀγὼἐρῶ is a grammatical correction of Mk.’ s καὶἀποκρίθητέμοικαὶἐρῶ . (M) 25. The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or from men? And they disputed among themselves, saying, If we say, From heaven; He will say to us, Why then did you not believe him?] So Mk. without πόθενἦν and with ἀποκρίθητέμοι , which Mt. omits as redundant, after ἀνθρώπων .— οἱδὲδιελογίζοντο ] for Mk.’ s καὶδιελογίζοντο , as often.— ἐνἑαυτοῖς ] for Mk.’ s πρὸςἑαυτούς . For a similar change, cf. Matthew 16:7, Mark 8:16. The point seems to be that John had borne witness to Christ as the Messiah. If the authorities had given credence to John, they would have had no need to ask by what authority Jesus acted.— ἐπιστεύσατεαὐτῷ ] πιστεύειν in 8:13, 9:28, 18:6, 21:22 meant to have “ trust,” “ assurance” in the power and goodness of God or of Christ. But here and in v. 32, 24:23, 26 it has the weaker sense to “ give credence to.” (M) 26. But if we should say, From men; we fear the multitude, for all hold John as a prophet.] Mk. has: “ But should we say from men— they feared the multitude. For all held John that he was truly a prophet.” — ἐὰνδέ ] is a grammatical correction of Mk.’ s harsh ἀλλά .— φοβούμεθα ] avoids Mk.’ s aposiopesis.— ἔχουσινὡςπροφήτην ] is a correction of Mk.’ s εἶχον — ὄντωςὅτιπροφήτηςἦν . (M) 27. And they answered Jesus, and said, We do not know. He also said to them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.] So Mk. with λέγουσιν for εἶπαν and καὶὁἸησοῦςλέγειαὐτοῖς for ἔφηαὐτοῖςκαὶαὐτός . 23-27. Mt. and Lk. agree in the following: αὐτῷδιδάσκοντι , Mat_23; διδάσκοντοςαὐτοῦ , Luk_1; περιπατοῦντοςαὐτοῦ , Mark 27. λέγοντες , Mat_23, Luk_2. ἀποκριθεὶςδέ , Mat_24, Luk_8. Mk. has no ἀποκριθείς . κἀγώ , Mat_24, Luk_3. εἴπητε , Mat_24; εἴπατε , Luk_8; ἀποκρίθητε , Mark 29. Both Mk. and Lk. omit ἵναταῦταποιῇς from Mark 26 and ἀποκρίθητέμοι from Mark 30. οἱδέ , Mat_25, Luk_5; καί , Mark 31. ἐὰνδέ , Mat_26, Luk_6; ἀλλά , Mark 32. Mk. has here: “ And He began to speak to them in parables,” followed by the parable of the Wicked Husbandmen. Mt. inserts first the parable of the Two Sons, then borrows from Mk. that of the Husbandmen, and then adds the parable of the Marriage Feast; thus forming a group of three prophetic parables (cf. Introduction, p. lxv), foretelling the divine judgement impending over the Jewish nation. See Gould on Mark 12:1. 28-32. Parable of the Two Sons. (L) 28. But what think ye? A man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go to-day work in the vineyard.]— τίδὲὑμῖνδοκεῖ ] See on 17:25.— προσελθών ] See on 4:3. (L) 29. And he answered and said, I am not willing; but afterwards he repented, and went.] (L) 30. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I (go), sir; and went not.] (L) 31. Which of the two did the will of the father? They say, The first. Jesus saith to them, Verily I say to you, That the toll-gatherers and the harlots go before you into the kingdom of God.]— προάγουσινὑμᾶςεἰςτὴνβασιλείαντοῦθεοῦ ] We might have expected the editor to use εἰςτὴνβασιλείαντῶνοὐρανῶν , so that προάγουσιν would have been a timeless statement of fact, meaning “ go” into the kingdom whenever it shall appear, and so practically equivalent to a future; cf. παραδίδοται , Mark 9:31. It very probably represents an Aramaic participle. The fact that we have τοῦθεοῦ instead of τῶνοὐρανῶν makes it clear that the phrase is not editorial, but that it is derived from the source used. The reason why the editor did not alter it into τῶνοὐρανῶν is not clear. But (1) he has perhaps once out of fourteen times left τοῦθεοῦ in a Marcan passage (Matthew 19:24). (2) He elsewhere once has a phrase, which he generally alters, e.g. μετὰτρεῖςἡμέρας , 27:63. Contrast 16:21, 17:23, 20:19 (3) He may have felt that here, as in 12:23 the “ kingdom of God” of his source was not quite the same as the “ kingdom of the heavens” which he elsewhere describes. See also on 21:43. In “ go before you into the kingdom” the meaning is not so much, “ will go before you into the kingdom when it is inaugurated,” as “ obey God by fulfilling John’ s command to repent, submit to the divine will, take upon themselves the yoke of the kingdom, and become heirs of its promises.” In other words, the “ kingdom” here means rather the condition of preparedness for the coming kingdom than that future kingdom itself. Had the Evangelist written, “ will go before you into the kingdom of the heavens,” he would have represented the Lord as foretelling the future admission of the people to whom he was speaking into the kingdom. This was just what the editor wished to avoid. They were to be cast out of the kingdom, 8:12. “ Go before you into the kingdom,” on the other hand, emphasises the fact that the toll-gatherers and harlots “ go,” and leaves it quite ambiguous whether the persons addressed “ go” or not. Like 12:28, this parable probably came from the Logia; and if that is so, the Logia contained not only parables of the kingdom of the heavens, but other sayings and parables in which the phrase “ kingdom of God” was used in a sense not always identical with “ the kingdom of the heavens.” (L) 32. For John came to you with the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him: but the toll-gatherers and the harlots believed him: and you saw (it), and did not afterwards repent, so as to believe him.]— ἐνὁδῷδικαιοσύνης ] ὁδός here, like the Heb. ד ּ ֶ ר ֶ ך ְ and the Aramaic א ו ֹ ר ְ ח ָ א , means not so much the path trodden as the manner, custom, method. To come with the way of righteousness is to come as a representative and teacher of righteousness and of her methods. “ John came with the way of righteousness,” means “ John came, and what he taught was good,” he represented and stood for the manner of life which righteousness demands. See Wellhausen, in loc., and cf. ὁδὸνθεοῦ , 22:16. The Lord applies the answer of the authorities to their own conduct by way of contrast. They had said that that son was to be approved who, though he was unwilling at first, yet afterwards went into the vineyard. But the Baptist came preaching righteousness, calling men to go into God’ s vineyard through the gate of repentance, and they had given no ear to his preaching. In this respect they were like the first son of the parable, who said I am unwilling. But, unlike him, they had not afterwards repented and obeyed the Baptist’ s call. On the other hand, the toll-gatherers and the harlots had also been like the first son, but they had changed their mind when John preached, and had obeyed the call. This only hardened the Jewish authorities the more. A vineyard in which outcasts worked was no vineyard for them. A kingdom into which the toll-gatherers could enter was no kingdom for them. Thus toll-gatherers and harlots went before them into the kingdom of God.— τοῦπιστεῦσαι ] “ gives rather the content than the purpose of μετεμελήθητε ,” Moulton, p. 216. But unless οὐ be omitted or another negative be inserted before πιστεῦσαι , it is difficult to make any sense of the clause which will suit this context, except by translating “ to believe,” i.e. “ and believed him.” See below. 28-31. א C D L al S1 S2 latt have the obedient son first, the disobedient son second. B reverses the order. In v. 31 א C L al c f q S2 have πρῶτος . This seems to be required by the context. The Pharisees could hardly give any other answer, and the Lord’ s reply seems to presuppose it. The Pharisees were in part like the first son, i.e. they refused to give heed to John’ s preaching. But they were also unlike him, since he came to a better state of mind, whilst they hardened themselves the more. B has ὕστερος , D latt ἔσχατος , S1 “ the last.” In the case of B, which has reversed the order of vv. 29, 30, the Pharisees still approve the conduct of the son who first refused and afterwards went. But D S1 latt make the Pharisees approve the conduct of the son who promised to go and failed to fulfil his promise. Wellhausen believes this to be the original text, and supposes that the Pharisees intentionally gave a perverse answer in order to make pointless the moral which Christ was going to draw from the natural rejoinder. They ought to have answered that the first son did his father’ s will, and He would then have contrasted their conduct with that of the son approved by them, and compared them to the son whose conduct they reprehended. But they purposely give the wrong answer, and Christ’ s rejoinder, v. 31, is an expression of indignation at their perversity, rather than an explanation of the parable. Merx, too, upholds this reading, and finds in it the original text which has given rise to the other readings. But it seems probable that the order of א C D L al and πρῶτος are the original. There would be a natural tendency to transpose this order: (1) It might be argued that if the first son went, there was no occasion to summon the second; (2) the fulfilment of the command forms an unexpected climax to the story; (3) it was natural to identify the disobedient son with the Jew, the obedient son with the Gentile. Along this line of interpretation the latter should come last in chronological order; (4) the ὕστερον of v. 29 may have had some influence in causing this verse to be placed after v. 30; (5) further, v. 32 may have suggested the change of order. “ John came, and you did not believe” = οὐκἀπῆλθε ; “ the toll-gatherers and harlots believed” = μεταμεληθεὶςἀπῆλθε . On these grounds the order of B might be explained as due to emendation for literary and exegetical reasons, and the substitution of “ the last” for “ the first” might be supposed to be later than the transposition of order. But the MS. evidence suggests that the substitution is earlier than the transposition of order, and is the probable cause of it. The earliest emendation seems to have been the substitution of “ the last” (D latt S1) for “ the first.” This may be due to antipharisaic motives. The Lord had said of them that “ they say and do not.” They must, therefore, be represented as approving of one who said “ I go,” and went not. The variations ὕστερος , ἔσχατος are against the originality of this reading. The transposition of order seems to have originated in a text in which “ the last” had already been adopted, and to have been made by some one who misunderstood the motive which had led to the substitution of “ the last” for “ the first,” in order to make the Pharisees return the obvious answer. 32. οὑμετεμελήθητε ] B 1 13 22 33 latt have οὐδέ . D omits the negative. c e alter its position quod non credidistis. S1 also omits. Burkitt translates “ but ye, when ye saw it— at the last have ye changed your mind that ye should believe in Him?” But the clause is not necessarily interrogative in the Syriac. The omission is probably accidental. The clause is very difficult. Mt. has τοῦ with the infinitive seven times. In 2:13 and 3:13 with an aorist, of a definite action, in 11:1 and 13:3 with a present, of a continuous action. In 6:8 it occurs after πρό . Here “ did not repent so as to believe” should be τοῦπιστεύειν rather than τοῦπιστεῦσαι . But to translate “ did not repent of having believed” seems to destroy the sense. The Pharisees had not believed, v. 32. D’ s omission of the negative gives a possible rendering “ repented so as to believe” ; but this seems an unlikely conclusion to the saying. The transposition of the negative by c e also gives a weak finish to the saying, and is probably a translator’ s emendation. Δ omits the whole of the last clause. This may be due to homœ oteleuton. It is difficult to think that the clause as it stands is original, but if any part is genuine οὐ or οὑδὲμετεμελήθητε must have belonged to it; possibly τοῦπιστεῦσαιαὑτῷ is a later gloss. 33-46. From Mark 12:1-12. See Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p. 114. 33-46. The labourers in the vineyard. (M) 33. Hear another parable: There was a man, a householder, who planted a vineyard, and placed round it a fence, and digged in it a press, and built a tower.] Mk. has: “ A man planted a vineyard, and placed round (it) a fence, and digged a press, and built a tower.” The details are borrowed from Isaiah 5:2. For the ἄνθρωπος — οἰκοδεσπότηςὅστις , cf. 13:52 ἀνθρώπῳοἰκοδεσπότῃὅστις , 20:1 ib., 18:23 ἀνθρώπῳβασιλεῖὅς . Mk. has simply ἄνθρωπος .— φραγμὸναὐτῷπεριέθηκεν ] Mk. has περιέθηκενφραγμόν . For Mt.’ s order, cf. Isaiah 5:2.— ληνόν ] Mk. has ὑπολήνιον ; Is. προλήνιον .(M) 33. And let it out to husbandmen, and went away.] So Mk. (M) 34. And when the season of the fruits arrived, he sent his servant to the husbandmen to receive its fruits.] Mk. has: “ And sent to the husbandmen at the season a servant, that he might receive from the husbandmen the fruits of the vineyard.” (M) 35. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another.] Mk. has: “ And they took him, and beat him, and sent him away empty. And again he sent to them another servant; and him they— (?), and shamefully treated. And another he sent, and him they killed.” (M) 36. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did to them likewise.] Mk. has: “ And many others; beating some, and killing some.” In Mk. there is before the final sending of the son a triple sending of a single messenger, vv. 2, 4, 5, followed by a general statement, v. 5 “ and many others.” Mt. simplifies this into a double sending of several messengers, vv. 34, 36, but seems to show a trace of Mk.’ s first three messengers in his ὃνμέν , ὃνδέ , ὃνδέ , v. 35. He avoids Mk.’ s rare and uncertain (probably corrupt) word ἐκεφαλίωσαν . Further, in Mk. the treatment of the first three messengers is climactic: the first they beat and sent away, the second they put to shame, the third they killed. After this “ the many others” comes in very weakly. Mt., with his double sending of several messengers, avoids this anticlimax. Lk. has a triple sending of a single messenger. The first was beaten and sent back empty-handed, the second beaten and dishonoured and sent away, the third wounded and cast out. Thus the crime of murder is not reached till the son is sent. (M) 37. And at last he sent to them his son, saying, They will reverence my son.] Mk. has: “ Still one he had, a son beloved. He sent him last to them, saying that they will reverence my son.” See Gould on Mark 12:6-11. (M) 38. But the husbandmen, having seen the son, said amongst themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us have his inheritance.] Mk. has: “ But those husbandmen said to one another that this is the heir; come, let us kill him, and ours shall be the inheritance.— ἐνἑαυτοῖς ] Mk. has πρὸςἑαυτούς . Mt. avoids πρός in this sense; cf. v. 25, and 16:7 = Mark 8:16. (M) 39. And they took him, and cast him outside the vineyard, and killed him.] Mk. has: “ And they took him, and killed him, and cast him outside the vineyard.” Mt., with the history of the Passion in his mind, reverses Mk.’ s second and third clauses. Christ was crucified outside the city. See on Luke 20:15. (M) 40, 41. When, therefore, the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to those husbandmen? They say to him, He will evilly destroy the evil ones, and will give the vineyard to other husbandmen, who will render to him the fruits at their seasons.] Mk. has: “ What will the lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard to others.” In Mk. Christ Himself answers the rhetorical question. Mt. places the answer in the mouth of the rulers, that they themselves, as in v. 31, may pronounce their own condemnation. This change involves others. Mk.’ s abrupt τίποιήσειὁκύριοςτοῦἀμπελῶνος must now, as an independent sentence, be rounded off by the anticipation of ὅτανοὖνἔλθῃ and by the addition of ἐκείνοις , which had been omitted from Mar_7. In v. 41 κακοὺςκακῶς takes the place of ἐλεύσεται , which has been transferred to v. 40; ἐκδώσεται , cf. ἐξέδετο , v. 33, takes the place of δώσει , and a clause is added to round off the sentence. For the phraseology, cf. Psalms 1:3. (M) 42. Jesus saith to them, Did you never read in the Scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, this became the head of the corner: from the Lord was this, and it is marvellous in our eyes?] So Mk., without “ Jesus saith to them,” and with “ Did you not read this Scripture,” for Mt.’ s “ Did you never read in the Scriptures.” The quotation is from the LXX. of Psalms 117:22. αὕτη corresponds to the Heb. neutral pronoun ז א ת . “ This” means this fact, that the rejected stone became the head of the corner. (E) 43. Therefore I say to you, That the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation which produceth its fruits.] The words do not occur in Mk. They are an expository comment of the editor. The parable carries forward the thought of the preceding section. The Jewish rulers had adopted towards the Baptist a policy of non-recognition, which involved them in doubts as to the authority of Christ as the Messiah, vv. 23-32. Their action was typical and prophetic. They had at all times disobeyed the messengers of God, and were on the point of putting to death the Messiah, the Son of God, and His final Messenger to them. Consequently the divine favour, the kingdom = the vineyard, would be withdrawn from them and given to others. Vv. 41-42 express the same thought under another metaphor. The stone which the builders of Israel, that is, the Jewish authorities, rejected would become the chief stone in another building. The edifice of Israel’ s national life was to give place to another building; cf. 16:18 οἰκοδομήσωμουτὴνἐκκλησίαν .— ἡβασιλείατοῦθεοῦ ] Since the parable as a whole is clearly taken from Mk., there is every reason to suppose that this verse, which is not in Mk., is an editorial comment on the meaning of the parable. The vineyard was to be taken from the Jewish nation; but what term could the editor substitute for the vineyard? What he wished to express was, no doubt, the privileged position of the Jews as the recipients of a divine revelation. But this was just what the Rabbinical writers express by “ the sovereignty of the heavens.” When a heathen became a proselyte, and was incorporated into the privileged Jewish people, he was said to take upon himself the sovereignty of the heavens; see Dalman, Words, p. 97. We might therefore have expected the editor to use the phrase βασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν . But since he has throughout the Gospel employed this term for the eschatological kingdom which Christ announced, and which was to be inaugurated when the Son of Man came upon the clouds of heaven, it would have been unsuitable here. For that kingdom had never been the possession of the Jewish rulers, and could not be taken from them. The phrase βασιλείατοῦθεοῦ , in the sense current among the Jews of the 1st century a.d., of sovereignty of God, seemed more suitable here; and the editor, by using it, once more betrays his Jewish origin, and emphasises his sense of the difference between this phrase in his Gospel and the more frequent βασιλείατῶνοὐρανῶν . See on 12:28 and 21:31, and Introduction, p. lxvii.— ἔθνει ] the conception of the Christian society as an ἔθνος occurs only here in the Gospel. It has twice been called an ἐκκλησία , 16:17, 18:17. The word is probably here suggested by the idea of the Jewish nation, implied in the ὑμῶν . (E?) 44. And every one who falleth upon this stone shall be dashed in pieces: but upon whomsoever it shall fall, it shall scatter him as dust.] The words do not occur in Mk. The stone of v. 42 seems to have suggested the stone of Isa 8:14, Isaiah 8:15 and the stone of Dan 2:34, Daniel 2:44-45. The verse apparently means that the rejection of the Messiah, “ the son” of v. 37 and “ the stone” of v. 42, would involve the complete break up of the Jewish polity.— λικμήσει ] is borrowed from Daniel 2:44 (Th.), and is used in the same sense as in that passage, namely, to break into small pieces, or to scatter as dust; see Deissm. Bib. Stud. p. 225. See also Briggs, Messianic Prophecy, p. 208. The verse is omitted by D 33 a b e ff1 2 S1. It may perhaps be an interpolation from Luke 20:18, where the saying occurs in the form πᾶςὁπεσὼνἐπ ʼ ἐκεῖνοντὸνλίθον , κ .τ .λ . But the verse as it stands in Mt. looks very much like an early gloss, suggested by v. 43. That verse seems to be an editorial interpretation of the meaning of the parable. The vineyard was to be given to others, v. 41. That is to say, the privileges of the Jewish nation, entrusted to it by God, were to be taken from it and given to others. The editor describes these privileges as “ the kingdom of God,” by which he probably means the whole of the special revelation vouchsafed to the Jewish nation. He could hardly have used the term “ the kingdom of the heavens,” because he everywhere employs this term to signify the kingdom announced by Christ as coming in the near future. Here the parable necessitates the use of a term to describe some privilege, corresponding to the vineyard, already in the possession of the Jewish nation. It is not very probable that after thus interpreting the parable and closing the narrative the editor would have added v. 44, which carries the thought back again to v. 42. But a later copyist of the Gospel has been reminded by the word ἔθνει (v. 43) of a passage in Daniel 2:44 where it is said that the kingdom shall not be left to another people, ἡβασιλείααὐτοῦλαῷἑτέρῳοὐχὑπολειφθήσεται , Th.; αὕτηἡβασιλείαἄλλοἔθνοςοὐμὴἐάσῃ , LXX. Whilst considering this contrast, his eye was caught by the next clause in Dn., λεπτυνεῖκαὶλικμήσειπάσαςτὰςβασιλείας . This afforded him the nucleus of an explanatory gloss, v. 44, which he has built up out of Dan 2:45 (Th..), Isaiah 8:14, Isaiah 8:15. How, then, are we to explain Luke 20:18? It is natural to say that, if not genuine in Mt., the history of the saying begins with Luke 20:18, whence it has been transferred to Mt. But, if I am not mistaken, the history of the clause begins rather with Matthew 21:43. It was the ἔθνει of that verse which directed attention to the “ other nation” of Daniel 2:44, and so to the λικμήσει of that passage. It is improbable that the original editor of Mt. inserted v. 44, but it may have been interpolated at a very early date, and may have been read as part of the first Gospel by the author of the third. Or it may have passed from the first Gospel into the third at so early a date that no hint of its spuriousness there is given by the extant witnesses to the text of that Gospel. There is, of course, no reason why the same glossator should not have inserted the words in both Gospels. (M) 45. And the chief priest and the Pharisees heard His parables, and perceived that He speaks about them.] (M) 46. And seeking to arrest Him, they feared the multitudes, since they held Him for a prophet.] Mk. has: “ They were seeking to arrest Him, and feared the multitude: for they perceived that He spoke the parable with reference to them. And leaving Him, they went away.” Mt., who has another parable to insert, omits the last clause. Mt.’ s slight changes of Mk. are intentional. ἔγνωσανγάρ in Mk. explains not the immediately preceding clause, but ἐζήτουναὐτὸνκρατῆσαι . Mt. places the clauses in logical order: (a) the motive, “ they perceived that He spoke about them” ; (b) the consequent action, “ seeking to arrest Him” ; (c) the hindrance, “ they feared the people.” Then to maintain the external form of Mk.’ s sentence, he adds another clause stating the ground of ἐφοβήθησαν .— ὄχλους ] as often, for Mk.’ s singular. εἰςπροφήτην , according to Wellhausen, is Aramaic. We should expect ὡς , as in v. 26. 33-46. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following particulars. Both have the order ἄνθρωποςἐφύτευσενἀμπελῶνα , Matthew 33, Luke 20:9. Both insert οἱγεωργοί , Matthew 35, Luk_10. Both insert ἰδόντες , Matthew 38, Luk_14. Both insert οὖν , Matthew 40, Luk_15. Both insert οἱἀρχιερεῖς , Matthew 45, Luk_19. More important is the fact that Lk. also inserts words almost identical with Matthew 44. If Matthew 44 be genuine, this agreement might seem to suggest a second source. But since in other respects the texts of Mt. and Lk. read like the result of independent redaction of Mk., it is better to suppose that Lk. had read Mt., and that the agreements just mentioned are due to reminiscence by Lk. of Mt.’ s version of the parable. The editor here adds a parable from the Logia. M the Second Gospel. Dalm. Dalman. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. LXX. The Septuagint Version. Deissm. Deissmann. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. S Syriac version: Curetonian. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. 1 τοῦθεοῦ ] So C D al latt S2; א B L omit. The phrase τὸἱερὸντοῦθεοῦ does not occur elsewhere, and is probably genuine here. 1 ἐποιήσατε ] So C D al, as in Lk. א B L have ποιεῖτε . E editorial passages. L the Matthæ an Logia. Apoll. R. Apollonius Rhodius. Diod. Diodorus. Hdt. Herodotus. Xen. Xenophon. 1 But the antithesis “ the Father— the Son” occurs also only once in Mk., viz. 13:32, yet is certainly genuine. In the same way Mark 11:25 may be a genuine survival in Mk. of a Palestinian form of expression which finds fuller expression in Mt. Th. Theodotion. 22:1. And Jesus answered again, and spake in parables to them, saving, 2. The kingdom of the heavens is likened to a human king, who made a marriage for his son.] For ὡμοιώθη , see on 13:24. For ἀνθρώπῳβασιλεῖ , 18:23. (L) 3. And sent his servants to call the invited (guests) to the marriage: and they were unwilling to come.] (L) 4. Again, he sent other servants, saying, Say to the invited (guests), Behold, my feast I have prepared: my oxen and fatlings are slaughtered, and all things are ready: come to the marriage.] For the double sending, cf. 21:36. (LE) 5, 6. And they, neglecting (the invitation), went away, one to his estate, and one to his business: and the rest seized his servants, and ill-treated them, and killed them.]— ἴδιον ] here = the possessive pronoun; see Deissm. Bib. Stud. 123. (E) 7. And the king was angry, and sent his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burnt up their city.] 6, 7. These verses may be due to the editor writing in remembrance of the death of the Baptist, the Crucifixion of the Messiah, the persecution of the Apostles, and the destruction of Jerusalem. v. 8 follows well upon v. 5. οὐκἦσανἄξιοι suits the indifferent guests of v. 5 much better than the executed murderers of v. 7. The verse expresses the editor’ s belief in the connection between the fall of Jerusalem and the Parousia. The marriage feast here follows the burning of the city. (L) 8. Then he saith to his servants, The marriage feast is ready, but the invited (guests) were not worthy.] (L) 9. Go therefore to the byways, and as many as ye shall find, invite to the marriage.]— διεξόδουςτῶνὁδῶν ] Cf. i. 199. (L) 10. And those servants went out into the highways, and gathered all whom they found, both evil and good: and the marriage feast was supplied with guests.]— συνήγαγον ] is probably a translation of the Aram. root ב נ ם which in the Piel means to “ gather,” and in the Hiphil to “ bring in,” to “ invite.” The subst. ה ב נ ס ה means hospitality, e.g., ה ב נ ס ת א ו ד ח י ם , Shabb 127a, Peah, c. 1. πονηρούς prepares the way for vv. 11-14.— πονηρούςτεκαί ] τεκαί only here in Mt., τε occurs also in 27:48, 28:12. 1-10. So far the editor has adapted a Logian “ kingdom” parable to his context. In the original parable the story of a king who made a marriage feast and invited guests who were indifferent to the invitation, was used to describe the reception accorded to the good news of the coming kingdom of the heavens. By inserting vv. 6-7 the editor has adapted this, and brought it into line with Mark’ s parable of the Husbandmen, and the preceding parable of the Two Sons. The Jewish nation in the person of its rulers had refused to listen to God’ s call to repentance (21:32), had rejected the Messiah (v. 39), and had neglected the summons to the marriage feast (22:5). Consequently, judgement upon them was at hand. Another people would receive their privileges (21:43, 22:10), whilst the Jewish metropolis, and with it the Jewish polity, would be destroyed, 22:7. The next four verses seem to be the closing paragraph of another parable. They are hardly suitable here as a conclusion of vv. 1-10, because the people invited in from the streets could hardly be expected to have provided themselves with festal attire. The parable to which 11-14 originally belonged no doubt spoke of an interval between the invitation and the feast, during which the guests were expected to make suitable preparations. Such a parable is attributed to Jochanan ben Zaccai in Shabbath 153a, and to Judah ha Nasi in Midr. Koh 98 (Wü nsche, p. 122). A king invited his servants to a feast, but gave them no fixed time for the meal. The wise attired themselves fittingly, and waited at the palace door. The foolish went away to their work. Suddenly the king issued his summons. The wise came in their festal robes, and the foolish in their working clothes. These were made to stand and watch the wise enjoying the meal. Luke 14:15-24 has a parable of similar outline to Matthew 22:1-10. But the language and details are quite different. The two Evangelists clearly are not borrowing from the same written source. (L) 11. And the king went in to behold the guests, and saw there a man not attired in a wedding garment.]— οὐκἐνδεδυμένον ] cf. Moulton, pp. 231 f.— θεάσασθαι ] cf. on 11:7. (L) 12. And he saith to him, Friend, how camest thou in here not having a wedding garment? And he was reduced to silence.]— ἑταῖρε ] See on 20:13. (L) 13. Then the king said to the servants, Bind him feet and hands, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.] Parable and fulfilment here intermingle. In the parable the rejected guest was dismissed from the palace with ignominy. But the editor has in mind the fulfilment of the parable in the expulsion of the unworthy from the kingdom into the darkness of Gehenna, cf. 13:41, 42, and gives the ending of the parable in terms more appropriate to its explanation and fulfilment. For τὸσκότος , κ .τ .λ . see on 8:12. (L) 14. For many are called, but few chosen.] Vv. 11-14 do not seem to suit this connection. The editor has added them apparently because of the similarity of subject-matter, a wedding feast 1-10, a wedding garment 11-14. Vv. 1-l0 in this connection seem clearly prophetic of the fate of the Jewish nation. That is to say, this application is given to the parable by the context into which the editor has set it. But vv. 11-14 seem to have no bearing upon this application, unless we suppose that the editor found in the verses some such train of thought as the following. The Jews as a nation would be punished for their rejection of God’ s call by the destruction of their national polity, vv. 1-9. Their privileges would be given to other people, v. 10; but though the invitation would be given to all, none would be admitted without the proper qualification, 11-14. It seems clear that the parable from which 11-13 are taken originally had reference not to the Jewish nation at all, but to the Christian society waiting for the coming kingdom. During this period the disciples were to be in a state of readiness, because when the kingdom came all who were not prepared would be rejected. Compare the parable of the Tares, 13:24-30, 36-43, and that of the Virgins, 25:1-13. The wedding garment obviously symbolises a condition of readiness and equipment with the necessary qualification. What this is need not be further defined than by saying that it is the righteousness obtained by obedience to Christ’ s teaching, 5:20; or by doing the will of God, 7:21; or the moral qualifications which Christ recommends, 18:3; or confession of Him before men, 10:32. V. 14 seems to express this warning in a proverbial form. Many are called to enter the kingdom, but comparatively few obtain the necessary qualifications, and are ultimately admitted. The words, though they express the same lesson of warning as vv. 11-13, do not seem very harmonious in form with them. They may be a detached saying added here by the editor because of the verbal connection between κλητοί and κεκλημένοι , vv. 3, 4. The contrast between the few and the many is found in 2 Est 8:1 “ The Most High hath made this world for many, but the world to come for few” ; 8 “ There be many created, but few shall be saved” ; cf. 8:55 “ the multitude of them that perish” ; 9:15 “ there shall be more of them which perish, than of them which shall be saved” ; Apoc. Bar 44:15 “ the dwelling of the rest who are many will be in the fire.” 15-22. From Mark 12:13-17. See Gould in loc. 15. Then the Pharisees went and took counsel how they might entrap Him in argument.] (M) 16. And they send to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Teacher, we know that Thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, and carest not for any man; for Thou regardest not the person of men.] Mk. has: “ And they send to Him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, that they might ensnare Him in argument. And they came and say to Him, Teacher, We know that Thou art true, and carest not for any man; for Thou regardest not the person of men, but truly teachest the way of God.” In Mk. the “ they” must refer to the chief priests and elders and scribes, who have not been mentioned by name since 11:27. Mt., who throughout regards the Pharisees as the most bitter of Christ’ s opponents, and lays stress on their hostility, has inserted chief priests and Pharisees in 21:45, and reintroduces them here as the subject of the sentence. For τότε , see on 2:7. For πορευθέντες , see on 21:2; and for συμβούλιονἔλαβον , 12:14. Mt. substitutes παγιδεύειν for Mk.’ s ἀγρεύειν . He retains here, unusually, Mk.’ s historic present, ἀποστέλλουσιν . He had omitted the Herodians from Mark 3:6, but retains them here because their presence adds point to the narrative. As supporters of Herod, they would have been glad to denounce to the Roman Government any one who agitated against the political status quo. The rearrangement of clauses in v. 16 brings together the two positive sentences followed by the two negative ones.— τὴνὁδόντοῦθεοῦ ] for ὅδον , see on 21:31. The way of God is the conduct or manner of life which God requires. (M) 17. Tell us, therefore, What thinkest Thou? Is it lawful to give tribute to Cœ sar or not?] Mk. omits the first clause, and adds δῶμενἢμὴσῶμεν . For τίσοιδοκεῖ , see on 17:25. For Mt.’ s omission of the redundant “ shall we give or not give,” see on 8:16; and for κῆνσος , 17:25. (M) 18. And Jesus perceived their malice, and said, Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites?] Mk. has: “ And He knew their hypocrisy, and said to them, Why tempt ye Me?” Mt. substitutes πονηρίαν for ὑπόκρισιν , but adds ὑποκριταί . (M) 19. Show to Me the tribute coin. And they brought to Him a denarius.] Mk. has: “ Bring Me a denarius, that I may see it. And they brought (one).” Mk.’ s φέρετε may be due to the fact that Roman denarii would not be current in the Temple, and were, therefore, not likely to be found there. If so, Mt. with his ἐπιδείξατε misses the point. See Swete. For προσφέρειν , see Introduction, p. lxxxvi. (M) 20. And He saith to them, Whose is this representation and legend? They say to Him, Cœ sar’ s.] Mk. has: “ And He saith to them, Whose is this representation and legend? And they said to Him, Cæ sar’ s.” For τότε , see 2:7. (M) 21. Then He saith to them, Render therefore to Cæ sar the things of Cæ sar, and to God the things of God.] So Mk., with “ And Jesus said” and no οὖν , which occurs in Mk. about four times as against about fifty-six occurrences in Mt. For the meaning, see Swete. (M) 22. And they heard (it), and marvelled, and left Him, and departed.] Mk. has: “ And they were marvelling at Him.” — ἐθαύμασαν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imperfect, as often. 15-22. Lk. agrees with Mt. in omitting δῶμενἢμὴδῶμεν from Mk v. 14; in δείξατε Luk_24 =Mat_19 ἐπιδείξατε against Mat_16 φέρετε ; and in the order ἀπόδοτε — τὰΚαίσαρος as against Mk.’ s τὰΚαίσαροςἀπόδοτε . Also in αὐτοῖς , Mat_21 = πρὸςαὐτούς , Luke 25. 23-33. From Mark 12:18-27. (M) 23. On that day there came to Him Sadducees, saying that there is no resurrection, and they asked Him.] Mk. has: “ And there come Sadducees to Him, who say that there is no resurrection; and they were asking Him.” For ἐνἐκείνῃτῇἡμέρᾳ , see 13:1; προσῆλθον , see on 4:3. Mt. avoids Mk.’ s hist. pres. ἔρχονται , as often.— ἐπηρώτησαν ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s imperf., as often. (M) 24. Saying, Teacher, Moses said, If a man die, not having children, his brother should marry his wife, and raise up seed to his brother.] Mk. has: “ Saying, Teacher, Moses wrote for us, that if a man’ s brother die, and leave a wife, and leave no child, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up seed to his brother.” Mk.’ s Greek is awkward. In ἔγραψενὅτι — ἵνα there is a confusion of two constructions, and the threefold ἀδελφός obscures the meaning. Mt. substitutes τις for τινοςἀδελφός , thus getting rid of one ἀδελφός , omits the superfluous ἵνα , omits the unnecessary καὶκαταλίπῃγυναῖκα , and substitutes the technical ἐπιγαμβρεύειν for λάβῃ : cf. Genesis 38:8 γάμβρευσαιαὐτήν . In Leviticus 18:16, Leviticus 20:21 marriage with a deceased brother’ s wife is forbidden. But Deuteronomy 25:5-10 specifies certain circumstances under which it shall be the duty of a man to contract such a marriage.— μὴἔχωντέκνα ] The Heb. has simply “ son,” i.e. male issue. But the has σπέρμα , and (Ant. iv. 255) interpreted in this sense. (M) 25. And there were with us seven brethren; and the first, having married, died, and not having seed, left his wife to his brother.] Mk. has: “ Seven brethren there were; and the first took a wife, and died, and left no seed.” (M) 26. Likewise the second, and the third, to the seventh.] Mk. has: “ And the second took her, and died, not leaving seed. And the third likewise. And the seven left no seed.” (M) 27. And last of all, the woman died.] So Mk. with ἔσχατον for ὕστερον . Mt. seven times has ὕστερον . (M) 28. In the resurrection, therefore, of which of them shall she be wife, for all had her?] Mk. has: “ In the resurrection, of which of them shall she be wife, for the seven had her as wife?” Mt. avoids Mk.’ s repeated “ seven” and “ wife,” and inserts a connecting particle . (M) 29. And Jesus answered and said to them, Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.] Mk. has: “ Jesus said to them, Do ye not therefore err,” etc. Christ’ s answer is twofold. In denying the possibility of a resurrection, and in supposing that imaginary complications arising out of earthly relationships could be used as an argument against it, they betrayed (a) insufficient knowledge of the law, which, if it did not explicitly teach the doctrine of the resurrection, yet did implicitly teach its possibility; (b) want of faith in the power of God to solve all such difficulties as they alleged. Broadly speaking, a belief in a resurrection was a fundamental doctrine of Jewish literature from the second century b.c. See Charles, Eschatology; Volz, Jü d. Eschat. 240 ff.; Schü rer, II. ii. 179 ff. But very varied views were held as to its scope. The Sadducees denied it; see Jos. Wars, ii. 165; B. Sanh 90:b. So did the Samaritans, who were accused by the Jews of having falsified the Pentateuch in order to obliterate passages which taught it; Sanh 90:b. Appeal was made on behalf of it to Scripture, e.g. in B. Sanh 90:b. R. Jochanan appeals to Numbers 18:28, from which it is deduced that Aaron is eternally living: “ Here is also the resurrection of the dead signified.” R. Simai appealed to Exodus 6:4 “ The Sadducees asked R. Gamaliel, Whence is it proved that the Holy One, blessed be He, will raise the dead? He answered, From the Pentateuch, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa.” There follow citations of Deu 31:16, Isaiah 26:19, and Son 7:10. “ He has no part in the world to come,” says the Mishnah (Sanh 10:1), “ who denies that the resurrection can be proved from the Pentateuch.” (M) 30. For in the resurrection they do not marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.] Mk. has: “ For when they rise from the dead they do not marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as angels in the heavens.” The point seems to be that, in the life which follows the resurrection, men will then be as the angels in heaven now are, immortal, and without need of marriage to propagate their kind. (M) 31, 32. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, Have ye not read that which was said to you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of dead (persons), but of living.] The inference seems to be that when the words were spoken the patriarchs were still living, and that their resurrection was a natural and probable corollary. Cf. the similar inference from Numbers 18:28 with reference to Aaron, quoted above from Sanh 90b. Mk. has: “ But concerning the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, at the Bush how God spake to him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of Jacob? He is not God of dead persons, but of living: ye greatly err.” The quotation is from Exodus 3:6. (M) 33. And when the multitudes heard, they were astonished at His teaching.] The editor inserts here words which he has omitted from Mark 11:18 “ For all the multitude was astonished at His teaching.” 23-33. Lk. agrees with Mt. against Mk. in the following: προσῆλθον , Mat_23 = προσελθόντες , Luke 27; ἔρχονται , Mark 18. ἐπηρώτησαν , Mat_23, Luke 27; ἐπηρώτων , Mark 18. ὕστερον , Mat_27, Luke 32; ἔσχατον , Mark 22. εἶπεν , Matthew 29, Luke 34; ἔφη , Mark 24. Both Mat_28 and Luke 33 insert οὖν , and both omit ἔλαβεναὐτήν , καὶἀπέθανενμὴκαταλιπὼνσπέρμα from Mark 21. 23. λέγοντες ] So א B. D 1 2 . The meaning seems to be that certain Sadducees came and denied that there was a resurrection. א c E F al have οἱλέγοντες ; but with this reading we should expect also οἱΣαδδουκαῖοι . 30. ἄγγελοι ] Add θεοῦ , א L. Omit B. D 1 209 latt S1 S2. 34-40. Cf. Mark 12:28-34. (E) 34. And the Pharisees, having heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, were gathered together.] (E) 35. And one of them asked Him, testing Him.] Mk. here records the story of a scribe who, approving of Christ’ s answers, himself asked a question, and expressed great approval of the answer which he received. The story ends with a statement of Christ’ s appreciation of the character of His questioner. In Mt. the incident takes a different turn. The Pharisees gather together, and one of them puts a question to Christ, testing Him. The whole of Mk.’ s continuation of the narrative after Christ’ s answer is omitted. It is difficult to see in the continual mention of the Pharisees in Mt. any other purpose than a desire to prepare the way for the chapter of denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees which is to follow in ch. 23. Cf. 21:45 “ the chief priests and the Pharisees,” 22:15 “ the Pharisees,” 34 “ the Pharisees,” 41 “ the Pharisees.” This may account for the unfavourable view taken here of Mk.’ s scribe. He was a Pharisee, and came to Christ with hostile intent. Consequently the approval expressed of him by Christ must be dropped, and with it goes what may have seemed to the editor the somewhat patronising words of the scribe in Mark 12:32, Mark 12:33. Cf. the omission of the reproachful οὐμέλεισοι from Mark 4:38 = Matthew 8:25, and of the somewhat sarcastic question from Mark 6:37 = Matthew 14:17. In this way Matthew 22:34-40 might be explained as due to editorial revision of Mar 12:28-34. But another factor has to be taken into account. Lk. in the parallel to Mk. abbreviates the whole section into one sentence: “ And certain of the scribes answered and said, Teacher, Thou hast well said. For no one dared to ask Him anything.” Two reasons for this shortening may be conjectured— (a) Lk. found Mk.’ s narrative to be not free from objection; (b) he had already inserted a similar story free from the objectionable element in 10:25-27. Now, Luke 10:25-27 agrees in some points with Matthew 22:34-40 against Mar_12. In both, according to the usual text, the questioner is described as νομικός . In both he comes to test Christ— πειράζων , Matthew 35; ἐκπειράζων , Luke 25. Both stories have a definite reference to the law, ἐντῷνόμῳ ; and both omit the quotation from Deuteronomy 6:4, and partially assimilate Mk.’ s quotation of Deu 6:5 to the Hebrew by substituting ἐν for Mk.’ s ἐκ (= LXX.). Lk., however, has both prepositions. These facts are rather difficult to explain. We might suppose that Mt. and Lk. were both acquainted with a narrative of a lawyer who came to tempt Christ. Lk. inserted it in ch. 10, and afterwards omitted the somewhat similar narrative of Mar_12, whilst Mt. substituted it for the story of Mar_12. Or Mt.’ s text may be regarded as a revision of Mk.’ s, and Luke 10:25-27 may be entirely independent, or affected by reminiscence of Mt. and Mk. on the part of Lk. (M?) 36. Teacher, what kind of commandment is great in the law?] Mk. has: “ What kind of commandment is first of all?” — ποῖος ] cf. 19:18. Or it is equivalent to τίς ; cf. 21:23ff., p. 241. (M?) 37. And He said to him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.] Mk. has: “ Jesus answered that the first is, Hear, Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God from all thy heart, and from all thy soul, and from all thy mind, and from all thy strength.” The quotation is from Deuteronomy 6:5. The LXX. has “ from all thy mind , and from all thy soul, and from all thy power .” But A F Luc have καρδίας for διανοίας . Mk. seems to have conflated the two renderings, and to have substituted ἰσχύος for δυνάμεως . Mt., remembering the fact that there were only three clauses in the original, retains only the first three from Mk., and assimilates to the Hebrew by substituting ἐν for ἐκ . (M?) 38. This is the great and first commandment.] (M?) 39. A second similar one is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.] The quotation is from Leviticus 19:18, and has already been quoted in 19:19. This saying in a negative form is ascribed to Hillel in B. Shabb 31a “ What is hateful to thee, do not do to thy neighbour. That is the whole law. All else is commentary upon it.” (M?) 40. On these two commandments hangeth the whole law, and the prophets.] Mk. has: “ Greater than these is no other commandment.” Mt. here postpones Mark 34b to the end of the next section, where it suitably closes the whole series of questions. 34. έπὶτὸαὐτό ] D latt S1 S2 have έπ ʼ αὐτόν cf. 27:27 συνήγαγονἐπ ʼ αὑτόν . έπί has here a hostile significance, as in Acts 4:27. This reading gives an admirable sense, and ould be easily corrupted into ἐπὶτὸαὐτό : cf. Acts 4:26. 35. νομικός , Om. 1 e S1 Arm Orig. The word occurs seven times in Lk., not in Mk., nor elsewhere in Mt. 37. διανοίᾳ ] c S1 S2 have “ power” (c. virtute) = ἰσχῦι from Mk. S1 S2 also have “ from” for ἐν throughout, assimilating to Mk. (and the Pesh. VS. of Dt.). 41-45. From Mark 12:35-37a. (M) 41. And when the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus answered and said, as He taught in the temple.” For the emphasis on the Pharisees, cf. on v. 35. The collocation of συνήχθησαν , v. 34, with περὶτοῦΧριστοῦ , v. 42, suggests that very possibly the Evangelist had in mind Psalms 2:2. (M) 42. What think ye about the Messiah? Whose Son is He? They say to Him, David’ s.] Mk. has: “ How say the scribes that the Messiah is David’ s Son?” — τίὑμῖνδοκεῖ ] cf. on 17:25. For λέγουσιναὐτῷ , cf. 19:7, 21:31, 22:21. (M) 43. He saith to them, How then does David in the Spirit call Him Lord, saying?] Mk. has: “ David himself in the Holy Spirit said.” — ἐνπνεύματι ] i.e. by divine inspiration. Cf. “ David said in the Holy Spirit,” Schir ha-Schirim 21 (Wü nsche, p. 54), and see Bacher, Exeget. Termin. ii. 202. (M) 44. The Lord said to My Lord, Sit at My right hand until I place Thy enemies underneath Thy feet.] So Mk. That is to say, “ there is a Psalm of David in which the writer speaks of the Messiah as Lord.” It is assumed that the Psalm is Davidic, and that it deals with the Messiah. The reference is to Psalms 110:1. Both Mt. and Mk. differ from the LXX. in omitting the article before κύριος , and in substituting ὑποκάτω for ὑποπόδιον . (M) 45. If, therefore, David calls Him Lord, how is He His Son? Mk. has: “ David himself calls Him Lord, and whence is He His Son?” Christ here raises a difficulty which He does not solve. If the Messiah is David’ s Son, how is it that David, speaking by divine inspiration, ascribes to Him a divine title and divine prerogatives? The solution suggested, though not expressed, is that the Messiah is not only Son of David, but Son of God. See Words, pp. 285 f. (M) 46. And no one could answer Him a word, nor did any one dare from that day to question Him any further.] Mk. has: “ And no one any further dared to question Him.” Mt. and Lk. agree in the following: αὐτούς , Matthew 41, Luke 41. καλεῖ — πῶς , Matthew 45, Luke 44; λέγει — πόθεν , Mark 37. Both insert οὖν , Matthew 45, Luke 44. 44. ὑποκἁτω ] א B D al b e h q S1 S2; ὑποπόδιον , E F al latt. In Mk. ὑποκάτω is read by B Dgr Td 28 S1, ὑποπόδιον by א A L al latt. Lk. has ὑποπόδιον here and in Acts 2:35. editorial passages. the Matthæ an Logia. Herodotus. Babylonian Talmud. Cf. on 6:19, 18:7. the Second Gospel. In Deuteronomy 25:5 LXX. has καὶσυνοικήσειαὐτῇ for ו ְ י ִ ב ּ ְ מ ֶ ה , but Aq. has ἐπιγαμβρεύσει . The Septuagint Version. Josephus. ἐντῷοὐρανῷ . Mk. has ἐντοῖςούρανοῖς , and the plural would accord with the usage of the first Gospel. Cf. 24:29, 36. 18:10. Mark 13:32 has the singular in this connection, and Mt. there substitutes the plural, so that the singular in 22:30 is all the more unexpected. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Winer-Schmiedel. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. Cf. also Siphra on Leviticus 19:18 (Ugol. 853) “ Rabbi Akiba said, This is the greatest commandment in the law,” and Bereshith R. (Wü nsche, p. 112). Dalman. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. 23. For Mark 12:37-40 Mt. substitutes a much longer discourse. The relation of this to Lk. may be shown as follows: It will be seen that Luke 11:39-52 contains sayings spoken to a Pharisee, 38, or Pharisees, 42, or lawyers, 46, all of which are incorporated in Mat_23, but without distinction of audience, in a different order, and in different language. The last difference makes it very unlikely that Mt. and Lk. had a common written source. Mt vv. 37-39 recur in Luke 13:34-35 in a different context, and with variations of language. A common written source is improbable. 1. Then Jesus spake to the multitudes, and to His disciples, saying.] Mk. has: “ And in His teaching, He was saying.” Lk. also has τοῖςμαθηταῖς in this connection. 2. The scribes and the Pharisees sit on the seat of Moses.] Cf. Rosh ha Shanah 25a “ Every council of three in Israel is like the council of Moses” ; Aboth 1:1 “ Moses received … and delivered to Joshua, and Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the men of the great synagogue.” — ἐκάθισαν ] The aor. is difficult. It may be due to the fact that the editor writes from his own standpoint, and looks back upon the period when the scribes and Pharisees were in power. But Wellhausen speaks of it as a Semiticism. (L) 3. All things therefore whatsoever they say to you, do and observe.] The words are difficult in view of the criticism of the regulations of the traditional law in 15:1-20; cf. esp. 15:6. We must suppose that a limitation is to be inferred from “ sit in Moses’ seat.” Do all things that they teach, in so far as this is in harmony with the spirit of the Mosaic law. The comprehensiveness of the saying reminds us of 5:18.— But do not according to their works: for they say, and do not.] This can hardly mean that the Pharisees did not themselves endeavour to conform to the regulations of the traditional law. The λέγουσιν implies that the whole Pharisaic system was professedly an endeavour to fulfil the commands of God expressed in the Old Testament, and to live up to the moral standard there revealed. By οὐποιοῦσι is meant that in practice their system tended to miss the real righteousness of the Old Testament, and to overlook its true principles, love, mercy, truth, etc. Cf. 12:7. They professed regard for the Old Testament, but neglected the mercy which it taught; 15:4, 5 they so explained away the divine command of filial duty as to sanction the direct contrary; 23:23 they paid great attention to minuter regulations of the law, but neglected the great underlying moral principles. (L) 4. And they bind heavy burdens, and lay them upon the shoulders of men; and they themselves with their finger are unwilling to move them away.] Luke 11:46 has: “ Ye burden men with intolerable burdens, and yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.” The verse gives an example of the failure to “ do” referred to in v. 3. The law was given not as a burden, but as a privilege. But the Pharisaic interpretation of it made it a burden upon life. And the Pharisees refused to lighten this ever accumulating burden of legal restrictions in the slightest degree. Traditionalism is always unwilling to relinquish what has become effete and antiquated. The burdens referred to are those of the traditional law with its ever-increasing complexity. For κινῆσαι = “ to remove,” cf. Revelation 2:5, Revelation 6:14. (L) 5. And all their works they do to be seen of men: for they make wide their phylacteries, and enlarge their tassels.] The verse emphasises a special vice which was eating into the heart of the whole Pharisaic system. For φυλακτήρια , see , “ Phylacteries.” For κράσπεδα , cf. on 9:20. ( L) 6, 7. And love the chief seat at feasts and the first places in the synagogues, and salutations in the market-places, and to be called by men, Rabbi.] Lk. has (11:43): “ You love the first place in the synagogues, and the salutations in the market-places.” Mk. reverses the order, and so does Lk. in the parallel to Mk., 20:46. — φιλοῦσι ] so Lk. φιλούντων . Mark 38 has θελόντων . (L) 8. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Teacher, and all ye are brethren.] (L) 9. And call no man your father upon earth: for one is your Father, the heavenly one] πατέραμὴκαλέσητεὑμῶν is harsh. “ Father” was a term of respect for the men of a past generation; cf. the title of the Mishnic treatise Pirke Aboth = Sayings of the Fathers, and the title πατέρωνὕμνος of Ecclus 44. The Aramaic Abba was used as a title or name of distinguished teachers; cf. Levy, Neuheb. Wö rterbuch; Words, 339. (L) 10. And be not called leaders: for one is your leader, even Christ.] καθηγητής and διδάσκαλος (v. 8) are probably renderings of ר ב , If so, the two verses are duplicate versions of one saying. See Dalm. Words, 340. (L) 11. But the greater among you shall be your minister.] Cf. Mark 9:35, Mark 10:43. (L) 12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased, and whosoever shall humble himself shall be exalted.] Cf. Proverbs 29:23. Similar words occur in Luke 14:11, Luke 18:14. 4. βαρέα ] Add καὶδυσβάστακτα , B D . Omit א L 1 209 a b e ff2 h 1 2. Probably an interpolation from Luke 11:46. τῷδακτύλῳαὐτῶν ] Om. S1. 5. τὰφυλακτήριααὐτῶν ] S1 S2 have “ the thongs of their frontlets.” — μεγαλύνουσιντὰκράσπεδα ] S1 S2 have “ lengthen the fringe(s) of their cloaks.” The translators are influenced by knowledge of Jewish practice and custom. 7. ῥαββεί ] D al S1 S2 ῥαββεί , ῥαββεί . 8. μὴκληθῆτε ] S1 S2 have “ call not ye men Rabbi,” assimilating to v. 9. 12. E F G al add here: “ Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: for ye devour the houses of widows, and for a pretence pray at length. Therefore ye shall receive more abundant judgement.” Omit א B D L Z a e ff1 g1 2 S1. The words are an interpolation from Mark 12:40, Luke 20:47. In some authorities the words stand after v. 13. 13-32. Seven illustrations of Pharisaic “ saying,” and “ not doing.” 13. But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut the kingdom of the heavens before men: for ye enter not in, neither do ye allow those who are going in to enter.] Luke 11:52 has: “ Woe to you, lawyers! for ye took away the key of knowledge. Yourselves ye did not enter, and those were going in ye prevented.” Cf. Fragment of a Lost Gospel, ed. Grenfell and Hunt, ll. 41-46, which may be reconstructed as follows: “ The key of the kingdom (or of knowledge) they hid. Themselves entered not, neither suffered they those who were going in to enter.” The meaning is that the Pharisaic interpretation of the law obscured rather than illuminated its religious content. (L) 15. But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hvpocrites! for ye go about sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is become (one) ye make him twice as much as yourselves a son of Gehenna.] For the Jewish Propaganda, cf. Bousset, Rel. Jü d. 80-82; Schü rer, 11 ii. 291 ff. For τὴνξηράν = τὴνγῆν , cf. Jonah 1:9, Haggai 2:6.— υἱὸνγεέννης ] that is, one destined for Gehenna; cf. ב נ י ג י ח נ ם , Rosh ha Sh 17a, ב ן ה ע ו ל ם ה ב א = “ son of the coming age” , Berakh 57a. ποιῆσαιἕναπροσήλυτον ] i.e. to Pharisaism. Whilst the number of heathen attracted to Judaism at this period was very great, a comparatively small proportion would have been regarded by the Pharisees as satisfactory converts. The Hellenistic Jewish literature, e.g. the writings of Philo and the Sibylline Oracles (Book iii.), are evidence of the zeal of Jews of the Dispersion to attract Gentiles to the worship of the one God. But converts to Pharisaism as distinguished from Judaism, with its infinite variety of shades of belief and practice (Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Therapeutæ , and those who belonged to none of these orders), were probably few. ἕνα may reflect upon this comparative failure of Pharisaic missionary zeal. Friedlä nder ingeniously illustrates the verse by reference to Ant. xx. 34-48. It is there recorded that a Jew named Ananias converted to the worship of God Izates, son of Monobazus of Adiabene, but told him that he could worship God without being circumcised. However, another Jew, “ reputed to be accurately acquainted with Jewish learning,” πάνυπερὶτὰπάτριαδοκῶνἀκριβὴςεἶναι , persuaded Izates to be circumcised, on the ground that he was guilty of impiety in neglecting to do so. Friedlä nder sees in this story an example of the Pharisaic zeal in compassing sea and land to make one proselyte to their own rigid interpretation of the universal application of the requirements of the law to the Gentiles. (L) 16. Woe to you, blind guides, who say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is not valid; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, is bound by his oath.] Cf. 5:33-37. As in that section, the reference is not to legal oaths but to the unnecessary reference to divine things in common life, Kiddushin 71a “ by the temple,” Taanith 24a “ by the temple worship.” (L) 17. Fools and blind: for which is greater, the gold, or the temple that hallowed the gold?] (L) 18. And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is not valid; but whosoever shall swear by the gift which is upon it, he is bound by his oath.] (L) 19. Ye blind men: for which is greater, the gift, or the altar that halloweth the gift?] B C al prefix μωροὶκαί , as in v. l7. (L) 20. He therefore who sweareth by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all that is upon it.] (L) 21. And he who sweareth by the temple, sweareth by it, and by Him who dwelleth in it.] (L) 22. And he who sweareth by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by Him that sitieth upon it.] (L) 23. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, judgement, and mercy, and faith: these ye ought to have done, and not to have neglected those.] Luke 11:42 has: “ But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and every herb, and pass by judgement and the love of God: these ye ought to have done, and not to have passed over those.” — For the tithing of small herbs, cf. Maaser, i. I: “ Everything which is eatable, and is preserved, and has its nourishment from the soil, is liable to be tithed.— ἡδύοσμον ] = mint. See DB., “ Mint.” — ἄνηθον ] = dill. See DB., “ Anise” ; cf. Maaser, iv. 5: “ Rabbi Eliezer said, Of dill must one tithe the seed, and the leaves, and the stalks.” — κύμινον ] See DB., “ Cummin.” All three herbs were used in cooking, and the two latter for medicinal purposes. For ἄνηθον , Lk. has πήγανον . Nestle, , Aug. 1904, suggests a misreading of ש ׁ ַ ב ּ ָ ר ָ א = πήγανον for ש ׁ ְ ב ֵ ת ָ א = ἄνηθον For “ judgement,” cf. Isaiah 1:17, Jeremiah 22:3, Zechariah 7:9, Secrets of Enoch 42:9 “ Blessed is he who gives a just judgement for the orphan and the widow.” For “ mercy,” cf. 9:13; and for “ faith,” cf. Habakkuk 2:4. (L) 24. Blind guides, who strain out the gnat, and swallow down the camel.] (L) 25. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye cleanse the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of rapacity and wantonness.] Luke 11:39 has: “ Now, ye Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and the plate , but your inside is full of rapacity and wickedness.— γέμουσιν ] The verb is usually followed by a genitive. ἐκ here signifies that the contents of the vessels are obtained by immoral methods. 23. S1 S2 omit. Burkitt thinks that they presuppose ταῦταδὲποιῆσαικἀκεῖναμὴἀφεῖναι , and that this is original, being a literal translation of an Aramaic idiom. In Luke 11:42 S2 again omits ἕδει , but S1 presupposes it. But the Syriac VSS. elsewhere omit δεῖ . So S1 9:11, 13:10, Luke 12:12, Luke 18:1, Luke 24:44, John 3:7, John 3:4:20, John 3:24; S2 Mar 13:10, Luke 24:44, John 3:7. 25. For the purification of vessels, see Schü rer, II. ii. 106 ff., and B. Kelim. The verse is aimed at the excessive importance attached to the ceremonial cleanness or uncleanness of utensils. After all, what does this matter, provided that they are used for honourable purposes? But if they be used to contain food gained in a dishonest manner, they may rightly be regarded as unclean. (L) 26. Blind Pharisee, cleanse first the contents of the cup and of the platter, that its outside also may be clean.] That is, “ use the vessels only for food honestly procured, and it will be unnecessary to ask if the outside is ceremonially clean.” Luke 11:40, Luke 11:41 has: “ Ye fools, did not He who made the outside make also the inside? But give as alms what is within; and, behold, all things are pure to you.” It is questionable whether the two Evangelists understood the words to be a polemic against the Pharisaic regulations about the purification of vessels, or whether they interpreted cup and plate as metaphors for men, like the sepulchres of the next verse, and understood the words to be aimed at the regulations concerning personal ceremonial cleanness; cf. Mark 7:1ff. In Mt. the reference to the cleansing of literal vessels seems hardly disputable, and αὐτοῦ in v. 26 would have to be deleted before τοῦποτηρίου could be interpreted as a metaphor of the human person. Lk., by inserting ὑμῶν in v. 39, seems to draw a contrast, not, as in Mt., between the outside of the vessels and their contents, but between the ceremonial cleanness of the vessels and the moral uncleanness of their possessors. Cf. Buddhist and Christian Gospels, p. 84: “ What use to thee is matted hair, fool! what use the goatskin garment? Within thee there is ravening; the outside thou makest clean.” But in v. 41 he seems to fall back upon the other contrast between the inside and outside of the vessels. Wellhausen thinks that Lk. has here misrendered his original. He would transpose ἔσωθεν and ἔξωθεν (with D Cyp) in v. 40, render ποιεῖν by do = set straight = cleanse, and substitute for δότεἐλεημοσύνην Mt.’ s καθάρισον . “ Does not the man who cleanses the inside cleanse the outside too? (cf. Mark 7:1ff). Cleanse the inside, and, lo, all is clean.” If this be the original form of the saying, Mt. has wrongly inserted τοῦποτηρίου and αὐτοῦ in v. 26. But, however the apparent inconsistency in Lk. be explained, it seems most natural to suppose that Mt. rightly understood the saying to be aimed at the casuistical distinctions between clean and unclean utensils.— καὶτῆςπαροψίδος ] omit D S1 1 209 a d e ff. (L) 27. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like to whitened tombs, which outside appear beautiful, but inside are full of dead bones, and all uncleanness.] Luke 11:44 has: “ Woe to you! for ye are as sepulchres that are unseen, and the men who walk over them do not know it.” It was customary on the 15th of the month Adar to whitewash graves, that people might not unintentionally touch them and contract ceremonial defilement; B. Moed Qat. 1 a, Schequal, i. 1. Moed Qatan, 5a, bases this on Ezekiel 39:15.— κεκονιαμένοις ] The tombs were whitened with chalk or lime. The Talmudic verb is צ י י ן = to mark, distinguish. κεκονιαμένοι occurs in Proverbs 21:9, where it apparently means plaistered, i.e. luxurious, dwellings. There is no need to suppose that οἵτινεςμὲνφαίνονταιὡραῖοι , which is omitted in S1, is a later gloss by someone who thought that the purpose of the whitening the tombs was to beautify them. ὡραῖος might seem to suggest an æ sthetic purpose for the whitening. But the original Aramaic may have been a more colourless word. The saying in Luk_11 has a different turn. There the Pharisees are likened to unwhitened tombs, which therefore defile those who unwittingly pass over them. The difference is not favourable to the theory of a common Greek source for Mt. and Lk. (L) 28. So also ye outwardly appear to men to he just, but within are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.] Like the whitened sepulchres, the Pharisees were fair outside, foul inside. (L) 29. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye build the tombs of the prophets, and adorn the sepulchres of the just.] Luke 11:47 has: “ Woe to you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, but your fathers killed them.” (L) 30. And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been their associates in the blood of the prophets.] That is, “ You honour the dead whom your ancestors put to death, and say that, had you lived in the days of your fathers, you would have been wiser than they.” (L) 31. So that you bear witness to yourselves, that ye are the descendants of those who killed the prophets.] Luke 11:48 has: “ Therefore ye are witnesses, and consent to the deeds of your fathers: for they killed them, but ye build (their sepulchres).” “ By so saying, you bear witness to the murder-taint in your blood.” (L) 32. And you will fill up the measure of your fathers.] “ And you will sin as they sinned.” (L) 33. Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers, how are you to escape from the condemnation of Gehenna? (L) 34. Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes. Some of them you shall kill and crucify; and some of them you shall scourge in your synagogues, and hunt them from city to city.] Lk. has: “ Therefore also the wisdom of God said, I will send to them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall kill and persecute.” In S. Luke διὰτοῦτοκαὶἡσοφίαθεοῦεἶπεν may be an insertion by the Evangelist into Christ’ s words, and by ἡσοφία may be meant Christ Himself. Or the clause may be a continuation of Christ’ s words. In that case the words which follow are presumably a quotation from an unknown source. See on Luke 11:49. In Mt. there is no hint that the words are a quotation, and the Evangelist clearly regards them as words of Christ Himself. But, of course, the Evangelist may have been aware that the Lord was quoting and adapting to Himself words from some literary source.— προφήταςκαὶσοφοὺςκαὶγραμματεῖς ] The Christian missionaries are described under terms taken from Jewish institutions. The προφήτης passed over into the Christian Church, but the terms σοφοί and γραμματεῖς were too familiar is contemporary Judaism to be permanently adopted by Christian teachers. For the scourging in the synagogues, cf. 10:17; for the persecuting from city to city, 10:23. (L) 35. In order that there may come upon you all the righteous blood slain upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous to the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the shrine and the altar.] Luke 11:50 has: “ In order that the blood of all the prophets (slain from the foundation of the world) may be required from this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who was slain between the altar and the house.” Abel (Gen_4) and Zachariah (2 Chronicles 24:20ff.) represent the beginning and end of the Old Testament Canon of Scripture, in which Chronicles is the last book. The murder of Zachariah left a deep impression upon Jewish tradition. In the Talmud, Sanh 96b, Gittin 57b; in the Jerus. Talmud, Taanith 69a; and in the Midrashim, e.g. Echa Rabbati, Wü nsche, p. 21, Koheleth 316, Pesikta R. Kahana 15, it is recorded that Nebuzaradan slew many Jews in order to quiet “ the blood of Zachariah,” who is said to have been “ a priest and a prophet.” It seems natural, therefore, to suppose that the Zachariah of the Gospels is the Zachariah of 2 Chronicles. Abel’ s blood cried from the ground (Genesis 4:10). Zachariah, when dying, said, “ The Lord look upon it and require it” (2 Chronicles 24:22).— υἱοῦΒαραχίου ] The Zachariah of 2 Ch. was son of Jehoiada. It is possible that Christ spoke of Zachariah as son of Barachiah, because the tradition of His age identified or confused the priest and the prophet; cf. Zechariah 1:1 . In this case the omission of υἱοῦΒαραχίου by א * is due to someone who wondered at the Barachiah instead of Jehoiada. Or the “ son of Barachiah” may be an insertion by the editor of the Gospel, either on the ground of Jewish tradition, or in remembrance of the of Isa 8:2, Zechariah 1:1. The fact that the editor of the Gospel elsewhere uses LXX. forms of proper names, as in Ἀσάφ , Ἀμώς , 1:8, 10, is in favour of the latter. Or, lastly, the “ son of Barachiah” may be a later insertion in the Gospel. (L) 36. Verily I say to you, All these things shall come upon this generation.] Luke 11:51 has: “ Yea, I say to you, it shall be required from this generation.” (L) 37. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killeth the prophets, and stoneth those sent to her, how often would I have gathered thy children, as a hen gathereth her young ones under her wings, and ye would not!] So Luke 13:34.— ἐπισυναγαεῖν ] Cf. 2 Est 1:20. (L) 38. Behold your house is left to you.] So Luke 13:35. (L) 39. For I say to you, You shall not see Me henceforth, until you say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.] So Luke 13:35 with δέ for γάρ , without ἀπ ʼ ἄρτι , and with ἕως for ἕωςἄν . ἀφίεταιὑμῖν ] cf. Apoc. Bar 8:2 “ He who kept the house has forsaken it” ; Joseph. Wars, vi. 299; 2 Es 1:33, Jeremiah 12:7, Jeremiah 26:6, Enoch 89:56 “ He forsook that their house.” ἀπ ʼ ἄπτι ] See note on p. 284. 37-39. The words seem to be a fragment belonging to an earlier period of the ministry, when Christ was leaving Jerusalem for the last time before His triumphal entry. We must imagine a controversy with the Jews similar to that recorded in S. John 10:22-39. As on that occasion, the Jews had perhaps tried to stone Him. He therefore spoke to them these parting words. They had rejected His teaching, and had adopted towards Him a policy which would lead in the near future to His death, and in the further future to the destruction of their State. For the present He would visit their Temple no more. Their house was given up to them. They would see Him no more until they greeted Him with the words of the Psalmist. The editor seems to have placed the paragraph here because it was suggested to him by the murders of v. 35 (Zachariah was stoned, 2 Chronicles 24:21). Lk. links them to another saying of Christ about Jerusalem, 13:33-35. 26. καὶτῆςπαροψίδος ] is omitted by D S1 1 209 a e; αὐτοῦ ] B* D E S1 1 13 28 69 124 157 a e; αὐτῶν , א B2 al. καὶτῆςπαροψίδος may have been inserted to assimilate to v. 25, and αὐτοῦ consequently changed into αὐτῶν . 27. S1 has: “ Graves that on the outside are whitened, and inside,” etc., omitting οἵτινεςμὲνφαίνονταιὡραῖοι . Merx regards the words as a gloss added by someone who misunderstood the purpose of the whitening of the graves. But this is quite unnecessary. Our Greek text simply states that graves when whitened appear outwardly beautiful, and does not say that they were whitened in order to beautify them. S1 has probably taken offence at the word ὡραῖοι as too strong a term to express the result of the whitening, and consequently omitted the clause. 32. πληρώσετε ] So B.* S1 60. πληρώσατε is read by א B2 C al, but the imperative breaks the connection: “ You acknowledge that you are physically descended from prophet-murderers, and, in fact, you are also morally their successors, and will sin as they sinned.” The present would be even better than the future, and the Aramaic original may have had the participle = “ Ye are filling up” ; that is, “ You sin, e.g., in the murder of the Baptist as they sinned.” D H al have the aorist ἐπληρώσατε , which gives an inferior sense. 35. υἱοῦΒαραχίου ] Omit א * 6 13. Jerome’ s Nazarene Gospel had filium Joiadæ . “ In evangelio quo utuntur Nazareni pro filio Barachiæ filium Joiadæ reperimus scriptum,” Comm. in Mt. 38. ὁοἶκοςὑμῶν ] א C D al add ἓρημος ; cf. Jeremiah 22:5 εἰςἐρήμωσινἕσταιὁοἶκοςοὖτος . Omit B. L ff2 S1. ἀφίεταιὑμῖνὁοἶκοςὑμῶν ] ὁοἶκος may mean either the city or the temple. For the latter, cf. Jeremiah 26:6 “ Them will I make this house” “ like Shiloh;” Apoc. Bar 8:2 “ He who kept the house” “ has forsaken it.” For the former, cf. Jeremiah 12:7 “ I have forsaken My house” ; 22:5 “ This house shall become a desolation. For thus saith the Lord concerning the house of the King of Judah.” Enoch 8950., 51, “ they forsook that their house” ; 55 “ He forsook that their house and tower.” See Charles’ note on 50. The two meanings seem here to be combined, “ Your city and Temple are abandoned by God, and given up to desolation.” For the idea of the abandonment of a doomed city by the divine power which protected it, cf. the story told in Jos. Wars, vi. 299, of the priests who, before the capture of the city by Titus, heard a sound as of a multitude, saying, “ Let us go hence.” Cf. also Apoc. Bar 8:1, 2, and Tacitus, Hist. v. 13. editorial passages. the Matthæ an Logia. Babylonian Talmud. Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings). the Second Gospel. Dalman. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Curetonian. Rel. Beweg. pp. 32 f. Josephus. Expository Times. quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. If this be so, the thought here is much the same as that which Mt. (15:10-20) has read into Mark 7:14-23. There it is “ Eating meat with unwashen hands will not defile you if you are morally clean” ; here it is if “ Eating from vessels which are ceremonially unclean will not defile you, if the food has been honestly obtained.” The Septuagint Version. 24-25. Discourse on the last things. 24:1-3 Occasion of the speech. 4-14 Events preceding the final apostasy. 15-28 The affliction preceding the Second Coming. 29-31 The Second Coming. 32-51 Admonitions to watchfulness. 25:1-46 Three parables,— the first inculcating watchfulness, the second diligence, the third describing the final judgement. Part of this discourse is contained in Mar_13. Matthew 24:1, Matthew 24:2 = Mark 13:1, Mark 13:2 3 = 3, 4 4, 5 = 5, 9a Mt. has already inserted Mark 13:9b, Mark 13:10a, Mark 13:11-13 in 10:17-22. He therefore does not repeat them here, but summarises 9b, 11, 12 in the words: τότεπαραδώσουσινὑμᾶςεἰςθλίψινκαὶἀποκτενοῦσινὑμᾶς . Matthew 24:9a = Mark 13:9b, Mark 13:11, Mark 13:12 9b = 13a [10-12] 13 = 13b 14 = 10 15-25 = 14-23 [26-28] 29-31 = 24-27 32-33 = 28-29 34-36 = 30-32 [37-41] 42 summarises 33-37 [43-51] 25 [1-13] [14-30] [31-46] Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following: οὐκαταλυθήσεται , Mat_2, Luk_6; οὐμὴκαταλυθῇ , Mar_2. λέγοντες , Mat_3, Luk_7. εἶπεν , Mat_4, Luk_8; ἤρξατολέγειν , Mar_5. γάρ , Mat_5, Luk_8. γάρ , Mat_6, Luk_9; καί , Mat_7, Luk_10. ἐτῷἀγρῷ , Mat_18 = ἐνἀγρῷ , Luke 17:31; εἰςτὸνἀγρόν , Mar_16 ἰδού , Mat_23, Luke 17:21; ἴδε , Mark 21. ἤ , Mat_23, Luke 17:21. τῶνοὐρανῶν , Matthew 29, Luke 26; αἱἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖς , Mark 25. καὶδόξηςπολλῆς , Matthew 30, Luke 27; πολλῆςκαὶδόξης , Mark 26. ἕωςἄν , Matthew 34, Luke 32; μέχριςουͅ , Mark 30. οὐμή , Matthew 35, Luke 33; οὐ , Mark 31. It seems clear that Mt. has seen in Mar_13 an eschatological discourse to which he could attach other sayings of a similar nature. By so doing he has built up a discourse forecasting the future from the moment of utterance to the final judgement. The general drift of this discourse seems clear. In v. 3 the disciples ask, “ When will these things, i.e. the destruction of the temple, be? And what shall be the sign of Thy coming and of the end of the world?” In vv. 4-14 Christ foretells the events that will happen before the end. There are to be false Christs, v. 5; wars and rumours, v. 6; political disturbances, famines, and earthquakes, v. 7; persecution of Christians by pagans, v. 9 treachery and apostasy amongst Christians themselves, vv. 10-11; the gospel to be preached in all the world, v. 14. Then will come the end . This is to be ushered in by a period of unprecedented distress. Its beginning will be marked by the appearance of the βδέλυγματῆςἐρημώσεως in the holy place. The Christians in Judæ a are advised to flee to the mountains, v. 16, and the urgency and physical sufferings accompanying their flight are graphically depicted, vv. 17-22. False Christs and false prophets are once more to arise, vv. 22-24. Then amidst portents of nature the Son of Man will come upon the clouds of heaven, and gather His elect to Himself, vv. 29-31. Here follow the words and parables of warning to watchfulness, 24:32-25:30. The whole discourse is magnificently ended by a description of the coming judgement. (M) 24:1. And Jesus went forth from the temple, and was going on His way; and there came to Him His disciples, to show Him the buildings of the temple.] Mk. has: “ And as He was going forth from the temple, one of His disciples saith to Him, Teacher, see what stones and what buildings !” For προσῆλθον , see on 4:3. (M) 2. And He answered and said to them., See ye not all these things? Verily I say to you, There shall not be left here a stone upon a stone, which shall not be thrown down.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said to him, Thou seest these great buildings; there shall not be left here a stone upon a stone, which shall not be thrown down.” ὁδέ for καὶὁ , often.— ὃςοὐκαταλυθήσεται ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s harsh repeated οὐμή . For οὐμή as common in discourse, see Moulton, p. 191. (M) 3. And as He was sitting on the mount of Olives, His disciples came to Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what (shall be) the sign of Thy coming, and of the consummation of the age?] Mk. has: “ And as He was sitting at the mount of Olives over against the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were asking Him privately, Tell us, when shall these things be, and what shall be the sign when all these things are about to be consummated?” — ἐπί ] for Mk.’ s harsh εἰς .— προσῆλθον ] see on 4:3. Mt., in view of Mk vv. 24-27, transforms Mk.’ s question about the fall of Jerusalem into one concerning the second coming and the end of the age. He introduces παρουσία without any antecedent explanation. In so doing he overlooks the fact that the disciples, according to the Gospel narrative, had not the requisite understanding of the future for a question about Christ’ s coming. For παρουσία cf. Secrets of Enoch 32:1 “ My second coming,” 425 “ the last coming.” — συντελείαςτοῦαἰῶνος ] is a technical apocalyptic expression; cf. Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 166. Cf. Apoc. Bar 13:3 “ the consummation of the times,” 27:15, 29:8, 30:3, 54:21, 56:2, 59:8, 82:2, 83:7, 23, Ass. Mos 1:18; cf. Enoch 16:1 “ until the day when the great consummation of the great world be consummated” , Daniel 12:4 LXX., καιρὸςσυντελείας ; 12:13 LXX., συντέλειαἡμερῶν ; Test. Lev_10, συντέλειατῶναἰώνων . (M) 4. And Jesus answered and said to them, Take heed lest any man lead you astray.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus began to say to them,” etc. Mt. omits Mk.’ s ἤρξατο , as often. (M) 5. For many shall come in My name, saying, I am the Messiah; and shall lead many astray.] Mk. has: “ Many shall come in My name, saying, that I am (He), and shall lead many astray.” Mt. inserts a connecting link , omits ὅτι , as often, and adds the explanatory ὁΧριστός . (M) 6. And ye shall be about to hear of wars and rumours of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For they must come to pass; but not yet is the end.] Mk. has: “ And when you shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be not troubled. They must come to pass; but not yet (is) the end.” — μελλήσετε ] see on 16:27.— γάρ ] added to form a connecting link.— τὸτέλος ] i.e. the fall of Jerusalem, and the consequent παρουσία and συντέλειατοῦαἰῶνος . (M) 7. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and earthquakes, in divers places.] Mk. has: “ For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There shall be earthquakes in divers places. There shall be famines.” Mt. smooths the jerky style of Mk. by adding particles. (M) 8. And all these things are a beginning of sufferings.] Mk. has “ A beginning of sufferings are these things.— ὠδίων ] The Jews spoke of “ the sufferings of the Messiah.” By the phrase they signified the time of unprecedented trouble which was to precede the Messianic salvation; see Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 173 ff.; Schü rer, 11. ii. 154-156. Cf. B. Sanhed 98a “ The disciple of Rabbi Eleasar asked him, What can one do to be preserved from the sufferings of the Messiah?” ; Shabb 118a “ three visitations, the sufferings of the Messiah, the judgement of Gehinnom, and the war of Gog and Magog.” For descriptions of the evils of the last days, cf. 2 Es 15. 16, Apoc. Bar 27. 48:31-37, 70:2-10, Jubilees 23:16-25, 2 Est 5:1-12, 6:18-25, Enoch 99:4-7, 100:1-6. (M) 9. Then shall they deliver you up to a affliction, and shall kill you.] In these words Mt. summarises Mk vv. 9b, 11, 12, which he has already inserted in 10:17-22, because they referred to the treatment of the Apostles. (M) And you shall be hated of all nations for My name’ s sake.] So Mark 13:18a omitting τῶνἐθνῶν . (L) 10. And then shall many be caused to stumble, and shall deliver one another up, and shall hate one another.] (L) 11. And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray.] (L) 12. And because that lawlessness is multiplied, the love1 of many shall wax cold.] 10-12. These verses are not in Mk. For the apostasy of the righteous in the last days, see the references in Volz, Jü d. Eschat. p. 179.— πληθυνθῆναιτὴνἀνομίαν ] Cf. 2 Est 5:2 “ iniquity shall be increased,” 10 “ unrighteousness shall be multiplied,” Enoch 91:7. (M) 13. But he who endured to the end, he shall be saved.] So Mark 13:13. Cf. Daniel 12:12 Theod. μακάριοςὁὐπομένων ; 2 Es 6:25 “ And it shall be that whosoever remaineth after all these things … he shall be saved,” 9:7, 8 “ And every one that shall be saved … he shall be preserved.” (M) 14. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a testimony to all the nations, and then shall come the end.] Mark 13:10 has: “ And to all the nations must first the gospel be preached.” — τὸτέλος ] i.e. the fall of Jerusalem and the end of the world. The editor defines τὸεὐαγγέλιον by adding τῆςβασιλείας , and somewhat limits the conception of the preaching to all nations by inserting εἰςμαρτύριον , which he borrows from Mk v. 9.— πᾶσιντοῖςἔθνεσιν ] for Mk.’ s harsh εἰςπάντατὰἔθνη ; see on 10:18. (M) 15. When, therefore, ye see “ the abomination of desolation,” which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place. Let the reader understand.] Mk. has: “ And when you see ‘ the abomination of desolation’ standing where he ought not. Let the reader understand.” τὸβδέλυγματῆςἐρημώσεως ] the phrase in Mk. seems to be borrowed from Daniel 12:11; cf. 9:27 βδέλυγματῶνἐρημώασεων , 11:31 βδέλυγμαἐρημώσεως . The object alluded to in these passages seems to have been an idol altar. Cf. 1 Mac 1:54, 59 “ they builded an abomination of desolation upon the altar;— and they sacrificed upon the idol altar, which was upon the altar of God.” Cf. Driver on Daniel 11:31. In Mk. the phrase denotes an undefined object described as fulfilling the prophecy of Daniel. But see Swete on Mark 13:14. The participle which follows is in the masc. gender, and suggests that the Evangelist had in mind a statue or other personal object.— ὁἀναγινώσκωννοείτω ] is a tacit reference to Daniel. Mt. adds an explicit reference to Daniel, substitutes a neuter for Mk.’ s masc. participle, and substitutes for Mk.’ s ambiguous ὅπουοὐδεῖ the more definite ἐντόπῳἁγίῳ . In Acts 6:13, Acts 21:28 τόποςἅγιος means the temple. But in both places it has the article which we should expect here. However, the temple is probably intended. The editor may have had in mind Daniel 9:27 καὶἐπὶτὸἱερὸνβδέλυγματῶνἐρημώσεωνἔσταιἕωςσυντελείας . In 2 Mac 2:18 “ the holy place” means the Holy Land. (M) 16. Then let those in Judæ a flee to the mountains.] So Mk. (M) 17. He who is on the housetop, let him not come down to take things out of his house.] Mk. has μὴκαταβάτωμηδὲεἰσελθάτω . For Mt.’ s omission of one clause, see Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 18. And he who is in the field, let him not turn back to take his coat.]— ἐντῷἀγρῷ ] for Mk.’ s harsh εἰςτὸνἀγρόν , cf. v. 3. (M) 19. But woe to those who are with child, and to those that give suck in those days!] So Mk. (M) 20. And pray that your flight happen not in winter, nor on the Sabbath.] Mk. has: “ And pray that it happen not in winter.” The subject here is probably general, “ the period of affliction.” Mt. interprets with special reference to v. 16, and adds ἡφυγὴὑμῶν . With this in mind, he adds also the remarkable μηδὲσαββάτῳ , a clear proof of the Jewish predilections of the Evangelist; cf. 5:18, 10:6, 23, 19:9, 23:3, 23. The saying with this addition was no doubt familiar to him from his Palestinian sources. It may have stood in the Logia. See Introduction, p. lv. (M) 21. For there shall be then great affliction, such as hath not happened from the beginning of the world until now, nor shall happen.] Mk. has: “ For those days shall be affliction such as there hath not happened like it from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and shall not happen.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s redundant τοιαύτη and ἣνἔκτισενὁθεός , cf. on 8:16, and substitutes τότεἔσται for Mk.’ s Semitic ἔσονταιαἱἡμέραιἐκεῖμαι . For the idea of the last days as a period of unprecedented tribulation, Cf. Daniel 12:1 ἐκείνηἡἡμέραθλίψεωςοἵαοὐκἐγενήθηἀφ ʼ οὖἐγενήθησανἕωςτῆςἡμέραςἐκείνης : Ass. Mos. 8:1 “ And there will come upon them a second visitation, and wrath such as has not befallen them from the beginning until that time” ; cf. Jeremiah 30:7, Jeremiah 30:1 Mac 9:27.— γέγονεν . For the perfect cf. Daniel 12:1 Th. (M) 22. And except those days were shortened, no flesh should be saved: but because of the elect, those days shall be shortened.] Mk. has: “ And except the Lord shortened the days, no flesh should be saved. But because of the elect whom He elected, He shortened the days.” — ἐκολοβώθησαν ] pass for Mk.’ s act; cf. Introduction, p. xxiii. For the omission of Mk.’ s redundant οὓςἐξελέξατο , cf. on 8:3.— οὐκ — πᾶς ] A Hebraism; cf. Blass, p. 178. But see also Class. Rev. 1901, p. 442. κολοβόω is elsewhere used of physical amputation.— ἐκλεκτούς ] For the elect in the final tribulation, cf. Enoch 1:1, 28:2, 3, 4, 48:9, 62:8, 11, 12, 13 “ the elect shall be saved on that day.” In Enoch 80:2 it is said that “ in the days of the sinners the years, will be shortened” ; cf. Apok. Abrahams 29: “ zü r Verkü rzung des Ä ons der Gottlosigkeit.” (M) 23. Then if any one say to you, Behold, here is the Messiah, or here; believe (him) not.] Mk. has: “ And then if any one say to you, Behold, here is the Messiah; behold, there; do not believe (him).” — μὴπιστεύσητε ] Mk. has μὴπιστεύετε , which is less applicable to a future occurrence. See Moulton, p. 124. (M) 24. For there shall arise false Messiahs, and false prophets, and shall give great signs and marvels; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.] Mk. has: “ For there shall arise false Messiahs and false prophets, and shall give signs and marvels to lead astray, if possible, the elect.” (M) 25. Behold, I have told you before.] Mk. has: “ But take ye heed, I have told you beforehand all things.” 26-27. Occur in Luke 17:23-24. (L) 26. If, therefore, they say to you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the chambers; believe (them) not.] Lk. has “ And they will say to you, Behold there, or behold here. Go not after nor follow (them).” (L) 27. For as the lightning goes forth from the east, and appears to the west; so shall be the presence of the Son of Man.] Lk. has: “ For as the lightning, when it flashes from the one part under the heaven shines to the other part under the heaven, so shall be the Son of Man.” The idea apparently is that the presence of the Son of Man will be not local, but everywhere visible. See on Luke 17:24, Luke 17:37. 28. Occurs in Luke 17:37. (L) 28. Wheresoever the corpse is, there will be gathered the eagles.] An enigmatic sentence, probably a proverbial saying; cf. Job 39:30 οὗδ ʼ ἄνὦσιτεθνεῶτεςπαραχρῆμαεὑρίσκονται , sc. “ young vultures.” Here the meaning probably is that the Parousia will be at the destined time when evil has reached its fated climax. Just as when life has abandoned a body, and it becomes a corpse, the vultures immediately swoop down upon it; so when the world has become rotten with evil, the Son of Man and His angels will come to execute the divine judgement. See Hastings, DCG. i. p. 65. (M) 29. And immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall all from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken.] Mk. has: “ But in those days after that tribulation the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall be falling from the heaven, and the powers which are in the heavens shall be shaken.” Such signs are symbolical of any great manifestation of Jehovah’ s power. Cf. Isaiah 13:10 at the fall of Babylon, “ The stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light, the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine” ; 34:4 at the destruction of Edom, “ All the host of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heavens shall be rolled together like a scroll” ; Ezekiel 32:7-8 at the desolation of Egypt, “ I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.” In the Apocalyptic literature such portents are to recur in the last evil time. Cf. Joe 2:31 “ The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood” ; 3:15 “ The sun and the moon are darkened, and the stars withdraw their shining” ; 2 Est 5:4 “ The sun shall suddenly shine forth in the night, and the moon in the day” ; Enoch 80:4 “ And the moon will alter her order, and not appear at the (appointed) time” ; Ass. Mos 10:5 “ And the horns of the sun will be broken, and he will be turned into darkness; and the moon will not give her light, and will be turned wholly into blood.” Mt. inserts εὐθέως . He has not, like Lk., definitely interpreted the βδέλυγμα of Mar_14 with reference to the last siege of Jerusalem. But nevertheless it remains probable that by his ἑστὸςἐντόπῳἁγίῳ he tacitly alludes to something that was to happen in the temple during the final invasion of Palestine by the Roman armies. By inserting εὐθέως in v. 29 he signifies his understanding that the παρουσία of the Son of Man was to take place at no great length of time after the fall of Jerusalem. Cf. ταχύ , Revelation 22:20. (E) 30. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven.] The words do not occur in Mk. They appear to be the answer to v. 3 τίτὸσημεῖοντῆςσῆςπαρουσίας ; There, however, the “ sign” seems to be distinct from the “ coming.” “ What shall be the sign which warns of Thy coming?” Here by analogy we should render: “ Then shall appear the sign which precedes the Son of Man,” as though the sign were some independent and unexplained phenomenon. Possibly this is the editor’ s meaning, who thinks of the sign as some unique portent which heralds the immediate coming of the Son of Man. But more probably the direct reference is to Daniel 7:13. The coming of one like a Son of Man there predicted was itself a sign: “ Then shall appear the well-known sign of the Son of Man predicted by Daniel.” (E) And then shall all the tribes of the land wail.] The words are not in Mk. They are based on Zechariah 12:12 καὶκόψεταιἡγῆκατὰφυλὰςφυλάς . (M) And they shall see the Son of Man coming upon the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.] Mk. has: “ And then shall they see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.” Mt. has transferred τότε to the previous clause. The words are based on Daniel 7:13, with a reminiscence of Zec 12:10 For Mk.’ s ἐννεφέλαις , Mt. substitutes ἐπὶτῶννεφελῶντοῦοὐρανοῦ , to assimilate to the LXX. of Daniel. See Driver on Daniel 7:13. For the “ glory” of the Son of Man, see on 16:27. The same combination of Zec 12:10-12 with Daniel 7:13 occurs in Revelation 1:7. It is, of course, possible that one writer is dependent on the other, but equally possible that this combination of the two passages was a commonplace of Christian Apocalyptic study. For the Messianic application of the previous clause of Zec 12:10, cf. John 19:37. Bousset on Revelation 1:7 suggests that there is implied in the passage a belief that Christ would appear with or on the cross. If Mt. had this in mind, the “ sign of the Son of Man” would mean the crucified Saviour appearing in the air. (M) 31. And He shall send His angels with a great trumpet, and they shall gather His elect from the four winds, from the ends of heavens to their ends.] Mk. has: “ And then shall He send the angels, and gather His elect from the end of earth to the end of heaven” .— ἀποστελεῖτοὺςἀγγέλουςαὐτοῦ ] cf. 13:41. For the trumpet as the signal for the gathering of the elect, cf. Ps.-Sol. 11:1-3, Isaiah 27:13, Apok. Abrahams 31. Schemoneh Esreh 10: “ Blow the great trumpet for our freedom, and raise a signal for the gathering of our dispersion.” (M) 32. And from the fig-tree learn its parable. So soon as its branch becomes soft, and it puts forth leaves, ye perceive that the summer is near.] So Mk., with ἐστίν and two variations in order. (M) 33. So also ye, when ye have seen all these things, perceive that it is near at the doors.] Mk. has “ these things happening” for “ all these things” .— ἐγγύς — ἐπὶθύραις ] is one of the pleonasms so characteristic of Mk. The subject of ἐστίν in Mk. seems to be the coming of the Son of Man. In Mt. the insertion of πάντα seems to suggest a wider reference to all that has gone before, including the appearance of the Son of Man, which is regarded as closely connected with the preceding events; cf. εὐθέως (v. 29). (M) 34. Verily I say to you, That this generation shall not pass away, until all these things have happened.] Mk. has μέχριςοὗ for ἕωςἄν . (M) 35. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away.]— οὐμὴπαρέλθωσιν ] for Mk.’ s οὐπαρελεύσονται . Cf. on v. 18, and Moulton, 190-192. (M) 36. But concerning that day and hour no one knoweth, not even the angels of the heavens, except the Father alone.] Mk. has “ in heaven,” “ or hour,” and omits “ alone.” In Mk. the “ day” and “ hour” are synonymous expressions for the period of the coming. Mt. westernizes, by treating “ hour” as a nearer specification of time within the “ day.” — οὐδὲὁυἱός ] is omitted in S1 א c a E F g1 2 al; and its omission would be so consonant with Mt.’ s treatment of Mk. in respect of statements about the person of Christ, that it is difficult to think that he would have retained the clause here. See Introduction, p. xxxi. For God’ s knowledge of the period of the Messiah, cf. Ps.-Sol. 17:28, Zechariah 14:7. Vv.37-41 find a parallel in Luke 17:26-27, Luke 17:30, Luke 17:34, Luke 17:35. Mt. drew them from the Logia, Lk. from an independent source. (L) 37. For as the days of Noah, so shall be the presence of the Son of Man.] Lk. has: “ And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man.” “ The days of the Messiah” was a technical expression for the Messianic period.1 (L) 38, 39. For as they were in those days which were before the flood, eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day in which Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not until the flood came and took away all; so shall be the presence of the Son of Man.] Lk. has: “ They were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were given in marriage, until the day in which Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed all; so shall it be on the day in which the Son of Man is revealed” .— τρώγοντες ] only here in Mt., not in Mk. or Lk., five times in Jn., always of eating the flesh of Christ. Lk. here has ἤσθιον . τρώγειν “ would seem to be used in ordinary Greek exclusively to mean eating vegetables, fruit, sweetmeats, etc., never flesh,” Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1710 n. (L) 40. Then shall there be two in the field; one is taken away, and one is left. Lk. has: “ I say to you, on this night there shall be two upon one bed. The one shall be taken away, and the other shall be left.” In Mt. the παραλαμβάνεται refers back to ἐπισυνάξουσι (v. 31). The Son of Man will come as unexpectedly as did the Flood. Just as this surprised men in their ordinary pursuits, and snatched them from their pleasures; so will the angels surprise men at work, and summon the elect from their daily toil. “ Three things,” said Johanan ben Zaccai, “ come unexpectedly, the Messiah, a discovery, and a scorpion,” B. Sanh 97a. (L) 41. Two (women shall be) grinding at the mill; one is taken, and one is left.] Lk. has: “ There shall be two (women) grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.” 30. καὶτότεκόψονταιπᾶσαιαἱφυλαὶτῆςγῆς ] S1 omits, and has “ ye will see” for the following ὄψονται . Merit believes the clause to be a gloss from Revelation 1:7 καὶκόψονταιἐπ ʼ αὐτὸνπᾶσαιαἱφυλαὶτῆςγῆς . The clause is a ré sumé of Zechariah 12:10 κόψονταιἐπ ʼ αὐτόν , 12 κόψεταιἡγῆ , 14 πᾶσαι — φυλαί . It is certainly curious that Mt. and Rev. should agree so closely in an inexact quotation of this kind. But the words may well have been a current Jewish-Christian adaptation of Zec. to the Second Coming known to both writers. Wellhausen remarks that the clause is not very suitable here, because in this connection the appearance of the Son of Man should be a sign of joy that the period of the great tribulation is at an end, and that the redemption of the elect has come. But to the anti-Pharisaic editor the joy of the elect would not be diminished by the remembrance that their anti-Christian Jewish persecutors would wail when the Son of Man appeared. The editor simply wishes to remind his readers that when the sign of the Son of Man was seen the prophecy of Zechariah would be fulfilled. 31. σάλπιγγος ] add φωνῆς , B X al; καὶφωνῆς , D al. Cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:16. 36. τῶνοὐρανῶν ] א * et cb B D 13 28 86 124 346 a b c e f ff1 2 h l q add οὐδὲὁυἱός . The words are genuine in Mk., but Mt. omitted them; cf. Introduction, p. xxxii. Their insertion here is due to assimilation to Mk. They are rightly omitted here by א c a E F G al g1 2 S1. Mt.’ s μόνος is a kind of compensation for the omitted clause. 42. Mk. here has four verses (33-36) containing a double exhortation to watchfulness and a simile of an absent householder. Mt. abbreviates these into one verse. (M) 42. Watch, therefore, because ye know not at what day your Lord cometh.] Cf. Mark 35. To compensate for the abbreviation, Mt. adds two similes of a householder and of an absent housemaster, which are found in a different connection in Luke 12:39, Luke 12:40, Luke 12:42-46. There is a remarkable amount of agreement here between Mt. and Lk., the only variations being the following: Mt. Lk. 43 ἐκεῖνο . 39 τοῦτο . φυλακῇ . ὥρᾳ . ἂνεἴασεν . ἀφῆκεν . τὴνοἰκίαν . τὸνοἶκον . 44 διὰτοῦτο . 40 — — 41 45 ὁπιστὸςδοῦλοςκαὶφρόνιμος . 42 ὁπιστὸςοἰκονόμοςὁφρόνιμος . κατέστησεν . καταστήσει . οἰκετείας . θεραπείας . δοῦναιαὐτοῖς . διδόναι . τὴντροφήν . τὸσιτομέτριον . 47 ἀμήν . 44 ἀληθῶς . 48 — 45 ἔρχεσθαι . 49 τοὺςσυνδούλουςαὐτοῦ . 45 τοὺςπαῖδαςκαὶτὰςπαιδίσκας . ἐσθίῃδὲκαὶπίνῃμετὰτῶνμεθυόντωνἐσθίειντεκαὶπίνεινκαὶμεθύσκεσθαι . 51 ὑποκριτῶν . 46 ἀπίστων . Mt. has no parallel to Luke 47-48, and Lk. has no parallel to Matthew 51b. The agreement may be due to use of a common source. Against this must be set the divergence in phraseology and context. Or it may be due to the fact that different sources contained the section with much agreement of language. Or Lk. may have seen Mt. Mk vv. 33-36 seem to have suggested to the editor the insertion here of Mat 24:43-12, for in 25:13 he repeats the text of Mk. from which this interpolation took its origin. ποίᾳ ] ποῖος is here equivalent to τίς , Moulton, 95; Blass, 176. (L) 43. And know this, that if the master of the house had known in what watch the thief comes, he would have watched, and not have permitted his house to be broken through.] (L) 44. Therefore be ye also ready; because at an hour which ye think not the Son of Man cometh.] (L) 45. Who then is the faithful and prudent slave, whom the master set over his establishment, to give to them their food in season?] (L) 46. Blessed is. that slave, whom his master shall find so doing when he comes.] (L) 47. Verily I say to you, That he will set him over all his possessions.] (L) 48, 49. But if that evil slave say in his heart, My master delays, and shall begin to beat his fellow-slaves, and shall eat and drink with the drunken;] (L) 50. The master of that slave shall come on a day when he does not expect (him), and at an hour which he does not know,] (L) 51. And shall cut him asunder, and set his portion with the hypocrites; there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.]— ἐκεῖἔσται , κ .τ .λ ] See on 8:12. M the Second Gospel. LXX. The Septuagint Version. L the Matthæ an Logia. 1 ἀγάπη . See Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 198 f. Ass. Mos. Assumption of Moses. Th. Theodotion. Class. Rev. Classical Review. DCG. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. E editorial passages. Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. 1 Cf Shabbath 113b. Sanhedrin 91b, and Enoch 61:5 “ the day of Elect One.” B. Babylonian Talmud. X passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. 25:1-12. A parable from the Logia. 1. Then shall the kingdom of the heavens be likened to ten virgins, who took their lamps, and went out to meet the bridegroom.— τότε ] i.e. at the period of Christ’ s coming (24:50).— ὁμοιωθήσεται ] i.e. admission into the kingdom will be granted to those who act like the wise virgins of the parable. On εἰςὑπάντησιν with genitive, see Moulton, 14, note 3. The scene depicted seems to centre round the house of the bridegroom, who has gone to fetch the bride from her parents’ house. The bride is not mentioned, because she plays no part in the application of the story to Christ returning from heaven. The addition of καὶτῆςνύμφης , therefore, in D Σ 1 3 4 Arm latt, seems to be a natural but thoughtless interpolation. (L) 2. And five of them were foolish, and five wise.] “ Like a king of flesh and blood, who distributed kingly garments to his servants. The wise amongst them folded them up and put them in a chest; the foolish of them went and used them for ordinary work,” Shabbath 152b. “ Like a king who invited his servants to a feast, and gave them no fixed time. The wise amongst them adorned themselves, and sat at the king’ s door, saying, Lacks the king’ s house anything? The foolish amongst them went to their work, saying, Is there ever a feast without preparation?” Shabbath 153a. (L) 3. For the foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them.] (L) 4. But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.] (L) 5. And while the bridegroom delayed, all slumbered and slept.] (L) 6. And in the middle of the night a cry was raised, Behold, the bridegroom! come out to meet him]. (L) 7. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.] (L) 8. And the foolish said to the wise, Give to us of your oil, because our lamps are going out.] (L) 9. But the wise answered, saying, There might not be sufficient for us and for you: go rather to the dealers, and buy for yourselves.] (L) 10. And whilst they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and those who were ready went in with him to the marriage-feast, and the door was shut.] (L) 11. And afterwards come also the rest of the virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.] (L) 12. But he answered and said, Verily I say to you, I know you not.] (L) 13. Watch therefore, because you know not the day nor yet the hour. The editor here returns to Mark 35 = Matthew 24:42 after his interpolated parables of illustration, 24:43-25:12. Cf. his similar insertion of a parable, 20:1-15, to illustrate Mark 10:31. There, too, he returns to the text in 20:16. 1. τοῦνυμφίου ] add καὶτῆςνόμφης , D X Σ , 1 124 209 262 latt S1 2 S4. The adaptation of the circumstances of a marriage festival to the coming of the heavenly Christ necessitated the omission of one of the chief actors in an actual marriage ceremony. The story might have been so adapted as to represent the bridegroom as coming to fetch his bride. In that case it would be the latter who would have to represented as waiting for his arrival. But this would not give the required moral. A plurality of waiting persons is demanded, that a division may be made between them. The waiting persons must, therefore, be represented as members of the household of the absent bridegroom, here ten maid-servants. Ten friends or men-servants would have served equally well. The bridegroom has gone to fetch his bride from her Parents house. Obviously in the application of the figure of bridegroom to Christ there is no room for the figure of the bride. For what bride would the heavenly Christ bring from heaven? The bride, therefore, has no interest for the story, and must be omitted. The insertion of καὶτῆςνύμφης seems to be due to a thoughtless desire to fill in details of the story, and possibly to the influence of the parallel use of bridegroom and bride to denote Christ and the Church; cf. Ephesians 5:22. 9. μήποτεοὐμὴἀρκέσῃ ] So B C D . א A L Z have οὐκ for οὐμή ; cf. Blass, pp. 213, 255, 256; Moulton, 192. 14. A second parable illustrating the condition of things at the coming of the Son of Man. S. Luke has an independent version of the parable in 19:11-28. (L) 14. For the case is that of a man travelling abroad, who called his own servants, and delivered to them his possessions.]— ὥσπεργὰρἄνθρωποςἀποδημῶν seems to be a reminiscence of Mar 13:34 ὡἄνθρωποςἀπόδημος . (L) 15. And to one he gave five talents, and to one two, and to one one; to each according to his capacity; and set out.] (L) 16. Forthwith he who had received the five talents went and traded with them, and gained five other talents.] (L) 17. Likewise, also, he of the two gained other two.] (L) 18. But he who received the one went away and digged in the earth, and hid his master’ s money.] (L) 19. And after a long time cometh the master of those servants, and taketh account with them.]— συναίρειν — λόγον ] cf. on 18:23. (L) 20. And he who had received the five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, five talent thou didst deliver to me; lo, I have gained other five talents.] (L) 21. His master said to him, Well done, good and faithful servant: over few things thou wert faithful, over many things will I set thee: enter into the joy of thy lord.]— τὴνχαρὰντοῦκυρίουσου ] cf. “ the king rejoiced,” Shabbath 153a 152b.— προσελθών ] cf. on 4:3.— προσήνεγκεν ] cf. on 8:16. (L) 22. And he of the two talents came and said, Lord, two talent thou didst deliver to me: lo, I have gained other two talents.] (L) 23. His master said to him, Well done, good and faithful servant: over few things thou wart faithful, over many I will set thee: enter into the joy of thy lord.] (L) 24. And he who had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou didst not sow, and gathering whence thou didst not scatter:] (L) 25. And I feared, and went away and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, thou hast thine own.] (L) 26. And his master answered and said to him, Evil and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather whence I did not scatter:] (L) 27. Thou oughtest therefore to have given my money to the changers, and I should have come and received my own with interest.] (L) 28. Take therefore from him the talent, and give to him who hath the ten talents.] (L) 29. For to every one who hath there shall be given and increased: but from him who hath not, even what he hath shall be taken from him.] Cf. on 13:12 where the saying is borrowed from Mk. There it seems to have reference to spiritual opportunities, and the use made of them. So here. The man who had ten talents had his chance, and used it. He deserved encouragement. The man who had buried his talent had missed his chance. It was therefore withdrawn from him. (L) 30. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness: there shall be the wailing and the gnashing of teeth.] “ These shall be bound in prison,” Shabbath 152b Cf. on 8:12. (L) 31. But when the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He shall sit upon the throne of His glory.] Cf. on 16:27, 19:28; Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, p. 225. (L) 32. And there shall be gathered before Him all the nations: and He shall separate them from one another as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.] For expressions in Jewish literature of the idea of a universal judgment, see Volz, Jü d. Eschat, 85. ἀφορίσει ] again in 13:49. In view of the necessary reference of αὐτούς to τὰἔθνη , it is impossible to limit the αὐτούς to members of the Jewish Christian community. The Gentiles are judged by the standard of their conduct to Jewish Christians, the τῶνἀδελφῶνμου of v. 40. (L) 33. And He shall place the sheep at His right hand, and the goats at the left.] See Hastings, i. p. 63. (L) 34. Then shall the King say to those at His right hand, Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.]— ὁβασιλεύς ] The change from “ Son of Man,” v. 31, to “ king” here is very abrupt and unexpected. It looks as though a parable in which “ the king” was the central figure had been adapted to refer to the coming of “ the Son of Man.” — τὴνἡτοιμασμένηνὑμῖνβασιλείαν ] cf. Daniel 7:27, Secrets of Enoch 9: “ For them (the righteous) this place is prepared as an eternal inheritance.” — κληρονομήσατε ] For the idea of “ inheriting” the future blessedness, cf. Volz, Jü d, Eschat. 306; and for the inheritance as prepared, ib. 124. (L) 35. For I hungered, and ye gave Me to eat: I thirsted, and ye gave Me to drink: I was a stranger, and ye invited Me in.] συνηγάγετε ] Wellhausen compares א ס ף . It is possible that כ נ ם was used in this sense. The noun ה כ נ ס ה is common in the phrase ה כ נ ס ת א ר ח י ם = hospitality, e.g. Shabbath 127a, Peah c. 1.— ἐπείνασα , κ .τ .λ .] cf. Isaiah 58:7, Ezekiel 18:7, To 4:16, Secrets of Enoch 9. (L) 36. Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited Me: I was in prison, and ye came to Me.]— γυμνός , κ .τ .λ .] Isaiah 58:7, Ezekiel 18:7, To 4:16, Secrets of Enoch 9, 2 Est 2:20.— ἠσθένησα , κ .τ .λ .], Ecclus 7:35. On the duty of visiting the sick, cf. Nedarim 39. 40: “ He who visits not a sick man is as though he shed blood. … Everyone who visits the sick will be saved from the judgement of hell” ; Buddhist and Christian Gospels, p. 105, “ Whosoever, O monks, would wait upon me, let him wait upon the sick.” (L) 37. Then the righteous shall answer Him, saying, Lord, when saw we Thee hungry, and fed Thee? or thirsty, and gave Thee to drink?] (L) 38. When saw we Thee a stranger, and invited Thee in t or naked, and clothed Thee?] (L) 39. When saw we Thee sick, or in prison. and came to Thee?] (L) 40. And the King shall answer and say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye did it to one of the least of these My brethren, ye did it to Me.] Cf. 10:42. (L) 41. Then sall He say also to those on the left hand, Depart from Me, ye accursed, into the eternal fire, which is prepared for the devil and his angels.] Cf. Secrets of Enoch 10:4-6 “ This place is prepared for those who do not honour God — for these this lace is prepared as an eternal inheritance.” — τὸπῦρτὸαἰώνιον ] cf. 18:8.— τὸἡτοιμασμένοντῷδιαβόλῳκαὶτοῖςἁγγέλοιςαὐτοῦ ] cf. Enoch 10:13 “ they (evil angels) will be led off to the abyss of fire.” — τὸἡτοιμασμένον ] D 1 22 a b c ff1 2 g1 h Iren Orig Hil have ὅἡτοίμασενὁπατήρμου ; ff omits καὶτοῖςἀγγέλοιςαὐτοῦ . (L) 42. For I hungered, and ye gave Me not to eat; I thirsted, and ye gave Me not to drink.] (L) 43. I was a stranger, and ye invited Me not in: naked, and ye clothed Me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited Me not.] (L) 44. Then shall they also answer and say, Lord, when saw we Thee hungry, or thirsty, or a strang er, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister to Thee?] (L) 45. Then shall He answer them, saying, Forasmuch as ye did it not to one of these least, ye did it not to Me.] (L) 46. And these shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.] Cf. Daniel 12:2; and for “ everlasting life,” see Words, 156 ff. This splendid ending (vv. 31-46) of the long discourse reads like a Christian homily. the Matthæ an Logia. passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Syriac version: Peshitta. Syriac version: Harclean. Syriac version: Curetonian. i.e. with other uncial MSS. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. Dalman. 26:1-5. From Mark 14:1, Mark 14:2. (E) 1. And it came to pass, when Jesus finished all these words, that He said to His disciples.] for the formula, cf. 7:28, 11:11, 13:53, 19:1. Here it is an editorial link, enabling the editor to resume Mk.’ s narrative, which he abandoned at 24:42.— πάνταςτοὺςλόγουςτούτους ] i.e. the whole discourse, 24-25. (M) 2. You know that after two days cometh the Passover, and the Son of Man is delivered up to be crucified.] Mk. has: “ And the Passover and the Unleavened Bread was after two days.” The verse is a difficult one. The Passover was on the 14th of the month, and the Unleavened Bread followed on the 15th, lasting till the 21st. It is difficult, therefore, to understand how both feasts could be said to be “ after two days.” The copyists in Mk. found the combination difficult. D a omit καὶτὰἄζυμα . S3 and k have Pascha Azymorum.1 Mt. omits καὶτὰἄζυμα as incorrect, because if the Passover was after two days, the Unleavened Bread was after three; and as unnecessary. Moreover, “ after two days” is difficult. It is generally supposed to mean on the morrow. But although “ after three days” seems to be equivalent to “ on the third day,” it is doubtful whether any Jew would have used “ after two days” as meaning on the morrow, any more than he would have said “ after one day” if he meant “ to-day.” It is possible that behind μετὰδύοἡμέρας lies the Aramaic ב ת ר י ו מ י ן , meaning “ after a time,” the ת ר being misread as ת ר י ן = two. Dalman, Gram.2 p. 215, quotes for ב ת ר י ו מ י ן Pea 20a, Vay. R. 10, and for ל ב ת ר י ו מ י ן vay. R. 23. We may therefore suppose that the original of Mk. ran: “ And the Passover and the Unleavened Bread was after some days,” i.e. was drawing near. Lk. (22:1) has seen that this must be the meaning. Mt., by adding καὶὁυἱός , κ .τ .λ . emphasises the fact that the Lord foresaw His arrest at the moment that the authorities were plotting it.— εἰςτὸσταυρωθῆναι ] Cf. 20:19. (E) 3. Then were gathered together the chief priests and the elders of the people into the palace of the high priest, who was named Caiaphas.] The verse is not in Mk. But in the next verse he speaks of “ the chief priests and the scribes.” Mt. substitutes for the latter “ the elders of the people,” as being a more forcible element in the Sanhedrin. (M) 4. And counselled one another that they should seize Jesus by craft, and kill Him.] Mk. has: “ And sought how they might seize Him by craft, and kill Him.” — συνεβουλεύσαντο ] reciprocal middle; cf. Moulton, p. 157. (M) 5. And they said, Not during the feast, in order that there may not he a tumult amongst the people.] Mk. has: “ For they said, Not during the feast, lest there be a tumult of the people,” thus laying greater emphasis on ἐνδόλῳ .— ἵναμὴ — γένηται ] for Mk.’ s μήποτεἔσται , on which see Blass, p. 213; also Gould, in loc. 6-13. From Mark 14:3-9. (M) 6. And when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper.] Mk. has: “ And when He was,” etc.— τοῦδὲ — γενομένου ] a correction of καὶὄντος ; cf. in 26:69 ὁδὲΠέτροςἐκάθητο , a similar correction of Mk.’ s καὶὄντοςτοῦΠέτρου . Mk. adds: “ as He sat at, meat,” which Mt. omits here, and transfers to the next verse. (M) 7. There came to Him a woman having an alabaster vase of precious ointment.] Mk. has: “ There came a woman having an alabaster vase of ointment, costly spikenard.” And poured it over His head as He sat at meat.] Mk. has: “ She brake the alabaster vase, and poured it on His head.” — προσῆλθεν for Mk.’ s ἦλθεν . For the word as characteristic of Mt., see on 4:3. Mt. omits the explanatory νάρδουπιστικῆς ; cf. Introduction, p. xxv.— βαρυτίμοὒ for Mk.’ s πολυτελοῦς . For βαπύτιμος in this sense, cf. Strabo, 798. Mt. omits the breaking of the vase.— κατέχεενἐπὶτῆςκεφαλῆς ] Mk. has the common post-Homeric construction, with the simple gen.— ἀνακειμένου ] for Mk.’ s κατακειμένου ; cf. a similar change to 9:10. Mar_4 times has κατακεῖσθαι ; Mt. avoids it in each case. For “ alabaster,” see Hastings, DCG. i. p. 41. (M) 8. And the disciples saw it, and were vexed, saying, Why this destruction?] Mk. has: “ And some were being vexed among themselves. Why was this destruction of the ointment?” (M) 9. For this might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.] Mk. has: “ For this ointment might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and given to the poor. And they were indignant with her.” For Mt.’ s shortening, cf. Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 10. And Jesus perceived it, and said, Why do you trouble the woman ? for she did a good deed for Me.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said, Let her alone. Why do you trouble her? A good deed she did in Me.” Mt. inserts γνούς ; cf. a similar insertion in 12:15. He omits ἄφετεαὐτήν as implied in the next clause; cf. Introduction, p. xxv.— εἰςἐμέ ] for Mk.’ s ἐνἐμοί , For ἐν , cf. ἐναὐτῷ , Matthew 17:12, where Mk. has the simple dative. (M) 11. For always you have the poor with you, but Me you have not always.] Mk. adds after “ with you” : “ And whensoever ye wish, you can always do well to them.” Mt. omits as redundant. (M) 12. For in having cast this ointment upon My body, she did it to prepare Me for burial.] Mk. has: “ What she could she did. She anointed My body beforehand, with a view to preparation for burial.” — ἐνταφιάζειν ] late and uncommon; cf. Genesis 50:2; Plut. De Esu. Carnium, i. 995 C; Test. XII. Patr. Jud. 26. (M) 13. Verily I say to you, wheresoever this gospel is preached in all the world, there shall be told also what she did, for a memorial of her.] Mk. has: “ And verily I say to you, Wheresoever this gospel is preached into all the world, also what she did shall be told for a memorial of her.” — ἐν ] Mk has εἰς ; cf. a similar change in 24:14. 7. βαρυτίμου ] B al S1.— πολυτίμου ] א A D al. 14-16. From Mark 14:10-11. (M) 14. Then went one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, to the chief priests.] Mk. has: “ And Judas Iscarioth, the one of the twelve, went away to the chief priests.” — τότε ] cf. on 2:7.— εἷς ] is here equivalent to τις ; cf. on 8:18. Mk.’ s ὁεἱς is paralleled in early papyri; cf. Moulton, p. 97.— Ἰσκαριώτης ] cf. on 10:4. (M) 15. And said, What will you give me, and I will deliver Him to you ?] Mk. has simply: “ In order that he might deliver Him to them.” And they weighed out to him thirty pieces of silver.] Mk. has: “ And they promised to give him silver.” Mt. alters, with a view to 27:9, where he quotes Zechariah 11:13. In the preceding verse, Zechariah 11:12, occur the words, ἔστησαντὸνμισθόνμουτριάκονταἀργυροῦς . He therefore assimilates Mk.’ s phrase to this passage. (M) 16. And from that time he was seeking a favourable opportunity that he might deliver Him.] Mk. has: “ And he was seeking how he might favourably deliver Him.” — εὐκαιρίαν ] = “ opportunity.” Cicero, Ad Att. xvi.82; Plat. Phæ dr. 272 A; Ox. Pap. i. 123. 3 (third or fourth century a.d.). 14-16. Mt. and Lk. agree in the following: Ἰσκαριώτης , Mat_14 = Ἰσκαριώτην , Luk_3; Ἰσκαριώθ , Mar_10. ἐζήτειεὐκαιρίαν , Mat_16, Luk_6. 17-35. From Mark 14:12-31. (M) 17. And on the first day of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, Where wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the Passover ?] Mk. has: “ And on the first day of Unleavened Bread, when they were sacrificing the Passover, His disciples say to Him, Where will Thou that we go and prepare that Thou mayest eat the Passover?” The verse is chronologically difficult. The first day of Unleavened Bread followed the Passover day. And even if we admit that the name Unleavened Bread was popularly given to the whole eight days1 (cf. Jos. Ant. ii. 317: “ a feast for eight days which is called the feast of Unleavened Bread” ), the Passover day after 3 o’ clock (when they were sacrificing the Passover) seems too late for the disciples to begin their preparation. It is more natural that this should have been completed on the day before. It is therefore probable that the text of Mk. rests upon an Aramaic original, which has been misunderstood by Mk. The original probably referred to a point of time prior to the Passover. It may have run, “ And before the feast of Unleavened Bread.” If so, Mk. misunderstood “ before” as meaning “ on the first day,” and has still further confused matters by identifying this “ first day” with the Passover day, adding, “ When they were sacrificing the Passover.” He feels that the supper recorded in vv. 17ff could not have taken place after the Passover day. Having got from his original “ on the first day of Unleavened Bread,” he is therefore obliged to identify this with the Passover day, and represent the meal as a Passover meal. In his source it was probably a meal two days before the Passover, after the necessary preparation had been made for the Passover meal on the 14th. Mt. and Lk. adopt without question the confused reckoning of Mk. and his identification of the meal with the Passover meal. Mt. omits ὅτετὸπάσχαἔθυον , either because the clause seemed unnecessary be cause implied in what follows, or perhaps to avoid the harsh juxtaposition of the first day of Unleavened Bread and the Passover. προσῆλθον — λέγοντες ] cf. on 8:3.— θέλειςἑτοιμάσωμεν ] cf. Luke 9:54, and Moulton, p. 185. (M) 18. And He said, Go into the city to such a man, and say, The teacher saith, My time is at hand; I celebrate at thy house the Passover with My disciples.] Mk. has: “ And He sendeth two of His disciples, and saith to them, Go into the city, and there shall meet you a man carrying a pitcher of water: follow him. And wheresoever he shall enter in, say to the master of the house that the teacher saith, Where is My chamber, where I may eat the Passover with My disciples?” Mt. avoids questions in the mouth of the Lord (cf. Introduction, p. xxxii), and therefore omits ποῦἐστὶντὸκατάλυμάμου . He avoids also the obscure reference to the man with the pitcher, the ambiguity of which is probably due to the fact that the Lord had an understanding with one of His adherents in the city, which enabled Him to throw an atmosphere of secrecy over His movements. He ostensibly arranged to keep the Passover meal on the 14th, whilst He purposed to eat a substitute for it on the evening of His message. In this way He safeguarded Himself from arrest during that last evening meal, since even if the place of meeting had been known outside the circle of the Twelve, no one, not excluding the Twelve, could have suspected that He would be found there till the evening of the 14th. ὁκαιρόςμουἐγγύςἐστιν ] The words seem to be a previously arranged password. “ Prepare the Passover meal; but for to-day, not to-morrow: for My Passover must be eaten to-night.” Mk. adds here: “ And He will show you a large upper room furnished (and) ready: there make ready for us.” Mt. omits. (M) 19. And the disciples did as Jesus appointed them, and prepared the Passover.] Mk. has: “ And the disciples went out, and came into the city, and found as He said to them: and made ready the Passover.” 17-19. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mark in ὁδὲεῖπεν , Mat_18, Luk_10 for καὶλέγει , Mar_12; and in δἐ , Mat_17, Luk_7 for Mk.’ s καἷ Note on the dates in Mar_14. 1.Mark 14:1 ἦνδὲτὸπάσχακαὶτὰἄζυμαμετὰδύοἡμέρας , κ .τ .λ . According to the usual interpretation, the authorities are here represented as plotting on Wednesday the 13th to arrest the Christ and to put Him to death, but as deciding not to effect this ἐντῇἑορτῇ . Did they then propose to postpone His capture until after the Feast of Unleavened Bread? If so, why did they arrest Him on the Thursday evening, the 14th-15th, and cause Him to be put to death on the 15th, i.e. ἐντῇἐορτῇ , contrary to their intention? It is clear that something is wrong with the text, for τὸπάσχα and τὰἄζυμα are not coincident, but successive periods. Both could not happen μετὰδύοἠμέρας Moreover, μετὰδύοἠμέρας is itself obscure. It is argued that μετὰτρεῖςἠμέρας is equivalent to τῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳ = “ on the day after to-morrow,” cf. 16:21; but the analogy of this usage does not justify μετὰδύοἡμέρας in the sense of “ on the morrow.” Greek and Aramaic alike used other expressions to denote this. We are therefore led by the general intention of the narrative to suppose that the authorities planned the arrest some days before the feast, and proposed to effect it before the feast. This is confirmed by the light thrown upon the following narrative, Mark 14:3-9, by John 12:1, where it is said that the feast at Bethany took place six days before the Passover. This would date the determination of the Sanhedrin in Mark 14:1 as six days or more before Passover. 2.Mark 14:12 καὶτῇπρώτῃἡμέρᾳτῶνἀζύμώὄτετὸπάσχαἔθυον . The clause must be corrupt. The first day of Unleavened Bread, the 15th Nisan, succeeded the Passover day, the 14th. Further, the 14th after 3 o’ clock would have been too late to make preparation for the meal. This must have been accomplished at least on the day before. 3.Mark 14:17 καὶὀψίαςγενομένηςἔρχεται , Κ .Τ .λ . In the belief of the editor of the second Gospel this was the Passover meal eaten on the evening of the 14th. But this identification introduces confusion into the whole of the surrounding narrative. For (a) the authorities had decided against arrest ἐντῇἐορτῇ . (b) Simon would not be “ coming from work” (15:20) cf. B. Berakhoth 4b, nor would Joseph have bought a linen cloth on a feast day (15:46), nor would one of the disciples carry arms on such a day (14:47). If, now, we put aside the chronological notices in Mk., the general tenor of the narrative is clear. In 14:1, 2 the authorities decide to arrest Christ before the Feast, i.e. before the Passover. The meal of Mar 14:3-9 took place, as the writer of the Fourth Gospel states, six days before the Passover. On or soon after the day of this feast, Judas arranged with the authorities to effect Christ’ s arrest, Mark 14:10-11. The Passover, the 14th, fell on the Sabbath. Two days before, i.e. on Thursday the 12th, Christ bade His disciples make the necessary preparations for the Passover meal, Mark 14:12-16. That same evening He sat down with His disciples at a meal in which He anticipated the Passover by two days, and instituted the Holy Communion, Mark 14:17-25. That evening He was arrested in the garden, and after trial before the Sanhedrin on the following morning (Friday the 13th), was condemned by Pilate and crucified. He was buried the same day at evening (Mark 14:42). Thus, as the authorities had decided, His execution took place before the Feast, i.e. on the 13th, and the notices that Simon was “ coming from work,” that one of the disciples was armed, and that Joseph bought a linen garment, are in harmony with the rest of the narrative, since the days on which these things took place were not feast days. With this arrangement the writer of the Fourth Gospel is agreed. The last supper was “ before the Passover,” i.e. two days before, on Thursday. The authorities would not enter into Pilate’ s palace on the following morning, i.e. Friday the 13th, because their purification in readiness for the Passover on the following day (Saturday the 14th) would have been rendered null1 (18:28). The crucifixion took place on the eve of the Passover (19:14; cf. the same statement, B. Sanh 43a, Ev. Pet 3), which was also the eve of the Sabbath (19:31, 42, cf. Das Leben Jesu; Krauss, p. 56: “ The Passover fell in that year on a Sabbath.” It is therefore clear that Mark 14:12, which seems to identify the first day of Unleavened Bread with the Passover day, and which suggests the identification of the last supper with the Passover meal, must be corrupt. The primary corruption no doubt lies in the words τῇπρώτῃἡμέρᾳτῶνἀζύμων . Behind this, whether in a documentary or oral source, must lie words which should give the meaning “ before the feast of Unleavened Bread,” thus re suming, v. 2, “ not on the feast.” The editor having misinterpreted this to mean “ on the first day of Unleavened Bread,” is obliged to suppose that the Passover day is intended. The real “ first day of Unleavened Bread” would be, as he is aware, too late. He therefore inserts ὄτετὸπάσχαἔθυον , thus identifying the last supper with the Passover meal, and introducing hopeless confusion into the succeeding narrative. The narratives of Mt. and Lk. are entirely based on Mk., and have the same confused chronology, although Mt. seems to have endeavoured to avoid some of the harsher incongruities by omitting καὶτὰἄζυμα from Mark 14:1, ὄτετὸπάσχαἔθυον from Mark 14:14, ἐρχόμενονἀπ ʼ ἀγροῦ from Mark 15:20, and ἀγοράσαςσινδόνα from Mark 15:46. Chwolson in his note, Ueber Das Datum im Evangelium Matthä i, xxvi. 17,2 suggests that the original of Matthew ran ב י ו מ א מ ק מ א פ מ י ר י א =“ in the days before the feast of Unleavened Bread” ; that the first מ ‍ of מ ק מ א was omitted, and the sentence translated as though it were ב ּ י ו מ ָ א ק מ ָ א ד פ מ י ר י א . But Mt. is dependent on Mk., and the error must be sought in Mk. Chwolson’ s Aramaic phrase or some similar expression very probably lies behind Mk.’ s τῇπρώτῃἡμέρᾳ In any case, Chwolson is right in regarding this phrase as impossible, and in seeing that what is wanted is some phrase meaning, “ Before the feast of Unleavened Bread.” Chwolson in his extremely valuable treatise, Das Letzte Passamahl Christi, suggests that the Passover fell on a Friday and was transferred to Thursday, because on the Friday there would not have been time for the roasting of the lambs before the beginning of the Sabbath. He thinks that whilst the offering of the lambs was therefore necessarily antedated, there was a difference of opinion as to the eating of the Paschal meal. Some, including Christ, eat it on the Thursday, others preferred to eat it according to the Mosaic law on the Friday the 14th, though the killing had been transferred to the previous day on account of the proximity of the Sabbath. But Chwolson’ s investigations are concerned with the text of the first Gospel, and his suggestions leave unsolved the texts of Mk. and Lk. It is with Mk. that any attempted solution must begin. If we transfer Chwolson’ s emendation to Mark 14:12, we may gladly admit that this writer is excellent authority for justifying us in substituting “ Before the feast of Unleavened Bread” for τῇπρώτῃἡμέρᾳτῶνἀζύμων . But what of ὄτετὸπάσχαἔθυον Are we to accept this statement with the identification of the last supper with the Passover meal which is implied in it? It seems more than probable that the ὄτετὸπάσχαἔθυον is due to the same writer who has just written τῇπρῶτῃἡμέρᾳτῶνἀζύμων . He realises that the last supper could not have taken place on the 15th, which was, properly speaking, the first day of Unleavened Bread. He is therefore obliged to suppose that by the first day of Unleavened Bread the Passover day was intended. And this preliminary error confuses the whole of the following narrative. In other words, Mark 14:12a is so certainly corrupt that no inference ought to be drawn from it as to the chronology of the succeeding narrative. And, apart from it, nothing is more clear than that the crucifixion of Christ did not take place on the 15th, from which it follows that the meal of vv. 17-25 was not the Passover meal of the 14th. But then what was it? Do not the disciples say, Where shall we make ready the Passover? And did not Christ bid them go and prepare it? But there is really no difficulty about the matter if we read vv. 12-16 in the light of the previous narrative. The Sanhedrin had decided on the removal of Christ before the feast, and had covenanted with Judas to arrange for His arrest at a convenient opportunity. Of all this Christ was aware. He knew that before the killing of the lambs in the Temple on the evening of the 14th, He himself would have fallen a prey to the plots of His enemies. And yet He proposed to eat the Passover meal with His disciples. Not, however, the technical Passover meal of the 14th, but a meal which should serve as such. Hence the mystery of vv. 12-16. Preparation for the Passover meal of the 14th had to be made early. In this case the disciples seem to have thought it well to begin on Thursday the 12th. They went, we read, and prepared the Passover. Not, of course, the lamb. That could only be offered in the Temple on the 14th, and then brought to the room afterwards. But they made other preparations, saw to it that the room was properly equipped, and perhaps purchased the necessary accessories of the feast. It may be thought that ἠτοίμασαντὸπάσχα must mean more than this, and include the actual preparation of the lamb itself, and so point to the 14th. But, in the first place, the phrase is due to the writer who has written v. 12a, who believed that the meal thus prepared was the technical Passover meal. The original may well have meant nothing more than “ prepared for the Passover.” And, on the other hand, it is very unlikely that the two messengers should have acted as representatives of the whole body in the solemn service of the slaughter of the lamb in the Temple on the 14th. Preparation by two delegates could only be preparation of subordinate details, not the actual sacrifice of the lamb itself. But why the mystery about the place of the meal? No doubt because, in view of the danger of arrest, Christ wished to keep His movements secret. He had arranged with some one that a room should be ready. There He sent His disciples to make preparations as though for the Passover meal of the 14th. Then the material and place for a meal having been secured, He came suddenly on that same evening of the 12th and sat down with His disciples, secure at least for a time from arrest, for He had the betrayer in His company. It was not the technical Passover meal, but for Him and for His disciples it would serve as such. There was indeed no lamb. But there was bread symbolising Christ’ s body, and that sufficed. (M) 20. And when it was evening, He sat down with the twelve disciples.] Mk. has: “ And when it was evening, He cometh with the twelve. And as they were sitting.” — ὀψίαςδέ ] for καὶὀψίας , as often.— ἀνέκειτο ] for ἔρχεται — καὶἀνακειμένωναὐτῶν , thus omitting the historic present. Cf. Introduction, p. xx. (M) 21. And as they were eating, Jesus said, Verily I say to you, that one of you shall deliver Me up.] Mk. has: “ And as they were eating, Jesus said, Verily I say to you, that one of you shall deliver Me up (one) who is eating with Me.” The last clause emphasises the heinousness of the treachery of the act. Mt. omits the words as already implied in εἶςἐξὑμῶν . For εἶς = τις , see Blass, P. 144 (M) 22. And being very grieved, they began to say to Him each one, Is it I, Lord ?] Mk. has: “ They began to be grieved, and to say to Him one by one, Is it I ?” — καί ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s asyndeton.— σφόδρα ] is characteristic of Mt., see on 2:10.— εἷςἔκαστος ] see Blass, p. 179, for Mk.’ s harsher εἷςκατὰεἷς which occurs in John 8:9. (M) 23. And He answered and said, He who dipped with Me his hand in the dish, he shall deliver Me up.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, One of the Twelve. He who dippeth with Me into the dish.” “ One of the Twelve” reaffirms the treachery of the act. and ὁἐμβαπτόμενος , κ .τ .λ ., is equivalent to ὁἐσθίωνμετ ʼ ἐμοῦ . Not only one of the Twelve, but also a partaker in a common meal. The clause in Mk. does not give any clue to the individuality of the traitor, for probably all dipped into the dish, but only emphasises his treachery. Mt. in substituting ὁἐμβάψας — τὴνχεῖρα , and adding οὗτόςμεπαραδώσει , may have understood the words to be a direct clue to the betrayer’ s personality. Hastings. DCG. i. p. 464. (M) 24. The Son of Man indeed goeth as it stands written about Him: but woe to that man through whom the Son of Man is delivered up! good were it for him if that man had not been born.] Mk. has the same with ὄτι at the beginning and no ἦν after καλόν . “ Mt. improves the Greek by adding ἦν , ” Moulton, p. 200. The sentence is very Semitic in construction and idea. For ὑπάγειν = goes on his destined path, goes to his fate, dies, see Schlatter on John 7:33. For καθὼςγέγραπται , see Bacher, Exeget. Term. I. 88, II. 91. The solemn repetition of ὁἄνθρωποςἐκεῖνος and the αὐτῷ — ὁἄνθρωποςἐκεῖνος is also Semitic. The whole verse could be literally translated into Hebrew or Aramaic; cf. B. Chag. 11b “ It were better for him if he had not come into the world,” Enoch 38:2 “ It had been good for them if they had not been born.” (E) 25. And Judas, who delivered Him up, answered and said. Is it I, Rabbi? He saith to him, Thou hast said.] The verse is not in Mk. Mt., who has understood ὁἐμβαπτόμενος as marking out the traitor in an indirect way, adds here a clause to make his identity still clearer.— σὺεἶπας ] For the tense. see Moulton, p. 140. The clause is an evasive or ambiguous affirmative, and is quite in the Semitic manner. For Rabbinic parallels. see Dalm. Words, 309 ff. But cf. Chwolsen, Das Letzte Passamahl, p. 88, who denies that it is a Rabbinic formula of affirmation. So also Merx, in loc.: “ Du hast es gesagt ist keine rabbinische Formel.” But the passages quoted by Dalman seem sufficient to show that “ thou hast said” is in harmony with the Jewish spirit. where an indirect affirmation is required. In the present instance it is needless to ask whether it can or cannot express a direct affirmative. because such a direct affirmative would mar the spirit of the whole narrative, as Mt. has well understood. Christ had stated the terrible fact that one of His chosen friends. who was at that very moment sharing with him in a common meal. would betray Him into the hands of His enemies. They answer Him in indignant words which are half-interrogative, half-negative, It is not I? And Judas amongst the others put the same question. Now it is inconceivable that Christ should have answered him with a simple affirmative. Such a statement made publicly could only have provoked an outburst of fury against Judas, and perhaps for a time at least have frustrated his purpose. If intended only for the ear of Judas, it was the sort of thing which could not have been said under the circumstances. It would only have led to angry denial. What was required was just what σὺεἶπας expresses, an ambiguous affirmative, suggesting to the traitor himself the certainty that his treachery was known; to others, if they overheard it, a half uncertainty as to what was meant, and leaving opportunity to Judas of withdrawing from his course of treachery before its absolute and final exposure. See Gould on Mark 14:20. (M) 26. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body.] Mk. has the same, omitting ὁἸησοῦς and φάγετε : and with καὶἔδωκεναὐτοῖςκαί for καὶδοὺςτοῖςμαθηταῖςαὐτοῦ .— δέ ] for καί , as often.— ἄρτον ] א B C D S1; τὸνἄρτον , A al.— εὐλογήσας ] i.e.“ uttered a form of thanksgiving.” — τοῦτόἐστιντὸσῶμάμου ] The ἐστιν is quite unemphatic, and in Aramaic would be unexpressed. “ This is My body,” i.e. “ this broken bread, of which you all eat, represents My body.” The inference that in some sense the disciples were to partake of Christ’ s body is unexpressed, but is implicit in the words τοῦτο = “ this broken loaf” ; the neuter is due to attraction to τὸσῶμα . (M) 27. And He took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave (it) to them, saying, Drink ye all from it.] Mk. has: “ And He took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave (it) to them, and they all drank from it.” Mt. assimilates ἕπιον to the imperative of the previous verse.— ποτὴριον ] So א B E al S1; τὸποτήριον , A C D al. The article here and before ἄρτον in v. 26 has probably been added to signify the Eucharistic bread and cup. (M) 28. For this is My blood of the covenant, which is being shed for many unto remission of sins.] Mk. has: “ And He said to them, This is My blood of the covenant, which is being shed on behalf of many.” — τοῦτο ] = this wine.— τὸαἶμάμουτῆςδιαθήκης ] This wine represents My blood, i.e. My covenant blood, i.e. My blood shed to ratify a covenant. Nothing is said in Mk. to define the nature of the covenant, except that the blood was being shed on behalf of many, i.e. to give them a right to the privileges of the covenant. The covenant might be regarded as a covenant between Christ and the many, or, more naturally, between God and the many. Mt., by adding εἰςἅφεσινἀμαρτιῶν , shows that he understood the covenant to be a covenant between God and the many by which remission of sins was secured to them, the sign of this covenanted forgiveness being the shed blood. For blood as signifying the ratification of a covenant, cf. Exodus 24:8.— τῆςδιαθήκης ]So א B L Z; τῆςκαινῆςδιαθήκης , A C D al; τὸτῆςκαινῆςδιαθήκης , A C al S1 has: “ My blood, the new covenant.” (M) 29. And I say to you, I will not drink from now of this fruit of the vine urtil that day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of My Father.] Mk. has: “ Verily I say to you, that I will no longer drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” The words are striking and unexpected. They seem to be a solemn farewell. But instead of a promise of a future return, we have this allusion to the joys of the Messianic kingdom. For the banquet as symbol of that joy, cf. on 8:11, and add Enoch 62:14 “ With that Son of Man will they eat and lie down, and rise up for ever and ever,” where, however, the picture is hardly so much that of a banquet as of perpetual fellowship.— οὐμή ] cf. Moulton, 187 ff.— γένημα ] from γίνεσθαι as opposed to γέννημα from γεννάω . Cf. Deissm. Bible Studies, p. 184.— γένηματῆςἀμπέλου — καινόν ] Why new? Contrast Luke 22:30. But in the Messianic kingdom all things will be new; cf. Isaiah 43:18, Revelation 21:5.— ἀπ ʼ ἂρτι ] is not in Mk. Lk. also adds ἀπὸτοῦνῦν . (M) 30. And they sang a hymn, and went out to the Mount of Olives.] So Mk. (M) 31. Then saith Jesus to them, All ye shall be made to stumble in Me on this night; for it stands written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus saith to them, that all ye shall be made to stumble: because it stands written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.” — τότε ] see on 2:7. Mt., as often, omits Mk.’ s ὄτι .— σκανδαλισθήσεσθε ] see on v. 29. Mt. adds ἐνἐμοὶἐντῃνυκτὶταύτῃ to make the point of the following quotation explicit.— πατάξω , κ .τ .λ .] The quotation is from Zechariah 13:7.— πατάξω ] LXX. and Heb. have the imperative.— τὸνποιμένα ] so Heb. and LXX. א c a c b A Q Γ .— καὶδιασκορπισθήσονταιτὰπρόβατα ] so Heb., LXX., A Q. Mk. transposes subject and verb.— τῆςποίμνης ] not in Heb., but so LXX. A. Since Mt. does not elsewhere ad extraneous words to Mk.’ s quotations, and does add words which are found in the LXX. κολληθήσεταιτῇγυναικί : 22:32, where he adds εἰμί ), it is more probable that he here adds τῆςποίμνης because he found it in a LXX. text, than that LXX. A should have been assimilated to the Gospel. The order καὶδιασκ . τὰπρόβατα is another assimilation to the LXX. (M) 32. But after I am risen, I will go before you into Galilee.] So Mk., with ἀλλά for δέ . For the unclassical insertion of με , see Blass, p. 239; Moulton, p. 212. (M) 33. And Peter answered and said to Him, If all shall be made to stumble in Thee, I will never be made to stumble.] Mk. has: “ And Peter said, Although all shall be made to stumble, yet not I.” — εἶπεν ] So Lk. Mk. has ἔφη . (M) 34. Jesus said to him, Verily I say to you, That on this night, before the cock crow, thrice thou shalt deny Me.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus saith to him, Verily I say to thee, That to-day, on this night, before that the cock crow twice, thrice thou shalt deny Me.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s redundant σήμερον ; cf. Introduction, p. xxv. — πρίν ] for Mk.’ s πρὶνἤ , cf. Blass, p. 229. Mk.’ s δίς is of doubtful authority; see Swete. (M) 35. Peter saith to Him, Even if I must needs die with Thee, I will not deny Thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.] Mk. has: “ And he was confidently saying, If I must needs die with Thee, I will not deny Thee. And likewise all were saying.” — οὐμή ] For the construction with fut. ind., cf. 16:22, and Moulton, p. 190. 36-56. From Mark 14:32-50. (M) 36. Then Jesus cometh with them to an estate called Gethsemanei, and saith to the disciples, Sit here until I have gone away yonder and prayed.] Mk. has: “ And they come to an estate of which the name (was) Gethsemanei, and He saith to His disciples, Sit here until I have prayed.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— ἔρχεται ] Mt., against his custom, retains the historic present.— Γεθσημανεὶ ] = “ oil-press” ; cf. Dalm. Gram.2 p. 191.— αὐτοῦ ] for Mk.’ s ὧδε , on which see Blass, p. 58.— ἕωςοὗ ] = “ until,” Blass, p. 272.1 (M) 37. And He took Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and distracted.] Mk. has: “ And He taketh Peter and James and John with Him, and began to be amazed and distracted.” — παραλαβών ] Mt. avoids, as usual, the historic present.— λυπεῖσθαι ] a softer word than Mk.’ s strong ἐκθαμβεῖσθαι ; cf. Introduction, p. xxxi. Mt., however, retains the striking ἀδημονεῖν , on which see Lightfoot, Philippians 2:26, Gould and Swete on Mk. Lk. omits the whole clause.— ἀδημονεῖν ] occurs in Ox. Pap. ii. 298, 45, first century a.d. λίανἀδημονοῦμεν . (M) 38. Then He saith to them, My soul is very grieved unto death; stay here and watch with Me.] Mk. has the same, without “ with Me,” and with καί for τότε , on which see 2:7.— ἕωςθανάτου ] Cf. Jonah 4:9, Ecclus 51:8. For ψυχή of the human soul of Christ, cf. John 12:27. Lk. omits the whole clause. See on Luke 22:42. (M) 39. And He went forward a little, and fell on His face, praying, and saying, My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from Me; but not as I will, but as Thou (willest).] Mk. has: “ And He went forward a little, and fell (imp.) (on His face, D al curss S1 k) upon the ground, and was praying that, if it were possible, the hour might pass from Him. And He said, Abba Father, all things are possible to Thee. Take this cup from Me. But not what I will, but what Thou (willest).” k omits ἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦ — παρένεγκε .— ἔπεσεν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imp., as often.— ἐπὶπρόσωποναὐτοῦ ] cf. 17:6. Mk. has in ἐπίτῆςγῆς . Mk. puts the contents of the prayer twice— once indirectly, and again directly. Mt., as usual, shortens; cf. Introd. p. xxiv.— προσευχόμενος ] Mt. omits here ἵναεἰδυνατόνἐστινπαρέλθῃἀπ ʼ αὐτοῦἠὥρα . ἠὥρα . here is ambiguous, and is used in a different sense in v. 37. But Mt. transfers εἰδυνατόνἐστιν and παρέρχομαι to the next verse; cf. k’ s omission in Mk.— πάτερμου ] Mk. has Ἀββᾶὁπατήρ . Mt. omits the Aramaic Ἀββά = My Father: cf. Dalm. Gram.2 p. 90. 198. For Mk.’ s ὁπατήρ , cf. Blass, p. 86; Moulton, pp. 70 ff. Mt. substitutes πάτερ ; cf. 6:9. For ποτήριον as a symbol of sorrow, cf. on 20:22 The “ cup” can be nothing but the approaching passion. “ The Lord’ s human soul shrank from the cross,” Swete.— εἰδυνατόνἐστιν ] Mk. has πάνταδυνατάσοι , but εἰδυνατόνἐστιν in v. 35. The recognition of the fact of God’ s sovereign power seems less suitable here than the expression of acquiescence in the necessity of the “ cup.” Lk. has been influenced by a similar feeling, but he has the still easier εἰβούλει .— παρελθάτω ] softens Mk.’ s direct παρένεγκε , but cf. παρέλθῃ in Mk v. 35.— πλήν ] cf. 11:22, 24, and Blass, p. 268. Lk. also adds πλήν . In Mk. the request is conditioned by the last clause, but the whole verse leaves the impression of an ungranted request more strongly than Mt.’ s modified rendering.— ὡςἐγὼθέλω ] Mk. has the more difficult τί , on which see Blass, p. 175 . On the “ cup,” see Hastings, DCG. i. p. 37. (M) 40. And He cometh to the disciples, and findeth them sleeping, and saith to Peter, Could you not thus watch with Me one hour?] Mk. has: “ And He eometh and findeth them sleeping, and saith to Peter, Simon, dost thou sleep? Couldest thou not watch one hour?” — ἔρχεται — εὑρίσκει ] Mt. retains the historic present contrary to his habit; cf. v. 36. Lk. also adds πρὸςτοὺςμαθητάς . (M) 41. Watch and pray, that you enter not into temptation: the spirit, indeed, is willing, but the flesh is weak.] So Mk., with ἔλθητε 1 for εἰσέλθητε ; cf. Introduction, p. xxvi. Lk. also has εἰσέλθητε .— εἰςπειρασμόν ] cf. 6:13. The words seem to be suggested by Christ’ s own experience. He, too, had entered into “ temptation,” v. 36. See Gould on Mark 14:38. (M) 42. Again a second time He went away, and prayed, saying, My Father, if this cannot pass, except I drink it, Thy will be done.] Mk. has: “ And again He went away, and prayed, saying the same word” The prayer added in Mt. expresses more strongly than v. 39 the submission of Christ to the Father’ s will.— γενηθήτωτὸθέλημάσου ] cf. 6:10. (M) 43. And He came again and found them sleeping, for their eyes were weighed down.] Mk. has: “ And again He came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were being weighed down. And they knew not what to answer Him.” — βεβαρημένοι ] Sc. ὕπνῳ , cf. Hom. Od. iii. 139, οἴνῳβεβαρηότες . Mk. has καταβαρυνόμενοι . For Mt.’ s omission of καὶοὐκᾔδεισαν , κ .τ .λ ., cf. similar omissions from Mark 6:52, Mark 9:6, and Introduction, p. xxxiii f. (M) 44. And He left them again, and went away, and prayed the third time, saying the same word again.] Mk. has no corresponding third withdrawal, but in v. 41 presupposes one in the words, “ and He cometh the third time.” Mt. fills the lacuna by slightly enlarging Mk v. 39. For ἀφείς , cf 13:36. (M) 45. Then He cometh to the disciples, and saith to them, Sleep on and rest; behold the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is being delivered up into the hands of sinners.] Mk. has: “ And He cometh the third time, and saith to them, Sleep on now and rest it is enough, the hour has come: behold the Son of Man is being delivered up into the hands of sinners.” — ἔρχεται ] as in vv. 36 and 40. Mt. retains the historic present, contrary to his custom.— τότε ] see on 2:7. Mt. omits Mk.’ s rare impers. ἀπέχει . (M) 46. Arise, let us go: behold, he that is delivering Me up is at hand.] So Mk. with a transposition of subject and verb. (M) 47. And while He was still speaking, behold, Judas, one of the Twelve, came, and with him a great multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and elders of the people.] Mk. has: “ And immediately, while He was still speaking, there cometh Judas, one of the Twelve, and with him a multitude with swords and staves, from the chief priests and scribes and elders.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s εὐθύς , as often, and adds ἰδού , on which see 1:20. Lk. also has ἰδού — ἦλθεν ] aor. for Mk.’ s παραγίνεται , as often.— ἀπό ] for Mk.’ s παρά . Mt. omits καὶτῶνγραμματέων , and adds τοῦλαοῦ at the end. (M) 48. And he that was delivering Him up gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that is He: seize Him.] Mk. has: “ And he that delivered Him up had given them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I shall kiss, that is He: seize Him, and lead Him away safely.” — ἔδωκεν ] for Mk.’ s pluperfect, cf. 27:18.— σημεῖον .] Mk. has σύσσημον , on which see Swete. Mt. omits καὶἀπάγετεἀσφαλῶς as redundant; see Introduction, p. xxiv. (M) 49. And immediately he came to Jesus and said, Hail, Rabbi: and kissed Him fervently.] Mk. has: “ And coming immediately he came to Him, and saith, Rabbi: and kissed Him fervently.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s ἐλθών as redundant; see Introduction, p. xxiv.— χαῖρε ] added by Mt. (M) 50. And Jesus said to him, Friend (do that) for which thou art come.] Mk. has no corresponding clause. Lk. also has an insertion. “ Jesus said to him, Judas, with a kiss dost thou deliver up the Son of Man?” ἐταῖρος occurs in some MSS. at 11:16, and in the vocative, 20:18 and 22:12, both times in parables.— πάρει occurs only here in Mt. The clause is enigmatic in its brevity: “ (do that) for which thou art present,” i.e. “ accomplish your purpose” ; or as Wellhausen, “ Do you kiss Me for the purpose on account of which you are come,” i.e. “ on such an errand?” Blass, p. 176, emends into αἶρε , “ take what thou art come to fetch.” Then they came and laid hands on Jesus, and seized Him.] Mk. has: “ and they laid hands on Him, and seized Him.” — τότε ] See on 2:7.— προσελθόντες ] See on 4:3. (M) 51. And, behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched forth his hand, and drew his sword, and smote the servant of the high priest, and struck off his ear.] Mk. has: “ And one of those who stood by drew his sword, and struck the servant of the high priest, and struck off his ear.” — ἰδού ] See on 1:20.— εἷς ] Mk. has εἶςδέτις , on which see Blass, p. 144.— τῶνμετὰἸησοῦ ] for Mk.’ s vaguer τῶνπαρεστηκότων .— πατάξας ] Mk. has ἔπαισεν , cf. Matthew 26:68. Lk. also has ἐπάταξε . See on Luke 22:50. E 52-54. Mt. adds here three verses which have no parallel in Mk. or Lk. Then saith Jesus to him, Return thy sword to its place: for all who take the sword shall perish with the sword. Or thinkest thou that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He shall now furnish Me with more than twelve legions of angels? How then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must happen?]— τότε ] See on 2:7.— πλείω ] indecl. א * B D; see Moulton, p. 50. The insertion seems intended to throw light upon the meaningless incident of Mk v. 47. This was an act which might have led to an attempt to prevent Christ’ s arrest. But He Himself checked it. He did not desire the plans of His enemies to be thwarted. (M) 55. In that hour Jesus said to the multitudes, As against a robber did you come out with swords and staves to take Me ? Daily in the Temple I sat teaching, and you did not seize Me.] So Mk. with “ daily I was with you in the temple teaching” for “ daily in the Temple I sat teaching.” — ἐνἐκείνῃτῇὥρᾳ ] see on 8:13. For Mk.’ s ἤμηνπρὸςὑμᾶς , see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2363a. (M) 56. And all this has come to pass that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.] Mk. has simply: “ But that the Scriptures might be fulfilled (you have arrested Me in this treacherous way).” Mt. supplies the ellipse by inserting the formula τοῦτοδὲὅλονγέγονεν (on which see Introduction, p. lxi), and so making an independent sentence. (M) And all the disciples left Him, and fled.] Mk. has: “ And they all left Him, and fled.” Mt. here omits Mk vv. 51-52; cf. Introduction, p. xviii. 57-75. From Mark 14:53-72. (M) 57. And they seized Jesus, and led Him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.] Mk. has: “ And they led Jesus away to the high priest. And there come together all the high priests and the elders and the scribes.” — οἱδέ ] δέ (also in Lk.) for καί , as often. — πρὸςτὸνἀρχιερέα ] Mt. adds the name as in v. 3.— ὅπου — συνήχθησαν ] for Mk.’ s καὶσυνέρχονται , avoiding hist. pres., as often.— οἰγραμκαὶοἰπρες .] the more usual order for Mk.’ s οἱπρες , καὶοἱγραμ . Mk. prefixes οἱἀρχιερεῖς . Mt. omits, as already implied in πρὸςτὸνἀρχιερέα . (M) 58. And Peter was following Him from afar unto the court of the high priest, and entered in, and sat with the servants, to see the end.] Mk. has: “ And Peter from afar followed Him inside into the court of the high priest, and was sitting with the servants, and warming himself at the blaze.” — ὁδέ ] for Mk.’ s καὶὁ , as often. ἠκολούθα ] Mk. has the aor.; generally the position is reversed.— ἔωςτῆςαὐλῆς ] abbreviates Mk.’ s redundant ἕωςἔσωεἰςτὴναὐλήν ; cf. Introduction, p. 24 f.— ἐκάθητο ] (so Lk.) for Mk.’ s ἦνσυνκαθήμενος .— ἰδεῖντὸτέλος ] gives a motive for Peter’ s action, which is wanting in Mk.’ s merely pictorial καὶθερμαινόμενοςπρὸςτὸφῶς (M) 59. And the chief priests and all the Sanhedrin were seeking false witness against Jesus, that they might put Him to death.] Mk. has: “ And the chief priests and all the Sanhedrin were seeking witness against Jesus, with a view to putting Him to death.” — ψευδομαρτυρίαν ] emphasises the treachery of the authorities. (M) 60. And did not find (any), though many false witnesses came.] Mk. has: “ And were not finding (any). For many bore false witness against Him, and their testimonies were not agreed.— εὗρον ] aor. for Mk.’ s imp., as often. (M) But afterwards two came, (61) and said, This man said, I can destroy the temple of God, and build (it, another) after an interval of three days.] Mk. has: “ And certain rose up and bore false witness against Him, saying, That we heard Him saying, That I will destroy this Temple made with hands, and will build after an interval of three days another made without hands. And not even so was their witness agreed.” The narrative in Mk. is not free from difficulty. The authorities sought false witnesses, two at least being necessary according to law, cf. Deuteronomy 19:15, but could not find them (55). For many offered witness, but two could not be found to agree (56). An example of the testimony offered by these discordant witnesses is given in 57-58. It seems to be a garbled version of words spoken by Christ, and was no doubt represented as a threat to destroy the Temple. But even these witnesses could not agree. The attempt, therefore, to produce the requisite number of witnesses failed, and it was necessary to find other grounds for condemning the accused. Mt., however, seems to have regarded Mk vv. 57-58 as at least part of the ostensible ground for condemnation. He therefore distinguishes between the witness here recorded and that of the previous false witnesses by introducing it with ὔστερον , “ later,” and by inserting “ two.” “ At last the requisite agreement between the legal minimum number of witnesses was obtained.” Mt. seems to have interpreted the “ Temple” of Mark 58 of the literal Temple, and adds τοῦθεοῦ . At the same time he seems to have found difficulty in attributing to Christ even in the mouth of false witnesses a direct threat to destroy the Temple, and alters the words into an assertion that Christ had power to do so , and to build another in three days. The insertion of δύο in v. 59 carries with it the omission of Mk v. 59, because the consent of two witnesses in the statement was sufficient to make it a ground of accusation. διὰτριῶνἡμερῶν ] cf. Mark 13:2 D. For διά =“ after the lapse of an interval,” cf. Galatians 2:1. It seems to mean “ during” in Acts 1:3, so Blass, p. 132. So perhaps here “ within three days.” But see against this Abbott (Johannine Grammar, 2331c], who renders Acts 1:3 “ after an interval of forty days.” δύο ] add ψευδομάρτυρες , A2 C D al latt. S1. (M) 62. And the high priest rose up, and said to Him, Dost Thou answer nothing? what do these witness against Thee?] Mk. has: “ And the high priest rose up into the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Dost Thou not answer anything? what do these witness against Thee?” Mt. omits Mk.’ s οὐκ ; see on 27:14. (M) 63. And Jesus was silent.] Mk. has: “ And He was silent, and answered nothing.” Mt. omits the last clause as redundant; cf. Introduction, p. xxv. (M) And the high priest said to Him, I adjure Thee by the livin God, that Thou tell us if Thou art the Anointed, the Son of God?] Mk. has: “ Again the high priest was asking Him, and saith to Him, Art Thou the Anointed, the Son of the Blessed?” — ὁυἱὸςτοῦθεοῦ ] Mk. has ὁυἱὸςτοῦεὐλογητοῦ Since, according to Mk., the endeavour to procure the legal number of witnesses had failed, the high priest directly interrogates the accused. He was popularly regarded as one who claimed to be the Messiah, and had been greeted as such by the populace, Mark 11:9, Mark 11:10. It is very doubtful whether the high priests, the Sadducees, held any definite Messianic doctrine, but, no doubt, the Pharisees (cf. Ps.-Sol.) anticipated the coming of a Davidic “ king” ; and other conceptions of the Messiah were current, as, e.g., in the Apocalyptic literature. Wellhausen argues that the claim to be the Messiah could not, according to Jewish conceptions, have been regarded as a blasphemous claim. But quite apart from the exact meaning of the relationship of the Messiah to God, which is implied in such terms as “ Son of God,” “ Son of the Blessed,” the nature of the Messiah, as depicted in the literature of the period as of earthly and heavenly origin (cf. Volz, Jü d. Eschat. pp. 214 f.), is such that claims to be Messiah might quite well be regarded as blasphemous, if they were untrue. And the high priest, no doubt, knew quite well that the idea of Messiahship, as used of Himself by Christ, involved and implied the conception of heavenly origin (cf. Mark 12:37). Mk.’ s τοῦεὐλογητοῦ is an abbreviation of a common Rabbinical formula, and is no doubt original. Mt. changes into the Christian and universal τοῦθεοῦ . “ The Son of the Blessed” occurs in the Acta Pauli (Schmidt), p. 26, and “ the Blessed,” p. 29.— ἵναἡμῖνεἴπῃς ] Lk. also has εἰπὸνἡμῖν . (M) 64. Jesus saith to him, Thou saidst: but I say to you, Henceforth you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.] Mk. has: “ And Jesus said, I am; and you shall see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” — σὺεἶπας ] Mk. has ἐγώεἰμι . On σὺεἶπας , see v. 25. The phrase implies a fine understanding of the circumstances of the scene. Christ was not “ the Son of God” in any sense in which the words could be understood by the high priest, and a question such as that addressed to Christ, where questioner and questioned lived in a different atmosphere of thought, could not, nor ever can be, answered with a word. Yet the phrase is an implied affirmative. “ Thou hast expressed in a phrase the inference which seems to follow from My teaching, and that inference is a half truth. But more is implied. From henceforth,” etc. The same evasive affirmative lies behind Luke 22:67 and John 18:37: “ Thou sayest that I am a king. That is a right inference from My teaching; but the kingship which I claim is a kingship of spiritual supremacy.” — ἀπ ʼ ἄρτι ] is difficult.1 It seems to be equivalent to “ soon,” “ hereafter.” “ I am the Messiah, but the Messiah of the future, not of the present; you will understand when you shall see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven.” Lk. also has ἀπὸτοῦνῦν .— ἐπί ] Mk. has μετά . See on 24:30, where Mk. in the parallel has ἐννεφέλαις . μετά occurs in Theodotion’ s VS of Dan 7:13. See Gould on Mark 14:60. (M) 65. Then the high priest rent his garments, saying, He has blassphemed; what further need have we of witnesses? lo, now ye have heard the blasphemy.] Mk. has: “ And the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What further need have we of witnesses? ye have heard the blasphemy.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— τὰἱμάτια ] a more ordinary word than Mk.’ s τοὺςχιτῶνας . See DCG. i. p. 209. (M) 66. What think ye ? And they answered and said, He is worthy of death.] Mk. has: “ What seemeth it to you? And they all adjudged Him to be worthy of death.” (M) 67, 68. Then they spat in His face, and buffeted Him; and some smote Him, saying, Prophesy to us, Thou Anointed One, Who is he who struck Thee ?] Mk. has: “ And some began to spit upon Him, and to cover His face, and to buffet Him, and to say to Him, Prophesy. And the servants received Him with blows.” — τότε ] see on 2:7.— ἐνέπτυσαν ] Mt. frequently avoids Mk.’ s ἤρξαντο . He telescopes Mk.’ s ἐμπτύειναὐτῷκαὶπερικαλύπτειναὐτοῦτὸπρόσωπον into ἐνέπτυσανεἰςτὸπρόσωποναὐτου : but his added clause,τίςἐστινὁπαίσαςσε , seems to imply reminiscence of the omitted words. In οἱδὲἐράπισαν he abbreviates Mk.’ s καὶοἱὑπηρέταιῥαπίσμασιναὐτὸνἔλαβον . The addition, “ Who is he that struck Thee?” which Lk. also has, is no doubt intended to explain προφήτευσον . It may, however, be doubted whether the verb in Mk. has not a more general reference, such as “ Prophesy now the destruction of the Temple” ; cf. Mk v. 58. In view of Mt.’ s explanatory clause, it is extraordinary that he should have omitted the “ covering” of the face. (M) 69. And Peter sat outside in the court; and there came to him a maid-servant, saying, And thou wast with Jesus the Galilean?] Mk. has: “ And whilst Peter was below in the court, there cometh one of the maid-servants of the high priest; and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him, and saith, And thou wast with the Nazarene, Jesus?” — ἔξω ] in the outer court. Mk. has κάτω .— ἐκάθητο refers back to v. 58.— προσῆλθεν ] see on 4:3. Mt. avoids thus Mk.’ s hist. pres.— Γαλιλαίου ] for Mk.’ s Ναζαρηνοῦ , which Mt. elsewhere omits, e.g. in 20:30 and 28:5. (M) 70. And he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.] Mk. has: “ And he denied, saying, I know not, nor understand what thou sayest.” For Mt.’ s omission of the redundant οὔτεἐπίσταμαι , see Introduction, p. xxv.— οὐκοἶδα ] So Lk. Mk. has οὔτεοἶδα . See on Luke 22:57. (M) 71. And another saw him when he had gone out into the gateway, and saith to those there, This man was with Jesus the Nazarene.] Mk. has: “ And he went outside into the antecourt; and the maid-servant saw him, and began to say to those who stood by that this man is (one) of them.” — ἄλλη ] Mt. infers from the change of scene that the ἡπαιδίσκη of Mk. was different from the maid-servant of the previous verse.— οὗτοςἦν , κ .τ .λ . ] Mt. assimilates to the previous charge, but substitutes for Mk.’ s Ναζαρηνοῦ , Ναζωραίου : cf. 2:23.— λέγει ] Avoiding, as often, Mk.’ s ἤρξατο . Mt. omits Mk.’ s ὅτι , as often, and πάλιν , which would not harmonise with ἄλλη . (M) 72. And again he denied with an oath that, I know not the man.] Mk. has: “ And he denied again.” — ἠρνήσατο ] assimilating to v. 70, and avoiding Mk.’ s imperfect ἠρνεῖτο . (M) 73. And after a little while there came they who stood (there), and said to Peter, Truly thou also art (one) of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee.] Mk. has: “ And after a little again they who stood by were saying to Peter, Truly thou art (one) of them; for thou art a Galilean.” Mt. omits Mk.’ s πάλιν , as often.— προσελθόντες ] see on 4:3.— καὶγάρ , κ .τ .λ .] is apparently an explanatory interpretation of Mk.’ s “ for thou art a Galilean.” Mt. supposes that this was an inference from S. Peter’ s language or pronunciation. See Dalm. Words, p. 80. (M) 74. Then he began to imprecate, and to swear that, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.] Mk. has: “ And he began to imprecate, and to swear that, I know not this man of whom you speak. And immediately the cock crew a second time.” — τότε ] see. on 2:7.— καταθεματίζειν ] only here for Mk.’ s ἀναθεματίζειν , which occurs three times to Act_23. With either word the meaning is “ to invoke a curse on himself if his statement were not true.” — καὶεὐθύς ] Mk. adds ἐκδευτέρου (om. א L); cf. δίς in v. 30 (om. א C D) and v. 72 (om. א C D). (M) 75. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, who said that Before the cock crow, thrice thou shalt deny Me. And he went outside, and wept bitterly.] Mk. has: “ And Peter remembered the word, how Jesus said to him that, Before the cock crow twice, thrice thou shalt deny Me. And ἐπιβαλών he was weeping.” If the text of S. Mark which lay before Mt. had δίς in vv. 30 and 72, and ἐκδευτέρου in v. 72, Mt. has probably omitted all three for the same reasons that have caused so many changes in the Western copies of Mk. See WH., § 323, and p. 330.— τοῦῥήματος ] so Lk. Mk. has τὸ̔ῆμα . ἐξελθὼνἔξω , which occurs also in Lk., seems to be a substitute for, or interpretation of, Mk.’ s difficult ἐπιβαλών . See Swete, and especially Moulton, p. 131.— ἔκλαυσεν ] aor., as often, for Mk.’ s imperfect.— πικρῶς ] is added by Mt. (and Lk.) to emphasise the point. See Hastings, DCG. i. p. 444. 73. δῆλόνσεποιεῖ ] D latt. S1 have ὁμοιάζει = “ is like,” i.e. “ resembles theirs.” E editorial passages. M the Second Gospel. S Syriac version: Peshitta. 1 S1 has: “ Two days before it was the Unleavened Bread of Pasek” (Burkitt). DCG. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. Plut. Plutarch. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. Ox. Pap. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. 1 See against this Chwolson, Das Letste Passamahl Christi, p. 4. Jos. Josephus. 1 Entry into the house of a heathen caused uncleanness for seven days (Chwolson). 2 Monatsschrift fü r Gesch. und Wissensehaft des Judenthums, lxxiii. 537-555. B. Babylonian Talmud. Dalm. Dalman. L the Matthæ an Logia. LXX. The Septuagint Version. 1 Mk. has ἕως . Cf. the same change in 14:22 = Mark 6:45. Mk.’ s ἔως may perhaps mean “ while” here and in 6:45, but Mt. uses ἕωςοὗ in five other cases (1:25, 13:33, 14:22, 17:9, 18:34) in the sense “ until,” so that it probably bears that meaning here. In Aramaic ע ד ד has either meaning. 1 So א c B, but א c A C D have the compound verb. latt. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon. 1 ἄρτι does not occur in Mk. or Lk. In Mt. ἄρτι occurs 4 times, and including ἀπ ʼ ἄρτι 7 times. In 23:39 and 26:29 ἀπ ʼ ἄρτι means “ from the present moment.” But in 26:64 this meaning cannot be pressed, because the period between the moment of utterance and the resurrection must in any case be excluded from the scope of the phrase. It is probably used here in the sense “ hereafter” with the implication “ soon.” On ἀπ ʼ ἄρτι , see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 1915, vi. WH. Westcott and Hort. 27:1, 2. From Mark 15:1. (M) 1. And when it was morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put Him to death.] Mk. has: “ And immediately in the morning the chief priests, with the elders, and scribes, and all the Sanhedrin, made a council.” — πρωίαςδὲγενομένης ] for Mk.’ s καὶεὐθὺςπρωί . Mt. substitutes δέ for καί , and omits εὐθύς , as often.— συμβούλιονἔλαβον ] see on 12:14. Mk. has συμ .ποιήσαντες . Mt. here, as in 26:47, omits καὶγραμματέων , and adds after πρεσβύτεροι , τοῦλαοῦ . He omits καὶὅλοντὸσυνέδριον as superfluous, but adds, perhaps as compensation, πάντες before οἰἀρχιερεῖς ; cf. Lk. ἅπαντὸπλῆθοςαὐτῶν . (M) 2. And bound Him, and led Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate the governor.] Mk. has: “ Bound Jesus, and carried Him away, and delivered Him to Pilate.” — ἀπήγαγον ] cf. 26:57 for Mk.’ s ἀπήνεγκαν . Lk. has ἤγαγον .— τῷἡγεμόνι ] Mt. uses this word of Pilate 7 times, Mar_10, Luk_1 (20:20). Mt. adds also the clause, κατὰτοῦἸησοῦὥστεθανατῶσαιαὐτόν : cf. 26:59 ὥστε : with the infinitive here expresses purpose; cf. Moulton, p. 207. 3-10. Mt. here adds an incident which has no parallel in Mk. or Lk. (P) 3. Then Judas, who delivered Him tip, when he saw that He was condemned, repented, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying.]— τότε ] see on 2:7.— μεταμεληθείς ] as in 21:30, 32.— ἔστρεψε ] is not used elsewhere in an active sense in the N.T.; cf. Isaiah 38:8. (P) 4. I sinned when I betrayed righteous blood.] (P) And they said, What is that to us? Thou shalt see (to that).] (P) 5. And he cast the silver into the temple, and went away and hanged himself.]— ῤίψας ] as in 15:30.— εἰςτὸνναόν ] ναός in 23:16, 21, 35, 26:61 is used of the shrine. Judas could hardly literally cast the money into this shrine, into which none but priests entered. He may have cast it down in the court of the priests.— ἀνεχώρησε ] see on 2:12.— καὶἀπελθὼνἀπήγξατο ] cf. 2 S 17:23 καὶἀπῆλθεν — καὶἀπήγξατο . (P) 6. And the chief priests took the silver, and said, It is not lawful to put them into the cot-ban, for it is the price of blood.] κορβανᾶς is an Aramaism. It is used in Jos. Wars, ii. 175, for the money hoarded in the Temple . This was collectively “ the offering” par excellence. But the term is not so used in Rabbinic writings. (P) 7. And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter’ s field, for a burial-place for strangers. ]— συμβούλιονλαβόντες ] see on 12:14. (P) 8. Wherefore that field was called, Field of Blood, unto this day.] (O) 9, 10. Then was fulfiIled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And I took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him that was priced, whom they of the children of Israel did price, and I gave them for the potter’ s field, as the Lord appointed me.]… τότεἐπληρώθη ] See Introduction, p. lxi. The passage alluded to is, no doubt, Zechariah 11:13. The good shepherd of Israel received as wages from the rulers of the people a paltry sum. He was bidden to cast it to the potter. So he cast it to the potter in Jehovah’ s house. The quotation in Mt. seems to play upon the facts of the narrative with reference to this passage. Christ was the Good Shepherd. He had been estimated at a paltry sum, thirty pieces of silver, by the rulers of the people. This sum should therefore be cast to the potter, or, by a slight change in the Hebrew, into the treasury . It is probable that in Zechariah 11:13 א ו צ ד is original. It alone gives a good sense, and a reason for ב י ת י ה ו ה . Why should the potter be in Jehovah’ s house? The treasury was naturally there. The M.T. may have substituted י ו צ ד from a feeling that the sum thus despised was not good enough for the sacred treasury. Just so the chief priests in Mt. will not put the sum into the treasury, but give it for the potter’ s field. Cf. Wellhausen on Zechariah 11:13. καὶἔλαβοντὰτριάκονταἀργύρια ] Zechariah 11:13 has καὶἔλαβοντοὺςτριάκονταἀργυροῦς .— τὴντιμὴντοῦτετιμημένουὃνἐτιμήσαντοἀπὸυἰῶνἸσραήλ ] seems to be a loose translation of the previous words of Zechariah, א ד ר ה י ק ר א ש ר י ק ר ת י מ ע ל י ה ם . The LXX is quite different.— καὶἔδωκααὐτὰεἰςτὸνἀγρὸντοῦκεραμέως ] seems to be a loose translation ofו א ש ל י ך א ת ו -א ל ה י ו צ ד . The τὸνἀγρόν appears to be due to the translator allowing the facts upon which he is commenting to creep into his translation; cf. v. 7. καθὰσυνέταξέμοιΚύριος looks like a reminiscence of ו י א מ ר י ה ו ה א ל י , Zechariah 11:13; in the LXX. language of Exo 9:12 καθὰσυνέταξενΚύριος . The addition of this clause and the 1st pers. in the original make it clear that ἔδωκα , and not ἔδωκαν , is the right reading. The action of the prophet in casting his rejected wages to the potter is regarded by the translator as prophetical of the action of the Sanhedrin in rejecting the proffered wages of Judas, and giving them for the potter’ s field. The application of the prophecy in this connection is clearly based upon two or three traditional facts. Judas had thrown the money into the Temple; cf. ו א ש ל י ך א ת ו ב י ת י ה ו ה . The Sanhedrin refused to put it into the treasury; cf. the probable emendation of א ו צ ר into י ו צ ר . The money thus rejected was applied to the purchase of a potter’ s field; cf. ו א ש ל י ך א ת ו -א ל ה י ו צ ר . The translator seems to have had the Hebrew text in his mind, and to have quoted from memory. From his acquaintance with the variant readings א ו צ ר and י ו צ ר (cf. for the former the renderings of Pesh. and Targ. Jon.), and from the way in which both words are alluded to in the narrative , we may infer that the writer of this narrative was also the translator of the quotation, and that he was thoroughly versed in Rabbinical methods of exegesis. See Hastings, DCG. i. p. 911. The narrative as it now stands seems to carry with it some traces of the style of the editor of the Gospel. τότε , see on 2:7. ἀναχωρεῖν , 10 in Mt., 1 in Mk., o in Lk.; συμβούλιονλαμβάνειν , 5 in Mt.; and συντάσσειν , 3 in Mt. may be claimed as such. On the other hand, κορβανᾶς , and the quotation in 9, 10, based as it is upon the Hebrew, and suggestive of Rabbinical method, point to a Hebrew or Aramaic original for the section. The story is clearly one in which existing tradition led to the application to it of the prophecy. And such a detail as the strangers’ burial-ground is too meaningless to be accounted for as a literary invention. It seems, therefore, probable that the narrative formed one of a cycle of Palestinian traditions known to the editor of the Gospels. A different tradition is given in Acts 1:18-19. The attribution of the prophecy to Jeremiah may be due to reminiscence of Jer 36:37-39 LXX. (purchase of a field), combined with 18:2 (the potter). 4. δίκαιον ] B2 mg L a b c d g1 q S1 “ blood of the righteous” ; ἀθῷον , א A B* al. ὄψει ] U Γ ; ὄψῃ , א A B al; “ thou shalt know,” S1. 5. εἰςτὸνναόν ] א B L; ἐντῷναῷ , A C al. 9. διά ] add Ἰερεμίου , א A B al; om. 33 157 a b S1. The omission is so natural that it seems probable that the word is genuine. 10. ἔδωκα ] א 122 S1; ἔδωκαν , B al. See above. 11-26. From Mark 15:2-15. (M E) 11. And Jesus stood still before the governor: and the governor asked Him, saying, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said, Thou sayest.] Mk. has: “ And Pilate asked Him, Art Thou the King of the Jews? And He answered and saith to him, Thou sayest.” — ὁδὲἸησοῦςἐστάθηἔμπροσθεντοῦἡγεμόνος ] With this connecting link Mt. returns to Mk.’ s narrative.— λέγων ] is inserted also in Lk.— ἔφη ] So Lk. Mk. has λέγει . For σὺλέγεις , cf. σὺεἶπας , 26:25, 64. (M) 12. And when He was accused by the chief priests and elders, He answered nothing.] Mk. has: “ And the chief priests were accusing Him much.” Mt. avoids, as often, Mk.’ s imperf. and the adverbial πολλά .— ἀπεκρίνατο ] The classical middle is rare in the N.T. It occurs only once in Mark 14:61, where Mt. omitted it, and in Mt. only here, where it seems, therefore, to be a reminiscence of the clause omitted from Mark 14:61; but Mt., as usual, has only a single negative; see on 27:14. On ἀπεκρίνατο , see Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2537. (M) 13. Then Pilate saith to Him, Dost Thou not hear how many things they witness against Thee?] Mk. has: “ And Pilate again was asking Him, saying, Dost Thou not answer anything? See of how many things they accuse Thee.” — τότε ] see on 2:7. Mt., as often, omits Mk.’ s πάλιν , and avoids his imperf. ἐπηρώτα . (M) 14. And He did not answer him, not even to one word; so that the governor marvelled greatly.] Mk has: “ And Jesus still answered nothing; so that Pilate marvelled.” Mt. avoids, as usual, Mk.’ s double negative, but here compensates by adding πρὸςοὐδὲἓνῥῆμα . Cf. Introduction, p. xxv; Hastings, DCG. i. p. 358. (M) 15. And at the feast the governor was wont to release to the multitude a prisoner whom they wished.] Mk. has: “ And at the feast he was releasing to them a prisoner whom they were begging off.” — εἰώθει — ἀπολύειν ] to emphasise the fact that this was a customary concession. Mk. uses his imperfects so indiscriminately that his ἀπέλυεν might mean nothing more than “ released” on this occasion.— κατά ] is not necessarily distributive, meaning “ at each feast,” so S1, though this was probably the idea in the mind of Mk., as Mt. has rightly seen. (M) 16. And they had then a prisoner of note, named Jesus Barabbas.] Mk. has: “ And one called Barabbas was bound with the rebels who had committed murder in the revolt. And the multitude went up, and began to ask (that he would do) as he was doing for them.” See Gould and Swete on Mark 15:7. (M) 17. When, therefore, they were gathered together, Dilate said to them, Whom will ye that I release to you? Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Anointed ?] Mk. has: “ And Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release to you the King of the Jews?” (M) 18. For he knew that they had delivered Him up through envy.] Mk. has: “ For he knew that the chief priests had delivered Him up through envy.” — ᾔδει ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s imperf. ἐγίνωσκεν .— παρέδωκαν ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s pluperfect; cf. 26:48. 19. Mt. adds here: (P) And as he was sitting upon the judgement-seat, his wife sent to him, saying, Have thou nothing to do with that righteous man: for I suffered much in a dream to-day on account of Him.]— κατ ʼ ὄναρ ] only besides five times in chs. 1. 2. See on 1:20.— πολλά ] this adverbial πολλά , which is common in Mk., occurs elsewhere in Mt. only twice, 13:3, 16:21, both from Mk. (M) 20. And the chief priests and the elders persuaded the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.] Mk. has: “ And the chief priests moved the people that he should rather release Barabbas to them.” For the insertion of καὶοἱπρεσβύτεροι , cf. v. 12.— τοὺςὄχλους plur. for Mk.’ s sing., as often. See Introduction, p. lxxxvi.— ἔπεισαν ] for Mk.’ s ἀνέσεισαν , which is late and uncommon in the sense to “ incite.” Add to references in lexx. ἀνασίομενοι = being “ incited,” Teb. Pap. 28, 20 (b.c. 114). (M) 21. And the governor answered and said to them, Whom will ye that I release to you of the two? And they said, Barabbas.] Mt. inserts this last clause in order to bring into the narrative explicitly the answer of the people to Pilate’ s question. In Mk v. 9 Pilate asks if they wish the King of the Jews to be released. No direct answer is given, but one is implied in v. 11. In v. 12 Pilate “ again” asks, What is then to be done to Jesus? They answer in v. 13 that He should be crucified. In v. 14 Pilate asks a third question, Why should Jesus be crucified? In Mt. Pilate first asks whether they will have Barabbas or Christ (v. 17). In v. 21 this question is repeated in other words, and seems to be merely resumptive on the part of the editor, no answer having been given. The answer comes in the same verse. They desire Barabbas. Consequently in v. 22 Pilate asks a second question, What then is to be done with Jesus? And in v. 23 a third question, What evil had He done? The insertion of the resumptive question in v. 21 necessitates also the insertion of λέγειαὐτοῖςὁΠειλᾶτος in v. 22.— ἀποκριθεὶςδὲὁἡγεμὼνεἶπεναὐτοῖς ] Mk. has ὁδὲΠειλᾶτοςπάλινἀποκριθεὶςἔλεγεναὐτοῖς . Mt. Omits πάλιν because he is about to repeat the governor’ s first question. (M) 22. Pilate saith to them, What then shall I do to Jesus who is called Anointed ? They all say, Let Him be crucified.] Mk. has: “ What then shall I do to Him whom you call the King of the Jews? And they cried out again, Crucify Him.” (M) 23. And he said, What evil has He done? And they the more were crying out, saying, Let Him be crucified.] Mk. has: “ And Pilate said to them, Why, what evil has He done? And they the more cried out, Crucify Him.” — ἔκραζον ] Mk. has the aor. The position is generally the reverse. But in Mk. A D al 1 69 346 have ἔκραζον , and so probably S1. 24, 25. Mt. here interpolates two verses: (P) 24, 25. And Pilate, seeing that he avails nothing, but that rather a tumult results, took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am guiltless of the blood of this righteous man: ye shall see (to it). And all the people answered and said, His blood (be) on us and on our children.] Cf. Ev. Peter: “ And no one of the Jews washed his hands, neither Herod nor any of his judges.” (M) 26. Then he released Barabbas to them; but he scourged Jesus, and delivered Him to be crucified.] Mk. has: “ And Pilate, being willing to content the multitude, released Barabbas to them; and he delivered Jesus, when he had scourged Him, to be crucified.— τὸνδέ ] So Lk. Mk. has καί . Mt. substitutes δέ , as often. 16, 17. S1 1 118 209 add Ἰησοῦν before Βαραββᾶν in v. 16, and Ἰησοῦντόν before Βαραββᾶν in v. 17. For the reading, see Burkitt’ s excellent note, Evangelion Da Mephkarreshe, ii. 277. The reading was known to Origen, who says that it was not found in many copies, forsitan recte ut ne nomen Jesu conveniat alicui in iniquorum Origen’ s negative testimony, that it was found in some copies, and his unwillingness to accept it, is almost decisive proof in favour of its genuineness. It is accepted by Burkitt, Zahn, Merx. But see WH. 27-56. From Mark 15:16-41.Mark 15:16-20a is omitted by Lk. (M) 27. Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Præ torium, and gathered to Him all the band.] Mk. has: “ And the soldiers led Him away within the court which is the Praetorium, and call together all the band.— τότε ] see on 2:7.— εἰςτὸπραιτώριον ] Mt. dovetails, as often, a twofold phrase of Mk.’ s; cf. Introduction, p. xxv. Mk. has “ within the court which is the Præ torium” ; “ within” as opposed to the space outside the palace where the tribunal was set up, v. 19.— αὐλῆς ] i.e. the court in the palace of Herod which was used as the Præ torium or residence of the governor when he was at Jerusalem; cf. Sanday, Sacred Sites, pp. 55 ff.— συνήγαγον ] avoiding, as often, Mk.’ s hist. pres. (M) 28. And they stripped Him, and put round Him a scarlet cloke.] Mk. has: “ And they put on Him a purple robe, and put round Him.” The “ scourging” of v. 26 has already implied stripping. In Mk. the καὶπεριτιθέασιν has as object the crown of thorns. Mt. seems to have supposed that both verbs referred to the robe. περιτίθημι may be used of either object. For στἐφανον , cf. Eur. Med. 984, and for χλαμύδα , Sapph. 68. We should expect Mt. to omit one verb; cf. Introduction, p. xxiv.1 But instead he converts ἐνδιδύσκειν into ἐκδύειν unobservant of the fact that the action implied in this verb was unnecessary. He avoids as usual Mk.’ s hist. presents. — χλαμύδακοκκίνην ] The chlamys was generally a military garment, but was worn also by kings. Mk. has πορφύρα . (M) 29. And they wove a crown of thorns, and put it on His head, and a reed in His right hand: and kneeling down before Him, they mocked Him, saying, Hail, King of the Jews!] Mk. has: “ — having woven a crown of thorns, and began to salute Him, Hail, King of the Jews.” — βασιλεῦ ] see Moulton, p. 71.2 Mt., having transferred Mk.’ s περιτιθέασιν to the previous clause, is obliged to insert a conjunction καί and a new verb ἐπέθηκαν , and adds ἐπὶτῆςκεφαλῆςαὐτοῦ . He inserts also καὶκάλαμονἐντῇδεξιᾷαὐτοῦ , taking the “ reed” from Mk v. 19, where it seems pointless and out of place. The καὶγονυπετήσαντεςἔμπροσθεναὐτοῦἐνέπαιξαναὐτῷ is also anticipated from Mark 19 καὶτιθέντεςτὰγόναταπροσεκύνουναὐτῷ . Mt. substitutes γονυπετήσαντες cf. 17:14; Mark 1:40, Mark 10:17, and changes προσεκύνουν into the ἐνέπαιξαν of Mk v. 20. (M) 30. And they spat upon Him, and took the reed, and beat upon His head.] Mk. has: “ And they beat His head with a reed, and were spitting on Him.” — ἐμπτύσαντες ] Mt. avoids Mk.’ s imperfect, as often. (M) 31. And when they had mocked Him, they stripped Him of the cloke, and put His own garments on Him.] so Mk., with πορφύρα as in v. 17 for χλαμύδα . (M) And they led Him away to crucify Him.] Mk. has: “ And they lead Him out in order that they may crucify Him.” — ἀπήγαγον ] avoiding, as often, Mk.’ s hist. pres. Lk. also has ἀπήγαγον . (M) 32. And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene, by name Simon: him they impressed, that he might bear His cross.] Mk. has: “ And they impress a passer-by, Simon, a Cyrenian, coming from the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, that he may bear His cross.” — ἠγγάρευσαν ] see on 5:41. Mt. avoids, as often, Mk.’ s hist. pres. Mt. omits ἐρχόμενονἀπ ʼ ἀγροῦ =“ coming from work” ; cf. Berakhoth 4b, perhaps because work would not have been possible on the first day of Unleavened Bread. See on p. 272. He also omits “ the father of Alexander and Rufus” ; cf. Introduction, p. xxxvi.— ἵναἄρῃτὸνσταυρὸναὐτοῦ ] cf. Artem. Oneir. ii. 56: ὁμέλλωναὐτῷπροσηλοῦσθαιπρότεροναὐτὸνβαστάζει , and note on 10:38. (M) 33. And they came to a place called Golgotha, that is (a place) called Skull-place.] Mk. has: “ And they bring Him to the Golgotha-place, that is being interpreted ‘ skull’ -place.” — ἐλθόντες ] avoiding, as often, Mk.’ s hist. pres. Lk. also has ἦλθαν .— Γολγοθᾶ ] is the Aramaic ג ו ל ג ו ל ת א =“ a skull.” For the dropping of the second ל , cf. Dalm. Gram. 2 p. 166. (M) 34. And gave Him to drink wine mixed with gall: and He tasted, and would not drink.] Mk. has: “ And they were giving Him drugged wine: and He did not take it.” — ἔδωκαν ] aor. for Mk.’ s imperf., as often.— οἶνονμετὰχολῆςμεμιγμένον ] for Mk.’ s ἐσμυρνισμένονοἶνον , probably with reference to Psalms 68:22 ἔδωκαν — χολήν , καὶ — ὄξος , and perhaps to avoid Mk.’ s rare σμυρνίζειν .— οἶνον ] A N al have ὄξος ; ff omits. ὄξος is a further assimilation to the LXX. (M) 35. And they crucified Him, and divided His garments by casting lot.] Mk. has: “ And they crucify Him, and divide His garments, casting lot over them (to determine) what each should take.” — σταυρώσαντες — διεμερίσαντο ] avoiding, as often, Mk.’ s hist. presents. For διεμερίσαντο , cf. Psalms 21:19. (M) 36. And sitting down they guarded Him there.] Mk. has: “ And it was the third hour, and they crucified Him.” But for ἐσταύρωσαν , D ff2 k n have ἐφύλασσον . Mt. seems to have had this in his text of Mk. Mt. seems to have wished to avoid Mk.’ s difficult third hour; cf. John 19:14.— ἐκεῖ ] Lk. also has this. (M) 37. And they placed above His head His accusation written, This is Jesus the King of the Jews.] Mk. has: “ And the inscription of His accusation was written, The King of the Jews.” — οὗτος ] Lk. also adds this. (M) 38. Then are crucified with Him two robbers, one at the right hand, and one at the left.] Mk. has: “ And they crucify with Him two robbers, one at (His) right hand, and one at His left.” — σταυροῦνται ] hist. pres., contrary to Mt.’ s custom. Passive for active, see Introduction, p. xxiii. (M) 39. And the passers-by were blaspheming Him, shaking their heads.] so Mk. Cf. Lamentations 2:15. (M) 40. And saying, Thou destroyer of the temple, and builder (of it) in three days, save Thyself. If Thou art the Son of God, come down from the cross.] Mk. has: “ Ah, Thou destroyer of the Temple, and builder of it in three days, save Thyself by coming down from the cross.” — ὁκαταλύων ] See Moulton, p. 127, who translates “ you would-be destroyer” — εἰυἰὸςεἷτοῦθεοῦ ] Lk. also has εἰοὖτὸςἐστινὁΧριστὸςτοῦθεοῦ . (M) 41. Likewise also the chief priests mocking with the scribes and elders, said.] Mk. has: “ Likewise also the chief priests mocking to one another with the scribes, said.” For the insertion of καὶπρεσβυτέρων , cf. vv. 12, 20. (M) 42. Others He saved; Himself He cannot save. He is Israels king. Let Him come down now from the cross, and we will believe upon Him.] Mk. has: “ Others He saved; Himself lie cannot save. Let the Anointed, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” — πιστεύσομεν ] Mk. has two verbs; cf. Introduction, p. xxv. Mt. here adds: (M) 43. He trusted in God; let Him deliver Him now, if He desires Him: for He said, I am the Son of God.] The first clause is similar to Psalms 21:9 ἠλπισενἐπὶκύριονρ῾υσάσθωαὐτον .— ὅτιθέλειαὐτόν . The second is an allusion to Wis 2:18 εἰγάρἐστινὁδίκαιοςυἱὸςθεοῦ — ῤύσεταιαὐτόν . The verse is probably clue to the editor. (M) 44. Likewise also the robbers who were crucified with Him, were reviling Him.] Mk. has: “ And they who were being crucified with Him, were reviling Him.” (M) 45. And from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.] Mk. has: “ And when it was the sixth hour, there was darkness over the whole land unto the ninth hour.” — γῆ ] may mean “ earth” ; so in Mark 13:27, Mark 13:31 (where, however, the contrast with heaven requires it) 2:10. But here there is nothing to suggest that it means more than “ land of Israel” ; cf. Ev. Peter 5, σκότοςκατέσχεπᾶσαντὴνἸουδαίαν , and Exodus 10:22 ἐγένετοσκότοςἐπὶπᾶσανγῆνΑἰγύπτου . (M) 46. And about the ninth hour Jesus called out in a loud voice, saying, Elei, Elei, lema Sabaqthani? that is, My God, My God, why didst Thou forsake Me?] Mk. has: “ And at the ninth hour Jesus called out in a loud voice, Eloï , Eloï , lama Sabaqthani, which is being interpreted, My God, My God, why didst Thow forsake Me?” — ἠλεί ] Mt. hebraises Mk.’ s ἐλωί with reference to Psalms 22:1. Ἐλωί is the Aramaic א ֱ ל ָ ה ִ י the ω for α being due to the influence of the Hebrew א ֱ ל ֹ ה ַ י ; see Dalm. Gram2 p 156. Mk.’ s λαμά (B D) also shows reminiscence of the Hebrew. Mt. and Mk. (א C L) have the Aramaic λεμά ; see Dalm. p. 221.— σαβαχθανεί ] is the Aramaic ש ב ק ת נ י . The ει , as in ῥαββεί , is to be pronounced ē ; see Dalm. p. 147, Anm. 4.Psalms 22:1 runs א ל י א ל י ל מ ה ע ז ב ח נ י . The words as uttered in Aramaic would be א ל ה י א ל ה י ל מ א ש ב ק ת נ י . Mk. has slightly Hebraised in ἐλωί , Mt. entirely in ἠλεί , Mk. also in λαμά . D in Mk. has ζαφθάνει , which may be a further assimilation to the Hebrew, and represent ע ז ב ת נ י , since D seems to assimilate the whole verse to the Hebrew reading, ἠλὶἠλὶλαμὰζαφθάνι . Lk. omits the whole verse.— θεε ] Mk. has ὁθεός . For the vocative case, see Blass, p. 87. Psalms 21:2 has ὁθεόςὁθεόςμου — ἴνατίἐγκατέλιπέςμε . Mk. has ὁθεόςμουὁθεόςμουεἰςτί . Mt. θεέμουθεέμουἵνατί . Mt. assimilates Mk.’ s εἰςτί to the LXX.— ἐγκατέλιπες ] D in Mk. has ὠνείδισας , probably to soften the harshness of the idea of Christ’ s entire abandonment by God. (M) 47. And some of those who stood there heard, and said that He calls Elias] Mk. has: “ And certain of the bystanders heard, and said, Lo, He calls Elias.” Mt.’ s change of Mk.’ s ἐλωί into the Hebrew ἠλεί may be due to the fact that the latter sounds more like Elias than the former in Greek, though not in Hebrew. The bystanders were probably Jews. א ל ה י = my God, might be intentionally perverted into א ל י ה ּ = Elijah, by a Jew. See Gould. (M) 48. And immediately one of them ran, and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave Him to drink.] Mk. has: “ And one ran and filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave Him to drink.” — καὶεὐθέωςδραμών Mk.has δραμωνδέτις . We should expect the position to be reversed. D has καὶδραμὼνεἶςκαὶπλήσας in Mk. Mt. probably had this in his copy of Mk.— πλήσαςτε ] Mk. never has τε . It occurs again in Matthew 22:10, Matthew 28:12. Mk.’ s τίς orεἶς is vague. Was it one of the guards, or a Jewish onlooker? The latter is not impossible. Mt., by adding ἐξαὐτῶν , probably interprets of the Jewish bystanders. (M) 49. And the rest said, Stay, let us see whether Elias is coming to save Him.] Mk. has: “ Saying, Let us see whether Elias is coming to take Him down.” In Mk. it is the offerer of the vinegar who, as he gave the Lord to drink, said, “ Let us see,” etc. But Mt. infers from the plural ἴδωμεν that it was not the offerer of the vinegar, but the bystanders who said, “ Let us see.” He therefore substitutes for λέγων , οἱδὲλοιποὶεἶπαν , changes Ἀφετε into ἄφες “ And the rest said, Stay” , and changes καθελεῖναὐτον into σώσων . “ Let us see if Elias will come to His assistance.” For Mk.’ s ἄφετεἴδωμεν , cf. Matthew 7:4.— σώσων ] For the rare fut. part., see Blass, p. 37. See also Moulton, p. 356 n. (M) 50. And Jesus, again having cried with a loud voice, gave up the spirit]. Mk. has: “ And Jesus, having uttered a loud cry, expired.” — κράξας ] Mk. has ἀφείς . Mt. takes this verb, and adding τὸπνεῦμα , substitutes it for Mk.’ s ἐξέπνευσεν , possibly to emphasise the voluntariness of Christ’ s death; cf. John 19:30. For ἀφιέναιτὸπνεῦμα , cf. ἀφιέναιτὴνψυχήν , Genesis 35:18. For ἀφιέναιφωνήν , cf. Genesis 45:2. (M) 51. And behold the veil of the Temple was rent from the top to the bottom into two.] Mk. has: “ And the veil of the Temple was rent into two from the top to the bottom.” — ἰδού See on 1:20.— τὸκαταπέτασματοῦναοῦ ] Jerome says that the Gospel according to the Hebrews had superliminare for καταπέτασμα “ In Evangelio cujus sæ pe fecimus mentionem superliminare templi infinitæ magnitudinis fractum esse atque divisum legimus,” In loc. “ In Evangelio autem quod Hebraicis literis scriptum est legimus non velum templi scissum sed superliminare templi miræ magnitudinis corruisse,” Ep. 120. 8. Jos. Wars, vi. 299, records, amongst other portents that preceded the fall of Jerusalem, the following: “ At that feast which we call Pentecost … the priests felt a quaking, and heard a great noise; and after that heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, ‘ Let us depart hence.’ ” In B. Joma 39b it is said that, amongst other signs which happened forty years before the destruction of the Temple, “ the doors of the Temple opened of themselves until Rabbi Jochanan ben Zaccai rebuked them, saying, ‘ O Temple, Temple ! Why troublest thou thyself? I know that thy end is near.” ’ Zahn may be right in suggesting that all these accounts are reminiscences of an event that happened at the porch of the Temple at the period of the crucifixion. A cleavage in the masonry of the porch, which rent the outer veil and left the Holy Place open to view, would account for the language of the Gospels, of Josephus, and of the Talmud. (P) 52, 53. And the earth was shaken, and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep arose, and came out of the tombs after His resurrection; and entered into the Holy City, and were made manifest to many.] The passage probably comes from Mt.’ s cycle of Palestinian traditions. The cause of the rending of the veil was an earthquake, which also exposed the bodies of the dead by laying bare their graves. These dead saints, whose rest was so rudely shattered, appeared to many in the city. Mt. adds this account to the Marcan record, but interpolates a clause which is inconsistent with the obvious meaning of the tradition. If Christ was the first-fruits of them that slept, how could His resurrection have been preceded by that of these saints? Under the influence of some such idea the editor adds the caution, “ after His resurrection.” Or had his authority, “ After their resurrection” ; and did he by mistake or purposely alter “ their” to “ His” ?— ἔγερσις ] occurs only here in N.T.— τὴνἁγίανπόλιν 1] cf. 4:5.— ἐνεφανίσθησαν ] only here in Mt. On the verb as signifying a visible manifestation, see Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, 1716 n. Cf. Buddhist and Christian Gospels, p. 189: “ When the Lord entered into Nirvana, a great earthquake, terrific and tremendous, accompanied His entry into Nirvana.” (M) 54. And the centurion, and they who were guarding Jesus with him, when they saw the earthquake, and the things which happened, feared exceedingly, saying, Truly this was a Son of God.] Mk. has: “ And the centurion, who stood by over against Him, seeing that He so expired, said, Truly this man was a Son of God.” — ἐκατόνταρχος ] Mk. has κεντυρίων (also vv. 44, 45), which does not occur elsewhere in the N.T. ἑκατόνταρχος occurs some twenty-two times in the LXX. Lk. also has ἐκατοντάρχης , and τὸγενόμενον = Mt.’ s τὰγινόμενα .— καὶοἱμετ ʼ αὐτοῦ , κ .τ .λ .] Mt. seems to have regarded Mk.’ s ὁπαρεστηκὼςἐξἐναντίαςαὐτοῦ as an unnecessary tautology, and to have substituted “ and those who,” etc.— ἰδόντεςτὸνσεισμόν , Mk. has: ὄτιοὔτωςἐξέπνευσεν . Mt. links on to his interpolated verses by substituting τὸνσεισμὸνκαὶτὰγινόμενα — θεοῦυἰὸς ] The centurion, who may well have known that Jesus was popularly understood to claim to be the Son of God, expresses his conviction that the circumstance of His death pointed to the reality of the claim. (M) 55. And there were there many women beholding from far off, who followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to Him.] Mk. has: “ And there were also women beholding from far off,— who when He was in Galilee were following Him and ministering to Him,— and many others who came up with Him to Jerusalem.” Mt. condenses Mk.’ s prolix account, apparently omitting the last clause, but really incorporating it by inserting πολλαί after γυναῖκες , and substituting ἀπό for ἐν , and αἵτινες for αἴ .— ἠκολούθησαν ] Aor., as often, for Mk.’ s imperfect.— ἀπὸτῆςΓαλιλαίας ] So Lk. (M) 56. Amongst whom were Mary of Magdala, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.] Mk. has: “ Amongst whom were Mary of Magdala, and Mary the mother of James the little and of Joses, and Salome.” The Sinaitic Syriac renders in both Gospels, “ Mary the daughter of James” ; and so Wellhausen. Mt. apparently identified Salome as the wife of Zebedee. (M) 57. And when it was evening, there came a rich man of Arimathæ a, named Joseph, who also himself was a disciple of Jesus.] Mk. has: “ And when it was now evening, since it was the preparation, i.e. the Friday, there came Joseph of Arimathæ a, a wealthy councillor, who also himself was awaiting the kingdom of God.” — ὀψίαςδέ ] for καὶὀψίας , as often. Mt. omits Mk.’ s note of time. The ἐπεὶἦνπαρασκευή in Mk.’ s source probably referred to the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath, which in this year probably coincided. Mk., who has identified the last supper with the Passover meal, omits very probably a reference to the Passover, and defines παρασκευή as being the day before the Sabbath. John 19:14 is aware that the day of crucifixion was the eve of the Passover, παρασκευὴτοῦπάσχα . See p. 271.— πλούσιος ] for Mk.’ s εὐσχήμωνβουλευτής . Mt. may have had in mind Isaiah 53:9 καὶτούςπλουσίουςἀντὶτοῦθανάτου .— ἐμαθητεύθη ] see on 13:52.— τοὔνομα ]. Lk. also has ὀνόματι . See Hastings, DCG. i. p. 902. (M) 58. He came to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. Then Pilate commanded it to be given.] Mk. has: “ Having dared, he went in to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus; and Pilate wondered whether He were already dead; and having called the centurion, asked him whether He were already dead. And having ascertained it from the centurion, he granted the corpse to Joseph.” Mt. and Lk. seem to have preferred to omit Pilate’ s doubt about Christ’ s death, and to have consciously avoided Mk.’ s (v. 45) πτῶμα . Lk. also has οὖτοςπροσελθών . (M) 59. And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth.] Mk. has: “ And he bought a linen cloth, and taking Him down, he swathed Him in the linen cloth.” Mt. omits the purchase of the cloth, cf. p. 272, and adds καθαρᾷ .— ἐνετύλιξεν Mk. has ἐνείλησεν ]. Lk. agrees with Mt. Cf. Abbott (Corrections of Mark, 520 f.; Johannine Vocabulary, 1866, Additional Note), who gives examples of the rare word ἐντυλίσσειν . (M) 60. And laid it in his new tomb, which he hewed out in the rock: and having rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, departed.] Mk. has: “ And placed Him in a tomb, which was hewn out of rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.” Mt. adds καινῷ , i.e. “ unused.” For the custom of using a great roll-stone like a millstone to close the entrance of the graves of wealthy men, see the interesting note and illustrations of Merx on Luke 22:52-54. (M) 61. And there were there Mary of Magdala, and the other Mary, sitting over against the tomb.] Mk. has: “ And Mary of Magdala and Mary (mother) of Joses were seeing where He was laid.” — ἡἄλλη M.] cf. v. 56. Mk. has ΜαρίαἡἸωσῆτος , which Wellhausen translates “ the daughter of Joses.” For Mt.’ s insertion of ἐκεῖ , cf. v. 55. 46. ἡλεί , ἡλεί or ἡλί , most MSS S1 latt. ἐλωεί , א . א and B assimilate to Mk. λεμά ] א B L 33 ff1 g1; λιμά , A K al f q; λαμά (so in Mk. B D) D I b h. Both in Mt. and Mk. λεμά is best attested. Mt. seems to have hebraised in ἠλεί . D in both Gospels hebraises the whole clause. 49. At the end of this verse the words: ἄλλοςδὲλαβὼνλόγχηνἔνυξεναὐτοῦτὴνπλευρὰνκαὶὲξῆλθενὔδωρκαὶαἶμα , are added by א B C L U Γ 54 8 67 115 127 *. The words seem to be a gloss derived from John 19:34 inserted by someone whose memory was recalled to John 19:34 by the εἶςὲξαὐτῶν of the last verse. In spite of their strong attestation, the fact that the next verse begins with ὁδὲἸησοῦςπάλινκράξας , and the contradiction, in fact, between the statement made by the verse as here placed and the Fourth Gospel, has served to check the transmission of the words by later copyists. The clause is omitted by A D αἰ S1 latt. 52. τῶνἁγίων ] S1 has “ the righteous” = τῶνδικαίων . 56. ἡτοῦἸακώβουκαὶἸωσὴφμήτηρ ] S1 has: “ daughter of James and mother of Joseph” ; and so in Mark 15:40 “ daughter of James the little, the mother of Joseph,” and Mark 15:47 “ the daughter of James.” In the latter place Ἰωσῆτος or Ἰωσήφ is the reading of most MSS. D ff2 n q and S1 have “ of james.” It seems clear, however, that in Mark 15:40, Mk. intended to describe Mary as“ the mother of James and Joseph.” In v. 47 he writes the ambiguous ὴἹωσῆτος , which to a Semitic translator would naturally suggest “ daughter of Joses.” Yet Mk. himself can hardly have intended to suggest a different Mary from her of v. 40, and his slovenly ἡἸωσῆτος must be taken to mean “ mother of Joses.” S1, translating daughter in accordance with Semitic usage, has seen the difficulty of describing this Mary in v. 40 as “ mother” and in v. 47 as “ daughter” of Joses, and has therefore assimilated to v. 40 by substituting “ James” for “ Joseph” to v. 47. D and the Latin versions have apparently been influenced by the Syriac in this substitution, or may have made the change independently to assimilate to v. 40. 62-66. Mt. here inserts vv. 62-66. (P) And on the morrow, which is after the Preparation, there were gathered together the chief priests and the Pharisees to Pilate, saying, Lord, we remembered that that deceiver said, whilst yet alive, After three days I rise again. Command therefore that the grave be made secure until the third day, lest His disciples come and steal Him, and say to the people, He is risen from the dead: and the last deception shall be worse than the first. Pilate said to them, Take a guard: go, make as secure as you can. And they went, and secured the grave (having sealed the stone) with the guard.]— τῇδὲἐπαύριονἥτιςἐστὶμετὰτὴνπαρασκευήν ] is a very paraphrastic expression for “ the morrow.” According to Mt.’ s reckoning, this would be the Sabbath, since the crucifixion took place on the Friday following the Passover. Why does he not say simply “ on the morrow” or “ on the Sabbath” ? He may have omitted Mk.’ s note of time (15:42), because he felt that Mk.’ s ἐπεί was inexplicable. The burial with the prior arrangements can hardly have been completed before the Sabbath entered, and “ since it was the preparation” seems therefore to be unmotived. He may also have felt that the action of the authorities in effecting the sealing and guarding of the grave was an unlikely course for them to have taken on the Sabbath, and to have avoided therefore the direct “ on the Sabbath.” But having written “ on the morrow,” he seems to have been unwilling to omit altogether Mk.’ s definition of time in 15:42, and to have added “ which is after the Sabbath” by way of compensation. For a similar case, where, after omitting a clause from Mk. he inserts it later in his narrative, cf. οὐδὲνἀπεκρίνατο , 27:12.— οἱΦαρισαῖοι ] See Introduction, pp. lxxviii f. μετὰτρεῖςἡμέρας .] Since Mt. corrects this phrase where it occurs in Mk. into τῇτρίτῃἡμέρᾳ , see on 16:21, it is strange to find it here. κουστωδία ] a Latin word. It occurs in a letter from Alexandria of a.d. 22, Ox. Pap. ii. ccxciv, l. 20, of certain people who were ἐνκοστωδεία = “ in prison.” 64. οὶμαθηταὶ ] add νυκτός , F G al S1. Om. א A B D al latt. M the Second Gospel. P Palestinian traditions. Jos. Josephus. O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f. LXX. The Septuagint Version. Targ. Targum. DCG. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. L the Matthæ an Logia. S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. al i.e. with other uncial MSS. E editorial passages. Teb. Pap. Tebtunis Papyri. WH. Westcott and Hort. 1 However, א ca B D 157 a b c ff 2 q S1 do omit περιέθηκαναὐτῷ , and have καὶἑνέδυσαν for καὶἑκδύσαντες This may be the original text. 2 א A L have ὁβασιλεύς = ” Hail you ‘ King’ ” (Moulton). Dalm. Dalman. B. Babylonian Talmud. 1 Add to reff. On 4:5, Isaiah 48:2, Isaiah 52:1, and cf. ἠἱερέπόλις Philo, De Somniis, 37 (i. 691), ἠιεροπόλις Legatio ad Caium, 36 (ii. 587), 38 (ii. 590), 43 (ii. 596). latt. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Ox. Pap. Oxyrhynchus Papyri. 28:1-8. From Mark 16:1-8. 1. And after the Sabbath, at the dawning towards the first (day) of the week, came Mary of Magdala and the other Mary to see the grave.] Mk. has: “ And when the Sabbath was over, Mary of Magdala and Mary the (mother) of James, and Salome, bought perfumes that they might come and anoint Him. And very early on the first (day) of the week, they come to the tomb when the sun had risen.” — ὀψὲδὶσαββάτων ] seems to correspond to Mk.’ s διαγενομένουτοῦσαββάτου . But whereas Mk. goes on to record something which happened on the evening after the close of the Sabbath, Mt. omits this, and passes on to the event of the next morning. His ὀψὲσαββάτων is therefore pointless and negligible. He seems to have wished to omit the “ purchase,” but not to have cared to pass over the note of time attached to it. Cf. his omission of the “ purchase,” Mark 15:42. For ὀψὲσαββάτων in the sense of “ late on the Sabbath” = “ after the Sabbath,” cf. Blass, p. 97; Moulton, p. 72; Zahn, in loc.; and Gram.2 p. 247, Anm. 2. It is, however, very difficult to believe that ὀψὲσαββάτων can mean anything else than either “ as the Sabbath ended,” or “ when it had ended,” i.e. “ on the evening after the Sabbath had drawn to a close,” which is exactly what the parallel phrase in Mk. means; cf. Dalm. l.c. Anm. 4. And yet this meaning is inconsistent with the context; for τῇἐπιφωσκούσῃεἰςμίανσαββάτων corresponds to Mk.’ s λίανπρωὶτῇμιᾷτῶνσαββάτων — ἀνατείλαντοςτοῦἡλίου , and clearly means “ at or about sunrise on Sunday morning.” In other words, Mt. by omitting Mk.’ s reference to the purchase of perfumes has combined two entirely inconsistent notes of time. Of course, Mt.’ s two notes of time will be in harmony if we suppose that he wishes to correct Mk. and to place the visit of the women to the grave on the Saturday evening. In that case τῇἐπιφωσκούσῃ means “ as the Sabbath was passing into the first day of the week,” i.e. “ on Saturday evening.” This is the meaning which ἐπιφώσκειν has in Luke 23:54 “ the Sabbath was beginning,” i.e. not Saturday morning, but Friday evening. The Aram. נ נ ה י means both “ dawn” and “ the beginning of the technical day,” i.e. “ evening.” See the note of Merx on Luke 23:54. But it is very difficult to think that Mt. has consciously abandoned Mk.’ s reckoning of the appearance of the angels at dawn on Sunday to the women, and has placed it on the Saturday evening. However, Mk.’ s λίανπρωὶτῇμιᾷτῶνσαββάτων — ἀνατείλαντοςτοῦἡλίου is itself difficult (see Swete). It is possible that Mt. believed that the appearance of the angels to the women took place on Saturday evening, and that he has substituted therefore for Mk.’ s λίανπρωί , κ .τ .λ ., a technical Jewish phrase which expresses the time on Saturday evening when the Sabbath was ending or had just ended. On the whole this seems the easiest view of the matter. Mk.’ s chronology will be here, as in 14:1, 12, due to misunderstanding of his Aramaic authority. See on Luke 23:54. θεωρῆσαιτὸντάφον ] The motive given by Mk., ἴναἐλθοῦσαιἀλείψωσιναὐτόν , must be changed by Mt. after the insertion of 27:62-66. The sealing of the tomb and the setting of the guard made it impossible for the women to suppose that they could find access to the tomb. θεωρῆσαι is a reminiscence of the omitted clause, Mark 15:47. 2-4. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled away the stone, and sat upon it. His appearance was as lightning, and his raiment white as snow: and from fear of him the guards were dismayed, and became as dead men.] Mk. is quite different. Mt., who has inserted the account of the sealing of the tomb and the setting of the guard, could hardly follow Mk. here in his record that the women expected to obtain access to the tomb, and thought that the stone would be the only obstacle. They came to see the tomb only. Mk vv. 3-5. have to fall out.— ἰδού ] see on 1:20.— σεισμός ] cf. the earthquake, 27:51.— προσελθών ] see on 4:3.— ἀστραπή ] cf. Daniel 10:6, and note on 17:2.— ὡςχιών cf. Isaiah 1:18, Daniel 7:9 καὶτὸἔνδυμααὐτοῦὡσεὶχιὼνλευκόν , Matthew 17:2 D 2 Rev 1:14. See Hastings, i. p. 504. (M) 5. And the angel answered and said to the women, Fear ye not: for I know that ye seek Jesus the crucified.] Mk. has: “ And he saith to them, Be not amazed; ye seek Jesus, the Nazarene, the crucified.” (M) 6. He is not here. for He is risen, even as He said: Come, see the place where He lay.] Mk. has: “ He is risen; He is not here lo the place where they laid Him.” — καθὼςεἶπεν ] Mt. anticipates this clause from Mk v. 7, where he has reason for substituting ἰδοὺεἶπονὑμῖν . See below. 3. λευκόν ] Om. 1 c ff1 g1, 2. 6. ἔκειτο ] Add ὸκὺριος , A C D Omit א B 33 S1 e.— ὸκύριος ] is not used in direct narrative of Christ in this Gospel, and is, no doubt, not genuine here.— εἶπεν ] S1 adds “ to you” (fem.), a manifest error of translation. (M) 7. And go quickly, and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead; and, behold, He goes before you into Galilee; there ye shall see Him: behold, I told you.] Mk. has: “ But go, tell His disciples and Peter that He goes be fore you into Galilee. There ye shall see Him, even as He told you.” Mt. Omits καὶτῷΠέτρῳ . See below.— ἰδοὺεἶπονὑμῖν ] Mk. interprets τοῖςμαθηταῖςαὐτοῦ of the larger body of Christ’ s disciples to whom Christ had not spoken these words. See below. (M) 8. And they went away quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy; and ran to bring His disciples word.] Mk. has “ And they went out, and fled from the tomb; for fear and amazement possessed them: and they told no one anything; for they were afraid.” With these words our Mk. ends. See Swete. Attempts have recently been made to show that Matthew 28:9-20 preserves in part the lost ending of Mk.’ s Gospel. 28:11-15, no doubt, formed no part of it, for this section is the sequel of 27:62-66, which is an interpolation into Mk., and like it, no doubt, came from a non-Marcan source. But it is urged that in 28:9-10, 16-20 we have a portion of Mk.’ s lost ending edited by the author of the first Gospel. The argument rests (1) upon the probability that Mk. contained just such a narrative as we have recorded in Matthew 28:9-10, Matthew 28:16-20, which supplies the fulfilment of the promise, Mark 16:7; (2) upon some points in Mt.’ s narrative which suggest that he is editing an earlier account. E.g. (a) Mark 16:7 has τοῖςμαθηταῖςαὐτοῦκαὶτῷΠέτρῳ . This suggests that there was to be a special appearance to Peter, and possibly that τοῖςμαθηταῖς indicates not the “ Eleven,” but the larger body of Christ’ s disciples. If Mt., for reasons indicated below, proposed to omit this appearance to Peter, it is natural that he should omit τῷΠέτρῳ here. (b) Mark 16:8 says that the women “ told no one, for they were afraid.” It is very natural that this should have been followed by an appearance to them of Christ dispelling their fear and repeating the angel’ s message. Mt. alters “ and told no one,” etc., into “ ran to tell His disciples.” Consequently the appearance of Christ, vv. 9-10, repeating the angel’ s message is quite unmotived. It would seem that Mt. has found Mk.’ s οὐδενὶοὐδὲνεἶπαν difficult, and has altered it, and then has continued with the appearance of Christ without noticing that the clause “ they told no one,” etc., is necessary to explain the appearance. (c) The τὸὄρος of Matthew 28:16 is unexplained in Mt. If in Mk. there stood an account of Christ’ s appearance to Peter (Mark 16:7) and the Eleven, at the latter of which He again bade them go to Galilee, and appointed a mountain as a meeting-place, it would be adequately accounted for. In that case Mark 16:8 must have been followed by narratives which recorded that the women brought Christ’ s message to the disciples, that the disciples disbelieved, and that, therefore, Christ Himself appeared to them and probably also to Peter. Why, then, has Mt. omitted all this? For the same reasons that have caused him to make the alterations of Mk.’ s statements about the Twelve which are tabulated in Introduction, p. xxxiii f. (d) In Matthew 28:17 we read that “ when they saw Him they worshipped. But some doubted.” Who are the some? Hardly some of the Eleven. It is inconceivable that Mt. should end his Gospel leaving his readers with the impression that some of the Eleven doubted the fact of Christ’ s resurrection. The οἱ presupposes a larger gathering than the Eleven only. But Mt. says distinctly οἱἕνδεκαμαθηταί . Yes; but this does not preclude the possibility, even in the editor’ s mind, that others were present. If in his source an appearance to the Eleven immediately preceded, which he has omitted, it is not unnatural that he should say that the Eleven went to Galilee, and there they and others met Christ at the appointed place of gathering. These suggestions seem to make it possible that the Mk. which Mt. had before him contained after v. 8 words corresponding to Matthew 28:9-10, then a statement that the disciples disbelieved the message of the women; and that, therefore, Christ appeared to Peter and to the Eleven, repeating the command to go to Galilee, and appointing a mountain as a place of meeting; lastly, a narrative corresponding to Matthew 28:16-20. The whole of Mat 28:9-10 might be Marcan so far as language goes, except, perhaps, καὶἰδού (ἰδού occurs in Mk. only in sayings, not in narrative), and τότε , which never occurs in Mk. in narrative. For ὑπήντησεν , cf. Mark 5:2; for προσελθοῦσαι , cf. Mark 1:31, Mark 1:6:35, Mark 1:10:2, Mark 1:12:28, Mark 1:14:35, Mark 1:45; for ἐκράτησαν , cf. (of the hand, but gen., not acc.) Mark 1:31, Mark 1:5:41, Mark 1:9:27; for προσεκύνησαν , cf. Mark 5:6, Mark 15:19. But προσέρχεσθαι and προσκυνεῖν are so characteristic of Mt., that, like καὶἰδού and τότε , they may be due to Mt.’ s editorial revision. How much of Mat 28:16-20 stood in Mk. cannot, of course, be determined with any precision. οἱδὲἕνδεκαμαθηταί seems to have been transferred here by the editor from the narrative which preceded in Mk. πορεύεσθαι occurs only in Mark 9:30 (B* D), and in Mt. twenty-eight times. It is therefore probably editorial. οὖ never occurs in Mk. τάσσομαι never occurs in Mk., and in Mt. only here in this sense. διστάζω does not occur in Mk., and in Mt. only again 14:31. προσκυνεῖν may be editorial. μαθητεύειν is probably editorial. πάντατὰἔθνη is probably Marcan, cf. Mark 13:10. τηρεῖν may be Marcan, cf. Mark 7:9. So may ἐνετειλάμην , Mark 10:3, Mark 13:34. On the other hand, καὶἰδού is probably and ἕωςτῆςσυντελείαςτοῦαἰῶνος certainly editorial. See on 13:39. It is true that vv. 9-10, 16-20 contain no phrase that is characteristically Marcan. We should expect to find in a narrative section like this εὐθὺς , an historic present, an imperfect or some other characteristic of Mk.’ s style. But still this is not decisive. If, e.g., Mk.’ s Gospel were lost from 15:41, we should feel doubtful whether Matthew 27:57-61 were based on Mk. These verses contain no characteristically Marcan phrases, whilst ἐμαθητεύθη , προσελθών , τότε are all Matthæ an. This is probably due to the fact that the section in Mk. has few of his most characteristic phrases, though now that we have it before us we can specify the following as finding analogies in his language: ἤδηὀψίαςγενομένης , cf. 6:35(2), 8:2, 11:11; ἦνπροσδεχόμενος , Mk. has ἦν with a participle 16 times, Mt. only 6, of which 4 are from Mk.; the repetition of εἰἤδητέθνηκεν ; ἦνλελατομημένον ; and the imperfect ἐθεώρουν . Indeed, the test of language is so indecisive that we might pick at random sections which Mt. has borrowed from Mk., e.g. 12:46-50, 8:23-27, of which we could not be sure that Mk. was the source, if the corresponding sections of his Gospel had been lost. It must, therefore, remain as a possible inference, on the grounds stated above, that Matthew 28:9-10, Matthew 28:15-20 are based on verses which originally stood at the end of Mk.’ s Gospel. If this were not the case, it is possible that vv. 16-20 are an editorial epilogue to the Gospel. A parallel may perhaps be found in 25:31-46 if this is a Chrisitian homily based quite possibly on traditional sayings of Christ, placed at the end of the great discourse, 24:4-25:30, as a suitable peroration to the speech. In this case vv. 18-20 may be based on sayings from the Logia or other sources. (M?) 9. And, behold, Jesus met them, sayin, Hail. And they came and held His feet, and worshipped Him.]— For καὶἰδού , see on 1:20.— προσελθοῦσαι ] See on 4:3.— ἐκράτησαν ] See on v. 8. In Mk. κρατεῖν is used with “ hand” in the genitive as the object three times, 1:31, 5:41, 9:27, and so Matthew 9:25. Elsewhere it takes the accusative; so 12:11 of an animal in a pit, 14:3, 21:46, 26:4, 48, 50, 55, 57 of the seizure of arrest, and 18:28 of a creditor seizing hold of his debtor.— προσκυνεῖν ] See on 2:2. (M?) 10. Then saith Jesus to them, Fear not: go tell My brethren, that they go into Galilee, and there they shall see Me.]— τότε ] See on 2:7.— τοῖςἀδελφοῖςμου ] Is this to be understood as referring to Christ’ s brethren in the literal sense, or to His spiritual brethren, “ the disciples” of v. 7? Cf. 12:49. 11. Mt. here adds vv. 11-15, the sequel of 27:62-66, and, no doubt, from the same source. 11. And as they were going, behold certain of the guard came into the city, and told to the chief priests all that had happened.]— ἰδού See on 2:7.— κουστωδία ] See on 27:66. (P) 12. And being gathered together with the elders, and having taken counsel.]— συμβούλιόντελαβόντες ] See on 12:14. (P) 13. They gave much money to the soldiers, saying, Say that His disciples came by night and stole Him while we were sleeping.]— ἱκανά ] only here in this sense in Mt.; cf. Mark 10:46. It is common in the Acts. For the tradition as to the theft of the body, cf. de Spec. 30: “ This is He whom His disciples secretly stole away, or the gardener took away that his lettuces might not be injured by the crowds of visitors.” Still earlier, Just. Mart. (Dial. c. Trypho, 108) speaks of the statements put forward by the Jews that the disciples had stolen the body of Christ. (P) 14. And if it be heard before the governor, we will appease him, and make you secure.] (P) 15. And they took the money, and did as they were instructed: and this account was noised abroad among the Jews until this day.]— διαφημίζειν ] Cf. 9:31, Mark 1:45. (M?) 16. And the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus appointed to them.] (M?) 17. And when they saw Him, they worshipped; but some doubted.]— προσκυνεῖν ] See on 2:2.— οἱδέ ] “ Some,” not of the Eleven, but of others who were present. The proper contrast to “ doubted “ would be “ believed” ; but Mt. is aware that the Eleven had already seen Christ in Jerusalem, where their doubts were dispelled. See on 27:8. For διστάζειν , cf. 14:31. (M?) 18. And Jesus came and spake to them, saying, All power was given to Me in heaven and upon earth.]— προσελθών ] See on 4:3.— ἐδόθη ] See on 11:27 and cf. Daniel 7:14. (M?) 19. Go therefore, make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.]— μαθητεύειν ] See on 13:52.— πάντατὰἔθνη ] is due to Mt.’ s source (Mark?); cf. Mark 13:10. βαπτίζειν in the New Testament describes a ceremonial process of the application of water (whether by immersion or affusion?) to persons. The rite thus termed presupposes a good deal that is not always expressed. (a) The person baptized has repented of his sins, and baptism implies the consequent forgiveness of them; Acts 2:38. (b) Baptism also implies belief in Christ. The person baptized expressed this belief, and was regarded after baptism as a disciple of Christ. (c) In connection with baptism we find two expressions, “ in the name of Christ” — Acts 2:38, Acts 10:48— and “ into the name of Christ” — Acts 19:5. These are not identical in meaning. “ In the name of Christ” probably implies the fact that the person baptized had expressed his belief in Christ, and his wish to be Christ’ s disciple, and that the name of Christ was uttered over him, symbolising the fact that as a result of the ceremony he had become a disciple of Christ. The phrase thus describes a part of the procedure of the baptismal ceremony. “ Into the name of Christ,” on the other hand, lays stress on the result of the ceremony. The person baptized became “ into the name of Christ,” i.e. became His disciple, i.e. entered into a state of allegiance to Him and of fellowship with Him. “ Baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” means, therefore, “ causing them to submit to a rite which results in their becoming disciples of, and confers upon them fellowship with, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” The remarkable fact that here only in the New Testament do we get the Triune Name used in connection with baptism, can be easily misunderstood. Elsewhere we have only the name of Christ. It is urged that a series of passages in the New Testament are most reasonably explained, if the writers were acquainted with the tradition that Christ Himself had sanctioned the use of the Threefold Name in connection with baptism. But, on the other hand, it is equally difficult to believe that if the tradition as recorded here by Mt. had been widely known in the time of S. Paul, and had been interpreted as a direction of Christ as to the exact form of words to be used in baptism, we should find several references to baptism in or into the name of Christ, and none in or into the Threefold Name. Nevertheless, the conclusion that the formula as here recorded marks a developed and late stage of doctrinal belief and ecclesiastical practice, is unjustified. The phrase may already have stood in the lost ending of Mk.; but even if we suppose that Mk.’ s ending contained a reference to baptism in or into Christ’ s name, or no clause about baptism at all, and if the connection of baptism with the Threefold Name is due to the editor, yet the conception Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is clearly as ancient as the Christian Society itself. For S. Paul, cf. 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, 2 Corinthians 13:14; for S. Peter, 1 P 1:2; for S. John, 1 John 3:23, 1 John 3:24 and the Gospel, passim. In the earliest Gospel, Mark 13:32, we already have the antithesis “ the Father, the Son,” which, combined with the Jewish and Christian conception of the Holy Spirit, presupposes the possibility of the formula “ Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” Mt. has borrowed this phrase from Mk., and in 11:27 he has a parallel saying showing that the combination “ the Son, the Father,” was also familiar to the source from which he was drawing (the Matthæ an Logia?). This antithesis “ the Father— the Son” is above all characteristic of the Fourth Gospel, and is no doubt due to the Palestinian background of that very Hebraic book. Thus, even if the editor of the first Gospel was the first to connect baptism with the Threefold Name, he was probably only bringing that rite into connection with a circle of Christological ideas and phrases which were current in the early Palestinian Church, and which from Palestine had penetrated Christian teaching everywhere. The objection that the Gospel containing this phrase cannot be early, because it conflicts with the custom of the early Palestinian Church, which baptized in or into the name of Christ, rests upon the false assumption that the editor intended to represent Christ as prescribing the formula which should be used at baptism. The words rather mean baptizing them into the fellowship of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and describe, not the formula to be used at baptism, but the end and aim which would be secured in and through baptism. The editor may well have written these words at a period when it was customary to baptize in or into the name of Christ, without at all wishing to represent Christ as having prescribed a fuller formula, but simply with the intention of summing up in a phrase the end and aim of the Christian life into which the convert entered at baptism. The best commentary on the words would be 1 John 1:3 combined with 1 John 3:23, 1 John 3:24. See Briggs, Messiah of the Gospels, p. 229. 19. βαπτίζοντεςαὐτοὺςεἰςτὸὄνοματοῦπατρὸςκαὶτοῦυἱοῦκαὶτοῦἁγίουπνεύματος ] On the text, see Conybeare, Zeitsch. fü r die Neutest. Wissensch. 1901, 275 ff.; Hibbert Journal, October 1902; Lake, Inaugural Lecture; Riggenbach, Der Trinitarische Taufbefehl; Chase, Journal Theol. Stud. vi. 481 ff. The evidence of Eusebius must be regarded as indecisive, in view of the fact that all Greek MSS. and all extant VSS., contain the clause (S1 S2 are unhappily wanting). The Eusebian quotation: πορευθέντεςμαθητεύσατεπάντατὰἔθνηἐντῷὀνόματίμου cannot be taken as decisive proof that the clause εἰςτὸὄνομα , κ .τ .λ ., was lacking in copies known to Eusebius, because ἐντῷὀνόματί may be Eusebius’ way of abbreviating, for whatever reason, the following clause. On the other hand, Eusebius cites in this short form so often that it is easier to suppose that he is definitely quoting the words of the Gospel, than it is to invent possible reasons which may have caused him so frequently to paraphrase it. And if we once suppose his short form to have been current in MSS. of the Gospel, there is much probability in the conjecture that it is the original text of the Gospel, and that in the second century the clause, βαπτίζοντεςαὐτοὺςεἰςτὸὄνομα , κ .τ .λ ., supplanted the shorter ἐντῷὀνόματίμου . An insertion of this kind derived from liturgical use would very rapidly be adopted by copyists and translators. The Didaché has, ch. 7: βαπτίσατεεἰςτὸὄνοματοῦπατρὸςκαὶτοῦυἱοῦκαὶτοῦἁγίουπνεύματος : but the passage need not be dependent on our canonical Gospel, and the Didaché elsewhere has a liturgical addition to the texts of the Gospels in the doxology attached to the Lord’ s Prayer. But Irenæ us and Tertullian already have the longer clause. (M?) 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I commanded them: and, behold, I am with you all the days, unto the consummation of the age.]— τηρεῖν ] cf. 19:17, 23:3.— καὶἰδού ] cf. on 1:20.— συντελείαςτοῦαἰῶνος ] If Mt. has been recasting in this section a portion of Mk.’ s lost ending, this phrase is no doubt due to him; see on 13:39. the Second Gospel. Dalman. editorial passages. Cf. also Mark 9:2 A D gr al latt. S1, Secrets of Enoch 1:3 “ Their hands whiter than snow,” Enoch 1062, 10 “ his body was whiter than snow.” Theodotion. Syriac version: Curetonian. Manuscripts of the Old Latin Version. Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels. Syriac version: Sinaitic MS. i.e. with other uncial MSS. πορεύεσθαι for Mk’ s ὑπάγειν . See on 21:1. Cf. especially Torkild Skat Rö rdam (The lost end of Mark’ s Gospel, Hibbert Jourmal, July 1905), to whom I am indebted for much that follows. Palestinian traditions. Tertullian. Cf Heitmü ller, Im Namen Jesu.